On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
Dr . Laurence ' s fiftll chapter is entitled , Comparison of Hie Colbert manuscript with A . Mistakes of Griesbach . Controverted reading 1 Tim * Hi . 16 . Mxisten . ee of the Alexandrine text problematical . Conclusion .
1 b p . 64 he informs us that Griesbacb , " notwithstanding his theory of classification , i « deciding upon the purity of a reading , seems principally guided by critical conjecture . "
Now this remark virtually acquits Griesbach of the charge of being unduly attached to any «« theory of classification , " whether it be established or his own . And what does Dr . L ,
mean by critical conjecture ? surely he employs these words in a very different sense from that . in which they are commonly understood . He shall explain this apparently formidable accusation . In the next page he tells us that Griesbach endeavours " to
point out , from general maxims of criticism , by investigating the internal marks of validity in their respective readings , the relative habits and value of' the Alexandrine and of the Western text . And this process our author thinks fit to style critical conjecture ! We leave the inference to our
readers . It was with reason that the ? learned Professor considered manuscripts as the most important of the sources whence corrections of the received text are to be derived . 65 , 66 . This also was the
opinion of Michael is , * who says , " they alone can be admitted as evidence , who simply report what they have heard and seen . " Griesbach professed to extract from six chapters in the Codex Colbert [ 17 ] all those readings on which he had formed a definite judgment—»
lecttones omnes , de quibus certo mthi constat . f His investigation of these was undertaken in order that he might fully illustrate the character and value of the Alexandrine and Western texts . But his enumeration'is , according to the Remarker , " strangely incorrect , as he omits one reading in the agreements , and not lews- than eighteen in
the disagreements . " We think that Griesbach purposely limited himself to the readings which wet have just — — ¦— . i i ¦ UJ ¦ ¦! m ^ m ^^ m . ¦ iiphV I * * Introd . &c . Vol . II . 16 & . t Symb . Critic . II . 89 . VOL . XII . 3 A
Untitled Article
described * and concerning the quality of which his mind had acquired a sufficient degree of satisfaction . If however we even rake the fact to be such as Dr . L . represents it , Griesbach ' s principle of classification remains utiimpeaehed . This intelligent and laborious editor was not , after all ,
completely accurate . He did not claim to be so : nor do we recollect that any such claim has ever been advanced in his behalf . We should feel and acknowledge some obligations to the Remarker , for assisting us to decide on the correctness or incorrectness of Griesbach ' s " enumeration ' of
readings , had the assistance been offered with greater modesty and distinctness . For Dr . L ., whose experience in the collation of manuscripts is comparatively slight , to assume the
individual readings of one of them as ** characteristical of it ' s class , in the absence of more direct testimony ^ might indeed be a bold measure . 7 J . Let it , nevertheless , be recollected that the eye and the discernment of Griesbach had
long been habituated to this task . It was not till after patient examination that he pronounced on the age and character of a manuscript . If by more direct testimony the Remarker means external evidence , let him shew whence it is to be obtained : or if he intends
to speak of plainer and stronger proofs than the manuscript itself affords , he will do us a favour by saying , where these are to be discovered . He attempts to illustrate this part of his reasoning by a number of observations on ' * the celebrated , the often discussed , and the long tortured reading of l Tim . iii . 16 , " in which
Griesbach ** proposes to . substitute o $ for Seo $ . " Griesbach ' s notes , in loc . to the last of his editions of the N . T ., contain his final and tnatureet thoughts on the reading of this passage . It is it case which demonstrates beyond contradiction that he relied on the
native excellence , and not on the number , of Codices manuscript ?' . The mass of manuscripts was opposed to him : but the best and the most ancient were on his side . «• It is admitted , " writes Dr . L ., with a solemn air , " that all known manuscripts , with the exception of four , which have Of , read $ eo $ . " Tt > the suffrages of th $ oi ttoA ^ qi Dr .
Untitled Article
Review— Laurence on € rriesbacK s Greek Testament . 561
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), June 2, 1817, page 361, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2465/page/41/
-