Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: What is the Codex Barococcio?

Expand Messages
  • Jay Rogers
    Re: What is the Codex Barococcio? Thanks, that s incredibly important. Thanks. It s the usual thing where an error gets published in one book and then gets
    Message 1 of 19 , Feb 29, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Re: What is the Codex Barococcio?
      Thanks, that's incredibly important. Thanks.

      It's the usual thing where an error gets published in one  book and then gets copied everywhere.

      If you Google "barococcio" you get hundreds of pages with the information that this is "c. 206" -- but no description of what it actually is.

      Ironically, a search for Codices Barocciani, yields far fewer results, most t\in Italians an German.

      Something seemed wrong when I read that a "codex" was from 206 A.D. I was wondering it this was a canonical list from a non-extant codex similar to the Muratorian canon. Is there any chance that the original manuscript that the Codex Barocciani draws from goes back to the third century?

      - Jay


      Andrew, Eric and Jay:
       
      It is not Barococcio, it is one of the Codices Barocciani, catalog number 206.
      According to Westcott in his A General Survey of the History of the Canon of the New Testament, page 567, it is located in the Bodelian Library at Oxford, England

      In the work Catalogi codicum manuscriptorum bibliothecae Bodleianae,
      By Bodleian Library, Henry Octavius Coxe
      published in 1853, volume 1 on page 366, the canon is listed under the Codices Barocciani, catalog number 206, and is the one numbered with a Greek theta.
       
      Apparently, someone got sloppy in their research and took the catalog number that Westcott listed for the year of writing. So actually there are a whole series of Codices Barocciani, of which the canon is catalog number 206.
       
      The best I can figure, this canon was written in the 7th century around 692 AD.
       
      I hope this helps,
       
      Kevin
      Prof. Kevin W. Woodruff, M.Div., M.S.I.S.
      Library Director/Reference Librarian, Assistant Professor of Bible, Greek, Theological Bibliography and Research
      Tennessee Temple University/Temple Baptist Seminary, 1815 Union Ave.
      Chattanooga, Tennessee 37404, United States of America
      423/493-4252 (office) 423/698-9447 (home) 423/493-4497 (FAX)
      Cierpke@... http://pages.prodigy.net/cierpke/woodruff.htm
       
       
       

      Andrew <andrew.bernhard@...> wrote:
      Hi Jay-

      I must say, I once studied the ancient lists of the canon and do not
      recall coming across any "Codex Barococcio." A canon list with 64 of
      the 66 books of the Bible from A.D. 206 seems remarkably early. I would
      think it would have stood out in your mind.

      I'd definitely be interested in learning more. How is it dated to such
      a precise year? Which two books are omitted? And most importantly, what
      modern sources are you reading that refer to this ancient codex (you
      say you see it listed in many places)?

      Thanks,
      Andrew

      > > WHAT EXACTLY IS THE BAROCOCCIO CODEX?
      > >
      > > I see it listed in many places. But I don't see as much information
      > on
      > > it as the Muratorian Canon. Why?
      > >




      Prof. Kevin W. Woodruff, M.Div., M.S.I.S.
      Library Director/Reference Librarian, Assistant Professor of Bible, Greek, Theological Bibliography and Research
      Tennessee Temple University/Temple Baptist Seminary, 1815 Union Ave.
      Chattanooga, Tennessee 37404, United States of America
      423/493-4252 (office) 423/698-9447 (home) 423/493-4497 (FAX)
      Cierpke@... http://pages.prodigy.net/cierpke/woodruff.htm



      Prof. Kevin W. Woodruff, M.Div., M.S.I.S.
      Library Director/Reference Librarian, Assistant Professor of Bible, Greek, Theological Bibliography and Research
      Tennessee Temple University/Temple Baptist Seminary, 1815 Union Ave.
      Chattanooga, Tennessee 37404, United States of America
      423/493-4252 (office) 423/698-9447 (home) 423/493-4497 (FAX)
      Cierpke@... http://pages.prodigy.net/cierpke/woodruff.htm

    • George F Somsel
      [206]. saec. XV, 38.3 × 27, membr (f. 1–190. 347–431; chart 191–346), foll. 431, col. 1: V. T. Evv Act Cath Apoc Paul (Phm Hebr). Olim Bessarionis
      Message 2 of 19 , Mar 3, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        [206]. saec. XV, 38.3 × 27, membr (f. 1–190. 347–431; chart 191–346), foll. 431, col. 1: V. T. Evv Act Cath Apoc Paul (Phm Hebr). Olim Bessarionis “locus 1” ut Evv 205 “locus 41”. Ex antecedente codice transcriptus est, ideoque nullum numerum sibi vindicat. Birch. et Burgon. perl. Holmesii 122 in V. T. Vidi 5 Mart 1886.]

        Tischendorf, C. v., Gregory, C. R., & Abbot, E. (1894; 2003). Novum Testamentum Graece: Prolegomena (3:510). Libronix.

        george
        gfsomsel

        … search for truth, hear truth,
        learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
        defend the truth till death.


        - Jan Hus
        _________


        ----- Original Message ----
        From: Stephen C. Carlson <scarlson@...>
        To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 12:57:11 PM
        Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] Re: What is the Codex Barococcio?

        Eric Rowe <e_rowe@hotmail. com> wrote:

        >I seem to recall a question like this before, and it turned out that
        >the numerical label for the codex in question had been mistaken for
        >its date. I don't know if that question was about this same Codex
        >Borococcio. But if it was, that would mean that Borococcio is actually
        >simply called codex 206 (or maybe 0206), and some Christian apologist,
        >anxious to find ammunition for his argument, misinterpreted that to
        >mean that it's from 206 A.D.

        Your recall is roughly correct.

        There is indeed a canon list in Codex Baroccianus 206, but this manuscript
        is actually dated to the end of the ninth century. An online catalog of this
        most famous collection of MSS in the Bodleian library at Oxford is here:

        http://www.bodley. ox.ac.uk/ dept/scwmss/ wmss/online/ medieval/ barocci/barocci. html

        Stephen Carlson

        --
        Stephen C. Carlson
        Ph.D. student, Religion, Duke University
        Author of The Gospel Hoax: Morton Smith's Invention of Secret Mark (Baylor, 2005)



        Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
      • Jay Rogers
        First, I want to say that I am very impressed that someone was able to track this down. It s question that I ve asked of various people for about a year now.
        Message 3 of 19 , Mar 4, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          First, I want to say that I am very impressed that someone was able to
          track this down. It's question that I've asked of various people for
          about a year now. The best answer I've had is literally, "I've never
          heard of it."

          If there is a Codex Barocci with a canonical list with every book but
          Esther and Revelation, then this must be it.

          I've also been able to track down the origin to Norman L. Geisler and
          William E. Nix. A General Introduction to the Bible. Chicago: Moody
          Press, 1986). p. 294.

          I'll have to see the page from that book to see if they cite their source.

          Someone probably read somewhere that "Codex Barocci (206)" contained
          every book in the Canon except Esther and Revelation.

          And eventually it got morphed into "Barococcio (ca. 206)"

          But why the name change?

          The Barocci Codices actually come from the mathematician Francesco
          Barozzi (Barocci) who kept the

          There is also an Italian Renaissance painter whose name is spelled
          "Frederigo Barocci or sometimes Barocccio.

          The extra syllable is probably a typo. (That "scribal error"
          explanation strikes again!)

          I too thought A.D. 206 was suspicious. "Why the odd number? Shouldn't
          it be c. 200 or 210?" Or so I thought.

          If it's ninth century it does nothing to bolster the argument for
          theearly dates for the acceptance of the canon -- except as an example
          of how some books were missing (accidently?) from later canons and
          canonical lists long after the canon was universally agreed upon.

          I did have another idea and maybe someone could help answer this.

          I noticed in looking at the MSS Barocci that many of these codices
          contain the church fathers. I am wondering if the original citation
          meant to say that a canonical list from 200 A.D. from one of the
          Barococci codices. What do you think?

          http://www.bodley.ox.ac.uk/dept/scwmss/wmss/online/medieval/barocci/barocci.html

          Anyway, the reason for my question is this.

          I recently produced a DVD called The Real Jesus: A Defense of the
          Historicity and Divinity of Christ --

          http://therealjesus.com

          Some clips are at: http://youtube.com/jcr4runner

          I am sorry to say I used this example in a graphic in the video with
          the Muratorian Canon, although I did not give an exact date. If I knew
          about this a month ago, I could have easily removed the example.




          --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, George F Somsel
          <gfsomsel@...> wrote:
          >
          > [206]. saec. XV, 38.3 × 27, membr (f. 1–190. 347–431; chart
          191–346), foll. 431, col. 1: V. T. Evv Act Cath Apoc Paul (Phm Hebr).
          Olim Bessarionis "locus 1" ut Evv 205 "locus 41". Ex antecedente
          codice transcriptus est, ideoque nullum numerum sibi vindicat. Birch.
          et Burgon. perl. Holmesii 122 in V. T. Vidi 5 Mart 1886.]
          >
          > Tischendorf, C. v., Gregory, C. R., & Abbot, E. (1894; 2003). Novum
          Testamentum Graece: Prolegomena (3:510). Libronix.
          >
          >
          >
          > george
          > gfsomsel
          >
          > … search for truth, hear truth,
          > learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
          > defend the truth till death.
          >
          >
          > - Jan Hus
          > _________
          >
          > ----- Original Message ----
          > From: Stephen C. Carlson <scarlson@...>
          > To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
          > Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 12:57:11 PM
          > Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] Re: What is the Codex Barococcio?
          >
          > Eric Rowe <e_rowe@hotmail. com> wrote:
          > >I seem to recall a question like this before, and it turned out that
          > >the numerical label for the codex in question had been mistaken for
          > >its date. I don't know if that question was about this same Codex
          > >Borococcio. But if it was, that would mean that Borococcio is actually
          > >simply called codex 206 (or maybe 0206), and some Christian apologist,
          > >anxious to find ammunition for his argument, misinterpreted that to
          > >mean that it's from 206 A.D.
          >
          > Your recall is roughly correct.
          >
          > There is indeed a canon list in Codex Baroccianus 206, but this
          manuscript
          > is actually dated to the end of the ninth century. An online
          catalog of this
          > most famous collection of MSS in the Bodleian library at Oxford is here:
          >
          > http://www.bodley ox.ac.uk/ dept/scwmss/ wmss/online/ medieval/
          barocci/barocci. html
          >
          > Stephen Carlson
          >
          > --
          > Stephen C. Carlson
          > Ph.D. student, Religion, Duke University
          > Author of The Gospel Hoax: Morton Smith's Invention of Secret Mark
          (Baylor, 2005)
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          ____________________________________________________________________________________
          > Looking for last minute shopping deals?
          > Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
          http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
          >
        • George F Somsel
          I happen to have that book in electronic format since it came with a collection of other works. Up to today I had never used it. It would appear that your
          Message 4 of 19 , Mar 5, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            I happen to have that book in electronic format since it came with a collection of other works.  Up to today I had never used it.  It would appear that your tracking this down to p. 294 of that work is incorrect.  I find no mention of Borococcio or any variant of the name on that page.  On p. 294 I find a table listing various persons, canons, translations and councils of the first 4 cent. with their contents.  The items listed are

            INDIVIDUALS

            Pseudo-Barnabas
            Clement of Rome
            Ignatius
            Polycarp
            Hermas
            Didache
            Papias
            Irenaeus
            Diognetus
            Justin Martyr
            Clement of Alexandria
            Tertullian
            Origen
            Cyril of Jerusalem
            Eusebius
            Jerome
            Augustine


            CANONS

            Marcion
            Muratorian
            Apostolic
            Cheltenham
            Athanasius

            TRANSLATIONS

            Tatian Diatessaron
            Old Latin
            Old Syriac

            COUNCILS

            Nicea
            Hippo
            Carthage (397)
            Carthage (419)

             
            george
            gfsomsel

            … search for truth, hear truth,
            learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
            defend the truth till death.


            - Jan Hus
            _________


            ----- Original Message ----
            From: Jay Rogers <jrogers@...>
            To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Tuesday, March 4, 2008 9:44:01 PM
            Subject: [textualcriticism] Re: What is the Codex Barococcio?

            First, I want to say that I am very impressed that someone was able to
            track this down. It's question that I've asked of various people for
            about a year now. The best answer I've had is literally, "I've never
            heard of it."

            If there is a Codex Barocci with a canonical list with every book but
            Esther and Revelation, then this must be it.

            I've also been able to track down the origin to Norman L. Geisler and
            William E. Nix. A General Introduction to the Bible. Chicago: Moody
            Press, 1986). p. 294.

            I'll have to see the page from that book to see if they cite their source.

            Someone probably read somewhere that "Codex Barocci (206)" contained
            every book in the Canon except Esther and Revelation.

            And eventually it got morphed into "Barococcio (ca. 206)"

            But why the name change?

            The Barocci Codices actually come from the mathematician Francesco
            Barozzi (Barocci) who kept the

            There is also an Italian Renaissance painter whose name is spelled
            "Frederigo Barocci or sometimes Barocccio.

            The extra syllable is probably a typo. (That "scribal error"
            explanation strikes again!)

            I too thought A.D. 206 was suspicious. "Why the odd number? Shouldn't
            it be c. 200 or 210?" Or so I thought.

            If it's ninth century it does nothing to bolster the argument for
            theearly dates for the acceptance of the canon -- except as an example
            of how some books were missing (accidently? ) from later canons and
            canonical lists long after the canon was universally agreed upon.

            I did have another idea and maybe someone could help answer this.

            I noticed in looking at the MSS Barocci that many of these codices
            contain the church fathers. I am wondering if the original citation
            meant to say that a canonical list from 200 A.D. from one of the
            Barococci codices. What do you think?

            http://www.bodley. ox.ac.uk/ dept/scwmss/ wmss/online/ medieval/ barocci/barocci. html

            Anyway, the reason for my question is this.

            I recently produced a DVD called The Real Jesus: A Defense of the
            Historicity and Divinity of Christ --

            http://therealjesus .com

            Some clips are at: http://youtube. com/jcr4runner

            I am sorry to say I used this example in a graphic in the video with
            the Muratorian Canon, although I did not give an exact date. If I knew
            about this a month ago, I could have easily removed the example.

            --- In textualcriticism@ yahoogroups. com, George F Somsel
            <gfsomsel@.. .> wrote:

            >
            > [206]. saec. XV, 38.3 × 27, membr (f. 1–190. 347–431; chart
            191–346), foll. 431, col. 1: V. T. Evv Act Cath Apoc Paul (Phm Hebr).
            Olim Bessarionis "locus 1" ut Evv 205 "locus 41". Ex antecedente
            codice transcriptus est, ideoque nullum numerum sibi vindicat. Birch.
            et Burgon. perl. Holmesii 122 in V. T. Vidi 5 Mart 1886.]
            >
            > Tischendorf, C. v., Gregory, C. R., & Abbot, E. (1894; 2003). Novum
            Testamentum Graece: Prolegomena (3:510). Libronix.
            >
            >
            >
            > george
            > gfsomsel
            >
            > … search for truth, hear truth,
            > learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
            > defend the truth till death.
            >
            >
            > - Jan Hus
            > _________
            >
            > ----- Original Message ----
            > From: Stephen C. Carlson <scarlson@.. .>
            > To: textualcriticism@ yahoogroups. com
            > Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 12:57:11 PM
            > Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] Re: What is the Codex Barococcio?
            >
            > Eric Rowe <e_rowe@hotmail. com> wrote:
            > >I seem to recall a question like this before, and it turned out that
            > >the numerical label for the codex in question had been mistaken for
            > >its date. I don't know if that question was about this same Codex
            > >Borococcio. But if it was, that would mean that Borococcio is actually
            > >simply called codex 206 (or maybe 0206), and some Christian apologist,
            > >anxious to find ammunition for his argument, misinterpreted that to
            > >mean that it's from 206 A.D.
            >
            > Your recall is roughly correct.
            >
            > There is indeed a canon list in Codex Baroccianus 206, but this
            manuscript
            > is actually dated to the end of the ninth century. An online
            catalog of this
            > most famous collection of MSS in the Bodleian library at Oxford is here:
            >
            > http://www.bodley. ox.ac.uk/ dept/scwmss/ wmss/online/ medieval/
            barocci/barocci. html
            >
            > Stephen Carlson
            >
            > --
            > Stephen C. Carlson
            > Ph.D. student, Religion, Duke University
            > Author of The Gospel Hoax: Morton Smith's Invention of Secret Mark
            (Baylor, 2005)



            Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
          • Kevin W. Woodruff
            Jay: Actually the Codices Barocciani are named after Giacomo Barocci (Barozzi) whose library was purchased by William Herbert, the Earl of Pembroke who donated
            Message 5 of 19 , Mar 5, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              Jay:
               
              Actually the Codices Barocciani are named after Giacomo Barocci (Barozzi) whose library was purchased by William Herbert, the Earl of Pembroke who donated them to the Bodleian in 1629, not his more famous grandfather Francesco.
               
              I also beleive that Geisler and Nix's source was Westcott's book in whose appenix the canon is actually reproduced
               
              Kevin

              Jay Rogers <jrogers@...> wrote:
              First, I want to say that I am very impressed that someone was able to
              track this down. It's question that I've asked of various people for
              about a year now. The best answer I've had is literally, "I've never
              heard of it."

              If there is a Codex Barocci with a canonical list with every book but
              Esther and Revelation, then this must be it.

              I've also been able to track down the origin to Norman L. Geisler and
              William E. Nix. A General Introduction to the Bible. Chicago: Moody
              Press, 1986). p. 294.

              I'll have to see the page from that book to see if they cite their source.

              Someone probably read somewhere that "Codex Barocci (206)" contained
              every book in the Canon except Esther and Revelation.

              And eventually it got morphed into "Barococcio (ca. 206)"

              But why the name change?

              The Barocci Codices actually come from the mathematician Francesco
              Barozzi (Barocci) who kept the

              There is also an Italian Renaissance painter whose name is spelled
              "Frederigo Barocci or sometimes Barocccio.

              The extra syllable is probably a typo. (That "scribal error"
              explanation strikes again!)

              I too thought A.D. 206 was suspicious. "Why the odd number? Shouldn't
              it be c. 200 or 210?" Or so I thought.

              If it's ninth century it does nothing to bolster the argument for
              theearly dates for the acceptance of the canon -- except as an example
              of how some books were missing (accidently? ) from later canons and
              canonical lists long after the canon was universally agreed upon.

              I did have another idea and maybe someone could help answer this.

              I noticed in looking at the MSS Barocci that many of these codices
              contain the church fathers. I am wondering if the original citation
              meant to say that a canonical list from 200 A.D. from one of the
              Barococci codices. What do you think?

              http://www.bodley. ox.ac.uk/ dept/scwmss/ wmss/online/ medieval/ barocci/barocci. html

              Anyway, the reason for my question is this.

              I recently produced a DVD called The Real Jesus: A Defense of the
              Historicity and Divinity of Christ --

              http://therealjesus .com

              Some clips are at: http://youtube. com/jcr4runner

              I am sorry to say I used this example in a graphic in the video with
              the Muratorian Canon, although I did not give an exact date. If I knew
              about this a month ago, I could have easily removed the example.

              --- In textualcriticism@ yahoogroups. com, George F Somsel
              <gfsomsel@.. .> wrote:
              >
              > [206]. saec. XV, 38.3 × 27, membr (f. 1–190. 347–431; chart
              191–346), foll. 431, col. 1: V. T. Evv Act Cath Apoc Paul (Phm Hebr).
              Olim Bessarionis "locus 1" ut Evv 205 "locus 41". Ex antecedente
              codice transcriptus est, ideoque nullum numerum sibi vindicat. Birch.
              et Burgon. perl. Holmesii 122 in V. T. Vidi 5 Mart 1886.]
              >
              > Tischendorf, C. v., Gregory, C. R., & Abbot, E. (1894; 2003). Novum
              Testamentum Graece: Prolegomena (3:510). Libronix.
              >
              >
              >
              > george
              > gfsomsel
              >
              > … search for truth, hear truth,
              > learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
              > defend the truth till death.
              >
              >
              > - Jan Hus
              > _________
              >
              > ----- Original Message ----
              > From: Stephen C. Carlson <scarlson@.. .>
              > To: textualcriticism@ yahoogroups. com
              > Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 12:57:11 PM
              > Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] Re: What is the Codex Barococcio?
              >
              > Eric Rowe <e_rowe@hotmail. com> wrote:
              > >I seem to recall a question like this before, and it turned out that
              > >the numerical label for the codex in question had been mistaken for
              > >its date. I don't know if that question was about this same Codex
              > >Borococcio. But if it was, that would mean that Borococcio is actually
              > >simply called codex 206 (or maybe 0206), and some Christian apologist,
              > >anxious to find ammunition for his argument, misinterpreted that to
              > >mean that it's from 206 A.D.
              >
              > Your recall is roughly correct.
              >
              > There is indeed a canon list in Codex Baroccianus 206, but this
              manuscript
              > is actually dated to the end of the ninth century. An online
              catalog of this
              > most famous collection of MSS in the Bodleian library at Oxford is here:
              >
              > http://www.bodley. ox.ac.uk/ dept/scwmss/ wmss/online/ medieval/
              barocci/barocci. html
              >
              > Stephen Carlson
              >
              > --
              > Stephen C. Carlson
              > Ph.D. student, Religion, Duke University
              > Author of The Gospel Hoax: Morton Smith's Invention of Secret Mark
              (Baylor, 2005)
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
              > Looking for last minute shopping deals?
              > Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
              http://tools. search.yahoo. com/newsearch/ category. php?category= shopping
              >




              Prof. Kevin W. Woodruff, M.Div., M.S.I.S.
              Library Director/Reference Librarian, Assistant Professor of Bible, Greek, Theological Bibliography and Research
              Tennessee Temple University/Temple Baptist Seminary, 1815 Union Ave.
              Chattanooga, Tennessee 37404, United States of America
              423/493-4252 (office) 423/698-9447 (home) 423/493-4497 (FAX)
              Cierpke@... http://pages.prodigy.net/cierpke/woodruff.htm
            • Dirk Jongkind
              I can see now how the mistake may have occurred quite easily. In Appendix D The Chief catalogues of the books of the Bible during the first eight centuries
              Message 6 of 19 , Mar 5, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                I can see now how the mistake may have occurred quite easily.
                In Appendix D 'The Chief catalogues of the books of the Bible during the first eight centuries' of Westcott's book he gives quite a number of canon lists and almost without exception gives the source followed by a date. The list of 'The sixty books' is item xvii. For each source the name and (often) the date is given in the margin, e.g.

                Concilium
                Carthagi-
                niense III.
                397 A.D.

                Exceptions (no date), occurring before item xvii, are iii, iv, xii
                In all cases the date is given on the last line with A.D. added, except for item xiv which runs (the + sign stands for the dagger indicating 'died in'):

                Athana-
                sius,
                Ep. Alex.
                326.
                +373.

                For item xvii, the list of the sixty books, Westcott gives

                Bibl. Bodl.

                Codd.
                Baroc.
                206.


                If you expect a year as the last line of the source indication, it is easy to take 206 as the year.

                Cheers,
                Dirk




                Kevin W. Woodruff wrote:
                Jay:
                 
                Actually the Codices Barocciani are named after Giacomo Barocci (Barozzi) whose library was purchased by William Herbert, the Earl of Pembroke who donated them to the Bodleian in 1629, not his more famous grandfather Francesco.
                 
                I also beleive that Geisler and Nix's source was Westcott's book in whose appenix the canon is actually reproduced
                 
                Kevin

              • Kevin W. Woodruff
                Jay; I ve checked Geisler and Nix and they do not refer to Codices Barocciani, Codex Borococcio or any such thing. Kevin Kevin W. Woodruff
                Message 7 of 19 , Mar 5, 2008
                • 0 Attachment
                  Jay;
                   
                  I've checked Geisler and Nix and they do not refer to Codices Barocciani, Codex Borococcio or any such thing.
                  Kevin

                  "Kevin W. Woodruff" <cierpke@...> wrote:
                  Jay:
                   
                  Actually the Codices Barocciani are named after Giacomo Barocci (Barozzi) whose library was purchased by William Herbert, the Earl of Pembroke who donated them to the Bodleian in 1629, not his more famous grandfather Francesco.
                   
                  I also beleive that Geisler and Nix's source was Westcott's book in whose appenix the canon is actually reproduced
                   
                  Kevin
                • Daniel Buck
                  Dirk Jongkind wrote: Bibl.
                  Message 8 of 19 , Mar 6, 2008
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Dirk Jongkind wrote:
                    <I can see now how the mistake may have occurred quite easily.
                    For item xvii, the list of the sixty books, Westcott gives
                    <snip>
                    Bibl. Bodl.
                    Codd.
                    Baroc.
                    206.

                    If you expect a year as the last line of the source indication, it is
                    easy to take 206 as the year.<

                    I would propose that this was the vorlage of the error. The
                    abbreviations were understandably (I hope my Latin is right)
                    expanded to:
                    Bibliotheca Bodelia Codex Barococcio, 206 A.D.

                    And the Internet took it from there.

                    But what of the SIXTY books? I thought we were talking sixty-FOUR.

                    Daniel Buck
                  • Byron Silvera
                    To alert you, I’ve looked through the Revised ed. Of Geisler etal, without finding any mention of Codex Barococcio. Geisler, Norman L., and William E. Nix. A
                    Message 9 of 19 , Mar 7, 2008
                    • 0 Attachment

                      To alert you, I’ve looked through the Revised ed. Of Geisler etal, without finding any mention of Codex Barococcio. Geisler, Norman L., and William E. Nix. A General Introduction to the Bible. Rev. and expanded. Chicago : Moody Press, 1996.

                      So, if Geisler and Nix (1986) were the origin of this puzzle, then they have removed it in their latest edition.

                       

                      Regards,

                       

                      Byron Silvera


                      From: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com [mailto:textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jay Rogers
                      Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 9:44 PM
                      To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: [textualcriticism] Re: What is the Codex Barococcio?

                       

                      First, I want to say that I am very impressed that someone was able to
                      track this down. It's question that I've asked of various people for
                      about a year now. The best answer I've had is literally, "I've never
                      heard of it."

                      If there is a Codex Barocci with a canonical list with every book but
                      Esther and Revelation, then this must be it.

                      I've also been able to track down the origin to Norman L. Geisler and
                      William E. Nix. A General Introduction to the Bible. Chicago : Moody
                      Press, 1986). p. 294.

                      I'll have to see the page from that book to see if they cite their source.

                      Someone probably read somewhere that "Codex Barocci (206)" contained
                      every book in the Canon except Esther and Revelation.

                      And eventually it got morphed into "Barococcio (ca. 206)"

                      But why the name change?

                      The Barocci Codices actually come from the mathematician Francesco
                      Barozzi (Barocci) who kept the

                      There is also an Italian Renaissance painter whose name is spelled
                      "Frederigo Barocci or sometimes Barocccio.

                      The extra syllable is probably a typo. (That "scribal error"
                      explanation strikes again!)

                      I too thought A.D. 206 was suspicious. "Why the odd number? Shouldn't
                      it be c. 200 or 210?" Or so I thought.

                      If it's ninth century it does nothing to bolster the argument for
                      theearly dates for the acceptance of the canon -- except as an example
                      of how some books were missing (accidently? ) from later canons and
                      canonical lists long after the canon was universally agreed upon.

                      I did have another idea and maybe someone could help answer this.

                      I noticed in looking at the MSS Barocci that many of these codices
                      contain the church fathers. I am wondering if the original citation
                      meant to say that a canonical list from 200 A.D. from one of the
                      Barococci codices. What do you think?

                      http://www.bodley. ox.ac.uk/ dept/scwmss/ wmss/online/ medieval/ barocci/barocci. html

                      Anyway, the reason for my question is this.

                      I recently produced a DVD called The Real Jesus: A Defense of the
                      Historicity and Divinity of Christ --

                      http://therealjesus .com

                      Some clips are at: http://youtube. com/jcr4runner

                      I am sorry to say I used this example in a graphic in the video with
                      the Muratorian Canon, although I did not give an exact date. If I knew
                      about this a month ago, I could have easily removed the example.

                      --- In textualcriticism@ yahoogroups. com, George F Somsel
                      <gfsomsel@.. .> wrote:

                      >
                      > [206]. saec. XV, 38.3 × 27, membr (f. 1–190. 347–431; chart
                      191–346), foll. 431, col. 1: V. T. Evv Act Cath Apoc Paul (Phm Hebr).
                      Olim Bessarionis "locus 1" ut Evv 205 "locus 41". Ex antecedente
                      codice transcriptus est, ideoque nullum numerum sibi vindicat. Birch.
                      et Burgon. perl. Holmesii 122 in V. T. Vidi 5 Mart 1886.]
                      >
                      > Tischendorf, C. v., Gregory, C. R., & Abbot, E. (1894; 2003). Novum
                      Testamentum Graece: Prolegomena (3:510). Libronix.
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > george
                      > gfsomsel
                      >
                      > … search for truth, hear truth,
                      > learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
                      > defend the truth till death.
                      >
                      >
                      > - Jan Hus
                      > _________
                      >
                      > ----- Original Message ----
                      > From: Stephen C. Carlson <scarlson@.. .>
                      > To: textualcriticism@ yahoogroups. com
                      > Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 12:57:11 PM
                      > Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] Re: What is the Codex Barococcio?
                      >
                      > Eric Rowe <e_rowe@hotmail. com> wrote:
                      > >I seem to recall a question like this before, and it turned out that
                      > >the numerical label for the codex in question had been mistaken for
                      > >its date. I don't know if that question was about this same Codex
                      > >Borococcio. But if it was, that would mean that Borococcio is actually
                      > >simply called codex 206 (or maybe 0206), and some Christian apologist,
                      > >anxious to find ammunition for his argument, misinterpreted that to
                      > >mean that it's from 206 A.D.
                      >
                      > Your recall is roughly correct.
                      >
                      > There is indeed a canon list in Codex Baroccianus 206, but this
                      manuscript
                      > is actually dated to the end of the ninth century. An online
                      catalog of this
                      > most famous collection of MSS in the Bodleian library at
                      w:st="on">Oxford is here:
                      >
                      > http://www.bodley. ox.ac.uk/ dept/scwmss/
                      wmss/online/ medieval/
                      barocci/barocci. html
                      >
                      > Stephen Carlson
                      >
                      > --
                      > Stephen C. Carlson
                      > Ph.D. student, Religion, Duke
                      University
                      > Author of The Gospel Hoax: Morton Smith's Invention of Secret Mark
                      (Baylor, 2005)
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
                      > Looking for last minute shopping deals?
                      > Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
                      http://tools. search.yahoo. com/newsearch/ category. php?category= shopping
                      >

                    • Jay Rogers
                      Here s yet another reference to the Codex Barococcio: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/thebes/4610/biblio/canon.html Codex Barococcio (206). Another supporting
                      Message 10 of 19 , Mar 10, 2008
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Here's yet another reference to the Codex Barococcio:

                        http://www.geocities.com/Athens/thebes/4610/biblio/canon.html

                        "Codex Barococcio (206). Another supporting testimony to the early
                        canon of the NT comes from a codex entitled 'The Sixty Books.' Upon
                        careful examination these 60 books actually include 64 of the
                        familiar 66 canonical books of the Bible. Only Esther is omitted from
                        the OT, and Revelation from the New. The canonicity of Revelation is
                        well attested elsewhere, being supported by Justin Martyr, Irenaeus,
                        Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and the Muratorian list."

                        It would be interesting to find out if it's possible that Roman
                        numerals could have been miswritten somewhere.

                        For instance, at a website that catalogs the extant manuscripts of
                        St. Basil of Caesarea, I found the collowing entry:

                        http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/ecf/208/2080028.htm

                        "Epist. Canon. Baroc. cxcvi. 184b (i.e. pt. l, p. 336).
                        Membranaceus, in 4to majori, ff. 313, sec. xi. anno scilicet 1043
                        exaratus."

                        Another possibility is that a catalog numer such as cxcvi could have
                        been miswritten as "ccvi" or "ca.206" as I've seen in many places.

                        But I don't think this is the manuscript, unless St. Basil had a
                        canonical list somewhere in his writings.

                        I think probably the catolog number that was originally suggested for
                        the Codex Barocciani 206 is the right answer. But still it would be
                        interesting to track down how this was originally garbled.



                        --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, "Byron Silvera"
                        <bsilvera@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > To alert you, I've looked through the Revised ed. Of Geisler etal,
                        without
                        > finding any mention of Codex Barococcio. Geisler, Norman L., and
                        William E.
                        > Nix. A General Introduction to the Bible. Rev. and expanded.
                        Chicago: Moody
                        > Press, 1996.
                        >
                        > So, if Geisler and Nix (1986) were the origin of this puzzle, then
                        they have
                        > removed it in their latest edition.
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > Regards,
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > Byron Silvera
                        >
                        > _____
                        >
                        > From: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
                        > [mailto:textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jay Rogers
                        > Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 9:44 PM
                        > To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
                        > Subject: [textualcriticism] Re: What is the Codex Barococcio?
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > First, I want to say that I am very impressed that someone was able
                        to
                        > track this down. It's question that I've asked of various people for
                        > about a year now. The best answer I've had is literally, "I've never
                        > heard of it."
                        >
                        > If there is a Codex Barocci with a canonical list with every book
                        but
                        > Esther and Revelation, then this must be it.
                        >
                        > I've also been able to track down the origin to Norman L. Geisler
                        and
                        > William E. Nix. A General Introduction to the Bible. Chicago: Moody
                        > Press, 1986). p. 294.
                        >
                        > I'll have to see the page from that book to see if they cite their
                        source.
                        >
                        > Someone probably read somewhere that "Codex Barocci (206)" contained
                        > every book in the Canon except Esther and Revelation.
                        >
                        > And eventually it got morphed into "Barococcio (ca. 206)"
                        >
                        > But why the name change?
                        >
                        > The Barocci Codices actually come from the mathematician Francesco
                        > Barozzi (Barocci) who kept the
                        >
                        > There is also an Italian Renaissance painter whose name is spelled
                        > "Frederigo Barocci or sometimes Barocccio.
                        >
                        > The extra syllable is probably a typo. (That "scribal error"
                        > explanation strikes again!)
                        >
                        > I too thought A.D. 206 was suspicious. "Why the odd number?
                        Shouldn't
                        > it be c. 200 or 210?" Or so I thought.
                        >
                        > If it's ninth century it does nothing to bolster the argument for
                        > theearly dates for the acceptance of the canon -- except as an
                        example
                        > of how some books were missing (accidently?) from later canons and
                        > canonical lists long after the canon was universally agreed upon.
                        >
                        > I did have another idea and maybe someone could help answer this.
                        >
                        > I noticed in looking at the MSS Barocci that many of these codices
                        > contain the church fathers. I am wondering if the original citation
                        > meant to say that a canonical list from 200 A.D. from one of the
                        > Barococci codices. What do you think?
                        >
                        > http://www.bodley.
                        >
                        <http://www.bodley.ox.ac.uk/dept/scwmss/wmss/online/medieval/barocci/b
                        arocci
                        > .html>
                        ox.ac.uk/dept/scwmss/wmss/online/medieval/barocci/barocci.html
                        >
                        > Anyway, the reason for my question is this.
                        >
                        > I recently produced a DVD called The Real Jesus: A Defense of the
                        > Historicity and Divinity of Christ --
                        >
                        > http://therealjesus <http://therealjesus.com> .com
                        >
                        > Some clips are at: http://youtube. <http://youtube.com/jcr4runner>
                        > com/jcr4runner
                        >
                        > I am sorry to say I used this example in a graphic in the video with
                        > the Muratorian Canon, although I did not give an exact date. If I
                        knew
                        > about this a month ago, I could have easily removed the example.
                        >
                        > --- In textualcriticism@ <mailto:textualcriticism%40yahoogroups.com>
                        > yahoogroups.com, George F Somsel
                        > <gfsomsel@> wrote:
                        > >
                        > > [206]. saec. XV, 38.3 × 27, membr (f. 1–190. 347–431; chart
                        > 191–346), foll. 431, col. 1: V. T. Evv Act Cath Apoc Paul (Phm
                        Hebr).
                        > Olim Bessarionis "locus 1" ut Evv 205 "locus 41". Ex antecedente
                        > codice transcriptus est, ideoque nullum numerum sibi vindicat.
                        Birch.
                        > et Burgon. perl. Holmesii 122 in V. T. Vidi 5 Mart 1886.]
                        > >
                        > > Tischendorf, C. v., Gregory, C. R., & Abbot, E. (1894; 2003).
                        Novum
                        > Testamentum Graece: Prolegomena (3:510). Libronix.
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > george
                        > > gfsomsel
                        > >
                        > > … search for truth, hear truth,
                        > > learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
                        > > defend the truth till death.
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > - Jan Hus
                        > > _________
                        > >
                        > > ----- Original Message ----
                        > > From: Stephen C. Carlson <scarlson@>
                        > > To: textualcriticism@ <mailto:textualcriticism%40yahoogroups.com>
                        > yahoogroups.com
                        > > Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 12:57:11 PM
                        > > Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] Re: What is the Codex Barococcio?
                        > >
                        > > Eric Rowe <e_rowe@hotmail. com> wrote:
                        > > >I seem to recall a question like this before, and it turned out
                        that
                        > > >the numerical label for the codex in question had been mistaken
                        for
                        > > >its date. I don't know if that question was about this same Codex
                        > > >Borococcio. But if it was, that would mean that Borococcio is
                        actually
                        > > >simply called codex 206 (or maybe 0206), and some Christian
                        apologist,
                        > > >anxious to find ammunition for his argument, misinterpreted that
                        to
                        > > >mean that it's from 206 A.D.
                        > >
                        > > Your recall is roughly correct.
                        > >
                        > > There is indeed a canon list in Codex Baroccianus 206, but this
                        > manuscript
                        > > is actually dated to the end of the ninth century. An online
                        > catalog of this
                        > > most famous collection of MSS in the Bodleian library at Oxford
                        is here:
                        > >
                        > > http://www.bodley. ox.ac.uk/ dept/scwmss/ wmss/online/ medieval/
                        > barocci/barocci. html
                        > >
                        > > Stephen Carlson
                        > >
                        > > --
                        > > Stephen C. Carlson
                        > > Ph.D. student, Religion, Duke University
                        > > Author of The Gospel Hoax: Morton Smith's Invention of Secret Mark
                        > (Baylor, 2005)
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > __________________________________________________________
                        > > Looking for last minute shopping deals?
                        > > Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
                        > http://tools.
                        > <http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?
                        category=shopping>
                        > search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
                        > >
                        >
                      • John McChesney-Young
                        At 7:15 PM +0000 3/10/08, Jay Rogers wrote in part: ... I thought Dirk Jongkind s explanation posted on March 5th made the origin clear, but you can see for
                        Message 11 of 19 , Mar 10, 2008
                        • 0 Attachment
                          At 7:15 PM +0000 3/10/08, Jay Rogers wrote in part:
                          ...
                          >I think probably the catolog number that was originally suggested for
                          >the Codex Barocciani 206 is the right answer. But still it would be
                          >interesting to track down how this was originally garbled...

                          I thought Dirk Jongkind's explanation posted on March 5th made the
                          origin clear, but you can see for yourself if you visit:

                          http://books.google.com/books?id=sjYRAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&ei=o-_VR5_dOoeSswPsuMT3Aw#PPA567,M1
                          or

                          http://tinyurl.com/25hwzd

                          This URL will take you to the Google Book Search image of page 567 of
                          Westcott's canon book; if you page backwards and forwards you'll see
                          that the "A.D." is usual but not inevitable (it's lacking in the date
                          of death of Athanasius on p. 563, for example). A careless reader or
                          one simply unaware of the scheme of abbreviations Westcott used could
                          easily mistake the MS number for a date.

                          John
                          --


                          *** John McChesney-Young ** panis~at~pacbell.net ** Berkeley,
                          California, U.S.A. ***
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.