Book contents
- Front Matter
- Contents
- List of illustrations
- Preface
- Abbreviations and textual conventions
- Introduction
- PART I The palaeography
- Chapter One The codex and the hand
- Chapter Two The punctuation
- Chapter Three The secondary hands
- Chapter Four Towards the codicology of a bilingual codex
- PART II The scribe and the tradition
- PART III The correctors
- PART IV The bilingual tradition
- Part V Text and codex
- Appendices
- Plates
- Notes on the plates
- Indexes
Chapter Three - The secondary hands
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 09 November 2009
- Front Matter
- Contents
- List of illustrations
- Preface
- Abbreviations and textual conventions
- Introduction
- PART I The palaeography
- Chapter One The codex and the hand
- Chapter Two The punctuation
- Chapter Three The secondary hands
- Chapter Four Towards the codicology of a bilingual codex
- PART II The scribe and the tradition
- PART III The correctors
- PART IV The bilingual tradition
- Part V Text and codex
- Appendices
- Plates
- Notes on the plates
- Indexes
Summary
Broadly speaking, the correctors of Codex Bezae have been correctly identified. Although Kipling attempted to place them in groups according to their age, as antiquissimus, perantiquus, vetus, and recens, we owe the classification of the various hands to Scrivener. There is no doubt about the existence of hands A to H, and L. Apart from the physical characteristics of the scripts, each has its own textual characteristics, as we shall discover in chapter 9.
However, Scrivener's dating of some of the hands was wildly incorrect. This is partly due to the late date he gave to the manuscript itself, partly to some considerable palaeographical indiscretions. Some of these were recognized a long time ago. But in what follows we shall find others.
The chronological sequence of the hands will need to be altered. There are also many corrections which cannot be by the hands to which Scrivener ascribed them (and my revisions of his opinions will be found in appendix 2). Therefore, although Scrivener was correct in his identification of the principal hands, the task of revision is still considerable.
A particular problem in the study of these correctors is the identification of the Latin and Greek scripts of a single hand. Whilst some of these are beyond doubt (for example, the Greek hand of G or the Latin hand of J1), others cannot be established with such certainty.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Codex BezaeAn Early Christian Manuscript and its Text, pp. 35 - 49Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 1992