How are biblical fragments dated?

Biblical fragments are primarily dated through paleographic analysis—examining the style and form of the handwriting itself. Scholars compare letter forms (such as alpha, epsilon, iota, omicron, and rho) to dated manuscripts of known age, looking for identical or nearly identical letterforms[1]. The presence or absence of serifs and overall script style—whether a manuscript exhibits characteristics of “Biblical Uncial” or other recognized writing conventions—helps narrow the timeframe[1].

The process involves comparing fragments against reference documents with established dates. For example, scholars may reference the Greek Minor Prophets Scroll from Nahal Hever, which has been dated between 50 BC and AD 50, to assess whether comparable letterforms suggest similar dating[1]. However, this method has inherent limitations. The fragmentary nature of manuscripts makes definitive identifications difficult[2], and paleographic dating can be contentious—scholars may disagree substantially about what a particular script style indicates chronologically.

Specific examples illustrate this challenge. One scholar argues that P64 (a Matthew fragment) displays the “Biblical Uncial” style, which did not emerge until the middle of the second century[1], while another researcher has proposed a much earlier date—potentially pre-66 AD—based on letter similarities with first-century documents[1]. Yet this earlier proposal lacks compelling new paleographic evidence[1].

For Dead Sea Scroll fragments, dating operates similarly but with some additional context. Fragments from Qumran are assigned dates based on script analysis, with some documents dated to the second half of the first century BC and others to the last quarter of the second century BC[3]. Ultimately, paleographic dating remains an informed estimate rather than a precise science, dependent on expert judgment and the availability of well-dated comparative materials.

[1] Philip Comfort, Encountering the Manuscripts: An Introduction to New Testament Paleography & Textual Criticism (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman, 2005), 128–129.
[2] Norman L. Geisler, “Dead Sea Scrolls,” in Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1999), 188.
[3] David Krouwer, “Pseudo-Ezekiel, Dead Sea Scrolls Texts,” in The Lexham Bible Dictionary, ed. John D. Barry et al. (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2016). [See here.]