Book - Think

NT Wrong, Biblical Studies, and Autobiography.

2009-02-02T10:29:00.000-08:00

I had the misfortune of reading Kierkegaard in between classes at a relatively conservative institution during my undergrad initiation into biblical languages, theology, and the history of all the critical and historical constructs that we label “Biblical Studies.” Not only did it throw the master plan off course, that being the attempt of Evangelicalism to pass on its disaffection with continental discourse to my as of yet unformed theological nerve center (which was further stymied by spending afternoons in Donald Bloesch’s office at a different school up the street, and then hearing Vanhoozer talk about Ricoeur ad infinitum in the very heart of Evangelicalism itself.). But Kierkegaard’s playful autonomy and ability to refute himself at will corrupted my sense of authorship (specifically in his pseudonymous work). It ran at odds with the interpretative strategies I employed in my coursework, but lingered in the back of my mind as a reminder that these things are provisional, open to revision. Even matters of historical criticism are open to Kierkegaard’s insistence that we learn to think in more playful ways about increasingly serious concerns. It was an odd, hermeneutically magical time that I have since been trained to shake off like a daydream in the course of writing properly annotated articles and theses, preparing indexes of data pools, or delivering papers at conferences that proclaim my irrefutable identity on a nametag.

Here is a truly Kierkegaardian question: Can Biblical Studies be written in the mode of David Foster Wallace? With his characteristic networks of footnotes, asides, self-refutations, and ominously uncritical and immediate perceptions of “what is at stake” in religious discourse. It is a question as silly as it is important, one hinted at in Staley’s (literally) phenomenal essay on autobiography in biblical criticism, but seldom broached within the guild. The possibility that scholarship could actually exist in pseudonymous or intentionally biographical modes, or even in the language of satire, is something that the history of biblical studies scholarship can’t quite wrap its head around. It is also one that has been posed to the biblioblogging world by the pseudonymous NT Wrong, whose blog has recently been abandoned with the promise of a new project in the near future. I know where I would probably fall in his famous spectrum (conservative, though this blog never actually appeared upon it, and doesn’t actually leave that many ideological clues in this respect). But I have followed the whole ordeal with rapt attention.

Part of this is due to my own lifelong struggle to understand how I am supposed to practically correlate all my disparate roles as New Testament Studies academic, historian of book forms, practicing book artist, and part-time film critic. It can get difficult to say the least. But I hope to see this discussion continue, especially as biblioblogging so effectively expands our research identities beyond SBL catalog abstracts into the flux of current events and changing minds. That is to say, blogging is not just another output for data, but actually involves a more nuanced conception of authorship and a geometrical expansion of what has always been referred to as the “academy.”

Some reactions to the recent NT Wrong interview:

NTW: This was one of the most absurd things I’ve seen in a long time. There were dozens of posts dedicated to discovering N. T. Wrong’s identity, thousands of words written, with greater or lesser degrees of seriousness. I loved it. I felt like I was watching from the box-seat at the theatre of the absurd… It also made me wonder whether this is how the Historical Jesus quest got started — as a joke which some slightly anal fellow didn’t quite get, and then it sort of snowballed from there, gradually gathering momentum until everybody thought it was actually very serious.

And to think that this grand prank has been played right as the new Jesus Seminar has convened. I would be more happy to compare the NT Wrong quest with the Historical Jesus quest if NT Wrong had been cruising the Usenet by that handle since 1980, and had left traces of long posts about his purpose and identity that now only exist as fragments in the Wayback Machine and the recesses of what is now Google Groups. And then there were a few biblioblogging predecessors on Yahoo or Live Journal in the early 1990’s that began to collect what NT Wrong posts they could recall from these old bulletin boards. And now this broad discussion would exist on the internet about who NT Wrong really was, and whether we can really trust that one guy’s Live Journal Entry #334 that claims he said this or that. And why does that WebEx post #0922456 agree verbally for several sentences, but then ascribe it to a different Usenet discussion context? And was NT Wrong ever actually on any of the UNIX platforms, or are all those just translations from BITNET? That would be far more thrilling and absurd.

NTW: It’s a strange ‘discipline’, isn’t it, in which one of the most well-known practitioners of biblical studies ends up quite high up in the hierarchy of the group which should really be the object of his study. Now, there are a few anthropologists and sociologists who do something similar as a form of total immersion or for some reason (I’m thinking, say, of Barbara Tedlock, both academic anthropologist of mysticism and practising shaman). But the difference is that these people not only use the emic experience to inform the etic conception, but continue to recognize the benefit of an etic conception to inform the emic experience. In the case of so many biblical scholars today — and N. T. Wright is merely just one of the most visible ones (and not only because he’s wearing a bright purple frock) — the academic-religious mix only goes, tendentiously, in one direction. Biblical studies is considered to ultimately be a mere tool for the service of the Church, so that everything done within the discipline is not primarily for the sake of knowledge itself, but for constructing new apologetics.

It goes without saying that I continue to see a valid distinction between ‘use’ and ‘interpretation’ (and I like Umberto Eco’s theoretical approach here), and I place scholars whom I encounter somewhere along the continuum between them. Frustratingly, in reading the publications of biblical studies, there are too many of these scholars far closer to the ‘use’ end of the continuum, so much so that it is just annoying to have to continually second guess whether a particular biblical scholar is interested in discovering what is true or only has an interest in defending what is already believed to be true.

I am not sold on this distinction between the emic and etic experience in biblical studies. Any attempt to discuss it simply shifts the etic axis from historical issues to history of interpretation, which then swings the pendulum of the emic back to a different, but equally academic-religious, category of “use.” And isn’t the pseudonymity of NT Wrong an expression of a particular category of “use” that only expresses his emic familiarity with the guild itself? I sense the same problem with his commentary on scholarship that he finds in most commentaries themselves.

Jacqueline Rush Lee: INTROspective at the Center for Book Arts

2009-01-16T09:50:00.000-08:00

Cailun has a scanned image of the Jacqueline Rush Lee exhibition currently at The Center for Book Arts:

This exhibition of work will showcase sculptures created entirely out of used books with selections from the 2005 Biennial of Hawaii Artists (Epic) and her 2002 exhibition Volumes. VOLUMES (2002) is a body of work that was created entirely from used books. This body of work followed a “petrified” books series of 2000 in which Ms. Lee used kiln processes to transform books. In Volumes water was used to transform the books further. When soaked in water the dyes of the book fore edges bleed and the pages warp into beautiful striations. Once dried the books were then built into geometric forms. EPIC (2003-2005) is an installation consisting of a collection of gypsum cement panels that Ms. Lee calls “Imprescoes; a joining together of the words “imprint” and “fresco.” Using the discarded books of anonymous book owners, the work emerged from an experimental casting process in which book covers, edges, and raw book spines were embedded into gypsum cement, and then removed. As the dyes in the book covers and fore edges “bleed” into the curing gypsum, soft, painterly traces of the books are left behind.

Lovely.

Textual Criticism in the 21st Century

2009-01-13T08:50:00.000-08:00

At ETC, Peter Head has blogged about the recent article by Koester in the Harvard Theological Review. In his overview of the subjects covered by HTR in the last century, one can see a sharp decline in papers on NT textual criticism in this most recent era of scholarship. A snippet:

"New discoveries of manuscripts, particularly of New Testament papyri, brought new excitement to the scene of New Testament study, and American scholars, some educated in Europe, such as James Hardy Ropes, or coming from Europe, such as Kirsopp Lake, played an important role in this discussion. Later, the center of these investigations had moved to the text-critical institute in Munster, where it became streamlined without achieving any significant progress, as J. Eldon Epp (sic) has so aptly argued in several publications."

It will be interesting to see what responses this generates at the ETC blog. On the one hand, Koester is right, and I wager that this statistic applies to other journals as broad in scope as the HTR. But on the other hand, the article ignores the idea that textual criticism has moved out of journals and into emerging databases and research programs that are simply taking a long time to put together. I consider what is happening at Birmingham, Muenster, somewhere in Texas, and in similar organizations to be more intriguing than a few HTR papers. And what percentage of biblical studies blogdom in the last five years or so involves discussion of text-critical matters? Enough to characterize this discussion as active and fruitful.

Coptic Bindings at the Morgan (the Coptic Tracery Binding)

2009-01-13T07:27:00.000-08:00

A new exhibition at the Morgan Library and Museum features one of the key items from its collection of Coptic bindings (a nice overview at the ABER:

"Another work in the show, the Coptic cover of the Gospels, is one of sixty Coptic bindings that Pierpont Morgan purchased in 1911, the year after they were found near the Monastery of St. Michael in Egypt. Almost all works were found with their original bindings and constitute an essential collection for the study of Coptic bookbinding. The Coptic Tracery Binding is regarded as the finest surviving Coptic binding. At its center is a cross surrounded by interlaced designs composed of two intertwined squares within a circle. All of these elements were cut from a single piece of red leather and sewn over gilt parchment."

This is the catalog item in question, which is an exemplary cover (though the link to the catalog description is incorrect). There is a nice large high-res image halfway down here. I wonder if it is a misnomer to refer to this as a "binding," as it is actually just the extant cover of an original book. In fact, some Coptic bindings are so elaborate and integral to a book's structure that they cease to exist as they are unbound. But the use of "bindings" to refer to the covers in the Pierpont collection goes all the way back to their original purchase, and is sustained in the literature. The exceptional nature of the Coptic Tracery binding is highlighted in Deborah Evetts lively account of how she crafted the Pierpont collection's current display cases.

On their origin:

"The manuscripts were found in 1910 at the site of the Coptic Monestary of St. Michael whose ruins are near the village of al-Hamuli in the Faiyum district of Egypt, southwest of Cairo. The Faiyum despression, an ancient jungle swamp covering 700 square miles, once stretched from Lake Birkat almost to the Nile and is renowned for the fossils found there. It was here that local farmers, digging for natural fertilizer for their fields, found the long buried manuscripts. This was the first of three big finds of ancient mss of the last hundred years, and is the only one composed solely of ancient Christian documents. The Nag Hammadi codices were found in 1945, and the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947."

On their condition:

"To understand the problems involved in designing houses for these covers, one has to appreciate the wide variety of sizes, thicknesses, and conditions to be accommodated. They range from complete bindings, complete covers, an partial covers to small fragments; from solid healthy boards to those whose papyrus is so riddled with insect tunneling that they "drape" like a Dali watch; from leather crazed by the kiln heating and blackened with leather dressing to leather that is remarkable for its color and quality after more than a thousand years internment; from papyrus boards with no leather covering to leather with no papyrus board."

So to have a cover in such fine condition as the one featured in this exhibition is remarkable. It not only withstood the ravages of time, but a series of failed attempts at preservation. Evett's point concerning the importance of this find is interesting, as it is seldom referenced within the context of codicology as practiced in the service of NT textual criticism. These manuscripts are so late in origin, and varied in subject matter, that they have limited value in providing witness to variants and text-types in the first few centuries. But their importance as witnesses to the technological development of the codex may outweigh both the Nag Hammadi and Qumran finds. Having had little interaction with the Morgan collection other than through its various published catalogs (one of the earliest of which can be read here - if you can't already tell, I love Google Books), I say this hesitantly. The amount of data that can be gleaned from the Nag Hammadi find from an artefactual perspective is still undetermined for the most part, and the more I probe, the more I find. But suffice it to say, these bindings and covers are a unique witness to a particular stage of early Christian publishing.

Here is an article on Pierpont's M579 by Leo Depuydt. The colophon of this particular Sahidic codex contains the oldest known date in any extant coptic manuscript (539 of the Era of the Martyrs, or 822 CE). There are some interesting descriptions of the codex in relation to the rest of the collection on pg. 269.

A Tour of a Torah Scroll

2009-01-09T14:44:00.001-08:00

I recently had the chance to spend some time with a few joined sections of an early to mid 18th century Eastern European copy of Numbers. And thanks to my handy new camera, I was able to take a bunch of pictures that are handy illustrations for the recent post on the production of Torah scroll parchment. In these pictures you can clearly see the medieval sewn parchment descendent of papyrus collesis (the organic adhesive process by which sheets of papyrus were joined), as well as a few examples of repairs that were made to the parchment due to small mistakes made during the final scraping process. (Click the picture for hi-res.)

Joining Stitches:

Here on the reverse of one of the joins you can see the simple running stitch that comprises the bulk of the joint, a simple and sturdy use of the natural thread with a low profile that makes it easy to roll up the scroll. The third picture of the reverse tail is a good example of the makeshift adjustments required by the uneven edges left by the curing and stretching process.

On this detail of the same interior tail, you can see that this stitch is not passed through the scroll itself, but joins one flap from each section, the second of which (on the left hand side) is actually folded under, forming a gutter on the reverse.

Here are these joining stitches on the interior, the points of which can just barely be seen.

While rolling the scroll, the entirety of the running stitch exposes itself.

Parchment Patches:

In these next few pictures you can see what small tears and repairs look like. They usually take their shape from having been small slices in stretched skin - leaving an ovoid shape when relaxed. These would then be patched with small pieces while the skin was still moist and naturally adhesive.

Ruling:

Here is a chance to see both the ruling that takes place before any inscription begins, as well as the large degree of variance that would characterize the exterior layer of these parchment sections. The ruling would have been pretty painstaking, but is the only way to maintain the high degree of regularity you see in this beautiful script (characteristic of the provenance of this scroll, the scribal hand here is lovely). The variance you see in the exterior is much greater than that of the interior, which is prepared more carefully and evenly:

So there is a quick tour of this simple, yet effective, device known as the scroll. Its preperation in the 1700s would not have been significantly different than its construction in the first few centuries of parchment use. Is this type of running stitch the oldest successful book stitch in the history of books? Probably.

Cologne Mani-Codex

2009-01-08T09:02:00.000-08:00

The Codex Manichaicus Coloniensis has made an appearance in blogdom today because April DeConick found it in its high-res glory (Der Mani-Kodex) at the website for the Cologne Papyri collection, which has provided quality images of its catalog items for some time now. The codex is interesting for a few reasons. What is left of it has provided a great deal of previously unknown information (firm dates and background info) about the founder of Manicheism. But it is also very tiny, only about 38 x 48 mm. As you can tell from the photos, its 96 parchment leaves are of a high quality, which permitted the clarity of its tiny and exacting script. Scattered throughout are remnants of thread, a lot of stitching stations, and curiously graphical marginal notations. Due to its size and presentation, many take it as an amulet, but I agree with Lee that the incredible amount of scribal artistry involved with such miniatures suggests alternative uses. I am inclined to think that the size of CMC is a radical example of the use of codices as a far more convenient and transportable format over the scroll. "Amulet" as a designation gets tossed around very quickly when dealing with artifacts of this size - it may be that these kinds of books were to their larger ancestors what a Kindle download of Infinite Jest would be to its massive counterpart.

New Series on "Bible in Technology": Learning and Teaching in a Post-PowerPoint Age.

2009-01-07T08:00:00.000-08:00

Excellent news via Mark Goodacre about a new series from Gorgias Press about the impact computer technology can (and could) have on biblical studies: Bible in Technology:

"The Bible in Technology (BIT) is a series that explores the intersection between biblical studies and computer technology. It also includes studies that address the application of computer technology to cognate fields of ancient history. The series provides a forum for presenting and discussing advancements in this area, such as new software or techniques for analyzing biblical materials, online projects, and teaching resources. The series also seeks to reflect on the contribution and impact of computer technology on biblical research and teaching methods."

Besides the obvious impact these tools can have on scholarship, it is entirely possible that the current exploration of various database packages, imaging programs, and online virtualization platforms will change the appearance of biblical studies classrooms within the next generation of teaching. I can imagine walking students through Paul's missionary journeys via a set of Google Earth reconstructions of major Greco-Roman urban centers. Consider the ease with which students can be trained to deal with textual variants through the evolving online NA 28, and schooled in the basics of NT manuscript features with reference to commonly available hi-res images. Even just the potential similar software holds for rooting the student's first experience of NT theology and narration in physical materials is provocative. We are moving quickly beyond PowerPoint here. In terms of emerging forms of pedagogy, I look forward to the possiblity that this series may provide the practical tools for teachers eager to provide more immersive contexts for learning.

And beyond this, the wikification of biblical studies in a plethora of blogs and twitters is but one facet of the changing face of the Bible in Technology. It is the increased functionality of text-critical databases that will move debate about text-types forward. We can't even quite predict what the increased focus on digital imaging (as at CSNTM) will produce, at least an increase in knowledge of both the breadth and depth of existing fragments and manuscripts. Every year I attend papers on ANE archeology more to see what impact tech is having on that guild than anything else, and one can see such innovation clearly in the first volume to be published by Gorgias Press on virtual Qumran. It is important to note that new technologies can affect academic scholarship in the same the way technology affects other disciplines or industries. The shift towards the internet as a news source, for example, has affected the very form of advertising and journalism. In the same way that the printing press affected literacy habits, so has digital publishing begin to create seismic shifts in the way we relate to texts. This is all entry-level McLuhan, but the effect of technology on the way we percieve antiquity and historiography has been tested more specifically by Walter Ong (Orality and Literacy) and Jeffrey Staley (The Print's First Kiss). Beyond the ability of emerging technology to arrange and articulate large fields of data that NT scholars, textual critics, and papyrologists have been wrapping their heads around for centuries, software can actually create new disciplines of thought that otherwise could not exist.

Consider, for example, a visual updating of Turner's Typology of the Codex, which would lay out the same data (including minor modifications and updates) with hypertexted reference to each manuscript and feature listed. Such a tool would provide the codicological database that doesn't currently exist, but it would also enable us to further root our understanding of the scribal process in more clarified historical forms. It would enable us to think of this newly accessible record as a searchable collection of artifacts rather than a set of figures which could only previously be "seen" through charts and graphs. The odd effect of a continued use of technology may not be the disembodiment of New Testament history through the same virtualizing processes that have characterized effects of the internet in other industries, but the evocation of an historical realism that has otherwise been inacessible to the casual student.

So, other than the possibility that this series may eventually alight on the topic of what current tech can reveal about books and literacy in the first and second century (as if there were anyone that could speak to this specific topic), it will be well worth keeping tabs on it for two reasons:

1. It may provide the post-PowerPoint practical tools that enable teachers to create more immersive learning contexts and student access points to all the fields of data that copy machines can't really provide.
2. It may not just track the ways in which technology is increasing the accuracy, adaptability, and searchability of current databases, but it may also chart the movement of scholarship towards schools of thought that can only be enacted within these emerging technologies themselves.

Nein to Umlauts. Long Live Distigmai!

2009-01-05T12:47:00.000-08:00

Breaking news is a common thing in textual criticism in terms of interesting fragments, variants, and digitized bits and bobs popping up on the blogosphere and discussion lists. But in a breathtaking blitz on the common use of "umlaut" to describe the pairs of dots in the margin of Codex Vaticanus, Philip Payne has officially declared* that they henceforth be called "distigmai" (pl) or "distigme" (sing) for the following reasons:

1. It will be readily recognized as a technical term with a specific
meaning, namely the presence of two (di) points (stigmata).
2. It has no other meaning that might distract from its use to
identify the locations of textual variants.
3. It is related to other expressions that described textual variants
in antiquity and is the most in keeping with the standard lexicon of
Greek paleography.
4. It is the expression most likely to gain universal acceptance.

Thanks to this modification, we will also know what to call the marks discovered by James Snapp in Codex Sangallensis 50 (a beautiful 9th century gospels codex, see the covers and pastedowns in the "binding" menu). It is generally accepted that they indicate textual variants in Vaticanus, but this is not indicative of their purpose in other contexts. This clarification is helpful, in that umlaut has always been a silly makeshift designation - I just tended to call them double stigmai when not in mixed company. See Evangelical Textual Criticism for the whole story behind this shift in terminology. I don't expect to hear about this on Paul Harvey anytime soon. Willker has an excellent page on these distigmai (which is just today outdated!), from which this image is shamefully stolen:

*Apparently this will be codified in the forthcoming: Philip B. Payne and Paul Canart. "Distigmai Matching the Original Ink of Codex Vaticanus: Do they Mark the Location of Textual Variants?" pages 191-213 in Patrick Andrist, ed., Le manuscrit B de la Bible (Vaticanus gr. 1209): Introduction au fac-similé, Actes du Colloque de Genève (11 juin 2001), contributions supplémentaires. Prahins, Switzerland: Éditions du Zèbre, 2009

An Intermission - The Machines That Made Us

2009-01-03T09:01:00.000-08:00

Bear with me during this time of re-designing the site (it is horrific at the moment). In the meantime, enjoy Stephen Fry's The Machines that Made Us, which is the best introduction to Gutenberg and bookbinding tech around:

More Medieval Rebindings - Hebrew Manuscript Institute

2008-11-16T06:39:00.000-08:00

On the heels of a previous post, Dr. Ezra Chwat passed along a photo from a Latin manuscript at an Innsbruck monastery (I am assuming the Wilton Basilica based on the file name). It is a rather pretty Latin text, you can see the column rules really well even from this picture (16th? 17th?). It has been rebound relatively recently in red cloth with some nice looking page repair. But whoever rebound it included the Hebrew folios that I am guessing lined the interior of the boards. You can see how intact and useful they are. In his email, Dr. Chwat made the point that if such folios had not been reclaimed and used as material in re-bindings, then they would have simply been read and handled until no longer viable and then buried according to custom. Such is the great blessing of bookbinding, which often recycles important literary artifacts simply because they were handy at the time.

Thanks for the helpful photo!

Speaking of Virtual Geographies - Manufacturing Rome

2008-11-13T07:29:00.000-08:00

Crossley recently blogged about the interesting SBL section on "Reading, Theory and the Bible on Reading, Space and Imagined Geographies." And then Google Earth announces the unveiling of a GE reconstruction of ancient Rome:

"Soaring above a virtual reconstruction of the Forum and the Palatine Hill or zooming into the Colosseum to get a lion’s-eye view of the stands, Google Earth’s 400 million users will be able to explore the ancient capital as easily “as any city can be explored today,” Michael T. Jones, chief technology officer of Google Earth, said Wednesday at a news conference at Rome’s city hall."

Talk about your killer apps. Are they going to resurrect Jerusalem as well? Rebuild the temple? Answer some lingering questions about Galilean urban planning? Despite the potential this tech has for the classroom, what an invigorating collaboration between printed and digital scholarship. It is like a virtual incarnation of all the recent movements in New Testament Studies towards social-scientific reconstructions of early Mediterranean culture. Think of it as Manufacturing Rome.

Jewish Book Materials at Modena

2008-11-05T15:58:00.000-08:00

Something similar to the project at Perugia I recently blogged about is occurring at the Hebrew Manuscript Institute with volumes from the Biblioteca Estense Universitaria in Modena. There are some extensive notes at the above link on the contents of these reclaimed folios, as well as a few descriptions of the actual bindings. I emailed Dr. Chwat for links to or attachments of some more helpful images, as it is still tough from the descriptions alone to determine how these folios were used in the rebinding of 16th century volumes. He responded with the link to the photo at the top of the IMHM.

Though I would love a few dozen more, including shots of some heads and tails, corner folds, pastedowns, etc... this shot is actually pretty helpful. In Dr. Chwat's original blog post, he notes a few somewhat difficult to decipher things. If by "plates" he means "boards," the bindings are fairly regular in that they consist of three bifolia - two for each board (interior?), and one used as a cover material. In the photo you can see that at some point labels in Italian were pasted on each spine. The organic pastes undoubtedly used on these labels are easy to remove. Seeing this photos, I can understand the impulse some bookbinder had - that stack of fine Jewish vellum in the corner of the shop would make excellent cover material. He also notes that there has been some text transfer and imprinting due to the proximity of each folio to another. And then:

"All but two (or possibly three) of the original Hebrew manuscripts are unique (that is- the sole remnant of this particular copy). This is highly unusual, as we are used to finding circulation of folios from particular manuscripts among many locations in Northern Italy and beyond."

Which is pretty nifty for Hebrew scholars. Without more images, I can't think of much else to say about this fascinating collection from a binding standpoint.

How to Make a Torah Scroll

2008-10-30T10:33:00.000-07:00

An odd resource for codicologists popped up a few years back when Philobiblon started a bookbinding journal called Bonefolder (which refers to one of the most basic bookbinding tools). Every now and then they publish an article that would be of interest to someone involved with the study of early Christian origins, such as an article on The Preservation of Torah Scrolls by Daniel Stuhlman. The big contribution of the article is a plea for more Jewish involvement with the preservation of Jewish book and scroll materials, as most conservation departments don't have someone on hand that is schooled ways to deal with artifacts that are still holy even if they are no longer useful. But leading up to this interesting point are some helpful descriptions of how parchment is made, and a survey of its most important preservation factors. At the very least, having some of this process in mind is helpful when looking at bits of NT parchment fragments. (Those fragments are from de Hamel's collection, recently photographed.)

The process of making parchment hasn't significantly changed since antiquity. There are references to the making of parchment in Pliny and Herodotus, and a slew of different words for the material, but by and large our knowledge of parchment preparation has been handed down to us through some Middle Age references and instructions that had been standardized centuries beforehand. Oddly enough, modern parchment preparation uses chemicals and enzymes that create weaker book materials.

From the article:

"The source for the skin is from kosher animals slaughtered for meat. Animals may not be killed solely to use the hides. The finest leathers and parchment come from fetal calves. The next grade comes from young calves. Older animals have hides with stains from the environment that are a challenge to remove. After skinning the animal, the skin is soaked in water. Lime is used to help removed the hair. The skin can be made into either leather or parchment... In general, the younger the animal at time of slaughter the thinner the hide, the smaller surface area, the smoother and finer the grain structure, and the less likelihood of damage due to disease, injury, or insects."

There was allowance in Jewish law for scrolls to be written on leather, but leather scrolls of any length are far heavier and more cumbersome than the alternative, which is parchment. Parchment is made by soaking the skin in lime for weeks, which softens the epidermis in such a way that hair can then be easily removed. In the Middle Ages, lime was predominantly used for dehairing, but in antiquity fermented organic pastes were used. The Dead Sea Scrolls, for example, were prepared in a characteristically Jewish way that involved smearing the skins with rotten flour paste and stacking them up for a few days. The old Jewish process made very fine parchments, but as the heat and enzymes built up during this process can quickly destroy skin, they eventually began to use the less volatile lime. (Throughout history, urine has also been used as a dehairing catalyst, which is why curators will ask you not to touch parchment materials directly.) After this, remaining fat and tissue are scraped from the other side. The skin is then carefully stretched, which aligns the skin fibers into a consistent grain, and it is scraped again while drying. By now the skin is pure collagen, and these additional scrapings allow the tanner to determine the final thickness and quality of the parchment. There are many ways to polish stretched parchment. Pumice, or rolls of bread with bits of glass baked into them, make the skins smooth and receptive to ink. Lime, egg whites, and other materials made the skins whiter. This process produces a writing material that is very receptive to ink and other sorts of decoration. It is more durable than paper from the binder's perspective, and very pleasurable to work with as its stiffer properties make it easier to sew and arrange in complex ways. But long term, parchment is more susceptible to poor environmental conditions. It is easy to see this difference in the curling, discoloration, and chemical reactions to various inks that characterize early parchment fragments (see this excellent summary of how leather and parchment decay).

In scholarship on fragments of biblical texts, parchment and vellum are sometimes used as interchangeable terms. Vellum is actually a subcategory of parchment made from the skin of calves, and graded by the age of the calf as noted above from the article. Technically, Hebrew scrolls are written on vellum, as parchment can be made from sheep, goats, horses, or cows. The Mishneh and Talmud call the vellum most scrolls were written on "gevil," which refers to the outer layer of a split-calf skin. (I am pretty sure the DSS were written on this layer of skin, which is a handy example from antiquity.)

There is a nice short summary of this process as applied to the medieval codex here. Either way, I think it is helpful to have these processes in mind when looking at fragments and folios. Not only does it help explain some of the physical anomalies that pop up every now and then in the form of bumps, splits, and holes - but it further helps to remind us that texts and textual variants aren't the only history told by manuscripts and codices.

An Update on This Blog

2008-10-29T10:17:00.000-07:00

I am finally finishing up a large writing commitment that has kept me from this blog. In the last year a massive backlog of coptic and assorted bookbinding related stuff has stacked up. I have a lot of info culled from a few weeks at the Oriental Studies Library in Cambridge. I have a large stack of Nag Hammadi and related images to wander through, as well as some work on a few neglected Robinson articles that he so kindly directed me towards. I still haven't gotten around to talking about some of the papers on miniature books/amulets from the last SBL. And of course with the explosion of post-copyright stuff on Google Books, a lot of volumes that previously could not be had through inter-library loan now can be had anywhere with a wireless signal. I look forward to exploring some classic and forgotten resources on the history of books, paper, and ancient libraries right here on this blog.

Long story short, I look forward to getting back to this blog. And to great many who come here for the coptic bookbinding posts from a few years ago, there is more to come. I have been working on copying some extant coptic sewing and cover patterns, and will share images of that work here.

Jewish Book Materials at Perugia

2008-10-29T09:42:00.000-07:00

A genizah is a room in a synagogue or cemetery that is used as a staging area for books and paper materials that need to be properly disposed. As no writing that contains the name of God can be destroyed, there is a set of rituals in place by which they can be buried in periodic cycles, often associated with various agricultural or religious blessings. Such writings would include anything from personal correspondence to scripture, and intact genizot offer a wide range of secular and religious materials in a variety of languages. The discovery of a genizah, such as the famous Cairo Genizah that contained almost 200,000 items waiting to be disposed, can open up worlds of linguistic and religious data that we have never been able to explore. In a digital age, it can be hard to comprehend how significant this Jewish practice has been for the study of history. But imagine if we lived in world in which no computers existed and then were to seal a reasonably sized library of our most treasured books and letters for archeologists to discover in 800 years. That approximates how important genizot can be. One man’s trash is another man's academic career.

But apart from all the historical and linguistic data we pick up from these deposits, there is also a wealth of book data to be had. I used to spend hours in a university rare book collection I curated just randomly selecting volumes and studying spines, sewing patterns, corner folds, etc… What someone interested in bindings would see in a genizah is much different from what someone interested in the actual texts would see. There are extant bindings, stacks of text blocks with similar sewing patterns, ranks of covers in a variety of materials, pamphlets – a book construction bonanza. There is some serious book technology history that comes to light in these finds.

In an exhibition of the wryly named Perugia Genizah (a genizah-in-spirit collection in the Biblioteca del Dottorato at the University of Perugia), we get a glimpse into the history of the construction and use of the Hebrew scriptures during the transition from the hand-written to printed market. Hand-written books were so much more expensive than those mass printed by the growing publishing industry, the vellum of worn out hand-written books often ended up being reused in the bindings of new printed volumes. Indeed, a sizable number of pages from Hebrew manuscripts have been discovered as padding in the binding boards of Italian medieval codices, 24 of which have been "excavated" at Perugia. From the exhibition catalog summary: “Of the twenty-four printed books in question, twenty were rebound with complete double folios, and four detached from two single folios.” Intact double folios are a nice find. The exhibition website summarizes the origins of these folios as mostly 13th to 15th century copies of Hebrew scriptures and rabbinical writings in Hebrew and Aramaic, and a 13th century Spanish copy of the Babylonian Talmud. It is typically thought that the reason we have so many Jewish books ending up in the bindings of later volumes is that after being confiscated during the Inquisition, they ended up as refuse in bookbinding shops. For example, a papal bull in 1553 rounded up all copies of the Talmud in Rome to be burned on Rosh Hashanah of that year, and many pages of these costly vellum books were filched from these fires to be sold to bookbinders. The Talmud pages at Perugia probably come from such an occasion. As similar confiscations often occurred during the emergence of the printing press industry, a lot of these vellum materials ended up on European trade routes, eventually coming to rest in the covers and spines of random codices.

So apart from the material historians can glean from these recovered texts what does the Perugia collection have to do with bookbinding?

1. The exhibition is a good entry point into this history of rebinding. One can quickly see the rise and fall of cultures via the cycling of paper and parchment materials through later generations of bindings. Is the history of book technology a political history? It certainly is, and the failure to recognize this is in part what led to confusion about the use of codex in the first and second century.
2. There are some excellent photos from the conservation process as part of the exhibition. Even the non-specialist can see pretty clearly how these materials were re-used so many centuries ago and then recently reclaimed.
3. The story behind how these folios ended up in later codices sheds light on how book materials made their way around European and Mediterranean trade systems. It shouldn’t be a surprise to see materials with a Germanic provenance ending up in volumes bound in Italy. I think this ultimately calls for greater attention by scholars of Christian and Hebrew manuscripts to how basic medieval bookbinding processes relate to the texts that are discovered either intact or as disiecta membra. In this period, as exhibitions like this one at Perugia demonstrate, it is possible for one volume to represent a few generations of written materials.

There are some similar projects ongoing in Europe that have released interesting bookbinding info, I will track some of it down.

The Binding of Codex Sinaiticus

2007-02-07T02:33:00.000-08:00

After seeing Sinaiticus at the British Library this weekend, I immediately realized that Cockerell was not only responsible for its conservation, but had re-bound it in precisely the same way. Sewn on meeting guards to cords laced into English oak boards wrapped with pale alum-tawed pigskin. He even used the same "thorn" rolling stamp as was used on Bezae.

But after digging a little deeper, I now wonder which Cockerell was responsible for the current binding of Sinaiticus. Douglas Cockerell, author of Scribes and Correctors of Codex Sinaiticus, is credited with the conservation of Sinaiticus in 1935. It is also recorded that his son, Sydney Cockerell, aided him in this restoration before taking over for his retiring father at the Central School of Arts and Crafts in London. And then, as I can only assume, Sydney Cockerell bound Codex Bezae precisely the same way almost 30 years later. (Anyone interested in the genealogy of English bookbinders, click here.) Fortunately, I recently met someone who worked under Cockerell the Younger, perhaps he can solve this mystery. It is intriguing to think that Cockerell the Younger would have used the very same "thorn" rolling stamp on the binding of Sinaiticus that was used on Bezae. (Or else this wins as the most irrelevant detail in blogging on New Testament MSS for 2007.)

On the history of the binding of Sinaiticus, there is this interesting tidbit from one of Skeat's last articles. The Cockerell he refers to here is Douglas Cockerell, citing the relevant section of Scribes and Correctors. The second binding of the manuscript, previous to Cockerell's, was done by monks at St. Catherine's zealously following Tischendorf's instructions to carefully preserve anything that looked like the 43 leaves he was permitted to take with him:

"The monks got as far as sewing the leaves into quires, and then sewing the quires together. They then attached to the back two broad bands which were evidently intended to be attached to the binding boards. By this stage, however, the volume had become very out of shape. As Cockerell describes it, 'While the fore-edge is roughly square, the spine is badly out of shape. When the spine is straightened up, as in the new binding, the fore-edge becomes irregular. It is quite possible that this later binding was never actually completed. The sewing threads were deliberately cut from the bands, perhaps with a view to a fresh start.' However, by this time the monks seemed to have realised that their primary objective, of securing the leaves against future loss, had been obtained, and they took no further action."

(T.C. Skeat "The Last Chapter in the History of Codex Sinaiticus" NT 42.4 (2000): 314)

The Binding of Codex Bezae

2007-02-05T05:11:00.000-08:00

“It is indeed defective and not copied correctly enough right from the beginning, nor is it in good enough condition as it should be, as may be seen from several parts in a different hand which have been inserted, and the barbarous notes of some ignorant old Greek monk added everywhere.”

- T. Bezae (in a letter to Cambridge University Library about the codex).

I was recently afforded a day of consultation with Codex Bezae at the Cambridge University Library. The Manuscripts Room of this library is one of the friendliest and most accommodating I have yet encountered. Much of my understanding of the most recent re-binding of Bezae is indebted to the head of the conservation department there who walked me through its construction and compared it to more recent binding procedures that are distinctly different.

The Current Binding.

Part of the catalog item is a two page typewritten treatment report by Stan Cockerell, who rebound Bezae in the 60’s. The treatment report chronicles the status of the manuscript at that time and its conservation process. Cockerell removed the codex from its 19th century binding and found that most of the outside fold of each folio had been severely damaged, as well as many of the interior folio leaves. Additional to this were seven saw cuts in the spine done at the time of its 19th century rebind. Such damage is consistent with a rebind in which the spine has been scraped of any original glue, and then each signature (gathering, quire) is re-sewn at five original points along with two rows of kettle stitching on the top and bottom of the spine. The conservation treatment here was similar to that of Siniaticus in that every leaf was flattened on clips. But unlike Siniaticus, “the number of repairs runs into several thousand.” Page tears and splits were either sewn or repaired with PVA adhesive along with a few different types of toned vellum and paper. Damaged folio backs were guarded with linen. (Bezae is a rather damaged text, lots of corrosive ink, ox gall stains, and tearing.) After all of these repairs were completed, the repaired signatures were sewn to vellum meeting guards with linen thread spaced every ½ inch. A meeting guard is simply a folded piece of material onto which a signature is sewn, they “meet” each other along their respective folded edges: m.g. > < sig. These meeting guards are then bound just like signatures along the spine, in this case on five large cords. The volumes were split at folios 175 and 176 to match the facsimile edition, and then laced onto English oak boards wrapped to about four inches or so in a pale alum-tawed pigskin. Cockerell said he wanted the codices to have a “mellow” feel.

These days the binding process would have been different in that rather than a flat-back binding with meeting guards, the entire codex would have been reconstructed and guarded folio by folio, re-sewn, and then bound on a hollow-back binding. Both are secure, lay flat, virtually adhesive free bindings. But the latter method tends to preserve the original codex construction and provide better visual access to the spine.

The Original Binding.

My mission in this consultation was to use Bezae as a test case to see if it were possible to find traces of the original binding structure of the earliest major rebound biblical codices. I was looking for hints of its original structure that had survived at least two re-bindings, one far more professional than its predecessor. These would be any of the following: Original alpha-numerical binding aids along the tailpiece of the codex on each signature that would have helped in the original binding process. Any tooling marks or signs of extant original adhesive. Folios on which it was possible to see a definitive and consistent sewing pattern that would most probably have been original.

1. Unfortunately, I didn’t find too much. In his monograph on Bezae, Parker enumerates 18 or 19 different hands in the manuscript, one of which is responsible for the Greek alpha-numeric numbering of each signature on the lower inner margin of the last page of each. Additional to this are three different sets of numbering and markings from binders or curators of the manuscript. One of these is in ink Roman numerals at the top fore-edge of each verso and recto. The other two are sets of ordinal numerals written in pencil and ink. I couldn’t find any catalog data on the codex that would link any of these much later hands to a particular time other than a possible match between the hand on one of the sets of folio numbering and a few sentences self-dated to 1898 on a set of folio maps in the box of scraps and whatnots that are part of the Bezae catalog item (see below). Such data would be somewhat irrelevant, however, the original folio numbering is consistent with Roman practice, albeit in Greek script (as they fall on the Greek side of the manuscript).

2. As far as tooling marks are concerned, Bezae is a very distinct example of the ruling of text-blocks. All the original adhesive had been removed excepting the possibility that one of the vellum scraps in an envelop with the codex had some adhesive (definitely not from Cockerell’s binding) that could either be from its 19th century or original binding. Other than that, the current codex has been so drastically cleaned and guarded that it would be difficult to find any tooling marks on the spine or endsheets.

3. Due to the binding previous to Cockerell’s, the sewing pattern is completely indeterminate. I got as close as Cockerell, who surmised that the original codex was bound on five cords, probably proportionally spaced as they are now (as the original codex was a bit larger than it currently is). And such a sewing pattern would be consistent with early European binding. The saw cuts on each folio have left a set of elongated holes that obscure any original manufactural marks.

As a result, there isn’t too much that one can say about the binding of Bezae. This consultation did, however, sharpen my attention to details that could be indication of original binding structure should all the right circumstances be in place. If Bezae had been rebound according to contemporary re-binding procedures, and had not been mangled by a 19th century binder, then it would be possible to surmise how the original codex had been constructed. Even if each signature had been fairly badly damaged, it would really only take three or four solid leads to detail its original sewing pattern with some certainty. Furthermore, extant endsheets and spine lining material would only enhance such conjecture, giving us further clues as to their method of attachment to actual covers. Bezae does not afford such data, but others may.

The “Bezae Box.”

There was a box of material that can be seen along with Bezae. Its contents are as following:

1. A few exhibition labels, on one of which E.A. Lowe is cited as sourcing the codex in “a near-East centre” (Egypt or Palestine) in the early fifth-century. A different label claims “Sicily” as its provenance.
2. Cockerell’s treatment reports along with a remarkable set of photos of the manuscript in various states of repair. A few of these were published in Parker’s monograph.
3. Two envelops of vellum scraps presumably leftover from the re-binding.
4. The Corpus Christianorum edition of the Vulgate text of the supplemental pages of Bezae by J. Mizzi.
5. Several sets of folio maps (a handwritten diagram of each folio) that had been checked and signed by four different librarians (1898, 1949, 1952, 1962) claiming “all here.”
6. Blank reconstructions of each folio, probably for re-binding practice.

Winchester Gospels

2007-01-31T12:30:00.000-08:00

I can't seem to find much background on this 11th century gospel codex (The Winchester Gospels) on display in the Wren Library at Trinity College, but it is very well preserved right next to a 9th century copy of Paul's epistles and directly across from one of Wittgenstein's actual notebooks and the first, handwritten copy of Milne's Winnie the Pooh:

verso:

recto:

Also next to it in the case is this lovely gem from a manuscript of the writings of St. Jerome. I have forgotton the date, but 10-11th? Regardless, this man teaching a bear to speak is a memorable image of medieval literacy. Though it is far later than St. Jerome, it jogged my memory as to his peculiar desire to make texts more readily understandable and readable through colemetric arrangement ("Per cola et commata," in basic stichometric sense-units rather than scripta continua). There is an interesting brief discussion of this as it relates to NT textual criticism a few pages into an old Kirsopp and Lake article on the text of Acts. (Kirsopp and Silva Lake, "The Acts of the Apostles" JBL 53/1 (1934): 34-45.)

Rebinding Codex Claromontanus

2007-01-17T03:32:00.000-08:00

While at Tyndale House I have been given the opportunity to do some repair work in the library. Fortunately, Tyndale House is one of the most well preserved libraries I have seen, mostly due to the fact that none of these books circulate. But I have been able to pluck a number of needy volumes from the shelves and give them what attention I can with so few materials and tools on hand. The above cover and spine is from F.F. Bruce's copy of Codex Claromontanus. As is characteristic of German books from this period, the text-block itself is in excellent condition. But the covers and spine were completely removed from the text.

Ordinarily, I would have recased the entire book, giving it a new cover, spine, and endsheets. But as I don't have any presses or cover material here, I opted to rebuild the book from the inside out. This above picture is of the spine interior. Note the spine card material, which was just some scrap pulp-based paper that had been lying around the bindery in 1852 (when the book was published). The first step here was to seperate the covers from the spine, leaving as much original material intact as possible. I left the spine itself attached to one of the boards, as this gutter had not completely disintegrated through use. I then scraped all the old padding from the spine while being careful not to damage the first few layers of each signature.

The second step was to retrace the steps of the original binding, and create enough space to reproduce it with new materials. This book was very sturdily bound on five flax threads that were then laced into the boards. You can see the remnant of one of these threads in the above photo. (Click for more detail.) My plan was to adhere a piece of mull to the spine with overlaps that would correspond to the distance I peeled back the covers on each board. This would replicate the threads that had originally been holding the covers on the book, but much more permanently.

Step three was the process of reattaching the covers to the book. I simply glued the one and a half inch flap of mull to the back edge of each board, and then glued the flap of cover material I had peeled back over this strip of mull. In the above picture, you can see this finished step on the first cover. The spine is rebuilt, and the mull flows neatly onto the back edge of the cover board.

Here the other cover is attached the same way. This was much trickier, as the spine material was still attached to this board. The final steps will involve affixing the left edge of the spine to the left cover, adding some archival grade paper to the end-sheet gutter margins, and then putting the book back on the shelf. I apologize for this contemporary diversion from the concerns of ancient books, but the methods you see here aren't that different than the sorts of repair that would have occured from the earliest days of the book.

Coptic Bookbinding - Between Book Historians and Biblical Studies

2007-01-15T04:18:00.000-08:00

Images of Coptic Bookbinding

Contemporary bookbinders often refer to any non-adhesive bookbinding in which unsupported stitching across the signatures is laced directly into the covers as a "Coptic Binding." ("Unsupported" simply means that the thread passes through each signature and is linked to the identical stitch on the previous signature, rather than being sewn over a cord or a thong. See below for images.) There are a number of tutorials on the web that demonstrate this technique, which can become complicated when sewing on more than three tapes or cords, with more than one needle, or with actual ancient materials (sewing up papyrus is far more difficult than sewing on modern paper). This is a good basic tutorial on the sewing method, but this tutorial takes one much closer the sorts of limp bindings we often see in Nag Hammadi and similar finds.

Many images of contemporary "Coptic" binding can be found online, but one of the more interesting collections of such bindings can be seen in the Special Collections section of the Princeton University Library website. Though most of these images are of relatively late books, the section on Early Codex and Coptic Sewing and Early European Sewing and Board Attachment are illustrative of the influence the earliest Coptic bindings had on book technology far into the modern era. The techniques in the "Early European Sewing" section are what characterize "modern" hand-bookbinding, the key difference from their Coptic predecessor being that European bindings introduced a cord or tape onto which each signature was sewn. (If you click on each image, it will take you to an enlarged version with an extremely handy magnifying tool. If only all papyrology sites had the same coding!) You can clearly see the differences in stitching between this 17th century Ethiopic text (though it is late, it is a very clear example of the Coptic stitch) and this 15th century English text. The former "Coptic" stitch would be expected in very early Christian manuscripts, and through a scrutiny of these images one can imaginatively retrace the steps of some of our earliest Christian artifacts.

Articles on Coptic Bookbinding

Such materials provide an interesting means of reflection on early Christian manuscripts that runs parallel to, and often complete independent of, the related discussion in Biblical Studies. But additional to archives of images, there are also a number of articles on these trajectories in the technology of books written by historians and practioners of book-bindings that highlight an interest direction of scholarship that Biblical manuscript studies has rarely addressed. A report from a 2003 Guild of Bookworkers seminar summarizes a paper given by Dr. John Sharpe on the History of the Early Codex. This sort of research provides some material depth to a number of questions that have puzzled papryologists and historians of early Christian literature for quite some time:

"The model for the early codex was a wooden tablet. Single-quire text blocks of papyrus bound in simple leather covers with a fore edge flap and a strap for fastening resemble the proportions and shape of many wooden tablets that survived as archeological evidence of the Early Christian Era. The further development of the book structure resulted in the necessity of multi-quire text blocks. Papyrus failed when used for the multi-section structures. Parchment became the material of choice... Covers of wooden boards and leather spines were made separately and attached as “case bindings”. Best examples of early Coptic bindings are books from the Nag Hammadi find (1945, Egypt). A similar single-quire Coptic codex is the Berlin 8502. Leather on its cover is similar to the one used in the Dead Sea Scrolls. It neither resembles tanned leather, nor does it resemble parchment or alum tawed skin. Single-quire text block was not the only codex form during the third and fourth centuries AD. Out of surviving codices from before 400 AD the majority is of the multi-quire type. Early bindings were quite elaborate. They used fringed leather strips that were laced through numerous holes in the board and used as wrapping pieces finished with bone pegs as fasteners. Those early multi-quire text blocks were sewn link stitch and bound in wooden boards with leather spine structures that were assembled separately from the text block and attached in a manner of case bindings. Bindings found under the ruins of the Monastery of Apa Jeremiah near Saqqara (1920) were dismantled and partially described by Lamacraft in 1939."

The lack of any consistent method in our earliest extant Coptic bindings suggests that this was still a period of experimentation with this format that expresses itself in the use of different stitching patterns and finishes. It was only with the eventual hegemony of parchment that any sort of standardization set in, as it made the fairly regular stitching of multi-quire text blocks possible. I always assumed on the basis of my very limited first hand knowledge of early Christian papyri that our earliest bindings were "case-bindings," which simply means that the top and bottom leaf of the text block were attached directly to the interior of a leather or stiff paper cover. Sharpe's undocumented point here both confirms my suspicion and raises the question of how related contemporary "Coptic bookinding" really is to its ancestor. Many contemporay definitions of Coptic bookbinding will tell you that the stitching is to be laced directly into the cover (as in the Ethiopic cover above), whereas many early Coptic bindings actually skipped this step and just had the covers glued directly to the endsheets of a textblock. I have always assumed that this latter method would have been the original method practiced by early Christians as it is the least technical and least time consuming process.

Another interesting article from the Book and Paper Group Annual covers the Adoption of the Codex. Here the "African" model of the early codex is described:

"The model takes two construction types with regard to assembly. The first type is a single quire papyrus codex which can be compared with the single quire parchment notebook from Roman examples. The single quire papyrus codex is associated with a portfolio or wallet like cover made of leather. The text was restitched directly though the cover with interior leather stays positioned in the inner fold to cushion the papyrus from the cinch of the sewing. The cover was frequently reinforced inside with a cartonnage of papyrus. Then, with its protective cover flaps closed and tied with thong, the text was well protected for travel.

The second type was used for binding multiple quires. Each quire was stitched from quire to quire forming chains of stitches across the back of the text. A stitch passing through the inner fold of the gathering would pass to the outer fold connecting the separate folios together. The stitch would then drop down to pick up a previous exterior stitch and climb to enter the next gathering. Quire by quire the book would be constructed. Cover boards, of wood or skin, were also sewn to the text. This "sewn board" book would then be covered with pasted leather and perhaps provided with a second, outer leather case for travel. The result was a secure text block with a docile, flat opening provided by the pliant stitch chains. For the following discussion the African bookbinding model combines together the single and multiple quire type. This obscures the possibility that the sewn single gathering codex may be more associated with the genre of letters folded for travel. The sewn multiple gathering would then be used to accommodate assemblies of letters or larger compilations or, eventually whole Gospels."

He next makes a number of interesting points made about the possible technological backgrounds to the codex. While I haven't ever encountered these in Biblical Studies oriented literature on early Christian manuscripts, such points are frequent in literature on this period by historians of bookbinding. Among many others, these two paragraphs are especially intriguing:

The resources of many crafts must have been assimilated into early codex bookbinding. The most apparent parallel to the sewn boards binding technique is found in boat building of antiquity where the shell-first construction method created a hull from sewn boards. The V tunnel lacings connecting the planks and seam battens evoke the whole range of early wooden board book cover attachments. A boat craft connection is also suggested by the role of sea faring trade in materials such as papyrus and by the role of Mediterranean seaports in the production and distribution of manuscripts. Crafts of sewing leather tents and containers would also be relevant. The fourth century Gnostic texts found at Nag Hammadi were generally stitched with leather thongs into leather portfolios.

From the perspective of technology, many comparisons of the scroll and codex format focus on text management features of the two formats. However, during this early period all books, both scroll and codex, lacked text management devises such as word spacing, pagination or punctuation. Only the punctuation of the codex page itself could have played a part in the first century selection of the format. The influence of page format on illustration, as opposed to text, would recommend the codex since iconography could be set off into distinct fields. The African model is relevant here since the tradition of illuminating Christian books was advanced, not by Greek convention, but by the heritage of Coptic art. In pharonic times prayers and liturgies were illustrated with figures of deities and protective symbols in bright colors with boarder designs at the top and bottom. The texts were traced in black outline with catchwords written in red.

The connection here between bookbinding and shipbuilding is as intriguing as it is provisional. At the very least, it points out that we can't simply think of the origin of the codex as something that began in a material void, linked only to early Christian theological or missiological particularities. In the course of bookbinding, I often turn to the construction and engineering of other things when I am stumped on a particular sewing or restoration problem. Likewise, early Christians must have sought better ways to put together books, publish their literature, and circulate these documents about the Roman empire. And they most probably turned to other trades and crafts for material solutions to problems in these processes. As the above article points out, this may not just be the case with the codex format, but also with questions regarding ideal page size, ideal text placement and size, and the best means of illumination and punctuation. In this way, the mystery of the origin of the codex is not simply theoretical or social in scope, but is technological and historical.

Coptic Bookbinding and Early Christian Origins

Reading an article about early Christian manuscripts by someone from beyond the guild of papyrology and early Christian studies is like having someone else tell you that your shirt is untucked in the back or you have toothpaste on your lip. From the perspective of book technology there are a number of unnoticed connections, unutilized points of access, and simply unknown practical contexts to early Christian fragments that characterize the practice of NT textual criticism. While the historical particularities of this last article could certainly be debated and more sharply defined, it helpfully demonstrates the point I have made consistently elsewhere that there is a lot of space in the material date to begin talking about early Christians as book-binders rather than just book-readers or book-users. There may be enough data out there from early Christian manuscript holdings to enact a convergence between all this data and scholarship from historians of book-binders and the discussion of textual criticism and early Christian origins currently taking place in Biblical Studies.

Update (1/09): Please click the "Coptic Bindings" for additional posts on this subject.

The Bog Psalter

2007-01-04T06:16:00.000-08:00

Excellent news today on the 8th century illumintated Book of Psalms recently found in a Tipperary bog. The Times reports that the book "is still in its original binding." As this book is probably a contemporary to the Book of Kells, which hasn't had its original covers for a long time, this 8th century bookbinding artifact is all the more exciting.

The provenance of the Book of Kells is murky, but we know it was in Kells by the 11th century because we have records of its being stolen from there during that period. Fortunately for us, said robbers then tore the text-block from its richly gilded and jewelled cover and ditched the actual pages, which were quickly recovered. They must not have been big readers. Ever since then it has been rebound several times, most of these far less than professional. In one notorious case some illustration was actually cropped from a few pages. In 1953, it was very finely rebound in four volumes of pigskin by Sir Robert Powell (who I have learned is the only person to be knighted for bookbinding). So while the actual pages of the Book of Kells may be in better condition than the Bog Psalter, the extant original binding of the latter makes it nearly as priceless.

I can't tell though from one of the last paragraphs in the article whether the binding or the text is of "a very high standard."

Coptic Book Covers at Al-Gourna

2007-01-04T02:45:00.000-08:00

All the way back in February 2005, Al-Ahram announced the discovery of two Coptic payprus codices, one "set of parchments between two wooden labels," and an assortment of ostraca beneath a sixth-century monastery in Al-Gourna near Luxor.

They described the contents as following: "The first book has a hard plain cover embellished with Roman text from the inside while the second includes no less than 50 papers coated with a partly deteriorated leather cover bearing geometrical drawings. In the middle, a squared cross 32cm long and 26cm wide is found. As for the set of parchments, Gorecki said it included 60 papers with a damaged leather cover and an embellished wooden locker." (Egypt Today also picked up the story, explaining that "Theologists cannot wait for the restoration processes to begin..." I know, it is a bit rude to poke fun of foreign news agencies helpful enough to publish info in English. But I can't help but ask: Are there any theologists out there standing by for these results?)

Science and Scholarship in Poland later described the actual contents of these manuscripts: 1. "One of the books" is the only complete text of the "Canons of Pseudo-Basil" in Coptic, which previously has only been extant in Arabic. 2. "The other" contains the "Life of St. Pistentios." 3. The stack of "richly decorated" parchment turned out to be the only complete translation of Isaiah in Coptic. In the bindings of the two codices were found scraps of "The Suffering of St. Peter," "another religious text," and some tax receipts. Someone has dated the Isaiah manuscript to 9/10th century, the two codices to 7/8th.

(Roger Pearse also has a comprehensive page on the find that I will be checking for updates periodically.)

Other descriptions of the find have either been too hard to track down, or they don't exist. So far many descriptions of the covers, bindings, and manuscripts are a bit ambiguous, but they sound like remarkable witnesses to Coptic bookbinding, especially in light of their decorative nature. Typically, if a spine and covers are intact enough that their padding and stiffening materials (such as the apocryphal materials recovered from these codices) are both sizable and legible, then that is a good indication that a decent technical description of the binding process can be made. To be fair, I can only state this with certainty on the basis of images of Coptic bindings from which other legible papyrus or parchment manuscripts have been extracted. Unfortunately, I have no first-hand experience with seperating materials of this age from ancient Coptic bindings. (If anyone ever needs a hand in this capacity, let me know.) But I have lifted things like handwritten guard duty records on folded rag-based paper from the spines of Revolutionary War-era American bindings (if I recall correctly, it was a bound book by Thomas Paine). In such a modern context it is the case that the sizability and legibility of spine padding materials is directly related to the overall condition of the covers. I think it would be safe to say the same thing of books from the 7/8th century. All this is to say that even though reported descriptions of the covers claim they are deteriorated, the fact that legible manuscripts have been lifted from the bindings indicates that they may be fairly intact.

After requesting images and/or more detailed descriptions of the find, I just recieved an email response from the very helpful PCMA, stating that "Tomasz Górecki, the head of the mission working at Sheikh Abd el-Gurna" will be in the field for a few more months. When he returns, I may be able to get some photographs and/or more detailed descriptions of these covers. If so, I will be more than happy to share them here.

Reflections on SBL - 2006

2006-11-29T06:55:00.000-08:00

1. The highlight of the conference for me was finally being able to see the covers of Codex W first hand. There hasn't been much written on them since the 1930's, and it is now my mission in life to get access for a fuller autopsy. I don't want to make any premature pronouncements on the implications these covers hold for the study of early Christian book technology, but if manufactural markings on the spine of the (now loose) Codex W indicate that the covers were produced secondary to the text, then a number of interesting points could be made about how early Christian bookbinding affected the use and perception of the canonical gospels.

I am crossing my fingers about that access, though, and may just have to proceed on the basis of my time with the covers during the exhibition and the somewhat unhelpful photographs we currently have.

2. Lots of good papers in the Textual Criticism and Papyrology seminars. I was particular interested to hear response to Holger Strutwolf's paper (see my summary below from the NA/27 conference at New College). Lo and behold, he fared well in the face of Epp's just criticism that Strutwolf has appeared to have not actually said much about the textual tradition beyond Epp's original work on text types. As it turns out, Strutwolf's suggestion that we conduct criticism within the parameters established by the textual tradition of each text is an intriguing idea.

2.5. Peter Head's paper on Tregelles was fascinating, I hope that either shows up in print, or that he will make copies available to interested parties.

3. I haven't the slightest idea why they scheduled Hurtado vs. Ehrman at the same time as Gathercole vs. Dunn. Poor programming decision. But in the epic square-off between the "Lord Jesus Christ" guy and the "Misquoting Jesus" guy, Earliest Christian Artifacts emerged as the winner. Ehrman's critique centered around the fact that Hurtado spends a lot of time in the book simply retreading old scholarship on the various issues that occupy each chapter. I really don't have a problem with this, that sort of synthesis needed to occur in this area and many students and scholars of other specializations will benefit from it.

4. The Scottish Universities Reception was exactly how I thought it would be.

5. My paper in the Bible in Ancient and Modern Media section went quite well. It was a rather polemical paper, which is always a gamble. But the gamble seemed to pay off and I now hope to see it in print some time from now.

New College Biblical Studies Seminar

2006-11-28T06:43:00.000-08:00

I will be giving a paper titled "A New/Old Look at John 21: Towards A Literary-Historical Reading of John 21" on 1 Dec. 2007 at the University of Edinburgh.

It really is a general overview of my thesis, and I hope at that time to recieve a great deal of criticism on the general flow of my argument as well as a few preliminary conclusions I have reached concerning the function of the Beloved Disciple, high frequency of literary self-awareness, and the provocative shift in narrative time in John 21.

Below is a small section of the paper that has direct relevance to this blog:

The initially obscure, hyperbolic reference made to “books” in John 21:25 has a clear set of parallels that would have triggered a network of rhetorical echoes in early readings of the text. The use of βιβλία would have conjured up an image of vast libraries of scrolls, such as the one referenced in a story contemporary to John in which Ptolemy asked Demetrius of Phalerum to collect all of the books of the world (which came to around 500,000). Here the narrative of Jesus overwhelms all the official literature of his day, that is, anything that was worthy of being written on a scroll.

This sets the stage for reflecting on how this rich seam of rhetoric in John 21 relates to the Gospel as a whole... The rhetoric of John 21:25 attempts to class the Gospel of John with the set of literatures related to the word βιβλία. This certainly comports well with Burridge’s estimation of the genre of John as bios literature, as relevant literatures would have also been published in the format related to the term. And this is contra Hengel’s take the hyperbole: “As all earlier Christian biblical texts were circulated as codexes[sic], i.e. in book form and using nomina sacra, in my view we may presuppose that this would already be the case with the first edition. This is one of the fixed Christian writing practices which goes back to the first century.” Though he arrives at this conclusion based on the papyrological record, there is no lexicographical merit to Hengel’s argument. In fact, I argue that it is the widespread Christian use of the codex in this period that would have pointed the rhetoric, having been specifically crafted by means of βιβλία at this pre-transitional stage in the lexicography of book technology. Hengel is right to characterize the use of the codex as a “fixed Christian practice,” but there is no evidence to suggest that βιβλία would have referred to one this early, and in this context.

Due to its position in the composition history of the Gospel, this raises an interesting question regarding the relevance of the rhetoric itself. If this rhetoric comes from the hand of the author, then it is simple to read the verse as a self-conscious attestation of genre. However, if it comes from the hand of a later author, whether of the entire chapter or simply vv. 24-25, it is possible to understand the hyperbole as a misreading of 20:30-31 that results in a series of literary and generic implications not considered by the initial author of the Gospel. This would mean that 21:24-25 sets up a retrospective generic expectation for the Gospel not explicitly intended by its author.

Either way, John 21:25 leads one to read the Gospel somewhat differently than the first conclusion of John 20:30-31. [Though I tend towards the former.] And either way, reading this text in light of its rhetorical connections to book culture in antiquity grants us a clear point of access into the self-perception of Gospel writers at the end of the first century... I am sure the writer of John 21 was pleased with stumbling across such an efficient, double-edged rhetoric.

CSCO - Gospel of Thomas Conference

2006-11-27T06:35:00.000-08:00

The Centre for the Study of Christian Origins will be holding a session on MSS of the Gospel of Thomas on 8 Dec. 2007 from 3:00-4:30 PM at New College, University of Edinburgh.

If I am not mistaken, Prof. Hurtado will be walking us through a set of digital images of Thomas MSS, which are listed in the appendix of Earliest Christian Artifacts. (Which I must say, is an awfully interesting monograph. Not that I am biased or anything.)

Penn Papyri Project

2006-05-25T01:45:00.000-07:00

I have had a scintillating time perusing the UPenn papyri holdings at their nicely designed online collection hosted by the Schoenberg Center for Electronic Text and Image. These are very sharp digital images, and allow a set zoom to the level of two lines of the text square.

In one good example of how the clear these digital images are, here is the P.Oxy. manuscript of Matthew 1 (P.Oxy. 2?). As Robert Kraft just pointed out to me, you can clearly see what appears to be an iota (or upsilon) with a superlinear mark on the upper left margin, as well as the alpha (page number) on the upper center. He suggested that this may be the sort of feature I am looking for as a manufactural mark (for lack of a better term) of its actual construction as a codex.

There are a few interesting features posed by these markers. From what I can tell from the online photograph, the "A" page number could be from a different hand from the rest of the text. The top stroke of the right half of the alpha ends a bit low and round compared to the other alphas on the page. Likewise, the hand of this manuscript produces a rather crisp, confident iota. If the secondary marker in the top margin is an iota, it also doesn't match the hand of this manuscript. From what I can tell, the same is true even if it is an upsilon. If it is a slightly faded lowercase gamma, however, it would be hard to tell from which of these two hands it comes.

All this is to say that such markers as are found in this margin, if truly coming from a different hand, could be assessed as marks of manufacture. I am a bit at a loss as to its actual reference. An iota perhaps marking this as the first quire of ten sheets (40 pages)? This would be a bit bulky, but possible. A gamma marking 3 sheet quires (12 sheets)? This comes closer to the classic octavo pattern of book-binding, much more amenable to early binding materials than larger quires.

Disclaimer: I am simply musing here with no firsthand knowledge of this actual manuscript, and a basic grasp of these features. I am interested in actually finding some marks of manufacture, and it is interesting to muse about the features described above from this perspective. Any corrections to the above is greatly appreciated, if not requested. If anything, take this post just as a link to the Penn project.

UK Holdings in the Kurzgefasste Liste

2006-05-24T02:32:00.000-07:00

I have completed a list of any and all items in the KL that are held at UK institutions, including lectionaries (though I have had a harder time verifying the location of those half-dozen on the antiquities market or in private collections). As the list is 30 pages long, cross-referenced by location, I will not post it here but simply offer it to anyone who is interested. Just reply to this topic indicating your interest and I can email it to you.

Scottish Postgraduate Conference In Theology and Religious Studies

2006-05-08T08:20:00.000-07:00

On June 8, New College is hosting the Scottish PG. Conference in Theology and Religious Studies. I have never attended one of these, so I don't quite know what to expect. But I did toss an abstract into the mix and it was accepted. I am looking forward to using the occasion as a chance to outline the broad strokes of some secondary research I have been doing here in Edinburgh through the following short paper:

Book Culture in Early Christianity: Text, Technology, and Early
Christian Theology

Recent advances in codicology and the history of literacy in early Christianity offer new paradigms for the study of early Christian origins and New Testament theology. This paper will summarize key historical propositions from these fields of scholarship and the nature of their relation to early Christian faith and practice. Much of the data concerning the writing culture of early Christianity, scribal practices in antiquity, and literacy rates in different areas of the Roman Empire has been part of New Testament studies for quite some time, but the means by which this data can deepen our appreciation of the development and spread of early Christian theology has not. This paper will propose several ways in which these rich fields of study can affect New Testament criticism and interpretation.

I did not have room in the abstract to toss in a sentence or two on my introduction to the paper, but I have been increasingly struck by how analogous the period of transition from scroll to codex in Greco-Roman culture is to our contemporary limbo between written and online publishing. In each historical context you have an authority granted to one medium or technology that is only slowly being granted to the other. Part of this textual transition is a complete redefinition of publishing, writing, and reading, and the cultural or semiotic authority that attends these activities. At the very least, thinking of a few early Christian scribal tendencies from this perspective is provocative. I won't have the time on this occasion to explore that thought in great detail, but perhaps at another conference.

Day Conference on TC and the NA Text (3 of 3)

2006-05-05T01:03:00.000-07:00

NA 28 - The First Digital Critical Edition of the Greek New Testament.

Klaus Wachtel

This final paper was primarily connected with a series of Power Point slides, which makes it difficult to summarize here. The INTF should consider publishing an introductory volume or CD for the CBGM, NA 28, and related projects that includes the visual presentations that were part of this conference. Such a volume would help articulate the finer points of the CBGM to specialists, and serve as a helpful introductory volume to new users of the NA text. I could imagine taking one or two class periods in an intermediate level NT Greek class to walk students through some of this same information.

Wachtel started by pointing out that the digital NA 28 is not exactly the "first" digital or online edition of the Greek New Testament, as there are several out there currently available for use. I think it is worth pointing out though that the projected digital NA 28 has been designed on such a grand scale that it will set a new bar for online Biblical Studies resources. The innovative thing about the NA 28 is that in all actuality, its content is and always has been digital. The print format, akin to the NA 27, is simply a reader-friendly format of its digital source. The INTF has brought the NT into the information age by monopolizing on this new status of written "texts" that by now is standard in the publishing industry. And as they have shifted what would normally just become a printed repository of these digital databases (the printed NA 28) into an online, flexibly searchable, and endlessly clickable resource, the claim that it is in some sense the "first" online critical Greek New Testament does hold water.

The NA 28 Prototype

The current prototype gives one a basic sense of the permanent design. It turns all words, variants, and other such isolated bits of information that make up the critical apparatus into XML entities that pop-up when clicked. Imagine for a moment looking at the entry in the critical apparatus for 1 John 1:4 in the NA 27 and being able to instantly access all the relevant information about its variants in several different ways. This is what the digital NA 28 is all about. One can click on each word and look at all of its extant variants in a column on the right. One could then click on a particular manuscript that features a reading for 1 John 1:4, such as the 04 manuscript, and on a new screen pops up the relevant section of 1 John 1:4 (1 John 1:2-10 in this case) directly transcribed from the 04 original manuscript. Wnat to see the reading of 03 on 1 John 1:4? No problem. Click it and up pops Vaticanus. And once in this screen, one can click on any word in the Vaticanus transcription to find out how it compares to other manuscript witnesses.

This is just one example of the flexibility of the entire system. Currently, only 1 and 2 John are available in a sample format, but we are definitely looking at a new generation of Greek New Testament publishing. Ultimately, one will be able to select what windows are on the screen, and thus tailor the system to their research needs. The timing of when this will be completely available is uncertain, and it may be sold as part of a package with the printed NA 28 edition.

The Transcripts

A secondary resource also available online, is the Transcripts section of the database. In order for the NA 28 prototype to function, it must have the text of every NT manuscript transcribed directly into it. For the INTF, this transcription process takes place in three stages, and all single inscriptions are done intially by two different people. What we are then left with is (for the sake of argument) an accurate transcription of all of our fragments in a searchable format.

The Transcriptions database is searchable in two main ways. One can first search verse by verse through the NT and look at all the manuscript variants of a particular text. In this new window, one can either then access the actual transcription of each manuscript for this verse or look at a collation of the original spellings of the variants related to the verse. Another way to use the Transcriptions database is simply to click on the drop down "Manuscript Descriptions" menu on the main page of the database. From this menu one can select a manuscript and look at a detailed description if its content, size, location, and even a related bibliography. Eventually, the INTF would like for this information to occupy one side of the page while having an actual digital image of each manuscript on the other. This would also be possible then for each verse as well. Want to see the transcription of p64 next to an actual image of the fragment? No problem, just click it. This image would come directly from the servers of its host institution.

Conclusion

There are several other potential projects linked to these two databases, such as an online textual commentary, searchable groups of patristic citation, more paleographical notations, and the integration of a Greek Lexicon. Syriac, Coptic, and Latin resources could also become available. I am not sure what the timeline on all this is, but I can not imagine it is in the near future.

There is a final way in which the digital NA 28 can be concieved of as the "first" of its kind. Apparently, the final database will be available as part of the printed edition of the NA 28. This may involve an access CD or a code that provides access to the database, but either way the printed and online editions will initially exist as different formats of each other. What happens though in the future when the INTF decides to alter particular readings (such as happened between the NA 27 and Editio Critica Maior), or happens upon additional manuscript sources for a particular verse? Naturally, the digital nature of the online version will make it easy for such changes to occur.

Yet, this poses an interesting problem for the print edition, as such changes would render it relatively obselete in relation to its online twin. Perhaps the key feature of the NA 28 does not necessarily just involve the incredible flexibility of its digital component. Rather, when I put my money down on the counter for the printed NA 28 I will not actually paying for a text, but for the scholarship behind the text. And I will be paying to have access to the scholarship that may uncover new readings or manuscripts that will then be available in the online database. Buying the NA 28 will be more of a subscription than a purchase.

Again, the timeline on all of this is a bit fuzzy. Strutwolf quipped that he hopes to see the Editio Critica Maior done in his lifetime. As he is older than I, that means I have a very good chance at using all these resources some day. This paper concluded the conference, and I hope that the Center for the Study of Christian Origins will have another day conference of this sort next year.

Day Conference on TC and the NA Text (2 of 3)

2006-05-01T01:36:00.000-07:00

Alexandrian, Western, Byzantine? The Theory of Local Text-Types - A Plea For Paradigm Shift in New Testament Textual Research.

Holger Strutwolf

In this second paper of the day conference we recieved a heavy dose of a few theoretical considerations at work behind the various projects related to the new NA databases. It was very helpful to look at the NA 28 and the Editio Critica Maior from this perspective as it served two convenient aims. Strutwolf situated these projects and the CBGM in the broader history of NT text criticism, and he demonstrated the potential they have for founding new paragigms in textual research.

The paper was outlined in three sections (these points are in paraphrase):

I. Essentials of the History of the Recension Hypothesis.
II. Reasons This Theory is Faulty.
III. Ways the Editio Critica Maior Embodies Necessary Theoretical Changes.

I. In the first section Strutwolf handily summarized the history of the Recension Hypothesis starting with Bengel, and then working through Griesbach, Semler, Westcott and Hort, and von Soden. In the introduction to his 1734 text, Bengel hypothesized that we should adopt the regions mentioned by Jerome and Tertullian as the broad outlines of the text-type groups manifest in our extant manuscripts. This basic notion of Bengel's Recension Hypothesis was taken up by Semler, and then popularized by Griesbach in his 1775 edition. The history of the RH is basically the history of variations on Bengel's theme. Different scholars used different nomenclature for various recensions, and retooled Bengel's original regional groupings. But by and large, the idea that we should assign manuscripts to one of a set number of geographical recensions held fast. Strutwolf suggested that the basic fault of Bengel's hypothesis is as material as it is methodological. As he simply didn't have enough manuscripts to critically discern different text-types, he was far too reliant on Jerome's attestation. It is a construct that stands or falls based on the accuracy of Jerome's comment which can be attributed to a number of things other than objective historiography. For example, Strutwolf commented that perhaps his partitioning early Christianity into three main areas of influence is colored by a trinitarian theology. Yet one of the long-standing durabilities of the RH is its simplicity, and it has become no less than axiomatic in NT textual research as a result.

II. The Editio Critica Maior is a crisis for the RH. Utilizing the flexible visualizing capabilities of the CBGM and its related databases, Strutwolf walked us through a number of texts which contradict the idea that we can draw such hard and fast lines between text-types and their according geographical locations. To this end, Strutwolf made two points in this section raised by manuscript evidence made clearer by the unique capacities of the CBGM.

- Firstly, when you look at the role manuscripts from different text-types play in genealogical coherence, the RH crumbles. We begin to see differing text-types showing up in stemmatic diagrams in places they shouldn't according to the RH, as their genealogical coherence displays textual interaction and ancestry where the RH attempts to make hard and fast regional distinctions. (Sorry I don't have any specifics on this, you really have to see the slides Strutwolf was using to get a detailed sense of his argument.) This leads us to a basic principle that we must privilege the role a manuscript plays in the genealogy of a text rather than its pre-concieved text type. Such roles are most properly assessed via the CBGM.
- Secondly, when one looks at the regional statistics (Sahidic, old Latin, Peshitta, etc...) of the manuscripts within the stemma for a particular reading, one can often see different text-types appearing in single regions. Simply based on these stastics, it doesn't seem that assigning sets of manuscript idiosyncracies to particular regions a priori is a legitimate critical enterprise. We can find any given set of "recensional" characteristics in any region throughout the transmission histories of certain texts. (Strutwolf demonstrated, for example, that we can see the characteristics of the Alexandrian tradition all over the place.)

These two general points are evidence that any reliance on the RH is unacceptable, as it doesn't fit our most current manuscript evidence.

III. Strutwolf then called for an abandonment of the text-type paradigm. In its place we should rely on the type of evidence produced by the CBGM. In a charming analogy, Strutwolf explained that his children are his children no matter where they live. Even if they are currently in Munich, they are his children based on their genetic relationship. In the same way the geographical location of a manuscript is not indicative of its ancestry. The place of origin and/or storage of a manuscript is nothing other than an indication of where it was last used. Instead we should assess the text-type of a manuscript based on its genealogical relationship to other manuscripts.

All the papyri from Egypt, for example, display a great deal of supposed "recensions" or text-types in one given region. And we have early Christian writers such as Origen who seem content with using a number of different text-types at the same time in one location. After an accumulation of such evidences, Strutwolf exclaimed that we are now in a "thrilling time" for NT textual criticism. We now have the tools and know-how available to initiate "a radical transformation of New Testament textual history." Even if one reads Strutwolf's paper in light of related points made by Colwell and Epp in equally paradigmatic essays, it actually was "thrilling" to see some of his evidences visualized by the CBGM and its databases. It did become apparent throughout the course of this essay that just as Strutwolf is able to conduct a wholesale appraisal of the RH and its affect on NT text criticism, so in the near future will one be able to conduct an appraisal of the CBGM as an apex of past genealogical methods and identify its pros and cons from that perspective.

Highlights from the Q and A Session:

1. When one looks at the stemmatic diagrams produced by the CBGM, we find certain single manuscripts cited as ancestors for a larger group of manunscripts through one or two other single manuscripts (completely hypothetical example: you will have a branch from 663 leading to 754 which then leads to another level of numerous manuscripts). How are we to then discern whether 754 or 663 is the most probable ancestor for this branch of the stemma?

Rather conveniently, Wachtel pointed out that even if one were to switch 754 and 663 (in this hypothetical example), the structure of the stemma would still remain the same. We can still argue about the fine details of probable ancestors for given readings, but the CBGM does produce more accurate structural outlines of manuscript transmission than we have had in the past.

2. Shouldn't we then switch from the geographical labels of the RH to something like "text-type 1," "text-type 2," usw...

No, because this approach still retains the basic notion that we need to seperate out text-types. We still could not legitimately draw a line between text-type 1, 2 and 3 when faced with the evidence of the CBGM. We simply need to confine our discussion of manuscript variants within the specific context of the transmission history of a given text.

3. What are some of the broader hermeneutical backgrounds to the CBGM?

Strutwolf did start his answer by recognizing that it is impossible to conduct any sort of criticism without some sort of hermeneutical bias. But, the CBGM is a relatively neutral tool in this respect. It features no ideological perspective on the text of the NT, and seems to circumvent the Bengelian fiddling with manuscript evidence which led to the RH by virtue of its raw statistical nature.

4. (My poorly worded question.) With the RH we had a starting place with discussing manuscript variants, namely the labels assigned to them a priori based on geography. But where then is our starting point with the CBGM? It seems that we are limited to talking only about the textual tradition of single texts, such as James, or 2 Peter. With such a starting point, we can't talk about the textual tradition of the Johannine Corpus as a whole, as we could with the RH. Rather, we can only talk about 1 John in isolation, GJohn in isolation, etc...

Yes. We have to start over with each book and develop their transmission histories in isolation. We cannot speak of a Luke/Acts transmission history. Only a Luke and an Acts transmission history.

I wish we had more time during the session to address this final point, as it raises the question as to how Strutwolf's hypothesis relates to the history of early Christianity. He did state that he sees in early Christianity a much broader network of textual transmission than the RH permits. If we can find all these different text-types existing in what are supposed to be the scribal and theological centers of early Christianity, then we must assume a different social structure than is often presupposed. Thus, while the CBGM presents itself as a neutral tool in terms of hermeneutical ideology, it does at the very least suggest a vision of early Christian geographical relationships that cuts against the grain of current models which position early Christian communities in relative textual isolation (thus resulting in historical constructs like "Johannine Christianity"). Here is a point of contact between the CBGM and the study of early Christian origins that really needs to be explored.

Day Conference on TC and the NA Text (1 of 3)

2006-04-27T12:07:00.000-07:00

On April 27, the Center for the Study of Christian Origins hosted a day conference here at New College featuring two scholars from the Institute fur neutestamentliche Textforschung. This laser-focused and well-recieved set of three papers from Klaus Wachtel and Holger Strutwolf garnered a fantastic amount of applause after the final Q and A, undoubtedly setting a new record for applause recieved by a paper delivered at New College. It may be that whatever tacit social cue that enables a group to stop clapping in a timely manner simply eluded us for a moment, or it may be that everyone else enjoyed the papers as much as I did. Let's just assume the latter. For me, the most beneficial aspect of the short conference was the clear visual and theoretical explanation of the primary features of projects related to the print and digitial versions of NA 28 and the Editio Critica Maior. After getting it straight from the INTF, I feel far more capable in my use of NA databases and look forward to having their full package in the far future.

Over the next three posts I will summarize the three papers and a few points of interest from their Q and A sessions. I might as well take this chance to address a few questions that Wachtel and Strufwolf did not have time to answer fully.

Reconstructing the Intitial Text in the Editio Critica Maior of the New Testament Using the Coherence-Based Genealogical Method.

Klaus Wachtel

Introduction

This first paper was by far the most challenging of the three, and served two functions. Wachtel first used some very helpful visual guides to introduce us to the mechanics of the digital NA prototype. After immersing us in the logic of its promising design, he then turned to a lengthy description of the critical process that lies behind this new resource. Wachtel pointed out that the Editio Critica Maior of the Catholic Epistles features 23 different readings from the NA 27 text, and as the Catholic Epistles are the only texts currently published in the series, one may extrapolate this to predict the amount of changes that may be in place once the entire NT canon has been evaluated. Thus even at this early stage, the fruit of the Editio Critica Maior's detailed labor is readily apparent and is becoming accessible online.

Section 1: The Resource

In the first section, Wachtel led us step by step through the remarkable features of the digitial NA prototype, that will someday be blessed with the full resources of the Editio Critica Maior. With perhaps his only nod to classic text critical principles, he raised the point that text criticism has two tasks: publishing the evidence of manuscript transmission, and reconstructing the original text. The prototype aims at fulfilling the first task by being a remarkably flexible repository for all the transmission data behind every NT manuscript variant, more on this in the third paper.

Section 2: The Methodology

In the second section, Wachtel addressed the second task in a brief introduction to the complicated Coherence-Based Genealogical Method. It seems that the most basic unique feature of both the prototype and the CBGM is that they allow the two tasks of text criticism (publishing transmission evidence, reconstructing the orgiginal text) to interface at every level of critical inquiry. While the CBGM is a process that potentially enables us to make more definitive decisions regarding variant NT readings, it is also a database of coherence-based genealogies that can be visualized and assessed in a variety of formats. Thus there is a constant interaction in this method between the actual publishing of variants in a database format and the actual use of these variants in constructing the most probable original text.

Much more could be said about this that I will reserve for future comment, but suffice it to say now that my initial impression is that the CBGM exists as a result of the use of emerging database technology, and certain emerging database technologies have taken shape based on the inherent logic to the CBGM. Perhaps it is this link between technology and praxis which has long been discussed in the work of Vattimo, McLuhan, Postman and others that is re-shaping our perspective on NT text criticism rather than any particular ideology or material discovery. This technological distinctive is what distinguishes the CBGM from other genealogical methods.

As far as the actual Coherence-Based Genealogical Method is concerned, I will thankfully defer to Gerd Mink's online introduction. At first the CBGM seems a bit more technically complicated than other genealogical methods, but it does result in elegant renderings of large amounts of manuscript data. Mink's introduction can be distilled into two points (quoting from the above link):

1. Elements of a genealogical hypothesis are not the manuscripts but the states of the text that they convey and that may be far older than the respective manuscript. The text with its respective state will be referred to here as witness, not the manuscript.

2. A hypothesis is called a stemma if it links witnesses or variants genealogically. For a hypothesis about a genealogical connection not only the connection itself but its quality is relevant. This quality has to be documented by adequate data. This complexity is integrated into this understanding of stemma. Consequently, a stemma in the sense of a graphical connection of witnesses is merely a simplified representation of a stemma in the more complex sense.

I will leave you to read the rest of Mink's introduction at your leisure, as these two introductory points are sufficient for the moment. Wachtel pointed out that this method is specifically geared towards the idiosyncracies of our current NT manuscript holdings. While there is a great wealth of NT manuscripts available, there are also far more that haven't survived. This bald fact makes it difficult for us to connect early manuscripts with later readings without relying on a fair bit of conjecture. On the other hand we must be clear that all surviving witness are related to each other in some fashion, there are always elements of coherence. Contamination simply "emerges from those texts at the disposal of the scribe." This leaves us with the working principle of establishing the genealogy of a reading based on every extant permutation of that text through hypotheses represented stemmatically. In these various print and online projects, the INTF has become uniquely capable of such representations.

The trickier areas of the CBGM involve discerning between pre-genealogical and genealogical coherence, and navigating prior and posterior variance within a given stemma. I don't have the clearest grasp of some of these finer points, but the method allows one to establish the potential anscestors of broad groups of variants for a particular reading and work one's way back to the most probable ancestor for the entire group of readings. The most probable ancestor is usually a relatively small group of manuscripts that can thus be regarded as closest to the original text. I hope that these stemmatic diagrams for key NT variants will be published as an additional resource, as they enable very efficient insight into textual relationships and grant easy access into the legwork behind the Editio Critica Maior.

Conclusion

Wachtel had an excellent slide that visually summarized the CBGM, but essentially it is a system of checks and balances between Internal Criteria (explantions for given variants) and External Criteria (pre-concieved text critical ideologies and pre-genealogical coherence). Both Internal and External Criteria establish local stemmata, then genealogical coherence within these stemmata, and then revise our preconcieved notions regarding any particular reading which leads to clarified relationships between manuscript variants. But as the CBGM is a methodology both linked to and part of a database, we are constantly able to revise our External Criteria based on the evidences of Internal Criteria. And we are also able to consistently reapply our revised External Criteria to the stemmatic diagramming of particular readings. It is a completely iterative process.

To conclude, Wachtel made two points regarding the methodology:

1. One problem with text criticism is the intrusion of subjective reasoning when gaps in the data emerge. In the CBGM, however, some of the more subjective elements involved with establishing geneaological coherence is offset by the presence of the objective facts of pre-genealogical coherence that are represented in this set of statistical databases.
2. The Editio Critica Maior has been criticized for not having many differences from N-A 27. But the CBGM is not just a "mopping up exercise" of clarifying and supporting existent readings based on this brilliant new database. The CBGM shows us what we are actually dealing with in terms of variants in a variety of statistical and visual formats, and shows us that we are dealing with probabilities rather than certainties. Wacthel didn't say this, but my impression is that while they are probabilities, they are darn good ones and far more helpful than the "certainties" of past text critical enterprises. The CBGM is simply "a tool that allows us to be coherent in our argument."

Q and A session
(This is just a sampling.)

1. How does the "original text" or "reconstructed text" relate to the most probable ancestors of a given reading? Are they on the same footing?

No, the most probable ancestor is a hypothetical stemmatic rendering of all the extant data. But, it does best explain the variants. The "ancestor" is a hypothesis of what the texts looked like before transmission.

2. What about where the uthor himself makes a spelling or grammar error, and thus the "ancestor" will be incorrect even if original?

In the Editio Critica Maior of James there are 15 points at which such situations are simply referred to as "lacunae." There is allowance in the process that the original text had spelling or grammar errors. (And it seems that the CBGM is very capable of charting the inevitable corrections stemmatically. This is another point at which the CBGM is simply a way of constructing more coherent transmission histories.)

Top Ten Online Biblical Studies Resources

2006-04-20T00:41:00.000-07:00

I don't suppose these are in any particular order, and they are definitely not arranged by frequency of use. I am, though, particularly keen on the first few. For this list I have selected websites that serve as helpful Biblical Studies resources because they monopolize on convenient features of the internet. For some of these resources, form is function and vice-versa. The internet has granted us access to a remarkable number of Biblical and related texts in tagged, translated, and searchable forms. Some sites have managed to transpose this material to the internet environment better than others. The internet has also given us instant access to images of papyri and other manuscripts that were previously only available in grainy, expensive photos or microfiche. Some of these online collections now even provide focusing and imaging tools that make even the amateur paleographer a potential expert. There are also now audio and visual materials on Biblical texts and history that were previously too unwieldy to collate outside of museum or archive settings.

1. Digital Nestle-Aland prototype

For a long time I thought of Tony Fisher's Greek New Testament as the bee's knees. Based on the NA 26 it simply could not be beaten for instant ease of use. But unfortunately this resource may be reduced to a zipped .tar file in the near future. Thankfully, the University of Muenster INTTR has raised the bar with their Digital Nestle-Aland prototype. This resource has a fairly steep learning curve, but a helpful guide will ease you into the process. A key feature of this ("yet another") online GNT is what amounts to a very handy toolbar that enables one to browse the entire critical apparatus (both the variants and the NA positive apparatus) behind a given text click by click. Unfortunately, the only text currently available in this system is 1 John. The Digital NA also works in tandem with the NT transcripts prototype, a somewhat more simplified database that allows one to work text by text and word for word through the NA 27 apparatus. Once this has evolved beyond the prototype stage it is hard to imagine something more efficient.

2. Perseus.

Perseus is like the Yankees of online Biblical Studies resources, always everyone's favorite. They are well-stacked, have LSJ on the mound, and the deepest bench in the league as far as primary and secondary resources go. One's first few forays into Perseus can be a bit intimidating, and it is helpful to spend the time getting the right fonts configured for the system, but it is eventually worth it.

3. Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon

Just take a look at this page, and click on "search the CAL databases" for an example of how helpful this site can be. There are assorted lexicons and search features there, but if you click on "texts" you can see the incredible range of Aramaic/Syriac texts available, most of which come with a brief morphological analysis pop-up. The "Targumic Studies Module" is a virtual cheat sheet for various Targums, and it includes an online version of Sokoloff's A Dictionary of Jewish Palestinian Aramaic. The only drawback to the site is its unfortunate design, and if viewed on high-resolution (as most monitors are these days), the Hebrew/Aramaic fonts can be a bit tiny. If granted a redesign, the CAL could be a very helpful research hub.

4. Excepting Willker's Online Images and Decker's MSS photos one would be hard-pressed to find a listing of all manuscript photos online. (Mark Goodacre brings many of them together at Text Criticism: Online Images.) As some of these sites have a few broken links, and there are certainly a few more fragments online now than are represented by them, it may be time for a massive update. There are a few places intent on producing large online databases of high-resolution digital manuscript photos, such as The Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts. But until then the laudable efforts of Willker, Decker, and Goodacre will have to suffice.

5. Four-Color Synopsis

In the real world, I am still joined to the hip with my NA Synopsis. But in the virtual world I have enjoyed using this pleasant synopsis by Carlson. Its design is helpful and gives one a sense of getting the big picture fairly quickly due to its colorful arrangement.

6. Audio GNT

A cousin to Greek and Latin Audio Online, this remarkably helpful teaching aid makes great use of the flexibility of the internet. Voiced by Marilyn Phemister, I will require all future 1st year Greek students to sleep with this cd playing. There is a cd set available by Jonathan Pennington that takes one through NT Greek vocabulary, but Audio GNT uniquely permits one to be an audience to what usually is an object of study.

7. Morphological Analysis of the LXX

One of many helpful resources on the UPenn servers is this little gem. I recommend printing out the file that explains the tagging system, but once one gets used to it this resource becomes a searchable analytical titan as far as online LXX studies are concerned.

8. Net Bible

There are a lot of online bibles out there. I consistently recommend this one to professionals and lay-people simply due to its user-friendly apparatus that tracks translation choices made verse by verse. Not only is it a good translation, but its running textual commentary seems designed to key scholars into NetBible's rationale as well as giving the layperson an insider's glimpse into how a text makes it from the original languages into English.

9. Google Scholar

This tool has turned out to be handier that it initially seemed, and not just for vanity searches. It can provide a bird's eye view over disciplines outside of one's speciality as well as specific bibliographic details of essays, papers, and lectures. As more and more scholarly material becomes part of the internet, this resource is going to become handier every month.

10. Ancient Maps of Jerusalem or Handbook of Biblical Numismatics

If you are as dorky as I am, then you will spend ages scouring the Ancient Maps of Jerusalem, scratching your heads for lost bits of schoolboy Latin and just generally having a good time. And even better, you can brag about the Handbook of Biblical Numismatics on your next date, see how well that goes over. But if I learned anything from working in the rare book room at Trinity International Unversity and stumbling across a copy of Gleason Archer's "A Descriptive Catalog of the Trinity Evangelical Divinity School Biblical Coin Collection," (a rather incredible collection) it is that coins really are fascinating and we can learn quite a bit about ancient cultures through numismatics. Hopefully, this last website will convince you of this.

Online Resources

2006-04-19T05:28:00.000-07:00

General texts:
Net Bible ; Unbound Bible ; Blue Letter Bible ; Online Parallel Bible

Jewish Texts:
Early Jewish Writings ; Texts of Judaism ; Sepherot ha-Qadosh ; Mishneh ; Y. Talmud ; B. Talmud ; Talmud Trans. ; Newsletter for Targum and Cognate Studies ; The Zohar ; Bar/Bat Mitzvah tutor! ; Mikra'ot Gedolot ; Early Hebrew Printing ; Audio Hebrew Bible

LXX:
LXX ; The Septuagint Online ; Morphological LXX ; Textual Mechanics of LXX/OG

Pseudepigraphy:
Critical Pseudepigrapha

GNT:
Digital NA Proto. ; NT Transcripts Proto. ; Fisher's Analytical Greek New Testament ; The Online Greek Bible ; Zhubert ; Biblon 2000 ; Parallel GNT ; GNT/LXX ; Online GNT ; Greek/Latin Audio Online ; Audio GNT

NT Trans.:
Peshitta ; Syriac Peshitta ; Vulgate ; Vulgate

NT Resources:
NT Gateway ; Synoptic Problem ; Four Color Synopsis ; Five Gospels Parallel ; Early Christian Gospels ; NT Apocrypha ; the Paul Page

DSS:
Open Scrolls ; DSS ; Great Isaiah Scroll

Nag Hammadi:
Bibliotheque copte de Nag Hammadi ; Gnostic Society Library ; G. Thomas ; GThomas Commentary

Fathers:
Early Christian Writings ; Early Church Fathers ; More Fathers ; Ecole Initiative ; NT Cit. in CF ; NT Canon ; Canon Cross-Ref.

Papyri Coll./Images:
Carlsberg ; Schoyen ; CSAM ; JRUL ; Early Greek Bible Manuscripts Project ; Biblical Manuscripts Project ; CSNTM ; U. Penn

Man. Images:
Papyri List ; Papyri List ; Goodacre's Online Images List ; Codex Vaticanus ; Codex W (032) - Mark ; Aleppo Codex ; Leningrad Codex

Text Criticism:
TCG ; Student's Guide to Variants ; Variant Comparison ; Man. Ordered by Century ; Swanson's Errata list ; Kurz. L. Update ; Lectionaries ; Ency. of NT Textual Criticism ; Text Types ; Ancient Writing ; Byz. Paleography ; Schoyen Paleography primer ; Man. Number Conv. Table ; IAM ; OT/NT text criticism ; TC intro ; Greek Bible in G-R World ; Conversion tables ; Lectionaries ; Kenyon ; Textual Commentary ; Majority Textual Commentary

Hebrew:
Unicode Converter ; Hebrew Script ; Hebrew Cantillation Marks

Greek:
Liddell-Scott Online/Perseus ; TLG ; Homeric Lexicon ; Greek Grammar ; Classical/Koine Greek ; Unicode Converter ; Greek Lexicography

Aramaic/Syriac:
Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon ; Syriac Script Intro.

Coptic:
Coptic Lexicon ; Bohairic Lexicon ; Plumley ; Coptic Intro. ; Coptic Intro. ; Coptic Resources ; Unicode Converter ; Nova Sahidica ; Coptic GJohn

ANE
Assyrian Aramaic ; Ras Shamra ; Cuneiform Digital Library ; ABZU ; BAS ; Inscriptitfact ; Handbook of Biblical Numismatics ; WSRP ; Numismatics

Lists:
ANE ; Aramaic ; B-Greek ; G. Megillot ; Hugoye ; Iudaios-L ; TC List

Links:
Brian's Biblical Links ; DSS links ; Explorator ; Greek Manuscripts Gateway ; iTanakh ; NT Gateway ; Paleojudaica ; U. Mich. Papyrology links ; Hebrew OT Links ; Bib. Studies Carnival ; Jewish Texts and History

General:
Journal Abbreviations

Papyrus and Manuscript Images Online

2006-04-18T13:37:00.000-07:00

CSNTM

PCE

Perseus

Oxford

Yale

Duke

U.Michigan

Columbia/APIS

Koeln

Heidelberg

Heidelberg AE

Sorbonne

Jewish, Biblical, and Early Christian Texts Online

2006-04-17T03:23:00.000-07:00

Tanakh ML

Early Jewish Writings

Qumran

Mishnah

Y. Talmud

Talmud Trans.

Pseudepigrapha

Net Bible

Greek New Testament

Greek New Testament

Peshitta

Peshitta

Catenae

Early Church Fathers

Additional Early Church Fathers

GJudas: The Unsettling Conclusion (The Robinson Contribution)

2006-04-17T02:39:00.000-07:00

After corresponding with several people involved, checking their responses against both Robinson's book and all the insider information (the "van Rijn angle") that has been made public, I am convinced of two things: Firstly, everyone who is comfortable with actually talking about the current state of the GJudas "find" as it relates to its troubled history has said all they are going to say at this point (including Roberty, Ferrell, and Ferrini, who hasn't said anything). Secondly, there is a lot more that could be said that hasn't.

As a result of this, we can only conclude that the National Geographic press about GJudas has been hopelessly edited for public consumption and the current codicological and papyrological analysis of the GJudas manuscript is really only an analysis of what is left of the original find. The Mathematical Treatise has been split and sold off to two different collections. It is highly probable that Ferrini sold leaves from some or all of the manuscripts that were in his possession at one point, people to whom these have been purportedly sold have not been forthcoming in responding to this allegation. And of course, the Gospel of Judas has lost a bit of weight over its journey through neglect and other means.

Investigative journalism is not my metier, but it has been revealing (and somewhat more exciting than thesis research) to spend the last week sniffing through all the data relevant to this "find" and substantiating Robinson's original paper on GJudas as well as related hearsay. Now I am extremely curious as to what extent the history of NT fragment discovery is seeded with analogous skullduggery, I have simply glossed over this facet of NT textual-criticism history with the swashbuckling image of Tischendorf wheedling manuscripts out of unsuspecting monks. It also seems that this sanitized image exists as a consensus simply for lack of an alternative. Perhaps there are other major and minor finds with similar grey-market histories, and have finally landed in the hands of scholarship a few leaves or fragments short of their original condition. That sounds like a book I would read, any interested publishers please feel free to contact me for a proposal.

Roberty confirmed via email that a critical edition of the whole codex will be done May 2006, to be released the following September, including unidentifiable fragments. Over the next few weeks, more information is going to surface regarding the "who sold what when" question (see previous posts), and I will fill in the gaps in previous posts accordingly.

(Update 4/20: R. Pearse has posted this interesting piece about Robinson's involvement with the Jung Codex debacle. It makes for interesting background reading to the GJudas issue.)
(Update 4/20: The Plain Dealer is reporting that Ferrini (or at least his reciever) is coughing up a few fragments of GJudas that he had laying about. This confirms our suspicion that he did manage to keep a few fragments and/or leaves from the manuscripts related to Codex Tchacos. Where's the rest?)

GJudas: The R. Pearse Investigation.

2006-04-14T02:28:00.000-07:00

Pearse has chronicled the details of his search for more info on the manuscripts physically related to the GJudas "find." Contact with van Rijn leads me to believe all this is correct. Here are some of the highlights:

From an anonymous source:

Everything except the so-called mathematical codex is in the hands of the Swiss foundation. Ferrini sold off the math codex in fragments, but I think most of it (I dare not say all) wound up in two collections, one a private collector in (I believe) Baltimore, the other the Lloyd Cotsen collection of children's literature in the Princeton University Library. It was a truly despicable act to break it up in this fashion...It has been said that all four were found together. But I am inclined to be skeptical about such a claim, unless there is irrefutable evidence for it. This question was not raised in 1983, and I have not read Herb Krosney's book to see what he has to report from his investigations into the provenance.

I am still having trouble understanding precisely how Ferrini fits into this, but apparently I am not the only one. Pearse notes,

"...if this is correct, then something strange happened. Frieda Tchacos Nussberger sold 4 mss to Ferrini, including the codex Tchacos; Ferrini didn't pay for at least the latter; Frieda then recovered the codex Tchacos. Ferrini sold the Mathematical Codex. Frieda (i.e. Roberty) acquires the other two. Is it really possible that Ferrini paid Frieda for the Exodus and Paul; then Frieda bought them back from Ferrini? Or can we speculate that Ferrini was merely Frieda's agent for whatever he could sell, and returned whatever he couldn't? Who knows?"

From what I can gather, we can only say with confidence that Ferrini never paid for the codex Tchacos, even though he may have sold a few leaves out of it. That latter point is conjecture though and I wouldn't want to make any false statements about the brokerage of the other texts.

More as this develops...

(Update 4/14: Pearse has posted an email response from Ferrell denying any involvement with the Exodus manuscript even though he had been linked with it rather early on. There is, however, some alleged precedent for Ferrell's involvement with such stories.)
(Update 4/14: I did recieve a possible explanation of Ferrini's involvement from an anonymous someone "in-the-know": "Ferrini, knowing he had Frieda by the balls, because of the provenance of the manuscripts, squeezed her out of the mathematical treatise and pages of the Exodus for peanuts, and Frieda, afraid to be exposed and lose the manuscripts, (Ferrini played kamikaze... all or nothing) accepted the cut up Gospel as he handed it to her.")

GJudas: The Tchacos-N./Roberty Solution.

2006-04-13T04:38:00.000-07:00

So now the NYT has picked up on this story. I bet they were reading my blog this morning. Excerpts from the article:

"I went through hell and back, and I saved something for humanity," Ms. Tchacos Nussberger said in a telephone interview. "I would have given it for nothing to someone who would have saved it."

Last week, National Geographic began a large campaign for the Gospel of Judas, featuring it in two new books, a television documentary, an exhibition and the May issue of National Geographic magazine.

The organization did not buy the document. Instead, it paid $1 million to the Maecenas Foundation, effectively for the manuscript's contents. Part of the revenues generated by the National Geographic projects go to the foundation.

The foundation was set up some years ago by Ms. Tchacos Nussberger's lawyer, Mario Roberty, well before it became involved with the Gospel of Judas. Mr. Roberty is the only official of the foundation, which he said was involved in projects like returning antiquities to their countries of origin. He said that when Ms. Tchacos Nussberger turned over the document to the foundation in 2001, he quickly contacted officials in Egypt and assured them that the manuscript would be returned there. He said the foundation had clear legal title to the document.

To quote Col. John "Hannibal" Smith: "I love it when a plan comes together!"

"'I think I was chosen by Judas to rehabilitate him,'" Ms. Tchacos Nussberger, 65, is quoted as saying in one of the society's books, "The Lost Gospel," by Herbert Krosney. Mr. Krosney is also an independent television producer who brought the gospel project to National Geographic.

Missing from the book is any mention of an incident in 2001 when Ms. Tchacos Nussberger was detained in Cyprus at the request of Italian officials, who wanted to question her as part of a broader investigation into antiquities that had been illegally taken out of Italy and sold elsewhere. Paolo Ferri, the Rome-based prosecutor in the case, said she was charged with several violations involving antiquities but was given a reduced sentence that was suspended because she had, among other things, previously agreed to return an artifact claimed by Italy.

I am willing to bet that the "van Rijn angle" is also missing from Krosney's book.

Then in 2001, Ms. Tchacos Nussberger sold it to an antiquities dealer in Ohio for $2.5 million, but the deal fell apart when the dealer did not make good on the payments.

There is Ferrini again, but according to Ferrini it was more a matter of questions concerning the provenance (which the Yale reps also had) than a cash issue. Given the reports concerning his bankruptcy, it may have been a bit of both.

All in all, I am not quite sure why the NYT overlooked Robinson's book and involvement with exposing some of this information, it is an important part of the story. I still have problems with the claim that National Geographic is sponsoring a full codicological OR papyrological analysis of this manuscript. They simply don't have enough of it to make a comprehensive assessment.

GJudas: The Michel van Rijn Angle.

2006-04-13T01:39:00.000-07:00

The Angle

(Disclaimer: I am simply summarizing here what I have gleaned from van Rijn and others, as I haven't yet read Robinson's book on the same subject, I am not quite clear on what really are the details. Read this as "historical fiction," if you will, kind of like The Da Vinci Code.)

Michel van Rijn brought the possibility of fraudulent dealing behind the GJudas sale to the public's attention via the infamous Artnews all the way back in 2001 (Well, as public as possible for a site that Google doesn't refer to. Please see James M. Robinson's paper linked in a previous post that covers some of this same material and adds in a few wrinkles.) In his first comment on the news item, in Jan. 2001, he hears about Ferrini's initial attempt to purchase this set of six manuscripts. By Sep. 2001, van Rijn uncovers a bit more information and reveals that the manuscript deal he had been tracking in Jan. through Roberty was actually been stolen from a dealer named Hanna in Egypt and smuggled into Geneva years ago before being sent to a safety-deposit box in New York. Then in Dec. 2001, van Rijn finds out that despite this information becoming public Roberty and Tchacos are trying to sell it to a US dealer, who I assume is Bruce Ferrini, it has since come to light that a few others were also approached. There is nothing until Dec. 2004, when van Rijn summarizes the whole affair in light of all the information he has gathered so far, even bringing us up to date with the parallel efforts of Kasser and Charles Hedrick to translate and publicize the text. With Hedrick's permission van Rijn uploaded some of these early images and translations.

So in van Rijn's narration we start with the stolen and smuggled manuscript from Egypt, seen by Tchacos in 1982, which then makes its way to a safety-deposit box in New York. I am not a curator, but that may not be the best place for a manuscript of this sort. The orginal owner of the manuscript, Hanna, then reclaims it and tries to sell it again in 1990 until Tchacos eventually picks it up for $300,000. Her efforts then to sell it off to others brings it into Bruce Ferrini's orbit in 1999 and apparently later in 2001. Ferrini pops up in Henk Sutton's article on GJudas translated from the Dutch by van Rijn:

"Ferrini suspects that in the meantime several single pages of the manuscript were put on the market. 'When I saw the work for the first time in 1999, only 25 pages remained intact, so at least half of them were missing. I cannot be absolutely sure if the manuscript was found incomplete or if its writing was never finished. But from time to time new pages would appear. Five or six different documents in total without page numbers, it was just a mess.' Ferrini hesitated for a long time. He signed the deal, but then refrained from purchasing. 'Frieda and Roberty could not provide him with any clear indication about its origin. We didn't buy the manuscript, because we didn't buy their story.'"

This explanation at least provides a plausible excuse for Ferrini's "stalling" that Roberty records in the emails below. Eventually, the Maecenas Foundation (a nice way of saying "Tchacos and Roberty") turns to alternative solutions and with Kasser's efforts this find then becomes National Geographic's cashcow. As it turns out, Tchacos actually bought the manuscript from its original owner and not its subsequent smuggler who showed it to her the first time, good thing she didn't buy it back then. Because of this, I wonder if van Rijn's original indictment of her still stands. Unless I am missing something. And now the codex will soon be back in Egypt anyway.

The Emails

The story of Michel van Rijn's involvement with the GJudas "find" is colorfully illustrated by this series of emails between van Rijn and Roberty (an initial broker of the manuscript) back in Jan. 2001 that have been faithfully recorded by Pearse here. At this point in the story Tchacos is handing over the manuscripts to Ferrini for "safekeeping." They had already been stolen, smuggled, and stashed in a safety-deposit box in Hicksville, New York for almost 20 years.

It is interesting enough to read through the emails in toto, but the gist is as follows:

Email 2. Roberty begins by suggesting a modification to van Rijn's first story about Ferrini's sale of the GJudas manuscript and related leaves and fragments. This story catalogs the contents as one codex containing the lost Gospel of Judas, the First Apocalypse of James, and the Epistle of Peter to Philip. (Henceforth known as the Tchakos Codex.) Along with this codex is the Book of Exodus in Greek, Letters of Paul in Sahidic Coptic, and a Mathematical Treatise in Greek. Whether or not these are all contained in a second codex is not stated. The suggested piece characterizes Ferrini rather negatively:

"Last fall, Zurich based antiques dealer Frieda Chakos entrusts priceless papyrus manuscripts which had been in a Bank vault in New York for almost 20 years to the “safe” facilities of Akron/Ohio based manuscript dealer Bruce P. Ferrini. She is approached by Ferrini through a middleman and doesn’t have a clue that by this time Ferrini is already in deep financial troubles. The news had not hit the papers yet. Ferrini takes advantage of the secrecy of the art-market and offers to help Frieda ‘in preserving these manuscripts for the benefit [of] mankind’"

The original piece that inspired this email can be read here, and the actual deal mentioned in this email can be read here.

Email 4: Roberty checks in again, unhappy that van Rijn has made public what he could only have possibly learned through his secret network of antiquities spies:

"Your first paragraph reveals such information that obviously could only be fed in by my side and this could make negotiations starting tomorrow (i.e. today) even more difficult. On the other hand, this quite precise technical info is of little importance or impact to the public."

Van Rijn also posted the letter that entails "Charlie's contribution" as mentioned in the email. I bet this Charles Hill, "former head of New Scotland Yard Art & Antiques Squad," has a few cool stories to tell.

Email 5: Further vilification of Ferrini ensues as Roberty encounters complications in actually getting the cash for the sale from Ferrini. (It is still not clear why Ferrini was not forthcoming with the payment, there are three options: Ferrini didn't have the money. Ferrini was worried about the provenance. Ferrini was seeing what he could obtain and sell with only paying as little as possible.) Roberty claims:

The overdue payment has been done because of a confusion with dealings Bruce has with Bill Veres. Bill claims Bruce owing him money and pretends having paid Frieda on behalf on Bruce USD 90" (which is not true !) and Bruce claims Bill owing him lots of money. Bill had introduced Bruce to Frieda and pretends to be his partner. At the same time he pretends feeling responsible towards Frieda for the mess she is in. For reasons completely independent of Bruce, Bill owes Frieda about USD 150". All this confusion is basically bullshit and is being used by Bruce just to avoid payment. By the way, he pretends that the sales price obtained by Sam Fogg is not of USD 900" and that the sale was not to Thompson.

We know now though from Henk Schutten's article that Ferrini's hesitancy may be plausibly explained by van Rijn's original warning: "You buy? You touch? You will be prosecuted! And damned..." Which apparently is arts and antiquities dealer lingo for: "the provenance of this manuscript is uncertain." This was certainly why others didn't buy the manuscripts after previous offers.

The Point

All this is to say that that the National Geographic version of events seems to be fairly sanitized:

The codex, containing the Gospel of Judas, was discovered in the 1970s near El Minya, Egypt, and moved from Egypt to Europe to the United States. Once in the United States, it was kept in a safe-deposit box for 16 years on Long Island, New York, until antiquities dealer Frieda Nussberger-Tchacos bought it in April 2000. After two unsuccessful resale attempts, Nussberger-Tchacos----alarmed by the codex's rapidly deteriorating state----transferred it to the Maecenas Foundation for Ancient Art in Basel, Switzerland, in February 2001, for restoration and translation. The manuscript will be delivered to Egypt and housed in Cairo's Coptic Museum.

Several pages of the Gospel of Judas as well as pages from the other three texts in the codex will be on exhibit at National Geographic Society headquarters in Washington, D.C., beginning Friday, April 7, 2006, for a limited engagement. After Kasser and his team complete conserving and translating the manuscript, the codex will be given to Egypt, where it will be housed in Cairo's Coptic Museum.

While this version nicely ties up all the loose ends and cuts through some of the gaps left in van Rijn's thrilling reportage, it doesn't quite fit the facts. Or at least it fits the fewest, nicest facts possible. They would have been better served ditching the "this manuscript will revolutionize our understanding of early Christianity" angle and just publicizing its remarkable backstory. At least that way they could have sold the rights to the story to Universal.

UPDATE 4/14: National Geographic does have a version of the tangled story of the Tchacos Codex posted, and while it is an admirable attempt to spin what are otherwise much less saccharine facts, it still doesn't deal with the problems raised by the "van Rijn angle."

You can read much of this information from Artnews on R. Pearse's exhaustive page. I believe he is at work tracking down exactly what is happening with the other five texts that are related to the GJudas manuscript, more on that later. Any corrections on this post are invited and appreciated.

GJudas: The Mr. Bruce Ferrini File.

2006-04-12T11:12:00.000-07:00

I hit the jackpot here with what appears to be a few more archived articles, and then a purported list of all fragments and such sold by Ferrini on Ebay until January 2006. He has enough Coptic fragments that Pearse's link (see previous post) could really be to any text.

There is some interesting commentary at the bottom, which provides a little backstory to Ferrini's collection on Ebay:

Late in 2005 Bruce P. Ferrini, an antiquities dealer in Akron OH, declared bankruptcy and began to offer items from his collections on eBay. A significant percentage of these offerings were papyri -- cartonnage as well as fragments in demotic, coptic, greek and arabic -- along with some related items on linen and lead. Without knowing, or being able to find out, how extensive the collection might be, I began to catalog the items offered and to offload the (generally excellent) images that were provided. My hope was that although the materials would end up with a large number of purchasers, presumably mostly private, it would still be possible to know what items had been sold and possibly to trace their distribution. I also bid on some pieces, especially cartonnage, to use in an upcoming seminar on papyrology at the University of Pennsylvania as well as to have on hand for study.

I am not quite sure who the "I" is here. I have a great guess, but it is a bit confusing towards the end of the webpage. Extremely interesting nonetheless.

(Update: The UPenn. page is by Dr. Robert Kraft. What a great idea to keep a record of where all these fragments have gone.)
(Update 4/18: The Beacon-Journal has published a lengthy biography of Ferrini. It is a tale of woe, and...validates the "van Rijn angle.")

GJudas: Ancient Coptic Manuscripts on Ebay? The Mysterious Case of Mr. Bruce Ferrini, Et Al.

2006-04-12T09:16:00.000-07:00

An Answer

I just stumbled across this post from Chris Weimer's blog, which really answers my question from yesterday concerning the other manuscripts physically related to the Gospel of Judas (physically related as a "manuscript" not socio-historically as a "text," though ultimately there may not be a difference in this case). Here he relays some information from the mysterious van Rijn via the incredible Roger Pearse (who is emerging is a bit of a hero in the midst of all this misdirected publicity) from a peculiar message board. In one frightfully helpful post, Pearse says:

"Few people seem to be aware that the codex containing the ps.Gospel of Judas came with a second codex containing further texts:

- the 'Book of Exodus' in Greek
- 'Letters of Paul' in Sahidic dialect and a
- 'Mathematical Treatise' in Greek.

Yesterday I wrote to art dealer Michel van Rijn, who has been recording the dodgy dealings around this find, asking if he knew how to contact Bruce Ferrini, the last known owner of these texts. Michel kindly replied, and allowed me to reproduce this interesting (but appalling) comment:

"Thanks your email. Ferrini is keeping himself unreachable... Yes Ferrini sold pages of the Judas, Exodus and mathematical treatise.

"Pages of the Exodus were sold to James E. Ferrell and are now part of the Ink and Blood traveling exhibition... The mathematical treatise was sold by Ferrini together with Samm Fogg, London, to Lord Thomson of Fleet, Canada.

"And Getty sponsor, Lloyd Cotsen, bought several pages. Judas?"

None of this is good news. I imagine that the codex has been reduced to a pile of fragments, of which saleable leaves are being sold, and the remainder, no doubt, thrown away. Can nothing be done to stop this destruction?"

This brings us to a total of six reported texts that are physically related to the Gospel of Judas, the two early Christian texts mentioned below (which are also named in the description of the National Geographic volume on GJudas along with something they are calling the "Book of Allogenes"), and the three listed above as part of the second codex by Pearse. Any correction on this point is appreciated.

A Sale!

Now here is the interesting bit, on this same thread, Pearse links to a sale on Ebay of a fragment at this link that he says is from Ferrini. The item here is actually a Coptic fragment (not Greek as the original title claims) in a rather free cursive script which certainly provides an interesting late example of papyrus construction, as you can see so clearly how the fibers run in perpendicular directions. It would make a handy educational aid. And at this link there is one of a few other 5/6 century Coptic fragments on sale. Frankly, there are enough different hands here that it seems unlikely one could definitively land something from the GJudas codex (which would be a nice addition to anyone's library). How curious that one can pick up these fragments of history with a few clicks of the mouse button.

(4/12 Update: This really is Ferrini's Ebay account.)

A Cast of Characters

This post is starting to wander, but it is worth it. Perhaps the most interesting result of this whole Gospel of Judas situation is the fantastic host of characters it has brought into the limelight. We have Rudolph Kasser working on a manuscript, Roger Pearse following the story for years (credit should also be given to Davila at Paleojudaica who picked up the story early), Michael van Rijn doing whatever mysterious thing it is that van Rijn does, and then this guy Bruce Ferrini who keeps popping up in ancient manuscript intrigues. It is worth scrolling down the page here to read a few articles about Ferrini and the ill-fated From the Dead Sea Scrolls to the Forbidden Book exhibit. There is a very interesting post from Lee Biondi (Ferrini's partner in the DSS exhibition) here, in which he mentions Ferrini and the DSS controversy. Van Rijn also makes a special anonymous appearance towards the beginning of Biondi's comments. Other than that, Ferrini seems to have an interesting job and I would love to browse his current stock, not least of which because some think he still has a few bits of these two codices. Perhaps there really is more to this story then meets the eye. Still looking...

Justin Martyr Conference

2006-04-12T02:02:00.000-07:00

New College is an invigorating place to be right now. We have a TC conference in a few weeks (see previous post), ISBL at the beginning of July, and the first dedicated Justin Martyr conference at the end of July (undertaken with the help of a grant from the British Academy). I would like to deliver a short paper, but the current lineup is somewhat intimidating to a NT student only periodically sidelighting in issues that late:

"The conference will feature presentations by the following scholars: Prof. Michael Slusser, Dr. Denis Minns, Dr. Paul Parvis, Dr. Paul Foster, Prof. Larry Hurtado, Prof. Graham Stanton, Prof. Judith Lieu, Prof. Cristoph Markschies, Dr. Sara Parvis, and Prof. J. Rebecca Lyman. Additionally, limited spaces are available for short papers (15–20 min. in length) on relevant topics."

A schedule is available in a .pdf at the conference webpage, and it looks like it will provide a comprehensive to the state of the art of Justin scholarship. I will post more on the conference when it rolls around.

GJudas: Hurtado on Judas

2006-04-11T03:24:00.000-07:00

Prof. Larry Hurtado has weighed in on Judas at Slate (honestly, you have to be pretty hip to be a senior NT scholar writing for Slate Magazine):

The Gospel of Judas has genuine historical value—as one of several bits of evidence showing the diversity of early Christianity, like the writings of such figures as Irenaeus, the bishop of Lyons in about 180 A.D. The text's depiction of Judas as the disciple to whom Jesus gave unique mystical revelations is not itself really unique. It somewhat resembles the portrayal of Thomas in the Gospel of Thomas. Nor is there evidence that the Gospel of Judas ever enjoyed much popularity as an alternative to the canon of the New Testament or was considered for inclusion in that canon. This text reflects a profoundly elitist viewpoint, claiming a specially conveyed revelation of religious truths withheld from ordinary Christians and their leaders.

I am looking forward to reading a traditional papyrological description of the manuscript, as I wonder what else this text was bound with. Apparently it also contains a variant of the Epistle to Philip and the Revelation of Jacob, the rest being unreadable, but I have been unable to track down Kasser's original comments on this point.

(Update 4/14: It turns out there is good reason that news on these manuscripts has been so sketchy. No one seems to know who has what and how or when they got it. See above post for more on this.)

The Genizah Collection

2006-04-11T02:44:00.000-07:00

Hey, look at this, more news about ancient manuscripts. Well, most of these aren't anywhere close to ancient, but many of them do shed light on ancient near east issues. The Taylor-Schechter Genizah Research Unit has had a website for a while, but this large new grant from the AHRC will provide the resources to catalog and digitize a bunch of these fragments (including interesting things like the "Zadokite" fragment):

"Professor Stefan Reif, Founder Director of the Taylor-Schechter Genizah Collection, said: “The Taylor-Schechter Genizah Collection at Cambridge University Library offers a window on the world of the 10th–13th centuries. The largest and most important collection of medieval Jewish, Hebrew and Arabic documents in the world, it is at least equal in importance to the Dead Sea Scrolls. Whilst the Dead Sea Scrolls chronicled the life of a dissident sect that cut itself off from the world, the Genizah fragments tell the story of ordinary people dealing with everyday life, love and lore."

The collection has taught us more about people like Maimonides, given us greater textual clarity on Talmud literature, and even afforded us access to a few Greek and Syriac texts that had been scraped and reused by later scribes (palimpsests). The relation of the collection to New Testament studies is limited, but it certainly helps to add dimension to what we already know about the language and customs of that era.

It will be especially interesting to see some of these fragments in greater detail, as some of them are amulets made of cloth (this particular one "has the aim of making the heart of the loved one burn with passion", others are rather well preserved pages of paper and vellum. With this large range of materials and manuscript types, I look forward to seeing the variety of book formats represented by this collection.

GJudas: Obligatory Gospel of Judas Nod...

2006-04-10T06:05:00.000-07:00

The "Unveiling"

One would be hard pressed to put together anything much better than Mark Goodacre's characteristically comprehensive rundown of the Gospel of Judas from academic bloggers seriously "in the know." As I was not able to see the National Geographic documentary, his summary is rather helpful. He certainly hasn't missed much on this one.

I have little other to add that hasn't already been said: "publicity stunt," "we have known about the text ever since Irenaeus" (A.H. I.31), "this particular manuscript has been discussed since Rudolph Kasser delivered a paper on the manuscript in 2004," "Michael van Rijn has followed this story for ages," and "a guy named Roger Pearse has had a site on the manuscript (with images and transcriptions!) for quite some time." All right, a few of those may be new to you. I had actually poked through the images on that last site a week or two before the National Geographic site was launched.

The Skullduggery

The Christian Century even had an article on it in the Dec. 27, 2005 issue. In this article there is an interesting anecdote about James Robinson's first experience with the text and its publication strategy:

"But in 2004, Rodolphe Kasser of the University of Geneva announced in Paris that by the end of 2005 he would be publishing translations of the Coptic-language version of the Gospel of Judas. As it turned out, the owner was a Swiss foundation, and the torn and tattered papyrus text had been hawked to potential buyers in North America and Europe for decades after it was found at Muhazafat Al Minya in Middle Egypt.

The "Judas" saga was confirmed in detail last month at the annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature in Philadelphia. Retired Claremont Graduate University professor James Robinson, general editor of the English edition of the Nag Hammadi Library, said he was first contacted in 1983 about negotiations to buy certain texts, including the Gospel of Judas. Many years later, he saw blurry photographs of part of the text.

Robinson said that early in November he learned that Kasser and several European, Canadian and U.S. scholars had signed agreements with the National Geographic Society to assist with a documentary film and a National Geographic article for an Easter 2006 release and a succession of three books.

Robinson was critical of the secrecy and inaccessibility surrounding the document—a recurring academic problem that delayed for decades the publishing of translations of some Dead Sea Scrolls and many Nag Hammadi codices. In his talk, Robinson called the practice "skullduggery"—with a glance at fellow panelist Marvin Meyer of Chapman University, a longtime colleague in the field and one of the contracted authors."

And apparently, the plot thickened quite some time ago. In a paper delivered at the 2005 SBL Congress (in particular the "Al-Minya discovery"), James M. Robinson works through some of the material that has become his book on the subject:

The first information about the existence of this text, which is in a papyrus codex along with a version of 1 Apoc. Jas. and a dialogue of Jesus with his disciples not identical with NCH III 5, was given by J. M. Robinson and S. Emmel at the Third International Congress of Coptic Studies in Warsaw in August 1984.

Koenen later sent me some almost completely illegible photographs he had obtained of some of the Coptic material. I made copies of them available to Wolf-Peter Funk. Ultimately, I turned over my copies, for safekeeping, to Stephen Emmel, at the quadrennial congress of the International Association for Coptic Studies meeting in Paris, on June 27, 2004. For he was the person involved from the very beginning, and has subsequently become the Editor of the Newsletter of the International Association for Coptic Studies. Hence, the Institut für Ägyptologie und Koptologie that he directs at the University of Münster, Germany is in effect the Secretariat of the International Association for Coptic Studies.

I had long since forwarded in March 1991 what I could read to Marvin W. Meyer, who was preparing the critical edition of The Letter of Peter to Philip:

According to the reports of James M. Robinson and Stephen Emmel, a somewhat divergent Coptic text of the Letter of Peter to Philip is to be found in a papyrus codex which at the present time is neither published nor available for study.

Further:

On July 1, 2004, at the quadrennial congress of the International Association for Coptic Studies held this time in Paris, Rodolphe Kasser announced that he was publishing The Gospel of Judas late in 2005. Given his slow track record in publishing the Tripartite Tractate of the Jung Codex (Nag Hammadi Codex I), no one has expected him to meet that deadline. It has already been rescheduled for early in 2006. He has added a co-editor, Gregor Wurst, which gives some hope that his edition will ultimately appear and make the text available to the rest of us.

Kasser’s report has led to all-too-sensational German articles in journals for a larger non-scholarly public, first by Ralph Pöhner in FACTS, then by Roger Thiede in Focus.

Thiede included an interview with Stephen Emmel. Although Emmel displays in exemplary form the necessary academic caution concerning a text that is not yet available, Pöhner and Thiede do the very reverse, with disastrous results. And of course Gilles Quispel got into the act, in another sensational essay by the Dutch journalist Hank Schutten.

Pöhner had interviewed me by phone from Zürich, and yet what he reports about my involvement is so littered with errors that one must be very tentative in using what he reports anywhere in his article. Of course one would hope that he might be in better control of the facts insofar as they have to do with his own Switzerland.

There is a lot more there. Robinson goes on to tell the twisted tale of how this text surfaced in the recent antiquities market. The long and the short of it is that this set of manuscripts has been so badly handled, unless we can chart "who sold what when" a full codicological description of the "find" in its entirety will never be possible. They need to shelve The Da Vinci Code, I want to see this movie. Donald Sutherland would probably make a good James Robinson.

The Fallout

It is unfortunate that the terrifically shady publication strategy of this otherwise interesting manuscript has perverted public (read: non-specialist) perception of what the Gospel of Judas actually is. If only this kind of cash and publicity could get thrown at any number of far more important early Christian manuscripts, things like The Da Vinci Code would be more immediately recognized by the non-specialist public for what they are: Foucault's Pendulum rip-offs featuring far less invigorating hermeneutical acrobatics. Imagine having such an accessible dedicated manuscript site for the Freer holdings, for example. Is it wrong to sense irony in the fact that the greatest early Christian manuscript publicity scam involves The Gospel of Judas? I think not.

I don't want to downplay the significance of actually having this text. It was one thing to have Irenaeus' mention of it, as we have always understood the theological nature of the text. But now that the manuscript is available to the same critical methodologies that have opened up the relationship between things like the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Mary, or the Odes of Solomon and the canonical Jesus traditions, we may actually have some interesting scholarship emerge. It may also shed further light on a project I am currently engaged in, namely assessing the characterization of apostle figures in late gospel writing.

And perhaps what may be most important about this find is the light that it has shed on the means by which such texts finally make it into the hands of scholars. Who is to say what NT fragments have never surfaced due to the vicissitudes of grey market antiquities dealings? Any excitment about this particular find should be tempered by the fact that we don't have as much of it as we should.

Crossing Our "t's" In The Passion Narrative

2006-04-09T03:53:00.000-07:00

A new study by the Royal Society of Medicine calls into question the traditional imagery of Jesus' crucifixion. Since there is evidence that the Romans crucified villians in a remarkable variety of ways, there is no way of knowing exactly how Jesus was crucified. Thus the macabre "head-up" depiction passed down to us by tradition may have no basis in the ancient history of criminal torture. As this article sees it, the fact is:

"only one piece of archaeological evidence has ever been found about a crucifixion, mainly because crucified people were not formally buried but left on a rubbish dump to be eaten by wild dogs and hyenas, say Masien and Mitchell.

This case entails a young Jewish man, whose inscription on an ossuary, found near Giv'at ha-Mivtar in Israel, suggests his name was probably Yehonanan ben Hagkol.

The clue to his demise comes from an 11.5-centimetre (4.8-inch) iron nail that had been hammered through one of his heels, attaching it to the side of the cross. But there are no signs of any nail holes in the bones of the wrist or the forearm."

The sad tale of Jehohanan ben HGQWL can be seen in more detail here and here at Frontline's From Jesus to Christ series (a reprint of an Expository Times article). In this article, Charlesworth concludes:

"In conclusion, we now have empirical evidence of a crucifixion. Death on a cross could be prolonged or swift. The crucifixion of Josephus' acquaintance who survived should not be projected to the crucifixion of Jesus. The major extrabiblical paradigm for crucifixion is no longer Josephus; it is the archaeological data summarized above. The crucifixion of Jesus, who did not possess a gladiator's physique and stamina, did not commence but culminated when he was nailed to the cross. After the brutal, all night scourging by Roman soldiers, who would have relished an opportunity to vent their hatred of the Jews and disgust for Palestinian life, Jesus was practically dead. I see not reason why the Synoptic account does not contain one of the few bruta facta from his life when it reports that, as he began to stagger from Herod's palace to Golgotha, he was too weak to carry the cross; Simon of Cyrene carried it for him. Metaphors should not be confused with actualities nor faith with history. It is not a confession of faith to affirm that Jesus died on Golgotha that Friday afternoon; it is a probability obtained by the highest canons of scientific historical research."

To be fair, the findings of the RSM are reasonable, as crucifixion imagery does depend more on the visual tradition of the earliest church than say, an actual diagram in the margin of an early manuscript of the Gospel of John. Yet there argument from silence falls apart in the claim that "Given the uncertainty as to exactly how he was crucified, the answer may only ever come if some new archaeological evidence or piece of writing emerges from the shadows of the past, it says."

As far as a "piece of writing," I wonder if the Gospel descriptions count. They each simply use the verb "to crucify," but John 19:33-35 and Luke 24:39 (along with John's parallel) at least put us in the ballpark. After the New Testament We do have reference in Clement of Alexandria to the cross as the "symbol of the Lord" (somewhere in the Stromata), and Tertullian speaks of the cross as a symbol of Christian suffering, and object worth of adoration (Apology). It is also Tertullian that speaks of the cross specifically as sort of an early Christian identity marker (in De Corona). But we don't have any explicit reference to the cross in early Christian artwork until the fifth century, they tended to depict Jesus pastorally or would use lamb imagery when referring to his suffering. We may find reason for this in the criticism levelled against Christians often found in Tertullian's apologies, namely that they were "cross worshippers." Thus we find things like the anchor, trident, and various monograms of Jesus name (such as the "chi/rho") in which the cross is more implicit.

The RSM though might have overlooked a crucial bit of evidence found in the use of the staurogram in some of our earliest manuscripts. This "tau/rho" combination looks remarkably like the cross found again in fifth century artwork. Perhaps it is this unique manuscript marker that serves as a link between eyewitness accounts of the crucifixion and later Christian imagery. I'll see if I can scratch up some images...

SBL 2006 Papers

2006-04-08T01:08:00.000-07:00

I'll go ahead in joining the biblioblogging trend of posting what seminar I will be participating in this year in DC. Mark Goodacre posted a few other announcements. There are four or five of us coming over from New College to deliver papers on our work this year at SBL, but I am not sure if they would be comfortable in having their topics broadcast at this point.

The Bible in Ancient and Modern Media section asked for papers on the use of the Bible in films that really don't have much to do with the Bible. (I suppose the frogs at the end of Magnolia are a good example of what they are looking for.) So I tossed together this:

"Jesus Beyond His Genre: The Non-Canonical Jesus Films."

Abstract

There is an interesting sub-genre of "Jesus films" that relates well to the "treatment of biblical themes in films that are not expressly biblical." This genre is distinct both from films that attempt to directly adapt the canonical gospels to the screen, and from films that simply feature a discernable Christ figure as a central theme. The films that populate this sub-genre rest somewhere in between, being filmed narratives that have nothing else to do with Jesus other than the suggestion of a title, a set of visual themes, or an abstract yet fully intentional nod to the nature of Jesus. This paper will outline the contours of this interesting genre by looking at three of its most effective examples, and attempt to identify the hermeneutics at play in such profoundly inter-textual works of art. At first glimpse, Bruno Dumont's controversial realist masterpiece "La vie de Jesus" is only related to Jesus by title. But beneath the surface of the film lies commentary about mortality and materiality that expands to fill the Christological brackets set by Dumont in the title. Gus van Sant's recent film “Last Days” narrates the last few days of Kurt Cobain’s life in the context of a loosely fictional stand-in that becomes increasingly cloaked in Jesus imagery until a final resurrection scene. And finally, Bresson’s “Au hazard Balthazar” quite boldly turns a dilapidated donkey into a provocative metaphor for the odd presence of Christ in contemporary culture. All three of these films are intentional and provocative allusions to Jesus in decidedly non-biblical narrative worlds. This paper will track the reflective strategies of this "non-canonical" genre through these three close readings in their appropriate film theoretical context, and articulate the rich potential for re-narrating Jesus by means of the startling generic conflict embodied by these films.

I should have added in the abstract that Dumont's film reportedly takes its title from Ernst Renan's famous volume of the life of Jesus. But I look forward to (briefly) covering this overlooked section of Jesus films. I don't think I will exhaust the range of explanations for this anomaly in the above paper, but ever since being exposed to these films I have always wondered how they manage to catch aspects of Jesus' life as narrated in the Gospels and tradition far more incisively than their more "faithful" counterparts produced by Christians seeking to tell the story of Jesus visually.

We may be able to add The Last Temptation of Christ and Jesus of Montreal to this list, but the key feature of the above films is that while not providing a metanarrative of Jesus' life and purpose, they do focus in on specific elements that add an intertextual dimension to the primary narrative. I would want to argue that, as Kazantzakis poses it, The Last Temptation of Christ is less about Jesus than it is about the human experience of spirituality. But that is a different paper for a different time, each context deserves closer scrutiny. And to be honest, I have a hard time with Jesus of Montreal as it is my least favorite of Arcand's films and its mimicry of the Gospel narratives seems to lack grounding in a broader sense of redemption or social justice. I am more than open to correction on this point.

Binderies and Book Artists

2006-01-08T14:02:00.000-08:00

Coming soon...

Resources - Modern

2006-01-07T14:00:00.000-08:00

Coming soon...

Resources - Ancient

2006-01-05T13:54:00.000-08:00

About

2006-01-04T10:54:00.000-08:00

Book-Think (formerly, and still tangentially known as "Ekthesis") is a blog about all the ways in which the use and production of reading materials in those first few centuries CE can inform current transitions in literacy and publishing, as well as notes on early Christian book materials from a bookbinding and restoration angle. There may also be reference scattered throughout to my current PhD thesis work on a literary-historical reading of John 21 at New College, University of Edinburgh (in New Testament Literature and Christian Origins), or Bible and film issues.

A great number of hits on this site are from people looking for info on Coptic Bookbinding - there will be more instructional videos, how-to posts, and links to the history of this binding style in the future.

Comments, suggestions, commissions:

bookthinkbindery (@) gmail.com