Tue Jun 11 08:16:30 1996

From owner-tc-list  Tue Jun 11 08:16:30 1996
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id IAA29696; Tue, 11 Jun 1996 08:14:16 -0400
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 96 07:11 CDT
X-Sender: waltzmn@popmail.skypoint.com
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
From: waltzmn@skypoint.com (Robert B. Waltz)
Subject: Re: Manuscript fragments....
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
content-length: 1977

On Mon, 10 Jun 1996, Maurice Robinson 
wrote, om part:

>(1) the same graph shows a continuing growth from the 9th - 13th centuries,
>but a decline in extant MSS from the 14th - 16th centuries.  Certain
>historical occurrences as well as a saturation of MSS to available
>churches may serve to explain this particular phenomenon;

I would imagine that this has been previously studied, but I would
mention three possible explanations for the decline in numbers starting
in century XIII:

* The decline of the Byzantine Empire. Although the Ottomans, like most
  of Islam, were tolerant of Christianity, toleration is not the same
  as encouragement. The monasteries must have been much poorer.

* The Black Death. Not only did this cut the population by a third
  in the latter part of this period, but it also severely damaged
  the economy. A weak economy would have less surplus to support
  such luxuries as manuscripts and the scribes that copied them.

* The transition to paper, which was taking place during this period.
  Although early paper, being made of cloth, was far sturdier than this
  cheap stuff we use nowadays, it was not as robust as parchment.
  Might not paper manuscripts have been destroyed far more easily?

>(2) this assumption still does not account adequately for the total number
>of extant MSS dropping from a very large number in the 10th - 9th
>centuries to a mere trickle in the 8th - 4th centuries.  A massive and
>systematic destruction of the uncial exemplars must have taken place to
>produce such a lopsided preservation of documents.

That sixth to eight century manuscripts were destroyed is evident from
the figures already cited. But were the manuscripts destroyed because
they were uncials? How, then, does one explain the large number of
ninth and tenth century uncials which survive largely intact (e.g.
Fe Fp Ge Gp He Ke Kap Lap M S U V X Y Gamma Delta Pi etc.)?

Bob Waltz
waltzmn@skypoint.com

Back