tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post3212109267980644472..comments2024-03-29T00:57:56.876+00:00Comments on Evangelical Textual Criticism: When is a Manuscript a Minuscule?P.J. Williamshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04388225485348300613noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-87022555571601351352013-11-11T19:44:04.447+00:002013-11-11T19:44:04.447+00:00Biblical text surrounded by commentary is quite co...Biblical text surrounded by commentary is quite common among Greek NT MSS of that genre. <br /><br />The other common form is text interspersed with commentary, such as in the MSS containing the commentary of Theophylact.Maurice A. Robinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05685965674144539571noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-26484646896963775922013-11-10T02:53:47.355+00:002013-11-10T02:53:47.355+00:00The page looks like a page of Talmud, with a raft ...The page looks like a page of Talmud, with a raft of text in a sea of commentary--except in Greek rather than Hebrew and Aramaic. Was this a common practice in the early centuries A.D.? I've had little experience with actual manuscripts, although I am aware of much literature from that era, both Jewish and Christian.Kephahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00999385775493831638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-27873993942475428202013-11-10T02:52:13.484+00:002013-11-10T02:52:13.484+00:00I'm not a professional critic, but there's...I'm not a professional critic, but there's one thing that strikes me about the manuscript: it looks like my volumes of the Babylonian Talmud printed by the Soncino Press, in which a single raft of text sits like a raft in a sea of commentary.<br /><br />Would someone with a better knowledge of manuscript preparation traditions in the early centuries A.D. comment on how common this format was? In my education in Bible/theology, I was given acquaintance with a wide range of texts, but had little actual experience looking at manuscripts. Kephahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00999385775493831638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-70377122761409362282013-11-02T23:02:51.210+00:002013-11-02T23:02:51.210+00:00Look at Barbour, Greek Literary Hands, 400-1600 (O...Look at Barbour, Greek Literary Hands, 400-1600 (Oxfrod, 1981), plate 6 (p.2), scholia in the margin of a MS of Euclid (888 AD) "a small plain uncial" .G.W. Schwendnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12348141394678110423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-40741579685943189072013-10-30T12:45:19.525+00:002013-10-30T12:45:19.525+00:00Quite a few of the letter-forms in the text of Jam...Quite a few of the letter-forms in the text of James in this MS -- connected or not -- are distinct from uncial letter-forms. (And some of the letters are connected; look at those GARs.) The lettering here is an instructive example of a minuscule that is not what one would normally think of as cursive, but it is still minuscule (and not uncial).<br /><br />Yours in Christ,<br /><br />James Snapp, Jr.<br /> James Snapp Jrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09493891380752272603noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-16705671082133860342013-10-29T22:26:01.574+00:002013-10-29T22:26:01.574+00:00GA K/018 is of the same sort (see the plate in Met...GA K/018 is of the same sort (see the plate in Metzger's <i>Text of the NT</i>): uncial-style biblical text accompanied by a large amount of interspersed (not surrounding) minuscule commentary. <br /><br />Why this should be considered an uncial MS and GA197 a minuscule is beyond me, unless there is some presumed 10th century cutoff date, after which no MS would qualify as uncial.Maurice A. Robinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05685965674144539571noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-2483289195487697992013-10-29T21:48:46.424+00:002013-10-29T21:48:46.424+00:00The mixture of minuscule and uncial seems to fit t...The mixture of minuscule and uncial seems to fit the way Metzger describes the Codices Recentiores period of minuscules on pp. 26-28 of his Manuscripts of the Greek Bible. The problem is that period is mid-thirteenth to mid-fifteenth centuries, and, at least according to the Liste, 197 is 11th century.<br /><br />I wonder if the rule, though, would just normally be that when uncial and minuscule are mixed, to call it a minuscule, since a scribe writing in minuscule might revert to uncial forms of letters, whereas the uncial label would imply that something was copied by a scribe who had not yet adopted the minuscule style.Eric Rowehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00559055709208918638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-50649339875123272672013-10-29T20:53:06.764+00:002013-10-29T20:53:06.764+00:00At the second row of the last image the two halves...At the second row of the last image the two halves are in reverse order. My bad.<br />Dirk Jongkindhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06759927266909478390noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-16470649938789041282013-10-29T15:33:03.139+00:002013-10-29T15:33:03.139+00:00This is a very interesting question, Dirk. I would...This is a very interesting question, Dirk. I would hesitate to call this script minuscule. Perhaps the designation "majuscule with minuscule influences" might work. Of course that doesn't fit our tidy G-A categories. If I had to choose, I would stick this MS in the majuscule category. Brice C. Joneshttp://www.bricecjones.weebly.comnoreply@blogger.com