Song of Songs - speakers identified in the text

[Steven Avery]

various notes also in the Private research section (restricted access)

Zosima Studies
http://www.purebibleforum.com/showthread.php?568-Zosimas-studies

=========================

Is this something that was done in Greek "LXX" writing in the early centuries?
Or is really something that came later, in more sophisticated Bible copying times, and when parchment space was less a concern?

Can we find it in later printed editions?

This page will put any historical information as to this unusual feature of the Sinaiticus text.

[Steven Avery]

This was noted in the 1860s as not consistent with an early text, see this thread.

healthy skepticism of 1860s scholar about Song of Solomon - and the complete NT - "not a word is wanting"
http://www.purebibleforum.com/showthread.php?641-healthy-skepticism-of-1860s-scholar-about-Song-of-Solomon-and-the-complete-NT-quot-not-a-word-is-wanting-quot

Now we have a paper that specifically shows that it was a later Vulgate features.

[Steven Avery]

Abstract - "rubrics of Codex Sinaiticus bear a literary relationship with rubrics in several later Latin manuscripts."

Lost Keys: Text and Interpretation in Old Greek "Song of Songs" and Its Earliest Manuscript Witnesses (1996)
Jay Curry Treat - University of Pennsylvania, jtreat@upenn.edu
https://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/vie...edissertations
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.738.4768&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Chapter Two examines the Old Greek text for its characteristics. It finds that the translation appears to have been a relatively serious attempt to represent each element in its Hebrew Vorlage by a corresponding formal equivalent in Greek. There are no indications that its translator interpreted the text allegorically, but its consistent formal equivalence with the Hebrew resulted in a Greek text that was just as multivalent as the Hebrew — open to allegorical interpretation on a wide variety of levels. It was the work of a Jewish translator of modest skill, working about the beginning of the common era. Some of its scribes provided aids for the use of readers: divisions of sense-units and rubrics (headings in redink) to identify changes in speaker. For example, Codex Sinaiticus, a fourth-century Old Greek manuscript, uses rubrics to indicate speakers such as “The Bride” or “The Groom’s Companions.” - p. 18-19

S Codex Sinaiticus = א. London: British Museum, Additional Ms. 43725. 37

Description: fourth-century parchment. Rubrics are indented from the right. Stichi are arranged in wide columns. Each stich is written on one or two lines; the first line extends to the left margin and is 20-28 letters long (mean length: 24 letters); the rest of the stich (if any) is indented on the next line below. The initial letter in each stich is the same size as the other letters.

According to Milne and Skeat’s analysis, Song of Songs was written by Scribe A but corrected by scribe D (the most careful of the Sinaiticus scribes) before it left the scriptorium.38 p. 29

4. Coptic, Latin, and Syriac Manuscripts

LaW Latin manuscript, Stuttgart, Württembergische Landesbibliothek, HB. 11,35 = Z in DE BRUYNE = W in Schulz-Flügel (about 800 C.E.).53

This edition uses LaW and LaF only as Latin witnesses to the rubrics of the Sinaiticus tradition. Therefore S-LaW-LaF often appear together in rubrics. The text of LaW-LaF is a Vulgate text with a very few OL elements.54 p. 35

Discussion of Sinaiticus variants on p. 361, 366, 384 - numeral of division 389-393.

The following four Greek manuscripts have rubrics in Song of Songs: Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, Venetus, and 161. There are surely other rubricated manuscripts of Song of Songs that have not yet been published.2 The following manuscripts do not have rubrics: Codex Vaticanus, Codex Ephraemi, PHam, 952,924, PBer, PDam, 147, and 502. p. 400

This chapter looks briefly at the rubrics in these four Greek manuscripts. The Sinaiticus set is a special case, because we also have Latin witnesses to the same tradition. Chapter Four will provide a fuller text, translation, and discussion of the Sinaiticus rubric-tradition. p 400

2 These four Greek manuscripts have been published. Erich Klostermann, “Eine alte Rollenverteilung zum Hohenliede,” Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 19 (1899): 158, implies that there are many Greek and Latin manuscripts of Song of Songs with rubrics. Regarding Latin manuscripts of Song of Songs with rubrics, see below in section “F. Latin Rubrics.”

Next is describing the simple and sparse rubrics of Alexandrinus and Codex 161 "fairly simple and are rather sparsely distributed throughout the Song. p. 401-403. Then to Sinaitcus, p. 404-407

===============

Regardless of how one may evaluate the possibilities, it tums out that the Codex Sinaiticus is the earliest document we know to mark every speech of a dialogue by writing the name or role of the Speaker in full on a line by itself before the speech. It appears possible that some scribe working on Song of Songs was the first person to write full attributions in this manner. There were earlier forms of the rubrics, and their exact form is lost to us. The rubrics in Codex Alexandrinus probably represent a very early stage in the development of Song of Songs rubrics. In its rubrics, not every Speech is attributed, but each attribution is unabbreviated and (in principle though not in practice) on a line by itself.80 I would expect the first Song of Songs rubrics to be similar. p. 431

More on p. 434 and later, a key question is what are the dates of the Vulgate mss that are very close to Sinaiticus.

It looks like it is from 800 AD and later : LaW-LaF

And this type of complex rubrication likely arose in that medieval period around 800 AD.

[Steven Avery]

Rubrics in Codex Sinaiticus
https://www.sas.upenn.edu/~jtreat/song/sinai.html
This is Song of Songs 1:1-4 in Old Greek from the Codex Sinaiticus. Codex Sinaiticus dates from about 360 CE.The rubrics (the writing in red ink) serve to provide a narrative framework and to distribute portions of the Song to various speakers.

This is Awesome Screenshot

The next one is Nimbus

For more information, see Jay Treat, Lost Keys: Text and Interpretation in Old Greek Song of Songs and its Earliest Manuscript Witnesses, Ph.D. Dissertation (University of Pennsylvania, 1996), chapters 3 and 4.

==============================

[Steven Avery]

The Song of Songs from the Codex Sinaiticus
http://www.reshistoriaeantiqua.co.uk...INAITICUS.html

An accompanying Greek text is available for comparison and it should be noted that this version found in the Codex Sinaiticus is annotated with Rubrics, which seem to have been added to the original Hebrew/Greek translation at a later date. Though obviously intended to clarify the text, they do a disservice by allocating identities to the speakers which are not reflected in the text itself. Therefore, although the terms ,‘brother’ or ‘sister’, are freely intermingled within the Greek text together with the terms ‘beloved’ or ‘lover’, the Rubrics have be consistently translated as above, and the ‘Daughters of Jerusalem’ likewise always translated as the’Women of the Harem’. It is hoped that this approach will clarify the translation for the reader.

Noting the Latin tradition, and the complexity, probably a much later date than the supposed 350 AD of Sinaiticus. Benedict likely picked it up from the Vulgate tradition.

[Steven Avery]

Song of Songs (2001)
Tremper Longman
https://books.google.com/books?id=02RyCgAAQBAJ&pg=PT47

... the Song is composed of dialogue with absolutely no stage directions. There is no narrative voice that guides readers as they process the speeches of the characters. As a matter of fact, even the rubrics that label the speakers are not in the original Hebrew text and are added by the translator/interpreter.121 As a matter of fact, as the commentary below will make explicit, we cannot be absolutely certain who is speaking in about 10 percent of the cases.