complicated apparatus of critical signs. But the Syriac Vulgate of the O.T. is much more ancient than the name Pĕshiṭtâ. It is largely and accurately quoted by Aphraates, and unmistakeable traces of its use appear in the Acts of Thomas: in other words, it has as early an attestation as our surviving materials carry us.
The Peshitta is a direct translation from the Hebrew, in all essentials from the Massoretic text. Some books, such as Chronicles, are amazingly paraphrased, but the variations appear to be due to the caprice of the translator or his exegetical tradition, not to differences of reading in the underlying Hebrew. Apart from intentional paraphrase the translation is fairly done: so well, in fact, that we cannot think of it as the work of Gentiles. It seems to me not improbable that it is a monument of Jewish learning of the great age of translations, the age of Aquila and Symmachus, which has been taken over by the Christian Church. Had it been wholly the work of Christians, I cannot but think that we should have heard of the singular erudition
