Re: Which ms did Erasmus use for Hebrews
- On Sun, 29 Jun 1997, Timothy John Finney <finney@...>
>Concerning which ms Erasmus used for Hebrews, I do not think that it wasThis leads to two questions:
>minuscule 2 (now 2315?). I transcribed ms 2 for Hebrews because I thought
>it was the one Erasmus had used (or given to the printer to use), but then
>I found that its text does nor agree with the Textus Receptus. (See the
>ESCATOU/ESCATWN variant in ch. 1 for example.) I read somewhere (don't
>ask me where) that E. used ms 7 for some of the Pauline letters. I
>haven't checked to see if the text of this ms corresponds with that of
>the TR in Hebrews.
1. How many differences were there between 2 and the TR? Because, of
course, Erasmus did not simply print the text of 2; he compared it
with 1 and the Vulgate and perhaps 4 and 7. And then the printer
added many errors. So unless the number of differences is quite
high, it is likely that the TR is still *based on* 2, but with
readings from the others.
2. Which of Erasmus's editions were you using? Because, of course,
Erasmus used additional manuscripts for his later editions.
The only one based *entirely* on the short list of manuscripts
above was the first -- which can hardly be compared to anything
because of its high number of errors. :-)
Robert B. Waltz
Want more loudmouthed opinions about textual criticism?
Try my web page: http://www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn
(A site inspired by the Encyclopedia of NT Textual Criticism)