Interchange of Future and Aorist Participle?
Posted: March 16th, 2020, 2:25 pm
In Martyrdom of Peter I have found the following passage where a future participle is present in the text (Accordance module, which is from the Bonnet Acta Apostolorum Apocrypha, 3 vols, Leipzig: 1891-1903) serving what appears to be a the normal function of an aorist participle:
MPeter 3.2 Ὁ δὲ Πέτρος ὅραμα θεασόμενος ἧκεν ἐπὶ τὸν τόπον, ὅπως αὐτὸν καὶ ἐν τούτῳ ἐλέγξῃ· ὅτε γὰρ εἰσίει εἰς τὴν Ῥώμην, ἐξέστησεν τοὺς ὄχλους πετώμενος.
The English translation is as follows: And Peter, having seen a vision, came to the place, that he might reprove him in this also; for when Simon entered into Rome, he amazed the crowds by flying.
In context, I believe the English translation is spot on in handling the participle (it is also translated the same way in Schneemelcher's New Testament Apocrypha volume). I have never seen a future participle used in this way and have not found any discussion of it in the grammars (Mayser, Mandilaras, Smyth). Has anyone seen something like this before?
I'm wondering if it is an anomolous usage, whether of this text or of this verb. I have been unable to locate a digital scan of this particular volume of Bonnet to see if it is a mistake in the Accordance text. There is a critical edition of The Acts of Peter in preparation (https://www.corpuschristianorum.org/ccsa), but who knows when that will be done to check what the reading is.
MPeter 3.2 Ὁ δὲ Πέτρος ὅραμα θεασόμενος ἧκεν ἐπὶ τὸν τόπον, ὅπως αὐτὸν καὶ ἐν τούτῳ ἐλέγξῃ· ὅτε γὰρ εἰσίει εἰς τὴν Ῥώμην, ἐξέστησεν τοὺς ὄχλους πετώμενος.
The English translation is as follows: And Peter, having seen a vision, came to the place, that he might reprove him in this also; for when Simon entered into Rome, he amazed the crowds by flying.
In context, I believe the English translation is spot on in handling the participle (it is also translated the same way in Schneemelcher's New Testament Apocrypha volume). I have never seen a future participle used in this way and have not found any discussion of it in the grammars (Mayser, Mandilaras, Smyth). Has anyone seen something like this before?
I'm wondering if it is an anomolous usage, whether of this text or of this verb. I have been unable to locate a digital scan of this particular volume of Bonnet to see if it is a mistake in the Accordance text. There is a critical edition of The Acts of Peter in preparation (https://www.corpuschristianorum.org/ccsa), but who knows when that will be done to check what the reading is.