From: Dave Washburn (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Jun 05 2001 - 12:57:18 EDT
> In a message dated 06/05/2001 7:50:01 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> email@example.com writes:
> << I have looked at it in the facsimile and it's correct that there is a
> brown dot there, but
> I would term it "of unknown origin". It is most probably only a blot.
> There is no extra
> space between the letters which one would expect if this is a
> comma. I
> would not base
> anything on this. >>
> I am sorry, but I beg to differ. I have a copy of the text right in front of
> me, and it is very clearly NOT a "blot." It is a well-placed point just like
> other marks in B. The spacing is not tight, but free and deliberate.
> Anyone who wants to check it for his- or herself can and should request
> through interlibrary loan the microfilm from the Ancient Biblical Manuscript
> Center, in Claremont. Leaning on my opinion or someone else's, like this
> fellow from TC, would be a mistake. Look at the microfilm and draw your own
> *informed* conclusion. I think you will see quite plainly that the dot is no
> blot at all, is not faded at all, and is from the original hand.
Considering that he has done just that, and is much more familiar
with the characteristics of this and hundreds of other manuscripts
than the rest of us are - in addition to the fact that he has no
theological stake in it one way or the other - I'd be much more
inclined to take his word. YMMV.
"You just keep thinking, Butch. That's what you're good at."
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [firstname.lastname@example.org]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to email@example.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:36:59 EDT