You could have a look at the article by Dirk Jongkind in:
H.A.G. Houghton and D.C. Parker (eds), "Textual Variation: Theological and
Social Tendencies?" (Texts and Studies 3.6) Piscataway NJ: Gorgias, 2008.
He looks at the nature of the copying process with regard to Codex Sinaiticus
and related evidence from psychological studies. (The other articles in the book
might also be of interest).

http://www.gorgiaspress.com/bookshop/pc-56164-44-houghton-h-and-d-parker-textual\
-variation-theological-and-social-tendencies.aspx

List of contents:
http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2008/02/new-book-textual-variati\
on-theological.html

Hugh Houghton

--- In Apparatus_Criticus@yahoogroups.com, Daniel Ria�o <danielriano@...> wrote:
>
> The study of scribal errors appears to be (or so it seems to me)
> another field of study where the adoption of the cognitive approach
> should yield wonderful results, but most works devoted to the topic I
> have been reading recently seem to be very "old school" oriented. I'd
> appreciate any hint on new approaches toward the description of the
> typology of scribal errors, especially in Greek and Latin.
>
>
> Daniel Ria�o
>

On Nov 21, 2009 3:02 PM, Larry Swain  wrote:
>I meant to answer this when you posted to another list, but
>time got away from me.  Apologies.  It seems to me that you
>want to check Bart Ehrman's provactively named The Orthodox
>Corruption of Scripture.

Bart Ehrman likes to tell the story that his Doktorvater
Bruce Metzger wanted him to call the book Orthodox Correction
of Scripture.

Stephen Carlson


--
Stephen C. Carlson
Ph.D. student, Religion, Duke University
Author of The Gospel Hoax: Morton Smith's Invention of Secret Mark (Baylor,
2005)

Dear Larry,

Yes, thanks for the advise.  On the other hand, not only should I have mentioned
that I have had a copy of that work (for many years now), but also that I've
been in touch with Ehrman, specifically in relation to this question/inquiry.

Quite interestingly, he replied that, to date, he was unaware of anyone who has
compiled a list of this sort and that, if I were to locate one, he especially
wanted to be informed.

Again, thanks,
Agape, Alan.




--- In Apparatus_Criticus@yahoogroups.com, "Larry Swain" <theswain@...> wrote:
>
> I meant to answer this when you posted to another list, but time got away
> from me.� Apologies.� It seems to me that you want to check Bart Ehrman's
> provactively named The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture.
>
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: "Good Companion Books"
>   To: Apparatus_Criticus@yahoogroups.com
>   Subject: [Apparatus_Criticus] Theologically Induced Textual Varriants
>   (Corruptions)
>   Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 06:37:00 -0000
>
>   �
>
>   Theologically Induced Textual Varriants (Corruptions)
>
>   I am in search of any theologically motivated Biblical "corruptions,"
>   those of which Textual Critics are known to commonly dismiss as of no
>   real value, that is, because of their having appeared within
>   manuscripts of little or no 'weight.'
>
>   Although I am fully aware that these are rightly being eliminated
>   from
>   consideration of any inclusion into the Biblical text, it is these
>   that I am, otherwise, looking to document.
>
>   Mind you, I am not interested in how any of these particular
>   "corruptions" have been evaluated by Textual Critics, nor am I trying
>   to determine whether they have any real value, especially on the
>   question of whether they should or should not be reconsidered for
>   inclusion within the Holy text - for, I also agree, such
>   "corruptions" are non-defensible, and therefore, non-debatable.
>
>   My interest in this sort of corruption stems from what I believe to
>   be in the story of how they collectively tell about the efforts of
>   some to change, add and/or delete certain wording from the Biblical
>   text. Apparently, the 'corruptor's' must have felt compelled to alter
>   certain scriptures, all in an effort to make the text say something
>   of which they discerned the Bible was in need of - changes of which,
>   in their view, could better serve their theological mindset, that is,
>   in some greater way than what they believed the Bible was capable of
>   saying on its own, without their help.
>
>   A few examples of the ones I've located thus far are:
>
>   Luke 8:28 "Jesus, Son of the highest God" was changed to "Jesus, the
>   highest God" in MS2766.
>
>   Luke 7:9 "when Jesus heard this" had been changed to "when God heard
>   this" in MS124.
>
>   Galatians 2:2, wherein "Son of God" had been later changed to "God
>   the Son" in MS1985.
>
>   Mark 3:11, whereas this would read, "You are the Son of God," this
>   had been later changed to "You are God, the Son of God" in MS69.
>
>   Mind you, you might be hard pressed to find any of these listed
>   within most any TC list, for, little known to some, the frequency of
>   such endeavors is quite commonly dismissed, and this is simply
>   because of the fact that, as you know, the general focus of most
>   Textual Critics is usually directed at restoring the Biblical Text,
>   that is, rather than in giving any consideration to the implications
>   of such efforts on the part of such corruptor's.
>
>   As far as I know, no one has ever documented a list of such
>   theologically induced "corruptions," for, with your help, that is
>   what I hope to do.
>
>   Thanking you in advance,
>   Agape, Alan.
>
>
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way:
> Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com
>
> Powered by Outblaze
>

_______________________________________________
Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way:
Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com

Dear All,

The following announcement might be of interest to those who have an interest
in technical aspects of compiling a critical edition. I am forwarding this
from the XeTeX list.

Best,
Arash

----------  Forwarded Message  ----------

Subject: [XeTeX] Ledmac mailing lists
Date: Friday 20 November 2009
From: Vafa Khalighi <vafa@...>
To: xetex@..., TeXhax <texhax@...>, "General discussion of LuaTeX."
<luatex@...>

> I have created a mailing list for ledmac users due to the requests that I
> have received. You can now go to
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/ledmac-users and subscribe.
>
> As I promised, later on there will be a new release of ledmac bundle on
> CTAN. Ledmac webpage is http://ledmac.berlios.de but at the moment there is
> nothing there, I will try to update that in a few days.
>
> Thanks
>
> --
> Vafa
>
-----------------------------------------

Theologically Induced Textual Varriants (Corruptions)

I am in search of any theologically motivated Biblical "corruptions," those of
which Textual Critics are known to commonly dismiss as of no real value, that
is, because of their having appeared within manuscripts of little or no
'weight.'

Although I am fully aware that these are rightly being eliminated from
consideration of any inclusion into the Biblical text, it is these that I am,
otherwise, looking to document.

Mind you, I am not interested in how any of these particular "corruptions" have
been evaluated by Textual Critics, nor am I trying to determine whether they
have any real value, especially on the question of whether they should or should
not be reconsidered for inclusion within the Holy text - for, I also agree, such
"corruptions" are non-defensible, and therefore, non-debatable.

My interest in this sort of corruption stems from what I believe to be in the
story of how they collectively tell about the efforts of some to change, add
and/or delete certain wording from the Biblical text. Apparently, the
'corruptor's' must have felt compelled to alter certain scriptures, all in an
effort to make the text say something of which they discerned the Bible was in
need of - changes of which, in their view, could better serve their theological
mindset, that is, in some greater way than what they believed the Bible was
capable of saying on its own, without their help.

A few examples of the ones I've located thus far are:

Luke 8:28 "Jesus, Son of the highest God" was changed to "Jesus, the highest
God" in MS2766.

Luke 7:9 "when Jesus heard this" had been changed to "when God heard this" in
MS124.

Galatians 2:2, wherein "Son of God" had been later changed to "God the Son" in
MS1985.

Mark 3:11, whereas this would read, "You are the Son of God," this had been
later changed to "You are God, the Son of God" in MS69.

Mind you, you might be hard pressed to find any of these listed within most any
TC list, for, little known to some, the frequency of such endeavors is quite
commonly dismissed, and this is simply because of the fact that, as you know,
the general focus of most Textual Critics is usually directed at restoring the
Biblical Text, that is, rather than in giving any consideration to the
implications of such efforts on the part of such corruptor's.

As far as I know, no one has ever documented a list of such theologically
induced "corruptions," for, with your help, that is what I hope to do.

Thanking you in advance,
Agape, Alan.

Dear All,

I am using the following code from one of the ledmac examples to format my
critical notes:

\renewcommand*{\threecolfootfmt}[3]{%
\singlespacing
\normal@pars
\hsize .3\hsize
\setlength{\parindent}{0pt}
\tolerance=5000
\raggedright
\hangindent2.5em \hangafter1
\leavevmode
\strut\hbox to 1.3em{\notenumfont\printlines#1|\hfil}\ignorespaces
{\select@lemmafont#1|#2}\rbracket\enskip
#3\strut\par\allowbreak}

How can I control the amount of white space between each critical note? The
following code does not seem to work:

\interparanoteglue{1em plus.4em minus.4em}

Many thanks and regards,
Arash

Why not simply say "illegible" (or abbreviate to "illeg" aut sim.)? If
this isn't a community that traditionally uses Latin, I don't see the
advantage of inventing an abbreviation that has to be both expanded and
explained anyway.

Best,

Gabriel

c.cicuzza wrote:
> Dear professor Nardelli,
> thanks a lot for your message. "Legi nequit" could be a good solution: do you
think that I can abbreviate it in "l.n.", in Italic letters? I feel that "Legi
nequit" could be considered too long by Asiatic scholars who do not know Latin.
I prepared a "legend" with all the abbreviations, such as "deest", and so on,
but I am afraid they will feel "legi nequit" too long.
> In my work the main effort was to use western criteria in the edition and in
the "apparatus criticus", modifying it according to the different needs,
peculiar to these texts and this religious tradition. So, your suggestion is
welcome!
> Thanks a lot,
> yours Claudio
>
>
>
> --- In Apparatus_Criticus@yahoogroups.com, "Jean-Fabrice Nardelli"
<jnardellis36@...> wrote:
>> For "not readable", you may want to use the latin tag "legi nequit" which can
often be found in critical apparatuses of Greek and Latin authors when a ms. is
either damaged or has no text for whatever reason.
>>
>> J.-F. Nardelli
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

--
Dr Gabriel BODARD
(Epigrapher & Digital Classicist)

Centre for Computing in the Humanities
King's College London
26-29 Drury Lane
London WC2B 5RL
Email: gabriel.bodard@...
Tel: +44 (0)20 7848 1388
Fax: +44 (0)20 7848 2980

http://www.digitalclassicist.org/
http://www.currentepigraphy.org/

Dear professor Nardelli,
thanks a lot for your message. "Legi nequit" could be a good solution: do you
think that I can abbreviate it in "l.n.", in Italic letters? I feel that "Legi
nequit" could be considered too long by Asiatic scholars who do not know Latin.
I prepared a "legend" with all the abbreviations, such as "deest", and so on,
but I am afraid they will feel "legi nequit" too long.
In my work the main effort was to use western criteria in the edition and in the
"apparatus criticus", modifying it according to the different needs, peculiar to
these texts and this religious tradition. So, your suggestion is welcome!
Thanks a lot,
yours Claudio



--- In Apparatus_Criticus@yahoogroups.com, "Jean-Fabrice Nardelli"
<jnardellis36@...> wrote:
>
> For "not readable", you may want to use the latin tag "legi nequit" which can
often be found in critical apparatuses of Greek and Latin authors when a ms. is
either damaged or has no text for whatever reason.
>
> J.-F. Nardelli
>

N.B. The file I attached was reduced in size in the transmission. I have
uploaded a full-size copy to the 'Files' section.

HG-C

--- In Apparatus_Criticus@yahoogroups.com, henrywgc@... wrote:
>
> I attach herewith a scan of a marginal inscription from a MS the main hand of
which is of the late 13th c. This inscription (possibly a poem?) is in a quite
different hand and looks later; can anyone suggest a date? Also, I am pretty
stumped with a reading for this: I can make out words here and there (latin!),
but a lot of the contractions and even letter-forms are obscure to me. If anyone
can suggest a reading, that would be very welcome! I've struggled with this for
a few weeks but the mists are refusing to lift!
>
> Apologies if this is too off-topic.
>
> Thanks
>
> Henry Gough-Cooper
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> AOL Email goes Mobile! You can now read your AOL Emails whilst on the move.
Sign up for a free AOL Email account with unlimited storage today.
>

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the Apparatus_Criticus
group.

   File        : /160_Margin.jpg
   Uploaded by : henrywgc <henrywgc@...>
   Description : Marginal inscription

You can access this file at the URL:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Apparatus_Criticus/files/160_Margin.jpg

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/groups/original/general.htmlfiles

Regards,

henrywgc <henrywgc@...>

K. Ziegler's Teubner is the standard edition.

--- In Apparatus_Criticus@yahoogroups.com, "Larry J. Swain" <theswain@...>
wrote:
>
> This is a little off the main topic, but I'm wondering if anyone knows of a
critical edition of Plutarch's Bioi or has access to one.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Larry Swain
>

This is a little off the main topic, but I'm wondering if anyone knows of a
critical edition of Plutarch's Bioi or has access to one.

Thanks,

Larry Swain

Stephen C. Carlson wrote:
>
> I thought that it was called a "manicule" -- but it appears that it went
> under many names.

Unicode call it a 'pointing index' as in:

Black left pointing index U+261A ☚
Black right pointing index: U+261B ☛
White left pointing index: U+261C ☜
White up pointing index: U+261D ☝
White right pointing index: U+261E ☞
White down pointing index: U+261F ☟


http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/manicule

(apologies to those who don't have UTF-8 mail readers or fonts and don't
see the pointy finger things, erm, manicules.)

While I much prefer 'manicule' when documenting things I tend to use
Unicode's terms for characters and glyphs.  (Of course, in manuscript
for you can easily argue that it is not a character but a marginal
decoration of some sort, and fair enough I certainly wouldn't disagree.)

-James

--
Dr James Cummings, Research Technologies Service, University of Oxford
James dot Cummings at oucs dot ox dot ac dot uk

--
Stephen C. Carlson
Ph.D. student, Religion, Duke University
Author of The Gospel Hoax: Morton Smith's Invention of Secret Mark (Baylor, 2005)

_______________________________________________
Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way:
Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com

In a manuscript chronicle from the 13th c. Anglo-Norman or Welsh, the marginalia
include roughly-drawn hands pointing at items in the text. They are perhaps not
be contemporaneous with the scribal hand of the text, but later ornamentation.
Is there a technical name for these? How common are they?

--- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, Bob Relyea <bob@...> wrote:

Responses inline....


Chris Weimer wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> This popped up in my TC group, and thought it may get some answers here
> since this is where the Biblicalists hang out. Anyone is free to join and
> inform my group as well.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Chris Weimer
> SFSU
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: <jkohut3@...>
> Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 6:49 PM
> To: <Apparatus_Criticus@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Apparatus_Criticus] UBS5? and NA28?
>
>
>> Hello Everyone,
>>
>>      Can anyone tell me if they have heard about any progress they are
>> making toward producing the Greek New Testament UBS5 or the NA28 ?
>>
>>      Also, does anyone have any details about the "virtual re-unification
>> of all extant leaves of Codex Sinaiticus" in July and/or its updated
>> website?
>>
I don't know what the state of NS28/UBS5 is. I think it's working toward
an online distribution. I know that Munster is working together with the
University of Birmingham to experiment with on-line unline publishing as
well as sharing electronic resources
(http://arts-itsee.bham.ac.uk/vmrsite/). The U of B has publish an
addition of John based on all the available Uncials
(http://www.iohannes.com/). It's really an apparatus type release as the
text is simply and 'average' text of all the witnesses (not a critical
text).

I do know that the Sinaiticus project is sponsoring a mini-Conference on
July 6 and 7 in the British Library to present papers about their
experience (including papers on the updated history).:
http://www.codexsinaiticus.org/en/project/conference.aspx Which probably
indicates the online sinaiticus should go live sometime in that time frame.

bob

>>      Thank you.
>>           John Kohut III
>>
>>

--- End forwarded message ---

Gabriel, I have no objects at all!

Chris Weimer
San Francisco State University

--- In Apparatus_Criticus@yahoogroups.com, Gabriel Bodard <gabriel.bodard@...>
wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> I would like to ask the list's indulgence to begin a discussion of the
> abstract definition of apparatus criticus, in the broadest possible
> sense. The aim would be to come up with a technology-agnostic list of
> the kinds of distinctions that an encoding scheme for app-crit would
> need to cater for.
>
> I have some ideas of my own re app-crit in documentary editions (not so
> much variant readings as observations of textual peculiarities and
> condition); Lachmannian app-crit is fairly well understood and catered
> for by existing schemata; others such as genetic app-crit I have little
> experience or opinion on.
>
> Before starting, we would invite a handful of interested folks from the
> TEI (Text Encoding Initiative) to join the list. I hope all the
> well-informed and opinioned folks on this list will take the lead in
> helping to come up with a comprehensive list, however.
>
> Any objections? Chris, does this seem appropriate to you?
>
> Regards,
>
> Gabriel
> (list moderator, but acting as private citizen...)
>
> --
> Dr Gabriel BODARD
> (Epigrapher & Digital Classicist)
>
> Centre for Computing in the Humanities
> King's College London
> 26-29 Drury Lane
> London WC2B 5RL
> Email: gabriel.bodard@...
> Tel: +44 (0)20 7848 1388
> Fax: +44 (0)20 7848 2980
>
> http://www.digitalclassicist.org/
> http://www.currentepigraphy.org/
>

Thanks a lot john.
that was so useful to explain.
Can u send me other important links please.
regards

yours
ashutosh madhav
research scholar
Hindi Bhawan
Banaras Hindu University
Varanasi-221005,India


--- In Apparatus_Criticus@yahoogroups.com, John McChesney-Young <jmccyoung@...>
wrote:
>
> On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 11:44 PM, madhav <sriashutosh@...>
> wrote in part:
>
> > 2:I do't know about how Principle of Textual Criticism have
> > developed according to time...
>
> The _Oxford Classical Dictionary_ 3rd. ed. lists the following in the
> "History" section of the bibliography for the article on textual
> criticism, to which I've added some URLs and other information I hope
> will be useful:
>
> Anthony Grafton - Defenders of the Text (1991)
> http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog/GRADEF.html
>
> Sebastiano Timpanaro - La genesi del metodo del Lachmann (1963, 1985),
> which since the publication of the OCD3 has been published in English
> translation as _The Genesis of Lachmann's Method_:
>
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/presssite/metadata.epl?mode=synopsis&bookkey=16132\
6
>
> Edwin J. Kenney - The Classical Text (1975) (now out of print, but
> published by the U of California Press and I would assume widely
> available in libraries)
>
> P. .L Schmidt, ''Lachmann's Method'' in A. C. Dionisotti et al. - The
> Uses of Greek and Latin: Historical Essays (1988) (also OP)
>
> Best,
>
> John
>
>
>
> --
> John McChesney-Young ** Berkeley, California, U.S.A.
> JMcCYoung~at~gmail.com ** http://jmccyoung.blogspot.com/
>

Dear all,

I would like to ask the list's indulgence to begin a discussion of the
abstract definition of apparatus criticus, in the broadest possible
sense. The aim would be to come up with a technology-agnostic list of
the kinds of distinctions that an encoding scheme for app-crit would
need to cater for.

I have some ideas of my own re app-crit in documentary editions (not so
much variant readings as observations of textual peculiarities and
condition); Lachmannian app-crit is fairly well understood and catered
for by existing schemata; others such as genetic app-crit I have little
experience or opinion on.

Before starting, we would invite a handful of interested folks from the
TEI (Text Encoding Initiative) to join the list. I hope all the
well-informed and opinioned folks on this list will take the lead in
helping to come up with a comprehensive list, however.

Any objections? Chris, does this seem appropriate to you?

Regards,

Gabriel
(list moderator, but acting as private citizen...)

--
Dr Gabriel BODARD
(Epigrapher & Digital Classicist)

Centre for Computing in the Humanities
King's College London
26-29 Drury Lane
London WC2B 5RL
Email: gabriel.bodard@...
Tel: +44 (0)20 7848 1388
Fax: +44 (0)20 7848 2980

http://www.digitalclassicist.org/
http://www.currentepigraphy.org/

On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 11:44 PM, madhav <sriashutosh@...>
wrote in part:

> 2:I do't know about how Principle of Textual Criticism have
> developed according to time...

The _Oxford Classical Dictionary_ 3rd. ed. lists the following in the
"History" section of the bibliography for the article on textual
criticism, to which I've added some URLs and other information I hope
will be useful:

Anthony Grafton - Defenders of the Text (1991)
http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog/GRADEF.html

Sebastiano Timpanaro - La genesi del metodo del Lachmann (1963, 1985),
which since the publication of the OCD3 has been published in English
translation as _The Genesis of Lachmann's Method_:
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/presssite/metadata.epl?mode=synopsis&bookkey=16132\
6

Edwin J. Kenney - The Classical Text (1975) (now out of print, but
published by the U of California Press and I would assume widely
available in libraries)

P. .L Schmidt, ''Lachmann's Method'' in A. C. Dionisotti et al. - The
Uses of Greek and Latin: Historical Essays (1988) (also OP)

Best,

John



--
John McChesney-Young ** Berkeley, California, U.S.A.
JMcCYoung~at~gmail.com ** http://jmccyoung.blogspot.com/

Dear Sir,
Myself Madhav,research scholar,Banaras Hindu University,India.Presently
I'm engage in 'Deep studyof Prof.Vishwanath pd's cotribution:in special
reference to Textual Criticism'.
I have some problems-
          1:I have shorter knowledge about history of Textual criticism
          2:I do't know about how Principle of Textual Criticism have
developed according to time.

Second problem is a big problem to me.Can you help me sir?

Hi to everybody,
I would like to ask: how to set in ledamc\ledpar package new line
number in every page, not continous one?
Best wishes
Karol Szwed