A fragment of the Book of Revelation in the Taylor-Schechter Genizah Collection (T-S AS 177.202)

hymnary of

Rabbanite scholar Saadia Gaon's (d.330/942) Tafsīr of the Pentateuch and revisions of it are widely attested in manuscripts of Coptic provenance. 2 The Christian Arabic Bible translations from the Cairo Genizah give the reverse perspective.Jews from Fusṭāṭ owned and later deposited in their genizot parts of codices that contained e.g.Christian Arabic translations of the Book of Psalms and the Pentateuch (including the Coptic recension of the Tafsīr) as well as liturgical manuscripts with major portions from the Old Testament. 3ewish interest in the Christian Old Testament can be accounted for as an instance of an awareness of a shared scriptural heritage.But Jewish readers were also intrigued by the sacred scriptures of non-Jews that did not overlap with their own.In the case of Christianity, this is evidenced by the fragments of the New Testament in the Cairo Genizah.
Two examples come from Copto-Arabic lectionaries (T-S 52.219 and T-S Ar. 52.220). 4he first contains pericopes from various books of the New Testament (John, Acts, Hebrews, 1 Corinthians) and the Psalms.The second is particularly fascinating.It is a reworked Holy Week lectionary (T-S Ar. 52.220) with readings from the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John), the Pauline Epistles (Galatians), the Psalms, and parts of a homily (Dionysius of Alexandria [?]). 5 The text is transcribed in Judaeo-Arabic and partly vocalised using Tiberian vowel signs.According to Kristina Szilágyi who first contextualised this fragment and highlighted its importance, it is ‚far from being a hasty copy: it is written very carefully, the unusual words being provided with full Arabic vocalization‛. 6This shows that Jews undoubtedly took an interest in lectionaries as such, i.e. as witnesses to the celebration of liturgy rather than witnesses to biblical texts.But it may also indicate curiosity about how exactly biblical texts were used in a liturgical context.
Apart from these lectionary fragments, two further fragments of Christian Arabic New Testament manuscripts can now be added to the corpus of Christian Arabic Bible translations in the Cairo Genizah.Their shelfmarks are T-S Misc.27.4.24b and T-S AS 177.202.Both are in the database of the Princeton Geniza Project since 2022.On 6 May 2022, images of the first were posted on the official social media account of the Princeton Geniza Lab (PGL), run by Alan Elbaum, and identified subsequently in a collective effort as containing portions of the Gospel of John, chapter 19.The fragment, probably dating from the tenth century, was then subjected to a more thorough study by Juan Pedro 2 See Ronny Vollandt, Arabic Versions of the Pentateuch: A Comparative Study of Jewish, Christian and Muslim Sources, Biblia Arabica, 2 (Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2015), pp.67-70; esp.p. 69: ‚The Tafsīr was in heavy use until recent times and accorded something of a canonical status.This is clear not only from the sheer number of surviving manuscripts, but also-and all the more so-in light of the frequency with which it was revised, augmented, and adorned with prefaces, short treatises and commentaries by Coptic scholars‛.
Monferrer-Sala who narrowed down the text as John 19:24-29 and 34-38 and showed that the translation is based on a Syriac Vorlage with possible influence from a Greek base-text. 7mages of the second fragment were posted on the same account on 12 May 2023.Elbaum had already identified it as a fragment of the Book of Revelation.The aim of what follows is to offer a description of T-S AS 177.202 and discuss its text.I would like to express my gratitude to Sarah Sykes of the Taylor-Schechter Genizah Research Unit and to Dr Ben Outhwaite, the head of the Genizah Research Unit, who provided me with images of the fragment. 8These are reproduced below with the kind permission of the Syndics of Cambridge University Library.

Description
Provenance and date: The fragment is part of the Taylor-Schechter Cairo Genizah Collection at Cambridge University Library.Hence, it is one of the roughly 200,000 fragments that Solomon Schechter (1847-1915) brought from Cairo to Cambridge with the financial support of Charles Taylor (1840-1908) in 1896/7.9It is impossible to say when exactly the fragment was deposited in the genizah of the Ben Ezra Synagogue.We may venture a terminus post quem though.The earliest date that might be assigned to the fragment on palaeographical grounds is the eleventh century CE.Its text is of Coptic provenance, which means that the original manuscript to which the fragment used to belong could have been produced and used in close proximity to the Jewish community of the Cairo Genizah.
Codicology: The fragment preserves the recto and verso of one folio.The writing support is paper.It is torn on all sides and measures in its present state 77,5×70 mm, exhibiting six lines of text on each side.The top preserves an empty margin of ca. 10 mm.The bottom with approximately one line and supposedly an empty margin is missing.Accordingly, the manuscript's original dimensions were roughly 100×80-90 mm.There are no indications of a liturgical use.Hence, the fragment comes from a rather small booklet that originally could have served a personalised use.The colour of the ink that was used is black-brown (probably iron-gall).
Palaeography: The script is a clear Nasḫī with sporadic iʿǧām and taškīl.The earliest date that might be assigned to it is the eleventh century CE.This makes the fragment the oldest known manuscript witness of a Coptic version of the Book of Revelation.For comparison, of the known manuscripts containing this version, the majority (six) was written in the 18th 7 J.P. Monferrer-Sala, ‚A fragment of the Gospel of John‛.century.Additionally, we have four manuscripts from the 19th, two from the 17th, four from the 16th, one from the 15th, and three from the 14th century (see below).On the verso, the scribe had to correct the text twice.In l. 1, the word ‫ابد‬ is written above the first few letters of ‫الابدىن‬ ‫الى‬ to correct the phrase to ‫الابدىن‬ ‫ابد‬ ‫.الى‬In l. 4, two crosses are used as annotational signs above the words ‫ان‬ and ‫جد‬ ‫الم‬ to indicate that something is missing from the phrase ‫جد‬ ‫الم‬ ‫ىكون‬ ‫.ان‬The missing expression ‫لك‬ was supposedly supplied in the margin.
Text: The text preserved on this fragment is Revelation 4:5-7 (recto) and 4:9-5:1 (verso), part of Chapter 9 in the Coptic tradition.Below follows a diplomatic transcription and English translation.

Translation
Recto lines [4:5] [...] rumblings, and thunder, and seven lamps [a fire …] [...] God's seven spirits. [6]And in front of A. This text, in Graf's words, ‚follows the Bohairic version in an accurate and faithful rendering‛. 14Following the conventions established in more recent scholarship on Arabic Bible translations, the translation preserved in our fragment is an independent translation (version) on the basis of a Bohairic Vorlage. 15We may dub it Arab Copt 1.This version has been printed a number of times, including also in the third volume of the Biblia Sacra Arabica (1671), but as with so many Arabic versions of biblical books there exists no critical edition. 16The text is the same that the Coptic scholar Ibn Kātib Qayṣar (fl.ca.1250) used in his commentary on the Book of Revelation, Kitāb Šarḥ ar-Ruʾyā. 17It was also used in an anonymous Copto-Arabic commentary on Revelation. 18he In general, this comparison corroborates Graf's estimation that Arab Copt 1 faithfully follows the Bohairic text.We can make the following observations with regard to the translation technique: Syntax: The common word order in Arabic verbal clauses is Verb-Subject-Object. 22 In some instances, however, the Arabic translator followed the sentence structure Subject-Verb-Object, as found in the Coptic text, e.g.recto l. 3: [...] [za]ǧāǧ yušabbihu l-ǧalīd = [...] ⲙ︦ ⲃⲁϫⲏⲓⲛⲓ ⲉϥⲟⲛⲓ ⲛ︦ ⲟⲩⲭⲣⲓⲥⲧⲁⲗⲟⲥ (‚[...] glass resembling ice‛); l. 5: wa-l-ḥayawān aṯ-ṯānī yušabbihu aṯ[-ṯawr] = ⲟⲩⲟϩ ⲡⲓⲍⲱⲟⲛ ⲙ︦ ⲙⲁϩⲃ︦ ⲉϥⲟⲛⲓ ⲛ︦ ⲟⲩⲙⲁⲥⲓ (‚and the second creature resembles the ox‛).In one case, however, this close adherence to the sentence structure of the Vorlage is not followed: recto l. 2 has wa-quddām (‚and in front of‛), whereas the Coptic text reads ⲟⲩⲟϩ ⲉϥⲭⲏ ⲙ︦ ⲡⲉⲙⲑⲟ (‚and there is in front of‛).The verbal expression ⲉϥⲭⲏ was probably left untranslated (cp.Erp.: wa-raʾaytu quddām, ‚and I saw in front of‛).It is noteworthy that the Arabic translator has resorted to using participles where the Coptic text has relative clauses: verso l. 1 and 6: ⲫⲏ ⲉⲧϩⲉⲙⲥⲓ (lit.‚that one who sits‛) = al-ǧālis; ibid.: ⲫⲏ ⲉⲧⲟⲛϧ (lit.‚that one who lives‛) = al-ḥayy.In one case, the relative clause is translated by a corresponding noun: verso l. 5: ⲡⲉⲧⲉϩⲛⲁⲕ (lit.‚that which You will‛) = mašīʾatika.In another case, it is translated by a verbal expression: verso l. 4: ⲛ︦ ⲑⲟⲕ ⲉⲧⲉⲙⲡϣⲁ (lit.‚You who are worthy‛) = tastaḥiqqu.

Concluding remarks
Our fragment testifies to the interest of the Cairo Genizah community in Christian Arabic translations of the Bible, especially of New Testament books.This interest, in fact, led to the preservation of the earliest known manuscript witness (or fragment thereof) of Arab Copt 1.This version was in use among Coptic Christians and appears in manuscripts as an independent text as well as together with the Bohairic text or Arabic commentaries.Our fragment comes from a small booklet, which was probably used for private study.It must have been used with a similar intention by its later Jewish possessor(s).If it was studied for scholarly purposes or -as Szilágyi and Vollandt have suggested with respect to other Christian Arabic Bible manuscripts in the Cairo Genizah -even for polemical purposes, 23 is hard to tell and requires further research into the Jewish reception of the New Testament, especially the Book of Revelation, in a premodern arabophone Egyptian context.As for the Christian side, it should be noted that the Book of Revelation, not part of the NT canon in 23 See the remarks made with respect to T-S Ar. 52.220 in F. Niessen, ‚New testament translations‛, p. 213: ‚the reason for a Judaeo-Arabic transcription of a Coptic-Christian lectionary has not necessarily to be found in a polemical context as if its only purpose was to provide the source or raw-material for possible Jewish anti-Christian polemics.Ruling out the merely academic interest in comparative liturgical studies, the careful handwriting of the fragment suggests that it belonged to a book or booklet used for the services on Good Friday.The reason for the existence of a Judaeo-Arabic lectionary may be found in the fact that a Jewish convert to Coptic Christianity relied on a Judaeo-Arabic version of the biblical readings for the Holy Week.The Hebrew characters with which he was more familiar, would have enabled him to follow the readings more easily than a text written in Arabic characters‛.
all Eastern Christian churches, did not share the fate of other translations from Bohairic, which were later often supplanted by translations made from other base-texts.The textual history of the Christian Arabic translations of Revelation still awaits detailed scrutiny.In any event, it will have to take into account the reception history of this text as well, including the reception of non-Christian communities, for which the fragment discussed here offers important testimony.

8I
would like to express my gratitude also to the following persons who offered support in various ways while I was preparing the present note: Marina Rustow, Alan Elbaum, and Alexander Simonov.
19llowing comparison of the Arabic text of our fragment with the Bohairic version edited by George William Horner allows us to more clearly appreciate the relation between the Arabic translation and its Coptic Vorlage:19