154
in the course of their reading. In their poli-
tical and social life the men have been interested,
guided, helped. The effects on the residents,
too, in the wise direction and strengthening of
effort have been no less marked ; and the influence
of such an institution on a part of London at once
The Epistle to the Hebrews
BY THE REV. G. H. GWILLIAM, B.D., FELLOW
IT is a commonplace of New Testament criticism
to note the difference of the reception which has
been accorded to the Apocalypse and to the Epistle
to tlre Hebnws in the different parts of the Church.1
The presence or absence of one or other of these
books may even be a sign of the origin and locality
of a particular list of canonical writings.2 While
the exclusion of the Hebrews would suggest that
the list was western, that epistle would certainly
be found in any genuine Syrian list. The Church
of Edessa appears to have received all the fourteen
Epistles of St. Paul, at least from the first days when
a formal list of his writings was first compiled by
the Syriac doctors. The object of this paper will
be to state the grounds on which such an assertion
is confidently made.
It is interesting, and useful for the present pur-
pose, to compare the contents of a Greek and of a
Syriac New Testament as they were published in
the fourth and fifth centuries. We have the unim-
peachable evidence of the MSS. themselves, which
we inherit from the copyists of those days. Of the
fourth century, we possess the Sinaitic and the lati-
can Greek New Testaments ; the former contains
all which is included in the English New Testa-
ment ; the latter originally, no doubt, contained as
much, but in its present state it is without the last
part of the EPistle to the Hebrews (ix. 15 f. ) and
the Revelation. Of the fifth century, the Alexall-
dria~r 1lTS. contains the whole New Testament, a few
leaves being lost : the Parisian fragments (Cod C.)
represent the same Canon.3
1
See, e.g. History of the New Testament Canon (Westcott),
p. 245. The acceptance of these books is well shown in a
Table in Studia Biblica, iii. (Oxford, 1891), pp. 254-257.
2 4
Professor Sanday in Studia Biblica, p. 244.
3
See the convenient Table, pp. 107, 108, of that useful
manual. Guide to the Textual Criticism
A of the New Testa-
ment, E. Miller, 1886.
one of the most crowded and most desolate is
most wide and beneficial. It is, in fact, in itself
an assertion of the principles which Arnold Toyn-
bee loved to teach ; the dignity of individual man,
and the doctrine of social responsibility.
ELEANOR F. JOURDAIN.
in the Syrian Church.
OF HERTFORD COLLEGE, OXFORD.
The contents of these ancient documents are
evidence that whatever doubts might have been
entertained by individual writers, whatever hesita-
tion might have been felt at an earlier period, the
Canon of the Greeks of the fourth and fifth
centuries was the same as that of our New Testa-
ment. In like manner, the opinion of the Church
of Edessa may be inferred from an examination of
a complete
Syriac New Testament, which is pre-
served in the British Museum.4 Like the above-
named Greek MSS. it is undated ; but with at least
as much confidence as they are assigned to particular
periods, this Peshitto codex may be assigned to the
century A.D. 450-55. There is no presumption
against its having been written in the middle of the
fifth century; it is almost certain that it is older than
the Cambridge MS. (D), and than most of the
fragments which form the group of sixth century
New Testament uncials. Its contents and arrange-
ment are as follows :-(1) SS.1I1attllew, 3>J.k, L uke,
Joll7l; (2) the Epistles of St. Paul, in the familiar
order, concluding with Hebrews : (3) the Acts ;
(4) James, i Peter, I John. Colophon : &dquo; here
endeth the writing of the Holy Gospel and of
I the Apostle, and of the Praxis and of the Three
Catholic Epistles, of Jakob one, and of 1etros one,
and of Juchanan one.&dquo; So much, and 170 more,
seems always to have been included in a Peshitto
New Iestament. The order, too, was seldom
varied ; and if, as in the case of Add. 14,448/5
the Apostolus came last, or, as in the Jacobite
iVlassorah,G the Holy Gospels, yet the Three Epistles
were always attached to the Acts, and the Episties
of St. Paul were arranged as in the English Bible.
Add. 14,470. See Catalogue of Syriac B. M. MSS.,
part i. p. 40.
5
Dated apparently A.D. 699-700, B. M. Cat. p. 41.
6
B. M. Cat. p. 108, Hora Syriacœ (Wiseman), p. 217.

The most significant fact here is the limitations
imposed on the Syrian Canon. The theologians
and critics of Edessa were conservative, and most
unwilling to admit additions to their Bible. When
at a later period the other Catholic Epistles and
the Revelation obtained a place, they came in
through another translation, and were never part
of the Peshitto. It must therefore have been for
good and valid reasons that the Syrians from the
first included the Hebrews amongst the Epistles of
St. Paul. That they did so appears certain when the
following further evidence is taken into account :-
( i ) The Syrians, like the Greeks, frequently
avoided the expense of an entire New Testament
by making a copy of a part. Among such parts
there are extant several Apostoli. These always con-
tain the fourteen Epistles of St. Paul, ending with
the Hebrews, and they include no more. One of
the most interesting is the British Museum copy,l
which is dated A. GR. 845 = A.D. 534-one of the
oldest dated MSS. in existence. The evidence of
this venerable codex is confirmed by the contents
of others in the same collection, and which, although
undated, may be confidently assigned to about the
same era.
But (2) we can go behind the evidence of even
these ancient codices ; the testimony of the quota-
tions in the Homilies of Aphraates, which were
composed between the years 337 and 345, and in
the works of Mar-Ephraim (born about 308 A.D.,
died 373), confirms the diplomatic evidence as
to the contents of the Syriac Apostollls. The
biblical quotations in the former writer are very
numerous. Some of his sentences are little more
than strings of Peshitto texts. He quotes repeat-
edly from all St. Pauls Epistles, with the exception
(apparently) of 2 Thessalonians and Philemon nor
is there any certain reference to St. James. The
quotations in Mar-Ephraim have lately been made
the subject of a special investigation by the Rev.
F. H. BVoods.2 He finds references to all St. Pauls
Epistles, except 2 Tlzessalollians and Plzilemollbut
he also notices a possible allusion to Peter, and
a distinct allusion to the 4pocal)pse. St. James is
not quoted.
It would not have been surprising to find no
reference in either of these early writers to such an
1
Add. 14,479, Catalogue, p. 86.
2 In Studia Biblica, iii. 1891, Essay iv. On pp. 118,119
are some remarks on the quotations from the Gospels in
Aphraates.
155
epistle as Philemon; it is, however, worthy of
remark that both appear to disregard the same
three books, Philemon, 2 Thessalanians, and . James.
If weight is to be given to an argument, which,
after all, is merely e silentio, then it may be sup-
posed that the days of Aphraates and Ephraim
form a stage in the history of the Canon of the
Syrian Church. The Peshitto MSS. which have
been mentioned show that before the middle of
the fifth century (how long before it is impossible
to say) a definite Table o.f Contents for a Peshitto
New Testament had been arranged, and one less
comprehensive than that which was authorised in
the west. Subsequently, by Philoxenus, or by
Thomas Heracleensis, the other Catholic Epistles
and the Apocalypse were added to the Syriac New
Testament, but they never formed part of the
Peshitto.3 According to a passage in the Docl1le
of Addai,4 a work itself perhaps later than the days
of Ephraim, but which embodies early traditions,
the Syrian Church only received at first the Gospels,
Acts, and Paltlim Epistles.55 In the time of
Aphraates and Ephraim the Epistles i Peter and
i John were winning recognition. Stjaiiies was
perhaps admitted at a somewhat later period; but
no doubt seems to have been entertained about
the Epistle to the Hebrews, or of its right to be
included amongst those ascribed to St. Paul.
But it may be thought that the critical value of
the Syriac Canon is affected by the early recogni-
tion of certain books, which were not included in
the Edessene Canon as finally received. The case
is this :-( I) It has been thought that Aphraates
quotes the apocryphal Tlzird Epistle to the Cor-
ZlrtlrrlllrS.~ (2) There is extant in Armenian a
Commentary on this work,7 attributed to St.
3 The antilegomena Epistles appear to be Philoxenian, the
Apocalypse Heraclean. So Dr. Gwynn in Transactions of
the Royal Irish Academy, xxvii. No. viii. pp. 29-36.
4
Edited, with English translation, by George Phillips,
D.D.
5
The passage is quoted by Professor Sanday, op. cit.
p. 245. His words imply that Aphraates did not quote I
Peter and I John; so Zahn, op. cit. inf. i. p. 375, and
Berts Index in Texte und Untersuchungen, iii. 3, p. 431.
But see The Homilies of Aphraates, edited, from fifth and
sixth century MSS., by that eminent Syriac scholar, the
I late Dr. Wright, pp. 69, 144.
6
Zahn, Gesch. des Neutestam.
Kanons, ii. Band, ii. Hälfte,
IAbth. p. 561.
7See W. F. Rincks Das dritte Sendschreiben an die
Korinther, Heidelburg, 1823; Zahn, op. cit. pp. 595-611 ;
"La Correspondance Apocryphe de S. Paul et les Corin-
156
Ephraim. (3) quotation in St. Ephraim is
A quently rejected,
noticed by Mr. ivoods 1 as having a great resem-
blance to 2 Peter iii. 10. (4) Ephraim expressly
quotes the Apocalypse (v. i ), saying, &dquo;In his
revelation John saw.&dquo;2 But from these no
arguments can be drawn to affect our view of the
critical value of the Syrian Canon, and of the
deliberate acceptance by the doctors of Edessa of
the fourteen Epistles of St. Paul. As to (3), Mr.
AVoods admits that the allusion may be to the
similar passage, i Thessalonians v. 2 ; and (i) is
spoken of but doubtfully by Dr. Zahn. The two
quotations are insufiicient as evidence to prove that
Aphraates Canon was more extensive than that of
the fifth century Peshitto. The inference from (2)
depends upon the genuineness of the work ; it can
hardly be said that this has been established.
But even if it be admitted that Ephraim com-
mented on 3 Caiinthians, the inference will be the
same as from (4)-the same which (i) and (3), if
allowed to be true, would prove-that Aphraates
and Ephraim were acquainted with some works
which were not universally accepted in the Syrian
Church. This might have been anticipated. The
Syrians were students of Greek literature,3 but not
every book which some Syriac Father knew, and
even regarded as inspired, was received on his
approval into the Peshitto Canon. Caution and
conservatism were marks of the Syriac theologians.
Even in the seventh and eighth centuries, with full
knowledge of the Canon of other Churches, they
clung to a New Testament, which contained an
addition to 31attheev xxviii. 18,. which knew not
the Perrco~e de A dllltera, and which excluded
2 Peter, 2 and ~To
3 John, Jude, A~ocal~~pse.
doubt the Peshitto Canon was of gradual forma-
tion ; such a supposition is almost certainly true,
even if no credit be given to the tradition quoted
above from the DodrillC of Addai but to imagine
that books once admitted could have been subse-
thiens" (Carriere et Berger), Rev. de Theol. et Philos., xxiii.,
1891.
1 cit. p. 137.
Op. 2Woods, op. cit. p.138.
3
It is enough to refer to the many translations from the
Greek into Syriac. See also Woods, op. cit. pp. 117, 118.
4 "
... earth; and as my Father hath sent me, I also
send you."
is to betray ignorancc of the
character of Edessene criticism. lvhen rightly
estimated, that character inspires confidence in
the judgment of the Edessene school ; and if any
value attaches to historical tradition in determin-
ing the authenticity and purpose of an ancient
writing, then must great weight be allowed to the
verdict of the Syriac critics, for they were men of
learning and research, and of an extensive acquaint-
ance with literature. Although Edessa and Nisibis
produced no men of genius fit to stand by the
Alexandrian Origen, the North African Augustine,
the Italian Jerome, yet could they boast of a long
line of translators, of compilers, of gospel harmon-
ists, of grammatical writers.6 Such men were fit
to form a judgment on the authenticity of biblical
works, and the limitations which they imposed
show that they must have had good grounds for
receiving all which they included in their Canon.7
Their S/z!c!la,s or 4 .postolits, from very early times,
contained St. Pauls fourteen Epistles, and nothing
more. Of variation in the order or contents there
is no trace ; and while elsewhere ~ doubts were
expressed about the authorship of the I~el~reae~s,
the Syriac critics formed their own judgment, and
unhesitatingly included this also amongst the
writings of St. Paul.
5 "
Tradition " is as offensive to some theologians of these
it was of old to ultra-Protestants. The apparent suc-
days as
cesses which have attended the modern text critic, or exegete,
are fascinating; but the sober-minded student suspects that the
truth may sometimes lie with the ancient contemporary, or
his successors, rather than with the writer of the nineteenth
century commentary, brilliant though he be in his conjec-
tures, and powerful by the very boldness of his scorn for the
verdicts of antiquity.
6 See
Wrights comprehensive article, "Syriac Literature,"
with its 1200 references, in Encyclopadia Britannica, ninth
edition.
7 On this
Bishop Westcott has justly insisted, op. cit. p.
267.
8
From mittere.
shlach=
E.g. Jerome,
9 who died A.D. 420, not long before the
Cod. Add. 14,470 (see above), which records the extent of the
fifth century Peshitto Canon, was written, says: "Epistola
autem, quæ fertur ad Hebræos, non Pauli creditur, propter
styli sermonisque distantiam ; sed vel Barnabæ, juxta Ter-
tullianum, vel Lucæ Evangelistæ, juxta quosdam, vel
Clementis, Romanæ postea ecclesiæ episcopi." See more in
Roulhs Reliquiæ Sacrœ, vol. i. p. 421.