28-05-2022, 06:53 AM
Very interesting Rich.
I would, personally, suggest that although your argument is logical, these scholars will still have had an understanding of many of these scripts, even if they couldn't personally read them.
Ie the galgolthic comment, it was perfectly recognizable and the implication was that they could quickly find someone who read it.
In some ways they would over compensate - Kirchner, and I'm sure many of his contemporaries, would happily claim knowledge that they didn't actually possess.
They were over confident. So show them a strange looking manuscript and they'd wave a hand and say ah! Western coptic in the third province or whatever, without really having a clue.
So for them to confess they were baffled would be a major confession.
I would, personally, suggest that although your argument is logical, these scholars will still have had an understanding of many of these scripts, even if they couldn't personally read them.
Ie the galgolthic comment, it was perfectly recognizable and the implication was that they could quickly find someone who read it.
In some ways they would over compensate - Kirchner, and I'm sure many of his contemporaries, would happily claim knowledge that they didn't actually possess.
They were over confident. So show them a strange looking manuscript and they'd wave a hand and say ah! Western coptic in the third province or whatever, without really having a clue.
So for them to confess they were baffled would be a major confession.