New Testament manuscripts in Greek are categorized into five groups,^[1] according to a scheme introduced in 1981 by Kurt and Barbara Aland in The Text of the New Testament.^[2] The categories are based on how each manuscript relates to the various text-types.^[2]: 381 Generally speaking, earlier Alexandrian manuscripts are category I, while later Byzantine manuscripts are category V.^{[2]: 381–382} Aland's method involved considering 1000 passages where the Byzantine text differs from non-Byzantine text. The Alands did not select their 1000 readings from all of the NT books; for example, none were drawn from Matthew and Luke.^[3]

The Alands' categories do not simply correspond to the text-types; all they do is demonstrate the 'Byzantine-ness' of a particular text; that is, how much it is similar to the Byzantine text-type, from least (Category I) to most similar (Category V). Category V can be equated with the Byzantine text-type, but the other categories are not necessarily representative of a text-type. Even though most texts in Category I agree with the Alexandrian text-type, they are not necessarily Alexandrian themselves; they are just very non-Byzantine.^{[4][2]: 381–382}

The Alands introduced the following categories (Aland & Aland category description according to the 1989 English translation, p. 106, between quotation marks):^[4][5]

• Category I: "Manuscripts of a very special quality which should always be considered in establishing the original text."^[4][5] This category includes almost all manuscripts before the 4th century.^[4] These manuscripts have almost no Byzantine influence, and often agree with the Alexandrian text-type (but are not necessarily Alexandrian themselves, for example 𝔓⁴⁵, 𝔓⁴⁶, Codex Vaticanus (B), and minuscule 1739).^[4] Some 4th-century and earlier papyri and uncials are in this category, as are manuscripts of the Alexandrian text-type. The Alands say the manuscripts in this category are important when considering textual problems, and in their opinion "presumably [represent] the original text".^{[1][2]: 383 [6]}

• Category II: "Manuscripts of a special quality, but distinguished from manuscripts of Category I by the presence of alien influences."^[4][5] The manuscripts in this category are similar to category I manuscripts, and are important in textual consideration of the autograph. However, the texts usually contain some alien influences, such as those found in the Byzantine text-type. Egyptian texts fall in this category.^{[1][5][2]: 383}

• Category III: "Manuscripts of a distinctive character with an independent text... particularly important for the history of the text."^[4][5] The manuscripts in category III are important when discussing the history of the textual traditions and to a lesser degree for establishing the original text. The manuscripts usually contain independent readings, and have a distinctive character. ƒ¹ and ƒ¹³ are examples of manuscript families that fall within this category. Manuscripts of this category usually present mixed or eclectic text-type.^{[1][2]: 383}

• Category IV: "Manuscripts of the D text."^[4][5] Category IV contains the few manuscripts that follow the text of the Codex Bezae (D). These texts are of the Western text-type.^{[1][2]: 383}

• Category V: "Manuscripts with a purely or predominantly Byzantine text."^[4][5] This category may be equated with the Byzantine text-type.^[4] Byzantine and mostly Byzantine texts fall under this category.^{[4][1][2]: 383}

• Uncategorised: Some manuscripts studied by the Alands were not categorised, for example because they were too short to determine which group they belonged to, or fell somewhere in between.^[4][5] The unclassified manuscript could be representative of the Western text-type, the "Caesarean text-type" (a term proposed by certain scholars to denote a consistent pattern of variant readings of the four Gospels), or anything else.^[4]

The following table is derived from the Alands' The Text of the New Testament.^{[7][lower-alpha 1]}

This system of classification would seem to prefer manuscripts which coincide more or less with the critical text of the Nestle-Aland and UBS Greek New Testaments, of which there are many supposedly Alexandrian manuscripts in Category I.^[2] Some manuscripts are placed in Category V because they are considered too "brief" to classify.^{[2]: 382, 385} The Alands consider Uncial 055 unclassifiable because it is a commentary, and not exactly an "Uncial" manuscript.^[1]: 119 Accordingly 𝔓⁷, 𝔓⁸⁹, Uncial 080, Uncial 0100, Uncial 0118, 0174, 0230, 0263, 0264, 0267, 0268 are considered by the Alands to be too brief to classify.^{[1]: 96, 102, 120–127} Uncial 0144 and 0196 are not accessible. The Alands do not classify 𝔓²⁵, stating this is due to the Diatessaric character of text (i.e. the four Gospels combined into a single narrative).^[1]: 97

𝔓⁵ was classified to Category I, but it is not a representative of the Alexandrian text-type. According to biblical scholar Philip Comfort it is "a good example of what Kurt and Barbara Aland call "normal" (i.e. a relatively accurate text manifesting a normal amount of error and idiosyncrasy).^[8]

Waltz stated:

As a classification scheme, [Aland & Aland's] attempt was at once a success and a failure. A success, in that it has conveniently gathered data about how Byzantine the various manuscripts are. A failure, because it has not been widely adopted, and in any case does not succeed in moving beyond Byzantine/non-Byzantine classification.^[4]

• List of New Testament papyri
• List of New Testament uncials
• List of New Testament minuscules
• List of New Testament lectionaries
• Textual variants in the New Testament