Codex Vaticanus Graece 1209, B/03

Observations in the Old Testament


  • Red ink
  • Section marks
  • Hexaplaric signs
  • Umlauts in the OT
  • Triplets in the OT



    Red ink:

    Section marks:
     
     

    Hexaplaric signs:

    1. Proverbs 715 ff.
    Hexaplaric signs p. 720     715 A 24 L
    715 A 27 L
    718 B 15, 21, 23, 28, 34 L etc.
    up until p. 735
    The text written by scribe A (according to Milne/Skeat) is labeled with three horizontally aligned dots in the left margin used as Obeli:     . . .
    These signs are many and quite clearly unenhanced, probably original.

    2. Sirach 836 ff.
     836 B 13 L
    837 B 4, 25 L
    up until p. 867
    Again written by scribe A, the same triple dots are used:      . . .

    3. Zech, Mal and Isa p. 987 - 1062
    Hexaplaric signs p. 987     e.g. p. 987 C / 992 A / 996 A,C / 1000 A / 1003 B / 1005 B / 1028 B / 1029 A,C / 1032 B / 1034 B / 1035 C / 1038 A,C / 1040 B / 1041 C / 1046 C / 1050 B / 1051 A,B,C / 1053 B,C / 1054 B / 1055 A,B / 1056 B / 1058 A / 1060 B / 1061 A / 1062 B /

    In Zech, Mal and Isa (p. 987 - 1062), written by scribe B, the Obelus and the Asteriskos can be found. The Obelus is written as a short line (bar) with a dot at both ends. The Obelus is sometimes accompanied by the abbreviation "OU K P- EBR-" or the fuller form "OI ?? OU K P- EBR-":
    OU KEITAI PARA EBRAIW
    or OI ? OU KEITAI PARA EBRAIW with ? = number of lines.
    The obelus signs are not reinforced, although the abbreviation sometimes is.

    4. Jeremia 1075/76
     1075 C 39-42
    1076 A 1-6
    Again line with two dots as Obeli, single occurrence only here. There is also one "OUK P- EBR-" without Obelus on p. 1074.

    5. Other:
    502 B 20 R
    516 B 39 R
    An Asteriskos sign, also found in Isa, but different to the normally found ones in Isa: This one has no cross, only the four dots. The dots are bigger.

    What is especially interesting is, that the Obelus of scribe B (dots plus line) resembles very much the umlauts in the NT. The Obelus is a very thin line with two small dots at the ends. In some cases the thin line is faded away, so that the appearance is almost perfectly that of an umlaut.
    It is not far-fetched to put forth the hypothesis that the umlauts of the NT are a variant or a derivation of the Obeli found in the OT.

     

    Other textcritical signs:

    A) Umlauts:
    Umlauts in the OT     Contra Payne there are umlauts in the OT. Albeit I counted only about 15. Are these of the same kind as those in the NT? I don't know. But I am tempted to assign them to variant signs. Even with the limited Rahlfs apparatus I found variants here. Of 14 safe umlauts I have found variants for 10 of them.
    There are probably more. I only went once through the OT.


    B) Triplets:
    Triplets in the OT     The interesting sign is what might be called a triplet. Three little dots arranged as a triangle. I have found about 75. Again, there are probably more. The last one I have found is on p. 875. The sign is very small and I have found about 22 (28%) which are not retraced and very faded. I am not sure what these are. Spot checks show variants here too. Nevertheless it appears that more than what one would expect from randomness appear at the beginning of a sentence, rarely paragraph though. 14 are on the first line of a column. I am not sure what to make of this.
    Triplet in minuscule replacement of Psalms, p.695 Now, what is most interesting is, that on the first page of the supplement for the Psalms (p. 695-704) there is one such symbol, too.

    Umlaut in minuscule replacement of Hebrews, p. 1519 Remember that on the first page of the NT supplement (Heb, Rev) there is an umlaut, at approximately the same position. No further umlauts/triplets can be found in these supplements.
    There is also probably one such symbol on p. 11 of the Genesis supplement.
    One is tempted to see these triplets in the OT as what are the umlauts in the NT, but as a known skeptic I am not really convinced atm. These signs are not so frequent and more haphazard than the umlauts in the NT. Is there another explanation? I am no OT scholar and know very little about the LXX. Eventually somebody knows what these signs are?

    I have received a note that these triplets appear in other MSS as well, e.g. in the OT of 01 and in 039. Can anybody confirm that?

    Back