Search Results

This chapter provides an overview of research that questions how papyrologists may read ancient documents, and presents the knowledge elicitation methodology used with the experts who read the Vindolanda texts to ascertain their thought processes when approaching a text. The process of reading and making sense of an ancient text is resolved into defined units, with characteristics about each being documented. General procedural information about the ‘papyrology process’ is also presented. Particular issues regarding problems in reading the Vindolanda stylus texts are highlighted, indicating areas in which computational tools may be able to aid the papyrologists in reading such texts. This results in a proposed model of how experts read ancient documents, which is used in subsequent chapters as a basis for the development of a computer system.

The Great ‘First World’ and its companion text, The Lesser ‘First World’, are both examples of Mandaean priestly esoteric literature, and have been hardly studied since their publication in 1963. An odd figure appears in the scroll of the The Great ‘First World’, along with a number of other illustrations, but the identity of the figure depicted is not specified, although it is in the same style as other Mandaean Lightworld beings and priestly prototypes in illustrated documents. Drower, the translator, hazards no guess at its identity. The author gives her own translation of the text on the body, and suggests on the basis of various arguments that the enigmatic figure might be the priestly prototype Hibil Ziwa, but might also invite interpretation as the mystic sage Dinanukht; it might, in fact, intentionally invite both interpretations.

The chapter is presented in two main parts. The first discusses the problem of whether or not it is possible to find or establish a letter‐perfect Torah text. The second looks at the subjection of scribal practices to halakhic determinations. It is pointed out at the end of the chapter that many rabbinic leaders over time (and now) have recognized the imperfection of the Torah, despite the insistence of many religious Jews that it is letter perfect. Furthermore, the halakhic literature continues to refine the text that has been transmitted through the ages.

This chapter examines ancient rabbinic accounts of Roman interference with the practice of Judaism during the first few decades of the 2nd century CE. Sources attributed to Tannaim in the Bavli are compared to those attributed to Tannaim in Palestinian compilations. It is shown that Babylonian portrayals tend to emphasize Roman prohibition of Torah study, while Palestinian portrayals do so only rarely, if at all. This will be the first of many respects in which Babylonian rabbis place greater stress on Torah study than do Palestinian rabbis, which is easily explicable according to the claim that the universe of experience of Babylonian rabbis, more so than of Palestinians, tended not to extend beyond the four walls of the study house.

The imaging of ancient document papers presents several challenges, the nature of which is determined by the character of the text, the material on which it is written and the state of preservation. This chapter talks about the struggle to read and interpret Latin manuscripts from Roman Britain. These manuscripts come mainly in three forms: texts written in ink on thin wooden leaves, texts inscribed with metal stylus on wax-coated wooden stilus tablets, and texts incised on sheets of lead. This chapter focuses on the problems of imaging and signalling process of the texts found on the Vindolanda stilus tablets. These problems in interpreting ancient texts arise from the two identifiable sources of difficulty. The first one is the problem of seeing and identifying, in abraded and damaged documents what is aimed to be read. The second is the problem arising from the character of the text itself which determines the ability of the reader to decipher and interpret it.

This chapter builds on the previous four, which analysed the closely related group of four responsa (responses to questions) about the accuracy of the Torah text and closely related matters, by Rabbi David ben Solomon ibn Abi Zimra (popularly known in English as Ibn Zimra, and in Hebrew as HaRaDBaZ). Ibn Zimra's approach was primarily halakhic, not masoretic, and to appreciate it an examination needs to be made of passages from both the halakhic and masoretic literature (the Masorah is the collective textual notes and other additions to the text of the Torah itself), especially the writings of Solomon ben Abraham Ben Adret, a prolific author and unchallenged rabbinic leader of Spanish Jewry until his death in 1310. Ibn Zimra cited Ben Adret several times, and the analysis presented begins with an anonymous question posed to Ben Adret on matters of spelling in the Torah, and goes on to give his response. Ibn Zimra's use of it is considered in the next chapter.

It is pointed out that the process of changing the text of the Torah is still continuing, as the evidence for doing this continues to grow and change. Moreover, despite the assurance that many previously questionable spellings have been settled to the satisfaction of the halakhic system, the historical fact that numerous conflicting readings (spellings and other variations) did (and still do) exist cannot be made to disappear. The text is testimony to both the care and precision of its preservation and to an extensive list of minor textual variations. Most of the variants in the postmedieval rabbinic literature are relatively minor, but there are quite a number, and examples of some of these passages are presented in this chapter. The current decoding craze (from an imperfect text that is treated as perfect for that purpose), and the possibility of the discovery of a new ‘old text’ of the Torah are also addressed.

Starts by tracing the origin of the Mandaeans to the Jordan/Palestine area (from whence they emigrated, in the first to third centuries CE, to Iran and Iraq), and gives a brief history to the present. Next, the characteristics of the religion are outlined: Mandaeans are the only still surviving group of Gnostics; their religion has an extensive literature with multifarious mythological traditions and intricate rituals; and their world is essentially three‐tiered, with an upper (heavenly) Lightworld on which much emphasis is placed, a middle earthly human world (Tibil), and a gloomy Underworld (which does not receive much attention). An overview is given of ancient Mandaean literature (the Ginza; the liturgies; the Book of John; ritual commentaries; and other works). There is then a brief note on European traditional Mandaean scholarship, which also covers the work of Lady Ethel S. Drower (1879–1972), who broke traditional scholarly moulds and did much of her work on the Mandaeans in the field. Lastly, the parameters and purpose of the book are described.

This chapter examines book burning as a form of purification, designed to protect readers and listeners from inaccurate or downright misleading material, during the early Byzantine period. Throughout the fourth and fifth centuries, when Christianity was struggling to define its theology more closely, every official condemnation was followed by ritual destruction. Decades after the decree of AD 528 that barred pagans from state office, Justinian ordered a persecution of surviving Hellenes, accompanied by the burning of pagan books, pictures, and statues. In the mid-sixth century, active persecution in Constantinople probably destroyed many ancient texts. The chapter considers two canons, issued by the Council in Trullo in AD 692, that shed light on book burning and destruction, purification, and the status of written texts in early Byzantium.

In order to see how the Greek, Roman, and Arab conquests of the Near East shaped the conqueror's and conquered's understanding of the origins of civilization, this chapter surveys the region's ancient mythologies before the conquests: Mesopotamian, Iranian, Egyptian, Greek, and Hebrew (the surviving Hurrian, Hittite, and Canaanite texts do not treat the subject). In Mesopotamian, Iranian, and Egyptian myths, gods create civilization ex nihilo and gave it to humans, sometimes through special human or semihuman interlocutors. The arts and sciences they create are almost always beneficial, and their point of origin is usually associated with cities, not with peoples. The genres of texts surveyed are also heterogeneous because of the ways that culture myths from the different ancient societies survived.

This chapter and Chapters 2 and 4–5 explore the principles that underlie medieval rankings of various types of halakhic evidence for deciding on a number of questionable spellings of the Torah text, including an important shift in ranking that received much support in the sixteenth century; they centre on a closely related group of four responsa (responses to questions) about the accuracy of the Bible text and closely related matters, by Rabbi David ben Solomon ibn Abi Zimra (popularly known in English as Ibn Zimra, and in Hebrew as HaRaDBaZ). A careful look at Ibn Zimra's responses offers an important glimpse into how a leading sixteenth‐century rabbinic authority evaluated his predecessors’ treatments of textual questions and ranked the conflicting witnesses to the spellings or orthographic irregularities of certain biblical words; it also clarifies the halakhic literature's overall approach to fixing the Bible text and reveals what appears to be a major inconsistency in Ibn Zimra's attitude towards the Masorah (the collective textual notes and other additions to the text of the Torah itself). Translations of each responsum are given, and an analysis made of the sources and nuances of their author's arguments, with observations on the relationships between these documents and other issues and compositions of masoretic and halakhic importance. The second responsum, which is covered in this chapter, shares much with some well‐known medieval polemical literature, and is an important statement on the origin and authority of the Masorah and the extent to which it should be used to determine the correct spelling of biblical words.

The story of the making of Sikh scripture is brought to the present and its development is situated within a broader historical context. First, the history of the Adi Granth is traced from its inception in the late seventeenth century to the present time. The primary data for this discussion are provided by the extant Sikh scriptural manuscripts compiled between 1700 and the middle of the nineteenth century, when creation of new manuscripts virtually ceased, and the printed editions of the Adi Granth proliferated from 1865 onwards. The focus is then shifted to the issue of the development of scriptural authority within the Sikh community and its evolution is examined in detail. The roles that the text has played and continues to play in the Sikh religious and community life today are considered. The chapter concludes with a brief assessment of future prospects for the role and status of the Adi Granth as the Sikh community (now a world community with adherents all across the globe) enters the twenty‐first century.

This chapter and Chapters 3–5 explore the principles that underlie medieval rankings of various types of halakhic evidence for deciding on a number of questionable spellings of the Torah text, including an important shift in ranking that received much support in the sixteenth century; they centre on a closely related group of four responsa (responses to questions) about the accuracy of the Bible text and closely related matters, by Rabbi David ben Solomon ibn Abi Zimra (popularly known in English as Ibn Zimra, and in Hebrew as HaRaDBaZ). A careful look at Ibn Zimra's responses offers an important glimpse into how a leading sixteenth‐century rabbinic authority evaluated his predecessors’ treatments of textual questions and ranked the conflicting witnesses to the spellings or orthographic irregularities of certain biblical words; it also clarifies the halakhic literature's overall approach to fixing the Bible text and reveals what appears to be a major inconsistency in Ibn Zimra's attitude towards the Masorah (the collective textual notes and other additions to the text of the Torah itself). Translations of each responsum are given, and an analysis made of the sources and nuances of their author's arguments, with observations on the relationships between these documents and other issues and compositions of masoretic and halakhic importance. The first responsum, which is covered in this chapter, discusses the propriety of changing a word in the Torah to conform with the spelling evidenced by the Zohar. Following the Zohar's midrashic exposition, several people had changed the spelling of the word ’tw (’oto ), ‘him’, to ’wtw in two places. .

The historical background to the Sikh religion is outlined, and an account given of the Adi Granth (“original book”) – the primary Sikh scripture, which is considered to be the highest authority within the community, and plays a central role in Sikh devotional and ritual life. It consists of about 3,000 hymns of carefully recorded authorship with over 2,400 hymns written by the 6 Sikh gurus who lived in the Punjab between 1469 and 1675. The text of the Adi Granth is divided into three main parts: the opening section is liturgical and includes three daily prayers; the Japji (meditation) has 38 stanzas and 2 couplets; the Rahiras (supplication) has 9 hymns; and the Sohila (praise) has 5 hymns. Next, there is an account of the early Sikh community, which also discusses the origin and expansion of the scriptural text. The chapter ends with a plan of the book.

A survey is made of the relevant Sikh literature, in order to understand Sikh perceptions of the history of compilation of the Adi Granth (the primary Sikh scripture) and the difference of views among scholars regarding the text's origin and its various stages of expansion. The important issues constituting scholarly debate and popular Sikh discourse on the compilation of the text of the Adi Granth are laid out. The chapter is divided into three main sections covering eighteenth‐century, nineteenth‐century, and twentieth‐century accounts.

This chapter and the next two examine in detail the extant Sikh scriptural manuscripts in relation to the compilation of the Adi Granth (the primary Sikh scripture). Here, an analysis is made of the information available about the Guru Harsahai Pothi (thought to date from the 1530s) and the Goindval Pothis (thought to date from the 1570s), which are traditionally associated with Guru Nanak and Guru Amardas, respectively. The contents of these manuscripts are drawn on to assess the early formation of the Sikh scriptural corpus, and questions of their history, dating, and location in the early Sikh sacred corpus addressed.

This chapter builds on the previous five, four of which (Chapters 2–5) analysed the closely related group of four responsa (responses to questions) about the accuracy of the Torah text and closely related matters, by Rabbi David ben Solomon ibn Abi Zimra. Ibn Zimra's approach was primarily halakhic, not masoretic, and to appreciate it an examination was made in the previous chapter of passages from both the halakhic and masoretic literature (the Masorah is the collective textual notes and other additions to the text of the Torah itself), especially the writings of Solomon ben Abraham Ben Adret, who was a prolific author and unchallenged rabbinic leader of Spanish Jewry until his death in 1310. The use by Ibn Zimra in his responsa of Ben Adret's responsum on matters of spelling in the Torah is considered. Also considered is the use by Ibn Zimra of Jacob ben Hayyim Ibn Adoniyah's masoretic Bible. A brief note is included on dating Ibn Zimra's responsa.