Steven Avery
Administrator
Archimandrite Porfiry Uspensky ..."
" Letters of the manuscript resemble the letters of the Church Slavonic very closely. Positioning of the letters was straight and solid (uninterrupted). There were no aspirates and accents above the words and no punctuation marks were inserted but for full points. The sacred text was written in four and two columns stichometrically with no space between the words so it seemed to be an indivisible utterance from full point to full point"
===========================
Added at Sinai? At least Hermas, but not Matthew.
No Tischendorf?
--- check facsimiles!
No Gregory?
===========================
Scrivener
xiii
https://archive.org/stream/afullcollationc00scrigoog#page/n21/mode/1up
...without spaces between the words or breathings (except a Gal. v. 21 - Galatians 5:21), or accents, or the iota ascript or postscript; the marks of punctuation also being exceedingly few.
xxii
The corrector B ... has much deformed the first leaves of the N. T. by adding breathings, accents, stops, and apostrophi, till afler a few pages he gradually got tired of his useless labour.
5. The corrector B is a full age below A, and may be conjecturely placed at the end of the sixth century...this corrector has only touched the Gospels and especially the early chapters of St. Matthew. Indeed, he has much deformed the first leaves of the N.T. by adding breathings, accents, stops, and apostrophi, till after a few pages he gradually got tired of his useless labour.
xxiii
(7) Far the greater part of the changes throughout the whole manuscript belong to C, of about the seventh century, before breathings and accents became habitual8.
xxiv (minor)
xxv
https://books.google.com/books?id=v-JUmBD5zIcC&pg=PP33
https://books.google.com/books?id=CNmOa7HaS6EC&pg=RA1-PP5
lxi
—the various corrections the primitive text has undergone from ten or more different hands, with inks of many various shades, in different ages, yet nearly all before breathings and accents came into common use
===========================
Hansell (1864)
p. 49
https://books.google.com/books?id=D_UDAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA49
The reader will be aware that the oldest Greek manuscripts that survive, where they comprise portions of formal books as distinguished from private letters, are written in uncial characters, that is, in what we should call capital letters, the most venerable of them without accents or breathings, or spaces between the words. This fashion continued universal up to the ninth century, and did not go out, at least in copies ot the Church Lessons from Scripture, until the eleventh: it then became displaced by the cursive common running-hand, which had all along been used in familiar intercourse; we have a few cursive documents dated in the ninth century, more in the tenth, a great number in the eleventh.1
p. 76-77
https://books.google.com/books?id=D_UDAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA76
One great mistake, however, has been made in regard to these volumes, for which (as we are informed) the Oxford Delegates are responsible, not Mr. Hansell. Most persons are aware that the most ancient extant manuscripts of the Greek Scriptures are nearly void of breathings and accents, which, if they were ever very extensively employed by Alexandrian copyists and grammarians (by whom they had been reduced to a regular system), had gone much out of use about the commencement of the Christian era. Not a vestige of them is to be found in the papyri of Herculaneum, whose latest date is fixed by the overthrow of that celebrated city (a.d. 7D); and although no less a judge than Sir Frederick Madden assigns to the first hand those in the red paint over the first four lines of the great Codex Alexandrinus of the fifth century, the oftener we look at them the more convinced we are that Mr. Westcott is right when he holds them to be decidedly more recent. Overlooking a few casual exceptions, breathings and accents do not re-appear in our Biblical codices before the seventh or eighth century, and are very partially and badly represented up to the tenth, as indeed the reader will have seen for himself in our extract from Mr. Bradshaw’s valuable fragment Wd (above, p. 03).
===========================
Journal of Sacred Literature (1864)
https://books.google.com/books?id=USA2AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA498
As for the writing of the Codex Sinaiticus Dr. Hilgenfeld can only judge of it, with the assistance of Montfaucon; with this aid, he owns that it belongs to the class of the oldest uncials, such as the Alexandrian, Vatican, Ephraem, etc. But this series begins in Montfaucon with Dioscorides (without accents and breathings) at the end of the fifth or beginning of the sixth century, and goes on to the beginning of the seventh century; and with accents and breathings a gradual change of character came in. According to Montfaucon, accents and breathings began to be added “septimo circiter sieculo," and from that time the old form of the letters was altered by degrees, etc. From Montfaucon’s data, Dr. Hilgenfeld infers that we have the fullest right to ascribe the Codex Sinaiticus to the sixth century. The Codex Colbertinus, he thinks, might compete for Dr. Tischendorf's prize on several grounds.
Montfaucon
https://digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/diglit/montfaucon1708/0280/image,info
The Montfaucon phrase is used by Tischendorf in his Claromontanus writings.
e.g.
https://books.google.com/books?id=OrrpVnbAOfIC&pg=PR17
Montefalconii vero iudicium satis cautum illud quidem iam supra vidimus : is codicem nostrum septimo circiter saeculo scriptum dixit , quamquam graecis codicibus antiquissimis quos ante commemoraverat in omnibus paene similem declaravit ...
this is another author
https://books.google.com/books?id=gkhpAAAAIAAJ&pg=RA1-PA27
quidem septimo circiter saeculo accentus et spiritus adscribi coepisse , deindeque paulatim priscam literarum formam nonnihil mutatam fuisse , ita ut tamen literae distinctae et separatae manerent , donec saeculo circiter ...
Gardthausen quotes Montfaucon,
e.g.
https://books.google.com/books?id=03YKAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA167-IA1
Also here is the Zeitschrift German mentioning Montfaucon
https://books.google.com/books?id=XDI2AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA214
Wait this may be the Hilgenfeld paper on Sinaiticus!
" Letters of the manuscript resemble the letters of the Church Slavonic very closely. Positioning of the letters was straight and solid (uninterrupted). There were no aspirates and accents above the words and no punctuation marks were inserted but for full points. The sacred text was written in four and two columns stichometrically with no space between the words so it seemed to be an indivisible utterance from full point to full point"
===========================
Added at Sinai? At least Hermas, but not Matthew.
No Tischendorf?
--- check facsimiles!
No Gregory?
===========================
Scrivener
xiii
https://archive.org/stream/afullcollationc00scrigoog#page/n21/mode/1up
...without spaces between the words or breathings (except a Gal. v. 21 - Galatians 5:21), or accents, or the iota ascript or postscript; the marks of punctuation also being exceedingly few.
xxii
The corrector B ... has much deformed the first leaves of the N. T. by adding breathings, accents, stops, and apostrophi, till afler a few pages he gradually got tired of his useless labour.
5. The corrector B is a full age below A, and may be conjecturely placed at the end of the sixth century...this corrector has only touched the Gospels and especially the early chapters of St. Matthew. Indeed, he has much deformed the first leaves of the N.T. by adding breathings, accents, stops, and apostrophi, till after a few pages he gradually got tired of his useless labour.
xxiii
(7) Far the greater part of the changes throughout the whole manuscript belong to C, of about the seventh century, before breathings and accents became habitual8.
xxiv (minor)
xxv
https://books.google.com/books?id=v-JUmBD5zIcC&pg=PP33
https://books.google.com/books?id=CNmOa7HaS6EC&pg=RA1-PP5
lxi
—the various corrections the primitive text has undergone from ten or more different hands, with inks of many various shades, in different ages, yet nearly all before breathings and accents came into common use
===========================
Hansell (1864)
p. 49
https://books.google.com/books?id=D_UDAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA49
The reader will be aware that the oldest Greek manuscripts that survive, where they comprise portions of formal books as distinguished from private letters, are written in uncial characters, that is, in what we should call capital letters, the most venerable of them without accents or breathings, or spaces between the words. This fashion continued universal up to the ninth century, and did not go out, at least in copies ot the Church Lessons from Scripture, until the eleventh: it then became displaced by the cursive common running-hand, which had all along been used in familiar intercourse; we have a few cursive documents dated in the ninth century, more in the tenth, a great number in the eleventh.1
p. 76-77
https://books.google.com/books?id=D_UDAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA76
One great mistake, however, has been made in regard to these volumes, for which (as we are informed) the Oxford Delegates are responsible, not Mr. Hansell. Most persons are aware that the most ancient extant manuscripts of the Greek Scriptures are nearly void of breathings and accents, which, if they were ever very extensively employed by Alexandrian copyists and grammarians (by whom they had been reduced to a regular system), had gone much out of use about the commencement of the Christian era. Not a vestige of them is to be found in the papyri of Herculaneum, whose latest date is fixed by the overthrow of that celebrated city (a.d. 7D); and although no less a judge than Sir Frederick Madden assigns to the first hand those in the red paint over the first four lines of the great Codex Alexandrinus of the fifth century, the oftener we look at them the more convinced we are that Mr. Westcott is right when he holds them to be decidedly more recent. Overlooking a few casual exceptions, breathings and accents do not re-appear in our Biblical codices before the seventh or eighth century, and are very partially and badly represented up to the tenth, as indeed the reader will have seen for himself in our extract from Mr. Bradshaw’s valuable fragment Wd (above, p. 03).
===========================
Journal of Sacred Literature (1864)
https://books.google.com/books?id=USA2AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA498
As for the writing of the Codex Sinaiticus Dr. Hilgenfeld can only judge of it, with the assistance of Montfaucon; with this aid, he owns that it belongs to the class of the oldest uncials, such as the Alexandrian, Vatican, Ephraem, etc. But this series begins in Montfaucon with Dioscorides (without accents and breathings) at the end of the fifth or beginning of the sixth century, and goes on to the beginning of the seventh century; and with accents and breathings a gradual change of character came in. According to Montfaucon, accents and breathings began to be added “septimo circiter sieculo," and from that time the old form of the letters was altered by degrees, etc. From Montfaucon’s data, Dr. Hilgenfeld infers that we have the fullest right to ascribe the Codex Sinaiticus to the sixth century. The Codex Colbertinus, he thinks, might compete for Dr. Tischendorf's prize on several grounds.
Montfaucon
https://digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/diglit/montfaucon1708/0280/image,info
The Montfaucon phrase is used by Tischendorf in his Claromontanus writings.
e.g.
https://books.google.com/books?id=OrrpVnbAOfIC&pg=PR17
Montefalconii vero iudicium satis cautum illud quidem iam supra vidimus : is codicem nostrum septimo circiter saeculo scriptum dixit , quamquam graecis codicibus antiquissimis quos ante commemoraverat in omnibus paene similem declaravit ...
this is another author
https://books.google.com/books?id=gkhpAAAAIAAJ&pg=RA1-PA27
quidem septimo circiter saeculo accentus et spiritus adscribi coepisse , deindeque paulatim priscam literarum formam nonnihil mutatam fuisse , ita ut tamen literae distinctae et separatae manerent , donec saeculo circiter ...
Gardthausen quotes Montfaucon,
e.g.
https://books.google.com/books?id=03YKAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA167-IA1
Also here is the Zeitschrift German mentioning Montfaucon
https://books.google.com/books?id=XDI2AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA214
Wait this may be the Hilgenfeld paper on Sinaiticus!
Last edited: