Byzantine text-type
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (June 2007) |
The Byzantine text-type (also called Majority, Traditional, Ecclesiastical, Constantinopolitan, or Syrian) is one of several text-types used in textual criticism to describe and group the textual character of Greek New Testament manuscripts. It is the form found in the largest number of surviving manuscripts. It remains the form of the New Testament that is standard in the Greek Orthodox Church; and, considerably altered, also underlies the Textus Receptus Greek text used for most Reformation-era translations of the New Testament into vernacular languages. Modern translations, however, mostly use an Eclectic text, that conforms more often to the Alexandrian text-type.
Contents |
[edit] Manuscripts of the Byzantine text
The Byzantine text-type is the text-type with by far the largest number of surviving manuscripts, especially from the invention of the minuscule (lower case) handwriting in the 9th century. For example, of 522 complete or nearly complete manuscripts of the General Epistles collated by the Institute for New Testament Textual Research in Münster, Germany, 372 of them attest the Byzantine reading in at least 90% of 98 test places. Amongst the earliest surviving manuscripts, however, the position is reversed; there being only six manuscripts earlier than the 9th century conforming to the Byzantine text-type; of which the oldest, the 5th century Codex Alexandrinus, is Byzantine only in the Gospels, the rest of the New Testament being Alexandrian. By comparison, the Alexandrian text-type is witnessed by nine surviving uncials earlier than the ninth century (including the Codex Alexandrinus outside the Gospels); and is also usually considered to be demonstrated in three earlier papyri. Modern critical editions of the New Testament tend to conform most often to Alexandrian witnesses - especially Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus. The earliest of the Church Fathers to witness to a Byzantine text-type in their New Testament quotations is John Chrysostom (c.349 - 407). The earliest translation to witness to a Greek base conforming to the Byzantine text is the Syriac Peshitta; usually dated to the 4th Century.
The form of the Byzantine text found in the earliest witnesses varies considerably, and differs again from that which would predominate from the 9th century onwards; for example, no surviving Byzantine witness earlier than the eighth century includes the pericope adulterae (John 7:53 - 8:11). Amongst the bulk of later manuscripts however, it is generally possible to demonstrate a clear Byzantine majority reading for each variant; and a Greek New Testament text based on these majority readings - "The Majority Text" - has been produced by Zane C. Hodges and Arthur L. Farstad, although this text does not correspond to any one particular manuscript.
[edit] Characteristics of the Byzantine text
When manuscripts of the Byzantine text-type are compared to those of the Alexandrian text-type, the distinct Byzantine readings tend to show a greater tendency to smooth and well-formed Greek, they display fewer instances of textual variation between parallel Synoptic Gospel passages, and are less likely to present contrary or "difficult" issues of exegesis. For example, Mark 1:2 reads "As it is written in the prophets.." in the Byzantine text; whereas the same verse reads, "As it is written in Isaiah the prophet.." in all other early textual witnesses. Since the quotation introduced is partly from Malachi, the Byzantine form of the verse avoids the difficulty that might be adduced were it to be concluded that Mark was presenting a factual inaccuracy.
Although there are no consistent Byzantine witnesses amongst the early New Testament papyri, many distinctive Byzantine readings have been found in these texts - albeit in manuscripts that otherwise conform more to other text-types. Hence, many (and possibly most) distinctive Byzantine readings are likely to be early in date. Two broad explanations have been offered for this observation:
- that the Byzantine text-type transmits a text closest to the primary form of the New Testament books; whose early manuscript witnesses have not however survived, as this text-type predominated in regions where the climate did not favour the preservation of papyrus;
- that the Byzantine text represents a consistent exercise in textual compilation and correction from around the 4th century, the editors having eclectically selected those readings from a range of early manuscripts, that best conformed to their presupposed standards of the characteristics to be expected in the New Testament text.
[edit] Origin of the Byzantine text
Among those who believe that the Byzantine text is only a secondary witness to the autograph, there is some debate concerning the origin of the Byzantine text and the reason for its widespread use. The suggestions that have been put forward are:
- That Lucian of Antioch used his text critical skills to produce a recension. (Jerome makes separate references to Lucian's recensions of both old and new testaments).
- That Constantine I paid for the wide distribution of manuscripts which came from a common source. (There are several references in Eusebius of Caesarea to Constantine paying for manuscript production).
- That after the Western Roman Empire stopped using Greek, and because of Barbarian and Muslim invasions, the only church to actively preserve the Greek text was the Byzantine church, which exercised central control from the Apostolic See of Antioch and withstood the Muslims until the 15th century.
[edit] The Textus Receptus
The first printed edition of the Greek New Testament in 1516 was completed by Erasmus and published by Johann Froben of Basel on March 1, 1516. Due to the pressure of his publisher to bring their edition to market before the competing Complutensian Polyglot, Erasmus based his work on around half-dozen manuscripts, all of which dated from the twelfth century or later; and only one of which was not of the Byzantine text-type. Six verses that were not witnessed in any of these sources, he back-translated from the Latin Vulgate, and he also introduced many readings from the Vulgate and Church Fathers. This text came to be known as the Textus Receptus or received text after being thus termed by Bonaventura Elzevir, an enterprising publisher from the Netherlands, in his 1633 edition of Erasmus' text. The New Testament of the King James Version of the Bible was translated from editions of what was to become the Textus Receptus. If the "Majority Text" of Hodges and Farstad is taken to be the standard for the Byzantine text-type, then the The Textus Receptus differs from this in 1,838 Greek readings, of which 1,005 represent "translatable" differences[1]
[edit] Modern critical texts
Karl Lachmann (1850) was the first New Testament textual critic to produce an edition that broke with the Textus Receptus, relying mainly instead in manuscripts from the Alexandrian text-type. Although the majority of New Testament textual critics now favor a text that is Alexandrian in complexion, especially after the publication of Westcott and Hort's edition, there remain some proponents of the Byzantine text-type as the type of text most similar to the autographs. These critics include the editors of the Hodges and Farstad text (cited below), and the Robinson and Pierpoint text. Depending on which modern critical text is taken as an exemplar of the Alexandrian text-type, then this will differ from the Hodges and Farstad text in around 6,500 readings (Wallace 1989).
To give a feel for the difference between the Byzantine form of text and the Eclectic text, which is mainly Alexandrian in character, of 800 variation units in the Epistle of James collected by the Institute for New Testament Textual Research, the Byzantine and Eclectic texts are in agreement in 731 of the places (a rate of 92.3%). Many of the 69 disagreements involve differences in word order and other variants that do not appear as translatable differences in English versions. According to the preface to the New King James Version of the Bible, the Textus Receptus, the Alexandrian text-type and the Byzantine text-type are 85% identical (that is, of the variations that occur in any manuscript, only 15% actually differ between these three).
The Byzantine type is also found in modern Greek Orthodox editions. A new scientific edition of the Byzantine Text of John's gospel, funded by the United Bible Societies in response to a request from Eastern Orthodox Scholars, has begun in Birmingham, UK.
[edit] See also
[edit] Critical text
[edit] Majority text
[edit] Notes
- ^ Michael D. Marlowe states:[1] yet it differs from the Received Text in about a thousand places, most of them being trivial. while Daniel B. Wallace [2] has counted 1,838 differences between it and the Textus Receptus.
[edit] Further reading
- The Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text, Second Edition, Edited by Zane C. Hodges and Arthur L. Farstad, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, 1985. ISBN 0-8407-4963-5.
- The New Testament in the Original Greek - Byzantine Textform 2005, Edited by Maurice A. Robinson and William G. Pierpont, Chilton Book Publishing. ISBN 0-7598-0077-4.
- "Some Second Thoughts on the Majority Text", Daniel B. Wallace, Bibliotheca Sacra, vol. 146, 1989. 270-290.
- The Identity of the New Testament Text II, Wilbur N. Pickering, ThM PhD, http://www.revisedstandard.net/text/WNP/
- The Majority Text Society
- What about the Majority Text?, Michael D. Marlowe www.bible-researcher.com
