Sister Threads -
keep these umlauts handy - ä é ü ö
TRAFFIC COP -->THIS THREAD --> Hilgenfeld and the German date debate of the 1860s
Theological Review (1864)
Notes on the Codex Sinaiticus
signed by "T."
....and it was thought the wiser course to reserve a final judgment till the Codex had been subjected to a more thorough examination by those who have made palaeography their special study. The means for doing this are now placed within reach of scholars, not only by the splendid facsimile edition of all the fragments recovered by Tischendorf, brought out last year under the auspices of the Emperor of Russia,—but also by the publication in one volume of the text of the New Testament.
Especially interesting is to see if there is any discussion about the physical flexibility, colour, etc. of the manuscripts.
The American Presbyterian and Theological Review (1866)
Brockhaus has published another edition, (8vo, price 4 thlr.) of Tischendorf’s Novum Testamentura grace, ex Sinaitieo Codice, giving also the readings of the Vatican Codex, and of the Elzevir edition. The previous edition by Brockhaus, Novum Test. Sinaiticum, 1863, is out of print. This later edition omits the palaeographic peculiarities, and corrects the evident blunders of the original; nor does it contain the Epistle of Barnabas, nor the Pastor of Hermas. Tischendorf has also written an Appendix on this Codex for the 8th edition of Theile's New Test. ; and another collation for the Polyglot of Stier and Theile. He replied sharply in 1863 to the impudent claim of Simonides, in a pamphlet, entitled “Assaults on the Sinai MS.;" and there too refuted the theory of the Russian Archimandrite, Porphyry Uspenski, that the Codex had a heretical origin. In another pamphlet, “Weapons of Darkness against the Sinai Bible,” 1863, he replied to an anonymous writer in the Sächsisches Kirchenblatt, who assigned the MS. to the 6th century. Hilgenfeld also tried to bring it down to the 6th century ; Tischendorf replied to him in the Tübingen Zeitschrift, 1864. But while this MS. is generally conceded to belong to the fourth century (e. g. by Weizsäcker on the Epistle of Barnabas, 1863 ; and by Tobler in an essay on the Epistle to the Hebrews in Hilgenfelds's Zeitschrift), several recent writers put it below the Vatican MS. as an authority, on account of its evident carelessness and numerous mistakes. Thus, Prof. Buttmann, in Hilgenfeld’s Zeitschrift, 1864, examines it carefully and finds in the Gospels alone some 360 plain errors or mistakes. Dr. Bömel, in a work on the Galatians, Frankfort, 1865, comes to a kindred result, and says, that Tischendorf himself, in the last, edition of his New Test., in the part on Matthew, i. to xvi. 23, "adopts the Sinaitic reading against the Vatican in 130 places, but the Vatican against the Sinaitic in 164 places.” The above is condensed from the Neue Evang. Kirchenzeitung. The editor of the Journal of Sacred Literature (April, 1865), Mr. Cowper, assigns the Sinai Codex to the 4th century, and a Coptic origin.
quick summary of some positions
Origin of the Four Gospels (1868)
Two men in particular have undertaken the task of assailing my work with the weapons mentioned above,—Dr. Hilgenfeld, of Jena, and Dr. Volkmar, of Zurich. The first has devoted to this task an article in the Review which he edits, heading it, “Constantine Tischendorf as Defensor Fidei.” ... and although I do not speak specifically of the whole'canon, and merely put together as of equal canonicity the four Gospels, the Pauline Epistles, the first of John, and the first of Peter,
Section with Tischendorf response to 1865 article by Hilgenfeld on dating of NT and canonicity.