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) 

3,000 Year old Egyptian Papyrus Bookroll

Recently archaeologistst in Egypt uncovered a Funerary Temple in Saqqara that belonged to Queen Nearit wife of pharaoh Teti who reigned from circa 2323 B.C. to 2291 B.C. Close by the pyramid of Teti, where the Temple was discovered, several burial shafts were uncovered that contained the remains of people who lived from circa 1550 B.C. to 1186 B.C. Many coffins were found in these shafts that belonged to a Pharoah worshiping cult. Amongst these coffins was one that belonged to Pwkhaef, along with four figurines meant to help the person in the afterlife. One of the more fascinating finds was the remains of a thirteen foot long papyrus bookroll that contained what looks to be chapter seventeen of the well known "Book of the Dead" and this roll also has the name Pwkhaef inscribed upon it. Though a precise date is uncertain as of now, it was most likely placed in the burial shaft along with the coffin and other artifacts during the period from circa 1550 B.C. to 1186 B.C. That means that this papyrus book is well over 3,000 years old. Judging by the press release images, the roll is very fragmentary, yet this bookroll is an example of the incredible length of time papyrus books could last (though in an extrememly fragmentary state) for hundreds of years in the right conditions.

______________________________________ 

SOURCES 

Egyptian Antiquities Ministry Press Release http://www.antiquities.gov.eg/DefaultAr/pages/NewsDetails.aspx?newsid=2420 

Live Science Press Release 

https://www.livescience.com/queen-temple-book-of-dead-found-egypt.html

Seneca: The Fate of an Unused Bookroll

There has been a lot of talk in recent years on the length of time an ancient book, or even "autograph" may have been in use. I briefly addressed this topic in "Myths and Mistakes in New Testament Textual Criticism," Chapter two "Myths About Autographs." In that chapter I cite a comment from the second century physician Galen where he mentions that some of the bookrolls were in an unusable state of decay (even while being stored in a Roman library).

"These (books), then, did not cause me a small pain when copying them. As it is, the papyri are completely useless, not even able to be un-rolled because they have been glued together by decomposition, since the region is both marshy and low-lying, and, during the summer, is stifling." (De indolentia 19).

This passaing comment by Galen is remarkably similar to Seneca the Younger's comments over one hundred years previously (ca. 60s CE). When writing to his friend Lucilius, Seneca attempted to answer a previous question and his response is telling.

"The subject concerning which you question me was once clear to my mind, and required no thought, so thoroughly had I mastered it. But I have not tested my memory of it for some time, and therefore it does not readily come back to me. I feel that I have suffered the fate of a book whose rolls have stuck together by disuse; my mind needs to be unrolled, and whatever has been stored away there ought to be examined from time to time, so that it may be ready for use when occasion demands." (Seneca, Ep. 72).

Though made in passing, Seneca's comments reveal that more is at stake for a book to be usable than merely lasting for many years. Even if a book remains on a shelf in a library, it can become unusable or, at best, very difficult to use because the roll will stick together from lack of use. It would be important then for those who cared for books in collections to exercise these rolls periodically in order to help prevent them from sticking together and decaying as both Seneca and Galen mention.

_________________________________

Clare K. Rothschild and Trevor W. Thompson, "Galen:'On the Avoidance of Grief,'" EC 2.1 (2011): 110-129.

Seneca. Epistles, Volume II: Epistles 66-92. Translated by Richard M. Gummere. Loeb Classical Library 76. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1920.

Vitruvius on the Properly Situated Villa Library

Marcus Vitruvius Pollio (80-15 BCE) was a Roman architect and military engineer that lived during the fall of the Roman Republic and the beginning of the imperial era. He is best known for his work "On Architecture" which influenced many great writers and thinkers over the centuries. Vitruvius dedicated Book 6 of this work to the topic of planning a Roman Villa. In one section he discussed the importance of orienting certain rooms towards the sunlight.

"I shall now describe how the different sorts of buildings are placed as regards their aspects. Winter triclinia and baths are to face the winter west, because the afternoon light is wanted in them; and not less so because the setting sun casts its rays upon them, and but its heat warms the aspect towards the evening hours. Bed chambers and libraries should be towards the east, for their purposes require the morning light: in libraries the books are in this aspect preserved from decay; those that are towards the south and west are injured by the worm and by the damp, which the moist winds generate and nourish, and spreading the damp, make the books mouldy." (De Arch., 6.4.1)

It is notable that Vitruvius includes a "library" with all the rooms that make up an ideal Roman Villa. 
The other interesting facet are the effects that solar heat, moisture, and airflow have upon the proper storage and preservation of the books. He indicates that libraries that face away from the morning sun (to the south and west) are in danger of becoming worm eaten and moldy, and decayed with moisture.
Though this is a passing statement by Vitruvius, I gather that it reflects an observed (and perhaps calculated) reality of the preservation and decay of books. Even when stored within a personal library (thus the owner would have vested interest its maintenance and preservation) books could still be subjected to decay and damage. This is not unlike the comments made by Galen that some of books he encountered in the Roman libraries were often in an almost unusable state due to decay and moisture (Peri Alupias 19)
These factors affected the longevity and useful life of books, even when stored within a personal library.
__________________

Vitruvius, De Architectura. (Joseph Gwilt, translator. London: Priestley and Weale, 1826).

Aristotle's Long Lasting Library

A first century copy of Aristotle's Constitutions. Papyrus 131

In connection with his academy it is known from ancient sources that Aristotle possessed a collection of books, a combination of his own, student's, and other philosopher's writings. Aristotle handed down this library on to his successor Theophrastus, who then bequeathed the collection to his follower Neleus. After Neleus failed to step in the leadership role of the Academy, he moved the collection to Skepsis (in Asia Minor). After this time the library was poorly cared for, at one point being buried in a trench! Years later the library was acquired by Apellicon, an Athenian collector and the books were moved to Athens. Strabo (quoted at length in full below), notes that Apellicon attempted to restore these works, without success, by filling in the lacuna now present in these copies due to decay. Later Sulla took (stole) the entire library and took it to Rome. Here booksellers gained access to these works and poorly transcribed them and circulated these poor copies widely. At this time, Aristotle's and Theophrastus's books would have been some 250 years old (Gamble, "Books and Readers in the Early Church," 177). Following is Strabo's account in full;

"From Scepsis came the Socratic philosophers Erastus and Coriscus and Neleus the son of Corsica's, this last a man who not only was a pupil of Aristotle and Theophrastus, but also inherited the library of Theophrastus, which included that of Aristotle. At any rate, Aristotle bequeathed his own library to Theophrastus, to whom he also left his school; and he is the first man, so far as I know, to have collected books and to have taught the kings in Egypt how to arrange a library. Theophrastus bequeathed it to Neleus; and Neleus took it to Scepsis and bequeathed it to his heirs, ordinary people, who kept the books locked up and not even carefully stored. But when they heard bow zealously the Attalic kings to whom the city was subject were searching for books to build up the library in Pergamum, they hid their books underground in a kind of trench. But much later, when the books had been damaged by moisture and moths, their descendants sold them to Apellicon of Teos for a large sum of money, both the books of Aristotle and those of Theophrastus. But Apellicon was a bibliophile rather than a philosopher; and therefore, seeking a restoration of the parts that had been eaten through, he made new copies of the text, filling up the gaps incorrectly, and published the books full of errors. The result was that the earlier school of Peripatetics who came after Theophrastus had no books at all, with the exception of only a few, mostly exoteric works, and were therefore able to philosophize about nothing in a practical way, but only to talk bombast about commonplace propositions, whereas the later school, from the time the books in question appeared, though better able to philosophise and Aristotelise, were forced to call most of their statements probabilities, because of the large number of errors. Rome also contributed much to this; for, immediately after the death of Apellicon, Sulla, who had captured Athens, carried off Apellicon's library to Rome, where Tyrannion the grammarian, who was fond of Aristotle, got it in his hands by paying court to the librarian, as did also certain booksellers who used bad copyists and would not collate the texts—a thing that also takes place in the case of the other books that are copied for selling, both here and at Alexandria. However, this is enough about these men." (Strabo, Geogr. 13.1.54; translation taken from Perseus)

 There are several intriguing features of this account that should be drawn out.

• This library contained copies of Aristotle's and Theophrastus's works that were made under their direction, yet, because of the decay of long years, the transcriptions made directly from these copies were poorly done and thus interjected textual corruptions early in the history of transmission, both during Apellicon's time and years later when Sulla possessed the library in Rome.
• These books did last for at least 250 years or so (supporting Houston's conclusion that books in antiquity had a useful life of 100-300 years), however, these authorial copies of Aristotle's and Theophrastus's works were not always available for use because at some point the collection was buried in a trench!
• The collection, though preserved over two centuries by the time it came to Rome, passed into many different hands and was transported across a wide geographical region. Different communities with their own agendas and priorities controlled access to these texts.

_____________________________________________

Gamble, Harry Y. Books and Readers in the Early Church: A History of Early Christian Texts. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995.

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

Julius Africanus and A Short Lived Book

George Houston, in his work “Inside Roman Libraries,” surveyed book collections in antiquity, analyzed their contents, the date of composition, and the rough date of the discarding of the collection, or, in the case of the library at Herculaneum, the last known period of use. From these data Houston wrote;

"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." (p. 257)

These dates are not entirely novel, however, for E. G. Turner stated many decades earlier that,

"In the second case, that of a literary roll which has afterwards been used for a document such as a dated or datable letter, there is a probability, which may differ from example to example, that a longish life should be assigned to the literary text, perhaps 50, perhaps even 100 years." (Turner, GMAW2, 19)

Of course, all of these dates are approximate and are based on papyri that have been randomly preserved from antiquity. In some instances though, ancient books had a much shorter useful life and the papyrus was repurposed for another document. This is the case for P.Oxy III.412, a well known fragment of a bookroll containing a work of Julius Africanus, a Christian writer who lived ca. 160-240 CE. This is an encyclopedic piece entitled "Kestoi" and was likely written some time in the 220's CE, though very little is known about the details of his life.

P. Oxy III.412 (Thompson, plt. 14 pg. 134)

This copy of Julius Africanus's "Kestoi" was not valued for too long however, because the bookroll was reused on the reverse for a cursive document dated to 275-276 CE. If one assumes that this copy is not in close proximity to the author (mainly due to some evidence of textual corruption) and if one allows for at least a generation of use for the roll before it was repurposed, then the book was probably copied in the 240's or 250's CE.

This level of precision in dating a literary book is rare and because of this, P.Oxy III.412 is valuable to palaeographers for dating the type of script that was used to copy this roll; the "Alexandrian Stylistic Class" (Orsini, pg. 62).  A search in the Leuven Database of Ancient Books reveals several New Testament manuscripts that are assigned to this stylistic class. Thankfully, some ancient books such as P.Oxy III.412 had a short useful life so that modern palaeographers have a more securely dated example by which to compare and date New Testament manuscripts.
________________

Bibliography

Grenfell B., P., and Author S. Hunt, eds. Oxyrhynchus Papyri. Part 3: Nos 401-653. London: Egypt Exploration Fund, 1903: pages 36-41.

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

Orsini, Pasquale. "I Papiri Bodmer: scritture e libri." Adamantius 21 (2015): 60-78.

Thompson, Edward Maunde. An Introduction to Greek and Latin Palaeography. Oxford: At the Clarendon Press, 1912.

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

Here is an interesting blog post by James Snapp that discusses P Oxy 412

How Long a Book? The Useful Life of Papyrus and Parchment Books

George Houston, in his work “Inside Roman Libraries,” surveyed book collections in antiquity, analyzed their contents, the date of composition, and the rough date of the discarding of the collection in a trash heap, or, in the case of the library at Herculaneum, the last known period of use. From these data Houston concluded that the useful life of papyrus bookrolls was on average 100-125 years and 300 to 500 years in extreme cases (pg. 257).

There is some difference, however, in the useful life of papyrus and parchment books in the various climates where they may be used for making books. In the later part of the second century, the physician Galen described the process of copying out books that were in a Roman library in order to preserve, for his own collection, copies of these works;

"These (books), then, did not cause me a small pain when copying them. As it is, the papyri are completely useless, not even able to be unrolled because they have been glued together by decomposition, since the region is both marshy and low-lying, and, during the summer, it is stifling." (Peri Alupias 19)

It is clear that in the more humid climate of Rome, the useful life of papyrus, if not properly cared for, was much reduced. As Galen so richly describes, the damp atmosphere quickly decomposed the organic papyrus material.

Library of Celsus in Ephesus (ca. 135 CE)

Examples From the Caesarean Library
In the more arid environment of the East, papyrus books could have a very long life. In the library of Caesarea in Palestine, Pamphilus (ca. 280 CE) set about making copies of Origen's works, in his own hand, in order to build the library's inventory. Apparently, these works were still present in the library, and in use, over 100 years later when Jerome wrote (ca. 392 CE);

Pamphilus the presbyter, patron of Eusebius bishop of Caesarea, was so inflamed with love of sacred literature, that he transcribed the greater part of the works of Origen with his own hand and these are still preserved in the library at Caesarea. (Jerome, Vir ill. 75; NPNF 2:377)

It is apparent that Pamphilus copied these works on papyrus because Jerome noted that Eusebius' immediate successors set about restoring the Caesarean Library's inventory in parchment codices.

"Euzoius was educated as a young man at Caesarea along with Gregory, the bishop of Nazianzus, under the rhetor Thespesius and later became bishop of the same city; with very great toil he attempted to restore on parchment (codices(?); membranis) the library of Origen and Pamphilus that had been damaged." (Jerome, Vir ill. 113; translation taken from Carriker, p. 23, n. 70)

Therefore, the works that Jerome had noted, that were in the hand of Pamphilus, were papyrus books that were still in use in the Caesarean library over 100 years later during Jerome's lifetime.

It is noteworthy, however, that Euzoius set about to restore the library's works in parchment codices, rather than papyrus. This was likely due to the fact that parchment was much more durable and had an incredibly long shelf life. As was noted in a previous post, the parchment Codex Sinaiticus, which was copied sometime ca. 350 CE, was still being used in the 6th or 7th centuries when scribes corrected the text to "an extremely old copy corrected in the hand of the holy martyr Pamphilus." Thus, the Codex Sinaiticus was still being used and consulted by scholars 200-300 years after its creation!

At least in the case of the Caesarean Library, papyrus books had a useful life of more than 100 years, and parchment many times longer.
____________
Bibliography

Carriker, Andrew James. The Library of Eusebius of Caesarea. VCsup 67. Leiden: Brill, 2003.

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

Clare K. Rothschild and Trevor W. Thompson. "Galen: 'On the Avoidance of Grief,' " Early Christianity 2 (2011) 110-129

P75, P66, and the Useful Life of Papyrus Codices

The Summer 2016 issue of The Journal of Biblical Literature published a new piece by Brent Nongbri, a researcher at Macquarie University of Sydney, Australia: 

"Reconsidering the Place of Papyrus Bodmer XIV–XV (𝔓75) in the Textual Criticism of the New Testament." Journal of Biblical Literature 135, no. 2 (2016): 405-37.

In this essay, Nongbri argues that Papyrus Bodmer XIV–XV (P75) should be dated into the fourth century (ca. 350 CE) rather than in the first half of the third century. This new proposed date is 100-150 years later than the traditional ca. 200-250 CE date. His essay follows a similar line of argumentation as in his previous article which contended for a fourth century date for P66 as well.

“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.

One interesting line of evidence which Nongbri brings to bear in these articles is that both codices appear to originate from the same ancient library/collection, the so-called Bodmer collection. A large portion of the collection dates into the 4th and 5th centuries. Therefore, Nongbri argues, this is evidence that both P66 and P75 date into the 4th century as well.

The Useful Life of Papyrus Codices.

I do not wish to debate the particulars of Nongbri's assessment, however, what I thought interesting was that the latest pieces included in the Bodmer collection date to the 5th century. And, if some of the additional papyri that Robinson contended were part of the assemblage as well, then the latest pieces date into the 6th or 7th centuries ("The Limits," pg. 25). What this means is that the manuscripts could not have been deposited in their location any earlier than the 5th century (probably the latter part of that century). Even if one agrees with Nongbri's 4th century date for P66 and P75, then these codices were in use for at least 100-150 years before they were discarded, add another 200 years if the collection was deposited in the 7th century. If the traditional dating holds for these codices (early third century) then we are looking at a useful life of 200-250 years, or, if the Bodmer papyri were deposited in the 7th century, 400-450 years of useful life.

In his masterful study of Roman libraries, George Houston noted the useful life of papyrus bookrolls:

"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)

The useful life of P66 and P75 appear to fall within the upper end of Houston's assessment. However, it is important to note that Houston's observations were specifically in regard to bookrolls and not codices (for the difference between bookrolls and codices read here). In the case of the Bodmer papyri, we have at least one instance from antiquity that confirms Houston's assessment with regard to the useful life of the papyrus codex as well.

The Marks of a Long Useful Life.
 
Nongbri notes that P75 had been rebound and repaired sometime in antiquity and bore other marks of continued use ("Reconsidering," pg. 431-432). Besides the evidence of rebinding, P75 has several interesting marginal notations that are not made by the original copyist's hand. Nongbri notes that at least two of these marginal notations use a 4th or 5th century majuscule hand ("Reconsidering," pg. 432-433).

P75 Marginal Note in Later Majuscule Hand

P75 Marginal Note in Later Majuscule Hand

Whether or not one agrees or disagrees with Nongbri's dating of P66 and P75 into the 4th century, he has teased out some very interesting details that highlight the long useful life of papyrus codices. Those who read them in antiquity obviously valued them. They repaired these books and rebound them. They studied their texts while making notes in the margin. These codices are more than just husks that carried texts, they are ancient artifacts that inform us on how early Christians used and valued these books.
(For more discussion on the useful life of papyrus books, read here, and read here)

________________________
Bibliography

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

Nongbri, Brent. "Reconsidering the Place of Papyrus Bodmer XIV–XV (𝔓75) in the Textual Criticism of the New Testament." Journal of Biblical Literature 135, no. 2 (2016): 405-37.

____________. “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.

The Church Fathers and The Useful life of Ancient Books

I recently finished reading through George Houston's, Inside Roman Libraries: Book Collections and Their Management in Antiquity, and was struck by the wonderful insights that Houston discovered in his detailed study of Roman libraries. In many ways these insights illuminate the world of Christian book collections and manuscripts as much as they do Roman libraries.
This is especially true of Houston's observations on the useful life of papyrus book rolls. In the conclusion to Inside Roman Libraries, Houston wrote;

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. (p. 257)

Houston's observations are helpful in understanding some of the references made by various Church fathers to ancient manuscripts consulted during their studies.

Irenaeus's Ancient Copies
Writing at the end of the second century, Irenaeus of Lugdunum, in his Against Heresies, discussed at length an important variant that was present in some manuscript copies of Revelation in circulation in his day. Irenaeus wrote that the number of the beast, 666, was "found in all the most approved and ancient copies" yet some manuscripts contained the number 616 (Hear. 5.30.1). If the average life of a papyrus book was 100 to 125 years, then it is possible that Irenaeus was referring to manuscripts that were 75 or more years old. It may be surmised then, that the manuscript copies that contained the 616 variant reading were not as old in Irenaeus's estimation. The Greek phrase used by Irenaeus here (preserved by Eusebius in Hist. eccl. 5.8) was ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς σπουδαίοις καὶ ἀρχαἰοις ἀντιγράφοις. The Greek word ἀρχαἰοις (ancient) used to describe the age of the manuscripts of Revelation that read 666 was the same word used by Irenaeus to describe Papias as "a man of the early period," or in the Greek, "ἀρχαἰος ἀνήρ" (preserved by Eusebius in Hist. eccl. 3.39). According to Eusebius, Papias was at the peak of his career near the beginning of Emperor Trajan's reign at around 100 CE (Hist. eccl. 3.39). Thus, in Irenaeus's mind, copies of Revelation that dated to the beginning of the second century would have been "ancient." And these copies would have been well within the 100 to 125 year useful life of papyrus manuscripts observed by Houston.

Tertullian and the Autographs
Writing in the early third century, Tertullian in Carthage North Africa wrote;

Come now, you who would indulge a better curiosity, if you would apply it to the business of your salvation, run over to the apostolic churches, in which the very thrones of the apostles are still preeminent in their places, in which their own authentic writings are read, uttering the voice and representing the face of each of them severally. (Praescr. 36; ANF 3:261; emphasis mine)

This has been a much disputed passage with discussions going at least as far back as Charles Hodge at Princeton University in the early 1800s.
The Latin word used by Tertullian here for "authentic writings" is "authenticae litterae." According to the Latin dictionary available on Perseus, this word means; "that comes from the author, authentic, original, genuine . . . the original writing, the original." It seems then that Tertullian was telling his readers that he thought the original apostolic documents were being read in the apostolic Churches in the early third century. It is difficult for me to accept that the original writings of, say, Paul were still existing at Rome or Corinth, but it may have been that very early copies of these writings were still being read in these Churches. If we consider the useful life of papyrus documents given by Houston, of 100 to 125 years with an upper limit of 300 years, then it is entirely possible that copies of Paul's letters dating to the later half of the first century were still being read in some Churches.

The Colophon of Pamphilus in Sinaiticus
In the fourth century manuscript of the Christian Bible, Codex Sinaiticus, there is preserved at the end of 2 Esdras and again at the end of Esther a colophon stating (from the end of 2 Esdras);

Collated against an extremely old copy corrected in the hand of the holy martyr Pamphilus, which copy at the end has a signature in his own hand, reading thus:
Copied from and corrected against the Hexapla of Origen
Antoninus collated
I, Pamphilus, corrected. (Parker, Codex Sinaiticus, 81)

According to Milne and Skeat, these corrections, and the corresponding colophon, date to the 6th or 7th century (Metzger, Text of the New Testament, 4th ed., 67). The Greek phrase in the colophon at the end of 2 Esdras reads "αντεβληθη προϲ παλαιω τατον λιαν αντιγραφον," the  Greek word παλαιω already means "old" but the adverb "λιαν" was added which means "very" or "extremely." Thus this manuscript must have been considered very old at the time and was valued for its textual pedigree. If we consider that Houston noted examples of papyrus book rolls still in use 300 and even 500 years after they were fabricated, then it is feasible that there was a 300 to 400 year-old copy of the Greek Bible corrected against the Hexapla by Pamphilus still present at the library of Caesarea.
Origen's Hexapla, and Pamphilus's copies were still present in Caesarea in the 5th century when Jerome wrote;

Pamphilus the presbyter, patron of Eusebius bishop of Caesarea, was so inflamed with love of sacred literature, that he transcribed the greater part of the works of Origen with his own hand and these are still preserved in the library at Caesarea. (Jerome, Vir ill. 75; NPNF 2:377)

The Second/Third Century New Testament Text
If Pamphilus's manuscripts were still available for reference in the 6th century, 300 years after they were copied, it may be representative of other major Christian centers. The Churches of Rome, Corinth, Antioch, Smyrna, Ephesus, Philippi, and others, may have had very old manuscripts of Christian writings available for reference and copying for several hundred years. Perhaps Irenaeus had sent a letter to Ephesus or Smyrna asking them to check their ancient copies of Revelation.
Manuscripts of the New Testament such as P66 and P75 give evidence of a high-quality textual pedigree and careful copying and, due to their extensive repairs, show evidence of a long useful life. Because of the apparent longevity of ancient books it is possible that the extant manuscripts of the New Testament preserved from the late second and early third century may have been copied from exemplars 100 years older and actually represent the state of the text at around ca. 100 CE and not just at ca 200 CE.

(For more discussion on explicit references to manuscripts in Church fathers, read here.)

Bibliography
Eusebius of Caesarea. The Ecclesiastical History, Books I-V. Translated by Kirsopp Lake. Vol 1. Loeb Classical Library. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1926.

Gamble, Harry Y. Books and Readers in the Early Church: A History of Early Christian Texts. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995.

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

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

Metzger, Bruce Manning, and Bart D. Ehrman. The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration. 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.

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