06-06-2025, 02:14 AM
Do you see any flaws in this?:
Daniel Plooij (1877-1935), _A Further Study of the Liège Diatessaron_ (1925), 92pp., on 68-69
https://archive.org/details/furtherstudy...ts+tale%22
Although the preceding list of Syriasms and Syriac readings represents only. a selection, its tale seems fully clear and a complete collation can, I think, hardly alter the main thesis.
The Syriasms, the Syriac readings and the cases of Syriac expressions found in APHRAHAT, EPHREM and the Old-Syriac on the one side and in L on the other, confirm fully, I think, the thesis that the Old-Latin Diatessaron was translated from the Syriac.
I do not see how the facts can be explained satisfactorily in any other way.
On the other hand the readings, especially the harmonistic readings, which the Old-Latin Gospels have in common with the Syriac and the Old-Latin Diatessaron, seem to prove as indubitably, that the translation of the Greek Gospels into Latin took place after, and under influence of, the Old-Latin Diatessaron.
What's your assessment of this genealogy?:
Arabic Diatessaron
^
|
by-AD 175 Aramaic Diatessaron ---------> Latin Diatessaron ---------> Dutch Leige Diatessaron
^
|
Aramaic Peshitta --------> Greek gospels
Daniel Plooij (1877-1935), _A Further Study of the Liège Diatessaron_ (1925), 92pp., on 68-69
https://archive.org/details/furtherstudy...ts+tale%22
Although the preceding list of Syriasms and Syriac readings represents only. a selection, its tale seems fully clear and a complete collation can, I think, hardly alter the main thesis.
The Syriasms, the Syriac readings and the cases of Syriac expressions found in APHRAHAT, EPHREM and the Old-Syriac on the one side and in L on the other, confirm fully, I think, the thesis that the Old-Latin Diatessaron was translated from the Syriac.
I do not see how the facts can be explained satisfactorily in any other way.
On the other hand the readings, especially the harmonistic readings, which the Old-Latin Gospels have in common with the Syriac and the Old-Latin Diatessaron, seem to prove as indubitably, that the translation of the Greek Gospels into Latin took place after, and under influence of, the Old-Latin Diatessaron.
What's your assessment of this genealogy?:
Arabic Diatessaron
^
|
by-AD 175 Aramaic Diatessaron ---------> Latin Diatessaron ---------> Dutch Leige Diatessaron
^
|
Aramaic Peshitta --------> Greek gospels