 |
| Image of Subatianus Aquila order to release a prisoner mentioned by Turner, "The Terms Recto and Verso," page 61 (see original image here) |
In a newly published article in Novum Testamentum, Brent Nongbri argues for a secure fourth century date for P.Bodmer XIV-XV (P75) based on the length of kollemata used in the manufacture of the roll the individual codex pages were cut from. The article is open access and available at the following link.
Brent Nongbri, The Construction and Date of P.Bodmer 14–15 (P75): The Length of kollemata as a Criterion for Dating Papyrus Codices", Novum Testamentum 68.4 (2026): 518-538.
Here is the abstract of the article.
This article describes an underutilized criterion for assigning dates to papyrus codices, the presence of very long sheets (kollemata) in the rolls from which the bifolia of papyrus codices were cut. In the 1970s, Eric Turner argued that a shift in the production of papyrus rolls took place in the fourth century, at which point rolls began to be manufactured using kollemata much longer than the 10–30 cm kollemata normally used in the early Roman imperial period. The present article briefly discusses the manufacture of papyrus rolls, gathers evidence for longer kollemata, and places this evidence in conversation with P.Bodmer 14–15 (P75). The date of this manuscript has been the subject of some debate in recent years, and consideration of the length of its kollemata adds another, perhaps decisive, piece of evidence that this codex was produced no earlier than the fourth century.
Overall, the article is an excellent piece of detective work that summarizes the ancient manufacturing process of papyrus rolls mentioned by Pliny the Elder in his Natural History, 13.74-82. Nongbri assembles the very limited evidence that is preserved from antiquity. He examines several codices that were constructed with pages cut from rolls that were manufactured by pasting very long sheets of papyrus together.
 |
| Papyrus Bookroll made up of individual papyrus pages glued together, each seam, or kollesis is highlighted in red (illustration adapted from Turner, "The Terms Recto and Verso," page 14) |
 |
| Papyrus bookroll illustrating how each codex bifolium were cut without regard for the kolleseis (illustration adapted from J. Scherer, Extraits des livres I et II du Contre Celse d’Orige`ne d’apre`s le Papyrus no. 88747 du Muse´e du Caire, Cairo, 1956) |
Nongbri provides several examples of codices made from papyrus bookrolls with wide kollemata that can be securely dated to the fourth century and after. From these examples, and going off some statements by Turner, Nongbri makes a broader argument, that codices manufactured from rolls with wide kollemata can be dated to the fourth century or after based on this feature alone. Turner's comments about the width of kollemata are found in the following work.
Eric G. Turner, "The Terms Recto and Verso. The Anatomy of the Papyrus Roll" in Actes du XVe Congrès International de Papyrologie (Brussels: Fondation Égyptologique Reine Élisabeth, 1978), page 62.
At first glance, these observations by Nongbri seem to be solid objective evidence that P.Bodmer XIV-XV (P75) must be dated into the fourth century. However, there are a few problems with this argument that nulify these claims.
First, the date ranges of several of Nongbri's examples actually span into the second and third centuries.
PGM I. Though it has been palaeographically dated from the third into the fourth or fifth centuries, recently, in a detailed examination using securely dated examples, Alberto Nodar has assigned this fragment to the third century (see the full open access article here).
PGM II + PGM VI. This magical papyrus has been palaeographically dated from the second to the third century (see summary here).
The Crosby-Schøyen Codex. This Coptic codex has been dated using Carbon 14 with a date span ranging from the third to the fourth century (see article here). It has also been palaeographically dated from the second to the sixth centuries.
Second is the passage in Pliny the Elder's Natural History 13.74-82 concerning the manufacturing of papyrus. I won't quote the passage in full, however, one section in 13.80 states,
Claudius also increased the width of the sheet, making it a foot across. There were also sheets a cubit (44 cm) across called 'macrocola,' but examination detected a defect in them, as tearing off a single strip damaged several pages. On this account Claudius paper has come to be preferred to all other kinds, although the Augustus kind still holds the field for correspondence; but Livia paper, having no quality of a first-class kind, but being entirely second class, has retained its position.
erat et cubitalis macrocollis, sed ratio deprehendit vitium, unius schidae revulsione plures infestante paginas. ob haec praelata omnibus Claudia, Augustae in epistulis auctoritas relicta; Liviana suam tenuit, cui nihil e prima erat, sed omnia e secunda.
There are a few issues with this quotation from Pliny the Elder. Adam Bülow-Jacobsen, "Writing Materials in the Ancient World," in The Oxford handbook of Papyrology (pages 5-6) notes that there are many problems with Pliny's statements that betray his lack of firsthand knowledge of the process. One in particular concerns Pliny's comments that the wider rolls with a kollema width of one cubit length were not favored for bookrolls. This larger roll he referred to as the 'macrocola' (Latin: macrocollis) was not preferred because a strip of papyrus might come loose from the page and potentially ruin a large section of writing. Nongbri seems to make much of this fact and suggests that this may be the reason these rolls with extremely wide kollemata of a meter or more were made specifically for codex leaves. The problem is that despite what Pliny says here, the macrocola rolls were used for and seemed to have been favored for extralarge deluxe volumes. Cicero preferred these larger rolls when he wanted a particularly fine copy of a book made. To Atticus he wrote,
"I am sending you the same composition more carefully revised, indeed the original copy, with plenty of additions between the lines and corrections. Have it copied on large paper (macrocollum) and read it privately to your guests; but, if you love me, do it when they are in a good temper and have had a good dinner, for I don't want them to vent on me the anger they feel towards you." (Att. XVI.3)
In another place, Cicero wrote to Atticus,
"But what on earth is the reason why you are so frightened at my bidding you send the books to Varro on your own responsibility? Even now, if you have any doubts, let me know. Nothing could be more finished than they are. I want Varro, especially as he desires it: but, as you know, he is "a fearsome man; the blameless he would blame." I often picture him to myself complaining of this perhaps, that my side in the books is more fully defended than his own, though I assure you, if ever you come to Epirus, I will convince you it is not. For at present I have to give way to Alexio's letters. However, I don't despair of winning Varro's approval; and, as I have gone to the expense of a large paper copy (macrocolla), I should like to stick to my plan." (Att. XIII.25)
One could also mention Catullus in his Poem 22 where he makes reference to the use of "royal paper." This is often thought to be the same type of large format 'macrocola' roll, mentioned by Cicero and Pliny (see McDonnell, "Writing, Copying," page 479, especially footnote 44). This fact, that these larger rolls were actually used and preferred for books, brings some doubt on the rest of what Pliny states. It may be that other, larger rolls were being produced and used as well, especially in non-literary contexts (more on that below).
The third problem with Nongbri's argument has to do with Turner's own comments surrounding these codices cut from rolls with wider kollemata. Turner does state that a shift happened in the fourth century, but actually suggests that the phenomenon began in the third century. Here are Turner's observations.
"6.2 However, starting in the fourth century a change in the process of manufacture must have taken place, for one begins to find sheets of greater breadth. . . . From inspection of the make-up of the Coptic codices from Nag-Hammadi J. M. Robinson has concluded that kollemata of "more than a metre" in breadth were used to make the rolls then cut up for the codices found there (Robinson 1975 p. 19; Robinson 1977). The quality of these sheets is far from fine: indeed they could only have been made by utilizing a length of stalk of the papyrus plant that manufacturers of an earlier age would have discarded (a consideration which incidentally reinforces the interpretation of "principatus medio" in Pliny n.h. xiii 74 offered by Bülow-Jacobsen 1976). Nevertheless it must be accepted as established that such a change in manufacturing standards and methods took place (possibly as early as the third century A.D.)." (Turner, "The Terms Recto and Verso," page 62).
To Nongbri's credit, he does bring this fact to light in his article, however, he states confusion over why Turner would suggest a third century date for the transition because "[t]he papyri he [Turner] mentions in the immediate context all date to the fourth century or later: (page 532, note 46)." What is striking, is that on the previous page, Turner discusses three examples of papyri with very large kollemata that date in the second or third centuries; these are given below (Turner, "The Terms Recto and Verso," page 61).
P.Oxy 37.2806. This is a Greek comedy that has been palaeographically dated to the second or third century (see website here). Only a fragment of the roll is preserved but in the 32.5 cm wide segment no kollesis was discovered and it is possible that, depending on how one places other preserved segments, the minimum width of the kolema was 40 cm. This is either a "macrocola" roll with a kollema of 44 cm as mentioned by Pliny, or this could have been one of the larger rolls (like those examined by Nongbri) used for a literary bookroll, we simply do not know.
P. Strasbourg 1.6. This is a documentary roll with 36.5 cm measured between the kolleseis and is securely dated to 244-261 CE (see website here).
P.Berol. 11532. This is a famous decleration that the Prefect of Roman Egypt, Subatianus Aquila wrote to Theon, the Governor of the Arsinoite nome, ordering the release of a man named Niger, son of Papirius (see the website here, and also here). The width of this sheet is 32 cm with no kollesis, so it had to have been cut from a roll made from pages at least this width.
These examples that Turner gives from the second and third centuries are probably what gave him pause and pushed him to suggest a shift in the third rather than the fourth century. When these examples from Turner are added to those second and third century examples given by Nongbri above, Turner's third century date is reinforced.
Finally, Turner originally suggested these rolls with wider kollemata may have been manufactured specifically for the construction of codices and Nongbri argues this in the article. However, perhaps these extremely long rolls were originally manufactured for use in a slightly different context. If we take a hint from the two examples given by Turner, (P. Strasbourg 1.6 and P.Berl. 11532) it may be that rolls made from extremely wide sheets were originally manufactured to be used for documentary purposes. The wide kollema would allow for varying sizes of individual sheets to be cut (such as the very wide prisoner release by Aquila) without having to take into account a kollesis. Along these same lines, many scholars have noted that the codex format had its origins within a "documentary" rather than a "literary" context (see the comments of Bülow-Jacobsen, "Writing Materials in the Ancient World," page 23). It may be that the rolls with wider kollemata were already being made for documentary use, whether to cut individual pages to be used as letters, lists, contracts, etc., or for codices used in a documentary context (See Galen, "On the Avoidance pf Grief," 31-33). It seems natural that some codices used for "literary" works may have still been cut from these rolls intended for "documentary" purposes. Note Turner's comments on these extremely wide rolls that the Nag-Hammadi codices were cut from, that the "quality of these sheets is far from fine" ("The Terms Recto and Verso," page 62). Perhaps it is because these codices were cut from very wide, poor quality papyrus intended for documentary needs. According to the very scant evidence discussed here, these rolls with wide kollemata began to be used for codices some time in the third century, but likely existed in documentary contexts much earlier. As the codex format began to be used in greater frequency in the fourth century, it may be that the market for these rolls with wider kollemata began to increase. Therefore, the fact that P.Bodmer XIV-XV (P75) was manufactured from a roll with extremely wide kollemata, according to the evidence, fits well within a third century context.
_______________________
Myles McDonnell, “Writing, Copying, and Autograph Manuscripts in Ancient Rome.” The Classical Quarterly, 46.2 (1996): 469 - 491.
,%20Codex%20Alexandrinus%20(Second%20from%20top),%20Codex%20Vaticanus%20(Second%20from%20Bottom),%20and%20the%20Correction%20at%20John%2013.19%20in%20P66%20(bottom).jpg)
