1859 Titan Magazine article by George Gilfallin on Vaticanus, applies to Sinaiticus, line ending issues Sinaiticus

Steven Avery

Administrator
Vaticanus


Dr. Hug, from his being a Roman Catholic divine, would have no objection to exalt the venerable age of any document in possession of the Papal See, a process which would be the natural result of bis ecclesiastical views and position, without any disparagement of his literary honesty or capacity. We make no wilful reflection upon either the fairness or the judgment of this scholar, when we take into account the necessary bias of his education and position, as only a proper deduction from the sum of plenary confidence in his critical decisions. We may respect him personally as much as any other scholar, but we must weigh his opinions before we can receive them as indisputable verdicts and settled truths.


Titan Magazine p. 138-155
http://books.google.com/books?id=vHEEAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA138


GO THROUGH ALL HIS ARGUMENTS

The whole style of his handiwork proclaims a curt and compendious text, weeding out with unsparing hand the right and the wrong alike. Omission is the grand characteristic of the document, exclusion the rule enforced with pitiless uniformity. The editor of the original was evidently a person enamoured of that 'brevity' which is 'the soul of wit.' He seems to have taken a full copy of the New Testament text into his hands, and to have ostracized into ruthless banishment all that did not suit his taste or meet his views. In this respect he bears resemblance to a gentleman mentioned in the correspondence of the Record a little more than a year since, who epitomized the Holy Bible by cutting off every superfluous word and every repetition, so as to reproduce the sacred volume in its essential integrity in a volume of one-sixth of the usual size, yet, of course, stripped of the drapery of idiosyncrasy which marked the individuality of' the sacred writers.

Journal of Sacred Literature
http://books.google.com/books?id=TG8tAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA220
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
He believes that Vaticanus was produced in Italy not Egypt

that would account better for the Latinisms, Hort actually said that later !

He destroys the antiquity and authority of Vaticanus. And if Vaticanus has no authority then neither does Sinaiticus

The whole style of his handiwork proclaims a curt and compendious text, weeding out with unsparing hand the right and the wrong alike. Omission is the grand characteristic of the document, exclusion the rule enforced with pitiless uniformity. The editor of the original was evidently a person enamoured of that 'brevity' which is 'the soul of wit.' He seems to have taken a full copy of the New Testament text into his hands, and to have ostracized into ruthless banishment all that did not suit his taste or meet his views. In this respect he bears resemblance to a gentleman mentioned in the correspondence of the Record a little more than a year since, who epitomized the Holy Bible by cutting off every superfluous word and every repetition, so as to reproduce the sacred volume in its essential integrity in a volume of one-sixth of the usual size, yet, of course, stripped of the drapery of idiosyncrasy which marked the individuality of' the sacred writers.

The Reader's Digest Condensed Bible of early years.

And Sinaiticus was the victim of the same philosophy. So rather than conflations in the TR we are dealing with Diminishments in the "Great" manuscripts. Which has always been my personal view on these manuscripts
 

Steven Avery

Administrator
linguistics

p. 142-3
1684888580877.png

1684888616150.png


1684888677223.png

1684888764491.png
 
Top