You are on page 1of 36

CHICAGO'S "ARCHAIC MARK" (MS 2427): A REINTRODUCTION TO ITS ENIGMAS AND A FRESH COLLATION OF ITS READINGS by MARGARET M.

MITCHELL AND PATRICIA A. DUNCAN Chicago


Abstract This article announces the public release via the Internet of a full set of interactive digital images of the University of Chicago's "Archaic Mark" (GregoryAland ms 2427; University of Chicago ms 972), an enigmatic miniature manuscript of the Gospel according to Mark. To foster further research into this curious illuminated hand-codex, we provide a history of research and critical appraisal of the complex questions involved in its datingwhich has been placed as early as the 13th century, and as late as the early 20th centmyand a fresh collation of its text, which supplements and corrects the readings heretofore available only in the Nestle-Aland 27th edition.

In a vault of the Special Collections Research Center at the University of Chicago lies a New Testament manuscript that is smaller in dimension than a Loeb Classical Library volume. In just a few weeks, a digital version of ms 972 (which is known to scholars by its Gregory-Aland catalogue number, 2427) will escape the constrictions imposed by the original's diminutive size and secure location to become available to researchers the world over through the Internet.1 This digital publication realizes, at least partially, the dreams of an earlier generation

1 The digital version of "Archaic Mark" is the result of the collaborative work of The Goodspeed Manuscript team, a group of librarians, digital and educational technology specialists and scholars at the University of Chicago, including Alice Schreyer (Director, Special Collections Research Center), Daniel Meyer, Elisabeth Long, Charles Blair, Judith Dartt, Chad Kainz (Director of Academic Technologies), Roberto Marques, David Farley, Limen Teh, Robert S. Nelson, Patricia Duncan, and Margaret M. Mitchell. We would like especially to thank the Provost's Academic Technology Initiative and the Women's Board of the University of Chicago for funding that has made this project, and hence these advances in research, possible. The authors would also like to acknowledge with gratitude the helpful feedback we received on an earlier draft of this essay from J. Keith Elliott and from Wieland Willker.

Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2006 Also available online - www.brill.nl

Novum Testamentum XLVIII, 1

M.M. MITCHELL AND P.A. DUNCAN

of Chicago scholars who recognized in "Archaic Mark" (as they named it) "a very problematic and a very important little codex of the Gospel of Mark."2 The purpose of the present article is to announce the public release of the digital version of ms 2427, to rehearse some of the known history of the codex, and to provide a critical assessment of existing research into its enigmas. We also seek to provide a basis for investigation of the critical questions it poses by setting forth in simultaneous print publication a set of revised readings of this curious codex. Heretofore scholars have had access to the readings of ms 2427 (a manuscript trumpeted by Prof. Ernest Cadman Colwell in 1945 as perhaps containing "the text of the Gospel of Mark in a more primitive form than any other known manuscript"3) only through the apparatus of the Nestle-Aland 27th edition, which was the first to cite it as a constant witness to the text of the Gospel according to Mark. This corresponds with the judgment of Kurt and Barbara Aland that ms 2427 is a minuscule "von sehr hohem textkritischen Wert."4 Having worked closely with the original over the past several years, including teaching a course designed around it,5 and having taken full advantage of technological advances that allow a high level of magnification of the digital images of the codex, we would like here to supplement, and in some cases correct, the readings of ms 2427 in the NestleAland 27th edition, which were made on the basis of an inferior microfilm of the original. We wish thereby to facilitate an accurate accounting of this manuscript in further editions and text-critical studies. Above all, it is our hope that the present essay and catalogue of readings, together with the public access afforded by the interactive digital version of the codex on the Goodspeed Manuscript Collection

2 Harold Rideout Willoughby, "Archaic Crucifixion Iconography," in Mimera Studiosa (ed Massey H Shepherd, Jr and Sherman E Johnson, Cambridge, MA Episcopal Theological School, 1946) 123-144, 127 3 Ernest Cadman Colwell, "An Ancient Text of the Gospel of Mark," The Emory Unwersity Quarterly 1 (1945) 65-75, 75 4 Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, Der Text des Neuen Testaments Einfhrung m die unssenschqfllichen Ausgaben sowie m Theorie und Praxis der modernen Textkritik (Stuttgart Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1982) 163 (a page which contains a plate of fol 43v of our manuscript) The Alands rate ms 2427 as a Category I witness ("Handschriften ganz besonderer Qualitt, fur die Feststellung des ursprnglichen Textes stets in Betracht zu ziehen" \p 116]) 5 Students in The Gospel according to Mark course m spring, 2004 created annotated pages of an early version of the digital codex, and read large portions of its Greek text m both the digital and the original Their creative and insightful participation informed this study m many ways

CHICAGO'S "ARCHAIC MARK"

portion of the Regenstein Library Special Collections webpage,6 will stimulate much more intensive research into this "baffling but obviously significant"7 Markan manuscript. 1. Known History of the Manuscript The precise history of ms 2427 cannot at present be traced back before 1917, when it was found among the possessions of Mr. John Askitopoulos, an Athenian collector and dealer of antiquities, after his death in that year.8 Sometime before 1931 the manuscript was appraised by no lesser authorities than Prof. Sirarpie Der Nersessian (Collge de France, Wellesley College) and Andr Xyngopoulos (then Ephor for Byzantine antiquities in the Greek government). Prof. Edgar J. Goodspeed of the University of Chicago learned of the manuscript from Prof. Der Nersessian, and he and Prof. Harold R. Willoughby viewed line drawings of its 17 manuscript illuminations made by Xyngopoulos himself. On September 18, 1935, Mr. Gregory Vlastos, a former student of Goodspeed and nephew of Mr. Askitopoulos, wrote asking if the University of Chicago would like to purchase the manuscript. The manuscript was sent via London to Chicago, where it has remained since (having been purchased at some point for an undisclosed sum of money).9 A comprehensive facsimile edition and commentary were
6 http //goodspeed lib uchicago edu As of this printing, visitors to the site will also be afforded access to ms 965 (Gregory-Aland 2400), The "Rockefeller McCormick New Testament" (12th-13th c), which may be the most heavily illustrated of any known Byzantine New Testament codex The Goodspeed Manuscript Collection is made up of 65 codices, the majority of which are Greek, but also some Latin, Synac and Armenian Plans are currently under way to create digital versions of the rest of the collection, all of which will be available on this site 7 Willoughby, "Archaic Crucifixion Iconography," 127 13 8 The account given here relies upon the unpublished report of the manuscript com posed by Robert W Allison, "Ms 972," filed at the Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library (Prof. Allison was on the staff of Special Collections in the 1970s, he is now Professor m the Department of Philosophy and Religion at Bates College), his report is cited here by permission Allison's historical reconstruction of the events leading up to the purchase of ms 972 is notable for its valuable research mto the archives containing correspondence between Profs Goodspeed and Willoughby that allow us to fill in the history of research that was gomg on behind the scenes, but not documented in formal publication 9 The details of the sale remain murky, apparently because Goodspeed and Willoughby deliberately wished to keep them from the public eye, presumably to protect the seller and others from tariffs or other penalties from the Greek government (Allison, "Ms 972," 17) A purchasing account for the manuscript was set up by the University's comptroller's office m June of 1937, but the actual sale may not have taken place until 1941 (in a letter of September 8, 1941, Colwell wrote to Goodspeed that "the manuscript

M.M. MITCHELL AND P.A. DUNGAN

planned by Profs. Goodspeed and Willoughby and Ernest Cadman Colwell (joined later by Prof. Allen P. Wikgren), but for various reasons never completed.10 The full body of published material on the text and illuminations of ms 2427 to this day amounts to a scattering of articles, mostly in obscure places.11 2. The Codex Ms 2427, a codex bound in an apparently secondary leather cover, contains the full text of a single document, the Gospel of Mark. The manuscript is written in a tiny minuscule hand on parchment leaves measuring roughly 11,5 X 8,5 cm, in single columns on 44 folios; the lines per page range from 21-25. The codex leaves are bound continuously, with one transposed bifolium (12r-v and 13r-v). The text is accompanied by no critical apparatus (canon tables, page headings, marginal textual notes, etc.), but it contains 16 splendid color illuminations of narrative scenes in the Gospel set roughly into their places within the text (usually inside a vermilion border), and an author portrait of the evangelist on the verso facing the incipit (Iv). The only other ornamentation is gilt marginal initials and a vividly colored bro-

is now bemg acquismoned by the library") The Supplement to the Census of Medieval and Renaissance Manuscripts m the Untied States and Canada (ed G.U Faye and W H Bond, New York The Bibliographical Society of America, 1962) 163, in its listing of ms 972 [= 2427], states rather vaguely, "Obtained by purchase" (giving no date) 10 The distribution of labor, as with the facsimile edition of the famous Rockefeller McCormick New Testament (published by the University of Chicago Press in 1932), was for Goodspeed, Colwell and later Wikgren, who received Goodspeed's notes, to produce an analysis of the text, and Willoughby a study of the images. Willoughby completed his part of the work a 162 page manuscript already mentioned by him as completed in "Archaic Crucifixion Iconography," 144 The Willoughby correspondence shows that senous consideration was given to publishing his iconographie studies separately, but this prospect was ultimately rejected m favor of a complete textual and iconographie investigation under one cover There was apparently revived mterest m the venture in the 1970s, but again the effort did not come to completion 11 Sadly, the complaint of Willoughby m 1946 remains true "The manuscript m question has nowhere been published, though it has been listed m a catalogue and very nfrequeny noticed otherwise Its problematic idiosyncrasies have never been completely canvassed The full stature of its importancepalographie, iconographie, and textualhas never been comprehensively estimated" ("Archaic Crucifixion Iconography," 127) The various articles on or mentioning this codex may be found in the notes below With a few exceptions (including unpublished materials which were obviously out of the public eye), the scholarship that does exist has been listed in J Elliott, A Bibliography of Greek New Testament Manuscripts (2nd ed, Cambodge Cambridge University Press, 2000) 227-8

CHICAGO'S "ARCHAIC MARK"

cade at the incipit (fol. 2r). There are no particular indications on the codex itself that it was originally part of a tefraevangehum. Because the four-fold gospel book is the customary format for gospel codices since late antiquity, it is certainly not outside the realm of possibility that the pages now comprising ms 2427 have been excised from a four12 gospel codex. The presence of an author portrait preceding the gospel 13 may, but need not, point in that direction. Nonetheless, the present artifact is not, strictly speaking, as most descriptions have it, a "frag ment,"14 but takes the form of a complete codex. Hence the original contents of the manuscript remain up for debate, and cannot be merely assumed as proven in future research. In either case, but perhaps espe cially if originally planned just to contain Mark, the choice of only one gospeland Mark, at thatis most curious. 3. The Text The Greek text of the Gospel of Mark in this codex was almost immediately recognized as having an extraordinary degree of corre spondence with the venerable 4th century uncial manuscript, Codex Vaticanus.15 Colwell counted only 188 variants from Vaticanus and argued further that, of 73 readings otherwise singular to Vaticanus, "Archaic Mark" shares 46. 16 Yet among the places where ms 2427 parts company from Vaticanus is the notorious "long ending" of Mark, which is found (after a lozenge at the end of 16:8, but with running text) on fols. 42v to 43v and comes to a clearly demarcated end with

12 The small size of the codex is not itself a counter-indication, since even tinier tetraevangelia were prominent in the 12th to 14th century Indeed, "all small New Testament manuscripts from [the 12th century] are Tetravangelia" (Annemarie Weyl Carr, "Diminutive Byzantine Manuscripts," Codices manuscnpti 6 [1980] 130-60, 135) Yet, all those listed by Carr, 149-160 include such synoptic reading tools as canon tables and kephalaia lists that are conspicuously absent m ms 2427 13 It may be worth noting that the author portrait m ms 2427 does not identify the evangelist by name, though that is customary in tetraevangelia, to distinguish among the four gospels 14 So the foundational description by Kenneth W. Clark, A Descriptive Catalogue of Greek New Testament Manuscripts m America (Chicago University of Chicago Press, 1937) 271 "Four Gospels () fragment" 15 On the incontestable importance of Vaticanus for textual criticism of the New (and Old) Testament, see Bruce M Metzger, The Text of the New Testament Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration (3rd ed ; Oxford Oxford University Press, 1992) 47 16 Colwell, "An Ancient Text of the Gospel of Mark," 71-72. These statistics will have to be redone on the basis of the fresh collation of the manuscript

M.M. MITCHELL AND P.A. DUNCAN

"amen." There are traces of erased lettering on the scored, but now blank, fol. 44, which indicate that it may once have held a colophon.17 Without a secure colophon,18 the dating of ms 2427 depends on a set of complexly interrelated and yet individually ambiguous factors: the physical format of the codex, its orthography, its text-history and its iconographie program. Estimates range from the 13th to the 19th or even the 20th century. The earlier dating lays claim to the palographie judgments of such esteemed scholars as Kirsopp Lake19 and Hermann Freiherr von Soden,20 whereas the later dating is reflective of a suspicion that the codex's readingscloser to Codex Vaticanus than any extant Beta-manuscript21are just too good to be true and must therefore depend upon a modern text-critical edition of the Greek New Testament. Such a conclusion has led some to the inference that the work is not genuinely Byzantine, but an archaized "forgery" produced for the antiquities market in the late 19th or early 20th century.22 While that judgment has received some support from chemical

17 Allison, "Ms 972," 21-22 enigmatically reported that these traces are "now visible only under ultra-violet light The colophon was written in a crude, late hand which may be dated anywhere from the sixteenth through the eighteenth centimes The colophon is too far gone for decipherment " It appears that the tests m question were done by Allison himself, although there is a telling coincidence of this test with a scene m Goodspeed's own (rarely read) mystery novel from 1935, The Curse vn the Colophon, in which the hero, a thinly veiled Doppelganger of Goodspeed himself, brings to light an invisible colophon on a Byzantine manuscript by using U-V lightthe hightech tool of the time What is perhaps especially puzzling is Allison's remark that whoever did this study was able to date, but not read, the colophon1 Currently Mr Chad Kainz of the University of Chicago is studying fol 44 with digital manipulation techniques to see if the expunged colophon can be retrieved 18 Colwell says "This none-too-impressive manuscript is exceedingly anonymous" ("An Ancient Text of the Gospel of Mark," 67). 19 Ibid, 67 "On the basis of a photograph, Kirsopp Lake was inclined to put it anywhere between the fifteenth and the twentieth centuries, but after looking at the manuscript itself said that it might be as early as the thirteenth century " Willoughby, "Archaic Crucifixion Iconography," 132 cites correspondence with Xyngopoulos including the latter's palographie assessment that it comes from the 14th century 20 This judgment may be recorded m a letter of Willoughby to Goodspeed, May 8, 1940 (ated as Letter no 13 by Allison, "Ms 972," 22), but the referent there could be a different manuscript. There is evidence, however, that the codex was taken to Berlin by Mr. Askitopoulos' son m the early 1930s for appraisal (Allison, "Ms 972," 20) 21 Colwell, "An Ancient Text of the Gospel of Mark," 71, using the nomenclature of Frederic Kenyon, for what Westcott and Hort and others have called the "Neutral" or "Alexandrian Text," the family that includes Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Ephremi resenptus, minuscule 33, etc (ibid, 69) 22 See, for example, the imaginative musings of Robert Casey, reacting to Willoughby's proposal for a 14th century dating "It is to be hoped that m the forth coming edition a chapter may be written by an advocatus diaboli who would do his best

CHICAGO'S "ARCHAIC MARK"

analysis of the pigmentation in the miniatures,23 without further study to confirm the relative dating of the images and the inscription of the text on the page, and consideration of possible layers of the original and later restoration attempts within the illuminations, it remains a tantalizing hypothesis that introduces its own set of fresh quandaries.24 At the very least such a suspicion still awaits the testing of the codex's readings against the various available collations and critical texts of the New Testament published in the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries to see if dependence can be established.25 And, given the
to prove that the codex was a manufacture of the nineteenth century, executed by a workman with the skill and limitations of a Simomdes, familiar with Lachmann's edition and the modern Greek Bible, and thinking in Greek Perhaps he had an Armenian fnend living in Constantinople or Kaisenye who was a skillful artist The failure of the attempt to prove this thesis would do much to clear the ground for confidence m this remarkable possession" (review of Muera Studiosa ed Massey H Shepherd, Jr and Sherman E.Johnson in The Journal of Religion 27 [1947] 148-9, 149) 23 Mary Virginia Orna, Patricia L. Lang, J E. Katon, Thomas F. Mathews, and Robert S Nelson, "Applications of Infrared Microspectroscopy to Art Historical Questions about Medieval Manuscripts," m Archaeological Chemistry IV {ed. Ralph O Allen, Advances m Chemistry Senes 220, Washington, D C * American Chemical Society, 1989) 26588, largely replicated in Mary Virginia Orna, "Doing Chemistry at the Art/Archaeology Interface," Journal of Chemical Education 74 (1997) 373-6, 374-5 This study on the basis of chemical testing makes a specific identification of the "ubiquitous blue pigment" in ms 2427 as "an iron, or Prussian, blue" which "was made by the Berlin color maker Diesbach m or around 1704" (p 275) Allison, "Ms 972," 16-17 reports on polarizing microscope and stereomicroscope tests on ms 2427 at the Art Institute of Chicago m the 1970s that indicated that the illuminations had been subjected to secondary restoration attempts, which may account for later pigments, and could, if conclusive, allow for an earlier date for the original Further chemical testing is, consequently, indicated, both on the pigmentation of the images and on the parchment itself The study by Orna, et al, which briefly considered our manuscript as one of ten under investigation, is a significant move m the nght direction because it represents the interdisciplinary effort among scientists and humanists which will be required for future research on the perplexities of the manuscript 24 Allison, "Ms 972," 11-12 raises four objections to the "forgery" theory that deserve further discussion and assessment 1 the writer of the manuscript does not appear to have the "degree of forethought" exerted m a linear fashion toward "such a defined purpose", 2 if attempting a forgery, the scribe would be expected to have used a more ancient style of writing; 3. a fraudulent manuscript would most likely have reused old parchment, but there is no evidence of this being a palimpsest, 4 the time and labor dedicated to the images, together with the increased risk of detection the pictures mvolve, are not consistent with the hypothesis of it being a fraud. Instead, Allison proposes the possibility that "the purpose of the production was not primarily the text at all, but rather the production for personal reasons of a beautiful little codex of Mark " 25 If the mam comparandum is Vaticanus, its readings first appeared m print in the (mcomplete) collations of Andreas Birch, Kntisk Beskrwelse over graske Haandsbnfler af det Nye Testamente (Copenhagen, 1785), according to Metzger, Text of the New Testament, 122-3, with ascendence to major importance with the epochal work of Westcott and Hort m 1881 (The New Testament m the Original Greek [New York Harper, 1881], assessment

M.M. MITCHELL AND P.A. DUNGAN

composite nature of the codex (text, illuminations, binding, etc.), a judgment about any one aspect of the manuscript does not immediately translate into an obvious conclusion for the others, just as the terms "forgery" and "fake" may be inadequate to capture fully the possible dynamics of this codex's stages of composition and history of use.26 Between the extremes of 13th and 20th century dating, Prof. Der Nersessian in a later assessment appears to take a medial position, assigning the codex to the 17th or 18th century.27 New Testament scholars who depend upon the authoritative listing of New Testament witnesses in the Nestle-Aland 27th edition find a mixed message: the editors side with an earlier dating (we have noted above that the Alands consider ms 2427 a Category I witness), but they signal their uncertainty with a question mark: "XTV?"28

in Metzger, Text of the New Testament, 129-37) Other important text-cncal works, like those of Karl Lachmann (Novum Testamentum Graece [Berlin Reimer, 1831, and subsequent editions]), mentioned m 22 above, and many others, would have to be tested to see if our scnbe could have replicated their exact text According to Prof Allen Wikgren's files, this effort was attempted by Colwell and some of his students at Glaremont m the 1970s, but, again, nothing was ever published So this remains to be done on the basis of the fresh collation of ms 2427 we have completed, and, m the case of Vaticanus, the new splendid facsimile edition of that manuscript (Bibhorum Sacrorum Graecorum Codex Vaticanus [Rome Istituto Poligrafico e Zeca della Stato, 1999]) Another more recent tool, Reuben J Swanson, New Testament Greek Manuscripts Variant Readings Arranged in Horizontal Lines agonist Codex Vaticanus, vol 2 Mark (Sheffield. Sheffield Academic Press, Pasadena William Carey International University Press, 1995), did not include ms 2427 m the select group of manuscripts chosen for representation (see pp v, vin) but will facltate the comparisons that need to be made 26 It is worth emphasizing that "fraud" and "forgery" (or "authentic" and "nauthentic") are rather imprecise terms to use for a manuscript, which is by definition a "copy" of some known and famous work (and hence had a scnbe, not, strictly speaking, an author writing for himself or m the guise of another). The same is true for illuminations earned out within a Byzantine iconographie tradition which, broadly speaking, is charactenzed by fidelity to existing models rather than entrepreneurial creativity This means that more nuanced and varied notions about intentionality (of the scnbe, of the illuminator, of the one who may have commissioned the manuscript, of its owner[s]) should be kept in play as the evidence is sifted 27 Her judgment is recorded m the catalogue notes edited by Edward Capps, Jr., "Byzantine Manuscnpt Illumination An Exhibition [at Oberlm College, Ohio], December 3-19," Allen Memorial Art Museum Bulletin 15 (1959) 42-59, 49. Prof Der Nersessian lists ms 2427 as "Four Gospels (mcomplete), T h e Archaic Mark* Byzantine, 17th-18th century " Apparently in support of that conclusion is a statement later in the notice to the effect that "Several of these miniatures, with their attempt at perspective, show the influence of western European painting " Willoughby, on the other hand, rejected western influence in a letter to Goodspeed, dated November 4, 1940and claimed that Prof Der Nersessian (together with Prof Kurt Weitzmann and Prof Albert M Fnend) agreed with him' See further discussion below on issues of iconography and dating. 28 Novum Testamentum Graece 27th e d , 711, as also Aland and Aland, Der Text des

CHICAGO'S "ARCHAIC MARK"

4. Orthography The orthography of ms 2427 adds to the puzzle. "The script in which Codex 2427 is penned is the despair of the trained paleographer. This is not at all the usual Byzantine book hand. It is crude, irregular, 29 choppy, uneven, difficult to read." Although digital technology, par ticularly as enhanced by the "Zoomify" interface with which the dig ital photographs of our codex have been processed, allows for a much closer view of the minute script, hence greatly improving our ability to make an accurate transcription in most cases,30 the characteristics of the paleography themselves send mixed messages.31 On the one hand the scribe appears to use a very early scheme of nomma sacra32 and a convention for rendering doubled consonants with a single let ter and horizontal stroke that is rare and may echo what is found in at least one early manuscript.33 But at the same time he employs such "modern" features as spaces between words, hyper-abbreviation including

Neuen Testaments, 159 ("XTV," with no question mark), cf Kurt Aland, Kurzgefasste Liste der griechischen Handschriften des Neuen Testaments (Arbeiten zur neutestamentlichen Text forschung 1, 2nd ed; Berlm/NY de Gruyter, 1994) 187 Kurt Aland, "Zur Liste der griechischen neutestamentlichen Handschriften," TLZ 8/9 (1953) 483, in dependence upon Clark, Descriptive Catalogue of Greek New Testament Manuscripts m America, 271 (who in turn credits his own information to E.G. Colwell, May, 1937) 29 Willoughby, "Archaic Crucifixion Iconography," 130. 30 Only one folio, 18r, is damaged, and at least half the page difficult to read (though improved readings have been made possible in some cases) 31 "It is certainly the most baffling manuscript from the viewpoint of paleography and text that I have ever seen" (letter of Colwell to Goodspeed, September 8, 1941) 32 Willoughby, "Archaic Crucifixion Iconography," 131, E.C Colwell, "Some Unusual Abbreviations in Ms 2427," in Studia Evangelica Papers presented to the International Congress on "The Four Gospels m 1957" held at Christ Church, Oxford, 1957 (ed Kurt Aland, et al, Berlin Akademie-Verlag, 1959) 778-93, 784-92 "In Ms 2427, the nomma sacra agree with usages of the third or fourth century m the shortness of the list [only 7 out of the usual list of 15 terms customarily abbreviated m Byzantine manuscripts], m the form of abbreviation [most often contraction, employing first and last letter, rather than suspension], and in the inclusion of words not found m the Byzantine list [, , , ]" (the quotation is from 784, in the brackets we have added the evidence Colwell cites on pp 784-92) A complete list of the abbreviations in ms 2427, and renewed investigation of them in light of research into the nomma sacra m the decades since Colwell wrote, are obviously called for For an entre mto that literature, see now J Elliott, e d , The Collected Bulicai Writings of TC Skeat (NovTSup 113, Leiden. Brill, 2004) xxni-xxiv Comparison with nomma sacra usage m a range of manuscripts will be facilitated by the apparatus to Swanson, New Testament Greek Manuscripts, vol 2 (Mark). 33 Colwell, "Unusual Abbreviations," 783, in reference to the Berlin Genesis (3rd c. CE, Staatsbibliothek Graec fol 66 I, II = Rahlfs 911)

10

M.M. MITCHELL AND P.A. DUNCAN


34

the use of a period, and placement of letters on the line, rather than 35 suspended from it. 5. Codtcobgical Comparisons In addition to these internal factors, an accurate dating of ms 2427 must entail careful comparisons with other manuscripts, in terms of both paleography and iconography. One article has offered the unequiv ocal claim that the same scribe and the same illuminator who worked on ms 2427 also were responsible for ms 2537 (in the Hermitage, St. Petersburg).36 That manuscript is unmistakably a fragment of a tetraevangehum (it contains just 8 folios, spanning Mark 14:72 to Luke 1:33) and has been dated variously from the 12th through the 15th cen turies.37 But the complicated conjecture that the two manuscripts were produced by the same team, and, further, that both were copied from the same exemplar, Athens 93 (= Gregory 777), has not yet been estab lished, either in terms of the text or the illuminations (two related, but distinct areas of inquiry). There is need for a detailed investigation of similarities and differences between the Chicago and St. Petersburg

This is especially the case with the definite article, which (taking into considera tion some shifting patterns within the manuscnpt) is often indicated by the initial let ter with both a supraknear stroke and a penod (Colwell, "Unusual Abbreviations," 778-80), see also the ubiquitous abbreviations of which bear multiple marks, some times as other times as ', sometimes as ', (especially m the latter half of the gospel, the supraknear stroke often becomes a circle around the letter kappa) 35 See the list of 12 orthographic characteristics summarized m Allison, "Ms 972," 10-11, largely dependent upon Colwell, "Unusual Abbreviations" The latter remains the only detailed treatment of the paleography of the manuscnpt to date 36 Orna, et al, "Infrared Microspectroscopy," 270 declares "There exists also a set of fragmentary gospels m the Hermitage Museum m Leningrad that must have been made by the same scnbe and illuminator [as ms 2427], because the similanues in scnpt, ini tials, and painting style can hardly be fortuitous" (emphasis added) 37 2537 is the Gregory-Aland catalogue number given to the Hermitage manuscnpt 1162, of which two pages are depicted m a plate m Iskusstvo Vujmta Sobraniiakh SSSR (Moscow. Sovetskij Xudozmk, 1977) vol 2, p. 58. A descnpuon of this manuscnpt may also be found m Kurt Treu, Die griechischen Handschriften des Neuen Testaments m der USSR (Berlin Akademie-Verlag, 1966) 229-30, who dates it to the 12th-13th c An initial argument offered by Orna, et al. for the comparative significance of these two manuscnpts is the proposition that "Both the University of Chicago and the Leningrad manuscripts are fragments" (270). As we have seen above, that cannot be merely assumed for ms 2427, which is quite different from the Hermitage codex m that it contains a smgle literary work m its entirety rather than 8 isolated folios from midwork. Chemical analysis would also be required to test the further proposal made by Orna, et al, that "the two manuscnpts may have been made out of the same batch of parchment sheets" ("Infrared Microspectroscopy," 270) Obviously there is much work yet to be done on the physical features of the codex and any comparative manuscnpts

34

CHICAGO'S "ARCHAIC MARK"

11

manuscripts, and a careful assessment of the various logical possibili ties which could account for them.38 Our own quite preliminary tex tual comparison between manuscripts 2427 and 2537 has revealed significant differences in orthography (variant ligatures, forms of abbre viation), and, most crucially, in text-type, which raise serious doubts about the claim that the same scribe "must have" penned both.39 Future research on each manuscript individually, and comparisons between the two, are clearly indicated and will be abundantly enhanced by digital technologies.
38 This pomt is conceded by Orna, et al, who, while stating categorically that the two manuscnpts were "made by the same scnbe and illuminator," say m the next paragraph that "Both [manuscnpts] have the last few chapters of the Gospel of Mark, and consequendy, these passages could be profitably studied to determine if they are identical" (ibid) 39 We have not yet succeeded m getting a full set of imagesdigital or printof the Hermitage manuscnpt, though we have tendered several requests But we were able to make a companson on the basis of the single photograph given m Iskusstvo Vizantn Sobramiakh SSSR vol 2, p. 58, which appears to be fol 4 of the 8 extant from this codex (the photograph there may have flipped or artificially juxtaposed the two pages out of order, for the author portrait of Luke should be 5v, but 6r should begin the text of Luke) The page which we have seen in the photograph contains the text of Mark 16*1-9, which we have compared with these verses as found on fols 42r and of ms 2427 A quick look gives a first impression of striking similanty, especially because both minuscule hands are cramped and somewhat crude, and both use sepa ration between words and a comparable measure of diacnticals But on closer inspec tion there are quite significant variations between ms 2537 and ms 2427 On this smgle page we have noted the following 1 Ligatures, ms 2537 has customarily different forms of epsilon (not as high above the line as in ms 2427), theta (rounder m ms 2537), iota (which tends to extend quite far below the line in ms 2427) and phi (strikingly different forms) Also the choice of which letter form to use e , whether to combme epsilon and iota mto a single ligature or to write them side by side on the line, or which form of beta or gamma or delta is to be used m medial position in a wordis often different m the exact same word in the two manuscnpts 2 Abbreviations most strikingly, ms 2537 never once abbreviates the definite article, whereas ms 2427 almost always does, also the form of abbreviation for is very different In a crucial divergence, while both use a nomen sacrum for m 16.6, ms 2537 uses the first two letters (sus pension form), but ms 2427 the first and last (contraction form) together with its char acteristic, emphatic super and subknear strokes. 3 Textual Readings: the two manuscripts part company dramatically Ms 2537 m 16 2 reads (with A, G, SOI), where ms 2427 has , the former reads and the latter ; m 16 3 ms 2427 has the unusual reading , but ms 2537 the Majority Text reading , in 16 4-5, where ms 2427 shares two unusual readings with ( mstead of , and mstead of ), ms 2537 is with the Majonty Text m both cases To sum up these preliminary observations any argument that the same scnbe and illuminator wrote both these manuscnpts, each m dependence on Athens 93, would have to account for their usmg divergent textual recensions, as well as different sets of illustrations and disposition of the text To these larger divergences we can add a host of individual points m the scnpt and in the images where the same scnbe or same illuminator varied his practice somewhat sigmficandy

12
6. Iconography

M.M. MITCHELL AND P.A. DUNGAN

The second line of inquiry into the dating of ms 2427, iconogra phy, involves detailed comparisons between the 17 miniatures in this codex and in all other extant manuscripts, especially those whose dates can be determined with some certainty. Even taken on its own terms the iconographie history of the 17 images in the codex raises inter pretive questions, such as why a codex of the Gospel of Mark con tains an image of the crucifixion of Jesus with so many Johannine features (fol. 39v), and whether the codex's images in general might betray Syrian or Armenian or even western influence, early or late.40 Willoughby's unpublished manuscript offers some valuable compara tive materials for each of the images and emphasizes throughout what appear to him to be ancient or archaizing elements retained in ms 2427; he concluded that the miniatures fit best in an Anatolian con text ("provincial or even ultra-provincial in origin") participating in the "antique revivalism" of the Palaiologan period in the 14th century.41 Yet many such issues of iconographie trends, provenance, and dating remain uncertain, particularly sis subsequent research may have blurred the edges of some of Willoughby's confident distinctions between "ori ental" and "occidental" Christian iconographie patterns. Willoughby himself noted both parallels and differences between the iconographie cycle of ms 2427 and the tefraevangehum 777 {Athens 93), which is dated to the end of the 12th century,42 and he flirted with the idea that they may have shared an exemplar (not that ms 2427 had 777 as its exem plar); but he seems never to have argued definitively for a direct retionship.43 At noted above, it has been suggested more recently that

40 Willoughby, "Archaic Crucifixion Iconography," esp. 134-44, and Willoughby, unpublished manuscnpt, passim, Der Nersessian, quoted m 27 above 41 Willoughby, "Archaic Crucifixion Iconography," 132 42 For a description of this manuscnpt, and some plates of images, see Anna MaravaChatzimcolaou and Christina Toufexi-Paschou, Catalogue of the Illuminated Byzantine Manuscripts of the National Library of Greece, vol 1 Manuscripts of New Testament Texts 10th12th Century (Athens Publications Bureau of the Academy of Athens, 1978) 224-43, with figs 633-38. 43 On March 24, 1940, Willoughby wrote tnumphantly to Goodspeed that he had found "a tetraevangelion m the National Library m Athens, in which 5 0 % of our miniatures are pictured with almost identical iconography and compositions, but m entirely different style'" In another letter, of June 15, 1940, he wntes "I discovered an iconographie twin to it in Athensa really distinguished and nearly contemporary codex," and indicates that he is testing the hypothesis that the two works were part of a "family" of manuscnpts In his unpublished manuscnpt Willoughby does careful compansons of similarities and differences in regard to 7 miniatures His conclusions are suggestive of a common exemplar, as m the following statement* "The mam fea-

CHICAGO'S "ARCHAIC MARK"

13

the relationship between the two manuscripts can be even more precisely pinned down by the hypothesis that the miniatures of ms 2427 were copied directly from 777 [Athens 9S).44 But as of yet the proposition that "Archaic Mark" used 777 as its iconographie model has not been proven in any detail.45 Even if direct influence can be proven

tures of the strikingly similar paralytic miniatures in Athens 93 and codex 2427 thus disclose an ancient prototype for their shared organization of the healing scene" (p. 23). In his early study of 1936, before ms 2427 arrived in Chicago, Willoughby noted some parallel motifs but did not do an isolated comparison between the two (see, e.g., his early study in The Four GospeL of Karahissar, vol II: The Cycle of Text Illustrations, with Ernest Cadman Colwell [Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1936] 155 n. 8; 240-1; 345 n. 6). 44 Robert S. Nelson (in Orna, et al., "Infrared Microspectroscopy," 270): "the miniatures [of ms 2427] are based on the cycle in a late 12th-century gospel book in the National Library in Athens, codex 93." See also pp. 275-78 (table intervening): "This fact [chemical results recorded in n. 23 above], in addition to the evidence indicating that both the Archaic Mark and the Leningrad gospel fragment were copies of the Athens codex 93, suggests that these manuscripts originated some time much later than their purported 12th-century fabrication." To our knowledge no one has actually argued for a 12th century date for ms 2427, and, as the observations collected in n. 39 above show, the evidence appears less sure than this statement might suggest. Nonetheless, the argument definitely deserves further investigation in all its variables. The authors go on to name the following intriguing possibility, which very much deserves careful study in the future: "Furthermore, neither of these manuscripts has a genealogy that can be traced prior to about 1930, a fact suggesting that their origin may very well be during the flurry of Athenian forgeries that came to the market in the 1920s." Although ms 2427 actually has been traced back at least to 1917, the reality that manuscripts were fabricated and sold in the 1920s and 1930s needs to be taken seriously and calls for detailed textual, iconographie, and codicological comparisons between ms 2427 and all manuscnpts known to have been fabricated and sold at that time, especially any which may have used Athens 93 as an exemplar. 45 In addition to the specifics of comparison of individual images, the choice and proportion of images to text vary markedly (Marava-Chatzinicolaou and ToufexiPaschou, Catalogue 1.232 note that in the case of Athens 93 "the selection of Gospel scenes found in the codex is unusual"). The Gospel of Mark is decorated with 4 images in Athens 93, but 16 in ms 2427 (indeed, the former has only 20 images for all four gospels). The similiarities in two of the comparisonsthe 2 scenes before Pilateare indeed the most striking, and there are parallel images in Luke and John to three more of the narrative illustrations in "Archaic Mark." A second factor that needs to be taken into account in future study of this question is that Athens 93 itself did not have one, but two different illuminators (ibid., 231, 241), so any comparison is rendered more complex. And, given that fact, even if ms 2427 drew on Athens 93 in some way for iconographie models, it would have had to have had still other sources for the 10 unparalleled images. Even this hypothesis of dependency cannot fully account for the iconography of ms 2427. We may add to this set of observations the fact that the St. Petersburg codex, ms 2537 (which was argued by Orna, et al. to have had the same illuminator), also exemplifies some iconographie differences from ms 2427. For instance, the text on fol. 4 (see n. 39 above) has no illumination in ms 2537, whereas ms 2427 has an image of the young man at the tomb speaking with the women. In ms 2537, the final Markan illustration appears to be Joseph of Arimathea asking for the body of Jesus.

14

M.M. MITCHELL AND P.A. DUNCAN

(which entails in any case a difficult burden of proof, and in the pre sent case, a need to account for some substantive differences already noted),46 that does not in itself settle the question of who might have used the Athens codex as an exemplar, and most pressingly, when, and why.47 On strictly comparative iconographie grounds, we must still concede, as did its earliest investigators, that the presence of a beard on Moses in the image of the transfiguration (fol. 2Ir) is a rather slim reed on which to hang a date!48

46 The first consideration mvolves the universal methodological requirement to show not just that the two sets of illuminations compare favorably, but that only the Athens manuscnpt (of all known manuscnptslet alone those that are lost) could possibly account for the set of images m "Archaic Mark." The second is the need to explain some possibly quite significant differences between the overall iconographie programs of the codices (see previous note), and between specific images. To cite just two exam ples of what must be a comprehensive set of compansons. 1. The author portrait of Mark m the two manuscnpts does have the same basic format (as with most author portraits from late antiquity forward), but ms 2427 (fol lv) lacks details that are in Athens 93 (fol 52v), such as the inscription of MARK spanning from top left to top nght, and a manuscnpt on the lectern It also contains other features not m Athens 93, such as two edifices behind the evangelist and a second little footstool (on the mam one) upon which his left foot rests Most strikingly, the evangelist is posed m thought m ms 2427, with his left hand to his ehm and his nght resting on a parch ment draped on his lap, whereas m Athens 93, Mark is holding his tablet with his left hand and wnting with a stylus with his nght hand The color of his chiton is blue m both, but the himatwn is purple m ms 2427 and "faded" in Athens 93. Willoughby never mentions Athens 93 m connection to the author portrait, he argues that the image of Mark m ms 2427 is a typical Chnstianizing of Hellenistic portraits of the philoso phers, with Mark depicted according to the model of Epicurus (Willoughby, unpub lished manuscnpt, 1-10) 2. The Jesus before Pilate scenes are strikingly similar in set-up, but ms 2427 (fol 37v) is, for instance, missing the rope around Jesus' neck which is present m Athens 93 (fol 83v), and the former has a striking black and white checkerboard floor m place of Athens 93's plain green flooring Furthermore, while both Pdates are under a baldachino, the number of pillars and construction material appear to vary (see also the expression of perplexity by Willoughby, unpublished manu scnpt, 75-85 on the "near identity" and yet "noteworthy differences" between the two) Perhaps there are good ways to account for such variations and other arguments by which a umque relationship between these two manuscriptsas iconographie model and copymight be established, but a full argument (including comparison with other possible exemplars that are extant) still awaits

Logically, dependence on Amens 93, even if established, does not m itself prove when the copying was done For example, while Orna, et al argue that dependence on Athens 93 suggests a 20th century date, Willoughby found in the same evidence reassurance for his 14th century dating, regarding elements common to the two as "archaic " 48 The detail comes from Willoughby, unpublished manuscnpt, 45-54 (who argued that Moses is depicted m Byzantine manuscnpts of the 10th- 13th c as unbearded, but hirsute [ironically, m a retrieval of earliest Chnsuan artistic fashion] after the 14th c ), the concession from Colwell, "An Ancient Text of the Gospel of Mark," 67 "there is little more than a beard of Moses by which to date the book "

47

CHICAGO'S "ARCHAIC MARK"

15

Obviously much more work needs to be done, and multiple hypothe ses about the date of the images (both original and possible restora tion) and the inscription of the text need to be carefully sifted and tested. The integration of scholarly expertise in a wide range of fields paleography, textual criticism, iconography, codicology, history, chem istrywill be essential to this effort. Technological advances involved in digitization have literally revolutionized access to iconographie resources for investigating such questions utterly beyond, and yet oddly consonant with the dreams of the earliest scholars who worked on ms 2427. 49 And yet, for all the technological changes, we inherit from them largely the same questions of historical scholarship to puzzle out. 7. Toward Future Research The foregoing critical summitry of some of the historical conun drums of ms 2427 is meant to generate and circulate rather than definitively answer the many questions this little codex poses, and to point to the few rigorous scholarly treatments which currently exist. An essential step toward renewed investigation of the codex must, how ever, be an accurate collation of its text of the Gospel according to Mark. The rest of this article consists of a table of readings in ms 2427 with NA27 as its base text.50 This entabulation is intended to cor rect and supplement the information about ms 2427 provided in NA27, as found in both the regular apparatus and the second appendix.51 In some 14 cases we propose a correction for the listing now given in NA27. These are marked with an asterisk.52 The rest of the entries (the
49 Assembling a full corpus of Byzantine iconographyin photographs and in ana lytical notes and commentarywas the dream of Willoughby and his colleagues at Chicago, who had planned a 10 volume work, "The Corpus of New Testament Iconography" Although never completed, the "Willoughby Collection," made up of over 17,000 items, remains housed within the Epstem Archive of the Department of Art at the University of Chicago (for the history of that project, including its compli cated relationship to the Princeton Index of Christian Art, see Ben Withers, "The Photograph and the Manuscnpt Episodes m the History of Art History at The University of Chicago," Chicago Art Journal [1994] 35-49) It is rather delightful to imagine what Willoughby, who boasted to Goodspeed about his use of "international air mail" to get photographs of Athens 93 out of Europe before the onset of World War , would have thought of the immediacy of communication afforded by cyberspace! 50 As noted above, the NA 27 constitutes the most complete published version of read ings of ms 2427 until now 51 Vanae Lectiones Minores, m NA27, pp. 721-7 52 See 1 31, 2 26; 3*22, 3 32, 7 12; 7 24, 7 30, 12 28; 14 3, 14 36, 14 40, 15.8; 15.43, 16*14 In 8 37 a word marked vid is with magnification seen to vary from the read ing for which it is cited

16

M.M. MITCHELL AND P.A. DUNGAN

majority) serve to document comprehensively all readings in ms 2427 27 that are variant readings to the NA text but are not currently rep resented in either apparatus of that standard edition. To keep the size of this table manageable, we have not replicated readings that have 27 been cited correctly in NA . All readings ofms 2427 in the apparatus and 27 Appendix II ofNA which are not listed below should be regarded as confirmed by our research. Hence, for a complete collation of the readings of ms 2427, scholars must consult boat NA27 and the table below. 8. Principles of Inclusion and Exclusion of Readings m the Accompanying Table Although ms 2427 employs accents, breathing marks, and some punctuation, we have followed the convention of the Nestle-Aland apparatus in not using diacritical marks in our listing ofms 2427 read ings, except when especially significant. Seeking to be as comprehen sive as possible, especially to aid in the dating of the inscription of the manuscript and identification of text-type and influences, we have reproduced all manner of variants, including obvious misspellings and apparent haplographies. Many, but not all such variant readings involve itacism, metathesis, doubling of consonants and non-assimilation or dropping of consonants in consonantal clusters. Other types of ortho graphic particularities include proper names (spellings, omissions), con sistent replacements, such as for , or the use of the Middle/Passive Imperative of the second person plural for the Infinitive, and choice of prepositions (both independent and prefixed). Other variants appear not to fit into any of these categories. Some exceptions to our principle of including all readings are the following. Presence or absence of wa-moveable is not recorded, nor are instances of abbreviation of a doubled letter by a supralinear stroke atop the single letter.53 Most significantly, our scribe makes such copi ous use of abbreviations of the definite article and the conjunction 54 that a complete catalogue of the practice has not been possible here. The same is true of the profuse use of nomma sacra in ms 2427, a topic which scholars will certainly wish to study further. For the sake of our

53 A characteristic of our scribe's work is the use of a supralinear stroke over a sin gle consonant to signal doubling, but that orthographic convention is not consistently in use For discussion and a list of occurrences, see Colwell, "Unusual Abbreviations," 781-2 54 See Colwell, "Unusual Abbreviations "

CHICAGO'S "ARCHAIC MARK"

17

textual collation these abbreviated terms have been written out piene in all but the few instances where the gender or case of the definite article are potentially ambiguous. We have not here given a record of the punctuation of the manuscript, either, though this also will bear 55 future investigation. Several other discrepancies seem clearly to have resulted from the later addition of gilded marginal initials subsequent to the inscription of the text of ms 2427, often causing erasure of the original lettering;56 where in our judgment this was the case, we have omitted them from the table below. Extra-textual features of ms 2427 also could not be included in the entabulation of the text, but deserve at least brief mention here. While ms 2427 is devoid of any critical apparatus, it does mark segments of text with lozenges. These appear immediately before verses 2:23; 3:1; 3:13; 3:31; 4:1; 4:35; 5:1; 5:21; 6:7; 6:14; 6:30; 6:45; 6:53; 7:1; 7:24; 7:31; 8:1; 8:22; 8:27; 9:2; 9:14*; 9:30; 9:33; 10:1; 10:17; 10:32; 10:46; 11:1; 11:27; 12:41; 13:1; 14:1; 14:3; 14:10; 14:12; 14:26; 14:66; 15:1; 15:40; and 16:9. The seventeen miniatures of ms 2427 (as named by H. R. Willoughby) are: The Evangelist Mark (lv), The Cure of Simon's Mother-in-Law (4v), The Capernaum Paralytic Forgiven (5v), Jairus5 Daughter Restored to Life (12r), The Multiplication of the Loaves and Fishes (15v), The Cure of the Bethsaida Blind Man (19v), The Transfiguration (21r), The Triumphal Entry (27v), The Last Supper (34v), Jesus Before Pilate (37v), Barabbas or Jesus? (38r), Roman Soldiers Mock Jesus (38v), Simon of Cyrene Carries the Cross (39r), The Crucifixion of Jesus with Two Thieves (39v), Four Young Men Dice

To ate one intriguing example, at 11 18 our text has a period after , which renders it an even more striking parallel to 16 8 (after which is a lozenge, and then the commencement of the longer ending) 56 At the beginning of the codex, it is evident that the scnbe had not fully worked out a plan for incorporating marginal initials In many instances, the addition of the initial required the erasure of the same letter on the Ime m the text For example, on folio 2v the second of three initials repeats the epsilon of , which appears smudged, perhaps m an attempt to rub out the duplicate Such problems of foresight are largely resolved as the manuscnpt proceeds, although difficulties occasionally persist The appar ent development in the way illuminated initials were incorporated into the text is not the only example of evolving scribal practice in the pages of ms 2427 Initially, the scnbe does not hesitate to break off a word at the end of a line and finish it on the following line Later, however, he begins sometimes to complete unfinished words by adding the remaining letters above the line of text, with some pages m the middle of the codex displaying this practice on multiple lines (e g , 35r) Certain letter forms and abbreviations also undergo change as the codex proceeds Most notable, perhaps, is the emergence of a linear gamma alongside the pendant gamma form The abbreviation for the conjunction , too, undergoes notable changes

55

18

M.M. MITCHELL AND P.A. DUNGAN

for Jesus' Clothes (40r), Joseph of Arimathea Asks Pilate for Jesus' Corpse (41v), and The Marcan Young Man at the Empty Tomb (42r). All but fol. 39v (a full page image) are inserted into the middle of a text page. The illustrations are part of the hermeneutical design of the codex, influencing the inscription of the text in various ways, as those who study the digital codex will see. The text of Mark in ms 2427 is also visually demarcated at both its beginning and its ending. The incipit (fol. 2r, under the gaze of the author portrait on the previous folio) contains an ornamental headpiece of geometric and floral designs in vivid blues and reds with gilding. This rectangular band is sup ported by twin blue pillars, inside of which is set the title, MAPKON, in gold ink. The final page of text (fol. 43v) tapers the wording of the "long ending" of Mark in 16:19-20 in a cyclone-like shape, such that the final rests at the very bottom edge of the page. As noted above, there is a subsequent folio (fol. 44) that is now blank. A final word about this collation and the larger investigation of which it is a part: no collation is indisputable, of course, or perfect. We have had to make many judgments in producing this set of read ings, both about what to include and what not to include, and about many individual readings (it,1 bears repeating that the original hand of this manuscript is exquisitely tiny!). This present entabulation of read ings is intended to be a base from which the range of scholars who will now have access to the digital images may work. The full impli cations of this fresh collation for the textual history and significance of our curious codex remain to be examined in future scholarship, carried out here and elsewhere. We welcome the on-going work of others and invite scholars to send us corrections, suggestions, and alter nate readings. We plan to keep an updated version of this collation on the Goodspeed Manuscript Collection webpage, which serves as the access point for the digital codex.57

See n 6 above for the uri

CHICAGO'S "ARCHAIC MARK"

19
ms 2427

verse

Nestle-Akmd

27

fil
2r

line(s)

1:2 1:3 1:4 1:5 1:5 1:6 1:7 1:7 1:12 1:14 1:14 1:15 1:15 1:18 1:18 1:21 1:24 1:26 1:27 1:27 1:29 1:31*2 1:34 1:34 1:35 1:38 1:40 1:40 1:41 1:42

2 3r 3 4r 4 5r

3 3 6 7-8 8-9 3 4 7 21 2 2 4-5 5 14 15 25 10-11 16 18 21-22 3 7 19 19-20 22-23 5 12 12 12-13 15

This variant spelling is repeated in Mk 1:16, 1:28, and 1:39. The conventional spelling, , appears in Mk 1:9, 3:7, and all instances thereafter. 2 Readings marked with an asterisk are proposed corrections to the citation of ms 2427 given in the apparatus of NA27.

20
Table (cont.) verse 1:43 1:44 1.44 1:44 1:45 Nestle-Aland

M.M. MITCHELL AND P.A. DUNCAN

27

fol

kne(s)

ms 2427

16 19 19 21 5
1-2 5

3 ^ 4

2:2 2:3 2:4 2:4 2:5 2:7 2-7 2:7 2:9


2:14 2:15 2:16 2:17 2:20 2:21 2:22 2:23 2:25 2:26 2-26 2:26* 2:26

8
9-10

14 20 6r 2 3 4 8 23 6
1-2

Kai (2nd instance in verse)

10 14 7r
1-2 4-5

'

6
11-12

15 16 17 19 20

Cf. Laddell Scott Jones, 1300, s. (Attic) Ms 2427 is consistent in spelling "David" as , other occurrences (Mk 10 4748, 11 10, 12.35-37) will not be listed separately below
4

CHICAGO'S "ARCHAIC MARK"

21

Table (cont.) verse 2.28 Nestle-Aland


27

fil

lvne(s) ms 2427

3:1 3:1 3:6 3:6 3:9 3:9


3:11 3:14 3:14 3:17 3:18 3:22* 3:22 3:25 3:25 3:25 3:27 3:29 3:29 3:32*

22

23 24 7 11
12-13 21-22

22 8r
2-3 6

7
11-12

13 21 22 8 2 2 3 8 12 13 19

3:33 3:33 3:34 3:34 3:34 3:35

20 21 21 22 22 24 9r 8 11

4:4 4:5

22
Table {cont.) verse Nestle-Aland

M.M. MITCHELL AND P.A. DUNCAN

27

fil
9

lme(s) ms 2427

4:12 4:12 4:13 4:15 4:15 4:17 4:22 4.27 4:27 4:31 4:32 4.32 4:33 4:33 4:34 4:40 4:41

1-2

iva

4 7 8-9
9-10

16
lOr

15-16 17

1 3 5 6 6-7
9-10

*"*

llr

5:1 5:1 5:9


5:10 5:13 5:13 5:14 5.14 5:15 5-19 5:20 5:22 5:28 5:29 5:33

2 3 5-6 6 23
llv

3 8 9 12 13
13r

15-16

1 3 8-9 21
23-24

13

CHICAGO'S "ARCHAIC MARK"

23

, Table (cont.) verse 5:37 5:38 5:39 5:41 6-2 Nestle-Aland


27

fol 12r

hne(s) ms 2427 21 1 2 8 23

12 ai 14r 14

6:2 6.3 6:4 6:5 6:6 6:7 6:8 6:8 6:10 6:10 6:10 6:11 6:11 6:13 6:14 6:15 6:16 6:17 6:17 6:18 6:19 6:19 6:20 6:20 6:20 6.20 6:22

1 7 10 11 15 17-18 18 20 2 2 2 4-5 5 8 10 14 15-16 16-17 18-19 21 22 23 1 1-2 2 3 9

24
Table (cont) verse 6:22 6:25 6:25 6:27 6:29 6:30 6:31 6:34 6:38 6:39 6:41 6:45 6:47 6:49 6:50 6:52 6:53 6:54 Nestle-Aland

M.M. MITCHELL AND P.A. DUNCAN

27

fol

line(s)

ms 2427

11
16-17

^ ,

18 23
15r 4-5 5 9 15 15


16

2 3-4 13
23-24

655
7:2-5

2 7-8 10 14
15-16 17-18

19
16

, , ' , , [ ]

CHICAGO'S "ARCHAIC MARK" Table (cont.) verse Nestle-Aland


27

25

fil

kne(s)

ms 2427

7.5 7:9
7:11 7:12* 7.14 7:14 7:15 7-17 7:18 7-19 7:19 7:19 7:20 7:21 7:22 7:23 7:24* 7:24 7:25 7:26 7:28 7:30* 7:30 7:31 7:32 7:32 7:35 7:35

6 15 20 22
17r

2 3 6 8 9 11 11 13 15 15 18
17

18 []

1 4 4 7 8 15 19 20 21 2 4 9 10 21
21-22

8:2
8:25

18 8:3 8:3
5

1 3

27 notes correctly the dative case variant in its second appendix, but does not cite the absence of

26
Table (coni.) verse Nestle-Aland

M.M. MITCHELL AND P.A. DUNGAN

27

fil

line(s)

ms 2427

8:4 8:4 8:5 8:6 8:8


8:11

c , * ,

3 5 7 / 7 14 19-20

19r
8:12 8:12 ', '

1 2

(cf. 8:38; 9:19)

8:14 8:17 8:17 8:17 8:19 8:20 8:21 8:22 8:26 8:27 8:27 8:28 8:34

5 9 10 10-11 16 16 19 19
19

17 20
20r

2 3 21
20

8:36 8:37 8:38

9:1 9:1 9:1


9:3 6

5 8 10 15 16 18
21r

(cf. 8:12; 9:19) (cf. 11:5)

6 The second gamma we read in this word may be the result of a progressive ortho graphical shift in the course of the manuscript for the letter nu to assume a form that

CHICAGO'S "ARCHAIC MARK"

27

Table (cont.) verse Nestle-Aland


27

fil

lme(s) 9-10

ms 2427 (cf. 7:30) (cf. 8:12, 38)

9:4 9:5 9:5 9:5 9:9 9:9


9:10 9:11 9:12 9-13 9:14 9:16 9:16 9:18 9:19 9:19 9:22 9:22 9:22 9:26 9:28 9.30 9:31 9:31 9:33 9:35 9:37 9:38 9-39 9:41 9:41 9:41 9:42

17
18-19

19 21 7 7 10 12 13
17-18

21 22r 3 3 7 10 10 18 20 21 22 10 14
18-19

6 '

19
21-22

23r

3 7 12
15-16

19 23 3 4 4 7

'

looks quite similar to our scribe's gamma (i.e, the word may be ) The phe nomenon seems to be repeated in 14 25 () and 14 43 ()

28
Table (cont) verse 9:43 9:45 9:45 9:47 9:48 9:50 10:4 10:7 10:8 10:14 10:14 10:19 10:19 10.22 10:25 10:25 10:25 Nestle-Aland

M.M. MITCHELL AND P.A. DUNCAN

27

fol

lme(s) 11 14 15 18

ms 2427 7


24

24
25

1-2 3 13 18 19,20 10 11 21 22 7 14 15 15-16 25

, 9

10:29

1-2

10:32 10:32 10:33 10.33 10:34

5 7 11 12-13 15

This variant spelling appears twice m 10 8 and again m 10 35 and 14 13

CHICAGO'S "ARCHAIC MARK"

29

Table {cent) verse 10:35 10:35 10:37 10:38 10:40 10:42 10:42 10:43 10:43 10:47 11:2 11:2 11:3 11:5 11:6 11:7 11:7 11:8 11:12 11:12 11:15 11:18 11:18 11:18 11:18 11:20 11:20 11:21 11:22 11:22 11:24 11:25 11:28 11:28 11:28 Nestle-Aland
27

fil

line(s) ms 2427

iva

17 18 20
26r

1 7 12

12-13 14 15

26

27r

4 4 5 9 11 13 14 15
27

(cf. 11:7) (cf. 9:1)


28

8 9

20-21 10-11 11 . 13 13-14 15 16 17 iva

9 10

28

2 6 10 11 12

30
Table {cont) verse 11:32 11:33 12:1 12:2 12:4 12:4 12:5 12.7 12:8 12:9 12:9 12:10 12:12 12:13 12.14 12:14 12:14 12:15 12:16 12:17 Nestle-Aland

M.M. MITCHELL AND P.A. DUNCAN

27

fil
29r

lme(s)

ms 2427

20 3 7 8-9 13 13 15 19
21-22

22
29

*
30

1 4 9 10 12 14 15 18 20
21-22

12:17 12:19 12:21 12:28 12:28 12:28* 12:28 12:30 12:32 12-33 12:34 12:34 12:36

'

1 5 10
30

3 3-4 4 5 8 13 15 18 20
31r

CHICAGO'S "ARCHAIC MARK"

31

Table {cont) verse 12:36 12:40 12:40 12:41 12:44 13:1 13:4 13:4 13:4 13:4 13:6 13:6 13:7 13:12 13:12 13:14 13:14 13:15 13:19 13:20 13:21 13:21 13:23 13:24 13:24 13:26 13-28 13:28 13:28 Nestle-Aland
27

fil

line(s)

ms 2427

3 12 14 15 31 2 6 12 13 13 13 16 16 17 32r 9 10 14 15 17 32 1-2 4 7 8 12 12 14 19 33r 2 3 3

13:30 13:31

5 6

Cf. Lk 13 25 D, BDAG, 730

32
Table {cont) verse 13:33 13:34 13:34 13:34 13.35 14:1 Nestle-Aland27

M.M. MITCHELL AND P.A. DUNCAN

fol

lme(s) 10 11 12 14 14 20

ms 2427 . 9

33
34

14.2 14:2 14:3 14:3 14:3* 14:4 14:6 14:7 14:7 14:9 14:9 14:10 14:10 14:13 14.13 14:14 14:14 14:15 14:19 14:21 14:22 14-24 14:28 14:30

1 2 2 5 6 8-9 13 14 14 18 19 21 1 8 10 12 12 14 34 1 4 8 35r 1 9 14

9 Only the abbreviation for the definite article is present here, so its gender is not resolved

CHICAGO'S "ARCHAIC MARK"

33

Table {cont) verse 14:31 14:32 14:32 14:33 14:33 14:33 14-35 Nestle-Aland
27

fol

lvne(s) ms 2427 19-20 21 22 22

'

17 18

35
14:36* 14:36 14:38 14:38 14-38 14:40*
36

3 5 6 11 12 12 16 3 5 7 10 18
36

(1-3, 5)

14 43 14:44 14:45 14:47 14:51 14:54 14:54 14.54 14:55 14.56 14:57 14-58 14:59 14:63 14:68 14:68 14:69 14:69 14-72

' '

1 2 2 5 6 7 8 11 22
37r

11 11 13

13-14

19

34
Table {cont) verse Nestle-Aland

M.M. MITCHELL AND P.A. DUNCAN

27

fol

1me(s) ms 2427

37
15:1 15:2 15:4 15:8 15:8* 15:9

4 5
10-11

(here and in 15:12)

38r

5 5-6 7-8

15:10

9
38

15:15 15:16 15:18 15:20 15:22 15:26 15:32 15:33 15:34 15.34 15:34 15:36 15:36 15:38 15:39 15:40 15:41 15:43* 15:44

8
18-19

22
39r 6-7

11
40r

4
40

8 10 11 11 14 17 17 21
41r

3 6 9 13 20

CHICAGO'S "ARCHAIC MARK"

35

Table {cont) verse Nestle-Aland


27

fil
41

hne(s)

ms 2427

15:46 15:47 16:2 16:2 16:3 16:3 16:3 16:10 16:10 16:14* 16:14 16:15 16:15 16:18 16:19 16:19

4-5 7 42r

1 2 4-5 5 5-6
43r 1-2 3 12
15-16 20-21 21-22

[] 10

43

8-9
11-12

12

10 The 27 apparatus lists 2427 both for and against the inclusion of this The word is present in the manuscnpt, so 2427 should be removed from the list of wit nesses lacking the conjunction (C, L, W, etc).

^ s
Copyright and Use: As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling, reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a violation of copyright law. This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However, for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article. Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available, or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s). About ATLAS: The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association (ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American Theological Library Association.