Vaticanus and Sinaiticus: How Closely Connected?

Almost as soon as pages of the Gospels in Codex Sinaiticus were brought to the attention of European scholars, its textual affinities to the Gospel-text of Codex Vaticanus were recognized.  Aside from a seven-chapter portion of the Gospel of John, both codices represent the Alexandrian transmission stream, and do so better than any manuscripts produced in later periods.  The geographical origin of 01 and 03 has remained in dispute, although ever since the days of J. Rendel Harris a very strong cumulative case has existed for assigning 03 to Caesarea.

The similarity of the closing arabesque in 03 at the end of Deuteronomy, and thee arabesque in 01 at the end of Mark on a cancel-sheet in 01 may link both codices to either the same scriptorium or to the same scribe/diorthotes.  Shown here are these details.  The combination of vertically arranged dots, horizontal carets, and wavy horizontal lines is rather rare.  The chapter-numbering in the margins of Acts shared by both manuscripts links them together historically later on, as shown conclusively by Robinson in Euthaliana (1895). The decorative coronis drawn by a scribe involved in their production appears to connect them to either the same location, or to the same mobile scribe who served as a diorthotes during the production of both codices. 

Lectionary 1043

Lectionary 1043 is a fragment assigned to the 400s, making it among the earliest lectionaries in existence.  It resides in Vienna at the Austrian National Library (P.Vindob. G 2324).  It contains, in whole or in part, ten lections from the Gospels:  (1) from the end of Mt. 7:16-7:20  (2) Mt. 10:39  to the end of 10:43 (2) Mt 10:37-42 (3) from Mt. 3:7-3:12 (end of Sect 12) (4) Mt 3:13-17, (5) Mt 7:13 - (6) Mk. 6:(18)-6:29 (7) Lk. 2:1-20 (8) Lk. 11:27-32 (9) Lk. 24:36 - ??? (10) Jn. 20:2-13.

(1)  MATTHEW 7

1.  Mt 7:19 – OUN

X.  Mt 10:37 – uncontracted UION

2.  Mt 10:41 – LHMPSETAI

3.  Mt 10:41 – LHMPSETAI

4.  Mt 10:42 – EAN 

In this lection we see Alexandrian orthography in 10:41, an agreement with the Byzantine text (and 01 and 019) in 10:42, and an agreement with 019 in verse 19.

(2)  MATTHEW 3

5.  Mt. 3:7 - AUTOU is absent, as in 01 and 03.

6.  Mt. 3:10 - begins HDH DE KAI H as in the Byzantine Text, disagreeing with 01 03 05 032) 

7.  Mt 3:10 - the very rare reading TO before PUR

8.  Mt 3:11 - UMAS BAPTISMA, agreeing with 01 032 and family 1.

9.  Mt 3:11 - AUTOU after UPODHMATA 

10.  Mt 3:11 - includes KAI PURI

11.  Mt 3:14 - IWANNHS is absent after O DE, agreeing with 01 and 03. 

12.  Mt 3:16 - BAPTISQEIS DE, agreeing with 01 and 03 instead of the Byzantine KAI BAPTISQEIS

13.  Mt 3:16 - agrees with 01 and 03 in the word-order of EUTHUS ANEBH

14.  Mt 3:16 - HNEWCHQHSAN before OI OURANOI, agreeing with 03. 

15, 16.  Mt 3:16 - TO PNA TOU, agreeing with the Byzantine text in both the inclusion of TO and the inclusion of TOU

X.  Mt 3:17 - UION is not contracted

17. - Mt 3:17 - HUDOKHSA, agreeing with C L P W 118 and a correction in 01.

(3)  MATTHEW 4:23-5:12

18. - 4:23 – EN OLH TH GALILAIA

19. - 4:24 – includes KAI before DAIMONIZOMENOUS

20.  5:1 – PROSHLQON

21.  5:2 – E before TO STOMA

22.  5:2 – ENDIDASKEN (?)

23.  5:3 – AUTON

24.  5:6 – PINWNTES

X.  5:8 – uncontracted QEON

25.  5:9 – does not have AUTOI after OTI

26.  5:10 – has THS after ENEKEN (agreeing with Codex C)

27.  5:11 – does not have RHMA

28.  5:11 –only has PSEUDOMENOI after ENEKEN EMOU

(5) MATTHEW 7 

29.  7:13 –DIERCHOMENOI

30.  7:14 – OTI [no DE]

31.  7:15 – DE

32.  7:16 – STAPHULAS

Up to this point Lectionary 1043 is roughly twice as Alexandrian as it is Byzantine:  seven readings are Byzantine, eleven are Alexandrian, and thirteen favor neither the Alexandrian nor the Byzantine text.   But in Mark 6 we see a startling shift in favor of the Alexandrian text:

(6)  MARK 6

33.  6:20 – HPOREI (not EPOIEI) (with 01 03 019)

34.  6:21 – EPOIHSEN (not EPOIEI) (with 01 03 019)

35.  6:22 –AUTHS after QUGATROS (with 032)

36.  6:22 –HRESEN (P45 and Byz: αρεσάσης) (with 01 03 019)

37.  6:23 – AUTH (not POLLA) – (notice the conflation in UBS)

38.  6:23 – AN (not EAN) (with 05)

39.  6:23 – O DE BASILEUS EIPEN (Byz & P45: ειπεν ο βασιλευς) (with 01 03 019)

40.  6:24 –AITHSWMAI (with 01 03 019)

41.  6:24 –BAPTIZONTOS (with 01 03 019)

42.  6:25–EUQUS (with 01 03)

43.  6:25 –ECHAUTHS DWS MOI (with 01 03 019)

44.  :26 –SUNANAKEIMENOUS (with 05 Byz)

45.  6:27 –EUQUS (with 01 03 019)

46.  6:27 –KAIPHALHN

47.  6:28 –KAI (not O DE) (with 03)

48.  6:28–TW before KORASION

(8)  LUKE 11

49.  27 – FWNHN GUNH

50.  28 –MENOUN GE

51.  29 – ZHTEI

52.  29 – does not have TOU PROFHTOU

53.  30 –TOIS NINEUITAIS SHMEION

(9) LUKE 24

54.  36 – LOUNTWN (missing LA-)

55.  36 – does not include O IHSOUS

(10) JOHN 20

56.  6 – KAI after OUN

57.  10 – TOUS after PROS (instead of AUTOUS or EAUTOUS)

58.  11 – MNHMEIW (instead of MNHMEION)

59.  11 – EXW KLAIOUSA

Out of 59 notable readings, when the 18 miscellaneous readings that are not supported by the flagship MSS of any text-type are set aside, the remaining 41 variation-units produce these simple ratios: 29/41 Alexandrian (70.7%) and 8/41 (19.5%) Byzantine.

Alexandrian dominance is particularly stunning in Mark 6.  A future post zooming in on Mark Mk. 6:19-6:29 is planned.  In the meantime, the strong affinity of Lectionary 1043 with the Alexandrian text should be noted, as well as two remarkable readings:  AUTHS in Mark 6:22 and EUDOKIA in Luke 2:14 - diverging from 01 and 03!  

The non-contraction of UION and QEON in Lectionary 1043 suggests an extraordinarily ancient production-date for its exemplar.

Lectionary 1043 should be treated as a witness of the first order in future compilations of the text of the Gospels.

This post is dedicated to the memory of James Roth.

 

The Trebizond Time Capsule: What We Know So Far

 

As many Turkish news outlets already reported last week, a significant discovery was made in Trabzon, Turkey following a minor earthquake:  among the stonework in a collapsed wall in the non-reconstructed area of the Fatih Mosque (founded as the Panagia Chrysokephalos Church in the 900s) were several boxes, coated with plaster, which upon examination were found to contain assorted manuscripts, including a copy of the Gospels.  

Janbi P. Sahtekar

My guest today is J. P. Sahtekar, who was present when the first three boxes were opened.

Me: Thank you for taking time to share about this discovery, Dr. Sahtekar.

JPS:  Thank you for spreading the news. And please call me J.P.; the "doctor" is a nickname.  

Me:  As you wish, J.P.  What can you tell us about the contents of the discovery in the mosque?

JPS:  The plastered boxes and the entire wall of bricks they were in seem to have been put in place during the mid-1400s, after the fall of Istanbul.  So they serve as a sort of time capsule to show what the Christians wanted to preserve secretly in the church.  In the first box there was an icon of Theodore the Studite, and in the second there was a rather unique bilingual copy of the Gospels written in Greek and Georgian.

Me:  Can you divulge anything about the manuscript's text?

JPS:  A full transcript is already in preparation, to be done by scholars from the Museum of the Bible in Washington D.C.  I can say a few details:  it has well-preserved miniatures for all four evangelists, and its text is mixed, with Matthew, Mark, and Luke being typical Byzantine, but in John it shifts entirely to what is typical of the family-1 cluster, with the story of the adulteress absent in John 8, and added at the end of the Gospel.  There are also some strange omissions in John 11 - the  whole chapter is rewritten so as to remove Martha of Bethany entirely.

Me:  Why would anyone do such a thing?

JPS:  I decline to speculate about scribal motives - and there might not be one; my preliminary understanding is that the scribe appears to have simply accidentally skipped a large portion of text.  I can only say that the find creates a promising opportunity to re-examine what we know - or think we know - about Georgian-language scribes' interaction with Greek Gospels prior to the work of George the Hagiorite.  More details will be included once the manuscript is officially catalogued.

Me:  Thanks for the update - looking forward to learning more!

Footage of the discovery on the scene in Trebzon can be accessed HERE and HERE.