A badly damaged annotated list of New Testament books, discovered in the eighteenth century by Ludovico Antonio Muratori. The list includes lengthy editorial commentary -- written in Latin that has been variously described as "barbarous," "wretched," "uncultured," "careless," and "full of blunders" -- providing the modern historian with a window (albeit a greasy one!) into early Christian attitudes about scripture.

What Muratori found is the oldest known New Testament canon -- that is to say, it is the earliest list of books that a Christian community considered authoritative. It is similar to the canon that is accepted by Christians today, but not identical to it. Most historians date the content of the document to the end of the second century, since it mentions the "very recent" activity of Pius I, who died in 157. However, a new generation of scholars has made the case that the list may not be quite that old, and that the reference to Pius may be an attempt at archaizing. The physical manuscript has been dated to the eighth century.

Muratori published the manuscript in 1740, and the document has been named in his honour ever since. Two other fragments (from a copy of the same document made four hundred years later) were discovered in 1897. Unfortunately, none of these manuscripts preserves the beginning of the list. It is assumed that the first two gospels described in the document were originally Matthew and Mark, but the author's comments about those gospels do not survive.

A number of things are noteworthy about the Muratorian canon.

• It does not include 1 or 2 Peter, the letter of James, or the epistle to the Hebrews, all of which are accepted in modern Bibles. It mentions only two letters by John, while the contemporary Christian canon includes three.
• It does mention the Wisdom of Solomon, a deuterocanonical book of the Old Testament.
• Along with the Apocalypse of John (which is accepted by modern Christians), the Muratorian canon endorses the Apocalypse of Peter, which is not part of modern Bibles and which no longer survives in its entirety. That said, the author seems to recognize that not everyone is willing to accept the Apocalypse of Peter in their own churches.
• The author of the canon complains about letters that have been forged in Paul's name. These forgeries (if that's what they were!) are no longer extant. However, in one of the grand ironies that is so common in Biblical scholarship, the author expresses his support for a number of letters that claim to be by Paul but which were almost certainly pseudonymous. These "deutero-Pauline" letters are included in the modern canon too.
• The eagle-eyed among you will note that the author of this canon expects to find the letters of Paul in a different order than they appear in modern Bibles. Today the letters of Paul are arranged roughly in descending order of length, but this author seems to aim for a chronological arrangement instead.
• The apocryphal Shepherd of Hermas is treated with some respect, but it is pointedly not included in the canon proper.

The canon that was eventually accepted by Christianity was published in the thirty-ninth Festal Letter of Athanasius of Alexandria in the year 367 -- possibly as many as two hundred years after the Muratorian canon was first written. The reasons for the differences between the two canons are complex, and I intend to discuss them in another node.

The Text of the Muratorian Canon

This is the Ante-Nicene Fathers translation of the Muratorian Canon, which was originally prepared in 1867 and which is now in the public domain. The English reads awkwardly partially because the translation is so old, but mostly because the document is written in abysmal Latin. Note too that the editors of the ANF did not have the benefit of the textual discoveries from 1897.

1. ... those things at which he was present he placed thus.
The third book of the Gospel, that according to Luke, the well-known physician Luke wrote in his own name in order after the ascension of Christ, and when Paul had associated him with himself as one studious of right. Nor did he himself see the Lord in the flesh; and he, according as he was able to accomplish it, began his narrative with the nativity of John.
The fourth Gospel is that of John, one of the disciples. When his fellow-disciples and bishops entreated him, he said, "Fast ye now with me for the space of three days, and let us recount to each other whatever may be revealed to each of us." On the same night it was revealed to Andrew, one of the apostles, that John should narrate all things in his own name as they called them to mind. And hence, although different points are taught us in the several books of the Gospels, there is no difference as regards the faith of believers, inasmuch as in all of them all things are related under one imperial Spirit, which concern the Lord's nativity, His passion, His resurrection, His conversation with His disciples, and His twofold advent, -- the first in the humiliation of rejection, which is now past, and the second in the glory of royal power, which is yet in the future. What marvel is it, then, that John brings forward these several things so constantly in his epistles also, saying in his own person, "What we have seen with our eyes, and heard with our ears, and our hands have handled, that have we written." For thus he professes himself to be not only the eye-witness, but also the hearer; and besides that, the historian of all the wondrous facts concerning the Lord in their order.

2. Moreover, the Acts of all the Apostles are comprised by Luke in one book, and addressed to the most excellent Theophilus, because these different events took place when he was present himself; and he shows this clearly -- i.e., that the principle on which he wrote was, to give only what fell under his own notice -- by the omission of the passion of Peter, and also of the journey of Paul, when he went from the city -- Rome -- to Spain.

3. As to the epistles of Paul, again, to those who will understand the matter, they indicate of themselves what they are, and from what place or with what object they were directed. He wrote first of all, and at considerable length, to the Corinthians, to check the schism of heresy; and then to the Galatians, to forbid circumcision; and then to the Romans on the rule of the Old Testament Scriptures, and also to show them that Christ is the first object in these; -- which it is needful for us to discuss severally, as the blessed Apostle Paul, following the rule of his predecessor John, writes to no more than seven churches by name, in this order: the first to the Corinthians, the second to the Ephesians, the third to the Philippians, the fourth to the Colossians, the fifth to the Galatians, the sixth to the Thessalonians, the seventh to the Romans. Moreover, though he writes twice to the Corinthians and Thessalonians for their correction, it is yet shown -- i.e., by this sevenfold writing -- that there is one Church spread abroad through the whole world. And John too, indeed, in the Apocalypse, although he writes only to seven churches, yet addresses all. He wrote, besides these, one to Philemon, and one to Titus, and two to Timothy, in simple personal affection and love indeed; but yet these are hallowed in the esteem of the Catholic Church, and in the regulation of ecclesiastical discipline. There are also in circulation one to the Laodiceans, and another to the Alexandrians, forged under the name of Paul, and addressed against the heresy of Marcion; and there are also several others which cannot be received into the Catholic Church, for it is not suitable for gall to be mingled with honey.

4. The Epistle of Jude, indeed, and two belonging to the above-named John -- or bearing the name of John -- are reckoned among the Catholic epistles. And the book of Wisdom, written by the friends of Solomon in his honour. We receive also the Apocalypse of John and that of Peter, though some amongst us will not have this latter read in the Church. The Pastor, moreover, did Hermas write very recently in our times in the city of Rome, while his brother bishop Pius sat in the chair of the Church of Rome. And therefore it also ought to be read; but it cannot be made public in the Church to the people, nor placed among the prophets, as their number is complete, nor among the apostles to the end of time. Of the writings of Arsinous, called also Valentinus, or of Miltiades, we receive nothing at all. Those are rejected too who wrote the new Book of Psalms for Marcion, together with Basilides and the founder of the Asian Cataphrygians.

Further Reading:

A good collection of relevant links can be found at: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/muratorian.html

The Ante-Nicene Fathers are online at: http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/