The Philosopher and the Tightly Wound Bookroll

My father, who has been reading through the moral letters of Seneca the Younger, alerted me to an interesting passage in Seneca's Letter 95 (ca. 65 AD). In this epistle Seneca is trying to explain a particular aspect of philosophy that Lucilius, the recipient of the work, had asked Seneca to expound upon. He begins the epistle with tongue-in-cheek that Lucilius may be requesting something that he does not really want. To illustrate this Seneca gives an example he thought that Lucilius could relate with (and probably many educated Romans at the time).

"There are many things that we would have men think that we wish, but that we really do not wish. A lecturer sometimes brings upon the platform a huge work of research, written in the tiniest hand and very closely folded; after reading off a large portion, he says: "I shall stop if you wish;" and a shout arises: "Read on, read on!" from the lips of those who are anxious for the speaker to hold his peace then and there." (Ep. 95.2)

The portion of the illustration that I zeroed in upon had to do with the description of the "research" that was being read by the lecturer. I give it in English and in the Latin below.

"A lecturer sometimes brings upon the platform a huge work of research, written in the tiniest hand and very closely folded"
"Recitator historiam ingentem attulit minutissime scriptam, artissime plicatam."

When I first read this reference I immediately wondered if Seneca could be describing a codex. The English translation states that the book was "closely folded," which gives the impression of folded pages. At first glance, this wording gives the impression of a compact, tightly folded codex that was written in a small script. This English translation is not unlike the phrase Martial uses to describe a codex.

"You who wish my poems should be everywhere with you, and look to have them as companions on a long journey, buy these which the parchment confines in small pages. Assign your book-boxes to the great; this copy of me one hand can grasp."
"Et comites longae quaeris habere viae, Hos eme, quos artat brevibus membrane tabellis: Scrinia da magnis, me manus una capit." (Epigr. 1.2)

It is pretty clear that Martial is referring to a parchment codex that is compact in size and contains a great deal of written material. His use of "brevibus membrane tabellis" makes this explicit as "membrana" is referring specifically to it's material, animal skin, and also it's form. Quintilian, uses the same word for his obvious description of a parchment codex in Institutio Oratoria 10.3.31. Martial also employs the word "tabellis" which was a common term for the ancient writing tablet.

On a closer examination however, it appears that Seneca does have a Roman bookroll in view. He uses the term "historiam," which is obviously the classic term used for a work of history and this type of work would have been more at home in the Roman bookroll in the first century. Most interesting is that Seneca is attempting to describe the density and detail of this work of literature.

First, by noting that the script is written in a small hand, "minutissime scriptam," which means that more written material could fit in the physical medium of the book.

Second, he indicates that the book is, "artissime plicatam." The adverb "artissime" is the superlative form of "artus," having the meaning of; close, strait, narrow, confined, short, brief. Together with the verb, "plicatam," the perfect passive participle of "plico"; to fold, to lay or wind together, to fold up, double up. The translator chose to use the sense of "folding," yet the verb can also have the sense of "coiling" or "winding" like a snake. Thus the verb can be used to described the coiling up action of winding a bookroll.

These descriptors help to paint the picture of a very large quantity of research material almost forcefully confined within a single bookroll by using very small handwriting, and tightly winding the parchment into a compact bookroll. When compared with the description Martial gives for the codex, this history looks to have been an unwieldy object!

_______________________

Martial, Epigrams (Walter C. A. Ker, trans. Vol. 1. LCL. London: William Heinemann, 1919).

Seneca the Younger, Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales (Richard M. Gummere, trans. Vol. 3. LCL. London: William Heinemann, 1925).

The Latin definitions are derived from;

A Latin Dictionary. Founded on Andrews' edition of Freund's Latin dictionary. revised, enlarged, and in great part rewritten by. Charlton T. Lewis, Ph.D. and. Charles Short, LL.D. Oxford. Clarendon Press. 1879.

Which can be access here.

Quintilian on Writing Well and Quickly

Ivory relief from the cover of a sacramentary, 10th century, Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna

While reading through Raffaella Cribiore's excellent work "Writing, Teachers, and Students in Graeco-Roman Egypt" I came across an interesting reference by Quintilian (ca. 35-100 CE) on the necessity of writing legibly. In his magnum opus, "The Institutes of Oratory" Quintilian was writing on the the art of educating and transforming a young boy into a rhetorician worthy of the Roman courts. In book one Quintilian writes about the necessity of teaching to write legibly.

"The art of writing well and quickly is not unimportant for our purpose, though it is generally disregarded by persons of quality. Writing is of the utmost importance in the study which we have under consideration and by its means alone can true and deeply rooted proficiency be obtained. But a sluggish pen delays our thoughts, while an unformed and illiterate hand cannot be deciphered, a circumstance which necessitates another wearisome task, namely the dictation of what we have written to a copyist. We shall therefore at all times and in all places, and above all when we are writing private letters to our friends, find a gratification in the thought that we have not neglected even this accomplishment." (Inst. Or. 1.1.28-29; )

There are a few elements of Quintilian's comments that relate to New Testament letter writing, in particular, Paul's use of a secretary to write his letters (see discussion here). It is fascinating that Quintilian makes the point that "writing well and quickly" is actually "disregarded by persons of quality"! Thus, the ability to write well was not a marker of high social status.
Despite this, Quintilian emphasizes the importance of clear writing, especially in personal letters, but not at the expense of an inordinate amount of time to write out one's thoughts. He notes especially that one may write out a letter in a less-than-legible hand, but then this eligibility requires the extra step of dictating this out to a copyist for better clarity in writing. Perhaps this is the case with Paul, for example, with regard to his letter to the Romans. He might have written it out himself and then, due to poor handwriting, dictated it out to Tertius (Rom. 16:22) for a more clear and practice hand. Of course this is pure speculation, but this possibility may be added to the list of reasons as to why the authors of the New Testament writings used secretaries and copyists. Also, their inability to write legibly would not have been a marker of low social status. 
_________________________

Cribiore, Raffaella "Writing, Teachers, and Students in Graeco-Roman Egypt" (Atlanta: Scholar's Press, 1996).

Quintilian, "Institutes of Oratory," (Harold Edgeworth Butler, trans. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1922).

Exposing Textual Corruption at SBL

I just received word that my paper proposal was accepted for the 2017 SBL Annual Meeting in Boston. For those who might be interested, it will be presented in the program unit; "Book History and Biblical Literatures." The title and abstract of the paper are,

Exposing Textual Corruption: Community as a Stabilizing Aspect in the Circulation of the New Testament writings during the Greco-Roman Era.

Abstract:

Very few manuscripts of the New Testament writings date to within the first three centuries of the Christian era. Because of this, William L. Petersen determined that, “Our critical editions do not present us with the text that was current in 150, 120 or 100—much less in 80 CE.” In contrast, Michel W. Holmes wrote that the New Testament text is “characterized by macro-level stability and micro-level fluidity.” Both of these scholars used a similar method, applying our knowledge of scribal transmission from later periods backward into the first century. Yet, each of their results were at opposite ends of the spectrum. Despite the disparity of these conclusions, there is another avenue that remains to be analyzed that governed the transmission of texts in the period under investigation; the publication and circulation conventions of the Roman imperial age.

This paper will set out the evidence for ancient publication through community transmission. It will consider examples from Cicero, Martial, Quintilian, Pliny the younger, and Galen. These authors reveal that, although they were familiar with and used commercial book dealers on occasion, they preferred to use social networks to circulate their writings. These same communities that copied and distributed an author’s compositions inadvertently created an environment in which significant alterations and plagiarizing of these same writings became known. Martial described this well when he wrote that “a well-known book cannot change its master” (Epig. 1.66). Through these networks Quintilian knew that some of his lectures had been crudely transcribed and were circulating amongst his followers (Inst. Or. Pref. 7-8). Pliny gives an example when he warned Octavius that draft versions of his poems had begun to circulate without Octavius’s consent (Ep. 2.10). Through the communities that circulated his writings, Galen learned that his original marginal note was mistakenly copied into the main body of text (In Hipp. epid. comm. III, 1.36).

Within the New Testament writings as a whole, this paper will examine Col 4:16, 1 Tim 4:13, and Rev 1:3, and in the Apostolic Fathers at, Poly. Phil. 13.2, 1 Clem. 47.1, Mart. Poly. 22.2, and Herm. Vis. 2.4. These examples portray early Christian publication practices as functioning primarily through social networks. As a result, any significant alterations to the New Testament writings were exposed in the wider community of the first and second centuries. This is evident in 2 Thess 2:1-2, where the author knew of falsely attributed letters. And in 2 Peter 3:16, where the author is aware that Paul’s epistles are being corrupted. In the second century, the textual alterations of Marcion and the Theodotians became widely known (Tertullian, Praescr. 38; Eusebius, Hist.eccl. 5.28).

The conclusion will be that because the New Testament writings were transmitted and circulated primarily through social contacts during the Greco-Roman era, this naturally produced a condition in which the plagiarizing and alteration of these books would have been exposed within these same community circles. This would have resulted in a moderately stable textual transmission during the first and second centuries.

Quintilian on The Critical Skills Grammarians Teach (ca. 95 CE)

While reading through Eric W. Scherbenske's "Canonizing Paul: Ancient Editorial Practice and the Corpus Paulinum," I came across a reference from Quintilian. He was sketching the critical skills taught as part of the standard literary education given by the Greek and Latin Grammarians (teachers); 

"As soon as the boy has learned to read and write without difficulty, it is the turn for the teacher of literature (grammatici). My words apply equally to Greek and Latin masters, though I prefer that a start should be made with a Greek: in either case the method is the same. This profession may be most briefly considered under two heads, the art of speaking correctly and the interpretation of poets; but there is more beneath the surface than meets the eye. For the art of writing is combined with that of speaking, and correct reading precedes interpretation, while in each of these criticism has work to perform. The old school of teachers (veteras grammatici) carried their criticism so far that they were not content with obelizing lines [marking for deletion] or rejecting books whose titles they regarded as spurious, as though they were expelling a supposititious child from the family circle, but also drew up a canon of authors, from which some were omitted altogether." (Inst. or. 1.4.1-3)

Quintilian notes here that it was customary for Grammarians to teach the art of analyzing a piece of literature for a correct textual reading as well as determining its authenticity in relation to an author's other writings. Of course, Quintilian is describing the ideal Greco-Roman education. It may have been uncommon for literates (of lesser or greater ability) to acquire this level of analytical skill. Nevertheless, the teaching of these critical skills appears to occur early in a child's literary education (soon after acquiring an adequate level of reading and writing ability). Thus, most literates may have had at least a rudimentary understanding of recognizing textual/transmission issues as well as the problems associated with authorship.  

Apostles, disciples, and other early Christian leaders who were literate, may have had at least some ability in analyzing and evaluating a particular writing's textual character or authorship claims.  This can be seen in Peter's assessment of those who have miss-interpreted and possibly textually altered Paul's epistles in 2 Peter 3:16, and Luke's evaluation of previous Gospel writings in 1:1-4. Similar parallels could be made with regard to the collecting of Ignatius's letters in Poly. Phil. 13.1-2.

Mosaic of Plato's academy (Pompeii)

__________
Quintilian, Institutio Oratoria (trans. H. E. Butler; LCL; London: William Heinman, 1920), 61-63.

Scherbenske, Eric W. Canonizing Paul: Ancient Editorial Practice and the Corpus Paulinum (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), 16.

Quintilian, Transcriptions, Publication, and Mark's Gospel

Mark writing the Gospel, London Rothschild Hours

Quintilian, a famous orator from the later part of the first century CE (see previous post), wrote his most famous work "Institutes of Oratory" in response to requests made by his students. Apparently, his students and followers wished for Quintilian to put down his vast knowledge and experience in teaching and practicing the art of rhetoric into a more permanent written form (Pref. 1-3). He dedicated the work to Marcellus Victorius because of his "extraordinary love of letters" and because, Quintilian wrote, "my treatise seemed likely to be of use for the instruction of your son" (Pref. 6).
It seems, however, that portions of Quintilian's teaching on rhetoric was already circulating in written form. He wrote that, 

"This I rather designed, because two books on 'The Art of Rhetoric' were already in circulation under my name, though neither published by me nor composed for that object, for after holding two days' discourse with me, some youths, to whom that time was devoted, had caught up the first by heart; the other, which was learned indeed in a greater number of days (as far as they could learn by taking notes), some of my young pupils, of excellent disposition, but of too great fondness for me, had made known through the indiscreet honor of publication. In these books, accordingly, there will be some things the same, many altered, very many added, but all better arranged, and rendered, as far as I shall be able, complete." (Pref. 7-8)

It is clear that this work, "The Art of Rhetoric," contained transcriptions of Quintilian's lectures, but was not written by Quintilian himself, and was done without his knowlege. Though this writing was attributed to Quintilian, he did not regard it as a sanctioned work, fully polished and complete, worthy of circulation. He contrasted this poorly written transcription with his "Institutes," which was designed to teach "from the very cradle as it were of oratory, through all the studies which can at all assist the future speaker to the summit of that art" (Pref. 6). It was Quintilian's desire that this new, carefully crafted work would supplant the inferior transcription in circulation, for he told Victorius that the material in the "Institutes" was "better arranged, and rendered, as far as I shall be able, complete" (Pref. 8).

Quintilian's account of the transcription of his lectures being published, brings to mind Papias's account (ca. 100 CE) of the circumstances surrounding the composition of Mark's Gospel.

"And the Elder used to say this: 'Mark, having become Peter's interpreter, wrote down accurately everything he remembered, though not in order, of the things either said or done by Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor followed him, but afterward, as I said, followed Peter, who adapted his teachings as needed but had no intention of giving an ordered account of the Lord's sayings. Consequently Mark did nothing wrong in writing down some things as he remembered them, for he made it his one concern not omit anything which he heard or to make any false statement in them." (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 3.39; Holmes, 569)

According to Papias, Mark copied down the teaching of Peter, arranged the material into a written document that contained everything that Peter taught. An interesting difference between Quintilian and Mark is that, in Quintilian's case, the transcriptions were circulated under his name, whereas, Mark's Gospel, as far as we know, was never circulated under Peter's name. Perhaps this is due to the fact that Mark was more instrumental in "composing" material while keeping it faithful to Peter's teaching. Also, Quintilian does not seem to be too pleased that this writing is circulating under his name and would rather have something more polished and complete attributed to him.
__________
Bibliography

Holmes, Michael W., ed. The Apostolic Fathers: Greek texts and English translations. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1999.

Quintilian. 2006. Institutes of Oratory. Ed. Lee Honeycutt. Trans. John Selby Watson. http://rhetoric.eserver.org/quintilian/ (accessed June 30, 2016).

What Are the New Testament Autographs?

I am privileged to have an article published in the June issue of the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society;

"What are the NT Autographs? An Examination of the Doctrine of Inspiration and Inerrancy in Light of Greco-Roman Publication." JETS 59/2 (June 2016): 287-308.

The abstract reads;

"This article explores the definition of the NT "autographs" as articulated in various inerrancy doctrinal statements. It begins by sketching the history of the doctrine of the inerrancy of the "autographs," followed by some modern criticisms of the doctrine. Greco-Roman publication composition and publication practices are surveyed by investigating three figures from the beginning of the Roman Imperial age through to its height: Cicero, Pliny the Younger, and Galen. Four extant examples of ancient papyrus "autographs" are examined, illustrating the draft and rewriting stages of composition. After analyzing Greco-Roman publication, a definition is proposed: in reference to the NT, the "autographs," as often discussed in biblical inerrancy doctrinal statements, should be defined as the completed authorial work which was released by the author for circulation and copying, not earlier draft versions or layers of composition."

A significant portion of the article focuses on select quotations from the letters and writings of Cicero, Pliny, and Galen illustrating that the writing process was often a long process which involved writing and rewriting. Friends and associates, scribes, and personal secretaries would often be a part of the editing process as well. All the while it was expected that these early draft stages of composition would not circulate beyond the immediate circle of associates who were offering feedback to these initial stages of composition. The key event that signaled the end of this process was the releasing of the work, by the author, for general circulation by the author's circle of acquaintances.
I also bring into the discussion a few extant examples of papyrus autographs. This is merely to illustrate that, usually, early stages of the writing process were characterized by rewriting, editing, deletions, and corrections. These papyrus copies were obviously not meant for wider circulation because they were incomplete. Of course, the event that would signal the completion of the composition process would be the releasing of the document for circulation by the author's associates.
Therefore, I think that, in light of this practice, the doctrinal statements should define the New Testament "autographs" in the same manner, that is, the completed form of the New Testament writings that were released for circulation.

Valentin de Boulogne, Apostle Paul Writing

Quintilian on Reading

While working my way through Raffaella Cribiore's "Writers, Teachers, and Students of Graeco-Roman Egypt," I came across an interesting comment made by Quintilian (95 CE) concerning the act of reading a text.

"The syllables once learnt, let him begin to construct words with them and sentences with words. You will hardly believe how much reading is delayed by undue haste. If the child attempts more than his powers allow, the inevitable result is hesitation, interruption and repetition, and mistakes which he makes merely lead him to lose confidence in what he already knows. Reading must therefore first be sure, then connected, while it must be kept slow for a considerable time, until practice brings speed unaccompanied by error. For to look to the right, which is regularly taught, and to look ahead depends not so much on precept as on practice; since it is necessary to keep the eyes on what follows while reading out what precedes, with the resulting difficulty that the attention of the mind must be divided, the eyes and voice being differently engaged." (Inst. Or. 1.1.31-34)

It is interesting that Quintilian is describing a very difficult multi-tasking operation in reading. The eyes must always be looking ahead at the text that is about to be read out-loud, in order to decipher the text while the voice is "speaking" the previous sections that had already been deciphered. The labor and effort in practicing this is apparent as Quintilian states that reading "must be kept slow for a considerable time." It seems that most of this difficulty was caused by the format of the bookroll, that is, the scriptio continua and the lack of punctuation and reader's aids.
 

Closeup of a Mosaic Depicting Virgil Holding a Bookroll

________________
Bibliography

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.