You can not rely on typed cards from the Vetus Latina Database for accuracy of the actual text as this example shows what has been omitted (highlighted) from the actual manuscript itself.
Good scholarship relies on the actual manuscript evidence for accurary.

Cards from Vetus Latina Database of first 3 verses of gigas Apocalypse

Actual manuscript of first 3 verses of gigas Apocalypse

Actual Text of above manuscript:
{1:1} Apokalypsis IHV XPI Quam DEDIT illi deus palam facere servis suis, quæ oportet fieri cito: et significavit mittens per angelum suum servo suo Iohanni,
{1:2} qui testimonium perhibuit verbo dei, et testimonium ihu xpi quæcumque: vidit.
{1:3} Beatus qui legit et qui audit verba prophetiæ huius et servat ea quæ in ea scripta sunt. Tempus enim prope est.

ihu xpi is an abreviation for ihesu christi; ds for deus; di for dei; þ for per and qi for qui

John Drywood

continuing on ...
There is a Greek variant in Apoc 1:5 that has puzzled scholars.
λύσαντι ἡμᾶς ἐκ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν ἐν τῷ αἵματι αὐτοῦ
‘having released us out of our sins...’
λούσαντιἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν ἐν τῷ αἵματι αὐτοῦ
‘having washed us from our sins...’

You will notice the difference in the prepositions that suggests reworking the text.
The two ways of expressing for absolving sin are essentially the same.(see similar language of 1 John 1:7) The first expression is supported by Cyprian’s bible thus dated before 258CE. The 4th century Sinaiticus aleph agrees with the Cyprian African old Latin h as well as the 6th century Syrian Crawford ms. Interestingly, the Greek text that Erasmus consulted for the Apocalypse was ms 2814 which reads having released but instead he favoured the Vulgate having washed which agreed with several western old Latin including gigas.

Comparing the old Latins, we discover that the change was deliberate due to preference of expression (soluit instead of lavit) and not scribal error.

{1:5} et ab Iesu Christo qui est testis fidelis primogenitus mortuorum, et princeps [h: emperator] regum terræ, qui dilexit nos, et lavit [h: soluit] nos a peccatis nostris in [h: omits] sanguine suo,

{1:5} and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the first-born of the dead, and the leader [h: commander in chief] over the kings of the earth, who having loved us and having washed [h: released] us from our sins with his blood,

h= Cyprian Old Latin text at Carthage

I will be examining other strange readings as I find them.

John Drywood

on a lordly day

{1:10} [Ego Iohannes] fui in spiritu in dominica die et audivi post me vocem magnam tamquam tubæ dicentis:
{1:10} I John was in the spirit on a lordly day, and I heard behind me a great voice like that of a trumpet, saying:
(1:10) Moi [Jean] étais dans l’Esprit un jour hautain, et j’entendis derrière moi une grande voix, comme celle d’une trompette, disant :

- the lordly day- is not the ecclesiastical world expression for Sunday. The Latin is not the genitive diei but ablative die. In Greek, ‘Lord’s’ kyriakē is a FEMININE attributive adjective describing the day and can not refer to Jesus. It could be rendered ‘on a lordly day’ similar in construction to 1 Cor 11:20 “the Lord’s supper” which can be rendered ‘a lordly super’.
ref: http://www.logosapostolic.org/bible_stu ... ds-Day.htm

So ‘lordly’ has nothing to do with Sunday which in Greek would have been the word Κυριακή which is derived from Κύριος (Lord). This later became fashionable in Christian circles. In 363, the council of Laodicea prohibited Christian observance of the Jewish Sabbath (Saturday) making Sunday the Lord’s day – dominus dies. But this is not the Latin or Greek expressed here as John is telling us things that shall shortly come to pass (4:1)

Thus John in the spirit of visions of the future has nothing to do with the Orthodox ‘Sunday’ or the Syrian Crawford interpretation ‘in the day of the Sabbath’ but rather in the sense of Christ’s advent as prophesied in Malachi 4:5 ‘the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord’ – judgment day. John is transported in his mind into the future while sitting in a cave at Patmos.

John Drywood

on amen

In this verse ‘amen’ is not found in any Latin text and is added only in the Byzantine Greek family. The only other example where ‘amen’ is found is the 6th century Syriac Crawford ms, proof that it is a very good translation in Syriac from earlier Greek texts and definitely is not the apostolic original or copy of.

Papyrus 98 is the earliest known fragment (1:13-2:1) of the apocalypse dated to early 2nd Century or before and it does not show the Greek word ἀμήν amen in this verse.

h: is the Cyprian text in African Latin superscript dated before 258 CE.
t : is a 7th+ C old Latin lectionary
you will notice that the phrase at the beginning is lacking in gigas but found in older Latin examples.

Here is the verse where the English is a translation of the above gigas text (before 370 CE) with a french translation below.

{1:18} P98 h : et vivus qui ; t : et vibus et fui mortuus, et ecce sum vivens in sæcula sæculorum, ^ et habeo claves mortis et inferni. t : amen
P98 lacks the phrase και ο ζων as does Latin Codex Gigas – all Greeks and vulgate retain et vivus;
^ ἀμήν amen is only found in Greek Byzantine family and a later addition ܐܡܝܢ in Syriac Crawford ms
{1:18} and I was dead and, behold, I live from age to age and I hold the keys of death and of hell.
(1:18) et j’étais mort et voici, je suis vivant aux siècles des siècles et je tiens les clefs de la mort et de l’enfer. »

John Drywood

the Crawford ms and Mosul 1887 edition

A quick test comparing the Crawford ms against the 1888 Mosul Edition reveals that they are the same text made by Clement Joseph David (Syriac Catholic Patriarch of Damascus) and by Mar Georges Ebed-Iesu Khayyath (Chaldean Patriarch in Mosul) for the Dominican (Roman Catholic) mission. They are Monophysite bibles which translated from Greek into Syriac during the 6th century the 5 non canon books not present in the Eastern Peshitta of only 22 NT books. The amen reference above in Rev 1:18 ܐܡܝܢ in Syriac Crawford ms appears also in the 1888 Mosul edition. In Rev 2:9 the words “Jews Jews” is doubled in both Crawford and Mosul which is a feature of emphasis in Syriac.

Part of the Mosul reading of Rev 2:9 is:

... ܢܦܫܗܘܢ ܝܗܘܕܝܐ ܝܗܘܕܝܐ ...
who say they are Jews,

John Drywood