{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027124773960216998, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0009041591320072332, 'mean_word_length': 5.550295857988166, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Accidental Publication, Unfinished Texts and the Traditional Goals of New Testament Textual Criticism

Notions of ‘authorship’, ‘publication’ and ‘ﬁnal text’ are often mentioned in traditional textual criticism, but less frequently discussed in detail. The projects of source and redaction criticism end and textual criticism begins based on when scholars imagine a text was ﬁnished. Yet modern notions of publication, textuality and authorship, which are largely shaped by the printing press, are often anachronistically applied to the ancient world. Exploring evidence from Plato to 4 Ezra to Tertullian and Augustine, I take up the question of when a text was considered ‘ﬁnal’ by reconsidering what counted as publication in the ancient world. Once the assumption of textual ﬁnalization is set aside, the tools traditionally associated with textual, source and redaction criticism become unhelpful. While textual critics have noted the practical impossibilities of arriving at the ‘original text’, I demonstrate the conceptual roadblocks to imagining an ‘original’ and ‘ﬁnal’ text in the ancient world.