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

tc-list Recovering the Invisible?

Expand Messages
  • Wieland Willker
    There are several methods which allow one to recover bits of otherwise invisible letters on a papyrus. I am not familiar with these techniques. I vaguely
    Message 1 of 10 , Oct 1, 1998
    • 0 Attachment
      There are several methods which allow one to recover bits of otherwise
      invisible letters on a papyrus.
      I am not familiar with these techniques.
      I vaguely remember IR and UV light analyses.
      Can someone please point me to any literature on this topic?

      Best wishes
      Wieland
    • Thomas J. Kraus
      Dear Wieland, *invisible* letters have always been a problem for papyrologists. Just remember Tischendorf´s go on Codex Ephraemi Syri rescriptus applying
      Message 2 of 10 , Oct 7, 1998
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Wieland,
        *invisible* letters have always been a problem for papyrologists. Just
        remember Tischendorf´s go on Codex Ephraemi Syri rescriptus applying
        Gioberti´s tincture (ammonium hydrosulphid) to it and by that intensifying
        some of the ingredients of the ancient ink while destroying some of the
        other material (Ephraem´s text and the parchment as well).
        You mentioned IR and UV. They only help in specific cases depending on the
        material and the faintness (ingredients) of the lettes. Never mind, they
        were a straight leap forward.
        Of course, microscopes are improving and they help a lot (nevertheless,
        the *konfokales Laserrastermikroskop*, which C.P. Thiede claims to hold a
        patent on, remains a riddle to me; no patent office could give me any
        further information about such a thing, and Thiede ...). There are good
        opportunities to identify blots and traces of ink, if you make a
        high-quality photo of your fragment, digitalize it (almost the same step),
        and try to reproduce it with applicable software or printers (you lose a
        massive amount of quality by that).
        Have you heard of the new procedure called *Mondo nuovo*? Specific
        photographies of one and the same manuscript are digitalized only carrying
        the spectral colours in all ranges from infrared to ultraviolet light,
        digitalized, and then the diverging colours on the many photographies are
        brought together by the new software (also called *Mondo nuovo*). The
        software was developed by scholars in Bologna and Parma and is applicable
        for parchment only (as far as I know). Recently, some newspaper articles
        mentioned it (DIE ZEIT, no. 30, 16 july 1998, page 34; SZ, no. 171, page
        V2/9). But a digitalized page of a parchment codex will cost about 1,000
        pounds sterling!
        For other computerizing procedures consult:
        A. Lange, Computer aided text-reconstruction and transcription.
        CATT-manual, Tuebingen 1993.
        A. Lange, Computer aided text-reconstruction (CATT) developed with the
        Dead Sea Scrolls, in: New Qumran texts and studies. Proceedings of the
        First Meeting of the International Organization for Qumran Studies, Paris
        1992, StTDJ 21, Leiden-New York-Cologne 1994, pp. 223-232.
        With a main focus on reconstructing fragmented texts:
        I.A. Moir, S. Michaelson and A.Q. Morton, Scriptures. The Use of Computers
        for Fragment Location, in: ZPE 17, 1975, 119-124.
        Concentrating on the restauration of manuscripts:
        H. Harrauer, Bericht über das 1. Wiener Symposium fuer
        Papyrusrestaurierung, Wien 1985.

        I hope that this is of any help for you and that my `messy´ confusing
        writing isn´t any problem. Sorry, I do not remember any further specific
        literature dealing with your issue.

        Best wishes, good luck,
        Thomas


        Universität Regensburg
        Kath.-theol. Fakultät
        Universitätsstr. 31
        D-93053 Regensburg

        Tel. + 49 941 943 36 90
        Fax. + 49 941 943 19 86
        thomas-juergen.kraus@...-regensburg.de
      • Jim Deardorff
        I came across a peculiarity here that perhaps someone can explain. The phrase KAI THS PARAYIDOS, or and of the plate, is listed by N-A 27 as being supported
        Message 3 of 10 , Oct 7, 1998
        • 0 Attachment
          I came across a peculiarity here that perhaps someone can explain. The
          phrase KAI THS PARAYIDOS, or "and of the plate," is listed by N-A 27 as
          being supported by aleph, B and others, but is left out of the text. Yet
          its ms support seems stronger, does it not, than for omitting it. Did
          ordinary logic, then, play a role here, in that it does not make very much
          sense to speak of a plate having an interior?

          Jim Deardorff
          Oregon State University
          http://www.proaxis.com/~deardorj
        • Robert B. Waltz
          ... The official explanation for this variant in the UBS commentary is: The weight of external evidence appears to support the longer text. At the same time
          Message 4 of 10 , Oct 7, 1998
          • 0 Attachment
            On Wed, 7 Oct 1998, Jim Deardorff <deardorj@...> wrote:

            >I came across a peculiarity here that perhaps someone can explain. The
            >phrase KAI THS PARAYIDOS, or "and of the plate," is listed by N-A 27 as
            >being supported by aleph, B and others, but is left out of the text. Yet
            >its ms support seems stronger, does it not, than for omitting it. Did
            >ordinary logic, then, play a role here, in that it does not make very much
            >sense to speak of a plate having an interior?

            The official explanation for this variant in the UBS commentary is:

            The weight of external evidence appears to support the longer
            text. At the same time the presence of AUTOU (instead of
            AUTWN) in B* f13 28 al seems to be a hint that the archetype
            lacked KAI THS PAROYIDOS. On balance, there is a slight
            probability that the words were inserted by copyists from
            ver. 25.

            (Note: I had, obviously, to transliterate the accented lower-case
            Greek of the Commentary.)

            The committee labelled this a D decision in both the fourth and
            fifth editions, meaning that they really don't know what the
            original text is.

            Looking solely at the external evidence, I incline, very slightly,
            to agree with them. This reading is clearly that of the "Caesarean"
            witnesses, and all the other types are split. At least, that's
            my top-of-the-head reaction; if I looked at it in more detail, I
            might well change my mind. :-)

            -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-

            Robert B. Waltz
            waltzmn@...

            Want more loudmouthed opinions about textual criticism?
            Try my web page: http://www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn
            (A site inspired by the Encyclopedia of NT Textual Criticism)
          • Carlton Winbery
            ... I wonder also if Luke 11:39 might have influenced a scribe or the tradition behind both Luke and Matt (maybe Q?). In Luke there a different word for plate,
            Message 5 of 10 , Oct 7, 1998
            • 0 Attachment
              >On Wed, 7 Oct 1998, Jim Deardorff <deardorj@...> wrote:
              >
              >>I came across a peculiarity here that perhaps someone can explain. The
              >>phrase KAI THS PARAYIDOS, or "and of the plate," is listed by N-A 27 as
              >>being supported by aleph, B and others, but is left out of the text. Yet
              >>its ms support seems stronger, does it not, than for omitting it. Did
              >>ordinary logic, then, play a role here, in that it does not make very much
              >>sense to speak of a plate having an interior?
              >
              >The official explanation for this variant in the UBS commentary is:
              >
              > The weight of external evidence appears to support the longer
              > text. At the same time the presence of AUTOU (instead of
              > AUTWN) in B* f13 28 al seems to be a hint that the archetype
              > lacked KAI THS PAROYIDOS. On balance, there is a slight
              > probability that the words were inserted by copyists from
              > ver. 25.
              >
              >(Note: I had, obviously, to transliterate the accented lower-case
              >Greek of the Commentary.)
              >
              >The committee labelled this a D decision in both the fourth and
              >fifth editions, meaning that they really don't know what the
              >original text is.
              >
              >Looking solely at the external evidence, I incline, very slightly,
              >to agree with them. This reading is clearly that of the "Caesarean"
              >witnesses, and all the other types are split. At least, that's
              >my top-of-the-head reaction; if I looked at it in more detail, I
              >might well change my mind. :-)

              I wonder also if Luke 11:39 might have influenced a scribe or the tradition
              behind both Luke and Matt (maybe Q?). In Luke there a different word for
              plate, TOU PINAKOS. Perhaps someone will also straighten out the fact that
              in Luke, they are commanded to give those dirty things inside the cup for
              alms.


              Carlton L. Winbery
              Fogleman Professor of Religion
              Louisiana College
              Pineville, LA 71359
              winberyc@...
              winbery@...
            • William L. Petersen
              It might be worth point out that the Eastman Kodak company used to have a series of professional handbooks on infrared photography and UV photography. They
              Message 6 of 10 , Oct 7, 1998
              • 0 Attachment
                It might be worth point out that the Eastman Kodak company used to have a
                series of professional "handbooks" on infrared photography and UV
                photography. They were available at a nominal price (each was 30 pp. or
                so), and were done with a commercial goal in view: to encourage the sale
                of IR film and UV etc. filters.

                Twenty-five years ago, when I wrote to the FBI about advanced photography
                techniques for detecting faint MS writing, they directed me to Kodak...so
                if it's good enough for them...

                Digitizing (and chromatic and "angle" recording of images, which are then
                "digitally" reassembled) have surpassed--to the best of my knowledge--the
                traditional photographic techniques. Some of this has been done with parts
                of the Dead Sea materials.

                --Petersen, Penn State Univ.
                Cheers! --Bill.

                WLP1@...
                865-7773
              • Mike Bossingham
                Hi, I saw on TV here in the UK, some work done by the British Library on the Beowolf manuscript. They managed to recover text in almost impossible conditions
                Message 7 of 10 , Oct 7, 1998
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hi,

                  I saw on TV here in the UK, some work done by the
                  British Library on the Beowolf manuscript. They managed
                  to recover text in almost impossible conditions

                  It may be worth contacting them.

                  Regards

                  Mike Bossingham
                  Maidenhead
                • Robert B. Waltz
                  Well, I made a mistake on this thread. I see that I wrote ... That first sentence should, of course, have read The [UBS] committee labelled this a D decision
                  Message 8 of 10 , Oct 8, 1998
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Well, I made a mistake on this thread. I see that I wrote

                    >>The committee labelled this a D decision in both the fourth and
                    >>fifth editions, meaning that they really don't know what the
                    >>original text is.

                    That first sentence should, of course, have read

                    The [UBS] committee labelled this a D decision in both the THIRD and
                    FOURTH editions.

                    Guess I'm expecting an upsurge in inflation again. :-)

                    -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-

                    Robert B. Waltz
                    waltzmn@...

                    Want more loudmouthed opinions about textual criticism?
                    Try my web page: http://www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn
                    (A site inspired by the Encyclopedia of NT Textual Criticism)
                  • Mark Goodacre
                    ... On the first point, the IQP s Critical Text of Q 11.39b reads THS PAROYIDOS with Matthew rather than TOU PINAKOS with Luke. I am interested by the
                    Message 9 of 10 , Oct 9, 1998
                    • 0 Attachment
                      On 7 Oct 98 at 21:44, Carlton Winbery wrote:

                      > I wonder also if Luke 11:39 might have influenced a scribe or the tradition
                      > behind both Luke and Matt (maybe Q?). In Luke there a different word for
                      > plate, TOU PINAKOS. Perhaps someone will also straighten out the fact that in
                      > Luke, they are commanded to give those dirty things inside the cup for alms.

                      On the first point, the IQP's Critical Text of Q 11.39b reads THS PAROYIDOS
                      with Matthew rather than TOU PINAKOS with Luke. I am interested by the
                      suggestion that Q might have influenced a scribe of Matthew (if I read the
                      words above correctly) -- on what grounds could one establish the likelihood of
                      that?

                      On the second point, it seems more likely that Luke 11.41 is referring to the
                      inner Pharisee than to the inner cup. Turner suggests that one take TA ENONTA
                      as an adverbial accusative, thus TA ENONTA DOTE ELEHMOSUNHN will mean something
                      like "Give alms inwardly", a theme with a clearly Lukan character and
                      paralleled not far away in 12.33-34. Thus we should probably see Luke 11.41as a
                      Lukan redaction of the saying found in Q (so Tuckett and Kloppenborg) or
                      Matthew (so Goulder).

                      Mark
                      --------------------------------------
                      Dr Mark Goodacre mailto:M.S.Goodacre@...
                      Dept of Theology Tel: +44 (0)121 414 7512
                      University of Birmingham Fax: +44 (0)121 414 6866
                      Birmingham B15 2TT
                      United Kingdom

                      Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/goodacre
                      World Without Q: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/q
                    • Ulrich Schmid
                      ... tradition ... for ... that in ... alms. ... PAROYIDOS ... the ... likelihood of ... No way! Assimilation to the immediate context (Mt 23.25) seems the most
                      Message 10 of 10 , Oct 9, 1998
                      • 0 Attachment
                        On Fri, 9 Oct 1998, Mark Goodacre wrote:

                        > On 7 Oct 98 at 21:44, Carlton Winbery wrote:
                        >
                        > > I wonder also if Luke 11:39 might have influenced a scribe or the
                        tradition
                        > > behind both Luke and Matt (maybe Q?). In Luke there a different word
                        for
                        > > plate, TOU PINAKOS. Perhaps someone will also straighten out the fact
                        that in
                        > > Luke, they are commanded to give those dirty things inside the cup for
                        alms.
                        >
                        > On the first point, the IQP's Critical Text of Q 11.39b reads THS
                        PAROYIDOS
                        > with Matthew rather than TOU PINAKOS with Luke. I am interested by the
                        > suggestion that Q might have influenced a scribe of Matthew (if I read
                        the
                        > words above correctly) -- on what grounds could one establish the
                        likelihood of
                        > that?

                        No way! Assimilation to the immediate context (Mt 23.25) seems the most
                        likely explanation (if I read the words above correctly).

                        Ulrich Schmid
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.