TWO SYRIAC DIALOGUE POEMS ON ABEL AND CAIN Introduction The two lively dialogue poems (soghyatha) published here belong to a clearly defined genre of Syriac poetry1 which has its roots in ancient Mesopotamian precedence disputes2. Among the comparatively small number of dialogue poems involving Old Testament characters the first of the two poems (Soghitha I) is probably the oldest, and since it was evidently known to Jacob of Serugh (in his homilies on Cain and Abel) it cannot be later than the fifth century. An early date for Soghitha I is in fact also likely seeing that it is transmitted in both eastern and western Syriac tradition. The second poem (Soghitha II), on the other hand, be- trays a medieval date by the presence of rhyme, and if we accept its as- cription to (Giwargis) Warda3, then its date of composition can be nar- rowed down to the thirteenth century. Although Soghitha II clearly knows Soghitha I, it is by no means slavishly based upon it, and it pro- vides a good example of the continuing use of the genre in the middle ages. Both poems follow the standard format of the genre (introduction, ex- tended dialogue, conclusion), though with some modifications at the end. Thus both provide an introduction to give the setting (12 stanzas in Soghitha I, and 7 in Soghitha II), after which the dialogue, in alternating stanzas, commences, together with an alphabetic acrostic. The two soghyatha depart from the normal pattern when they reach Òadhe in the acrostic (st. 47 in I, and st. 43 in II), for at that point several narrative stanzas appear, before the ‘dispute’ is finally concluded with God's in- tervention and his judgement on Cain. The biblical starting point of the two soghyatha is Genesis 4, 8, which in the Peshitta reads, ‘Cain said to Abel his brother, “Let us travel to the 1 See my Syriac dialogue poems: marginalia to a recent edition, in Le Muséon, 97 (1984), p. 29-58 (= BROCK, Syriac dialogue poems), and Syriac dispute poems; the vari- ous types, in G.J. REININK and H.L.G. VANSTIPHOUT, Dispute Poems and Dialogues (Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta, 42), Leuven, 1991, p. 109-119. 2 For this aspect see especially R. MURRAY, Aramaic and Syriac dispute poems and their connections, in M.J. GELLER, J.C. GREENFIELD and M.P. WEITZMAN, Studia Aramaica (JSS, Supplement 4), Oxford, 1995, p. 157-187. 3 On Giwargis, see A. BAUMSTARK, Geschichte der syrischen Literatur, Bonn, 1922, p. 304-305, and D. BUNDY, Interpreter of the acts of God and humans: George Warda, historian and theologian of the 13th century, in The Harp, 6 (1993), p. 7-20. 334 S.P. BROCK valley”. And it came to pass when they were in the valley Cain rose up against Abel his brother and killed him’. Although the biblical text gives no hint of any dispute between the brothers at this point, such a dialogue is indeed found in the Palestinian Targum tradition, although of a very different (and much more theological) character4. It seems quite likely that the Syriac author of Soghitha I was indirectly aware of the existence of Jewish literary embellishments of the biblical text here, and as a result he took this verse as the starting point for his own very different hand- ling of the dispute. The focus of interest of the two poems is in fact very narrow, for al- though the conclusion takes the biblical narrative down to Gen. 4, 12, neither author shows any particular interest in the reasons why Cain's offering was rejected, or how he knew that it had been rejected. Whereas most early Jewish and Christian exegetes5 exerted considerable ingenu- ity in elucidating both these points, where the biblical text is either enig- matic or entirely silent, all we find in the two poems are incidental re- flections of this exegetical tradition. Thus, for example, the view that Abel's sacrifice had been consumed by fire from heaven, referred to by both Aphrahat and Ephrem6, is alluded to once in Soghitha I in st. 23b, [Cain] ‘He honoured you greatly with the flame’. The reason for the re- jection of Cain's offering is indeed given as his lack of love (Soghitha I) or absence of purity of heart (Soghitha II), but in neither poem is much prominence given to this; instead, more attention is given to another trait in Cain's character, his overweening greed for land and his intolerance of the idea of having any rival in ownership on earth7. Both Soghyatha are transmitted in liturgical manuscripts and have a liturgical context. Soghitha I belongs to Lilyo, or the Night Office, of Monday in Holy Week8, while Soghitha II is allocated to the 5th Sunday of Lent. Soghitha I has already been published several times in its East Syriac form9 (from which the text printed below differs in a number of respects, 4 For this see G. VERMES, Post-Biblical Jewish Studies, Leiden, 1975, ch. 7; cfr also J.B. GLENTHØJ, Cain and Abel in Syriac and Greek Writers (4th-6th Centuries), (C.S.C.O., 567; Subs., 95), Louvain, 1997, p. 7 (= GLENTHØJ, Cain and Abel). 5 For these, see especially V. APTOWITZER, Kain und Abel in der Agada den Apokryphen, der Hellenistischen, Christlichen und Muhammedanischen Literatur, Wien- Leipzig, 1922, and GLENTHØJ, Cain and Abel. 6 APHRAHAT, Demonstration, IV, 2; EPHREM, Commentary on Genesis, III, 3; for the background to this tradition see my Fire from heaven: from Abel's sacrifice to the Eucha- rist. A theme in Syriac Christianity, in Studia Patristica, 25 (1993), p. 229-243. 7 GLENTHØJ, Cain and Abel, p. 142-143, 264. This theme is also familiar in Jewish tra- dition (e.g. TanÌuma Mishpa†im, 9; Midrash ha-Gadhol to Gen. 4, 8). 8 One manuscript (H), however, gives Wednesday of Holy Week instead. 9 See below, under NF, NM, NP. TWO SYRIAC DIALOGUE POEMS ON ABEL AND CAIN 335 especially at the end), and once in an early form of the West Syriac tra- dition10 that is only slightly different from the present edition. By con- trast, Soghitha II is published here for the first time. Soghitha I Soghitha I is transmitted by numerous manuscripts in both the eastern and western Syriac tradition; in the former it is usually attributed to Narsai, an ascription which cannot be taken seriously. For the present edition use has been made of the three oldest available manuscripts in the western tradition, a selection of later western Syriac manuscripts, and three editions of the eastern Syriac tradition. These are: - A = British Library, Add. 17190, f. 53r-55v, dated 893. This manu- script omits stanza 7. - B = British Library, Add. 14516, f. 186r-v, of the ninth century. This lacks stanzas 1-26c, due to a lost folio. - C = British Library, Add. 14506, f. 204v-207v, of the ninth/tenth cen- tury. This text of this manuscript, with a few corrections, provides the basis for the edition below. - D = British Library, Add. 12147, f. 192v-193v, of 1006. The manu- script omits stanza 4 and all subsequent even stanzas. - E = Oxford, Bodleian Library, Dawkins 1, f. 146r-147r, of the eleventh century. - F = Oxford, Bodleian Library, Dawkins 32, f. 104r-105r, of c. 1165. This has stanza 3 missing. - G = Harvard syr. 30, f. 178v-179v, of the twelfth century. The manu- script omits stanzas 2, 3 and all subsequent odd stanzas. - H = Harvard syr. 31, f. 160r-161r, of the twelfth century. The manu- script omits stanzas 5, 6, 10, 12 and 16. - J = Harvard syr. 103, f. 209v-210v, of the twelfth/thirteenth century. The manuscript omits stanzas 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 14, and all subsequent even stanzas up to 53, after which it has 54[ii], 55[i] and 55[ii]; 56 is omitted. - K = New York, Union Theological Seminary, syr. 3, f. 1v-2v, of the twelfth/thirteenth century. The manuscript omits stanzas 1, 3, and all subsequent odd stanzas. 10 In my Soghyatha mgabbyatha, Monastery of St Ephrem, Holland, 1982, no. I; the text is also printed in Qolo Suryoyo, 26 (1982), p. 31-27 (sic). For a description of the contents of this collection of 26 dialogue soghyatha, see my Syriac dialogue poems (see note 1). 336 S.P. BROCK - L = Birmingham, Selly Oak Colleges Library, Mingana syr. 545, f. 86v-89v, of 1929. The manuscript omits stanzas 25, 26, 29cd, and 30ab. From stanza 13 onwards the order of the stanzas is in considerable disar- ray, and the following sequence is found (even numbers = Abel, odd numbers = Cain): 13, 15, 14, 16, 17, 19, 18, 20, 21, 23, 22, 24, 19ab, 30cd, 27, 33, 28, 34, 31, 37, 32, 38, 35, 41, 36, 42, 39, 45, 40, 46, 43, 49, 44, 50, 47, 53[iv], 48, 55[ii], 51, 52, 53[ii], 54[ii], a new stanza, 56[ii]. The piece figures among a collection of memre attributed to Ephrem. - N = Eastern Syriac tradition attributed to Narsai. Use has been made of the following three editions: NF = F. FELDMANN, Syrische Wechsellieder von Narses, Leipzig, 1896, p. 23-27. The edition is based on Berlin Sachau 174-6, (Verzeichniss, nr. 57), of 1881. NM = A. MINGANA, Narsai Doctoris Syri Homiliae et Carmina, Mosul, 1905, II, p. 386-91. NP = Homilies of Mar Narsai, published by the Patriarchal Press, San Francisco, 1970, I, p. 334-40. This is a photographic reproduction of a manuscript written in 1901. Between these three editions there are only a small number of insignifi- cant differences, and so their combined witness is cited as N.