Codex Sangallensis 18 (GA 0130): Gospel Undertext beneath Latin

The leaves survived in the Saint Gall library because they were recycled into a later manuscript. Their relationship to the separate Codex Sangallensis 48 is one of resemblance, not identity; the shelfmark 18 and GA 0130 secure this artifact’s distinct catalog record. The modern GA identifier and repository shelfmark are treated as complementary controls on identity: the first connects the object to international textual scholarship, while the second identifies the physical leaf or codex in its present collection. This is especially important where old catalogs divided leaves that belong together, joined fragments that later proved distinct, or used a nickname based on a collector rather than a place of production. The record therefore distinguishes recovery place, copying place, later custody, publication, and current location. Where the early route is undocumented, it remains unknown rather than being reconstructed from a later library label. Facsimiles and digital workspaces extend access, but the original parchment remains the archaeological object.

Seven palimpsest leaves preserve Mark 1:31–2:16 and portions of Luke 1–2 beneath a later Latin Vulgate text. The Greek writing is a Gospel undertext, not the visible main purpose of the reused medieval volume. Pages about 29.5 by 21.3 centimeters contain two columns of twenty-two large majuscule lines. Washing and scraping erased portions of the Greek before the Latin overtext was copied, leaving uneven legibility and physical scars from reuse. The dossier reads the writing surface as evidence alongside the copied words. Column count, line count, page size, ink, letter formation, nomina sacra, punctuation, corrections, commentary, pagination, reuse, and broken margins each answer different questions about production and use. A single photographed side cannot stand for every page of a lost codex, so the image caption identifies the exact role of the surviving leaf. The selected public-domain image depicts this manuscript itself rather than a generic scribe, modern painting, or unrelated Bible. Where fragments share a parent codex, they are consolidated into one interpretive record instead of being counted as independent artifacts.

The display date “Ninth-century Greek undertext; later Latin overtext” follows current catalog and palaeographic judgment. Letter shapes, ruling, page design, material, related dated hands, and publication history can narrow a range, but most of these manuscripts do not carry a copied colophon that supplies a modern calendar year. The artifact directly preserves Mark 1:31–45; Luke 1:20–31; Luke 2:24–48; that is a material connection to Scripture in the manuscript’s own historical period, not a claim that the leaf was present when the narrated events occurred. Later date does not automatically mean worthless text, and early date does not automatically make every reading original. Textual criticism weighs agreements, differences, corrections, scribal habits, translation, and genealogy passage by passage.