Codex Vaticanus Now Online (and Other Links)


I was alerted to this by this blogpost right here. The 4th century Codex Vaticanus is now available for online viewing.

And since we’re talking about biblical manuscripts, version and texts here, I might as well give other links I know of. I appreciate folks adding more.


Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts:

Codex Sinaiticus:
Codex Bezae:
Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus:
Codex Alexandrinus (New Testament only): and

Various NT papyri:
The Rylands papyri collection (includes some biblical papyri):
(Papyrus 52 - oldest NT fragment:
Chester Beatty Library NT papyri:
New Testament Virtual Manuscript Room:
Institute for New Testament Textual Research:

The Hexapla: (Vol. I) and (Vol. II)
The Septuagint Sessions (podcast):
Septuagint Resources:
Papyrus 967 (Old Greek Daniel, Esther): (includes critical editions such as the Nestle-Aland NT and the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia):

Hebrew / Aramaic

The Dead Sea Scrolls: and
The Aleppo Codex (10th century, Masoretic): and
The Leningrad Codex (AD 1008-1009, Masoretic): and
Codex Cairensis (AD 895, Prophets, Masoretic):
Samaritan Pentateuch (part of an interlinear):

(Manuscripts from the Cairo Geniza)
The Friedberg Jewish Manuscript Society:
Princeton Geniza Project:
Taylor-Schechter Genizah Research Unit:
Penn/Cambridge Genizah Fragment Project: (Aramaic Targumim):
The Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon Project (Aramaic texts):


Vetus Latina - Resources for the study of the Old Latin Bible:
The Vetus Latina Institute:
Old-Latin Biblical Texts (1886, Mark, Matthew, from various Vetus Latina Manuscripts):
Vetus Latina Iohannes (Vetus Latina manuscripts of John):
Bibliorum sacrorum latinae versiones antiquae, seu Vetus italica (1743):

Codex Amiatinus New Testament (earliest surviving complete manuscript of the Vulgate, transcription):
Codex Gigas (13th century):
Gutenberg Bible (British Library):
The Clementine Vulgate Project:



Thank you Patrick457.

Nice work.

God bless.





Now I’ll provide links to specific manuscripts – mainly the more famous / interesting ones. Even those who can’t read Greek or Hebrew can still at least enjoy looking at them. New Testament first:

Papyrus 52: (ca. early-to-mid 2nd c.) Our earliest undisputed NT fragment; contains John 18:31-33, 37-38.

Papyrus 66: (ca. 200) Our earliest substantially complete manuscript of John’s gospel.

Papyrus 75: (ca. 175-225) Contains text of Luke’s gospel followed by John.

Papyrus 104: (late 2nd century): Contains Matthew 21:34-37, 43, 45. Counts as one of the earliest witnesses to Matthew’s gospel.

Papyrus 04, 64 and 67: (late 2nd-early 3rd c.) P64 and 67 are small fragments from Matthew’s gospel, while P4 is a manuscript of Luke. Similarities in handwriting leads many scholars to believe that both papyri were written by the same scribe and could have even come from the same manuscript. Papyrus 64 in particular is also known under the monicker of the ‘Magdalen papyri’, after the library it is housed in (Magdalen College, Oxford). Notable because of the controversial claim by the late paleographer Carsten Peter Thiede that these fragments - or rather, only the Matthew fragments - should be dated to the 1st century. (A bit of a shameless plug here, but I’ll refer the reader to my own thread on the issue: Even without Thiede’s claim, the fragments still rank among the earliest NT manuscripts found so far. (Information on P4) (Information on P64-67) (pictures of P64)

Papyrus 46: (ca. 175-225) Contains most of the Pauline epistles (some pages now missing): Romans (last eight chapters), Hebrews, 1-2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Galatians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians (first two chapters), in that order.

Papyrus 45: (ca. 250) Originally contained all four gospels and Acts (manuscript is currently heavily damaged and fragmented). Notable for the fact that this is our only surviving text of Mark’s gospel that predates the 4th century; all of the other surviving manuscripts of Mark are from the 4th century or later. (No surprise here, Mark was the least-popular and least-used of the four gospels among the early Christians.)

Papyrus 47: (3rd c.) One of the earliest manuscripts we have of Revelation.

Papyrus 115: (3rd-4th c.) Another early papyrus of Revelation. Notable for being one of the handful of manuscripts which give the number of the beast as 616 (six hundred sixteen), instead of 666 (six hundred sixty-six) attested in most other manuscripts.


I wish I could read Greek. :frowning:


Amazing. Guess they weren’t kidding about releasing all those ancient documents some years ago.

Thank you, internet.

And thank you, Patrick!


You’re welcome. :smiley: I have another link:

New Testament Transcripts (Prototype): A transcription of various NT manuscripts.

And here’s a few more early (in other words, pre-4th century) papyri:

Papyrus 77 and Papyrus 103: (2nd-3rd century) Two more quite early fragments of Matthew’s gospel. Paleographer and NT scholar Philip Comfort had deemed that these two papyri could have come from the same manuscript.

(Papyrus 77) (Wikipedia)—0POxy–00-0-0–0prompt-10—4----ded–0-1l–1-en-50—20-about-2683–00031-001-1-0utfZz-8-00&a=d&c=POxy&cl=search&d=HASH015d3359431f135f32f60a99

(Papyrus 103) (Wikipedia)

Papyrus 90: (late 2nd century) Yet another papyri of John’s gospel. Out of the four gospels (in fact, out of early Christian literature in general), John’s is the most-attested one among the papyri, followed by Matthew. (12-16 papyri of John that predate the 4th century and 12 of Matthew, compared to 7 of Luke and 1 of Mark.)—0POxy–00-0-0–0prompt-10—4------0-1l–1-en-50—20-about-3523–00031-001-1-0utfZz-8-00&a=d&c=POxy&cl=search&d=HASH4ba24737966a84d10be02b

Papyrus 98: (2nd century) A papyrus fragment of Revelation (1:13-2:1); one of the four or five manuscripts of Revelation that predate the 4th century. The text is written on a ‘recycled’ papyrus (the other side of the fragment contains another text from the late 1st-2nd century).

I’ve already given the links to the so-called ‘four great uncials’ - Sinaiticus (א), Vaticanus (B), Alexandrinus (A), Ephraemi © - plus Codex Bezae (D) in the OP, so I won’t repeat that here.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit