Newly discovered ancient manuscripts of previously unknown texts found in a fragmentary, disordered, and incomplete state present challenges to modern scholars seeking to restore, conserve, and study them. The first order of business is the ordering of the disordered pages, if possible. Restoring page sequence is, in effect, reconstructing their original order in the ancient codex, from which sheets and leaves were detached, by accident or by design. Restoring page sequence cannot be accomplished apart from making a provisional transcrip-tion and translation of the fragments. A final critical transcription of the ancient text and its translation into a modern language, however, await the codicological reconstruction of the manuscript, for page sequence affects how a text is understood and hence translated. The process might popularly be described as trying to reconstruct a multilayered multisided jigsaw puzzle, lacking most of its pieces. The recently published Gospel of the Savior (P. Berol. inv. 22220, hereafter GSav) is one such previously unknown text, and its reconstruc-tion proceeded in precisely the manner described above.

The Tosefta reads: “If a person found a ring on which was the image of the sun, the image of the moon, the image of a dragon (snake), he should bring it to the Dead Sea. And also a nursing female image () and Sarapis.”tos. ‘Abod. Zar. 5(6):1 (ed. Moshe Shemouel Zuckermandel, 468). The term follows MS Erfurt, while the version in MS Vienna is . The latter is preferable. This passage in the Tosefta almost certainly belongs to the second century C.E. Although this dictum is unattributed in the Tosefta, b. [Abod. Zar. states that R. Judah taught the baraita concerning the nursing female image or Sarapis (see b. ‘Abod. Zar. 43a, and Shraga Abramson, Tractate ‘Abodah Zarah of the Babylonian Talmud [New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America] 77). “R. Judah” is R. Judah bar Ilai, a fourth-generation Tanna, who was active in the Land of Israel in the Usha genera-tion (second century C.E.). Each component of this intriguing passage in the Tosefta deserves close examination; the current article will reexamine the phrase a “nursing female image,” and attempt to identify the two pagan characters repre-sented by this cryptic wording. Saul Lieberman, one of the leading scholars who attempted to answer this question, was of the opinion that this phrase refers to Isis nursing her son Horus (“Harpocrates” in Greek).Saul Lieberman, Hellenism in Jewish Palestine (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1962) 136. Actually, he was not the first to note the connection between the nursing female image and Isis. See Isidore Lévy, “Nébo, Hadaran et Sérapis dans l'apologie du Pseudo-Meliton,” RHR 20 (1899) 373 n. 6; Marcus Jastrow, A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature (London: Luzac, 1903; repr., Jerusalem: Horev, 1985) 103, s.v. “ ,”; Heinrich Blaufuss, Götter, Bilder und Symbole nach den Traktaken über fremden Dienst (Nuremberg: Buchdruckerei von J. L. Stich, 1910) 19; Jacob Levy, Wörterbuch über die Talmudim und Midraschim (vol. 3; Berlin: Harz, 1924) col. 107a. Because the pair Isis-Sarapis was extremely common during the time of the Roman empire and especially in the second century C.E., the listing of Sarapis after the “nursing female image” probably led Lieberman to conclude that this character can be none other than Isis.Plutarch, De Isi. et Osi. 28.361 and many more. For the affinity between Isis and Sarapis, already in the Hellenistic period, see Robert Turcan, Les cultes orientaux dans le monde romain (2d rev. ed.; Paris: Les belles lettres, 1992) 78–79. Furthermore, Isis nursing Horus (Isis Lactans) is a quite well-known motif in Hellenistic-Roman sculpture.Roger Packman Hinks, “Isis Suckling Horus,” The British Museum Quarterly 12 (1937–1938) 74–75; John Ducey Cooney, “Harpocrates, the Dutiful Son,” Bulletin of the Cleveland Museum of Art (1972) 284–90; Vincent Tran Tam Tinh, Isis Lactans—Corpus des monuments gréco-romains d'Isis allaitant Harpocrate (EPRO 37; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1973); idem, “De nouveau Isis Lactans,” in Hommages à M. J. Vermaseren (EPRO 68; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1978) 3:1231–68, pls. 226–49, figs. 1–56. The expression, the “nursing female image,” usually refers to Isis nursing her son Horus; however, on occasion we see Isis nursing the bull Apis. See G. J. F. Kater-Sibbes and Marteen J. Vermaseren, Apis I (EPRO 48; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1975) no. 106; no. 141, pl. 81. According to the BT interpretation of the baraita, it is proven that the nursing female image to which R. Judah bar Ilai referred is that of a woman nursing her son. See ‘Abod. Zar. 43a; Rashi ad loc., s.v. meniqah: “A woman nursing a son.” It may also be noted that in the first century C.E., men commonly wore rings bearing depictions of Harpocrates and Egyptian gods. See Shua Amorai-Stark, “Isis in the Art of Gems of the Hellenistic-Roman Period,” Ph.D. diss. (Hebrew), Hebrew University, Jerusalem, 1988, 13 (primary sources). Lieberman concluded from this that Isis, like Sarapis, is “specifically mentioned” in Rabbinic literature.Lieberman, Hellenism, 136. Although this assertion would be correct regarding Sarapis, who is mentioned by name both in the Tosefta and in the Babylonian Talmud,b. ‘Abod. Zar. 43a. In this source, the tradition regarding the nursing female image and Sarapis is transmitted by R. Judah bar Ilai (see above, n.1). The fact that R. Judah taught this exegesis is apparently a further proof that the tradition of the nursing female image originated in the Egyp-tian cults, since R. Judah bar Ilai was known to be a sage who possessed a number of traditions pertaining to Egypt and its religions. See Gen. Rab. 87 (ed. Judah Theodor and Chanoch Albeck, 1071–72); Cant. Rab. 1:1 (ed. Shimshon Dunsky, 1). For a theoretical and historical interpretation of this tradition, see Samuel Tobias Lachs, “An Egyptian Festival in Canticles Rabba,” JQR 46 (1960) 47–54. For other traditions relating to Egypt that were transmitted by R. Judah, see tos. Kip-purim 2:5 (ed. Lieberman, 231–32); y. Yoma 6:6, 43(d); tos. Sukkah 4:6 (ed. Lieberman, 273–74). It is our opinion that R. Judah's frame of reference for the nursing female image is not Egypt, but rather the Land of Israel. R. Judah's halakhic stance on this issue almost certainly derives from the fact that the nursing female image comprised a quite common and widespread religious-ritual phenomenon in the second century C.E. Gentile community in the Land of Israel, as reflected in Rabbinic literature. We will show (below) that the cult of Isis Lactans did not exist in the Land of Israel in the Roman period. the name “Isis” and similar theophoric names, such as ’ and ’, are absent from Rabbinic literature.