Subject: Re: Manuscript fragments....

From: [email-masked] (Robert B. Waltz)
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 96 07:51 CDT

On Tue, 11 Jun 1996, Maurice Robinson <[email-masked]> wrote:

>On Tue, 11 Jun 1996, Robert B. Waltz wrote:
>
>> I would mention three possible explanations for the decline in numbers
>> starting in century XIII:

Please note that I was not saying that any of these explanations were
*the* correct answer; merely that they might have contributed.

>> * 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.
>
>This does not explain the continuing growth in numbers during centuries
>9-12, which levels off in century 13.  The same historical situation
>existed in the preceding as well as the following centuries, and in
>itself should not have affected the number of MSS.

Not entirely... Byzantium lost control of Egypt, parts of Palestine, and
eastern Anatolia *before* the ninth century, but its boundaries then
remained essentially stable until the battle of Manzikert in 1071. Even
then, Constantinople itself was safe. It was not until the Ottoman
Empire became a major power starting in the twelfth century that
Byzantium and the Balkan areas came under direct threat.

>> * 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.
>
>Did the Black Death really affect the Balkans and Turkey as much as it did
>Western Europe?  Also a bad analogy, since it does not seem that the Latin
>manuscript trade in western Europe suffered.  Certainly the number of
>extant MSS declines in centuries 14-15, but not by anywhere near a third;
>in fact even with the decline, the total number of extant MSS from either
>century 14 or 15 exceeds that available in centuries 9 and 10 combined.
>We are talking only of a small decline -- not matters turning back to a
>trickle, as the pre-9th century uncial situation happens to be.

All right, I'll accept that based on your superior knowledge of Vulgate
manuscripts. For what it's worth, though, the Black Death *did* affect
the east significantly (that's where the plague came from, after all!).
It probably didn't affect the Balkans much; they were too sparsely
populated. But I seem to recall reading somewhere that the plague
struck Constantinople heavily, and that its population *never*
recovered.

Now it's obvious that a plague that hit in the late 1340s could not
have *started* the decline. But I thought it reasonable that it
might have contributed.

>> * 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?
>
>This has more merit, and may explain some of the decline, but I would not
>think it explains all of it.  I still think that basically a saturation
>point had been reached, and MSS simply were not continuing to be copied
>in an increasing manner, but primarily to replace those which were lost
>or destroyed.  Given the accidents of history, the slight decline in
>number over the 14th and 15th centuries is not really very significant.

Why didn't you say so in the first place? :-)

[remainder omitted as I don't think Robinson and I disagree -- though
he seems to think otherwise]

Bob Waltz
[email-masked]