Second Baruch: A Critical Edition of the Syriac Text with Greek and Latin Fragments, English Translation, Introduction, and Concordances (review)

Students of post Second Temple destruction Judaism will be interested in the content of the apocalyptic work 2 Baruch. Daniel M. Gurtner has produced an edition of the Syriac text, the major text witness to 2 Baruch, based on the well-known seventh century manuscript labeled 7a1, along with an English translation. In his introduction, Gurtner discusses the history of research into 2 Baruch, the text witnesses to 2 Baruch, the question of the original language of the work, its provenance and purpose, its relation to another early apocalyptic work 4 Ezra, the date of composition, and its structure and contents. He builds his translation on those of R. H. Charles, L. H. Brockington, and A. F. J. Klijn. The main parts of the book are the Syriac text with an English translation on opposite pages and a concordance of Syriac words. The author also includes the Greek and Latin fragments placed in their positions corresponding to the Syriac text, along with their respective concordances. Moreover, he supplies a bibliography and an index of passages cited from the Old Testament, the New Testament, the Apocrypha, the Pseudepigrapha, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and classical sources.

Gurtner regards 2 Baruch as a Jewish apocalyptic work, composed in response to the destruction of the Second Temple, that bridges the gap between Temple centered-Judaism and rabbinic Judaism. It contains two parts: an Apocalypse (chapters 1-77) and an Epistle (chapters 78-87). While he does not take a position on the language of original composition, he alleges that the extant Syriac text derives from a Greek Vorlage. On the basis of the reference to "the twenty-fifth year of Jeconiah" (2 Baruch 1:1), Gurtner dates the composition to 95 C.E., between the destruction of the Temple in 70 C.E. and the revolt of 132-135.

While one always welcomes interest into Syriac sources, this volume has serious flaws in the transcription, translation, and analysis of the Syriac, which could have been avoided. Unfortunately, the author did not collaborate with scholars who are more at home in Syriac than he. Collaboration by a New Testament scholar with Syriac scholars working on either of two international projects, namely the Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon project at Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati or the Peshitta Institute at the University of Leiden, would have improved the volume as a whole and the concordance in particular.

Syriac spelling errors flaw the text of the book: read 'weeks' for (28:2); read 'of men' for (73:5); read 'tribes' for (78.title); read 'which exist' for (83:4); read 'delights' for (83:15); read 'place for repentance' (see Ms a) for (85:12).

Mistranslations also appear: "property" ( 19:5) should be "prosperity"; "O sons of Jacob" ( 31:3) should be "you seed of Jacob"; "the ruins" ( 35:1) should be rendered "its ruins"; "from your covenant" ( 41:3) should be rendered "from your statutes" as in 48:22; "this is the word" ( 42:3) should be translated "this is the meaning" as in 39:8; "the Creator" ( 44:4) should be rendered "our Creator"; "when it comes" ( 52:3) should be "of then"; "renewed blood" ( 56:6) should be translated "that it be renewed with blood"; "the unwritten Law" ( 57:2) should be "without writing, the Law"; "as long as they lived" ( 66:4) should be translated "while alive"; "the bright waters" ( 74:4) should be "the last bright waters"; "his judgments, which he has decreed against you" ( 78:5) should be rendered "the judgment of the one who decreed against you"; "the end of the letter" ( 87:1) should be "the writing ... is finished." The translation "and every seizure of young crops" (83:14) does not fit the Syriac (all pride and pomp) at all...