Page 1 of 1

Variant Reading in Josephus

Posted: March 22nd, 2012, 9:24 pm
by MAubrey
I came across this variant morphological form in Βίος:

§385 Ἐγὼ δ ̓ ἀκούσας ἠπόρουν, τίνα τρόπον ἐξαρπάσω τὴν
Τιβεριάδα τῆς Γαλιλαίων ὀργῆς. ἀρνήσασθαι γὰρ οὐκ ἐδυνάμην
μὴ γεγραφέναι τοὺς Τιβεριεῖς καλοῦντας τὸν βασιλέα· ἤλεγχον γὰρ
αἱ παρ ̓ ἐκείνου πρὸς αὐτοὺς ἀντιγραφαὶ τὴν ἀλήθειαν.

Niese's apparatus reads:
γεγραφηκέναι MW

I never expected to see this form for γράφω's perfect infinitive. Perseus won't parse it and I only see four other instances in the Duke Databank Papyri. Am I just seeing a desire by the scribe (and the four papyri authors) to regularize this perfect infinitive to the -κα paradigm? When I see -κε- I normally think pluperfect, but that can't be the case with the infinitive.

Anyway, more than anything else, I'm just curious to hear what other think of this particular morphological creation.

Thoughts?

Re: Variant Reading in Josephus

Posted: March 22nd, 2012, 9:42 pm
by Louis L Sorenson
I find at least 15 occurances of γεγραφηκέναι versus 213 of γεγραφέναι.

Re: Variant Reading in Josephus

Posted: March 22nd, 2012, 10:43 pm
by MAubrey
Are you searching TLG? Or something else?

My search for the form was in Logos' edition of Perseus.

Re: Variant Reading in Josephus

Posted: March 22nd, 2012, 11:32 pm
by Louis L Sorenson
Yes, TLG.

Re: Variant Reading in Josephus

Posted: March 23rd, 2012, 2:20 am
by Ken M. Penner
MAubrey wrote:γεγραφηκέναι MW
... Am I just seeing a desire by the scribe (and the four papyri authors) to regularize this perfect infinitive to the -κα paradigm?
That would be my guess as well. Βιος has a couple more instances of γεγραφέναι (in 358-359), with no variants noted.
BDAG does list a -κα- form (γεγραφήκαμεν in 2 Macc 1:7). LSJ says "later γεγράφηκα; IG11(4).1026 (Delos, ii B.C.); PHib.1.78.2 (iii B.C.)."

Re: Variant Reading in Josephus

Posted: March 23rd, 2012, 6:09 am
by cwconrad
Perhaps this has already been answered to the satisfaction of Mike. I don't really understand what the problem is. The verb γράφειν has a 1st perfect γέγραφα and a 2nd perfect γεγράφηκα, just as it has a 1st passive ἐγράφθην and a 2nd passive ἐγράφην. The perfect infinitive ending is -έναι. I would expect that one might find both forms in this era when some are beginning to Atticize -- and Josephus falls into that category, doesn't he? That being the case, he would choose the older perfect stem.

It's always seemed a bit amusing to me that the older aorists, perfect, and passives are called "second" and the newer forms are called "first." I realize that "first" here must mean "more common" -- but it still seems to me that the earlier form ought to be called "first" and the later one "second." I remember having to do a second take with Aristotle's distinction of two senses of πρῶτος: "first" in the natural order, and "first" in relation to ourselves.