Fragments of the Commentary of Ephrem the Syrian on the Diatessaron

to say that my researches in another direction have been very fruitful. I have set to work to see how much of the original Syriac text may be extant in the shape of Catenae chains (of patristic commentary) or Commentaries on the Gospel in the Syriac tongue: and the present volume will show that a great deal is to be gathered from the Syriac commentators both for the knowledge of the Diatessaron harmony of the four Gospels and of Ephrem’s comment upon it.

Of the writers upon whom I depend those to whom I chiefly refer are Isho‘dad of Merv who flourished about A.D. 850, Moses Bar-Kepha his contemporary, Bar-Ṣalibi and Bar-Hebraeus, who belong respectively to the 12th and 13th centuries. And to them must be added Ephrem himself, as a source for the original Syriac of the commentary. For it will be found that he has often incorporated portions of his own hymns, which appear in the Armenian text in the disguise of unsuspected prose¹.

Of the other writers quoted, Isho‘dad is a Nestorian follower of Nestorius, who emphasized the distinction between the human and divine natures of Christ, Bar-Kepha and the two later doctors are Monophysites those who believe in the single divine nature of Christ, so that we may say that the whole Syrian church has laid its hands on Ephrem’s commentary. The only thing we may have to be careful about will be the handling of cases where Ephrem’s language might seem to favour unduly one or other of the great parties in the Syrian church. In such passages the text as transcribed by a learned doctor might easily become suspect.

Of these writers, unfortunately, none is at present in print, except in part Bar-Hebraeus; his commentary on Matthew in the work called the Storehouse of Mysteries was edited by Spanuth in 1879; and that on the Gospel of John in 1878 by Schwartz.

noted above from Isaiah li. 1, where Mösinger says, ‘quo loco, nescio I do not know the place.’ The following are some of the corrections to be made.
p. 63, note 4, for Fortasse ex Is. xlix. 10 Perhaps from Is. 49:10 read Amos viii. 11.
p. 122, l. 11, for Mark i. 32 read Jer. xv. 19.
p. 138, note 1, where M. refers the reading ‘qui blasphemat Deum, crucifigatur let him who blasphemes God be crucified’ to Lev. xxiv. 16 correct to Deut. xxi. 23.
p. 193, for cf. Is. liv. 12, vel Ez. iii. 9 compare Is. 54:12 or Ez. 3:9 read Amos vii. 8.
p. 210, note 4, for Cf. Is. liii. 11 compare Is. 53:11 read Is. lii. 15.
p. 228 and p. 280, where the words ‘Tu dixisti, Mundus per gratiam aedificabitur You said, The world will be built by grace’ are either quoted or implied, make the reference to Ps. lxxxiii. 3, which in English appears as ‘I said, Mercy shall be built up for ever.’

I do not wish to criticize Mösinger severely: some of these passages were difficult to identify. Even if his edition is inadequate, he is a great public benefactor to whom we are all deeply indebted.

¹ An instance may be found on p. 28.