I'm currently Reading
Scribes and Scholars: A Guide to the Transmission of Greek & Latin LIterature, by L.D. Reynaolds & N.G. Wilson. On pp 55-56 of the paperback edition, there's this very interesting tidbit about greek texts tranlated into syriac and arabic:
Quote:
Probably the first text to be translated was the New Testament, followed shortly by a range of patristic works. The earliest manuscripts of these versions go back to the fourth and fifth centuries, and it is well known that they are of value to theologians. It comes as a suprise, however, to find that other forms of Greek literature were translated. The schools of Nisibis and Edessa are known to have prepared versions of Aristotle, and a section of Theophrastus' Meteorology survives in Syriac alone. Philosophy and science were not the only concerns of the Syrians. They translated some Lucian and the grammar of Dionysius Thrax, as if attempting to give their pupils the benefits of a Greek literary education in translation. These latter translations are not of any great value to the modern scholar interested in establishing the correct form of the Greek text; it sometimes happens that the Syriac, instead of helping to correct the Greek, has to be corrected from it. {emphasis mine --Lee}
Arabic versions of classical texts are perhaps more numerous than their Syriac counterparts and certainly better known; this may be due to the accident of survival. The stimulus to make these translations seems to have come purely from a desire to use the best handbooks of science and philosophy available, and it is unlikely that a translation of the Bible preceded that of classical texts. As a rule, the translations were made made from an existing Syriac version, and so allowance must be made for two stages at which the inaccuracy of a translator could mar the expression of the original. When an Arabic version exists side by side with the Greek tradition one cannot assume as a matter of course that it will substantially help in determining the Greek text. {again, emphasis mine}
|
Author then goes on to talk about manuscripts that are important because they preserve sections of books that have been lost in the original greek.
But while this book mostly concentrates on secular literature, the caution about the poor quality of the translation between greek and syriac manuscripts is something that I wonder we shouldn't be thinking about when looking at christian writings as well. While the greek versions may very well be full of interpolations and redactions, we can't assume that the syriac versions were accurate translations in the first place. And if the secular literature is a fair comparison, it may in fact be a very bad assumption to make.
{Posting made in the early morning hours, waiting for the painkiller to kick in so I can go back to bed...}
--Lee
04-11-2004, 06:14 AM
Note on Syriac Texts
