Subject: Re: Time needed for collation (Was: Re: tc-list Money)

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 09:53:57 EDT

In a message dated 7/16/99 2:43:08 PM, Ulrich wrote:

>Maybe Bill Warren can tell us about the routines he employs in his 
institution
>and give us an estimation on the basis of his experience.

I'll post this to add the experiences we've had both in collating and in 
setting up the Center for New Testament Textual Studies.  

During 1999 we will complete over 60 collations of the Gospel of John as well 
as some other collations in the Synoptics and Paulines.  As to time 
requirements, no specific time can be set due to several factors: 1) the 
ability of the collator and the speed at which the person feels comfortable 
collating (while on a "clean" ms. we might realize a full collation of John 
in 40 hours, on other mss. the same length of text can take 100 hours.  I 
worked on 565 in John and thought I'd never finish with the final chapters 
due to the quality of the ms./microfilm for that portion of text.  At times a 
single chapter required 10 hours or more); 2) the nature of the ms. and 
access to a source for checking questionable readings (we work primarily from 
microfilms, but microfilms are not always adequate for resolving questionable 
readings); 3) the nature of the rules for the project/collation (our work on 
the Paulines is for a specific project that only needs notations of 
"significant" variants as defined by that project, although we have noted all 
items as a part of our internal procedures.  We work with the IGNTP 
primarily, and so seek to have 3 collations of each ms.--not all done 
necessarily at our Center-- and seek to note all variations, significant and 
insignificant.  Even though noting all items is more time consuming, future 
studies will benefit due to this practice--for example, a future study on 
final nu would not require all new collations); 4) the health of the collator 
(I seek to hold collators to about 4 hours maximum per day collating, with 
regular breaks.  We could push more, but the long-term health of the people 
working in the Center must be considered.  I had one student a few years ago 
that suffered severe eye strain due to collating 10 to 12 hours a day for 
several weeks.  He then had to have about 4 weeks of total eye rest to 
restore his health.  At that point I realized that specific restrictions 
would be needed to prevent such problems.  And obviously the quality of the 
collation suffers with eye fatigue.  I try to remind myself regularly of 
Legg's health problems.); 5) the start-up time for collating a ms. (I require 
a collation of a single chapter before allowing the collator to begin an 
official collation.  In this way the hand of the scribe can be somewhat 
mastered.  Also I require the notation of scribal traits while the collation 
is being made.  A helpful suggestion given to me at the Birmingham conference 
this past April was to have collators make a hand copy of a page of the ms., 
seeking to learn the scribe's strokes, etc. in the process.  I have started 
using that suggestion for beginning collators.  Also, I seek to have 
collators study some about the ms. from the standard handbooks when 
feasible--not all mss. have descriptions, etc., outside of the Kurzgefasste 
Liste.  And of course, collators new to a specific project must study the 
guidelines for that project.  Overall, we use the IGNTP guidelines as a 
starting point for all of our work, with variations and additions as 
needed.); 6) the reconciliation of collations (As has been indicated, once 
multiple collations of a given ms. are in hand, then the task of reconciling 
the differences in the collations must take place before a usable collation 
is produced.  This process involves returning to the ms. whereever 
differences in the collations occur in order to check the correct reading, 
and so more time is added to the total process at this point.); 7) accuracy 
demands (No collation is in many ways preferable to a bad collation, since 
the work of correcting a bad collation is almost as much as that of making a 
new collation.  Therefore, slower work with greater accuracy is preferable to 
faster work with less accuracy.  Based on this, I do not place a time 
restriction on the people doing collations at the Center, but have had to 
discard or totally rework some collations.  As others have stated, not all 
who are capable with Greek make capable collators.  I most trust those in 
regular employment at the Center since they have worked with multiple mss. 
and helped in the evaluation of the collations of others, thus becoming 
acutely aware of the quality issues related to collations.)

Some other points to consider from my own experience are as follows: Any 
Center needs strong financial backing, with that backing being an on-going 
struggle.  We are just finishing our first full year of existance, with 
set-up of the Center requiring 5 to 6 months after moving into the 
facilities.  Regular staffing with minimal turnover is a must for TC, since 
expertise with the mss. only comes from contact with the mss.  And research 
assistants require money that is secure for a considerable amount of time.  I 
doubt that the money needed for such an enterprise would be available to many 
individuals, and so Centers or Institutes are likely going to be needed as a 
foundation for securing grants, etc.  While we've had considerable success on 
this front, securing funds is a cost in and of itself that must be factored 
into the total cost of the enterprise.  

And then we have the situation of travel for work on mss. on site.  This is 
an expense that cannot be dismissed since many NT mss. are only accessible on 
site, if accessible then.  

Personally, I would see a total figure of some 15 to 25 million needed for 
just the collation side of the equation if all NT mss. are envisioned 
(including reconciling the collations and putting them into a usable 
electronic format), and a time period of minimally 10 years if the required 
funding were available.  Just setting up such an undertaking and 
finding/employing/training capable people would take a couple of years.  The 
evaluation of the resulting data to determine textual relationships and the 
integration of the evidence into the creation of a critical text would be 
separate.  And the above price would not include the versional or patristic 
evidence, which requires even more time to assimulate.  

Realistically, we do need more sites for the work, and more integration among 
the sites on both data generated and quality guidelines.  But smaller sites 
(we don't need to duplicate Münster) likely will be more feasible for getting 
the work done rather than waiting for a megasite to take on the task.  

At least that's the view from here.  Feel free to reply off-list to any of 
these points.

Paz,

Bill Warren
Landrum P. Leavell, II, Professor of New Testament and Greek
Director of the Center for New Testament Textual Studies 
New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary