## Re: [textualcriticism] Problems with Phi 043

Expand Messages
• ... Arg. I misspoke. I flipped left and right. What I meant to say is it looks like the pages are consistently written starting on the right and then
Message 1 of 11 , Sep 1, 2009
On 09/01/2009 11:58 AM, Wieland Willker wrote:
>> 10b+11a is one opening, 10:11-14 on the left, continuing
>>
> to 10:15-
>
>> 19 on
>> the right.
>> 11b+12a is the next opening, 10:19-24 on the left,
>>
> 10:25-27 on the
>
>> right
>>
>
> The order is this:
> 0011a 10:11-14
> 0010b 10:15-19
> 0012a 10:19-24
> 0011b 10:25-27
>
> Your arrangement does not work, since 10b must come on the
> right side of 11a.
>
Arg. I misspoke. I flipped left and right.

What I meant to say is it looks like the pages are consistently written
starting on the right and then continuing on the left (as opposed to the
normal starting on the left and proceeding to the right). My point,
which was obscured by my mixing my left and right, was that the
manuscript appears to be written self-consistently in a way that we
don't recognize as standard. To make that assumption work, it requires
the addition of 3 missing pages, and the assumption that some text was
not ever in the manuscript.

Note that a user of the manuscript itself would have little problem
(except for the missing pages) in adjusting to the odd scheme. After a
page or two, you would quickly learn to look to the right first then
come back and finish on the left before turning the page. You wouldn't
have had to jump around to different pages like you do when you lay out
the images in order verso then recto.

Corrected 'reconstruction' (NOTE: I'm assuming 3-5 verses a page, which
is why 11:29-12:2 does not fit on page M2b).

10b+11a is one opening, 10:11-14 on the right, continuing to 10:15-19 on
the left.
11b+12a is the next opening, 10:19-24 on the right, 10:25-27 on the left
12b+13a next, 10:28-33 on the right, 10:33-37 on the left
13b+M1a* 10:38-42 on right (missing), 11:1-5 on the left
M1b*+14a 11:6-10 on right, 11:11-15 (approx) on left (missing)
14b+M2a* 11:16(approx)-19 on right (missing), 11:20-23 on left
M2b*-15a 11:24-28 on right, 11:29-34 (approx) on left (missing)
(11:34 (approx)-12:2 missing, perhaps from exemplar?)
15b-16a 12:3-7 on right, 12:8-13 on left
16b-17a 12:13-18 on right, 12:18-24 on left
17b-18a 12:24-28 on right, 12:28-32 on left
18b-19a 12:32-36 on right, 12:36-40 on left
19b-M3a* 12:41-42 on right (missing), 12:43-46 on left
M3b*-20a 12:46-13:1 on right, 13:2 - 7? on left (missing).

and
49b-50a 20:22-25 on right, 20:25-28+Add on left (note the off-print
verifies they are facing pages.
50b-51a 20:Add-29 on right, 20:29-34a on left (also off-printted).
51b-52a 20:34b-21:3a on right, 21:3b-7 on left
53b-54a 21:13-16 on right, 21:16-19 on left
• Batiffol s 1886 edition of Phi/043 is available on-line and can be downloaded as .pdf at
Message 2 of 11 , Sep 1, 2009

Batiffol's 1886 edition of Phi/043 is available on-line and can be downloaded as .pdf at

He marks the point at which each folio begins, which may be of help. The introduction (in French) indicates (pp. 20-21) the state of the manuscript when he transcribed it.

It would be interesting to know if his transcription can be considered accurate. He does indicate itacisms all over the place, as well as the nomina sacra. Incidentally, if the transcription is accurate, the text seems nearer the Majority text than that of N and Sigma/042.

Tony Pope

--- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, "Wieland Willker" <wie@...> wrote:
>
> > 10b+11a is one opening, 10:11-14 on the left, continuing
> to 10:15-
> > 19 on
> > the right.
> > 11b+12a is the next opening, 10:19-24 on the left,
> 10:25-27 on the
> > right
>
>
> The order is this:
> 0011a 10:11-14
> 0010b 10:15-19
> 0012a 10:19-24
> 0011b 10:25-27
>
> Your arrangement does not work, since 10b must come on the
> right side of 11a.
> I.e. 11a+10b is one opening, not the other way round.
>
>
> Here is the order by content:
>
> 0011a 10:11-14
> 0010b 10:15-19
> 0012a 10:19-24
> 0011b 10:25-27
> 0013a 10:28-33
> 0012b 10:33-37
> missing 10:38-42
> 0013b 11:1-5
> 0014a 11:6-10
> missing 11:11-19
> 0014b 11:20-23
> 0015a 11:24-28
> missing 11:29-12:2
> 0016a 12:3-7
> 0015b 12:8-13
> 0017a 12:13-18
> 0016b 12:18-24
> 0018a 12:24-28
> 0017b 12:28-32
> 0019a 12:32-36
> 0018b 12:36-40
> missing 12:41-42
> 0019b 12:43-46
> 0020a 12:46-13:1
>
>
>
>
>
> Best wishes
>     Wieland
>        <><
> ------------------------------------------------
> Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
> mailto:wie@...
> http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
> Textcritical Commentary:
> http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html
>

• Wieland and TC-List, Unfortunately, I was not on the original Albania trip, when 043 was photographed. Neither was Dr. Jeff Hargis. I ve asked him to look at
Message 3 of 11 , Sep 1, 2009
Wieland and TC-List,

Unfortunately, I was not on the original Albania trip, when 043 was photographed. Neither was Dr. Jeff Hargis. I've asked him to look at all the images to see what is going on with the manuscript though.

Daniel B. Wallace, PhD
Executive Director
Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts
www.csntm.org

----- Start Original Message -----
Sent: Tue, 1 Sep 2009 20:58:33 +0200
From: "Wieland Willker" <wie@...>
To: <textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [textualcriticism] Problems with Phi 043

>
> > 10b+11a is one opening, 10:11-14 on the left, continuing
to 10:15-
> 19 on
> the right.
> 11b+12a is the next opening, 10:19-24 on the left,
10:25-27 on the
> right

The order is this:
0011a 10:11-14
0010b 10:15-19
0012a 10:19-24
0011b 10:25-27

Your arrangement does not work, since 10b must come on the
right side of 11a.
I.e. 11a+10b is one opening, not the other way round.

Here is the order by content:

0011a 10:11-14
0010b 10:15-19
0012a 10:19-24
0011b 10:25-27
0013a 10:28-33
0012b 10:33-37
missing 10:38-42
0013b 11:1-5
0014a 11:6-10
missing 11:11-19
0014b 11:20-23
0015a 11:24-28
missing 11:29-12:2
0016a 12:3-7
0015b 12:8-13
0017a 12:13-18
0016b 12:18-24
0018a 12:24-28
0017b 12:28-32
0019a 12:32-36
0018b 12:36-40
missing 12:41-42
0019b 12:43-46
0020a 12:46-13:1

Best wishes
Wieland
<><
------------------------------------------------
Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
mailto:wie@...
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
Textcritical Commentary:
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html

----- End Original Message -----
• ... I now understand your model. That s in fact possible! But that would be a very strange book, wouldn t it? ...
Message 4 of 11 , Sep 2, 2009
Robert Relyea wrote:
> After a page or two, you would quickly learn to look to the right
> first then come back and finish on the left before turning the page.

I now understand your model. That's in fact possible!
But that would be a very strange book, wouldn't it?

Tony Pope wrote:
> Batiffol's 1886 edition of Phi/043 is available on-line and can be
>
http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k96302s.image.r=Batiffol.langEN.f2.pagi
nation

Thank you very much for this link!

In the introduction I cannot find anything that points to reading from the
right to the left. Also from the notation of the folio numbers in his text I
take it that Batiffol did not see anything problematic in this codex. The
text smoothly goes on from one folio to the next.

The only other explanation I can come up with:
As Daniel Buck has already pointed out, every folio consists of two sheets
glued together.
At some point in the history of the codex, after Batiffol, someone or
something took them apart, perhaps water damage, and the sheets have then
been put together in the wrong way. But is this reasonable?

I still think that I have overlooked something.

Best wishes
Wieland
<><
--------------------------
Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
mailto:wie@...
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
Textcritical commentary:
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/
• Are you sure this is not simply a mistake in the numbering of the pics on the CSNTM website? It would be the simplest solution. cheers dirk Comment by Wieland:
Message 5 of 11 , Sep 2, 2009
Are you sure this is not simply a mistake in the numbering of the pics on the CSNTM website? It would be the simplest solution.

cheers
dirk

Comment by Wieland:
I agree and of course I thought about that, but this is not the case. Looking at the images it is clear that what they call "b" is the verso of "a".

Wieland Willker wrote:

Robert Relyea wrote:
> After a page or two, you would quickly learn to look to the right
> first then come back and finish on the left before turning the page.

I now understand your model. That's in fact possible!
But that would be a very strange book, wouldn't it?

Tony Pope wrote:
> Batiffol's 1886 edition of Phi/043 is available on-line and can be
>
http://gallica. bnf.fr/ark: /12148/bpt6k9630 2s.image. r=Batiffol. langEN.f2. pagi
nation

Thank you very much for this link!

In the introduction I cannot find anything that points to reading from the
right to the left. Also from the notation of the folio numbers in his text I
take it that Batiffol did not see anything problematic in this codex. The
text smoothly goes on from one folio to the next.

The only other explanation I can come up with:
As Daniel Buck has already pointed out, every folio consists of two sheets
glued together.
At some point in the history of the codex, after Batiffol, someone or
something took them apart, perhaps water damage, and the sheets have then
been put together in the wrong way. But is this reasonable?

I still think that I have overlooked something.

Best wishes
Wieland
<><
------------ --------- -----
Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
mailto:wie@uni-bremen. de
http://www.uni- bremen.de/ ~wie
Textcritical commentary:
http://www.uni- bremen.de/ ~wie/TCG/

```--
Dirk Jongkind, PhD
Fellow and Tutor, St. Edmund's College
Research Fellow in New Testament Text and Language
Tyndale House
36 Selwyn Gardens
Cambridge, CB3 9BA		Phone:(UK) 01223 566603
United Kingdom			Fax:  (UK) 01223 566608

```
• Well, the Chinese bound this MS, so maybe that explains things? dbw ... Sent: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 11:22:27 +0200 From: Wieland Willker To:
Message 6 of 11 , Sep 2, 2009
Well, the Chinese bound this MS, so maybe that explains things?

dbw

----- Start Original Message -----
Sent: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 11:22:27 +0200
From: "Wieland Willker" <wie@...>
To: <textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [textualcriticism] Re: Problems with Phi 043

>
> Robert Relyea wrote:
> After a page or two, you would quickly learn to look to the right
> first then come back and finish on the left before turning the page.

I now understand your model. That's in fact possible!
But that would be a very strange book, wouldn't it?

Tony Pope wrote:
> Batiffol's 1886 edition of Phi/043 is available on-line and can be
>
http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k96302s.image.r=Batiffol.langEN.f2.pagi
nation

Thank you very much for this link!

In the introduction I cannot find anything that points to reading from
the
right to the left. Also from the notation of the folio numbers in his
text I
take it that Batiffol did not see anything problematic in this codex. The
text smoothly goes on from one folio to the next.

The only other explanation I can come up with:
As Daniel Buck has already pointed out, every folio consists of two
sheets
glued together.
At some point in the history of the codex, after Batiffol, someone or
something took them apart, perhaps water damage, and the sheets have then
been put together in the wrong way. But is this reasonable?

I still think that I have overlooked something.

Best wishes
Wieland
<><
--------------------------
Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
mailto:wie@...
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
Textcritical commentary:
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/

----- End Original Message -----
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.