{"title":"Resolving Genealogical Ambiguity: Eusebius and (ps-)Ephrem on Luke 1.36","authors":"M. Crawford","doi":"10.1163/17455227-01402005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The earliest formal New Testament commentary in Syriac is the so-called Commentary on the Diatessaron attributed to Ephrem. This commentary is thoroughly at home in the world of Syriac Christianity, as seen not least in the fact that it focuses on Tatian’s idiosyncratic gospel version. Nevertheless, portions of the commentary also exhibit awareness of exegetical traditions shared with contemporary Greek authors. This paper focuses on one of the more striking of these parallels, namely, (ps-)Ephrem’s treatment of Mary’s Davidic lineage and relation to Elizabeth her ‘kinswoman’. Eusebius of Caesarea had taken up this issue in his Gospel Problems and Solutions, and the author of the Syriac commentary argues for the same three points evident in Eusebius’ treatment. Hence, the Syriac commentator has likely been directly or indirectly influenced by Eusebius’ formulation of this tradition, although specifying the manner of this transmission of ideas is impossible.","PeriodicalId":41594,"journal":{"name":"Aramaic Studies","volume":"14 1","pages":"83-97"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/17455227-01402005","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aramaic Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/17455227-01402005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The earliest formal New Testament commentary in Syriac is the so-called Commentary on the Diatessaron attributed to Ephrem. This commentary is thoroughly at home in the world of Syriac Christianity, as seen not least in the fact that it focuses on Tatian’s idiosyncratic gospel version. Nevertheless, portions of the commentary also exhibit awareness of exegetical traditions shared with contemporary Greek authors. This paper focuses on one of the more striking of these parallels, namely, (ps-)Ephrem’s treatment of Mary’s Davidic lineage and relation to Elizabeth her ‘kinswoman’. Eusebius of Caesarea had taken up this issue in his Gospel Problems and Solutions, and the author of the Syriac commentary argues for the same three points evident in Eusebius’ treatment. Hence, the Syriac commentator has likely been directly or indirectly influenced by Eusebius’ formulation of this tradition, although specifying the manner of this transmission of ideas is impossible.
期刊介绍:
The journal brings all aspects of the various forms of Aramaic and their literatures together to help shape the field of Aramaic Studies. The journal, which has been the main platform for Targum and Peshitta Studies for some time, is now also the main outlet for the study of all Aramaic dialects, including the language and literatures of Old Aramaic, Achaemenid Aramaic, Palmyrene, Nabataean, Qumran Aramaic, Mandaic, Syriac, Rabbinic Aramaic, and Neo-Aramaic. Aramaic Studies seeks contributions of a linguistic, literary, exegetical or theological nature for any of the dialects and periods involved, from detailed grammatical work to narrative analysis, from short notes to fundamental research. Reviews, seminars, conference proceedings, and bibliographical surveys are also featured.