VETUS LATINA IOHANNES

Electronic Edition
Corrections/Alterations to a printed edition


03 (Codex Vercellensis) and Gasquet


The transcription of 03 (Codex Vercellensis) is based on A. Gasquet, Codex Vercellensis iamdudum ab Irico et Bianchino bis editus denuo cum manuscripto collatus in lucem profertur (Collectanea Biblica Latina 3), Pustet: Rome, Ratisbon, New York, 1914.

However, a comparison of Gasquet with black and white photographs of the manuscript provided by the Institut Vetus Latina reveals a number of places in which Gasquet is inaccurate. The following file lists the corrections which have been made. (Corrections to Irico and Bianchini are not listed, unless they also involve a correction to Gasquet; it should also be observed that Gasquet is not always to be relied upon as a reporter of Irico.) All of these are also recorded as notes to the transcription.

John 1:15 Gasquet marks 'lo et' and 'ante' as no longer visible, but they are clear on our photographs.
John 1:17 Gasquet does not record the correction, which is written in small letters in the left hand margin.
John 1:18 umquam] unquam Gasquet and Irico, but 'umquam' can be made out from the photographs.
John 1:19 Gasquet marks 'ad eum', 'rosolymis', 'tem' and 'tas ut' as no longer visible, but these can be made out on our photographs.
John 1:29 Neither Gasquet or Irico records the superline above 'dei', visible from the manuscript (cf.
John 1:36)
John 1:30 Gasquet marks 'e' of 'erat' as no longer visible, but it is clear on our photographs.
John 1:32 Gasquet marks 'am' as no longer visible, but it is clear on our photographs.
John 1:36 Gasquet does not record the superline on 'dei', which is clear from images of the manuscript (cf.
John 1:30).
John 1:38 Gasquet does not mark the hanging line.
John 1:41 interprae | tatum] interpre | tatum Gasquet, interpreta | tum Irico. The word division is clear from the manuscript; the final letter of line 20 appears to be an ae digraph; it is not a standard 'e' or 'a'.
John 1:42 illu̅ (with superline, clear from the manuscript)] illum Gasquet and Irico. Gasquet also records a hanging line and a capital letter, which images of the ms show to be incorrect.
John 1:45 Gasquet marks 'il' of 'illi' as no longer visible, but it can be made out on our photographs.
John 1:45 prophetae Bianchini] profetae Gasquet. Gasquet marks 'fetae' as no longer visible, but the whole word is clear on our photographs, ending with an ae digraph, and Bianchini's 'prophetae' is vindicated.
John 1:47 Gasquet marks a hanging line and capital 'e' on 'ecce', neither of which is found in the photos of the manuscript.
John 1:47 is | trahelita (Bianchini)] is | raelita Gasquet. The 'tra' at the beginning of the line can clearly be made out from images of the manuscript. Bianchini's reading of the whole word has therefore been followed.
John 1:51 The space between 'illis' and 'amen' is not recorded by Gasquet, but is clear from the images
John 2:7 impleberunt (Bianchini)] impleuerunt Gasquet; 'implebe' can be clearly seen in images of the manuscript
John 2:9 Gasquet marks 'chi' of 'architriclinus', 'a' of 'aqua', 'num' of 'uinum', 'et n' and 'unde' as no longer visible, but they can be clearly made out on our photographs
John 2:10 Gasquet marks 'us ponit et cu̅', 'riati fue' and 'aute̅' as no longer visible, but they can be made out on our photographs.
John 2:11 Gasquet marks 'et ma' as no longer visible, but it can be made out on our photographs.
John 2:13 Gasquet marks 'pascha' as no longer visible, but it can just be made out on our photographs
John 2:13 hierosolymis (Bianchini)] hyerosolimis Gasquet; 'hier' can be seen in the manuscript, so Bianchini has been followed for the whole word; compare 'hierosolymis' visible on page 192.
John 2:14 Gasquet marks 'mularios sedentes' as no longer visible, but it can be made out on our photographs
John 2:19 Gasquet marks 'hoc' and 'et' as no longer visible, but they can be clearly made out on our photographs
John 2:23 Gasquet marks 'nomine' as no longer visible, but it can be made out on our photographs
John 2:25 Gasquet marks this as a hanging line
John 3:1 ih̅m has been re-inked by a later hand; it may be a correction.
John 3:6 The final 'm' of natum has been re-inked by a later hand: it may be a correction.
John 3:12 The correction of 'creditis' to 'credetis' is not recorded by Gasquet and Irico; see also line 14.
John 3:12 Gasquet marks 'ro caelestia' and the second 'creditis' (sic) as no longer visible; both can be made out on our photographs, but the second word is 'credetis' (although Bianchini and Irico have 'creditis').
John 4:10 Gasquet marks 'Re' of 'Respondit' as no longer visible, but it can be clearly made out on our photographs.
John 4:39 Gasquet marks 'propter uer' as no longer legible, but 'propter u' can be made out from our images.
John 5:3 aridorum] This word (a whole line) is omitted by Gasquet.
John 5:43 The images of the manuscript are slightly unclear for this word, and suggest that 'accepistis' may have been corrected to 'accipistis'.
John 6:1 Gasquet marks the 's' of 'ih̅s' as and 'r' of 'mare' as no longer visible, but 'h̅s' and 'mare' can be made out from our images.
John 6:3 Gasquet omits the hanging line, which is clear from the images.
John 6:4 Gasquet omits the hanging line, which is clear from the images.
John 6:5 Gasquet marks the 't' of 'multae' as no longer legible, but it can be made out from our images.
John 6:16 Gasquet marks 'factum esset' as no longer legible, but 'set' can be made out from our images.
John 6:49 Gasquet marks the final 'unt' of 'manducauerunt' as no longer legible, but it can be clearly made out from our images. The images also suggest that 'panem' has been written 'pamnem'.
John 6:53 Gasquet marks the 'mod' of 'quomodo', the 'hi' of 'hic' and the 'ma' of 'manducare' as no longer legible, but these are all visible apart from the 'm' of 'quomodo'.
John 7:9 Gasquet marks 'illis' as no longer legible, but 'lis' can be made out from our images.
John 7:10 Gasquet marks a hanging line with capital 'T'. This is not supported by our images, although only the initial 't' can be made out on this line.
John 7:22 sabbotao] sabbato Gasquet; sabboteo Irico (not mentioned by Gasquet).
John 7:23 Gasquet and Irico read 'sabbato', but 'sabboato' is clear from images of the manuscript.
John 7:27 Gasquet marks 'tem cum ue' as no longer legible, but 'te ... mue' can be made out from our images
John 7:30 Gasquet marks the 'uen' of 'uenerat' as no longer legible, but the 'n' can be made out from our images.
John 7:31 Gasquet does not mark the space between 'fact' and 'audierunt', which is visible in images of the manuscript.
John 7:32 sacesrdotes] sacerdotes Gasquet and Irico; the 's' is clearly visible in images of the manuscript.
John 7:32 conprhehenderent] conprehenderunt Gasquet and Irico; the 'h' is clearly visible on images of the manuscript.
John 8:13 Gasquet omits the hanging line and capital 'R', which are clear from the images.
John 8:17 uestru̅] ueru̅ Gasquet and Irico.
John 8:36 uere li | beri] uere | liberi Gasquet and Irico; the manuscript is clear.
John 8:41 habemus (Irico): hahemus (Gasquet) is an error, as he does not note the divergence from Irico.
John 8:42 Gasquet does not mark a hanging line or capital; the images show that the 'A' is a capital, and it appears to project into the margin compared with the lines below.
John 8:49 Gasquet marks 'meum', 'uos me non' and the 'hon' of 'honorificatis' as no longer legible, but these can be made out from our images.
John 8:51 Gasquet marks 'amen di' and 'co uobis' as no longer legible, but 'amen di' and 'o uob' can be made out from our images.
John 8:52 Gasquet omits the hanging line and capital 'D', which are clear from the images.
John 8:57 iudaei] iudeaei Irico; the images are faint, but might support Irico's reading.
John 9:3 Gasquet marks the 'ni' of 'manifestetur' as no longer legible, but it can be made out from our images.
John 9:11 'mo qui dicitur ih-s tetigit' inter lineas minoribus litteris scripta (Gasquet). In fact, 'mo qui' projects into the central margin, and 'dicitur ih-s tetigit' is found between the lines, as noted in this transcription.
John 9:13 Gasquet omits the hanging line and capital 'A', which are clearly visible from images of the manuscript.
John 9:14 Gasquet omits the hanging line and capital 'I', which are clearly visible from images of the manuscript.
John 9:27 disci | puli] discipu | li Gasquet and Irico, but the spacing on the manuscript seems clear.
John 9:37 Gasquet marks 'Ait illi' as no longer legible, but the hanging 'A' can be made out from our images.
John 10:7 The manuscript images of this line appear to read '..manua', but the reading is not altogether secure.
John 10:12 prophriae] propriae Gasquet and Irico; the 'h' is clearly visible from the manuscript.
John 10:12 Gasquet marks the whole of 'rapit' and the 'par' of 'dispargit' as unreadable, but at least 'rapi' and 'pa' can be made out from photographs.
John 10:23 It is possible that this is a hanging line, but the evidence from the photographs and Irico is ambivalent
John 11:34 Gasquet does not record the space between 'posuistis' and 'dicunt', which can be seen in the manuscript.
John 12:18 Gasquet omits the hanging line and capital 'F', which are clearly visible from images of the manuscript.
John 12:26 The correction of 'ministra' to 'ministrat' is not recorded by Gasquet or Irico, but is clear from images. Also the line break is clearly mi | nister, as read by Bianchini; Gasquet follows Irico in reading min | ister.
John 12:39 'esseias' is a typographical error in Gasquet; Irico has 'eseias', which can be clearly read on this well-preserved page of the manuscript.
John 12:40 'occulos' is a typographical error in Gasquet and Irico; 'oculos' can be clearly read on this well-preserved page of the manuscript.
John 13:8 Gasquet does not record the hanging line and capital 'D', which are clearly visible from images of the manuscript.
John 13:18 A mark visible on the photograph of the manuscript suggests that the 'd' of 'quods' may have been deleted
John 13:21 Gasquet and Irico read 'uobis | tradet', but images of the manuscript show that Bianchini is correct with 'uo | bis tradet'
John 13:22 Gasquet marks 'eius res' as no longer visible, but it is clear on our images of the manuscript.
John 13:23 Gasquet marks the 'be' of 'recumbens' and 'ex dis' as no longer visible, but these can be made out in our images of the manuscript.
John 13:26 Gasquet marks 'nc' of 'intinctum', the 'nem' of 'panem', 'porrexero', the 'it er' of 'intinxit ergo' and the 'dit iu' of 'tradidit iudas' as no longer visible, but these can be made out in our images of the manuscript.
John 13:27 Gasquet does not record the hanging line and capital 'D', which are clearly visible in images of the manuscript.
John 14:10 Gasquet and Irico both read 'quae', but 'que' is all that can be made out from our fairly clear image of this page.
John 14:19 Gasquet and Irico simply read 'non uide' on this line, but in between these two words there is a gap, which appears from images to be filled by a fairly clear letter 'm', with no obvious bleed-through from the verso.
John 14:28 Gasquet and Irico just read 'quia', but there is clearly a 'd' and possibly an 'i' following visible on images of the manuscript, although the next line begins 'dixi'. later in the verse, Gasquet and Irico both read 'quia eo ad patrem', but the manuscript has 'quia ego ad patrem'.
John 15:20 uos per | sequentur] Gasquet and Irico both read 'uos | persequentur', but the division of the words is clear from images of the manuscript.
John 15:25 Gasquet does not record the hanging line and capital 'C', which are clearly visible in images of the manuscript.
John 16:2 Gasquet reads 'offeret', omitting 'et', noting that Bianchini reads 'offerre et' and that Irico follows the manuscript. However, Irico actually reads 'offerret et'; it is quite difficult to make out this line on the images of the manuscript, but 'et' is clearly present, which suggests that Gasquet has omitted it in error.
John 16:16 Gasquet and Irico both read 'pusillum', but 'pusillu̅' is reasonably clear from the images.
John 17:12 illis] Irico, illlis Gasquet (which seems to be a typographical error, as he doesn't note the variation from Irico).
John 18:2 Gasquet does not record the hanging line and capital 'I', both of which are clear from images of the manuscript
John 18:5 Gasquet marks 'tra' and 'erat' as no longer visible, but these can be made out on images of the manuscript.
John 18:35 Gasquet marks 'et ego' as no longer visible, but 'et .go' can be fairly well made out on images of the manuscript.
John 19:25 Gasquet does not record a hanging line; the manuscript is not entirely clear, but it seems probable given the beginnings of the next few lines.
John 19:31 tollerenttur] Irico (verified from manuscript), tollerentur Gasquet.
John 20:15 It is highly improbable that Gasquet could see any more of page 314 than the first four lines, given that that was all he could see of the other side, and seems to be all that survives of this page. It seems likely that the italic typesetting was omitted from this page. And yet he comments in verse 16 that Bianchini reads 'rhabbi' "cum ms." even though Irico could not see the end of this word.
John 20:24 Gasquet does not record the hanging line and capital 'T', which can be clearly seen in the manuscript.
John 20:25 Gasquet does not record the hanging line and capital 'P', which can be clearly seen in the manuscript.
John 20:30 Gasquet marks 'dis' of discipulis as no longer visible, but it can be made out from our images.
John 21:24 Gasquet does not record the hanging line and capital 'E', which can be clearly seen in the manuscript.


< Back to manuscript descriptions