Friday, July 29, 2016

Minuscule 1424 - Help: Is this a correction?

0
I could use some help.

Here is minuscule 1424 at 1 Pet 4:11, located on the CSNTM website as GA_1424_0213b.jpg. [I haven't found a way to navigate the CSNTM without wanting to end my life, but the image is roughly 60% down, two pages before 2Pt]

My gripe is with the reading ης χορηγει.

It seems to me that the first letter of ης is the result of a correction, mostly because of its dark ink, but also because of the majuscule η that is used. The circumflex above is part of the correction, but the breathing seems original.

Which leads me to assume, if correct, that we had here originally ὡς, just as in the line above, after the comma. The omega would fit under the current eta.

Am I seeing things that are not there? And, in light of the discussion earlier in the week is this a 1424*vid, or is this all too speculative?

Thursday, July 28, 2016

Coptologist Position at the American University in Cairo

0
The Sociology, Anthropology, Psychology and Egyptology Department (SAPE) is seeking a specialist in Coptic Studies (Coptology). Candidates must be able to teach the Coptic language and must also offer at least one other specialty from among the following: Coptic monasticism, Coptic archaeology, Coptic art and architecture, Late Antique Egypt. The candidate will teach courses at both the graduate and undergraduate levels.
https://www.interviewexchange.com/jobofferdetails.jsp?JOBID=72839

Wednesday, July 27, 2016

What to do when a word is no longer in your manuscript

5
Looking at the variation in 1 Cor 3:5 I notice that NA28 lists P46 in support of the first τις as P46vid (from videtur), that is, it is the 'apparent reading, but not certain'.

So how much of τις should be visible in order to warrant this citation?

The image and transcription are actually very clear: There is not a single trace left of any of the letters of τις.



However, the second τις in the parallel question in 1 Cor 3:5 is there very clearly later in the final line. So on the assumption that the scribe of P46 was just as consistent as everybody else who copied this verse, it is not unreasonable to assume that P46 had at one stage τις ουν at the place where we now only have a gap. Still, it seems to me that this is pushing the normal use of 'vid' somehow.

Thursday, July 21, 2016

Color Images of P72 and P75 Online

2
Good news! Jean-Baptiste Piggin has discovered that, without any fanfare, the Vatican has just posted color images of both P72 and P75 on its website. Until now the only images I knew of were black and white images on CSNTM and the NT.VMR. At the moment I can’t get the main images for P72 to load but it may just be my connection. (Update: Tommy reminded me that P72 has been up since January.)

Some of the less famous parts of P75 (P. Hanna 1).
P72 (P. Bodmer VIII)

By the way, I notice the Vatican’s new interface has a nice “download JPG” feature now. You can get sizes up to 4040 × 4016 pixels.

HT: @RickBrannan

Thursday, July 14, 2016

What Is ‘Logically Impossible’ for the ECM?

14
The Editio Critica Maior defines a “variant” as a reading that is both “grammatically correct and logically possible.” If it doesn’t meet these two criteria it is marked with an f for Fehler (= error). Neither criteria is completely objective, but then most of the errors so recorded in the ECM are pretty obvious gibberish. Occasionally, however, one finds cause for disagreement. Here’s an example.

At James 2.3, minuscule 1563 reads:
...καὶ τῷ πτωχῷ εἴπητε· σὺ στῆθι ἐκεῖ ἐπὶ τὸ ὑποπόδιόν μου.
...and to the poor you say, “You stand there on my footstool.”
GA 1563 at Jas 2.3
Speaking of this variant, Klaus Wachtel explains that
Reading f [εκει in 1563] is marked as an error by an additional f (for the German Fehler). That it is an error becomes clear if we compare the reading of 1563 at the next passage of variation (50-56b) where it reads ἐπὶ τὸ ὑποπόδιόν μου, resulting in the request Stand there on my footstool.
Now standing on a footstool seems a bit odd to me but hardly impossible—either logically or physically. But maybe the editors have a different conception of “impossible” than I do.

Nothing of great significance follows from this except that editors have to make judgments and you may not always agree with them. So it may be something worth checking.

Monday, July 11, 2016

Manuscript Quiz

25
I’ve just returned from a week in Ferrara, Italy presenting on the CBGM. It was a great time despite the heat. While there I had the chance to look at Ferrara’s complete collection of Greek New Testament manuscripts. Okay, it’s only two, but one of them is a complete copy of the New Testament—a relative rarity. I will have more to say about this interesting manuscript in the future hopefully. But I thought I would share one particular image I took and see if astute readers can tell me its text-critical significance. Hint: it involves both of our blog editors.

GA 582, fol. 17v. 14th cent.

Friday, July 08, 2016

What Motivated Bengel

1
Here is a good word from Bengel for your weekend.
Human selections of sayings and examples, taken from Scripture, have their use; the study, however, of the Sacred Volume, should not end here; for it should, both as a whole, and in its several parts, be thoroughly studied and mastered, especially by those who are occupied in teaching others. In order fully to accomplish which, we ought to distinguish the clearly genuine words of the Sacred Text, from those which are open to doubt or question, from the existence and authority of various readings, lest we should either pass by, and thus fail to profit by the words of the apostles, or treat the words of copyists as if they were those of the apostles. I have endeavoured to furnish such a text, with all care and fidelity, in my larger edition of the Greek New Testament, published at Tubingen, and in the smaller one published at Stuttgardt.
Gnomon, vol. 1, pp. 9-10