searching Tischendorf, Swete, Jongkind et al for אc.a. or C.a. - Tischendorf affinity in Psalms and out? - script features

[Steven Avery]

Swete

Zwinglius - Jim West

How Many Scribes Worked on Codex א

In the text of א Tischendorf distinguishes the hands of four original scribes. To one (A), who wrote nearly the whole of the N. T., he assigns the fragments of Genesis and of 1 Chronicles, 1 Maccab…

zwingliusredivivus.wordpress.com

The second and third (אc.a, אc.b) are correctors of the seventh century, and throughout the MS., more especially in the O. T., are the prevailing hands; the former stands alone in the poetical Books, the latter predominates in the Prophets.

 

[Steven Avery]

Jongkind on Ca
p. 10-11

All the corrections are ascribed to one of the following correctors: A (contemporary, scribe D), B (described as a vir doctus), Ba (appearance
somewhere in between A and B), and the series Ca, Cb, Cc, and Cc* (the last in Revelation only). Later and unimportant correction hands are D and E.

Question: What books have Ca ??

The various C

Scrivener Full Collation xxiii

p. 12
Regarding the identity of the various C correctors, Lake notes that the ink of the author of extensive notes appended to Esther and Ezra shows the same reddish ink as that of the NT Ca corrector, but he does not believe the hands to be identical.

p. 17
TOYTO.
The group of C correctors is increased by Milne and Skeat.33 The Ca
corrector is identified along the same lines as Tischendorf had done, and
· Cpamph is also recognised in agreement with Lake.

33 Milne-Skeat, 46-50.

pp. 146
Milne and Skeat give the following translation: "At the sign of the
three crosses, is the end of the seven leaves which are superfluous and not
part of Esdras".35 We find these three crosses placed at the bottom of the
column (line 48) instead of next to line 26. However, in the margin before
line 26, one or two partially erased crosses are still visible. Milne and Skeat
observe rightly that the current note is not by the hand of corrector Ca and
must be later, though it still belongs to the seventh or eighth century. What
remains visible of the first version of the note is enough to show that it
does not come from the hand of any of the earliest correctors and must
come from after the scriptorium stage. As the original place of the one or
two crosses has been erased, this is the second version of the note. Milne
and Skeat suggest that the reason why the note and the crosses were
replaced might have been that the note spoke of seven leaves and was,
apparently, later interpreted as seven full leaves.