This essay advances an interpretation of early Christian codex books, which goes beyond Catherine Pickstock’s critique of Jacques Derrida. Firstly, it summarizes Derrida’s deconstruction of Plato’s Phaedrus and introduces his understanding of writing as différance. Secondly, it outlines Pickstock’s After Writing in order to understand her emphasis upon the liturgical nature of platonic dialogue. It is here that an ambiguity emerges between writing and codex books in Pickstock’s account. In response, the insights of book historians such as Roger Chartier will (...) be brought to bear in order to understand the longer history of the codex, which sees the printing press as a continuation of the early transition from roll to codex in the second century of the Common Era. It has long been noted that Christians of this period were early and pervasive adopters of codex binding for their sacred literature. By summarizing the reasons why, it will be shown how the codex expressed early Christian religious concerns. (shrink)

This paper examines the passages of johannine Revelation concerning the books. The purpose is to underline the weight of the book as object, as idea, as written text in all the composition. Recent authors in papyrological studies have faced the problem of the form of the earlier Christian book, a question that for many years has already been discussed. But now they have investigated more texts from the early Christianity. In this way, the analysis of the Revelation can support the (...) thesis that the Christians of the first centuries also used the books in papyrusroll form in writing and reading their sacred texts. The article reads some contexts and images of the books in the Revelation in the light of the papyrological evidence and updates the literature. (shrink)

TheSatyricahas long been associated with a Neronian courtier named Petronius, mentioned by Tacitus in hisAnnals. As such, the text is usually dated to the mid first centuryc.e.This view is so established that certain scholars have suggested it is ‘little short of perverse not to accept the general consensus and read theSatyricaas a Neronian text of the mid-60sad’. In recent years, however, there has been a groundswell of support for re-evaluating this long-held position. Laird, after comparing the ‘form and content’ of (...) the text to the Greek novel, came to the ‘unattractive’ conclusion that the text may be second century. Similarly, in two recent pieces inCQ, Roth argues that the manumission scene in theCenaestablishes a newterminus post quemfor the text; she suggests that the freedoms granted by Trimalchio closely parallel—and parody—descriptions of awardingciuitasfound in the letters of Pliny the Younger. Indeed, the three slaves manumitted in the novel are associated with a boar (Sat.40.3–41.4), Dionysus (Sat.41.6–7) and a falling star (Sat. 54.1–5); likewise, the three slaves that are the subject of Pliny's letter are C. Valerius Aper (boar), C. Valerius Dionysius (god of wine) and C. Valerius Astraeus (stars). Roth's argument suggests that the author of theSatyricawas not Nero's contemporary but a member of Pliny's intellectual circle, offering strong circumstantial evidence that troubles the accepted tradition on the work's authorship and date. (shrink)