Textuality in antiquity differs significantly from that of modern Western culture in which the text exists as a fixed, idealized abstraction. In antiquity reading was speaking, and stichography is a visual representation of this interface between speech and writing. Stichography’s spatialization displays scribes’ perception of the spoken text including the concomitants of oral performance. Stichography also reflects scribes’ attentiveness to the readership’s experience with the performed or inscribed text. Scribes interacted with compositions as authors, adapting them according to the exigencies of specific performance events. As a result, the transmission of a specific written layout can supersede parallelismus membrorum; nevertheless, parallelism is a constitutive device in the majority of stichographic texts. The demarcation of sense units elicits two symbiotic social uses, both of which are also implied by the content of the canon. Stichographic texts provide a formatted reference point that is styled to facilitate oral performance and pedagogy.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
E. Tov, “The Background of the Stichometric Arrangements of Poetry in the Judean Desert Scrolls,” in Prayer and Poetry in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Related Literature: Essays in Honor of Eileen Schuller on the Occasion of Her 65th Birthday (stdj 98; ed. J. Penner, K. Penner and C. Wassen; Leiden: Brill, 2012), 409–20, esp. 418–20.
E. Ulrich, “The Qumran Scrolls and the Biblical Text,” in The Dead Sea Scrolls Fifty Years after their Discovery (ed. L. Schiffman et al.; Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 2000), 51–59; S. Niditch, “Hebrew Bible and Oral Literature: Misconceptions and New Directions,” in The Interface of Orality and Writing: Speaking, Seeing, Writing in the Shaping of New Genres (wunt 260; ed. A. Weissenrieder and R. Coote; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010), 3–18; L. de Vries, “Local Oral-Written Interfaces and the Nature, Transmission, Performance and Translation of Biblical Texts,” in Translating Scripture for Sound and Performance: New Directions in Biblical Studies (Biblical Performance Criticism 6; ed. J. Maxey and E. Wendland; Eugene: Cascade Books, 2012), 68–98, esp. 71–75.
J. Assmann, “Form as a Mnemonic Device: Cultural Texts and Cultural Memory,” in Performing the Gospel: Orality, Memory, and Mark (ed. R. Horsley, J. Draper and J. Foley; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2006), 67–82, esp. 79–80; A. Kirk, “Manuscript Tradition as A Tertium Quid: Orality and Memory in Scribal Practices,” in Jesus, the Voice, and the Text: Beyond the Oral and Written Gospel (ed. T. Thatcher; Waco: Baylor University Press, 2008), 215–34, esp. 215–16.
R. Rodríguez, Oral Tradition and the New Testament (London: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, 2014), 27. Because in most cases ‘oral’ means “realized in performance,” the term oral performance could appear redundant; however, a text can be called oral in terms of composition, mode of transmission, and performance. R. Finnegan, “What Is Orality—If Anything?” Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 14 (1990): 130–49, esp. 134–36; idem, Oral Poetry: Its Nature, Significance and Social Context (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977), 17. Moreover, as J. Foley has illustrated, oral poems may contain a written composition, performance or reception (cf. How to Read an Oral Poem [Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2002], 50–52).
J. Foley, “Plentitude and Diversity: Interactions between Orality and Writing,” in The Interface of Orality and Writing: Speaking, Seeing, Writing in the Shaping of New Genres (wunt 260; ed. A. Weissenrieder and R. Coote; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010), 103–18, esp. 107–12.
G. Brooke, “The “Apocalyptic” Community, the Matrix of the Teacher and Rewriting Scripture” in Authoritative Scriptures in Ancient Judaism (JSJSup 141; ed. M. Popović; Leiden: Brill, 2010), 39–53, esp. 42.
I. Yeivin, Introduction to the Tiberian Masorah (Masoretic Studies 5; trans. E. Revell; Missoula: Scholars Press, 1980), 43–44.
J. Kugel, The Idea of Biblical Poetry: Parallelism and Its History (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998), 121–27. The first is called “small brick over large brick, large over small.” This type of arrangement forms spaces that interlock on the page where inscribed areas are located above non-inscribed areas. The other type was called “small brick over small brick, large over large,” which forms two columns side-by-side.
B. Metzger, Manuscripts of the Greek Bible: An Introduction to Greek Palaeography (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981), 39. See also H. Swete, An Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1900), 344–46.
I. Hunter, “Lengthy Verbatim Recall: The Role of Text,” in Psychology of Language (ed. A. Ellis; London: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1985), 1.207–35, esp. 210–11; D. Rubin, Memory in Oral Traditions: The Cognitive Psychology of Epic, Ballads, and Counting-out Rhymes (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), 6–7.
K. O’Keeffe, Visible Song: Transitional Literacy in Old English Verse (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), 4–5.
A. Doane, “Oral Texts, Intertexts, and Intratexts: Editing Old English,” in Influence and Intertextuality in Literary History (ed. J. Clayton and E. Rothstein; Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1991), 75–113, esp. 77.
A. Doane, “Spacing, Placing and Effacing: Scribal Textuality and Exeter Riddle 30 a/b,” in New Approaches to Editing Old English Verse (ed. S. Keefer and K. O’Keeffe; Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1998), 45–65, esp. 49.
A. Doane, “The Ethnography of Scribal Writing and Anglo-Saxon Poetry: Scribe as Performer,” Oral Tradition 9 (1994): 420–39, esp. 421.
K. Halliday, Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning (London: University Park Press, 1978), 111; D. Hymes, “Ways of Speaking,” in Explorations in the Ethnography of Speaking (ed. R. Bauman and J. Sherzer; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 433–75, esp. 440; A. Agha, “Register,” in Key Terms in Language and Culture (ed. A. Duranti; Oxford: Blackwell, 2001), 212–15.
J. Foley, “Word-Power, Performance, and Tradition,” The Journal of American Folklore 105 (1992): 275–301, esp. 290–91.
K. Dronsch, “Transmissions from Scripturality to Orality: Hearing the Voice of Jesus in Mark 4:1–34” in The Interface of Orality and Writing: Speaking, Seeing, Writing in the Shaping of New Genres (wunt 260; ed. A. Weissenrieder and R. Coote; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010), 119–129, esp. 121–22.
S. Pfann, “The Aramaic Text and Language of Daniel and Ezra in the Light of Some Manuscripts from Qumran,” Textus 16 (1991): 127–37, esp. 136; idem, “4QDanield (4Q115): A Preliminary Edition with Critical Notes,” RevQ 17 (1996): 37–71, esp. 46; E. Ulrich et al., eds., Qumran Cave 4. xi: Psalms to Chronicles (djd 16; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2000), 239–40.
E. Revell, “The Accents: Hierarchy and Meaning,” in Method in Unit Delimitation (Pericope 6; ed. M. Korpel, J. Oesch and S. Porter; Leiden: Brill, 2007), 61–91, esp. 88–89.
Pfann, “Aramaic Text and Language of Daniel,” 136. See also idem, “4QDanield (4Q115): A Preliminary Edition with Critical Notes,” 52–53. Pfann concludes that “the system of divisions utilized in these manuscripts represent an unconnected (or loosely connected) pre-Masoretic system based upon logical breaks and word clusters, used here by certain scribes (including the scribe of 4QDana), which was an early effort to convey to the reader stops which the Masoretes later indicated in much greater detail” (4QDanield [4Q115]: A Preliminary Edition with Critical Notes,” 53).
A. Lord, The Singer of Tales (2nd edition; ed. S. Mitchell and G. Nagy; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2000), 99–102, 133.
R. Finnegan, Literacy and Orality: Studies in the Technology of Communication (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1988), 69.
J. Foley, “Memory in Oral Tradition,” in Performing the Gospel: Orality, Memory, and Mark (ed. R. Horsley, J. Draper and J. Foley; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2006), 83–96, esp. 84.
Tov, Scribal Practices, 170. Elsewhere Tov notes that some layouts are “based upon aesthetic or exegetical traditions that sometimes differ from those of the Masoretes and the early versions” (“Background of the Stichometric Arrangements,” 410).
Tov, “Background of the Stichometric Arrangements,” 409. דברי אמ״ת is an acronym formed from the first letter of the three major poetic books: א = איוב (Job), מ = משלי (Proverbs) and ת = תהלים (Psalms).
Tov, “Background of Sense Divisions,” 313–14, 323–24, 327, 336–39. Whereas “ad hoc” conveys Tov’s judgment that spacing techniques lack any underlying principle that can be consistently applied, “impressionistic” intimates his assessment that spacing techniques are based upon unsystematic, subjective judgments of scribes. E. Ulrich’s evaluation of the spacing techniques in Isaiah arrives at a similar conclusion, although he uses the word “impressions.” “Impressions and Intuition: Sense Divisions in Ancient Manuscripts of Isaiah,” in Unit Delimitation in Biblical Hebrew and Northwest Semitic Literature (Pericope 4; ed. M. Korpel and J. Oesch; Assen: Van Gorcum, 2003), 279–307, esp. 304.
Tov, “Background of Sense Divisions,” 328. Another example is found in the large number of section breaks in 4QDeutn.
S. Talmon, “Synonymous Readings in the Textual Traditions of the Old Testament,” ScrHeir 8 (1961): 335–83; E. Greenstein, “Misquotation of Scripture in the Dead Sea Scrolls,” in The Frank Talmage Memorial Volume (ed. B. Walfish; Haifa: Haifa University Press, 1993), 1.71–83; R. Person, “The Ancient Israelite Scribe as Performer,” jbl 117 (1998): 601–09; idem, “Text Criticism as a Lens for Understanding the Transmission of Ancient Texts in their Oral Environment,” in Literacy, Orality, and Literary Production in the Southern Levant: Contextualizing the Creation of Sacred Writing in Ancient Israel and Judah (ed. B. Schmidt; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, forthcoming); D. Carr, Writing on the Tablet of the Heart: Origins of Scripture and Literature (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 230–31; idem, “Torah on the Heart: Literary Jewish Textuality within its Ancient Near Eastern Context,” Oral Tradition 25 (2010): 17–40, esp. 27–34.
Zahn, Rethinking Rewritten Scripture, 111. Zahn comments that “such a harmonization may even have been done unconsciously: a scribe copying the shorter formulation may have simply continued as if it were the longer one without giving it a thought. On the other hand, an editor may have felt that the two statements should match and added the extra section deliberately.”
K. Van der Toorn, Scribal Culture and the Making of the Hebrew Bible (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2007), 99, 116.
J. VanderKam, The Dead Sea Scrolls Today (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994), 32.
E. Schuller, “Some Reflections on the Function and Use of Poetical Texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls,” in Liturgical Perspectives: Prayer and Poetry in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls (stdj 48; ed. E. Chazon, R. Clements and A. Pinnick; Leiden: Brill, 2003), 173–89, esp. 180–83.
D. Dimant, “Men as Angels: The Self-Image of the Qumran Community,” in Religion and Politics in the Ancient Near East (ed. A. Berlin; Bethesda: University of Maryland, 1996), 93–103, esp. 98ff.; E. Chazon, “Human and Angelic Prayer in Light of the Dead Sea Scroll,” in Liturgical Perspectives: Prayer and Poetry in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls (stdj 48; ed. E. Chazon, R. Clements and A. Pinnick; Leiden: Brill, 2003), 35–47.
B. Reike, “Remarques sur l’histoire de la forme (Formgeschichte) des textes de Qumran,” in Les Manuscrits de la Mer Morte. Colloque de Strasbourg 25–27 Mai 1955 (ed. J. Daniélou; Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1957), 37–44, esp. 41ff; M. Delcor, “Qumran: Les Hymnes,” in Qumran et Découvertes au Désert de Juda, Supplément au Dictionnaire de la Bible (Paris: Letouzey et Ané, 1979), 51.861–904, esp. 897–900. For a description of the various community meetings, see C. Hempel, “Community Structures in the Dead Sea Scrolls: Admission, Organization, Disciplinary Procedures,” in The Dead Sea Scrolls after Fifty Years: A Comprehensive Assessment (2 vols.; ed. P. Flint and J. VanderKam; Leiden: Brill, 1999), 2.67–92, esp. 75–79.
P. Bourdieu, In Other Words: Essays Towards a Reflexive Sociology (trans. M. Adamson; Stanford: Standard University Press, 1990), 95.
E. Bakker, “How Oral is Oral Composition?” in Signs of Orality: The Oral Tradition and Its Influence in the Greek and Roman World (ed. E. Mackay; Leiden: Brill, 1999), 29–47, esp. 32.
E. Said, “The Text, the World, and the Critic,” in Textual Strategies: Perspectives in Post-Structuralist Criticism (ed. J. Harari; Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1979), 161–88, esp. 164–65.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 594 | 68 | 7 |
Full Text Views | 350 | 4 | 1 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 110 | 8 | 3 |
Textuality in antiquity differs significantly from that of modern Western culture in which the text exists as a fixed, idealized abstraction. In antiquity reading was speaking, and stichography is a visual representation of this interface between speech and writing. Stichography’s spatialization displays scribes’ perception of the spoken text including the concomitants of oral performance. Stichography also reflects scribes’ attentiveness to the readership’s experience with the performed or inscribed text. Scribes interacted with compositions as authors, adapting them according to the exigencies of specific performance events. As a result, the transmission of a specific written layout can supersede parallelismus membrorum; nevertheless, parallelism is a constitutive device in the majority of stichographic texts. The demarcation of sense units elicits two symbiotic social uses, both of which are also implied by the content of the canon. Stichographic texts provide a formatted reference point that is styled to facilitate oral performance and pedagogy.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 594 | 68 | 7 |
Full Text Views | 350 | 4 | 1 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 110 | 8 | 3 |