New Testament Manuscripts

Numbers 1501-2000

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:

Manuscript 1505

Location/Catalog Number

Mount Athos, where it has been as long as it has been known. Catalog number: Athos Laura B' 26

Contents

1505 contains the entire New Testament except the Apocalypse; also Psalms and Odes. It is written on parchment, 1 column per page.

Date/Scribe

The colophon (which is not in the same hand as the manuscript) claims a date of 1084. E.C. Colwell has shown that the colophon (the text of which is shown below) is fraudulent.

Εγραφη επι της βασιλει[ας] του ευσεβεστατου κ[αι]
φιλοχριστου κ[υριο]υ αλεξιου μ[ε]γ[α]λ[ου] δουκα
σεμβαστου του κομνηνου επι ετ[ους] ςφϘβ
κυ[κλω ελιου] θ κυ[κλω] [σεληνης] ιη ενδ[ικτιωνος]
η η αποκρεα ιανουριω λα νομ[ικον] φασκ[α] μ[α]ρ[τιω]
κε χρ[ιστιανον] πασχ[α] μ[α]ρ[τιω] κη η νηστεια τ[ων]
αγ[ιων] αποστολ[ων] ημερ[αι] λς

(For further discussion of this forged colophon, see the appropriate item in the article on Scribes and Colophons).

The manuscript probably dates from the twelfth century. Gary S. Dykes believes that it is by the same scribe as 2400, which the Alands date to the thirteenth century but which Dykes believes to come from the twelfth century.

Description and Text-type

1505 is most closely associated with 2495 (XV, at Sinai). 2495 could perhaps be a slightly corrupted descendent of 1505; certainly they have a close common ancestor. In Acts, for instance, if the Aland statistics are correct, 2495 is 1505's closest relative among manuscripts which have at least 50 sample readings; they agree 88% of the time. 1505's next-closest relatives, in order, are 1890 (81%), 2138 (79%), 1856 (73%), and 1611 (73%).

In the gospels, von Soden listed 1505 as Kx. Wisse describes it as Kmix/Kmix/Kx, and adds "Kx Cluster 261 in 1 and 10; pair with 2495."

In the Acts and Epistles, 1505 is a member of family 2138 (also known as family 614 or family 1611). It is one of the leading members of the group, especially in Paul, where the family consists of only a handful of manuscripts (1505, 1611, 2495, the Harklean Syriac, 1022 in part, and probably 2005). In the Acts and Catholics, where the family breaks down into several subgroups, 1505 and 2495 form their own subgroup (other important subgroups include 2138+1611, 2412+614, and -- in the Catholics -- 630+1799+429+522+206. For further details, see the entry on 2138.)

Family 2138 is often described as "Western." This is perhaps open to question; its kinship with D is, at the very least, loose. The family contains a significant number of non-Byzantine non-Alexandrian readings, but these appear to me to come from their own independent tradition.

Aland and Aland classify 1505 as Category V in the Gospels and Category III in the Acts and Epistles.

See also the entry on 2495.

Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript

von Soden: δ165

Bibliography

Collations:

Sample Plates:
Kirsopp & Silva Lake, Dated Greek Minuscule Manuscripts to the Year 1200 A.D.

Editions which cite:
Cited in NA26 for the Catholic Epistles.
Cited in NA27 for Acts, Paul, and Catholics.
Cited in NA28 for Acts and Paul but no longer included in the apparatus for the Catholics
Cited in UBS4 for the Gospels and Catholics.

Other Works:
E.C. Colwell, "Methods in Validating Byzantine Date-Colophons: A Study of Athos, Laura B.26," originally published as "A Misdated New Testament Manuscript: Athos, Laura B.26 (146) in Quntulacumque: Stodies Presented to Kirsopp Lake...; republished in Colwell, Studies in Methodology in Textual Criticism of the New Testament, pp. 142-147
See also the various articles by C.-B. Amphoux concerning Family 2138.

Manuscript 1506

Location/Catalog Number

Mount Athos, where it has been as long as it has been known. Catalog number: Athos Laura B' 89.

Contents

Contains the gospels with very many minor lacunae. Also contains Romans plus 1 Corinthians 1:1-2, 1:4-4:15, again with minor lacunae. Written on parchment, 1 column per page. Commentary manuscript; Maurice Robinson (confirming Von Soden) notes that it has a "Theophylact interspersed commentary."

Date/Scribe

The colophon gives a date of 1320. The text is written in red ink, with the commentary in black; the latter is much easier to read. Maurice Robinson, who has examined films of the manuscript, makes this observation: "Theoph. Comm. interspersed with text; but the red ink used for the text is so light [on the film] as to be virtually non-readable. Only major readings can be noted, and not orthographic or individual letters in most cases."

Description and Text-type

In the gospels 1506 is thoroughly Byzantine (making it very mysterious that Aland included it in the later editions of SQE). It was not profiled by Wisse due to an illegible microfilm. (No doubt the poor condition of the manuscript is largely responsible for this; in addition, Wisse generally did not examine commentary manuscripts.) Nonetheless, it does not appear to belong to the major Byzantine strands (Kx, Kr, etc.), as it omits the story of the Adulteress.

In Paul, insofar as it survives, 1506 is extraordinarily valuable. The overall cast of its text is Alexandrian, falling close to ℵ. But it also has at least one unique reading: Alone among known Greek manuscripts, it omits chapter 16 of Romans. (It place the doxology of Romans after both chapter 14 and chapter 15.) Many scholars have, of course, questioned whether chapter 16 belongs here; the finding of a Greek manuscript which omits the chapter is, at the very least, interesting.

Aland and Aland classify 1506 as Category V in the Gospels and Category II in Paul.

Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript

von Soden: Θε402

Bibliography

Collations:

Sample Plates:

Editions which cite:
Cited in NA26-NA28 for Paul (although, given the state of the manuscript, its readings can only be considered assured when it is cited explicitly).
Cited in SQE13 for the Gospels.
Cited in UBS4 for Paul.

Other Works:

Manuscript 1518

Now lost, although we have significant data about its readings. Tischendorf 216a, 272p; Von Soden's α551; also cited as cscr. A paper manuscript, usually dated to the fifteenth century. It was brought to England, apparently from the Ottoman Empire, by J. D. Carlyle around the end of the eighteenth century. In 1804 it went into the Lambeth library. In 1817, it went back to Constantinople, and that original manuscript can no longer be traced. However, a collation was kept at Lambeth, and it seems that the collation is what is usually meant when we refer to 1518. It was Bourdett-Coutts III.37, and is now at the University of Michigan library. A. V. Valentine-Richards, The Text of Acts in Codex 614 (Tisch. 137) and its allies gives a complete text of 614 in Acts along with collations of 383 431 1518. However, although this book was published in 1934 (and reissued in paperback in 2014), the work was done long enough ago that the collations use Tischendorf numbers rather than New Gregory numbers.
For more details about its family, see the entry on 2138 and Family 2138.

Manuscript 1611

Athens, National Library 64. Von Soden's α208; Tischendorf 307a, 351p, 105r; Scrivener 307a, 469p, 111r. Contains the Acts, Pauline and Catholic Epistles, and Apocalypse with lacunae. Considered by von Soden to belong with Ic1 in the Acts and Epistles and to go with Αν (Andreas) in the Apocalypse. Dated to the tenth century by Scrivener/Miller, to the twelfth by von Soden and Kurzgefasste Liste, and to the tenth by NA28. Its text has long been known to be interesting; von Soden's classification as Ic1 places it in 2138 and Family 2138 (also known as Family 1611) in the Acts and Epistles, and every study since his time has confirmed that; Wachtel put it in Hkgr, Richards listed it as Group A1 in the Johannine Epistles (a group he called Alexandrian but which is in fact Family 2138), Amphoux put it in the 2138/1611 type in the Catholics, and Barbara Aland cited it as one of her Greek witnesses paralleling the Harklean Syriac in the Catholic Epistles (the Harklean is known to be part of the 2138 type). In Acts, among substantial manuscripts, its closest relative is 2138 (87% agreement), followed by 1890 (83%), 1292 (82%), 614 (81%), 2412 (78%), and 2652 (75%). The Alands list it as Category III in the Acts, Paul, and the Catholics (this is typical of Family 2138 witnesses), and as Category II in the Apocalypse. Despite their high rating in the Apocalypse, its main importance is probably in the Acts and Catholic Epistles; for details, see the entry on 2138 and Family 2138.

Manuscript 1735

Mount Athos, Athos Laura B' 42. Von Soden's α182. Dated to the eleventh century by von Soden, to the eleventh or twelfth by the Alands and the Kurzgefasste Liste, and to the tenth by NA28. One wonders if the upgrade to its date didn't come about because it was realized to be interesting.
Von Soden, based surely on inadequate data, listed it simply as K (Byzantine), but this is clearly not the whole story. The Alands list it as Category II in the Catholic Letters, and as Category III in the Acts and Paul -- although both those numbers strike me as somewhat high. It is only mildly non-Byzantine, by their numbers, in Acts and Paul, although distinctly non-Byzantine in the Catholics.
Other than that, the nature of the text in the Catholics is somewhat uncertain. Wachtel listed it as strongly non-Byzantine, but this is not really a classification. Amphoux and Outtier placed it with 1739. Based on my own test of readings in James, chapter 2, this is simply wrong; in that chapter, at least, it goes strongly with the group consisting of A 33 81 436, and shows no special kinship with 1739 at all. However, that is based on only a single chapter; further examination might reveal more.
It is only with NA28 that 1735 has finally made it into the critical apparatus, for the Catholic Epistles.
In Acts, the text appears to be curious. The Alands list it for 100 of their 104 sample readings; 35 of these agree with UBS, and 80 with the majority text (24 agree with both); there are just ten readings which agree with neither. But, stunningly, five of these ten are singular (although two of the five are relatively minor variants on the UBS text). Is the manuscript merely a poor copy, or is it something else? I note that, among substantial manuscripts, there is no manuscript with which it agrees more than 82% of the time (2712), and even that might be a biased sample, because the two exist for only 55 readings. It agrees only 79% with 1456, its next-closest ally (based on 70 readings). There is no well-known non-Byzantine manuscript with which it agrees even 75% of the time (which is where Text und Textwert cuts off its list of relatives). Probably the manuscript needs a more detailed study.

Manuscript 1739

Location/Catalog Number

Mount Athos, where it has been as long as it has been known. Catalog number: Athos Laura B' 64

Contents

1739 contains the Acts, Paul, and the Catholic Epistles. Acts 1:1-2:6 are from another, later hand. The quire numbers indicate that the volume originally contained the Gospels as well. (One may speculate that Acts 1:1-2:6 were removed when the Gospels and Acts were separated.) It may have also contained the Apocalyse; we simply cannot tell at this time (the last page of the manuscript shows signs of offprints of a kephalia list for the Apocalypse, but these do not appear to come from the same scribe). There are a number of marginal comments from early church fathers; in Paul the majority of these are from Origen, though in the Acts and Catholic Epistles other writers come to the fore.

At some point several of the pages had portions cut off; this evidently cost us the colophon for Acts and part of that for Paul. Several of the marginal notes also seem to have suffered attempts at erasure. It has been speculated that these were removed by an owner of the manuscript who disapproved of their contents (perhaps he didn't approve of the editor of the commentary? And the editor probably gave his name, as there are comments in the first person).

1739 is written on parchment, 1 column per page.

Date/Scribe

Dated paleographically to the tenth century.

The scribe, who gives his name as Ephraim, also wrote the Venice Aristotle (Codex Marcianus 201), dated by its colophon to 954. Ephraim is also believed to have written the gospel codex 1582, dated 949, and our chief manuscript of Polybius (believed to date from 947).

In his work on 1739, Ephraim copied a preface to the Pauline Epistles which apparently came from the compiler of this commentary edition. It states that that edition was based on a very ancient manuscript which was found to have a text similar to Origen's. The exception is Romans, which was taken directly from the text of Origen's commentary on that book.

It has been thought that Ephraim compiled the commentary himself, but it seems more likely that he had it before him and copied it.

One or two later hands have worked on the codex, probably during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. One added lectionary notes. The same or (more likely) another added comments that Lake called "long but unimportant." Also around this time, a reader attempted to eradicate many of the ancient notes. It is possible that this is also the person who cut off the final colophon. Whoever this person was, he has significantly reduced our knowledge of this most valuable of codices.

Description and Text-type

The earlier editors classified 1739 as Alexandrian. Von Soden describes it as a member of the H group in Paul; in Acts he placed it with Ib2.

Zuntz, based on a far more detailed examination of 1 Corinthians and Hebrews (only), placed it in its own text-type with 𝔓46, B, and the Coptic versions.

The Lakes considered it a strong representative of the "Cæsarean" text.

Richards places it in his "Group A3," which I would call "family 1739," in the Johannine Epistles. The work of Duplacy and Amphoux confirms the existence of this group in the Catholics as a whole. (Wachtel, however, who examines manuscripts based on relatively few readings, does not distinguish the "Alexandrian" and family1739 texts.)

Thomas C. Geer, who examined Family 1739 in Acts, concluded that the manuscript was Egyptian, but also belonged to Family 1739. (For this rather contradictory statement, see the section on family 1739 below.)

The similarity to the text of Origen, first noted by the compiler of the ancestor, is real, although 1739's text is by no means identical to Origen's. It should be noted, however, that there is no evident change in text-type between Romans and Paul's other letters.

In the author's opinion, family 1739 forms its own text-type, which (in Paul in particular) falls between the other three non-Byzantine text-types (𝔓46/B, Alexandrian, "Western"). Also in the author's opinion, the readings of this group are extremely early and deserve consideration equal to that given to the best uncials.

1739 is the best and usually the earliest representative of a large textual grouping. In the Acts (where the family is perhaps slightly poorer than in the Epistles), other members of this group include 323, 630, 945, and 1891. In Paul, they include 0121(a), 0243/0121b, 6, 424**, 630 (in part), and 1881 (1908 has an abbreviated form of the commentary in Romans, but the text is different). In the Catholics, 1739's allies include 323, 945, 1881, 2298, and (at a slightly greater distance) C/04 and 1241. Zuntz believes that the other Pauline manuscripts (0243, etc.) are descendents of 1739. In my opinion, however, the type goes back before 1739, as most of the lesser manuscripts (with the exception of 0121) preserve at least occasional non-Byzantine readings not found in 1739 itself.

Scholars have speculated that 1739 was copied from a fourth or fifth century commentary manuscript (since none of the marginal commentators quoted date from after the fourth century, and it appears that the scholia were already present in Ephraim's exemplar). Zuntz, in fact, believes that the text of this manuscript was contemporary with 𝔓46 (second century). Against this we should point out the flowering of family 1739 texts in the tenth century -- there are three (1739, 0121, 0243) from that century, and only C (which is a marginal member of the type) occurs earlier. (See, however, the comments by Zuntz on 0121/M). The nature of the text also may argue against this; it seems to me likely (though far from certain) that the combined edition of text and commentary was compiled during the Photian revival of learning of the ninth century. The text itself, of course, is very much older.

1739 was copied from an uncial ancestor. It is possible that this manuscript was also the exemplar of 0243; the two are that close. It seems more likely, however, that 0243 and 1739 are "first cousins," each copied from the same exemplar with one intervening copy. (The marginal commentary in 1739 may have been added to the intervening copy, or more likely the copyist of 0243 or its parent did not bother with the marginalia.) The other members of the family go back somewhat further, and form their own subgroups (e.g. 6 and 424** seem to descend from a common text).

Aland and Aland classify 1739 as Category II in Acts and Category I in Paul and the Catholics.

Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript

von Soden: α78

Bibliography

Collations:
Kirsopp Lake & Silva New, Six Collations of New Testament Manuscripts. (1932) Collated by Morton S. Enslin from photographs by R.P. Blake. The text and annotations are collated separately. A few passages are omitted because of damaged photographs.

Sample Plates:
Lake & New (1 page)
Aland & Aland (1 page)
Metzger, Manuscripts of the Greek Bible (1 page)

Editions which cite:
Cited in full in NA26, NA27, and all UBS editions. Also cited by von Soden, Merk, and Bover, but these collations are highly inaccurate.

Other Works:
J.N. Birdsall, A Study of MS. 1739 and its Relationship to MSS. 6, 424, 1908, and M (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, 1959)
E. von der Goltz, Eine Textkritische des zehnten bezw. sechsten Jahrhunderts. (1899; includes much of the text, but collated under bad conditions and rather inaccurate. The marginalia are not included.)
Otto Bauernfiend, Der Römerbrieftext des Origens (Texte und Untersuchungen, xiv.3, 1923; includes a discussion of 1739 and its relatives, supplementing von der Goltz)
Thomas C. Geer, Jr., Family 1739 in Acts (Society of Biblical Literature Monograph Series, 1994). Consists mostly of tables comparing manuscripts 206, 322, 323, 429, 453, 522, 630, 945, 1704, 1739, 1891, 2200. The analysis is flawed, but the results are generally valid.
K.W. Kim, "Codices 1582, 1739, and Origen," Journal of Biblical Literature, volume 69 (1950), p. 167f.
G. Zuntz, The Text of the Epistles: A Disquisition upon the Corpus Paulinum (1953; includes a large section on 1739, its ancestry, and its relationship to 𝔓46 and B, as well as observations about its relation to Origen).

Note: The above list is very incomplete, and includes only works devoted largely or entirely to 1739.


The final lines of the final page (folio 102) of 1739. The last four lines of Philemon are shown (verses 22-25, beginning μοι ξενιαν).
This is followed by the subscription, (προς as a ligature) ΦΙΛΗΜΟΝΑ ΕΓΡΑΦΗ ΑΠΟ ΡΩΜΗΣ ΔΙΑ ΤΥΧΙΚΟΥ ΚΑΙ ΟΝΗΣΙΜΟΥ.
This is followed by Ephraim's signature. Note that the bottom of this page has been cut off rather sloppily
by a later owner. This presumably was to suppress some information the owner did not approve of.

Family 1739

Note: This section is far from finished. It may be a long time before I get to return to the research, though.

The existence of a "1739-text" was realized almost from the time when 1739 was discovered, when it was observed that, in Paul, the text of 1739 had similarities to those of M/0121, 6, and 424**, and that the marginal commentary was shared in part by 1908.

At the time, however, little attention was paid to this fact. As recently as 1953, Zuntz could write "At any rate, [the] common peculiarities [of 6, 424**, 1908, and 0121] are so striking as to rob these formerly important witnesses of their vote wherever their evidence is now found to be anticipated by 1739" (G. Zuntz, The Text of the Epistles, 1953, p. 74). However, this view needs to be modified in light of modern discoveries. The 1739 text is not a simple group, but an actual type, which in the Catholics can be discerned as early as the fifth century in C (and is in fact even older, as Origen also attests the type). In any case, all witnesses to the family need to be considered to determine its scope.

The first steps toward this came when Birdsall (in the 1959 thesis noted above) observed that 0121 was actually two codices, one of which proved to be part of 0243, which was discovered at about this time. I myself took a second step by adding to the family 1881, which is (after 1739 itself) the best witness to the complete family in Paul. In addition, the pair 630-2200 are weak members of the family in Romans-Galatians.

The family has also gathered some attention in the Catholics. Both Richards and Amphoux demonstrated its existence. Richards found the family to include (𝔓74) 1739 323 1241 1243 623 5 (1845) (642) in the Johannine Epistles; the more exact research of Amphoux and Outtier located the family text in 323 945 1241 1243 1735 2298 2492.

In Acts, the most detailed study has been that of Thomas C. Geer, Jr., in the monograph Family 1739 in Acts (Society of Biblical Literature Monograph Series, 1994). This work examines an even dozen members of family 1739 (206, 322, 323, 429, 453, 522, 630, 945, 1704, 1739, 1891, 2200). Methodologically it is hardly a success; apart from the fact that it uses too few readings to be of much use, and assumes that the only possible text-types are Aexandrian, Byzantine, and "Western," it tries to have things both ways by classifying eight manuscripts as Byzantine (206, 322, 323, 429, 522, 630, 1704, 2200) and four as Egyptian (453, 945, 1739, 1891) -- but still calling them all members of family 1739! In fact all of these manuscripts (except perhaps 453) are family 1739 texts with some Byzantine mixture, with the mixture being least in 1739 1891 and most in 322 323.

Even so, Geer's results (when compared with our results from the Catholics) allow us to prepare a sort of a genealogy (though not a precise stemma) of family 1739. Note the existence of several subgroups, including family 630 (630 2200 and some lesser members), which carries across the Paulines and Catholics although it does not always align with 1739. In the diagram below, the numbers, of course, represent actual manuscripts. The bold letters represent hypothetical ancestors. Note that, since this is not a stemma, the lines do not represent actual acts of copying but lines of descent. They may represent only one generation of copying, but more likely they represent two or three or even more. Where there is Byzantine mixture, I have marked this with a light-coloured slash. The extent of the mixture is shown by the number of slashes.

Partial genealogy of family 1739 in Acts.

The geographical center of Family 1739 is difficult to determine. 1739 itself, of course, is on Mount Athos, as are its mixed relative 945 1704. 1241 (the best representative in the Catholics other than 1739), 1243 (also good in the Catholics) and 1881 (the best representatives of the type other than 1739 in Paul), however, are at Sinai, and 1891 (the best representative other than 1739 in Acts) is at Jerusalem.

All of the above has been based on published results; very little of it is my own work. The available publications are not always the most complete. The section which follows will attempt to outline the text-type of family 1739 in Paul and the Catholics, and then describe its significance.

Paul

As noted, the witnesses here are 0121, 0243, 6, 424**, 630/2200 (Romans-Galatians), 1881, and 1908.

The first and last of these are most easily disposed of. In both cases, the dependency is obvious.

If we examine the Nestle apparatus, we find that 0121 and 1739 both exist for 59 readings (disregarding conjectures, punctuation varia, etc.). The two agree in 47 of these cases, or 80% of the time. However, the agreement is actually closer than this. It appears distinctly possible that 0121 is a corrupt descendent of 1739. Let us examine the twelve differences briefly:

Thus in the fragment in 1 Corinthians 0121 agrees everywhere with 1739 (text or margin); in 2 Corinthians it either agrees with 1739 or the Byzantine text (there appears to have been block mixture here). While 0121 cannot have been copied directly from 1739, it could be a grandchild or niece via a sister which has suffered Byzantine mixture. In any case it adds little to the family text.

The same can be said for 1908, which we can briefly dismiss. It shares certain of 1739's marginal comments (e.g. in Romans 1:7 they share the scholion stating that Origen's text omitted ΕΝ ΡΩΜΗ), but there is no kinship between the texts. In addition, the marginal commentary in 1739 is fuller and better. 1908's commentary may or may not be descended from 1739's; in any case, it offers us nothing of value not found in 1739.

This is simply not true for the other witnesses (0243, 6, 424**, 630, 1881). All of them -- especially the first and the last -- can help us to move back beyond 1739. 0243 is helpful because it almost certainly derives from an exemplar no more than three copies removed from 1739's exemplar. 1881 is helpful because, although neither as pure nor as good as 1739, it is a complete text of the 1739 type which is independent of 1739 itself.

424** (Tischendorf's 67**) is a manuscript whose ordinary text is quite Byzantine. A corrector worked over that manuscript and made many hundreds of corrections, many of them quite striking (e.g. the omission of "in Ephesus" in Ephesians 1:1). The vast majority of these changes agree with 1739.

Given the Byzantine nature of its underlying text, 424 as corrected is not an overwhelmingly good Family 1739 witness. But the corrections themselves witness an excellent family 1739 text.

Relatively close to 424** is 6 (e.g. it too omits "in Ephesus" in Ephesians 1:1). 6 is an odd mix, with late Byzantine scattered among important Family 1739 readings (e.g. the omission of "and clings to his wife" in Eph. 5:31 -- a reading shared only with 1739*).

630 (and its close relative 2200, which together form family 630 -- a group found throughout Acts, Paul, and the Catholics, though its text-type changes) is a block-mixed witness. In Romans-Galatians it has a family 1739 text with a significant Byzantine overlay; from Ephesians on it is nearly purely Byzantine.

1881 is, after 1739, the best complete witness to family 1739. It has suffered some Byzantine mixture (it would appear that about 30% of its distinctive family 1739 readings have been replaced by Byzantine variants), but still agrees with 1739 some 80% of the time -- as well as retaining a few family readings where 1739 seems to have suffered corruption.

Finally, there is 0243 (including the manuscript once known as 0121b). This manuscript, which includes 2 Corinthians complete as well as fragments of 1 Corinthians and Hebrews, is noteworthy for its close agreement with 1739. The two agree at about 95% of all points of variation. (A striking example is their reading χωρις θεου in Heb. 2:9). It is likely that 1739 and 0243 are first cousins; they may even be sisters. If we examine Hebrews, for instance, the complete list of differences is as follows:

Verse1739 reads0243 reads
Heb. 1:2 τους αιωνας εποιησεν 1739* with K L Byz εποισε τους αιωνας with Bc (𝔓46 ℵ B* D* I 33 1739c? εποισεν)
Heb. 1:3 εκαθισεν εν with rell εκαθισεν (hapl?)
Heb. 1:4 αυτους with rell αυτοις
Heb. 1:12 αυτους ως ιματιον with 𝔓46 ℵ A B D* αυτους with K L 056 0142 33 1881 Byz
Heb. 2:9 1739margin illegible (rell reads χαριτι θεου) χωρις θεου with 1739* 424c
Heb. 4:1 δοκη with 𝔓46 ℵ A B D K al δοκει with L 056 0142 al (itac?)
Heb. 12:21 εμφοβος ενφπβος (rell read εκφοβος)
Heb. 12:25 χρηματισαντα τον χρηματισαντα with 𝔓46* ℵ* A D (rell χρηματισοντα)
Heb. 13:4 δε 1739c with C Dc K L 33 Byz γαρ 0243 1738* with 𝔓46 ℵ* A D* P 81 1175 1881
Heb. 13:5 αρκουμενοι 1739c with rell αρκουμενος 0243 1739* with 𝔓46c-vid 81 1881
Heb. 13:6 ου with ℵ* C* P 33 1175 και ου with 𝔓46 A D K L 81 1881 Byz
Heb. 13:11 εισφερεται with rell εισφερετε with D* (itac.?)
Heb. 13:16 ευαρεστειται with 𝔓46 (ℵ A) D(*) K L rell ευεργετειται 0243vid
Heb. 13:17 υμων και with rell υμων και και (dittog?)
Heb. 13:21 αυτου αυτω 1739margin with ℵ* A C* 33* 81* 1175 αυτου 0243 1739* with D K L 1881 Byz

Thus we find a grand total of only fifteen differences between 1739 and 0243 in Hebrews, many of which do not qualify as "real" variants. Four (1:3, 1:4, 13:16, 13:17) are singular readings of 0243 (two being clear errors and the other two also possibly slips of the pen). 13:11 is a subsingular itacism in 0243, and the difference in 4:1 is also itastic. Five (1:2, 2:9, 13:4, 13:5, 13:21) involve places where 1739* and 1739margin disagree, with 1739* agreeing with 0243 in four of five cases. 12:21 is a spelling variant. Thus, in the whole of Hebrews, 0243 and 1739 have only three substantial differences (1:12, 12:25, 13:6, and even 12:25 and 13:6 may be errors of copying).

From such a small sample, it is difficult to determine which of the two manuscripts is the earlier. If anything, 1739 (even though a minuscule) looks more primitive than 0243. The errors in 0243 imply that it cannot be the exemplar of 1739. But 1739 can hardly be 0243's exemplar, either, because of 0243's lack of acknowledgement of the marginal readings (most of which were included by the original scribe of 1739). The two might be sisters, or even more likely, uncle and nephew or first cousins. They probably aren't much more distant than that.

The following tables summarize the members of Family 1739 in Acts, Paul, and the Catholic Epistles.

Family 1739 in Acts -- based on the list offered by Thomas C. Geer, Jr. Family 1739 in Acts, but with the addition of 2298. (Note: Von Soden lists as related Ib witnesses the following: 1891 242 522 206 1758 1831 429 536 491 | 1739 2298 323 440 216 066. However, some of these cannot be verified, others are clearly not members of Family 1739 in Acts, and in any case the subgroups are wrong. Therefore only witnesses identified by Geer, plus 2298, are included.)

MSDateLocationCatalog NumberSoden
descrip. 		Comment
206XIIILondonLambeth 1182Ib1 Contains the Acts and Epistles with lacunae. Acts 1:1-12:3, 13:5-15, 2 John, 3 John, and Jude are from another hand (dated XIV). 206 is listed as Category III by the Alands in the Catholics; V elsewhere. Originally from "a Greek island" (Scrivener). Like 429, 522, 630, and 2200, it belongs with Family 2138 in the Catholics. According to Geer, it belongs with the pair 429 522, but only in the second half of Acts (in the first half of Acts it is a much weaker member of the family).
322XVLondonBritish Libr. Harley 5620Ib? Contains the Acts and Epistles. Sister of 323 or nearly. It has a weak Family 1739 text in Acts and the early Catholic Epistles; much more strongly Family 1739 in the later Catholics. Paul is mostly Byzantine. Classified by the Alands as Category II in the Catholics and III elsewhere. "There are no chapter divisions primâ manu; the writing is small and abbreviated" (Scrivener).
323XIIGeneva Public and University Library Gr. 20.Ib2 Contains the Acts and Epistles, with Acts 1:1-8, 2:36-45 from a later hand. Known to be a near-sister or forerunner of 322 since at least the time of Scrivener. It has a weak Family 1739 text in Acts and the early Catholic Epistles; much more strongly Family 1739 in the later Catholics. Paul is mostly Byzantine. Classified by the Alands as Category II in the Catholics and III elsewhere. "brought from Greece, beautifully but carelessly written, without subscriptions" (Scrivener).
429XIVWolfenbüttelHerzog August Libr. 16.7 Aug. Ao Ib1 Contains the Acts and Epistles in the hand of one George; the Apocalypse was added by a later (XV) hand. The Alands list it as Category III in the Acts and Catholics; V in Paul and the Apocalypse. Von Soden lists it as K(1) in the Apocalypse. According to Geer, it is closest to 522; also to 206 in the second half of Acts. Like 206, 522, 630, and 2200, it belongs with Family 2138 in the Catholics.
453XIVRomeVatican Libr. Barb. Gr. 582Ia1 Contains the Acts and Catholic Epistles (only), with commentary. Dated XI by Scrivener, but all other authorities give the date as XIV. Rated Category III by the Alands. Geer considers it a very weak member of Family 1739; certainly it is among the most Byzantine of the manuscripts listed here. Von Soden classified it as Ia1, and one of the manuscripts in that group is 307, found by the Alands to be very close to 453. (No one, however, has claimed 307 as a member of family 1739). In the Catholics, Wachtel lists it among the manuscripts that are 30-40% non-Byzantine, and groups it with 1678 and 2197.
5221515OxfordBodleian Library, Canon. Gr. 34Ib1 Complete New Testament, "written by Michael Damascenus the Cretin for John Francis Picus of Mirandola" (Scrivener). Rev. 2:11-23 are lost. The Alands list 522 as Category III in the Acts and Catholics; V in the Gospels, Paul, and Apocalypse. Von Soden lists it as Kx in the Gospels and Ib in the Apocalypse. It has the Euthalian prologues but evidently not the text. According to Geer, it is closest to 429; also to 206 in the second half of Acts. Like 206, 429, 630, and 2200, it belongs with Family 2138 in the Catholics.
630XIV RomeVatican Libr. Ottob. Gr. 325Ib Contains the Acts and Epistles (lacking Acts 4:9-5:1). Pairs with 2200 throughout and and probably with 1799 in the Catholics only; also (at a greater distance) with 206, 429, 522 in the Acts and Catholic Epistles (all of these manuscripts belonging to Family 2138 in the Catholics). The Alands list as Category III, but the text in fact varies widely. In Acts it is Family 1739 (with significant Byzantine mixture). The early epistles of Paul are also mixed Family 1739; in the later epistles it is entirely Byzantine. Geer indicates that 630 and 2200 are closer to 1891 than to 1739, and share with 1891 a tendency to turn Byzantine in the final chapters of Acts. The Aland statistics in Text und Textwert list 630 as 1739's fifth-closest relative in Acts; they agree in 77% of the sample readings, trailing 1891, 945, 2200, and 1704.
945XIAthos Dionysiu 124 (37)Contains the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles. In both the Acts and Catholic Epistles it stands very close to 1739, but with more Byzantine readings; it is possible that it is actually a corrupt descendent of 1739 itself, though perhaps more likely that it is derived from one of 1739's immediate ancestors (since it has a few non-Byzantine readings not found in 1739). In Acts, Geer reports that 945 is also close to 1739's near-sister 1891, and also to 1704. In the Gospels, von Soden lists it as belonging to Iφ (which he regarded as one of the weaker branches of Family 1424); Wisse corrects this to Kmix/Kx. The Alands list it as Category III in Acts and the Catholic Epistles, V in the Gospels and Paul. Even in Paul there are hints of 1739 type readings, but only very few; the main run of the text is Byzantine. The Aland statistics in Text und Textwert list 945 as 1739's second-closest relative in Acts (trailing only 1891); they agree in 84% of the sample readings.
17041541AthosKutlumusiu 356 Contains the entire New Testament. Classified by the Alands as Category III in Acts, V elsewhere. Not profiled by Wisse because of its late date. According to Geer, it stands closest to 945, with 1739 next on the list. Based on Geer's data for "Primary Family 1739 readings," it would appear possible that 1704 is a descendent of 945, or at least of one of its near kin (nearer than 1739); in seventy readings, only once does 1704 have the family text when 945 does not, and there are several instances where 945 preserves the family reading but 1704 has been conformed to the Byzantine text. Geer confirms that 1704 is much more Byzantine in its final chapters. The Aland statistics in Text und Textwert list 1704 as 1739's fourth-closest relative in Acts; they agree in 80% of the sample readings, trailing 1891, 945, and 2200.
1739XAthosLavra B' 64Ib2 Contains the Acts and Epistles, with marginal commentary. Acts 1:1-2:6 are from a later hand; they probably were added when the gospels were cut off. Written by the scribe Ephraem, who also wrote 1582. Best and often the earliest member of Family 1739, although the Alands rate it Category II in Acts (I elsewhere). Von Soden classifies it as H (Alexandrian) elsewhere. A near-sister of 1891, and possibly the ancestor of some of the other Family 1739 witnesses (e.g. 945 and 1704; probably not of the 206-429-522-630-2200 group). Furnished with a marginal commentary, mostly from Origen in Paul but from other sources in the Acts and Catholics.
1891XJerusalem; St. PetersburgJerus: Orthodox. Patr. Saba 107; St.P: Russ. National Libr. Gr. 317IbThe two leaves in St. Petersburg were formerly numbered 2162. Contains the Acts and Epistles. Text is valuable only in Acts (where the Alands rate it Category II; elsewhere V). Seems to be a near-sister of 1739, and very nearly as pure a text of the family. Geer reports a connection to 630, and also an increasing number of Byzantine readings in the final chapter. This suggests the possibility that its ancestor was a Byzantine manuscript corrected toward a good Family 1739 text, but only in Acts, with the corrector becoming careless as he approached the end of the manuscript. The Aland statistics in Text und Textwert list 1891 as 1739's closest relative in Acts; they agree in 91% of the sample readings.
2200XIVElassonOlympiotisses 79 IbContains the entire New Testament. Pairs with 630 in the Acts and Epistles; also with 1799 in the Catholics. Von Soden classifies it as Kx in the Gospels; Wisse lists it as Kx/Kmix/Kx. The Alands classify it as Category III in the Acts and Epistles, V in the Gospels and Apocalypse. Geer confirms its closeness to 630, and also with 1891, and indicated a shift toward the Byzantine text in the final chapters of Acts. The Aland statistics in Text und Textwert list 2200 as 1739's third-closest relative in Acts; they agree in 81% of the sample readings, trailing 1891 and 945.
2298XIParisNational Libr. Gr. 102Ib2 Contains the Acts and Epistles complete. Despite its high Gregory number, this manuscript has long been known; it was 7a and 9p in the old catalogs, and seems to have been cited by Stephanus. Dated to century X by Scrivener and XII by Omond. In Acts the Alands rate it Category III; they consider it Byzantine in Paul; in the Catholics they promote it to Category II. It doesn't seem to have gotten much attention in Acts, but the Aland statistics in Text und Textwert list 2298 as 1739's sixth-closest relative in Acts; they agree in 77% of the sample readings, trailing 1891, 945, 2200, 1704, and 630.

Note that only one manuscript (1891) agrees with 1739 as much as 90% of the time in the Aland samples; the only six manuscripts to agree at least 70% of the time (among substantial manuscripts, of course) are 1891 (91%), 945 (84%), 2200 (81%), 1704 (80%), 630 (77%), and 2298 (73%). The next-closest texts are 429 (65%), 323 522 (64%), 322 (63%), 206 (62%), and 180 (61%). 1739 agrees with the Old Uncials only in the 50% range. Of course, the Aland sample is too small and is biased, so the particular percentages of agreement don't tell us much (odds are that all these manuscripts would have higher agreement rates in a random sample), but it seems most unlikely that 1739 belongs to the same type as B or ℵ or A.

Family 1739 in Paul. The following manuscripts have been shown to be connected with Family 1739 (or, in the case of 1908, with 1739 itself) in Paul:

MSDateLocationCatalog NumberSoden
descrip. 		Comment
0121 XLondonBritish Libr. Harley 5613H Tischendorf's M, cited as 0121a in NA26; formerly lumped with the Hamburg portion of 0243 as M/0121 Contains 1 Cor. 15:52-16:24, 2 Cor. 1:1-15, 10:13-12:5. Written in red ink. Usually dated to century X, but Zuntz argues that its semi-uncial hand belongs to XII. Of the manuscripts of Family 1739, it is the one most likely to be descended from 1739 itself (see the list of readings cited above). The earlier portions (in 1 Corinthians and 2 Corinthians 1) are very close to 1739; the portion from the second half of 2 Corinthians has a heavy Byzantine overlay. Categorised by the Alands as Category III.
0243XHamburg, Vienna Vienna: National Libr. San Marco 983; Hamburg: Univ. Libr. Cod. 50 in scrin. HThe Hamburg portion was formerly known as 0121(b); Tischendorf's M. Contains 1 Cor. 13:4-2 Cor. 13:13 (Vienna); Hebrews 1:1-4:3, 12:20-13:25 (Hamburg). Written in red ink. Categorized by the Alands as Category II, but it is extremely close to 1739 (which is Category I); the two might possibly be sisters, although first or second cousins is more likely. Where it exists, 0243 is of equal authority with 1739 in determining the text of Family 1739.
6XIIIParisNational Libr. Gr. 112. HContains the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles with lacunae. Von Soden classifies it as Ik in the Gospels; Wisse refines this to Π6. Elsewhere Von Soden classifies it as H (Alexandrian). The Alands specify it as Category III in Paul and the Catholics and V elsewhere. This assessment seems to be correct. 6 goes with Family 1739 in Paul and the Catholics (although it has a heavy mixture of Byzantine readings, often of the very latest sort); it appears Byzantine in Acts. Within Family 1739, it appears closest to 424**. The pair have a purer family text in Paul than in the Catholics. Wachtel places 6 in his 30-40% non-Byzantine group in the Catholics, without indicating any further classification. Scrivener reports that "This exquisite manuscript is written in characters so small that some pages require a glass to read them."
424**XIVienna Austrian National Libr. Theol. Gr. 302HContains the Acts, Epistles, and Apocalypse (with some minor lacunae in the latter). The basic run of the text, 424*, is conceded by all to be purely Byzantine. The corrections (which are numerous only in Paul and the Catholic Epistles) are entirely different; in Paul they agree with 1739 some 90% of the time, and in the remaining instances we usually find 1739 to be Byzantine (with 424** often supported by other members of Family 1739). It would thus appear that 424 was corrected from a high-quality manuscript of the 1739 type. In both Paul and the Catholics it appears to be closest to 6; the pair are not quite so close to 1739 in the Catholics as in Paul.
630XIV RomeVatican Libr. Ottob. Gr. 325Ib Contains the Acts and Epistles (lacking Acts 4:9-5:1). Pairs with 2200 throughout and and probably with 1799 in the Catholics only; also (at a greater distance) with 206, 429, 522 in the Acts and Catholic Epistles (all of these manuscripts belonging to Family 2138 in the Catholics). The Alands list it as Category III, but the text in fact varies widely. In Acts it is Family 1739 (with significant Byzantine mixture). The early epistles of Paul are also mixed Family 1739; in the later epistles it is entirely Byzantine (the dividing line seems to fall roughly between Galatians and Ephesians, although the number of Byzantine readings increases steadily from Romans onward). In Acts, Geer indicates that 630 and 2200 are closer to 1891 than to 1739, and share with 1891 a tendency to turn Byzantine in the final chapters of Acts.
1739XAthosLavra B' 64H Contains the Acts and Epistles, with marginal commentary. Acts 1:1-2:6 are from a later hand; they probably were added when the gospels were cut off. Written by the scribe Ephraem, who also wrote 1582. Best and often the earliest member of Family 1739, although the Alands rate it Category II in Acts (I elsewhere). Von Soden classifies it as H in Paul and the Catholics; Ib2 in Acts. Along with 0243, the best and most important of the Family 1739 witnesses in Paul, but probably not the ancestor of any of the others except perhaps 0121. Furnished with a marginal commentary, mostly from Origen in Paul but from other sources elsewhere. A colophon states that the text of Romans was taken from Origen's commentary on that book, but the evidence of the other Family 1739 witnesses (which agree equally with 1739 in Romans and elsewhere) implies that there is no great shift in the text.
1881XIVSinaiSt. Catherine's Monastery Gr. 300 Contains Paul and portions of the Catholic Epistles (commencing in chapter 1 of 1 Peter; James and probably Acts have been lost). Classified as Category II by the Alands; Wachtel places it in the "over 40% [non-Byzantine]" category in the Catholic Epistles. Beyond this it has not been studied, but in Paul it is clearly the best complete Family 1739 text other than 1739 itself. Although it has suffered some Byzantine mixture, it appears to preserve some readings which have been replaced in 1739 by Byzantine readings.
1908XIOxfordBodl. Libr. Roe 16(H) Contains Paul with a marginal commentary -- according to von Soden, the commentary being that of (the pseudo-)Oecumenius. However, there are also certain comments in the margin which clearly derive from the commentary in 1739 (e.g. the omission of "in Rome" in Romans 1:7). Despite this, 1908 does not have a Family 1739 text; although it has some interesting readings (the Alands place it in Category III), these appear to be mostly Alexandrian.
2200XIVElassonOlympiotisses 79 IbContains the entire New Testament. Pairs with 630 in the Acts and Epistles; also with 1799 in the Catholics. Von Soden classifies it as Kx in the Gospels; Wisse lists it as Kx/Kmix/Kx. The Alands classify it as Category III in the Acts and Epistles, V in the Gospels and Apocalypse. Geer confirms its closeness in Acts to 630, and also with 1891, indicating a shift toward the Byzantine text in the final chapters of Acts. Its relationship to 630 has not been explored in detail in Paul, but it seems to endure. Thus we find assorted Family 1739 readings in the early epistles, but an almost purely Byzantine text roughly from Ephesians onward.

Family 1739 in the Catholics. The following list is derived from Amphoux and my own researches, confirmed partly by Richards. Richards lists the members of Family 1739 (his group A3) as 𝔓74 5 323 623 642 1241 1243 1739 1845. However, 642 and 1845 are members only in 2 and 3 John (which are too short to make classification a meaningful declaration), 𝔓74 is classified on too few readings to be meaningful, and even 5 and 623 are too far from the heart of the family to be classified with certainty based on Richards' methods. These are therefore omitted from the list, as is 2492 (suggested by Amphoux). 2492 has some interesting readings (though it is more Byzantine than not), but there is no evident pattern of agreement with 1739. 322 should probably be included in the list (as a sister of 323), but its connection with Family 1739 has not been verified.

MSDateLocationCatalog NumberSoden
descrip. 		Comment
C/04VParis National Libr. Gr. 9HPalimpsest, originally containing the entire Greek Bible, but most of the Old Testament and nearly half the New have been lost. (In the Catholics, in addition to the first verse or two lost at the beginning of each book that was lost when the coloured ink they were written in washed off, it lacks James 4:2-end, 1 Pet. 4:5-end, 1 John 4:3-3 John 2.) Text-type varies (Alexandrian/Byzantine mix in the Gospels and Acts; purely Alexandrian in Paul and the Apocalypse). In the Catholics there is no trace of Byzantine influence. The text is not purely Family 1739, but neither is it Alexandrian; it falls between the two traditions, with the balance somewhat favouring Family 1739. Pending further investigation it is not clear if the text is an Alexandrian/Family 1739 mix or if it is some sort of "proto-Alexandrian" text (though Family 1739 is also associated with Origen, who of course predates C by centuries).
6XIIIParisNational Libr. Gr. 112. HContains the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles with lacunae. Von Soden classifies it as Ik in the Gospels; Wisse refines this to Π6. Elsewhere Von Soden classifies it as H (Alexandrian). The Alands specify it as Category III in Paul and the Catholics and V elsewhere. This assessment seems to be correct. 6 goes with Family 1739 in Paul and the Catholics (although it has a heavy mixture of Byzantine readings, often of the very latest sort); it appears Byzantine in Acts. Within Family 1739, it appears closest to 424**. The pair have a purer family text in Paul than in the Catholics. Wachtel places 6 in his 30-40% non-Byzantine group in the Catholics, without indicating any further classification. Scrivener reports that "This exquisite manuscript is written in characters so small that some pages require a glass to read them."
323XIIGeneva Public and University Library Gr. 20.Ib2 Contains the Acts and Epistles, with Acts 1:1-8, 2:36-45 from a later hand. Known to be a near-sister or forerunner of 322 since at least the time of Scrivener. It has a weak Family 1739 text in Acts and the early Catholic Epistles; much more strongly Family 1739 in the later Catholics (roughly 2 Peter-Jude, but the increase in Family 1739 readings is gradual). Paul is mostly Byzantine. Classified by the Alands as Category II in the Catholics and III elsewhere. "brought from Greece, beautifully but carelessly written, without subscriptions" (Scrivener).
424**XIVienna Austrian National Libr. Theol. Gr. 302HContains the Acts, Epistles, and Apocalypse (with some minor lacunae in the latter). The basic run of the text, 424*, is conceded by all to be purely Byzantine. The corrections (which are numerous only in Paul and the Catholic Epistles) are entirely different; in Paul they agree with 1739 some 90% of the time, and in the remaining instances we usually find 1739 to be Byzantine (with 424** often supported by other members of Family 1739). It would thus appear that 424 was corrected from a high-quality manuscript of the 1739 type. In both Paul and the Catholics it appears to be closest to 6; the pair are not quite so close to 1739 in the Catholics as in Paul.
945XIAthos Dionysiu 124 (37)Contains the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles. In both the Acts and Catholic Epistles it stands very close to 1739, but with more Byzantine readings; it is possible that it is actually a corrupt descendent of 1739 itself, though perhaps more likely that it is derived from one of 1739's immediate ancestors (since it has a few non-Byzantine readings not found in 1739). In Acts, Geer reports that 945 is also close to 1739's near-sister 1891, and also to 1704. In the Gospels, von Soden lists it as belonging to Iφ (which he regarded as one of the weaker branches of Family 1424); Wisse corrects this to Kmix/Kx. The Alands list it as Category III in Acts and the Catholic Epistles, V in the Gospels and Paul. Even in Paul there are hints of 1739 type readings, but only very few; the main run of the text is Byzantine.
1241XIISinai St. Catherine's Monastery Gr. 260HContains the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles, with two lacunae (Matt. 8:14-13:3, Acts 17:10-18). In addition, about a quarter of Paul, and the whole of the Catholic Epistles, are later insertions. The text is thoroughly mixed (so, e.g., the Alands consider it Category III in the Gospels, V in Acts, III in Paul, and I in the Catholics). In Matthew and Mark it is mostly Byzantine with some Alexandrian readings; in Luke (where Wisse assigns it for the most part to Group B) the Alexandrian element comes to the fore; 1241 may be the most Alexandrian minuscule of that book. John is less Alexandrian than Luke but better than Matthew or Mark. In Acts, the text is purely Byzantine. This is also true of the text of Paul in the first hand; however, the supplements are generally of other sorts. In places they appear mixed Alexandrian, in others perhaps mixed family 1739. However, it is difficult to say with certainty given the number of Byzantine readings even in the supplements and their relatively limited extent. In the Catholics, 1241 is all from a later hand, but the quality of the supplement is very strong. Both Richards and Amphoux recognize it as a member of Family 1739, and Wachtel (who does not acknowledge the family) still places it in his best and least Byzantine category. Within Family 1739, 1241 ranks with 1739 itself and C as a witness, although it appears to belong with a slightly different branch of the family. Unlike manuscripts such as 945, it clearly is not a descendent of 1739, and provides an important check on the family text. Although 1241 is written in a fairly neat hand, it is generally regarded as carelessly written, with many scribal errors, misspellings, and nonsense readings.
1243XISinaiSt. Catherine's Monastery Gr. 262K Contains the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles. In the Gospels, it is classified Category III by the Alands; von Soden described it as Iβ. Wisse lists it as group 1216, paired with 1579. In Acts and Paul, the Alands again rate it Category III; von Soden demotes it to K for Acts -- which is reasonable for the Acts and Paul; non-Byzantine readings are few. It is not true in the Catholics, where the Alands raise 1243 to Category I, and Wachtel places it in the least Byzantine category. 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.
1735XI/XIIAthosLavra B' 42K Contains the Acts and Epistles with lacunae. Von Soden classed it as a Byzantine witness, and this is true or nearly in the Acts and Paul. The Alands list it as Category III in those books, but promote it to Category II in the Catholics. Wachtel lists it in his least Byzantine category. Based on the evidence gathered by the Alands and Wachtel, it seems to be a rather weak Family 1739 witness.
1739XAthosLavra B' 64H Contains the Acts and Epistles, with marginal commentary. Acts 1:1-2:6 are from a later hand; they probably were added when the gospels were cut off. Written by the scribe Ephraem, who also wrote 1582. Best and often the earliest member of Family 1739, although the Alands rate it Category II in Acts (I elsewhere). Von Soden classifies it as H in Paul and the Catholics; Ib2 in Acts. Along with 0243, the best and most important of the Family 1739 witnesses in Paul, but probably not the ancestor of any of the others except perhaps 0121. Furnished with a marginal commentary, mostly from Origen in Paul but from other sources elsewhere. A colophon states that the text of Romans was taken from Origen's commentary on that book, but the evidence of the other Family 1739 witnesses (which agree equally with 1739 in Romans and elsewhere) implies that there is no great shift in the text. In the Catholics, 1739 might well be the ancestor of 945, and perhaps the pair 322/323 at a greater distance, but the leading witnesses (e.g. 1241, 1243, 1881) are clearly independent and probably go back to a slightly earlier form of the text.
1881XIVSinaiSt. Catherine's Monastery Gr. 300 Contains Paul and portions of the Catholic Epistles (commencing in chapter 1 of 1 Peter; James and probably Acts have been lost). Classified as Category II by the Alands; Wachtel places it in the "over 40% [non-Byzantine]" category in the Catholic Epistles. Beyond this it has not been studied, but in Paul it is clearly the best complete Family 1739 text other than 1739 itself. The situation is much the same in the Catholics: It is clearly a Family 1739 text with some Byzantine corruptions. It appears to stand slightly closer to 1241 than 1739, but generally stands between the two.
2298XIParisNational Libr. Gr. 102Ib2 Contains the Acts and Epistles complete. Despite its high Gregory number, this manuscript has long been known; it was 7a and 9p in the old catalogs, and seems to have been cited by Stephanus. Dated to century X by Scrivener and XII by Omond. A clear member of Family 1739 in the Catholics, and possibly a weak one in Acts. In Acts the Alands rate it Category III; they consider it Byzantine in Paul; in the Catholics they promote it to Category II, and Wachtel places it in his least Byzantine category. Still, it is not as strong a witness to the type as 1739 or 1241.

Manuscript 1799

Location/Catalog Number

Princeton, New Jersey (previously Baltimore, Maryland, and originally from the Monastery of Saint Andrew on Mount Athos, where Gregory saw it; it was taken to the U. S. in 1930). Catalog number: Univ. Lib. Med. a. Ren. MS. Garrett 8.

Contents

Acts and Epistles, lacking Acts 1:1-13:9 (2 quires=16 folios), with assorted smaller lacunae (Jude 1-16, 2 Cor. 1:4-2:11, Phil. 4:13-Col. 1:21, 1 Thes. 1:1-2:5, 2 Thes. 1:1-3:5). It is written on parchment, 1 column per page. Philemon precedes Hebrews.

Date/Scribe

Dated XIII by Sprengling, who first examined it. K.W. Clark inclines to XII. Kurzgefasste Liste dates it XII/XIII.

Description and Text-type

The only scholar who has classified this manuscript at all is Richards, who correctly assigns it to his "group A1" (family 2138; see the entry on 2138) in the Johannine Epistles.

K.W. Clark, in the course of collating 1799, observed that (in Acts and the Catholics) it belongs with 2412 (i.e. family 2138), being particularly close to 206. This is clearly correct; 1799 is a member of family 2138, and approaches the group 630-429-522-206. It is so close to 630 that one is almost tempted to regard them as sisters.

In Paul the text is much weaker; it is largely Byzantine, and such few non-Byzantine readings as it has do not appear to belong with any particular group.

What is interesting about 1799, however, is not its text but the way it has been edited. For 1799 is assuredly not a normal continuous-text manuscript; it may even have been taken from a lectionary. There are no fewer than 217 modifications apparently designed for public reading. To be specific: There are in Paul 179 places where 1799 adds the word αδελφοι to the text. In fifteen other places, the word has been moved from its normal place in the text to the beginning of a sentence. (The word is dropped three times.) In the Pastoral Epistles, instead of αδελφοι, we find τεκνον Τιμοθεε added 21 times (and moved once) and τεκνον Τιτε added four times. It appears that all these exhortations are intended to mark the beginnings of paragraphs; in every case they mark the beginnings of sentences. One can only suspect that these insertions were made for purposes of public exhortation; they likely come from the lectionary. (Lection readings are noted in the margin.)

Aland and Aland neither collated nor classified 1799, perhaps because of its lectionary-ish text. Nonetheless it probably deserves some attention in the Acts and Catholic Epistles.

Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript

von Soden: (reportedly ε610; obviously this is not correct!)

Bibliography

Collations:
K.W. Clark, Eight American Praxapostoloi (1941).

Sample Plates:
K. W. Clark, A Descriptive Catalogue of Greek New Testament Manuscripts in America, plate XIII

Editions which cite:

Other Works:
K. W. Clark, A Descriptive Catalogue of Greek New Testament Manuscripts in America

Manuscript 1825

This number was originally assigned to a single leaf of Romans at Sinai, also known as Harris 21. The number was de-assigned in the KListe.

Manuscript 1866

This is the number Gregory initially assigned to Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 294. Gregory must have given it only the briefest look, because he failed to notice that it was a (paper) lectionary. Gregory dated it to the twelfth century. Hatch, who pointed out that it was a lectionary, redated it to the fourteenth century, and the KListe dated it even later, to the fifteenth century. It now has a lectionary number, 𝓁1591.

Manuscript 1874

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 273. Von Soden's α7. Tischendorf 895evl?? Acts and Epistles, complete, although Acts 5:7-21 are from a different hand. Dated by most authorities to the tenth century; Gregory suggested the twelfth. Black ink with red initials; 2 columns per page. Hebrews follows 2 Thessalonians. Contains much Euthalian matter. There is a small amount of non-Biblical material at the end. Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai. The Alands list it as Category III in Paul (perhaps due to the Euthalian influence?), Category V elsewhere; von Soden put it in Ia1, but the Byzantine element seems the largest.

Manuscript 1876

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 279. Von Soden's α504. Acts, epistles,and Apocalypse, lacking the end (it breaks off at Rev. 13:8 αρνιου). Hebrews follows Philemon. Dated to the fifteenth century by all authorities. Paper, one column per page. Black ink, red initials. All books except the Apocalypse have hypotheses (though that for Hebrews is labelled προς Ρωμαιους) as well as lectionary indications and notes. Old Testament quotations are marked. There are section indications, but not the usual ones. There are a few scholia on Acts, Romans, 1 Corinthians, and the Apocalypse, which usually come in groups, as if they were added when a scribe became interested in a particular part of a particular book. There are several comments in Arabic in scattered places.
There is no comprehensive assessment of the text except the Alands'; they put it in Category V. The KListe lists von Soden's assessment only in the Apocalypse, where he put it in Ia4; it appears in fact to be an Andreas manuscript without the commentary. It appears that von Soden in fact classified the other books as Ic2. Richards however finds it to be Byzantine in the Johannine Epistles, placing it in his group B2 group. Given the nature of Richards's methods, I'm not sure I accept his subgroups, but I don't think there is much doubt the manuscript is Byzantine.
But that is only in the Johannine Epistles. Looking at the Aland T&T data for the Catholics, we find that 1876 has only four readings that don't agree with the Byzantine text: James 9:2 και διακριθτε (where it has 139 allies; this the only time it agrees with the UBS text against the majority, but this is clearly a place where the Byzantine text splits), 1 John 3:1 τεκνα κληθωνεν (a subsingular reading resulting from an accidental loss of θεου; a corrector conformed it to the Byzantine text. This is one of only two corrections noted in the manuscript), 3 John 12 οιδαμεν (another place where the Byzantine text divides), and Jude 18 εν εσχατω καιρω, a reading found only in 1876 and 1250. 1250 is also at Sinai, and agrees with 1876 at every reading in the sample set except 1876's error at 1 John 3:1 and at 1 John 5:4 which is an ημων/υμων variant where the Byzantine text is divided. Thus there seems a very high likelihood that 1876 and 1250 are related.
In Acts, the Aland data for 1876 looks more interesting -- four readings that agree with UBS and three that disagree with both UBS and the majority. If Acts were the only book examined, 1876 might deserve something better than a Category V designation. The seven readings:
* Acts 4:34 ην εν αυτοις (with UBS, but 111 allies; this is a place where the Byzantine text splits. Does not agree with 1250).
* Acts 10:12 (this is an h.t. reading, although shared with 633 1311 2400 2558; the corrector changed it to the Majority reading.)
* Acts 12:25 εις αντιοχειαν (independent reading, shared with 23 allies, none of them being those that agree with 2876 at 10:12; it doesn't agree with 1250 either, but there are chances of scribal error here)
* Acts 15:7 εν υμιν (agrees with UBS; the Majority text splits here, but still, 1876 has 162 allies. 1250 is not one of them)
* Acts 19:3 ειπεν τε, omitting προς αυτους (agrees with UBS against the majority, but a substantial minority has the 1876 reading; it looks like the reading of a Byzantine subgroup. Here again 1250 is not one of the manuscripts that agree with 1876)
* 21:8 ηλθομεν (1876 agrees with UBS against the majority, but this is a case where the majority as very much divided)
* Acts 24:6-8: a long addition in a verse where there is great diversity of readings. 1876's immediate allies are 206 429 801 1367** 1490 1509 1758 2626 2815, but there are many others with very similar readings.
Looking at that list, it seems likely that, in Acts, 1876 is not interesting after all. It may belong to a minority Byzantine subgroup, but it's still Byzantine.
Description and a facsimile are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai. A collation and discussion are found in M. M. Carder's Th.D. dissertation "An Enquiry into the Textual Transmission of the Catholic Epistles (1968); as far as I know, this has not been published, but it was used by Richards.

Manuscript 1877

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 280. Von Soden's α455. Acts and Epistles, complete. Hebrews follows 2 Thessalonians. Dated to the fourteenth century by all authorities, although Gardthausen was not quite certain. Parchment, 1 column per page. Black ink, red initials. There are hypotheses to all the books, and a note about the history of Paul. Old Testament quotations are indicated; there are lection notes, although not all lectionary readings are marked.
Unfortunately, we don't have much information about the text. Von Soden did not assess it. The Alands do not put it in Category V in Acts and the Catholics but raise it to Category III in Paul. The statistics in Paul (32 readings which agree with UBS against the Byzantine text and fully 23 which agree with neither) are intriguing, and even the numbers for Acts and the Catholics make it less Byzantine than some manuscripts, but we don't have much information beyond that.
Description and a facsimile are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1878

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 281. Von Soden's Oπ111. Consists of Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians (with Romans 1:1-4:2 a supplement from a later hand). Assigned to the eleventh century by all authorities. Commentary manuscript (von Soden files it with the Oecumenius commentaries); the text and commentary are in parallel columns of nearly equal size, but the hand used for the commentary, although very similar to that used for the text, is much smaller -- the commentary is probably at least twice as long as the text. Brown ink with red initials. It is clear that the volume was originally longer, since the hypotheses include Galatians (and omit Romans; presumably they were lost when the first leaves were lost). It seems certain that 1879 (see below) is the second half of what was once a single volume.
The text has never been examined in much detail. Von Soden did not classify the commentary manuscripts, so his classification tells us nothing. The Alands place it in Category V, i.e. Byzantine, and the placement of "Romans 16:25-27" at the end of chapter 14 supports this.
Description and a facsimile of 1878 are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1879

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 282. Von Soden's Oπ111. CConsists of Galatians through Hebrews (Hebrews follows Philemon). Assigned to the eleventh century by all authorities. Commentary manuscript (von Soden files it with the Oecumenius commentaries); the text and commentary are in parallel columns of nearly equal size, but the hand used for the commentary, although very similar to that used for the text, is much smaller -- the commentary is probably at least twice as long as the text. Brown ink with red initials. Hypotheses for all books included except Philemon and 2 Thessalonians (space was left for the latter but it was never added); there are two for Hebrews. It has a non-standard set of chapter numbers (perhaps related to the commentary?).
It seems clear that this is the second half of a book that was originally complete, and there is no reason to doubt that 1878 is the first half.
The text has never been examined in much detail. Von Soden did not classify the commentary manuscripts, so his classification tells us nothing. The Alands place it in Category V, i.e. Byzantine.
Description and a facsimile of 1879 are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 1880

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 283. Von Soden's α76; Tischendorf 403a, 369p. Acts and Epistles, more or less complete even though the volume is damaged -- it appears it originally had four (five?) paintings. Those of Peter and Paul are still present; paintings before the letters of John and Jude have been cut out but were presumably of those authors; there is no mention of a painting of James. Dated to the tenth century by all authorities. Brown ink with red initials; 1 column per page. Reader helps include chapter lists, lectionary markings, introductory notes, and markings of Old Testament quotations. Hebrews follows Philemon. Description and a facsimile in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai. The Alands list it as Category V elsewhere; von Soden put it in Ib but did not specify a subgroup. This hints to me that it's Byzantine but with some erratic readings.

Manuscript 1881

Location/Catalog Number

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery, where it has been as long as it has been known. Monastery catalog number: 300.

Contents

Contains Paul complete, with Hebrews following Philemon. Also contains the Catholic Epistles of Peter (beginning 1 Peter 1:8 και δεδοξασμενη), John, and Jude. It is written on paper, 1 column per page. There are sections and lectionary marks and notes; Old Testament quotations are marked. There are "two pages of unimportant matters" at the end, according to Hatch.

Date/Scribe

Dated paleographically to the fourteenth century. It is written on paper, in a single column, in black ink with red initials.

Description and Text-type

1881 is a member of family 1739 in both Paul and the Catholics. In Paul it is the best complete manuscript of the family other than 1739 itself. It appears to retain at least a few family readings lost in 1739. The same appears to be true in the Catholics, although because of lack of text it is difficult to be certain.

Aland and Aland classify 1881 as Category II. This appears to be correct based on their definition of the Categories; 1881 is a Family 1739 text with Byzantine mixture.

Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript

von Soden: α651

Bibliography

Collations:

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

Editions which cite:
Cited in NA26 for Paul.
Cited in NA27 for Paul.
Cited in NA28 for Paul (but not, oddly, in their upgraded edition of the Catholic Epistles).
Cited in the Münster Editio Critica Maior for the Catholics as far as it is extant.
Cited all editions of UBS.

Other Works:

Manuscript 1906

Paris, National Library Coislin Gr. 28. Von Soden's Oπ101; Tischendorf/Scrivener 23p. Contains the Pauline Epistles with a commentary (reported by Von Soden to be that of Oecumenius; the Paris Library site agrees); also includes patristic works by Euthalius, Chrysostom, and others. Hebrews follows Philemon. The colophon dates it to the year 1056 and gives the scribe's name as Νικηφορ(ος). Folios 85-89 (near the end of Romans) are a supplement probably from XIV; there are also missing folios before the beginning of the Biblical text. The Biblical text is significantly larger than, but in the same writing style, as the commentary. As is typical of a commentary manuscript, it has such reader aids as prologues, but lacks lectionary equipment. It has a few interesting readings (as again is typical of commentary manuscripts), but overall its text is fairly ordinary; the Alands list it as Category V, or Byzantine. This might be slightly unfair, but only slightly. Black-and-white scans, from a microfilm, are available at https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10038000b.