지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 저널정보
- 대한성서공회 성경원문연구 성경원문연구 제56호
- 발행연도
- 2025.4
- 수록면
- 78 - 97 (20page)
- DOI
- 10.28977/jbtr.2025.4.56.78
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Sameul Prideux Tregelles’ Greek New Testament was published in 1879 after his death in 1875. At the prolegomena of the book, we find “the Rev. F. J. A. Hort, D.D., Pulsean Professor of Divinity” as an editor. The editor is a co-editor of the Westcott-Hort version, namely Fenton John Anthony Hort, and his son, Arthor Fenton Hort, gives evidence, “He [Hort] had been in constant communication with Tregelles for many years past, and freely used for his own work his collations and those of other scholars.” In addition, Timothy C. F. Stunt, who wrote the biography of S. P. Tregelles, revealed the relationship between Tregrelles and F. J. A. Hort.
Based on the evidence above, we may think a relationship between Tregelles’ GNT and Westcott and Hort’s GNT existed. Nevertheless, it is hard to find any mention of Tregelles’ version within both Westcott’s and Hort’s writings. Interestingly, Tregelles’ GNT is primarily used by both the Scrivener’s edition and the Palmer’s edition which were published in Oxford in 1881, the same year of the Westcott and Hort’s edition.
Hence, after examining Matthew’s Gospel in both versions, this study shows, first, that the differences between both versions can be primarily explained in terms of the Vatican manuscript. In particular, some readings in Westcott and Hort’s GNT are supported only by the Vatican manuscript based on CNTTS. In relation to these Westcott and Hort’s readings, the Palmer’s edition (1881) stands side by side with the Tregelles’ edition. Secondly, some differences can be explained by the Sinaiticus manuscript. Thirdly, some readings in Westcott and Hort’s GNT are supported by a few manuscripts which do not include the Sinaiticus and Vatican manuscripts.
Through this study, we think that there is a possibility that Tregelles’ GNT was used by Westcott and Hort’s Greek New Testament, and further, that Tregelles’ GNT was welcomed by the scholars in Oxford but rejected by those in Cambridge. Furthermore, we suggest that the Tregelles’ edition influenced, even indirectly, the earliest Korean translations from 1882 to 1911 that supposedly relied solely on the Palmer’s edition.
Hence, this study suggests a need to fully compare and examine the Tregelles’ edition not only with the Westcott and Hort’s GNT, but also with the Palmer’s edition.
Based on the evidence above, we may think a relationship between Tregelles’ GNT and Westcott and Hort’s GNT existed. Nevertheless, it is hard to find any mention of Tregelles’ version within both Westcott’s and Hort’s writings. Interestingly, Tregelles’ GNT is primarily used by both the Scrivener’s edition and the Palmer’s edition which were published in Oxford in 1881, the same year of the Westcott and Hort’s edition.
Hence, after examining Matthew’s Gospel in both versions, this study shows, first, that the differences between both versions can be primarily explained in terms of the Vatican manuscript. In particular, some readings in Westcott and Hort’s GNT are supported only by the Vatican manuscript based on CNTTS. In relation to these Westcott and Hort’s readings, the Palmer’s edition (1881) stands side by side with the Tregelles’ edition. Secondly, some differences can be explained by the Sinaiticus manuscript. Thirdly, some readings in Westcott and Hort’s GNT are supported by a few manuscripts which do not include the Sinaiticus and Vatican manuscripts.
Through this study, we think that there is a possibility that Tregelles’ GNT was used by Westcott and Hort’s Greek New Testament, and further, that Tregelles’ GNT was welcomed by the scholars in Oxford but rejected by those in Cambridge. Furthermore, we suggest that the Tregelles’ edition influenced, even indirectly, the earliest Korean translations from 1882 to 1911 that supposedly relied solely on the Palmer’s edition.
Hence, this study suggests a need to fully compare and examine the Tregelles’ edition not only with the Westcott and Hort’s GNT, but also with the Palmer’s edition.
목차
1. 서론
2. 문제 제기, 연구 주제, 연구 방법
3. 바티칸 사본으로 설명이 가능한 부분
4. 시내산 사본으로 설명이 가능한 부분
5. 두 사본으로 설명이 어려운 경우
7. 결론
참고문헌(References)
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0