Some Observations on the Nomina Sacra of the First Three Centuries

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Jax
Posts: 1443
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Some Observations on the Nomina Sacra of the First Three Centuries

Post by Jax »

mlinssen wrote: Sat May 08, 2021 1:50 pm And I'll butt in anyway:

"abbreviation" most certainly does not a nomen sacrum make

1. Is the word shorter than it could be? Mark with A (possibly A1 and such for different forms of the same word)
2. Does the word have a superlinear stroke? Mark with S (S1 for multiple strokes, S2 for a single stroke covering multiple letters, S3 for a stroke that covers the entire word
3. Make an exception for the I(H)S variants as those don't fit the definition of (1). Xrestos also is an odd one out as the Greek word means good but X(P)C naturally implies something entirely different

Have a look at https://www.academia.edu/Documents/in/Nomina_Sacra and check out

https://www.academia.edu/9048303/_Readi ... 015_566_94

https://www.academia.edu/6423187/Consen ... anuscripts

(Use at own risk LOL)

https://www.google.com/search?q=Academi ... mina+sacra helps too LOL

In related news:

Grondin does have helpful research on Thomas sometimes: https://www.academia.edu/34602316/The_N ... ir_Numbers - I don't know about the Greek but the info on the Coptic is correct

https://www.academia.edu/37445283/Nomin ... di_Library gives you a fine overview of the Nag Hammadi uses
Excellent! Thank you.

Lane
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Some Observations on the Nomina Sacra of the First Three Centuries

Post by mlinssen »

U Mich has a fun and fine overview of NS used in P46:

https://apps.lib.umich.edu/reading/Paul ... sacra.html

Highly interestingly, it says:
Because of its early date, P46 shows some of the earliest forms of nomina sacra, using certain three-letter abbreviations (e.g. ιηϲ) rather than the two-letter forms (e.g. ιϲ) which began to replace them in the fourth century. Also, P46 only uses nomina sacra for a subset of the list of words which eventually came to be contracted
Thomas naturally has an even shorter list, and doesn't have a superlinear stroke on STROS, and the superlinear strokes don't cover entire words

There's also a note on regular abbreviations, and counting, in P46:

https://apps.lib.umich.edu/reading/Paul ... metry.html

The N at the line ends being sometimes replaced by a superlinear also is a Coptic feature, and it's also present in Thomas. Layton only makes a comment on that regarding the Oxyrhynchus papyri, however:
The scribe made use of contractions (compendia) well known from bibli­cal manuscripts: (lazy me doesn't want to transcribe the Greek). The letter nu at the end of a line is usually suppressed, being represented by a supralinear stroke over the preceding letter, e.g., (...).
If you need any help, I have some time on my hands now. As obvious as the whole alleged NS business is to me, I would love to spell it out for the more reading impaired
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Some Observations on the Nomina Sacra of the First Three Centuries

Post by mlinssen »

And you can see on the Michigan U site what the religious want to make-believe:
Screenshot_20210509-081903_Chrome_1.jpg
Screenshot_20210509-081903_Chrome_1.jpg (338.88 KiB) Viewed 2002 times
The superlinear strokes don't cover the entire word, but that most certainly doesn't prevent them from transcribing those as such.
Guillaumont does the same, Miss April does the same, while Layton neatly sticks to the text

There is a process to everything, and every process is the same: first there is chaos, and it slowly converges into order. Then, with order firmly established, offshoots start a new life on their own, in a much more orderly fashion. And when one zooms out, the entire process in itself appears as chaos

The NS end up in an orderly fashion with much less variation than in the beginning, and they are all neatly marked with strokes covering the entire word

So the closer to the beginning that one gets:
1. The more variation there is
2. The less the consistency in adding superlinear strokes
3. The less number of letters in a word that are covered with a superlinear stroke

Look at Thomas, and you will see a perfect example of the initial stage. I was just kidding about Grondin of course, all of his work is (very) sloppy and inaccurate: here is the Coptic list as it is in reality

ⲓ̅ⲥ̅ (Logion 0, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 61, 62, 63, 64, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 73, 75, 76, 77, 78, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 92, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 100, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 114)
ⲓⲏ̅ⲥ̅ (Logion 13, 22, 90)
̄ⲡ̅ⲛ̅̅ⲁ̅ (Logion 14)
ⲡⲛ̅ⲁ̅ (Logion 29, 44, 53, 114)
ⲥ⳨ⲟⲥ (Logion 55)

IHS has only 2 letters covered, and PNA likewise - only on one out of six occasions does it have full stroke.
These are very important variations to notice, as they attest to a lack of order, an absence of rules, habit, custom

On a side note: sometimes it is hard to decide whether a stroke does or does not cover a letter, for example when it starts halfway. Perhaps cases of ambiguity can be marked as well, just to be perfect

Just for the record: naturally, like everything else, the so-called nomina sacra also started with Thomas. Why? I really wouldn't know. The most logical explanation would be that they represented numbers in Thomas:

ⲓ̅ⲥ̅ - 10 and 200
ⲓⲏ̅ⲥ̅ - 8 and 200
ⲡ̅ⲛ̅̅ⲁ̅ - 80 and 50 and 1
ⲡⲛ̅̅ⲁ̅ - 50 and 1
User avatar
Jax
Posts: 1443
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Some Observations on the Nomina Sacra of the First Three Centuries

Post by Jax »

mlinssen wrote: Sat May 08, 2021 11:05 pm And you can see on the Michigan U site what the religious want to make-believe:

Screenshot_20210509-081903_Chrome_1.jpg

The superlinear strokes don't cover the entire word, but that most certainly doesn't prevent them from transcribing those as such.
Guillaumont does the same, Miss April does the same, while Layton neatly sticks to the text

There is a process to everything, and every process is the same: first there is chaos, and it slowly converges into order. Then, with order firmly established, offshoots start a new life on their own, in a much more orderly fashion. And when one zooms out, the entire process in itself appears as chaos

The NS end up in an orderly fashion with much less variation than in the beginning, and they are all neatly marked with strokes covering the entire word

So the closer to the beginning that one gets:
1. The more variation there is
2. The less the consistency in adding superlinear strokes
3. The less number of letters in a word that are covered with a superlinear stroke

Look at Thomas, and you will see a perfect example of the initial stage. I was just kidding about Grondin of course, all of his work is (very) sloppy and inaccurate: here is the Coptic list as it is in reality

ⲓ̅ⲥ̅ (Logion 0, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 61, 62, 63, 64, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 73, 75, 76, 77, 78, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 92, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 100, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 114)
ⲓⲏ̅ⲥ̅ (Logion 13, 22, 90)
̄ⲡ̅ⲛ̅̅ⲁ̅ (Logion 14)
ⲡⲛ̅ⲁ̅ (Logion 29, 44, 53, 114)
ⲥ⳨ⲟⲥ (Logion 55)

IHS has only 2 letters covered, and PNA likewise - only on one out of six occasions does it have full stroke.
These are very important variations to notice, as they attest to a lack of order, an absence of rules, habit, custom

On a side note: sometimes it is hard to decide whether a stroke does or does not cover a letter, for example when it starts halfway. Perhaps cases of ambiguity can be marked as well, just to be perfect

Just for the record: naturally, like everything else, the so-called nomina sacra also started with Thomas. Why? I really wouldn't know. The most logical explanation would be that they represented numbers in Thomas:

ⲓ̅ⲥ̅ - 10 and 200
ⲓⲏ̅ⲥ̅ - 8 and 200
ⲡ̅ⲛ̅̅ⲁ̅ - 80 and 50 and 1
ⲡⲛ̅̅ⲁ̅ - 50 and 1
Thank you for that break down of NS in Thomas. Very helpful :cheers:

Pity though that Michigan U only has that tool for a little of Galatians, color coded words and the transliteration tool are very helpful for me as I am still learning Greek.
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Some Observations on the Nomina Sacra of the First Three Centuries

Post by mlinssen »

Jax wrote: Sun May 09, 2021 7:25 am Pity though that Michigan U only has that tool for a little of Galatians, color coded words and the transliteration tool are very helpful for me as I am still learning Greek.
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/romans/1.htm will solve that problem for you

Just get the MSS from https://manuscripts.csntm.org/Manuscript/Group/GA_P46

and get the corresponding interlinear from biblehub

Still a hell of a job.
You could also do a top-down approach instead of bottom up: get the verses that could have NS and locate them in the MS

I can prep one for you if we agree on the items first. Metzger has the following:

Code: Select all

God	Θεός	ΘΣ	ΘΥ
Lord	Κύριος	ΚΣ	ΚΥ
Jesus	Ἰησοῦς	ΙΣ	ΙΥ
Christ/Messiah	Χριστός	ΧΣ	ΧΥ
Son	Υἱός	ΥΣ	ΥΥ
Spirit/Ghost	Πνεῦμα	ΠΝΑ	ΠΝΣ
David	Δαυὶδ	ΔΑΔ	
Cross/Stake	Σταυρός	ΣΤΣ	ΣΤΥ
Mother	Μήτηρ	ΜΗΡ	ΜΗΣ
God Bearer i.e. Mother of God	Θεοτόκος	ΘΚΣ	ΘΚΥ
Father	Πατήρ	ΠΗΡ	ΠΡΣ
Israel	Ἰσραήλ	ΙΗΛ	
Savior	Σωτήρ	ΣΗΡ	ΣΡΣ
Human being/Man	Ἄνθρωπος	ΑΝΟΣ	ΑΝΟΥ
Jerusalem	Ἱερουσαλήμ	ΙΛΗΜ	
Heaven/Heavens	Οὐρανός	ΟΥΝΟΣ	ΟΥΝΟΥ
Allegedly, according to Wikipedia, these are the NS in P46:

ΚΕ ΚΝ ΚΥ ΚΩ ΚΣ ΧΡΩ ΧΡΥ ΧΡΝ ΧΝ ΧΣ ΧΩ ΧΥ ΧΡΣ ΙΗΥ ΙΗΝ ΙΗΣ ΘΩ ΘΥ ΘΝ ΘΣ
ΠΝΑ ΠΝΙ ΠΝΣ ΥΙΥ ΥΙΝ ΥΙΣ ΥΝ ΣΤΡΕΣ ΣΤΡΝ ΣΤΡΩ ΣΤΡΟΣ ΣΤΡΟΥ ΕΣΤΡΟΝ ΕΣΤΡΑΙ
ΕΣΤΑΝ ΣΤΟΥ ΑΙΜΑ ΑΝΟΥ ΑΝΟΝ ΑΝΟΣ ΑΝΩΝ ΑΝΟΙΣ ΠΡΙ ΠΗΡ ΠΡΑ ΠΡΣ ΙΥ

They all have full superlinears, these are not to be trusted at all.
But as you can see, a language like Greek, with all its declinations, is hardly suitable for a concept like NS - Coptic would be far, far more stable ROFL. Or Dutch or English for that matter!
User avatar
Jax
Posts: 1443
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Some Observations on the Nomina Sacra of the First Three Centuries

Post by Jax »

mlinssen wrote: Sun May 09, 2021 10:57 am
Jax wrote: Sun May 09, 2021 7:25 am Pity though that Michigan U only has that tool for a little of Galatians, color coded words and the transliteration tool are very helpful for me as I am still learning Greek.
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/romans/1.htm will solve that problem for you

Just get the MSS from https://manuscripts.csntm.org/Manuscript/Group/GA_P46

and get the corresponding interlinear from biblehub

Still a hell of a job.
You could also do a top-down approach instead of bottom up: get the verses that could have NS and locate them in the MS

I can prep one for you if we agree on the items first. Metzger has the following:

Code: Select all

God	Θεός	ΘΣ	ΘΥ
Lord	Κύριος	ΚΣ	ΚΥ
Jesus	Ἰησοῦς	ΙΣ	ΙΥ
Christ/Messiah	Χριστός	ΧΣ	ΧΥ
Son	Υἱός	ΥΣ	ΥΥ
Spirit/Ghost	Πνεῦμα	ΠΝΑ	ΠΝΣ
David	Δαυὶδ	ΔΑΔ	
Cross/Stake	Σταυρός	ΣΤΣ	ΣΤΥ
Mother	Μήτηρ	ΜΗΡ	ΜΗΣ
God Bearer i.e. Mother of God	Θεοτόκος	ΘΚΣ	ΘΚΥ
Father	Πατήρ	ΠΗΡ	ΠΡΣ
Israel	Ἰσραήλ	ΙΗΛ	
Savior	Σωτήρ	ΣΗΡ	ΣΡΣ
Human being/Man	Ἄνθρωπος	ΑΝΟΣ	ΑΝΟΥ
Jerusalem	Ἱερουσαλήμ	ΙΛΗΜ	
Heaven/Heavens	Οὐρανός	ΟΥΝΟΣ	ΟΥΝΟΥ
Allegedly, according to Wikipedia, these are the NS in P46:

ΚΕ ΚΝ ΚΥ ΚΩ ΚΣ ΧΡΩ ΧΡΥ ΧΡΝ ΧΝ ΧΣ ΧΩ ΧΥ ΧΡΣ ΙΗΥ ΙΗΝ ΙΗΣ ΘΩ ΘΥ ΘΝ ΘΣ
ΠΝΑ ΠΝΙ ΠΝΣ ΥΙΥ ΥΙΝ ΥΙΣ ΥΝ ΣΤΡΕΣ ΣΤΡΝ ΣΤΡΩ ΣΤΡΟΣ ΣΤΡΟΥ ΕΣΤΡΟΝ ΕΣΤΡΑΙ
ΕΣΤΑΝ ΣΤΟΥ ΑΙΜΑ ΑΝΟΥ ΑΝΟΝ ΑΝΟΣ ΑΝΩΝ ΑΝΟΙΣ ΠΡΙ ΠΗΡ ΠΡΑ ΠΡΣ ΙΥ

They all have full superlinears, these are not to be trusted at all.
But as you can see, a language like Greek, with all its declinations, is hardly suitable for a concept like NS - Coptic would be far, far more stable ROFL. Or Dutch or English for that matter!
Cool. Thanks for the manuscript link. I already do use the biblehub site. :thumbup:

I'm not really trying to identify NS in the text as much as separating out individual words from the sea of letters for translation purposes at this time.
User avatar
Jax
Posts: 1443
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Some Observations on the Nomina Sacra of the First Three Centuries

Post by Jax »

But as you can see, a language like Greek, with all its declinations, is hardly suitable for a concept like NS - Coptic would be far, far more stable ROFL. Or Dutch or English for that matter!
If the point of NS is to designate numbers then I would agree with you. In Greek this would be a complete mess.
User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 3411
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Some Observations on the Nomina Sacra of the First Three Centuries

Post by DCHindley »

My late father-in-law used to keep lists like these, in notebooks, which he would study religiously looking for the clue that would crack things wide-open for him. Of course, he was doing it to figure out how to create a willing lottery number combination.

They say that gambling is just as much an addiction as alcohol or drugs. This sounds like gambling, not science.
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Some Observations on the Nomina Sacra of the First Three Centuries

Post by mlinssen »

DCHindley wrote: Sun May 09, 2021 12:15 pm My late father-in-law used to keep lists like these, in notebooks, which he would study religiously looking for the clue that would crack things wide-open for him. Of course, he was doing it to figure out how to create a willing lottery number combination.

They say that gambling is just as much an addiction as alcohol or drugs. This sounds like gambling, not science.
What does sound like gambling, David? Writing down all exact versions of nomina sacra (and their variations) in P46?
User avatar
Jax
Posts: 1443
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Some Observations on the Nomina Sacra of the First Three Centuries

Post by Jax »

I confess, I'm unsure what David is getting at here myself.
Post Reply