the James Donaldson linguistic argument that Barnabas and Hermas are not 4th century

Steven Avery

Administrator
the evidence points to a strong confirmation of Hilgenfeld's opinion that that Codex is not earlier than the sixth century

James Donaldson gives a summary in 1877 (note: this was referenced by Gardthausen in his 1879 edition of Griechische Palaeographie.)

The Theological review, Volume 14 (1877)
The Shepherd of Hermas
James Donaldson review of:
Oscar Gebhardt and Adolph Harnack's Hermas edition from the Apostolic Fathers series
Guilielmus Heyne on the dating of Hermas
Heinrich Behm on dating and authorship and more
George H. Schodde on the Ethiopic Hermas
Walter Cassels (Supernatural Religion). (The last was actually only referenced en passant.)

https://books.google.com/books?id=W0EEAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA507
p. 504-519


... Putting all these circumstances together, we think that the best solution of the problem is to suppose that we have, as the basis of our present Greek manuscripts, a recension and modernized version belonging to the sixth or seventh century, and that the editor used all the materials at his command, having probably in his possession large portions of the original text, but filling up gaps from some Latin translations, introducing parts from some modifications of the text, such as those of pseudo-Athanasius, and clothing the whole in the language current among the Christian populace of his day. We may add that the texts of Hilgenfeld and Gebhardt partake somewhat of the character which we have assigned to our sixth-century recension. They have used the Latin translations to amend the Greek, and where the Greek is defective they have re-translated the Latin into Greek.

The hypothesis we have proposed we do not deem by any means certain. The subject is one which awaits fuller investigation. We have been compelled to omit considerable portions of our argument, for they would occupy too much space; but it is enough to draw attention to some of the most prominent characteristics of this curious problem. It is not one of great consequence, as far as the substance of Hermas is concerned. It has much more to do with the date of the Sinaitic Codex, and the evidence points to a strong confirmation of Hilgenfeld's opinion that that Codex is not earlier than the sixth century. - p. 514

Note, that is not a terminus ante quem, it is given as a terminus post quem, the earliest date. The earliest date for Sinaiticus. And, historically, the 6th century has its own difficulties, clashing with other positions taken for Sinaiticus authenticity, leaving us with a strong evidence that can be consistent best with 19th century creation. To be clear, in textual circles even 6th century would have been late enough to make the convoluted theories of Hort that much more impossible.

As far as can be determined, the position of Donaldson never received a response from Sinaiticus 4th century defenders.

Some of the earlier material is here:

Sinaiticus - Hermas, Barnabas linguistic, history anomalies

Steven Avery - Oct 31, 2014
http://earlywritings.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=21642&sid=e5a856cc477f7deb3a86e7e51ceadc54#p21642

==========================

The Gardthausen section is at a time when the dating of Sinaiticus was still subject to scholarly discussion. Thus he mentions the 500s in reference to Hilgenfeld and Donaldson (p. 145) Gardthausen is summarized as early fifth century, according to Ropes.

Viktor Emil Gardthausen (1843-1925)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victor_Gardthausen

Griechische Palaeographie
Viktor Emil Gardthausen
https://archive.org/stream/griechischepalae01garduoft#page/n5/mode/2up
https://books.google.com/books?id=4d8NAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA143
p. 143-149
https://archive.org/stream/griechischepala00unkngoog#page/n165/mode/2up


Google translation
But there are, however, attempts made him much further back zoom. Hoffmann maintains the Ambrosian and Syrian palimpsest Iliad as older than the cod. Sinaiticus, while Hilgenfeld and Donaldson placed it in the 6th century for linguistic reasons, as in the Old and New Testaments the genuine optative occurs frequently [Donaldson, p. 511], while in Hermas it occurs only once. Even such forms as (Greek-sunxunnou, sunio, titho, afiousi) can be found only when Hermas in c. Sinaiticus and the Leipzig fragments.

Es sind aber allerdings Versuche gemacht, ihn bedeutend weiter herabzurücken. Hoffmann hält die Ambrosianische und die syrisch rescribirte Ilias für älter, als den cod. Sinaiticus, den Hilgenfeld £ und Donaldson) aus sprachlichen Gründen in das 6. Jahrhundert setzten, weil im Alten und Neuen Testament der wirkliche Optativ öfter, beim Hermas nur einmal vorkommt. Auch solche Formen wie (Grk) finden sich nur beim Hermas im c. Sinaiticus und in den Leipziger Fragmenten.

p. 145 dating.jpg


This shows us that Hilgenfeld was including linguistic reasons for Sinaiticus to not be 4th century.

The Syriac palimpsest of the Iliad referenced from Karl August Julius Hoffman (1812-1869), Codex Nitriensis, is dated to the 6th century. The Ambrosian Iliad is an illuminated ms. placed in the 5th century.

==========================

For a review of the Hilgenfeld-Tischendorf differences:


The Journal of Sacred Literature and Biblical Record, Volume 5 (1861)
The Age of the Sinaitic Codex
https://books.google.com/books?id=onotAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA495
p. 495-500

Theological Review (1864)
Notes on the Codex Sinaiticus
https://books.google.com/books?id=QUAEAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA214

The abject scribal (leaving aside textual) corruptness of the manuscript, later emphasized out by Burgon in 1871, was one point emphasized:


Undue weight, in his opinion, has been attached by the editor to the beauty and form of the uncial characters. An un-theological friend well versed in palaeography, whose opinion he asked, drew from an inspection of the writing the same conclusion at which Hilgenfeld had arrived through another process,—viz. that the MS. could not be older than the sixth century. ... The text of this Codex of the New Testament is disfigured by constant mis-spellings, and abounds in violations of all the laws of flexion and syntax. ... Hilgenfeld sees in the barbarism of the Sinai tic text clear proofs of a later age and a declining culture, and thinks our MS. may possibly have been the work of some monks of the convent of St Catharine, where it was discovered, and which was not founded till 530 A.D. p. 215-216

... traces of illiterate carelessness. ... In the Sinaiticus, these phenomena reach their height The force of Hilgenfeld's argument depends on the character of the variations exhibited by the Codex Sinaiticus,—whether they are merely the less usual forms of words, and modes of expression and construction, such as we know existed in the Hellenistic and colloquial Greek of the apostolic age, and would naturally find a place in the Christian writings of that period,—or whether they are such as are evidently traceable to the simple growth of barbarism. p. 216

... could not, therefore, have been written earlier than the sixth century, subsequent to the foundation of St Catharine's monastery in 530 A.D Hilgenfeld regards the internal character of this MS. as in full accordance with this supposition of its date. He looks on it as a hasty transcript by ignorant and incompetent scribes, whose astounding blunders have caused endless trouble to its numerous correctors. It abounds in omissions; which can only be ascribed to haste, as this is not a usual fault in the worst manuscripts. Hilgenfeld has given a list of these. Some blunders, resulting obviously from the same cause, are scarcely credible. ... p. 21-220

Judging from the instances alleged by Hilgenfeld, which have been taken from all parts of the New Testament and which we have in every instance carefully verified by a reference to the original text, we should say that the Sinaitic text is generally very corrupt, abounding with extraordinary violations both of grammar and of sense. We have rarely turned to a single passage referred to by Hilgenfeld, without finding in the context some other example of corruption... (p. 221)

This was one of the major Hilgenfeld concerns that fourth century was far too early. Donaldson confirmed Hilgenfeld, from the linguistic elements of Barnabas and Hermas, some of which is above.
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
Maximus

Donaldson
https://archive.org/stream/apostolic.../n402/mode/2up


Then there is a considerable number of passages preserved to us in Greek by Origen and other writers. The Sinaitic Greek differs often from this Greek, and agrees with the Latin translation, especially the Palatine. There is every, especially internal, probability that the Greek of the ancient writers is nearer the original than the Sinaitic.

The Apostolical Fathers: A Critical Account of Their Genuine Writings and of Their Doctrines (1864)
James Donaldson
https://books.google.com/books?id=Qd8CAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA390 (1874)
https://books.google.com/books?id=StcCAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA310 (1864)


Donaldson.jpg


3 Vis. ii. 3.

===========================================

Codex Sinaiticus Project
Q93 f2r, Hermas 7:4
http://codexsinaiticus.org/en/manuscript.aspx?folioNo=2&lid=en&quireNo=93&side=r&zoomSlider=0

. εριϲ δε μαξιμω ε̣ιδου θλιψειϲ ερχεται εαν ϲοι φανη δοκη παλιν αρνηϲαι εγγυϲ κϲ τοιϲ επιϲτρεφομενοιϲ ωϲ γεγραπται εν τω ε ελδαδ και ωδατ μωδατ μωδατ τοιϲ προφητευϲαϲιν εν (verso) τη ερημω τω λαω ·
Lightfoot

Hermas 3[7]:4 But thou shalt say to Maximus, "Behold tribulation cometh (upon thee), if thou think fit to deny a second time. The Lord is nigh unto them that turn unto him, as it is written in Eldad and Modat, who prophesied to the people in the wilderness."
https://carm.org/shepherd-of-hermas

Ante-Nicene Christian Library
Frederick Crombie translation - (1827-1889)
https://books.google.com/books?id=aS88AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA12
https://books.google.com/books?id=ZYBPAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA331

Blessed are all they who practise righteousness, for they shall never be destroyed. Now you will tell Maximus: Lo! 1 tribulation cometh on. If it seemeth good to thee, deny again. The Lord is near to them who return unto Him, as it is written in Eldad and Modat,who prophesied to the people in the wilderness.”

1 Now you will say: Lo! great tribulation cometh on.— Vat.
Lo! exceedingly great tribulation cometh on.—Lips.

PBodmer 38

PBodmer 38 cover.jpg


PBodmer 38 section.jpg


In the quote above, when it said
"E sembra presuppore (ma dopo Μαξιμω) μεγαλη."
E seems to presuppose (But after 'Maximo'), megale."
E is Ethiopic
is the note on p. 73 is saying that Ethiopic translation seems to reflect Maximus rather than magna?

Bodmer 38 having:
ις δε Μαχιμω ιδου θλιψεις ερχε

the same dubious reading as Sinaiticus, that looks like it comes from a Latin retorversion, lessens the ability to use this as a singular late dating Sinaiticus evidence.


Maximw: mana L1 (Magno em. Hilgenfeld); anche il Paris. Lat. 11553 (Sangermanensis1) non utilizzato finora per per il testo di L1 ha magna ecce tribulatio che deve essere mantenuto; E sembra presupporte (ma dopo Maxivmw)/ megavlh.

Maximw: manuscript L1 (Great em. Hilgenfeld); also the Paris Lat. 11553 (Sangermanesus) not used so far for text of L1 behold a great tribulation which must be maintained; And it seems it presupports (but after Maxivmw)/ megavlh.

Anger & Dinsdorf (1856) have the correct megale.

Page 9, Visions II, 3
Ereis de idou thlipsis erchetai megale sfodra.
Ερεισ δε ιδου θλιψις ερχεται μαγαλη σφοδρα

However, per Tischendorf, the corruption was in his text (this is from his post Anger publication)


Tischendorf, 1856, page 5, Visions II, 3

Ereis de Maximo Idou thlipsis erchetai
Ερεις δε Μαξιμω (6) Ιδου θλιψις ερχεται
The footnote:
6) ερεις δε μαξιμω: ita prorsus apogr.

That means "exactly like the apograph" -
Exactly what the copy in front of me says.
So Anger and Dindorf changed the text! Tischendorf says he wrote it as the text SAYS.


==================


The idea is simple ..

there is nobody named Maximo / Maximus in Hermas, yet the Sinaiticus Greek has Maximus due to the late Latin-->Greek error

There was a translation to Latin and in the Latin "great tribulation" changed when the "great" became maximo -- this loose Latin Palatine text retroverts back into the Greek (and then to Sinaiticus) where it forces the faux text "say to Maximus, tribulation" when the original Greek has the great tribulation.


A good question is whether ANY early Greek supports Maximus and whether it is simply close to iron-clad evidence of a late Latin retroversion. So far, it looks late.

===============

In David's book p. Is the World's Oldest Bible a Fake? 153


But now we come to maximum overkill. As I said, all but one of the Latin translations of the Shepherd of Hermas are pretty much the same. But one stands out: the Palatine Codex 150 of the Vatican Library.

And one example above all convinced me that Simonides’ Lipsiensis and the Sinaiticus Hermas both seem back-translated from the Vatican Palatine Codex: Visions ii.3. There is more than one numbering system. Online it’s called Hermas 7:4.
David book 2.jpg


As Donaldson showed, it’s supposed to say “But say thou, behold, great tribulation cometh.” In Latin, great is “magna.” In Greek, great is “megale.” And “thlipsis megale” is exactly the term “great tribulation” used three times in the New Testament.

But the Vatican’s Palatine Codex changed “magna” to “maximo.” That’s like changing “great” to “greatest.” Or, Maximo could be the name of a person, “Maximus.” Either way, it’s the wrong word. Guess what Simonides’ Lipsiensis says? Maximo!

Guess what the Sinaiticus did with the Greek? It also transliterated Maximo!


David second pic.jpg

In fact, in Donaldson’s words, “Now we find that the text of the Pastor of Hermas found in the Sinaitic codex is substantially the same as that given in the Athos manuscript. The variations are comparatively slight.”

He also wrote:


Then there is a considerable number of passages preserved to us in Greek by Origen and other writers. The Sinaitic Greek differs often from this Greek, and agrees with the Latin translation, especially the Palatine.
And there isn’t anything earlier they could have copied.

Additional analysis with David W. Daniels:

The Greek would have been:
thlipsis θλιψιν for tribulation and
megale μεγαλη for great
"great tribulation"

correct Greek word)--> megale, μεγαλη

As is seen in the early papyri.

p. 73 of Papyrus Bodmer XXXVIII, Erma: Il Pastory (Ia-IIIa visione) (Cologny-Geneve: Fondation Martin Bodmer, 1991)
"Behold a great tribulation" - that must be maintained.
Also on p. 73:
"E sembra presuppore (ma dopo Μαξιμω) μεγαλη."
Seems to presuppose (But after 'Maximo'), megale

and this is in the NT with tribulation.
Matthew 24:21 θλιψις μεγαλη
Revelation 2:22 (accusative case) θλιψιν μεγαλην

==========================================

the general Latin Vulgate texts say:
magna - which means "great" and corresponds to "megale" μεγαλη in Greek

L1 (Latin Vulgate) is "magna ecce tribulatio che deve essert mantenuto"

(μεγαλη translated correctly to Latin) -- magna

==========================================

the corrupted Latin would be as in the Palatine (Palatinus) and this error for "great" is ONLY in this one spot:
error: maximo (maximum - greatest) instead of the correct
magna - magno (great). - that's "great" which is a comparative, they should never have changed magno to maximo

maximo makes no sense back translated into Greek.

(maximus is an intensive - a superlative)

==========================================

Sinaiticus Latin retroversion error

(Greek word brought back from wrong Latin into Sinaiticus) Μαξιμω ( μαξιμω )

==========================================

Retroversion Error

(correct Greek word)--> megale, μεγαλη
(translated correctly to Latin) -- magna
(Latin tweak, change of form) -- maximo
(Greek word from wrong Latin becomes name) — Maximo Μαξιμω
(μαξιμω in Sinaiticus leads to nonsensical variant “speak to Maximus”)
Question for research.

We want to see if the name error existed in the Latin.

If the Palatine Codex 150 actually has the word capitalized or not.
If not - then it's a superlative for a comparative, greatest for great.
If it's capitalized, the copyist take it for a person, Maximus.

Either way the Greek is wrong with Maximus and has come from the late Palatine.

Another question is the date of the Ethiopic ms and how it got a dual reading.
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
Barnabas edition - emendations and historical speculations previously proposed by modern scholars

"Barnabas... and it contains many of the conjectural emendations previously proposed by scholars."

James Donaldson (1864)
https://books.google.com/books?id=tMlDAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA254

(SEE ABOVE)
noch die Fragmente des Hirten ab, einer Schrift von glei-
chem Ansehen mit Barnabas, die im Originaltexte für
gänzlich verloren gegolten hatte, bis ihn 1855 der viel-
berufene Grieche Simonides, theils abschriftlich theils in
drei Papierblätteru des 14. Jahrhunderts, vom Berg Athos
nach Leipzig brachte. Aus mehreren Gründen hatte ich
diesen an vielfacher Verderbniss leidenden Text für eine
mittelalterliche Rückübersetzung aus dem Latein ange-
sehen; der uralte Sinaitext überzeugte mich bald, dass
diese Ansicht, wenigstens in Bezug auf das Ganze, eine
irrthümliche gewesen.

Quote from Donaldson about proposed emendations that made it into Barnabas
http://earlywritings.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=21748

This is very similar to the phenomenon of gearing a forgery to include the historical speculations of scholars.
As discussed:


"warnings of Lykurgos, could not resist the investigations of the profoundly learned Egyptian scholar, Lepsius, who was the first to detect the cooked-up text, partly derived from his own works and the works of Chevalier Bunsen" - Simonides

Gentlemen's Magazine (1856)
https://books.google.com/books?id=bBg2AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA441

And this next explanation is stronger.

About 1855, Simonides offered to Karl Richard Lepsius, then Professor of Egyptology at Berlin and considered the founder of modern Egyptology, a Greek manuscript written by one Uranius of Alexandria and containing a history of the kings of Egypt. Delighted to find an ancient work that so precisely confirmed his own theories on the early history of Egypt, Lepsius advanced 2,000 thalers to the Prussian Academy to allow it to buy the manuscript (assuming a rough equivalency between an 1855 thaler and an 1855 dollar, that would be some $60,000 today).

The Jesus' Wife Papyrus in the History of Forgery (2015)
Christopher. Jones
http://gospel-thomas.net/JWF_NTS_Jones.pdf

The precise confirmation should have been a warning, but it played to the pride of Lepsius.

And I believe similar is proposed in the NT. Emendations that match other proposals (perhaps "eye of a needle" changed would qualify, Matthew 19:24).

Even discussed by Jan Krans.
http://vuntblog.blogspot.com/2018/01/amsterdam-database-of-new-testament.html

This matching of historical speculation is discussed in the BCHF forum as well.

Sinaiticus - Hermas, Barnabas linguistic, history anomalies
http://earlywritings.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=21748

Where I do indicate we should be cautious about the Donaldson quote, as we do not have the specifics.


Simply put, Donaldson, for linguistic reasons, believes that the Barnabas text is not an authentic 4th-century Greek text. Later, he goes into this more.

Note: his reference to: "contains many of the conjectural emendations previously proposed by scholars" may be ironic. It has often occurred that non-genuine texts base themselves on modern scholarship to fill in the gaps, and has been a smoking ink-spot. And Simonides was accused of using published texts and emendation suggestion improvements at times. However, I would not press the point without first knowing many of the emendations, and also whether they were published as a group, and how strong are the matches.
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
This quote is special, and should get its own thread.

"There are many circumstances in this narrative calculated to awaken suspicion, and there are other circumstances of an equally suspicious nature which I have not mentioned. But those who are most competent to judge, have allowed that it seems a genuine ancient manuscript."
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
===========================================

εριϲ δε μαξιμω ε̣ιδου θλιψειϲ ερχεται


=========================

magnus, magna -um, maior -or -us, maximus -a -um ADJ
large, great; powerful; big; tall; long; broad; extensive; spacious;


=>maximo

maxi.mo ADJ 1 1 DAT S M SUPER
maxi.mo ADJ 1 1 DAT S N SUPER
maxi.mo ADJ 1 1 ABL S M SUPER
maxi.mo ADJ 1 1 ABL S N SUPER
magnus, magna -um, maior -or -us, maximus -a -um ADJ
large, great; powerful; big; tall; long; broad; extensive; spacious;
maxi.mo ADJ 0 0 DAT S M SUPER
maxi.mo ADJ 0 0 DAT S N SUPER
maxi.mo ADJ 0 0 ABL S M SUPER
maxi.mo ADJ 0 0 ABL S N SUPER
maxi ADJ
greatest/biggest/largest; longest; oldest; highest, utmost; leading, chief;
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
From Bill Brown\
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/bibleversiondiscussionboard/viewtopic.php?p=73704#p73704
maybe
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/bibleversiondiscussionboard/sinaiticus-nonsense-2020-t6253.html
maybe
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/bib...ime-of-year-again-folks-t5961-s20.html#p73704

He gives Donaldson the following words as being "late"

Bounos - first occurs in the 5th century BC and is found in Luke 3:5 and in the dative form in Luke 23:30.
Sumbios - first occurs in Aristotle (4th c BC) and also in the Testaments of the 12 patriarchs, finalized by 2nd century CE
Katachuma - occurs in Aristophanes (who lived 4th and 5th century BC)

America The Babylon - 2 | PDF | Bible Prophecy - Scribd
1667150373581.png

https://www.scribd.com › document › America-the-Babyl...
... that is also found in Luke 3:5 as it sits almost side by side with the word "hora". Now this word for hill that we see in Luke 3:5 is the word "bounos".
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
three of the four words he says in 1874 (p316) are not found elsewhere or only in Suida and a later author, are now attested in pre-Christian and early Christian literature (see Montanari's dictionary). The fourth (anthropopoiètos) is a verbal form, the verb is attested as well.
Joseph Verheyden -

This is only Barnabas
1680047721204.png


1667173787429.png
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
More from the 1877 Theological Review, Donaldson.
(note he helps separate the Dressel and Tischendorf arguments.)

Tischendorf edited the three leaves and the genuine copy in Dressel’s Apostolic Fathers, and it was seen at once that the Greek corresponded much more nearly with the Palatine version than with the Vulgate. Tischendorf maintained strongly that the Greek text which he edited was a re-translation from the Latin. Soon after was published an Ethiopic version of the Pastor of Hermas. It differed from the Vulgate and the Palatine versions and the Leipzig Codex, and added complications to the question. Before its publication, Tischendorf discovered his Codex Sinaiticus, with the Pastor of Hermas nearly complete in Greek at the end. The Greek of the Codex may be pronounced nearly the same in substance with that of the Leipzig Codex, but there is great variety in the readings and forms. The difference, however, is not such as in the slightest degree to diminish the force of the arguments which Tischendorf adduced to prove that the Greek was a re-translation from the Latin. The critic, nevertheless, changed his opinion on falling in with the Sinaitic Codex. Strangely enough, just as the Greek of the Leipzig Codex was found to agree more with the recently discovered Palatine than with the Vulgate, so Schodde affirms that the Codex Sinaiticus agrees more with the recently discovered Ethiopic than with any other. Gebhardt thinks that Schodde has omitted to notice certain divergencies; but, on the whole, Schodde’s account may be taken to be correct.

Here, then, we have several representations of the Pastor of Hermas—the Vulgate and the Palatine versions, the Codex
of Leipzig and the Codex Sinaiticus, and the Ethiopic version.

How are we to account for the differences ? Which of them is nearest to the original Hermas ?

We do not intend to discuss these questions fully in this place. But we draw attention to some aspects of the question.
And first it may be noticed that all of them may lie regarded as giving a substantially true representation of the original
work, except the Ethiopic. The Ethiopic has unquestionably omitted or abbreviated large portions. Some of these omis-
sions might possibly be accounted for by the circumstance that the passages were not in the original Greek; but as
others of them were certainly made for dogmatic reasons, it is likely that the Ethiopic translator dealt somewhat freely
with his text.

...

p. 508-

The phenomena which gave rise to the opinion that the Greek was a re-translation are certainly very peculiar and
interesting. They form themselves into two classes.

First, there are words and grammatical forms and constructions which seem to indicate an age later than that of Hermas.
We need not go minutely into these. Dindorf has mentioned some in his Preface to Anger and Dindorf's edition of the Pastor of Hermas. Tischendorf has adduced a considerable number in his tractate in Dressel’s edition, “De Herma Graeco Lipsiensi.” He speaks there of the barbarous character of the Codex. And I have adduced a number in my Apostolical Fathers. Secondly, there are expressions, and even large passages, which seem to be translated from the Latin; and there is a considerable admixture of Latin words in the Greek text

Dindorf in Preface of Anger and Dindorf

"Hermae Pastor Graece Primum Ediderunt "
https://books.google.com/books?id=QEVMAAAAYAAJ&pg=PR5
Anger V to XXV
Dindorf - XXVI- XXXII

Sample from Visions III,15 (discussed by Tischendorf also)
p. xxviii
1670475187796.png


“De Herma Graeco Lipsiensi.”
Tischendorf
p. 44-55
https://books.google.com/books?id=_xpWAAAAMAAJ&pg=PR44


p. 510
1670473315199.png

p. 512-513

So
the writer of the Shepherd was without doubt a resident in
Italy. It is possible that lie may have been born and brought
up in Home. Latin may have been his native tongue. If so.
then his Greek style would be largely modified by his I .a tin
mode of thought, especially if he were not a purist in style.
There is 110 doubt that the writer of the Shepherd has intro-
duced Latin words and Latin phrases, and there are some
passages of considerable length which seem to us to read
exactly as if they were translated from the Latin. But do
these warrant the inference that they were translated ? May
not the writer have thought them out in Latin and written
them in Greek ?
The other way of accounting for the peculiarity is to sup-
pose that the work was modernized in the course of time. The
book was popular among the Greeks. The number of MSS. of
the Vulgate translation is proof that it was not unpopular also
among the Latin-speaking Christians of the Middle Ages.
Like popular books, it suffered all kinds of treatment. It was
abridged, as the Ethiopic translation shews. It was carelessly
transcribed, a fact proved by the numerous omissions that
occur in the Sinaitic and Leipzig Codices
, and divergencies of
readings in the Vulgate and Palatine. Its contents also were

1670473735064.png


Exordium p. 513 beginning

p. 514
BACK to POST #2

 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
Donaldson Verheyden Brown Kirk DiVietro
This goes with 7,8,9 above

A CLOSER LOOK AT FOUR WORDS HIGHLIGHTED BY DAVID DANIELS

1680203073252.png

Donaldson (1864)
https://books.google.com/books?id=60gtAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA309
Donaldson (1874)
Daniels

1680196992859.png

1680197049166.png


ajkribeuvsqai akribeusthai

ajnqrwpopoivhto" anthropopoiatos

pareivsdusi" pareisdusis

eksferndona'n eksferndonan

bohqoiv boathoi

pevmyuai pempsuai

Daniels Section

sumyelion sumpselion

kerbikarion kerbikarion

lention lention

karpasinon karpasinon


=========================================
συμψελιον

Daniels
https://books.google.com/books?id=bXJGDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA151
1680202797118.png

The group of men is sitting on a συμψέλιον (sumpselion) which is like a bench,
https://leorningcniht.wordpress.com/2011/09/27/shepherd-of-hermas-11th-mandate/
“I saw a couch of ivory (sumpselion elephantinon) placed there ..."
Covered with a linen cushion, it is the sort used at trials or spectacles (sumpselion, a word transliterated from the Latin subsellium).

IN P. OXY
Other words normally used.


=========================================

κβρβικαριον

=========================================

Xeimov

=========================================

καρπασιηον
https://pdfhost.io/v/ZwEB.NO0p_The_...Arrians_Account_of_the_Voyage_of_Nearkhos.pdf
1680197668919.png



=========================================

P. 3,15. dij ajnovdou ajsicivou1] Instead of these words
the Latin interpreter read something quite different,
and he took me through a certain place to the right, i.e.
diaV tovpou tinoV" proV" dexiavn2. It is true that here
the Greek seems to be superior to the Latin a[nodo"
a[skio"3, and it fits very well topw/ krhmnwvcdei4 what
Hermas says in the next words. On the other hand, a
little later
.
18. diabaV" toVn potamovn ejkei'non h\lqon eij" taV
o[cqa",5 It is more probable that the writing in the
margin of the codex is written eij" taV oJmalav6 in response to the Latin I came to the plain. After
crossing the steep streams and passing through the river, Hermas reaches a plain adjacent to the other
bank of the river, where he bends his knees.

1 Di anodou asixiou
2 dia topou tinos pros deksian
3 anodos askios
4 topo kramnoxdei
5 diabas ton potamon ekeinon alqon eis ta oxqas
6 eis ta homala
tou en hagiois patros hamon Athanasiou arxiepiskopou
Aleksandreias Didaskaliai pros Antiocon ton arxonta
pros Antiochon doukan
 

Attachments

  • 1680202165129.png
    1680202165129.png
    1.4 KB · Views: 132
  • 1680202165148.jpeg
    1680202165148.jpeg
    540 bytes · Views: 123
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
συμψέλιον, ου, τό (POxy. 921; Sb 4292, 4. Written σεμψέλλιον: PGrenf. II 111, 37; CWessely, Wiener Studien 24, ’02, 99f. Lat. loanw.=‘subsellium’. Loanw. in rabb.) bench Hv 3, 1, 4; 7; 3, 2, 4; 3, 10, 1; 5; 3, 13, 3; m 11:1.* Arndt, William et al. A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature : a translation and adaption of the fourth revised and augmented edition of Walter Bauer’s Griechisch-deutsches Worterbuch zu den Schrift en des Neuen Testaments und der ubrigen urchristlichen Literatur 1979: 781. Print.

this is the Bible of lexicons. says it is a loan word from Latin
and those are the references where it appears in Hermas

kerbikarion κερβικάριον, ου, τό (Lat. loanw., cervical. Exx. in CWessely, Wiener Studien 24, ’02, 99ff. Cf. e.g. PFay. 347; BGU 814 (1895-1933) , 11; Sb 7994, 15; Herodian Gramm. [II AD] in the Lex. Vind. (Lexicon Vindobonense) p. 312, 2 declares that the use of the foreign word κερβ. for ὑπαυχένιον=‘a pillow under the neck’ is a barbarism; loanw. in rabb.) pillow κ. λινοῦν a linen p. Hv 3, 1, 4.* Arndt, William et al. A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature : a translation and adaption of the fourth revised and augmented edition of Walter Bauer’s Griechisch-deutsches Worterbuch zu den Schrift en des Neuen Testaments und der ubrigen urchristlichen Literatur 1979: 429. Print.


looking at subellium .. is it in Greek in POxy 921 .. and what is Hv?
Oxyrhynchus papyra 921 don't know the date
Hv is hermas


fayon towns papyra 347 and some german names of Egyptian papyra but no dates. the Herodian Grammar appears to date from 11 AD


lention λέντιον, ου, τό (Lat. loanw.: linteum, also in rabb.; Peripl. Eryth. c. 6; Arrian, Peripl. 4; Inschr. v. Magn. 116, 34; POxy. 929, 10 λίνον καὶ λέντιον; Ostraka II 1611, 1; Hahn 235; 262; 266) linen cloth Hv 3, 1, 4; towel J 13:4f (Vi. Aesopi I c. 61 of a woman who is preparing to wash another person’s feet: περιζωσαμένη λέντιον). M-M.* Arndt, William et al. A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature : a translation and adaption of the fourth revised and augmented edition of Walter Bauer’s Griechisch-deutsches Worterbuch zu den Schrift en des Neuen Testaments und der ubrigen urchristlichen Literatur 1979: 471. Print.

Periplus Maris Erytharaei 1 AD

PO oxy = Oxy again



UWilcken, Griesbach Ostraka I, II

here's a book for you

LH Rom u. Romanismus im Griech (latinisms in Greek) Osten 1906 p 235, 262 & 266


Vitae Aesopi, ed AEberhard 1872

MM = Moultan and Milligan I have that over in the office

karpasinon καρπάσινος, η, ον (Dionys. Hal. 2, 68, 5; Strabo 7, 2, 3; Esth 1:6) made of fine flax (Lat. carbasus; כַּרְפַּס) λέντιον κ. (v.l. καρπάσιον) a fine linen cloth Hv 3, 1, 4 (Tibullus 3, 2, 21 carbasea lina).—Olck, Pauly-W. III 1572ff.* Arndt, William et al. A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature : a translation and adaption of the fourth revised and augmented edition of Walter Bauer’s Griechisch-deutsches Worterbuch zu den Schrift en des Neuen Testaments und der ubrigen urchristlichen Literatur 1979: 404. Print.
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
ἀνάκειμαι impf. ἀνεκείμην (Pind., Hdt.+; inscr., pap., LXX; Jos., Ant. 3, 38 al.) lie, recline. 1. gener. (opp. ἑστηκέναι) Mk 5:40 v.l.; Hv 3, 12, 2. 2. otherw. always of reclining at table. equals dine (Aristot. and Diphilus [300 BC] in Athen. 1 p. 23c; Polyb. 13, 6, 8; BGU 344; 1 Esdr 4:11; cf. Phryn. 216f Lob.) αὐτοῦ ἀνακειμένου ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ as he was dining in the house Mt 9:10.—26:7; Mk 14:18; 16:14. ἀ. μετά τινος Mt 26:20. σύν τινι J 12:2; ἀ. ἐν τῷ κόλπῳ τινός lean on someone’s breast=take the place of honor, in case it was the breast of the head of the house 13:23 (cf. Lk 16:23, where sc. ἀνακείμενον [some mss. supply ἀναπαυόμενον]). Pliny, Epist. 4, 22, 4 cenabat Nerva cum paucis; Veiento proximus atque etiam in sinu recumbebat.—ὁ ἀνακείμενος the one who is reclining, the guest Mt 22:10f; Mk 6:26; Lk 22:27 (opp. ὁ διακονῶν); J 6:11; 13:28,—For pictures on ancient reliefs and vases cf. e.g. JJung, Leben u. Sitten d. Römer I 1883, 24; ABaumeister, Denkmäler d. klass. Altert. I 1885, 365f. M-M.* Arndt, William et al. A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature : a translation and adaption of the fourth revised and augmented edition of Walter Bauer’s Griechisch-deutsches Worterbuch zu den Schrift en des Neuen Testaments und der ubrigen urchristlichen Literatur 1979: 55. Print.


ὑπαυχένιον Hupauxenion







Kirk​


Kirk DiVietro

Herodian Greek grammarian Alternate titles: Aelius Herodianus, Herodianus Technicus Written and fact-checked by Last Updated: Article History Flourished: c.101 - c.200 Notable Family Members: father Apollonius Dyscolus Subjects Of Study: Greek language accent grammar Herodian, in full Aelius Herodianus, byname Herodianus Technicus , (flourished 2nd century AD), Greek grammarian of Alexandria who is important primarily for his work on Greek accents. A son of the grammarian Apollonius Dyscolus, Herodian settled in Rome under the emperor Marcus Aurelius, to whom he dedicated a treatise on accentuation and quantity entitled Katholikē prosōdia (“General Prosody”). Extracts from it survive. His Peri monerous lexeos (“On Anomalous Words”), a discourse in which he disputes his father’s position on analogy, survives complete, and the titles of about 30 other works by him are known, though only a few extracts from them survive. A number of spurious and doubtful works were also attributed to him.












Write to Kirk DiVietro








Kirk​



anakeimai - to recline to eat - does not appear in Hermas






Kirk
Kirk DiVietro


klino - to recline or lay on a couch







Kirk​


Kirk DiVietro

κλίνω 1 aor. ἔκλινα; pf. κέκλικα; 1 aor. pass. ἐκλίθην (Bl-D. §76, 1; W-S. §13, 9f) (Hom.+; inscr., pap., LXX, Philo, Joseph., Test. 12 Patr.). 1. trans.—a. incline, bend, bow τὴν κεφαλήν the head of Jesus as he was dying J 19:30 (but since the bowing of the head came before the giving up of his spirit, and since esp. in the Fourth Gosp. the Passion is a voluntary act of Jesus to the very last, the bowing must not be regarded as a sign of weakness; the Crucified One acted of his own accord. Cf. BGU 954, 5 κλίνω τ. κεφαλήν μου κατενώπιόν σου). τὸ πρόσωπον εὒς τὴν γῆν bow one’s face to the ground Lk 24:5.—b. lay (down) τὴν κεφαλήν (to sleep) Mt 8:20; Lk 9:58. c. pass. lean, fall (over) λέγει κύριος (where?) ὅταν ξύλον κλιθῇ καὶ ἀναστῇ B 12:1.—d. fig. cause to fall, turn to flight (as early as Hom.; Jos., Ant. 14, 416)παρεμβολὰς κ. ἀλλοτρίων Hb 11:34. 2. intr. (Bl-D. §308; Rob. 800) decline, be far spent (X.+; PHib. 38, 8 [252/1 BC]) of the day Lk 9:12; 24:29 (cf. Apollon. Rhod. 1, 452 κλίνοντος ἠελίοιο; Polyb. 3, 93, 7; Arrian, Anab. 3, 4, 2; Jer 6:4 κέκλικεν ἡ ἡμέρα). M-M.* Arndt, William et al. A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature : a translation and adaption of the fourth revised and augmented edition of Walter Bauer’s Griechisch-deutsches Worterbuch zu den Schrift en des Neuen Testaments und der ubrigen urchristlichen Literatur 1979: 436. Print.







Kirk​


Kirk DiVietro

klino to recline on a couch = no usage in Hermas







You sent​

 

Steven Avery

Administrator
The four words from Gardthausen on Donaldson

sunxunnou,
sunio,
titho,
afiousi

1688388665605.png

cuvxuwou, no w, it is nn
cuviuj,
τιθώ, *** given
άφίουα

Bounos - first occurs in the 5th century BC and is found in Luke 3:5 and in the dative form in Luke 23:30.
Sumbios - first occurs in Aristotle (4th c BC) and also in the Testaments of the 12 patriarchs, finalized by 2nd century CE
Katachuma - occurs in Aristophanes (who lived 4th and 5th century BC)



===================================
optative.
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
OPTATATIVES IN AV /TR

Luke 1:38 And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.

Luke 20:16 He shall come and destroy these husbandmen, and shall give the vineyard to others. And when they heard it, they said, God forbid.

Acts 5:24 Now when the high priest and the captain of the temple and the chief priests heard these things, they doubted of them whereunto this would grow.

Rom 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged. Rom 3:6 God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world?

Rom 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law. Rom 6:2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

Rom 6:15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. Rom 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

Rom 7:13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.

Rom 9:14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. Rom 11:1 I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. Rom 11:11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy. 1 Cor 6:15 Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. Gal 2:17 But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid. Gal 3:21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law. Gal 6:14 But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.



optatives in KJV TR
 
Last edited:
Top