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

RE: [textualcriticism] TC general question

Expand Messages
  • James Spinti
    Jonathan, Homeric scholarship is in a flux--as it has been ever since Milman Parry came up with his oral poetry theory over 70 years ago. But, that being said,
    Message 1 of 5 , Feb 2, 2010
    • 0 Attachment

      Homeric scholarship is in a flux--as it has been ever since Milman Parry
      came up with his oral poetry theory over 70 years ago. But, that being
      said, by the time you get to the Alexandrian period there is a bit more
      agreement. As far as I know, the majority opinion is still that the
      Alexandrian editors did not affect the vulgate text of the Iliad or
      Odyssey. The Alexandrians produced their own texts for their needs; the
      vulgate text was produced for sale and reading, not analysis in the way
      the Alexandrians did it.

      But, I'm not convinced that you can compare the case of the Homeric
      epics with the biblical text. The cultural settings of the two are
      different enough that I doubt the textual transmission would be the

      My $.015,

      James Spinti
      Marketing Director, Book Sales Division
      Eisenbrauns, Good books for more than 30 years
      Specializing in Ancient Near Eastern and Biblical Studies
      jspinti at eisenbrauns dot com
      Web: http://www.eisenbrauns.com
      Phone: 574-269-2011 ext 226
      Fax: 574-269-6788

      -----Original Message-----
      From: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
      [mailto:textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jonathan C.
      Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 12:59 AM
      To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] TC general question

      Dear List,

      A tangent of the original post, but related to the subject matter, is M.
      A. Robinson's claim in the appendix article to his and Pierpont's The
      New Testament in the Original Greek: Byzantine Textform, "The Case for
      Byzantine Priority" (p. 542-3), that there is a shorter Alexandrian form
      of Homer and a longer (perhaps "Western"?) form of Homer, but that the
      mainstream Vulgate text did not change much. The critically produced
      shorter Alexandrian form could not change the dominant form, and the
      longer forms, in the words of Homeric scholar Thomas Allen, "withered of

      First, do current Homeric scholars still hold to the basic view of Allen
      (and Robinson) above? Second, what do you think of Robinson's analogy
      between the Alexandrian critical endeavors upon the classical texts and
      those of the New Testament?

      Jonathan C. Borland

      On Feb 2, 2010, at 4:33 AM, Kevin W. Woodruff wrote:


      Yes, P52 dates within 50 years of John's Gospel

      Venetus A of Homer's Illiad is dated to about 10th century CE and so is
      almost 1800 years after Homer.

      The earliest papyrus fragments of the Odyssey are in the 3rd century BC
      and Homer lived ca. 850 BCE.


      Prof. Kevin W. Woodruff, M.Div., M.S.I.S.
      Library Director/Reference Librarian, Assistant Professor of Bible,
      Greek, Theological Bibliography and Research
      Tennessee Temple University/Temple Baptist Seminary, 1815 Union Ave.
      Chattanooga, Tennessee 37404, United States of America
      423/493-4252 (office) 423/698-9447 (home) 423/493-4497 (FAX)
      Cierpke@... http://pages.prodigy.net/cierpke/woodruff.htm

      --- On Mon, 2/1/10, Steve Raine <sp1raine@...> wrote:

      From: Steve Raine <sp1raine@...>
      Subject: [textualcriticism] TC general question
      To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Monday, February 1, 2010, 2:27 PM

      Hi folks--

      Would it be accurate to say that extant biblical manuscripts
      (portions) are closer in date to 'autographs' than those of any
      ancient document?

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