Nikolai Alexandrovich Morozov handles Sinaiticus, notes the Tischendorf antiquity claims are false

Steven Avery

Administrator
Nikolai Alexandrovich Morozov (1854-1946)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Alexandrovich_Morozov


Prophets: the history of the origin of biblical prophecies, their literary presentation and characteristics (1914)
Prophets: history of Bible prophecies and their literary presentation and characterization

https://books.google.com/books?id=PVwOnQEACAAJ

From a Russian Forum:


Polymath NA Morozov, whose writings became foundation stone for all followers of alternative history and new chronology, had his own view on Tischendorf's activities. Tischendorf brought a manuscript with Bible text from Sinai and published it in 1862 as if dated IV century. Morozov believed that Tischendorf deliberately passed the manuscript to the Russian library that was far from all cultural centers and almost unreachable for European scholars at the time so they had no means to expose his plot . Morozov examined the Sinaiticus personally and saw the following:

“the lower corners of the parchment sheets of the document are not frayed at all and bear no traces of greasiness and finger prints. As it should have, had the manuscript been in usage for centuries during church service by Sinai monks, who had never been remarkable for their cleanliness like all Eastern monks though…

At the same time, while the inner parchment sheets of the manuscript are absolutely new (meaning with no defects and greasiness) all the front and rear cover sheets are torn and even lost… The most interesting fact about the Sinaiticus is the condition of its inner parchment The sheets are very thin, made of elaborate leather and, what is the most peculiar, the sheets are very flexible and not at all fragile! And this circumstance is rather important for dating the manuscript.

When we are dealing with ancient documents which were kept for millenniums, even in the best climate conditions we see that even the slightest touch can turn them into dust. as if we touch ash of the book that is invisibly smoldered affected by oxygen. The perfect state of the Sinaiticus inner sheets, while its covers are torn, shows that monks treated the manuscript with neglect, and suggests that the manuscript was presented to the monastery by some pious lover of old religion patterns (script) when new patterns were already in use that is after the 10th century. It was not damaged inside by constant reading possibly because monks became unaccustomed to such writing and preferred to read new patterns. Only due to this fact, the manuscript had been preserved on Sinai until the time it was found by Tischendorf.”

Morozov N.A. Prophets. History of the emergence of biblical prophecies, their literary exposition and characterization. Moscow, 1914
.


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

The scholar and encyclopedist NA Morozov, whose works became the basis for fans of alternative history and new chronology, had his own view of Tischendorf's activities. Tischendorf brought a handwritten copy of the Bible from Sinai and printed it in 1862 as a document of the 4th century. Morozov believed that Tischendorf deliberately transferred the manuscripts to the Russian library, which was far from the cultural centers at that time, and which was difficult for European scholars to access and expose his scam. Morozov personally examined the Sinaiticus Codex and saw [171] that:

?the parchment sheets of this document are not at all frayed at the lower corners, not greasy or dirty with fingers, as should be the case with a thousand years of its use in worship by the Sinai monks, who, like all eastern monks, have never been distinguished by cleanliness. ... While the middle sheets of parchment in it are completely new (in the sense of not being spoiled or greasy), all the initial and last ones are torn and even lost ... What seemed especially interesting to me in the Sinai Codex is the internal condition of its parchment. Its sheets are very thin, beautifully crafted and, what is most amazing, have retained their flexibility, have not become brittle at all! And this circumstance is very important for determining the antiquity.

When we deal with documents that have really lain for a millennium, even under the best climatic conditions, then often, at the slightest touch to their sheets, they break into tiny pieces, as if we had touched the ashes of a book that had quietly decayed under the action of atmospheric oxygen ... The excellent condition of the inner sheets of the Sinaiticus Codex, with obvious traces of careless handling by monks who tore off its binding and tore off the outer sheets, suggests that this manuscript was given to them by some pious lover of ancient religious examples at a time when new examples were in use, i.e. after the 10th century. It was not spoiled inside by constant reading, probably precisely because they had already lost the habit of reading such writing and preferred the new one. Only because of this the manuscript was preserved on Sinai until the time when Tischendorf found it there?

Morozov also speaks about the Leningrad Codex found by Firkovich:
“I examined the material of this book and came to the same conclusions regarding its qualities that I have already expressed here regarding the Sinaiticus Codex: its sheets are too flexible for their unusual antiquity.”

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

Good discussion
http://wap.historia.forum24.ru/?1-9-0-00000006-000-0-0

Our first ref found to this at:

According to your faith be it done unto you… (The Holy Book and the Global Crisis)
2009-2010

http://fanread.ru/book/7616590/?page=29
"suspiciously well preserved"

eg "Let us cite some more quotes from the work "Tishendorf in Search of the Genuine New Testament" [174]: .. Let us cite some more quotes from the work "Tishendorf in Search of the Genuine New Testament" [174]

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

Sept 6, 2007
http://kuraev.ru/smf/index.php?topic=34111.0
Post #9 may be a different paragraph and makes some excellent points. he also goes to Uspensky 1865 and the ongoing disputes with Tischendorf. (Uspenksy remained duped that it was ancient, he just discussed maybe 700 AD) This second Morozov quote strengthens the first, has more direct science. About the need for real science microscopic .. ".. explore.... sooner or later... the whole story of the discovery is very suspicious". Compare to 2427 -

ADDED 2023 - Uspensky 1865 IS very strong, Sinaiticus is not gray hair, wrinkles

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

Romanian ref to Morozov - Jan, 2016
https://martoriimincinosi.wordpress.com/2016/01/19/in-numele-minciunii-ariene-codex-sinaiticus/

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

According to your faith be it unto you.. (2010)
https://books.google.com/books?id=QXjZDs741CcC&pg=PA162

N.A. Morozov / ?Prophets?
According to your Faith Be it Unto You
http://doverchiv.narod.ru./morozov/p-00-0gl.htm

http://doverchiv.narod.ru./morozov/p-09-01.htm
Division IX. The antiquity of biblical manuscripts in European stacks
Section IX. On the Antiquity of Biblical Manuscripts in European Book Depositories


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

The History of Human Culture in Natural Science (2015)
By Morozov N. A.

https://books.google.com/books?id=L7lqCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA390

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

Alexsander is largely the same as above, he does give a Russian magazine that discusses the English Simonides issues.
http://www.aleksandrnovak.com/content/1528.html
(?3) - NA Morozov. "Prophets?, doverchiv.narod.ru.
(?4) - ?The Orthodox Review" magazine for 1862 number 9, "notes the Orthodox Review", December 1862 Topic:. "Foreign notes" on page 162 - 166. rapidshare.com.
(?4) - Journal "Orthodox Review" for 1862, No. 9, "Notes of the Orthodox Review", December 1862, Section: "Foreign Notes", pp. 162-166. rapidshare.com.

The scholar and lexicographer NA Morozov works, which became the basis for the lovers of alternative history and new history, had his eyes on the activities of Tischendorf. Tischendorf brought from the Sinai manuscript copy of the Bible and published it in 1862 as document IV century.Morozov believed that Tischendorf specially handed the manuscript in Russian library, while distant from the cultural centers in which European scientists have been hard to get and expose him scam Morozov personally inspected the Codex Sinaiticus and saw (?3), that: "Sheets of parchment in the document is not on the bottom corners istrepany not zamusleny and fingers are clean, as it should be when the millennial use them in worship Sinai monks never differ, as well as all the Eastern monks, cleanliness. ... At that time, as the average sheet of parchment in her brand new (in the sense of unspoiled and nezamuslennosti), all initial and the last ragged and even lost. .especially interesting as it seemed to me in the internal state of his parchment. Sheets him very thin, well dressed and that all striking retained its flexibility, they do not become brittle This fact is very important to determine the antiquity.

When we are dealing with documents that really have lain millennium, even under the best climatic conditions, while often at the slightest touch to their lists, they break down into tiny pieces, as if we touched the ashes of the book, quietly decayed from the action of atmospheric oxygen ... Excellent condition of the inner sheet of the Codex Sinaiticus with obvious signs of neglect him monks disrupt his cover and break outside the sheets, it is and suggests that this manuscript got them from some pious lover of ancient religious samples already at the time when Used were new samples, te, after the X century. He was not spoiled in a constant reading, probably just because already become estranged to read this letter and preferred new. Only from this manuscript and preserved at Sinai to the time when it Tischendorf found there. "

==========

Fomenko, 1998, quotes Morozov.
https://books.google.com/books?id=osqvZTC4pysC&pg=PT12
https://books.google.com/books?id=ne1WAAAAMAAJ
==========

One forum, or one Morozov quote, discusses how much wear it would have even if were only used a few times a year.
One forum discusses Morozov and the occultist Blavatsky (a reference about which we have a separate thread, she said Sinaiticus had been faked based on contacts in Sinai) in the same post!

==========

WIP
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
longer Sinaiticus section from Morozov

Н.А.Морозов/ ?Пророки?
According to your Faith Be it Unto You


** doverchiv.narod.ru./morozov/p-00-0gl.htm
now archived at

**doverchiv.narod.ru./morozov/p-09-01.htm
now archived at
https://web.archive.org/web/20170326080501/http://www.doverchiv.narod.ru/morozov/p-09-01.htm

Division IX. The antiquity of biblical manuscripts in European stacks
Отдел IX. О древности библейских рукописей в европейских книгохранилищах

Вместе с тем рушатся и без того мало обоснованные выводы о принадлежности IV веку древнейших из рукописей Библии, имеющихся в различных европейских книгохранилищах. Эти выводы сделаны были, главным образом, немецким богословом Тишендорфом, родившимся в 1815 году и умершем в 1874.

Я не буду здесь входить в детальное рассмотрение качества многочисленных палеографических работ этого честолюбивого и умственно ограниченного исследователя наполовину сухого ученого-теолога, наполовину придворного льстеца. Все приведенное мною здесь достаточно доказывает, как он преувеличивал, теша свое самолюбие, древность всех манускриптов, привезенных им из троекратных его командировок разными правительствами на восток, или рассмотренных им в книгохранилищах Рима и Парижа.

Однако для того, чтобы дать понятие о древнейших рукописях Библии, сохранившихся до нашего времени, и о том как они дошли до нас, я должен начать именно с его третьего путешествия на восток в 1859 г.

Выхлопотав себе крупную субсидию от русского императора, Тишендорф, бывший в это время уже профессором специально устроенной для него кафедры библейской палеографии при теологическом факультете Лейпцигского университета, отправился в Египет и на Синай, где нашел у монахов св. Екатерины рукописный экземпляр Библии которую сначала напечатал (в 1862 г.), как открытый им документ IV века, а затем через семь лет после этого преподнес императору Александру II, за что немедленно и получил потомственное русское дворянство. Подаренный им императору документ хранится теперь в Петербургской Публичной библиотеке под названием Синайский кодекс (Codex Sinaiticus). Он содержит полное собрание старозаветных и новозаветных книг, написанных на пергаменте крупным почерком, отдельными заглавными буквами, которыми, по утверждениям Тишендорфа, писали до IX или X века нашей эры, после чего стали писать строчными обычными буквами.

Полуграмотные и безграмотные монахи, давшие увезти от себя эту Библию за тридевять земель, уже этим самым достаточно показали, что не видели в ней необыкновенной древности. Соображения же Тишендорфа (имевшего, как и монахи св. Екатерины, личный интерес приписать подаренным императору документам наибольшую из всех возможных старин), ни в каком случай не мешают беспристрастному исследователю принять для этого экземпляра время много позднее VI века, необходимое для того, чтобы в него могли войти разобранные нами здесь пророчества, принадлежащие и по содержанию и по астрономическим вычислениям, несомненно, средине V или даже началу VI века.2

2 Во всяком случае можно только удивляться, что лейпцигский протестантский профессор библейской палеографии, германец Тишендорф, имевший полную возможность подарить эти рукописи своему университету, предпочел отдать их в далекую по тому времени от всех культурных центров Россию, в которую ученым из Европы при их незнании русского языка было чрезвычайно трудно ездить.

При внимательном осмотре Синайского кодекса в рукописном отделении Публичной библиотеки мое вниманье прежде всего обратило на себя то обстоятельство, что листы пергамента у этого документа совсем не истрепаны на нижних углах, не замуслены и не загрязнены пальцами, как это должно бы быть при тысячелетнем пользовании им в богослужении Синайскими монахами, никогда не отличавшимися, как и все восточные монахи, чистоплотностью. Сделанное мне возражение одного знакомого историка, что монахи, считая эту книгу за особенно святую, всегда тщательно вымывали себе пальцы, приступая к ее чтению, не заслуживает ни малейшего внимания, так как прежде всего противоречить психологии этих людей, считавших за подвиг благочестия никогда в жизни не мыться. Кроме того, и сама книга показывает на себе следы именно крайне неосторожного обращения с собою. В то время, как средние листы пергамента в ней совершенно новы (в смысле неиспорченности и незамусленности), все начальные и последнее оборваны и даже утрачены. Совершенно такой вид получает в несколько лет вообще всякая книга, которую мало читают, но часто роняют на пол, хватая как попало и употребляя на покрышку сосудов или в виде пресса. Переплет такой книги скоро обрывается, как оборван и утрачен и у описываемой теперь рукописи, и первые листы постепенно отрываются и пропадают, в то время, как внутренние листы под прикрывающими их верхними, остаются почти совершенно без порчи.

Все следы подобного обращения видны и на Синайском кодексе. На снятых с него фототипических изображениях, изданных теперь в Англии, страницы кажутся много грязнее, чем они есть в действительности, потому что даже и новый пергамент, сфотографированный на снежно-белом фоне глянцовитой бумаги, всегда покажется серым и грязным. Но даже и на таких снимках нетрудно видеть, что в данном случае углы листов совсем не обтрепаны от тысяч чтений, как должно бы быть, если б эту книгу читали хоть два раза в год, в продолжение более чем тысячелетнего ее существования.

В последние восемь лет жизни мне приходилось при своих научных занятиях иметь дело с книгами, просуществовавшими на свете не менее четырехсот лет, и внешний вид их был положительно не новее этого кодекса, хотя и их очень мало читали до меня: некоторые были даже не везде разрезаны.

Особенно же интересным показалось мне в Синайском кодексе внутреннее состояние его пергамента. Листы его очень тонки, прекрасно выделаны и, что всего поразительнее, сохранили свою гибкость, нисколько не сделались хрупкими! А это обстоятельство очень важно для определения древности.

Когда мы имеем дело с документами, действительно пролежавшими тысячелетие, хотя бы при самых лучших климатических условиях, тогда часто, при малейшем прикосновении к их листам, они ломаются на мельчайшие кусочки, как будто бы мы тронули пепел книги, незаметно истлевшей от действия атмосферного кислорода. Таков, например, Туринский папирус, содержащий полный список древних египетских царей, рассыпавшийся при перевозке в Европу из Египта на 164 кусочка. Таковы и все другие очень древние документы. У Синайского же кодекса листы пергамента, как я уже сказал совершенно гибки, так что при простом исследовании его по качеству материала ему трудно дать древность более 600 лет до настоящего времени.

Характер же его письма заглавными буквами не может служить безусловным доказательством глубокой древности. Ведь ничто не мешает любителю книг с древней внешностью написать себе совершенно такими же буквами целую книгу и теперь... А что такие любители могли встречаться и в самом конце средних веков, против этого едва ли можно серьезно возражать. В религиозных делах мы постоянно имеем дело с подобными пережитками старины. Разве еврейские раввины в синагогах не пользуются и теперь, в века книгопечатанья, непременно рукописями, написанными по древнему образцу? Разве в православных церковных книгах и до сих пор не употребляется славянский шрифт и язык? Разве в нашем искусстве и архитектуре не устраиваются и теперь орнаменты разных минувших стилей и эпох?

Прекрасное состояние внутренних листов Синайского кодекса при явных следах небрежного обращения с ним монахов, сорвавших его переплет и оборвавших наружные листы, именно и наводит на мысль, что эта рукопись досталась им от какого-нибудь благочестивого любителя древне-религиозных образцов уже в то время, когда в употреблении были новые образцы, т. е. после X века. Его не испортили внутри постоянным чтением, вероятно, именно потому, что уже отвыкли читать такое письмо и предпочитали новое. Только от этого рукопись и сохранилась на Синае до времени, когда ее нашел там Тишендорф.

То же самое можно сказать и об остальных таких же документах в других европейских книгохранилищах.

Уже и без специального их осмотра, одно наше вышеприведенное астрономическое и литературное исследование пророческих книг Библии достаточно показывает, что ни один из таких ?кодексов? не может быть отнесен даже и к VI веку.

Значит, рушится созданная тем же самым Тишендорфом легенда и о необычной древности, хранящегося в Ватикане (и сделавшегося известным для ученых лишь с 1870 г.) сборника старозаветных и новозаветных рукописей, так называемого Ватиканского кодекса (Codex Vaticanus).

Он тоже написан по-гречески на сохранившем свою гибкость пергаменте, как и наш синайский сборник, и такими же отдельными, но более красивыми, мелкими заглавными буквами, в три столбца на странице. Этот экземпляр, по словам самих монахов, неизвестно когда и как попал в Ватикан. Приехавший туда Тишендорф первый возвеличил его, а с ним и ватиканское книгохранилище, и себя самого, отнеся его к IV веку, как к наибольшей из всех возможных древностей. Но более осторожные исследователи уже и прежде меня приписывали ему в смысле крайней из возможных старин только V век, а теперь приходится отнести и его к периоду между VI и XII веками, хотя, конечно, ничто не могло помешать любителю красивых книг древнего образца заставить хорошего писца и в XVI веке сделать себе на пергаменте такую копию по древнему способу писания.

То же самое можно сказать и об остальных немногих, известных до сих пор, древнейших греческих пергаментных Библиях того же типа. Из них Александрийский кодекс (Codex Alexandrinus), подаренный в 1628 г. английскому королю Карлу I константинопольским патриархом Кириллом Лукарисом без обозначения древности, хранится теперь в Британском музее в Лондоне. Он содержит, со значительными пробелами, книги обоих заветов и, кроме того, два послания Климента Римского, одно из которых, не окончено и признается подложным. Слова в этом сборнике также написаны слитно, но иногда конец одного слова отделяется черточкою от другого, а конец фразы часто отмечается точкой наверху. Он считается, даже теологами, за документ не ранее VI века. К этому же типу относятся кодекс Безы и кодекс Ефрема Сирина (Codex Beza и Codex Ephraemi Syri) в Париже. В последнем из них, впрочем, имеются только четыре Евангелия и Деяния Апостолов в параллельных греческой и латинской версиях, а старозаветные книги только в отрывках. Однако он во многих отношениях интереснее остальных, так как принадлежит к отделу палимпсестов, т. е. вторично восстановленных. Дело в том, что после XIII века с его пергамента был стерт выцветший текст библейских книг и, вместо них, были написаны сочинения Ефрема Сирина. В таком виде пергамент этот находился сначала во Флорентийской библиотеке Медичи, а оттуда попал в Парижскую национальную библиотеку, где консерватор рукописей Гоз? химическими средствами восстановил первоначальный текст, хотя от этого пергамент и сделался так тонок, что стал просвечивать и многое из написанного сделалось не ясно.

На этом именно документе и удалось Тишендорфу создать свою первоначальную славу. Отправившись в Париж в 1840 году еще совсем молодым человеком (25 лет) он прочел (путем сравнения с обычными текстами Библии) содержание этого списка и издал его с незначительными пропусками, как (по его мнению) образчик Библии V века.

Отсюда мы видим, что почти вся репутация необъятной древности за перечисленными нами библейскими документами создана авторитетом одного и того же лица, Тишендорфа. А его авторитет, вместе с русским потомственным дворянством и всеми его заграничными чинами, орденами и командировками, наоборот, создан древностью этих самых документов. Одно поддерживало другое, как пара игральных карт прислоненных вершинами друг к другу в детском карточном домике, и домик этот держался до сих пор.

Других, более или менее полных Библий, писанных по-гречески прежними отдельными прописными буквами без разделения на слова, без придыханий, ударений и знаков препиранья в настоящее время неизвестно. Из отдельных же библейских сочинений самыми замечательными и, пожалуй, самыми древними приходится считать рукописи пророчества ?3ахария? (т. е. уже исследованной нами книги ?Помнит Грядущий?) и ?Малахия? (что по-еврейски просто значит: Послание), хранящаяся в Гейдельберге. Они написаны на листах папируса и относятся археологами к VII веку, против чего и у меня нет никаких причин возражать.

Что же касается до древности дошедших до нас еврейских ?подлинников?, то прежде всего оказывается, что никаких еврейских рукописей ранее десятого века нигде на свете нет, хотя рукописи более позднего времени, главным образом, средины XVIII века многочисленны в различных национальных книгохранилищах Европы.

...
Одним словом, куда ни ступишь в деле документальной разработки доказательств древности дошедшей до нас Библии, везде встречаешь лишь зыбкую почву, из которой не успеешь вытащить одну ногу, как уже завязнет другая.
Журнал ?Православное обозрение? № 9 за 1862 год опубликовал заметку ?Странное объявление Симонидеса о Синайском кодексе?, которая вносит некоторую ясность в этот вопрос. Приведём её полностью.

?В английской газете “Gardian” помещено странное объявление по поводу Синайского кодекса. Оно принадлежит известному Симонидесу, заподозренному палеографу и продавцу древних рукописей; он пишет, что открытый Тишендорфом кодекс принадлежит не к IV столетию, а к 1839 году по Р. Хр. и написан им самим! ?К концу 1839 года, говорит он, мой дядя, игумен монастыря св. мученика Пантелеимона на Афоне, Венедикт, желал принести достойный дар императору русскому Николаю I за его пожертвования монастырю св. мученика. Так как он не имел предмета, который мог бы считаться приличным для этой цели, то обратился за советом к иеромонаху Прокопию и русскому монаху Павлу, и они решили, что лучше всего написать Ветхий и Новый завет, по подобию старых образцов, унциалом и на пергаменте. Эта копия, вместе с отрывками из семи “мужей апостольских”; Варнавы, Ермы, Климента Римского, Игнатия, Поликарпа, Папия и Дионисия Ареопагита, в великолепном переплете назначалась для поднесения государю, посредством дружеской руки. Работу начать просили Дионисия, секретаря монастырского; но он отказался, находя её трудною для себя. Вследствие этого я решился сам приняться за неё, так как дорогой для меня дядя, по-видимому, очень желал этого. Сравнив важнейшие рукописи, сохранявшиеся на Афоне, я начал упражняться в приёмах старого монашеского письма, а мой учёный дядя сравнил копию московского издания обоих Заветов (она обнародована была знаменитыми братьями Зосимами и назначалась для греческого народа) с несколькими старыми рукописями, очистил её на основании этих последних от многих ошибок и передал мне для переписки.

При этих двух очищенных от ошибок Заветах (старая орфография была впрочем, удержана), у меня не доставало пергамента, и с позволения Венедикта я взял из монастырской библиотеки очень толстую, в старинном переплете, почти неписаную книгу, в которой пергамент сохранился замечательно хорошо и был отличной работы. Эта книга, очевидно, была приготовлена секретарём или настоятелем монастыря, за несколько столетий, для особых целей; на ней была надпись "сборник похвальных слов" и на одном листе короткая, поврежденная временем, речь. Я вынул лист, на котором находилась речь, равно и некоторые другие поврежденные, и принялся за работу. Прежде скопировал я Ветхий и Новый завет, потом послание Варнавы и первую часть пастыря Ермы.
Переписку остальных творений я отложил, так как мой пергамент весь вышел. После тяжёлой для меня утраты, смерти моего дяди, я решился отдать мою работу монастырскому переплётчику, чтобы он переплёл рукопись в доски, обтянутые кожею, так как листы я разобрал для удобства, и когда он это сделал, книга поступила в моё владение. Несколько времени спустя, по переселение моём в Константинополь, я показывал труд патриархам Анфиму и Константию и объяснил им цель его. Константий взял его к себе, осматривал, и просил меня передать библиотеке Синайского монастыря, что, и сделано мною. Вскоре за тем, по ходатайству обоих патриархов, я удостоился покровительства сиятельнейшей графини Етленг и её брата А. С. Стурдзы; но прежде чем отправиться в Одессу, я ещё раз побывал на острове Антигоне, чтобы посетить Константия и окончательно объясниться по поводу моего обещания, — передать манускрипт библиотеке Синайской горы. Но патриарх был в отсутствии и я оставил ему пакет с письмом. По своём возвращении он написал ко мне следующее письмо (письмо говорит, что рукопись принята). По получение этого письма я опять посетил патриарха, который не оставил меня своим благосклонным, отеческим советом и дал письма к Стурдзе; я возвратился в Константинополь, и оттуда в ноябре 1841 г. прибыл в Одессу.

Возвратившись в Константинополь в 1846 г., я тотчас отправился на Антигону, с целью посетить Константия и вручить ему большую связку манускриптов. Он принял меня с большою благосклонностью, и мы говорили о многом и, между прочим, о моём манускрипте; он сообщил мне, что несколько времени назад он послал его на Синай. В 1852 г. я увидел манускрипт на Синае и спросил библиотекаря, как он достался монастырю? Но он, по-видимому, ничего не знал о ходе дела, и я также ему ничего не сказал. Осматривая манускрипт, я нашёл, что он кажется гораздо древнее, чем, сколько можно было бы ожидать. Посвящение императору Николаю, стоявшее в начале книги, было вырвано. Затем я начал свои филологические исследования, так как в библиотеке было много драгоценных манускриптов, которые мне хотелось просмотреть. Между прочим нашёл я здесь пастырь Ермы, Евангелие от Матфея и спорное письмо Аристея к Филоктету; все они написаны были на египетском папирусе из первого столетия. Обо всём этом сообщил я Константию и своему духовнику Каллистрату в Александрии.
Вот короткий и ясный отчёт о кодексе Симонидеса, который профессором Тишендорфом, бывшим на Синае, взял, не знаю почему; потом отправлен в Петербург и выдан там под названием Синайского кодекса. Когда увидел я в первый раз, два года назад, Факсимиле Тишендорфа у г. Ньютона в Ливерпуле, то тотчас узнал своё произведение и сейчас же сообщил об этом г. Ньютону?.
В заключение Симонидес указывает на несколько доселе живых свидетелей, которые видели и даже перечитывали кодекс; объясняет, что поправки в тексте манускрипта принадлежат отчасти дяде Венедикту, отчасти Дионисию, который ещё раз хотел переписать кодекс, и которому принадлежат каллиграфические знаки. Он берётся доказать все это подробно. Сам Симонидес на поле и в заглавиях сделал также некоторые знаки, чтобы обозначить рукописи, из которых он брал варианты. Тишендорф же для объяснения этих знаков выдумал самые странные гипотезы. Два места манускрипта Симонидес так хорошо помнит, хотя и не видал его уже несколько лет, что это одно может уже доказать, кто автор этого манускрипта?.

В своём ответе Тишендорф, как и следовало ожидать, обвиняет Симонидеса в шарлатанстве.

(Источник информации. С благодарностью VVU)

назад начало вперед

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


ENGLISH BEGINS - FORUM WRITING (could use better English bibliographic summary) - to what extent writer, to what extent Morozov?

However, the collapse of the already few valid conclusions about the accessories IV century the oldest Bible manuscripts available in various European stacks. These conclusions were mainly German theologian Tischendorf, who was born in 1815 and died in 1874.

I will not go into a detailed examination of the quality of the work of numerous paleographic ambitious and intellectually limited researcher half dry theologian scholar, half courtier. All I have quoted here proves enough, he exaggerated, Tesha (?) their self-esteem, the antiquity of manuscripts he had brought from his trips three times by different governments to the east, or come before it in the stacks of Rome and Paris.

However, in order to give an idea of the oldest manuscripts of the Bible that have survived to our time, and how they came to us, I have to start with his third trip to the East in 1859

Procure myself a large grant from the Russian Emperor, Tischendorf, who was at that time already a professor specially arranged for him to the Department of Biblical paleography at the Faculty of Theology of the University of Leipzig, he went to Egypt and Sinai, where he found the monks of St. Catherine handwritten copy of the Bible which was first published (in 1862) as they open the document the IV century, and then seven years later presented to Emperor Alexander II, with the once and that was the hereditary Russian nobility. the document he presented to the emperor is now kept in the St. Petersburg Public Library, called Codex Sinaiticus (Codex Sinaiticus). It contains the complete collection of Old Testament and New Testament books, written on parchment close-hand, single capital letters, which, according to Tischendorf, wrote to the IX or X century AD, and then began to write lowercase letters common.

Semi-literate and illiterate monks, who gave himself to take away from the Bible to distant lands, thereby already sufficiently shown that it is not seen in the extraordinary antiquity. Considerations as Tischendorf (who had, like the monks of St. Catherine's personal interest to attribute bestowed by the Emperor records the greatest of all possible Starin), in any case does not interfere with the impartial investigator to accept for this instance, a lot later than the VI century it needed to in he could get us here disassembled prophecy belonging in content and astronomical calculations, of course, the middle of the V or VI top veka.2

2 In any case, we can only wonder what the Leipzig Protestant professor of Biblical paleography, a German Tischendorf, who had a full opportunity to present these manuscripts to his university, chose to send them to far by the time all the cultural centers of Russia, in which scientists from Europe in their ignorance of Russian language was very difficult to ride.

A careful examination of the Codex Sinaiticus in the manuscript department of the Public Library My focus primarily drew on the fact that the sheets of parchment in the document is not worn out on the lower corners, not zamusleny and not contaminated fingers, as it should have to be at the millennial use them worship Sinai monks never differ, as well as all the eastern monks, cleanliness. Make me an objection of a friend of the historian, the monks, considering this book for especially holy, always carefully washed out his fingers, starting to her reading, does not deserve any attention, because first of all, contrary to the psychology of these people who thought of piety feat never in my life not wash. In addition, the book itself shows traces is extremely careless handling with them. At that time, as the average sheet of parchment in her brand new (in the sense of unspoiled and nezamuslennosti), all initial and the last ragged and even lost. It is this kind of gets in a few years in general, every book you do not read, but often dropping to the floor, grabbing at random and eating vessels on the tire or in the press. Binding of such a book will soon breaks as ragged and faded and is now described the manuscript, and the first sheets are gradually detached and lost, while as the inner sheet under the top cover them, remain almost completely without damage.

All traces of such treatment can be seen and the Codex Sinaiticus. On take off his phototype images published are now in England, the pages seem a lot dirtier than they really are, because even the new parchment, photographed on a snow-white background glyantsovitoy papers always seem gray and dirty. But even in such pictures is not difficult to see that in this case the angles of the sheets is not frayed from thousands of readings, as it should be, if I read this book at least twice a year, in the course of more than a thousand years of its existence.

In the last eight years of my life I had with their scientific sessions deal with books that existed in the world for at least four years, and their appearance was positively later this Code, although very few of them read to me: some were not always cut .

Particularly interesting as it seemed to me in the Codex Sinaiticus the internal state of his parchment. Sheets him very thin, well dressed and that all striking retained its flexibility, they do not become brittle! This fact is very important to determine the antiquity.

When we are dealing with documents that really have lain millennium, even under the best climatic conditions, while often at the slightest touch to their lists, they break down into tiny pieces, as if we touched the ashes of the book, quietly decayed from the action of atmospheric oxygen. Such, for example, the Turin papyrus, containing a full list of ancient Egyptian kings, spilled during transportation to Europe from Egypt for 164 pieces. These and all the other very ancient documents. At Sinai the Code of parchment sheets, as I have already said quite flexible, so that with a simple study on the quality of its material it is difficult to give more than 600 years of antiquity to the present.

The character of his writing in capital letters can not be used as absolute evidence of great antiquity. After all, nothing prevents the fan from the ancient books write themselves looks quite the same letters a book and now ... And that such fans can meet and at the end of the Middle Ages, against it is hardly possible to seriously argue. In religious matters, we are constantly dealing with these remnants of antiquity. Is Jewish rabbis in the synagogues do not enjoy, and now, in the century of printing, certainly manuscripts written by ancient pattern? Does not the orthodox church books and still not used Slavic font and language? Is it in our art and architecture and now not arranged ornaments of different styles and eras of the past?

Excellent condition of the inner sheet of the Codex Sinaiticus with obvious signs of neglect him monks disrupt his cover and break outside the sheets, it is and suggests that this manuscript got them from some pious lover of ancient religious samples already at the time when Used were new samples, t. e., after the X century. He was not spoiled in a constant reading, probably just because already become estranged to read this letter and preferred new. Only from this manuscript and preserved at Sinai to the time when it found there Tischendorf.

The same can be said about the rest of the same documents in other European stacks.

Even without a special inspection of one above our astronomical and literary study of the Bible prophetic books sufficiently shows that none of these "codes" can not be assigned even to the VI century.

So, collapsing created by the same Tischendorf legend and unusual antiquities, stored in the Vatican (and made known to scholars only from 1870), a collection of Old Testament and New Testament manuscripts, the so-called Vatican Code (Codex Vaticanus).

He, too, was written in Greek on parchment to preserve its flexibility, as well as our collection of Sinai, and the same individual, but more beautiful, small capital letters, in three columns on the page. This instance, according to the monks themselves, who knows when and how to hit the Vatican. Tischendorf arrived there first exalted him, and with it the Vatican library, and himself, attributing it to the IV century, as the greatest of all possible antiquities. But more cautious researchers already before I attributed to him in the sense of the very possible starin only the V century, and now I have attributed it to the period between the VI and XII centuries, although, of course, nothing could prevent the lovers of beautiful books of the ancient sample to get a good scribe and in the XVI century, to make yourself a copy on parchment of the ancient writings of the method.

The same can be said about the rest of the few known so far, the ancient Greek parchment Bibles of the same type. Of Alexandria Code (Codex Alexandrinus), presented in 1628 King Charles I of Constantinople Patriarch Cyril Lucaris without designation of antiquity, is now kept in the British Museum in London. It contains considerable gaps, books of both Testaments, and in addition, two letters of Clement of Rome, one of which is not completed and recognized as false. The words in this collection are written as one word, but sometimes the end of a word is separated from the other dash, and the end of the phrase is often marked by a point at the top. It is considered, even by theologians, for the document not earlier than the VI century. The same type includes Beza Code and Code of Ephrem the Syrian (Codex Beza and Codex Ephraemi Syri) in Paris. The last of them, however, there are only the four Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles in parallel Greek and Latin versions, and the Old Testament books only in fragments. However, it is in many ways more interesting to others as a member of the Department of palimpsests, t. E. A second recovered. The fact is that after the XIII century, with its parchment was erased faded text of biblical books and, instead of them, were written works of Saint Ephrem. As such, the parchment it was first in the Florence library of the Medici, and from there went to the Paris National Library, where conservative manuscripts Goz? chemicals restored the original text, although this parchment and became so thin that began to shine, and much of the writing was done is not clear.

In this document it and Tischendorf managed to create its original glory. Going to Paris in 1840, still a young man (25 years old), he read (by comparison with the usual text of the Bible), the contents of this list and published it with only minor gaps as (in his opinion) the Bible example of the V century.

From this we see that almost all the reputation of the vast antiquity of our listed biblical documents established the authority of one and the same person, Tischendorf. And his authority, together with the Russian hereditary nobility and all its overseas officers, awards and trips, on the contrary, established the antiquity of most of these documents. One supports other like a pair of playing cards leaning against each other peaks in the children's house of cards, and the house stayed still.

The other, more or less complete Bibles, written in Greek, the same individual capital letters without division into words, without aspiration, accents and characters bickering is currently unknown. Of the individual as biblical writings most remarkable and, perhaps, the most ancient is necessary to consider the manuscript "3ahariya" prophecy (ie, has a book, "Remember to come" we studied..) And "Malachi" (which in Hebrew simply means: Message), stored in Heidelberg. They are written on sheets of papyrus and includes archaeologists to the VII century, and against which I have no reason to object.

As to the ancient extant Jewish "originals", the first thing is that there are no Hebrew manuscripts of the tenth century before anywhere else in the world do not, although the manuscript of a later time, mainly the middle of the XVIII century in numerous different national stacks Europe.

The most ancient Jewish manuscript consists, however, only the "Five Books of Moses" is now in the British Museum and is attributed to the IX century. Another old Jewish manuscript Bible stored in our Public Library, contains the "Isaiah" and several other prophets, and on it put its scribe in 1228. It has a punctuation of letters, in the Babylonian system, so that it is called the Babylonian Code (Codex Babylonicus Petropolitanus), although found Firkowicz not in Babylon, and in the Crimean Karaites. Its 1228 is considered to be placed on the "Seleucid era", which correspond to our 916 year. But if we recall that the Seleucids were pagan dynasty, who graduated in Babylon to exist exactly one thousand years to 916 years, and which had the Jews even less relationship than the Christian, the same right we can find it in 1228 marked and Julian account. I examined the material in this book came about its qualities to the same conclusion, which is here expressed about Codex Sinaiticus: sheets it is too flexible for unusual antiques.

Ancient just described two manuscripts of no one in the Hebrew language. The oldest Hebrew manuscripts containing the entire Old Testament Bible, refers only to 1009 AD (if not later).

That is all that can be said about the issue of the documentary setting time of occurrence of the Bible. Nowhere is there any original documents certifying the existence of at least some of its books to the eve of the Middle Ages.

But, perhaps, it is possible to prove the monotony of its translation in different languages?

And it turns out to be vain thing. We have already seen that the legend of the 70 Greek translators - legendary that is legendary and medieval rumor of a Latin translation of the Bible by Jerome, and the antiquity of the so-called Samaritan translation of the Pentateuch more than anything else, requires evidence because of the lack of any ancient Samaritan manuscripts.

Even all the quotes from the books of the Bible or commentaries attributed to medieval Talmudists and massoretam, only represent a manuscript late medieval or early Renaissance. This apocrypha, quoted and commented on before them apocrypha. Defenders of the ancient books of the Bible is often claimed that some passages of them remained from the first centuries of our era, and even before it, but these assertions always suffer from one major drawback: no one can specify where exactly these passages are stored .. And when you start to get? to the original sources of these allegations, we always find that the "surviving fragments" refers to a quote in the writings of the late middle ages, groundlessly attributed by the authors to different writers to ancient times! It is as if they tsitatory who lived a thousand years, we kept the ancient passages for us!

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

The section below is essentially a Russian Magazine working with historical material we have from the Guardian and additional sources.

In short, wherever you step into the reality of documentary evidence of the development of ancient extant Bible, everywhere you meet a shaky ground from which do not have time to pull one leg, as zavyaznet other.
The magazine "Orthodox Review" number 9 published an article "Strange classified Symonides of the Codex Sinaiticus" for 1862, which brings some clarity to this issue. We give it in full.

"In the English newspaper" Guardian "strange ad placed on the Codex Sinaiticus. It belongs to the famous Simonides suspected seller paleography and ancient manuscripts; He writes that the open Tischendorf code does not belong to the IV century, and by 1839, at the birth of Christ. and written by himself! "By the end of 1839, he says, my uncle, the abbot of the monastery of St. martyr Panteleimon on Mount Athos, Benedict, wished to bring a decent gift Russian Emperor Nicholas I for his donation to the monastery of St. martyr. Since he did not have an object, which could be considered decent for this purpose, then he turned for advice to ieromonahu Procopius and Russian monk Paul, and they have decided that it is best to write the Old and New Testament, in the likeness of old samples, uncial and on parchment . This copy, together with excerpts from the seven "apostolic men"; Barnabas, Hermas, Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Polycarp, Papias, and Dionysius the Areopagite, in a magnificent cover prescribed for presentation to the emperor by a friendly hand. Work began asked Dionysius, the Secretary of the monastery; but he refused, finding it difficult for themselves. Because of this, I decided to take myself for it, as dear to me uncle, apparently, very much like this. Comparing the most important manuscripts are stored on Athos, I started to practice receptions old monastic letters and my scientist uncle compared the copy of the Moscow edition of both Testaments (she released was the famous brothers Zosima and is assigned to the Greek people) with several old manuscripts, cleaned it on the basis of these past many mistakes and gave me for correspondence.

When these two peeled Testaments errors (old spelling has however, retained), I lacked the parchment, and with the permission of Benedict I took from the monastery library is very thick, in an old cover almost unwritten book in which the parchment remained remarkably well and was excellent work. This book was obviously cooked secretary or Abbot, for several centuries, for specific purposes; on it was written "a collection of words of praise," and on one sheet of short, damaged time speech. I took a sheet of paper on which there was a speech, even as some other damaged, and set to work. First I copied the Old and New Testament, and then the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas first part.

Correspondence others creations I put as my entire parchment left. CONSTANTA took him to her, examined, and asked me to the library of the Sinai Monastery that, and I have done. On receipt of this letter, I again visited the patriarch, who did not leave me with his benevolent, fatherly advice and gave the letter to Sturdza;

Returning to Constantinople in 1846, I immediately went to Antigonus, with magnificent Constantia and give him a big bunch of manuscripts. But he apparently did not know anything about the progress of the case, and I also did not tell him anything. Dedication to Emperor Nicholas, which stood at the beginning of the book, it was taken out. they were written on an Egyptian papyrus from the first century.
then sent to St. Petersburg and issued there under the name of Codex Sinaiticus.

In conclusion Simonides points to several hitherto living witnesses who saw and even reread the Code; Tischendorf also to explain these characters invented the most bizarre hypotheses.

===========================
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
Morozov uses Sinaiticus inauthenticity as a base

See this section on Morozov
**doverchiv.narod.ru/morozov/1-4-01.htm
Но вот, в половине XIX века появился теолог Тишендорф (1815—1874 гг. )

Отправившись сначала, в 1840 г., во Францию, в Париж, еще молодым человеком, 25 лет, он попал во Французскую национальную библиотеку, где хранитель рукописей Гозе химическими средствами восстановил на пергаментных листах, на которых кем-то были написаны ?Сочинения Ефрема Сирина?, прежний выцветший текст первоначально написанных тут глав из Библии. Тишендорф издал этот текст, отнеся его к V веку нашей эры. На каком основании? Потому что текст писан крупными заглавными буквами, тогда как уже с IX века, по его мнению, начали писать строчными. Но в таком случае, почему же не приписать этого текста именно IX веку? Тишендорф не приводит по этому предмету никаких убедительных доказательств. 1) Кроме того, это даже и доказать невозможно. На каких основаниях можно было бы подумать, что переход от первоначального крупного письма к мелкому совершился почти одновременно во всех странах, и в столицах Западной Европы, и в глухих местностях Греции и Египта, совершенно отрезанных тогда от центров культурного мира мусульманским завоеванием и не знавших, как стали писать в Риме и Париже или Константинополе по-новому?
1) О малой ценности палеографических выводов Тишендорфа я уже говорил в своей книге ?Пророки?, стр. 255—256, и не хочу о них здесь распространяться.

...

Палеография здесь наименее надежное средство, не только по вышеприведенным причинам неодновременности перехода к новой транскрипции в разных местностях, но и по легкости подделки. Конечно, трудно подделать почерк какого-либо определенного человека, Петра или Ивана, но ничего не стоит научиться писать (по какому-либо образчику) почерком определенной эпохи, включающим в себя тысячи индивидуальных почерков, в том числе и почерк подражателя. Ведь если, например, в IV веке каждый мальчик в несколько недель мог научиться писать по прописям своего времени, то почему не мог бы сделать это же и мальчик XIX века, не говоря уже о взрослом человеке? Это чистый пустяк, и думать, что кто-нибудь тут может определить по простому стилю букв подлинность документа, очень наивно.

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

What we see with Morozov is fascinating. His overall theories will usually be considered as flaky chronology theories.

However, the base of much of his theorizing is the simple fact that Sinaiticus clearly was not a 1500+ year old heavily used ms. The description given by Tischendorf is shown to be false.

Morozov runs with that to suggesting that other mss should be questioned as to age. The centerpiece is his scientific assessment of Sinaiticus, which is clearly not 4th century, or even anything close. Today, the supporters of Sinaiticus authenticity go even further, having it being handled virtually continually until about 1500. All the different notes in Greek and Arabic are assigned to a wide variety of centuries, which requires it being taken out, read, written upon and used. So why are the pages so pristine? Why did it never age in the desert heat? (The only aging is the section that was coloured.)
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
In 1932 he was named an Honorary Member of the Soviet Academy of Sciences. His scientific background is rather extensive and strong.

This post will include more on his background, and also the Fomenko reference.
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
Morozov on the Russian apparatchiks and Tischendorf

This is an update of some translation, although it can be smoothed a bit. The key point here was to get the actual words from Morozov where he talks not only about the condition of the Sinaiticus mansucript, but also about the shenanigans of the Russian authorities and Tischendorf leading to the "discovery".

There is one section that need to be determined if it is Fomenko or directly Morozov, and the prophecy aspect is new.

The notes here are also to help in our research and as a guide to our Russian researcher-translator.


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

**doverchiv.narod.ru./morozov/p-09-01.htm

Полуграмотные и безграмотные монахи, давшие увезти от себя эту Библию за тридевять земель, уже этим самым достаточно показали, что не видели в ней необыкновенной древности. Соображения же Тишендорфа (имевшего, как и монахи св. Екатерины, личный интерес приписать подаренным императору документам наибольшую из всех возможных старин), ни в каком случай не мешают беспристрастному исследователю принять для этого экземпляра время много позднее VI века, необходимое для того, чтобы в него могли войти разобранные нами здесь пророчества, принадлежащие и по содержанию и по астрономическим вычислениям, несомненно, средине V или даже началу VI века.2

Semiliterate and ignorant Sinai monks who allowed the manuscript to be taken away from them thus showed that they saw no particular ancientry in the manuscript. And Tischendorf’s considerations (who had his personal interest, as well as monks of St. Catherine, to grant more antiquity to the parchments bestowed to Russian Emperor) could not really prevent impartial investigator to date the sample as created much later than in VI century because it contained prophecies which in content and astronomical calculations belonged to the middle of V or even beginning of VI century as we discussed here. 2

Can we find the prophetic element written directly by Morozov?

2 Во всяком случае можно только удивляться, что лейпцигский протестантский профессор библейской палеографии, германец Тишендорф, имевший полную возможность подарить эти рукописи своему университету, предпочел отдать их в далекую по тому времени от всех культурных центров Россию, в которую ученым из Европы при их незнании русского языка было чрезвычайно трудно ездить.

2 In any case we can only wonder that Tischendorf being the Protestant professor of Biblical paleography in Leipzig and a German, who had a full opportunity to present these manuscripts to his university, preferred to send it to distant Russia isolated from all cultural centres at the time where European scholars had almost no opportunity to get to because they didn’t know Russian language.

And I believe the section highlighted above is Morozov (this will be checked, and if possible, a bibliographic reference given) and is very important, because it shows he understood that Tischendorf had used tricks to mask the deception, especially keeping the manuscript itself inaccessible.

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

This next section we have covered above:

Polymath N. A. Morozov, whose writings became foundation stone for all followers of alternative history and new chronology, had his own view on Tischendorf’s activities. Tischendorf brought a manuscript with Bible text from Sinai and published it in 1862 as if dated IV century. Morozov believed that Tischendorf deliberately passed the manuscript to Russian library that was far from all cultural centres and almost unreachable for European scholars at the time so they had no means to expose his plot. Morozov examined the Sinaiticus personally and saw the following:

“lower corners of the parchment sheets of the document are not frayed at all, bear no traces of greasiness and finger prints as it should have had the manuscript been in usage for centuries during church service by Sinai monks, who had never been remarkable for their cleanliness like all Eastern monks though…

At the same time while inner parchment sheets of the manuscript are utterly new (meaning with no defects and greasiness) all front and rear cover sheets are torn and even lost… The most interesting fact about the Sinaiticus is the condition of its inner parchment. The sheets are very thin, made of elaborate leather and, that is the most peculiar, are very flexible, non-fragile at all! And this circumstance is rather important for dating the manuscript.

When we are dealing with ancient documents which were kept for milleniums even in the best climate conditions we see that even the slightest touch can turn them into dust as if we touch ash of the book that invisibly smoldered affected by oxygen. Perfect state of Sinaiticus inner sheets while its torn covers shows that monks treated the manuscript with neglect suggests that the manuscript was presented to the monastery by some pious lover of old religion patterns when new patterns were already in use that is after X century. It was not damaged inside by constant reading possibly because monks became unaccustomed to such writing and preferred to read new patterns. Only due to this fact the manuscript had been preserved on Sinai till the time it was found by Tischendorf.”


Morozov N.A. Proroki. Istoriya vozniknoveniya bibleyskih prorochestv, ih literaturnoe izlozhenie i characteristiki. Moscow, 1914.

Have we been able to look directly at this book?

Учёный-энциклопедист Н. А. Морозов труды, которого стали основой для любителей альтернативной истории и новой хронологии, имел свой взгляд на деятельность Тишендорфа. Тишендорф привёз из Синая рукописный экземпляр Библии и напечатал его в 1862 году, как документ IV века. Морозов считал, что Тишендорф специально передал рукописи в русскую библиотеку, далёкую в то время от культурных центров, в которую европейским учёным было трудно попасть и разоблачить его афёру. Морозов лично осматривал Синайский кодекс и увидел [171] , что:

?листы пергамента у этого документа совсем не истрёпаны на нижних углах, не замуслены и не загрязнены пальцами, как это должно бы быть при тысячелетнем пользовании им в богослужении Синайскими монахами, никогда не отличавшимися, как и все восточные монахи, чистоплотностью. … В то время, как средние листы пергамента в ней совершенно новы (в смысле неиспорченности и незамусленности), все начальные и последнее оборваны и даже утрачены… Особенно же интересным показалось мне в Синайском кодексе внутреннее состояние его пергамента. Листы его очень тонки, прекрасно выделаны и, что всего поразительнее, сохранили свою гибкость, нисколько не сделались хрупкими! А это обстоятельство очень важно для определения древности.
Когда мы имеем дело с документами, действительно пролежавшими тысячелетие, хотя бы при самых лучших климатических условиях, тогда часто, при малейшем прикосновении к их листам, они ломаются на мельчайшие кусочки, как будто бы мы тронули пепел книги, незаметно истлевшей от действия атмосферного кислорода … Прекрасное состояние внутренних листов Синайского кодекса при явных следах небрежного обращения с ним монахов, сорвавших его переплет и оборвавших наружные листы, именно и наводит на мысль, что эта рукопись досталась им от какого-нибудь благочестивого любителя древне-религиозных образцов уже в то время, когда в употреблении были новые образцы, т. е. после X века. Его не испортили внутри постоянным чтением, вероятно, именно потому, что уже отвыкли читать такое письмо и предпочитали новое. Только от этого рукопись и сохранилась на Синае до времени, когда её нашёл там Тишендорф?.

Морозов Н. А. Пророки: История возникновения библейских пророчеств, их литературное изложение и характеристика. М. 1914.
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
did Morozov know of the Simonides claim to help produce Sinaiticus


This is an interesting question. So far, there is no indication that Morozov even know of the Simonides history when Morozov nailed the Sinaiticus inauthenticity and Tischendorf shenanigans to the wall.

We do have one Morozov book being newly checked by our Russian researcher :) and will keep you informed.


История возникновения библейских пророчеств, их литературное изложение и характеристика

Prophets. Genesis of biblical prophesies, its literary presentation and characteristics.

p. 258 has the material above

 

Steven Avery

Administrator
Maybe p. 443-444 also check p. 430

1691182728883.png


https://books.google.com/books?id=YL0IAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA443
1691182681378.png
 

Steven Avery

Administrator
Book
According to your faith may it be unto you... (The Holy Book and the Global Crisis)

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

ДОТУ – Открытый Университет Жизнеречения​

По вере вашей да будет вам…

29 марта, 2010
Главная страница / Книги
(Священная книга и глобальный кризис)

DOTU – Open Life Science University
According to your faith may it be...
March 29, 2010 Home page / Books
(The Holy Book and the Global Crisis)


Google books

The author is USSR Internal Predictor


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

Chapter 19
"Весёлые истории с Фирковичем и Тишендорфом"
Many hits as chapter 19 title in the book
Funny stories with Firkovich and Tischendorf ss69100 December 16, 2013


This article includes Simonides, also discusses Firkovich and the Leningrad Codex

( §1 ) - Dm. Yurevich. Leningrad Code and its meaning. http://www.sinai.spb.ru/ot/lencodex/lencodex.html .

.
( §2 ) - Priest Maxim Fionin. HISTORY OF THE DISCOVERY OF THE SINAI CODE.( http://www.mitropolia-spb.ru/ ).

( §3 ) - N. A. Morozov. “Prophets”, doverchiv.narod.ru .

( §4 ) - Journal "Orthodox Review" for 1862, No. 9, "Notes of the Orthodox Review", December 1862, Category: "Foreign Notes", pp. 162 - 166. rapidshare.com .

( §5 ) - Paleographer and seller of ancient manuscripts.

( §6 ) - “Tischendorf in search of the authentic New Testament”, www.biblicalstudies.ru .

( §7 ) - See Codex Sinaiticus, www.biblicalstudies.ru .
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
SHAPIRA, Dan 2015. 'On Firkowicz, Forgeries and Forging Jewish Identities'. In: Janos M. BAK, Patrick J. GEARY and Gabor KLANICZAY (eds.) Manufacturing a Past for the Present. Forgery and Authenticity in Medievalist Texts and Objects in Nineteenth-Century Europe. Leiden & Boston: Brill, 156-169.
 

Steven Avery

Administrator
Post #8 - compare to post #2


The encyclopedist scientist N. A. Morozov, whose works became the basis for lovers of alternative history and new chronology, had his own view of Tischendorf’s activities. Tischendorf brought a handwritten copy of the Bible from Sinai and published it in 1862 as a document of the 4th century. Morozov believed that Tischendorf specifically transferred the manuscripts to the Russian library, which at that time was far from cultural centers, which was difficult for European scientists to get into and expose his scam . Morozov personally examined the Codex Sinaiticus and saw ( §3 ) that:

“the sheets of parchment of this document are not at all frayed on the lower corners, not dirty or dirty with fingers, as should have been the case with thousands of years of use in worship by the Sinai monks, never distinguished, like all eastern monks, by their cleanliness. ... While the middle sheets of parchment in it are completely new (in the sense of being unspoiled and uncluttered), all the initial and last sheets are torn and even lost... What seemed especially interesting to me in the Codex Sinaiticus was the internal state of its parchment. Its sheets are very thin, beautifully crafted and, what is most amazing, they have retained their flexibility and have not become brittle at all! And this circumstance is very important for determining antiquity.

When we are dealing with documents that have actually lain for a millennium, even under the best climatic conditions, then often, at the slightest touch to their sheets, they break into the smallest pieces, as if we had touched the ashes of a book that had imperceptibly decayed from the action of atmospheric oxygen... The excellent condition of the inner sheets of the Codex Sinaiticus with obvious traces of careless handling by the monks, who tore off its binding and tore off the outer sheets, suggests that they got this manuscript from some pious lover of ancient religious samples already at the time when new samples were in use, i.e. after the 10th century. It was not spoiled internally by constant reading, probably precisely because they were already unaccustomed to reading such a letter and preferred a new one. It was only because of this that the manuscript was preserved in Sinai until the time when Tischendorf found it there.
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
Kevin McGrane

282
In 1914, when the codex was still in Russia, scientist Nikolai Alexandrovich Morozov examined it and noted that

‘The sheets are very thin, made of elaborate vellum and, what is the most peculiar, are very flexible, and not at all fragile. And this circumstance is rather important for dating the manuscript.’

In Morozov’s opinion, the parchment could not be older than 600 years; however, though Morozov was a polymath, he was not a specialist on parchment. From a purely mechanical point of view, the parchment is so exceptionally thin (typically 0.16mm thick) that its very fineness imparts flexibility even when its bulk stiffness (flexural modulus) increases with age.

Facebook
- Eureka Sept 21, 2024
https://www.facebook.com/groups/digital.eureka/posts/7398282263607872/
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Administrator
Rus' and Rome. Russian-Horde Empire on the pages of the Bible
Fomenko Anatoly Timofeevich , Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich




According to I.A. Kryvelev, “the most ancient of the surviving manuscripts of the Bible are written in Greek.”


It is useful to become more familiar with the activities of K. Tischendorf, on whose authority the dating of the oldest Greek manuscripts of the Bible from various European book depositories to the 4th century rests. N.A. Morozov, who specially studied the biography of the theologian, wrote in his work “Christ”: “Having obtained a large subsidy from the Russian emperor, Tischendorf, who was at that time already a professor at a specially organized department of biblical paleography at the theological faculty of the University of Leipzig, went to Egypt and Sinai, where he found a handwritten copy of the Bible among the monks of St. Catherine, which he first printed (in 1862) as a document of the 4th century that he had discovered, and then, seven years later, presented to Emperor Alexander II, for which he immediately received hereditary Russian nobility. The document he presented to the emperor is now kept in the St. Petersburg Public Library under the name of the Sinaiticus Codex... It contains a complete collection of Old and New Testament books, written on parchment in large handwriting, in separate capital letters, which, according to Tischendorf, were used to write until the 9th or 10th century AD, after which they began to write in lowercase ordinary letters."


Is the size of the letters really a sufficient basis for dating? And for such important cases! Incidentally, it still needs to be proven that in the 16th–18th or even 19th centuries, someone – even Tischendorf himself – could not have rewritten the Bible in capital letters. Especially since he apparently had a personal interest in this. After all, he received hereditary Russian nobility for this. N.A. Morozov wrote: “In any case, one can only be surprised that the Leipzig Protestant professor of biblical paleography, the German Tischendorf, who had every opportunity to donate these manuscripts to his university, preferred to give them to distant… Russia.”


N.A. Morozov had the opportunity to personally examine the Codex Sinaiticus. He says: “Upon careful examination of the Codex Sinaiticus in the manuscript department of the Public Library, my attention was first of all drawn to the fact that the parchment sheets of this document were not at all frayed at the lower corners, not soiled or dirty with fingers, as should have been the case with a thousand years of use.” Let us note that N.A. Morozov could notice all this only because he was lucky enough to hold this document in his hands. And according to him, for example, “on the phototype images taken from it (the Codex Sinaiticus – Auth. ), published in England, the pages seem much dirtier than they actually are.” This is strange. After all, the quality of professional photographs, even at the beginning of the 20th century, was quite high. Didn’t the publishers of the photocopy try to give the codex an “ancient” look?


“What seemed especially interesting to me,” continues N.A. Morozov, “is the internal condition of the parchment of the Codex Sinaiticus. Its sheets are very thin, beautifully crafted and, what is most amazing, have retained their flexibility and have not become fragile at all! And this circumstance is very important for determining antiquity. When we deal with documents that have really lain for a thousand years, even under the best climatic conditions, then often at the slightest touch their sheets break into tiny pieces… The excellent condition of the internal sheets of the Codex Sinaiticus with obvious traces of careless handling by monks who tore off its binding and tore off the outer sheets…”


As for the torn binding and outer sheets, this is indeed extremely strange in combination with the excellent preservation of the codex itself. After all, it was on the binding and on the outer (first and last) sheets that the manuscript's output data were indicated. Who, where and when made it, copied it, etc. And the binding itself can tell a lot about the time and place of production. Therefore, it seems that the binding and outer sheets of the Sinaiticus Codex were torn not by monks or those who used it, but, for example, by Tischendorf himself. In order to hide the obvious traces of the late origin of the manuscript. After all, we repeat, Tischendorf needed to find a "very, very ancient manuscript." Nobility, especially hereditary, was not given for free.


It is curious that Tischendorf was simply “haunted” by the biblical manuscripts allegedly from the 4th century, which became famous thanks to him. Just as he himself became very famous thanks to them. N.A. Morozov wrote: “The legend created by the same Tischendorf about the unusual antiquity of the collection of Old and New Testament manuscripts kept in the Vatican (and which became known to scholars only since 1870), the so-called Vatican Codex, is collapsing… It is also written in Greek on parchment that has retained its flexibility, like the Sinai collection, and in the same separate… small capital letters… This copy, according to the monks themselves (of the Vatican? – Author ), is unknown when and how it ended up in the Vatican. Tischendorf, who arrived there, was the first to exalt it, and with it the Vatican library, and himself, by attributing it to the 4th century as the greatest of all possible antiquities. But more cautious researchers had already assigned it to me before… only the 5th century, and now we have to attribute it to the period between the 6th and 12th centuries, although, of course, nothing could prevent a lover of beautiful books of ancient type from getting a good scribe to make such a copy on parchment for himself in the 16th century.” We will add on our own behalf: not only in the 16th, but even in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries.


As our research shows (for example, “Biblical Rus”, Moscow, 1998), even N.A. Morozov did not realize how late the complete manuscripts of the Bible that have reached us are.


Here, for example, is a manuscript of the Bible discovered in the 17th century, the so-called Codex Alexandrinus. It was presented "in 1628 to the English King Charles I by the Patriarch of Constantinople Cyril Lucaris without indicating its antiquity, and is now kept in the British Museum in London." However, as we show in this book, the Bible in its modern form was significantly edited and possibly supplemented even in the 17th century. Therefore, if the Codex Alexandrinus was really written before 1628, it could not be complete. Which is what we see! According to N.A. Morozov, "it contains, with significant gaps, the books of both Testaments and, in addition, two epistles of Clement of Rome, one of which is unfinished and is recognized as a forgery."


We see that even the set of biblical books in the 17th century had not yet been established. Different codices at that time could include different biblical books. For example, the Epistles of Clement of Rome, which are no longer included in the modern canon.


Another example. The second prophecy of Daniel, which was circulated in the 17th century copies, was excluded from the final version of the Bible. That is, in the 17th century it had not yet been finally decided whether to include it in the canon. And familiarity with it turns out to be very useful today, since it turns out that the second prophecy of the biblical Daniel is filled with medieval geographical and ethnic names. That is probably why it was not included in the canon, despite its wide popularity at that time.


In conclusion, we will tell the reader some details about the discovery of the Codex Sinaiticus. When Tischendorf came to the monastery of St. Catherine on Sinai in search of ancient manuscripts, “he noticed in the library, in the middle of the hall, in a wastepaper basket, scraps of parchment that had been thrown out and intended for the stove. Following his scholarly instinct, he took one of the sheets and recognized it as a fragment of a very ancient manuscript of the Bible; this manuscript also included the next 129 sheets that he pulled out of the basket. He managed to acquire 43 sheets.” With these sheets, he returned to Europe, and then returned here several times. In the end, the manuscript “was found in full” and was sold to the Russian Tsar for 9 thousand rubles at that time, “which was a lot at that time.” This whole story lasted 15 years (1844–1859).


There is something strange about all this. Let us remember that the manuscript seen by N.A. Morozov was in excellent condition. And yet it was allegedly treated so barbarously by the “ignorant monks.” They tore it into shreds, threw it into a dirty basket, and used it to light a stove…
 

Steven Avery

Administrator


Flexibility and Flexural Modulus

Since "palaeography" in its wider definition includes all elements of manuscript dating
I believe the following post is in our realm!

In 1914, when the Sinaiticus codex was still in St. Petersburg, Russia, scientist and polymath Nikolai Alexandrovich Morozov (1845-1946) examined Codex Sinaiticus and gave a number of reasons for doubting its provenance and antiquity, and one highlight is that he noted:

"The sheets are very thin, made of elaborate vellum and, what is the most peculiar, are very flexible, and not at all fragile. And this circumstance is rather important for dating the manuscript."

Morozov had additional interesting comments, my question today though is single-focused.

This flexibility notion was countered in a paper by a gentleman named Kevin McGrane as follows:

"In Morozov’s opinion, the parchment could not be older than 600 years; however, though Morozov was a polymath, he was not a specialist on parchment. From a purely mechanical point of view, the parchment is so exceptionally thin (typically 0.16mm thick) that its very fineness imparts flexibility even when its bulk stiffness (flexural modulus) increases with age."

Is this true? Are all fine manuscripts flexible with age? Even while getting "stiff".

Would the thinness also work negatively, increase ink-acid deterioration and cracking?

Your thoughts most welcome!

Thanks!

(And I can post also two videos of Sinaiticus so you can see the flexibility, the edges are so flexible that they are even dog-eared on page turning!)

Steven Avery
Dutchess County, NY USA
 
Top