The library · Edition and sources
Tatian: Diatessaron — Arabic Witness
Hope W. Hogg; ANF09 (1897) · Edition commentary
Reading appearance
Accessibility options
Saved in this browser and shared between texts. Labels and line patterns remain in every theme.
About this reading layout
Source wording, punctuation, paragraph boundaries and supplied line breaks are retained. Long prose also has editorial reading breaks at sentence boundaries. Substantial passages already enclosed in double quotation marks are set apart; this does not identify their source or establish a connection.
These added breaks are reading aids, not claims about the original manuscript’s layout. Poetry is lineated only where the downloaded text supplies line breaks. References and edition notes remain with their text.
Translator and historical edition notes
John i. 1.
John i. 2.
John i. 3.
John i. 4.
John i. 5.
On the margin of the Vatican ms., fol. 1a, are written by a later hand these words, The first of his Gospel. The first of the Evangel (is) the Gospel of Luke; followed by the text of the first four verses of Luke, and that in turn by the words, Four complete Gospels, Matthew, and Mark, and Luke, and John. See Ciasca’s Essay, cited above (Introduction, 5), p. 468.
Luke i. 5.
Luke i. 6.
Luke i. 7.
Luke i. 8.
Luke i. 9.
Luke i. 10.
Luke i. 11.
Luke i. 12.
Luke i. 13.
This word is constantly recurring in the sense of fear.
Luke i. 14.
Luke i. 15.
Everywhere, except in the introductory notes, the Arabic is the Spirit of Holiness, as in the Arabic versions.
Luke i. 16.
Luke i. 17.
See § 28, 17, note.
Luke i. 18.
Luke i. 19.
Luke i. 20.
Luke i. 21.
Luke i. 22.
Luke i. 23.
Luke i. 24.
Luke i. 25.
Luke i. 26.
The Vat. ms. has over this verse, The second section, from the Gospel of Luke, i.e., as divided in the Syriac and Arabic versions.
The Borgian ms. omits to Galilee.
Luke i. 27.
Luke i. 28.
Luke i. 29.
Luke i. 30.
Luke i. 31.
Luke i. 32.
Luke i. 33.
Luke i. 34.
Luke i. 35.
Luke i. 36.
Luke i. 37.
Luke i. 38.
Luke i. 39.
Vat. ms., like that described by Gildemeister (see Introduction, 20) has into Galilee (cf. § 8, 10, note).
Lit. the, a form due to Syriac influence (cf. § ii. 12, and passim).
Luke i. 40.
Luke i. 41.
Luke i. 42.
Luke i. 43.
Luke i. 44.
Luke i. 45.
Luke i. 46.
Luke i. 47.
Luke i. 48.
The Arabic word ordinarily means tribe or nation, but in this work it regularly represents the Syriac word used in the N.T. for generation.
Luke i. 49.
The Arabic would naturally be rendered, the blessing on me, That; but a number of passages in this work seem to justify the rendering given in the text (cf., e.g., § 46, 54, and especially § 15, 40).
Luke i. 50.
Luke i. 51.
Luke i. 52.
Luke i. 53.
Luke i. 54.
Luke i. 55.
Luke i. 56.
Luke i. 57.
Luke i. 58.
Luke i. 59.
The text is indistinct in the Vat. ms. The reading seems to be conflate, the doublets being when it was, which is the reading of Ibn-at-Tayyib’s Commentary, and on.
Luke i. 60.
Luke i. 61.
Luke i. 62.
Luke i. 63.
Luke i. 64.
Luke i. 65.
Lit. described (cf. § ii. 46).
Luke i. 66.
Luke i. 67.
Luke i. 68.
Luke i. 69.
Luke i. 70.
Luke i. 71.
Luke i. 72.
Luke i. 73.
Luke i. 74.
Or, should.
Luke i. 75.
Luke i. 76.
Luke i. 77.
Here and elsewhere the Arabic translator uses life and live and give life, as in Syriac, for salvation, etc.
Luke i. 78.
Borg. ms. has and for of.
The word used in the Peshitta means visit, either in the sense of caring for or in that of frequenting. See § 24, 29.
So Borg. ms. The Vat. ms. is very indistinct. Lagarde (see Introduction, 13, note), quoting Guidi, prints Whereby there visiteth us the manifestation from on high. The difference in Arabic is in a single stroke.
Luke i. 79.
Luke i. 80.
Matt. i. 18.
This is preceded in Vat. ms. by the genealogy, Matt. i. 1–17 (see Introduction, 13), with the marginal note The Beginning of the Gospel of Matthew. (Lagarde, op. cit., 1886, p. 154.) The text presents nothing worthy of note in this place except that verse 16, construed on the same principle as the preceding verses, to which, except in the words printed in italics, it is strictly parallel in construction, reads thus: “Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary, who of her begat Jesus, the Messiah” (cf. the remarkable reading of Sin.
Syriac). As it stands, this is the only possible interpretation of the words, for who is masculine. But a mistake in the gender of a relative pronoun is very common in Arabic among illiterate people, while in Syriac there is, to begin with, no distinction. If then we correct the relative, who of her will become of whom (fem.), and begat will of course be construed as passive. We thus get the text followed in Ibn-at-Tayyib’s Commentary, the ordinary reading of the Peshitta, of whom was born Jesus.
Matt. i. 19.
Matt. i. 20.
The Arabic might even more naturally be rendered born, thus giving us the reading that Isho‘dad tells us was that of the Diatessaron (Harris, Fragments, p. 16 f.); but throughout the whole genealogy (see § 1, 81, note) this word has been used by the Vat. ms. in the sense of begat. Here the Borg. ms. has of her for in her; but Ibn-at-Tayyib in his Commentary discusses why Matthew wrote in and not of.
Matt. i. 21.
cf. § 1, 78.
Matt. i. 22.
Matt. i. 23.
Matt. i. 24.
Matt. i. 25a.
Luke ii. 1.
The Arabic expression is clearly meant to represent that used in the Peshitta.
Luke ii. 2.
This is the most natural meaning of the Arabic sentence; which, however, is simply a word-for-word reproduction.
Luke ii. 3.
Luke ii. 4.
Luke ii. 5.
Luke ii. 6.
Luke ii. 7.
Luke ii. 8.
Luke ii. 9.
Luke ii. 10.
Luke ii. 11.
Luke ii. 12.
Luke ii. 13.
The Arabic represents Syr. idiom.
Luke ii. 14.
Luke ii. 15.
Luke ii. 16.
Luke ii. 17.
Luke ii. 18.
cf. § 1, 66, note.
Luke ii. 19.
Borg. ms. inserts all above the line, after these. The meaning ought then to be, these things, namely, all the sayings.
The Arab. might mean set them apart; but the Syriac is against this.
Luke ii. 20.
Luke ii. 21.
Luke ii. 22.
Luke ii. 23.
Luke ii. 24.
Luke ii. 25.
Luke ii. 26.
Or, anointed.
Luke ii. 27.
Luke ii. 28.
Luke ii. 29.
For order cf. (in part) Sin. Syriac.
Luke ii. 30.
Luke ii. 31.
Luke ii. 32.
i.e., becoming manifest.
Luke ii. 33.
Luke ii. 34.
Luke ii. 35.
So also in Syriac versions and the quotation of Isho’dad from Ephraem (Harris, Fragments, p. 34), but not the Armenian version.
The Arabic sides with the Peshitta and Ibn-at-Tayyib’s Commentary, against the remarkable reading of Sin. supported by Isho’dad, as in last note (Syriac text), and the Armenian in Hill, p. 336. See now also The Guardian, Dec. 18, 1895.
Luke ii. 36.
Luke ii. 37.
Luke ii. 38.
Luke ii. 39.
Matt. ii. 1b.
On the substitution of this general phrase for Matt. ii. 1a, see the remarks of Harris in Fragments, etc., p. 37 ff.
Matt. ii. 2.
Matt. ii. 3.
Matt. ii. 4.
This periphrasis for where is very characteristic of this work.
Matt. ii. 5.
Matt. ii. 6.
Matt. ii. 7.
Matt. ii. 8.
Matt. ii. 9.
Matt. ii. 10.
Matt. ii. 11.
Matt. ii. 12.
So in later Arabic and some Arabic versions. According to classical usage the word means sleep.
Matt. ii. 13.
Matt. ii. 14.
Matt. ii. 15.
Matt. ii. 16.
Matt. ii. 17.
Matt. ii. 18.
Or, is weeping, and so in next line is not willing.
Matt. ii. 19.
Matt. ii. 20.
Matt. ii. 21.
Matt. ii. 22.
Matt. ii. 23.
Luke ii. 40.
Luke ii. 41.
A general word (cf. Syr. versions).
Luke ii. 42.
Luke ii. 43.
Luke ii. 44.
Luke ii. 45.
Luke ii. 46.
Luke ii. 47.
Luke ii. 48.
Luke ii. 49.
Or, knew.
Luke ii. 50.
Luke ii. 51.
Luke ii. 52.
Luke iii. 1.
Luke iii. 2.
There is a very rare use of this Arabic word in the Hebrew sense of saying.
Luke iii. 3.
So Vat. ms. The Borg. ms. has with.
Matt. iii. 1b.
Matt. iii. 2.
Matt. iii. 3a.
Luke iii. 4b.
Luke iii. 5.
Luke iii. 6.
See note on § 1, 78.
John i. 7.
John i. 8.
John i. 9.
John i. 10.
John i. 11.
John i. 12.
Or, authority.
John i. 13.
John i. 14.
In Syr. this word also means truth.
John i. 15.
Or, earlier than I.
John i. 16.
John i. 17.
i.e., came to be.
John i. 18.
cf. Peshitta, etc. (not Cur.); cf. also Gildemeister, op. cit., p. 29, on Luke ix. 20.
John i. 19.
John i. 20.
John i. 21.
John i. 22.
John i. 23.
John i. 24.
Lit. from the side of.
John i. 25.
John i. 26.
Or, in.
John i. 27.
John i. 28.
Matt. iii. 4.
On the original Diatessaron reading, honey and milk of the mountains, or, milk and honey of the mountains, which latter Ibn-at-Tayyib cites in his Commentary (folio 44b, 45a) as a reading, but without any allusion to the Diatessaron, see, e.g., now Harris, Fragments of the Com. of Ephr. Syr. upon the Diat. (London, 1895), p. 17 f.
Matt. iii. 5.
Matt. iii. 6.
Matt. iii. 7.
The translator uses invariably an Arabic word (name of a sect) meaning Separatists.
Lit. Zindiks, a name given to Persian dualists and others.
Matt. iii. 8.
Matt. iii. 9.
Matt. iii. 10.
Luke iii. 10.
Luke iii. 11.
Grammar requires this rendering, but solecisms in this kind of word are very common, and in this work (e.g., § 48, 21) the jussive particle is sometimes omitted. We should therefore probably render let him give, let him do, etc.
Grammar requires this rendering, but solecisms in this kind of word are very common, and in this work (e.g., § 48, 21) the jussive particle is sometimes omitted. We should therefore probably render let him give, let him do, etc.
Luke iii. 12.
Luke iii. 13.
Luke iii. 14.
cf. Peshitta, where the word has its special meaning, soldiers.
Luke iii. 15 .
Our translator constantly uses this Arabic word (which we render haply, or, can it be? or, perhaps, etc.) to represent the Syriac word used in this place. The latter is used in various ways, and need not be interrogative, as our translator renders it (cf. especially § 17, 6).
Luke iii. 16.
Luke iii. 17 .
Or, shall.
Luke iii. 18.
Matt. iii. 13.
Luke iii. 23a.
The Vat. ms. here gives the genealogy (Luke iii. 23–38), of which we shall quote only the last words: the son of Adam; who (was) from God. If this were not the reading of the Peshitta (against Sin.) and Ibn-at-Tayyib’s Commentary, one might explain from as a corruption of the Arabic son of, the words being very similar. On the Borg. ms. see § 55, 17, note.
John i. 29.
John i. 30.
cf. § 3, 54, note.
John i. 31.
Matt. iii. 14.
Matt. iii. 15.
Luke iii. 21b.
Matt. iii. 16b.
For the statement of Isho’dad (see above, Introduction, 10), “And straightway, as the Diatessaron testifieth, light shone forth,” etc., see Harris, Fragments, etc., p. 43 f.
Luke iii. 22a.
Matt. iii. 17.
John i. 32.
John i. 33.
John i. 34.
Luke iv. 1a.
Mark i. 12.
Lit. calumniator.
Mark i. 13b.
Matt. iv. 2a.
Luke iv. 2b.
Matt. iv. 2b, 3.
Matt. iv. 4.
Matt. iv. 5.
Lit. calumniator.
Matt. iv. 6.
Matt. iv. 7.
Borg. ms. omits and.
Luke iv. 5.
Lit. backbiter, a different word from that used above in § 4, 43, 47.
Luke iv. 6.
Lit. backbiter, a different word from that used above in § 4, 43, 47.
Luke iv. 7.
Matt. iv. 10.
Luke iv. 13.
Lit. backbiter, a different word from that used above in § 4, 43, 47.
Matt. iv. 11b.
John i. 35.
John i. 36.
John i. 37.
Or, speaking.
John i. 38.
John i. 39.
John i. 40.
cf. Peshitta.
John i. 41a.
John i. 42a.
The Arabic word used throughout this work means Stones.
John i. 43.
John i. 44.
John i. 45.
John i. 46.
John i. 47.
Lit. the (cf. note to § 1, 40).
John i. 48.
John i. 49.
John i. 50.
John i. 51.
Luke iv. 14a.
John ii. 1.
Arabic Qatna; at § 5, 32, Qatina, following the Syriac form.
Lit. the (cf. note to § 1, 40).
John ii. 2.
John ii. 3.
John ii. 4.
The reading of Cur. and Sin. is not known; but cf. Moesinger, p. 53, and Isho’dad quoted in Harris, Fragments, etc., p. 46.
John ii. 5.
John ii. 6.
John ii. 7.
John ii. 8.
John ii. 9.
John ii. 10.
John ii. 11.
Perhaps a comma should be inserted after sign.
Luke iv. 14b.
Luke iv. 15.
If the text does not contain a misprint the word for by is wanting in both mss. It should doubtless be restored as in § 7, 3.
Luke iv. 16.
Luke iv. 17.
Luke iv. 18.