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

A Correction in Aleph on I Chron Twin-page

Expand Messages
  • james_snapp_jr
    In Codex Sinaiticus, in the OT portion, damage has claimed the pages of First Chronicles up to 9:27, but at the Codex Sinaiticus website, you can view what is
    Message 1 of 1 , Apr 28, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      In Codex Sinaiticus, in the OT portion, damage has claimed the pages of First Chronicles up to 9:27, but at the Codex Sinaiticus website, you can view what is left, containing I Chron. 9:27-19:17.

      At I Chron. 19:19, though, the text of I Chron. suddenly morphs into the text of First Esdras 9:9, and from that point on, it's First Esdras. Weird, huh? Milne & Skeat sorted things this out already. First Chronicles appeared in its proper place earlier in the codex, and the text of 9:27-19:19 that we encounter is the result of misplaced pages in the exemplar. (I.e., the text of First Esdras was, in the lost portion of the text, interrupted by an intrusion of pages of First Chronicles; the ultra-mechanical copyist just kept on copying as if nothing had happened.)

      The big hint to what occurred is the note on the page that says "At the sign of the three crosses is the end of the seven leaves which are superfluous and not part of Esdras." (See Milne & Skeat, p. 2.)

      Anyway: on one of those "superfluous" pages that contains text from I Chronicles, there's a dimly-written correction in the upper right margin of Quire 34, Folio 8, v. It barely shows up on page-views but when you zoom in on it at the Codex Sinaiticus website you can see it.

      There's an upper-pointing arrow to the left of the writing, and alongside the text of the column it's under, there is, on the left-hand side, alongside the 15th (or so) line, a down-arrow. What we have here is a correction. The writing in the margin consists of the first half of I Chron. 11:18, which is omitted in the text because the copyist's line of sight jumped from the EN TH PULH at the end of 11:17 to the one that's half-way along in verse 18.

      My question is, was this correction made at the point of the codex's production? I would think so: it's faint, for one thing. And, later correctors would have no reason to make corrections in the superfluous pages, unless they were just that meticulous. Then again, copyists sometimes did things for no apparent reason. What do you think? (Maybe Dirk J. or somebody can point out whether this sort of arrow-accompanied corrections were used by just one corrector.)

      Yurs in Christ,

      James Snapp, Jr.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.