https://www.amazon.com/Text-Epistles-Disquisition-Paulinum-Archaeology/dp/0197258603/
I have argued for years (a decade at least) that Logos is thin on textual criticism. Sure, bunches of intros. Metzger and his look-alike buddy. Hints of Ehrman. And even copies of early papyri. Plus Logos tools to organize it all.
But try to find a discussion of 'Paul' ... earliest mss's and why hebrews included? Why only those? A single Mark and how significant? Or why the Byzantine went down the tubes? Basically, your Bible.
Yes, the Canon. Yes, mss's. And yes, the physicality of mss's. All bits and pieces.
I ran into Guntz, trying to track down how 'Paul' got grouped. P46 as earliest. Somehow, I landed in a 'proto-Alexandrian' world with strong hints of Byzantine.
Holmes is quite good:
https://michaelwholmes.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/holmes-2006-sbl-revised-paper-2010-edition-24-nov.pdf
And a review of Guntz:
https://question-assumptions.blogspot.com/2012/02/this-past-week-i-gave-presentation-in.html
