Numerous respected textual critics have stressed the value of the Syro-Latin agreements against the Greek text. In their opinion, these agreements between the Old Syriac and the Old Latin gospel texts seem to indicate the earliest texts that we now possess.
Also, Wieland asked me before to post here for discussion some Syro-Latin agreements in Jn. There's of course a great number of such agreements, so where do we begin? Also, to be sure, it's possible that these agreements do not really go back to the earliest gospel texts of them all. For example, it's clear that the Old Syriac textual tradition, itself, had a large number of internal variations. Just like the Greek tradition, it was also a living tradition that was probably gradually adjusted over time in various ways. So which of the Old Syriac texts are really the earliest?
Myself, I'm also quite interested in the history of the Diatessaron. So can we say that the triple agreements between the Diatessaron, the OS, and the OL -- of which there are also a great number, of course -- point to the earliest gospel texts? I think this is a possibility that cannot be dismissed so easily.
So now I have this idea. What if we examine the first miracle of Jesus, turning water into wine, in light of all the above? (Of course I have already posted recently about those very interesting Western Diatessaronic agreements in this passage.) What prompts me now to return to this subject is my recent examination of this passage as we find it in the Persian Diatessaron.
The Persian Diatessaron exists in one copy only (located in Florence, Italy). It was edited and translated into Italian by G. Messina (DIATESSARON PERSIANO, ed. G. Messina, "Biblica et Orientalia" 14, Rome, 1951). The Persian text is dated in 1547, but this seems to be a translation from Syriac, as prepared in the 13th century by a Jacobite priest (see Petersen, TATIAN'S DIATESSARON, 1994, p. 260). Petersen finds that there is "frequent recourse" there to the readings of the Old Syriac. Also, according to Petersen,
"Messina noticed that the Persian Harmony's text contained an exceptional number of Semitisms." (Petersen 1994:260)
So if we assume that both MG and the Dutch DT are representatives of the Old Latin textual tradition, and that the Persian DT is a representative of the Old Syriac tradition, and also if some textual agreements between the Persian and the Western DTs are found, then, basically, they would seem to fit into the category of Syro-Latin agreements?
However it may be, I have now located 9 textual agreements in Jn 2:1-11 (against the Greek text) between the Persian DT and the Magdalene Gospel -- some of them also attested in some other Western DTs. I can present this evidence soon but, meanwhile, I'm just wondering if there will be some comments from listmembers about this procedure that I'm now proposing. Does this seem like a sound procedure?
Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku
The goal proposed by Cynic philosophy is apathy, which is equivalent to becoming God -=O=- Julian