IX. Besides the fragments of the preceding antient versions, taken from Origen's Hexapla, there are found in the margins of the manuscripts of the Septuagint some additional marks or notes, containing various renderings in Greek of some passages in the Old Testament: these are cited as the Hebrew, Syrian, Samaritan, and Hellenistic versions, and as the version of some anonymous author. The probable meaning of these references it may not be improper briefly to notice.

1. The Hebrew (i Eßganos) is supposed by some to denote the translation of Aquila, who closely and literally followed the Hebrew text but this idea is refuted by Montfaucon and Bauer, who remark that, after the reference to the Hebrew, a reading follows, most widely differing from Aquila's rendering. Bauer more probably conjectures that the reference Eßgans denotes the Hebrew text from which the Septuagint version differs.

2. Under the name of the Syrian ( Zugos) are intended the fragments of the Greek version made by Sophronius, patriarch of Con stantinople, from the very popular Latin translation of Jerome, who is supposed to have acquired the appellation of the Syrian, from his long residence on the confines of Syria. He is thus expressly styled by Theodore of Mopsuestia in a passage cited by Photius in his Bibliotheca.1

3. The Samaritan (so Eaμageirinov) is supposed to refer to the fragments of a Greek version of the Hebræo-Samaritan text, which is attributed to the antient Greek scholiast so often cited by Flaminio Nobili, and in the Greek Scholia appended to the Roman edition of the Septuagint. Considerable doubts, however, exist concerning the identity of this supposed Greek version of the Samaritan text; which, if it ever existed, Bishop Walton thinks, must be long posterior in date to the Septuagint.2

4. It is not known to which version or author the citation EXλnvixos, or the Hellenistic, refers:- The mark Aλos, or

¿ Avery gapos denotes some unknown anonymous author.

Before we conclude the present account of the antient Greek versions of the Old Testament, it remains that we briefly notice the translation preserved in St. Mark's Library at Venice, containing the Pentateuch, Proverbs, Ruth, Song of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations of Jeremiah, and Prophecy of Daniel. The existence of this version, which was for a long time buried among other literary treasures deposited in the above-mentioned library, was first announced by Zanetti and Bongiovanni in their catalogue of its manuscripts. The Pentateuch was published in three parts, by M. Ammon, at Erlang, 1790, 1791, 8vo.: and the remaining books by M. Villoison at Strasburgh, 1784, 8vo. The original manuscript, Morelli is of opinion, was executed in the 14th century; and, the numerous errors discoverable in it, prove that it cannot be the autograph of the translator. By whom this version was made, is a question yet undetermined. Morelli thinks its author was a Jew; Ammon supposes him 1 Page 205, edit. Hoeschelii.

2 Prol. c. xi. § 22. pp. 553, 554.

to have been a Christian monk, and perhaps a native of Syria; and Bauer, after Zeigler, conjectures him to have been a Christian grammarian of Constantinople, who had been taught Hebrew by a Western Jew. Whoever the translator was, his style evidently shows him to have been deeply skilled in the different dialects of the Greek language, and to have been conversant with the Greek poets. Equally uncertain is the date when this version was composed: Eichorn, Bauer, and several other eminent biblical writers, place it between the sixth and tenth centuries: the late Dr. Holmes supposed the author of it to have been some Hellenistic Jew, between the ninth and twelfth centuries. "Nothing can be more completely happy, or more judicious, than the idea adopted by this author, of rendering the Hebrew text in the pure Attic dialect, and the Chaldee in its corresponding Doric." Dr. Holmes has inserted extracts from this version in his edition of the Septuagint.3

§3. ON THE ANTIENT ORIENTAL VERSIONS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 1. SYRIAC VERSIONS. Notice of the Syriac Manuscripts brought from India by the late Rev. Dr. Buchanan; Editions of the Syriac Version; · II. ARABIC VERSIONS, and Editions; III. Other Oriental Versions.-1. PERSIAN Versions; -2. EGYPTIAN Versions; 3. ETHIOPIC or ABYSSINIAN Version; -4. ARMENIAN Version; -5. SCLAVONIC, or Old Russian Version.

I. SYRIA being visited at a very early period by the preachers of the Christian faith, several translations of the sacred volume were made into the language of that country. The most celebrated of these is the Peschito or Literal (Versio Simplex), as it is usually called, on account of its very close adherence to the Hebrew text, from which it was immediately made. The most extravagant as

1 British Critic, O. S. vol. viii. p. 259.

2 The preceding account of antient Greek versions is drawn from Carpzov, Critica Sacra, pp. 552-574; Bauer, Critica Sacra, pp. 273-288; Morus, Acroases Hermeneutica, tom. ii. pp. 120-147; Bishop Walton, Prolegom. c. ix. § 19. pp. 385-387; Jahn, Introductio in Libros Sacros Veteris Fœderis, pp. 66-70; and Masch's edition of Le Long's Bibliotheca Sacra, part ii. vol. ii. sect. I. pp. 220-229. Montfaucon, Præl. Diss. ad Origenis Hexapla, tom. i. pp. 46-73. In the fourth volume of the Commentationes Theologica, (pp. 195-263,) edited by MM. Velthusen, Kuinöel, and Ruperti, there is a specimen of a Clavis Reliquiarum Versionum Græcarum V. T. by John Frederic Fischer: it contains only the letter A. A specimen of a new Lexicon to the antient Greek interpreters, and also to the apocryphal books of the Old Testament so constructed as to serve as a Lexicon to the New Testament, was also lately published by M. E. G. A. Böckel, at Leipsic, entitled Nova Clavis in Græcos Interpretes Veteris Testamenti, Scriptoresque Apocryphos, ita adornata ut etiam Lexici in Novi Faderis Libros usum præbere possit, atque editionis lxx. interpretum hexaplaris, specimina, 4to. 1820. Such a work, when completed, must prove highly valuable to biblical students. Cappel, in his Critica Sacra, has given a copious account with very numerous examples of the various lections that may be obtained by collating the Septuagint with the He brew, (lib. iv. pp. 491-766.) and by collating the Hebrew text with the Chalder paraphrases and the antient Greek versions, (lib. v. ce. 1-6. pp. 767-844.) tom. ii. ed. Scharfenberg.

sertions have been advanced concerning its antiquity, some referring it to the time of Solomon and Hiram, while others ascribe it to Asa the priest of Samaritans, and a third class to the apostle Thaddeus. This last tradition is received by the Syrian churches; but a more recent date is ascribed to it by modern biblical philologers. Bishop Walton, Carpzov, Leusden, Bishop Lowth, and Dr. Kennicott, fix its date to the first century; Bauer and some other German critics, to the second or third century; Jahn fixes it, at the latest, to the second century; De Rossi pronounces it to be very antient, but does not specify any precise date. The most probable opinion is that of Michaelis, who ascribes it to the close of the first, or to the earlier part of the second century, at which time the Syrian churches flourished most, and the Christians at Edessa had a temple for divine worship erected after the model of that at Jerusalem and it is not to be supposed that they would be without a version of the Old Testament, the reading of which had been introduced by the apostles. The arguments prefixed to the Psalms were manifestly written by a Christian author. This version was evidently made from the original Hebrew, to which it most closely and literally adheres, with the exception of a few passages which appear to bear some affinity to the Septuagint: Jahn accounts for this by supposing, either that this version was consulted by the Syriac translator or translators, or that the Syrians afterwards corrected their translation by the Septuagint. Leusden conjectures, that the translator did not make use of the most correct Hebrew manuscripts, and has given some examples which appear to support his opinion. Dathe however speaks most positively in favour of its antiquity and fidelity, and refers to the Syriac version, as a certain standard by which we may judge of the state of the Hebrew text in the second century: and both Kennicott and De Rossi have derived many valuable readings from this version. To its general fidelity almost every critic of note bears unqualified approbation, although it is not every where equal: and it is remarkably clear and strong in those passages which attribute characters of Deity to the Messiah. Jahn observes, that a different method of interpretation is adopted in the Pentateuch from that which is to be found in the Book of Chronicles; and that there are some Chaldee words in the first chapter of Genesis, and also in the Book of Ecclesiastes and the Song of Solomon: whence he infers that this version was the work not of one, but of several authors.1

An important accession to biblical literature was made, a few years since, by the late learned and excellent Dr. Buchanan, to whose assiduous labours the British church in India is most deeply indebted; and who, in his progress among the Syrian churches and Jews of

1 Carpzov, Critica Sacra, pp. 623-626; Leusden, Philologus Hebræo-Mixtus, pp. 67-71; Bishop Lowth's Isaiah, vol. i. p. xci.; Dr. Kennicott, Diss. ii. p. 355; Bauer, Critica Sacra, pp. 308-320; Jahn, Introd. ad Vet. Fæd. pp. 75, 76; De Rossi, Varie Lectiones ad Vet. Test. tom. i. prol. p. xxxii.; Dathe, Opuscula ad Crisin et Interpretationem Vet. Test. p. 171; Kortholt, de Versionibus Scripturæ, pp. 40-45; Walton, Proleg. c. 13. pp. 593, et seq. Dr. Smith's Scripture Testimony of the Messiah, vol. i. pp. 396, 397.

India, discovered and obtained numerous antient manuscripts of the Scriptures, which are now deposited in the public library at Cambridge. One of these, which was discovered in a remote Syrian church near the mountains, is particularly valuable it contains the Old and New Testaments, engrossed with beautiful accuracy in the Estrangelo (or old Syriac,) character, on strong vellum, in large folio, and having three columns in a page. The words of every book are numbered: and the volume is illuminated, but not after the European manner, the initial letters having no ornament. Though somewhat injured by time or neglect, the ink being in certain places obliterated, still the letters can in general be distinctly traced from the impress of the pen, or from the partial corrosion of the ink. The Syrian church assigns a high date to this manuscript, which, in the opinion of Mr. Yeates, who has published a collation of the Pentateuch, was written about the seventh century. In looking over this manuscript, Dr. Buchanan found the very first emendation of the Hebrew text proposed by Dr. Kennicott,2 which doubtless is the true reading.

The first edition of this version of the Syriac Scriptures appeared in the Paris Polyglott; but, being taken from an imperfect MS., its deficiencies were supplied by Gabriel Sionita, who translated the passages wanting from the Latin Vulgate, and has been unjustly charged with having translated the whole from the Vulgate. This text was reprinted in Bishop Walton's Polyglott, with the addition of some apocryphal books. There have been numerous editions of particular parts of the Syriac Old Testament, which are minutely described by Masch.3 A new edition of the Syriac Version of the Old Testament is at this time printing under the editorial care of the Rev. Professor Lee, of Cambridge, under the patronage of the Church Missionary Society, and at the expense of the British and Foreign Bible Society. To his collation of the Travancore Manuscript has been added that of another manuscript belonging to the Rev. Dr. Adam Clarke, and one of the Pentateuch found by Mr. Lee in the Library of New College, Oxford.4

The other Syriac versions being made from the Septuagint, it may suffice to offer a brief notice of the Syriac translation of Origen's Hexaplar edition of the LXX., which is the most celebrated and valuable. This translation was executed in the former part of the seventh century; the author of this version is unknown. The late Professor De Rossi, who published the first specimen of it,5 does not decide

1 In the Christian Observer, vol. xii. pp. 171–174, there is an account of Mr. Yeates's Collation; and in vol. ix. of the same Journal, pp. 273-275. 348-350, there is given a very interesting description of the Syriac manuscript above noticed. A short account of it also occurs in Dr. Buchanan's "Christian Researches" respecting the Syrians, pp. 229-231. (edit. 1811.)

2 Gen. iv. 8. And Cain said unto Abel his brother, Let us go down into the plain. It may be satisfactory to the reader to know that this disputed addition is to be found in the Samaritan, Syriac, Septuagint, and Vulgate Versions, printed in Bishop Walton's Polyglott.

3 Part ii. vol. i. sect. iv. pp. 64-71.

4 Report of the Church Missionary Society for 1817-18, p. 154.

5 M. De Rossi's publication is entitled, Specimen ineditæ et Hexaplaris Bibliorum Versionis, Syro-Estranghelæ, cum simplici atque utriusque fontibus, Græco

whether it is to be attributed to Mar-Abba, James of Edessa, Paul, Bishop of Tela, or to Thomas of Heraclea. Assemanni ascribes it to Thomas, though other learned men affirm that he did no more than collate the Books of Scripture. This version, however, corresponds exactly with the text of the Septuagint, especially in those passages in which the latter differs from the Hebrew. A MS. of this version is in the Ambrosian Library at Milan, comprising the Books of Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Hosea, Amos, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, Jeremiah, Daniel, and Isaiah: it also contains the obelus and other marks of Origen's Hexapla; and a subscription at the end states it to have been literally translated from the Greek copy, corrected by Eusebius himself, with the assistance of Pamphilus, from the books of Origen, which were deposited in the library at Cæsarea. The conformity of this MS. with the account given by Masius in the preface to his learned Annotations on the Book of Joshua, affords strong grounds for believing that this is the second part of the MS. described by him as then being in his possession, and which, there is reason to fear, is irrecoverably lost. From this version M. Norberg edited the prophecies of Jeremiah and Ezekiel in 1787, 4to. Londini, Gothorum; and M. Bugati, the Book of Daniel, at Milan, 1788, 4to.1

V. Although the Christian religion was preached in Arabia, as well as in other countries of the East, at an early period, yet it never was the established religion of the country, as in Syria and Egypt; for even the temple at Mecca was a heathen temple till the time of Mohammed. Historical evidence, therefore, concerning the ARABIC VERSIONS, does not extend beyond the tenth century, when

1. Rabbi Saadias Gaon, a celebrated Jewish teacher at Babylon, translated, or rather, paraphrased, the Old Testament into Arabic: of this version the Pentateuch was printed at Constantinople, in folio, in the year 1546, in Hebrew characters; and in the Paris and London Polyglotts, in Arabic letters. —The prophecy of Isaiah was published by Paulus in 8vo. at Jena, in 1790, 1791.2 The remaining books of this translation have not hitherto been discovered. Besides this, there are several other Arabic Versions extant, made immediately from the Hebrew, either by Jews, Samaritans or Christians, of which the following are the principal, viz.

2. The Arabic version of the Pentateuch, published by Erpenius et Hebræo, collate cum duplici Latinâ versione et notis. Edidit, ac diatribam de rarissimo codice Ambrosiano, unde illud haustum est, præmisit Johannes Bern. Rossi. 8vo. Parma, 1778. The specimen consists of the first psalm printed in six columns. The first contains the Greek text of the Septuagint; the second, the Syro-Estrangelo text; the third, the Latin text translated from the Septuagint; the fourth, the Hebrew text; the fifth the Peschito or old Syriac text above noticed; and the sixth, the Latin text translated from this latter version.

1 Masch, part ii. vol. i. pp. 58-60. Jahn, Introd. ad Vet. Feed. pp. 76-78. Monthly Review, O. S. vol. lix. pp. 452-454. Some other Syriac versions of less note are described by Masch, ut supra pp. 60-62.

2 On this book some remarks have been published by Dr. C. D. Breithaupt at Rostock, entitled Commentationis in Saadianam versionem Jesaiæ Arabicam fasciculus primus, 1819. 8vo.