[The images of MSS provided here are secondary and provisional in
nature, mostly drawn from the referenced publications, and intended to
help illustrate various aspects of the subject under examination. For a
quick list of the fragments reviewed here (and others),
see
Early Papyri and MSS for LXX/OG Study.
The following images are
linked below [listed here for convenience; other links to be added]:
01.
Qumran cave 4 LXXDeut 11 (2nd bce, parchment roll)
02.
PRyl458 of Deut (2nd bce, papyrus roll),
03.
Qumran cave7 Exod 28 (2nd/1st bce, papyrus roll),
04.
Qumran cave4 Lev\a (2nd/1st bce, parchment roll),
05.
Qumran cave7 EpJer (2nd/1st bce, papyrus roll),
05+.
Qumran cave 7 frg 5 (unidentified controversial "Mark" frg, papyrus
roll),
05+.
Qumran cave7 frg 8 (unidentified),
06.
PFouad266a [942] Gen (1st bce, papyrus roll),
07.
Qumran cave4 Lev\b (1st bce, papyrus roll; tetragrammaton = IAW),
08.
PFouad266b [848] Deut (1st bce, papyrus roll;
Hebrew/Aramaic tetragrammaton),
09.
PFouad266c [847] Deut (late 1st bce, papyrus roll),
10.
Qumran cave4 paraphrase of Exod(?) (late 1st bce, papyrus roll),
11.
Qumran cave4 unidentified Greek (late 1st bce, parchment roll),
12.
Qumran cave4 Num 3-4 (turn of the era, parchment roll),
13.
Nahal Hever Minor Prophets (hand A), with example of paleo-Hebrew
tetragrammaton
and
hand B (turn of the era, parchment roll),
14.
POxy3522 of Job 42 (1st ce, papyrus roll; paleo-Hebrew
tetragrammaton), see also the
black and white image,
15.
POxy4443 of Esther (1st/2nd ce, papyrus roll), see also the
black and white image,
16.
PFouad 203 prayer/amulet? [no image yet]
17.
PYale1 of Gen 14, recto, and
verso (2nd ce, papyrus codex; number 318 abbreviated),
18.
PBodl5 of Pss 48-49 (2nd ce, parchment codex),
19.
POxy656 of Gen (2nd/3rd ce, papyrus codex, problematic
tetragrammaton),
20.
POxy1007 of Gen (3rd ce, parchment codex),
21.
POxy1166 of Gen 16 (3rd ce, papyrus roll),
22.
PBerlin 17213 of Gen (3rd ce) [no image yet]
23.
POxy1075 of Exod (3rd ce, papyrus roll; end of book),
24. Cairo ostrakon 215 of Judith (late 3rd ce) [no image yet]
25.
PLitLond 202 of Gen (3rd/4th ce, papyrus codex) [no image yet]
26.
PWien Rainer 18 of Pss (3rd/4th ce, parchment roll; Symmachus?) [no image
yet]
27.
PAlex 203 of Isa 48 (3rd/4th ce, papyrus roll?),
28.
PHarris 31 of Ps 43 (3rd/4th ce, papyrus roll/amulet?),
29.
POxy1225 of Lev 16 (early 4th ce, papyrus roll),
30.
PLitLond 211 of Dan 1 Theodotion (early 4th ce, vellum roll) [no image
yet]
[[under construction (additions from July 2001)]]
add 31.
Goettingen # 967 Ezekiel-Daniel-Esther (about 200 ce, papyrus codex);
ending of Daniel/Susanna, with subscriptio (PKoeln Theol 37v, p.196)
add 32.
POxy4442 Exodus [first side] (early 3rd ce, papyrus codex);
[other side]
add 33. PVindobGr 29828+29456 Jannes and Jambres
(early 3rd ce, papyrus roll [reused], nomina sacra uncontracted) [vh1068]
add 34. PMich 4925 Jannes and Jambres
(early 3rd ce, papyrus roll [reused]) [BASP 16 (1979) 114]
add 35. PChBeat 16 Jannes and Jambres
(4th ce, papyrus codex, odd nomina sacra) [Pietersma]
add 36. POxy1173+1356+1207+2158+ Philo (3rd ce, papyrus codex) [vh696]
add 37. PAntin 8 Prov-Wisd-Eccl (3rd ce, papyrus codex) [#928 = vh254]
add 38. PAntin 9 Prov (3rd ce, papyrus codex) [#987 = vh252]
add 39. Freer Minor Prophets (late 3rd ce, papyrus codex) [vh284];
add 40. Berlin Genesis (late 3rd ce, papyrus codex) [#911 = vh004];
add 41. PLond Christ 5 (3-5th ce, liturgical codex) [vh921],
add 42. POxy2745 Hebrew onomasticon (3/4th ce, papyrus roll) [vh1158]
add 43. POxy2068 (4th ce, papyrus liturgical roll) [vh966]
add 44. PAntin 10 Ezek (4th ce, papyrus codex) [#988 = vh316]
add 45. PSorbonne 2250 Jer 17f & 46 (late 4th ce, papyrus codex;
aberrent text) [#817 = vh308];
add 46. PRanier 4.5 Psalm 9 (5th ce, papyrus amulet?) [#2086 = vh105].
add 47. PBerlin 17035 Gen 36 Symmachus? (5/6th ce, parchment
codex) [vh022];
add 48.
PGiessen 13+19+22+26 Deut 24-29 (5/6th ce; parchment codex; possibly
non-Christian provenance) [no image yet]
for additional images of scriptural and other (mostly Christian)
fragments, see
Wieland Willkur's
links
The main sources cited below are abbreviated as follows:
Aland = Kurt Aland (ed), Repertorium der griechischen christlichen Papyri I: Biblische Papyri ... (Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 1976).
DJD = Discoveries in the Judean Desert, the official publication series for the Dead Sea Scroll materials (Oxford Press).
Roberts (MSB) = Colin H. Roberts
Tov = his article in this volume; otherwise also "Scribal
Practices and Physical Aspects of the Dead Sea Scrolls" in
Treu = Kurt Treu, "
Turner = E.G.Turner, Greek Manuscripts of the Ancient World,
(Princeton University Press 1971); second edition revised and
enlarged edited by P. J. Parsons (Bulletin Supplement 46, London:
Institute of Classical Studies 1987).
Turner (Codex) = E.G.Turner, The Typology of the Early Codex
(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1977).
vh### = Joseph van Haelst,
The standard papyrological designations will be used, as listed
also in vh, Aland, and elsewhere.
A major goal of this research is to explore more closely the
preserved evidence from early Jewish biblical and related
materials in Greek reflecting scribal habits and techniques in
order to address questions about Greek Jewish developments, on
the one hand, and the relationship between Greek Jewish "scribal
culture" and early Christian literary practices on the other.
My intuitions are that the continuities between "Jewish" and
"Christian" will outweigh the discontinuities in such matters,
but the thrust of earlier scholarship (with some exceptions) has
not tended in that direction. Thus I have attempted to select and
examine closely some 30 biblical and related Greek fragmentary
manuscripts, all of which are either clearly Jewish in origin or
have a reasonable claim to be so, with a view to building up a
more carefully controlled set of criteria for addressing
ambiguities in other, even more ambiguous (with regard to origin)
materials. It will be clear from this evidence that there was a
variegated "scribal culture" in pre-Christian Jewish circles (not
unlike the situation in the non-Jewish Greek world!); how much of
it may have carried over into "Christian" practices, and under
what conditions, remain less clear, but hopefully will receive
further light from this study.
My work on this topic in many ways parallels and supplements the
research of my colleague, Emanuel Tov, who focuses even more than
I have attempted on the significance of various "physical"
characteristics (spacing, punctuation, etc.) for the ancient
preparers and users of the texts. I also view my efforts as
continuations of the suggestive but relatively little known study
by the late Kurt Treu, in his essay mentioned below (which is
readily available in English through the aforementioned Internet
home page). That I am often critical of the conclusions of the
late Colin Roberts on these subjects does not detract from my
appreciation of and respect for his pioneering efforts as one of
the papyrological giants of the 20th century, on whose shoulders
we all must stand.
Among the 120 or so papyri and other early fragments of Greek
Jewish scriptures ("LXX/OG") and related materials dated
paleographically from the 4th century and earlier, we find more
than a dozen that are clearly of Jewish origin, and another dozen
or so for which this identification has also been strongly
suggested.\1/ The vast majority of the remainder has been assumed
to have been produced by Christian copyists, although the
evidence is seldom unambiguously clear. This study attempts to
reexamine the situation with a focus especially on details of
format and presentation ("textual mechanics"), without any
special attention to textcritical content.\2/
---
\1/I have not included several manuscripts listed by Treu as
ambiguous but worth consideration when his reasons appear to be
less "mechanical" than seem appropriate for this study. For
example, he points out (142f) that since we have evidence for
Jewish presence at such sites as Oxyrhynchos and Antinoopolis, it
is not unreasonable to suppose that some of the Jewish Greek
scriptural materials from those sites might be of Jewish origin,
and he offers some textcritical observations in support (e.g.
closer affinities to the surviving Hebrew text, "eccentric
text"). From this textual basis, he expands his horizons further;
see his notes on PAntin 8, 9, 10 [vh254, 252, 316]; PGiss 13...
[vh58]; PSorbonne 2250 [vh308]; PBerlin 17035 [vh022]; Freer
Minor Prophets [vh284]; Berlin Genesis [#911 = vh004]; Chester
Beatty (etc.) Ezekiel-Daniel-Esther [#967 = vh315]; PRanier 4.5
[#2086 = vh105]. Probably POx 2745, a Hebrew onomasticon roll
[vh1158] mentioned by Treu (144) should be added to my list; see
also n.11 below on liturgical materials (e.g. POx 2068). A fresh
look at the evidence from the early papyri (3rd ce) of Philo's
works will also be in order at some point.
\2/The textcritical situation seems analogous to what the NT
papyri have shown -- that the textual relationships prior to the
imagined watershed of recensional activity in the 3rd and early
4th centuries ce are in many ways just as confused and confusing
as afterwards. Of course, the materials from this early period,
on rolls and early mini-codices, must be examined book by book
(and sometimes even in smaller units within "books") rather than
in generalized "text types," but even then clear patterns seldom
emerge. Did we really expect clear patterns, given what we have
learned from the Judean Desert discoveries as well as from other
avenues of information about those textually tumultuous early
times? For details, consult Emanuel Tov's
===
The basis for scholarly discussion of these materials in the past
quarter century was established primarily by the publications of
Treu's article and Roberts' Schweich Lectures (MSB). Treu
attempted to view the early fragments in the larger framework of
how Judaism adapted to, or perhaps reacted to the Greco-Roman
world in which it existed and often flourished. While Treu did
not ignore textual matters (see n.1 above), he was much more
focused on the sorts of "physical" and immediately visible
criteria that could reasonably be employed in attempting to
identify "Jewish" scriptural materials. The appendix to his 1973
article presents a challenge to previous analyses, and sets the
stage for subsequent discussion.
Roberts, in his attempt to extract information from the early
papyri for reconstructing the development of Christianity in
Egypt, shows sympathy for some of Treu's observations while at
the same time defending aspects of the "older" approach, with its
tendency to focus on early Christianity.\3/ Perhaps unwittingly, in
his quest to identify characteristic "Christian" traits in the
early manuscripts and fragments, Roberts actually opens some new
lines of investigation applicable to the Jewish materials as
well: especially suggestive are his comments about the
"documentary" tendencies exhibited in some aspects of the
presentation of early Christian materials (use of spacing,
punctuation, enlarged letters, etc.), and his attempt to
distinguish the resultant paleographical "style(s)" of his
"Christian" witnesses from a more "elegant" literary approach in
(some of) the clearly Jewish fragments.
---
\3/This was not a new interest for Roberts, as his pioneering
early article on "The Christian Book and the Greek Papyri" (JTS
50 [1949] 155-68) amply attests. It rewards rereading even now.
===
The older "criteria" to which Treu, especially, reacts, and the
new issues introduced into the discussion by Roberts (with
further elaboration recently by Lawrence W. Hurtado\4/), may be
summarized as follows -- we will want to be especially alert to
such matters when we survey the data:
---
\4/"The Origin of the
===
1. Scroll or codex format -- as a rule of thumb, and especially
when other evidence is lacking, the equation of scroll with
Jewish and codex with Christian has tended to prevail.
Admittedly, Christians continued to use the roll format well
after codices became popular, and clearly codices came to be used
among Jews at some point, but there is little clarity or
agreement on the history of such developments. In the survey of
30 Jewish and possibly Jewish texts that follows, all but items
17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 24 (ostrakon) and 25 are scrolls.
2. Papyrus or parchment material -- it is clear now that early Jewish
scriptural copies could be inscribed on either material (see the
Dead Sea Scrolls, for example), but in 1973 Treu felt the need to
argue against the idea that authentic Jewish copies could only be
written on animal skins. Of the unambiguously (by date) Jewish
manuscripts listed below, all but items 1, 4, 11, 12, and 13 (see
also 20, 24 [ostrakon], 26, 30) are on papyri.
3. Use of "nomina sacra" -- Roberts especially (developed further
now by Hurtado) has championed the view that a widely accepted
"system" of abbreviation by contraction of certain key words with
"sacral" connotations (especially "Jesus," "Christ," "Lord," and
"God"; but also several others) developed early in Christian
scribal circles, although the modern inventor of the term "nomina
sacra" (Ludwig Traube -- at a time when virtually no early Jewish
evidence was available) thought that the practice must have had
Jewish roots.\5/ No unambiguously Jewish manuscripts with
abbreviated nomina sacra in Greek (as opposed to tetragrammaton
representations, on which see below) have yet been agreed upon
by the debating scholars, but items 19, 21, 23, 27, (and 29?)
below (see also n.11 on POx 2068) would seem to offer a strong
challenge to Roberts' position.
---
\5/Traube,
===
4. Treatment of the "tetragrammaton" -- the presence in many of the
clearly Jewish fragments of a special way of representing the four
lettered divine name
---
\6/Hurtado's article provides an excellent discussion of these
related issues, as well as an extensive (if not exhaustive)
bibliography.
===
5. Treatment of numbers -- Roberts also argued that Christian
copyists tended to use number symbols rather than spelling out
the numbers in good Greek literary style. He saw this as another
"documentary" influence. (This feature, if accurate, could
strengthen Hurtado's theory that the abbreviated use of
6. Use of "scriptio continua" (continuous writing, without word
or sense division) or of spacing and other visual aids for the
reader -- Roberts attempted to claim that influences from
"documentary" scribal practices may have led early Christian
scribes and copyists to abandon the strict literary convention of
writing an unbroken string of letters and introduce various sorts
of sense divisions and similar indicators (using blank spaces,
punctuation, enlarged letters, marginal marks, etc.); similar
features also seem to be present in many of the early Jewish
texts (as Roberts also noted, rather in passing\7/). Of the
unambiguously Jewish manuscripts listed below, only items 3 and 5
show completely unbroken strings of writing in their very limited
fragmentary remains. Thus it makes no sense to employ this
feature as a sign of "Christian" origin.
---
\7/Roberts MSB 18 and n.3: "Documentary practice may not have been the
only influence on Christian scribes. In the manuscript of the Minor
Prophets found in a cave near Engedi in Judaea [subsequently
identified as Nahal Hever] and dated between 50 B.C. and A.D. 50, an
enlarged letter, preceded by a small blank space, marks the beginning
of a new phrase, while verses are marked off by larger spaces. This
may well have been standard Hebrew usage in texts such as this,
clearly intended for liturgical reading." The footnote refers to
articles by E.J.Revell in BJRL 54 (1971) 214ff and StudPap 15 (1976)
131ff, comparing this situation with Hebrew Masoretic tradition.
Roberts then concludes "this might indicate that the method of
paragraphing by the initial letter was of Jewish origin." Study
of such phenomena in early Jewish and Christian biblical texts is
now underway by Emanuel Tov and will make it quite clear that
this was no uniquely "Christian" development (in addition to the
publications listed above, I have been privileged to see a draft
form of his forthcoming "Scribal Features of Early Witnesses to
Greek Scripture" [tentative title]).
===
7. Assessment of literary style -- Roberts saw in most of the
early Jewish materials an "elegance" of writing style distinct
from most of the early Christian examples. He noted especially
the use of "serifs" (decorative strokes) on certain letters. I
have also tried to pay attention to "shading," that is, the
relative thickness of horizontal, vertical, and oblique strokes
(shading occurs when one type of stroke tends to be thinner than
another). The general comments of Eric Turner on these matters in
the Greco-Roman world at large deserve attention, since in what
follows attempts will be made briefly to describe the various
Jewish hands:
Then Turner lists some of the "objective considerations" on which
his classifications are based, including degree of formality or
informality in writing, speed and skill in execution, size,
shape, and tilt of the letters, and consistency of spacing
between letters and lines (ed 1, p.24 = ed 2, p.20f).
Turner's resulting general categories of classification for
literary hands of the first four centuries are: (1) Informal
round hands; (2) Formal round hands (with three subdivisions:
Round/Square, Biblical Majuscule, Coptic Uncial); (3) Formal
mixed hands (20-21). Most of the materials described below will
fit into Turner's second category, of formal round/square
decorated hands. Indeed, it may help to nuance his "round/square"
style by noting the extent of formal decoration present --
"highly decorated" indicates that most non-rounded strokes
terminate with full serifs (short perpendicular strokes to both
sides) or half serifs (to only one side); "moderately decorated"
would include the use of hooks or blobs as well as some serifs;
"sporadically/minimally decorated" and "undecorated" complete the
scale.\8/
---
\8/With such paleographical backgrounding in view, here is my
summary checklist of the phenomena that ideally would deserve
attention in a complete examination and description of the
materials listed below (but for present purposes, a summary
treatment will suffice). Note that Aland also tries to follow
such a checklist in his descriptions (p.6):
manuscript identification
overall form and format description
marginal markings (outside the writing blocks)
overall style of writing (within the writing blocks)
use of internal spacing (absence of ink)
explicit in-line markings (presence of ink)
===
Now let us turn to the detailed evidence.
Here are brief descriptions of the Jewish and possibly Jewish
fragments (including a few unidentified, perhaps "parabiblical"
early pieces) arranged in roughly chronological order (according
to paleographical approximations).\9/
---
\9/Items are presented with the Goettingen Septuagint Institute
(or "Rahlfs") number in brackets, where available, followed by
the van Haelst number (vh###) and Aland's [AT##]. Other attempts
to identify and discuss aspects of the early Jewish biblical
papyri are noted by Hurtado (his n.6), and by Tov in his
forthcoming study (above, n.7).
===
Attention will be given especially to the aforementioned
"presentational" issues, as described by the respective editors
and reevaluated, when possible, by the present author from
available photographs -- and with the problematic issues
described above also in mind.
From Qumran, cave 4; ed. E.Ulrich, DJD 9 (1992) 195 (plate 43),
with paleographical comments by P.Parsons, 11-12.
Very few consecutive letters are preserved on these tiny,
misshapen fragments, making precise judgments especially
problematic. The manuscript seems to have contained 26-29 letters
per line, but the length of each column cannot be determined.
The hand is literary, but not elegant, tending to a thick
informal upright bilinear round style (
There is some evidence of spacing between at least three of the
possible 7 word breaks, but no preserved left margins and not
enough words to determine the extent and nature of the use of
spacing or associated devices.
No nomina sacra or other special markings are preserved.
[[link appended excerpts]]
Location of the find is unknown (purchased with other papyri in
1917 by Rendel Harris; cartonnage, possibly from the Fayum); ed.
C.H.Roberts,
The papyrus itself is light colored and of good quality.
Originally it was about 28 cm tall with at least 30 lines per
column, and columns about 10 cm wide with 27-29 letters per line
(average). These fragments are written in a relatively bilinear
(
The use of spacing is noteworthy, with both smaller and larger
spaces employed between various word groups, but no word division
as such. Roberts comments: "our text ... shows no sign of
documentary influence and we cannot ascribe to this cause the
systematic use of [spacing] found here" (26), and wonders about
possible influence from Hebrew or Aramaic. See now the
investigations by Emanuel Tov mentioned above.
No nomina sacra occur, or other special markings.
[[link appended excerpts]]
From Qumran cave 7; ed. M.Baillet (with J.T.Milik & R.de Vaux),
DJD 3 (1962) 142-43 & plate 30. Brief paleographical comments by
P.Parsons in DJD 8 (1990) 25.
Probably 19-20 letters per line average; column height cannot be
determined on the basis of the two small preserved fragments. The
hand is a highly decorated formal upright with strict bilinearity
in the few preserved letters -- none protrude above or below the
projected lines (there are no occurrences of
No unusual formatting appears in the small extant fragments and
there are no occurrences of nomina sacra or other special
markings.
[[link appended excerpts]]
From Qumran cave 4; ed. E. Ulrich DJD 9 (1992) 161 & plate 38;
paleographical analysis by P.Parsons, 7.
Full scroll height about 20 cm, with at least 1.3 cm top margin
and 1.5 bottom; about 28 lines per column, with an average of 47-
48 letters per line (about 10 cm wide, with at least .8 cm
between columns). There are faint traces of horizontal
guidelines, with the letters dropped from the line. This produces
greater linearity at the top of the roughly bilinear
(with
A textual break marked by an inline blank of about 3-4 letter
widths and a horizontal paragraphos mark below that line on the
left margin indicates the start of Lev 26.21. Otherwise there are
a few possibly intentional short spaces between some words or
clauses at other points in the fragment, but no observable
pattern.
No nomina sacra are preserved in the fragment, or other special
markings. Iota adscript is used. An interlinear correction occurs
(apparently by the original copyist), and perhaps a couple of
"strike-over" corrections as well.
[[link appended excerpts]]
From Qumran cave 7; ed. M.Baillet (with J.T.Milik & R.de Vaux),
DJD 3 (1962) 143 & plate 30.
Parts of 5 lines (21 total letters) are preserved, with probably
originally 23-24 letters per line; there is no way to know the
size of the column(s). The hand appears to be bilinear, formal
upright round/square, relatively thick but perhaps shaded on some
horizontals and obliques, with subtle ornamentation (small but
full serifs, curved flourishes) on most non-rounded letters.
There are no preserved examples of the letters
No spacing appears in the preserved material, although it is
tempting to reconstruct it for one of the lacunae. There are no
abbreviations, nomina sacra, or other special marks.\10/
[[link appended excerpts]]
---
\10/Qumran cave 7 has produced several other small Greek fragments
that have not yet been identified convincingly. In general, many
of them seem to be bilinear and decorated with serifs and/or
hooks. Spacing may be present on 7Q5 and 7Q15, and 7Q16 may have
a paragraph mark (see also 7Q7?). Since they are probably of
Jewish provenance, they are also of possible relevance as
attesting Jewish literary activity and scribal practices. In his
forthcoming article (above, n.7) Tov notes the following
suggested identifications with LXX/OG locations, any of which if
verifiable would qualify the respective fragment(s) for inclusion
in the present list:
7Q4 Numbers 14.23-24
===
Unknown provenance (acquired by P.Jouget in 1943); ed. Zaki Aly
and Ludwig Koenen,
The height of the roll is unknown, while the preserved columns
are about 15 cm wide (about 38 letters per line, average), and
the width of vertical margins is unknown. It is good quality
papyrus, written by the same hand or in the same scribal
tradition as #848 (item 8 below) in a highly decorated rigorous
bilinear formal upright (only
Spacing of about half the width of a letter is occasionally
found, especially before and after some proper names.
No examples of the tetragrammaton have survived on these eight
small fragments, nor any unusual markings, but
[[link appended excerpts]]
From Qumran cave 4; ed. E.Ulrich, DJD 9 (1992) 168 (plates 39-
41), with paleographical analysis by P.Parsons, 10.
A tall scroll, about 31 cm high (about 38 lines per column), with
columns of about 10-11 cm in width (23-29 letters).
This fragment is written in a highly decorated bilinear script,
with no significant shading (compare #848 and #943b, items 8 and
13 below).
Spacing is used before and after the divine name (represented by
[[link appended excerpts]]
Unknown provenance (acquired by P.Jouget in 1943); ed. Zaki Aly
and Ludwig Koenen,
The height of the roll was about 24 cm, with 21-23 lines per
column, while the preserved columns vary from about 15.5 to 16.5
cm wide (about 37 letters per line, average, but line endings are
irregular and the final letters sometimes cramped), and the width
of vertical margins varies from about 1.5 cm down to 0.2 cm(!),
with a tendency for the lower lines gradually to "move" their
beginnings more to the left ("Mass' Law"). Similarly, there is a
tendency for the top lines in a column to have more space between
them than those at the bottom.
The text is written on good quality papyrus, by the same hand or
in the same scribal tradition as #942 (item 6 above) in a highly
decorated rigorous bilinear formal round/square upright (only
Paragraph markers are frequent at the left margin between the
lines, and spacing of varying widths is found throughout to
indicate various units (or sometimes with no apparent function).
Spacing around proper names does not seem to be a feature of
#848, unlike its sister MS #942 (item 6 above). At Deut 21.1,
along with a paragraph sign, there is a large diagonal slash in
the left margin. Its function (if any) is not clear. There are a
few corrections, and a marginal gloss at the bottom of one
column. Iota adscript is normal.
The tetragrammaton appears frequently, in small square
Aramaic/Hebrew letters (resembling
[[link appended excerpts]]
Unknown provenance (acquired by P.Jouget in 1943); ed. Zaki Aly
and Ludwig Koenen,
The height of the roll may have been about 24 cm (as with #848,
item 8 above), with about 21 lines per column, but the width of
the columns was much smaller, around 17 cm (about 24 letters per
line, average, but with a great deal of variation), and the width
of vertical margins may have been around 1 cm.
The text is written on good quality papyrus, and although in some
ways the hand is similar to ##942 and 848 (items 6 and 8 above),
it is less formal in execution, while still generally bilinear
(the top flourish on
One paragraph stroke is preserved, and small spacing is used
similarly to #848 (item 8 above) but also in connection with the
start of proper names (as in #942, item 6 above), but not after
such names.
There are no instances of the tetragrammaton, but
[[link appended excerpts]]
From Qumran cave 4; ed. E.Ulrich, DJD 9 (1992) 223f (plate 47),
with paleographical analysis by P.Parsons, 12f.
Dimensions undetermined (no complete line or vertical fragment
extending through an entire column's height has been preserved).
The writing is similar to #802 (see above, item 7); an informal
round/square highly decorated (but no shading) literary script
("ineptly written," so Parsons). Some spacing (e.g. with proper
names) and paragraph markings, plus a marginal "coronis" (as in
#848, item 8 above) and a few corrections by the original hand.
No occurrences of nomina sacra or tetragrammaton are
preserved.
[[link appended excerpts]]
From Qumran cave 4; ed. E.Ulrich, DJD 9 (1992) 219 (plate 46),
with paleographical analysis by P.Parsons, 12.
The dimensions represented in these 8 fragments are undetermined.
The hand is similar to #802 (item 7 above) and #803 (item 12
below) -- a highly decorated bilinear, but with no shading.
Some use of spacing occurs for larger as well as smaller units.
Fragment 2 seems to have
[[link appended excerpts]]
From Qumran cave 4; ed. E.Ulrich, DJD 9 (1992) 188 (plates 42-
43), with paleographical analysis by P.Parsons, 11.
Large format, more than 25 cm tall (34 lines per column), with
columns about 10.5-11 cm wide (27-34 letters per line) and
perhaps a 1.5 cm margin between. Some use of spacing. Iota
adscript. Highly decorated pronouncedly bilinear round/square
hand (some oval letters, which tend to lean backwards) with no
shading, similar to #802 (item 7 above). No occurrence of the
tetragrammaton. A few corrections.
[[link appended excerpts]]
From the Cave of Horror, Nahal Hever (Wadi Habra), Israel; ed.
E.Tov, DJD 8 (1990), with paleographical analysis by P.Parsons,
19-26.
Dimensions can vary somewhat from column to column (especially
widths), but in general the material was about 35 cm tall (42 lines
per column for hand A, 33 for hand B) with column widths
averaging around 9 cm (7.5-11.5 range), and about 1.7 average
margins between. It is possible that the original scroll was
around 10 meters long, if it was a single scroll containing all
the Minor Prophets. It is also possible that two separate scrolls
(hand A and hand B, thus #943a-b) are represented by the
fragments. The leather inscribed by hand B is also coarser than
that by hand A.
Scribe A uses spacing for sections and sub-sections (with some
enlarged initial letters), but not for words as such; scribe B
spaces between most words as well. Both hands are bilinear
round/square in conception (but not necessarily in execution;
hand A is especially inconsistent) and heavily ornamented (but
not with full serifs). Hand A shows no consistent shading, while
hand B does. Parsons concludes that hand B was "a much more
fluent and consistent copyist than hand A" (22). Paragraph marks
also occur in hand A, and some marginal marks.
Each of the respective sections (A and B) has a different
rendering of the archaic Hebrew tetragrammaton, and probably
hand A
actually wrote the material in continuity with the Greek (not
after the Greek was completed), from left to right. It is not
clear whether
hand B followed the same procedure (see Tov, DJD
8, p. 14).
It is possible that we have remnants of two scrolls here; in any
event, two different hands worked on the materials that have
survived, and the second hand presents virtual word division in
those sections.
[[link appended excerpts]]
From Oxyrhynchos; ed. P.Parsons, POx 50 (1983) 1 (with plate).
Dimensions may be as small as 14 cm tall (15 lines per column),
or as large as 29 cm (39 lines) or even 32 cm (46 lines),
depending on the identification of the poorly represented (3
legible letters!) 2nd column, with 19-22 letters per line.
Informal (even careless) upright bilinear (some ovals, tending to
lean left) with moderate ornamentation (mostly by hooks on some
vertical strokes); no shading; some ligatures and cursive
tendencies; dieresis/trema on the initial letter of
Use of spacing followed by an exaggerated letter for sense
divisions. Tetragrammaton in paleo-Hebrew, written consectutively
by the original scribe from left to right.
[[link appended excerpts]]
From Oxyrhynchos; ed. K.Luchner, POx 65 (1998) 4ff (with plate).
About 30 cm tall, with writing block 20 cm (31 lines) by 7 cm (25
letters average) and about 2 cm between columns. Has paragraph
markers with enlarged initial letters of next line projecting
into the left margin, and initial letters of most other lines
also enlarged. Otherwise relatively bilinear with minimal
ornamentation (some hooks and flourishes), and various
"documentary" tendencies (ligatures, cursive forms, etc.).
Some spacing for word/phrase separation and at line ends before
paragraph markers; dieresis/trema occurs several times, and iota
adscript (not always where expected!). Otherwise no punctuation
or special markings.
No occurence of tetragrammaton; "nomina sacra" are uncontracted
-- e.g.
[[link appended excerpts]]
Unidentified provenance; Ed P.Benoit, RevBiblique 59 (1951) 549-65.
From the top of the middle column (of three), 19 lines (about 17-
18 letters per line) are preserved, but it is not possible to
determine how much has been lost below. I have not seen a photo
of this material but the editor provides an extensive
paleographical description and classes the hand as clearly
"literary," carefully written without any cursive forms.
Roberts MSB 78: "There can be little doubt of the
Jewish origin [of this manuscript], a prayer against evil
spirits, written on a roll of papyrus and attributed to the late
first or early second century."\11/
---
\11/Roberts continues, MSB 78: "Both PLond Christ 5 (=vh921), a
leaf from a liturgical book of the third century [vh reports 4-
5th ce!], and POx 17.2068 (=vh966), some fragments of a papyrus
roll of the fourth century, have been thought to be Jewish [e.g.
by G.D.Kilpatrick]; but in the latter the contraction of
===
Largely bilinear upright round/square lettering but with
descenders on
The text includes mid-points after most proper or gentilic names,
some breaks between verse-units, possibly some smaller breaks as
well, and mid-points to offset number shorthand
The editor, Bradford Welles, dated PYale 1 to around the year 90
and especially because of the codex form considered it
unquestionably Christian. Treu would date it at least a century
later , and wonders if it might be of Jewish origin. Turner also
dates it to late 2nd or early 3rd c [Codex "OT 7" pp. 90, 164].
Roberts also dates this text later than 100 [see van Haelst], but
considers it definitely of Christian origin not only because of
its codex form but because "the numeral 318 is written not in
words but in symbols, contrary to the usual practice of Graeco-
Jewish manuscripts; moreover, in this passage the symbols
had for the author of the epistle of Barnabas [9.7-9; see further
Hurtado] a mystical significance which the words could not have
conveyed and it is reasonable to think that they had the same
meaning for the writer of PYale 1" [MSB 78].
Ed J.W.B.Barns and G.D.Kilpatrick, Proc Br Acad 43 (1964), 229-32
(plate).
Originally 35-40 lines per page.
The photographs are difficult to read, but the hand appears to be
a "delicate" round/square minimally decorated bilinear similar
to #905 (item 19 below).
Stichometric format (with some long lines continued at the end
of the next line and marked with guidelines accordingly). Uncontracted
forms of
Oxyrhynchos; ed. Grenfell & Hunt, POx 4 (1904) 28f (plate).
Page dimensions at least 11 by 24 cm, 41-42 lines per page
(Turner, Codex OT 9).
Carefully written in a round/square large upright hand with
minimal decoration (similar to #2082, item 18 above). Some use
of spacing as well as explicit high and middle stops. No
abbreviations except the stroke representing
Treatment of tetragrammaton passages warrants further comment.
At Gen 15.8 (where the absence of
The remaining two passages are especially interesting since they
both occur at the end of lines at Gen 24.31 (line 122) and 24.42
(line 166; see the photo), and in neither case is the full form
of the word
[[link appended excerpts]]
Oxyrhynchos; ed. A.S.Hunt, POx 7 (1910) 1-3 (plate).
Relatively square page format, about 16 cm high, with two columns
of about 33 lines each and 20-25 letters per line.
Basically upright "formal mixed" bilinear lettering (
The tetragrammaton is rep resented by paleo-Hebrew double yod
(two yods with a line through them both; a form found already on
coins from the 2nd century bce [[locate a photo?]]), and
"Either we have an instance of a Jewish scribe being influenced
by Christian practice or we must assume that a Christian copying
a Jewish manuscript preserved the Hebrew form of the Name, as a
few later manuscripts, e.g. the Marchalianus [MS Q], do" (MSB
...). Apparently Roberts does not consider the possibility that
the tradition of abbreviating
Oxyrhynchos; ed. A.S.Hunt, POx 9 (1912) (plate).
At least 28 lines per column, about 14-15 letters per line.
The calligraphic style in this scroll fragment differs
significantly from all that we have seen above; this is in an
attractive large undecorated bilinear round/square "Biblical
Uncial/Majuscule" with thick strokes except for the horizontals
(thus "shaded").
This is an especially important text for the discussion of Jewish
or Christian scribal practice. Roberts sees the evidence as
ambiguous, finally concluding that "It is perhaps more likely to
be Christian than Jewish" (MSB 77; but see his earlier comments
in JTS 50 [1949] 157). Treu is less sure.\12/ If this text is
Jewish in origin, it suggests that the "biblical majuscule" style
may have come into Christianity from Judaism, and that the use of
nomina sacra was no less Jewish than Christian in this early
period!
---
\12/The fragment contains a variant that might also be relevant
to this discussion: in Gen 16.11 which parallels the familiar
wording of Matt 1.21 "she shall bear a son," #944 has
===
Provenance unknown; ed. K.Treu, Archiv fuer Papyrusforschung 20
(1970) 46f (plate).
Fragments of 8 and 9 lines from a page that originally contained
27-28 lines of about 26-27 letters each. The script is in a
relatively bilinear round/square hand that tilts slightly to the
left at the top, with little obvious decoration (some feathering)
or shading, and regular ligaturing of some letters (e.g. alpha,
epsilon, and tau with what follows them).
There is a mid-stop with a space at the end of 19.17, and a space
of about 3 letter widths at the end of 19.18, where most texts
have a form of
Oxyrhynchos. Ed A.S.Hunt POx 8 (1911) (plate).
The remains of 23 lines plus a simple subscription at the end of
the book of "Exodus," with about 19-23 letters per line. On the
reverse side and in a different and slightly later hand from the
3rd/4th ce are 17 lines from near the beginning of the Apocalypse
(POx 1079 = vh559 = NT18).
The Exodus scroll is clearly written in a "sloping uncial hand of
medium size," bilinear in concept but erratically executed
without literary formalism; there is sporadic ornamentation (no
serifs as such) and appears to be some consciousness of word or
phrase division (a few very small spaces, and some slightly
enlarged letters) in addition to the one high-stop and space
after 40.28. Dieresis/trema occurs on the first letter of
"Israel." At the end of the text are found three pointed space
fillers (> > >) after the last word (underlined, to separate it
from the subscription?) and then centered (or indented) on a
separated line the title
The reuse of this roll within a generation or so to inscribe a
Christian apocalypse inclines one to believe that the Exodus text
was also Christian in origin, but as Treu is quick to point out,
"Jewish manuscripts in the possession of Christians are
attested" (as well as the opposite -- see the reused Cairo Geniza
copies of the Hexapla and of some church fathers). Roberts does
not discuss this fragment in MSB.
Fayum; ed. J. Schwartz, RevBiblique 53 (1946) 534-37 (plate).
This unusual fragmentary piece containing at least 19 lines
(often with 50 letters or more) from Judith 15.1-7 is written in
a sloping but neat semi-cursive hand with minimal ornamentation
and no evidence of spacing or added marks of any sort. "Israel,"
"sons of Israel," and "Jerusalem" are spelled out in full.
The editor discusses some pros and cons of whether to classify
the fragment as Jewish or Christian, and leaves the question
open. Treu (143f and n.81) and Roberts (MSB 78) seem to agree.
Provenance unknown; ed. H.J.M.Milne, Catalogue... (1927) 165f
(no plate).
The page was originally about 14 by 17 cm, with 16-17 lines per
page, written in a "medium-sized upright laterally compressed
cursive hand of a type familiar in documents of the period of
Diocletian. Punctuation by a middle point and a small space in
the line. The
Fayum or Heracleopolites Nome; ed. C.Wessely in Melanges ...
Chatelain (1910) 224-29 [identified as Aquila], with handwritten
replica in Studien zur Palaeographie und Papyruskunde ...
Theologischen Inhalts 2 (1911) [corrected identification to
Symmachus].
Roberts MSB 77: "The Tetragrammaton is in the archaic Hebrew
characters; the writing is noticeably elegant." In the
handwritten facsimile, it appears to be moderately decorated with
cursive tendencies and frequent ligatures and no pattern of
spacing.
Provenance unknown; ed. A.Carlini, Ann. Sc. Norm. Sup. Pisa,
series 3, vol 2.2 (1972) 489-94 (plate).
The two best preserved columns (of three) differ significantly in
width, with the first averaging about 11 letters, and the second
about 15; the columns seem to have contained 24-25 lines (not 27
as the editor estimates).
The writing style fits Turner's "formal mixed" classification,
with a combination of petit rounded letters (except omega) some
medium sized forms (e.g. alpha, iota, rho) and otherwise bold
strokes. The result is a relatively attractive upright hand with
minimal decoration and a hint of shading (the photo is somewhat
blurred, making subtle judgments difficult). One dieresis/trema
is visible, on the first letter of the name Jacob. There is a
wider space than normal between the last line of 48.11 and the
first line of 48.12, and possibly a space was present in the line
on which 48.16 begins. Otherwise, no spacing between letters is
obvious.
The editor claims that
Unknown provenance; ed. J.E.Powell, Rendel Harris Papyri 1 (1936)
(plate); identified by G.D.Kilpatrick, JTS 50 (1949) 176-177.
Beginning of six fragmentary lines, stichometric (longest line
has 44 letters, shortest 23 -- thus perhaps a page rather than a
roll?). "The writing is of the elegant character referred to
above [in connection with Jewish biblical manuscripts]" (Roberts
MSB 77) -- shaded and modestly ornamented (mostly by feathering),
with slightly enlarged initial letters.
Oxyrhynchos; ed. A.S.Hunt, POx 10 (1914) (plate).
Parts of only 12 lines are preserved, with about 15-20 letters
per reconstructed line. The style is a heavy, slightly sloping
"formal mixed" tending towards "biblical majuscle" (but with
relatively smaller
In this short amount of text, three instances of dieresis/trema
occur, and three middle stops, without any accompanying spacing
(which suggests that they may have been added by a later hand).
No nomina sacra are visible, although the editor has supplied --
perhaps unnecessarily -- the contracted form of "Israel" in one
reconstruction, preceded by the full form of
Upper Egypt, from the cover of a Sahidic codex; ed. H.I.Bell in
Budge, Coptic Biblical Texts (1912) xiv (no plate).
Parts of 8 lines are preserved. Since I have not seen a
reproduction of this piece, here are Roberts' comments: "A
fragment of a parchment roll of Daniel in the version of
Theodotion, written in the first half of the fourth century;
Listing
of other early fragments
There are various ways in which this complex body of literary
"presentational evidence" can be analyzed, depending to a large
extent on what sort of conclusions are being tested or what
hypotheses developed. There are few "control" criteria, such as
date, to assist the process. Intuitions are important, but also
need careful testing. My own approach tends to assume that
developments of this nature came into early Christian circles
by means of the Greek Jewish world unless the evidence clearly
indicates otherwise; my impression is that Roberts (and Hurtado)
would assume the Christian origin of such practices unless there
were contrary evidence. So how is the evidence to be evaluated?
It would be useful to have an appropriate and unambiguous term to
denote the sorts of features under analysis, some of which have
come back into the spotlight partly as a result of scholarly
reconsideration of the "oral" side of ancient textual culture.
Hurtado seems to prefer "material culture" (659 n.14), but that
seems to me unnecessarily imprecise. Something like "textual
presentation" or even "textual mechanics" gets closer to the
point -- the conventions involved in laying out the text,
from choice of material (e.g. papyrus, leather, pottery, etc.)
to its mode of packaging (roll, codex, ostrakon, etc.)
to the details of how the writing is organized relative to the
writing surfaces (dimensions of writing material, size of columns
and letters, column/page layout)
as well as relative to itself (paragraphing and marginal markers,
use of spacing in relation to lines and letters, punctuating,
abbreviating, form of numbers, form of corrections and notations,
use of diacritics, etc.), perhaps sometimes with a view to
facilitating (public) reading.
"Style": A central point in the overall discussion is the
assessment of relevant Greek transcriptional styles. Colin
Roberts has moved farther than most in this area, in which he was
very experienced -- although sometimes his desire to illuminate
early Christian "orthodox" development seems to me to
problematize aspects of his presentation.
Roberts sees most of the clearly "Jewish" LXX/OG texts as more
professionally written -- more "literary" and "elegant" in
appearance than most of the earliest "Christian" texts --
although exactly what features indicate the degree of
"literaryness" for him would be useful to know with more
precision (e.g. "bilinearity" or consistent height of letters,
use of "serifs" and other embelleshments on non-rounded basic
strokes, thickness of strokes, shading, etc.). For him this
observation goes hand in hand with his explanation of certain
"documentary" (in contrast to "literary") tendencies in the early
Christian materials (e.g. the use of spacing/punctuation,
diacritics, abbreviated numbers and special contractions, less
formal script, cursive tendencies, ligatures).\13/
---
\13/Roberts, MSB 76: "There seems to have been a distinctive style of
writing used for Jewish copies of the scriptures in Greek from the
second century B.C. onwards and still used, with modifications of
course, down to the third century A.D. [\fn/ The style of these Jewish
manuscripts needs closer examination and definition than they have as
yet been given, especially in the use of serifs (for these see GMAW,
p.25).]; a parallel would be the development of the so-called Biblical
Uncial or Biblical Majuscule.... But not all Greek manuscripts known
to be Jewish are written in this style, witness the roll of the Minor
Prophets from Engedi [actually, Nahal Hever], and parallels to it can
be found among the secular literary papyri." See also P.Parsons,
DJD 8 (1990) 23f, on the Minor Prophets scroll (item 13 above):
"...the use of enlarged initials at line-beginning (hands A and B)
and phrase-beginning (hand A) and (set out in the margin) to mark
a new section (hand A) gives this manuscript a documentary look.
... The fact is itself remarkable. Early Christian books show the
same characteristic; copies of the Greek classics do not. It has
therefore been tempting to argue that the texts of the Early
Church stood closer to the world of business than to that of
literature, and to draw conclusions about the social milieu in
which the texts circulated or the esteem in which they were held.
Now we see the same thing in a Jewish manuscript of pre-Christian
date. This may suggest that the Christians inherited the
practice, rather than inventing it; the problem remains, why
Greek-speaking Jews should have adopted it in the first place"
(23f). Parsons adds, in his comparisons of the various Dead Sea
Scroll Greek scripts: "This makes it clear that serifed hands
are common enough (but not universal) in Judaean material
assignable to the period i B.C.-i A.D." (25).
===
The range of hands and styles even within the Judean Desert
fragments, which were produced within a fairly limited period of
time, is noteworthy, and is also reflected in the Egyptian
materials contemporary with the Judean. A detailed comparative
analysis of the relevant features remains to be made, but I doubt
that it will result in identifying "schools" or traditions of
scribal culture except in very broad terms. Of course, comparison
with what was happening at the same time in the larger Greco-
Roman world will also be very relevant.\14/ If, in general, the
Roman period (moving into the "common era") witnessed a tendency
for literature to be copied less elegantly than it had been
before, the presence of such a "decline" in Jewish texts, and
its reflection in Christian materials would seem less significant
than otherwise.
---
\14/Note, for example, Turner's strictures on giving too much
weight to the use and forms of "serifs" in classifying styles of
Greek hands (ed1, 25 = ed2, 21)!
===
Nevertheless, progress has been made in this survey simply by
recognizing the extent of the problem and sampling some of the
possibilities. A next step in assessing these phenomena more
carefully would require availability of excellent reproductions
of the extant fragments in a framework that facilitates close
comparison and contrast (e.g. by computerized paleographic
analysis). Hopefully, the Internet can be used to provide such a
resources in the near future, if permissions from the current
"owners" of the materials can be obtained to display high quality
digitized images.
Scroll/Codex: Of course, the main vehicle for Greek literary
production at the start of the period we are examining was the
roll, and a major point of discussion is the introduction of the
codex format and its very rapid acceptance in emerging (Egyptian)
Christianity -- where the roll also survives, but not in such
relative abundance.\15/ How soon and under what conditions Jewish
authors and copyists accepted the codex format is not clear.
But as Treu pointed out forcefully, the mere fact that a fragment
of LXX/OG is in codex format does not necessarily mean that it
must be of Christian origin. Whether there will ever be
sufficient evidence to support my suspicion that the codex form
came into early Christianity from Judaism remains to be seen.
Probably not in my lifetime. But it is almost certain that at
least one Jewish codex can be identified in the raw data of this
report (as even Roberts gradually came to admit) -- POx 656, from
the late 2nd or early 3rd century ce (item 19; see also 20 and
22).
---
\15/The previous state of this question has been defined by the
study produced jointly by Roberts and T.C.Skeat, The Birth of the
Codex (1983; also released with a 1987 date).
===
Spacing: Whether roll or codex, comprehending the texts required
some mental gymnastics on the part of the reader, especially when
little or no visual assistance was available to identify larger
or smaller sense units or ideally, words. In general, traditional
literary Greek texts are in scriptio continua -- an uninterrupted
flow of letters -- with occasional breaks or indicators for
larger units. As Roberts correctly points out, in many -- perhaps
most -- of the early Christian texts with which he deals (not
only LXX/OG texts), there are various helps for indicating sense
units, whether spaces or lines in the left margin (paragraphoi)
or punctuation marks, or exaggerated initial letters or letters
that protrude into the left margin. Roberts explains this as part
of what he calls the "documentary" influence on early Christian
scribal practice.
What Roberts notes (e.g. in editing item 2) but fails to pursue
with the same vigor or consistency is that despite their
relatively more "literary" flavor the clearly Jewish fragments
almost all show evidence of the same sort of "aids to the reader"
phenomenon. Indeed, the second hand (or, if I am right, second
scroll) of the Nahal Hever Greek Minor Prophets materials
[#943b, item 13b above] uniquely engages in actual word division
of an obvious sort. To me, this kind of evidence deserves much
closer exploration than it has received thus far, and Emanuel Tov
is making a major contribution to this discussion by his careful
analysis of such phenomena in the Judean Desert materials and in
other biblical texts (see n.7 above). Spacing occurs in the
Jewish materials whether "elegant" or not, early or late. It also
occurs quite early in materials of clearly Christian origin. To
view this as coincidental seems highly unlikely, given the fact
that early Christianity developed out of Judaism! This not so
unambiguously "documentary" practice -- which has not yet
received the attention it deserves in the study of Greco-Roman
literature in general\16/ -- almost certainly has been inherited
by Christian scribes, if not from their Jewish examples (which
seems to me most likely), then from the scribal culture of the
Greco-Roman world at large.
---
\16/A small (yet large!) step in this direction is taken by
William A. Johnson in his Yale dissertation on
===
Special Words: Some of the spacing issues in these early Jewish
and Christian texts are associated with the appearance of
personal or ethnic names and certain special words that, for
present purposes, fall into three categories: (1) the
tetragrammaton, (2) "nomina sacra," and (3) number symbolism.
Jewish scribes were selfconscious about the representation of the
tetragrammaton -- the special revered 4 letter name of the Jewish
God -- and had available a variety of devices, from paleo-Hebrew,
to square Hebrew (thus Greek
Roberts certainly wants to see it otherwise, and traces the
practice that became so prevalent, if not pervasive, in Christian
MSS of abbreviating a select group of "nomina sacra" terms to the
initial and original Christian sacralizing of "the Name" Jesus,
which then led to similar treatment for "Lord," and for "God,"
and for the other "nomina sacra." Hurtado introduces some
considerations (see n.4 above) to strengthen this argument.
Nevertheless, I remain skeptical. Though it admittedly remains
ambiguous, some of the evidence presented above suggests that
Jewish scribes sometimes may have used contractions of
One other "special words" detail that comes up in the discussion
is treatment of numbers. Roberts argues that good literary Greek
texts invariably (or perhaps, normally) spell out numbers rather
than using symbols, while Christian texts -- again following
"documentary" influences -- usually employ the symbols. In our
early texts, examples are few, and I have not systematically
explored all of the early fragments of Greek Jewish scriptures
for this feature. If PYale 1 (item 17), a codex fragment of
Genesis that should probably be dated no earlier than the 2nd
century ce, is of Jewish origin, Roberts' hypothesis would be in
trouble since number symbols are found in that material. But the
combination of codex and symbolized number in PYale 1 unites to
make it difficult for Roberts even to consider the possibility
that the text is of Jewish origin. Treu is not so troubled, and
leaves open the possibility. Obviously I agree that this should
be an open question.
This just scrapes the surface of the variety of information and of
issues that can emerge from close study of these early LXX/OG
materials. Roberts recreates a developmental historical hypothesis
about early Christianity in Egypt from the details as he interprets
them, and in general, the hypothesis makes a great deal of sense.
But he does not consistently engage the question of what we can
learn about Greek speaking/writing/reading Judaism in Palestine
and Egypt from the same materials, and in that regard, often
fails to be convincing about details.
The evidence is clear that prior to the emergence of
Christianity, Greek speaking/writing Jews had access to a range
of scriptural (and other) works copied in a highly "professional"
manner. That these manuscripts were produced by specifically
Jewish copyists cannot be assumed, although in some instances,
the treatment of the tetragrammaton and the apparently
selfconscious attention to indicating significant sense units by
means of spacing suggests that the task must have been entrusted
to persons who were familiar with those sorts of special literary
traditions. The differences in overall "style" between some of
the early Jewish manuscripts suggests that our preserved
witnesses represent varieties of technique that had developed in
Jewish literary circles. Whether on the basis of this evidence
one can mount economic arguments (these Jews were rich enough to
afford such quality), or liturgical ones (the spacing techniques
were developed to assist in oral reading in the synagogues), or
even issues of cultural-educational status (these Jews knew what
was appropriate to their social station) I will leave to others.
The data suggests variety, and that is what we should have
expected. And as new situations developed in the transition to
Roman rule and influence, we should expect changes to evidence
themselves, not only in our Jewish to Christian trajectories, but
in the surrounding world as well.
Early Christianity was formed in large measure in close
relationship (positive and negative) to the types of Judaism
present in the Greco-Roman world in the first century of the
common era. The "scriptural" preoccupations of many early
Christian representatives surely were influenced by the
established Jewish frameworks of the time. Thus in the end -- if
one can responsibly speak of such an end -- I would expect to
find that the debt of early Christianity to its Jewish heritage
is even greater in these areas of "textual mechanics" and
transmitted scribal craft than our scholarly traditions and
approaches have permitted us to recognize.
//08 July 1999 draft #6//
Appended Excerpts [[to be linked]]
1. 4Q122=LXXDeut Deuteronomy 11 [#819; not known to vh]
parchment roll, 2nd bce; Rockefeller Museum, Jerusalem.
[excerpts]
Ulrich, DJD 9 (1992) 195 (plate 43): "The manuscript is
inscribed in a literary hand not particularly elegant, though
not careless; its uncial letters seem to be somewhat influenced
by cursive forms. ... Space for word division appears between
some words but not between others, and an unexpected space
appears within the word
Parsons, DJD 9 (1992) 11-12: The letters ... are of irregular
heights and widths. ... The letters are written with a thick pen,
but without organised contrasts. ... There are small decorative
hooks or blobs on the feet of some uprights, as well as on the
tops of
Parsons, DJD 8 (1990) 25: "The hand of this scrap shows no
similarities with [#943a-b]; it is an informal script of
Ptolemaic look with some cursive tendencies and no decoration
except some terminal hooks and blobs."
2. PRyl 458 Deuteronomy 23-28 [#957 = vh057]
papyrus roll, 2nd bce; John Rylands Library, Manchester ENG.
[excerpts]
Roberts,
"What is paleographically of most interest about the text is the
scribe's system of punctuation, or rather of interspacing. ...The
writer regularly leaves a space not only at the end of a verse or
sentence, but at the end of a
3. 7QLXXEx Exodus 28 [#805 = vh038];
papyrus roll, 2nd/1st bce; Rockefeller Museum, Jerusalem.
[excerpt]
Parsons DJD 8 (1990) 25: "This small serifed bilinear hand has
some similarities with hands A and B [of #943 Minor Prophets]
(note the pointed alpha, and wide tau hooked down at the left)."
4. 4Q119=LXXLev\a Leviticus 26 [#801 = vh049];
parchment roll, 2nd/1st bce; Rockefeller Museum, Jerusalem.
[excerpts]
Ulrich, DJD 9 (1992) 161 (plate 38): "The scribe used the
customary
Parsons, DJD 9, 7: "The script ... is approximately bilinear .... The
letter forms tend toward the oval/rectangular, but not consistently.
... There is no consistent use of shading as part of the style. ...
There is no consistent use of ornament, but there are sporadic terminal
hooks, notably on the foot of
Parsons, DJD 8 (1990) 25: "This is a pinched, undecorated hand
... with a pronounced Ptolemaic look; not similar to [#943a-b],
and probably earlier"
5. 7QLXX EpJer Epistle of Jeremiah (Baruch 6) [#804 = vh312];
papyrus roll, 2nd/1st bce; Rockefeller Museum, Jerusalem.
[excerpts]
Parsons, DJD 8 (1990) 25: "This tiny scrap shows a broad bilinear
script without ornament (except for a half-serif on the foot of
tau)."
6. PFouad 266a Genesis 3-38 [#942 = vh056]
papyrus roll, 1st bce; Egyptian Papyrological Society, Cairo.
[excerpts]
Zaki Aly & Ludwig Koenen,
Turner, Greek Manuscripts\2 #56 (describing #848, below, which is
virtually identical to the 9 small fragments of #942): "Medium to
large, formal, upright, rounded capitals, written slowly. ...
Markedly bilinear, the lower line outlined by horizontal strokes
on the feet of letters [full feet on
7. 4Q120=LXXLev\b Leviticus 2-5 [#802 = vh046];
papyrus roll, 1st bce; Rockefeller Museum, Jerusalem.
[excerpts]
Ed. E.Ulrich, DJD 9 (1992) 168 (plates 39-41): "The scribe used
the customary
Parsons, DJD 9 (1992) 10: "The scribe used a bilinear script ...,
with square/circular letter forms. The upper line is broken by
the risers of
8. PFouad 266b Deuteronomy 17-33 [#848 = vh56];
papyrus roll, 1st bce; Egyptian Papyrological Society, Cairo.
[excerpts]
Koenen, Three Rolls 4-5: "The quality of the papyrus is the same
as in the case of 942, and both rolls have probably been written
by the same scribe. The columns of 848 are smaller (... [about]
37 letters per line); the height of the writing area varies
between 15.5-16.5 cm. (21-23 lines). The upper margin was
originally at least 3.5 cm., the lower margin 4 cm. This
indicates close to 24 cm. for the height of the entire roll.
The tetragrammaton is represented by small square Hebrew letters
(slightly more than half the height of the Greek, written along
the bottom part of the line) inserted into a space equivalent to
about "5-6 Greek letters (i.e. about the size of
Turner, Greek Manuscripts\2 #56: "The ends of lines are not even.
Letters may be reduced in size at the line-end. Medium to large,
formal, upright, rounded capitals, written slowly. Contrast
between thick horizontals and downward obliques, and fine
verticals [RAK Note: this is not obvious from the photos].
Markedly bilinear, the lower line outlined by horizontal strokes
on the feet of letters [full feet on
9. PFouad 266c Deuteronomy 10-33 [#847 = vh56]
papyrus roll, late 1st bce; Egyptian Papyrological Society, Cairo.
[excerpts]
Koenen, Three Rolls 7: "The papyrus is of a quality similar to
942 and 848. Only 49 very small fragments of a few letters each
are extant. ... The columns seem to have had [about] 21 lines.
... One might assume that the overall height of the roll 847 was
the same (24 cm.) [as 848]. The width of the lines averages 24
letters ... but the number of letters per lines varies
considerably.
"In many details, this hand is similar to 848 [above], but
larger, thinner, more rounded and irregular, and less bilinear,
though the extensions of letters above the 'upper line' and below
the 'lower line' are only small (see particularly
10. 4Q127 Exodus Paraphrase (?) [unknown to vh];
papyrus roll, late 1st bce; Rockefeller Museum, Jerusalem.
[excerpts]
Ulrich, DJD 9 (1992) 223f (very similar to 4QLXXLev\b = #802):
"Where a margin is listed as questionable, there is insufficient
evidence to determine whether the blank portion of the papyrus
actually represents a margin, or rather a blank line above or
below the extant text, or a space between words; it should be
remembered, however, that in the Greek manuscripts from Cave 4
blank lines to signal a new paragraph are unusual." ...
"Paragraphing is indicated in at least two places. Above
Parsons, DJD 9, 12f: "The scroll is written in a bilinear hand ...,
with the letter forms round and square [
11. 4Q126 unidentified Greek [not known to vh];
parchment roll, late 1st bce; Rockefeller Museum, Jerusalem.
[excerpts]
Ulrich, DJD 9 (1992) 219 (plate 46): "The scribe used the
customary Setting the Scene
The Main Issues
Several 'styles' of writing were simultaneously in use [in the
Ptolemaic as in the Roman period]. Contemporary with each other, they
cross-fertilize and hybridize easily. Study of these reciprocal
influences is rewarding, provided only that the investigator is not
trying to prove a derivation of one 'style' from another. ...>
The Manuscript Fragments
1.
4Q122=LXXDeut, Deuteronomy 11 [#819; unknown to vh];
parchment roll, 2nd bce; Rockefeller Museum, Jerusalem.
2.
PRyl 458, Deuteronomy 23-28 [#957 = vh057 = AT28];
papyrus roll, 2nd bce; John Rylands Library, Manchester ENG.
3.
7Q1 LXXEx, Exodus 28 [#805 = vh038 = AT18];
papyrus roll, ca 100 bce; Rockefeller Museum, Jerusalem.
4.
4Q119=LXXLev\a, Leviticus 26 [#801 = vh049];
parchment roll, ca 100 bce; Rockefeller Museum, Jerusalem.
5.
7Q2 LXX EpJer, Epistle of Jeremiah (Baruch 6) [#804 = vh312 =
AT144];
papyrus roll, ca 100 bce; Rockefeller Museum, Jerusalem.
7Q5 Exodus 36.10-11;
Numbers 22.38
7Q6.1 Psalm 34.28; Proverbs 7.12-13
7Q6.2 Isaiah 18.2
7Q8 Zechariah 8.8;
Isaiah 1.29-30; Psalm 18.14-15; Daniel 2.43; Qohelet 6.3
6.
PFouad 266a, Genesis 3-38 [#942 = vh056 = AT3];
papyrus roll, 1st bce; Egyptian Papyrological Society, Cairo.
7.
4Q120=LXXLev\b, Leviticus 2-5 [#802 = vh046 = AT22];
papyrus roll, 1st bce; Rockefeller Museum, Jerusalem.
8.
PFouad 266b, Deuteronomy 17-33 [#848 = vh56 = AT27];
papyrus roll, 1st bce; Egyptian Papyrological Society, Cairo.
9.
PFouad 266c, Deuteronomy 10-33 [#847 = vh56 = Aland01];
papyrus roll, late 1st bce; Egyptian Papyrological Society, Cairo.
10.
4Q127 Exodus Paraphrase (?) [no Goettingen #; unknown to vh];
papyrus roll, late 1st bce; Rockefeller Museum, Jerusalem.
11.
4Q126 unidentified Greek [no Goettingen #; unknown to vh];
parchment roll, late 1st bce; Rockefeller Museum, Jerusalem.
12.
4Q121=LXXNum, Numbers 3-4 [#803 = vh051];
parchment roll, turn of the era; Rockefeller Museum, Jerusalem.
13.
8HevXIIgr = Nahal Hever Minor Prophets [#943 = vh285];
parchment roll(s), turn of the era; Rockefeller Museum, Jerusalem.
14.
POx 3522 Job 42 [Goettingen #??; unknown to vh];
see also the
black and white image;
papyrus roll, 1st ce; Ashmolean Museum, Oxford.
15.
POx 4443 Esther E + 8-9 [Goettingen #??; unknown to vh];
papyrus roll, 1st/2nd ce; Ashmolean Museum, Oxford.
16. PFouad 203 prayer/amulet? [no Goettingen #; vh911];
papyrus roll, ca 100 ce; Egyptian Papyrological Society, Cairo.
17.
PYale1 recto and
verso
of Genesis 14 [#814 = vh012 = AT6];
papyrus codex, 2nd ce; Beinicke Library, Yale University,
New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
18.
PBodl 5, Psalms 48-49 [#2082 = vh151 = AT68];
papyrus codex, 2nd ce; Bodleian Library, Oxford.
19.
POx 656 Genesis 14-27 [#905(U4) = vh013 = AT8];
papyrus codex, 2nd/3rd ce; Bodleian Library, Oxford.
20.
POx 1007 = PLitLond 199, Genesis 2-3 [#907 = vh005];
parchment codex, 3rd ce; British Museum, London.
21.
POx 1166 = PLitLond 201, Genesis 16 [#944 = vh014 = AT9];
papyrus roll, 3rd ce; British Museum, London.
22. PBerlin 17213, Genesis 19 [#995 = vh015 = AT10];
papyrus codex, early 3rd; Staatlichen Museen, Berlin.
23.
POx 1075 = PLitLond 203, Exodus 40 [#909 = vh044 = AT21];
papyrus roll, 3rd ce; British Museum, London.
24. Cairo Ostrakon 215, Judith 15 [#999 = vh080];
ostrakon, latter 3rd ce; Egyptian Papyrological Society(?), Cairo.
25. PLitLond 202 = BM P 2557, Genesis 46-47 [#953 = vh030 =
AT14];
papyrus codex, ca 300 ce; British Museum, London.
26. PVindob 39777 = StudPal 11.114 = PWien Rainer 18,
Ps 68/69, 80/81 (Symmachus) [Goettingen #?? = vh167];
parchment roll, 3/4 ce; Vienna.
27.
PAlex 203, Isaiah 48 [Goettingen #?? = vh300];
papyrus roll, 3/4th ce; Alexandria Museum, EGYPT.
28.
PHarris 31, Psalm 43 [#2108 = vh148 = AT67];
papyrus roll(?), 3/4th ce; Central Library of the Selly Oak
Colleges, Birmingham ENG.
29.
POx 1225, Leviticus 16.33f [#947 = vh048 = AT23];
papyrus roll, early 4th ce; Princeton Theological Seminary, NJ.
30. PLitLond 211, Daniel 1.17f (Theodotion) [#925 =
vh319];
vellum roll, early 4th ce; British Museum, London.
Summary and Conclusions
Concluding Remarks