(h/t Brandon Wason, Sitz im Leben)
Michael W. Holmes (ed.), The Apostolic Fathers: Greek Texts and English Translations. 3rd edition (amazon.com). Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007. Pp. xxv, 806. ISBN 9780801034688. $42.99. BMCR review
Timothy B. Sailors provides a 4200+ word review of Michael Holmes’ edition of the Apostolic Fathers. Sailors is top-notch and well-respected, and his review carries some weight.
Before I dig in, I’ll note that I have several Greek and English editions of the Apostolic Fathers in print (Holmes’ 2nd edition, Kirsopp Lake’s Loeb edition, Bart Ehrman’s Loeb edition, C.C. Richardson’s edition, Lightfoot’s one-volume and his five volume Clement/Ignatius/Polycarp editions). My go-to volume at this point is Holmes’ third edition (the edition reviewed by BMCR). It is well-produced, well-researched, and I’m even mentioned in the introduction — so you know it’s gotta be good.
And while Sailors’ review is informative and generally positive, I can’t help but feel that he’s strung together a bunch of nitpicky quibbles that top-notch scholars of the early church (and specifically the writings of the Apostolic Fathers) would have, but real people using the book wouldn’t notice or care about.
Here’s an example that typifies the nitpicky quibbly-ness, in my eyes:
Though this remains a "Select Bibliography", it greatly expands those in the previous editions and far surpasses the "Select Bibliography" in the Loeb edition. There are nevertheless some works one would expect to see which are surprisingly absent. And, though an English edition was given in the list of abbreviations in earlier versions of this book, Holmes has removed the potentially helpful reference to W. Bauer's Griechisch-deutsches Wörterbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der frühchristlichen Literatur, despite the publication of an English translation of the most recent edition.
Where to begin? Yes, it is a select bibliography. And there are no lexica cited anywhere that I see, either in the abbreviation list or the bibliography. And if Sailors is bemoaning the lack of reference to BDAG, why in the world does he go about citing it as “an English translation of the most recent edition” of the German edition of BAAR? (note: That description actually may not be quite accurate. If I recall my John A.L. Lee correctly, BDAG is essentially a 3rd edition of the English stream of this text, and while the German may be consulted for articles, Danker’s work is definitely not a translation of BAAR).
Would anyone amongst the primary audience for Holmes’ work refer to BDAG that way and implicitly understand what is being referred to?
Another example: Approximately 800 of the 4200 words of the review (do the math, it’s just under 20%) are devoted to Fragments of Papias, and most of those on the Arabic, Syriac and Armenian fragments Holmes includes. Yes, this is a distinctive of Holmes’ edition, but is it worth spending 20% of your words on when the review is already lengthy?
Anyway, while Sailors’ review is helpful and informative, and while he does end up giving a positive review, I can’t help but wish he’d reviewed the book for the target audience instead of for a select group of scholars who already likely know the sorts of quibbles he brings up.