Abstract
AbstractThis is the second part of a two-part article focused on a fragmentary parchment codex, whose three extant leaves, designated in Leo Depuydt's catalogue as P.MorganLib. 265, are housed at the Morgan Library & Museum in New York. These fragments bear witness to 1 Cor 2.12–3.18; 7.16–30; 15.3–30 in the ‘classical’ variety of Fayyūmic Coptic (dialect F5). The first part of this article was published in NTS 68 (2022) 89–104. In the second part, I discuss the witnesses to the Fayyūmic version (fa) of First Corinthians, the relationship between fa and the Bohairic version (bo), and the text-critical value of the variant readings attested in P.MorganLib. 265. This is followed by the editio princeps of the manuscript, notes on the Coptic text, an English translation and images.
Highlights
Having discussed various features of P.MorganLib. 265 as a manuscript, I am going to discuss the Fayyūmic text of First Corinthians, of which this manuscript is a witness
Version To the best of my knowledge, in addition to P.MorganLib. 265, there are five other witnesses to First Corinthians in Fayyūmic; four of them are written in dialect F5, one in dialect F4
Kahle observed that the flesh side of the fragment contains 1 Cor 15.29, and the hair side 1 Cor 15.32.6 That this manuscript and P.MorganLib. 265 bear witness to the same version is clear from the fact that the poorly preserved text of 1 Cor 15.29 in P.Vindob
Summary
I proceed to a discussion of the importance of P.MorganLib. 265 for the textual criticism of the Greek New Testament. The text at the juncture of verses 15.15 and 15.16 (ⲉϣϫⲉ ⲛⲛⲓⲗ̣ ⲉϥ̣ ⲙⲁⲟⲩⲧⲛⲉⲧ̣ ⲱ ̣ⲛⲟⲩ ⲉⲛ,̣ ‘if the dead should not rise’) has neither ϩⲁⲣⲁ nor ⲅⲁⲣ, and it is difficult to ascertain which of the two clauses was omitted It seems more plausible, that fa supports the reading of majuscule 044 rather than that of Codex Claromontanus, given that the omission of the first clause of 1 Cor 15.16 is better attested in the Greek manuscript tradition and is easier to explain The text of fa, on the other hand, corresponds to οὐδὲν ἀwῆκεν αὐτῷ ἀνυπότακτον (‘he has left nothing that was not made subject to him’) of Heb 2.8, bearing witness to a reading that has no support in the Greek tradition.[35] This assimilation of 1 Cor 15.27 to Heb 2.8 was undoubtedly triggered by the fact that both passages offer an exegesis of the same Old Testament passage (viz. Ps 8.7) and that both were considered to be written by the same author (viz. Paul). Ⲛϩⲉⲛⲙⲉⲧⲗⲉϥϯ ⲥ ϭⲁⲙ ⲅⲁⲣ ⲡⲉ⸱ⲁⲗⲗⲁ ⲃⲱ ⲛⲗⲱⲙⲓ ⲉⲛ ⲛ ϯⲛⲟⲩ ⲁⲛ ⲙⲙⲛ ϣϭⲧⲉ ϩⲉⲛϣⲉϫⲓ ⲛⲥ ⲁⲙⲙⲁⲧⲉⲛ ⲃⲱ⸱ⲁⲗⲗⲁ ϩⲛ ϩⲉⲛ
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
