"The Gestation of the Codex" or, "From Scroll and Tablets to Codex and Beyond"

"Historical"  I(STORI/AS

3000 Macedonian war with Rome = P.Oxy. 1.30 (Brit.Libr. inv. 745 = P.Lit.Lond. 121). Oxyrhynchus.  c. 100 [above n.84 P. Oxy. 1.30 = E. A. Lowe, C.L.A. 112.207 and Supplement, p. 47. E. G. Turner, The Typologv of the early Codex, p. 38, accepts a date early in the second century, but on p. 128, no. 497, it is dated first century.]
2651 [CPP 0156] Fragment of a theme or notes on the Troy legend = P.Strasb. inv. G 1352. Prov? Roman period; perhaps written by a slave [different hands on each side?]

Grammatical/Lexical

2145. Grammatical manual ? (mainly prepositions and adverbs) = P.Harr. 59 (inv. 172b + 182h) = Wouters 11. Prov?  Typology 356 (iii E.G.T.; ii\ex. Wouters; II éd.)  [verso gives a list of authors with the number of books written by each] [R&S #10]
2155. Grammatical manual (grammar and doxography) = PSI 7.849 = Wouters 22. Prov?  Typology 359 (iii E.G.T.; ii ed) [R&S #11]
2738* [CPP 362] school text; grammar/philology = Ber. Berl. Mus. 34 (1913), p. 219 (G. Plaumann) (only transcription of the masculine noun-adjective pair). (now lost). 2/3 c
1218.1. [CPP 046]  P.Oxy. 30. 2517. Lexicon to Homer. Typology 207a (ii) [R&S #14 -- see also above]

Medical & Mathematical

2389 Fragment médical = P.Rain. 1.32 (P. Vindob. inv. G 29250 = MPER NS XIII 19). Prov? II (Harrauer - Sijpesteijn; III Gerstinger)
2340. Medical treatise = P.Mil.Vogl. 1.15. Oxyrhynchus.  Typology 387 (ii ?; iv\in. Andorlini) [R&S #12]
2355. Medical manual = BKT 3.29-30 (P.Berol. inv. 9015). Prov? Typology 389 (i-ii - so ed.; milieu iii Andorlini) [R&S #13]
1437.05 (undated) POxy 4171 Ptolemaeus math.
2581.1 Philosophie ou traité scientifique ? = P.Ant. 3.145. Antinoé    II/III

Legal

2279.1 = P.Oxy. 46.3285 is dated 2nd half of 2nd CE;

several of these pieces are opisthographs or are written on reused materials. The 6 "Law" parchments rolls are dated 4th to 6th CE.

Astrological/Astronomical/Calendric

2021.71 Almanach, pour 136-144 (?) = P.Oxy. 61.4189 Jones. Oxyrhynchus    after 144 ?

M-P2021.75 POxy 61.4193 almanac 195-203 (after 203)

M-P2024 POxy 31.2551 kings of Egypt/astrological text (3/4th c)

2021.49 (undated) POxy 4174 Table des mouvements moyens de la lune

Miscellaneous

1190.01 [CPP 0468] why codex? only one side inscribed? = P.Mil. Vogl. 3.119. 1st c. CE.
2300.01 Traité de rhétorique = P.Oxy. 53.3708. Oxyrhynchus    II (/III ?)
1957.81 Vers = BKT 9.33 (P.Berol. inv. 21132). Hermopolis (ou Fayoum)    II/III
2850.2 Prose (rhétorique ?) = P.Mil.Vogl. 6.261 (inv. 78). Prov? II/III
2462* [CPP 180] mythological fragment (?), related to Orpheus and Dionysus. = PSI 07, 850 (G. Vitelli - G. Coppola, 1925). 2/3? c
3022.2 (undated) Fragment indéterminé = CLA Suppl. 1753 (P.Louvre inv. E 7113). 6 lignes sur chaque face (parchment)

 
   One crucial point must be reiterated here.  On pp. 40-41 above we listed thirteen Christian manuscripts in codex form which in our view can be assigned to the second century.  We now have seventeen [[correct the number]] non-Christian manuscripts in codex form which can be similarly dated, and at first sight it might seem that at least in [[73]] this century there is no appreciable difference between Christian and non-Christian practice in the use of the codex form. But the backgrounds to these sets of figures are entirely different. The thirteen Christian codices are the only known examples of Christian manuscripts of the second century, if we except two rolls, one of which being written on the verso of a roll is not evidence of the choice of the roll format. The seventeen [[##]] non-­Christian codices, on the other hand, must be balanced against 857 [[##]] rolls dating from the same period: in other words, codices here amount to only about 2% of the total, a proportion so small and so constantly confirmed by new discoveries that we are bound to accept that in non-Christian literature of the second century the codex played only a very small -- though still not entirely negligible -- part.

        The foregoing speculations must necessarily remain unproven, but they do suggest strongly that, as already surmised, a variety of different reasons operated in favor of the codex in the non-Christian world.  Although the situation attested by Martial (and per­haps other such situations of which we have no knowledge) does not seem to have made any immediate impact, the idea of the codex as an acceptable vehicle for literature maintained a tenuous existence and may have provided the inspiration for the manuscripts we have been considering. It would seem that the twin advantages of comprehensiveness and convenience were gradually appreciated and that this process, as the figures show, steadily gained momentum during the third century. The triumph of Christianity may well have provided the final impulsion, although it seems likely that even without this the codex would eventually become the victor.

       Finally, why did the whole process take so long?  As already suggested, sheer conservatism must have played a very large part in delaying the change. Scriptoria are by nature homes of tradition, and the educated reading public which set the standards may have been equally resistant to change. [[add something on book trade and school uses!]] Another factor which has escaped attention, and is difficult for us to appreciate, is that the whole battery of aids to reading and comprehension which the reader of to-day takes for granted -- the separation of words, systematic provision of accents and breathings, punctuation, paragraphing, chapter headings, lists of contents, footnotes, indexes, bibliographies, etc. -- simply did not exist [[!! were not exhibited in the high literature conventions]] in the ancient world nor (and this is important) was their absence felt, however [[74]] indispensable they may seem to us.[[revise and update!!]] In just the same way the advantages of the codex (and disadvantages of the roll) may well not have been so apparent to the second-century public and may therefore not have operated so forcefully and speedily in effecting the change as the critic of to-day would expect.

[[75]]

13

EPILOGUE

      The replacement of the roll by the codex must have had profound effects upon the transmission of literature, but it is not easy to define these effects precisely or to say how they were achieved.  In the first place, it is likely that in an increasingly poverty-stricken age, marked by contracting culture and declining literacy, the codex with its greater capacity would have fostered the. production of selections of works such as those of the Attic dramatists, or the compilation of epitomes and florilegia. But this subject would require a book to itself. [[any new lit?]] Nor is it easy to say how the actual transmission of texts was affected. It is true that (if we disregard the results of excavation, [[including the Dead Sea Scroll disvoveries]]) no single work of ancient literature has survived above ground through the Middle Ages in roll form. But the corollary, that if the codex form had never been devised, the whole of ancient literature would have been lost to us, is less easily demonstrated. Certainly the fact that a work of ancient literature achieved circulation in codex form was no automatic passport to survival.  One has only to think of the multitude of works read by Photius in the ninth century (and which must obviously have been [[mainly if not exclusively]] codices) and which have subsequently vanished, to appreciate this.  And overshadowing everything is the sheer accident of survival, mitigated only by the influence of the schools.  If we reflect on the number of works which depend for their text on a very few manuscripts, or even a single exemplar, we can see how difficult it is to assign a precise role to the influence of the codex.  On the purely practical level we would offer here two considerations which, if we are correct, may have played a part in enabling the codex to contribute to the survival of ancient [[76]] literature. Firstly, the superior capacity of the codex, with an average content perhaps six times that of the roll, had the result that, where a manuscript did survive, a much greater volume of text was preserved than would have been the case with a single roll. As a result, works which could be included within a single codex, such as Virgil, are likely to have survived intact, while more voluminous works have reached us in much larger sections than would have been the case if transmission had depended upon the roll: the decads of Livy, for instance, are a good example. Secondly, the roll was particularly susceptible to damage, since despite the use of book-boxes rolls seem to have been frequently shelved without any such covering, and whilst in use were totally exposed to wear and tear.  The very construction of the codex, on the other hand, imposed some form of binding, and this gave the contents a hitherto unprecedented and enduring degree of protection. [[elaborate? early codices (e.g. single gathering) may have lacked binding and covers]]

       But all these speculations are for the future. For practical purposes our enquiry ends in the fourth century, and the Codex Sinaiticus (here illustrated), written about the middle of the century, represents the apex of development of the codex. There­after, the codex form remained unaltered for more than a thousand years, until the twin developments of paper and printing transformed it into the book of today.

[[77]]

PAPYRI

Berliner Klassikertexte
5. 2. 73-9 (= Pack\2 437)	71
3. 29-30 (= Pack\2 2355)	71-72
Boston, Wyman Coll (= Van Haelst 495)	60-61
London, British Library
Egerton Pap. 2	41, 51
Add.  MS. 34473, art. I	plate 4
Add.  MS. 43725, ff  92v, 93r	plate 5
London, Petrie Museum, University College 36088,36089	plate 1
Oxford, Bodleian MS. Gr. bibl. g 5 (P)	40
Oxford, Magdalen Coll. Gr. 18	40, 65, 66
Paris,  Bibl. nat. Suppl. Gr. 1120	40, 65, 66
P.  Alex. Inv. 203	39
P.  Ant. i. 7	40
P.  Baden iv.56	40, 46
P.  Barc. Inv	40, 65, 66
P.  Berol.	31
Inv. 7358-9	plate 2
Inv. 10569	21
Inv. 1165	60
P. Bodmer
II	41, 65
XIV, XV	65, 66
P. Bon.
i. 3  (= Pack\2 645)	71, 72
i. 4   (= Pack\2 1801)	71, 72
P. Chester Beatty
1	49, 56, 66
2	44, 66
II, ff. 15r and 90r	plate 3
6	40, 47-48, 51, 65-66
8	41
9	41
P. Colon. Inv. 3328 (Lollianus, Phoinikika)	68, 69,71
P. Duke Inv.   (Plato, Parmenides)	71
P. Fouad 74	12
P. Harr.
31	39
59 (=Pack\2 2155)	71, 72
119 (=Pack\2  868)	71, 72
P. Holmiensis	17 [[78]]
P. Leid. ined.	70
P. Lips. Inv.
39	39
170	40
P. Lit. Lond.
5 + 182	21
206 (=Van Haelst 555)	60, 61
207	39
127 (=Pack\2 293)	71
211	39
127 (=Pack\2 293)	39
P. Mich. 130	41
P. Milan (= Pack\2 3)	69, 71, 72
P. Milan Vogliano 2.33 (= Pack\2 747)	71,  72
P. Oxy.
1.1	41, 43
1.30	28
2.208	65
3.405	41
4.656	41
4.657	39
4.697 (=Pack\2 1546)	71, 72
6.849 (=Van Haelst 603)	60, 61
7.1007 (=Van Haelst 5)	60, 61
8.1075	39
9.1166	39
10.1225	39
10.1228	39
12.1477	70
13.1594  (=Van Haelst 82)	60, 61
15.1781	65
30.2517	71, 72
31.2539	69
34.2683	41
38.2832	70
38.2833	70
41.2949	44
42.3010	69
42.3011	69
42.3012	69
44.3157	47, 65, 71, 72
44.3197	20
47.3326	72
47.3330	71
50.3523	41
P. Oxy. ined.	70
P. Palau Rib. Inv.182	55, 65
P. Petaus 30	7, 60
P. Ryl.
1.5	41
1.28 (=Pack\2 2112)	70
3.457	40, 65
3.549	72
PRIMI i. 15 (= Pack\2 2340)	71, 72
PSI
1.23	21
1.24	21
2.147 (=Pack\2 1362)	71, 72
6.728 (=Pack\2 2113)	70
7.849 (=Pack\2 2145)	71, 72
8.921	39, 47
8.959-960	21
12.1292	39
P. Schubart 30 (=Pack\2 1)	69
P. Turner 8	69
P. Yale i. 1	40
P. Yale Inv. 1534 (=Pack\2 311)	71
Stud. Pal.
11.114	39
15.234	39

[[79]]

I        Inscribed wax tablet, mid third century B.C.E. [at least four tablets hinged horizontally, inscribed on only one side each]: account of expenses incurred on journey in Lower Egypt. Actual measurement of each tablet 9.1 cm x 5.7 cm.

             By courtesy of the Petrie Museum, University College, London (ref. UC36088,36089)

+Wax tablet and stylus, ca 600 CE, Schoyen collection: Cheikh Fadl, Egypt, 21x11 cm (wax 18x8 cm), 9+4(?)+3 lines in Greek cursive script, hinged vertically, with the original writing stylus of bronze [P.J. Sijpesteijn, Stud. Pap. 21;  H. Harrauer & P.J. Sijpesteijn: Neue Texte aus dem antiken Unterricht, Mitt. Pap. Ost. Nat. NS XV (1985)]

+Pottery Depictions of vertically hinged tablet codices from early 6th century BCE [see the online collection assembled by Andrew Wiesner and the Perseus images]

+Pottery Depictions of vertically formatted scrolls from early 6th century BCE [see the online collection assembled by Andrew Wiesner and the Perseus images]

+Sarcophagus representation, boy with scroll (folded) and open horizontally hinged tablet codex, and group with similar objects  including an open scroll held with one hand, a horizontally hinged tablet codex, and a bundle of scrolls on the floor [Rome, Vatican Museum, Gallery of the Candelabrum. Credits: Barbara McManus, 2003];

+Painted depictions of woman with horizontal hinged tablet codex (Pompeii), and another similar image (Rome)
II         Notebook on thin leather, second century A.D., with notes of labor employed and payments made. Actual measurements 7.5cm x l 1.8cm.
By permission and with the kind assistance of Professor Dr. Wolfgang Müller, Direktor des Aegvptisches Museums und Leiter der Papyrus-Sammlung der Staallichen Museen zu Berlin (P.  Berol. 7358/9)

+Sarcophagus representation, man with scroll, and woman with mini-scroll [Rome, Vatican Museum. Credits: Barbara McManus, 2003]

+boy with mini-scroll (Rome, 50-70 CE; Boston, Museum of Fine Arts. Credits: Barbara McManus, 2003)

+Painting of child reading scroll, woman holding scroll [Roman, first century CE; Pompeii, Villa of the Mysteries. Credits: Barbara McManus, 2003]

+Depiction of scroll cabinet (scrinium) and two handed reader [from Aquileia; Rome, Museum of Roman Civilization. Credits: Barbara McManus, 2003], one hand folded scroll posture [closeup] (Hadrumatum mosaic, Tunis, Bardo Museum. Credits: Barbara McManus, 1982); similar  and another angle (Rome, "Gardens of Pomey" 180-200 CE; now in London, British Museum. Credits: Barbara McManus, 2001)

+Statues of toga clad men with scroll in left hand and capsa beside left foot: St.Petersburg, Hermitage Museum. (Credits: Barbara McManus, 1988); 

III        Papyrus Codex of the Pauline Epistles, third century A.D.: the conjoint leaves show Romans 11.24-33 on the left and on the right the end of Philippians and the beginning of Colossians.  Actual measurements 19 cm x 30 cm.

The start of Hebrews in the same codex, part of which is at U.Michigan

List of some NT papyri, with an image of p\13, an opisthograph (Livy on the other side; P.Oxy. 657)

IV        Parchment Codex of Demosthenes, De Falsa Legatione, second century A.D.: the plate shows the two pages of a bifolium, slightly reduced, each with two columns to the page. Actual measurement of a page 19 cm x 16.5 cm.

V          Parchment Codex of the Bible, Codex Sinaiticus, fourth century A.D.: the bifolium shows in part Psalms, xix-8 -- xxiii 5. Actual measurement of a page 37.6 cm X C. 24. 7 cm.

An image of a poetic, 2 columed page of Codex Sinaiticus, Psalms 5-6 [British Library]

A non- poetic, 4 columned page of Sinaiticus [Leipzig]

VI        Painting of a young man holding an open Codex, from the catacomb of SS. Peter and Marcellinus, Rome, third century.

             By permission of the Pontifica Commissione di Archeologia Sacra

+Catacomb of Domitilla, fresco including codex and scrolls [Rome, after 356]

+for some other images, search also the collection of Barbara McManus (roll, tablet, school, etc.)

[[initial editing, RAK (after Laura Ng), 11de2006; corrected and updated by RAK from Nov 2007 on]]