Subject: Re: tc-list Recovering the Invisible?

From: "Thomas J. Kraus" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 14:37:37 +0200

Dear Wieland,
*invisible* letters have always been a problem for papyrologists. Just 
remember Tischendorf´s go on Codex Ephraemi Syri rescriptus applying  
Gioberti´s tincture (ammonium hydrosulphid) to it and by that intensifying 
some of the ingredients of the ancient ink while destroying some of the 
other material (Ephraem´s text and the parchment as well).
You mentioned IR and UV. They only help in specific cases depending on the 
material and the faintness (ingredients) of the lettes. Never mind, they 
were a straight leap forward.
Of course, microscopes are improving and they help a lot (nevertheless, 
the *konfokales Laserrastermikroskop*, which C.P. Thiede claims to hold a 
patent on,  remains a riddle to me; no patent office could give me any 
further information about such a thing, and Thiede ...). There are good 
opportunities to identify blots and traces of ink, if you make a 
high-quality photo of your fragment, digitalize it (almost the same step), 
and try to reproduce it with applicable software or printers (you lose a 
massive amount of quality by that).
Have you heard of the new procedure called *Mondo nuovo*? Specific 
photographies of one and the same manuscript are digitalized only carrying 
the spectral colours in all ranges from infrared to ultraviolet light, 
digitalized, and then the diverging colours on the many photographies are 
brought together by the new software (also called *Mondo nuovo*). The 
software was developed by scholars in Bologna and Parma and is applicable 
for parchment only (as far as I know). Recently, some newspaper articles 
mentioned it (DIE ZEIT, no. 30, 16 july 1998, page 34; SZ, no. 171, page 
V2/9). But a digitalized page of a parchment codex will cost about 1,000 
pounds sterling!
For other computerizing procedures consult:
A. Lange, Computer aided text-reconstruction and transcription. 
CATT-manual, Tuebingen 1993.
A. Lange, Computer aided text-reconstruction (CATT) developed with the 
Dead Sea Scrolls, in: New Qumran texts and studies. Proceedings of the 
First Meeting of the International Organization for Qumran Studies, Paris 
1992, StTDJ 21, Leiden-New York-Cologne 1994, pp. 223-232.
With a main focus on reconstructing fragmented texts:
I.A. Moir, S. Michaelson and A.Q. Morton, Scriptures. The Use of Computers 
for Fragment Location, in: ZPE 17, 1975, 119-124.
Concentrating on the restauration of manuscripts:
H. Harrauer, Bericht über das 1. Wiener Symposium fuer 
Papyrusrestaurierung, Wien 1985.

I hope that this is of any help for you and that my `messy´ confusing 
writing isn´t any problem. Sorry, I do not remember any further specific 
literature dealing with your issue.

Best wishes, good luck,
Thomas

Universität Regensburg
Kath.-theol. Fakultät
Universitätsstr. 31
D-93053 Regensburg

Tel. + 49 941 943 36 90
Fax. + 49 941 943 19 86
[email-masked]

---

From: Jim Deardorff <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 08:00:14 -0700 (PDT)

I came across a peculiarity here that perhaps someone can explain. The
phrase KAI THS PARAYIDOS, or "and of the plate," is listed by N-A 27 as
being supported by aleph, B and others, but is left out of the text. Yet
its ms support seems stronger, does it not, than for omitting it. Did
ordinary logic, then, play a role here, in that it does not make very much
sense to speak of a plate having an interior?

Jim Deardorff
Oregon State University
http://www.proaxis.com/~deardorj

---

From: "Robert B. Waltz" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 10:33:21 -0500

>sense to speak of a plate having an interior?

The official explanation for this variant in the UBS commentary is:

   The weight of external evidence appears to support the longer
   text. At the same time the presence of AUTOU (instead of
   AUTWN) in B* f13 28 al seems to be a hint that the archetype
   lacked KAI THS PAROYIDOS. On balance, there is a slight
   probability that the words were inserted by copyists from
   ver. 25.

(Note: I had, obviously, to transliterate the accented lower-case
Greek of the Commentary.)

The committee labelled this a D decision in both the fourth and
fifth editions, meaning that they really don't know what the
original text is.

Looking solely at the external evidence, I incline, very slightly,
to agree with them. This reading is clearly that of the "Caesarean"
witnesses, and all the other types are split. At least, that's
my top-of-the-head reaction; if I looked at it in more detail, I
might well change my mind. :-)

-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-

                        Robert B. Waltz
                     [email-masked]

Want more loudmouthed opinions about textual criticism?
Try my web page: http://www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn
(A site inspired by the Encyclopedia of NT Textual Criticism)

---

From: "William L. Petersen" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 13:53:35 -0400

It might be worth point out that the Eastman Kodak company used to have a
series of professional "handbooks" on infrared photography and UV
photography.  They were available at a nominal price (each was 30 pp. or
so), and were done with a commercial goal in view:  to encourage the sale
of IR film and UV etc. filters.

Twenty-five years ago, when I wrote to the FBI about advanced photography
techniques for detecting faint MS writing, they directed me to Kodak...so
if it's good enough for them...

Digitizing (and chromatic and "angle" recording of images, which are then
"digitally" reassembled) have surpassed--to the best of my knowledge--the
traditional photographic techniques.  Some of this has been done with parts
of the Dead Sea materials.

--Petersen, Penn State Univ.
Cheers!  --Bill.

[email-masked]
865-7773

---

From: Carlton Winbery <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 21:44:59 +0400

>might well change my mind. :-)

I wonder also if Luke 11:39 might have influenced a scribe or the tradition
behind both Luke and Matt (maybe Q?). In Luke there a different word for
plate, TOU PINAKOS. Perhaps someone will also straighten out the fact that
in Luke, they are commanded to give those dirty things inside the cup for
alms.

Carlton L. Winbery
Fogleman Professor of Religion
Louisiana College
Pineville, LA 71359
[email-masked]
[email-masked]

---

From: "Robert B. Waltz" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 10:20:17 -0500

Well, I made a mistake on this thread. I see that I wrote

>>fifth editions, meaning that they really don't know what the

That first sentence should, of course, have read 

The [UBS] committee labelled this a D decision in both the THIRD and
FOURTH editions.

Guess I'm expecting an upsurge in inflation again. :-)

                        Robert B. Waltz
                     [email-masked]

---

From: "Mark Goodacre" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 12:35:23 GMT

On  7 Oct 98 at 21:44, Carlton Winbery wrote:

> plate, TOU PINAKOS. Perhaps someone will also straighten out the fact that in
> Luke, they are commanded to give those dirty things inside the cup for alms.

On the first point, the IQP's Critical Text of Q 11.39b reads THS PAROYIDOS 
with Matthew rather than TOU PINAKOS with Luke.  I am interested by the 
suggestion that Q might have influenced a scribe of Matthew (if I read the 
words above correctly) -- on what grounds could one establish the likelihood of 
that?

On the second point, it seems more likely that Luke 11.41 is referring to the 
inner Pharisee than to the inner cup.  Turner suggests that one take TA ENONTA 
as an adverbial accusative, thus TA ENONTA DOTE ELEHMOSUNHN will mean something 
like "Give alms inwardly", a theme with a clearly Lukan character and 
paralleled not far away in 12.33-34. Thus we should probably see Luke 11.41as a 
Lukan redaction of the saying found in Q  (so Tuckett and Kloppenborg) or 
Matthew (so Goulder).

Mark
--------------------------------------
Dr Mark Goodacre       mailto:[email-masked]
  Dept of Theology                Tel: +44 (0)121 414 7512
  University of Birmingham      Fax: +44 (0)121 414 6866
  Birmingham  B15 2TT
  United Kingdom

Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/goodacre
World Without Q: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/q