VERSIONS
368
VERSIONS
he corrected its mistakes and emended such transla-
tions as affected the true sense of the Gospels, and
probably followed the same method in revising all the
books of the New Testament, which he put forth at
Rome about 383. In that year, working from the
commonly received text of the Septuagint, he made
a cursor}' revision of the Psalter, which was used in
the Roman Church until the time of St. Pius V, and is
still retained at St. Peter's, Rome, in the Ambrosiau
Rite at Milan, and in the Invitatory psalm of Matins
in the modern Breviary. About 388, using the Hexa-
plar text a." a basis, he revised the Psalter more care-
fully and this recension, called the GaUican Psalter
from becoming current in Gaul, is now read in the
Breviary and in the Vulgate. From the same sources
he later corrected all the Old-Tostament books that
he judged canonical, but even in his own day all this
revision, excepting the Book of Job, was lost. The
unrevised text of the greater part of the Old Latin
Version continued in use in the Western Church until
it was supplanted by the Vulgate.
(2) Egyptian, or Coptic, Versions. — The first Chris- tians of Lower Eg3i)t commonly used Greek, but the natives generally spoke Coptic (see Egypt, \I, Coptic Literature), which is now recognized in four dialects, viz.: Bohairic, Sahidic, Akhmimic, and Fayiknic (Middle Egyptian). As Christian com- munities formed and flourished, the Bible was trans- lated into these dialects and it is generally admitted that some versions, if not all, date back to the second century. That they were independent translations from the Greek seems certain, and Bibhcal criticism has therefore profited by the light they have thrown on the Septuagint andi the New-Tesiament MSS. Of these versions the most important are in Bohairic or Memphite, the language used at Memphis and Alex- andria, and Sahidic, the language of the upper Thebais. The former is entirely extant and since the eleventh or twelfth century has been the standard text of the Church in EgyiJt. The latter exists in large frag- ments, but Uttle has so far been found of the others.
FayHmic (Middle Egyptian) or as it has been termed Bashmuric (Bushmuric), one of the Coptic dialects according to the division of Athanasius, Bishop of Cos (eleventh cent.), is the name now applied to some fragmentary versions pubUshed as the "Codices BasmjTici" by Zoega ("Catalogus", Rome, 1810).
(3) Ethiopia and Amharic Versions. — Early in the fourth century, St. Frumentius preached the Gospel in Abyssinia and there laid the foundation of the Ethiopic Church. Its version of the Scriptures probably dates from the close of the following century. It undoubtedly originated from the Septuagint and Greek MSS., but present texts do not certainly repre- sent the original version and may possibly be a later translation from the Arabic or Coptic.
Falasha Version. — This is an Old Testament in Geez, the sacred speech of Abyssinia, among the Fala- sha in North Abyssinia, who follow the Jewish religion and claim to be descended from Jewish exiles of the time of Solomon.
Amharic Versions. — As a language, the Amharic Bupplanted the Geez about 1300 and is still in use. Catholic missionaries liave made it the medium of their translations of portions of the Scriptures, but the first Amharic Bible was completed in 1810-20 by Asselin de Chcrville, French consul at Cairo. A Bible Society reprint appeared in 1842, and a new edition was prepared in 1875 by Krapf, aided by several Abyssinian scholars.
Galln Ver.'iinn. — A Gospel of St. Matthew in the language of the South ,\bvssinian Galla was published by Krapf (Ankobiir, 1S42). A G.alla New Testament in .4mharic characters was edited bv a Bible Society in 1870; Genesis and Psalms, 1873; Exodus, 1877.
(4) Gothic Version. — The Goths embraced the
faith in the third centurv but in the fourth they fell
into Arianism. Their Bishop Ulfilas (318-388j, 'after
devising an alphabet, produced a version of the Scrip-
tures from the Septuagint Old Testament and from
the Greek of the New. Extant fragments, the oldest
of which are of the fifth and sixth century, bear traces
of the Septuagint recension of Lucian and of the
Syriac versions of the New Testament.
(5) Arnieiiian Version. — History. — In 406 the Armenian alphabet was invented by Mesrob, who five years later completed a translation of the Old and New Testament from the SyTiac version into Arme- nian. This translation was recognized as imperfect, and a few years later Joseph of Baghim and Eznak, disciples of Mesrob, were sent to Edessa to make a new version from the Syriac. ^^'hen they returned bringing some copies of the Greek version it was seen that their work would be greatly benefited by the use of this "authentic" copy. Consequently some of the translators, including Moses Chorenensis, were sent to study Greek at Alexandria, where the final revision was made, the Old Testament being trans- lated from the Septuagint according to the "Hexapla" of Origen. This version was without delay officially adopted by the authorities in the Armenian Church. Comparatively little use has been made of the Armenian version by scholars engaged in critical work on the Bible, as few of them in the past knew Arme- nian, and the version moreover was beheved to have been modified according to the Peschitto, and even revised under King Haitho II (1224-70), according to the Vulgate. The insertion in particular of the text concerning the three heavenly witnesses (I John, V, 7) was attributed to him, since it was found in Uscan's first printed edition of the Armenian Bible (Amsterdam, 1666). Modern investigation reveals no solid ground for believing in these revisions. As regards I John, v, 7, it is not necessary to assume its insertion by anyone before Uscan, whose edition is lacking in critical value and embodies many emenda- tions and additions taken from the Vulgate. The Armenian version follows quite closely the "received" Greek te.xt. The variations in the MSS. are probably due to divergencies in the Greek sources. The version is a witness to the general reading of certain Greek copies of the fifth century.
Principal Editions. — The first part of the Armenian version to be printed was the Psalter, pubUshed at Venice in 156.5 by Abgar. In 1666 Uscan (probably Bishop of LTschovank in Erivan) published at Amster- dam a complete Bible in 4to, and in 1668 a New Testa- ment in Svo. The former work leaves much to be desired from the standpoint of critical accuracy. Apart from the insertion of the verse I John, v, 7, Ecclesiasticus and IV Esdras were simply translations from the Vulgate made by Uscan himself and the Apocalypse was scarcely less so. The work begun by Uscan was continued and perfected by the Jilechi- tarists (q. v.) and Zohrab published a New Testa- ment (1789), and a critical edition of the whole Bible (1805). Another was issued in 18.59. In both these editions the verse I John, v, 7, was omitted as it was not to be found in any of the older MSS. The Prot- estant Bible societies have also brought out several editions of the Armenian version both in the classical and in the modern language. Among the former are: Complete Bible (St. Petersburg, 1814; Cal- cutta, 1817); Old and New Testament separately (St. Petersburg, 1817). Editions in the modern dialects are, among others: Complete Bible (Mos- cow, 1835); Psalter (Basle, 1844); New Testament (Constantinople, 18t)0).
(6) Georffian, or Grusian, Versions. — Apparently kindred to the Armenian and probably derived from it in the sixth century is the Gregorian version, showing the influence of the Septuagint and the Greek New Testament. It was revised after the Slav trans-
