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

P.S. re. Characteristics of Lectionaries

Expand Messages
  • James Snapp, Jr.
    JM, I just remembered an exception: a Latin witness, Liber Comicus, is a lectionary; nevertheless it was assigned the letter t (the same way that Codex
    Message 1 of 10 , Jan 3, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      JM,

      I just remembered an exception: a Latin witness, "Liber Comicus," is a
      lectionary; nevertheless it was assigned the letter "t" (the same way
      that Codex Vercellensis = "a" and Bobbiensis = "k"). Briefly looking
      over the "Codices Graeci et Latini" list in NA-27, it looks like Old
      Latin "r" and maybe some others fit this description also.

      Yours in Christ,

      James Snapp, Jr.
      Curtisville Christian Church
      Tipton, Indiana (USA)
      www.curtisvillechristian.org/KataMarkon.html
    • Peter M. Head
      ... Basically yes. ... Peter M. Head, PhD Sir Kirby Laing Senior Lecturer in New Testament Tyndale House 36 Selwyn Gardens Cambridge CB3 9BA 01223 566601
      Message 2 of 10 , Jan 4, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        At 21:50 03/01/2008, you wrote:
        >Thank you for your response, Peter. By "basically yes"
        >I'm assuming you mean that, basically yes, mss. are
        >classified by text critics as lectionaries solely on
        >the basis of the form of the their text (which is
        >arranged according to the way the text was to be read
        >at public worship during the course of the liturgical
        >year as opposed to the order in which the text was
        >originally composed). This would make the answer to
        >the converse question basically no. That is to say,
        >continuous-text mss., regardless of whether they
        >contain indications that the ms. was used as a
        >lectionary (e.g., they may contain extraneous text
        >like incipits/excipits, hymns, or liturgical
        >directives), are not classed as lectionaries by text
        >critics. Members of the first group would have the
        >letter "l" (for "lectionary") prepended to their
        >classification numbers while the latter group would
        >not have the "l" prepended. Have I understood
        >correctly?

        Basically yes.


        >I'll be having a look at the article you mention.
        >Thank you for bringing it to my attention.
        >
        >Sincerely,
        >James
        >
        >--- "Peter M. Head" <pmh15@...> wrote:
        >
        > > I think the basic answer is 'yes'. If you want
        > > something to read I
        > > would suggest the essay on lectionaries in Ehrman &
        > > Holmes, The Text
        > > of the NT in Contemporary Research.
        > >
        > > Cheers
        > >
        > > Peter
        > >
        > > At 15:36 02/01/2008, you wrote:
        > > >Several days have passed since I made this query
        > > >regarding a matter very fundamental to modern NT
        > > text
        > > >criticism. After all, aren't something like 50% of
        > > all
        > > >extant NT mss. classified as lectionaries? Surely
        > > >someone on this list can provide some response--at
        > > the
        > > >least something like "you really need to address
        > > >authorityX regarding this question." I see, for
        > > >example, that Peter Head, who subscribes to this
        > > list,
        > > >has a web page on lectionaries. Can you offer any
        > > sort
        > > >of information in response to my query, Peter?
        > > Anyone
        > > >else?
        > > >
        > > >Thank you,
        > > >James
        > > >
        > > >--- James Miller <jamtata@...> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > > I recently began a thread raising the question
        > > of
        > > > > the
        > > > > relation of lectionary mss. to the Majority
        > > Text. As
        > > > > frequently happens, I've discovered that, for
        > > that
        > > > > discussion to proceed, some preliminary
        > > questions
        > > > > have
        > > > > to be resolved. Chief among those questions is
        > > the
        > > > > following: what, exactly, for text critics,
        > > > > identifies
        > > > > a ms. as a lectionary ms.?
        > > > >
        > > > > Within this thread, I would like to ask in
        > > > > particular
        > > > > whether mss. are classed as lectionaries purely
        > > on
        > > > > the
        > > > > basis of their form. In other words, some mss.
        > > > > containing the text of the NT do not have their
        > > text
        > > > > arranged in the order of the NT's found on most
        > > > > modern
        > > > > bookshelves--the order in which, incidentally,
        > > it
        > > > > seems likely the NT authors originally composed
        > > > > these
        > > > > works. Rather, in the mss. in question, the text
        > > is
        > > > > ordered according to the way the text is to be
        > > read
        > > > > out at public worship services during the course
        > > of
        > > > > the liturgical year.
        > > > >
        > > > > There might be additional indications that a
        > > given
        > > > > ms.
        > > > > is a lectionary ms., such as the presence of
        > > > > seemingly
        > > > > extraneous text; incipits and/or excipits for
        > > each
        > > > > lesson, liturgical directives or verses from
        > > other
        > > > > parts of the Bible that were sung as hymns in
        > > > > connection with the reading. But for now I want
        > > to
        > > > > disregard those indicators and focus exclusively
        > > on
        > > > > the form or ordering of the text contained in
        > > the
        > > > > mss.
        > > > >
        > > > > It seems clear that the mss. with this
        > > non-original
        > > > > ordering were lectionaries, i.e., they were
        > > books
        > > > > produced to aid in reading the biblical text at
        > > > > public
        > > > > worship services. My question regards the role
        > > the
        > > > > ordering of the text plays in text critics's
        > > > > classification of these mss. as lectionaries.
        > > > >
        > > > > Clearly this ordering plays a role in the
        > > > > classification of a ms. as a lectionary. I doubt
        > > any
        > > > > text critic, coming across such a ms., would be
        > > > > disinclined to consider it a lectionary and to
        > > group
        > > > > it among other mss. having the same form. But my
        > > > > question is whether the ordering of the text is
        > > the
        > > > > sole criterion upon which text critics classify
        > > a
        > > > > ms.
        > > > > as a lectionary?
        > > > >
        > > > > To put the question conversely. There do seem to
        > > be
        > > > > mss. that have the text of the Gospels or
        > > Epistles
        > > > > in
        > > > > the order found in most modern Bibles, but that,
        > > at
        > > > > the same time, were clearly read from at public
        > > > > worship services (e.g., as indicated by the
        > > presence
        > > > > of incipits and excipits written in the
        > > margins).
        > > > > Could such a ms., despite the order of its text,
        > > be
        > > > > classed by text critics as a lectionary ms.? Are
        > > > > there
        > > > > any such mss. included by text critics who have
        > > > > assigned sigla to NT mss., among the group with
        > > the
        > > > > italicized letter "l" (abbreviation for
        > > > > "lectionary")
        > > > > preceding the ms. number? Or do all those with
        > > the
        > > > > "l"
        > > > > prepended have their text arranged according to
        > > the
        > > > > progression of an annual liturgical cycle?
        > > > >
        > > > > To provide some basis for any discussion that
        > > may
        > > > > arise from this thread, I provide the following
        > > link
        > > > > that contains information about the
        > > lectionaries:
        > > > >
        > >
        > >http://www.skypoint.com/members/waltzmn/Lectionary.html
        > > > > . In that article, it is stated that: "Copying a
        > > > > lectionary from a continuous text is difficult.
        > > One
        > > > > is
        > > > > forced to constantly skip around in the
        > > document.
        > > > > This
        > > > > does not mean that lectionaries are never copied
        > > in
        > > > > this way; the existence of the Ferrar Lectionary
        > > > > (l547), which has a text associated with f13,
        > > > > demonstrates this point. But it is reasonable to
        > > > > assume that the large majority of lectionaries
        > > were
        > > > > copied from other lectionaries, and only
        > > > > occasionally
        > > > > compared with continuous-text manuscripts."
        > > > >
        > > > > The presumption in this quotation regarding form
        > > > > seems
        > > > > to be that lectionary mss. are identified by the
        > > > > form
        > > > > or ordering of their text. The author contrasts
        > > the
        > > > > lectionaries in a sort of generic way with
        > > > > continuous-text witnesses. Has this author
        > > > > accurately
        > > > > represented the views of text critics in
        > > implying
        > > > > that
        > > > > lectionary mss. are identified by the ordering
        > > of
        > > > > the
        > > > > text they contain, which contrasts with the
        > > ordering
        > > > > of continuous-text witnesses, or not?
        > > > >
        > > > > C'mon text critics. Get over your holiday
        > > hangovers
        > > > > and offer some input here! :)
        > > > >
        > > > > Thanks,
        > > > > James
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > >
        > >___________________________________________________________________
        > _________________
        > > > > Be a better friend, newshound, and
        > > > > know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
        > > > >
        > >
        > >http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > >
        > >___________________________________________________________________
        > _________________
        > > >Looking for last minute shopping deals?
        > > >Find them fast with Yahoo!
        > > >Search.
        > >
        >http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >Yahoo! Groups Links
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > >
        > > Peter M. Head, PhD
        > > Sir Kirby Laing Senior Lecturer in New Testament
        > > Tyndale House
        > > 36 Selwyn Gardens
        > > Cambridge CB3 9BA
        > > 01223 566601
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >____________________________________________________________________________________
        >Be a better friend, newshound, and
        >know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it
        >now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >

        Peter M. Head, PhD
        Sir Kirby Laing Senior Lecturer in New Testament
        Tyndale House
        36 Selwyn Gardens
        Cambridge CB3 9BA
        01223 566601
      • Daniel Buck
        ... beginnings and endings of readings
        Message 3 of 10 , Jan 8, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, William Warren <WFWarren@...>
          wrote:
          > Many of our continuous text mss have markings (ARCH, TELOS) for the
          beginnings and endings of readings<

          This discussion brings up another interesting question relating to the
          transmission of the NT text:

          What is the chronological textual evidence for the incorporation of
          gospel- and epistle-ending 'amens' into continuous-text mss, and what
          is the correlation, if any, to their presence in lectionaries?

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