I. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS

1224. UNCANONICAL GOSPEL.

Fragment 2, 6.3 x 13.1 cm. Fourth century. Plate I (Fragment 1 recto, Fragment 2 verso).

These small but highly interesting fragments from a papyrus book are written with care in an upright uncial a majuscule script style used in ancient manuscripts hand of medium size. The contrast between dark and light strokes is well marked, and the frequent thickening at the tops of letters gives a somewhat ornate effect; compare 1229. The letter o varies in size, being sometimes quite small, sometimes on the same scale as the other letters; μ also is inconsistent, the internal part being either angular or curved; ν generally has a long tail, whereas ρ is shorter and sometimes does not descend at all below the line. Hands of this type are commonly assigned to the fourth century, and to that period the present example may also be attributed, though it is likely to have been written early in the century rather than late, and a third-century date is not out of the question. Iesous Jesus is abbreviated with an overline original: "ιη", as in 1079, a papyrus of about the same age. The letter ν at the end of a line sometimes appears as a horizontal stroke over the preceding vowel; an angular sign to fill up a short line is once used. Both fragments are from the tops of leaves, and the columns or pages were numbered—in one place (2 verso i) certainly, in another (2 recto ii) probably—in the formal script of the text below. In Fragment 1 recto and 2 recto i, on the other hand, the figures are more negligently written, but since an intermittent numeration would be inconvenient, they are likely, nevertheless, to have proceeded from the pen of the original scribe.

Fragment 2 contains two columns on recto and verso, and the question arises whether this is to be regarded as a single leaf with double columns, or as two leaves with a single column to the page. Since Column i of the verso is numbered 174 and Column i of the recto [1]76, it is clear that verso i, ii, and recto i were consecutive; but if the fragment consists of two leaves, recto ii immediately preceded verso i, instead of following recto i, as it would if a single leaf with double columns be supposed. The latter hypothesis is supported by the narrow space between the columns and the absence of a strongly marked crease down the