ECM collated 127 continuous text manuscripts (MSS) for 1 Peter, apart from a few fragments, which number represents about 20% of the extant (known) MSS. By a careful comparison of TuT and ECM I believe we can arrive at some reasonably close extrapolations. Thus I venture to predict, if complete collations ever become available, that for any non-Byzantine variants listed with 5 to 1% support (in my apparatus) the margin of error should not exceed ±1%; for non-Byzantine variants listed with 10 to 6% support the margin of error will hardly exceed ±2%; where there is some division among the Byzantine witnesses the margin of error will rarely exceed ±10%. However, I guarantee the witness of Family 35. Please see the last footnote for Matthew for further information.
*5:1 τους f35 [78%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP ¦ ουν 1 ℵ [17%] ¦ ουν 𝕻72A,B [4%] NU ¦ — [1%]
†5:1 ο f35 𝕻72ℵA,B [89%] RP,HF,OC,TR,NU ¦ ως [11%] CP ¦ two other readings
‡5:2 επισκοπουντες f35 𝕻72A (99.2%) RP,HF,OC,TR,CP[NU]ECM ¦ — ℵB (0.8%)
§5:2 αλλ f35 A [97%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP,NU ¦ αλλα 𝕻72ℵB [3%] ECM
*5:2 εκουσιως f35 B [86%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP ¦ 1 κατα Θεον 𝕻72ℵA [14%] NU
†5:3 μηδε f35 𝕻72 [49%] RP,HF,CP ¦ μηδ ℵA [50%] OC,TR,NU (B omits v. 3; two other readings.)
‡5:3 γινομενοι rell ¦ γενομενοι [20%]
§5:5 ομοιως f35 𝕻72A,B [74%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP,NU ¦ 1 δε ℵ [1%] ¦ 1 οι [5%] ¦ 1 δε και [1%] ¦ 1 δε οι [7%] ¦ 1 και οι [5%] ¦ 1 δε και οι [7%] ¦ one other reading
*5:5 υποτασσομενοι f35 (94%) RP,HF,OC,TR,CP ¦ υποταγωμεν (1.4%) ¦ — (𝕻72)ℵA,B (4.2%) NU ¦ two other readings
†5:5 ο f35 ℵA [99%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP[NU]ECM ¦ — 𝕻72B [1%]
‡5:6 υμας υψωση f35 𝕻72ℵA,B [79%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP,NU ¦ ~ 21 [4%] ¦ 1 υψωσει [14%] ¦ ~ υψωσει 1 [3%]
§5:6 καιρω f35 𝕻72ℵB [85%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP,NU ¦ 1 επισκοπης A [14%] ¦ 1 εν τω μελλοντι αιωνι [1%]
*5:7 επιρριψαντες f35 [93%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP ¦ επιριψαντες ℵA,B [4%] NU ¦ αποριψαντες 𝕻72 ¦ επιρριψατε [3%]
†5:7 μελει rell ¦ μελλει [20%]
‡5:7 υπερ f35 [35%] ¦ περι 𝕻72ℵA,B [65%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP,NU (God does the caring for them, in their place.)
§5:8 οτι f35 𝕻72 [50%] TR ¦ — ℵA,B [50%] RP,HF,OC,CP,NU
*5:8 περιερχεται f35 [24%] ¦ περιπατει 𝕻72ℵA,B [76%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP,NU (The lion isn’t ambling aimlessly; he is circling the prey, looking for an opening.)
†5:8 τινα f35 𝕻72ℵA [99%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP[NU]ECM ¦ — B [1%]
‡5:8 καταπιειν f35 (ℵ)B [53%] CP,NU ¦ καταπιει [25%] ¦ καταπιη 𝕻72A [22%] RP,HF,OC,TR
§5:9 εν f35 A [99.4%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP,ECM ¦ 1 τω 𝕻72(ℵ)B [0.6%] [NU]
*5:9 επιτελεισθαι rell ¦ επιτελεισθε ℵA,B [12%] ¦ επιτελειται 𝕻72
†5:10 υμας f35 𝕻72ℵA,B [92%] RP,HF,OC,CP,NU ¦ ημας [8%] TR
‡5:10 ιησου f35 𝕻72A [97%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP[NU] ¦ — ℵ(B) [3%] ECM
§5:10 καταρτισαι f35 [88%] RP,HF,TR,CP ¦ καταρτισει 𝕻72ℵA,B [12%] OC,NU ¦ two other readings
*5:10 υμας f35 [88%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP ¦ — 𝕻72ℵA,B [12%] NU
†5:10 στηριξαι f35 [33%] TR,CP ¦ στηριξει 𝕻72ℵA,B [66%] RP,HF,OC,NU ¦ στηριξοι [1%] (Future indicative or aorist optative?)
‡5:10 σθενωσαι f35 [30%] TR,CP ¦ σθενωσει ℵA,B [66%] RP,HF,OC,NU ¦ σθενωσοι [1%] ¦ — 𝕻72 [3%] ¦ one other variant
§5:10 θεμελιωσαι f35 [30%] TR,CP ¦ θεμελιωσει 𝕻72ℵ [66%] RP,HF,OC,NU ¦ θεμελιωσοι [1%] ¦ — A,B [3%]
*5:11 η δοξα και το κρατος f35 ℵ (59.6%) RP,HF,OC,TR,CP ¦ 125 (31.3%) ¦ ~ 45312 (7%) ¦ το (−το 𝕻72) κρατος 𝕻72A,B (0.8%) NU (Three other readings; the evidence for η δοξα is massive.)
†5:11 των αιωνων f35 ℵA [91%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP ¦ — 𝕻72B [9%] NU
‡5:12 εστηκατε f35 [92%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP ¦ στητε 𝕻72ℵA,B [8%] NU ¦ two other readings
§5:14 ιησου f35 ℵ [95%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP ¦ — A,B [5%] NU
*5:14 αμην f35 ℵ [97%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP ¦ — A,B [3%] NU (𝕻72 omits the whole last sentence.)
†5:14 The citation of f35 is based on forty-three MSS—18, 35, 141, 149, 201, 204, 328, 386, 394, 432, 604, 664, 757, 824, 928, 986, 1072, 1075, 1100, 1248, 1249, 1503, 1548, 1637, 1725, 1732, 1754, 1761, 1768, 1855, 1864, 1865, 1876, 1892, 1897, 2221, 2352, 2431, 2466, 2554, 2587, 2626 and 2723—all of which I collated myself. 1865, 2554 and 2723 are very pure representatives of f35 in 1 Peter, with not a single variant, as were the exemplars of 35 and 824. For 1865, 2554 and 2723 to have no variants after all the centuries of transmission is surely an eloquent demonstration of the faithfulness and accuracy of that transmission. Since these MSS come from all over the Mediterranean world (Sinai, Jerusalem, Patmos, Constantinople, Bucharest, Aegean, Trikala, Athens, Meteora, Sparta, Ochrida, Mt. Athos [nine different monasteries], Grottaferrata, Vatican, etc.) they are certainly representative of the family, giving us the precise family profile—it is reflected in the Text without exception. ECM collated 127 continuous text manuscripts (MSS) for 1 Peter, apart from a few fragments, which number represents about 20% of the extant (known) MSS. By a careful comparison of TuT and ECM I believe we can arrive at some reasonably close extrapolations. Thus I venture to predict, if complete collations ever become available, that for any non-Byzantine variants listed with 5 to 1% support (in my apparatus) the margin of error should not exceed ±1%; for non-Byzantine variants listed with 10 to 6% support the margin of error will hardly exceed ±2%; where there is some division among the Byzantine witnesses the margin of error will rarely exceed ±10%. However, I guarantee the witness of Family 35. Please see the last footnote for Matthew for further information.