Evaluating h.t. in Aleph/B - James Snapp weighs in

James Snapp has has taken the time to examine our lists of probable h.t. errors in Matthew and Mark in the light of his own research, and offered the following report-card at TC-Alternat-list:

"Mr. Scrivener,

I compared your list of proposed parableptic errors elicited by h.t. in Mt and Mk to my translation of Mt based on the Equitable Eclectic text, and to the Greek Uncial Archetype of Mark.

Results:

In Mk we agree in 10 out of 10 cases.

In Mt we agree in 9 out of 13 cases. [~70%] The passages where I favor the shorter reading are:

(1) Mt. 15:8 - The variants in this citation should be considered together.

(2) Mt. 20:7 - The Byz reading is a conformation to the preceding text in v. 4. How does your proposed KAI-to-KAI skip account for the shorter reading? Where is the second KAI?

(3) Mt. 20:22 - h.t. could explain the shorter reading in 20:23, but not the shorter reading in 20:22; harmonization to Mk. 10:38-39 explains them both.

(4) Mt. 26:3 - a judgment based on internal evidence is difficult; the shorter reading is explicable by h.t. or by h.a. But the external evidence for the shorter reading is widespread. P45 and Codex A and several Old Latin copies and the Vulgate do not support the longer reading. KAI OI GRAMMATEIS is read in Mk. 14:1 and in Lk. 22:2, so early harmonization (early enough to be picked up in the Peshitta) in the Byz transmission-stream seems more likely than several independent omissions.

Yours in Christ,

James Snapp, Jr.

 To quickly answer James' question re: 20:7, we repost Nazaroo's reconstruction of the h.a. (homoeoarcton - similar beginning of line) below:


                          ...λεγουσιν
αυτω οτι ουδεις ημας  εμισθ-
ωσατο λεγει αυτοις υπαγετε
και υμεις εις τον αμπελωνα
και ο εαν η δικαιον ληψεσθε
οψιας δε γενομενης λεγει οκ-
υριος του αμπελωνος τω επι-
τροπω αυτου καλεσον  τους
εργατας και αποδος  αυτοις
τον μισθον  αρξαμενος  απο
των εσχατων εως των πρωτ-
ων...

mr.scrivener