In 1892, the twins travelled from their home in Cambridge to Cairo, then made their way for nine days on foot and by camel across one of the world's more inhospitable deserts. Arid plains gave way to limestone ridges, maze-like wadis and, finally, the brutal 7,000ft peaks of the Mount Sinai range. Agnes, the travel writer of the pair, had no complaint to make about the journey other than that the camel's rolling gait disturbed her reading of the Psalms in Hebrew.I don't believe the second century date. I doubt that the earlier Syriac text would be any earlier than the fourth century, and this seems to be right.
Since Tischendorf's escapades, the monks had tended to greet visitors with a volley of stones, thrown down from the vast fortified walls. But Agnes saw only a spiritual oasis; she likened it to a dove hiding in a cleft of the rocks. Respect for the sisters' sex ensured a welcome, and their tents were soon pitched in the monastery garden, close to “the well of Moses” and the original burning bush.
Agnes dared to ask to see the oldest Syriac manuscripts and, in a dimly lit chamber, she found the promised chests. One harboured a dirty, damaged volume whose parchment pages had to be steamed apart using the twins' travel kettle. Faint beneath the main 7th-century text were two columns of older underwriting. Agnes's Syriac studies meant that she could read the headings: “Of Matthew”, “Of Luke”.
Agnes had found and recognised one of the earliest New Testament manuscripts yet discovered, its text dating to the 2nd century. ...
Cross file under Aramaic Watch.
UPDATE (24 March): Stephen C. Carlson e-mails:
It is not super clear, but perhaps the author is making a distinction between the age of a manuscript and the age of its text. The manuscript itself is late fourth / early fifth century, but its text could be as early as the late second depending on when the translation into Syriac was made.I suppose that could be what it means. But if so, then no, it isn't very clear.
