Of the 127 listed New Testament papyri fully fifty-nine come from Oxyrhynchus, and these comprise portions of the following texts:
Matthew (13 copies), Luke (2 copies), John (15 copies), Acts (4 copies), Romans (4 copies), 1 Corinthians (2 copies), 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, 1&2 Thessalonians, Hebrews (4 copies), James (4 copies), 1 Peter, 1 John, Jude, and Revelation (3 copies).
Matthew (P1 = P. Oxy 2; P19 = P. Oxy 1170; P21 = P. Oxy 1227; P35 = PSI 1; P70 = P. Oxy 2384 & PSI inv. CNR 419 & 420; P71 = P. Oxy 2385; P77 = P. Oxy 2683; P101 = P. Oxy 4401; P102 = P. Oxy 4402; P103 = P. Oxy 4403; P104 = P. Oxy 4404; P105 = P. Oxy 4406; P110 = P. Oxy 4494),
Luke (P69 = P. Oxy 2383; P111 = P. Oxy 4495),
John (P5 = P. Oxy 208 & 1781; P22 = P. Oxy 1228; P28 = P. Oxy 1596; P36 = PSI 3; P39 = P. Oxy 1780; P90 = P. Oxy 3523; P93 = PSI inv. 108; P106 = P. Oxy 4445; P107 = P. Oxy 4446; P108 = P. Oxy 4447; P109 = P. Oxy 4448; P119 = P. Oxy 4803; P120 = P. Oxy 4804; P121 = P. Oxy 4805; P122 = P. Oxy 4806),
Acts (P29 = P. Oxy 1597; P48 = PSI 1165; P112 = P. Oxy 4496; P127 = P. Oxy 4968),
Romans (P10 = P. Oxy 209; P26 = P. Oxy 1354; P27 = P. Oxy 1355; P113 = P. Oxy 4497),
1 Corinthians (P15 = P. Oxy 1008; P123 = P. Oxy 4844),
2 Corinthians (P124 = P. Oxy 4845),
Galatians (P51 = P. Oxy 2157),
Philippians (P16 = P. Oxy 1009),
1 Thessalonians (P65 = PSI 1373);
1-2 Thessalonians (P30 = P. Oxy 1598),
Hebrews (P13 = P. Oxy 657 & PSI 1292; P17 = P. Oxy 1078; P114 = P. Oxy 4498; P126 = PSI 1497),
James (P20 = P. Oxy 1171; P23 = P. Oxy 1229; P54; P100 = P. Oxy 4449),
1 Peter (P125 = P. Oxy 4934),
1 John (P9 = P. Oxy 402),
Jude (P78 = P. Oxy 2684), and
Revelation (P18 = P. Oxy 1079; P24 = P. Oxy 1230; P115 = P. Oxy 4499).
Just for information, and in case my adding up doesn't add up (or have missed something).
Thanks for this info, Peter. Any idea if transcriptions of all these papyri are available on-line?
ReplyDeleteEdgar
For some of the papyri, transcriptions are available at
ReplyDeletehttp://nttranscripts.uni-muenster.de/AnaServer?NTtranscripts+0+start.anv
I see, for example, that is gives p18 in Revelation 1:4-7. You need to select the reference and the "Verse by Verse" field.
This transcription does bring up a question, though. I'm familiar with the T, Z, C, and V sigla, but what's the significance of the S I see affixed to 1739?
ReplyDeleteLooking at the "manuscript description" field, I just answered my own question. It's apparently an abbreviation of supp; i.e., a portion of the mss in a later hand that doesn't have its own G-A #.
They haven't yet identified the supplement to Aleph (01S) in Mark 14:54 – Luke 1:56--which would leave 2 of the 3 oldest mss of Mark lacunose at the end of the book.
ReplyDeleteIs there a reason you've listed "1 Thessalonians, 1&2 Thessalonians"? Is there one copy of 1 Thessalonians by itself, and one copy of the pair?
ReplyDelete-TurretinFan
I would note that P21 (POxy 1227) has recently gone online at the Muhlenbery College library site:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.muhlenberg.edu/library/papyri/welcome.html
Their other holding of the POxy materials are also online. The photography is not as hi-res as I would like--nothing near what Dan Wallace is doing these days, but most is readable, if small. My own amateur photos of P21 may be a bit better than the ones now posted:
http://ntresources.com/classes/p21.htm
These were taken when photos were still allowed. On my last trip there with a text crit class we were told that photos were no longer allowed because they were scheduled to be digitized and posted.
Thanks for this very helpful listing. Of course, some of the "copies" you mention are fragments. For example, P.Oxy. 4934 (P125) is a very lacunose leaf containing 1 Pet 1:23-2:5 (recto) and 2:7-12 (verso). Digital images for more recently published papyri are available online at the Oxyrhyncus site. To my knowledge, transcriptions are only available in the Egypt Exploration Society's annual Oxyrhyncus volume.
ReplyDeleteScott,
ReplyDeleteThey are ALL fragments. These were, after all, dug out of a landfill.
I have an off topic question. Does anyone know where I can find Origen's text for Colossians 4:15 (Nympha or Nymphas)?
ReplyDeleteMetzger mentions him in his Textual Commentary, but my searching in the Patrologia Graeca did not yield anything. The TLG E does not contain anything either.
If anyone can help, please drop a line. Many thanks.
Emanuel Contac, Romania
Re Turretin's question: yes basically, it is just that P30 has bits from both 1 and 2 Thessalonians, so that seemed to be the clearest way to list them.
ReplyDeleteTwo other possible papyri:
ReplyDeleteP32, Titus. Hunt thought it was probably from Oxyrhynchus.
P52, John. Roberts thought it was possibly from Oxyrhynchus.
Matthew Hamilton
The question ought to be about the manuscripts, not about the papyri (specify whether they are are all codices) to the exclusion of parchment codices. A list of ancient manuscripts found at Oxyrhynchus would be more useful than a list of papyri.
ReplyDeleteThe persistent focus of NT scholars on the material rather than the manuscript is difficult to understand (we're talking about Egypt in late antiquity, not in the middle ages), and can be misleading, especially when non-specialists are involved (and in our case these are numerous, to say the least). Of course parchment fragments from Oxyrhynchus/Egypt can be tracked down in various repertories, but pride of place goes to the papyri. Yet for textual purposes a papyrus codex (say) of the sixth century doesn't possess qualities that a parchment codex of this date doesn't have. They are all manuscripts.
For the anonymous "amonymous" person regarding parchment NT MSS from Oxyrhynchus, here are the earliest ones (sorry, don't know about later ones)
ReplyDelete0206 (P.Oxy.1353), I Peter 5:5-13, 4th century, but Don Barker apparently has (apparently) recently dated it earlier
0308 (P.Oxy.4500), Rev.11:15-18, 4th century, but dated as 3rd-4th century in LDAB.
What is interesting, and I don't know if it has been discussed in the literature, is why the ratio of parchment to papyrus NT MSS from Oxyrhynchus is so low compared to the ratio of parchment to papyrus NT MSS found at all other sites in Egypt.
Matthew Hamilton
Thanks Matthew for mentioning those two. Not secure though. (On the other hand, neither is P127 acc. to the editors).
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said:
ReplyDelete"The question ought to be about the manuscripts, not about the papyri (specify whether they are are all codices) to the exclusion of parchment codices. A list of ancient manuscripts found at Oxyrhynchus would be more useful than a list of papyri."
I agree with your comments, and have said exactly the same thing in a paper from which this is a small excerpt. Of course if the question is: 'tell us about NT papyri from Oxyrhynchus' then this list is a good answer!
Re: 0206: my reading is that Dan Barker has argued that this could be dated earlier, or in the range II-IV, not that it definitely is earlier than IV.
ReplyDeleteFor the record (from another footnote): parchment texts from Oxy: 069 (P. Oxy 3); 071 (P. Oxy 401); 0162 (P. Oxy 847); 0163 (P. Oxy 848); 0169 (P. Oxy 1080); 0170 (P. Oxy 1169); 0172 (PSI 4); 0173 (PSI 5); 0174 (PSI 118); 0176 (PSI 251); 0206 (P. Oxy 1353); 0308 (P. Oxy 4500).
ReplyDeleteA week late but I just remembered from the SBL 2010 program "A New Fragment of Romans from Oxyrhynchus", Michael Theophilos, Australian Catholic University.
ReplyDeleteWas anybody at SBL 2010 and if so, could they provide any details - eg: papyrus or parchment?
Matthew Hamilton
In addition to a fragment of Romans, a check of Michael Theophilos's entry at Australian Catholic University shows there is another fragment from Oxyrhynchus that was discussed back in 2008, "A New Fragment of Romans from Oxyrhynchus".
ReplyDeleteAgain, does anybody know any details?
Matthew Hamilton
Hi guys. Does anyone know if P.Oxy 4844 includes 1 Corinthians 15:4 (specially the word "Third" or "Trite" in verse 4)??? I heard that the there was lacuna present, but not sure if that lacuna pertained to verse 4 as a whole or the word "third", or if that lacuna did not affect verse 4 at all... Thank you!
ReplyDelete