an early second century letter, sent by the praefect’s office to a strategos.įrom this type derives the above-mentioned “Alexandrian stylistic class”, which itself is the origin of the Alexandrian majuscule.an edict of the praefect Marcus Petronius Mamertinus, written 133-137,.it is round, unimodular and looped, and the strokes end in apices (in the lower parts) and small hooks (in the upper parts) sometimes curves and flourishes are added at the end of letters. The first type (comprising a large number of New Testament manuscripts) was used in the main central and peripheral offices in the second and third centuries. Two forms of writing originated in bureaucratic and chancery practices. Here is how Orsine and Clarysse classify the famous P52 fragment (with my own formatting): Orsine and Clarysse also criticize Jaroš for referring to Comfort-Barrett’s work on manuscript dating (also arguing for early dates) as if it represented a consensus, “thought this is clearly not the case.” Orsine and Clarysse object that the dates of Jaroš are assigned sometimes on the basis of comparing single letters apart from the general graphic aspect. Jaroš also has assigned dates for manuscripts much earlier than those proposed by Nestle-Aland, but Orsine and Clarysse point out the fragile foundations of these early dates, being dependent as they are upon comparisons with less than absolutely firm dates of related manuscripts.
(Papyrologists have generally reacted negatively to Thiede’s general arguments for earlier dating of manuscripts.)ī.
Thiede has argued for a first century date for P52. So for the benefit of those who are curious, here are the relevant points and conclusion of Pasquale Orsini & Willy Clarysse.Ĭ.P. Larry Hurtado does not appear to be particularly interested in P52 since he makes no mention of it in his post, though he does mention around 15 other manuscripts. And since the Gospel of John is widely considered the latest of the canonical gospels, this fragment can serve as evidence for the traditional dating of the Gospels - the last decades of the first century. The main point of interest of this fragment is that it is generally dated to around 125 CE, and that since it was found in Egypt, this date accordingly is evidence that the Gospel of John, generally thought to have been composed in Asia Minor, must have been some time earlier than 125 CE. I won’t repeat all the details here since they are widely known and readily available on Wikipedia. Of course the one manscript that is of most popular and controversial interest is P52, that small scrap of text from the Gospel of John. The object of the recent article is a critique of the tendencies of a few scholars in NT studies to push for early datings of NT manuscripts, sometimes highly improbably early datings. The point of the recent article? Again, Hurtado: Pasquale Orsini & Willy Clarysse, “Early New Testament Manuscripts and Their Dates: A Critique of Theological Palaeography,” Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 88 (2012): 443-74.Īs Hurtado himself points out, “the authors are both professional/trained palaeographers, and Clarysse is the founder of the extremely valuable Leuven Database of Ancient Books (LDAB), which provides data on all published/edited manuscripts from the ancient world, and can be accessed online here.” With thanks to Larry Hurtado and the PhD student who brought this to his attention, I have accessed a recently published article that, as Dr Hurtado himself says, “all concerned with the study of NT manuscripts should read”:
0 kommentar(er)
