If I may offer a small correction:
The *NTS* article does NOT propose that Shem-Tob used
>an Arabic translation of the gospels made by Isaac Velasquez of Spain
as Smith put it in his post. (I am reminded of the first reactions to the
TC article, which interpreted me as arguing that Shem-Tob was dependent
upon the Middle Dutch *Vorlage* of the Liege Harmony...)
Rather, to quote the *NTS* article:
"...has Howard considered the possibility that Shem-Tob might be dependent
upon the same *Vorlage* as that used *in Spain* by Isaac Velasquez *in 946
CE* when he translted the separate gospels into *Arabic*? Velasquez's
translation has been known for over a century, and more than sixty years
ago Anton Baumstark remarked on the extraordinary fact that this Arabic
translation contained *numerous variant reading which were also found in
the Middle Dutch Liege Harmony. Baumstark concluded that the ***Latin
separate-gsopel *Vorlage* from which Velasquez worked was *related to the
Western harmoniezed gospel tradition, especially the Middle Dutch
tradition.* ***" (pp. 494-495)
It is this "Latin separate-gospel *Vorlage* from which Velasquez worked"
which is the presumed link with Shem-Tob--recall the reading "fowl" in Matt
22:4 in both Shem-Tob and the Liege Harmony, which shows that Shem-Tob's
*Vorlage* is almost certainly *LATIN* (TC article, para. 89).
Dependence of Shem-Tob upon a *LATIN* Vorlage is explicitly stated at the
conclusion of my *NTS* article, pp. 510-511: after pointing out (point 4,
at the top of p. 511) that Velasquez's translation was made from "a Latin
separate-gospel text which had numerous agreements with the Liege Harmony,"
I state (middle of the page) "One is forced to conclude that the *Vorlage*
of Shem-Tob's Hebrew Matthew was a *medieval Latin manuscript of the
separate gospels, whose text had been profoundly influenced by the same
harmonized gospel tradition found in the Middle Dutch family of harmonies.* "
Reading either article and concluding--contrary to the explicit statements
asserting Latin dependence--"that Shem Tob may have used an Arabic
translation of the gospels made by Isaac Velasquez of Spain" means that one
has been reading too quickly. No statement in either article even remotely
suggests Shem-Tob's dependence upon an Arabic source, of any sort.
Please: read carefully and accurately. I go out of my way to *write*
accurately; I ask my readers to make the same investment.
As to Smith's questions about "further information on this apparently
unpublished Arabic text, or where one may be able to get a microfilm or
photocopy of a ms.": I have given the bibliographic information in the TC
article: see Baumstark and Guidi; one may also consult G. Graf,
*Geschichte der christlichen Arabischen Literatur* (5 vols.; Vatican,
1944-53), which is the standard work on Arabic Christian literature. The
manuscripts are in Munich (Staatsbibliothek, as I recall), in Seville
(Cathedral Library), and in Fez (? I am working from memory: check the
sources). The Arabist of our NIAS team, Dr. Peter Joosse of Frankfurt, has
obtained microfilms of three or four of the manuscripts (I forget the
precise number), all, of course, in Arabic script. He is doing preliminary
work on an edition and translation. Publication (if it ever occurs) will
be many years down the road... As both the *TC* and the *NTS* articles
indicate, we also have Baumstark's archive, which contains occasional notes
on variants in Velasquez's text. Dr. August den Hollander (Amsterdam) and
Dr. Ulrich Schmid (Bethel) are the curators of the archive, which is
described in full in the articles. It is now in Amsterdam.
--Petersen, Penn State University.
At 09:45 PM 10/5/98 +1000, you wrote:
>Some time ago Prof William Petersen informed us of his critique of George
Howard's work concerning the Hebrew text of
>Matthew contained in the work of the 14th century Shem Tob of Spain. Prof
Petersen's article in the latest "New Testament
>Studies" journal goes a little further than his first publication in TC
earlier this year. in NTS he suggests that Shem Tob
>may have used an Arabic translation of the gospels made by Isaac Velasquez
of Spain apparently made from an Old Latin source
>in about 930 CE. This translation was quite popular in Spain and Morrocco
for some time and was a quite plausibly accessable
>to Shem Tob.
>Does anyone know if there is any further information on this apparently
unpublished Arabic text, or where one may be able to
>get a microfilm or photocopy of a ms. So far the only information I have
is what I have gleaned from Petersen's article,
>Metzger's "Early Versions of the N.T.", and Voobus' "Early Versions of the
>With thanks, Errol Smith.