Subject: Re: tc-list Big omission in Jn 12.34

From: Jim West <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1998 10:31:11 +0000

At , you wrote:
>NA 27 mentions the omission of "tis estin outos o uios tou anqrwpou" at 
>the end of the verse. Of course, such an omission can be due to an 
>homeoteleuton and is likely to occur independently in several mss.
>
>Looking at the apparatus, I found that this omission seemed quite rare 
>(P75, l2211 al. sa(ms) ac2).
>In fact, I noticed that omission because I found it too in the Arabic 
>version on which I'm working.
>Searching for more evidence, I found that:
>- Three manuscripts of the second Georgian version (A, D and E) have the 
>same omission.
>- The Synopsis of Nestle-Aland gives several Byzantine uncials that have 
>the omission too.
>
>Now this last point: the Synopsis gives a very different perspective than 
>NA. If you look only at NA, you get the impression that this is a rare, 
>probably Alexandrine, variant (a  lectio brevior). When you look at the 
>Synopsis (and at the versions) the variant seems much more widespread, 
>and perhaps less significative.
>
>Comments?
>
>Jean V.
>

Could it simply be that the editors of NA27 (with their limited space)
merely gave the more significant witnessess whereas the Synopsis (with
considerably more available space) was able to include more information?

Best,

Jim

[email-masked]