Drakakes and the acrostics

[Steven Avery]

Who Faked

Dr. Drakakes
(see Drakachis on p. 45 ) - Elliot
Drakakis

Δρακακης

Elliott

p. 354
was still there - all right; the proof
of which is, that I took a tracing
from it, of four pages, containing the
acrostichs [sic], two of which I showed
to yourself, before Dr. Drakakes, and
Callinikos saw it, who remarked
the acrostichs in his letter to me.
Tischendorf, in denying this, conceals



p. 358


Some people did see those tracings. The Editor of The Literary Churchman of 1863 and a Dr. Drakakes (probably Δρακακης, ;, Drakakis) saw them together, as Simonides pointed out (and the Editor printed without objection, thus admitting it was true) in the journal in 1863. Kallinikos saw them. And others took his notes about his tracings and tested out Simonides’ words on the Codex itself, housed in St. Petersburg! As Falconer Madan, the Bodleian Librarian and Lecturer

Page 385

February 2 - Simonides wrote to the editor that he
and Dr. Drakakes both saw Simonides’ four tracings
of acrostics with his name on the Codex;

Page 452
according to this, three people, the Editor of The
Literary Churchman, a Dr. Drakakes and Kallinikos
all saw the tracings Simonides made of the
acrostics.

 

[Steven Avery]

Elliott p. 45

 

[Steven Avery]

From p. 373: 349) Codex Sinaiticus and the Simonides Affair by J.K. Elliott (1982), pp. 51-52. Note that according to this, three people, the Editor of The Literary Churchman, a Dr. Drakakes and Kallinikos all saw the tracings Simonides made of the acrostics. 350) JSL Vol. 3 (1863), pp. 212.

 

[Steven Avery]

“But the Pentateuch was still there [in 1852] - all right; the proof of which is, that I took a tracing from it, of four pages, containing the acrostichs....” Simonides claims he took a tracing from the Pentateuch, which we know to be Genesis 24. That he took the four pages of tracings is beyond dispute. There are numerous witnesses to these pages. But that he took them in 1852 makes no sense, because Archimandrite Porfiry Uspensky had come and gone, and he had a part of Genesis 24 with him! So that page at the very least was cut into, by 1850 or even 1845. As I already showed, Uspensky didn’t take pages. He only took cuttings of pages that were already cut into. So I think the acrostic of Genesis 24 was gone before 1845. And Uspensky’s detailed descriptions, again, leave no doubt that there were no notes by Simonides remaining even as early as 1845. We know that Simonides knew nothing about what was in the Codex by 1845, because of the Archimandrite’s descrip- tion, which matches what we still see today." P. 374

P. 375 Why Did Simonides Lie? Simonides was covering up for the real reason he had written his name at the beginning and end of the Codex. Second, Simonides was making up a reason why he had “made tracings” of the pages where he had written these signatures, which he called “acrostics.” But Simonides had already written to Rodokanakis in his mid-June 1843 letter that he had written the acrostics: “But, as was explained before, if (God helping) we both go to Mount Sinai next December, I will show you with all these even the acrostics, for the sake of curiosity.”351 Even W.A. Wright knew about at least some of the acrostics. Simonides had already openly displayed some of his tracings. Wright wrote from Trinity College, Cambridge, on February 1st, 1863:


“These tracings he says he took when at Mount Sinai in 1852; for what reason is best known to himself.”352 But the timeline indicates, as best I can gather, that he wrote both the acrostics and the tracings in 1843, nine years before he later claimed. Why did he do this? Why didn’t Simonides simply say, “I wrote the acrostics and my tracings of them at Athos in 1843”? Because of what Simonides believed he had to protect. He had a set of priorities in his life. And as far as I can gather, he stayed true to them. Simonides valued his great uncle Benedict first. Everything that had to do with Uncle Benedict, as he called him, was sacrosanct. He’d do anything to keep his word to him.

​

David​

The timeline is wrong for Simonides' 1852 claim. He wrote about them in 1843.






This contains a tiny bit of theory and a whole lot of fact.


Simonides had already written to Rodokanakis in his mid-June 1843 letter that he had written the acrostics:
Is that in Barnabas or separate

In the introduction to Barnabas
It's at the end of the book
Greek and English










Greek and English

was Simonides writing in English in the early 1840s?



No








I translated it with my son for the book



My book







got it

Ἀν δὲ (Θεοῦ συνάρσει) τὸν προσεχῆ Δεκέμβριον μεταβῶμεν ἀμφότεροι εἰς Σίναιον ὄρος, καθὰ προαπεφασίσθη, καταδείξω σοι σὺν πᾶσι τούτοις καὶ τὰς ἀκροστιχίδας, χάριν περιεργίας.



But, as was explained before, if (God helping) we both go to Mount Sinai next December, I will show you with all these even the acros- tics, for the sake of curiosity.








Page 405



Who faked