For the first time, the readings of the newly discovered Papyri 117-127 are listed in the apparatus, opening up interesting perspectives particularly for the Acts of the Apostles.
Distinction between consistently cited witnesses of the first and second order abandoned
The distinction between consistently cited witnesses of the first and second order has often caused uncertainties and complications. It was difficult to discover, for example, whether a consistently cited witness of the second order was not explicitly cited because it agreed with the majority reading or because it had a lacuna, and so we have given up this distinction. From now on all manuscripts cited consistently for the respective writing will be listed for passages with a positive apparatus.
Abandoning the distinction between consistently cited witnesses of the first and second orders increases the number of apparatus notes. At the same time, however, we have rearranged the apparatus for more tightness and clarity. Witnesses not cited consistently are listed only if they contribute variants of text-historical relevance. Unless there are particular reasons not to do so, the variants of consistently cited witnesses are given in full, even if they differ from other consist- ently cited witnesses in detail only. The appendix containing variae lectiones minores has been retained, but it is confined to readings which would have disturbed the clarity of the main apparatus.
Apparatus notes systematically checked
In the context of the NTTranscripts project and of transcription of manuscripts for the Editio Critica Maior the Nestle-Aland apparatus notes were checked systematically. This brought about increased precision in the citation of Greek manuscripts.
Imprecise notes abandoned
Furthermore, the notes pauci (pc) and alii (al) indicating that, apart from the witnesses cited explicitly, there are a few or more additional witnesses for a variant, have been abandoned. The main reason for this is that these notes could easily lead to a mistaken conclusion that apparatus entries without pc or al were exclusively supported by the witnesses cited. However, even where the ECM is extant pc and al cannot be used in a precisely defined way, because full collation of all the manuscripts would yield more witnesses for known variants.
Previously concatenated notes now cited separately
Concatenation of apparatus entries by et or sed has been criticised, because often the witnesses listed in support of the text at the second variation unit were erroneously referred to the combination of both passages. Now attestations that were concatenated previously are cited separately, and cf points to possible relations between variants, where a hint appeared to be useful.
Inserted Latin texts reduced and translated
Latin abbreviations and connecting texts are kept as simple as possible. They are translated in the general list of abbreviations (Appendix IV).
References thoroughly revised
The apparatus of references in the outer margin has been thoroughly revised and supplemented mainly with references to early literature.
2. Revision of the Catholic Letters
The Editio Critica Maior sets new standards in providing source material relevant to the history of the text and in analysing it systematically. Therefore, the versions and the quotations from patristic literature are cited in the present edition according to the second edition of the ECM of the Catholic Letters. The selection of Greek manuscripts cited in the present edition comprises the witnesses that are most important for reconstructing the text.
The text
Compared to the 27th edition, the text differs at altogether 34 passages, for example:
ECM/NA28
NA27
Jak 2,3
ἢ κάθου ἐκεῖ
ἐκεῖ ἢ κάθου
1 Pt 4,16
μέρει
ὀνόματι
2 Pt 2,11
παρὰ κυρίῳ
παρὰ κυρίου
2 Pt 2,18
ὄντως
ὀλίγως
Jd 5
ἅπαξ πάντα ὅτι Ἰησοῦς
πάντα ὅτι [ὁ] κύριος ἅπαξ
The reconstructed text of the Catholic Letters reflects the second edition of the ECM in one further respect. Passages for which the editors had to leave open the decision as to which of the variants is the initial text are specially marked. The second edition of the ECM has a split guiding line at these passages. In the new Nestle-Aland the reading text remains unchanged in such cases, but the sign ♦ precedes the reference mark in the text and the citation of the variant seen as equal to it in the apparatus. As a consequence square brackets, which could in any case be used only for possible additions, have become obsolete in the Catholic Letters.
Defining the Consistently Cited Witnesses for the Catholic Letters
The ECM text of the Catholic Letters was established by means of the Coherence-Based Genealogical Method (in what follows “coher- ence method”). One essential concept of this method is that of “potential ancestor”. One of two textual witnesses may be classified as potential ancestor of the other, if it more often supports a variant from which the variant of the other witness can be derived. Some witnesses have many, others have a few or only one potential ances- tor. The percentages of agreement between witnesses compared are used to arrange the potential ancestors of a witness in a ranking order, according to their degree of relationship. The method can also be applied to a comparison with the reconstructed initial text. Hence we can say for which manuscript texts the initial text A has the highest rank among their potential ancestors. This is the case, apart from a couple of highly fragmented papyri and majuscules, for altogether 18 majuscels and minuscules. Their text is more closely related to A than to anymanuscript text. In addition, there are a few other consistently cited witnesses, partially only for individual writings. In addition, all the papyri containing the thext of the Catholic Letters were included.
댓글