Re: [textualcriticism] Stephen Carlson's "Gospel Hoax" on Secret Mark
- At 01:45 AM 12/3/2005 +0000, P.M. Head wrote:
>BUT According to Smith the three hands (Madiotes, Dionysios, Anobos) appearI considered that possibility, Peter. However, the date 1779 in the
>on f.1.r and it is not at all clear to me that the right hand text in the
>photograph 5A can be f.1.r (else how can we explain the text and other pages
>facing on the left - f.1.r should be the first folio of the book). Acc to
>Smith's Catalogue (helpfully given in ET here on p100f - I assume this is an
>ET of the Greek translation of the original rather than the original english
>script) No 22 contains primarily an 18th Cent MS in a 17th Cent printed
>book. This was written on the first 11 sheets and the final 6 sheets. f.1.r
>identifies earlier owners (as we would expect, on the first opening of the
>book). Later Smith says: 'The final sheet (r), a Romanian writing with Latin
>characters, pertains to a brother of a certain Dionysios and is dated 1779.'
>It seems to me that the right hand text in the photo 5A (and front cover) is
>actually this text. It looks like a final sheet (in 5A you can see the
>backboards behind it). It clearly follows the main manuscript text (so it
>can't be f.1.r). It clearly has the date 1779 about half way down. It is not
>all very clear as to what is being said here (as I commented previously), so
>I can't confirm the other details, but the date itself would seem to prove
>this is not f.1.r but rather 'the final sheet (r)' (presumably f.17.r but
>this is not stated).
photo of MS 22 occurs within a Greek text, in Greek letters (EIS TOIS
1779 / IANOUARIOU / XION. MEGALON), not within a Romanian writing with
Also, the recto of final sheet would not be facing the binding (which,
as shown in the picture was composed of older manuscripts). Indeed,
the verso of the final sheet would be facing the binding.
For these reasons, I did not adopt the alternative identification that
you discuss here.
(The ET of the catalog in the book is my translation of the modern
Greek. It is not the original Smith had translated.)
Stephen C. Carlson mailto:scarlson@...
Author of: The Gospel Hoax, http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1932792481
- Thanks again Stephen - that is a good job and a good reply,
The photo and caption in Secret Gospel are useful here (in support of your
case - clearer than the photo in your book actually) and it does look like
5A is the front page of the book = f.1.r.
Together with the information you provided that:
one of whose lines reads "MONAXOU KAI ARXIMANDRITOU."
That certainly fits with Smith's catalogue description.
No names noted as yet, and also 'tacit withdrawals' on your side!
My 'tacit withdrawal' of the alternative proposal was more of a strategic
withdrawal (I'd rather try to disprove your identification than to have to
prove the alternative). But now I'm willing to acquiesce (surrender) to the
proposed identification of 5A = f.1.r. [I'd be even happier to know that
someone had seen the relevant names on this sheet as well of course, but as
a working hypothesis this does seem to be the only viable option on the table]
Presumably your confidence that the upper text is Madiotes comes from the
order of treatment in Smith's catalogue.
Cheers for now
At 02:52 PM 12/5/05, you wrote:
>At 10:28 AM 12/5/2005 +0000, Peter Head wrote:Peter M. Head, PhD
> >What you are saying is that you considered various possibilities for the
> >identification of the page in the photo 5A, including the one I have
> >proposed (but which you did not adopt). But I wonder whether there is ANY
> >positive evidence for the identification you adopt?
> >According to Smith the Madiotes sheet is:
> >a) f.1.r: i.e. the opening sheet of the whole book
>The page is either f.1.r (rightside-up) or f.17.v (upside-
>down). The orientation of the handwriting at the top of
>the page would indicate that, unless it is upside-down, it
>is the f.1.r page.
>Further confirmation of the orientation of the book comes
>from Smith's caption for the picture (SECRET GOSPEL, p.
>37) states: "The endpaper, here turned down, was a page
>from a Georgian manuscript. . . . The leather edge of the
>binding is seen at the left; the bound, modern Greek
>manuscript, at the right." The word "down" is appropriate
>if the page is f.1.r; it is inappropriate if the page is
>f.17.v. The consistency of Smith's numbering of the pages
>in his catalog with his description of the orientation of
>the MS in his photo means that the page must be f.1.r.
>Further corroboration, should that even be necessary, comes
>from the content of the second hand (both as listed in the
>catalog and from the top-down in the MS), which is assigned
>by Smith to "the monk Dionysios, Archimandrite", one of whose
>lines reads "MONAXOU KAI ARXIMANDRITOU." [Negatively, for
>the f.17.v. identification, none of the content shown in the
>photo corresponds to "Luke, son of the blessed Panagiotos,
>the tailor (ampatzes)."]
>In light of the tacit withdrawal of the alternative proposal,
>which had confounded not only recto and verso but also Greek
>and Latin letters, I see no reasonable basis to question the
>identification of the page as f.1.r.
>Stephen C. Carlson mailto:scarlson@...
>Author of: The Gospel Hoax, http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1932792481
Sir Kirby Laing Senior Lecturer in New Testament
36 Selwyn Gardens Phone: (UK) 01223
Cambridge, CB3 9BA Fax: (UK) 01223 566608