As a novice, I find it hard to figure out un-vocalized text. More as a proof of concept for what I would like to have, I created this version of the Interlinear, with vowels based on the Assyrian Ancient NT (little red book) and audio that automatically highlights the current word, as it is spoken.

Would be nice to have some help, if there is interest, with continuing with that work. The most time consuming part is creating the so called audio cue file, that tells you when a word is started and when it end. Plus adding the vowels to the consonant only text, as read from the book (or here: http://www.peshitta.org/pdf/peshitta.pdf). An alternative would be to highlight just the current verse, that would be a lot faster to build.

Note that if you click on a word, audio will automatically jump to that word, giving you a chance to hear it again.

Would be nice to read some feedback, if any:

https://aramlang.github.io/nt/ar/mattai1.html

This forum is kinda dead. But where is everyone? Are there no people left on earth that care about the Peshitta, and at least entertain Aramaic primacy as a possibility? Or are Peshitta primacists found in some groups on twitter, facebook and so on? Only a few years ago I asked here how people feel on Peshitta Primacy, and the replies were that it is all evident, now no one is even present.

I know that life is short and some of the defenders have fallen asleep. But where are all the people???

Want to share this great online treasure I've found:
http://assyrianlanguages.org/sureth/index.php

It lists both classical and modern Aramaic entries. I do not know how complete, but I see entries from Oraham, Bailis Shamun, etc.

I am making this Thread as a place to collect information on Crawford MS (sometimes "Crawford Codex"), which is hard to find, but has received some attention in this group. I am personally very interested in the Manuscript and am asking anyone to report what they know about it.

The Codex is a Peshitta text from the 12th century, which has all 27 writings of the New Testament (and a Passion harmony), but is in almost complete agreement with the eastern Peshitta (Hebrews 2:9 being the exception). The text originated in a monastery in southeast Turkey. It is interesting to note how it was not too far from the regions in which much of the New Testament also originated.

"On fol. 250a within a multi-coloured border there is a count of the number of shahe, pethgame etc. in the New Testament. It is much effaced. Fol. 250b has a colophon, also not all legible, in a serto hand. The scribe was Stephen, a monk of the monastery of Mar Jacob the recluse of Egypt and Mar Barshabba near Salafo in Tur 'Abdin. He mentions the names of some of his relatives and his teachers. The latter are the late Rabban Quriakos, Rabban Sahda, Rabban Saliba, Rabban ?Marnaha, that is, ?Haya, and Rabban Barsauma. Text and translation are given by Gwynn, Apocalypse, part 2, pp. 31-8 and 94-9 resp."

Specific questions I had:
Can you confirm or deny that Crawford MS agrees with the eastern text in the known locations (e.g. in Acts 20:28, Hebrews 2:9, 2:16, the Pericope Adulterae (John 7:53-8:11), Luke 22:17-18, Acts 8:37, 15:34, 28:29)?
-> it agrees with the eastern Peshitta in all places except Hebrews 2:9.

Are there any other significant discernible readings that are not found in the eastern text?
-> Apparently no, but there are some errors in spelling.

In the past I have heard some believe the text is not that great after all, having many errors of ortography, and is textually not clearly eastern either. If anyone can provide more details on this I would greatly appreciate it. Like, what specific errors or weaknesses can you name? Any information on the text would be appreciated.

Here goes my collection of information:

The western five texts (2 Peter, 2 & 3 John, Jude, Revelation) as found in Crawford are available here: 
http://www.dukhrana.com/crawford/

The first book by John Gwynn, "The Apocalypse of St. John, in a Syriac Version Hitherto Unknown" (1897), where he also argues that Crawford MS reads like an original and not a translation:
https://archive.org/details/apocalypseofstjo00gwynuoft

The other book by John Gwynn, "Remnants of the later Syriac versions of the Bible" (1909), which contains the four "western" epistles:
https://archive.org/details/remnantsoflaters00gwynrich

Gwynn's Article "On a Syriac Ms. of the New Testament in the Library of the Earl of Crawford, and an Inedited Version of the Apocalypse included in It" in "The Transactions of the Royal Irish Academy", Vol. 30 (1892 - 1896), pp. 347-418 (72 pages) 
https://www.jstor.org/stable/30079785
(Gwynn sometimes erroneously omits Jude from his description of the Codex)

On the monastery in which the text was produced, "Syriac Monasicism in Tur Abdin: A Present-Day Account" by Mark DelCogliano (2006):
https://www.academia.edu/1860499/Syriac_...ay_Account

Jegar Sahadutha-"Heap of Witness" (Evidence for an Aramaic Original NT) (2008) by Rev. David Bauscher, which argues that Crawford Revelation is the original Aramaic text:
https://books.google.de/books/about/Jega...34eWniYH0C

Divine Contact-Discovery of The Original New Testament (2007) by Rev. David Bauscher, where we learn the same:
https://books.google.de/books/about/Divi...u-V0fEpx4C

The Crawford MS Codex is part of the John Rylands Collection (Syriac MS 2).
https://archive.org/details/CatalogueJoh...3/mode/2up


On the text and variants like Hebrews 2:9 (from http://peshitta.org/for/showthread.php?t...51#pid8551 ):

(09-08-2008, 09:37 PM)Stephen Silver Wrote: Shlama Akhi Otto:
 The Crawford Codex is the Peshitta New Testament with only one western change (Hebrews 2:9). Now I understand that the Crawford W-5 is the Philoxenian Recension, not the Harklean Version. I have noted the differences between the Crawford Codex and the Mosul text (Harklean) in the 4 Western Epistles. The book Remnants, does a thorough study on all of the known variants.

I have read the intro to Remnants of the Later Syriac Versions of the Bible which Paul Younan graciously posted. This is the definitive work. Check out some of the names on this work, John Gwynn, Prof. F.C. Burkitt and  Dr. Christian D. Ginsburg. This is a definitive work of 19th Century scholarship.

Remnants of the Later Syriac Versions
http://www.peshitta.org/pdf/western_five.pdf

Many on this forum have wondered what became of the Philoxinian Recension and it's been under our noses and in use as the Crawford Codex. The Crawford, Book of Revelation was available on the internet with John Gwynn's transcription of the original text. There are some slight differences between the Crawford (Philoxinian) and the Harklean (1891 Mosul text). However, as Remnants of the Later Syriac Versions clearly points out, the Harklean is a revision to conform to the western Greek oriented churches. Moreover one can easily study the entire W-5 at this time by downloading the PDF of Remnants.

Shlama,
Stephen

(09-08-2008, 07:00 PM)ograabe Wrote: The Western Five according to Dave Bauscher as written in his The Original Aramaic New Testament In Plain English:

"The Epistle of 2nd Peter is not included in The Peshitta ; neither is 2nd John, 3rd John, Jude or Revelation. Those books are supplied in John Gwynn's edition of the General Epistles from The Crawford Aramaic manuscript and others of these books.

These books have been included in the Western Canon of The Syrian Orthodox Church, The Maronite Church and others which use the Aramaic NT, however, the General Epistles in those churches have been based on The Harklean Syriac Version, which is a translation from the Greek NT into Aramaic done in AD 616.

The text used by John Gwynn is not The Harklean Version. The texts of the two editions are quite diverse in many places, & Gwynn characterizes the Crawford & Palestinian Aramaic texts used as very Peshitta-like 'as idiomatic as The Peshitta'- and of a high quality, unlike the Harklean's Aramaic, which is quite crude and stilted, -'has systematically done violence to the Syriac' - very obviously a literal translation of Greek. (See John Gwynn's introductions to Remnants of The Later Syriac Versions of The Bible & The Apocalypse of St John. Gwynn was not a Peshitta primacist, however; he believed the Syriac NT was entirely translated from Greek.)"

Is Dave correct about this issue? He apparently rejects entirely the Harklean Revelation.

Otto

(12-06-2010, 09:01 PM)Stephen Silver Wrote:

konway87 Wrote:According to Steven Silver, Crawford Codex has only one western change (Hebrews 2:9). So after Peshitta, I think it is the next most accurate manuscript.

Shlama:
 I disagree. The Khabouris Codex, Yonan Codex (of which we have transcribed only a small portion) and the Mingana Codex are all virtually identical, while the Crawford Codex has minor grammatical errors and some variations which I found later one. I don't have a list of the errata of the Crawford Codex.
 I transcribed the Western Five from the Crawford Codex and it varies from the UBS (United Bible Society).

Mingana Codex
http://vmr.bham.ac.uk/Collections/Mingana/Syriac_148

 The Mingana Codex is in excellent written form and in my personal opinion it is better than the Khabouris Codex.

Shlama,
Stephen Silver

(12-02-2010, 07:35 PM)gbausc Wrote: (...)
I have numerous examples in Revelation, showing that the Greek of Revelation is translated from the Crawford ms. readings, and not vice versa.
John Gwynn states in his book on The Crawford ms. of The Apocalypse that the Crawford text is very like the Peshitta's text in other books and far
superior to the Harklean. It is idiomatic and excellent Aramaic and would easily be taken for an original Aramaic composition by any who did not know better.
Frankly, no one knows better, as scholarship on this subject is rife with unwarranted assumptions and unhistorical assertions that take for granted that the entire Peshitta is a translation of the Greek NT. I have found just as much, if not more, evidence to support Aramaic Crawford primacy as I have found for Peshitta primacy in other NT books. That evidence is in the books, Divine Contact and in my translations, as well as in Jegar Sahadutha-Heap of Witness.
Facts are what are needed when discussing this matter, as in all scholarship. Simply quoting authorities and claims is not going to prove any position.

Another interesting point Gwynn makes is that the vocab. of Crawford Revelation is so like that of the Peshitta OT, that it is as if the writer of it learned
the Peshitta OT so well beforehand that he translated Greek into idiomatic Peshitta Aramaic quite naturally!
One problem is that we cannot find any Greek text, or combination of Greek texts that could be used to translate into the Crawford text. It just does not work that way; the converse scenario can be shown, and I have done so.

Blessings,

Dave Bauscher

(12-03-2010, 08:09 PM)ograabe Wrote: Apparently the fourth century AD Vaticanus Greek New Testament tends to agree with the Crawford text of Revelation. Meanwhile the Majority text and the Byzantine family of Greek texts does not. Vaticanus wasn't "discovered" until the 19th Century so the Crawford is unlikely to a translation of that Greek version.

Otto

(12-03-2010, 08:58 PM)konway87 Wrote: I think 4th century Codex Sinaiticus manuscript also agrees with Crawford Revelation in certain places. I think it is mentioned on page no. 382 of Bauscher's Book.

(05-04-2015, 07:00 PM)gregglaser Wrote: Please download the 2nd Edition (corrected) transcription of the 'Crawford Codex of Revelation' at either the links above, or at Dukhrana, or here:



(...)

Fourth, the process of scribing an ancient codex is rewarding, but if you make a mistake in your published work (ESPECIALLY the Book of Revelation) it weighs on your heart and can keep you up at night.  I pray that if there are any of my 8-mistake original editions floating around in cyberspace that they be discarded, and that my revision posted here: (1) Transcription; (2) Transcription with Translation; and (3) Transcription, Translation & Commentary -- be supplanted in their place.  If you are reading this post and can help make that happen, you?ll have my gratitude.  

Greg Glaser

Hello everyone.  Greetings !  Yes my name is Mike.  Thank you all for being here.  It's been a long time.  

What is the phonetic pronunciation of " Jesus Christ " in the Aramaic New Testament , the Peshitta ?  Transliterated - is it not " Yeshua Meshiac " or " Yeshua Messiah " ?  Or is it another way ?  Second , is it the same pronunciation as the original Hebrew or is it slightly different ?  

Also , does the Aramaic New Testament ever transliterate the Hebrew pronunciation within the Aramaic New Testament ?  

Kindly ; 

Thanks so much.

Hi, I am confused, In Matthew 28:1 It has "in the evening of the SABBATH, as it was twilight (on) the first of the week..."

My confusion is; As the Jewish Sabbath runs from evening to evening. (Twilight to twilight; Sun going down, to Sun going down).
The grammar appears to be in question in this verse compared to other Gospels verses? Surely the time interval mentioned here has to fix the time around late in the "day" of the SABBATH, as the sun was going "down"... To me, it's twilight around 6 PM?

My question is; In the translated Aramaic from the Interlinear, what does "evening of the SABBATH" mean? In the context of this verse. Is it an Idiom? Source of western confusion?

Have a missed something? Please enlighten me

Thanks, David 

Music files on this site are in an old Real Player format. You can't play them on phones, etc.

Here are converted files converted to .mp3, which play in any browser this days:

https://aramlang.github.io/peshitta/music/

I have fully restored http://www.assyrianlanguage.com/ from archive.com. That combined with an older/simpler version of that Grammar I have around, allowed me to restore sound to all pages except for a very few "newer" ones,  which were not found in the older version Grammar.

It's a pity for such an amazing site to not be easily available. Does anybody know how to reach out to Alan Aldawood to ask for permission to publish the restored site somewhere? If so feel free to private message me, or reply here if no sensitive data is involved.

It has all the copyright notices intact. Sound support is improved by playing sound inline, not by downloading the audio file. You just click the word/sentence and it is automatically spoken.

Copyright allows one to restore a personal copy for private use, but not to re-publish the site for everybody. Would be nice to be able to make it public, if permission granted.
Maybe the old domain name could also be resurrected.

Right now if you follow Tools->Grammar link you get nothing. That site is no longer up. 
The site was amazing, with pronunciation and real life practical examples.
It turns out site is still found in the archive.org. Here is the last live snapshot of the site:

https://web.archive.org/web/200708080842...guage.com/

While searching for something on peshitta.org, I got search results that look like this: http://www.peshitta.org/forums/forumid6/32.html [/url][url=http://www.peshitta.org/forums/forumid6/32.html]
It turns out that's an old forum before 2003. There is a lot of great information in there!
Looks like you can cycle through the pages starting from 1.html to 2152.html.

Attached there is also an html file which could be run in a browser on a local computer making cycling through pages a bit easier. If I see any interest in this subject, we could post this file somewhere on the web instead.

Attached Files

  archive.html (Size: 1.91 KB / Downloads: 2)