Author: Paananen, Timo Contributor: University of Helsinki, Faculty of Theology, Biblical Studies
Doctoral Programme in Theology and Religous StudiesThesis level: Doctoral dissertation (article-based) Abstract: A standard approach in historically minded disciplines to documents and other artefacts that have become suspect is to concentrate on their dissimilarities with known genuine artefacts. While such an approach works reasonably well with relatively poor forgeries, more skilfully done counterfeits have tended to divide expert opinions, demanding protracted scholarly attention. As there has not been a widespread scholarly consensus on a constrained set of criteria for detecting forgeries, a pragmatic maximum for such dissimilarities—as there are potentially an infinite numbers of differences that can be enumerated between any two artefacts—has been impossible to set. Thus, rather than relying on a philosophically robust critical framework, scholars have been accustomed to approaching the matter on a largely case-by-case basis, with a handful of loosely formulated rules for guidance. In response to these shortcomings, this dissertation argues that a key characteristic of inquiry in historically minded disciplines should be the ability to distinguish between knowledge-claims that are epistemically warranted—i.e., that can be asserted post hoc from the material reality they have become embedded in with reference to some sort of rigorous methodological framework—and knowledge-claims that are not. An ancient letter by Clement of Alexandria (ca. 150–215 CE) to Theodore, in which two passages from the Longer Gospel of Mark (also known as the Secret Gospel of Mark) are quoted, has long been suspected of having been forged by Morton Smith (1915–1991), its putative discoverer. The bulk of this dissertation consists of four different articles that each use different methodological approaches. The first, a discourse analysis on scholarly debate over the letter’s authenticity, illuminates the reasons behind its odd character and troubled history. Second, archival research unearths how data points have become corrupted through unintended additions in digital-image processing (a phenomenon labelled line screen distortion here). Third, a quantitative study of the handwriting in Clement’s Letter to Theodore shows the inadequacy of unwittingly applying palaeographic standards in cases of suspected deceptions compared to the standards adhered to in forensic studies. Additionally, Smith’s conduct as an academic manuscript hunter is found to have been consistent with the standard practices of that profession. Finally, a study of the conceptual distinctions and framing of historical explanations in contemporary forgery discourse reveals the power of the methodologic approach of WWFD (What Would a Forger Do?), which has recently been used in three varieties (unconcealed, concealed, and hyperactive) to construe suspected documents as potential forgeries—despite its disregard of justificatory grounding in favour of coming up with free-form, first-person narratives in which the conceivable functions as its own justification. Together, the four articles illustrate the pitfalls of scholarly discourse on forgeries, especially that surrounding Clement’s Letter to Theodore. The solution to the poor argumentation that has characterized the scholarly study of forgeries is suggested to be an exercise in demarcation: to decide (in the abstract) which features should be acceptable as evidence either for or against the ascription of the status of forgery to an historical artefact. Implied within this suggestion is the notion of constraint, i.e., such that a constrained criterion would be one that cannot be employed to back up both an argument and its counter-argument. A topical case study—a first step on the road to creating a rigorous standard for constrained criteria in determining counterfeits—is the alternative narrative of an imagined creation of Clement’s Letter to Theodore by Smith around the time of its reported discovery (1958). Concealed indicators of authority, or the deliberate concealment of authorial details within the forged artefact by the forger, is established as a staple of the literary strategy of mystification, and their post hoc construction as acceptable evidence of authorship is argued to follow according to criteria: 1) that the beginning of the act of decipherment of a concealed indicator of authority has to have been preceded by a literary primer that is unambiguous to a high degree, 2) that, following the prompting of the literary primer, the act of deciphering a concealed indicator of authority has to have adhered to a technique or method that is unambiguous to a high degree, and 3) that, following the prompting of the literary primer and the act of decipherment, both of which must have been practiced in an unambiguous manner to a high degree, the plain-text solution to the concealed indicator of authority must likewise be unambiguous to a high degree.
Tässä väitöskirjassa tarkastellaan Klemens Aleksandrialaisen (n. 150-215 jaa.) kirjettä Theodorokselle, joka sisältää Salaisen Markuksen evankeliumin nimellä tunnettuja tekstikatkelmia. Näissä katkelmissa, jotka eivät sisälly kanonisoituun Uuteen testamenttiin, Jeesus mm. herättää nuorukaisen kuolleista ja opettaa tälle Jumalan valtakunnan salaisuuden. Klemensin kirje todistaa laajemmin kristinuskon varhaisvaiheen moninaisuudesta, mutta sitä on myös epäilty väärennökseksi. Historiallisten väärennösten tunnistamiseen ei ole löytynyt yleisesti hyväksyttyä metodia. Historiantutkijat ovat joutuneet arvioimaan epäiltyjä väärennöksiä tapauskohtaisesti, ja taidokkaasti toteutetut väärennökset johtavatkin usein pitkään ja kiivaaseen keskusteluun. Väitöskirjan ytimen muodostavat neljä artikkelia, joissa tarkastellaan Klemensin kirjettä eri näkökulmista ja kuvataan myös yleisemmin historiallisten väärennösten paljastamiseen liittyviä sudenkuoppia. Ensimmäinen artikkeli kuvaa diskurssianalyysin keinoin väärennösväitteistä käytyä sananvaihtoa, jota leimaa puhuminen toisten tutkijoiden ohi ja yli. Toinen ja kolmas artikkeli analysoivat Klemensin kirjeen käsialaa. Ne paljastavat, että digitaalinen kuvankäsittely on tahattomasti muokannut käsialan yksityiskohtia. Vertailuaineisto osoittaa, ettei Klemensin kirjeen käsiala sisällä "väärentäjän vapinaa" tai muita yleisiä väärennöksen tuntomerkkejä. Neljäs artikkeli tarkastelee ja problematisoi tutkijoiden tapaa perustella väärennösväitteitä luomalla kuvitteellisia tarinoita, joilla selitetään väärennöksien yksityiskohtien syntymistä. Väitöskirjassa ehdotetaan, että historiallisten väärennösten paljastamiseen täytyy kehittää vankka tieteellinen viitekehys. Väitöskirjan yhteenvetoluvussa otetaan tähän ensimmäinen askel tarkastelemalla, kuinka autenttisuuden kysymystä on lähestytty mm. kirjallisuustieteen alalla. Yhteenvetoluvussa analysoidaan mystifikaatiolle (kirjallinen genre) tyypillistä tapaa piilottaa "kätkettyjä tekijyyden indikaattoreita" väärennöksiin. Analyysin perusteella todetaan, että aiemmin tutkijat ovat saattaneet langeta kehittelemään villejä väärennösteorioita erilaisten kuviteltujen vihjeiden ja salakirjoitusten pohjalta. Jotta vältytään tämänkaltaiselta "kryptoanalyyttiseltä hyperaktiivisuudelta," tarvitaan "kätkettyjen tekijyyden indikaattoreiden" käytölle kriteerejä. Ehdotettujen kriteerien mukaan ainoastaan sellaiset "kätketyt tekijyyden indikaattorit" voidaan hyväksyä todellisiksi, joiden 1) olemassaoloon viitataan yksiselitteisesti, joiden 2) purkaminen tapahtuu yksiselitteisellä metodilla ja jotka 3) nimeävät tekijän yksiselitteisellä tavalla.
Friday, May 24, 2019
A Study in Authenticity : Admissible Concealed Indicators of Authority and Other Features of Forgeries—A Case Study on Clement of Alexandria, Letter to Theodore, and the Longer Gospel of Mark
A Study in Authenticity : Admissible Concealed Indicators of Authority and Other Features of Forgeries—A Case Study on Clement of Alexandria, Letter to Theodore, and the Longer Gospel of Mark
Thursday, May 23, 2019
Open Access Journal: The Canadian Institute in Greece Bulletin de l'Institut canadien en Gréce
[First posted in AWOL 2 March 2017, updated 23 May 2019]
The Canadian Institute in Greece Bulletin de l'Institut canadien en Gréce
ISSN: 0226-2614
The Canadian Institute in Greece Bulletin de l'Institut canadien en Gréce
ISSN: 0226-2614
The Institute produces a semi-annual Bulletin to keep its membership up-to-date on the latest events at the Institute and activities of its members. In addition to reports from the Athens staff and the Institute’s financial reports, the Bulletin also includes the latest news on fieldwork carried out under the aegis of CIG, and by its Board members and members at large, activities organized by its Associations of Friends, and articles by its interns and Fellows.
The most recent issue of the Bulletin, volume 42, appeared in November 2018. Electronic copies of some previous issues may be viewed below:
- Bulletin 41 - Spring 2018
- Bulletin 40 - Autumn 2017
- Bulletin 39 - Spring 2017
- Bulletin 38 - Autumn 2016
- Bulletin 37 - Spring 2016
- Bulletin 36 - Autumn 2015
- Bulletin 35 - Spring 2015
- Bulletin 34 - Autumn 2014
- Bulletin 33 - Spring 2014
- Bulletin 32 - Autumn 2013
- Bulletin 31 - Spring 2013
- Bulletin 30 - Autumn 2012
- Bulletin 29 - Spring 2012
- Bulletin 28 - Autumn 2011
- Bulletin 27 - Spring 2011
- Bulletin 26 - Autumn 2010
- Bulletin 25 - Spring 2010
- Bulletin 24 - Autumn 2009
- Bulletin 23 - Spring 2009
See AWOL's full List of Open Access Journals in Ancient Studies
Open Accesss Journal: ACME: Annali della Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia dell'Università degli Studi di Milano
[First posted in AWOL 19 July 2010. Updated 23 May 2019]
ACME: Annali della Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia dell'Università degli Studi di Milano
Online ISSN: 2282-0035
Print ISSN: 0001-494X
ACME: Annali della Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia dell'Università degli Studi di Milano
Online ISSN: 2282-0035
Print ISSN: 0001-494X
La rivista è quadrimestrale e accoglie articoli e studi su tutti gli argomenti che costituiscono materia d’insegnamento della Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia.
Gli articoli presentati per la pubblicazione sono sottoposti a revisione scientifica anonima.
A partire dall'annata 2009 la Rivista è integralmente on line in formato open-access.
Gli indici dal 1995 al 2008 sono consultabili in questa stessa pagina
Gli indici completi di «ACME» dal 1948 al 1994 sono pubblicati nel volume:
«ACME. Annali della Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia dell’Università degli Studi di Milano – Indici (I, 1948 - XLVII, 1994)», Milano, LED, 1996.
V. 71, N. 1 (2018)Acme si propone di contribuire allo studio e all’approfondimento dei settori umanistici della ricerca, sia con l’apporto di maestri riconosciuti, sia valorizzando il contributo di studiosi giovani e promettenti che sappiano approfondire specifiche tematiche filologiche e filosofiche, storiche e artistiche.
V. 71, N. 1 (2018)
Sommario
Saggi
Alla periferia del modernismo. Alcune considerazioni
Postille
2013
2018
V. 71, N. 1 (2018)
See AWOL's full List of Open Access Journals in Ancient Studies
New Open Access Journal: Frammenti sulla scena (online)
Frammenti sulla scena (online)
ISSN 2612-3908
ISSN 2612-3908
La rivista scientifica FRAMMENTI SULLA SCENA (ONLINE). STUDI SUL DRAMMA ANTICO FRAMMENTARIO è l'organo scientifico ufficiale del Centro Studi sul Teatro Classico dell'Università degli Studi di Torino.
La rivista accoglie contributi dedicati all'indagine degli aspetti letterari, linguistici, filologici, antropologici, filosofici, storico-archeologici e papirologici del dramma frammentario greco-latino e delle tradizioni teatrali minori del Mediterraneo, nonché studi relativi alla permanenza, alla fortuna e all'esegesi dei testi teatrali in epoca antica, tardoantica, bizantina e paleocristiana.
Lo scopo di questa rivista è pervenire, mediante l'apporto di tutte le discipline afferenti alle Scienze dell'antichità, a delineare una nuova visione di insieme del patrimonio letterario rappresentato dai testi teatrali pervenuti in forma frammentaria o noti per tradizione indiretta.
La rivista è pubblicata dal Centro Studi sul Teatro Classico; direttore scientifico prof. Francesco Carpanelli, direttore editoriale dott. Luca Austa.
I contributi pubblicati nella rivista sono stati sottoposti a una valutazione anonima in doppio cieco e al vaglio definitivo del Comitato scientifico che ne attesta la validità nel rispetto degli standard internazionali di scientificità.
La rivista è pubblicata con cadenza annuale; i singoli contributi inviati alla Redazione sono pubblicati (previo superamento della valutazione in doppio cieco) nei mesi di aprile, agosto e dicembre di ciascun anno. Al termine dell'anno solare la Redazione allestirà il numero definitivo, corredato da un indice dei contenuti.
The scientific journal FRAMMENTI SULLA SCENA” (ONLINE). STUDIES ON FRAGMENTARY ANCIENT DRAMA is the official scientific body of the Centre for Studies in Greek and Roman Theatre of the University of Turin.
The journal includes papers dedicated to the investigation of the literary, linguistic, philological, anthropological, philosophical, historical-archaeological and papyrological aspects of fragmentary Greco-Roman drama and of the minor theatrical traditions of the Mediterranean, as well as studies concerning permanence, fortune and exegesis of theatrical texts in ancient, late antique, Byzantine and early Christian times.
The purpose of this journal is to outline, new vision of the literary heritage represented by theatrical texts received in fragmentary form or known by indirect tradition.
The journal is published by the Centre for Studies in Greek and Roman Theatre; scientific director Prof. Francesco Carpanelli, editorial director Dr. Luca Austa.
The papers published in this journal are subject to an anonymous double-blind evaluation and to the final scrutiny of the Scientific Committee, which certifies its validity in compliance with international scientific standards.
The journal is published annually; the individual papers sent to the editorial board are published (after passing the double-blind assessment) in April, August and December of each year. At the end of the year the editors will set up the final number, accompanied by an index.
N. 0 (2019)
Full Issue
View or download the full issue PDF (Italiano)
Table of Contents
Philologica
Historica
Palaeographica et papyrologica
Traditio et fortuna
See AWOL's full List of Open Access Journals in Ancient Studies
Wednesday, May 22, 2019
Open Access Journal: Interpretatio: Sources and Studies in the History of Science, Series A
[First posted in AWOL19 September 2016, updated 22 May 2019]
Interpretatio: Sources and Studies in the History of Science, Series A
Interpretatio: Sources and Studies in the History of Science, Series A
This peer-reviewed publication is devoted to the history of premodern science understood as a subject that includes not only what was variously called science from antiquity up to the early modern period in cultures ranging from Spain to India, and from Africa to northern Europe, but also the diverse contexts in which this science figured at a given time. It aims to make fundamental texts in the history of science accessible to the modern reader both online and in print, primarily (but not exclusively) by means of editions, translations, and interpretations that satisfy the requirements of specialists but still address the needs of non-specialists and general readers.
Interpretatio comes in two forms. The first, Series A, is comprised of brief items (each numbered and paginated separately) that are published as they are ready. The second, Series B, is for monographs, collections of essays, and the like.
Interpretatio is intended for readers interested in the history and interpretation of the various disciplines called science in the West from antiquity until the modern era, as well as in intellectual history and philology.
Open Access Content
In January 2019 the first open access issue will be available through the Archives section of this web site.
See AWOL's full List of Open Access Journals in Ancient Studies
Open Access Journal: Romanitas - Revista de Estudos Grecolatinos
[First posted in AWOL 6 November 2016, updated 22 May 2019]
Romanitas - Revista de Estudos Grecolatinos
ISSN: 2318-9304
See AWOL's List of Spanish/Catalan/Portuguese Open Access Journals on the Ancient World
Romanitas - Revista de Estudos Grecolatinos
ISSN: 2318-9304
Romanitas - Revista de Estudos Grecolatinos é um periódico semestral voltado para a divulgação de trabalhos inéditos sob a forma de dossiês, artigos livres e resenhas. O periódico exibe uma vocação interdisciplinar, buscando congregar pesquisadores em História, Letras e Arqueologia que se dediquem ao estudo da Antiguidade Clássica, campo de conhecimento que tem experimentado, no Brasil, um significativo incremento ao longo dos últimos anos. Mantida pelo Laboratório de Estudos sobre o Império Romano (Leir) da Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo, Romanitas pretende conferir visibilidade à produção intelectual dos pesquisadores vinculados ao sistema nacional de pós-graduação, além de promover o intercâmbio com especialistas estrangeiros, requisito indispensável para a consolidação da área.
2018
See AWOL's List of Spanish/Catalan/Portuguese Open Access Journals on the Ancient World
See AWOL's full List of Open Access Journals in Ancient Studies
Open Access Journal: Monuments and Sites
Monuments and Sites
Es handelt sich hierbei um eine 2004 von ICOMOS International erneut gegründete Publikationsreihe, an der sich die über 100 Nationalkomitees und mehr als 25 wissenschaftlichen Spezialkomitees des Weltdenkmalrats ICOMOS beteiligen können. Dementsprechend vielfältig ist das Themenspektrum. Neben der Behandlung übergreifender Fragestellungen, wie etwa die für ICOMOS International verbindlichen Grundsatzpapiere sowie die angemessene Fortschreibung der Welterbeliste, umfasst diese Reihe auch Tagungs- und Forschungsergebnisse.
2009Monuments and SitesBd. 18 (2009)Cultural Heritage of Astronomical Observatories: From Classical Astronomy to Modern Astrophysics200820052002200120022001Monuments and SitesBd. 3 (2001)The Polychromy of Antique Sculptures and the Terracotta Army of the First Chinese Emperor: Studies on Materials, Painting Techniques and ConservationMonuments and SitesBd. 2 (2001)Qin Shihuang: The Terracotta Army of the First Chinese Emperor / Die Terrakottaarmee des Ersten Chinesischen Kaisers2004
See the full List of Open Access Journals in Ancient Studies
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
Stumble It!
