Great moments in textual transmission.

[mlinssen]

[Did I bring up a thought experiment?

No, you brought up the context in Thomas, and I am bringing up a thought experiment.

Ah, I get it now, thanks for clarifying. But the context of Thomas in this case doesn't have anything to do with translating the word, there is only one translation for ⲥⲁⲉⲓⲣ and that is colostrum. That is its meaning, according to Crum and Westendorf. Well that and butter, to be exact

The context that I brought up, referring to the infants drinking milk, points to that colostrum likely being human milk instead of animal milk, but that didn't change the translation in any way, it's still the literal value from the dictionary, and still colostrum

There can only be one single meaning for the word. And somehow it seems that you are uncomfortable with that, is it not?

Not in any way, nor am I sure what would suggest such a thing to you.

If you do not wish to respond to my thought experiment, that is fine! Your call completely. But no, I was not suggesting it was your idea; it was definitely mine. (The "it" in my sentence was supposed to refer to the part of your response that I highlighted; sorry that was not clearer.)

Well, I pondered on your thought experiment for not very long, but still couldn't figure out how taking the logion entirely out of context would change anything to its only possible meaning of colostrum. So, I thought that there must be something to it, because you're a pretty clever guy and we've established quite a few times now that the translation is what it is, and can only be what it is, given the text and the dictionary

The only thing that you and I have been going back and forth about is the possible widening of the definition of colostrum to human colostrum over animal colostrum. We have located the reference in Crum and (you) found out that the word that Crum refers to is not the word that he refers to, but slightly different.
Yet that doesn't change a thing to the fact that Crum pointed out the word, that the very text and sentence it is in can only be explained as meaning human colostrum, and that is that - ⲥⲁⲉⲓⲣ means colostrum, no question about it, and it can mean either animal colostrum but also human colostrum, for which naturally there must be context

"She gave milk" doesn't provide that context, for example.
Taking the logion entirely out of context, we're left with a woman putting colostrum in dough. Then the only question remains: animal colostrum or human colostrum?
Naturally, as it's fairly bizarre to put human colostrum in bread, the answer to that would be animal colostrum

But colostrum it is, and colostrum it remains

So your question of

Which meaning for ⲥⲁⲉⲓⲣ would you select from the available options

is very extraordinary, and very much unlikely you because I've come to know you, in the little time that I'm online here, as an enormously precise and thorough person. Because the choice you are offering me, is one choice out of one

Even if I were to pick butter over colostrum (which would be much less bizarre, butter softens the bread), ⲥⲁⲉⲓⲣ could never mean leaven, which was your very first choice in your very first reply viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7292#p113946 to my post, with a second preference of you for butter - but by now it should be clear that only the second is possible, and the first isn't, and you correctly asked whether I thought that the text became corrupted

Which I don't. Someone incorrectly assumed that it had to say leaven, translated it as such, and at that point in time it was a legacy for everyone else. It's a bit like baptising Jesus; only if you're an incredibly gifted poet can you sketch the entire scene, suggesting the baptism, without actually and factually having one.
But not here. Leave out the word leaven, and you destroy the only valuable piece of information in the entire canonical version

[Ben C. Smith]

Ah, I get it now, thanks for clarifying. But the context of Thomas in this case doesn't have anything to do with translating the word, there is only one translation for ⲥⲁⲉⲓⲣ and that is colostrum. That is its meaning, according to Crum and Westendorf. Well that and butter, to be exact

So can it be butter? (Instead of colostrum, whether human or animal.)

Well, I pondered on your thought experiment for not very long, but still couldn't figure out how taking the logion entirely out of context would change anything to its only possible meaning of colostrum.

Above you say that it could mean butter; here you say that its only possible meaning is colostrum. Yet butter and colostrum are not the same thing. This is confusing to me, so I am trying to figure it out. My working guess is that you are convinced from the broad context of Thomas that it must be colostrum, but if you were to find this one saying all by itself, not in Thomas, you would think that butter works fine. But that is, as I said, a working guess, which is why I am asking you for clarification.

The only thing that you and I have been going back and forth about is the possible widening of the definition of colostrum to human colostrum over animal colostrum.

No, I have tried at least twice to put butter forward as a viable option.

Taking the logion entirely out of context, we're left with a woman putting colostrum in dough. Then the only question remains: animal colostrum or human colostrum?

Can it be neither? Can it be butter that she is putting in the dough?

Naturally, as it's fairly bizarre to put human colostrum in bread, the answer to that would be animal colostrum

Butter would be a considerably less weird thing than colostrum to put in dough.

Because the choice you are offering me, is one choice out of one

Two, so far: butter or colostrum.

Even if I were to pick butter over colostrum (which would be much less bizarre, butter softens the bread)

Yes, that is what I am suggesting: not overall, as my final answer, but as an interim test of your seeming assumption that it cannot be butter; it must be colostrum. I am wondering why you think that must be.

ETA 1:

...as Crum suggested it was? In the 1913 version of the book we consulted, I'm unsure we got the right one by the way, but still it's close and an awful lot closer than the ⲥⲉⲉⲣⲉ (closest variant of the second I think) that would mean leaven?

It was 1915: https://archive.org/details/miscellaneo ... 9/mode/2up, same year as what Crum gave for the book:

Budge 1915.png (36.73 KiB) Viewed 7437 times

ETA 2: Also:

Which is what Crum says, and Westendorf too by the way. And I can't argue with either, nor do I wish to

Good to know! Could you post the text or an image of the text, or give a link, to Westendorf? Thanks.

[mlinssen]

Good to know! Could you post the text or an image of the text, or give a link, to Westendorf? Thanks.

Well, I can't upload anything here. I have Westendorf on my device, just unsure which img site to upload it to

Second, I got the impression that the choices you offered me were still based on the word entries themselves, the two occurrences of CIR - not the translations behind the first entry of CIR

And I made a thinking typo with 1913, Crum refers to 1913 version I thought - my copy is not so good, I'm still undecided it says 1915 there, we consulted 1915 indeed

If you look at the logion, it says that

did she/r make-be he of some(PL) great loaf

Butter doesn't affect the size of bread, but maybe the bread is so great because it is so soft? Possible

With regards to the context of Thomas, there is no mention of leaven nor butter at all, but milk, yes: twice in 22, once in 79. Strictly speaking the milk in 22 can be of any mammal

[mlinssen]

Good to know! Could you post the text or an image of the text, or give a link, to Westendorf? Thanks.

Well, I can't upload anything here. I have Westendorf on my device, just unsure which img site to upload it to

[EDIT] Thanks Mac!

IMG_20201029_093810.jpg (599.21 KiB) Viewed 7409 times

Second, I got the impression that the choices you offered me were still based on the word entries themselves, the two occurrences of CIR - not the translations behind the first entry of CIR

And I made a thinking typo with 1913, Crum refers to 1913 version I thought - my copy is not so good, I'm still undecided it says 1915 there, we consulted 1915 indeed

If you look at the logion, it says that

did she/r make-be he of some(PL) great loaf

Butter doesn't affect the size of bread, but maybe the bread is so great because it is so soft? Possible

With regards to the context of Thomas, there is no mention of leaven nor butter at all, but milk, yes: twice in 22, once in 79. Strictly speaking the milk in 22 can be of any mammal

https://imgshare.io/image/Nh9p1Z
https://imgshare.io/image/Nh9wR4

Well, I was wrong. No milk in Westendorf and he even clubs together the variants that Crum separated. Another fight LOL

Sauerteig = leaven, Rahm = cream

IMG_20201029_093745.jpg (568.33 KiB) Viewed 7409 times

[MrMacSon]

Good to know! Could you post the text or an image of the text, or give a link, to Westendorf? Thanks.

Well, I can't upload anything here. I have Westendorf on my device, just unsure which img site to upload it to

The attachment BC&H upload mechanism.PNG is no longer available

[MrMacSon]

BC&H upload mechanism 2.PNG (61.75 KiB) Viewed 7414 times

[mlinssen]

BC&H upload mechanism 2.PNG

[davidmartin]

there's a parallel in the Odes if it were milk the woman hid in the dough (ancient bread sometimes included milk by the looks of it)

"Then She gave the mixture (milk) to the generation without their knowing, and those who have received it are in the perfection of the right hand"
This is confirmed by another odes or two that refers to similar things hidden eg "And it came boundless and invisible, and until it was set in the middle they knew it not. Blessed are they who have drunk from it"

I think it's possible to take a middle position and please nobody (my goal on here!). It might mean leaven but a hearer might connect it with milk if they saw the bread as bodies the woman's milk is the nourishment. In Egyptian the similarity between the word for leaven and butter/milk would add to this effect. I don't think this works in other languages though.

[mlinssen]

there's a parallel in the Odes if it were milk the woman hid in the dough (ancient bread sometimes included milk by the looks of it)

"Then She gave the mixture (milk) to the generation without their knowing, and those who have received it are in the perfection of the right hand"
This is confirmed by another odes or two that refers to similar things hidden eg "And it came boundless and invisible, and until it was set in the middle they knew it not. Blessed are they who have drunk from it"

I think it's possible to take a middle position and please nobody (my goal on here!). It might mean leaven but a hearer might connect it with milk if they saw the bread as bodies the woman's milk is the nourishment. In Egyptian the similarity between the word for leaven and butter/milk would add to this effect. I don't think this works in other languages though.

Thank you David, but in the Coptic that we have, leaven is not an option - it simply is the wrong word.
Milk or butter, that's it. And now, with Westendorf, cream as well perhaps - but that is still fresh

[Ben C. Smith]

Well, I was wrong. No milk in Westendorf and he even clubs together the variants that Crum separated. Another fight LOL

Thanks for posting those! Much appreciated.

Crum refers to 1913 version I thought - my copy is not so good, I'm still undecided it says 1915 there....

It is 1915 in Crum on Google Books. I highlighted the date by including "1915" in the search terms. When I include "1913," the same page comes up, but the date is no longer highlighted. Also, I called my daughter, with much better eyes than mine, over to my laptop to read the date to me (without giving her any indication either way), and without hesitation she said 1915. (Does a 1913 edition of the book even exist? I have searched a bit online in some of the usual catalogues, to no avail; but I have not been exhaustive. Budge wrote at least three other books that year, including one on Syrian anatomy and another publishing a new papyrus find, but not Miscellaneous Coptic Texts, so far as I can find.)

If you look at the logion, it says that

did she/r make-be he of some(PL) great loaf

Butter doesn't affect the size of bread, but maybe the bread is so great because it is so soft? Possible

I do not think milk affects the size of the bread, either. Not sure I understand what you are saying about softness affecting the size.

At any rate, I have now looked up as many of the Sahidic instances (omitting Achmimic, Fayyûmic, and Bohairic instances) of ⲥⲓⲣ and variants listed by Crum as I have current access to, checking the spelling of each. I have also included Thomas on this list, to see how it fits in, as well as two other instances to which a footnote by Crum pointed. The passages from the Bible are available online. The only Sahidic instance I am still missing is Zeitschrift für ägyptische Sprache 33, page 133, so if anyone knows where to find that one, feel free to let me know. Thanks.

Okay, here is the current list:

Deuteronomy 32.14: 14 “Curds [Masoretic חֶמְאַת = curd, LXX βούτυρον = butter, ⲥⲁⲉⲓⲣⲉ] of the herd, and milk of the flock, with fat of lambs and rams, the breed of Bashan, and of goats, with the best of the wheat; and you drank wine of the blood of grapes.”

1 Samuel 17.18: 18 “Bring also these ten cuts of cheese [Masoretic חֲרִצֵי הֶחָלָב, Alexandrinus <σ>τρυφαλίδας τοῦ γάλακτος = cheeses of milk, Coptic ⲛⲟⲉⲓⲕ ⲛⲥⲁⲉⲓⲣ] to the commander of their thousand, and look into the wellbeing of your brothers and bring back confirmation from them.” (Hesychius: τρυφαλίδες· τὰ τμήματα τοῦ ἁπαλοῦ τυροῦ.)

2 Samuel 17.27-29: 27 Now when David had come to Mahanaim, Shobi the son of Nahash from Rabbah of the sons of Ammon, Machir the son of Ammiel from Lo-Debar, and Barzillai the Gileadite from Rogelim 28 brought beds, basins, pottery, wheat, barley, flour, roasted grain, beans, lentils, roasted seeds, 29 honey, curds [Masoretic חֶמְאָה = curd, OG βούτυρον = butter, Coptic ⲥⲟⲉⲓⲣⲉ], sheep, and cheese of the herd, for David and the people who were with him, to eat. For they said, “The people are hungry and exhausted and thirsty in the wilderness.”

Job 20.17: He does not look at the streams, the rivers flowing with honey and curds [Masoretic חֶמְאָה = curd, OG βουτύρου, Coptic ⲥⲁⲓⲣⲉ].

Proverbs 30.33: For the churning of milk produces butter [Masoretic חֶמְאָה = curd, OG βούτυρον = butter, Coptic ⲥⲟⲉⲓⲣⲉ], and pressing the nose brings forth blood; so the churning of anger produces strife.

Cairo Ostracon 44674.65 apud W. E. Crum, The Monastery of Epiphanius at Thebes 2, page 232, #296, lines 1-26: 1-26 From — to Isaac. Before (coming to) the matter of our humility, we greet thy revered father[ship] in [all] the fullness of our soul. Be so kind and have us in remembrance [in] the raising of thy holy hands. Hereafter: be so kind, if the thing be easy to thee, if [thou] find a man about to go north unto the dwelling of Apa John of Pshoueb, do thou be kind and send unto him (John) in thy name, that he may send in to Keft and seek a baker well skilled to bake and skilful to make butter [ⲥⲓⲣ, note 5: “perhaps here ‘leaven’”] and may send him south unto us by the 2d day of —, that he may bake us our bread and we give him his wage. Be so kind, neglect not to send him. Give it unto the holy father, Apa Isaac, from this humblest one [....]

Metropolitan Museum of Art 12.180.65, apud W. E. Crum, The Monastery of Epiphanius at Thebes 2, page 242, #335, lines 1-8: 1-8 Be so good and take a little butter [ⲥⲓⲣ] [and] bring it in unto us forthwith. Delay not, for there is need. Give it unto David; from Paham, this humblest one.

Thomas 96.1-2: 1 Jesus s[aid], “The kingdom of the Father is lik[e a] woman. 2 She took a little ??? [ⲥⲁⲉⲓⲣ], [h]id it in some dough, and made it into lar[ge] loaves. 3 He who has ears, le[t] him hear.”

Cairo Ostracon 46304.79 apud Crum, W. E. Crum, The Monastery of Epiphanius at Thebes 2, page 296, note 5 to #296: 5 ⲥⲏⲣⲉ, butter.

Budge, Miscellaneous Coptic Texts in the Dialect of Upper Egypt, page 141, line 21: 21 ⲥⲁⲓⲣⲉ, colostrum.

Johannes Leipoldt & W. E. Crum, Sinuthii Archimandritae Vita et Opera Omnia, volume 4, page 190, #37, line 11: ⲥⲉⲣⲉ, leaven (link).

W. E. Crum, Short Texts from Coptic Ostraca and Papyri, page 76, #282, line 3: ⲥⲓⲣ, leaven (link).

To summarize the spelling variants:

Code: Select all

ⲥⲁⲉⲓⲣⲉ	curds, butter	  (Deuteronomy 32.14)
ⲥⲟⲉⲓⲣⲉ	curds, butter	  (1 Samuel 17.29; Proverbs 30.33)
ⲥⲁⲓⲣⲉ	curds, butter	  (Job 20.17)
ⲥⲁⲓⲣⲉ	colostrum	  (Budge, Miscellaneous Coptic Texts, page 141)
ⲥⲁⲉⲓⲣ	cheese		  (1 Samuel 17.18)
ⲥⲁⲉⲓⲣ	???		  (Thomas 96.2)
ⲥⲏⲣⲉ	butter		  (Cairo Ostracon 46304.79)
ⲥⲉⲣⲉ	leaven		  (Leipoldt & Crum, Sinuthii Archimandritae Vita et Opera Omnia 4, page 190)
ⲥⲓⲣ	butter		  (Metropolitan Museum of Art 12.180.65)
ⲥⲓⲣ	butter? leaven?	  (Cairo Ostracon 44674.65)	
ⲥⲓⲣ	leaven		  (Crum, Short Texts from Coptic Ostraca and Papyri, page 76)

Does this look like a fair summary of the results thus far?

I think it's possible to take a middle position and please nobody (my goal on here!). It might mean leaven but a hearer might connect it with milk if they saw the bread as bodies the woman's milk is the nourishment.

Thank you David, but in the Coptic that we have, leaven is not an option - it simply is the wrong word.

What do we think of the following listing from A Concise Coptic-English Lexicon (1999), by Richard H. Smith (the same Richard H. Smith who coedited Ancient Christian Magic with Marvin W. Meyer)?

Smith, Page 28, & Gathercole, Page 545.png (63.74 KiB) Viewed 7395 times