As to the readings, it appears to ns that tbey are such as characterised the 5th and 6th cen turies. The text is not that of N, B, Z, or even D, but rather that of A and C. In Matt. vi. it has the doxology of the Lord's prayer which is not in N, B, D, Z ; it has John vii. 53-viii. 11 ; con tains John v. 3, 4 ; has the usual order of the 4 and 5 verses in Matt. v. ; and has the later en larged form of v. 44. It also contains the last 12 verses of Mark xvi., contrary to N and B ; has utos not 066s in John i. 18 ; and in Matt. xxii. 35 has the later reading Kat X4-icov, omitted in B, L, and the Peshito. It has also ol SdhaeKa in Luke xxii. 14, with A, C, E, etc., but contraty to N, B, D, the Curetonian, Syriac, and Italic. In John i. 27 it has the words ikorpocrWv Aou 14-yovev con trary to N, B, L, and the Curetonian Syriac ; but with A, E, F, etc., the old Italic, Vulgate, and Peshito, In Matt. xix, 17 it has the old and genuine 7-1 Ac Ipcorcis rept Toil aya0o0; in John iii. Is Caranra, dXXcl are omitted with N, and the Curetonian Syriac, E, etc. On the whole, while it is easy to see a number of the oldest readings in the text, such as those in N, B, the old Italic, D, etc., yet the readings of a later period prevail. Its text, though often differing from the Peshito, is neither older nor better. The Greek at its basis is not anterior to the 5th century. Nothing is more incorrect than the assertions of Minischalchi that Matthew's Gospel is the apostle's authentic one ; and that the source of the version was anterior to and wholly different from, that of the Peshito.
VIII. Hexaplar-Syriac.-A version of the SepViii. Hexaplar-Syriac.-A version of the Sep- tuagint into Syriac was made by Paul of Tela, at Alexandria, at tbe instigation of the Monophysite patriarch Athanasius, A.D. 617. It is from Ori gen's Hexaplar text, with his critical remarks, the margin having notes respecting various readings, fragments of the versions of Aquila, Theodotion, Symmachus, with scholia from Syriac and Greek write's.
The character of the version is extreme literality. Every Greek word is rendered by a Syriac one, to the neglect of the laws of the language into which the version was made. This makes it very useful to the critic, and most important in restoring Origen's text. The Greek text at its basis agrees for the most part with the Codex Alexandrinus. But it often leans to the Vatican, and not seldom to the Complutensian texts. At other tirnes it de parts from all. Eichhom has given copious ex amples of its peculiarities and uses ; which are sufficient to prove its value in restoring the genuine text of the Septuagint as Origen left it Three MSS. containing this version, but none of them complete, have been known to scholars. That formerly possessed by Masius contained Joshua, Judges, Kings, Chronicles, Ezm, Esther, Judith, Tobit, and a considerable part of Deuter onomy, as we learn from his commentary on Joshua, which contains a Latin version of that
.boolc (Antwerp 1574, fol.) This codex has disap peared. Another in the Ambrosian Library a.: Milan contains the Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Eccle siastes, Canticles, the Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach, the twelve minor Prophets, Jeremiah, Baruch, Lamentations, Daniel, Ezekiel, Isaiah. A third MS. in the Paris Libmry has the fourth book of Kings. In 1787 Norberg published Jeremiah and Ezekiel from the Milan MS., with a Latin version. His transcript must have been very imperfect, judging from Bugati's remarks. In 1788 Bugati published Daniel. In 1820 the Psalms appeared, four years after his death, superintended by Cighera. In 1834, 1835, Middeldorpf published in two volumes 4to, at Berlin, the four books of Kings, Isaiah, the twelve minor Prophets, Proverbs, Job, Canticles, Larnentations, and Ecclesiastes, with a commentary. The editor bad only a faulty tran script of Norberg's, and did not collate the original. With the exception of Bugati's Daniel, none of these is well edited. Norberg's edition is very incorrect ; nor is that of Middeldorpf less so. In 1859 Rordam issued Libri 7ndicnin et Ruth seam duo: versionon Syriaco-Hexpalarcin ex codice Musa' Britannici 11117W primuin ea'iti, Greece /rainfall, notisque illustrati, in two fasciculi, 1859, 1861, Copenhagen 4to. A competent scholar has under taken the task of editing the remainder-Dr. Antonio Ceriani of Milan. In 1861 appeared his Mom, menta sacra et profana, tom. i. fascic. i. Milan, containing, among other ancient documents, the Hexaplar-Syriac, Baruch, Lamentations, and the epistle of Jeremiah. In the preface, the learned editor states his intention to publish, from the Ambrosian MS. and others, the entire version, even the books printed before, of whose inaccurate execution he speaks in just terms. No more is yet published ; and scholars must regret its being de. layed by the issue of other ancient documents, such as those in tom. iii. fascic.
Most of the works on the literature of Syriac versions have been already quoted. In addition to them we may refer to Wichelhaus De N. T. versione Syriaca antiqua, etc., Halis, 185o ; Lee's Prolegomena to Bagsler's Polyglot/ ; Bernstein's Commentate° de Charklensi Novi Testainenti trans latione Syrica, 1857 ; Reusch, Syria interprer cum fonte N. T. Grieco collatus, 1741; Stores Obser vations super N. T. versionions Syriacis, 1772; Winer, De unt vers. Syriacce N. T. critic.° cante institnendo,1823; Loehlein, ..5yrids ep. ad Ephesios interpres, 1835; michadis, 7. D. Cura in ver sthnem Syriacarn Actium Apostolicoruin, 1755 ; Credner, De prophetaran: min. vers. Syr. quarn Peschito vocant indole, 1827 ; the Introductions of De Wette, Herbst, and Bleek, with Davidson's Treatise on Biblical Criticism, vol. ii.-S. D.