Thu Mar 7 15:45:08 1996

From majordom  Thu Mar  7 15:45:08 1996
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (5.0/SMI-SVR4)
	id AA16238; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 15:45:08 +0500
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 1996 15:42:05 -0500 (EST)
From: Bart Ehrman 
To: textual criticism list 
Subject: Lucian and the Byzantine text
In-Reply-To: <199603071915.LAA14637@desiree.teleport.com>
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Length: 1121
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Status: O
X-Status: 

   In response to D. Wheeler's query:

    Very few people who actually work in this material, of course, pin 
the Byzantine text on Lucian (though there are still a few "Hug-ians" 
among us...).  The most important recent treatment is K. Wachtel, _Der 
Byzantinische Text der Katholischen Briefe_ ANTF 24; Berlin: de Gruyter, 
1995.  Wachtel makes a strong case that the Byzantine text, while having 
its roots in the fourth century, was a slow train coming (I'm 
paraphrasing); the process continued up to the ninth century, when it was 
more or less brought to a conclusion with the introduction of the 
minuscule script.  The data he uses, of course, apply to the Catholic 
epistles; they are, in fact, the _Teststellen_ used by the Institut fuer 
neutestamentliche Textforschung (the Institute founded by Kurt Aland and 
now directed by Barbara Aland in Muenster).

     Now that I think of it, isn't Klaus on this list?  If so, I hope he 
can say a few things about it (like, whether I've got the basic thrust 
right on the basis of a quick perusal).

-- Bart D. Ehrman, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Back