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

RE: [textualcriticism] Re: Problems with Phi 043

Expand Messages
  • Wieland Willker
    ... page 2; leaf 2v ... 5v, 7; 6r, 8; 6v, But this is 1. wrong and 2. doesn t explain anything. Best wishes     Wieland       
    Message 1 of 11 , Sep 1, 2009
      Daniel Buck wrote:
      > "Volume 1. Leaf 1r is page 1, 1v is page 1; leaf 2r is
      page 2; leaf 2v
      > is page 3; leaf 3r is page 4; 3v, 5; 4r, 6; 4v, 6; 5r, 7;
      5v, 7; 6r, 8; 6v,


      But this is 1. wrong and 2. doesn't explain anything.


      Best wishes
          Wieland
             <><
      ------------------------------------------------
      Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
      mailto:wie@...
      http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
      Textcritical Commentary:
      http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html
    • Robert Relyea
      ... Assuming the page numbers are correct, It looks like the pages are consistantly written starting on the left page rather than the right page. With that
      Message 2 of 11 , Sep 1, 2009
        On 09/01/2009 10:14 AM, Wieland Willker wrote:
        > Recently the CSNTM added codex Phi / 043 to their archives
        > and show some images on their webpage, here:
        > http://www.csntm.org/Manuscript/View/GA_043
        >
        > This manuscript is noteworthy e.g. for its strange addition
        > after Mt 20:28 and another after 21:9.
        >
        > When I looked at the images and tried to note the contents,
        > it occurred to me that the verso never shows the
        > continuation of the recto.
        > This is strange!
        > What has happened here?
        >
        > The folks from the CSNTM so far have not come up with an
        > explanation. Attentive Gregory does not note anything.
        >
        > Can anybody explain this?
        >
        Assuming the page numbers are correct,

        It looks like the pages are consistantly written starting on the left
        page rather than the right page. With that assumption. Here is an
        attempt to reconstruct the pages based on openings.

        10b+11a is one opening, 10:11-14 on the left, continuing to 10:15-19 on
        the right.
        11b+12a is the next opening, 10:19-24 on the left, 10:25-27 on the right
        12b+13a next, 10:28-33 on the left, 10:33-37 on the right
        13b+M1a* 10:37-42 on left (missing), 11:1-5 on the right
        M1b*+14a 11:6-10 on left, 11:10-15 (approx) on right (missing)
        14b+M2a* 11:15(approx)-20 on left (missing), 11:20-23 on right
        M2b*-15a 11:24-28 on left, 11:29-36 (approx) on right (missing)
        (11:36 (approx)-12:2 missing, perhaps from exemplar?)
        15b-16a 12:3-7 on left, 12:8-13 on right
        16b-17a 12:13-18 on left, 12:18-24 on right
        17b-18a 12:24-28 on left, 12:28-32 on right
        18b-19a 12:36-40 on left, 12:32-36 on right
        19b-M3a* 12:37-42 on left (missing), 12:43-46 on right
        M3b*-20a 12:46-13:1 on left, 13:2 - 7? on right (missing).

        *In order to complete this reconstruction I had to assume 2 things:
        1) three missing pages M1, M2, and M3.
        2) actual missing text in the original. There can only be 2 pages
        between 15a and 15b, and we have one of them (16a). 11:29-12:2 (about 26
        verses) would not fit on a single page. Since 15a and 15b are on a
        single sheet, most of these verses must not have ever been in the
        manuscript. This could be because they were missing from the scribes
        exemplar.

        NOTE that the image 20b and probably 21a would give us a clue to the
        exact extent of what was on M3b.


        The pattern continues 49b-54a

        49b-50a 20:22-25 on left, 20:25-28+Add on right (note the off-print
        verifies they are facing pages.
        50b-51a 20:Add-29 on left, 20:29-34a on right (also off-printted).
        51b-52a 20:34b-21:3a on left, 21:3b-7 on right
        52b-53a 21:7-9+Add on left 21:Add+10-13 on right
        53b-54a 21:13-16 on left, 21:16-19 on right


        NOTE that this layout would not be as confusing to someone examining the
        manuscript, presented with these openings. Only the missing pages would
        cause some confusion.
      • Wieland Willker
        ... to 10:15- ... 10:25-27 on the ... The order is this: 0011a 10:11-14 0010b 10:15-19 0012a 10:19-24 0011b 10:25-27 Your arrangement does not work, since 10b
        Message 3 of 11 , Sep 1, 2009
          > 10b+11a is one opening, 10:11-14 on the left, continuing
          to 10:15-
          > 19 on
          > the right.
          > 11b+12a is the next opening, 10:19-24 on the left,
          10:25-27 on the
          > right


          The order is this:
          0011a 10:11-14
          0010b 10:15-19
          0012a 10:19-24
          0011b 10:25-27

          Your arrangement does not work, since 10b must come on the
          right side of 11a.
          I.e. 11a+10b is one opening, not the other way round.


          Here is the order by content:

          0011a 10:11-14
          0010b 10:15-19
          0012a 10:19-24
          0011b 10:25-27
          0013a 10:28-33
          0012b 10:33-37
          missing 10:38-42
          0013b 11:1-5
          0014a 11:6-10
          missing 11:11-19
          0014b 11:20-23
          0015a 11:24-28
          missing 11:29-12:2
          0016a 12:3-7
          0015b 12:8-13
          0017a 12:13-18
          0016b 12:18-24
          0018a 12:24-28
          0017b 12:28-32
          0019a 12:32-36
          0018b 12:36-40
          missing 12:41-42
          0019b 12:43-46
          0020a 12:46-13:1





          Best wishes
              Wieland
                 <><
          ------------------------------------------------
          Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
          mailto:wie@...
          http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
          Textcritical Commentary:
          http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html
        • Robert Relyea
          ... Arg. I misspoke. I flipped left and right. What I meant to say is it looks like the pages are consistently written starting on the right and then
          Message 4 of 11 , Sep 1, 2009
            On 09/01/2009 11:58 AM, Wieland Willker wrote:
            >> 10b+11a is one opening, 10:11-14 on the left, continuing
            >>
            > to 10:15-
            >
            >> 19 on
            >> the right.
            >> 11b+12a is the next opening, 10:19-24 on the left,
            >>
            > 10:25-27 on the
            >
            >> right
            >>
            >
            > The order is this:
            > 0011a 10:11-14
            > 0010b 10:15-19
            > 0012a 10:19-24
            > 0011b 10:25-27
            >
            > Your arrangement does not work, since 10b must come on the
            > right side of 11a.
            >
            Arg. I misspoke. I flipped left and right.

            What I meant to say is it looks like the pages are consistently written
            starting on the right and then continuing on the left (as opposed to the
            normal starting on the left and proceeding to the right). My point,
            which was obscured by my mixing my left and right, was that the
            manuscript appears to be written self-consistently in a way that we
            don't recognize as standard. To make that assumption work, it requires
            the addition of 3 missing pages, and the assumption that some text was
            not ever in the manuscript.

            Note that a user of the manuscript itself would have little problem
            (except for the missing pages) in adjusting to the odd scheme. After a
            page or two, you would quickly learn to look to the right first then
            come back and finish on the left before turning the page. You wouldn't
            have had to jump around to different pages like you do when you lay out
            the images in order verso then recto.

            Corrected 'reconstruction' (NOTE: I'm assuming 3-5 verses a page, which
            is why 11:29-12:2 does not fit on page M2b).

            10b+11a is one opening, 10:11-14 on the right, continuing to 10:15-19 on
            the left.
            11b+12a is the next opening, 10:19-24 on the right, 10:25-27 on the left
            12b+13a next, 10:28-33 on the right, 10:33-37 on the left
            13b+M1a* 10:38-42 on right (missing), 11:1-5 on the left
            M1b*+14a 11:6-10 on right, 11:11-15 (approx) on left (missing)
            14b+M2a* 11:16(approx)-19 on right (missing), 11:20-23 on left
            M2b*-15a 11:24-28 on right, 11:29-34 (approx) on left (missing)
            (11:34 (approx)-12:2 missing, perhaps from exemplar?)
            15b-16a 12:3-7 on right, 12:8-13 on left
            16b-17a 12:13-18 on right, 12:18-24 on left
            17b-18a 12:24-28 on right, 12:28-32 on left
            18b-19a 12:32-36 on right, 12:36-40 on left
            19b-M3a* 12:41-42 on right (missing), 12:43-46 on left
            M3b*-20a 12:46-13:1 on right, 13:2 - 7? on left (missing).

            and
            49b-50a 20:22-25 on right, 20:25-28+Add on left (note the off-print
            verifies they are facing pages.
            50b-51a 20:Add-29 on right, 20:29-34a on left (also off-printted).
            51b-52a 20:34b-21:3a on right, 21:3b-7 on left
            52b-53a 21:7-9+Add on right 21:Add+10-13 on left
            53b-54a 21:13-16 on right, 21:16-19 on left
          • wengurobo
            Batiffol s 1886 edition of Phi/043 is available on-line and can be downloaded as .pdf at
            Message 5 of 11 , Sep 1, 2009

              Batiffol's 1886 edition of Phi/043 is available on-line and can be downloaded as .pdf at

              http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k96302s.image.r=Batiffol.langEN.f2.pagination

              He marks the point at which each folio begins, which may be of help. The introduction (in French) indicates (pp. 20-21) the state of the manuscript when he transcribed it.

              It would be interesting to know if his transcription can be considered accurate. He does indicate itacisms all over the place, as well as the nomina sacra. Incidentally, if the transcription is accurate, the text seems nearer the Majority text than that of N and Sigma/042.

              Tony Pope


              --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, "Wieland Willker" <wie@...> wrote:
              >
              > > 10b+11a is one opening, 10:11-14 on the left, continuing
              > to 10:15-
              > > 19 on
              > > the right.
              > > 11b+12a is the next opening, 10:19-24 on the left,
              > 10:25-27 on the
              > > right
              >
              >
              > The order is this:
              > 0011a 10:11-14
              > 0010b 10:15-19
              > 0012a 10:19-24
              > 0011b 10:25-27
              >
              > Your arrangement does not work, since 10b must come on the
              > right side of 11a.
              > I.e. 11a+10b is one opening, not the other way round.
              >
              >
              > Here is the order by content:
              >
              > 0011a 10:11-14
              > 0010b 10:15-19
              > 0012a 10:19-24
              > 0011b 10:25-27
              > 0013a 10:28-33
              > 0012b 10:33-37
              > missing 10:38-42
              > 0013b 11:1-5
              > 0014a 11:6-10
              > missing 11:11-19
              > 0014b 11:20-23
              > 0015a 11:24-28
              > missing 11:29-12:2
              > 0016a 12:3-7
              > 0015b 12:8-13
              > 0017a 12:13-18
              > 0016b 12:18-24
              > 0018a 12:24-28
              > 0017b 12:28-32
              > 0019a 12:32-36
              > 0018b 12:36-40
              > missing 12:41-42
              > 0019b 12:43-46
              > 0020a 12:46-13:1
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > Best wishes
              >     Wieland
              >        <><
              > ------------------------------------------------
              > Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
              > mailto:wie@...
              > http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
              > Textcritical Commentary:
              > http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html
              >

            • Daniel B. Wallace
              Wieland and TC-List, Unfortunately, I was not on the original Albania trip, when 043 was photographed. Neither was Dr. Jeff Hargis. I ve asked him to look at
              Message 6 of 11 , Sep 1, 2009
                Wieland and TC-List,

                Unfortunately, I was not on the original Albania trip, when 043 was photographed. Neither was Dr. Jeff Hargis. I've asked him to look at all the images to see what is going on with the manuscript though.

                Daniel B. Wallace, PhD
                Executive Director
                Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts
                www.csntm.org


                ----- Start Original Message -----
                Sent: Tue, 1 Sep 2009 20:58:33 +0200
                From: "Wieland Willker" <wie@...>
                To: <textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com>
                Subject: RE: [textualcriticism] Problems with Phi 043

                >
                > > 10b+11a is one opening, 10:11-14 on the left, continuing
                to 10:15-
                > 19 on
                > the right.
                > 11b+12a is the next opening, 10:19-24 on the left,
                10:25-27 on the
                > right

                The order is this:
                0011a 10:11-14
                0010b 10:15-19
                0012a 10:19-24
                0011b 10:25-27

                Your arrangement does not work, since 10b must come on the
                right side of 11a.
                I.e. 11a+10b is one opening, not the other way round.

                Here is the order by content:

                0011a 10:11-14
                0010b 10:15-19
                0012a 10:19-24
                0011b 10:25-27
                0013a 10:28-33
                0012b 10:33-37
                missing 10:38-42
                0013b 11:1-5
                0014a 11:6-10
                missing 11:11-19
                0014b 11:20-23
                0015a 11:24-28
                missing 11:29-12:2
                0016a 12:3-7
                0015b 12:8-13
                0017a 12:13-18
                0016b 12:18-24
                0018a 12:24-28
                0017b 12:28-32
                0019a 12:32-36
                0018b 12:36-40
                missing 12:41-42
                0019b 12:43-46
                0020a 12:46-13:1

                Best wishes
                Wieland
                <><
                ------------------------------------------------
                Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
                mailto:wie@...
                http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
                Textcritical Commentary:
                http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html




                ----- End Original Message -----
              • Wieland Willker
                ... I now understand your model. That s in fact possible! But that would be a very strange book, wouldn t it? ...
                Message 7 of 11 , Sep 2, 2009
                  Robert Relyea wrote:
                  > After a page or two, you would quickly learn to look to the right
                  > first then come back and finish on the left before turning the page.

                  I now understand your model. That's in fact possible!
                  But that would be a very strange book, wouldn't it?




                  Tony Pope wrote:
                  > Batiffol's 1886 edition of Phi/043 is available on-line and can be
                  > downloaded as .pdf at
                  >
                  http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k96302s.image.r=Batiffol.langEN.f2.pagi
                  nation


                  Thank you very much for this link!
                  That's very helpful!

                  In the introduction I cannot find anything that points to reading from the
                  right to the left. Also from the notation of the folio numbers in his text I
                  take it that Batiffol did not see anything problematic in this codex. The
                  text smoothly goes on from one folio to the next.

                  The only other explanation I can come up with:
                  As Daniel Buck has already pointed out, every folio consists of two sheets
                  glued together.
                  At some point in the history of the codex, after Batiffol, someone or
                  something took them apart, perhaps water damage, and the sheets have then
                  been put together in the wrong way. But is this reasonable?

                  I still think that I have overlooked something.

                  Best wishes
                  Wieland
                  <><
                  --------------------------
                  Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
                  mailto:wie@...
                  http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
                  Textcritical commentary:
                  http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/
                • Dirk Jongkind
                  Are you sure this is not simply a mistake in the numbering of the pics on the CSNTM website? It would be the simplest solution. cheers dirk Comment by Wieland:
                  Message 8 of 11 , Sep 2, 2009
                    Are you sure this is not simply a mistake in the numbering of the pics on the CSNTM website? It would be the simplest solution.

                    cheers
                    dirk

                    Comment by Wieland:
                    I agree and of course I thought about that, but this is not the case. Looking at the images it is clear that what they call "b" is the verso of "a".




                    Wieland Willker wrote:
                     

                    Robert Relyea wrote:
                    > After a page or two, you would quickly learn to look to the right
                    > first then come back and finish on the left before turning the page.

                    I now understand your model. That's in fact possible!
                    But that would be a very strange book, wouldn't it?

                    Tony Pope wrote:
                    > Batiffol's 1886 edition of Phi/043 is available on-line and can be
                    > downloaded as .pdf at
                    >
                    http://gallica. bnf.fr/ark: /12148/bpt6k9630 2s.image. r=Batiffol. langEN.f2. pagi
                    nation

                    Thank you very much for this link!
                    That's very helpful!

                    In the introduction I cannot find anything that points to reading from the
                    right to the left. Also from the notation of the folio numbers in his text I
                    take it that Batiffol did not see anything problematic in this codex. The
                    text smoothly goes on from one folio to the next.

                    The only other explanation I can come up with:
                    As Daniel Buck has already pointed out, every folio consists of two sheets
                    glued together.
                    At some point in the history of the codex, after Batiffol, someone or
                    something took them apart, perhaps water damage, and the sheets have then
                    been put together in the wrong way. But is this reasonable?

                    I still think that I have overlooked something.

                    Best wishes
                    Wieland
                    <><
                    ------------ --------- -----
                    Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
                    mailto:wie@uni-bremen. de
                    http://www.uni- bremen.de/ ~wie
                    Textcritical commentary:
                    http://www.uni- bremen.de/ ~wie/TCG/


                    -- 
                    Dirk Jongkind, PhD
                    Fellow and Tutor, St. Edmund's College
                    Research Fellow in New Testament Text and Language
                    Tyndale House
                    36 Selwyn Gardens
                    Cambridge, CB3 9BA		Phone:(UK) 01223 566603
                    United Kingdom			Fax:  (UK) 01223 566608
                    
                    
                  • Daniel B. Wallace
                    Well, the Chinese bound this MS, so maybe that explains things? dbw ... Sent: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 11:22:27 +0200 From: Wieland Willker To:
                    Message 9 of 11 , Sep 2, 2009
                      Well, the Chinese bound this MS, so maybe that explains things?

                      dbw

                      ----- Start Original Message -----
                      Sent: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 11:22:27 +0200
                      From: "Wieland Willker" <wie@...>
                      To: <textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com>
                      Subject: RE: [textualcriticism] Re: Problems with Phi 043

                      >
                      > Robert Relyea wrote:
                      > After a page or two, you would quickly learn to look to the right
                      > first then come back and finish on the left before turning the page.

                      I now understand your model. That's in fact possible!
                      But that would be a very strange book, wouldn't it?

                      Tony Pope wrote:
                      > Batiffol's 1886 edition of Phi/043 is available on-line and can be
                      > downloaded as .pdf at
                      >
                      http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k96302s.image.r=Batiffol.langEN.f2.pagi
                      nation

                      Thank you very much for this link!
                      That's very helpful!

                      In the introduction I cannot find anything that points to reading from
                      the
                      right to the left. Also from the notation of the folio numbers in his
                      text I
                      take it that Batiffol did not see anything problematic in this codex. The
                      text smoothly goes on from one folio to the next.

                      The only other explanation I can come up with:
                      As Daniel Buck has already pointed out, every folio consists of two
                      sheets
                      glued together.
                      At some point in the history of the codex, after Batiffol, someone or
                      something took them apart, perhaps water damage, and the sheets have then
                      been put together in the wrong way. But is this reasonable?

                      I still think that I have overlooked something.

                      Best wishes
                      Wieland
                      <><
                      --------------------------
                      Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
                      mailto:wie@...
                      http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
                      Textcritical commentary:
                      http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/




                      ----- End Original Message -----
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.