Not a member?     Existing members login below:
Holidays Offer
 

The Encyclopedia of New Testament Textual Criticism


place where it is orange. In any given section, it is red or yellow. Similarly, a block-mixed
text may have Alexandrian and Byzantine strands (for example), but any particular
section is either from the Alexandrian or the Byzantine source, not both. In an ordinary
mixed manuscript, you will see Alexandrian and Byzantine readings in immediate
proximity throughout.
Block mixture is not overly common, but neither is it rare. Students should always be
alert to it, and never assume, simply because a manuscript belongs to a certain text-
type in one book or section of a book, that it will belong to that type in another section.
Noteworthy Block Mixed Manuscripts
The following list highlights some of the better-known examples of block mixture.
?/01. Sinaiticus. In the Gospels, ? is generally Alexandrian. The ?rst nine or so chapters
of John, however, do not belong with the Alexandrian text; they are often considered
“Western.” (For a recent examination of this, see the article by Fee.)
C/04. The fragmentary nature of C makes it dif?cult to de?ne its mixture. But it is
generally agreed that, in the gospels, it is mixed. Some have argued that it is block
mixed. Gerben Kollenstaart reports on the work of Mark R. Dunn, who concludes, “C is
a weak Byzantine witness in Matthew, a weak Alexandrian in Mark, and a strong
Alexandrian in John. In Luke C's textual relationships are unclear.”
L/019. Codex Regius, L of the Gospels, is mostly Alexandrian in Mark, Luke, and John.
In the ?rst three-quarters of Matthew, however, Byzantine elements predominate. (This
is probably the result of incomplete correction in an ancestor.)
R/027. The general run of the text is about 80% Byzantine (the remainder being
Alexandrian). In chapters 12–16, however, Alexandrian elements come to dominate,
constituting about 60–70% of the total.
W/032. The Freer Gospels are the most noteworthy example of block mixture,
containing a high number of textual shifts and no particular pattern to their occurrence.
(This has led to signi?cant speculation about the manuscript. Henry A. Sanders, the
original editor, believed W was copied from scraps of manuscripts which survived
Diocletian's persecution; Streeter instead suggested that the various books were copied
from multiple exemplars, which showed different patterns of corrections.) Metzger lists
the books' contents as follows: Matthew — Byzantine. Mark 1:1–5:30 — “Western.”
Mark 5:31–end — “Cæsarean.” Luke 1:1–8:12 — Alexandrian. Luke 8:13–end —
Byzantine. John 1:1–5:11 — Supplement with mixed text. John 5:12–end —
Alexandrian. (Hurtado, however, argues that the break occurs not in Mark 5 but around
42
The Encyclopedia of New Testament Textual Criticism
 
Remove