Next Event
Current Topic
Schedule
Who We Are
Contacts
History
Archives
Map
1997-1998
Topic
Schedule
Contacts
|
|
Topic for
1997-1998:
Textual Commentary as Social Practice
For 1997-98, the PSCO brought together scholars of early
Judaism, scholars of early Christianity, and classicists to examine
interpretation as a social practice in the Mediterranean world of the
first through fifth centuries CE, from Philo of Alexandria through
Augustine of Hippo. Among the various literary forms in which
interpretative practice is expressed, we have chosen to focus on the
commentary as a genre (and the commentary mode within texts in other
genres) -- precisely the mode of writing that most appears to subordinate
the writer to the authority of the text under interpretation. In order to
make sense of commentary writing in late antiquity, we wish to situate it
within the context of ancient modes of reading, ancient modes of
construing the relation of text and meaning, and ancient modes of
transmitting knowledge, as these can be reconstructed within particular
communities and cultures.

More
about the Topic
The post-classical social milieux of the Mediterranean world
witnessed the creation of pagan, Jewish, and Christian commentaries on
authoritative texts of the past. Early examples included commentaries on
the Iliad, the Timaeus, Habakkuk, and the Gospel of John. Interpreters,
interpretations, and interpretive communities flourished. This year's PSCO
will consider the intersection of textual and social issues raised by
interpretive writings in the early centuries of the common era.
Participants in the seminar are invited to consider such questions
as the following. What motivates the production of commentaries and other
interpretive texts? What is their relation to oral teaching? What
assumptions, aims, and strategies characterize the commentaries? How do
interpreters and interpretive communities develop their interpretive aims
and methods in response to their foundational texts and contemporary
pressures? How do they respond to one another's interpretive aims and
methods? What relations can we discover between orality, textuality,
literacy, and social power on the one hand and the interpreter, the
interpretive community, and the written commentary on the other?
What norms of reading inform the interpretative strategies of a
particular writer? Are canonical texts seen as produced according to
common strategies of production, such as the rules of rhetorical
composition, and explicated as such? How do texts function in communities
where a canon is still developing? How do such assumptions reflect the
social setting of the interpreter, whether elite and metropolitan or
marginal? Do certain types of interpretative practice enact the claims of
those who use them to social power by asserting their elite status? How
do specifically Jewish and Christian modes of interpretation and
commentary appropriate or reject the ground-rules of other contemporary
writing in similar genres?
During this year's seminar, we wish to explore questions
like these in relation to a wide range of materials, including the
pesharim of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Philo of Alexandria's Questions on
Genesis, Neo-Platonic commentaries, Heracleon and Ptolemy, and church
writers such as Hippolytus, Origen, and Augustine.

3/10/98
Jay Treat
|