Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-tnzcf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T08:19:53.482Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Eusebius and the Gospel Text

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 August 2011

M. Jack Suggs
M. Jack Suggs
Affiliation:
Brite College of The Bible, Texas Christian University
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Harvard Theological Review has recently carried an article by D. S. Wallace-Hadrill entitled “Eusebius and the Gospel Text of Caesarea.” Students of the Eusebian text have known for some time that Mr. Wallace-Hadrill was working on this problem with what appeared to be unusual thoroughness. His published conclusions in the Harvard Theological Review come as something of a surprise and require some attention.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Harvard Theological Review , Volume 50 , Issue 4 , October 1957, pp. 307 - 310
Copyright
Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 1957

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1 HTR, XLIX (1956), 105–114.

2 “An Analysis of Some Quotations from the First Gospel in Eusebius' Demonstratio Evangelica,” JTS, N. S. I (1950), 168–175.

3 The New Testament Text of Eusebius of Caesarea (Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Duke University, 1954)Google Scholar.

4 “Eusebius' Text of John in the ‘Writings against Marcellus,’” JBL, LXXV (1956), 137–142Google Scholar.

5 HTR, XLIX (1956), 106.

6 Since this was written, an article by the present writer on “The Eusebian Text of Matthew” has appeared in Novum Testamentum I (1956), 233–245Google Scholar.

7 Ibid., p. 105.

8 The adoption of Wallace-Hadrill's categories in this paper should not be taken to imply acceptance of them. On the contrary, his Alexandrian category appears much too broad; the inclusion of A and 157, for example, needs argumentative support. Moreover, treating the vg as Western requires great caution, since this version is in some measure a revision of the Latin in the direction of the Alexandrian authorities.

9 In a few instances, Mras calls attention to a scripture citation which is imbedded in a passage from another Father who has been quoted by Eusebius. These citations have no claim to be Eusebian, and are — of course — ignored.

10 There is very little difference between the Gospel quotations in the Mras and Gifford editions. Reference is made to the location of the Matthean passages in Mras simply because Gifford is so inaccessible to most American readers. While the Mras text was only completed this year, it can doubtless be found in more libraries.

11 HTR, op. cit., p. 108.