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

Re: [textualcriticism] Re: Has Irenaeus' text and translation been mangled?

Expand Messages
  • Robert Relyea
    ... Oops, It appears I have again mixed up Irenaeus with Ignatius. Mike Holmes volume does not include Irenaeus. bob
    Message 1 of 9 , Oct 22 1:47 PM
      On 10/22/2012 12:09 PM, Robert Relyea wrote:
      > Mike Holmes has an edition of the church fathers, that has been
      > reedited in light of more recent finds, as well as a new modern
      > english translation:
      >
      > http://www.amazon.com/The-Apostolic-Fathers-English-Translations/dp/080103468X
      >
      >
      > If we are likely Mike may even chime in on any difficulty he had in
      > reconstructing Irenaeus.

      Oops, It appears I have again mixed up Irenaeus with Ignatius. Mike
      Holmes volume does not include Irenaeus.

      bob
      >
      > bob
      >
      > On 10/22/2012 09:30 AM, mikek wrote:
      >> To David Hindley (and all wanting to add anything):
      >>
      >> Thanks. But agian David, it just "sounded" like the translators
      >> Roberts and Donaldson come across as saying that the translators
      >> thought Irenaeus text NEEDED IMPROVEMENT (because the Latin was so
      >> bad) and they made the IMPROVEMENTS themselves (whoever the
      >> translators into English that actually did the translating), in both
      >> the Latin AND THE GREEK(where it was bad). Sort of like they said,
      >> "Irenaeus text is not understood here[or wherever] so let's just
      >> TRANSLATE IT in the way what he was trying to write." To me then,
      >> in Irenaeus' quotations of the New Testament (or wherever he wrote
      >> something) the translators would just WRITE IN the English
      >> [IMPROVEMENTS] verses FROM OUR MODERN ENGLISH BIBLES INTO THE
      >> TRANSLATION ITSELF. This would make my comparision of Irenaeus
      >> quotes null and void. I would be wasting my time.
      >>
      >> David, are you familiar with Irenaeus' text then? Is the above
      >> scenerio not the case then?
      >>
      >> Would I be able to do a study on the New Testament quotes of Irenaeus
      >> from the english translation; or most all of his writings in
      >> (mainly) "Against Heresies" books?
      >>
      >> You also mentioned that some of the text of Irenaeus and the other
      >> texts you mentioned (like Hippolytus and that other church writer)
      >> OVERLAP. Would that mean I have a better shot at studying those
      >> OVERLAPPING TEXTS since it is like saying the same thing twice??
      >>
      >> Thank-you for the link to and your contribution to this issue.
      >>
      >> Kindly,
      >>
      >> Mike Karoules
      >>
      >>
      >> --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, "David
      >> Hindley"<dhindley@...> wrote:
      >>> Mike,
      >>>
      >>> The underlying Greek and Latin text Andrew speaks of is this two
      >>> volume edition
      >>> of Irenaeus:
      >>>
      >>> Sancti Irenaei episcopi Lugdunensis Libros quinque adversus haereses
      >>> (1857)
      >>>
      >>> Vol 1 http://archive.org/details/sanctiirenaeiep01harvgoog
      >>>
      >>> Vol 2 http://archive.org/details/sanctiirenaeiep00harvgoog
      >>>
      >>> There is a 100 page introduction which appears to be concerned
      >>> mainly with
      >>> Gnostic heresies, but quite a lot of notes (in English) which I am
      >>> sure would
      >>> comment on any irregular quotes.
      >>>
      >>> Where the Greek fragments overlap (say from Epiphanius and
      >>> Hippolytus), the
      >>> readings are fairly in accord with one another, and where Greek
      >>> fragments
      >>> overlap the Latin translation Harvey deduced that the Latin is very
      >>> literal in
      >>> rendering the Greek, and was made not too long after it was written
      >>> by Irenaeus.
      >>> The "barbarous" Latin is not as barbarous as the editor of the ANF
      >>> series makes
      >>> it, but rather exhibits a "provincial" accent of the region near
      >>> Lugdunum, if
      >>> you may. The Latin translation appears to have been known to
      >>> Tertullian in the
      >>> early 3rd century. The translation issues mentioned are due to the
      >>> unfamiliar
      >>> terminology used by the Valentinian gnostics (hence the need for
      >>> Harvey's 100
      >>> page introduction.
      >>>
      >>> The 2 volumes above served as the primary source for the ANF
      >>> translators, half
      >>> by D. Roberts and the other half by W. H. Rambaut (originally
      >>> published 1868),
      >>> and it looks as though they tried to be literal as well. The
      >>> American editor A.
      >>> Cleveland Cox does not appear to have made any changes.
      >>>
      >>> Fun Fun!
      >>>
      >>> Dave Hindley
      >>> Newton Falls, Ohio, USA
      >>>
      >>>
      >>>
      >>> -----Original Message-----
      >>>
      >>> 1a. Has Irenaeus' text and translation been mangled?
      >>> Posted by: "mikek" steelcurtain40@... steelcurtain40
      >>> Date: Sat Oct 20, 2012 3:13 am ((PDT))
      >>>
      >>> Hello folks and all textual criticism junkies!
      >>>
      >>> I have a question for everyone (please):
      >>>
      >>> I had wished to embark on my own research on the accuracy and type
      >>> of style of
      >>> Irenaeus' own quotes of the New Testament. It seems , though, my
      >>> trip has
      >>> crashed through because, according to what I have read in a
      >>> preview of
      >>> Irenaeus' texts and writings - much of the translation in english is
      >>> almost a
      >>> reinvention of what the translators think Irenaeus intended to write.
      >>>
      >>> In the Introduction of Roberts-Donaldson it is stated: "The work of
      >>> Irenaeus,
      >>> now for the first time translated into English, is unfortunately no
      >>> longer
      >>> extant in the original. It has come down to us only in an ancient
      >>> Latin
      >>> version, with the exception of the greater part of the first book,
      >>> which has
      >>> been preserved in the original Greek through means of copious quotes
      >>> made by
      >>> Hippolytus and Epephanuis. The text, BOTH LATIN AND GREEK IS
      >>> OFTEN MOST
      >>> UNCERTAIN. [what; oh say it ain't so, Joe!] Only 3 manuscripts
      >>> of the work
      >>> Against Heresies are at present known to exist. Others, however
      >>> were used in
      >>> the earliest printed editions put forth by Erasmus. . . .One of our
      >>> difficulties
      >>> throughout, HAS BEEN TO FIX THE READINGS WE SHOULD ADOPT, especially
      >>> in the
      >>> first book. AFTER THE TEXT HAS BEEN SETTLED ACCORDING TO THE BEST
      >>> JUDGEMENT
      >>> WHICH CAN BE FORMED, THE WORK OF TRANSLATION BEGINS"
      >>>
      >>> They go on to say, "Irenaeus, even in the original Greek, is often
      >>> a very
      >>> obscure writer. . .And the Latin version adds to these difficulties
      >>> of the
      >>> original, by being itself of the most barbarous character. IN FACT
      >>> IT IS OFTEN
      >>> NECCESSARY TO MAKE A CONJECTURAL RETRANSLATION OF IT INTO GREEK IN
      >>> ORDER TO
      >>> OBTAIN SOME INKLING OT WHAT THE AUTHER WROTE."
      >>>
      >>> So, I asked myself, then, why even bother to make a translation
      >>> of Irenaeus
      >>> if it is next to impossible to know what Irenaeus wrote down in the
      >>> first place?
      >>>
      >>>
      >>> It seems to me , having already read some of Irenaeus in English, the
      >>> translation (in the English) appears clear enough and the often
      >>> quoted New
      >>> Testament texts of Irenaeus also seem very understandable and clear.
      >>>
      >>> Here is my point or question: Are we to conclude, then, that the
      >>> New Testament
      >>> quotes of Irenaeus (in the English translation OF IRENAEUS) was
      >>> interjected by
      >>> the translators themselves from the current Englsih translations
      >>> that we have??
      >>>
      >>> To put it this way, instead of just translating the New Testament
      >>> quotes of
      >>> Irenaeus from the copies that we do have, (Latin or Greek) did the
      >>> translators more-less just guess or CONJECTURE (as best they could
      >>> with the
      >>> best intentions that they had) the wording of Irenaeus' NT quotes
      >>> FROM OUR
      >>> MODERN BIBLE TRANSLATIONS ONTO THE IRENAEUS ENGLISH TRANSLATION??
      >>>
      >>> And , should I just toss aside my own personal study of Irenaeus'
      >>> quotes of the
      >>> New Testamnt (in English)??
      >>>
      >>> Another way, am I just spinning my wheels in researching Irenaeus'
      >>> quotes of
      >>> the New Testament seeing that the text and TRANSLATION is already been
      >>> significantly tampered with?? thank you much. Kindly, Mike Karoules
      >>>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >> ------------------------------------
      >>
      >> Yahoo! Groups Links
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >
      >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.