Classic but ignored.

That is a far too common observation about books on textual criticism, but it applies to this book perhaps more than any other. Zuntz's detailed examination of the Pauline tradition is widely quoted and widely respected -- but it didn't change anything! Zuntz's intensely detailed examination of the text of 1 Corinthians and Hebrews showed that there were major defects in most textual critics' beliefs about the text of Paul -- and yet, somehow, critics since his time have not adjusted their own theories.

Zuntz's methods of criticism are also worthy of examination, because he devoted great attention to the exact nature of agreements between witnesses. Far too few scholars have done this sort of examination.

In other words, it's time people got this book back off the shelf and actually learned from it.

That's not to say that anyone should be going back and doing the same sort of examination of other books. Zuntz's method was immensely laborious and produced relatively limited results given how much work it took. Most of this could and should now be turned over to computers. But programmers need an idea of what their software ought to do. And, for that, Zuntz can give some useful guidelines. At least if people start paying attentin. ( )