Subject: Modelling early MS transmission

From: Timothy John Finney <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 12:18:19 +0800 (WST)

Thanks to Vincent Broman and Maurice Robinson for their replies on MS 
copying parameters. A few more thoughts:

Firstly, the critical time for development of variants is said to be the
first two hundred years of transmission i.e. 100 to 300 AD.  We have a few
MSS from this era, mainly papyri from Egypt. (On this point, while vellum
is more durable than papyrus, papyri, nevertheless, can have a lifetime of
far more than 30 to 40 years. Take P46 for example.) Is there historical,
psychological and statistical data that can inform us of likely copying
frequencies, practices and habits of that time? 

As Vincent noted, population statistics for this era are important.
Studies have been made on this, and the Alands mention one in their _Text
of the New Testament_ (off the top of my head, I think that it was by
Harnack, early this century). I have come across an estimate of the number
of MSS made based on the number of churches (referred to in Amphoux' book 
on the Text. Sorry about these vague references - I'm not at
the library.) I also have a vague recollection of seeing a reference to a 
paper in a statistical journal that addressed such problems. Most 
unfortunately, I did not write it down at the time.

Returning to my call for data rather than speculations, I don't want to
stifle discussion. Certainly not -- this can lead us to new discoveries! 
But I would like to have a good set of references which give solidly based
answers to these questions, if such are possible. James Adair is setting
up a tc bibliography accessible via the tc web page. Perhaps he could 
include a section called 

History, Statistics and Psychology of (early) MS copying

or suchlike?

So if you do come across a good, relevant reference, don't be like me and
assume that you will be able to find it again: write it down and send it
to this list (with a summary?)

I would like to say that the idea of discovering the psychology of early 
scribes is not mine: it was mentioned to me by researchers at the Institute 
for New Testament Textual Research (INTF) in Muenster.

To finish, as far as I know, the only cases of extant copies of extant MSS
are the two copies of Codex Claromontanus. This would indicate that we
have but a small number of the total ever made surviving. Assuming that
copyists did not destroy their exemplars (remembering that a decree was
once made that forbade the cleaning of Biblical MSS for other writings --
another reference I should have written down), can you think of how to 
arrive at an estimate of the total number of uncials from this fact?

Have a good weekend,

Tim Finney
Baptist Theological College
of Western Australia

---

From: Maurice Robinson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 12:03:46 -0500 (EST)

On Sat, 30 Mar 1996, Timothy John Finney wrote:

Being away from my home computer in North Carolina for the holidays (I am
currently in Michigan), I cannot answer the questions raised in sufficient

> frequencies, practices and habits of that time? 

In the proper climate and with sufficient care, a papyrus book could
likely last 50-60 years with regular use, I would think. In some cases a
papyrus MS might even last more than a century, though I would suspect
this to be more doubtful.  The fragments of papyrus MSS which survive all
seem to have fallen apart or disintegrated some time before the possible
maximum life of such a MS, perhaps due to travel or less than optimum
preservation conditions.  Of course, if the surviving evidence is instead
taken as typical, then one is faced with a possible shelf/use life of
papyri for about 20-25 years. I tend to doubt this scenario.  Of course,
all this is speculation and unsupported by factual data, but I do seem to
recall some comments about old MSS (I know the colophon to the Martyrdom
of Polycarp speaks of finding an old copy which was almost totally worn
out from age and in poor condition, but the age implied there seems to be
more pushing the century mark than anything less).

> have but a small number of the total ever made surviving. 

With this I fully concur, of course (and probably most everyone else as
well).  There is an important point here, however, and that is that the
limited sample of MSS preserved from antiquity -- especially in the
pre-minuscule era -- might _not_ provide to us a statistically significant
representative sample of the _real_ state of affairs in MS transmission in
the period from century I-VIII, both due to the limited amount of material
preserved and the limited geographical area of MS preservation, especially
in the papyrus era. This of course has been part of my contention
continually in regard to the possibility that the Byzantine Textform may
well have been dominant even in the early centuries, both numerically as
well as geographically. 

> Assuming that

The decree was made by the Council of Trullo, AD 692, and it specifically
concerned turning biblical MSS into palimpsests.  I suspect two major
things regarding this decree, and they are (1) that the destruction of
biblical MSS for re-use as palimpsests was widespread and problematic in
the period before AD 692, which caused the council even to consider a ban
on the practice; and (2) that the decree obviously was not effective,
since most of the known palimpsests we currently possess were made after
the 692 decree.  I suspect that, especially at the time of the conversion
from uncial to minuscule script, the conversion of most uncial MSS to
either scrap paper or palimpsest use was a dominant practice.

_________________________________________________________________________
Maurice A. Robinson, Ph.D.           Professor of Greek and New Testament
Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary     Wake Forest, North Carolina
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

---

From: "Robert B. Waltz" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 1996 12:57:42 -0700

>On Sat, 30 Mar 1996, Timothy John Finney wrote:

BTW -- didn't anyone else note this date? I rather suspect we're resuming
an old thread here, and some of this may already have been copied.

[ snip]
>well have been dominant even in the early centuries, both numerically as

We should probably offer a clarification here: The only known copies of
extand *uncials* are the two copies of Claromontanus. There are a few
copies of minuscules known, of which the most important (I think)
are 205 and 205abs. Since 205 is itself extremely close kin to 209
(someone though 205 a copy of 209), this group -- and indeed family 1
as a while -- form a good basis for comparisons of the habits of scribes.

Other minuscule copies (I'm taking this from the Kurzgefasste Liste;
there may be more that haven't been observed) include 9 and 9abs;
30 and 30abs; 1160 and 1160abs; 1909 and 1909abs; 1929 and 1929abs;
1983 and 1983abs; 2036 and 2036abs; it's also been speculated that
614 is a copy of 2412, and I wouldn't be surprised if some other
members of family 2138 turn out to be copies. There are also a handful
of copies among the lectionaries.

For that matter, I expect the Munster T&T volumes will reveal a few more
copies.

But these are, of course, minuscules, and the circumstances of their
transmission may (note that I say *may*) not match those of the uncial
era.

I think that, to learn about copying in the uncial era, we will have
to turn to sister manuscripts (e.g., in Paul, K and 0151 or 056 and 0142)
and see what we can extrapolate from those.

And even that gives us information for the late uncial era.

BTW -- there are also some known copies of vulgate and (I think)
Peshitta and Armenian manuscripts. But I doubt they tell us much....

Bob Waltz
[email-masked]