Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [ANE-2] 1QIsa[a]

Expand Messages
  • Jack Kilmon
    Hi Victor: By “dead on” I did not mean letter for letter Masoretic style. There were no Masoretic texts of any Biblical Texts in the 2nd century BCE. I
    Message 1 of 13 , Jul 3 7:42 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Victor:

      By “dead on” I did not mean letter for letter Masoretic style. There were no Masoretic texts of any Biblical Texts in the 2nd century BCE. I am talking about translational differences between the DSS scribe’s Aramaized Hebrew and use of matres lectionis at a time when there was no such thing as pointing or Masoretic texts. These are the orthographic differences of which you speak in a text that is absolutely astonishing, IMO, for its harmony to the Ben Asher and Ben Hayyim texts which also show primarily differences resulting from usage of matres and only three translation differences. Otherwise to call 1QIsa(a) a MT would be silly. They are separated by twelve centuries. There are a few interpretive differences. I think the scribe did use an exemplar text, made some mistakes of parablepsy which he himself as well as later editors corrected. That 1QIsa(a) was used as an exemplar for 1QIsa(b) is the best evidence for the praxis. For my own purposes I see nothing that will alter the manner I will reconstruct lacunae in the reconstruction.

      Jack

      Jack Kilmon

      From: Victor Hurowitz
      Sent: Sunday, July 03, 2011 6:57 AM
      To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
      Cc: 'Jack Kilmon'
      Subject: RE: [ANE-2] 1QIsa[a]

      How can you say the scroll is "dead on" to the MT? There are hundreds of orthographic differences which were studied years ago by Y. Kutscher and shown to be essentially "cribs" making the scroll readable to someone who spoke a later dialect of Hebrew. You are right that the scroll couldn't have been written from memory, but it wasn't simply copied out from an earlier version either. It was revised in the process of copying. It's basic text is of the MT variety, but it itself is hardly MT.

      Victor Hurowitz



      From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jack Kilmon
      Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2011 5:56 PM
      To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [ANE-2] 1QIsa[a]





      Good morning, Tom:
      I am just finishing my first cup of Jamaican Blue Mountain. I agree with
      you. Having just finished reading each column of the scroll, except for
      errors of omission and repetition, 1QIsa(a) is "dead on" to the later
      Masoretic text. Although one of the Isaiah scrolls may have been an
      "exercise" and perhaps from memory, the Great Scroll was
      penned...er...reeded...for use and halakha would have forbidden using
      memory. A "memory scroll" would not be such an accurate proto-Masoretic
      example as is this one. The reproduction I am making is actually a
      reconstruction designed to look exactly as the scroll looked when the scribe
      wrote his last letter, so there will be no lacunae. Reconstructing the text
      in the lacunae falls perfectly in line with the MT. This is important to me
      since sheepskins are not cheap. This scroll, the original, not mine, was
      definitely not written from memory. There are marginal notes from editors
      for some of the parablepsy and some were missed by the editor(s).

      Jack Kilmon

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Tom Verenna
      Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2011 7:56 AM
      To: mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [ANE-2] 1QIsa[a]

      I'm aware of copy errors as they are quite easy to prove within a text.
      However I am not sure I am persuaded that one can argue that a whole
      document is produced from memory. Perhaps one might argue that a text might
      be 'contaminated' by memory inclinations, whence through the process of
      copying a text over an over might produce. Like when a student, who light
      copy a quote from a poet, might stop looking at the text he is copying and
      include the line or verse from memory, perhaps slightly skewing it. But can
      one adequately argue for memory? I think that one would be hardpressed to
      argue convincingly that particular case. But then again, I am just waking
      up, and have not yet had a cup of coffee, so perhaps I am not yet alert
      enough to grasp the argument.

      Thomas Verenna
      Philadelphia, PA

      Sent from my iPhone

      On Jul 1, 2011, at 4:37 PM, George F Somsel <mailto:gfsomsel%40yahoo.com> wrote:

      > In the NT it is common to see errors which are either generated by errors
      > of the
      > eye or errors of hearing. One might skip a line because there is another
      > line
      > with the same ending (homoioteuleuton) or even repeat a line. On the
      > other hand
      > when the vowels began to iticize, i.e., coalesce into an "i" sound. Thus
      > there
      > are clues to what the cause might be for an an error, but evidence isn't
      > always
      > present. If one finds a passage which is similar in some respects to
      > another,
      > one might find some elements introduced from the other passage which would
      > then
      > indicate an error of memory.
      > george
      > gfsomsel
      >
      > … search for truth, hear truth,
      > learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
      > defend the truth till death.
      >
      > - Jan Hus
      > _________
      >
      > ________________________________
      > From: Tom Verenna <mailto:tsverenna%40gmail.com>
      > To: "mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com" <mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com>
      > Sent: Fri, July 1, 2011 12:02:54 PM
      > Subject: Re: [ANE-2] 1QIsa[a]
      >
      >
      > One has to wonder how anyone can determine that...
      >
      > Thomas Verenna
      > Philadelphia, PA
      >
      > Sent from my iPhone
      >
      > On Jul 1, 2011, at 12:15 PM, Stephen Goranson <mailto:goranson%40duke.edu> wrote:
      >
      > > Millar Burrows, The Dead Sea Scrolls (1955) page 114:
      > > "He may have been writing from dictation or even from memory."
      > >
      > > Stephen Goranson
      > > http://www.duke.edu/~goranson
      > >
      > >
      > > ________________________________
      > > From: mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Petr
      > > Tomasek
      > >[mailto:tomasek%40etf.cuni.cz]
      > > Sent: Friday, July 01, 2011 11:29 AM
      > > To: mailto:ane-2%40yahoogroups.com
      > > Subject: [ANE-2] 1QIsa[a]
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Hello!
      > >
      > > Can someone from the Qumran experts, please, confirm or falsify me
      > > my feeling that someone suggested a hypothesis that 1QIsa[a]
      > > was not copyied from another scroll, but written from memory?
      > >
      > > If so, would You, please, point me to the appropriate sources?
      > >
      > > Thank You very much,
      > >
      > > Petr Tomášek,
      > > PhD student,
      > > The Protestant Theological Faculty,
      > > Charles University, Prague
      > >
      > > --
      > > Petr Tomasek <http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~tomasek>
      > > Jabber: mailto:butrus%40jabbim.cz<mailto:butrus%40jabbim.cz>
      > >
      > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      > > EA 355:001 DU DU DU DU
      > > EA 355:002 TU TU TU TU
      > > EA 355:003 NU NU NU NU NU NU NU
      > > EA 355:004 NA NA NA NA NA
      > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ------------------------------------
      > >
      > > Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      ------------------------------------

      Yahoo! Groups Links




      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Brian Colless
      This thread has caused me to recall sitting in a Mishnaic Hebrew class at Sydney University more than 50 years ago. The teacher was Rabbi Israel Por(r)ush, I
      Message 2 of 13 , Jul 3 9:26 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        This thread has caused me to recall sitting in a Mishnaic Hebrew class
        at Sydney University more than 50 years ago.

        The teacher was Rabbi Israel Por(r)ush, I had been in a Latin class
        with his daughter Naomi, 5 years before that, and I always envied her
        sitting in the library doing Hebrew exercises (teacher was ECB
        Maclauren) with the Brown, Driver, and Briggs lexicon open in front of
        her. When I started as a language teacher in a secondary school I was
        finally able to attend Hebrew courses in the late afternoon.

        On one occasion my Rabbi was asked a question about the text of the
        DSS and MT; he paused, and remained silent for a while, then said he
        was running through the first page of Isaiah in both texts, comparing
        them.

        I never found out whether he had actually memorized the whole book of
        Yesha`yahu in those two editions.

        Brian Colless
        Massey University, NZ

        From: Victor Hurowitz
        Sent: Sunday, July 03, 2011 6:57 AM
        To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
        Cc: 'Jack Kilmon'
        Subject: RE: [ANE-2] 1QIsa[a]

        How can you say the scroll is "dead on" to the MT? There are hundreds
        of orthographic differences which were studied years ago by Y.
        Kutscher and shown to be essentially "cribs" making the scroll
        readable to someone who spoke a later dialect of Hebrew. You are right
        that the scroll couldn't have been written from memory, but it wasn't
        simply copied out from an earlier version either. It was revised in
        the process of copying. It's basic text is of the MT variety, but it
        itself is hardly MT.

        Victor Hurowitz
        On 3/07/2011, at 2:55 AM, Jack Kilmon wrote:

        > Good morning, Tom:
        > I am just finishing my first cup of Jamaican Blue Mountain. I agree
        > with
        > you. Having just finished reading each column of the scroll, except
        > for
        > errors of omission and repetition, 1QIsa(a) is "dead on" to the later
        > Masoretic text. Although one of the Isaiah scrolls may have been an
        > "exercise" and perhaps from memory, the Great Scroll was
        > penned...er...reeded...for use and halakha would have forbidden using
        > memory. A "memory scroll" would not be such an accurate proto-
        > Masoretic
        > example as is this one. The reproduction I am making is actually a
        > reconstruction designed to look exactly as the scroll looked when
        > the scribe
        > wrote his last letter, so there will be no lacunae. Reconstructing
        > the text
        > in the lacunae falls perfectly in line with the MT. This is
        > important to me
        > since sheepskins are not cheap. This scroll, the original, not mine,
        > was
        > definitely not written from memory. There are marginal notes from
        > editors
        > for some of the parablepsy and some were missed by the editor(s).
        >
        > Jack Kilmon
        >
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: Tom Verenna
        > Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2011 7:56 AM
        > To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: Re: [ANE-2] 1QIsa[a]
        >
        > I'm aware of copy errors as they are quite easy to prove within a
        > text.
        > However I am not sure I am persuaded that one can argue that a whole
        > document is produced from memory. Perhaps one might argue that a
        > text might
        > be 'contaminated' by memory inclinations, whence through the process
        > of
        > copying a text over an over might produce. Like when a student, who
        > light
        > copy a quote from a poet, might stop looking at the text he is
        > copying and
        > include the line or verse from memory, perhaps slightly skewing it.
        > But can
        > one adequately argue for memory? I think that one would be
        > hardpressed to
        > argue convincingly that particular case. But then again, I am just
        > waking
        > up, and have not yet had a cup of coffee, so perhaps I am not yet
        > alert
        > enough to grasp the argument.
        >
        > Thomas Verenna
        > Philadelphia, PA
        >
        > Sent from my iPhone
        >
        > On Jul 1, 2011, at 4:37 PM, George F Somsel <gfsomsel@...>
        > wrote:
        >
        > > In the NT it is common to see errors which are either generated by
        > errors
        > > of the
        > > eye or errors of hearing. One might skip a line because there is
        > another
        > > line
        > > with the same ending (homoioteuleuton) or even repeat a line. On the
        > > other hand
        > > when the vowels began to iticize, i.e., coalesce into an "i"
        > sound. Thus
        > > there
        > > are clues to what the cause might be for an an error, but evidence
        > isn't
        > > always
        > > present. If one finds a passage which is similar in some respects to
        > > another,
        > > one might find some elements introduced from the other passage
        > which would
        > > then
        > > indicate an error of memory.
        > > george
        > > gfsomsel
        > >
        > > � search for truth, hear truth,
        > > learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
        > > defend the truth till death.
        > >
        > > - Jan Hus
        > > _________
        > >
        > > ________________________________
        > > From: Tom Verenna <tsverenna@...>
        > > To: "ANE-2@yahoogroups.com" <ANE-2@yahoogroups.com>
        > > Sent: Fri, July 1, 2011 12:02:54 PM
        > > Subject: Re: [ANE-2] 1QIsa[a]
        > >
        > >
        > > One has to wonder how anyone can determine that...
        > >
        > > Thomas Verenna
        > > Philadelphia, PA
        > >
        > > Sent from my iPhone
        > >
        > > On Jul 1, 2011, at 12:15 PM, Stephen Goranson <goranson@...>
        > wrote:
        > >
        > > > Millar Burrows, The Dead Sea Scrolls (1955) page 114:
        > > > "He may have been writing from dictation or even from memory."
        > > >
        > > > Stephen Goranson
        > > > http://www.duke.edu/~goranson
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > ________________________________
        > > > From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
        > Petr
        > > > Tomasek
        > > >[tomasek@...]
        > > > Sent: Friday, July 01, 2011 11:29 AM
        > > > To: ane-2@yahoogroups.com
        > > > Subject: [ANE-2] 1QIsa[a]
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > Hello!
        > > >
        > > > Can someone from the Qumran experts, please, confirm or falsify me
        > > > my feeling that someone suggested a hypothesis that 1QIsa[a]
        > > > was not copyied from another scroll, but written from memory?
        > > >
        > > > If so, would You, please, point me to the appropriate sources?
        > > >
        > > > Thank You very much,
        > > >
        > > > Petr Tom��ek,
        > > > PhD student,
        > > > The Protestant Theological Faculty,
        > > > Charles University, Prague
        > > >
        > > > --
        > > > Petr Tomasek <http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~tomasek>
        > > > Jabber: butrus@...<mailto:butrus%40jabbim.cz>
        > > >
        > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
        > > > EA 355:001 DU DU DU DU
        > > > EA 355:002 TU TU TU TU
        > > > EA 355:003 NU NU NU NU NU NU NU
        > > > EA 355:004 NA NA NA NA NA
        > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > ------------------------------------
        > > >
        > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > >
        > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > >
        > >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        > ------------------------------------
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • victor avigdor hurowitz
        The first chapter in the book of Isaiah is the haftarah for the Shabbat before 9th Av and many people have it memorized, perhaps because it is chanted
        Message 3 of 13 , Jul 4 2:58 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          The first chapter in the book of Isaiah is the haftarah for the Shabbat
          before 9th Av and many people have it memorized, perhaps because it is
          chanted customarily following the cantillation of the Scroll of
          Lamentations, so it's no real big trick to look at the first column of
          1QIs(a) while you're chanting MT Isaiah and noting differences. And
          someone who had already committed MT to memory shouldn't have too much
          trouble remembering the variants in the Scroll.
          Victor Hurowitz
          BGU




          On Mon, 4 Jul 2011, Brian Colless wrote:

          > This thread has caused me to recall sitting in a Mishnaic Hebrew class
          > at Sydney University more than 50 years ago.
          >
          > The teacher was Rabbi Israel Por(r)ush, I had been in a Latin class
          > with his daughter Naomi, 5 years before that, and I always envied her
          > sitting in the library doing Hebrew exercises (teacher was ECB
          > Maclauren) with the Brown, Driver, and Briggs lexicon open in front of
          > her. When I started as a language teacher in a secondary school I was
          > finally able to attend Hebrew courses in the late afternoon.
          >
          > On one occasion my Rabbi was asked a question about the text of the
          > DSS and MT; he paused, and remained silent for a while, then said he
          > was running through the first page of Isaiah in both texts, comparing
          > them.
          >
          > I never found out whether he had actually memorized the whole book of
          > Yesha`yahu in those two editions.
          >
          > Brian Colless
          > Massey University, NZ
          >
          > From: Victor Hurowitz
          > Sent: Sunday, July 03, 2011 6:57 AM
          > To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
          > Cc: 'Jack Kilmon'
          > Subject: RE: [ANE-2] 1QIsa[a]
          >
          > How can you say the scroll is "dead on" to the MT? There are hundreds
          > of orthographic differences which were studied years ago by Y.
          > Kutscher and shown to be essentially "cribs" making the scroll
          > readable to someone who spoke a later dialect of Hebrew. You are right
          > that the scroll couldn't have been written from memory, but it wasn't
          > simply copied out from an earlier version either. It was revised in
          > the process of copying. It's basic text is of the MT variety, but it
          > itself is hardly MT.
          >
          > Victor Hurowitz
          > On 3/07/2011, at 2:55 AM, Jack Kilmon wrote:
          >
          >> Good morning, Tom:
          >> I am just finishing my first cup of Jamaican Blue Mountain. I agree
          >> with
          >> you. Having just finished reading each column of the scroll, except
          >> for
          >> errors of omission and repetition, 1QIsa(a) is "dead on" to the later
          >> Masoretic text. Although one of the Isaiah scrolls may have been an
          >> "exercise" and perhaps from memory, the Great Scroll was
          >> penned...er...reeded...for use and halakha would have forbidden using
          >> memory. A "memory scroll" would not be such an accurate proto-
          >> Masoretic
          >> example as is this one. The reproduction I am making is actually a
          >> reconstruction designed to look exactly as the scroll looked when
          >> the scribe
          >> wrote his last letter, so there will be no lacunae. Reconstructing
          >> the text
          >> in the lacunae falls perfectly in line with the MT. This is
          >> important to me
          >> since sheepskins are not cheap. This scroll, the original, not mine,
          >> was
          >> definitely not written from memory. There are marginal notes from
          >> editors
          >> for some of the parablepsy and some were missed by the editor(s).
          >>
          >> Jack Kilmon
          >>
          >> -----Original Message-----
          >> From: Tom Verenna
          >> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2011 7:56 AM
          >> To: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
          >> Subject: Re: [ANE-2] 1QIsa[a]
          >>
          >> I'm aware of copy errors as they are quite easy to prove within a
          >> text.
          >> However I am not sure I am persuaded that one can argue that a whole
          >> document is produced from memory. Perhaps one might argue that a
          >> text might
          >> be 'contaminated' by memory inclinations, whence through the process
          >> of
          >> copying a text over an over might produce. Like when a student, who
          >> light
          >> copy a quote from a poet, might stop looking at the text he is
          >> copying and
          >> include the line or verse from memory, perhaps slightly skewing it.
          >> But can
          >> one adequately argue for memory? I think that one would be
          >> hardpressed to
          >> argue convincingly that particular case. But then again, I am just
          >> waking
          >> up, and have not yet had a cup of coffee, so perhaps I am not yet
          >> alert
          >> enough to grasp the argument.
          >>
          >> Thomas Verenna
          >> Philadelphia, PA
          >>
          >> Sent from my iPhone
          >>
          >> On Jul 1, 2011, at 4:37 PM, George F Somsel <gfsomsel@...>
          >> wrote:
          >>
          >>> In the NT it is common to see errors which are either generated by
          >> errors
          >>> of the
          >>> eye or errors of hearing. One might skip a line because there is
          >> another
          >>> line
          >>> with the same ending (homoioteuleuton) or even repeat a line. On the
          >>> other hand
          >>> when the vowels began to iticize, i.e., coalesce into an "i"
          >> sound. Thus
          >>> there
          >>> are clues to what the cause might be for an an error, but evidence
          >> isn't
          >>> always
          >>> present. If one finds a passage which is similar in some respects to
          >>> another,
          >>> one might find some elements introduced from the other passage
          >> which would
          >>> then
          >>> indicate an error of memory.
          >>> george
          >>> gfsomsel
          >>>
          >>> ? search for truth, hear truth,
          >>> learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
          >>> defend the truth till death.
          >>>
          >>> - Jan Hus
          >>> _________
          >>>
          >>> ________________________________
          >>> From: Tom Verenna <tsverenna@...>
          >>> To: "ANE-2@yahoogroups.com" <ANE-2@yahoogroups.com>
          >>> Sent: Fri, July 1, 2011 12:02:54 PM
          >>> Subject: Re: [ANE-2] 1QIsa[a]
          >>>
          >>>
          >>> One has to wonder how anyone can determine that...
          >>>
          >>> Thomas Verenna
          >>> Philadelphia, PA
          >>>
          >>> Sent from my iPhone
          >>>
          >>> On Jul 1, 2011, at 12:15 PM, Stephen Goranson <goranson@...>
          >> wrote:
          >>>
          >>>> Millar Burrows, The Dead Sea Scrolls (1955) page 114:
          >>>> "He may have been writing from dictation or even from memory."
          >>>>
          >>>> Stephen Goranson
          >>>> http://www.duke.edu/~goranson
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>> ________________________________
          >>>> From: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
          >> Petr
          >>>> Tomasek
          >>>> [tomasek@...]
          >>>> Sent: Friday, July 01, 2011 11:29 AM
          >>>> To: ane-2@yahoogroups.com
          >>>> Subject: [ANE-2] 1QIsa[a]
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>> Hello!
          >>>>
          >>>> Can someone from the Qumran experts, please, confirm or falsify me
          >>>> my feeling that someone suggested a hypothesis that 1QIsa[a]
          >>>> was not copyied from another scroll, but written from memory?
          >>>>
          >>>> If so, would You, please, point me to the appropriate sources?
          >>>>
          >>>> Thank You very much,
          >>>>
          >>>> Petr Tom�?ek,
          >>>> PhD student,
          >>>> The Protestant Theological Faculty,
          >>>> Charles University, Prague
          >>>>
          >>>> --
          >>>> Petr Tomasek <http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~tomasek>
          >>>> Jabber: butrus@...<mailto:butrus%40jabbim.cz>
          >>>>
          >>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
          >>>> EA 355:001 DU DU DU DU
          >>>> EA 355:002 TU TU TU TU
          >>>> EA 355:003 NU NU NU NU NU NU NU
          >>>> EA 355:004 NA NA NA NA NA
          >>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>> ------------------------------------
          >>>>
          >>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>
          >>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >>>
          >>>
          >>
          >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >>
          >> ------------------------------------
          >>
          >> Yahoo! Groups Links
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          >
          >
          > ------------------------------------
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
          >

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • victor avigdor hurowitz
          Dear ANE, Ever since ANE went to YAHOO I have not been able to communicate by using Microsoft Office Outlook. For some reason my address is rejected. Yesterday
          Message 4 of 13 , Jul 4 3:03 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            Dear ANE,
            Ever since ANE went to YAHOO I have not been able to communicate by using
            Microsoft Office Outlook. For some reason my address is rejected.
            Yesterday I finally tried to register again and I was successful in
            sending one letter to ANE. Today, a few minutes ago I tried again by
            replying to Brian Colless, but again I was rejected.
            I am writing at this very moment on the old Telnet program which is how I
            always used to communicate with ANE. What must I do to register again with
            the YAHOO?
            Thanks,
            Victor Hurowitz
            ANE
          • Robert M Whiting
            ... Dear Victor (and others with similar problems), By rejected, I presume you mean that yahoo sends you a message saying you must be a member to post messages
            Message 5 of 13 , Jul 4 4:11 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              On Mon, 4 Jul 2011, victor avigdor hurowitz wrote:

              > Dear ANE,
              > Ever since ANE went to YAHOO I have not been able to communicate by using
              > Microsoft Office Outlook. For some reason my address is rejected.
              > Yesterday I finally tried to register again and I was successful in
              > sending one letter to ANE. Today, a few minutes ago I tried again by
              > replying to Brian Colless, but again I was rejected.
              > I am writing at this very moment on the old Telnet program which is how I
              > always used to communicate with ANE. What must I do to register again with
              > the YAHOO?

              Dear Victor (and others with similar problems),

              By rejected, I presume you mean that yahoo sends you a message saying you
              must be a member to post messages to the group. The most common reason
              for this is that you are trying to post from a address that is not
              registered with yahoo.

              To fix this, go to the ANE-2 home page (or any sub-page) and click on the
              link that says "Edit Membership" near the top of the page (just under the
              advertising banner). This will take you to a page that contains your
              optional settings for the group. Under "Step 1." there is a section
              labeled "Email Addresses". Make sure that all the addresses that you may
              want to post from are included. If not, click on the link that says "Add
              new email address" and then add any additional email addresses. Once the
              email address is registered, you should be able to post from it.

              If this doesn't fix your problem, it may be specific to MSOutlook in which
              case, since I don't use Outlook, you're on your own.

              Bob Whiting
              whiting@...
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.