Eugenius Bulgaris - (Voulgaris) - grammar - Philopatris - Bryennius - 1768 - Matthaei

Steven Avery

Administrator
Philopatris

Eugenius comments on the Philopatris evidence (fascinating, today not on the radar of the common piddle-studies) given by Richard Porson, who managed to not mention his grammatical writings. Hmmmm.

On this Philopatris evidence from the 2nd century, worthy of its own study, Eugenius is equivocal.

Letters to Mr. Archdeacon Travis (1790)
Richard Porson
http://books.google.com/books?id=SUg7AAAAcAAJ&pg=PA235
Bishop Eugenius too, who published Joseph Bryennius, and translated Virgil's Georgics into Greek hexameters, seems to be of my opinion ; for after mentioning Cave's demonstration, he adds, Sed genitilem illum auctorem relinquamus, qui forsitan non ex Joannis epistola, sed ex propalato jam tunc Christianorum dogmateunitatem naturaecum Trinitatesubsannare scrurriliter intendebat ..
 

Steven Avery

Administrator
Dunkin
Knittel reproduces Eugenius' discussion of the solecism as it was reported by a Professor Matthaei in Moscow, in 1780, who included a letter from Eugenius in his own discussion of the passage.83 A similar grammatical argument was advanced by Frederick Nolan in 1815. 84

(83) - See Knittel, op. cit., pp. 206-8; interestingly, Knittel also notes where Gregory Nazianzus dealt with the grammatical issue.
(84) - F. Nolan, An Inquiry into the Integrity of the Greek Vulgate, or Received Text of the New Testament, pp. 254-61, 564-5
 

Steven Avery

Administrator

Steven Avery

Administrator
Alo has enlightenent dspnse

Eric Rowe - here is a section in
Christian Frederick Matthaei (1744-1811)

SS[ancti] apostolorum septem epistolae catholicae (1782)
p. 56-62

I’m trying to prepare a page that includes the above, Philopatris, Bryennius, and any material, right now traveling today I don’t have all my notes.

The above is the first section with his grammar, followed by Knittel, who only used the grammar material.
 
Top