The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Appendix 1 Ghost Writing, Pseudepigraphy, and the Amanuensis Hypothesis
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
BNTC (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark
Colossians, P. F. (2016)
UnresolvedThe Letters of Paul
(1991)
UnresolvedMI: Baker Academic
Rapids, G. (2012)
UnresolvedUntitled work
Paul, R. R. (n.d.) · InterVarsity
UnresolvedPan. 33.4. See further Cynthia Damon, "Suetonius the Ventriloquist
Dom, S. (2014)
UnresolvedUntitled work
Pastoral Epistles Francis, J. (n.d.) · SPCK
UnresolvedUntitled work
(n.d.) · Cf. Dio Cassius
UnresolvedAuthor, Amanuensis
(2022)
UnresolvedEvQ 45 [1973]: 100-110
(2009)
UnresolvedBNTC (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark
Colossians, P. F. (2016)
Unresolved
Cited by
Still being checked.
Metadata
- Venue
- Secretaries in Ancient Letter Writing
- Publisher
- Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht
- Published
- 2026-05-06
- Pages
- 345-350
- OpenAlex
- W7160518574
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 18
- Type
- paratext
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Biblical Studies and Interpretation
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Classical Studies and Philology
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › Libraries, Manuscripts, and Books
- Keywords
- ghostwriting, pseudepigraphy, authorship attribution, literary forgery
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Appendix 1 Ghost Writing, Pseudepigraphy, and the Amanuensis Hypothesis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.13109/9783666502606.345
- The paper
- Appendix 1 Ghost Writing, Pseudepigraphy, and the Amanuensis Hypothesis. (2026). Secretaries in Ancient Letter Writing. https://doi.org/10.13109/9783666502606.345
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
