Tuesday, January 10, 2006

D, F, and G in the Pastorals

The Greek-Latin bilingual mss D (06), F (010), and G (012) evince a characteristic text within the Pauline Corpus—a text that is generally called 'Western'. The text of these manuscripts diverges from most other Greek manuscripts in a consistent pattern throughout the Pauline Corpus, including the Pastorals, which are usually said to have a different transmission history from other parts of the Pauline Corpus (witness their non-inclusion in Marcion and, if we follow Epp rather than Duff, in P46). So why do these bilingual mss bear a consistent relationship to other texts across a corpus with a diverse transmission history? Is not the most obvious conclusion that, in general, the common traits of the 'Western' text originated after the Pauline Corpus came to be transmitted together (or alternatively that the common traits of all the other mss originated after the corpus was brought together—D, F, and G being taken to represent the earlier text)?


  1. D (06) is Codex Claromontanus, a complete set of Paul (as supplemented by Dabs1). Its Gospels counterpart is Bezae (D 05).
    F (10) (supplemented by f)has all the Pauline epistles except Romans 1-3:19. Gospels counterpart is F 09.
    G (12) is virtually identical to F, but interlinear rather than parallel.Gospels counterpart is G 11.
    How confusing, to have completely different mss called by the same letter name, just because they are all Western diglots. And in the middle of these all are Ee 07 and Ea 08 (also a diglot) which have nothing in common other than both being classed as Byzantine!
    But actually, Ea 08 does have some interesting Western readings, such as the Acts 8:37 long reading.

  2. Outside of Marcion and Epp's view of P46 (I follow Duff, by the way), is there really any other evidence of a different transmission history of the Pastorals from the rest of the Corpus Paulinum?

    The evidence of D, F, and G, as you point out suggests the opposite, and I would tend to agree.