tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post4638566937779795382..comments2024-03-28T19:21:17.654+00:00Comments on Evangelical Textual Criticism: Codex Sinopensis (O 023) OnlineP.J. Williamshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04388225485348300613noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-53595679750627905192017-04-19T17:52:38.271+01:002017-04-19T17:52:38.271+01:00Paul,
I'm not sure Σ and Φ at Matt. 15:16 is ...Paul,<br /><br />I'm not sure Σ and Φ at Matt. 15:16 is the best place to verify Cronin's conclusions with O. With respect to Φ, it wasn't copied from the same exemplar, so Cronin's observation might be true, but the point is moot if you're talking about O's relationship to the exemplar of N-O-Σ. Von Soden thought Φ was related, but even he admitted that it was not a part of the same immediate family as N-O-Σ. For von Soden, Φ might be a cousin, but it's not one of the "3 Brüdern" (p. 1246). As for Σ, von Gebhardt mentioned a number of corrections made to a second exemplar in Σ. Σ actually agrees with O in the uncorrected text at Matt. 15:16 (N is not extant), but the Σ^2 corrector corrected the text to the Byz. reading there. Von Gebhardt mentions it as one of those secondary corrections on p. lii of his edition and mentions it as a correction again in a footnote to the transcription on p. 29, though for some reason his transcription of Σ includes the addition as if it were not a correction at all.<br /><br />The microfilm of Σ042 at the INTF VMR is clear enough that you can see the correction there. It's p. 124(v), left column, about two-thirds of the way down.<br /><br />ElijahElijah Hixsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05816323223305820788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-32535306883437952532017-04-18T21:32:04.723+01:002017-04-18T21:32:04.723+01:00Also noted early on by H.S. Cronin when he examine...Also noted early on by H.S. Cronin when he examined Codex Sinopensis in 1900 in Paris, he found its readings are obviously closer to Aleph and B than the other Purple Uncials Σ Φ in Matthew. A quick look at Mt 15:16 is decisive in support of his findings with O (023) having the corrupted non-Byzantine, ο δε ειπεν reading while Σ Φ read Byzantine. Interestingly, the only OL MSS having the Byzantine reading is the common f q combination while the Syriacs split with the Peshitta siding with O (023) and the Harklean Sy reading with the Byzantines as is usually the case in Peshitta vs Harklean split readings.<br /><br />Paul Anderson<br />CSPMTUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03145254303136513631noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-18879265129710556162017-04-18T09:19:42.072+01:002017-04-18T09:19:42.072+01:00James,
The Mariupol leaf comes directly between B...James,<br /><br />The Mariupol leaf comes directly between BnF folios 21 and 22, and the text is continuous across the page breaks: (Matt. 18:9 BnF f. 21v βλη| |θηναι Mariupol f. r; Matt. 18:16 Mariupol f. v ινα επι | | ϲτοματοϲ δυο μαρτυρων BnF f. 22r).<br /><br />Thanks for the index. I'm sure it is much more helpful to people than if I were to post the chaotic hand-written index hanging at my desk, in which I penciled in verse numbers over each folio number on a print-out of Cronin's reconstruction on p. 593 of his article.<br /><br />ElijahElijah Hixsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05816323223305820788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-83577453831587122282017-04-18T05:23:32.973+01:002017-04-18T05:23:32.973+01:00Elijah,
That's more or less my take as well -...Elijah, <br />That's more or less my take as well -- the chapter-titles are just chaoter-titles, not notices for feast-days. But signs of liturgical use are always something to keep an eye out for.<br />Meanwhile: I made an index at <br />http://www.thetextofthegospels.com/2017/04/codex-sinopensis-o-023.html .<br /><br />Btw, how sure are we that the photographed page is indeed part of 023?<br />James Snapp Jrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09493891380752272603noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-28845305388537212682017-04-17T22:47:51.687+01:002017-04-17T22:47:51.687+01:00James,
You're welcome! I only skimmed the few ...James,<br />You're welcome! I only skimmed the few pages on Sinopensis, but I can't give a full endorsement. I haven't seen any red ink or feast indicators. At the tops of some pages, Sinopensis does have some of the chapter headings (N and Σ have these as well), but I don't know of any convincing evidence that it was ever used as a lectionary. It doesn't have any lectionary converters that are common in later manuscripts. In fact, I would be surprised if it did. Sinopensis seems like the kind of book that only comes out of the vault once a year or when somebody especially famous like the Pope comes to visit (for a contemporary example, Google "Pope Rossanensis").<br />ElijahElijah Hixsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05816323223305820788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-46875596141508714592017-04-17T08:17:24.899+01:002017-04-17T08:17:24.899+01:00Elijah,
Thanks. Btw, any thoughts about the descr...Elijah, <br />Thanks. Btw, any thoughts about the description of 023 in "The Impact of Scripture in Early Christianity"?James Snapp Jrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09493891380752272603noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-44586907302127512182017-04-17T07:26:18.944+01:002017-04-17T07:26:18.944+01:00Daniel, James is correct that Sinopensis is not ex...Daniel, James is correct that Sinopensis is not extant for Matt. 10:8. However, both N and Σ are, are, and apart from two minor spelling differences (which I note), they agree. Because they agree, there is no reason to doubt that exemplar for N O Σ at Matthew 10:8 had: Αϲθενουνταϲ θεραπευετε νεκρουϲ εγειρετε (εγιρετε N)· λεπρουϲ καθαριζετε δαιμονια (δαιμονεια N) εκβαλλετε· δωραιαν ελαβετε δωραιαν δοτε.<br /><br />Peter, I indexed the images of the microfilm for INTF, which is both incomplete and all out of order. The new images were posted as additions to those, except that the new images are of full sheets where there are full sheets, not single folios. So, for example, one side of one sheet has folios 4r and 10v, so that same image of both folios is posted where INTF was already indexed for 4r and also posted where INTF was already indexed for 10v.<br /><br />James, f. 19 is here (or, if the link doesn't work, go to Gallica.bnf.fr, search for "supplement grec 1286" and select "dans les manuscrits" from the drop-down menu. F. 19 is one of the single folios on the second page of results): http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b105388211.r=supplement%20grec%201286?rk=450646;0.<br /><br />ElijahElijah Hixsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05816323223305820788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-60565031485157964932017-04-17T02:51:38.275+01:002017-04-17T02:51:38.275+01:00Where are images of f. 19 (Mt. 17:10-17)?Where are images of f. 19 (Mt. 17:10-17)?James Snapp Jrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09493891380752272603noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-34892773303689246622017-04-16T08:26:35.778+01:002017-04-16T08:26:35.778+01:00It appears to be indexed on the INTF site. It appears to be indexed on the INTF site. Peter J. Montoro IVhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11893055527110529190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-45786300365651282342017-04-16T05:33:00.330+01:002017-04-16T05:33:00.330+01:00Daniel Buck,
According to Kronin in the 1901 JTS,...Daniel Buck, <br />According to Kronin in the 1901 JTS, it's not there; the first and second pages extant have Mt. 7:7-22; the third extant page has 11:5-12.<br /><br />If I have time next week I may cobble together some sort of index.<br />James Snapp Jrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09493891380752272603noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-88660122891105616532017-04-15T23:51:29.034+01:002017-04-15T23:51:29.034+01:00The Gallica images have been linked to by the INTF...The Gallica images have been linked to by the INTF with the content indexed and you can click through to the Gallica site. However, the manuscript is incomplete and that text does not seem to be extant (at least according to the INTF indexing). Peter J. Montoro IVhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11893055527110529190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-40578089463868330752017-04-15T21:26:40.566+01:002017-04-15T21:26:40.566+01:00Is there any easier way than reading through half ...Is there any easier way than reading through half of the images to see how O reads at Matthew 10:8?Daniel Buckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02600146498880358592noreply@blogger.com