The Testament of
Abraham.
————————————
Introduction.
————————————
Greek text of both the
recensions of this work is published for the first time in “Texts
and Studies,” Vol. II., No. 2 (Cambridge, 1892), by Montague
Rhodes James, M.A. None of the manuscripts are older than the
thirteenth century; of the six which contain the longer version the
best is a Paris . written 1315, and the
principal of the shorter recension (also in
Paris) belongs to the fifteenth century. There are also versions
in Roumanian, Slavonic, Ethiopic, and Arabic.
The work itself has hitherto been little noticed, and it
is doubtful how far it was well known in ancient times. It is
perhaps that cited as “Abraham” in early lists of
Apocryphal works, and some passages in early Christian writers may
indicate their knowledge of such a work. The evidence for this is
given in full by the editor of the Greek text in his introduction (pp. 7–29). The conclusions drawn by him from these notices, and from the work itself, are “that it was written in the second century, that it embodies legends earlier than that century, that it received its present form perhaps in the ninth or tenth century.” Certain features in it also “seem to point to Egypt as its birthplace,” such as the conception of Death in the longer recension, which has parallels in the Coptic Apocryphal books, the weighing of souls, and the presence of recording angels at the judgment scene.
Neither of the two versions can be supposed to be true
copies of the original work. They differ from each other not only
in length, but in arrangement. The shorter recension may preserve
more of the original language, but it transposes certain sections, thereby confusing the order of the narrative, and in this the Arabic version generally agrees with it. The most essential discrepancy begins with Chap. X. of the longer recension, where Abraham, after being taken up on the cloud, is first shown the iniquities that take place on earth. The shorter text places this at the end of his journey, quite destroying the original moral of the writer, who wishes to emphasize the mercy of God, and to show how Abraham’s righteous indignation is replaced by feelings of compassion for the sinner. The vision of judgment is then altered in the shorter version, the doubtful soul being there condemned, instead of being saved by the intercession of Abraham. In this point the editor thinks that the shorter recension may have been influenced by the Apocalypse of Paul, as would also seem to be the case with Michael’s reason for leaving Abraham in Chap. IV, which is quite different from the pretext given in the longer text. It is also remarkable that in the shorter form there is no word. of Abraham’s unwillingness to die, which is so prominent a feature of the other, and is no doubt original, as the idea is not otherwise unknown in Apocryphal literature. The conclusion of the shorter version is very much curtailed, compared with the longer one.
On account of these many differences between the
recensions of this remarkable work, it has been judged best to give
both of them entire, and so arranged that the reader can readily
discover in what respects the one differs from the other.