The membership of this blog is made up of evangelicals involved in academic study of textual criticism. Those with appropriate expertise and theological convictions who wish to be considered for membership should contact Peter Head or Tommy Wasserman. Those applying for membership must indicate that they have read either the OT or the NT in its original language(s), should be actively involved in text-critical research, and should be already contributing to the blog through comments. They should give e-mail details of an academic and a pastoral referee, a summary of their academic and/or ministry involvement, a statement of their doctrinal commitment (which may be by reference to various classic evangelical statements of faith, e.g. 39 Articles, Westminster Confession), and an indication of their area of interest within textual criticism. Non-members who wish to comment are not expected to be evangelical, but they are requested to respect the blog's ethos.
Posts
Comments
8 Comments:
Here's my options:
The top (front) one is the Jn. 19.17-18 -
ὃ λέγεται Ἑ]β̣ραϊστὶ Γ̣[ολγοθα, ὅπου αὐτὸν
ἐσταύρωσα]ν, καὶ με̣[τ᾿ αὐτοῦ ἄλλους
δύ]ο ἐντεῦ[θεν καὶ ἐντεῦθεν,
Bottom (back) Jn. 19.25-26 -
Μαγδαληνή] Ῑς̄ οὖν ϊ[δὼν τὴν μητέρα
καὶ τὸν μα]θητὴν π̣[αρεστῶτα ὃν
ἠγάπα λέ]γ̣ει τῇ μ̄ρ̄̈̈[ῑ̣ γύναι, ἴδε ὁ ῡς̄ σου.
Line spacing just my approximations.
(although entered in unicode, none of my diacritical marks showed up in my browser when I posted the comment) so here it is without...
The top (front) one is the Jn. 19.17-18 -
ὃ λέγεται Ἑ]βραϊστὶ Γ[ολγοθα, ὅπου αὐτὸν
ἐσταύρωσα]ν, καὶ με[τ᾿ αὐτοῦ ἄλλους
δύ]ο ἐντεῦ[θεν καὶ ἐντεῦθεν,
Bottom (back) Jn. 19.25-26 -
Μαγδαληνή] Ῑς οὖν ϊ[δὼν τὴν μητέρα
καὶ τὸν μα]θητὴν π[αρεστῶτα ὃν
ἠγάπα λέ]γει τῇ μρ[ι γύναι, ἴδε ὁ ῡς σου.
Rick, nice work. I'm not saying yours is wrong, but in the top image the rho (of BRAISTI) does not match your rho in the bottom image (MR[I]). (Could the nomen sacrum be MI [without rho]?)Also, after your BRAISTI in the top image, the next letter, to me, seems to be a rounded one, maybe an epsilon? But I can't see how Jn 19.20f. would fit, certainly not as well as your Jn 19.17-18, anyway. With several variants for this passage, I'm not certain enough yet.
in the top image the rho (of BRAISTI) does not match your rho in the bottom image (MR[I]). (Could the nomen sacrum be MI [without rho]?)
It's faint, but if you zoom in the Ρ is definitely plausible. The nomina sacra could be rendered differently, but from the other options I saw in the apparatus, the ρ was constant.
Also, after your BRAISTI in the top image, the next letter, to me, seems to be a rounded one, maybe an epsilon?
The letter you mention is questionable, but an epsilon doesn't seem possible. I'd have to see another example of a Γ by this same hand to agree with you here, which we don't have.
JCB: the rho (of BRAISTI) does not match your rho in the bottom image (MR[I])
I think that if you click on the photos to enlarge and look very closely at the bottom MP[I] you will see the remnants of the same type of Rho as appears in [E]BRAISTI.
And the bottom text is clearly Jn 19:25-26 as noted by Rick.
Wow, so enlarging the photo really does help. Thanks!
Good work Rick.
I would change your line 2 on the top to render it as a nomen sacrum (note the over bar):
ESTR]N KAI ME[T ...
This might also make the line lengths a bit more consistent - there is an obvious problem in your transcription that line 2 has 9 letters missing to the left, while line 3 has only 2.
The bottom piece has some traces of a top line that might bit able to fit something like: TOU KLWPA
It is a good size lower margin too.
Post a Comment