This library is built in the open.
If you spot an error, have a suggestion, or just want to say hello — we’d love to hear from you.

The only two secure three-column codices listed (out of over 1100 consulted) are both parchment codices assigned to the fourth century, PSI II 129, Demosthenes, and Codex Vaticanus Gr. 1209 = B; a further possible three-column codex is Codex Vaticanus Gr. 1288, Cassius Dio, assigned to the fifth century. As three-column codices are so rare and none is as early as 4497, it is more likely that 4497 is from the inner (spine) part of a two-column codex, implying c. 35 lines to the column. The relatively few two-column New Testament manuscripts datable before 400 all have less than 40 lines to the column (cf. K. Aland, Kurzgefaßte Liste der griechischen Handschriften des Neuen Testaments² Concise List of the Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament). The written area of a double-column page with its intercolumnium would measure c. 10–11 cm broad by 17 cm deep. Assuming margins of say 2 cm, this would imply a codex 14–15 cm wide by 21 deep, which would fall into Turner's Group 7 (p. 19). No top or bottom margins survive so that the position of the fragment within the column is unknown.
For the collation, in addition to the works cited in the general introduction, account has been taken of K. Junack et alii, Das Neue Testament auf Papyrus II. Die Paulinischen Briefe, Teil I The New Testament on Papyrus II. The Pauline Epistles, Part I (Berlin–New York 1989). No other papyrus of Romans so far published contains these passages.
Diagrams and transcriptions for Romans 2:12-13 and 2:29 follow.
Recto 2: The final letter of "they will be judged" is smudged and may have been altered. There is probably a high point after it.
4 Spacing indicates that the papyrus followed ℵ A B D G Ψ et al. in omitting "the" before "law", which is added by K L 049 056 0142 0151 and many minuscules.
Verso 4: A trace of the rough breathing over "o" is visible. This proves that the papyrus followed the majority of manuscripts in reading "the praise"; it did not follow 056 0142 pc in omitting "the".
W. E. H. COCKLE