Berichtigungsliste der griechischen Papyrusurkunden aus Agypten, vol. 8.

• Author: Bagnall, Roger S.

The BL, as it is familiarly known to papyrologists, has since the first volume (published in fascicles 1913-22) been one of the cornerstones of the orderly edifice of this discipline and a central tool of bibliographic control. It records for all Greek papyri (and similar objects, like ostraka) published in distinct bibliographic units (generally indexed volumes) the reeditions, proposed textual corrections, and discussions put forth since the appearance of the base text. Scholars can thus use it to trace the fortunes of any text and in this way hope not to have missed anything crucial when citing or studying the papyrus in question.

The usefulness of such a volume depends upon its completeness, accuracy, and availability. No such tool can hope to be free of omission and error; usage has shown that volume 2 (1929-1933) is less reliable than volume 1, for example. The transfer of the project to Leiden after Bilabel's death and the accumulated files and expertise of several decades now have given the more recent volumes a very high degree of reliability and usefulness. Volume 8 has been prepared by F. A. J. Hoogendijk, with a significant contribution of items missing from older volumes provided by Peter van Minnen. Though only time will tell, it gives an initial impression of high quality work in compilation and presentation.

Availability is quite another matter. Once volume 3 had cleared away the backlog of twenty-two years, succeeding volumes have covered six to eight years each. The amount of material to be covered, however, has grown considerably, a fact that exercises the editors' arithmetical skills in the preface to the newest volume. Where volume 3 required 12.5 pages of material per year elapsed since the last volume's cutoff, volume 7 requires 50.5 pages per year and volume 8 requires 67.6 pages. The progression is nearly linear, but the user hefting the 541 pages of corrections required by the output of 1979-1986 can hardly help but echo the editors' amazement. The great growth of critical work on papyri in the 1970s and 1980s, mirrored in these figures, reflects in part the success that the late Herbert Youtie had in making such work more fashionable; in part the greater accessibility of collections, thanks to modern air travel and communications, along with a universalization of photography; and perhaps also in part the gradual decline in the numbers of well-preserved unpublished papyri in collections, making it more attractive...