the collection of conjectural absurdities by textual scholars to "explain" the colour tampering disparity

Steven Avery

The attempts are amazing.

James Snapp
Elijah Hixson
Jacob Peterson
British Library

On this thread we will plan on coalescing the earlier attempts and adding new material

the conservation and storage games of the Sinaiticus darkening deniers

the colour photography games of the Sinaiticus darkening deniers

James Snapp on colour disparity - "As far as I can tell, they do not vary in color"

James Snapp attempts to defend authenticity of Sinaiticus

there must be another explanation for the colour and staining anomalies of the 1844 and 1859 Sinaiticus sections

why the Sinaiticus and textual and manuscript scholars do not want to touch the real issues

responses from those involved in textual criticism

British Library - and other - modern comments on research and condition and colour

reasons, excuses, confusions - circularity

Some, like Tommy Wasserman, just dance away from the question.

Note: I am not including the ones about the "phenomenally good condition", the easy-peasy page turning suppleness.


Plus these threads could all be put in one sub-forum.

Last edited:

Steven Avery

analysis threads

be sure to visit !!

are the Leipzig CFA 43 leaves white parchment?

Is the ink placed over the yellow ms. or does the ms. yellow naturally after the ink?

the colouring of Codex Simoneidos is one of the most amazing evidences of ms tampering or forgery that has ever been seen

why the colour and condition of Sinaiticus points to inauthenticity

the early 1860s references to the colouring of the manuscript

can photography anomalies account for the 1844 CFA white vs the 1859 yellow ?

discoloration of documents, stains, liquids used - forensic testing

when in the 1850s was the Sinaiticus ms coloured?

If the 1859 St. Petersburg manuscript is artifically coloured, can it still be ancient and authentic ?

why do we know that the 1859 CSP leaves were artificially coloured?

Tischendorf would have preferred to have one consistent colour manuscript

"the colour ... wholly different from that invariably found on genuine documents of the same professed age and character"

coincidences abound!!

red flags of forgery

Sinaiticus ms accepted as unbound and trimmed after 1844. Why not other tampering? colouring, Arabic notes, et

when did Tischendorf first publicly connect the 1844 CFA to the 1859 Sinaiticus?

The Tale of Two Manuscripts

academics can't handle simplicity

"over 150 years of scholarly research on this ancient codex"

what is the smoking gun?

CSP image specialist skills

CSP encouragements to ongoing study

Tischendorf descriptions show awareness of CFA-CSP colour anomaly

white parchment

no testing of materials of ink! .. oops

notes on the condition of ancient parchment mss

manuscript photo gallery

no colour photos available until CSP 2009

physical reexamination
four types
Last edited: