Skip to content

6. Material Context

Jump to bottom
Gabriel Bodard edited this page May 13, 2024 · 18 revisions

Material context of text-bearing objects

SunoikisisDC Digital Classics and Byzantine Studies: Session 6

Date: Monday May 13, 2024. 16:00-17:30 BST = 17:00-18:30 CEST.

Convenors: Daria Elagina (Universität Hamburg), Martina Filosa (Universität zu Köln)

Youtube link: youtu.be/FsWu5qCBLXw

Slides: Combined slides (PDF)

Outline

In this session, we will explore the descriptive and procedural metadata pertaining to the material context of text-bearing objects in digital editions. We discuss the features of an ancient text-bearing object, such as an inscription, a seal, or a manuscript, that are important to record in a machine-readable form, including description, history, prior scholarship, process and adherence to established standards, in particular TEI and EpiDoc. A case study in this regard is represented by the role of rubrication (i.e. the presence of elements written in red ink) in Ethiopic manuscript culture. Using the manuscript tradition of the Chronicle of John of Nikiu as an example, a historiographical text composed in the seventh century in Egypt and transmitted exclusively in Ethiopic, we will illustrate the influence of the material context of the creation of the manuscript itself, in particular the scribes’ workflow, on the transmission of the text, and some initial thoughts on the way in which this process might be translated in a machine-actionable way.

Required readings

  • Balicka-Witakowska, E., A. Bausi, C. Bosc-Tiessé, and D. Nosnitsin 2015. ‘Ethiopic Codicology’, in A. Bausi, P. G. Borbone, F. Briquel-Chatonnet, P. Buzi, J. Gippert, C. Macé, M. Maniaci, Z. Melissakis, L. E. Parodi, W. Witakowski, and E. Sokolinski, eds, Comparative Oriental Manuscript Studies. An Introduction (Hamburg: COMSt, 2015), 154–174. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.46784
  • Valieva, N., and P. Liuzzo 2021. ‘Giving Depth to TEI-Based Descriptions of Manuscripts: The Golden Gospel of Ham’, Aethiopica 24 (2021), 176–211. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15460/aethiopica.24.0.1632
  • EpiDoc Guidelines on Descriptive and Historical data
  • EpiDoc Guidelines on Provenance

Further readings

  • Anderson, L., and H. Wendt, "Ancient Relationships, Modern Intellectual Horizons: The practical challenges and possibilities of encoding Greek and Latin inscriptions." In ed. M.T. Rutz & M.M. Kersel, Archaeologies of Text: Archaeology, Technology, and Ethics. Oxbow Books, 2014 (Joukowsky Institute Publication 6). Pp. 164–175.
  • Elagina, D. 2023. "Materiality and community: Digital approaches to Ethiopic manuscript culture." In: Palladino C. & Bodard G (eds.), Can’t Touch This. London: Ubiquity Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/bcv.f
  • Filosa, M. et al. 2023. "Description, translation and process: Making the implicit explicit in digital editions of ancient text-bearing objects." In: Palladino C. & Bodard G (eds.), Can’t Touch This. London: Ubiquity Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/bcv.d

Resources

Exercise

Option 1

  • Select one or more editions of text-bearing objects (inscriptions, papyri) from the following online corpora: IOSPE, CGRN, Papyri.info, IRT2021, Telemon, Orasis.
  • In each edition, both in the published version and in the exported XML file, look for the following information:
    • provenance and acquisition
    • hammer price (if bought at auction)
    • exclusivity rights on the publication and/or permission to publish the material
    • if the edition was done in the framework of a funded project, who is the funder
  • Is this information present in the edition?
    • If it is there, where is this information to be found (in the publication, in the XML data, in an overarching page about the project etc.)? Could it be more explicit?
    • If it is not there, how would you encode this information in EpiDoc? How would you make this information more visible and explicit?
  • Are EpiDoc guidelines exhaustive on this topic?
  • What further information would you like to know? Where, if anywhere, might this be found?
  • Did you find any publications or editions that did adequately record the features discussed in this session?

Option 2

  • Collect information on rubrication and/or usage of coloured ink and the workflow of copyists in the manuscript culture you study.
  • Is this topic covered in (printed or digital) scholarly publications?
  • How would you encode the presence or absence of rubrication and/or coloured ink in a manuscript in TEI?
  • Are TEI guidelines exhaustive on this topic? Compare them with the Beta maṣāḥǝft Guidelines.
Clone this wiki locally