By Greg Paulson with Katie Leggett

From left to right: Katrin Landefeld, Megan Burnett, Marie-Luise Lakmann, Annette Hüffmeier, Dora Panella, Katharina Sandmeier

 

It's well known that the critical editions produced at the INTF in Münster—the Nestle-Aland, the UBS Greek New Testament, and the Editio Critica Maior (ECM)—are renowned worldwide and provide the basis for almost all modern New Testament translations around the globe. Most will also know that Barbara Aland was the first female director of the INTF, serving from 1983-2004, and leaving an indelible legacy on the institute and the wider field of New Testament textual criticism. A lesser-known fact, however, and one that we are also very proud of, is that half of the INTF's current staff working on these acclaimed critical editions is female.

In this blogpost we would like to introduce you to some of the highly qualified women behind your critical editions. Through these short interviews we hope you get to know them better and see how each of their contributions has a direct impact on the most widely used Greek New Testaments in the world.

 

- - -

Dr. Marie-Luise Lakmann

 

Tell us about your academic background and what brought you to the INTF:

After studying Classical Philology (Greek, Latin, Pedagogy) at the University of Münster, I began a project called Platonism in Antiquity in 1985 led by Matthias Baltes, which was a comprehensive study of the history of Plato's philosophy in texts and commentaries. As part of this project, I wrote my doctoral thesis called "Der Platoniker Tauros in der Darstellung des Aulus Gellius" (Leiden 1993). In 2002, the INTF advertised a position to collaborate in developing a digital edition with the most important manuscripts of the New Testament, called "Digitale Edition der überlieferungsgeschichtlich wichtigsten Handschriften des Neuen Testaments mit kritischem Apparat auf einer Website," better known as NT Transcripts (http://nttranscripts.uni-muenster.de/). The purpose of the project was to make digital transcriptions of the most important Greek New Testament manuscripts and produce an apparatus online, further developing the Collate program created by Peter Robinson. This was a pioneering work in the field when digital tools were only in their infancy and essentially the beginning of the NTVMR. My fascination with philological work on Greek texts and the constantly expanding digital possibilities in the field made this position very appealing. I’ve been working as a researcher in various areas of New Testament editions and textual criticism ever since NT Transcripts.

As a 22-year veteran of the INTF, I’m proud to say I've been at the INTF the longest of the current employees. Since I've been part of the INTF for nearly one-third of its lifespan, I've had the privilege of seeing numerous fascinating developments in the field of New Testament textual criticism in these 22 years. Throughout my time here, my enthusiasm for textual criticism has continued to grow the more deeply I engage with the many facets of this field. I greatly enjoy working with the sources of the New Testament and especially grappling with philological challenges of the text, which requires a meticulous and sometimes even detective-like approach.

 

What specific project(s) are you working on at the INTF? How does your work directly affect the critical editions?

One focus of my work is the transcription and collation of New Testament manuscripts. This task has remained a constant throughout my tenure at the INTF and is still ongoing! In 2007 I began working on the ECM of the  Catholic Letters, which was the continuation of the project first envisioned by Kurt Aland and others in the 1960s. Under the direction of Barbara Aland, the first volumes of the ECM were published, and the current director  Holger Strutwolf, secured funding from the North Rhine-Westphalian Academy of Sciences and Arts until 2030 to make the editions of Acts, Mark, Matthew, and Luke (in this order).

Image: Preview of digital ECM Matthew

As part of the ECM team, I provide transcriptions of selected manuscripts and compile the text-critical apparatus of the Greek manuscripts based on these transcriptions. This work is carried out verse by verse in four stages: regularization of the variants, establishing variation units, determining the order of the variants, and post-editing and correcting the apparatus. This results in the Greek apparatus you see in the ECM (digital and print). Another major project has been an intensive revision of the Nestle-Aland 28th edition apparatus. For this I worked with Beate von Tschischwitz, who was an integral part of the INTF staff until retiring at the end of 2016. We revised the entire apparatus, making it more user-friendly and incorporating the new findings of the ECM Catholic Letters.

I also worked as co-editor on the ECM Mark, and now Matthew, supporting the editorial team. We meet regularly to discuss places where there are significant differences in the manuscript tradition. Sometimes establishing the Ausgangstext can be resolved quickly, other times we come back again and again to try and discern the best solution for particularly difficult passages. I am also involved in indexing and transcribing in the NTVMR as well the digital edition, and I assist in maintaining the Kurzgefasste Liste.

A particularly enjoyable responsibility is coordinating and supervising the student workers at our institute, which includes training them in Greek paleography and how to use digital tools to produce transcriptions and upload microfilm and digital images of manuscripts.

 

Who (past or present) has had the biggest influence on your formation as a scholar?

By working on the research project "Platonism in Antiquity" I became familiar with aspects of academic research that are also fundamental to my work at INTF. The leader of this project, Prof. Matthias Baltes (1940-2003) was a role model for many students and staff thanks to his prolific knowledge, enthusiasm, and disciplined approach to work.

 

What do you wish more people knew about the INTF or the work you do there?

That in the long history of the INTF, which celebrates its 65th anniversary this year, groundbreaking work on the New Testament has been and continues to be pursued in a way that is unparalleled in the world. The institute remains at the forefront of New Testament studies, pioneering numerous groundbreaking projects in areas such as manuscript studies, critical editions, and digital humanities.

 

What is your all-time favorite critical edition of the New Testament?

The Nestle-Aland 28th edition, on whose revision I worked intensively.

 

- - -

Dr. Megan Burnett

 

Tell us about your academic background and what brought you to the INTF:

I studied Biblical Studies, first a BA at Southwest Baptist University and then an MA and PhD at New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary where I wrote my dissertation Codex Washingtonianus: An Analysis of the Textual Affiliations of the Freer Gospels Manuscript (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias, 2022).

After graduating, I saw a position funded jointly by the German Bible Society and INTF as a research fellow for the hand editions of the Greek New Testament. This 3-year postdoc position was previously held by Dora Panella. I was excited at the prospect of working at the INTF because it's the premiere institute for NT textual criticism and I wanted to pursue this career.

 

What specific project(s) are you working on at the INTF? How does your work directly affect the critical editions?

Image: Editing program view of NA29 Mark

My primary task is to revise the Nestle-Aland (NA) edition, implementing new information from the Editio Critica Maior as it becomes available. For the forthcoming 29th edition of the NA, I updated the text and apparatus of Mark and Revelation. The book of Acts was done primarily by Dora, which means the NA29 will contain major updates to these three books. Apart from these changes, further changes that will appear in the NA29 edition are more cosmetic. For example, the NA (and the UBS GNT) will no longer use letters to signify majuscules, utilizing their Gregory-Aland numbers instead.

Besides revising the NA, I also attend the NA and UBS GNT editorial meetings and take the meeting minutes. It has been fascinating to see the decision-making processes of the editors firsthand. The NA and the UBS GNT have different target audiences and purposes, which is reflected in how the editors determine what information they include in the apparatus. The NA includes more apparatus units to illustrate the transmission of the text. For the UBS GNT, which is the base text for Bible translations in over 700 languages, the editors only include textual variants that are potentially significant for translation.

 

What do you like about working at the INTF/doing textual criticism?

I became interested in biblical studies when I underwent a crisis of my Christian faith as a young college student at Southwest Baptist University. It was there that my professors introduced me to a whole new way of understanding the Bible, and it began to come alive for me. The historical characters of the NT went from being people of “ye olde ancient days” to people of a concrete time and place, with distinct cultures and worldviews.

I didn’t become interested in textual criticism until seminary. There, Dr. Bill Warren, who has been very influential in my formation as a scholar, set up an excellent research center called the Center for New Testament Textual Studies. I started transcribing a few manuscripts, and it all snowballed from there. Ironically, I did some introductory work on textual criticism in undergraduate studies, and I  found it to be quite boring at the time! It seemed so esoteric and removed from an understanding of the New Testament. It wasn’t until I started engaging with the manuscripts that I realized how important and practical it all is. Either the manuscript evidence says one thing or it says something else. That clarity appeals to me.  Of all biblical study disciplines, textual criticism is the closest to a hard science. I appreciate the wealth of data (i.e., NT manuscripts) that text critics have available for research. The INTF has done a great deal to make this data accessible through its Virtual Manuscript Room (https://ntvmr.uni-muenster.de/).

Concerning my job specifically, I have been intrigued by what exactly goes into the creation of the critical editions. One thing I appreciate about textual criticism is that the work is similar no matter where one goes in the world. I did my studies in the USA, but then moved to Germany to do my professional work. And though I certainly experienced some cultural differences, I have found that my work as a text critic remains largely unchanged. This work entails collaborating with people from all over the world. No matter where we are, it seems like we’re all on the same team.

 

What do you wish more people knew about the INTF or the work you do there?

It’s a pet peeve of mine, but textual criticism isn’t the same as biblical translation. Whenever I tell people what I do, they often say, “Oh, so you do translation work.” I try to explain that I do the work that needs to happen before translation can start, but they often still don’t understand. A lot of folks are simply used to having the Bible around and have spent little time thinking about where it came from.

Certain sectors of the community also have a particular bugbear about the phrase “initial text" (Ausgangstext) and think it somehow denigrates the textual authority of the NT. As a committed Christian, I have no problem with this term and know it is not at all intended to weaken the authority of the Bible as the living word of God. In my experience, my colleagues at the INTF have a high respect for the New Testament and for the work they do as text critics.

 

Do you have advice for others (or specifically for women) wanting to enter this field?

Learning to do textual criticism is like learning to drive a car. You can read all the books you want, but you don’t learn to drive until you get behind the wheel. If you want to do textual criticism, you have to work with the manuscripts themselves. Reading books about manuscripts will not be enough.

 

- - - 

Dr. Annette Hüffmeier

 

Tell us about your academic background and what brought you to the INTF:

I studied to be a secondary school teacher in ancient Greek, history, German, and mathematics, but I actually only worked at a school during my teacher training period. Since I really enjoyed delving deeply into academic topics, I decided to pursue a PhD (1996-1999). My doctoral thesis was called “Pythagorean Sayings in Porphyry's Life of Pythagoras.” I had laid the foundation for this years earlier during my year abroad at Trinity College in Dublin during which I obtained my M. Litt.

After I began my teacher training period, I took maternity leave to focus on raising my children. I began supporting the existing intensive Greek courses at the Faculty of Protestant Theology in the late 1990s and was eventually offered a temporary part-time teaching position there in 2007. In 2010, Gerd Mink at the INTF was due to retire and I successfully obtained his position.

My position is split between teaching at the Protestant faculty and researching at the INTF. Even though these two roles certainly require more work than one full time position, I wouldn't want to miss out on either! Combining work and family at the beginning when my children were young was only possible because my husband reduced his work hours (before he later retired). Thankfully, I was able to work flexibly, teaching and working at the INTF in the mornings when our daughters were at nursery and school and then finishing the rest at home (often) late in the evenings when the children no longer needed me.

Each October, I teach an intensive Greek course for beginners who after six or nine months are going to take the state qualification Graecum. After a few months with the basics, we move to reading Plato and finally Paul. The course is supplemented with classes on the world of Paul. While the intensive pace can be exhausting, it is very rewarding to have close contact with the students and to witness positive growth. This work is connected with the INTF because often our graduates go on to work as student assistants, for example in transcription, patristics, or at the Bible Museum.

At the INTF I can work independently, utilizing my skills in classic ancient Greek, but I also enjoy collaboration with colleagues. We're part of a larger interdisciplinary project in which everyone knows they can't be successful on their own and that they stand on the shoulders of their predecessors. The opportunity to collaborate internationally is also a particularly rewarding aspect of the work.

 

What specific project(s) are you working on at the INTF? How does your work directly affect the critical editions?

I work almost exclusively on the ECM. My primary tasks are creating and refining the apparatus, coordinating the versional and patristic contributions to it, working in the editorial team, a lot of proofreading, giving presentations on the ECM both locally and internationally, and representing the INTF in various external committees like IGNTP and SBL. My work —together with that of Marie-Luise — is the critical apparatus, which would not exist without our combined efforts. We collaborate on the four steps she mentioned above, with the goal to make the apparatus as comprehensible and readable as possible. I also work with the versionists and patristic scholars to coordinate material so we can identify certain variants that are not present in Greek manuscripts and determine how probable it is that these go back to lost Greek readings. If a positive decision is made, I work with the versionists to retro-translate the versional wording into Greek, which can then be found in the apparatus.

I also work extensively to refine the apparatus, checking the multiple instances of lectionary readings, examining the references to synoptic parallels or adding punctuation to the initial text (again along with Marie-Luise). As a member of the ECM editorial committee, I am one of five that votes on textual decisions and uses the help of the CBGM to do this. When I first started with ECM Acts 14 years ago, I was the only female on the committee and a complete newcomer in the field. It was very intimidating working alongside such seasoned textual critics, but thankfully I held my own and was able to stay on.

 

Image: Preliminary CBGM General Textual Flow diagram for Matthew 16:26/6-8

 

Who has had the biggest influence on your formation as a scholar?

My former Greek teacher at school (Manfred Kretschmer) and my Greek professor in Classics (Prof. Dr. Matthias Baltes), who sadly passed away far too early.

 

What do you wish more people knew about the INTF or the work you do there?

How hard we all work (together) and how we struggle over every textual decision that is made. Each decision is scrutinized extensively, and we strive to remain objective and keep ideology out as much as possible. Unfortunately, a common fallacy is that our work is largely done by computers. It's not the CBGM that automatically generates the many thousands of textual decisions behind our critical editions. We humans do that! Of course we are supported by digital tools in this endeavor, but our task as scholars with these thousands of textual decisions is to carefully weigh every single one.

 

Do you have advice for others (or specifically for women) wanting to enter this field?

Don't let yourself be discouraged on your career path. If you believe that what you are doing is worthwhile, then keep steadily working at it (but without wearing yourself down). Set measurable, interim goals for yourself and seek out help when needed. Network as much as possible. Always keep learning and consider early on what you are (not) prepared to sacrifice for your career.

 

- - - 

Dr. Katrin Maria Landefeld

 

Tell us about your academic background and what brought you to the INTF:

I studied Latin, Greek and Theology in Bielefeld and Münster and then completed my doctorate in classical Greek Philology, writing my dissertation on prayer in the works of Epictetus. At that time, I was a tutor for Latin and Greek, then had various other teaching assignments, and finally was a lecturer in Bielefeld and Bochum. While working on my doctorate, I saw a position advertised for student workers at the INTF. That is how I got to know Marie-Luise Lakmann. I worked in the Patristics Department for about a year as a research assistant gathering citations from editions of Church Fathers. After my time there, I taught Latin in Bochum and in 2020 came back to the INTF to work on a project with Prof. Dr. Holger Strutwolf, Prof. Dr. Ulrich Schmid and Dr. Troy Griffitts. Our project was called “Theory of Variation on the basis of an open digital edition of the Greek New Testament.” It investigated the emergence of variants in Acts of the Apostles. We tagged the text and variants morphologically, making it possible to search for certain grammatical phenomena. Specifically, I studied corrections in particular manuscripts. I found that the examination of single places of correction can be profitable for judging specific variants and their emergence. We also looked at genealogical connections of manuscripts and found that 05 and 08/1884 are probably connected in this way.

In 2023, I returned to the Patristics department and now work together with David Vasquez. In addition to my work in Patristics, I am writing my Habilitation, a commentary on Augustine's “De musica” book 6, in which Augustine combines music theory with theology.

 

What specific project(s) are you working on at the INTF? How does your work directly affect the critical editions?

Image: INTF database of Patristic citations for Mark 1:1

The church fathers are often early witnesses to the text of the NT so it's important to include this information in the ECM. Since we often know when and where church fathers lived, they are valuable for understanding the transmission and reception of the NT. Church fathers quoted Scripture in a variety of works, such as homilies and commentaries, and in numerous forms, such as allusions and direct quotations. My task is to collect and evaluate these Patristic NT citations and assign them to variant readings in the ECM apparatus. All the church fathers and their respective works consulted are listed in the printed edition of the ECM. There is also a database of Patristic citations that is open to the public, so everyone can see what material was used and evaluated for the editions. Although we only incorporate direct quotations in the ECM apparatus, the database offers the full context of the quotation (and bibliography) so that readers have exhaustive evidence at their fingertips if they wish to research further. As new editions of the NA appear, the Patristic citations will be revised based on the ECM.

 

Why did you decide to pursue this field?

I got to know the INTF while studying in Münster and was fascinated by the combination of Theology and classical languages being utilized there. I pursued this field because I found the idea of working together in this interdisciplinary team really inspiring, and I am grateful to be working here now.

 

What do you like about working at the INTF/doing textual criticism?

First and foremost, the team at the INTF is great! It is a wonderful experience to work together on such a monumental project developing an esteemed critical edition. Textual criticism is a field where you are able to scrutinize textual and grammatical details, which is something I enjoy.

 

Who (past or present) has had the biggest influence on your formation as a scholar?

There are many people who have influenced my formation as a scholar, I’ll only name a few here. Dr. Peter Prestel was my Latin and Greek teacher in Bielefeld, with whom I have worked together for many years. He piqued my interest in classical languages, and I could always come to him with questions while I was studying. I’m very grateful to him for all his help and for giving me the chance to teach language courses. Moreover, Prof. Dr. Rainer Henke, Prof. Dr. Christian Pietsch and Prof. Dr. Samuel Vollenweider have also had an immense influence on me and my work. They supervised several theses/papers throughout my studies and enhanced my interest in ancient philosophy and theology. Now, Prof. Dr. Christian Pietsch and Prof. Dr. Holger Strutwolf are supervising my Habilitation. Through conversations with them, the idea of writing a commentary on Augustine's early work “De musica” for this project emerged, allowing me to combine again my interest in theology and textual studies. Finally, the team at the INTF continues to impact me and my work. To all these people, I am very grateful.

 

What is your all-time favorite critical edition of the New Testament?

The ECM, of course :)

 

- - - 

Dr. Katharina Sandmeier

 

Tell us about your academic background and what brought you to the INTF:

I studied Egyptology, Coptology, and Ancient Near Eastern Studies at the University of Münster. These disciplines offer a joint BA program here in Münster. When I started, I was still undecided about which field I would find most interesting. I then took courses in Coptic language and culture and found both fascinating. In my MA program I focused on Coptology and decided I wanted to make it my profession. As I was finishing my MA thesis in 2014, there was an opening at the INTF, and it soon became a second home. This was immensely lucky since jobs in such a specialized field are rare, and I didn’t even have to move to a new city! One of my main interests during my studies was book culture and codicology; the New Testament and its witnesses have a lot to do with that. So, I was able to enrich my area of speciality and be employed while doing so. I started as a student assistant working part-time while I wrote my PhD on Coptic and Greek punctuation and segmentation. (Just finished!) Since 2022 I’m a full-time researcher and the heart of the Coptic department at the INTF – which, after Siegfried Richter left, is made up of a student assistant and myself.

 

What specific project(s) are you working on at the INTF? How does your work directly affect the critical editions?

I work on the Coptic tradition of the NT for the ECM. Egypt was under Roman rule by the time Christianity spread, and letters from the Greek alphabet, along with some characters from Demotic, were used to reproduce the Coptic language in written form. Around the 4th or early 5th century, the NT was translated from Greek into different dialects of late antique Egypt, most commonly Sahidic, Bohairic, and Fayyumic. Coptic is important for a critical edition because we can figure out which of the different textual traditions within the Greek was used as a source text for the Coptic translation. The Coptic support of a certain variant in the Greek critical apparatus helps us ascertain that this reading was established quite early on.

Image: ECM Matthew Coptic apparatus editing program. This particular passage shows where the Coptic tradition can be cited (circled in red).

 

The first step is cataloging all relevant witnesses, which in the Coptic tradition are often quite fragmentary and can be scattered across different collections and museums. The electronic repository of all known Coptic NT MSS is called the SMR database and can be found here: <http://intf.uni-muenster.de/smr/> This was begun here at the INTF by Gerd Mink and Franz-Jürgen Schmitz in the 1970s (back then, of course, in printed form) and is still growing today. The second step is to transcribe all Coptic witnesses from available images. For some witnesses there are editions which can be collated and utilized, but many have never been published or even worked on in any form! The existing critical editions of the Coptic NT are quite old and therefore don’t include many of the MSS we know today. After collection and transcription, the final task is to connect the Coptic tradition with the variants of the Greek source texts in the critical apparatus of the ECM, determining which Greek variants are possible Vorlagen for the Coptic translations. I have carried out this work on the ECM of Acts and Mark and right now am working on ECM Matthew. I have already started on transcriptions for ECM Luke as well.

 

What do you like about working at the INTF/doing textual criticism?

It’s amazing to see how numerous Greek variants can result in the same Coptic translation while at the same time, a certain Greek expression can be rendered with different Coptic phrases. Sometimes these nuances are due to a specific Coptic dialect, but also within the same dialect there seem to have been options to choose from which – as far as we know – have little or no difference in the meaning.  I also really enjoy the search for parallels in the versions, like the old Latin, Syriac, Gothic or Ethiopic translations of the NT. Similarities between the versions when they differ from the Greek variants can indicate the attestation of a reading which has been lost in the Greek tradition. Looking for these makes for some great eureka moments.

 

Who has had the biggest influence on your formation as a scholar?

That would be Siegfried Richter. He was my supervisor when I joined the INTF and introduced me to Coptic textual criticism. During this collaboration, I learned not to dwell on mistakes made but to be happy that they were found before publication! When I first began, Richter once compared my way of working to a tank: I would choose a direction and once that path was chosen, put all my energy towards full speed ahead. From him, I learned that it’s sometimes necessary to take a step back and get a different perspective, to pause and make sure the direction and destination are (still) right. I think about this view very often when I face a new challenge. I’m sure he doesn't know how much of an impression his words have made on me!

 

What do you wish more people knew about the INTF or the work you do there?

Curating the SMR-database and transcribing all relevant Coptic MSS are necessary prerequisites before the work of assigning Coptic to Greek variants can even begin. Each of these elements is an immense amount of work. Most people see either the database/transcription aspect or only the text-critical work that is done here. It is important to acknowledge the thorough treatment of the whole Coptic NT tradition being carried out at the INTF and how much effort it takes to organize and research this tradition so that we can accurately represent it in the ECM.

 

- - -

We hope you’ve enjoyed these short profiles about the talented women contributing to the critical editions. In a field historically dominated by men, we are privileged to collaborate with such skilled and dedicated women. We extend our heartfelt gratitude for their years of hard work and commitment and hope these scholars will inspire future generations, and particularly more women, to pursue the field of New Testament textual criticism!

Image: T2

 

In an attempt to put the magic back in the Kurzgefaßte Liste, the INTF will be resurrecting the talisman and ostracon numbers.

In the latest issue of JBL (142 no. 4 [2023]: 633–655), Brice Jones and I explore the usefulness of amulets and magical ostraca for New Testament textual criticism. We briefly define these objects and describe how New Testament text is recorded on them. We then survey which amulets and magical ostraca were used in 20th critical editions of the Greek New Testament and why these categories were added and then subsequently removed from the Kurzgefaßte Liste.

Although the essential research is based on Jones’ book, New Testament Texts on Greek Amulets from Late Antiquity, it was fun to dig further into the history of Kurzgefaßte Liste publications to see exactly what happened to these witnesses. Years ago, I saw an unknown symbol in Nestle’s Novum Testamentum Graece. It was not until I read Jones’ book that I finally made the connection that it was an amulet, T3.

Image: Citations of T3 (highlighted) in the Nestle 13th edition (1927) at Matt 6:12–13

 

Our article, “Resurrecting Amulets and Ostraca in New Testament Textual Criticism,” seeks to explain why the “talisman” and “ostracon” categories have now been continued in the Kurzgefaßte Liste. It highlights the shift in New Testament textual criticism toward an increased appreciation of the social milieu of those who used the biblical text and how this new perspective on the value of amulets and magical ostraca justifies their inclusion in the ECM, CBGM, and the Kurzgefaßte Liste.

Amulets up to T39 and magical ostraca up to Os30 will be catalogued in the Kurzgefaßte Liste as an appendix and will not be included in the tally of Greek New Testament witnesses for now.[1] Readers can see how their inclusion affects already cataloged witnesses and how images and transcriptions of these new additions are already accessible in the NTVMR.

To find which amulets and magical ostraca have been added to the Liste, in the NTVMR, just type in “t” or “os” in the search field under “name” (or use the six-digit Doc IDs beginning with 51 and 52 for “ID” in the search field). Or, you can click here for amulets and here for magical ostraca.

The article explains how these witnesses will appear in the apparatus of ECM Matthew when it is published, as well as in the CBGM. Their inclusion in the CBGM is probably unexpected since they are non-continuous witnesses. From the article,

“Amulets have two major disadvantages in the context of the CBGM: (1) they contain a small amount of text, and (2) their text is often an indirect witness; that is, they were not initially created with the primary intention of accurately transmitting the New Testament text. Their limited text poses the same problem as other fragmented texts (like the early papyri), and, on this basis alone, their inclusion in the CBGM would produce cautionary results at best. As indirect witnesses, they would be inappropriately taken as representing the same tradition as continuous text manuscripts or lectionaries that are in the CBGM.” (p. 647)

Nevertheless, the Greek text of amulets can be assigned to Greek variants in the apparatus, unlike versions that would have to rely on a retro-translation. In the CBGM, amulets and ostraca, with only a small amount of text available, qualify as “fragmented” witnesses and their inclusion in the Coherence at Variant Passages diagrams can be turned on or off with the button labeled “Frag.” This way, users will have the option to see them or not. Their inclusion is largely exploratory, and a study is planned to appear on the results in the forthcoming edition of ECM Matthew.

Below is the full list of amulets and magical ostraca now recorded in the Liste. If there are any more we should be aware of, please let us know!

 

T1 =[0152]	Mt 6:11-13	IV	Pottery	Athens, National Historical Museum, 12227
T2	Mt 4:23-24	VI-VII	Pg	Allentown, PA, Muhlenberg College, Pap. 1077 (theol. 2)
T3	Mt 6:9-13	VI	Papyrus	Location unknown, Zuletzt: Germany, (früher: Berlin, Staatliche Museen P. 954)
T4	Mt 6:9; Jn 1:23; Gospel incipits	VI?	Papyrus	Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, 13926
T5	Mt 6:9-13	VII-VIII	Wood	Heidelberg, Ägyptologisches Institut , 761
T6	Mt 6:9-13; Lk 9:37(?); 11:1b-2	V-VI	Papyrus	Giessen, Universitätsbibliothek, P. Iand. 14
T7	Mt 6:9; Mk 1:1-8; Lk 1:1-7; Jn 1:1-17	XII/XIII	Pg	Chicago, IL, University of Chicago Library, Ms. 125 (Goodspeed)
T8	Jn 2:1a-2; Rom 12:1-2	V-VI	Papyrus	Wien, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, G 2312
T9	Jn 1:1, 3	V	?	Glasgow, University Library, Ms. Gen. 1026/12
T10	Mt 28:19; Mt 4:23; Gospel incipits; Jn 1:1	V-VI	Pg	Berlin, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin Preußischer Kulturbesitz, P. 6096
T11	Mt 4:23; 9:35; 8:15; Mk 1:31	V-VI	Papyrus	Berlin, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin Preußischer Kulturbesitz, P. 21230
T12	Mt 6:9-11	IV-VI	Papyrus	Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Libraries, AM 8963
T13	Mt 6:9-13	VI-VII	Papyrus	Durham, NC, Duke University, David M. Rubenstein Library, P. Duk. Inv. 778
[T14]	= 0324
T15	Mt 6:9-13	VI-VIII	Papyrus	New Haven, CT, Yale University Library, P. CtYBR 4600
T16	Mt 6:9-13; 2 Cor 13:13(?)	IV-V	Papyrus	Oslo, University of Oslo Library , P. 1644, fol.; Oslo/London, The Schøyen Collection, MS 244/4, fol.
T17	Mt 6:10-12	E III - A IV	Papyrus	Oxford, Sackler Library, P. Ant. 54
T18	Mt 6:11-13	VI	Papyrus	Köln, Institut für Altertumskunde, Inv. Nr. 3559 (recto), fol.; Inv. Nr. 3583 (recto), fol.
T19	Mt 6:12-13	V	Papyrus	Köln, Institut für Altertumskunde, Inv. Nr. 3302
T20 =[P105]	Mt 27,62-64; 28,2-5	V/VI	Papyrus	Oxford, Sackler Library, P. Oxy. 4406
T21	Mk 1:1-2	III-IV	Papyrus	Oxford, Sackler Library, 25 3B 58/E(c)
T22	Jn 1:1-11	V-VI	Papyrus	Köln, Institut für Altertumskunde, Inv. Nr. 649, fol.; Inv. Nr. 689, fol.
T23	Jn 1:5-6	VI-VII	Pg	Wien, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, G 29831
T24	Jn 1:29, 49	VI-VII	Papyrus	Berlin, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin Preußischer Kulturbesitz, P. 11710
T25	2 Cor 10:4; 1 Thess 5:8; Eph 6:16	VI	Papyrus	Wien, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, G 26034, fol.; G 30453, fol.
T26 =[0262]	1 Tim 1:15-16	VII	Pg	Berlin, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin Preußischer Kulturbesitz, P. 13977
T27 =[P78]	Jd 4.5.7.8	III/IV	Papyrus	Oxford, Sackler Library, P. Oxy. 2684
T28	Col 3:9-10	IV/V	Papyrus	London, University College, Petrie Museum, UC 32070
T29	Act 9:1	III/IV	Papyrus	Birmingham, University of Birmingham Cadbury Research Library, P.Harr. inv. 486
T30	Mt 1:20	VI-VIII	Papyrus	Ann Arbor, MI, University of Michigan Library, P. Mich. inv. 4944b
T31	Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Jn 1:1	V-VI	Papyrus	Alexandria, Bibliotheca Alexandrina Antiquities Museum, BAAM 0505
T32	Jn 1:1		Papyrus	Heidelberg, Institut für Papyrologie, P. Lat. 5
T33	Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Lk 1:1; Jn 1:1	VI-VII	Papyrus	Wien, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, G 348
T34	Mt 6:9-13	IV	Papyrus	Oxford, Sackler Library, P. Oxy. 4010
T35	Ps 21:19/Mt 27:35/Jn 19:24	VI	Papyrus	Wien, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, G 29418
T36	Mt 6:11-12	VI-VII	Papyrus	Wien, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, L 91
T37	Mt 6:9	VII?	Wood	Paris, Musée du Louvre, D 552B
T38	James 1:14-17	E V?	Papyrus	Genova, Biblioteca Universitaria, 1160 Vo

 

 

Os1-20 =[0153]	Matt 27:31–32; Mark 5:40–41; 9:17, 18, 22; 15:21; Luke 12:13–15, 15– 16; 22:40–45, 45–49, 49–53, 53–54, 55–59, 59–60, 61, 61–64, 65–69, 70–71; John 1:1–9, 14–17; 18:19–25; 19:15–17	V-VI	Pottery	Location unknown
Os21	Lk 1:42, 28	IV-VIII	Pottery	London, British Museum, EA 33101
Os22	John 2:1	VII	Pottery	London, British Museum, EA 55805
Os23	Act 2:22-24 (UC 62598), 2:25-29, 32-36; 3:1-2 (UC 62568); 15:38-16:1, 7-9 (UC 62540+62547); 16:18; 19:1, 8-9 (UC 62567); Rom 13:3-6, 7-11 (UC 62600); Gal 1:8-11 (UC 62732), 15-18; 2:3-8 (UC 62583); James 2:2-3, 8-9 (UC 62719); 4:11-13 (UC 62592); 1Jn 2:12-14, 19-22 (UC 31897); 3:17-22; 4:1-3 (UC 62566), 19-14, 18-21 (UC 62584); Jude 1-3, 4 (UC 62573).	V	Pottery	London, University College, Petrie Museum, UC 31897, fol.; UC 62598, fol.; UC 62568, fol.; UC 62540, fol.; UC 62547, fol.; UC 62567, fol.; UC 62600, fol.; UC 62732, fol.; UC 62583, fol.; UC 62719, fol.; UC 62592, fol.; UC 62573, fol.; UC 62566, fol.; UC 62584, fol.
Os24	Rom 8:31	IV-VI	Stone	Cambridge, Cambridge University Library, Ostraka inv. 129
Os25	Lk 1:28	V-VII	Pottery	London, British Museum, EA 32966
Os26	Mt 1:19-20	V-VI	Pottery	Turin, Museo Egizio, Cat. Fab. 2136
Os27	Mt 7:18-20, 29-8:4	VI-VII	Pottery	Cairo, Coptic Museum, Naqlun 53/88, fol.; Naqlun 64/86, fol.
Os28	Mt 16:18-19; Heb 5:6	VI-VII	Pottery	New York, NY, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Acc. no. 14.1.202
Os29	Jn 9:1-12; Act 3:11	VII-VIII	Pottery	London, British Museum, Eg. Dept. (?)
Os30	Heb 2	VI-VIII	Pottery	Anonymous owner, Anonymous owner, Milan Private Owner

 

We are still in the process of acquiring images, but many images are already included in the NTVMR, especially ones with text from Matthew, such as T34:

 

Some ostraca also have images in the NTVMR, for example Os25:

 

I end with a quote from the article:

“While there is little doubt that amulets and magical ostraca provide an important window into early Christian faith and practices, as many have convincingly argued, the precise textual worth of each of these witnesses remains to be determined. Magical ostraca in particular warrant further research, and scholars now have new resources at their fingertips to gain insights into and to research the rich textual history of the New Testament. It is hoped that recording these witnesses in the Liste (and their images in the NTVMR whenever possible), and including them in the ECM and CBGM, will make way for more productive and nuanced research on their worth for textual criticism and the role they play in the exploration of the social history of early Christianity.” (p. 655)

While the theme of the SBL annual meeting this year in Denver was “reconnect,” the meeting also created unique opportunities to make new connections. One of these opportunities was at a joint session of the ECM and Gospel of Mark program units. This was a chance for exegetes and text critics to come together and share with each other about the intricates of their fields and how textual criticism influences exegesis and vice versa.

 

In this spirit, Alicia Myers, New Testament professor and exegete at Campbell University, and I presented on how to use ECM Mark and how this changes the way we teach textual criticism. It was a difficult topic, especially fitting it all in the time limit, but we hope we did it justice. We’ve recorded our presentation and made it available on the INTF’s YouTube channel. Here’s a link:

 

https://youtu.be/2txMVZeBIqQ

 

For anyone who has never used an edition of the ECM, this is probably the best place to start since it goes over the basics and gives an impression of how to actually incorporate use of the edition in the classroom.

At the INTF there is a parttime position available for a Coptic specialist (36 months maximum). Responsibilities include collecting data on Coptic manuscripts of Galatians and Ephesians and transcribing them for the ECM. Please see the post for more information:

https://www.uni-muenster.de/Rektorat/Stellen/ausschreibungen/st_20211012_sk2.html

The ECM of Mark was published at the end of July! It is available to order through the German Bible Society’s website.

 

The complete title is Novum Testamentum Graecum: Editio Critica Maior, Volume I: The Synoptic Gospels, book 2: The Gospel of Mark. This numbering might be confusing since the Catholic letters were titled ECM IV and Acts was designated as ECM III. The INTF has been working on the Synoptic Gospels (ECM volume I), and Mark is book two of volume I, or ECM I.2 for short. We are now working on ECM Matthew which will be published as ECM I book 1, or ECM I.1. Here's an overview of the ECM volumes, bearing in mind only the Catholic Letters, Acts, and Mark have been published:

Volume I: Synoptic Gospels

Volume II: The Gospel of John

Volume III: Acts

Volume IV: Catholic Letters

Volume V: Paul's Letters

Volume VI: Revelation

 

Like ECM Acts, there are three parts to ECM Mark: (1) text and apparatus, (2) supplementary material that explains which manuscripts were selected and has introductions to the versions and other detailed information, and (3) a collection of studies on the text of Mark in different manuscript traditions. Part 3, Studies, is where the "Text-Critical Commentary" can be found.

 

Image of the Three Parts of ECM Mark

 

As promised in a previous blog post, we now present links to digital tools and downloads that accompany the printed edition and offer access to the data behind the edition.

 

Here is the link to CBGM Mark 3.5. This is the third phase of the CBGM for Mark. The .5 indicates we  have made several changes to the local stemmata in the current phase, but did not systematically go through all the variants again to bring it to a new phase. A local stemma of variants has been established at each variant passage. What we called “Genealogical Queries” for Acts and Catholic Letters, we are now just calling “CBGM” since the former term didn’t really take off.

 

The start page of the CBGM (see below) also has instructions for the CBGM Docker, containing now both Acts and Mark. The CBGM for these two books can be downloaded onto your own computer and you can edit the local stemmata. I’ve already posted a video tutorial on how install Acts CBGM, but the Docker image now also includes Mark CBGM.

Image of the CBGM start page

 

The Greek text and apparatus of the ECM of Mark is also available online (the digital ECM). Clicking on a manuscript in the apparatus of Mark calls up its transcription. The “Text-Critical Commentary,” published in the Studies volume (3), is also available free online. All passages with a commentary will display a highlighted speech bubble. For example, go to Mark 1:1, word address 12-16, and click on the speech bubble (see image below). It will bring you to the commentary for that passage and you can read why υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ, a Byzantine reading, was adopted over υἱοῦ θεοῦ as the initial text. Users are also invited to comment on passages in the NTVMR forum, which Klaus Wachtel also mentioned at the end of his blog post on the Text-Critical Commentary.

 

Returning to the apparatus, if you click on the circle icon (see image below), this brings you to the CBGM for this passage.

 

The Patristic database has been updated to include Mark (see image below). Now both Acts and Mark are available.

 

Image of Links to the Text-Critical Commentary, CBGM, and the Patristic Database in the digital ECM

 

Last but not least, the ECM Mark page on the INTF's website now has lists of textual changes between the ECM of Mark and the text of Mark in NA28 and split lines in ECM Mark.

 

In ECM Mark there are:

33 textual changes. Interestingly, 21 of these changes are in accordance with the Byzantine text. If you’re curious about the reasons these readings were chosen, the textual commentary can help shed some light on these decisions.

There are also 126 split lines in ECM of Mark. In most of the split lines (107 to be exact), the Byzantine text is one of the variants given equal weight as the Ausgangstext.

 

With its comprehensive apparatus based on full transcriptions of 209 Greek manuscripts and a text newly established on the basis of a systematic method—the CBGM—ECM Mark intends to offer an enduring contribution to the field of textual criticism. It is our hope that researchers will take advantage of the free transcriptions (on the NTVMR) and access to the editorial textual decisions (via the CBGM and Text-Critical Commentary).

 

Although these tools (1) the CBGM, (2) the CBGM Docker container, (3) the digital ECM, (4) the Text-Critical Commentary, and (5) the Patristic database may seem daunting at first, they offer a wealth of material; it is worthwhile to take the time to explore them and discover how they might be beneficial for your own research.

 

In the Preface to the Studies volume of ECM Acts, Holger Strutwolf said: “The ECM does not see itself as an end at all, but rather as opening a new phase of text-critical work on the New Testament” (ECM III/3, Preface). The same continues to be true for ECM Mark.

The ECM of Mark is currently being printed and will be available soon. Once it appears in print, we will make our online tools for it accessible. These will include the digital edition, the CBGM, a Docker container, and a list of textual changes compared to the NA28.

 

Even though the ECM of Acts was published back in 2017, we realized we have not posted the list of textual changes online for Acts like was done for the ECM of the Catholic Letters. So, in this post, I thought I would take the opportunity to review what is already available for the ECM of the Catholic Letters, update online resources for ECM Acts, and explain what will be available for the ECM Mark.

 

The INTF’s homepage lists a number of “Online Utilities”. These cover different topics but I’ve singled out the pertinent ones for the ECM and CBGM and have listed them here for convenience.

Image: ECM Volumes and available Digital Tools and Downloads

 

ECM IV: The Catholic Letters

Textual Changes

The ECM of the Catholic Letters (2nd edition, 2013) contained 33 textual changes compared to the NA27. These changes were adopted in the NA28 and are listed in the NA28 on pages 50*-51* and posted on the INTF’s website under “NA28” and Textual Changes. The first printing of the NA28 listed 34 textual changes, but the entry concerning the elision in ἀλλά in 1 Peter 2:25 was removed in later printings (since it is only orthographical); this resulted in 33 textual changes. Spellings were changed in a number of locations in the NA28. For a complete list see Orthographical standardization under “NA28” in “Online Utilities”.

 

Split Primary Lines

A split primary line occurs when the editors leave the decision open where two or more variants of about equal weight should be adopted in their reconstruction of the Ausgangstext. There are 43 split-line (diamond) readings in the ECM of the Catholic Letters, which were incorporated into the NA28. A list of diamond readings was posted under the “NA28” link under Split Primary Line in ECM2. The NA28 itself does not list these.

 

CBGM

The Coherence-Based Genealogical Method (CBGM) offers tools for reconstructing the Ausgangstext in the ECM which is based on full transcriptions of witnesses. Decisions are based on textual criticism and philological study of all variants. The CBGM and its data for the Catholic Letters is available online here.

 

ECM III: Acts

Textual Changes

Compared to the NA28, the ECM of Acts has 52 textual changes. For a list, see Textual Changes under “ECM Acts” in “Online Utilities”.

 

Split Guiding Lines

There are 155 split lines in ECM Acts. A list of these is found under Split Primary Line.

 

CBGM

The CBGM for Acts is also available online here. Phase 4 of the CBGM for Acts uses the new interface designed by the Cologne Center for eHumanities.

 

Textual Commentary and Digital Edition

It’s important to note that all of the textual changes and split lines are discussed in the online textual commentary on the NTVMR, explained here. The “Text-Critical Commentary” gives concise reasons why one variant is favored over another (in the case of textual changes) or explains why the decision has been left open (in the case of split lines).

            This commentary has been integrated into the digital ECM (dECM). The dECM displays the text of ECM Acts (different from the NA28) and offers interactivity that is not possible in a printed edition. For example, the apparatus links to transcriptions and images of manuscripts, there is more versional data included than what was in the printed ECM, and every variant unit has a link to the specific passage in the CBGM.

 

Patristic Citations

There is also the online database of Patristic citations available here. What is innovative about this database is that the reader is not only given the specific work of the author cited but also the full context of the quote. Nikolai Kiel has described how the ECM treats Patristic citations.

 

Docker Container

The newest addition to ECM Acts is the Docker container, which is a downloadable package that enables you to run the CBGM for Acts on your own computer. Different from the online CBGM, the program enables you to make different textual decisions and reestablish the local stemmata to your own theories. Video instructions for the CBGM Acts Docker are found here, which also includes a short introduction to the CBGM.

 

Mark

After the ECM of the Gospel of Mark appears in print (26 July 2021), we’ll upload a list of textual changes and split guiding lines online. Like Acts, there will be an online textual commentary, a digital version on the NTVMR, the CBGM (with downloadable docker container), and the Patristic citations database.

 

Image: Advertisement of ECM Mark from German Bible Society

 

We hope these resources will guide readers to better understand the data behind the editions and can provide a solid starting place for further research to take place. Now that a Docker container is available for Acts, anyone can now experiment with the CBGM, which may be the best way to learn how the method works firsthand.

As is well-known, the ECM of the Acts of the Apostles is available online in the New Testament Virtual Manuscript Room of the INTF since 2017. (The text-critical commentary is also online.)

 

Alongside the main text of the edition, all Greek variants are presented. After entering a verse in the “Quick Lookup”, the ECM apparatus appears in a window below the main text. See for example Acts 1:8.

 

In the apparatus there is now a link to “VC” – meaning Versio Coptica.

 

Clicking on VC will open a new window, which presents the full Coptic transcriptions that were used for the citations in the Greek apparatus.

 

The top of this window includes a link to the “Introduction” which leads to primary information about the edition created by S.G. Richter, K.D. Schröder and M.H.O. Schulz. Furthermore, a list of all cited witnesses as well as an apparatus with notes on the manuscripts is provided. Next to the link to the introduction, the button “SMR online” will take you to the SMR Database of Coptic New Testament Manuscripts with plenty information on all manuscripts.

 

The line-by-line layout of VC shows all Sahidic and Fayyumic pieces used in the edition, as well as the manuscript mae 3 which is the famous Codex Glazier, the only Middle Egyptian witness of Acts. The Bohairic siglum “bo 00” is the main text of G. Horner’s edition of Acts. A printed version of this edition of “Versio Coptica: Die Apostelgeschichte in koptischer Überlieferung” is in preparation.

 

Keep in mind that versional evidence is not used as a consistent witness in the apparatus of Acts, but only cited at selected passages which are of special importance to the Greek text or its history (cf. Novum Testamentum Graecum. Editio Critica Maior III. The Acts of the Apostles, ed. by H. Strutwolf et al. Part 1.1, Stuttgart 2017, p. 20*).

 

This new “VC” feature online enables all interested users not only to test the citations of Coptic witnesses in the Greek apparatus, but allows them to form their own opinions about citations at passages where the Coptic version had not been recorded in the apparatus of the ECM.

 

Any corrections can be sent to me here, s.g.richter at uni-muenster.de, and would be much appreciated!

From the beginning of critical work on the text of the Greek New Testament citations by early Christian writers have played a prominent role in research on textual history.

Nestle/Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece28, 78*.

 

Establishing the New Testament text of the Church Fathers has a strategic importance for textual history and criticism. It shows us how the text appeared at particular times and in particular places: this is information we can find nowhere else.

K. Aland/B. Aland, The Text of the New Testament, 168.

 

Patristic citations are witnesses to the text of the manuscripts that the Church Fathers used. Their witness is highly significant for textual criticism and for the reconstruction of the initial form of the New Testament text. An advantage of citations for textual criticism is that we can more or less ascertain the date and location of Church Fathers. If the text of a certain author is recoverable, conclusions can be drawn regarding the biblical text circulating in his day.

 

When examining citations of a Church Father, it is important to observe his specific approach to citation because some of the variants found in patristic literature trace back to the way the author treated his source text. Therefore, it is crucial to determine whether the Father has quoted the biblical text literally or imprecisely, if he just alludes to it or only paraphrases it.

 

Contrary to an exegete, not every patristic reference is reliable or usable for a textual critic. Most of the “citations” listed in the Biblia Patristica, for example, do not conform to the actual wording of the biblical text and thus have no text-critical value at all.

 

In our database of citations of Acts there are three main categories under “citations”:

•           Citation

•           Varying Citation/Adaptation

•           Allusions (paraphrases are to be treated like allusions)

 

Citation

According to D.A. Koch, a citation is a “the conscious adoption of external written (or rarely oral) wording, which is reproduced by an author in his own writing and is recognizable as such.”[1]

 

Varying Citations

For our purposes in the ECM, varying citations are generally treated like citations wherever their wording is adjusted to the context of the Church Father's text. Particularly small changes regarding the original biblical text can be identified. The following definition of an adaptation by Carroll D. Osburn fits our definition of a varying citation: “A quotation from a recognizable text, often without an introductory formula, in which much of the lexical and syntactical structure of the text is preserved and woven unobtrusively into the patristic context and/or syntax in less important portions of the text.”[2]

 

Allusion

According to Osburn, allusions are defined as “A reference to the content of a certain biblical passage in which some verbal or motif correspondence is present, but reflecting intent to give only the gist of the text rather than to cite.”[3]

 

A citation fulfills its function when the reader can identify it as a citation. In order to ensure that the citation is obvious, the author can use a citation marker. That way he shows his intent to actually cite a text, for example, ὡς ἐν ταῖς Πράξεσι τῶν ἀποστόλων γέγραπται and ἐν δὲ ταῖς Πράξεσιν ὁ Λουκᾶς γράφει.

 

When a longer passage is being cited in accordance with the manuscript tradition, it is very likely a citation. On the contrary, a paraphrase consists of a free or loose reproduction of a foreign text.[4] A vague allusion can be seen where the author uses “a single traditional formulation, which, however, is fully integrated into its own presentation”.[5]

 

Generally, a citation can be distinguished from an allusion by its more precise reproduction of the original wording, which matches the wording of one or more Greek manuscripts.

 

Often, the Church Fathers use a citation to support a certain interpretive approach, showing they are not afraid to adjust a passage for their own grammatical or textual context. As opposed to a copyist, whose only goal is (or should be) the exact reproduction of a manuscript, patristic authors might have a certain theological agenda in mind and try to match a citation to their purposes. In order to achieve this, citations and connectives like δέ, γάρ, καί, etc. are often substituted, omitted or changed, especially at the beginning. Also relevant to the accuracy of the citations is the way a Father handles his source material: Does he cite carefully or rather freely from memory? We also find citations being loosely cited in the beginning and cited precisely soon afterwards or vice versa.

 

The transition between a varying citation and an allusion is often fluid. This means that one part of a patristic reference can be an allusion while the other one can be treated as a direct citation.

 

Has the author altered the New Testament passage for the sake of style or to fit his theological position? Some important factors are necessary to assess the text-critical relevance of the citation:

 

The length of the cited passage: The most simple rule for distinguishing between genuine citations and allusive references or from memory (memoriter) citations is the length of the passage in question.[6]

 

Introductory formulas or citation markers: The general context is very important to assess the accuracy of the citation.

 

Stylistic Tendencies: All adaptations, alterations, additions, omissions and transpositions of the text, which go back to a Father’s stylistic tendencies, are excluded from the attestation of the textual tradition. Only a patristic citation with a high probability of being derived from a manuscript can be considered for our purposes. Allusions or reminiscences can also be recorded so long as they can be traced back to a certain manuscript text. Sometimes, a Church Father can witness to different forms of text, noted in the Nestle-Aland as “partim” (e.g. Or^pt). This can mean that the Father knew both texts from different manuscripts, as is often observed in Origen's works. This should not be seen as a flaw in the reliability of the patristic author. Rather, from the early testimony of a single Church Father to more than one text form, you can see that “important” variants emerged and circulated at the very beginning of the textual tradition.

 

Regarding Origen, it is also remarkable that he employed scribes, often dictating his thoughts to them and instructing them to add biblical references later on. His scribes then drew their biblical citation out of a manuscript that was not necessarily the same as the one Origen used. This can often be seen in Origen’s Commentary on John.

 

All in all, each Church Father has to be observed individually in order to evaluate his habits of citation; this also involves considering the respective genre of his work.[7] Evaluating citations from different kinds of works like commentaries, polemical treatises, homilies, letters, or theological tractates can lead to different results. In a commentary, for instance, you might expect the author to have used a manuscript and commented on it continuously. In a homily, though, we have to consider the homiletic implications that could have affected the use of biblical texts.

 

It is possible that not all variants of the Greek transmission that we have in known manuscripts are attested. Therefore, patristic citations may include some new variants.[8]

 

It is also possible that a Church Father may have randomly changed his text and thus created a new variant, which is also attested to in other manuscripts. In order to recognize such intentional changes to the text, it is important to observe the context of the citation, whether the author prefers certain terms or expressions and thus enters these in his own biblical text.

 

In essence, the criteria for patristic citation must be strictly employed. For New Testament textual criticism, the definition of a citation and of an allusion in the ECM is essential. In the ECM of the Catholic Letters, we have included citations based on the following principles:

 

“Variants are excluded from the apparatus if they may be ascribed to a Father’s stylistic tendencies and are unlikely to have been in his manuscript source.”[9]

 

 “A true quotation is one where the wording of the Father’s text is identical with a reading found in the manuscript tradition.”[10]

 

“Allusions are considered only if they clearly reflect a known reading.”[11]

 

I hope this short foray into how the ECM uses Patristic sources has helped to guide some readers who are new to this area in textual criticism.