Accidental Publication, Unfinished Texts and the Traditional Goals of New Testament Textual Criticism
Notions of ‘authorship’, ‘publication’ and ‘final text’ are often mentioned in traditional textual criticism, but less frequently discussed in detail. The projects of source and redaction criticism end and textual criticism begins based on when scholars imagine a text was finished. Yet modern notions...
Saved in:
Published in | Journal for the study of the New Testament Vol. 39; no. 4; pp. 362 - 387 |
---|---|
Main Author | |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
London, England
SAGE Publications
01.06.2017
|
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | Notions of ‘authorship’, ‘publication’ and ‘final text’ are often mentioned in traditional textual criticism, but less frequently discussed in detail. The projects of source and redaction criticism end and textual criticism begins based on when scholars imagine a text was finished. Yet modern notions of publication, textuality and authorship, which are largely shaped by the printing press, are often anachronistically applied to the ancient world. Exploring evidence from Plato to 4 Ezra to Tertullian and Augustine, I take up the question of when a text was considered ‘final’ by reconsidering what counted as publication in the ancient world. Once the assumption of textual finalization is set aside, the tools traditionally associated with textual, source and redaction criticism become unhelpful. While textual critics have noted the practical impossibilities of arriving at the ‘original text’, I demonstrate the conceptual roadblocks to imagining an ‘original’ and ‘final’ text in the ancient world. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0142-064X 1745-5294 |
DOI: | 10.1177/0142064X17705592 |