Steven Avery
Administrator
searching
homoeoteleuton or homeoteleuton or homoioteleuton
plus Sinaiticus
maybe Jongkind
homoeoteleuton or homeoteleuton or homoioteleuton
plus Sinaiticus
maybe Jongkind
Last edited:
homoeoteleuton - Nazaroo quotes Houghton (find Schmidt and Holmes)
- Thread starter Steven Avery
- Start date
Steven Avery
Administrator
Houghton (2011) on Scribal Habits
Nazaroo
http://homoioteleuton.blogspot.com/2011/08/houghton-2011-on-scribal-habits.html
Houghton pre-publication
https://web.archive.org/web/2011072....uk/627/2/2011_EarlyChristianity-preprint.pdf
Better choices for new readers in this field would be probably be Zuntz' study on the Epistles, Sturz' foundational work on The Byzantine text-type, and Dr. Maurice Robinson's valuable article on the same topic. In regard to key passages of the NT relevant to Textual Criticism, the work of James Snapp Jr. on The Ending of Mark must be considered essential reading to those wishing to avoid confusion and the inevitable disinformation now rampant in the current literature on T.C.
Houghton also notes the findings of Schmidt and Holmes, regarding the unlikelihood of coincidental but identical readings by independent copyists. But this can be very misleading, as a large number of significant cases of homoeoteleuton involve extensive segments of duplicate strings of letters, allowing sometimes hundreds of different line alignments and 'situations' which would generate identical outcome-texts even though the scribes skipped at different places. (See many of our posts here illustrating this).
Nazaroo
Posted by Nazaroo at 2:33 AM
Nazaroo
http://homoioteleuton.blogspot.com/2011/08/houghton-2011-on-scribal-habits.html
Houghton pre-publication
https://web.archive.org/web/2011072....uk/627/2/2011_EarlyChristianity-preprint.pdf
Certainly, Hernández (2006), Jongkind (2007), and Royse (2008) have gathered and analyzed a vast amount of detailed data from the papyri, and these three works stand out especially high above their contemporaries, and must be considered highly recommended reading. It is hard to see however, what value Bart Ehrman's work can be granted, given his crippling atheistic bias in regard to the Bible text, - or what little there is remaining that can be milked out of Colwell's acknowledged pioneering (pre 1965), but now hopelessly out of date study.
Better choices for new readers in this field would be probably be Zuntz' study on the Epistles, Sturz' foundational work on The Byzantine text-type, and Dr. Maurice Robinson's valuable article on the same topic. In regard to key passages of the NT relevant to Textual Criticism, the work of James Snapp Jr. on The Ending of Mark must be considered essential reading to those wishing to avoid confusion and the inevitable disinformation now rampant in the current literature on T.C.
Houghton also notes the findings of Schmidt and Holmes, regarding the unlikelihood of coincidental but identical readings by independent copyists. But this can be very misleading, as a large number of significant cases of homoeoteleuton involve extensive segments of duplicate strings of letters, allowing sometimes hundreds of different line alignments and 'situations' which would generate identical outcome-texts even though the scribes skipped at different places. (See many of our posts here illustrating this).
|
| click to enlarge |
Nazaroo
Posted by Nazaroo at 2:33 AM
Last edited: