Subject: tc-list The Living Text

From: "Wieland Willker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 13:44:16 +0200

Regarding the discussion about what an autograph is and in view of Parkers
"Living Text of the Gospels":
If we depart from trying to reconstruct the autographs, what is the end
result? If we simply try to establish the diversity of readings? Each
variant represented the text of the Gospel for some group at some point.
Have they all the same value then?
Is this leading people to say: I believe in Codex B! - No, I'm a
Sinaiticus-man!
Should all early readings (definition!) be placed with equal weighting side
by side in the NT? Will the new NA-28 look more like Swanson? Do we have the
choice to choose readings, both THE WORD OF GOD?
Haven't thought about that before, interesting. Is this a new TC paradigm?

Best wishes
    Wieland
      <><
--------------------
mailto:[email-masked]
http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/

---

From: [email-masked] (U.B.Schmid)
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 1999 17:54:17 +0200

Wieland Willker wrote:
> result? 

The concept of "autograph" within NT textual scholarship should be trated with 
caution, because it supports anachronistic and naive views of the task of our 
discipline.
In my view, the ultimate goal of textual scholarship is clearing up the textual 
history of given texts. The proper designation of the starting point of a 
textual transmission is not "autograph", but *archetype*. Whenever there is a 
textual transmission, it is legitimate, in fact necessary, to ask for it's 
archetype. However, for a lot of texts from antiquity the archetype doesn't 
necessarily equal the autograph. This is especially true for texts which have 
been transmitted through intermediary genres, such as collections of all sorts, 
e.g., letter collections, collections of excerpts (epitomai), medical 
prescriptions and diagnoses, laws, oracles, etc. Sometimes, the textual history 
points back to a collective archetype. And, the quest for the autograph of every 
single item within the collection requires new orientation. 
If we follow the textual history of texts back to their off-spring, we should be 
careful to not somehow "naturally" expect to face "autographs" behind the last 
turn of the journey.   

------------------------------------------
Dr. Ulrich Schmid
[email-masked]