Subject: I Corinthians 11:10

From: "ROLAN, BRET R" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 97 09:11:35 -0500

I have come across a reading in Irenaeus that is interesting, and I 
wonder if there is any NT manuscript support extant.

Irenaeus, "Against Heresies" 8:2 has:
  - "A woman ought to have a VEIL upon her head, because of the angels." 
(KALUMMA)

Where the printed Greek NT versions I have access to would support the 
more familiar:
I Corinthians 11:10 
  - "For this cause ought the woman to have POWER on her head because of 
the angels." (EXOUSIAN)

I understand that Irenaes was quoting verses that the gnostic 
Valentinians used in support of their particular doctrines, but he does 
not challenge this particular reading.

I have a few questions:

1)  Are there any non-trivial variations in any extant manuscript?

2)  If so, what are they, and what elucidation do you have on them?

3)  Is it likely that Irenaeus' reading is a gloss, and the principle of 
"the hardest reading is preferred" applies?  (as the phrase "power on her 
on the head" seems to generate some confusion.)

4)  I am not conversant in Greek, so could anyone who is tell me if this 
verse could be understood as "a woman ought to have authority over her, 
because of the angels."?

Thank You,

Bret R. Rolan

---

From: "Robert B. Waltz" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 08:54:07 -0500 (CDT)

>not challenge this particular reading.

Question (since I don't have an edition of Irenaeus to consult): Is this
from the *Greek* Irenaeus? If it's from the Latin or the Armenian, it
doesn't mean much; many of the versions gloss this reading.

>1)  Are there any non-trivial variations in any extant manuscript?

Based on the information available to me, there are no variations
in the Greek manuscripts. The gloss you cite is, however, common
in the versions. Even today, most English versions render the
word "veil."

>on the head" seems to generate some confusion.)

Clearly a gloss. No one would ever change the clear reading "veil" to
the unclear "authority." And in any case, all the manuscripts read
"authority."

>verse could be understood as "a woman ought to have authority over her, 

There are those who would read this as "a woman ought to have authority
over her head, because of the angels."
^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^

Others would read it as ...have [a symbol of] authority upon her head.
                                                        ^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^

I would say that the phrase just isn't very clear. I will freely admit
that I would like to read it "a woman ought to have authority over
her own head," but I doubt that's how Paul meant it....

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

                        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)