Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

architriklinos (corrections)

Expand Messages
  • Yuri Kuchinsky
    Greetings, I would like to correct some mistakes I ve made in my analysis of Jn 2:1-12. First of all, I was mistaken in saying that metron is a very large
    Message 1 of 1 , Jul 5, 2002
      Greetings,

      I would like to correct some mistakes I've made in my analysis of Jn
      2:1-12.

      First of all, I was mistaken in saying that "metron" is a very large
      amphora. In fact, as Jeffrey Gibson has correctly pointed out, "metron"
      was an ancient unit of measure. According to Haenchen's Commentary on John
      (Fortress, 1984, p. 173), this amounted to "about 9 gallons". Thus, the
      jars in Jn 2:6 would have contained "80 to 100 liters" each, or "18 to 27
      gallons".

      In this passage, the Liege Gospel reads /mensuren ochte te drien/ = "two
      or three measures". And Plooij also supplies here the following supporting
      version as found in Zacharias Chrysopolitanus, /binae vel ternae
      mensurae/. But, as Plooij also notes, both the Vulgate and the Old Latin
      versions have /metretas/ here.

      If the word /mensurae/ indeed represents the underlying Latin version of
      the Liege Gospel, this would imply that the jugs were not really portrayed
      there as being exceedingly large, because it seems like /mensurae/ is a
      more general and less precise word, compared to /metretas/. Also, as I've
      previously pointed out, there are still further details in the
      Diatessaronic versions indicating that the jugs are smaller there. (As to
      how to interpret the full implications of the jugs being smaller, this
      still needs to be looked into further.)

      Also, I was wrong in stating previously that in the MG version of Jn
      2:1-12 "the good man" is only mentioned once. In fact, he's mentioned
      twice, of course. Sorry about this confusion.

      (MG 10:6a) "Now, there were six jars that the good man and all the men
      washed from..."

      (MG 10:11a) "And as soon as the good man had drank thereof, he called the
      butler, and said to him..."

      Thus, in fact, in MG, this "good man" is basically identified with "the
      chief of the feast". It looks like the underlying Latin expression here
      was /pater familias/, equivalent to /oikodespoths/ in Greek. As John Lupia
      so helpfully pointed out, this word is used in NT gospels 12 times, and
      its Vulgate Latin equivalent is almost always /pater familias/. (In Mk
      14:14 only, the Latin equivalent is /domino domus/.) The Liege Gospel has
      /hushere/ in this passage, translated in the Plooij edition as "the master
      of the house". Unfortunately, in his textual commentary, Plooij avoids
      dealing with this matter further.

      It's also quite interesting that KJV translates /oikodespoths/ five times
      as "the goodman of the house".

      According to Jack Kilmon, in the later Peshitta, the equivalent of
      /architriklinos/ is REB BEYTH. The literal meaning of this seems to be
      "master of the house", although it may also mean "steward". It's not
      really so important to me whether or not the Peshitta may preserve a
      genuine early tradition here, although the Old Syriac version of this word
      may help to clarify the matter some more.

      Best wishes,

      Yuri.

      Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku -=O=- Toronto

      I doubt, therefore I might be.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.