The Syriac Forms of New Testament Proper Names 9781463232238

Citation preview

T h e Syriac Forms of N e w Testament Proper N a m e s

Analecta Gorgiana

894 Series Editor George Anton Kiraz

Analecta Gorgiana is a collection of long essays and short monographs which are consistently cited by modern scholars but previously difficult to find because of their original appearance in obscure publications. Carefully selected by a team of scholars based on their relevance to modern scholarship, these essays can now be fully utilized by scholars and proudly owned by libraries.

The Syriac Forms of New Testament Proper Names

F. Crawford Burkitt

gorgias press 2011

Gorgias Press LLC, 954 River Road, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA www.gorgiaspress.com Copyright© 2011 by Gorgias Press LLC Originally published in 1912 All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise without the prior written permission of Gorgias Press LLC.

ISBN 978-1-61143-469-9

Printed in the United States of America

ISSN 1935-6854

THE SYRIAC FORMS OF NEW TESTAMENT PROPER NAMES BY F . C.

BURKITT

FELLOW OF T H E

ACADEMY

Read January 24, 1912 THK subject I have chosen for this Paper sounds, I fear, rather dry and technical, so that it may not be out of place to begin by claiming that it presents one element of general interest. The Pilgrim from Palestine, with his staff and his scallop-shell and his. tales of the Holy Land, is one of the most picturesque figures of the middle ages: it will be my task this afternoon to introduce you to the earliest of that band, the earliest that has left any record. His tale is told in a dead language, and perhaps not all his archaeology is correct, but he deserves to be heard with the respect due to a pioneer. The New Testament is a collection of Greek \\ ritmgs, and it is not till the last quarter of the second century A. D. that there is any e\idence of efforts to translate it into other tongues. But 111 the period between 170 and 200 the Gospels, Acts, and Pauline Epistles were translated into Latin in the West, at Rome or Carthage, and into Syriac in the East, at Edessa in the Euphrates Valley. The translation of the New Testament into Latin presented no spccial difficulty, and least of all in the proper names. There is, of course, a right way and a wrong, as those know who have read Professor Housman's amusing article in the last number of the Journal of Phibhgy on Greek Nouns in Latm Poetry 1 . But the points raised are, after all, of subsidiary interest. The Latin translator had merely to give the Latin letter which custom and authority prescribed as equivalent to the Greek letter. He had no need to be wise above that which had been written: it is a pretty question whether we ought to write Pharao 1 It is worth while recording the fact that the oldest Christian .MS.S. support Professor Housman's general conclusions, e. g. k has '' Heroden \ aud the Wurzburg; I'alimpsest in Jeremiah xiii has 1 E n f r j t c n

v

r-1

a

PROCEEDINGS OF T H E BRITISH

ACADEMY

or Fatno, but all that either form tells us is that the title of the king of Egypt is spelt ApA(u in Greek. The translator from Greek into Syriac is in a very different case. Syriac, the former common speech of the Euphrates Valley, is a Semitic language, the first cousin of Hebrew. Like Hebrew, many of the vowels do not appear in writing, and those that are written are given in a notation that, according to our ideas, is singularly imperfect. On the other hand, many distinctions are made, especially in the sibilants, which disappear in the Greek, and (as in Hebrew) there are four true guttural sounds which are not represented in Greek at all. It is easy enough to transliterate true Greek Proper Names into Syriac. They look indeed rather clumsy, and without the insertion of vowel signs the transliterations are often ambiguous 1 . The real difficulty and the real interest arises when, as so often in the New Testament, the Proper Name in the Greek is itself a transliteration or adaption of a Semitic word. Greek is a poor language for such a purpose, and the Semitic words lose in transliteration many of their most striking characteristics. The Patriarchs are shorn of their gutturals . 'Abraham, Yishak, and Yaalcob become ABp&AM, ICAAK, and IAKO^S, and there is nothing to tell the reader that Abraham's h is an English h, Isaac's is a Jch (or very nearly), while Jacob's is the peculiar Semitic 'ain. Moreover, without private information, the »translator from Greek into a Semitic language would not know where to put the gutturals in : as a matter of fact, the h in A/3paafi comes between the second and third a, the h in Iiraas comes instead of the first a, and the ' in Ia/iw/3 comes between the a and the K. These difficulties lie in the nature of the languages and confront a translator as soon as he sets about his task. When therefore we find that the older Syriac Versions, speaking generally, do not simply transliterate the New Testament Proper Names, but give the proper Semitic equivalent, we are obviously in the presence of a learned achievement, of a « ork of Biblical learning which demands elucidation and explanation. How did the Syriac translator come by his information p A few words may here be said on the Syriac Versions of which account will be taken here. The Syriac Vulgate, commonly called 1 T h e commemoration of a certain Aoj/Xq a t Nieomedia on March 2 5 is given by Lietzmann f r o m t h e ancient Syriac M a r t y r o l o g y as ' d v l ' s ' . I t doesn't look quite so bad m Syriac letters 1

SYRIAC FORMS OF N E W TESTAMENT NAMES

:}

the Peshitta, comprises t h e greater p a r t of t h e Old and New Testaments. I t is preserved with a surprising absence of variation 111 many MSS., some of which arc as old as t h e fifth century. T h e Canonical Books of t h e Old T e s t a m e n t were translated originally direct from t h e Hebrew, probably by Jews r a t h e r than C h r i s t i a n s ; b u t certain books, notably t h a t of Isaiah, seem t o have been revised from t h e Greek Bible. T h e so-called ' Apocrypha \ such as t h e Book of Wisdom, must have been translated f r o m t h e Greek. T h e t e x t of the Peshitta in t h e New Testament is also a revision ; it is now generally recognized t h a t this revision was made by Rabbula, Bishop of Edessa from 411 to 435. No MS. of the Acts or Pauline Epistles previous t o this rev ision survives, b u t two MSS. of the Gospels are known, Cureton's MS. and the Sinai Palimpsest, which represent t h e texts current before Rabbula. Besides these MSS. we have t h e scanty remains of Syriac literature earlier t h a n t h e fifth century, notably t h e works of Aphraates (345 a . d . ) a n d E p h r a i m (d. 373 a . d . ) . A large mass of evidence tends t o shew t h a t t h e form in which t h e Gospel generally circulated a m o n g Syriac-speaking Christians before t h e time of R a b b u l a was not t h e F o u r separate Gospels, b u t Tatian's Diatessaron : this work survives in a late Arabic translation, b u t t h e Syriac t e x t from which this Arabic translation was made had been assimilated wholesale to t h e Peshitta. In any case, t h e Arabic cannot be depended on for details connected with t h e spelling of Proper Names. Our three chief authorities, therefore, are the Sinai Palimpsest (S), the Curetonian MS. (C), and t h e P e s h i t t a ( P ) . A later Syriac version of t h e parts of t h e New T e s t a m e n t not comprised in t h e Peshitta (viz. 2 Peter, 2 and 3 J o h n , J u d e , and t h e Apocalypse), made in t h e sixth century for Philoxenus of Mabbogh, is cited as . Many of t h e P r o p e r Names in t h e Gospels are mentioned by Aphraates, whose works include a Homily on t h e Gospel Genealogies: his evidence, where necessary, is quoted as A. I t is clear t h a t for t h e most p a r t A p h r a a t e s used t h e Diatessaron 1 , Rabbula's revision of the t e x t was in many ways drastic and thorough-going, b u t fortunately t h e Proper Names were very little altered. H i s procedure was not unlike t h a t of the English Revisers of 1881, who also left t h e Proper Names much as they were, though in other respects they made alterations in t h e direction of conformity to the Greek. T h e proof of t h e above statement lies in t h e very 1 T h e number after A is the page m (1907).

Patrologia Syrmca,

vol. ! (1894), vol. ii

4

PROCEEDINGS OF T H E

BRITISH

ACADEMY

numerous agreements of S, C, and P, and the very few cases of actual difference. For instance, the final h in 'Beelzebub' is attested by no Greek MS., so far as I know', but Kabbula retains it, following both S and C, and also A T14. The agreement between S, C, and 1' in the Gospels is the justifilation for using P m the rest of the New Testament, where S and C fail us. It should, of course, be remarked that the definite agreement of 1' with S C is naturally confined to those Proper Names which aie transmitted without variant in the Greek. Naturally it may happen that there is a variant in a name, and in such cases 1' and S C are sometimes found on opposite sides, e. g. in Job i 28 8 C support ' B e t h a b a r a w h i l e P supports ' B e t h a n y B u t such cases are comparatively rare, and do not seriously call in question the general faithfulness of P to the nomenclature of the Old Syriac Version. A glance at S C and P shews that the general practice of the translator of the New Testament into Syriac, whoever he may have been, was to give the Old Testament equivalent for the Proper Names, as far as this could be done. A discussion of this part of the subject will be found in Evangelion da-Mejyharreshc, vol. ii, pp. 201-205, and I need not repeat it here, as I do not think the dependence of the Syriae New Testament m this respect upon the Syriac Old Testament, has ever been seriously challenged. The evidence forces us. in fact, to regard the Old Testament Peshitta as older than the Syriac New Testament, and as having been familiar to the translator of the latter. This at once accounts for a large number of peculiar forms, the origin of which docs not here concern us, as it is sufficient to say that they were taken from the Old Testament. Thus 1 Zion' is transliterated p»nX Sehyun, though the Greek is h a v and the Hebrew ¡Vi*. It is difficult to see how the Syriac form can have arisen, but it throws no direct light upon the geographical knowledge of the New Testament translator, as no doubt it was taken direct from the Old Testament in Syriac l . Some of the greater Geographical names may very well ha\e been derived from common knowledge and use, names such as x h v r m Urishlem for Jeiusalcm, or j^rti

Beth Nakrln for Mesopotamia.

What needs investigation are the rarer names, names of persons that 1 i7*3T 'dry land ' i.-? regularly rendered in t h e Peshitta by rtflaoa^. ' thirsty ( r e g i o n ) ' : it is, therefore, probable t h a t fVi' was understood to mean Dry Tor, or some such signification.

SYRIAC FORMS OF N E W T E S T A M E N T N A M E S

.5

do not appear to have been familiar to Syriac-speaking folk, and names of places for which we can hardly suppose that the natives of Edessa, or even of Antioch, could have had special appellations,. Once more we may remind ourselves of the nature of the processes gone through before a New Testament Semitic Proper Name appears in Syriac. I t has been transliterated from Hebrew or Aramaic into Greek letters: the Syriac translator then takes this Greek transliteration, and either transliterates it into Syriac letters, or decides on an appropriate Syriac equivalent. The latter process is not transliteration, but really a kind of translation: it may afford us historical information about the subject matter of the New Testament, but should not be used as a textual ' v a r i a n t ' . This simple caution is not always remembered, as an example will make clear. The name Caiaphas (Kaidas or Kaitfiw;) is transliterated N S ' p ; Cephas (Kt)as), on the other hand, is A t first sight it seems irregular that the Syriac equivalent to Ki^iai should begin with D instead of p . But what we have t o recognize is t h a t N3ND is not a transliteration at all, but the Syriac for ' s t o n e ' : the translator, or possibly Syriac Church custom, recognized t h a t S. Peter's name was Simon Stone, and they called him, where necessary, by this appellative When Westcott and H o r t discuss the breathings to be assigned to New Testament Proper Names such as AA^alos, they talk about ' the authority of the Syriac' (Introd., § 408). I t is one of the chief objects of this Paper to find out in what exactly the ' authority' of the Syriac consists. Is it, we ask, a real and continuous Palestinian tradition, or is it merely an achievement of learning, meritorious and interesting indeed, but not really authoritative? W h a t had the Syriac translator t o go by, when the Old Testament failed him, and when the context did not suggest (as it did in the case of S. Peter's name) a practically certain solution ? Now it is true that there are a number of excellent transliterations or identifications, whichever we like to call them, to be found in the Syriac versions. Simon the Cananaeun (Kamvuios) is rendered i O i p , and so is properly distinguished from the Canaanite woman (Xamvaia), who is Nfi'JSiS. Tabitka and Talitha are sadly confused in Latin MSS.: in the Syriac texts they are properly distinguished and intelligently spelt Words referring to Jewish Parties, See.—Pharisees (Peruke), Sadducees (Zaddukay?), Osanna (Oshana), Phylacteries (Tephille),—are given a Syriac dress that is near enough to the 1

It is the tame in Arabic, «here S. Peter is commonly called

(or uU^,)

6

PROCEEDINGS OF T H E

BRITISH

ACADEMY

current Jewish technical term to suggest some knowledge of Jewish conditions. Of the personal names, p n for Annas, W D for \ o u t « [ > l N 1 \ S E > for Sapphira, I } for Barabbas 2 , 13 (i.e. Saturday's child) for Barsabbas 3 , are all well spelt, ' i n for 'i'haddaeus and (Dalman 124) for S Í Á Q S are recognized as Semitic names and spelt accordingly: it may be remarked in passing that the name of Simon Magus is spelt jlO'D (Simon) in Syriae, as distinguished from Simon Peter and Simon the Tanner, who are given the same name as Simeon (jWÜí? Shim'dn) the Patriarch. As is well known, the Syriac New Testament translates Xptcmis by Mshtha, i.e. ' Messiah', wherever it occurs. 'lacrois becomes 1'IE" (pronounced Yeshu' and Isho ), which is the later Hebrew form of Joshua. The Pesliitta always represents 5 W I H ' by SW 1 , e. g. in Josh i 1, and it was no doubt the Syriac form of the name Joshua t h a t determined the spelling of the name for Jesus among Syriac-speaking Christians. It may here be mentioned t h a t t h e controversial n orks of Ephraim Syrus, now being edited by my friend Mr. C. W . Mitchell for t h e T e x t and Translation Society from a palimpsest in the British Museum, will shew t h a t t h e Syriac-speaking Marcionites were not similarly influenced by the Old Testament, and that they transliterated 'IijcroCs by ID'. Of the place-names in Syriac, for Xopa(etv agrees with the Talmudic spelling; i O S XV3 (Beth I'hugge) for Br¡6. Origen had not only expressed his opinion t h a t the name of the city near which the swine had rushed into the sea was Gergesa, rather than G a d a r a or G e r a s a . he went on to identify the people with t h e Girgashites of Gen xv 21. Mr. Raymond Clapp, to whom is due the credit of having called attention t o the great importance of these names for our estimate of the date of the Old Syriac Version concludes t h a t X ' D J I ) , the reading of S in Mk v 1, is a simple transcript of a Greek MS. which read Ffpyecriji'S;, a reading which was itself t h e result of Origen's conjectuie. A little consideration will, however, shew t h a t the Syriac form suggests the opposite conclusion, viz. t h a t all t h a t it tells us is t h a t the translator identified ' t h e country of the [Gerasenes]' with ' t h e land of the Girgashites'. For, strange to say, the Old Testament Peshitta, in Gen xv 21 and elsewhere, represents t h e Hebrew by N ' D W J . T h e reason for this is quite obscure, j u s t as it is quite obscure why the I'lain of Shinar OWfc?) should be turned in the Peshitta into " l ^ D . T h e Sinai Palimpsest, therefore, intends us to understand ' G i r g a s h i t e s 1 in M k v 1, and t h e word should be pronounced

Gargosaye2.

W i t h regard to ' B e t h a b a r a ' m J oh i 28 the case is similar. T h e word is written in C with the plural p o i n t s ; they are not legible in S, but whether they are really absent or merely illegible in S their presence in C shews t h a t the word was regarded as plural, and therefore as a significant appellation (like 4 Overstrand') that H o r t ' s conclusion is r i g h t , viz. the g e n u i n e reading of t h e Greek is G a d a r e n e s ' in M a t t , b a t f Gera«ene«' in Mk and Lk. (2) in t h e Syriac, P ha« Gadai e n e s ' e v e r y w h e r e ; C has e G a d a r e n e s ' m Lk (the only place where it m e x t a n t ) ; S has ' G a d a r e n e s ' m M a t t and Lk, h u t in Mk ' t h e district of the G ' is rendered ' t h e land of the fc^WG(3) T h e r e n d e r i n g of t h e Diatessaron is not known f i o m any early a u t h o t i t y : n a t u r a l l y Ciasca's Arabic implies ' G a d a r e n e s t h e r e a d i n g of 1\ (4) Syriac Versions appear to have had some tendency t o i n t r o d u c e t h e name G.idaiene : Abnnelech of Gerar becomes Abimelech of i r i ^ J G e n xx), and t h e H a g a r e n e s of P s lxxxin 6 become r i j i . " ^ . These Gadarenes also m e e t us in 1 C b r w v n 28 P. (5) ' G a d a r e n e s ' in M a t t Mil 28 S is simply a correct r e n d e r i n g of t h e G r e e k , and needs no f u r t h e r e x p l a n a t i o n ; ' G a d a r e n e s ' iu Lk v m 20, 37 S C m a y he a harmonization with M a t t , or (more likely) an assimilation to the Diatessaron. It is the reading in Mk v 1 S, which lias escaped h a n n o m / a t i o n , t h a t needs explaining. 1 Journal of Bib!teal Literature xxvi 02-83. See also B a e t h g e n ' s Evangehenfragmente (188.5), p. 83. 3 T h e d r o p p i n g of the G m resents no difficulty m t h e case of a MS. like S For parallels, see Evangehon da-Mepharrcshe n 4 0 : see also M a t t vhi 28 in t h e m a r g i n of t h e Ilarcleati Version. 4 i

S Y R I AC FORMS OF N E W T E S T A M E N T N A M E S

1]

and not as a transliteration of a Greek word. In this interpretation the Syriae differs from Origen, who thought that Ri;fla,3apa meant O ' K O S KaTaoKevijs (i.e. S03H f l ' 3 , from to create!) 1 , while the Syriae connects it with Tiipav TOV 'lopbavov. W e find, then, that the Syriae agrees with Origen in thinking of the 'Girgashites 1 as the people who owned the Herd of Swine, and also in identifying the place where John baptized with a spot which may be spelt in Greek Bqtfa/Sapa. A couple of identifications such as these can hardly have been made independently, but we have further to go on and ask whether there is any justification for the common view, that these identifications were made for the first time by Origen. Origen's Commentary 011 S. John, in which these identifications are found, is a bulky work, composed partly a t Alexandria, and partly much later a t Caesarea. In the former books, so far as they survive, the geographical interest is absent, though there are several pieces of Origen's characteristic lore about the Hebrew meanings of New Testament names 2 . But from Book vi onward, i.e. in the part written at Caesarea, Origen airs his knowledge of Palestine, and is quite ready to change the transmitted text of Scripture accordingly. AVhat has happened ill the interval ? W e could almost have guessed, even apart from our author's express statement, for we have all seen it in our friends and contemporaries. Origen has been on a Pilgrimage through the Holy Land, and he 110 longer needs information about the sites, for has he not seen them for himself ? A t the same time, as I pointed out in the Paper already referred to, Origen does not himself claim to have discovered ' B e t h a b a r a ' or ' G e r g e s a W h a t he tells us is t h a t ' they say that Bethabara (ra Brj0a/3apa) is shewn by the gorge of the Jordan, where they declare that John baptized ' (Orig. in Joan, vi 40). Further on he mentions ' Gergesa, from which come the Girgashites (oi Tepyfa-aioi), an ancient city by what is now called the Lake of Tiberias, by which is a steep place close to the Lake, from which it is shewn that the Swine were cast down by the demons' (Ibid, vi 41). This is what he learnt when he went on his pilgrimage, and in accordance with his geographical information he points out that Bethany is not beyond Jordan, and that neither Gerasa nor (ladara is situated on the Sea of Galilee. The step that Origen took was to emend the Greek text of the Gospels in accordance with the local identifications. This is some' See Isaiali xl 28, xliii 7 ; also Bi]$efitppa o W Karoijravijt OS 20155. E.g. ii 33 (Srooke l 09).

2

12

PROCEEDINGS

OF T H E

BRITISH

ACADEMY

thing more than tlie translator o f t h e Syriac Version can be proved to have done. His general aim was to find the proper Aramaic equivalent o f the names, not t o tell us with what letters the Greeks represented the Aramaic names. H e does not care whether the Evangelist wrote 'Upoirokvita or 'lepova-aAijfi: t h e place meant is what his countrymen called Urishkm, and he writes it so. No various reading is implied in Acts xxi 7, where for KarqvTri)0fa0a), in D (Bt\ff 0a), in the genuine Old Latin (Bezatha, Betzata, Bclzatha, Betzetha), or the Vulgate (Bethsaida). The Egyptian versions, also, with the text of the Harclean and the Ethiopic, have ' B e t h s a i d a s p e l t like the ' city of Andrew and Peter \ The supporters of Bijflcrrca are the vast majority of Greek MSS. (including, of course, A and C), the Gothicizing revised Latin texts f and q, and all the Syriac versions, except the text of the Harclean. I t is also in the Armenian, where the spelling (Beth hezda) makes it pretty certain that it has been derived from a Syriac source. For 'Bethesda' are the Byzantine tradition and ' t h e authority of the Syriac'; against ' Bethesda' are the ancient Versions (except the Syriac), local tradition, and the most ancient and trusted Greek MSS. Such a division of the evidence is not only unfavourable to Bethesda • it makes it very likely that the Old Syriac Version, which is the one really ancient authority that supports this reading, is also the source of it. W e are dealing with probabilities, and by the nature of the case we cannot hope to do more than frame a hypothesis, which will cover the facts of the ease and be consistent with the phenomena of other various readings and unlikely forms of Proper Names. My hypothesis, then, is that B?)Ca0a was the form written by the Evangelist; that this became extensively corrupted to BttOfrQa, Bi|Sfafla, &c., and also widely assimilated to ' Bethsaida'. The Syriac translator, on the other hand, whatever of these forms may have been before his eyes, thought that ' House of Mercy' was not far off, and so wrote Beth Hesda. The Martyr Lueian, or whoever else is the real foster-father of the Antiochian-Byzantine t e x t m a y very likely have had 'Bethsaida' in the text that lay before him : this was a manifest geographical blunder and needed correction, and the correction that was chosen was derived from the Syriac tradition. The whole question is, in certain ways, parallel to the question of ' Nazareth'. In both cases we have a current tradition now in vogue about the names, a tradition which is unsatisfactory in the light 1

'Hie text called AT by von Soden

22

PROCEEDINGS

OF T H E

BRITISH

ACADEMY

of t h e earliest evidence. In t h e case of N a z a r e t h it is t h e selection of a site, in t h e case of Bethesda i t is t h e form of a name. In b o t h cases b y f a r t h e oldest witness t o t h e unsatisfactory c u r r e n t t r a d i t i o n it, t h e ancient Syriac Version. I d o not believe these Syriac names have a n y more ' a u t h o r i t y ' t h a n Joarash for J a i r u s , or Kiilnc for C a n a , t h e only difference is t h a t t h e former p a i r f o u n d favour a t t h e cud of t h e f o u r t h century a m o n g t h e Greeks a n d t h e l a t t e r pair did n o t . I t will be convenient t o notice here ccrtain Syriac forms of P r o p e r Names t h a t for various reasons need some elucidation. 1. T h e E l a m i t e s of A c t s ii 9 are rendered (.Alanuye) in P . T h i s is n o t an irregular transliteration of 'EAajieiTai, b u t means t h e Alans, a b a r b a r o u s people mentioned by P l i n y (vi 26) ill connexion with t h e K u r d s a n d by t h e Dialogue T)e Fato (u 3 ) in connexion with t h e regions n o r t h of P o n t u s . T h e n a m e of t h e E l a m i t e s was n o d o u b t taken by S. L u k e from t h e Old T e s t a m e n t , b u t a Mesopot a m i a n t r a n s l a t o r would know t h a t t h e y were e x t i n c t as t h e D r u i d s , and so he chose a more modern n a m e from t h e same sort of region as an equivalent. I n exactly t h e same spirit D e Sacy's Arabictranslates t h e ' P a r t b i a n s ' bv i.e. Kurds. 2. Bar-Jesus, t h e name of . t h e M a g u s in A c t s xiii 6, is variously spelt in i m p o r t a n t W e s t e r n texts, so t h a t t h e original reading is somewhat d o u b t f u l . In P NiSlE* 1 3 ( B a r s l m m a ) is given as an equivalent. T h e meaning of Barslmma is not k n o w n : what is known is t h a t i t was an old family n a m e in Edessa, where it appears on t h e preChristian grave of t i O T B n i m l VS? (i. e. ' Stella, d a u g h t e r of B a r shuma')1. I do n o t suppose we can reconstruct t h e Greek word which suggested B a r s l m m a t o t h e Syriac t r a n s l a t o r , any more t h a n we could recover 'EAa/wirai from ' t h e A l a n s ' ill A c t s ii 9. 3. M a t t h i a s in A c t s i 23, 2 6 is t r a n s l i t e r a t e d N\TO in P . So f a r as I know, t h e r e is no variation in t h e name ill Greek or L a t i n , except t h a t some ancient MSS. have Ma86iav instead of Marfliaf. B u t in Syriac t h e case is different. A p h r a a t e s 150 (Demonstr. iv 6) calls him ' D ^ l f i , a n d t h i s n a m e is substituted for ' M a t t h i a s 1 wherever it occurs in t h e Syriac Version of Euscbius's History. I t is evident t h a t 1 7.DMG \ x \ v i 104. word in line 3, lead

I take this opportunity of suggesting t h a t t h e difficult Sachau, may be au ill-cut The

first four lines will then run : (1) ' I . ' I u bath Barslmma, (2) have made for myself tins tomb. (3) I beg of thee, whoever else enters (4) h e r e , not to m o \ e my bones and the sai eophagus ' I assume t h a t Ty is the abs. state of JsTlVy (Job ix i)), tiie name of a certain Mar ot Constellation.

SYRIAC FORMS OF N E W T E S T A M E N T N A M E S

23

tills is no mere palaeographical error, but that the Old S\riac Version of the Acts must have had '¡S^lft also. Tliis name occurs as ©oAojtaios in Josephus (Ant. xx 1), and is, of course, the second part of the name Bartholomew '. An obscure name does occur in Judges and Samuel, but '¡bVlfi is nothing more than Ptolemy in a Semitic disguise (see Levy, Neu-IIebr. Diet., s. v.). Why the Old Syriac of Acts should have represented Matthias by this name cannot now be ascertained. 4. Malchus in Job xvni 10 is rendered (Matek) in 1', but (? Maleku) in S The word occurs ill S at the end of a line, so t h a t it is not quite certain that an D may not be lost in the margin: in that case S would present a mere commonplace transliteration of Mains'. But as the name appears to be treated as a Semitic one in P, it is more likely t h a t is the true reading, in which case we have an interesting parallel to ' Gashmn the A r a b i a n m e n t i o n e d in Neh vi 6 2 . U ^ S (i. e. elil») is a very common Palmyrene name (Cook, Aramaic Glossary, p. 73, where, however,' vol. 7 1 is a misprint for ' vol. G a n d "D^fi is a woman's name). 5. Finally, as bearing upon the general sociological equipment of the Syriac translator, it should be noticed that the technical Jewish term j ' T i n j D (Sanhedrin) is never used to render avrdpiov, even when it might have been not inappropriate. In M a t t x 17 S I' the technical Jewish term for the local Jewish Court is correctly given fl'X Beth-din)3, but even in Acts xxii 30 mav TO irvvebpiov is only rendered VIWH i.e. 'all the assembly of their Heads'. I imagine the translator was only acquainted with the provincial Judaism of Upper Mesopotamia. ' Phylacteries' and 'Beth-dins' he knew, but the parts of the Jewish organization that came to an end with the Destruction of Jerusalem were as unfamiliar to him as to the rest of the Gentile world. It is now time to sum up the mam results of these scattered observations. I shall attempt to do so in a series of propositions. (1) The translator of the Syriac Version aimed at giving the vernacular equivalent of the New Testament Proper Names, rather than a transliteration of the Greek. Examples : Acre for l'tolemais, Alans for Elamites, 1 !

In Matt viii 3 tlwtomeus occurs in a for Bartholomew.

No doubt corresponds to whence NinK derived t h e spelling |-OC€M\ 3 T h e S y n a c should be vocalized Bdh dayydiui (i. e. ( Place of t h e judged ').

• it would be interesting t o know dim', with Gwilliam's Mas. 3, uot Heth

21

P R O C E E D I N G S Ol-' T H E

BRITISH

ACADEMY

(2) Wherever possible, the forms of the Names in the Syriac New Testament are assimilated to those in the Syriac Old Testament (Peshitta), which is earlier and normative for the Syriac New Testament. Examples : Sehyon for Sion, Ycshi for Jesus. (3) When t h e Old Testament failed, the Syriac is sometimes demonstrably wrong Example • Yoarush for Jairus. (4) A connexion between the Syriac translator and Origen is to be noted, b u t it is by way of agreement in identification combined with disagreement in etymology. Examples : Bethabara and Betliphage. (5) T h e connexion is t o be explained by t h e rise of local Palestinian Christian traditions, fostered by t h e rise of Christian pilgrimage. Examples: ' Gergesenes1 and again Bethabara. (6) Some Syriac identifications never influenced non-Syriac Christian tradition. This demonstrates the existence of a certain independence in the Sjriac identifications. E x a m p l e : Ka/nc for Cana. (7) In other cases the Syriac identification is the oldest evidence for the modern and incorrect theory, and ill some eases may have been the parent of t h a t theory. Examples : Nasrath for Nazareth, BeMcsda for Bezatha. (8) Now t h a t a direct dependence of t h e Syriac New Testament upon Oi igen is excluded we are free to date the work in conformity with all t h e other indications, i. e. in t h e last quarter of the second century A.D. I t is thus the earliest surviving monument of t h e reviving interest which Christians were beginning to take in t h e Holy Places. This lessens its value for textual criticism, as the translator becomes, to a certain extent, a critic rather than a witness. W h e n minutely examined, the Syriac Version, even in its oldest form, shews, like all other monuments of Christianity, the great chasm t h a t separates the second-century Christian Church from Palestinian life before the Destruction of Jerusalem. T h e only bridge across this great chasm is the Greek text of the New Testament itself. Naturally I do not wish t o deny the continuity of Catholicism with t h e first preaching of t h e Christian Gospel, b u t the continuity with the Fathers of old time t o which t h e Catholic Church of t h e second century justly attached so much weight was connected with ideas and not with tangible antiquities. I t is possible for theologians to have very different notions of the ' d e p o s i t ' which T i m o t h y was charged so carefully to guard, but quite certainly it did not include

SYKIAC

FORMS

OF N E W T E S T A M E N T NAMES

25

any t h e o r y a s t o t h e site of Na?aretli. F o r such t h i n g s we a r e driven back t o t h e words of t h e Greek T e s t a m e n t , a n d t h e Semitic consonants of t h e Syriac Version b e a r witness t o n o g e o g r a p h i c a l or linguistic t r a d i t i o n t h a t goes b e h i n d this. F . C. B U R K 1 T T .

APPENDICES I.

AlJPHAEUSj AGABUS, HEBRfcW,

T H E t h r e e n a m e s Alphacus, Agabus, a n d Hebrew, are best t r e a t e d t o g e t h e r in t h e f o r m of a N o t e t o W e s t c o t t a n d H o r t ' s well-known Introduction § 408, a p a r a g r a p h e x p l a i n i n g a n d d e f e n d i n g t h e s m o o t h a n d r o u g h b r e a t h i n g s a d o p t e d by t h e m in t h e i r edition of t h e G r e e k t e x t of t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t . T h e y say : — ' I n p r o p e r names t r a n s l i t e r a t e d f r o m t h e H e b r e w or A r a m a i c we have . . . exactly followed t h e H e b r e w or A r a m a i c spelling, expressing X a n d SJ b y t h e s m o o t h b r e a t h i n g , a n d H a n d n by t h e r o u g h b r e a t h i n g . . . . I n 'AXtfiaTas we follow t h e V u l g a t e Syriac ( t h e Old Syriac is lost 111 t h e f o u r places where t h e n a m e occurs), which agrees with w h a t t h e best m o d e r n a u t h o r i t i e s consider t o be t h e A r a m a i c o r i g i n a l . W e have also in t h e t e x t accepted t h e a u t h o r i t y of t h e Syriac f o r "Ayapos ( f r o m 235?): b u t " A y a f l o s ( f r o m 2 j n ) is s u p p o r t e d by t h e existence of a Hagab in E z r ii 4 5 f . ; N e h wi 48. I n like m a n n e r 'E/3ep, 'Eftpcuos, 'Efipali, 'E/3paiAZ

Hebrew has

1 Chr i 53) is spelt T h e Hebrew is

seems to occur in 1 Chr xx\ i 14 B, where the Here A has iioi&c.

8. Zalmunna,

K i n g of Midian (Judges rai 5 ff., Psalm lxxxiii 11),

appears in the Greek Bible as ~a\uava or SeX/jai'a. Zalmunna (Antiq.

But ' Zeba and

113!) are called by Josephus ZefSijv nai Zapnoiv^v

v 228).

Is it too fanciful to suppose that in this instance

Josephus modified the name for the sake of alliteration ? 9. Zaraces (Ezra A I 3 8 ) corresponds to the THNV of 2 Chr xxxvi 4. I t is conceivable that there may have been in the Semitic original a mention of Zedekiah ( H ' p l i l ) , but the te\t is doubtful as B lias ZApiON and the Latin Zaracelem and

Zachariam.

These nine instances appear to me to be of no importance at all. The case is different with respect to the remaining one — 10. Zoar, Hebrew

the city near the Dead Sea, where L o t took refuge, in I t is mentioned eleven times in all.

In eight

these (Gen xiv 2, 8 ; xix 22,23, 30 bis • Deut xxxiv 3 ; Isai

of

5 ) the

Greek Bible has Sijycop, a transliteration which points t o a vocalization different from the Massoretic (? cf.

Josh xv 54).

Further, the

use of y for V is characteristic of the earlier Greek transliterations. But besides hjytap

we find in Gen xiii 10, Jerem xxxi ( x h i i i ) 4,

V-oyopa and in Jerem

xxxi ( x l v i i i ) 34 Zo'yop.

more than a transcribers mistake.

This is something

I t is clear that there must have

been a definite reason for spelling the name of this town with Z . N o doubt the reason was that ' Z o a r 1 was a known place, spelt 7.0apa or

Zaapa

by

Ptolemy

(v

16).

referring to Gen xiv 2, BaAo, ij Ian . . . tj koX «if hi vvv ouetrat.

Eusebius (OS

Siywp, ij viv Zwopa

231) says, KOXOI^ivi}

Further, there was a special reason why

this town should be spelt with Z.

W e know from Gen xix that

.30

PROCEEDINGS

OF T H E

BRITISH

ACADEMY

1

the name was supposed to mean ' Littleham or ' Littleborough and Josephus says of it Zojwp ERT KCH VVV Xeyercu' KaXovtn yap oimos 'EjSpaioi TO oXiyov. Now though t and X do not indiscriminately or regular]}7 interchange, yet one or two roots containing these letters do interchange, and "1S)X—"Iv't is one. "VEX is one of the words for ' l i t t l e 1 in Hebrew, while in Jewish Aramaic it is T5JT and in Syriac U S t . W h e n therefore Josephus says t h a t Zwcip means TO SXiyov, it is Aramaic rather than Biblical Hebrew t h a t he has in mind, and very likely he knew of the town of Zcoopa as "lV"T, t h e form found in the ' J e r u s a l e m 1 Targtim to Gen xiv and xix, and also in the ' J e r u s a l e m ' (i. c. Palestinian) T a l m u d . Somewhat similarly the root p i t is used in Syriac (not in Palestinian Aramaic) instead of p I X , so t h a t e. g. the SaSSoMatoi appear regularly in the Syriac \ersions as N'pTlt. But this is an exclusively Syriac form and does not occur even in the Christian Palestinian dialect. T h u s the names of Z o a r — — Z c o a p a do not really form an isolated exception to t h e rule t h a t Greek Z does not correspond to Semitic X. T h e evidence rather suggests t h a t in historical times this town was known by an Aramaic name (*lS?t), r a t h e r than by the old Hebraeo-Canaanite one ("®X) by which it is called in the Old Testament. I t is possible t h a t the more modern Aramaic name had once a footing in the Old T e s t a m e n t itself, and t h a t this stage is reflected by the Greek Bible, in which possibly S>;ycop corresponds to while Zoyopa. represents T h i s peculiar ease is a very slender foundation for supporting the theory that in Nafape'il or Nafapa the second consonant corresponds t o a sade and not to a

zain.

INDEX Abaddon 7 Abia 0 Abraham 2 Acre, see Ptolemais Adonizedek 28 Aenon 13 Agabus 25, 26 Alans, see Elamites Alphaeus 5, 25, 26 Annas 6 Arabia 6 Arabs 6 Aretas 8 Arzareth 28 Azotus 8 Barabbas 6 Bar-Jesns, Barshuma 22 Barsabbas 6 Bartholomew 23 Beelzebub 4 Bethabara 4, 9f., 13, 24 Bethany 4,13,14 Bethesda 19f., 24 Bethlehem Serieb 17 n. Bethphage 6, 13, 24 Bethsaida 6, 9, 17 Bezatha, see Bethesda Bezeth 20 Boanerges 17 Boaz 8 Bozez 28 Caiaphas 5, 9 Caua 18 f , 22 Canaanite, Cananaean 6 Capernaum 17, 27 f. Cephas 5 Chorazia 6,17f. Chuza 6

Dalmanutha 15,17 Dule 2 n. Elamites 22, 23 Gadarenes 10 n. Gaza 8 Gennesaret 8,15 Gerar 10 u. Geraseues 10 n. Gergesenes, Girgashites 9f., 24 Gethsemane 8 Gnsham, Gaslmm 23 n. Hagaren es 10 n. Hebrew, Heber 25 f. Hezron 28 Hosanna 5 Huz 29 Isaac 2 'lu, see Barshuma Jacob 2 Jairus, Jair 7, 22, 24 Jerusalem 4,12 Jesus, Jesu 6 Jobel, see Obed Joppa 8 Jordan 13 Joshua 6 Lydda8 Malchus 23 Mattatha 8 Matthias, see Tholomaeus Melchizedek 28 Mesopotamia 4 Messiah 6 Mibzar 29

INDEX N'ai il lì Na zara IG Nazarene, Nazoraean 16, 18 Nazareth 15 f., 21, 24 N'azirite* IG, 18 Obed C Partii u n d Peter 5 n.

Sap ph ira Sarepta 28 Saron, Sharon 8 Segor, see Zoar Chinar 10 Sid ou 28 Silas fi Simon, Simeon l> Sion 4. IG

Pharaoh 2 Pharisees 5 Phylacteries 5, 23 Ptoiemais 8 , 1 2 , 23

Tabi th it 3 Talitha 5 Tarsus 8 Thaddaeus (» Tholomneus 23

Ö adduce es 5, 30 Salim 13 Sanhédrin 23

Zalraumia 20 Za race* 20 Zoar, Zoara 29^30