Introduction: The Historical and Linguistic Landscape of Syriac Christianity

The Syriac versions of the Bible represent one of the most important streams of textual transmission in the early history of Christianity. Originating in the Syriac-speaking regions of the Roman and Parthian empires, especially centered around Antioch of Syria and Edessa (modern Urfa), these versions played a formative role in the dissemination and preservation of the Scriptures. Syriac, a dialect of Eastern Aramaic, served as the vernacular of a broad Christian population stretching from Mesopotamia to Persia and beyond. The demand for Scripture in this tongue drove early translation efforts beginning in the second century C.E., producing a range of versions that collectively reflect a complex and layered textual history.

Antioch, one of the three great cities of the Roman Empire, is noted in Acts 11:26 as the place where the disciples were first called “Christians.” While Greek was widely spoken in this multicultural hub, the growth of Christianity into the interior of Syria and Mesopotamia brought the need for Scripture in the local language: Syriac. This need led to the creation of Syriac versions of both the Old and New Testaments. These versions—ranging from the Old Syriac to the Peshitta, and later to the Philoxenian and Harclean—offer valuable witnesses to the transmission of the biblical text, especially the New Testament, in the early centuries of the Church.

The Old Syriac Version: Early Translations of the Gospels and Possibly the Apostolos

The earliest known Syriac version of the New Testament is the so-called Old Syriac. Though largely supplanted by later versions, it survives today in two major manuscript witnesses: the Curetonian Gospels (London, British Library Add. 14451) and the Sinaitic Palimpsest (discovered at St. Catherine’s Monastery on Mount Sinai in 1892). These two codices, dating from the 5th century and late 4th century respectively, contain varying selections of the four canonical Gospels. The text they present is significantly different from the Peshitta and is characterized by a freer translation style, often preserving Diatessaronic readings and evidencing a distinct textual tradition.

While no manuscripts of an Old Syriac version of Acts or the Pauline epistles (the “Apostolos”) have been discovered, internal evidence from early Syriac authors strongly suggests the existence of such a version. Quotations in the writings of fourth-century authors like Aphrahat, Ephrem the Syrian, and the anonymous Liber Graduum (Book of Steps) demonstrate textual forms that do not match the Peshitta but rather reflect an earlier, possibly free, translation from the Greek.

In 1 Corinthians 1:27, we find early Syriac readings that include the instrumental pronoun ܒܗܘܢ (“by them”), as preserved in Aphrahat and Ephrem. This detail, absent in the Greek text and the later Peshitta, suggests a translation shaped by exegetical or theological interpretation rather than strict adherence to a Greek Vorlage. Furthermore, a variation in the term used for “fools”—such as ܗܕܝܘܵܛܐ (“idiots”) instead of ܣܟܠܐ (“fools”)—in the Liber Graduum indicates a possible alternate recension of the Old Syriac Apostolos.

Similarly, in Hebrews 5:7, the Peshitta reads “even when He was clothed with flesh” (ܐܦ ܟܕ ܠܒܝܫ ܗܘܐ ܒܣܪܐ), diverging from the Greek phrase “in the days of His flesh” (ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ). Earlier Syriac usage may have rendered this as “in the days of His body” (ܒܝܘܡ̈ܝ ܦܓܪܗ), reflecting an older, possibly less theologically charged vocabulary.

The Peshitta: The Standard Syriac Version

The Peshitta (“simple” or “common”) emerged in the late fourth to early fifth century as the standardized version of the Bible for Syriac-speaking churches. Unlike the Old Syriac, the Peshitta was designed to be a unified and ecclesiastically sanctioned text. The translation of the Old Testament was likely carried out by Jewish or Jewish-Christian scholars, and in some books it exhibits affinities with the Targums and even the Septuagint.

The Peshitta New Testament originally consisted of only 22 books: the four Gospels, Acts, the Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews), and the General Epistles of James, 1 Peter, and 1 John. It did not include 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, or Revelation, likely due to their disputed canonical status in the Syriac Church during the early centuries. The omission of Revelation and the shorter epistles is consistent with the conservative nature of the Syriac canon, influenced by theological and ecclesiastical factors.

Textually, the Peshitta represents a moderately revised form of the Old Syriac. For instance, in 1 Corinthians 1:27, the Peshitta drops the instrumental pronoun ܒܗܘܢ (“by them”), likely in an attempt to align more closely with the Greek. However, a manuscript from around 600 C.E. (British Museum Add. 14480) includes ܒܗܘܢ in the second clause, revealing that vestiges of the earlier translation tradition persisted within the Peshitta textual stream.

In Hebrews 5:7, the Peshitta’s unusual phrase “clothed with flesh” (ܠܒܝܫ ܒܣܪܐ) may be a Syriac idiomatic rendering or possibly influenced by interpretive concerns. The Greek text speaks of Christ “in the days of His flesh,” yet the Syriac phrase potentially blurs the line between incarnation and experience. The term ܒܣܪܐ (“flesh”) may represent a later theological refinement, replacing an earlier ܦܓܪܐ (“body”) to emphasize Christ’s true humanity.

The Philoxenian Version: Theological Motivation and Greek Conformity

By the early sixth century, the need for a more precise rendering of the Greek New Testament led to the creation of the Philoxenian version, commissioned by Philoxenus, bishop of Mabbug (Hierapolis). This version was produced by his chorepiscopus Polycarp around 508 C.E. The Philoxenian sought to correct the perceived deficiencies of the Peshitta, especially those readings that were seen as Nestorian in tendency or insufficiently literal.

Philoxenus’s complaint in his commentary on John illustrates his concern: “Because of this we also have taken up the burden that the Holy Scriptures of the New Testament should once again be translated from Greek into Syriac.” His translation included the previously omitted General Epistles and Revelation, for the first time offering a complete Syriac New Testament.

In Hebrews 5:7, Philoxenus’s text rendered the Greek closely: ܗܘ ܕܒܝܘܡܬܵܐ ܕܒܣܪܗ (“He who in the days of His flesh”)—an accurate reflection of ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ. This text eliminates the Peshitta’s interpretive rendering and adheres strictly to the Greek word order and terminology.

Although the Philoxenian version was a scholarly and theological advancement, it failed to gain widespread acceptance across all branches of the Syriac Church. Its usage was largely limited to Monophysite communities, such as the Jacobite Church.

The Harclean Version: Hyper-Literal Revision and Greek Fidelity

In 616 C.E., Thomas of Harkel completed a revision of the Philoxenian version, producing the Harclean Syriac. His method was even more rigorous than Polycarp’s, reflecting a meticulous word-for-word rendering of the Greek, often at the expense of Syriac idiom and clarity. Thomas made use of Greek manuscripts in the Enaton monastery near Alexandria, where textual scholarship flourished.

The Harclean text of 1 Corinthians 1:27 is a striking example of this method:

ܐܠܐ ܠܣܟܠܐ ܕܥܠܡܐ ܓܒܐ ܐܠܗܐ ܐܝܟܢܐ ܕܢܒܗܬ ܠܚܟܝܡܐ…

Each Greek element is mirrored exactly in the Syriac, including a word-for-word rendering of conjunctions and participles. In Hebrews 5:7, Thomas adds details like ܕܝܠܗ (“of His”) for αὐτοῦ, again preserving Greek syntax and grammar with exactness.

Though the Harclean version found use in scholarly and ecclesiastical circles, its complex and unnatural Syriac style limited its broader use. Still, its value in textual criticism is immense, as it provides a near-interlinear representation of the Greek text as it stood in the early seventh century.

Additional Versions: Christian Palestinian Aramaic and Other Traditions

Another version sometimes confused with the Syriac tradition is the Christian Palestinian Aramaic version, which was used by Melkite Christians in Palestine and Egypt. Though written in a script similar to Estrangela, it represents a different dialect of Aramaic and is not strictly a Syriac version. Nevertheless, its readings are sometimes helpful for comparative textual analysis.

The influence of the Syriac versions extended beyond the Near East. The Armenian Gospels of the fifth century show signs of Old Syriac influence. Likewise, the Georgian Bible, completed by the end of the sixth century, was partly based on both Armenian and Syriac traditions. The Peshitta also served as a base for certain Sogdian and Arabic translations, extending its impact far beyond its original linguistic bounds.

Textual and Theological Significance of the Syriac Versions

The Syriac versions offer an essential witness to the early text of the New Testament, particularly in the centuries between the Greek autographs and the later medieval Byzantine tradition. The Old Syriac captures an earlier, freer stage of translation, often reflecting interpretive or paraphrastic tendencies. The Peshitta reflects a moderate attempt at standardization and doctrinal soundness. The Philoxenian and Harclean versions, in turn, were scholarly efforts aimed at literal fidelity to the Greek, driven in part by theological concerns during the Christological controversies of the early sixth century.

From a textual criticism standpoint, the Syriac tradition—especially the Old Syriac and Peshitta—provides an important counterpoint to both Alexandrian and Western textual forms. These versions allow us to observe how certain phrases were understood, rendered, and sometimes re-interpreted in a Semitic linguistic environment. They also show how theological pressures could lead to revisions or adjustments in the text.

The textual history of the Syriac versions affirms the reliability of the New Testament text while demonstrating the intricacies of its transmission. Far from casting doubt on the integrity of Scripture, these versions reveal the care with which early translators and scholars approached the sacred text, seeking to make it intelligible and faithful across cultures and languages.

You May Also Enjoy

How Can Textual Variants Strengthen Our Confidence in the Bible Rather Than Undermine It?

About the Author