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

Re: [textualcriticism] P64 and Thiede

Expand Messages
  • Peter Head
    At 07:07 PM 6/7/05, Malcolm wrote: Because of the disparity of dating and the extremely complex exactitude that is required there are few people with enough
    Message 1 of 9 , Jun 8, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      At 07:07 PM 6/7/05, Malcolm wrote:

      Because of the disparity of dating and the extremely complex exactitude that is required there are few people with enough exposure to a variety of turn of the century mss (fragments) to make an intelligent and judicious determination. 

      I disagree with this comment. Although it suited him to raise the complexity of palaeographical analysis (especially for scholars without their own 'epifluorescent confocal laser scanning device'), Thiede's claims are not really that complicated: "P64 exhibits particular stylistic similarities with a range of manuscripts that can be securely dated in the first century." The alleged similarities of hand can be examined in the photos provided in my article to which reference was already made (link below). This will demonstrate how unfounded Thiede's claims were. [And in fact there have been four or five unanswered critical scholarly responses to Thiede's article].

      Peter M. Head, 'The Date of the Magdalen Papyrus of Matthew (P. Magd. Gr. 17 = P64): A Response to C.P. Thiede', Tyndale Bulletin 46.2(1995)251-285. Date of P. Magd. Gr. 17 = P64: On-line version

      Cheers

      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

    • Stephen C. Carlson
      ... A photograph of P. Oxy. 246 is between pp. 172-173 of Deissmann s LIGHT FROM THE ANCIENT EAST and I ve uploaded a detail of it to:
      Message 2 of 9 , Jun 8, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Peter Head <pmh15@...> wrote:
        >P. Oxy 246
        >
        >'a dated papyrus resembling it almost like a twin', (acc. Jesus Papyrus pp
        >111-112).
        >
        >Complete nonsense of course.

        A photograph of P. Oxy. 246 is between pp. 172-173 of
        Deissmann's LIGHT FROM THE ANCIENT EAST and I've
        uploaded a detail of it to:

        http://www.hypotyposeis.org/images/poxy-246-detail.jpg

        Stephen Carlson


        --
        Stephen C. Carlson,
        mailto:scarlson@...
        "Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs chant the words." Shujing 2.35
      • Wieland Willker
        ... I don t see the similarities. The writing looks untrained. BTW, what I noticed a while ago in comparing p64 and p67 is that in p67 the Kappa always has a
        Message 3 of 9 , Jun 8, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          > A photograph of P. Oxy. 246
          > http://www.hypotyposeis.org/images/poxy-246-detail.jpg

          I don't see the similarities. The writing looks untrained.

          BTW, what I noticed a while ago in comparing p64 and p67 is that in p67 the Kappa always has a characteristic turn at the top right end of the upward stroke. This cannot be seen in P64.
          How certain can we be that this is the same MS?

          PS: I am looking for good images of P64.

          Best wishes
          Wieland
          <><
          ------------------------------------------------
          Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
          mailto:willker@...-bremen.de
          http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
          Textcritical commentary:
          http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html
        • malcolm robertson
          Dear Peter, One of the major problems that I have with the critiques offered to Thiede s thesis are what I see as hidden agendas or ulterior motives in
          Message 4 of 9 , Jun 9, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Dear Peter,
             
            One of the major problems that I have with the critiques offered to Thiede's thesis are what I see as hidden agendas or ulterior motives in challenging Thiede's dating.  Thiede himself was not free of this issue either.  I think the script similarity issue - although admittedly limited by Theide himself by this marshalling of a limited number of existing textual evidence - was inadequate and yet again is crucial to any dating of mss. 
             
            For example, if one is going to compare script against script in order to eliminate the disparity of a 200 year appraised dating spread, I would suggest that Rahlf's P 967 be used as the touchstone against which comparisions are lodged.  If the provenance issue is going to be brought in then the individual idiosyncrasies and their variations by the same (or different) individual(s) should be admitted and weighted.  You know we are dealing with human variables and probabilities.
             
            The issues of a) codicology (scroll or codex; one or two columns; variation in line length); b) theological issues (eyewitness testimony) based solely on palaeographic evidence and not on historical or internal content grounds; c) text-type bias motivations (omission of words, letters); d) limited examination of presently existing textual evidence; or e) the unknown variable of the appearance and use of nomina sacra can all or in part skew the assessment. These issues are not proven axioms for assessment but simply unknown (held in tension) variables in the equation.
             
            In making these and previous remarks I am not denying or supporting Thiede's thesis.  I am simply stating what I see as unscholarly proceedings by and against him.  
             
            Cordially in Christ,
             
            Malcolm
             
             
             



            Do you Yahoo!?
            Make Yahoo! your home page
          • Peter Head
            Dear Malcolm, I don t understand all your message. And I should be marking exams and other things. So apologies for brevity. Firstly we should admit that most
            Message 5 of 9 , Jun 10, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Dear Malcolm,

              I don't understand all your message. And I should be marking exams and
              other things. So apologies for brevity. Firstly we should admit that most
              of the various (not necessarily hidden) agendas were introduced (as was his
              normal custom) by Thiede himself.
              Secondly I am still waiting to see an example of any such ulterior motives
              or other 'unscholarly proceedings' in the scholarly responses to Thiede's
              claim about the date of P64. I know I had to work hard to keep the focus
              where it should be - on the manuscript hand and comparable examples. Have
              you read my response to Thiede? I'd love to know where the problems are.
              Once I took the trouble to find the manuscripts (and the extra trouble to
              get permissions to publish them) I am afraid that the argument crumbled
              into nothingness.

              Three responses to consider (there are others, but these focus on the
              script and datable comparable examples):
              Wachtel in ZPE 107 (1995) 73-80.
              Puech in RB 102 (1995) 570-584 (really 577-584)
              Head in Tyndale Bulletin 46 (1995) 253-285.

              The claim was made. It has been refuted. Time to move on.


              Cheers

              Peter

              At 03:26 PM 6/9/05, Malcolm wrote:
              >One of the major problems that I have with the critiques offered to
              >Thiede's thesis are what I see as hidden agendas or ulterior motives in
              >challenging Thiede's dating. Thiede himself was not free of this issue
              >either. I think the script similarity issue - although admittedly limited
              >by Theide himself by this marshalling of a limited number of existing
              >textual evidence - was inadequate and yet again is crucial to any dating
              >of mss.
              >
              >For example, if one is going to compare script against script in order to
              >eliminate the disparity of a 200 year appraised dating spread, I would
              >suggest that Rahlf's P 967 be used as the touchstone against which
              >comparisions are lodged. If the provenance issue is going to be brought
              >in then the individual idiosyncrasies and their variations by the same (or
              >different) individual(s) should be admitted and weighted. You know we are
              >dealing with human variables and probabilities.
              >
              >The issues of a) codicology (scroll or codex; one or two columns;
              >variation in line length); b) theological issues (eyewitness testimony)
              >based solely on palaeographic evidence and not on historical or internal
              >content grounds; c) text-type bias motivations (omission of words,
              >letters); d) limited examination of presently existing textual evidence;
              >or e) the unknown variable of the appearance and use of nomina sacra can
              >all or in part skew the assessment. These issues are not proven axioms for
              >assessment but simply unknown (held in tension) variables in the equation.
              >
              >In making these and previous remarks I am not denying or supporting
              >Thiede's thesis. I am simply stating what I see as unscholarly
              >proceedings by and against him.
              >
              >Cordially in Christ,
              >
              >Malcolm
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >Do you Yahoo!?
              ><http://us.rd.yahoo.com/my/navbar/sethp/*http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs>Make
              >Yahoo! your home page
              >
              >----------
              >Yahoo! Groups Links
              > * To visit your group on the web, go to:
              > *
              > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/textualcriticism/>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/textualcriticism/
              >
              > *
              > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              > *
              > <mailto:textualcriticism-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>textualcriticism-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              >
              > *
              > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
              > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.

              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, Yes I have read/studied your essay(s) and those of others - less Wachtel and Puech. I guess my issues are more with the others than you. However,
              Message 6 of 9 , Jun 10, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                Dear Peter,
                 
                Yes I have read/studied your essay(s) and those of others - less Wachtel and Puech.  I guess my issues are more with the others than you. However, these issues of mine are by no means personal, but more directed toward a sounder and more uniform methodological approach to this science (or at least its application).  The disparity in assigning dates to these compositions (in this case P64) and the wide margin of error (plus or minus a given number of years) as well as the use of non established unknown variables as axiomatic givens makes me shudder.
                 
                I too do not have time at present to write a paper nor enter into a long drawn out discussion on this topic.  Perhaps later - if God will.
                 
                Cordially in Christ,
                 
                Malcolm 
                 
                ______________________________
                 
                Dear Malcolm,

                I don't understand all your message. And I should be marking exams and
                other things. So apologies for brevity. Firstly we should admit that most
                of the various (not necessarily hidden) agendas were introduced (as was his
                normal custom) by Thiede himself.
                Secondly I am still waiting to see an example of any such ulterior motives
                or other 'unscholarly proceedings' in the scholarly responses to Thiede's
                claim about the date of P64. I know I had to work hard to keep the focus
                where it should be - on the manuscript hand and comparable examples. Have
                you read my response to Thiede? I'd love to know where the problems are.
                Once I took the trouble to find the manuscripts (and the extra trouble to
                get permissions to publish them) I am afraid that the argument crumbled
                into nothingness.

                Three responses to consider (there are others, but these focus on the
                script and datable comparable examples):
                Wachtel in ZPE 107 (1995) 73-80.
                Puech in RB 102 (1995) 570-584 (really 577-584)
                Head in Tyndale Bulletin 46 (1995) 253-285.

                The claim was made. It has been refuted. Time to move on.


                Cheers

                Peter

                At 03:26 PM 6/9/05, Malcolm wrote:
                >One of the major problems that I have with the critiques offered to
                >Thiede's thesis are what I see as hidden agendas or ulterior motives in
                >challenging Thiede's dating. Thiede himself was not free of this issue
                >either. I think the script similarity issue - although admittedly limited
                >by Theide himself by this marshalling of a limited number of existing
                >textual evidence - was inadequate and yet again is crucial to any dating
                >of mss.
                >
                >For example, if one is going to compare script against script in order to
                >eliminate the disparity of a 200 year appraised dating spread, I would
                >suggest that Rahlf's P 967 be used as the touchstone
                against which
                >comparisions are lodged. If the provenance issue is going to be brought
                >in then the individual idiosyncrasies and their variations by the same (or
                >different) individual(s) should be admitted and weighted. You know we are
                >dealing with human variables and probabilities.
                >
                >The issues of a) codicology (scroll or codex; one or two columns;
                >variation in line length); b) theological issues (eyewitness testimony)
                >based solely on palaeographic evidence and not on historical or internal
                >content grounds; c) text-type bias motivations (omission of words,
                >letters); d) limited examination of presently existing textual evidence;
                >or e) the unknown variable of the appearance and use of nomina sacra can
                >all or in part skew the assessment. These issues are not proven axioms for
                >assessment but simply unknown (held in tension) variables in the equation.
                >
                >In making these and previous
                remarks I am not denying or supporting
                >Thiede's thesis. I am simply stating what I see as unscholarly
                >proceedings by and against him.
                >
                >Cordially in Christ,
                >
                >Malcolm
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >Do you Yahoo!?
                ><
                http://us.rd.yahoo.com/my/navbar/sethp/*http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs>Make
                >Yahoo! your home page
                >
                >----------
                >Yahoo! Groups Links
                > * To visit your group on the web, go to:
                > *
                >
                <
                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/textualcriticism/>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/t\
                extualcriticism/

                >
                > *
                > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                > *
                >
                <mailto:
                textualcriticism-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>textual\
                criticism-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                >
                > *
                > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
                > <
                http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.

                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



                Discover Yahoo!
                Have fun online with music videos, cool games, IM & more. Check it out!
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.