Abstract

Three major reshuffles delineate two families within the manuscript tradition of the Commentary on Matthew by Hilary of Poitiers. In the first two cases, J. Doignon in his critical edition favored the text of the α family, judging that the β family generally attests to numerous revisions intended to suppress difficult lectiones. In the third case, on the other hand, he adopted the short text of the β family, thus demoting two short passages in 33, 5 specific to the α family. This article shows that on the one hand the language of these passages is attributable to Hilary and on the other their content fits perfectly with his exegesis. It thus argues for their authenticity.