Peshitta Forum
Earliest known date attached to four Gospels - Printable Version

+- Peshitta Forum (http://peshitta.org/for)
+-- Forum: New Testament (http://peshitta.org/for/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Aramaic Primacy Forum (http://peshitta.org/for/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: Earliest known date attached to four Gospels (/showthread.php?tid=2020)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6


Re: Earliest known date attached to four Gospels - Paul Younan - 03-21-2009

Akhan Phil,

Thank you for the manuscript number!

Further information: in addition to the name of the Church in Baghdad, I have now learned that this manuscript had been in the possession of the Rassam family in Baghdad.

Can this link be a resource?

http://www.vaticanlibrary.va/home.php?ling=eng&res=1280x1024

Ominously, there is a link on the bottom of the page titled "Secret Archives", that does not bode well for our search. I've also been told that representatives from the CoE have in the past requested access to this manuscript and have repeatedly been denied.


Re: Earliest known date attached to four Gospels - Paul Younan - 03-21-2009

University of St. Louis has the largest collection of Vatican Library manuscripts outside of the actual Vatican Library:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://libraries.slu.edu/vfl/index.cfm?getvar=none&stage=0&searchstr=">http://libraries.slu.edu/vfl/index.cfm? ... searchstr=</a><!-- m -->

If they have microfilm of this manuscript we are in business! I'm going to contact them.


Re: Earliest known date attached to four Gospels - Paul Younan - 03-21-2009

Notice, Akhay, in the CD Rom collection that Brigham Young University was able to reproduce:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://libcat.slu.edu/search/Y?searchtype=o&searcharg=61830997&SORT=D&searchscope=5&Submit=Search">http://libcat.slu.edu/search/Y?searchty ... mit=Search</a><!-- m -->

They entirely skipped over Codex 91....hmmm.


Re: Earliest known date attached to four Gospels - Paul Younan - 03-21-2009

(edited)


Re: Earliest known date attached to four Gospels - Andrew Gabriel Roth - 03-21-2009

Shlama Akhu Rafa,

I know all about the Tebra Negast, Menelik the First and the Ethiopian claim to the ark. I am in relative agreement with Graham Hancock on this based on a reading of 1 Kings 18. "Sign and Seal" is a good book, and as Hancock says the Tebra Negast version need not be perfect in order to point to real history. Axum, for example, didn't exist in Menelik's time.

As for the rest, I hold my breath and pray. Can it really be possilble?


Re: Earliest known date attached to four Gospels - Phil - 03-21-2009

Shlama Paul,

I think I made a mistake here.

A more complete description of this Codex Syr. 91 is here:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/CUA&CISOPTR=101968&REC=3">http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/docum ... 1968&REC=3</a><!-- m -->

On the left menu, click Part 1 Volume 2, and then look for the page 489.

This is not the Gospel itself. I think it is a series of commentaries and homilies, mainly by an Elia III.

At the page 492 there is only the description of the inscription related to this Gospel of 78 A.D.

If I read correctly the latin, this description occurs in the folio 140 of the manuscript.

So we have here a manuscript with a copy of the inscription. The manuscript of the Gospel itself is elswhere.

Sorry for the mistake.


Re: Earliest known date attached to four Gospels - Thirdwoe - 03-21-2009

...

POP! <!-- s:crazy: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/crazy.gif" alt=":crazy:" title="Crazy" /><!-- s:crazy: -->

...


Re: Earliest known date attached to four Gospels - Phil - 03-21-2009

Thirdwoe Wrote:...

POP! <!-- s:crazy: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/crazy.gif" alt=":crazy:" title="Crazy" /><!-- s:crazy: -->

...

Yep, this is what happens when amateurs like me try a treasure hunt based on the Internet. <!-- sBlush --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/blush.gif" alt="Blush" title="Blush" /><!-- sBlush --> <!-- sConfusedtupid: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/withstupid.gif" alt="Confusedtupid:" title="Stupid" /><!-- sConfusedtupid: -->

At least that description is quite clear about the existence of a Gospel of the first century.


Re: Earliest known date attached to four Gospels - Paul Younan - 03-21-2009

Phil Wrote:At least that description is quite clear about the existence of a Gospel of the first century.

True, but where's the manuscript? What did Mar Elia III do with it?

This certainly explains why there is no mention anywhere of the actual Gospel. And I was going to drive down to St. Louis to examine microfilm!


Re: Earliest known date attached to four Gospels - Phil - 03-21-2009

Paul Younan Wrote:
Phil Wrote:
Thirdwoe Wrote:...

POP! <!-- s:crazy: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/crazy.gif" alt=":crazy:" title="Crazy" /><!-- s:crazy: -->

...

Yep, this is what happens when amateurs like me try a treasure hunt based on the Internet. <!-- sBlush --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/blush.gif" alt="Blush" title="Blush" /><!-- sBlush --> <!-- sConfusedtupid: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/withstupid.gif" alt="Confusedtupid:" title="Stupid" /><!-- sConfusedtupid: -->

At least that description is quite clear about the existence of a Gospel of the first century.

That's Codex 90, the Homilies by the Patriarch Elia. So we still do not know the catalog number of the Gospel?

The Codex 91 starts on page 489 (the codex numbers on the menu don't matches the numbers of the document). This manuscript have 149 folios, described between the pages 489 and 493. The inscription occurs on the folio 140 - page 492 of the document.

Folio 141 have a comentarie by a Machicha, bishop of Gesluna (I think he is the same as Makkikha, a Patriarch from 11th century), "at the and of a very ancient gospel", I just don't figure out if is the same gospel refered on folio 140.
Shlama


Re: Earliest known date attached to four Gospels - Paul Younan - 03-21-2009

OK, well then. Here's what we know so far:

(a) The Church in Baghdad was named Mar Sawrisho
(b) The CoE Patriarch, Mar Elia III, recorded the passage of the colophon to the Gospels
© Mar Elia III was Patriarch of the CoE from 1176-1190 AD
(d) Assemani did not himself see the manuscript, but is merely recording the entry in folio 140 of Mar Elia's Homilies

That leaves us with about 600 years from Mar Elia to Assemani.

What we need is exact translation of the Latin: does Assemani simply quote folio 140 of Mar Elia's Homily, and that is the reference given at the start of this thread?

If so, there is no proof that this manuscript is known today in the possession of anyone. It could have been destroyed during the sack of Baghdad by the Mongols and Turks. Or the story could continue, as I've heard it, that the Rassam Family in Baghdad (Chaldeans) had possession of it until its eventual transfer to the Vatican.


Re: Earliest known date attached to four Gospels - Paul Younan - 03-21-2009

OK, given the latest clarification...I'm going back through my posts and "adjusting" any negative comments and/or thoughts I had about Assemani and the Vatican! (on this issue!)


Re: Earliest known date attached to four Gospels - abudar2000 - 03-21-2009

breekh saphro,

Folks I've included the Syriac text from this other catalogue, and it goes well beyond the earlier Latin and Syriac text in details. akh Paul please confirm my translation of the Syriac text, because the implication of this quote would be great, and I will hold my comments until you verify it!


Assemani ??? Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana Vol 2 -- P492

?????? ?????? ???????????????????????????? ???????????????? ?????? ?????????????? ???????????????? ?????????????????? ?????????????????? ???????????????????????? ???????????????????? ??????????????. ???????? ?????????? ?????? ???????????????????????????? ?????????????????? ????????????????. ?????????????? ?????????? ???????????? ???????? ?????????????? ?????? ???????????????????? ??????????. ???????????????? ?????????? ?????? ?????? ?????????????? ????????????????. ???????? ?????????????????? ?????????????????? ?????????????? ?????????? ?????? ???????????? ???????????????? ???????????? ?????????? ??????????????????. ???????????????? ???????????? ?????????? ???????????????? ?????????? ?????????????????????? ?????? ?????????????? ???????? ???????? ???????????????? ?????????????????? ???????????? ???????????????????? ?????????????? ???????????????? ???????????? ?????????????? ???????????? ?????????? ???????????? ?????????????????? ?????????? ?????????? ?????????????? ?????????????? ?????????? ????????????:

Syriac Translation:
On this old Gospel upon the altar of the Holy Church that is in the temple of the Romans from the city of Baghdad. There was an Old Edessan Gospel that was clear with no missing letters, and was said to be better than any new Books. Only the first section was lost from it from that time period and at the end was written:
This Holy Book was finished on the 5th day in the week, the 18th in December of the year 389 of the Greeks (i.e 78 AD). Handwriting by the hand of the apostle AHay friend of Mor Mori the student of Mor Aday the Apostle; his prayer be with us Amen!

tawdi,
keefa-morun


Re: Earliest known date attached to four Gospels - Paul Younan - 03-21-2009

Shlama Akhi Keefa,

Yes, I saw this too on p. 492 of Assemani's Catalogue, the translation is right on!


Re: Earliest known date attached to four Gospels - abudar2000 - 03-21-2009

shlom lkhun,

tawdi akh Paul!

So for some reason the Romans placed a Syriac Gospel on their Holy Altar: <= Edited: See Paul's post below; this should now be ignored

...

-Also the patriarch of the Assyrian Church saw this Gospel, so you would think that if it differed from the Peshitta that he would have mentioned that.

I look forward to the outcome from Paul's and Nimrod's research in tracing what happened to it.

And also, hopefully we will get our hands on the manuscript that was written by the Assyrian Patriarch Eliya III, to read his complete description. I'm assuming he has more than what is quoted in the catalogue.

push bashlomo,
keefa-morun