TEXTUAL TRANSMISSION AND TRANSLATION
24. Diatessaric Readings in the
3’4 J. N E V I L L E BIRDSALL
who is gratified to note that Professor Metzger agrees with him that there is no evidence of the Diatessaron to be found there.7 He evidently shared not only this opinion with the writer, but also ignorance of the work of Lake, which is hidden in a one- column note in the Expository Times, vol. I 7 (I 905-6). It is a merit of Professor Tjitze Baarda to have brought it to light again in his Proefschrift on the gospel quotations of Afrahat.8 The rear column of the advance may be said to be the work of Professor Molitor, especially in his Latin translation and harmony of the gospels.9 In the writer’s view, this does no more than to high- light harmonistic readings in the gospel tradition in Georgian which have entered that tradition from a four-gospel base in Armenian, itself tinctured with sporadic Tatianic hue from its ultimate Syriac base.
It is concerning the document discussed by Lake that this note is written in honour of one whose article on the evidence of the versions10 for the text of the NT was amongst the writer’s stimuli to study and research in this field. This document is the work of a contemporary of the martyr who was converted to Christ from Islam and eventually suffered for his faith in AD 786 on January 6. Johannes Sabanidze writes in response to the request of Samuel, Catholicos of Kartli, whose request constitutes the first section of the work. This continues with an address by the martyrologist directed to the church as it listens to the account of the witness of Abo on the feast of the Epiphany. This leads him to speak of the Name of Jesus, which he states himself unable to ex- pound, yet willing to make the attempt for the sake of his zealous brethren. He then embarks upon a catalogue and exposition of names by which Jesus is called, which we will give below.11 7 B. M. Metzger, 2-h Early Versions of the New Testament (Oxford: Clarendon, r 977)Y 192.
8 T. Baarda, Th Gospel Quotations of Aphrahat the Persian Sage: I, Aphrahat’s T&t of the Fourth Gospel (Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit, rg75), 135-7 (9 52) and Appendix, pp. 381, 449.
9 J. Molitor, Synopsis Latina evangeliorum Ibericorum antiquissimorum secundum Matthaeum, Marcum, Lucam desumpta e codicibus Adysh, Opiza, Tbeth necnon e frag- mantis biblicis et patristicis quae dicuntur Chanmeti et Haemeti (CSCO 256/Subs. 24;
Louvain, rg65), esp. Part III, ‘Harmonismen in denen wir unbedenklich Tatianis- men vermuten diirfen’.
I0 B. M. Metzger, ‘The Evidence of the Versions for the Text of the New Testament’, Jvew Testament Manuscript Studies (ed. M. M. Parvis and A. P. Wik- gren; Chicago: University of Chicago, rg5o), 25-68.
1’ This study is based upon the recent edition by Ilia Abuladze, Dzveli k’art’uli
Diatessaric Readings in Martyrdom of Abo? 3’5 Lake’s discussion12 deals with two gospel quotations, one from John which is in the exposition referred to, the text of which will shortly be given. The other is from Luke and appears in the earlier part of the sermonic introduction: this is ostensibly Luke
I 7 : 2 I which appears in the form ‘sasup’eveli grmtisay gult’a
$ina t’k’uent’a ars’ - the Kingdom of God ‘is within your hearts. Since we have more to say of the catalogue of names in which the Johannine quotation appears, it is better to deal with the alleged Diatessaric quality of this other quotation at once.
Lake based himself on Moesinger’s translation of the commentary of Ephraem upon the Concordant Gospel ‘regnum intra in corde vestro est’ and ‘regnum Dei in corde vestroy. This is confirmed, with slight stylistic variation, by the more recent translation of Leloir.14 Unfortunately, this occurs in a section of the commen- tary which has not come to light in the original Syriac. We have then no first-hand assurance that it was the reading of the Diates- saron. To the contrary, we have some probable evidence that it was not. In quotations in works of Ephraem in Syriac (collected by Leloir) 15 we have four occurrences and in no case does the rendering with ‘your hearts’ appear: three instances have the Peshitta form, and one that of the Vetus Syra.16 Furthermore, the Pseudo-Ephraemic ‘Exposition of the Gospel’, extant only in Armenian, whose links with the Diatessaron have often been acknowledged, has a form which appears to be a slavish rendering
agiograp’iuli Ziteraturis dzeglebi (Monuments of Old Georgian Hagiographical Literature; Tbilisi: Me’t’sniereba, rg64), I .46-81. Further bibliography will be found in M. van Esbroeck, Les plus an&em hornkliaires georgiens (Louvain-la-Neuve:
Universite catholique, institut orientaliste, rg75), I 36-7, while the historical background is discussed by Paul Peeters in the article, ‘Les Khazars dans la Passion de S. Abo de Tiflis’, AnBoZl 52 (rg34), 2 1-63.
12 ‘Tatian’s Diatessaron’, 286.
13 G. Moesinger, Evangelii concordantis expositio facta a Sancto Ephraemo Do&ore Syro (Venice, 1876), 209, 21 I.
14 L. Leloir, Saint Ephrem: Commentaire de I’t?vangile concordant, Version armknienne (CSCO 137/Arm. I; Louvain, rg53), 255, 257; translation (CSCO r45/Arm. 2;
Louvain, I 954)) I 84-5.
1s L. Leloir, L’kvangile d’Ephrem d’apr2s les euvres kdities (CSCO 18a/Subs. I 2 ; Louvain, rg58), go, nos. 560-3.
16 The matter is discussed by F. C. Burkitt, Evangelion da Mepharreshe (Cam- bridge: Cambridge University, rgo4), 2.198 and 298. He considers the homily from which Leloir’s nos. 561 and 562 are taken to be the work of Isaac of Antioch. He cites no evidence, however, for non-authenticity of that containing no. 560, which also has the Peshitta rendering. Moreover, he provides no data to tell us how many quotations he counted in the work of Ephraem.
3’6 J . N E V I L L E BIRDSALL
of the wording of the Peshitta. 17 It would appear most probable, then, that in this case the Georgian form known in the Martyr- dom is a legacy in Georgian of an Armenian ancestry, but extends no further back in the tradition.
The second reading which Lake considers to show Diatessaric origin is the form in which John IO : 7 or g is quoted ‘me var kar chorebisay’- I am the door of life. This Lake attributed to the Diatessaron on the strength of a quotation of AfrahatI*
which takes this form, but adds the words ‘that whosoever by me shall enter shall live for ever’. On this we may make two observations. Firstly, the Georgian form which stands in the edition translated by Schultze is the reading of one MS only, as the more recent edition of Abuladze shows us.19 The form accepted by the latter (apparently on the basis of majority attestation by fourteen of his fifteen MSS) is ‘me var kari chovart’ay’-I am the door of the sheep. There may then be some doubt whether it should be read in this form, agreeing with the Greek tradition, or in the form discussed by Lake.
For my part, I would be inclined to accept the form discussed by Lake on the basis of Zectio &@lior @or. But even so, does it come from the Diatessaron? Baarda20 doubts this, since Afrahat also attests ‘I am the door of the sheep’, and in this view he agrees with Leloir and Ortiz de Urbina in their earlier studies.
The phrase ‘door of life’ is known to Ephraem,zI but in connec- tion with other passages than John I O, namely Ps. I I 8 : 20 and Luke I I : 52. It is then, concludes Baarda, an agraphon, and
he discusses it in this light. .
But there is a further reason why we should not hasten to take Lake’s assessment of the significance of this reading as the correct one. The reading occurs in the sermonic introduction, and this 17 G. Egan (ed.), Saint Ephrem: An Exposition of the Gospel (CSCO 2gr/Arm. 5;
Louvain, rg68), 69; translation (CSCO 2g2/Arm. 6; Louvain, rg68), 64. Egan has promised a discussion of the biblical text which has not yet appeared; mean- while we rely on the work of Joseph Schaefers, Eine altsyrische antimarkionitiwhe Erkliirung von Parabeln des Herrn (Miinster: Aschendorff, rgr 7), 81 n. 4.
I* Demo&ratio 4.5 (PS I. 145).
19 Dxveli k’art’uli, 52 (line 25) and n. 47.
20 Gospel Quotations, 135-7, 381, 449.
21 Commentary on the Concordant Gospel 18.8 and 2 I .2 I (Leloir, Saint Ephrem:
Commentaire, 257,326; translation, 185,232). It is intriguing that the former of these occurrences is in close proximity to the Lucan passage also found in Abo and dis- cussed by Lake.
Diatessaric Readings in Marprdom of Abo? 3’7 does not represent the Georgian text of the eighth century, but a traditional body of material which John and his contemporaries inherited from a more primitive period. Since it is not available in English,22 it may be worth while to give the whole of the rele- vant part in translation, so that it is more readily accessible to English-speaking scholarship.
John refers in the course of his sermonic address to the declara- tion of the Epistle of Paul to the Philippians that ‘every knee shall bow and every
continues as follows : tongue confess’ the Name of Jesus. He Because fearful and holy and altogether powerful and wonderful and Lord and Almighty is His name. We are not able to attain to (the exposition of) the richness of His name but in accordance with my inability and your eagerness I will make a beginning of your instruction, beloved! (His names are) Door, Way, Lamb, Shepherd, Stone, Pearl, Flower, Angel, Man, God, Light, Earth, Salt, Worm, Mustard-seed, Sun of Righteousness, Son of the eternal Father, and One God, constant (lit. invariable) and indestructible is His nature after the taking of a Body and the unification with Godhead; in connection with which we are perhaps able to make known to you truthfully about each name but only by His grace shall I make it known to you, the friends of Christ.
He is called Door because He said, ‘I am the Door of Life’ (v. 1.
‘of the sheep’), because truly those who believe in Him enter through Him, the door of the Kingdom (v. 1. ‘through Him as through the door of the Kingdom’).
He is called Way because He said, ‘I am the Way and the Truth and the Life’,23 because He becomes a way to us as we ascend to heaven.
He is called Lamb, because ‘He was slain for US’,~~ and ever lives,25 and by the division26 of His body and blood to us gives to us eternal life.
He is called Shepherd because He said, ‘I am the Good Shepherd’.27 Truly, He has turned us wandering sheep back, and has killed our 22 An abbreviated version of the Martyrdom will be found in D. M. Lang Lives and Legends of the Georgian Saints (2d edn. ; London: Allen & Unwin, rg76),
I 15-33. A French translation of this section has been made by M. van Esbroeck;
see note 54 below.- _
23John 14: 6.
24 1 Cor. 5: 7. 2s Heb. 7: 25.
26 Ganqopay, rendered here ‘division’, is used in the setting of the miraculous feeding in the Georgian version at Mark 6: 41 and John 6: I I.
27 John IO: 14: the ‘wolf’in the exposition has links with IO: 12.
318 J . N E V I L L E BIRDSALL
enemy the lion with the rod of the cross and has brought to life again by the power of the Godhead the corpse of the first-formed destroyed by that lion (lit. by him) and has healed by His wound the bite of the venomous wolf and has dissipated the deadly venom by the medicine of His Godhead and has fulfilled the word spoken through the prophet, namely, ‘He was wounded because of our sins and by His wounds we are healed’.28
He is called Corner-Stone by the prophet because He is the one who was dishonoured29 and rejected by the highpriests and by the scribes of the people of the Jews in Jerusalem, but became the head of all the corners30 of heaven.31
He is called Pearl because He shines out like a pearl between the two valves of the spirit and the body. Lovers of God, as merchants32 of the kingdom, seek Him with faith, not as God alone and not as mere man, but as God and man, and they purchase Him, uniquely of great price, by the expenditure of all treasure (v. 1. ‘of all the world’) and by the pouring out of their blood also.
He is called Salt34 because He has drawn near to our body corrupted by sin and has removed from us the stench of idol-worship and has prepared (lit. mixed) our souls with sweet savour by the faith of the worship of God.
He is called Flower because as a flower He has sprung up from the root of Jesse35 for the church from the holy virgin Mary in bodily form, and (furthermore) has spread over us the spirit of grace through the sweet smell of Godhead.
He is called Angel, because it was spoken of Him through the pro- phet, ‘the Angel of great counsel, wonderful’,36 who came to us as deliverer from the Father.
28 Isaiah 53: 5,6: cf. the use of these verses in I Pet. 2: 24,25, and note ‘wander- ing sheep’ which has links with both; and the use of ‘lion’ in I Pet. 5: 8 to describe the devil.
29 Cf. Mark 8: 3 I ; Luke g: 22: yet this is not a direct borrowing from scripture;
the phrase ‘the scribes of the people of the Jews in Jerusalem’ smacks of a later, probably anti-Judaic style.
30 The word ‘kidet’a’, here rendered ‘corners’, is used in the translation of Ps. I 17: 22 in all Georgian recensions, and in the AdiS MS in Matt. 21: 42 and Mark 12: I O.
31 The image has here become very highly developed and complex; Eph.
2: 20 may well be a link in its chain of evolution.
32 Matt. 13: 45. 3s Matt. 13: 46.
34 The image of the Christian as a sacrifice salted by Christ recalls Rom. 12: I
and the variant at Mark g: 4g based on Lev. 2: 13 (which however is known only in Codex Bezae and MSS of the Old Latin).
35 Isa. II: I.
36 Isa. g: 6 (Abuladze, whose scripture references are on the whole very accurate -and better than Schultze’s!-here inadvertently gives Ps. g: 6).
Diatessaric Readings in Martyrdom of Abo? 3 ’ 9 He is called Man, because the prophet said, ‘He is a man and who shall know Him?‘37 Truly He put on perfect Manhood without sin, and revealed to us His Godhead.
He is called God as the blessed John the beloved said, ‘The word was God, and through Him everything was made that was made’.38
He is called Light, because He said, ‘It was (v. 2. ‘I am’) the true Light which lights every man who comes into the world’.39
He is called Earth, as David said, ‘The earth has given its fruit, bless us 0 God, our God’.@ Truly the maker of the earth came to the earth and from the earth is (His) body of an earthly nature from those who were made from the earth; as a comely shoot He has sprung from the earth, and has produced as fruit His holy apostles and martyrs and righteous, and has filled the accursed earth with the fruit of blessing.
He is called Mustard-seed+’ because He made Himself small and was made like us in our stature so that He might plant (Himself in) the field of our soul and strike the roots deep and might gather us upon the branches of His cross and be exalted42 and exalt us with Him.
He is called Worm because He said, ‘I am a worm and not a man’.43 By the brightness of the Godhead, as a hook in a worm, thus He hid His own Godhead in His body44 and cast it into the nether regions of the world and drew it up like a good fisherman : about whom He says, ‘He took the dragon with a hook and put a bridle in his mouth and a spike through his nose’,d5 that is the devil whom He took and whose wiles He broke, about whom the Psalmist David bears witness,
‘Thou hast broken the heads of the dragon’.46
He is called Sun of Righteousness because the prophet said, ‘The Sun of Righteousness shall illuminate you who fear his name, beneath whose wings is healing‘,Q because (the sun) is that which covers and warms and there is nothing which is hid from its heat.48
But I have explained nothing at all of this to you of myself, beloved, 37 Jer. 17: g. 38 John I: I, 3. 39 John I: g; cf. g: 5.
40 Ps. 66: 7. 41 Mark 4: 31 and parallels.
42 John 12: 32. 43 Ps. 21: 7.
44 A less literal rendering might be ‘flashing forth Godhead, He hid it in His flesh like a hook in a worm’. The Georgian verb rendered ‘brightness’ or ‘flashing’
is found in the translation of &a$yaapa (Wisd. 7: 26). E)~Ac&nav is one of the words it represents in the gospels. A near parallel is found in Cyril of Alexandria, thes. 6 (MPG 75.80), where the subject-matter is the eternal generation of the Son, and the image that of the sun emitting its rays.
4s Job 40: 25, 26 (cited by Schultze) provides a closer parallel, adapted only to form a specific assertion in prophetic mode, than Ezek. 29: 4, adduced by Abu- ladze.
46 Ps. 73: 14 (with the variant avv~8Xaaaslouv~7pLIas, known in the whole Georgian tradition).
47 Mal. 4: 2 . 48 Ps. 18: 7.
320 J . N E V I L L E BIRDSALL
lovers of Christ and keepers of the teaching, but from the witness of the prophetic books and according to the preaching of the apostles, namely what is written in the holy gospels and the faith established by the holy fathers, the teachers.
Clearly, John spoke the truth : this is no document of the eighth century, but an inheritance from earlier days. Lists of titles of Christ are found in the Acts of Peter49 and the Acts of John,50 of which the Acts of Peter share Door, Way, Pearl, Light, and Mustard-Seed with our document, and the Acts of John the first two terms only. Each has a number of others. Lists are found in Justin’s Dialogue with Trypho (especially ch. 126) and lie behind the second book of Cyprian’s Testimonia (Ad Quirinum).
A number of the scriptural citations in our document are known in the earlier literature, especially ‘angel of great counsel, wonderful’ (Isa. g : 6)51 and ‘he is a man and who shall know him ?’ (Jer. I 7 : g) .52 The phrase ‘I am a worm and no man’ is found quoted in Justin, Dialogue IOI, but is not expounded, although the whole verse from which it comes is said to be fore- told of Jesus. Its exposition by the image of the hook in the worm is found with almost exactly the same wording in the homily of Amphilochius of Iconium, ‘In illud : Pater, si possibile est’, where the quotation from Job 40 is also found (a text never found in the early testimonia lists).53 In fact a concurrence of recent researches shows that this list in the Martyrdom of Abo is also found in the Amphilochian homily, ‘De recens baptizatis et in resurrectionem’ ; however, it is known in its full form only in the Martyrdom.54 The opinion of van Esbroeck is that only by use of the text of the Martyrdom may the archetype of
49 Act. Petr. 20 (ed. L. Vouaux [Paris, 19221, 3469).
so Act. JO. g8 (LB 2/1, 200).
51 Justin, dial. 126.1 (ed. E. J. Goodspeed [Gottingen, 19141, 246).
52 Cyprian, ad Quir. 2. IO (CSEL 311, 74).
53 CPG 3237; text edited by K. Holl, Amphilochius eon Ikonium (Ttibingen:
Mohr, rgo4), gr-102, esp. 98-g. Data about the use of Job 40: 25-6 are derived from Bibliu Patristica (2 ~01s. ; Paris: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique,
‘975-7).
54 CPG 3238; BHG rg36q: edited by C. Datema, Amphilochii Iconiensis Opera (Corpus Christianorum, series graeca 3 [Turnhout, rg78]), 151-6. For the details of recent research see CPG ii sub numero (where, however, we should read ‘versio georgica s.n. Epiphanii’ [not ‘Amphilochii’]); van Esbroeck, Les plus an&w hombliuires georgiens, 152-3; and id. ‘Archtologie d’une homtlie sur la Paque at- tribute a Chrysostome ou Epiphane de Chypre’, Armenian and Biblical Studies (ed. Michael Stone; Jerusalem, x976), 165-81.
Diatessaric Readings in Mar&dom of Abo? 321 the homily be reconstructed. The christological remarks with which the exposition is rich show a two-nature doctrine in terminology which is close to that of Amphilochius, namely Godhead-body (it is ambiguous whether ‘body’ or ‘flesh’ is being rendered in Georgian). 55 What we have here then is apparently a borrowing by John Sabanidze of an expansion by Amphilochius of a much earlier list, Thus a document of early Christianity has been preserved in Georgian dress.
Its preservation alerts us to the possibility that other traces of ante-Nicene literature may be found in the same area. Remains of Melito and Hippolytus in Georgian are well known. In the Martyrdom of Eustathius of Mzhetha possible links with the Epistula Apostolorum have been discerned,56 while Kekelidze in an article rarely observed has argued that the use of the Apology of Aristides may be observed in the same document.57 A list of canonical books of the OT, preserved in a Sinai MS,58 might have links with declarations of Melito or other early lists.59 It is a field well worth prospecting, and young scholars should be encouraged to learn Georgian and the other relevant lan- guages so that that field may be exploited as it should be. It is a curious phenomenon of Christian scholarship at the present time that so much ingenuity should be expended upon areas where no more advance is possible because of a dearth of new data, when there are virgin seams scarcely prospected and com- pletely unmined.
But to return to the quotation of John IO : 7 or its related agraphon. Its occurrence in a list transmitted through Amphi- lochius shows without a doubt that no trace of the Diatessaron is to be discerned here, but a valuable relic of early exposition 55 horci and (plural) horcni are used to render both &pa and odpt in the Georgian biblical translations. A uniform rendering has been given in the text.
56 See note 6 above.
57 K. Kekelidze, ‘Antimazdeisturi polemikis p’ilosop’iuri dasabut’eba udzvel’s k’art’ul mcerlobagi’ [‘The philosophical argument of anti-Mazdean polemic in the earliest Georgian literature’], Etiudebi 5 (Tbilisi, rg55), 42-60. I owe knowledge of this interesting article to Professor E. 3Jintibidze of the University of Tbilisi.
58 See M. T’arhniSvili (TarchniSvili), Geschichte der kirchlichen georgischen Literutur (Rome: Biblioteca apostolica vaticana, rg55), 327. The reference there given to an unprinted catalogue of Georgian MSS on Mt. Sinai may be improved now as follows: I. JavahiSvili (DZavachiSvili), Sinis mt’is kart’ul _heZnucert’u ugcerilobu (Tbilisi,
rg47), 57,referring to MS 34, fol. 203.
59 See e.g. H. B. Swete, An Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek Cambridge-University, 1g14), 203.
(London: