Followers

Showing posts with label Georgian. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Georgian. Show all posts

Friday, May 22, 2020

Video Lecture: Early Versions of the New Testament

Lecture 4:  Early Versions of the NT
The lecture-series Introduction to New Testament Textual Criticism continues at YouTube:

Lecture 04: Early Versions of the New Testament


(20 minutes) With captions!


An outline:

Alexander Souter: “The history of the New Testament text cannot be understood without a knowledge of the history of the church.”

          Part of that history is the history of the early translations of the New Testament text.  Today we are taking a closer look at some of the early versions of the New Testament – especially early translations of the Gospels. 

This involves mainly the study of early translations into Latin, Coptic, and Syriac, but there are other important versions of the New Testament too.

The Old Latin, also called the Vetus Latine:

          Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs (180) - A transcript of a trial during a persecution in Carthageduring the trial:

          Saturninus the governor:   “What sort of things do you have in that case of yours?”

          Speratus (Christian):  “Books and letters of Paul, a righteous man.”

The Old Latin” might be a misleading term.

Different Latin transmission-lines:      African, European, Italian, & Spanish.       

Do they go back to one Latin text?    Or to one Greek text?              

Mark 9:15 – gaudentes, “rejoicing” instead of “running”  

Two Christian writers around the late 300s and early 400s – Jerome and Augustine – said that there were many Latin versions, with a range of quality.

Once-used Greek words – translated the same way?

The earliest Latin Gospels-text tends to be “Western.”    

Text types –

Western:  tweaked to increase clarity in a particular way, like the text of the Gospels and Acts in Codex Bezae.

Byzantine:  agreeing with the text that was in dominant use in the vicinity of Byzantium (Constantinople).

Alexandrianagreeing with the text of Codex Vaticanus (and allies).

Caesarean (Gospels):  agreeing with the text of family-1

In witnesses with a Western form of the text, the Gospels often appear in this order:      Mt – Jn – Lk – Mk.

Vulgate:  Gospels:  by Jerome.               

        Gregory the Great (590 to 604):  still the “new” version.          

But it’s not as if we can pick up any Vulgate manuscript and expect to see every reading that Jerome adopted. Some Old Latin readings were mixed into Vulgate texts.

There were later revisions:   Alcuin.  Theodulf. Others.

The representation of Old Latin witnesses: 

Old identification-method: witnesses are represented by lower case letters, by lower case letters with superscripted numerals, and by short abbreviations.

New identification-method: Beuron numbers, so-called because this method was developed by members of the Vetus Latina Institut in Europe.

Gospels manuscripts have numbers 1-49;    Acts/Catholics/Revelation are 50-74;

Pauline Epistles are 75-99.

A lot of Old Latin witnesses are only partly Old Latin, side-by-side with Vulgate texts. 

Production-dates don’t always mean anything.

Coptic:  different transmission-lines in different dialects.

SahidicBarcelona codices. –                

Alexandrian Gospels    

Sahidic version in Acts 27:37 – agrees w/B. 

(Suggests a close relationship.)          

Codex T:  “diglot” – Sahidic and Greek side by side.               

The Western text was also in Egypt:

          G67:  Acts in “Middle Egyptian.”

Middle Egyptian:  basically three manuscripts:

          G67, Codex Schoyen 2650 (Matthew), and the Schiede Codex (Matthew)

Lycopolitan:  the Qua Codex (300s).

Proto-Bohairic:  Papyrus Bodmer III (300s).   Includes the Gospel of John.  Alexandrian. 

          Strange treatment of sacred names in John 1:1 & 1:18.

BohairicHuntington MS 17 (from 1174)

Achmimic: incomplete.  Mt, Lk,  Jn, Romans, Gal., James, Jude.

Fayyumic:  fragmentary

Syriac:  different transmission-lines.

          Tatian’s Diatessaron. In Syria, this appears to have been the dominant Gospels-based text until the Peshitta emerged (late 300s?).  The Diatessaron did not have the

genealogies. But Aphrahat apparently has something else, with genealogies.

Old Syriac:  Sinaitic Syriac.  Curetonian Syriac.  Codex at St. Catherine’s, Syriac 37.

Peshitta:  usually agrees with the Byzantine Text.

         Not included:  Second Peter, Second John, Third John, Jude, and Revelation.

Peshitta MSS of special interest:                 

Codex Phillips 1388               

        B.L. Add MS 14470               

        Rabbula Gospels           

Philoxenian – includes the books not in the Peshitta

Harklean Syriac:    Echoes an ancient Greek text in the General

Epistles.      Extremely literal. Finished in 616 – using ancient MSS near Alexandria.

Has its own limited apparatus in the margin.

Palestinian Aramaic – mainly extant in lectionaries. Has the story of the adulteress at the end of John.

Other Versions:

Gothic:  mid-300s. 

Main witness:  Codex Argenteus.  Wulfilas – an Arian.  Was he an Arian when he did the translation-work?  We don’t know.

Armenian and Georgian

         Armenia:  first Christian nation (early 300s)         

         Mesrop:  made the Armenian alphabet, and translated the Bible.

         Thought to have a basis in a Syriac text.  (Maybe some Diatessaron influence?)

         First edition – finished c. 411.

Revision – 430s.  Based on a Greek codex from Constantinople.

800s and 900s = Old for Armenian.           

Late revisions (esp. in Cilician Armenia) toward the Byz. Text (Nerses of Lambron) and toward the Vulgate (1100/1200s).

There are different kinds of script used for writing Armenian:

          erkat’agir = iron letters (because of the ink?) – has a better chance of not

being a medieval revision.
          bolorgir = rounder and smaller

          notrgir = cursive (later)

         shghagir = modern slanted cursive

The older an Armenian Gospels MS is, the more likely it appears to be based on a text that was like the text of f1.             

The same is true of Old Georgian Gospels-MSS’ textual character.

Georgian:  translated from Armenian. But some Georgian witnesses are older than most  Armenian witnesses.

         Oldest substantial Gospels-MS: Adysh MS:  897 A.D.

         The Old Georgian is an echo of an echo, but the voice is old.

         The Old Georgian also goes back to the 400s.

         George of Athos:  early 1000s – revision of the Gospels in     Georgian.  His revision made the Georgian text more Byzantine.

         Revelation may have a different kind of base-text than the rest.

Armenian and Georgian copyists went all over the place – Egypt, Jerusalem, etc.

Some quirk-readings may have been acquired from a particular locale.

Ethiopic (Ge’ez)

                   Christianity in Ethiopia:          

                   Beta Samati site – church in the early 300s.

                   Chrysostom (380s) – mentioned that the Gospel of John had been translated into Ethiopic.

                   Consistently translated from Greek.

Garima Gospels:  produced in the 500s.  And it’s fancy.

Most Ethiopic MSS:  1300s or later.           

          Tends to match up with the Peshitta – mainly Byzantine.         

          Does not have the PA.

          There are over 500 Ethiopic NT MSS.

          John seems less Byzantine.

Arabic

          First layer:  600s or even earlier.

         Najran, in southern Arabia:  a Christian center in the 400s.

Base-texts of Arabic versions echo families of texts.

Some families echo the Peshitta, but at least two echo Greek texts.

0136/0137 – Greek-Arabic diglot (frag., Mt)

Sinai Arabic MSS 8 and 28 = Codex Sinaiticus Arabicus (CSA)

Families A and C echo Greek texts (more than 70% Byzantine).

Family B in Lk. 16:19:  the rich man's name:  Nineveh (comp. Sahidic and P75)


Old Church Slavonic - 800s. 

Glagolithic alphabet, and Cyrillic alphabet.


Nubian - A Christmastime lectionary and assorted inscriptions.         


Caucasian Albanian - New Finds (1975) at Saint Catherine’s Monastery


Takeaway #1:       

Early versions can be extremely valuable to track the scope of readings and groups of readings. 

Q:  What was the early range of rival readings?


Takeaway #2:

Early versions shouldn’t be asked to do things that they can’t do.  Sometimes, articles are not transferable.  Sometimes word-order cannot be expected to reflect the Greek word-order.  Some languages don’t have exact parallels for the nuances of Greek.


Takeaway #3:

Early versions should be considered with an awareness of stages in their histories. 

Early versions’ testimonies should generally be boiled down to reflect the history of the text of the version, keeping in mind when and where the versional text was revised, in cases where this can be observed.


Takeaway #4:

Instead of thinking of the versions uniformly as “Versions “of the New Testament,”      early versions should generally be separated into Gospels, Acts, Pauline Epistles, General Epistles, and Revelation.


 

 

Saturday, September 9, 2017

Versional Manuscripts at the Library of Congress

            The website of the Library of Congress provides page-views of dozens and dozens of Greek New Testament manuscripts, to which I provided links in earlier posts.  It also contains quite an impressive assortment of versional New Testament manuscripts – Arabic, Armenian, Ethiopic, Georgian, Slavonic, and Syriac are all represented.
            The members of the 1949-1950 expedition that photographed these manuscripts must have worked in a preternatural energetic flurry in order to collect all these page-views.  The manuscripts listed here represent just a fraction of the work involved; a total of 1,073 manuscripts were photographed.  They included not only manuscripts of Scripture but also patristic and liturgical works. Some of the compositions fall into such obscure categories that one might need a jargon-dictionary to sort it all out.  Such a resource is provided at the Library of Congress’ website, helping viewers to know the difference between a Sticherarion and a Synaxarion.  Also provided at the Library of Congress’ archives:  a tour of Saint Catherine’s monastery in pictures! It’s like visiting the monastery as it existed seventy years ago, minus the sand.    
            Without further ado, here is a list of 163 versional New Testament manuscripts at Jerusalem and Sinai, consisting of 56 Arabic manuscripts (this is not all of them!), 20 Armenian manuscripts, 1 Ethiopic manuscript, 27 Georgian manuscripts, 6 Slavonic manuscripts, and 53 Syriac manuscripts:      

Arabic New Testament Manuscripts at Jerusalem:
A page from Arabic MS
68 at St. Catherine's
.

Arabic 15 – Evangelion (Made in 1700s)
Arabic 18 – Evangelion (Made in 1500s)
Arabic 29 – Apostolos (Made in 1642)
Arabic 30 – Evangelion (Made in 1405)
Arabic 60 – Evangelion (Made in 1615)
Arabic 71 – Apostolos (Made in 1764)
Arabic 226 – Apostolos (Made in 1764)
Arabic 236 – Evangelion (Made in 1738)

Some Arabic New Testament Manuscripts at St. Catherine’s:
Arabic MS 74, page-view 68,
at Saint Catherine's.

Arabic Manuscripts 68 – Four Gospels (1300s), a decorated copy
Arabic Manuscripts 151 – Epistles and Acts (made in 867)  Unusual formatting of the text.
Arabic Manuscripts 310 – Epistles of Paul (late 900s)  Neatly written.

Armenian New Testament Manuscripts: 
A page from the
King Gagek Gospels
.

Armenian 1924 – Four Gospels (A.D. 1064) braided cross frontispiece

Ethiopic New Testament Manuscript: 
Saint John in Ethiopic MS 11,
at Jerusalem.

Georgian New Testament Manuscripts at St. Catherine’s:

            Braided cross page.

Georgian New Testament Manuscripts at Jerusalem:
A page from Georgian MS
102 at Jerusalem.

            Also notable: 

Slavonic New Testament Manuscripts:
Slavonic (Slavic) Manuscripts 1 – Four Gospels (at St. Catherine’s) (production-date unknown)
Slavonic (Slavic) Manuscripts 2 – Four Gospels (at St. Catherine’s) (Made in 1532)
Slavonic (Slavic) Manuscripts 3 – Four Gospels (at St. Catherine’s) (production-date unknown)
Slavonic (Slavic) 39 – Apostolos (production-date unknown)
Slavonic Abraam 3 – Four Gospels (at Jerusalem) (1200s)
The beginning of Matthew
in Slavonic MS Abraam 3.


Syriac New Testament Manuscripts at St. Catherine’s:    

Syriac MS 3 – Epistles of Paul (c. 600) – An important manuscript.
Syriac MS 30 – Gospels (late 300s/early 400s) This is the Sinaitic Syriac palimpsest.  The upper writing consists of biographies and martyrologies of female saints.  The lower writing is the Gospels text.
Two pages from Syriac MS
159 at St. Catherine's.

            Also notable:
            Syriac MS 59 – Homilies on John (c. 800)
            Syriac MS 19 – Homilies on Song of Songs (c. 700)

Syriac New Testament Manuscripts at Jerusalem:
Syriac 1 – Evangelion (Made in 1679)

That is a lot of versional New Testament manuscripts!


This post is presented in memory of Vickey Rose McCorkle, cherished sister in Christ.
“She has been a helper of many, and of myself also.”



Wednesday, May 10, 2017

Georgian New Testament MSS at Saint Catherine's Monastery


Sinai Georgian MS 16 - Image 277.
from the Library of Congress
Collection of Manuscripts in
St. Catherine's Monastery, Mt. Sinai
            The Georgian version of the New Testament is one of the least-researched areas in New Testament textual criticism.  The Library of Congress recently released page-images of some important Georgian manuscripts that are housed at Saint Catherine’s Monastery; a list of some of them is included at the end of this post. 
            What do we know about the Georgian version of the New Testament?  A few brief points should be enough to convey the basics about what we know, and what we would like to know, about the Georgian version of the New Testament.  If you would like more details, see Jeff Childers’ chapter on the Georgian version in The Text of the New Testament in Contemporary Research (1995). 

● Like Greek, the Georgian language is written in different scripts.  The script called asomt‘avruli is analogous to Greek uncials.  The kut‘xovani (“angled”) script is analogous to Greek minuscule lettering.  It is also called nuskhuri.  In the Middle Ages, both of these scripts became antique as the military script, mxedruli, began to dominate, and it is still essentially the Georgian script in use today.  

Also, though not particularly significant for New Testament research, there is another way to classify Georgian scripts:  the Georgian letter xani was used as a prefix in the 300’s-600’s.  This prefix was then replaced by the letter hae, h, until the 800’s, at which point it also fell into disuse.  Georgian script that uses the xan-prefix is called xanmeti; script that uses the hae-prefix is called haemeti.   

● Georgian New Testament manuscripts tend to be either manuscripts of the four Gospels or of Acts and the Epistles, and one should not assume that the different parts share the same text-type.  Although it is generally agreed that the Georgian version was made sometime in the 400’s, we do not have very many substantial early Georgian manuscripts, so it is not easy to discern what kind of readings the earliest Georgian text contained.  Only faint hints can be gained by consulting quotations that appear in Georgian literature, such as The Martyrdom of Saint Shushanik, a composition from the 400’s, probably.  The best impression that the presently available evidence gives is that the Georgian version of the Gospels – like the Armenian version, in some respects – circulated in two forms not long after it was first created. 

Sinai Georgian MS 16 - Image 322.
from the Library of Congress Collection of Manuscripts in
St. Catherine's Monastery, Mt. Sinai
● An assortment of linguistic clues (such as unusual renderings in Georgian that are explained as mistranslations of Armenian terms) has contributed to a consensus that the Georgian version of the Gospels was initially translated from Armenian, and that the Georgian text was then revised, reflecting the revision of the Armenian text.  Between the representatives of the first form of the Armenian Gospels-text, and representatives of the first form of the Georgian Gospels-text, the Georgian remains are more substantial, and so, despite being a translation of a translation, the Georgian Gospels-text has something to offer that is text-critically interesting:  echoes of whatever text (probably something in Syriac) was used in the early 400’s as the initial basis for the Armenian Gospels.  The early Georgian version is also a major witness, albeit indirect, to the Greek Caesarean Gospels-text that was used after 430 to revise the Armenian text.

● It was once assumed that the Georgian text of the Epistles shared the same general pattern of Armenian-based development and revision, but that is probably not the case.  Georgian monks came into contact with monasteries outside the borders of Georgia almost as soon as the Gospels were translated, if not sooner – and the Greek manuscripts at those monasteries were not ignored by the Georgians.  Access to those texts apparently caused the early Georgian translators to adopt a distinctly different base-text for the Epistle (and probably also for Acts).  Textually, the early Georgian version of the Epistles is related to the Greek text of Codex Coislinianus (H, 015).     

● The Georgian text of the Gospels was repeatedly revised (sometimes, apparently, as little more than some monks’ isolated project) until the revisions that were undertaken in 1000’s.  At that time, Euthymius the Athonite (so-named because he resided at Mount Athos, in northeastern Greece) attempted to systematically correct the text of the Gospels to Greek exemplars there.  In addition, he translated the book of Revelation into Georgian, from a Greek base-text resembling what was circulated alongside the commentary of Andreas.  After Euthymius, George (or Giorgi) the Athonite tidied up Euthymius’ work, favoring a Byzantine standard.  Yet Giorgi’s revision-work was not quite definitive (although it eventually dominated all other revisions); another monk named Ephrem the Small brought the Georgian text even closer to a Byzantine standard in the late 1000’s. 

            Thus, the Georgian text of the Gospels should be considered stratified:   in the 1000’s a Byzantine layer intruded upon and overwhelmed (mostly) the earlier levels, the better-represented of which is a strong Caesarean witness.  The affinities of the less-attested early form are not altogether clear, but continued study of Old Georgian witnesses such as the Khanmeti Gospels Lectionary from the 700’s, as well as some palimpsests, may provide some more information about that.


            Here are links to the collections of page-views of some of the microfilm images, from the Library of Congress, of Georgian manuscripts housed at Saint Catherine’s Monastery on Mount Sinai.
Sinai Georgian MS 39 - Image 122.
from the Library of Congress Collection of Manuscripts in
St. Catherine's Monastery, Mt. Sinai

MS 63:  Gospels-Lectionary