Read the line in red on the Codex Sinaiticus "square" script and "circular" script...
Greek PaleographyFrom Antiquity to the Renaissance [by T. Janz]
Biblical Majuscule
Biblical majuscule is so called because it is illustrated particularly in the great Bible manuscripts
of the fourth and fifth century such as
Codex Vaticanus (discussed below),
Codex Sinaiticus (currently dismembered and housed in various libraries but
viewable on line) and
Codex Alexandrinus (
British Library, Royal 1.D.VIII). However, it was in fact used for writing all kinds of sacred and secular texts, not only Bibles. It makes its first appearance in papyri of the 2nd century C.E. and continued in use alongside minuscule well into the minuscule era.
According to the description provided in Cavallo’s
book (mentioned in the
preceding page), this script, which does not present any particular difficulties for decipherment, is characterized by:
- a vertical axis;
- letters of regular size (or "module"), both vertically and horizontally;
- letter shapes which tend to fit into a square (so that letters such as epsilon, theta, omikron, sigma are circular);
- noticeable separation of individual strokes within each letter (especially in oblique strokes which meet at right angles, as those in the letters beta, kappa and mu; and in the triangular alpha made up of three distinct strokes and easily confused with both delta and lambda);
- a few specific strokes which regularly break out of the bilinear scheme (namely the descending strokes of ypsilon and rho, and the ascending and descending ones of phi and psi);
- a general lack of flourishes or serifs at the ends of the strokes;
- sophisticated stroke contrast with three levels of boldness in the strokes that compose a letter (thick, thin and intermediate), the vertical strokes being thick, the horizontal ones thin, and the oblique ones usually intermediate.
Biblical Majuscule includes both "square" and "circular" i.e. round (rotondo) characters.
You are welcome to show examples.
As pointed out on the other thread, the use of "rotondo" in Vitaliano's time, is no longer a valid objection, nor an obstacle to Vitaliano's description being the Codex Sinaiticus.
The Italian word "rotondo" comes from the Latin word
"rotundus".
It's interesting to note
the technical vocabulary used in Greek paleography
at the time.
Vitaliano Donati's
contemporary Bernard de Montfaucon's (
who's lives overlapped by 24 years) wrote in 1708:
Berard de Montfaucon
"Palaeographia Graeca, sive, De Ortu et Progressu Literarum Graecarum"
Paris, 1708
Lib. I
Pages 113-114
"Prisca vero scriptio AEgyptiaca , qualis habetur in Codice Alexandrino, nunc Anglicano, cum aliis paris circiter aetatis omnino conſentit in exemplaribus videlicet Charactere unciali quadro et rotundo, cujusmodi [Page 114] observatur in Codicibus
ante septimum et octavum saeculum exaratis."
Berard de Montfaucon
"Greek Palaeography, or, On the Rise and Development of Greek Literature"
Paris, 1708
Book 1
Pages 113-114
“But it is a genuine ancient Egyptian script, such as is found in the Codex Alexandrinus (now English [Or: "Anglican"]) which is consistent [Or: “completely agrees”] with all the other exemplars [Or: “copies”] of about the same age, viz in the square and round uncial characters,
such as [Page 114] is observed in the Codices written before the seventh and eighth centuries.”
Here we note that the Codex Alexandrinus is described in
the technical terms of the time as being written in BOTH:
"CHARACTERE UNCIALI QUANDRO ET ROTUNDO"
"THE SQUARE AND ROUND UNCIAL CHARACTERS"
For his time, Vitaliano's description was accurate!
After his time, and specifically, after the Codex Sinaiticus was discovered, different names for categories of Greek Uncial script were
invented and distinguished further than what was used in Vitaliano's time.
So, when taken in context, Vitaliano's use of Italian "rotondo"
was not inaccurate by the Greek paleographic standards of the day/time/age.
That interesting picture again for you Stevie...
You'd almost think the "rotundus" uncial script on the left was a lithograph of the Codex Sinaitiucs, wouldn't you Steven?