Quires - Sheets - Folia - Pages (recto and versa) - CFA 43 folia is 86 pages (5 quires plus)

Steven Avery

Each picture on the cover of the David W. Daniels book:

Is the 'World's Oldest Bible' a Fake?

PBF - where to read and purchase Is the 'World's Oldest Bible' a Fake?

is a sequential page.

Recto, verso, recto, verso.

1 Quire = 4 sheets = 8 folia = 16 pages
........................................... 8 leaves

1 Sheet = 2 folia = 4 pages

1 Folio = 2 pages - (Recto and Verso)

The exception is Barnabas, last quire, which is
1 sheet = 2 folia = 4 pages.
That said, there are 823, not 824 pictures they post.

Thus the often stated "43 leaves" of the CFA is 43 folia, not 43 sheets.
40 of the leaves are 5 quires (20 sheets).

David will be explaining about the final three in a new video.


Note that you will at times find textual writers get this wrong.

Simple example, the attempt of authenticity defense of James Snapp talked of 172 pages in the CFA that went to Leipzig in 1844, when the number is 86.

Facebook - King James Bible Debate

Quire Counting 101

Quires - Sheets - Folia - Pages (recto and versa)


The James Snapp page counting error is here:

The Text of the Gospels - Tuesday, March 21, 2017
Sinaiticus Is Not a Forgery - Setting the Stage

"In May of 1844, the textual critic Constantine Tischendorf visited Saint Catherine’s Monastery on Mount Sinai, and there, “in the middle of the great hall,” he saw “a large and wide basket full of old parchments.” According to Tischendorf, the librarian informed him that the monks had “already committed to the flames” two heaps of papers like these. Tischendorf examined the contents of the basket, and found there “a considerable number of sheets of a copy of the Old Testament in Greek,” and he was then allowed to take “a third of these parchments, or about forty-three sheets,” which, if it had not been for his intervention, “were destined for the fire.” (If one calculates that each sheet was intact, and folded in the middle, with writing on both sides, this totals 172 pages.)"

James took what Tischendorf was translated into English as having some validity, quoting from his book that was translated to English c. 1866. Big error. There were 20 sheets involved in the 5 intact quires that Tischendorf stole. And Tischendorf mangled sheets of another quire, in order to have the colophon that was a big part of his push for an early date. Tischendorf may have been trying to hide the fact that he took intact quires out of the Simoneidos manuscript. James Snapp is not always a Tischen-dupe, but here he should have done his own manuscript checking.
More discussion on the Facebook forum thread.
Last edited:

Steven Avery

yay --- error correction!

July 12, 2018

James acknowledges the error.


James Snapp said...Steven,
I see what you mean. I'll try to correct the error; Tischendorf's comment was probably mistranslated and was meant to refer to leaves rather than sheets.

Steven Avery said...Yep, mistranslation is often the source, e.g. one Russian site, the National Library has the error as well. Stanley Porter also, in his book.

Academia.edu also needs correction:
Sinaiticus and Simonides

Now, if you can only move a bit out of the textual criticism mentality to really look at the fullness of historical and material evidences, then you can consider more real issues, rather than emphasizing pseudo-issues.

Steven Avery
Last edited: