{ "viewingDirection": "left-to-right", "metadata": [ { "label": "Origin Place", "value": "Many places have been proposed for the place of origin, including southern France, Egypt, northern Africa, Palestine and Beirut." }, { "label": "Provenance", "value": "

Perhaps at the monastery of St Irenaeus in Lyon, France from the ninth century. Leaves inserted in the ninth century to supply missing text bear Lyonese characteristics, notably the use of blueish ink. The text also appears to have influenced the martyrology written by Ado of Lyons in 850-60, and it is possible that Florus of Lyon was responsible for it coming to this location.<\/p>

Taken to the Council of Trent by Guillaume du Prat, bishop of Clermont, where some of its Greek readings were cited as evidence relevant to matters then under debate. <\/p>According to a note by Theodore Beza, the manuscript was discovered in the monastery of St Irenaeus in 1562 when the city was sacked by the Huguenot army during the religious wars." }, { "label": "Extent", "value": "

Volume I: ii + 157 + ii Leaf height: 260 mm, width: 212-228 mm. <\/p>

Volume II: ii + 258 + ii Leaf height: 260 mm, width: 218-225 mm. <\/p>" }, { "label": "Funding", "value": "The Polonsky Foundation" }, { "label": "Date of Creation", "value": "Late 4th or early 5th Century" }, { "label": "Classmark", "value": "Cambridge, University Library, MS Nn.2.41" }, { "label": "Note(s)", "value": "Gregory-Aland Dea / O5; Scrivener Evan D" }, { "label": "Additions", "value": "

An early hand has included marginal Ammonian section numbers accompanying the Greek text, and running heads indicating the current book in both Greek and Latin in the upper margin, on the single horizontal ruling line besides the text lines. Occasional Greek lection notes, including some marginal ἀρχή and τέλος marks, have been added by different hands, including one set in fomal majuscule<\/i> script and others in a very crude hand. There are numerous corrections of the main text by several different hands.<\/p>

Later Greek hands, one using an informal minuscule<\/i> script and a crude and eccentric majuscule<\/i> script have added notes in margins of the Greek text regarding the content of the page on which they appear. The latter hand has also added προσερμηνείαι (notes to be used in divination) in a crude Greek majuscule<\/i> script in the lower margins of the Greek text of the Gospel of Mark. Where these are added to Gospel manuscripts, they usually appear in the Gospel of John, but that of Mark here appears last in the sequence, the position usually occupied by John.<\/p>

The beginning of modern chapters has been marked with their number in Roman numerals in the margin of the Latin text by different hands, whille running chapter numbers in Roman numerals appear in the upper right-hand corner of recto folios from f. 69r<\/a> onwards. These numbers also appear in the upper left-hand corner of the verso in the same portion of the manuscript, except in the latter part of Matthew (ff. 83v103v<\/a>), where this position is occupied by Greek κεφάλαιον (chapter) numbers.<\/p>

There is a Latin note on f. 73r<\/a> regarding the names of the Magi and the thieves crucified with Jesus. Latin notes in ink in different hands and modern English notes in pencil have been added regarding lost folios and quires.<\/p>" }, { "label": "Subject(s)", "value": "Bible" }, { "label": "Associated Name(s)", "value": "Ado of Lyons; Florus, of Lyons, -860; Prat, Guillaume du; Burghley, William Cecil, Baron, 1520-1598; Bacon, Anthony, 1558-1601" }, { "label": "Format", "value": "Codex" }, { "label": "Language(s)", "value": "Greek and Latin" }, { "label": "Alternative Title(s)", "value": "Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis" }, { "label": "Binding", "value": "

Quarter tawed pigskin<\/i> over oak boards, in two volumes. Sandy and Elizabeth Cockerell, 1965 (stamp on skin on the inside of the right-hand boards).<\/p>

Volume I Binding height: 279 mm, width: 250 mm, depth: 52 mm. <\/p>

Volume II Binding height: 279 mm, width: 252 mm, depth: 71 mm. <\/p>

A former binding, dating to the 19th-century, is preserved separately: pasteboards covered in light brown leather, with blind-tooled panel and scrollwork, with metal clasp, metal plates at the corners and another in the centre engraved with the coat of arms of the University of Cambridge (on the front) and 'Codex Bezae Cantab.' (on the rear) (?pewter, all now tarnished).<\/p>

A report by Sandy Cockerell - entitled 'Repairing and Rebinding the Codex Bezae' - is kept separately, along with several black-and-white photographs of the manuscript and the rebinding work in progress. Dated November 1965, but beginning with a description of the condition of the manuscript dated January 1962, the report suggests that the project to conserve and rebind Codex Bezae took place over several years. According to Cockerell:<\/p>

\"The manuscript had been removed from the 19th century binding at some time and in removing it a great deal of damage had been done to the folds of the vellum leaves, particularly to the outside fold of each gathering.\"<\/p>

It is not clear when this removal took place, but other notes imply that this occurred during the Librarianship of Henry Bradshaw (b. 1831, d. 1886, Librarian 1867-1886): specifically, a collation diagram by Bradshaw's hand, which describes the structure of the quires and concludes 'all in box Aug 25' and 'together with Bezae's letter + seal Sept. 3' (no year is given). This sheet then continued to be used by subsequent members of Library staff as a means of checking that all of the leaves were present: it is signed 'all here' by Francis Jenkinson on 30 September 1898, and by H.L. Pink on 14 December 1949, 5 December 1952 and 26 January 1962.<\/p>

Bradshaw's notes indicate that Codex Bezae was kept disbound in a box and this seems to have been the case until Cockerell's rebinding work. Another note, written by H.R. Creswick (1902-1988, Librarian 1949-1967), states '4 Red boxes inspected 9 Dec. 1949 HRC & HLP [i.e. H.L. Pink] & JCTO [i.e. J.C.T. Oates]. All the Manuscript is in good state'. An index card bears the notes by several members of staff between 4 June 1904 and 16 May 1963, recording the removal of selected leaves for display in the Library's show cases. In some cases, the display was just for a single day, notes regarding their removal and return beearing the same date, however in other instances it appears that leaves from Codex Bezae remained on view for extended periods: a note by H.R. Creswick concerning unspecified folios states 'In show case since 1926 at least<\/em>, returned to box 9 May 1934 (Librarian's order to clear show cases)' (presumably in preparation for the re-location of the Library to the new building on West Road).<\/p>" }, { "label": "Uniform Title", "value": "New Testament and Acts of the Apostles" }, { "label": "Condition", "value": "Almost the whole of f. 96<\/a> has been torn away, leaving a stub with a small amount of surviving text on it. Extensive areas of the edges of some folios (e.g. ff. 26<\/a>, 32<\/a>, 91<\/a>, 94<\/a>, 219<\/a>, 303<\/a>, 504<\/a>) have also been lost, with some loss of text; these folios have been repaired with paper patches. Smaller areas have been torn from the margins of a number of other folios, some of which have also been repaired with paper patches. There are long lateral tears across a number of folios, which have been repaired with thread (e.g. ff. 35-40<\/a>) and/or translucent patches (e.g. ff. 98-101<\/a>). A considerable number of worm-holes are present in the outermost folios. Defects in the parchment have left a number of holes, which have formed since the copying of the manuscript (e.g. ff. 51<\/a>, 55<\/a>) There are extensive dark brown stains to many folios, and some areas of black dirt and drops of wax, as well as general discoloration to the outer folios and water staining elsewhere. The text has become seriously faded in places, and this has sometimes been overwritten. The surface of the leaves has been treated with glycerol to eradicate mould." }, { "label": "Script", "value": "

ff. 3-6<\/a>, 8r-16v<\/a>, 25r-104v<\/a>, 113r-168v<\/a>, 177r-347v<\/a>, 415r-446v<\/a>, 455r-502v<\/a>, 504r-508v<\/a>, 510r-510v<\/a>: The original Latin text is written in half uncial<\/i> script in brown ink, the Greek text by the same hand in Biblical majuscule<\/i> script in brown ink, without accents or breathings. Mute iota<\/i> is absent. There is non-functional use of the double dot. The horizontal stroke for nu<\/i> is sometimes used at the end of lines. Punctuation in use includes the middle and upper points and two-dot colon. Various characteristics of this hand have been highlighted as indicating that the scribe was primarily trained in copying Latin. For instance, the article is often omitted, while the usage regarding Greek nomina sacra is archaic for the likely time of copying, whereas that for the Latin ones is more up to date. Letter-forms show possible traces of Latin influence, notably the resemblance of upsilon<\/i> to a Latin Y. The dative forms ἡμῖν and ὑμῖν are consistently spelt incorrectly as ἡμεῖν and ὑμεῖν.<\/div>
ff. 7*r-7*v<\/a>, 169*r-175*v<\/a>, 348*r-348*v<\/a>: The Greek text of the replacement leaves is written in a majuscule<\/i> script in black or dark brown ink, without accents and usually without breathings, but with occasional breathings in anomalous forms. Mute iota<\/i> is absent. There is non-functional use of the double dot, which is sometimes incorrectly placed on diphthongs. Punctuation in use includes the lower, middle and upper points and middle comma. The Greek script is written by a scribe trained in Latin, and shows signs of Latin influence in the form of letters such as epsilon<\/i>, kappa<\/i> and upsilon<\/i>, as well as displaying anomalous practices such as the form of breathings. Latin letters are occasionally used in error in place of Greek ones (e.g. f. 169*v, line 20<\/a>, \"pαρρησια\" for \"παρρησια\"). There are frequent itacisms and other spelling errors, and the article is often omitted. The subscription to Mark and superscription to Acts on f. 348v<\/a> are written in blue ink.<\/div><\/div>" }, { "label": "Physical Location", "value": "Cambridge University Library" }, { "label": "Abstract", "value": "

There are half-a-dozen ancient manuscripts which are the foundation of our understanding of the text of the New Testament writings. Among these stands the copy known since the sixteenth century as Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis. Any manuscript which has survived from antiquity is a marvel for this reason alone, and as we explore its pages, we have a rare opportunity to explore a little of the written culture of late antique Christianity. Although in the past century some remarkable papyrus manuscripts have been recovered from the sands of Egypt, their discovery has in general served more to highlight the significance of the parchment manuscripts than to diminish it. <\/p>

Among this group, Codex Bezae occupies a unique place for several reasons. In the first place, as a bilingual manuscript, with a Greek text and a Latin version on facing pages, it provides a valuable insight into the reception of the Gospels and Acts in the western Christian tradition. The Latin version it contains is one of the small handful of manuscripts which are the most important witnesses to the development of a Latin version before Jerome's famous Vulgate of 382. Secondly, it provides a strikingly different form of text to that preserved in almost every other manuscript, and to the printed Greek text and the translations derived from it. These differences consist in the Gospels in frequent harmonisation of the text and in Acts in a free restyling of the text found best represented by Codex Vaticanus and reproduced in English translations.<\/p>

The manuscript is the work of a single scribe, one trained primarily to copy Latin texts. Its present contents are the Gospels of Matthew, John, Luke and Mark, a single page of the last verses of 3 John (in Latin only) and the Acts of the Apostles. The only book that is complete is the Gospel of Luke, since there are pages missing from all the others. It is possible that between Mark and 3 John the manuscript originally contained Revelation and the rest of the Epistles of John. The Gospels are in the so-called Western order, with the two who were apostles first, followed by the two who were companions of the apostles.<\/p>

The manuscript is best dated to the end of the fourth or the beginning of the fifth century. Many places have been proposed for its place of origin, including southern France, Africa, Egypt and Palestine. I have proposed Berytus (Beirut). There were a number of correctors and annotators working in the first centuries of its existence. The first strong evidence for the manuscript's history is replacement leaves for missing portions of Matthew, John and Mark. The style of writing and the use of blue ink provide a very strong case that these pages were written in Lyons in the ninth century. At this period Lyon was an important centre for the dissemination of ancient works in the west.<\/p>

It is probable that the Codex Bezae remained there, in the Monastery of St Irenaeus, until the sixteenth century. It was apparently taken over the Alps to the Council of Trent in 1546. Its textual significance was already recognised, since it was one of the manuscripts whose readings was cited in the first edition of the Greek New Testament to include such information, made by Robert Stephanus in Paris in 1550. Then after the sacking of Lyons in the religious wars it came into the hands of the Reformer Theodore de Bèze, Calvin\u2019s successor at Geneva. The first part of its name is derived from the Latin form of his name, Beza. In 1581, Beza presented the manuscript to Cambridge University. This is the origin of the second part of its name, Cantabrigiensis.<\/p>

A printed transcription of the manuscript (using a font imitating the shape of the characters) was published by the University Press in 1793. A more accurate transcription, with the corrections and annotations fully detailed, was made by F.H. Scrivener and published by Deighton Bell in 1864. A facsimile edition was published by the University Press in 1899.<\/p>

Of the many distinctive readings of the manuscript, the following deserve special mention:<\/p>

It is the oldest manuscript to contain the story of the adulterous woman (John 7.53-8.11). It is on Folios 133v<\/a> to 135<\/a>.<\/p>

The genealogy of Jesus in Luke's Gospel is arranged in reverse order so as to conform more closely with that in Matthew. It is on Folios 195v<\/a> to 197<\/a>.<\/p>

There is a story about Jesus found in no other manuscript (the story of the man working on the Sabbath, placed after Luke 6.4). It is on Folios 205v<\/a> and 206<\/a>.<\/p>

It is the oldest manuscript to contain the longer ending of Mark (16.9-20). The last pages of Mark are missing, so all that remains is the Greek text of verses 9-15. What follows is text supplied in the ninth century. It is on Folio 347v<\/a>.<\/p>

In Acts, when the angel delivers Peter from prison the detail is added that they go into the street down seven steps (Acts 12.10). It is on Folios 463v<\/a>-464<\/a>, eleven lines from the bottom of the page.<\/p>

Professor David Parker
Edward Cadbury Professor of Theology and Director of the Institute for Textual Scholarship and Electronic Editing
University of Birmingham
March, 2012<\/p>" }, { "label": "Former Owner(s)", "value": "Béze, Théodore de (1519-1605)" }, { "label": "Title", "value": "Codex Bezae" }, { "label": "Author(s) of the Record", "value": "Christopher Wright (with notes on 19th-century binding and 20th-century repairs by Dr James Freeman)" }, { "label": "Material", "value": "Parchment, thin and of extremely high quality" }, { "label": "Collation", "value": "With the rebinding and conservation of the manuscript in 1965, the quires were mounted on guards, and the gutter edges of many of the leaves repaired and stabilised with Japanese tissue paper. In Volume I, Quire 1, the present arrangement of the leaves does not reflect their original structure. The 3rd and 4th leaves (ff. 5-6) are now joined together, however the structure of the other quires in the volume (almost all containing eight leaves), and the loss of text at the beginning of the quire, together suggest that the 2nd and 3rd leaves (ff. 4-5) were originally joined together as the central bifolium in this quire.

Volume I:<\/p>