Jump to content

basic CNTTS variation question


Kristin
 Share

Recommended Posts

This question is super basic, but I just want to double check that I am understanding the CNTTS correctly. So I will clarify my understanding, and I would appreciate confirmation or correction about this.

 

My understanding is that the 0 refers to the base text which means it is identical to the Greek Bible. (I am aware that the NA28 is a different Bible then the UBS3 which Acc doesn't sell, but my understanding is that the two texts are really close. So we can pretend I am reading the UBS3...) So 0 stands for the identical reading as the normal Greek Bible I am reading.

 

So for example, Mt 1:1 says Βίβλος γενέσεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ υἱοῦ Δαυὶδ υἱοῦ Ἀβραάμ. That means the 0 text also says Βίβλος γενέσεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ υἱοῦ Δαυὶδ υἱοῦ Ἀβραάμ.

 

Skipping down to variation 1:1-3.0, it just has the word Χριστου and nothing else. This means that this mss is completely identical to the base text apart from that Χριστου no longer has a circumflex.

 

Under that is another variation with again only one word of χ̅υ̅. So that means that the text is identical to the base text except for Christ in nomen sacrum. So these mss following this variation say Βίβλος γενέσεως Ἰησοῦ χ̅υ̅ υἱοῦ Δαυὶδ υἱοῦ Ἀβραάμ. Is this correct?

So following that logic, that is how it works with all variations, that the CNTTS just lists the variation, so if they don't say anything (as in, not typing out the rest of the sentence) that means the verse is the same as the base except this one little thing. If there are more variations, then it will list more and not just one word.

 

Am I understanding this correctly?

Thank you for anyone who can clarify this.

Sincerely,

Kristin

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 1:1-3.0, Χριστου is not a variant: it’s the base text. The code 0 in the third column tells you that. It’s not the base text of the whole verse, but just for this variant. The sole variant is in the following row. It is an insignificant variant (code 1), and specifically a nomen sacrum (code X).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi @jlm,

Thank you for the explanation, and I think I understand. If you don't mind, I am going to attach a screenshot with my understanding, and I would appreciate it if you can confirm everything I am saying is correct.

 

I also have two points which I am unsure about, which I put in orange. The first concerns duplicated words in missing words, and the second is just double checking what I am 99% sure about, regarding which texts follow the base text. I had been noting circumflexes, but now that I see that is irrelevant it is changing my understanding, so I would feel better just having it confirmed.

 

Thank you again for the clarification.

 

Kristin

 

333993801_Bildschirmfoto2021-09-20um14_50_17.thumb.png.e4bccb6bf3aa723450a05b117e065d9a.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On variation unit 1:1-1.0, you are correct @Kristin. The Greek words in the apparatus are written without accents because older manuscripts are generally written without accents. So if the apparatus were to include accents, it would be suggesting that the manuscripts indicate a particular accent when they actually give no information.

 

Variation unit 1:1-0.0 is a different kind of variation unit, namely L, which stands for "Lacunae, this variation unit appears at the beginning of each verse and shows all manuscripts that are partially extant or not extant for this verse or passage." In this context, "the same as the Greek Bible" just means that they include text for the verse. That text may differ from the UBS3, and in fact it does differ (in insignificant ways) for all of the Greek manuscripts, as the other variation units for this verse indicate. The verse is written out in full for two manuscripts because these have partial lacunae (variation code 98), and the clearest way to show exactly what is missing is to write out the whole verse as it would be expected to read in that manuscript, and put the missing parts in brackets. "υιου(2)" is the second occurence of the word υιου found in the UBS3 text of the verse. The corresponding place in manuscript 579 is illegible. The distinction between υιου(1) and υιου(2) is important in the variation units that follow, since the units are considering one word at a time: the numbers are the only way to distinguish which υιου the apparatus is talking about.

 

With the CNNTS apparatus, you have to use instant details a lot to see what all the codes mean. Otherwise, it's almost impossible to understand what the apparatus is saying.

Edited by jlm
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, jlm said:

In 1:1-3.0, Χριστου is not a variant: it’s the base text. The code 0 in the third column tells you that. It’s not the base text of the whole verse, but just for this variant. The sole variant is in the following row. It is an insignificant variant (code 1), and specifically a nomen sacrum (code X).

 

Thanx for this @jlm. I had been wondering with Kristin's question how the variation unit itself was demarcated. I knew there had to be a way.

 

Thx

D

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, jlm said:

With the CNNTS apparatus, you have to use instant details a lot to see what all the codes mean. Otherwise, it's almost impossible to understand what the apparatus is saying.

 

They are also all described together in the front matter which is worth the read I haven't yet given it.

 

Thx

D

Edited by Λύχνις Δαν
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi @jlm,

Thank you very much for the detailed explanation! I really appreciate it, and that clarifies things a great deal.

 

If you do not mind, I have a few questions, as this has been really challenging to understand. I have been studying it for months and every time I think I finally have it... well, so I have two main questions. First is dealing with what should be in brackets, which I will post below. The second deals with the mss which are even included, for which I am going to post two screenshots. I couldn't really ask it on only one picture, so I am including part one and part two.

 

@Λύχνις Δαν, concerning the user's manual at the beginning, yes, I have for sure read that... a few times... but I sometimes feel like I need a manual to understand the manual.

 

Looking at Mt 1:1 as a random example for P1 βιβλος γενεσεως ι̅υ̅ χ̅υ̅ υ̅υ̅(1) δαυιδ is not in brackets, so that is part what is actually included in P1. When you get to [υ̅υ̅(2)] , that is in brackets, which means that is NOT part of the text.

 

If looking at Mt 9:27 and 038, there is a variation of παραγωντι and that is all that is written. That is NOT saying that 038 contains the entire verse and the only difference is the ω. It is rather saying that this lets me start creating the verse. So Mt 9:27 starts with Καὶ παράγοντι ἐκεῖθεν τῷ Ἰησοῦ, so to write out what 038 says I would need to say [Καὶ] παράγωντι [ἐκεῖθεν τῷ Ἰησοῦ] and if I want to see if I can take other words, such as Καὶ out of brackets, I would need to look for other words where 038 also has variants.

 

I see below that 038 also has εκιθεν τω ιησου. So now my little verse says [Καὶ] παράγωντι εκιθεν τω ιησου. Thus 038 does not have και at the beginning, and so that needs to remain in brackets.

 

It appears that the sole reason why the Greek Bible even has και is hanging on a lone manuscript of 33. No other mss seems to include it.

Sincerely,

Kristin
 

Part 1 - mt 1.png

Part 2 - mt 9.png

Edited by Kristin
oops, I forgot the screenshots. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kristin said:

Looking at Mt 1:1 as a random example for P1 βιβλος γενεσεως ι̅υ̅ χ̅υ̅ υ̅υ̅(1) δαυιδ is not in brackets, so that is part what is actually included in P1. When you get to [υ̅υ̅(2)] , that is in brackets, which means that is NOT part of the text.

 

If looking at Mt 9:27 and 038, there is a variation of παραγωντι and that is all that is written. That is NOT saying that 038 contains the entire verse and the only difference is the ω. It is rather saying that this lets me start creating the verse. So Mt 9:27 starts with Καὶ παράγοντι ἐκεῖθεν τῷ Ἰησοῦ, so to write out what 038 says I would need to say [Καὶ] παράγωντι [ἐκεῖθεν τῷ Ἰησοῦ] and if I want to see if I can take other words, such as Καὶ out of brackets, I would need to look for other words where 038 also has variants.

 

I see below that 038 also has εκιθεν τω ιησου. So now my little verse says [Καὶ] παράγωντι εκιθεν τω ιησου. Thus 038 does not have και at the beginning, and so that needs to remain in brackets.

 

It appears that the sole reason why the Greek Bible even has και is hanging on a lone manuscript of 33. No other mss seems to include it.


Yes, υ̅υ̅(2) is missing from P1. It happens that Wikipedia has a photo of this page, in which you can see that the upper right corner of the page is missing. It’s torn right after the word δαυιδ, and then the second line starts with αβρααμ. Also, you can see this page has no accents.

 

Regarding Mt 9:27, 33 is not listed on the first group because it has a lacuna. It is listed with code 98, partial lacunae, and then were shown what is missing or has to read. This time, parts of the verse have been replaced with ellipses, and instant details tells us these represent “the rest of the text within the reading.” So that’s where παραγοντι is hiding. 


You are correct about Mt 9:27 and 038.

 

As for the και at the beginning of the verse, since there are no variants, the apparatus is telling us that it is present in all the manuscripts that do not have lacunae.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...