Centre for the Study of Manuscript Cultures, Hamburg.
14 - 16 November 2013.
In order to establish manuscriptology as a discipline of manuscript
studies it is necessary to clarify the concept of manuscript.
The Conference in particular aims to focus on this clarification and
will therefore discuss the relationship between manuscripts
and epigraphy, which is particularly insightful for this purpose.
Manuscripts, including the texts, illustrations, notes, or other
signs contained in them, are to be distinguished from other means of
recording and transmitting information, particularly from
other media of literacy. Regarding manuscripts and epigraphy, it will
not be possible to begin with clear-cut definitions; rather,
blurred boundaries and overlaps have to be expected, not least because
the concept of epigraphy is neither homogenous nor uncontroversial.
When examining the types and amounts of text found in epigraphy and
manuscripts, one will immediately discover great differences between
these two writing supports. Therefore, detailed comparative analyses of
the conventions are desirable, which stipulate particular types, sizes
and arrangements of signs for different types of inscriptions and texts
contained in manuscripts, and which are reflected in an intentionally
planned layout. Additionally, a more or less spontaneous use of letters
and signs has to be taken into account, as, for instance, is the case
with annotations or graffiti. Furthermore, it is to be examined how
reliable a distinction according to the producers of these types of
writings
is, as suggested at times, who sometimes are considered to belong to an
artisanal circle or, at other times, to a scriptorium or chancellery.
Thus the basic material conditions of epigraphy and manuscript are
addressed as well. Whether or not the distinction between ‘soft’
materials for manuscripts and ‘hard’ materials for epigraphy, as has
been suggested, is feasible should be examined in the light of
clay and bamboo manuscripts or epigraphic evidence found on textile or
leather. Furthermore, it is to be asked whether the category of
durability
derived from the attribution to a certain material may be exclusively
ascribed to inscriptions. Also, the differentiation between stationary
and
transportable use, which can be deduced from the difference between
‘hard’ and ‘soft’ materials, does not seem to apply
without limitation.
Finally, the transfer from inscription to manuscript (and vice
versa?) will be addressed which can be found, for example, when specific
epigraphic conventions are being included in manuscripts, for instance
text pages appearing in epigraphic mode. Illustrations and image
sequences can also be accompanied, supplemented, or explained by
inscriptions and, last but not least, the visual representation of real
inscriptions should be mentioned in this context.
Source: COMSt list
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario