The Causes of the Corruption of the Traditional Text of the Holy Gospels. John William Burgon
Ibid. p. 177–8.
[31] Also in Ammonius the presbyter, A.D. 458—see Cramer's Cat. p. 334–5, last line. Λογου is read besides in the cursives Act. 36, 96, 105.
[32] I look for an approving word from learned Dr. Field, who wrote in 1875—'The real obstacle to our acquiescing in the reading of the T.R. is, that if the words ουδε εχω had once formed a part of the original text, there is no possibility of accounting for the subsequent omission of them.' The same remark, but considerably toned down, is found in his delightful Otium Norvicense, P. iii, p. 84.
[33] B and C read—αλλ' ουδενος λογου ποιουμαι την ψυχην εμαυτω: which is exactly what Lucifer Calarit. represents—'sed pro nihilo aestimo animam meam caram esse mihi' (Galland. vi. 241).
[34] [Symbol: Aleph] reads—αλλ' ουδενος λογον ποιουμαι την ψυχην τιμιαν εμαυτω 'ως τελειωσω τον δρομον μου.
[35] 'Sed nihil horum (τουτων is found in many Greek Codd.) vereor, nee facio animam meam pretiosiorem quam me.' So, the Cod. Amiat. It is evident then that when Ambrose (ii. 1040) writes 'nec facio animam meam cariorem mihi,' he is quoting the latter of these two clauses. Augustine (iii1. 516), when he cites the place thus, 'Non enim facto animam meam preliosiorem quam me'; and elsewhere (iv. 268) 'pretiosam mihi'; also Origen (interp. iv. 628 c), 'sed ego non facto cariorem animam meam mihi'; and even the Coptic, 'sed anima mea, dico, non est pretiosa mihi in aliquo verbo':—these evidently summarize the place, by making a sentence out of what survives of the second clause. The Latin of D exhibits 'Sed nihil horum cura est mihi: neque habeo ipsam animam caram mihi.'
[36] Dr. Field says that it may be thus Graecized—αλλ' ουδενα λογον ποιουμαι, ουδε λελογισται μοι ψυχη τι τιμιον.
[37] ii. 296 e—exactly as the T.R.
[38] Exactly as the T.R., except that he writes την ψυχην without μου (ix. 332). So again, further on (334 b), ουκ εχω τιμιαν την εμαυτου ψυχην. This latter place is quoted in Cramer's Cat. 334.
[39] Ap. Mai ii. 336 εδει και της ζωης καταφρονειν 'υπερ του τελειωσαι τον δρομον, ουδε την ψυχην εφη ποιειωσαι τιμιαν 'εαυτω.
[40] λογον εχω, ουδε ποιουμαι την ψυχην τιμιαν εμαυτω, ωστε κ.τ.λ. (ap. Galland. x. 222).
[41] αλλ' ουδενος λογον ποιουμαι των δεινων, ουδε εχω την ψυχην τιμιαν εμαυτω. Epist. ad Tars. c. 1 (Dressel, p. 255).
[42] The whole of Dr. Field's learned annotation deserves to be carefully read and pondered. I speak of it especially in the shape in which it originally appeared, viz. in 1875.
[43] Ibid. p. 2 and 3.
[44] Surprising it is how largely the text of this place has suffered at the hands of Copyists and Translators. In A and D, the words ποιουμαι and εχω have been made to change places. The latter Codex introduces μοι after εχω—for εμαυτω writes εμαυτου—and exhibits του τελειωσαι without 'ως. C writes 'ως το τελειωσαι. [Symbol: Aleph]B alone of Codexes present us with τελειωσω for τελειωσαι, and are followed by Westcott and Hort alone of Editors. The Peshitto ('sed mihi nihili aestimatur anima mea'), the Sahidic ('sed non facto animam meam in ullâ re'), and the Aethiopic ('sed non reputo animam meam nihil quidquam'), get rid of τιμιαν as well as of ουδε εχω. So much diversity of text, and in such primitive witnesses, while it points to a remote period as the date of the blunder to which attention is called in the text, testifies eloquently to the utter perplexity which that blunder occasioned from the first.
[45] Another example of the same phenomenon, (viz. the absorption of ΕΝ by the first syllable of ΑΝθρωποις) is to be seen in Acts iv. 12—where however the error has led to no mischievous results.
[46] For those which insert in (14), and those which reject it (25), see Wordsworth's edition of the Vulgate on this passage.
[47] Of Fathers:—Ambrose i. 1298—Hieronymus i. 4482, 693, 876: ii. 213: iv. 34, 92: v. 147: vi. 638: vii. 241, 251, 283—Augustine 34 times—Optatus (Galland. v. 472, 457)—Gaudentius Brix. (ap. Sabat.)—Chromatius Ag. (Gall. viii. 337)—Orosius (ib. ix. 134), Marius M. (ib. viii. 672), Maximus Taur. (ib. ix. 355)—Sedulius (ib. 575)—Leo M. (ap. Sabat.)—Mamertus Claudianus (Gall. x. 431)—Vigilius Taps. (ap. Sabat.)—Zacchaeus (Gall. ix. 241)—Caesarius Arel. (ib. xi. 11)—ps.-Ambros. ii. 394, 396—Hormisdas P. (Conc. iv. 1494, 1496)—52 Bps. at 8th Council of Toledo (Conc. vi. 395), &c., &c.
[48] See Wetstein on this place.
[49] Antiqq. i. 99, xviii. 5. 4.
CHAPTER III.
ACCIDENTAL CAUSES OF CORRUPTION.
II. Homoeoteleuton.
No one who finds the syllable ΟΙ recurring six times over in about as many words—e.g. και εγενετο, 'ως απηλθον … ΟΙ αγγελΟΙ, και ΟΙ ανθρωπΟΙ ΟΙ πΟΙμενες ειπον—is surprised to learn that MSS.