![]() |
Nestle 13th edition (1927) |
In the 13th edition (and for some time beyond) it marks places where Erwin Nestle (son of Eberhard) thought that the majority principle used by his father had not led to the original text. In those cases, he marked his preferred reading with a diamond, explaining its use thus: “Some of these [places of textual difficulty], which must be considered original, are distinguished with the prefixed symbol ◆ in the apparatus, as Rom 5.1” (p. 12*).
A number of these diamond readings also happen to be conjectures and thanks to help from Jan Krans, I can present here a list of all the conjectures accepted by various Nestle editions. You can click on the link in parentheses to see more detail at the Amsterdam Database.
- Matt 2:6 (link)
- Matt 6:16 (link)
- Matt 12:33 (link); according to us not a true conjecture
- Matt 15:5 (link); actually only the omission of a iota subscript;
- Mark 7:11 (link; = cj15781)
- Acts 7:38 (link)
- Acts 16:12 (link)
- Rom 13:3 (link; actually attested)
- 1 Cor 2:4 (link)
- 1 Cor 6:5 (link)
- 1 Cor 14:38 (link)
- 1 Cor 16:22 (link; just an editorial alternative)
- 2 Cor 3:3 (link; actually attested)
- 2 Cor 7:8 (link; also attested)
- 2 Cor 8:12 (link; just an editorial alternative)
- 1 Tim 4:3 (link)
- 1 Tim 5:13 (link)
- Rev 2:13 (link)
One of the reasons for noting this is because its easy to think that the conjectures printed at Acts 16.12 in NA27/28, 2 Pet 3.10 in NA28, and now Acts 13.33 in the ECM show a trend toward greater willingness to print a conjecture. But actually, these changes should be seen as a return to an earlier Nestle tendency and not an innovation or move away from it. In fact, based on the list here, the Nestle(-Aland) editions have grown more reticent to print conjectures since 1927 not less.