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

Re: [textualcriticism] Corrector to Sinaiticus

Expand Messages
  • Jack Kilmon
    ... From: Michael Theophilos To: Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 3:05 PM
    Message 1 of 9 , Feb 4, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Michael Theophilos" <michael.theophilos@...>
      To: <textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 3:05 PM
      Subject: [textualcriticism] Corrector to Sinaiticus


      >
      >
      >
      > Greetings,
      >
      > In my files I have a note that the corrector for Aleph was a seventh
      > century hand. Does
      > this ring any bells for anyone? Has anyone written on the dating of the
      > Aleph corrector?
      >
      > Michael


      Tischendorf thought there were 4 scribes but Milne and Skeat identified 3,
      all contemporaries of the same scribal school., only one of which is a good
      speller. Because of the poor spelling and omissions, as many as NINE
      correctors have worked on the text from the time of its completion up to the
      12th century. The most extensive corrections were made in the 7th century
      but these were groups of correctors called alpha c.a and alpha c.b and alpha
      c.a revised the entire mss.

      Jack Kilmon
      San Marcos, Texas
    • malcolm robertson
      Dear Michael, Apart from K. and B. Aland, The Text of the New Testament (Eerdmans, 2nd ed., 1989) p. 108 I know of none. Aland identifies only three
      Message 2 of 9 , Feb 4, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Michael,
         
        Apart from K. and B. Aland, The Text of the New Testament (Eerdmans, 2nd ed., 1989) p. 108
        I know of none.  Aland identifies only three correctors (see Jack Kilmon's post for possible additional ones et opt cit there).  They are Aleph 1 (4th-6th cent.); Aleph 2 (ca. 7th cent.); and Aleph c (12th cent).
         
        One thing to remember is that the identification of correctors hands is exceptionally subjective and tenuous at best.
         
        With best regards,
         
        Malcolm

        Michael Theophilos <michael.theophilos@...> wrote:


        Greetings,

        In my files I have a note that the corrector for Aleph was a seventh century hand.  Does
        this ring any bells for anyone?  Has anyone written on the dating of the Aleph corrector?

        Michael 










        Do you Yahoo!?
        Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'

      • D Jongkind
        The obvious place to go to is of course H.J.M. Milne and T.C. Skeat, Scribes and correctors of the Codex Sinaiticus (London: British Museum, 1938). They tell
        Message 3 of 9 , Feb 4, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          The obvious place to go to is of course H.J.M. Milne and T.C. Skeat,
          Scribes and correctors of the Codex Sinaiticus (London: British Museum,
          1938). They tell you all there is to know about the identification of
          the scribal hands and the correctors.

          Cheers,
          Dirk Jongkind
        • Peter Head
          Milne & Skeat, Scribes and Correctors of Codex Sinaiticus. Also thre was a dissertation done at Birmingham some few years back on some aspect fo the
          Message 4 of 9 , Feb 4, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Milne & Skeat, Scribes and Correctors of Codex Sinaiticus.

            Also thre was a dissertation done at Birmingham some few years back on some
            aspect fo the correctors of Sinaiticus. You could probably email David
            Parker for details.

            At 09:05 PM 2/3/05, you wrote:



            >Greetings,
            >
            >In my files I have a note that the corrector for Aleph was a seventh
            >century hand. Does
            >this ring any bells for anyone? Has anyone written on the dating of the
            >Aleph corrector?
            >
            >Michael
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >

            Peter M. Head, PhD
            Sir Kirby Laing Senior Lecturer in New Testament
            Tyndale House
            36 Selwyn Gardens Phone: (UK) 01223
            566607
            Cambridge, CB3 9BA Fax: (UK) 01223 566608
            http://www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Tyndale/staff/Head/Staff.htm
          • Peter Head
            ... I don t think this is very helpful. There is no point having a general rule when it will absolutely depend on the particularities of the manuscript. Even
            Message 5 of 9 , Feb 4, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              >Malcolm wrote:



              >One thing to remember is that the identification of correctors hands is
              >exceptionally subjective and tenuous at best.
              >

              I don't think this is very helpful. There is no point having a general rule
              when it will absolutely depend on the particularities of the manuscript.
              Even if (w.r.t. Sinaiticus) one might affirm that the identification of
              correctors hands is exceptionally DIFFICULT and entails the exercise of
              personal judgement; it would not follow that the process was 'tenuous',
              just that one's personal judgements must be tested against the observations
              and arguments of other people who have studied them. Indeed it is not
              equally difficult at every point (identifying correctors for Ephraimi
              Rescriptus, now that must be difficult).

              Peter


              Peter M. Head, PhD
              Sir Kirby Laing Senior Lecturer in New Testament
              Tyndale House
              36 Selwyn Gardens Phone: (UK) 01223
              566607
              Cambridge, CB3 9BA Fax: (UK) 01223 566608
              http://www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Tyndale/staff/Head/Staff.htm
            • malcolm robertson
              Dear Peter, I suppose it would be best to qualify my use of tenuous(*) as my own subjective appraisal of the identification of correctors by others.
              Message 6 of 9 , Feb 4, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                Dear Peter,
                 
                I suppose it would be best to qualify my use of tenuous(*) as my own subjective appraisal of the identification of correctors by others.  Nevertheless, the subjective appraisal of the objective observation still - at least if only to my way of seeing it - is "more or less"(c1) tenuous as far as subjective inferences from the alledged objective data indicate.  If you wish to use difficult instead of tenuous - of course be my guest.  The two factors - objective and subjective - are both variables in the equation that can and oft do prove both difficult and tenuous.
                 
                With best regards,
                 
                Malcolm

                Peter Head <pmh15@...> wrote:


                >Malcolm wrote:



                >One thing to remember is that the identification of correctors hands is
                >exceptionally subjective and tenuous at best.
                >

                I don't think this is very helpful. There is no point having a general rule
                when it will absolutely depend on the particularities of the manuscript.
                Even if (w.r.t. Sinaiticus) one might affirm that the identification of
                correctors hands is exceptionally DIFFICULT and entails the exercise of
                personal judgement; it would not follow that the process was 'tenuous',
                just that one's personal judgements must be tested against the observations
                and arguments of other people who have studied them. Indeed it is not
                equally difficult at every point (identifying correctors for Ephraimi
                Rescriptus, now that must be difficult).

                Peter


                Peter M. Head, PhD
                Sir Kirby Laing Senior Lecturer in New Testament
                Tyndale House
                36 Selwyn Gardens                                       Phone: (UK) 01223
                566607
                Cambridge, CB3 9BA                                      Fax: (UK) 01223 566608
                http://www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Tyndale/staff/Head/Staff.htm





                Do you Yahoo!?
                Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'

              • sarban
                ... From: Jack Kilmon To: Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 1:03 PM Subject: Re: [textualcriticism]
                Message 7 of 9 , Feb 4, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: "Jack Kilmon" <jkilmon@...>
                  To: <textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com>
                  Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 1:03 PM
                  Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] Corrector to Sinaiticus


                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Tischendorf thought there were 4 scribes but Milne and Skeat identified 3,
                  > all contemporaries of the same scribal school., only one of which is a
                  good
                  > speller. Because of the poor spelling and omissions, as many as NINE
                  > correctors have worked on the text from the time of its completion up to
                  the
                  > 12th century. The most extensive corrections were made in the 7th century
                  > but these were groups of correctors called alpha c.a and alpha c.b and
                  alpha
                  > c.a revised the entire mss.
                  >
                  The late 6th/early 7th century corrections appear to have occurred
                  when Sinaiticus was at Caesarea.

                  Are those corrections to Revelation in Sinaiticus which agree
                  with the text of Andrew of Caesarea, attributed to this corrector
                  or to an earlier 4th century corrector ?

                  My manuals appear to disagree on this point.

                  Andrew Criddle
                • Jack Kilmon
                  ... From: sarban To: Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [textualcriticism]
                  Message 8 of 9 , Feb 4, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    ----- Original Message -----
                    From: "sarban" <sarban@...>
                    To: <textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com>
                    Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 12:57 PM
                    Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] Corrector to Sinaiticus


                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > ----- Original Message -----
                    > From: "Jack Kilmon" <jkilmon@...>
                    > To: <textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com>
                    > Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 1:03 PM
                    > Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] Corrector to Sinaiticus
                    >
                    >
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>
                    >> Tischendorf thought there were 4 scribes but Milne and Skeat identified
                    >> 3,
                    >> all contemporaries of the same scribal school., only one of which is a
                    > good
                    >> speller. Because of the poor spelling and omissions, as many as NINE
                    >> correctors have worked on the text from the time of its completion up to
                    > the
                    >> 12th century. The most extensive corrections were made in the 7th
                    >> century
                    >> but these were groups of correctors called alpha c.a and alpha c.b and
                    > alpha
                    >> c.a revised the entire mss.
                    >>
                    > The late 6th/early 7th century corrections appear to have occurred
                    > when Sinaiticus was at Caesarea.
                    >
                    > Are those corrections to Revelation in Sinaiticus which agree
                    > with the text of Andrew of Caesarea, attributed to this corrector
                    > or to an earlier 4th century corrector ?
                    >
                    > My manuals appear to disagree on this point.
                    >
                    > Andrew Criddle


                    It is my understanding that Scribe A wrote Revelation but Scribe D wrote the
                    first five verses and rewrote pages where Scribe A made mistakes. This
                    would have been the original 4th century fellers.

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