A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament, Vol. II.Scrivener, Frederick Henry Ambrose
Religion
A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament, Vol. II.
Scrivener, Frederick Henry Ambrose
Bible. New Testament -- Criticism, interpretation, etc.
*8. Oriental 1001, large 8vo, paper, with illuminations, Copt.
Arab., “bought of N. Nassif, 21 May, 1869.” The four Gospels
complete. Each Gospel is preceded by introductory matter, table of
contents, &c. The first few leaves of the book are supplied by a
later hand. A note (fol. 77b), written by Athanasius, Bishop of
Apotheke or Abutij, A.M. 1508 = 1792 A.D., states that the
original date of the MS. was A. Mart. 908 (= A.D. 1192). This date
is also repeated fol. 264b. It may possibly be correct, though the
MS. does not appear so old. On fol. 125b this same Athanasius
records that he presented the book to the convent of St. Antony,
A. Mart. 1508 (= A.D. 1792). It contains Luke xxiii. 34, and the
pericope John vii. 53-viii. 11; but omits the additions Luke xxii.
43, 44; John v. 3, 4.
*9. Additional 5995, fol., paper, Copt. Arab, “brought from Egypt
by Major-General Turner, August, 1801.” The four Gospels complete.
The few first leaves of St. Matthew and the last leaf of St. John,
besides some others in the middle of the volume, are added in a
later hand. In an Arabic colophon (fol. 233b) it is stated that
the book was repaired A. Mart. 1492 (i.e. A.D. 1776) by one
Ibrahim, son of Simeon, but that its original date was more than
four hundred years earlier. This is perhaps an exaggeration. The
same colophon says that it was written for the convent of Baramus
in the desert of Scete. Coptic chapters are written in uncials
while the Ammonian Sections and Eusebian Canons are in cursive
letters. It has not Luke xxii. 43, 44; xxiii. 17; nor the pericope
John vii. 53-viii. 11; but contains Luke xxiii. 34, and the
interpolation in John v. 3, 4.
*10. Additional 14,740 A. A folio volume in which various Bohairic
and a few Armenian fragments are bound up together, of various
sizes and ages, some on vellum, some on paper. The following
fragments of the Bohairic New Testament on vellum are important on
account of their antiquity.
(i) Luke viii. 2-7, 8-10, 13-18.
(ii) 2 Cor. iv. 2-v. 4.
(iii) Eph. ii. 10-19; ii. 21-iii. 11.
(iv) 1 Thess. iii. 3-6; iii. 11-iv. 1.
The fragment from the Ephesians, the most ancient of them all,
appears from the handwriting to rival in antiquity the oldest
Sahidic fragments. They are all more or less mutilated. This
volume also contains several paper fragments of the Bohairic New
Testament, belonging chiefly (it would appear) to lectionaries,
but these are not worth enumerating.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account