New Testament Manuscripts

Numbers 1001-1500

Note: In the catalog which follows, bold type indicates a full entry. Plain type indicates a short entry, which may occur under another manuscript.

Contents: * 1010 * 1108: see under 2138 and Family 2138 * 1175 * 1185 * 1186 * 1187 * 1188 * 1189 * 1190 * 1191 * 1192 * 1193 * 1194 * 1195 * 1196 * 1197 * 1198 * 1199 * 1200 * 1201 * 1202 * 1203 * 1204 * 1205 * 1206 * 1207 * 1208 * 1209 * 1210 * 1211 * 1212 * 1213 * 1214 * 1215 * 1216 * 1217 * 1218 * 1219 * 1220 * 1221 * 1222 * 1223 * 1224 * 1225 * 1226 * 1227 * 1228 * 1229 * 1231 * 1232 * 1233 * 1234 * 1235 * 1236 * 1237 * 1238 * 1239 * 1240 * 1241 * 1242 * 1243; see also under 1739 and Family 1739 * 1244 * 1245 * 1246 * 1247 * 1248 * 1249 * 1250 * 1251 * 1252 * 1253 * 1254 * 1255 * 1256 * 1292: see under 2138 and Family 2138 * 1319: see under 365 and Family 2127 * 1409 * 1424 * 1448 * 1490: see under 2138 and Family 2138

Manuscript 1010

Location/Catalog Number

Athos. Catalog number: Iviron, (66) 738.

1010 contains the gospels. The original text of Luke 8:4-44; John 12:25-13:22 has been lost and replaced by supplements.

Date/Scribe

Dated paleographically to the twelfth century. 1010 is written on parchment, one column per page.

Description and Text-type

Von Soden classified 1010 as I^φc -- i.e. a member of Family 1424 (the other members of the c branch include 945, 990, 1207, 1223, and 1293). But neither Wisse nor the Alands found evidence to support this. The Alands list 1010 as Category V (i.e. purely Byzantine), although they admit that it might be a member of Family 1424. Huck-Greeven cites 1010 -- but not as a member of the "Soden group" (=Family 1424).

It is, however, the evidence of Wisse which is most decisive. Wisse confirms the existence of von Soden's I^φ subgroups, but finds no connection between them. Wisse lists 1010 as Kmix in Luke 1 and a member of K^x (cluster 160) in Luke 10 and 20. (K^x cluster 160 consists of 160, 1010, and 1293, all of which von Soden labelled as I^φc.) However, 1424 is a (diverging) member of Cluster 1675, along with 517, 954, 1349 in Luke 1, 1424, and 1675 -- all found by von Soden to be members of I^φa. Thus Wisse sees no evidence of a link between 1010 and 1424.

Finally, a check of 987 test readings for 1010 reveals no kinship with 1424 beyond the Byzantine -- as well as showing 1010 to be an entirely Byzantine manuscript. As far as the test readings are concerned, it appears simply to be a member of K^x, whereas 1424 has at least a few independent readings. (For more on Family 1424, see the entry on 1424.)

Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript

von Soden: ε1266.

Bibliography

Collations:

Sample Plates:

Editions which cite:
Cited in NA²⁶, but dropped from NA²⁷.
Cited in UBS³ and UBS⁴.
Cited by Von Soden, Merk, and Bover.

Other Works:

Manuscript 1175

Location/Catalog Number

Patmos. Catalog number: Ioannou 16.

Originally contained the Acts and Epistles. 1 Thes. 1:10-3:2, Tit. 1:7-end, Philemon, and Hebrews 3:6-6:7, 8:6-10:8, 11:20-12:2, 13:21-end have been lost. 1175 is written on parchment, with two columns per page.

Date/Scribe

Dated paleographically to the eleventh century.

Description and Text-type

1175 has suffered a great deal of block mixture. The greater part of the text is Alexandrian, but large sections are purely Byzantine: Romans, the Johannine Epistles, probably Thessalonians. Elsewhere, 1175 is one of the most Alexandrian of the minuscules. In Paul, for instance, it is second only to 33 and 1739 in its freedom from Byzantine influence, and second only to 33 in the purity of its Alexandrian text. It is, along with 81, the leading witness to the late Alexandrian text.

In the Acts, the Alands show it agreeing with UBS in 69 readings, with the Majority Text in just 39 (in 19 of those instances, it agrees with both). Fifteen of its readings agree with neither; six of those are singular. It is considered (along with 81) one of the leading Alexandrian minuscules, but even here Lake and New detect some degree of mixture; they believe that the manuscript fluctuates in the degree of "Western" influence. It is noteworthy that, in the Aland statistics, there is no substantial manuscript with which it agrees as much as 70% of the time; the only manuscripts with which it agrees even 60% of the time are 81 (66%), A (63%), C (62%), 𝔓⁷⁴ (61%), and ℵ (60%). It agrees with B only 57% of the time and with 1739 only 53%. Thus, contrary to Lake and New, it appears to be affiliated specifically with the true Alexandrians (𝔓⁷⁴ ℵ A C 81) against B, just as in Paul it goes with ℵ A C 33 81 against 𝔓⁴⁶ B 1739.

In the Catholics, the degree of mixture makes it less valuable, although outside the Johannine Epistles it still has many good readings.

Von Soden lists 1175 as H. Richards lists it as a member of the Byzantine Group B⁶ in the Johannine Epistles (other members of this group include L, 049, 424*, 794, 1888, and 2143). Wachtel considers it Alexandrian in the earlier Catholic epistles. Aland and Aland in the first edition of The Text of the New Testament listed it as Category II; despite its Byzantine mixture, the second edition lists it as Category I. My opinion inclines toward their earlier assessment; even in the Alexandrian parts, 1175 has few unique readings; it almost always has lots of company among the Alexandrian manuscripts.

Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript

von Soden: α74. Tischendorf: 389^a; 360^p

Bibliography

Collations:
Kirsopp Lake & Silva New, Six Collations of New Testament Manuscripts (1932). Only Acts is collated.

Sample Plates:
Aland & Aland (1 page)

Editions which cite:
Cited in NA²⁶ for Acts and Paul.
Cited in full in NA²⁷ for Acts and Paul.
Cited in full in NA²⁸ for Acts, Catholics, and Paul.
Cited in full in UBS⁴.
Cited by von Soden, Merk, and Bover.

Other Works:

Manuscript 1185

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 148. Not catalogued by Von Soden. Contains the gospel complete. Dated paleographically to the fourteenth century by Hatch and the KListe; Gregory never saw it. Written by a scribe named Metrophanes. There is a colophon stating that it was presented to the convent in 1632, but it appears to have been written centuries before that. Written on paper, one column per page. Black ink with red initials. Has chapter lists and lectionary indications, but the sections it contains are not those of Ammonius.
Although it doesn't have a classification by von Soden, it seems unlikely that there is anything unusual about the manuscript; the Alands put it in Category and Wisse ways it is ^r.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1186

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 158. Von Soden's ε1249. Contains the gospels complete. Dated to the twelfth century by all authorities. Black ink, initials red. One column per page. Includes the Eusebian marginalia, but the tables themselves were not completed; also has chapter numbers and lectionary markings. There are portraits of the four evangelists plus one of Moses receiving the law.
The text seems to be entirely unremarkable. Von Soden places it in K^x; Wisse does the same although the subgroup varies from chapter to chapter; the Alands put it in Category V.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1187

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 150. Von Soden's ε1083. Contains the gospels complete. Dated to the twelfth century by Hatch; Gregory and Gardthausen preferred the tenth or eleventh; the KListe says eleventh. Brown ink, initials red. Two columns per page. Includes the Eusebian marginalia, lectionary indications, chapter lists; Old Testament quotations are marked.
The text is noteworthy for the number of disputed readings that are marked. There is a scholion on John 7:53-8:11, which is obelized in red. There are commas in the margin at John 5:4, and there is an asterisk by Matthew 16:2-3. Von Soden listed it as I^r, but the Alands put it in Category V. Wisse puts it in Group Λ, which is his name for I^r. This group is mostly Byzantine -- von Soden said it was 90% K and 10% I -- so the Alands' dismissal of the manuscript is not too surprising, but it might be worth a closer look to try to explain why so many significant variants are noted.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1188

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 151. Von Soden's ε1114. Contains the gospels complete. Dated to the twelfth century by Hatch; Gregory and Gardthausen preferred the eleventh; the KListe says eleventh or twelfth. Written by a scribe named George. Brown ink, initials red. One column per page. Includes lectionary indications, plus chapter lists for Mark through John, but no Eusebian apparatus.
Von Soden classifies the text as I^φa -- that is, Family 1424. The Alands do not grant it any value, placing it in Category V. Wisse also makes it mostly Byzantine -- Kmix/K^x/K^x. We should recall, however, that 1424 is distinctive mostly in Mark, not Luke, and the 1424 text is Byzantine enough that a casual examination might not reveal the slight non-Byzantine stratum. Thus there is a slight chance that the manuscript might repay a detailed analysis, particularly in Mark.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1189

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 152. Von Soden's ε493. Written by a scribe named George, who called himself ὁ Γαλησιώτης. Hatch was unable to be certain where this was. There are several other scribes named George who are of about the right date (e.g. those of 429, 579, and 649), but Hatch does not identify any other manuscripts by this scribe. At least we can identify the date: the colophon says it is from 1346.
Contains the gospels complete. One column per page. Black ink, initials gold. There are pictures before each gospel, of an unusual sort: Each evangelist, on bended knee, receives his gospel from Christ. It seems to have been a de luxe copy; not only are the lections indicated, but the lection notes and the αρχη and τελος are in gold. The list of chapters is also partly in gold. Old Testament quotations are indicated.
John 7:53-8:11 is obelized (in black). Despite that, the text does not seem noteworthy. Von Soden and Wisse both classify it as K^r, and the Alands list it as Category V.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1190

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 153. Von Soden's ε1196. Contains the gospels complete. Dated to the twelfth century by Hatch; Gregory and Gardthausen preferred the eleventh or twelfth; the KListe says eleventh or twelfth. One column per page, brown ink. It seems to have been a fairly expensive copy; the initials are in gold, and there are portraits of Mark, Luke, and John although not Matthew. It has full lectionary equipment (including two synaxaria) and Eusebian apparatus, plus hypotheses and chapter lists, although not all Old Testament quotations are marked.
The text is not particularly valuable -- the Alands place it in Category V -- but may have a complicated history. Von Soden classified it as K^x, but Wisse makes it partly K^r and partly K^x. Given that the marginal material is not typical of K^r, one suspects some sort of editorial activity.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1191

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 154. Von Soden's ε1099. Contains the gospels complete. Dated to the twelfth century by Hatch; Gregory and Gardthausen preferred the tenth or eleventh; the KListe says eleventh or twelfth. One column per page, brown ink with initials of gold over red. There are portraits of all four Evangelists. The Eusebian tables are included, but the sections are not always marked. Similarly there are a few lectionary markings but they are not consisten. Chapter lists and headings are included, and Old Testament quotations marked.
The text, notably, excludes Matthew 16:2-3. And yet, it doesn't give much other evidence of importance. Von Soden classified it as K¹, and the Alands place it in Category V. Wisse calls it K^x. That's obviously not promising, but one wonders if it might not be worth a little more examination.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1192

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 155. Von Soden's ε1115. Contains the gospels complete. Dated to the eleventh century by all authorities. Black ink, initials mostly red but a few in blue. One column per page. Includes lectionary apparatus and the Eusebian marginalia. The lectionary apparatus is odd; the opening of lections is marked ⁘ ≋ ⋇, the endings by a more normal τε⎫.
Textually, the manuscript perhaps needs more examination than it has gotten. The Alands do not place it in Category; this typically means that it's not purely Byzantine but not particularly noteworthy either. Von Soden put it in I^ηb, i.e. probably Family 22 (or, at least, something somewhat associated with Family 1), and Wisse supports this, classifying group 22b (athough weak in Luke 10).
The association with Group 22b is robust. 1192, notably, lacks John 7:53-8:11. It has Mark 16:9-20 -- but the word τελος follows 16:8, and there is a short preface to 16:9-20 indicating doubt. This same note is found in 1210 and in 22; see the discussion there for details. The whole family needs a more thorough study.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1193

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 156. Von Soden's ε494. Contains the gospels complete. Dated to the twelfth century by Hatch and the KListe; Gregory and Gardthausen tentatively suggested the fourteenth. I'm not a paleographer, but the hand looks more likely to be twelfth century to me. One column per page, brown ink with red initials. There are portraits of the first three Evangelists. Chapters, sections, and lectionary marks are included, as well as chapter lists.
The text is mundane. Von Soden classified it as K^x, as does Wisse, and the Alands place it in Category V.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1194

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 157. Von Soden's ε1094. Contains the gospels complete. It was written on Patmos by a monk named John for the abbot Theoktistos. (The colophon also has a place for the indiction and date, but they are missing.) Dated to the twelfth century by Hatch; Gregory and Gardthausen prefer the tenth or eleventh; the KListe says eleventh. Two columns per page, black ink with red initials. There are portraits of the Evangelists, all badly damaged. Chapters, sections, and lectionary marks are included, as well as lection notes.
The text shows signs of interest. The Alands do not place it in any Category, hinting that it is not a pure member of the Byzantine text. Von Soden put it in I^φr, which agrees roughly with Wisse's classification of M10.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1195

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 158. Von Soden's ε1116. Contains the gospels complete. Dated by its colophon to 1123 (but the colophon, by Maximus Hieromachus, is from another hand, thought to be later. It says the manuscript was written εν χωρα μολυβου, i.e. presumably Molyvos/Mithymna, Lesbos, Greece). Black ink, initials red. Two columns per page. Includes the Eusebian marginalia and some but not all lectionary markings. Old Testament quotations marked.
The text has been variously assessed, although it is probably mostly Byzantine. But it is likely that it omitted John 7:53-8:11; the verses are present in the text, but they are written on a leaf containing John 7:44-8:17 which has much smaller print and more lines per page; it looks as if the original leaf was cut out and replaced, and it would not have had room for 7:53-8:11. Also, Luke 22:43-44 are obelized.
This would seem to hint at an interesting text, but this has not been supported by detailed assessments. Von Soden listed it as K^x, which is about as low as he could rank it. Wisse also lists it as Byzantine, but in group M1195. The Alands do not place it in Category. Probably it needs a more detailed look than it has so far received.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1196

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 159. Von Soden's ε495. Contains the gospels complete. Dated to the fourteenth century by all authorities. Written on a mix of parchment and paper. Brown ink, initials red. One column per page. Has pictures before all four Gospels, and chapter lists for all but Matthew. Luke and John have poetic prologues; John also has an hypothesis. It has lectionary indications and notes, but seemingly no Eusebian apparatus. Old Testament quotations are sometimes but not always marked. There is a colophon, but it doesn't give any useful historical information.
The text is Byzantine enough that the Alands put it in Category V, but von Soden filed it as I^κ (family Π), which Wisse confirms, putting it in group Π171.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1197

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 160. Von Soden's ε1117. Contains the gospels complete. Dated to the twelfth century by all experts. One column per page, brown ink with gold initials. There are portraits of the Evangelists. Chapters, sections, and lectionary marks are included, as well as lection notes, but no Eusebian tables. John 7:53-8:11 is obelized, but there isn't much else other evidence of an unusual text. Von Soden classified it as K^x, the Alands placed it in Category V, and Wisse made it partly K^x and partly Kmix.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1198

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 161. Von Soden's ε1298. Contains the gospels complete. Dated to the twelfth century by Hatch and the KListe; Gregory and Gardthausen said twelfth or thirteenth. One column per page, brown ink with ed initials. Chapter lists (that of Matthew being dislocated to the end of the codex), numbers and titles; limited lectionary and Eusebian apparatus; Old Testament quotations intermittently indicated.
There is some disagreement about the nature of the text. Von Soden put it in I^r, that is, Family Λ, but the Alands write it off as Category V. Wisse put it partly in K^x and partly in Cluster 686, which has "some" relationship to Family Λ. Possibly the manuscript deserves a fuller examination, but it will surely be found to be Byzantine of some type.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1199

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 161. Von Soden's ε1197. Contains the gospels complete. Dated to the twelfth century by Hatch and the KListe; Gregory and Gardthausen said eleventh or twelfth. The scribe was a monk named Makarios, who gave his title as ἱεροδιάκονος (the last four pages are a supplement from another hand). One column per page, black ink with red initials. Chapter lists, with numbers and titles of chapters; lection notes. Also has Irenaus on the Four Gospels. The text isn't worthy of much comment. Von Soden regarded it as K^r, and Wisse finds the same in the two chapters profiled. The Alands put it in Category V.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1200

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 163. Von Soden's ε1250. Contains the gospels complete. The main run of the text, which is on parchment, is dated to the twelfth century by all authorities; the first eight and last sixteen pages are paper supplements of much later date. One column per page, black ink with gold-over-red initials. Chapter lists, with numbers and titles of chapters; lection notes. There are pictures of all four evangelists. The text is interesting in a small way. The Alands put it in Category V, but von Soden put it in I^κb, and Wisse makes it Family Πb, which is the same thing.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1201

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 164. Von Soden's ε1312. Contains the gospels, beginning with Matthew 7:15 [ενδυ]μασι (although the KListe shows it as complete). Written at Sinai by a deacon named Sabas. Dated by its colophon to the year 1250. (There is a second colophon by a later hand.) In addition to the beginning of Matthew, it appears that some prefatory material is missing, because there are hypotheses and chapter lists for Mark, Luke, and John, but not Matthew. There are lists and titles of chapters, plus the Ammonian sections and lectionary marks. Old Testament quotations are marked. Black ink with red initials.
John 7:53-8:11 is obelized. But this is quite common in Sinai manuscripts and doesn't tell us much about the text. Von Soden and Wisse both found it to be ^x, and the Alands put it in Category V.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1202

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 165. Von Soden's ε544. Copied by a scribe named John Rhosos, to whom Gardthausen attributed several other manuscripts; Hatch believes he probably wrote the manuscript in Crete in the fifteenth century. All other authorities accept this date. Gospels, complete. Parchment, one column per page. Brown ink with red initials. There are pictures of all four evangelists, with chapter lists, numbers, and titles, plus the Ammonian Sections. There are subscriptions for each gospel. There are lectionary markings and notes, plus material for saints' memorials.
John 7:53-8:11 is obelized. The Alands put it in Category V despite this, but von Soden valued it a bit higher, placing it in I^φr. This is what Wisse calls the M groups, and this seems to be correct; Wisse classifies 1202 as M1386. So it's Byzantine, but not from the main branch of the Byzantine text.
Description and a facsimile are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1203

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 166. Von Soden's ε1042. Contains the gospels essentially complete (portraits of the evangelists Mark and John have been cut out; those of Matthew and Luke remain but are damaged). Four pages from a lectionary are found at beginning and end (as flyleaves)?Dated the tenth century by Gregory and Gardhausen (the date accepted by the KListe); Hatch and von Soden prefer the eleventh. Includes the Eusebian tables and chapter list but seemingly not the Eusebian marginal numbers. The lectionary apparatus is not included. One column per page; brown ink with red initials.
No one seems to have noticed anything interesting about the text. The Alands place it in Category V (Byzantine). Von Soden put it in K^x, and Wisse supports this. Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1204

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 167. Von Soden's ε1251. Contains the gospels complete. Dated to the twelfth century by all authorities. Folios 122-129 (of 134) are a supplement from another hand. One column per page, brown ink with red initials, with very long lines; it is a very crowded page that cannot have been easy to read. Chapter numbers and titles; Eusebian apparatus; lectionary notes, although the lectionary list has been disordered (part at the beginning part at the end). Only Mark has a subscription.
There is some disagreement about the nature of the text, although it is probably mostly Byzantine. The Alands failed to put it in any Category. Von Soden thought it was K^x. Wisse classified it as M1402. This hints that it might be block mixed, but no one seems to have given it a detailed look.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1205

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 168 (one leaf in St. Petersburg, Public Library Greek 113). Von Soden's ε1313. Contains the gospels complete. Dated to the thirteenth century by all authorities except Hatch, who dates it to the twelfth. One column per page, black and brown ink with red initials. There is a colophon with a date, but it appears to refer to when the monastery was dedicated, not when the manuscript was written. Chapter numbers and titles, with chapter lists; Eusebian apparatus. There are portraits of the first three evangelists.
The text is clearly Byzantine but of a relatively rare type. The Alands put it in Category V, but von Soden put it in I^r and Wisse puts it in Group Λ, his equivalent of I^r.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1206

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 169 (one leaf in the St. Petersburg, Public Library Greek 308). Von Soden's ε496. Contains the gospels, breaking off at John 11:52 (ουκ ειπεν αλλα αρ....). Dated paleographically to the twelfth century by Hatch; Gardhausen and Gregory said fourteenth; the KListe, presumably on the basis of the St. Petersburg leaf that Hatch did not know, says 1247. One column per page, black ink with red initials. The writing is small and the lines long; it is tiring to read. It has chapter lists (missing that for Matthew), numbers, and titles; lectionary marks; Eusebian sections. Old Testament quotations sometimes marked. Von Soden lists the text as K^x, and the Alands put it in Category V. Wisse disagrees only slightly, regarding it as partly K^x, partly Kmix. Certainly there is no reason to consider it unusual.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1207

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 170. Von Soden's ε1098. Contains the gospels complete. Dated to the eleventh century by Hatch; Gregory and Gardhausen said tenth or eleventh. One column per page; brown ink with initials in red and gold. Includes lectionary apparatus and the Eusebian marginalia. Old Testament quotations are indicated inconsistently. Includes portraits of the evangelists Matthew, Luke, and John but not Mark. Material at the front of the codex include a synaxarion and an excerpt from 2 Peter about the Transfiguration.
There is some disagreement about the text. The Alands place write it off as Category V. But Von Soden gave it the somewhat better classification of I^φc, i.e. peripheral to Family 1424. Wisse gives yet another classification, Π473, and paired with 944. Π473 is not one of the better Π groups, being relatively close to K^x. Still, the manuscript probably deserves more attention than it has gotten. (See also the entries on 1010 and 1424.) Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1208

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 171. Von Soden's ε1399. Contains the gospels complete. Dated paleographically to the thirteenth century by Hatch and the KListe; Gregory and Gardthausen say thirteenth or fourteenth. Black ink with red initials; one column per page. There are paintings of Mark, Luke, and John; presumably there was one for Matthew which has been lost. It has a full lectionary apparatus (including synaxarion and menologion) and the Ammonian sections but no chapter references, and Old Testament quotations are only sometimes indicated, which makes me wonder a little if it was finished.
The text is not very interesting. The Alands put it in Category V. Von Soden thought it was K^x, while Wisse thought it was M349, so there is some doubt about just which Byzantine strand it belongs to, but it certainly appears to be Byzantine.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1209

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 172 (one leaf in St. Petersburg, Public Library Greek 291). Von Soden's ε1118. Contains the gospels complete (Luke 24:1-21 in St. Petersburg; the rest at Sinai). Dated to 1067 by its colophon. The scribe was Zacharias, a presbyter (so Hatch; von Soden says Zacharias was a πραιτωριωτης!). Includes lectionary apparatus and the Eusebian marginalia. Brown ink with red initials. Textually, it doesn't seem to have much value. The Alands place it in Category V. Von Soden put it in I^κ, i.e. Family Π, and Wisse supports this, classifying as Π278 along with 278 and part of 1509. Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1210

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 173. Von Soden's ε1198. Contains the gospels complete. Dated to the eleventh century by Hatch and the KListe; Gregory and Gardhausen said eleventh or twelfth. One column per page; black ink with initials in red. Includes lectionary indications and the Eusebian marginalia. There are chapter summaries for Mark, Luke, and John but not Matthew; perhaps the latter has been lost.
The text is interesting. The Alands do not place 1210 in any Category, implying that it is not quite purely Byzantine. Von Soden placed it in I^ηb, i.e. probably Family 22 (or, at least, something somewhat associated with Family 1). Wisse concurs, placing it in group 22b along with 22 134 149 and 1192. This association is robust. 1210 lacks John 7:53-8:11. It has Mark 16:9-20 -- but with a preface indicating doubt. The same preface is found in 1192 and in 22; see the discussion there for details.
The link with 22 and 1192 is interesting because 1192 is also at Sinai and the other three are in libraries that contain many manuscripts from elsewhere. Is it possible that Group 22b should be associated with Sinai? More research is surely needed.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1211

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 174. Von Soden's ε1093. Contains the gospels almost complete (John breaks off at 21:19 του[το]). Dated to the eleventh century by Hatch and the KListe; Gregory and Gardhausen said tenth or eleventh. One column per page; brown ink with initials in red. The secondary material is curiously incomplete: Matthew has hypotheses and chapter list; Mark has only hypotheses; Luke and John have neither. Old Testament quotations are sometimes marked but not always. The Eusebian apparatus is present.
Perhaps the most interesting thing about the text is that it omit Matthew 16:2-3. Otherwise, it does not seem noteworthy. Von Soden filed it as type A^k, but this type is mostly Byzantine (and does not seem to cohere anyway, according to Wisse). The Alands do not place 1211 in Category V. Wisse makes it a mix of K^x and 1519, but the 1519 text is also strongly Byzantine.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1212

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 175. Von Soden's ε1119. Contains the gospels almost complete; folios 48-55 are a supplement from a later hand (on paper; the rest of the manuscript is on parchment). Dated to the eleventh century by all authorities. One column per page, having both black and brown ink with initials in red. The scribe was a monk named Arsenios. It has almost all the standard marginalia: Eusebian apparatus, lectionary indications, chapter names and numbers, and more. There are hypothesis for Mark through John; those for Matthew are missing. The flyleaves, from a different hand, contain part of a synaxarion.
The Alands place 1212 in Category V, but von Soden, while labelling it Byzantine, put it in K^ak. This looks like a sort of "Sinai Group," since Von Soden put the Sinai manuscripts 1212 1213 1214 1215 1225 in K^ak. However, Wisse neither sees anything unusual about 1212's text nor lumps it with the other Sinai gospels; he places 1212 in K^x Cluster 1179. The four manuscripts in this cluster were all classified as K^ak by Von Soden, but the reverse is not the case. The fact that all the 1179s are part of K^ak perhaps does argue that we should look at this group outside Wisse's three chapters, but as far as I know, no one has done this.
Description and a facsimile of 1212 are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1213

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 176. Von Soden's ε1314. Contains the gospels complete. The colophon tells us that the scribe's name was George and that it was written in 1286. Black ink with red initials; one column per page. Chapter lists and titles, plus subscriptions for each gospel. Has the Eusebian and lectionary apparatus. Old Testament quotations are marked.
John 7:53-8:11 is obelized. But this is quite common in Sinai manuscripts and doesn't tell us much about the text. Von Soden thought it was K^ak (to which he assigned several Sinai manuscripts), but this group has not held up; the Alands put 1213 in Category V and Wisse put it in K^x Cluster 1213.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1214

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 177. Von Soden's ε1120. Contains the gospels complete. Dated to the eleventh century by all authorities. One column per page, brown ink with initials in red. Has chapter headings, hypotheses, lectionary indications, but no Eusebian apparatus. Since the hypothesis for Matthew and the subscription for John are missing, it is possible that leaves have been lost at both beginning and end, even though the text of the gospels themselves are complete. There are blank leaves at beginning and end.
There isn't a lot to say about the text. Von Soden put it in K^ak along with several other Sinai manuscripts (1212 1213 1215 1225; for this classification, see the notes on 1212), but the Alands stick it in Category V and Wisse demotes it to K^x. Its value seems quite slight.
Description and a facsimile of 1214 are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1215

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 178. Von Soden's ε1315. Contains the gospels complete. Dated paleographically to the thirteenth century. Black ink with red initials; one column per page. There are paintings of Matthew, Luke, and John, all damaged, and apparently another picture near the beginning that is so damaged that Hatch cannot identify what it is supposed to be. In addition to the full Eusebian and lectionary apparatus (including lection notes), it has hypotheses for the four gospels and for Mark and Luke individually. Old Testment quotations are marked. It also has two commentary items, one by Epiphanius, the other apparently anonymous.
Textually, it almost certainly needs a closer examination than it has received so far. The Alands wrote it off as Category V. Von Soden gave it the unenlightening classification K^ak -- unenlightening because the K^ak manuscripts do not seem to belong together, although curiously a great many of them are from Sinai. But the most curious thing is Wisse's classification. He makes it Mixed in Luke 1, K^x in Luke 10, Kmix in Luke 20 -- but lists it as Cluster 2283. Cluster 2283 has only three manuscripts, 1215, 2283, and 2605. But 2283 itself is listed as Kmix/K^x/K^x; 2605 is Kmix/Kmix/K^x. Thus there is no chapter where the three manuscripts of this alleged cluster all are of the same group! Fortunately, given that 1215 is at least mixed in Luke 1, it was included in IGNTP Luke. (Using that apparatus, I decided to check Luke 2. I examined all non-orthographic variants where there were at least two major manuscripts on each side, plus all readings where 1215 differed from the majority. There were, by my definition and my count, 87 such points of variation. There were only eight readings where 1215 differed from the majority. Five of these were omissions of a word or two -- more likely scribal slips than genetic readings; several of them were readings of the first hand that were corrected. It appeared that there was no other manuscript that agreed with 1215 in as many as five of these. We don't have a proper K^x profile for Luke 2, so I can't prove that it was an erratic K^x manuscript, but I suspect it was; if it wasn't, it would have been no more than a Kmix manuscript. Certainly, in that chapter, it wasn't worth any real attention.)
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1216

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 179. Von Soden's ε1043. Contains the gospels complete. Dated to the eleventh century by Hatch and the KListe; Gregory and Gardthausen preferred the tenth century. One column per page, brown ink with initials in red and gold. Has chapter headings, hypotheses, lectionary indications, Eusebian markings and tables, portraits of the Evangelists. Old Testament quotations are indicated. There are some notes from later hands -- a few in Latin rather than Greek. All in all, a very well-fitted-out manuscript.
The text is worthy of some attention. Among other things, it omits Matthew 16:2-3. The Alands don't put it in any Category, which implicitly recognizes it as not quite purely Byzantine, but Von Soden was more explicit, placing it in his group I^βb. Colwell determined that at least some of the I^β manuscripts did belong together, and Wisse, although he split off many of the manuscripts Von Soden put in this group, concurred that there is a Group 1216, with 1216 a good representative of the type. Wisse believe that another important Sinai manuscript, 1243, also belongs with the type in the Gospels.
Description and a facsimile of 1216 are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1217

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 158. Von Soden's ε1252. Contains the gospels complete. Dated by its colophon to 1186. (Curiously, the scribe's name has been erased from this colophon.) Brown ink, initials red. One column per page. Has the lectionary apparatus and lists of chapters but lacks the Eusebian apparatus. It nonetheless has a number of appendices of the sort you often find today in a certain sort of cheap Bible: A list of the twelve apostles, the seven deacons, twelve other disciples mentioned in Luke, ten appearances of Jesus; also scholia on John from Chrysostom.
It's hard to know if the text has any value. Von Soden placed it in K^x, and the Alands write it off as Category V. Wisse, although he says it is K^x in Luke 10 and 20, describes it as Mixed in Luke 1. So it might be worth examining the early chapters of Luke, and perhaps the final chapters of Mark, to see if it is of any interest.
Description and a facsimile of 1217 are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1218

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 181. Von Soden's ε1299. Contains the gospels complete; folio 192 (of 412) is a later insertion on paper (the rest is parchment). Dated to the eleventh century by Hatch; the KListe says twelfth; Gregory and Gardthausen preferred the twelfth or thirteenth century. One column per page, black ink with initials in red. Has chapter lists for Mark, Luke, and John; those for Matthew are presumably lost. Old Testament quotations are indicated, and there are lectionary markings, but the Eusebian apparatus is lacking. The text is not noteworthy. Von Soden placed it in K^x, and Wisse agrees. The Alands put it in Category V. Description and a facsimile of 1218 are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1219

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 182. Von Soden's ε1121. Contains the gospels complete. Dated to the eleventh century by all authorities. One column per page, brown ink with initials in red (a few having some gold as well). In addition to the usual Eusebian apparatus and lectionary markings, and notations of Old Testament quotations, it has extensive commentary features: Cosmas Indicopleustes's observations on the gospels; chapter lists, hypotheses, and a bunch of supplementary items: a comment on the relationship between Jesus and his brother James; a parallelism of the gospel resurrection stories; a list of post-resurrection appearances. Flyleaves include writings in Arabic and Syriac.
The text is at least moderately interesting. The Alands do not place it in any Category, implying that it is not purely Byzantine. Von Soden put it in I^κa,, that is, the a group of Family Π, and Wisse agrees, making it a core member of the group and pairing it with 489. Thus it is at least important for the history of the Byzantine text.
Description and a facsimile of 1219 are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1220

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 183. Not cataloged by Von Soden. Contains the gospels with extensive lacunae: all of Matthew, plus Mark 1:1-5:13. 5:33-6:8, 7:27-8:11. Two leaves are in St. Petersburg (Friends of Antique Literature 0.153); presumably these supply part of the lacunae in Mark. One suspects Tischendorf's hand in this.... Dated to the eleventh century by Hatch; Gregory, Gardhausen, and the KListe say tenth. Two columns per page, brown ink with initials in red. Because the beginning is missing, it is hard to know all the auxiliary elements included, but there are lectionary markings and Eusebian numbers, plus chapter lists for Luke and John. Some Old Testament quotations are marked. There is a note in Arabic at the end.
Since Von Soden did not know the manuscript, he of course did not classify it. The Alands put it in Category V. Wisse puts it in group M609. In any case, it seems pretty clear that it is Byzantine.
Description and a facsimile of 1220 are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1221

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 184. Von Soden's ε1122. Contains the gospels with minor lacunae. Dated to the eleventh century by all authorities. One column per page, brown ink with initials in red and gold. With Eusebian apparatus, lectionary markings, chapter lists; επιγραμμα for the first three gospels; hypotheses for Mark and Luke. Old Testament quotations are marked. There appear to have been small Evangelist portraits, but all have been cut out.
Luke 22:43-44 are included but obelized. This is the only known sign of interest in the text. Von Soden classified it as K^x, the Alands put it in Category V, and Wisse listed it as Kmix/K^x.
Description and a facsimile of 1221 are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1222

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 185. Von Soden's ε1090. Contains the gospels complete. Dated to the eleventh century by Hatch and the KListe; Gardthausen and Gregory said tenth or eleventh. A later hand added some punctuation. Two columns per page. Brown ink, with slightly enlarged initials but no special color used. Chapter lists for Mark-John; subscriptions to all the gospels; lectionary markings; Old Testament quotations marked.
The text is at least mildly interesting. The Alands don't think much of it, putting it in Category V. But Von Soden classified it as I^φr -- a group which also includes M and 71. Wisse agrees, at least in part, placing 1222 in the M27 group along with many others (including M and 71). So the Alands are right in calling it Byzantine, but at least it's a different kind of Byzantine.
Description and a facsimile of 1222 are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1223

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 186. Von Soden's ε1091. Contains the gospels complete. Dated to the eleventh century by Hatch; Gardthausen and Gregory said tenth or eleventh; the KListe says tenth. One column per page. Brown ink, with initials in red. Full lectionary equipment (including some lection notes) and Eusebian apparatus. Old Testament quotations are marked. There are chapter numbers and titles. Apparently Matthew is the only Gospel with a subscription.
There is a note by John 7:53-8:11 saying that it is not found in many copies. But in general the text is probably more Byzantine than anything else. The Alands put it in Category V. Von Soden rated it slightly better, putting it in I^φc. Wisse puts it in the Π groups, but not the same subgroup throughout; he places it in Π1441 in Luke 1 and 10 (a group which roughly corresponds with I^φc), Π268 in Luke 20. Possibly the manuscript would be worth a closer investigation.
Description and a facsimile of 1223 are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1224

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 187. Von Soden's ε1125. Contains the gospels complete. Dated paleographically to the twelfth century by Hatch and the KListe; Gardhausen and Gregory said eleventh. One column per page, black ink with red initials. It has most of the usual reader aids -- lectionary indications and tables, chapter numbers and lists, book subscriptions. Old Testament readings are marked. There are pictures (all damaged) of the evangelists. There are section markings, but they are not the standard Ammonian/Eusebian sections.
The one feature of interest in the text is that John 7:53-8:11 are obelized. But that doesn't mean that the text is in any way noteworthy. Von Soden lists it as K^r, Wisse agrees, and the Alands put it in Category V.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1225

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 188. Von Soden's ε1044. Contains the gospels complete. Dated to the eleventh century by Hatch; Gardthausen and Gregory said tenth or eleventh; the KListe says tenth. Two columns per page. Brown ink, with initials in the same color. Full lectionary equipment (including some lection notes from another hand) and Eusebian apparatus. Old Testament quotations are marked. There are chapter lists. At the end is a homily by Theodore of Trimithus on the life of Chrysostom, in a different hand from the main text.
Textually, there isn't much reason to be interested in 1225. Von Soden put it in K^ak (along with a bunch of other Sinai manuscripts), but the Alands relegated it to Category V and Wisse files it in K^x
Description and a facsimile of 1225 are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1226

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 189. Von Soden's ε1316. Contains the gospels complete. Dated paleographically to the twelfth century by Hatch; Gardhausen, Gregory, and the KListe say thirteenth. The first eight pages are a supplement (on paper) from a later hand. One column per page, black ink with black initials. Chapter numbers and titles; subscriptions for the first three gospels; Ammonian sections; lectionary indications; Old Testament quotations are marked.
Several disputed passages are obelized: Luke 22:44-45, John 5:4, John 7:53-8:11. But if the marginal indications seem to show text-critical interest, the text itself doesn't. Von Soden put it in K^x, Wisse agrees, and the Alands put it in Category V.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1227

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 190. Von Soden's ε497. Contains the gospels complete -- but from different scribes across many years. Gregory and Garthausen assigned all the texts to the fourteenth century, but Hatch and the KListe say they span the twelfth through fourteenth century. Hatch believes that three manuscripts were combined to form the existing volume. Matthew is from the thirteenth century; Mark and Luke (which came from the same original manuscript) are from the fourteenth; John is from the twelfth. All have brown ink and red initials, and all have one column per page, so it is easy to see why they were combined, but the hands are indeed very different. The only apparatus to Matthew is the Ammonian sections; the others all have lectionary indications and chapter lists; Mark and Luke have chapter titles and hypotheses as well. John has a preface with a history of John. There are two separate synaxaria, one between Luke and John, one at the end. There are a few added leaves of non-Biblical material at beginning and end.
Assessing the text is difficult because the manuscript is not a unity. Wisse lists it as K^x, which presumably is true in Luke, and probably Mark as well. The Alands put it in Category V -- but if Mark and Luke are K^x, they might miss a slightly better text in Matthew, and they didn't assess John at all. Von Soden made it A^k, which proves to be a mostly-Byzantine type. So there probably isn't much value in any part of 1227 -- but a closer examination, of all the parts, is probably needed if we are to be certain.
Description and facsimiles of two of the three parts in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1228

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 191. Von Soden's ε1253. Contains the gospels, badly damaged. The surviving portion includes Matthew 1:1-10:22, Matthew 28:19-20, Luke 6:3-John 20:11. Dated paleographically to the twelfth century by all authorities. Two columns per page, black ink with red initials. It probably had chapter lists for all the gospels, but only those for Mark and John survive. It has the Ammonian sections and lectionary indications, although the lection notes appear to be from a later hand. Old Testament quotations are marked.
With such so much missing material, assessing the text has been difficult. The Alands don't put it in any Category -- which usually means a manuscript not purely Byzantine, but in this case is probably due in part to the lack of text. Von Soden thought it was K^x,, but we can't know why he thought so. Wisse had only two chapters to profile, but found one to be Kmix and the other M27. This makes it seem likely there is some degree of block mixture, although possibly only of Byzantine types; more data is clearly needed.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1229

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 192. Von Soden's ε1317. Contains the gospels with defects; Matthew 1:1-11 (through αδελφους) is entirely lost; Matthew 10:5-12:45, 14:13-26, 21:19-end are supplements from a sixteenth century scribe. Dated to the thirteenth century by all authorities. One column per page, black ink with initials in red. Has Eusebian canon and lection notes; Old Testament quotations are indicated. Chapters are marked, and there are chapter lists for Matthew, Luke, and John; probably those for Mark were lost when the ending of Matthew was lost.
The text probably needs further examination. Wisse made it basically Byzantine, placing it in Cluster 1229. But the Alands didn't place it in any Category, implying a not-entirely Byzantine text, and von Soden placed it in I' -- a group which isn't real, but often the members of the type are mostly Byzantine with some mixture of other readings. Hatch reports that Matthew 16:2-3 and John 7:53-8:11 are omitted. It is collated in the IGNTP Luke, so I looked over its readings in Luke and reached a Wisse-ish conclusion: The text is pretty clearly distinct from the bulk of the majority text (about one difference every five or six verses) -- but none of the differences were of much significance: A word omitted, a slightly different verb form (possibly just an itacism), a substitution of synonyms. The text is unusual without being in any way interesting. I wonder a little if it is block mixed.
Description and a facsimile of 1229 are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1231

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 194. Von Soden's ε1403. As it now stands, it contains only a tiny fraction of Mark: Mark 2:14 (starting at αυτω ακολουθει) through 8:3 (ending with νηστεις εις). Even this tiny fragment takes 56 folios; there are only 12 lines per page and the print is very large; there are only a few dozen words, or about two verses, per page. The ink is brown, with red initials. The chapters have numbers and titles, and Old Testament quotations are indicated, but lectionary and Eusebian apparatus are not evident.
Textually, we can't say much about 1231. Von Soden didn't classify it and Wisse could not examine a volume that does't include Luke. The Alands relegated it to Category V, but obviously based on limited evidence. Looking at the sample in Hatch, it appears to agree exactly with the majority text, but the sample is so small that I am not sure I could correctly identify some of the letter forms.
Description and a facsimile of 1231 are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1232

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 195. Von Soden's ε545. Gospels. Complete, although Matthew 1:1-19 are a supplement from a later hand (the KListe lists it as damaged). The manuscript was donated to Sinai, although apparently not written, by a monk named Joachim. Hatch is certain it is fifteenth century, and Garthausen and Gregory also inclined toward that date. Paper. One column per page. Brown ink with red initials. It has chapter lists and hypotheses for each gospel, with Ammonian sections, lectionary marks, and symbols marking Old Testament quotations.
There is no sign that the text is interesting. The Alands put it in Category V, von Soden listed it as K^x, and Wisse lists it as K^x Cluster 281.
Description and a facsimile are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1233

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 196. Von Soden's ε546. Gospels, complete. Dated to the fifteenth century by all authorities. Paper. One column per page. Brown ink with red initials. There are paintings of all four evangelists. It has chapter lists for each gospel, and hypotheses for all but Matthew, with Ammonian sections, lectionary marks, and symbols marking Old Testament quotations. Mark has a subscription; there are various Patristic quotations in prefaces to other gospels.
The Alands put the text in Category V, but it's not a standard K^x or K^r manuscript. Von Soden listed it as I^κ (family Π), and Wisse agrees, placing it in Π171.
Description and a facsimile are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1234

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 197. Von Soden's ε498. Contains the gospels essentially complete -- the last leaf, containing the last verse and a half of John is a supplement by Anastasius the Cretan, who gave the manuscript to Mount Sinai in 1628. Dated to the fourteenth century by all authorities. Written on paper. Black ink, initials red. One column per page. There are lectionary indications and notes. Each gospel has a list of chapters and a subscription; Mark also has an hypothesis. Old Testament quotations are marked. There are section indications, but not the Eusebian/Ammonian sections.
The reason for the unusual sections is not hard to seek: both von Soden and Wisse classify it as K^r, and the Alands put it in Category V.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1235

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 198. Von Soden's ε499. Contains the gospels complete. Dated to the fourteenth century by all authorities. Written on paper. Black ink, initials red. Paper. One column per page. There are portraits of the Evangelists, plus subscriptions for the gospels, and it has the Eusebian tables and sections. But only a few lections have αρχη and τηλος indicated, and Old Testament quotations are rarely marked; one wonders if it was finished.
Luke 22:42 is marked with an obelisk. There doesn't seem to be much else that is unusual about the text, though. The Alands put it in Category V, and von Soden categorized it as K^x. Wisse modifies this slightly, placing it in Group 291, which has some kinship to Family Π, but it's still Byzantine.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1236

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 199. Von Soden's ε1400. Contains the gospels complete, although folios 152-155 and 162 of 162 are from a later hand. The scribe who wrote the additional folios gave his name as παπας Γεωργιος and gave the date as 1548, but the rest of the text is to the fourteenth century by all authorities. Brown ink, initials red. Paper. One column per page. There are lists of chapters for Mark, Luke, and John, and subscriptions for Mark and Luke; presumably that for John was lost when the last pages were damaged, and perhaps some material at the beginning was lost. There are lectionary marks and notes, but the sections are not the Ammonian Sections.
John 7:53-8:11 is obelized. This, and the unusual sections, both make sense in light of the text, because von Soden classifies it as K^r, and Wisse specified it as K^r Cluster 189. K^r has its own system of sections and often obelizes the Pericope. The Alands classify it as Category V, as we would expect of a K^r manuscript.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1237

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 200. Von Soden's ε599. Gospels, complete. Dated to the fifteenth century by Hatch and the KListe; Gregory and Gardthausen say fifteenth or sixteenth. Paper. One column per page. Brown ink with black initials, although red is used in the lectionary indications. Obviously this means it marks the lectinary readings; it also has sections. Each gospel also has chapter lists and hypotheses, plus hexameter comments. Old Testament quotations are marked.
The text is unusual enough that the Alands do not put it into any Category. Von Soden put it in I^φr -- the M-type text. Wisse agrees, making it a weak member of M1386. So, overall, it is more Byzantine than anything else.
As with many Sinai manuscripts, John 7:53-8:11 are obelized.
Description and a facsimile are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1238

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 201 (one leaf, no doubt "borrowed" by Tischendorf, is St. Petersburg, Public Library Greek 396). Von Soden's ε1322. Contains the gospels, much damaged -- the portion at Sinai consists of Matthew 1:1-18:19 (ending επι), Luke 9:31 (starting αυτου)-end, John 1:39 (starting [ερμηνευομε]νον)-end. (My gut tells me that the St. Petersburg leaf is the beginning of John, but I don't know.) Dated by its colophon to 1244; the scribe was named Ιακοβος. One column per page, black ink with red initials. Chapter numbers and titles; there are also lists for Matthew and John (the only books for which they would be extant). Old Testament quotations are marked, but the lectionary passages apparently are not.
Several disputed passages are obelized: Luke 22:43-44, John 5:4, John 7:53-8:11. It is noteworthy that many Sinai texts mark at least John 7:53-8:11 (1187, 1197, 1201, 1223, 1224, 1226, 1238); 1226 marks the same three passages as 1238. This is noteworthy because these five manuscripts are not of the same text-type; they represent most of the major strands of the Byzantine text (K^x, K^r, Family Λ, Family Π). This would hint that these passages were marked as some sort of local attempt to annotate the text. 1238 itself, however, seems un-noteworthy; von Soden classified it as K^x, Wisse agreed in the two chapters of Luke where 1238 is extant, and the Alands put it in Category V.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1239

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 203. Von Soden's ε617. Gospels, complete. Dated to the sixteenth century by all authorities. Paper. One column per page. Black ink with red initials. There are pictures of the four evangelists. That, plus the gold ink, hint at a de luxe copy, but there are almost no other marginal helps -- seemingly no lectionary indications or sections or anything -- I wonder if it was finished.
The text is late enough that von Soden didn't analyze it. The Alands put it in Category V. Wisse concluded that it was a copy of the Textus Receptus. It seems safe to say that it has no textual value.
Description and a facsimile are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1240

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 189. Von Soden's δ472. New Testament (excluding the Apocalypse) plus Psalms, in the order Psalms, Acts, Catholic Epistles, Paul (Hebrews follows Philemon), Gospels. Dated paleographically to the twelfth century. Romans and 2 Corinthians 9:2-11:8 are an addition by a later hand. Brown ink (except in the supplement, which has black ink) with red initials. The writing is quite small and the parchment sometimes imperfect.There are chapter lists for all the Gospels, plus Chrysostom's prologue to Luke and a list of chapters for that book only. There are lectionary markings throughout, and both synaxarion and menologion. There are hypotheses for the books in all parts of the New Testament. Old Testament quotations are marked. The KListe says there is a commentary on Matthew, but Hatch does not mention one.
The evidence, insofar as we have any, is that the text is Byzantine. The Alands put it in Category V, von Soden and Wisse classed it as K^x. For the Gospels, I'd consider that pretty conclusive. But K^x is a Gospels classification; one wonders if von Soden examined it in the Acts and Epistles. The Text und Textwert data for Acts certainly seems to indicate a Byzantine manuscript -- of the 103 readings tested, not one agrees with UBS against the Byzantine text. 1240 has the Majority reading in 97 of the 103 readings, and a reading that agrees with neither UBS nor the majority in 6. Those six are perhaps faintly interesting, though:
Acts 2:30 -- 1240 with 1642* 1678 1886 2255
Acts 2:46 -- 1240 with 3 205 209 582 796* 914 1767 2494
Acts 3:21 -- 1240 with 3 205 209 450 582 592 914 1886
Acts 18:27 -- 1240 with 97 263 385 466 582 617* 632 794 901 914 1490 1505 1722 1768 1831 1850 1890 2400 2495 2718
Acts 23:20 -- 1240 with 38 88 205 254 312 385 467 469 567 641 914 996 1319 1524 1573 1721 1742 1757 1842 1886 2085 2127 2712 2716
Acts 25:17 -- 1240 with B 056 3 43 51 97 181 209* 234 390 455 458 912 999 1003 1390 1405 1594 1622 1642 1748 1753 1829* 1838 1860 1873^supp 1886 2279 1431 2511 2576 2675
So 1240 agrees four times with 914 and with 1886, and three times with 3 205 209 582. Remember, these are rare readings! Is this a hint of some sort of kinship within the Byzantine text? 914 also has no readings that agree with UBS against 𝔐, and (apart from one singular reading) just six non-Byzantine readings, four of which agree with 1240. (1886 also has no readings which to with UBS against 𝔐, but it seems more erratic -- three singular readings to go with its nine readings that agree with neither UBS nor 𝔐.) Ideally we should investigate, although it's probably not very important in practice.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1241

Location/Catalog Number

Mount Sinai, where it has been for as long as it has been known. Catalog number: Katharinen-Kloster 260.

1241 contains the entire New Testament except the Apocalypse. Matthew 8:14-13:3 and Acts 17:10-18 have been lost. A few other portions are slightly damaged. 1 Cor. 2:10-end, 2 Cor. 13:3-end, Galatians, Eph. 2:15-end, Philippians, Colossians, Hebrews 11:3-end, and the Catholics Epistles come from a different hand. 1241 is written on parchment, with one column per page in the Gospels and two columns per page elsewhere.

Date/Scribe

Dated paleographically to the twelfth century. The original scribe is regarded as careless; there are many minor errors. The ink is black, with red initials.

There are images of the four evangelists, and a fifth picture after Acts, but all except the image of Matthew are "rude drawings without colour," according to Hatch.

Mark, Luke, and John have chapter lists; that for Matthew is presumably lost. There are lectionary marks, and Old Testament quotations are indicated.

Description and Text-type

1241 is a very diverse text. The text of Matthew and Mark is more Byzantine than anything else, though with many Alexandrian readings. In Luke the Alexandrian element prevails; 1241 is perhaps the best minuscule witness to that book. John is not as Alexandrian as Luke, but much better than Matthew and Mark.

1241 is entirely Byzantine in Acts. The Aland samples show only two non-Majority readings: Acts 13:42 (where it still has 101 allies, so clearly this is a Byzantine reading although not the Byzantine reading) and Acts 22:9 (where it has 49 allies, so this is again very possibly the reading of a Byzantine subgroup).

In Paul, the basic run of the text is Byzantine, but the supplements are of higher quality. Although still primarily Byzantine, there are many Alexandrian and other early readings.

In the Catholic Epistles 1241 is an excellent text, affiliated with family 1739. It appears to belong to a separate branch of the type (perhaps a "Sinai Group" as opposed to the "Athos Group" found in 1739 and 945?).

Wisse classifies 1241 as Group B (but notes that "the last part of [chapter] 1 is not Group B"). Von Soden lists it as H. Richards lists it as Group A³ (family 1739) in the Johannine Epistles. Amphoux also lists it as family 1739. Aland and Aland list it as Category I in the Catholics and Category III in the Gospels, Acts, and Paul.

Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript

von Soden: δ371. Tischendorf: 290^a; 338^p

Bibliography

Collations:
Kirsopp Lake & Silva New, Six Collations of New Testament Manuscripts (1932). Only Luke and John are collated.

Sample Plates:
Aland & Aland (1 page)
William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai, plate XLV

Editions which cite:
Cited in full in NA²⁶.
Cited in full in NA²⁷.
Cited in full in NA²⁸.
Cited in full in UBS³.
Cited in UBS⁴ for the Gospels, Paul, and the Catholics.
Cited by von Soden, Merk, and Bover for the Gospels.
Cited by SQE¹³ for the Gospels.
Cited by Huck-Greeven for the Luke.
Cited in IGNTP Luke.

Other Works:

Manuscript 1242

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 261. Von Soden's δ469. Contains the Gospels, Acts, and Catholic and Pauline Epistles (Hebrews follows Philemon). Hatch thinks the Gospels and the Acts and Epistles were originally separate volumes now bound together, and certainly they are from different hands. All are complete. The main part of the book is on parchment; at both beginning and end there are added paper leaves, both of which contain a menologion and synaxarion; the part at the end also has some "later notes." Dated to the thirteenth century by Hatch and the KListe; Gregory and Garthausen prefer the fourteenth. Both sections have one column per page, with brown ink and red initials; the gospels have 29 lines per page, the rest 27; the two parts also use slightly different punctuation. The Gospels have Eusebian markings and tables, as well as lectionary marks, with Old Testament quotations marked and some lection notes. The portion containing Acts and Epistles precedes Acts with information about Luke the Evangelist; there are hypotheses for the Epistles but not much else in the way of apparatus.
Hatch reports that the manuscript lacks John 7:53-8:11. There aren't many other hints of interest in the text, however. The Alands classify it as Category V. Von Soden put it in I', but that is not a coherent group, just a bunch of manuscripts von Soden didn't think were purely Byzantine; indeed, it might be the absence of the pericope that caused von Soden to put it there. Wisse in Luke classified it as Kmix/Kmix/1167, which means it is mostly Byzantine. It might be worth some additional examination, but I wouldn't expect much.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1243

Mount Sinai, where it has been for as long as it has been known. Catalog number: Katharinen-Kloster 262. Soden's δ198. Contains the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles, apparently complete. Dated to the eleventh century in the Kurzgefasste Liste and von Soden; Hatch thinks it is from the thirteenth century. Contains the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles; Hebrews follows Philemon. One column per page; brown ink with red initials. Spaces have been left for pictures at the beginning of the four Gospels, Acts, 1 Peter, and Romans, and whole pages have been left before James and Jude, perhaps also for portraits, but no portraits were ever supplied. The Gospels have Eusebian sections (but not tables) and there are lectionary marks throughout; Old Testament quotations are marked. There is a synaxarion but no menologion. Chapters are marked, and there are lists for the gospels, Catholic Epistles, and Romans, but Hatch does not report them for Acts or the later Pauline Epistles. There are a few notes from later hands near the beginning of the Gospels and before Acts.
In the Gospels, it is classified Category III by the Alands; von Soden described it as I^β. Wisse lists it as group 1216, paired with 1579, a group which corresponds very loosely with von Soden's I^β; it is mostly Byzantine but clearly distinct from K^x. In Acts and Paul, the Alands again rate it Category III; von Soden demotes it to K for Acts. The Catholics are very different; the Alands raise 1243 to Category I, and Wachtel places it in the least Byzantine category. In these books, 1243 is clearly a member of Family 1739, falling closer to 1739 than to 1241, though perhaps with some influence from the C type of text. In recognition of this, it was made a "constant witness" to the Catholic Epistles in NA²⁸.
The text of Acts is not as good, but certainly better than von Soden's classification implies; the Alands' data shows it as having seven readings which agree with the UBS text against the majority, and eleven which agree with neither (although an astonishing seven of those are singular). It appears to have no close relatives; among manuscripts which exist for 50 or more of the Alands' sample readings, it is closest to 1094, and they agree only 81% of the time. It agrees 80% with 133 319 632 656 1526. Those are all Byzantine manuscripts; it's clear that the Byzantine element is the dominant one, but it's not clear what the other 20% or so of the text is, and the Alands' small sample is not enough to let us be sure. The manuscript probably should get a more thorough examination.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1244

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 274. Von Soden's α75. Acts and Epistles, complete (Hebrews follows Philemon); also a writing by Basel on the eucharist (which Hatch says is not the one printed by Migne). Assigned to the eleventh century by Hatch and the KListe; von Soden and Gardhauen preferred the tenth. Brown ink with red initials (a few gold initials at the start of books). Single column. There is much supplementary material: Hypotheses (two different ones for several books, including a set by Theodoret at the end), chapter lists, prologues to Paul, and the Euthalian apparatus. At the end are a synaxarion and menologion, on paper, from a later hand.
There isn't much textual information about 1244. Von Soden simply classified it as K (Byzantine) without specifying a type. The Alands put it in Category V. The T&T data for Acts shows no instances of it agreeing with UBS against the Majority text, although there are six places where it agrees with neither. A detailed examination might reveal more, but odds are that it's almost purely Byzantine.
Description and a facsimile of 1244 are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1245

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 275. Von Soden's α158. Acts and Epistles, with Hebrews after Philemon. Portions of 2 Corinthians-Philippians have been misplaced in binding. Assigned to the twelfth century by Hatch, Gregory, and the KListe; Gardhauen preferred the eleventh. Brown ink with gold initials. Single column. Includes small portraits before each book. All books have lectionary markings; Old Testament quotations are marked. All books except Acts have hypotheses. All books have chapters and chapter titles, but only a few (2 and 3 John, 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews) have ists of chapters, according to Hatch.
Textual assessments of 1245 are conflicting. Von Soden put it in I^c1 -- in other words, Family 2138. Perhaps in deference to this, the Alands did not place it in any Category. Yet a glance at the affiliation data in the Text und Textwert volume for Acts shows no affiliation with any member of Family 2138 that I could see -- there are only five readings (out of 103) which disagree with the Majority text (one which agrees with UBS, three which agree with neither UBS nor 𝔐, and one singular); only one of these readings appears to be the reading of Family 2138. The T und T volume for the Catholics is less clear, but the numbers again look very Byzantine. Richards found it to by Byzantine (type B⁴ in 1-3 John. In the Acts and Catholics, where Family 2138 is easily identified, it seems clear that 1245 is not a member (at least in most of the books). Is Paul any different? Given what von Soden found, perhaps the matter needs more examination (particularly since Family 2138 is not as distinct in Paul), but I would not expect much.
Description and a facsimile of 1245 are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1246

Formerly Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 265. Gardthausen thought he saw it, but Gregory could not find it in 1906, von Soden did not catalog it, and Hatch was unable to locate it. The librarian at Sinai guessed it might have gone to Cairo. The first edition of the KListe has no location for it. It apparently contained the Gospels, Acts and Epistles. Given that it has been missing for so long, it is likely that, if it still exists and has been found, its connection with Sinai has been lost and it has a new number.

Manuscript 1247

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 266. Von Soden's δ566. Gospels, Acts and Epistles, complete. Hebrews follows Philemon. Dated to the fifteenth century by all authorities. Paper. Two columns per page. Brown ink with red initials. The name of Συμεων μοναχος Μοσχοπουλος is given after John, but it is not clear that he wrote it. There are pictures of the four evangelists.
I wonder a little if the Gospels were for a time bound separately, or were copied from such a manuscript, since there are hints of loss of secondary materials at both beginning and end: There are lists of chapters and hypotheses for Mark, Luke, and John but not Matthew; there are subscriptions for Matthew, Mark, and Luke but not John. The sections in the gospels are not the Ammonian sections. There are chapter numbers. The epistles also have hypotheses at the end of the volume. There are lectionary markings (with indications in red) and lection notes. Old Testament readings are marked.
John 7:53-8:11 is obelized. That, plus the unusual sections in the Gospels, would hint at a K^r text, but von Soden listed it as K^x. This seems to be an error, however; Wisse indeed classifies it as weakly K^r. (The Alands put it in Category V, which is doubtless true but not very helpful.)
Outside of the gospels there does not seem to have been any classification except the Alands'. In Acts, it does have six non-Byzantine readings in their sample, but only one of these is really rare (Acts 20:24 ουδενος λογου ποιουμαι ουδε εχω την ψυχην, found only in 460 1247 2194, although there are a great many similar but not identical readings). Three of 1247's other five non-Byzantine readings also occur in 460, a much less Byzantine manuscript; the two may be distantly akin, but probably there isn't much reason to care about 1247 when 460 is available, since it is probably a better manuscript of the type.
In the Catholics, it is again very strongly Byzantine, having only four readings which don't agree with the majority and all but one supported by more than a hundred manuscripts; even the one exception, James 2:5, has about thirty allies. My feeling is that it's probably a member of some Byzantine subgroup that occasionally splits from the majority.
Description and a facsimile are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1248

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 267. Von Soden's δ409. There is some disagreement about the contents of this manuscript. The original KListe says it contains the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles. However, Hatch says it contains the entire New Testament, including the Apocalypse -- and, since his facsimile is of the Apocalypse, I'd be inclined to believe Hatch! The New Testament is followed by a number of helps and Patristic writings, including one by Christopher of Alexandria (ninth century) and several by Ephraim. The biblical books themselves are in the order Gospels, Acts, Catholics, Paul (Hebrews follows Philemon), Apocalypse. It is apparently complete. Dated to the fourteenth century by all authorities. Paper. Black ink; red initials. One column per page. Almost all the usual apparatus are present: Eusebian sections, extensive lectionary material, list of chapters for the gospels, hypotheses for Mark-John and for all the epistles, chapter titles. Curiously, for such a heavily-annotated book, not all Old Testament quotations are marked. Neither the KListe nor Hatch describes it as a commentary manuscript, but there is clearly a commentary on Hatch's apocalypse page.
The text does not seem to be in any way interesting. The Alands classify it as Category V. Von Soden put it in K^x in the Gospels, K^r in Acts. Wisse put it in Kmix in Luke 1 but K^x in the other chapters. Richard put it in Group B² in the Johannine Epistles; given how many of the members of this group have high defection rates, I'm not confident of its existence, but it does look as if 1248 is Byzantine and pairs with 201. The link with 201 seems to be supported by the Text und Textwert volume for Acts; 1248 is too Byzantine to have its affiliations listed, but if we look at the six places where it is listed as non-Byzantine, two are places where it has minor variations on the Byzantine reading (perhaps accidental); the other four are places where a substantial block of manuscripts splits from the Byzantine text -- and 1248 agrees with 201 in all of these. It appears Schmidt classified it among the "Complutensian" manuscripts in the Apocalypse. It is hard to read the very small print in Hatch's facsimile, but it seemed to be an Andreas text as far as I tested it.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1249

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 276. Von Soden's α454. Acts and Epistles (Hebrews follows Philemon), almost complete; lacks Hebrews 10:38-end (ends ζησεται). Von Soden dated it to 1324, and the KListe reprints this, but Hatch could not find any dating information and believes it is from the twelfth century (there is a date of 1663 at the beginning of the book, but this was obviously written later). Black ink with red initials. There are chapters, but Hatch says they are not the usual ones. All books except Acts have hypotheses (Hebrews has two). Full lectionary apparatus, plus lection notes. Old Testament quotations are marked.
Insofar as we can tell, there isn't much value in the text. Von Soden classified it as K^r (which might explain those unusual chapter divisions mentioned by Hatch). The Alands put it in Category V. The T&T data for Acts shows only four instances of it agreeing with UBS against the Majority text and two readings that agree with neither. And in fact the four places where T&T lists it as non-Majority are places where the majority divides; in every one of them, 1249 agrees with between 80 and 160 others. Hodges and Farstad list three of the readings of 1249 as M^part readings and the fourth as a reading of K^r. So I think Von Soden's classification is likely right, although I don't have enough data to prove it.
Description and a facsimile are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1250

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 269. Von Soden's ε571 and α564. Gospels, Acts, and Epistles, with the Gospels at the end (which I suspect is why von Soden gave it two numbers rather than a single δ number. He might have a point, as there are hints that Matthew is defective at the beginning and John at the end). Hebrews follows Philemon. Paper, one column per page. Black ink with red initials. Written by a scribe named Acasius. Dated to the fifteenth century by all authorities. The manuscript has room for Evangelist portraits, but they were never supplied. All gospels have chapter lists and lectionary markings; all but Matthew have hypotheses; all but John have subscriptions. There are sections, but not the Ammonian sections. Old Testament quotations are indicated. There are hypotheses for all the Epistles except Romans; that to Hebrews is labelled προς Ρωμαιους. There are a few non-Biblical leaves at the beginning.
The Alands put the manuscript in Category V. This is certainly true in the Gospels; both von Soden and Wisse classify it as K^r, as you would expect based on the use of non-Ammonian section divisions. Outside of the gospels, I know of no attempt to classify it. In the Catholic Epistles, in the Alands' Text und Textwert data, it has only four readings which do not agree with the majority text. Three of these four are cases where there is a degree of division in the Majority text, implying that 1250 goes with the lesser branch but is still Byzantine; the only exception is Jude 18, where 1250 and 1876 are the only manuscripts to read εν εσχατω καιρω, but this might well be a scribal slip.
The situation in Acts appears to be significantly different. It still has only one instance where it agrees with UBS against the Majority text (Acts 21:8, where it has 181 allies; the Majority text is divided here), but it is listed as having nine which agree with neither: 2:23 (94 allies), 12:25 (60 allies), 13:42 (101 allies), 15:18 (16 allies), 15:34 (33 allies), 16:33 (16 allies), 23:1 (42 allies), 24:4-6 (14 allies), 25:5 (68 allies). These readings don't seem to match a major group such as Family 2138 or Family 1739, but they do seem to cohere a little; my guess, looking at these readings, is that 1250 belongs with von Soden's K^c type. However, I say this in the absence of an actual reconstructed K^c text compared against the Aland readings.
Description and a facsimile are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1251

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 270. Von Soden's δ269. Gospels, Acts, Paul, and Catholic Epistles, in that order; Hebrews follows Philemon. The original Kurzgefasste Liste marked it as incomplete, probably because Gardthausen and Gregory said it lacked James -- but Hatch says that James is present. The KListe, and seemingly Gregory, dated it to the thirteenth century; Hatch says the fourteenth. Two folia, containing Matthew 1:1-2:1 and 13:50-14:23, are missing and have been replaced by a later hand. Paper. Black ink, initials red. The Gospels have chapter lists; all books have subscriptions and chapter numbers and titles. There are lectionary markings and notes; there are sections in the Gospels, but they are not the Ammonian Sections. Some Old Testament readings are marked, but not all.
The Alands treat the manuscript rather strangely. It is not included in the list of Category V manuscripts; rather, in their list of minuscules of Category III or higher, they include it but label it as Category V?. Certainly it appears to be Byzantine in the Gospels. John 7:53-8:11 are obelized, but that is common in K^r manuscripts, and both von Soden and Wisse categorize it as K^r, with Wisse saying that it should pair with 2367.
The Aland statistics show a slightly higher rate of non-Byzantine readings in the Acts and Epistles, but it's clearly extremely Byzantine in Paul and the Catholics. In Acts, where thirteen of its readings are non-Byzantine... it looks a little more complicated. Most of the non-Byzantine readings are in roughly chapters 2-4 -- and every single one of them agrees with 429. It also agrees with 522 in most of them. The Alands sample only a few readings, so I cannot claim statistical significance, but I suspect, for at least part of Acts, that 1251 belongs with the 206/429/522 group that is related to families 1739 and 2138. Beyond those chapters, however, it is clearly Byzantine.
Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1252

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 302. Von Soden gave it the symbol Θ^ε49, and this appears to be correct; Hatch says that it is a copy of Theophylact's Commentary on the Gospels. The KListe says it is a complete Gospel commentary, and was written in 1306. The Alands list it as Category V, which is typical of Theophylact manuscripts.

Manuscript 1253

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 303. Von Soden gave it the symbol Θ^ε64, and this appears to be correct; Hatch says that it is a copy of Theophylact's Commentary on the Gospels. The KListe says it is incomplete, and was written in the fourteenth century. The Alands do not classify it, probably because it has only a portion of the Gospels.

Manuscript 1254

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 304. Gospel of Matthew, with commentary. The KListe says it is contains only Matthew, and was written in the fourteenth century. Von Soden did not catalog it, but based on the other commentary manuscripts in his part of the Sinai library, it was likely Theophylact's commentary. The Alands list it as Category V, which is typical of Theophylact manuscripts.

Manuscript 1255

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 305. Gospel of Luke, incomplete, with commentary. The KListe says it was written in the thirteenth century. Von Soden did not catalog it, but based on the other commentary manuscripts in his part of the Sinai library, it was likely Theophylact's commentary. The Alands list it as Category V, which is typical of Theophylact manuscripts.

Manuscript 1256

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 306. Gospels of Luke and John, with commentary. The KListe says it was written in the thirteenth century. Von Soden did not catalog it, but based on the other commentary manuscripts in his part of the Sinai library, it was likely Theophylact's commentary. The Alands do not classify it, probably because it has only a portion of the Gospels.

Manuscript 1409

Athos, Xiropotamu 244. Contains the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles with lacunae (e.g. there is a lacune of about a chapter around Acts 17). Dated to the fourteenth century in the Kurzgefasste Liste, and no other assessment is available (Von Soden does not seem to have examined it). Relatively little is known of its text as a result. In the Gospels, Wisse lists it as K^r with a surplus in Luke 1; this agrees with the Alands, who list it as Category V. The Alands also list it as Category V in Paul. In the Acts and Catholic Epistles, however, they promote it to Category II. That it is not entirely Byzantine in Acts is clear; whether it is as good as other Category II manuscripts is less so. It exists for 98 of the Alands' sample readings; it agrees with the UBS text in 43, with the Majority text in 56 (in 21 cases, it agrees with both UBS and Byz); it has 20 readings which agree with neither, two of which are singular. Among substantial witnesses (i.e. those where both MSS. exist for at least fifty of the Aland readings), its closest relative is 2746, but their agreement is only 66%. It agrees 63% with 2175 2774. The list below shows the readings where it agrees with neither UBS nor the majority:
Acts 2:38 -- 1409* with 6 460 629 1722
Acts 2:43-44 -- with E 33 104 181* 459 1722^c 1838 1842^c 1884 2344 2774
Acts 2:47-3:1 -- with 218 365 1359 1595 2718
Acts 3:21 -- with ℵ² B^c E 94 363 610 945 1106 1678 1884 2818
Acts 4:33 -- with ℵ A 1175
Acts 10:30 -- singular
Acts 13:33A -- with 𝔓⁷⁴ ℵ A B C* D
Acts 13:42 -- with 101 other manuscripts including L 049 5 88 623^c 1241 1852 1877 2298 2492
Acts 15:17-18 -- singular but close to 38 256 365 1319 1573 2772
Acts 15:24 -- with H L 90 432 442 603 621 921 996 1070 1247 1249 1409 1842 1896 2508
Acts 15:34 -- with 87 other manuscripts including 5 6 33 88 94 180 307 323 383 441 453 610 614 623 1175 1739 1891 2298 2344 2412
Acts 19:3 -- with 𝔓⁴¹ 𝔓⁷⁴ ℵ A E 5 33 436 623 1642 1735 1873 1884 2344 2374 (2805)
Acts 19:14 -- with E Ψ 181 629 1319^supp 1875 (and close to 𝔓⁷⁴ ℵ A B C 33 94 206 429 522 945 1175 1490 1704 1735 1758 2298 2344)
Acts 20:24a -- with 441 621 (and close to 𝔓⁷⁴ ℵ² A 181 1735^c 1875 2344)
Acts 20:29 -- with 180^c 206 429 441 522 621 629 630 945 1490 1509 1704 1735 1758 1831 1842* 2344 2805
Acts 21:20 -- with ℵ 3 97* 209* 457* 1642 1717 2243 2816*
Acts 23:20 -- with 85 other manuscripts including ℵ² Ψ 6 94 180 307 424^c 436 441 483 610 614 629^c 876 945 1175 1505 1611 1739 2138 2298 2412 2495
Acts 23:30 -- with 6 2147 2541 2652
Acts 24:6-8 -- with E 180 628 1161 1847 1884 2541
Acts 26:14 -- with H 049 57 61 62 142 172 216 322 323 326 440 567 629 935 1311 1404 1609 1642 1643 1702 1722 1727 1829 1837 1850 1857 1871 2085 2086 2401 2483 2774 2799
It is clear that the manuscript has a strong Byzantine element, and the non-Byzantine readings do not stand particularly close to any other witness. Note how many of the readings above see it allied with obscure, mostly-Byzantine manuscripts which split from the Majority for one or two readings which agree with 1409. Frankly, it looks to me as if a high fraction of 1409's non-Byzantine readings come from many generations of bad copies; I would list it as Category III, not Category II.
In the Catholic Epistles, Wachtel groups it with 436 1067 2541 (though the Alands list 436 2541 as Category III in the Catholics and 1067 as Category II); this group of manuscripts appears generally Alexandrian, with a text much like A 33 but with more Byzantine readings.

Manuscript 1424

Location/Catalog Number

Chicago (Maywood). Catalog number: Jesuit-Krauss-McCormick Library, Gruber Ms. 152. Originally from Kosinitza, Turkey.

1424 contains the entire New Testament with marginal commentary. Matthew 1:23-2:16 are lost (a loss of one folio). There are marginal commentaries on the Gospels and Pauline Epistles. I read somewhere that it also contains Hermas, but Clark's list of the contents does not mention this (although there is a brief Martyrdom of Paul before the epistles proper). The order is unusual; Gospels (with commentary), Acts, Catholic Epistles, Apocalypse, and Pauline Epistles (with commentary). One folio of 2 Corinthians was lost and added by a later hand.

Date/Scribe

Dated paleographically to the ninth or tenth century. 1424 is written on parchment, one column per page. It was written by a monk names Sabas. The Eusebian apparatus is by a different, probably later, hand. There are a few other notations from later hands, which are of no textual interest.

Description and Text-type

Although 1424 contains the entire New Testament, all interest in the manuscript has focussed on the gospels (the Alands classify it as Category V, i.e. purely Byzantine, everywhere but in the Gospels, and there is no reason to question this).

The manuscript generated uncertainty from the very start, when it received the Scrivener symbol ג, although it is not an uncial. Others apparently also called it an uncial.

Von Soden did not help matters when he classified 1424 as a witness to the I^φ group. He broke this group down into four subgroups:

I^φa: 1424 517 1675 954 349 1188(John)
I^φb: 7 267 659 1606(Matt-Luke) 1402(Matt+Mark) 1391(Matt+Mark) 115 117 827 1082(Mark) 185(John)
I^φc: 1293 1010 1223 945 1207(Luke+John) 990
I^φr: M 1194 27(Matt+Mark) 71 692(Mark)

Streeter renamed this group Family 1424 (the name most often used today, although Huck-Greeven uses the symbol Σ and adopts the title the "Soden Group"). Not unexpectedly, Streeter also declared the family to be "Cæsarean" (this is not surprising because Streeter declared everything "Cæsarean" that was not demonstrably something else). Even Streeter conceded family 1424 to be only a tertiary witness to the type.

The work of Wisse, however, seems to have dissolved the I^φ group. Wisse finds 1424 to be a diverging member of Cluster 1675, which also contains 517, 954, 1349 (in Luke 1), and 1675, and thus corresponds to I^φa.

However, Wisse classifies the members of I^φb as follows: 7=Cluster 7, 267=Cluster 7, 1606=K^x Cluster 187, 115=K^mix/K^x, 117=K^x, and 827=Cluster 827. Thus this group apparently is to be dissolved.

The members of I^φc break down as follows: 1293=K^mix/K^x Cluster 160, 1010=K^mix/K^x Cluster 160, 1223= Family Π (various subgroups), 945=K^mix/K^x, 1207=Family Π (Group 473, pair with 944). Thus I^φc may survive in the form of K^x Cluster 160 (consisting of 160, 1010, and 1293, all classified as I^φc), but there is no reason to link this group with 1424.

The members of I^φr are listed by Wisse as follows: M=M27 (diverging member), 1194=M10, 71=M27 (core member). Thus I^φr, which Wisse renames the "M groups," is also real, but not evidently related to 1424.

All of the above must be treated with a certain amount of caution, since Wisse worked only on Luke and his method does not assess mixture. However, it would appear that I^φ needs to be dissolved. Thus Family 1424, instead of referring to I^φ as a whole, should be reserved for the small group 517, 954, (1349), 1424, 1675.

Whether this group is "Cæsarean" is another question. It is worth noting that Aland and Aland find 1424 to have an interesting text only in Mark (but do not classify the other members of Wisse's Cluster 1675. This often means that the manuscripts are heavily Byzantine but have too many non-Byzantine readings to write off as Category V; such manuscripts often belong to one of the non-K^x groups). The table below shows the rate of agreements for 1424 with an assortment of other manuscripts. Both overall and non-Byzantine readings are noted. The data is for Mark only; 1424 was profiled in 212 readings, of which 49 were non-Byzantine.

Manuscript	Overall Agreements	Non-Byzantine Agreements
ℵ	35%	33%
A	80%	(Insufficient samples)
B	40%	41%
C	58%	56%
D	36%	56%
E	84%	(No samples)
K	82%	(Insufficient samples)
L	51%	59%
W	45%	53%
Δ	54%	57%
Θ	53%	76%
Ω	81%	(Insufficient samples)
f¹	68%	56%
f¹³	69%	69%
28	61%	79%
33	72%	100%
565	50%	65%
579	73%	82%
700	66%	73%
892	62%	71%
1071	80%	82%
1241	85%	91%
1342	65%	67%
a	38%	50%
arm	54%	75%
geo1	47%	73%

On the evidence, it would appear that 1424's non-Byzantine readings are late Alexandrian, not "Cæsarean." Yes, it agrees with Θ f¹ f¹³ 700 much more than with ℵ or B -- but note its 100% agreement with 33 in non-Byzantine readings! It's also closer to 892 than to several so-called "Cæsarean." witnesses.

In the rest of the New Testament 1424 hardly bears mentioning; it's just another Byzantine witness. In Acts, e.g., the Alands' statistics show only two readings, out of 104, which don't agree with the Byzantine text (and one of these may have been a scribal error in 1424*, and in the other, 1424 has 47 allies, so it might be a member of a Byzantine subgroup).

Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript

von Soden: δ30.

Bibliography

Collations:

Sample Plates:
Clark, Greek New Testament Manuscripts in America, plate XXIV.

Editions which cite:
Cited in NA²⁶ and NA²⁷ for the Gospels.
Cited in UBS³ and UBS⁴ for the Gospels.
Cited by Von Soden, Merk, and Bover for the Gospels.

Other Works:
B. H. Streeter, The Four Gospels: A Study of Origins (MacMillan, 1924) devotes considerable space to the relations between the various "Cæsarean" witnesses.
Clark, Greek New Testament Manuscripts in America, pp. 105-107.

Manuscript 1448

Athos, Lavra A' 13. Soden's δ256. Contains the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles apparently complete. Dated to the eleventh century in the Kurzgefasste Liste, and to the twelfth by von Soden. Von Soden seems to have regarded it as a K^x manuscript, which may be true in the gospels but is not so elsewhere. Even in the Gospels, it isn't a member of one of the standard Byzantine groups; Wisse lists it as Cluster 127 -- a group that seems to be mostly Byzantine (close to K^x in places), and which includes no particularly noteworthy manuscripts, but is nonetheless independent. Still, there is no question but that Cluster 127 is Byzantine. This corresponds to the assessment of the Alands, who rate 1448 as Category V (Byzantine) everywhere except in the Catholic Epistles, where they promote it to Category III. Amphoux seems to have been the first to identify it as a member of 2138 and Family 2138, an identification partly confirmed by Wachtel, who does not consider it to be a true member of Family 2138 but lists it (along with 1852) as being in the "Umfeld" of the family, implying that it is somewhat akin. It is among the witnesses added in NA²⁸ for the Catholics, although given the number of Family 2138 witnesses, it is perhaps not one of the more important additions.
Although there isn't much question but that it is mostly Byzantine outside the Catholics, it does show some hints of interest in Acts, having eight non-Byzantine readings in the Aland sample:
Acts 3:22 -- with 102 175 189 45 1102 1127 1270 1297 1315 1597 1598 1721 1896 2085 2131 2374 2799
Acts 4:33 -- 1448* with 69 321
Acts 18:17 -- singular
Acts 21:8 -- with 181 other manuscripts including 𝔓⁷⁴ ℵ A C E Ψ 5 33 94 181 307 322 323 436 441 453 614 623* 629 630 945 1175 1505 1611 1739 1891 2138 2298 2344 2412 2495
Acts 23:1 -- with 42 other manuscripts including B 307 436 453 610 614 623* 1505 1611 2138 2412 2495
Acts 23:20 -- with 85 other manuscripts including ℵ² Ψ 6 94 180 307 424^c 436 441 610 614 629^c 945 1175 1505 1611 1739 2138 2298 2412 2495
Acts 24:6-8 -- with 226 465 603^c 901 959 1448 1618 1649 1741 1750 2523 (but this is a very fractured reading that really consists of many variants and should not be used for assessing mixed manuscripts)
Acts 25:5 -- with 44 other manuscripts including ℵ A B C E 5 33 81 104 181 436 623* 630 945 1175 1739 1891 2298 2344
What I observe here is a manuscript which is purely Byzantine in the first twenty or so chapters of Acts (the only non-Byzantine readings look like errors), but somehere around Acts 20, it starts showing readings of the 453/1739/2138 type (groups that are hard to clearly distinguish in Acts without more readings than this). My guess would be that it is descended from the same sort of source in Acts as in the Catholic Epistles, but that it was corrected toward the Byzantine text, and the correction was near-total in Acts 1-20, but got sloppier in the later chapters of Acts and in the Catholic Epistles. Thus a better description of its type in Acts (pending further investigation) might be "Category V in chapters 1-20, Category III (probably family 2138) in chapters 21-28."