Subject: TR editions

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 1996 13:18:16 -0400

Perhaps someone could help with the following regarding TR texts.  What is
the difference between the 1873 Oxford TR edition and the 1889 Oxford TR
edition?  Also, is Tischendorf's Stephanus text (I realize he prints both the
1550 Stephanus and 1624 Elzevir texts) the same as the 1873 Oxford text (I
suspect it is), or not, and if not, what are the differences?  

The background of this question relates to the use of collation information
from different sources, all supposedly based on the TR.  But if the TR texts
differ, then the collation information would need to be adjusted accordingly.
 For example, the IGNTP uses the 1873 Oxford TR text, and so if that text is
not the same as the Tischendorf Stephanus text, the use of Tischendorf in
conjunction with IGNTP collations would need to take the differences into
account. 

Thanks,

Bill Warren
Professor of New Testament and Greek
New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary

---

From: Maurice Robinson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 1996 21:33:47 -0400 (EDT)

On Fri, 19 Apr 1996 [email-masked] wrote:

> edition?  

Probably no significant differences.  At the most perhaps some accent or 
punctuation changes.  I would suspect the text itself of any Stephens 
1550 TR reprint to remain the same.

> Also, is Tischendorf's Stephanus text (I realize he prints both the

Again probably so, though I have never seen a copy of a Tischendorf 
edition of the TR; only his own edited editions, which differ 
significantly, of course.

> differ, then the collation information would need to be adjusted accordingly.

The major collations made in the mid-1800s by Scrivener were against a 
Stephens 1550 TR, which obviously could not have been against the 1873 
Oxford edition which had not yet been published.  I, however, would not 
be overly concerned, so long as the text was specifically a Stephens 1550 
reprint, and not one with changes like the Elzevir editions.

> conjunction with IGNTP collations would need to take the differences into

That would be correct if such were the case.  From reading Scrivener's 
Plain Introduction (1894), which probably goes into more detail about the 
various TR editions than any more recent source, I noticed no specific 
suggestion that there were any textual differences among Stephens 1550 
editions.

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