Search

Abstract A flyleaf bearing the title of Matthew's gospel, found with the Luke fragments of 4 (henceforth P4), has been neglected in studies of P4 as well as in editions of the Greek New Testament. This article publishes for the first time a photograph of the flyleaf, and seeks to provide an accurate transcription of the often misspelled title. It also discusses the various factors impinging upon the date of the fragment, such as the Philo codex in which it was found and the apostrophe in the middle of Matthew's name. A date in the late second or early third century makes best sense of the evidence, making this neglected flyfleaf the earliest manuscript title of Matthew's gospel. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 1998 the author published a blueprint for his research in the ornamentation of early modern books in Quaerendo, then under the supervision of Ton van Uchelen. In 2007 this research resulted in a thesis on the subject called De beer is los (Foxes on the Loose). In this special edition of Quaerendo a new blueprint is presented. This time it is for research on layout. Inspired by the writings of his promotor, Professor Janssen and in close cooperation with his Belgian colleague Goran Proot, the author proposes to develop a computer-assisted model for layout that can be used to examine the interaction between ideas and the pages on which these are presented. The Idea of a book is derived from the famous Dutch typographer Huib van Krimpen (1917-2002). Early modern books will be compared to this 'ideal book' to find out if and how we can define progress in book design, and the circumstances that influenced it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract A flyleaf bearing the title of Matthew's gospel, found with the Luke fragments of 4 (henceforth P4), has been neglected in studies of P4 as well as in editions of the Greek New Testament. This article publishes for the first time a photograph of the flyleaf, and seeks to provide an accurate transcription of the often misspelled title. It also discusses the various factors impinging upon the date of the fragment, such as the Philo codex in which it was found and the apostrophe in the middle of Matthew's name. A date in the late second or early third century makes best sense of the evidence, making this neglected flyfleaf the earliest manuscript title of Matthew's gospel. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In a previous study the author proposed that the third edition of Leviathan (the 'Ornaments') was produced not long before 1702 (the date given in the earliest dated copy). An alternative view, dating the edition to 1670 and suggesting that it incorporated corrections by Hobbes, was put forward by the late Karl Schuhmann; it was based on both typographical and textual evidence. This article considers Schuhmann's arguments and finds them unconvincing. It also adduces some new evidence (concerning the prices at which copies of Leviathan sold, and the ornaments and type of the third edition), on the basis of which it proposes that this edition was produced in the period 1695-1702, probably by the printer John Darby. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]