apostolicfathers0201clem - Carmel Apologetics

MANUSCRIPTS AND VERSIONS. 121
truly says, and in this he was followed by most later editors, though
not by Ussher or Voss. So a^tovtKou appears in the transcript of
Allatius. These are some of the more decisive instances in which
Allatius copies a printed text ;
but many more might be adduced.
Thus aifj.a.T(ov for (nrepfjLaTwv, Trail. lo, was Morel's conjecture
: aVe-
Set^cv for (XTrrjXeyia', Magn. 3, appeared first in an edition of Plantinus,
being suggested by dir^Xu^v a misprint of the editio princeps ; dXri-
€(Tav was first substituted for fikKvaav, Philad. 5, in the edition of
Plantinus, where the editio princeps has eiA.7;vo-av ; Tr€TrXrjpo(}iopr]fji.ivr]
for Tr€TrX7]pu)[x.evr], Sniym. inscr., was an early editorial correction, founded
on ir€TrXr]poixivr], again a misprint of the editio princeps. All these
are devoid of ms authority, and yet all
appear in this transcript. In
several passages also this transcript follows the capricious alterations
of gg where they are found in no other ms, and the strong presumption
is that in these cases also the transcriber must have derived his
readings from some printed text. Lastly, it occasionally introduces
readings which are found only in the text of the Middle form, and
which (there is
good reason to believe) never had a place in the Long
recension; e.g. amo-Ta'o-et for ah-^creL in Tofyc. 7.
The case against this transcript might be considerably strengthened ;
but I believe that sufficient has been said to show its worthlessness.
It contains in fact a 7Hade up text. Allatius must have had before him
more than one printed edition, for he could not (so far as I have observed)
have got the readings twv Trpwrcoi/ TrpwTOTrXda-Twv Hero 4 and
diiovLKov Magn. 13 from the same edition. He professes however to
have taken the epistles from a Vatican ms; and this
may be so far
true, that togetlier with his printed texts he did employ such a
MS. But, if so, can we identify it After we have thus traced the most
characteristic
and striking readings of this transcript to printed editions,
it no longer remains an obstacle to the identification of the ms in
question with Valic. 859 or with Ollod. 348,
that its text 'neexlonginquo
quidem accedit ' to that presented by either. A more formidable
objection
is the fact that, whereas the transcript contains
the twelve epistles complete, these two mss want the whole of the first
epistle and the beginning of the second. But with his other aids
before him, Allatius could easily have supplied the omission. Until some
other Vatican ms therefore is discovered which better satisfies the
conditions, it may be presumed that the MS referred to was one of those
with which we are acquainted. At all events sufficient has been said to
show that this transcript is quite useless for critical purposes. Nor has
the investigation been superfluous ; for, if we had been obliged to