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

Re: The genealogy in D

Expand Messages
  • Daniel Buck
    Wieland wrote:
    Message 1 of 2 , Dec 21, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Wieland wrote:
      <<This turned out to be more interesting than I first thought. :-)
      I always thought that the weird genealogy in D was just one of the
      many
      idiosyncrasies of D. But now I find that Aphraates reads exactly
      this genealogy,
      too! (only that he omits TOU ELIAKEIM, it is given in IGNTP Luke).
      Additionally the addition of these names,
      TOU AMASIOU TOU IWAS TOU OCOZIOU,
      also occurs in Mt in Sy-C, Aeth and Epiphanius (4th CE). Where do
      these names come from?

      Thoughts? Is there anything published on this?>>

      I'm having to go by notes, since I don't seem to have access to D
      online anymore, so pardon the scribbles.

      I think it was Colwell who described the scribes of so many of our
      ancient mss (notably the Gr portion of bilinguals) as apparently
      illiterate in Greek, or inproficient at best, and this comes through
      in D/d's genealogy. He gets the 3 missing names of Matthew 1 from I
      Chronicles chapter 3 and inserts them between IORAM and IWAQAM.
      They are OXOZIOU/OCHOZIAE (Ahaziah), IWAS/IOAS (Joash), and
      AMASIOU/AMASIU (Amaziah). OZIAS should be the next name, but he
      doesn't realize that Amaziah is the same person as Uzziah, and he
      repeats OZEIA/EZECIA before moving on to IWAQAN/IOATHAN.
      ELIUKEIM/ELIACIM follows IOSEIA/IOSIA.

      So to answer your question, AMASIOU TOU IWAS TOU OCOZIOU is an
      inverted quote of I Chronicles 3:11-12, supplying the 3 names
      omitted from Matthew 1:8. If this relates back to the Diatesseron,
      perhaps we could see it as a Latin scribe inproficient in Greek
      transcribing a Syriac scribe inproficient in Hebrew. I suspect that
      D's scribe got it directly from his OT. The concept, though, must
      have been much more widespread that earlier supposed. Might it have
      something to do with the canonicity of Jubilees (as in Aeth)?

      Daniel Buck
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.