tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post7329540651568609747..comments2024-03-29T07:11:17.775+00:00Comments on Evangelical Textual Criticism: Notes from my afternoonP.J. Williamshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04388225485348300613noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-69222645601351460952020-07-20T17:16:27.942+01:002020-07-20T17:16:27.942+01:00Dirk, I see what you're talking about, but is ...Dirk, I see what you're talking about, but is it necessarily an iota? There looks like there might be some kind of vertical-ish stroke behind the left part of the ο. I wonder if what you are seeing as the iota and what I'm seeing behind the ο could be the full α, partly erased. The σ of ις is not as flat on top as some other instances of σ, so I wonder if it could be αποκκρινεται ο· corrected in scribendo to αποκρινετα ο ις· (by erasing part of α and writing ο over the tail, keeping ι where it was and changing ο to σ)? I suppose a copyist may have thought that in context the verb would be sensible enough, and it would be better to leave it that way than to omit Jesus' name (but I admit that's just speculation). It would have to be before the breathing mark was added to ο though.<br /><br />It seems like a stretch and is not normally the sort of thing I would suggest because of how unlikely that scenario must be, but at the same time, I would think that αποκρινετα ending in a half-formed α would also be extremely unlikely, yet there it is.Elijah Hixsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05816323223305820788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-38278638526809292562020-07-17T09:11:36.320+01:002020-07-17T09:11:36.320+01:00Excellent Jean, it is satisfying when a hypothesis...Excellent Jean, it is satisfying when a hypothesis is demonstrated to be correct.<br /><br />Elijah, I can see the iota (vertical with a tiny foot to the right) but no clearly formed alpha. Yet there is some smudging.<br /><br /><br />Dirk Jongkindhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04818254802904977365noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-15659302073861815662020-07-16T20:31:42.965+01:002020-07-16T20:31:42.965+01:00Brilliant solution; thanks! I was looking at the B...Brilliant solution; thanks! I was looking at the BnF images at Gallica, which I've often found to be slightly clearer than the INTF images. The BnF images had the fold too though. It's always good when these sorts of things happen, because (as in this case) they can confirm that one does indeed know what one is doing.<br /><br />The unfolded images do raise another issue though—there is no ι at the end of αποκρινεται.Elijah Hixsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05816323223305820788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-1683915879879906022020-07-16T18:03:16.477+01:002020-07-16T18:03:16.477+01:00A look at the INTF-Films shows they have two pictu...A look at the INTF-Films shows they have two pictures of 579 Folio 146 r (=INTF page 2960): One with the fould, one with the flattened page, and the article!<br />Jean Putmanshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09156196111740868436noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-58212414647076880802020-07-16T17:42:29.049+01:002020-07-16T17:42:29.049+01:00Interesting to consider: Was the mistake made when...Interesting to consider: Was the mistake made when Metzger handwrote this on paper? Or when a typist typed his handwritten notes for printing? Probably the former. If so, the datum is correct in his mind, but mistaken when handwritten, and the mistake was copied faithfully when printed in the first edition and the second edition. Is there an “original text”? And which one would it be? And which is the Ausgangstext? The one in his mind? The one handwritten? The one printed in the first edition? The one printed in the second edition? And what would be the answers if the datum had been corrected at one of those stages?Jeff Catenoreply@blogger.com