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

Re: [textualcriticism] Standard text for collation of Greek OT texts?

Expand Messages
  • Filotheu Monahul
    For me, the 1709 edition of the LXX is the best text ever. http://www.cyclopaedia.org/1709/1709biblia.html
    Message 1 of 7 , Feb 25, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      For me, the 1709 edition of the LXX is the best text ever.
      http://www.cyclopaedia.org/1709/1709biblia.html


      On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 6:37 PM, Bryan Cox <b_coxus@...> wrote:

      What is the standard text used for collating Greek OT manuscripts? Is
      Rahlf's Septuaginta used?

      Similarly, how does one go about determining which "flavor" of Greek
      OT one has (i.e., Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, etc.)?

      Thanks!
      Bryan Cox
      Plano, Tx

    • James Miller
      ... I think perhaps a false analogy is being made here (the TC situation regarding the LXX being analogized to the NT text critical situation where mss. have
      Message 2 of 7 , Feb 25, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        --- Bryan Cox <b_coxus@...> wrote:

        > What is the standard text used for collating Greek
        > OT manuscripts? Is
        > Rahlf's Septuaginta used?

        I think perhaps a false analogy is being made here
        (the TC situation regarding the LXX being analogized
        to the NT text critical situation where mss. have
        classically been collated against the TR). To get
        started in ensuring that I've understood you
        correctly, could you please say more about what you
        mean when you say "collating Greek OT manuscripts?" If
        you're looking for something like classification of
        readings into text types, such as is done in NT TC
        circles, I would remark initially that this enterprise
        seems to be in an even less well developed state in
        LXX studies than it is in NT studies. If that's what
        you're getting at, please let me know and I can make
        some more remarks in a subsequent post. If that's not
        where you're going with the question, perhaps I can
        make other contributions if you would offer further
        clarification.

        > Similarly, how does one go about determining which
        > "flavor" of Greek
        > OT one has (i.e., Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion,
        > etc.)?

        I think these sorts of characterization (of text type)
        have been only partially worked out, and even then for
        only very limited portions of the OT in Greek. The
        matter is complicated by the fact that some of the
        so-called "recensions," e.g., Theodotion, appear to
        pre-date their alleged formulators.

        James

        PS This discussion may be more appropriate to the LXX
        listserv at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lxx/


        ____________________________________________________________________________________
        Looking for last minute shopping deals?
        Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
      • Bryan Cox
        ... For example, my original thought was to collate a MS against Rahlf s Septuaginta, observing and noting any differences. On second thought, I wondered if
        Message 3 of 7 , Feb 25, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, James Miller <jamtata@...>
          > To get started in ensuring that I've understood you
          > correctly, could you please say more about what you
          > mean when you say "collating Greek OT manuscripts?"

          For example, my original thought was to collate a MS "against"
          Rahlf's Septuaginta, observing and noting any differences. On second
          thought, I wondered if Rahlf's was really the modern "standard" for
          collation. More than one person has suggested the Göttingen edition
          (as long as the texts fall within what has been completed to this
          point, which mine do).

          > If you're looking for something like classification of
          > readings into text types, such as is done in NT TC
          > circles, I would remark initially that this enterprise
          > seems to be in an even less well developed state in
          > LXX studies than it is in NT studies. If that's what
          > you're getting at, please let me know and I can make
          > some more remarks in a subsequent post.

          My second question was something along these lines, just for my own
          edification and not for what I am attempting to do. However, I
          certainly would not mind further information along these lines.

          > I think these sorts of characterization (of text type)
          > have been only partially worked out, and even then for
          > only very limited portions of the OT in Greek. The
          > matter is complicated by the fact that some of the
          > so-called "recensions," e.g., Theodotion, appear to
          > pre-date their alleged formulators.

          Interesting. I did not realize that these "recensions" had not been
          worked out (in at least in some detail) already.

          > PS This discussion may be more appropriate to the LXX
          > listserv at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lxx/

          I have posted my question there as well.

          Thanks,
          Bryan Cox
          Plano, Tx
        • James Miller
          ... Rahlfs s hand edition is a sort of trial run for the later Goettingen edition. It was meant to establish some general guidelines for the larger, more
          Message 4 of 7 , Feb 25, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            --- Bryan Cox <b_coxus@...> wrote:

            > For example, my original thought was to collate a MS
            > "against"
            > Rahlf's Septuaginta, observing and noting any
            > differences. On second
            > thought, I wondered if Rahlf's was really the modern
            > "standard" for
            > collation. More than one person has suggested the
            > Göttingen edition
            > (as long as the texts fall within what has been
            > completed to this
            > point, which mine do).

            Rahlfs's hand edition is a sort of "trial run" for the
            later Goettingen edition. It was meant to establish
            some general guidelines for the larger, more complex
            project that would follow it--like which books would
            be included, what the apparatus would be like, etc.
            Both Rahlfs's hand edition and the later Goettingen
            utilize what's called an "eclectic approach." What
            this means in practice is that the editor for any
            given book takes into consideration all significant
            readings from extant ms. evidence and chooses from
            among them the reading that seems to him, according to
            TC criteria, the most original. So, the text that
            appears in the body of any given volume is eclectic,
            meaning no particular ms. is favored over any other
            and, conversely, that the way the body of the volume
            reads cannot be found in any one ms. Alternate
            readings of significance appear in the apparatus.

            Given that basic mode of operation, I'm not really
            sure how the notion of a collation applies. Certainly
            the various ms. readings are collated against one
            another. But so far as I know there is no reference
            text--such as the TR has historically been a reference
            text against which NT mss. are collated--for either
            the Goettingen edition or Rahlfs's hand edition. If
            someone else knows differently, I would appreciate
            being informed about that.

            It may be worth noting with respect to your other
            query that the Goettingen editors do group mss.
            together in their key according to whether they show
            tendencies toward the recensions (e.g., Theodotion,
            Aquila) or Origen's revised Septuagint. The problem
            there, so far as I can see, is that no given ms. is
            thought to have the text of any given book in a pure
            form of that recension: all seem to be more or less
            contaminated. I hope I'm relating to you accurately
            the state of matters in this field.

            It seems to me that the notion of a collation with
            respect to the LXX would be more properly applied to
            something like the Larger Cambridge Septuagint (often
            called Brooke/McLean), and to its "trial run"
            predecessor, Swete's hand edition of the LXX. In that
            case, a "diplomatic approach" was taken to producing
            an edition of the LXX. What this means is that a
            single, high-quality ms. (Codex B) was chosen as the
            text to be printed in the body of the work. Many other
            mss. and authorities (the versions, patristic
            evidence) were consulted as well. But alternate
            readings, i.e., readings that differed from those
            found in B, were relegated to the apparatus. As has
            been noted, this edition of the LXX remains incomplete
            and appears to have been abandoned a few decades ago.

            > Interesting. I did not realize that these
            > "recensions" had not been
            > worked out (in at least in some detail) already.

            My area of specialization is actually LXX, but I have
            the impression that a similar state of affairs obtains
            in NT studies as well. That is to say that the notion
            of text-types is bandied about freely and even forms a
            sort of touchstone of the field. But the more closely
            one looks into what actually constitutes the type, the
            further the notion of the set type fades away. I hope
            to pose some questions along these lines soon on this
            list regarding the relation of the lectionary text to
            the Byzantine text type. In any case, I am certainly
            open to correction on this question if I've portrayed
            matters inaccurately.

            I'll look forward to seeing what answers are posed to
            your query on the LXX list.

            James


            ____________________________________________________________________________________
            Looking for last minute shopping deals?
            Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.