Abstract
Since the middle of the twentieth century, there has been a tendency among scholars to marginalize the palaeographical opinions of Grenfell and Hunt. Their alleged belief that the codex format was a post-third century development is said to have induced them to date fragments of Chrstian codices much later than they would have on strictly palaeographical grounds. I argue that this is a serious misrepresentation of their views and practices.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 149-162 |
Number of pages | 14 |
Journal | Bulletin of the American Society of Papyrologists |
Volume | 48 |
Publication status | Published - 2011 |