Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Zosimas 1821 Moscow Bible used as an OT Sinaiticus source

  1. Default Zosimas 1821 Moscow Bible used as an OT Sinaiticus source

    With the help and study of Rohan Meyer, we tracked down Claromontanus (or its sister manuscript) as one source for Sinaiticus.

    Now let us look for the Zosima (Zosimas) Moscow Bible:

    Dionysius, the professed calligrapher of the monastery, was afraid to undertake the task, Simonides commenced it at the request of his uncle, who provided him with that edition of the Greek Bible which the brothers Zosimas, wealthy Bussian merchants, had defrayed the cost of publishing at Moscow. This Moscow Bible, after having been collated with three ancient manuscripts and the printed edition of the Codex Alexandrinus, so as to be cleared from many errors (the old spelling however remaining unaltered), was given to Simonides to transcribe.

    A Full Collation of the Codex Sinaiticus with the Received Text of the New Testament
    Simonides ... His statement is that the Moscow Greek Bible, published at the cost of the brothers Zosimas, in 1821, and collated with three ancient manuscripts and the printed edition of God. Alex., was what he had to transcribe ... Certainly it could not be the Cod. Sin. that he wrote for his uncle. The Moscow Bible is simply a copy of the Textus Receptus.

    The Sinaiticus Manuscript: Brief Account of Its Discovery and of Its Character
    Bible Treasury: Volume 8 - (likely John Nelson Darby - Dec 1, 1870)
    Darby, who uses Tischendorf and Scrivener as main sources, misses the point that the Moscow Bible would be used as a major source for the OT, but not necessarily the NT. The simple textual facts, and the discovery of the Claromontanus homoeoteleutons, shows that the NT likely received special, and different, attention.

    Here is the main primary source, from Simonides:

    Having then examined the principal copies of the Holy Scriptures preserved at Mount Athos, I began to practice the principles of calligraphy; and the learned Benedict, taking a copy of the Moscow edition of both Testaments (published and presented to the Greeks by the illustrious brothers Zosimas), collated it with the ancient ones, and by this means cleared it of many errors, after which he gave it into my hands to transcribe. - Simonides, published in the Guardian, Sept 3 1862, p. 211

    Journal of Sacred Literature (1863)
    This is mentioned a few more times in that JSL publication.

    ... Simonides speaks of
    'a copy of the Moscow edition of both Testaments, published and presented to the Greeks by the illustrious brothers Zosimas.'
    Upon which you asked —
    'Is it impossible to ascertain so simple a point as whether the Moscow booksellers, Zosimas, sent a copy of the Moscow Bible to the Greeks for their use ?’
    This is a misunderstanding of Simonides’ words. The brothers Zosimas were not booksellers, but wealthy Russian merchants, who, having obtained leave from the Holy Synod, at their own cost published an edition of the Greek Bible at Moscow, thus presenting it to the Greek Church. p. 221
    Frederick Field - December 23, 1862

  2. Default

    Looking for the exact printed edition:

    d) The edition worked out by the German J. Grabe, based mainly on the Origenis Hexapiorum and on A, published in Oxford (1703-1720). This LXX edition was the basis for the Moscow edition (1821), approved by the Holy Synod of the Moscow Patriarchate and published at the expense of the Greek Zosimas Brothers.

    A reprint of the Moscow edition was the one approved by the Holy Synod of the Church of Greece and published in four volumes under the supervision of a special committee at the expense of the Society Promoting Christian Knowledge (1843-1850) "to be distributed gratis to the clergy of Greece.” p. 310

    ... the edition of the Codex Alexandrinus published by the Moscow branch of the Russian Bible Society in 1821 ... the editors of the 1821 Moscow edition, prepared under the supervision of Protopresbyter Yakov Dmitriyev of the Dormition Cathedral in the Kremlin, had based it upon Breitinger’s reprint of Grabe’s editio princeps of the Codex Alexandrinus, they had ignored Grabe’s critical marks with the result that some of his corrections of and additions to the text in the Codex Alexandrinus, which had been printed in smaller type, were included in the Moscow edition as if they had formed part of that codex’s text, while its actual readings are to be found in the four lists of variants printed at the end of the edition. Hence some of the allegedly Alexandrinus readings noted by Gorsky and Nevostruyev are not in fact found in that codex, as was pointed out by the celebrated Russian bibliographer Vukol Undol’sky (1815-1864). Despite this the appearance of this first part of their description of the Synodal collection has rightly been hailed as marking the beginning of Russian scholarship with regard to the Slavonic Bible. p. 618-619

    61 ... for the 1821 Moscow edition see ibid. II, 2, no. 4801. In the lengthy title of this latter edition it is misleadingly claimed that the New Testament is a reprint of the edition published by the authority of Patriarch Cyril, viz. Cyril VI of Constantinople (1813-1818), at Constantinople in 1810. In fact it was taken from the diglot (Koine and Modern Greek) published by the British and Foreign Bible Society at Chelsea in 1810, for which see ibid. II, 2, no. 4787. The New Testament in that edition is in turn a reprint of the 7th and last Elzevir edition published at Amsterdam in 1678. for which see ibid. II, 2, no. 4712.

    The Interpretation of the Bible
    : The International Symposium in Slovenia (1998)
    Interpretacija Svetega Pisma
    edited by Joze Krasovec
    The Slavonic Translation of the Old Testament
    Francis J. Thomson
    Francis J. Thomson is in the linguistics department of the University of Antwerp.

    For the Thomas Darlow Catalogue, that has the long name of the 1821 Bible, we can start with this catalogue source:

    Historical catalogue of the printed editions of Holy Scripture in the library of the British and Foreign Bible Society compiled by T.H. Darlow and H.F. Moule.
    4796 (correction to above);seq=78


    Click on this picture of the catalogue entry to make it larger and readable:

    Zosimas Moscow Bible.jpg

    Where the earlier Grabe edition is:

    Septuaginta interpretum tomus I. continens Octateuchum: tomus secundus, continens Veteris Testamenti libros historicos omnes, sive canonicos sive apocryphos ; tomus tertius, continens;seq=59

    ... the text is based on Codex A. Any departures from that MS.—in the way of correction or addition—are distinguished by smaller type. All words for which the editor found no equivalent in the Massoretic Hebrew aro marked with an obelus; and snob as he believed to have been derived from a non-Septuagiut source, with an asterisk. Each volume contains full prolegomena.
    'Septuaginta interpretum : tomus I. Continens Octateuchum; quem ex antiquissimo MS. codice Alexandrino accurate descriptum ... summa cura edidit Joannes Ernestus Grabe S.T.P'

    Hē palaia diathēkē kata tous Hebdomēkonta = Vetus testamentum juxta Septuaginta interpretes. Greek, Ancient [to 1453]

    Jacques Le Long - longer description:

    Bibliotheca sacra post cl. cl. vv. Jacobi Le Long et C.F. Boerneri iteratas cvras ordine disposita, emendata, svppleta, continvata ab Andrea Gottlieb Masch ..., Volume 2 (1781)
    Jacques Le Long

    Grabe 1707 online, Vol 1

    Septuaginta interpretum tomus I [-ultimus].: Continens Octateuchum [-Psalmorum, Jobi, ac tres Salomonis libros, cum Apocrypha ejusdem, nec non Siracidæ Sapientia]; quem ex antiquissimo MS. Codice Alexandrino accuratè descriptum, et ope aliorum exemplarium, ac priscorum scriptorum, præsertim vero hexaplaris editionis Origenianæ emendatum atque suppletum, additis sæpe asteriscorum & obelorum signis,
    Joannes Ernestus Grabe

    [[Hē palaia diathēkē kata tous Hebdomēkonta] = Vetus testamentum juxta Septuaginta interpretes.].
    Vol 1-2-3-4

    Title Page - Vol 1;seq=13


    Vetus Testamentum ex versione Septuaginta interpretum olim ad fidem codicis ms. alexandrini summo studio & incredibili diligentia expressum, emendatum ac suppletum a Joanne Ernesto Grabe ... nunc vero exemplaris vaticani aliorumque mss. codd. lectionibus var. nec non criticis dissertationibus illustratum, insigniterque locupletatum. Svmma cvra edidit Joannes Jacobus Breitingerus.
    Vol 1-2-3-4

    It would be interesting to see a page of the Zosimas and compare.

    Background information:


    Prepared for katapi by Paul Ingram, 2005.
    An Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek. Additional Notes — Henry Barclay Swete


    Here is a hint of a later date that has needed a placement on the forum. This has to refer to someone early, who knows the Greek Orthodox liturgy, like Porfiry Uspensky

    If, as has been stated by one very competent critic, the arrangement of Lessons for daily reading in the Greek Church in the present day is the same as that occurring in the Sinaitic Codex, this will bring the MS. down to the seventh century.

    The British Quarterly Review (1863)
    The Sinaitic Codex
    Character of the Text - Age of the Manuscript

  3. Default various features can show the source-->target connection ( Zosimas to Sinaiticus )

    "the old spelling, however, remained unaltered" - JSR, p. 248
    This would explain the old spelling of the Old Testament, especially if it is generally a match for the Zosimas edition, which should be a match for the Grabe editions. The Zosimas edition, which is still largely Alexandrinus-based, had corrections made by the editor in the notes, and Benedict is said to have done his own extra collation. However, there could easily be good remnants of text, spelling quirks, and general matches, and perhaps even homoeoteluetons as from Claromontanus, that show the 1821 edition as a primary source for the Sinaiticus text.

    It would also be good to check to see if this edition, or the earlier Grabe-based editions, maintain a Greek letter style from Alexandrinus, and, if so, how close this is to Sinaiticus.

    Note that we do have a criticism of the Sinaiticus itacisms, how could they source back to the Zosimas edition:

    Cod. Sinaiticus is full of itacisms, as Simonides might easily have seen from the specimen pages previously given in Tischendorfs Notitia. He would have us believe, therefore, that Benedict deliberately and systematically altered the true spelling of the Moscow Bible into the blundering itacisms of the old MSS. However unlikely this may seem, no supposition short of it will suit the necessity of his case.

    The Christian remembrancer (1864)
    Constantine Simonides and his Biblical Studies
    However, since Sinaiticus went through more hands, and some of it might have been dictation, these various itacisms could easily have arisen even if the printed Moscow Bible was a primary source.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts