29 replies to this topic

[Helen Brown]

The good news: they are now officially in the pipeline. We don't have a release date yet but we will be making them top priority.

[Fr. Rich]

Yes!!!

[Jonathan C. Borland]

Ditto!

[nicklaurence]

Great news!

[Michael J. Bolesta]

The good news: they are now officially in the pipeline. We don't have a release date yet but we will be making them top priority.

 

Praise the LORD!

[David Harris]

We would love to acquire these, but have the usual issues with getting licensing and etexts from the current publishers. We have been trying for years.

 

Hi Helen,  Thanks for this statement.  I'm not exactly familiar with the academic publishing industry, and I'm a bit confused as to why would Yale University Press not want this series to reach as many people as possible?  Not to mention that some would purchase the electronic modules even if they had some volumes in print (like me!) because they are more convenient to use.   Could you shed some light on my the etexts and licensing agreements are so difficult to come by?

 

Thanks!

[Helen Brown]

I really cannot go into details, but in this case there wasn't an etext available until recently. Many publishers of new books want to sell the hard copies for a while before they license the etext. Also, some publishing houses are struggling with the changing market situation, and there have been several mergers and changes of personnel, which hinder negotiations.

[David Harris]

Thanks, Helen, for the info!  

 

p.s.  Did I miss something, or did you say in an earlier post that the Anchor Bible Series is currently in the pipeline?    If so, may I officially say:  "YIPPPPEEEEE!!!!" 

[Unix]

Anyone, help me decide whether to cancel the orders I mention in: http://www.christian...9/#post62981989 for example some fairly recent ICC volumes?! Additionally, there's a thread about commentaries, welcome to post there: http://www.christian...ms.com/t7541241

I am sure it will not age as well as ICC, which in my view, on the whole, remains a better set.

 

rari

[DWFrancis]

I think that depends a lot of yourself and how you value them. obviously Luoar feels the ICC is a better set, anchor has going for it the fact all volumes were made after the discover of the Deadsea Scrolls therefore offering valuable insights into not only the OT but the literature of Jesus' time. That being said from what i know the detail on many things done in the ICC is very encyclopaedic in nature, but I do not own the ICC, but I can say for example the 870 pages on Romans in theEDIT  (I misread the information on ICC Romans, the 1901 Volume is 450 pages, the  2 Volume 2004 commentary on Romans is over 1300 pages combined, with the two complete commentaries in the iCC over 1800 pages but there would bound to be some overlap) ICC is probably no more in-depth than Joseph A. Fitzmyer in Anchor… which of course is many decades newer… For contemporary comparisons it might be very interesting to see how Colossians compares, both were published in 2005, anchor is 580 pages, while ICC contains both it and the little letter Philemon at 512 pages (to be perfectly fair in comparison, Anchor's volume on Philemon is 138, therefore making Anchor 718 pages compared to ICC's 512). I am only offering the vaguest of ideas because I do not own the ICC and have not used them, often times a simple page count can be very deceptive. The New Interpreter's Bible pages are large compared to many others, so each page contains much more information than something like the Interpretation series. I do own a couple Anchor volumes in hard back and like I already said I have not seen an ICC volume to offer even the most superficial comparison.

 

-Dan

Edited by DWFrancis, 03 May 2013 - 10:35 PM.