Forthcoming in The Journal of Theological Studies: Moses as a Symbol of the Crucified Jesus: An Early Reference to the Staurogram?

Early on in my studies, I came across Larry Hurtado's book The Earliest Christian Artifacts: Manuscripts and Christian Origins. It was deeply informative and fascinating to learn of all the features that were characteristic of Christian books; the codex, readers aids, and the nomina sacra (among other distinctives). I used his work as the basis for a detailed adult Sunday School class that I gave at my home Church over a period of several weeks that covered the information found in The Earliest Christian Artifacts. I had the opportunity to share this with Hurtado one time at SBL and he was thrilled. He said that one of his goals for writing that book was to inform the every day Christian of the rich heritage of the manuscript tradition of the New Testament. 

Hurtado was also well known for his work on the staurogram, to which he dedicated a chapter in his book. I too became fascinated with the nomina sacra (thanks to Hurtado), and in particular this curious tau-rho ligature. I was convinced by Hurtado's arguments that this device was used as a sort of crude pictogram of the crucified Jesus. Eventually this curiosity led to me writing an article on the origin of this device. After an earlier draft version was rejected by JBL, I submitted my manuscript to The Journal of Theological Studies and I recently learned that it was accepted for publication. I wish that Hurtado was still with us because I would love to talk about the staurogram with him over a cup of coffee.

I am not sure when the article will appear in print. Until that time, here is the title and an abstract to whet your appetite.

Moses as a Symbol of the Crucified Jesus: An Early Reference to the Staurogram?

Abstract:
This article investigates the origins of the Christian use of the staurogram, a ligature formed by the superimposed Greek letters tau and rho, as a symbol of the crucified Jesus, in three early New Testament gospel codices; P66, P75, and P45. Evidence is presented from the Epistle of Barnabas 12.1-3, which interprets Moses’s outstretched arms during the battle against Amalek as a prefiguring of Jesus’s crucifixion, demonstrating that the veneration of cruciform imagery was already present within the imagination of some Christian communities. This suggests that all the necessary ingredients and catalysts were present for the appropriation of the tau-rho ligature at the beginning of the second century. The presence of the staurogram in the Beratius Nikatoras inscription, several Christian gemstone rings, Codex Sinaiticus, and the “Jung Codex,” and the nomen sacrum evidence from a recently discovered Frankfurt Silver amulet, are used to construct a chronological framework for the adoption of the staurogram in the New Testament gospel papyri. This article argues that there is good reason to believe staurograms could have appeared in manuscripts of the canonical gospels as early as the end of the second century and were adopted as standalone pictograms by the fourth century

Key words: staurogram, nomina sacra, Epistle of Barnabas, Ephrem the Syrian, Frankfurt Silver Amulet, P45, P66, P75, Codex Sinaiticus

 

P.Bodmer II (P66), a Marginal Correction, and the Useful Life of Books

While re-reading James Royse's discussion of P66, I came across his brief mention of a correction at John 13:19a. It seems that the original copyist skipped over an entire line in their exemplar and omitted the following phrase in red, 

ἀπ᾽ ἄρτι λέγω ὑμῖν πρὸ τοῦ γενέσθαι, ἵνα πιστεύσηται ὅταν γένηται ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι.

The interesting feature about this correction is that it appears to be the only correction not made by the original copyist of the manuscript. Here are Gordon Fee's comments in full.

"However, there is one correction which seems clearly to be the work of a second hand: the addition of απ αρτι λεγω υμιν προ at 13:19. The square μ and υ simply demand a second hand: in the original scribe’s hand (even in the corrections which are obviously his) these letters are always well-rounded. Although this particular hand does not seem to be clearly in evidence at any other point, it does indicate that a second hand has had access to the MS." (Fee, Papyrus Bodmer II, 59)

The script used in P66 has been classified by Turner as "informal round" which has letters that "are rounded but also seem flattened" (Turner and Parsons, Greek Manuscripts of the Ancient World, 21). Orsini and Clarysse have placed the script of P66 into their "Alexandrian Stylistic Class" which is characterized by letters that are "unimodular and looped, and the strokes end in apices (in the lower parts) and small hooks (in the upper parts); sometimes curves and flourishes are added at the end of letters." (Orsini and Clarysse, "Early New Testament Manuscripts and Their Dates," 458).

 

P.Bodmer II showing correction at John 13:19

When examining the interlinear correction at John 13:19 in closer detail, the difference in the two scripts is apparent. As Fee noted in the quote above, the μ and υ are markedly different, the correction being more angular and less looped and curved than the letters of the main text. Also note the difference in shape and the flow of the pen strokes in the way the alpha, mu, upsilon, and omicron are formed (these letters are highlighted in red below).

Closeup detail of John 13:19 correction in P.Bodmer II (P66). Compare the highlighted letters in the original script with those of the interlinear correction at the top.

Also, added to the difference in letter shapes is the difference in ink. It is difficult to see the details in the gray scale image, but it appears that the ink of the marginal correction is darker and the ductus is sharper with less fading from the ink. Again, it is difficult to tell from this image, but it appears to be a different ink that was used in the correction as compared to the main body of text. When comparing the script of the correction at John 13:19 with the more formal rounded biblical majuscule of the fourth and fifth centuries, clear parallels can be seen.

Closeup detail of John 13.19 in Codex Sinaiticus (top), Codex Alexandrinus (Second from top), Codex Vaticanus (Second from Bottom), and the Correction at John 13.19 in P66 (bottom).

I aligned the same text from John 13:19 with the text from three other codices in order to illustrate the close similarities between the style of script used in these manuscripts (in Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, the text spread across two lines so I altered the image so that the text from these manuscripts would appear horizontally together for comparison purposes). When looking at the overall letter forms, it seems that the scribe of the correction in P66 was using a very similar script to that used in these other manuscripts. This script is designated by Orsini and Clarysse as "Biblical majuscule" and they place both Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus into this classification (Orsini and Clarysse, "Early New Testament Manuscripts and Their Dates," 451). According to Orsini and Clarysse, this script was used as early as the second century and they place P64+67+4 into an early stream of this style and assign a date of the late second to the early third century.

John 13.19 Correction in P66 (top) and detail from P4 (bottom)

Though the image from P4 is not as high quality, I compared similar letters from P4 with the correction at John 13:19 in P66 (highlighted in red above). There are definately close similarities between these scripts, especially with the more uniform thickness of the strokes, when compared with the corresponding thinner-thicker ductus of the fourth century codices. Therefore, purely on palaeographical grounds, this interlinear correction at John 13:19 could have occurred anywhere from the third century, into the fourth or even fifth centuries. However, the uniform thickness of the strokes in the P66 correction looks closer to the script in P4, so if this fact holds any chronological weight, then the correction is likely earlier rather than later within this 3rd to fourth century spectrum.

This correction indicates that someone was using P.Bodmer II at a date sometime after the book was produced, they noticed the omission by the copyist, and added the missing text in between the lines. It's possible that this correction occurred during one of the many rebindings that P66 underwent in its (apparently long) useful life. Nongbri has a detailed discussion of this rebinding in his treatment of the appearance of quire signatures in P66. The quire signatures could be from the orginal binding, or could possibly originate from a later rebinding. Either way, the quire signatures do not correspond with the latest binding preserved in the manuscript .According to Nongbri, quire signatures are first seen in the early fourth century so it is likely that multiple rebindings occurred on P66 in the fourth and possibly early fifth centuries (See the full discussion in Nongbri, "The Limits," 29-32).

 

P.Bodmer II detail showing reinforcement repair in the spine (highlighted in red)

P.Bodmer II detail showing reinforcement repair in the spine (highlighted in red)

 

 Figures 20 and 21 taken from Nongbri "The Limits of Palaeographic Dating of Literary Papyri," pg. 30, with the quire signatures highlighted in red.

If a third century production of the codex holds true, then the manuscript was used for about one hundred years before it was repaired sometime in the fourth century. It is possible, as Nongbri suggests, that at this time the quire signatures were placed in the manuscript and perhaps, the marginal interlinear correction at John 13:19 was made by the scribe who was facilitating the rebinding (highly speculative I admit). The manuscript continued to be used and the reinforcing strips and possibly another rebinding ocurred in the later fourth or even into the fifth century and the page margins (and the remains of the quire numbers) where trimmed. Then finally, the codex was deposited into its final location in the fifth, or perhaps (if Robinson's material is included in the same deposit) into the sixth or even seventh centuries (Nongbri, "The Limits," 25). That means that this manuscript was being used anywhere from 200 to 300 years before it was deposited into its final location (see earlier blog post here). 

One final comparison of scripts is worth noting here. P.Bodmer XIV–XV (P75) also contains a marginal comment that uses a similar "Biblical Majuscule" script as that used in the John 13:19 correction of P66. 

The marginal comments in P.Bodmer XIV-XV (P75) compared with the correction at John 13:19 in P.Bodmer II (P66) 

 

Though not an exact match, the marginal comments in P75 are very similar to the correction at John 13:19 in P66. Look especially at the two circled alphas, their shape and form is very similar, though they are not exactly the same hand because there are minor differences in the size and shape of the upsilon and the omicron, and the marginal hand in P75 has no serifs or hooks like those in the correction in P66. With that said, this indicates that these new testament codices were being used and read well into the fourth and fifth centuries. This corresponds with Houston's assessment.

"The identification of such collections, and of the manuscripts within them, provides new evidence on an old question: how long did a papyrus roll last? The evidence from our collections indicates that a usable lifetime of about 100 to 125 years was common and can reasonably be considered the norm; a small but significant number of manuscripts were still usable some 300 years after they were first created; and on rare occasions a manuscript might last, it seems, for half a millennium." (Inside Roman Libraries, p. 257)

____________________________________________

Fee, Gordon, Papyrus Bodmer II (P66): Its Textual Relationships and Scribal Characteristics (Studies and Documents, 34; Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1968). 

Houston, George W. Inside Roman Libraries: Book Collections and Their Management in Antiquity (Chapel Hill: UNC Press, 2014).

Nongbri, Brent, “The Limits of Palaeographic Dating of Literary Papyri: Some Observations on the Date and Provenance of P. Bodmer II (P66),” Museum Helveticum 71 (2014): 1-35

Orsini, Pasquale and Willy Clarysse, “Early New Testament Manuscripts and Their Dates: A Critique of Theological Palaeography,” Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 88 (2012): 443-74. 

Royse, James Ronald. Scribal Habits in Early Greek New Testament Papyri (NTTSD 36. Leiden: Brill, 2008).

Turner, E. G. Greek Manuscripts of the Ancient World (2nd edition, ed. P. J. Parsons. London: University of London, Institute of Classical Studies, 1987) 

A Sacred Number in the Gospel of Mark?

The painstaking task of transcribing and collating Greek New Testament manuscripts will often bring to light many tantalizing features that have as of yet gone unnoticed. Mainly because so many of these manuscripts have not been studied in detail, or at all. Not only this, but also because transcription forces the scholar to slow down and compare the texts of the manuscripts being studied, highlighting any unique characteristics. Recently I came across an interesting feature in GA 989 which is a twelfth century Four Gospels minuscule manuscript with commentary bordering the biblical text. It has to do with the use of the numeral twelve. In Mark 6:7 Jesus commissions the twelve disciples to preach the gospel.

"And he called the twelve and began to send them out two by two, and gave them authority over the unclean spirits."

Mark 6:7 in GA 989 showing the number 12  Ι̅β̅ in Greek

A fascinating aspect is that in this verse the scribe chose to use the Greek numeral sign for the number twelve ( Ι̅β̅ ) rather than writing out the number in full (δωδεκα). Here also the word for "unclean" spirit is written in full (plene) rather than in the nomen sacrum form. No where else in the Gospel of Mark in GA 989 is the Greek numeral for twelve used. And there seems to be no differentiation in this manuscript in the use of nomen sacrum for the Holy Spirit or an unclean spirit. Thus it seems to be more than a coincidence that the scribe chose to use the abbreviated Greek numeral for twelve and unclean spirit is written out in full (πνευματων ακαθαρτων) in the context of this verse. It is certainly possible that there is nothing significant to this, a mere coincidence. It is also impossible to definitively know for certain. It could be, however, that the Greek numeral for twelve (Ι̅β̅ ) was used in a "sacred" sense like a nomen sacrum, preserved from an earlier tradition.

Zachary Cole recently published a monograph that discussed this topic.

Zachary Cole, Numerals in Early Greek New Testament Manuscripts
Text-Critical, Scribal, and Theological Studies. NTTSD 53 (Leiden: Brill, 2017).

In Chapter 7, pages 175-178, Cole discusses the possibility that the Greek number twelve ( Ι̅β̅ ) was used as a sacred number (numerus sacer) when referring to the twelve disciples in Codex Sinaiticus in the Gospel of Matthew.

Codex Sinaitcus Matt 10:5 [Q74-f.5v]
www.codexsinaiticus.org

There is not enough data to draw any hard conclusions in GA 989. These tantalizing remnants of scribal activity, however, may be all that remain of an early tradition of representing the "twelve" disciples in a sacred sense.  

The Monks of Codex Sinaiticus

The grand Biblical manuscript, Codex Sinaiticus had an extremely long useful life (see previous post). It was manufactured around the middle of the 4th century and continued to be valued up to its modern "re-discovery" by Constantine von Tischendorf. Signs of its long useful life can be found in the margins of its parchment leaves. Several marginal notes scattered throughout the manuscript were written by readers and scribes of the codex.

The first group of notes were written sometime in the 12th century by a monk named Dionysius.

Bottom margin of Q39-f3r (www.codexsinaiticus.org)

On the bottom left margin of Q39-f3r, under 1 Maccabees 1:9, reads a note (see image above). The following Greek transcription is taken from www.codexsinaiticus.org

"μνησθητι κε την ψυχην του αμαρτωλου
διονυσιου μοναχου οταν ελθησ εν τη βασιλεια σου"
"Remember Lord the soul of the sinner Dionysius the monk when you come in your kingdom." (Parker, 117)

Bottom margin of Q66-f6r (www.codexsinaiticus.org)

On the bottom margin of Q66-f6r, under Song of Songs 3:5 reads another note that is simply Dionysius' name "διονυσιο(σ) (μον)αχ(οσ)" (Greek transcription is taken from www.codexsinaiticus.org).

Bottom left margin of Q66-f7r (www.codexsinaiticus.org)

The final note left by Dionysius is found on the bottom margin of Q66-f7r, under Song of Songs 6:3 reads in Greek (transcription taken from www.codexsinaiticus.org)

"μνησθητηκε
διονυσι(ου)μ(ον)αξ(ου)
αμαρτωλ(ου)"
"Remember Lord the monk Dionysius the sinner." (Parker, 117)

Another lengthy marginal note dating from around 1200 CE identifies a monk or scribe named Theophylact.

Bottom right margin of Q68-f1v (www.codexsinaiticus.org)

Bottom left margin of Q68-f2r (www.codexsinaiticus.org)

The marginal notes as they are viewed when the pages are open

On the bottom right hand margin on Q68-f1v and extending over into the bottom left hand margin of  Q68-f2r reads a note in Greek (transcription taken from www.codexsinaitcus.org);

"Ο πας(ης) σοφι(ας) χορηγ(ος) υ(ιο)σ θυ̅ και
λογ(ος) η ενυποστατ(ος) σοφια του π̅ρ̅ς̅
η διδασκουσα α̅ν̅ο̅ν̅ γνως(ιν) σοφισον
αμαρτωλ(ον) θεοφυλα(κτον) προς δοξαν" (Q68-f1v)
"του ονοματος σ(ου) ει το ποιης(αι) το θελημα σ(ου)" (Q68-f2r) 

"The bestower of all wisdom, Son of God and Word, the incarnate Wisdom of the Father who teaches knowledge to man, instruct the sinner Theophylact to the glory of your name that he may do your will." (Parker, 118)

Though these marginal notes give sparse information about the scribes who wrote these entreaties to God, they reveal that the codex was still in use 850 years after its production.
________________________

Parker,, D. C. "Codex Sinaiticus: The Story of the World's Oldest Bible." London: Hendrickson, 2010. 

Codex Sinaiticus: A Hulking Pile of a Book

In a recent issue of "Expository Times," Christfried Böttrich of Greifswald University (Germany) published an article on the Codex Sinaiticus.

"Codex Sinaiticus and the use of Manuscripts in the Early Church." Expository Times 128.10 (2017): 469-478

In this article, Böttrich contends that the library at Caesarea (T. C. Skeat), rather than Alexandria (Kirsopp Lake) was the likely source of the production of the manuscript. He gives the following reasons;

"First: there are some lexical indications regarding geographical substitutes. Second: Codex Sinaiticus adopts the Eusebian system in the gospels, and offers a special text division in Acts following a model that can be traced back to Pamphilus. Third: there are two famous colophons after the text of 2 Esdras and Esther claiming a correction of the text in Caesarea at least in the 6th century; such colophons should be viewed with caution because they became inflationary in later times, being copied from one codex to the other, but these two predate such secondary usurpation." (pg. 470) 

Böttrich does not give any new evidence or argument for Caesarea as the likely place of origin. The bulk of the article focuses, rather, on the purpose for producing such a fine codex in the first place. He engages with the well known theory that both Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus were two of the large Biblical codices requested from Eusebius of Caesarea by the new Christian Emperor Constantine. Here is an excerpt of the request,

"Be ready therefore to act urgently on the decision which we have reached. It appeared proper to indicate to your Intelligence that you should order fifty volumes with ornamental leather bindings, easily legible and convenient for portable use, to be copied by skilled calligraphists well trained in the art, copies that is of the Divine Scriptures, the provision and use of which you well know to be necessary for reading in church. Written instructions have been sent by our Clemency to the man who is in charge of the diocese that he see to the supply of all the materials needed to produce them. The preparation of the written volumes with utmost speed shall be the task of your Diligence. You are entitled by the authority of this our letter to the use of two public vehicles for transportation. The fine copies may thus most readily be transported to us for inspection …" (Vit. Const 4.36.2–4; quoted from the article, pgs. 472-473).

Böttrich gives several reasons why Codex Sinaiticus was not one of these codices produced for public reading in a Church worship context. First is that the four column format with its many corrections cluttering the margins does not easily facilitate public reading (pg. 474). Second is the shear size of the book;

"The biggest problem is the weight. All in all, the codex originally must have covered more than 730 parchment sheets, a hulking pile. Who could carry it in daily use? Is it conceivable to manage liturgical readings with such a codex? Regarding the emperor’s guidelines, Codex Sinaiticus would not have been a clever solution." (pg. 474-475)

No one can argue that Sinaiticus is a very large codex and must have weighed a tremendous amount in its original complete form. Its size, however, may not exclude it from having been used in a Church worship context. There is at least one instance from about the same time period that mentions a Church congregation holding several large copies of the Bible. In the capital city of Cirta, Numidia, in North Africa, during the great persecution under Diocletion (ca. 303 CE), there is a detailed account of the confiscation of Bibles. In this account, a subdeacon surrenders to the officials a very large copy of the scriptures [codicem unum pernimium maiorem] and several church readers surrender "five large codices, and two small ones" [codices quinque maiores et minors duos] (Gamble, "Books and Readers," pgs. 145-147). Of course, the overall size of these copies are relative, and they still may be considerably smaller than Codex Sinaiticus. Even so, as this account suggests, it would not be out of place for a Christian congregation to use a larger copy of the Bible in their worship practices.

As Böttrich mentioned, Sinaiticus's four column layout is not unlike a bookroll from the height of the Roman Imperial era (pg. 474). This format, however, does not necessarily imply that Sinaiticus was not meant for public reading. As William Johnson noted, there were many who read out from bookrolls in group settings and were able to navigate its format. Johnson describes a scene in which the physician Galen (last half of the second century) and his rival Martialius publicly read from a bookroll and argued over its text (Johnson, "Reading and Reading Culture," pgs. 88-89). Johnson also recounts a dinner party scene described by Aulus Gellius (last half of the second century) where passages from poets were read out from bookrolls and discussed amongst the learned group (Johnson, pg. 105). Some of the formatting in Sinaticus also suggests that the codex had public reading in view. "Ekthesis" and other reading aids are used throughout the codex, and several places in the codex, the text is formatted into lists in such a way that the reading-out of these lists would emphasize each word in a unique way. Peter Head noted this in his paper "The Gospel of Mark in Codex Sinaiticus," stating that, "These lists would also have been reflected in public reading of the text of Sinaiticus, with each item pronounced carefully and separately, developing emphasis over the course of the lists" (pg. 13). I argue in my paper "Codex Sinaiticus as a Window into early Christian Worship," that these lists were read in a public worship setting in a unique way that facilitated learning or memorizing these words and phrases (pg. 12).

Böttrich's article is a nice summary of the scholarship and theories behind the production of arguably the world's most famous Biblical manuscript. He makes a great assessment that Caesarea is the likely origin of its production and that Sinaiticus is likely not one of the codices manufactured at Emperor Constantine's demand.

Codex Sinaiticus (www.codexsinaiticus.org)

_______________________________________________________
Bibliography

Böttrich, Christfried."Codex Sinaiticus and the use of Manuscripts in the Early Church." Expository Times 128.10 (2017): 469-478

Gamble, Harry Y. Books and Readers in the Early Church: A History of Early Christian Texts. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995
Head, Peter M. "The Gospel of Mark in Codex Sinaiticus: Textual and Reception-Historical Considerations." TC: A Journal of Biblical Textual Criticism , Vol. 13 (2008): 1-38.

Johnson, William A. Readers and Reading Culture in the High Roman Empire: A Study of Elite Communities. Edited by Joseph Farrell and Robin Osborne. Classic Culture and Society. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.

Mitchell, Timothy. "Codex Sinaiticus as a Window into Early Christian Worship." in Eleutheria 3:1 Fall (2014): 2-19.

Family Π, Codex Alexandrinus, and a 4th Century Text of Mark

When I first began wading into the deep waters of textual criticism, any study of the later Medieval Greek manuscripts of the New Testament (those that are generally aligned with the Byzantine or Majority text) appeared less interesting. The earlier papyrus fragments, or the large ornate codices such as Vaticanus and Sinaiticus were certainly more glamorous and fascinating than the thousands of minuscule manuscripts that looked so similar to my untrained eye that they all blurred together. I think that I am not alone in my experience.

This view changed quickly after I was introduced to Amy Anderson’s research into Family 1. Here was a group of manuscripts, though late in date, which preserved a textual history that reached back into the early centuries of the Christian era. This is when I realized that there is a largely unexplored world of Byzantine manuscripts that have deep roots into the fertile soil of the transmission history of the New Testament.

As I began to learn more about the rich textual history imbedded in these Medieval Greek codices, I came across a group of related manuscripts that were discovered to have a unique textual character in a book from 1936; Silva Lake’s monograph "Family Π and the Codex Alexandrinus."According to Silva Lake, this group, Family Π, was first noticed by Wilhelm Bousset way back in 1894 in his work “Textkritische Studien zum Neuen Testament,” and was further examined by Hermann von Soden. 

Codex Π opened to Luke

The significance of this group of manuscripts are their apparent connection with Codex Alexandrinus and with an even older archetype. Silva wrote;

“[T]he reconstructed text of Family Π, therefore, represents a manuscript older than the Codex Alexandrinus and affords another witness to a text which must have existed in the early part of the fifth century, if not before. Moreover, both the text of Family Π and the Codex Alexandrinus were elements in the formation of the Ecclesiastical text,--since it differs from each about equally and to the same extent that Π differs from A.”

It has yet to be explored further (to my knowledge), but von Soden also noted that Family Π’s text in Mark showed great similarities with the text used by Victor of Antioch in his commentary on Mark. If this proves to be true, then it is further confirmation that this unique text has roots into the late fourth century.

Jacob Geerlings further explored the history of this family in his 1962 work, “Family Π in Luke.” After considering the provenance of each codex, Geerlings concluded that the group originated from Mt. Athos, most likely the Laura Monastery. He surmised that Codex Π could have been gifted to the Laura Monastery when it was founded in 963 CE. The provenance of Codex Π before its presence on Mt. Athos is not as clear. However, Geerlings postulated that, because Codex Alexandrinus was probably copied in Constantinople at the Studios Monastery, Codex Π was likely produced there as well.

Since the time of these studies more codices have been discovered that show some connection to Family Π. Therefore, I hope to begin a fresh study, using the tools available today of this very interesting Family of Greek Bibles from Mt. Athos.
________________

Bousset, Wilhelm. Textkritische Studien zum Neuen Testament. 1894.

Champlin, Russell. Family Π in Matthew. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1964

Geerlings, Jacob. Family Π in Luke. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1962.

Lake, Silva. Family II and the Codex Alexandrinus: The Text According to Mark. London: Christophers, 1936

von Soden, Hermann. Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments. Berlin, 1902-1913

[UPDATE: I completed my dissertation and graduated with my PhD in July of 2023. My dissertation and accompanying data is now available for download. For details see the following more recent post here.]

Avoiding The Damaged Page: Imperfections Creating Errors in the Copying of a Text (?)

In 2015, Dr. Brice Jones published a fascinating piece on the scribal practice of avoiding imperfections in the writing material while copying out a text;

"Scribes Avoiding Imperfections in Their Writing Matierials" Archiv für Papyrusforschung 61.2 (2015): 371-383.

Dr. Jones discussed several phenomenon of imperfections that a scribe may encounter while performing their task; cracks, folds, tears, holes, separated or shrunken fibers, stains, and κολλήσεις (joint seams). The article is summarized nicely on his blog, here.
In short, if a scribe encountered a feature on the page they were inscribing, the copyist would more than likely have to pull the pen away from the page and then place it back in a (sometimes drastically) different location. For example, in the case of a hole, the scribe would have to alter the placement of the letters by writing around the defect in some way. Dr. Jones highlighted this phenomenon on pages 376-378. This occurred in the case of Codex Sinaiticus through-out the manuscript, in particular, on Q84-f.5.r, at the bottom of the first column.

A Scribe avoiding a hole in the parchment C. Sinaiticus (Q84-f.5.r)

Dr. Jones also highlights another similar case at Q18-f.6.r on page 377 of his article.
I find this fascinating, especially in its relation to the introduction of scribal errors in the copying of the text. In a particularly bad case in Codex Bezae that Jones highlights on page 377 of his article, the scribe had to avoid a large hole, writing the text around the imperfection.

A scribe avoiding a hole in C. Bezae (f. 205r)

This brought to mind another excellent article that drew attention to the scribal practice of re-inking the pen, which inadvertently led to the introduction of errors in the transcribing of the text.

Peter M. Head and Mike Warren, "Re-inking the Pen: Evidence from P. Oxy. 657 (P13) Concerning Unintentional Scribal Errors." New Testament Studies 43 (1997): 466-473.

In the article, Dr. Head and Dr. Warren contend that, 

"the constant necessity to re-ink one's pen provided the opportunity for scribal distraction at the level of eye, memory, judgement and pen, and would thus have been an occasion for the introduction of unintentional copying error." (pg. 466)

 This may (must) be true in the case of defects in the writing material. The lifting of the pen and the distraction of avoiding the imperfection may have led to the introduction of an error in the copying of the text.

Moral Maxims, Education, and Codex Sinaiticus

Recently, I have been reading through Raffaella Cribiore's "Writing, Teachers, and Students in Graeco-Roman Egypt," who examines in detail the physical remains of Greek writing instruction on ostraca, papyrus, wooden and wax tablets, and codices. Many of these writing samples and exercises consist of "maxims and sayings of famous men" (pg. 46). These remains reflect the attitudes expressed by the famous rhetorician Quintilian (ca. 95 CE) who wrote,

"It will be found worth while, when the boy begins to write out words in accordance with usual practice, to see that he does not waste his labor in writing out common words of everyday occurrence. . . . I would urge that the lines, which he is set to copy, should not express thoughts of no significance, but convey some sound moral lesson. He will remember such aphorisms even when he is an old man, and the impression made upon his informed mind will contribute to the formation of his character." (Inst. Or. 1.1.34-36)

Quintilian is hardly innovative in urging young students to learn useful maxims and sayings from the greats of Greek and Roman literature, though, he may be one of the few who urge students to incorporate these in writing exercises. The fourth century BCE Greek statesman Aeschines, while quoting from Hesiod, mentioned in passing that "for this is the reason, I think, that in our childhood we commit to memory the sentiments of the poets, that when we are men we may make use of them" (Ctesiph. 135). This practice continued for some time for in the third century CE, Diogenes Laertius, while writing about the fourth century BCE philosopher Diogenes the Cynic, wrote,

"The boys used to get by heart many passages from poets, historians, and the writings of Diogenes himself; and he would practice them in every short cut to a good memory" (VI 31).

This practice of memorizing moral maxims and sayings continued for many centuries and students would learned them through copying them out in school exercises and singing them in songs and chants. Augustine of Hippo mentioned that he used to "commit to memory the wanderings of I know not what Aneas while I forgot my own: and to bewail dead Dido because she killed herself ," and he complained that "one and one makes two, and two and two makes four, was a harsh song to me" (Confess. 1.13).

It is possible that this ancient practice of incorporating moral maxims and sayings into songs and chants was continued in Christian education as well. In a paper published in 2014, I argued that certain scribal features, the use of "lists" in Codex Sinaiticus, preserve an ancient practice of Christian instruction.

"Codex Sinaiticus as a Window into Early Christian Worship." Eleutheria 3:1 Fall (2014): 2-19.

Codex Sinaiticus was copied in the standard scriptio continua with some reading aids such as ekthesis integrated into the layout of the columns. Yet, at select locations in the text, the scribes interrupted the steady stream of letters and placed on a line "only one key word or phrase" which left "a noticeable empty space on the right hand side of the column" ("Codex Sinaiticus," pg. 4). One interesting place where these lists were employed was at "two-ways" or "virtue and vice lists" in the New Testament and in the Epistle of Barnabas. The use of "virtue and vice lists" and "two ways" was a common method in giving moral instruction in both Jewish and Christian literature ("Codex Sinaiticus," pg. 9).

Codex Sinaiticus at Mark 7:21 (codexsinaiticus.org)

It is likely that these paragraph lists were read differently than the surrounding text, either chanted or sung. Perhaps, following in the Graeco-Roman tradition, these areas in the text were formatted in a way that facilitated learning of these moral maxims. It is well known that the "colophons at the end of 2 Esdras and Esther indicate a possible connection with Pamphilus’ famous library at Caesarea in Palestine. Origen was head of a school for catechumens during his days in Alexandria in Egypt and later began a similar school in Caesarea. Pamphilus was Origen’s star pupil and later directed his school in Caesarea. These colophons may connect Sinaiticus with an ancient tradition of early Christian worship and instruction of new converts" (quoted from the article abstract).

________________
Bibliography

Adams, Charles Darwin, trans. The Speeches of Aeschines. LCL. Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann. 1919.

Butler, H. E., trans. The Institutio Oratio of Quintilian. Vol. 1. LCL. Harvard University Press; New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1920.

Cribiore, Raffaella. Writing, Teachers, and Students in Graeco-Roman Egypt. American Studies in Papyrology 36. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1996.

Hicks, R. D., trans. Diogenes Laertius: The Lives of Eminent Philosophers. Vol. 2. LCL. Harvard University Press; London: William Heinemann, 1925.

Watts, William, trans. St. Augustine's Confessions. Vol. 1. LCL. Harvard University Press; London: William Heinemann, 1912.