‘Dating early Greek and Coptic literary hands’ in Hugo Lundhaug and Lance Jenott, eds. The Nag...

Dating Early Greek and Coptic Literary Hands

CHRISTIAN ASKELAND

This chapter considers modern contributions to the dating of early Coptic manuscripts. With regard to paleography, it revisits and reinforces arguments originally offered by Peter Parsons, critiquing developmental models of paleography in light of the extant datable evidence. Paleography should remain a means of last resort, and is not reliable for dating literary manuscripts to a single century. The survey underscores the clear connection between our securely-datable manuscripts and Egyptian monasticism. 1

Status quaestionis

Coptic Paleography Publications

At present, Coptic paleography remains at best a guild art - a craft often practiced but seldom discussed. The twentieth century began on a conservative note. In his 1905 British Museum catalog in which he generally did not date manuscripts, Walter Crum referenced Hyvernat's 1888 Album de paleographie copte as the only significant work on Coptic paleography, and indicated that "Suspended judgment is indeed still imperative on this fundamental question and little can here be said upon it."2 Viktor Stegemann published his 1936 Koptische Paliiographie album with its extensive examples, although without any synthesis or methodological conclusions.3

Whereas Stegemann's edition has endured as a valuable source for paleographic parallels, the 1964 Koptische Paliiographie edition of Cramer

1 I thank Alin Suciu and Brent Nongbri for their comments on this chapter. 2 Walter Ewing Crum, ed., Catalogue of the Coptic Manuscripts in the British Muse

um (London: The British Museum, 1905), xviii; Henri Hyvernat, Album de paleographie copte pour servir a !'introduction paleographique des Actes des martyrs de l'Egypte (Paris: Leroux, 1888).

3 Viktor Stegemann, Koptische Paliiographie: 25 Tafeln zur Veranschaulichung der Schreibstile koptischer Schriftdenkmiiler auf Papyrus, Pergament und Papier fur die Zeit des III.-XIV. Jahrhunderts; mit einem versuch einer Stilgeschichte der koptischen Schrift (2 vols.; QSGKAM, Reihe Ci; Heidelberg: Bilabel, 1936).

458 Christian Aske/and

was not well received. According to Martin Krause, Cramer's edition dated manuscripts both too early and too late in apparent ignorance of recent scholarly publication.4 Krause's second major criticism of Cramer consists of the manner in which the editor had organized her character specimens, and further critiques concerned the quality of images, labeling of images and the inopportune timing of the endeavor given the impending publication of relevant manuscripts. 5

Aside from Crum's dictionary, Paul Kahle's two-volume Bala'izah edition was perhaps the most pivotal work of the twentieth century, particularly in terms of redefining dialect and reassessing the ever-increasing number of Coptic manuscripts. Preceding a list of early manuscripts in his edition, Kahle summarized four characteristics upon which he relied for dating: Greek paleography, demotic letters, superlineation, dialect and external evidence. 6 Although its contents were not novel, the list details the influences which were active both before and after Kahle - most of which will be discussed in the present article.

Peter Nagel has described how Coptic manuscripts from the early Islamic period were larger in format, were typically written on parchment and were more elaborately illustrated than earlier manuscripts. 7 As a general principle, most scholars would agree with Nagel's thesis concerning the notable increase in format during and after the seventh century, allowing for characterizations of later manuscripts. Indeed, the collections of larger format parchment manuscripts acquired from Hamuli, Scetis and Sohag corroborate such a generalization. Bentley Layton's 1985 discussion of Coptic paleography encouraged a new spirit of minimalism among Coptologists as they approached manuscript dating, and also outlined a strategy for creating a viable science for dating Coptic manuscripts. Specifically, Layton underscored the need to identify manuscripts in holding institutions and to produce the basic editions which would afford scholars fundamental

4 "Die Arbeit der Verfasserin ist - um das Urteil vorweg zu nehmen - ein Rilckschritt gegenilber der Paliiographie von V. Stegemann: nicht nur deshalb, weil sie die koptische Urkunden nicht mit behandelt und alle neueren Bemilhungen um die koptische Paliiographie vollig ignoriert, sondern auch, weil die angewandte Methode m.E. falsch und die Durchftihrung im einzelnen voller Fehler ist." Krause, review of M. Cramer, Koptische Paliiographie in BO 23 (1966): 287.

5 In this way, Krause repeats his contention that Stegemann's edition was still the standard (review ofM. Cramer, Koptische Paliiographie, 293).

6 Paul E. Kahle, Bala 'izah: Coptic Texts from Deir el-Bala 'izah in Upper Egypt (2 vols.; London: Oxford University Press, I 954), I :269.

7 "DVCTVS," n.d., n.p. [cited 26 October 2012]. Online: http://dvctvs.upf.edu/catalog o/ductus.php?operacion=introduce&ver=l&nume=266. Frank Feder has conducted a similar conspectus of theoretically fourth-century manuscripts in Joshua I-VJ and Other Passages in Coptic (CBM 9; Dublin: Hodges Figgis, 1963).

Dating Early Greek and Coptic Litera,y Hands 459

interaction with the scripts and formats of the relevant witnesses. 8 According to his vision, the construction of a paleographic method would only require first a comprehensive and systematic electronic database.9

Objectively Dated Manuscripts

Few Coptic literary manuscripts can be dated to the earliest period with confidence, leaving scholars with a limited sample of paleographic evidence with which to begin. Numismatic and papyrological evidence accompanying the biblical and Manichaean texts from Kellis date the majority of the collection to 355-380. 10 H. I. Bell dated BL Or. 7594, the Sahidic codex of Deuteronomy, Jonah and Acts to the early part of the fourth century based upon papyrus fragments in the codex's bindings. 11 Likewise, Bell dated the Middle Egyptian glosses to Hosea and Amos to the first half of the third century due to the Greek documentary text on the reverse. 12

Fragments from the bindings of the Nag Hammadi Codex VII date to 341,

8 Bentley Layton, "Towards a New Coptic Paleography," in Acts of the Second International Congress of Coptic Studies, Roma, 22-26 September 1980 (ed. Tito Orlandi and Frederik Wisse; Rome: C. I. M., 1985), 150.

9 Layton ("Towards a New Coptic Paleography") references the Camile de paleographie hebraique as a model for this undertaking; see Colette Sirat, Michel Arie, and Mordehai" Glatzer, eds., Codices hebraicis litteris exarati quo tempore scripti fuerunt exhibentes (3 vols.; Turnhout: Brepols, 1997).

10 Iain Gardner, ed., Coptic Documentary Texts from Kellis (Dakhleh Oasis Project monographs 9; Oxford: Oxbow, 1999), 8-11. Similarly, five biblical codices from Saqqara may be dated to circa 600 based upon nine coins with which they were found; Herbert Thompson, ed., The Coptic Version of the Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline Epistles in the Sahidic Dialect (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1932), x.

11 Bell referenced both Greek paleography and data related to inflation for his conclusions; E. A. Wallis Budge, ed., Coptic Biblical Texts in the Dialect of Upper Egypt (London: The British Museum, 1912), xiv-xvii. "Two [scraps from the binding] contain writing in literary uncials which might be of the fifth century, but are not perhaps necessarily so (cf. P.Oxy. 661). They were, presumably, if of the fifth century, later insertions" (Budge, Coptic Biblical Texts, xvii). His most compelling evidence, however, may be the references to pagan priests and temples and the lack of reference to Christianity in the binding fragments (ibid., xvii). The current contents of the codex may not have been create at the same point in history; Peter Nagel, "Aufbau und Komposition des Papyruskodex BL OR. 7594 der British Library," in Coptology: Past, Present, and Future: Studies in Honour of Rodolphe Kasser (OLA 61; Leuven: Peeters, 1994), 347-55.

12 Arthur Hunt, however, argued concerning the script on the verso that it was "late third if not fourth; in places the latter has to me almost an early Byzantine look." Harold Idris Bell and Herbert Thompson, "A Greek-Coptic Glossary to Hosea and Amos," JEA 11:3 (1925): 241.


346 and 348; 13 the date of the enclosed leaves remains at issue, 14 but they were probably created not more than a century after the binding. 15 Radio isotope dating of the Tchacos codex offered five dates ranging from the third to fourth centuries. 16 The "Panopolis archive" was created from archival materials sometime in the middle of the fourth century. 17 Most other 'early' manuscripts, however, are dated on various other characteristics. The present survey will deal with the question of paleography (section II), will review securely-datable Greek-Coptic hands (section III) and will second consider other issues germane to dating (section IV).

Are Greek and Coptic Hands Comparable?

Most paleographic dating of Coptic manuscripts has relied upon Greek parallels. In other words, a scholar could assume that ancient Egyptian scribes used the same ductus and character forms when copying Greek manuscripts that they used for their Coptic manuscripts. Such an assumption accords with the current consensus on ethnicity and language in preIslamic Egypt. Indeed, the concept of distinctly Greek and Coptic ethnic groups is no longer defensible. 18 The same persons and institutions were creating and reading our extant Greek and Coptic manuscripts.

Although the argument for parallel Greek-Coptic paleography seems convincing prima facie, scholars have voiced hesitation. Rodolphe Kasser has argued "a Coptic script that possesses the same graphic characteristics

13 John W. B. Barns, Gerald M. Browne, and John C. Shelton, eds., Nag Hammadi Codices: Greek and Coptic Papyrifi·om the Cartonnage of the Covers (NHS 16; Leiden: Brill, 1981), I I.

14 Stephen Emmel, "The Coptic Gnostic Texts as Witnesses to the Production and Transmission of Gnostic (and Other) Traditions," in Das Thomasevangelium: Entstehung

Rezeption - Theologie (ed. Ji:irg Frey, Enno Edzard Popkes, and Jens Schroter; BZNW 157; Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2008), 38-40.

15 Hugo Lundhaug, "Shenoute of Atripe and Nag Hammadi Codex II," in Zugiinge zur Gnosis: Symposium of the Patristische Arbeitsgemeinschaft (PAG) (ed. Christoph Markschies; Patristic Studies 12; Leuven: Peeters, 2013), 209-210. For a discussion of reused papyri, cf. Eric Gardner Turner, "Recto and Verso," JEA 40 (I 954): 102-6.

16 The current discussion weighs these dates in a later section; Herbert Krosney, The Lost Gospel: The Quest for the Gospel of Judas Iscariot (Washington, D.C.: National Geographic, 2006), 269-74; Peter Head, "The Gospel of Judas and the Qarara Codices: Some Preliminary Observations," TynBul 58:1 (2007): 11-13.

17 Roger S. Bagnall, "Public Administration and the Documentation of Roman Panopolis," in Perspectives on Panopolis: An Egyptian Town fi·om Alexander the Great to the Arab Conquest; Acts fi·om an International Symposium Held in Leiden on 16, 17 and 18 December 1998 ( ed. Arno Egberts, Brian Paul Muhs, and Jacques van der Vliet; Papyrologica Lugduno-Batava 31; Leiden: Brill, 2002), 1-12.

18 Roger S. Bagnall, Egypt in Late Antiquity (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993), 230-60.

Dating Early Greek and Coptic Literary Hands 461

as a Greek one may nevertheless be of clearly later date." 19 Kasser cited Kahle to substantiate his opinion, but appears to misinterpret him. 20 In fact, in his list of early manuscripts, Paul Kahle appealed directly to Greek paleography and to the person of C. H. Roberts to support his dates, with no caveats about bilinguals. 21 In his recent survey of the Coptic biblical majuscule, Pasquale Orsini has argued that early Coptic scribes prepared their Coptic manuscripts with the same Greek hands used contemporaneously in the Greek tradition. 22 While many Greek diglots use a single consistent Greek script (e.g. Strasbourg Achmimic 1 Clement, Gregory-Aland T 029, and the Hamburg Bilingual codex), Gardner and Choat have noted that the documentary texts discovered in Kellis differentiate between Greek and Coptic. 23 Although some sort of relationship may have existed between Greek and Coptic scripts, the nature of this relationship is currently uncertain. Possibly, Greek-Coptic biblical texts may have employed an archaic Greek hand throughout, especially in the later period when the minuscule form and its incumbent Greek textform become standard in the rival Byzantine tradition.24 With regard to perhaps the oldest diglot manuscripts, Anne Boud'hours has noted that later medieval Bohairic Greek scribes employed the sloping uncial to distinguish their Greek characters from the late Alexandrian majuscule of the Coptic parallel text.25

19 Kasser, "Paleography," in The Coptic Encyclopedia (ed. Aziz S. Atiya; New York: Macmillan Library Reference, 1991 ), 8: 182.

20 The interpretation may actually lie with Guglielmo Cavallo, who first read Kahle in this way. 'Tpaµµm:a AAE~avopiva," JOBG 24 (1975): 52-53.

21 Kahle, Bala 'izah, l :269. He also cites demotic characters, superlineation, dialect and external evidence as informative for certain manuscripts.

22 Orsini, "La maiuscola copta," Segno e Testo 6 (2008): 142. 23 These authors reference Stegemann's Koptische Palaographie as the locus classicus

for the above assumption concerning the similarity of Greek and Coptic hands, and they likewise note Kahle's suspicions concerning this presumption; Iain Gardner and Malcolm Choat, "Towards a Palaeography of Fourth Century Documentary Coptic," in Coptic Studies on the Threshold of a New Millennium: Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress of Coptic Studies, Leiden, August 27-September 2, 2000 (ed. Mat Immerzeel and Jacques van der Vliet; 2 vols.; OLA 133; Leuven: Peeters, 2004), 2:495-503.

24 No minuscule manuscripts survive from Sohag or Hamuli, only Greek majuscules. 25 Anne Boud'hors, "L'onciale penchee en copte et sa survie jusqu'au XVe siecle en

Haute-Egypte," in Scribes et manuscrits du Mayen-Orient (ed. Frarn;:ois Deroche and Francis Richard; Etudes et recherches; Paris: Bibliotheque nationale, 1997), 117-33.


Modem Approaches to Paleography

Modern Paleography

For purposes of the present discussion, modern Greek literary paleography can be presented in three stages. In the first stage, Guglielmo Cavallo published his developmental reconstruction of Greek paleography, which most scholars support to this day. In the second phase, several non-specialists published controversial and indefensible reassessments which posited earlier dates for various manuscripts. In the third and present stage, several specialists are responding to those unscholarly publications, generally reinforcing the developmental theories of Cavallo.

In first phase, the modern concept of Greek paleography was codified. The preeminent voice in the science of paleography has been Guglielmo Cavallo, whose many publications have standardized the already-popular notion of an evolutionary model of script development. According to Cavallo's evolutionary model, an ancient script's development could be traced through various features as it rose, reached its apogee and then declined. For example, Cavallo describes the biblical majuscule in the following terms:

If in the biblical majuscule, for instance, the canon or ideal configuration is represented by the hand of the Codex Sinaiticus, then the Vienna Dioscurides ... shows the beginning of its decline, and later stages of its degeneration can be seen [in later manuscripts] ... By the end of the period under consideration, the main literary scripts have all become mannered and betray symptoms of decline, some more so than others.26

According to Cavallo, then, the various Greek scripts rose and fell just like the ancient empires which employed them. 27 As one reviews the dozens of examples of biblical majuscules in his 1987 edition, one encounters only a few dated literary witnesses, a fact which the editors themselves emphasize.28 In fact, only one literary codex with a biblical majuscule script appears, the regal Vienna Dioscurides, dated to circa 515 CE. Criticizing Cavallo's method, Eric Turner writes:

26 Guglielmo Cavallo and Herwig Maehler, Greek Bookhands of the Early Byzantine Period (AD 300-800) (Supplement 47; London: University of London, Institute of Classical Studies, 1987), 2.

27 "L'epoca del Vaticano e del Sinaitico segna ii momento de! massimo splendore della maiuscola biblica, al quale segue, con lo spirare de! IV secolo, la lenta ma sempre piu evidente decadenza" (Cavallo, Ricerche sulfa maiuscola biblica [Florence: Le Monnier, 1967], 69).

28 "The main reason for our general lack of confidence in dating later Greek bookhands is the apparent lack of securely dated specimens which could serve as chronological points of reference for comparable scripts" (Cavallo and Maehler, Greek Bookhands, 1).

Dating Early Greek and Coptic Literwy Hands 463

If I cannot accept this metaphysical concept, it is from a wish to have an empirical anc~or in time and place for examples of this handwriting; and a belief that unless this hand can be proved to have emanated from a single centre, it too is unlikely to have developed and degenerated in linear fashion. If it was written in several centres it is likely that cross-influences will have affected this style, as they did other styles.29

P. J. Parsons offered the most direct critique, underscoring Cavallo's lack of empirical evidence to support the proposed dating scheme. After describing Cavallo's method as essentially following traditional practice, Parson states:

But [Cavallo] follows the line with unusual rigour and confidence: his observation of stylistic details is admirably precise and acute; his view of the development of the [biblical uncial] is correspondingly detailed; and the datings deduced are of unprecedented exactness - within 25, even within 10 years. First, what exactly is the evidence? From Cavallo's material we can list some thirteen MSS which offer evidence of date; for the rest, about 120 MSS, we rely entirely on paleographic judgement. Of the thirteen, one was dated by its scribe (Vat Gr 1666); one can be dated historically (the Vienna Dioscurides); the others depend on the testimony of marginalia or verso texts. This testimony is naturally flexible. 30

According to Turner and Parsons, Cavallo has constructed a propositional mansion on a minute foundation. This mansion is correspondingly as expansive and ornate as its foundation is diminutive and fragile. In this way, the problem is not limited to the point of departure, but extends to the perhaps overly aggressive execution. In Cavallo's defense, no distinct alternative method of dating has been proposed. The scholar is essentially left with the approach of Cavallo, or with a paleographic agnosticism. Although the latter is not appealing, it is generally accepted with respect to contemporary epigraphic dating. Bradley McLean writes:

The dating of Hellenistic and Roman inscriptions according to allegedly key developments of particular letter forms is notoriously difficult and unreliable because older letter forms persist alongside new forms ... it is not possible to date inscriptions precisely on the basis of letter forms. Older masons often continued or even revived the use of letter forms, formulae, layouts, and spellings characteristic of earlier periods, sometimes even mixing them indiscriminately with contemporary letter forms. This tendency may represent an attempt to make inscriptions look older and more venerable than they really were. For example, from Hadrian's reign onward, there was a general archaizing tendency, in society, resulting in the use of archaic letter forms in inscriptions?

29 Eric G. Turner, Greek Manuscripts of the Ancient World (2nd ed.; Supplement 46; London: University of London, Institute of Classical Studies, 1987), 22 (1st ed. p. 26).

30 Peter J. Parsons, "Review of Ricerche sulla maiuscola biblica by Guglielmo Cavallo," Gnomon 42:4 (1970): 379.

31 Bradley McLean, An Introduction to Greek Epigraphy of the Hellenistic and Roman Periods from Alexander the Great down to the Reign of Constantine 323 B.C. A.D. 337 (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2002), 42-43. McLean is optimistic about research directed toward identifying inscribers, and is open to future research on dates


Likewise, Geoffrey Woodhead offers his own caveats concerning epigraphic dating:

In many cases, even in the majority of cases, a precise dating is impossible, and it would be misleading to attempt to offer one. In this event, the most that can be done is to suggest the period within which, as it appears, the inscription may be safely attributed 'the Hellenistic period', 'aetas Imperii Romani', or, more closely, the second century, BC, the first century AD, and so forth. In the edition of an inscription some indication date ought always to be given, even though it be of the vaguest. 32

Woodhead's conservatism here assumes that the dating is based upon evidence other than the script itself, which he suggests "is much better left as a final refuge; its evidence is far less precise and secure than is popularly supposed."33 The cognate field of epigraphy may be an imperfect parallel for Greek and Coptic literary paleography, but the cited sources demonstrate the kind of methodological conservatism advisable for Greek and Coptic literary hands.

Paleography Gone Wrong

In 1960, Herbert Hunger argued that 1.)366 could be paleographically assigned to 100-150 AD. 34 Twenty eight years later, Young Kyu Kim assigned 1.)346 to the middle or early second century contra the accepted early third century date. 35 In 1994, Carsten Peter Thiede redated 1.)364 to the late first century, whereas formerly scholars had placed the manuscript around 200 AD. 36 Thiede co-authored a popular book based on his analysis,37 and various New Testament scholars emphatically rejected his arguments in journal articles.38 Phillip Comfort produced a survey of pre-fourth century

based upon "styles" by which he means the general formatting (codicology) of the inscription, especially when these "styles" can be studied within their own regional contexts.

32 Arthur Geoffrey Woodhead, The Study of Greek Inscriptions (2nd ed.; Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1981), 52.

33 Woodhead, Study of Greek Inscriptions, 62. 34 Herbert Hunger, "Zur Datierung des Papyrus Bodmer II (\1366

)," AOA W.PH 4 (1960): 12-23; Turner, Greek Manuscripts of the Ancient World, 108.

35 Young Kyu Kim, "Palaeographical Dating of \1346 to the Later First Century," Biblica 69 (1988): 248-57; Daniel Wallace, "Review of Young Kyu Kim's Paleographical Dating of \1346 to the Later First Century," BSac 146 (1989): 451-52.

36 Carsten Peter Thiede, "Papyrus Magdalen Greek 17 (Gregory-Aland \1364). A Reap

praisal," ZPE 105 (1995): 13-20. 37 Matthew D' Ancona and Carsten Peter Thiede, Eyewitness to Jesus (New York:

Doubleday, 1996). 38 Peter M. Head, "The Date of the Magdalen Papyrus of Matthew (P. Magd. Gr. I 7 =

\13 64): A Response to C.P. Thiede," TynBul 46 (1995): 251-85; Klaus Wachtel, "\1364167

:

Fragmente des Matthausevangeliums aus dem I. Jahrhundert?" ZPE 107 (1995): 73-80; Harald Vocke, "Papyrus Magdalen 17 - weitere Argumente gegen die Frlihdatierung des


New Testament manuscripts which escalated the endeavor, paleographically examining 55 manuscripts. 39 The most extensive paleographic enterprise in this group has received the least published scholarly response, perhaps due to its enormous size (5163 pages, PDF on CD);4° Karl Jaros offered editions and paleographic examinations of 95 biblical papyri, eighteen of which were dated to the period 50-150 CE.

A Modern Reaction

In the last phase, several scholars have criticized these assessments. Brent Nongbri has questioned both the dating and the ideological abuses of the dating of John Rylands Greek Papyrus 3.457.41 This small fragment, which is better known by the Gregory-Aland number ~ 52

, has been widely cited as the earliest New Testament manuscript. Specifically, Nongbri has argued that the second-century examples employed to date ~ 52 should be augmented by witnesses dated to the third century. Nongbri's colleague, Don Barker, has similarly argued with respect to three New Testament papyri that scholars have assigned date ranges which are more precise than evidence would allow. 42 Barker, for example, argues thus for a threecentury window for ~ 67 (mid-second to mid-fourth centuries).43 In contrast to these technical, paleographic arguments, Roger Bagnall has criticized the dating of New Testament manuscripts arguing from statistical probability concerning the unlikelihood that "we would possess more than one or two pieces of Christian text from any time before the Severan period ( 193-

angeblichen Jesus-Papyrus," ZPE 113 (1996): 153-57; David C. Parker, "Was Matthew Written before 50 CE? The Magdalen Papyrus of Matthew," ExpTim 107 (1996): 40-43.

39 The critic isms of this edition are many. Comfort copied his transcriptions from editiones principes, and not from images. He did not mark uncertain characters with diacritical dots. His edition included manuscripts dated earlier than 300 CE, and aggressively dated witnesses to this period. Finally, although his edition covered fifty-five manuscripts, only forty-one have a plate. David P. Barrett and Philip W. Comfort, eds., The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts (Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers, 2001 ); David C. Parker, "Review of Comfort and Barrett, The Text of the Earliest New Testament," TC 4 (1999); Maurice A Robinson, "Review of Comfort and Barrett, The Text of the Earliest New Testament," TC 6 (2001); Anna Passoni dell' Acqua, "Byblica in papyris. IV (2003)," in Papiri e ostraka greci (Papyrologica Lupiensia 13; Lecce: Congedo Edi tore, 2004 ), 151.

4° Karl Jaros, ed., Das Neue Testament nach den iiltesten griechischen Handschriften: Die handschriftliche Uberlieferung des Neuen Testaments vor Codex Sinaiticus und Codex Vaticanus (Wtirzburg: Echter, 2006).

41 Brent Nongbri, "The Use and Abuse of ~ 52: Papyrological Pitfalls in the Dating of

the Fourth Gospel," HTR 98 (2005): 23-48. 42 Don Barker, "The Dating of New Testament Papyri," NTS 57 (2011): 571-82. 43 Barker, "The Dating of New Testament Papyri," 578.


235)."44 The eminent papyrologist's arguments derive not only from his previous statistical survey of Christian names in documentary texts,45 but also extend to literary references to the expansion of the Egyptian episcopate and related historical data. Notably, Bagnall's analysis led him to expect twelve manuscripts from the late second/early third century. 46 These concerns and objections are best understood in light of the indefensible arguments for ridiculously early dates of various New Testament papyri.47

The preeminent work on the issue to date is, no doubt, that of Pasquale Orsini and Willy Clarysse, which challenges the lackluster attempts of Comfort and Barrett and Karl Jaros.48 The Orsini-Clarysse article presents the developmental views first championed by Guglielmo Cavallo, augmented by an updated graphic typology and listing of dated/datable manuscripts. Essentially, Orsini-Clarysse support the accepted Kurzgefasste Liste dates, dating four manuscripts earlier and nine later.49

•

Foundations for Paleographic Study

The vast majority of dated specimens from the Roman period are reused papyri consisting of paleographically-dated documentary texts which have been reused for a literary text.50 Thus, the paleographic examples are themselves largely dependent on paleography.51 In the present section, the read-

44 Roger S. Bagnall, Early Christian Books in Egypt (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009), 25.

45 Roger S. Bagnall, "Religious Conversion and Onomastic Change," BASP 19 (1982): I 05-24; "Conversion and Onomastics: A Reply," ZPE 69 (1987): 243-50.

46 Bagnall, Early Christian Books in Egypt, 20. 47 Thiede, "Papyrus Magdalen Greek 17 (Gregory-Aland ~ 64). A Reappraisal"; Bar

rett and Comfort, The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts. 48 Pasquale Orsini and Willy Clarysse, "Early New Testament Manuscripts and Their

Dates: A Critique of Theological Palaeography," ETL 88.4 (2012): 443-74; Barrett and Comfort, The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts; Jaros, Das Neue Testament.

49 For a constructive response to Orsini and Clarysse, see Larry W. Hurtado, "New Testament Scholarship and the Dating of New Testament Papyri," in Interdisciplinary Dating: Dialogues between Manuscript Studies and Material Sciences (ed. Zachary Cole; Leiden: Brill, forthcoming).

50 Grant Edwards, a PhD candidate at the University of Birmingham, created an extensive database of such manuscripts. In volumes 64-77 of the Oxyrhynchus volumes, he was able to identify approximately 260 examples.

51 Several excellent catalogs offer copious examples of mostly paleographically-dated Greek hands. Joshua D. Sosin et al., "Checklist of Greek, Latin, Demotic and Coptic Papyri, Ostraca and Tablets," Duke University Libraries, n.d., n.p. "Instrumenta," "Palaeography," and "Handbooks" [cited 23 August 2014]. Online: http://library.duke.edu/ rubenstein/scriptorium/papyrus/texts/clist.html.


er will encounter "objectively dated" samples of Greek/Coptic hands. Archeological provenance, binding materials, colophons, radiometric testing or other means allow scholars to assign these manuscripts to a period no greater than one century. The current study focuses on manuscripts from before the Islamic era which have been largely ignored for paleographic purposes, but also includes some prominent later examples, which are already widely-known. The present discussion will focus on biblical majuscule style and a broader group of informal Greek literary hands. 52 Briefly, the Alexandrian majuscule will be mentioned as the beginning of a distinct phase of Coptic literary history. Through the presentation of script samples from documents datable by some non-paleographic means, the reader may determine for themselves whether indeed styles evolved over the centuries and to what degree reconstructions of these style histories is useful for paleographic dating. The present set of examples, while not exhaustive, expands upon examples from Greek paleography introductions.

Biblical Majuscule

The most prominent surviving Greek parchment codices of the Bible preserve Greek uncial script (e.g. the codices Alexandrinus, Sinaiticus, Vaticanus) referred to as the Biblical majuscule or unimodular script. This script parallels imperial Greek epigraphy with typical deviations from the earlier Attic system (e.g. c for :r and m for 0). Although epigraphers express extreme skepticism concerning the paleographic dating of this style, Greek and Coptic scholars have routinely and aggressively dated the literary parallels written on papyrus and parchment. The primary sources for paleographic reconstruction can be briefly presented in two categories, those with secure dates and those reused papyri with paleographicallydated material on the opposite side.53

52 Clarysse and Orsini ("Early New Testament Manuscripts," 460) describe six distinct styles (severe style, round chancery script, canonized majuscules, semi-formal majuscules, Alexandrian chancery script of Subatianus Aquila, cursive), and doubtlessly the informal hands could be divided into some of these other styles as well as into the biblical majuscule. The limitation here to the biblical majuscule and the broader grouping of essentially everything else reflects the difficulties of the evidence and the time limits of the current study.

53 Orsini and Clarysse, "Early New Testament Manuscripts," 452 n. 37.


Securely-dated Biblical Majuscules:

P.Ryl. I 16 Vindob. Med. gr. I Vat. Barb. Gr. 336 Vat. gr. 1666 Sin. gr. NE Meg. Perg. 12

regnal year colophon allusion 2 colophons colophon date colophon date

220-225 512-528 post 730 ca. 800 861/2

Paleographically-dated opisthographs with biblical majuscules: 54

P.Oxy. XLV 3227 P.Oxy. LXII 4327 P.Oxy. XLIX 3509 P.Berol. 13929, 21105

II-III early III III-IV V

For the purposes of the present discussion, the term "securely-dated" references an objective means of dating such as radioisotope analysis, archaeological evidence, archival provenance or an inscribed dating. The term is used in distinction to paleographic dating, which this article seeks to demonstrate as highly subjective and circular in the case of literary hands from the Coptic period. The lists above demonstrate limited extent of dated literary hands from the early period. The only well-preserved specimens date to the sixth, eighth and ninth centuries. Similarly, the earlier pieces are papyri fragments whose date depends upon the paleographic assessment of documentary hands. 55 Scholars lack even a single objectively dated equivalent to parallel the great biblical uncials Sinaiticus, Vaticanus and Alexandrinus in the fourth and fifth centuries.

Objectively-dated Greek Biblical Majuscules

P.Oxy. XLV 3227 (second to third century, reused papyrus)

P.Oxy. LXII 4327 (third century, reused papyrus)

TA. CEJ ..A.. O"'f' A.C'KA.J OMENoyc,<:f HO,

54 Images of these four manuscripts are all available online through the institutional websites. The biblical uncial style is the simple formal style which dominates.

55 P.Ryl. I 16 is not an exception to this rule, as will be discussed below.


P.Oxy. XLIX 3509 (third to fourth century, reused papyrus)

OOOT JOY,-~Nen J IKHCTT"-NYfJ..Jh..J

P.Berol. 21105 (fifth century, scholia in documentary hand)

q,A rA..'°rOC"-.&M TT l"TTTT'I AN A~ TT OTT

Vindob. Med. gr. 1 (512-528 CE, colophon)

ToycA1 r1 OJ\AAoyco ANT6l<Oyc~ce1 AO

Vat. Barb. Gr. 336 (post 730?)

Vat.Gr. 1666 (ca. 800)

nOAAoaoywyPd.VTtnN..:11

llA .cl.A <DTHC6t;;- HT~C eK

Sin.Gr. NE Meg.Perg. 12 (861/2)

469

Initially, the astute reader may identify a difference between those hands earlier than the fifth century and those later than the sixth century. The later hands are more polished, angular and benefit from a mastery of the writ-


ing implement, allowing for a greater calligraphic variation between thick and thin strokes. The sample group above is, however, a corpus permixtum, containing examples from lower quality papyrus manuscripts (those above through the fifth century) and higher quality parchments (those above dated after the fifth century). Scholars should be aware of the logical consequences. Naturally, the production of codices of higher and lower quality was not limited in either era, and the evaluation of hands should focus on the ideal forms, or canons, which one assumes to have guided the scribes, and not on the skill with which the ideal form was executed.

Eschewing the idiosyncratic issues of scribal skill, one struggles to identify paleographic distinctions among the above samples, which could form a basis for a scheme of paleographic development. The present examples are by no means a substitute for a broad study of the hands, but they do show that descending characters are not restricted to the confines of their lines in the earlier period, and likewise do not always drop low in the later period. Different shapes for a Kappa or Mu do not demonstrate that earlier or later forms were not know in the same time period. The samples offered above need not be the final word. The Coptic tradition offers numerous further examples of Greek hands which may be dated by a means other than paleography.56 The following examples selectively represent a wider corpus of securely-datable early Coptic hands. Greek paleography as a science has largely ignored this Greek-Coptic evidence.

Additional Securely Dated Greek(-Coptic) Biblical Majuscules

Tchacos Codex (Gospel of Judas, etc., third/fourth century)

E<..f 0)~2.(uJJ< E' E.OA 1-...l ~E<--IOY

o e,cy J.J rr>-Y--ro<-90,1--l~ 1--l

Glazier Codex (Acts, fifth/sixth century)

€ 1 A. ~--~X ITC'~E 20"(N M,t~ 11-tc· ei~yEJMN~l~~N

56 For a paleographic assessment of the biblical majuscule in Coptic manuscripts, see Orsini, "La Maiuscola Copta."

Dating Early Greek and Coptic Litera,y Hands

Chester Beatty Coptic Codex A (Pauline Epistles, c. 600)

TTA\_'1(.1\0CTT A.n OCCtf O.J\IJ C ~XCIC ~ .... M ITOY<'-•'-'-)

Chester Beatty Coptic Codex B (John's gospel, c. 600)

TT(;)'APre"'-IONl<c&. rr' ~ I CJlJ ~ t--1 N H C "

Sotheby's Pesynthios papyrus (Martyrdom of Chamoul, before 629)

7',AI r &~cu, T' rr"'n-~ ~u.ov7'.· ANOKnf:

Vat.Capt. 49 (circa 884)57

x:e<J>fie~9._aAll-410 ._ .. .._. AC>C IIJl.t(.A N lrl MA ❖ ~J-1 ... 0<

BnF Copt 13 (1178-1180)

~ 1:>N~H ..\-~a.uu UOC':. H fl..uili: ~ ~•su1na1-.pUJpH. ltOAIJl.JIIC8

471

Two of the above examples (Tchacos codex 58 and Pesynthios 59) derive

from papyrus manuscripts, although the ductus does not betray this fact. Except in the case of the Bohairic witnesses (the final two examples), the

57 Hugh G. Evelyn White cites thirteen dated Scetian Bohairic manuscripts ranging from 830 to 979 CE. Evelyn White, ed., The Monasteries of the Wadi 'n Natrz1n, Part I: New Coptic Texts from the Monastery of Saint Macarius (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1926), xxv.

58 The present author discusses the radiometric dating of the Tchacos codex in another publication; Christian Askeland, "Carbon Dating and the Gospel of Judas," in Interdisciplinary Dating: Dialogues between Manuscript Studies and Material Sciences (ed. Zachary Cole; Leiden: Brill, forthcoming).

59 The majority of this manuscript is held in the British Library; C. W. Goodwin, "On Two Fragments of the Acts of the Martyrs Chamoul and Justus in the Sahidic Dialect," Cambridge Antiquarian Society 6 (1856): 191-93; Crum, Catalogue of the Coptic Manuscripts in the British Museum, no. 325 (and 338), pp. 146-47, pl. 8. The sample above is from a leaf which Sotheby's auction house sold 10 July 2012: http://www.sothebys.com/ en/auctions/ecatalogue/lot.pdf.L 12242.html/f/5/L 12242-5. pdf.


biblical majuscules here depict canonical stability; even the Scetian Bohairic hands, which are distinguished by the sharp contrast in vertical and horizontal stroke thickness and the adoption of the ogival Mu, still reflect a general commitment to the style typical during the Roman Empire.6° Furthermore, the Bohairic hands demonstrate the rigid stability and consistency of their own subtype over a three-century period. The Chester Beatty Codices are part of a group of five found in Saqqara, all in excellent condition along with a number of dated mint-condition coins. 61 Similarly, at least a dozen other Bohairic manuscripts with dated colophons predating 1000 CE are extant from the Scetian monasteries where Vat.Capt. 49 was found. 62

Informal Literary Scripts ('reformed documentary')

The term "reformed documentary" was coined by C. H. Roberts and still occasionally functions to describe a biblical majuscule style with documentary qualities.63 While most would reject the terminology,64 this type of hand is largely accepted as a kind of middle class scribal hand, written by a non-professional scribe. Such hands have generally been dated to the first Christian centuries - before Constantine and the supposed rise of the "scriptorium. "65

6° For a discussion of BnF Copte 13, see Stephen Emmel, "Le mystere du manuscrit copt~ 13," in Pages chretiennes d'Egypte: !es manuscrits des Coples (ed. Anne Boud'hors; Paris: Bibliotheque nationale de France, 2004), 16-19.

61 Thompson, The Coptic Version of the Acts of the Apostles, ix-x. 62 Evelyn White, The Monasteries of the Wadi 'n Natriin, 1:25. 63 "What I think they all, in varying degrees, have in common is that, though the writ

ing is far from unskilled, they are the work of men not trained in calligraphy and so not accustomed to writing books, though they were familiar with them; they employ what is basically a documentary hand but at the same time they are aware that it is a book, not a document on which they are engaged. They are not personal or private hands; in most a degree of regularity and of clarity is aimed at and achieved. Such hands might be described as 'reformed documentary.' One advantage for the palaeographer in such hands is that with their close links to the documents they are somewhat less difficult to date than purely calligraphic hands." Colin H. Roberts, Manuscript, Society and Belief in Early Christian Egypt (London: Oxford University Press, 1979), 14.

64 Edoardo Crisci rejects the notion of the "reformed documentary" hand as a canon, but instead describes the Christian scribes as generally operating with a "sostanziale pragmatism," which produced various formats and levels of quality in their manuscripts; see Crisci, "Riflessioni paleografiche ( e non solo) sui piu antichi manoscritti greci de! Nuovo Testamento," in Oltre la scrittura: variazioni sul tema per Guglielmo Cavallo ( ed. Daniele Bianconi and Lucio Del Corso; Dossiers Byzantins 8; Paris: Centre d'etudes Byzantines, 2008), 59-60. Clarysse and Orsini cite Crisci's statement as authorative, although Crisci did not offer a formal argument backed by evidence.

65 Bruce M. Metzger offered a classic synthesis of the scriptorium method of scribal copying in Manuscripts of the Greek Bible: An Introduction to Greek Palaeography (Ox-


In the first instance, these papyri may be dated by their resemblance to other similar informal literary hands. Unlike pure documentary texts, the number of informal literary hands with an objective (non-paleographic) date is small. 66 As already noted, numerous reused papyri with literary hands on one side and paleographically datable documentary hands on the opposite side offer some point of comparison. Similarly, informal literary hands could be dated based on their similarity to documentary hands. Documentary papyri, by the nature of their contents, are far more likely to include compositional dates than literary texts. 67

In the following examples, the reader will encounter informal literary hands from the age of Constantine and later - during a period when monastic sects where avidly copying Christian manuscripts. Clearly, the "reformed documentary" style survives into the late fourth century, if not later. In the case of P.Oxy. II 209 (~10

), the first example below, one finds an example of the danger of dating a literary text based on documentary hands. This Greek fragment appears below to illustrate a danger common to Greek hands. This leaf contains writing exercises in the same ink but in two unrelated different styles. In other words, one could never deduce the peculiarities of the informal literary script from the documentary script. The literary script contains the beginning of Paul's epistle to the Romans, while the documentary script reflects an attempt at mercantile terms (cf infra T&v rcapa yi,viJµarn<;). While some links can be found between the semi-literary and cursive scripts, one would never otherwise reconstruct the former from the latter. A variety of objectively dated Greek and Coptic examples follow which all have their origins amidst Coptic literary finds,68

and which sample larger groups of relevant manuscripts.

ford University Press, 1981), 21-22. No actual evidence exists that such a system was used for a biblical manuscript.

66 The present writer knows of no comprehensive list of informal literary hands. Alan Mugridge has written about the spectrum of scribal hands which ranges from literary to documentary, and the different kinds of literature which appear in the various forms. Mugridge interacts extensively with William Johnson's prior work on bookhands from Oxyrhynchus. See Mugridge, "Writing and Writers in Antiquity: Two 'spectra' in Greek Handwriting," in Proceedings of the 25th International Congress of Papyrology: Ann Arbor, July 29 - August 4, 2007 (ed. Traianos Gagos et al.; Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Library, 2010), 573-80; William A. Johnson, Bookrolls and Scribes in Oxyrhynchus (University of Toronto Press, 2004).

67 Hermann Harrauer's Handbuch contains 301 dated Greek cursive documents, while the University of Heidelberg's "Pappa!" database has over 3200 dated examples of documentary hands (http://www.pappal.info); Harrauer, Handbuch der griechischen Paliiographie (2 vols.; Stuttgart: Hiersemannn, 2010).

68 The current list also includes one sample from the Dura-Europos papyri; C. Bradford Welles, R. 0. Fink, and J. F. Gilliam, eds., The Parchments and Papyri. The Excavations at Dura-Europos Conducted by Yale University and the French Academy of In-


Informal Greek(-Coptic) Hands

P.Oxy. II 209 (Romans, 320-339 CE)69 ----TT>YAOC·'c>.Qy ,-..oc xrv l ti y _A.t~NOC(Zf~~,~A Io NO'(

P.Oxy. II 209 (writing exercise, 320-339 CE)

en.,..) r'l::'n 1 ~ ~ h~"')e ~

Genesis fragment NHC VII (fourth century)

w d'J ·.-aJ<Q)O.. er~&..Hc,.. y ~ o fn M7TJ\.feu8oAH ~'f

Nag Hammadi Codices scribe A (late fourth/early fifth century)

Nag Hammadi Codices scribe B (late fourth/early fifth century)

no~o~ )....~.oJ{.h.E-N ~r )CLO~€-,-.J~fl.)..__~HfG-

Nag Hammadi Codices scribe C (late fourth/early fifth century)

~-ro,-< n e-,,.,~,-,..., e,u. rr O"f OE;!,.,. n E:J-< c x.tt :,.JU..eeHnJAf o,,--<P-11 :J!J~

scriptions and Letters, Final Report Volume 5, Part I (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1959).

69 According to AnneMarie Luijendijk, "The dates in the Leonides archive range from 315 C.E. to 334 C.E .... It is unknown when the archive was discarded, but in view of the dates in the archive it is likely that the NT papyrus was written ... in the 320s or 330s." Luijendijk, "A New Testament Papyrus and Its Documentary Context: An Early Christian Writing Exercise from the Archive of Leonides (P.Oxy. II 209/\ll 10

)," JBL 129.3 (2010): 580.


P.Ryl. I 1 (Panopolis trove, after 337 [293?])

JO ~CTI€ f ~JzA1 TH r:}x~E-Nrt~UJ

P.Bouriant 3 (unknown hymn, Panopolis trove, after 337 [197])

"'fe-M-<M Yc T( c(.<rJo f h n'f-..1

ghca"~ir( f A"JJ ~ Y '\_

P.Munch. II 34 (Greek Psalms, Panopolis trove, after 337 [302/3])

etoJ',.rro" CXo• Nr~€n Jc:A.tr~HJ<""r

BL Or. 1920 (letter, Melitian archive, circa 330-340)

rr~rr ~-ra..Re E-t•tu,,N~ "'YU' N E-<: t--11-t.C\vi-t pa rGsJ-

P.Kell. Copt. 53 (Mani's epistles, before 380)

n.po,t,-l~c.u.BN1.ul:r1 fl~· E~\'3.'ia.p~rJ.M'tlTNT>::'

P.Kell. Copt. 54 (Manichaean instruction, before 380)

o~rtl.TTHN.~~~H y~ <4j.J-fJ tci..o-plN'N ,a.

P.Kell. Gr. 97A I ("Acts of John," before 380)

475

476 Christian Askeland

P.Kell. Gr 98A I (Manichaean prayer, before 380)

wc-~-rtk 6-¥8~e-J.'1if<" i 6( r UJN ~N

Dura Parchment 24 (gospel harmony, before 256)

\ h c>-f>l,F/"" ,-.s ~A'--'/cd~ ,cm

I .Ar-M ref6J c,~J .. _E:: N H

Alexandrian Majuscule

Decades before the Islamic conquest (641/2 CE), the Coptic language was displacing Greek as the prestige language. Although the Biblical majuscule style survived well into the Muslim Era, a new regional style emerged, which was distinct to Egypt and to the Islamic Era in general. Known as the Coptic uncial, the bimodular script and as the Alexandrian majuscule, this formalized version of the cursive chancery script was used for Sahidic and Greek manuscripts widely from the seventh century onwards, and would be the basis for the distinctive script used in the extant Classical Bohairic manuscript tradition. 70 Because the current chapter deals with the earlier period, only three examples of this Islamic era script appear here. 71

Louvre, N 2406.3 (RE 48) (Pesynthios archive, before 629 CE) 72

.tr£ rrf1.u L- !.yw~ ~J<::.ruJ.wl<N ,_

f ptJ<...Nt 1+LJ.HTN t<9N~lWT Nd...1<

70 Jean Irigoin discussed the script extensively, noted that it was used for paratext in Byzantine manuscripts of the tenth century, and argued that this was indeed the "Alexandrian script" referenced at the Fourth Council of Carthage. Irigoin, "L'onciale grecque de type copte," JOBG 8 (1959): 48.

71 Arguably, the Alexandrian majuscule has its origins in the Roman period and earlier in the chancery scripts of these eras. Pasquale Orsini hypothesizes an earlier stage among informal literary hands as the "unimodular Alexandrian majuscule." Orsini and Clarysse, "Early New Testament Manuscripts," 452-53. The present study uses the term only for the formal literary hand of the seventh century and later.

72 I thank Florence Calament for her help in producing this sample.


Agyptisches Museum, P. 10677 (Festal letter, probably 713 or 719)

M 579 (Hagiographic miscellany, 30 Aug 823)

U'-1 ~KJ1CtC N'TfTN &..ptTI1 · 7'.0JTTIJ.NO

477

Because of the secure dates of the Hamuli and Sohag manuscript colophons, 73 this script is now associated with later Coptic manuscripts (ninth to tenth centuries), whereas the "biblical majuscule" has often been associated with earlier manuscripts (fourth to sixth centuries). 74 This Alexandrian Majuscule, however, featured in the Greek tradition of the sixth century,75

and the biblical majuscule survived for hundreds of years in both the Sahidic and Bohairic traditions. Indeed, the biblical majuscule was likely used in Greek-Coptic diglot manuscripts for both Greek and Coptic texts in the early Islamic period. 76 Often, elements of the Alexandrian majuscule

73 Twenty-five manuscripts from the Hamuli discovery contain colophons dated to the ninth and tenth century. Leo Depuydt, Catalogue of Coptic Manuscripts in the Pierpont Morgan Library (2 vols; Corpus of Illuminated Manuscripts 4-5, Oriental Series 1-2; Leuven: Peeters, 1993), !:Ii-Iii. For an initial and extensive survey of the White Monastery colophons, see Arnold van Lantschoot, Recueil des colophons des manuscrits chretiens d'Egypte (2 vols.; Bibliotheque du Museon 1; Leuven: Istas, 1929). Tito Orlandi has outlined the dates of these and other relevant Coptic manuscript groups; Orlandi, "The Library of the Monastery of Saint Shenute at Atripe," in Perspectives on Panopolis: An Egyptian Town from Alexander the Great to the Arab Conquest Acts From an International Symposium Held in Leiden on 16, 17 and 18 December 1998 (ed. Arno Egberts, Brian Paul Muhs, and Jacque van der Vliet; Papyrologica Lugduno-Batava 31; Leiden: Brill, 2002), 211-31. Although the 1910 Hamuli find consisted solely of Alexandrian majuscules, the Sohag library preserves a broad array of Alexandrian and Biblical majuscules. Sometimes, marginalia and superlineation in Sohag Alexandrian manuscripts indicate an origin in the Fayum.

74 For a discussion of Greek scribal hands and examples of manuscripts, see Cavallo and Maehler, Greek Bookhands.

75 E.g., P.Grenfell II 112; Cavallo and Maehler, Greek Bookhands, pl. 37. 76 For instance, Pierpont Morgan manuscript M615 (a Greek-Coptic lectionary) uses

the Alexandrian majuscule only for section titles. One may also note that Hamuli manuscripts written in the Alexandrian majuscule often have colophons written in Cavallo's "sloping pointed majuscule." Anne Boud'hors ("L'onciale penchee") has described the influence of the sloping pointed majuscule in the Sahidic literary tradition, offering also an excellent overview of the various hands prominent in the Islamic era.


appear in Biblical majuscule manuscripts, suggesting a date in the later period. Generally speaking, the Alexandrian majuscule flourished as a literary hand in Egypt from the seventh century onwards, eventually evolving into the peculiar script found in medieval Bohairic manuscripts. Although the Alexandrian majuscule is best known through parchment manuscripts, the script was also used on papyrus. 77

Conclusions on Paleography

The present survey is no substitute for a proper analysis, which would entail an online database with high resolution images, additional use of radiometric dating and an international collaboration from scholars with diverse skills and interests. The digitally mastered samples offered here are no substitute for high resolution color images. Furthermore, this overview essentially ignores the sloping script which is only rarely used for literary manuscripts in Egypt. 78 Those already acquainted with these scribal hands will doubtlessly find them of limited help and will question the constructive nature of the present analysis. On the contrary, the simple and limited samples appear here to support the following caveats to non-specialists with an interest in dating, serving as a window into the often repeated cliches about the dangers of paleographic dating of Coptic (and Greek) hands.

1. Stability of the biblical majuscule. The samples above demonstrate the relative immutability of the primary Greek literary script in the early Christian era. The quantity of securely-datable biblical majuscules is too small to allow for any confident reconstruction of stylistic development, and, to the extent that the evidence does differ, the variations are probably limited to scribal acumen or whim.

2. Variety and diversity. Ancient manuscript caches, such as those surveyed here, demonstrate that a variety of substyles existed simultaneously. All scribes were not conforming to a slowly and consistently developing graphic pattern.

3. Distinguishing paleography from codicology. Some of the biblical majuscule variation between early and later manuscripts clearly reflects the use of parchment and related professional calligraphic skill. One would not

77 The seventeen papyrus codices of the library from Thinis could be the earliest extant group of literary Alexandrian majuscules. See Tito Orlandi, "Les papyrus coptes du Musee Egyptien de Turin," Le Museon 87 (1974): 115-27.

78 Sinai literary manuscripts frequently employ sloping scripts. See Dieter Harlfinger, Dieter R. Reinsch, and Joseph A.M. Sonderkamp, eds., Die datierten griechischen Handschriften des Katharinen-Klosters auf dem Berge Sinai 9.-12. Jahrhundert (Berlin: Reimer, 1983). Coptic scribes favored this script for letters and sometimes colophons, and, later, for bi-lingual manuscripts; Boud'hors, "L'onciale penchee."


want to assume that the stichometric formatting which created crisp bottom lines in certain manuscripts or the increased skill with the calamus which allowed for characters to be shaped with differing line thickness are developments in the biblical majuscule style. Instead, these features demonstrate that a skilled artisan produced the manuscript.

4. Semi-literary Greek hands. An abundant and diverse array of objectively dated hands of this type from the fourth to fifth century are extant. Minimally, the use of documentary hands to paleographically place such hands into the pre-Constantinian period deserves careful scrutiny. A paleographically-derived date range of less than two centuries for such a hand is generally unconscionable.

5. Early monastic contexts. One should not underestimate the repeated appearance of monastic setting such as Kellis, Panopolis, Dishna and Nag Hammadi. The rise of monasticism resulted in a literary revival evident in the extant manuscripts, resulting in an Egyptian milieu in which there was not only a greater number of Christians, but also a more pervasive Christian manuscript culture. One would expect that the lion's share of undated manuscripts from the early period derive from the monastic milieu of the fourth and later centuries.

In summary, the present discussion suggests that scholars should paleographically date only so far as empirical evidence allows. If the argument cannot be falsified, then it may not be verified. Such methodological conservatism is in principle nothing new. Cavallo and Maehler note that while literary hands of the Roman period had often been dated to half centuries, those from the fourth to eighth centuries often were dated to a period of two full centuries 79 As already noted, Greek epigraphers have approached the use of paleography with even greater skepticism. The exception to the rule for both authorities is the identification of the epigrapher. 80

Non-Paleographic Dating Venues

Dialect

Because certain dialects do not appear in the documentary witnesses of the sixth to eighth centuries, manuscripts which appear in these minor dialects are regularly dated early. Aside from Fayumic which appears to have

79 Cavallo and Maehler, Greek Bookhands, 1. so Stephen V. Tracy, Attic Letter-Cutters of 229 to 86 B.C. (Berkeley: University of

California Press, 1990).


flourished into the eighth century,81 only the Sahidic and Bohairic traditions survive Late Antiquity. 82

The history of these minor dialects remains unclear. 83 Excavations at Kellis have revealed that the Manichaean community there employed a subdialect of Lycopolitan, while orthodox Christian manuscripts from the same site use Sahidic. Iain Gardner has suggested that "Sahidic was deliberately promoted by the expanding Christian community in Egypt, presumably through education, and that there is consequently a social context for dialect usage."84 The list below indicates that canonical Christian manuscripts appear in all the minor dialects. In the case of biblical texts, the minor dialects often appear to preserve transpositions of the Sahidic biblical texts, and not de nova translations from the Greek. 85

The Bohairic dialect offers special challenges. medieval Bohairic manuscripts are more easily dated because they often contain colophons with dates, their paper often contains watermarks or other datable features, and their systems of djinkim are known to have been expanded at the end of

81 Depuydt, Catalogue, I :!xv. A significant number of Fayumic documentary texts have appeared along with their more frequent Sahidic counterparts.

82 For an overview of the dialects, see Rodolphe Kasser, "KAT' ASPE ASPE. Constellations d'idiomes Coptes plus ou moins bien connus et scientifiquement re9us, aper9us, pressentis, enregistres en une terminologie jugee utile, scintillant dans le firmament Egyptien ii l'aube de notre troisieme millenaire," in Coptica - Gnostica - Manichaica: Melanges ojferts a Wolf-Peter Funk (BCNH.E 7; Quebec: Les Presses de l'Universite Laval, 2006), 389-92.

83 For a geographic-statistical analysis of the dialects, see Wolf-Peter Funk, "Dialects Wanting Homes: A Numerical Approach to the Early Varieties of Coptic," in Historical Dialectology: Regional and Social (ed. Jacek Fisiak; Trends in Linguistics 37; Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1988), 149-92.

84 Iain Gardner, Coptic Literary Texts, Volume 2 (Dakhleh Oasis Project monographs 15; Oxford: Oxbow, 2007), 5. The Medinet Madi manuscripts perhaps also support this contention. The dialectal situation with Nag Hammadi is not reducible to one dialect, but also suggests that Sahidic was an 'orthodox' register; Wolf-Peter Funk, "Toward a Classification of the 'Sahidic' Nag Hammadi Texts," in Acts of the Fifth International Congress of Coptic Studies, Washington, 12-15 August 1992 (ed. Tito Orland and David W. Johnson; 2 vols.; Rome: C. I. M., 1993), 2:163-77.

85 Peter Nagel has argued that the Achmimic texts are not only related to, but are indeed derived from the Sahidic versions; Nagel, "Papyrus Bodmer XVI und die achmimische Version des Buches Exodus," in Agypten und Altes Testament. Studien zu Geschichte, Kultur und Religion Agyptens und des Alten Testaments (Religion im Erbe Agyptens 14; Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1988), 94-152. The same has been noted of Lycopolitan texts; Herbert Thompson, The Gospel of St. John according to the Earliest Coptic Manuscript (London: Bernard Quaritch, 1924), xxi; Paulinus Bellet, "Analecta Coptica," CBQ 40.1 (1978): 45. Paul Kahle's work on the nature of the Fayumic (Bala 'izah, 1 :279-90) was not conclusive and deserves fresh attention.


the fourteenth century.86 Because of these benchmarks, medieval Bohairic manuscripts can be dated. Several manuscripts are extant which appear to predate the paper period (tenth century and later). If these manuscripts could be dated, the resultant data would illuminate an important stage in the development of the Coptic Bible. In particular, the medieval Bohairic biblical tradition is often asserted to have been the result of a redaction in the sixth to eighth centuries.87

Material

Typically, papyrus manuscripts receive early dates. While papyrus manuscripts containing one of the minor dialects have routinely been dated to the fourth century, parchment has been viewed as a later medium. As mentioned above, only paper offers a reliable basis for dating manuscripts. Both papyrus and parchment were options for any manuscript created between the fourth and tenth centuries. Monastic libraries appeared to have almost exclusively preferred parchment from the seventh to tenth centuries, but one can only presume that manuscripts were created outside Islamic-era monasteries for private (i.e. non-liturgical) purposes. 88 Likewise, in the fourth century, the majority of Coptic manuscripts may have been private copies created with papyrus for individual use, but at least some high-quality parchment manuscripts were created in this period. 89

Perhaps, the most promising means of dating may lie in the radiometric dating of the papyrus and parchment materials. As cosmic radiation strikes the earth's upper atmosphere, Nitrogen atoms are converted to the Carbon

86 Monique Zerdoun Bat-Yehouda, Le papier au Mayen-Age: histoire et techniques (Bibliologia 19; Turnhout: Brepols, 1999); Malachi Beit-Arie, Hebrew Codicology: Tentative Typology of Technical Practices Employed in Hebrew Dated Medieval Manuscripts (Etudes de paleographie hebraYque; Paris: Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1976), 20-40; Paul E. Kahle, "A Biblical Fragment of the IVth-Vth Century in Semi-Bohairic," Mus 63 (1950): 147-57. Rodolphe Kasser surveyed the predecessors to the djinkim in the Middle Egyptian Fayumic and early Bohairic witnesses; Kasser, "'Djinkim' ou 'surligne' dans !es textes en dialecte copte moyen-egyptien," BSAC 23 (1976): 115-57.

87 E.g., Rodolphe Kasser, "Les dialectes coptes et !es versions coptes bibliques," Biblica 46 ( 1965): 303-4; Wolf-Peter Funk, "The translation of the Bible into Coptic," in The New Cambridge History of the Bible. Vol. I: From the Beginnings to 600 (ed. James Carleton Paget and Joachim Schaper; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 20 I 0), 536-46.

88 "DVCTVS." 89 Edoardo Crisci, "Papiro e pergamena nella produzione libraria in Oriente fra IV e

VIII secolo d.C. materiali e reflexioni," Segno e Testa I (2003): 79-127. For example, the dialectally idiosyncratic P.Bodmer 6 as well as the Middle Egyptian manuscripts of Acts (Codex Glazier), Matthew (Codex Scheide), and Psalms (Mudil Codex) could all theoretically be dated to the fourth century.


14 isotope (1 4C), which decays with a half-life of approximately 5730 years and constitutes approximately one part per trillion of total atmospheric carbon. Breathing organisms maintain a level of 14C in keeping with the atmosphere until their death. Using the half-life and calibrating according to known variables, modern researchers can objectively reconstruct the time since the plant or animal's death down to a stretch of decades. 90 However, the actual employment of the technology is not simple. As Bronk Ramsey said, "A more powerful telescope needs more careful handling, and is no easier to use than a pair of binoculars."91 Often, the results provide a firm date range of about two centuries, as in the cases of the Glazier Acts Codex (V-VI),92 the Tchacos Codex (III-IV),93 three White Monastery leaves dated by Schussler (780-1014, X-XII, VII-VIII), 94 and the Medinet Madi codices (III-VI). 95 Although the scientific results of radiometric dating are objective and reliable, the interpretation of these results can be downright pernicious. 96 "A more powerful telescope needs more careful handling, and is no easier to use than a pair ofbinoculars."97

Codicology

The Nag Hammadi codices suggest that early Coptic codices could be large (30 + cm in height), and other early texts such as the Crosby-Sch0yen codex demonstrate the possibility that early manuscripts could be created

9° For an overview, see C. Bronk Ramsey, "Radiocarbon Dating: Revolutions in Understanding," Archaeometry 50.2 (2008): 249-75.

91 Bronk Ramsey, "Radiocarbon Dating," 266. 92 John Lawrence Sharpe, "The Earliest Bindings with Wooden Board Covers: The

Coptic Contribution to Binding Construction," in Erice 96, International Conference on Conservation and Restoration of Archive and Library Materials, Erice (Italy), CCSEM, 22nd-29th April 1996 (ed. Piero Colaizzi and Daniela Costanini; 2 vols.; Rome: Istituto centrale per la patologia de! libro, 1996), 2:2383 n. 13.

93 Rodolphe Kasser, Marvin W Meyer, and Gregor Wurst, The Gospel of Judas (1st ed.; Washington, D.C.: National Geographic Society, 2006), 133-134.

94 Karlheinz Schilssler, "Zur 14C-Datierung der koptischen Pergamenthandschriften Sa 11, Sa 615 und Sa 924," in Proceedings of the Tenth international Congress of Coptic Studies, Rome, 17-22 September 2012 (ed. Alberto Camplani and Paola Buzzi; Leuven: Peeters, 2016), 811-20.

95 Jason Beduhn and Greg Hodgins, "The Date of the Manichaean Codices from Medinet Madi, and its Significance," in Manichaeism East and West (ed. Sam N. C. Lieu et al.; Turnhout: Brepols, forthcoming).

96 The radiometric dates of the so-called Gospel of Jesus' Wife were used to verify its authenticity; Karen L. King, '"Jesus Said to Them, "My Wife ... "': A New Coptic Papyrus Fragment," HTR 107.2 (2014): 135. The National Geographic Society's publication of the Gospel of Judas selectively interpreted the results to suggest a date in the last half of the third century. See Askeland, "Carbon Dating and the Gospel of Judas."

97 Bronk Ramsey, "Radiocarbon Dating," 266.


with multiple columns. Additionally, early Coptic scribes were capable of creating elaborate illustrations in their manuscripts. 98 The tendency, however, was precisely the opposite; manuscripts written in the minor dialects ( except later Fayumic) typically are between 10 and 25 cm in height, and use a one column format. Again, codicology is not linear - scribes did not begin creating manuscripts in one format and develop into other formats over the centuries. The Saqqara codices ( circa 600 CE)99 indicate how later scribes operating in a monastic setting might create small format codices with unusual textual collections, whereas both phenomena would normally be more typical of the earliest period.

Provenance

Coptic literary texts have often survived in groups which provide some sort of historical context. Since the colophons from the White Monastery at Sohag are limited to the tenth to twelfth centuries, manuscripts from this collection could be assumed as a rule to date from this period. Likewise, the better preserved manuscripts from the library of the Archangel Michael monastery near modern-day Hamuli have colophons from the ninth to tenth centuries. James Robinson has argued that the Dishna collection which now mostly rests in the Bibliotheque Bodmer and Chester Beatty Library was buried in the sixth or seventh century, 100 although one could argue for an earlier date of burial. In the case of the Nag Hammadi codices, the cartonnage bindings imply a date range after about 348. 101 Numismatic and documentary evidence from Kellis in the Dakhleh Oasis suggest that the Manichaean texts were used by the community there between approximately 355 and 380. 102 Many other groups deserve further examination (e.g., the Panopolis trove [mid-fourth century], 103 the Saqqara codices [circa 600], 104 the so-called Qarara codices [third/fourth century], 105 the Bala'izah papyri [until the eighth century], 106 the Wadi Sarga papyri [until the eighth

98 E.g., the illustration in Codex Glazier containing the Middle Egyptian of Acts; Hans-Martin Schenke, ed., Apostelgeschichte 1, 1-15,3 im Mittelagyptischen Dialekt des Koptischen (Codex Glazier) (Berlin: Akademie, 1991), Abb. 18.

99 Thompson, The Coptic Version of the Acts of the Apostles, x. 100 James M. Robinson, The Story of the Bodmer Papyri: From the First Monastery's

Library in Upper Egypt to Geneva and Dublin (Eugene, Oreg.: Cascade, 2011), 130-50; Robinson, "The Pachomian Monastic Library at the Chester Beatty Library and the Bibliotheque Bodmer," Manuscripts of the Middle East 5 (1990): 6.

101 Lundhaug, "Shenoute of Atripe and Nag Hammadi Codex II," 209. 102 Gardner, Coptic Literary Texts, Volume 2, 6. 103 Bagnall, "Roman Panopolis." 104 Thompson, The Coptic Version of the Acts of the Apostles, x. 105 Askeland, "Carbon Dating and the Gospel of Judas." 106 Kahle, Bala 'izah, 1: 16.


century], 107 the Edfu papers [tenth century], 108 the Teshlot archive [ eleventh century] 109

).

Conclusions

Aside from archeological evidence or the testimony of a colophon, scholars have little if any warrant to date Coptic manuscripts to a single century. Although later Egyptian monasticism appears to have gravitated toward more formal manuscripts (i.e. larger, double columned, illustrated, parchment manuscripts written in Alexandrian uncials containing traditional biblical textual collections), these manuscript features were not innovations, but rather institutional preferences. While the cumulative presence of these features may suggest an Islamic-era date, the opposite is not true. Many features employed to date texts early are highly circular and reveal little more than the unpretentious construction of an informal manuscript. A considerable number of those manuscripts which have been dated to the fourth and fifth century could therefore date to as late as the early eighth century or possibly later.

Bibliography

Acqua, Anna Passoni dell'. "Byblica in papyris. IV (2003)." Pages 123-53 in Papiri e ostraka greci. Papyrologica Lupiensia 13. Lecce: Congedo Editore, 2004.

Askeland, Christian. "Carbon Dating and the Gospel of Judas." Forthcoming in Interdisciplinary Dating: Dialogues between Manuscript Studies and Material Sciences. Edited by Zachary Cole. Leiden: Brill.

Bagnall, Roger S. "Religious Conversion and Onomastic Change." Bulletin of the American Society of Papyrologists 19 ( 1982): I 05-24. "Conversion and Onomastics: A Reply." Zeitschrift fiir Papyrologie und Epigraphik 69 (1987): 243-50.

-. Egypt in Late Antiquity. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993. -. "Public Administration and the Documentation of Roman Panopolis." Pages 1-12 in

Perspectives on Panopolis: An Egyptian Town from Alexander the Great to the Arab Conquest. Acts from an International Symposium Held in Leiden on 16, 17 and 18 December 1998. Edited by Arno Egberts, Brian Paul Muhs, and Jacques van der Vliet. Papyrologica Lugduno-Batava 31. Leiden: Brill, 2002.

-. Early Christian Books in Egypt. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009.

107 Walter Ewing Crum and Harold Idris Bell, eds., Wadi Sarga: Coptic and Greek Texts from the Excavations Undertaken by the Byzantine Research Account (Coptica 3; Hauniae: Gyldendalske boghandel, 1922), 9.

108 Bentley Layton, Catalogue of Coptic Litera,y Manuscripts in the British Library Acquired Since the Year 1906 (London: British Library, 1987), xxvi-xxx.

109 Leslie MacCoull, "The Teshlot Papyri and the Survival of Documentary Coptic in the Eleventh Century," OCP 55 (1989): 201-6.


Barker, Don. "The Dating of New Testament Papyri." New Testament Studies 57 (2011): 571-82.

Barns, John W. B., Gerald M. Browne, and John C. Shelton, eds. Nag Hammadi Codices: Greek and Coptic Papyri ji·om the Cartonnage of the Covers. Nag Hammadi Studies 16. Leiden: Brill, 1981.

Barrett, David P., and Philip W. Comfort, eds. The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts. Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers, 2001.

Beduhn, Jason and Greg Hodgins. "The Date of the Manichaean Codices from Medinet Madi, and its Significance." Forthcoming in Manichaeism East and West. Edited by Sam N. C. Lieu, Nils Arne Pedersen, Enrico Morano, Erica Hunter. Turnhout: Brepols.

Beit-Arie, Malachi. Hebrew Codicology: Tentative Typology of Technical Practices Employed in Hebrew Dated Medieval Manuscripts. Etudes de paleographie hebraYque. Paris: Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1976.

Bellet, Paulinus. "Analecta Coptica." The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 40.1 (1978): 3-52. Bell, Harold Idris, and Herbert Thompson. "A Greek-Coptic Glossary to Hosea and

Amos." Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 11.3 (1925): 241-46. Boud'hors, Anne. "L'onciale penchee en copte et sa survie jusqu'au XVe siecle en

Haute-Egypte." Pages 117-33 in Scribes et manuscrits du Mayen-Orient. Edited by Fran,;ois Deroche and Francis Richard. Etudes et recherches. Paris: Bibliotheque nationale de France, 1997.

Bronk Ramsey, C. "Radiocarbon Dating: Revolutions in Understanding." Archaeometty 50.2 (2008): 249-75.

Budge, E. A. Wallis, ed. Coptic Biblical Texts in the Dialect of Upper Egypt. London: British Museum, 1912.

Cavallo, Guglielmo. Ricerche sulfa maiuscola biblica. Florence: Le Monnier, 1967. -. 'Tpaµµm:a a?cE~avopiva." Jahrbuch der 6sterreichischen Byzantinischen Gesellschaft

24 (1975): 23-54. Cavallo, Guglielmo, and Herwig Maehler. Greek Bookhands of the Early Byzantine Peri

od (AD 300-800). Bulletin supplement 47. London: University of London, Institute of Classical Studies, 1987.

Crisci, Edoardo. "Papiro e pergamena nella produzione libraria in Oriente fra IV e VIII secolo d.C. Materiali e reflexioni." Segno e testo 1 (2003): 79-127.

-. "Riflessioni paleografiche (e non solo) sui piu antichi manoscritti greci de! Nuovo Testamento." Oltre la scrittura: variazioni sul tema per Guglielmo Cavallo. Edited by Daniele Bianconi and Lucio <lei Corso. Dossiers Byzantins 8. Paris: Centre d'etudes Byzantines, 2008.

Crum, Walter Ewing, ed. Catalogue of the Coptic Manuscripts in the British Museum. London: British Museum, 1905.

Crum, Walter Ewing, and Harold Idris Bell, eds. Wadi Sarga: Coptic and Greek Texts from the Excavations Undertaken by the Byzantine Research Account. Coptica 3. Hauniae: Gyldendalske boghandel, 1922.

D'Ancona, Matthew, and Carsten Peter Thiede. Eyewitness to Jesus. New York: Doubleday, 1996.

Depuydt, Leo. Catalogue of Coptic Manuscripts in the Pierpont Morgan Library. 2 Vols. Corpus of Illuminated Manuscripts 4-5, Oriental Series 1-2. Leuven: Peeters, 1993.

DVCTVS: National Papyrological Funds. Accessed 26 Oct. 2012. http://dvctvs.upf.edu/ Emmel, Stephen. "Le mystere du manuscrit copte 13." Pages 16-19 in Pages chretiennes

d'Egypte: /es manuscrits des Coptes. Edited by Anne Boud'hors. Paris: Bibliotheque nationale de France, 2004.


-. "The Coptic Gnostic Texts as Witnesses to the Production and Transmission of Gnostic (and Other) Traditions." Pages 33-49 in Das Thomasevangelium: EntstehungRezeption - Theologie. Edited by Jorg Frey, Enno Edzard Popkes, and Jens Schroter. Beihefte zur Zeitschrift fiir die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der alteren Kirche 157. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2008.

Evelyn White, Hugh G., ed. The Monasteries of the Wadi 'n Natriin, Part 1: New Coptic Texts from the Monastery of Saint Macarius. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1926.

Funk, Wolf-Peter. "Dialects Wanting Homes: A Numerical Approach to the Early Varieties of Coptic." Pages 149-92 in Historical Dialectology: Regional and Social. Edited by Jacek Fisiak. Trends in Linguistics 37. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1988.

-. "Toward a Classification of the 'Sahidic' Nag Hammadi Texts." Pages 2:163-77 in Acts of the Fifth International Congress of Coptic Studies, Washington, 12-15 August 1992. Edited by Tito Orlandi and David W. Johnson. 2 Vols. Rome: C. I. M., 1993.

-. "The Translation of the Bible into Coptic." Pages 536-546 in The New Cambridge History of the Bible. Volume I: From the Beginnings to 600. Edited by James Carleton Paget and Joachim Schaper. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.

Gardner, Iain, ed. Coptic Documentmy Texts from Kellis. Dakhleh Oasis Project Monographs 9. Oxford: Oxbow, 1999.

-, ed. Coptic Literary Texts, Volume 2. Dakhleh Oasis Project Monographs 15. Oxford: Oxbow, 2007.

Gardner, lain, and Malcolm Choat. "Towards a Palaeography of Fourth Century Documentary Coptic." Pages 2:495-503 in Coptic Studies on the Threshold of a New Millennium: Proceedings of the Seventh international Congress of Coptic Studies, Leiden, August 27-September 2, 2000. Edited by Mat Immerzeel and Jacques van der Vliet. 2 Vols. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 133. Leuven: Peeters, 2004.

Goodwin, C. W. "On Two Fragments of the Acts of the Martyrs Chamoul and Justus in the Sahidic Dialect." Cambridge Antiquarian Society 6 (1856): 191-93.

Harlfinger, Dieter, Dieter R. Reinsch, and Joseph A.M. Sonderkamp, eds. Die datierten griechischen Handschriften des Katharinen-Klosters auf dem Berge Sinai 9.-12. Jahrhundert. Berlin: Reimer, 1983.

Harrauer, Hermann. Handbuch der griechischen Paliiographie. 2 Vols. Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 2010.

Head, Peter M. "The Date of the Magdalen Papyrus of Matthew (P. Magd. Gr. 17 = \1364):

A Response to C. P. Thiede." Tyndale Bulletin 46 (1995): 251-85. -. "The Gospel of Judas and the Qarara Codices: Some Preliminary Observations." Tyn

dale Bulletin 58.1 (2007): 1-23. Hunger, Herbert. "Zur Datierung des Papyrus Bodmer II (\1366

)." Anzeiger der osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, phil.-hist. Klasse 4 (1960): 12-23.

Hurtado, Larry W. "New Testament Scholarship and the Dating of New Testament Papyri." Forthcoming in interdisciplinary Dating: Dialogues between Manuscript Studies and Material Sciences. Edited by Zachary Cole. Leiden: Brill.

Hyvernat, Henri. Album de paleographie copte pour servir a !'introduction paleographique des Actes des martyrs de l 'Egypte. Paris: Leroux, I 888.

Irigoin, Jean. "L'onciale grecque de type copte." Jahrbuch der 6sterreichischen Byzantinischen Gesellschaft 8 (1959): 29-5 I.

Jaros, Karl, ed. Das Neue Testament nach den iiltesten griechischen Handschriften: Die handschriftliche Uberlieferung des Neuen Testaments var Codex Sinaiticus und Codex Vaticanus. Wtirzburg: Echter, 2006.


Johnson, William A. Bookrolls and Scribes in Oxyrhynchus. University of Toronto Press, 2004.

Kahle, Paul Eric. "A Biblical Fragment of the IVth-Vth Century in Semi-Bohairic." Le Museon 63 (1950): 147-57. Bala 'izah: Coptic Texts from Deir el-Bala 'izah in Upper Egypt. 2 Vols. London: Oxford University Press, 1954.

Kasser, Rodolphe. "Les dialectes coptes et Jes versions coptes bibliques." Biblica 46 (1965): 287-310.

-. "'Djinkim' ou 'surligne' dans Jes textes en dialecte copte moyen-egyptien." Bulletin de la Societe d'archeologie copte 23 (1976): 115-57.

-. "Paleography." Pages 8: 175-84 in The Coptic Encyclopedia. Edited by Aziz S. Atiya. New York: Macmillan Library Reference, 1991.

-. "KAT' ASPE ASPE. Constellations d'idiomes coptes plus ou mo ins bien conn us et scientifiquement res;us, apers;us, pressentis, enregistres en une terminologie jugee utile, scintillant dans le firmament egyptien a l'aube de notre troisieme millenaire." Pages 389-492 in Coptica - Gnostica - Manichaica. Melanges ofjerts a Wolf-Peter Funk. Bibliotheque copte de Nag Hammadi - Etudes 7. Leuven and Paris: Les Presses de l'Universite Laval, 2006.

Kasser, Rodolphe, Marvin W Meyer, and Gregor Wurst. The Gospel of Judas. Washington, DC: National Geographic Society, 2006.

Kim, Young Kyu. "Palaeographical Dating of \]346 to the Later First Century." Biblica 69 (1988): 248-57.

King, Karen L. "'Jesus Said to Them, "My Wife ... "': A New Coptic Papyrus Fragment." Harvard Theological Review 107.2 (2014): 131-59.

Krause, Martin. "Review of M. Cramer, Koptische Palaographie." Bibliotheca Orientalis 23 (1966): 286-93.

Krosney, Herbert. The Lost Gospel: The Quest for the Gospel of Judas Iscariot. Washington, DC: National Geographic Society, 2006.

Lantschoot, Arnold van. Recueil des colophons des manuscrits chretiens d'Egypte. 2 Vols. Bibliotheque du Museon I. Leuven: lstas, 1929.

Layton, Bentley. "Towards a New Coptic Paleography." Pages 149-58 in Acts of the Second International Congress of Coptic Studies, Roma, 22-26 September 1980. Edited by Tito Orlandi and Frederik Wisse. Rome: C.I.M., 1985.

-. Catalogue of Coptic Literary Manuscripts in the British Library Acquired Since the Year 1906. London: British Library, 1987.

Luijendijk, AnneMarie. "A New Testament Papyrus and Its Documentary Context: An Early Christian Writing Exercise from the Archive of Leonides (P.Oxy. II 209/\]3 10

)."

Journal of Biblical Literature 129.3 (2010): 575-96. Lundhaug, Hugo. "Shenoute of Atripe and Nag Hammadi Codex II." Pages 201-26 in

Zugange zur Gnosis: Symposium of the Patristische Arbeitsgemeinschaft (PAG). Edited by Christoph Markschies. Patristic Studies 12. Leuven: Peeters, 2013.

MacCoull, Leslie. "The Teshlot Papyri and the Survival of Documentary Coptic in the Eleventh Century." Orientalia Christiana Periodica 55 (1989): 201-6.

McLean, Bradley. An Introduction to Greek Epigraphy of the Hellenistic and Roman Periods from Alexander the Great down to the Reign of Constantine 323 B.C. - A.D. 337. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2002.

Metzger, Bruce Manning. Manuscripts of the Greek Bible: An Introduction to Greek Palaeography. Oxford University Press, 1981.

Mugridge, Alan. "Writing and Writers in Antiquity: Two 'spectra' in Greek Handwriting." Pages 573-80 in Proceedings of the 25th International Congress of Papyrology:


Ann Arbor, July 29 - August 4, 2007, Edited by Traianos Gagos, Adam Hyatt, Arthur Verhoogt, and Terry Wilfong, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Library, 2010.

Nagel, Peter. "Papyrus Bodmer XVI und die achmimische Version des Buches Exodus." Pages 94-152 in Agypten und Altes Testament. Studien zu Geschichte, Kultur und Religion Agyptens und des A/ten Testaments. Religion im Erbe Agyptens 14. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1988.

-. "Aufbau und Komposition des Papyruskodex BL OR. 7594 der British Library." Pages 347-55 in Coptology: Past, Present, and Future: Studies in Honour of Rodolphe Kasser. Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 61. Leuven: Peeters, 1994.

Nongbri, Brent. "The Use and Abuse of \j352: Papyrological Pitfalls in the Dating of the

Fourth Gospel." Harvard Theological Review 98 (2005): 23-48. Orlandi, Tito. "Les papyrus coptes du Musee egyptien de Turin." Le Museon 87 (1974):

115-27. -. "The Library of the Monastery of Saint Shenute at Atripe." Pages 211-31 in Perspec

tives on Panopolis: An Egyptian Town fi·om Alexander the Great to the Arab Conquest: Acts From an international Symposium Held in Leiden on 16, 17 and 18 December 1998. Edited by Arno Egberts, Brian Paul Muhs, and Jacque van der Vliet. Papyrologica Lugduno-Batava 31. Leiden: Brill, 2002.

Orsini, Pasquale. "La maiuscola copta." Segno e testo 6 (2008): 21-150. Orsini, Pasquale, and Willy Clarysse. "Early New Testament Manuscripts and Their

Dates: A Critique of Theological Palaeography." Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 88.4 (2012): 443-74.

Parker, David C. "Was Matthew Written before 50 CE? The Magdalen Papyrus of Matthew." Exposito,y Times 107 (1996): 40-43.

-. "Review of Comfort and Barrett, The Text of the Earliest New Testament." TC: A Journal of Biblical Textual Criticism 4 (1999): http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/v04/ComfortBarrett-ed 1999rev .html

Parsons, Peter J. "Review of Ricerche sulla maiuscola biblica by Guglielmo Cavallo." Gnomon 42.4 (1970): 375-80.

Roberts, Colin H. Manuscript, Society and Belief in Early Christian Egypt. London: Oxford University Press, 1979.

Robinson, James M. "The Pachomian Monastic Library at the Chester Beatty Library and the Bibliotheque Bodmer." Manuscripts of the Middle East 5 (1990): 36-40.

-. The Story of the Bodmer Papyri: From the First Monastery's Library in Upper Egypt to Geneva and Dublin. Eugene, Or.: Cascade, 2011.

Robinson, Maurice A. "Review of Comfort and Barrett, The Text of the Earliest New Testament." TC: A Journal of Biblical Textual Criticism 6 (2001): http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/v06/CB2001 rev .html

Schenke, Hans-Martin, ed. Apostelgeschichte 1,1-15,3 im mittelagyptischen Dialekt des Koptischen (Codex Glazier). Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1991.

Schussler, Karlheinz. "Zur 14C-Datierung der koptischen Pergamenthandschriften Sa 11, Sa 615 und Sa 924." Pages 811-820 in Proceedings of the Tenth international Congress of Coptic Studies, Rome, 17-22 September 2012. Vol. 2. Edited by Alberto Camplani and Paola Buzzi. Leuven: Peeters, 2016.

Sharpe, John Lawrence. "The Earliest Bindings with Wooden Board Covers: The Coptic Contribution to Binding Construction." Pages 2:381-400 in Erice 96, International Conference on Conservation and Restoration of Archive and Library Materials, Erice (Italy), CCSEM, 22nd-29th April 1996. Edited by Piero Colaizzi and Daniela Costanini. 2 Vols. Rome: Istituto centrale per la patologia de! libro, 1996.


Shore, A. F., ed. Joshua I-VI and Other Passages in Coptic. Chester Beatty Monographs 9. Dublin: Hodges Figgis, 1963.

Sirat, Colette, Michel Arie, and MordehaY Glatzer, eds. Codices hebraicis litteris exarati quo tempo re scrip ti fi1erunt exhibentes. 3 Vols. Turnhout: Brepols, 1997.

Sosin, Joshua D., Roger S. Bagnall, James Cowey, Mark Depauw, Terry G. Wilfgong, and Klaas Anthony Worp. "Checklist of Greek, Latin, Demotic and Coptic Papyri, Ostraca and Tablets." Duke University Libraries, n.d. No pages. Cited 23 August 2014. On! in e: http ://1 i brary. duke. ed u/ ru benstein/ scri pto ri um/papyrus/texts/ c list.html.

Stegemann, Viktor. Koptische Paliiographie: 25 Tafeln zur Veranschaulichung der Schreibstile koptischer Schriftdenkmiiler auf Papyrus, Pergament und Papier fiir die Zeit des 111.-XIV. Jahrhunderts; mil einem Versuch einer Stilgeschichte der koptischen Schrift. 2 Vols. Quellen und Studien zur Geschichte und Kultur des Altertums und des Mittelalters, Reihe C 1. Heidelberg: Bilabel, 1936.

Thiede, Carsten Peter. "Papyrus Magdalen Greek 17 (Gregory-Aland \l364): A Reapprais

al." Zeitschrift fiir Papyrologie und Epigraphik 105 (1995): 13-20. Thompson, Herbert, ed. The Coptic Version of the Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline

Epistles in the Sahidic Dialect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1932. -. The Gospel of St. John according to the Earliest Coptic Manuscript. London: Bernard

Quaritch, 1924. Tracy, Stephen V. Attic Letter-Cutters of 229 to 86 B.C. Berkeley: University of Califor

nia Press, 1990. Turner, Eric G. Greek Manuscripts of the Ancient World. 2nd edition. University of Lon

don, Institute of Classical Studies Supplement 46. London: University of London, Institute of Classical Studies, 1987.

Turner, Eric Gardner. "Recto and Verso." Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 40 (1954): 102-6.

Vocke, Harald. "Papyrus Magdalen 17 - weitere Argumente gegen die Friihdatierung des angeblichen Jesus-Papyrus." Zeitschrift fiir Papyrologie und Epigraphik I 13 (1996): 153-57.

Wachtel, Klaus. "\)364/67: Fragmente des Matthausevangeliums aus dem 1. Jahrhundert?"

Zeitschriftfiir Papyrologie und Epigraphik 107 (1995): 73-80. Wallace, Daniel. "Review of Young Kyu Kim's Paleographical Dating of \1346 to the Lat

er First Century." Bibliotheca sacra 146 (1989): 451-52. Welles, C. Bradford, R. 0. Fink, and J. F. Gilliam, eds. The Parchments and Papyri. The

Excavations at Dura-Europos Conducted by Yale University and the French Academy of Inscriptions and Letters, Final Report Volume 5, Part 1. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1959.

Woodhead, Arthur Geoffrey. The Study of Greek Inscriptions. 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981.

Zerdoun Bat-Yehouda, Monique. Le papier au Mayen-age: histoire et techniques. Bibliologia 19. Turnhout: Brepols, 1999.

‘Dating early Greek and Coptic literary hands’ in Hugo Lundhaug and Lance Jenott, eds. The Nag...

Documents

Transcript of ‘Dating early Greek and Coptic literary hands’ in Hugo Lundhaug and Lance Jenott, eds. The Nag...