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

Re: tc-list Provenance of mss

Expand Messages
  • Andrew Payne
    I understand what you mean, but isn t this highly dependent on visual contact with the exemplar? By this, itacisms and the like would not be nearly as
    Message 1 of 5 , Feb 4, 1999
    • 0 Attachment
      I understand what you mean, but isn't this highly dependent on visual contact with
      the exemplar? By this, itacisms and the like would not be nearly as constant with
      someone reading from the exemplar and the scribe copying what he heard (try
      collating with another person). Maybe you have something and I'm reluctant to admit
      it. But, I'm not so sure Frederik Wisse was that successful either.

      Andrew Payne

      "Dr. Ulrich Schmid" wrote:

      > Tim Finney wrote:
      > [...]
      > > Some implications:
      > >
      > > (1) There _is_ such a thing as a local text. The maps show that there
      > > are three main groups. (After much discussion I associate these, very
      > > tentatively, with Egypt, Palestine, and Constantinople/Antioch.)
      > >
      > > (2) The spelling maps indicate manuscript provenance. For your interest
      > > (and dismay?), Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, Vaticanus, and Claromontanus all
      > > are neighbours of P46 and P13 in the spelling perspective. That is, they
      > > were all written in Egypt.
      >
      > Thanks Tim, that sounds interesting. One immetidate question arises, however:
      > How do the dates of the MSS relate to your spelling map? Is it possible to
      > exclude *vertical* changes of spelling fashions in favour of more *horizontally*
      > arranged geographic distribution?
      >
      > ------------------------------------------
      > Dr. Ulrich Schmid
      > U.B.Schmid@...
    • Dr. Ulrich Schmid
      Message 2 of 5 , Feb 5, 1999
      • 0 Attachment
        Maybe my point was not clear enough, but it was basically the same point Bob
        Waltz addressed. The clusters on a spelling map *may* represent chronological
        instead of geographical distribution. What are the reasons to favour the one
        explanation over the other?

        Another question arises with respect to Tim's placing of Codex Alexandrinus
        among the "Egyptian" manuscripts. This may well be correct on the level of the
        individual manuscript, but what about the text it represents? Since the
        geographical associations (Egypt, Palestine, Constantinople) are so closely
        related to very prominent associations of "text-types", I wonder what the
        distribution in the Gospels might look like. Assuming for the moment the same
        groupings on a spelling map for Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, AND Alexandrinus within
        the Gospels, I wonder what the geographical associations may explain (imply?,
        represent?), for the textual affiliations certainly change.

        Ulrich

        Andrew Payne wrote:
        > I understand what you mean, but isn't this highly dependent on visual contact
        > with
        > the exemplar? By this, itacisms and the like would not be nearly as constant
        > with
        > someone reading from the exemplar and the scribe copying what he heard (try
        > collating with another person). Maybe you have something and I'm reluctant
        > to admit
        > it. But, I'm not so sure Frederik Wisse was that successful either.
        >
        > Andrew Payne
        >
        > "Dr. Ulrich Schmid" wrote:
        >
        > > Tim Finney wrote:
        > > [...]
        > > > Some implications:
        > > >
        > > > (1) There _is_ such a thing as a local text. The maps show that there
        > > > are three main groups. (After much discussion I associate these, very
        > > > tentatively, with Egypt, Palestine, and Constantinople/Antioch.)
        > > >
        > > > (2) The spelling maps indicate manuscript provenance. For your interest
        > > > (and dismay?), Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, Vaticanus, and Claromontanus all
        > > > are neighbours of P46 and P13 in the spelling perspective. That is, they
        > > > were all written in Egypt.
        > >
        > > Thanks Tim, that sounds interesting. One immetidate question arises,
        > however:
        > > How do the dates of the MSS relate to your spelling map? Is it possible to
        > > exclude *vertical* changes of spelling fashions in favour of more
        > *horizontally*
        > > arranged geographic distribution?
        > >
        > > ------------------------------------------
        > > Dr. Ulrich Schmid
        > > U.B.Schmid@...
        >

        ------------------------------------------
        Dr. Ulrich Schmid
        U.B.Schmid@...
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.