The Duke Papyrus Archive (DPA) was first put online
in June, 1995. Through a joint effort with Special Collections at Perkins
Library, the Classics Department, and Information Technology Services the
DPA was able to grow from a project to conserve and catalog Duke's
collections of papyri to a digital archive serving scholars and
individuals interested in papyrus the world over. The DPA is the end
product of a series of activities that were put in motion long before
the Internet was widely available. To understand the impact of the DPA
some background information will need to be provide to give a complete
picture of how it all transpired.
Professor John Oates of Duke University conceived the idea of
cataloging the Duke papyrus collection. The last major purchase of papyri
was made in 1988 and the body of mostly unexplored materials had grown
substantially in the preceding twenty years. Few papyri had been edited
and many had not yet been properly conserved. To make a successful bid for
funding to the Preservation and Access division of the National Endowment
for the Humanities Oates enlisted the cooperation of Steve Hensen of the
Special Collections Library at Duke. The papyrus would become a special
collection managed by Perkins Library.
The project, was funded in 1992 and provided for the conservation of
the entire collection by a papyrologist, the preparation of catalog
records for the online catalog of the Duke University Libraries as well as
for OCLC and RLIN by a librarian in cooperation with the papyrologist,
archival photography and the publication of a printed catalog containing
excerpts from the catalog records. This would ensure physical as well as
intellectual control over the collection.
The project introduced some novel ideas about accessing information
about papyri. The catalog records would be presented in a standard format
and become part of local and international databases, where they could be
accessed by a wide variety of users, not just professional papyrologists
for whom the printed catalog was intended.
The format used was US MARC (Machine-Readable Cataloging) format, the
international standard for all automated library cataloging and
specifically the Archival and Manuscript Control (AMC) format, a subset of
the US MARC format. The AMC format provides a clear structure for entering the data.
What one puts in a record follows the widely-used Anglo-American
Cataloguing Rules (AACR 2)[7]
and, more particularly, Archives, Personal Papers and Manuscripts (APPM),[8]
which customizes these rules for describing archives and manuscripts. This
also dictates the use of standard reference tools such as the online
Library of Congress Name Authority File (LCNAF), the Library of Congress
Subject Headings (LCSH)[9]
and the Art and Architecture Thesaurus (AAT),[10]
and it therefore presents an opportunity to bring a measure of uniformity
to cataloguing papyri.
An example of a complete record[16]
with the AMC tags
and explains the steps taken in producing it after each line of
information can be found here.
By September, 1992, the need for a printed catalog quickly evaporated.
More and more papyrologists were becoming computer literate and they could
also be expected to use the online databases to get at the information
they wanted. Duke decided to place the papyri records online through
the Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) and through the local Online
Public Access Catalogue (OPAC) of the Duke University Libraries. A unique
aspect of cataloging the records using MARC was that when the the papyri
records were placed in the OPAC they were merged with more than 4 million
other records of books and manuscripts held exclusively by the Duke
University Libraries. In the case of OCLC they were merged with more than
24 million other records of books and other items held in libraries
worldwide. Need statement about uniqueness and how it helped the
archive or distinguishes the archive.
Around the same time, experiments at The University of Michigan had
shown that scanning papyri rather than photography was the way of the
future. Scans could be manipulated and enlarged depending on the need of
the scholar or the teacher: changing brightness and contrast could help
read difficult passages in the text, enlargement and projection onto a
screen could improve instruction in papyrology. Since the conservation
work on the Duke papyri would have to be done first, it was decided to
postpone the scanning for a year.
In September, 1993, Suzanne Corr, the librarian, started to make
catalog records and scans simultaneously. For the catalog records she used
notes made while conserving, transcribing and interpreting the papyri. The
color scans were made with a flatbed scanner at 300 dpi. This was deemed
sufficient for the practical uses the scans might be put to. They could be
blown up four times without losing sharpness. The files thus created were
not too big. It did not take long before 600 dpi became the generally
accepted standard for archival scanning and the files, though extremely
large, could be accommodated on ever cheaper storage media. When the
switch was made from 300 to 600 dpi a differentiation was introduced
between archival scans, which would not be tampered with, and scans for
general use, which would be compressed and disseminated on CD ROMs. Over
time further improvements in the scanning technology were adopted and this
has resulted in better color quality and a somewhat faster scanning
process. More information on the imaging process can be found
here.
Midway in the project the full implications of the Internet became
clear and the pieces of the puzzle started to come together. Until that
moment separate dissemination of the information and the images had been
contemplated. The individual user would have to put the two together from
different sources. The catalog records would be available through the
online catalog of the Duke University Libraries and at least one
international database, OCLC. The images were still few in number and
would become a problem only when they would fill up the storage medium.
But with the evolution of the Internet, the World Wide Web in particular,
it became clear that the information and the images could be dynamically
linked. The cumbersome method of searching an online database and then
turning to a set of CD ROMs or vice versa had become obsolete.
This is the major advantage of the Internet over traditional media and
it cannot be overemphasized. Online bibliographical databases such as OCLC
and RLIN, which both contain millions of records, have been with us for
some time, but they are dead ends in themselves: once the relevant
bibliographical record has been found, one still has to locate an actual
copy of the book in the library of one's own institution or, if one is
less fortunate, through interlibrary loan. Likewise large sets of pictures
of items of special interest to students of the ancient world, such as
Greek vases, have been with us for some time, usually in print such as the
Corpus vasorum antiquorum or sometimes in microform such as the
Dead Sea Scrolls. But these media are also dead ends in themselves. There
is no way to search the Corpus vasorum antiquorum but to browse
through all the volumes. Indices to some of the Dead Sea Scrolls have only
become available in recent years, but these are again not linked up with
the pictures. Only the Internet allows links between large sets of
descriptive data and large sets of images. The Duke papyrus project could
make a smooth transition to the Internet, because it had been producing
just such a large set of descriptive data - the catalog records describing
the papyri - and was in the process of producing just such a large set of
images.
This is an essential point: the production of large sets of images for
the Internet has to go hand in hand with the production of large sets of
descriptive data. Without the catalog records the images of the Duke
papyri would not only be meaningless, but also inaccessible. Of course,
one could call them up one by one and try to make sense of what one sees,
but this would be impractical. That the DPA provides both content and
pictures in fully searchable and browsable form is the result of more
painstaking work than meets the eye. Eventually only four months out of a
total of sixty-four months of work will have been spent on the DPA proper.
The rest of the time was spent conserving, transcribing, interpreting,
cataloging and imaging the papyri.
With assistance from Paul Mangiafico, library systems coordinator of
the Special Collections Library at Duke, work on the DPA started in April
of 1995 and a first sampling was put online in June. The catalog records
were downloaded from the online catalog of the Duke University Libraries
into dummy text records that provide links to the images. These records
are the core of the DPA, because they provide the essential contextual and
descriptive information about the papyrus. One can get at these records in
two ways. A keyword search will take a user straight to a particular
record. Thumbnails of the images then provide access to images of the
papyrus. This is the way to search for those who already know exactly what
they are looking for. One can also approach the records by browsing the
various categories into which the material has been organized.
The DPA makes both 72 and 150 dpi images of the Duke papyri available
online. These were derived from the 300 and 600 dpi archival scans, which
were made before. The 72 dpi images display lifesize and in full color on
a 72 lpi screen, the most common kind in use today. On a good monitor they
give an adequate idea of what the papyri look like in real life, but they
can still be difficult to read. The 150 dpi images display a little more
than twice enlarged on a 72 lpi screen and are quite legible. Ninety-five
percent of all papyri can be read adequately from these 150 dpi scans,
which are far superior to black-and-white photos. When the papyri are
substantial the size of the image files can be quite large, but never too
large to handle.
It was also decided to make records and images of all papyri accessible
in both search modes, not just a "best of Duke" selection. This is
essential for scholarly purposes, as Theodor Mommsen put it in 1858
describing his work on the corpus of Latin inscriptions: "Ob jedes Stück,
das er aufhebt und aufheben muss, auch wirklich des Aufhebens wert sei,
danach fragt der Archivar zunächst nicht." Small fragments may join others
and comprehensiveness avoids the effect of creating a "canned" exhibit.
Also included are a number of text files about papyrology in general and
about the Duke papyri in particular. From these users can get some help in
formulating their search requests and also gain an insight into the kind
of context they can put the material in. This can be a scholarly context,
through the annotated bibliographies, or a general context, through the
blurbs written for the non-specialist. This should facilitate greater user
control once users familiarize themselves with the options available to
them.
It was decided not to scan the printed editions of some of the texts,
because this is better done in the context of capturing the entire
papyrological apparatus digitally. It would of course be extremely useful
to have these materials online as well, especially for those working at
papyrologically challenged institutions such as Oshkosh and Harvard. To
scan in all text editions is a major undertaking, which will have to be
part of the Advanced Papyrological Information System (APIS), a joint
project of a number of institutions to create for all major papyrus
collections in the United States an apparatus of the sort pioneered at
Duke.
With the basic structure in place, the material in the DPA was
increased ninefold in the last two months of 1995. It took only a few
more weeks to complete the DPA in March of 1996 once the remaining images
had been made. The speed with which it has been put together should raise
hopes for the future. One should expect other papyrus collections to be
able to add their holdings in an expeditious manner, particularly if APIS
is funded. Other projects, such as the online database of Greek vases and
that of squeezes
(paper impressions) of Greek inscriptions, both undertaken at Oxford, can
proceed even more expeditiously. The vases and inscriptions have almost
all been published before and some form of cataloging already exists for
them. Oxford has a large collection of squeezes of Ptolemaic inscriptions,
which would be a welcome complement to APIS.
It should be clear that the creation of databases such as the DPA
requires the investment of large amounts of time and money. The Internet,
however, has clear advantages over traditional media when it comes to
cost. Only the creators of online databases need to spend time and money
on the catalog: they have already put the information and the images
together and the materials are available to the users at the cost of a
very short telephone call. There is no need for every individual scholar
to construct meaning every time an image is called up, because the
essential information is available in the catalog record. There is also no
need for every research library to buy expensive picture databases such as
the Corpus vasorum antiquorum. Individual scholars with a modem
will eventually be able to mimick such a research library at home.
Another advantage of the Internet over traditional catalogs is the
open-ended character of online databases. They are dynamic - provided
there is an institution or a scholar behind the scene to refresh the data
on a regular basis. This helps produce the initial set of data more
quickly and also facilitates updates. When a catalog of pictures with
descriptions is given in print, whether on paper, in microform or on CD
ROM, it almost has to be final. An online database, however, does not have
to be perfect right away and can therefore be made accessible at an early
stage. This allows extensive screening of preliminary work by colleagues
worldwide, who will all bring their expertise to bear on problematic
pieces. The DPA is ninety-five percent original scholarship and it is
simply impossible that the "final" catalog for all 1,373 papyri was
produced in merely three years. Ongoing research will always create the
need to update the material, whether it is presented as a printed catalog
or as an online database, and it is much easier to update the latter.
Revisions of materials in the DPA are dated at the bottom of the page. The
need to service an online database can be a powerful argument to persuade
university administrators to continue to fund the expertise that
originally created the data.
There are a number of virtues of the DPA that can be reproduced at
other institutions and with other materials. First the images. What does
it mean to have a database of over a thousand papyri at your fingertips?
The instant accessibility of the images obviously holds great promise for
scholars. Almost any kind of papyrological research involves the
consultation of hundreds of different texts. Only very few are illustrated
in the old-fashioned way and one usually does not bother to acquire prints
of every text one wants to use or quote. If the readings are in doubt or
the character of the script is the feature one is interested in, often
mediocre prints have to be ordered from the institutions holding the items
at sometimes forbidding costs. This may take a long time and the
alternative is to change one's travel plans to accomodate visits to the
institutions holding the items. Now, if the DPA is replicated at more and
more institutions, the costs of one's everyday research will go down and
the quality as well as the speed (or quantity) will go up. Eventually one
will be able to put materials dispersed over several collections together
or at least check published and unpublished holdings for possible links.
The instant accessibility of the images is a boon to students. They
have a large selection of material at their disposal to test their skills.
Relatively few institutions hold significant numbers of papyri - only
about seven in the United States. Until recently students at other
institutions have had to make do with black and white plates. The DPA now
offers them study material in full colour with helpful comments on the
individual texts as well as more general information and annotated
bibliographies. Since the Duke papyrus collection holds a significant
number of literary texts, which are often written in easy-to-read scripts,
there is enough practice material for beginners. The instant accessibility
of the images is also a boon to all non-specialists who want to see an
example of a certain kind of text or an illustration they can use in their
classes or on their own home pages. There is great variety in the Duke
papyrus collection and it appeals to a similarly great variety of
interests. Examples of the various scripts used in ancient and early
medieval Egypt can be called up at a moment's notice, fragments of the
sacred writings of Christianity and Islam are instantly accessible, Greek
and Latin classics from Homer to Cicero can be inspected without a big
fuss, and the curiosity about life in the past can be satisfied by reading
the notes provided in the catalog records or the blurbs written
specifically for non-specialists, all in plain English.
Now the ideas behind the DPA or its substance. Early on the decision
was made to catalog the entire collection, not just the Greek texts. Every
major papyrus collection holds items in the various languages and scripts
used in ancient Egypt, but usually the Greek material is in better shape
than the rest, because it has attracted the attention of classicists or
ancient historians in the past. Thanks to the inclusive character of the
project at Duke, the DPA gives the material in languages other than Greek
a chance. This greatly enhances the appeal of the papyri to those
interested in ancient Egypt (the Hieratic and the Demotic papyri), in
early Christianity (the Coptic papyri) and early Islam (the Arabic
papyri). By including both literary and documentary texts another fence is
broken down. Of course, most scholars interested in Greek literary texts
will not always bother to look at the documents and those interested in
early Christianity will not always bother to look at the Ptolemaic
documents and so on, but at least the DPA does not automatically preclude
them from doing so.
The decision to use standard cataloging rules has resulted in greater
consistency and makes searches of the material more rewarding to
specialists and non-specialists alike. Transliterated Greek has been
avoided, but the translations of certain papyrological terms is not a
problem for specialists: sapienti sat. As noted earlier, one can
search the web site as a whole by keywords. This search mode is not very
precise, but the great advantage is that one can go straight to the
records linked to the images. One can also search the online catalog of
the Duke University Libraries, which allows more sophisticated searches. A
list of Library of Congress subject headings used in the catalog records
is available as part of the DPA and users should familiarize themselves
with them and with the genre headings from the Art and Architecture
Thesaurus, a list of which is also provided. The records in the online
catalog do not currently link up with the DPA, but about half the records
have links in them that only need to be activated. The Duke University
Libraries will add the links to the other half of the records in due
course.
The original grant from NEH came with the proviso that the Duke papyri
would become more accessible in a variety of ways. A large part of the
collection had not yet been conserved, let alone explored. This has now
been taken care of. The catalog records are available to scholars and
others through the online catalog and one international database. The DPA
presents these catalog records together with images of the papyri. The
number of people on the Internet who all have access to the DPA doubles
every year. Its audience is fast becoming the world. The questions sent to
the papyrus mailbox, which is part of the DPA, range from scholarly
inquiries from colleagues to requests from grade school students for their
projects. Thousands of users have logged in from around the world.
A few years ago the Dead Sea Scrolls affair raised the issue of who
should have access to ancient manuscripts. This has resulted in the
release of this material in microform. It has also created the impression
that scholars working on ancient manuscripts do not want to share their
privileges with others. Occasionally a sensational find of a Greek
literary papyrus is indeed kept from the eyes of scholars for years, but
this is bad for papyrology, as the disastrous publication (or rather
non-publication) history of the Derveni papyrus shows. There are really
only a few scholars who are up to publishing papyri and they all know and
trust each other.
The DPA puts the Society of Biblical Literature's Statement on Access
to Ancient Written Materials into practice. To quote: "Those who own or
control ancient written materials should allow all scholars to have access
to them. If the condition of the written materials requires that access to
them be restricted," - of course it does - "arrangements should be made
for a facsimile reproduction that will be accessible to all scholars."
Those who formulated this statement were thinking of the Dead Sea Scrolls
and the checkered history of their publication, but there are a few
examples of ancient written materials made accessible in facsimile almost
instantly after they were acquired. In fact these examples suggest that
only good can come from increased accessibility. Restrictions have never
resulted in anything good; the Derveni papyrus and the Dead Sea Scrolls
disasters offer instructive warnings. Not long after the Nag Hammadi
codices with Coptic gnostic texts were found a facsimile was published,
which enabled a team of scholars from around the world to start producing
reliable editions of these texts, kept at the Coptic Museum in Cairo.
Editions with full philological apparatus as well as translations have
been widely available for many years now and these texts have thus become
part and parcel of scholarship on early Christianity. The contrast with
the pirated transcription of the Derveni papyrus is painful, because that
text is so important to classicists.
To conclude, the DPA not only provides a challenge to other
institutions holding collections of both published and unpublished papyri,
but also appeals to the wider world of scholarship. The Duke papyri
present an interesting mix of materials for as many contexts as there are
scholars. As noted earlier, the work on the ninety-five percent
unpublished pieces has been preliminary at best. The DPA invites
papyrologists to finish the job of editing the texts. It invites others to
become papyrologists.
Originally authored by Peter van Minnen on 12/12/95
Revised 07/2004 |