Notes to Chapter 10 237
- Among many studies that illustrate this phenomenon, see John Whittaker, “The Value of Indirect Tra-
dition in the Establishment of Greek Philosophical Texts or the Art of Misquotation,” in John N. Grant, ed.,
Editing Greek and Latin Texts: Papers Given at the Twenty-Third Annual Conference on Editorial Problems,
University of Toronto 6–7 November 1987 (New York: AMS, 1989), 63–95; Christopher D. Stanley, Paul and
the Language of Scripture: Citation Technique in the Pauline Epistles and Contemporary Literature (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1992); Sabrina Inowlocki, “‘Neither Adding nor Omitting Anything’: Josephus’
Promise not to Modify the Scriptures in Greek and Latin Context,” Journal of Jewish Studies 56/1 (2005):
48–65; idem, Eusebius and the Jewish Authors: His Citation Technique in an Apologetic Context (Leiden: Brill,
2006). - A. Souter, “The New Testament Text of Irenaeus,” in W. Sanday and C. H. Turner, eds., Nouum Testa-
mentum Sancti Irenaei Episcopi Lugdunensis (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1923), cxii. - Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, The Text of the New Testament: An Introduction to the Critical Editions
and to the Theory and Practice of Modern Textual Criticism, 2nd ed., trans. Erroll F. Rhodes (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1995), 55. - The translation of Robert M. Grant, Irenaeus of Lyons (New York: Routledge, 1997), 161. Rousseau’s
translates “conservation.” See A. Rousseau, B. Hemmerdinger, C. Mercier, and L. Doutreleau, Irénée de Lyon:
Contre les Hérésies Livre iv, 2 vols., SC 100, t. I (Paris, 1965). The SC text is quae pervenit usque ad nos custoditio
sine fictione Scripturarum, plenissima tractatio neque additamentum neque ablationem recipiens, et lectio sine
falsatione, et secundum Scripturas expositio legitma et diligens et sine periculo et sine blasphemia... Rousseau’s
retroversion of custoditio is diath/rhsiv. - B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt, The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Part 3 (London: Egypt Exploration Society,
1903), 10. - C. H. Roberts, Manuscript, Society and Belief in Early Christian Egypt, The Schweich Lectures of the
British Academy 1977 (London, 1979), 23. - Ibid., 23, it “certainly comes from the later part of the [second] century.” It is a “scholarly” text: “One of
the criteria Turner employs for identifying the ‘scholarly’ texts is the presence of critical signs and other scribal
practices” (23–24), and P.Oxy. 405 has them, as we shall see. - Ibid., 53. Of course, we really do not know when it reached Oxyrhynchus. Roberts elsewhere suggests
that the ms may have been produced in a scriptorium either in Alexandria—perhaps in relation to the school
founded by Pantaenus—or in Oxyrhynchus itself (24). - Peter R. Rodgers, “Irenaeus and the Text of Matthew 3.16-17,” in J. Harold Ellens, ed., Text and Com-
munity: Essays in Memory of Bruce M. Metzger, vol. 1 (Sheffield: Phoenix, 2007), 51. - Grenfell and Hunt apparently judged that these were in the original hand of the scribe. Having exam-
ined the papyrus myself (8 August 2008), with the help of the icam iris video enlarger in the conservation
department at the Cambridge University Library, I can confirm that this is the case. The diplai exhibit the same
color and density of ink, the same quality of line as the written text, and they correspond to the scribe’s use of
space-filling diplai in the text at column i, lines 10 and 14. - Kathleen McNamee, Sigla and Select Marginalia in Greek Literary Papyri, Papyrologica Bruxellensia 26
(Brussels: Fondation Égyptologique Reine Élisabeth, 1992), 9 n.2. - Ibid., 15–16; E. G. Turner, Greek Papyri: An Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1968,
1980), 117. An example of this may be seen in the same Oxyrhynchus Papyri volume that contains the editio
princeps of the Irenaeus fragment, in P.Oxy. 445, a fragment of the sixth book of the Iliad from the late second
or early third century, thus exactly contemporary with the Irenaeus fragment (Oxyrhynchus Papyri 3: 84). The
scribe of this copy of the Iliad used diplai in the left margin to mark lines for which there existed a correspond-
ing critical scholion. Some of these scholia are written in this manuscript, others are not. Other examples may
be seen in Plates I and II in L. D. Reynolds and N. G. Wilson, Scribes and Scholars: A Guide to the Transmission
of Greek and Latin Literature, second ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1974). Diogenes Laertius, writing
of the copying of Plato’s works, says “that the diple (>) calls attention to doctrines and opinions characteristic
of Plato” (Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers III.66). C. D. Yonge, The Lives and Opinions of Eminent
Philosophers (London: Henry G. Bonn, 1953). Origen adapted two of the Aristarchian signs for his Hexapla,
the obelisk to mark passages of the Septuagint not found in the Hebrew, and the asterisk to mark the parts in
Hebrew or other Greek versions but not found in the LXX (McNamee, Sigla, 12, n.18). See S. P. Brock, “Ori-
gen’s Aims as a Textual Critic of the Old Testament,” Studia Patristica X (1970): 215–18. - McNamee, Sigla, 7.