A (Codex Alexandrinus)

The Codex Alexandrinus occupies a distinguished place in the annals of biblical scholarship as a principal manuscript of the Greek Bible. Catalogued in the British Library in London under Royal MS 1. D. V-VIII, it is designated by the siglum A or 02 according to the Gregory-Aland numbering system, and δ 4 in the von Soden classification. This manuscript, inscribed on parchment, has been dated to the fifth century through the discipline of palaeography, which analyzes comparative writing styles. Containing most of the Greek Old Testament and the entire Greek New Testament, Codex Alexandrinus is among the four Great uncial codices, a term denoting manuscripts that originally comprised the full corpus of the Old and New Testaments. Its peers include the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, making it one of the earliest and most comprehensive manuscripts of the Bible extant.

The manuscript derives its name from Alexandria, Egypt, where it was housed for several centuries. The narrative of its relocation is steeped in the annals of ecclesiastical history: Cyril Lucaris, the Eastern Orthodox Patriarch, transported it from Alexandria to Constantinople (present-day Istanbul, Turkey). Subsequently, in the 17th century, it was bestowed upon Charles I of England. Its alphanumeric designation, A, was conferred by Bishop Brian Walton in the 1657 Polyglot Bible, a pioneering work that arrayed biblical texts in multiple languages side by side for comparative study. This designation gained formal acceptance and continued use with the standardization of the New Testament manuscript listing by J. J. Wettstein in 1751, securing Codex Alexandrinus’s primacy in the sequence of manuscripts.

Before the acquisition of Codex Sinaiticus by British scholars, Frederick H. A. Scrivener, a noted biblical scholar and textual critic, lauded Codex Alexandrinus as the preeminent manuscript of the Greek Bible in Britain. Today, it is housed in the British Library alongside Codex Sinaiticus, prominently displayed in the Sir John Ritblat Gallery. For those unable to visit the British Library in person, the library provides a complete photographic reproduction of the New Testament portion of Codex Alexandrinus on its website, offering global access to this pivotal biblical manuscript.

Content

The Codex Alexandrinus, a venerable manuscript of the Greek Bible, has not come down to us intact. Of its original approximately 820 pages, only 773 remain. The vicissitudes of history and the passage of time have led to the loss of some portions of this significant biblical codex. The extant sections of Alexandrinus offer a comprehensive Greek rendition of the Old Testament, inclusive of the Apocrypha. Notably, it encompasses the entirety of the four books of Maccabees and Psalm 151, extending its canonical breadth beyond that recognized in many contemporary biblical traditions.

In addition to the Old Testament and Apocryphal books, the Codex Alexandrinus contains the majority of the New Testament’s text. However, it is not without lacunae; specific passages have been lost to time, including Matthew 1:1–25:6, John 6:50–8:52, and 1 Corinthians 4:13–12:6. These missing sections underscore the manuscript’s journey through the ages, marked by both preservation and loss.

Beyond the canonical texts, the Codex Alexandrinus is of paramount importance for including certain early Christian writings, most notably the First and Second Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians. These documents, attributed to Clement of Rome, are significant for their insight into early Christian thought and practice, situating the Codex Alexandrinus as a critical resource not only for biblical scholarship but for understanding the broader contours of early Christian history.

While the Codex Alexandrinus has been subject to the inevitable attrition of time, losing some of its original content, the surviving portions provide a rich tapestry of biblical and early Christian literature. Its comprehensive coverage of the Old Testament and Apocrypha, the substantial representation of the New Testament, and the inclusion of significant early Christian writings like the Clementine epistles, collectively affirm its invaluable contribution to biblical studies and the history of Christianity.

Some Textual Variants

The Codex Alexandrinus, a cornerstone in the field of New Testament textual criticism, features a plethora of unique textual variants that shed light on the intricate process of scriptural transcription and the evolution of biblical texts over centuries. This ancient manuscript, originating from the 5th century, is a treasure trove for scholars, offering insights into the textual variations that exist within the biblical canon. Here are some noteworthy textual variants found in the Codex Alexandrinus, juxtaposed with those from other manuscripts, highlighting the dynamic nature of biblical texts.

In the Old Testament, for example, the Codex Alexandrinus records Methuselah’s age at 187 years in Genesis 5:25, contrasting with the 167 years noted in Codex Vaticanus. Such discrepancies extend to various books, like Deuteronomy and Joshua, where terms and actions differ (e.g., “in a pillar” vs. “in a cloud” in Deuteronomy 31:15).

Moving to the New Testament, the Codex Alexandrinus includes the longer ending of Mark (16:9–20), a passage omitted in some of the earliest manuscripts, underscoring the debates around canonical content. Similarly, in Luke 4:17, it uses “opened” instead of “unrolled,” affecting the understanding of Jesus’ action in the synagogue.

John 1:39 illustrates a variation in time reporting, with “about the sixth hour” in Codex Alexandrinus and “about the tenth hour” in the majority of manuscripts, potentially impacting the chronology of events. Acts 8:39 shows a divergence in describing Philip’s departure, with “the Holy Spirit fell on the eunuch” in Codex Alexandrinus versus a simpler “spirit of the Lord” in the majority.

These examples highlight just a fraction of the textual variations that make the Codex Alexandrinus an invaluable asset in biblical studies. Its unique readings offer alternative perspectives on biblical events and teachings, emphasizing the diverse manuscript tradition that has preserved the biblical text through millennia. Scholars continue to study these variants to gain deeper insights into the historical, theological, and literary contexts of the Bible, ensuring the rich tapestry of biblical tradition remains vibrant and accessible for future generations.

Verses Not Included

The Codex Alexandrinus, an ancient manuscript of the New Testament, notably omits several verses found in later manuscripts, highlighting the complex history of the New Testament’s textual transmission. For instance, Mark 15:28, which discusses the fulfillment of scripture through Jesus’ crucifixion among criminals, is absent in this codex, as well as in other early manuscripts such as Codices Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Bezae, and Regius, pointing to a divergence in early biblical texts.

Similarly, the emotive passage in Luke 22:43–44, detailing Christ’s intense agony in Gethsemane, is not included in Codex Alexandrinus. This omission is shared with other significant manuscripts like Papyrus 75, Codices Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, and Washingtonianus, suggesting an early tradition that lacked this narrative.

The case of Acts 8:37, which provides an Ethiopian eunuch’s confession of faith before baptism by Philip, further illustrates selective inclusion across manuscripts. While Codex Alexandrinus, along with the majority of manuscripts, omits this verse, it is found in Codex E and several minuscule manuscripts, revealing the textual variances that have intrigued scholars over centuries.

Acts 15:34, detailing a post-council decision, is similarly omitted in Codex Alexandrinus and the most ancient witnesses, yet appears in a handful of manuscripts, reflecting the dynamic nature of the Acts’ textual history.

The absence of Acts 24:7, 28:29, and Romans 16:24 in Codex Alexandrinus aligns with the earliest manuscript evidence, challenging later textual traditions that include these verses. This pattern of omission extends to the Pericope Adultera (John 7:53–8:11), a narrative absent in Alexandrinus, with scholarly consensus suggesting there was originally no space for this passage in the manuscript.

These omissions in Codex Alexandrinus underscore the manuscript’s critical role in understanding the development of the New Testament text. Its witness to an earlier form of the text offers invaluable insights into the early Christian community’s scriptural traditions, emphasizing the evolution of the biblical canon through centuries of transcription, translation, and theological reflection.

Date

The dating of the Codex Alexandrinus, a cornerstone manuscript of the Greek Bible, involves a blend of historical annotation and scholarly inference. An Arabic note inscribed on the reverse of the manuscript’s first volume attributes its authorship to Thecla, a martyr and distinguished figure in Egyptian Christianity. This note suggests a composition slightly subsequent to the Council of Nicaea, which convened in 325 C.E. However, the veracity and implications of this attribution warrant careful consideration.

Scholar Samuel Prideaux Tregelles offered an intriguing hypothesis linking the manuscript’s commencement in the Gospel of Matthew—specifically at chapter 25, coincidentally associated with the feast day of Thecla—to a potential origin in a monastery dedicated to her. Tregelles speculated that Thecla’s name might have been initially noted in the margin, later lost to trimming, leading to the tradition of her authorship. Cyril Lucaris, the patriarch who transferred the codex from Alexandria to Constantinople, also endorsed this attribution. Nevertheless, critical analysis suggests the manuscript cannot predate the late 4th century, rendering direct authorship by Thecla historically implausible.

Further anchoring the codex in time, its inclusion of Athanasius’s Epistle on the Psalms to Marcellinus posits a terminus post quem (earliest possible date) of 373 C.E., given Athanasius’s death in that year. Additionally, the absence of chapter divisions in Acts and the Epistles, a feature associated with Euthalius, Bishop of Sulci, not widely adopted until the mid-5th century, offers a terminus ad quem (latest possible date) for the manuscript’s creation.

The presence of the Epistle of Clement within the codex hints at a period when the Christian biblical canon had not yet fully crystallized, adding another layer to its dating. The manuscript’s calligraphy, characterized by relatively more sophisticated initial letters and decorative elements—though still aligned with earlier traditions—suggests a slightly later origin than the Codex Vaticanus or Sinaiticus.

Taking these factors into account, the Codex Alexandrinus is situated within a generation following the creation of the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus codices. While it may originate from the late 4th century, scholarly consensus, including that of the Institute for New Testament Textual Research (INTF), places it firmly within the 5th century. This dating not only situates the codex within a critical period of early Christian history but also reflects the evolving artistry and textual traditions of early Christian manuscripts.

Physical Features

The Codex Alexandrinus, a cornerstone of biblical scholarship, is a quintessential example of an ancient codex, precursor to the modern book, crafted with meticulous care. Comprising 773 leaves of thin, exquisite vellum, the manuscript originally contained approximately 820 pages. It is divided into four volumes, measuring 12.6 × 10.4 inches each, bound in the quarto format. This arrangement involves layering parchment leaves, folding them twice into a compact block, and stitching them together to create the codex. Historically, these folios were assembled into quires of eight, though modern rebinding has adjusted them to sets of six. The passage of time and subsequent handling have led to the pages’ discoloration, particularly at the edges, with some damage inflicted by both age and at times, the oversight of modern binders, affecting the text, especially in the upper inner margins.

Frederick Scrivener highlighted the manuscript’s fragility, noting the vellum’s susceptibility to damage and the ink’s tendency to flake, leading to restricted access to the manuscript to preserve its condition. The manuscript encompasses the Septuagint for the Old Testament, though ten leaves are lost, and the New Testament, missing 31 leaves. Notably, portions of 1 and 2 Clement are also absent, likely missing three leaves.

The text is presented in a two-column format using uncial script, with lines per column ranging from 49 to 51 and each line holding 20 to 25 letters. Early sections of each book are distinguished by red ink, and larger letters at the start of sections are marginally set, reminiscent of practices in other significant codices. Despite the absence of word division (scriptio continua), some pauses are marked with a dot, suggesting a space between words. The manuscript lacks accents or breathing marks, with minimal punctuation included by the original scribe. The Old Testament’s poetical books are uniquely formatted stichometrically, and Old Testament quotations within the New Testament text are marginally annotated.

Decorative elements are sparse, limited to tail-pieces concluding each book, and there’s an observed tendency towards enlarging initial letters of sentences, making Codex Alexandrinus a pioneer in this stylistic feature. The manuscript showcases iotacistic errors typical of its era, alongside occasional confusions between Ν and Μ, and the substitution of ΓΓ for ΝΓ, hinting at its Egyptian origins, though this is not conclusively accepted.

The manuscript evidences a stylistic shift beginning with the Gospel of Luke through to 1 Corinthians 10:8, incorporating Coptic influences in certain letters, suggesting multiple scribes’ involvement. Scholars have debated the exact number, with estimates ranging from two to five, based on the analysis of handwriting differences and textual corrections.

Corrections abound within the Codex Alexandrinus, applied both by the original scribe and subsequent revisers, aligning the text with various other codices and the majority of minuscule manuscripts. These corrections vary in extent across different biblical books, with the Pentateuch seeing significant alterations and the Book of Revelation receiving minimal corrections.

The manuscript’s folios are numerated in Arabic in the verso of the lower margin, a practice that provides insights into the original extent of the manuscript, as evidenced by the starting numeral in the surviving portion of Matthew.

Textual Character

The Codex Alexandrinus, a cornerstone of biblical scholarship, is a quintessential example of an ancient codex, precursor to the modern book, crafted with meticulous care. Comprising 773 leaves of thin, exquisite vellum, the manuscript originally contained approximately 820 pages. It is divided into four volumes, measuring 12.6 × 10.4 inches each, bound in the quarto format. This arrangement involves layering parchment leaves, folding them twice into a compact block, and stitching them together to create the codex. Historically, these folios were assembled into quires of eight, though modern rebinding has adjusted them to sets of six. The passage of time and subsequent handling have led to the pages’ discoloration, particularly at the edges, with some damage inflicted by both age and at times, the oversight of modern binders, affecting the text, especially in the upper inner margins.

Frederick Scrivener highlighted the manuscript’s fragility, noting the vellum’s susceptibility to damage and the ink’s tendency to flake, leading to restricted access to the manuscript to preserve its condition. The manuscript encompasses the Septuagint for the Old Testament, though ten leaves are lost, and the New Testament, missing 31 leaves. Notably, portions of 1 and 2 Clement are also absent, likely missing three leaves.

The text is presented in a two-column format using uncial script, with lines per column ranging from 49 to 51 and each line holding 20 to 25 letters. Early sections of each book are distinguished by red ink, and larger letters at the start of sections are marginally set, reminiscent of practices in other significant codices. Despite the absence of word division (scriptio continua), some pauses are marked with a dot, suggesting a space between words. The manuscript lacks accents or breathing marks, with minimal punctuation included by the original scribe. The Old Testament’s poetical books are uniquely formatted stichometrically, and Old Testament quotations within the New Testament text are marginally annotated.

Decorative elements are sparse, limited to tail-pieces concluding each book, and there’s an observed tendency towards enlarging initial letters of sentences, making Codex Alexandrinus a pioneer in this stylistic feature. The manuscript showcases iotacistic errors typical of its era, alongside occasional confusions between Ν and Μ, and the substitution of ΓΓ for ΝΓ, hinting at its Egyptian origins, though this is not conclusively accepted.

The manuscript evidences a stylistic shift beginning with the Gospel of Luke through to 1 Corinthians 10:8, incorporating Coptic influences in certain letters, suggesting multiple scribes’ involvement. Scholars have debated the exact number, with estimates ranging from two to five, based on the analysis of handwriting differences and textual corrections.

Corrections abound within the Codex Alexandrinus, applied both by the original scribe and subsequent revisers, aligning the text with various other codices and the majority of minuscule manuscripts. These corrections vary in extent across different biblical books, with the Pentateuch seeing significant alterations and the Book of Revelation receiving minimal corrections.

The manuscript’s folios are numerated in Arabic in the verso of the lower margin, a practice that provides insights into the original extent of the manuscript, as evidenced by the starting numeral in the surviving portion of Matthew.

Scribes and Correctors

The scholarly analysis of the Codex Alexandrinus, particularly concerning its scribes and correctors, presents a nuanced view of its textual genesis. Frederic G. Kenyon initially posited that the manuscript’s transcription was the effort of five distinct scribes, whom he labeled with Roman numerals. According to Kenyon’s assessment, the first two scribes were responsible for the Old Testament, while the subsequent scribes were allocated various portions of the New Testament: the third scribe copied the Gospels and part of Corinthians, the fourth was tasked with Luke-Acts, the General Epistles, and part of Romans and Corinthians, and the fifth scribe concluded the manuscript with Revelation.

Contrary to Kenyon’s theory, Milne and Skeat later proposed that the entire codex was likely the work of just two scribes, identified as I and II. This simplification suggests a more streamlined approach to the codex’s creation, though it acknowledges the potential for variation in the manuscript’s sections.

The quality of the exemplars, or master copies, used by the Alexandrinus scribes appears to have varied significantly across the New Testament. Particularly in the Gospels, the exemplar was of a lesser quality, indicative of a Byzantine text type, which might not reflect the original text as reliably as other sources. This contrasted with the sections containing the General Epistles and Revelation, where the Codex Alexandrinus is considered a more faithful witness to the original writings.

Moreover, the scribe responsible for the New Testament content in Codex Alexandrinus did not merely copy the text verbatim but introduced his own readings into the manuscript. This practice, highlighted by textual critic Fenton John Anthony Hort, involved the substitution of synonyms within the text, suggesting a degree of interpretive freedom taken by the scribe. Such individualisms are a testament to the scribe’s engagement with the text and reflect a unique characteristic of Codex Alexandrinus.

In terms of its textual witness, the Codex Alexandrinus offers a mixed representation. Within the Gospels, it aligns with the Byzantine text type, a later and more widespread text type among Greek New Testament manuscripts. Its value increases with the Epistles, where it presents a more accurate account, and it reaches its peak in the book of Revelation, where Alexandrinus is esteemed as the most reliable witness to the original text among the extant manuscripts.

History of Codex Alexandrinus

The Codex Alexandrinus, a crucial ancient manuscript of the Bible, has sparked much debate regarding its origins. Cyril Lucaris, who first brought attention to the codex, suggested Alexandria as its birthplace, a view widely accepted and seemingly supported by a 13th or 14th-century Arabic note found within the manuscript. This note, attributed to “Athanasius the humble,” possibly refers to Athanasius III, the Patriarch of Alexandria from 1276 to 1316, implying the codex’s long-standing connection to Alexandria.

Contrarily, F. C. Burkitt challenged this notion, proposing that the manuscript might have originated from Constantinople, based on the premise that its text aligns more with the Byzantine tradition. This hypothesis suggests that the Arabic inscriptions, including the one by “Athanasius the humble,” were added after the codex had been moved to Mount Athos, and before Cyril Lucaris became Patriarch of Constantinople.

Kenyon defended the Alexandrian origin, emphasizing Cyril’s conviction of its Egyptian roots. However, in the mid-20th century, examinations of the Arabic note by A. S. Fulton and comparisons made by T. D. Moschonas with other documents linked to Athanasius III lent weight to the manuscript’s Alexandrian provenance.

Still, the debate didn’t end there. Burnett Hillman Streeter suggested alternative origins like Caesarea or Beirut, pointing to the codex’s eclectic text type and its inclusion of writings beyond the New Testament. T.C. Skeat later speculated that the codex might have been moved to Alexandria from Constantinople between 1308 and 1316, alongside writings of John Chrysostom. Whether it was initially composed in Constantinople or Alexandria remains an open question.

A Latin note from the 17th century ambiguously claims the manuscript was presented to the patriarchate of Alexandria in 1098, but this could be a misunderstanding of the Arabic inscription.

Despite these varied theories about its origins, the Codex Alexandrinus remains a pivotal source for biblical scholars, its history reflecting the complexities of early Christian manuscript traditions and the transmission of biblical texts across centuries and cultures.

About the Author

SCROLL THROUGH THE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES BELOW

BIBLE TRANSLATION AND TEXTUAL CRITICISM

BIBLE TRANSLATION AND TEXTUAL CRITICISM

BIBLICAL STUDIES / BIBLE BACKGROUND / HISTORY OF THE BIBLE/ INTERPRETATION

EARLY CHRISTIANITY

HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY

CHRISTIAN APOLOGETIC EVANGELISM

TECHNOLOGY AND THE CHRISTIAN

CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY

CHRISTIAN DEVOTIONALS

CHRISTIAN FICTION