Mary, mother of Jesus, features prominently in all the Syriac liturgical and literary traditions. A special commemoration, the ‘Praises of Mary’, devoted to her immediately following the Nativity, is found in both E. and W. Syr. tradition, on the 2nd Friday after the Nativity in the former, and on 26 Dec. in the latter. Again in both E. and W. Syr. traditions, the Annunciation is primarily celebrated during the ‘Period of the Annunciation (Subbara/Suboro)’, covering the Sundays immediately before Christmas. A separate commemoration on 25 March was added in the Syr. Orth. tradition in the early Middle Ages, and in the Chald. tradition. Also distinctive to the Syriac Churches are the agricultural commemorations of Mary of the Seeds (15 Jan.) and Mary of the Blades of Wheat (šeble; 15 May).

The Gospel genealogies concern only Joseph, but in due course a number of traditions grew up concerning her lineage (Davidic and/or Levitical), and besides Joachim and Anna as the names of her parents, a few texts provide Zadoq and Dina as alternatives. The earliest elaborations of traditions concerning her life are to be found in the 2nd-cent. (Greek) Protogospel of James, translated into Syriac. She features obliquely in the Odes of Solomon (Ode 19), and very prominently in Ephrem ’s madrāše on the Nativity (some of which are written with her as the imagined speaker [e.g., no. 11]). She is also the subject of a group of early madrāše attributed (wrongly) to Ephrem, as well as of a number of memre by Yaʿqub of Serugh . She features as the protagonist in several dialogue soghyāthā (Mary and the Angel, Mary and Joseph, Mary and the Magi, Mary and the risen Jesus), and in a number of anonymous memre (including a narrative poem on Mary and Joseph). Some of the earliest texts concerning the death, or ‘Departure’, of Mary are preserved in early Syriac mss., and these play an important role in the study of the development of traditions concerning her Dormition/Assumption. Numerous liturgical texts commemorating her in both prose and poetry are to be found in all the Syriac liturgical traditions; in the Melk. tradition, in particular, there are many texts on Mary which are translated from Greek (including the ‘Akathistos’). In the verse texts especially, great use is made of typology, whose aim is to bring out different aspects of her miraculous birthgiving and the relationship between her and her Child; thus numerous prefigurations of her in the OT are identified, such as the ‘fleece’ of Judg. 6:36–7, ‘thirsty earth’ of Is. 53:2, or ‘door’ of Ez. 44:2. Most of these ‘types’ are also to be found in Greek and Latin liturgical poetry, and this applies to the extensive contrasted Eve/Mary typology, which gave rise to the imagery of the divine Word being sown in Mary’s ear, thus providing a specific contrast with Eve’s listening to the serpent’s false promise. Some of the ‘types’, however, are distinctive to the Syriac tradition: thus Mary as a ‘tree’ is based ultimately on Ephrem’s Commentary on Gen. 22:13, where the ram ‘held’ in the tree (bush) is seen as a type of Christ, the Lamb, held in Mary’s womb.

At the roots of the controversy over the use of the title ‘Bearer of God’ (yāldat alāhā) lie two different conceptualizations of how salvation for humanity is brought about by Christ. For the W.-Syr. tradition the Word of God descends and underpins, as it were, humanity at the incarnation, so that the title ‘Bearer of God’ simply expresses Mary’s role in salvation history. For the Ch. of E., however, salvation is conceived as being effected for humanity through the raising of Christ’s body, representing our humanity, at the Ascension; accordingly, it is essential to distinguish mentally between Christ’s divinity and the humanity which he has assumed at his birth from Mary, otherwise salvation would not be ensured.

See Fig. 71c.