1. The highlight of the conference for me was finally being able to see the covers of Codex W first hand. There hasn't been much written on them since the 1930's, and it is now my mission in life to get access for a fuller autopsy. I don't want to make any premature pronouncements on the implications these covers hold for the study of early Christian book technology, but if manufactural markings on the spine of the (now loose) Codex W indicate that the covers were produced secondary to the text, then a number of interesting points could be made about how early Christian bookbinding affected the use and perception of the canonical gospels.
I am crossing my fingers about that access, though, and may just have to proceed on the basis of my time with the covers during the exhibition and the somewhat unhelpful photographs we currently have.
2. Lots of good papers in the Textual Criticism and Papyrology seminars. I was particular interested to hear response to Holger Strutwolf's paper (see my summary below from the NA/27 conference at New College). Lo and behold, he fared well in the face of Epp's just criticism that Strutwolf has appeared to have not actually said much about the textual tradition beyond Epp's original work on text types. As it turns out, Strutwolf's suggestion that we conduct criticism within the parameters established by the textual tradition of each text is an intriguing idea.
2.5. Peter Head's paper on Tregelles was fascinating, I hope that either shows up in print, or that he will make copies available to interested parties.
3. I haven't the slightest idea why they scheduled Hurtado vs. Ehrman at the same time as Gathercole vs. Dunn. Poor programming decision. But in the epic square-off between the "Lord Jesus Christ" guy and the "Misquoting Jesus" guy, Earliest Christian Artifacts emerged as the winner. Ehrman's critique centered around the fact that Hurtado spends a lot of time in the book simply retreading old scholarship on the various issues that occupy each chapter. I really don't have a problem with this, that sort of synthesis needed to occur in this area and many students and scholars of other specializations will benefit from it.
4. The Scottish Universities Reception was exactly how I thought it would be.
5. My paper in the Bible in Ancient and Modern Media section went quite well. It was a rather polemical paper, which is always a gamble. But the gamble seemed to pay off and I now hope to see it in print some time from now.
11/29/06
11/28/06
New College Biblical Studies Seminar
I will be giving a paper titled "A New/Old Look at John 21: Towards A Literary-Historical Reading of John 21" on 1 Dec. 2007 at the University of Edinburgh.
It really is a general overview of my thesis, and I hope at that time to recieve a great deal of criticism on the general flow of my argument as well as a few preliminary conclusions I have reached concerning the function of the Beloved Disciple, high frequency of literary self-awareness, and the provocative shift in narrative time in John 21.
Below is a small section of the paper that has direct relevance to this blog:
It really is a general overview of my thesis, and I hope at that time to recieve a great deal of criticism on the general flow of my argument as well as a few preliminary conclusions I have reached concerning the function of the Beloved Disciple, high frequency of literary self-awareness, and the provocative shift in narrative time in John 21.
Below is a small section of the paper that has direct relevance to this blog:
The initially obscure, hyperbolic reference made to “books” in John 21:25 has a clear set of parallels that would have triggered a network of rhetorical echoes in early readings of the text. The use of βιβλία would have conjured up an image of vast libraries of scrolls, such as the one referenced in a story contemporary to John in which Ptolemy asked Demetrius of Phalerum to collect all of the books of the world (which came to around 500,000). Here the narrative of Jesus overwhelms all the official literature of his day, that is, anything that was worthy of being written on a scroll.
This sets the stage for reflecting on how this rich seam of rhetoric in John 21 relates to the Gospel as a whole... The rhetoric of John 21:25 attempts to class the Gospel of John with the set of literatures related to the word βιβλία. This certainly comports well with Burridge’s estimation of the genre of John as bios literature, as relevant literatures would have also been published in the format related to the term. And this is contra Hengel’s take the hyperbole: “As all earlier Christian biblical texts were circulated as codexes[sic], i.e. in book form and using nomina sacra, in my view we may presuppose that this would already be the case with the first edition. This is one of the fixed Christian writing practices which goes back to the first century.” Though he arrives at this conclusion based on the papyrological record, there is no lexicographical merit to Hengel’s argument. In fact, I argue that it is the widespread Christian use of the codex in this period that would have pointed the rhetoric, having been specifically crafted by means of βιβλία at this pre-transitional stage in the lexicography of book technology. Hengel is right to characterize the use of the codex as a “fixed Christian practice,” but there is no evidence to suggest that βιβλία would have referred to one this early, and in this context.
Due to its position in the composition history of the Gospel, this raises an interesting question regarding the relevance of the rhetoric itself. If this rhetoric comes from the hand of the author, then it is simple to read the verse as a self-conscious attestation of genre. However, if it comes from the hand of a later author, whether of the entire chapter or simply vv. 24-25, it is possible to understand the hyperbole as a misreading of 20:30-31 that results in a series of literary and generic implications not considered by the initial author of the Gospel. This would mean that 21:24-25 sets up a retrospective generic expectation for the Gospel not explicitly intended by its author.
Either way, John 21:25 leads one to read the Gospel somewhat differently than the first conclusion of John 20:30-31. [Though I tend towards the former.] And either way, reading this text in light of its rhetorical connections to book culture in antiquity grants us a clear point of access into the self-perception of Gospel writers at the end of the first century... I am sure the writer of John 21 was pleased with stumbling across such an efficient, double-edged rhetoric.
11/27/06
CSCO - Gospel of Thomas Conference
The Centre for the Study of Christian Origins will be holding a session on MSS of the Gospel of Thomas on 8 Dec. 2007 from 3:00-4:30 PM at New College, University of Edinburgh.
If I am not mistaken, Prof. Hurtado will be walking us through a set of digital images of Thomas MSS, which are listed in the appendix of Earliest Christian Artifacts. (Which I must say, is an awfully interesting monograph. Not that I am biased or anything.)
If I am not mistaken, Prof. Hurtado will be walking us through a set of digital images of Thomas MSS, which are listed in the appendix of Earliest Christian Artifacts. (Which I must say, is an awfully interesting monograph. Not that I am biased or anything.)
5/25/06
Penn Papyri Project
I have had a scintillating time perusing the UPenn papyri holdings at their nicely designed online collection hosted by the Schoenberg Center for Electronic Text and Image. These are very sharp digital images, and allow a set zoom to the level of two lines of the text square.
In one good example of how the clear these digital images are, here is the P.Oxy. manuscript of Matthew 1 (P.Oxy. 2?). As Robert Kraft just pointed out to me, you can clearly see what appears to be an iota (or upsilon) with a superlinear mark on the upper left margin, as well as the alpha (page number) on the upper center. He suggested that this may be the sort of feature I am looking for as a manufactural mark (for lack of a better term) of its actual construction as a codex.
There are a few interesting features posed by these markers. From what I can tell from the online photograph, the "A" page number could be from a different hand from the rest of the text. The top stroke of the right half of the alpha ends a bit low and round compared to the other alphas on the page. Likewise, the hand of this manuscript produces a rather crisp, confident iota. If the secondary marker in the top margin is an iota, it also doesn't match the hand of this manuscript. From what I can tell, the same is true even if it is an upsilon. If it is a slightly faded lowercase gamma, however, it would be hard to tell from which of these two hands it comes.
All this is to say that such markers as are found in this margin, if truly coming from a different hand, could be assessed as marks of manufacture. I am a bit at a loss as to its actual reference. An iota perhaps marking this as the first quire of ten sheets (40 pages)? This would be a bit bulky, but possible. A gamma marking 3 sheet quires (12 sheets)? This comes closer to the classic octavo pattern of book-binding, much more amenable to early binding materials than larger quires.
Disclaimer: I am simply musing here with no firsthand knowledge of this actual manuscript, and a basic grasp of these features. I am interested in actually finding some marks of manufacture, and it is interesting to muse about the features described above from this perspective. Any corrections to the above is greatly appreciated, if not requested. If anything, take this post just as a link to the Penn project.
In one good example of how the clear these digital images are, here is the P.Oxy. manuscript of Matthew 1 (P.Oxy. 2?). As Robert Kraft just pointed out to me, you can clearly see what appears to be an iota (or upsilon) with a superlinear mark on the upper left margin, as well as the alpha (page number) on the upper center. He suggested that this may be the sort of feature I am looking for as a manufactural mark (for lack of a better term) of its actual construction as a codex.
There are a few interesting features posed by these markers. From what I can tell from the online photograph, the "A" page number could be from a different hand from the rest of the text. The top stroke of the right half of the alpha ends a bit low and round compared to the other alphas on the page. Likewise, the hand of this manuscript produces a rather crisp, confident iota. If the secondary marker in the top margin is an iota, it also doesn't match the hand of this manuscript. From what I can tell, the same is true even if it is an upsilon. If it is a slightly faded lowercase gamma, however, it would be hard to tell from which of these two hands it comes.
All this is to say that such markers as are found in this margin, if truly coming from a different hand, could be assessed as marks of manufacture. I am a bit at a loss as to its actual reference. An iota perhaps marking this as the first quire of ten sheets (40 pages)? This would be a bit bulky, but possible. A gamma marking 3 sheet quires (12 sheets)? This comes closer to the classic octavo pattern of book-binding, much more amenable to early binding materials than larger quires.
Disclaimer: I am simply musing here with no firsthand knowledge of this actual manuscript, and a basic grasp of these features. I am interested in actually finding some marks of manufacture, and it is interesting to muse about the features described above from this perspective. Any corrections to the above is greatly appreciated, if not requested. If anything, take this post just as a link to the Penn project.
5/24/06
UK Holdings in the Kurzgefasste Liste
I have completed a list of any and all items in the KL that are held at UK institutions, including lectionaries (though I have had a harder time verifying the location of those half-dozen on the antiquities market or in private collections). As the list is 30 pages long, cross-referenced by location, I will not post it here but simply offer it to anyone who is interested. Just reply to this topic indicating your interest and I can email it to you.
5/8/06
Scottish Postgraduate Conference In Theology and Religious Studies
On June 8, New College is hosting the Scottish PG. Conference in Theology and Religious Studies. I have never attended one of these, so I don't quite know what to expect. But I did toss an abstract into the mix and it was accepted. I am looking forward to using the occasion as a chance to outline the broad strokes of some secondary research I have been doing here in Edinburgh through the following short paper:
Book Culture in Early Christianity: Text, Technology, and Early
Christian Theology
I did not have room in the abstract to toss in a sentence or two on my introduction to the paper, but I have been increasingly struck by how analogous the period of transition from scroll to codex in Greco-Roman culture is to our contemporary limbo between written and online publishing. In each historical context you have an authority granted to one medium or technology that is only slowly being granted to the other. Part of this textual transition is a complete redefinition of publishing, writing, and reading, and the cultural or semiotic authority that attends these activities. At the very least, thinking of a few early Christian scribal tendencies from this perspective is provocative. I won't have the time on this occasion to explore that thought in great detail, but perhaps at another conference.
Book Culture in Early Christianity: Text, Technology, and Early
Christian Theology
Recent advances in codicology and the history of literacy in early Christianity offer new paradigms for the study of early Christian origins and New Testament theology. This paper will summarize key historical propositions from these fields of scholarship and the nature of their relation to early Christian faith and practice. Much of the data concerning the writing culture of early Christianity, scribal practices in antiquity, and literacy rates in different areas of the Roman Empire has been part of New Testament studies for quite some time, but the means by which this data can deepen our appreciation of the development and spread of early Christian theology has not. This paper will propose several ways in which these rich fields of study can affect New Testament criticism and interpretation.
I did not have room in the abstract to toss in a sentence or two on my introduction to the paper, but I have been increasingly struck by how analogous the period of transition from scroll to codex in Greco-Roman culture is to our contemporary limbo between written and online publishing. In each historical context you have an authority granted to one medium or technology that is only slowly being granted to the other. Part of this textual transition is a complete redefinition of publishing, writing, and reading, and the cultural or semiotic authority that attends these activities. At the very least, thinking of a few early Christian scribal tendencies from this perspective is provocative. I won't have the time on this occasion to explore that thought in great detail, but perhaps at another conference.
5/5/06
Day Conference on TC and the NA Text (3 of 3)
NA 28 - The First Digital Critical Edition of the Greek New Testament.
Klaus Wachtel
This final paper was primarily connected with a series of Power Point slides, which makes it difficult to summarize here. The INTF should consider publishing an introductory volume or CD for the CBGM, NA 28, and related projects that includes the visual presentations that were part of this conference. Such a volume would help articulate the finer points of the CBGM to specialists, and serve as a helpful introductory volume to new users of the NA text. I could imagine taking one or two class periods in an intermediate level NT Greek class to walk students through some of this same information.
Wachtel started by pointing out that the digital NA 28 is not exactly the "first" digital or online edition of the Greek New Testament, as there are several out there currently available for use. I think it is worth pointing out though that the projected digital NA 28 has been designed on such a grand scale that it will set a new bar for online Biblical Studies resources. The innovative thing about the NA 28 is that in all actuality, its content is and always has been digital. The print format, akin to the NA 27, is simply a reader-friendly format of its digital source. The INTF has brought the NT into the information age by monopolizing on this new status of written "texts" that by now is standard in the publishing industry. And as they have shifted what would normally just become a printed repository of these digital databases (the printed NA 28) into an online, flexibly searchable, and endlessly clickable resource, the claim that it is in some sense the "first" online critical Greek New Testament does hold water.
The NA 28 Prototype
The current prototype gives one a basic sense of the permanent design. It turns all words, variants, and other such isolated bits of information that make up the critical apparatus into XML entities that pop-up when clicked. Imagine for a moment looking at the entry in the critical apparatus for 1 John 1:4 in the NA 27 and being able to instantly access all the relevant information about its variants in several different ways. This is what the digital NA 28 is all about. One can click on each word and look at all of its extant variants in a column on the right. One could then click on a particular manuscript that features a reading for 1 John 1:4, such as the 04 manuscript, and on a new screen pops up the relevant section of 1 John 1:4 (1 John 1:2-10 in this case) directly transcribed from the 04 original manuscript. Wnat to see the reading of 03 on 1 John 1:4? No problem. Click it and up pops Vaticanus. And once in this screen, one can click on any word in the Vaticanus transcription to find out how it compares to other manuscript witnesses.
This is just one example of the flexibility of the entire system. Currently, only 1 and 2 John are available in a sample format, but we are definitely looking at a new generation of Greek New Testament publishing. Ultimately, one will be able to select what windows are on the screen, and thus tailor the system to their research needs. The timing of when this will be completely available is uncertain, and it may be sold as part of a package with the printed NA 28 edition.
The Transcripts
A secondary resource also available online, is the Transcripts section of the database. In order for the NA 28 prototype to function, it must have the text of every NT manuscript transcribed directly into it. For the INTF, this transcription process takes place in three stages, and all single inscriptions are done intially by two different people. What we are then left with is (for the sake of argument) an accurate transcription of all of our fragments in a searchable format.
The Transcriptions database is searchable in two main ways. One can first search verse by verse through the NT and look at all the manuscript variants of a particular text. In this new window, one can either then access the actual transcription of each manuscript for this verse or look at a collation of the original spellings of the variants related to the verse. Another way to use the Transcriptions database is simply to click on the drop down "Manuscript Descriptions" menu on the main page of the database. From this menu one can select a manuscript and look at a detailed description if its content, size, location, and even a related bibliography. Eventually, the INTF would like for this information to occupy one side of the page while having an actual digital image of each manuscript on the other. This would also be possible then for each verse as well. Want to see the transcription of p64 next to an actual image of the fragment? No problem, just click it. This image would come directly from the servers of its host institution.
Conclusion
There are several other potential projects linked to these two databases, such as an online textual commentary, searchable groups of patristic citation, more paleographical notations, and the integration of a Greek Lexicon. Syriac, Coptic, and Latin resources could also become available. I am not sure what the timeline on all this is, but I can not imagine it is in the near future.
There is a final way in which the digital NA 28 can be concieved of as the "first" of its kind. Apparently, the final database will be available as part of the printed edition of the NA 28. This may involve an access CD or a code that provides access to the database, but either way the printed and online editions will initially exist as different formats of each other. What happens though in the future when the INTF decides to alter particular readings (such as happened between the NA 27 and Editio Critica Maior), or happens upon additional manuscript sources for a particular verse? Naturally, the digital nature of the online version will make it easy for such changes to occur.
Yet, this poses an interesting problem for the print edition, as such changes would render it relatively obselete in relation to its online twin. Perhaps the key feature of the NA 28 does not necessarily just involve the incredible flexibility of its digital component. Rather, when I put my money down on the counter for the printed NA 28 I will not actually paying for a text, but for the scholarship behind the text. And I will be paying to have access to the scholarship that may uncover new readings or manuscripts that will then be available in the online database. Buying the NA 28 will be more of a subscription than a purchase.
Again, the timeline on all of this is a bit fuzzy. Strutwolf quipped that he hopes to see the Editio Critica Maior done in his lifetime. As he is older than I, that means I have a very good chance at using all these resources some day. This paper concluded the conference, and I hope that the Center for the Study of Christian Origins will have another day conference of this sort next year.
Klaus Wachtel
This final paper was primarily connected with a series of Power Point slides, which makes it difficult to summarize here. The INTF should consider publishing an introductory volume or CD for the CBGM, NA 28, and related projects that includes the visual presentations that were part of this conference. Such a volume would help articulate the finer points of the CBGM to specialists, and serve as a helpful introductory volume to new users of the NA text. I could imagine taking one or two class periods in an intermediate level NT Greek class to walk students through some of this same information.
Wachtel started by pointing out that the digital NA 28 is not exactly the "first" digital or online edition of the Greek New Testament, as there are several out there currently available for use. I think it is worth pointing out though that the projected digital NA 28 has been designed on such a grand scale that it will set a new bar for online Biblical Studies resources. The innovative thing about the NA 28 is that in all actuality, its content is and always has been digital. The print format, akin to the NA 27, is simply a reader-friendly format of its digital source. The INTF has brought the NT into the information age by monopolizing on this new status of written "texts" that by now is standard in the publishing industry. And as they have shifted what would normally just become a printed repository of these digital databases (the printed NA 28) into an online, flexibly searchable, and endlessly clickable resource, the claim that it is in some sense the "first" online critical Greek New Testament does hold water.
The NA 28 Prototype
The current prototype gives one a basic sense of the permanent design. It turns all words, variants, and other such isolated bits of information that make up the critical apparatus into XML entities that pop-up when clicked. Imagine for a moment looking at the entry in the critical apparatus for 1 John 1:4 in the NA 27 and being able to instantly access all the relevant information about its variants in several different ways. This is what the digital NA 28 is all about. One can click on each word and look at all of its extant variants in a column on the right. One could then click on a particular manuscript that features a reading for 1 John 1:4, such as the 04 manuscript, and on a new screen pops up the relevant section of 1 John 1:4 (1 John 1:2-10 in this case) directly transcribed from the 04 original manuscript. Wnat to see the reading of 03 on 1 John 1:4? No problem. Click it and up pops Vaticanus. And once in this screen, one can click on any word in the Vaticanus transcription to find out how it compares to other manuscript witnesses.
This is just one example of the flexibility of the entire system. Currently, only 1 and 2 John are available in a sample format, but we are definitely looking at a new generation of Greek New Testament publishing. Ultimately, one will be able to select what windows are on the screen, and thus tailor the system to their research needs. The timing of when this will be completely available is uncertain, and it may be sold as part of a package with the printed NA 28 edition.
The Transcripts
A secondary resource also available online, is the Transcripts section of the database. In order for the NA 28 prototype to function, it must have the text of every NT manuscript transcribed directly into it. For the INTF, this transcription process takes place in three stages, and all single inscriptions are done intially by two different people. What we are then left with is (for the sake of argument) an accurate transcription of all of our fragments in a searchable format.
The Transcriptions database is searchable in two main ways. One can first search verse by verse through the NT and look at all the manuscript variants of a particular text. In this new window, one can either then access the actual transcription of each manuscript for this verse or look at a collation of the original spellings of the variants related to the verse. Another way to use the Transcriptions database is simply to click on the drop down "Manuscript Descriptions" menu on the main page of the database. From this menu one can select a manuscript and look at a detailed description if its content, size, location, and even a related bibliography. Eventually, the INTF would like for this information to occupy one side of the page while having an actual digital image of each manuscript on the other. This would also be possible then for each verse as well. Want to see the transcription of p64 next to an actual image of the fragment? No problem, just click it. This image would come directly from the servers of its host institution.
Conclusion
There are several other potential projects linked to these two databases, such as an online textual commentary, searchable groups of patristic citation, more paleographical notations, and the integration of a Greek Lexicon. Syriac, Coptic, and Latin resources could also become available. I am not sure what the timeline on all this is, but I can not imagine it is in the near future.
There is a final way in which the digital NA 28 can be concieved of as the "first" of its kind. Apparently, the final database will be available as part of the printed edition of the NA 28. This may involve an access CD or a code that provides access to the database, but either way the printed and online editions will initially exist as different formats of each other. What happens though in the future when the INTF decides to alter particular readings (such as happened between the NA 27 and Editio Critica Maior), or happens upon additional manuscript sources for a particular verse? Naturally, the digital nature of the online version will make it easy for such changes to occur.
Yet, this poses an interesting problem for the print edition, as such changes would render it relatively obselete in relation to its online twin. Perhaps the key feature of the NA 28 does not necessarily just involve the incredible flexibility of its digital component. Rather, when I put my money down on the counter for the printed NA 28 I will not actually paying for a text, but for the scholarship behind the text. And I will be paying to have access to the scholarship that may uncover new readings or manuscripts that will then be available in the online database. Buying the NA 28 will be more of a subscription than a purchase.
Again, the timeline on all of this is a bit fuzzy. Strutwolf quipped that he hopes to see the Editio Critica Maior done in his lifetime. As he is older than I, that means I have a very good chance at using all these resources some day. This paper concluded the conference, and I hope that the Center for the Study of Christian Origins will have another day conference of this sort next year.
5/1/06
Day Conference on TC and the NA Text (2 of 3)
Alexandrian, Western, Byzantine? The Theory of Local Text-Types - A Plea For Paradigm Shift in New Testament Textual Research.
Holger Strutwolf
In this second paper of the day conference we recieved a heavy dose of a few theoretical considerations at work behind the various projects related to the new NA databases. It was very helpful to look at the NA 28 and the Editio Critica Maior from this perspective as it served two convenient aims. Strutwolf situated these projects and the CBGM in the broader history of NT text criticism, and he demonstrated the potential they have for founding new paragigms in textual research.
The paper was outlined in three sections (these points are in paraphrase):
I. Essentials of the History of the Recension Hypothesis.
II. Reasons This Theory is Faulty.
III. Ways the Editio Critica Maior Embodies Necessary Theoretical Changes.
I. In the first section Strutwolf handily summarized the history of the Recension Hypothesis starting with Bengel, and then working through Griesbach, Semler, Westcott and Hort, and von Soden. In the introduction to his 1734 text, Bengel hypothesized that we should adopt the regions mentioned by Jerome and Tertullian as the broad outlines of the text-type groups manifest in our extant manuscripts. This basic notion of Bengel's Recension Hypothesis was taken up by Semler, and then popularized by Griesbach in his 1775 edition. The history of the RH is basically the history of variations on Bengel's theme. Different scholars used different nomenclature for various recensions, and retooled Bengel's original regional groupings. But by and large, the idea that we should assign manuscripts to one of a set number of geographical recensions held fast. Strutwolf suggested that the basic fault of Bengel's hypothesis is as material as it is methodological. As he simply didn't have enough manuscripts to critically discern different text-types, he was far too reliant on Jerome's attestation. It is a construct that stands or falls based on the accuracy of Jerome's comment which can be attributed to a number of things other than objective historiography. For example, Strutwolf commented that perhaps his partitioning early Christianity into three main areas of influence is colored by a trinitarian theology. Yet one of the long-standing durabilities of the RH is its simplicity, and it has become no less than axiomatic in NT textual research as a result.
II. The Editio Critica Maior is a crisis for the RH. Utilizing the flexible visualizing capabilities of the CBGM and its related databases, Strutwolf walked us through a number of texts which contradict the idea that we can draw such hard and fast lines between text-types and their according geographical locations. To this end, Strutwolf made two points in this section raised by manuscript evidence made clearer by the unique capacities of the CBGM.
- Firstly, when you look at the role manuscripts from different text-types play in genealogical coherence, the RH crumbles. We begin to see differing text-types showing up in stemmatic diagrams in places they shouldn't according to the RH, as their genealogical coherence displays textual interaction and ancestry where the RH attempts to make hard and fast regional distinctions. (Sorry I don't have any specifics on this, you really have to see the slides Strutwolf was using to get a detailed sense of his argument.) This leads us to a basic principle that we must privilege the role a manuscript plays in the genealogy of a text rather than its pre-concieved text type. Such roles are most properly assessed via the CBGM.
- Secondly, when one looks at the regional statistics (Sahidic, old Latin, Peshitta, etc...) of the manuscripts within the stemma for a particular reading, one can often see different text-types appearing in single regions. Simply based on these stastics, it doesn't seem that assigning sets of manuscript idiosyncracies to particular regions a priori is a legitimate critical enterprise. We can find any given set of "recensional" characteristics in any region throughout the transmission histories of certain texts. (Strutwolf demonstrated, for example, that we can see the characteristics of the Alexandrian tradition all over the place.)
These two general points are evidence that any reliance on the RH is unacceptable, as it doesn't fit our most current manuscript evidence.
III. Strutwolf then called for an abandonment of the text-type paradigm. In its place we should rely on the type of evidence produced by the CBGM. In a charming analogy, Strutwolf explained that his children are his children no matter where they live. Even if they are currently in Munich, they are his children based on their genetic relationship. In the same way the geographical location of a manuscript is not indicative of its ancestry. The place of origin and/or storage of a manuscript is nothing other than an indication of where it was last used. Instead we should assess the text-type of a manuscript based on its genealogical relationship to other manuscripts.
All the papyri from Egypt, for example, display a great deal of supposed "recensions" or text-types in one given region. And we have early Christian writers such as Origen who seem content with using a number of different text-types at the same time in one location. After an accumulation of such evidences, Strutwolf exclaimed that we are now in a "thrilling time" for NT textual criticism. We now have the tools and know-how available to initiate "a radical transformation of New Testament textual history." Even if one reads Strutwolf's paper in light of related points made by Colwell and Epp in equally paradigmatic essays, it actually was "thrilling" to see some of his evidences visualized by the CBGM and its databases. It did become apparent throughout the course of this essay that just as Strutwolf is able to conduct a wholesale appraisal of the RH and its affect on NT text criticism, so in the near future will one be able to conduct an appraisal of the CBGM as an apex of past genealogical methods and identify its pros and cons from that perspective.
Highlights from the Q and A Session:
1. When one looks at the stemmatic diagrams produced by the CBGM, we find certain single manuscripts cited as ancestors for a larger group of manunscripts through one or two other single manuscripts (completely hypothetical example: you will have a branch from 663 leading to 754 which then leads to another level of numerous manuscripts). How are we to then discern whether 754 or 663 is the most probable ancestor for this branch of the stemma?
Rather conveniently, Wachtel pointed out that even if one were to switch 754 and 663 (in this hypothetical example), the structure of the stemma would still remain the same. We can still argue about the fine details of probable ancestors for given readings, but the CBGM does produce more accurate structural outlines of manuscript transmission than we have had in the past.
2. Shouldn't we then switch from the geographical labels of the RH to something like "text-type 1," "text-type 2," usw...
No, because this approach still retains the basic notion that we need to seperate out text-types. We still could not legitimately draw a line between text-type 1, 2 and 3 when faced with the evidence of the CBGM. We simply need to confine our discussion of manuscript variants within the specific context of the transmission history of a given text.
3. What are some of the broader hermeneutical backgrounds to the CBGM?
Strutwolf did start his answer by recognizing that it is impossible to conduct any sort of criticism without some sort of hermeneutical bias. But, the CBGM is a relatively neutral tool in this respect. It features no ideological perspective on the text of the NT, and seems to circumvent the Bengelian fiddling with manuscript evidence which led to the RH by virtue of its raw statistical nature.
4. (My poorly worded question.) With the RH we had a starting place with discussing manuscript variants, namely the labels assigned to them a priori based on geography. But where then is our starting point with the CBGM? It seems that we are limited to talking only about the textual tradition of single texts, such as James, or 2 Peter. With such a starting point, we can't talk about the textual tradition of the Johannine Corpus as a whole, as we could with the RH. Rather, we can only talk about 1 John in isolation, GJohn in isolation, etc...
Yes. We have to start over with each book and develop their transmission histories in isolation. We cannot speak of a Luke/Acts transmission history. Only a Luke and an Acts transmission history.
I wish we had more time during the session to address this final point, as it raises the question as to how Strutwolf's hypothesis relates to the history of early Christianity. He did state that he sees in early Christianity a much broader network of textual transmission than the RH permits. If we can find all these different text-types existing in what are supposed to be the scribal and theological centers of early Christianity, then we must assume a different social structure than is often presupposed. Thus, while the CBGM presents itself as a neutral tool in terms of hermeneutical ideology, it does at the very least suggest a vision of early Christian geographical relationships that cuts against the grain of current models which position early Christian communities in relative textual isolation (thus resulting in historical constructs like "Johannine Christianity"). Here is a point of contact between the CBGM and the study of early Christian origins that really needs to be explored.
Holger Strutwolf
In this second paper of the day conference we recieved a heavy dose of a few theoretical considerations at work behind the various projects related to the new NA databases. It was very helpful to look at the NA 28 and the Editio Critica Maior from this perspective as it served two convenient aims. Strutwolf situated these projects and the CBGM in the broader history of NT text criticism, and he demonstrated the potential they have for founding new paragigms in textual research.
The paper was outlined in three sections (these points are in paraphrase):
I. Essentials of the History of the Recension Hypothesis.
II. Reasons This Theory is Faulty.
III. Ways the Editio Critica Maior Embodies Necessary Theoretical Changes.
I. In the first section Strutwolf handily summarized the history of the Recension Hypothesis starting with Bengel, and then working through Griesbach, Semler, Westcott and Hort, and von Soden. In the introduction to his 1734 text, Bengel hypothesized that we should adopt the regions mentioned by Jerome and Tertullian as the broad outlines of the text-type groups manifest in our extant manuscripts. This basic notion of Bengel's Recension Hypothesis was taken up by Semler, and then popularized by Griesbach in his 1775 edition. The history of the RH is basically the history of variations on Bengel's theme. Different scholars used different nomenclature for various recensions, and retooled Bengel's original regional groupings. But by and large, the idea that we should assign manuscripts to one of a set number of geographical recensions held fast. Strutwolf suggested that the basic fault of Bengel's hypothesis is as material as it is methodological. As he simply didn't have enough manuscripts to critically discern different text-types, he was far too reliant on Jerome's attestation. It is a construct that stands or falls based on the accuracy of Jerome's comment which can be attributed to a number of things other than objective historiography. For example, Strutwolf commented that perhaps his partitioning early Christianity into three main areas of influence is colored by a trinitarian theology. Yet one of the long-standing durabilities of the RH is its simplicity, and it has become no less than axiomatic in NT textual research as a result.
II. The Editio Critica Maior is a crisis for the RH. Utilizing the flexible visualizing capabilities of the CBGM and its related databases, Strutwolf walked us through a number of texts which contradict the idea that we can draw such hard and fast lines between text-types and their according geographical locations. To this end, Strutwolf made two points in this section raised by manuscript evidence made clearer by the unique capacities of the CBGM.
- Firstly, when you look at the role manuscripts from different text-types play in genealogical coherence, the RH crumbles. We begin to see differing text-types showing up in stemmatic diagrams in places they shouldn't according to the RH, as their genealogical coherence displays textual interaction and ancestry where the RH attempts to make hard and fast regional distinctions. (Sorry I don't have any specifics on this, you really have to see the slides Strutwolf was using to get a detailed sense of his argument.) This leads us to a basic principle that we must privilege the role a manuscript plays in the genealogy of a text rather than its pre-concieved text type. Such roles are most properly assessed via the CBGM.
- Secondly, when one looks at the regional statistics (Sahidic, old Latin, Peshitta, etc...) of the manuscripts within the stemma for a particular reading, one can often see different text-types appearing in single regions. Simply based on these stastics, it doesn't seem that assigning sets of manuscript idiosyncracies to particular regions a priori is a legitimate critical enterprise. We can find any given set of "recensional" characteristics in any region throughout the transmission histories of certain texts. (Strutwolf demonstrated, for example, that we can see the characteristics of the Alexandrian tradition all over the place.)
These two general points are evidence that any reliance on the RH is unacceptable, as it doesn't fit our most current manuscript evidence.
III. Strutwolf then called for an abandonment of the text-type paradigm. In its place we should rely on the type of evidence produced by the CBGM. In a charming analogy, Strutwolf explained that his children are his children no matter where they live. Even if they are currently in Munich, they are his children based on their genetic relationship. In the same way the geographical location of a manuscript is not indicative of its ancestry. The place of origin and/or storage of a manuscript is nothing other than an indication of where it was last used. Instead we should assess the text-type of a manuscript based on its genealogical relationship to other manuscripts.
All the papyri from Egypt, for example, display a great deal of supposed "recensions" or text-types in one given region. And we have early Christian writers such as Origen who seem content with using a number of different text-types at the same time in one location. After an accumulation of such evidences, Strutwolf exclaimed that we are now in a "thrilling time" for NT textual criticism. We now have the tools and know-how available to initiate "a radical transformation of New Testament textual history." Even if one reads Strutwolf's paper in light of related points made by Colwell and Epp in equally paradigmatic essays, it actually was "thrilling" to see some of his evidences visualized by the CBGM and its databases. It did become apparent throughout the course of this essay that just as Strutwolf is able to conduct a wholesale appraisal of the RH and its affect on NT text criticism, so in the near future will one be able to conduct an appraisal of the CBGM as an apex of past genealogical methods and identify its pros and cons from that perspective.
Highlights from the Q and A Session:
1. When one looks at the stemmatic diagrams produced by the CBGM, we find certain single manuscripts cited as ancestors for a larger group of manunscripts through one or two other single manuscripts (completely hypothetical example: you will have a branch from 663 leading to 754 which then leads to another level of numerous manuscripts). How are we to then discern whether 754 or 663 is the most probable ancestor for this branch of the stemma?
Rather conveniently, Wachtel pointed out that even if one were to switch 754 and 663 (in this hypothetical example), the structure of the stemma would still remain the same. We can still argue about the fine details of probable ancestors for given readings, but the CBGM does produce more accurate structural outlines of manuscript transmission than we have had in the past.
2. Shouldn't we then switch from the geographical labels of the RH to something like "text-type 1," "text-type 2," usw...
No, because this approach still retains the basic notion that we need to seperate out text-types. We still could not legitimately draw a line between text-type 1, 2 and 3 when faced with the evidence of the CBGM. We simply need to confine our discussion of manuscript variants within the specific context of the transmission history of a given text.
3. What are some of the broader hermeneutical backgrounds to the CBGM?
Strutwolf did start his answer by recognizing that it is impossible to conduct any sort of criticism without some sort of hermeneutical bias. But, the CBGM is a relatively neutral tool in this respect. It features no ideological perspective on the text of the NT, and seems to circumvent the Bengelian fiddling with manuscript evidence which led to the RH by virtue of its raw statistical nature.
4. (My poorly worded question.) With the RH we had a starting place with discussing manuscript variants, namely the labels assigned to them a priori based on geography. But where then is our starting point with the CBGM? It seems that we are limited to talking only about the textual tradition of single texts, such as James, or 2 Peter. With such a starting point, we can't talk about the textual tradition of the Johannine Corpus as a whole, as we could with the RH. Rather, we can only talk about 1 John in isolation, GJohn in isolation, etc...
Yes. We have to start over with each book and develop their transmission histories in isolation. We cannot speak of a Luke/Acts transmission history. Only a Luke and an Acts transmission history.
I wish we had more time during the session to address this final point, as it raises the question as to how Strutwolf's hypothesis relates to the history of early Christianity. He did state that he sees in early Christianity a much broader network of textual transmission than the RH permits. If we can find all these different text-types existing in what are supposed to be the scribal and theological centers of early Christianity, then we must assume a different social structure than is often presupposed. Thus, while the CBGM presents itself as a neutral tool in terms of hermeneutical ideology, it does at the very least suggest a vision of early Christian geographical relationships that cuts against the grain of current models which position early Christian communities in relative textual isolation (thus resulting in historical constructs like "Johannine Christianity"). Here is a point of contact between the CBGM and the study of early Christian origins that really needs to be explored.
4/27/06
Day Conference on TC and the NA Text (1 of 3)
On April 27, the Center for the Study of Christian Origins hosted a day conference here at New College featuring two scholars from the Institute fur neutestamentliche Textforschung. This laser-focused and well-recieved set of three papers from Klaus Wachtel and Holger Strutwolf garnered a fantastic amount of applause after the final Q and A, undoubtedly setting a new record for applause recieved by a paper delivered at New College. It may be that whatever tacit social cue that enables a group to stop clapping in a timely manner simply eluded us for a moment, or it may be that everyone else enjoyed the papers as much as I did. Let's just assume the latter. For me, the most beneficial aspect of the short conference was the clear visual and theoretical explanation of the primary features of projects related to the print and digitial versions of NA 28 and the Editio Critica Maior. After getting it straight from the INTF, I feel far more capable in my use of NA databases and look forward to having their full package in the far future.
Over the next three posts I will summarize the three papers and a few points of interest from their Q and A sessions. I might as well take this chance to address a few questions that Wachtel and Strufwolf did not have time to answer fully.
Reconstructing the Intitial Text in the Editio Critica Maior of the New Testament Using the Coherence-Based Genealogical Method.
Klaus Wachtel
Introduction
This first paper was by far the most challenging of the three, and served two functions. Wachtel first used some very helpful visual guides to introduce us to the mechanics of the digital NA prototype. After immersing us in the logic of its promising design, he then turned to a lengthy description of the critical process that lies behind this new resource. Wachtel pointed out that the Editio Critica Maior of the Catholic Epistles features 23 different readings from the NA 27 text, and as the Catholic Epistles are the only texts currently published in the series, one may extrapolate this to predict the amount of changes that may be in place once the entire NT canon has been evaluated. Thus even at this early stage, the fruit of the Editio Critica Maior's detailed labor is readily apparent and is becoming accessible online.
Section 1: The Resource
In the first section, Wachtel led us step by step through the remarkable features of the digitial NA prototype, that will someday be blessed with the full resources of the Editio Critica Maior. With perhaps his only nod to classic text critical principles, he raised the point that text criticism has two tasks: publishing the evidence of manuscript transmission, and reconstructing the original text. The prototype aims at fulfilling the first task by being a remarkably flexible repository for all the transmission data behind every NT manuscript variant, more on this in the third paper.
Section 2: The Methodology
In the second section, Wachtel addressed the second task in a brief introduction to the complicated Coherence-Based Genealogical Method. It seems that the most basic unique feature of both the prototype and the CBGM is that they allow the two tasks of text criticism (publishing transmission evidence, reconstructing the orgiginal text) to interface at every level of critical inquiry. While the CBGM is a process that potentially enables us to make more definitive decisions regarding variant NT readings, it is also a database of coherence-based genealogies that can be visualized and assessed in a variety of formats. Thus there is a constant interaction in this method between the actual publishing of variants in a database format and the actual use of these variants in constructing the most probable original text.
Much more could be said about this that I will reserve for future comment, but suffice it to say now that my initial impression is that the CBGM exists as a result of the use of emerging database technology, and certain emerging database technologies have taken shape based on the inherent logic to the CBGM. Perhaps it is this link between technology and praxis which has long been discussed in the work of Vattimo, McLuhan, Postman and others that is re-shaping our perspective on NT text criticism rather than any particular ideology or material discovery. This technological distinctive is what distinguishes the CBGM from other genealogical methods.
As far as the actual Coherence-Based Genealogical Method is concerned, I will thankfully defer to Gerd Mink's online introduction. At first the CBGM seems a bit more technically complicated than other genealogical methods, but it does result in elegant renderings of large amounts of manuscript data. Mink's introduction can be distilled into two points (quoting from the above link):
I will leave you to read the rest of Mink's introduction at your leisure, as these two introductory points are sufficient for the moment. Wachtel pointed out that this method is specifically geared towards the idiosyncracies of our current NT manuscript holdings. While there is a great wealth of NT manuscripts available, there are also far more that haven't survived. This bald fact makes it difficult for us to connect early manuscripts with later readings without relying on a fair bit of conjecture. On the other hand we must be clear that all surviving witness are related to each other in some fashion, there are always elements of coherence. Contamination simply "emerges from those texts at the disposal of the scribe." This leaves us with the working principle of establishing the genealogy of a reading based on every extant permutation of that text through hypotheses represented stemmatically. In these various print and online projects, the INTF has become uniquely capable of such representations.
The trickier areas of the CBGM involve discerning between pre-genealogical and genealogical coherence, and navigating prior and posterior variance within a given stemma. I don't have the clearest grasp of some of these finer points, but the method allows one to establish the potential anscestors of broad groups of variants for a particular reading and work one's way back to the most probable ancestor for the entire group of readings. The most probable ancestor is usually a relatively small group of manuscripts that can thus be regarded as closest to the original text. I hope that these stemmatic diagrams for key NT variants will be published as an additional resource, as they enable very efficient insight into textual relationships and grant easy access into the legwork behind the Editio Critica Maior.
Conclusion
Wachtel had an excellent slide that visually summarized the CBGM, but essentially it is a system of checks and balances between Internal Criteria (explantions for given variants) and External Criteria (pre-concieved text critical ideologies and pre-genealogical coherence). Both Internal and External Criteria establish local stemmata, then genealogical coherence within these stemmata, and then revise our preconcieved notions regarding any particular reading which leads to clarified relationships between manuscript variants. But as the CBGM is a methodology both linked to and part of a database, we are constantly able to revise our External Criteria based on the evidences of Internal Criteria. And we are also able to consistently reapply our revised External Criteria to the stemmatic diagramming of particular readings. It is a completely iterative process.
To conclude, Wachtel made two points regarding the methodology:
1. One problem with text criticism is the intrusion of subjective reasoning when gaps in the data emerge. In the CBGM, however, some of the more subjective elements involved with establishing geneaological coherence is offset by the presence of the objective facts of pre-genealogical coherence that are represented in this set of statistical databases.
2. The Editio Critica Maior has been criticized for not having many differences from N-A 27. But the CBGM is not just a "mopping up exercise" of clarifying and supporting existent readings based on this brilliant new database. The CBGM shows us what we are actually dealing with in terms of variants in a variety of statistical and visual formats, and shows us that we are dealing with probabilities rather than certainties. Wacthel didn't say this, but my impression is that while they are probabilities, they are darn good ones and far more helpful than the "certainties" of past text critical enterprises. The CBGM is simply "a tool that allows us to be coherent in our argument."
Q and A session
(This is just a sampling.)
1. How does the "original text" or "reconstructed text" relate to the most probable ancestors of a given reading? Are they on the same footing?
No, the most probable ancestor is a hypothetical stemmatic rendering of all the extant data. But, it does best explain the variants. The "ancestor" is a hypothesis of what the texts looked like before transmission.
2. What about where the uthor himself makes a spelling or grammar error, and thus the "ancestor" will be incorrect even if original?
In the Editio Critica Maior of James there are 15 points at which such situations are simply referred to as "lacunae." There is allowance in the process that the original text had spelling or grammar errors. (And it seems that the CBGM is very capable of charting the inevitable corrections stemmatically. This is another point at which the CBGM is simply a way of constructing more coherent transmission histories.)
Over the next three posts I will summarize the three papers and a few points of interest from their Q and A sessions. I might as well take this chance to address a few questions that Wachtel and Strufwolf did not have time to answer fully.
Reconstructing the Intitial Text in the Editio Critica Maior of the New Testament Using the Coherence-Based Genealogical Method.
Klaus Wachtel
Introduction
This first paper was by far the most challenging of the three, and served two functions. Wachtel first used some very helpful visual guides to introduce us to the mechanics of the digital NA prototype. After immersing us in the logic of its promising design, he then turned to a lengthy description of the critical process that lies behind this new resource. Wachtel pointed out that the Editio Critica Maior of the Catholic Epistles features 23 different readings from the NA 27 text, and as the Catholic Epistles are the only texts currently published in the series, one may extrapolate this to predict the amount of changes that may be in place once the entire NT canon has been evaluated. Thus even at this early stage, the fruit of the Editio Critica Maior's detailed labor is readily apparent and is becoming accessible online.
Section 1: The Resource
In the first section, Wachtel led us step by step through the remarkable features of the digitial NA prototype, that will someday be blessed with the full resources of the Editio Critica Maior. With perhaps his only nod to classic text critical principles, he raised the point that text criticism has two tasks: publishing the evidence of manuscript transmission, and reconstructing the original text. The prototype aims at fulfilling the first task by being a remarkably flexible repository for all the transmission data behind every NT manuscript variant, more on this in the third paper.
Section 2: The Methodology
In the second section, Wachtel addressed the second task in a brief introduction to the complicated Coherence-Based Genealogical Method. It seems that the most basic unique feature of both the prototype and the CBGM is that they allow the two tasks of text criticism (publishing transmission evidence, reconstructing the orgiginal text) to interface at every level of critical inquiry. While the CBGM is a process that potentially enables us to make more definitive decisions regarding variant NT readings, it is also a database of coherence-based genealogies that can be visualized and assessed in a variety of formats. Thus there is a constant interaction in this method between the actual publishing of variants in a database format and the actual use of these variants in constructing the most probable original text.
Much more could be said about this that I will reserve for future comment, but suffice it to say now that my initial impression is that the CBGM exists as a result of the use of emerging database technology, and certain emerging database technologies have taken shape based on the inherent logic to the CBGM. Perhaps it is this link between technology and praxis which has long been discussed in the work of Vattimo, McLuhan, Postman and others that is re-shaping our perspective on NT text criticism rather than any particular ideology or material discovery. This technological distinctive is what distinguishes the CBGM from other genealogical methods.
As far as the actual Coherence-Based Genealogical Method is concerned, I will thankfully defer to Gerd Mink's online introduction. At first the CBGM seems a bit more technically complicated than other genealogical methods, but it does result in elegant renderings of large amounts of manuscript data. Mink's introduction can be distilled into two points (quoting from the above link):
1. Elements of a genealogical hypothesis are not the manuscripts but the states of the text that they convey and that may be far older than the respective manuscript. The text with its respective state will be referred to here as witness, not the manuscript.
2. A hypothesis is called a stemma if it links witnesses or variants genealogically. For a hypothesis about a genealogical connection not only the connection itself but its quality is relevant. This quality has to be documented by adequate data. This complexity is integrated into this understanding of stemma. Consequently, a stemma in the sense of a graphical connection of witnesses is merely a simplified representation of a stemma in the more complex sense.
I will leave you to read the rest of Mink's introduction at your leisure, as these two introductory points are sufficient for the moment. Wachtel pointed out that this method is specifically geared towards the idiosyncracies of our current NT manuscript holdings. While there is a great wealth of NT manuscripts available, there are also far more that haven't survived. This bald fact makes it difficult for us to connect early manuscripts with later readings without relying on a fair bit of conjecture. On the other hand we must be clear that all surviving witness are related to each other in some fashion, there are always elements of coherence. Contamination simply "emerges from those texts at the disposal of the scribe." This leaves us with the working principle of establishing the genealogy of a reading based on every extant permutation of that text through hypotheses represented stemmatically. In these various print and online projects, the INTF has become uniquely capable of such representations.
The trickier areas of the CBGM involve discerning between pre-genealogical and genealogical coherence, and navigating prior and posterior variance within a given stemma. I don't have the clearest grasp of some of these finer points, but the method allows one to establish the potential anscestors of broad groups of variants for a particular reading and work one's way back to the most probable ancestor for the entire group of readings. The most probable ancestor is usually a relatively small group of manuscripts that can thus be regarded as closest to the original text. I hope that these stemmatic diagrams for key NT variants will be published as an additional resource, as they enable very efficient insight into textual relationships and grant easy access into the legwork behind the Editio Critica Maior.
Conclusion
Wachtel had an excellent slide that visually summarized the CBGM, but essentially it is a system of checks and balances between Internal Criteria (explantions for given variants) and External Criteria (pre-concieved text critical ideologies and pre-genealogical coherence). Both Internal and External Criteria establish local stemmata, then genealogical coherence within these stemmata, and then revise our preconcieved notions regarding any particular reading which leads to clarified relationships between manuscript variants. But as the CBGM is a methodology both linked to and part of a database, we are constantly able to revise our External Criteria based on the evidences of Internal Criteria. And we are also able to consistently reapply our revised External Criteria to the stemmatic diagramming of particular readings. It is a completely iterative process.
To conclude, Wachtel made two points regarding the methodology:
1. One problem with text criticism is the intrusion of subjective reasoning when gaps in the data emerge. In the CBGM, however, some of the more subjective elements involved with establishing geneaological coherence is offset by the presence of the objective facts of pre-genealogical coherence that are represented in this set of statistical databases.
2. The Editio Critica Maior has been criticized for not having many differences from N-A 27. But the CBGM is not just a "mopping up exercise" of clarifying and supporting existent readings based on this brilliant new database. The CBGM shows us what we are actually dealing with in terms of variants in a variety of statistical and visual formats, and shows us that we are dealing with probabilities rather than certainties. Wacthel didn't say this, but my impression is that while they are probabilities, they are darn good ones and far more helpful than the "certainties" of past text critical enterprises. The CBGM is simply "a tool that allows us to be coherent in our argument."
Q and A session
(This is just a sampling.)
1. How does the "original text" or "reconstructed text" relate to the most probable ancestors of a given reading? Are they on the same footing?
No, the most probable ancestor is a hypothetical stemmatic rendering of all the extant data. But, it does best explain the variants. The "ancestor" is a hypothesis of what the texts looked like before transmission.
2. What about where the uthor himself makes a spelling or grammar error, and thus the "ancestor" will be incorrect even if original?
In the Editio Critica Maior of James there are 15 points at which such situations are simply referred to as "lacunae." There is allowance in the process that the original text had spelling or grammar errors. (And it seems that the CBGM is very capable of charting the inevitable corrections stemmatically. This is another point at which the CBGM is simply a way of constructing more coherent transmission histories.)
4/20/06
Top Ten Online Biblical Studies Resources
I don't suppose these are in any particular order, and they are definitely not arranged by frequency of use. I am, though, particularly keen on the first few. For this list I have selected websites that serve as helpful Biblical Studies resources because they monopolize on convenient features of the internet. For some of these resources, form is function and vice-versa. The internet has granted us access to a remarkable number of Biblical and related texts in tagged, translated, and searchable forms. Some sites have managed to transpose this material to the internet environment better than others. The internet has also given us instant access to images of papyri and other manuscripts that were previously only available in grainy, expensive photos or microfiche. Some of these online collections now even provide focusing and imaging tools that make even the amateur paleographer a potential expert. There are also now audio and visual materials on Biblical texts and history that were previously too unwieldy to collate outside of museum or archive settings.
1. Digital Nestle-Aland prototype
For a long time I thought of Tony Fisher's Greek New Testament as the bee's knees. Based on the NA 26 it simply could not be beaten for instant ease of use. But unfortunately this resource may be reduced to a zipped .tar file in the near future. Thankfully, the University of Muenster INTTR has raised the bar with their Digital Nestle-Aland prototype. This resource has a fairly steep learning curve, but a helpful guide will ease you into the process. A key feature of this ("yet another") online GNT is what amounts to a very handy toolbar that enables one to browse the entire critical apparatus (both the variants and the NA positive apparatus) behind a given text click by click. Unfortunately, the only text currently available in this system is 1 John. The Digital NA also works in tandem with the NT transcripts prototype, a somewhat more simplified database that allows one to work text by text and word for word through the NA 27 apparatus. Once this has evolved beyond the prototype stage it is hard to imagine something more efficient.
2. Perseus.
Perseus is like the Yankees of online Biblical Studies resources, always everyone's favorite. They are well-stacked, have LSJ on the mound, and the deepest bench in the league as far as primary and secondary resources go. One's first few forays into Perseus can be a bit intimidating, and it is helpful to spend the time getting the right fonts configured for the system, but it is eventually worth it.
3. Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon
Just take a look at this page, and click on "search the CAL databases" for an example of how helpful this site can be. There are assorted lexicons and search features there, but if you click on "texts" you can see the incredible range of Aramaic/Syriac texts available, most of which come with a brief morphological analysis pop-up. The "Targumic Studies Module" is a virtual cheat sheet for various Targums, and it includes an online version of Sokoloff's A Dictionary of Jewish Palestinian Aramaic. The only drawback to the site is its unfortunate design, and if viewed on high-resolution (as most monitors are these days), the Hebrew/Aramaic fonts can be a bit tiny. If granted a redesign, the CAL could be a very helpful research hub.
4. Excepting Willker's Online Images and Decker's MSS photos one would be hard-pressed to find a listing of all manuscript photos online. (Mark Goodacre brings many of them together at Text Criticism: Online Images.) As some of these sites have a few broken links, and there are certainly a few more fragments online now than are represented by them, it may be time for a massive update. There are a few places intent on producing large online databases of high-resolution digital manuscript photos, such as The Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts. But until then the laudable efforts of Willker, Decker, and Goodacre will have to suffice.
5. Four-Color Synopsis
In the real world, I am still joined to the hip with my NA Synopsis. But in the virtual world I have enjoyed using this pleasant synopsis by Carlson. Its design is helpful and gives one a sense of getting the big picture fairly quickly due to its colorful arrangement.
6. Audio GNT
A cousin to Greek and Latin Audio Online, this remarkably helpful teaching aid makes great use of the flexibility of the internet. Voiced by Marilyn Phemister, I will require all future 1st year Greek students to sleep with this cd playing. There is a cd set available by Jonathan Pennington that takes one through NT Greek vocabulary, but Audio GNT uniquely permits one to be an audience to what usually is an object of study.
7. Morphological Analysis of the LXX
One of many helpful resources on the UPenn servers is this little gem. I recommend printing out the file that explains the tagging system, but once one gets used to it this resource becomes a searchable analytical titan as far as online LXX studies are concerned.
8. Net Bible
There are a lot of online bibles out there. I consistently recommend this one to professionals and lay-people simply due to its user-friendly apparatus that tracks translation choices made verse by verse. Not only is it a good translation, but its running textual commentary seems designed to key scholars into NetBible's rationale as well as giving the layperson an insider's glimpse into how a text makes it from the original languages into English.
9. Google Scholar
This tool has turned out to be handier that it initially seemed, and not just for vanity searches. It can provide a bird's eye view over disciplines outside of one's speciality as well as specific bibliographic details of essays, papers, and lectures. As more and more scholarly material becomes part of the internet, this resource is going to become handier every month.
10. Ancient Maps of Jerusalem or Handbook of Biblical Numismatics
If you are as dorky as I am, then you will spend ages scouring the Ancient Maps of Jerusalem, scratching your heads for lost bits of schoolboy Latin and just generally having a good time. And even better, you can brag about the Handbook of Biblical Numismatics on your next date, see how well that goes over. But if I learned anything from working in the rare book room at Trinity International Unversity and stumbling across a copy of Gleason Archer's "A Descriptive Catalog of the Trinity Evangelical Divinity School Biblical Coin Collection," (a rather incredible collection) it is that coins really are fascinating and we can learn quite a bit about ancient cultures through numismatics. Hopefully, this last website will convince you of this.
1. Digital Nestle-Aland prototype
For a long time I thought of Tony Fisher's Greek New Testament as the bee's knees. Based on the NA 26 it simply could not be beaten for instant ease of use. But unfortunately this resource may be reduced to a zipped .tar file in the near future. Thankfully, the University of Muenster INTTR has raised the bar with their Digital Nestle-Aland prototype. This resource has a fairly steep learning curve, but a helpful guide will ease you into the process. A key feature of this ("yet another") online GNT is what amounts to a very handy toolbar that enables one to browse the entire critical apparatus (both the variants and the NA positive apparatus) behind a given text click by click. Unfortunately, the only text currently available in this system is 1 John. The Digital NA also works in tandem with the NT transcripts prototype, a somewhat more simplified database that allows one to work text by text and word for word through the NA 27 apparatus. Once this has evolved beyond the prototype stage it is hard to imagine something more efficient.
2. Perseus.
Perseus is like the Yankees of online Biblical Studies resources, always everyone's favorite. They are well-stacked, have LSJ on the mound, and the deepest bench in the league as far as primary and secondary resources go. One's first few forays into Perseus can be a bit intimidating, and it is helpful to spend the time getting the right fonts configured for the system, but it is eventually worth it.
3. Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon
Just take a look at this page, and click on "search the CAL databases" for an example of how helpful this site can be. There are assorted lexicons and search features there, but if you click on "texts" you can see the incredible range of Aramaic/Syriac texts available, most of which come with a brief morphological analysis pop-up. The "Targumic Studies Module" is a virtual cheat sheet for various Targums, and it includes an online version of Sokoloff's A Dictionary of Jewish Palestinian Aramaic. The only drawback to the site is its unfortunate design, and if viewed on high-resolution (as most monitors are these days), the Hebrew/Aramaic fonts can be a bit tiny. If granted a redesign, the CAL could be a very helpful research hub.
4. Excepting Willker's Online Images and Decker's MSS photos one would be hard-pressed to find a listing of all manuscript photos online. (Mark Goodacre brings many of them together at Text Criticism: Online Images.) As some of these sites have a few broken links, and there are certainly a few more fragments online now than are represented by them, it may be time for a massive update. There are a few places intent on producing large online databases of high-resolution digital manuscript photos, such as The Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts. But until then the laudable efforts of Willker, Decker, and Goodacre will have to suffice.
5. Four-Color Synopsis
In the real world, I am still joined to the hip with my NA Synopsis. But in the virtual world I have enjoyed using this pleasant synopsis by Carlson. Its design is helpful and gives one a sense of getting the big picture fairly quickly due to its colorful arrangement.
6. Audio GNT
A cousin to Greek and Latin Audio Online, this remarkably helpful teaching aid makes great use of the flexibility of the internet. Voiced by Marilyn Phemister, I will require all future 1st year Greek students to sleep with this cd playing. There is a cd set available by Jonathan Pennington that takes one through NT Greek vocabulary, but Audio GNT uniquely permits one to be an audience to what usually is an object of study.
7. Morphological Analysis of the LXX
One of many helpful resources on the UPenn servers is this little gem. I recommend printing out the file that explains the tagging system, but once one gets used to it this resource becomes a searchable analytical titan as far as online LXX studies are concerned.
8. Net Bible
There are a lot of online bibles out there. I consistently recommend this one to professionals and lay-people simply due to its user-friendly apparatus that tracks translation choices made verse by verse. Not only is it a good translation, but its running textual commentary seems designed to key scholars into NetBible's rationale as well as giving the layperson an insider's glimpse into how a text makes it from the original languages into English.
9. Google Scholar
This tool has turned out to be handier that it initially seemed, and not just for vanity searches. It can provide a bird's eye view over disciplines outside of one's speciality as well as specific bibliographic details of essays, papers, and lectures. As more and more scholarly material becomes part of the internet, this resource is going to become handier every month.
10. Ancient Maps of Jerusalem or Handbook of Biblical Numismatics
If you are as dorky as I am, then you will spend ages scouring the Ancient Maps of Jerusalem, scratching your heads for lost bits of schoolboy Latin and just generally having a good time. And even better, you can brag about the Handbook of Biblical Numismatics on your next date, see how well that goes over. But if I learned anything from working in the rare book room at Trinity International Unversity and stumbling across a copy of Gleason Archer's "A Descriptive Catalog of the Trinity Evangelical Divinity School Biblical Coin Collection," (a rather incredible collection) it is that coins really are fascinating and we can learn quite a bit about ancient cultures through numismatics. Hopefully, this last website will convince you of this.
4/19/06
Online Resources
General texts:
Net Bible ; Unbound Bible ; Blue Letter Bible ; Online Parallel Bible
Jewish Texts:
Early Jewish Writings ; Texts of Judaism ; Sepherot ha-Qadosh ; Mishneh ; Y. Talmud ; B. Talmud ; Talmud Trans. ; Newsletter for Targum and Cognate Studies ; The Zohar ; Bar/Bat Mitzvah tutor! ; Mikra'ot Gedolot ; Early Hebrew Printing ; Audio Hebrew Bible
LXX:
LXX ; The Septuagint Online ; Morphological LXX ; Textual Mechanics of LXX/OG
Pseudepigraphy:
Critical Pseudepigrapha
GNT:
Digital NA Proto. ; NT Transcripts Proto. ; Fisher's Analytical Greek New Testament ; The Online Greek Bible ; Zhubert ; Biblon 2000 ; Parallel GNT ; GNT/LXX ; Online GNT ; Greek/Latin Audio Online ; Audio GNT
NT Trans.:
Peshitta ; Syriac Peshitta ; Vulgate ; Vulgate
NT Resources:
NT Gateway ; Synoptic Problem ; Four Color Synopsis ; Five Gospels Parallel ; Early Christian Gospels ; NT Apocrypha ; the Paul Page
DSS:
Open Scrolls ; DSS ; Great Isaiah Scroll
Nag Hammadi:
Bibliotheque copte de Nag Hammadi ; Gnostic Society Library ; G. Thomas ; GThomas Commentary
Fathers:
Early Christian Writings ; Early Church Fathers ; More Fathers ; Ecole Initiative ; NT Cit. in CF ; NT Canon ; Canon Cross-Ref.
Papyri Coll./Images:
Carlsberg ; Schoyen ; CSAM ; JRUL ; Early Greek Bible Manuscripts Project ; Biblical Manuscripts Project ; CSNTM ; U. Penn
Man. Images:
Papyri List ; Papyri List ; Goodacre's Online Images List ; Codex Vaticanus ; Codex W (032) - Mark ; Aleppo Codex ; Leningrad Codex
Text Criticism:
TCG ; Student's Guide to Variants ; Variant Comparison ; Man. Ordered by Century ; Swanson's Errata list ; Kurz. L. Update ; Lectionaries ; Ency. of NT Textual Criticism ; Text Types ; Ancient Writing ; Byz. Paleography ; Schoyen Paleography primer ; Man. Number Conv. Table ; IAM ; OT/NT text criticism ; TC intro ; Greek Bible in G-R World ; Conversion tables ; Lectionaries ; Kenyon ; Textual Commentary ; Majority Textual Commentary
Hebrew:
Unicode Converter ; Hebrew Script ; Hebrew Cantillation Marks
Greek:
Liddell-Scott Online/Perseus ; TLG ; Homeric Lexicon ; Greek Grammar ; Classical/Koine Greek ; Unicode Converter ; Greek Lexicography
Aramaic/Syriac:
Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon ; Syriac Script Intro.
Coptic:
Coptic Lexicon ; Bohairic Lexicon ; Plumley ; Coptic Intro. ; Coptic Intro. ; Coptic Resources ; Unicode Converter ; Nova Sahidica ; Coptic GJohn
ANE
Assyrian Aramaic ; Ras Shamra ; Cuneiform Digital Library ; ABZU ; BAS ; Inscriptitfact ; Handbook of Biblical Numismatics ; WSRP ; Numismatics
Lists:
ANE ; Aramaic ; B-Greek ; G. Megillot ; Hugoye ; Iudaios-L ; TC List
Links:
Brian's Biblical Links ; DSS links ; Explorator ; Greek Manuscripts Gateway ; iTanakh ; NT Gateway ; Paleojudaica ; U. Mich. Papyrology links ; Hebrew OT Links ; Bib. Studies Carnival ; Jewish Texts and History
General:
Journal Abbreviations
Net Bible ; Unbound Bible ; Blue Letter Bible ; Online Parallel Bible
Jewish Texts:
Early Jewish Writings ; Texts of Judaism ; Sepherot ha-Qadosh ; Mishneh ; Y. Talmud ; B. Talmud ; Talmud Trans. ; Newsletter for Targum and Cognate Studies ; The Zohar ; Bar/Bat Mitzvah tutor! ; Mikra'ot Gedolot ; Early Hebrew Printing ; Audio Hebrew Bible
LXX:
LXX ; The Septuagint Online ; Morphological LXX ; Textual Mechanics of LXX/OG
Pseudepigraphy:
Critical Pseudepigrapha
GNT:
Digital NA Proto. ; NT Transcripts Proto. ; Fisher's Analytical Greek New Testament ; The Online Greek Bible ; Zhubert ; Biblon 2000 ; Parallel GNT ; GNT/LXX ; Online GNT ; Greek/Latin Audio Online ; Audio GNT
NT Trans.:
Peshitta ; Syriac Peshitta ; Vulgate ; Vulgate
NT Resources:
NT Gateway ; Synoptic Problem ; Four Color Synopsis ; Five Gospels Parallel ; Early Christian Gospels ; NT Apocrypha ; the Paul Page
DSS:
Open Scrolls ; DSS ; Great Isaiah Scroll
Nag Hammadi:
Bibliotheque copte de Nag Hammadi ; Gnostic Society Library ; G. Thomas ; GThomas Commentary
Fathers:
Early Christian Writings ; Early Church Fathers ; More Fathers ; Ecole Initiative ; NT Cit. in CF ; NT Canon ; Canon Cross-Ref.
Papyri Coll./Images:
Carlsberg ; Schoyen ; CSAM ; JRUL ; Early Greek Bible Manuscripts Project ; Biblical Manuscripts Project ; CSNTM ; U. Penn
Man. Images:
Papyri List ; Papyri List ; Goodacre's Online Images List ; Codex Vaticanus ; Codex W (032) - Mark ; Aleppo Codex ; Leningrad Codex
Text Criticism:
TCG ; Student's Guide to Variants ; Variant Comparison ; Man. Ordered by Century ; Swanson's Errata list ; Kurz. L. Update ; Lectionaries ; Ency. of NT Textual Criticism ; Text Types ; Ancient Writing ; Byz. Paleography ; Schoyen Paleography primer ; Man. Number Conv. Table ; IAM ; OT/NT text criticism ; TC intro ; Greek Bible in G-R World ; Conversion tables ; Lectionaries ; Kenyon ; Textual Commentary ; Majority Textual Commentary
Hebrew:
Unicode Converter ; Hebrew Script ; Hebrew Cantillation Marks
Greek:
Liddell-Scott Online/Perseus ; TLG ; Homeric Lexicon ; Greek Grammar ; Classical/Koine Greek ; Unicode Converter ; Greek Lexicography
Aramaic/Syriac:
Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon ; Syriac Script Intro.
Coptic:
Coptic Lexicon ; Bohairic Lexicon ; Plumley ; Coptic Intro. ; Coptic Intro. ; Coptic Resources ; Unicode Converter ; Nova Sahidica ; Coptic GJohn
ANE
Assyrian Aramaic ; Ras Shamra ; Cuneiform Digital Library ; ABZU ; BAS ; Inscriptitfact ; Handbook of Biblical Numismatics ; WSRP ; Numismatics
Lists:
ANE ; Aramaic ; B-Greek ; G. Megillot ; Hugoye ; Iudaios-L ; TC List
Links:
Brian's Biblical Links ; DSS links ; Explorator ; Greek Manuscripts Gateway ; iTanakh ; NT Gateway ; Paleojudaica ; U. Mich. Papyrology links ; Hebrew OT Links ; Bib. Studies Carnival ; Jewish Texts and History
General:
Journal Abbreviations
4/18/06
4/17/06
GJudas: The Unsettling Conclusion (The Robinson Contribution)
After corresponding with several people involved, checking their responses against both Robinson's book and all the insider information (the "van Rijn angle") that has been made public, I am convinced of two things: Firstly, everyone who is comfortable with actually talking about the current state of the GJudas "find" as it relates to its troubled history has said all they are going to say at this point (including Roberty, Ferrell, and Ferrini, who hasn't said anything). Secondly, there is a lot more that could be said that hasn't.
As a result of this, we can only conclude that the National Geographic press about GJudas has been hopelessly edited for public consumption and the current codicological and papyrological analysis of the GJudas manuscript is really only an analysis of what is left of the original find. The Mathematical Treatise has been split and sold off to two different collections. It is highly probable that Ferrini sold leaves from some or all of the manuscripts that were in his possession at one point, people to whom these have been purportedly sold have not been forthcoming in responding to this allegation. And of course, the Gospel of Judas has lost a bit of weight over its journey through neglect and other means.
Investigative journalism is not my metier, but it has been revealing (and somewhat more exciting than thesis research) to spend the last week sniffing through all the data relevant to this "find" and substantiating Robinson's original paper on GJudas as well as related hearsay. Now I am extremely curious as to what extent the history of NT fragment discovery is seeded with analogous skullduggery, I have simply glossed over this facet of NT textual-criticism history with the swashbuckling image of Tischendorf wheedling manuscripts out of unsuspecting monks. It also seems that this sanitized image exists as a consensus simply for lack of an alternative. Perhaps there are other major and minor finds with similar grey-market histories, and have finally landed in the hands of scholarship a few leaves or fragments short of their original condition. That sounds like a book I would read, any interested publishers please feel free to contact me for a proposal.
Roberty confirmed via email that a critical edition of the whole codex will be done May 2006, to be released the following September, including unidentifiable fragments. Over the next few weeks, more information is going to surface regarding the "who sold what when" question (see previous posts), and I will fill in the gaps in previous posts accordingly.
(Update 4/20: R. Pearse has posted this interesting piece about Robinson's involvement with the Jung Codex debacle. It makes for interesting background reading to the GJudas issue.)
(Update 4/20: The Plain Dealer is reporting that Ferrini (or at least his reciever) is coughing up a few fragments of GJudas that he had laying about. This confirms our suspicion that he did manage to keep a few fragments and/or leaves from the manuscripts related to Codex Tchacos. Where's the rest?)
4/14/06
GJudas: The R. Pearse Investigation.
Pearse has chronicled the details of his search for more info on the manuscripts physically related to the GJudas "find." Contact with van Rijn leads me to believe all this is correct. Here are some of the highlights:
From an anonymous source:
Everything except the so-called mathematical codex is in the hands of the Swiss foundation. Ferrini sold off the math codex in fragments, but I think most of it (I dare not say all) wound up in two collections, one a private collector in (I believe) Baltimore, the other the Lloyd Cotsen collection of children's literature in the Princeton University Library. It was a truly despicable act to break it up in this fashion...It has been said that all four were found together. But I am inclined to be skeptical about such a claim, unless there is irrefutable evidence for it. This question was not raised in 1983, and I have not read Herb Krosney's book to see what he has to report from his investigations into the provenance.
I am still having trouble understanding precisely how Ferrini fits into this, but apparently I am not the only one. Pearse notes,
"...if this is correct, then something strange happened. Frieda Tchacos Nussberger sold 4 mss to Ferrini, including the codex Tchacos; Ferrini didn't pay for at least the latter; Frieda then recovered the codex Tchacos. Ferrini sold the Mathematical Codex. Frieda (i.e. Roberty) acquires the other two. Is it really possible that Ferrini paid Frieda for the Exodus and Paul; then Frieda bought them back from Ferrini? Or can we speculate that Ferrini was merely Frieda's agent for whatever he could sell, and returned whatever he couldn't? Who knows?"
From what I can gather, we can only say with confidence that Ferrini never paid for the codex Tchacos, even though he may have sold a few leaves out of it. That latter point is conjecture though and I wouldn't want to make any false statements about the brokerage of the other texts.
More as this develops...
(Update 4/14: Pearse has posted an email response from Ferrell denying any involvement with the Exodus manuscript even though he had been linked with it rather early on. There is, however, some alleged precedent for Ferrell's involvement with such stories.)
(Update 4/14: I did recieve a possible explanation of Ferrini's involvement from an anonymous someone "in-the-know": "Ferrini, knowing he had Frieda by the balls, because of the provenance of the manuscripts, squeezed her out of the mathematical treatise and pages of the Exodus for peanuts, and Frieda, afraid to be exposed and lose the manuscripts, (Ferrini played kamikaze... all or nothing) accepted the cut up Gospel as he handed it to her.")
From an anonymous source:
Everything except the so-called mathematical codex is in the hands of the Swiss foundation. Ferrini sold off the math codex in fragments, but I think most of it (I dare not say all) wound up in two collections, one a private collector in (I believe) Baltimore, the other the Lloyd Cotsen collection of children's literature in the Princeton University Library. It was a truly despicable act to break it up in this fashion...It has been said that all four were found together. But I am inclined to be skeptical about such a claim, unless there is irrefutable evidence for it. This question was not raised in 1983, and I have not read Herb Krosney's book to see what he has to report from his investigations into the provenance.
I am still having trouble understanding precisely how Ferrini fits into this, but apparently I am not the only one. Pearse notes,
"...if this is correct, then something strange happened. Frieda Tchacos Nussberger sold 4 mss to Ferrini, including the codex Tchacos; Ferrini didn't pay for at least the latter; Frieda then recovered the codex Tchacos. Ferrini sold the Mathematical Codex. Frieda (i.e. Roberty) acquires the other two. Is it really possible that Ferrini paid Frieda for the Exodus and Paul; then Frieda bought them back from Ferrini? Or can we speculate that Ferrini was merely Frieda's agent for whatever he could sell, and returned whatever he couldn't? Who knows?"
From what I can gather, we can only say with confidence that Ferrini never paid for the codex Tchacos, even though he may have sold a few leaves out of it. That latter point is conjecture though and I wouldn't want to make any false statements about the brokerage of the other texts.
More as this develops...
(Update 4/14: Pearse has posted an email response from Ferrell denying any involvement with the Exodus manuscript even though he had been linked with it rather early on. There is, however, some alleged precedent for Ferrell's involvement with such stories.)
(Update 4/14: I did recieve a possible explanation of Ferrini's involvement from an anonymous someone "in-the-know": "Ferrini, knowing he had Frieda by the balls, because of the provenance of the manuscripts, squeezed her out of the mathematical treatise and pages of the Exodus for peanuts, and Frieda, afraid to be exposed and lose the manuscripts, (Ferrini played kamikaze... all or nothing) accepted the cut up Gospel as he handed it to her.")
4/13/06
GJudas: The Tchacos-N./Roberty Solution.
So now the NYT has picked up on this story. I bet they were reading my blog this morning. Excerpts from the article:
To quote Col. John "Hannibal" Smith: "I love it when a plan comes together!"
I am willing to bet that the "van Rijn angle" is also missing from Krosney's book.
There is Ferrini again, but according to Ferrini it was more a matter of questions concerning the provenance (which the Yale reps also had) than a cash issue. Given the reports concerning his bankruptcy, it may have been a bit of both.
All in all, I am not quite sure why the NYT overlooked Robinson's book and involvement with exposing some of this information, it is an important part of the story. I still have problems with the claim that National Geographic is sponsoring a full codicological OR papyrological analysis of this manuscript. They simply don't have enough of it to make a comprehensive assessment.
"I went through hell and back, and I saved something for humanity," Ms. Tchacos Nussberger said in a telephone interview. "I would have given it for nothing to someone who would have saved it."
Last week, National Geographic began a large campaign for the Gospel of Judas, featuring it in two new books, a television documentary, an exhibition and the May issue of National Geographic magazine.
The organization did not buy the document. Instead, it paid $1 million to the Maecenas Foundation, effectively for the manuscript's contents. Part of the revenues generated by the National Geographic projects go to the foundation.
The foundation was set up some years ago by Ms. Tchacos Nussberger's lawyer, Mario Roberty, well before it became involved with the Gospel of Judas. Mr. Roberty is the only official of the foundation, which he said was involved in projects like returning antiquities to their countries of origin. He said that when Ms. Tchacos Nussberger turned over the document to the foundation in 2001, he quickly contacted officials in Egypt and assured them that the manuscript would be returned there. He said the foundation had clear legal title to the document.
To quote Col. John "Hannibal" Smith: "I love it when a plan comes together!"
"'I think I was chosen by Judas to rehabilitate him,'" Ms. Tchacos Nussberger, 65, is quoted as saying in one of the society's books, "The Lost Gospel," by Herbert Krosney. Mr. Krosney is also an independent television producer who brought the gospel project to National Geographic.
Missing from the book is any mention of an incident in 2001 when Ms. Tchacos Nussberger was detained in Cyprus at the request of Italian officials, who wanted to question her as part of a broader investigation into antiquities that had been illegally taken out of Italy and sold elsewhere. Paolo Ferri, the Rome-based prosecutor in the case, said she was charged with several violations involving antiquities but was given a reduced sentence that was suspended because she had, among other things, previously agreed to return an artifact claimed by Italy.
I am willing to bet that the "van Rijn angle" is also missing from Krosney's book.
Then in 2001, Ms. Tchacos Nussberger sold it to an antiquities dealer in Ohio for $2.5 million, but the deal fell apart when the dealer did not make good on the payments.
There is Ferrini again, but according to Ferrini it was more a matter of questions concerning the provenance (which the Yale reps also had) than a cash issue. Given the reports concerning his bankruptcy, it may have been a bit of both.
All in all, I am not quite sure why the NYT overlooked Robinson's book and involvement with exposing some of this information, it is an important part of the story. I still have problems with the claim that National Geographic is sponsoring a full codicological OR papyrological analysis of this manuscript. They simply don't have enough of it to make a comprehensive assessment.
GJudas: The Michel van Rijn Angle.
The Angle
(Disclaimer: I am simply summarizing here what I have gleaned from van Rijn and others, as I haven't yet read Robinson's book on the same subject, I am not quite clear on what really are the details. Read this as "historical fiction," if you will, kind of like The Da Vinci Code.)
Michel van Rijn brought the possibility of fraudulent dealing behind the GJudas sale to the public's attention via the infamous Artnews all the way back in 2001 (Well, as public as possible for a site that Google doesn't refer to. Please see James M. Robinson's paper linked in a previous post that covers some of this same material and adds in a few wrinkles.) In his first comment on the news item, in Jan. 2001, he hears about Ferrini's initial attempt to purchase this set of six manuscripts. By Sep. 2001, van Rijn uncovers a bit more information and reveals that the manuscript deal he had been tracking in Jan. through Roberty was actually been stolen from a dealer named Hanna in Egypt and smuggled into Geneva years ago before being sent to a safety-deposit box in New York. Then in Dec. 2001, van Rijn finds out that despite this information becoming public Roberty and Tchacos are trying to sell it to a US dealer, who I assume is Bruce Ferrini, it has since come to light that a few others were also approached. There is nothing until Dec. 2004, when van Rijn summarizes the whole affair in light of all the information he has gathered so far, even bringing us up to date with the parallel efforts of Kasser and Charles Hedrick to translate and publicize the text. With Hedrick's permission van Rijn uploaded some of these early images and translations.
So in van Rijn's narration we start with the stolen and smuggled manuscript from Egypt, seen by Tchacos in 1982, which then makes its way to a safety-deposit box in New York. I am not a curator, but that may not be the best place for a manuscript of this sort. The orginal owner of the manuscript, Hanna, then reclaims it and tries to sell it again in 1990 until Tchacos eventually picks it up for $300,000. Her efforts then to sell it off to others brings it into Bruce Ferrini's orbit in 1999 and apparently later in 2001. Ferrini pops up in Henk Sutton's article on GJudas translated from the Dutch by van Rijn:
"Ferrini suspects that in the meantime several single pages of the manuscript were put on the market. 'When I saw the work for the first time in 1999, only 25 pages remained intact, so at least half of them were missing. I cannot be absolutely sure if the manuscript was found incomplete or if its writing was never finished. But from time to time new pages would appear. Five or six different documents in total without page numbers, it was just a mess.' Ferrini hesitated for a long time. He signed the deal, but then refrained from purchasing. 'Frieda and Roberty could not provide him with any clear indication about its origin. We didn't buy the manuscript, because we didn't buy their story.'"
This explanation at least provides a plausible excuse for Ferrini's "stalling" that Roberty records in the emails below. Eventually, the Maecenas Foundation (a nice way of saying "Tchacos and Roberty") turns to alternative solutions and with Kasser's efforts this find then becomes National Geographic's cashcow. As it turns out, Tchacos actually bought the manuscript from its original owner and not its subsequent smuggler who showed it to her the first time, good thing she didn't buy it back then. Because of this, I wonder if van Rijn's original indictment of her still stands. Unless I am missing something. And now the codex will soon be back in Egypt anyway.
The Emails
The story of Michel van Rijn's involvement with the GJudas "find" is colorfully illustrated by this series of emails between van Rijn and Roberty (an initial broker of the manuscript) back in Jan. 2001 that have been faithfully recorded by Pearse here. At this point in the story Tchacos is handing over the manuscripts to Ferrini for "safekeeping." They had already been stolen, smuggled, and stashed in a safety-deposit box in Hicksville, New York for almost 20 years.
It is interesting enough to read through the emails in toto, but the gist is as follows:
Email 2. Roberty begins by suggesting a modification to van Rijn's first story about Ferrini's sale of the GJudas manuscript and related leaves and fragments. This story catalogs the contents as one codex containing the lost Gospel of Judas, the First Apocalypse of James, and the Epistle of Peter to Philip. (Henceforth known as the Tchakos Codex.) Along with this codex is the Book of Exodus in Greek, Letters of Paul in Sahidic Coptic, and a Mathematical Treatise in Greek. Whether or not these are all contained in a second codex is not stated. The suggested piece characterizes Ferrini rather negatively:
"Last fall, Zurich based antiques dealer Frieda Chakos entrusts priceless papyrus manuscripts which had been in a Bank vault in New York for almost 20 years to the “safe” facilities of Akron/Ohio based manuscript dealer Bruce P. Ferrini. She is approached by Ferrini through a middleman and doesn’t have a clue that by this time Ferrini is already in deep financial troubles. The news had not hit the papers yet. Ferrini takes advantage of the secrecy of the art-market and offers to help Frieda ‘in preserving these manuscripts for the benefit [of] mankind’"
The original piece that inspired this email can be read here, and the actual deal mentioned in this email can be read here.
Email 4: Roberty checks in again, unhappy that van Rijn has made public what he could only have possibly learned through his secret network of antiquities spies:
"Your first paragraph reveals such information that obviously could only be fed in by my side and this could make negotiations starting tomorrow (i.e. today) even more difficult. On the other hand, this quite precise technical info is of little importance or impact to the public."
Van Rijn also posted the letter that entails "Charlie's contribution" as mentioned in the email. I bet this Charles Hill, "former head of New Scotland Yard Art & Antiques Squad," has a few cool stories to tell.
Email 5: Further vilification of Ferrini ensues as Roberty encounters complications in actually getting the cash for the sale from Ferrini. (It is still not clear why Ferrini was not forthcoming with the payment, there are three options: Ferrini didn't have the money. Ferrini was worried about the provenance. Ferrini was seeing what he could obtain and sell with only paying as little as possible.) Roberty claims:
The overdue payment has been done because of a confusion with dealings Bruce has with Bill Veres. Bill claims Bruce owing him money and pretends having paid Frieda on behalf on Bruce USD 90" (which is not true !) and Bruce claims Bill owing him lots of money. Bill had introduced Bruce to Frieda and pretends to be his partner. At the same time he pretends feeling responsible towards Frieda for the mess she is in. For reasons completely independent of Bruce, Bill owes Frieda about USD 150". All this confusion is basically bullshit and is being used by Bruce just to avoid payment. By the way, he pretends that the sales price obtained by Sam Fogg is not of USD 900" and that the sale was not to Thompson.
We know now though from Henk Schutten's article that Ferrini's hesitancy may be plausibly explained by van Rijn's original warning: "You buy? You touch? You will be prosecuted! And damned..." Which apparently is arts and antiquities dealer lingo for: "the provenance of this manuscript is uncertain." This was certainly why others didn't buy the manuscripts after previous offers.
The Point
All this is to say that that the National Geographic version of events seems to be fairly sanitized:
The codex, containing the Gospel of Judas, was discovered in the 1970s near El Minya, Egypt, and moved from Egypt to Europe to the United States. Once in the United States, it was kept in a safe-deposit box for 16 years on Long Island, New York, until antiquities dealer Frieda Nussberger-Tchacos bought it in April 2000. After two unsuccessful resale attempts, Nussberger-Tchacos----alarmed by the codex's rapidly deteriorating state----transferred it to the Maecenas Foundation for Ancient Art in Basel, Switzerland, in February 2001, for restoration and translation. The manuscript will be delivered to Egypt and housed in Cairo's Coptic Museum.
Several pages of the Gospel of Judas as well as pages from the other three texts in the codex will be on exhibit at National Geographic Society headquarters in Washington, D.C., beginning Friday, April 7, 2006, for a limited engagement. After Kasser and his team complete conserving and translating the manuscript, the codex will be given to Egypt, where it will be housed in Cairo's Coptic Museum.
While this version nicely ties up all the loose ends and cuts through some of the gaps left in van Rijn's thrilling reportage, it doesn't quite fit the facts. Or at least it fits the fewest, nicest facts possible. They would have been better served ditching the "this manuscript will revolutionize our understanding of early Christianity" angle and just publicizing its remarkable backstory. At least that way they could have sold the rights to the story to Universal.
UPDATE 4/14: National Geographic does have a version of the tangled story of the Tchacos Codex posted, and while it is an admirable attempt to spin what are otherwise much less saccharine facts, it still doesn't deal with the problems raised by the "van Rijn angle."
You can read much of this information from Artnews on R. Pearse's exhaustive page. I believe he is at work tracking down exactly what is happening with the other five texts that are related to the GJudas manuscript, more on that later. Any corrections on this post are invited and appreciated.
(Disclaimer: I am simply summarizing here what I have gleaned from van Rijn and others, as I haven't yet read Robinson's book on the same subject, I am not quite clear on what really are the details. Read this as "historical fiction," if you will, kind of like The Da Vinci Code.)
Michel van Rijn brought the possibility of fraudulent dealing behind the GJudas sale to the public's attention via the infamous Artnews all the way back in 2001 (Well, as public as possible for a site that Google doesn't refer to. Please see James M. Robinson's paper linked in a previous post that covers some of this same material and adds in a few wrinkles.) In his first comment on the news item, in Jan. 2001, he hears about Ferrini's initial attempt to purchase this set of six manuscripts. By Sep. 2001, van Rijn uncovers a bit more information and reveals that the manuscript deal he had been tracking in Jan. through Roberty was actually been stolen from a dealer named Hanna in Egypt and smuggled into Geneva years ago before being sent to a safety-deposit box in New York. Then in Dec. 2001, van Rijn finds out that despite this information becoming public Roberty and Tchacos are trying to sell it to a US dealer, who I assume is Bruce Ferrini, it has since come to light that a few others were also approached. There is nothing until Dec. 2004, when van Rijn summarizes the whole affair in light of all the information he has gathered so far, even bringing us up to date with the parallel efforts of Kasser and Charles Hedrick to translate and publicize the text. With Hedrick's permission van Rijn uploaded some of these early images and translations.
So in van Rijn's narration we start with the stolen and smuggled manuscript from Egypt, seen by Tchacos in 1982, which then makes its way to a safety-deposit box in New York. I am not a curator, but that may not be the best place for a manuscript of this sort. The orginal owner of the manuscript, Hanna, then reclaims it and tries to sell it again in 1990 until Tchacos eventually picks it up for $300,000. Her efforts then to sell it off to others brings it into Bruce Ferrini's orbit in 1999 and apparently later in 2001. Ferrini pops up in Henk Sutton's article on GJudas translated from the Dutch by van Rijn:
"Ferrini suspects that in the meantime several single pages of the manuscript were put on the market. 'When I saw the work for the first time in 1999, only 25 pages remained intact, so at least half of them were missing. I cannot be absolutely sure if the manuscript was found incomplete or if its writing was never finished. But from time to time new pages would appear. Five or six different documents in total without page numbers, it was just a mess.' Ferrini hesitated for a long time. He signed the deal, but then refrained from purchasing. 'Frieda and Roberty could not provide him with any clear indication about its origin. We didn't buy the manuscript, because we didn't buy their story.'"
This explanation at least provides a plausible excuse for Ferrini's "stalling" that Roberty records in the emails below. Eventually, the Maecenas Foundation (a nice way of saying "Tchacos and Roberty") turns to alternative solutions and with Kasser's efforts this find then becomes National Geographic's cashcow. As it turns out, Tchacos actually bought the manuscript from its original owner and not its subsequent smuggler who showed it to her the first time, good thing she didn't buy it back then. Because of this, I wonder if van Rijn's original indictment of her still stands. Unless I am missing something. And now the codex will soon be back in Egypt anyway.
The Emails
The story of Michel van Rijn's involvement with the GJudas "find" is colorfully illustrated by this series of emails between van Rijn and Roberty (an initial broker of the manuscript) back in Jan. 2001 that have been faithfully recorded by Pearse here. At this point in the story Tchacos is handing over the manuscripts to Ferrini for "safekeeping." They had already been stolen, smuggled, and stashed in a safety-deposit box in Hicksville, New York for almost 20 years.
It is interesting enough to read through the emails in toto, but the gist is as follows:
Email 2. Roberty begins by suggesting a modification to van Rijn's first story about Ferrini's sale of the GJudas manuscript and related leaves and fragments. This story catalogs the contents as one codex containing the lost Gospel of Judas, the First Apocalypse of James, and the Epistle of Peter to Philip. (Henceforth known as the Tchakos Codex.) Along with this codex is the Book of Exodus in Greek, Letters of Paul in Sahidic Coptic, and a Mathematical Treatise in Greek. Whether or not these are all contained in a second codex is not stated. The suggested piece characterizes Ferrini rather negatively:
"Last fall, Zurich based antiques dealer Frieda Chakos entrusts priceless papyrus manuscripts which had been in a Bank vault in New York for almost 20 years to the “safe” facilities of Akron/Ohio based manuscript dealer Bruce P. Ferrini. She is approached by Ferrini through a middleman and doesn’t have a clue that by this time Ferrini is already in deep financial troubles. The news had not hit the papers yet. Ferrini takes advantage of the secrecy of the art-market and offers to help Frieda ‘in preserving these manuscripts for the benefit [of] mankind’"
The original piece that inspired this email can be read here, and the actual deal mentioned in this email can be read here.
Email 4: Roberty checks in again, unhappy that van Rijn has made public what he could only have possibly learned through his secret network of antiquities spies:
"Your first paragraph reveals such information that obviously could only be fed in by my side and this could make negotiations starting tomorrow (i.e. today) even more difficult. On the other hand, this quite precise technical info is of little importance or impact to the public."
Van Rijn also posted the letter that entails "Charlie's contribution" as mentioned in the email. I bet this Charles Hill, "former head of New Scotland Yard Art & Antiques Squad," has a few cool stories to tell.
Email 5: Further vilification of Ferrini ensues as Roberty encounters complications in actually getting the cash for the sale from Ferrini. (It is still not clear why Ferrini was not forthcoming with the payment, there are three options: Ferrini didn't have the money. Ferrini was worried about the provenance. Ferrini was seeing what he could obtain and sell with only paying as little as possible.) Roberty claims:
The overdue payment has been done because of a confusion with dealings Bruce has with Bill Veres. Bill claims Bruce owing him money and pretends having paid Frieda on behalf on Bruce USD 90" (which is not true !) and Bruce claims Bill owing him lots of money. Bill had introduced Bruce to Frieda and pretends to be his partner. At the same time he pretends feeling responsible towards Frieda for the mess she is in. For reasons completely independent of Bruce, Bill owes Frieda about USD 150". All this confusion is basically bullshit and is being used by Bruce just to avoid payment. By the way, he pretends that the sales price obtained by Sam Fogg is not of USD 900" and that the sale was not to Thompson.
We know now though from Henk Schutten's article that Ferrini's hesitancy may be plausibly explained by van Rijn's original warning: "You buy? You touch? You will be prosecuted! And damned..." Which apparently is arts and antiquities dealer lingo for: "the provenance of this manuscript is uncertain." This was certainly why others didn't buy the manuscripts after previous offers.
The Point
All this is to say that that the National Geographic version of events seems to be fairly sanitized:
The codex, containing the Gospel of Judas, was discovered in the 1970s near El Minya, Egypt, and moved from Egypt to Europe to the United States. Once in the United States, it was kept in a safe-deposit box for 16 years on Long Island, New York, until antiquities dealer Frieda Nussberger-Tchacos bought it in April 2000. After two unsuccessful resale attempts, Nussberger-Tchacos----alarmed by the codex's rapidly deteriorating state----transferred it to the Maecenas Foundation for Ancient Art in Basel, Switzerland, in February 2001, for restoration and translation. The manuscript will be delivered to Egypt and housed in Cairo's Coptic Museum.
Several pages of the Gospel of Judas as well as pages from the other three texts in the codex will be on exhibit at National Geographic Society headquarters in Washington, D.C., beginning Friday, April 7, 2006, for a limited engagement. After Kasser and his team complete conserving and translating the manuscript, the codex will be given to Egypt, where it will be housed in Cairo's Coptic Museum.
While this version nicely ties up all the loose ends and cuts through some of the gaps left in van Rijn's thrilling reportage, it doesn't quite fit the facts. Or at least it fits the fewest, nicest facts possible. They would have been better served ditching the "this manuscript will revolutionize our understanding of early Christianity" angle and just publicizing its remarkable backstory. At least that way they could have sold the rights to the story to Universal.
UPDATE 4/14: National Geographic does have a version of the tangled story of the Tchacos Codex posted, and while it is an admirable attempt to spin what are otherwise much less saccharine facts, it still doesn't deal with the problems raised by the "van Rijn angle."
You can read much of this information from Artnews on R. Pearse's exhaustive page. I believe he is at work tracking down exactly what is happening with the other five texts that are related to the GJudas manuscript, more on that later. Any corrections on this post are invited and appreciated.
4/12/06
GJudas: The Mr. Bruce Ferrini File.
I hit the jackpot here with what appears to be a few more archived articles, and then a purported list of all fragments and such sold by Ferrini on Ebay until January 2006. He has enough Coptic fragments that Pearse's link (see previous post) could really be to any text.
There is some interesting commentary at the bottom, which provides a little backstory to Ferrini's collection on Ebay:
I am not quite sure who the "I" is here. I have a great guess, but it is a bit confusing towards the end of the webpage. Extremely interesting nonetheless.
(Update: The UPenn. page is by Dr. Robert Kraft. What a great idea to keep a record of where all these fragments have gone.)
(Update 4/18: The Beacon-Journal has published a lengthy biography of Ferrini. It is a tale of woe, and...validates the "van Rijn angle.")
There is some interesting commentary at the bottom, which provides a little backstory to Ferrini's collection on Ebay:
Late in 2005 Bruce P. Ferrini, an antiquities dealer in Akron OH, declared bankruptcy and began to offer items from his collections on eBay. A significant percentage of these offerings were papyri -- cartonnage as well as fragments in demotic, coptic, greek and arabic -- along with some related items on linen and lead. Without knowing, or being able to find out, how extensive the collection might be, I began to catalog the items offered and to offload the (generally excellent) images that were provided. My hope was that although the materials would end up with a large number of purchasers, presumably mostly private, it would still be possible to know what items had been sold and possibly to trace their distribution. I also bid on some pieces, especially cartonnage, to use in an upcoming seminar on papyrology at the University of Pennsylvania as well as to have on hand for study.
I am not quite sure who the "I" is here. I have a great guess, but it is a bit confusing towards the end of the webpage. Extremely interesting nonetheless.
(Update: The UPenn. page is by Dr. Robert Kraft. What a great idea to keep a record of where all these fragments have gone.)
(Update 4/18: The Beacon-Journal has published a lengthy biography of Ferrini. It is a tale of woe, and...validates the "van Rijn angle.")
GJudas: Ancient Coptic Manuscripts on Ebay? The Mysterious Case of Mr. Bruce Ferrini, Et Al.
An Answer
I just stumbled across this post from Chris Weimer's blog, which really answers my question from yesterday concerning the other manuscripts physically related to the Gospel of Judas (physically related as a "manuscript" not socio-historically as a "text," though ultimately there may not be a difference in this case). Here he relays some information from the mysterious van Rijn via the incredible Roger Pearse (who is emerging is a bit of a hero in the midst of all this misdirected publicity) from a peculiar message board. In one frightfully helpful post, Pearse says:
This brings us to a total of six reported texts that are physically related to the Gospel of Judas, the two early Christian texts mentioned below (which are also named in the description of the National Geographic volume on GJudas along with something they are calling the "Book of Allogenes"), and the three listed above as part of the second codex by Pearse. Any correction on this point is appreciated.
A Sale!
Now here is the interesting bit, on this same thread, Pearse links to a sale on Ebay of a fragment at this link that he says is from Ferrini. The item here is actually a Coptic fragment (not Greek as the original title claims) in a rather free cursive script which certainly provides an interesting late example of papyrus construction, as you can see so clearly how the fibers run in perpendicular directions. It would make a handy educational aid. And at this link there is one of a few other 5/6 century Coptic fragments on sale. Frankly, there are enough different hands here that it seems unlikely one could definitively land something from the GJudas codex (which would be a nice addition to anyone's library). How curious that one can pick up these fragments of history with a few clicks of the mouse button.
(4/12 Update: This really is Ferrini's Ebay account.)
A Cast of Characters
This post is starting to wander, but it is worth it. Perhaps the most interesting result of this whole Gospel of Judas situation is the fantastic host of characters it has brought into the limelight. We have Rudolph Kasser working on a manuscript, Roger Pearse following the story for years (credit should also be given to Davila at Paleojudaica who picked up the story early), Michael van Rijn doing whatever mysterious thing it is that van Rijn does, and then this guy Bruce Ferrini who keeps popping up in ancient manuscript intrigues. It is worth scrolling down the page here to read a few articles about Ferrini and the ill-fated From the Dead Sea Scrolls to the Forbidden Book exhibit. There is a very interesting post from Lee Biondi (Ferrini's partner in the DSS exhibition) here, in which he mentions Ferrini and the DSS controversy. Van Rijn also makes a special anonymous appearance towards the beginning of Biondi's comments. Other than that, Ferrini seems to have an interesting job and I would love to browse his current stock, not least of which because some think he still has a few bits of these two codices. Perhaps there really is more to this story then meets the eye. Still looking...
I just stumbled across this post from Chris Weimer's blog, which really answers my question from yesterday concerning the other manuscripts physically related to the Gospel of Judas (physically related as a "manuscript" not socio-historically as a "text," though ultimately there may not be a difference in this case). Here he relays some information from the mysterious van Rijn via the incredible Roger Pearse (who is emerging is a bit of a hero in the midst of all this misdirected publicity) from a peculiar message board. In one frightfully helpful post, Pearse says:
"Few people seem to be aware that the codex containing the ps.Gospel of Judas came with a second codex containing further texts:
- the 'Book of Exodus' in Greek
- 'Letters of Paul' in Sahidic dialect and a
- 'Mathematical Treatise' in Greek.
Yesterday I wrote to art dealer Michel van Rijn, who has been recording the dodgy dealings around this find, asking if he knew how to contact Bruce Ferrini, the last known owner of these texts. Michel kindly replied, and allowed me to reproduce this interesting (but appalling) comment:
"Thanks your email. Ferrini is keeping himself unreachable... Yes Ferrini sold pages of the Judas, Exodus and mathematical treatise.
"Pages of the Exodus were sold to James E. Ferrell and are now part of the Ink and Blood traveling exhibition... The mathematical treatise was sold by Ferrini together with Samm Fogg, London, to Lord Thomson of Fleet, Canada.
"And Getty sponsor, Lloyd Cotsen, bought several pages. Judas?"
None of this is good news. I imagine that the codex has been reduced to a pile of fragments, of which saleable leaves are being sold, and the remainder, no doubt, thrown away. Can nothing be done to stop this destruction?"
This brings us to a total of six reported texts that are physically related to the Gospel of Judas, the two early Christian texts mentioned below (which are also named in the description of the National Geographic volume on GJudas along with something they are calling the "Book of Allogenes"), and the three listed above as part of the second codex by Pearse. Any correction on this point is appreciated.
A Sale!
Now here is the interesting bit, on this same thread, Pearse links to a sale on Ebay of a fragment at this link that he says is from Ferrini. The item here is actually a Coptic fragment (not Greek as the original title claims) in a rather free cursive script which certainly provides an interesting late example of papyrus construction, as you can see so clearly how the fibers run in perpendicular directions. It would make a handy educational aid. And at this link there is one of a few other 5/6 century Coptic fragments on sale. Frankly, there are enough different hands here that it seems unlikely one could definitively land something from the GJudas codex (which would be a nice addition to anyone's library). How curious that one can pick up these fragments of history with a few clicks of the mouse button.
(4/12 Update: This really is Ferrini's Ebay account.)
A Cast of Characters
This post is starting to wander, but it is worth it. Perhaps the most interesting result of this whole Gospel of Judas situation is the fantastic host of characters it has brought into the limelight. We have Rudolph Kasser working on a manuscript, Roger Pearse following the story for years (credit should also be given to Davila at Paleojudaica who picked up the story early), Michael van Rijn doing whatever mysterious thing it is that van Rijn does, and then this guy Bruce Ferrini who keeps popping up in ancient manuscript intrigues. It is worth scrolling down the page here to read a few articles about Ferrini and the ill-fated From the Dead Sea Scrolls to the Forbidden Book exhibit. There is a very interesting post from Lee Biondi (Ferrini's partner in the DSS exhibition) here, in which he mentions Ferrini and the DSS controversy. Van Rijn also makes a special anonymous appearance towards the beginning of Biondi's comments. Other than that, Ferrini seems to have an interesting job and I would love to browse his current stock, not least of which because some think he still has a few bits of these two codices. Perhaps there really is more to this story then meets the eye. Still looking...
Justin Martyr Conference
New College is an invigorating place to be right now. We have a TC conference in a few weeks (see previous post), ISBL at the beginning of July, and the first dedicated Justin Martyr conference at the end of July (undertaken with the help of a grant from the British Academy). I would like to deliver a short paper, but the current lineup is somewhat intimidating to a NT student only periodically sidelighting in issues that late:
A schedule is available in a .pdf at the conference webpage, and it looks like it will provide a comprehensive to the state of the art of Justin scholarship. I will post more on the conference when it rolls around.
"The conference will feature presentations by the following scholars: Prof. Michael Slusser, Dr. Denis Minns, Dr. Paul Parvis, Dr. Paul Foster, Prof. Larry Hurtado, Prof. Graham Stanton, Prof. Judith Lieu, Prof. Cristoph Markschies, Dr. Sara Parvis, and Prof. J. Rebecca Lyman. Additionally, limited spaces are available for short papers (15–20 min. in length) on relevant topics."
A schedule is available in a .pdf at the conference webpage, and it looks like it will provide a comprehensive to the state of the art of Justin scholarship. I will post more on the conference when it rolls around.
4/11/06
GJudas: Hurtado on Judas
Prof. Larry Hurtado has weighed in on Judas at Slate (honestly, you have to be pretty hip to be a senior NT scholar writing for Slate Magazine):
I am looking forward to reading a traditional papyrological description of the manuscript, as I wonder what else this text was bound with. Apparently it also contains a variant of the Epistle to Philip and the Revelation of Jacob, the rest being unreadable, but I have been unable to track down Kasser's original comments on this point.
(Update 4/14: It turns out there is good reason that news on these manuscripts has been so sketchy. No one seems to know who has what and how or when they got it. See above post for more on this.)
The Gospel of Judas has genuine historical value—as one of several bits of evidence showing the diversity of early Christianity, like the writings of such figures as Irenaeus, the bishop of Lyons in about 180 A.D. The text's depiction of Judas as the disciple to whom Jesus gave unique mystical revelations is not itself really unique. It somewhat resembles the portrayal of Thomas in the Gospel of Thomas. Nor is there evidence that the Gospel of Judas ever enjoyed much popularity as an alternative to the canon of the New Testament or was considered for inclusion in that canon. This text reflects a profoundly elitist viewpoint, claiming a specially conveyed revelation of religious truths withheld from ordinary Christians and their leaders.
I am looking forward to reading a traditional papyrological description of the manuscript, as I wonder what else this text was bound with. Apparently it also contains a variant of the Epistle to Philip and the Revelation of Jacob, the rest being unreadable, but I have been unable to track down Kasser's original comments on this point.
(Update 4/14: It turns out there is good reason that news on these manuscripts has been so sketchy. No one seems to know who has what and how or when they got it. See above post for more on this.)
The Genizah Collection
Hey, look at this, more news about ancient manuscripts. Well, most of these aren't anywhere close to ancient, but many of them do shed light on ancient near east issues. The Taylor-Schechter Genizah Research Unit has had a website for a while, but this large new grant from the AHRC will provide the resources to catalog and digitize a bunch of these fragments (including interesting things like the "Zadokite" fragment):
"Professor Stefan Reif, Founder Director of the Taylor-Schechter Genizah Collection, said: “The Taylor-Schechter Genizah Collection at Cambridge University Library offers a window on the world of the 10th–13th centuries. The largest and most important collection of medieval Jewish, Hebrew and Arabic documents in the world, it is at least equal in importance to the Dead Sea Scrolls. Whilst the Dead Sea Scrolls chronicled the life of a dissident sect that cut itself off from the world, the Genizah fragments tell the story of ordinary people dealing with everyday life, love and lore."
The collection has taught us more about people like Maimonides, given us greater textual clarity on Talmud literature, and even afforded us access to a few Greek and Syriac texts that had been scraped and reused by later scribes (palimpsests). The relation of the collection to New Testament studies is limited, but it certainly helps to add dimension to what we already know about the language and customs of that era.
It will be especially interesting to see some of these fragments in greater detail, as some of them are amulets made of cloth (this particular one "has the aim of making the heart of the loved one burn with passion", others are rather well preserved pages of paper and vellum. With this large range of materials and manuscript types, I look forward to seeing the variety of book formats represented by this collection.
"Professor Stefan Reif, Founder Director of the Taylor-Schechter Genizah Collection, said: “The Taylor-Schechter Genizah Collection at Cambridge University Library offers a window on the world of the 10th–13th centuries. The largest and most important collection of medieval Jewish, Hebrew and Arabic documents in the world, it is at least equal in importance to the Dead Sea Scrolls. Whilst the Dead Sea Scrolls chronicled the life of a dissident sect that cut itself off from the world, the Genizah fragments tell the story of ordinary people dealing with everyday life, love and lore."
The collection has taught us more about people like Maimonides, given us greater textual clarity on Talmud literature, and even afforded us access to a few Greek and Syriac texts that had been scraped and reused by later scribes (palimpsests). The relation of the collection to New Testament studies is limited, but it certainly helps to add dimension to what we already know about the language and customs of that era.
It will be especially interesting to see some of these fragments in greater detail, as some of them are amulets made of cloth (this particular one "has the aim of making the heart of the loved one burn with passion", others are rather well preserved pages of paper and vellum. With this large range of materials and manuscript types, I look forward to seeing the variety of book formats represented by this collection.
4/10/06
GJudas: Obligatory Gospel of Judas Nod...
The "Unveiling"
One would be hard pressed to put together anything much better than Mark Goodacre's characteristically comprehensive rundown of the Gospel of Judas from academic bloggers seriously "in the know." As I was not able to see the National Geographic documentary, his summary is rather helpful. He certainly hasn't missed much on this one.
I have little other to add that hasn't already been said: "publicity stunt," "we have known about the text ever since Irenaeus" (A.H. I.31), "this particular manuscript has been discussed since Rudolph Kasser delivered a paper on the manuscript in 2004," "Michael van Rijn has followed this story for ages," and "a guy named Roger Pearse has had a site on the manuscript (with images and transcriptions!) for quite some time." All right, a few of those may be new to you. I had actually poked through the images on that last site a week or two before the National Geographic site was launched.
The Skullduggery
The Christian Century even had an article on it in the Dec. 27, 2005 issue. In this article there is an interesting anecdote about James Robinson's first experience with the text and its publication strategy:
And apparently, the plot thickened quite some time ago. In a paper delivered at the 2005 SBL Congress (in particular the "Al-Minya discovery"), James M. Robinson works through some of the material that has become his book on the subject:
Further:
There is a lot more there. Robinson goes on to tell the twisted tale of how this text surfaced in the recent antiquities market. The long and the short of it is that this set of manuscripts has been so badly handled, unless we can chart "who sold what when" a full codicological description of the "find" in its entirety will never be possible. They need to shelve The Da Vinci Code, I want to see this movie. Donald Sutherland would probably make a good James Robinson.
The Fallout
It is unfortunate that the terrifically shady publication strategy of this otherwise interesting manuscript has perverted public (read: non-specialist) perception of what the Gospel of Judas actually is. If only this kind of cash and publicity could get thrown at any number of far more important early Christian manuscripts, things like The Da Vinci Code would be more immediately recognized by the non-specialist public for what they are: Foucault's Pendulum rip-offs featuring far less invigorating hermeneutical acrobatics. Imagine having such an accessible dedicated manuscript site for the Freer holdings, for example. Is it wrong to sense irony in the fact that the greatest early Christian manuscript publicity scam involves The Gospel of Judas? I think not.
I don't want to downplay the significance of actually having this text. It was one thing to have Irenaeus' mention of it, as we have always understood the theological nature of the text. But now that the manuscript is available to the same critical methodologies that have opened up the relationship between things like the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Mary, or the Odes of Solomon and the canonical Jesus traditions, we may actually have some interesting scholarship emerge. It may also shed further light on a project I am currently engaged in, namely assessing the characterization of apostle figures in late gospel writing.
And perhaps what may be most important about this find is the light that it has shed on the means by which such texts finally make it into the hands of scholars. Who is to say what NT fragments have never surfaced due to the vicissitudes of grey market antiquities dealings? Any excitment about this particular find should be tempered by the fact that we don't have as much of it as we should.
One would be hard pressed to put together anything much better than Mark Goodacre's characteristically comprehensive rundown of the Gospel of Judas from academic bloggers seriously "in the know." As I was not able to see the National Geographic documentary, his summary is rather helpful. He certainly hasn't missed much on this one.
I have little other to add that hasn't already been said: "publicity stunt," "we have known about the text ever since Irenaeus" (A.H. I.31), "this particular manuscript has been discussed since Rudolph Kasser delivered a paper on the manuscript in 2004," "Michael van Rijn has followed this story for ages," and "a guy named Roger Pearse has had a site on the manuscript (with images and transcriptions!) for quite some time." All right, a few of those may be new to you. I had actually poked through the images on that last site a week or two before the National Geographic site was launched.
The Skullduggery
The Christian Century even had an article on it in the Dec. 27, 2005 issue. In this article there is an interesting anecdote about James Robinson's first experience with the text and its publication strategy:
"But in 2004, Rodolphe Kasser of the University of Geneva announced in Paris that by the end of 2005 he would be publishing translations of the Coptic-language version of the Gospel of Judas. As it turned out, the owner was a Swiss foundation, and the torn and tattered papyrus text had been hawked to potential buyers in North America and Europe for decades after it was found at Muhazafat Al Minya in Middle Egypt.
The "Judas" saga was confirmed in detail last month at the annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature in Philadelphia. Retired Claremont Graduate University professor James Robinson, general editor of the English edition of the Nag Hammadi Library, said he was first contacted in 1983 about negotiations to buy certain texts, including the Gospel of Judas. Many years later, he saw blurry photographs of part of the text.
Robinson said that early in November he learned that Kasser and several European, Canadian and U.S. scholars had signed agreements with the National Geographic Society to assist with a documentary film and a National Geographic article for an Easter 2006 release and a succession of three books.
Robinson was critical of the secrecy and inaccessibility surrounding the document—a recurring academic problem that delayed for decades the publishing of translations of some Dead Sea Scrolls and many Nag Hammadi codices. In his talk, Robinson called the practice "skullduggery"—with a glance at fellow panelist Marvin Meyer of Chapman University, a longtime colleague in the field and one of the contracted authors."
And apparently, the plot thickened quite some time ago. In a paper delivered at the 2005 SBL Congress (in particular the "Al-Minya discovery"), James M. Robinson works through some of the material that has become his book on the subject:
The first information about the existence of this text, which is in a papyrus codex along with a version of 1 Apoc. Jas. and a dialogue of Jesus with his disciples not identical with NCH III 5, was given by J. M. Robinson and S. Emmel at the Third International Congress of Coptic Studies in Warsaw in August 1984.
Koenen later sent me some almost completely illegible photographs he had obtained of some of the Coptic material. I made copies of them available to Wolf-Peter Funk. Ultimately, I turned over my copies, for safekeeping, to Stephen Emmel, at the quadrennial congress of the International Association for Coptic Studies meeting in Paris, on June 27, 2004. For he was the person involved from the very beginning, and has subsequently become the Editor of the Newsletter of the International Association for Coptic Studies. Hence, the Institut für Ägyptologie und Koptologie that he directs at the University of Münster, Germany is in effect the Secretariat of the International Association for Coptic Studies.
I had long since forwarded in March 1991 what I could read to Marvin W. Meyer, who was preparing the critical edition of The Letter of Peter to Philip:
According to the reports of James M. Robinson and Stephen Emmel, a somewhat divergent Coptic text of the Letter of Peter to Philip is to be found in a papyrus codex which at the present time is neither published nor available for study.
Further:
On July 1, 2004, at the quadrennial congress of the International Association for Coptic Studies held this time in Paris, Rodolphe Kasser announced that he was publishing The Gospel of Judas late in 2005. Given his slow track record in publishing the Tripartite Tractate of the Jung Codex (Nag Hammadi Codex I), no one has expected him to meet that deadline. It has already been rescheduled for early in 2006. He has added a co-editor, Gregor Wurst, which gives some hope that his edition will ultimately appear and make the text available to the rest of us.
Kasser’s report has led to all-too-sensational German articles in journals for a larger non-scholarly public, first by Ralph Pöhner in FACTS, then by Roger Thiede in Focus.
Thiede included an interview with Stephen Emmel. Although Emmel displays in exemplary form the necessary academic caution concerning a text that is not yet available, Pöhner and Thiede do the very reverse, with disastrous results. And of course Gilles Quispel got into the act, in another sensational essay by the Dutch journalist Hank Schutten.
Pöhner had interviewed me by phone from Zürich, and yet what he reports about my involvement is so littered with errors that one must be very tentative in using what he reports anywhere in his article. Of course one would hope that he might be in better control of the facts insofar as they have to do with his own Switzerland.
There is a lot more there. Robinson goes on to tell the twisted tale of how this text surfaced in the recent antiquities market. The long and the short of it is that this set of manuscripts has been so badly handled, unless we can chart "who sold what when" a full codicological description of the "find" in its entirety will never be possible. They need to shelve The Da Vinci Code, I want to see this movie. Donald Sutherland would probably make a good James Robinson.
The Fallout
It is unfortunate that the terrifically shady publication strategy of this otherwise interesting manuscript has perverted public (read: non-specialist) perception of what the Gospel of Judas actually is. If only this kind of cash and publicity could get thrown at any number of far more important early Christian manuscripts, things like The Da Vinci Code would be more immediately recognized by the non-specialist public for what they are: Foucault's Pendulum rip-offs featuring far less invigorating hermeneutical acrobatics. Imagine having such an accessible dedicated manuscript site for the Freer holdings, for example. Is it wrong to sense irony in the fact that the greatest early Christian manuscript publicity scam involves The Gospel of Judas? I think not.
I don't want to downplay the significance of actually having this text. It was one thing to have Irenaeus' mention of it, as we have always understood the theological nature of the text. But now that the manuscript is available to the same critical methodologies that have opened up the relationship between things like the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Mary, or the Odes of Solomon and the canonical Jesus traditions, we may actually have some interesting scholarship emerge. It may also shed further light on a project I am currently engaged in, namely assessing the characterization of apostle figures in late gospel writing.
And perhaps what may be most important about this find is the light that it has shed on the means by which such texts finally make it into the hands of scholars. Who is to say what NT fragments have never surfaced due to the vicissitudes of grey market antiquities dealings? Any excitment about this particular find should be tempered by the fact that we don't have as much of it as we should.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
