TC Journal vol. 27 (2022) Is Out

I have the pleasure to announce that vol. 27 (2022) of TC: A Journal of Biblical Textual Criticism is finally published after some delay. A number of reviews will be added soon, but we could not wait to get these articles out. In the previous blogpost, Peter announced a book about the Greek palimpsests at St Catherine's Monastery. Incidentally, in this volume of TC, my student Conrad Elmelund has produced an editio princeps of one of those palimpsests – Greek NF MG 99 (GA 0289), presumably from the fifth century. Do I need to say that I am proud?

 Below I paste the contents and links:

Volume 27 (2022)

Articles

Timo Tekoniemi, The Position of Old Latin Manuscript La¹¹⁵ in the Textual History of 2 Kings: Identifying kaige and (Proto-)Lucianic Readings in a kaige Section (pp. 1–15)

Abstract: The value of Old Latin witnesses in the textual criticism of Septuagint has been lately noted by a growing number of scholars. As a daughter version of the Septuagint, the Old Latin is an important witness to the textual history of the Septuagint, as well as to the Hebrew Vorlage behind it. This article seeks to elucidate and ascertain the text-historical position of the fifth century Old Latin manuscript Palimpsestus Vindobonensis (La¹¹⁵) in 2 Kings. This task is carried out by first mapping all the characteristic readings of the manuscript (248 cases in total) and then by studying fourteen most illuminating readings. In 2 Kings, the manuscript seems to be free of Hexaplaric and Vulgate influence and most probably also of kaige readings. There are few, if any, recensional Lucianic readings. For the most part, the text of La115 belongs to the proto-Lucianic layer and therefore mostly seems to preserve the Old Greek text—sometimes even when all preserved Greek witnesses have lost these Old Greek readings. La¹¹⁵ is thus argued to be an exceedingly important witness to the textual evolution of 2 Kings.

Leonardo Pessoa da Silva Pinto, The CBGM and Lachmannian Textual Criticism (pp. 17–31)

Abstract: The discipline of New Testament textual criticism has changed considerably in the last few decades. Among the most relevant developments is the Coherence-Based Genealogical Method, which, however, is often unknown to or misunderstood by textual scholars of both biblical and nonbiblical literature. This article explains the main concepts of the CBGM and compares them with the core principles of (Neo-)Lachmannian textual criticism. The comparison shows how deeply many steps and concepts of the CBGM are rooted in the traditional methods of textual criticism, the Lachmannian method in particular, but also the many differences in its procedures and terminology. Many of these changes result from the effort of integrating the potential of the computer tools now available to the discipline.

Katrin Maria Landefeld, Die textgeschichtliche Verbindung zwischen Codex Bezae (05) und dem Handschriftenpaar 08/1884 in Acta (pp. 33–49)

Abstract: The so-called Western tradition in the text of Acts is a much-discussed topic in New Testament Textual Research. There is still no agreement concerning possible theological tendencies in the text and the analysis of the transmission of this text is not completed. Present research uses the Coherence-Based Genealogical Method (CBGM) of the Institut für Neutestamentliche Textforschung in Münster. By measuring quantitative agreement between manuscripts and building local stemmata for variation-units, potential ancestors and descendants for manuscript texts can be found. This is more difficult with texts of the Western tradition. They often contain long insertions and these differ among the manuscripts of this tradition as well. So, the agreement rates between these manuscripts and others, and also among themselves, are quite low. Although these manuscripts have different wording, they are probably connected in the transmission of the text. This can be seen with the help of internal criteria. This essay will study variants in the manuscripts 05, 08, and 1884 and show that they most probably have a genealogical connection despite several textual differences. The discussed variants show the same insertions with regard to content and only show different wording or grammatical phrasing. By studying these, a possible chronological order of the variants can also be assumed. This can also be useful to assess other variation-units, as an example will show. The study shows that further analyses of this kind can help to clarify the transmission of the Western text and also make it visible in the CBGM.

Conrad T. Elmelund, The Undertext of Greek NF MG 99 from Sinai (GA 0289) (pp. 51–68)

Abstract: Despite having been included in critical editions since NA²⁷, an edition with the full text of Sinai Greek NF MG/ΜΓ 99 (GA 0289) has not been published until now. The Greek undertext of the palimpsest, written in biblical majuscule, was provisionally dated in the Kurzgefaßte Liste to VII/VIII (600–799 CE) but has now been redated by Guglielmo Cavallo to the fifth century. The present edition, based on new multispectral images of the damaged palimpsest, not only corrects readings included in the NA²⁸-apparatus but also brings to light and discusses a significant number of new readings that should be considered for inclusion in future editions.

Paul A. Himes, Lectio difficilior potior and an Aramaic Pun—Βεώρ vs. Βοσόρ in 2 Peter 2:15 as a Test Case for How a Classic Rule Might Be Refined (pp. 69–83)

Abstract: Lectio difficilior potior (“prefer the more difficult reading”), while still in use in recent scholarship, has been criticized for being overly subjective and of relatively little value as a canon of internal criteria. These criticisms have not been adequately addressed. Yet 2 Pet 2:15 provides a fertile testing ground for the refinement of this rule absent text-critical bias. Since every single current edition of the Greek New Testament, and almost all commentators, agree with Βοσόρ due to overwhelming external support, the rule is not needed to prove the superior reading of Βοσόρ. Rather, the near-universal agreement on the reading gives us an opportunity to develop a methodology for determining whether or not Βοσόρ is the lectio difficilior compared to Βεώρ, a methodology that would hopefully be free from bias. This methodology, which draws from Brooke Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort’s distinction between “real and apparent excellence,” could then assist in rehabilitating lectio difficilior potior as a helpful, if secondary, principle in textual matters.

Note

Elvira Martín-Contreras, How to Deal with Annotations by Different Scribes When Studying and Editing the Masorah (pp. 85–92)

Abstract: This article tackles the problem posed by presence of annotations written by different scribal hands when studying and editing the masorah. What should we do? Should we ignore the differences between the annotations and merely focus on their content? Starting with a review of how second hands and other paleographic features have been treated in the most recent editions of the masorah from the Leningrad B19a codex, a step-by-step guide on how to include paleographic and other material aspects in the study of the masorah in critical editions (in particular in the Biblia Hebraica Quinta) is presented.