Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: the ending of Mark

Expand Messages
  • Jim West
    ... I would humbly disagree that such a thing occured at the end of Mark. It is merely evasive and ignores the text we have by replacing it with some
    Message 1 of 26 , Jan 28, 1999
    • 0 Attachment
      At 09:26 AM 1/28/99 +0000, you wrote:

      >"Oops I lost a page" is based on very scholarly observation of the
      >facts, I would suggest.

      I would humbly disagree that such a thing occured at the end of Mark. It is
      merely evasive and ignores the text we have by replacing it with some
      hypothetical accident.

      >
      >Incidentally, the hypothesis was put forward by C. H. Roberts who was a
      >fellow of the British Academy and a world-famous scholar of the origin
      >of the codex book. (C. H. Roberts, 'Proceedings of the British Academy
      >40' - 1954 - pages 168-204, page 190.)

      Lovely.
      I'm sure he was far more brilliant than anyone who would disagree with him.
      Still, the specific text we are discussing simply requires no such theory.
      There just isn't any reason to think that the Gospel ending is lost. Such a
      theory says more about the person putting it forth than it does about the
      author of the Gospel.

      >
      >Best wishes,
      >BRIAN WILSON
      Best,

      Jim

      +++++++++++++++++++++++++

      Jim West, ThD
      Quartz Hill School of Theology

      jwest@...
      http://web.infoave.net/~jwest
    • Graham Hamer
      ... is ... him. ... theory. ... Such a ... I m sure the idea of the lost page(s) is much older than Roberts. It s still a dumb idea though. I prefer the one
      Message 2 of 26 , Jan 28, 1999
      • 0 Attachment
        ----------
        > From: Jim West <jwest@...>
        > To: synoptic-l@...
        > Subject: Re: the ending of Mark
        > Date: 28 January 1999 08:57
        >
        > At 09:26 AM 1/28/99 +0000, you wrote:
        >
        > >"Oops I lost a page" is based on very scholarly observation of the
        > >facts, I would suggest.
        >
        > I would humbly disagree that such a thing occured at the end of Mark. It
        is
        > merely evasive and ignores the text we have by replacing it with some
        > hypothetical accident.
        >
        > >
        > >Incidentally, the hypothesis was put forward by C. H. Roberts who was a
        > >fellow of the British Academy and a world-famous scholar of the origin
        > >of the codex book. (C. H. Roberts, 'Proceedings of the British Academy
        > >40' - 1954 - pages 168-204, page 190.)
        >
        > Lovely.
        > I'm sure he was far more brilliant than anyone who would disagree with
        him.
        > Still, the specific text we are discussing simply requires no such
        theory.
        > There just isn't any reason to think that the Gospel ending is lost.
        Such a
        > theory says more about the person putting it forth than it does about the
        > author of the Gospel.
        >
        > >
        > >Best wishes,
        > >BRIAN WILSON
        > Best,
        >
        > Jim
        >
        >
        I'm sure the idea of the lost page(s) is much older than Roberts. It's
        still a dumb idea though. I prefer the one where Mark gets knifed in the
        back before he is able to finish the last page (maybe the author of Q did
        it!).

        Graham
      • Mark Goodacre
        ... I wonder if Brian was referring specifically to the idea of the last page in a codex being lost? Certainly the idea of a lost ending is old. Streeter,
        Message 3 of 26 , Jan 28, 1999
        • 0 Attachment
          On 28 Jan 99 at 14:18, Graham Hamer wrote:

          > I'm sure the idea of the lost page(s) is much older than Roberts.

          I wonder if Brian was referring specifically to the idea of the last page in a
          codex being lost? Certainly the idea of a lost ending is old. Streeter, for
          example, thinks that the earliest copy was accidentally mutilated or lost, but
          he seems to be imagining a scroll, _Four Gospels_, p. 338: "the two ends of a
          roll would always be the most exposed to damage; the beginning ran the greater
          risk, but, in a book rolled from both ends, the conclusion was not safe". Does
          anyone know how much earlier than Streeter the idea goes? Surely it must be
          much older than him? And is Roberts the first to propose that it was the last
          leaf of a codex that got lost? It would be interesting to know the answers to
          these questions -- can anyone oblige?

          Mark
          --------------------------------------
          Dr Mark Goodacre M.S.Goodacre@...
          Dept of Theology, University of Birmingham

          Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/goodacre
          --------------------------------------

          Synoptic-L Web Page: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
          Synoptic-L Archive: http://www.egroups.com/list/synoptic-l
          Synoptic-L Owner: mailto:Synoptic-L-Owner@...
        • Graham Hamer
          ... in a ... Certainly the original lost page idea related to breaking off of the last section of a scroll. Since Roberts was one of the first people to
          Message 4 of 26 , Jan 28, 1999
          • 0 Attachment
            >
            > I wonder if Brian was referring specifically to the idea of the last page
            in a
            > codex being lost?
            >

            Certainly the "original" lost page idea related to breaking off of the last
            section of a scroll. Since Roberts was one of the first people to believe
            in the widespread use of the codex by the (very) early church then it may
            well be likely he was first to apply this to Mark's "lost ending". Is it
            now widely held that the gospel autographs were codices? I remember being
            taught that the length of both Luke and Acts was equivalent to the standard
            scroll capacity (so to speak) although I can't recall ever seeing any
            detailed statistics to justify such an assertion. However, if it were
            true, then that might tend to support the supposition that the autographs
            were written on scrolls and that scrolls were not superseded until the
            second century CE.

            Graham
          • Graham Hamer
            ... I thought the evidence for the use of codices was that they were not restricted to Christian groups and were used for low status documents. ... If you
            Message 5 of 26 , Jan 28, 1999
            • 0 Attachment
              Jack Kilmon wrote:


              > I think the codex was an invention for the purpose of collating
              > ALL the collected works of the NT either toward the end of the
              > 1st century or the first few years of the second

              I thought the evidence for the use of codices was that they were not
              restricted to Christian groups and were used for low status documents.
              >
              > We DO after all, have TWO people that copied
              > a whole lotta Mark to write their own gospels

              If you believe the "Synoptic problem" is solved you do - but not otherwise.
              Sorry to be boring but I am far from convinced by the arguments for Markan
              priority. So the problem is still not solved for me and we can keep the
              e-mails going!

              Graham
            • Jack Kilmon
              ... I don t believe the autographs of any of the NT works, either by the gospelers, epistolographers or Paul, were originally in codex form. There are a number
              Message 6 of 26 , Jan 28, 1999
              • 0 Attachment
                Graham Hamer wrote:

                > >
                > > I wonder if Brian was referring specifically to the idea of the last page
                > in a
                > > codex being lost?
                > >
                >
                > Certainly the "original" lost page idea related to breaking off of the last
                > section of a scroll. Since Roberts was one of the first people to believe
                > in the widespread use of the codex by the (very) early church then it may
                > well be likely he was first to apply this to Mark's "lost ending". Is it
                > now widely held that the gospel autographs were codices? I remember being
                > taught that the length of both Luke and Acts was equivalent to the standard
                > scroll capacity (so to speak) although I can't recall ever seeing any
                > detailed statistics to justify such an assertion. However, if it were
                > true, then that might tend to support the supposition that the autographs
                > were written on scrolls and that scrolls were not superseded until the
                > second century CE.

                I don't believe the autographs of any of the NT works, either by the
                gospelers, epistolographers or Paul, were originally in codex form.
                There are a number of reasons. First, the codex became popular for
                Christians for its capacity to present ALL the collated NT works
                and make them easy to search. Secondly, a codex is an expensive
                and time consuming task. Most of the single NT works would not take
                up one quire...making the exercise a waste of time. The few Greek
                fragments among the DSS that are written on both sides are more
                "re-used" or opisthographs than codices....hmmmmm, are two
                Kleenex Kleenices? (g)

                I think the codex was an invention for the purpose of collating
                ALL the collected works of the NT either toward the end of the
                1st century or the first few years of the second....by the way,
                just how DO we know that P52 is a fragment of a codex and not
                an opisthograph?

                If Mark was written between 64-70, it was almost certainly a
                scroll in its autograph form. Having said that, however, we
                really don't know what the autograph Mark said in relationship
                to canonical Mark which I think we can agree was not the
                Mark used by Luke and Matthew.

                Whether or not there was an ending to Mark, and subsequently
                if that ending was lost, should not be that hard to divine (yep...
                that's a pun). We DO after all, have TWO people that copied
                a whole lotta Mark to write their own gospels. It would seem
                to reason that Matthew or Luke would have copied Markan
                thingies occurring after 16:8. So let's look at what Matthew
                copied and revert it back to Markan style.

                Mk 16:9 And Jesus himself met them and said "Howdy!" Matt 28:9

                Mk 16:10 And they went up to him and lommed onto his feet
                and groveled on the ground a bit. Matt 28:9

                Mk 16:11 Jesus said to them
                "C'mon fellers, you don't have to be afraid." Matt
                28:10

                Mk 16:12 "Go and tell my brothers to hot foot it to
                Galilee and I'll catch up with them there." Matt
                28:10

                Mk 16:13 They were tickled pink and ran to tell the
                rest of the gang. Matt 28:8

                Mk 16:14 And the gang made a bee-line to Galilee
                to the mountain the boss told them about Matt 28:16

                Mk 16:15 And Jesus be-bopped up to them and said,
                "Go and preach this stuff to everyone. I'll
                stiick like glue to y'all from now on." Matt
                28:19


                So there ya go..there WAS an ending to Mark that Matthew copied
                so it musta got lost but I have solved the whole problem so we can
                go home now.

                Jack
                jkilmon@...

                http://www.historian.net
              • Brian E. Wilson
                Graham Hamer wrote - ... Graham, According to Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, in The Text of the New Testament tr. E. F. Rhodes, (Grand Rapids, 1987), page
                Message 7 of 26 , Jan 28, 1999
                • 0 Attachment
                  Graham Hamer wrote -
                  >
                  >Certainly the "original" lost page idea related to breaking off of the last
                  >section of a scroll. Since Roberts was one of the first people to believe
                  >in the widespread use of the codex by the (very) early church then it may
                  >well be likely he was first to apply this to Mark's "lost ending". Is it
                  >now widely held that the gospel autographs were codices? I remember being
                  >taught that the length of both Luke and Acts was equivalent to the standard
                  >scroll capacity (so to speak) although I can't recall ever seeing any
                  >detailed statistics to justify such an assertion. However, if it were
                  >true, then that might tend to support the supposition that the autographs
                  >were written on scrolls and that scrolls were not superseded until the
                  >second century CE.
                  >
                  Graham,
                  According to Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, in "The Text of the
                  New Testament" tr. E. F. Rhodes, (Grand Rapids, 1987), page 101f., -

                  >"In contrast to pagan and also to Jewish literature (which were written
                  >on rolls, the former on papyrus and the latter on leather), from all
                  >appearances the codex form was used by Christian writers from the very
                  >beginning. It is amazing how long it took for this fact to be
                  >recognized, since all the New Testament papyri, from the first to be
                  >discovered, were from codices. Only four of the eighty-eight known
                  >papyri are from scrolls, and all of these are either opisthographs or
                  >written on reused material."
                  >
                  In my opinion, the inference from the amount of material in Luke or Acts
                  can be turned on its head. Luke contains roughly 19,500 Greek words.
                  But LXX Isaiah and LXX Psalms were very popular in the early church.
                  And LXX Isaiah contained about 25,700 words and LXX Psalms about 34,600
                  Greek words, on my rough count. If Luke was about the right length to
                  fill a standard roll or papyrus, then Isaiah and Psalms were far too
                  long for this. So if we are going to argue from the lengths of books,
                  the argument from length would indicate that codices, not rolls, were in
                  use when Christians wrote their books of the LXX and NT in Greek. (I did
                  not originate this argument. My tutor at Birmingham, UK, put it forward
                  in a seminar about ten years ago.)

                  One possibility is that the Hebrew Logia attested in the Papias
                  tradition concerning a person named Matthew, were written on a wooden
                  codex by Matthew the apostle. (He may have been a tax-collector before
                  he became a disciple of Jesus, in which case he would have used a wooden
                  codex in his job.) This may have set the precedent for the use of the
                  codex format for written Jesus tradition from then onwards. This may be
                  why all extant papyrus manuscripts of the synoptic gospels are on
                  codices. (This argument is put forward by Professor Alan Millard of
                  Liverpool University in his book, "Discoveries from the Time of Jesus" -
                  Oxford, 1990 - pages 168-169).

                  Best wishes,
                  BRIAN WILSON

                  E-MAIL : brian@... *** HOMEPAGE RECENTLY UPDATED ***
                  SNAILMAIL ; Rev B. E. Wilson, http://www.twonh.demon.co.uk
                  10 York Close, Godmanchester,
                  Huntingdon, Cambs, PE18 8EB, UK
                • Graham Hamer
                  Brian Wilson wrote: , ... Brian, Thank you for this reference. ... I am not particularly impressed with the scroll length theory but I don t think your
                  Message 8 of 26 , Jan 29, 1999
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Brian Wilson wrote:
                    ,
                    > According to Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, in "The Text of the
                    > New Testament" tr. E. F. Rhodes, (Grand Rapids, 1987), page 101f., -
                    >
                    > >"In contrast to pagan and also to Jewish literature (which were written
                    > >on rolls, the former on papyrus and the latter on leather), from all
                    > >appearances the codex form was used by Christian writers from the very
                    > >beginning. It is amazing how long it took for this fact to be
                    > >recognized, since all the New Testament papyri, from the first to be
                    > >discovered, were from codices. Only four of the eighty-eight known
                    > >papyri are from scrolls, and all of these are either opisthographs or
                    > >written on reused material."

                    Brian,

                    Thank you for this reference.

                    > >
                    > . If Luke was about the right length to
                    > fill a standard roll or papyrus, then Isaiah and Psalms were far too
                    > long for this. So if we are going to argue from the lengths of books,
                    > the argument from length would indicate that codices, not rolls, were in
                    > use when Christians wrote their books of the LXX and NT in Greek.

                    I am not particularly impressed with the scroll length theory but I don't
                    think your argument really rebuts it. Since presumably Christian and
                    Jewish consumers were in a minority in most places in the Roman world.
                    Therefore standard scroll length (if there was such a thing) will have
                    been determined by "secular" needs. Moreover since the LXX is a
                    translation the length of each book will have been determined by the Hebrew
                    original. Valid comparators can only be Greek originals!

                    >
                    > One possibility is that the Hebrew Logia attested in the Papias
                    > tradition concerning a person named Matthew, were written on a wooden
                    > codex by Matthew the apostle.

                    Many things are possible but some are more likely than others. This
                    appears to me to be speculation that borders on fantasy. Quite fun though
                    since it is entirely unverifiable.

                    Graham
                  • David C. Hindley
                    Message text written by Jack Kilmon ... gospelers, epistolographers or Paul, were originally in codex form. There are a number of reasons. First, the codex
                    Message 9 of 26 , Jan 29, 1999
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Message text written by Jack Kilmon

                      >>I don't believe the autographs of any of the NT works, either by the
                      gospelers, epistolographers or Paul, were originally in codex form.
                      There are a number of reasons. First, the codex became popular for
                      Christians for its capacity to present ALL the collated NT works
                      and make them easy to search. Secondly, a codex is an expensive
                      and time consuming task. Most of the single NT works would not take
                      up one quire...making the exercise a waste of time. The few Greek
                      fragments among the DSS that are written on both sides are more
                      "re-used" or opisthographs than codices....hmmmmm, are two
                      Kleenex Kleenices? (g)<<

                      I was always under the impression that the codex was adopted because of its
                      economic use of writing space. But you do have a point that it would have
                      been wasteful for most individual epistles, in spite of the utility of
                      twice the words in the same number of leaves. As for the Greek DSS
                      fragments, unfortunately we do not have enough readable data to determine
                      whether the texts on both sides of the fragments were from the same
                      literary work, so the existance of papyrus fragments written on both sides
                      can mean many things besides your suggestion.

                      >>I think the codex was an invention for the purpose of collating
                      ALL the collected works of the NT either toward the end of the
                      1st century or the first few years of the second....by the way,
                      just how DO we know that P52 is a fragment of a codex and not
                      an opisthograph?<<

                      "All" may be an overstatement, IMHO, but certainly this was true of groups
                      of the kinds of mss that were eventually canonized. The question I would
                      ask would be "Under what circumstances were NT documents being published,
                      that the codex would be the format of choice?" It was not very common among
                      the pagan and everyday writings that survived, at least not until the 2nd
                      century. What conditions required that several books be published in tandem
                      (usually grouped about Gospels, Pauline epistles, Catholic epistles, etc)?
                      In other words, "Why those groups of books? What purpose were they put to?

                      Were these these codices being published in an organized way? Otherwise,
                      how can almost universal adoption of a relatively new standard (the codex)
                      be explained? The traditional models, e.g. of individual copyists copying
                      for the sake of edification of themselves or of the churches meeting in
                      their town, do not adequately explain this phenomenon, IMO.

                      Regarding P52, plate 19 of Kurt Aland's "The Text of the New Testament"
                      clearly shows that both sides of the fragment are from a continuous text of
                      the Gospel of John (18:31-22 and 13:37-38, respectively), so that pretty
                      much argues against an opisthograph in this case.

                      Dave H
                    • David C. Hindley
                      Message text written by Jack Kilmon ... bring his books [BIBLIA] and *especially* the parchments [MEMBRANA]. Just what was Paul referring to? Were BIBLIA
                      Message 10 of 26 , Jan 29, 1999
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Message text written by Jack Kilmon

                        >In 2Tim 4:13, Paul asks for Timothy to
                        bring his books [BIBLIA] and *especially* the parchments [MEMBRANA].
                        Just what was Paul referring to? Were BIBLIA written scrolls and
                        MEMBRANA still blank? Were BIBLIA codices?<

                        I would suspect (and this is likely to sound very traditional) that BIBLIA
                        will more than likely be either non biblical scrolls (or codices), while
                        the MEMBRANA would be copies of the Jewish scriptures on parchment. Out of
                        curiosity, I'd have to ask what kind of books these BIBLIA were? Was he
                        keeping copies of his correspondence? Were they works of various apologists
                        or even secular writers?

                        But then, doesn't C. Thiede suggest that these MEMBRANA were actually
                        "notebooks" which he says were used by business persons to record
                        transactions, or government stenographers to record the "acta" of the
                        officials? I think the thrust of his argument was that these leaves of
                        leather kept within wooden covers were precursers to codices (only
                        unbound). But wouldn't papyrus be the better material for such uses? Maybe
                        MEMBRANA was a technical use of a word that properly refers to the
                        parchment itself, so that it has the secondary meaning of "notebook".

                        Dave Hindley
                        DHindley@...

                        PS: Yes, I do ask a lot of questions! But I feel that they are relevant to
                        the process of finding good explanations to your question.
                      • Jack Kilmon
                        ... I don t think we are talking about papyrus rolls for the NT autographs.There are different dynamics between the length restrictions for parchment vs
                        Message 11 of 26 , Jan 29, 1999
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Graham Hamer wrote:

                          > > . If Luke was about the right length to
                          > > fill a standard roll or papyrus, then Isaiah and Psalms were far too
                          > > long for this. So if we are going to argue from the lengths of books,
                          > > the argument from length would indicate that codices, not rolls, were in
                          > > use when Christians wrote their books of the LXX and NT in Greek.
                          >
                          > I am not particularly impressed with the scroll length theory but I don't
                          > think your argument really rebuts it. Since presumably Christian and
                          > Jewish consumers were in a minority in most places in the Roman world.
                          > Therefore standard scroll length (if there was such a thing) will have
                          > been determined by "secular" needs. Moreover since the LXX is a
                          > translation the length of each book will have been determined by the Hebrew
                          > original. Valid comparators can only be Greek originals!
                          >

                          I don't think we are talking about papyrus rolls for the NT autographs.There
                          are different dynamics between the length restrictions for
                          parchment vs papyrus. In 2Tim 4:13, Paul asks for Timothy to
                          bring his books [BIBLIA] and *especially* the parchments {MEMBRANA].
                          Just what was Paul referring to? Were BIBLIA written scrolls and
                          MEMBRANA still blank? Were BIBLIA codices?...somehow I don't
                          think so. Paul clearly makes a distinction and highlights the importance
                          of the parchments over the books. I think biblia was what he had
                          already written...or copies...and membrana were the still blank
                          parchment.

                          Jack
                          jkilmon@...
                        • Jack Kilmon
                          ... I am inclined to believe that the BIBLIA were reference works used by Paul and from which he cites. They would have been the Wisdom of Solomon,
                          Message 12 of 26 , Jan 29, 1999
                          • 0 Attachment
                            David C. Hindley wrote:

                            > Message text written by Jack Kilmon
                            >
                            > >In 2Tim 4:13, Paul asks for Timothy to
                            > bring his books [BIBLIA] and *especially* the parchments [MEMBRANA].
                            > Just what was Paul referring to? Were BIBLIA written scrolls and
                            > MEMBRANA still blank? Were BIBLIA codices?<
                            >
                            > I would suspect (and this is likely to sound very traditional) that BIBLIA
                            > will more than likely be either non biblical scrolls (or codices), while
                            > the MEMBRANA would be copies of the Jewish scriptures on parchment. Out of
                            > curiosity, I'd have to ask what kind of books these BIBLIA were? Was he
                            > keeping copies of his correspondence? Were they works of various apologists
                            > or even secular writers?

                            I am inclined to believe that the BIBLIA were "reference" works used
                            by Paul and from which he cites. They would have been the Wisdom
                            of Solomon, Testimonies of the 12 Patriarchs, 1Enoch, perhaps even
                            an anthology of Jesus sayings..all in scroll form. I would think that
                            he kept copies of his letters to the various churches but I doubt
                            copies would have been penned on expensive parchment and would
                            be included in the BIBLIA. When MEMBRANA were written upon
                            they became BIBLIA, so I believe the membrana were blank parchments,
                            precious and expensive enough to warrent the "MALISTA."

                            Jack
                            jkilmon@...

                            http://www.historian.net
                          • David C. Hindley
                            Message text written by Jack Kilmon ... by Paul and from which he cites. They would have been the Wisdom of Solomon, Testimonies of the 12 Patriarchs, 1Enoch,
                            Message 13 of 26 , Jan 29, 1999
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Message text written by Jack Kilmon

                              >I am inclined to believe that the BIBLIA were "reference" works used
                              by Paul and from which he cites. They would have been the Wisdom
                              of Solomon, Testimonies of the 12 Patriarchs, 1Enoch, perhaps even
                              an anthology of Jesus sayings..all in scroll form.<

                              Would these have then been books written in papyrus, or parchment? I would
                              understand BIBLIA as papyrus rolls, but I have to admit that the writing
                              material upon which the book was written is not necessarily implied in the
                              word. Where does the switch occur between parchment books (as at Qumran,
                              all the pseudepigrapha were written exclusively on parchment) to papyrus
                              codices of Christian writings?

                              It appears that I have to add an in-depth study of these (sometimes
                              technical) terms to my long, long, "to-do" list! <g>

                              Dave H
                            • Brian E. Wilson
                              Brian Wilson wrote - ... Graham Hamer commented - ... Graham, A scientific law like the inverse square law of gravitational attraction between two masses can
                              Message 14 of 26 , Jan 30, 1999
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Brian Wilson wrote -
                                >
                                >One possibility is that the Hebrew Logia attested in the Papias
                                >tradition concerning a person named Matthew, were written on a wooden
                                >codex by Matthew the apostle. (He may have been a tax-collector before
                                >he became a disciple of Jesus, in which case he would have used a
                                >wooden codex in his job.) This may have set the precedent for the use
                                >of the codex format for written Jesus tradition from then onwards. This
                                >may be why all extant papyrus manuscripts of the synoptic gospels are
                                >on codices. (This argument is put forward by Professor Alan Millard of
                                >Liverpool University in his book, "Discoveries from the Time of Jesus"
                                >- Oxford, 1990 - pages 168-169).
                                >
                                Graham Hamer commented -
                                >Many things are possible but some are more likely than others. This
                                >appears to me to be speculation that borders on fantasy. Quite fun though
                                >since it is entirely unverifiable.
                                >
                                Graham,
                                A scientific law like the inverse square law of gravitational
                                attraction between two masses can be **verified** by observing the
                                motion of planets around our sun, or by experiments using two masses,
                                one suspended on a thread, in a physics laboratory. No synoptic
                                hypothesis, or theory of the origin of the codex book, can be verified
                                in this sense, however. Hypotheses of how the synoptic gospels came to
                                be written, or how the codex book was introduced, are not scientific
                                hypotheses. They are not capable of empirical verification - that is by
                                observation of events now, or by designing and carrying out experiments
                                to test predictions made on their basis. I readily agree, therefore,
                                that the hypothesis I outline above is entirely empirically
                                unverifiable, just like the Two Document Hypothesis, or the Farrer
                                Hypothesis, or the Griesbach Hypothesis, or a hypothesis of C. H.
                                Roberts concerning the origin of the codex book, or any hypothesis you
                                have put forward yourself on Synoptic-L.

                                The hypotheses relevant to our study on Synoptic-L are hypotheses of
                                what has happened in the past - historical hypotheses. These are not the
                                same as scientific hypotheses. To test a historical hypothesis, the best
                                we can do is check systematically whether it fits well all the available
                                data. If a hypothesis fits well all the observed data, then it is to
                                be accepted. If it does not fit well all the observed data, then it is
                                to be rejected. For instance, to test the Griesbach Hypothesis, which is
                                a historical hypothesis, we need to check whether it fits well all the
                                patterns of similarities and differences of wording and order of
                                material observed in the synoptic gospels, and so on. If it fits well
                                all the data, it is to be accepted. If it does not fit well all the
                                data then it is to be rejected. The fact that it is "totally
                                unverifiable" is totally irrelevant to the task of checking whether it
                                fits the data observed in a synopsis.

                                The hypothesis I outline above does fit all the available data well,
                                including the Papias tradition concerning Matthew, the traditions
                                concerning Matthew in the synoptic gospels, the known use of wooden
                                codices from the time of Homer onwards, the surviving wooden codices
                                from the third century BCE, the recorded use of a codex by the slave of
                                Pliny the Younger in the first century CE, the use of codices by tax-
                                collectors as represented in, for instance, the bas relief at Neumagen,
                                Germany shown in Alan Millard's "Discoveries from the Time of Jesus"
                                (Oxford, 1990), pages 168-169, all extant papyrus manuscripts of the
                                synoptic gospels being written on codices, and so on.

                                I am sure the hypothesis I outline above does appear to you to be
                                speculation. But then, what historical hypothesis does not involve
                                speculation? The existence of "Q" in the Two Document Hypothesis is pure
                                speculation - a hypothetical document since is not attested by early
                                writers and since no copy of it has survived. On your assumptions, I
                                could say that "Q" is "speculation that borders on fantasy, and quite
                                fun since it is totally unverifiable". But, in my view, that would not
                                be good method, would not be scholarly, and is not what this List is
                                about. The Two Document Hypothesis can be systematically checked to see
                                whether it fits well all the available data. The fact that it is based
                                on speculation is irrelevant to answering the question whether it
                                represents what actually happened.

                                Perhaps you would like to put forward your own ideas on the origin of
                                the codex book, and any link this may have with the synoptic gospels?

                                Best wishes,
                                BRIAN WILSON

                                E-MAIL : brian@... *** HOMEPAGE RECENTLY UPDATED ***
                                SNAILMAIL ; Rev B. E. Wilson, http://www.twonh.demon.co.uk
                                10 York Close, Godmanchester,
                                Huntingdon, Cambs, PE18 8EB, UK
                              • Brian E. Wilson
                                Brian Wilson wrote - ... Graham Hamer commented - ... Graham, I was not trying to argue above for a standard length of a papyrus roll. The standard length of a
                                Message 15 of 26 , Jan 30, 1999
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Brian Wilson wrote -
                                  >
                                  >In my opinion, the inference from the amount of material in Luke or
                                  >Acts can be turned on its head. Luke contains roughly 19,500 Greek
                                  >words. But LXX Isaiah and LXX Psalms were very popular in the early
                                  >church. And LXX Isaiah contained about 25,700 words and LXX Psalms
                                  >about 34,600 Greek words, on my rough count. If Luke was about the
                                  >right length to fill a standard roll or papyrus, then Isaiah and Psalms
                                  >were far too long for this. So if we are going to argue from the
                                  >lengths of books, the argument from length would indicate that codices,
                                  >not rolls, were in use when Christians wrote their books of the LXX and
                                  >NT in Greek.
                                  >
                                  Graham Hamer commented -
                                  >
                                  >I am not particularly impressed with the scroll length theory but I don't
                                  >think your argument really rebuts it. Since presumably Christian and
                                  >Jewish consumers were in a minority in most places in the Roman world.
                                  >Therefore standard scroll length (if there was such a thing) will have
                                  >been determined by "secular" needs. Moreover since the LXX is a
                                  >translation the length of each book will have been determined by the Hebrew
                                  >original. Valid comparators can only be Greek originals!
                                  >
                                  Graham,
                                  I was not trying to argue above for a standard length of a
                                  papyrus roll. The standard length of a commercial roll of papyrus was
                                  about 10 metres. This has been widely-accepted by palaeographers and
                                  papyrologists for many years. The Gospel of Luke would have fitted
                                  comfortably into such a standard length roll. None of this is in
                                  dispute.

                                  You are right that the length of LXX Isaiah and LXX Psalms would have
                                  been largely determined by the length of the Hebrew originals. That is
                                  to say, the number of words in Greek in each LXX book would be
                                  determined roughly by the number of Hebrew words in the original. The
                                  question is, however, if LXX Isaiah and LXX Psalms were each written in
                                  one volume, could that have been on a standard roll of papyrus? The
                                  answer is definitely in the negative. As T. C. Skeat, and other
                                  palaeographers and papyrologists argue, a roll of papyrus longer than 10
                                  metres is very unwieldy to use. This is precisely why a standard
                                  commercial roll of papyrus was no longer than about 10 metres. Neither
                                  LXX Isaiah nor LXX Psalms would have fitted into a standard papyrus
                                  roll.

                                  So, on what did early Christians write their copies of LXX Isaiah or LXX
                                  Psalms? I think it very likely indeed that they wrote them on codices.
                                  The papyrus P963 - the Chester Beatty Papyrus VI written "no later than
                                  150 CE" according to the palaeographers - was penned by a Christian
                                  scribe. It contained LXX Numbers and LXX Deuteronomy. Clearly this was
                                  too long to have been written on a standard papyrus roll, and was in
                                  fact written on a papyrus codex. This is in line with all the other
                                  indications that from the beginning Christians writing copies of the LXX
                                  books, or writing books of the NT in Greek, used codices, not rolls, for
                                  their writings.

                                  Best wishes,
                                  BRIAN WILSON

                                  E-MAIL : brian@... *** HOMEPAGE RECENTLY UPDATED ***
                                  SNAILMAIL ; Rev B. E. Wilson, http://www.twonh.demon.co.uk
                                  10 York Close, Godmanchester,
                                  Huntingdon, Cambs, PE18 8EB, UK
                                • David C. Hindley
                                  Message text written by Brian E. Wilson ... Psalms? I think it very likely indeed that they wrote them on codices.
                                  Message 16 of 26 , Jan 30, 1999
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Message text written by "Brian E. Wilson"

                                    >So, on what did early Christians write their copies of LXX Isaiah or LXX
                                    Psalms? I think it very likely indeed that they wrote them on codices.<

                                    Well, wouldn't it be the same way that Jews copied their LXX translations
                                    of these same books? Yet I am not aware of any evidence of the LXX in
                                    codice format that did -not- emanate from Christian circles.

                                    Unfortunately, I do not think we can know how Jews copied the books of the
                                    LXX, but I am hesitant to believe that they were using codices. So why the
                                    change when Christians copied these books? It boils down to the same
                                    question we were asking about NT books: why the adoption of the codex
                                    versus the traditional scroll?

                                    Dave H
                                  • Brian E. Wilson
                                    Brian Wilson wrote - ... David Hindley commented - ... David, I am sure you are right that the Jews wrote books on rolls, not codices. They sometimes used
                                    Message 17 of 26 , Jan 30, 1999
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Brian Wilson wrote -
                                      >
                                      >So, on what did early Christians write their copies of LXX Isaiah or
                                      >LXX Psalms? I think it very likely indeed that they wrote them on
                                      >codices.
                                      >
                                      David Hindley commented -
                                      >Well, wouldn't it be the same way that Jews copied their LXX
                                      >translations of these same books? Yet I am not aware of any evidence of
                                      >the LXX in codex format that did -not- emanate from Christian circles.
                                      >Unfortunately, I do not think we can know how Jews copied the books of
                                      >the LXX, but I am hesitant to believe that they were using codices.
                                      >
                                      David,
                                      I am sure you are right that the Jews wrote books on rolls, not
                                      codices. They sometimes used sheets of papyrus/wood/ivory/parchment for
                                      writing notes, but they wrote books on scrolls. The oldest surviving
                                      copy of LXX Deuteronomy was written about 100 BCE, and therefore not by
                                      Christians but by Jews. It was written on a scroll. Some LXX
                                      manuscripts have been discovered at Qumran - (1) 4Q LXX Numbers, which
                                      contains parts of Number 3.30 - 4.14, (2) 4Q LXX Lev(b) which contains
                                      numerous fragments of chapter 2 to 5 of Leviticus (3) 4Q LXX Lev(a)
                                      which contains Leviticus 26.2-16. These were all written on scrolls by
                                      Jews. Jews wrote copies of LXX books on scrolls.

                                      David continued-
                                      > So why the change when Christians copied these books? It boils down to
                                      >the same question we were asking about NT books: why the adoption of
                                      >the codex versus the traditional scroll?
                                      >
                                      Yes. This is the big question. In my view, the Hebrew/Aramaic Logia of
                                      the Papias tradition were short reports or notes which could well have
                                      been written on a wooden codex by the apostle Matthew. These Logia were
                                      eventually translated, again according to the Papias tradition. It is
                                      possible that the translated notes were written on a codex like their
                                      original Hebrew/Aramaic version. And if the synoptic gospels were based
                                      on the translation of the Logia, it is possible that they were written
                                      on codices continuing the codex format transmission of Jesus tradition.
                                      The use of codices by early Christians writing in Greek caught on from
                                      this practice. That is my explanation.

                                      The explanation is not proof, of course, but at least it is an
                                      explanation which fits the facts well. To fit the facts we need a
                                      hypothesis which pinpoints an event very early in the story of Christian
                                      origins, to account for the widespread use of codices by early
                                      Christians writing in Greek.

                                      Best wishes,
                                      BRIAN WILSON

                                      E-MAIL : brian@... *** HOMEPAGE RECENTLY UPDATED ***
                                      SNAILMAIL ; Rev B. E. Wilson, http://www.twonh.demon.co.uk
                                      10 York Close, Godmanchester,
                                      Huntingdon, Cambs, PE18 8EB, UK
                                    • Jack Kilmon
                                      The oldest examples we have of the LXX are from caves 4 and 7 of the DSS. They are scrolls and not codices. Jack ... --
                                      Message 18 of 26 , Jan 30, 1999
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        The oldest examples we have of the LXX are from caves 4 and 7
                                        of the DSS. They are scrolls and not codices.

                                        Jack

                                        "David C. Hindley" wrote:
                                        >
                                        > Message text written by "Brian E. Wilson"
                                        >
                                        > >So, on what did early Christians write their copies of LXX Isaiah or LXX
                                        > Psalms? I think it very likely indeed that they wrote them on codices.<
                                        >
                                        > Well, wouldn't it be the same way that Jews copied their LXX translations
                                        > of these same books? Yet I am not aware of any evidence of the LXX in
                                        > codice format that did -not- emanate from Christian circles.
                                        >
                                        > Unfortunately, I do not think we can know how Jews copied the books of the
                                        > LXX, but I am hesitant to believe that they were using codices. So why the
                                        > change when Christians copied these books? It boils down to the same
                                        > question we were asking about NT books: why the adoption of the codex
                                        > versus the traditional scroll?
                                        >
                                        > Dave H

                                        --
                                        ______________________________________________

                                        taybutheh d'maran yeshua masheecha am kulkon

                                        Jack Kilmon
                                        jkilmon@...

                                        http://www.historian.net
                                      • Graham Hamer
                                        Brian Wilson wrote: The existence of Q in the Two Document Hypothesis is pure ... Brian, I am really not doing this to be awkward - but if you said that
                                        Message 19 of 26 , Feb 1 1:21 AM
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Brian Wilson wrote:

                                          The existence of "Q" in the Two Document Hypothesis is pure
                                          > speculation - a hypothetical document since is not attested by early
                                          > writers and since no copy of it has survived. On your assumptions, I
                                          > could say that "Q" is "speculation that borders on fantasy, and quite
                                          > fun since it is totally unverifiable".

                                          Brian,

                                          I am really not doing this to be awkward - but if you said that about Q I
                                          would agree with you entirely. Maybe I'm not cut out for this NT stuff but
                                          I could not believe in Q when I first started studying the gospels at the
                                          end of the 1960's and I still can't understand why anyone finds the
                                          arguments in any way convincing now. One effect of the supposition that Q
                                          existed has tended to blind us to the possibility that the synoptics were
                                          written much earlier than is usually supposed because we have to "make
                                          room" for Q before Matt and Luke. I take your general point about
                                          verification, though.


                                          > Perhaps you would like to put forward your own ideas on the origin of
                                          > the codex book, and any link this may have with the synoptic gospels?
                                          >
                                          >
                                          I am open to the view that the popularisation of the codex to carry
                                          substantial test was closely linked with the spread of Christianity.
                                          However, I think there is simply insufficient evidence to go beyond this.
                                          If you look at the number of "coulds" and "possibilities" that Professor
                                          Millard uses to link Hebrew Logia, Papias, Matthew, tax collectors and
                                          codices then I really don't think that the epithet "fantasy" is unfair.
                                          Mind you if I had a speculation half as pleasing as this one I would not
                                          hesitate to share it with Synoptic-L.

                                          Kind regards,

                                          Graham
                                        • TonyProst@aol.com
                                          Can anyone comment on the use of codex in the civilian world? I believe Julius Caesar began to prefer them, and introduced them to Roman use. Regards, Tony
                                          Message 20 of 26 , Feb 1 9:44 AM
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            Can anyone comment on the use of codex in the civilian world? I believe Julius
                                            Caesar began to prefer them, and introduced them to Roman use.

                                            Regards,
                                            Tony Prost
                                            All Nonnos All DAy
                                            http://members.aol.com/tonyprost/index.html
                                          • Jeremy Duff
                                            ... First reference to literature in codices is Martial Epigrams 14.184-192 (mid-late first century AD). Beforehand (Caesar etc.) they were used for jottings.
                                            Message 21 of 26 , Feb 1 10:13 AM
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              At 12:44 01/02/99 EST, you wrote:
                                              >Can anyone comment on the use of codex in the civilian world? I believe Julius
                                              >Caesar began to prefer them, and introduced them to Roman use.
                                              >
                                              >Regards,
                                              >Tony Prost
                                              >All Nonnos All DAy

                                              First reference to literature in codices is Martial Epigrams 14.184-192
                                              (mid-late first century AD). Beforehand (Caesar etc.) they were used for
                                              jottings.

                                              Jeremy


                                              =========================================
                                              Jeremy Duff
                                              Junior Research Fellow, St Cross College, Oxford
                                              Tutor, Wycliffe Hall, Oxford.

                                              EMail: Jeremy.Duff@...
                                              Phone: 01865-274218
                                            • Jeremy Duff
                                              Papyrus codices came first, on the whole, not vellum. I wouldn t be surprised if some of the earliest extant codices are the biblical ones from the second
                                              Message 22 of 26 , Feb 1 12:20 PM
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                Papyrus codices came first, on the whole, not vellum.

                                                I wouldn't be surprised if some of the earliest extant codices are the
                                                biblical ones from the second century (papyrus), though I may well be wrong.
                                                If you want to know try Turner, The Typology of the Early Codex (1977).

                                                Jeremy

                                                At 13:27 01/02/99 -0800, you wrote:
                                                >An early codex, or caudex, was essentially two wax tablets bound
                                                >together like a book, or two ivory or wooden slates with wax. I
                                                >am interested in the what ms fragment is the earliest extant
                                                >exemplar of a vellum codex and the earliest exemplar of a papyrus
                                                >codex (which apparently came later)...not necessarily biblical in nature.
                                                >
                                                >Jack
                                                >
                                                >Jeremy Duff wrote:
                                                >
                                                >> At 12:44 01/02/99 EST, you wrote:
                                                >> >Can anyone comment on the use of codex in the civilian world? I believe
                                                Julius
                                                >> >Caesar began to prefer them, and introduced them to Roman use.
                                                >> >
                                                >> >Regards,
                                                >> >Tony Prost
                                                >> >All Nonnos All DAy
                                                >>
                                                >> First reference to literature in codices is Martial Epigrams 14.184-192
                                                >> (mid-late first century AD). Beforehand (Caesar etc.) they were used for
                                                >> jottings.
                                                >>
                                                >> Jeremy
                                                >>
                                                >> =========================================
                                                >> Jeremy Duff
                                                >> Junior Research Fellow, St Cross College, Oxford
                                                >> Tutor, Wycliffe Hall, Oxford.
                                                >>
                                                >> EMail: Jeremy.Duff@...
                                                >> Phone: 01865-274218
                                                >
                                                >
                                                >
                                                >
                                                >
                                              • Brian E. Wilson
                                                Jack Kilmon wrote - ... Jack, It is vitally important to distinguish codices used for notes, accounts, documentary records and the like, from codices used for
                                                Message 23 of 26 , Feb 1 12:50 PM
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  Jack Kilmon wrote -
                                                  >
                                                  >An early codex, or caudex, was essentially two wax tablets bound
                                                  >together like a book, or two ivory or wooden slates with wax. I
                                                  >am interested in the what ms fragment is the earliest extant
                                                  >exemplar of a vellum codex and the earliest exemplar of a papyrus
                                                  >codex (which apparently came later)...not necessarily biblical in nature.
                                                  >
                                                  Jack,
                                                  It is vitally important to distinguish codices used for notes,
                                                  accounts, documentary records and the like, from codices used for books.
                                                  The interesting question is not how or when the codex format was first
                                                  used. We know that it was used several centuries BCE. For instance we
                                                  have surviving wooden codices with wages accounts from mid third century
                                                  BCE of expenses incurred on a journey in Lower Egypt. The tablets, still
                                                  with writing on the wax, are held in the Petrie Museum, University
                                                  College, London, UK.

                                                  Some wooden codices had as many as ten wooden tablets bound together.

                                                  The earliest extant vellum codex is P. Oxy. 30 and is of a book which is
                                                  usually given the title "de Bellis Macedonicis". It was written about
                                                  100 CE. It is in Latin, and thought to have been written in Rome.

                                                  The earliest extant fragment of a papyrus codex book is P52, the Rylands
                                                  Papyrus of part of the Gospel of John. This was written between 100 and
                                                  125 CE, according to current opinions amongst papyrologists (they used
                                                  to say it was written about 125 CE, so they have adjusted their mean
                                                  estimate by about 12 years in recent research on this.)

                                                  The material of which a codex book was made may not be terribly relevant
                                                  to when and where the codex book originated, however. The most
                                                  significant piece of information is that virtually all Christian books
                                                  in Greek were written on codices, whereas virtually all non-Christian
                                                  books were written on rolls, for the first two and a half centuries CE.
                                                  Something very major must have happened early in the origins of
                                                  Christianity to bring about such widespread use of the codex for early
                                                  Christian books written in Greek.

                                                  Best wishes,
                                                  BRIAN WILSON

                                                  E-MAIL : brian@... *** HOMEPAGE RECENTLY UPDATED ***
                                                  SNAILMAIL ; Rev B. E. Wilson, http://www.twonh.demon.co.uk
                                                  10 York Close, Godmanchester,
                                                  Huntingdon, Cambs, PE18 8EB, UK *** SEE HOMEPAGE FOR FIRST DRAFT OF PAPER ***
                                                • Jack Kilmon
                                                  An early codex, or caudex, was essentially two wax tablets bound together like a book, or two ivory or wooden slates with wax. I am interested in the what ms
                                                  Message 24 of 26 , Feb 1 1:27 PM
                                                  • 0 Attachment
                                                    An early codex, or caudex, was essentially two wax tablets bound
                                                    together like a book, or two ivory or wooden slates with wax. I
                                                    am interested in the what ms fragment is the earliest extant
                                                    exemplar of a vellum codex and the earliest exemplar of a papyrus
                                                    codex (which apparently came later)...not necessarily biblical in nature.

                                                    Jack

                                                    Jeremy Duff wrote:

                                                    > At 12:44 01/02/99 EST, you wrote:
                                                    > >Can anyone comment on the use of codex in the civilian world? I believe Julius
                                                    > >Caesar began to prefer them, and introduced them to Roman use.
                                                    > >
                                                    > >Regards,
                                                    > >Tony Prost
                                                    > >All Nonnos All DAy
                                                    >
                                                    > First reference to literature in codices is Martial Epigrams 14.184-192
                                                    > (mid-late first century AD). Beforehand (Caesar etc.) they were used for
                                                    > jottings.
                                                    >
                                                    > Jeremy
                                                    >
                                                    > =========================================
                                                    > Jeremy Duff
                                                    > Junior Research Fellow, St Cross College, Oxford
                                                    > Tutor, Wycliffe Hall, Oxford.
                                                    >
                                                    > EMail: Jeremy.Duff@...
                                                    > Phone: 01865-274218
                                                  • Jack Kilmon
                                                    In my understanding, after the wax tablets, the term was applied to books of this format made of papyrus, vellum, or parchment. Although papyrus usually
                                                    Message 25 of 26 , Feb 1 2:51 PM
                                                    • 0 Attachment
                                                      In my understanding, after the wax tablets, the term was applied to books of
                                                      this format made of papyrus, vellum, or
                                                      parchment. Although papyrus usually appeared in the form of a scroll, and
                                                      parchment and vellum in the form of the codex, there was a brief intermediate
                                                      stage, the papyrus codex. This came at a time when parchment was not yet fully
                                                      accepted, partly because it was thought to be a somewhat vulgar material, and
                                                      partly because, when the codex was new, it was not realized that papyrus was not
                                                      really suitable to that format.

                                                      Jack


                                                      Jeremy Duff wrote:

                                                      > Papyrus codices came first, on the whole, not vellum.
                                                      >
                                                      > I wouldn't be surprised if some of the earliest extant codices are the
                                                      > biblical ones from the second century (papyrus), though I may well be wrong.
                                                      > If you want to know try Turner, The Typology of the Early Codex (1977).
                                                      >
                                                      > Jeremy
                                                      >
                                                      > At 13:27 01/02/99 -0800, you wrote:
                                                      > >An early codex, or caudex, was essentially two wax tablets bound
                                                      > >together like a book, or two ivory or wooden slates with wax. I
                                                      > >am interested in the what ms fragment is the earliest extant
                                                      > >exemplar of a vellum codex and the earliest exemplar of a papyrus
                                                      > >codex (which apparently came later)...not necessarily biblical in nature.
                                                      > >
                                                      > >Jack
                                                      > >
                                                      > >Jeremy Duff wrote:
                                                      > >
                                                      > >> At 12:44 01/02/99 EST, you wrote:
                                                      > >> >Can anyone comment on the use of codex in the civilian world? I believe
                                                      > Julius
                                                      > >> >Caesar began to prefer them, and introduced them to Roman use.
                                                      > >> >
                                                      > >> >Regards,
                                                      > >> >Tony Prost
                                                      > >> >All Nonnos All DAy
                                                      > >>
                                                      > >> First reference to literature in codices is Martial Epigrams 14.184-192
                                                      > >> (mid-late first century AD). Beforehand (Caesar etc.) they were used for
                                                      > >> jottings.
                                                      > >>
                                                      > >> Jeremy
                                                      > >>
                                                      > >> =========================================
                                                      > >> Jeremy Duff
                                                      > >> Junior Research Fellow, St Cross College, Oxford
                                                      > >> Tutor, Wycliffe Hall, Oxford.
                                                      > >>
                                                      > >> EMail: Jeremy.Duff@...
                                                      > >> Phone: 01865-274218
                                                      > >
                                                      > >
                                                      > >
                                                      > >
                                                      > >
                                                    • Graham Hamer
                                                      ... in a ... for ... lost, but ... of a ... greater ... Does ... be ... last ... answers to ... C S C Williams wrote If the Christians already used the codex
                                                      Message 26 of 26 , Feb 8 12:39 AM
                                                      • 0 Attachment
                                                        Mark Goodacre wrote:
                                                        > I wonder if Brian was referring specifically to the idea of the last page
                                                        in a
                                                        > codex being lost? Certainly the idea of a lost ending is old. Streeter,
                                                        for
                                                        > example, thinks that the earliest copy was accidentally mutilated or
                                                        lost, but
                                                        > he seems to be imagining a scroll, _Four Gospels_, p. 338: "the two ends
                                                        of a
                                                        > roll would always be the most exposed to damage; the beginning ran the
                                                        greater
                                                        > risk, but, in a book rolled from both ends, the conclusion was not safe".
                                                        Does
                                                        > anyone know how much earlier than Streeter the idea goes? Surely it must
                                                        be
                                                        > much older than him? And is Roberts the first to propose that it was the
                                                        last
                                                        > leaf of a codex that got lost? It would be interesting to know the
                                                        answers to
                                                        > these questions -- can anyone oblige?
                                                        >
                                                        C S C Williams wrote "If the Christians already used the codex or book
                                                        form for their gospels during the first century, as Mr C H Roberts believes
                                                        (JTS, XL, 1939, 253ff) then the last page could easily have been torn
                                                        away." (Alterations to the Text of the Synoptic Gospels and Acts, Oxford,
                                                        1951, page 44). This looks like Williams (either consciously or
                                                        unconsciously) may have been the source of Roberts' suggestion in his book
                                                        on the codex.

                                                        Graham
                                                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.