[1] The dates are arrived at by inference. See Beck, H.-G., Kirche und theologische Literatur im byzantinischen Reich (München, 1959), p. 425Google Scholar; Maas, P., ‘Die Chronologie der Hymnen des Romanos’, ByZ 15 (1906), pp. 1–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Grosdidier de Matons, J., Romanos le Mélode (Paris, 1977), pp. 175–8.Google Scholar

[2] The source for this information is the second strophe of the hymn for Romanos' feast day (October 1st); the text is most readily accessible in Grosdidier de Matons, Romanos, p. 169.

[3] Krumbacher, K., ‘Miscellen zu Romanos’, SBAW.PPH, Band XXIV, Abt. III (München, 1909), pp. 1–138Google Scholar; Maas, P. and Trypanis, C. A., in the Introduction to their so-called ‘Oxford edition’ of the hymns, Sancti Romani Melodi Cantica, Cantica Genuina (Oxford, 1963).Google Scholar

[4] Baumstark, A., ‘Syrische und hellenistische Dichtung’, Gottesminne 3 (1904/1905), pp. 570–93; ‘Hymns (Greek Christian)’ in the ERE (Edinburgh, 1914), Vol. 7, pp. 5–12.Google Scholar

[5] Wellesz, E., A History of Byzantine Music and Hymnography (Oxford, 1961 ²), pp. 44, 156, 184–5, 325.Google Scholar

[6] Hymnes, Vols. I–V, respectively SC 99, 110, 114, 128 and 283 (Paris, 1964–81). All references to Romanos' hymns in this article are made to this edition, by Vol. number and page in the footnote, and by hymn number and strophe number in the text.

[7] The quotations are, respectively, from pp. 4 and 245. How Grosdidier de Matons arrived at these conclusions mystifies me, for he himself often speaks of parallels of thought or practice with Syria (cp. Vol. II, pp. 14, 264). And in the same series in which Grosdidier de Matons published his edition of Romanos, L. Leloir has published a French translation of the Syriac and Armenian recensions of Ephrem's Commentary (SC 121), which contains abundant parallels with Romanos' work. See examples A and B, infra.

[8] Vol. IV, p. 556.

[9] Chap. XXI.10: Leloir, L., Saint Éphrem, Commentaire de l'eacute;vangile concordant, Chester Beatty Monographs 8 (Dublin, 1963), p. 215Google Scholar, hereafter cited as Leloir, Beatty; the same reading is also in the Armenian recension, Leloir, L., Saint Éphrem, Commentaire de l'évangile concordant, CSCO 145 (Louvain, 1964), p. 227, hereafter cited as Leloir, CSCO.Google Scholar

[10] Vol. IV, p. 128.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Ibid.

[13] Chap. XX.5: Leloir, CSCO, p. 203.

[14] Lamy, T. J., Sancti Ephraem SyriHymni et Sermones (Mechliniae, 1886), Vol. 2, p. 543.Google Scholar

[15] Vol. II, p. 23.

[16] In Romanos' Second Hymn on the Nativity (XI, 11, 11. 3–4), Vol. II, pp. 101 f.; Third Hymn on the Nativity (XII, Prooimion, 1. 4), Vol. II, p. 118; Idem (XII, 1,1. 2), p. 120; Idem (XII, 5,11, 1–4), pp. 123 f.; Idem (XII, 12,11. 2–3), p. 128.

[17] The English translation is that of S. Brock, The Harp of the Spirit, Studies Supplementary to Sobornost 4 (n.l., 1975), pp. 63–5. Brock's translation is based on what he considers to be the most reliable MS of the verse homily, Or. 8606 in the British Museum.

[18] Vol. II, p. 36.

[19] These parallels will be presented in full in my forthcoming dissertation, The Diatessaron and Ephrem Syrus: Sources of Romanos the Melodist (Utrecht, 1983).

[20] Romanos, : Hymn on Mary at the Cross (XXXV, 16, 1. 7), Vol. 4, p. 184. Ephrem: Leloir, Beatty.p. 211; Leloir, CSCO, p. 225. The reading is also present in the Heliand, the Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions and the Dialogue of Timothy and Aquila. I am indebted to Prof. J. Neville Bird-sail for calling this latter source to my attention.Google Scholar

[21] Romanos, : Hymn on the Holy Innocents (XV, 7,1. 7), Vol. 2, p. 212. Ephrem: Leloir, CSCO, p. 27.Google Scholar

[22] Romanos: Hymn on the Leper (XX, 13,1. 6), Vol. II, p. 374, for the spoken command of healing, followed in strophe 14,1. 1, by the touching. Ephrem: Comm. (VII, pp. 21 and 24), Leloir, CSCO, pp. 74, 75. See also Hill, J. H., A Dissertation on the Gospel Commentary of S. Ephraem the Syrian (Edinburgh, 1896), pp. 33–4.Google Scholar

[23] Vol. III, p. 156.

[24] Vol. IV, p. 386.

[25] Chap. CXXXVII; Gibson, M. D. and Lewis, A. S., The Palestinian Syriac Lectionary (London, 1899), p. 147.Google Scholar

[26] Vol. II, p. 318.

[27] Vol. IV, p. 386.

[28] For example, the notorious Roman emperor Antoninus (born c. 205; reigned 218–222) was born in Emesa and had a Syriac name, Elagabal. See also the ‘semitisms’ which P. Maas and C. A. Trypanis called attention to in Sancti Romani Melodi Cantica, xvi, n. 1; e.g., Romanes' scansions require that Hebrew names be scanned as in Hebrew, not Greek.

[29] ‘Tatian's Diatessaron and the Dutch Harmonies’, JThS 25 (1924), pp. 128 ff.Google Scholar

[30] ‘Das Neue Testament in Lateinischer Sprache’ in Die alten Übersetzungen des Neuen Testaments, Kirchenvaterzitate und Lektionare, ed. Aland, K., ANTF 5 (Berlin, 1972), pp. 47, 48, n. 158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

[31] Jezus, het verhaal van zijn leven ('s-Gravenhage, 1980), p. 204.Google Scholar

[32] ‘Heliand, Tatian und Thomasevangelium’, ZAW 51 (1960), pp. 255–68Google Scholar; ‘Heliand und Thomas evangelium, VigChr 18 (1964), pp. 65–73.Google Scholar

[33] JrEdwards, O. C.., in a review of G. Quispel's Tatian and the Gospel of Thomas, JBL 96 (1977), p. 466.Google Scholar

[34] B. Metzger, in a review of Idem, JThS 27 (1976), p. 481.

[35] Witnesses to the Diatessaron are commonly divided into eastern and western branches, on the basis of provenance. The following list is after Metzger, B., Early Versions of the New Testament (Oxford, 1977), pp. 12–25:CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Western Eastern

Codex Fuldensis Commentary of Ephrem

Old High German Arabic Harmony

Theodiscum Persian Harmony

Codex Sangallensis Quotations by:

Middle Dutch Aphraates

Liège Ephrem

Stuttgart in the Liber Graduun

Haaren

Cambridge

Hague

Old Italin

Venetian

Tuscan

Middle English

Commentary of Zachary of Besançon

Poetic:

Der Heliand

Vita Beate Virginis Marie et

Salvatoris Rhythmica

Saelden Hort

This first criterion was developed by Prof. G. Quispel, and refined by himself and his colleague, Prof. R. van den Broek.

[36] An example is the Pepysian Harmony's recounting of a light in the Jordan at Jesus' baptism, a reading which is also found in Vetus Latina MSS a and g ¹. Since the Pepysian Harmony might have acquired the reading from the Vetus Latina, one must either invoke other criteria to resolve the impasse, or one must demonstrate that a and g ¹ are also dependent upon the Diatessaron.

[37] These three types of readings must be omitted, for one cannot create a reliable argument from an omission; nor where it is impossible to ascertain what the exact equivalent of a word is in another language to make a direct comparison; nor where the context of Romanes' hymn might have brought about a change, e.g. the deletion of connecting narrative material from the gospels by Romanes often results in his supplying the vocative of the person addressed, to avoid confusion.

[38] Vol. V, p. 92.

[39] Vol. IV, p. 330.

[40] Messina, G., Diatessaron Persiano (Roma, 1951), p. 135.Google Scholar

[41] Goates, M., The Pepysian Harmony, Early English Text Soc., O.S. 157 (London, 1922), p. 57, 11. 11 f.Google Scholar

[42] Bergsma, J., De levens van Jezus in het Middelnedertands, Bib. v. Middelned. Letterkunde 54 (Leiden, 1895), p. 124.Google Scholar

[43] Chap. IV, p. 45; Messina, p. 351,1. 22.

[44] Plooij, D., et alii, The Liège Diatessaron, published in 8 fasc. (Amsterdam, 1929–1970), p. 730,1. 21; for the Stuttgart and Hague Harmonies, Bergsma, p. 254,1. 26.Google Scholar

[45] Chap. 226; Gerhardt, C., Das Leben Jhesu, CSSN Series Minor, Tome I, Vol. 4 (Leiden, 1970), p. 160,1.6.Google Scholar

[46] Chap. 64; Ibid., p. 41,1. 4.

[47] The English translation is that of M. Scott, The Heliand, University of N. Carolina Studies in the Germanic Languages and Literatures 52 (Chapel Hill, 1966), p. 80; the Old Saxon reading, from the edition of Behaghel, O., Heliand und Genesis, Altdeutsche Textbibliothek 4 (Tübingen, 1958 ⁷), p. 82,1. 2332, is: an isahslun niman.Google Scholar

[48] Vol. V, p. 348.

[49] Vol. II, p. 376.

[50] Leloir, Beatty, p. 99.

[51] Leloir, CSCO, p. 126.

[52] Gibson, M. D., The Commentaries of Isho 'dad of Merv, Horae Semiticae V (Cambridge, 1911), Vol. 1, p. 42.Google Scholar

[53] Plooij, The Liège Diatessaron, p. 104.

[54] V. Todesco, Il Diatessaron Veneto, Part I of Il Diatessaron in Volgare Italiano, StT 81 (Città del Vaticano, 1938), p. 50,11. 10 f.

[55] Vol. IV, p. 294.

[56] Ibid., p. 596.

[57] Beck, E., Ephrem des Syrers Hymnen de Nativitate, CSCO 187 (Louvain, 1959), p. 35.Google Scholar

[58] Ibid., p. 88.

[59] Beck, E., Ephrem des Syrers Paschahymnen, CSCO 249 (Louvain, 1964), p. 6.Google Scholar

[60] Ibid., p. 70.

[61] Leloir, CSCO, p. 222.

[62] Ibid., p. 216.

[63] Gibson, Isho'dad, p. 113.

[64] Ibid., p. 114.

[65] Goates, p. 100,11. 5 f.

[66] Ibid., p. 102,11. 2 ff.

[67] Todesco, p. 156,11. 21 ff.

[68] Scott, p. 194; Old Saxon from Behaghel, p. 195.

[69] Et argumentaautem quae praedicta sunt dominicae passionis in nullo altero facta sunt: neque enim sol medio die occidit aliquo de veteribus mortuo, neque scissum est velum templi, neque terra mota est, neque petrae disruptae sunt, neque mortui resurrexerunt, neque in tertia die quis illorum surrexit, neque receptus est in caelum … A. Rousseau, Irénée de Lyon, Centre les Hérésies, Livre IV, SC 100 (Paiis, 1965), Tome II, pp. 852–4,11. 60 ff. The date of this Latin translation of Irenaeus is, of course, difficult to determine; it is almost certainly much later than the time of Irenaeus.

[70] Tischendorf, C. v., Evangelia Apocrypha (Leipzig, 1876 ²), cited from the photoreprint (Hildesheim, 1966), p. 323 for the Greek recension; p. 389 for the Latin (‘A’).Google Scholar

[71] Ibid., p. 436 for the Greek recension ‘A’; p. 444 for the Greek recension ‘B’.

[72] Moricca, U., ‘Un nuovo testo dell' “Evangelio di Bartolomeo”’, RBib 30 (1921), p. 492.Google Scholar

[73] Regarding dates, see M. R. James, The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford, 1924): ‘The account of the Descent into Hell (Part II (of the Acts of Pilate)) is an addition to the Acta. It does not appear in any Oriental version, and the Greek copies are rare. It is in Latin that it has chiefly flourished, and has been the parent of versions in every European language … we (do not) know when the Descent was first appended to the Acts of Pilate. Not, I should conjecture, before the fifth century’ (p. 95). On the Anaphora Pilati: ‘There are two Greek texts of this which do not differ in essentials. In some manuscripts one form is appended to the Acts of Pilate. It is a late document, and not of much interest in its present form ’ (p. 153). And concerning the Gospel of Bartholomew, where our citation occurs only in the Latin recension: ‘The Greek text may be as old as the fifth century; the Latin 2 (which has our reading) of the sixth or seventh … The Latin is exceedingly incorrect, and there are many corruptions and interpolations’ (p. 166).

[74] Old-Latin Biblical Texts 7 (Oxford, 1923), ad loc.

[75] This is true even of the Heliand, which is merely taking the events of the gospels to their logical conclusion. If the veil is torn in two, then- what is behind it becomes visible.

[76] I am indebted to Dr. G. Mussies of Utrecht for calling this to my attention.

[77] All of the Diatessaronic sources speak of a general resurrection with the exception of the Venetian Harmony, which has conflated the canonical reading with the Diatessaronic, as it does so often; and Isho'dad, who, in one of his two references (XXII), speaks of ‘five hundred dead men’ being resurrected. His other reference, however, contains no such restriction.

[78] It must be pointed out that although there is a degree of interchangeability between the Diatessaronic νεκροί and the Matthean κεκοΨημένοι, the subject in Matthew is σώματα, which is in no way equivalent to the Diatessaronic νεκροί. If the matter were one of substitution, then we would expect the Diatessaronic reading to be something like πολλά σώματα τω¯ν νεκρω¯ν άγίων. Clearly, we are dealing with something more than a simple substitution between semi-synonymous terms.

[79] 1 Cor. 7. 39; 11. 30; 15. 6; 15.18; 15. 20; 15. 51; 1 Thes. 4. 13; 4. 14; 5. 15.

[80] The texts are conveniently broken down in Schmoller, A., Handkonkordanz zum Griechischen Neuen Testament (Stuttgart, 1973 ¹⁵), p. 9, under 'd) οι a˘γωι.Google Scholar

[81] All of the Diatessaronic witnesses presented read νεκροί. Some of them, however, conflate it with σώματα. The Venetian Harmony, as is its fashion, does so. The Heliand also speaks of ‘bodies’ a line after referring to the ‘dead men’. And Romanes, in one of the three places where he reads οι νεκροί, conflates it with the canonical σώματα (Hymn on the Ten Drachmas; XLV, 17,1.1). It is noteworthy, however, that in the other two places where Romanes reads οι νεκροί he is paralleling his source more closely and extensively than here, and in those places he does not conflate the canonical and the Diatessaronic readings.

[82] Attention should be drawn to another Syriac reading in Romanos. In his First Hymn on the Resurrection (XL, 10), line 9 speaks of άγίων σώματα, δικαίων τάγματα. άγίων is, of course, from the Koine text. δικαίων, however, is the reading of Syr^sin (‘many bodies of the righteous which were asleep’) and of Ephrem (Hymn on the Azymis, III, 14, cited above). It is, apparently, a Syriac substitution for άγίων. But, since it is absent from all other Diatessaronic witnesses, which, when they differ from the Koine text, read οι νεκροί, it cannot claim to be a Diatessaronic reading.

[83] As early as the ninth century, Isho'dad was reporting the conjectures of earlier exegetes: ‘And I consider, that they did not even take food at all (i.e., during the three days after the tombs were opened, but before they were allowed to appear); but were kept by the Divine energy, as Moses and Elia were kept in their fasts; but they went about through Friday and the Sabbath, according aS some say, they each stood near his grave and gave glory; others say, they assembled on the Mount of Olives where our Lord prayed; and others, that they departed to Paradise at the entrance of the soul of our Lord and that of the Thief; but those who say, that they remained for a long time in life, and that a few of them lived till the kingdom of Titus, are not much inclined to truth’ (Gibson, p. 114).

[84] Cf. the commentaries of Lohmeyer and Klostermann on Matthew, ad loc.

[85] The other two sources which are totally unambiguous on the point are Isho'dad (XXII) and Ephrem, Hymn on the Nativity IV; Hymn on the Nativity XVIII; Hymn on the Resurrection III, all quoted above.

[86] See n. 72.

[87] Bell, H. I. and Skeat, T. C., Fragments of an Unknown Gospel (London, 1935), p. 45Google Scholar. The text runs:

[ ]αι πολλά σώ-

[ματα τω¯ν κε]κοΨημένω(ν)

[άγίων ήγέρθ]η καί είση¯λ-

[θεν είς τήν άγ]ίαν πόλιν

[ πα]ρ ήμι¯ν πο-

[ ]κτλ.

Obviously, there is no room for ‘after his resurrection’.

[88] Ibid., pp. 42 f.

[89] It is significant that other scholars have also questioned whether the hand of a Gentile, perhaps Pauline, redactor has revised Matthew. Cp. A. F. J. Klijn, ‘Jerome’s Quotations from a Nazoraean Interpretation of Isaiah' in Judéo-Christianisme, a Festschrift for Jean Daniélou (Paris, 1972), pp. 241–55, esp. 251–4; this work also appeared as Volume 60 (1972) of the journal Recherches de Science Religieuse.

[90] Gibson and Lewis, p. 212, Chap. CL.

[91] Example E (Jn. 11. 25) is also to be found in the Heliand, Chap. XLIX, 1. 4054 f. (Scott, p. 138; Behaghel, p. 141). Example F (Jn. 2. 5) not only is to be found in the one MS of the Peshitta, but also in Ephrem's Commentary (Arm. & Syr.) (V, 2,1. 23; Leloir, CSCO, p. 44; and also at V, 4, 1. 13; Leloir, CSCO, p. 45), and, in the West, in the Venetian Harmony (Chap. XVII, U. 9–10; Todesco, p. 35). Finally, example G (Jn. 20. 5) is also to be found in the Persian Harmony (Chap. IV, 53; Messina, p. 367), and, in the West, in the Venetian Harmony (Todesco, p. 159,1. 36).