Article

1. Attribution to Ephrem
2. In many Syriac manuscripts of the Cave of Treasures authorship is ascribed to Ephrem, the famous fourth-century Syriac Church Father. Although Ephrem undoubtedly could not be the author — this attribution is an apparent anachronism — it still deserves our serious attention as an essential element in the author’s strategy of promoting his version of Syriac identity. his pseudepigraphic attribution should be analysed in the context of the growing importance of Ephrem’s igure among Syriac-speaking Christians during the sixth and seventh centuries. As for external evidence, Ephremian attribution is corroborated by several ancient translations of the Cave of Treasures and by references to this work found in some later Syriac compositions. Concerning the former, in the still unpublished karshuni recension of the Cave of Treasures (Mingana Syr. no 32, fols 89v–145v ) Ephrem is mentioned as the author of the work. That the Cave of Treasures was originally devised as Ephremian pseudepigraphon is important for understanding the particular agenda pursued by the work’s author. To understand what cultural work such attribution might perform in the context of sixth-century Syriac Christianity, let us take a brief look at the role that the igure of Ephrem played at that time.
3. The author of the Cave of Treasures has deliberately chosen to hide behind the name of Ephrem to avail himself of the authority of this universally revered Church Father. By so doing he resorted to a centuries-old literary strategy, inherited by early Christianity from its Jewish as well as Greco-Roman matrix, which remained much in vogue among Christians through Late Antiquity (Aland, ‘The Problem of Anonymity and Pseudonymity’; Speyer, Die Literarische Fälschung; Meade, Pseudonymity and Canon; Beatrice, ‘Forgery, Propaganda and Power’; Gray, ‘Forgery as an Instrument of Progress’). He was not the irst among Syriac Christians to hide behind the name of Ephrem. Although it is diicult to date precisely the diferent works that constitute the rich pseudo-Ephremian dossier in Syriac, it is very likely that Ephrem’s name was already used for such a purpose before the sixth century (see Melki, ‘Saint Éphrem le Syrien’, pp. 44–88. One of the earliest works of this kind is the so-called Testament of Ephrem. For the text, see Ephrem the Syrian, Sermones iv, ed. and trans. by Beck, pp. 43–69).

1. Priority of the Syriac Language (Syriac as the Primeval Language)
2. The main thrust of this passage is to assert that the ‘one language’ (MT תָחֶא הָפָשׂ ;Pesh ܚܕ ܠܫܢܐ (shared by all humanity before the tower of Babel was none other than Syriac. To substantiate this bold assertion our author claims — though without giving any examples — that all the languages in the world are derived from Syriac and thus contain some of its elements. It is signiicant that the author of the Cave of Treasures does not simply airm the primacy of the Syriac language but does so while explicitly rejecting a similar claim made by some unspeciied ‘ancient writers’ concerning Hebrew. By doing that he challenges an extremely inluential, centuries-old tradition shared by many Jews and Christians. he idea of Hebrew as the primeval language was irst formulated in Jewish circles during the Second Temple period. Its earliest attestation comes from the Book of Jubilees, where God restores to Abraham ‘the language of creation’, that is, the Hebrew language, which fell into disuse ater the disaster of the tower of Babel.46 Another tradition of this kind appears also in 4QExposition on the Patriarchs (= 4Q464), one of the sectarian writings from Qumran, where Hebrew is mentioned in connection with Abraham and is said to triumph at the end of days and become again the language of all humanity. The notion of Hebrew primacy was also among the many ideas inherited by Early Christianity from its Jewish matrix, and it soon became widespread through the Christian œcumene. It is attested in a variety of Greek sources, Christian as well as pagan.

1. Among the Greek authors of Late Antiquity that espoused it one can mention Julius Africanus,50 zosimos of Panopolis,51 John Chrysostom,52 and the Apocalypse of Paul (ch. 30). In the Latin west one of its earliest attestations comes from Jerome, who considered Hebrew to be ‘the mother of all languages’.53 A little later, this opinion was further supported by the authority of Augustine.54 he primacy of Hebrew was a notion apparently popular also among the Christians of Egypt, as it is found in the Chronicle of John of Nikiu55 and in some Coptic magical texts.56 It is not clear when exactly this idea was irst introduced into Syria. It could have become known to Syriac-speaking Christians through the Book of Jubilees, which it seems was translated into Syriac and circulated in the region.57 Here it is worth noting that a later East-Syrian exegete such as Ishodad of Merv explicitly lists ‘the books of Jubilees’ (ܠܝܐ̈ ̈ܐ ܕܝܘܒ ܟܬܒ (as among those known to him that support the idea of Hebrew being the primeval language.
2. Wherever one might think of looking for the ultimate roots of this idea in Syria, we ind its explicit expression already in the third century. he author of the Pseudo-Clementines, a Greek work written in Syria, speaking about the introduction of idolatry ater the lood remarks that ‘until that time the Hebrew language, which had been given to the human race by God, predominated’.59 he popularization of this notion among Syriac Christians was facilitated by the early — no later than the irst decade of the ith century — translation of the Pseudo-Clementines into Syriac.60 Apart from the author of the Pseudo-Clementines, one of the earliest Syrian writers to espouse the idea of Hebrew as the primeval language seems to be Eusebius of Emesa, a fourth-century exegete born in Edessa.
3. The idea of Hebrew primacy was still popular in sixth century Syria at the time of the Cave of Treasures’s composition. Jacob of Serug testiies to that in the second of his Memre on the Apostle homas in India, where he paraphrases the part of the Acts of homas (chs 5–8) in which the apostle meets the Jewish lute-girl. Jacob adds a detail not found in the original text of the Acts and says that the apostle cursed the butler who smote him on his cheek ‘in Hebrew’ — ‘in that language in which his Lord cursed the serpent in Eden’.66 Another sixth-century writer, a certain Mar Aba, an East-Syrian historiographer whose work survived only partially in Arabic translation, also acknowledges Hebrew to be ‘the irst language in the world’ (الدنيا فى لسان ل ّ او ّ( , although he is aware of those who hold Syriac to be the first one.67 he notion of Hebrew as the primeval language retained its appeal for at least some Syriac-speaking Christians well after the time of the Cave of Treasures, as one can see from the writings of Jacob of Edessa, who was its most prominent apologist during the seventh century.68 All these examples demonstrate, in my view, that on the question of the primeval language Hebrew originality was the prevailing opinion in late ancient Syria.