What We Know about the People behind the Dead Sea Scrolls History, archeology, and the scrolls themselves reveal a fascinating picture of a unique Jewish community. Anthony FergusonThe ancient Jewish group known as the Essenes remained in obscurity for over two millennia. Neither the Old Testament nor the New Testament mentions this group, and although ancient authors like Josephus, Philo, and Pliny describe them, in addition to some church fathers, the Essenes never captured the public’s interest quite like the Pharisees did. All that changed one day in 1948 after the exhilarating announcement that ancient biblical manuscripts had been discovered near the Dead Sea and now known the world over as the Dead Sea Scrolls. This announcement would soon catapult the Essenes from obscurity to the front pages of every major newspaper. The Essenes became popular almost immediately. Despite this popularity, knowledge of the Essenes is often quite basic for most scholars and interested laypeople. Most would correctly identify the Essenes as a Jewish sect, but a more detailed description evades many. So who were the Essenes? We need to first decide on the relevant evidence which is not completely straightforward. Scholars disagree about the reliability of the historical accounts, the nature of the Qumran settlement, and the group described in the non-biblical Dead Sea Scrolls. So which evidence is relevant for this conversation, and ultimately, what does the evidence tell us about this mysterious group of Jews that has captured our attention? Putting the puzzling pieces together The community described in the Qumran manuscripts does not designate itself as Essenes. Rather, they designate themselves with titles like “the Yahad” (e.g., 1QS 5:3), “the sons of light” (e.g., 1QS 2:16), and “members of the covenant” (CD 2:2). This discrepancy, therefore, compels us to start our investigation with the sources that use the name “Essenes.” Among these accounts, Philo (Hypothetica 11:1–18; Every Good Man is Free 12:75–13:91), Josephus (Jewish Wars 2.119–161; Life 1.10–12; Antiquities 18.18–22), and Pliny (Natural History 5.25) are the most well-known and most cited—and for good reason. These authors were contemporaries of the group. Their accounts are rather detailed, and Pliny’s description, in particular, provides us with “GPS coordinates” to the Essenes’s settlement! Thus, we will begin with the historical accounts and then proceed to the evidence from Qumran and the scrolls deposited nearby. The evidence 1. Historical accounts The historical accounts should be interpreted critically since scholars have pointed out apparent inconsistencies and embellishments in these accounts. For example, Pliny says the group has existed for thousands of ages. Despite this reality, the accounts have considerable overlap, and this overlap illustrates the accounts’ credibility. Get new articles and updates in your inbox. Leave this field empty if you're human: 2. The site Pliny’s “GPS coordinates” link the site of Qumran to the Essenes, so the site of Qumran is a good second step. In his Natural History, Pliny described three locations on the northwest shore of the Dead Sea, and he located the Essene settlement north of Masada and Engedi (Natural History 5.25). To the best of our knowledge, Qumran is the only settlement that fits this description at this time.1James C. VanderKam, An Introduction to Early Judaism, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2022), 167. This geographical and chronological correspondence demonstrates an important link between Pliny’s accounts and the site of Qumran and strongly suggests that this was an Essene settlement. In addition to Pliny’s description, the site’s archeology and artifacts provide a further link between the Essenes and Qumran.2Jodi Magness’ excellent book The Archaeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls,2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2021) traces several similarities between the archaeology of the site and the historical accounts including the toilet habits, nature of the pottery, and the nature of the site summarized here. For example, Josephus described the Essenes’ modest approach to defecating. The Essenes, according to Josephus, would defecate privately and then wash afterward (Jewish Wars 2.148–149). The archaeological site at Qumran provides key details about the Essenes. Photo credit This historical account interestingly aligns with what scholars have identified as a toilet at Qumran. The toilet is roofed, secluded to ensure privacy, and connected to a ritual bath. Although concern for privacy and a desire to wash oneself after this act fits our modern hygienic perspective, Josephus’s account demonstrates that these practices were exceptional. The lack of ornate features and decorative pottery likewise aligns with Philo’s account that the Essenes despised luxury (Philo, Hypothetica 11.11). 3. The manuscripts The Qumran manuscripts, often called the Dead Sea Scrolls, are likewise important data when investigating the identity of the Essenes. Although some scholars argue that Jews fleeing the Jewish revolts deposited these manuscripts in the caves, this suggestion is unlikely since the non-biblical texts describe a community that had separated from mainline Judaism (1QS 8:9–18; 9:20).3James C. VanderKam has a helpful concise discussion of this topic in Early Judaism, 166–167. Scholars have rightly discovered many similarities between the historical accounts and these texts, which further suggest that these texts were deposited there by Essenes.4Magness, for example, discusses many of these similarities in The Archaeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls, 2nd ed. Josephus’s description of the initiation process in Jewish Wars 2.137–142 aligns with the community’s process outlined in their handbook (see 1QS 6:14–23). The penal code described in both accounts is similar. For example, both forbid spitting during a meeting of the assembly (1QS 7:13; Jewish Wars 2.147). Members of the Essenes were prohibited from sharing their community’s secrets (Jewish Wars 2.142); 1QS has a similar prohibition (1QS 9:17). The similarities strongly suggest that these manuscripts were Essene documents. A scholar studies the Great Isaiah Scroll. Image credit So, who were the Essenes? The historical accounts, the site of Qumran, and the Qumran manuscripts all provide valuable evidence for understanding the identity of the Essenes. What do we learn about them from this information? Here are six characteristics that we know about this group. 1. Essenes were sectarians The Essenes separated from mainline Judaism because of different interpretations of the law, or halakhic disagreements. These disagreements are outlined in a text labeled 4QMMT (MMT is an abbreviation for the Hebrew words translated as “Some Percepts of the Torah). This group further disagreed with the lifestyle of the Hasmonean rulers. These ethical concerns are outlined in a commentary on Habakkuk (1QpHab). Here, we learn that the “wicked priest” (a high priest from the temple) pursued the Teacher of Righteousness (the leader of the Essene community) to destroy him on the Day of Atonement. The Essenes separated from Judaism in Jerusalem for ethical and hermeneutical reasons. 2. Essenes lived throughout Israel Josephus makes this point when he describes how the Essenes did not occupy just one town, but lived together closely in many towns (Jewish Wars 2). This detail is verified in the community’s handbook (see 1QS 6:2) and by the archaeological evidence. The incongruence, for example, between the number of kitchen dishes that number over one thousand and the maximum capacity of permanent residences implies that this could not be a permanent residence for all Essences.5See Magness, Archaeology of Qumran, 79–81 for this evidence and conclusion. Rather, Qumran probably functioned as a community center as described by Jodi Magness and others. 3. Essenes cherished the Bible Approximately one-fourth of the scrolls discovered at Qumran are biblical texts.6See Emmanuel Tov’s statistics in Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, 3rd ed. (Minneapolis, Fortress, 2011), 95. In addition, the Qumran community composed numerous other literary documents based on the biblical text. These include commentaries, liturgical compositions, compositions that reworked beloved Bible stories, and harmonized texts that topically rearranged some of the biblical texts. Moreover, if ten men were gathered in the same location, they were required to designate someone to study the Law continually (1QS 6:6). The Essenes cherished the Bible. Approximately one-fourth of the scrolls discovered at Qumran are biblical texts. 4. Essenes were devout Josephus and Philo both describe their devotion to the Lord and to the Scriptures as praiseworthy. The penal code outlined in their handbook (1QS) prescribed up to a two-year punishment for any member who sinned unintentionally while an intentional sin could lead to banishment (1QS 9:1). Strict obedience to the Scriptures was expected from community members. 5. Essenes were extremely hierarchal Newly initiated community members would immediately be assigned a rank in the community based on their understanding of the Law and the integrity of their life (1QS 6:1–2, 18). This rank dictated where members sat during meetings and when they were permitted to speak. Related The Great Isaiah Scroll was among the first discovered. Today, it is housed at the Shrine of the Book in Jerusalem. Photo by Dennis Jarvis How Much Can the Most Famous Dead Sea Scroll Prove?The Great Isaiah Scroll is a crucial piece of the Old Testament puzzle, but it doesn’t give us the whole picture. Anthony Ferguson 6. Essenes were (somewhat) countercultural The Essenes understood slavery as a moral evil, and that this institution promulgated injustice, was contrary to nature, and outraged the law of equity (see Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 18.21–22 and Philo, Every Good Man is Free 12.79). In this way, this community should be applauded. Yet, their view of women was chauvinistic. They described women as sexual predators and selfish creatures who promoted dissension (Josephus, Jewish Wars 2.121; Jewish Antiquities 18.22; Philo, Hypothetica 11.14). Some historical authors claimed that this negative view of women was the reason some refrained from marriage. Thus, they upheld the dignity of humanity in a way that was quite countercultural but not in every way. Conclusion A fairly clear picture of the Essenes emerges from considering the historical accounts, the site of Qumran, and the manuscripts deposited nearby. Of course, Essenism was not monolithic. Some Essenes married while others did not, and their religious beliefs and attitudes toward Judaism in Jerusalem did not remain static. Despite these details, a careful investigation of the sources allows us to deepen our knowledge of this group in several key ways: they were a hierarchal and devout sect of Jews spread throughout Judea who treasured the Bible. Perhaps, this is a good starting place for those whose imagination is captured by this now less mysterious ancient Jewish group!Notes1James C. VanderKam, An Introduction to Early Judaism, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2022), 167.2Jodi Magness’ excellent book The Archaeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls,2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2021) traces several similarities between the archaeology of the site and the historical accounts including the toilet habits, nature of the pottery, and the nature of the site summarized here.3James C. VanderKam has a helpful concise discussion of this topic in Early Judaism, 166–167.4Magness, for example, discusses many of these similarities in The Archaeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls, 2nd ed.5See Magness, Archaeology of Qumran, 79–81 for this evidence and conclusion.6See Emmanuel Tov’s statistics in Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, 3rd ed. (Minneapolis, Fortress, 2011), 95.
Is the Earliest, Most Complete Hebrew Bible Going on Auction? The sale of Codex Sassoon raises questions about what’s real and what’s hype about this important manuscript. Kim PhillipsUsually, those of us who work on mediaeval Hebrew Bible manuscripts sit quietly in our libraries and try not to get under anyone’s feet. However, once in a blue moon we get our moment in the sun (if you’ll forgive the mixed metaphor), and one of our treasured manuscripts captures the public’s attention. Usually that’s because it is being sold. Such is the case with the recent flurry of interest in the Sassoon Codex, due to be auctioned by Sotheby’s in May of this year. According to the estimates, it is possible that the codex will sell for $50 million, and thereby become the most valuable historical document ever auctioned. Sadly, looking at anything through the lens of a dollar sign can distort one’s vision of reality. Perhaps that is happening here. At any rate, what is certain is that a veritable dust cloud of exaggerations and half-truths are flying around in the press coverage of the imminent sale of Codex Sa$$oon. I would like to try and clear the air a little. What is the Sassoon Codex? The Sassoon Codex is a Hebrew Bible. Christians refer to the same text as the Old Testament. Many early mediaeval Hebrew Bible manuscripts only contain part of the scriptures: perhaps the Pentateuch only, or the prophetic books, or the Psalms. Relatively few early Hebrew Bible manuscripts contain the entire Hebrew Bible. Codex Sassoon is one of them. That turns out to be rather important later on. Codex Sassoon or Sassoon 1053 The word “codex” basically means: book, that is, something with pages connected to a spine that you can turn to quickly find your place. This is different to a scroll. If you want to read the last chapter of a story written in a scroll, you have no option but to laboriously unroll the entire thing until you get to the final part. So, codices have some significant advantages over scrolls, particularly if you want a quick peek at the end to see if he marries the girl, or if it really was the butler, in the drawing room, with the candlestick. Nonetheless, the scroll (rather than the codex) occupies a very special role in Jewish liturgy, and Jewish communities were rather slow to adopt the codex alongside the scroll, for writing the biblical text. In fact, it wasn’t until towards the end of the first millennium AD that Hebrew Bibles began to appear in codex form. So, this manuscript is part of the early shift to codex form. We’ll come back to that point in a bit. For a long time, this particular Hebrew Bible Codex was part of the massive Judaica collection belonging to David Sassoon, whence the name “Sassoon codex” (or Sassoon 1053, for those who like an extra slice of nerd with their nomenclature). Finally, it is important to explain that the Sassoon Codex—together with every other Hebrew Bible Codex from about AD 800 onwards—is a Masoretic Bible Codex. This simply means that it contains the Masoretic Text. Related The opening of Numbers in the Yonah Pentateuch (14th c.), showing its ornate micrography. BL Add MS 21160. Public domain The Extraordinary Hebrew Text behind Your English BibleThe Masoretic Text is the fruit of the genius of Jewish textual scholars who codified the pronunciation of the Hebrew text. Kim Phillips Now we are in a better position to address some of the exaggerations and half-truths in the media coverage of the Sassoon Codex. Half-truth 1 “It wasn’t until the early Middle Ages that scholars known as Masoretes … standardized the text of the Hebrew Bible, which had remained in flux since antiquity.” Sotheby’s To be frank, this is nonsense. Pure mashed potato. The consonantal text of what we now call the Hebrew Bible was fixed well before the birth of Christ, and there is a great deal of evidence that a firm tradition regarding the correct reading of that consonantal text was also fixed by that time. The genius of the Masoretes (Jewish scholars, roughly AD 600–900, particularly interested in the text of the Hebrew Bible) was not that they “standardized” the text of the Hebrew Bible, but that they (1) found ways to accurately represent in writing what had previously been preserved orally regarding the correct reading of the consonantal Hebrew text; (2) consolidated and developed a massive, intricate network of textual notes designed to prevent inadvertent changes to the text of the Hebrew Bible in the future. Get new articles and updates in your inbox. Leave this field empty if you're human: Half-truth 2 Between AD 100 and AD 800 the Hebrew Bible was only transmitted orally, rather than in writing. NY Times It is true that, today, very few traces survive of Hebrew Bible manuscripts written between about AD 100 to AD 800. Exceptions include the extraordinary Ein Gedi Leviticus Scroll, and—possibly—some of the scroll fragments currently housed in Cambridge University Library. However, this so-called “silent period” does not imply that the Hebrew Bible was transmitted only orally between those dates. On the contrary: stringent Jewish regulations stipulate that the biblical text must be read from a scroll in synagogue services—not recited from memory. These regulations were codified in around AD 600—right in the middle of the “silent period”! So where did all these Bible manuscripts go? Put simply: some went up in smoke, and some went down into the ground. The burning of synagogues in key Jewish centres (such as Jerusalem and Old Cairo) in the high Middle Ages is to be blamed for the loss of many Hebrew Bible manuscripts. Other Bible manuscripts, having been used to the point of being worn out beyond repair, were buried—according to Jewish custom. Half-truth 3 “In Codex Sassoon, a monumental transformation in the history of the Hebrew Bible is revealed, bringing to light the full story of the Hebrew Bible that had previously never been presented in book form.” Jewish Chronicle This is hype. Let’s take things more slowly. It is true, as explained above, that Judaism was relatively slow to adopt the codex format. Hebrew Bible codices—rather than scrolls—only start appearing towards the end of the first millennium AD. But let’s be clear: before that point the Hebrew Bible was written in scroll format! RelatedThe Extraordinary Hebrew Text behind Your English BibleKim PhillipsThe Changing Fortunes of Codex VaticanusAn-Ting YiAppreciating the Diverse Evidence from the Dead Sea ScrollsAnthony Ferguson It is also true that the Jewish scribal experts—the “Masoretes”—found ways of writing down the traditional way to read the consonantal biblical text. Before the Masoretes, this aspect of the biblical tradition had indeed been transmitted orally. So, the appearance of the Masoretic Text towards the end of the first millennium is a really, really significant stage in the history of the Hebrew Bible. If, in this third half-truth, we were to replace the words “Codex Sassoon” with the words “The Masoretic Text,” I would be the first to sign up in agreement. The Masoretic Text is a monumental transformation in the history of the Hebrew Bible. Above all, though, this particular half-truth gives the strong impression that Codex Sassoon is the first ever Hebrew Bible in codex form. This is overwhelmingly unlikely! Let’s unpack this further. As was mentioned earlier, Masoretic Hebrew Bible codices frequently contained only part of the Hebrew Bible as a whole. Pentateuch codices were most common. Codices containing the book of Psalms were very common, and so forth. Although dating these partial codices is frequently very difficult indeed, it is highly probable that many of them predate the Sassoon Codex. In fact, it is likely that whichever part of the biblical text you were to choose, I would be able to find you a codex-format manuscript containing the Masoretic Text of that section that predates Codex Sassoon. So, if Codex Sassoon has any particular claim to glory, it must be related to the fact that in this particular codex the entire Hebrew Bible is preserved in a single volume. So let’s try this for size: Possible truth “Codex Sassoon is the earliest Masoretic Hebrew Bible containing the entire text of the Hebrew Bible in a single volume!” Maybe. However, there are various difficulties in proving this claim. First, the claim that Codex Sassoon is from the late 9th or early 10th centuries is based on the results of carbon-dating. However, carbon-dating yields a range of possible dates for whatever is being dated, not a precise point in time. And there is at least one other codex vying for the privilege of being “The Earliest Masoretic Hebrew Bible Containing the Entire Text of the Hebrew Bible in a Single Volume.” That manuscript is the famous Aleppo Codex. The Aleppo Codex is thought to date from around 930 (though this date is itself contestable), and so it may well pip the Sassoon Codex to the post. In addition, there are various aspects of the Sassoon Codex that may point to a slightly later date rather than a slightly earlier one. These all get rather technical, but one illustration may be the use of the colon sign (called sof-pasuq) to mark the end of each biblical verse. It is thought that in the earliest Masoretic codices these dots were used less frequently (technically, they are redundant, as the end-of-verse is already indicated by the silluq accent on the last word of the verse). For example, in Codex Or. 4445, a Torah manuscript currently housed in the British Library and thought to date from the 9th–10th centuries, the sof-pasuq sign only occurs irregularly. However, in Codex Sassoon it appears more regularly, just like the codices from the later 10th century onwards. A snippet from Codex Sassoon (left), showing three sof-pasuq signs, and from Or. 4445 (right) showing the absence of three sof-pasuq signs. Another problem with this claim is that even if Codex Sassoon is indeed the earliest surviving “Masoretic Hebrew Bible Containing the Entire Text of the Hebrew Bible in a Single Volume,” this in no way implies that it was the first ever “Masoretic Hebrew Bible Containing the Entire Text of the Hebrew Bible in a Single Volume.” It is entirely possible that earlier such manuscripts existed, but have not survived. In fact, given our current limited state of knowledge, it is entirely possible that earlier such manuscripts existed, and have survived, but have not yet been recognized as such. One further point that is cropping up a lot in the media coverage is that, even if the Aleppo Codex does turn out to be earlier than Codex Sassoon, the Aleppo Codex is substantially damaged: most of the Torah is no longer available, and some of the later biblical books are very damaged, too. Of course, some of Codex Sassoon is also missing or damaged beyond repair, so even this claim to superiority is relative rather than absolute. The earliest complete Masoretic Hebrew Bible manuscript that survives in its entirety is still the Leningrad Codex, from around the year 1008. The earliest complete Masoretic Hebrew Bible manuscript that survives in its entirety is still the Leningrad Codex, from around the year 1008. Conclusion Codex Sassoon is a really important manuscript. It would definitely be one of my three desert-island Hebrew Bibles. But great importance must not be confused with superlative importance. Claims like “Codex Sassoon: The Earliest Most Complete Hebrew Bible” are nonsensical (a text can be complete, or incomplete, but how on earth can it be “most complete”?!) and grossly misleading. Happily, we can be thankful for this valuable witness to the text of the Old Testament even once the exaggeration is cleared away.
Scribal Blunders in Biblical Numbers Different ways of writing numbers in Greek can be difficult both for ancient scribes and modern scholars. Zachary J. ColeAncient scribes faced many challenges when they copied books, but they seem to have had an especially difficult time with numerals. A survey of the numbers in the Bible shows that copyists often misread and miscopied them, leading to a variety of textual variants among existing manuscripts. This is more significant than we might think at first. Remember that numbers play a significant role throughout the New Testament. For example, think of the three sets of fourteen generations in Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus (Matt. 1:17), the precise hours given for the chronology of Jesus’ passion (Mark 15:25, 33, 42), the number of witnesses to Jesus’ resurrection (1 Cor. 15:6), the number of the Beast (Rev. 13:18), and the ubiquitous numbers three, seven, and twelve. In this article, we consider why many numerals were prone to corruption during the copying process and what this tells us about the New Testament text. Writing numbers To understand why some ancient copyists botched biblical numbers, we need to recognize that there were two different systems of number-writing in use at the time of the New Testament. Perhaps surprisingly, biblical manuscripts often contain both systems standing side-by-side. Actually, modern English does the same thing; we can spell numbers fully or use shorthand symbols (two and 2). Koine Greek likewise used both number-words and number-symbols. A Greek writer, for instance, could spell the number “two” fully, δύο (duo), or use the shorthand equivalent letter beta (β̅). New Testament manuscripts, especially the early ones, often use both systems, sometimes even within the same verse. Numbers written as both letters (yellow) and words (red) in Luke 12:52 in P75 (3rd c.). Pap.Hanna.1 1B.6v The numerical shorthand we find in New Testament manuscripts is an alphabetic system. This means the regular letters of the Greek alphabet were used to express numerical values. For example, the number 153 could be expressed in shorthand form as ρ̅ν̅γ̅—where ρ̅ stands for one hundred, ν̅ for fifty, and γ̅ for three. Notice how it is potentially confusing to use the very same characters for both letters and numbers. How should a scribe know if the letter alpha (α) was meant to stand for a number (“one”) or was simply a part of the next word? To help prevent misunderstanding, scribes used a horizontal stroke above the letters to mark them out as shorthand numbers (ρ̅). Confusing numbers Even still, confusion occurred. Consider four notable examples of numerals with textual variation in the New Testament. Number of shipwrecked passengers First, in Acts 27, Luke narrates the account of Paul’s shipwreck on the way to Rome, and he happens to mention that there were 276 persons aboard the ship (Acts 27:37). Or was it only 76 persons? While the vast majority of Greek manuscripts have the number 276, there is one early manuscript that instead reads: “about 76”. That manuscript is an important one, Codex Vaticanus (B 03). It is hard to see how such an alternative reading would arise when the numerals are written as words. Observe: Most Greek manuscripts: “276 in the ship” (ἐν τῷ πλοιῷ διακόσιαι ἑβδομήκοντα ἕξ) Codex Vaticanus: “about 76 in the ship” (ἐν τῷ πλοιῷ ὡς ἑβδομήκοντα ἕξ) However, if we remember that scribes often used numerical shorthand, the reason for the error becomes clear. With the number written as a symbol (and without spaces between words), the phrase would have appeared like so: entōploiōsos (εντωπλοιωϲ̅ο̅ϲ̅). Now we can see how the scribe of Vaticanus could misread this as en tō ploiō ōs os (εν τω πλοιω ωϲ ο̅ϲ̅). These numerals in the exemplar of Vaticanus were almost certainly written in shorthand. RelatedThe Bible Jesus ReadJohn D. MeadeThe Bible in the Language of JesusPhilip M. FornessHow the Two Testaments Became One BibleMichael Dormandy Number of years by the pool A second example appears in Codex Ws (032), which wrongly states that the crippled man at the pool of Bethesda had been lying there for forty-eight years rather than thirty-eight (John 5:5). Here, it is easy to see the similarity between the longhand forms of the numbers: tesserakonta kai oktō (τεσσεράκοντα καὶ ὀκτῳ) versus triakonta kai oktō (τριάκοντα καὶ ὀκτῳ). Such visual and aural similarity by itself might explain the error. However, this appears to be another case in which numerical shorthand caused the problem. The difference between the shorthand versions is very slight, a one-letter difference: mē (μη) versus lē (λη). Furthermore, if we take into account the appearance of ancient majuscule (capital) script, the difference is even harder to detect at first glance: ΜΗ and ΛΗ. Number of Jesus’ followers Third, a well-known case of numerical variation appears in Luke 10:1 and 17. Luke tells us that in addition to the core group of twelve disciples, Jesus also had a larger group of seventy followers—or was it seventy-two? Manuscripts are split here. The majority of Greek manuscripts contain “seventy-two,” but several manuscripts—some very early and some later—simply have “seventy.” The difference in Greek would appear like so: seventy-two: ο̅β̅ = ἑβδομήκοντα δύο seventy: ο̅ = ἑβδομήκοντα Making a decision here is extremely difficult, and commentators are not in agreement about the original wording. From a transcriptional point of view, it’s more likely that a scribe would inadvertently omit duo (δύο) or β̅ rather than add it. A survey of numerical errors in New Testament manuscripts shows that, in general, scribes tended to omit the second of two digits rather than add them. This trend suggests that “seventy-two” is the preferable reading. In this case, knowledge of numerical shorthand does not immediately decide the issue but a knowledge of scribal tendencies can help.1For more on this argument, see Zachary J. Cole, “P45 and the Problem of the ‘Seventy(-two)’: A Case for the Longer Reading in Luke 10.1 and 17,” NTS 63.2 (2017): 203–221. Get new articles and updates in your inbox. Leave this field empty if you're human: Number of the Beast A fourth and final example is the famous “number of the beast” in Revelation 13:18. The standard reading here is, of course, 666. Written fully, it is hexakosioi hexēkonta hex (ἑξακόσιοι ἑξήκοντα ἕξ). In shorthand, it would be χ̅ξ̅ϲ̅. However, two notable Greek manuscripts (P115 and C 04) attest an alternative number, 616. Written longhand, it would be hexakosioi deka hex (ἑξακόσιοι δέκα ἕξ; as in C 04), and shorthand it would be χ̅ι̅ϲ̅ (as in P115). Unfortunately, knowing the appearance of the shorthand version does not seem to help us resolve this textual problem. There is no obvious transcriptional reason why a scribe might mistake one of these for the other. A portion of P115 (3rd c.) showing 616 as the number of the Beast in Rev. 13:18. P.Oxy.LXVI 4499 It is worth recognizing the potential symbolic value of the number of the beast, and thus the likelihood that a scribe could intentionally change it. It is possible, for example, that early Christians saw the numerical value 666 as a code for a name. Using the practice of gematria (called isopsephy in Greek), the letters of a name or word could be totaled up (since, as we have seen, letters were also numbers) and connected with other things. For example, many early Christian documents have the number 99 written at the top, which most likely means “amen,” since the total of the values in the word amēn (ἀμήν) amount to exactly 99: α (1) + μ (40) + η (8) + ν (50) = 99. If early readers of Revelation were seeking to identify a known individual as the Beast, this may have led to intentional changes so that the numbers “added up,” so to speak. In short, recognizing the dynamics of Greek number-writing can often, though not always, explain the cause of errors in the copying of numerals. Preserving numbers The examples that we have considered here are instructive for an additional reason. One of the striking things about these points of variation is how relatively minor they are. This point can be seen more clearly when we consider how some skeptical scholars claim that scribes intentionally corrupted the text of the New Testament by doctoring its presentation of Jesus. It is often claimed that scribes deleted uncomfortable wording and added things to make Jesus appear more impressive and godlike than he really was. With that idea in mind, the remarkable thing about New Testament numbers is how stable most of them they are. Take, for example, the account of the feeding of the five thousand in John’s Gospel. Here would have been an opportunity for a scribe to fudge the numbers and exaggerate the extent of Jesus’ miracle. It would have been easy to change five thousand into six thousand, or ten thousand, and so on. And yet the Nestle-Aland critical apparatus notes only one textual variant affecting the value of this number (John 6:10). It is in Codex Sinaiticus (ℵ 01), which wrongly has three thousand (which was subsequently corrected). In other words, scribes here had the opportunity to exaggerate the extent of Jesus’ miracle and thereby inflate the depiction of Jesus. But there is only one known manuscript that miscopied the number, and the value actually decreased. We would expect the opposite if scribes were rewriting the narrative. The remarkable thing about New Testament numbers is how stable most of them they are. We can also consider the narrative of the feeding of the four thousand. One might imagine that this account would have been another tempting occasion for a scribe to exaggerate numerical values and thereby increase the miraculous nature of the feeding. Instead, this is exactly what we do not find. The account appears in both Matthew and Mark. According to the Nestle-Aland apparatus, there are no textual variants with respect to the number of loaves Jesus multiplied (seven in Matt. 15:34/Mark 8:5), the size of the crowd (four thousand in Matt. 15:38/Mark 8:9), nor the amount of leftover baskets (seven in Matt. 15:37/Mark 8:8).2The only apparent numerical variant is that a handful of manuscripts add “about” (ὡς/ὡσει) before four thousand in Matthew 15:38 in parallel to Mark 8:9. In other words, there is remarkable stability across all Greek manuscripts in these seemingly minor numerical details. In conclusion, appreciating the dynamics of ancient Greek number-writing can help us understand the causes of some errors that occurred while copying. Yet, the overall picture gives us confidence in the stability and reliability of the New Testament.Notes1For more on this argument, see Zachary J. Cole, “P45 and the Problem of the ‘Seventy(-two)’: A Case for the Longer Reading in Luke 10.1 and 17,” NTS 63.2 (2017): 203–221.2The only apparent numerical variant is that a handful of manuscripts add “about” (ὡς/ὡσει) before four thousand in Matthew 15:38 in parallel to Mark 8:9.
Four Ways Scholars Date Early Hebrew Bible Manuscripts Scholars use multiple methods to date the earliest copies of the Old Testament. At their best, they yield a range of fifty years. Drew LongacreIn recent years, some scholars have argued that the Psalms were still being collected into the Psalter late into the 1st century AD, well after Jesus’ death. But what if there was a copy of the book of Psalms written much earlier than that? In fact, that seems to be the case with 4QPsa, a Psalms manuscript from the Dead Sea Scrolls dated to the late 3rd or early 2nd century BC that must surely play an important role in determining when the book of Psalms was compiled. The dates when manuscripts were written are thus very important for understanding their significance and for understanding the history of the Bible. But the process of how scholars determine those dates is complex and involves several sources of information. The earliest period from which we have copies of the books of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament starts from the 3rd century BC. The Dead Sea Scrolls include nearly 1000 early manuscripts—mostly in Hebrew and Aramaic (which use the same alphabet), but also some other languages—discovered in the Judean Desert, most of which date between 350 BC to AD 135. Far fewer early Hebrew manuscripts have survived from other places like Egypt and from the so-called “silent period” from the 3rd to the 8th centuries AD. That means that the Dead Sea Scrolls are our earliest direct sources for the Hebrew scriptures and Jewish literature and are of immense historical and religious significance. But how do scholars go about dating them? There are four main ways. 1. Internal Dates and Contents Sometimes scribes wrote the date explicitly on their manuscripts. In such cases, it is easy to know when it was written—as long as the type of calendar the scribe used is clear and well-understood. For instance, the manuscript known as 5/6Ḥev papLease of Land is dated to the third year of the revolt against the Romans by Bar Kokhba (AD 132–135), which corresponds to AD 134. Such dates are common in legal documents and letters, though precious few survive from some periods. Unfortunately, the ancient scribes who copied works of Hebrew literature like the scriptures did not write the date on their manuscripts. When an explicit date is lacking, the contents of a manuscript may also imply something about its date. If it is possible to determine when a book was originally composed, the copy obviously cannot be dated earlier. In most cases, the books of the Old Testament were written significantly earlier than their earliest surviving copies, so this criterion is generally of limited value. 2. Archeological Context One of the best indicators for dating early Hebrew manuscripts is where they were discovered, otherwise known as their provenance. Many ancient manuscripts were found in archeological contexts that are datable. For instance, a Leviticus scroll called EGLev was found charred inside a synagogue in En Gedi in Israel that was burned in the 6th or 7th century AD, which means that the scroll cannot be dated later than this destruction. The site of Qumran in the Judean Desert (east of Jerusalem) was destroyed by the Romans in AD 68, so all of the scrolls found in the surrounding caves associated with the site (labelled 1Q, 2Q, 3Q, 4Q, etc.) must have been written earlier than this date. It is unusual (though not impossible) for manuscripts to be many centuries older than the archeological context in which they were discovered. Thus, dating is one reason why it is so important to know as much as we can about where ancient manuscripts came from. The site of the En Gedi synagogue allows a more precise dating of a Leviticus scroll found at the site. David Jones 3. Radiocarbon Dating Another important tool that is used to date early Hebrew manuscripts is radiocarbon dating. Carbon-14 (aka 14C or “radiocarbon”) is a radioactive isotope of carbon that is found throughout the atmosphere and is absorbed into plants and the animals that eat them. 14C decays at a known rate to become the more common 12C. When plants or animals die, they stop taking in new 14C, so the amount of 14C gradually diminishes at a constant rate. By comparing the amount of 14C left in the organic material with the amount of 12C and known historical atmospheric conditions, scientists are able to determine approximately how long ago the plant (e.g., papyrus) or animal (e.g., parchment) that was used to make a manuscript died. Get new articles and updates in your inbox. Leave this field empty if you're human: With few exceptions, writers usually used these writing materials soon after they were prepared, so scholars generally suppose that the date when a manuscript was written was very close to when the plant or animal died. In most cases, these tests can tell researchers approximately in which century the manuscript was written. However, fluctuations in the original atmospheric conditions make it difficult to distinguish certain periods, yielding less precise or more ambiguous dates for these stretches of time. Radiocarbon dating also requires destroying a small part of the manuscript, which makes many institutions hesitant to use the technique. Despite this, the method has been frequently applied to early Hebrew manuscripts, providing a wealth of information that is not available to scholars working on most other types of ancient manuscripts. So far, more than 60 early Hebrew and Aramaic manuscripts have been subjected to radiocarbon dating, yielding dates ranging from the 4th century BC up through the 8th century AD. So far, more than 60 early Hebrew and Aramaic manuscripts have been subjected to radiocarbon dating. 4. Ancient Handwriting Another way of dating early Hebrew manuscripts—in fact, often the most important—is by studying their handwritten scripts, which is a discipline called paleography. When attempting to date early Hebrew manuscripts, the other means of dating mentioned above are frequently unavailable or not sufficiently precise. In such cases, paleographers study the development of different styles of writing over time and try to figure out where an undated manuscript fits into that history on the basis of its handwriting. RelatedIs the Earliest, Most Complete Hebrew Bible Going on Auction?Kim PhillipsHow the Two Testaments Became One BibleMichael DormandyThe Extraordinary Hebrew Text behind Your English BibleKim Phillips One of the best ways of paleographically dating an early Hebrew manuscript is by finding dated or datable manuscripts written in very similar writing styles. The more similar the scripts are, the more likely they are to be from the same period. For instance, one Psalms scroll called 5/6Ḥev Ps was deposited in a cave in Naḥal Ḥever by refugees during the Bar Kokhba revolt (AD 132–135). The script style looks very similar to 5/6Ḥev papLease of Land, a contract from the same cave which we noted earlier was dated to AD 134. This suggests that 5/6Ḥev Ps must have been written some time close to AD 134, and its archeological context means that it could not have been written later. Thus, 5/6Ḥev Ps can be dated approximately to AD 50–135. Whenever it is impossible to find close analogies with manuscripts of known date, paleographers try to analyze scripts in light of the general development of writing styles. Since handwriting styles change over time, paleographers can create typologies or timelines for these developments, noting both changes in the general appearance of the scripts and changes in individual letter shapes. They start by placing datable manuscripts on the timeline and observing what has changed between the earlier and the later manuscripts. When paleographers try to date an early Hebrew manuscript that has some features of the earlier manuscripts and some of the later ones, they normally presume that that manuscript was written sometime between the manuscripts dated on either side of it. For example, when paleographers date 4QSamb (an old copy of 1 Samuel), they might compare it to early dated manuscripts like WD papDeed of Slave Sale (335 BC) and later ones like 5/6Ḥev papLease of Land mentioned above. The handwriting of 4QSamb has many features of the earlier manuscripts, but also some later features, so we can place it on the timeline between WD papDeed of Slave Sale (335 BC) and 5/6Ḥev papLease of Land (AD 134) like so: WD papDeed of Slave Sale → 4QSamb → 5/6Ḥev papLease of Land. Since 4QSamb is much closer to WD papDeed of Slave Sale than 5/6Ḥev papLease of Land, it must also be dated very early on the timeline. Thus, most paleographers conclude that 4QSamb must have been written in the 3rd century BC, possibly making it the oldest copy of any part of the Hebrew scriptures in existence. The more the timeline is filled in with datable manuscripts, the more precisely paleographers can date other manuscripts based on where they fit in the timeline. For this reason, paleographers are constantly looking for new evidence for dating ancient manuscripts and revising the timeline where evidence requires it. And recent developments have seen the use of computer tools to help study and compare ancient handwriting, which has great promise for future gains in the field. The Foundation for Further Study By combining the information from the contents of the manuscripts, their archeological contexts, radiocarbon dates, and their handwriting, scholars are able to propose dates for early Hebrew manuscripts. Based on these sources of information, scholars often suggest dates that are quite precise, even within 50-year ranges of possible dates, not much longer than the working lifespan of a scribe. Not everyone agrees that these narrow date ranges are reliable, however, and a growing number of paleographers prefer to leave open wider ranges of possible dates, such as a century or more. This is especially the case for the 3rd to 8th centuries AD, where hardly any Hebrew manuscripts have survived and the timeline has many long gaps and uncertainties. But despite the limitations, these tools are essential for dating early Hebrew manuscripts and are foundational for any study of the manuscripts and texts of the Hebrew scriptures and thus to the history of the Bible.
Four Lessons from Medieval Illustrated Bibles Illuminated Bibles are a living testament to human history in addition to being the divine record of history. David S. HoggAmong the treasures housed in the British Library is the Luttrell Psalter. It is a lavishly illustrated early 14th century manuscript commissioned by Sir Geoffrey Luttrell. Inside the front cover someone has written the name of Sir Geoffrey followed by the Latin words me fieri fecit. Loosely translated this means, “Sir Geoffrey Luttrell brought me into existence.” This is interesting for at least two reasons. First, by writing it in the first person, the author is personifying the book itself—treating it as though it were speaking to us. On one level, we might consider this a bit childish since we know books are inanimate. But on another level, precisely because this is written in a book containing a portion of the Bible, itself the only book in all creation that can be described as living and active (Heb. 4:12; 1 Thess. 2:13), it does not seem entirely out of place. Whatever else might be said of their piety, citizens of medieval Europe well understood that the Bible and the church claimed that this is a book that has the power to transform hearts and minds because it is a living word that has the power to impart eternal life (1 Pet. 1:23; 2 Tim. 3:14–17). It is, in short, a book that speaks to us like no other. Thus, to add an element of personification on the inside cover is not entirely out of place. The second reason this little notation is interesting is that it invites the reader to consider the intentionality behind creating this specific volume. Besides Sir Luttrell, who might have been involved in producing this lavish copy of God’s Word? Printers? Artists? Scribes? Leather workers? Purveyors of fine parchment? Which members of the Luttrell family, young or old, had input into what illuminations they wanted to include? By way of contrast, in our age where Bibles are everywhere, from homes to hotel rooms, and available in multiple formats, from print to audio recordings to software programs to hypertext online versions, considerations about how the Bible is produced have faded into the background. And, it may be argued, rightly so since the process of mass producing print, audio or electronic Bibles is not especially engrossing. Why Illuminate the Bible? Be that as it may, the somewhat eccentric Jerome who translated the Bible into Latin in the early fifth century (the text we now call the Vulgate) would be elated at the modern proliferation of simple, straightforward, text-only Bibles published around the globe. Throughout his life, Jerome remained staunchly opposed to the ornamentation of God’s Word—evidence that illustrating the Bible in some way was practiced before the Middle Ages in the earliest centuries of the church. To the list of those who prefer the Bible to remain a simple, text-only book, I suspect we could add some of the leaders of the Reformation, to say nothing of the Puritans, whose opinions on the subject are a foregone conclusion. The collective motto of Jerome & Co. might be, “Just print the Bible. It’s not a coloring book.” RelatedAppreciating the Diverse Evidence from the Dead Sea ScrollsAnthony FergusonRevelation’s Place in the Greek BibleClark R. BatesDid Nicaea Really Create the Bible?John D. Meade This is, however, not the position taken by many Christians throughout the ancient and medieval church. Exhibit A: the Luttrell Psalter. Here is a portion of the Bible with elaborate ornamentation throughout, to say nothing of the full color illustrations of people and daily life that fill the spaces amidst the sacred leaves. What’s more, this practice was followed well into the sixteenth century. If we fast forward about a century beyond the creation of the Luttrell Psalter to the time when Gutenberg revolutionized book production with his moveable type printing press, we discover that he printed the Bible with large blank spaces at the beginning of books and chapters as well as leaving considerable real estate blank at the margins. This was done on purpose and for decades following Gutenberg’s life. The point was that everyone who could afford a Gutenberg Bible could take their copy to a book illuminator and make it their own by having it decorated however they wished. Lest you think this an antiquated practice, consider the recent publication of the ESV Bible in formats that either already have ornamentation in them or leave large blank spaces as an intentional invitation for people to add their own illustrations and adornments. It seems illuminated manuscripts are back in style. At this point, it is worth noting that many Bibles, parts of Bibles, and other manuscripts created in the Middle Ages included no adornment. Illustration was an expensive undertaking. Even so, if the cache of illuminated texts that have survived into our own day is any indication, a lot of Bibles included some form of adornment. But why, we might ask, was adorning the margins and first letters of books and chapters in the Bible done in the first place? Why was it so popular for over 1,500 years? In what follows, I offer four reasons why manuscripts of the Bible were illuminated. One of several curious creatures (or “grotesques”) in the Luttrell Psalter. BL Add MS 42130 1. Illustration communicates the value of the text What do you do with the things you value greatly? If it’s a picture, you might have it professionally framed. If it’s an object associated with a strong memory, you may keep it in a special box. If it’s beautiful or costly, you might display it in a glass case. We often convey value through context. In the Middle Ages, all books were relatively expensive, but illuminating a manuscript with colors created from costly dyes and overlaying letters and borders with gold leaf communicated a level of importance that went above and beyond. Depending on the level of craftsmanship required, portions of the Bible or even the whole Bible created in this way could take anywhere from two to four years. Even in a slower age bereft of automation and computers, anything that took multiple years and several people to make signaled significance to the observer. While communicating the value of the Bible through its physical production could matter in a number of situations, one context in which a visual reminder of the value of the text of Scripture was especially helpful was in missionary work. In her very illuminating book, Hidden Hands, Mary Wellesley cites a letter written by an eighth century missionary named Boniface in which he is requesting an illuminated manuscript of the Pauline epistles, “to impress honour and reverence for the Sacred Scriptures visibly upon the carnally minded to whom I preach.” Wellesley herself comments on the rationale for Boniface’s request writing that a “manuscript was not simply a repository of text but an embodiment, in visual and physical form, of the sacral power of Scripture.”1Mary Wellesley, Hidden Hands: The Lives of Manuscripts and Their Makers (London: Quercus, 2022), 164 2. Illustration prompts thinking about the text On the page where Psalm 36 begins (in our English Bibles that would be Psalm 37) in the Luttrell Psalter, there is an illustration at the bottom of the page of a naked blue man. Yes, you read correctly. Furthermore, this little blue man (slightly turned to preserve at least a modicum of modesty) has been hoisted upon a pole held horizontally to the ground and is carried by two people as he waves a leaf of some kind and looks like he is having a grand time (despite what one imagines must be a terribly uncomfortable way to travel!). Why, it seems reasonable to ask, is there a little naked blue man on the page below Psalm 37? Although we can’t be sure since no interpretive notes are included with the illustration, it is likely the case that this illustration is depicting the wicked, the enemy, described in the Psalm. In medieval England, blue was the color associated with the enemy and thus the wicked because their archrivals, the Scottish, would sometimes paint their bodies with a blue dye before going into battle. Knowing this, and reading Psalm 37:35, for instance, we discover that the Psalmist tells us that he has seen the wicked spreading himself out (naked) like a tree. The fact that we have an identifiable enemy (blue guy), being exalted on a pole and paraded about by two people, and revealed as naked as a tree before the world (holding a leaf in his hand to help us make the connection in case we missed it), it seems an apt, if mildly amusing pictorial representation of the verse. The “blue man” at the bottom of Psalm 37 on the left page in the Luttrell Psalter. BL Add MS 42130 Again, we must be careful not to read too much into these illustrations, but it appears that the Luttrell family are using a popular cultural trope to heighten and focus the attention of the reader on the contents of the Psalm. As Israel had enemies in their time who would one day pass away under God’s judgment while the righteous alone remained, so the English have their enemies who will not abide despite appearances to the contrary. Instead of passing over a text quickly, the illustration invites the reader to consider who the little blue men are in their life who will not stand in future judgment despite their present prosperity. In fact, whether the reader lives in the 14th or the 21st century, it also prompts a smile—not that someone would fall under judgment, but that, in the end, the righteous will overcome. 3. Illustration is an expression of God-given gifts to create beauty God did not condemn the Israelites for living in great cities with homes filled with good things (Deut. 6:10–11), nor did he frown upon using wealth to create beautiful things (Solomon’s palace). Historically, in the western classical tradition, the good, the true and the beautiful were held in high regard. Today, one might be forgiven for thinking each of these in their turn has been rejected or ignored. With respect to the Bible, in a culture that prizes functionality and efficiency, sometimes even to the detriment of the good, true, and beautiful, we should take care not to assume our priorities are superior or the standard by which all others should be measured. Take, for example, a mass-produced digital alarm clock. It is entirely functional with nothing but numbers because it is assumed that all that is needed is accuracy, not beauty (and preferably cheap!). Surely, every clock should be just like this because a clock has only one purpose: to tell the time. But do we not stand amazed at clocks or watches that have been crafted with beauty? I own what is called a skeleton watch. It is called this because while there are hands to tell the time, there is nothing hiding the inner workings so you can see all the wheels, cogs, springs, and coils in their tiny, exquisite detail turning, twisting, untwisting, rotating, flying, and rocking. When I first bought the watch when my children were younger, they used to ask to look at it while we ate dinner and they sat mesmerized by it. I have never once seen them stare in awe at the cheap, but accurate digital alarm clocks they had by their bedside! From the beginning of creation, God has called humanity to the work of creativity and beauty. From the beginning of creation in the garden of Eden, God has called humanity to the work of creativity and beauty. Throughout its history, the church has believed that applying artistic or creative gifts to this world and what we make is part of what it means to be made in the image of God. We must never change the text of Scripture, but surely the margins are free for applying God-given talent in a thoughtful way. 4. Illustration connects us with others, past, present, and future Most of us like new books. There something about the pristine quality, the new book smell, and the wonder of being the first to turn the pages. Recently, however, I heard an author talk about her love of books, and she clearly favored what she called good, clean used copies of classic works. She likes used books that are still in good condition because they include the occasional marginal notation and, more often than not, they fall open to a place the previous owner looked over for some time. Her point was that she loved knowing that she was one in a line of connected readers who all read the book before her. In an unusual way, it reminded her that books and reading are fundamentally communal. What a wonderfully positive way to think in the midst of a world that can often seem bent on using the practice reading and writing as a way to drive a wedge between people. There is something about a book, especially the Bible which is the very Word of God to humanity, which, when ornamented and illustrated and colored bids us slow down and appreciate the whole, to pause over the wonder not only of revealed truth, but of the generations before us who have done the same and left their mark, their clues to how they understood and applied the same texts we are now perusing. Reading a Bible that includes the artistic fingerprints, marginal notes and interlinear underlinings bids us to forego our modern penchant to read as though we are alone and confronts us as individuals who are part of a body of readers, a genealogy of the faithful, the church throughout the ages. A Bible that is illuminated is a Bible that has a human history in addition to being the divine record of history. A Bible that is illuminated is a Bible that has a human history in addition to being the divine record of history. Mary Wellesley is surely right when she wrote that, “manuscripts, by their very nature, resist neat chronologies, because they often tell simultaneous histories. They might have been written in one age, but contain texts dated much earlier, and they also incorporate the histories of their later owners and readers.”2Hidden Hands, 9. In this sense, medieval illuminated Bibles are first and foremost the living Word of God, but they are also a kind of living testament to generations of faithfulness that draws the reader into conversations about perennial nature truth, goodness, and beauty.Notes1Mary Wellesley, Hidden Hands: The Lives of Manuscripts and Their Makers (London: Quercus, 2022), 1642Hidden Hands, 9.
Revelation’s Place in the Greek Bible The history of the Apocalypse in the Greek manuscripts reveals that its place at the end is not uniform. Clark R. BatesHardly any book of the New Testament has puzzled Christian readers more than the book of Revelation. It begins as an epistle to seven churches, then shifts to depicting a series of visions of heavenly judgment cast upon the earth, and ends with the glorious restoration of the created order. The reader finds himself lost in a world of falling stars, biblical plagues, monstrous horses, dragons, war, and heavenly cities with startling physical features. Is what the book portrays real or figurative? Is it a prophecy that is to come or something that has already happened? For some Christians, its contents are read as their window into the future, while others would prefer never to read the book at all. It might surprise you to know that the modern confusion around the book of Revelation is not entirely new. This text has challenged Christian readers almost from its inception, and this is most evident in its Greek manuscript tradition. Revelation has challenged Christian readers almost from its inception, and this is most evident in its Greek manuscript tradition. As a book, Revelation (also called the Apocalypse) sometimes rested uneasily alongside the rest of the New Testament, often as an insertion centuries after the copying of the larger canonical corpus. Many of these manuscripts surface after the twelfth century, some containing Revelation from a fourteenth century addition, suggesting a later desire to “close” the collection of books. Additionally, Revelation stands out among other Greek New Testament texts by its inclusion in groupings of non-biblical material. Its insertion alongside a variety of hagiographic texts, patristic writings, and homilies, without additional New Testament content, also suggests a liminal status within the Greek-speaking church—particularly after the fourth century. This is reinforced by the absence of Revelation in the Greek liturgical tradition, which means it was not read regularly within the gathering of believers. The canonical impact of the material reality surrounding a still-contentious text like Revelation raises questions for modern Bible readers, and, for this reason, deserves our attention. The Material Data The latest survey of the manuscript evidence records a total of 314 manuscripts containing all or part of the text of Revelation.1Garrick Allen divides the manuscripts of the Apocalypse into two strands: the canonical and the eclectic. The canonical strand consists of those manuscripts that combine the Apocalypse with other “canonical” books of the New Testament, whereas the eclectic strand is made up of manuscripts which combine the Apocalypse with other, non-canonical material. Allen also acknowledges that these categories cannot account for every manuscript, especially those that are fragmentary, but his classification is immensely helpful for the present and future discussions. See Garrick Allen, Manuscripts of the Book of Revelation: New Philology, Paratexts, Reception (Oxford: Oxford University, 2020), 156–92. This is comprised of seven papyri, twelve majuscules (written on parchment or animal skin in capital letters), and 295 minuscules (written in a form of “lowercase” letters). Some of these manuscripts contain commentary text, others insert the book into collections of New Testament books. Some manuscripts contain only Revelation, while others include it among collections of nonbiblical material. Because the papyri are fragmentary, the earliest, complete witnesses to the book are the large, complete New Testament manuscripts such as Codex Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, and Ephraemi Rescriptus, which date to the fourth and fifth centuries.2While Codex Vaticanus contains the text of Revelation on ff. 1523–1536, it is a fifteenth century supplement and therefore of nominal value for early attestation of the book’s canonical reception. RelatedThe Fall and Rise of RevelationT. C. SchmidtHow the Two Testaments Became One BibleMichael DormandyWhy Are Protestant and Catholic Bibles Different?John D. Meade Perhaps the most glaring feature of the data is the number of New Testament manuscripts that lack the book of Revelation. Textual scholar Josef Schmid felt that the book’s absence in the commentaries of the great Greek exegetes and its exclusion from the liturgy, as seen in the manuscript tradition, reflected the peculiar fate of Revelation. He observed that “the number of manuscripts that preserve Revelation lags behind that of the rest of the New Testament significantly.”3Josef Schmid, Studies in the History of the Greek Text of the Apocalypse: The Ancient Stems, Juan Hernández Jr., Garrick V. Allen, and Darius Müller, eds. and trans. (Atlanta: SBL, 2018), 32. Six ancient majuscules between the fourth and fifth centuries contain Revelation alongside the early papyri. Among these are, MS 9351 (GA 0163), a fifth-century fragment containing only twelve lines of text from Rev. 16:17–20, P.Oxy 180 (GA 0169), a fourth-century fragment containing thirty lines of text—with many holes—from Rev. 3:19–4:3, and PSI 1166 (GA 0207), a fourth-century page containing Rev. 9:2–15 on twenty-nine lines in two columns covering both sides. The Greek manuscript tradition is silent from the seventh century until the ninth century. By the ninth century, we have a full copy of Revelation in GA 1424, which is the first, complete New Testament in minuscule handwriting. From the tenth century, three majuscules and thirteen minuscules remain extant, containing larger portions—and in some cases the whole—of Revelation. By the eleventh century the use of majuscule script fades into memory with the wholesale implementation of the minuscule, and the manuscript count increases to thirty-eight minuscules containing most, or all, of the text. In the twelfth century, thirty-six minuscules are extant—most containing the entire book. The manuscripts increase from thirty-eight minuscules in the thirteenth century to sixty-nine in the fourteenth, sixty in the fifteenth, and forty-three in the sixteenth. The number of Revelation manuscripts increases exponentially after the eleventh century. Even then, the number of manuscripts containing either the New Testament or part of it without Revelation is still greater leading up to the sixteenth century. Dissecting the Data In both Codex Sinaiticus and Alexandrinus, Revelation is combined with the remaining twenty-six books of the New Testament. But there are no extant, complete Greek manuscripts from the following four centuries. When Revelation does reappear, joined with New Testament works, it is found in less than one-third of complete, New Testament collections and less than one-fifth of collections containing Acts, the Pauline Epistles, and the Catholic Epistles (known as Apostolos manuscripts)—or other New Testament texts. Of those manuscripts that contain only the Gospels alongside Revelation, several appear to have had the book of Revelation inserted at a later date. Other combinations include Acts plus Revelation; the Gospels and Catholic Epistles plus Revelation; or Hebrews plus Revelation. When Revelation appears alone it is often accompanied by the commentary of either Oecumenius, Andrew of Caesarea, or Arethas of Caesarea. While it is not unusual to find New Testament texts accompanied by commentary, the frequency with which Revelation is found with commentary raises the question of how it was being read within these contexts. Some scholars think this format shows that the book was read more often as a kind of study book than a devotional or canonical text. However, what is perhaps the most intriguing of all appearances of Revelation within the extant, textual material is its presence alongside other, nonbiblical texts. The last peculiarity related to the transmission of Revelation is its textual character. Its increase in circulation during the late-medieval era might lead us to think that the book would, like other contemporaneous New Testament manuscripts, conform to the Byzantine textual family that was dominant in this later period. But this is not the case. Later Revelation manuscripts tend to split into two, well-attested text forms, which then further divide into four major stems. A scene from the Silos Apocalypse (11th c.). Add MS 11695 Consequently, in those manuscripts containing Revelation alongside the combination of Acts and the Catholic Epistles, the book of Revelation does not fit neatly into the same textual family as the rest of the manuscript. The sister manuscripts in the text of Revelation are rarely ever sisters in the Apostolos, and the sister manuscripts in the Apostolos are almost never immediate sisters in Revelation. This indicates that, when copied, these manuscripts copied the text of Revelation from a different manuscript than what was used for the other books. From Text to Canon The peculiarities in the Greek manuscript tradition of Revelation’s reception in the Eastern Church naturally raise questions about the book’s canonical status. To that question, we can make several observations. First, though the transmission of the text of Revelation is more sporadic and far different than others in the New Testament canon, its use is widely attested in the Latin-speaking, Western Church without the inconsistency in the manuscript tradition seen in the Greek Church.4The earliest Latin commentary on the Apocalypse comes from Victorinus of Pettau in AD 260, with commentaries continuing for subsequent centuries into the medieval era. Second, while Revelation faced challenges to its level of authority in the East after the fourth century, prior to this time, it was generally received as canonical by the most vocal in the Church. Related A scene from Albrecht Dürer’s “The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse” (1498). Source The Fall and Rise of RevelationRevelation was used widely in the early church, then doubted in the East in the fourth century, but eventually accepted again. T. C. Schmidt Third, it must be remembered that the Church Fathers did not only think of Christian texts in strict binary terms of “canonical” and “non-canonical.” They also thought of them in levels of value. The clearest example of this is found in the writings of the fourth-century historian Eusebius, who identified four categories of books circulating in the Church: “received,” “disputed,” “rejected,” or “heretical.” A good example of how these categories were applied can be seen in the case of 2 Peter. Many outlying New Testament books that are considered canonical today, were challenged in ways similar to Revelation, and this can actually be encouraging to modern Christians because it testifies to the sobriety with which these sacred texts were debated. Get new articles and updates in your inbox. Leave this field empty if you're human: Revelation’s lack of use in the worship of the Eastern Church is also not so dissimilar to modern times. The current lectionary cycle for the Western Church reveals that only ten passages of Revelation have been read in the church over a period of ten years, and even these avoid any sections portraying the bowl and vial judgments, the heavenly visions, or other passages that seem “strange” to most modern readers (e.g., Rev. 12:1–4 where a woman gives birth in Heaven and a dragon waits to eat the child). Conclusion What modern Christians should take away from the material data of Revelation is an awareness that it must be handled with care. We should be cautious about minimizing its unique content and should probably avoid sweeping theological inferences related to its placement as the final book of the Bible. After all, the reason it is so often found at the end of Greek manuscripts is actually because it was added later, and the end of a manuscript is the easiest place to add more text. In conclusion, we might well approach the text of Revelation with the temperance of one of its earliest commentators who wrote, Having been asked many times by many people—who out of love have a greater opinion of my abilities—to elucidate the Apocalypse of John the Theologian and to adapt the prophecies to the time after this vision, I was putting off this undertaking, knowing that to explain the things which are secretly and mysteriously seen by the saints which will happen in the future times befits a great mind and one enlightened by the Divine Spirit. Andrew of Caesarea, Commentary on RevelationNotes1Garrick Allen divides the manuscripts of the Apocalypse into two strands: the canonical and the eclectic. The canonical strand consists of those manuscripts that combine the Apocalypse with other “canonical” books of the New Testament, whereas the eclectic strand is made up of manuscripts which combine the Apocalypse with other, non-canonical material. Allen also acknowledges that these categories cannot account for every manuscript, especially those that are fragmentary, but his classification is immensely helpful for the present and future discussions. See Garrick Allen, Manuscripts of the Book of Revelation: New Philology, Paratexts, Reception (Oxford: Oxford University, 2020), 156–92.2While Codex Vaticanus contains the text of Revelation on ff. 1523–1536, it is a fifteenth century supplement and therefore of nominal value for early attestation of the book’s canonical reception.3Josef Schmid, Studies in the History of the Greek Text of the Apocalypse: The Ancient Stems, Juan Hernández Jr., Garrick V. Allen, and Darius Müller, eds. and trans. (Atlanta: SBL, 2018), 32.4The earliest Latin commentary on the Apocalypse comes from Victorinus of Pettau in AD 260, with commentaries continuing for subsequent centuries into the medieval era.