Re: 2813: copy of printed manuscript?
- Daniel Buck,
2813 is definitely not a copy of a printed TR. I checked the text in the opening verses of Luke 5; at first the only difference was the spelling of "Nazareth," but in verse 6 there is a transposition (PLHQOS ICQUWN -- disagreeing with Stephanus 1550 and agreeing with RP-2005) and then, after the last word of verse 6 (AUTWN), there is a reading that is definitely not TR.
DB: "There is still the matter of the alleged 16th century colophon to deal with. Perhaps a Greek scholar would like to comment on the meaning of META CRONOUS DEKAPENTE."
It looks to me like this is not a colophon about the production-date of the MS, but about the production-date of the Gospel of Luke itself (i.e., it is a statement about when Luke wrote the book). Without investigating this too much, I'd say that the note simply claims that Luke wrote 15 years after Christ's ascension.
DB: "What is the date of the Greek text on the end paper? It must be very old, as it contains rubrication and ligatures."
I don't know. If I had to guess, I'd say 1700's.
DB: "What is the printed text--is it biblical?"
It's part of an Orthodox liturgy-book -- it includes a Theotokion, a hymn in praise of Mary.
DB: "Is 2813 a hand-copy of the TR, or Byzantine?"
It is essentially Byzantine. (But I only looked at a few verses of Luke 5.)
Yours in Christ,
James Snapp, Jr.