The text of Matthew's Gospel in the writings of Basil of Caesarea

THE TEXT OF MATTHEW'S GOSPEL IN THE WRITINGS OF BASIL OF CAESAREA

by Jean-Frangois Racine

A Thesis subrnitted to the Faculty of Theology

of the University of St. Michael's Coiiege and the Biblical Department of Toronto School of Theology in partial Mfdment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Theology awarded by the University of St. Michael's College

Toronto 2000 @

Jean-François Racine

National Library of Canada

Bibliothéque nationale du Canada

Acquisitions and Bibliographic Services

Acquisitions et services bibliographiques

395 Wellington Street OttawaON K1AON4 Canada

OrtawaON K I A û N 4

395. rue WeUingtcm

Canada

The author has granted a nonexclusive licence allowing the National Library of Canada to reproduce, Ioan, distribute or seii copies of this thesis in rnicroform, paper or electronic formats.

L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive permettant a la Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou vendre des copies de cette thèse sous la forme de microfiche/fih, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique.

The author retains ownership of the copyright in this thesis. Neither the thesis nor substantial extracts fiom it may be printed or othenvise reproduced without the author's permission.

L'auteur conserve la propriété d u droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés ou autrement reproduits sans son autorisation.

THE TEXT OF MA'ITHEW'S GOSPEL IN THE WRlTINGS OF BASIL OF CAESAREA Jean-François Racine

An abstract of a Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Theology of the University of St. Michael's College and the Biblical Department of Toronto School of Theoiogy in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosaphy in nieology awarded by the University of St. Miciiael's College

ABSTRACT

The dissertation is a text-criticai study of Manhew's Gospel as found in the writings of Basil of Caesarea (c. 330-379 C.E.). Its threefold aim is to (1) display Basil's text of the Fint Gospel, (2) identify its texrual character, and (3) investigate the textuai

trends of the eady Byzantine text-type. Chapter 1 examines how aspects of Basil's Me, such as the supervision of

ascetics settlements, the involvement in ttieologicai debates, and the social situation of

mid-fourth century Cappadocia influenced his use of the Bible. Chapter 2 explains the method used to display Basil's text of Matthew. Chapter 3 provides the complete text

of every citation, adaptation, and significant allusion to Matthew's Gospel in ail genuine writings of Basil. This text is obtained from criticai editions and specific manu-

scripts. A critical apparatus displays the result of d a t i n g these quotations with a sample of witnesses representing the major text-types. A quantitative analysis and a cumprehensive profiie analysis (Chapter 4) indicate that Basil's text of Marthew is in greater agreement with witneses belonging to the Byzantine text-type than with any

other text-type. Chapter 5 analyses Basil's way of quoting Matthew's Gospel, surveys various hypotheses regarding the origin of the Byzantine text type, and investigates the

textual trends of this text type in Matthew . An examinaiion of ninety-nine distinctive, exclusive and primary Byzantine variant readings found in Basil's writings shows the overall editorial charader of this text type in Matthew. T y p i d y ; the Byzantine readings examined in ihis study tend to be stylistic impmvements, clarifications of diffcult

readings and harmonizations with amparable readings found in other gospels or in

Matthew. T h e appendices are provideci, which lut: (1) uncertain quotations of Matthew's Gospel, (2) quotations of Matthew found

in the dubious tmtk de Baptisme,

and (3) occurrences where it is suggested that Basil's witness could be cited in the

apparatus of the Greek New Testament of Nestle-Aland and United Bible Sociîeties.

...

lll

CONTENTS

Absmct List o f Tables Remerciements

Introduction The Need for Investigating Basil of Caesarea's Quotations of Matthew Chapter 1

Basil of Caesarea, Theoiogian, Axetic and Bishop

Chapter 2

Introduction to the Critical Apparatus

Chapter 3

The Text of the Fim Gospel in Basil

Chapter 4

Data A d y s i s

Chapter 5

Pecuiiarities of Bad's Quotations of the Gospel of Matthew

Conclusion Appendix A

Uncertain Quotations

Appendix B

Quotations from de b0ptim.w

Appendix C

Bad's Ten of Matthew in the Apparatus of NA*' and UBS4

Bibliography

LIST OF TABLES

1.

Proportionai Relationships (%) of Ail Witnesses to One Another in Matthew (coefficient of confidence: 95%)

2.

Witnesses RanM according to Proportional Agreement with Basil in Matthew (coefficient of confidence: 95%)

3.

Proportional Relationships of Witnesses with B a d Arranged by Textual Group in Matthew

4.

Basil's Attestation of Inter-group Readings in Matthew

5.

Basil's Attestation of Intra-group Readings in Maîthew

6.

Basil's Support of Uniforni and Predominant Readings That Are Also Distinctive, Exclusive or Rimary in Matthew

7.

Preservation of Uncornmon Non-Byzantine Variants

REMERCIEMENTS

Je tiens à remercier mes parents pour leur soutien indkfectible durant toutes ces années. Je remercie également mes directeurs de recherche, Bart D. Ehrrnan et

Paul J. Fedwick, pour leur aide diligente et pour m'avoir poussé à toujours faire mieux. Merci a Anne Hébert pour sa patience durant ces deux dernieres années lorsque je passais mes fins de semaine au bureau en tête à tête avec cette thèse.

J'étends mes remerciements à Léas Sirard s.s.s qui s'est montré un interlocuteur intéressé et bien documenté tout au long de mon doctorat. II a gracieusement

mis à ma diçposition les ressources de son étonnante bibliothèque personnelle. Je suis aussi reconnaissant envers mes collègues Jean-Guy Girard,Marc Jean et Camil Ménard du département de sciences religieuses et d'éthique de l'université du Québec à Chicoutimi pour leurs nombreux encouragements à achever ce travail. Cette recherche a été facilitée par une bourse Québec-Ontario accordée par le

Fonds pour la Formation des Chercheurs et l'Aide à la Recherche (Fonds FCAR).

Chimuthni, juin 2000

INTRODUCTION

THE NEED FOR INVESTIGATING BASIL OF CAESAREA'S QUOTATIONS OF MAïTHEW Textual critics of the New Testament acknowledge at l e s t three main textual traditions: the Alexandrian (or Egyptian), the so-called Western, and the Byzantine. The time and place of their development remain obscure. Although numerous Greek

manuscripts and versions manifest the various text types and mixtures of text types,

these Greek manuscripts cannot, for the most part, be dated or located accurate1y.l Early Christian writen can nevertheless be easily located temporally and geographi-

cally. These authon frequently quote and aliude to the text of the New Testament. By

extracting these citations and allusions, and by comparing them with manuscripts representing the different text types, one can add a piece to the punie of the history of the transmission of the New Testament text.

Why Basil?

Basil of Caesarea (a. 330-379) is a valuable witness for the study of the developrnent of the New Testament text. A prolifc writer, Basil abundantly quotes the

New Testament in his works. His quotations are ofien long and appear to have ofien been carefully copied from a wrinen text. In addition, a study has been done recentiy IEarly papyn, e.g., ~ 4 5 p6, , ~ 5 2 P64 , c67 and p66, have ail been found in Egypt, which may suggest that the earliest manuscripts onginated in Egypt. It is more likely, however, that they were preserved there simply because Egypt offered better conditions than other regions for the prese~ationof ancient documents. On that point see Bart D. Ehrman, "The Use and Significance of Patristic Evidence for NT Textual Criticism ," in New Testament Teaunl CritiaCtsm. Eregesis and Eorly Church History. A Discussion of Methods, eds. Joël Delobel and Barbara Aiand. Contributions to Biblical Exegesis and Theology, no. 7 (Kampen, Netherlands: Kok Pharos, 1994), 118-120.

2

c o n c e d g Gregory of Nyssa's text of the New Testament? Gregory of N y s a (ca. 335-394) was Basil's brother, so the study of Basil's New Testament quotatiom will aiiow us to

obtain .a more complete pictue of the New Testament text in usage in Cap-

padocia during the fourth century.

Previous studies of Basil's t e a of the New Testament The 1 s t forty years have seen the appearance of several studies on Basil and the New Testament. Prior to that time, W. K. L. Clarke had sbown some interest for the topic in an inûoductory chapter of his translation of Basil's ascetic works.3 His purpose was to test the authenticity of some treatises on the rationale that similarity of

quotations between works may point to identiîy of authorship. Clarke ailated the

quotations o f the New Testament found in the Maurist edition of the works of Basil with Souter's edition of the Greek New Testament. He found that most quorations

agreed verbatim. He aïs4 classified the number of readings according to von Soden's three-class nomenclature. In his chart, Clarke provided ody the number of agreements between the treatises and Souter's edition of the New Testament. His data are too frag-

mentary to permit one to draw a clear picture of Basil's New Testament t e a . Yet,

these figures allow one to grasp the quantitative importance of New Testament quotations in Basil's works.4

2James A. B m k s , Thc Ncw Testament T m of Gregory of Nyssa. SBLNTGF, no. 2 (Aitanta: Scholars Press, 19%). 3 William Kemp Lowther Clarke, The Ascetic Workr of Saint -2, TransZared Into EngZish wirh Zntroduaion and Notes. Translations of Christian Literature, Series 1: Greek Texts (London: SPCK, 1925), 19-27, esp. 25-27.

4For instance, Clarke counted 2348 NT quotations in B a d ' s ascetical works Clarke, Ascetic Works, 26.

only . See

Like Cl-,

Giibomont h t came a> the study of the New Testament quota-

tions to test the authenîicity of some of Basil's writing~.~ A 1957 article examines

Basil's preference in the corpus of the New Testament by counting the frequency with which each book of the New Testament is quoted in the Mordia.6 Oliver comments on

Gribomont's statistics, contending that 'Gribomont's data on the gospels in the Moralia are diEicult to confirm, since he does not cite the exact source of his information. His figures do not coincide with Migne, nor with the individual manuscripts upon which he

most heavily depends, viz., Vaticanus Graecus 413 and 428.

"'Thereafter, Gribomont

concentrated on the quotations of Pauline and Johannine fiterature.

*

His first article on

Basil's paulinism displays in charts the number of Pauline quotations in a sample of Basil's works and comments on the picture of Paul that appears h m these quotations. The second article continues the statistical investigation by charting the number of

Pauline quotations in Basil's works, which he considered genuine. In his 1982 article, Grïbomont counted ail occurrences of Johannine quotations in Basil's works. He com-

5~eanGribomont, "L'Exhortation au renoncement attribuée à saint Basile. Étude d'authenticité, " OrChrP 21 (1955): 375-398.

Gribomont, "Les Règles Morales de saint Basile et le Nouveau Testament," in Studia P ~ s t i c uvol. , 22.2, eds. Kurt Aland and F. L. Cross. TU, no. 64 (Berlin: +demie Verlag, 1957), 416-426.Reproduad in Jean Gribomont, Saint Basile. EvangiZe ez Eglise. Méhges, tome 1, ed. Enzo Bianchi. Spinnialité orientale, no. 36 (Brégrolles-en-Mauge, Maine-&-Loire: Abbaye de Bellefontaine, l984), 146156. Gribomont went further by notichg that Basil seems to prefer specific chapters of some books of the NT; those which he quotes extensively, e.g., Rom 12. 7~arold H. Oliver, "The Text of the Four Gospels as Quoted in the 'Moralia' of Basil the Great" (Ph. D. diss., Emory University, 1961), 78.

*lean Gribomont, "Le paulinisme de saint Basile, " in Srvdionun Puuiimnun

Congressus Inremationalis Cotholiw 1961, vol. 2. AnBib, no. 17-18 (Rope: Editrice Pontificio Instituto Bibliw , 1963), 48 1-490. Repduced in Saint Banle. Evmgile er

Église, 192-200; idem, "Le paulinisme de saint Basile - Note complémentaire," in Saint Bade. Evangile a Eglise, 201-208; idem, "La tradition johannique chez saint Basile," in Parola e Spirito. Sludi in onore di Smimio Ciprimi, tome 1, ed. Cesare C a d e Marcheseiii (BrPaideia, l982), 847-866. Reproduced in Saint Banle. Evangile et EgZise, 209-228.

ments on Basil's preferences in the Johannine corpus. Gribomont's articles help one to

grasp better the importance of New Testament quotaîions in Basil's writiags. Still, they provide no clue as to the New Testament text used by ~ a s i l . 9

Harold H. Oliver was the fvst to specifically investigate the matter of Basil's

tetraercangelion text. In his 1961 Ph. D. dissertation under the direction of Merril M. Parvis at Emory University, he chaoses to focus on the Moralïa because of its great concentration of Gospel citations and the length of these citations. Oliver proceeds by displaying the cbrnplete citations of the Gospels dong with their location in the works, and their support in a wide range of Greek New Testament rnanuscripts. He went further by detennining the percentage of agreement between the citations of each gospel and manuscript. The purpose of his quantitative study was to test the validity of von

Soden's classification of Basil's text among his P text-type. 10 Oliver demonstrated that Basil's text of the four gospels showed instead the textual characteristics of von Soden's Kl sub-group. To arrive at his resuits, Oiiver used the Multiple Method designed by his adviser M e d i M. Parvis and better known since discussed by ColweU in two articles. l l With his extensive treatment of the text of the four Gospels in Basil's

Moralia, Oliver's dissertation would seern to render useless any further research on the gPrior to Gribomont, William A. Tieck had written " Basil of Caesarea and the Biblen (Ph.D. diss., Columbia University 1953). The author focussed on Basil's perception of the Bible and was therefore not interested in Bad's text of the NT. looliver, The T m of the Four Gospels, 7-9, 12. 1lEmest C. Colweii, "The Significance of Grouping of New Testament Manuscripts," NTS 4 (1958): 73-92. Reproduced as "Method in Grouping New Testament Manuscripts," in Studies in Texncal Criticism of the New Testament. NTTS, no. 9 (Leiden: Brill, 1969), 1-25; idem, "Method in Locating a Newly -Discovend Manuscript within the Manuscnpt Tradition of the Greek New Testament, " in Studia Evangelica, vol. 1, eds. Kurt Aland et ai. TU, no. 73 (Berh: Akademie Verlag, 1959), 757-777. Reproduced as "Method in L o c a ~ ga Newly Discovered Manuscript." In Shuiies in T m 2 Criticism of the Nau Testament, 26-44.

rnatter.12 1 believe, however, that it is both possible and desirable to go hrther, and for several reasons. Fim, Oliver considerad only one part of Basil's writings, namely the Moralia. m a t part is wnsiderable, but it is possible to increase significantly the

amount of data by investigating Bad's other works. Second, Oliver was concerned with testing von Soden's classification of Basil's text of the Gospels. He succeeded in

showing the inadequacy of von Soden's label regarding Basil's text, but nonetheless reclassified it within von Soden's nomenclature. Meanwhile, von Men's textual

theory has proven to be wrong in several different ways and has failen into disuse. It is therefore necessary to re-label Bad's text according to currently used text-types. Third, although the Multiple Method used by Oliver ailows one to masure the affinities

between Basil's text of the Gospels and a sample of manuscnpts, it does not provide a precise judgment wncerning the affinities of Bad's text of the Gospels with a definite text-type. To achieve that judgment, it is necessary to use another method. Bart D.

Ehrman designed such a method for his study of the text of the Gospels in the writings

of Didymus the Blind?

Fourth, Oliver did not estimate the incidence of his fmdings

on Our knowledge of the origin and character cf the early Byzantine text-type. 1 intend

to investigate this matter to the fuli extent of the data available.

12There has not been, in fact, any further research on the topic except for Jean Duplacy, "Les regulae morales de Basile de Césarée et le texte du Nouveau Testament en Asie-Mineure au Ive siècle, " Arbeiten urr Kirchengeschichte 50 (1980): 6983. Reproduced in Jean Duplacy , Erudes de critique terxtuelle du Nouveau Tenament, ed. Joël Delobel. BETL, no. 78 (Leuven: Leuven University PresslPeeters, 1987), 293-307. Duplacy appears mainly ancerneci with the possibility that the original edition of the Regulae Morales did not quote the text of the NT and supplied references instead. Duplacy concludes by maintainhg the likelihood of an original edition of the Regulae Mordes including full New Testament quotations. i%ee Bart D. Ehrman, D i d y m the Blind and the T m of the Gospels. SBLNTGF, no. 1 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1986)' 223-253 and idem, "The Use of Group Profiles for the Classification of New Testament Documentaq Evidence," JBL 1O6 (1987): 465-486.

Purpose ofthe dissertation To surnmarize, the purpose of this dissertation is 1) to present Bad's text of

the Gospel of Maahew by laying out all quotaîions Basil made h m the F i t Gospel in aii his works;14 2) to charaderize this ea in relation to the exisMg manuscripts of the

Gospels by using bath a method o f quantitative anaiysis and a profile method; 3) to contribute to the study of the history of the transmission of the New Testament text by presenting a sample of the text of Manhew in use in Cappadocia in the middle of the 4th century; 4) to shed some light on the chamcter and origin of the early Byzantine

text-type of the First Go@.

14Thelarge amount of NT quotations in Basil's works forced to limit the scope of the project to the sole First Gospel.

BASIL OF CAESAREA, THEOLOGIAN, ASCETIC AND BISHOP A "revolutionary aristocrat" . That is how Jean Gribomont portrayed Basil of

Caesarea in an article on his aristocraiïc background and social involvement in rnidfourth century Cappadocia.1 Basil was bom after the wuncil of Niaa (325), as were the other Cappadocians, i. e., his brother Gregory of Nyssa and his friend Gregory of

Naziantus. The creed issued at Nicea was discussed during most of his lifetime. At Basil's deaîh (a. 379), in part due to his efforts at clarijting its terms, this creed was

on the way to common acceptame. In fact, dong with the other Cappadocians, Basil was deeply involved in the christological debates of the fourth century, and greaîly con-

tributed to the elaboration of the Greek theology of the Trinity.2 H e was also an

'Jean Gribomont, "Un aristocrate révolutionnaire, évêque et moine," Aug 17 (1977): 179-191. On these aspects, see also Ioannes Karayannopoulos, "St. Basil's Social Activity: Principles and Praxis,"in Rusil of Cùesarea: Christian,HwMnist, Ascetic. A Sineen-Hundredth Anniversq Sympasiwn, ed. Paul J. Fedwick (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, l98l), 375-39 1; R . n Teja, Organizacion ecommica y social de Cùpûbcia en el siglo IV, segwt los Padres capczdocios. Acta Salmanticensia, Filosofia y Letras, no. 78 (Salamanca: Universidad de Salamanca, 1974); BarTreucker, Politische wrd sou'algeschichtliche Sîudien tu den &zn'liiusBriefen (Frankfurt am Main, 1961).

a n the theological contributions of Basil and the other Cappadocians, see for instance Stanley M. Burgess, n e Ho& Spirit= Ancient Christian Traditions (Hendrickson: Peabody, Mass., 1997), 133; Michael A. G. Haykin, nie Spirit of God. ï%e Exegesis of l and 2 Corinthians in the heumaiochian Controverg of the Fourth Cenncry. VCSup, no. 27 (Leiden: Brill, 1994), 104-169; Anthony Meredith, The Cappadocians (Crestwood, N . Y .: St. Vladimir's SemPress, 1995), 29-35; 102-114; 124-125; Jaroslav Pelikan, La tradition chrétienne, tome 1, L 'émergence de la tradition catholique (100-6W), transl. Pieme Quiiiet. Théologiques (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1994), 221-236; Johannes Quasten, Pmology vol. 3, The Golden Age of Greek Pmarnstic Literantre. From the Corncil of Nicea fo the C o d of Chaicedon (Westminster, Md.: Christian Classics hc., 19921, 228-233; 248-253; 283-288; Bernard Sesboiié and Joseph Wolinski, Histoire des dogmes, tome 1, Le Dieu du salur (Paris: Desclée, 1994), 267-270, 296-301; Frances M. Young, From Niaa to W cedon. A Guide to the Litermre iznà Its &zckgrounâ (Fortxess: Philadelphia, 1983), 109-113.

ascetic, whose w r i ~ g have s g d y influenced both Eastern and Western monasticism.3 Finally, he was the sometime bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia. Each

of these aspects of Basil's life d

d have had an effect on the rnanner he studied and

used the Bible in his writings. 1 will draw a short biographical sketch of Basil in the

following pages, emphasizhg elements of his life relevant to his use of the text of the New Testament.

Basil was bom into a wealthy Christian family in about 330 at Caesarea in Cappadocia. His father, Basil of

Neocesafea

(Pontus),was a sophist-rhetoriciari. His

mother, Emmelia, was a noble-woman from Cappadocia. They had nine children; the

3 ~ o the r importance of Basil to Christian moouticism, see for instance

William Kemp hwther Clarke, Saint BcrsiI the Great. A Snuiy of MoMcism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1913); Patrice Cousin, Précis d'histoire monanique. La vie de 1'Eglise (Paris:Bloud & Gay, 1956), 65-70; David Knowles, Les mines chrétiens, transl. by Christine Renard-Cheinisse. L'Univers des Connaissances (Paris: Hachette, 1969), 22 and 24; Guy-Marie Oury, Les mines. Bibliothèque d'histoire du christianisme,no. 13 (Paris: Desclée, 1987), 40-43; Jules Pargoire, "Basile de Césarée (Saint) et Basiliens," in Dicno-re d'archéologie chrérienne er de iintrgie, vol. 2, ed. Fexnand Cabrol (Paris: Letouzey et h é , lgO7), 501-510.

4No "Me of B a d " has been published recentiy. Some monographs on Basil nevertheless deal with biographical matters. These include Philip Rousseau, B a i l of Caesarea. Transformation of the Classical Heritage, no. 20 (Berkeley, Calif. : University of California Press, 1994); Robert Pouchet, W l e le Grand et son mivers d'amis d'après sa correspondance. Une stratégie de conrmution. Studia Ephemeridis Augustinianum, no. 36 (Rome: Institutum Paîristicum Augustinianum, 1992); Wolf und erlaLitert. 3 Dieter Hauschild, Ban'Iius w n Càesarea. Bnefe. Eingeleitet, *ersvolumes, Bibliothek der Griechischen Literatur, Bd. no. 3, 32, 37 (Stuttgart: Anton Hiersemann, 1973, 1990, 1993); Kiaus Koschorke, Spuren der alten Liebe. S d i e n m m Kirchenbegrijf des &IsiIiusw n Cuesar~l.Paradosis, no. 32 (Freiburg, CH: Universitatsverlag, 1991); Benoît Gain, L 'Eglise de Cappadoce au IVe siècle d'après la correspondance de BosiIe de Césarée (330-379).OrChrAn, no. 225 (Rome: Pontificium Institutum Orientale, l985), 41-58, 291-322, 393-398; Paul J. Fedwick, The Church and the Chansma of Leadership in Baril of Caesarea. Text and Studies, no. 45 (Toronto:Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1979); idem, "A Chronology of the Life and Works of Basil of Caesarea," in Baril of Gzescvec~:Chnsziun, Humanisr, Ascetic. A Suteen-Hdredth Anniversas, Symposium, Tome 1, ed. Paul J. Fedwick (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1981), 3-19; Meredith, Cappadocians, 19-38; Quasten, vol. 3, 204-236.

9 narnes of five of them are h w n : Macrina the Younger, Basil, Naucratius, Gregory of Nyssa, and Peter of Sebaste.

Education -

-

--

B a d began his higher education in Caesarea (ca.346-348), where he may have met Gregory of Nazianzus, continueci this education in Constantinopl~(ca. 348-

349) studying with the famous teacher of rhetoric Libanius, and finally completed it in Athens from ca. 349 m 355.6 In Athens, he met Gregory of Nazianzus who had

preceded him in the city.7 Basil's education prepared him for the profession of rhetorician, which he practiced for a short time in Caesarra. His rhetorical skius are

manifest in his works, although he expresses disdain for his education as a rhetorician: Afier 1 had wasted much time in vanity and had spent neatly all my youth in the vain labor in which 1 was engaged, occupying myself in ampiring a knowledge made fmlish by God, when at length, as if aroused from a deep sleep, 1 looked upon the wondrous light of the tmth of the Gospel and saw the futility of the wisdom 'of the d e s of th& world who are passing away' 5 0 r Antioch

according to Merdith, Cappadocians, 21, note 6 who likely

leans o n the witnesses of Socrates (Wist. eccl. W.26 = PG 67, 529A) and Sozomen (Hisz. eccl. VI.26 = PG 67, 1333C). Nevertheless, it is more probable that both Basil and Gregory of Naziannis were Libanius' students during the teacher's second sojourn in Constan~opie(ca. 348-353). On this matter, see A. J. Festugière, Antioche païenne et chrén'eme. Libonius, Chrysostome et les moines de Syrie, avec un commentaire archéologique sur I'Antiochi~(196s) par Roland Martin, professeur à l'université de Dijon. Bibliothèque des &les fiançaises d'Athènes et de Rome, no. 194 (Paris: E. de Boccard, 1959), 409.

GHere, I foliow the chronology proposed by Fedwick, "Chmnology, ". On the content of superïor education, see for instance Henri-Irénée Mârrou, Histoire de 2 'éducation dans 1 'AntiqwWté, 6th ed. revised (Paris: Seuil l965), 280-322. On Basil's education, see Paul J. Fedwick, "Basil of Caesarean on Education, " in Basilio di Caesarea, la sua etaJ k sua opera e il basilianesim in Sicilia. Am- del Congresso i n t e ~ o n a i emes , si^ 3-6 XII 1979 (Messina: Centro di studi urnanistici, 19831, 579600, esp. 581-587. 71x1 his funeral oration on B a d , Gregory of Naziannis recds the y e a n spent in Athens and comments on his fkiendship with Basil. See Or. Bas. 15-25.

having mowned deeply my piteous Me, 1 prayed that guidance k given me for my introduction to the doctrines of religion? Photius who lived four centuries later (820-891) mnsidered hirn an outstanding rhetorician:

He [Basil] is admiiable in aU his wntiogs. More than any one else he knows how to use a style that is pure, distinct, suitable, and in general, forensic and panegyricai; in arrangement and purity of sentiment he is second to none. He is fond of persuasivenes and swe+tnessand brilliancy, his words flow Wre a stream gushing fonb spontanmusly h m a spring. He ernploys probabiiity to such an extent, that if any one were to take his discourses as a mode1 of forensic language, and p h c e himself in hem, provided he had some acquaintance with the d e s comected with it, 1 & not think he would need to consult any other author, nor even Plato nor Dernosthenes, whom the ancients recommended those to study who desire to becorne masten of the forensic and panegyrical style? B a d ' s m*orical skills are evident mostly in his homilies and polemical treatises. Although he draws his theological ideas h

m scriphire, which he quotes gen-

erously and without much alteration, the architecture of the dismurses and even the choice of the tems show much acquaintance Mth rhetoric. 10

8Ep 223.2. I quote the translation of Agnes Clare Way, ed., Mnt W . Lerrers (186-368).FC, no. 28 (New York: Fathers of the Church, 1955), 127. gPhotius, Bibi. cod. 141. 1 quote the translation of John H. Freese, ed., The Library of Photios (SPCK:London, 1920) as found in Quasten, vol. 3, 208. 1OOn this aspect, see George L. Kustas, 'Saint B a d and the Rhetorical Tradition," in Basil of Caesareu: Christian, H'ist, AsceîiencC A Sixteen-Hundredth Anniversav Symposium, tome 1, ed. Paul J. Fedwick (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 198l), 221-279 and James Manhall Campbell, me InfliKce of the Second Sophistic on the Style of the Sermons of St. MI the Great. The Catholic University of America Patristic Studies, no. 2 (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of Amenca, 1922). As an example regardhg the choice of tenns, Kustas mentions that Basil prefers the term homotirnos ("of like honor") to the term hom00~os(consubstantid) to descnbe the Spirit, the former being a rhetoricai tenn, the latter a philosophical term. See Kustas, "Saint Basil and the Rethorid Tradition, " 231-233. Campbell, whose method is to highlight features of the second sophistic and to trace examples of it in Bad's homilies, notices Basil's attention to the structure of the hodies, the use of paradox, of puns, of sophisticated metaphon. He nevertheless qualifies Basil as a restrained rhetorician in these homilies. See Campbell, Influence of the Second Sophistic, 148- 149.

The Ascetic Life

Bad's interest in ascetic Me grew stronger. Ca. 357-358, he toured settlements of ascetics with Eusthatius, bishop of Sebaste and went on his own to visit other settlements in Cale-Syria, Mesopotamia, Palestine, and Egypt. His baptism followed

this tour. 11 He also joined his mother and sister Macrina on a family estate in Annisa to live an ascetic life. Gregory of Nazianzus joined him briefly and both, during this tirne, composed the Philocdia, an antbology of Chigen's works. Throughout his whole

career, Basil oversaw severai p u p s of ascetics. This oversight provided an avenue for

an important iiteraxy activity. Thus, he produced the M d i a , a collection of eighty

moral insmictions, mch of them supported by quotations h m the NT. Another cuiiec-

tion gathers Basil's answen to questions asked by monks. These questions-answers went through several editions as Basil, on each tour of his communities, received new

questions. A Latin version, made from an eariier edition was soon produced by Rufinus; other editions and translations were published in the years that foiiowed. l2

Common to all these d e s are abundant quotations h m the NT. Indeed, Basil considered that the ideal nile of life was the life and doctrine of Christ. This explains the large n u m ber of quotations, often extensive, from the Gospels. Furthemore, he stated

"On this matter, see Ep 1 and Ep 223.2. '*one generally distinguishes the RegJne fUnus ractufae or "Long Rules" organized under fîfty-five headings h m the Reg& br& tractatm or "Shorter Rules" arranged under three hundred thirteen headings. This division was apparenily made by editors of these questions-answers. Fedwick distinguishes seven recensions of B a d ' s Asceticon and iists al manudpts, which beiong to each recension. Two recensions (Ask 2 and 3) do not separate the two collections. On this matter, see Paul J. Fedwick, nie Ascetica. contra Eauwmmrum 1-3. ad Amphilochiwn de Spintu Soncto, dubia et spuria, with Supplements tu Volumes 1-11, in Bibliotheca &rsiIiana Universalis, vol. m. Corpus Christianomm (Turnhout: Brepols, 1997), xxviii-xxk, 62, 87. Fedwick also provides a table, which displays the conespondence between the arrangement of the questions-answers in Ask 2 and 4, see ibid., 49-57. Sainte Trinité 105, the manuscript 1 used to oollect quotations h m the Fint Gospel belongs to the recension Ask 2. On the value of this manuscript, see ibid., 48.

in the Mordia that "every word or thing should be confirmecl by the testirnony of

inspired scripture, for the assuring of the good and rebuking of the bad. "13

Priesthood B a d was ordained as a presbyter amund 362-364 by his bishop Eusebius, whom he served as an adviser. A -ment

with the bishop brought him back to

ascetic life for a short t h e , until he was recaiied by Eusebius on Gregory of

Naziarizus' advice. It is during this period that he wrote his wnrra Ewromium, in response to Eunomius' own Aplogia.

Along with Aetius of Antiwh, Eunomius was the chief representaîive of the Anornian Party, whose position could be describeci as "second generation" Arian. 14 Anomoians used a more thorough philosophical and semantical argumentation than their Anan predecessors. Thus, they oonsidered that God's substance raides in his

unbegotten character. This character makes God absolutely transcendent (Le., dissimilar = anornoios), the act of generation king totally alien to him. Therefore, God could not have begotten a Son, equal to him in nature, since he is the absolute monad.

Hence, the Son was a creature, the first one made by the Faîher, and the Holy Spirit was the Son's fust creature. l5 As

a result, the homoians envisioned the Trinity as a

1 3 ~ o 26.1. r 1 quote the English translation found in William Kemp Lowther Clarke, The Ascetic Workr of Saint &il, Translated into English with Introduction and Notes. Translations of Christian Literature, Series 1: Greek Texts (London/New York: SPCKIMacMillan, l925), 109. 14Basil could have heard Eunomius as he aîtended the synod of Constantinople (360) as an observer. On this matter, see Stanislas Giet, " Saint Basile et le concile de Constantinople de 360," JTS n.s. 6 (1955): 94-99.

15See Eunomius, Apologia, 20.20-2 1.

B a d responded to Eunomius on the latter's own ground, namely logics and language. H e insisteci on the impossibility of defining God, since human beings can

only know characteristics of God and not God himself. Ingeneracy was therefore only one of God's properties and did not encompass his whole nature. Basil also leaned on the liturgical confessions of faith, especially the one used at baptism, attested in Matt

28: 19-20, which juxtaposes the narnes of Father, Son and Spirit. He also appealed to other passages, which witnessed to the equality of the Son with the Father or the divine status of the Holy Spirit.17

Basil's effort at refuting Eunomius was also the occasion for c l w i n g and refining the vocabulary used to describe the Trinity. The Nicene creed had stated the

16~rnongAetius' w n ~ g s only , the Synugnation has been preserved in Epiphanius, Pan. 76.11. It is found in Karl Holl, ed., Ep#hunius Werk 111, 2th ed. CGS, no. 37 (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1985) and Lionel R. Wickham ed., "The Synragmoton of Aetius the Anoeman, " JTS n. S. 19 (1968): 532-569. There are also two editions of Eunomius' Apology: Bernard Sesboüé, George-Matthieu de Durand and Louis Doutreleau, eds.,Basile de Césarée. a n t r e E m m e suivi de E m m e . Apologie, tome ïI. SC, no. 305 (Paris: Cerf, 1983), 177-352 and Richard Paul Vaggione, ed., Eunomius. The m a n t Woks. Oxford Early Christian Texts (Odord: Clarendon, 1987). For an exposition of Aetius and Eunomius' positions and Basil's response to Eunomius, see for instance, Sesboüé, Dieu du sdut, 262-263; 284; idem, Saint h i l e et la Trinité. UR acte théologique au IVe siècle (Paris: Desclée, 1998); Lionel R. Wickham, "Aetius and the Doctrine of Divine Ingeneracy," in Snrdia Panistica, vol. XI, ed. F. L. Cross, TU, no. 1OS (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1972), 259-263 and Meredith, Cappadocio~ls,23-24. 17~.g.,conceming the equaiity of the Son with the Spirit: John 5: 26; 6:27; 12:45; 14:9; 17:lO; Phi. 2:6,7; Col 1:15; Heb 1:3 in Eur 1.17.23-18,29; Matt 16:27; John 5:18,19; 10:30; 1 Cor 1:24; Phi1 2:6 in Eur 1.23.20-25,22; Luke 10:16; John

5:23 in Eun 1.26.28-30; John 10:30 in Ewt 1.27.18; Col 1:15,18; Heb 1:3 in Eun II.8.40-41; Ps 109:3; John 1:l; 1 Cor 1:24,30; Col 1:15; Heb 1:3 in Eun 11.17.1-30; Pss 2:7; 109:3 in Eun II.24.19-21; Jn 14:6; 1 Cor 1:24 in Eun 11.27.23-25; Mark 1:24 in Eun II.31.61; 2 Cor 4:4; Col 1:15; Heb 1:3 in Ewr 11.32.48; John 17:lO in Ewr 11.34.13. Concenllng the Spirit, Basil's argument was basically to show that the names and functions attributed to the Spirit are the same as the ones granted to the Father and the Son. For instance, the Spirit completed creation (Ps 33:6; Job 33:4); his power is spread through the whole universe (Pss 1399); he teaches as does Christ (John 14:26); he distributes the charisrnas (1 Cor 12:4-6); he searches the depths of God (1 Cor 2: 1011) ; he gives life (Rom 8: 11), etc. 1 borrow these &ta from Sesboüé, Saint Basile er la Trinité, 158, 167.

deiry of the Son by declaring him cmsubstantial (homoousios) to the Father. Nevertheless, the rneaning of the term ousia was arnbiguous. It oould even be used as a synonym for hyposmsis.

ls

Now, Arius, in a ooafession of faith addressed to

Alexander, could declare that there were three hypostares.19 On the other hand, the term homousios could be interpreted as irnplying that the Father and the Son were not

distinct, since they shared the same nature. This position was held by Marcellus of Ancyra, and was assimilated to SabellianiSm.** Basil's aim was to steer a middle

course between Arianism and Sabellianism, so that one would confess both m n substantiality (homoousios) and distinction of penons (hypostases).21 For this reason, he sought to cl-

each of these terrns and h a U y adopted the formula "one Godhead

in t h e persons", which is probably the most enduring heritage left by Basil and the

other Cappadocians. A notable aspect of Bad's priestly penod was his involvement on the occa-

sion of a famine in Cappadocia around 369, in successfully finding and distributhg food to the needy. Three of his homilies were Wrely given at that time, with the perspeaive of obtaining provisions for dismbution. These homilies took their cues h m

evangelical princip1es.P Gregory of N a z i a m alludecl to this episode in his funeral

oration on Basil: 1% this see Pelikan, Tradition chrétienne, 219; Quasten, Pmlogy, vol. 3, 228; Sesboüé, Saint Basile et la Trinité, 15. In Ep. Afi 4, Athanasius writes: 'now subsistence [hyposîasis]is essence [ouial, and means nothing else but vexy being."

oonféssion is quoted by Athanasius, Syn. 16.

3, 199.

**onMarcellus' of Ancyra theological position, see Quasten, PmoZogy, vol. 21Basil

explah his goal in Ep 210.4-5.

ZSee HomiZia in ilZud dievangeli secwdom Iucam: "Desmuunhorrea me, et majora aedifiabo: ' itemque de avariria, Homifia in divires and HomIIUfiadicta tempore f m k et siccitaris. The first homily comments Luke 12:18, the second, Matt 19:16-26 and the third Amos 3% In his edition and commentary of the two fmt homilies, Courtonne has idenàfied biblical allusions as weli as quotations to Pagan authors. See Yves Courtonne, ed., Saint Basile. Homélies sur la n'chesse. Edition

By his word and exhortations he opened up the storehouses of the rich and brought to realUation the words of Scripture: 'he d d t bread to the hungry and he satisfied the poor with bread, and he fed them in famine and he has filled the hungry with good thiags." [cf. Ira 58:7; Ps 131:15; 32: 19; Ldce 1531 And in what manner? For this amtributed in no smail way to his assistance. H e assembled in one place those afflicted by the famine, inchdh g some who had recovered a little h m it, men and women, children, old men, the distresseci of every age. He collected through contributions al1 kinds of food helpful for relïeving famine. He set before them d d r o n s of pea soup and our saited meats, the sustemnce of the poor?

Basil's social involvement gained him favor among the population, so that he

was the ideal candidate for bishop when Eusebius died in 370. In addition, the name of his family helped him obtain the s u p p o ~h m other wealthy, influentid fa1nilies.2~ During his episcopate, Basil wntinued his social action with the creation of hospitals,

shelten for the poor, and hospices for travellen.25 critique et exégétiqze (Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1935). Both homilies show the vanity amassing material goods, and the responsability of wealthy peuple toward needy people.

=Or. &rs. 35. 1 quote the English translation found in Leo P. McCauiey and others , eds., Funerai Oranons by Saint Gregory Nazianzen and Saint Ambrose, FC, no. 22 (New York: The Fathers of the Church, 1953), 58. On the same episode, see Gregory of Nyssa, Bas. 124.14-1 25.1. 1 refer to Otto lendle, "In Basilium fratrem, " in Gregorii Nysseni Semones, Pars II, vol. 10, t. 1, eds. Werner Jaeger, Hermann Langerbeck and Heinrich Domes (Leiden: Briil, 1990). 24Here 1 adopt Gribomont's explanation of the circumstances of Bad's episcopal election. See, Gribomont, "Un aristocrate révolutionnaire, " 184. Nevertheless, Basil's candidacy was met with opposition h m some neighbouring bishops and some people from Caesarea, so that he had to summon bishops fmm distant locations, among whom Gregory's of Nazianas ill father. On this, see Or. Bas. 37.

250n this aspect, see for instance Demetrios J. Constantelos, "Baril the Great's Social Thought and Involvement, " GOTR 26 (1981): 81-87; Gerald F. Reilly , Zmpenùm and Sacerdotiwn According ro Sr. Basil the Great. Caîholic University of Amenca Studies in Christian Antiquity, no. 7 (Washington, D.C. : Catholic University of Arnerica Press, 1945), 117-134; Stanislas Giet, Les idées et 1'action sociales de saint Basile (Paris: Lecoffre, l941), 417-423.

He also kept fighting for the recognition of the Nicene creed in a period when state-supported Arianism appeared to triumph. Indeed, empermr Valens (364378) promoted the reconciliation of the Eastern Church around the formula of Rimini

(359),which had replaceci the terms homoousios - coined at the council of Nicea (325)

- with the more arnbiguaus term homoios (alike).

All bishops who refûsed to r-g-

nize the formula of Rimini and to ~cceptmmmunion with the Anomoian party were disposseseci of their see, which was then handed over to an Arian bishop. Basil suc-

cessfully resisted the emperor and his prefect Modestus on this point. He kept his see and was even granteci authority over the religious affairs of Armenia.26

During these years, Basil wrote his second polemical treatise de Spi& Smcto ad Amphilochiwn to defend the divine s t a t u of the Holy Spirit and its con-

substantiality with the Father and the Son. He had already dealt with this matter in the third book of the contra Eunomim. The treatise could have taken its cue h m an accusation that Basil used mntradictory doxologicd formulae. Basil writes:

Lately when praying with the people, and using the full doxology to God the Father in both fonns at one tirne 'with the Son togezher with the Holy Ghost," and at another 'through the Son in the Holy Ghost," 1 was attacked by some of those present on the ground that 1 was introducing novel and at the same tirne mutuaIly contradictory tems.Z7

directed against Basil's former mentor, Eusthatius of Sebaste who had espaused a 26On this matter, see Fedwick, Church and Chansma, 103-104 and Benoît Pruche, ed., Basile de Césarée. Sur le Sàînt-Esprit. Introduction, texte, traduction et notes, 2nd ed. SC, no. 17bis (Paris: Cerf, l968), 62-63.

2%mph~p1.3 quoted h m Blomfield Jackson, ed. Ine Treaîise de Spi&

Smm.

me Nine Homilies of the Hexaemeron and the Letters of Saint Basil the Great,

Archbishop of Gwserea Trmlartcd Mth Notes. NP*, Eerdmans, 1968), 3.

vol. 8 (Grand Rapids, Mich.:

P n e w ~ t o l t ~ l c h iposition.*s m Nevertheless, Pouchet has argued that it was aimed at the Anornians as was the contra E W U ) ~ ~ * W ~ . * ~

Basil's method to ascertain the nature of the Holy Spirit was to examine îhree sets of biblical passages, d&g

with his tiîles (onom~ul), his activities (energaiai),

and his gifu (euergesiai). Matt 28: 19-20 was the comentone of his argumentation: In this formula, the th=

pmons stood in relation to each other, not in subordination, but

in coordination. The same passages used in conrra Eunomiwn III were used to sustain

28This position muid have originateci with Macedonius, aichbishop of Constantinople, dispossed of his see in 360. It pretended that beings are neither created from the Spirit, nor by the Spirit, but in the Spirit, so the Spirit must be infenor in nature to the Father and the Son, king neither a creaturr nor a creator, but something in between. On this, see Sesbiié, Dicu du salw, 264-265. Domes, Sesboüé, Meredith, Gribomont, Amand de Mendieta, Heising, Haaron, Yarnarnura and Fedwick think bat the treatise was directed against Eusthatius. See Hermann Donies, De Spirim sancto. Der &imag &s &rsiIiw uun AbscMuss dcc tntnnimnschen Dogrnas. Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Gôttingen, Philologisch-Historkch Klasse, no. 3. Folge, w . 39 (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprçcht, M 6 ) , 81-85; Sesboüé, ibid. ;Meredith, CappadUcim, 31; Jean Gribomont, "Esotérisme et tradition dans le Truité du (Sont-Esprit de saint Basile," Oecumenica 2 (1967): 40-41 ; idem, "Intransigenceand Lnnicism in Saint Basil's 'De Spritu Sancto'," Word and Spinr (1979): 109-136; Emmanuel Amand de Mendieta, Thc 'U-tren ' and 'Secret' Apostolic Traditions in the Theulogid î h u g h r of Sr. Bpnl of Cllesano. S ï ï Occasional Papen, no. 13 (Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd, 1965), 21-24; R. C. P. Hanson, "Basil's Doarine of Tradition in Relation to the Holy Spirit, " VC 22 (1 968): 252; Alkuùi Heiring, "Der Heilige Geist und die Heiligung der Engel in der Pnerimatologie des Badius von Câsarea, " ZKT 87 (1965): 292-293; Kei Yamarnura, "The Development of the Docmne of the Holy Spirit in Patristic Philosophy: St. B a d and St. Gregory of Nyssa," transl. by H.G. Seraphim, SVTQ 18 (1974): 5-6; Fedwick, Church and ChanSrno, 149. 29See Jean-Robert Pouchet, "Le traité de S. Basile le Grand sur le SaintEsprit. Milieu originel," RSR 84 (1996): 325-350. John M. Rist had made a similar suggestion earlier. See "Basil's 'Neoplatonism': Its Background and Nature," in Busil of laesarea: Chnsîian, H-kt' Ascetic. A Sixteen-HWredrh Anniversas, Symposium, tome 1, ed. Paul J. Fedwick (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1981), 197. For a more nuanced position, see Pmche, Sur le Saint-Esprit, 76-77.

Basil's argument.3o Still, Basil never affinns that the Holy Spirit is God. He qualifies him as bmotirms rather than homzuïos in relation with the Father and the Son. Ses-

boüé explains this reserve by the fact that the deity of the Spirit is never explicitly stated in the Bible. In addition, the Spirit's deity could have presented a difficulty for some Christians. Basil is therefore content to ask for an acceptance of the Nicene creed and the understanding that the SpKit is not a creature.31 This treatise on the Holy

Spirit would have some influence on theoiogical defrnitions adopted thereafter, particuIarly at the council of Constantinople (381).32

Duruig his epixopate, Basil also had to cope with the division of the Cap padocia into two smailer provinces: Cappadocia prima (capital city: Caesarea) and Cappadocia secunda (capital city: Tyana). The motive of the division could have been to diminish the size and to increase the number of provinces in order to decrease the power of the imperial governors and to reduce the amount of administrative work. In

addition, the airn could have been to separate the urban part of Cappadocia (Cappadocia secunda) from the rural parts (Cappadocia prima) made up mostly of imperial estates 30See note 17 above. Basil also argueci from 1 Cor 12:4-6, which, according to him, mentions fmt the one who brings the spiritual gifts, Le., the Spirit, second, the sender of the gifts, i-e., the Son, and f d y the source of the gifts, Le., the Father. See AmphSp 16.37. On Basil's argumentation from 1 Cor 129-6, see Haykin, Spirit of Gûd, 149-152. 31See Sesboüé, Dieu du salru, 267-271. On Basil's argumentation in AmphSp, see also P. C. Christou, "L'enseignement de saint B a d e sur le Saint-Esprit, " VCaro 23 (1969): 86-99; Burgess, The Holy Spirit, 136-44; Jamslav Pelikan, "The 'Spiritual Sense' of Scripture: The Exegetical Basis of St. Basil's Doctrine of the Holy Spirit," in Basil of Caesarea: Chrisnàn, Hwnanist, Ascetic. A SLxreen-Hundredth Anniversary Symposium, tome 1, ed. Paul J. Fedwick (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1981)- 337-360, esp. 343, 359-360; Haykin, Spirit of G d ,114-

166. 32Domes, De Spiria sanao, 85-91 believes that Basil's thought on the Holy Spirit gave the tone to the discussian, but nevertheless did not make its way into the formulation of the dogmatic formulas. Contra Dorries, see André de Halieux, "La profession de foi de l'Esprit-Saint dans le Symbole de Constantinople," R ï Z 10 (1979): 18-23 reprinted in André de Haileux, Purrologie et oecuménisme. Recueil d 'études BETL, no. 93 (Leuven: Lwven University Press/Peeten, IWO), 303-337.

and of one city: ~aesarea.3~ The loss of half of the provincial administration economically impoverished Caesarea. In addition, Anthimos, the bishop of Tyana wanted to act as a metmpolitan bishop, since the temtory of an ecclesiastical metropolis usually comesponded to the temtory of a civil one.34 To counter Anthimos, Basil installed his brother Gregory as the see of Nyssa and Gregory of Nazianzus as the see of Sasima, both towns in Cappadocia secunda. Far from king happy at the appointment, the latter

ran away to Nazianzus and never set foot in Sasimes, a miserable village, whose raison

d'êrre was to serve as a postal relay to change horses. Gregory complained to Basil about this appointment, holding a grudge against him after this epis0de.3~

B a d died in Caesarea, at about 50 years of age (379), soon after Valens had lified the order of banishment on bishops who held to the Nicean cree~l.~~ He 331 found this explanation in A. H. M. Jones, The Cities of the Eastern Roman Provinces, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Clarendon, 1971), 184. Giet has a related explanation for the division of Cappadocia: by creating new 'curiales', the emperor may have sought to increase the revenues he obtained h m the provinces. See Stanislas Giet, Les idées et 1'action sociales de saint Basile (Paris: Lecoffre, 1 941) , 367. One may dismiss the emperor Valens' enmity towards Basil as the motive of the division of the province, since after king reunited in 379 by Theodosis in 379, Cappadocia was parted again in 382 soon after Basil's death.

34Gregory of Nazianzus describes the conflict between the two bishops. See Or. Bas. 58.3. 3sGregory complained to Basil in letten 48 and 50. On Gregory of Nazianzus' appointment in Sasimes, see Stanislas Giet's short monograph Sarimes. Une méprise de soint Basile (Paris: Gabalda, 1941) . 36There has k n recently some debate regarding the date of Basil's death. January L, 379 was traditionally regarded as the date of his death. In 1981, Booth suggested antedating his death to 14 June 377, since he believed that Basil had been elected bishop earlier than 370. In 1988, bas& on Valens' alieged departure from Antioch, Maraval proposeci August-September 377 as the t h e of Basil's death. Pouchet challenged Maraval's claim and suggested instead autumn 378. Rousseau appears unconvinced by Maraval's suggestion and would prefer to hold to the traditional date as does Bames who abundantly documents his claim. On these matters, see Alan D. Booth, "The Chronology of Jerome's Early Years, " Phoenix 35 ( 1 98 1) : 237-259; Pierre Maraval, "La date de la mort de Basile de Césarée," REAug 34 (1988): 25-38; Jean-Robert Pouchet, "La date de l'élection épiscopale de saint Basile et celle de sa mort," RHE 87 (1992): 5-33; Rousseau, Basil of Cuesarea, 360-363 and Timothy D. Barnes, "The Collapse of the Homoeans in the East, " in Studiu P&stica, vol. XXIX, ed. Elizabeth A. Livingstone (Leuven: Peeters, 19971, 3-16.

remained immensely popdar, as demonstrated by the formidable quantity of manuscripts of his works, which circulated in numerous languages, the iconography and the

existence of his ~eneration.3~ 37The four volumes publirhed by Fedwick, listing all manuscripts of Basil's writings, iconography and testimwnia, witness to his popularity through the ages. See Paul J. Fedwick, Bibliotheca &sifiana Univerdis. A Sof r k M m c r i p t Tradition of the Worki of &IsiZ of Cizescuea, 4 volumes. Corpus Christianomm (Turnhout: Brepols, 1993- 1999). O n iconography and veneration, sec Daniel Stiernon, "Basilio il Grande. Vita, o p e , culto, reliquie, iconogdîa," in Bibliotheca Sanaonun, vol. 2 (Rome: Istituto Giovanni xxîii, 1962), 910-944.

Basil and the Bible38 In most of his works, Basil quotes the Bible abundantly as one notices when ~ ~ may wonder why Basil looking at the Scripture index of each of Basil's w o r k ~ .One was so fond of Scripture and felt the

nead to quote it so frequently in his works. One

may also question whether Basil always quotes Scripture in the same ways and for the same reasons.

What Tieck calls Basil's "bibliocentricity" becornes obvious as one considers his ascetical works.*

AU but nine of the fifty-five Regulrrefirriur tmctatae are s u p

38There have k e n several studies devoted to Basil's use of the Bible. See for instance, G. J. M. Bartelink, "Obse~ationsde saint Basile sur la langue biblique et théologique," VC 17 (1963): 85-104; Elena Cavalcanti, "Il significato dell'exgesi letterale in Basîlio e in Agostino. Omelie sdl'Esamerone e De Genesi ad lineram EIII," ~ n m ldi i storia del1'esegesi 4 (1987): 119-142; Mario Girardi, "Basilio di Caesarea esegeta dei Proverbi," VetChr 28 (1991): Z-60;.idem, "Note su1 lessico esegetico di Basilio di Caesarea, " VetChr 29 (1992): 19-53; idem, "Basilio e Gregono Nisseno sulle beatitudini, " VetChr 32 (1995): 91-129; Jean Gribornont, "Les Règles Morales de saint Basile et le Nouveau Testament," in SMia Pattistica, vol. 2.2, eds. Kun Aland and F. L. Cross, TU, no. 64 (&rijn: Akademje Verlag, 1957), 416-426; reprinted in Jean Gribomont, Wnr M l e . Evangile et Eglise. Mélanges, tome 1, ed. Enzo Bianchi. Spiritualité orientale, no. 36 (Brégrolles-en-Mauge, Maine-&-Loire: Abbaye de Bellefontaine, l 984), 146-l 56; idem, "Le paulinisme de saint Basile, " in Snnfirma decision on the exaa text of a vene when they display the same ~ o r d i n g . ~

Even when using these principles, it may be impossible to choose between two different readings that are equaiiy attesteci in Basil's writings. One should not discard the pos-

sibility that Basil quoted h m different copies of the First Gospel during his career,

especially since he may have written during several joumeys away h m Caesarea. In addition, some ailusions are so remote h m the text of a verse uiat 1 found it useless to attempt a reconstruction of Bad's most Uely text.

4Principles of classification of paaimc evidence for New Testament textuai criticism were enunciated at first by Gordon D. Fee, "The Text of John in Origen and Cyril of Alexandria: A Contribution to Methodology in the Recovery and Analysis of Patristic Citations," Bib 52 (1971): 362-363; reprinted in Eldon J. Epp and Gordon D. Fee, Studies in the *os, and Metttod of New Testament T d Criticism. SD, no. 45 (Grand Rapids, Mich. : Eerdmans, 1993), 301-334; idem, "The Text of John in the The Jenrsalem Bible: A Critique of the Use of Patristic Citations in New Testament Textual Criticism," JBL 90 (1971): 169-170; reprinted in Epp and Fee, Studies in the Thwry and Methud, 335-343. Fee refined these principles in subsequent works such as "The Use of Patristic Citations in New Testament Textual Criticism: The State of the Question, " AAR W 26.1 (BerlidNew York: De Gruyter, 1W ) ,256-261; reprinted in Epp and Fee, Studies in the l7wory and Methi, 344-359, and idem, "The Use of the Greek Fathers for New Testament Textual Criticism,"in The Tex? of the Nav Testament in Cufitemporq Research. Essqys on the S t . Qmem-onis. A Volwne in Honor of Bmce M. Memer, eds. Bart D. Ehrman and Michael W. Holmes. SD, no. 46 (Grand Rapids, Mich. : Eerdmans, 1995), 201-204. They also have been describeci and use. in the five volumes published so far of the collection Thc New Testument in the Greek Fathers, i. e., Bart D. Ehrman, Didymus the Blind and the Text of the Gospels. SBLNTGF, no. 1 (Atianta: Scholars Press, 1986); James A. Brooks, me New T e m menr Tem of Gregory of hiyssa. SBLNTGF, no. 2 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1991); Bart D. Ehrman, Gordon D. Fe,and Michael W. Holmes, n e T m of the Fourth Gospel in the Wn'tings of Origen, vol. 1. SBLNTGF,no. 3 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 2 992); Darreil D. Hannah, nie Text of 1 Corinririans in the Wntings of Origen. SBLNTGF, no. 4 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997); Rodenck L. Mulien, The New Testament T m of Sril of Jemalem. SBLNTGF, no. 5 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997).

Abbreviaiions of Basii's Works 1 have listed aii of Basil's works that have been taken into consideration in

my study. Some of Basil's writings are absent from the List, sina they la& any relevant material.

1 modelled my system of abbreviation from the List provided in the Toronto

1979 Symposium volume on Basil.5 1 nevertheles altered the system, maialy by removing periods wherever possible, and by using Garnier's numeral system to desig-

nate Basil's letters instead of the names of the addressees as does Fedwick. More corn-

plete information on the editions can be found in the bibliography. 1 have used the most recent editions available and cross-checked them with older editions. In some

instances, I also verified modem translations and ancient versions. Whenever no modem edition was available, I used specific manuscripts or the 18th century Maurist edition. In these cases, 1 gave the Migne's location number (Pû)? 1 also included the

number of the work (CPG #) in M. Geerard's CluMs P

m ~raecorwn.~

AmpirSp DE SPIRITU SANCTO A D AhKPHILOCHIUM (SC l7bis [1968];CPG 2839)

AscPr3

PROEMWM IN REGULAE FUSIUS mCTATAE (VatGr 428; PG 31, 889A-901A; CPG 2281)

S ~ a uJonathan l Fedwick, ed., Ml of Chesarea. Christan, Hda, Ascetic. A Sixteen-HUlCiredth Anniversary Symposium (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1981), xix-xxxi. 6The use of the Migne's location number (PG) should not be interpmbd as the use of the text printed in Migne iuelf. 1justify the use of this system, since it is highly convenient and that Migne is the only complete edition of Basil's works widely available. Garnier's 18th century edition is rare, even in the De Sinner 1839 reprint. The most recent edition by Mpone, Konstantinou in Bibliothéke helli?nt%2puteron kai ekklesiastikan euggruphedn, reprints Migne's wherever no critical edition has been published and aIso uses its location nurnbers. 7 ~ a u r i cGeerard, e Clavis Pornun Graecorzun, vol. 2. CCSG (Turnhout: Brepols, 1974).

33 Bapt

DE BAPTISMO libri duo (SC 357 [1989];CPG 2896)

EP

E P Z W (Foriin Patnicco [1984]for letters 1-46;Courtonne 1 [1957],ï I

[l96l], III [1966]for the remaining letters; CPG 2900) Eun

CONlllPA E U N O W M Iibri tres (SC 299 [1982],305 [1983];CPG 2837)

It4#

HOMaLA IN LUUD, A?îENDE TIBZ IPSI (Rudberg [1962]; CPG 2847)

HBapt

H O W U EMjlORTATORlA AD SANCTUM BAP27SUA (VatGr413;PG 31, 424-444; CPG 2857)

HOMILU IN SANCTAM CHRISî7 GENEMïïONEM (VatGr 413; PG 3 1, 1457-1473;CPG 2913)

H O M U ZN U U D DICTUM EVANGELI SECUADAM L U C M "DESïRUAM HORREA M U ,ET MAJORA AEDIFICMO: " m Q U E DE AVARITU (Courtonne 119351;CPG 2850)

HDiv

HOMILLA IN D W S (Courtonne 119353;CPG 2851)

HEbr

H O M L U IN EBRZOSOS (VatGr 413; PG 31,444-464; CPG 2858)

Hex

HOMILUE ZN HEXlEMERON 1 -9 (Mendieta & Rudberg 119971; CPG 2835)

HFam

HOMEU DICTA 7EMPORE FAMIS ET SZCCITATIS (VatGr413; PG 31, 304-328;CPû 2852) HOMZLCA ZN W R D W M MARTHWU (VatGr 413; PG 31,489-508;CPG 2862)

HOMlLIA DE GRAZiURUM ACï7ONE (VatGr 413; fG 31, 217-237;CPG 2848) H O M U DE HUMILITATE (Gasnier, PG 31,525-540;CPG 2865) HOMILIA ADVERSUS EOS QUI IRASCUNlVR (VaîGr 413; PG 31,353-

372;CPG 2854)

34 HIul

HO1C17LU IN MARTIREM JL/ZIITAM ET IN EA QUAE SUPERFUERANT DZCEADA IN PRlUS HABITA CONCIOIE DE GRAZïARUM ACTIONE

(VatGr 413; PG 31, 237-261 ; CPG 2849)

HleUIn 1 H O M E U DE J U U M O 2 (VatGr 413; PG 3 1, 164-184; CPG 2845) Hleiun 2 HOMILLA DE J U U M O 2 (VatGr 413; PG 31, 185-197; CPG 2846) HM-

HOMZLIA QUOD DEUS NON EST AUCTOR UALORUM (VatGr 413; PG

31, 329-353; CPG 2853)

H M . HOMILLA IN SANCTUM UARTHEM UAUANTEM (Garnier; PG 3 1, 589600;CPG 2868) HMm

HOMILLA IN SANCTOS QUADRAGIATA MARTHES (VatGr 413; PG 31,

508-525; CPû 2863)

HMund HOMILIA QUOD REBUS MUlWAIV;IS ADHAEREADUM NON SIT, ET DE INCENDIO EX;I1PA E C C L E S W FACTO (Garnier; PG 31, 540-564; CPG

2866)

HProv

HUMILU IN PRINCIPIUM PROVERBIUM (VatGr 413; PG 31, 385-424;

CPG 2856) HPs

HOMILIAESUPER PSALMOS (VatGr413 for HPs 1, 7, 28, 29. 32, 33, 44.

59, 6 1, 115; Gamier for the remaining ones; PG 29: 209-493; CPG 2836) HSab

HOMILIA CONTRA SABELLIANOS, ET ARIUM, ET ANOMOEOS (Garnier;

PG 31, 600-617; CPG 2869)

H Trin

UUSDEM HOMILLA. ADVERSUS EOS QUI PER CALUMNIAM DICUNT

DZCZ A NOBZS DEOS TRES (VatGr 413; PG 31, 1488-1496; CPG 2914) 6 ; WUSDEM (Gribomont [1953, pp. 279-2821; CPG 2884) H Y P ~ PROLOGUE ~ Mor

MORALLA or REG=

MORALES (VatGr 428; PG 3 1, 69 1-869; CPG

2877)

MorPrF PROLOGUE 8; Ejusdem defide (VatGr 428; PG 31, 676C-692C; CPG 2886)

35

PROLOGUE 7;DE JUDZCZO DEI (VatGr 428;PG 31, 653-676;CPG 2885) REG-

BREWUS TRACTATAE (HTrin 105;PG 31, 1052C-1305B;CPG

2875) REGULAE FUSIUS îîUCTATAE (HTrin 105; PG 31, 905B-1052C;CPû

2875)

Summary of Sigla and Abbreviations Used in the Text, Apparatus, and Footnotes

The following sigla appear in the apparatus:

Adaptation Adaptation that supports a reading of the apparatus Ailusion Ailusion thaî supports a reading of the apparatus Citation Citation taken to be representative of Basil's text and used as the collation base.

Indicates a correction to the manuscript

Lemma

Laanose. A verse or part of a verse is rnissing in the manuscripts listed.

Variant supporteci by Gregory of Nyssa punial. A verse is partially missing in a manuscript Indicates the reconstnicted text used as the collation base. Signifies a continuous quotation: when found at the end of a reference, a quotation wntinues without break into the foilowing verse; when found at the beginning, a quotation is a continuation itself.

36 vid

videzur. Indicaies the likely reading of a manuscript W c u l t to read or lacunose

*

Indicates the onginai reading of a manuscript prior to a correction

[..*l

Brackets are used (a) for words that Basil attests, when the form is in question; (b) for words that Basil appears to attest, when there are residual

doubts; and (c) for divergent forms of the tea, both/aii of which Basil

appears to attest. .a.

__LI

Ellipses are useû whenever there is no evidence of Basil's support. Variants below this line are supported by a single manuscript and therefore considered as unsisnificant for establishing textuai relationships among manuscripts.

The foliowing abbreviations appear in the text and footnotes:

AnBib

Analecta Biblica

ANRW

Auftieg und Niedergang der rbmischen Welt

ANTF

Arbeiten mr neutestamentlichen Textforschung

AW

Augusrinicurwn

BAGD

W. Bauer, W. F. Arndt, F. W. Gingrich, and F . W . Danker,

Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament

Bas.

In Ban'liwnfratrem

BDF

F. Blass, A. Debrumer, and R. W. Funk, A Greek Grammar of the N m Testament

BETL

Bibliotheca epherneridum theologicanim lovaniensium

Bib

Biblica

Bibl.

BibIiotheca

cod.

&ex

CGS

Die griechischen Schriftsteller der ertem drei Jahrhunderte

Doctr. chr.

De d o c t n *chrimsRam ~

ed.

editor, edited by

e.ga

exempli gr&,

Ep. Af i .

Epistula ad Afios episcops

=P.

especiall~

FC

Fathers of the Church

FgNT

Filologia Neotestamentaria

Garnier

J. Garnier, P. Maran, and F. Faveroiles eds. Sand Potris

for example

nosin. Basilii. Càesareae Coppdociae archiepiscopi, opera omnia q u a txmnt

WTR

Greek Onhodox I;heologicol R m è w

JECS

Jounial of Eàdj Christian Studies

Johnston

C . F . H . Johnston ed., On the Holy Spirit

Hel.

Helena

Hist. eccl.

Historia eccIesiasnanca

HTKNT

Herders thedogischer Kommentar m m Neuen Testament

HTR

Harvard Xheological Revîew

HTM 105

Sainte Trinité 105 for Regulae fusus tractatae; Reguiae brevius

tractatae8 ICC

International Cntical Commentary

Le.

id est, that is

8This manuscript, which dates from the seamd part of the 10th century has a troctatue after R e g u l a e ~ u s complete corpus of the d e s and has Regulae tracrame without an explicit separation. On the value of this manuscript, see Paul J. Fedwick, ed., ï 3 e Ascetica. Contra Eunomrmrwn 1-3, M Anrphilochim de Spiritu Sancro, Dubia er Spuna. with Suppfements ro Volumes 1-11, in Bibliotheca BadliaM Universolis, vol. III. Corpus Chnstianorum (Turnhout: Brepols, 1997), 46-48.

38

.

n.

Illias

Iph. aul.

Iphigenia auiidel~~t~s

JBL

/oumal of Biblical Literor~re

JTS

J o u d of Theologid Sadies

LASBF

Liber cuullucs Snrdii biblici fianciscani

LSJ

Liddell-Scott-lones, Greek-English k c o n

LXX

The Septuagint

MHT

J. H. Moulton, W. F. Howard, and N. Turner, A Gmmmar of

Nau Teswnent Greek

NA27

Nesile-Aland, Novum Te~tamennunGrmce, 27th ed.

Neot

Neotestamentica

r \ i T

New Testament

NovT

Novwn Testamenncm

n.s.

new series

NTS

New Testament Studies

NTTS

New Testament Twls and Studies

Oliver

H. H . Oliver, m e Ted of the Four GospeZs in the Moralia of Basil the Great

Or. Bas.

O r d o in laudem Ban'lii

OrChrP

Onentalia chn'stiana periodica

Pan.

Pancrrion (Adversus bereses)

PO

Patrologia onentalis

RBén

Revue bénédictine

mw

Revue des études augustiniennes

Resp.

Respublica

M E

Revue d'histoire ecclésiastique

39 Rhet.

Rhetoncrr

RTL

Revue rhéologique de Louvain

SBLDS

Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series

SBLNTGF

Society of Biblical Literature the New Testament in the Gnek

Faîhers SC

Sources chrétiennes

SD

Studies and Documents

S e m . Dom.

De sennone Domini in monte

StudMon

Studia Monamka

SVTQ

St. Vïadimrmr 's ï%eoZogica.l Q ~ e r l y

Syn.

De sy&s

TCGNT

B. M. Metzger, A Temrlvar KCYL

D E W A 8 II C Q f i 3 565 7001 BhqBsv t4 B C f l 33 INA: a b k]

D ~ ~ ~ e I I Z I I f l 3 5 6 5 7 0 0 a, eb kt ] omit n B C f l 3 3

vpeq e07e 70 +% TOU K O U ~ O U .OU buvarat

ZOMqw&ua~ETWW

+

O ~ O U ÇK E L ~ E ~ ~

(Mor 18-6; PG 31, 732D) [Cl**

Lac.: L e uoopov K B C D E W A 8 ï I B O f 1 fi3 (= rourov K O U ~ O U ) a b

33 565 700, mundi k Nyssa] huius mundi

*8This is a nonsense reading thaî can be explained by conhision between the "s" of sallietur and "P.

-

Lac. : C e Nyssa

---n p rell] omit A INA: a b k] 7015

reii] omit A [NA: a b k]

o r w ç t h u r u vpwv 7a m X a &pya rar b&xuoar sou r a m p a v p o u ovpauor~" (RBr 299; PG 3 1 , 1293B) [Cl

TOP

eu roc5

29R..r 3 13 is absent from Garnier, from HTrin 105, VatGr 428 and VatGr 413. It is prexnt and edited in Jean Gribomont, Histore du texre des Ascétiques de S. Basile. Université de Louvain, Institut Orientaliste. Bibliothèque Du Musbn, no. 32 (Louvain: Publications universitaites/Institut orientaliste, 1953), 1 80-186.

t d p w r o v ~s a e p y a qpwu &famu

TOU

zarepa r)pw

TOU

eu r o q oup&voy

(HPs

28.2; PG 29, 284BC) [fUl] rhcvecv +a youa7cl r p q sou r a m p a vpwu TOU ev z o i ~oupauoy

(Ep 150.2.17-18)

CM1

Lac.: C e

epya r d ]

omit B*

Lac.: e

m u Kvpcou & a & ~ a c o ~ a p w o vw u , o n ' m a EU q put rupaur ov pr) rapeAOg a z o rov vopov, EWÇ a u Tamu veuqmcn (RBT 4; PG 31, 1084C) [Cl EL

yap

BK TOU Y O ~ O VW T eu ~ r)

pux ~ e p a m OU i a p e X E v u e 7 u ~ (AmphSp 1.2.32)

[Ml* TEXT: cwa ev 7 pur xepaca ov pq rcrpeABg a r o zov uopov, W C a u rawa y&vi)rac

Lac. : C 33Pt e N y s a

av reli] omit B* INA: a b k]

Lac.: C 33Pt e Nyssa

B E L W A 8 II n f l 3 7001 i ) 565, iustitia vestra a b] iustitia (=q Gt~cr~omvr))

Vp@U 9 & K ~ ~ O U V W K

omit in roto D

Lac. : 33Pt e Nyssa

Lac. : C e Nyssa o p y ~ f o p v o K~ B C DE E L W A o p y a r o p v o ç D', pascitur k

R]

e v o ~ o g'H B

reus a b k pawr

f 13]

8 II C O f1 f l 3 33 565 700, irascihir a b]

~ u < l cl v o ~ wnCD E

purra KC

D W, racha a b

L W A 8 II Zf l f l 3 33 565 700,sine causa

B DEL 0A 8

C O f l 33 (565) 700, raca k] p c m a X*

Lac. : C e Nyssa

~ a u ]eau ovu rell

Lac. : C e Nyssa ~ p 0 0 6 ~ pHs B

GraXXcqqûr

E L W A 8 IX Z O f f l3 33 565 700, offer k]

rd]~a.rcrMamûtD P A : a b k]

~ h û o ureil] veni (=oh6e?) k

rpoupsr5 D a b

Lac. : C e Nyssa orvnlv(l) B D E L W A 0 II O 13 33 565 700, eam a b] ay f l f l3 565 7001 oupauotç o v r q etuehuomat e y np B a a r k u r o u ovparuwu Cc 33 kJ o u p a u q a etodiuuerar v u B a ~ ~ ~ h l TWY c r uovpauwu W 9, caelis est ipse intrabit in regnum caelorum a b

Lac.: D e Nyssa

q reil] omit A INA:

ou

reil]

Satpovccr

KCYC

C

... ry ay ouopan

7q 04

6?I

o w q

a b k]

reU] omit E-0

rell] omit E*

give more c d i t to th& citation, as it is longer. In addition, the reading present in second citation, is mt found in the manuscripts of

E K ~ O ~ ~ ~ E U C T ~ ~ ~ ~ the U ,

RBr. 7-e

omission is likely due to a homoeoteleuton.

Lac. : D e NyssaPt ov6emre X B (=OU) a b

cm'&

OU

C E L W A 8 II E U f l f l 3 33 565 700, numquam k Nyssa] non

? t B C E W d I I Z f 2 f 1 33565700,ame a b k ] c r * ' s p o v r a q L e

f lr ~ y v w vv p q

rell] q v w v crwovq

E7

vos cognovi ( = v p a ~eyvwv) k

-

4povcpq, 0 0 7 ~ y a o b o p p v %u oururu awov e r c 7.1; PG 31, 712C) [cl71 av&t

-

~czpav

+

(Mor

Lac. : D e Nyssa 70WOV5

BcC E L W d O I I C c O f l f l 3 3 3 565700, haec a b k ] omit B ' F

E L W A II L: R 565, simulabo illum k] o p o ~ u e z a Nc B 8 f l f 13 33 7001 similis est ( = o p o q EOTIY) a b

oporoao a w o v C

TV

ointav awov E L A Iï Q f 13 565 700, &mum suam a b k] crwov rqv oixurv K BCW8Zfl33

Lac. : D e NyssaP ~ a r ( 1 )N

B C ~ E L W ~ 8 1 1 E Q f l f l f 3 3 5 6 5 7 0 0omit ] abk

ncrc(2h B C

E L W A 8 I I Z Q f l f1333565700(Nyssa)] omitabk

~ X B O UO& S O T ~ ~ O~L aeruevuav t or avepoc W B C E L W A 8 iI Z fl f 1 f 13 33 565 700 (Nyssa)] flaverunt venti, advenerunt flumina (=em&uoav oc cruepoc, qMov OL m~cxpoi)a b (Nyssa)] advenenint fluxnina, venerunt venit (=qAtJov ot rorapor elvevacrv oc aaqmî) k (Nyssa) xpooenEuav WC B C k] rpouermev

E (L)A @ O) f 1 P3(565) 700, offenderunt a b, inpegerunt

~7 rpwsrpouoav

KQL OUK

memu

... r m p a v

Wl

r p o u ~ p p ~ a8 v El rpoueao$av

33

rell] omit 33

Lac. : D e Ny ssa

33 565 7001 o o n ~ crrouer 8 f 13, qui audit a b

565 7001

TOUL

8 f13, facit a b k

Z fl f i fi 33 565 700 k] similis est (=o p o q q v o t ~ ~ awou au C BW8Cfl700

E L A II O f

l 3 565,

Qmum suam a b k] a w o u n)v

otrcav W

-------------72T'he agreement of the Old Latin manuscripts, 8 and f l 3 is likely coincidenta1 since the Latin manuscripts tend to translate Greek participles preceded by an article with a relative pronoun and a verb.

omit in toto 33

Lac.: D apC e Nyssa K(IL(~)

H B C E L W A M I Z Qfi3565700] ~~ omit a b k

K ~ ~ ~ ) K B c E L W A ~f13565700] I I E Q ~ o~m i t a b k rpom~euav,offenderunt (a b), inpegenint (k)] r p o o e ~ o ~ aHu B E L W A II C R 565 700 (a b k)] rpoueppq[av C 9 f l] rpoueyPovuav fl3 m$obpa

8 ~ f l ~ 3 3omit ] ~BCELW~IIOfl565700abk

qhûov or ~orapocK(YL E ~ U U WOL avepoi reii] flaverunt venti, advenenint flumina (=erv&vccrvoc avquu,gh9ov oc ~orcrpoc) b] qh8ov oc imapoc ~7 advenemnt flumina, venerunt venti (=~)hûovor iompoc emeuacuv oc avepoc) k

Lac. : D e Nyssa

Manhew 897

Lac. : D e Nyssa

Manhew 8:26

731t is not certain that Basil's text shows these words in this order. 74Citing Isa 53:4; Davies and Allison comment: 'Matthew has obviously not followed the LXX (which is here a very loose translation). His agreements with it are minimal. He has instead trandated the text from the Hebrew and worded it to serve the purposes of his narrative." See Wiiiiam D. Davies and Dale C. Allison, ï7ze Gospel According to Saint Manhew. ICC,no. 26, vol. 2 (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1 Wl), 37. '5The only difference between these two citations is the omission of awoç in the fmt citation. a w q is weii attested in ail manuscripts o f the NT, so one could infer that in the first case, Basil simply decided to cite h m r a adkuwrç. ~

Lac. : D e NyssaPt

76AItough 1 am certain that Basil's text had the verb e z m p a o , 1 am less cerrain of the tense and mode of the verb in his tea.

Lac. : e Nyssa

Lnc. : e Nyssa

C E L W A ~ I I C Qfr333565, ~ ~ etecce k] rbov ND, ecce a b ] omit 700

~ a r c d o uB

ovvau&u&ivro r d ] m?v&~&curoD* INA: â b k]

Lac. : e N y s a ELTOY

D E L A 0 II Z f2 f l 3 565 700, dixemnt k]

dicebant a b

E X ~ ~ OK VB C W f 33,

or

+

reli) omit A UJA: a b k]

O

6c Irjuov~axovaac ecreu a w o y , ou peta au ~oucrruoc rwvowGc iarpov au' q o v ~ e q+ (Mor52.3; PG 31, 777B) [Cl

OL KCXKWS

Lac. : DPt e Nyssa Iquouç C E L W A 8 I I C O f l f l 3 3 3 5 6 5 7 0 0 , Iwus

a b k ] omit n B D

x B C*, ait b, duit k] e c r ~ awoq v CCE L W A 9 KI E R f 1 f l 3 33 565 700 awd

ELTW

77Theevidence is equaiiy divided conceming the presence or the absence of this word in Basil's text.

Lac. : aPt e Nyssa

ycvp

reU] omit b

Lac. : e Nyssa

q o ~ ~ v o p eK*v B] W C F T ~ U Om~ KP v a NI,ieiunamus m u e n t e r a b] y u s e v o p v aoMa C D E L W A 8 11 Z l2 f l f l 3 33 565 700, ieiunarnus multum k

Lac. : e Nyssa 781

that location.

would tend to include rc e m v , which is absent from one manuscript at

PT K B C E L W A ~ E I Ifi333565J Q ~ ~ TL D,numquid a b k ] ou 700 OL

K B C D E W A ~ I I Z O omit ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m]A : a b k ]

~ . w é k t vX B C

E L A 8 II E f2 f f l3 33 565 700,lugere k]

yossvav

D W,

ieiunare a b

~qorevoouotu W B C E W 8 ev exerucrG s a s qpepaic

II C O f l f l3 33 565 700, ieiunabunt k]

D7

aqmevovutv yosevoovotv eu e x e t v a y my q p p a y DC,

ieunabunt in a i s diebus a b] yasevuwmu L A

v v p + w v o ~ rell] v u u ~ m v D INA: a b k]

70 ~ A r ) p u p aawov

a r o rov w a ~ t o vKW x ~ r p o vqiupar y t u m a t

PG 31, 725D) [cl79

+

(Mor 14.1;

--

Lac. : e Nyssa ET&YME~~ ~ q 3 h ~x pB C a

D E L W A II Z O f l f 13 33 565, committit cornmissuram a b k] emBXqpa e z d a h h e c 8 700

qva4ou HB D

E L W * A 8 II C O f l

fl3

33 565 700, rudis a b k]

WC

79w. 16-17 are missing h m Gamier.

a y v a ~ o v çC

Lac. : e Nyssa TE

K C D E L W A ~ I I I : Qomit ~ ~B700 ~ ~[NA:abk] ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ]

~ a or r a m o i i r r o ~ w r c r tR B E L W A 8 II C Q f 1 f 13 33 565 700, et utres peribunt b] rai at a m o i D] omit a k aMa j 3 a M o w i u înuou umv gy a u r o v ~icawovs B E (L)W 9 II C O f l f l 3 33 565 7001 cuM' ocvov mou eiq c r u ~ o v c~ a r v o uBAq7eov ~ X ] aMa orvov mou e q c r a ~ o v ç/3aMouaru ~artuovc C] @arXXovutu & otuou ueou e q i r a ~ o v çuaivovq D, mittunt autem vinum mvum in utres novos k] ~acXouuarvoruou veov e q amovq VEOUÇ A] sed vinum novum in utres IKJVOS mitnint (=cxAAa avov veov ecq ~ ab aaruovq ~ a r w o u@ahhouorv

o v u ~ p o v v r c n rell] q p o v v r a i D*

INA: a b k]

80~b,nt h m Garnier.

81Although the manuscript which sexves as a basis of collation for Basil's MoraZiu is an uncial, there is no doubt h m the accentuation of these words that they are to be r a d xparateiy. A g h p s e at VatGr 413, a minuscule manuscript, conftnns this judgement.

Lac. : e Nyssa Xorhovwos f 11 AaAovvsog a m C X B C D E L W A 8 II C of l 3 33 565 700,

illos a, ad eos b k e M o u A O 33 565, unus accessit a] EEEAûON x2 C* D E W 8 II C] f 7001 q rpoueh80u n1B] rpoush8wv X? sy apoueh8wv

etueA8ov

7q

I ~ U O U C C L f 131 quidam princeps veniens (=TG r p w rpoueh8ou?) k] unus accessit nomine Iainis (=eq ehûwv o v o p a n I a r p w ) b

OTL

aou

B C E L W A 9 I I E Q 5 6 5 7 0 0 J omit ~ D f fll 3 3 3 a b k

K B C D E L W A ~ I I f1333565700, Q ~ ~ s w k] omit C a b

Lac.: e Nyssa ~~ohovûqclev B (E) L W A 8 Ii Z Q f 1 f l 3 565 700, secutus est k] q ~ o A o v ûX~ C ~

D 33, sequebatur a b

mmuerq o n Guuapare ~ o w .rrocr)ua~; o (Ep 234.3.13-14)

[Ad]*

T E X T : [ ~ t u r e u e ~ q JOTL * 2 buvapac z o w o z o q o u t ;

Lac. : 33Pt e Nyssa

82The familiar tone of this letter to Amphilochius could explain the 2nd person singular, not found in any manuscript of Matthew

.

Lac. : e Nyssa

Lac. : e Nyssa

Lac. : e Nyssa

83All manuscripts add a w o v to the end of this verse. c r v ~ o vand he decided to not quote it, or his text did not have it.

Either Basil's text had

Lac. : e Nyssa

< r m c K B C E L W A 8 I I O f l fl333 565 7OO]

a w q r a r D,

eiset a bk]

omit C

TOUTOU~

TOUÇ

r d ] ~ o w o v c6E Q

60Se~a rell] omit CC

heyov reli] omit K* ~ B v w u reii]

omit X*

Lac. : e Nyssa 6e ~ B C E L W ~ 8 I I Z R f l f 1 ~ 3 3 5 6 5 7 0 0 , J ab] e d omit D k

~

-

Lac. : e Nyssa

Lac. : e Nyssa

+

pv

r q q d e ~ p v o o vpq& apyvpov pt)& x a h r o v

58.3; PG 31, 789C) [Cl

saç rovcrs upov (Mor

Lac. : e Nyssa

~ ( 7 cwyvpov 8 ~

reU] aut argentum (=q

apyvpov)

k] omit tt

Lac.: e Nyssa rq

N B C D E L W A ~ I I Z f1333565,non R ~ ~ a b k ] pqre D700,ne-c k

A II E il f l 3 565 700, virgas k] paB6ov K B D 8 f l 331 virgam in manibus vestris (=pa&w sv s a s x ~ p u r vvpov?) a b

pafltovç C E L W

atios ycrp K B C E L W A

9 Iï Z 0 f l f13 33 565 est enim a b, dignus est autem k

7001

crÇro~y w e o ~ iD,

dignus

"One would expect to h d the sarne negative conjunction in both places, but manuscripts 565 700 altemate pq& and p p the same way. 8SThe verb is present in most quotations, so 1 klieve it was found as such in Basil's text.

BQTL

E W A W I C O 3 3 1 omit K B C D L f l f l 3 5 6 5 7 0 0 a b k

Lac. : e Nyssa a v l a vpq b&zar K BC C D E W A 8 II Of 1 f l 3 33 565 7001 ouoc au pq & t o m L C, quicumque non f e c e p e ~ ta b (k)

OC ~

OC

a v pq ~ * * 8 ]

K B C D E W A 8 II O f l f l 3 33 565, audierit (k)] aKouoooiu L Z, audierint a b] moa~ouoq 700 (k)

a K O V q

C E W A ïï Z Q f l f l 3 565 7001 & & ~ X O ~ Z U O Le t w u B D 8 33, exeuntes ... foras de (a b), profisci extra (k)] eEsp~opsvore~ L (a b k)

E&~XO~EYOC

7 5 O L K L C Y ~E K ~ ~domo Ç , iüa b] n)s o u u x ~8t 565 700, domo a, domurn k] omit D

7 K B C E W A ~ I I EfO l f 3~3 5~6 5 7 0 0 , v e l

B C E L W A 8 II E R f l f l 3 33 a b , aut k] omit D L

86Evidence is equaiiy distributeci between these two readings, which makes it difficult to c h w s e one of them. 8 7 ~ ~ appean & ~ ~inqail citations, but at different places, depending on the citation and the different manuscripts of Basil's Moralia. Apparently, no Greek manu-

script of Matthew places the demonstrative after ot~iars. 88This

creates a nonsense m g .

rwvroàov B D E L W A ~ I I Z f13565700] O ~ ~ wr7wvrobov NC33,de

pedibus a b, a pedibus k

m~

reli] omit K [NA:a b k]

Lac.: e Nyssa

y~ rell] omit L

89Such a reading appears in manuscript 1342 of Luke. This is not sufficient evidence to classw the quotation as uncertain.

TEXT: &v q w aromehhw v p a ç w ç r p o @ a z a sv peuy AVKW* y r u e d e [ovvlgl +pourpot w ç ot oc#wq Karr ampator wç a r aepcurepac

Lac. : e NyssaPt EU

p ~ u ~ ~ / ~ pxpCuD qE L W psaov B, in medium k

ouv

A 9 ïï E f2 f1 f13 33 565 700,in medio a b] &y

rell] omit k

6~ ~ B C E L W ~ 8 I I Z Q f l f 1 ~ 3 3 5 6 5 7 0omit 0] Dabk

auzw

K B C D E L W A 8 1 1 Z 1 2 f 1 f1333565700,suis bk] omit W a

911 would be inclined to include ovv. The quotaion that ornits it is very short and wuld therefore have betn done from memory.

poua am^

r d ] adtendite vobis (=r p o ~ m e r e a w o v ~ )a] et adtendite vobis

(= K(YL ~ p o o q e 7~ C~ T W O V ~ b )

r d ] mpa&uwui

~ a p cGr w a o v c n

v p ç reii] omit

W

C*

Manhew i0:18

Lac.: e Nyssa

Manhew 10:20

Lac.: e Nyssa rarzpoqupuv W B C E L W A ~ ~ C fi333565700, R ~ ~ paais vestri a b k

~ o r r p o ç D]

o u ~ ]ou ycrp

Manhew 10~23

reU

Lac-: e Nyssa

Lac. : e Nyssa

------ou

yvwafl~amat

rell]

E

OUK C Y T O K C Y ~ U + ~ ? ~ Q ~ T ~ C

Manhew 10~27 Xeyo v p v EU q a ~ o r c erra?& a su ?y 4wrc K a c O r p ~ 70 y ovg q ~ o v o u zq ~p v & x ~ e GTL r w & p a ~ u v + (Mor 70.13;PG 31, 828A) [Cl

92*po~ has an advantage over onginate from various works.

si^,

as it is found in more quotations that

Lac. : e Nyssa rpos

7001 etc K B C D E L W A 8 I I C R f l f1333565, in a b k

Lac.: 33Pt e Nyssa

93This reading is alu, found in manuscripts 1 28 118 157 1424 1582. Its presence in various works of Basil points towards îts age.

94Evidence tends to include both articles.

6s ~ M OX B Vc D E w A 9 k] p a M o v L f 1

f l3 33 565 700, sed potius a b, magis autem

K B C D E L W A I I E U ~ k]~ omit ~ ~ 9~f l~3 7~0 0, a~b ~

K C Y ~ ~ )

r?u(2)

N C E W Af13700] ~ omit x ' B C D L I I Z U f i 33565 F A : a b k]

n B C E L W A 9 ïï Z Q f 1 f13 33 565 700, in gehenna k] ecq ysevav D, in gehennam a b

EU Y E E Y ~

Lac.: 33Pt e Nysa TWXELTCY~H B C D E L W (A)9 II Z f2 f l f l 3 565 7001 mAovuzar D, veneunt a, veniunt b k TOU Z C Y T ~ O GN B C D E L W A 9 II Z O f 1 f13 33 565 700, sine pave k] sine voluntate patris (=aveu q q BOUATJSrov m z p ~ ? )a b

avw

uomp~ovrell]

TOU

acruapiou

D* [NA: a b k]

&TLv

u m v rell] omit L

vpov

rell] vestri qui est in caelis (=vpov

TOU EV ~ O Lo Î

v ~ a u o ~ ?b)

9 5 ~ h i word s is otherwise unknown in Greek literanire. It could be the combination of K ~ aroMwac, L or a scribal mistake. There are no variants in the manuscript tradition at that location, so 1 am inclined to discard it.

Lac. : 33Pt e Nyssa v p w v 6 ~N B C D E L W A

8 I I C Qf 1

f13

5657001 a M a D,sed a b k

Lac.: 33Pt e Nyssa

-

-

-

-

-

Lac.: 33Pt a e Nyssa

D,et ego eum b] ~ a eu~awy o N B C E W A €3 II Z O f l f13 33 565 700,et ego ... in ipso k] ausou ~ a y oL

~ a y aow o v Tor5

B C C f l f 1 3 5 6 q omit K D E L W A ~ I700 I ~ WA: ~ abk]

EV &FOL

rell] me (=&op) b

+

uwou ep.rpoo&u TWU arvûpwlov u p yuopar ~ a y w o a q 6' a u a p q o - q r a t ~ p . r p o d e vrov r a r p o ç pou zov eu o v p a u q (Mor 6.1; PG 3 1 , 7 1 2 A )

[q%

Lac. : 33Pt e Nyssa

autem a b k] wrq 6e B

wmmrar~N B D E L W AC II C R 700, negavent (a b k)] - f I 3 565 (ab k) BCDELWAC813

a r a p y q r a c C 8fl

E 0 f l 3 33 565 700

INA:

33, et ego eum a b k] a w o v Kayw C E L II O oupavocs

K C D E L W (AC) 8 Z II f 1 565 7001 roy ovpauocç B R f l 3 INA: a b

kl

omit in ZOZO A-

96~issingfrom Garnier. 971 prefer t ! e reading 05, because it is unique and found in two quotations from different works. 981 would prefer to include this

verse 30,

reading for the same reason as above.

"The verse bas been added by the fim saibe at the top of the page, before so that the order is v. 33, 30, 31 and 32.

Lac.: e Nyssa

D E L W A 9 II C O f 1 f13 33 565 700,patrem aut rnatrem a b] matrem aut patrem ( = ~ n ) r e p a 1) r a ~ e p a )k

rampa q ppzpa W BC KCXL

+

... o t t o c rell] omit

K

~ OÇ L OU

afiq Kac

XapBauei

B*

TOU

Dl"

oraupou CYWOU

KOL

a ~ o X o d e eOILUU pou

OVK

e m FOU

(Mot2.3; PG 31, 705B) [Cl

oç ou haplpavec

TOU

maupov a w o v ~ a c auohovûec ozcuo pou ovx e m pou afcg

(Mor62.1; PG 31,797B) [Cl Lac. : e Nyssa

~ O CUY ~ L Od~ l ]

O

meus discipulus

( = p a & ) m ~ pou) k

G m o p e u o ~upaq E C ~ E&prac uai

O

ep& & x o p u o ç & m c

rov a.rroure~havrarpe

(Mor36.1; PG 31,756C) [Cl** O

Gqopevog v p a c e p &erac

(Mor 72.3; PG 31, 848C) [Cl

Lac. : DPt e Nyssa

---------1-e

omission may be explained by a homo8oteIeuton.

Lac. : aPt e Nyssa

# v ~ p o vpovov X B C E C L W (A)8 IT 0 f l f13565 i I v ~ p o v vpovou I; 331 W o u Eq u6asog (= u k r q t,bvxpov povov) b ELÇ

700, frigidae tanturn k] D] aquae frigidae tantum

ovopa ~ ~ & J z oHu B C D EcL W A 9 IT E Q f1 fl 3 33 565 700, in nomine discipuli k] in nomine meo (=etc ovopar pou) a b] omit E*

ou pq H B C on) a b

D ELW

II C O fl f13 33 565 700, non k] quianon

(=OU

a?roX~uyrov p ~ d o vX B C E L W A 9 n C Of 1 fl3 33 565 7001 a r o h q ~ a cO p d o ç D,penbit merces eius a b k

Lac.: e Nyssa

Lac.: e NyssaPf

NT.

IOlThese word orden and case endings are found in no manuscript o f the 102The text of the quotation is very accurate, but the order of both clauses is

not found anywhere else. This is why 1 label the quotation as an dusion.

1% is possible that there is confusion here with the aorist, second person plural of the verb oparo (Le., to see) which would be w $ a d o t r . Substitutions of "wu with "O" are indeed fairly common in 8. The negative form would have been ovr U $ ~ @ Q L compared , with OVK EKO$~Y& found in most manuscripts.

Lac. : e Nyssa

B C E L W A 8 I1 C O f l fl3 33 565 700, factae sunt a b] D, factae fuerant k

~ ~ W O V T O~t

awov

yqoue)ua~rov a&X+ov oov" (RBr 232; PG 31, 1237B) [Cl

ro Kpcpa rov Kvpmv emowoq, on ' a u a p a p q q e y oe O a&A+oç oou, w a y e E A ~ E OQWOV Y p r a e u uou KPL a w o v pouou. eau m v a u o v q , eaepb>)oa~TOU a8eh4ov uovw + (RBr 293; PG 3 1, 1289A) [Cl

+

y a p a p a p m P,LC t ~ eO a & h e oov, v?raTs ehecytov amov v a t u oou rat awou ~ O V O U .e a u uou agoviq, m e p h u a ~m u a&A&v uou + (Mor 52.4; PG 31,777D-780A)[ A 4 *

ECYV

O a&A#w aov a p p q , eA&ou a v ~ o v " + (Ep 288.3-4) [Ad]*

yqparllarc r a p * ' e a u

awov p m a t v uov xar

Lac. : C k Nyssa be H B D apcrpw ECSQE

E L W A II I: 0 fi 33 700,quod a b , autem e] omit 8 f13 565

W33] a p a p q u y N B D E L A ~ I I C f13565700 O ~ ~ pA:abe]

D E L W A W I Z Q fl333565700,inte abe] omit ~ B f l

v m y s W B D 9 f 1 3 33 7001 u r a y e xac E L W A II C R f l 565, vade et a b e

------lsoSince most quotations of this verse omit these two words, their presence in the remaining quotations wuld be a way to intmdua them. ls1~ere, 1 would tend to prefer apwq to a p a p q q , as the latter is found only in manuscript HTrin 105 of RBr. On the other hand, a p a p q is found without exception in Mor, RFus and Ep. l S 2 ~ q(re is absent fmm several quotations in different works and manuscripts, so we propose thaî Basil used manuscripts of the First Gospel that had these words, and other manuscripts that did not have it.

1530nly one citation omits "on. The omission may be due to a scribal emr.

&au 6G pr) a x o v q sapaha& ma uov e n eva q 8vo tua e n t w o p a 7 5 6v0 q 7 ~ w v pupmpwu u7a& r a v p q p a (Mot52.4; PG 3 1,780A) [Cl

+

+

eau & pq aKoum aapaha& p.ma m a w o v en eua q bu0 wa e.rrr u 7 0 p a 7 ~ 6vo p a p m p o v q r p w v m a @ T a u pqpa (RBr 3; PG 3 1, 1084AB) [Cl

+

eau & pq a x o v q r a p a X a & F a aov e t c eva r ) bvo t v a e r c m o p a z 6uo ~ p a p m p o v q rpcou uraûqoerac aav pqFa (RBr 47; PG 31, 1113AB) [Cl

+ +

+

+

+

eau & ~ n a)K o v q r a p a h a @ sF a uov p a p n p o u xac r p w v ma& m u pqpa

HL

sua q bvo tua ~

+ (R&232; PG 31,

eau & pq ~ K O Vr Q a p~a h a @ &ma d p p m p o v q rprou ma& T a u pqpa

e ~ l m en v

+

r mopa70q e 6v0

1237B) [Cl

eua 9 6v0 CUQ! s l u~r o p a r q 6u0

( B r 293; PG 31, 1289A) [Cl

eau aov pt) a ~ o v narparXafi q F a aearwov a M a u

+

(Ep 288.4-5) [Ad]*

Lac. : C k Nyssa

w 8 II R fl

aKoucq K B D E a ~ o v uov q C,

f13 565

audierit te e

7001

oou a r o v m L A 33,

teaudierit a b]

pnrr crecrwov sua r) 6vo it L 8 Ii Zf f l 3 33, tecum adhuc unum vel duos (b)] p e m uov me eu& q 6vo D E W A O 565 700 (b)] mc sua q 6vo p m crov B] tecum adhuc et unum vel duos @ n aueawov ezr xar &var q Svo?) a] tecum unum aut duo ( = p m uou r) h o ? ) e r) r p w v u m B E W II C Of l f l3] 6, r) ~ p w paprvpov v uza& K 8 700, duorum vel trium tetium stet a b, duum aut trium testium stabit e] 6vo 7 rpcwu ma& D l p a p ~ v p o u6vo q r p u v urab LI Svo p a p n p w u q r p w v ara&)ame A 33 565

bvo papzvpwv

lS4TheArmenian version looks more like a citation here. lS5racappears in oniy one quotation, so that q

Basil's text.

seems more likely to reprisent

Lac.: C k Nyssa l%cr*sp is more cornmon than y, but it is not excluded that Basil knew both or quoted lobsely sometirnes, for y is found in manuscripts of Matthew.

B D E W A 811 Z O f 1 &-t

f i 3 33 565

7001 u r o v it L [NA:a b el

K B D E L W A ~ I I Z fO 1 3~3 3~ ~ 6 ~ 7 0 C lautern ] (=&) ab] omite

r a p a ~ o v q ( * ) N B D E L W A 8 II Of f l3 33 565 7001 ratcr&oyuu tempserit (=uara+poyar)za~) e] non audient (=pq a x o v a 2 ) ) a b

Z,con-

O E B U M ~ H B D E L A ~ I I fi3565700] Z ~ ~ ~ e9virq W 3 3 P A : a b e ]

Lac. : C k Ny ssa

EY 7 q OU~(IU&)

(a)]

EY TO(C o

E W A II Z $2 f 1 565 7 W ,in caelo (a)] au ovpauy N B 8 f 13 u p a u q D L 331 et in caelo ( = x m eu [ ~ qO]V P Q V ~ ) b e

wcrr

... ovpauy

rell] omit 70O8158

hc. : C k Nyssa m h v apqv

f 11

B E II O 33 700, iterum amen a b] mhcu & W A]

a p q u 8 f l3 5 6 3

i t e m audite (=m h r u arovtre) e

h q o uprv r d ] vpiu -0 on

ou

W

rell] omit 700

rell]

O

W N A : a b el

lS7Thisomission is Wrely due to a homoeoteleuton.

158idem.

r a b ND LC

p o v q ~ ~ULOU t ) TOU &OU xhqpovwa v u enayyehuwu 'ou eau out âvo q r p e a~ v y y ~ u q o ~so epou ouopa eusi equ ev wuqa aurwu" (RBt 306; PG 31, 1301A) [Ad]

Ka&TOU

Lac. : C k Nysa orou e~utu]OIOU rcxp e m u Sc 8 f l 3 C, ubi enim sunt a b] OU yap srotv K* E L W A II Q f l 33 565 7001 OUK E M ~ U yap Dfl et ubicumque (=rat ~aurarz(ov?)e

7

reil] omit N*

EKEL

rell] xap' 05OVK Dl omit e

B De

Lac.: C k Nyssa r o m c r ~ qK B D E L W A ~ I I Z f13335657001 U ~ ~ si (=sav) a b e epe O cr&h+w LI scq spa O a & A + q pou W D E W A II C R f 1 33 565 700, in me frater meus a b e] O a&hM pou spe B 8f l 3

ELÇ

Matthew 18:22

Lac. : C k N y s a K B DC E L W A 9 II E R fl f13 33 565 7001 c m x y D*, septies a e ] . e t septies (KU e i r a ~ r ~b )

ena

Matthew 18~31

'5% adaptations are more d i a b l e than lemmata, and if longer quotations are more reliabie than shorter ones, one would omit pou here. Nevertheless, the word is present in at least two manuscripts of Basil's works, narnely Laurent. Med W 1 4 and Paris Coislin 237. 1 wouid prefer to omit it, because 1 believe that Basil would have written it if he had had it under hîs eyes, considering that he copied directly h m the text here. 1% is impossible to know whether this particle was part of Basil's text or he added it to insert the quotation.

Lac.: k Nyssa

OL

ovu5ovho~a w o u rell] avrou oc ovv&uAoc

B

Lac.: k

al m p - a m v dominus eius b e Nyssa

~ v p c q dominus ,

OU

W BC

D E L W A 8 lï Z Q f 1 f l3 33 565 700,

C D E L W A 8 II C R f l f l3 33 565 700,(quoadusque) a b e Nyssa] omit N1 B] uov N*

K B C E L W A 8 II C fl f l f l 3 33 565 700,univemm a b, omne e Nyssa] omit D

aav

162Since there is only one allusion to this verse, it is difficult to make any

statement regarding the presence of awq.

enr wopvecgr K a c yarpqcq X q w 6e upcu orc 0s a u arohutq w u yvvawa a w o v aMqv poqazar K a t O a r o l i e h v p n p yapquug f i o w r a r (Mur73.2; PG 31,

852B) [Cl

Lac. : k Nysa o n q av (=O-?)

auzov

n E L W A 8 II C O f 1 f13 33 565 7001

e-au B C

D] quiamque

abe

rell] vpov W*

163This Mding and the the two to Matt 5:32.

following it could be &bal harmoWons

Lac.: k Nyssa

rat LÔOV e q r p w e h û w u a r e v awy, b d a u ~ a l u arya8e, r q v crtwuwv; + (Mor59.1 ; PG 31, 792C) [Ad]*

7t

cryaûov rocr)oo cua

Lac.: k Nysa &t.rev awy C E L W A II Z D f 1 33 565, *EL awy D,ait illi bj dixit ( = e t l e u )

dkit illi a] a w y ursv X B 8fl3 7001 e

ara@& C E W A 8 I I E ~ f 1 3 3 3 5 6 5 7 0 0 ,bone b] omit ~ B D L f l a e T O L ~ t~u a ~ 4(0 J f"w>)vatouwv CCE A II C O f l f13 565 700, faciam ut habeam vitam aeternam a b ] m q u o t u a uxw 3Ln)u a w u w u B C* D 9, faciam vitam s awuuw ~ l q p o u o p q c ~ wK L 331 zaqcTu t u a aetemam consequor el ~ o t q u a @qv

rwqv

=O

arydov

awvwv W

rell] omit C

Lac. : k Nyssa

x B C D L W A 0 ïï Z Q f 1 f 13 565 700, duit el I ~ ~ . T O wsu V S E 33, Iesus dixit a b

MEV

aya9oç C D E W A II Z R f 1 f l3 33 565 7001

O

a y a 9 ~X B

L 8 [NA:a b el

& L ~ ~ W O B = C E W ~ I i ~ f l f l 3 3 3 5 6 5omit ] è t B D L 8 f 1 7 0 0 a ] Deus (=$&os) b] pater (=mm)e M d e w 19:18 OU ~ O U C V OU ~ Tp~

a

O

&

+

(HPs 1.4; PO 29, 220A) [~d]*l64

Lac.: k Nyssa

ou p

o

u

O

K

r d ] omit N*

Matthew 19:19

+

a y a q u & G rov r)lquwu uov q oeawou

(HPs 1.4; PG 29, 220A)

Lac. : k Nyssa

164This muid aiso be Exod 20: 13-15, but the order of the items is the one found in Matthew. 165niis amld

be Lev 19:18, but the context is Matthew.

apoarcrypar TOU Kvpcov e u ~ c vro, ' ~ o h q o o uaov r a m a p x o w a

(RBr 101; PG 31, 1153A)

[q

KCVL

% STUXO(C~

Lac.: k Nyssa T7WXOlç

NCELWAIIZQ f1333565700] ~~ r w n q o ( ç B D 8 [NA: a b

el oupavy X

E L W A 8 II E Q f 1

caeiis e

f13

33 565 700, caelo a b]

ovpavoy B C D,

mhquou reu) et vende (=rra& rwh.r)uov) e uTapXovra rell] omnia (=r a m ) b] omnia tua (=mm uov) e

Lac. : k Nysa

Lac. : k Nyssa

rd]

&&~cr(l) Tac

& ~ a mD INA: a b e]

reil] omit D* F A : a b e]

Lac.: k 007LG it

Q,

B C D E* L W A Iï 8 Z f 1 f l 3 33 565 700,quicumque e Nyssa

EC

qui a b

a4~irev it B C D E L W A 8 II I:Uf 1 f l3 33 565 700 Nyssa reliquerit (= at#quev)

a b] dimiserint (=a#quovutv) e

1-e only certainty hem is that Basil's text had the verb ra8ion)p. We cannot Say anything about its ending.

167The only certainty is that Basil's text had the verb rprrw. We cannot say anything about its ending.

l%ince 1 have not seen this rrading in any manuscript of Matthew, 1assume that Basil is quothg h m memory and introduces an element from Mark 10:29. Interestingly, Swanson, New Testamenî Greek Mmwcnpts, vol. 1, ad loc. mentions the same readùig for Clement of Alexandria, Stn,mato IV 15.4.

0, nomen meum (a b e)] rov o v o p a 7 q pou C D E L W A I I L O f l f&33 565 700 (abe) ~ ~ s s a

E ~ O U ] TOU epov ovo a r q it B ~ ~ c r r o n a r X a a c o vKa C D sa] ?ro;hXaduxaioua B L

E W A 8 II O f l f l 3 33 565 700, ceatuplum

a b e Nys

Lac. : k Nyssa

TOU a r s h û e w i p o ~ e r c ~ &O auouaaq* "apow TO aou K a i u m ~ s "(RBr 255;

1253A)

PG 31,

- -

Lac.: 33Pt k apov 8

B C D E L W A 8 II Z O f l f l3 33 565 700, toiie

(=&pou o w q ) a b

e Nyssa] tolle itaque

Lac.: 33Pt k

16manuscripts a and b undentood the "r)" as the interrogative particle an, while manuscript e undentood it as the conjunction W . Othe&, these are not signifcant variants, for they may denote a stylistic preference and they have may =und

alike to hearers.

l ' a i s kind of variant is rare1y noticed, for both sounds must have been almost sirnilar. Nevertheless, Latin versions chose to mandate it either as the conjunction if ( a b) or the conjunction or (e). That witnesses to a different understanding of this word.

Matthew 20:22

- -

Lac.: O 565P a k Nyssa

Lac. : Q 565 k Nyssa

Lac.: R 565 k Nyssa owy N B D E L W A ~ I I C f13700,ita ~ ~ a b e ] o v ~ o ~ C33 & ernadl) X

C EC L W A 8 ïï Zf l f l 3 33 700, ent a b el

e m v B D] eoro

E*

au' ... 6canouoq r d ] omit E* EV

U ~ Up q a s ycveo8ac U D ESW A 9 II C f l f l3 33 700, inter vos maior fien a b e] m a t yeveoûat su v p w C] vpov p q a ç

vpw ~ e u e u û aT~~ O Z Weu ]

y~vsoûarc LI p q c q su u p u yeueuûuc B

171Thisreading is also found in 118 and 1424.

- -

-

Lac. : O k Nyssa

Eorar

x C D L W A ~ I I I f1333565700] : ~ ~ c m B E INA: a b e ]

Lac. : Q k Nysa

Lac. : k Nyssa I q u o u ~X

B C E W A 700, Iesus (a be)]

e)] omit Q TOU&OU

O

Iquov~ D L 9 II Zf i fi3 33 565 (a b

C D E W A I I E U f l 5 6 5 , D e i ae] omit ~ ~ L e f l ~ 3 3 7 0 0 b

Manhew 21:13

Lac. : aPt k Nysa

O

rell] omit D F A : a b e]

17% appearS that the scribe had some diffidties with this phrase, taking the word urtegrus into aca>unt which does not appear in Latin dictionaries.

Lac. : k Nyssa CYV/~CYU

N ~ C E L W ~ 8 I 1 E Q f l f 1 3 3 3 5 6 5 7 0 0omit ] Dabe

Lac.: k Nyssa v?rays, vade e] v r a y s cqlrepou spyaroov N B C 565 700, vade hodie ope& ab

D E L W A 0 8 I10f l f l 3 33

-

Lac. : 33Pt 565 k Nysa EUTLU

K B C D E L W 0 II 0 f i f i 3 7OO, (swt) (ab e)] omit A IZ

Lac.: 33Pt 565 k Nyssa auleau

K B C D E L W A ~ I I I Z O ~ ~ ~omit ~ ~a~b ~e ~ O O ]

Marrhew 22:14 roMoi ~AqrotoXIyoc 6e exA&~zoc (HPs 32.7; PG 29, 341C)

[AU]*

Lac. : k Nyssa

omit in toto 33

sxhwror

K B C D E W A 8 ïI C O f

a r v q ea.rru q r p a q ~ c v rpeyahq

13

1 700

[NA:a b e]

swohq (Mot3.1; PG 31, 70SC) [Cl

avn) emiv . r r p c o q rrar 1reyaA7 ewoh-r) rpon)

5651 ot &xAexrcc L f

+

(RFus 1; PG 31, 908A) [Ad]*

6~ xac p q a h q eu~oAq(RBr 163; PG 3 1, 1 188D) [AU]'

Lac. : C k Nyssa

Lac.: C k K

orL rpo+qsac upepavzac E W A II O f 1 f l3 565 np&7ac N B D L 8 C 33, pendet et prophetae

~

700 Nyssa] abe

upeparar K a t oc

ohoc rell] omit K*

173~he evidence is fairly consistent regvding the presence of the article in Basil's text of Matthew. I would tend to omit it, as does the longer quotation.

'rocovatvw y a p , #queu

O

Kvpuq,

PG 31, 1293AB) [Ad]

'rpw TO @ea&lmtTW

a v û p w r o ~ " (RBr 298;

Lac.: C k Nyssa 6d2) E W A II Z R 331 yap tt B D L 8 f f l3 700, enim a b el omit 565 ?wu c p a z w v auzwv

E W Iï C fl f l 3 33 565 7001

sou c p u z w v (L) A] omit X

BD

8flabe

Lac. : C 33Pt k Nyssa r a ~~p o r o ~ h t o - Kc L f 33Yid, primos discubitos a] (D) E W A 8 II C R f i 3 565 700, primum reaibitum b] (=~ h c a c c ~KuQ T ~ K ) U V E ~ Ye? )

174~atGr 428 that I use as the base of collation reads r p o ~ a e & p c c r ~here. That appears to be a speUing rnistake.

Lac. : C k Nyssa

Lac.: C 33Pt k

.

~ a h y q q qH* D ECL 0 ï I f 1 f 13 565, (est .. vobis magister) (e)] e a w O K C M & ) ~ ~vpwv G W , (est . rnagkter vester) a b] eu7rv vpov O G d a c r ~ a h qnC B 33 (e)] eo7w upou O ~aûqyiln)~ O Xpcorw E* A Z f2 Nyssa] vpov ea7w O ucr&).yrlqg O Xpiuow 7001

g m v V ~ W Y O

..

E L W A Iï Z f l f 1 f l3 565 700, vos autem nofite vocari rabbi a b, vos autem ne vocati fueritis rabbi e] VWLÇ & pq6~va!

v p ~ ÔE ~ cpq K X T J ~ Zpœ&% ~, ?tCB D ~ a h c q r a cpar&%r ,

81 omit K*

17sPreference may be given to thaî quotation, for its length guarantees that B a d did not quote h m memory. The shortness of the other quotation raises sorne doubt under that aspect.

Lac.: C 33Pt k u p d l ) NB O

O

E L W A II O f 1 f13 565 7001 v w v D 8,vobis a b e] omit Nyssa

r a q p vpov D E L W A mmp N B C 33 Nyssa

8 II Q f 1 f13 565 7 0 0 , pater v e r a b e] v p o O~

eu rot< o v p a v o q E II O 565 700, qui in caeb est (a b), qui est in caelis (e) Nyssa] O EU O U ~ Q U O Y D W A 9 Z f 1 (a b e)] O o v p o v q K B L f 13 33~id

Lac. : C 33Pt k Nysa

Lac.: C 33Pt k Nyssa

omit in loto f 1

Lac. : aPt b k Nyssa r c r ~ ~ o r u p wK v BCDELWA0IIZOfl

fl3335657001 omit a e

D E 0 R f 1f13 7001 & e h B C L W A TI C 33 5651 autem (=&) a] omit e

E ~ UK

WU

reli]

TOP

D [NA: a e]

Lac. : b k Nyssa

g N B E L W A ~ I I C f13335657ûû] Q ~ ~ omit C D a e

yepouutv

r d ] pleni estis (=y e w e ) e

17%e evidence i s divided between these two words. The manuscript evidence of Baril's works may give a slight advantage to a w w v .

Lac. : b k Nysa X B C D E L W ~ C f1333700] Q ~ ~ su&v

EU705

AI1565 [NA:ae]

~ ~ ~ t n ) ~ r W a pBo C$ E ~ L W A I I C O ~omit ~ ~D8f1700ae ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ] a ~ w uXC

BC C E C L W A II E Q 33 5 6 q

a w o u'H

B* D E* 0 f l f l3 700, eius a e

Lac. : bPt k Nyssa

oç] o m v e ~W B C JZ&~U

fl3]

E L W A 8 II Z 0 f f l 3 33 565 700, q u e a e] omit H* D

p u K B C E L W 8 II E Of l et&v D A , a foris a

33 565 700, a foris quidem e] p u e&&v

yepwv] yspovuru tt B C E L W A 8 II C O f l f l 3 33 565 700, parent a, apparent

el

Y&Wt

D

n B C D E L W A 8 n Z f l f i 3 33 565 700, omni spurcitia a b] omnies inmunditiae (= raru~ecar~u9apomc)e

n - ( y q ~ QKO&YI)C~~

l 77Missing from

VatGr 413.

Lac. : aPf k Nyssa

o 4 e ~reil]

omit b

Lac.: k

Lac. : k NyssaPt a q v

K B C E L W A ~ I I Cf1333565700] Q ~ ~ ue D, te a b e

~ a q s / a v cn C D E L W A 8 II C O f l f l3 33 565, suos a b e] omk B 700 Nyssa

mepvyac ?tB C

D E L W 8 II I:O f l f l 3 33 565 7001

suis a b, alas suas e Nyssa

-

nspuyaq ay ç A, dis

-

Lac. : aPt k Nysa i~pqpw N

C D E W A ~ I I Bf iU3 3~3 ~5657O0,deseria a b e ] omit B L

-

-

-

-

Lac. : k Nyssa

Lac. : k Nysa

KY 70 T A ~ O V VUU ~Q ~~Y O~~ U Y*tqe~ar)~ U homou 114.5-6) [AU]*

T

O

TOMOG ~ WC aycrqC (Ep

in Mk 13:6 has the same nadùrg as Maît 245, but Mers in MLr 135. Since Basil quotes both verses together (Matt 24:4-5), it is more likely that he is quoting from Matthew than Mark.

Lac.: C k N y s a rh$h&pa~n B E L W A 8 II L: Q f l f l3 33 565 7001 r)rr)@vvai D, abundabit b e] abunàat (=rAq&vec)

a

Lac. : C k Nyssa

am N B D E W A 8 II E Q f l f l 3 33 565 700, vobis duent a bJ e r q vpu L, dixerit vobis e

vprv

7

N B D E L W A ~ I I Z fUl 3~3 3~ 5 6 5 7 0 , a u t a] omit b e

Lac. : C k Nyssa

pqaha B D E

K

~

LW

reU] L omit e

C

A 8 II Z R f l f l3 33 565 700, megala a b e] omit K W*

Lac. : C k Nyssa

be, autem ab] ovv F B C D E L W A 8 II E O f i fi3 33 565 700, ergo e] omit N*

W A 8 i I Z D f i f13565700, ecce ae]

r)

rdou 33,

veleoce b

- -

VIL(Y

reli] omit a

Morthm 24:27

+

oulep Tap q a m p a n ) e&pxezac a r o uuurohov ~ a c +aiveral àuupov, emar q ~apovumTOU umu TOU Q ~ ~ W T O U (Mor68.2; PG 3 1, 808A)

Lac. : C k Nyssa

q rapouoia K B D L II C f 1 33 565 700, adventus f 13, et adventus b e

~ $ 1 ) rell]

17%.

omit 565 P A : a b el

26-27 are absent h m Garnier.

I*~bsent from Gamier.

181Sincethis word order is found nowhere else, 1 assume that Basil is quoting loosely.

Lac. : C k Nyssa ex N D ] a r o ~ E L W d 8 L I C O f l f 1 ~ 3 3 5 6 5 7 0 0 , d ea b e

Lac. : C k Nysa

yey7ac c u z a X o ~r d ] omit 565 r a r d ] omit H* [NA: a b e] qyuç

mil] et&q W 7 iarn proximus

(=qhcyyvq)

e

Mazthew 24:33

Lac.: C k Nysa mura zarwcr B E L A 8 C II O 565, omnia ista e] 7avm rawa H D W C f 1 f 13 700,haec omnia b] ~ a v z a m 87 r a w a r rawa yrvopeva 33, haec omnia fieri a 182This quotation is very close to Mark 13:28-29, but is closer to Matthew. Only 1424 in Mark 13:28-29has the same wording as Matt 2432. It is therefore m o n lilcely that Basil =pied h m Matthew rather than Mark.

Lac. : C k Nyssa c u ~ t a qL] ~ ~ ~y~ e uac r w p c r ç X B C D E W A Il fl f 13 565 700, illa et hora (a), iilo et hora (e)] y ç raf n)ç o p a ~8 f l (a e)] exervqq 7 q q o p a g Z 33,

iUa vel hora b

ouda O vtoc N* B D 8 f 13, neque flius a b] n ue fdius hominis (=ours O vcoc TOU C Y Y ~ ~ W T O V el) omit NCE L W A II C R f 33 565 700

"I

mnlp

X B D L A ~ I I Bfi333565700,pater ~ ~ abe] m q p p o v E W D

Lac. : C k Nyssa

Lac. : Cpt k Nyssa

lg30ne latin manuscript (ri)and the Vulgate join &y ( q p p c r ) and hour order. Greek manuscripts have one or the other. One might posit that Basil was aware of both readïngs and sought to include them, or, more likely, he quoted h m mernory. ( w ~ c u )in that

~ u p wX B D

L f133, dominus ae]

r u p q awov

E W A II T: U f13 565 700,

dominus eius b] r v p q a w o v ?ou 0

B L W A 8 II* C f l3 33, familiam a b] ouw IIC i'2f l 700, curam e

O~KMWC

TOU

DE

H 5 6 3 tkpcrremc

reii] omit D N A : a b e]

avroy

reU] servis suis

(=7y

h v X q a w o v ) e]

omit W

Lac. : k Nyssa

E W A II Z D 565 7001 owsic facientem a b, ita facientem e

~ou>vum owwq

rowvwa X B C D L 8 f l

f13

33,

e h h v rell] omit e

Lac. : k N y s a roiq v r c l p ~ o w t va w o v )t B C D E L W A C f2 f f l 3 33 700, bona sua a] r q vmpy(ovow 91 crwou r q u r a p ~ o v a r v II 5651 sua ( = a w o v ) el omit b

Lac. : k Nyssa enetuo~ K c B C D E L W A I ~f1333565700,ille E ~ ~ ~ ~ a b e ] omit x * 8 O

ww POU E W A n Z Q fi D L 8 33 700

e p p d a r c Z fl,

f l 3 565, dominusmeus a b e ] p o v o n t p t q 8

BC

venire (ab e)] ehûerv C D E Lw A 8 II O fi3 565 (a b e)] omit

~B33700

Lac. : aPt k Nyssa avzovhawov K B C D L 8f l f l 3 33 700, suos a b e] omit E W A II C R 565 ~dq K B C D E L A (8)f l f13 33, manducat b e] edteiv W II *LM) E(

I:0 565 700 a

(B) C D E L A 9 fl f131 muet 33, bibat b el riveeu W II Z Q 565 700

Lac. : a e k Nyssa

--

ed2)

rell] omit b

Lac.: a e k Nyssa

l*5~ccordingto Legg, Evmge~iwnsecdurn Matthaeum, ad lm., crzcazov is also found in 1012, 1295 and Epiphanius. This is confirmeci by Augustinus Merk ed., Novwn Testmntaun graece et lorine, 1lîh ed. (Rome:Pontifici0 Instituto Biblico, 1992) ad loc. who adds Iraeneus-Greek.

Lac.: 33Pt aPt e k NyssaPt

S ~ $ ~ O VK

B C D E L W A (8) II Z Q f l f l 3 33 5651

venerunt b

Kat

&E&~ou

700, et

Lac.: 33Pt a e k Nyssa 186Bothreadhgs are likely representative of Basil's text. It is not impossible, either, thai Basil knew of a different word order.

Lac. : a e k Nyssa

awwv S C

D E W AII z o f l

f13

33 565, suis b] omit N L e 700

&hacou K B C E L W A 8CI C Q f l f l 3 33 565 700, o h m b] Aauw ev r o q ayyecocç awov D

18%venthough some manuscripts of Matthew omit awov hem, one must consider the posibility thaî the oruission Û due îo a homoeoteleuton made either by Basil or a scribe copying the work. The word aww is indeed rrpeated at the end of the sentence.

226 Lac.: 33P a e k Nyssa awodl) C

E W A II Z $2 f13 565, suis b]

omit

r B D L 8f1 700

Lac.: 33Pt a e k Nysa

Lac.: 33P a e k Nyssa epxerac B CC E

avrov

W A 8 II Z:R f 1 f13 565, venit b] omit N B C* (D) L 700

D E L W A ~ I I E fl o f13S65] avry C,ei b] omit K B700

yqouev

rell] q e v e r o B INA: b]

-

-

lB81heomission could be explainecl as a homoeotcleuton.

Lac. : 33P a e k Nysa

-

-

-

Lac. : 33P a e k Nyssa T ~ U PK

B C C D E w A 9 n E nf l fi3 33 565 700,nostrae b]

V ~ W

C*L

ad2) dl]omit A B A : b]

Lac. : a e k N y s a

qptv nar ugrv B C qpev K 700

D E L W A 8 II I:O f l f 13 33 565, nobis et vobis b]

vwv rat

Lac.: a e k Nyssa

a c K B C D E W ~ 8 I I C O f l 3 3 5 6 5 7 0 0 ] omit Lf13 [NA: b]

vmepov & epxovrar K a 4 ai hormc zapûeuoc kyoumr, mpre mrpce, av&ov q p v (Mor16.1; PG 31, 728B) [CJ

Lac. : a e k Nysa ep~ov~crc tt B C E L A 8 II Z SI f f l3 33 565 7001 qXBov D W, veniunt b

68 rell] omit b hocrac r d ] hume

0189

mp9evoc reU] omit 700

+

O

& a r o u p d e q arev, app MW upw,

OUK O&

(Mor1.5; PG 31, 704B)

U~UC

[Cl O

& aro~&eq a m u ,

*O

V ~ L OUK V , OCdOL u p a ~(Mor16.1; PG 31, 728B) [C)

TEXT: O & amxprtkq errev, [apr)v]lw heya vpv, ovx o

' I v o û ~(variant C , E and F)and aftewards towards replacing the dative év

En

I'akhaiq for an acaisative object. It is difficult to make a definitive judgment regarding variarit, G which îs close to variant B as it omits the subject "Jesus,"but neverthe-

less has the accusative rotam W i & e instead of an ablative. n i e acaisative may have

seemed more natural after the verb ciraïbat as it is in Matt 9:35 and 23: 15 where this

verb is alço employed.

360n this variant,

see T C G m 1st ed., 12.

3"Ihus, ail Gr& manuscripts appear to have the accusative after r&p be due to a scribe's faulty memory. To summarize,

either variant rnay represent the most ancient reading.

Word alteration; grammatical change: addition of a comecting particle

lolThisspelling is found in UM Bel and Dragon 1:11. See also BDF $47(3); MHT,vol. 3, 131-32; LSJ online.

333 One may divide all these variant readings into two categories: those that use the indicative mode ie., variant& A, D, and F and those that use the participle mode,

i. e. variants B, C, E, G,and H. Al1 variants that use the indicative mode have S e to

indicate the simultaneity of Peter's - and Jesus', acmrding to variant D - aming home, and Jesus' question to Peter. The conjunction 6re is unnecessiiry with the use of the participle mode.

The most difficult readhgs are variants B and C, which have an accusative singular masculine participle aorist*. This unexpected accusative participle aorist modifies arirzov, the object of ~ ~ ~ @ O a a To e v smooth . out this more difficult sentence

structure, variants G and H changed for the most wmmon absolute genitive already used at the beginniag of 17:24. This change rnakes clear Peter's and Jesus' wrning

into the house together, which is unspecified with variants A, B, C, and E. Variants A, D, and F also smoathed out the difficult accusative paiticiple aorist by changing it for an indiutive aorist and adding ore. As for variants G and H,

variant D made clear th& Peter and Jesus came home together. The addition of 8

' I ~ a o ûin~variant F is a Scribal blunder which creates a non-sense teading. The dative participle aorist used in variant E is also a scribal blunder, for the use of dative is

unjustifiecl here.

F i y , one notices that variants A, C, E, F, and H have the wmpound verb

eioip~opcrr,while variants B, D, and G have the verb Zpxopai. The use of the cornpound eiaépxoparc may seem redundant, since it creates a repetition of the preposition

eic already used in the next clause (&j v oiriau). Nevertheles, the repetition of the preposition sic after a wmpound verb is unexceptional. lo2 The deletion of & as

umecessaq would therefore be unusual. Yet, Mut 17:24 begins with the formula l%.g., Matt 520; 6:6; 7:21; 10:12; 12:4, 29; 18:3,8,9; 19:23,24; 25: 10,21,23; 26:4l. See also MHT, vol. IV, 39 and Robertson, Grmnmar, 559.

'EXB6wov b8 aWGu & Ka+apvndary. The main

ciifference between variants A, C, and D is the use of the subjunctive present &a, or the subjunctive aorist2 a&. Both tenses are syntactically correct, and neiîher would be

more likely than the other. One may notice that variants A and D an closely relateci, differing only in word order. The odd word order found in variant D rnight be regarded as a scribal blunder if it was not also found in several manuscripts of 1 John

5: 13: b n

CKWYCOY. Such a word order would tend to be n o m a h x i to the

most common fonnuia.116 For this reason, transcrjptional probability m a l w variant D likely to represent the most ancient reading. Variant A muid reprisent a second stage

in rearranging the word order, and variant B would represent a third stage by changing

the subjunctive present to the subjunctive aorist2. 1%

this variant reading, see T C G m 2nd ed., 38.

l %.g., Matt 19:29; Mark 10: l7,3O; Luke 10:25; 18: l8,3O; John 3: l5,16,36; 4: l4;,36; 5:24,39; 6:27,40,47,54; 10:28; 12:25; 17:2; Acts 13:48; Rom 2:7; 521; 6:22; Ga1 6:8; 1 Tim 1:16; 1 John 2:25; 3:15; 511; Jude 1:21.

Variant A is a harmonhîion to Mark 10:18/Luke 18: 19 and should therefore be considenxi as secondary. Variant D is probably related to variant A, and would

have dropped )&y%,

Variant perhaps under the influence of Matt 19:16b ( ~ &ycré%v). i

B considen a-ydoû as a substantive, whiie variant C possibly considers it as an adjective, since both of its uses in the verse are anarthmus. In this way, variant C is closer to the parallel passages (Le., Mark 10: 18ILuke 18:19) that have anarthrous &y(ré&

and

a y c r B 6 ~ . For this reason, variant B Wrely represents the most ancient reading because

of its dissùnilarity with the parallel passages.117

A. ov&v; i> bè &&Y épw&

=spi

706

*do%

ek 8urw 8 &ylrte6g

PM+, Ti pe

(N~27).

It appears probable that the manuscripts cited in variant A harmonized fully

or parrially their reading with the ones found in the Synoptic puallels, so that variant B likely represents the most ancient reading.Ilg

-

l190n this variant, see TCGNT 2nd ed.,

39-40.

C. Deus (=9ew) b D- pater ( = = a m )e

Harmon;lnt;on Variant A is predictably a harmonizaîion to the parallel passage (Le., M k 10:18Lk 1 8: 19). Its omission would indeed be improbable, if it had been the most

ancient reading.120 Variant C is probably an abbreviation of variant A, aud variant D would be a further adaptation made h m variant C. Therefore, variant B iikely represents the rnost ancient reading.

D E W A ~ Z 565,Dei Q ~ ~ ae B.#omit U B L 8 f1333700b Omission A.

T O U ~ E O VC

Variant A muld be an addition to emphasize the sacred character of the

Temple, which otherwûe did not need such emphasis for the Maahean Jearioh Christian community. 121 Nevertheles, the phrase is missing from the paralle1 passages in Mark 1 1 :15 and Luke 19:45. In addition, it is otherwise unknown in the NT and rare in the

LXX (see 1 Esd 5:43,54; 8: l7,18), so that it muid be deleîed by copyisîs who may have found it umecessary and uncornmon. For this reason, 1 would tend to consider

variant A as the most ancient reading.122

12%

this variant, see TCGNT 2nd ed., 39-40.

121See TCGNT 2nd

ed., 54.

122T'his is also the opinion of W. D. Davies and D. C. AUison, me Gospel Accordhg to Saint Mmhew. ICC,no. 26, vol. 2 (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1991) 137, note 26 and Joachim Gnilka, D u Marthorssvangelium, vol. 2. HTKNT, no. 1 (Freiburg: Herder, 1986) 207.

B. q r p q K a t peyahq A C 565 C.# q ~reyahqlac r,, X B 8f 1 f l 3 33 700, maximum et primum a b e D. peyaht) uar 11007)) D (a b e) E. q m a h q Kat II r p w q L F. q r p w q K a t q crg.ahr) W

Word order; short omission

The most difïïcult readings are variants A and D, whîch have anarthmus adjectives. One may explain this absence of articles by the fact that the first 5 was

accidentally dropped while copying, verse: a *

considering the abundaria of '7" in this

écwiu 3 p e y t 5 X ~xai ~ r p & q émoA$. Conversely, variants E and F have an

article for each adjective, iikely to add emphasis. If this were the case, these variants could be secondary. Divergences in word order an likely due to a scribe's faulty memory while copying, since both adjectives are equal. Consequently, either variant B

or C couid represent the most ancient reading.

rpo+qmr xpepavrac E W A II R f 1 f 13 565 700 Nyssa KpepaTarr K ~ oc L ' i r p m m t ES B D L 8 C 33, pendet et prophetae

A. u a t

B.#

OL

abe

Worà oràer

The most dificuit readhg is variant B, which splb the two-part subject (~"XOÇ6 w6pw, ai oi rp0447t~c)before and after the v e h . Variant A could have

edited the clause to b

~ back g both parts of the subject together. Thus, variant B

likely represents the most ancient reading.

A. 6&(2) E w A II C Q 33 B . # y a p K B D L f 1~ f13700, enim a b e

C. omit 565

Grammatid change change of a conneding particle

345

The use of yaip in variant B is explanatory after the first clause: z&wa 6& T& &ya a h 3 v romûocu r p k TG Bea&jvcu 7&

&vûp&rorç i n d i d g that examples of

the

Pharisees' behavior will follow. &5, used in variant A, could be seen as oopuiative,

mereIy juxtaposing the clause of 23:Sb to the one found in 23:5a. However, it owld

also have an explanatoxy sense uncornmon with thk particle, but found, for instance, in John 3:l9,23. No reading is more likely than the other, but variant B would be more

probable than variant A, so transcnptional probability would tend to replace &5 with y&p.

Variant C is pmbably a scribal blunder, for there are no stylutic reasons to omit

one or the other particle here.

The mention of the clothes (7% ipcrliwv) in variants A and B couid be an explanation for readers unfanilliar with the Jewish costume. It could also be an

assimilation to Matt 9:20. In addition, a+& in variant A parallels the ah3v found in the previous clause: r& @ v h a ~ ~ pauhrG u . Variant B may have omitted aÙ&v as

unnecessary. To surnmarize, variant C likely represents the most ancient readiag.

A. pa881 pa&3i/paB&x pa& D E W II O f l 3 700 B.# pcr#3&lpaBBec X B L A 8 C f 1 33 565, rabbi a b e

Short Interpolation

'=For comparable cases, see variant readings nos. 10;16; 31 ; 35; 46; 50; 78 and 99.

The double v d v e found in variant A muid likely be a scribal addition to make the saying more solemn.124 Such an addition would make the reading mnform to the usage of other double vocatives in the Fint Gospel (e.g., Matt M l ; 23:37;

25: 11). One could also psit thaî it was omitted because it was wnsïdered a scribal biunder, or that the cupyist's eye skïppeû the fint or second &Y@&.

Finally, it d

d

have been omitted by an editor trimming useless words to make the style mon t e r d m

Considering that other double vocatives of the First Gospel are found in ali manuscripts, accidental omission app*us unlikely. The addition of a second pa@& appears

more probable, so that variant B Iike1y represents the most ancient d g .

A.

O

su

7%

ovpauoy E

II 0 565 700, qui in -lis

est (a b), qui est in caek (e)

Nyssa

B. o e v ovpavoG D W A 9 s f l (abe) C.# O o v p a u q K B L f13 33Yid

Harmonization Variants A and B imply a moaadic noun, Le.,

oùpavk,

which is frequently

anarthmus afier a prep0~ition.l~~ 1 would tend to $ive a slight preference to variant A over variant B, since there is unanimity of the G m k manuscript tradition of Matthew only in the case of artidar o u p a v e (with d~).l*~ This unanirnity may indicate a Matthean preference for articular ovpauotq with év and a scribai tendenq to delete the art& cle. Nevertheless, the phrase 8 r a n j p 6 o C p & u c ~(variant C ) is a Manhean expression

'"For such an explanation, see TCGNT 2nd ed., 49.

'=On Attic terseness of style, see variant reading no. 10 above. 12%ee

51; 53 and 54.

other instances of monadic nouns in variant readings nos. 5; 20; 32;

1z7See Matî 5: l2,l6; 6:9; 16: 19. Compare with Matt 545; 6: 1; 7: 11,21; 10:32,33; 1250; 16:17; 18:10,14,19; 19:Sl.

347

used only seven times in the GospeI. This phrase was likely to suffer alteration as the

manuscript tradition shows.128 Sina variant C is the reading most lilrely to be altereû,

it likely represents the most ancient reading. Variants A and B show two types of alteration.

eheov C E W A 11 Z O f 1 f 13 700, misericordiam a e B.#7oekw K B D L 8 3 3 C. 70 Aeov 565 Grammatical change: gmderl29 A.

TOU

e k q is mostiy neutral in the NT, but almost always masailine in secular

Greek.13* Variant A wuld therefore be a stylistic correction to wnform the word to its daily use. Other occumnces, in Maa 9: 13; 23:23, are shifariy mrrected by the same manusaipts. Variant C muid be a compromise to make exoc; more neutral-like by

changing the find letter h m "a"to "vu. Consequently, variant B likely represents the

most ancient reading.

A.# zhaqoac B E W A II C R f13 565 700, errent e B. .nhmq&lvar N D,inducantur a b C. ~ h a u a d o r L 8 f 1 33

Form aiteration

IzgThe expression is found in Matî 5:48; 6:14; 6:26,32; 15:13; 18:35; 23:9. Only in Matt 6:26 is the manuscript tradition uaanimous.

lz9For a sùnilar case, see variant reading no. 22. 130See variant reading no.

22 above.

The most diffidt nading is variant B. It is an infinitive passive aoristl followed by an accusative object. One sometimes encuunters a passive verb foiîowed by an a d v e objezt in the NT, but such a wnstruction is rare. 131 Variant C is also

difficult, for it is an infinitive middle-passive present. The use of the present in this context is unexpected. In addition, it is unclear whether the verb shodd be understood as a middle or a passive. To understand .rXcrvâ&r

relieves the pmblem of the accusaiive object zoùg ~

as a middle verb (as in Jas 5:19) Variant A ( d a i u a r )

K ~ K T O ~ .

has the most cornmon infinitive active aoristl and therefore does not give any difficulty. In addition, it d

s the form used in LXX Deut 13:2-6. Conrequently, as the

most difficult reading, variant B W

y represents the most ancient reading. Variant A

and C could be seen as soIutions to wlve the difficulty of variant B.132

72. Manhew 24~33 A.# n a v m 7ama B E L A 8 C II U 565, omnia ista e B. Tama r a u m Y D W C f 1 f l3 7 0 , haec ornnia b C. ncyv 7awa e* D. mwa rama yuopeva 33, haec omnia fieri a Word order

It is possible to discard as secondary variants C (scribal blunder) and D

(additional emphasis) fiom the list of possible most ancient readings, so that either variant A or B iïkely npresents the oldest reading. Nonetheless, one should notice thai the different word order in variants A and B have different meanings. 'Zbus, mkcr

131E.g., Luke 7:29; Phil 1:11; Phil 3:8; 1 Tim 65. On this amtnsaion, see Porter, Zdioms, 66;Robertson, Grammur, 484-486 and Wallace, Greek Grammar, 438-439. 1 could fînd another instance of this constmction in Euripides, Hel. 598: ' n h a t q t k i ~n j v & & i p h p o v ~7ovu",but in this example, rhavuw is used with the meaning of wandering. 132Interestingly, ~ ~ and2 the 7TR (Scrivener 1894 and 1902 editions) p ~ t variant A. Variant B is printed in Tischendorf and variant C is printed in Westcoa and Hort, von Soden, and Bover.

taken togetherW.l33 Davies and AUison notes that Matthew genenlly prefers the word

order raka rawa (e.g., 4:9; l3:34,Sl). 1% Still, the manuscript üadition is spht for many occurrences of tùis phrase (e.g., Maü 6:32; 1356; 23:36; 24:2,8,33,32), so that it is impossible to favor one variant over the other.

A. roiovwa oww E W A II C Q 565 700 B.# OUT% ? ~ O C O U Y T ~8 B C D L 9 f 1 f l 3 33, sic facientem a b, ita facientem e

Word oFder

Variant A d

d be a stylistic improvement, since the adverb usually cornes

after the verb.135 Otherwise, one of the variants should be attributed to a scribe's faulty memory while copying. Thus, variant B cwld represent the most ancient reading, but variant A cannot be discardecl as such.

A.# ha@ovocrc B D E A II C R f1 B. Xor/3ovcra H C L W 8 f 13 33 565 C. ~AcrBov 700, acceperunt b

Form alteration

133~eeGeorg B. Winer, A Treatise on the G r m r of New Testament Greek, 3rd ed. revised 19th English edition], transl. and ed. W. F. Moulton (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1882) 686 quoted in k m y Heimerdinger, "Word Order in Koine Greek. Using a Text-Critical Approach to Study Word Order Patterns in the Greek Text of Acîs, " FgNT 9 (1996) 164. 134 See Davies and Mison, Gospel Acwrding

658. 135See BDF 5474.2.

?O Saint

Matthew, vol. 1, 657-

350 Variant A has dropped the nnal " i nof the diphtong

"ai"as often

the Heilenîstic pmod.136 It is therefore simiiar to variant B. Variant C d

happemecl in

d be the

result of a scribe's fauity memory when copying. Therefore, either variant A or B could represent the most ancient reading.

A. qaav ee a w u v E W II Q f13 33 565 B.# ef m u qtrap, H B C D L A Z f l 700, ex eis erant b

e

Word order

The most diffcuit reading is variant A, which separates with $uav the genitive 6e ab&

h m ~révre. Such a construction is uncornmon in Matthew (contrast

with Man 10:29; 18:12; 22:35; 27:48) and in the rest of the NT. 137 A scribe wodd

rather tend to conform the phrase to the most mmmon word order than the opposite, u>

variant A would represent the most ancient reading. Yet, one cannot exclude the possibility of a scribe's faulty memory to explain the origin of these divergent readhgs.

A. &ouipoi rai ai r e w e p o p a i E (A) f2 f l 3 B. &pov~por ai ~ e w popcri e W II 565 700 C.# p o p a i rat revre & p o u & p ~H B C D L 8

f l 33Gd, fatuae et quinque pmdentes b

Word order; short interpolation

Variants A and B are closely related, the only difference king the presence or the absence of ac. Variant A is probably a stylistic irnpmvemement. The pnsence

of ai can be explained by the fact th& the verse refea to a part of a quantity mentimed 1360n this matter, see MHT, vol. 2, 84-85. l f 7 ~ n o t h einstana r of this construction is found in John 7:44a: r i v i q ijeehov 65 ab& ~ t & ~a tt z~6 l~ .

&È

351 before (i.e., &o). 138 Variant A would thenfore depend on variant B. It Y nonethe-

. . .

l e s impossible to dtscnminate between variant B and C for both word orders are

likely, the alteration possibly king due to a scribe's faulty memory.

A. crrrrve~p p a k Aa@ovuar

E W A Iï O f l 3 565 N B C L C 33

B.# ac y a p p p a t Xa#3ouuac C. crt ovv popcvr hac@ouuac D D. hcr/30vuar & ar pwpac 8f l

E. a c n v e ~ha6ouoar 700 F. sed quinque fatuae acceptis ( = a M a mu?& pupac Aa/3ovuac) b Grammaüd change: omission of a comecting partide; word alteration

The m a t difficult reading muld be variant B because of the presence of y& which, generally, has either an inferential sense, or an explanatory s e ~ l ~ eIn.the ~ ~ ~

present case, raip can be sexm as explanatory, for it details the previous statement. l*

Such an explanatory y&@ rnay have been deemed too stmng, or useless, h m whence its replacement by other particles in variants C ( o h ) and D (bé as in Maîî 25:4), or its

deletion in variants A and E. In addition, variants A and E retained the d a t i v e pro-

noun aiitueg inherited h m Matt 25: 1b. Variant E, which probably originates fiom variant A, is most lilcely a scribal blunder as the copyist's eye shifted h m Maîî 25:3a

to Matt 25: 1b. Similady, the different word order in variant D may have arken h m a faulty memory while copying. Finally, variant F ad& emphasis with an a d v e d v e

comective (i.e., se&

and by adding the mention of the number of fwlish virgins (Le.,

1380nthis, see BDF $265. 1390n this, set Porter, Idioms, 207-8.

l%n this, see Richard A. Edwards, "Narrative Implications of C;ar in Matthew," CBQ 52 (1990): 647.

pinque). As the most dificuit rrading, variant B lïkely represents the most ancient reading. Variants A, C,and D could be attempts to smwth over that dificulty.

C E W A II E 0 f13 565, suis b B.#omit N B D L 8 f 1 7 0 0 Short intapolption141 A. a v r w d l )

Any variant muid be the oldest depending of one's understanding of the

evolution of the text towards expansion or contraction, toward k i n g more specific or more terse.

The emphatic negative OP p i (variant A) may have sounded too strong in this context and may have been replaced by OGK (variant B). 142 Variant C does not make

sense in this context and is Wrely a scribal error.

and 99.

l41For simüar cases, see variant nadings nos. 10; 16; 3 1 ; 35; 46;50;67

14%o W. D.Davies and D. C. J. Allison, nie Gospel According to Soint Mmhew. ICC no. 26,vol. 3 (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1997)399, note 171. On the negative où p i , see MHT, vol. 1, 187-192;C. F. D.Moule, An Idiom Book of New Testament Greek, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Ress, 1963) 156-157; Porter, Zdiom, 283; Robertson, Grc111utt(lr,1174;Zerwick, B i b l i d Greek, $444.

C. omit a b Word alteration

The verb mpbatiuo is amistently used in the rest of the story (Le., Maü 25: 17,2O, 22). Matthew's fondness for paralleikm would therefore plead for the use of this verb in M n 25: 16 as weïl. Variant B c o w q u e n l y seems more Wrely to k the

most ancient reading.143 Variant A may have arisen h m a Jcribe's faulty me-. Variant C rnay be explained by the scribe's eye skipping M

y fîom in eis (Le., d r

arir7oZs) in Matt 25:16 to in eis in Matt 25:17.14

A. a M a rame raXum Y C D E W

A II C Of l f l3 565 700 B.# a M a reme B L 8 33, dia quinque a b

Short interpolation Any variant could represent the most ancient reading, depending o n one's

understanding of the evolution of the text towards expansion or contraction, toward k i n g more spefioc or more terse. Variant A is more specific while variant B avoids the unecessary r&Aaarwcr aforementioned in 25: 15,16a.

A. ~ c r r W B C ~ D E W A I I ZfQ i f 1 3 565700 B.# omit N* CSL 8 33 a b Gmmmaîicai change: addition of a connecting particle

Transcriptional probability can go both ways in the present case. Either variant A is the most ancient reading and nai was deleted as unnecessary (i.e., variant 14%

note 199.

Davies and Allison, Gospel Acmrding tu Soinr Matthew, vol. 3, 406,

lMMatt 25: 16b: operatus est in eis et lueratus esr d i a quinque. Matt 25: 17: Similiter qui d w accepit, Iucrarus est in eis aIia dim.

354

B) or g a i was added to emphasize the seamd semant's s i m h behavior with the first servant.

A. xpovov rohvv WC E A II C Q 565

B.# rohvv ~pouov K* B C D L 8 f 1 f 13 33 700, multum tempue (a b) C. xpovov n u a W Word order

Either variant A or B is rnay represent the most ancient reading, since no word order is more difncult than the other and b o t , variants are syntacticaily correct.145 Variant C would have made the statement more general and perhaps more

realistic by replacing roh6u (Le., much) with n u a (i. e., some, ansiderable). There-

fore, it is k l y secondary.

A. p r ' arvrou hoyov E W A 0 f13 565 B.# hayov m' awwv â B C D L 8 II C f l 33 700, rationem cum eis a b

Word order Any variant is lilrely to represent the most ancient reading and the divergence in word order rnay originaîe from stylistic preferences or from a scribe's fauity

i45niis phrase is enoountered nowhere else in the NT which makes it difficult to see what would have been the most common word order. It is nonetheless found in the LXX: 2 Macc 6: 13; Job 29: 18; Isa 27: 10 (rohùv ~p6uow)and in Isa 34: 10 (xp6vov rohik).

c o ~ t r u a i o nfound in variant A. is also found in Rev 11:7: roc+a notice that a variant that r a d s rocjaec r 6 h o u pm' aWov arose in several rnanuscripts. 1-e

p' a h G u '~Ohepov. One may

Variants A and B are explicative clauses to explain that the five aforemen-

tioned talents have been gained h m the five talents that had been given by the muter. The same variants are found in Matt 25:22 in reference to the two talents. In this case,

vanscriptional probabilities can work both ways. Either the clause found in variants A and B were present in the older text and were removed by later q y i s t s as useless

explanations, or they wen absent h m the older text and added as a supplementary piece of infornation on the source of the gain. The choioe of the preposition (id or Ev) is a matter of stylistic prrference.147 To summarize, interna1 evidence does not

permit to select one of these variants as the lîkely oldest reading.

A. 6e W A I I O f l f13 565

B.# omit N B C D E L 8 C 33 700 a b Grammaticai change: addition of a connecthg partide &' play s the role of a comective between 25:20, which tells of the servant

who received five talents h m his master and 2521, which telis of the servant who received two talents h m his master. Similarly, several manuscripts have 66 in 2522 to connect this verse, which deals with the servant who received a single talent, to the

previous verse. Transcriptional probabilities can go both ways hem. bé could be added

1 4 7 L e x i ~ ndo s not p&de supplementary examples of the verb ~ e p h i w w used with these prepositions, so one does not know which preposition was to be expected in such a case.

356 to make a comection with what precedes or it could be deemed unnecesrary and deIeted.

A. Xa&v K D E Q 565 700, acceperat (ô) B.#omit B C L W A 8 1 1 E f 1 fl333

Interpolation Variant A makes Matt 2522 (rpouehû&v[6i] ai ii ?à 6 b 7&3u~wcrhaBOv E ~ Wmore ) symmetrical with

M a î ~2520 (rai rpooeAO&v 6 7à réMs ~ & W T C X hamu

r p o m j v q ~ e v ) . TradScripbod probability

makes t&e research of syrnmetzy more likely

than its deletion. For this nason, variant B may be considerrd as the most ancient reading.

A. er'atmoy C E W A I I C Q f1356S ~~

B.#omit ~ B D L 8 3 3 7 0 0 b Interpolation See comment on variant reading no. 85 above.

A. a.ro6Erov C ~ ~ ~ I I C O f 1 3 5 6 5 7 0 0 B.# rov & K B D L e f i 33, autem qui a b

Harmonization Variant A J most likely a harmonization to the Lukan parailel (Luke 19:26), so that variant B would represent the most ancient reading.

B . # > ~ X @ a r e~

B D E L w ~ e L f 1 3 3INA: 3 ab] Form alteration

Variants A and B are two foms of the seand plural indicative ami& of b o ~ c r rbut , variant B has an aoristl ending which is sometimes found with this

verb.148 Variant A is pmbably a comction of variant B to the more g r d d y correct aorist2 ending. Such a correction occurs in several other places, e.g., Matt 1 1 :7,8,9; 26:55. 149 Therefore, variant

B likely represents the most ancient reading.

A. aha@ouzpov pupov a o v m & ~ p ~ y r o E v W A E O f1 B.# ~ o v u aha@atwpou a pvpov @apwcfiov B f l3 700, habens alabastrum unguenti

pretiosi (a b) C. q o u u a arha&arpov pupov ~ohwtpouK ID L 8 33 (a b) D. aha@aarpov pupou a o v u a roXvnpov II 565 Word order

Variants A and B have @ap&ov

while variants C and D have r o h t k p o v .

The former is a hapar legomenun in the NT and the latter is also found in Maît 13:46 and the Johannine parallel (John 12:3). It is therefore likely that rohwilpov is due to the ïnfiuence of the Johannine parallel. One could mnsequently discard variants C and

D.lso Either variant A or B is likely to represent the most ancient reading. The divergence in word order may be due to stylistid preference or to a scribe's f d t y memory while copying.

l%ee BDF $81(3); Harold K. Moulton ed., The AnalytiCOI Greek Laicon Revised (Grand Rapids, Mich. : Zondervan, 1978) §35(12).

149Surprisingly, several manuscripts are not consistent in having an aoristl enàing in Matt 25:36 and an aorist2 ending in Man 25:39 or vice-versa. IsoSci Davies and Allison, Gospel Acmrding to Soint Matthav, vol. 3, 444, note 20 and Donald A. Hagner, Matthew 14-28. WBC, no. 33B @alias: Word Books, 1995) 756; Gundry, Mottirew, 520.

Both variants are grarnrnatically correct, although éxi + accusative (variant A) bas a directiond amnotation while &ri + genitive (variant B) has a positional one.

in the case of

Nonetheles, it is impossible to be dogrnatic in BibLical Greek, M.152 é n

+ accusaîive was more ammon than the other cases, and the use of the

accusative grew in populPnty at the expense of the other cases as the language evolved.153 In other words, the genitive was more likely to be transforrned into an auiusative than the opposite. For thic reason, variant B could repRsmt the most

.

ancient readiag

A. p a h s a c awov E W A II Z Q f i 565 B # p h p ~ tX B D Lf I~3 3 3 7 O a b

Short interpohtiod"

G m k manuscript tradition agrees so often, placing the genitive personal pronoun crhoû after "disciples"(paûqra~a&)rai~/ p a

u

a

a

)

in the First

1SlFor a similar case, see variant readings nos. 40 and 42 above. i52See MHT,vol. 3, 271 153See BDF

.

$233; Robertson, Grammrir, 600-1.

154For a shilar case, see variant reading no. 41 above.

359 Gospel, that it was likely to k added wherever it was missing. l"

'Ibis may be the

case Mth vaMm A, which means that variant B may be îhe most ancient.156

A.15' uotrsoç a v r o v E W A II C 0 f 1 565 700 B.# €4ô ~ a m qK B C L 33, singuli a b C. e c examq a v r w D 0 f13 Word alteration Variants B and C combine the two indefinite pronoms & and ex am^ to produce an intensive fomulation.ls8 Variant A may have found this formulation

excessive and, accordingly, deletexi &. Regarding uMôv, two main scenarios are possible: Either it was added in place of & (variant A), and variant C would represent a

confiation of variants A and B, or it was present dong with efC in the mon ancient reading (variant C), and was deleted afterwards (variant B). The first scenario seems

more probable as the expression e(C Zxaazcq is rarely found in the NT or in the LXX (e.g., Ac 2:6; Rev 21:21; Lev 25: 10; 4 Macc

13:13)and was likely to be altered as an

uncornmon idiom. Thus, variant B likely represents the most ancient reading.

lsssee Matt 5 1 ; 8:23; 9:10,11,19,37; 11:l; 12:l; 1523; 16:21,24; 24:l; 28:13. '56Contra J. K. Elliott, " M a h i cwith a Possessive in the New Testament, " in Essays Md Snidies in Nou Testcurrenf Terrunl Cn'ticism. Estudios de Filologia Neotestamentaria, no. 3 (Cordoba, Spain: Almendro, 1992) 139-145 who argues for the onginality of the possessive with p a & l s a ~ / p a e > j ? & ~ / p a & , ~ & v / p & & I ?ina the ~ NT on the b a i s that this form is the most common. 1570ne may notice that this variant is also supported by P3' and *S. 15gOn this, se+ BDF $305 and MHT, vol. 3, 198. 'Ibis combination is also in Acts 2:6 and an even more intensive fomulation is found in Rev 21:21: av& eig É u a u r ~ . u-&

A. rov aprov E W A I I C il f13 565 B.# aprov N B C D L 8f l 33 700 INA: a b3

HaFmonizaüon (to a Litnrgical formula)

The article in variant A was likely added as a result of the developement of liturgical formulae and theo10gicai studies referxïng to the eucharistie bread. It is

indeed difficult to conceive why the article would have been removed if it had been

present in the m a t ancient reading. l 5g

A. evl(aproqqarç E W A II C R f l f l3 565 B.# evAoyr)oa~K B C D L 0 33 700, cum benedixisset a, benodixit b

Word alteration; hprmonizatïon Variant A is probably a harmonization to the following verse (Matt 26:Ua. ai Aafi0v mmjprov uai e ~ u p r c m j u a s )or , to the Lukan parallel (L,uke 22: 19), or to the Pauline parallel (1 Cor 11:24) or more simply an influence h

m liturgy. There-

fore, variant B probably represents the most ancient reading.

A. E ~ L ~ OK*U C E W A ïï Z ft 565, dedit b B.# F B D L e f l p 33 700

F o m alteration Variant A has an unexpected imperfect while variant B has an aorist

participle. In this wntext, the imperfect would be more predictably changed into an aorist than the opposite, so that variant A likely represents the most ancient reading. In 1 5 9 sirnilar ~ interpolation ocnin in the liturgy of saint James. See B. Mercier, Lo liturgie de saint Jocques, édition critique ah tcne grec avec tradunion latine. PO,no. 26, fasc. 2 (Paris:Firmin-Didot, 1948) 202.

361

addition, the imperfect may have k e n used in this conte= to draw attention on the action. 160

A. q W K C ~EY WA

II E O fl

fl3 33 565, quam duodecim a

B.#&&KcY K B D L 8 7 0 0 C. XITmifia(=Gobeua@ua~) b Short interpolation

The presence of the particle i j (than) in variant A can be expected as r-, and is a comparative (comparative of roX6g). 161 However, it appcan that >3 may be

omitted after the adverbial comparatives .r)léov ( r h î u ) and e'hormu @&ou), which may be the case in variant B.162 Both variants A and B are thenfore gnmmatically correct, and either of them could tepresent the most ancient reading. Variant C is

Wcely secandary, since it g d y infiates the number of legions of angels (12,000).

A. awy C E W A ~ I I L ;f13565700,ei O ~ ~ b B.#omit K B D L 3 3

Short interpolation163 Transcriptional probability can go both ways in this reading. aGTy in variant A could either be added to be more specific and to parallel the crhy found in Matt

26:34, or it muld be deleted as umecessary.

1-n

thû use of the imperfect, see Porter,Idiom, 34.

161See BDF

5185.

l620n this, see Smyth,Greek Grommar, $1074. 163~or similar cases, see variant readings nos. 10; 16; 31; 35; 46; 50; 67 and

78.

362

Textuai Tendencies of the Byzantine Variants in the Tea of Maühew Used by Basil of Caesarea

The foilowing remarks are applicable to Basil's text of the F i t Gospel, classified as Byzantine, but do not cbim to apply to the whole Byzantine text type of Matthew.

As a fint observation one may notice, from the sample d d b e d above, that the number of Byzantine readings longer than their Alexandrian counterparts is grrater

than the number of Byzantine icadiags shorter than their Alexandrian co~nterparts.1~

The proportion is 4.1 to 1 in the studied sample. 165 This peculiarity of Byzantine readings has aiready been noticed in several works of New Testament textuai criticism.166

Such a statistic tells nothing rcgarding the secondary or editorial character of the Byzantine readiogs, for edhrial work couid p

d both by expansion and contrac-

tion. Still, looking more closely at this matter, one notices that Byzantine variants considered to be secondvy are more often expansions than contractions of the text, in a

1e4Longer variant readkgs: nos. 1; 5; 9; 16; 17; 21; 23; 26; 33; 34; 37; 46; 49; 50; 51; 54; 57; 63; 67; 68; 69; 76; 78; 81; 82; 85; 86; 87; 88; 93; 95; 98; 99. Shorter variant readings: nos. 20; 24; 27; 32; 35; 56; 64; 77. 'S'Ibis ratio muid be different if one increased the size of the sample, but one could not reasonabiy expect the proportion to be reversed.

l%ee for instance Westcott and Hort, Z n t r ~ d r r ~ oron the NT, 135. See also Gregory, Conon and T m ,4% and 501; Marie-Joseph Lagrange, Critique taucclle: la oitique rationnelle, avec la collaboration de Stanislas Lyomet. Inaoduction iI'ttude du Nouveau Testament, no. 2,2 (Paris: Gabaida, 1935) 134-135 on the character of codex Alexandrinus (A 02), perceived as an early representative of the Byzantine text type; Léon Vaganay and ChristipBernard Amphoux, Initiaion ii h critique tenuelle du nouveau testament, 2nd ed. Etudes annexes de la Bible de Jérusalem (Paris: Cerf, 1986) 159.

ratio of 2.7 to 1. le7 Thmfore, Byzantine corruption appears to proceed more often by expansion than by antraction.

It is nevertheless possible to be more precïse concerning the different aspects of Byzantine comiption. Thus, they can be describexi as stylistic corrections, clarifica-

tions and harmonizations.

Some stylistic corrections appear to have been made to standardize a readhg to a more "correct"Greek usage

- as long as we can ascertain this "correct"Greek

usage. In fact, conformity to Attic usage could explain the occumnce of some

variants.169 Variants where monadic or proper nouns are made anarthrous a n also be

classifieci among stylistic correcti0ns.170 Stylûtic c o d o n s could al= consin in changing a plural verb to the singuiar with a neutrd subject,171 in changing a verb

h m the present to the aorist,172 in bnnging together parts of the same clause,173 and in confonning a clause to general usage by changing the word order.lH Odd usages of

167Secondaq Byzantine expansions are found at readings nos. 1; 9; 16; 17; 21; 26; 34;37;49; 51; 57; 67; 68;69;87; 95. Secondary Byzantine cmtractions are found at readings nos. 20; 24; 27; 32; 56; 77. 168hterestingly, 1 have not found any clear instance of conflation in this sample of variants. One may explain variant readings nos. 12 and 55 as mnflations, but it is also possible to find other explanations for the occurrence of these rradings. Hort used his analysis of Byzantine confiate readïngs to demonstrate the posterionty of this text type. See Westcott and Hort, Imodution to the NT, 93-107. It should be noticed that Hon pmvided only eight instances of these conflaîe readings, and that these were drawn exclusively from Mark and Luke. 169~.g.,vasiant readings nos. 22; 29; 47; 70. 170~.g.,variant readings nos. 6; 20; 32. 171~.g., variant readings nos. 18; 19.

., variant reading no. 44.

7 2 ~g.

173~.g., variant readings nos. 56; 65. 1 7 4 ~g., .

variant readings nos. 4; 73.

a verb could as weIl be changed into a more cornmon form.175 Paradoxically, stylistic

corrections wuld ansisi in deleting an overly stmng or useless particle, in deleting a word to avoid redundancy, and perhaps in adding an auxiliary in a sentence deemed ta, elliptic. 176 Finaily, evidence suggests changes to comecting particies, i77 replacement of a word with a more cornmon expression in the New Testament or in the F i t Gospel,l78 and even the creation or accentuation of the parallelism pnsent in a parsage. 179

In addition, a number of Byzantine readiags, when comparod to Alexandrian readings, could be explained as clarifications. In these cases, Alexandrian readings

may be considerrd ambiguous when compared to their corresponding Byzantine nadings.lsO In some instances, the Byzantine variant reading could consist in an addition of an implied subject or object in order to make a clause more specific.lgl In other

instances, the clarification took the f o m of a more appropriate word,l82 or of a different orthography of a proper noun to avoid a confusion behueen two characterd83

Aiso, clarifications could mnsist in an additional explanation to readers unfamiliar with l"E.g.,

variant rradings nos. 2; 49; 71; 90.

i76E.g., variant Mdings nos. 77; 94; 26. 177~.g.,variant reading m. 3. 17B~.g.,variant reading nos. 15. 179~.g.,vaxiant readings nos. 38; 87; (99). lgoE.g., variant readings nos. 9; 14; 39; 46; (48); 50; 56; 63; 67; (81); (85); (88); 93; 99. It may neverthelas be dficult to distinguish clarifications from stylistic corrections in certain cases. lB*~.g.,variant readings nos. 9; 50; 46; 81; 85; 93; 99. 18*E.g., variant reading no. 14. 183E.g. variant reading no. 39.

the Jewish co~turne,l8~ or in an emphasis on the divine character of the Temple-1w

Finally, severai Byzantine readings could be explained as hannonizations, either to other gospels,ls6 or to another passage of Matthew,lg7 or even to a liturgical for-

mula. 188

In other words, most of the Byzantine readings studied in this sample appear secondaxy when cornparecl to Alexandrian readings. 189 This conclusion had already been reached by Hort, who worked h m a larger sample. 'go Consequentiy,Hoa considered the whole Byzantine text type as the resuit of an editorial revision that would

have taken place at the beginning of the fourth century in Syria (Antioch) where several types of text were in usage. The editorial endeavor aimed to standardize the NT text. For that purpose, it bormwed h m d cument types.lgl More specifically, Han suggested that, before a variation unit, Byzantine editors could either (a) choose and -y one of the readings before then: or, (b) choose and modify one of these readings or, (c)

combine several readings (conflation). They could also inuoduce variation where there was none.192 1%.

g., variant reading no. 67.

l g s ~g., .

variant reading no. 63.

lg6~.g.,vviant readings nos. 1; 18; 59; 60; 51; 62; 89; 91. l"~.g., variant readings nos. 37; 57; 69. 18*~.g.,variant reading no. 95. Variant reading no. 96 muid alro mpnsent an hannonization to a liturgical formula unlas it was derived h m another passage of Matthew, fmm Luke or fmm 1 Corinthians.

lgq

found a single example of possible confiation in variant reading no. 12.

1WSee Westcutt and Hort, Inrroduction to the NT, 115-119; 132-135. 191Sec Westmtt and

Hort, Inîroduaion to the NT, 135-143, especiaily 133.

1ESee Wesmtt and Hon, Introduction tu the NT, 116-117.

The order of these possibilities is significant, and is in some way confirmed by the large number of primary (169), d o m (365) and, predominant (323) Byzantine

readings listed in chapters 3 and 4 in mmparison with the proportionally smaller number of distinctive (5) and exclusive (32) Byzantine readùigs found in the same sample.193 These figures may indicate that Byzantine editors were indeed more likely to choose a reading among the avaiiable ones than to cmate a new one? reached the same conclusion in his study of

Zuntz had

P"in relation to a sample of manuscripts

of the Pauline epistles.195 In addition, the evidence of distinctive and exclusive Byzantine readings gathered in this study may ofien be explained as a modification of an existing reading rather than the creation of a new one. If, as Hon argued, confla-

tion was also a mean used by Byzantine editors, 1found no clear instance of it in my data. One may therefore question whether this feature was a means of editorid process

in the First Gospel. Finally, the fourth means of the editorial pmcess was the i n d u c -

tion of variation where there was none. In these cases, one would expect several Greek manuscnpts assigned to the Byzantine text type to align themselves against the rest of the Greek manuscript tradition. 1 found such

instances in my data.196 Most of them

invoIve o d y a few manuscripts and were therefore classified as exclusive readings, but a few of them involve a larger number of manuscripts and were classified as distinctive

1930ne can compare these figures with, for instance, the number of each category of Western readings. Primary: 99; uniforni: 130;predominant: 209; distinctive: 66; exclusive: 136. 194See

for instance distinctive and exclusive readings in Matt 5: 3 1; 10:8,15;

12: 14; 15:l3,l4; 18: 19; 22:38; 23:8(2X),9; 24:47; 25:2,20; 26:7; 27:46.

lgsûiinther Zuntz, The T m of the Episrles. A Disquisition Upon the Corpur P d i n u m (0xfo:d: Oxford University Press, 19531, 55: 'Our inquiry has confirmed what was anyhow probable enough: The Byzantines did not hit upon these readings by conjecture or independent error. They reproduced an older tradition. " 19%. g., exclusive variant readings found in Matt 3: 11; 6:7; 13:20,56; 17:25; 18:g; 22: 8; 23:25,26; 24:24,36; 2527,357. 26:6.52. and d i s ~ c t i v ereadings . .

foundin ~

a t 24:&5,46,49(2~). t

,

-

readings. These d

d npnsent instances where Byzantine editors introduced variation

where there was none,

One d

d also posit that these readings repmduce more ancient readings

found in manuscripts m w vanished. In P46,Zuntz found an anticipation of several Byzantine readings, previously considered to be Iate. This finding led him to believe that the Byzantine editors never altered the text without manuscript evidence.lg

Unfortunately, there is no quivalent to P46 for the First Gospel. The relevant papyri

are tm fragmentary to be useM for this s t ~ d y Therefore, . ~ ~ ~ until new evidence is discoved, which could take the form of an almost complete second-century papyrus of the F h t Gospel, one may legitimately think that, in some instances, Byzantine editors were introducing variation where there was none. To summarize, evidence gatherzd in chapters 3, 4, and 5 indicates thaî

Baril's text of Matthew shows closer affinities to the Byzantine text type than to any other text types. However, this affinity does not make Basil's text of Maahew a pure representative of the Byzantine text type, since it supports only a small proportion of distinctive and exclusive readings, and it witnesses to a significant number of nonByzantine readings. Nonetheless, Bad's text of Matthew reflects the editorial trends that were already affecting the Byzantine text type in mid fourth century Cappadocïa.

Thus, most of the Byzantine variants found in B a d were thought to be secondary in cornparison with their Alexandrian counterparts.

99

From an interna1 point of view,

lg?Zuntz, T m of the Epistes, 5 5. 1 9 8 look ~ at a List made by Sturz of "Papryus-Distinctively Byzantine Alignments Opposed by Westerns, Alexandrians, and Westcott and Hortn displays onl one instance of a "distinctivew (in fact primary) Byzantine reading also attested in P 3 h n d ~ 4 5 . See Sun, Byzantine Tm-Type, 145. 1raised the possibility that a few Byzantine readings supporteci by Basil were more ancient than their Alexandrian counterparts, but it shodd be noticai that all these readings (Le., variant readings nos. 43; 53; 54; 63;66 and 75) were prirnary Byzantine readings rather than distinctively o r exclusively Byzantine.

368 Byzantine sccondary readings d

d most often be explained as stylistic impnwements,

clarifications and hannonkations. From an extemai point of view, classification of evidence indicaies that Byzantine editors were more likely to select among existing readings available to hem, or to m

e these readings slightly, than to intrpduce varia-

tion where there was none. Evidence muld indicaie nevertheless that they introduced

variation h m tirne to time as was proposed by Hort, but denied by Zuntz. Fiaally,

Byzantine editors appear not to have used conflation in editing the text of Ma#tiew.

CONCLUSION The primaq aim of this study was to coliect, to display and to classify Basil of Caesarea's quotations of the First Gospel and to compare his reconstxucted text of

Matthew with a sample of manuscripts representing the major textual groups. As a result, Bad's text of Matthew was found to be in greater agreement with the Byzantine textuai group than with

any other. Basil's text of Matthew therefore appears as the ear-

liest known witness of the Byzantine text type. The study therefore bruigs a new piece of evidence to the puzzle of the history of NT textuai criticism by indicating that some

form of Byzantine text type already circulate. in mid fourth century Cappadocia. The dissertation makes other significant contributions to N T textual criticism. For instance, the results of quantitative analysis, proceeding h m a sample of more than 675 variant readings shared by Basil and various rnanuscripts, lead to the reclas-

sifation of Famiiy 1 (fi), which has been classified so far as a Caesarean witness in

Matthew as it is so considerd in Mark. From now on, f 1 should be classified as a secon-

Alexandrian witness in Matthew . Furthermore, the dissertation proposes a refmement of Colwell 's method of

quantitative analysis with the calculation of error correction. In fact, quantitative analysis of the relationships between NT manuscripts can give the false impression of

accuracy, especially when it proceeds from a small sarnple of variant readings. The use of error correction permits the precise indication of the level of accuracy of any

quantitative analysis. It also clearly demonstrates that quantitative analysis should a h to work from samples as large as possible to increase accuracy.

FinaIly, the dissertation investigates the textual character of the early Byzantine text type of Matthew displayed in Basil's works. The examination of 99 dis369

tinctive, exclusive and primary Byzantine variant readings found in Basil's text of Matthew shows that this text type was mainiy the result of editorial work, which consisted

in a selection among existing variant readings with the perspective of improving style, of c l w i n g difficult readings, and of hannonizing readings with those found in other

gospels or comparable readings in Matthew. Fmm tirne to tirne, editors could have introduced vanation where there was none, but this likely rarely occurred, considering the srnall number of instances of this phenornenon in the studied sample.

One must also acknowledge the limits of this study. Thus, the picture of Basil's NT text is far h m k i n g complete. Further study should investigate Basil's text of Luke's and John's

Gospels as weii as h û text of the Pauline corpus. Such a

study could cause some surprise, since the textual character of Basil's NT text could

differ from document to document.2 Nonetheless, quantitative analysis of Basil's text of Luke and John could not reach the accuracy obtained with Matthew , since the number of quotations from the Third and Fourth Gospels is considerably smaller than from

the First Gospel? Furthemore, the investigation of Gregory of Naziamus' NT text

would permit to provide a clearer picture of the NT text which circulated in rnid-fourth century Cappadocia. l Basil's

text of Mark's Gospel appears impossible to reconstruct c o n s i d e ~ g

the small number of unequivocal quotations of the Second Gospel in Basil's works.

*For instance, Oliver concludeci his study by noticing that Basil-exhibited a

text (von Soden's nomenclature) in Matthew, Mark and John, and a Kl text in Luke. See Harold H. Oliver, "The Text of the Four Gospels as Quoted in the Moralia of Basil

Ki

the Great" (Ph.D. diss., Emory University, 196l)+907.

3 ~ oinstance, r the index of biblical passages of Umberto Neri, and Maria Benedetta Artioli, eds. Opere asceriche di Basilio di Cesarea (Turin:Unione tipographico-editrice Torinese, 198O), 679-694 lists 349 quotations of Matthew , comparatively to 174 quotations of Luke and 164 quotations of John. In contrast, there are 704 quotations of the Pauline corpus. 4Brooks has aiready studied Gregory's of Nyssa NT text. See James A. Brooks, The Nau Testament Text of Gregory of hissa. SBLNTGF,no. 2 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1991).

Any fbrther research on Basil's N T t e a would be greatly eased by the pub-

lishing of critical editions of Basfi's ascetid and homiletic corpora.5 At this t h e ,

anyone who wants to attempt this type of work must rely either on the 18th century Maurist edition or on specific manuscripts, making the work either unrelîable or arduous. In his 1953 monograph, Gribomont prepared the ground for such a critical

edition of the asceticai corpus by i d e n w g the best recensions and manu~cripts.~ Recently, Fedwick completed and improved this work by listing and classifjhg ail known manuscripts of Basil's w o r k ~ .With ~ the existence of such guidelines, the tirne appears to be ripe for producing such critical editions of Basil's ascetical and homiletic

corpora, which would accelerate research on Basil's NT text.

far, only a few homilies have appeard in ,&tical editions: Yves Courtonne, ed., Saint M I e . Homéllies sur la tichesse. Edition cntique et exégétique (Paris: Finnin-Didot , 1935); Stanislas Giet, ed., M I e de Césarée. Homélies sur I 'Hexaéméron.SC,no. 26 (Paris: Cerf, 1949); Emmanuel Amand de Mendieta and Stig Y. Rudberg, eds., Bosi1iu.s w n Laesarea. Homilien zwn Hexaemeron. GCS neue folge, no. 2 (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1997); Stig Y ..Rudberg, ed., L 'homélie de Basile de Césarée sur le mot 'Observe-toi toi-même. ' M o n cncntique du teae grec et étude sur la tradition manuscrite. Acta Universitatis Stockholrniensis. Studia Graeca Stockholrniensis, no. 2 (Stockholm: Almquist & WickseU, 1962). 6~eanGribomont, Histoire du t a t e des Ascétiques de S. & d e . Bibliothèque da Muséon, no. 32 (huvain: Publications univetsitaires, 1953).

/

4

'~aulJ. Fedwick, ed., Bibliothcca BPaIiana Univers&. A Srudy of the Mmuscripr Tradition of the Wonbc of Ml of Caesurea, 4 volumes. Corpus Christianorum (Turnhout: Brepols, 1993-99). - .-

APPENDIX A UNCERTAIN QUOTATIONS

Matthew 3:3; Mark 1:3; Luke 3:4 O Ioarvvr)~h v r ) F U e l w y e ~ o

Matthew 3:8; Luke 3:8 a M a K a t Kaprovg a t m v ~

eu ry e p v p y

pstarvotas norquar

~n&@qteuovs u a p m v 7wa pmauotas

(HTrin 4; PG 31,14%B) [AU]

(Ep 22.7.20-21)

(Ep 188.4.16-17) [AU]

w]

Mbîthew 4:2; Mark 1:13 ou mrpqutxg q~npmxq 7wv 7eaaepaKovra qpepwu (MMart 6; PG 31, 520A) [AU]

owoc e r a v oc mwxoc 7y m v p a n

(RBr 205; PG 31, 1217C) [All]

'A large number of manuscripts of Luke have a text similar to that of Matthew for this part of the verse. For that reaw>n, I must consider the possibility that Basil was quoting fiam Luke here.

Matthew 6:26;8:2& Mark 4:32; Luke 8.5: 9:5,58; l3:l9; AOS I l :6 q ?pcr#q TOU arqm *et wq ro, T a .remtuor rov ovpauov ( M a l 10; PG 31, 352B)

[Ml

Mutthew 6~32;Luke 12:30 eanv vno TOU K V ~ L OKU E K O A V ~ ~ YECTOYTWOV watt 6:25/Luke 12:22] & T & V ~ K O ü T ~"TCYWC '

yap ZaV?Q

7 C Y E@V TOU KOUPOU & n ~ r t ) 7 & t -

KCYL

(R%

42.1;

PG 31, 1025A) [CJ

M m h e w 7:2; Luke 6:38 Q

y a p w r p pmpst7q ~ awiperpq&lumt uprv

(HPs 61.5; PG 29, 481D) [Ad]

Manhew 7 5 ; Luke 6:42 wa

616q&lr&

EK&~&W

m u o&bhpv upov (Ep 207.4.34-35B) [AU]

~ K O V

Matthew 8 9 2 ; 13:42,50; 2 2 9 3; 2451; 2530;Luke 13~28 orou eanv O K h a u 6 p 0 ~K ~ OCBpwypoq 7wv 060vrou (RBr 57; PG 3 1, 1121B) [AU]

2Missing h m VatGr 413. 3Migne and Neri attribute this quotation to Mark 2: 10. 4Missing from VatGr 413.

M d e w 9:17; M d 2:22; Luke 5:33 o v & y yap B a b otvov veov sy o u r o v ~rahaw y r u a pq rcrr O orvw r a v q a r o ) c o w a r s~ecvoc a u r o t (HPs 32.5; PG 29, 337A) [AU]

rac

Matrhav 9:22; Ma& 534; 1052; Luk 750; 8.48; 17.919;18:42 ' 7 ) % l U T q Top OOV,' MOLU,'U&QWK&U 0s" (HPs 7.2; PG 29; 232C) [Ad]

Matthew 1I:II; Luke 7:28 6ta rowo p & u

e u y & v ~ q r o yyvvacrov ovx aveu-

I ~ a v v o uTOU @ a i z ~ u r omieun v

1.9; PG 31, 177C) [AU15 51nthese two quotations, the position of per@v might lead us to belkve thai there is a conflation with Luke 7:28.

M a n h m 11:19; tuke 7:35 " e & ~ a y~a p ",

~ Q L U -7 ,

mt#w~ a r o 7uu T ~ K Y O Y a ~ t l ) ~(NPS " 7.1; PG 29,

229C-232A) [Ad]

Marthew 11:26;Luke 10~21

+

var

O

aanlp, me o w o ç cy&v&ro ev6o~tar&pnpod&v uov (Mur 61.1 ; PG 31,

796B) [Cl

+

var

O

I a q p , o n owoç ey&ue?o &u6o~rcr& p ~ p o # & u uou (Mur 70.26;

PG 31,

Marthew 11:27;24:36; Mank 13:22; Revelan'on 2:17; 2 9:lZ OUTU KCYC 70 Y ~ v & qoc&* (Ep 236.1 28) [Cl

- -

-

6~issingfrom Garnier.

spite of the fact that this quotation is introduced as a verbatim citation from a gospel, it look like a wnflation of Mt 12:6 with Mt 12:41-42Lk 11:31-32.

EL

SE

Z

~ TOUYuspou

& (RBr 309;

PG 31, 1304A) [AU]

Matthew 12:43; Luke 11.-24 'orau &&A)D," h m , ' 7 0 a ~ a h p r o vm m p a a r o PG 29, 429A) [ ~ d ] *

sMissing from VatGr 413.

%issing from VatGr 413.

TOU