Studies in the History of the Greek Text of the Apocalypse: The Ancient Stems by Josef Schmid

Abstract

Reviewed by: Studies in the History of the Greek Text of the Apocalypse: The Ancient Stems by Josef Schmid Russell Morton josef schmid, Studies in the History of the Greek Text of the Apocalypse: The Ancient Stems (Text-Critical Studies 11; Atlanta: SBL Press, 2018). Pp. xxxviii + 298. Paper $39.95. Since 1955, Schmid's two-volume Studien zur Geschichte des Griechischen Apokalypse-Textes has remained a valuable resource for textual criticism of Revelation. Its worth is confirmed by the fact that it has continued to be cited by commentators including David E. Aune (WBC, 1997–98), G. K. Beale (NIGTC, 1999), Craig R. Koester (AB, 2014), and Martin Karrer (EKKNT, 2017). Volume 2 of this classic resource, The Ancient Stems, has now been translated and edited by Juan Hernández, Garrick V. Allen, and Darius Müller. Schmid recognized that the text of the Apocalypse was "handled with little piety" (p. 157), resulting in a complex textual history. From the very early root, S. proposed that the textual tradition branched into four distinct "stems." The oldest of the stems is represented by the Codex Alexandrinus (A) and Ephraemi Rescriptus (C). Although each of these texts has its unique features, S. considered that their common "stem" was, perhaps, the one with the greatest agreement to a hypothetical Urtext, or original form. Nevertheless, even these manuscripts were not free from textual contamination. Thus, while S. highly regarded the A and C manuscripts, he rejected Westcott's and Hort's evaluation of them as representatives of a "neutral" text. Another early stem was represented by 𝔭47. At the time of S's research, this papyrus was the earliest known fragment of the Apocalypse. Nevertheless, S. understood 𝔭47's stem to reflect a development of Revelation's textual history subsequent to that represented by the A and C manuscripts. 𝔓47 is most helpful when its corrections are similar to those found in A, C. and Codex Sinaiticus. Although Sinaiticus shares common corrections with 𝔭47, the uncial, likewise, represents a distinct textual stem. S., however, considered Sinaiticus's text to be highly unreliable. Of all its unique readings, S. considered only one correction common to Sinaiticus and 𝔭47, found in Rev 9:20, to be representative of the Urtext (p. 120). The final stem was represented in the commentary by Andreas of Caesarea and the Koine (K) text. Although Wilhelm Bousset and Hermann von Soden thought these traditions were independent of one another, S. concluded that they shared a stem, which could be recognized by their common corrections (p. 155). In numerous places, K and Andreas's commentary provide better witnesses to the Urtext than the other stems, demonstrating that they are not simply dependent on earlier textual traditions. Schmid's Ancient Stems, while valuable, reflects the weaknesses one can expect in a pioneering work. First, S. never discussed his critical theory. Second, he "overrates agreement as evidence of a common lineage and underrates the possibility of coincidental agreement in errors" (p. xxxv). Finally, his language can be imprecise. For example, he never defined a hierarchy of textual forms. The last objection, however, is mitigated when we consider that S. did not think it was possible to recreate connections between the textual forms. In this regard, his understanding of textual development was clearly superior to Westcott's and Hort's hypothesis regarding the development of textual traditions. It is fortunate that the state of research has progressed since 1955. This fact is recognized both in the translators' introduction and the errata section at the end of the volume. The translators' introduction is helpful in various ways. First, it contextualizes S.'s contribution. The translators recognize that S.'s work was transitional. Also, they note that textual [End Page 720] criticism has advanced beyond his work. For example, the translators note that with digital tools and more adequate critical theory, such as the Coherence Based Genealogical Method (CBGM), the time has come for newer approaches to the textual history of the Apocalypse. The translators' introduction does, however, possess one major flaw. When references are made to S.'s Ancient Stems, the page numbers are to the German original, not to the translation. Thus, the incautious...