The P64, P67, and P4 Gospel Codex Fragments
Papyrus fragments now divided among Oxford, Montserrat, and Paris preserve Matthew and Luke in closely related hands, while their proposed origin in one multi-Gospel codex remains debated.
- Artifact date
- Late second or early third century AD
- Findspot
- Egypt; fragments now Oxford, Barcelona, and Paris
What archaeologists can actually examine
P64 and the fragments formerly numbered P67 preserve portions of Matthew 3, 5, and 26; P4 preserves substantial broken passages from Luke 1-6. Scholars have long accepted that the Oxford and Montserrat Matthew pieces belong together. T. C. Skeat argued that the Paris Luke fragments were written by the same scribe and came from the same codex, perhaps an early four-Gospel book. Peter Head, S. D. Charlesworth, Brent Nongbri, and others have shown why a shared hand does not by itself prove a shared physical codex. The dossier therefore distinguishes the surviving texts from the larger reconstruction.
Matthew fragments belong together
The Oxford and Montserrat pieces are catalogued as one P64 manuscript and preserve passages from Matthew 3, 5, and 26.
Luke survives in P4
The Paris fragments retain discontinuous portions of Luke 1-6 across several early narrative and teaching scenes.
Same hand is not automatically same book
Palaeographic resemblance supports association, but fiber direction, quire structure, provenance, and dimensions govern the codex claim.
Four-Gospel claim remains a hypothesis
Neither Mark nor John survives in the fragments, so an original four-Gospel contents cannot be directly demonstrated.
First-century redating is not consensus
Current scholarship generally favors a broader late-second- or early-third-century palaeographic range.
Follow the evidence from discovery to debate
Move through the find in a deliberate order: establish its provenance, examine the surviving object, place it in time, and then weigh the scholarly interpretation.
How the find came to light
The fragments reached three collections through different modern histories. P64 is held by Magdalen College, Oxford; the related Matthew pieces are associated with the Montserrat collection in Catalonia; and P4 is in the Bibliothèque nationale de France. P4 had been used in the binding of a Coptic codex acquired from Egypt, whereas the exact archaeological recovery of the Matthew fragments is poorly documented. C. H. Roberts published P64 in 1953, and Ramón Roca-Puig connected the Barcelona pieces with it. Skeat later brought the Matthew and Luke material into a single-codex hypothesis. Their scattered custody makes codicological comparison valuable but also deprives the reconstruction of a controlled common find context.
What you are looking at
The Matthew fragments are small pieces of papyrus leaves written on both sides. P67 preserves Matthew 3:9, 15 and 5:20-22, 25-28; P64 preserves Matthew 26:7-8, 10, 14-15, 22-23, 31-33. P4 contains broken sections from Luke 1:58 through 6:16, including the birth narrative, John the Baptist, Jesus' temptation, early healings, and the naming of the Twelve. Similar handwriting, page layout, line length, punctuation, and scribal habits drove the proposed association. Yet fiber direction, page reconstruction, color, provenance, and quire structure must also be explained. These are fragments from books, not a surviving bound Gospel collection.
Where it belongs in history
A late-second- or early-third-century date remains a prudent summary, but it is palaeographic and necessarily broad. Carsten Peter Thiede's much-publicized first-century redating of P64 was not widely accepted, because the comparative hands do not support such precision. Skeat's reconstruction pushed the fragments toward an early four-Gospel codex; later critics have emphasized that the same professional scribe could copy more than one manuscript and that codex construction must fit the papyrus fibers and missing leaves. Whatever the final relationship of P4 to P64/67, the pieces belong to the early centuries of Christian codex production and show careful copying of Matthew and Luke before the major parchment Bibles.
Consensus, questions, and debate
Three questions must be kept separate. First, P64 and P67 are generally treated as one Matthew manuscript; current CSNTM cataloguing folds the former P67 pieces into P64. Second, strong palaeographic similarities make it plausible that P4 was copied by the same hand. Third, the claim that all pieces came from one codex, and especially a four-Gospel codex, remains disputed. Skeat answered yes and reconstructed a single-quire Gospel book. Head accepted much of the scribal comparison but warned that the physical and chronological conclusions outran the evidence; Charlesworth's fiber analysis challenged the single-quire model, while later multi-quire proposals try to preserve unity. Nongbri emphasizes how collection history complicates confident provenance and dating.
The biblical record beside the artifact
The connection is textual and passage-specific. The Matthew fragments preserve John the Baptist's warning and baptismal setting in Matthew 3, Jesus' intensification of righteousness and teaching on anger and lust in Matthew 5, and the anointing, Judas's agreement, Last Supper, and prediction of the disciples' scattering in Matthew 26. P4 preserves sections of Luke 1-6, including Jesus' birth in Luke 2:1-7, the wilderness testing in Luke 4:1-2, the Nazareth conflict, miraculous catch, Levi's call, Sabbath controversies, and selection of the Twelve. Together they illuminate the physical transmission of these passages; the shared-codex proposal does not prove Gospel authorship or dates of composition.
Matthew 26:7–33
7There came unto him a woman having an alabaster box of very precious ointment, and poured it on his head, as he sat [at meat].
8But when his disciples saw [it], they had indignation, saying, To what purpose [is] this waste?
9For this ointment might have been sold for much, and given to the poor.
10When Jesus understood [it], he said unto them, Why trouble ye the woman? for she hath wrought a good work upon me.
11For ye have the poor always with you; but me ye have not always.
12For in that she hath poured this ointment on my body, she did [it] for my burial.
13Verily I say unto you, Wheresoever this gospel shall be preached in the whole world, [there] shall also this, that this woman hath done, be told for a memorial of her.
14¶ Then one of the twelve, called Judas Iscariot, went unto the chief priests,
15And said [unto them], What will ye give me, and I will deliver him unto you? And they covenanted with him for thirty pieces of silver.
16And from that time he sought opportunity to betray him.
17¶ Now the first [day] of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover?
18And he said, Go into the city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples.
19And the disciples did as Jesus had appointed them; and they made ready the passover.
20Now when the even was come, he sat down with the twelve.
21And as they did eat, he said, Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.
22And they were exceeding sorrowful, and began every one of them to say unto him, Lord, is it I?
23And he answered and said, He that dippeth [his] hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me.
24The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not been born.
25Then Judas, which betrayed him, answered and said, Master, is it I? He said unto him, Thou hast said.
26¶ And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed [it], and brake [it], and gave [it] to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body.
27And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave [it] to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;
28For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
29But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.
30And when they had sung an hymn, they went out into the mount of Olives.
31Then saith Jesus unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad.
32But after I am risen again, I will go before you into Galilee.
33Peter answered and said unto him, Though all [men] shall be offended because of thee, [yet] will I never be offended.
Luke 2:1–7
1And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Cæsar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed.
2([And] this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.)
3And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city.
4And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judæa, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David:)
5To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child.
6And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered.
7And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.
A responsible historical conclusion
These fragments make an unusually instructive case study in responsible manuscript archaeology. The material facts already matter: early Christians copied extended portions of Matthew and Luke in codex form, using skilled hands and page planning. If P4 and P64/67 did share one volume, they would be important evidence for collecting multiple Gospels at an early date. If they came from separate books copied by the same scribe, they still reveal a book-producing setting where more than one Gospel circulated. Either result is historically significant. The debate also demonstrates why spectacular labels such as 'the oldest four-Gospel codex' must remain hypotheses until handwriting, fibers, dimensions, provenance, and quire construction converge.
Authoritative sources
Institutional catalogs, excavation reports, and academic publications let you examine the evidence beyond this summary.
GA P64 (Montserrat, formerly GA P67)
Center for the Study of New Testament ManuscriptsDocuments current cataloguing of the Montserrat Matthew fragments as part of P64 and provides object-level codicological data.
The Magdalen Papyrus P64
Magdalen College, University of OxfordExplains the Oxford fragments, Matthew 26 contents, codex format, collection history, and why the sensational first-century date lacks broad acceptance.
The Oldest Manuscript of the Four Gospels?
New Testament Studies / Cambridge University PressPresents T. C. Skeat's detailed argument that P4, P64, and P67 were copied by one scribe and belonged to one Gospel codex.
Is P4, P64 and P67 the Oldest Manuscript of the Four Gospels? A Response to T. C. Skeat
New Testament Studies / Cambridge University PressProvides Peter Head's critical response and separates scribal similarity from the stronger single-codex and dating conclusions.