Abstract
Abstract Before the interpretation of any text can start, the original wording of the text itself must be critically established. Conventionally, this is done following qualitative criteria. This article, however, explores the application of spatial analyses to New Testament textual criticism by demonstrating how the Levenshtein edit distance could be adapted to calculate confusion distances for variant readings in New Testament manuscripts, i.e. the possibility that a (combination of) letter(s) is confused by another (combination of) letter(s). Subsequently the outcomes are translated to Euclidian space using classical Multi-Dimensional Scaling, which enables visualisation and spatial analyses (in this case not related to geographical space). The article focuses on the data preparation and algorithm to make the data suitable for spatial analyses, thus providing the New Testament textual critic with new analytical tools.
Highlights
The original documents of almost all ancient writings have been lost, and the writings of the New Testament form no exception
To take advantage of this spatial language for visualisation, several researchers developed methods for information visualization and analysis. These methods are identified under the umbrella “spatialization,” which Yuan defines as the process of transforming “non-geographic data to spatial forms for visual analysis.”[39]. As such, spatialization should be distinguished from various geocoding techniques that aim to extract geographical references from unstructured text.[40]
In the remainder of this article, we develop a methodology to measure palaeographic confusion between textual variants and experiment with spatial analysis, integrating concepts from textual criticism, computer science, and spatial science
Summary
The original documents of almost all ancient writings have been lost, and the writings of the New Testament form no exception. Before any interpretation of a New Testament text, a researcher first must face the challenge of establishing its original wording by critically evaluating the differences in the existing manuscripts. There are texts where the different manuscripts do correspond, but where the content of the text puzzles the researcher In these cases, some researchers assume a corruption of the text and emend the text by conjecture. Some researchers assume a corruption of the text and emend the text by conjecture Both the establishment of the original text from differing manuscripts and conjectural emendation are traditionally based on qualitative criteria, which is not to say that the discipline does not utilize quantitative methods.[1]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
