Tuesday, September 23, 2008

A Day in Oxford

Had a nice day-trip to Oxford yesterday with another ETC blogger (a.k.a. Simon Gathercole). The Oxford folk were very kind and accommodating (considering we were from Cambridge, and one of us was a foreigner). We managed to see some good things in Duke Humfrey’s Library (the oldest reading room in the Bodleian Library - and rather atmospheric compared with the manuscript room in Cambridge University Library):

P. Oxy 1 (most of a page of the Gospel of Thomas)
P. Oxy 1170 (=P19)
P. Oxy 1597 (= P29)

Then we spent the afternoon in the Papyrology Rooms of the Sackler Library (make sure you get this right) and saw:

P. Oxy 2383 (P69) [on this see here and here];
P. Oxy 4406 (P105);
P. Oxy 4803 (P119); P. Oxy 4804 (P120); P. Oxy 4805 (P121); P. Oxy 4806 (P122) [on these see here];
P. Oxy 4844 (P123); P. Oxy 4845 (P124) [on these see here].

So that was eleven (admittedly quite small) manuscripts in one day: no amazing new discoveries; great for checking a couple of details - it is always helpful to see the real thing no matter how carefully you’ve transcribed information from pictures, helpful for two current writing projects, not quite long enough for a really thorough look at the newest Oxy ones.

Oh, and in between we had a bite of lunch with the Inklings, C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien at The Eagle and Child:


  1. Happy day! I am jealous. Eagle and Child was a regular when I lived in Oxford; it's usefully right next to the Theology Faculty building. One of the nice things about that Synoptic Problem conference in April was getting a chance to go back there again.

  2. I'm intrigued by your desire to preserve my anonymity, Peter!

    a.k.a. "Another ETC blogger"

  3. PS Please spell Tolkien right!


  4. OK. I've adjusted the post! (for identification and spelling)

  5. Re P69: the latest number of Novum Testamentum has an article on P69:
    Thomas A. Wynant, "A New Transcription of P. Oxy 2383 (P69)" NovT 50.4 (2008) 351-7. The article includes new multi-sprectral photographs, which show up very nicely online.

  6. Ah, I may have to go back for another look.

  7. I'm not sure I'm equally convinced by all of Wayment's re-readings. Anyone else had a look?

  8. I had a short look at the article and (oh man!), MAQHTAS is now so obvious!
    Why did nobody else found that before? No multi-sprectral imaging is necessary to see that.

    Preliminary conclusion:
    P69 omits vss 42-44, not 45a.
    Omission due to parablepsis is no option anymore now.

  9. true, but omission due to doctrinal reasons is still an option. Or we have two different versions of Luke's gospel (my personal view).