English, asked by kaursehajpreet895, 1 month ago

editing of the dead sea scrolls​

Answers

Answered by indo21509
0

1

Editing the Dead Sea Scrolls: What Should We Edit and How Should We Do It?

Eibert Tigchelaar (KU Leuven)

Lecture Copenhagen Conference on Dead Sea Scrolls and Material Philology, April 5, 2014

(cleaned up with minor revisions in 2018 and 2019)

I.

In the 1990s the American classicist Glenn Most organized a series of conferences in

Heidelberg in which the participants reflected upon key elements of classical history of

philology in the light of new tendencies in the humanities and philology. The conference

resulted in 6 volumes in the series Aporemata: Kritische Studien zur Philologiegeschichte. In a

sense, the sequence of the conferences reflects the different stages in classical philology, as

seen by Most: collecting fragments, editing texts, commentaries, historicizing, and disciplining

classics. Each of these volumes was concluded by Hans Ulrich Gumbrecht, literary theorist at

Stanford University.

The important thing is that Most initiated in the field of classicists a reflection on their

own history of philology. And that too, reflection on the kinds of philology that inform and

determine our editing and scholarly research, has been a major contribution of this

conference. I have heard great papers, from many different perspectives, that all commented

on different perspectives on the project of editing or interpreting manuscript, in conversation

with what has been called new, material, or artefactual philology. Especially on the first day,

there were no less than four papers (by George Brooke, Michael Langlois, Trine Hasselbalch,

and Kipp Davis) that touched upon issues that I had wanted to discuss in my paper. George

discussed the principles that have governed previous editions, something I had thought to do

myself, Michael presented in a very sophisticated way the different steps of a what one might

call a philology of fragments, Trine covered several questions I had wanted to discuss, for

example on the reason why scrolls scholars did not use Karl Lachmann, and Kipp

appropriated and superbly illustrated my own thesis that manuscripts are scholarly

Similar questions