3 ms·
That argument about Greek works being lost due to use of papyrus in Europe in I assume the early middle ages is worth considering (any links would be appreciate
by fngjdflmdflg 2y ago
That argument about Greek works being lost due to use of papyrus in Europe in I assume the early middle ages is worth considering (any links would be appreciated). My argument above is about the claim that "if you have nothing to write on you cannot really have a school, library or university. And if you did there would be no material to study from. You would have to write on animal skin (parchment) and that doesn't scale at all." Specifically that the second sentence results in the first sentence being the case in Europe (ie. that there was nothing to write on in Europe).
- kragen 2y agounfortunately the texts i'd most like to link are not linkable because they were lost in medieval times https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3290/long_paper3261.pdf https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3290/long_paper3261.pdf says: > It is to be noted, that historical and philological knowledge of loss rates is very scarce and elusive, but it can still be approached from various angles, such as the collection of data from ancient library catalogues, inventories, wills, as well as allusions and intertextuality [54, 4, 9]. Buringh [9] provides estimates for the Latin West, with a geometric mean of loss around -25% per century, with variations from -11% in the 9th to -32% in the 14th and 15th centuries (with local variations between medieval institutions from –3% to –71% per century). The global loss rate for non-illustrated manuscripts of several well known collections have been estimated around 93-97% [32, 38, 53, 40]. But there is a potential bias in accounting only for well known institutional collections, from which some manuscripts are known to have survived: trying to account for fully lost libraries, Buringh [9] is compelled to revise his estimates higher, to -25% by century until the 12th, up to -43% in the 15th. (note that buringh's figures here are highest after the dark ages and the introduction of paper!) i only have buringh's figures from this scholium because buringh's paper itself has not been preserved in sci-hub and will probably be lost in the next century i agree that in the counterfactual history where there was no papyrus in europe there would have been even higher losses
- fngjdflmdflg 2y ago>i only have buringh's figures from this scholium because buringh's paper itself has not been preserved in sci-hub and will probably be lost in the next century I accessed it just fine. Try the doi link: 10.1163/9789047428640. The author is the same as the one I quoted above, and he gives the same 25% figure there. I don't see any specific argument about papyrus in the text you quoted though, which is what I was hoping you would link to. From what little I read about it, it seems parchment was the primary medium for manuscripts in Europe starting from the 4th century: >Parchment, however, did not come into general use for book production until some centuries later, even though it had a marked advantage over papyrus in its greater durability; moreover, it was better suited than papyrus for writing on both sides. It was at about the start of the fourth century A.D. that it began to take the place of papyrus in the manufacture of the best books, and the works con- sidered worth preserving were gradually transferred from papyrus roll to parchment codex. It is in this century that the great parchment codices of the Greek Bible (the Vaticanus and the Sinaiticus; see p p . 62-7) were prepared; and the earliest extant parchment manu- scripts of pagan works date probably from the same century. But the use of papyrus did not cease then, and papyrus manuscripts of the New Testament have been found dating from the fifth, sixth, and seventh centuries.[0] So it seems difficult to blame the loss of Greek works in Europe on the lack paper specifically. An argument could be made that by the end of the Roman Empire, nobody cared about Greek science anymore, which meant they didn't feel the need to preserve it in parchment and instead only used papyrus, which later deteriorated. That is something I could agree to, as the Romans never really cared about science (or anything intellectual) in the first place. I would still want to see some links that actually make this argument (which I had assumed you had when I asked for them). My main point here is that it is hard to say that Greek works were lost due to lack of technology (either in the strong form given by GP or the weak form you proposed here). More likely in my opinion is that literate Europe was not so interested in Greek works to begin with in the early middle ages. Most scribes were monks or part of the clergy generally, and they were mainly interested in ecclesiastical works, and that is what got written down, copied and studied. I would also suggest that Greek works were probably not universally seen as heretical at this point (early middle ages) as there was not such a strong central church/Pope which only developed in earnest starting in the 8th century (or so I recall). Although I have no evidence for that last claim. [0] Metzger, Bruce (2005). The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration (4th ed.). Oxford University Press. p. 8. source found via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus full text here: https://ia600208.us.archive.org/9/items/TheTextOfNewTestament4thEdit/TheTextOfNewTestament4thEdit.pdf https://ia600208.us.archive.org/9/items/TheTextOfNewTestamen...