Hort on Haplography

Hort on Haplography

Hort discusses Acts


For Acts 2:30, F.J.A. Hort (1892) comments in his Introduction (Notes on Select Readings) p 92:

+kata sarka...etc. - is in both the "Western and Syrian (Gk Syr.[=Byzantine])" text; its found also in Origen Ps. (XV Cord.Gall.) Eusebius Ps..

On the other hand it is missing from the "Latin copy of Ireneaus and Euseb. Ecl.. Perhaps [it is a reference] from 2 Sam. vii.12."

From this it is plain that Hort acknowledged that the fuller reading is found in two of the three major text-types, which he himself held as legitimate entities through his own "Genealogical Method".

He selects the "Neutral" reading (the Alexandrian/Egyptian text-type) for his text by reason of his preference for this text-type over all others combined, not on the basis of any internal evidence or argument, or any even-handed treatment of the major text-types.


Hort does not comment on Acts 15:24.


For Acts 20:15: Hort again offers a brief note:

+KAI... - Western and Syrian (Greek, Latin, Syriac, Egypt.[Copt]) & "many of the later documents"...
In support of omission: "אABCE cu lat.vg me aeth arm".

Again Hort offers no discussion at all of internal evidence, or of possible HomoioArcton. He appears to deliberately avoid any discussion of haplography in every case when it comes to omissions adopted by him from B/Aleph.

Hort completely avoids commenting on his alterations at Acts 21:22, 22:9.

The only extensive note in the Introduction is on Acts 26:28.

Again Hort completely avoids discussing Acts 26:29-31a, presumably because he would then have to confront the question of Haplography again.


So Hort has little to offer for our examples. We might turn to Metzger for a bit more of a textual discussion, but probably not much of one on Haplography errors. For that we will have to turn to E.C. Colwell and and probably Hoskier.