Sat Apr 27 13:50:35 1996

From majordom  Sat Apr 27 13:50:35 1996
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (5.0/SMI-SVR4)
	id AA00618; Sat, 27 Apr 1996 13:50:35 +0500
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 13:47:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: Maurice Robinson 
To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Subject: Byzantine text
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Length: 3210
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu



[Correcting myself somewhat:]


On 24 Apr 1996, Robert B. Waltz wrote:

>>> the Vulgate has a Byzantine element (a very strong one in the
>>> gospels, less so in the Epistles)

Robinson:

>>>The Vulgate remains Alexandrian in character even in the gospels.

Waltz:

>>This statement I WILL NOT concede. ...  The vulgate gospels
>>have a mixed text, with both Alexandrian and "Western" elements, but
>>the Byzantine element is very strong. I do not say that they ARE
>>Byzantine -- but to call them Alexandrian is absurd.
>>I will present statistics if needed.

>I also have statistics ... which indicate (to the best of my
>recollection without reviewing the data packed away in various file
>folders) the Vulgate to be more Alexandrian than any other, with the
>next most significant degree of mixture to be Western.

Since posting the above message, I have consulted my 20-year-old
statistical data regarding the "near-neighbor clusters" surrounding the
Vulgate in Matthew and Acts (Luke and John remain to be tabulated once
more), and the preliminary results are as follows:

In Acts:

The Vulgate's nearest neighbors in descending order of groups (breaks
indicated by | ) are the following:

ar | bo p45 | l 629 A 81 p74 geo | e Luc gig C Aleph sy-p r | sa | B
arm sy-h 33 eth 181 | 945 1739 E 104 630 436 Psi | 1505 88 Aleph-c Orig
451 1877 Byz ....

The high percentage of agreement is 81%, with most of the remaining 
members in the 50-60% range.  The Byzantine element is only 42% in
Acts.  In Acts the Alexandrian element is extremely strong (bo A 81 p74
C Aleph sa B 33) but the main secondary mixture appears to be with
Caesarean elements (p45 629 geo arm 945 1739 E 630 436).


In Matthew:

The Vulgate's nearest neighbors, following the same method of
presentation, are the following (ranging from 91% agreement to 60% in
this chart):

aur l | g1 | ff1 c f | Aug q K | ff2 b 565 | 1079 W Byz a | 1365 1071 X
Delta 1242 1646 2174 cop goth ....

Here in Matthew the Western element remains the strongest (aur l g1
ff1 c f Aug q ff2 b) but the next most significant group are the
Caesarean witnesses (565 1079 W) followed by the primary Byzantine
group (Byz).  So in Matthew, at least, the Byzantine element is
stronger than in Acts, but it still is not as strong or as dominant as
the Western or Caesarean elements (the position of K in this
arrangement requires further study, since it normally is Byzantine
but here seems to be more Western/Caesarean).

Please note that this is merely a bare presentation of the raw data; I
have a more sophisticated method for defining group boundaries and near
neighbor clusters than is indicated by arranging material in lines of
descending percentages.  However, the further application of my method
was only completed for my master's thesis in Acts, and the gospel data
remains basically incompletely evaluated, since only the raw percentage
data is at hand.

_________________________________________________________________________
Maurice A. Robinson, Ph.D.           Assoc. Prof./Greek and New Testament
Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary     Wake Forest, North Carolina
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Back