Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a24b5feadc85258a

Jump to content

Talk:Garima Gospels

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 1 month ago by Llywrch in topic Text of the Gospels

Oxford Conference November 2013

[edit]

a report and resume of the conference proceedings is published here: http://www.ethiopianheritagefund.org/Ethiopia%20and%20the%20Mediterranean%20World%20in%20Late%20Antiquity-%20bausi%20review.pdf

Conference programme is here: http://www.ethiopianheritagefund.org/conference.html

In my view this is sufficient academic publication for a rewrite of the article on the lines of Prof. Bausi's resume. "The dating of Abbā Garimā 2 in particular would also make it the most ancient Christian manuscript decorated with paintings, even older than the famous Rabbula Four Gospels book of the Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana of Firenze" TomHennell (talk) 17:39, 4 February 2014 (UTC)Reply

The wide range is caused by combining two ranges, one for each manuscript. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.144.71.8 (talk) 12:06, 5 February 2014 (UTC)Reply
I suppose the argument would be that the Codex Washingtonianus is not itself illustrated; rather it is the covers that are painted. While the Codex Alexandrinus has decorative tailpieces rather than full-page miniatures. A more precise counter-example might be the Cotton Genesis - if this is assumed to be a Christian manuscript. But the statement in the article is simply a quote from the source. TomHennell (talk) 12:14, 5 February 2014 (UTC)Reply
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Garima Gospels. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:27, 8 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Gärima

[edit]

If "Gärima" is the correct spelling, then both this page and Abba Garima Monastery should be re-titled (or at least have a note added). Placing a few diaereses in the article without explanation just confuses the reader. Srnec (talk) 02:17, 18 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Text of the Gospels

[edit]

Because of the early date of these manuscripts, the character of their texts would be of interest; that is, which one of the four text types do they belong (i.e. Western, Alexandrian, Caesarian, Byzantine), which important readings do they witness, etc. However, this issue is passed over lightly -- "a version of the Byzantine Text that differs from the later Majority Text" -- & provides no details about the more interesting variants. Although due to the quality of the translation into Ge'ez the amount of useful detail is necessarily limited, something can be said about the more important variants. For example, which ending to the Gospel of Mark do these manuscripts witness, & the Pericope Adulterae. (I will admit that information on these points is scarce. I have looked for information about the text of the Garima Gospels, & found nothing more than that terse statement.) -- llywrch (talk) 16:37, 15 June 2026 (UTC)Reply