Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T08:27:44.093Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Lord's Prayer and ΧΜΓ: Two Christian Papyrus Amulets*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2010

Brent Nongbri
Brent Nongbri*
Affiliation:
Macquarie University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The last few years have seen a renewed interest in the study of papyrological remains as a means of shedding light on early Christianity.1 To add further evidence to this discussion, I draw attention to two papyri in Yale University's Beinecke Library. In 1997, Yale acquired several papyri from Galerie Nefer in Zürich. The lot contained papyri ranging in date from the Ptolemaic era to the Medieval period. Two of these pieces (both, unfortunately, without specific provenance) appear to be Christian textual amulets.

Type
ARTICLES
Information
Harvard Theological Review , Volume 104 , Issue 1 , January 2011 , pp. 59 - 68
Copyright
Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

My thanks to Theodore de Bruyn, David G. Martinez, Michael L. Peppard, and Kevin W. Wilkinson for advice on different aspects of these papyri.

References

1 See Epp, Eldon Jay, “The Oxyrhynchus New Testament Papyri: ‘Not Without Honor Except in their Hometown’?” JBL 123 (2004) 5–55Google Scholar; reprinted in Perspectives on New Testament Textual Criticism: Collected Essays 1962–2004 (Leiden: Brill, 2005) 743–801; the papers collected in New Testament Manuscripts: Their Texts and Their World (ed. Thomas J. Kraus and Tobias Nicklas; Leiden: Brill, 2006); Choat, Malcom, Belief and Cult in Fourth-Century Papyri (Turnhout: Brepols, 2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hurtado, Larry W., The Earliest Christian Artifacts: Manuscripts and Christian Origins (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2006)Google Scholar; Luijendijk, AnneMarie, Greetings in the Lord: Early Christians in the Oxyrhynchus Papyri⃛ (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Divinity School, 2008);Google Scholar and, most recently, Bagnall, Roger S., Early Christian Books in Egypt (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Abbreviations for papyrological publications follow the conventions of the Checklist of Editions of Greek, Latin, Demotic, and Coptic Papyri Ostraca and Tablets (online: http://scriptorium.lib.duke.edu/papyrus/texts/clist.html; last accessed 9 August, 2009). Abbreviations for inscriptions follow Horsley, G. H. R. and Lee, John A., “A Preliminary Checklist of Abbreviations of Greek Epigraphic Volumes,” Epigraphica: Periodico Internazionale di Epigrafia 56 (1994) 129–69Google Scholar.

3 For a general overview of the magical use of scripture in papyri, see Judge, Edwin A., “The Magical Use of Scripture in the Papyri,” in Perspectives on Language and Texts: Essays and Poems in Honor of Francis I. Andersen's Sixtieth Birthday (ed. Conrad, Edgar W. and Newing, Edward G.; Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1987) 339–49Google Scholar, to be reprinted in Jerusalem and Athens: Cultural Transformation in Late Antiquity (essays selected and edited by Alanna Nobbs; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, forthcoming). Verses from the Lord's Prayer appear frequently in papyri, usually together with other short biblical excerpts. Thomas J. Kraus has conveniently collected and discussed papyri (as well as parchments and wooden and clay tablets) containing all or part of the Lord's Prayer in “Manuscripts with the Lord's Prayer—They are More than Simply Witnesses to that Text Itself,” in New Testament Manuscripts: Their Texts and Their World, 227–66. Kraus's article has an ample bibliography on the topic that I will not repeat here; I simply list the items in his catalog and the dates that have been proposed for them: P.Ant. 2.54 (third cent. C.E.); P.Erl.Diosp. 1 (313–314 C.E.); P.Sch⊘yen 1.16 (late fourth cent. C.E.); O.Athens inv. 12227 (fourth or fifth cent. C.E.); P.Oxy. 60.4010 (fourth cent. C.E.); P.Princ. 2.107 (fourth–sixth cent. C.E.); P.Col. 11.293 (fifth cent. C.E.); P.Köln 4.171 (fifth cent. C.E.); P.Iand. 1.6 (= P.Giss.Lit. 5.4; fifth or sixth cent. C.E.); P.Duk.inv. 778 (late sixth cent. C.E.); P.Köln 8.336 (sixth cent. C.E.); PSI 6.719 (fourth–sixth cent. C.E.); BGU 3.954 (sixth cent. C.E.); MPER N.S. 15.184 (sixth or seventh cent. C.E.); Louvre MND 552 B (seventh cent. C.E.?); P.Bad. 4.60 (eighth cent. C.E.); and University of Chicago Goodspeed MS 125 (fourteenth cent. C.E.). I should add one note to Kraus's bibliography on Goodspeed MS 125: Another portion of this manuscript has been identified (Ms. M. 499 in the Morgan Library in New York, which contains a colophon dating to the third quarter of the fourteenth cent.). It preserves Psalms 35 and 91 along with the Letter of Abgar, Christ's reply, and the story of the Mandylion. See most recently Peers, Glenn, “Magic, the Mandylion and the Letter of Abgar: On a Greco-Arabic Amulet Roll in Chicago and New York,” in Intorno al Sacro Volto: Genova, Bisanzio e il Mediterraneo, secoli XI–XIV (ed. Calderoni Masetti, Anna Rosa, Dufour, Colette Bozzo, and Wolf, Gerhard; Venice: Marsilio, 2007) 163–74Google Scholar and by the same author, “Art and Identity in an Amulet Roll from Fourtheenth Century Trebizond,” in Religious Origins of Nations? The Christian Communities of the Middle East (ed. Bas ter Haar Romeny; Leiden: Brill, 2010) 153–78. A good deal of additional bibliography on the piece is available in the Morgan Library's records online at http://corsair.morganlibrary.org/msdescr/BBM0499.htm (last accessed 11 August 2009).

4 This letter is plate 43c in Cavallo, Guglielmo and Maehler, Herwig, Greek Bookhands of the Early Byzantine Period: A.D. 300–800 (London: Institute of Classical Studies, 1987)Google Scholar.

5 Garbled versions of the Lord's Prayer are not uncommon in the papyri. For example, the portion of the prayer preserved in P.Princ. 2.107 reads πατηρ υμων εν τηϛ ουρανηϛ αγιασθητω τω θελημα σου τον αρτον υμων των επιουσιων (which might be rendered as “Your father who is in heaven, hallowed be your will; your daily bread”).

6 The portion of the Lord's Prayer preserved in P.Iand. 1.6 (= P.Giss.Lit. 5.4) has colons dividing the sense lines. The part of the prayer in P.Köln 8.336 appears to use a combination of colons and high dots for the same purpose.

7 de Bruyn, Theodore, “Papyri, Parchments, Ostraca, and Tablets Written with Biblical Texts in Greek and Used as Amulets: A Preliminary List,” in Early Christian Manuscripts: Examples of Applied Method and Approach (ed. Kraus, Thomas J. and Nicklas, Tobias; Leiden: Brill, 2010) 145–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 150. My thanks to Theodore de Bruyn for sharing this work with me before its publication.

8 See BGU 3.954, P.Princ. 2.107, P.Iand. 1.6 (= P.Giss.Lit. 5.4), P.Sch⊘yen 1.16, and PSI 6.719.

9 While peculiar readings and irregular orthography are indeed characteristic of biblical textual amulets, it should be noted that the proper execution of manuscript copying itself was thought by some to exert power against demons. Skemer writes, “In the sixth century, Cassiodorus reminded the monastic scribes of Vivarium that the act of copying scripture would spread Christ's words and thus wound the Devil, in effect destroying the demonic power that had been unleashed upon Christ during the passion.” Skemer, Don C., Binding Words: Textual Amulets in the Middle Ages (University Park, Pa.: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 2006) 84.Google Scholar The reference is to Cassiodorus, Institutiones 1.30. See the edition of Mynors, Roger A. B., Cassiodori Senatoris Institutiones (Oxford: Clarendon, 1937)Google Scholar.

10 Papyri with non-continuous portions of the New Testament have been only sporadically included in text critical discussions. See Alessandro Biondi, “Le citazione bibliche nei papiri magici cristiani greci,” SP 20 (1981) 93–127; and Pickering, Stuart R., “The Significance of Non-Continuous New Testament Textual Materials in Papyri,” in Studies in the Early Text of the Gospels and Acts: The Papers of the First Birmingham Colloquium on the Textual Criticism of the New Testament (ed. Taylor, David G. K.; Atlanta, Ga.: SBL, 1999) 121–41Google Scholar. Nevertheless, when relevant, I mention in these notes observations of text critical interest. For a good general discussion of the textual problems of the Lord's Prayer, see Parker, David C., The Living Text of the Gospels (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997) 49–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 One can compare the dimensions of this piece to PSI 6.719 (25.0 × 5.5 cm), a Christian amulet assigned to the sixth century. The writing on PSI 6.719 is, however, much smaller (a single long column with six lines of compactly spaced text, including the first line and doxology of the Lord's Prayer), and the piece seems to have been folded fewer times. P.Oxy. 73.4932, a recently published amulet containing Septuagint Psalm 72:21–23 assigned by its editor to the fifth century, likely had similar dimensions as well (it now measures 14.1 × 6 cm, but judging by the missing words of the psalm, its original length was probably roughly 28–30 cm).

12 In the first group, the right-leaning stroke (/) of the Χ curves downward and crosses the lower portion of the Μ. In the second group, the right-leaning stroke of the Χ has an elaborate bend and loop that could almost be another letter before it attaches to the upstroke of the Μ. In the third set, the right-leaning stroke of the X curves and joins directly with the Μ. The fourth set is difficult to see, but it appears that the bottom of the left-leaning stroke (\) of the Χ moves directly into the upstroke of the Μ.

13 I will not reproduce the bibliography here. The following three studies provide good overviews of the debate and more comprehensive bibliographies. For a summary of the earliest studies, see William K. Prentice, “ΧΜΓ, A Symbol of Christ,” CP 9 (1914) 410–16; for the state of affairs in the middle of the twentieth century, see Jan-Olof Tjäder, “Christ, Our Lord, Born of the Virgin Mary (ΧΜΓ and VDΝ),” Eranos 68 (1970) 148–90. The most recent in depth treatment of the topic is Llewelyn, Stephen R., “The Christian Symbol ΧΜΓ, an Acrostic or an Isopsephism?” in New Documents Illustrating Early Christianity, Volume 8: A Review of the Greek Inscriptions and Papyri Published 1984–85 (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1998) 156–68Google Scholar. See also the brief but informative notes in Choat, Belief and Cult, 114–16.

14 The first appearances of the symbol probably date to the third century; see Llewelyn, “The Christian Symbol ΧΜΓ,” 156–57 n. 3. For relatively recent published examples, see Tomaz Derda, “Inscriptions with the Formula θεοῦ χάριϛ κέρδοϛ on Late Roman Amphorae,” ZPE 94 (1992) 135–52 and Roland R. R. Smith, “The Statue Monument of Oecumenius: A New Portrait of a Late Antique Governor from Aphrodisias,” JRS 92 (2002) 134–56, esp. 137 and 150–53.

15 See, for example, P.NYU 1.8, a receipt likely from the fourth or fifth century, P.Mich. 8.519, a letter found in Karanis assigned to the fourth century, P.Oxy. 59.3986, a contract dating from 494 C.E., and P.Oxy. 16.1961, a lease dating from 487 C.E. For ΧΜΓ placed at the top of a Christian hymn assigned to the sixth century, see P.Oxy. 60.4011. ΧΜΓ also appears at the top of P.Oslo 1.5, a protective amulet assigned to the fourth or fifth century.

16 On these two oracular requests, written in the same hand and cut from the same sheet of papyrus, see Youtie, Herbert Ch., “Questions to a Christian Oracle,” ZPE 18 (1975) 253–57Google Scholar; reprinted in Youtie, Herbert Ch., Scriptiunculae Posteriores (2 vols.; Bonn: Rudolf Habelt, 1981) 1:225–29Google Scholar. BGU 3.948, a personal letter dated to the fourth or fifth century, has ΧΜΓ repeated three times above the first line of the letter.

17 Tjäder's article cited above was highly influential and convinced many that the symbol was originally an acrostic standing for Χ(ριστὸv) Μ(αρία) Γ(εvvᾷ). Alain Blanchard provided further support for that understanding in his essay “Sur quelques interprétations de ΧΜΓ,” Proceedings of the XIV International Congress of Papyrologists (London: Egypt Exploration Society, 1975) 19–24. Naphtali Lewis, however, has since soundly refuted their arguments (“Notationes Legentis,” BASP 13 [1976] 158–59); see also Llewelyn, “The Christian Symbol ΧΜΓ,” 157–59, esp. n. 5.

18 For a possible instance of ΧCΜΓ, see ISyriaPrentice 211(= IGLSyr 4.1486).

19 Georgina Robinson, for example, accepts that ΧΜΓ at first was an abbreviation for Χ(ριστὸϛ) Μ(άρτυϛ) Γ(ένηται), which she regards as the source of the variant forms Κ(ύριοϛ) Μ(άρτυϛ) Γ(έvvηται) and Θ(εὸϛ) Μ(άρτυϛ) Γ(έvηται) (“ΧΜΓ and ΘΜΓ for ΧΜΓ,” Tyche 1 [1986] 175–77). Bernard P. Grenfell and Arthur S. Hunt reported the discovery of many inscribed fragments of amphorae with ΧΜΓ at Oxyrhynchus, one of which has the letters reversed: ΓΜΧ. See their excavation report for the 1906–1907 season, reprinted in Oxyrhynchus: A City and Texts (ed. Alan K. Bowman et al; London: Egypt Exploration Society, 2007) 367.

20 Alternative isopsephic interpretations include ἅγειοϛ ὁ θεόϛ (God is holy). If the symbol is regarded as an isopsephism for θεὸϛ βοηθόϛ, then some caution should be exercised in using the label “Christian” to describe it, since this phrase does occur at least once in reference to another god. In this regard, Llewelyn refers to SEG 27.1016, an inscription from Jerusalem (undated by its editors) that reads: θεοϛ | βοη|θοϛ | Ποσι|δωv | βοηθει (God the helper, Poseidon, help!); see Llewelyn, “The Christian Symbol ΧΜΓ,” 163.

21 For examples of ΧΜΓ paired with θ at the top of documentary papyri, see SB 16.13037 (522 C.E.) and P.Lond. 2.483 (616 C.E.). P.Mich. 6.378, a list of payments and part of an archive dated to the fourth or fifth century, begins with these symbols along with a cross: + ΧΜΓ θ.

22 Llewelyn discusses many uses of the phrase that likely date from the fourth and fifth centuries (“The Christian Symbol ΧΜΓ,” 162–64).

23 For the abbreviation ΘΒ at the top of a letter assigned to the fifth century, see P.Heid. 4.333. One must allow, however, that this abbreviation could be resolved in different ways (such as θεὸϛ βοηθῶv or θεὲ βοήθει).

24 Such a conclusion is not new. Although William K. Prentice strongly argued for the acrostic interpretation, he wrote in 1922, “Of course it is entirely possible that many people who used the symbol were ignorant of its original meaning: to them it was merely a sign, which was useful on house-lintels and elsewhere to avert evil, or which was merely customary. Under such circumstances it would be natural that different interpretations were found for it, and perhaps some believed it the more potent [sic] the more meanings could be given to it.” Publications of the Princeton University Archaeological Expeditions to Syria in 1904–5 and 1909 Division III: Greek and Latin Inscriptions, Section B: Northern Syria (Leiden: Brill, 1922) 171.

25 ISyriaPrentice 224 (= IGLSyr 4.1452).

26 ISyriaPrentice 234 (= IGLSyr 4.1443). William K. Prentice discusses these inscriptions in “Magical Formulae on Lintels of the Christian Period in Syria,” AJA 10 (1906) 137–50. This phenomenon is not limited to Syria. The back of the head of a statue (likely from the early fifth century) discovered in 1904 in Aphrodisias is inscribed with: ΧΜΓ | Θ(ε)ὲ βοήθι (chi-mu-gamma, God, help!). For a recent discussion of the piece, see Smith, “The Statue Monument of Oecumenius,” 151.

27 See Pieter J. Sijpesteijn, “Wiener Melange,” ZPE 40 (1980) 91–110. See also Llewelyn, “The Christian Symbol ΧΜΓ,” 156.