The two ligatures for Jesus - IS and IHS - in the Gospel of Thomas

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2808
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

The two ligatures for Jesus - IS and IHS - in the Gospel of Thomas

Post by Leucius Charinus »

In the following the terms ligature, nomina sacra, abbreviation, rune, encryption are inter-changable. Martijn Linssen has pointed out that there are two separate ligatures - IS & IHS - in the Coptic Gospel of Thomas.

The dominant ligature is the two letter abbreviation IS. This occurs 102 times. The second ligature is the three letters abbreviation IHS. And this occurs only 3 times. [1] Both of these "nomina sacra" are being interpreted and translated with the name "Jesus" in all the contemporary scholarship on Thomas.

What's hidden by the two runes of Jesus (IS & IHS) hidden in the Gospel of Thomas?

QUESTION (1): Are the existence of the two ligatures deliberate?

What is the explanation for the two separate ligatures IS and IHS - both translated as Jesus - in the Gospel of Thomas? What was the intention (if any) of the author of Thomas to use two separate ligatures for Jesus? Why bother if IS = IHS and Jesus is Jesus? Was it simply a scribal error. These things happen in almost all manuscripts. Is this some coincidence or is the author being purposeful? How can this question be answered?


QUESTION (2): If the two ligatures are deliberate what then?

If the separate use of IHS is deliberate and purposeful then what was the purpose? How is IHS Jesus to be differentiated from the IS Jesus and what are the implications to Thomas as a whole? What does the IHS Jesus do or say in logia 13, 22 and 90 which would alert a reader or an analyst that the IHS Jesus is different from the IS Jesus?


The details are are available below. Translation used is from Martijn Linssen. (Logion 90 in draft). Alternative translations and notes from ECW are linked if required by others. [2]

I will offer some ideas related to these two questions in a separate post. I hope to have explained the situation accurately. In the interim this is open for any answers to these two questions, or ideas, or comments, or criticism, or more questions.

Background Data for these questions:


(0) PROLOGUE to Thomas: (Linssen translation)

These ones are the words which are hiding, the living IS has said them, and Didymos Judas Thomas wrote them


(1) Logion 13 (Linssen translation)

IS said to his Disciples: compare me, and say it to me: I resemble whom? Simon Peter said to him: you resemble a Righteous Messenger. Matthew said to him: you resemble a human Philosopher, man of heart/mind. Thomas said to him: oh writer (teacher, master), Wholly my mouth will receive him not that says it: you resemble who?

IHS said: myself; your writer not. Since you drank, you became drunk from the Fountain which boils; this one I myself have measured her. And he took him, he Withdrew; he said to him three words.

After that Thomas However came to his friends, they questioned him: what has IS said to you?

Thomas said to them: if I should say to you one in the words he has said to me, you will carry stone and you cast to me, and a fire comes from the stones, and she* burns you.


(2) Logion 22 (Linssen translation)

IS beheld some little persons that take milk; he said to his Disciples:
these little persons who take milk, they are comparable to they
who are going inward to the reign of king;
they said to him: well then, we been made little persons,
we will go inward to the reign of king.

IHS said to them:
Whenever if you should make be the two one,
and if you should make the inside part in the manner of the outside part,
and the outside part in the manner of the inside part,
and the part of the heaven in the manner of the part of the ground;
So-that you will make be the male with the woman to that one single,
in order that will not the male make be male and the woman make be woman,
Whenever if you should make be some eyes to the place of an eye,
and a hand to the place of their hands,
and feet to the place of feet,
an Image to the place of an Image;
Then you will go inward to the reign-of king.


(3) Logion 90 (translation draft only)

said IHS : Come to me! My yoke is Chrestos, servitude is gentle(?), you will fall asleep.


[1] For a comprehensive summary of all Christian related ligatures and more explicit references to "Chrestos" and "Christos", "Chrestian" and "Christian" see:
https://www.academia.edu/84288595/Jesus ... di_Library

[2] Early Christian Writings Website links:

Logion 13: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... mas13.html
Logion 22: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... mas22.html
Logion 90: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... mas90.html
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 2110
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: The two ligatures for Jesus - IS and IHS - in the Gospel of Thomas

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

Leucius Charinus wrote: Sun Aug 07, 2022 9:24 pm Why bother if IS = IHS and Jesus is Jesus? Was it simply a scribal error. These things happen in almost all manuscripts.
...
I hope to have explained the situation accurately. In the interim this is open for any answers to these two questions, or ideas, or comments, or criticism, or more questions.
(bolding mine)

As far as I know, only a Coptic Codex, which is a translation from Syriac, and three Greek fragments exist. The wording of the Codex sometimes differs not inconsiderably from the Greek fragments.Two examples:

1)
The Coptic reading of Logion 37 contains the nomen sacrum IS, while P.Oxy. 655 only offers the unwritten "he".

Nag Hammadi Codex II Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 655
Jesus ("IS") said, "When you take off your clothing without being ashamed He says, "When you take off your clothes and are not ashamed ..."

2)
While P.Oxy. 1 uses only the nomen sacrum "IS", P.Oxy. 654 contains only the nomen sacrum "IHS". In this respect, P.Oxy. 654 (dated to 3rd cent.) also differs from the Coptic Codex (dated to 4th cent.).

Nag Hammadi Codex II Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 654
These are the hidden words that the living Jesus (IS) spoke. And Didymos Judas Thomas wrote them down. These are the [secret] words [which] the living Jesus (IHS) [sp]oke, an[d Judas, who is] (called) Thomas, [wrote down]

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

Re: The two ligatures for Jesus - IS and IHS - in the Gospel of Thomas

Post by mlinssen »

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Sun Aug 07, 2022 11:53 pm
Leucius Charinus wrote: Sun Aug 07, 2022 9:24 pm Why bother if IS = IHS and Jesus is Jesus? Was it simply a scribal error. These things happen in almost all manuscripts.
...
I hope to have explained the situation accurately. In the interim this is open for any answers to these two questions, or ideas, or comments, or criticism, or more questions.
(bolding mine)

As far as I know, only a Coptic Codex, which is a translation from Syriac, and three Greek fragments exist. The wording of the Codex sometimes differs not inconsiderably from the Greek fragments.Two examples:

1)
The Coptic reading of Logion 37 contains the nomen sacrum IS, while P.Oxy. 655 only offers the unwritten "he".

Nag Hammadi Codex II Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 655
Jesus ("IS") said, "When you take off your clothing without being ashamed He says, "When you take off your clothes and are not ashamed ..."

2)
While P.Oxy. 1 uses only the nomen sacrum "IS", P.Oxy. 654 contains only the nomen sacrum "IHS". In this respect, P.Oxy. 654 (dated to 3rd cent.) also differs from the Coptic Codex (dated to 4th cent.).

Nag Hammadi Codex II Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 654
These are the hidden words that the living Jesus (IS) spoke. And Didymos Judas Thomas wrote them down. These are the [secret] words [which] the living Jesus (IHS) [sp]oke, an[d Judas, who is] (called) Thomas, [wrote down]

Hi Kunigunde, the Coptic is the first text, it is out of the question that it is a translation from any other language. Logion 7 attests to that, but so does the elaborate wordplay, and the Greek loanwords serve a very specific function, mirroring their Coptic counterparts that sit in a much less metaphysical level

The examples you give are even somewhat flattered, there are great differences between the Coptic and the Greek: I treat all those in detail in the Commentary - the quick pointer to them is in

viewtopic.php?p=140626#p140626

The most severe example is logion 28 (page 287) where the Coptic states

IS said: I stood to my feet in the middle of the World and I revealed outward to them in Flesh

which the Greek explicitly has quite differently:

Says IS I-stood in the-middle of-the world and in flesh I-was-seen to/by-them

We can ignore the "to my feet" which is a typical Egyptian expression - but relocating the adverbial phrase is most significant. There are plenty other discrepancies such as e.g. truth versus heaven in logion 6, and so on: on a conceptual level most are identical, but not even at that level can we say that Greek and Coptic Thomas are the same. When we drill down to grammar and semantics we find differences in tenses, active versus passive, yet even 3rd person singular versus 2nd person plural

The Greek copies all opt for their own version of IS or IHS and stick to that, as far as we can tell from the fragments

In related news: the translation of 37 is wrong, the Coptic says "to make named of your shame", to strip yourself from your shame. But all "scholars" simply must harmonise Coptic and Greek Thomas for some reason; even Attridge mysteriously manages to present translations of the Greek that agree verbatim with the Coptic that is analysed by Layton yet translated by Lambdin

Simply amazing
Last edited by mlinssen on Mon Aug 08, 2022 5:25 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: The two ligatures for Jesus - IS and IHS - in the Gospel of Thomas

Post by mlinssen »

Leucius Charinus wrote: Sun Aug 07, 2022 9:24 pm QUESTION (1): Are the existence of the two ligatures deliberate?

What is the explanation for the two separate ligatures IS and IHS - both translated as Jesus - in the Gospel of Thomas? What was the intention (if any) of the author of Thomas to use two separate ligatures for Jesus? Why bother if IS = IHS and Jesus is Jesus? Was it simply a scribal error. These things happen in almost all manuscripts. Is this some coincidence or is the author being purposeful? How can this question be answered?
One can't extrapolate from generalisations when it concerns specifics, that is the dumbest thing to do.
FYI: no text ever mixes these, save for the NHL (and a minute selection of Greek fragments). Vaticanus, Sinaiticus and Alexandrinus mix but only because of the various separate hands - which naturally is most invaluable information.
Thomas consists of one single hand save for the first 8 lines of leaf 47 - logion 78-79, https://www.gospelofthomas.eu/blog/wp-c ... scan16.jpg
QUESTION (2): If the two ligatures are deliberate what then?

If the separate use of IHS is deliberate and purposeful then what was the purpose? How is IHS Jesus to be differentiated from the IS Jesus and what are the implications to Thomas as a whole? What does the IHS Jesus do or say in logia 13, 22 and 90 which would alert a reader or an analyst that the IHS Jesus is different from the IS Jesus?


The details are are available below. Translation used is from Martijn Linssen. (Logion 90 in draft). Alternative translations and notes from ECW are linked if required by others. [2]

I will offer some ideas related to these two questions in a separate post. I hope to have explained the situation accurately. In the interim this is open for any answers to these two questions, or ideas, or comments, or criticism, or more questions.
You certainly have. Thanks!

Background Data for these questions:


(0) PROLOGUE to Thomas: (Linssen translation)

These ones are the words which are hiding, the living IS has said them, and Didymos Judas Thomas wrote them


(1) Logion 13 (Linssen translation)

IS said to his Disciples: compare me, and say it to me: I resemble whom? Simon Peter said to him: you resemble a Righteous Messenger. Matthew said to him: you resemble a human Philosopher, man of heart/mind. Thomas said to him: oh writer (teacher, master), Wholly my mouth will receive him not that says it: you resemble who?

IHS said: myself; your writer not. Since you drank, you became drunk from the Fountain which boils; this one I myself have measured her. And he took him, he Withdrew; he said to him three words.

After that Thomas However came to his friends, they questioned him: what has IS said to you?

Thomas said to them: if I should say to you one in the words he has said to me, you will carry stone and you cast to me, and a fire comes from the stones, and she* burns you.


(2) Logion 22 (Linssen translation)

IS beheld some little persons that take milk; he said to his Disciples:
these little persons who take milk, they are comparable to they
who are going inward to the reign of king;
they said to him: well then, we been made little persons,
we will go inward to the reign of king.

IHS said to them:
Whenever if you should make be the two one,
and if you should make the inside part in the manner of the outside part,
and the outside part in the manner of the inside part,
and the part of the heaven in the manner of the part of the ground;
So-that you will make be the male with the woman to that one single,
in order that will not the male make be male and the woman make be woman,
Whenever if you should make be some eyes to the place of an eye,
and a hand to the place of their hands,
and feet to the place of feet,
an Image to the place of an Image;
Then you will go inward to the reign-of king.


(3) Logion 90 (translation draft only)

And most certainly not mine
said IHS : Come to me! My yoke is Chrestos, servitude is gentle(?), you will fall asleep.
[/box]


[1] For a comprehensive summary of all Christian related ligatures and more explicit references to "Chrestos" and "Christos", "Chrestian" and "Christian" see:
https://www.academia.edu/84288595/Jesus ... di_Library

[2] Early Christian Writings Website links:

Logion 13: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... mas13.html
Logion 22: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... mas22.html
Logion 90: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... mas90.html
Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 2110
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: The two ligatures for Jesus - IS and IHS - in the Gospel of Thomas

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin »

mlinssen wrote: Mon Aug 08, 2022 3:17 am
Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Sun Aug 07, 2022 11:53 pm While P.Oxy. 1 uses only the nomen sacrum "IS", P.Oxy. 654 contains only the nomen sacrum "IHS". In this respect, P.Oxy. 654 (dated to 3rd cent.) also differs from the Coptic Codex (dated to 4th cent.).

Nag Hammadi Codex II Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 654
These are the hidden words that the living Jesus (IS) spoke. And Didymos Judas Thomas wrote them down. These are the [secret] words [which] the living Jesus (IHS) [sp]oke, an[d Judas, who is] (called) Thomas, [wrote down]

The examples you give are even somewhat flattered, there are great differences between the Coptic and the Greek

... on a conceptual level most are identical, but not even at that level can we say that Greek and Coptic Thomas are the same. When we drill down to grammar and semantics we find differences in tenses, active versus passive, yet even 3rd person singular versus 2nd person plural
Hi Martijn, I already thought that there could be great differences in content, but I was only interested in the use of the nomina sacra. But good to know! Thanks.

Nevertheless, the use of different nomina sacra in the prologue of the gospel seems to be significant.

Is it correct that in Coptic only the fixed forms "IS" and "IHS" are used? So there are no nomina (for Jesus) where the last letter depends on the grammatical case?

mlinssen wrote: Mon Aug 08, 2022 3:25 am FYI: no text ever mixes these, save for the NHL (and a minute selection of Greek fragments). Vaticanus, Sinaiticus and Alexandrinus mix but only because of the various separate hands - which naturally is most invaluable information.
Thomas consists of one single hand save for the first 8 lines of leaf 47 - logion 78-79,
I have no idea, but my old Ludwig Traube wrote that this phenomenon is not uncommon in Coptic manuscripts. (Ludwig Traube, Nomina Sacra, 1907, p. 271, note 4 "Die beiden Doppelformen kommen oft in denselben Handschriften nebeneinander vor." - translation: The two double forms (IS XS and IHS XRS) often occur side by side in the same manuscripts.)

I know such a thing from Papyrus 45 (GMark). There the old type "IH" (the first two letters of Jesus) is regularly used (not "IS"), but the scribe sometimes switches to the conflated form "IHS" (see for example Mark 9:2,5).
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: The two ligatures for Jesus - IS and IHS - in the Gospel of Thomas

Post by mlinssen »

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Mon Aug 08, 2022 9:12 am
mlinssen wrote: Mon Aug 08, 2022 3:17 am
Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Sun Aug 07, 2022 11:53 pm While P.Oxy. 1 uses only the nomen sacrum "IS", P.Oxy. 654 contains only the nomen sacrum "IHS". In this respect, P.Oxy. 654 (dated to 3rd cent.) also differs from the Coptic Codex (dated to 4th cent.).

Nag Hammadi Codex II Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 654
These are the hidden words that the living Jesus (IS) spoke. And Didymos Judas Thomas wrote them down. These are the [secret] words [which] the living Jesus (IHS) [sp]oke, an[d Judas, who is] (called) Thomas, [wrote down]

The examples you give are even somewhat flattered, there are great differences between the Coptic and the Greek

... on a conceptual level most are identical, but not even at that level can we say that Greek and Coptic Thomas are the same. When we drill down to grammar and semantics we find differences in tenses, active versus passive, yet even 3rd person singular versus 2nd person plural
Hi Martijn, I already thought that there could be great differences in content, but I was only interested in the use of the nomina sacra. But good to know! Thanks.

Nevertheless, the use of different nomina sacra in the prologue of the gospel seems to be significant.

Is it correct that in Coptic only the fixed forms "IS" and "IHS" are used? So there are no nomina (for Jesus) where the last letter depends on the grammatical case?

mlinssen wrote: Mon Aug 08, 2022 3:25 am FYI: no text ever mixes these, save for the NHL (and a minute selection of Greek fragments). Vaticanus, Sinaiticus and Alexandrinus mix but only because of the various separate hands - which naturally is most invaluable information.
Thomas consists of one single hand save for the first 8 lines of leaf 47 - logion 78-79,
I have no idea, but my old Ludwig Traube wrote that this phenomenon is not uncommon in Coptic manuscripts. (Ludwig Traube, Nomina Sacra, 1907, p. 271, note 4 "Die beiden Doppelformen kommen oft in denselben Handschriften nebeneinander vor." - translation: The two double forms (IS XS and IHS XRS) often occur side by side in the same manuscripts.)

I know such a thing from Papyrus 45 (GMark). There the old type "IH" (the first two letters of Jesus) is regularly used (not "IS"), but the scribe sometimes switches to the conflated form "IHS" (see for example Mark 9:2,5).
Das stimmt ganz genau Kunigunde, Koptisch hat keine Verbeugung. Von allen Sprachen die es gibt in Mesopotamien ist Koptisch die einzige die geeignet ist für eine Erfindung wie Nomina Sacra

Traube hatte Recht, aber ich möchte sehr gerne wissen welche Texte er in Gedanken hatte! Wir können sehr schön im lateinischen beobachten wie die Nomina Sacra viel "netter" sind aber das hat natürlich überwiegend zu tun mit der Tatsache dass diese Texte viele später sind, und eine gewisse Art von Organisierung kennen

English summary: it is blatantly evident that ALL of this could only have originated not only IN Egypt but also solely WITH Coptic

:whistling:
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2808
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

Re: The two ligatures for Jesus - IS and IHS - in the Gospel of Thomas

Post by Leucius Charinus »

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Mon Aug 08, 2022 9:12 am Nevertheless, the use of different nomina sacra in the prologue of the gospel seems to be significant.
Thanks for your interest in the runes Kunigunde Kreuzerin. I'd have to agree that the different nomina sacra in the prologue of the gospel (Coptic vs P.Oxy. 654) seems to be significant. As does the consistent use of IHS in P.Oxy. 654 rather than the IS in the Coptic and in P.Oxy 1. Are there any ligatures in P.Oxy 655 at all? IDK. The different consistent use of IHS in P.Oxy. 654 may indicate a different scribal convention for the nomina sacra (IS or IHS) at the time it was written. WIKI says this fragment was written on the back of a survey report.

However AFAIK none of the Oxy fragments contain 13, 22 or 90. Would the Oxy fragments have broken their consistency (whether IS or IHS) at these logia? Or even elsewhere? We dont know. The reason IMO that this is important is because the Coptic is as complete as it could be. The Gospel of Thomas is nestled in full between The Secret Book of John and the enigmatic Gospel of Philip in the NHL Codex 2 which is one of the 4 very expensively bound codices in the NHL.
User avatar
Leucius Charinus
Posts: 2808
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 4:23 pm
Location: memoriae damnatio

Re: The two ligatures for Jesus - IS and IHS - in the Gospel of Thomas

Post by Leucius Charinus »

mlinssen wrote: Mon Aug 08, 2022 3:25 am FYI: no text ever mixes these, save for the NHL (and a minute selection of Greek fragments). Vaticanus, Sinaiticus and Alexandrinus mix but only because of the various separate hands - which naturally is most invaluable information.

Thomas consists of one single hand save for the first 8 lines of leaf 47 - logion 78-79, https://www.gospelofthomas.eu/blog/wp-c ... scan16.jpg
Thanks for this information. So the one single hand of Thomas mixed the ligatures at 13, 22 and 90 either inadvertently or purposefully. It would be interesting to know which.

And in regard to the draft translation of Logion 90 in the OP
And most certainly not mine
What draft translation are you running with at the moment? Will it contain "Chrestos"?


Logion 65
Also another question about your translation of Logion 65. There is a lacuna in the first line noted in your translation as follows... ⲭⲣ[ⲏⲥⲓ]ⲥ. Where others translate this as "A good man" or " kind man" your translation is different. Is it possible that this could be
..... ⲭⲣ[ⲏⲥⲧⲟ]ⲥ ?
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: The two ligatures for Jesus - IS and IHS - in the Gospel of Thomas

Post by mlinssen »

Leucius Charinus wrote: Wed Aug 10, 2022 7:56 pm
Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote: Mon Aug 08, 2022 9:12 am Nevertheless, the use of different nomina sacra in the prologue of the gospel seems to be significant.
Thanks for your interest in the runes Kunigunde Kreuzerin. I'd have to agree that the different nomina sacra in the prologue of the gospel (Coptic vs P.Oxy. 654) seems to be significant. As does the consistent use of IHS in P.Oxy. 654 rather than the IS in the Coptic and in P.Oxy 1. Are there any ligatures in P.Oxy 655 at all? IDK. The different consistent use of IHS in P.Oxy. 654 may indicate a different scribal convention for the nomina sacra (IS or IHS) at the time it was written. WIKI says this fragment was written on the back of a survey report.

However AFAIK none of the Oxy fragments contain 13, 22 or 90. Would the Oxy fragments have broken their consistency (whether IS or IHS) at these logia? Or even elsewhere? We dont know. The reason IMO that this is important is because the Coptic is as complete as it could be. The Gospel of Thomas is nestled in full between The Secret Book of John and the enigmatic Gospel of Philip in the NHL Codex 2 which is one of the 4 very expensively bound codices in the NHL.
All of that is in my Commentary Pete
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 3431
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: The two ligatures for Jesus - IS and IHS - in the Gospel of Thomas

Post by mlinssen »

Leucius Charinus wrote: Wed Aug 10, 2022 8:16 pm
mlinssen wrote: Mon Aug 08, 2022 3:25 am FYI: no text ever mixes these, save for the NHL (and a minute selection of Greek fragments). Vaticanus, Sinaiticus and Alexandrinus mix but only because of the various separate hands - which naturally is most invaluable information.

Thomas consists of one single hand save for the first 8 lines of leaf 47 - logion 78-79, https://www.gospelofthomas.eu/blog/wp-c ... scan16.jpg
Thanks for this information. So the one single hand of Thomas mixed the ligatures at 13, 22 and 90 either inadvertently or purposefully. It would be interesting to know which.

And in regard to the draft translation of Logion 90 in the OP
And most certainly not mine
What draft translation are you running with at the moment? Will it contain "Chrestos"?


Logion 65
Also another question about your translation of Logion 65. There is a lacuna in the first line noted in your translation as follows... ⲭⲣ[ⲏⲥⲓ]ⲥ. Where others translate this as "A good man" or " kind man" your translation is different. Is it possible that this could be
..... ⲭⲣ[ⲏⲥⲧⲟ]ⲥ ?
None really. I am not working on Thomas at moment

https://www.academia.edu/42150590/XREST ... impossible

Regarding ⲭⲣ[ⲏⲥⲓ]ⲥ:

https://www.academia.edu/44902212/The_P ... your_Quest
Post Reply