Return to Index

Colwell on Scribal Habits

A study of P⁴⁵, P⁶⁶, P⁷⁵

Conjectural Changes and Scribal Habits

"In the last generation we have depreciated [devalued] external evidence of documents [MSS.] and have appreciated [raised the importance of] the internal evidence of readings; but we have blithely assumed that we were rejecting "conjectural emendation" if our conjectures were supported by some manuscripts.

"We need to recognize that the editing of an eclectic text rests upon conjectures. If these conjectures are to be soundly based, they must rest upon transcriptional probability [copyist errors] as well as intrinsic probability [authors' habits].

"If the conjectures as to transcriptional probability are to be soundly based, they must rest upon a knowledge of scribal habits."

"A careful study of what scribes actually did, with a resultant catalogue of readings produced by scribes, is essential for textual criticism." (p. 107)

"The present chapter is an initial step toward meeting the needs which have been mentioned. Its primary purpose is to increase skill in the evaluation of an individual scribe's habits, and thus to increase skill in the evaluation of that manuscript. Also its purpose is to gain knowledge of of the habits of scribes in general - of the processes of corruption - and thus to increase skill in the evaluation of readings. "

Singular Readings in Each Manuscript

"The singular readings of P⁴⁵, P⁶⁶, and P⁷⁵ constitute the material for this study. ...this study is restricted to singular readings on the assumption that these readings are the creation of the scribe." (p. 108)

"P⁶⁶ has 482,
P⁴⁵ has 275,
P⁷⁵ has 257 singular readings (not counting) itacisms." (p. 111)

Return to Index

Correct Method for Classification of Readings

"The primary classification of these readings must be based upon their genesis [i.e. what caused them] - not upon formal descriptive categories, nor upon the presence or absence of intention, nor upon the bodily organ responsible for error..."

"...readings were [formerly] classified ...as (a) omission, (b) addition, (c) transposition, or (d) substitution. When classifcation...is based upon these descriptive categories, the student has tacitly assumed knowledge of the original text...not yet attained."

"To speak of omissions, transpositions and the like does not help us to understand the habits of scribes. ... To base a primary classification of readings upon the presence or absence of intention is to anticipate the establishment of probabilities which must be established other ways.

There is always the risk of reading deliberate intention into unintended error." (p. 109-110)

Return to Index

The Most Common Errors: Haplography

"How shall we begin a classification of of the Singular Readings of the manuscripts based upon the nature of the origin of the readings?

Dain in his invaluable manual states that the most frequent scribal errors are:

(1) the leap from the same to the same (homoeoteleuton and homoeoarcton) and,

(2) the omission of short words.

- A. Dain, Les Manuscrits (Paris, 1940), pp. 43 ff

"Our scribes have a worse than average record:

The leap from same to the same is a familiar phenomenon to all students of manuscripts. It is really the case of the misplaced scribe. The scribe loses his place, looks around and finds the same word, or at least the same syllable or letter, and starts from there.

If he looks ahead to find his place, the result is a gap in the text. If he looks back, the result is a text twice written (dittography).

A special case of a gap caused by the leap is that where a word, or at least a syllable or a letter, is repeated immediately in the text. The writing of only one of these (haplography) causes the loss of the other.

P⁶⁶ has 54 leaps forward, and 22 backward; 18 of the forward leaps are haplography.

P⁷⁵ has 27 leaps forward, and 10 backward.

P⁴⁵ has 16 leaps forward, and 2 backward.

From this it is clear that the scribe looking for his lost place looked ahead three times as often as he looked back. In other words, the loss of position usually resulted in the loss of text, an omission." (p. 112)

Return to Index

Summary: Character of Each Manuscript - P⁴⁵, P⁶⁶, P⁷⁵

"In P⁷⁵ the text that is produced can be explained in all its variants as the result of a single force, namely the disciplined scribe who writes with the intention of being careful and accurate. There is no evidence of revision of his work by anyone else, or in fact of any real revision, or check. Only one out of five of his singular readings (including nonsense readings) is corrected. The control had been drilled into the scribe before he started writing.

"P⁴⁵ gives the impression of a scribe who writes without any intention of exactly reproducing his source. He writes with great freedom - harmonizing, smoothing out, substituting almost whimsically. Here again there is no evidence whatever of control by a second party (fewer than three singular readings per hundred are corrected), nor in fact of external controls of any kind.

"P⁶⁶ seems to reflect a scribe working with the intention of making a good copy, falling into careless errors, particularly the error of dropping a letter, syllable, a word, or even a phrase where it is doubled, but also under the control of some other person, or second standard, so that the corrections which are made are ususally corrections to a reading read by a number of other witnesses. Nine out of ten of the nonsense readings are corrected, and two out of three of all his singular readings. In short, P⁶⁶ gives the impression of being the product of a scriptorium, i.e., a publishing house. It shows the supervision of a foreman, or of a scribe turned proofreader."

"In summary, P⁷⁵ and P⁶⁶ represent a controlled tradition; P⁴⁵ represents an uncontrolled tradition. P⁷⁵ and P⁴⁵ are, according to their own standards, careful workmen. P⁶⁶ is careless and ineffective - although he is the only calligrapher of the three. He uses up his care, his concern, in the production of beautiful letters." (p. 117-118)