This study examines singular readings in the Gospel of Matthew across five of the earliest extant Greek copies of Matthew: Codex Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Ephraemi, Bezae, and Washingtonianus. In each of the selected MSS, it is determined where a spelling, word, clause, phrase, sentence, or group of sentences is different from other MSS. These “singular readings” are collected in order to shine light on what such idiosyncrasies can tell us about the MS or tendencies of the scribe who copied the MS. One of the more interesting finds is that some of our MSS add text more than they omit it, which is contrary to other studies. Apart from itacistic changes, alternate spellings are not always the most frequent type of singular reading in our MSS. The MSS have similar types of singular readings, but they often go about creating them in different ways. Conclusions are that our MSS either prefer Attic Greek to Koine (Washingtonianus) or vice versa (Sinaiticus), but two MSS (Vaticanus and Bezae) fluctuate between both grammatical standards. Our MSS typically have a high percentage of error due to parablepsis, but one MS seems to skip letters within words more often than entire words (Ephraemi). Ephraemi does not transpose words, but when the other MSS create transpositions, they all record instances where the genitive pronoun is placed prior to the word it modifies and verbs are moved forward in sentences. In addition, transpositions in Sinaiticus could have resulted from corrected leaps. Context often plays a part in the creation of singular readings, but context affects each MS differently. Nearby text seems to prompt changes in all of our MSS, but remote text such as a gospel parallel, does not often influence our scribes: Ephraemi contains the only harmonization seems to be intentional. In Sinaiticus and Washingtonianus, several readings exhibit possible interpretations of the text (but typically these do not appear to be theological changes) and they both contain readings that conflate textual variants. All of the singular readings record either a textual addition, omission, or substitution, but the MSS do not end up with the same amount of text: both Codex Vaticanus and Ephraemi add more words than they omit, whereas Codex Sinaiticus, Bezae, and Washingtonianus end up with more omissions. This final element adds a counterweight to other studies that contend MSS omit text more than they add. The examination yields few singular readings of dramatic theological import. Rather, the singular readings expose grammatical currents of the 4th-5/6th centuries, currents that are more prevalent than scribal attempts to re-present the text of Matthew.

This study seeks to gain an understanding about the scribal tendencies observed in the Fourth Gospel in Codex Alexandrinus using the method of isolating and classifying singular readings similar to what was first proposed by Colwell, and later modified by Royse and others. In addition to singular readings made before corrections, this study considers singular readings in relation to punctuation markers and line breaks. First, a brief introduction to Codex Alexandrinus is given. Second, the method used to undertake this study is set forth and explained. Third, each singular reading in the Fourth Gospel in Codex Alexandrinus is listed under each respective group in which it is classified, the text of the exemplar is reconstructed if possible and each singular reading is discussed. Finally, the resulting data are analyzed and conclusions are given regarding the tendencies of the scribe responsible for the Fourth Gospel in Codex Alexandrinus. In general, this thesis demonstrates that the strongest tendency of the scribe was that of omission; the scribe was reluctant to add or to harmonize. Harmonizations, when they do occur, are never corrected. Both punctuation and line breaks often afforded the opportunity for the scribe to become distracted and to commit error.

The aim of this work is to take the methodology developed by Ernest Cowell, and further refined by James R. Royse, of cataloging singular readings of Greek scribes and seek to apply it to Coptic scribes. This study focuses on the text of John found in P. Mich Inv. 3521 and the singular readings of that manuscript. In order to have a basis of comparison, singular readings from two other Coptic versions of John are cataloged as well.1 In total 1619 singular readings have been identified in the three manuscripts. Following Colwell and Royse, the readings have been further divided into orthographic, sensible and nonsense readings. The sensible and nonsense readings have been further divided and categorized into additions, omissions, substitutions, transpositions and verbal prefixes. All of these entries are then noted in the accompanying database with appropriate commentary so that the reader may format and use the information in a variety of ways. In addition to the database, detailed commentary has been provided on the singular readings of P. Mich. Inv. 3521 with the following conclusions: Like Greek scribes, Coptic scribes are more likely to omit something than to add something; The category of "transpositions as corrected leaps" which James Royse found useful in his work, has proved unhelpful when dealing with this papyrus; and finally some preliminary analysis about the scribe of P. Mich. Inv. 351 is given. 1 Elinor Husselman, The Gospel of John in Fayumic Coptic (P. Mich. Inv. 3521), The University of Michigan Kelsey Museum of Archaeology Studies (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1962); Rodolphe Kasser, Papyrus Bodmer III: Évangile de Jean et Genèse I-IV, 2 en Bohaïrique (Louvain: Secrétariat du CorpusSCO, 1958); Herbert Thompson, The Gospel of St. John According to the Earliest Coptic Manuscript (London: British School of Archaeology in Egypt, 1924).