Subject: Which ms did Erasmus use for Hebrews

From: Timothy John Finney <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 18:56:49 +0800 (WST)

Concerning which ms Erasmus used for Hebrews, I do not think that it was
minuscule 2 (now 2315?). I transcribed ms 2 for Hebrews because I thought
it was the one Erasmus had used (or given to the printer to use), but then
I found that its text does nor agree with the Textus Receptus. (See the 
ESCATOU/ESCATWN variant in ch. 1 for example.) I read somewhere (don't 
ask me where) that E. used ms 7 for some of the Pauline letters. I 
haven't checked to see if the text of this ms corresponds with that of 
the TR in Hebrews.

Best regards,

Tim Finney

[email-masked]
Baptist Theological College
and Murdoch University
Perth, W. Australia

---

From: Mike and Jeanne Arcieri <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 11:19:13 -0700

> haven't checked to see if the text of this ms corresponds with that of

Tim, 

It is generally agreed that these MSS were used by Erasmus:

Erasmian edition        MSS used

1516                    Codex 2e  (13th cent.)      sent to press
                        Codex 2ap  (12th cent.)     sent to press
                        Codex 1r  (12th cent.)      sent to press
                        Codex 1eap  (12th cent.)    collated
                        Codex 4ap  (15th cent.)     collated
                        Codex 7p  (11th cent.)      collated
                        Commentary of Theophylact   collated
________________________________________________________________________________
1519                    Codex 3ap (12th century)        collated
________________________________________________________________________________
1522                    Codex 61 (Codex Montfortianus,
                        used for 1 John 5:7-8 only)
                        Latin MSS                       collated
_________________________________________________________________________________

1527                    Complutensian Polyglot NT
                        (heavily used to revise Apocalypse text of 1522)
                        Latin MSS
__________________________________________________________________________________
1535                    none
_________________________________________________________________________________

Now how exactly he used them and where his own variations from the text of these MSS came from is more 
difficult to determine. Even though he sent 2ap to Froben he still did consult 1eap, 4ap and 7p.  

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mike Arcieri

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

---

From: "Robert B. Waltz" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 12:33:32 -0500 (CDT)

>haven't checked to see if the text of this ms corresponds with that of 

This leads to two questions:

1. How many differences were there between 2 and the TR? Because, of
   course, Erasmus did not simply print the text of 2; he compared it
   with 1 and the Vulgate and perhaps 4 and 7. And then the printer
   added many errors. So unless the number of differences is quite
   high, it is likely that the TR is still *based on* 2, but with
   readings from the others.

2. Which of Erasmus's editions were you using? Because, of course,
   Erasmus used additional manuscripts for his later editions.
   The only one based *entirely* on the short list of manuscripts
   above was the first -- which can hardly be compared to anything
   because of its high number of errors. :-)

-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-

                        Robert B. Waltz
                     [email-masked]

Want more loudmouthed opinions about textual criticism?
Try my web page: http://www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn
(A site inspired by the Encyclopedia of NT Textual Criticism)