Oxyrhynchus papyri vols 1-14 online at Archive.org

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Mark Goodacre has made a valuable discovery:

Archive.org now has the first fourteen volumes of The Oxyrhynchus Papyri online in toto and in a variety of formats, for viewing and for download; Volumes 1-5 are digitized by Google Books from Harvard University Library and so should appear also on Google Books in due course.  They do not yet have my favourite format, the flip book, but no doubt that will appear in due course. Volumes 6-14 are digitized by Brigham Young University and include the flip book format. I have also noted below an alternative (and superior) version of Volume 4, from University of California Libraries, which has been online for much longer. Here are the links:

The Oxyrhynchus Papyri Volume 1 (1898)
The Oxyrhynchus Papyri Volume 2 (1899)
The Oxyrhynchus Papyri Volume 3 (1903)
The Oxyrhynchus Papyri Volume 4 (1904) [Alternative version]
The Oxyrhynchus Papyri Volume 5 (1908)
The Oxyrhynchus Papyri Volume 6 (1908)
The Oxyrhynchus Papyri Volume 7 (1910)
The Oxyrhynchus Papyri Volume 8 (1911)
The Oxyrhynchus Papyri Volume 9 (1912)
The Oxyrhynchus Papyri Volume 10 (1914)
The Oxyrhynchus Papyri Volume 11 (1915)
The Oxyrhynchus Papyri Volume 12 (1916)
The Oxyrhynchus Papyri Volume 13 (1919)
The Oxyrhynchus Papyri Volume 14 (1920)

(HT: Wieland Willker on the Textual Criticism list)

It’s a reminder of how much we owe to Google books and Archive.org.  There is an online site somewhere, where for years academics have been messing around in a snail-like manner.  But this is the raw material.

Quite often an academic library, asked to digitise its collection, will decide to implement some very slow, very expensive ‘Rolls-Royce’ solution.  They talk about “portals”, they talk about getting users to register — even to pay — and all that.  They frequently decline to make the content available in PDF form, because they would “lose control”.  But all these endeavours are futile, and they will all fail.  People don’t want that.  What they want is PDF’s.

It may well be that some site will come into being for collaborative working in the future.  But it won’t be because people are forced to, in order to access some manuscript which happens to be at Crumbagdalen College Oxford because of a historical accident.  It will be where actual value for the user is created.

I hope the arrival of these volumes online gees up the Oxford people.  An online site for the papyri is a good thing; but they need to start with getting all the volumes online, and then with enhancing what those give us.  In that order, please.

Share

Wikipedia and the British Museum

Posted on by Roger Pearse

The British Museum seems to be run by some clever people.  At Digging Digitally there is an article quoting the New York Times, Venerable British Museum Enlists in the Wikipedia Revolution.

The British Museum has begun an unusual collaboration with Wikipedia, the online, volunteer-written encyclopedia, to help ensure that the museum’s expertise and notable artifacts are reflected in that digital reference’s pages.

About 40 Wikipedia contributors in the London area spent Friday with a “backstage pass” to the museum, meeting with curators and taking photographs of the collection. And in a curious reversal in status, curators were invited to review Wikipedia’s treatment of the museum’s collection and make a case that important pieces were missing or given short shrift.

“I looked at how many Rosetta Stone page views there were at Wikipedia,” said Matthew Cock, who is in charge of the museum’s Web site and is supervising the collaboration with Wikipedia. “That is perhaps our iconic object, and five times as many people go to the Wikipedia article as to ours.”

“Ten years ago we were equal, and we were all fighting for position,” Mr. Cock said. Now, he added, “people are gravitating to fewer and fewer sites. We have to shift with how we deal with the Web.”

What unites them is each organization’s concern for educating the public: one has the artifacts and expertise, and the other has the online audience.

Read the whole article.  What is depicted is a model for institutions on how to deal with the internet revolution.  It’s clever, it costs them nothing, it gains the institution respect and traction on the internet… there is, in truth, no downside.

The issue of revenue from images is also addressed.  This is the real barrier in stupid institutions.

Dividing them are issues of copyright and control, principally of images. Wikipedia’s parent, the Wikimedia Foundation, is strongly identified with the “free culture movement,” which generally holds that copyright laws are too restrictive. The foundation hosts an online “commons” with more than six million media files, photos, drawings and videos available under free licenses, which mean they can be copied by virtually anyone as long as there is a credit.

That brought Wikipedia into a legal tussle with another prominent British institution, the National Portrait Gallery, … Both the portrait gallery and the British Museum generate revenue by selling reprints and copies of pieces in their collections.

“Especially at a time like this, we can’t afford to sacrifice any revenue source,” Mr. Cock said.

And while Mr. Wyatt said he “would love a high-resolution image of the Rosetta Stone,” that shouldn’t be Wikipedia’s only goal in working with the museum. He said that there had been some extremism on his side of the debate: “ ‘Content liberation’ is the phrase that has been used within the Wikimedia community, and I hate that: they see them as a repository of images that haven’t been nicked yet.”

I’d have liked to see this issue explored more in what is frankly a splendid article by the NY Times. 

We all hate how Wikipedia is sucking the life out of the web.  We all hate its weaknesses.  But it is there, it is a fact, and it has to be engaged with.  The controversial articles on “Jesus” attract the head-bangers, full of hate, and we can do nothing with such articles to improve them.  But minor articles can be safely created and edited, and I have done so myself.

All credit to Matthew Cock for realising that he can make Wikipedia work for the British Museum, and not just the other way around.  This is a new world.  The clever will make the web work for them; the stupid will cower trying to hold back the tide, and failing.

I am sadly accustomed to the disgusting sight of the British Library pointlessly fighting to keep its collections off-line, and have blogged about it passim.  But this can distract from the fact that other British state-run institutions are not so stupid.  Indeed I suspect that outside the narrow world of academic libraries, most of them are waking up and seeing opportunities.  The National Archives are allowing readers to bring in digital cameras.  The British Museum are seeing a way to make the public promote the national collection online.  And how many others, I wonder?

Share

Stephanos of Alexandria steps out of the shadows

Posted on by Roger Pearse

In the early 600’s Stephanos of Alexandria was a philosopher interested in alchemy.  His extant works consist of nine orations on alchemy, the last delivered in the presence of the emperor Heraclius.

Three of these were translated into English and published before WW2 in Ambix, the alchemy journal, by Sherwood Taylor.  As I have mentioned before, I discovered a draft of the fourth oration among Taylor’s papers in Oxford a couple of years ago. 

Last year I suggested to the modern editors of Ambix that it might form a nice part of their 75th anniversary issue to publish the material.  They agreed but not a lot happened.

Over the weekend I had an email from Dr Jenny Rampling, who has taken responsibility for this.  She’s in Athens, “cataloguing Hellenistic alchemical manuscripts” — which I suspect means medieval mss. of Hellenistic texts, but is still exciting stuff!  Apparently she’s working with a Greek researcher. 

She tells me that investigation reveals the draft would need revision before it could be published, but the idea is for her co-worker to do that, and that it will indeed appear in Ambix.  She asked my opinion, so I’ve written a letter of suggestions, although how welcome they will be I don’t know — never ask for opinions unless you want to get them!

I’ve also suggested she talk to the CSNTM people.  After all, people in Athens cataloguing mss ought to have some common interests.

So … some progress.  Ancient texts by alchemists are still ancient texts, and ought to be accessible.  Currently they are not.

UPDATE (July 3rd).  No reply or acknowledgement from Jenny Rampling.  Hum.

Share

From my diary

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Cambridge University Library is going to put Codex Bezae online, or so I read in a Daily Telegraph story.   Better still, they’re preparing to put all their books online, and make them freely available.  That’s what we want to hear.

Anne Jarvis, the university Librarian, said that the exciting new plans would open up priceless collections to students worldwide.

She said: “Our library contains evidence of some of the greatest ideas and discoveries over two millennia.

“We want to make it accessible to anyone, anywhere in the world with an internet connection and a thirst for knowledge.

Good for them!  Codex Bezae will be in the first tranche, as — at little pointlessly — will be a Gutenberg bible. 

I hope they attract lots of funding.  This will be the first UK library to take mass free access seriously, and if they do it, will probably guarantee the existence of the library into the digital age.

Dan Wallace and the chaps at CSNTM who photograph manuscripts of the bible were in Cambridge trying to negotiate access.  I suspect their efforts — seemingly fruitless at the time — probably helped change minds and create expectations at CUL.

I’m increasingly impressed with what Anne Jarvis is doing.  I’ve just discovered that even people like me — readers not part of the university — can use the library Wifi network if we get a ‘Lapwing ticket’, valid for a limited period.  It doesn’t look as if they charge, either, which is as it should be.  Lack of access to electronic resources is a real pain for the occasional visitor, and they have addressed it.

I have also received my copy of Croke and Harries, Religious conflict in fourth century Rome, and started to read it.  Lots of excellent texts in translation. 

But it’s much too sunny today to be sat in doors, so I went off to Norwich today instead.

Share

More on the Santa Prisca Mithraeum

Posted on by Roger Pearse

The inscription painted on crumbling stucco in the Mithraeum under Santa Prisca has provoked much discussion.

Fig.69: "et nos servasti eternali sanguine fuso" - or is it?

This image comes from Martin Vermaseren, The excavations in the Mithraeum of the Church of Santa Prisca in Rome, p.215 in the Google preview.  It’s a diagram, not a plate; although apparently plate LXVIII shows it.

These are lines 13-15 of the inscription.  The restored reading is:

Primus et hic aries astrictius ordine currit;
Et nos servasti eternali sanguine fuso;
Offero ut fiant numina magna Mithre.

On p.222 Vermaseren asks:

Finally there is the question whether the three lines of verse on this section of the wall (of which line 15 is the last) are related. … This is not at all certain, although it cannot be excluded.

It takes little effort to see that line. 14, “Et nos servasti eternali sanguine fuso” is indeed a restoration, rather than simply reading the text.  Unfortunately Vermaserens discussion of the line on p.217-8 is not online.

Share

The Santa Prisca Mithraeum in Rome

Posted on by Roger Pearse

Under the church of Santa Prisca in Rome is the remains of a Mithraeum.  It is notable because of an inscription somewhere in it, which is often supposed to refer to Mithras “saving” people “by the eternal blood”.  There seems to be more than a little doubt about whether it really does say this, tho.  The Mithraeum is full of frescos, all in glorious colour!

Obviously we could use a photograph.  So I was wondering where the inscription is.  Is it still in situ, I wonder?  Is it possible to visit the Mithraeum?  Or how else can one get a picture of the inscription?

This site suggests that it is, although it looks as if you have to make an appointment.  I’m not quite sure what that site is, tho.  But this site suggests it can arrange site visits to various unusual sites.  An Italian site gives slightly different info here.  I must admit I am tempted to go over to Rome for a couple of days and see what I can snap!

I did a Google images search for “Santa Prisca Mitreo”, and came up incidentally with this wonderful colour tauroctony (click on it to see it full size) from here, which is in fact from the Mithraeum at Marino, not the Santa Prisca one:

Fresco of Mithras from the Mithraeum at Marino

I’ve seen a few of these, so here are the standard elements.  Their real meaning, of course, is largely forgotten, but we can list the elements of the painting.

At the top left, the sun beams down rays, one ray striking Mithras.  Top right is the moon.  Mithras kneels on the bull and stabs it, and a dog and a snake leap up to lick the blood, and a scorpion grabs the bull’s balls.  In this case Mithras’s cloak is lined with stars.  The action takes place in a cavern.  The two attendants, Cautes and Cautopates appear on either side, one with the torch pointing up, one down. 

A band of coloured images reciting the myth is on either side.  I can’t make out most of them, but on the right, from the top, #2 is the sun, Helios, kneeling to Mithras; #3 is the two shaking hands.   Those on the left ought to depict Mithras’ struggle with the bull.

Share

From my diary

Posted on by Roger Pearse

An email this morning to say that the translation of John Chrysostom’s In Kalendas is now done all the way through and just needs revision.  This is excellent news.  When it arrives I will post it online.

Share

From my diary

Posted on by Roger Pearse

A week or two back I placed an order for Croke and Harries, Religious Conflict in Fourth Century Rome.  This has now arrived at my local library, it seems.  I’ll pop in at the weekend and pick it up.  The library demand $8 for every loan of this sort, which means I can do few of them.  But it will be most interesting to see.

On a different note, I was thinking about Cicero’s The Dream of Scipio earlier today.  There’s a Wikipedia page on it, from which I found a link to both Latin and English.  But I first looked in Google books.  There, to my surprise, I found myself reading a passage on the work in The Discarded Image, by a certain C.S.Lewis!  Yes, this is one of Lewis’ academic works, and includes a page or two on the Dream of Scipio. 

The work includes a description of the universe, which made it very popular in the middle ages.  Lewis tells us that over 50 manuscripts survive.  His quotations from it are given from a modern American translation, by Stahl, published in 1956.  These are much more interesting than the online translation linked by Wikipedia, which looks incomplete in all the most interesting areas.  Among other things we learn that Cicero knew that the men at the Antipodes would not simply fall off the globe.  The earth, indeed, is described as a globe, at the centre of the universe.

Now 1956 is before US copyright law started to get all silly.  Books published at that period had to be renewed in 1984 for the copyright to persist.  And not many were.  So it is possible that this book is out of copyright in the US.  Unfortunately a search reveals that it was renewed in 1980; by Columbia University Press, who seem to have been assiduous in renewing books, whether they needed them or not.  That means it will come out of copyright after 95 years, in 2051.  By that date I doubt I will be still alive!  Curiously tho, the book still seems to be available to buy.  It was reprinted in 1990.  But who on earth is interested in the Dream of Scipio?

UPDATE: Hunting around the web I find a Latin edition of the text by Pearman, 1883, with English notes here; and better yet a translation in the same year by the same person here!

UPDATE: I scanned the Pearman translation, modernised it, and added it to the Fathers collection here.

Share

Let us praise the men who burned all the ancient books

Posted on by Roger Pearse

The translation of the remains of Philip of Side’s book is coming along.  Much of it is deeply tedious.  I was reading one of the fragments, which consists of a long and boring speech by Constantine, which has not even the merit of being authentic. 

Another fragment consists of one of the most inept pieces of apologetic I have seen for a while, defending the authenticity of Constantine’s vision, In hoc signo vinces, by appealing … to pagan myth.  Yes, that’s right.  The vision must be true because pagans believe in mythological stuff.  No wonder people didn’t copy this work.

We need to regret the losses of ancient texts.  But it is good for us to remember sometimes that most of these books perished because they deserved to, because they were not that interesting and were full of stuff that no-one would willingly read.  In many ways, perhaps we have the cream of ancient literature.

Let us praise those selfless souls who refrained nobly from copying long and boring texts, and who generously gave of their libraries to the flames, so we would be spared wading through it!

Share

Evoe! Evoe! Let the wine flow tonight! (well, the diet coke anyway)

Posted on by Roger Pearse

It is a time of solemn rejoicing here at Roger Pearse Towers.  The staff have been given the evening off to make merry, and are even now dancing on the lawn wearing masks and wreaths of vine leaves and in their Sunday best.  The maids are carrying candles and one and all are sampling the new wine — or at least, the decaf diet coke laid on copiously from the ancestral cellar.

The cause of all this merriment is that the last, the very last portion commissioned from someone else of the Eusebius volume  has come in!  Adam McCollum has transcribed all the Syriac text — 21 pages of it — which would be a job all by itself.  But the original editors were weak and cowardly men, and only printed the consonants.  Adam has added the vowels, which the original editors never had the courage to do.  And he did it to a deadline and on time, and in a beautiful Serto font.  Would that everyone I have worked with was so professional. 

What this means is that the book can now be finished and prepared for the typesetter.  I need await no-one but myself.  I need to spend a day or so on adding some cross-references between the Greek and Syriac text. I ought to build some kind of index.  I think there is a couple of days of editorial work; probably a couple of weekends. 

Once that is done, I shall approach the people with whom I have discussed typesetting.  They can typeset the Coptic, I think, as a sample.  That will test their nerves and their skill; if they can do that, I shall be confident they can do all of it.

Thanks be to God, to have got this far after more than 2 years.  My sincere thanks, not just to Adam who has been a tower of strength in all this, but also to David Miller who translated the Greek and Latin; Claudio Zamagni and the people at Sources Chretiennes who supplied me with the Greek text in electronic form;  Tom Schmidt who typed up the new fragments of the Greek and checked all the other fragments over against Mai’s text; to Carol Downer and the UCL Coptic Readers Group who translated the Coptic and came through after I had given up any hope of doing that; to Ambrose Boles who transcribed the Coptic quickly and well into Keft, and by no means least to Adam McCollum who translated and transcribed both the Syriac and the Arabic and whose professionalism cheered me no end during the dark days when I wondered if it would ever all be done. 

I’m not out of the woods yet.  But now we can move forward.

Share