Chris Lovelace,

Try looking up the Non-Western Interpolations in it.

Yours in Christ,

James Snapp, Jr.


--- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, "Danger" <sigebryht@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Colleagues,
>
> I have just "inherited" a copy of the TWENTY-THIRD edition of Nestle-Aland's
Novum Testamentum Graece.
>
> It's quite an interesting little book. I regularly use Nestle-Aland 27 and UBS
4, but have never encountered an edition this early.
>
> 1.) Can anyone tell me anything about how it compares with the more recent
editions? (Most information I can find seems not to include this edition.)
>
> Of course, I can readily see the relative paucity of witnesses cited in the
apparatus, compared to more recent volumes.
>
> 2.) I am inclined to assume that I will find little cause to consult this
volume, given the recent scholarship evident in the newer revisions. However, I
do not cease to be surprised at what some of these older books contain. Does
anyone know of "hidden gems" or other interesting features in this edition?
>
> In any event, the small size of this volume makes it fit perfectly in my coat
pocket. I think it will make a nice New Testament for the daily commute, etc.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Chris Lovelace
>

The closing-titles of NT books are routinely considered mundane features of NT
MSS, serving only to point out that one book has ended, and what that book was. 
But when the closing-titles vary -- from, say, "according to Matthew" to
"according to Saint Matthew" to "The Gospel according to Saint Matthew," etc.,
or, in the case of John, ranging from "According to John" to "The Holy Gospel
According to John the Theologian," they might be useful genetic markers, so to
speak:  in some cases, shared titles might indicate shared textual
relationships.

Also, a feature of Sinaiticus stands out:  there's no closing-title for Matthew.
Why not?  It occurs to me that someone should take a very close look at the
closing-titles in Aleph and confirm who wrote them. (Dirk Jongkind, do you have
any info about this?)  Was this something the main copyist would write?  Or were
the closing-titles, and the page-headings, added later on in the production of
the codex, perhaps by the diorthotes as a means of keeping track of which pages
he had proof-read?

Yours in Christ,

James Snapp, Jr.

Hi James,

See Milne, H. J. M. and T. C. Skeat. _Scribes and Correctors of the
Codex Sinaiticus_ (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1938).

Best,

Tim F.

--- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, "james_snapp_jr" <voxverax@...> wrote:
>
> The closing-titles of NT books are routinely considered mundane features of NT
MSS, serving only to point out that one book has ended, and what that book was. 
But when the closing-titles vary -- from, say, "according to Matthew" to
"according to Saint Matthew" to "The Gospel according to Saint Matthew," etc.,
or, in the case of John, ranging from "According to John" to "The Holy Gospel
According to John the Theologian," they might be useful genetic markers, so to
speak:  in some cases, shared titles might indicate shared textual
relationships.
>
> Also, a feature of Sinaiticus stands out:  there's no closing-title for
Matthew.  Why not?  It occurs to me that someone should take a very close look
at the closing-titles in Aleph and confirm who wrote them. (Dirk Jongkind, do
you have any info about this?)  Was this something the main copyist would write?
Or were the closing-titles, and the page-headings, added later on in the
production of the codex, perhaps by the diorthotes as a means of keeping track
of which pages he had proof-read?
>
> Yours in Christ,
>
> James Snapp, Jr.
>

Byzantine bookbinding -- it sounds like just the sort of obscure topic that a NT
text-critic might want to know a little bit about, just in case it might be
helpful someday.

If anyone here happens to be in London on April 16, you might want to attend the
lecture on that subject that is being given by a specialist on the subject:  at
http://www.ligatus.org.uk/node/568
you can find additional details.

Also, I highly recommend poking around the Ligatus website and seeing what those
folks are up to!  What ambitious projects!  For an example, see
http://www.ligatus.org.uk/stcatherines/
and
http://www.ligatus.org.uk/stcatherines/node/114
and
http://www.ligatus.org.uk/stcatherines/msprogress

Yours in Christ,

James Snapp, Jr.

Tim Finney,

Thanks; I had consulted that already but wasn't quite satisfied.  I found the
info I was looking for about the subscriptions in Sinaiticus, though, in
Jongkind's book, large parts of which are available to read online for free.

Yours in Christ,

James Snapp, Jr.


--- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, "yennifmit" <tfinney@...> wrote:
>
> Hi James,
>
> See Milne, H. J. M. and T. C. Skeat. _Scribes and Correctors of the
> Codex Sinaiticus_ (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1938).
>
> Best,
>
> Tim F.
>
> --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, "james_snapp_jr" <voxverax@> wrote:
> >
> > The closing-titles of NT books are routinely considered mundane features of
NT MSS, serving only to point out that one book has ended, and what that book
was.  But when the closing-titles vary -- from, say, "according to Matthew" to
"according to Saint Matthew" to "The Gospel according to Saint Matthew," etc.,
or, in the case of John, ranging from "According to John" to "The Holy Gospel
According to John the Theologian," they might be useful genetic markers, so to
speak:  in some cases, shared titles might indicate shared textual
relationships.
> >
> > Also, a feature of Sinaiticus stands out:  there's no closing-title for
Matthew.  Why not?  It occurs to me that someone should take a very close look
at the closing-titles in Aleph and confirm who wrote them. (Dirk Jongkind, do
you have any info about this?)  Was this something the main copyist would write?
Or were the closing-titles, and the page-headings, added later on in the
production of the codex, perhaps by the diorthotes as a means of keeping track
of which pages he had proof-read?
> >
> > Yours in Christ,
> >
> > James Snapp, Jr.
> >
>

I'm Molka Molkan from Egypt, I speak Arabic as the first language, I studied TC
of Qura'nic mms. and in general TC of Qur'an Because my Arabic Language, I've a
big number of topics and issues, any one here need this kind of topics?

Sincerely,

Molka Molkan,

 

I'm Molka Molkan from Egypt, I speak Arabic as the first language, I studied TC of Qura'nic mms. and in general TC of Qur'an Because my Arabic Language, I've a big number of topics and issues, any one here need this kind of topics?

Sincerely,

Molka Molkan,

((((((((((((((((
the language used by the church at Rome was Greek until the mid-third century
))))))))))))))))

I'm not sure where he gets that either.  I think the dominance of Latin as the
primary language of Rome from centuries prior to that is very well documented by
history.  In fact, I have been trying to find some examples of Greek writings
that originated from Rome in order to get some examples of the dialect, and have
come up completely empty.  Anyone know of some examples?

Joe V

What is the basis for concluding they wrote in Greek?

--- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, George F Somsel <gfsomsel@...> wrote:
>
> Justin wrote in Greek from Rome.  Irenaeus also wrote in Greek and his work
was later translated into Latin.
>  
>
> george
> gfsomsel
>
> search for truth, hear truth,
> learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
> defend the truth till death.
>
> - Jan Hus
> _________
> …
>
>
> >________________________________
> > From: JV <jovial@...>
> >To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
> >Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 6:07 PM
> >Subject: [textualcriticism] Re: Bruce Metzger assertions on Greek and Latin
in early Rome
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> >((((((((((((((((
> >the language used by the church at Rome was Greek until the mid-third century
> >))))))))))))))))
> >
> >I'm not sure where he gets that either.  I think the dominance of Latin as
the primary language of Rome from centuries prior to that is very well
documented by history.  In fact, I have been trying to find some examples of
Greek writings that originated from Rome in order to get some examples of the
dialect, and have come up completely empty.  Anyone know of some examples?
> >
> >Joe V
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

I think I finally got an answer to the issue I raised earlier.

Greek was well spoken in the souther part of Italy, in the "heel" and "toe" of
the "boot" of Italy.  There are some idioms I had noticed in a previous writing
I had seen of a Greek text that came from Italy once before, but I have since
misplaced a copy of it so I can't use it as a reference.  I'd love to find
something drafted in Greek in Rome and compare the differences to what was
spoken in Southern Italy. Preferably something not theologically charged, like
one of the Church Pioneers.  And something not written by a transplant.  Someone
born in Greek and moved to Rome would use his childhood dialect.  So that would
mean Justin wouldn't be much help much if he did write in Greek.  I am
interested in understanding the Italian Dialect.

----- Original Message -----
From: JV
To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2012 7:24 PM
Subject: [textualcriticism] What Language Did Justin or Irenaeus write in?



>What is the basis for concluding they wrote in Greek?

For Justin, the fact that all surviving manuscripts of his work are in
Greek? That there is never any hint that he wrote in any other language?
That he studied Greek philosophy?  Similarly for Irenaeus.  We know from
what survives to us that he originally wrote in Greek, and what we have from
him in other languages is clearly translation.

I suggest that you do some research in standard references.

N.E. Barry Hofstetter M.A., M.Div., Th.M.
Vice-President for Academic Affairs
The North American Reformed Seminary
http://www.tnars.net

----- Original Message -----
From: JV
To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2012 7:33 PM
Subject: [textualcriticism] Italian Greek



>I think I finally got an answer to the issue I raised earlier.

>Greek was well spoken in the souther part of Italy, in the "heel" and "toe"
>of the "boot" of Italy. There are some idioms I had noticed in a previous
>writing I had seen of a Greek text that came from Italy once before, but I
>have since misplaced a copy of it so I can't use it as a reference. I'd
>love to find something drafted in Greek in Rome and compare the differences
>to what was spoken in Southern Italy. Preferably something not
>theologically charged, like one of the Church Pioneers. And something not
>written by a transplant. Someone born in Greek and moved to Rome would use
>his childhood dialect. So that would mean Justin wouldn't be much help much
>if he did write in Greek. I am interested in understanding the Italian
>Dialect.

Good luck your're going to need it...  :)

In the first centuries, Greek was widely spoken throughout the
republic/early empire and even in the city of Rome itself (to the point
where the poet Juvenal complains that one cannot walk the streets without
hearing Greek spoken -- sort of like Spanish in Miami).  This cosmopolitan
mixture of Greek is really what produced Koine or Panhellenic.  Local
dialects really didn't survive this process, as far as we can tell with the
evidence left to us.  Additionally, of those writings that survive to us,
the vast majority of authors are seriously attempting to model themselves
after classical Attic Greek, and only occasionally does some hint of their
own dialect or the Koine slip through.  We have a few, like Epictetus, who
write in an "elevated" Koine, and of course the Christian authors, but they
are of no help for what you want here.  There are the non-literary papyri,
but those are mostly from Egypt (and tend to be Koine).  Your best bet might
be epigraphy, both formal (though those tended to avoid dialecticisms) and
graffitti.

N.E. Barry Hofstetter, M.A., M.Div., Th.M
Semper melius Latine sonat...
The American Academy
http://www.theamericanacademy.net
(2010 Salvatori Excellence in Education Winner)

http://my.opera.com/barryhofstetter/blog

Bruce Metzger
> the language used by the church at Rome was Greek until the mid-third century

(snip)

David Solomoni
Why Paul wrote in Greek to the Romans
http://www.salomoni.it/davide/theology/blog/2006/09/why-paul-wrote-in-greek-to-romans.html
              (snip Cicero and Juvenal)
Both Clemens Romanus (ca. 88-98 CE) and Ignatius of Antioch (ca. 98-115 CE) wrote in Greek, Ignatius specifically writing in Greek to the Church of Rome; there are several other examples of writers writing in Greek in Rome in the first centuries CE: for instance, Galen (in Rome after 168 CE, serving as physician to Emperor Marcus Aurelius and his son Commodus), or Justin Martyr (Apologia, 148-161 CE). On the other hand, the first known Christians writing in Latin are Apollonius and Pope Victor I (late 2nd half of II CE).
             (snip Catacombs)
Liturgically, Justin in his First Apology describes how the Eucharist was celebrated in Greek in Rome; on the other hand, we have a fragment of the De Sacramentis written by the Pseudo-Ambrose, ca. 400, where the Roman liturgy is apparently said in Latin. In liturgy then, the transition from Greek to Latin happened somewhere in between these data points, but it seems difficult or controversial to be more precise. We also know that under Pope Damasus (366-384) the Vulgate became the official version of the Bible used in the Roman liturgy. Greek did not disappear completely: for example, those familiar with Roman or Ambrosian Catholic rites can easily remember that parts of the Mass are still in Greek today (notably the invocation Kyrie Eleison). Note also the symbol IH abbreviating the word , the so-called monogram of Christ XP, the two letters - to signify beginning and end, and the iconography of the fish, Greek , acrostic for . In summary, all evidence points to the fact that by the time Romans was written, a substantial part (if not the majority) of the population in Rome was bilingual, that contemporary Christian literature was indeed normally written in Greek, that Greek was a common (if not the usual) language of Roman Christians and a kind of lingua franca, and that Greek continued to be used in Rome and in Roman rites for several more decades and perhaps centuries. The transition from Greek to Latin happened gradually, with Greek's usage progressively disappearing; and by the end of the fourth century CE we have strong indications that Roman liturgy had converged into using Latin rather than Greek in most of its forms.

The bilingual aspect should be considered carefully.  If half are considered as reasonably bilingual, that means that there are a substantial portion that would want their Bible in their fluent tongue, Greek or Latin.  i.e If 25% of a church community really needs a Bible in their native tongue, then the likelihood is that Bibles in that language will be quickly forthcoming.  The attempt by Bruce Metzger to say that the Roman church would not have a Latin Bible:

> Bruce Metzger
> the Old Latin versions would not have originated there, but within those early Christian communities that used Latin.

is a scholastic failure conjecture.  The possibility of an early second century Itala Bible is very good, although one could say that in some other areas it is that much more a certainty.

The Bible in translation: ancient and English versions (2001)
Bruce Manning Metzger
http://books.google.com/books?id=pkB7pDKa_ZkC&pg=PA30
Because the language used by the church at Rome was Greek until the mid-third century,

Christians as a Religious Minority in a Multicultural City: Modes of Interaction and Identity Formation in Early Imperial Rome : Studies on the Basis of a Seminar at the Second Conference of the European Association for Biblical Studies (EABS) from July 8-12, 2001, in Rome (2004)
Early Christians in the City of Rome - Peter Lampe
http://books.google.com/books?id=BYnzICG5aDkC&pg=PA27
In the second century, while Greek was the dominant language of the educated Christians in Rome, a rather uncultivated Latin was being used by some lower class Christian circles in town. In the first half of the third century, however, Latin and Greek were already equally represented on the catacomb inscriptions.

I am sure that list members will want to join me in taking a moment to
congratulate Stephen Carlson on the successful defense of his PhD here
at Duke this week.  His thesis title was "The Text of Galatians and
Its History".  Those of you who know Stephen's work will not be
surprised to hear that his thesis was outstanding, and his defense of
it exemplary.  If we awarded "honors" here at Duke, or "graduation
with distinction", this thesis would have received that award.  Very
many congratulations, Stephen, on a richly deserved PhD, and all the
very best for your future!

Mark Goodacre

--
Mark Goodacre
Duke University
Department of Religion
Gray Building / Box 90964
Durham, NC 27708-0964    USA
Phone: 919-660-3503        Fax: 919-660-3530

http://www.markgoodacre.org

For a theologically charged book, it could have just been that the Greek
speaking Church liked what he said and Rome did not.  We know from their
backgrounds that Justin and Irenaeus COULD have written in Greek.  I am not
saying they didn't, but it wouldn't help me if they did in their case.

Josephus wrote from the comfort of Rome and did not write in Latin and we KNOW
that because he told us so.  Yet parts of what he wrote only survived in Latin. 
However, Josephus is not much help in finding what I'm looking for since he
probably learned Greek before moving to Rome too.

A true vulgare usage should spawn a local dialect under normal cases.  Our
modern world has a hard time appreciating that since the advent of TV / radio /
etc has killed a lot of the local dialects that used to exist in europe. But
that would be the norm.

--- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, "Barry H." <nebarry@...> wrote:
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: JV
> To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, April 13, 2012 7:24 PM
> Subject: [textualcriticism] What Language Did Justin or Irenaeus write in?
>
>
>
> >What is the basis for concluding they wrote in Greek?
>
> For Justin, the fact that all surviving manuscripts of his work are in
> Greek? That there is never any hint that he wrote in any other language?
> That he studied Greek philosophy?  Similarly for Irenaeus.  We know from
> what survives to us that he originally wrote in Greek, and what we have from
> him in other languages is clearly translation.
>
> I suggest that you do some research in standard references.
>
> N.E. Barry Hofstetter M.A., M.Div., Th.M.
> Vice-President for Academic Affairs
> The North American Reformed Seminary
> http://www.tnars.net
>

Dear David,

First, what's the linguistic justification for translating the APO ... MECRI ...
construction in Acts 10:30 as anything other than a *duration* of four days in
time (see BDAG)? Anything like "four days ago" seems to me to represent merely
unsubstantiated linguistic gymnastics.

Sincerely,

Jonathan C. Borland



--- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, David Palmer <kanakawatut@...> wrote:
>
> Can anyone demonstrate by sound TC theory how or whether "fasting" was excised
from or added to Acts 10:30?
>
> Here is a chart of the Acts 10:30 manuscripts.
>
> David Robert Palmer
> http://bibletranslation.ws/palmer-translation/
>

A fellow list member suggested I forward this information to the list:
Eisenbrauns' latest 10-day sale: Cambridge Library Collection 20% off:

http://www.eisenbrauns.com/pages/NEWSLIST

The Cambridge Library Collection has a wealth of classic textual
critical and other 19th century resources in it. Eisenbrauns is making
these titles available at a 20% discount.

Enjoy!
James
________________________________
James Spinti
Marketing Director, Book Sales Division
Eisenbrauns, Good books for more than 35 years
Specializing in Ancient Near Eastern and Biblical Studies
jspinti at eisenbrauns dot com
Web: http://www.eisenbrauns.com
Phone: 574-269-2011 ext 226
Fax: 574-269-6788