How Tall Would a Stack of New Testament Manuscripts Be?

On By Daniel B. WallaceIn Early Christianity, History, New Testament Studies, statistic, Textual Criticsim

If you could stack up all handwritten manuscripts of the New Testament—Greek, Syriac, Latin, Coptic, all languages—how tall would the stack be? 

I was recently challenged on my numbers in a Facebook discussion in the group “New Testament Textual Criticism.”

I have said in many lectures that it would be the equivalent of c. 4 & 1/2 Empire State Buildings stacked on top of each other. How did I come up with that number? 

First, I needed to figure out the total number of pages of all our Greek NT manuscripts. Ancillary to that, but helpful for estimating versional witnesses, is determining the average number of pages in the manuscripts. For Greek NT MSS, my wife did the addition. When I was on sabbatical in Germany in 2002–03, I spent a few months in Tübingen (after several months in Münster). Pati added up all the leaf counts of Greek NT MSS listed in the 1994 Kurzgefaßte Liste. Then, she doubled it to get the page count. The average-sized MS was well over 400 pages long. Total number was something like 2.5 million pages. Of course, now we have the online K-Liste, and quite a few more MSS on the list, but the ’94 was the latest available at the time. Keep in mind that the folio count of those MSS that had been mislabeled were not listed in the 1994 K-Liste, although the official number of MSS was (which was higher than the actual number by a couple hundred or so). Today, the official number is, at last count, 5999. The actual number, I believe, is closer to 5800.[1] Many other researchers suggest the actual number to be about 5500, but I have reason to believe it’s higher than this. Regardless, all our numbers are approximations, but we do need a ballpark figure to give us some sort of a benchmark. 

Next, I needed to estimate the thickness of the average MS. This was trickier to do and could only be an estimate since the depth of MSS is almost never measured in any metadata write-ups. But CSNTM has been measuring depth on all MSS since 2015. I had previously guesstimated 3.5” thickness per average MS. After sampling twenty MSS at the National Library of Greece, whose average number of leaves came to 239, the depth came out to 2.9″ (that’s a shortfall of 6/10th of an inch from my original guess). 

Taking the average of 2.9″ per MS above as depth (including covers, which I estimated at c. 1/2″; these I have not measured but after looking at hundreds of MSS, this number seemed to be on the conservative side), times 5800 MSS = 1402 feet, almost as high as the Empire State Building (1454′). 

Third, I added the number of versional witnesses. I have estimated somewhere between 15,000 and 20,000 versional witnesses, with the Latin making up for the bulk of these. In our many expeditions, I have seen numerous Coptic MSS, far more than I had thought were extant. And I have assumed c. 10,000 Latin MSS. If this number is as low as 8,000, that is offset by the more sumptuous medieval Latin MSS than their Greek counterparts. The depth, thus, would be larger than 2.9″, but I’m assuming 10,000 (perhaps too high) at 2.9″ depth (probably too low). Assuming that other versional witnesses are similar in size (though, since none of them is as early as the earliest Greek NTs, and thus not as fragmentary, they will tend to be fuller, with quite a number of them being very large), we come up with the following numbers:

20,800 total number of MSS (5800 Greek + 15,000 versions): = 5027 feet

25,800 total number of MSS (5800 Greek + 20,000 versions): = 6235 feet

This number is a bit smaller than I had estimated previously. I have adjusted my presentation in light of the new polling of the average MS depth. Incidentally, four stacked Empire State Buildings would be 5816 feet tall (and yes, I’m counting the antennae on top).

Bibliographical comparison. I tried to compare apples with apples: the NT in all handwritten copies compared to classical Greek works of all handwritten copies in any language. For the latter, I did not do any scientific count but gave a broad estimate based on selective data of a number of authors. 15 MSS seemed to be a generous estimate. That stack came to 3.625 feet tall, but I rounded it up to 4 feet.

Significance—this IS helpful and not misleading when properly used. Some of the comments on the Facebook discussion appear to have made many false assumptions—e.g., that our NT MSS are written on a scroll (or roll), that they are single-leaf MSS, or that I was counting Greek only. “When properly used”: In my lectures on this topic, I don’t use these figures in isolation. I offer four questions that need to be answered. The first question is pertinent to this discussion: How many variants are there? I use Peter Gurry’s estimate of 500,000 (Greek MSS only), but since he didn’t count nonsense readings and most spelling variants, when they are included the numbers are exponentially higher. In other words, I do not minimize the number of variants in the slightest. At this point in the lecture, many Christians tend to squirm in their seats; many others are rejoicing in their minds! Recovering the autographic wording appears to be hopeless. 

Then I put things into perspective. The context of the number of MSS was simply that, as Richard Bentley argued three hundred years ago, the more MSS, the more variants. I also compared the date of the earliest NT fragments with the average earliest copies of Greco-Roman writings. Even the earliest copies of (just about) any Greco-Roman literature come many centuries after the autographs were written. Although only about 1% of our Greek MSS are complete NTs, the average size is well over 400 pages. I assume the same for versions. 

Significance continued: Why specific numbers? I would argue strenuously that giving numbers in this context is quite helpful for most people. Some think abstractly and such numbers may seem meaningless. But I believe that many, if not most, think more concretely, especially in lay circles and on college campuses, when trying to get a handle on textual criticism. Grasping the topic in a one hour presentation is challenging enough without seeing concrete numbers! As an apt analogy, consider the Wong-Baker FACES® Pain Rating Scale. Created in 1983 to help children identify the intensity of pain on various parts of their body, this 1–10/happy-face-to-sad-face model soon mushroomed into an international standard for doctors across the globe—for adults as well as children. So it is with giving numbers on MSS. The analogy breaks down, however, because the pain index is completely relative. Logically, if the pain index is considered quite helpful for medical practitioners and their patients, in spite of its relativity, how much more so would the number of NT MSS be for those interested in textual matters? However, it would be misleading to give only the official number because of numerous caveats (see Jacob Peterson’s chapter, “Math Myths: How Many Manuscripts We have and Why More Isn’t Always Better,” in Myths & Mistakes). So, I give an estimate that is well within the ballpark of actual. And I show, century by century through the first millennium, how many MSS we have. I have tried to be very circumspect when dealing with the data, though of course in a popular lecture I dare not show my homework for fear of losing my audience! 

The numbers, caveats, context, and other features I use in this lecture have been tweaked over the years, and the Facebook discussion has helped me refine them further. I’m sure some folks will quibble over what I have presented (textual critics are the most hyper-critical scholars I know!), but implications of indolence coupled with suggestions of sham estimates, without giving me the benefit of the doubt, seeing what I have said, or even contacting me about this (only one friend did, and that’s how I learned about the discussion), are not particularly helpful. A little more charity will go a long way.

 

[1] Note too that a number of kinds of witnesses, in particular certain types of lectionaries, that Gregory had counted were abandoned when Aland took over the numbering system. Hundreds more of these unregistered MSS exist. (Dozens are at the National Library of Greece alone, but we did not shoot them.) So, in a sense, the numbers could go both ways—to a degree. If we counted all these, the total would swell to well over 6000 MSS. If we didn’t count Gregory’s at all, the numbers would drop by 225, or just under c. 5600.

Advertisement

Why Should I Get a ThM?

On By Daniel B. WallaceIn Contemporary Issues

The world has changed at a dizzying (and, concomitantly, nauseating, pace) in 2020, but one thing remains constant. Hebrews 13.8 declares, “Jesus Christ is the same—yesterday, today, and forever!” Yet, the Jesus Christ who is proclaimed in pulpits across the nation and spanning the globe is often conformed to the fashionable ideology of the day. He is not the same as he was yesterday. 

The Church needs rock solid pastors and leaders who know the Lord and know the text. People who preach the same Jesus Christ the apostles proclaimed. We need leaders who have been trained well in Scripture. 

I am in my fourth decade of teaching at Dallas Seminary. I have served under five of the six presidents this institute has had. One thing I have deeply loved about the school is its commitment to the word of God. It’s the only theological seminary I know of that, instead of offering a three-year Master of Divinity degree, offers a four-year Master of Theology degree. This has been the same from the beginning, 96 years ago. 

The fourth year gives the student 33% more time than an MDiv to reflect, meditate, dialog, fellowship, and dig in. Things gel in that fourth year. And the high-level of biblically-based, earnest fellowship/discussions—from both the minutiae of the text to macro-current events that are reshaping our world, and everything in between—will almost never be replicated after you leave seminary. You will find that Christians—even Christian leaders—are usually just not that interested in the Bible. This sad state of affairs needs an equal and opposite reaction if evangelical Christianity is going to survive.

During the pandemic, potential students are really questioning the necessity of that fourth year, and questioning moving to Texas. It’s too expensive. It’s not necessary. I have a ministry right where I am. Dallas is too hot. It’s too great a sacrifice. My advice: Don’t shortcut your training when preparing for a lifetime of ministry. The Lord never put a premium on ignorance. His condemnation of the religious leaders of his day was both that they did not know the power of God or the Scriptures. Our students learn the biblical languages especially with a view toward faithful exegesis and exposition of the text. And yes, they pay a big price. 

The One Dollar House

I grew up in Newport Beach, California. To move to Texas with my new bride was challenging. I was leaving a ministry in SoCal—a church where I was the assistant pastor. We bought a house for $1.00 (you read that right) and lived in it for most of my years of preparation in the ThM program. 

(The house was part of the Homestead Urban Renewal program. Essentially, a lottery was set up for potential homeowners to get a foreclosed, dilapidated house in a very bad neighborhood for a buck and bring it up to city code. They had to own it for at least three years. Ours was at the very bottom of our list: house built in 1920, asbestos siding, lead paint, no AC, no heat, no shower, foundation shifting 12” from one end of the house to the other. And thousands upon thousands of roaches which we could never eradicate. We lived there for three and a half years, and we got to know poverty well—both because all our neighbors were very poor and because we shared in their economic state. We also got to see the underbelly of racism and oppression.)

In spite of our poverty, in spite of the sky-high crime rate in our neighborhood, in spite of the weather, in spite of the army of roaches, God provided for us. He saw us through our difficulties. He was faithful. The Sovereign of the universe, God himself, designed this wilderness experience for our good and his glory. These were formative years. We made the sacrifice because we believed that the ThM was the best way for me to prepare for a lifetime of ministry. And along the way, the Master Teacher put us through a curriculum of his own. I wouldn’t trade those years for a million bucks.

No Excuse

Tuition costs have gone up exponentially since the 1970s. And houses nowadays—even in Dallas—usually cost a bit more than a buck. But Dallas has one of the lowest unemployment numbers in the country. It’s been that way for decades. And DTS has made a remarkable, stunning offer to ThM students: fourth year free! The last twenty-four units will cost you nothing, nada, zilch—provided you take them the way they should be taken: on campus, in the flesh, in Dallas. The particulars are found at this link: https://www.dts.edu/admissions/tuition-aid/scholarships-discounts/last-year-free/.

Lots of things are competing for your time. But the deep-dive training that is a pastor’s and teacher’s requisite are a small price to pay in order to serve King Jesus for the rest of your days. And you just might find that the benefits and blessings that accompany you during the four years in Dallas are something that you would not trade for a million bucks.

Epilogue

The administration of Dallas Theological Seminary has neither endorsed this blog, nor was it even aware that I was writing it. These are my own reflections.

Digitally Reuniting Fragments of an Ancient Gospels Manuscript

On By Daniel B. WallaceIn Contemporary Issues

Guest post by Stratton L. Ladewig

In November, New Testament Papyri 𝔓45, 𝔓46, 𝔓47: Facsimiles (NTP) will be released—a collaboration between Hendrickson and CSNTM. This publication is the culmination of a project started in 2013 when CSNTM digitized the collection at the Chester Beatty (formerly known as the Chester Beatty Library). The following year, the portion of P46 that is housed at the University of Michigan was digitized. There will be two facsimile volumes: one with papyrus images against a black background and the other with a white background. We are excited about the developments in these manuscripts’ presentation. Four advancements in P45’s textual history are presented in NTP and are highlighted here: (1) digital reunification of the multiple fragments with their larger papyrus leaves, (2) the in-print release of a new plate containing twelve fragments, (3) the identification of a previously unknown leaf, and (4) a fuller presentation of folio 8.

The development of technology facilitated the opportunity to reassemble the fragmentary pieces of P45’s papyrus. Almost every leaf of the manuscript could rightfully be considered a fragment. Of its 30 known leaves, most are “mutilated”—to quote Frederic G. Kenyon (General Introduction, p. 6). However, several smaller pieces have been discovered since the manuscript was initially placed in glass, and it is these fragments that are addressed here. These smaller fragments are found in separate plates of glass from the larger portions to which they belong. In NTP, these later discoveries are reunited digitally and presented as they once were. The result is that a fuller testimony is recorded. At times, letters were split in half, each being found on separate portions of the papyrus in multiple plates of glass. It is stunning to see these fragments united in a full color, high resolution reproduction.

(Image caption: Left: a portion of P45 folio 16, Middle:
a portion of fragment #4; Right: a portion of fragment #5)

The second advancement in the presentation of P45 is the release of twelve fragments that are in print for the first time. These fragments are located in a single plate at the Chester Beatty. This release supplements the knowledge base of this witness to the NT. The contents of six of the fragments have been identified. As such, in the facsimiles, these are placed with their respective leaves—as mentioned above—giving a more complete record of the manuscript’s contents. On occasion, two fragments were found to belong to the same leaf. It is thrilling to realize that research on P45, as vast as the literature has been in the past 86 years, still has room for discovery.

Third, two of the fragments, which were identified by T. C. Skeat and B. C. McGing in 1991, belong to the same P45 leaf. These two are currently found in the same plate, but they are mixed with other fragments from a manuscript of Numbers and Deuteronomy, not P45. Nevertheless, because they originally came from a single papyrus leaf, they were arranged as such in the facsimiles. Their alignment relative to one another is tentative, but the text contained on them makes it clear that they form a new leaf that comes between folio 15 and folio 16. Although this is not a new discovery, the placement of these fragments together gives the reader a glimpse of the text that has not been available for hundreds of years.

Finally, the fragments of folio 8 were assembled into a composite P45 leaf. This leaf is composed of five fragments with a complex history. The fragments were inconsistently presented in Kenyon’s initial publication of the manuscript. At first, none of the five fragments were known to belong to P45, leaving some additional fragments of this leaf to be discovered after his transcription volume was typeset. However, not all the fragments made it into his facsimile volume or his transcription volume. NTP unites the portions of folio 8 into a composite presentation.

NTP highlights the work of the Center in capturing images of P45, P46, and P47. Yet, the presentation in the facsimiles brings four advancements in P45’s textual history. Together, they bring together rich images and reunification of fragments to give the reader a greater understanding of this manuscript’s witness to the wording of the NT.

New Discoveries on Every Page: P45, P46, P47

On By Daniel B. WallaceIn Bible Translation, Contemporary Issues, CSNTM, Early Christianity, Exegesis, Greek Grammar, History, New Testament Studies, Textual Criticsim

Nearly nine decades ago, three of the earliest and most extensive New Testament papyri were made available to scholars through color photographs. These facsimiles, together with their authoritative transcriptions, have remained the primary access that biblical scholars and papyrologists have had to them. Until now. With the multi-volume publication of New Testament Papyri 𝔓45, 𝔓46, 𝔓47 coming out later this year, new, exquisite, exact-size images will become available in print. After digitizing these priceless manuscripts at the Chester Beatty in Dublin and the University of Michigan, CSNTM has collaborated with Hendrickson Academic in the endeavor to offer fresh, library-quality images of these third-century copies of large portions of the New Testament.

P45 cover

The facsimiles will be published both with a white background and a black background, each of which offers different views of the texts. Perhaps surprisingly to many, the black background images were found to be much more helpful for creating accurate transcriptions.

For this initial offering, the transcription of just 𝔓47 will be included with the images of all the manuscripts. 𝔓45 and 𝔓46 will follow in coming years, as the task of transcription still continues. The process of transcribing, however, which has been done in large part on the other two papyri, should yield far more precise results than Sir Frederic Kenyon’s editio princeps of the 1930s. It is no exaggeration to say that thousands of corrections to Kenyon’s transcriptions are in the offing. To be sure, most of these are quite minor, but some are fairly stunning. But every correction to Kenyon’s brilliant but somewhat rushed efforts bring us one step closer to understanding the text of the New Testament in third-century Egypt.

By the use of careful measurements, rigorous comparisons with multiple close-ups of individual letters and ligatures, and intense arguments (!), the editors (Stratton Ladewig, Robert Marcello, and Dan Wallace) are able to offer a new standard transcription of each papyrus. In this short blog, I offer but one animation that lays out our procedure. (Thanks go to my son, Andrew Jon Wallace, for producing this illustration.)

The 28th edition of the Nestle-Aland text in Mark 8:22 reads Καὶ ἔρχονται εἰς Βηθσαϊδάν. Καὶ φέρουσιν αὐτῷ τυφλὸν καὶ παρακαλοῦσιν αὐτὸν ἵνα αὐτοῦ ἅψηται. One variant is listed—Βηθανιαν for Βηθσαιδαν in D and a couple other witnesses. What is not mentioned is the variant for ερχονται. The majority of manuscripts here, along with the key majuscules א* and A, have the singular ερχεται. Kenyon reconstructed the wording of 𝔓45 as having the plural, though underdotting every letter as dubious. But this identification is almost surely incorrect. The space for the word and the shape of the letter fragments fits like a glove for ερχεται. Due to the difficulty of making out the letters in the old plates, one can understand the wrong guess. But with better photographs coupled with the comparisons that digital images readily afford, the CSNTM editors have concluded that 𝔓45 here has ερχεται.

Such may not seem terribly significant. Yet every small decision, every correction, every change to the identification of the text in question gives us a better sense of what these scribes wrote eighteen centuries ago. Further, the singular here does offer a slightly different interpretation on the passage. Although it is true that Jesus and his disciples came to Bethsaida, whether Mark wrote “they came” or “he came” has some significance. On occasion the evangelists use a singular verb with a compound subject. This throws the spotlight on the first-named subject. And frequently, that subject is Jesus (see John 2:2; 3:22; cf. also Matt 13:55; Acts 5.29; 16:31). Mark concludes his pericope on the healing of the blind man with this idiom (Mark 8:27: Καὶ ἐξῆλθεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς καὶ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ). It is a distinct possibility that he would begin the pericope the same way. Such would be a subtle and fitting inclusio in one of Mark’s better-crafted stories. And 𝔓45 might just tip the scales for us to see it.