Charles Butler on the Vulgate text and Colbertinus and others

Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Administrator
Codex Colbertinus

Codex Colbertinus - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

Horae Biblicae
books.google.com

Horae Biblicae

books.google.com

The Gentleman's Magazine: Or, Monthly Intelligencer ..., Volume 85, Part 1
Charles Butler
https://books.google.com/books?id=4K8UAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA127
https://archive.org/details/gentlemansmagaz303unkngoog/page/n143/mode/1up
The three last manuscripts I have caused to be examined, and shall copy the verse, as it stands in each of them; first inserting a copy of the verse as it stands in the Vulgate.


In the Vulgate, it is expressed in the following words: "Tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in Cælo: Pater, Verbum, et Spiritus sanctus: et hi tres unum sunt."


I. In the Codex Regius, No. 5315, membranaceus, olim Colbertinus, sæc. xv. fol. xvi. recto: "Tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in cælo, Pater, filius, et Spiritus Sanctus: et hii tree unum sunt."


II. In the Codex Regius, No. 2015, membranaceus, olim Colbertinus, sæc. x. (at non uumera'o verso:)
"Tres sunt, qui testimonium perhibent in cælo, Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus: et ii ires unum sunt."

In the margin the following words are written: "Nota. In Epistola beati Joannis ita legendum."
III. In the Codex Regius 2796, membranaceus, item olim Colbertinus, sæc. xiii. it is expressed in the following words:
“ Tres sunt, quitestimonium perhibent in cælo, Pater, Verbum et Spiritus sanctus, et hi tres unum sunt."
This is the reading adopted by Ruinart. The importance of the verse, and the contests which it has occasioned, make me think, that this account of its state in the manuscripts I have mentioned, would be acceptable to some of your biblical readers; and I shall be obliged to any of your Correspondents to inform me, if any thing important has appeared on the subject, since the publication of Dr. Marsh's important Letters to Mr. Archdeacon Travis. C. B.
 
Last edited:
Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Administrator
www.tapatalk.com

Bible Versions Disc Board-Steven Avery of Duchess County, New York - World Class Hypocrite Blunderer Who Won't Admit It

Steven Avery is notorious for exaggerating his evidence. The only reason is obvious; there's so little, he has to find a way to turn his five loaves a
www.tapatalk.com www.tapatalk.com
Apr 23, 2022#244
Is the UBS4 or UBS5 available online? Or the introductions to either one at the very least? I have UBS4 in my Logos Bible software but it doesn't have the introduction. I started reading this thread at page 1 again and want to look up the Colbertinus reference Maestroh mentioned. I'm also going through the introduction to the copy of NA27 that I have.

This is from Metzger’s book “Early Versions.” It’s page 296, I keep a copy in my email for reference.
1721610427775.jpeg
 
Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Administrator
Matt
Is the "Colbertinus" you speak of, the Vulgate ms with the three quotes of the Latin Psuedo-Athanasius ("De Trinitate"), Psuedo-Augustine (Speculum “Audi Israhel” plus another attributed to him) and Fulgentius ("Against the Arians") on the last, or one of the last folio's?"

NO, but Matt gives a great view of the Berger 13174 ms.
Bring it to a 13174 page.

Here's a break down and comparison of the contents/text of the Ms with other Comma mss/PNF-quotations below.


Paris, BNF ms lat. 13174 (circa. 9th century A.D./C.E.)
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8427447k.r=Latin 13174?rk=21459;2

Folio 72v = Ps-Jerome Prol. Bottom line mentions Johns Epistle
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8427447k/f153.item.r=Latin 13174.zoom

Folio 72r = Ibid. 1st John 5:7 comments
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8427447k/f154.item.r=Latin 13174.zoom

Folio 92r = 1st John begins
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8427447k/f193.item.r=Latin 13174.zoom

Folio 92v = 1st John Capitula
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8427447k/f194.item.r=Latin 13174.zoom

Folio 98r = 1st John 5:7 main text + marginal not
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8427447k/f205.item.r=Latin 13174.zoom

Folio 139v = PNF quotations of CJ 1st John 5:7-8
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8427447k/f286.item.r=Latin 13174.zoom

Matt .. is this Colbertinus? Nope

BVDB
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/bibleversiondiscussionboard/viewtopic.php?p=83349#p83349
 
Last edited:
Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Administrator
The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration (2005)
Metzger and Ehrman

c. Codex Colbertinus, written in the twelfth century, probably in southern France, is now in the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris and
contains the four Gospels in a mixed form of text. Clear traces of African readings persist in what is generally a European Old Latin
text contaminated here and there by Jerome's Vulgate.


1721665645805.png
 
Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Administrator
Vogels, Heinrich Josef:
REVIEW by Josef Schmid
Evangelium Colbertinum: Codx lat. 254 der Bibliothèque Nationale zu Paris. (1953)
https://mthz.ub.uni-muenchen.de/MThZ/article/download/1955H4S336/407/596
Volume 2
archive.org

Evangelium Colbertinum. Codex lat. 254 der Bibliothèque nationale zu Paris : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

2 volumes 25 cm
archive.org
Volume One
books.google.com

Evangelium Colbertinum

books.google.com

1888
Belsheim .. only the Gospels ? (in the edition we see online)

Julicher

Sabatier

More here

Description: Evangelium Colbertinum :: IxTheo

ixtheo.de ixtheo.de
Evangelium Colbertinum / 2 Untersuchungen
 
Last edited:
Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Administrator
Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Administrator
Lat 254
VL 6
===============
Codex Colbertinus - is the heavenly witnesses Old Latin, Vulgate or hybrid?

Codex Colbertinus

Codex Colbertinus - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

Is the heavenly witnesses verse Old Latin or Vulgate or hybrid?

Not a very important manuscript in terms of the heavenly witnesses variant, there is much in both the Old Latin and the Vulgate and the early church writers that is much earlier.

However, this must be a critically important question, since one poster has 15 posts about the manuscript since mid June!

So there are three different ways to determine the Colbertinus text.

1) The manuscript as a whole has historically been put in the Old Latin group, and thus was put as it-c for inclusion in some apparatuses.

2) Or you say that since after Acts that the manuscript is "predominantly" of Vulgate, lets put its heavenly witnesses in the Vulgate group.

3) Or you could look at the actual text and determine if its features are those of 1 John 5 in the Old Latin or in the Vulgate.

TNC actually tried (3) but he was not sure of the manuscript, so he analyzed the amazing Corbie 13174 manuscript, which has three church writer citations in the margin, as well as its own text! Good college try, though. And I will say that generally TNC does understand that the actual words in the text can help you peg whether it is of Vulgate or Old Latin origin. A simple example: if 1 John 5:6 has "Christ est veritas" (Christ is truth) this is a strong indication of a Vulgate lineage, not Old Latin.

However, we have a problem finding the Colbertinus text. There are editions of it online that are simply the Gospels.
 
Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Administrator
Houghton

The Latin New Testament: A Guide to Its Early History, Texts, and Manuscripts (2016)
Hugh Houghton
https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/31592/626900.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
https://books.google.com/books?id=CXQqCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA101

And what does Houghton say on page 120:

p. 101 in Google books
"Codex Colbertinus...contain the whole of the New Testament...copied in southern France in the twelfth century. ..contains some Old Latin readings in the Acts of the Apostles, while the rest of the New Testament is predominantly Vulgate."
 
Last edited:
Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Administrator
Notre manuscrit est le numéro 254 de la Bibliothèque nationale (autrefois manuscrit 4051 de Colbert). Il est célèbre dans l'histoire des anciennes versions latines sous le nom de Codex Colbertinus. Il contient en effet le seul texte complet qui soit conservé de la version « européenne » des Évangiles. Telle est l'indifférence des éditeurs et même des critiques à l'égard de l'origine des manuscrits et des textes, que personne n'a songé à rechercher la patrie du Codex Colbertinus. La date même en est mal indiquée par les auteurs, qui le mettent au xr° siècle; le catalogue de 1744, toujours enclin à rajeunir les manuscrits, indique le x1° siècle. La vérité paraît être entre les deux le Codex Colbertinus est probable

[ocr errors]


1. ACT., II, 33, : hoc donum quod (= tol. cav. compl1.2. leg1. æm, osc. Théod. B. N. 93. 254, 321. 11505**. 17250**. Mun. 6230, ms. provençal de Lyon et bible allemande [cod. Tepl.]; B. N. 6: hunc donum quem; B. N. 16262: donum. Hoc quidem vos videtis). IV, 16 dicentes: Viri fratres (B. N. 4**. 7. 342. 343.11932, versions provençales [Lyon et B. N. fr. 2425] et vaudoise). XIII, 6, à la fin quod interpretatur paratus (Lucifer, gig. leg 2*. dem. Metz 7*. Vienne 1190. Théod. Ambr. E. 53 inf. B. N. 4**. 7. 11 [qui int. p.]. 93. 11505** [qui int. p.]). XXVIII, 31: sine prohibitione, quia hic est J. C. filius Dei per quem incipiet totus mundus judicari (4**. 7. leg 2**. dem. Théod. [om. Jhesus] B. N. 9. 93 [om. Jh.]. 202. 315. 342. 343. 11533*. 11932. 16262. Lyon 347. 367. Mars. 250, versions provençales [mss. de Lyon et B. N. fr. 2425], catalane et allemande [Tepl]).

ment, d'après son écriture, de la seconde moitié du XIIe siècle. Le caractère archaïque de ses illustrations s'explique par le fait qu'il a été exécuté dans le midi de la France, pays dont le développement artistique retarde sur le nord de la France.
Je ne dirai pas par quelles recherches et avec quelle méthode M. H. Omont, aidé de l'expérience de M. Delisle, est arrivé à retrouver la provenance du Codex Colbertinus. Il me suffira de dire que, dans le manuscrit latin 9364 de la Bibliothèque nationale, on trouve aux feuillets 74 et 75 un « Catalogue des manuscrits donnez à Monseigneur (à Colbert) par M. de Rignac.... le 6 février 1682 », et que vers la fin de la liste des livres in-4° (fol. 75) on voit indiqués les volumes suivants :

Epistolæ Petri de Vineis (Colb. 4050).
Novum Testamentum (Colb. 4051).
Vetus collectio canonum (Colb. 4048).

Nous sommes donc en droit de donner au manuscrit 4051 de Colbert le nom de manuscrit de Rignac. Étienne de Rignac était conseiller à la Cour des aides de Montpellier. C'est du Languedoc que provient notre Nouveau Testament, et il y a tout lieu de penser qu'il n'a pas été copié bien loin.
Le volume est composé de deux manuscrits différents; le premier contient les Évangiles et le second le reste du Nouveau Testament. L'ordre dans lequel sont rangés les livres saints est assez rare: il se rencontre en particulier dans le manuscrit 15 de Saint-Germain (B. N. 11553), dans la grande bible du Puy (B. N. 4), dans un Nouveau Testament qui paraît languedocien (B. N. 341) et dans cinq bibles italiennes. Les Évangiles représentent un texte ancien, pur de tout mélange avec la Vulgate; ils sont pourtant accompagnés du système de sections et de parallèles qui est ordinaire à la version de saint Jérôme. Après les Actes des Apôtres, nous lisons, écrite en petit caractère, une note sur la passion de saint Pierre et de saint Paul analogue à celle que nous retrouvons dans deux anciens manuscrits espagnols'. Je n'insiste pas davantage sur les particularités extérieures de ce curieux texte.
 
Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Administrator
Our manuscript is number 254 of the National Library (formerly manuscript 4051 of Colbert). It is famous in the history of ancient Latin versions under the name of Codex Colbertinus. It contains in fact the only complete text that has been preserved of the "European" version of the Gospels. Such is the indifference of the editors and even of the critics with regard to the origin of the manuscripts and texts, that no one has thought to look for the homeland of the Codex Colbertinus. The date itself is poorly indicated by the authors, who put it in the 10th century; the catalog of 1744, always inclined to rejuvenate the manuscripts, indicates the 11th century. The truth appears to be between the two Codex Colbertinus is probable [ocr errors] 1. ACT., II, 33,: hoc donum quod (= tol. cav. compl1.2. leg1. æm, osc. Théod. B. N. 93. 254, 321. 11505**. 17250**. Mun. 6230, Provençal ms. of Lyon and German bible [co d. Tepl.]; B. N. 6: hunc donum quem; IV, 16 dicentes: Viri fratres (B. N. 4**. 7. 342. 343.11932, Provençal versions [Lyon and B. N. fr. 2425] and Vaudois). XIII, 6, at the end quod interpretatur paratus (Lucifer, gig. leg 2*. dem. Metz 7*. Vienne 1190. Théod. Ambr. E. 53 inf. B. N. 4**. 7. 11 [qui int. p.]. 93. 11505** [qui int. p.]). XXVIII, 31: sine prohibitione, quia hic est J. C. filius Dei per quem incipiet totus mundus judicari (4**. 7. leg 2**. dem. Théod. [om. Jhesus] B. N. 9. 93 [om. Jh.]. 202. 315. 342. 343. 11533*. 11932. 262. Lyon 347. 367. March 250, Provençal versions [mss. of Lyon and B. N. fr. 2425], Catalan and German [Tepl]).
ment, according to his writing, from the second half of the 12th century. The archaic nature of its illustrations is explained by the fact that it was executed in the south of France, a country whose artistic development lags behind that of the north of France. I will not say by what research and with what method Mr. H. Omont, aided by the experience of Mr. Delisle, managed to find the origin of the Codex Colbertinus. It will suffice for me to say that, in the Latin manuscript 9364 of the National Library, we find on leaves 74 and 75 a "Catalogue of manuscripts given to Monseigneur (to Colbert) by Mr. de Rignac.... on February 6, 1682", and that towards the end of the list of books in-4° (fol. 75) we see the following volumes indicated:

Epistolæ Petri de Vineis (Colb. 4050).
Novum Testamentum (Colb. 4051).
Vetus collectio canonum (Colb. 4048).

We are therefore entitled to give Colbert's manuscript 4051 the name of the Rignac manuscript. Étienne de Rignac was a counsellor at the Court of Aids of Montpellier. Our New Testament comes from Languedoc, and there is every reason to believe that it was not copied far away. The volume is composed of two different manuscripts; the first contains the Gospels and the second the rest of the New Testament. The order in which the holy books are arranged is quite rare: it is found in particular in manuscript 15 of Saint-Germain (B. N. 11553), in the great bible of Puy (B. N. 4), in a New Testament which appears to be Languedoc (B. N. 341) and in five Italian bibles. The Gospels represent an ancient text, free from any mixture with the Vulgate; they are nevertheless accompanied by the system of sections and parallels which is common to the version of Saint Jerome. After the Acts of the Apostles, we read, written in small characters, a note on the passion of Saint Peter and Saint Paul similar to that which we find in two ancient Spanish manuscripts.' I will not insist further on the external particularities of this curious text.
Send feedback
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top