Subject: tc-list Text-Type of Old Syriac

From: "Douglas F. Salmon" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 1998 08:22:21 -0700

I am concerned by a statement I recently read in Wikenhauser's, New
Testament Introduction (ET, 1958) :

"In recent times, however, competent textual critics (Burkitt, Lake,
Kenyon, and others) have insisted that the Old Syriac Gospel text does not
belong to the Western form" (p. 142).

This is contrary to the usual discussions of the Western witnesses I am
familiar with, e.g. most recently Eldon J. Epp listed the Old Syriac
version as a witness in his article on "Western Text" in the Anchor Bible
Dictionary.  My question to the list is:  Are there scholars today who
_DON'T_ feel that the Old Syriac is a witness to the Western text-type.

Doug Salmon
[email-masked]

---

From: "Robert B. Waltz" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 1998 18:02:27 -0600

>_DON'T_ feel that the Old Syriac is a witness to the Western text-type.

Most of the statements I've seen on this subject have in fact been old.
(So, for instance, Baarda's essay in Ehrman & Holmes, _The Text of the
New Testament in Contemporary Research_, does not address the question.)

But I'm going to be aggressive and ask, How would one *know*?

The Old Syriac certainly has readings characteristic of the "Western"
text. It also has readings *not* associated with that text -- e.g.
the omission of the ending of Mark in the Sinai manuscript.

So before one can answer the question, one must offer a definition
of the "Western" text. The text of D? The text of the old latins?
_Which_ old latins? Or is it the consensus of the above?

And what is a text-type anyway? And how does one determine if a
version belongs to it?

This is not a case of being obtuse. Various people on the list have
different definitions of a text-type -- or at least have different
feelings about what is and is not a text-type. So until we know
how *you* define the term, we can't give an answer.

Speaking solely for myself, I suspect the Old Syriac does belong to
a distinct text-type. However, this is based on sketchy information
and on analogies to Paul and the Catholics. I do not consider
this an established conclusion. Particularly since I don't read
Syriac. :-)

-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-

                        Robert B. Waltz
                     [email-masked]

Want more loudmouthed opinions about textual criticism?
Try my web page: http://www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn
(A site inspired by the Encyclopedia of NT Textual Criticism)