Minuscule 69
New Testament manuscript | |
Name | Codex Leicester |
---|---|
Text | New Testament † |
Date | 15th century |
Script | Greek |
Now at | Leicester |
Size | 37.8 cm by 27 cm |
Type | Caesarean text-type (Gospels), Byzantine (rest of books) |
Category | III, V |
Note | no marginalia |
Minuscule 69 (in the
Description
Contents
The manuscript is a codex (precursor to the modern book), containing the entire New Testament with four gaps (Matthew 1:1–18:15; Acts 10:45–14:17; Jude 7–25; Revelation 19:10–22:21)[3] on 213 leaves (sized 37.8 cm by 27 cm). The text of the manuscript skips from Acts 10:45 to 14:17 without a break, which possibly indicates the copyist copied it from a defective manuscript.[2] The codex is written on 91 leaves of parchment and 122 of paper.[2] According to biblical scholar Frederick H. A. Scrivener, it is in fact 83 leaves of vellum and 130 of paper. Usually two parchment leaves are followed by three paper leaves.[2] The paper was of very poor quality.[2] The quality is so bad that four of the leaves were only written on one side.[4]: VI The leaves are arranged in
The original sequence of the books was:
The text of Rev 18:7–19:10 is fragmentary.[6]
It has some non-biblical additional material like: An explanation of the Creed and the Seven Councils (on fol. 159v), the Lives of the Apostles (on fol. 160v), Limits of the Five Patriarchates (on fol. 161r). These are also seen in the codices Minuscule 211 and 543.[5]: 62–65
-
Folio 161 (recto) of the codex with the text of "The Limits of the Five Patriarchates"
-
Folio 161 (verso) with the text of "The Limits of the Five Patriarchates"
It contains an
The headings of the Gospels are titled as ἐκ τοῦ κατὰ Μάρκον etc., something also seen in Minuscule 178.[3]
Scribal habit
The text is written in one column per page, 37–38 lines per page.[7][8] The large initial letters at the beginning of each book are written in red ink.[3]
The writing is rather rough and inelegant. It was written by a strange hand, the letter epsilon / ε being recumbent and so much like the letter alpha / α, that it is not clear which was intended.[2] The accents are placed over the succeeding consonant of the vowel. According to Scrivener, "The whole style of writing resembling a careless scrawl".[6] There are numerous marginal notes written by a beautiful hand, who wrote words Ειμι Ιλερμου Χαρκου (I am William Chark) at the top of the first page.[6] The hand of the corrector is nearly as old as the scribe.[4]: XI
The name Ἰησοῦς (Jesus) is always written in full up to John 21:15, where we meet with the nomen sacrum ις, and in 41 other places, 19 of which are in Acts.[2] The nomina sacra (an early Christian method of designating important names/words) are contracted in a usual way: δαδ (δαυιδ / David), ις (Ιησους / Jesus), κς (κυριος / Lord), ουνος (ουρανος / Heaven), ανος (ανθρωπος / man), χς (χριστος / Christ), ιηλ (Ισραηλ / Israel), ιλημ (Ἱεροσόλυμα / Jerusalem), σηρ (σωτηρ / saviour), πηρ (πατηρ / father), μηρ (μητηρ / mother), πνα (πνευμα / spirit), στρος (σταυρος / cross), and παρνος (παρθενος / virgin). The abbreviation χς is used once for χρηστος.[4]: XIII
Scholar
There are some unusual grammar forms: ειπαν (twice only – Matthew 26:35; Luke 20:2), ηλθατε (Matthew 25:36), εξηλθατε (Matthew 26:55; Mark 14:48; Luke 7:24, Luke 7:25, Luke 7:26; Luke 22:52), εισηλθατε (all instances), ανεπεσαν (John 6:10), παραγενομενος (Luke 14:21).[4]: IX–X
In some cases the accusatives are written with ending -αν for -α, e.g. νυκταν, θυγατεραν, χειραν. The gender is sometimes altered, verbs in -αω or -οω are formed as those in -εω (e.g. επηρωτουν, Luke 3:10; Luke 20:27; επετιμουν, Luke 18:15; ετολμουν; ερωτουν; εμβριμουμενος and others). The augment is often omitted after Luke 11:44, but all before Luke Luke 9, and there is a double augment in ηπηντησαν (John 4:51).[4]: X
Text
The text of the codex is very remarkable; it belongs to Family 13 as a very important member of the group.[2] The Greek text of the Gospels of this codex is considered to be a representative of the Caesarean text-type.[2] The text-types are groups of different New Testament manuscripts which share specific or generally related readings, which then differ from each other group, and thus the conflicting readings can separate out the groups. These are then used to determine the original text as published; there are three main groups with names: Alexandrian, Western, and Byzantine.[9]: 205–230 Biblical scholar Kurt Aland placed it in Category III of his New Testament manuscript text classification system.[10] Category III manuscripts are described as having "a small but not a negligible proportion of early readings, with a considerable encroachment of [Byzantine] readings, and significant readings from other sources as yet unidentified."[10]: 335 An analysis using the Claremont Profile Method, confirmed its placement among Family 13 (ƒ13)[11]
In the
The text of
In John 4:5 it reads
In 2 Cor 11:17 it reads ανθρωπον for κυριον.[13]: 488
Although there is no liturgical markings in the codex, it is likely many of its various readings have arisen from lectionaries.[4]: XI
History
Textual critic Wettstein
The manuscript was presented to
It was formerly held in the library of the Town Council of Leicester.[6] The codex is now located in the Leicestershire Record Office (Cod. 6 D 32/1) at Leicester.[7][8]
See also
- List of New Testament minuscules
- Family 13
- Textual criticism
References
- ^ Gregory, Caspar René (1908). Die griechischen Handschriften des Neuen Testament. Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs. p. 50.
- ^ ISBN 978-0-19-502924-6.
- ^ a b c d e f g Gregory, Caspar René (1900). Textkritik des Neuen Testaments. Vol. 1. Leipzig: J.C. Hinrichs. pp. 144–145.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l Ferrar, William Hug; T. K Abbott (1877). A Collation of Four Important Manuscripts of the Gospels by the late William Hugh Ferrar. Dublin: Macmillan & Co.
- ^ a b c Harris, James Rendel (1877). The Origin of the Leicester Codex of the New Testament. London: C. J. Clay & Sons. p. 12.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j Scrivener, Frederick Henry Ambrose; Edward Miller (1894). A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament. Vol. 1 (4th ed.). London: George Bell & Sons. pp. 202–203.
- ^ ISBN 3-11-011986-2.
- ^ a b c "Liste Handschriften". Münster: Institute for New Testament Textual Research. Retrieved 7 April 2011.
- ^ ISBN 978-0-19-516122-9.
- ^ ISBN 978-0-8028-4098-1.
- ISBN 0-8028-1918-4.
- ^ Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2nd edition, Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, Stuttgart 2001, p. 147.
- ^ Metzger, Bruce Manning, eds. (2001). Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece (27 ed.). Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft. (NA27)
- ^ a b Wettstein, J. J. (1751). Novum Testamentum Graecum editionis receptae cum lectionibus variantibus codicum manuscripts. Amsterdam: Ex Officina Dommeriana. p. 53.
- ^ 'The Scribe of the Leicester Codex', Journal of Theological Studies, old series 5 (1904), pp. 445–7
- ^ S. P. Tregelles, "An Introduction to the Critical study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures", London 1856, p. 209.
- ^ Scrivener, F. H. A. (1859). An Exact Transcript of the Codex Augiensis. Cambridge: Deighton Bell & Co. pp. 40–47.
Further reading
- Ferrar, W. H. (1877). T. K Abbott (ed.). A Collation of Four Important Manuscripts of the Gospels by the late William Hugh Ferrar. Dublin: Macmillan & Co. pp. 389 + LVIII. [as L]
- Harris, J. Rendel (1887). The Origin of the Leicester Codex of the New Testament. London: C. J. Clay & Sons.
- Scrivener, Frederick Henry Ambrose (1859). An Exact Transcript of the Codex Augiensis. Cambridge: Deighton Bell & Co. pp. 40–47.
- James, M. R. (1904). "The Scribe of the Leicester Codex". Journal of Theological Studies. V: 445–447. Retrieved 2011-06-09.
- James, M. R. (1910). "Two More Manuscripts written by the Scribe of the Leicester Codex". Journal of Theological Studies. XI (2): 291–292.
External links
- "Liste Handschriften". Münster: Institute for New Testament Textual Research. Retrieved 7 April 2011.
- Digital Images of Codex Leicestrensis at the CSNTM
- Codex Leicestrensis at the Encyclopedia of Textual Criticism