1878Re: [John_Lit] Beloved Disciple passages in ms Pepys
- Aug 6, 2001On Thu, 2 Aug 2001, Horace Jeffery Hodges wrote:
> Yuri Kuchinsky <yuku@...> wrote:Jeffery,
> > This principle of textual criticism is known as
> > "lectio difficilior potior", meaning roughly "The
> > more difficult reading is preferable". But
> > this is usually taken to apply to cases of textual
> > corruption because of careless copying, because
> > scribes tend to replace odd words with ordinary
> > ones. In this case, though, this can hardly be
> > relevant.
> Whether this principle is "usually taken" as you
> state, I do not know (lacking statistics), but you may
> be correct.
This is what the standard reference books say.
> However, I do know that the principle is used for theBut for this case (the gender of the porter), we haven't yet considered
> case that I proposed. Readings that are theologically
> difficult (or difficult for other reasons) are
> sometimes subject to later editing to bring them more
> into line with expectations.
which reading is the more difficult theologically, and from which
> > Are you suggesting that the scribes of all five mssAgain, which reading do you consider the more difficult theologically in
> > in question have done the same thing independently
> > purely by accident?
> Easier readings do not arise only by accident. Some
> are intentional.
this case, and from which perspective?
> Also, would these texts all have been independent ofGood question, and again something to consider...
> one another? Just curious.
> > Again, like in the previous case, your suggestionAnd who applies it thus?
> > does not seem very relevant. This is not how "lectio
> > difficilior potior" principle is normally applied in
> > textual criticism.
> Whether "normally" or not, it is thus applied.
> > > Also, I suspect -- but others on this listserveSee my next post.
> > > would need to give their more expert opinions --
> > > that if the evangelist had meant "believed that
> > the body had been taken away", then he would have
> > > used a verb other than "pisteuo" (possibly
> > > "dokeo", as in John 5:45; 11:13, 31).
> > Just like you, I'm not sure about this.
> Then, we have to hope that others will weigh in on
> this and let us know for certain.
> > > Also -- as I mentioned previously -- the fact thatI wrote on Jul 23, 2001 in message,
> > > the Pepys manuscript refers to Peter and the
> > > beloved disciple as "Saint" Peter and "Saint" John
> > > suggests that it has undergone ecclesiastical (or
> > > at least "pious") editing.
> > This has already been addressed previously.
> Yuri, are you sure that you posted this reply? I
> looked carefully in your posts for a response but
> found none. Either I missed it (somehow), or the post
> didn't appear (at least, not on my server).
> Anyway, what was your answer?
"It's clear that among its special material ms Pepys also contains some
late glosses. It's a medieval ms, after all, with a long history of
transmission of its own. And yet, in my estimate these glosses are no more
than 1% of the text. Obviously it's your choice if you wish to focus on
this 1%, or on the remaining 99% of the text."
> > Also, I take it that you're persuaded by the thirdStill, it's clear that the lectio difficilior rule would support the
> > case that I cited, the Toscan DT parallel. Perhaps
> > because lectio difficilior rule would support
> > the primitivity of Pepys in this case?
> Sorry, I don't recall your argument on this point. I
> responded to what appeared to me to be possible
> difficulties with some of your arguments. Absence of a
> response to other points doesn't necessarily mean that
> I either agree or disagree with those points. More
> likely, it means that I was pressed for time (which I
primitivity of Pepys in the case of the Toscan DT parallel.
Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku
Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority,
it is time to reform -=O=- Mark Twain
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>