New Testament Papyrus chart


Click for full size.
Papyrus fragments are typically dated paleographically to a span of 50 years, so their location within this chart should be understood as very approximate. A few mss were left out, either because they contain very few words or because, as is the case with P98 of Revelation chapter 1, they are unusually difficult to date.

Children 鈥 Barn

Don’t worry! I won’t post pictures of mine. Perhaps because I don’t have any, or perhaps because I care about my readers.

A few brief reflections however …

If you are a woman and want to know if a man likes children or not, ask him! Don’t ask another man “Does X like children?”, or actually, you can ask that question but ask the man himself too, then you’ll find out if the first guy is a liar. If another man says X doesn’t like children, there’s still 90 % chance that he does 鈥 at least his own.

In Yorkshire barn is a dialectal word for children. In Sweden barn is the word in standard language. In Gothic it’s barn. In Syriac it’s yalud (infant) or taly. However son is bar 軖塥 . Coincidence?

Sk盲ggebarn is a new word in Swedish. It is made up of two pieces 鈥 sk盲gg = beard, barn = barn. And then there is the connecting vowel. Swedish doesn’t use as many connecting vowels as Danish and Scanian so the form sk盲ggbarn could have been expected, and indeed it occurs but rarely.

A sk盲ggebarn is a man aged above 18, who travels to a foreign country (such as Sweden) and upon asylum claims that he has lost his ID-card and that he is x years old, where x << 18. This simple deception has been well known for at least five years and it is not clear why the migration authority insisted on getting fooled in the face of criticism. Today, they have been ordered by the government to switch to a restrictive extreme, as if a car driver who has been in the left roadside ditch could make up for her mistake by slipping into the right one as well.

I found it curious that /e/ was used for connecting vowel here. Some investigation revealed that the forms with /e/ were mostly used by people from central Sweden. Scanians used /a/ at least as often. The connecting vowels are not completely understood. I suggest /a/ is partitive and /e/ is locative or instrumental. Lucazin1 suggest it is genitive and should be /a/ for masculine and neuter nouns, and /e/ for most feminine except some old irregular ones. In this case our rules agree and it should be sk盲ggabarn in Scanian.

1 Utkast till ortografi 枚ver det Sk氓nska spr氓ket, tabell 12.1 sid 124.

With Lorries in Traffic 鈥 Q&A

Why did the lorry flash its high beams?
When a lorry passes another, it is usually hard for the passing driver to know when the rear end of his trailer has passed and it is safe to move back to the right lane. The one who gets passed will therefore often flash the high beams as a signal indicating when it is time to change lanes.

Other resons may include: salute a friend, signal to an oncoming to switch to low beams, mistake when fumbling for another control and a signal that something is wrong with the vehicle ahead.

Continue reading

Comparison between Bornholmsk and Mainland Scanian sounds

A table which compares the phones of Bornholmsk (Espersen 1908 & Prince 1924) with those in mainland Scanian (from the north-western area according to Lucazin 2010).

Phoneme Bh IPA Scy. IPA words so pronounced
/a/ [a] [蓱] or [a] land (country/land), kat (cat)
/a虅/ [a藧] [a藧] or [蓱藧] fara (travel), kar (man/chap)
/蓱虅/ [蓱蕣]1 [a蕣汰], [蓱蕣汰] or [蓱藧] dag (day), klar (clear)
/e/ [e] [蓻] fett (fat/grease)
/e虅/ or /ei/ [e藧] [e藧]2 ner (down), reza (journey v.)
/ai/ [忙i] [ai] Scy. fail/Sv. fel (failure/wrong)
/i虅/ [i藧] [ei]3 kni蕥 (knife)
/i/ [i] [i] or [ei汰] brink (brink), sil (herring)
/o/ no info [蕣] or [e蕣汰]4 ondra (lower), gold (gold)
/o虅/ “English oh [e蕣] sol (sun)
/u虅/ [蕢藧]?? [酶蕢] skru蕥a (screw)
/y虅/ [y藧] [酶蕪] sky (sky), myra (ant)
/忙虅/ [蓹e] [ai] or [蓻藧] kn忙 (knee)
/酶虅/ “i in bird [酶藧]5 r酶d (red), b酶ste (loin/flank/ham)
/蓴虅/ [e蕣] n氓l (needle), see o虅
/b/ [b] [b] b忙ra (carry), flab (mouth)
/d/ [d] [d] dra (drag/pull)
/f/ [f] [f] f忙 (cattle)
/h/ [h] [h]
/j/ [j] [瑟汰] jord (earth)
/l/ [l] [l] luka (weed v.)
/m/ [m] [m]
/p/ [p] [p]
/t/ [t] [t]
/g/ and /j/ [g] and [j] [g] and [瑟]
/z/ [z] [s] snaka (talk)
/s/ [s] [s] Bh. sten/Scy. stain (stone)
/r/ [r] [蕘]
/k/ and /蓵/ [k], [t汀蓵] and [蓵] [k], [t汀蓵] and [蓵]
/n/, /刹/ and /艐/ [n], [刹] and [艐] [n] and [艐] springa (chink/slit)
/蕥/ [蕥] [蕥] ki蕥a (row/quarrel v.)

1 Since the sources predate IPA, Prince doesn’t mention it and it doesn’t exist in Danish, my sources really don’t say what it sounds like, but [蓱蕣] is likely.

2 [e藧] I am pretty confident that this sound isn’t a common realization of /e虅/ in NW Scania, since I grew up in NW Scania and I can pronounce it in speech only with very much difficulty. [ei汰] possible.

3 actually [ei汰藧] is the notation in Lucazin p. 27. Certainly, in the NW, the i is pronounced longer than the e.

4 [o] is my guess for both accents.

5 This should probably be a diphthong instead.

Literature used:
Utkast till ortografi 枚ver Sk氓nska Spr氓ket (2010), M Lucazin.
The Danish Dialect of Bornholm (1924) John Dyneley Prince.
Bornholmsk Ordbog (1908) J C S Espersen & Konglige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab.

Whoever has, to him more shall be given 鈥 Why?

For to the one who has, more will be given, and he will have an abundance, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. 鈥 Matthew 13:12, ESV.

Coins 鈥 a portion can be called a mina

A friend brought up this verse recently and said it has been abused and interpreted to mean that it would be fair to redistribute resources from persons who have less to those who have more. Is Christ the Anti-Robin-Hood? Such an interpretation should be rejected, of course, with ease by any Christian, but a few questions remain:
Continue reading

Wair镁an 鈥 ain waurd bruk

Let’s look at this very used and useful Gothic word. Its meaning is pretty clear. From corresponding words in Latin and Sanskrit, we get the meaning to turn, and in analogy with the English word, wair镁an is used in expressions like “turn into X”. It is still used in many Germanic languages in one form or another. For example Svensk Etymologisk Ordbok mentioned that the Scanian expression 蕥uren (how something turns out relative to expectations) is a form of the perfect participle.

Common uses are:
1. to become

脧bai jah jus wilei镁 镁amma siponjos wair镁an? 鈥斅燡ohn 9:27.
If even you want his disciples to become(?)

blindai ussai茣and, jah haltai gaggand 鈥 Matthew 11:5.
blind see, and lame walk
Great, but how do we say leprous encleanify? We don’t. Like in English we rewrite it with a helping verb 鈥 namely wair镁an:
blindai ussai茣and, jah haltai gaggand, 镁rutsfillai hrainjai wair镁and

2. to describe stochastic outcomes, mainly nature

Wegs mikils war镁 茂n marein, swaswe 镁ata skip gahuli镁 wair镁an fram wegim 鈥 Matthew 8:24.
Wave high there was at sea, so the ship covered to be(come) by waves

Another example of this use is the fixed expression war镁 镁an which is very useful for story telling. It occurs 15 times in the gospels:

Ref W&H R&P SyP Sinaitic palimp.
Matthew 7:28 魏伪喂 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 魏伪喂 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 軜軛軜軔 軙軣軙 軜軣軙
Luke 1:8 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 未蔚 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 未蔚 軛軜軔 軛軜軔 軙軡堍 軛軜軔 軛軜軔 軙軡堍
Luke 1:11 omit omit omit omit
Luke 2:1 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 未蔚 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 未蔚 軛軜軔 軙軡堍 軜軛軜軔
Luke 2:6 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 未蔚 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 未蔚 軜軛軜軔 軙軣軙 軜軣軙
Luke 3:21 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 未蔚 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 未蔚 軛軜軔 軙軡堍 軜軣軙
Luke 6:6 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 未蔚 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 未蔚 軛軜軔 軙軡堍 non ext.
Luke 8:22 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 未蔚 魏伪喂 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 軛軜軔 軙軡堍 軜軛軜軔
Luke 8:40 蔚谓 未蔚 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 未蔚 omit 軜軣軙
Luke 9:37 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 未蔚 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 未蔚 軜軛軜軔 軜軣軛軜
Luke 9:51 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 未蔚 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 未蔚 軜軛軜軔 軙軣軙 軜軣軙
Luke 9:57 魏伪喂 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 未蔚 軜軣軙 軜軣軙
Luke 16:22 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 未蔚 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 未蔚 軛軜軔 軙軡堍 軜軛軜軔
Luke 18:35 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 未蔚 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 未蔚 軜軣軙 軜軣軙
(John 10:22) 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 蟿慰蟿蔚 蔚纬蔚谓蔚蟿慰 未蔚 軛軜軔 軙軡堍 軜軛軜軔 軛軜軔

The table shows the text of Wescott&Hort’s Alexandrian Greek edition, Robinson & Pierpont’s Byzantine Greek edition, the Eastern Classical Syriac Peshitta and the Old Classical Syriac Sinaitic Palimpsest respectively, in the places where the Gothic version has war镁 镁an.

Ma镁etes describes the early Cristians

OPINION In Ante-Nicene Fathers, we find this description of the early Christians from, probably, the 2nd century:

For the Christians are distinguished from other men neither by country, nor language, nor the customs which they observe. For they neither inhabit cities of their own, nor employ a peculiar form of speech, nor lead a life which is marked out by any singularity. The course of conduct which they follow has not been devised by any speculation or deliberation of inquisitive men; nor do they, like some, proclaim themselves the advocates of any merely human doctrines.
But, inhabiting Greek as well as barbarian cities, according as the lot of each of them has determined, and following the customs of the natives in respect to clothing, food, and the rest of their ordinary conduct, they display to us their wonderful and confessedly paradoxical method of life.
They dwell in their own countries, but simply as sojourners. As citizens, they share in all things with others, and yet endure all things as if foreigners. Every foreign land is to them as their native country, and every land of their birth as a land of strangers.
They marry, as do all [others]; they beget children; but they do not cast away f艙tuses. They have a common table, but not a common bed. They are in the flesh, but they do not live after the flesh. They pass their days on earth, but they are citizens of heaven. They obey the prescribed laws, and at the same time surpass the laws by their lives. They love all men, and are persecuted by all.

So, the Cristians were not distinguished from other men by the customs which they observed. Why is this important? It is important because if your customs are incompatible with the customs of other men, you will not be able to communicate with them. If you can’t communicate with men who don’t belong to your group, you will not be able to see through lies about these people that someone from your own community wants to establish, or established as fact long ago. Such lies could even make you scared of these men.

Religious leaders know this, so they try to set you apart 鈥 holy in an unnecessary way 鈥 as so different from other people that you dare not talk to them lest you become contaminated by their unpious manners, and they dare not talk to you lest they get ensnared by pharisaic logic and dragged down into a black hole of cultic subjection under a god that always seems to decide according to the wishes of a group of men who also publish that god’s decrees, or perhaps interpret them.

It would seem that the best solution is to do like the early Christians did according to Mathetes 鈥 to be very much like everybody else and feel free to talk to any member of society. (Luke 5:30-32) However, what do we do when society itself embraces extreme customs?

Which is the real cause for the success of Scandinavia?

There is an immense need to set straight the record of what made the Scandinavian countries successful in the first half of the 20th century. The three most commonly voiced explanations are atheism, sexual liberty and the wellfare state. Sadly, these rather mark the end to Scandinavia’s era of success. Nima Sanandaji (a blogger with a PhD from KTH in Stockholm) who is well suited for the task, has produced an essay which tries to answer the question based on sound statstics, for example recognizing that there is a time lag between a social development (such as a reform) and its effect on work ethics and life expectancy.

“Why do Nordic societies have unusually strong emphasis on individual responsibility and strong social capital? Religion, climate and history all seem to have played a role in forming these unique cultures. Over a hundred years ago, German sociologist Max Weber observed that Protestant countries in northern Europe tended to have a higher living standard, more high-quality academic institutions and overall stronger social cohesion than Catholic and orthodox countries.”

You can read the paper here.