Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T16:48:26.141Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Papyrus Bodmer II (John I-XIV) and the Text of Egypt

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2009

A. F. J. Klijn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The publication of the text of Papyrus Bodmer II,1 in the official list of New Testament papyri given the siglum 66, is very important not only for the history of the text of Egypt, but also for textual criticism in general.

Type
Short Studies
Information
New Testament Studies , Volume 3 , Issue 4 , July 1957 , pp. 327 - 334
Copyright
Copyright Cambridge University Press 1957

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 327 note 1 Papyrus Bodmer II, Evangile de Jean chap. 114, Publi par Victor Martin, Professeur l'Universit de Genve, in Bibliotheca Bodmeriana, v (Bibliotheca Bodmeriana, 1956).

page 327 note 2 Roberts, C. H., An Unpublished Fragment of the Fourth Gospel in the John Rylands Library (Manchester, 1945). It is of course not quite safe to say that we are really dealing with a B text, as the fragment is too small to draw final conclusions.Google Scholar

page 327 note 3 P. M. Barnard, Clement of Alexandria's Biblical Text, with introduction by F. C. Burkitt, in: Texts and Studies, v (1899). B. H. Streeter, The Four Gospels (London, 1926), p. 57, cannot deny that Clement shows a Western text, but does not consider Clement to be a witness for an Egyptian text as it is possible for him to have brought with him a text from Southern Italy.

page 327 note 4 Martin, , op. cit. p. 17.Google Scholar

page 327 note 5 Streeter, , op. cit. p. 57.Google Scholar

page 327 note 6 SeeKlijn, A. F. J., A Survey of the Researches into the Western Text of the Gospels and Acts (Utrecht, 1949), PP. 11021.Google Scholar

page 327 note 7 Lake, K., Blake, R. P. and New, S., The Caesarean Text of the Gospel of Mark, in Harv. Theol. Rev. XXI (1928), pp. 207404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 328 note 1 Tasker, R. V. G., The Text of the Fourth Gospel used by Origen in his Commentary on John, in, Journ. of Theol. Stud. XXXVII (1936), pp. 14655;CrossRefGoogle Scholaridem, The Chester Beatty Papyrus and the Caesarean Text of Luke, in Harv. Theol. Rev. XXIX (1936), pp. 34552; idem, The Text of St Matthew used by Origen in his Commentary on St Matthew, in Journ, of Theol. Stud. XXXVIII (1937), pp. 604; idem, The Chester Beatty Papyrus and the Caesarean Text of John, in Harv. Theol. Rev. XXX (1937), pp. 15764.

page 328 note 2 See Maldfeld, G., Die Griechischen Handschriften des N.T. auf Papyrus, in Zeitschr. neut. W.sch. XLII (1949), pp. 22853 and K. Aland, Zur Liste der neutestamentlichen Handschriften, in Zeitschr. neut. W.sch. XLV (1954), pp. 179217.Google Scholar

page 328 note 3 For an evaluation of 66 with regard to other papyrus fragments of John see: K. Aland, Das Johannesevangelium auf Papyrus, in Forsch. und Fortschritte, Akademie Berlin, Band 31 (1957), pp. 505.

page 328 note 4 The Parchment 0171 (Luke xxii. 4456) also shows a Western text for Egypt in the fourth century, see M. J. Lagrange, Critique Textuelle, II, La Critique Rationelle (Paris), pp. 716.

page 328 note 5 The text of Nestle, without slavishly following B, is in the main an Egyptian text.

page 329 note 1 Martin has given a collation of 66 and the text published by Souter. R. Schippers, De Papyruscodex van Johannes (66), in Gereformeerd Theologisch Tijdschrift, 57 (1957), pp. 3445, has clearly shown that Martin's conclusions (pp. 14152) drawn upon this evidence are rather misleading.

page 329 note 2 Our investigation is built on the part of John available in 45 which is x. 725, 31-xi. 10, 1836, 4357.

page 329 note 3 Of some importance is the peculiar reading in 66 in vii. 52:0 I. .

page 330 note 1 It is still a rule to consider readings in , etc. not as Caesarean if K is in support. This is done as all Caesarean MSS. are of a rather late date and obviously corrected by the standard text. This, however, does not mean that all Caesarean readings with K in support are corrections. Especially those with 45 and, as will be seen, with 66 in support may be original Caesarean readings. It is, however, not evident whether a reading is original or corrected. We therefore leave them out.

page 331 note 1 Novum Testamentum Graece, novis curis elaboravit D. Erwin Nestle adiuvante D. Kurt Aland, editio vicesima secunda (Stuttgart, 1956).

page 332 note 1 Aland, , op. cit. p. 55.Google Scholar

page 332 note 2 Aland, , op. cit. 55, n. 29: die 23. Auflage (welche die wichtigsten Lesarten des 66 bereits enthalten wird) befindet sich in Vorbereitung.Google Scholar

page 332 note 3 See Lagrange, op. cit. p. 99: Si on les compare l'un l'autre (scil. and B), on reconnait aisment la supriorit de B, plus pur de la tendance harmoniser, moins port s'isoler.

page 334 note 1 Martin, , op.cit. p. 31.Google Scholar