I should weary you, my dear student, if I were to take you through all the evidence which I could amass upon this disagreement with one another,—this Concordia discors. But I would invite your attention for a moment to a few points which being specimens may indicate the continued divisions upon Orthography which subsist between the Old Uncials and their frequent errors. And first96, how [pg 085] do they write the “Mary's” of the Gospels, of whom in strictness there are but three?

“The Mother of Jesus97,” as most of us are aware, was not “Mary” (?a??a) at all; but “Mariam” (?a???),—a name strictly identical with that of the sister of Moses98. We call her “Mary” only because the Latins invariably write her name “Maria.” So complete an obliteration of the distinction between the name of the blessed Virgin—and that of (1) her sister, Mary the wife of Clopas99, of (2) Mary Magdalene, and of (3) Mary the sister of Lazarus, may be deplored, but it is too late to remedy the mischief by full 1800 years. The question before us is not that; but only—how far the distinction between “Mariam” and “Maria” has been maintained by the Greek copies?

Now, as for the cursives, with the memorable exception of Evann. 1 and 33,—which latter, because it is disfigured by more serious blunders than any other copy written in the cursive character, Tregelles by a mauvaise plaisanterie designates as “the queen of the cursives,”—it may be said at once that they are admirably faithful. Judging from the practice of fifty or sixty which have been minutely [pg 086] examined with this view, the traces of irregularity are so rare that the phenomenon scarcely deserves notice. Not so the old uncials. Cod. B, on the first occasion where a blunder is possible100 (viz. in St. Matt. i. 20), exhibits ?a??a instead of ?a???:—so does Cod. C in xiii. 55,—Cod. D in St. Luke i. 30, 39, 56: ii. 5, 16, 34,—Codd. CD in St. Luke by ?BC, in St. Matt. i. 34, 38, 46,—Codd. B?D, in ii. 19.

On the other hand, the Virgin's sister (?a??a), is twice written ?a???: viz. by C, in St. Matt xxvii. 56; and by ?, in St. John xix. 25:—while Mary Magdalene is written ?a??? by “the five old uncials” no less than eleven times: viz. by C, in St. Matt. xxvii. 56,—by ?, in St. Luke xxiv. 10, St. John xix. 25, xx. 11,—by A, in St. Luke viii. 2,—by ?A, in St. John xx. 1,—by ?C, in St. Matt. xxviii. 1,—by ?B, in St. John xx. 16 and 18,—by BC, in St. Mark xv. 40,—by ?BC, in St. Matt. xxvii. 61.

Lastly, Mary (?a??a) the sister of Lazarus, is called ?a??? by Cod. B in St. Luke x. 42: St. John xi. 2: xii. 3;—by BC, in St. Luke xi. 32;—by ?C, in St. Luke x. 39.—I submit that such specimens of licentiousness or inattention are little calculated to conciliate confidence in Codd. B?CD. It is found that B goes wrong nine times: D, ten (exclusively in respect of the Virgin Mary): C, eleven: ?, twelve.—Evan. 33 goes wrong thirteen times: 1, nineteen times.—A, the least corrupt, goes wrong only twice.