362 Clarence Russell Williams, 



2. All the peculiarities of S are tound in J*ap. Rylands 28 as well 

 as in B, a remarkable fact which suggests that these three MSS came 

 from the same scriptorium. 



II. Orthographical : 



1. The spelling of xpa[ijbaTO? asKPAliAI\T( )- ten out of the eleven 

 times where it occurs in X agrees with w^itnesses exclusively Egyptian, 

 both of an earlier and later date than this MS. 



2. The spelling of 'I(7pa7i}.£iTYj? as IIAPAHAEITHI eight out of 

 the nine times it occurs in the N.T. in S is common to the Old Latin, 

 both European and African, but in Greek codices it appears to be 

 found only in N and in B, in the latter in the form ISTPAHAEITHl. 

 This was one of the supports of WH theory of the Western prove- 

 nance of these MSS, but this spelling is also found in the papyri of 

 Egypt. "Thus the evidence for the spelling in Egypt is probably as 

 early as any that can be adduced in Latin, and even if it be ultima- 

 tely aLatinism it affords no argument against the Egyptian prove- 

 nance of any individual MS." 



III. The four column page of N suggests close relationship with the 

 pap3'ri. In fact Scrivener declares that "either S or its immediate 

 prototype must have been derived from a papyrus exemplar, probably- 

 of Egyptian origin." 



IV. "The remarkable similarity subsisting between the hands of 

 the scribes who added the superscription to Acts in both MSS" in- 

 dicates either the same scribe or two scribes in the same scriptorium ; 

 Prof. Lake is inclined to believe the latter. Now as Egyptian Papyrus 

 Rylands 28 agrees with J< and B" in practically the only palaeo- 

 graphical pecularities they present" it seems most probable that these 

 three MSS all came from the same scriptorium, and Rylands 28 indi- 

 cates that it was in Egypt. 



V. There is an extraordinary resemblance between the Psalms 

 in the Coptic text of the Pistis Sophia and the text of »S in the 

 Psalms. 



VI. That the text of NB represents the recension of Hesychius lias 

 been argued byBousset, and accepted by von Soden and many Ger- 

 man scholars, but to some English scholars this does not seem to rest 

 on a very solid foundation. 



VII. No non-Alexandrian writer has been found who used the " Neu- 

 tral" text, in spite of the contention of WH that this text, though 

 connected with Alexandria, was not confined to it. 



VIII. The archetype of B contained the epistles in an order found 

 elsewhere only in the Sahidic Version. It may therefore be inferred 

 tliat this was the Old Egyptian or Alexandrian order. This however 



