More videos: Anderson on Family 1, Hixson on the Tyndale Textual Commentary

Two more videos from my ThM class on textual criticism are now live. In the first, Dr. Amy Anderson gives an overview and update of her work on the textual history of Family 1 in the Gospels. She also gives a helpful overview of the state of the discipline at the start. In the second, Dr. Elijah Hixson introduces the textual commentary being written to accompany the Greek New Testament Produced at Tyndale House, Cambridge.

Amy Anderson

Elijah Hixson

Thanks to both my guests for joining my class. You can find all the videos in this series at the Text & Canon Institute YouTube channel. Be sure to subscribe if you’re into that sort of thing.

New Testament Textual Commentaries

I’ve been casually compiling a list of New Testament textual commentaries for several months. There is a lot more than just Metzger. I thought it might be helpful to post them here. This wasn’t an exhaustive attempt at getting every single last one of them, so I’m almost certain I’m missing some. I’ll try to keep an eye on the comments in case any readers think of any I missed. I make no judgments on the value of any of these; some are no doubt better than others. There will eventually be a textual commentary to accompany the Tyndale House Greek New Testament, but because it is still in the preparation stages and is not yet published, I leave it off the list.

I am excluding articles, chapters and monographs written on individual variants, and in general commentaries that happen to deal with variants (though Aune's Revelation WBC is an exception). That being said, I do include a few things here that are not primarily textual commentaries but contain interesting or valuable text-critical discussions.

I have arranged the following first in canonical order, then alphabetical by author, then finally by date (earliest first).

Whole New Testament

Bengel, Johann Albrecht. Η Καινη Διαθηκη. Novum Testamentum Graecum Ita Adornatum Ut Textus Probatarum Editionum Medullam Margo Variantium Lectionum in Suas Classes Distributarum Locorumque Parallelorum Delectum Apparatus Subiunctus Criseos Sacrae Millianae Praesertim Compendium, Limam, Supplementum Ac Fructum Exhibeat Inserviente Jo. Alberto Bengelio. Tübingen: Cotta, 1734.

Bengel, Johann Albrecht. Apparatus Criticus Ad Novum Testamentum Criseos Sacrae Compendium, Limam, Supplementum Ac Fructum Exhibens. Editio Secunda Curis B. Auctoris Posterioribus Aucta et Emendata, Copiosoque Indice Instructa. Edited by Philipp David Burk. Tübingen: Cotta, 1763.

Brown, Andrew J., ed. Novum Testamentum ab Erasmo recognitum II: Evangelium secundum Iohannem et Acta Apostolorum. ASD VI-2. Leiden: Brill, 2001. Note on these three volumes by Brown: These volumes are Andrew Brown's annotated editions of Erasmus' Greek text. However, in Brown's discussions throughout of variants and readings in manuscripts Erasmus used (which themselves make Brown's volumes interesting and valuable), Brown often provides his own text-critical analysis.

Brown, Andrew J., ed. Novum Testamentum ab Erasmo recognitum III: Epistolae apostolicae (prima pars). ASD VI-4. Leiden: Brill, 2004.

Brown, Andrew J., ed. Novum Testamentum ab Erasmo recognitum IV: Epistolae apostolicae (secunda pars) et Apocalypsis Iohannis. ASD VI-4. Leiden: Brill, 2013.

Comfort, Philip W. New Testament Text and Translation Commentary: Commentary on the Variant Readings of the Ancient New Testament Manuscripts and How They Relate to the Major English Translations. Carol Stream, Ill.: Tyndale House Publishers Inc., 2008.

Comfort, Philip W. A Commentary on the Manuscripts and Text of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic, 2015.

Comfort, Philip W. A Commentary on Textual Additions to the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic, 2017.

Doedes, Jacobus Izaak. Verhandeling over de tekstkritiek des Nieuwen Verbonds. Haarlem: Bohn, 1844.

Donaldson, Amy M. “Explicit References to New Testament Variant Readings Among Greek and Latin Church Fathers.” PhD thesis, University of Notre Dame, 2009. Available here: https://curate.nd.edu/show/5712m615k50. Note: If you haven’t been reading Amy Donaldson’s work, what have you been doing with your life? It’s not really a textual commentary, but it contains a kind of anthology of patristic text-critical discussions.

Houghton, H.A.G. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. A Companion to the Sixth Edition of the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2025.

Jongkind, Dirk (with Elijah Hixson). A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Produced at Tyndale House, Cambridge. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, forthcoming (2026?).

Loken, Israel P., and Rick Brannan. Lexham Textual Notes on the Bible. Lexham Press, 2014. Note from publisher’s website: “For comparison, these notes are more than one might find as a footnote in a modern Bible translation, but less than what one would find in a textual commentary such as those by Metzger, Comfort, or Alford.”

Lucas, Franciscus. Notationes in Sacra Biblia: quibus, variantia discrepantibus exemplaribus loca summo studio discutiuntur. Antwerp: Plantin, 1580. Available here.

Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. London: United Bible Societies, 1971.

Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. 1st ed., corrected. Stuttgart: United Bible Societies, 1975. Note: I haven’t checked what the corrections are or what differences there are between these two editions.

Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. 2nd ed. Stuttgart: Deutsche Biblegesellschaft, 1994.

Nestle, Eberhard. “Textkritische Bemerkungen zu einzelnen Stellen des NT.s.” In Einführung in das Griechische Neue Testament, 2nd ed., 208–265. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1899.

Published in English as:

Nestle, Eberhard. “Critical Notes on Various Passages of the New Testament.” In Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the Greek New Testament, edited by Allan Menzies, translated by William Edie, 247–335. London: Williams and Norgate, 1901.

New English Translation - Novum Testamentum Graece New Testament. Stuttgart/Dallas: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft/NET Bible Press, 2004. Note: There are some text-critical notes that accompany the NET Bible. I cite the NET+NA27 edition here simply because it was the edition I found at Tyndale House when I made this update to the list.

Omanson, Roger L. A Textual Guide to the Greek New Testament. Stuttgart: Deutsche Biblegesellschaft, 2006. Note: I am not sure if this book does much more than simplify/expand/explain Metzger’s Textual Commentary. I admit I haven’t spent a whole lot of time with it, but when I have consulted it, it’s usually just been Metzger re-worded and explained.

Pierpont, William G. An Examination of the Conspicuous Differences between the Traditional Text of the New Testament and the Alexandrian. Unpublished paper. Undated [though additional research may be able to arrive at a date]. A scan of this work to be kept in CSNTM's digital archives.

Scrivener, Frederick Henry Ambrose. “Application of the Foregoing Materials and Principles to the Criticism of Select Passages of the New Testament.” In A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament for the Use of Biblical Students, edited by Edward Miller, 4th ed., 2:321–412. London: George Bell & Sons, 1894. Available here.

Tasker, R. V. G. "Appendix: Notes on Variant Readings." In The Greek New Testament, Being the Text Translated in the New English Bible 1961, pp. 411–445. Oxford: Oxford University Press/Cambridge University Press, 1964.

Westcott, B. F., and F. J. A. Hort. “Appendix I. Notes on Select Readings,” in Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1882. Note: I’m not sure if this section could be said to be Westcott and Hort or just Hort. On p. 18 of the book, we find the following statement: “For the principles, arguments, and conclusions set forth in the Introduction and Appendix both editors are alike responsible. It was however for various reasons expedient that their exposition and illustration should proceed throughout from a single hand ; and the writing of this volume and the other accompaniments of the text has devolved on Dr Hort.” Update: Resolved (see comments below by Peter Gurry).

Gospels

Multiple Gospels

Lucas, Franciscus. “Notarum ad varias lectiones in quatuor Evangeliis occurrentes libellus duplex: Quorum uno graecae, altero latinae varietates explicantur.” In In sacrosanta quatuor Jesu Christi Evangelia, 1019–1092. Antwerp: Plantin, 1606. Available here.

McGrath, Gavin. A Textual Commentary on the Greek Received Text of the New Testament. Multiple volumes. Sydney, NSW, 2008–. Available online at http://www.gavinmcgrathbooks.com/commentary.html. This is a multi-volume series that as of the date of this writing [1 Dec 2022], only volumes on Matthew and Mark have appeared. ITS INCLUSION HERE IS NOT AN ENDORSEMENT OF ANY OF THE CONTENT OF THESE VOLUMES.

Victor, Ulrich. “Textkritischer Kommentar zu ausgewählten Stellen des Lukas- und des Johannesevangeliums.” Novum Testamentum 51.1 (2009): 30–77.

Weiss, Bernhard. Textkritik der vier Evangelien. TUGAL NF 4.2. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1899. Available here.

Wheeler, Frank. “Textual Criticism and the Synoptic Problem: A Textual Commentary on the Minor Agreements of Matthew and Luke Against Mark.” PhD diss., Baylor University, 1985.

Willker, Wieland. “An Online Textual Commentary on the Greek Gospels (12th Edition),” 2015. http://www.willker.de/wie/TCG/.

Matthew

Blass, Friedrich. Textkritische Bemerkungen zu Matthäus (BFCT 4.4; Gütersloh: Bertelsmann, 1900). Note from Jan Krans-Plasier: “To be consulted together with Friedrich Blass, Euangelium secundum Matthaeum cum variae lectionis delectu (Leipzig: Teubner, 1901). There is more by Blass, e.g. his editions of Luke, John, Acts, and Hebrews.”

Borland, Jonathan C., Mike Arcieri, and Maurice A. Robinson. “A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament,” 2010–2017. https://tcgnt.blogspot.com/. Note: Takes a Byzantine priority position but only covers Matt. 1:5–8:4 (as of 5 July 2020).

Hirunuma, Toshio. 新約本文学演習 : 異文資料の取り扱い方. マタイ福音書 / The Praxis of New Testament Textual Studies: How to Use Apparatus Chriticus: Matthew. 新約硏究社 / Shin-Yaku-Kenkyu-Sha, 1981. [Japanese text is copy/pasted from Worldcat; the English is the English information printed in the book itself] Note: Hirunuma discusses 242 variation units (in Japanese) in Matthew's Gospel. The copy at the Center for New Testament Textual Studies is part of the Fee collection and bears the inscription on a label pasted to the inside front cover: "To Professor Gordon D. Fee | with the compliments of | Toshio Hirunuma | Osaka, Febr. 1982." Presumably, the copy at Princeton Seminary was Metzger's. Baylor's copy might be Epp's, but that is nothing more than speculation on my part.

Miller, Edward. A Textual Commentary upon the Holy Gospels, Part 1-14. London: George Bell & Sons, 1899. Note: This work defends a ‘traditional text,’ but I admit I haven’t read it enough to know if it simply defends the textus receptus at every point by any means necessary, if it usually defends the textus receptus but occasionally breaks from it in favour of majority text readings, etc. Available here.

Victor, Ulrich. “Textkritischer Kommentar zu ausgewählten Stellen des Matthäusevangeliums.” In Filología Neotestamentaria 22 (2009): 55–90.

Mark

Blass, Friedrich. Textkritische Bemerkungen zu Markus (BFCT 3.3; Gütersloh: Bertelsmann, 1899).

Elliott, J. K. “An Eclectic Textual Commentary on the Greek Text of Mark’s Gospel.” In New Testament Textual Criticism: Its Significance for Exegesis. Essays in Honour of Bruce M. Metzger, edited by Eldon J. Epp and Gordon D. Fee, 47–60. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981.

Reprinted as:

Elliott, J. K. “An Eclectic Textual Commentary on the Greek Text of Mark’s Gospel.” In Essays and Studies in New Testament Textual Criticism, 159–170. Estudios de Filologia Neotestamentaria 3. Cordoba: Ediciones el Almendro, 1992.

Elliott, J. K. “An Eclectic Textual Commentary on the Greek Text of Mark’s Gospel.” In The Language and Style of the Gospel of Mark: An Edition of C. H. Turner’s “Notes on Marcan Usage” Together with Other Comparable Studies, 189–201. NovTSup 71. Leiden: Brill, 1993.

Greeven, Heinrich, and Eberhard Güting. Textkritik Des Markusevangeliums. Münster: LIT-Verlag, 2005.

Haelewyck, Jean-Claude. “The Healing of a Leper (Mark 1,40-45):  A Textual Commentary.” Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 89.1 (2013): 15–36. Available here (with institutional access).

Hirunuma, Toshio. 新約本文学演習 : 異文資料の取り扱い方. マルコ福音書 / The Praxis of New Testament Textual Studies: How to Use Apparatus Criticus. Mark. 新約硏究社 / Shin-Yaku-Kenkyu-Sya: Matsubara (? acc. to worldcat) / Nishi-ku, Osaka, Japan, 1976. [Japanese text is copy/pasted from Worldcat; the English is the English information printed in the book itself]. Note: Hirunuma has 145 textual discussions (in Japanese) on variants in the Gospel of Mark. The copy at Princeton Theological Seminary bears this inscription on a flyleaf: "To Professor Bruce M. Metzger | with the compliments of | the author | Toshio Hirunuma | April 1976."

Strutwolf, Holger, Gregory S. Paulson, and Klaus Wachtel. “Text-Critical Commentary.” In Novum Testamentum Graecum Editio Critica Maior: I Die synoptischen Evangelien / The Synoptic Gospels. 2: Das Markusevangelium / The Gospel According to Mark. Teil 3: Studien / Part 3: Studies, edited by Holger Strutwolf, Georg Gäbel, Annette Hüffmeier, Marie-Louise Lakmann, Gregory S. Paulson, and Klaus Wachtel, 8–34. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2021.

Turner, C. H. “A Textual Commentary on Mark I.” JTS (o.s.) 28.2 (1927): 145–58. https://doi.org/10.1093/jts/os-XXVIII.January.145.

Victor, Ulrich “Textkritischer Kommentar zu ausgewählten Stellen des Markus-Evangeliums.” In Das Neue Testament nach den ältesten griechischen Handschriften: Die handschriftliche Überlieferung des Neuen Testaments vor Codex Sinaiticus und Codex Vaticanus, by Karl Jaroš, 5065–5109. CD-ROM. Ruhpolding/Vienna: Franz Philipp Rutzen/Echter, 2006. Note: See Parker's review of the CD-ROM here (http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/vol13/Jaros2008rev.pdf), where he begins with the words “This CD-ROM consists of a single PDF file which is 5,163 pages long (331.1 MB).” Because someone before my time at the Center for New Testament Textual Studies was as much of an information hoarder archivist as me, if you live near New Orleans, you can access this work even if you don't have the archaic technology necessary to read a CD-ROM. Someone printed out all 5100+ pages and put them in 3-ring binders at the Center for New Testament Textual Studies.

Karl Jaroš, Das Neue Testament nach den ältesten griechischen Handschriften, at CNTTS.

Luke

Hirunuma, Toshio. 新約本文学演習 : 異文資料の取り扱い方. ルカ福音書 (1) / The Praxis of New Testament Textual Studies: How to Use Apparatus Chriticus. Luke (1). 新約硏究社 / Shin-Yaku-Kenkyu-Sya: Matsubara-shi, Osaka, Japan, 1989. [Japanese text here is copy/pasted from Worldcat; the English is the English information printed in the book itself]. Note: This book seems to be the first part of a multi-volume textual commentary on Luke, but I don't know as of the time of writing this (6 March 2024) if it was ever completed. This volume contains 193 textual discussions from the Title/inscription of Luke's Gospel through Luke 6:49. The copy at Princeton Theological Seminary bears the signature of its previous owner: Bruce M. Metzger!

Wasserman, Tommy. “A Short Textual Commentary on the Lucan Travel Narrative (Luke 9:51–19:46).” In Getting Into the Text: New Testament Essays in Honor of David Alan Black, edited by Daniel L. Akin and Thomas W. Hudgins, 90–115. Eugene, OR: Pickwick, 2017.

Acts + Catholic Epistles

Acts

Wachtel, Klaus. “Text-Critical Commentary.” In Novum Testamentum Graecum Editio Critica Maior: III Die Apostelgeschichte / Acts of the Apostles. Teil 3: Studien / Part 3: Studies, edited by Holger Strutwolf, Georg Gäbel, Annette Hüffmeier, Gerd Mink, and Klaus Wachtel, 1–38. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2017.

Rius-Camps, Josep, and Jenny Read-Heimerdinger. The Message of Acts in Codex Bezae: A Comparison with the Alexandrian Tradition. 4 vols. JSNTSup/LNTS. London: Bloomsbury T. & T. Clark, 2004–2009. Note: I mention this 4-volume set simply because of its idiosyncratic emphasis on a particular strand of the manuscript tradition.

Weiss, Bernhard. Die Apostelgeschichte: Textkritische Untersuchungen und Textherstellung. TUGAL, 9.3/4. Leipzig: J.C. Hinrichs, 1893. Available here.

Catholic Epistles

Stanojević, Jovan. Orthodox New Testament Textual Scholarship: Antoniades, Lectionaries and the Catholic Epistles. T&S 3rd series 26. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias, 2021. Contains a "Commentary on the Selected Variation Passages" on pp. 154–170.

Wachtel, Klaus. Der byzantinische Text der katholischen Briefe: eine Untersuchung zur Entstehung der Koine des Neuen Testaments. ANTF 24. Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 1995. Note: The textual commentary section of this work concerns the Teststellen used in the Text und Textwert volumes. Available here (if you have institutional access).

Weiss, Bernhard. Die katholischen Briefe: Textkritische Untersuchungen und Textherstellung. TUGAL, 8.3. Leipzig: J.C. Hinrichs, 1892. Available here.

Jude

Albin, Carl Axel. Judasbrevet: traditionen, texten, tolkningen. Stockholm: Natur och kultur, 1962. Note: Thanks to Thomas Kraus for directing me to this one.

Landon, Charles. A Text-Critical Study of the Epistle to Jude. JSNTSup 135. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996.

Wasserman, Tommy. The Epistle of Jude: Its Text and Transmission. ConBNT 43. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International, 2006.

Paul (Including Hebrews)

More than one letter

Erasmus, Desiderius. Annotations on Galatians and Ephesians. Edited and translated by Reimer A. Faber. Collected Works of Erasmus 58. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2017. Note: I include Erasmus’ Annotations for historical value even though they are really more like a category I have rejected—commentaries that address variants. Additionally, I only include here the volumes currently available in English translation; the rest are, of course, available in Latin. Buy it (or use institutional access if you have it to download it) here.

Weiss, Bernhard. Textkritik der paulinischen Briefe. TUGAL 14.3. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1896. Available here.

Romans

Erasmus, Desiderius. Annotations on Romans. Translated by John B. Payne, Albert Rabil Jr., Robert D. Sider, and Warren S. Smith Jr. Collected Works of Erasmus 56. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1994. Available here.

1 Corinthians

Kloha, Jeffrey. “A Textual Commentary on Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians.” PhD thesis, University of Leeds, 2006. (Four volumes!). Available here.

Galatians

Carlson, Stephen C. The Text of Galatians and Its History. WUNT 2.385. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2015.

The published version of:

Carlson, Stephen C., “The Text of Galatians and Its History.” PhD. diss., Duke University, 2012. Available here.

Wasserman, Tommy. “A Short Textual Commentary on Galatians.” In Studies on the Text of the New Testament and Early Christianity: Essays in Honor of Michael W. Holmes On the Occasion of His 65th Birthday, edited by Daniel M. Gurtner, Juan Hernández Jr., and Paul Foster, 345–371. NTTSD 50. Leiden: Brill, 2015.

Zimmer, Friedrich. “Zur Textkritik des Galaterbriefes.” Zeitschrift für Wissenschafliche Theologie 24 (1881): 481-494.  Note: Thanks to Jan Krans-Plaisier for pointing out this article and Zimmer's other Galatians studies to me. Available here.

Zimmer, Friedrich. “Zur Textkritik des Galaterbriefes.” Zeitschrift für Wissenschafliche Theologie 25 (1882): 327-342. Note: I have not yet been able to verify the title/pages of this one or the 1883 article myself, but I am happy to take Jan's word for it.

Zimmer, Friedrich. “Zur Textkritik des Galaterbriefes.” Zeitschrift für Wissenschafliche Theologie 26 (1883): 294-308.

Philippians

Price, James D. “A Computer-Aided Textual Commentary on the Book of Philippians.” Grace Theological Journal 8.2 (1987): 253–290. Available here.

Rodgers, Peter R. “A Textual Commentary on Philippians 2.5–11.” In Text and Community: Essays in Memory of Bruce M. Metzger, Volume 1, edited by J. Harold Ellens, 187–195. New Testament Monographs 19. Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2007.

1–2 Thessalonians

Edwards, Grant G. “The Text and Transmission of 2 Thessalonians.” PhD thesis, University of Birmingham, 2019. Note: The thesis is defended but not available yet, but I’ve seen the Table of Contents, and one of the chapters is a textual commentary. I imagine it will probably be part of a published version eventually, but I mention it here as the PhD thesis because it hasn’t been published yet. Update: thesis available here.

Wasserman, Tommy. “A Short Textual Commentary on 1–2 Thessalonians.” In Die Bibel zum Sprechen bringen. Festschrift zu Ehren von Holger Strutwolf, edited by Lakmann, et al., 291–305. ANTF 61. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2025.

Zimmer, Friedrich. Der Text der Thessalonicherbriefe: samt textkritischem Apparat und Kommentar. Quedlinburg: Chr. Friedr. Viewegs, 1893. Note: This work is different from Zimmer’s earlier work listed below, and this one is hard to describe. There’s an introduction on text-critical method, discussions of manuscripts, etc, and a critical text with an apparatus that blends things together—the manuscript witnesses like a normal apparatus and also bits of commentary mixed in.

Zimmer, Friedrich. “Zur Textkritik des zweiten Thessalonicherbriefes.” Zeitschrift für Wissenschafliche Theologie 31 (1888): 322–342. Note: No shame in admitting that I only know about Zimmer because of Grant. Available here.

The Pastorals

Elliott, J. K. The Greek Text of the Epistles to Timothy and Titus. Studies and Documents 26. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1968.

A slight revision of:

Elliott, J. K. “An Examination of the Greek Text of the Epistles to Timothy and Titus.” DPhil thesis, University of Oxford, 1967. UPDATE: Two of the three volumes of this thesis available here.

Philemon

Solomon, S. Matthew. “The Textual History of Philemon.” PhD diss., New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, 2014. Note: The majority of this work consists of an extensive edition of Philemon with all variants in all known manuscripts (up to 2014; P139 had not been published yet), but it contains a textual commentary section at the end.

Hebrews

Bruce, F. F. “Textual Problems in the Epistle to the Hebrews.” In Scribes and Scripture: New Testament Essays in Honor of J. Harold Greenlee, edited by David Alan Black, 27–39. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1992. Note: It was by reading Bruce that I learned that John Calvin (and Erasmus before him) advocated a conjectural emendation at Hebrews 11:37. Calvin rejected the textus receptus there, writing, “The words ‘they were tempted’ seem superfluous, and I have no doubt that the likeness of the two words επρίσθησαν and έπειράσθησαν was the reason why the second gradually crept into the text being added erroneously by some ignorant scribe, as Erasmus conjectures“ (p. 184 of Johnston’s 1963 translation). On this conjecture, see its entry in the Amsterdam Database of New Testament Conjectural Emendation: https://ntvmr.uni-muenster.de/nt-conjectures?histID=s25589.

Revelation

Aune, David E. Revelation. 3 Volumes. Word Biblical Commentary 52a–52c. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1998.

Elliott, J. K. “A Short Textual Commentary on the Book of Revelation and the ‘New’ Nestle.” NovT 56.1 (2014): 68–100. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685365-12341440.

Karrer, Martin, and Darius Müller. “Textkritischer Kommentar.” In Novum Testamentum Graecum Editio Critica Maior VI: Die Offenbarung / Revelation. Teil 3.1 Studien zum Text / Part 3.1 Studies on the Text, edited by Martin Karrer, Darius Müller, Marcus Sigismund, Holger Strutwolf, Annette Hüffmeier, and Gregory S. Paulson, 225–400. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2024.

Schmid, Josef. Studies in the History of the Greek Text of the Apocalypse: The Ancient Stems. Translated and edited by Juan Hernández, Jr., Garrick V. Allen, and Darius Müller. Text-Critical Studies 11. Atlanta: SBL Press, 2018.

Originally published as:

Schmid, Josef. Die alten Stämme, vol. 2 of Studien zur Geschichte des griechischen Apokalypse-Textes. MThS 2. Munich: Zink, 1955.

Weiss, Bernhard. Die Johannes-Apokalypse: Textkritische Untersuchungen und Textherstellung. TUGAL, 7.1. Leipzig: J.C. Hinrichs, 1891. Available here.

———

Finally (things that I add here for fun)

I’d like to point readers to Drew Longacre’s list of Old Testament text-critical resources, which includes a section on the “Text-Critical Commentaries, Monographs, and Lists of Variants” that are available online.

Also, this one caught me by surprise, because it is completely outside of the circles I travel in. Royal Skousen has written what looks to me like a textual commentary on textual variants in the Book of Mormon, and it’s available online, here.

———

Update history:

• 8 July 2020: I added a few entries based on feedback from readers. I admit that I'm inconsistent in the way that I have cited sections of books—sometimes as a book section (e.g. Scrivener) and sometimes just mentioning the book itself (e.g. Westcott and Hort). Either way, there should be enough information here to track these works down. Thanks to readers who suggested additions: Jan Krans-Plaisier, Thomas Kraus, Teunis Van Lopik, M.M.R., and Mark Ward.
• 14-15 July 2020: I added a few links and some more readers' suggestions.
• 6 January 2021: I added the three published volumes of Andrew Brown's editions of Erasmus' text in the ASD series. See note for explanation.
• 5 July 2021: I added a link to Edwards' PhD thesis and an entry for Victor's article (see Matthew's Gospel).
• 26 November 2021: I added entries for ECM Mark, Hirunuma and Stanojević.
• 21 June 2022: I added an entry for Pierpont's unpublished textual commentary.
• 2 July 2022: I added an entry for Tasker.
• 11 Aug 2022: I added some links.
• 1 Dec 2022: I added an entry for McGrath's textual commentary on the TR.
• 6 March 2024: I added info on Hirunuma's Mark and Luke volumes and made adjustments to what I had for his Matthew volume.
• 18 Dec 2024: I moved up the update history to the end and cleaned up the presentation some, and I added entries for the ECM Revelation, two more articles by Victor, and Jongkind's forthcoming work.
• 7 Aug 2025: Added Wasserman on 1–2 Thess., Houghton.

Asa or Asaph in Matthew 1: A Teaser for the THGNT Textual Commentary

Yesterday morning, I was reading a sermon by Charles Haddon Spurgeon (1834–1892) titled “Concealing the Words of God.” No, the sermon is not about textual criticism, but Spurgeon made a remark that sent my mind back to the arguments surrounding Asa or Asaph in Matt. 1:7–8. Spurgeon said (emphasis mine),

Lay no embargo upon any form of truth; demand no toll for the commodities of heaven. Let your mind be an open port, carrying on a free trade in the treasures of the gospel. Believe whatever God says, because God says it, though you may not always see its why and wherefore or perceive its internal consistency. Be prepared, and even anxious, to know the whole truth as far as you can know it, and let it pervade your entire being with its holy influence. It will be a terrible thing if one of these days you shall have to say “I rejected a great truth. I had a suspicion that it was so, but I did not wish to believe it, and so I shut my ears to its evidence. I had a leaning towards the opposite view, and I felt committed to it, and so refused to alter.” —Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit 25 (1879): 245.

Of course, Spurgeon is talking about theology here, but his remarks have relevance to arguments I’ve come across regarding a textual variant in Matt. 1. Since Spurgeon was not opposed to textual criticism, I’ll use his remark to leap into the Asa/Asaph variant at Matt. 1:7–8. I derive parts of what follows from the forthcoming Textual Commentary for the Tyndale House Greek New Testament that Dirk Jongkind and I are working on.

The variant in question is at Matt. 1:7–8. There are two instances of a name in Matthew’s genealogy—Ἀσά or Ἀσάφ, right at the end of v. 7 and beginning of v. 8. A sampling of the textual evidence breaks down thus, derived mostly from the UBS5 (with languages separated by commas):

Ἀσάφ· Ἀσὰφ] P1(^vid ασ̣α̣[φ ασα]φ̣) ℵ B C 700 f¹ f¹³, aur c g1 k q vg^mss, sa bo mae, arm, eth, geo, (sy^hmg) 

Ἀσά· Ἀσὰ] K L W Δ Σ 33 565 1241 892 1424 Byz, (a), f ff1 vg, sy^c sy^s sy^p sy^h sy^pal, slav

The Tyndale House edition, UBS, NA and SBL editions all go with Ἀσάφ. The earliest manuscripts support Ἀσάφ, as well as much of the Old Latin tradition, all of the Coptic tradition, and most of the ‘minor’ versions. On the other hand, the majority of Greek, Latin and Syriac manuscripts support Ἀσά, as it is supported by the Byzantine Greek text and the Vulgate, as well as some Old Latin and most Syriac versions.

Textually, if one’s preference is for early manuscripts, this decision is easy. There is a clear ‘winner’ among early witnesses in the Greek tradition. Still, the explanation for the variation has caused concern for some. The issue is that in 1 Kings 15:9, this individual is named Asa, not Asaph. Copyists were not unaware of this difference—in GA 1582 (which is close to the archetype of fam. 1), the text has Ἀσάφ, but a marginal note mentions that “Ασα” is the name according to 1 Kings (see Amy S. Anderson, The Textual Tradition of the Gospels: Family 1 in Matthew. NTTS 32. [Leiden: Brill, 2004], 62.)

The question, then, is whether copyists changed Ἀσά to Ἀσάφ, presumably because of the familiarity with the Psalmist, or did copyists see Ἀσάφ, perceive an error and ‘correct’ it, writing Ἀσά and conforming the text to 1 Kings?

Metzger writes that Ἀσάφ likely came about because “the evangelist may have derived material for the genealogy, not from the Old Testament directly, but from subsequent genealogical lists, in which the erroneous spelling occurred” (Textual Commentary, 2nd ed. [Stuttgart: German Bible Society, 1994], 1). If one believes that the original text is inerrant, one would rightly be suspicious of Metzger’s explanation here. That being said, one must not fall into the fallacy of a false dilemma and think that one must accept Metzger’s reason in order to accept the same text as Metzger.

In the current draft of the forthcoming Textual Commentary for the THGNT, we write the following to support the decision to print Ἀσάφ:

The text is adopted on the basis of its early evidence. The king’s name is given as Ἀσά thoughout 1 Kings 15, which could have led scribes to think the reading Ἀσάφ is an error, even as some modern scholars have suggested.[1] The similarity of the names Ἀσάφ (also note the Psalmist of the same name) and Ἀσά could have led to confusion as well.  

The name used in the Hebrew text of 1 Kings 15 is אָסָא (Asa), and a legitimate interpretation of this name is that it is a hypocorism (a shortened name)—an alternative form of the same name,אָסָף  (Asaph).[2] An alternative explanation for the use of Ἀσάφ might be that Matthew knows Hebrew better than his later copyists, and for the king who is called Asa in 1 Kings 15, Matthew uses the longer form of his name, Asaph.

---

[1] For example, Bruce M. Metzger suggests that Matthew may have copied Ἀσάφ from “genealogical lists, in which the erroneous spelling occurred,” in Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2nd ed. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Biblegesellschaft, 1994), 1. W. D. Davies and Dale C. Allison also suggest that Ἀσάφ is an error, corrected by later scribes in The Gospel According to Saint Matthew: Volume 1, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1988), 175.

[2] On אָסָא as a hypocorism (a shortened form) of אסף and the divine name but אָסָף as a hypocorism of the divine name and אסף, see Wilhelm Gesenius, Hebräisches und Aramäisches Handwörterbuch über das Alte Testament: Gesamtausgabe, ed. Herbert Donner, 18th ed. (Heidelberg: Springer, 2013), 83, 85. We are indebted to Pete Myers for this reference.

If one wanted to push the evidence a bit further, one might conclude that having the right text (Ἀσάφ) supports traditional views about Matthean authorship better than the majority reading, Ἀσά. If the author of Matthew’s Gospel was a Hebrew-speaking Christian, wouldn’t it make sense that he knew how Hebrew names worked better than his Greek- and Latin-speaking copyists centuries later?

As Spurgeon said, Believe whatever God says, because God says it, though you may not always see its why and wherefore or perceive its internal consistency. Our priority should be for the text and what it is, trusting that it is internally consistent even if we do not always perceive it so. When I was discussing this passage with a friend, he said something helpful to me once we found the explanation of hypocorism. “The thing you’ve got to remember,” he said, “is that the text [i.e. Asaph] was already perfect and without error long before we found an explanation for why it is perfect and without error.”