
Please Support the Bible Translation Work of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV)
$5.00
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Introduction to P100
Papyrus 100 (designated as P100, P. Oxy. 4449), one of the numerous papyri discovered at Oxyrhynchus, Egypt, is a vital early witness to the text of the Epistle of James. Dated paleographically to the early third century C.E. (200–250 C.E.), this papyrus consists of fragments from James 3:13–4:4 and 4:9–5:1. Housed today at the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford, England, P100 contributes significantly to the textual history of the General Epistles, particularly in affirming the stability of the Alexandrian textual tradition during the early Christian centuries.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Paleographic and Codicological Features
The surviving portion of P100 consists of a single leaf originally measuring approximately 13 x 29 cm, written in a reformed documentary hand with 37 lines per page. Its pagination—numerals 6 and 7—indicates that it was part of a codex, either of the entire Epistle of James or a broader collection of Catholic Epistles. The scribe’s hand is consistent with other early third-century documentary styles, and it bears similarities to P. Oxy. 1100 (dated to 206 C.E.), thereby reinforcing the manuscript’s assigned dating.
The use of reformed documentary script—marked by more careful and formal writing—suggests that this manuscript was not merely utilitarian but intended for use among readers who valued a legible and reliable copy of Scripture. The codex format also reflects the Christian preference, by the late second and early third centuries, for the codex over the scroll, allowing easier access and reference.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Textual Character of P100
Of particular importance is P100’s textual affinity. Among the twenty-seven textual variants attested in this fragment, P100 aligns with Codex Vaticanus (B) in twenty-two readings. It also agrees frequently with Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Codex Alexandrinus (A). These correspondences strongly situate P100 within the Alexandrian textual tradition. Its high level of agreement with Vaticanus—more than 80%—suggests that the text of James preserved in this manuscript is a faithful representative of the early Alexandrian form of the text.
The Alexandrian text-type is generally regarded as the most reliable and earliest form of the New Testament text, a position that gains strength from such papyri as P100, P75 (Luke/John), and P66 (John), which predate the major uncials by over a century. Therefore, P100 plays a corroborative role in verifying the early existence of this text-type in Egypt, where a significant number of papyri were discovered.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Reconstruction and Analysis of the Greek Text
The extant portions of P100 include part of James chapter 3 through the beginning of chapter 5. Below, we offer a transcription and partial analysis of select verses with attention to textual variants and their implications.

James 3:13–18 (recto)
The passage begins with a discussion of wisdom and conduct:
“δειξάτω ἐκ τῆς καλῆς ἀναστροφῆς τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ ἐν πραΰτητι σοφίας…”
(“Let him show by his good behavior his works in the meekness of wisdom…”)
Here, P100 presents no notable deviation from the standard Alexandrian text. However, it does include the rare phrase “ψυχική δαιμονιώδης” (earthly, natural, demonic) in 3:15, affirming a reading found in Vaticanus and Sinaiticus.
James 4:1–4
“Πόθεν πόλεμοι καὶ πόθεν μάχαι ἐν ὑμῖν; οὐκ ἐντεῦθεν, ἐκ τῶν ἡδονῶν ὑμῶν…”
(“What is the source of quarrels and conflicts among you? Is not the source your pleasures…”)
The P100 text here supports the Alexandrian reading without introducing any substantial variants. This confirms that even in the early third century, a form of the text nearly identical to Vaticanus was already being transmitted.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Gaps and Conjectural Reconstruction
There are portions of the papyrus where the text is damaged, requiring conjectural reconstruction, especially where only partial letters or words remain. For example, in James 4:4, the fragment reads:
“μοιχαλίδες, οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι ἡ φιλία τοῦ κόσμου ἔχθρα τοῦ θεοῦ ἐστίν;”
(“You adulteresses, do you not know that friendship with the world is hostility toward God?”)
Even in its fragmented state, the reading confirms the Alexandrian form. No deviation suggests a later recension or Byzantine influence.

James 4:11–5:1 (verso)
James 4:14–15
This section addresses the uncertainty of life:
“οἵτινες οὐκ ἐπίστασθε τὸ τῆς αὔριον. ποία γὰρ ζωὴ ὑμῶν; ἀτμὶς γάρ ἐστε…”
(“Yet you do not know what your life will be like tomorrow. You are just a vapor…”)
P100 presents no divergence here from the Alexandrian witnesses, again testifying to the stability of this portion of the text in the early centuries.
James 5:1
The concluding visible text commands:
“Ἄγε νῦν, οἱ πλούσιοι, κλαύσατε ὀλολύζοντες…”
(“Come now, you rich, weep and howl…”)
There is no textual variant of consequence here, but the wording confirms the Alexandrian form and exhibits no harmonization or expansion, features sometimes found in later text-types.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Textual Comparisons and Implications
P100’s closest textual ally is clearly Codex Vaticanus. Out of the twenty-seven variants examined within its extant content, P100 agrees with B in twenty-two instances. This substantial agreement is not accidental or incidental. Rather, it points to an established textual tradition in Egypt by the early third century that aligns with what would later be formalized in the great uncial codices.
The relatively minor agreements with Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Alexandrinus (A) also support its placement within the Alexandrian tradition, though B remains its most dominant parallel. There is minimal alignment with the Byzantine text-type, which typically reflects later scribal tendencies including harmonizations, expansions, or liturgical influences.
Western readings—often characterized by paraphrastic tendencies and singular variants—are also absent from P100. This absence further distances P100 from the idiosyncrasies found in Codex Bezae (D) and related Western witnesses, confirming the manuscript’s affiliation with the more consistent Alexandrian family.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Codicological Implications for Canonical Formation
The presence of page numbers (6 and 7) suggests P100 was not a standalone document but a part of a codex. Whether this codex contained only James or was a complete collection of the General Epistles (James through Jude) cannot be conclusively determined from one leaf. However, it demonstrates the early inclusion of James among Christian writings being copied and transmitted in codex form, supporting its authoritative use in the Egyptian Christian community at that time.
The fact that the text is preserved on high-quality papyrus with regular pagination and clean formatting indicates deliberate production, likely for use in a Christian context—either for private reading, public instruction, or liturgical reading.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Conclusion: Significance of P100 in Textual Transmission
P100 (P. Oxy. 4449) stands as a compelling witness to the early and stable transmission of the Epistle of James. Its textual character, paleographic dating, and codicological features all converge to confirm that by the early third century C.E., a highly reliable and near-original form of the Alexandrian text of James was in circulation in Egypt. The heavy alignment with Codex Vaticanus reinforces the reliability of the Alexandrian tradition and supports the documentary method of textual criticism, which prioritizes early and geographically diverse manuscript evidence over internal conjectures.
With no significant interpolations, paraphrases, or doctrinally motivated alterations, P100 affirms the integrity of the Epistle of James as preserved in the early centuries and further establishes the trustworthiness of the New Testament text as handed down through time.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
You May Also Enjoy
How Might We Weigh Metzger’s Approach to Text-Types and Reasoned Eclecticism in Recovering the Original New Testament Text?










































































































































































































































































































Leave a Reply