German 2011 papers - Martin Hanus on Simonides “the forms of the ε, the μ, the υ and finally those of the α“ - Andreas Lindemann - Antonio Carlini

[Steven Avery]

"Besonders waren es die Formen des ε, des μ, des υ und vollends die des α“ – Die Fälschungen des Konstantin Simonides

"It was especially the forms of the ε, the μ, the υ and finally those of the α” – The Fakes of Constantine Simonides

von Martin Hanus

Tischendorf und die Suche nach der ältesten Bibel
TOC
https://www.ujschneider.de/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Tischendorf-Inhalt.pdf
TOC
https://www.univerlag-leipzig.de/fi...h_der_ältesten_Bibel_-_Inhaltsverzeichnis.pdf

mit Beiträgen von
Christfried Böttrich, Martin Hanus, Foteini Kolovou, Alexandra Pitzing und Jonas Schollmeyer
herausgegeben von
Foteini Kolovou und Ulrich Johannes Schneider

Foteini Kolovou - Profile on Academia.edu

University of Leipzig, Professor of Byzantine Studies and Modern Greek Philology, Faculty of Philology

uni-leipzig.academia.edu

 

[Steven Avery]

Vorwort
von Ulrich Johannes Schneider ..................................................................................................................................... 4

„Mich reißt das Schicksal gewaltig fort” – Linien einer Biographie
von Christfried Böttrich ................................................................................................................................................. 6

„Ihr Name klang in jedem wieder“ – Der Poet und der Professor Tischendorf
von Alexandra Pitzing .................................................................................................................................................. 17

„Morgen reis’ ich ab nach dem Lande des Aufgangs“ – Tischendorfs Reiseberichte
von Alexandra Pitzing .................................................................................................................................................. 20

„Benommen hab’ ich mich denn auch mehr als ein russischer Prinz
denn als ein sächsischer Professor“ – Der Bibelforscher Tischendorf
von Jonas Schollmeyer ................................................................................................................................................. 33

„Solang’ ich ... meine vatikanische Bibel unter den Händen habe,
ist’s mir, als ob ich den ächtesten Champagner schlürfte“ – Tischendorf und das Griechische
von Foteini Kolovou...................................................................................................................................................... 41

„Besonders waren es die Formen des ε, des μ,
des υ und vollends die des α“ – Die Fälschungen des Konstantin Simonides
von Martin Hanus......................................................................................................................................................... 53

Lebenslauf Tischendorfs mit den wichtigsten Veröffentlichungen
von Jonas Schollmeyer ................................................................................................................................................. 64

Literaturhinweise ......................................................................................................................................................... 66

Zu den Autorinnen und Autoren ................................................................................................................................. 67

Impressum ................................................................................................................................................................... 68

=============

*Foreword* by Ulrich Johannes Schneider ................................................................................. 4

*“Fate carries me away with great force” – Lines of a Biography* by Christfried Böttrich ............................................................................................. 6

*“Her name echoed in everyone again” – The Poet and the Professor Tischendorf* by Alexandra Pitzing .............................................................................................. 17

*“Tomorrow I depart for the land of the rising sun” – Tischendorf’s Travel Reports* by Alexandra Pitzing .............................................................................................. 20

*“I behaved more like a Russian prince than a Saxon professor” – The Bible Scholar Tischendorf* by Jonas Schollmeyer ............................................................................................ 33

*“As long as I have my Vatican Bible in my hands, it is as if I were sipping the finest champagne” – Tischendorf and the Greek* by Foteini Kolovou ................................................................................................. 41

*“It was especially the forms of ε, μ, υ, and finally of α” – The Forgeries of Konstantin Simonides* by Martin Hanus
.................................................................................................... 53

*Curriculum Vitae of Tischendorf with his most important publications* by Jonas Schollmeyer ............................................................................................64
*References* ........................................................................................................66

*About the Authors* ............................................................................................67
*Imprint* .............................................................................................................. 68

 

[Steven Avery]

https://www.jstor.org/stable/48680398?read-now=1&seq=6#page_scan_tab_contents

Konstantin von Tischendorf und der Codex Sinaiticus
Andreas Lindemann
Theologische Rundschau, Vol. 81, No. 1 (2016), pp. 74-79 (6 pages)

 

[Steven Avery]

Michael Lattke REVIEW
https://www.academia.edu/6729960/Rezension_von_Tischendorf_und_die_Suche_nach_der_ältesten_Bibel

Foteini Kolovou; Ulrich Johannes Schneider (ed.), Tischendorf and the search for the oldest Bible (Fonts from the Leipzig University Library, Vol. 21), Leipzig: Leipziger Universitätsverlag 2011, 68 pages, ISBN 978-3-86583-561-1, ! 19.80

This booklet is the catalog for the exhibition in the Bibliotheca Albertina (February 18 - May 29, 2011) with contributions by Christfried Böttrich, Martin Hanus, Foteini Kolovou, Alexandra Pitzing and Jonas Schollmeyer. The foreword comes from the library director Schneider, who is also a member of the Institute for Cultural Studies at the University of Leipzig. All in all, the catalog with numerous interesting illustrations (photos, drawings, documents, manuscripts, book titles and newspaper clippings) reports on the »story of the discovery of the Codex Sinaiticus « (p. 5). Of course, the "educational phase of the Christian religion" (p. 5) did not begin in the fourth century, that is, the period to which this majuscule codex is dated. The Greifswald New Testament scholar Böttrich, who occupies a prominent place in the targeted literature references (p. 66 f.), contributes a biographical contribution in broad strokes, from Tischendorf's early undertakings to his adventurous discoveries, editorial work, private developments, scientific controversies, the disputes about this code up to the Russian relations including the nobility diploma and the last honors in Leipzig (pp. 6-13).

After a brief sketch of the poet and Professor Tischendorf (p. 17), Pitzing writes a vivid report on "Tischendorf's Travel Reports" (pp. 20-32). After all, the scholar, who is often criticized for his self-reflection, "also made a considerable and very entertaining contribution to 19th-century travel literature" (p. 22).

Schollmeyer, who is also a student assistant at the University of Leipzig (p. 33-40), reports on the “Bible researcher Tischendorf” within the history of New Testament textual criticism from Lachmann to Aland 64 f.).

Editor Kolovou's contribution is about "Tischendorf and the Greek" (pp. 41-52). In the description of typical errors in "Pi-Omega" (p. 43) she unfortunately left one of the rare careless mistakes. More serious is their assertion that the New Testament papyri "are generally dated to the second century" (p. 42). For out of around 100 papyri, only two or three come from this early period, around half, however, from the 3rd to 4th centuries, while the rest is even more recent.

The concluding contribution by Hanus, a colleague of Prof. Kolovou, is devoted to the »falsifications of Konstantin Simonides« (pp. 53-63) uncovered by Tischendorf, to which »palimpsests with the shepherds of Hermas « (p. 56). The irony of history is that this writing, which is counted among the Apostolic Fathers, “was not lost”: “Only three years after Tischendorf published the Leipzig hermas as a forgery, he found in St. Catherine's Monastery the almost complete text of this scripture, which today is no longer officially part of the Christian Bible” (p. 57). The catalog presented is instructive even for specialists and can be recommended to everyone who is interested in the Bible and the history of science.

 

[Steven Avery]

In Elliott 2015 bibliography
https://brill.com/display/title/27198
https://books.google.com/books?id=MH29BwAAQBAJ&pg=PA51#v=onepage&q&f=false

"Besonders waren es die Formen des ε, des μ, des υ und vollends die des α“

 

[Steven Avery]

Tischendorf und der Codex Sinaiticus (2016)
Andreas Lindemann

Konstantin von Tischendorf und der Codex Sinaiticus on JSTOR

Andreas Lindemann, Konstantin von Tischendorf und der Codex Sinaiticus, Theologische Rundschau, Vol. 81, No. 1 (2016), pp. 74-79

www.jstor.org

There may be various new references here.

Foteini Kolovou presents Tischendorf's editorial principles and the search for the original text (41–52, with very nice illustrations), and

Martin Hanus concludes by describing the history of the textual forgeries uncovered by Tischendorf (including the "Shepherd of Hermas"), made by Konstantin Simonides (53–63), who in turn claimed to have personally copied the Codex Sinaiticus from a Moscow Bible edition in 1839 ("Today his claim is only taken up to question the authenticity of the Gospels as a whole", 58).

Foteini Kolovou stellt Tischendorfs Editionsprinzipien und die Suche nach dem Urtext dar (41—52, mit sehr schönen Illustrationen), und Martin / lanus beschreibt abschließend die Geschichte der durch Tischendorf aufgedeckten Textfälschungen (u.a. des »Hirten des Hermas«), angefertigt von Konstantin Simonides (53—63), der seinerseits behauptete, den Codex Sinaiticus im Jahre 1839 eigenhändig aus einer Moskauer Bibelausgabe abgeschrieben zu haben (»Heute wird seine Behauptung nur dann aufgegriffen, um die Authentizität der Evangelien insgesamt in Frage zu stellen«, 58).

 

[Steven Avery]

Antonio Carlini
Simonides falsario5.doc
https://www.academia.edu/37673334/Simonides_falsario5_doc

Possiamo seguire le prime fasi della disputa grazie alle parole stesse di Tischendorf che scrive prima un «Bericht» apparso nel Dresdner Journal, Nr. 30 del 5 Febbraio 1856 27 e successivamente aggiunge una ampia nota (datata Pasqua 1863) alla Praefatio della seconda edizione dei Patres Apostolici di Albert Dressel (Dressel 1863, i-iv). Si può capire l’origine dell’errore di valutazione critica in cui era caduto Tischendorf. Ci sono effettivamente delle convergenze significative (in particolare apparenti ‘espansioni’ testuali) tra la versione Vulgata e il Codex Athous che ora la critica, alla luce dei successivi ritrovamenti papiracei, giustifica come prova dell’appartenenza dei due testimoni a un filone di tradizione autonomo e nettamente distinto da quello rappresentato, per le Visioni, dal Sinaitico, dal Papiro Bodmer XXXVIII, nonché dalla Palatina e dall’Etiopica. 28 Era facile pensare, p. es. che panou`rgo~ ei\ peri; ta;~ grafav~ di Vis. III 3, 5 fosse frutto di retroversione dal latino (versutum esse circa scripturas), soprattutto dopo aver fatto la collazione del Sinaitico che è privo di quella sequenza. Sono anche altre le espansioni testuali che caratterizzano la testimonianza convergente del Codex Athous e della Vulgata. 29 Non si dimentichi poi che la lingua greca di Erma esibisce una serie di latinismi che potevano apparire nati per suggestione di un modello latino. Se dunque su questo punto Tischendorf corresse la sua posizione, inflessibile restò sempre nella condanna dei palinsesti di Erma e di Uranios, dal primo momento che li ebbe sotto gli occhi (il 22 Gennaio 1856), presente Dindorf. Il giudizio di Tischendorf è netto: «Mein Erstaunen war nicht gering, als ich schon nach wenig Minuten auf beiden Blättern eine Menge paläographischer Eigenthümlichkeiten bemerkte, die mir als innere Widersprüche in dem Charakter der Schrift galten. Besonders waren es die Formen des e, des m, des u und vollends die des a, welche ich als solche bezeichnen musste, die mir noch in keiner der vielen ähnlichen von mir gelesenen Handschriften des höchsten Alterthums vorgekommen waren». 30 Il rigetto avveniva dunque per ragioni squisitamente paleografiche e, data l’autorità di Tischendorf, quel giudizio pesava. 31 Come si è visto, anche altre (e più pesanti) prove erano state portate contro l’autenticità in particolare del palinsesto di Uranio, ma Simon. individuò in Tischendorf il grande nemico che l’aveva screditato anche sul piano tecnico. E allora, a distanza di tempo, alla fine del 1862,

27 Il «Bericht» è ripubblicato in Lykurgos 1856, 66-73 (in particolare 68 e n. 2). 28 Carlini 1991, 21-22. 29 Due altri casi (Vis. III 6, 2 e Vis. III 5, 4) sono richiamati anche da Tischendorf (in Dressel 1863, iii- iv); ma per un quadro completo delle convergenze AL 1 contro Sinait. Bodmer L 2 Etiopica, Carlini 1983, 98-99. 30 Lykurgos 1856, 69. 31 Per l’eco suscitata in Francia dalla disputa su Erma e Simon., Jallabert 1858.

escogitò una sensazionale forma di vendetta contro di lui. Pur di togliere a Tischendorf onore e merito di aver portato in luce un manoscritto antico che si stava rivelando fonte di primaria importanza per la ricostruzione del testo biblico, non esitò ad attribuire a sé la confezione, fatta in giovinezza, di quel sontuoso manufatto ‘falso/antico’. Tischendorf proprio in quel tempo stava per far uscire l’edizione del testo contenuto nel Sinaitico (con tavole anche del Pastore). J. K. Elliott ha raccolto la copiosa documentazione che riguarda il «Simonides-affair». Il Guardian del 3 settembre 1862 ospitò una lunga lettera di Simon. che raccontava la storia di un progetto da lui ideato, d’intesa con lo zio Benedetto, nel lontano 1839: per fare uno straordinario dono allo zar Nicola I di una Bibbia completa (con anche i Padri Apostolici) in pergamena e in lettere capitali, si era assunto il compito (non facile, ma per il quale si sentiva attrezzato) di copiare in elegante stile ‘antico’ di scrittura Vecchio e Nuovo Testamento, nonché Epistola di Barnaba e Pastore di Erma, rinunciando però agli altri Padri Apostolici. E’ precisamente il contenuto del Sinaitico. Completato il lavoro, aveva presentato il codice pergamenaceo al patriarca Costanzo (che era stato vescovo del Sinai), ricevendo il suggerimento di donarlo al Monastero di Santa Caterina perché quella era la destinazione ideale. All’insaputa di Simon. il codice era poi finito, per iniziativa evidentemente di Costanzo, precisamente al Sinai dove egli lo vide in occasione di un suo viaggio, con tanto maggior disappunto perché dovette constatare che era stato eliminato il foglio iniziale con la dedica allo zar. La chiusa della lettera che Simon. dice di aver scritto per amore di verità e per proteggere il testo sacro da imposture è eloquente nella difesa del suo comportamento e nell’accusa contro Tischendorf: «In conclusion, you must permit me to express my sincere regret that, whilst the many valuable remains of antiquity in my possession are frequently attributed to my own hands, the one poor work of my youth is set down by a gentleman who enjoys a great reputation for learning, as the earliest copy of Sacred Scriptures». 32 Si resta increduli di fronte questa testimonianza, resa (a dire dell’autore) pro veritate. La prima risposta del 2 ottobre 1862 (The Clerical Journal) è rapida e liquidatoria; in una seconda lettera (Allgemeine Zeitung del 23 dicembre), Tischendorf, dopo aver parlato, a scherno, del «Sinaitico scritto nel 1839» e aver bollato Simon. come «this fabulist and rival of Palaephathus», rinvia sostanzialmente il lettore alla sua edizione in 4 volumi in cui sarà possibile constatare la miniera di nuove, importanti, originali lezioni. 33 Ma non si deve credere che la disputa si sia presto acquietata: molti saranno, come documentato da Elliott, gli interventi sulla stampa degli «Opponents» (a Simon.), ma anche dei «Defenders». 34 E Simon. non si sente nell’angolo se, quando pubblica il Periplo di Annone (London, 1864), nella lista delle sue opere inserisce, al nr. 40 e al nr. 41, il «suo» Sinaitico: 40. Codex Friderico-Augustanus. jjEggravfh me;n uJpo; K. Simwnivdou, ejn

 

[Maprchr]

Here’s the English translation of the Italian passage you shared:

---

We can follow the early stages of the dispute thanks to Tischendorf’s own words. He first wrote a Bericht (report) that appeared in the Dresdner Journal, No. 30, on February 5, 1856, and later added an extensive note (dated Easter 1863) to the Praefatio of the second edition of Albert Dressel’s Patres Apostolici (Dressel 1863, i–iv). One can understand the origin of the critical misjudgment into which Tischendorf had fallen.


There are indeed significant convergences (in particular apparent textual “expansions”) between the Vulgate version and the Codex Athous, which criticism now, in light of subsequent papyrus discoveries, justifies as proof that the two witnesses belong to an autonomous line of tradition, clearly distinct from that represented, for the Visions, by the Sinaiticus, Bodmer Papyrus XXXVIII, as well as the Palatine and the Ethiopic.


It was easy to think, for example, that panourgos ei peri tas graphas in Vis. III 3, 5 was the result of retroversion from the Latin (versutum esse circa scripturas), especially after collating the Sinaiticus, which lacks that sequence. There are also other textual expansions that characterize the convergent testimony of the Codex Athous and the Vulgate.


Nor should it be forgotten that the Greek of Hermas exhibits a series of Latinisms that could easily appear to have arisen under the influence of a Latin model. Thus, although on this point Tischendorf corrected his position, he remained inflexible in his condemnation of the palimpsests of Hermas and Uranios, from the very first moment he had them before his eyes (January 22, 1856), with Dindorf present.


Tischendorf’s judgment is unequivocal: “My astonishment was not small, when after only a few minutes I noticed on both leaves a multitude of palaeographic peculiarities, which to me counted as internal contradictions in the character of the script. It was especially the forms of e, m, u, and finally a, which I had to designate as such, since they had never appeared to me in any of the many similar manuscripts of the highest antiquity that I had read.”


The rejection therefore occurred for purely palaeographic reasons, and given Tischendorf’s authority, that judgment carried weight. As has been seen, other (and even stronger) proofs were also brought against the authenticity of the palimpsest of Uranios in particular, but Simonides identified in Tischendorf the great enemy who had discredited him also on the technical level. And so, after some time, at the end of 1862…

 

[Maprchr]

Here’s the English translation of the Italian passage you shared:

---

He devised a sensational form of revenge against him. In order to deprive Tischendorf of the honor and merit of having brought to light an ancient manuscript that was proving to be a source of primary importance for the reconstruction of the biblical text, he did not hesitate to attribute to himself the production, in his youth, of that sumptuous “false/ancient” artifact. At precisely that time Tischendorf was preparing to publish the edition of the text contained in the Sinaiticus (with plates also of the Shepherd). J. K. Elliott has collected the abundant documentation concerning the “Simonides affair.”


The Guardian of September 3, 1862, hosted a long letter from Simonides, in which he recounted the story of a project he had conceived, in agreement with his uncle Benedict, back in 1839: to make an extraordinary gift to Tsar Nicholas I of a complete Bible (including also the Apostolic Fathers) in parchment and in capital letters. He had taken upon himself the task (not easy, but for which he felt equipped) of copying, in elegant “ancient” style of writing, the Old and New Testaments, as well as the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas, though renouncing the other Apostolic Fathers. This is precisely the content of the Sinaiticus.


Having completed the work, he presented the parchment codex to Patriarch Constantius (who had been bishop of Sinai), receiving the suggestion to donate it to the Monastery of St. Catherine, since that was the ideal destination. Unknown to Simonides, the codex then ended up, evidently through Constantius’s initiative, precisely at Sinai, where he saw it on the occasion of one of his journeys, with all the greater disappointment because he had to note that the initial leaf with the dedication to the Tsar had been removed.


The closing of the letter, which Simonides says he wrote out of love for truth and to protect the sacred text from imposture, is eloquent in defense of his conduct and in accusation against Tischendorf: “In conclusion, you must permit me to express my sincere regret that, whilst the many valuable remains of antiquity in my possession are frequently attributed to my own hands, the one poor work of my youth is set down by a gentleman who enjoys a great reputation for learning, as the earliest copy of Sacred Scriptures.”


One remains incredulous before this testimony, rendered (according to the author) pro veritate. The first response of October 2, 1862 (The Clerical Journal) was rapid and dismissive; in a second letter (Allgemeine Zeitung, December 23), Tischendorf, after mockingly speaking of the “Sinaiticus written in 1839” and branding Simonides as “this fabulist and rival of Palaephathus,” essentially referred the reader to his edition in four volumes, in which it would be possible to see the wealth of new, important, original readings.


But one must not think that the dispute soon subsided: there were many interventions in the press, as documented by Elliott, from Simonides’s “Opponents” but also from his “Defenders.” And Simonides did not feel cornered, for when he published the Periplus of Hanno (London, 1864), in the list of his works he included, at no. 40 and no. 41, “his” Sinaiticus:

1. Codex Friderico-Augustanus. Written by K. Simonides, in…

 

[Steven Avery]

Bump - now on Corona
https://www.facebook.com/groups/512612756104594/posts/1762179307814593/

Hi forum!
In 2011 the Leipzig University Library had a Sinaiticus exhibition and put out a 68 page book, the TOC is online.
Tischendorf und die Suche nach der ältesten Bibel Katalog zur Ausstellung in der Bibliotheca Albertina, 18. Februar - 29. Mai 2011
https://search.worldcat.org/title/709560721
The especially interesting article in the book is by
von Martin Honus:
"Besonders waren es die Formen des ε, des μ, des υ und vollends die des α“ – Die Fälschungen des Konstantin Simonides
p. 53-63
So far it is difficult to find this exhibition-catalog-book for sale, or at a library, or online, and so far we do not have a contact for Martin Honus.
(Yes, another step will be to contact the editors of the book.)
If you can help find this interesting article it would be greatly appreciated!
Thanks!

Worldcat
https://search.worldcat.org/title/742029269
library@nyam.org
+1 212 822 7315
New York Academy of Medicine

https://catalog.nyam.org/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=255982

69 miles from your current location.
The New York Academy of Medicine, 1216 Fifth Avenue
South of 103 street
New York, NY 10029

​

Authors:
Christfried Böttrich, Foteini Kolovou, Ulrich Johannes Schneider, Universitätsbibliothek Leipzig

 

[Steven Avery]

bump

Worldcat

Tischendorf und die Suche nach der ältesten Bibel : Katalog zur Ausstellung in der Bibliotheca Albertina, 18. Februar-29. Mai 2011 | WorldCat.org

Tischendorf und die Suche nach der ältesten Bibel : Katalog zur Ausstellung in der Bibliotheca Albertina, 18. Februar-29. Mai 2011 | WorldCat.org

search.worldcat.org

New York Academy of Medicine | WorldCat.org

The New York Academy of Medicine, New York, US-NY, US, 10029

search.worldcat.org

New York Academy of Medicine
library@nyam.org
+1 212 822 7315

https://catalog.nyam.org/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=255982

 

[Steven Avery]

CARM

One moment, please...

Tischendorf und die Suche nach der ältesten Bibel

mit Beiträgen von
Christfried Böttrich, Martin Hanus, Foteini Kolovou, Alexandra Pitzing und Jonas Schollmeyer
herausgegeben von
Foteini Kolovou und Ulrich Johannes Schneider
Leipzig 2011


Katalog zur Ausstellung in der Bibliotheca Albertina
18. Februar – 29. Mai 2011

Page 53

„Besonders waren es die Formen des ε, des μ, des υ und vollends die des α“ – Die Fälschungen des Konstantin Simonides von Martin Hanus

Google Translated:


Tischendorf and the search for the oldest Bible

With contributions by Christfried Böttrich, Martin Hanus, Foteini Kolovou, Alexandra Pitzing, and Jonas Schollmeyer
edited by Foteini Kolovou and Ulrich Johannes Schneider
Leipzig 2011

Catalog accompanying the exhibition at the Bibliotheca Albertina
February 18 – May 29, 2011

Page 53

"It was especially the shapes of ε, μ, υ, and especially α" – The Forgeries of Konstantin Simonides by Martin Hanus

 

[Steven Avery]

https://forums.carm.org/threads/cod...simonides-timeline.13239/page-64#post-1982968

Related to the above.

Tischendorf und die Suche nach der ältesten Bibel

mit Beiträgen von
Christfried Böttrich, Martin Hanus, Foteini Kolovou, Alexandra Pitzing und Jonas Schollmeyer
herausgegeben von
Foteini Kolovou und Ulrich Johannes Schneider
Leipzig 2011

Katalog zur Ausstellung in der Bibliotheca Albertina
18. Februar – 29. Mai 2011

Page 53

„Besonders waren es die Formen des ε, des μ, des υ und vollends die des α“ – Die Fälschungen des Konstantin Simonides von Martin Hanus
Google Translated:

Tischendorf and the search for the oldest Bible

With contributions by Christfried Böttrich, Martin Hanus, Foteini Kolovou, Alexandra Pitzing, and Jonas Schollmeyer
edited by Foteini Kolovou and Ulrich Johannes Schneider
Leipzig 2011

Catalog accompanying the exhibition at the Bibliotheca Albertina
February 18 – May 29, 2011

Page 53

"It was especially the shapes of ε, μ, υ, and especially α" – The Forgeries of Konstantin Simonides by Martin Hanus

The title turns out to be a quote from Tischendorf.

Tischendorf
Im Feuilleton des Dresdner Journals Nr. 30 vom 5. Februar 1856,
zitiert nach: Lykurgos, Enthüllungen, 2. Aufl., S. 69.

,,Besonders waren es die Formen ε, des μ, des u und vollends die des a, welche ich als solche bezeichnen musste, die mir noch in keiner der vielen ähnlichen von mir gelesenen Handschriften des höchsten Alterthums vorgekommen waren. Dazu kam, dass das Hermas-Palimpsest einer viel jüngeren Zeit angehören sollte als das des Uranios, was wohl durch die Erscheinung einzelner Spiritus in dem erstern veranlasst war, wovon das letztere völlig frei geblieben. Allein zur Setzung dieser Spiritus-zeichen fehlte bei den bemerkten Beispielen jeder paläographischer Grund, und gerade in den fehlerhaften Formen der genannten Buchstaben fand ich beide angeblich so verschiedene Palimpseste übereinstimmend.”

Source
https://app.box.com/s/0dfd65wyaemqf1rgj8bb711ihlzw08tb

DeepL & Google Translated with slight modifications (03/02/26)

Constantin Von Tischendorf
In the Feuilleton of the Dresdner Journal No. 30 of February 5, 1856,
quoted from: Lykurgos, "Exposing", 2nd Edition, Page 69

“In particular, it was the forms E [= Epsilon], the M [= Mu], the Υ [= Upsilon], and especially that of the A [= Alpha], which I had to identify as such, that I had never encountered before in any of the many similar manuscripts from ancient times which I had read. In addition, the Hermas Palimpsest was supposed to belong to a much more recent period in time to that of Uranios, which was probably caused by the appearance of individual “Spiritus” [i.e. aspiration (See note below)] in the former, from which the latter remained completely free. However, there was no paleographic reason for the use of these “Spiritus Asper” [i.e. diacritical markings in Greek for rough breathing or aspiration] signs in the examples noted, and it was precisely in these erroneous [Or: “incorrect”] forms of the aforementioned letters that I found both of these supposedly so different palimpsests to be identical [Or: “the same” “alike”].”