tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post2742738990817448869..comments2024-03-20T12:35:12.828-04:00Comments on The Text of the Gospels: Seven Interesting Variants in JudeJames Snapp Jrhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09493891380752272603noreply@blogger.comBlogger17125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-8172390973917873922024-01-01T08:17:59.166-05:002024-01-01T08:17:59.166-05:00Does "best attested" mean "attested...Does "best attested" mean "attested by most mss" or "attested by Vaticanus and/or Sinaiticus, and at least one other mss"?Daniel Buckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02600146498880358592noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-73351344895927608692023-10-03T19:48:02.265-04:002023-10-03T19:48:02.265-04:00I think Pal.gr.171 is actually GA-149.I think Pal.gr.171 is actually GA-149.Daniel Buckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02600146498880358592noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-84994757159595059882022-05-30T12:25:09.570-04:002022-05-30T12:25:09.570-04:00I ran into a handful of interesting variations in ...I ran into a handful of interesting variations in Jude 4 (of all places) recently.<br /><br />Jude 4: ...ΔΕCΠΟΤΗΝ [ΘΝ] ΚΑΙ ΚΝ ΗΜWN ΙΝ ΧΝ...<br /><br /><br />P⁷²: ΔΕCΠΟΤΗΝ ΚΑΙ ΚΝ ΙΗΝ ΧΡΝ °ΗΜWN°<br /><br />This instance of transposition (°ημων°) could have easily been the result of a parableptic skip (KN>HMWN) caused by hom. tel. ("N"), and then caught by the scribe shortly thereafter. If so, the overline (KN) made little difference. <br /><br /><br />P⁷⁸ & ms. 38 : ΔΕCΠΟΤΗΝ ° ΚΝ ΗMWN IHN XPN<br /><br />Here, °KAI has been omitted. This is likely a case of homoioarcton (KAI KN) in which the overline (if present in the exemplar) didn't deter the scribal slip.<br /><br /><br /> ...και κν ° ιν χν....—is read by: 88 104 181 459 631 638 901T 915 1622 1829 1836 1838 1842 1860 1875 1881 1892 1896 L422 L593 L896 Didymus<br /><br />The omission of °ημων can easily be explained by hom. tel., i.e., και κν [ημων] ιν χν. Again, the preceding overline (κν) didn't deter the skip.<br /><br /><br />...δεσποτην °και° θν και κν...—is read by: 250 383 393 424* 592 616 634 1369 1742 1862 1880 1888 2712<br /><br />This instance of dittography may have been caused by a simple omission of θν (h.t. "ν") in which the scribe immediately caught the error, and corrected it (the best they could) in a manner similar to that of a common transposition. If so, this is evidence of the exact type of omission we have to do with, viz. "Θεον" via one letter h.t. and with an overline present over the omitted portion.<br /><br /><br />...δεσποτην θν και κν ημων °°...<br /><br />°ιν χν° is omitted by 1717 & 2816 after ημων, i.e., και κν ημων [ιν χν]. This is possibly/probably the result of a parableptic skip from "ν" in "ημων"—to "ν" in "χν." If so, this would be another example of h.t. involving a single letter ("ν") with an overline positioned over the omitted portion of text.<br /><br /><br />Obviously, other explanations are possible for some of these variant readings. Even so, I think they're definitely pertinent to the conversation considering the one letter h.t. and h.a. possibilities/probabilities (w/ overline), and the ideal location (Jude 4). <br /><br /><br /> <br /><br /><br /><br />Matthew M. Rosehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16314585538959945496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-80342199981190739142021-12-30T22:03:51.876-05:002021-12-30T22:03:51.876-05:00James Snapp Jr.,
You're very welcome! Thank y...James Snapp Jr.,<br /><br />You're very welcome! Thank you for all your hard work, and I hope you're recovering well. God bless.Matthew M. Rosehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16314585538959945496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-61595093352107050092021-12-30T18:07:03.162-05:002021-12-30T18:07:03.162-05:00Matthew M. Rose,
Well, that surely seems like mor...Matthew M. Rose, <br />Well, that surely seems like more than enough to justify modifying what I stated in the post! I must seen some of these, but not remembered. Thanks!James Snapp Jrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09493891380752272603noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-85609598103482761062021-12-27T18:39:05.068-05:002021-12-27T18:39:05.068-05:00Matt. 12:28 ...ΒΑCΙΛΕΙΑΤΟΥ°ΘΥ°ΗΠWC
Omit: Γ
Matt...Matt. 12:28 ...ΒΑCΙΛΕΙΑΤΟΥ°ΘΥ°ΗΠWC<br /><br />Omit: Γ<br /><br /><br />Matt. 15:28 ...ΑΠΟΚΡΙΘΕΙC°OIC°EΙΠΕΝ<br /><br />Οmit: D<br /><br /><br />John 19:30 ...ΤΟΟΞΟC°OIC°ΕΙΠΕΝ<br /><br />Omit: א* <br /><br /><br />John 19:30 ...το οζος °ειπεν<>ο ις° τετέλεσται <br /><br />Transposed: 579 [It appears that the very same scribal error is also responsible for this transposition. Another similar example is given below.]<br /><br /><br />Matt. 11:25 ΑΠΟΚΡΙΘΕΙC°ΕΙΠΕΝ<>ΟΙC°<br /><br />Transposed: P62<br /><br /><br />John 13:3 ...ΕΙΔWC°OIC°OTI<br /><br />Omit: P66 א B D L W 1071<br /><br /><br />Matt: 8:29 ...COI°IV°VIE<br /><br />Omit: א B C* L 1 33 118 1346<br /><br />[This is another possible instance of haplography (IV) in which (if truly an error) the overline didn't hinder the mix-up.]<br /><br /><br />To be honest, I think (tentatively) that the presence of an overline is more likely to increase the likelihood of scribal error, than act as any kind of deterrent. I have dozens more of these noted/tabulated (1, 2, & 3 letter types) in which an overline is present over the portion of text that helped caused the error, or was present over the delete text. I also have dozens (probably over a hundred) examples (primarily singulars) in which a contraction/nomina sacra is omitted for no apparent reason at all. Obviously one is free to speculate about cropping, stylistic or theological tampering, and whether or not at least a few of the examples given are viable readings. That all said, I think it should be obvious that an overline is not necessarily a dead end (if present on only one side of the equation) for parableptic, HT, or HA speculation in regards to the probability of such and such reading; Jude 4 in this case.<br /><br />Please note: I had no time to verify any of the examples given in this specific post, although Swanson (my source) is generally accurate. <br /><br />Correction: I would not (at second glance) label the John 6:22 (in Y) as "homoioarcton," but rather simply "parablepsis." Although the mechanics of the skip forward are more in line with HA, than HT. Which is what I was trying to portray. -MMR<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Matthew M. Rosehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16314585538959945496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-58215842521488027362021-12-26T20:58:36.250-05:002021-12-26T20:58:36.250-05:00On verse 22, Clement of Alexandria reads: "An...On verse 22, Clement of Alexandria reads: "And some pluck from the fire, and on others have compassion, making a difference" (Jud 1:22-23, Stromata, book 6, ch. 8). The reading resembles the textus receptus, but in reverse order like the Vulgate.Demianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03098425683385627645noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-62799421988386806522021-12-24T14:17:55.906-05:002021-12-24T14:17:55.906-05:00John 6:3 ...ΕΙC ΤΟ ΟΡΟC °O IC° KAI
Omit: Δ
John...John 6:3 ...ΕΙC ΤΟ ΟΡΟC °O IC° KAI<br /><br />Omit: Δ<br /><br /><br />John 6:4 ...οφθαλμους °ο ις° και<br /><br />Omit: f13 [This is the only example I didn't personally verify. Hopefully Swanson is accurate here.]<br /><br /><br />John 6:22 ...ΜΑΘΗΤΑΙCΑΥΤΟΥ°ΟΙC°ΕΙCTO<br /><br />Omit: Y(034) [This one is homoioarcton, "OICEIC" — keep in mind that the hand of 034 favored a very rounded "E" (epsilon).]<br /><br /><br />John 6:35 ...ΕΙΠΕΝ ΔΕ ΑΥΤΟΙC °Ο ΙC° EΓW<br /><br />Omit: Δ. [I commonly see this type of mix-up OIC OIC and EIC OIC, especially in uncials i.e. AYTOICOIC where the article and nomina sacra is dropped. I believe one just came up on a Facebook group recently. I'll see if I can track it down.]<br />Matthew M. Rosehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16314585538959945496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-54467408282302360822021-12-24T04:31:00.331-05:002021-12-24T04:31:00.331-05:00A few more singulars:
Luke 1:43 ...TΟΥΚΥ°ΜΟΥ°ΠΡΟC...A few more singulars:<br /><br />Luke 1:43 ...TΟΥΚΥ°ΜΟΥ°ΠΡΟCME<br /><br />Omit: W(032) [The nomina sacra precedes the omission here.]<br /><br /><br />Luke 1:68 ...ΕΥΛΟΓΗΤΟC°ΚC°OΘCTOY<br /><br />Omit: W(032)<br /><br /><br />Luke 2:27 ...ΠΑΙΔΙΟΝ°ΙΝ°ΤΟΥ<br /><br />Omit: א* [The correction in the margin says it all.]<br />Matthew M. Rosehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16314585538959945496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-39295237405055553572021-12-24T01:21:36.764-05:002021-12-24T01:21:36.764-05:00I found this interesting cluster today.
John 1:45...I found this interesting cluster today.<br /><br />John 1:45 ...ΕΥΡΗΚΑΜΕΝΙΝΤΟΝ°ΥΝ°ΤW...<br /><br />Omit: W(032)sup<br /><br /><br />John 1:45 ...ΕΥΡΗΚΑΜΕΝ°ΙΝ°ΤΟΝ<br /><br />Omit: L(019)<br /><br /><br />John 1:45 ...ΕΥΡΗΚΑΜΕΝΙΝ°ΤΟΝ°ΥΝΤΟΥ...<br /><br />Οmit: P66 P75 א B 33(om. του) 579<br /><br />Here (again) the nomina sacra precedes the omission. I know I've seen (and marked) many more like these in my Swanson volumes. Let me know if you'd like more examples (preferably of the singular and/or sub-singular variety, I know).Matthew M. Rosehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16314585538959945496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-28916041570422227992021-12-23T19:40:27.417-05:002021-12-23T19:40:27.417-05:00Luke 7:22 ...ΑΠΟΚΡΙΘΕΙC°OIC°EΙΠΕΝ
Omit: P75 א B D...Luke 7:22 ...ΑΠΟΚΡΙΘΕΙC°OIC°EΙΠΕΝ<br /><br />Omit: P75 א B D W 700<br /><br />Retain: A E K L M U Γ Δ Θ Λ Π Ψ Ω f1 f13 2 28 33 157 565 579 1071 1424 Byz<br /><br /><br />Luke 13:2 ...AΠΟΚΡΙΘΕΙC°OIC°EIΠΕΝ<br /><br />Οmit: P75 א B L 157<br /><br />Retain: A D E(sup) K M N U W Γ Θ Δ Λ Π Ψ f1 f13 2 28 33 118 565 579 700 1071 1424 Byz<br /><br /><br />Luke 13:2 ...OIC°EΙΠΕΝΑΥΤΟΙC°ΔΟΚΕΙΤΑΙ <br /><br />Omit: W(032) <br /><br />Here the nomina sacra is before the omission, but it applies because the overline (if one existed in the hypothetical exemplar) still didn't interrupt the parableptic skip from OIC to AYTOIC.<br /><br />I'm thinking that there's many more of these to be found, unfortunately it's going to take me some time to dig them up out of my notes, as my library and notebooks are in shambles (literally piles) due to some flooding last week. I'll post them in batches ASAP, Lord willing.<br />Matthew M. Rosehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16314585538959945496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-70248436075124176302021-12-22T23:47:43.692-05:002021-12-22T23:47:43.692-05:00Matthew Rose,
I suppose what you describe is conc...Matthew Rose, <br />I suppose what you describe is conceivable - but merely conceivable.<br />I've seen a lot of MSS and I can't recall encountering a parableptic mistake like that (dropping a nomina sacra ending with N because the preceding word also ends with N). <br /> But perhaps I have and simply don't recollect it. In any event, if you see one, please let me know!<br /><br />There is another possibility that comes to mind but I am reticent to bring it up because I think it falls into the category of "pet theories."<br /><br />James Snapp Jr. <br />James Snapp Jrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09493891380752272603noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-60618398843791890682021-12-22T23:39:30.435-05:002021-12-22T23:39:30.435-05:00Craig,
Thanks; errors corrected; keyboard cleaned...Craig, <br />Thanks; errors corrected; keyboard cleaned! Merry Christmas!<br />James Snapp Jr.<br />James Snapp Jrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09493891380752272603noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-78832025923435595702021-12-22T16:03:54.248-05:002021-12-22T16:03:54.248-05:00James Snapp Jr.,
Well, that's assuming the hy...James Snapp Jr.,<br /><br />Well, that's assuming the hypothetical exemplar was contracted. If so, 1.) a faded or rubbed off overline would definitely make it easier to overlook. 2.) A halfhearted overline (similar to that contained in א for ΚΝ right next door) would also help. 3.) It wouldn't be the first time a nomina sacra was dropped for no apparent reason (especially when another is nearby), let alone when there's a HT possibility to boot. <br /><br />Obviously we're dealing with probabilities here, and there's certainly no way to be sure....But, I just wanted to bring it up and get your feedback on the point, which is appreciated. Matthew M. Rosehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16314585538959945496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-46300143432161503222021-12-22T14:01:00.506-05:002021-12-22T14:01:00.506-05:00I love all of your blog posts James. Thanks for al...I love all of your blog posts James. Thanks for all the thoughtful content.<br />One funny irony. You have made a scribal error in the spelling of Wasserman’s name a couple of times in the first paragraph.<br />Grace and peace to you.Craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11450463442275045122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-45592528799479885512021-12-22T13:29:31.198-05:002021-12-22T13:29:31.198-05:00Matthew Rose,
After contraction to _QS_? How cou...Matthew Rose, <br />After contraction to _QS_? How could a scribe overlook the overline?<br /><br />James Snapp Jrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09493891380752272603noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-634163619207075722021-12-22T04:02:19.479-05:002021-12-22T04:02:19.479-05:00On Jude 4 you write:
"It is not easy to see ...On Jude 4 you write:<br /><br />"It is not easy to see how θεον could be omitted accidentally"<br /><br />Why not homoioteleuton? <br />δεσπότην Θεόν ΔΕCΠΟΤΗΝΘΝ<br /><br />Wasserman also notes as much on pg. 252 (footnote 64).<br />Matthew M. Rosehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16314585538959945496noreply@blogger.com