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

Re: Scribal peculiarities

Expand Messages
  • mr.scrivener
    Greetings Mr Wasserman: I have two leads for you: (1) the Jude inscription looks painfully like the Egyptian practice found in Christian Magic amulets and
    Message 1 of 26 , Jun 7, 2006
      Greetings Mr Wasserman:

      I have two leads for you:

      (1) the Jude inscription looks painfully like the Egyptian practice
      found in 'Christian Magic' amulets and small scrolls. I suggest you
      start with the two following books as an introduction to the subject:

      Ancient Christian Magic (Coptic texts of ritual power) Edited by
      Meyer & Smith (Harper Collins 1994), and

      Medicine, Miracle & Magic in NT Times by H.C. Kee.(Cambridge UP 1986-
      1990)

      Also useful might be:
      Paganism & Christianity 100-425 C.E. A Sourcebook Macmullen & Lane

      The writing of religious texts backwards or in patterns was very
      common throughout Egypt and the Aegean in the period.

      (2) Studying Vaticanus I have come to the conclusion that the 'NT'
      Obelisk (the one you describe is a lemniscus =dot/dot)has a variety
      of uses but mostly as a generic indicator of an accidental omission
      corrected in the margin. there is a good introduction to the changes
      in meaning over periods and places here:

      http://www.christianforums.com/t2994963-asterisk-and-obelus-three-
      different-usages.html





      --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, Tommy Wasserman <tomwas@...>
      wrote:
      >
      > I have come across a large number of scribal peculiarities through
      the
      > years. Here are two which someone might help me with:
      >
      > 1) in an MS the final AMHN (in Jude) is written backwards on three
      > lines:
      >
      > HN
      > M
      > A
      >
      > Has anyone seen anything similar?
      >
      > 2) In some minuscule MSS there is a sign in the margin, •/•, plus a
      > reading. I interpret the sign as an "obelus periestigmenos." The
      > question is whether this sign has the same function over time, i.e.
      in
      > the early uncials and in the minuscules, respectively. In short, I
      am
      > not sure if it unequivocally refers to a correction of the text (or
      > might be a reference to an alternative reading).
      >
      > Any ideas?
      >
      > With regards
      >
      > Tommy Wasserman
      > Centre for Theology and Religious Studies
      > Lund University
      > Sweden
      >
    • mr.scrivener
      Dear Mr. Brown: Thank you for your prompt reply: However, you seem to have left an ambiguity - Mr Woodward s ideas may be without merit, but are the marks just
      Message 2 of 26 , Jun 7, 2006
        Dear Mr. Brown:

        Thank you for your prompt reply:
        However, you seem to have left an ambiguity -
        Mr Woodward's ideas may be without merit,
        but are the marks just dust specks, imperfections in the photos,
        or actual scribal scribbles, whatever their meaning?
        Could you clarify?

        Still perplexed,
        Eeyore.

        --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, Timothy Arthur Brown
        <t.a.brown@...> wrote:
        >
        > Hello,
        >
        > Bruce Prior and I are in the process of finishing up pre-press work
        on
        > the Freer Gospels transcription now. You can expect to see an
        edition
        > available at this year's SBL annual meeting in Washington, DC. The
        new
        > images I alluded to are, as far as I know, still intended for
        public
        > release this November as well. The newest images are those taken
        by the
        > Freer/Sackler photography department and I think it's safe to
        assume
        > that this image library will be published by the Freer/Sackler
        Gallery
        > itself.
        >
        > And now concerning Woodard's "Kodex W". . . Bruce and I first
        learned of
        > Woodard's theories a couple of years ago. The claims are wild, but
        we
        > agreed that such claims, regardless how unbelievable, ought not be
        > automatically rejected simply because they do not conform to our
        current
        > understanding of the manuscript. We had at our disposal the tools
        and
        > access necessary to examine these claims, so we decided to do so.
        We
        > were in contact with Lee Woodard by phone and by e-mail and we each
        had
        > a copy of his book. Becoming thus fully informed of his claims, we
        > examined high resolution images of the relevant parts of the codex
        and
        > were unable to substantiate any of Woodard's theories. Since this
        > examination, I have had opportunity to access the original at the
        Freer
        > Gallery and must still conclude that Woodard's ideas are without
        merit.
        >
        > Sincerely,
        >
        > T. A. Brown
        > Franconia, New Hampshire USA
        >
        >
        >
        > mr.scrivener wrote:
        >
        > > --------------------
        > > Dear Mr. Brown:
        > >
        > > In this message (last year), you mentioned publishing
        transcriptions
        > > of Codex W, as well as a possible new Facsimile edition available
        on
        > > disk by the '2006 SBL Meetings..'. Well, its June 2006, and I was
        > > wondering how your projects are coming along.
        > >
        > > ----------------------
        > > Also, is anyone aware of the following website, which claims to
        have
        > > discovered 'seals' or 'signatures' of the scribes who wrote Codex
        W
        > > (the Gospel mss)?
        > >
        > > http://www.washington-codex.org/woodard_kodex_article_1.htm
        > > <http://www.washington-codex.org/woodard_kodex_article_1.htm>
        > >
        > > Although the site makes many wild claims, and dates the Gospel
        Codex
        > > W too early, surely just the existance of these 'seals' at the
        > > beginning and end of each gospel in the codex require a thorough
        > > investigation and proper explanation.
        > >
        > > Any ideas?
        > >
        > > Curiosity is killing me here...
        > > Eeyore
        > >
        > > ------------------------------
        >
      • Wieland Willker
        ... I think in Vaticanus it represents a correction. In Vaticanus also exists a wavy sign (vertical ~) which might indicate an explanation of some kind:
        Message 3 of 26 , Jun 8, 2006
          Tommy Wasserman wrote:
          > 2) In some minuscule MSS there is a sign in the margin, •/•,
          > plus a reading.

          I think in Vaticanus it represents a correction.

          In Vaticanus also exists a wavy sign (vertical ~) which might indicate an explanation of some kind:
          http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/Vaticanus/dittographies.html
          (image on the right)

          Just for completeness sake, in Vaticanus also another sign appears once:
          http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/Vaticanus/wordorder.html


          Best wishes
          Wieland
          <><
          ------------------------------------------------
          Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
          mailto:willker@...-bremen.de
          http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
          Textcritical commentary:
          http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html
        • Tommy Wasserman
          ... Thank you mr. scrivener (is that your real name?). Sorry I was not clear - the MS in question is a medieval Greek continuous-text minuscule with no other
          Message 4 of 26 , Jun 8, 2006
            mr.scrivener wrote:

            >
            > Greetings Mr Wasserman:
            >
            > I have two leads for you:
            >
            > (1) the Jude inscription looks painfully like the Egyptian practice
            > found in 'Christian Magic' amulets and small scrolls.

            Thank you mr. scrivener (is that your real name?). Sorry I was not
            clear - the MS in question is a medieval Greek continuous-text
            minuscule with no other signs of "magic" use whatsoever, a subject of
            which I am otherwise quite familiar with.

            > I suggest you
            >
            > (2) Studying Vaticanus I have come to the conclusion that the 'NT'
            > Obelisk (the one you describe is a lemniscus =dot/dot)has a variety
            > of uses but mostly as a generic indicator of an accidental omission
            > corrected in the margin. there is a good introduction to the changes
            > in meaning over periods and places here:

            I found the following information about the symbol in "Transformed Into
            His Image" in Grace Theological Journal 2.2 (Fall 1981) 230-31 which
            made me hesitat to equal the function to that in the early uncials:

            A partial explanation of the symbol is given by Diogenes
            Laertius (iii, 66). He names and describes the use of various signs in a
            text of Plato; in regard to this sign he says: "the obelos
            periestigmenos is for random
            rejections (of passages)." Nowhere has ↓ been found among literary
            papyri of Classical
            authors.

            The use of both signs, however, is frequent in Biblical and
            Christian papyri. Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus demonstrate
            the frequent use of both signs, sometimes together and sometimes
            separately, but always where a correction has been made. When
            used together, ↓ stands in the margin and •/•. marks the precise place
            in
            the line for the correction.

            Henry A. Sanders notes the use of •/•. in some biblical manuscripts
            dated to the fourth or early fifth century, marking the location
            of the omission and then repeated in the margin giving the words to
            be supplied.

            An exact parallel to P.Rob. inv. 28 is described in P. Tura, where ↓
            and •/•. stand together in the margin at the beginning of the part to be
            supplied.

            A somewhat later function of •/• is described by Isidore (A.D. 602-
            36), bishop of Seville (1.21): Lemniscus, id est, virgula inter geminos
            punctos jacens, opponitur in his locis, quae sacrae Scripturae
            interpretes
            eadem sensu, sed diversis sermonibus transtulerent, "The
            lemniscus, that is a stick lying between two points, is placed in those
            places which the interpreters of Holy Scriptures transcribe in the
            same sense, but with different expressions."

            end of citation

            With regards

            Tommy Wasserman
            Centre for Theology and Religious Studies
            Lund University
            Sweden
          • Timothy Arthur Brown
            Hello, The claims that Woodard makes are so numerous that a full response would require more attention than his ideas deserve. To answer you generally, some
            Message 5 of 26 , Jun 8, 2006
              Hello,

              The claims that Woodard makes are so numerous that a full response would require more attention than his ideas deserve.  To answer you generally, some of what Woodard is seeing is offset, that is, ink which has cross-printed from the facing page; in other instances he is reading things into mere stains in the parchment; sometimes he's attributing special significance to the quite typical scribal decorations of a colophon; and he even finds minute hidden messages in the ragged shapes of letters that have suffered the effects of time and use.

              I hope it is clear that Bruce Prior and I investigated Woodard's claims because we feel responsible to consult secondary sources in our work and, for the sake of thoroughness, needed to make a careful, open-minded examination of Woodard's work as well.  As it turns out, Woodard's work proved unworthy of the time we invested in it.

              If you would like more detail, you could purchase Woodard's book (though I dislike the idea of giving him undue encouragement) and then purchase the new set of images which will hopefully be made available before the end of the year.  This will enable you to examine his claims yourself.

              Yours sincerely,

              T. A. Brown
              Franconia, New Hampshire  USA



              mr.scrivener wrote:

              Dear Mr. Brown:

              Thank you for your prompt reply:
              However, you seem to have left an ambiguity -
              Mr Woodward's ideas may be without merit,
              but are the marks just dust specks, imperfections in the photos,
              or actual scribal scribbles, whatever their meaning?
              Could you clarify?

              Still perplexed,
              Eeyore.

              --- In textualcriticism@ yahoogroups. com, Timothy Arthur Brown
              <t.a.brown@. ..> wrote:
              >
              > Hello,
              >
              > Bruce Prior and I are in the process of finishing up pre-press work
              on
              > the Freer Gospels transcription now. You can expect to see an
              edition
              > available at this year's SBL annual meeting in Washington, DC. The
              new
              > images I alluded to are, as far as I know, still intended for
              public
              > release this November as well. The newest images are those taken
              by the
              > Freer/Sackler photography department and I think it's safe to
              assume
              > that this image library will be published by the Freer/Sackler
              Gallery
              > itself.
              >
              > And now concerning Woodard's "Kodex W". . . Bruce and I first
              learned of
              > Woodard's theories a couple of years ago. The claims are wild, but
              we
              > agreed that such claims, regardless how unbelievable, ought not be
              > automatically rejected simply because they do not conform to our
              current
              > understanding of the manuscript. We had at our disposal the tools
              and
              > access necessary to examine these claims, so we decided to do so.
              We
              > were in contact with Lee Woodard by phone and by e-mail and we each
              had
              > a copy of his book. Becoming thus fully informed of his claims, we
              > examined high resolution images of the relevant parts of the codex
              and
              > were unable to substantiate any of Woodard's theories. Since this
              > examination, I have had opportunity to access the original at the
              Freer
              > Gallery and must still conclude that Woodard's ideas are without
              merit.
              >
              > Sincerely,
              >
              > T. A. Brown
              > Franconia, New Hampshire USA
              >
              >
              >
              > mr.scrivener wrote:
              >
              > > ------------ --------
              > > Dear Mr. Brown:
              > >
              > > In this message (last year), you mentioned publishing
              transcriptions
              > > of Codex W, as well as a possible new Facsimile edition available
              on
              > > disk by the '2006 SBL Meetings..'. Well, its June 2006, and I was
              > > wondering how your projects are coming along.
              > >
              > > ------------ --------- -
              > > Also, is anyone aware of the following website, which claims to
              have
              > > discovered 'seals' or 'signatures' of the scribes who wrote Codex
              W
              > > (the Gospel mss)?
              > >
              > > http://www.washingt on-codex. org/woodard_ kodex_article_ 1.htm
              > > <http://www.washingt on-codex. org/woodard_ kodex_article_ 1.htm>
              > >
              > > Although the site makes many wild claims, and dates the Gospel
              Codex
              > > W too early, surely just the existance of these 'seals' at the
              > > beginning and end of each gospel in the codex require a thorough
              > > investigation and proper explanation.
              > >
              > > Any ideas?
              > >
              > > Curiosity is killing me here...
              > > Eeyore
              > >
              > > ------------ --------- ---------
              >


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