Re: [textualcriticism] CSNTM's - request assistance on Codex Sinaiticus Project misinformation
- Steven, I appreciate your comment but it really is misdirected. CSNTM only mentions the link and discusses the codex; we say nothing about any English translation. Hence, your issue is with the British Library, not with CSNTM.
----- Start Original Message -----
Sent: Sun, 02 May 2010 09:22:51 -0400
From: schmuel <schmuel@...>
Subject: [textualcriticism] CSNTM's - request assistance on Codex
Sinaiticus Project misinformation
> Hi Folks,----- End Original Message -----
> Daniel Wallace,
> ....Peter Gurry ... a brand-new look for the CSNTM website....
> updated information on several pages. Take a look and tell us what
> you think. Daniel B. Wallace, PhD Executive Director Center for the
> Study of New Testament Manuscripts
> Steven Avery
> Daniel, the CSNTM Is in dialog with the Codex Sinaitics Project as you
> mention here,
> including making sure that the information on the site is sensible and
> Yet this Codex Sinaiticus Project represents itself as giving the reader
> an "English Translation" of Codex Sinaiticus at the following page :
> Perhaps the CSNTM could inform their readers of the problem, in a special
> writing and on the blog link, and use its good offices to rectify the
> What they have for the readers unawares is not remotely an actual English
> translation of Sinaiticus. Unmentioned on the site, but acknowledged in
> correspondence, they have a work that looks to be an individual's (Heny
> T. Anderson) translation - apparently Authorized Version-based - simply
> modified in limited places to have some Sinaiticus differences. This is
> not remotely an actual Sinaiticus textual translation. Here is an
> accurate description from Michael Marlowe of the text used..
> Michael Marlowe
> Henry T. Anderson, The New Testament Translated from the Sinaitic
> Manuscript discovered by Constantine Tischendorf at Mount Sinai.
> Cincinnati: The Standard Publishing Company, 1918. This purports to be an
> English version of Codex Sinaiticus, but in fact it is a revision of
> Anderson's earlier translation of the New Testament, with alterations
> according to some of the readings of Codex Sinaiticus. The preface gives
> no information about what sources Anderson used. It is said that the
> version was prepared by Anderson shortly before his death in 1872.
> One short review in 1919 gives the problem in a nutshell.
> The Monist, Volume 29 (1919)
> Albert J. Edmunds
> By comparing this translation with the photograph of the Greek
> manuscript, the reader will discover two things:
> 1. Important matter omitted by the manuscript is added by the translator.
> 2. Important matter added by the manuscript is omitted by the translator.
> The Project does not even obviously indicate the source of the
> translation (they claim they did at one time and will again in the
> future), much less yet the more significant fact that this is simply not
> The Project Manager of the Project, Dr Juan Garcés, has had all the
> information about this for months, yet the Project as a whole seems to
> want to keep the readers of the website unawares (ie. deceived) ...
> believing that this is an English translation. The only way to have this
> fixed appears now to be public pressure, I have corresponded with them
> for months with only words, no actions, as the result.
> Dozens of blatant examples and hundreds of minor examples of the problem
> could be given. Here I will give a few of the well-known differences.
> Matthew 27:49
> but another, having taken a spear. pierced his side and blood and water
> came out
> And another took a spear and pierced his side, and out came water and
> blood (James Snapp)
> But the rest said: Wait, let us see if Elijah is coming to save him.
> Luke 1:26
> "a city of Judea",
> And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of
> Galilee, named Nazareth,
> Mark 6:22
> "his daughter Herodias"
> and the daughter of the same Herodias having come in and danced"
> (Dean John Burgon made a special note on this Sinaiticus reading.)
> Even the ETC blog does not note that the English translation .. isn't.
> We discussed the problem of Sinaiticus non-translations here:
> English 'translation' of Sinaiticus - tampered to mask blunders
> Steven Avery
> Bayside, NY
- Dear Dr. Wallace:
I haven't looked over everything, but it didn't seem strikingly different. Here are some suggestions:
In the main list of MSS, arrange the MSS in order of age, with the oldest first. This won't be as simple as it sounds, since some MSS are precisely dated and others only have approximate dates. Go century by century, placing explicitly dated MSS before MSS with palaeographically assigned dates. When two or more MSS without explicit dates are assigned to the same century, they should be arranged in the order of their NA-numbers.
In the description-pages, manuscripts which are intact (no missing pages and no damage to the Scripture-text) should have an explicit note describing them as intact.
Index-pages should be made ASAP for each and every copy, with priority given to the non-lectionaries. At the very least a skeletal index should be provided for every non-lectionary MS before it is placed online. For example, the skeletal index for a Gospel-copy could list the page-numbers for the beginning of Matthew, the beginning of Matthew 16, the beginning of Mark, the beginning of Luke, the middle of Luke 22, the beginning of John, and the beginning of John 8.
Ideally, each page-image should be tagged with a heading in the lower margin stating the book, chapter, and verses shown on the page. Less ideally, CSNTM should feature a page devoted to helping novice readers identify passages in the Gospels according to their ancient chapter-titles and numbers, and according to the Canon-numbers.
Ideally, each image should be framed with arrow-buttons so that the viewer can automatically advance to the previous page of the MS and to the following page of the MS. This will make MS-reading a lot more efficient.
In the main list, the uncial manuscripts' numeral-designations (01, 02, 03, etc.) should be accompanied by some mention of the traditional siglum (such as the Aleph-symbol for 01, K for 017, N for 022, Delta for 037, Psi for 044, and so forth). Similarly, if a MS is a member of a major family (f-1 or f-13), this should be mentioned alongside the manuscript's number. Perhaps the entries for uncials should be in a different color for easy recognition. (The idea could be expanded: blue for uncials, black for minuscules, and green for lectionaries. Different fonts could achieve the same effect.)
Stichometry-counts should be noted in the descriptions. For Gospels-MSS, instead of just noting the presence or absence of the Eusebian Section-numbers, the number of Eusebian Sections in each Gospel should be given.
And let's get some analysis of the text in that 284-page uncatalogued tenth-century Gospels-MS with semi-uncial colophons currently in a private collection in the UK!!! Is it collated yet? I quickly looked over Mk. 16:9-20 ~
16:9 - has AF
v. 14 - has DE after hUSTERON
v. 14 - does not have EK NEKRWN
v. 18 - "KAI EN TAIS CERSIN" does not appear
v. 18 - KAI instead of KAN, I think
v. 18 - BLAFH (I think)
v. 18 - I'm not sure what is right before ARRWSTOUS. (Shorthand for "EPI"?)
v. 19 - just _KS_ before META TO
v. 19 - TAUTA after LALHSAI AUTOIS
v. 20 - "AMHN" is included
The copyist had a strong tendency to omit movable-NU. The last three lines of 16:20 are centered in "drain" formation, as if forming the upper half of a V-shape. The final Eusebian section/canon number is 234/10, placed alongside the line on which 16:9 begins.
Whoever gave CSNTM access to photograph this copy: thank you for this act of service to the body of Christ. (And thanks to all the CSNTM people for making the pictures available!)
Meanwhile, although CSNTM isn't connected with the British Library, if an opportunity arises to speak with anyone connected with the Codex Sinaiticus website, please advise them to replace the pseudo-translation that Steven mentioned with a real translation of the text in the codex. It is rather sad that after all the effort and expense of putting Codex Sinaiticus online, the one part that needs the greatest improvement is the one part of the MS-presentation that will be comprehensible to most English-reading viewers.
Yours in Christ,
James Snapp, Jr.
Minister, Curtisville Christian Church
- Dr. Wallace and Mr. Gurry,
The site looks great. Nice subtle color changes. Easier to navigate.
I would certainly keep the MSS listed as per the order as per the Nestle/Aland numbers. Thus keeping it simple and logical.
The images (on the display pages) seem bright and sharp, and load
fairly quickly. For us slow dial-up users we appreciate less
ballons and confetti and more source materials.
Your Java scripting loads quickly too. Job well done. My only caveat would be the covering of some marginal notes (from the fathers) with
your brightly coloured watermark. (in 1424 for example, sadly some of the father's comments are overwritten by your watermark). Then I suppose that I could order the DVD with the TiFFs without the watermarks, yes??
MS 2558 (paper if I recall) has been wonderfully preserved by y'all. Such fragile documents need the care you give them, preserving them for future Bible lovers. A great work and service!! I am deeply impressed.
One of the best sites on the internet has and is getting better,
Mr. Gary S. Dykes
--- In email@example.com, "Daniel B. Wallace" <csntm@...> wrote:
> After working for several weeks on the project, Peter Gurry, one of CSNTM's interns, put together a brand-new look for the CSNTM website. It is much more streamlined than before, with updated information on several pages. Take a look and tell us what you think.
> Daniel B. Wallace, PhD
> Executive Director
> Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts
- Thanks, Gary, for the encouraging note. As for 1424, we have a set size and location for the watermark, but it is also our policy not to cover any text if we can avoid doing so. We will be getting those redone after we return from our current expedition to Greece and Romania.
Daniel B. Wallace, PhD
Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts
----- Start Original Message -----
Sent: Tue, 11 May 2010 00:19:38 -0000
From: "mydogregae01" <garyandgale@...>
Subject: [textualcriticism] Re: new look at CSNTM's website
> Dr. Wallace and Mr. Gurry,----- End Original Message -----
> The site looks great. Nice subtle color changes. Easier to navigate.
> I would certainly keep the MSS listed as per the order as per the
> Nestle/Aland numbers. Thus keeping it simple and logical.
> The images (on the display pages) seem bright and sharp, and load
> fairly quickly. For us slow dial-up users we appreciate less
> ballons and confetti and more source materials.
> Your Java scripting loads quickly too. Job well done. My only caveat
> would be the covering of some marginal notes (from the fathers) with
> your brightly coloured watermark. (in 1424 for example, sadly some of the
> father's comments are overwritten by your watermark). Then I suppose that
> I could order the DVD with the TiFFs without the watermarks, yes??
> MS 2558 (paper if I recall) has been wonderfully preserved by y'all. Such
> fragile documents need the care you give them, preserving them for future
> Bible lovers. A great work and service!! I am deeply impressed.
> One of the best sites on the internet has and is getting better,
> Mr. Gary S. Dykes
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Daniel B. Wallace" <csntm@...>
> > After working for several weeks on the project, Peter Gurry, one of
> CSNTM's interns, put together a brand-new look for the CSNTM website. It
> is much more streamlined than before, with updated information on several
> pages. Take a look and tell us what you think.
> > Daniel B. Wallace, PhD
> > Executive Director
> > Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts
> > www.csntm.org