[Note: since I cannot update the release notes page at https://ntvmr.uni-muenster.de/nt-conjectures-release the notes for the fresh instalment are temporarily provided here.]
26. 2 January 2023 (2023–1)
Compared to the previous release (25; 2022–4) 24 conjecture records were added (cj16931 to cj16954), together with 209 history records (s32264 to s32472). In the source records 212 citations have been included as well. The total number of true conjectures is now 6.536 (out of 6.955 conjecture records); the total number of history records is 22.472, of which 8.180 contain a citation.
Newly found conjectures and editorial alternatives
An important source of previously unknown conjectures (to me that is) was found in a series of articles by Harald Sahlin, notably in the journal Studia theologica. Since Sahlin also wrote numerous articles in Swedish to which I have no access yet, even more contributions by him are to be expected.
Rom 5:16 (cj16941): Sahlin (1987) supposed homoeoteleuton had caused the loss of some words, so that instead of οὐχ ὡς δι’ ἑνὸς ἁμαρτήσαντος τὸ δώρημα one should read οὐχ ὡς δι’ ἑνὸς ἁμαρτήσαντος τὸ κρίμα, οὕτως καὶ δι’ ἑνὸς δικαιώσαντος τὸ δώρημα; (as a question). This is actually just a modification of the conjecture he proposed four years earlier (see cj14302).
1 Cor 1:28 (cj16932): Blass (1902) wanted to adopt parts of Marcion’s (reconstructed) reading, thus changing καὶ τὰ ἀγενῆ τοῦ κόσμου καὶ τὰ ἐξουθενημένα ἐξελέξατο ὁ θεός into καὶ τὰ ἀγενῆ καὶ τὰ ἐλάχιστα καὶ τὰ ἐξουθενημένα.
Other noteworthy additions and corrections
Matt 11:17: Wellhausen’s conjecture (cj16794) cannot be just the omission of τὸν υἱὸν εἰ μὴ ὁ πατήρ, οὐδέ, but it is slightly unclear how he would construe the Greek. Based on his translation it seems he would also omit τις ἐπιγινώσκει, thus leaving the sentence as οὐδεὶς ἐπιγινώσκει τὸν πατέρα εἰ μὴ ὁ υἱός.
John 1:18: the conjecture made by Hirsch (cj16923; see instalment 25) turns out to be just a reinvention of the conjecture made by Semler in 1766 (cj10759). The cjID has been given to another conjecture, namely Blass’ rewriting of John 20:9–11 (cj16923; see above).
Jas 1:17 (cj10367): Hauck’s conjecture (1926) was recorded incorrecty as the omission of ἐνι παραλλαγὴ ἢ τροπῆς ἀποσκίασμα; Hauck actually proposed to read (partially following 𝔓23) ἔνι τι παραλλαγῆς ἢ τροπῆς ἀποσκιάσματος, or to accept Dibelius’ conjecture cj10368.