Michael Luzin on Song of Songs de facto affirms later medieval formatting sophistication

Steven Avery


In the compared books and places of the Old Testament, there are significant extra additions only in the book of the Song of Songs (in the rest, very insignificant). This book is written in colloquial form, but who, to whom, about what and about whom is not indicated in the text, so that sometimes it becomes very difficult to understand speech, especially in Greek translation (LXX). The scribe of the Sinai manuscript indicated who and when, to whom, about whom and what to talk about, and made a lot of superfluous additions, or he wrote from the manuscript in which these additions were. But -

a) so that no one confuses these additions with the text of the book itself and does not mistake the words of the scribe for the words of the inspired writer of the book, the scribe wrote them everywhere in cinnabar.

b) There are similar postscripts in some other ancient manuscripts, for example. in A, although these additions in the Sinaiticus seem to be more complete than in other known manuscripts.

c) These additions are made quite correctly and to the point; in all the places over which they are made, as can be seen from the course and content of the speeches, exactly those persons speak to those persons and about those persons and objects that are indicated in the additions made.

d) That the scribe of the Sinai manuscript correctly and Orthodoxally understood the meaning of the Song of Songs, or copied from the Orthodox manuscript, this is evident, among other things, from the fact that in one postscript (61, 1. Song. Songs 1, 6.) it says : προς τον νυμφιον Χρ τ ( Χριστον ), i.e. to the bridegroom Christ (the bride says). – Thus, these postscripts are completely free from suspicion of heretical origin.

Last edited: