Introduction to the textual criticism of the Greek New TestamentNestle, Eberhard
Religion
Introduction to the textual criticism of the Greek New Testament
Nestle, Eberhard
Bible. New Testament -- Criticism, Textual
(9) v. 11: et visa sunt a b c (visae) e f, vg; et paruerunt d.
(10) illis a, ante illos b, vg; apud illos c e, in conspectu eorum d,
coram illos f.
(11) tanquam a, sicut b e, vg; quasi c d f.
(12) delira a, deliramentum b e f, vg; (b spells -lirr-, and f -ler-),
deliramenta c, derissus d.
(13) v. 13: municipium a, castellum b c d e f, vg.
(14) stadios habentem LX ab hierusalem a, quod aberat stadia sexaginta
ab hierusalem b, quod abest ab ierosolymis stadia sexag. c, iter
habentis stadios sexag. ab hierus. d, quod est ab hierosolymis stadia
septem e, quod aberat spatio stadiorum LX ab hierus. f, quod erat in
spatio stadiorum sexaginta ab hierusalem vg.
(15) cui nomen a, nomine b c d e f, vg.
(16) ammaus a, cleopas et ammaus b, emmaus c f, vg; alammaus d, ammaus
et cleopas e.
Is not this almost exactly as Jerome said: tot exemplaria, quot codices?
And when we take into account that all this variety in the Latin
manuscripts is not simply due to a difference in translation, but that a
similar diversity exists in the Greek,[101] we can easily understand
what a task it is to extricate the original text from out these
conflicting witnesses. At the same time, we have evidence of the
singular position in which D stands to all the others; while the last
example also affords an illustration of the way in which mistakes might
arise. The reading ᾗ ὄνομα in verse 13 would preclude any possibility of
misunderstanding. But suppose the reader or the translator had before
him a manuscript like D, in which the reading was ὀνόματι. What
happened, we shall suppose, was this. The phrase, “Emmaus by name,” was
taken as referring, not to the village, but to the subject of the
sentence; the other name, Cleopas, was then inserted from verse 18, and
in time placed even before Emmaus by a later copyist. And accordingly we
find, even in Ambrose of Milan, that the two travellers are regularly
called Ammaon et Cleopas. It was just as Jerome said: a vitiosis
interpretibus male edita, a praesumptoribus imperitis emendata
perversius, a librariis dormitantibus aut addita aut mutata.
(2.) THE LATIN VERSION OF JEROME.
[Sidenote: Codex Epternacensis.]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account