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
It is frequently stated that copies exist of Stephen’s edition of 1551
(the first to contain the verse enumeration) bearing on the title-page
the date MDXLI. In the two I examined belonging to the collections of
Lorck and Reuss, the two halves of the number MD and LI are far apart.
In the case of the Lorck copy it is possible to suppose that a letter
has been erased from the middle, but not in the Reuss copy. In his
Preface, Stephen says: “Quod autem per quosdam ut vocant versiculos opus
distinximus, id, vetustissima Graeca Latinaque ipsius Novi Testamenti
exemplaria secuti, fecimus: eo autem libentius ea sumus imitati, quod
hac ratione utraque translatio posset omnino eregione Graeco contextui
respondere.” As Ezra Abbot pointed out, Stephen gave a double number
19/20 to the verse Τινὲς δὲ ... πρὸς μέ in Acts xxiv. A similar double
enumeration occurs in the previous chapter, where the verse Γράψας ...
χαίρειν is numbered 25/26. Accordingly, Abbot’s supposition becomes
pretty certain, that the verse division was originally made for a Latin
copy which, at the passage in Acts xxiv., contained the additional
sentence: Et apprehenderunt me clamantes et dicentes, Tolle inimicum
nostrum. And in chapter xxiii. several Latin editions show an extra
sentence at the place marked with the double number: et ipse postea
calumniam sustineret tanquam accepturus pecuniam. But what edition it
was from which Stephen took the enumeration into his Greek copy is not
yet known. Unfortunately, as Abbot shows (_l.c._ 173-182), later
editions frequently deviated from Stephen’s enumeration. Even Oscar v.
Gebhardt, in his editions of Tischendorf’s text, followed in eight
instances a different verse division from that recommended by Gregory in
his Emendanda (p. 1251 ff.).
Several mistakes in numbering crept into the Stuttgart edition of the
N.T., but the division and enumeration have been carefully compared with
that of the Reuss copy for the second edition. There are differences in
verse-division even in the reprint of Westcott and Hort’s Greek
Testament (Macmillan fount, 1895), Heb. xii. 22, 23: in Swete’s _Gospel
of St. Mark_ (Mk. ii. 18, 19), and in Cronin’s edition of _Codex
Purpureus Petropolitanus_ (Lk. iii. 23, 24, ix. 7, 8.)
The Textus Receptus is usually indicated by the Greek letter ϛ, the
initial of Stephen’s name.
[Sidenote: Beza.]
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account