In the statements of evidence I have included the percentage of manuscript attestation for each variant, within either ( ) or [ ]. I have used ( ) for the evidence taken from TuT, which I take to be reasonably precise. For the variant sets that are not covered there I had to revert to von Soden and the apparatus of N-A27, supplementing from other sources where possible (Scrivener and Tischendorf)—the percentages offered, I have used [ ] for these, are extrapolations based on a comparison of these sources.
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 should hardly exceed ±3%; where there is some division among the Byzantine witnesses the margin of error should rarely exceed ±15%. But I guarantee the witness of Family 35.
*3:1 και f35 [95%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP ¦ — ℵA,C [5%] NU (OC has small print.)
†3:2 πραοτητα f35 [97%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP ¦ πραυτητα A,C [3%] NU ¦ σπουδην τα ℵ (Aleph really got lost.)
‡3:5 ων f35 [97%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP ¦ α ℵA,C [3%] NU (The Alexandrians confused the referent.)
§3:5 τον αυτου ελεον f35 [95%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP ¦ το αυτου ελεος ℵA [4%] NU ¦ το ελεος αυτου [1%] (Liddell & Scott give the masculine as the original form, with the neuter appearing later.)
*3:7 γενωμεθα f35 [96%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP ¦ γενηθωμεν ℵA,C [4%] NU (The middle voice is presumably correct.)
†3:8 τω f35 [50%] OC,TR ¦ — ℵA,C [50%] RP,HF,CP,NU
‡3:8 τα f35 [90%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP ¦ — ℵA,C,I [10%] NU
§3:8 ωφελιμα rell ¦ ωφελημα [30%]
*3:9 ερις f35 [20%] ¦ εριν ℵ [1%] ¦ ερεις A,C [75%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP,NU ¦ ερειν [2%] ¦ εριδας [2%]
†3:13 απολλω f35 C [95%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP ¦ απολλων ℵ [4%] NU ¦ απολλωνα [1%]
‡3:15 αμην f35 [95%] RP,HF,OC,TR,CP ¦ — ℵA,C,048 [5%] NU
§3:15 The citation of f35 is based on thirty-six MSS—18, 35, 201, 204, 328, 386, 394, 444, 604, 757, 824, 928, 959, 986, 1072, 1075, 1100, 1247, 1249, 1503, 1548, 1637, 1725, 1732, 1761, 1768, 1855, 1864, 1865, 1876, 1892, 2080, 2466, 2554, 2587 and 2723—all of which I collated myself. 35, 1072, 1503, 1855, 1864, 1892, 2080, 2587 and 2723 are ‘perfect’ representatives of f35 in Titus, as they stand, and the exemplars of another four probably were too. Since these MSS come from all over the Mediterranean world (Sinai, Jerusalem, Patmos, Constantinople, Bucharest, Aegean, Trikala, Athens, Mt. Athos [seven 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. In the statements of evidence I have included the percentage of manuscript attestation for each variant, within either ( ) or [ ]. I have used ( ) for the evidence taken from TuT, which I take to be reasonably precise. For the variant sets that are not covered there I had to revert to von Soden and the apparatus of N-A27, supplementing from other sources where possible (Scrivener and Tischendorf)—the percentages offered, I have used [ ] for these, are extrapolations based on a comparison of these sources. 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 should hardly exceed ±3%; where there is some division among the Byzantine witnesses the margin of error should rarely exceed ±15%. But I guarantee the witness of Family 35.