Entries with tag ntvmr .

Amulets and Ostraca

Image: T2

 

In an attempt to put the magic back in the Kurzgefaßte Liste, the INTF will be resurrecting the talisman and ostracon numbers.

In the latest issue of JBL (142 no. 4 [2023]: 633–655), Brice Jones and I explore the usefulness of amulets and magical ostraca for New Testament textual criticism. We briefly define these objects and describe how New Testament text is recorded on them. We then survey which amulets and magical ostraca were used in 20th critical editions of the Greek New Testament and why these categories were added and then subsequently removed from the Kurzgefaßte Liste.

Although the essential research is based on Jones’ book, New Testament Texts on Greek Amulets from Late Antiquity, it was fun to dig further into the history of Kurzgefaßte Liste publications to see exactly what happened to these witnesses. Years ago, I saw an unknown symbol in NestleNovum Testamentum Graece. It was not until I read Jones’ book that I finally made the connection that it was an amulet, T3.

Image: Citations of T3 (highlighted) in the Nestle 13th edition (1927) at Matt 6:12–13

 

Our article, “Resurrecting Amulets and Ostraca in New Testament Textual Criticism,” seeks to explain why the “talisman” and “ostracon” categories have now been continued in the Kurzgefaßte Liste. It highlights the shift in New Testament textual criticism toward an increased appreciation of the social milieu of those who used the biblical text and how this new perspective on the value of amulets and magical ostraca justifies their inclusion in the ECM, CBGM, and the Kurzgefaßte Liste.

Amulets up to T39 and magical ostraca up to Os30 will be catalogued in the Kurzgefaßte Liste as an appendix and will not be included in the tally of Greek New Testament witnesses for now.[1] Readers can see how their inclusion affects already cataloged witnesses and how images and transcriptions of these new additions are already accessible in the NTVMR.

To find which amulets and magical ostraca have been added to the Liste, in the NTVMR, just type in “t” or “os” in the search field under “name” (or use the six-digit Doc IDs beginning with 51 and 52 for “ID” in the search field). Or, you can click here for amulets and here for magical ostraca.

The article explains how these witnesses will appear in the apparatus of ECM Matthew when it is published, as well as in the CBGM. Their inclusion in the CBGM is probably unexpected since they are non-continuous witnesses. From the article,

Amulets have two major disadvantages in the context of the CBGM: (1) they contain a small amount of text, and (2) their text is often an indirect witness; that is, they were not initially created with the primary intention of accurately transmitting the New Testament text. Their limited text poses the same problem as other fragmented texts (like the early papyri), and, on this basis alone, their inclusion in the CBGM would produce cautionary results at best. As indirect witnesses, they would be inappropriately taken as representing the same tradition as continuous text manuscripts or lectionaries that are in the CBGM. (p. 647)

Nevertheless, the Greek text of amulets can be assigned to Greek variants in the apparatus, unlike versions that would have to rely on a retro-translation. In the CBGM, amulets and ostraca, with only a small amount of text available, qualify as “fragmented” witnesses and their inclusion in the Coherence at Variant Passages diagrams can be turned on or off with the button labeled “Frag.” This way, users will have the option to see them or not. Their inclusion is largely exploratory, and a study is planned to appear on the results in the forthcoming edition of ECM Matthew.

Below is the full list of amulets and magical ostraca now recorded in the Liste. If there are any more we should be aware of, please let us know!

 

 

T1
=[0152]

Mt 6:11-13

IV

Pottery

Athens, National Historical Museum, 12227

T2

Mt 4:23-24

VI-VII

Pg

Allentown, PA, Muhlenberg College, Pap. 1077 (theol. 2)

T3

Mt 6:9-13

VI

Papyrus

Location unknown, Zuletzt: Germany, (früher: Berlin, Staatliche Museen P. 954)

T4

Mt 6:9; Jn 1:23; Gospel incipits

VI?

Papyrus

Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, 13926

T5

Mt 6:9-13

VII-VIII

Wood

Heidelberg, Ägyptologisches Institut , 761

T6

Mt 6:9-13; Lk 9:37(?); 11:1b-2

V-VI

Papyrus

Giessen, Universitätsbibliothek, P. Iand. 14

T7

Mt 6:9; Mk 1:1-8; Lk 1:1-7; Jn 1:1-17

XII/XIII

Pg

Chicago, IL, University of Chicago Library, Ms. 125 (Goodspeed)

T8

Jn 2:1a-2; Rom 12:1-2

V-VI

Papyrus

Wien, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, G 2312

T9

Jn 1:1, 3

V

?

Glasgow, University Library, Ms. Gen. 1026/12

T10

Mt 28:19; Mt 4:23; Gospel incipits; Jn 1:1

V-VI

Pg

Berlin, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin Preußischer Kulturbesitz, P. 6096

T11

Mt 4:23; 9:35; 8:15; Mk 1:31

V-VI

Papyrus

Berlin, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin Preußischer Kulturbesitz, P. 21230

T12

Mt 6:9-11

IV-VI

Papyrus

Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Libraries, AM 8963

T13

Mt 6:9-13

VI-VII

Papyrus

Durham, NC, Duke University, David M. Rubenstein Library, P. Duk. Inv. 778

[T14]

= 0324

     

T15

Mt 6:9-13

VI-VIII

Papyrus

New Haven, CT, Yale University Library, P. CtYBR 4600

T16

Mt 6:9-13; 2 Cor 13:13(?)

IV-V

Papyrus

Oslo, University of Oslo Library , P. 1644, fol.;

Oslo/London, The Schøyen Collection, MS 244/4, fol.

T17

Mt 6:10-12

E III - A IV

Papyrus

Oxford, Sackler Library, P. Ant. 54

T18

Mt 6:11-13

VI

Papyrus

Köln, Institut für Altertumskunde, Inv. Nr. 3559 (recto), fol.; Inv. Nr. 3583 (recto), fol.

T19

Mt 6:12-13

V

Papyrus

Köln, Institut für Altertumskunde, Inv. Nr. 3302

T20
=[P105]

Mt 27,62-64; 28,2-5

V/VI

Papyrus

Oxford, Sackler Library, P. Oxy. 4406

T21

Mk 1:1-2

III-IV

Papyrus

Oxford, Sackler Library, 25 3B 58/E(c)

T22

Jn 1:1-11

V-VI

Papyrus

Köln, Institut für Altertumskunde, Inv. Nr. 649, fol.; Inv. Nr. 689, fol.

T23

Jn 1:5-6

VI-VII

Pg

Wien, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, G 29831

T24

Jn 1:29, 49

VI-VII

Papyrus

Berlin, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin Preußischer Kulturbesitz, P. 11710

T25

2 Cor 10:4; 1 Thess 5:8; Eph 6:16

VI

Papyrus

Wien, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, G 26034, fol.; G 30453, fol.

T26
=[0262]

1 Tim 1:15-16

VII

Pg

Berlin, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin Preußischer Kulturbesitz, P. 13977

T27
=[P78]

Jd 4.5.7.8

III/IV

Papyrus

Oxford, Sackler Library, P. Oxy. 2684

T28

Col 3:9-10

IV/V

Papyrus

London, University College, Petrie Museum, UC 32070

T29

Act 9:1

III/IV

Papyrus

Birmingham, University of Birmingham Cadbury Research Library, P.Harr. inv. 486

T30

Mt 1:20

VI-VIII

Papyrus

Ann Arbor, MI, University of Michigan Library, P. Mich. inv. 4944b

T31

Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Jn 1:1

V-VI

Papyrus

Alexandria, Bibliotheca Alexandrina Antiquities Museum, BAAM 0505

T32

Jn 1:1

 

Papyrus

Heidelberg, Institut für Papyrologie, P. Lat. 5

T33

Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Lk 1:1; Jn 1:1

VI-VII

Papyrus

Wien, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, G 348

T34

Mt 6:9-13

IV

Papyrus

Oxford, Sackler Library, P. Oxy. 4010

T35

Ps 21:19/Mt 27:35/Jn 19:24

VI

Papyrus

Wien, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, G 29418

T36

Mt 6:11-12

VI-VII

Papyrus

Wien, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, L 91

T37

Mt 6:9

VII?

Wood

Paris, Musée du Louvre, D 552B

T38

James 1:14-17

E V?

Papyrus

Genova, Biblioteca Universitaria, 1160 Vo

 

 

Os1-20
=[0153]

Matt 27:31–32; Mark 5:40–41; 9:17, 18, 22; 15:21; Luke 12:13–15, 15– 16; 22:40–45, 45–49, 49–53, 53–54, 55–59, 59–60, 61, 61–64, 65–69, 70–71; John 1:1–9, 14–17; 18:19–25; 19:15–17

V-VI

Pottery

Location unknown

Os21

Lk 1:42, 28

IV-VIII

Pottery

London, British Museum, EA 33101

Os22

John 2:1

VII

Pottery

London, British Museum, EA 55805

Os23

Act 2:22-24 (UC 62598), 2:25-29, 32-36; 3:1-2 (UC 62568); 15:38-16:1, 7-9 (UC 62540+62547); 16:18; 19:1, 8-9 (UC 62567); Rom 13:3-6, 7-11 (UC 62600); Gal 1:8-11 (UC 62732), 15-18; 2:3-8 (UC 62583); James 2:2-3, 8-9 (UC 62719); 4:11-13 (UC 62592); 1Jn 2:12-14, 19-22 (UC 31897); 3:17-22; 4:1-3 (UC 62566), 19-14, 18-21 (UC 62584); Jude 1-3, 4 (UC 62573).

V

Pottery

London, University College, Petrie Museum, UC 31897, fol.; UC 62598, fol.; UC 62568, fol.; UC 62540, fol.; UC 62547, fol.; UC 62567, fol.; UC 62600, fol.; UC 62732, fol.; UC 62583, fol.; UC 62719, fol.; UC 62592, fol.; UC 62573, fol.; UC 62566, fol.; UC 62584, fol.

Os24

Rom 8:31

IV-VI

Stone

Cambridge, Cambridge University Library, Ostraka inv. 129

Os25

Lk 1:28

V-VII

Pottery

London, British Museum, EA 32966

Os26

Mt 1:19-20

V-VI

Pottery

Turin, Museo Egizio, Cat. Fab. 2136

Os27

Mt 7:18-20, 29-8:4

VI-VII

Pottery

Cairo, Coptic Museum, Naqlun 53/88, fol.; Naqlun 64/86, fol.

Os28

Mt 16:18-19; Heb 5:6

VI-VII

Pottery

New York, NY, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Acc. no. 14.1.202

Os29

Jn 9:1-12; Act 3:11

VII-VIII

Pottery

London, British Museum, Eg. Dept. (?)

Os30

Heb 2

VI-VIII

Pottery

Anonymous owner, Anonymous owner, Milan Private Owner

 

We are still in the process of acquiring images, but many images are already included in the NTVMR, especially ones with text from Matthew, such as T34:

 

Some ostraca also have images in the NTVMR, for example Os25:

 

I end with a quote from the article:

While there is little doubt that amulets and magical ostraca provide an important window into early Christian faith and practices, as many have convincingly argued, the precise textual worth of each of these witnesses remains to be determined. Magical ostraca in particular warrant further research, and scholars now have new resources at their fingertips to gain insights into and to research the rich textual history of the New Testament. It is hoped that recording these witnesses in the Liste (and their images in the NTVMR whenever possible), and including them in the ECM and CBGM, will make way for more productive and nuanced research on their worth for textual criticism and the role they play in the exploration of the social history of early Christianity. (p. 655)

[1] Peter Head’s essay, “Additional Greek Witnesses,” in The Text of the New Testament in Contemporary Research, ed. Ehrman and Holmes, 2nd ed (2013), was especially helpful for bringing the list of ostraca up to date. Correspondence with Theodore De Bruyn was very helpful when I first began to research amulets. I have Joseph Sanzo to thank for bringing to my attention, among other things, that the term “ostraca” really should be “magical ostraca” since we are talking about apotropaic artifacts, not mere citations from the Bible.

How Many Greek New Testament Manuscripts Are There REALLY? The Latest Numbers

By Katie Leggett and Greg Paulson

 

In this post we'll tackle the question of how many Greek New Testament manuscripts there are using the latest information in the NTVMR. We'll explain how Greek New Testament witnesses are currently registered in the Liste and some of the complexities of counting manuscripts.

The work of cataloguing all known Greek New Testament manuscripts worldwide is a massive endeavor that has been going on for many years. The Kurzgefasste Liste (for more on the history of the Liste, see here) was designed to offer a systematic list of all known Greek New Testament manuscripts and to make them available as potential witnesses for use in critical editions and more widely for scholarly research. Greek New Testament manuscripts are designated with a Gregory-Aland (GA) number and their codicological and paleographical features like date, contents, writing material, script, lines, columns, and dimensions are catalogued.

Just since 2019, an additional 167 Gregory-Aland numbers have been added (2 papyri, 3 majuscules, 81 minuscules, and 81 lectionaries.[1] These numbers would be even higher if we also included the dozens of additions to the Liste which were not given a new GA number but were identified as parts of manuscripts already entered therein. While the Liste aims to offer a census of available witnesses of the Greek New Testament, it is far from exhaustive. It's important to keep in mind there are still more manuscripts we aren't yet aware of. The Liste is constantly in flux. We are very grateful for the support of scholars, librarians, and curators who continue to collaborate and inform us of unregistered manuscripts.[2]

We have also been in the process of cleaning up the Liste by identifying manuscripts that were unknowingly entered twice, combining folios that belong together, and removing manuscripts that never should have been entered in the first place because, for example, they have no New Testament content or were entered without enough information to identify them.

While some might find it disconcerting that so many entries have been stricken from the Liste, this purging process has actually been going on for many years. In the first edition of the Liste (1963), Kurt Aland described this "Bereinigung" and its importance in detail; he continued this reduction process into the second edition in 1994 as well.[3] The desideratum has never been to simply add as many manuscripts as possible but rather to offer the most accurate representation of the available manuscript evidence. We recognize there have been many inconsistencies over the years about what qualifies for inclusion (e.g. Psalms and Odes, prayer books, ostraca, supplements, manuscripts with virtually no information to identify them again, etc.). We are in process of creating more sensible and transparent criteria for what manuscripts should be removed and what will be included in the future.

 

Counting Complexities

Some of the factors that make tallying manuscripts difficult have been discussed elsewhere but we'll briefly address a few of these issues here.[4]

First, throughout its history, the Liste (or its predecessor inaugurated by Gregory) has included diverse New Testament witnesses such as lectionaries and other liturgical books, amulets, ostraca, and even patristic works; these have been divided between the four main Liste categories of: papyri, majuscules, minuscules, and lectionaries. (But of course, the distinctions between categories are not always clearcut.) Under minuscules one also finds catenae, but not lectionaries even though they are written in minuscule script. Under lectionaries were Psalms and Odes (which will no longer be added) as well as other liturgical books like euchologia.[5] Even if we compare two "complete" New Testaments, a full continuous text of Mark will contain all 16 of its chapters, but a complete lectionary might only contain four or five chapters of Mark (none of which are even a complete chapter). Yet a lectionary will still be considered "complete" for what it was intended for (in this case, liturgy on Sundays). This means when we speak of "manuscripts" we mean a wide range of witnesses with Greek text of the NT, and these of course have varying worth for critical editions, dating from the late second century to the eighteenth century.

Second, numerous manuscripts have gone missing over the years or have been destroyed. We're still working out the best practice for how to deal with these. Should they be counted, especially if there are no images? For the moment if we have good reason to believe a manuscript no longer physically exists (but have not yet confirmed), we have decided to tag it in the NTVMR with the feature called "Manuscript Destroyed." There are currently 56 manuscripts in the Liste tagged as “Manuscript Destroyed”. The majority of these were held at Mega Spileon Monastery in Kalavryta and the Skete of Saint Andrews on Mt. Athos. Sometimes we are pleasantly surprised to rediscover a manuscript presumed destroyed. This was the case, for example, with 0229 formerly housed at the Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana in Florence. While the 1963 Liste noted it was destroyed, it was, in fact only badly damaged and is now housed at the Papriological Institute in Florence.[6] Another example is the four leaves of 0106 held at the University Library in Leipzig that were listed as "Kriegsverlust" and long assumed to have been destroyed in WW2. However, they were recently rediscovered in the Moscow State University Library.[7]

Another concern is what to do with manuscripts that have long been missing. When we don't know the current location of a manuscript, we list it under "location unknown" (formerly called "Besitzer unbekannt"). There are currently 105 manuscripts in this category, but these are certainly not all the same! Some are here because they were recently auctioned or sold. Numerous manuscripts have landed in private collections, which makes them tricky to keep track of. This was the case for 2805 which was held in a private collection in Athens until it was sold on Christies in 2013. Through a gracious tip[8] we found out it had been purchased by a private collector in New York.

Unfortunately, this proves the exception as private buyers often do not want to be identified, especially if their manuscript has a problematic provenance.

Other manuscripts in "location unknown" like those in Damascus have been missing for over 100 years. Despite our best efforts, we've not be able to verify where these are.[9] But manuscripts that have been missing for decades do occasionally turn up again. Many of the manuscripts held at the Kosinitza Monastery near Drama, Greece were looted during WWI and have been missing since then. Several of these have been located again in recent years including 1424 and 1429 which have been returned to Drama.[10] Just last month we discovered another Kosinitza New Testament manuscript: L2378 that has ended up in Sydney. (Here is a presentation about this lectionary. At timestamp 6:24 the origin of the manuscript and its theft from Monastery Kosinitza is narrated.)

In 2021, GA 2853 was removed from "location unknown" when it was discovered to be the same as 2892 owned by the Van Kampen Foundation and housed in Orlando.[11] Likewise we discovered 2343, whose location has been unknown since at least the 1963 Liste, was at the Walters Art Museum under GA 2375. These few examples illustrate why we never give up hope of a manuscript turning up again after we've lost track of it. 

Adding to the complexity of counting manuscripts is the fact that one entry, that is one GA number, can represent a single fragment with just a few verses like 0317 (pictured below).

 

Or one GA number can represent a rather voluminous codex, such as L351, with over 300 leaves (pictured below).

 

While this fragmentary nature is well known for papyri (and perhaps majuscules), this is often overlooked when it comes to minuscules and lectionaries. In fact, approximately 27% of lectionaries have 50 folios or less and 10% of minuscules have 50 folios or less.

Another matter that can make understanding data in the Liste confusing is that there isn't always a one-to-one correlation between an entry in the Liste and a single artefact. That is, one GA number doesn't necessarily correspond to one physical manuscript or a single shelf number at a holding institution. It is possible for multiple artefacts scattered throughout the globe to share a single GA number. This is the case with L2434, which has a current total of 48 leaves dispersed throughout 26 locations.[12] Here is the list of locations of L2434 in the NTVMR.

Or it often happens that a single artefact will be assigned multiple GA numbers, such as Panteleimon Monastery 97, which has been given 17 Gregory-Aland numbers! (See its entry in Pinakes below.) 

 

Each part of the artefact was given a separate entry because it had unique features which could not be subsumed under a single GA number.

Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana Gr. Z. 10  has two GA numbers, 209 and 2920, because fol. 1-381 were originally Gospels, Acts, Catholic Letters, and Paul, and later a manuscript of Revelation was combined with it, becoming fol. 382-421 in the same codex. These two portions of Gr. Z. 10 are from different centuries, have a different line count, and the script is different (with 2920 resembling 205 according to Gregory). These were clearly originally two separate artifacts and were not intentionally made to be bound together.

Thus, one artefact can be given multiple GA numbers if the physical features (e.g. date, columns, writing material) deviate so greatly from the other parts that it must be catalogued in the Liste as a separate entry to record these distinctions. Here is an example from Barb. Gr. 521, where GA 054 and 392 are bound in the same codex (see below).

 

And depending on the purpose of an artifact, a shelf mark could represent a collection of material, such as Paris, Suppl. Gr. 1155, which has 11 GA numbers. As you can see in these images, folio 4v Suppl. Gr. 1155 (GA 063) is distinct from the following folio 5r (GA L352) (see below).

 

Then there are supplemental portions of manuscripts.[13] If the supplement was originally part of another manuscript and was later torn out and bound together with another manuscript, in the past the rule of thumb was that it was assigned a new GA number.[14] Some supplements were created specifically with the intention to replace the missing text in a manuscript, and these are not normally given a separate GA number (e.g., fol. 89-96 in GA 2542).[15] However, this isn't always possible to know for certain, and doesn't change the fact that part of a manuscript may have distinct paleographical and codicological features that cannot simply be subsumed under one GA number. For new entries when a manuscript contains features that varies substantially from the rest of the manuscript,[16] we will consider on a case-by-case basis whether to give that portion a new GA number. We must be careful about assigning GA numbers ad absurdum and inflating the Liste beyond what is manageable or useful.

So, a manuscript scattered across various holding institutes may share a single GA number or portions of a single artefact may be assigned multiple GA numbers. Palimpsests add yet another layer of complexity since the same pages of a single artifact can be assigned two GA numbers. This is the case with Cambridge University Library, Ms. Add. 10062. The undertext is 040 (Codex Zacynthius) containing portions of the Gospel of Luke, and the overtext is L299 with daily readings from the four Gospels. 

Thus, one GA number does not always correspond to a single manuscript or artefact but rather designates a distinct paleographical and codicological witness of the New Testament text. This distinction is useful at times for understanding the data in the Liste and working with manuscripts in the real world. For example, if someone wanted to view Greek New Testament manuscripts at the Herzog August Library in Wolfenbüttel, Germany they would look in the Liste and see eight entries. But if they asked the librarian for eight New Testament manuscripts there might be some confusion since the library has only five artefacts with text of the NT with five different shelf numbers (or six if you count their manuscript of Psalms with Odes!). In other words, how the INTF catalogues manuscript witnesses in the Liste (that is, based on text critical features) may be different than how holding institutions themselves catalogue their manuscripts. In the case of Wolfenbüttel, one of their artifacts was given a second GA number for the book of Revelation, and two of their manuscripts contain palimpsests with New Testament text.

With so many factors that complicate the task of counting manuscripts, it's no wonder that obtaining an accurate tally of Greek New Testament manuscripts is often seen as a fool's errand and the desideratum is round numbers or a gross estimate that may be much higher or lower than the actual number. We fully recognize that the data in the Liste is a work in progress and there are still inconsistencies and errors to be resolved. There are still far too many manuscripts registered which we know very little about. It is likely there are still dozens of duplicate entries and fragmented/separated manuscripts that belong together that need to be identified.[17] Nevertheless, we believe the Liste offers the best data available about the current Greek New Testament manuscript evidence and we strive continually to make it more accurate.

In light of the complexities mentioned above, we are convinced that rather than trying to ascertain how many New Testament manuscripts we have, a more useful question—and one which we can answer by utilizing the NTVMR—is how many New Testament witnesses have been catalogued in the Liste to date. By utilizing the NTVMR, this is relatively easy to find out.

Without further ado, here are the current tallies:

 

Customizing the Results

 

The NTVMR also offers users the ability to sort through the data and generate lists which eliminate certain kinds of manuscripts. Providing customized parameters can refine search results. It is possible, for example, to eliminate all manuscripts tagged as "Manuscript Destroyed," or "Presumed Missing," or other liturgical books or commentary manuscripts (including catenae).

For example, if you wanted to know how many minuscules there are that do not have a commentary, you can do the following search in the NTVMR:

Enter "3" as the ID in the "Manuscript Num." field

Select the feature "Commentary"

Check the box "Does not have"

Select the feature "Removed"

Select "Display"

Check the box "Does not have"

(Or click here to perform this search—you can see the search parameters in the URL.)

And you’ll discover there are 2,236 minuscules in the Liste that do not have a commentary.

Another example: if you want a tally of all lectionaries, but do not want to include ones tagged as "Other liturgical books," this can be easily done as well.

Or you can add together all destroyed manuscripts with ones presumed missing, and subtract this number from the total number of manuscripts, which results in 5,541 manuscripts.

Therefore, user can generate a more sparse or refined list of New Testament witnesses depending on their interests or research purposes.

 

In closing, the current number of entries in the Kurzgefasste Liste, 5,700, is only a snapshot in time; it will surely be outdated soon—probably even before you’ve finished reading this. There are certainly still more duplicate entries to be found, more manuscripts waiting to be assessed, and more discoveries to be made. While we continue to hope for new discoveries, particularly as exciting digitization efforts are underway in places like Sinai and Athos, it's also possible the current numbers will decrease as more entries are combined and we continue to prune results so we can offer the most accurate and reliable inventory of the Greek New Testament manuscript evidence.

 


[1] Some of these lectionaries were inserted in the free numbers L1581–L1598 and L1596 (see here).

[2] Here a special word of thanks is due to the tireless efforts of Georgi Parpulov who has informed us of dozens of new additions, many of which result from Birmingham’s Catena project.

[3] See Aland, "Einführung," in the Liste (1st ed., 1963), 12ff.

[4] See J. Raasted, Review of the 1963 Liste, Libri 16 (1966): 75–76; J.K. Elliott, Review of the 1994 Liste, NovT 39 (1997): 85–87; D.C. Parker, An Introduction to the New Testament Manuscripts and Their Texts (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 38–46.

[5] We are waiting for a full-scale analysis of the liturgical books catalogued in the Liste before we undertake any efforts to sort through which manuscripts in the lectionary category should be removed.

[6] This error seems to stem from translating the Italian "distrutto" as "destroyed" instead of "badly damaged." See Iginio Crisci “La collezione dei papiri di Firenze” in Proceedings of the Twelfth International Congress of Papyrology, ed. Deborah H. Samuel, ASP 7 (Toronto: Hakkert, 1970), 93

[7] R. Ast, A. Lifshits, and J. Lougovaya, "Codex Tischendorfianus 1, Rediscovered and Revisited," ZPE (2016): 141-160.

[8] Thanks to Brent Niedergall for this information.

[9] For some background on these missing fragments see here.

[10] L1240 and 2856 both stolen from Kosinitza are now in Sofia, Bulgaria. It is also highly likely that this manuscript, sold in 2004 through Sotheby’s, is Kosinitza's L1244.

[11] Thanks to Hugh Houghton for his assistance in this discovery. Unfortunately, the whole Van Kampen collection seems to have now gone underground with the closing of the Holy Land Experience in Orlando, FL.

[12] Some of these leaves were in the Liste under four different GA numbers. After Andrew Patton identified them as originally belonging to one lectionary, dismembered by Otto Ege, they were consolidated under the GA number L2434. Since then numerous leaves have been added. For more watch the video here.

[13] Dealing with supplements has admittedly been handled in different ways throughout the years and there are many inconsistencies in the Liste concerning which supplements get their own GA number and why. Hundreds of manuscripts have anomalies, e.g. in contents, line count, different hands etc. and recording these goes beyond the scope of a "kurzgefasste" list.

[14] This is generally observable when the contents of the biblical text overlap (e.g., 278 and 2898), although this is rare—more often a lectionary and a minuscule will share the same codex; or Revelation (which often circulated by itself) will be added to the end of an existing codex.

[15]The most famous exception to this rule is Vatican gr. 1209 (i.e. GA 03 and 1957).

[16] How much divergent material a manuscript should contain and how many features must be different from the main part of the manuscript depends on several factors. As a rule of thumb, if only one or two features vary, we will insert a brief footnote to explain which features are different. If we are dealing with three or more divergent features, we consider assigning a new number. For example, a manuscript contains 50 pages written three centuries later with a different line count and a different number of columns than the main manuscript, then the case could be made that these folios represent a unique instantiation of the New Testament text which merit a new GA number. This is our criteria going forward. The INTF does not currently have the time and resources to review all previously entered manuscripts for supplements that may meet these criteria.

[17] This is especially true for the lectionaries. We are currently in the process of uploading microfilm images for lectionaries in the NTVMR which will make it much easier to identify duplicate entries or folios that belong together.

Liste (Greek) and Manuscript Catalogue (all)

The NTVMR began as a digital environment to carry out editorial work on the Greek New Testament. As the NTVMR has continued to expand and evolve, we have hosted a variety of research projects there; although most of these projects are related to the Greek New Testament, some have to do with languages other than Greek (e.g. the Mark16 project) or even deal with non-canonical texts (e.g. 1 Clement).

 

To support these projects, we have been allocating new Doc IDs in the NTVMR to a variety of relevant primary resources which do not belong in the Kurzgefaßte Liste. For example, Got1; syH3; sa 1; VL 1; arm 252.

 

This has recently created some confusion about which materials searchable on the NTVMR actually belong in the Liste since non-Greek New Testament resources were included in the same database.  

 

Therefore, we have taken steps to make this distinction clearer by changing the “Liste” link so that only what belongs in the Kurzgefaßte Liste, i.e., manuscripts designated with a Gregory-Aland number, are located under this link. This should correspond to what will be included in the forthcoming printed Liste.

 

For those who benefit from other research projects in the NTVMR beyond the parameters of Greek New Testament manuscripts, we have created a new link labeled “Manuscript Catalog,” which has all available documents (including all Greek New Testament witnesses included in the Liste).

 

All documents in the NTVMR are now available under the new link in the sidebar on the homepage:

 

Manuscript Catalog (All)

 

The link for the Liste is now restricted to only items in the Kurzgefaßte Liste:

 

Liste (Greek)

 

By providing separate search tools we hope to offer the user an experience that is tailored to their specific research purposes. Researchers who want to work strictly with Greek New Testament manuscripts will now have a more efficient platform to do so. Likewise, those who want to incorporate other traditions into their research will continue to see all results available under “Manuscript Catalog (all).”

How to Make a Critical Edition on the NTVMR

(Updated @Classics URL for how to make a critical edition.)

 

The NTVMR is useful tool for researching Greek New Testament manuscripts (and manuscripts in other languages as well). The platform can, however, seem daunting at first sight. Over at the Digital Orientalist, I have written a short overview of the NTVMR and given brief explanations of the its main features. It can be read here: https://digitalorientalist.com/2021/04/02/introduction-to-the-ntvmr/

 

 

You can also find helpful information about how to use the NTVMR under: https://ntvmr.uni-muenster.de/help

 

For those of you who are already familiar with the NTVMR and want to collate manuscripts and make your own critical edition, there is a step-by-step guide, now published in @Classics, which can be accessed here: https://classics-at.chs.harvard.edu/classics18-paulson/

 

This guide will show you how to view the differences between any manuscripts of your choosing (provided you or someone else has already transcribed them) on the NTVMR.

 

Image of Unedited Realtime Collation tool in the NTVMR

 

The NTVMR is not just a space to view images, but offers a customizable environment to build your own text-critical project. I hope you give it a try! Feedback is welcome.

Recent Bloggers Recent Bloggers

Darius Mueller
Posts: 2
Stars: 5
Date: 17/06/24
marie-luise lakmann
Posts: 3
Stars: 12
Date: 29/05/24
Katie Leggett
Posts: 1
Stars: 3
Date: 04/05/24
Greg Paulson
Posts: 24
Stars: 68
Date: 19/01/24
Klaus Wachtel
Posts: 2
Stars: 3
Date: 13/03/23
Theodora Panella
Posts: 2
Stars: 6
Date: 09/03/20
Jan Graefe
Posts: 2
Stars: 0
Date: 18/09/19
Siegfried G. Richter
Posts: 1
Stars: 3
Date: 01/07/19
Nikolai Kiel
Posts: 1
Stars: 4
Date: 06/06/19