Fee’s data for Codex Sinaiticus as a “Western” witness in John 4:1-42

Group 1 — Singular Agreements

Of thirteen singular agreements between Sinaiticus and Bezae in John 4, ten of the thirteen occur in the passage covered by my study of Bezae’s layering in John 4:1-42. In the table below, I have replaced Fee’s apparatus with the data in my study, which covers more Greek witnesses, fewer Latin witnesses, no Syriac witnesses, Origen, and a selection of early Christian writers in Latin (Beuron abbreviations): [1]

4:9 D S* e a b d – ου γαρ συγχρωνται ιουδαιοι σαμαριταις c: S[D] + ου γαρ συνχρωνται ιουδαιοι σαμαρειταις
4:11 D S a b d e ff  [2] – ουν post ποθεν
4:14 Cy D S* a b d ff c ο δε πινων <- ως δ’αν πιη c: S[Ca] ος δ αν πιη
4:17 D S e b d r ff c Her/y εχεις <- εχω
4:24 D S* d ff Her/y – αυτον c: S[Ca] + αυτον
4:24 Hil D S* a d r Her/n προσκυνειν δει <- δει προσκυνειν c: S[Ca] δει προσκυνιν
4:27 D S* d r εν <- επι (_ τουτω) c: S[Ca] επι
4:27 D S 1654 a b d r ff  [3] + αυτω (ειπεν _)
4:38 (no retroversion) απεσταλκα <- απεστειλα
4:42 D S* b d r Her-y σην μαρτυριαν <- σην λαλιαν c: S[Ca] λαλιαν

Group 2 — Sparsely-Attested Agreements

Fee mentions seven additional variants with relatively sparse Greek support, five of which are attested in John 4:1-42. Four involve an explicit agreement between Bezae and Sinaiticus: [4]

4:1 P66 D S Θ 1 35 565 1010 1241 1293 e a b d r ff c ιησους <- κυριος
4:14 Hil D S 33 213 397 1010 1071 1241 1242 1293 2561 a b d + εγω (_ δωσω)
4:17 D S C L 597 1241 2786 d r ανδρα ουκ εχω <- ουκ εχω ανδρα
4:25 (no retroversion) αναγγελλει <- αναγγελει c: S[Ca] αναγγελει

Fee plausibly suggests that Bezae and Sinaiticus share a common tradition at the following variant in 4:42, where both readings have a genitive nuance after the verb ακουω, despite the explicit difference in their readings: [5]

αυτοι γαρ ακηκοαμεν P66 P75 A B C W Byz pl
αυτου γαρ ακηκοαμεν = (?) αυτοι γαρ ακηκοαμεν παρ’ αυτου D a = (?) S Π2 565 λ φ pc

[1] G. D. Fee, “Codex Sinaiticus in the Gospel of John: A Contribution to Methodology in Establishing Textual Relationships,” New Testament Studies 15 (1968) 23–44 at 32.

[2] My data erroneously reads S q r c for S e a b d ff.

[3] The witness of 1654 shows that this is no longer a “singular” S-D agreement.

[4] Fee, “Sinaiticus,” 32.

[5] Fee, “Sinaiticus,” 33.