With this short blog article, I want to draw you attention to the verse Rm 6:7 in the Latin column, which is namely... absent!
The complete verse qui enim mortuus est iustificatus est a peccato is omitted in Latin (see folio_135r) – not in Greek and in Arabic. It does not seem to be an error made by the copist as a space was left blank in the column:
Several hypotheses are possible behind this lack. Let's examine three of them.
1. The Latin text that the scribe was copying already missed the verse. This can have resulted from a homoioteleuton error, as both verses 6:6 and 6:7 end with peccato.
2. The scribe intentionally omitted this part of the text. The omission actually echoes the one that occurs in Rm 4:35 (folio 133r). We attribuated the omission of part of the verse 4:35 to a scribal error. However, it must be noted that the passages of 4:25 and 6:6 are both concerned by sin and justification. Did the scribe consider some parts as theologically problematic (see also the omission in Arabic in Rm 6:23, folio 136r)? It would be premature to jump to such conclusion. However, we will be attentive to any other similar phenomenon.
3. Finally, we cannot for now exclude that the verse was erased later on. If we do not see traces of correction on the manuscript image (maybe a slight discolouration?), it will require a manual inspection to be sure.
Do you consider one of the hypotheses more likely?
Comments powered by CComment