Peter M. Head, «The Habits of New Testament Copyists. Singular Readings in the Early Fragmentary Papyri of John», Vol. 85 (2004) 399-408
After an introduction that discusses the role that singular readings have played in the analysis of scribal habits, including an earlier study of synoptic gospel manuscripts by the same author, this study examines singular readings in the early fragmentary papyri of John’s Gospel. The study confirms earlier research showing that the most common singular readings concern spelling and that word order variations, word substitutions and harmonisations to context are also not uncommon. Omission of words is more common than addition.
404 Peter M. Head
some additional fragments of this manuscript were published providing text
from John 4,51-52; 5,21-25 (24). Although the fragments are small, two
singular readings are found. First, the omission of autw (4,52; frag b recto,
line 3); second the reading ed[wke for dedwke (at 5,22, frag b verso, line 3): an
aorist for the perfect (possibly harmony with 5,26-27?).
P5 (P. Oxy 208, 1781; London, BL Inv 782, 2484) comprises two
fragments of a late third century codex. The first fragment contains portions
of John 1,23-31.33-41 and 20,11-17.19-25 (it is probably the penultimate
sheet of a codex containing John’s Gospel in a single quire). The second
fragment contains portions of John 16,14-30. There is no doubt that these
come from the same original document. The rounded upright uncial is clear
and strong. The scribe uses nomina sacra (although not for anthropos), has a
tendency to leave small spaces between words and definite spaces for
punctuation purposes, and rough breathings. Particularly characteristic are a
number of corrections or alternative readings added to the text, possibly by
the original scribe (or possibly made by a diorthotes practically contemporary
with the original scribe).
At fol. 1, recto, line 15 (John 1,38): the scribe initially omitted oi de and
has then written these letters above the line (above a longish space reflecting
a natural pause in the syntax before eipan) Although this singular omission
was corrected (probably by the original scribe) it is clearly an acceptable
indication of the habits of this scribe, albeit of a different character to
uncorrected singular readings.
Three singular readings occur in the second fragment of this manuscript
(P. Oxy 1781). The first two involve spelling variants. At recto, line 20 (John
16,20) for luphqhsesqe this text reads louphqh[sesqe (it is likely that the
scribe originally wrote loip before crossing through the omicron and
changing the iota into an upsilon). At recto, line 22 (John 16,21) instead of
luphn this text reads loi[phn (a correction subsequently added an upsilon).
These two similar singular readings may have arisen through an idiosyncratic
pronunciation.
A major omission from John 16,23-24 occurred at verso line 8 where the
scribe omitted en tw onomati mou ew" arti ouk hthsate ouden. This is most
plausibly attributed to confusion caused by the repetition of en tw onomati mou
at either the beginning of successive lines in his exemplar (homoioarcton) or
at the end of successive lines (homoeoteleuton). These words were subse-
quently incorporated in a correction that was added at the bottom of the page
(possibly by a different hand) (25). At verso line 20 (16,27) this text singularly
omits egw. At line 2 of the second folio of the verso of the first fragment (i.e.
P. Oxy 208; John 20,19 the scribe has omitted kai[3] and subsequently added
this word above the line. This is another example of a singular omission that
has been subsequently corrected.
In addition to these readings a number of other singular readings may be
(24) T.C. SKEAT – B.C. MCGING, “Notes on Chester Beatty Biblical Papyrus I (Gospels
and Acts)â€, Her. 150 (1991) 21-25. ELLIOTT – PARKER also provide photographs and a
transcription in John. The Papyri.
(25) B.P. GRENFELL – A.S. HUNT, OxyPap XV (1922) 12.