New Testament Manuscripts
Papyri
Contents: 𝔓1 * 𝔓4 * 𝔓9 * 𝔓10 * 𝔓11 [+ 𝔓14] * 𝔓12 * 𝔓13 * 𝔓15 * 𝔓20 * 𝔓23 * 𝔓24 * 𝔓26 * 𝔓27 * 𝔓28 * 𝔓31 * 𝔓32 * 𝔓37 * 𝔓38 * 𝔓39 * 𝔓44 * 𝔓45 * 𝔓46 * 𝔓48 * 𝔓49 * 𝔓50 * 𝔓51 * 𝔓52 * 𝔓53 * 𝔓54 * 𝔓61 * 𝔓64+𝔓67 * 𝔓72 * 𝔓74 * 𝔓75 * 𝔓78 * 𝔓79 * 𝔓81 * 𝔓90 *
Note: Many of the papyri, especially the Beatty and Bodmer papyri, have been subject to so much discussion that no attempt is made to compile a full bibliography.
𝔓1
Location/Catalog Number
University of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia), Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology Egypt Sect. E 2746 (formerly known as Museum of Science and Art E 2746). Designated by its discoverers Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 2. Found by Grenfell and Hunt in 1897, and granted to the University in 1904. It is said to have been found on the second day of Grenfell and Hunt's expedition.
Contents
Matthew 1:1-9, 12, 14-20.
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the third century.
Description and Text-type
A codex. The surviving portion consists of one fairly-complete folio and part of another, with one column per page. We have 24 lines on the extant folio; it is estimated that there were originally 29. It appears the folios were numbered, since there is a numeral ᾱ in the upper margin of the verso.
Von Soden classified it as H (Alexandrian), which is surely correct. Hedley declared it closer to B than to ℵ. The Alands regard it as a "strict" text, although as usual they give no basis for the assessment.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Old Gregory: Ts
von Soden: ε01
Bibliography
Collations:
Sample Plates:
Editions which cite:
Cited with all editions starting from von Soden.
Other Works:
Kenneth W. Clark, A Descriptive Catalogue of Greek New Testament Manuscripts in America, pp. 341-342.
Comfort, Early Manuscripts & Modern Translations of the New
Testament, p. 32
𝔓4
Location/Catalog Number
Paris, National Library Suppl. Greek 1120.
Contents
Luke 1:58-59, 1;62-2:1, 2:6-7, 3:8-4:2, 4:29-32, 4:32-35, 5:3-8, 5:30-6:16
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the third century by most scholars, but Roberts suggested that it is part of the same manuscript as 𝔓64+𝔓67, which is often dated c. 200. (See below).
Description and Text-type
Aland and Aland list 𝔓4 as Category I with a "Normal" text. Von Soden listed it as H (Alexandrian), which is quite clearly correct; it has a number of significant readings shared with ℵ and B.
Grenfell and Hunt apparently suggested that 𝔓34 (containing John 16:14-30) is from the same codex as 𝔓4. No one else seems to have accepted this suggestion.
More widely quoted is the suggestion that 𝔓4 is part of the same document as 𝔓64+𝔓67. This is certainly possible on chronological grounds, and it is generally agreed that the handwriting used in the two is very similar. The latter pair, however, contain fragments of Matthew. If 𝔓4 and 𝔓64+𝔓67 are indeed one manuscript, they represent quite possibly the earliest instance of a papyrus containing more than one gospel. Peter Weigandt, Joseph van Haelst, C. H. Roberts, and T. C. Skeat have all argued for the identification, on the basis of script; Peter Head and Scott Charlesworth argued against it on other grounds. (For a more detailed summary, see Tommy Wasserman's article "A Comparative Textual Analysis of 𝔓4 and 𝔓P64+67." Thanks to James Dowden for pointing out this article.)
I personally do not think the evidence sufficient to draw firm conclusions; if I had to guess, I would guess the two fragments are from two different codices copied by the same scribe. But I certainly would not be dogmatic. So far, the list of manuscripts in NA28 does not list 𝔓4 and 𝔓64+𝔓67 as being the same manuscript.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
von Soden: ε34
Bibliography
Collations:
Sample Plates:
Editions which cite:
Cited in all editions since Von Soden.
Other Works:
Comfort, Early Manuscripts & Modern Translations of the New
Testament, pp. 33-34
The already-cited Wasserman article "A Comparative Textual Analysis of 𝔓4 and 𝔓P64+67" contains a great deal of detail about the readings of this manuscript. However, the self-referential nature of Aland-based textual criticism (if you already know the correct reading of the text, which their method assumes, why do you have to study the manuscripts?), which it uses extensively, makes the conclusions quite dubious.
𝔓9
Location/Catalog Number
Cambridge (Massachusetts), Harvard University, Semitic Museum, Pap. 3736, Designated by its discoverers Oxyrhynchus papyrus 402.
Contents
1 John 4:11-12, 14-17, with much damage, especially on the recto (where only six lines survive; there are eleven lines surviving on the verso)
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the third century in Nestle-Aland; fourth or fifth century by Kenneth Clark. Das Neue Testament auf Papyrus, p. 9, declares the orthography "very bad" ("sehr schlecht").
Description and Text-type
Von Soden considered it to be H (Alexandrian). The Alands put it in Category I but consider it carelessly written (a sentiment echoed by Comfort). This is backed by the only reading cited in NA28: in 4:15, 𝔓9-vid, alone, has αυτω εστιν for τω θεω. Also, in 4:16, it appears to read χς for θς, again uniquely.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
von Soden: α1009
Bibliography
Editions:
B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt, Oxyrhynchus Papyri III (1903)
K. Junack, W. Grunewald, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, I. Die Katholischen Briefe; such text as there is is on pp. 141-143.
Collations:
Sample Plates:
Editions which cite:
Cited in all editions since Von Soden.
Other Works:
Kenneth W. Clark, A Descriptive Catalogue of Greek New Testament Manuscripts in America, pp. 117-118.
Comfort, Early Manuscripts & Modern Translations of the New
Testament, pp. 35-36.
K. Junack, W. Grunewald, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, I. Die Katholischen Briefe, pp. 9-10.
𝔓10
Location/Catalog Number
Cambridge (Massachusetts), Harvard University, Semitic Museum, Pap. 2218 Designated by its discoverers Oxyrhynchus papyrus 209.
Contents
Romans 1:1-7 (recto); the verso does not contain any New Testament text, and Turner did not consider it a codex.
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the fourth century -- probably early in the century. The documents found with it included a contract dated to 316 C.E. Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, p. 30, describes the orthography as rather poor ("relativ schlecht"); their characterization includes a very high number of mis-spellings and itacisms. One curiosity is the use of δαυδ, without an overbar, for δαυιδ -- is this a mis-spelling or a botched nominum sacrum or something else?
Description and Text-type
Aland and Aland list 𝔓10 as Category I. Von Soden did not list a type. Most authorities would probably list it as Alexandrian.
The only variant for which it is cited in Bover, Merk, or NA27 is Romans 1:1, where it agrees with B 81 m am cav dubl ful hub reg val in reading χριστου ιησου for ιησου χριστου of 𝔓26 ℵ A G 1739 Byz and all other uncials. In 1:6, seemingly alone among all witnesses, it omits αυτου εν οις εστε και υμεις κλητοι, and in 1:7, it has κυριου χριστου Ιησου. There are a few other orthographic oddities, which would fit with Grenfell and Hunt's suggestion that it was a practice text.
Deissman suggested that this was written for use in an amulet. He believes the owner was probably named Aurelius Paulus, since that name appears in the lower margin. Grenfell and Hunt believed it to have been a school child's practice copy. It almost certainly was not meant to be part of a complete text of Paul; perhaps it was discarded once the error in 1:6 was noticed.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
von Soden: α1032
Cited as Td before Gregory renumbered the manuscript.
Bibliography
Collations and Editions:
K. Junack, E. Güting, U. Nimtz, K. Witte, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, II,. Die Paulinischen Briefe, Teil 1; such text as there is is on pp. 1-4.
Sample Plates:
Editions which cite:
Cited in all editions since Von Soden.
Other Works:
Kenneth W. Clark, A Descriptive Catalogue of Greek New Testament Manuscripts in America, pp. 115-116.
Comfort, Early Manuscripts & Modern Translations of the New
Testament, p. 36.
K. Junack, E. Güting, U. Nimtz, K. Witte, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, II, Die Paulinischen Briefe, Teil 1 pp. XXI-XXII.
𝔓11 [+𝔓14]
Location/Catalog Number
𝔓11: Saint Petersburg, Russian National Library Gr. 258A
𝔓14: Mount Sinai, St. Katherine's Monastery MS. Harris 14
Contents
𝔓11: 1 Corinthians 1:17-22, 2:9-12, 2:14, 3:1-3, 3:5-6, 4:3-5:5, 5:7-8, 6:5-9, 6:11-18, 7:3-6, 7:10-14
𝔓14: 1 Corinthians 1:25-27, 2:6-8, 3:8-10, 3:20
Even the surviving verses of both fragments are heavily damaged (so much so that Tischendorf was unable to tell whether the fragments he had were of five or six leaves).
It is widely believed that 𝔓11 and 𝔓14 are part of the same manuscript; NA28 lists them together with a question mark, and Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus lists their contents together.
Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus lists seventeen fragments, denominated by roman numerals, as part of the St. Petersburg portion 𝔓11 and seven, designated by roman letters, as part of the Sinai portion 𝔓14.
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the seventh century. Some older manuals give its date as the fifth century, but this was based on comparison with uncial manuscripts; a comparison with the style of papyri resulted in the change. The orthography is described by Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus as fair to good ("mittelmäßig bis gut").
Description and Text-type
Aland and Aland list 𝔓11 as Category II. Von Soden listed its text as "H or I."
In fact the text of 𝔓11 seems fairly ordinary (though its fragmentary nature makes a firm determination difficult; the Nestle text, for instance, cites it explicitly only about fifteen times, most often with the Alexandrian group ℵ A C 33, but also with the Byzantine and "Western" texts; there appears to be some slight kinship with the later members of Family 1739, particularly 1881). NA28 does not cite the 𝔓14 portion at all although it is listed as a constant witness; Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus -- which cites it as 𝔓11 -- shows only three variants, one of which might be orthographic, one described as a haplography, and one only videtur, so there really isn't much testimony from that portion of the manuscript! Overall, the best description of its text is probably "mixed," although most of the readings are old. It does not appear to have any immediate relatives.
The most noteworthy thing about 𝔓11, therefore, is not its text but its history: It was the first biblical papyrus to be discovered (Tischendorf observed it in 1862), and the only one to be cited in Tischendorf (as Q).
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
von Soden: α1020
Tischendorf: Qp
Bibliography
Collations and Editions:
Ellwood M. Schofield, The Papyrus Fragments of the Greek New Testament
K. Junack, E. Güting, U. Nimtz, K. Witte, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, II, Die Paulinischen Briefe, Teil 1; such text as there is is scattered across pp. 158-209.
Sample Plates:
Editions which cite:
Cited in all editions since Tischendorf.
Other Works:
Kurt Aland, "Neutestamentliche Papyri," NTS 3
K. Junack, E. Güting, U. Nimtz, K. Witte, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, II,. Die Paulinischen Briefe, Teil 1 pp. XXIII-XXIV.
𝔓12
Location/Catalog Number
New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, Pap G. 3b (formerly Amherst IIIb). Recovered by Grenfell and Hunt in 1897, it went into the collection of Lord Amherst of Norfolk; after his death in 1909, Morgan acquired it in 1913.
Contents
Contains Hebrews 1:1 (only)
Date/Scribe
𝔓12 is a curiosity: a papyrus written in cursive rather than uncials. It was not originally a Biblical manuscript; it is a letter from Rome to αδελφοι in the Arsinite nome of Egypt, who are asked to send the writer money in Alexandria. This letter, which is quite large, is written in three columns of 25 lines each -- in uncials. The uncial writing appears to be of the third century. The text of Hebrews was added probably in the fourth century, in the upper margin of the recto. The verso was originally blank, but someone -- probably the writer of the verse from Hebrews, although Brooke & McLean date it to the third century. -- copied onto it the text of Genesis 1:1-5 in the LXX version and Aquila's version. That side of the manuscript is Rahlfs 912; Brooke & McLean U2. (Given that B does not exist for those verses, it's a fairly important witness, but it appears from the Brooke & McLean apparatus that it agrees entirely with A except for omitting, probably by accident, the first sentence of Genesis 1:5.)
Description and Text-type
Von Soden knew the manuscript but did not classify it. The Alands call it Category I but admit that it is too brief to classify. It is a bit hard to read, but it appears to agree entirely with 𝔓46c (i.e. it agrees with UBS in all readings except that it adds ημων after πατρασιν; the two appear to be the only Greek witnesses with the reading although it is found in several Old Latin witnesses).
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Old Gregory: יb
von Soden: α1003
Bibliography
Collations:
See K. Junack, Das Neue Testament auf Papyrus, Vol. 2: Die paulinischen Briefe
Sample Plates:
Editions which cite:
Cited with all editions starting from von Soden.
Other Works:
Kenneth W. Clark, A Descriptive Catalogue of Greek New Testament Manuscripts in America, pp. 170-171.
Comfort, Early Manuscripts & Modern Translations of the New
Testament, p. 36.
𝔓13
Location/Catalog Number
London (British Library, Papyrus 1532 verso) and elsewhere (Florence, Cairo). Designated by its discoverers P. Oxy. 657
Contents𝔓13 is an opisthograph, with the epitome of Livy on the reverse side. Presumably the manuscript originally contained all of Hebrews (it has been suspected that it contained other material as well; a full-length scroll could contain rather more than twice the material found in Hebrews); it now retains Hebrews 2:14-5:5, 10:8-22, 10:29-11:13, 11:28-12:17, with many minor lacunae. Despite the damage, 𝔓13 is the most extensive papyrus outside the Beatty and Bodmer collections. Date/ScribeDated paleographically to the third or fourth century. It has been speculated that the scroll was carried to Egypt by a Roman official, then left behind and rewritten. |  Portions of two columns of 𝔓13, beginning with Hebrews 4:2. Note the extensive damage (which is even worse in the lower halves of the columns). 𝔓13 is the only extensive NT opisthograph. Observe the surviving numbering at the top of the left column. |
Description and Text-type
Aland and Aland list 𝔓13 as a free(?) text with "A number of distinctive readings, often with 𝔓46." Von Soden lists its text-type as H.
The most substantial of the Oxyrhynchus papyri, 𝔓13 is also perhaps the most important. As noted by Sanders and, later, the Alands, it frequently aligns with 𝔓46 (and -- perhaps even more often -- with B for the portions of Hebrews where both exist); Kenyon notes an 82% agreement rate between the two papyri (though it is not entirely clear how he defines this rate of agreement), with similarities even in punctuation and pagination. This even though the two cannot have had the same contents; a scroll simply could not contain ten Pauline letters. It is possible that 𝔓13 contained Romans and Hebrews, in that order, in which case it followed the same order as 𝔓46). 𝔓13 contains a number of singular and subsingular readings, but so do its kin 𝔓46 and B type; that's what happens when a type doesn't have many witnesses! Since this type contains only three other witnesses (𝔓46, B, and the Sahidic Coptic), 𝔓13 is an extremely important witness which has not, so far, received sufficient attention (Zuntz, e.g., never even mentions it in his work on 1 Corinthians and Hebrews).
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
von Soden: α1034
Designated P. Oxy. 657 in the Oxyrhynchus Papyri series.
Bibliography
Collations:
B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt, Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Volume 4.
See also K. Junack, Das Neue Testament auf Papyrus, Vol. 2: Die paulinischen Briefe
Sample Plates:
Comfort, Manuscripts of the Greek Bible (1 page)
Comfort, The Quest for the Original Text of the New Testament (1 page; same photo as above)
Editions which cite:
Cited in all editions since von Soden.
Other Works:
Philip W. Comfort, Early Manuscripts & Modern Translations of the New Testament, p. 37
𝔓15
Location/Catalog Number
Cairo, Egyptian Museum, JE 47423; Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 1008
Contents
Romans 7:18-8:4, with 7:18-32 on the verso and the rest on the recto.
Date/Scribe
Dated to the third or fourth century by all major examiners; NA28 says third. Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus says the orthography is relatively good ("relativ gut").
Description and Text-type
Von Soden described the text as H. The Alands call it Category I with "at least normal text." My informal examination showed a manuscript that is clearly not Byzantine, and agrees with 𝔓46, ℵ, A, and B more than D and G (especially in the latter pair's unique readings), but which had readings of all types; I certainly would not wish to declare it to belong to a particular subtype.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
von Soden: α1044. Designated P. Oxy. 1008 in the Oxyrhynchus Papyri series.
Bibliography
Collations and Editions:
B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt, Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Volume 7.
K. Junack, E. Güting, U. Nimtz, K. Witte, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, II, Die Paulinischen Briefe, Teil 1; such text as there is is on pp. 214-227.
Sample Plates:
Editions which cite:
Cited in all editions since Von Soden.
Other Works:
K. Junack, E. Güting, U. Nimtz, K. Witte, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, II, Die Paulinischen Briefe, Teil 1 pp. XXVI-XXVIII.
𝔓20
Location/Catalog Number
Princeton University Library, Am 4117. Found in Egypt by Grenfell and Hunt c. 1915, and numbered by them Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 1171.
Contents
Portions of James 2:19-3:9.
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the third century. Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, p. 11 calls the orthography "good."
Description and Text-type
𝔓20 is a fragment of a single leaf, 11.5 cm. tall and somewhat less than 4.5 cm. wide at the widest. It is the central portion of a leaf; both left and right edges are damaged, as is the bottom. Portions of 20 lines survive on each side, with usually about twelve characters per line. The original seems to have had about 30-35 characters per line, so the surviving portion is relatively slight. The hand is rough and hasty-looking; given the state of the manuscript, it is often difficult to distinguish the letters.
The small amount of remaining text makes it difficult to classify the manuscript. The Alands list it as Category I, with a "normal" text. Von Soden lists it as H (Alexandrian). Schofeld reports that it only twice departs only twice from the "B-group," -- but of course this is a vague group description. Still, the general feeling is that the manuscript is Alexandrian.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
von Soden: α1019. Ropes and Milligan apparently prematurely referred to it as 𝔓21.
Editions
Collations:
B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt, Oxyrhynchus Papyri,
volume IX (1912).
K. Junack, W. Grunewald, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, I. Die Katholischen Briefe; such text as there is is on pp. 47-54.
Sample Plates:
W. H. P. Hatch, The Principal Uncial Manuscripts of the New Testament
Editions which cite:
Cited in Von Soden, Merk, Bover, NA26, NA27.
Other Works:
Kenneth W. Clark, A Descriptive Catalogue of Greek New Testament Manuscripts in America, pp. 181-182.
Philip W. Comfort, Early Manuscripts & Modern Translations of the New Testament, pp. 39-40.
Ellwood M. Schofield, The Papyrus Fragments of the Greek New Testament
K. Junack, W. Grunewald, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, I. Die Katholischen Briefe, pp. 10-12.
𝔓23
Location/Catalog Number
University of Illinois Urbana Classical Museum G. P. 1229. Found in Egypt by Grenfell and Hunt and numbered by them Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 1229; granted to the university in 1915.
Contents
Portions of James 1:10-12, 15-18
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the third (Aland) or fourth (Clark) century. Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, p. 12, calls the orthography "good."
Description and Text-type
𝔓23 is a fragment of a single leaf, torn at the bottom, with 16 lines remaining out of probably 28 or 29 as originally written. The lettering is large, broad, and "rather coarse and irregular in formation," according to Clark. The pages are numbered at the top, β and γ, which would seem to imply either the papyrus originally consisted only of the Catholic Epistles (or even of James alone) or that Acts followed the epistles.
The small amount of remaining text makes it difficult to say much about the manuscript. The Alands list it as Category I, with a "strict" text. Certainly it appears to agree almost entirely with ℵ B, although there is a minor difference in verse 17.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Editions:
B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt, Oxyrhynchus Papyri X (1914)
K. Junack, W. Grunewald, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, I. Die Katholischen Briefe; such text as there is is on pp. 36-39.
Sample Plates:
Editions which cite:
Cited in the post-von Soden editions.
Other Works:
Kenneth W. Clark, A Descriptive Catalogue of Greek New Testament Manuscripts in America, p. 274
Comfort, Early Manuscripts & Modern Translations of the New
Testament, p. 41
K. Junack, W. Grunewald, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, I. Die Katholischen Briefe, pp. 12-14.
𝔓24
Location/Catalog Number
Newton Centre: Andover Newton Theological School, Franklin Trask Library, O.P. 1230 (i.e. Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 1230, its original designation). The school gained possession of it in 1915.
Contents
Portions of Rev. 5:5-8, 6:5-8. According to K. W. Clark, it has suffered additional damage since being found.
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the fourth century by the Alands, though some have preferred the third century; Clark says "early fourth." The hand is unattractive and rather difficult; the copyist was probably not a trained scribe. Clark describes it as "approximating a cursive."
Description and Text-type
𝔓24 is a fragment of a single leaf, which now looks rather like a very short, fat letter T turned upside down. The vertical stroke of the T contains two lines, with only about five or six surviving letters per line; the cross of the T contains portions of four lines, with about sixteen letters on the two central (and best-preserved) lines. The lines appear to have been fairly long -- about 30-32 letters per line -- so even the best-preserved lines retain only about half the text of the relevant verses.
The fact that the manuscript has so many letters per line, and so many lines per page (there are over 1600 letters between Rev. 5:6, the last line on the first page, and Rev. 6:6, the beginning of the second page, which at 32 letters per line gives us some 50+ lines per page) implies a large papyrus size; Schofield thought it might have been a church Bible.
With only about 150 letters to examine, it is simply not possible to determine the nature of 𝔓24's text. The Alands list 𝔓24 as Category I, but this is doubtless based primarily on its date (early manuscripts of the Apocalypse being so rare); even they don't venture a guess as to whether its text is free, normal, or strict. Comfort observes that the manuscript has "only" three divergences from A, but in context this is quite a high number.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Collations:
B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt, Oxyrhynchus Papyri,
volume 10.
Sample Plates:
Philip W. Comfort, Early Manuscripts & Modern Translations of the New Testament, has plates of the entire manuscript.
Editions which cite:
Cited in Von Soden, Merk, Bover, NA26, NA27.
Other Works:
Kenneth W. Clark, A Descriptive Catalogue of Greek New Testament Manuscripts in America, p. 5.
Philip W. Comfort, Early Manuscripts & Modern Translations of the New Testament, pp. 41-42
Ellwood M. Schofield, The Papyrus Fragments of the Greek New Testament
𝔓26
Location/Catalog Number
Southern Methodist University (Dallas) O.P. 1354 (i.e. Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 1354, its original designation). The school gained possession of it in 1922.
Contents
Portions of Romans 1:1-9, 10-16 (with verses 1-9 on the recto, 9-16 on the verso)
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to c. 600 by the Alands; similarly Clark dates it to the sixth or seventh century. Clark describes the writing as a "upright, large, heavy uncial in later Byzantine style."
An interesting footnote is that it has a book title, or at least part of one -- [ρ]ω̣μαι̣[ους], with only the μα entirely certain. Does this imply that it was part of a collection of Paul's epistles? Probably, but we can't prove it.
Description and Text-type
The surviving portion of 𝔓26 has 22 lines per page and appears to retain most of the original height but only about half the original width. The Alands place it in Category I, but Clark says the text is of only "slight" interest. Based on what we can see in Das Neue Testament auf Papyrus, the text insofar as it can be read is effectively identical to the UBS text (which would explain the Aland and Clark descriptions: Clark thinks it insignificant because it doesn't show anything unusual; the Alands approve of it because doesn't disagree with their preferred text) It does agree with ℵ A etc. in reading ιησου χριστου rather than B's χριστου ιησου in verse 1. In 1:10 it has υπερ for επι, without other uncial support. In 1:16, it agrees with ℵ A B C D*,2 G 33 81 1506 1739 1881 in omitting the words του χριστου added by D1 K L P Ψ 1175 𝔐.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Collations and Editions:
B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt, Oxyrhynchus Papyri,
volume XI
K. Junack, E. Güting, U. Nimtz, K. Witte, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, II, Die Paulinischen Briefe, Teil 1; such text as there is is on pp. 1-7.
Sample Plates:
Editions which cite:
Cited in the UBS and recent NA editions.
Other Works:
K. Junack, E. Güting, U. Nimtz, K. Witte, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, II, Die Paulinischen Briefe, Teil 1, pp. XXIX-XXX.
𝔓27
Location/Catalog Number
Cambridge, University Library Additional MS. 7211.
Contents
Two fragments containing portions of Roman 8:12-22, 24-27, 33-9:3, 5-9. 8:12-33 is on the verso, the rest on the recto. Even the intact portions have been torn and battered, with much loss of text -- so much so that NA28 never cites it explicitly, although there are a few long insertions in certain manuscripts which we can be certain it does not contain.
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the third century. Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus declares the orthography "good."
Description and Text-type
The Alands place 𝔓27 in Category I with a "strict" text. There isn't really much to say about it, though; checking the variants for which it is cited in Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, we find the following:
- 8:15 -- orthographic
- 8:16 -- orthographic
- 8:17 -- orthographic
- 8:20 -- 𝔓27 A Bc C Dc 𝔐 επ; 𝔓46 ℵ B* D* F G εφ
- 8:21 -- 𝔓27* - vid ........ρ̣ωθη; rell ελευθερωθησεται
- 8:24 -- (it is suggested that 𝔓27 reads τις, not τις τι or some other reading, here, but this is based solely on space; while it almost certainly does not read τις τι και as in 𝔐, a reading such as ΤΙϹ Ϗ would certainly fit)
- 8:34 -- text is defective for add/omit εκ νεκρων after εγερθεις; there isn't room in the text for it, but it might have been in the margin, or some other text omitted
- 8:38 -- 𝔓27 has only ου̣[...] υψωμα of the reading ουτε μελλοντα ουτε δυναμεις ουτε υψωμα, but this seems to imply that it agrees with 𝔓46 ℵ A B C D F G against the reading ουτε υψωμα ουτε μελλοντα ουτε δυναμεις of 𝔐
- 9:1 -- orthographic
- 9:3 -- 𝔓27 has only [αυ]τος εγω of the reading αναθεμα ειναι αυτος εγω, but this is enough to imply that it agrees with the reading of 𝔓46 A B D F G or ειναι αναθεμα αυτος εγω of ℵ rather than αυτος εγω αναθεμα ειναι of C 𝔐
- 9:3 -- 𝔓27 𝔓46 ℵ A B C 𝔐 απο; D G υπο
This sample is probably enough to demonstrate that 𝔓27 is not Byzantine, but it's not clear if it has any strong affiliations beyond that.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 1355
Bibliography
Collations and Editions:
B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt, Oxyrhynchus Papyri,
volume XI
K. Junack, E. Güting, U. Nimtz, K. Witte, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, II, Die Paulinischen Briefe, Teil 1; such text as there is is on pp. 58-73.
Sample Plates:
Photographs of the manuscript are available at http://csntm.org/Manuscript/View/GA_P27.
Editions which cite:
Cited in Merk, Bover, UBS, and recent NA editions.
Other Works:
K. Junack, E. Güting, U. Nimtz, K. Witte, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, II, Die Paulinischen Briefe, Teil 1 pp. XXX-XXXII.
𝔓28
Location/Catalog Number
Berkeley (Palestine Institute Museum), Pacific School of Religion Papyrus 2 -- Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 1596. Found by Grenfell and Hunt, and in the college's collection since 1924.
Contents
Portions of John 6:8-12, 17-22
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the third century by the Alands, to the fourth century by Clark. The hand slants slightly and looks hasty and unattractive. Numbers are spelled out (as, e.g., in 𝔓66) rather than written as numerals (as in 𝔓75). Its use of the Nomina Sacra is incomplete; although we find Ιησους abbreviated, in verse 9, we find ανθρωπους spelled out.
Description and Text-type
𝔓28 is a fragment of a single leaf, ten cm. tall and five wide. The surviving portion is from the bottom of the leaf, and is broken on both sides. Eleven lines survive on the recto, twelve on the verso (plus a few blots from a thirteenth). About 13-15 letters survive on each line, out of an average of perhaps 32 letters per line (the lines seem to have been somewhat irregular).
Textually, most scholars have regarded 𝔓28 as Alexandrian. The Alands list it as Category I, with a "normal" text. Grenfell and Hunt described it as eclectic, somewhat closer to ℵ than B (though, given the list of variants below, I find it hard to see what led them to this conclusion). The small amount of surviving text makes any determination difficult, but the description "eclectic" seems to fit; it has noteworthy differences with almost every important manuscript. The following table shows the notable readings of 𝔓28, with their supporters (the text is as transcribed by Finegan):
| Readings of 𝔓28 and supporters | Other readings |
| 6:9 ταυτα τι εστιν 𝔓28 𝔓66c 𝔓75 rell UBS | ταυτα εστιν D*; τι εστιν ταυτα 𝔓66* e |
| 6:11 ελαβεν ουν (𝔓28 .λεβεν ο..) 𝔓66 A B D L W 892 al UBS | ελαβεν δε ℵ* E F H 33 700 Byz; και λαβων G Θ f1 f13 565 (579 και ελαβεν) |
| 6:11 ε...ριστησας εδ.... (i.e. ευχαριστησηας εδωκεν or similar) 𝔓28 𝔓66 (𝔓75 ..............εδωκεν, which could agree with 𝔓28 or with the later witnesses) N Γ 69 579 | ευχαριστησηας διεδωκεν A B K L W f1 33 565 700 892 rell UBS; ευχαριστησηας και διεδωκεν ℵ D |
| 6:11 τοις ανακειμενοις(𝔓28 ...........ενοις but lacks space for a longer reading) 𝔓66 𝔓75 ℵ* A B L N W f1 33 565 579 1241 al UBS | τοις μαθηταις οι δε μαθηται τοις ανακειμενοις D E F G H K Γ Δ Θ Ψ f13 892 Byz |
| 6:17 και σκοτια ηδη εγεγονει (𝔓28 ....σκοτια ηδ;...) (𝔓75 ....σκοτια ηδη εγεγονει) rell UBS | καταλβεν δε αυτους η σκοτια ℵ D |
| 6:17 ουπω προς αυτους εληλυθει ο Ιησους (𝔓28 .....ηλυθει ο ις) (𝔓75 ηδ. .... προς αυτους εγεγον.. . ις) B N Ψ | ουπω εληλυθει προς αυτους ο Ιησους (L) W (f13) 33 69 788 pc UBS; ουπω εληλυθει ο Ιησους προς αυτους D; ουπω εληλυθει Ιησους προς αυτους ℵ; ουκ εληλυθει προς αυτους ο Ιησους A E F G H (K) Δ Θ f1 565 579 700 892 Byz |
| 6:19 σταδιους 𝔓28 𝔓75-vid rell UBS | σταδια ℵ* D |
| 6:20 ο δε λεγει (𝔓28 ο δε....) (𝔓75 ...γει) rell UBS | και λεγει ℵ |
| 6:21 επι της γης 𝔓28 rell UBS | επι την γην ℵ* f13 579 1424 pc |
| 6:22 ειδεν οτι (𝔓28 ιδεν οτι) ℵ D | ειδον οτι (𝔓75 ειδο....) A B L N W Θ 33 al UBS; ιδων οτι E F G H Δ Ψ 565 579 700 1241 Byz |
(There are, of course, many other variants in this part of John, but 𝔓28 is too fragmentary to testify to these, and the line lengths seemingly too irregular to testify to most of the add/omit variants.) NOTE: NA27 and related editions list 𝔓28 as reading ωσει πεντακισχιλιοι in verse 10. This is based solely on calculations of line lengths; the only surviving text is -χιλιοι. This reading does appear likely -- the line is extremely short if the reading is ως -- but is too uncertain for us to use it in determining textual groupings. A similar situation occurs in verse 19,θεωρουσιν τον Ιησουν. 𝔓28 breaks off in the previous line at εικουσι π.... i.e. εικουσι πεντε, and all that survives of the text θεωρουσιν τον Ιησουν is ν ιν. The Aland Synopsis lists 𝔓28 as omitting τον, but this is based solely on line lengths and must be considered quite uncertain.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Collations:
B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt, Oxyrhynchus Papyri,
volume 13.
Sample Plates:
Finegan, Encountering New Testament Manuscripts
Editions which cite:
Cited in Merk, Bover, NA26, NA27.
Other Works:
Kenneth W. Clark, A Descriptive Catalogue of Greek New Testament Manuscripts in America, p. 148.
Philip W. Comfort, Early Manuscripts & Modern Translations of the New Testament, p. 43
Ellwood M. Schofield, The Papyrus Fragments of the Greek New Testament
𝔓31
Location/Catalog Number
Manchester, John Rylands Library, Manuscript PRylands 4 or Greek Papyrus 4.
Contents
Romans 12:3-8 on the verso of the manuscript; the recto is blank. Text begins with [υπερ]φ̣ρ̣ο̣νει̣ν̣ and ending ιλαροτητι.
Date/Scribe
Dated to the sixth or seventh century by most scholars; NA28 says VII. Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus calls the orthography good. One wonders, though, about the purpose of the manuscript; it has been suggested that it is a talisman or an amulet (although Romans 12 seems an odd text for a talisman).
Description and Text-type
The Alands place it in Category I. Nestle-Aland cites it only twice, however. Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus has a few more variants (listing only places where either the major manuscripts divide; there are of course several more sub-singular points of variation)
- 12:4 -- πολλα μελη with 𝔓46 ℵ B D F; A 1739 𝔐 μελη πολλα
- 12:4 -- πραξιν εχει with 𝔓46 F*; ℵ A B D Fc G 1739 𝔐 εχει πραξιν
- 12:5 -- χ̅ω̅ το δε with 𝔓46 ℵ B D* F G P 1739; Dc 𝔐 χ̅ω̅ ο δε
- 12:5 -- εις αλλ[.]λ̣ω̣ν̣; εν αλληλων rell
Thus insofar as we can tell, 𝔓31 seems closest to 𝔓46 and B, but we really don't have much to go on!
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Collations and Editions:
K. Junack, E. Güting, U. Nimtz, K. Witte, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, II, Die Paulinischen Briefe, Teil 1; such text as there is is on pp. 104-106.
Sample Plates:
Editions which cite:
Cited in the recent Nestle-Aland editions. UBS nominally cites it, but it is not extant for any of the variants cited by UBS.
Other Works:
K. Junack, E. Güting, U. Nimtz, K. Witte, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, II, Die Paulinischen Briefe, Teil 1 pp. XXXII-XXXIV.
𝔓32
Location/Catalog Number
Manchester, John Rylands Library, Gr. P. 5
Contents
Titus 1:11-15 (recto), 2:3-8 (verso). The surviving material is a tiny fragment of a papyrus leaf, the bottom part of the leaf; on the recto, the beginnings of 13 lines survive (but no more than nine letters per line); on the verso, we have parts of the ends of 14 lines (but no more than nine letters per line, and sometimes as few as three). The lines seem to have averaged about 27-28 letters per line, so we have less than a third even of the surviving verses. It is estimated that, when intact, there were 26 or 27 lines per page. Based on this, Gathergood concludes (and I concur) that Titus did not begin at the top of a page. Gathergood argues on this basis that there were other books in the codex. Given that Gathergood's reconstruction puts the start of the text a fifth of the way down the verso of the page, not the recto, I think this likely (if the text had started a fifth of the way down the recto, there might have been prefatory material or a headline occupying the space at the start of the quire). It is not, however, proof; there is just a chance that Titus was the only book but was preceded by some sort of preface.
Date/Scribe
Dated to the third century by most authorities; the Alands date it around 200 C.E. The earliest estimate, by Bell and Skeat, was second century; the latest, by Dobschütz, was third or fourth. By all accounts, it is the oldest extant manuscript of Titus, and indeed of the Pastoral Epistles. The papyrus was located by Grenfell and Hunt, and Hunt published it in Catalogue of the Greek Papyri in the John Rylands Library, but it is not known where they found it. The writing is large and somewhat decorative; there are even some reader aids (spaces between a few words, diareses, and marginal marks of unknown purpose). The nominum sacrum θυ is used, and space considerations indicate that the other nomina sacra were probably used as well.
Description and Text-type
The Alands place it in Category I with "at least" a normal text.
There is one difference between the transcriptions in Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus and Gathergood's paper (apart from the fact that Gathergood does not mark letters as uncertain, which makes her reconstruction look much more certain than it probably is. In 1:11, Auf Papyrus reads [ανατρε]πουσιν; Gathergood reads [ανατρε]πουσι.
There aren't many other readings to which it can testify. In 1:12, add/omit δε, line lengths might be slightly favorable to the inclusion, but it's too close to call. In 1:13, where ℵ* 075 omit εν, 𝔓32 is defective, but the line is so short that 𝔓32 must either have had it or had some other text of two to five letters. In 1:14, it has εντολ̣, probably agreeing with the εντολαις of all texts except FG 075. In 1:15, it is defective for add/omit μεν, but without it, the line is very short (just 23 letters, compared to the usual 26-30), so even though NA28 does not cite it for this reading, it probably supported the longer reading of ℵc Dc 𝔐 (frankly, I suspect NA28 would have cited it for the longer reading were it not for the fact that the evidence against it is so overwhelming -- ℵ* A C D* F G P 6 33 81 1739 1881. The editors didn't want to admit that this early papyrus had a purely Byzantine reading). In 2:4 it has [φιλοτεκ]ν̣ους (omitted by K, but found in every other uncial). In 2:5, where C, the Harklean, and one Vulgate manuscript adds και η διδασκαλια after θεου, it omits the phrase with all other known Greek witnesses, and there is no room for it elsewhere in the verse. In 2:7, where ℵ* has τυπον παρεχουμενος and all other witnesses have παρεχουμενος τυπον, it has only a few letters of the verb, but they are enough to show that it was not preceded by τυπον. Later in the verse, it has αφθονιαν with F G 075 1881 (or, at least, something with a ν in the middle) against the αφθοριαν of ℵ* A (C) D* K P 0150 33 (81) 104 1739 and the αδιαφθοριαν of many later witnesses. It is defective at the end of the verse, but there does not seem to be room for the αφθαριαν added by most Byzantine witnesses but omitted by ℵ A (C) D* F G 075 0150 33 81 365 1739 1881. And that's it; there is no more text.
It seems pretty clear that it is not a Byzantine text, but it doesn't really go with either the Alexandrian or "Western" text. My own guess is that it is related to 𝔓46/B, but obviously this is beyond proof; there isn't enough text for us to properly classify 𝔓32. In any case, there aren't any really doubtful readings to which it can testify.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Collations and Editions:
Arthur Hunt, Catalogue of the Greek Papyri in the John Rylands Library, Volume I (1911), pp. 10-11
K. Junack, E. Güting, U. Nimtz, K. Witte, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, II, Die Paulinischen Briefe, Teil 1; such text as there is is on pp. 228-230.
Emily J. Gathergood, Papyrus 32 (Titus) as a multi-text codex: a new reconstruction
Sample Plates:
Editions which cite:
Cited in the recent Nestle-Aland and UBS editions.
Other Works:
K. Junack, E. Güting, U. Nimtz, K. Witte, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, II, Die Paulinischen Briefe, Teil 2 pp. XLVIII-XLXIX.
Emily J. Gathergood, Papyrus 32 (Titus) as a multi-text codex: a new reconstruction
𝔓37
Location/Catalog Number
University of Michigan, P. Mich. 137/Inventory number 1570. It was purchased from a dealer in Cairo in 1924. It may be from the Fayyum; other documents in the sale came from there.
Contents
Portions of Matthew 26:19-36
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the third century by Clark, to the late fourth by Kenyon; the Alands say third or fourth. Clark describes the hand as "cursive."
Description and Text-type
𝔓37 consists of a single leaf, but that almost intact; there are 32 lines per page, with (it is thought) only a single line missing (resulting in a lacuna in 26:36-37). Sanders, who in 1926 collated it and published a facsimile in the Harvard Theological Review ("An Early Papyrus Fragment of the Gospel of Matthew in the Michigan Collection"), concluded that it was closest to the "Western" text, although his rather strange statistical method makes it hard to know what to make of his data. The Alands place it in Category I with a "free" text and say it is often close to 𝔓45 -- which, if true, might explain why Sanders found most of its readings to be "Western" or "Cæsarean." In fact both papyri are fragmentary enough that it is hard to establish their degree of affiliation, but they do have some fairly rare readings together. It's just that it's often hard to tell what is genetic and what is simply paraphrase -- e.g. in 26:21 the two papyri, seemingly alone, omit οτι. Genetic -- or just two scribes who drop a word that isn't needed? The question might be worth a more detailed study with better methodology.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Collations:
Sample Plates:
Editions which cite:
Cited in the editions since Von Soden.
Other Works:
Kenneth W. Clark, A Descriptive Catalogue of Greek New Testament Manuscripts in America, pp. 334-335.
Philip W. Comfort, Early Manuscripts & Modern Translations of the New Testament, pp. 45-46
𝔓38
Location/Catalog Number
University of Michigan, P. Mich. 138/Inventory number 1571. It was purchased from a dealer in Cairo in 1924; some have suspected it comes from the Fayyum, because others in the same batch came from there.
Contents
Portions of Acts 18:27-19:6, 12-16
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the third century by Sanders, to the fourth by Clark; the Alands say c. 300.
Description and Text-type
𝔓38 consists of a single folio, sufficiently damaged that it is in three pieces; it had one column, with probably 21 lines per page. There is a page number, ΝΘ, at the top of the verso. Sanders, who in 1926 collated it and published a facsimile in the Harvard Theological Review, ("An Papyrus Fragment of Acts in the Michigan Collection") concluded that it was a single-quire codex containing Acts only.
The text is striking. Sanders called it "thoroughly Western." The Alands put it in Category IV with a "free" text related to D. That it is distant from the Alexandrian and Byzantine texts is clear. Does that make it "Western"?
Unlike some manuscripts claimed as "Western," 𝔓38 really does seem to belong with D. In Acts 18:28, it agrees with D 614 (against 1505) in adding διαλεγομενος. In 19:1 it has at least part of D's long rewrite that omits mention Apollos, a reading found elsewhere only in ro2 and the Harklean margin. Later in that verse it has the singular reading και ειπεν τοις μαθηταις, partly agreeing with D. There is another singular reading in 19:3. (It does have Ιησουν with the majority, instead of D's Χριστον, in 19:4). In 19:5, it appears to join D 614 hark** (not 1505) in adding Χριστου εις αφεσιν αμαρτιων. (It disagrees with D in having εξορκιζομεν in 19:13.) In 19:14, its version of the Skeva passage is much closer to D than to B etc. There are several other minor agreements with D. It isn't a close relative of D, but there isn't much doubt that both have a common ancestor somewhere in their history. Indeed, 𝔓38 is perhaps the best evidence we have that D of Acts is an actual type, and not just an idiosyncratic rewrite.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Collations:
Sample Plates:
Editions which cite:
Cited in the editions since Von Soden.
Other Works:
Kenneth W. Clark, A Descriptive Catalogue of Greek New Testament Manuscripts in America, pp. 335-336.
Philip W. Comfort, Early Manuscripts & Modern Translations of the New Testament, pp. 46-47.
𝔓39
Location/Catalog Number
Rochester (New York, USA). Ambrose Swabey Library, Inv. no. 8864 -- Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 1780
Contents
Portions of John 8:14-22
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the third century. The hand is very clear and the surviving text easily read; one suspects an expert scribe.
Description and Text-type
𝔓39 is a fragment of a single leaf, preserving the entire height of the manuscript but only one edge. There are 25 lines per page, but only about six or seven surviving letters per line (occasionally less, especially on the verso). There appear to have been about thirteen or fourteen letters per line (column?), meaning that about half the text survives.
There is general agreement that the manuscript is Alexandrian. The Alands list it as Category I, with a "strict" text. Grenfell and Hunt list it as aligning with B; Schofield goes further, claiming it never departs from B. When these authors wrote, of course, 𝔓75 was not known. In the area covered by 𝔓39, there are only a handful of differences between 𝔓75 and B. 𝔓39 does not testify to verse 14, και/η. In verse 15, where 𝔓75 d f cop add δε, 𝔓39 is not extant, but line lengths make is more likely than not that it omits the word with B rell. The next variant in 𝔓75, the omission of εγω in verse 22, occurs after the end of the manuscript (which actually breaks off at the end of verse 21; all that is visible of verse 22 is part of a stroke of the first letter).
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
von Soden: α1019
Bibliography
Collations:
B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt, Oxyrhynchus Papyri,
volume 15.
Sample Plates:
Editions which cite:
Cited in Merk, Bover, NA26, NA27.
Other Works:
Philip W. Comfort, Early Manuscripts & Modern Translations of the New Testament, p. 47
Ellwood M. Schofield, The Papyrus Fragments of the Greek New Testament
𝔓44
Location/Catalog Number
New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, MS. 14.1.157. Acquired in 1914 by the Museum's expedition to Egypt; it was found in Tombs 65-66 of the Monastery of Cyriacus at Thebes.
Contents
Portions of Matthew 17:1-3, 6-7, 18:15-17, 19, 25:8-10; John 9:3-5, 10:8, 10-11, 12:17-18.
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the sixth or seventh century. Clark (who, however, was not able to see the manuscript) calls the writing medium-sized, "clear, heavy and rustic, rounded, generally upright."
Description and Text-type
𝔓44 consists of a three folios, although the third is so defective that the writing cannot be deciphered. What is noteworthy is the contents of the folios. The verso of the first contains the portions of Matthew 17 and 18; the recto contains the portions of Matthew 25 and John 10. The verso of the second folio contains John 12; the recto, John 9. Thus 𝔓44 -- although you can't tell it from the Aland publications that cite it -- is not a continuous text of the gospels. It is either a collection of excerpts or, more likely, a lectionary (and probably should be cited as such).
Sanders thought the text agreed more with ℵ than the other uncials. I suspect it deserves a closer look, just to see what a seventh century lectionary was like.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Collations:
Sample Plates:
Editions which cite:
Other Works:
Henry A. Sanders, in Harvard Theological Review XXVI, pp. 77-98
Kenneth W. Clark, A Descriptive Catalogue of Greek New Testament Manuscripts in America, pp. 135-136.
𝔓45
Location/Catalog Number
Dublin, Chester Beatty Library, P. Chester Beatty I; Vienna, Austrian National Library, Pap. Vindob. G. 31974 (one leaf, containing Matt. 25:41-26:39)
Contents
𝔓45 is surely in the worst condition of any of the substantial Biblical papyri. Even the surviving leaves (a small fraction of the original contents, estimated at 30 of 220 original leaves) are damaged; the most substantial pages are perhaps 80-90% complete, but many others are just small fragments. There are relatively few complete lines; many of the surviving leaves represent only about 20% of the width of the original manuscript. Therefore any list of verses included in the manuscript will make it seem more substantial than it really is; very many of these verses survive only in part (often very small part).
With that said, the verses represented at least partly in 𝔓45 are: Matt. 20:24-32, 21:13-19, 25:41-26:39; Mark 4:36-40, 5:15-26, 5:38-6:3, 6:16-25, 36-50, 7:3-15, 7:25-8:1, 8:10-26, 8:34-9:8, 9:18-31, 11:27-12:1, 12:5-8, 13-19, 24-28; Luke 6:31-41, 6:45-7:7, 9:26-41, 9:45-10:1, 10:6-22, 10:26-11:1, 11:6-25, 28-46, 11:50-12:12, 12:18-37, 12:42-13:1, 13:6-24, 13:29-14:10, 14:17-33; John 4:51, 54, 5:21, 24, 10:7-25, 10:31-11:10, 11:18-36, 43-57; Acts 4:27-36, 5:10-20, 30-39, 6:7-7:2, 7:10-21, 32-41, 7:52-8:1, 8:14-25, 8:34-9:6, 9:16-27, 9:35-10:2, 10:10-23, 31-41, 11:2-14, 11:24-12:5, 12:13-22, 13:6-16, 25-36, 13:46-14:3, 14:15-23, 15:2-7, 19-26, 15:38-16:4, 16:15-21, 16:32-40, 17:9-17.
It is possible that the codex originally contained other books (e.g. the Catholic Epistles); unlike many of the major papyri, it is not a single-quire codex, but rather uses gatherings of two leaves, meaning that it could have had many more leaves at the end.
All told, we have two leaves of Matthew, six of Mark, seven of Luke, two of John, and thirteen of Acts, with the leaves of Matthew being only the smallest fragments. The leaves of Mark and Acts are rather more substantial, but still badly damaged; those of Luke and John are relatively complete. The leaves are broad enough, and the single column of text wide enough, that these thirty leaves contain substantial amounts of text, but still only about 5% of the original contents.
Kenyon was of the opinion that the gospels were originally in the "Western" order Matthew, John, Luke, Mark, with Acts (and conceivably other material) following. Given the state of the manuscript, the fact that it used multiple quires, and the fact that it was brought to the west in pieces, this cannot be proved -- but Mark and Acts were discovered together, so it seems likely.
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the third century.
Description and Text-type
It appears that 𝔓45 was originally the most extensive of all papyrus manuscripts -- the only one to include more than one NT section. It has, however, been very badly damaged, meaning that relatively little text survives. This makes an accurate assessment of the manuscript's type rather difficult. Wisse, for instance, did not even attempt a profile.
When Kenyon first published the manuscript, however, he attempted to classify it, stating that in Mark it seemed to be Cæsarean; in Luke and John, neither purely Alexandrian nor Western; in Acts, primarily Alexandrian (although it has some of the smaller "Western" variants, it has few if any of the greater).
Kenyon, however, was probably led astray by Streeter's bad definition of the "Cæsarean" text and by all the bad work which followed from this. Two more recent works have re-examined the ground and produce a very different conclusion.
The first and, in the long term, probably more important is E. C. Colwell, "Method in Evaluating Scribal Habits: A Study of 𝔓45, 𝔓66, 𝔓75" (1965; now available as pages 106-124 in Colwell's Studies in Methodology in Textual Criticism of the New Testament). This showed that 𝔓45 is the result of a freely paraphrased copy; the scribe of 𝔓45 or one of its immediate ancestors felt free to expand, paraphrase, and shorten the text. (Though Colwell noted that deletions were much more common than additions -- "The dispensable word is dispensed with.")
The noteworthy point here is that this sort of editing is typical of at least two other Gospel text-types, the "Western" and the "Cæsarean." (Though both of these add and harmonize more than they delete.) Observe what this means: To a scholar who simply studied the types of readings in 𝔓45 (as opposed to the pattern of readings, which is the true definition of a text-type), 𝔓45 would appear to belong to one of the periphrastic text-types. Of the two, the "Cæsarean" is, of course, the more restrained, and also has more Alexandrian readings; 𝔓45, as an Egyptian manuscript, probably started with an Alexandrian text.
Thus, Colwell established that 𝔓45 needed to be examined more closely before it could be labelled "Cæsarean." Kenyon's "Cæsarean" classification was not rigorous, and was just what one would expect from a non-rigorous examination of a manuscript like 𝔓45.
Colwell's implicit call for a more detailed study was supplied by Larry W. Hurtado in Text-Critical Methodology and the Pre-Caesarean Text: Codex W in the Gospel of Mark. This study suffers from major methodological flaws, but it pretty definitely establishes its main conclusion: That 𝔓45 and W do not belong with the so-called "Cæsarean" text. (Hurtado has also been interpreted to mean that the "Cæsarean" text does not exist. This conclusion, however, is premature, given his methodology; see the discussion of the "Cæsarean" text in the article on text-types.)
So where does this leave 𝔓45? The truth is, very little controlled analysis has been done of the manuscript. It was discovered too late for Von Soden. Wisse did not profile it. The Alands list it as Category I with a free text, but it seems likely that this assessment is based simply on what they think of the manuscript. The manuscript needs a re-evaluation before we can really state firm conclusions. My own analysis indicates that the manuscript is in fact closer to B than to any other uncial. On the face of it, it would appear that 𝔓45 comes from the Alexandrian tradition, but has been so heavily edited that it begins to appear "Westernized."
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Note: As with most major manuscripts, no attempt is made to compile a complete bibliography.
Collations:
The basic publication remains Frederic G. Kenyon, Chester Beatty Biblical Papyri (Part II, The Gospels and Acts, in two fascicles). Various authors (Gerstinger, Merk, Zuntz) have published supplements or additional analysis.
Sample Plates:
The Chester Beatty Library web site now has the Biblical papyri digitized at https://viewer.cbl.ie/viewer/browse/-/1/SORT_TITLE/DC:biblicalpapyricollection/. (Be warned, however, that the site is not organized by manuscript but by content, one leaf at a time; if you want to see, say, a passage in Luke in 𝔓45, you have to go through the list of pages of 𝔓45, 𝔓46, and 𝔓47 until you get to the section on Luke. And the LXX and apocryphal manuscripts are included.)
Aland & Aland, The Text of the New Testament (1 plate)
Sir Frederick Kenyon & A. W. Adams, Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts (1 plate)
Editions which cite:
Cited in NA16 and later, UBS, Merk, Bover
Other Works:
The two most important works are probably those already cited:
E. C. Colwell, "Method in Evaluating Scribal Habits: A Study of 𝔓45, 𝔓66, 𝔓75" (1965; pp. 106-124 in Colwell's Studies in Methodology in Textual Criticism of the New Testament).
Larry W. Hurtado in Text-Critical Methodology and the Pre-Caesarean Text: Codex W in the Gospel of Mark.
𝔓46
Location/Catalog Number
Dublin, Chester Beatty Library, P. Chester Beatty II; Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Inv. 6238
Contents
86 leaves (out of an original total of probably 104), containing portions of Romans 5:17-1 Thes. 5:28 (including Hebrews, following Romans. According to Sanders, only one other manuscript, 1919, has the Pauline Epistles in this order). The surviving leaves (most of which are somewhat damaged) contain Romans 5:17-6:3, 6:5-14, 8:15-25, 27-35, 8:37-9:32, 10:1-11, 11, 24-33, 11:35-15:9, 15:11-end (with 16:25-27 following chapter 15!); 1 Cor. 1:1-9:2, 9:4-14:14, 14:16-15:15, 15:17-16:22; 2 Cor. 1:1-11:10, 12-21, 11:23-13:13; Gal. 1:1-8, 1:10-2:9, 2:12-21, 3:2-29, 4:2-18, 4:20-5:17, 5:20-6:8, 6:10-18; Eph. 1:1-2:7, 2:10-5:6, 5:8-6:6, 6:8-18, 20-24; Phil. 1:1, 1:5-15, 17-28, 1:30-2:12, 2:14-27, 2:29-3:8, 3:10-21, 4:2-12, 14-23; Col. 1:1-2, 5-13, 16-24, 1:27-2:19, 2:23-3:11, 3:13-24, 4:3-12, 16-18; 1 Thes. 1:1, 1:9-2:3, 5:5-9, 23-28; Heb. 1:1-9:16, 9:18-10:20, 10:22-30, 10:32-13:25
The original contents of 𝔓46 are subject to debate. If the manuscript was indeed 104 pages long (and the quire numberings make it clear that it was planned to be so), and the number of letters per page were maintained, there is no possible way it could have contained all the Pastoral Epistles; the remaining space would have allowed inclusion of 2 Thessalonians but not much more. But it is a single-quire codex and, of course, scribes had to guess at the beginning how many pages they would need in a single-quire codex. The Pastorals represent only a little more than 10% of the Pauline corpus, and an scribe's error of 10% in estimating the length of the codex is not impossible. This is especially true in a case like 𝔓46 where the scribe did nothing to regulate his page size; there are no rules or prickings on the pages. Thus, while it seems fairly likely that 𝔓46 did not and was not intended to include the Pastorals, the possibility cannot be denied that they were included on additional leaves attached at the end. Sanders says that there were, on average, more lines per page in the second half of the codex than the first, implying that the scribe was trying to fit in more text, but if so, he didn't compress it nearly enough! But it might have given him enough space for some of the Pastorals. Sanders's suggestion (pp. 10-12) is that he intended to include 1 and 2 Timothy but not Titus. But this seems to be based on Sanders's feeling that Titus is the least Pauline of the Pastorals.
Date/Scribe
Various dates have been proposed for 𝔓46, based entirely on paleographic evidence. The earliest dates have been around the beginning of the second century (a date which has significant implications for the formation of the Pauline canon, but to which few experts subscribe); the latest have placed it in the third. Kenyon said early third century; Sanders said third without specifying whether early or late. The most widely accepted date today is probably that of the Alands, who place it circa 200 C.E.
The scribe of 𝔓46 seems to have been a professional copyist, working in a scriptorium. This first conclusion is implied by the neat book hand. That he was working in a scriptorium is less certain, but Zuntz notes several places where the scribe came to a crux in copying and left a small gap in the manuscript. Zuntz theorizes, and this seems reasonable, that the scribe was unable to read or understand the exemplar, and so left space to allow the corrector to settle the reading.
It was Sanders who pointed out that there are no rules or fixed borders on the pages, meaning that the margins vary widely. That the scribe was professional is implied by the surprising straightness of the lines and the generally highly legible writing, but he seems to have made few efforts to prepare a high-quality book.
It looks as if the scribe was writing for pay; Sanders observes that there are stichoi counts on four of the books -- and all of them are somewhat larger than expected; that for 2 Corinthians is extremely high. It is as if the scribe was cheating to increase the amount he was paid.
The Nomina Sacra are in evidence, and many of them have settled on their final usage rules (e.g. the singular θεως and its inflected forms are consistently abbreviated, but the plurals are not; similarly with κυριος) -- but some forms are not entirely fixed, since we see both υς and υις for υιος, and χς χρς for χριστος as well as ις ιης for ιησους.
There is very little punctuation by the original scribe, but Sanders reports that there are spaces between words at various points which tend to correspond with breaks in sense. Some of these spaces are much wider than others, but Sanders does not find a clear pattern to these. Some punctuation was added by a later hand. Sanders finds only one accent, and a dozen breathing marks. Initial iota is usually but not always marked with a diaeresis; upsilon is marked about two-thirds of the time. The mark almost never occurs within a word, so the diaeresis might almost be treated as equivalent to a space, marking a new word.
Despite his apparent profession, the scribe left a great deal to be desired in other areas as well; 𝔓46 contains a high number of peculiar errors. Zuntz thinks (and here again I believe he is right) that the copyist did much of the copying while tired or otherwise not at his best, as the errors seem to come in bunches, and are often quite absurd (e.g. writing ΓΡΑ for ΓΑΡ).
The correctors weren't much better. The first corrector was the scribe himself, who occasionally spotted his own errors and attempted to repair them. The second corrector seems to have been contemporary, and employed as the διορθωτης. But this scribe wasn't all that much better; according to Zuntz, he missed the large majority of the original scribe's peculiar errors. (This raises the possibility that the errors were in their common exemplar, but Zuntz does not believe this.)
A third corrector, working probably in the third century, made a handful of corrections in a cursive script, as well as a line count. Zuntz thinks that this corrector was a private owner of the manuscript, making corrections as he spotted them rather than systematically examining the manuscript.
Description and Text-type
The text of 𝔓46 has been the subject of a quiet but significant controversy, with too many scholars ignoring others' results. The first attempts at studies were by the original editors, Kenyon and Sanders. Sanders, who had access to the larger portion of the text, did the more detailed study -- although it was methodologically flawed, since he counted readings that agreed with various manuscripts, without so much as casting percentages. And, sadly, he did not include 1739 in his table, although he did mention one unique reading it shared with 𝔓46. He found, by this means, that 𝔓46 had fully 199 significant variants that had no other support listed by Tischendorf. It also, for the small amont of text where they overlapped, had a very high rate of special agreements with 𝔓13; Sanders says they show "very little difference" apart from their singular readings. Aside from these, he showed that 𝔓46 was closest to B, but its next closest ally, especially in Romans and Hebrews (the second book of the codex), was D. Hence, "Western." Sanders also showed pretty clearly, that 𝔓46 did not align closely with the Alexandrian text as exemplified by ℵ A C 33. So the sense, when the manuscript was first found, was that it had mostly Alexandrian readings, but with a number of "Western" readings as well, especially in Romans.
The only possible word for this description is "simplistic." A number of those so-called "Western" readings are not readings characteristic of D-F-G, but rather scribal blunders in 𝔓46.
There is something we must remember here. If two manuscripts display a mixture of Alexandrian and "Western" readings, they may simply be mixed manuscripts. But if they display the same pattern of mixture, then they are genetically related.
It should also be noted that 𝔓46 and B have a number of singular agreements -- and that these agreements are by no means harmonistic adjustments or the like. Several of them (e.g. Col. 2:2, του θεου χριστου; Col. 3:6, omit επι τους υιους της απειθειας) display strong signs of originality.
It was Zuntz who first tackled this issue head-on. In The Text of the Epistles: A Disquisition upon the Corpus Paulinum, he examined the text of Paul starting not from the established Alexandrian/Byzantine/"Western" perspective but from the standpoint of 𝔓46. This proved an immensely (and probably excessively) laborious process; it took Zuntz a whole volume just to examine the data for two books (1 Corinthians and Hebrews). Nonetheless, it produced a noteworthy result: 𝔓46 and B form a group (along with a handful of other witnesses) which is clearly distinct from the main Alexandrian group found in ℵ A C 33 81 1175 etc.
Zuntz proceeded to confuse the issue by calling this type "proto-Alexandrian," Even though he found that, where the types differed, both the proto-Alexandrian and Alexandrian texts preserved original readings, he still gave the clear impression that the proto-Alexandrian text was a forerunner of the mainstream Alexandrian group. I believe Zuntz knew better, but he did not really analyse the relations between his types, except on a reading-by-reading basis. This made his results hard to understand. In addition, Zuntz analysed the data only with respect to 𝔓46. This sounds reasonable, but in fact it has severe drawbacks. By his method, any manuscript which has a significant number of readings found only in 𝔓46+B, and not in the Alexandrian or Byzantine or "Western" texts, will appear to belong to the 𝔓46 type. So the Bohairic Coptic, which actually appears to be an Alexandrian text with some 𝔓46/B mixture, went into the 𝔓46/B type, as did 1739 (which on detailed examination shows readings of all three other text-types, plus some of its own, making it perhaps a text-type in its own right -- indeed, Stephen Carlson found, in Galatians, that it belongs on the ℵ/A/33 side of the split between those manuscripts and 𝔓46/B).
Unfortunately, Zuntz's research has not been pursued. Metzger's The Text of the New Testament, for instance, persists in describing 𝔓46 in terms of Alexandrian and "Western" readings. And Zuntz's research needs to be continued, as it focuses entirely on 𝔓46 and does not examine the tradition as a whole.
My own results imply that there are fully five text-types in Paul: The Alexandrian text of ℵ A C 33 81 1175 1506 and the Bohairic Coptic; the 𝔓46/B type (consisting only of these two and the Sahidic Coptic; this type too seems associated with Egypt, and so needs a name); the Western text of D F G and the Latins, the Byzantine text, and the Family 1739 text (in Paul, 1739 0121 0243 6 424** 630+2200 (Romans-Galatians) 1881; Origen's text is close to, but not identical with, that of this group). The Alexandrian, 𝔓46/B, and 1739 texts are somewhat closer to each other than to the other two, but by no means a single text. But it should be noted that these results, like Zuntz's, have not been tested (though based on stronger statistical tools than most scholars have used. I can at least say that Stephen Carlson's cladistic approach agrees with me in placing 𝔓46 and B together, at a significant distance from ℵ/A/33 etc.).
𝔓46 should have been the most important papyrus ever discovered. 𝔓45 is too fragmentary and periphrastic to be important, 𝔓47 too limited in extent, 𝔓66 too error-prone, 𝔓72 too erratic, and 𝔓75 too close to B to really contribute much. 𝔓46 should have changed our view of the entire history of the text of Paul. Somehow, this seems not to have happened.
Still, some have argued strongly for the significance of particular readings. Sanders, p. 35, for instance, strongly suggests that 𝔓46's unique placement of Romans 16:25-27 (which it locates after chapter 15) is original.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Note: As with most major manuscripts, no attempt is made to compile a complete bibliography.
Collations:
Frederick G. Kenyon, The Chester Beatty Biblical Papyri. (𝔓46 is found in fascicle III, covering Paul)
Henry A. Sanders, A Third-Century Papyrus Codex of the Epistles of Paul (which includes both the material in Kenyon and the leaves not found in that book. Note: The 2015 reprint by Wipf & Stock is a fairly good but not perfect reprint; the text is mostly quite legible but the photos are not ideal. The book also has the peculiar habit of filling in the gaps on damaged pages with the text of the Textus Receptus.)
See also K. Junack, Das Neue Testament auf Papyrus, Vol. 2: Die paulinischen Briefe
Sample Plates:
The Chester Beatty Library web site now has the Biblical papyri digitized at https://viewer.cbl.ie/viewer/browse/-/1/SORT_TITLE/DC:biblicalpapyricollection/. (Be warned, however, that the site is not organized by manuscript but by content, one leaf at a time; if you want to see, say, a passage in Hebrews in 𝔓46, you have to go through the list of pages of 𝔓45, 𝔓46, and 𝔓47 until you get to the section on Hebrews. And the LXX and apocryphal manuscripts are included.)
Aland & Aland, The Text of the New Testament (1 plate)
Comfort, Manuscripts of the Greek Bible (1 plate, same page as the above)
Comfort, The Quest for the Original Text of the New Testament (1 plate; same page as above)
Metzger, Manuscripts of the Greek Bible (1 plate)
Metzger, The Text of the New Testament (1 plate -- again, the same leaf)
Sir Frederick Kenyon & A. W. Adams, Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts
(1 plate)
Editions which cite:
Cited in NA16 and later, UBS, Merk, Bover
Other Works:
Perhaps most important of the many works on 𝔓46 is the one already mentioned, as it is the only one to treat 𝔓46 in light of its own text rather than by comparison to the more recent uncials:
G Zuntz, The Text of the Epistles: A Disquisition Upon the Corpus Paulinum.
𝔓48
Location/Catalog Number
Florence, Laurenxian Library, PSI 1165.
Contents
Portions of Acts 23:11-17, 25-29.
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the third century. The script is considered quite similar to 𝔓13.
Description and Text-type
𝔓48 is extremely defective even for the surviving portion of a leaf. We have portions of three margins, but the key word is "portions"; we have really only about ten lines, from the middle of the page, and even those are damaged (e.g. one whole vertical strip of papyrus has been lost). The latter verses hardly exist at all; the surviving material is just a few strings and strips extending down to the bottom margin of the page.
It has become traditional to regard 𝔓48 as "Western" -- the Alands, e.g., list is as having a Category IV text, free but related to D. It is worth noting, however, that 𝔓48 and D have no common material at all.
Determining the actual text-type of 𝔓48 is extremely difficult simply because of its limited size. The Nestle-Aland text, for instance, reports ten readings from the first section (Acts 23:11-17). Two of these readings are singular according to the apparatus, one is supported only by pc, and four are supported only by versions (usually Latin). One is supported by 614 h and the Harklean margin. But several of these are really conjectural readings from the heavily damaged portion of the papyrus. At least one reading (23:16, insert εαν δεη και απεθανειν) is based on only the barest handful of letters and is reconstructed on the basis of 614 h harkmarg. This can hardly be accepted as valid evidence of text-type. The bottom line, if there is one, is surely that we just don't know what 𝔓48 is relate to.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Collations:
E. Lobel, C. H. Roberts, E. P. Wegener, Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Volume 18.
Sample Plates:
Editions which cite:
Cited in Merk, NA26, NA27, and the UBS editions.
Other Works:
Philip W. Comfort, Early Manuscripts & Modern Translations of the New Testament, p. 55
𝔓49
Location/Catalog Number
Yale University P 415. Acquired from a dealer in Cairo in 1931.
Contents
Ephesians 4:16-29 (recto), 4:32-5:13 (verso), rather badly mutilated -- the single folio is in three pieces; it has been torn vertically down the middle, then one of the halves torn again about a third of the way down the page. Also, although two of the margins are preserved, the other two edges have been lost, the top and (I think) inner margin. Every surviving line has lost at least one or two letters in the margin and one or two in the middle; most have lost four to six in the middle. (I would consider the text in Das Neue Testament auf Papyrus to be somewhat overconfident in its reading of several of the letters.)
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the third century. Clark calls the writing "semi-uncial." The writing appears rather hasty to me.
Description and Text-type
Clark merely calls the text "mixed." The Alands predictably put it in Category I but are not sure whether it is a "normal" or "strict" text. Hatch and Wells, who wrote about it in the Harvard Theological Review in 1958, claim that its closest relative is B, then ℵ, then A and 𝔓46. My spot check of the readings in the NT Auf Papyrus doesn't really support that; it certainly goes against D very strongly, and also seems to go against 𝔓46, but it isn't much closer to B than to ℵ or A. I would agree with Clark in calling the text seemingly mixed; the sample is too small (fewer than twenty readings where there is disagreement between 𝔓46𝔓49ℵABD), but 𝔓49 doesn't seem affiliated with any particular group.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Collations and Editions:
K. Junack, E. Güting, U. Nimtz, K. Witte, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, II, Die Paulinischen Briefe, Teil 1; such text as there is is on pp. 69-79.
Sample Plates:
Images of both sides of the single sheet (two pages) can be found at the Yale Library web site at http://findit.library.yale.edu/catalog/digcoll:2775661.
Editions which cite:
Other Works:
Kenneth W. Clark, A Descriptive Catalogue of Greek New Testament Manuscripts in America, p. 374
Philip W. Comfort, Early Manuscripts & Modern Translations of the New
Testament, p. 54
Other Works:
K. Junack, E. Güting, U. Nimtz, K. Witte, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, II, Die Paulinischen Briefe, Teil 2 pp. LIII-LVI.
𝔓50
Location/Catalog Number
Yale University P 1543. Acquired from a dealer in Cairo in 1933.
Contents
Acts 8:26-32, 10:26-31.
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the fourth or fifth century by the Alands, to the fourth century by Clark and by Kraeling, who collated it. The Alands say it has "orthographical peculiarities and corrections." Clark says it is an "untrained hand" and speculates that it might be an amulet (even though the surviving portion comes from two consecutive folios). Comfort thinks it a "hasty job."
Description and Text-type
The Alands -- rather unusually for a manuscript this early -- put it in Category III. Kraeling thought the text closest to B.
I am inclined to agree with those who think there is something odd about 𝔓50; about two-thirds of one column has been left blank, as if some other sort of content is supposed to be added there, and there are strange lines above and below the word αφωνος in 8:32, whereupon the text goes directly to Acts 10:26. I suspect it is either an odd sort of lectionary or a collection of readings of some sort.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Collations:
Sample Plates:
Images of both sides of the single sheet can be found at the Yale Library web site at http://findit.library.yale.edu/catalog/digcoll:2758752.
Editions which cite:
Other Works:
Kenneth W. Clark, A Descriptive Catalogue of Greek New Testament Manuscripts in America, p. 374
Philip W. Comfort, Early Manuscripts & Modern Translations of the New
Testament, pp. 54-55
𝔓51
Location/Catalog Number
Oxford (Ashmolean Museum, Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 2157).
Contents
Portions of Galatians 1:2-10, 13, 16-20. Every line of the surviving fragment is damaged (usually at both ends); every surviving verse is missing at least a few letters.
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the fourth or fifth century. Das Neue Testament auf Papyrus, p. LVI says that, apart from an ει/ι itacism, the orthography is quite proper.
Description and Text-type
Aland and Aland list 𝔓51 as Category II. It is hard to see how they determined this, however, as the fragment is so small. Collating its text against 𝔓46 ℵ A B D G K L 81 330 365 1739 produced only eight variants where at least two of these manuscripts agree against the others; in these eight readings, 𝔓51 showed the following rates of agreement:
| Manuscript | Agreement Rate |
| 𝔓46 | 3/7=43% |
| ℵ | 3/8=38% |
| A | 3/8=38% |
| B | 7/8=88% |
| D | 2/8=25% |
| G | 2/8=25% |
| K | 2/8=25% |
| L | 2/8=25% |
| 81 | 3/8=38% |
| 330 | 4/8=50% |
| 365 | 2/8=25% |
| 1739 | 5/8=63% |
Thus 𝔓51 is quite close to B. This is confirmed by the original editors, who describe the text as "eclectic... its closest affinities seem to be with B, but an agreement with D F G against ℵ A B 𝔓46 is worth noting." This reading (Gal. 1:19) is not, however, a true agreement with the "Western" witnesses; where D* F G read αποστολων ειδον ουδενα and the remaining witnesses have αποστολων ουκ [𝔓46 B ουχ] ειδον, 𝔓51 appears to conflate to read αποστολων ουκ ειδον ουδενα.
<π>It should be noted, however, that every letter of this reading is at least slightly damaged -- the reconstruction is
αποστο[..]
[..]κ̣ε̣ι̣δ̣ο̣ν̣[.]υ̣̣δ̣ε̣ν̣[.]α̣
So we should perhaps not place much importance on this variant.
It is curious to observe that 𝔓51 is not close to B's ally 𝔓46; as the editors note, "None of the three peculiar readings of ...[𝔓46]... find support here, nor does [𝔓51] ever agree with 𝔓46 except when the latter is supporting B." But this appears to be an artifact of the fact that 𝔓46 and B have an unusually high rate of disagreements in these verses.
The most interesting reading of 𝔓51 is, surely, in Gal. 1:5, where (along with H 0278 330) it reads ω εστιν η δοξα (it is defective for η δοξα, but the addition of εστιν is clear).
Given the lateness and rarity of this reading, and the small amount of text we have to work with, we can hardly be dogmatic about 𝔓51's text. I'll give a wild speculation, though, and suggest that 𝔓51 is one of the elements of what became the Euthalian text.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Collations and Editions:
E. Lobel, C. H. Roberts, E. P. Wegener, Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Volume 18.
K. Junack, E. Güting, U. Nimtz, K. Witte, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, II, Die Paulinischen Briefe, Teil 1; such text as there is is on pp. 1-8.
Sample Plates:
Editions which cite:
Cited in NA26, NA27, and the UBS editions. (The edition
of Merk also claims to cite it, but lists it as containing Matthew!)
Other Works:
Philip W. Comfort, Early Manuscripts & Modern Translations of the New Testament, p. 55
K. Junack, E. Güting, U. Nimtz, K. Witte, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, II, Die Paulinischen Briefe, Teil 2 pp. LVI-LVIII.
𝔓52
Location/Catalog Number
Manchester, John Rylands Library, Gr. P. 457
Contents
Portions of John 18:31, 32, 33, 37, 38 (see transcription below)
Date/Scribe
Generally dated to the second century. C. H. Roberts, who first observed the manuscript, dated it before 150 C.E. More recent observers have tended to date it in the range of 110 to 125 C.E.
Description and Text-type
Aland and Aland list 𝔓52 as a normal text. However, it should be noted that we really know nothing about the textual affiliations of this manuscript, which contains roughly 118 legible letters. The most noteworthy feature of the manuscript is its age -- though even this should be taken with some caution. How certain can a paleographic determination be when it is based on so small a sample?
I have also seen it stated that 𝔓52 comes from a single-quire codex. However, we have only a fragment of a single leaf -- and no part of the binding. Because it is written on both sides, it is safe to assume that 𝔓52 is a codex. But we have no basis on which to claim that it is a single-quire codex.
The story of the manuscript is well-known. Acquired by Grenfell in Egypt in 1920, it went unnoticed among many other manuscript fragments until 1934, when C. H. Roberts recognized that it contained part of the Gospel of John. Impressed with the antiquity of the writing, he hastily published a booklet, An Unpublished Fragment of the Fourth Gospel in the John Rylands Library. Despite some caution among scholars about his early and precise dating, almost all accept that it comes from the second century -- simultaneously proving that the codex form and the Gospel of John were in use by that date.
The surviving fragment is only about 9 cm. tall by 6 cm. wide at its widest, counting lines makes it appear that the pages contained about eighteen lines of about 32 letters per line. This implies a page size of about 22 cm. by 20 cm.
Textually 𝔓52 tells us little. The complete text is transcribed below:
|
recto |
verso |
As noted, it appears that 𝔓52 had about thirty characters per line. If so, then the likely reconstruction of the surviving lines is as follows (surviving characters shown in upper case, the rest in lower)
recto
ΟΙ ΙΟΥΔΑΙοι ΗΜΕιν ουκ εxεστιν αποκτειναι
ΟΥΔΕΝΑ ΙΝΑ Ο Λογος του ιυ πληρωθη ον ει-
ΠΕΝ ΣΗΜΑΙΝΩν ποιω θανατω ημελλεν απο-
ΘΝΗΣΚΕΙΝ ΙΣηλθεν ουκ παλιν εις το πραιτω-
ΡΙΟΝ Ο Πιλατος και εφωνησεν τoν ιν
ΚΑΙ ΕΙPεν αυτω συ ει ο βασιλευς των ιου-
δαΙΩν...
verso
(...λευς) ειμι εγω εις τουΤΟ ΓεγΝΝημΑΙ
και εληλυθα εις τoν κοΣΜΟΝ ΙΝΑ ΜΑΡΤΥ-
ρησω τη αληθεια πας ο ων ΤΗΣ ΑΛΗΘΕι-
ας ακουει μου της φωνης ΛΕΓΕΙ ΑΥΤΩ
ο πιλατος τι εστιν αληθεiα καΙ ΤΟΥΤο
ειπων παλιν εξηλθεν προς ΤΟΥΣ Ιου-
δαιους και λεγει αυτοις εγω ουδεΜΙαν
Observe the mis-spellings of ΗΜΕιν (line 1r), ΙΣηλθεν (line 4r).
Perhaps more interesting are the uses of the name of Jesus in lines 2r and 5r. Was the name abbreviated? This is an important and difficult question. Looking at the verso, we find the following line lengths: 28, 30 (38 if εις τουτο is included), 29, 28, 29, 28, 31. In the recto, if "Jesus" is abbreviated, we have 35, 31, 31, 33, 28, 30; if it is expanded, 35, 34, 31, 33 (28 if we omit παλιν), 31, 30. This is problematic, as the average line lengths on recto and verso are distinctly different -- 29 for the verso, 31.33 or 32.33 for the recto. If we consider only the recto, using the long forms produces less deviation for the line lengths (standard deviation of 1.97; it is 2.42 if we use the short lengths). However, if we take all thirteen lines we can measure, using the abbreviations produces the lesser deviation (2.14, with a mean line length of 30.1; without abbreviations the mean is 30.5 and the deviation 2.30). On the whole, then, it is perhaps slightly more likely that the manuscript used the nomina sacra than not, but it is absolutely impossible to be dogmatic.
As far as interesting variants go, 𝔓52 tells us little. The following is a list of variants to which it attests (note that these are all either idiosyncratic readings or of trivial importance, often both):
- 18:32 ινα ο λογος του ιησου πληρωθη 𝔓52-vid 𝔓66-vid rell; W sa ac2 pbo pc ινα πληρωθη ο λογος του ιησου
- 18:32 ον ειπεν 𝔓52-vid ℵc rell; ℵ* omits
- 18:33 παλιν εις το πραιτωριον 𝔓52-vid 𝔓66-vid B C* Dsupp L W X Δ f13 579 1071 𝓁844 lat; 𝔓60-vid ℵ A Cc (N Ψ) Υ 087 565 700 892supp 𝔐 εις το πραιτωριον παλιν; 33 1424 εις το πραιτωριον (𝔓52 might support this reading; with παλιν this line is longer than it ought to be, but without it it is too short).
- 18:37 και εληλυθα 𝔓52 (or other reading omitting 5-10 letters); rell και εις τουτο εληλυθα
- 18:38 λεγει αυτω 𝔓52 rell; 𝔓66 λεγει ουν αυτω
By the nature of the case, 𝔓52 cannot help us with the variant add/omit εγω (after ειμι in verse 37).
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
The bibliography for 𝔓52 is too extensive to be tracked here. The basic article is the C. H. Roberts item (An Unpublished Fragment of the Fourth Gospel in the John Rylands Library) mentioned above. For more popular works on the subject see the lists below.
Collations:
Collations of 𝔓52 are common -- and often rather optimistic in their readings of almost obliterated letters. Many include reconstuctions of the text as well. The following list includes some of the less scholarly, but more widely available, reconstructions:
Finegan, Encountering New Testament Manuscripts, pp. 85-100 (text, recontruction, and comparison with other manuscripts)
Metzger, Manuscripts of the Greek Bible, p. 62 (includes reconstructed text)
Salmon, The Fourth Gospel: A History of the Text, pp. 50-53
Sample Plates:
Almost every modern introduction to textual criticism includes photos of 𝔓52 (which is why no photo is included here). Examples include:
Aland & Aland, The Text of the New Testament
Finegan, Encountering New Testament Manuscripts
Metzger, Manuscripts of the Greek Bible
Salmon, The Fourth Gospel: A History of the Text
Editions which cite:
Cited in all the recent Nestle-Aland editions and the like; it should be noted, however, that 𝔓52 is so short that it plays no real role in the critical apparatus.
Other Works:
Philip W. Comfort, Early Manuscripts & Modern Translations of the New Testament, pp. 55-56
𝔓53
Location/Catalog Number
Ann Arbor, University of Michigan, Inv. 6652. The Matthew fragment and part of the Acts fragment were purchased in 1934 from Maurice Nahman of Cairo; the bottom half of the Acts fragment came from a separate dealer in the Fayyum.
Contents
Matthew 26:29-40, Acts 9:33-10:1. Note that this makes it one of the very small papyri with more than one book, and (along with 𝔓45) one of even fewer to contain books from more than one corpus. The two folios are in three pieces. It is not clear whether the document originally contained the Gospels and Acts, like 𝔓45, or just Matthew and Acts. Nonetheless Sanders, who collated it, and Bell concur in placing the two parts together
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the third century by the Alands.
Description and Text-type
The Alands put it in Category I, with a text that is normal or better. It seems to be a pretty typical Alexandrian text, with no unusual readings noted.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Collations:
Sample Plates:
Editions which cite:
Other Works:
Kenneth W. Clark, A Descriptive Catalogue of Greek New Testament Manuscripts in America, p. 340
Philip W. Comfort, Early Manuscripts & Modern Translations of the New
Testament, p. 57
𝔓54
Location/Catalog Number
Princeton (University Library, P. Princeton 15). (Clark lists it as Garrett Pap. L.III.1.)
Contents
Portions of James 2:16-18 (beginning with του σωματος), 22, 24-25, 3:2-4. The manuscript is damaged on both sides and at the bottom (though the defect at the bottom does not involve much text); in addition, the manuscript is broken in the middle (it in fact consists of two major pieces and some shreds), which explains how a single leaf can contain four sections of text. All four sections are damaged. The state of the fragment is so bad that it is hard to determine even the line length, but it appears to have been about twenty characters; we have about ten characters in the surviving lines. A total of 29 lines survive. Enough of the margins survive that we can read page numbers on both sides (ΚΘ Λ) -- those page numbers being large enough that it seems clear that the manuscript contained more than just James, and probably more than just the Catholic Epistles.
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the fifth or sixth century. The hand is quite firm and clear (or would be if the fragment were not so discoloured and faded).
Description and Text-type
Aland and Aland list 𝔓54 as Category III or possibly Category II. The Nestle text, however, cites it for only four readings (one of them, in 2:18, being subsingular), and the new Editio Critica Maior hasn't much more of significance; there just isn't enough text to make a clear determination of the manuscript's type. Clark thought it agreed most closely with A; Schofield simply called it "neutral."
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
When Schofield published his edition, he presumed that this would be 𝔓25.
Bibliography
Collations and Editions:
E. H. Kase, Papyri in the Princeton University Collections, Volume II
Ellwood M. Schofield, The Papyrus Fragments of the Greek New Testament
K. Junack, W. Grunewald, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, I. Die Katholischen Briefe; such text as there is is on pp. 46-52.
Sample Plates:
Editions which cite:
Cited in NA26, NA27, and the UBS editions.
Other Works:
Kenneth W. Clark, A Descriptive Catalogue of Greek New Testament Manuscripts in America, p. 79 (who, however, used the symbol 𝔓25).
K. Junack, W. Grunewald, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, I. Die Katholischen Briefe, pp. 14-16.
𝔓61
Location/Catalog Number
New York: Pierpont Morgan Library Papyrus Colt 5. Found by the Colt Archaeological Institute at Nessana (in Palestine) in 1937.
Contents
Fourteen fragments (by the Morgan Library's count) of which eight contain enough text to be assessed; they contain Romans 16:23-27 (Fragments I and VIII), 1 Corinthians 1:1-6 (Fragments I and VIII), 5:1-6, 9:13 (Fragment II), Philippians 3:5-6, 12-16 (Fragment III); Colossians 1:3-7, 9-13 (Fragment III); 4:14 (Fragment IV); 1 Thessalonians 1:2-3 (Fragment IV); Titus 3:1-5, 8-11, 14-15 (Fragment V); Philemon 4-7 (Fragment V). All fragments are very, very damaged; many contain just a few letters. The most significant are a couple of pieces from near the spine of the original codex (including the fold), with about fifteen lines of text but rarely as many as ten letters per line and often far less.
A demonstration may be in order. I took the portion of 1 Corinthians 1:1-6 and Titus 3:1-5 as a sample, and tested all readings in the Auf Papyrus apparatus (omitting a few found only in a stray late uncial), with observations on what 𝔓61 actually reads.
| Variant | Support for non-majority variant(s) | 𝔓61 has |
| 1C 1:1 add/omit κλητος | A D 81 0151 omit | 𝔓61 entirely defective but does not appear to leave room |
| 1C 1:1 ιησου χριστου/χριστου ιησου | 𝔓46 B D F G 33 Χριστου Ιησου | 𝔓61 entirely defective |
| 1C 1:2 word order: τη ουση εν κορινθω ηγιασμενοις εν χριστω ιησου | 𝔓46 B D*,2 F G ηγ. εν χ.. ι. τη ουση εν κ. (056 0142 with 𝔐 but omit ιησου) | 𝔓61 τη ουσ...ρ̣ιν...α̣σ̣με̣ν̣... |
| 1C 1:2 κυριου ημων | A omit ημων | 𝔓61 entirely defective |
| 1C 1:2 αυτων (add/omit) τε | 𝔓46 ℵ* A*vid B D* F G 0150 33 81 1175 1506 omit τε | 𝔓61 entirely defective |
| 1C 1:4 add/omit μου | ℵ* B omit | 𝔓61 entirely defective |
| 1C 1:4 add/omit του θεου | A* 056 0142 omit | 𝔓61 entirely defective but appears to have room for the reading |
| 1C 1:6 χριστου/θεου | B* F G 81 1175 θεου | 𝔓61 entirely defective; this is after the end of the fragment |
| Ti 3:1 add/omit δε | add δε after θπομιμνησκε A | 𝔓61 entirely defective |
| Ti 3:1 add/omit και | omit και after αρχαις ℵ A C D* F G 0150 Ψ 104 1739 1881 | 𝔓61 entirely defective |
| Ti 3:1 add/omit και | add και before (F G) or after πειθαρχειν A F G | 𝔓61 entirely defective |
| Ti 3:1 αγαθον | ℵ* αγαθους | 𝔓61 α̣γαθ̣[.]ν̣ |
| Ti 3:2 μηδενα | μη F G (μηδεν K) | 𝔓61 [..]δεν̣α̣ |
| Ti 3:2 ενδεικνθμενους πραυτητα (or εν. πραοτητα) | ενδικνυσθαι σπουδην τα ℵ* | 𝔓61 [..]δεικνυμενους π̣[.......] |
| Ti 3:3 ποτε και ημεις | και ημεις ποτε P Ψ | 𝔓61 πο̣τε κα[......] |
| Ti 3:3 ανοητοι απειθεις | ανοητοι και απειθεις D; ανοητοι Ψ | 𝔓61 [...]ητοι απε̣ι̣θει̣ς̣ |
| Ti 3:3 επιθυμιαις | εν επιθυμιαις ℵ* | 𝔓61 entirely defective |
| Ti 3:3 στυγητοι | στυγηται ℵ*; μισητοι D*; οτοιπητοι F G | 𝔓61 [..]υ̣[.]η̣[.]ο̣ι̣ |
| Ti 3:4 add/omit η χρηστοτης | F G omit | 𝔓61 η χρη̣[.....] |
| Ti 3:5 α/ων εποιησαμεν | α ℵ A C* D* F G 33 81 1739 | 𝔓61 entirely defective; this is after the end of the fragment |
That's twenty passages. In twelve, it is entirely defective, although it sometimes can attest to an add/omit reading despite the defects. But it's a pretty limited witness.
Date/Scribe
Dated c. 700 by the Alands.
Description and Text-type
Aland and Aland list 𝔓61 as Category II. The Auf Papyrus volume at one point calls it "Alexandrian;" the obvious caution is that, with any manuscript this badly damaged, it's easy for a transcriber to read what he wants to read....
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Collations and Editions:
K. Junack, E. Güting, U. Nimtz, K. Witte, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, II, Die Paulinischen Briefe, Teil 1 and 2.
Sample Plates:
Photos can be found on the Morgan Library web site at https://www.themorgan.org/manuscript/351510, https://www.themorgan.org/manuscript/351511,
Editions which cite:
Cited in
Other Works:
K. Junack, E. Güting, U. Nimtz, K. Witte, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, II, Die Paulinischen Briefe, Teil 2 pp. LVIII-LIX.
𝔓64+𝔓67
Location/Catalog Number
𝔓64: Oxford, Magdalen College Gr. 17. (The Aland catalogs give the number as Gr. 18, but the library catalog and web site give it as Gr. 17.)
𝔓67: Barcelona, Fundació Sant Lucas Evangelista P. Barc. 1
Contents
(Fragments of) Matthew 3:9, 3:15, 5:20-22, 5:25-28, 26:7-8, 26:10, 26:14-15, 26:22-23, 26:31-33. For instance, 𝔓64, the Oxford fragment (which contains the tiny portion of Matthew 26) consists of three small scraps, the largest four lines tall with and the widest being only about 12 letters across. The Barcelona fragment contains the portions of Matthew 3 and 5, and is not in much better shape.
It appears that the page was originally about 200 by 130 mm., with two columns per page and about 35-40 lines per page.
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to around the year 200 (the Bodleian site claims late second century).
Interestingly, the fragment appears to have Nomina Sacra -- but not in full form. The words κυριος and Ιησους are abbreviated, but the words do not appear to have lines above them.
Description and Text-type
Aland and Aland list 𝔓64+67 as Category I with a "Strict" text.
It has been suggested that 𝔓64+𝔓67 are part of the same document as 𝔓4. This is certainly possible on chronological grounds. The latter manuscript, however, contain fragments of Luke. If 𝔓4 and 𝔓64+𝔓67 are indeed one manuscript, they represent quite possibly the earliest instance of a papyrus containing more than one gospel. I do not think the evidence sufficient to draw firm conclusions, however. For further discussion, see the entry on 𝔓4.
The text of 𝔓4 is clearly Alexandrian. The evidence for 𝔓64+𝔓67 frankly does not strike me as sufficient to draw a firm conclusion; there just isn't enough text.
It is interesting to note that the Alands rate 𝔓64+𝔓67 a "strict" text, 𝔓4 a "normal" text. However, neither is extensive enough for such a judgment to be truly meaningful.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Collations:
Sample Plates:
The Oxford portion can be seen on the Bodleian web site at https://digital.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/inquire/p/29fc0a57-e9f0-466b-b225-a697022c8de6.
Editions which cite: Cited in NA26, NA27, NA28, and the UBS editions.
Other Works:
Tommy Wasserman, "A Comparative Textual Analysis of 𝔓4 and 𝔓P64+67" discusses the text largely in the light of the Aland analysis, but see the article on 𝔓4 for the frankly quite obvious limitations of the Alands' self-referential assessment of manuscripts.
𝔓72
Location/Catalog Number
Cologne, Bodmer library. Bodmer Papyrus VII (Jude). Also Vatican, Bodmer VIII (1-2 Peter); also Bodmer V, X, XI, XII, XIII, XX
Contents
A complex document, Christian but not a Bible manuscript; one may wonder if the Biblical books were considered canonical. The full contents, in four volumes, are:
- Volume I: The Protevangelium of James, an apocryphal work which has provoked great controversy and which seems to be the source of a number of Christian legends (pp. 1-49).
- 3 Corinthians (pp. 50-57)
- Odes of Solomon (pp. 57-62)
- Jude (pp. 62-68)
- Volume II: Melito's Paschal Homily (pp. 1-63)
- A hymn (p. 64)
- Volume III: Defective at beginning; surviving material starts with the Apology of Phileas (pp. ?-146)
- Psalms 33-34 (pp. 147-?)
- Volume IV: 1-2 Peter (pp. 1-36)
Date/Scribe
Typically dated to the late third century, or to III/IV. Note that, while this makes it likely that it is the oldest substantial witness to 1-2 Peter and Jude, it is at least possible that B or ℵ is older. Four scribes are thought to have worked on the book (including the non-Biblical portions). They vary in their orthography, naturally, but there are many itacisms and peculiar forms.
Description and Text-type
The fact that 𝔓72 is only partially a Biblical text definitely complicates the textual picture. For example, there have been studies of 𝔓72's text of the Protevangelium of James, such as Chris Jordan, "Protevangelium Jacobi (PJ): An Introduction." It is known that there are substantial differences between the texts of this book, including a fairly long vision of Joseph which is omitted in 𝔓72's text but found in others. I know of no attempt to synthesize studies of the Biblical text with the other texts, which is singularly unfortunate.
Aland and Aland list 𝔓72 as Category I, but this is based mostly on age. They call the text of the Petrine Epistles "normal," that of Jude "free," which latter description I doubt anyone would dispute, but as usual, it's not clear what that means in practice. The Alands show it disagreeing with the majority text in 92% of readings, second only to B among substantial witnesses -- but this tells us much more about the Alands' biased sample than about 𝔓72. There has been a tendency, probably starting from Kubo's research, to link it with B, but I suspect this is based more on its extreme distance from the Byzantine text than any meaningful kinship study. Stephen C. Carlson's studies in 1 Peter, while they place both it and B close to to archetype, seems to place 𝔓72 on the ℵ/A side of the split with B.
If there is anything to be drawn from all this, it's that 𝔓72's text is relatively close to the autograph but has been fairly poorly copied. Where it agrees with other important witnesses, it has value, but singular and sub-singular readings perhaps do not deserve much respect.
In addition to its text, 𝔓72 has a number of marginal notes briefly describing the contents of the text, rather like modern section headings, most of them being "about" some particular topic, e.g. περι σαρκος by 1 Peter 4:6, followed by περι αγαπη two verses later.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Collations and Editions:
Carlo M. Martini, Beati Petri Apostoli Epistulae, Ex Papyro Bodmeriana VIII (facsimile, 1968)
K. Junack, W. Grunewald, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, I. Die Katholischen Briefe.
Sample Plates:
Aland & Aland, The Text of the New Testament
Editions which cite:
Other Works:
K. Junack, W. Grunewald, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, I. Die Katholischen Briefe, pp. 16-25.
𝔓74
Location/Catalog Number
Cologne, Bodmer library. Bodmer Papyrus XVII
Contents
Contains most of Acts (1:2-5, 7-11, 13-15, 18-19, 22-25, 2:2-4, 2:6-3:26, 4:2-6, 8-27, 4:29-27:25, 27:27-28:31) and fragments of all seven Catholic Epistles (portions of 75 verses of James, 16 verses of 1 Peter, 4 of 2 Peter, 27 of 1 John, 4 of 2 John, 2 of 3 John, and 5 of Jude).
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the seventh century.
Description and Text-type
Aland and Aland list 𝔓74 as Category I. Richards lists it as a member of his Group A3 (Family 1739), but even he admits "𝔓74 was classified even though there are only eight non-TR readings in 1-3 John by which the manuscript could be judged. We placed 𝔓74 in A3 because seven of its eight non-TR readings are group readings in A3, while only five of the eight are group readings in A2 [the main Alexandrian group], and just three of the eight are A1 [Family 2138] group readings" (W. L. Richards, The Classification of the Greek Manuscripts of the Johannine Epistles, p. 139). However, Richards seems to have been betrayed by his inaccurate groups and his small sample size. In the Catholic Epistles as a whole (meaning primarily James), 𝔓74 is not close to Family 1739. The following data examines all readings of 𝔓74 in the Catholics cited explicitly in NA27. There are exactly fifty such readings. Of these fifty, 𝔓74 agrees with the Byzantine text in a mere six. Nine of its readings are singular or subsingular (i.e. not supported by any of the test witnesses ℵ A B L P 33 323 614 1241 1505 1739) It has six readings which have only one supporter among the test witnesses. Its rate of agreements are as follows:
| Witness | Overall Agreements | Agreements supported only by 𝔓74 and the listed witness |
| ℵ | 17 of 50 (34%) | 0 |
| A | 30 of 49 (61%) | 4 |
| B | 21 of 50 (42%) | 1 |
| L | 11 of 50 (22%) | 1 |
| P | 14 of 46 (30%) | 0 |
| 33 | 21 of 44 (48%) | 0 |
| 323 | 17 of 50 (34%) | 0 |
| 614 | 14 of 50 (28%) | 0 |
| 1241 | 20 of 49 (41%) | 0 |
| 1505 | 14 of 50 (28%) | 0 |
| 1739 | 22 of 50 (44%) | 0 |
Thus 𝔓74's allegiance is clearly with A. If we omit 𝔓74's nine singular readings, they agree in 30 of 41 variants, or 73% of the time. A is the only manuscript to agree with 𝔓74 over 70% of the time. In addition, A agrees with the larger part of 𝔓74's most unusual readings.
We also observe that 𝔓74's next closest relative is 33, which is fairly close to A.
Without adding statistics, we can observe that 𝔓74 seems to have a similar text of Acts. Although it has been called Byzantine, in fact it is a high-quality Alexandrian text of that book, and deserves the Alands' Category I description.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Collations and Editions:
Rudolf Kasser, Papyrus Bodmer XVII: Actes des Apôtres, Epîtres de Jacques, Pierre, Jean et Jude
K. Junack, W. Grunewald, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, I. Die Katholischen Briefe; also volume III, Acts
Sample Plates:
Aland & Aland (1 plate)
Editions which cite:
Cited in all UBS editions and in NA26 and NA27
Other Works:
K. Junack, W. Grunewald, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, I. Die Katholischen Briefe, pp. 25-28.
𝔓75
Location/Catalog Number
Formerly Cologny (Geneva), Switzerland, Bodmer library; donated to the Vatican in 2007. Bodmer Papyrus XIV, XV.
Contents
Contains major portions of Luke and John: Luke 3:18-22, 3:33-4:2, 4:34-5:10, 5:37-6:4, 6:10-7:32, 7:35-39, 41-43, 7:46-9:2, 9:4-17:15, 17:19-18:18, 22:4-end, John 1:1-11:45, 11:48-57, 12:3-13:10, 14:8-15:10. The volume, despite loss of leaves, is in surprisingly good condition, we even have portions of the binding (which is thought to have been added later). We have all or part of 102 pages (51 leaves), out of an original total of about 144 (72 leaves). Generally speaking, the earlier leaves are in better condition; many of the pages in the latter part of John have gone to pieces and have to be reconstructed from fragments.
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the third century (with most scholars tending toward the earlier half of that century); Martin and Kasser, who edited the manuscript, would have allowed a date as early as 175. The scribe seems to have been generally careful, writing a neat and clear hand (though letter sizes vary somewhat), and (with some minor exceptions) using a fairly consistent spelling. Colwell observed that the natural writing tendencies of the scribe were strongly restrained by the text before him, indicating a copy of very high fidelity. The editors of the codex argued that the copyist was a professional scribe. We do note, however, that lines are of very variable length (25 to 36 letters per line), as are the pages (38 to 45 lines per page). As 𝔓75 is a single-quire codex of (presumably) 36 folios, it has been argued that the scribe was trying to get more text on a page toward the end of the volume to hold the codex to the available space.
Description and Text-type
The fact which has struck every examiner of 𝔓75 is its extremely close resemblance to B. A number of statistical studies to this effect have been made; as far as I know, however, all have been done by textual critics with weak mathematical backgrounds and with inadequate controls. Thus, none of their figures for agreements between manuscripts can be regarded as meaning much. Still, the result is unquestionable: 𝔓75 is closer to B than to any other manuscript, and vice versa. There are enough differences that 𝔓75 cannot be the parent of B, and is unlikely to be a direct ancestor, but 𝔓75 and B certainly had a common ancestor, and this ancestor must have been older than 𝔓75. Moreover, both manuscripts have remained quite close to this ancestral text. The mere fact that the two agree does not tell us how good this ancestral text is (most scholars would regard it as very good, but this is for other reasons than the closeness of the two manuscripts). The point is that, good or bad, we are able to reconstruct this text with great accuracy.
Interestingly, there has been no systematic study examining the text of 𝔓75. The Alands, of course, list it as Category I, with a strict text, but this is based simply on the date and character of the manuscript; it is not really an examination of the text. Wisse, for some reason, did not profile 𝔓75, even though it is the only papyrus of Luke substantial enough to allow such an evaluation (at least of Chapter 10).
The discovery of 𝔓75 has had a profound effect on New Testament criticism. The demonstration that the B text is older than B seems to have encouraged a much stronger belief in its originality. The UBS committee, for instance, placed the Western Non-Interpolations back in their text based largely on the evidence of 𝔓75.
The irony, as E. C. Colwell pointed out in the essay "Hort Redivivus: A Plea and a Program" (p. 156 in the reprint in Studies in Methodology in Textual Criticism of the New Testament), is that 𝔓75 should have had no such effect. The existence of manuscripts such as 𝔓75 had never been questioned. The major Bodmer papyri (𝔓66, 𝔓72, 𝔓74, and 𝔓75) are important and influential witnesses, but they should have little effect on our textual theory. The truly significant witnesses were the Beatty papyri -- 𝔓46, as Zuntz showed, should have completely altered our view of the text of Paul (but somehow it didn't); 𝔓47 perhaps should have a similar if less spectacular effect on our text of the Apocalypse; and 𝔓45 (as Colwell showed) allows us to see the sorts of liberties some copyists could take with the Biblical text.
This is not to deny the great value of 𝔓75. Since 𝔓66 is a notably inaccurate copy, and 𝔓45 paraphrases (see Colwell, "Method in Evaluating Scribal Habits: A Study of 𝔓45, 𝔓66, 𝔓75," pp. 196-124 in Studies in Methodology), 𝔓75 is the earliest substantial and careful manuscript of the Gospels. Most would also regard it as having the best text. It does have a few limitations, however. It has been accused of omitting minor words such as personal pronouns (see page 121 in the Colwell essay).
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Note: As with most major manuscripts, no attempt is made to compile a complete bibliography.
Collations and Edition:
Rudolf Kasser and Victor Martin, Papyrus Bodmer XIV-XV. Two
volumes; Volume I contains the Lukan material, Volume II the Johannine. Scholars should probably be aware that the introduction to these volumes is in French, not English or German or Greek or Latin. Also, although the text of 𝔓75 is in uncials, the transcription is in lower case, and although there are no accents or breathings, it does use such modern orthography as terminal sigma (e.g. λογος not ΛΟΓΟϹ). And volume I, at least, has no comparison with other texts; it's just an introduction, a set of plates, and a minuscule transcription of 𝔓75's uncial text, with a reconstruction of the missing parts.
Supplementary portions of the text are found in Kurt Aland, "Neue
neutestamentliche Papyri III," New Testament Studies #22.
Sample Plates:
Complete black and white plates in Kasser & Martin. Sample plates in almost every recent book, including Aland & Aland, Metzger's Text of the New
Testament and Manuscripts of the New Testament, Finegan,
Encountering New Testament Manuscripts, and anything ever published
by Philip Wesley Comfort.
Editions which cite:
Cited in all editions published since its discovery -- including
NA25 and higher, all UBS editions, and even Hodges &
Farstad.
Other Works:
Calvin Porter, "Papyrus Bodmer XV (𝔓75) and the Text of
Codex Vaticanus," Journal of Biblical Literature 81.
E. C. Colwell, "Method in Evaluating Scribal Habits: A Study of 𝔓45, 𝔓66, 𝔓75," pp. 196-124 in Studies in Methodology
𝔓78
Location/Catalog Number
Oxford, Ashmolean Museum. Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 2684
Contents
Portions of Jude 4-5, 7-8 (additional material illegible)
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the third or fourth century.
Description and Text-type
𝔓78 contains only a fragment of a single leaf, measuring a little over 10 cm. across by 2.5 cm. tall. This suffices to hold three to four lines of text. There are two columns of about a dozen lines each. The surviving portion appears to be the top of the page.
The verso portion is easily read, although written in a rather hurried, inelegant hand. The left-hand column begins with verse 4, αρνουμενοι, and ends with verse 5, ειδοτας. Column 2 begins with verse 7, αιωνιου, and ends with verse 8, εενυπνιαζομε[νοι].
The recto portion is in much worse shape, being almost illegible. The left column begins with verse 8, σαρκα μεν. The rest of this column is only marginally legible, and the second column cannot really be deciphered (at least in visible light). The fragment thus contains a total of only about 100 Greek characters.
Nonetheless its text is striking. The Alands classify it as Category I (based on its date) with a "free" text. We observe several noteworthy readings:
- v. 5 -- add αδελφοι after βουλομαι (singular reading)
- v. 7 -- επεχουσαι for υπεχουσαι (with 630 1505 2495 and certain other Family 2138 witnesses)
- v. 8 -- αυτοι for ουτοι (singular reading)
- v. 8 -- δοξαν for δοξας (a reading seemingly supported only by Latin and Syriac witnesses)
Several of these may be the result of a hasty and careless scribe. Sadly, the fragment is so short that we cannot really draw further conclusions.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Collations and Editions:
L. Ingrams, P. Kingston, P. Parsons, J. Rea, Oxyrhynchus Papyri, volume 34.
K. Junack, W. Grunewald, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, I. Die Katholischen Briefe; such text as there is is on pp. 160-162.
Sample Plates:
Editions which cite:
Cited in UBS4 and above, NA26, and above.
Other Works:
Philip W. Comfort, Early Manuscripts & Modern Translations of the New Testament, pp. 64-65
K. Junack, W. Grunewald, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, I. Die Katholischen Briefe, pp. 28-29.
𝔓79
Location/Catalog Number
Berlin, Staatliche Museen, P. 6774.
Contents
Portions of Hebrews 10:10-12, 28-30, the recto containing parts of 12 ασμε[νοι εσμεν]... 15 το διηνε[κες] and the verso including parts of 28 [αθετη]σας... 30 [οιδαμεν] γαρ τον.
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the seventh century.
Description and Text-type
A single leaf, the surviving portion quite small (5.3 cm wide by 11.2 cm. high), from the inner side of the leaf. It is believed that it was in two columns (although all the surviving text is from a single column); 15 lines survive on the recto and 17 on the verso; it is estimated that it originally had 32 lines per column.
The text seems to average about 14 or 15 letters per column. Typically seven or eight letters per line survive, so we have about half the text.
The transcriptions in Horsley and in Das Neue Testament auf Papyrus do not entirely agree, with auf Papyrus marking many more letters as uncertain. One difference extends beyond marking a letter as uncertain; in 10:12, Horsley gives the first word of the verse as αυτος (read also by Dc K L 056 0142 0151; this is clearly the Byzantine reading) while auf Papyrus reads it as ουτος (found also in 𝔓13 𝔓46 ℵ A C D* P Ψ 0278; this is clearly the reading of all the older text-types). There is one other apparently-unique reading in 10:11, where it omits πολλακις (apparently; the text is defective here, and there is no room for the word in the line, but the scribe could perhaps have squeezed it into the margin), but the only other variants are itacisms and spelling variants. There are several instances of the symbol ′′ to indicate a sense break.
The Alands describe 𝔓79 as Category II, but it's not obvious why, given that the only clearly Alexandrian reading (the αυτος/ουτος variant) is extremely uncertain.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Collations:
The compete text is printed in G. H. R.
Horsley, New Documents Illustrating Early Christianity, 2, 1982, p. 139
See also K. Junack, Das Neue Testament auf Papyrus, Vol. 2: Die paulinischen Briefe (description and bibliography on pp. LXII-LXIII).
Sample Plates:
Editions which cite:
Cited in NA27 and NA28 and in UBS4 and UBS5.
Other Works:
𝔓81
Location/Catalog Number
Trieste, S. Daris #20.
Contents
Portions of 1 Peter 2:20-3:12
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the fourth century. Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, p. 30, describes the orthography as very good ("sehr gut").
Description and Text-type
The Alands describe 𝔓81 as Category II. There is a possible subsingular reading in 1 Peter 2:23 (add τον τοπον, a reading not supported by any papyrus or uncial witness, but the reading is really just a guess based on line length). Other than this, it seems to agree about equally with ℵ, A, and B -- I went through the variants in the apparatus to Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, and found that it testified to eleven readings. Seven of these were shared with B, four with A, three, with ℵ, none with K; one was the singular mentioned above, and one agreed only with 049. That on its face sounds like it agrees most with B, but with so little text, the sample is not very meaningful; it's hard to know its type, except that it's pretty definitely not Byzantine.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Collations and Editions:
K. Junack, W. Grunewald, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, I. Die Katholischen Briefe; such text as there is is on pp. 80-87.
Sample Plates:
Sergio Daris, "Uno nuovo frammento della prima lettera de Pietro," Papyrologica Castroctaiana, 1967.
Editions which cite:
Cited in UBS4 and above, NA26 and above, and the Editio Critica Maior.
Other Works:
K. Junack, W. Grunewald, Das Neue Testament Auf Papyrus, I. Die Katholischen Briefe, pp. 30-31.
𝔓90
Location/Catalog Number
Oxford, Ashmolean Museum. Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 3523
Contents
Portions of John 18:36-19:7
Date/Scribe
Dated paleographically to the second century (making it, after 𝔓52, perhaps the oldest surviving New Testament papyrus). The script is considered similar to the "unknown gospel," P. Egerton 2.
Description and Text-type
𝔓90 contains only a part of a single leaf, about 15 cm. tall and nowhere more than six cm. wide. It appears that we have the entire height of the leaf, but only a portion of its width, with thirteen or fewer characters surviving on each line (24 lines visible on the recto, 23 on the verso). Even the surviving characters are often illegible. (So much so that, of the eleven readings noted in NA27, eight are marked vid.) The manuscript appears to have originally has about twenty characters per line, meaning that even the best-preserved lines are missing a third of their text, and most are missing half or more. The hand is generally clear but not polished.
Because the manuscript is so newly-discovered, it has not been classified according to any of the standard classification schemes. It does not appear to contain any noteworthy variants. The following table shows its rate of agreement with some key manuscripts in the variants cited in NA27:
| MS | Agreements | Percent Agreement |
| 𝔓66 | 5/11 | 45% |
| ℵ | 7/11 | 64% |
| A | 1/11 | 9% |
| B | 3/11 | 27% |
| Dsup | 3/11 | 27% |
| K | 2/11 | 18% |
| L | 6/11 | 55% |
| Q | 2/11 | 18% |
| 1 | 3/11 | 27% |
With such small samples, our percentages of agreement obviously don't mean much. But it will be clear that 𝔓90 is not Byzantine; it appears to be an Alexandrian witness of some kind. Comfort listed it as closest to 𝔓66 (based probably on some relatively unusual readings they share), but his mindless bias toward early papyri is well-known; in fact it looks closer to ℵ. Its lack of kinship with B is noteworthy.
Other Symbols Used for this Manuscript
Bibliography
Collations:
L. Ingrams, P. Kingston, P. Parsons, J. Rea, Oxyrhynchus Papyri, volume 50.
Sample Plates:
Editions which cite:
Cited in NA27.
Other Works:
Philip W. Comfort, Early Manuscripts & Modern Translations of the New Testament, pp. 68-69