In Ephrem's commentary (Mös. 91) we have as follows:
Et quod dixit: Virgam in signum nimirum regiminis et humilitatis. Non baculum quia non ad gregen furientem pascendum exierunt, sicut quondam Moyses.
The Arabic Diatessaron has the following sequence:
Mark vi. 8b nisi virgam tantum, non peram, neque panem, Luc. ix. 3b neque duas tunicas habeatis, Matt. x. 10b neque calceamenta neque baculum, Mark vi. 9 sed calceati eritis sandaliis.
Now let us see what Syriac words underlie virgam and baculum.
The commentary of Bar Ṣalibi on the Gospel has evidently made use of Ephrem, for we have
ܘܠܐ ܬܪܡܠܐܕ܂ ܢܝܫܐ ܕܦܫܝܛܘܬܐ ܘܐܬܐ ܕܡܟܝܟܘܬܐ܂ ܘܠܐ ܚܘܛܪܐ܂ ܡܛܠ ܕܠܐ ܠܓܙܪ̈ܐ ܥܦܩܝܢ ܠܡܪܥܐ ܐܝܟ ܡܘܫܐ؛
i.e. and no wallet, a token of their simple life and a sign of their lowliness; and no club, for they were not going to feed flocks, like Moses.
In one respect this is better than the present text of Ephrem, in that it makes the want of a wallet the sign of poverty, rather than the carrying of a stick. Probably Ephrem's text should run
And as to what he said no wallet, etc.
And a stick but no club, etc.
Bar Ṣalibi tells us that ܚܘܛܪܐ is the word for club, and it follows that Tatian has harmonized the two renderings of ῥάβδος which are extant in the Old Syriac.
Did he also harmonize two words for 'shoes.' We notice that the text of Ephrem continues:
Porro non dixit caligas quas si portarent, ab omnibus rejicerentur, sed sandalia ut ita forsitan praemium mandatorum suorum acciperent. Sed licet plebeii essent, tamen eos exaltavit, &c.
For the opening words, we should correct
Porro dixit, neque caligas.
The comment shows that the sandals are taken to be plebeian compared to the caligae: and it is probable, therefore, that Tatian's text ran
non caligas, sed sandalia.
In this way the apparent conflict between Matthew and Mark is again resolved. This harmonization might have been made either in Greek or in Syriac. Taking the two cases together, the evidence is slightly in favour of a harmonization of previous existing Syriac gospels.
