Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 16.djvu/95

 VERSIONS

79

VERSIONS

end of the second century. On the other side Forbes Robinson (Hastings, "Diet, of the Bible", IV, 570) does not think that there is sufficient ground for beheving that a Coptic version existed before the fourth century (see also Burkitt in Cheyne, "Encycl. Bibhca", IV, 5008 seq.). However, in proportion as older manuscripts are discovered, and Coptic versions are submitted to a closer study, the pendulum of opinion is swinging back to the former view. Leipoldt agrees that the Sahidic version was com- pleted about A. D. 350 ("Gesch. der christlichen Literaturen", VII, 2, Leipzig, 1907, p. 139). Dr. Kenyon goes one step further: "If, therefore, we put the origin of the Coptic versions about a. d. 200, we shall be consistent with all extant evidence, and probably shall not be very far wrong" ("Textual Criticism of the New Testament", 154, quoted by Budge in "Coptic Biblical Texts", p. LXXXIII). More emphatic still is Horner: "If, with Harnack, relying on Leipoldt we may conjecture, though we cannot prove, that the Sahidic version partly goes back to the third century, there seems some reason for supposing that need of a vernacular version arose as early as the time of Demetrius [a. d. ISS). Where history fails us, the internal character of the Sahidic supplies confirmation of a date earlier than the third

century the traces of early mixture shown

by the definite tinge of Western influence can hardly be explained except by reference to a date as early as possible. If Christianity did not exist at all in Upper Egypt before A. D. 1.50, then we must come down to the date of Demetrius as the earliest possible date of the version ; but if, as is more likely, the Chris- tian religion had spread by means of theXile imme- diately after it began to be preached in Alexandria, and had already become infected by heretical and semi-pagan superstitions in the second century, we may provisionally conclude from the character of the Sahidic version that it was made at that time" ("The Coptic Version of the New Testament in the Southern Dialect", III, O.xford, 1911, p. 398).

All agree as to the great value of the Coptic versions. The Sahidic version is especially of im- portance for the study of the Septuagint, as it was made, it seems, from Greek manuscripts free from Hexapla influence. However, the critical value of those versions cannot be fully realized until we have a more comprehensive study of them, based on critical editions as we already have for the New Testament in Bohairic and the Gospels in Sahidic by Horner. The following is a synopsis of the material on hand for the study of the several Coptic versions. (See the writer's "fitude des versions copies de la Bible" in "Rev. bibl." (1896-7) for a fuller account of the Bohairic material and in the case of the other three versions for an account up to that date.)

The Bohairic Version. — The only complete books of the Old Testament known to be extant in Bohairic are the Pentateuch, the Prophets with Lamentations, the Psalms, and Job. Of the others we have frag- ments only, mostly taken from lectionaries. The New Testament is complete, ('hief editions: Penta- teuch, Wilkins (London, 1731); P. de Lagarde (Leipzig, 1867); Prophets and Lamentations, Tattam, Prophetse majores (Oxford, 18.52); Prophetae minores (ibid., 1836); Psalms, Tuki (Rome, 1744), Ideler (Berlin, 1837), Schwartze (ibid., 1851); Job, Tattam (London, 1846). The older editions of the New Testament have all been outranked by the recent Oxford edition; "The Coptic Version of the New Testament in the Northern Dialect, otherwise called Memphitic or Bohairic", by Geo. Horner (4 vols. Clarendon Press, 1898-1905). The only new manu- script of importance is one of those ret-cntly acquired by thelate J.P. Morganof New York. It issuppo.seil to have come from the Monastery of St. Michael in the

Faydm as the rest of the collection. It contained once the four Gospels. Many leaves unfortunately are now missing. Still it may prove of considerable value as it is from one to two hundred years older than the oldest known Bohairic manuscript of the Gospels (Bodl. Huntington 17, A. D. 1174).

The Sahidic Version. — Of this version until recently we had almost nothing but fragments, representing several hundred manuscripts, chiefly from the monas- tery of AmbaShnildah (Shenoute) near Sohag province of Akhmim, generally known as the "White Monas- tery". The only complete books were those of the Wisdom of Solomon and the Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), and some of the minor Epistles. Of late, however, this nimiber has been considerably increased, see above, Coptic Litera- ture, Morgan collection, and British Museum, Recent acquisitions. The most important editions since 1897 (besides those mentioned in the article just referred to) are the following:

A. Old Testament.— (\) Rahlfs, "Die Berliner Handschrift des sahidischen Psalters" (Abhandlungen der kSniglichen Gesellschaft der Wissenchaften, zu Gottingen, philolog.-hist. Klasse, IV, 4), Berlin, 1901. This codex, which Rahlfs ascribes to about A. D. 400, contained in the neighbourhood of 129 leaves out of which 98 are still extant in a rather dilapidated con- dition. The greatest lacuna (about thirty leaves), between leaf 94 and 95, covered Psalms 106-143. Six pages are reproduced in collotype at the end of the book. (2) "A Coptic Palimpsest containing Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Judith, and Esther", by Sir Herbert Thompson (Oxford Univ. Press, London, 1911). This palimpsest is the manuscript Add. 17,183 of the British Museum known already from the descriptions of W. Wright, "Catalogue of the Syriac Manuscripts in the British Museum", II, 89, no. DCCCXII, and Crum, "Catalogue of the Coptic Manuscripts of the British Museum", no. 12. Specimens of the script, which can be dated in the seventh century, were published by the present writer in "Album de paloographie copte" (Paris, 1888), pi. VII, 1, and LVI, 1. Some twenty-five folios of the original MS. are now missing, leaving as lacunse: Joshua, ii, 1.5-iii, 5; .\, 26-36; xvii, 17- .xviii, 6; xix, 50-xx, 1, 6; xxii, 14-20; Judges, vii, 2-6, 15-19; viii, 11-19; viii, 28-i.x, 8; x, 7-14; xvi, 19-xvii, 1; xviii, 8-21; xix, 8-15; xx, 16-23; xx, 48- xxi, 6; xxi, 15 end; Ruth, iv, 3-9; Judith, ii, 6-iv, 5; V, 6-14; v, 23-vi, 3; vii, 2-7; vii, 18-21; xvi, 7-xvii, 16; Esther (according to Sweet's Greek edition): A, 11-i, 11; ii,8-15; iii, 13-B,4; iv, 1.3-C, 6; D, 9-vi, 5; viii, 2-E, 6; E, 17-viii, 12. (3) "The Coptic (Sahidic) version of certain books of the Old Testament from a Papyrus in the British Museum" by Sir Herbert Thompson (Oxford Univ. Press, London, 1908). This papyrus (British Museum, Or. 5984), once in ordinary book form, now consists of fragments only, preserved in 62 numbered glass frames. Originally it contained the Books of Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastcs, Canticle of Canticles, Wisdom, and Ecclesiasticus (Sirach). Of Job only x.x.xviii, 27-xxxix, 12 is left. Of Proverbs there are considerable portions from iv, 16 to the end; of Ecclesiastes, likewi.se from vi, 6 to ix, 6; of Canticle of Canticles, from the beginning to the end; of Wisdom, from the beginning to xix, 8; of Ecclesiasticus from the beginning to xl, 18. The script (illustrated by a plate reproducing Ecclesi- asticus Prol. 1-i, 12) is pronounced by Crum (Proc. of the Soc. of Bibl. Archaeology) to be "Perhaps of the sixth or -seventh century". (4) "Sahidisch- griechische Psalmenfragmente" by C. Wessely in "Sitzung.sber. d. kais. Akad. d. Wissenschaften, philos.-histor. Kla.s.se", vol. 155, I (Vienna, 1907). In this the learned curator of the Rainer collection gives us some very important fragments of the Psalms, among which are twenty-four leaves of a