Thu Jun 6 18:00:41 1996

From owner-tc-list  Thu Jun  6 18:00:41 1996
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id RAA11108; Thu, 6 Jun 1996 17:59:22 -0400
X-Sender: winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net (Unverified)
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 17:02:08 +0400
To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
From: winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net (Carlton L. Winbery)
Subject: Re: "Alexandrian" Text
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
content-length: 1451

Larry Hurtado wrote;
>Maurice (and others):  If you imagine that the only way "Byzantine
>readings" can have made their way into mss is through the "influence" of
>a "Byzantine text-type" (i.e., a relatively matured type of text such as
>we have in the primary Byzantine mss reps.), then, yes, readings in early
>mss would suggest that this text-form might be there.  But, if (as I see
>it) "text-types" are basically the result of scribal copying/transmission
>habits/tastes/objectives, etc. (shaped of course by ecclesiastical
>concerns etc.), then what becomes the "Byzantine text-type" is basically
>a matured form/degree (late, so the evidence) of scribal/editorial
>tendencies observable quite early in their initial operation.  So, the
>"Byzantine text" is basically an "ecclesiastical" text, that reflects a
>few centuries of transmission with readability, inoffensiveness,
>harmonization, etc. operational.  These tendencies began very early, so
>they show up ad hoc in such early witnesses as P45, P46, etc.  But a more
>programmatic operation of these tendencies gathers force over time.
>
Larry has made an excellent statement that seems to me to account for the
evidence that we have.  This explanation of the growth of texts makes
unnecessary elaborate and imaginative explanations for obvious scribal
improvements such as the obvious harmonization in I Thess. 1:1.

Carlton L. Winbery
Fogleman Professor of Religion
Louisiana College

Back