Fri Oct 25 21:20:14 1996

From owner-tc-list  Fri Oct 25 21:20:14 1996
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id VAA09805; Fri, 25 Oct 1996 21:19:12 -0400
X-Sender: waltzmn@popmail.skypoint.com
Message-Id: 
In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.16.19961025174442.1f379a92@mail.sunbelt.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 20:10:43 -0700
To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
From: "Robert B. Waltz" 
Subject: Re: E. C. Colwell--A Maverick?
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
content-length: 2301

On Fri, 25 Oct 1996, Jim West  wrote:

[ ... ]

>Since no one has so far come to the side of Aland I feel it incumbent upon
>myself to do so.  When all is said and done, and the fad theories of textual
>transmission have passed into the dust of antiquity, it is Aland's work that
>will remain.
>
>What Aland and his very learned colleagues did in their versions of the NT
>was to offer "significant" variants based on their many years of research.
>It is therefore highly suspect when a scholar comes along and simply makes a
>reputation for himself by denigrating the work of his predecessors.  One is
>welcome to make a name- but one should do so with a positive contribution to
>the field and not hypotheses which have yet to be verified (e.g. Colwell).
>
>To call the work of Kurt Aland egregious is horribly unfair and quite
>untrue.  Thus, in spite of comments to the contrary, Aland's work will in
>the long run prove to be far more valuable than Colwell's.

I would distinguish two things here: Aland's work as a collector and
cataloger of manuscripts, and his work as a textual theorist.

As a cataloger, Aland is surely the greatest since Gregory (possibly
since Tischendorf). He also founded the only college in the *world*
devoted to textual studies. He is also responsible for the only
complete (or nearly complete) file of manuscript reproductions.
There is no doubt that he will have an enduring legacy.

As for NA27, I do not deny that it is the best hand edition available.
Merk has more variants, but is inaccurate. It's also harder to use.
I wish NA27 were fuller. But I certainly wouldn't want to do without it.

But as a textual critic, he is weak. His proposed method of local
genealogy is good -- but he doesn't apply it. His classification
of manuscripts has value -- but only if one realized that it is
not systematic, and that "Categories I, II, III, and V" do not represent
the "quality" of the manuscripts, but only their approximate degrees
of Byzantine influence.

This is not to denigrate Aland. Who was greater, Tischendorf or
Hort? I don't think that can be answered. Aland is our new
Tischendorf. Now we need a new Hort. Colwell isn't that great,
but he's the closest thing we have. (Other than me, of course. :-)

Bob Waltz
waltzmn@skypoint.com

Back