New Testament Manuscripts

Numbers 2001 and up

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 2085

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 277. Von Soden's α465. Contains the Acts and Epistles complete (Hebrews follows Philemon). The KListe gives it only the approximate date of the fourteenth century, but according to Hatch it was copied in 1308. The scribe, who was from Αγιοπετρίτης, gave his name as θεϋ̅οṡ'. Despite the strange spelling, Hatch believes this should be read as θεοδωρος, not θεοδουλος, because many other copies claimed by Theodore of Hagiopetros are known, and the handwriting appears to be the same to Hatch. The one hesitation is that Theodore's dated manuscripts are from 1278-1301, so 2085 is rather later than the last of them. The manuscript is on parchment, with two columns per page. The ink is brown, with gold initials; a few at the start of books are blue, red, and gold (quite elaborate for a non-gospels manuscript!). There are hypotheses for all the books (three for Hebrews), an unusual set of chapters, and much lectionary equipment. Old Testment quotations are marked. In addition to the Biblical books there is a table of the sun cycles.
No one seems to have examined its text in detail. Von Soden classified it as K, but without further specification. The Alands did not put it in any Category. This seems peculiar at first glance, because in Acts, at least, it has only one reading with the UBS text against the majority (Acts 15:17), and even that is a place where the Byzantine text splits (296 manuscripts constitute 𝔐; 2085 is one of 163 manuscripts to agree with UBS). Presumably the reason for the non-classification is the eight readings which go with neither 𝔐 nor UBS. None of these readings is particularly rare, though, with the partial exception of Acts 24:6-8, where many manuscripts add the verses; 2085 simply has a slightly odd form. Otherwise, the readings of 2085 have 26, 19, 16, 102, 36, 26, and 36 supporters. I didn't notice that these readings seemed to agree particularly with any other manuscript. It is somewhat closer to 2799 than to anything else. But I'd be inclined to file it as a slightly odd Byzantine manuscript. The situation is even more extreme in the Catholics, although this may have to do with the Alands' poor sampling technique; every reading in James, 1-2 Peter, and 1-3 John agrees with the majority or some minor variation thereon; only in Jude does 2085 diverge -- in two readings, Jude 4 and 25A. In both of these it has between 20 and 30 allies of no great distinction. Again, I'd call 2085 Byzantine. I don't have data for Paul, but I think the Alands could, in this case, have 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 2086

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 278. Von Soden's α492. Acts and Epistles, complete. Hebrews follows Philemon. The scribe was named Stephen. Von Soden dated it to 1362; Hatch says the manuscript contains a date but that it is illegible. Hatch and the KListe both date it to the fourteenth century, however. Parchment, 1 column per page. Black ink, red initials. There are lectionary indications and notes; Old Testament quotations are marked. A few alternate readings are noted. Acts has chapters; Paul comes with Theodoret's commentary and a description of his voyages. The subscription includes a nine-line prayer.
There isn't much textual data on the manuscript. Von Soden assessed it as K, but the Alands do not put it in Category. The T&T data for the Catholics shows it with only six non-Byzantine readings. Four of these six are well-supported; the other two might well be pure errors. I'd incline to call it a sloppy Byzantine manuscript in the Catholics. In Acts, it has seven non-Byzantine readings (one of which agrees with UBS and one of them singular). Again, it looks to me like a sloppy Byzantine manuscript; although I don't have enough data to be sure, I think the Alands could have rated it Category V.
Description and a facsimile are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 2138 and Family 2138

Location/Catalog Number

Moscow. Catalog number: University 2.

Contents

2138 contains the Acts, Epistles, and Apocalypse. It has a few slight lacunae (e.g. 1 John 2:7-17). 2138 is written on parchment, with one column per page.

Date/Scribe

Dated by its colophon to the year 1072.

Description and Text-type

Note: Family 2138 is the name that Amphoux offers for a large group of manuscripts having a very distinct text of the Acts and Catholic Epistles. The name is slightly deceptive -- Family 2138 is actually a separate text-type (at least in the Catholic Epistles), not merely a family, and 2138 is not the earliest representative of the type (the Harklean Syriac is). Nor does 2138 always have the family text (in Paul, 2138 is mostly Byzantine). But I have adopted the name for consistency with Amphoux.

Now for the details on 2138:

Aland and Aland list 2138 as Category III in the Acts and Epistles and V in the Apocalypse. Von Soden describes it as Ic1 in the Acts and Epistles and K in the Apocalypse. In the Johannine Epistles, Richards lists it as the best representative of his A1 group (which Richards describes as having an Alexandrian text, but in fact his A1 is Family 2138). Amphoux places it at the head of Family 2138 in the Catholics. Wachtel puts it in the Hkgr family, another name for Family 2138.

The analysis of Amphoux, Richards, and Wachtel are clearly correct as far as the Catholic Epistles is concerned. 2138 is the oldest Greek witness, and one of the best representatives of the type, which bears its name. It should not, however, be considered the ancestor of the type. Family 2138 is fairly large (Amphoux lists as primary witnesses 206, 429, 522, 614, 1108, 1292, 1448, 1505, 1518, 1611, 1758, 1799, 1831, 1890, 2138, and 2495; Wachtel offers 206, 429, 522, 614, 630, 1292, 1490, 1505, 1611, 1799, 1831, 1890, 2138, 2200, 2412, and 2495. Richards confirms the results for 206, 614, 1611, 1799, 2138, and 2412; I have verified them for 206, 429, 522, 614, 630, 1505, 1518, 1611, 1799, 2138, 2412, and 2495). The Harklean Syriac also goes with this type. It can be shown that the family falls into various subgroups (tentatively, 2138+1611, 614+2412, 630+1799+2200, 1505+2495). Since the other groups preserve certain family readings not found in 2138 and 1611, it follows that the group is earlier (and less Byzantine) than 2138. It is, in fact, older than the Harklean Syriac, since the Harklean also lacks many characteristic readings of the family. It thus appears that Family 2138 is an early text-type. Amphoux equates it with the "Western" text, but this is rather doubtful based on the results in Paul, where the manuscripts show no relationship to D F G.

It appears that Family 2138 also exists in the Acts, and includes many of the same witnesses as in the Catholics. In Acts, however, the family is somewhat less striking. Its best-known representative, 614, has often been labelled "Western" -- but here, again, the evidence is somewhat weak. (See also the entry on 614.)

A distinct group of Family 2138 witnesses also exists in Paul, but here the name is deceptive, since 2138 -- which in these books is largely Byzantine -- appears to abandon it. The remaining texts are 1505, 1611, 2495, probably 2005, and a portion of 1022 (Pastorals, Hebrews), plus of course the Harklean Syriac. The family is much more Byzantine than in the Acts and Epistles. It is worth repeating that this family does not show any demonstrable affiliation with the D-F-G text. Thus there is no evidence that Family 2138 is "Western" in any part of the New Testament.

The following offers a brief summary of information about the various members of Family 2138 in Paul. Note: Von Soden also classifies 1518, 1108, 2138, and 1245 with the Ic1 group -- but 1518 is lost, 1108 and 1245 seem to be mixed, and 2138 has at best a weak family text in Paul; they are therefore omitted from the table pending better information.

MSDateLocationCatalog NumberSoden
descrip. 		Comment
1022XIVBaltimoreWalters Art Gallery MS. 533Kx Contains the Acts and Epistles with minor lacunae. Contains a Family 2138 text only in the Pastorals and Hebrews; elsewhere it is Byzantine (the Alands do not classify 1022, but Richards places it in his group B4 in the Catholics). A collation was published by K. W. Clark.
1505XIIAthos Lavra B' 26(Kx)Colophon claims a date of 1084, but Colwell has shown this is false. Contains the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles. The Alands list it as Category III in the Acts and Epistles, V in the Gospels. Wisse confirms that it is Byzantine in the Gospels (Kx and Kx Cluster 281; paired with 2495, which pairs with 1505 in the Acts and Epistles as well).
1611X (earlier dated XII)AthensNational Library 94Ic1 Acts, Epistles, and Apocalypse with lacunae. Earliest and best Greek manuscript of the family in Paul. Rated Category III by the Alands (but II in the Apocalypse, where von Soden groups it with Andreas!).
2005XIVEscorialPsi III 2Ic1 Contains the Acts and portions of Paul (2 Corinthians-Hebrews). Rated Category III for Paul by the Alands. Not properly studied, and may not be a member of Family 2138, but scattered readings in von Soden imply that it probably goes with this text at least in part.
2495XIV/XVSinai St. Catherine's Monastery Gr. 1992 Contains the entire New Testament with minor lacunae. Very close to 1505 but slightly more Byzantine; it may possibly be a descendent of 1505. Wisse reports that it also goes with 1505 in the Gospels (Kx and Kx Cluster 281; paired with 1505). The Alands rate it "Category III with reservations" in Paul.

In Acts, many manuscripts have been assigned to Family 2138, although sometimes the evidence is imperfect. But 614 1505 1611 2138 2412 2495 certainly belong there, and there is every reason to think that we could add other manuscripts to the list. The Alands show the following as 2138's closest relatives in that book (examining only manuscripts which exist for at least fifty readings): 1890 (91%), 1611 (87%), 1505 (79%), 1526 (76%), 2495 (76%), 1610 (74%), 614 (74%), 913 (73%), 1292 (72%), 1853 (71%), 2412 (71%), 436 (69%), Ψ (69%), 1830 (68%), 2652 (68%). Thus it would appear that there are several Family 2138 witnesses which have not in the past been classified with the family.

The following offers a brief summary of information about the various members of Family 2138 in the Catholics. The column "Identified by" lists the scholar(s) who have associated the manuscript with Family 2138.

MSDateLocationCatalog NumberSoden
descrip. 		Identified byComment
206XIIILondonLambeth 1182Ib1 Amphoux, Richards, WachtelContains the Acts and Epistles with lacunae. 2 and 3 John and Jude are not Family 2138; they come from another hand (dated XIV) which also supplied Acts 1:1-12:3, 13:5-15. 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 to Family 1739 in Acts.
429XIVWolfenbüttelHerzog August Libr. 16.7 Aug. Ao Ib1 Amphoux, WachtelContains the Acts and Epistes 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. Like 206, 522, 630, and 2200, it belongs to Family 1739 in Acts.
5221515OxfordBodleian Library, Canon. Gr. 34Ib1 Amphoux, WachtelComplete 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. Like 206, 429, 630, and 2200, it belongs to Family 1739 in Acts.
614 XIIIMilanAmbrosian Libr. E 97 SupIc2 Amphoux, Richards, WachtelContains the Acts and Epistles (missing Jude 3-end). Pairs with 2412 (the Alands, who rate 614 as Category III, consider them sisters; Clark thought 2412 might be 614's exemplar; it is perhaps most likely that 614 is a niece or grand-niece of 2412). Commonly linked to the "Western" text in Acts -- although this cannot be considered conclusively proved.
630XIV RomeVatican Libr. Ottob. Gr. 325IbWachtel Contains the Acts and Epistles (lacking Acts 4:9-5:1). Pairs with 2200 throughout and probably with 1799 (in the Catholics only); also (at a greater distance) with 206, 429, 522. The Alands list as Category III, but the text in fact varies widely. In Acts it, like 206, 429, 522, and 2200, belongs to Family 1739 (with significant Byzantine mixture). The early epistles of Paul are also mixed Family 1739; in the later epistles it is entirely Byzantine. In the Catholics it is one of the best Family 2138 groups.
1108XIIIAthosEsphigmenu 64Ic1Amphoux Contains the Acts and Epistles with lacunae. Identified by Von Soden as Family 2138 in Paul as in the Catholics, but evidence for this is weak. Not classified by the Alands, which probably indicates that it has, at best, a weak family text.
1292XIIIParisNational Libr. Suppl. Gr. 1224Amphoux, Wachtel Contains the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles. The Alands list 1292 as Category II in the Catholics and V elsewhere. Listed by the von Soden as Ik in the Gospels and Kx in Paul. Wisse describes it as weak Πb in Luke 1 and Kx in Luke 20.
1448XIAthosLavra A' 13Amphoux Contains the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles. The Alands list 1448 as Category III in the Catholics and V elsewhere. Listed by Von Soden as Kx (?) in the Gospels; Wisse describes it as Cluster 127. Wachtel 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.
1490XIIAthosLavra A' 65KrWachtel Contains the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles. Not classified by the Alands or Wisse.
1505XIIAthos Lavra B' 26(Kx)Amphoux, WachtelColophon claims a date of 1084, but Colwell has shown this is false. Contains the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles. Pairs with 2495. The Alands list it as Category III in the Acts and Epistles, V in the Gospels. Wisse confirms that it is Byzantine in the Gospels (Kx and Kx Cluster 281; paired with 2495).
1518XIVIc1Amphoux Lost (formerly at Lambeth Palace in London; may be the same as 1896). Contained the Acts and Epistles (missing Acts 7:52-8:25).
1611X (earlier dated XII)AthensNational Library 94Ic1 Amphoux, Richards, Wachtel Acts, Epistles, and Apocalypse with lacunae. Pairs with 2138, although it seems to be later and inferior. Rated Category III by the Alands (but II in the Apocalypse, where von Soden groups it with Andreas!).
1758XIIILesbosLimonos 132.Ib1Amphoux Contains the Acts, Epistles, and Apocalyse with lacunae. Not classified by the Alands.
1799XII/XIII Princeton (N.J.)Univ. Libr. Med. a. Ren. Ms. Garrett 8 Amphoux, Richards, WachtelActs and Epistles with lacunae. Seems to go with 630 and 2200 in the Catholics. In Paul it has a mostly Byzantine text, with a very few readings of other sorts, plus lectionary incipits. Not classfied by the Alands; von Soden lists it as a gospels manuscript!
1831XIVAthensNational Libr. 131Ib1 Amphoux, WachtelContains the Acts and Epistles with lacunae. Not classified by the Alands.
1890XIVJerusalemTaphu 462Amphoux Contains the Acts and Epistles. Not classified by the Alands. Wachtel notes that it belongs to Hkgr (family 2138) in James and 1 Peter, but is largely Byzantine in the other epistles.
21381072MoscowUniv. 2IcaAmphoux, Richards, Wachtel Contains the Acts, Epistles, and Apocalypse. Von Soden classified the Apocalypse as K. The Alands list it as Category III in the Acts and Epistles and V in the Apocalypse. 2138 pairs with 1611 (though 2138 is the better of the two). It is the best and (except for the Harklean Syriac) earliest manuscript of Family 2138, but is not the ancestor of the others; the 2138+1611 group has some Byzantine corruptions not found in the 614+2412, 630+1799+2200, and 1505+2495 groups.
2200XIVElassonOlympiotisses 79 IbWachtelContains 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. Geer classifies it (like 630, and also 206, 429, and 522) with Family 1739 in Acts. The Alands classify it as Category III in the Acts and Epistles, V in the Gospels and Apocalypse.
2412XIIChicagoUniversity of Chicago Libr. MS. 922 Richards, WachtelContains the Acts and Epistles, missing Rom. 13:4-15:26, Hebrews 13:7-16. Heb. 12:28-13:6 was written by a later hand over an erasure. Pairs with 614 (the Alands list them as sisters, both belonging to Category III; Clark offers the possibility that 2412 is the exemplar of 614). K. W. Clark, who published a collation, describes it as "neat and plain, and fairly well preserved."
For the collation, see: Kenneth W. Clark, Eight American Praxapostoloi (1941); also Kenneth W. Clark, Greek New Testament Manuscripts in America, p. 269
2495XIV/XVSinai St. Catherine's Monastery Gr. 1992Amphoux, Wachtel Contains the entire New Testament with minor lacunae. Very close to 1505 but slightly more Byzantine; it may possibly be a descendent of 1505. Wisse reports that it also goes with 1505 in the Gospels (Kx and Kx Cluster 281; paired with 1505). The Alands rate it "Category III with reservations" in Paul and "higher" for the Catholics.

Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
von Soden: α116

Bibliography

Collations:
Barbara Aland with Andreas Juckel, Das Neue Testament in Syrischer Überliefung I collates 2138 (along with 1505, 1611, and 2495) against the Harklean Syriac in James, 1 Peter, and 1 John.

Sample Plates:

Editions which cite:
Cited in UBS4 for the Catholic Epistles.
Cited by Von Soden, Merk, and Bover for the Acts and Epistles, but the citations are not overly accurate.

Other Works:
C.-B. Amphoux, "La Parenté textuelle de syh et du gr. 2138 dans Jacques," Biblica 62.
C.-B. Amphoux, "Quelques témoins grecs des formes textuelles les plus anciennes de l'Epître de Jacques: le groupe 2138 (ou 614)" New Testament Studies 28.

Manuscript 2145

Saint Petersburg, Russian National Library Greek 222. Soden's ε1222. Contains the Gospels; Matthew 1:1-9:28 being lost. Dated by its colophon to 1144/1145, and written by a scribe named John. Textually the manuscript contains several interesting features; the first hand lacks the story of the Adulteress, which was added by a later hand. In addition, the title page of Mark contains a sort of summary of Mark 16:9-20. Von Soden classified 2145 as Io (other manuscripts of this type being U X 213 443 1071 1321(part) 1574). Wisse describes it as M1195 in Luke 1 and 10 and Kx in Luke 20. Other members of M1195 include 293 1195 1589 2200(part) 2549(part). The Alands do not assign 2145 to a Category; this seems to imply that 2145 is not purely Byzantine, but is much more Byzantine than anything else.

Manuscript 2200

Location/Catalog Number

Elasson. Catalog number: Olympiotisses, 79.

Contents

Contains the entire New Testament. 2200 is written on paper, one column per page.

Date/Scribe

Dated paleographically to the fourteenth century.

Description and Text-type

In the Gospels, von Soden grouped 2200 with Kx. This concurs with Aland and Aland (who place it in Category V) and for the most part with Wisse, who places it in Kx in Luke 10 and 20, although he classifies it as M1195 in Luke 1.

In the Apocalypse, the Alands place it in Category V. It belongs to the main K group (headed by 046).

2200 is much more interesting in the Acts and Epistles, where the Alands promote it to Category III and von Soden places it in Ib. We can, however, be more detailed. Wachtel places it in the Hkgr (family 2138) group in the Catholic Epistles. Geer places it among the members of Family 1739 in the Acts. Within family 1739, 2200 is closest to 630 (a fact confirmed by both the Alands and Geer). In Acts, based on the Aland samples, 630 and 2200 agree in 93% of their readings; 630's next-closest substantial relative, 1891, agrees in only 81% of cases. 1891 is also the closest substantial relative to 2200 (other than 630, of course), agreeing 85% of the time. The fact that 630 and 2200 disagree seven times in 95 readings where both exist, only one reading of which is a clear error (630 has a singular reading in Acts 3:11), is a strong argument against actual sister-hood, but they clearly go together.

This kinship continues in Paul. The apparatus of UBS4 lists 396 readings for 2200. 630 exists for 392 of these. And the two manuscripts agree in 378 of these 392 readings (96%; by comparison, 2200 agrees with L -- a typical Byzantine manuscript -- 80% of the time, and with 1739 61% of the time). Even more amazingly, 630 and 2200 agree in all 54 of their mutual non-Byzantine readings. The following table lists their disagreements, with occasional comments:

Verse2200 reads630 readsComment
Rom. 5:1 εχομεν εχωμεν
Rom. 10:1 του Ισραελ εστιν αυτων 2200 Byzantine; 630 with 1739
Rom. 14:19 2200*vid διωκομεν διωκωμεν 630 2200** Byzantine
Rom. 15:24 Σπανιαν Σπανιαν ελευσομαι προς υμας 630 Byzantine; 2200 with 1739
1Co 4:17 Χριστω Χριστω Ιησου 2200 Byzantine; 630 with 1739
1Co 11:15 δεδοται αυτη δεδοται 2200 Byzantine; 630 with 1739
1Co 13:3 καυθησωμαι καυθησομαι
1Co 15:49 φορεσωμεν φορεσομεν 2200 Byzantine (with 1739); 630 with 6 1881
1Co 15:54 οταν δε το θνητον... αθανασιαν οταν δε το φθαρτον... αθανασιαν 630 Byzantine; 2200 with 1739*
1Co 15:55 νικος που σου αδη το νικος κεντρον που σου αδη το νικος 630 Byzantine; 2200 subsingular
2Co 1:10 οτι και ετι οτι και 2200 Byzantine
2Co 1:11 ημων υμων 2200 Byzantine
2Co 12:1 καυχασθαι δη καυχασθαι δει
Gal 4:7 θεου δια Χριστου δια Χριστου 2200 Byzantine; 630 subsingular

Thus it will be seen that 2200 and 630 are extremely close in both Acts and Epistles. (It is interesting that they are also of the same century.) Based on the above, it would appear that neither is the ancestor of the other. The two are probably cousins, descended from the same ancestor with one or two intermediate stages. This means that 2200's text is closely comparable to 630's: Weak Family 1739 in the Acts; weak family 1739 in Romans-Galatians; purely Byzantine in Ephesians-Hebrews; Family 2138 in the Catholic Epistles.

Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
von Soden: δ414

Bibliography

Collations:

Sample Plates:

Editions which cite:

Cited in the Münster Editio Critica Maior for the Catholics. Cited in UBS4 for Paul.

Other Works:
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.

Manuscript 2355

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 1591. Not catalogued by von Soden. Gospels, complete, although Matthew 1:1-25 are not in the same hand as the rest. Dated paleographically to the fourteenth century. Paper, 1 column per page. Black ink, red initials. Full lectionary equipment. Hypotheses and subscriptions to the gospels, plus chapter lists. The included sections are not the standard Ammonian sections. There are assorted notes and other works at the end, including a prayer for the scribe, but it does not give a name or date.
John 7:53-8:11 is obelized, but this does not say anything noteworthy about the text. Wisse rates it as Kr, and Kr manuscripts often obelize the Pericope. The Alands concur at least to the extent of putting it in Category V.
Description and a facsimile are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 2356

Sinai, St. Catherine's Monastery 1594. Not catalogued by von Soden. Contains the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles, almost complete (lacks Matthew 28:14-Mark 1:13, Jude 5-25, 1 Thessalonians 1:8-5:28, Hebrews 8:25-13:25). Hebrews follows Philemon. The final folios of Paul seem to be disordered. Dated to the fourteenth century by Hatch and the KListe. Written on paper. Brown ink with red initials. Luke and John have chapter lists; all gospels have sections (not the Ammonian sections) All Epistles have hypotheses. There are lectionary indications and notes. There is a scribble by a later hand at the end of John.
Based on that description, one would probably expect the manuscript to be Kr in the Gospels, but it does not seem to be so; Wisse classifies it as Kx, with parts of it being Cluster 352. The Alands put it in Category V.
Description and a facsimile are in William Henry Paine Hatch, The Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament at Mount Sinai.

Manuscript 2400

Chicago, University Library MS. 965. The Rockefeller McCormick New Testament, containing the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles. The contents are in the order Gospels, Acts, Catholics, Paul, with Hebrews following Philemon. It is suspected that the volume once contained the psalter as well. Clark says it is by the same scribe as 38 and 1505, and dates it c. 1270. The Alands also place it in the thirteenth century (the same date they use for 38; the dating of 1505 is suspect because of its probably-forged colophon). Gary S. Dykes agrees that 1505 and 2400 are by the same scribe but would date both to the twelfth century. A colophon signed by Ιερεμιας, thought to be from the sixteenth or seventeenth century, says that it belonged to Alexander (spelled Αλεξαντρου not Αλεξανδρου) the voivode, but since several voivodes in the relevant period were named Alexander, this doesn't really help us to locate the manuscript. The last known colophon is from 1891, but it doesn't give much useful information. The known history of the manuscript stretches back only to 1910, when it was acquired by dealers in Paris. In 1927, Goodspeed saw it there and arranged for photos to be sent to Chicago. Edith Rockefeller McCormick saw the results and purchased the manuscript in 1928.
The format changes between the gospels and the rest; it typically has 42 lines per page in the gospels, but from 35 to 38 elsewhere. As originally written, it appears to have had at least 221 folios (including flyleaves). As it stands now, it has 207 -- but six of these are replacements for five lost folios; a total of twenty of the original folios are gone. The replacement pages (XIV-XV century) are inferior both in parchment and quality of writing. That still leaves nine gaps which have not been filled in. The missing sections are Matt. 9:20-38, 20:20-15, Luke 4:42-5:33, 23:39-24:21; John 2:3-4:10; Acts 1:1-10, 7:58-9:3, 16:39-17:22, 19:25-20:7; Acts 1:1-25, Luke 2:27-3:9 are from the first batch of additions and Luke 9:36-10:6, Rom. 1:1-26, 2 Peter 3:11-18, 1 John 1:1-9, Jude 14-25 are from a still later hand. It also lacks John 8:21-59, but this was simply omitted by the original scribe, who passed directly from one verse to the next. The most likely explanation is that a leaf was missing from his exemplar, although it strikes me as just barely possible that the scribe somehow misunderstood some sort of marginal note on John 7:53f. and as a result omitted a different set of verses. There is a cross mark by John 7:53, perhaps a hint that these verses were doubted.
It appears that many of the missing leaves were cut out, perhaps because of their illustrations. Willoughby thinks that the earliest pages excised were replaced (hence the various additions listed above), but the later losses not repaired -- but offers no supporting evidence.
It appears that the Gospels and Acts have been heavily used, the Epistles less so (a rather rare situation; usually Acts gets about the same amount of attention as Paul, but Willoughby thinks Acts was given more than the usual attention because of its illustrations).
The manuscript has suffered significantly from water. Willoughby does not think this is the result of damp; rather, he thinks that -- like the Latin Book of Durrow, even though that is an entirely different culture -- water was poured over it to be used in curing diseases. That water was spilled on it seems likely, although I think more evidence is needed that it was used as an holy object (if it was regarded as a relic of some sort, with what saint was it associated? Willoughby's authority was the dealer who had the book, but I'm less willing to trust such a source -- saying that the book was used as a holy object would surely give the book more of a mystique than saying, "some dimwit spilled water on it"). Fortunately, although parts of the text have become smudged, they generally remain legible.
There are interesting and unusual decorative touches -- for instance, the bottom half of the page containing Luke 7:21-36 is cruciform. Similar ornamental design is found in 38. The frontispiece is on purple parchment, and one other such leaf has been cut out, perhaps because it contained a desirable piece of art. The Ammonian Sections and τιτλοι, both later additions, are in gold.
Fourteen different scribes have been identified in the codex, but the main run of text is all in one hand; the others filled in the lost leaves. There was no systematic correction. It has the Eusebian canon tables, but, strangely, not the table numbers in the text (it does have the Ammonian sections, as we saw, although with some striking errors). It appears that the quires have been heavily reorganized; the original format was mostly quaternions, with a few ternions at the ends of books, but now the quires are highly irregular.
Textually 2400 has very little value for most of its contents. Willoughby and Riddle, who looked at the text, thought they found interesting readings in the gospels, possibly "Cæsarean" -- but this was based on comparisons with the Textus Receptus, which makes everything "Cæsarean." Wisse finds it to be simply a weak member of Πa -- which would be enough to make it look slightly non-Byzantine based on comparison with the Textus Receptus. It does have that strange mark by John 7:53, but that's about it. In Acts, Willoughby agrees that it isn't worth much, although he claims that in Acts 3:20-5:29, it shifts to another type of text, perhaps of the 206/429/522 group, although Willoughby's list of relatives is not reminiscent of any family of manuscripts I've ever seen -- in any case, it is a large enough family that we don't really need more members. Willoughby claims that 2400 is of the greatest interest in Paul, comparing it to 69 and 330 (and if it were truly related to the latter, it would be quite interesting -- and Gary S. Dykes thinks the relationship with 330 is indeed real. My own spot checks in Romans show no kinship, however). Clark seems to agree, since he calls it "Neutral" -- but the Alands label it "obviously" Category V throughout. The interest of 2400 lies not in its text but in its illustrations -- although, sadly, very many of these are badly chipped and abraded; the text has survived much better than the drawings. (This is apparently typical of Byzantine miniatures; they must not have used a good substrate. The flaking does reveal the curious fact that the original sketches were done with a red ink rather than the usual black or brown.)
An amazing fact about these illustrations is that, instead of using blank parchment or white paint for backdrops, they use gold (laid on as gold powder, not gold leaf, which was probably easier to apply but which requires even more gold than leaf would have). So the book must have been extremely expensive.
Clark counts ninety surviving miniatures, and suspects about 25 others have been lost (Riddle estimated 21, Goodspeed 26). Most are genuinely Biblical, although one that is found in John, chapter 1, is thought by Willoughby to show the Descent into Hell. (I'd be cautious about that; it's too damaged for me to make any guess as to what it shows!) Willoughby thinks most are connected with the church liturgical cycle rather than being intended primarily to illustrate the text; the miniature of the Descent into Hell is his main proof of that (since the calendar links that with the reading of John 1). It also has a tendency to show miracles, especially healings and exorcisms; there are also quite a few illustrations of Jesus as teacher (a rare motif; miracles are a much more common subject of illustrations). The style of the paintings is similar to those in 38 -- they are probably from the same school although no one seems to have suggested that the artist is the same; in any case, 2400 has far more illustrations than 38 -- according to Willoughby, only two other manuscripts (187 and 269, both of the Gospels only) contain more. But the similarity of style strongly hints that 2400, like 38, was copied in the scriptorium of Michael Paleologus. Its iconography is also very close to 574, the famous Four Gospels of Karahissar -- so close that they have been called "twin brothers" (although there does not seem to be any textual relationship). Willoughby has a full list of the illustrations on pp. 39-41, and Clark Descriptive Catalog, also has a list. Willoughby considers the style to be Cappadocian.
The cover plates of the manuscript are extremely expensive, biblical scenes created in silver covered with gold, and show both Greek and Latin elements, implying an origin in an area where both forms of Christianity had influence. But they are not believed to be a pair, and they are newer than the manuscript (Clark says sixteenth century, De Ricci fifteenth), so they probably don't tell us much about the manuscript's own history.
There is an interesting inscription on the Letter of James. It reads ο αγιος Ιακωβος αδελφος ΘΕ; Willoughby thinks that the last word should be read ΘΕΟΥ -- i.e. that James was not simply the brother of Jesus but the brother of God. Make of that what you will... the formula does not seem to be attested anywhere else.
After it was brought to Chicago, four volumes were devoted to 2400, its text, and its illustrations -- one by Goodspeed, one by Riddle, and two by Willoughby. Possibly the volumes on the illustrations were justified (although I do not think Willoughby was competent to do them), but it is truly tragic that all that effort was devoted to a manuscript with so little textual value when vital manuscripts like 33, 892, 1175, 1506, 1611, and 1739 have been published only in poor-quality collations if at all.

Manuscript 2402

Chicago, University Library MS. 130. The Elizabeth Day McCormick Apocalypse, so-called because McCormick found it in a French bookshop, bought it, and eventually donated it to the University of Chicago. A curiosity (to put it mildly): although listed among the New Testament manuscripts, it is not in fact a copy of the Greek New Testament! It is a copy of the Apocalypse, with a modified form of the Andreas commentary -- but not in koine Greek; it has been translated into the Greek of the sixteenth century. This translation was apparently done by Maximos the Pelponnesian (who, interesting, is associated with Cyril Lucar, the Orthodox Patriarch who donated Codex Alexandrinus to the British crown); it is a reasonably clear translation but one not noteworthy for consistency of rendering (E. C. Colwell observes the case of Rev. 2:7, 11, 17, 29, 3:6, 13, 22, all of which contain the same phrase ο εχων ους... εκκλησιαις, no two instances of which are rendered the same way in 2402). Josef Schmid was consulted about the text, and concluded that the primary source was the group of Andreas manuscripts sometimes known as Family 2067 (743 2051 2055 2064 2067). Family 2067 is not a particularly noteworthy type even among Andreas manuscripts, and 2402 has a fair number of divergences from it anyway -- although it isn't really clear how much of this was found in the exemplar of the translation and how much was Maximos adjusting the text, perhaps based on his memory of other manuscripts.
2402 was probably copied in the late sixteenth or perhaps early seventeenth century (the watermarks of the paper are typical of the late sixteenth century, as is the writing). It is not the original of the translation -- indeed, three other copies are known, one of them reportedly being 2114. But 2402 is unique for its illustrations: It is the only fully-illuminated Greek copy of the Apocalypse known to exist, and the illustrations are arguably more interesting than the text. All of these are reproduced (in black and white, sadly) in the first volume (by Harold R. Willoughby) of the multi-volume set The Elizabeth Day McCormick Apocalypse, which is the source of all the information given here. The text can be found in the second volume. This is probably all that textual students need to know; students of Byzantine art, on the other hand, have real reason to look up the publication to see what a sixteenth century illuminated manuscript looks like.

Manuscript 2423

Durham, North Carolina, Duke University MS. Greek 3. (Rubenstein Library.) Not yet digitized. Acts and Epistles (Hebrews follows 2 Thessalonians), lacking Gal. 3;12-4:25, Eph. 1:10-3:2, 4:1-21, Phil. 1:1-14, 1 Tim. 1:1-7, 2:7-end, 2 Tim., Titus, Philemon. Dated paleographically to the thirteenth century. One of the manuscripts collated in Kenneth W. Clark's Eight American Praxapostoloi. A plain manuscript with little ornamentation; the few reader helps are mostly in Paul, where it has the Euthalian prologues, section heads, and faded red lectionary notes. The Alands place it in Category V, which is surely correct as the text is completely unremarkable.

Manuscript 2427

Location/Catalog Number

Chicago. Catalog number: University of Chicago Library, MS. 972.

Contents

2427 contains the Gospel of Mark (only). Given that the first and last pages are blank, and that it consists of six quires, and that the first five are regular but the sixth is not, it seems clear that it was never intended to contain anything else. It also contains seventeen miniatures -- one of Mark the evangelist and sixteen of events in the gospel.

Date/Scribe

2427 is written on parchment, one column per page. Paleographers looking at the writing have dated the manuscript to the fourteenth century (but see below).

Description and Text-type

Because 2427 came to light relatively recently (it was bought in 1937 from a private collection in Athens), and because it contains only Mark, few attempts have been made to classify it. The only comprehensive classification to include it is that of the Alands, who rate it Category I.

Despite the limitations of the Alands' methods, this seems to be formally a correct evaluation. 2427 is unquestionably the least Byzantine and most strongly Alexandrian of the minuscules of Mark. It is, in fact, the strongest ally of Vaticanus in that book; it seems to stand in almost the same relationship with B as B has with 𝔓75 -- i.e. the same sort of text, with a slight mixture of other readings which have arisen over time. Samples indicate about an 80% rate of agreement with B; the only substantial difference is that 2427 includes 16:9-20. 2427 is not nearly as close to the other Alexandrian witnesses.

The above circumstances have left 2427 under something of a cloud. It is certainly reasonable to ask how a fourteenth century minuscule could have fewer Byzantine readings than any other manuscript more recent than the fourth century! So there were many who have doubted its authenticity. This led to further examinations, of various types. Mary Virginia Orna, Patricia L. Lang, J. E. Katon, Thomas F. Mathews, and Robert S. Nelson, in "Applications of Infrared Microspectroscopy to Art Historical Questions about Medieval Manuscripts" (Archaeological Chemistry, 4 (1988), pp. 270-288) found that one of the illustrations contained a chemical with a cyanide (-CN) group. The earliest known pigment containing a cyanide group is Prussian Blue (KFe[Fe(CN)6]) -- first commercially produced by Diebach in around 1704. The chemical is complex, and rather dangerous to create, so chances are strong (though it's not quite certain) that a painting containing it dates from the eighteenth century or later. (Thanks to Wieland Willker for bringing this to my attention.)

On the other hand, the parchment appears old (though it has not, to my knowledge, been examined in detail with modern methods), and the writing is also somewhat weathered. It's hard to know what to make of this. If genuine, 2427 should be considered among the leading Alexandrian witnesses. If a forgery (and the chemical evidence does point in that direction), what was the purpose? Is it possible that the illustrations are later than the manuscript itself? Or could they have been retouched?

And chemical arguments have certain dangers. For example, it has been maintained that the presence of titanium dioxide in ink implies recent creation. But it has now been shown that titanium dioxide does occur in older inks.

It appears that the answer has finally been found. Stephen C. Carlson informs me (private communication) that 2427 appears to have been copied from the New Testament edition of Philipp Buttmann, published 1860. This in turn was largely based on Cardinal Mai's edition of Vaticanus. It is widely and correctly stated that Mai's edition of B is very bad -- but it is genuinely an edition of B, just an error-filled one. This, note, explains both the similarity of 2427 to B and its significant divergences.

Carlson's results were published in 2006, and since then, Dr. Willker has undertaken to verify these results. He concurs with Carlson. It would appear that the mystery of 2427 has been solved. And that it should be removed from the critical apparatus.

That of course leaves the task of figuring out the history of the manuscript since the forgery was created. But if the manuscript was made in the nineteenth century -- perhaps, if we wish to be generous, by someone who wanted a manuscript with a very old text -- this could also explain the manuscript's weathered look.

Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript

Bibliography

Collations:

Sample Plates:
Aland & Aland (1 page)

Editions which cite:
Cited in NA27 (but removed from the apparatus of NA28, for obvious reasons!)
Cited in UBS4.
Cited in SQE13.

Other Works:

See Dr. Willker's web site for his detailed analysis. Carlson's work was published by SBL.
See also Kenneth W. Clark, Greek New Testament Manuscripts in America, p. 271.

Manuscript 2464

Location/Catalog Number

Patmos. Catalog number: Joannu 742.

Contents

Originally contained the Acts and Epistles. The largest part of Acts has been lost; the manuscript begins in chapter 19. In Paul, 2464 lacks Rom. 11:29-16:10, the Pastorals, Philemon, and Hebrews 7:2-14, 9:20-10:4, 10:19-end. In the Catholics, the manuscript ends in 3 John; Jude has been lost. 2464 is written on parchment, with one column per page in the Gospels and two columns per page elsewhere.

Date/Scribe

Originally dated to the tenth century, NA27 lowers this to the ninth century (probably based on the claim by F. J. Leroy that 2464 is from the same pen -- that of Nikolaos Studites -- as the dated ninth century minuscule 461. Aland and Wachtel do not concede this claim, but allow that "2464... comes from the same time and probably even the same scriptorium as the Uspenski Gospels [=461]").

Description and Text-type

The basic run of the text is late Alexandrian, but heavily mixed. Romans is almost purely Byzantine. Even in the remaining books it appears that about half the original Alexandrian readings have been replaced by Byzantine. 2464 has few striking readings; its readings are usually supported by a large number of Alexandrian witnesses.

Aland and Aland list 2464 as Category II. It is the author's opinion that, for Paul (the only corpus where it was included in the Nestle-Aland apparatus) this is clearly too high a ranking. Even if one ignores the block mixture in Romans, the rest of the text has enough Byzantine readings that it belongs in Category III.

In Acts, it's much harder to judge the text, because there is so little of it. The Alands have only 35 sample readings -- not enough for a real assessment. But the statistics, such as they are, are striking: 18 Byzantine readings, 13 which agree with UBS (four of these are readings which agree with both the majority and UBS) -- and fully eight readings which agree with neither. Three of these are singular (although all are close to better-attested readings). Its closest relative among manuscripts for which both exist for at least 30 readings is E -- but they agree only 61% of the time. Ψ and 623 agree with it 60% of the time; all other manuscripts agree less than that. So there is reason to think that the text of Acts is worth more detailed investigation.

Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript

Bibliography

Collations:

Sample Plates:

Editions which cite:
Cited in NA26 for Paul.
Cited in NA27 for Paul.
Cited in UBS4 for the Acts and Epistles.
Cited in the Münster Editio Critica Maior for the Catholics.

Other Works:
F. J. Leroy, "Le Patmos St. Jean 742 [Gregory 2464]," published in Th. Lefèvre, Zetesis, Bijdragen... aan Prof. Dr. E. de Stijcker, 1973.
Barbara Aland and Klaus Wachtel, "The Greek Minuscule Manuscripts of the New Testament" (translated by Bart D. Ehrman, and appearing in Ehrman & Michael W. Holmes, Eds., The Text of the New Testament in Contemporary Research: Essays on the Status Quaestionis, Eerdmans, 1995) very briefly discusses, with references, the history of 2464 (p. 45).

Manuscript 2495

Location/Catalog Number

Sinai. Catalog number: Kathar.-Kloster Gr. 1992.

Contents

Originally contained the entire New Testament. A few odd phrases have been lost due to damage over the years. It is written on paper, one column per page.

Date/Scribe

Dated paleographically to the fourtheenth/fifteenth century.

Description and Text-type

In the Acts and Epistles, 2495 belongs with the family 2138 text-type (also called family 1611, family 614, Hkgr, etc.; a Greek text related to that also found in the Harklean Syriac; see the entry on 2138). It is particularly close to 1505; if 2495 is not a descendent of 1505, they certainly have a close common ancestor. 2495, however, has noticeably more Byzantine readings than 1505. It preserves few if any family readings not found in 1505 (and, as a result, was replaced by 1505 in the critical apparatus of the recent Nestle-Aland editions). The Aland samples for Acts show 1505 as 2495's closest relative by far; they agree in 88% of the test readings. Among substantial manuscripts, 2495's next-closest relative is 1890 (79%), followed by 2138 (76%), 1526 (70%), 913 (70%), and 1611 (70%); all others are below 70%. Thus we see that 2495 is clearly a member of Family 2138, but that it is much closer to 1505 than to the others.

In the Catholics, 1505 and 2495 again form a distinctive subtype within family 2138 (other subgroups being 2138+1611, 614+2412, 630+1799+2200, etc). Some, e.g. Amphoux, have considered this type to be residue of the "Western" text. This, however, can be disputed; see the entry on 614.

In Paul, the text of this family is much weaker, and clear representatives are fewer (to my knowledge, only 1505, 1611, 2495, the Harklean Syriac, probably 2005, and parts of 1022).

1505 and 2495 also go together in the Gospels, although there they are Byzantine. Wisse describes 2495 as Kmix/Kx/Kx, and adds "Kx Cluster 261 in 1 and 10; pair with 1505." Aland and Aland list it as "Category III with reservations, but higher in the Catholic Epistles."

To date, 2495 has not been studied in the Apocalypse. (1505 does not contain that book.)

See also the entry on 1505.

Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript

Bibliography

Collations:

Sample Plates:

Editions which cite:
Cited in NA26 for the Acts and Epistles; in NA27 it has been quite reasonably been replaced by 1505, which has an earlier and better text of the same type.
Cited in UBS3 for the Acts and Epistles.
Cited in the Münster Editio Critica Maior for parts of the Catholics.

Other Works:

Manuscript 2542

Location/Catalog Number

Saint Petersburg. Catalog number: Public Library Gr. 694

Contents

2542 contains Matthew with slight lacunae, Mark, and Luke (missing 24:20-end).

Date/Scribe

Dated paleographically to the twelfth (so SQE13) or thirteenth century (so NA27, Wisse, etc.). 2542 is written on parchment, one column per page.

Description and Text-type

2542 has only recently come to scholarly attention, and relatively little is known of its text. The Alands classify it as Category III. Wisse lists it as Mixed in Luke 1 and a weak member of Family 1 in Luke 10 and 20.

Both assessments seem to be correct. Spot checks of the Nestle apparatus show 2542 to be much more Byzantine than anything else. In some places (e.g Mark 8) it does appear to have affinities with family 1 (although even here it is more Byzantine than most members of the family); in others (e.g. Mark 1) it seems to be simply a witness with many Byzantine readings and a handful of non-Byzantine variants of no particular type.

Since 2542 lacks the Gospel of John, we cannot tell where it places John 7:53-8:11 (which Family 1, of course, places after John 21:25). Other than that, it generally has the more Byzantine reading at noteworthy points of variation (e.g. it includes Mark 16:9-20 without variant or question; although Family 1 has a note here; 2542 also includes Luke 22:43-44, 23:34, although of course both of these are found in Family 1).

Quite frankly, I do not understand 2542 was included in the NA27 apparatus when manuscripts such as 157, 1071, and 1241 were omitted. It is a useful but not exceptional manuscript.

Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript

Bibliography

Collations:

Sample Plates:

Editions which cite:
Cited in NA27 for Mark and Luke.
Cited in SQE13 (with no notation in the list of witnesses of any lacunae, indicating that it is cited for all four gospels. Obviously, however, it cannot be cited for John, and a cursory examination of the apparatus to Matthew makes me wonder if it is fully cited for that gospel).

Other Works: