Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Syriac??? Gen 1:26

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2004

    Default Syriac??? Gen 1:26

    The NET notes for Gen 1:26 say "51 )tc The MT reads "earth"; the Syriac reads "wild animals" (cf. NRSV)."

    It's amazing the stuff one forgets (if I ever even knew)!!!

    Can someone give me a quick primer (or point me to a trustworthy link) on...

    What is Syriac?
    When was it written?
    For what geographical area?
    What, if any, is the relationship with the Peshitta?
    What, if any, is the relationship with Aramaic?

    I've been a missionary in Argentina for 16 years, and, for some reason, Syriac variants haven't come up before. (Go figure).

    The question came up because I told my Bible Study Methods class to actually read and study the footnotes and reflect on their significance.

    And, lo and behold the Spanish equivalent of the NET note popped up.

    I tried tracking some of this stuff down, but got confused.

    I know I should know this, but, alas, I don't, so any help you can give me or point me to would be greatly appreciated.

  2. #2


    Syriac is a late, post-New Testament form of Aramaic, written in a different script. The Peshitta is in Syriac. I haven't done any Syriac amongst my formal language study (which did include 2 years of various kinds of Aramaic), so that's about the extent of my knowledge.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2004


    Thanks Ben!

    Any one else have anything to add?

    So, in the NET note, does "syriac" mean "Peshitta" or simple one of any number of MSS?

    Is the Peshitta the official version of the Eastern Church?


  4. #4


    I have compiled a collection of resources related to Syriac studies HERE. The Wikipedia article on the Peshitta looks quite accurate and is worth checking.
    Mark G. Vitalis Hoffman
    Glatfelter Professor of Biblical Studies
    United Lutheran Seminary at Gettysburg & Philadelphia -
    Biblical Studies and Technological Tools

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2004


    Thanks for the resources, Mark!

    And thanks for confirming the general reliability of the wikipedia entry. I had no way to evaluate it's accuracy!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts