Christian Texts and History • Re: Whiston had a Didache in book 7 of his Apostolic Constitutions

A question I have is the church sez that the only complete copy of the Didache is in Codex Hierosolymitanus, which worries me because Tischendorf visited the library where it was "found" not long before it was "found". Yet there seems to be a complete Didache in Whiston's AC as book 7.
What text was Whiston translating, and how does its Didache differ from the Codex Hierosolymitanus one?

As to the Whiston Didache, and raising the question whether that could be a source for the Codex Hierosolymitanus, that would take some checking.

The question I have is slightly different. Why is it that the "experts" said Codex Hierosolymitanus (H) was the first full copy of the Didache, a writing that many Early Christian writers had mentioned, yet Whiston had a complete copy of it in book 7 of his Apostolic Constitutions?

Looking at his translation of the Apostolic Constitutions, it has the Didache buried in Book 7:

• http://ldsfocuschrist2.files.wordpress. ... histon.pdf
• http://books.google.com/books?id=xQ8aAAAAYAAJ
• https://archive.org/download/workclaimi ... isuoft.pdf

Was it considered spurious? What did he use as the basis for his translation of the AC? I'll try to do a comparison with the version in H, which I, and Donalson, are suspicious of.

The version of the AC on the net:

The Apostolic Constitutions (or Constitutions of the Holy, Apostles, lat. Constitutiones Apostolorum),
By Clement, Bishop And Citizen Of Rome (Pseudonym), The Work Claiming To Be The
Constitutions Of The Holy Apostles, Including The Canons;
William Whiston's Version, Revised From The Greek; Irah Chase, Otto Krabbe
D. Appleton and company, 1848

has an unsigned preface, I presume by Irah Chase, where it says:

In revising the version here presented, regard has been had chiefly to the Greek text of the Constitutions, as published with notes in the Amsterdam edition of the Apostolical Fathers, and to the Greek text of the canons, as recently edited by Bruns in his Bibliotheca Ecclesias-
tica, under the supervision of Neander. The Septuagint translation of the Old Testament being the one used by the author and his contemporaries, the references in the margin are made to the books, chapters, and verses, as they stand in that Greek translation. Some of its pecu-
liarities which receive no countenance from the Hebrew original, may here be traced, as having had a decided influence on the theology and reasoning of the early fathers.

So I assume it's a revision of Whiston's work consulting the greek text listed above. But what was Whiston working from, a hundred years earlier?

Statistics: Posted by ebion — Fri Jan 05, 2024 7:17 pm

---