This library is built in the open.
If you spot an error, have a suggestion, or just want to say hello — we’d love to hear from you.

...I cannot explain. I collated|The process of comparing a manuscript word-for-word against a known text to identify differences. the little book On the Creation of the World original Greek: περὶ κοσμοποιίας / Peri kosmopoiias in Florence in the summer of 1887; Friedrich Hanssen most kindly permitted me to compare my collation with his own; the readings noted by him and omitted by me, or those differing from my collation, I have indicated with the mark M^h in the critical apparatus|The section of a scholarly book that lists the different ways various manuscripts record the same passage..
Judging the nature of Codex M is a task full of difficulty. For it shows a double face, so to speak, since it presents sometimes an excellent and genuine text, and sometimes one that is corrupted and extremely faulty. Indeed, the scribe seems to have accurately copied the version he was using; because of this, I believe the form of Philo’s text shown in Codex M is actually much older than the scribe’s own time. It seems to me that the archetype|The now-lost original manuscript from which other surviving copies were made. from which this manuscript was derived was an ancient book of the highest quality, not unlike Codex V. Certain notable errors in Codex M demonstrate that this original source was written in uncial script|A style of writing using only capital letters, common in ancient manuscripts., and that in it, individual words were not always separated, nor were they distinguished by accents or other marks. This lack of spacing led the scribe to misread the letters:
For example:
What I have said regarding the excellence of the original source and its similarity to Codex V is most strongly confirmed by many superior readings in the first part of the treatise On the Creation of the World, where M is the only manuscript to agree with Codex V: compare 11,14 withered original: ἀφαυανθεῖσαν; 18,1 to the original: τοῖς; 21,16 leaving incomplete original: ἀτελῆ καταλιπών; 26,15 let us make original: ποιήσωμεν; 28,13 in which all original: ἐν αἷς ἅπασαν; 28,16 the images original: τὰς εἰκόνας; 29,1 directly original: ἄντικρυς; 29,4 of the soul original: ψυχῆς; 29,16 of farmers original: γεωπόνων; 29,19 having been brought upon original: ἐπενεχθείσης; 30,12 let it be said original: λελέχθω; 31,2 the natures original: τὰς φύσεις; 32,4 having been bridled original: χαλιναγωγηθείς; 32,21 in hands original: ἐν χερσί; 33,1 of the perfect original: τελείου. Therefore, in the later part of the text, where we are deprived of the assistance of Codex V, it is reasonable that the quality of Codex M shines forth all the more. And indeed, a large harvest of good...