RE: RE: Eclectic Method
> Received: from sunvax.sun.ac.za by maties4.sun.ac.za with smtp; Sat, 27 Apr
> 96 17:39:15 +0200
> Received: from graf.cc.emory.edu by SUNVAX.SUN.AC.ZA with SMTP;
> Sat, 27 Apr 1996 17:36:32 +0100 (WET-DST)
> Received: from scholar.cc.emory.edu (scholar.cc.emory.edu [184.108.40.206]) by
> graf.cc.emory.edu (8.7.3/8.6.9-950630.01osg-itd.null) with SMTP id LAA22077;
> Sat, 27 Apr 1996 11:34:45 -0400 (EDT)
> Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (5.0/SMI-SVR4)
> id AA00261; Sat, 27 Apr 1996 11:37:24 +0500
> Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 11:34:25 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Andrew Gross <aqg3222@...>
> To: tc-list@...
> Subject: RE: Eclectic Method
> In-Reply-To: <0754438249304557@...>
> Message-Id: <Pine.OSF.3.91.960427112949.10781A-100000@...>
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
> Sender: owner-tc-list@...
> Precedence: bulk
> Reply-To: tc-list@...
> On Sat, 27 Apr 1996 cook@... wrote:
> > I think OT TC must adjust to NT and for that matter Septuagintal
> > The time is ripe to reconstruct an OT critical text! I argued it in the
> > Festschrift for FC Fensham in 1986.
> > Johann Cook
> Unfortunately, our library has not yet received this volume. Would you be
> so kind as to elucidate this for us? This sounds like a fruitful line of
> discussion because (1) we can get some good discussion about the different
> needs and approaches between OT and NT text critical methodology and (2)
> we'll actually be getting some OT text critical talk going here. (I know
> I shouldn't complain, and that if I'm so curious, I should be starting
> threads myself...)
> Anyway, I'd appreciate hearing more about this.
> andrew gross
> Dear Andrew
> Three recent developments prompt rethinking of textcritical projects.
> First the whole array of new exegetical tools, not least the CATSS data
> base, which makes available Hebrew and Greek textual materials. In the same
> vein the availability of the Dead Sea materials can be mentioned. At least
> the material is available in microfiche format. It is also true that there
> has been a boom of publications of scrolls over the past 5 years (cf. my
> article in BibOr 1/2 1995, 24-35).
> The second concerns textual theory where much fruitful reflection has been
> going on of lately. The Jerusalem school (Talmon, Tov etc.) has demonstrated
> that the multiple text concept is applicable. It is just not possible to fit
> texts into hypothetical "procrustus beds". This theory is helpful as it
> takes the reality of "textual variety" serious. This reality has been
> demonstrated again by the Dead Sea scrolls.
> A prominent development is the refinement of methodology in respect of the
> use of the versions in the textual criticism. The Goettingen Septuagint
> edition is advancing steadily. The problematic Samuel books are currently
> being prepared by prof. Aejmeleaus, director of the Septuaginta Unternehmen.
> One of the most important developments in Septuagint studies has been the
> theoretical work being done re the translation technique followed by
> individual translators. This facet is currently treated differently than
> previously. There is a growing conciousness that the versions (especially the
> LXX) can be of determinitive importance for TC. However, a methodologically
> sound approach is a sine qua non. First and foremost is the acceptance of the
> fact that it (LXX) is to be read as a work in its own right, and that it is
> the first commentary on the Hebrew Bible. The "holistic" approach inter
> alia by Sanders and Van der Kooij is useful in this regard.
> These aspects also have to do with the translation technique followed in
> translation units. In this regard James Adair, who did some theoretical work
> in Stellenbosch on textual criticism, has written an excellent article in
> JNSL 20/2 (1994), 111-142 on the use of the versions in the TC of the OT. I
> propose this contribution be read as basis for further discussion.
> In the final analysis it does naturally depend on what the textcritic sets
> out to aim at. I am of the opinion that "original texts" should be
> reconstructed. The book by my colleague, FE Deist, Witnesses to the OT (pp.
> 1-9 and 81-83) is instructive in this regard. This applies also to the
> excellent works by Tov, especially his volume on Textual Criticism.
> In short the time in my opinion is right for novel approaches to TC of the
> OT. Interestingly enough prof. Pisano, one of the editors of the new BH
> Quinta, said, as an answer to my question in Cambridge 1995 whether the time
> has not come for reconstructing, that the new project actually acts as
> intermediate stage towards reconstructing!!
> Let's start "reconstructing"!
> Johann Cook
> Dept of Ancient Near Eastern Studies
> University of Stellenbosch
- The complete Hebrew Scriptures (Hebrew Bible) or TANAKH (Torah-Law,
Neviim-Prophets, Ketuvim-Writings) based on the Masoretic Hebrew text
with vowels and cantillation marks in one complete compact black hard
covered volume which measures 12 cm x 19 cm with over 1360 pages that
have been arranged according to traditional chapter and verse divisions
along with larger Hebrew letter printing and thicker paper pages for a
volume of this size. Each book is $ 20.00 (U.S.) postpaid ($ 15.50 for
the book plus $ 4.50 for postage) and can be ordered directly from:
Julian Goldberg, 260 Adelaide St., E., # 215, Toronto, Ontario, Canada