Uncial 0177: A Greek–Coptic Leaf of Luke 1–2

The leaf is cataloged in the Austrian National Library’s Coptic biblical parchment collection and has been republished in modern Vienna editions. Its precise early find circumstances remain uncertain, but the Greek and Coptic texts demonstrably share one physical page. The modern GA identifier and repository shelfmark are treated as complementary controls on identity: the first connects the object to international textual scholarship, while the second identifies the physical leaf or codex in its present collection. This is especially important where old catalogs divided leaves that belong together, joined fragments that later proved distinct, or used a nickname based on a collector rather than a place of production. The record therefore distinguishes recovery place, copying place, later custody, publication, and current location. Where the early route is undocumented, it remains unknown rather than being reconstructed from a later library label. Facsimiles and digital workspaces extend access, but the original parchment remains the archaeological object.

One ivory-colored parchment leaf preserves Luke 1:73–2:7 in Greek and Luke 1:59–73 in Coptic. The unequal passage spans show how the two language columns occupied the page rather than functioning as a modern line-by-line interlinear. The large leaf measures about 36 by 27.5 centimeters and carries two columns of thirty-six lines. Greek and Coptic majuscule writing, abbreviated nomina sacra, and several scribal peculiarities make language identification part of the artifact’s physical reading. The dossier reads the writing surface as evidence alongside the copied words. Column count, line count, page size, ink, letter formation, nomina sacra, punctuation, corrections, commentary, pagination, reuse, and broken margins each answer different questions about production and use. A single photographed side cannot stand for every page of a lost codex, so the image caption identifies the exact role of the surviving leaf. The selected public-domain image depicts this manuscript itself rather than a generic scribe, modern painting, or unrelated Bible. Where fragments share a parent codex, they are consolidated into one interpretive record instead of being counted as independent artifacts.

The display date “Tenth century AD” follows current catalog and palaeographic judgment. Letter shapes, ruling, page design, material, related dated hands, and publication history can narrow a range, but most of these manuscripts do not carry a copied colophon that supplies a modern calendar year. The artifact directly preserves Luke 1:59–80; Luke 2:1–7; that is a material connection to Scripture in the manuscript’s own historical period, not a claim that the leaf was present when the narrated events occurred. Later date does not automatically mean worthless text, and early date does not automatically make every reading original. Textual criticism weighs agreements, differences, corrections, scribal habits, translation, and genealogy passage by passage.