52 MAARTEN J.J. MENKEN There is, however, the textual problem that some textual wit- nesses (Sc V) read oti while others (S H) omit it. To my mind, the ™ longer reading is in this case the preferable one: oti may have ™ been omitted accidentally by parablepsis 37, or because the reading with oti was found to be difficult. Secondary insertion of oti is ™ ™ less obvious. But even if one prefers the reading without oti, one ™ still has to construe thn plhghn thv sarkov aytoy ej aytwn as ù ù ˜ ù ß ˜ß ߘ an accusativus cum infinitivo from which the infinitive eınai has ® been left out, and not as an accusativus respectus (“ for God says concerning the blow inflicted on his flesh by them”). The reason is that according to a syntactical rule 38, a prepositional attribute in postposition requires the article, especially when it is emphasized — and it is emphasized is this case: they (the Jews) inflict the blow on him, it is the full measure of their sins that is completed (5,11). If thn plhghn were an accusativus respectus, one would expect ù ¥ the wording thn plhghn thv sarkov aytoy thn ej aytwn. So ߘùß ß˜ ù ù ˜ ù whichever reading is preferred, with or without oti, the meaning is ™ the same: the object of God’s speaking is not the sentence on the shepherd and the sheep in 5,12cd, but the assertion that they, the Jews, are responsible for the blow inflicted on Jesus. The Epistle of Barnabas is full of Old Testament quotations, and a large majority of these are introduced by the verb legein, ¥ “ to say”, with God, or somebody speaking in the name of God (Ja- cob, Moses, David, a prophet), or Scripture, as its subject 39. In all instances, the ensuing quotation is the direct object of the verb, ei- ther directly or indirectly (in the formula tı legei; – “what does ¥¥ he say?”, with tı replacing the following quotation 40). The only ¥ exception is in 15,3, where the author introduces a quotation from Gen 2,2-3 with the words to sabbaton legei en arxƒ thv ktı- ù¥ ¥ ßß ˜ ¥ Uncial T and Y can be confused, certainly when somewhat carelessly 37 written, and I is easily overlooked. So OTI may have been overlooked after OY, the final two letters of aytoy. ߘ See BLASS – DEBRUNNER, Grammatik, §269,2. 38 See Barn. 2,4.7.10 ; 3,1.3; 4,4.5.7.8.11; 5,2.4.5.13.14; 6,1.2.3 (twice).4 39 (twice).6.7.8.12 (twice).13.14.16 (twice); 7,4; 9,1 (thrice).2.3 (thrice).5 (twice) .8 ; 10,1.2.10.11; 11,2.4.6.9.10; 12,1.4.7.9.11; 13,2.4.5.7; 14,2.3.7.8.9; 15,2.3.4.6.8; 16,3.5. Cf. the list in R. HVALVIK, The Struggle for Scripture and Covenant. The Purpose of the Epistle of Barnabas and Jewish-Christian Competition in the Second Century (WUNT 2/82; Tübingen 1996) 333-341. See Barn. 6,1.3.6.8 ; 7,4; 9,5; 11,10; 13,2.5.7. 40