Leiden bracketing system

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Leiden bracket system is a system for the uniform edition of epigraphic , papyrological or (mostly handed down in manuscripts ) literary sources . It regulates the spelling of texts that were originally available in the form of inscriptions , manuscripts, papyri or on similar writing materials and which are to be transcribed and reproduced in printed form. The aim of the edition guideline is that the printed text reproduces the original document and its characteristics as comprehensively, clearly and correctly as possible and is nevertheless understandable with a minimum of prior knowledge.

Certain brackets and other characters ( Sigla ) are used for this purpose , with which additions, corrections and other editorial measures by the publisher are clearly identified and special features of the original version of a text are pointed out. In the case of a typical inscription, for example, the details of the application and preservation on the stone as well as possible abbreviations and spelling mistakes are made clear. Knowing this information is sometimes of crucial importance when examining and understanding a text as well as when assessing its source value and its scientific location.

Origin and Distribution

The development of the Leiden system of brackets was agreed in September 1931 at the papyrological section of the International Day of Orientalists in Leiden on a proposal by the Dutch Graecist and papyrologist Bernard Abraham van Groningen . The declared aim was to counteract the “almost unbearable discrepancy in the use of brackets and other critical signs” in classical antiquity . In the years before, the Union Académique Internationale had already compiled a compilation of the various edition guidelines in use at the time in classical philology and supplemented it with “advice and recommendations” (“conseils et recommandations”) for uniform handling. The proofs of this work were already available to the Papyrological Section of the Orientalist Day in 1931; although it was not finally published until 1932 (a revised new edition appeared in 1938). Inspired by this design from the neighboring compartment of classical philology who gathered in Leiden Papyrologists convened a commission that one for possible in the following months , all should draw useful Classical Studies disciplines unified approach. It was composed of Bernard Abraham van Groningen, the French Pierre Jouguet and the Belgian Marcel Hombert . The result of their work was published in January 1932 in the journal Chronique d'Égypte and then initially announced in various papyrological journals, in Germany for example by Ulrich Wilcken in the Papyrus Research Archive .

In fact, the resulting "Leiden bracket system" convinced the majority of the professional world and found its way into the neighboring disciplines of papyrology, especially in epigraphy and classical philology. As early as 1932 it was introduced for the edition of Greek inscriptions in the Inscriptiones Graecae project , which was headed by Ulrich Wilcken. Today it is the generally used system for the scientific publication of ancient inscriptions and papyrus finds. Important publisher editions that use the Leiden bracket system for the edition of literary sources include the Loeb Classical Library , the Tusculum Collection , the Collection des Universités de France and the Bibliotheca Teubneriana .

For the uniform edition of texts from the Aegean Bronze Age , which are written in Linear A or Linear B , the " Wingspread Convention " was drawn up at a conference in Wingspread in 1961 . It essentially corresponds to the Leiden bracketing system, but contains small additions for the specific requirements of the scripts to be reproduced with it.

Overview of the most important sigla

Seal description
[] Square brackets indicate that the clasped section on the original inscription is damaged and no longer or at least very difficult to read and has been supplemented by the publisher for the printed publication. The restored characters are reproductions of the illegible original that are classified as likely to bordering on certainty.
[...] Dots on the line indicate the determinable number of non-reconstructible letters (in this case three).
[- -] Dashes indicate an indeterminate number of letters that cannot be reconstructed.
() Round brackets indicate that the part of a word in brackets has been left out in the original, i.e. that the term has been abbreviated. The content enclosed in such brackets completes the abbreviation used.
Example: P (ontifex) M (aximus) means that instead of the written Pontifex Maximus in the original inscription only PM can be found.
Example of use in a translation: Smikylion (son) of Eucalides . (In ancient inscriptions, the name of a person is often followed by the name of their father in the genitive and without a more detailed explanation of the relationship; this must therefore be added to the translation.)
<> Angle brackets indicate that the publisher has corrected a mistake in the original inscription (for example, accidentally left out letters, spelling errors or an erroneous number).
In some cases, the incorrect part of the text is simply replaced by the correction (ie “C <ae> sar”, although the original incorrectly says “Ceasar”) - then a reference to the original spelling must be made in the comment on the edition. In some cases, however, both the incorrect and the corrected spelling are indicated within the angle brackets, for example according to the format "C <ae = EA> sar".
{} Curly brackets surround text that the editor has deleted as superfluous (for example, words or parts of words accidentally spelled twice).
ABC A point under the letter indicates that the original is only partially preserved and cannot be clearly seen from the lines that are still visible (even if it can be reconstructed with great certainty based on the preceding and / or following letters).
... Dots on the line indicate the number of suspected non-reconstructible letters (Greek and papyrological)
+++ Plus signs on the line indicate the number of presumed unrecoverable letters (Roman)
[[ABC]] The double bracketing of a section of text is called a shave in scientific nomenclature , that is, the bracketed section was intentionally removed from an inscription in ancient times. The reasons for this are mostly politically motivated: for example, the Roman emperor Caracalla had the name of his brother and co-regent Geta deleted from inscriptions that named both rulers with equal rights after he had murdered him. This measure is known as damnatio memoriae .
If parts of a letter can still be recognized despite the shave, a point is placed under them: [[ạḅc̣]]
v
vv
vacat 		for "empty" indicate an unlabeled place in the text witness. The size of the empty field can be indicated by the number of letters that could have been there according to the font size.
If the publisher suspects an unlabeled area, which cannot or cannot be proven with certainty due to the state of preservation of the original, this can be indicated by [ vacat ] or ṿ (i.e. by square brackets or a point below the letter).
| Vertical lines mark the beginning of a line if the text is not printed with the original line breaks.
|| For the sake of clarity, vertical double lines mark the beginning of every fifth line.

When using older inscription editions it should be noted that some brackets can have a different meaning; so <...> can also mean a repayment by the publisher, (...) a correction by the publisher.

literature

  • Bernard Abraham van Groningen: Projet d'unification des systèmes de signes critiques. In: Chronique d'Égypte. Volume 7, 1932, numbers 13-14, pp. 262-269.
  • Essai d'unification des méthodes employées dans les éditions de papyrus. In: Chronique d'Égypte. Volume 7, 1932, numbers 13-14, pp. 285-287.
  • Bernard Abraham van Groningen: De signis criticis in edendo adhibendis. In: Mnemosyne . Volume 59, 1931, pp. 362-365.
  • Sterling Dow: Conventions in editing. A suggested reformulation of the Leiden system (= Greek, roman and byzantine studies: Scholarly aids. Volume 2). Duke University, Durham (NC) 1969 (detailed presentation and discussion of numerous symbols, including various not listed above).
  • Brian F. Cook: Greek Inscriptions (= Reading the Past. Volume 5). University of California Press, Berkeley 1987, ISBN 0-520-06113-6 .
  • Bradley H. McLean: An Introduction to Greek Epigraphy of the Hellenistic and Roman Periods from Alexander the Great down to the Reign of Constantine (323 BC - AD 337). The University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor 2002, ISBN 0-472-11238-4 , pp. 27-39.
  • Alison E. Cooley: The Cambridge Manual of Latin Epigraphy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2012, ISBN 978-0-521-54954-7 , pp. 350-355.

Individual evidence

  1. ^ Sterling Dow: Conventions in editing. A suggested reformulation of the Leiden system. Duke University, Durham (NC) 1969, p. 2.
  2. ^ Bernard Abraham van Groningen: Projet d'unification des systèmes de signes critiques. In: Chronique d'Égypte. Volume 7, 1932, numbers 13-14, pp. 262-269.
  3. ↑ a b Ulrich Wilcken: The Leyden bracket system. In: Archives for Papyrus Research. Volume 10, 1932, number 3-4, p. 211 f., Here p. 211.
  4. ↑ Marcel Hombert : Emploi des signes critiques. In: L'Antiquité classique . Volume 1, 1932, Faszikel 1-2, pp. 497-498, here p. 498 ( online ).
  5. ^ Joseph Bidez , Anders Bjørn Drachmann (Red.): Emploi des signes critiques. Disposition de l'apparat dans les éditions savantes de textes grecs et latins. Conseils et recommandations. Champion, Paris 1932.
  6. ^ Joseph Bidez , Anders Bjørn Drachmann (Red.): Emploi des signes critiques. Disposition de l'apparat dans les éditions savantes de textes grecs et latins. Conseils et recommandations. New edition by Armand Delatte and Albert Severyns . Union Académique Internationale / Les Belles Lettres, Brussels / Paris 1938 (for the history of origin, see p. 1–4 there).
  7. ↑ Essai d'unification des méthodes employées dans les éditions de papyrus. In: Chronique d'Égypte. Volume 7, 1932, numbers 13-14, pp. 285-287.
  8. ↑ Bärbel Kramer , Dieter Hagedorn : Greek Papyri of the State and University Library Hamburg (P. Hamb. IV) (= Archive for Papyrus Research. Supplement 4). BG Teubner, Stuttgart / Leipzig 1998, ISBN 3-519-07537-7 , p. XXII, note 1.
  9. ^ Ulrich Wilcken: The Leyden bracket system. In: Archives for Papyrus Research. Volume 10, 1932, Numbers 3-4, pp. 211 f.
  10. ^ Ulrich Wilcken: The Leyden bracket system. In: Archives for Papyrus Research. Volume 10, 1932, Numbers 3-4, pp. 211 f., Here p. 212.
  11. ↑ Notae Diacriticae in Edendis Textibus Mycenaeis Minoicisque, a Tertio Colloquio internationalization Studiorum Mycenaeorum in 'Wingspread' convocato, editoribus commentatoribus comme data. In: Emmett L. Bennett (Ed.): Mycenaean Studies. Proceedings of the Third International Colloquium for Mycenaean Studies held at "Wingspread", September 4-8, 1961. The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison 1964, pp. 260-262. See also: Sterling Dow: Conventions in editing. A suggested reformulation of the Leiden system. Duke University, Durham (NC) 1969, pp. 17-19.
  12. ^ As usual in the Clauss-Slaby epigraphic database ; see. the search explanations there .