This article explores the relationship of a minor variant in Hebrews 2.9 – Jesus dead ‘apart from God’ (χωρὶς θɛοῦ) – with the minor variant of Mark 15.34 and more broadly with Psalm 22.2, as suggested by Harnack, Michel, Zuntz, Elliott, Ehrman and Rodgers. First, it highlights new elements in the file of the evidence of Heb 2.9 and compares it with the case of Mark 15.34. Secondly, it demonstrates that paying attention to the minor variants of Heb 2.9 and Mark 15.34 allows one to grasp better the diversity of Jewish and early Christian readings of Ps 22.2 or Ps 21.2 LXX: these readings provide a plausible context to explain the emergence of these two minor variants.

The article makes a case for a thorough reappraisal of the text of Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica by discussing a number of textual problems in Book 8. It proposes some twenty new conjectures, as well as reviving six old ones that seem to have been undeservedly forgotten.

Notes on the text and interpretation of passages in Plutarch's Life of Alexander.

This article argues for an emendation to Ovid, Amores 3.9, Ovid's lament for Tibullus. The transmitted text of line 59 would seem to present a contradiction: Ovid speculates about aliquid nisi nomen et umbra surviving death, and then proceeds in the next few lines to identify that aliquid as, precisely, Tibullus’ umbra. Ovid's original text was most likely aliquid nisi nomen et ossa, referring to a burial site and funerary inscription; with this text, Ovid reproduces details from Tibullus 1.3, a poem which he reworks throughout his elegy.

Rhet. Her. 1.2 quoad eius fieri poterit contains the surprising reading quoad eius. Earlier scholarship has debated the authenticity of this reading and its relationship to quod eius. A survey of the sources shows that quod eius appears in a number of inscriptions as well as in the transmitted text of nine passages within surviving Latin literature. So that phrase must be authentic; it appears to have arisen as a limiting formula in the language of the law. In two other passages, quoad eius appears in inferior manuscripts that lack authority, while the reading transmitted by authoritative textual sources is quod eius. Rhet. Her. 1.2 is the only passage in which quoad eius is the transmitted reading. This phrase is also linguistically problematic. Hence it is very likely to be corrupt. It probably arose as a conflation of quod eius with quoad, both of which are attested in similar contexts. On balance, it seems more likely that the original reading in this passage was quoad.

This paper raises objections to the constitution of these lines in the OCT. The lines are gnomic but they generalize based on an actual sequence of events just described and should contain an allusion to the offence that will cause the Greeks to perish, the outrage against Athena's temple. This, it is argued, stood in a lacuna best marked after 95. The article has three theses: (1) sacking ‘cities, temples, and tombs’ is implausible because the latter two are parts of the first; (2) plundering tombs refers to nothing in the play, nor was this thought of as an offence against the gods; (3) 96–7 do not refer to the offence that causes the fool's death but are a description of his success, the destruction of the hated enemy population. That success stands in ironic contrast with his subsequent death.

At Aur. Vict. Caes. 10.5, the reading lautus should be retained; -que is a dittography and should be deleted. At 13.3, satis should be emended into sagatis. This article also provides a brief analysis of Victor's references to clothing and attempts to explain why he comments on the Dacian costume at 13.3, the only ethnographic reference to clothing in the entire work.

This paper discusses an earlier emendation to fr. 54 GRF Funaioli from Varro's De bibliothecis and argues that, while the text et citro refers to cedar oil, it should not be emended to et cedro. A comparison with a passage from Pliny the Elder (HN 13.86) is used to support the view presented in the article.

Ausgehend von der kulturwissenschaftlichen Forschung zu Familienalben und deren Gemeinsamkeiten mit dem Neuen Testament lädt dieser Beitrag dazu ein, darüber nachzudenken, was sich verändert, wenn wir die Fragen der Einführung in das Neue Testament durch die Brille der Theorie des sozialen Gedächtnisses betrachten. Aufbauend auf Forschungsergebnissen der Oral History und kulturwissenschaftlichen Gedächtnistheorie wird argumentiert, dass die allgemeine Einleitung in den Bereich des kulturellen Gedächtnisses und die spezielle Einleitung in den Bereich des sozialen/kollektiven Gedächtnisses fällt. Beide sind durch den Floating Gap getrennt, was die vielfach wahrgenommenen Veränderungen in der ersten Hälfte des zweiten Jahrhunderts erklärt. Im nächsten Schritt wird ein Modell, das auf dem Dreigenerationengedächtnis, der Generational Gap (nach einer Generation), der Floating Gap (nach 3-4 Generationen) und den ersten Generationen von Jesus-Anhängern aufbaut, mit Vorschlägen zur Datierung neutestamentlicher Bücher aus der Einleitungswissenschaft ins Gespräch gebracht. Es zeigt sich, dass die vor und nach dem Generational Gap verwendeten Genres je unterschiedliche Eigenschaften haben, die den Erwartungen an Medien des sozialen und kollektiven Gedächtnisses entsprechen. Der Beitrag schließt mit allgemeinen Fragen zu Medien und Medienwandel im Neuen Testament, d.h. Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit, identische Texte und Textkritik, dem Kanon als primärem Kontext, der Ausweitung des Geltungsbereichs sowie fluiden Gattungen, und kommt zu dem Schluss, dass kulturwissenschaftliche Gedächtnistheorie in der Tat neue Perspektiven für die Einleitungswissenschaft bietet.

This article discusses textually problematic passages in Catullus 63, a particularly corrupt poem from a particularly corrupt manuscript tradition. It proposes new conjectures and revives several old ones. Throughout there are notes on punctuation, conjecture attribution and an analysis of the structure of Attis’ lament.

This note makes a new argument for van Lennep's conjecture di at Ovid, Heroides 7.21 against the manuscript reading te.

This article discusses the text of seven passages in the etymological books 5–7 of Varro's De lingua Latina, and proposes new conjectures for all of them. The discussions are of direct relevance to the interpretation of fragments and testimonies of lost Latin authors quoted by Varro: the scenic poets Naevius, Pacuvius, Caecilius Statius, Juventius and Atilius, and the grammarian Aurelius Opillus. The starting point for the discussions is the new Oxford edition of Varro's De lingua Latina by Wolfgang de Melo.

This paper analyses the probability of a reading so far neglected by editors in Lactantius Placidus’ late antique commentary on Stat. Theb. 5.16. Next, the article argues that, regardless of the accepted reading, this part of the scholium is likely an interpolation.

This note suggests a new emendation for the spurious verb bibunt in Nemesianus, Cynegetica 68. The passage should read Nilique latentem in origine fontem.

Conjectures are made on the text of three passages in Tibullus, Books 1–2: 1.4.26 hastam … suam for crines … suos, 2.1.56 membra for bache, 2.4.60 aliis rebus for alias herbas.

Four of the witnesses selected for the Editio Critica Maior of Mark are witnesses to a unique combination of catena commentaries on the Gospels not found in any other manuscripts. An analysis of their text in the Gospel of Mark, using the tools of the Coherence-Based Genealogical Method, shows that they also feature an almost identical form of the biblical text that frequently diverges from both the Majority Text and all other Greek New Testament manuscripts. These four manuscripts, GA 238, GA 377, GA 807 and GA 1160, therefore, constitute a group within the textual tradition of the Gospels. This article provides the evidence that GA 377 is a direct copy of GA 807. No other instances of direct copying can be proven within the group, but their agreement raises the possibility that they are siblings. The format of the catenae may explain the high degree of homogeneity in this group of Gospels manuscripts.

The so-called Hymn of the Bride is found in Chapters 6–7 in the first Act of the apocryphal Acts of Thomas. The manuscripts containing it show a particular history of the text which does not always coincide with that of the rest of the Act. For instance, family gamma (Γ) often presents a summarized version of the first two Acts, thus heavily shortening the Hymn.

A study of the text is essential to establish a new edition with translation, which is the aim of the project in which this study is embedded. However, analysis of the manuscripts omitting or summarizing the Hymn is also relevant for other goals, such as a proper understanding of the interrelationships between the different manuscripts and of the interest in the text, and its use by early Christian communities and by later readers.

Consequently, in this paper, I will analyse the particularities of such a textual tradition and offer a few conclusions that will, in turn, contribute to the broader analysis of the Acts of Thomas.