From LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU Wed Sep 1 17:39:14 1999 Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 11:21:06 -0500 From: "L-Soft list server at University of Illinois at Chicago (1.8c)" To: Lou Burnard Subject: File: "TR9M2EN DOC" The Record of the T.E.I. Work Group TR9 (Manuscripts) Secretary of the record : J. Hamesse First Meeting : Louvain-la-Neuve, October 26-27th, 1991 Those present : D. BUZZETTI (Bologna), J. HAMESSE (Louvain-la-Neuve), C. HUITFELDT (Bergen) and M. SPERBERG-McQUEEN (Chicago) The session begins on Saturday,October 26, 1991 at 10 A.M. M. Sperberg-McQueen, coming from Bonn where he had another meeting, joins the other participants at 1 P.M. The discussion begins by considering the general guidelines to be applied within the framework of the T.E.I. It would seem that if the goal is to have the standards proposed by the researchers accepted, it must be that these standards are rigorous, simple, and easy to use. A system too complicated risks not being adopted by everyone. A first distinction comes up : - all the encoded manuscripts must be in the form of a diplomatic transcription; - among them, certain ones may then receive a coding adapted for a critical edition. Then, the discussion quickly brought up the specific differences between modern manuscripts (ex. Wittgenstein), and ancient or medieval manuscripts. It thus seems useful to make a distinction between these two groups. Therefore, it is decided that the report concerning the encoding of the manuscripts will include a general part applicable to all the manuscripts. This will be followed up by two specific sections : the first one will take into consideration the characteristics particular to ancient and medieval manuscripts; the second one will deal exclusively with modern manuscripts. The general part which is common to both sections will concern itself with the necessary guidelines for registering a diplomatic transciption. The document which serves for the basis of the discussion was furnished by D. Buzzetti. It concerns the guidelines used by the Commission for the critical edition of theOpera omnia by saint Thomas. It appears quite clear that the abbreviations used and which are already in use by a good number of medieval scholars (which represents a great advantage for our enterprise) were not conceived solely for a diplomatic transcription, but in view of a critical edition. It is thus sufficient that these are reviewed and to retain at this level those that could be useful at this first phase of the work. Concerning the diplomatic transcription, we must not consider only the physical and material characteristics of the document. Everything that relates to the contents is to be incorporated into the second phase of the project, notably the critical edition. The group must agree to retain a list of abbreviations that must be present and encoded in every diplomatic transcription. This list will be presented in the report on the manuscripts. Then, the discussion proceeded directly to the second phase of the project, notably that concerning the critical edition, a dialogue must be established with the group Critique textuelle directed by P. Robinson (Oxford), as well as with J. Barnard's group which deals with the Livres imprime''s, at least for that which refers to the incunabula and the ancient editions which contain the characteristics of manuscripts and those of printed texts (cf. an ancient edition that J. Hamesse shows to the other participants). We then move on to the examination of a document in reference to modern manuscripts. The guidelines for registering these was developed by the team which handles the edition of the Wittgenstein manuscripts. The different rubrics are reviewed point by point. At the end of this task, it clearly appears that a series of necessary abbreviations for these types of modern manuscripts are not relevant for ancient and medieval manuscripts. It is thus decided that, apart from the general guidelines which apply to all manuscripts, two groups of documents that require different registering guidelines and thus specialized and suitable abbreviations must be set up. In a general way, concerning modern manuscripts, the single example of Wittgenstein is not sufficient, and other specialists having different experience must be called upon to establish a common criterion. The name of G. Grapulli from Rome was cited. He is the editor for the Acts on Transmissione dei testi a stampa nel periodo moderno (I. Seminario Internazionale, Roma 23-26 marzo 1983) (Lessico Intellettuale Europeo,36), Roma, 1985. At the end of the meeting, a conclusion is needed. It is impossible to draft a definitive text without a larger consultation of specialists. This issue will be brought up at the meeting in Myrdal (15-18 November, 1991). Such a meeting could take place in Bergen, from the 14 to the 16 of February, 1992. It would bring together 13 individuals : E. BROWN (Historical American Association), D. BUZZETTI (Bologna), S.DUMONT (Toronto), Ch. FAULHAUBER (Berkeley), J. HAMESSE (Louvain-la-Neuve), C. HUITFELDT (Bergen),M. KL&Oum;SEL (Indianapolis), I. KROPAC (Graz), C. LUNA (Pisa), E. MYLONAS (Harvard), P. ROBINSON (Oxford), M. SPERBERG-McQUEEN (Chicago),M. THALLER (G&oum;ttingen). J. Hamesse will take the responsibility for drawing up the record of this meeting. She will also prepare the first document concerning the guidelines for the registering of manuscripts, at least for that which refers to the general guidelines and the ancient and medieval manuscripts. C. Huitfeldt will draw up the part which deals with modern manuscripts. This document will be ready for the meeting in Myrdal.