rjohara.net |
Darwin-L Message Log 2:82 (October 1993)
Academic Discussion on the History and Theory of the Historical Sciences
This is one message from the Archives of Darwin-L (1993–1997), a professional discussion group on the history and theory of the historical sciences.
Note: Additional publications on evolution and the historical sciences by the Darwin-L list owner are available on SSRN.
<2:82>From GA3704@SIUCVMB.SIU.EDU Thu Oct 14 08:49:36 1993 Date: Thu, 14 Oct 93 08:42:24 CST From: "Margaret E. Winters" <GA3704@SIUCVMB.SIU.EDU> To: darwin-l@ukanaix.cc.ukans.edu Subject: manuscript transmission I too am a little uneasy about pushing the parallels between manuscript transmission and genetic transmission too far, and in fact much beyond the idea that there *is* transmission. It is the social factors of manuscript transmission that bother me somewhat, although I may easily be missing too much about the genetic parallels. A couple of examples which seem to me to be problems: 1. Biblical transmission is often altered by the sacred nature of the text (and this goes for sacred texts in general) - they are often copied far more carefully than secular texts - I'm talking about the 11th-13th centuries for the secular texts since that is the period I know most about. This goes for translation too (where other parallels may lurk). The only decent amount of East Germanic we have extent (called Gothic) is a translation of parts of the gospels. BUT, the syntax, when examined carefully, is often word-for-word renditions of Greek (the source language), therefore making the text relatively useless for historians of syntax looking for clues as to East Germanic. The same kind of respect goes often into the simple copying of such texts so that they end up being much more conservative than the number of generations of mss should be. 2. Another factor is the reason why texts exist. We have to differentiate between those which were originally written and meant for a literate public (courtly romances, for example) where at least one person could read to the others and those which were written down almost accidentally after centuries of oral transmission (epic poems in Old French) where we actually have mss which were more cheat-sheets for recitation than sources for reading. I'm not sure where all of this leads, but these factors are very much part of manuscript transmission. And of course let us not forget how random our collection of mss is compared to how many were copied and lost! Margaret Winters <ga3704@siucvmb.siu.edu>
Your Amazon purchases help support this website. Thank you!