Ἀβιάθαρ in 1Kgs.21.1

[jonathanrobie]

This reference is in my paper copy of Abbott-Smith, but it seems wrong:

<entry n="Ἀβιάθαρ|G8">
  <note type="occurrencesNT">1</note>
  <form><orth>Ἀβιάθαρ</orth>, <foreign xml:lang="grc">ὁ</foreign>, indecl. (Heb. <foreign xml:lang="heb" n="H54">אֶבְיָתָר</foreign>), </form>
  <sense><gloss>Abiathar</gloss> (<ref osisRef="1Kgs.21.1">I Ki 21:1</ref>): <ref osisRef="Mark.2.26">Mk 2:26</ref>.†</sense>
</entry>

Here is the text for 1Ki 21:1:

Καὶ συνήθροισεν υἱὸς Αδερ πᾶσαν τὴν δύναμιν αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀνέβη καὶ περιεκάθισεν ἐπὶ Σαμάρειαν καὶ τριάκοντα καὶ δύο βασιλεῖς μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ καὶ πᾶς ἵππος καὶ ἅρμα· καὶ ἀνέβησαν καὶ περιεκάθισαν ἐπὶ Σαμάρειαν καὶ ἐπολέμησαν ἐπ᾽ αὐτήν.

It's not in 1 Chronicles 21:1, either:

Καὶ ἔστη διάβολος ἐν τῷ Ισραηλ καὶ ἐπέσεισεν τὸν Δαυιδ τοῦ ἀριθμῆσαι τὸν Ισραηλ.

Or anything else that looks like a 21:1, here are the places I find Αβιαθαρ in the LXX:

1SA 23:9 - καὶ ἔγνω Δαυιδ ὅτι οὐ παρασιωπᾷ Σαουλ περὶ αὐτοῦ τὴν κακίαν, καὶ εἶπεν Δαυιδ πρὸς Αβιαθαρ τὸν ἱερέα Προσάγαγε τὸ εφουδ κυρίου.

1SA 30:7 - καὶ εἶπεν Δαυιδ πρὸς Αβιαθαρ τὸν ἱερέα υἱὸν Αχιμελεχ Προσάγαγε τὸ εφουδ.

2SA 17:15 - καὶ εἶπεν Χουσι ὁ τοῦ Αραχι πρὸς Σαδωκ καὶ Αβιαθαρ τοὺς ἱερεῖς Οὕτως καὶ οὕτως συνεβούλευσεν Αχιτοφελ τῷ Αβεσσαλωμ καὶ τοῖς πρεσβυτέροις Ισραηλ, καὶ οὕτως καὶ οὕτως συνεβούλευσα ἐγώ·

2SA 19:12 - καὶ ὁ βασιλεὺς Δαυιδ ἀπέστειλεν πρὸς Σαδωκ καὶ πρὸς Αβιαθαρ τοὺς ἱερεῖς λέγων Λαλήσατε πρὸς τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους Ιουδα λέγοντες Ἵνα τί γίνεσθε ἔσχατοι τοῦ ἐπιστρέψαι τὸν βασιλέα εἰς τὸν οἶκον αὐτοῦ; καὶ λόγος παντὸς Ισραηλ ἦλθεν πρὸς τὸν βασιλέα.

1KI 1:19 - καὶ ἐθυσίασεν μόσχους καὶ ἄρνας καὶ πρόβατα εἰς πλῆθος καὶ ἐκάλεσεν πάντας τοὺς υἱοὺς τοῦ βασιλέως καὶ Αβιαθαρ τὸν ἱερέα καὶ Ιωαβ τὸν ἄρχοντα τῆς δυνάμεως, καὶ τὸν Σαλωμων τὸν δοῦλόν σου οὐκ ἐκάλεσεν.

1KI 1:25 - ὅτι κατέβη σήμερον καὶ ἐθυσίασεν μόσχους καὶ ἄρνας καὶ πρόβατα εἰς πλῆθος καὶ ἐκάλεσεν πάντας τοὺς υἱοὺς τοῦ βασιλέως καὶ τοὺς ἄρχοντας τῆς δυνάμεως καὶ Αβιαθαρ τὸν ἱερέα, καὶ ἰδού εἰσιν ἐσθίοντες καὶ πίνοντες ἐνώπιον αὐτοῦ καὶ εἶπαν Ζήτω ὁ βασιλεὺς Αδωνιας.

1KI 2:27 - καὶ ἐξέβαλεν Σαλωμων τὸν Αβιαθαρ τοῦ μὴ εἶναι ἱερέα τοῦ κυρίου, πληρωθῆναι τὸ ρῆμα κυρίου, ὃ ἐλάλησεν ἐπὶ τὸν οἶκον Ηλι ἐν Σηλωμ.—

1CH 15:11 - καὶ ἐκάλεσεν Δαυιδ τὸν Σαδωκ καὶ Αβιαθαρ τοὺς ἱερεῖς καὶ τοὺς Λευίτας, τὸν Ουριηλ, Ασαια, Ιωηλ, Σαμαιαν, Ελιηλ, Αμιναδαβ,

[cbearden]

That certainly looks like an error. My inclination is to record the original text as it is, but perhaps that would make the book less useful.

What about inserting an editor's note in square brackets?

[jonathanrobie]

I wonder what version of the LXX he was working with. Is this a real error, or a textual difference?

Regardless, an editor's note may be the best we can do.

Jonathan

On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 6:31 PM Charles Bearden @.***> wrote:

That certainly looks like an error. My inclination is to record the original text as it is, but perhaps that would make the book less useful.

What about inserting an editor's note in square brackets?

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/Abbott-Smith/issues/106#issuecomment-912844855, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AANPTPLOU42WJYGBNQ7GAJ3UAFECLANCNFSM5DJ4A5SA . Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675 or Android https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub.

[destatez]

All

I downloaded the version shown below for my searches

Dave Commits on Sep 2, 2021

1.

Corrected a reference - III Kings LXX is the same as 1 Kings in OSIS … https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/Abbott-Smith/commit/64e60baac579c110eb1aa4172fcba42539d5d176#diff-ac3ad71dfc46b7215c6a86379a398601d587fe0b498657d0ff8a8a16c8bea9ac … [image: @jonathanrobie] https://github.com/jonathanrobie jonathanrobie https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/Abbott-Smith/commits?author=jonathanrobie committed 2 days ago 64e60ba https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/Abbott-Smith/commit/64e60baac579c110eb1aa4172fcba42539d5d176#diff-ac3ad71dfc46b7215c6a86379a398601d587fe0b498657d0ff8a8a16c8bea9ac

On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 6:03 PM Jonathan Robie @.***> wrote:

I wonder what version of the LXX he was working with. Is this a real error, or a textual difference?

Regardless, an editor's note may be the best we can do.

Jonathan

On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 6:31 PM Charles Bearden @.***> wrote:

That certainly looks like an error. My inclination is to record the original text as it is, but perhaps that would make the book less useful.

What about inserting an editor's note in square brackets?

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub < https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/Abbott-Smith/issues/106#issuecomment-912844855 , or unsubscribe < https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AANPTPLOU42WJYGBNQ7GAJ3UAFECLANCNFSM5DJ4A5SA

. Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS < https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675

or Android < https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub .

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/Abbott-Smith/issues/106#issuecomment-912854883, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEACF35NKGLE2AKXHSJR2RTUAFH45ANCNFSM5DJ4A5SA . Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675 or Android https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub.

[cbearden]

So, we already have one note from the project team:

<entry n="ὅτου">
  <form><orth>ὅτου</orth>, v.s. <foreign xml:lang="grc">ὅστις</foreign>.</form>
<note type="transcriber">Although this entry is out of order alphabetically, it is in this place in Abbott-Smith.</note></entry>

All other occurrences of note either have no @type or the type is occurrencesNT.

I had thought to make a note like this:

<note type="markup editor">[Markup editor’s note: this reference appears to be a mistake.]</note>

But we should make these two notes have the same form.

I'm content to use “Transcriber’s note” and @type='transcriber', but I'm tempted to then enclose the note on ὅτου in square brackets and introduce it with “Transcriber’s note:”.

Any comments? If we are in agreement, I'll make it happen and publish it as a pull request from my repo.

[cbearden]

FWIW, my Rahlf’s Septuagint (DBG 1979) has no variants for that verse. I’m skeptical that a mention of Abiathar would fit in there anyway. In the LXX, 1Ki 21 appears to be largely the content of the Hebrew text of 1Ki 20, with Ben-Haddad called The Son of Ader (υἱὸς Αδερ), while the LXX 1Ki 20 is the story of how Ahab stole Naboth’s vineyard, which appears in the Hebrew text of 1Ki 21. Abiathar has been off the scene for a while.

[destatez]

Charles

Having “Transcriber’s note” and @type='transcriber' seems to me to be redundant. I thinks it should be left as “note” and then the type qualifies what kind of note it is.

Dave

On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 3:46 PM Charles Bearden @.***> wrote:

So, we already have one note from the project team:

ὅτου, v.s. ὅστις.

Although this entry is out of order alphabetically, it is in this place in Abbott-Smith.

All other occurrences of note either have no @type or the type is occurrencesNT.

I had thought to make a note like this:

[Markup editor’s note: this reference appears to be a mistake.]

But we should make these two notes have the same form.

I'm content to use “Transcriber’s note” and @type='transcriber', but I'm tempted to then enclose the note on ὅτου in square brackets and introduce it with “Transcriber’s note:”.

Any comments? If we are in agreement, I'll make it happen and publish it as a pull request from my repo.

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/Abbott-Smith/issues/106#issuecomment-913847515, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEACF33WF6OG7ZCSHMBCJ5TUAUSA7ANCNFSM5DJ4A5SA . Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675 or Android https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub.

--

[cbearden]

Hi Dave,

Here is my thinking:

If the note is to appear in the visible document, it ought to be made clear that it originates with the transcription or markup team instead of being part of the original document. A common way of doing this in edited texts is to enclose the note in square brackets and to give the source of the note. The value of the @type attribute will not be visible to the reader, so it won't provide a clue as to the source of the note.

Here is a page with an example of a typical editor's note:

https://cmosshoptalk.com/2019/02/19/chicago-mla-apa-ap-whats-the-difference/

Near the bottom of the page is this note:

[Editor’s note (December 3, 2019): This post has been updated to reflect a change made for the 7th edition of the APA manual, published in the fall of 2019. Namely, APA now recommends adding an apostrophe and an s (rather than an apostrophe alone) to form the possessive of names that end in an unpronounced s (e.g., “Descartes’s philosophy”).]

While I understand why you might find it redundant, in my view the @type attribute has one purpose (to be machine-readable, a hook for CSS perhaps) and the reader-visible label has a different purpose. But in any case I accept a little redundancy for the sake of clarity for the reader.

Chuck

[destatez]

Charles

Thanks for the explanation. You’re doing the best way.

Dave

On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 5:18 PM Charles Bearden @.***> wrote:

Hi Dave,

Here is my thinking:

If the note is to appear in the visible document, it ought to be made clear that it originates with the transcription or markup team instead of being part of the original document. A common way of doing this in edited texts is to enclose the note in square brackets and to give the source of the note. The value of the @type attribute will not be visible to the reader, so it won't provide a clue as to the source of the note.

Here is a page with an example of a typical editor's note:

https://cmosshoptalk.com/2019/02/19/chicago-mla-apa-ap-whats-the-difference/

Near the bottom of the page is this note:

[Editor’s note (December 3, 2019): This post has been updated to reflect a change made for the 7th edition of the APA manual, published in the fall of 2019. Namely, APA now recommends adding an apostrophe and an s (rather than an apostrophe alone) to form the possessive of names that end in an unpronounced s (e.g., “Descartes’s philosophy”).]

While I understand why you might find it redundant, in my view the @type attribute has one purpose (to be machine-readable, a hook for CSS perhaps) and the reader-visible label has a different purpose. But in any case I accept a little redundancy for the sake of clarity for the reader.

Chuck

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/Abbott-Smith/issues/106#issuecomment-913872074, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEACF322VLCGMNJY3FOC3PTUAU42ZANCNFSM5DJ4A5SA . Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675 or Android https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub.

--

[jonathanrobie]

Can you show me the markup you have in mind?

To me, what matters is that this is a correction to the original text and it changes the text itself. To me, a footnote feels like a straightforward way to say "The [DATE] edition of Abbott-Smith says 1 Hezekiah 3:16, but there is no such book. We have removed this reference" or whatever.

Any time we diverge from the text of Abbott-Smith, there should be a footnote.

Does that make sense?

Jonathan

On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 6:18 PM Charles Bearden @.***> wrote:

Hi Dave,

Here is my thinking:

If the note is to appear in the visible document, it ought to be made clear that it originates with the transcription or markup team instead of being part of the original document. A common way of doing this in edited texts is to enclose the note in square brackets and to give the source of the note. The value of the @type attribute will not be visible to the reader, so it won't provide a clue as to the source of the note.

Here is a page with an example of a typical editor's note:

https://cmosshoptalk.com/2019/02/19/chicago-mla-apa-ap-whats-the-difference/

Near the bottom of the page is this note:

[Editor’s note (December 3, 2019): This post has been updated to reflect a change made for the 7th edition of the APA manual, published in the fall of 2019. Namely, APA now recommends adding an apostrophe and an s (rather than an apostrophe alone) to form the possessive of names that end in an unpronounced s (e.g., “Descartes’s philosophy”).]

While I understand why you might find it redundant, in my view the @type attribute has one purpose (to be machine-readable, a hook for CSS perhaps) and the reader-visible label has a different purpose. But in any case I accept a little redundancy for the sake of clarity for the reader.

Chuck

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/Abbott-Smith/issues/106#issuecomment-913872074, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AANPTPPFMH4Y27SWTPOJX2LUAU42ZANCNFSM5DJ4A5SA . Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675 or Android https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub.

[jonathanrobie]

Oh, I should have given the reason that I prefer the footnote.

Users mostly just need the correct references. A note saying what we did should not occupy half of a definition, it's best to get that out of the way, and maybe not even to display it in some places. But we do need to say when we did that with a footnote or something.

Jonathan

On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 11:20 AM Jonathan Robie @.***> wrote:

Can you show me the markup you have in mind?

To me, what matters is that this is a correction to the original text and it changes the text itself. To me, a footnote feels like a straightforward way to say "The [DATE] edition of Abbott-Smith says 1 Hezekiah 3:16, but there is no such book. We have removed this reference" or whatever.

Any time we diverge from the text of Abbott-Smith, there should be a footnote.

Does that make sense?

Jonathan

On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 6:18 PM Charles Bearden @.***> wrote:

Hi Dave,

Here is my thinking:

If the note is to appear in the visible document, it ought to be made clear that it originates with the transcription or markup team instead of being part of the original document. A common way of doing this in edited texts is to enclose the note in square brackets and to give the source of the note. The value of the @type attribute will not be visible to the reader, so it won't provide a clue as to the source of the note.

Here is a page with an example of a typical editor's note:

https://cmosshoptalk.com/2019/02/19/chicago-mla-apa-ap-whats-the-difference/

Near the bottom of the page is this note:

[Editor’s note (December 3, 2019): This post has been updated to reflect a change made for the 7th edition of the APA manual, published in the fall of 2019. Namely, APA now recommends adding an apostrophe and an s (rather than an apostrophe alone) to form the possessive of names that end in an unpronounced s (e.g., “Descartes’s philosophy”).]

While I understand why you might find it redundant, in my view the @type attribute has one purpose (to be machine-readable, a hook for CSS perhaps) and the reader-visible label has a different purpose. But in any case I accept a little redundancy for the sake of clarity for the reader.

Chuck

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/translatable-exegetical-tools/Abbott-Smith/issues/106#issuecomment-913872074, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AANPTPPFMH4Y27SWTPOJX2LUAU42ZANCNFSM5DJ4A5SA . Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675 or Android https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub.