EARLIEST QUOTE USED FOR LECTIO BREVIOR - Jean Daillé
Today I ran into what seems to be the earliest quote that is used for the lectio brevior (shorter reading) theory that is a key part of the Hortian charade. Bengel and Griesbach are two important names in this discussions of textual canons, and we plan to examine their positions. However Jean Daillé precedes Bengel.
And this quote from 1666 gets a surprisingly large amount of usage. Richard Porson in the heavenly witnesses debate, Tregelles and others. And through Porson it even jumps to Shakespeare text analysts.Jean Daillé (1594-1670)
Jean Daillé (in Latin Dallaeus) (1594–1670) was a French Huguenot minister and Biblical commentator. He is mentioned in James Aitken Wylie's History of Protestantism as author of an Apology for the French Reformed Churches.[SUP][/SUP][SUP]
[/SUP]... His works include the treatise Du vrai emploi des Pères (1631), translated into English by Thomas Smith under the title A Treatise concerning the right use of the Fathers (1651). The work attacks those who made the authority of the Church Fathers conclusive on matters of faith and practice. Daillé contends that the text of the Fathers is often corrupt, and even when it is correct, the reasoning is often illogical. He argued that all the Ignatian epistles were spurious, and he was contradicted by John Pearson.
In his massive Sermons on the Philippians and Colossians, Daillé made his claim to rank as a preacher. He wrote also Apologie pour les Eglises Réformes and La foi fondée sur les Saintes Écritures. His life was written by his son Adrien, who retired to Zürich at the revocation of the edict of Nantes.
PRDL - http://www.prdl.org/author_view.php?a_id=4
CERL - https://data.cerl.org/thesaurus/cnp01390735
Perhaps Daillé supplies pure Bible contras with the first lectio brevior quote. We are currently (June, 2019) researching his Latin section, skeptical of the Porson usage. Here is an immediate contribution, my preliminary sense, subject to a more full review of the surrounding material.Ioannis Dallaei De scriptis, quae sub Dionysii Areopagitae et Ignatii Antiocheni nominibus circumferuntur, libri duo. Quibus demonstratur illa subdititia esse, diu post martyrium, quibus falso tribuuntur, obitum ficta; idemque de illis judicandum quae de operibus Christi cardinalibus inter Cypriani monumenta habentur. Adjecta est brevis commonefactio, de ruffiniana origenicorum aliquot operum interpretatione (1666)
Natura enim ita comparatum est ut auctorum probatorum libros plaerique omnes amplos, quam breves malint; verentes scilicet, ne quid sibi desit, quod auctoris vel sit, vel esse dicatur.
Translation from Jonathan Borland on b-latin:
[B-Latin] Jean Daillé and the first lectio brevior quote
Jonathan C. Borland - Dec 6, 2014
In fact, this quote may be abused by Porson and Tregelles. We need more research as to the full context, also we should add how it is used in the textual debates."For nature so has it that the vast majority should prefer recognized authors' books/manuscripts that are long/full rather than short/concise; reverently of course, lest anything that either may be or may be said to be the author's should become lost to them."
The Tregelles usage, which simply accepts the Porson nonsense about millions of margin notes, and in that context quotes Daillé, is here:FALLACY IN MISUSE OF QUOTE
In fact, there is an obvious fallacy in the misapplication of the Daillé quote by Porson and others who work with the Porson nonsense (see below).
Daillé is not saying that there was a propensity to add in new oddball material by later scribes. And Daillé is not saying that margin writing would be brought into the text.
Daillé is simply saying that a scribe seeing two manuscripts, one with text and one without, would be more likely to choose the longer text, so as not to lose material from the writer. This, in a sense, is an obvious truism, if the material is sensible and fits.
This is especially true if the internal evidence also supports this inclusion as being from the writer, and the writing is fitting the context. And also often such material is quoted by early church writers (and early manuscripts and versions). A simple example is Irenaeus and Cyprian utilizing Acts 8:37, which information would help a scribe who was informed in those areas. Similarly, the Greek mss. may be split, however the longer text is supported by the Latin and Syriac texts.
In many cases, the scribe will properly conclude that the shorter text was simply "sleepy scribe syndrome". Or caused by various issues like homoeoteleuton, which lead to the shorter text! The scribe's instincts will often be 100% accurate.
An account of the printed text of the Greek New Testament, with remarks on its revision upon critical principles (1854)
Samuel Prideaux Tregelles
Next we plan to look at the original section, and the usages by Porson (reprinted in the Classical Review of 1828) Tregelles, Andrews Norton (1818), and the Journal of Sacred Literature (1849, possibly Tregelles) and see if there really is any substance to claiming Jean Daillé as a lectio brevior proponent.
Andrews Norton, Unitarian, in the context of Luke 9:55-56, quotes the Latin above and Porson and concludes:
From this known propensity of transcribers to turn every thing into text which they found written in the margin of their MSS. or between the lines, so many interpolations have proceeded, that at present the surest canon of criticism is, Praferatur lectio brevior.
A Discourse on Religious Education: Delivered at Hingham, May 20, 1818, Before the Trustees of the Derby Academy : Being the Annual Derby Lecture (1818)
This is by way of introduction. The plan is to expand the studies on the development and gross abuse of the lectio brevior concept. However the side-journey to theories about the ECW is also interesting. The approach of Daillé may prefigure the method of the modern liberals and skeptics, who go way overboad in declaring solid writings as spurious. In fact, they apply such analysis even to the New Testament books.SIDENOTE: EARLY CHURCH WRITINGS
It does seem that Daillé, whose writings also make solid points, went a bit overboad in terms of ECW writings (quick to label writings spurious with weak, circular and special pleading argumentation).
Here is an interesting book by Daillé translated into English:
A Treatise Concerning the Right Use of the Fathers in the Decision of Controversies Existing at this Day in Religion (1631 French)
Jean Daillé - translated by Thomas Smith, 1651, 1856 edition
John James Blunt (1794-1855)
dealt with Daillé's skeptical approach to the ECW in sermons, this third section is right on point:
On the right use of the early fathers; 2 ser. of lectures (1858)
John James Blunt
In the next post you can see how Richard Porson used this Daillé quote.