The Sinai Palimpsests Project is a major international scholarly and technological initiative aimed at recovering erased texts from palimpsest manuscripts housed at St. Catherine’s Monastery, located at the foot of Mount Sinai in Egypt—the world’s oldest continually operating monastery.
Copyright, Robert Clifton Robinson
The Objective of the The Sinai Palimpsests Project:
Spectral imaging and recovery: Utilizing state-of-the-art multispectral and backlighting technologies to make undertexts—once considered lost—legible again.
Identification of erased texts: Scholars have identified hundreds of previously unknown or little-studied texts dating from the 5th to the 12th century.
Digital access and scholarship: Developing an online, open-access digital library to make these recovered texts globally available to scholars and the public.
The Project Timeline
Duration: The core imaging work occurred between approximately 2011 and 2016, involving numerous expeditions to the monastery.
Coverage: Out of over 160 known palimpsests at the monastery, about 74 manuscripts (totaling approximately 6,800 pages) were imaged.
Results: From these, scholars identified up to 305 erased texts, many of which were entirely new discoveries or the oldest surviving witnesses of known works.
Important Discoveries
Linguistic diversity: Texts were found in a remarkable variety of languages—Christian Palestinian Aramaic, Caucasian Albanian, Ethiopic, Slavonic, Armenian, and Latin—shedding light on the wide-reaching connections of the monastery in the medieval world.
Christian Palestinian Aramaic: The project significantly expanded known corpus of this rare language by about 30%.
Genre variety: The recovered undertexts include biblical writings (e.g., early versions of Corinthians, the book of Numbers), medical treatises (including Hippocratic and pharmacological manuscripts), secular literature—like an illustrated fictional text—and possible musical notation for ancient chants.
Unexpected finds: One of the most important literary results involved fragments of a previously unknown epic poem about the childhood of Dionysus, in hexameter, dating to the 5th–6th centuries CE.
Why This Matters
As a biblical scholar and apologist, I find this especially compelling:
Historical context: The project uncovers textual witnesses that predate or complement canonical texts—offering new angles for examining manuscript traditions and transmission.
Forensic and paleographic insight: Revealing previously hidden layers of writing is akin to archaeological excavation for the biblical record—textually and materially.
Relevance in the broader intellectual world: The multilingual breadth of texts paints a vivid picture of how St. Catherine’s Monastery functioned as a crossroads of Christian and cultural interaction in late antiquity and the Middle Ages.
Giving public access and scholarship: This digital library greatly accelerates access to these sources, and it is a treasury for research, teaching, and apologetics alike. This research helps us confirm the historical eyewitness reliability of the New Testament narrative about Jesus.
What Does The Actual Recovered Texts Say, And How Does This Alleged Gospel Compare To The Four Gospels We Already Have?
What the recovered Sinai palimpsest texts actually say (selected, concrete examples) The Old Syriac Matthew fragment (found via the Sinai Palimpsests Project; published 2023).
What was recovered: Matthew 11:30–12:26 in Old Syriac (the “Old Syriac” Gospel tradition predating the Peshitta). The text stands very close to the Curetonianus (Sy c).
Only one clear wording difference: where the standard Greek of Matt 12:1 reads that the disciples “began to pick the heads of grain and eat,” the Old Syriac fragment adds that they “rub[bed] them in their hands” (i.e., a clarifying detail).
What is the significance: This recent discovery is not a new or different gospel, but an early translation witness of the already existing canonical Matthew, likely translated in the 3rd century and copied in the 6th; it is the fourth known witness to the Old Syriac Gospels.
Caucasian Albanian palimpsests (NF 13, NF 55) — lectionary + Gospel of John
What these texts contain: fragments of a lectionary and portions of the Gospel of John translated into the now-extinct Caucasian Albanian (Old Udi), probably 7th century. The translation shows dependence chiefly on Old Armenian with influence from Georgian, Greek, and Syriac sources.
We can see UCLA’s catalog for NF M 55 listing Gospel of John and lectionary content (with folio ranges) recovered by multispectral imaging.
Other Biblical Undertexts Imaged at Sinai
The project has also brought to light fifth–sixth-century biblical undertexts such as Corinthians and Numbers (Greek), among many other genres.
A separate report from the field notes a 6th-century Syriac 1 Timothy among “double palimpsests” (illustrating how layered and complex these finds can be).
How These Newly Discovered Texts Affect Biblical Scholarship
From 2011–2016, this team imaged 74 palimpsests (~6,800 pages) and identified ~305 erased texts in ~10–11 languages. These include biblical, liturgical, patristic, classical, medical, and more. These newly discovered hidden texts, allow us to see how precisely the biblical texts of the New Testament we have today, are precisely the same story about Jesus in every primary and significant record the New Testament presents us with.
If This Is An “alleged Gospel,” How Does It Compare to the Four Canonical Gospels We Already Have?
In many cases such as the Nag Hammadi texts, these texts are alleged as new Gospels or additional Gospels of Jesus Christ.
Recent discoveries of alleged Jesus’ secret teachings to his ‘brother’ James unearthed by scholars in Oxford are a part of the original discovery from Nag Hammadi. These letters are known Gnostic documents that were created by a group who seek to corrupt the truth of the Gospels of Christ and make Jesus something far different from who is portrayed by the New Testament.
Before the canonization of the New Testament, there were some 30 gospels of Jesus Christ that were under careful consideration. All but Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, which are a part of our New Testament today, were excluded—after having been examined thoroughly for accuracy and authenticity. Scott Kellum writes:
Their individual status as Scripture is usually not debated. …There are about 30 known Gospels that appeared before the year 600.”[1]
The primary reason that many other alleged gospels of Jesus were not added to the cannon of the New Testament, is due to the diligence of men of the first century, chosen by God, to preserve the accurate text of the New Testament. It was well known prior to the canonization of the New Testament, the particular documents which contained inaccuracies. This is due largely to the knowledge of the true accounts of Jesus life and ministry which were written before 90 A.D, and very likely before the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. In every case, all conflicting documents which are today put forth as alternatives to the four gospels, were written at a time of great distance from the original four gospels.
All of the Gnostic gospels of Jesus, the most prominent of which—the Gospel of Thomas—was found with many other Gnostic texts, written in the third or fourth century.[2] The body of these texts are described as the “Nag Hammadi,” from the location of their discovery along the west bank of the Nile river, 60 miles north of Luxor.[3] Containing some 49 documents in three papyrus codices, none of the texts from these later writings which describe Jesus’ work and ministry—add to our understanding of the four gospels that were written before the end of the first century. In fact—they are in conflict with the writings of the four gospels which were complete by 90 A.D.[4]
If it is later alleged by some that this 2023 discovery, is a “New Gospel,” we should remember that this discovery is not a different or apocryphal gospel. It is an Old Syriac translation of canonical Matthew, offering another early textual witness to the same Gospel we already have.
What These Tests Are (and are not)
Again, this is: an early Syriac translation of Matthew (3rd-century translation; 6th-century copy), recovered under two later layers of writing (a double palimpsest). It augments our textual apparatus for Matthew.
This Is not: a “lost fifth gospel,” nor a text introducing new episodes about Jesus. It sits within the known Old Syriac family alongside the Syriac Sinaiticus and Curetonianus (earlier than the Peshitta).
How This Newly Discovered Text Reads Compared To Our Existing Greek/English New Testament
The narrative and pericopes are the same; differences are translation choices, lexical nuances, and occasional harmonizing clarifications typical of versional traditions.
Example (Matt 12:1): the Old Syriac adds the clarifying phrase that the disciples “rubbed [the grain] in their hands”—a detail that doesn’t change the event but reflects a translator’s explicitation (and is familiar from Luke-parallel phrasing in some traditions).
Text-critical value: Because the Old Syriac tradition likely crystallized earlier than our oldest complete Greek witnesses, it sometimes preserves early readings or interpretive tendencies valuable for establishing the history of the text. The 2023 fragment is described as an “important piece of the jigsaw puzzle” for Gospel textual history.
The Relationship to the Famous Syriac Sinaiticus (Sinai Syriac 30)
The Syriac Sinaiticus (discovered at St Catherine’s in 1892 and still there) contains a nearly complete Old Syriac translation of the four canonical Gospels. The new fragment simply adds another witness to that same Old Syriac tradition—again, not a different gospel.
More Information:
- Project overview and numbers: Sinai Palimpsests Project (EMEL) and the project “About” page.
- Old Syriac Matthew 2023 discovery: OeAW press release (with the Matt 12:1 example) and the open-access article in New Testament Studies.
- Caucasian Albanian Gospel of John & lectionary: Brill abstract; UCLA catalog entry NF M 55.
- Other biblical undertexts at Sinai: field reporting on Corinthians/Numbers and “double palimpsests.”
The Sinai palimpsests have presented us with an early witnesses to the same four canonical Gospels, plus other biblical and non-biblical works. The highly publicized “new” find is an Old Syriac Matthew fragment—text-critically important, but not a new gospel; it largely confirms the Gospel tradition you already know, while offering fine-grained early phrasing that helps us trace how the Gospel text was transmitted across languages and centuries.
In examination of the first verse presented to us, highlighting the notable Old Syriac (Vat. iber. 4) variant within Matthew 11:30–12:26, especially focusing on the frequently noted additional phrase in Matt 12:1 giving us insights into early textual transmission.
Mini–Apparatus: Matt 11:30–12:26 (Old Syriac vs. Standard Greek/English)
The following is a comparison focusing on what’s currently reported from the fragment, notably in Matt 12:1, framed against the standard Greek text (e.g., NA27/UBS5) and typical English translations.
- Text Component: Standard Greek (UBS/NA): Jesus and disciples walk through grain fields on the Sabbath; disciples hungry, pluck heads of grain and eat.
- Old Syriac (Vat. iber. 4): Same, plus: “rub them in their hands” before eating.
- The Implication: Emphasis on Sabbath violation. Adds tactile detail—dehusking or cleaning grain.
Scholarly Significance of the Sinai Palimpsests: This extra phrase—“rub them in their hands”—is the only variant specifically reported from this fragment so far, and is evident in both the OeAW release and corroborating news reports.
Summary of Other Verses (Matt 11:30–12:26)
Current limitations: Only Matt 12:1 has received specific textual commentary in the original reports. No unique variants for verses 11:30–12:26 beyond that have been publicly detailed yet.
Comparative observation: The fragment is described as “virtually identical to that in the Curetonianus manuscript”, one of the canonical Old Syriac witnesses, implying that elsewhere within this passage it aligns closely with the known Old Syriac tradition. 
Text‑critical significance: Even though only one variant is currently noted, the fragment enriches our early witness base for the Old Syriac version—now the fourth such manuscript—helping textual critics refine how the Gospel of Matthew circulated in Syriac communities. 
Why This Matters (Textual-Critically and Theologically)
Tangibility of Detail: The additional clause in Matt 12:1 (“rub them in their hands”) provides a physical, everyday detail—how grain was dehusked—that enhances narrative vividness and reflects interpretive translation liberties that scribes sometimes took to clarify meaning.
Witness to Early Translation Practice: As a Syriac translation likely made in the 3rd century (the fragment itself copied in the 6th century, overwritten by a later scribe)  , it represents an early window into how Middle Eastern Christians rendered the Gospel text.
Comparison with Curetonianus and Sinaiticus: This fragment aligns closely with the known Old Syriac tradition (Curetonianus and Sinaitic Syriac), reinforcing textual consistency—and perhaps occasionally adding translators’ clarifications.
Contribution to Critical Editions: Once fully published (in New Testament Studies, likely with transcription and Syriac text), critical editions of Matthew (e.g. NA-Smaller, GNT) will cite this fragment especially for Matt 12:1. It may also prompt reconsideration of marginal notes or variant inclusion in critical apparatuses.
What This Means At This Point:
There is only one explicit variant—Matt 12:1—is currently reported: “rub them in their hands.”
This fragment is text-critically valuable as another early Old Syriac witness, aligning closely with Curetonianus. For the rest of Matt 11:30–12:26, no new variants have yet been published, but the fragment serves to fill gaps in our manuscript continuity. Full publication offers excellent future opportunity for deeper verse-level comparison and textual apparatus work.
Sources and Citations
[1] Kellum, L. Scott; Köstenberger, Andreas J.; Quarles, Charles L (2009-08-01). The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown (Kindle Locations .739-742 B&H Publishing. Kindle Edition.
[2] F. F. Bruce. The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? (Kindle Locations 1104-1108). Kindle Edition.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Ibid.
Dating of the Fragment (3rd century translation, 6th century copy)
“Grigory Kessel discovered one of the earliest translations of the Gospels, made in the 3rd century and copied in the 6th century, on individual surviving pages of this manuscript.”
Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften (Austrian Academy of Sciences), “New Testament fragment of 1,750-year-old translation discovered.” April 2023.
https://www.oeaw.ac.at/en/news/new-testament-fragment-of-1750-year-old-translation-discovered
Old Syriac Witness Tradition (Fourth Known Manuscript)
“Until recently, only two manuscripts were known to contain the Old Syriac translation of the gospels. … The small manuscript fragment … was identified by Grigory Kessel … as the third layer … in the Vatican Library manuscript.
The fragment is so far the only known remnant of the fourth manuscript that attests to the Old Syriac version.”
ÖAW, 2023. https://www.oeaw.ac.at/en/news/new-testament-fragment-of-1750-year-old-translation-discovered
Specific Variant in Matthew 12:1
“For example, while the original Greek of Matthew chapter 12, verse 1 says: ‘At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath; and his disciples became hungry and began to pick the heads of grain and eat,’ the Syriac translation says: ‘… began to pick the heads of grain, rub them in their hands, and eat them.’”
ÖAW, 2023. https://www.oeaw.ac.at/en/news/new-testament-fragment-of-1750-year-old-translation-discovered
Textual Importance of the Fragment
“It is an important piece of the jigsaw puzzle in New Testament history and one of the oldest textual witnesses of the Gospels.”
ÖAW, 2023. https://www.oeaw.ac.at/en/news/new-testament-fragment-of-1750-year-old-translation-discovered
“The fragment is so far the only known remnant of the fourth manuscript that attests to the Old Syriac version – and offers a unique gateway to the very early phase in the history of the textual transmission of the Gospels.”
ÖAW, 2023. https://www.oeaw.ac.at/en/news/new-testament-fragment-of-1750-year-old-translation-discovered
Text of Matthew 11:30–12:26
“The small fragment reveals a section of the Book of Matthew, from 11:30 to 12:26. It offers some new insights, Kessel claims, into how the Gospels were translated and transmitted.”
Aleteia, “Fragment of Old Syriac Gospel found in medieval manuscript,” April 16, 2023.
A Publication in New Testament Studies
“The findings are published in the journal New Testament Studies.”
Phys.org, “Fragment of 1,750-year-old New Testament translation discovered.” April 7, 2023.
https://phys.org/news/2023-04-fragment-year-old-testament.html
“The recently published article (Mar 2023) referenced by the news article is A New (Double Palimpsest) Witness to the Old Syriac Gospels (Vat. iber. 4, ff. 1 & 5), a journal article from New Testament Studies which has pictures of the manuscript and the transcriptions in Syriac (open access via Cambridge University Press).” Hermeneutics StackExchange discussion.
Sinai Palimpsests Project Relevance
“Since 2011, a team of imaging scientists and experienced scholars … have photographed, digitized, and studied the library’s collection of palimpsests. … As of June 2018, over 160 palimpsests have been identified, with over 6,800 pages of texts recovered.” Wikipedia, Saint Catherine’s Monastery.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Catherine%27s_Monastery
Context of the Old Syriac Manuscripts
“These four manuscripts represent only the Gospels. … Two additional manuscripts of the Old Syriac version of the gospels were published in 2016 by Sebastian Brock and in 2023 by Grigory Kessel, respectively.”Wikipedia, Syriac versions of the Bible.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syriac_versions_of_the_Bible
Categories: Robert Clifton Robinson
Robert Clifton Robinson 
Please see, "Guidelines For Debate," at the right-side menu. Post your comment or argument here: