25 to context, style, or argument One must hold open the

possibility that in a few cases of "verbal inexactness" Epiphanius may in fact have been relying upon some sort of non-Biblical text. Further, while it is possible that his Biblical quotations reflect the type of text he used

1

in southern Palestine, one must be equally cognizant of |

his work in Salamis (and even in Egypt) and refrain from ruling out the possibility that his works may reflect substantial amounts of the texts which he used there as

58

well. Although presenting a much more simple picture,

it is not in the best interests of textual criticism to attempt to specifically attribute the Biblical text of Epiphanius to one locale (i.e., southern Palestine) with the certainty with which one might locate the Biblical texts of element of Alexandria, Irenaeus, or Tertullian.

The Purpose of the Present Investigation

The purpose of the present investigation is to

collect, evaluate, and present all the data of Epiphanius’s text of the Pauline epistles, and, on the basis of a critical reconstruction of that text, to evaluate Epiphanius’s

text as to its place in the history of the New Testament «

^ The brief attempt by Eldridge, op. cit., p. 6, to use the memoriter citations of Epiphanius to assign the text of his quotations from the Gospels to southern Palestine to the exclusion of any texts he may have used

in Salamis is unconvincing. It is inconceivable that q

Epiphanius made ho significant use of Biblical materials jj

which he found on Cyprus after his arrival. *]

'3

text. Although it is generally thought that Epiphanius’s text is Koine in character, there is no a priori reason to prohibit a different type of text in the Pauline epistles. The textual character of the Gospels in the works of Epiphanius cannot determine the textual character

of the quotations from the e p i s t l e s . T h e textual character of Epiphanius’s quotations from these epistles has not yet been established by the presentation of

evidence. Therefore, this investigation will attempt to present comprehensive and conclusive evidence of the textual character of Epiphanius’s citations from the Pauline epistles.

Previous Examinations of the Biblical Text of Epiphanius

There has been no significant attempt to determine the textual characteristics of Epiphanius’s text of the epistles. Only minute evidence of the textual character of Epiphanius’s quotations from the New Testament is set

^^Codex Alexandrinus is Koine in the Gospels and Egyptian in the epistles. Of. Metzger, The Text of the New Testament, p. 47*

Although the authenticity of the Pastorals, Hebrews, and certain of the other epistles has been questioned by modern critical scholarship, these books were accepted as genuine by Epiphanius and were generally included in the Pauline corpus that emerged prior to his work. Accordingly, the Pauline epistles, for the purposes of this thesis, will

include Rom., 1 & 2 Oor., Gal., Eph., Phil., Col., 1 & 2 Thess., 1 & 2 Tim., Tit., Philem., and Heb.

27

forth by Hermann von Soden^^ and B. A* H u t t o n . I t ia

lamentable that no adequate critical edition of the text

I

of Epiphanius’s writings was extant when these two 45

scholars conducted their research.

Hermann von Soden concluded that the I-text^^ could 45

be discerned in Epiphanius’s quotations from Aots^^ and the Pauline e p i s t l e s . H e also noted that among the

Palestinian Fathers of the fourth century (i.e.> Eusebius, Cyril of Jerusalem, and Epiphanius) Epiphanius attested the most r e a d i n g s . V o n Soden did not present

specific evidence pertaining to the textual character of i

Von Soden, op. cit., I, 3, pp. 1759, 1873, 1953- 1954; II, p. xix.

^^An Atlas of Textual Criticism (Cambridge: University é

Press, 1911), cf. charts inside the back cover. j

^^The Berlin Academy’s publication of Karl Holl’s edition of the works of Epiphanius in Die Greichischen Christlichen Schriftstellar der ersten drei Jahrhunderte, X XV , t x X l, XXXVIÏ (Le ip z ig ; J. C. Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung,

1915, 19 22, 1933) is the critical edition currently avail­

able for scholarly investigation.

^^Von Soden*s I-text contains a variety of manu­ scripts with quite diverse textual peculiarities, causing him to divide this type of text into several sub-groups. Of. von Soden, op. cit., II, pp. xiv, xv.

45lbld., I, 3, p. 1759. 4Glbid., p. 1953.

Von Soden's K-text is commonly referred to aa

the Byzantine text, but is also known as the Koine, Syrian, Antiochian, or Ecclesiastical text.

4^Von Soden, o^. cit., II, p. xix.

Epiphanius’s quotations from the Gospels, and he considered the infrequent quotations from the Catholic epistles to be relatively unimportant.

B. A. Hutton, in constructing tables listing "triple readings" passages and in drawing up charts setting forth the attestation for these readings, included Epiphanius among the witnesses who provide attestation for his so- called "triple readings." To his Alexandrian text, Hutton assigned Epiphanius’s quotations of Matt. 8:28, Luke 8:26, John 15:26, Acts 15:1, Rom. 15:8, 1 Cor. 15:47, and Rev. 3:7. He assigned citations of John 2:17, Acts 2:28, and 1 Cor. 7:8 to the Western text, and 1 Oor. 7:32 and 9:7 to the Syrian text. It is obvious that Hutton did not examine a sufficient number of Epiphanius*s quotations to render justifiable any conclusions as to the textual

affinities of Epiphanius’s text. Of the twelve readings 50 cited by Hutton, only five are from the Pauline epistles.^ This is hardly sufficient to constitute a significant

contribution to the analysis of Epiphanius’s quotations from these epistles.

Lawrence A. Eldridge, in a doctoral dissertation at Princeton Theological Seminary, undertook to assemble the full text of Epiphanius’s quotations from the Gospels and to determine the affinity of the quotations with the four main text-types (i.e., Alexandrian, Western, Caesarean,

49lbid., p. 1875.

%

2 9

5^0f. bibliographical data in fn. 26, p. 16, and B y z a n t i n eH i s . analysis consisted of determining the percentages of agreement with New Testament witnesses representing the respective text-types. Matt. 1:18-11:18

was found to be predominantly Alexandrian, while 11:19- %

26:50 was textually mixed, but strongly Byzantine. Mark was found to be Western, exhibiting frequent agreement with the African Old Latin text. Luke and John were concluded to have primary affinity with the Caesarean text. He

further concluded that the frequent agreement of Epiphanius with the Alexandrian text likely reflects his use of a

fourth century Palestinian text which still preserved many pre-Byzantine readings which were subsequently lost

through Byzantine revision and are thus absent from most late Caesarean manuscripts. Eldridge also noted that Epiphanius’s text of Luke and John witnesses to a stage

in the development of the Caesarean text intermediate between the pre-Byzantine text current in Caesarea during the third century and the thoroughly revised text which occurs in relatively late Caesarean manuscripts. Because of the verbal inexactness characteristic which he noted in many of Epiphanius’s quotations, Eldridge concluded that Epiphanius generally quoted from memory and probably from a text which he had known and used for many years. On this basis Eldridge argued that Epiphanius’s quotations reflect the type of text which he had commonly used in southern Palestine during the first fifty years of his

i life. His use of a Caesarean text leads Eldridge to

conclude that this text-type cannot he localized only in I Caesarea during the fourth century. The work of Eldridge

has been criticized on two accounts: 1) an inadequate following of his method resulted in an incomplete presen­ tation of textual data, and 2) his analysis of textual

eg

relationships remains unconvincing. The textual

affinities of Epiphanius have not yet been satisfactorily defined.

The Sources of Critical Data

"f

Although formerly the writings of Epiphanius were |

considered to be quite extensive, careful criticism has ^

discovered several works, attributed to him to be spurious, or at least d u b i o u s . T h e following are the genuine

^ A critical appraisal of Eldridge’s work is found if

in a review article by Gordon Fee, Journal of Biblical Literature, XC (1971), pp. 368-370.

^^The following works are considered dubious or spurious; Anacephalaeosis; Anaphora graeca; Commentarii in Hexaemeron; De divina inhumnatione; Enumerartio LXXII prophetarum et prophetissarum; Fragmentum de Trinitate; Homilia de 'Assumptions D. N. Jesu Christi; Homiliae in

Gene Sim ei" Lucam; Homilia in laudes sanctae Mariae Deiparae; homilia in die festp palmarurn I; Homilia in die festo

palmarura II; Homilia in Resurrectionem _I; Homilia in

Resurrectionem II; Homilia in divini corporis sepulturam; Index Aposto1orurn; Index discipulorum; Hotitiae episco- paturn; Rhysiologus; ^ prophetarumvita et obitu; De propHetarum vita et obitu recensio' alia; Tractatus de numerum mysteriis. The writer is indebted to J. Duplacy for the above list of Opera Dubia ant Spuria, which was prepared for the committee directing the preparation of the Novi Testamenti Graeci Editio Maior Oritica by Pbre M. van Parys on the basis of material furnished by Mr. M. Geerard, who prepared the Glavis Patrum Graecorum for

the Corpus Christianorum.

^ The following Greek works do not contain citations from the Pauline epistles: Bpistula ad Eusebium, Yivianum, Oarpum et ad Aegyptios; Epistula ad Theodosium imperatorem; De XII gemmis; Scholia in Genesin; Testamentum ad cives. As this investigation is concerned only with the Greek text of Epiphanius, the following authentic works, which are currently extant only in translation, were omitted from consideration: Epistula ad Basilianum (Syriac);

55^011, 008, I, pp. 1-149.

^ P. Maas, "Die ikonoklastisolxe Episode des

Epiphanies an Johannes," Byzantinische Zeitschrift, XXX (1929-30), pp. 279-286.

^^Paul de hagarde, Symmicta, II (Gottingen:

Dieterichsche SortimentsbuohEandlung, 1880), pp. 149-216. Of. also J. P. Migne, Patrologia Graece, XLIII (Paris; n.p.,

1863), col. 237-294.

008, I, pp. 162-463; II; III. Of. also 0. Quispel, Lettre à Flora, Vol. XXIV of Sources chrétiennes (Paris; Editions du derf, 1966); and 0.' higgi, Epifanio contro Mani (Rome: Esse-Gi-Esse, 1967).

^ % a r l Roll, "Die Schriften des Epiphanius gegen die Bilderverehrung," Gesammelte Aufsatze zur Kirchengeschichte, II (Tubingen: J. 0. B. Mohr, 1928), pp. 356-359,

4 31

works of Epiphanius from which quotations from the Pauline

54 55

epistles have been extracted: Ancoratus, Epistula ad

56 57

Joannem Hierosolymitanum, De mensuris ponderibus,

Panarion,^^ and Tractatus contra eos qui imagines faciunt. The vast majority of quotations from the Pauline epistles are contained in two major works. Most important and containing most of his quotations from these epistles is the Panarion Haereses which sets forth various remedies for eighty heresies threatening the Church. The Ancoratus, written about 374 and thus the earliest extant treatise of

3 2

Epiphanius, is designed, as its title suggests, to provide 4 %

the Christian reader with doctrine which will serve as a I

firm anchor while the wild winds and waves of heresy wreck havoc. A significant number of quotations from the Pauline

epistles occur in the Ancoratus, Both the Pan, haer. and Anc. are available in a critical edition prepared by Karl Holl for the GCS series, and this work was used as the

source from which the vast majority of Epiphanius’s citations from the Pauline epistles were derived.

The scholarly world is much indebted to Holl for his production of an edition of the works of Epiphanius which is, in-several ways, a distinct advancement beyond its

predecessors. Holl utilized several manuscripts, some much older than those available to earlier editors, and much to the benefit of the reader he lists and describes them,

indicates how much they contain, assesses their value and relation to each other, and provides data on their dates and locations. In the footnotes to each page, Holl

The works of Epiphanius were first published in Latin by Janus Oornarius (Basel; 1543), and in Greek by Jo. Oporinus (Basel; 1544). Both of these publications

were based upon Oodex Jenensis. Dionysius Petavius. using ^

the edition of Oporinus and manuscripts V, P ' and P*^,

published a Greek-Latin edition of Epiphanius (Paris; 1622)

which later became the basis of the text published by J. P. | Migne, Patrologia Graece. XLI-XLIII (Paris; 1858). The

Petavius edition was used by Tischendorf in the critical apparatus of his eighth edition of the Greek New Testament. Franz Ohler, in his Corpus haereseologioum, II, III (Berlin;

1859-1861), used the manuscripts M ana S t o update the earlier editions of Epiphanius. Another edition of the works of Epiphanius was published by Wilhelm Dindorf in

1859

-

1862

.

^^In addition to the information provided in the GO8 volumes, cf. the lengthy article by K. Holl in Texte und Untersuchungen mentioned in fn. 6, p. 5., supra.

i

cites the manuscripts used in editing the text which is found on that page, and when variants occur in these

manuscripts he gives indication of such in the footnotes. | He uses a different style of Greek type to denote those

instances where Epiphanius quotes the text of another patristic writer. Unfortunately, however, from time to

time Holl tends to prefer the text of the TR in Epiphanius’s Biblical quotations, a text mainly preserved in the later manuscripts of Epiphanius’s works (and at times in no extant manuscript of his works), and to ignore the non- Koine readings preserved in the earlier and better manu­

scripts of Epiphanius’s writings. One is made to wonder whether Holl has treated the patristic text in a similar f a s h i o n . A l t h o u g h hesitant to criticize the erudite worksmanship of a scholar such as Karl Holl, the present writer has deemed it necessary for the purposes of this thesis to depart at times from the text that is printed by Holl in favor of another r e a d i n g . T h e r e is no doubt

Of. A. Souter’s pertinent remark in A Study of Ambrosiaster, Vol. VII, no. 4, of Texts and Etudies T?am- bridge; University Press, 1905), p. 42, '*THe Benedictine text is no less worthless in the Scriptural quotations than in the rest of the work." Of. also his comments on his own edition of the Pseudo-Aygustinian Quaestiones in Journal of Theological Studies, XI (1909-10), pp. 143-144.

^^Although it would have been most desirable to assemble a complete textual apparatus for each of the quotations from the Pauline epistles, limitations of time and finance have rendered it necessary to restrict the judgment upon readings to the evidence presented by Holl in the GCS. The same principles generally applied to the textual criticism of the New Testament have been applied to the patristic text. Here, as elsewhere, the manuscripts should be weighed and not counted. It is theoretically possible that the correct reading may be preserved in any of the extant manuscripts of Epiphanius’s works.

34

that an uncritical uae of the GO3 text would seriously | jeopardize any effort to adequately assess the textual

affinities of Epiphanius#

Much of the textual evidence cited in the critical apparatus of this thesis is drawn from the apparatus critici of the editions of Tischendorf,^^ and von Soden. Supplementary évidence was derived from the editions of Tregelles,^^ Nestle-Aland,^^ and the UBS Greek Testament.

^Constantine Tischendorf, Novum Testamentum Graece (8th ed.; Leipzig; Giesecke and Devrient, 18^2). Frequent reference was made to Vol. 3 of this edition; Caspar R. Gregory, ed.. Prolegomena (Leipzig; J. C. Hinrich’s, 1894). Conversion of tischendorf’s sigla into their Gregory

equivalents necessitated reference to Kurt Aland, Kurz- gefasste Liste der griechischen Handschriften des neuen Testaments; Band I of Arbeiten zur neutestamentlichen text- forschung (Berlin: WaTTeF"ïïê~'Gruytêr7~T9E311 the Gregory designations and order are employed throughout this thesis.

^^von Soden, op. cit., II. In order to convert von Soden’s unique sigla into their Gregory equivalents the work by Benedikt Kraft, Die Zeichen fur die wichtigeren Handschriften des griechischen Neuen~testaments (ireihurg; Herder, 1955) was utilized. Only those witnesses which

are specifically mentioned in von Soden's apparatus are |

employed in the present study.

^^Samuel P. Tregelles, The Greek New Testament (London: Samuel Bagster and Sons, 1Ô57-TST971

Erwin Nestle and Kurt Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece (25th ed.; Stuttgart: Privilegierte Württemberg- ische Bibelanstait, 1963).

^^Kurt Aland, Matthew Black, Carlo M. Martini, |

Bruce M. Metzger, and Allen Wikgren, eds.. The Greek

New Testament (2nd,ed.; Stuttgart; Württemberg Bible

4

.y .-..yyi- sv' . 'y/: % ''gS'4^ - ' ' ' \" T' '^' " n.t

35

^Gunther Zuntz, The Text of the Epistles; A Disquisition Upon the Corpus PauTTnum (London;Oxford University Press, 1953 ).

70_{P. H. A. Scrivener, A Plain Introduction to the} Criticism of the New Testament (3rd ed.; Cambridge : ÎDeighton, Bell and OoTl 1883 ).

71_{Joseph M. Bover, ed., Novi Testament!; Biblia}

Graeca et Lat ina (5th ed.; Madrid ; drdficas Condor, 1968). 72_{Augustinus Merk, ed.. Novum Testamentum: Graece} et Latine (9th éd.; Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, T964T:---

KAINH AIA9HKH (2nd ed.; London; British and Foreign Bible Society, 1958). The revised critical apparatus is the result of the collaboration between Erwin Nestle and G. D. Kilpatrick, who was the editor of the volume.

74%, J, Vogels, Novum Testamentum Graece et Latine (4th éd.; Freiburg im ïïfesgau and Barcelona: Uerder, 1955).

7^H. j. Frede, Epistula ad Ephesios, Vol. XXIV, no.

4, of Vetus Latina (Freiburg; Herder, 1962-64); Epistulae ad Philippenses et ad Colossenses, Vol. XXIV, no. 2, of Vetus Latina (Ureiburg; Herder, 1966-71)•

1

Further textual evidence was taken from the textual

investigations of Zuntz^^ and S c r i v e n e r . T h e editions

71 72 73

of Bover, Merk, and Kilpatrick were consulted at

points. In order to supplement the Latin evidence given

in the principal critical editions of the Greek New

I

Testament, the texts of Vogels74 the Beuron project^^ were consulted.

Although much of the textual evidence utilized in

the present investigation was derived from the apparatus ÿ

Testament, many readings were gathered from the writer’s examination of original manuscripts as well as published collations or printed texts of a number of witnesses.

An examination of the full text or published collations of the following manuscripts yielded several readings

7 A

In document The text of the Pauline Epistles in Epiphanius of Salamis (Page 37-48)