not even photographs till Kirsopp Lake - just the Tischendorf book - helped push the fake consensus

[Steven Avery]

CARM
https://forums.carm.org/threads/cod...simonides-timeline.13239/page-22#post-1406844

You are going on and on about how I should search out photographs from the 1840-1860s (the 1862 book by Tischendorf was done without photographs, that is in Lake 1922, noting the primitive nature of photography at that time)

This is in 1911 and 1922.

Codex Sinaiticus Petropolitanus The New Testament 1911
Kirsopp Lake
https://archive.org/details/codexsinaiticus_201907/page/n3/mode/1up

The Tsar was pleased to accept the present brought by Tischendorf; in November, 1859, the MS. was exhibited for a fortnight, and was then taken to Leipzig, in order that Tischendorf might issue a facsimile edition in accordance with the Tsar’s orders. Photography was not in those days sufficiently advanced to enable it to be employed, though Tischendorf considered its possibility, but special type was cut to imitate the MS., and the result may fairly claim to be the most perfect facsimile edition which was ever published in the pre-photographic period.

So the Tischendorf con of hiding the manuscript sections away, very difficult to access, the two sections far apart, and pointing to his books did not even offer photographs!

Fake palaeography, used to manufacture the faux "consensus".

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

A comparison of the 1840's-1850's-1860's first photographs taken of the manuscript for Tischendorf's first facsimiles, with Kirsopp Lake's photos etc etc etc...
Would be very interesting for all parties involved!
I'm curious about Avery's near silence on his and the S.A.R.T. teams historical efforts to obtain access to these images in some shape or form...
I would have thought this would have been one of the first ports of call, especially in a controversy over the CSP's photography!
Hmmm

Were there photographs used for the 1846, 1860 and 1862 books?
An interesting question.

Now answered.

 

[Steven Avery]

See PBF with blotches examples

Definition of Facsimile: What is a Facsimile Edition?
https://www.facsimilefinder.com/articles/facsimile-definition-what-is-facsimile-edition/

Notes & Queries
https://books.google.com/books?id=vmI7AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA441
collotype reproduction
246 full-size collotype plates
https://books.google.com/books?id=vmI7AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA441

Thus Hendrickson is called a facsimile edition.
Also Vaticanus 1209
Any book of photographs of a manuscript.

“Reproduced in facsimile from photographs…”
TNC chops quote, or uses quote that has the word negatives
“From negatives taken by Professor and Mrs. Lake in Petrograd and Leipzig , before the war”

see McGrane and Sinaiticus.net. Contra Lake above, there photographs, and they were tweaked
See CARM and Facebook discussions.

London Review of Books (2009)
Peter Campbell
https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v31/n14/peter-campbell/at-the-british-library
After its removal from Mount Sinai, technology paid it the tribute of state of the art facsimiles. In the 19th century fonts were specially cut to match the original characters, in the 20th reproductions of photographs of the pages were printed in collotype – then the most prestigious of printing processes. The digitised codex is the 21st century’s best shot.

The Codex Sinaiticus (1977)
T. S. Pattie
https://www.jstor.org/stable/42554012
He prepared a luxurious edition complete with scholarly commentary, in 'facsimile type' of the 346^ leaves, published in 1862 at Russian expense. The 43 leaves at Leipzig he had already published. Both parts were pubhshed in 1911 in collotype facsimile by Kirsopp and Helen Lake

Digitising the Hand-Written Bible: The Codex Sinaiticus, its History and Modern Presentation
Dr. Ekkehard Henschke
https://www.academia.edu/70130866/Digitising_the_Hand_Written_Bible_The_Codex_Sinaiticus_its_History_and_Modern_Presentation