The Enchiridion Greek Text

A Brief Overview of the Greek Textual-Critical History of the Enchiridion

The Enchiridion reading group is reading the Greek text as presented on Perseus and Bibliotheca Augustana. It is the text from the 1916 Epictetus Dissertationiones Ab Arriani Digestae by Henricus Schenkl (Heinrich Schenkl). The text of Schenkl is not only Greek text available, nor the most recent. Two other Greek texts are available in print: one by W.A. Oldfather (Loeb:1928) and the recent edition by Gerhard Boter (Brill:1999).

Most students of Greek will probably not want to deal with textual variants. However, the variants are often the result of people trying to understand 'hard-to-read' texts. They can be of great use in increasing your knowledge of Greek grammar and vocabulary. Many emendations and variants are simplifications or clarifications of the Greek text. The variants provide a further understanding into the meaning of the text.

A note: The Christianizing versions of the editions varied in how they dealt with the Greek. Nilus' version merely changes names and a few other words/word forms: 'gods' to 'God', 'Socrates' to 'Paul'. The Christianizing version designated as Par (=paraphrase) is a totaly reworking of the Greek text. Textual changes in Par are more doctrinal in nature; Par's major alterations of the text will not help you understand the meaning of the original Greek text.

Both Oldfather and Schenkl reprint Schweighauser's 1798 Greek text (with a few alterations). Dr. Boter, who has created the first new critical edition of the Enchiridion since 1798, has the following to say about the scholarship on the text of the Enchiridion. Boter tries to put a few things in perspective (most of the comments below are taken from his book.)

Earlier Critical Texts (1529, 1554, 1560)

The first edition of the complete Greek text of the Encheiridion was published in 1529 (in the editio princeps of Simplicius' commentary), but the text of the Encheiridion was abbreviated there. Since then, there have been numerous editions of the Greek text, often being edited or amended by the the consultation of various manuscripts the editor had available. The earlier texts gradually became corrupted by emendations and contamination. The different editions in print often used the Greek text from various manuscripts. The editions by Schegk (1554) and Wolf (1560) provided the standard for the vulgate of the Enchiridion until Scweighauser's edition maior of 1798 (source - Boter p. 71)

Schweighauser (1798)

"There has not been a new critical text of the Enchiridion since 1798. The text of Schenkl is really the text of the 1798 Editio Maior by Johann Schweighauser. Schweighauser's editio maior (published in 1798; Oldfather nr. 294) marks an enormous progress on all previous editions; in fact, it can be regarded as the only critical edition of the Enchiridion hitherto published.... Schweighauser’s critical notes are very extensive...these notes show Schweighauser’s deep insight into every aspect of Epictetus’ text, and they are an inexhaustible source of lucid and pertinent remarks. In fact, the very excellence of Schweighauser’s edition has been one of the factors deterring later scholars from embarking on the enterprise of a new critical edition, his text being the basis of all the later editions." (Boter pp. 83). Schweighauser's work was reprinted in 1977. The Enchiridion is in volume 3 (of 5 vols. <VET!>).

Schenkl (1894, 1916)

The Greek text Schenkl uses has a long history, and he presents it as his own --as a new critical edition from an investigation of the manuscripts.... H. Schenkl, in his Teubner edition of Epictetus (1894, 1916 2nd edition; Oldfather nrs. 22-25) , contented himself with printing Schweighauser’s text of the Enchridion (pp. 5*-38*) but he does give a new critical apparatus, which is predictably based on Schweighauser’s notes.... Schenkl’s use of the indirect tradition is fuller than Schweighäuser’s.

A major advantage of Schenkl’s edition is the apparatus of parallel passages in the Dissertations, even if this report is not quite complete (for instance,Schenkl does not note that Enck 26,7-8 is based on Diss. I 4,23). But the overall impression is that Schenkl just did not feel like preparing a new edition of the Enchiridion, because it would involve the investigation of too many manuscripts. His edition of the Enchiridion shows too many traces of being a rush job, and does not meet the high standards of his other work on the text of Epictetus <meaning the Discourses>. Unfortunately, the editions after Schenkl repeat Schenkl’s errors (with the exception of all too obvious printing errors). (Boter p. 84).

Note: Boter has improved and corrected the cross-references; they are included as the third critical apparatus section in his Greek text.

How does the Schenkl 1894 edition compare to the 1916 edition?

From a brief comparison of the two texts (by Louis Sorenson), the two editions are significantly different in some regards; but the same Greek text of both editions is identical.

The 1894 edition has an introduction of 122 pages; the 1916 edition has 95 pages of introductory material. The Discourses of the 1894 edition take up 400 pages; the 1916 edition 454 pages. (This is despite the fact that the pagination is different. The 1916 2nd edition has more characters of Greek per line. So the difference must be attributed to the textual apparatus which is significantly larger in the later edition.)

The order of chapters and indexes is different. The 1916 edition moves the Enchiridion to the end (Appendix B in the 1894 edition) after all the Fragments, Stobaeus, etc. The Enchiridion is broken out of the normal numbering sequence and given the page numbers 1*-38* in the second edition; it is on pp. 424-493 in the 1st edition. This segmenting out of the Enchiridion allows the VERBORUM indexes page numbering to be the same as the 1st edition. The INDEX VERBORUM is exactly the same (except for corrections in the first addenda being incorporated into the second edition; the second edition has a much larger addenda of corrections to the VERBORUM; the Verborum corrections listed in the 1st edition are not listed in the Verborum corrections of the second edition).

Oldfather (1928, in the Loeb Classical Library)

"Oldfather, in his two-volume Loeb edition of Epictetus (19254928; Oldfather nr. 1 3), follows Schenkl’s text, although in some places he departs from it. He gives textual notes where he deviates from other editions, namely Schenkl's. Oldfather apologizes for the absence of a critical edition of Enchiridion with reference to the large number of sources (as Schenkl had also done); he continues: 'Another [reason] is the very slight probability that any really notable contributions to knowledge might result therefrom. As an intellectual problem the preparation of a new edition of the Encheiridion presents certain interesting features, but as a practical undertaking it is outranked by a good many other possible investigations.'" (Boter p. 85 quoting Oldfather).

20th Century Scholarship

"Apart from a few published conjectures by Richards and Kronenberg our century has not seen much progress in the field of the textual criticism of Epictetus’ Encheiridion, although Oliver’s notes in his edition of Perotti’s translation contain many valuable observations." (Boter p. 85).

Boter (1999)

Gerhard Boter (The Encheiridion of Epictetus And Its Three Christian Adaptations: Transmission and Critical Editions. Brill: 1999) is the first new critical edition since Schweighauser. Boter has completed a thorough investigation of the the manuscript tradition. "A real critical edition of the Greek text, however has hitherto never been made.... It is my aim to fill this gap. (Boter p. xv). What has Boter provided?

A new critical Greek text
A new English translation that follows the text closely
Six apparati - four below the text and two at the end

An apparatus of the relevant MSS for each section
References to the Ench in the indirect tradition (e.g. Simplicius, Strobaeus, etc)
Cross-references to the source passages in the Diatribes and fragments
A complete critical apparatus containing variant readings of the 1st and 2nd families, the indirect tradition and some of the more important variants of the 3rd family
A list of all orthographical variants and scribal self-corrected errors pp. 346-349
Framents and other variants are listed in their own apparatus pp. 342-345

What's not included?

Variants in accents and breathings are not listed
Conjectures by scholars are not listed
Readings of the Christian adaptations that do not shed light on the original
Simplicius' variant readings are not given - because of his liberty in quoting E.

The page of the Enchridion Section 1.1 from Boter's book (pp. can be found here. I have included comments in the image to help one understand the format of the work.

Table of Significant Editions

Year	Author	Name
1529	Haloander	Editio princeps
1531	A. Cratender		Basel
	V. Trincavelli

1540	C. Neobarius		Paris
1550	H. Verlenius		Louvain
1552	Jac Tusanus by M Juvenis			316
1554	Th. Nageorgus		Strassburg	238	Latin Translation, explanatory notes
1554	J Schegk			238	famous edition. Politan's Latin translation of Ench.
1555	Salmanaca			10	J Ferandus edit.
1560	Wolf	3 vol		35	Simplicius Latin translation, Greek Dissertations
1564	apud Andream Wechelum		Paris
1566			Paris	126
1595		Notae breves atque Emendationses Cl. Salmansii in Manuale Epicteti	Geneva
1578	Platin			128
1607		Plantiniana Raphelengii		136 141 142	reprints; minute size
1627	J Maire			145 146
1634	J Maire