Steven Avery
Administrator
Is the three crosses note mentioned in German?
the colophon debate with Hilgenfeld and Tischendorf - and Fabiano
- Thread starter Steven Avery
- Start date
Steven Avery
Administrator
wip correspondence - show about leaves destroyed too
David Parker
Dirk Jongkind
David Parker
Dirk Jongkind
Last edited:
Steven Avery
Administrator
Adolf Bernhard Christoph Hilgenfeld (1823-1907) '
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Bernhard_Christoph_Hilgenfeld
Constantin Tischendorf in seiner fünfundzwanzigjährigen schriftstellerischen Wirksamkeit: literatur-historische Skizze (1862)
Voldebing
https://books.google.com/books?id=WDk6AAAAcAAJ&pg=PA45
Zeitschrift für wissenschaftliche Theologie (1863)
https://archive.org/details/zeitschriftfrwi12unkngoog
Die Anfechtungen der Sinai-Bibel - The Challenges to the Sinai Bible (1863)
http://books.google.com/books?id=577FhUUliFQC
Zeitschrift für wissenschaftliche Theologie (1864)
there may be a Voume 1 and 2 per Bernhard Weiss
https://books.google.com/books?id=GKpPAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA211
p. 211-219
Methodist Quarterly Review (1864)
https://books.google.com/books?id=TCdGAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA672
Journal of Sacred Literature (1864)
The Age of the Sinaitic Codex
Reprinted from the Clerical Journal - footnote by JSL editor
http://books.google.com/books?id=onotAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA497
Hilgenfeld in Zeitschrift … Journal for Scientific Theology
Journal of Sacred Literature (1865)
https://books.google.com/books?id=6PgDAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA109
Theological Review (1864)
Notes on the Codex Sinaiticus
http://books.google.com/books?id=QUAEAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA218
American Presbyterian (1866)
https://books.google.com/books?id=-mvUAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA192
Gartdhausen (1879) (1911)
https://archive.org/stream/griechischepaleo02gard#page/126/mode/2up
Gregory (1884) Latin with Abbot
https://books.google.com/books?id=6fi4wK1_Z4sC&pg=PA347
Bernhard Weiss (1888)
https://books.google.com/books?id=5PAUAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA410
3 The parts of the 01«1 Testament discovered in 1844 were published at Leipzig as tho Cod. Fridcrico-Augustan us, in 18-10. Besides the Old and New Testaments the Cod. Sinait. contains the Epistle of Barnabas and part of the Shepherd of Hermas. Comp. Tischeudorf, Sotitia edit. Cod. bill. Sinait., Lips. 1860. Die Sinnibibcl, Lcipz. 1871. As to the value of the MS. couip. K. Wieseler Theol Stud. u. Krit., 1861, 64,,Hilgenfeld, who puts it into the sixth century, in his Zeittchr.f. tcu*. Theol, 1864, 1, and against him Tischendorf in the same journal 1804,,2. Comp, also Phil. Buttmann in the same, 1864, 00, Scrivener, A Full,Collation of the Cod. Sin., London, 1804, 07. The MS. is iu Petersburg.
Gregory (1907)
http://books.google.com/books?id=guU2AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA339
p. 338-339
Stanley Porter .. Garthausen, no Hilgenfeld
https://books.google.com/books?id=QhCdBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA42
Scribes, Script, and Books: The Book Arts from Antiquity to the Renaissance (2010)
The Greek and.Hellenistic Book
Leila Arvin
https://books.google.com/books?id=4q1MHDoFVwkC&pg=PA154
“The proofreader left a note”
Hilgenfeld mentions these two Tischendorf
1856
https://books.google.com/books?id=Sm4miSmqzf4C&pg=PR76
1863
https://books.google.com/books?id=7odU1Rf97VwC&pg=PR26
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Bernhard_Christoph_Hilgenfeld
Constantin Tischendorf in seiner fünfundzwanzigjährigen schriftstellerischen Wirksamkeit: literatur-historische Skizze (1862)
Voldebing
https://books.google.com/books?id=WDk6AAAAcAAJ&pg=PA45
Zeitschrift für wissenschaftliche Theologie (1863)
https://archive.org/details/zeitschriftfrwi12unkngoog
Die Anfechtungen der Sinai-Bibel - The Challenges to the Sinai Bible (1863)
http://books.google.com/books?id=577FhUUliFQC
Zeitschrift für wissenschaftliche Theologie (1864)
there may be a Voume 1 and 2 per Bernhard Weiss
https://books.google.com/books?id=GKpPAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA211
p. 211-219
Methodist Quarterly Review (1864)
https://books.google.com/books?id=TCdGAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA672
Journal of Sacred Literature (1864)
The Age of the Sinaitic Codex
Reprinted from the Clerical Journal - footnote by JSL editor
http://books.google.com/books?id=onotAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA497
Hilgenfeld in Zeitschrift … Journal for Scientific Theology
Journal of Sacred Literature (1865)
https://books.google.com/books?id=6PgDAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA109
Theological Review (1864)
Notes on the Codex Sinaiticus
http://books.google.com/books?id=QUAEAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA218
American Presbyterian (1866)
https://books.google.com/books?id=-mvUAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA192
Gartdhausen (1879) (1911)
https://archive.org/stream/griechischepaleo02gard#page/126/mode/2up
Gregory (1884) Latin with Abbot
https://books.google.com/books?id=6fi4wK1_Z4sC&pg=PA347
Bernhard Weiss (1888)
https://books.google.com/books?id=5PAUAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA410
3 The parts of the 01«1 Testament discovered in 1844 were published at Leipzig as tho Cod. Fridcrico-Augustan us, in 18-10. Besides the Old and New Testaments the Cod. Sinait. contains the Epistle of Barnabas and part of the Shepherd of Hermas. Comp. Tischeudorf, Sotitia edit. Cod. bill. Sinait., Lips. 1860. Die Sinnibibcl, Lcipz. 1871. As to the value of the MS. couip. K. Wieseler Theol Stud. u. Krit., 1861, 64,,Hilgenfeld, who puts it into the sixth century, in his Zeittchr.f. tcu*. Theol, 1864, 1, and against him Tischendorf in the same journal 1804,,2. Comp, also Phil. Buttmann in the same, 1864, 00, Scrivener, A Full,Collation of the Cod. Sin., London, 1804, 07. The MS. is iu Petersburg.
Gregory (1907)
http://books.google.com/books?id=guU2AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA339
p. 338-339
Stanley Porter .. Garthausen, no Hilgenfeld
https://books.google.com/books?id=QhCdBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA42
Scribes, Script, and Books: The Book Arts from Antiquity to the Renaissance (2010)
The Greek and.Hellenistic Book
Leila Arvin
https://books.google.com/books?id=4q1MHDoFVwkC&pg=PA154
“The proofreader left a note”
Hilgenfeld mentions these two Tischendorf
1856
https://books.google.com/books?id=Sm4miSmqzf4C&pg=PR76
1863
https://books.google.com/books?id=7odU1Rf97VwC&pg=PR26
Last edited:
Steven Avery
Administrator
Fabiani and Cozzi like Hilgenfeld, answered by Skeat, Milne
Last edited:
Steven Avery
Administrator
Tischendorf in 1860 and later
https://books.google.com/books?id=DpI4EOWye7MC&pg=RA5-PA3
Quarto vero sacculo dum adscribimus biblia Sinaitica, quaeritur an forte erroris nos cunvincant quae libris Esdrae et Estherae posteriore manu suhscripta sunt. Hare enim qui scripsit testator utrumque ilium librum in codice Sinaitico ad exemplar collatum esse „antiquissimum,“ ab ipso Pamphilo captivo recognitum.1 At minime contraria ista sunt nostrae de actate codicis sententiae. Spectant enim ad ea quae a ca et cb correctoribus nostris ineunte fere saeculo septimo in illis libris mutata sunt. lllo tempore codex Sinaiticus, qui etiamnum, i. e. duodecim saeculis post, maximam partem pulcherrimus est, haud dubie satis novus videbatur. Pamphili vero exemplar a manu eius certissimjm venerandae vetustatis indicium habebat.
But in the fourth bag, when we ascribe to the Sinaitic Bible, we ask whether perhaps they convince us of error which were written by a later hand in the books of Esdras and Esther. For Hare, who wrote as a witness, said that both of those books in the Sinaitic codex were "the most ancient," reviewed by the captive Pamphilus himself. For they look to those things which were changed in those books by our correctors ca and cb about the beginning of the seventh century. At that time the codex Sinaiticus, which still exists, i. e. twelve centuries later, for the most part it is very beautiful, and no doubt it seemed quite new. But the copy of Pamphili, by his hand, had certain indications of venerable antiquity.
Praterea exemplar illud minime tum videtur
https://books.google.com/books?id=DpI4EOWye7MC&pg=RA5-PA3
Quarto vero sacculo dum adscribimus biblia Sinaitica, quaeritur an forte erroris nos cunvincant quae libris Esdrae et Estherae posteriore manu suhscripta sunt. Hare enim qui scripsit testator utrumque ilium librum in codice Sinaitico ad exemplar collatum esse „antiquissimum,“ ab ipso Pamphilo captivo recognitum.1 At minime contraria ista sunt nostrae de actate codicis sententiae. Spectant enim ad ea quae a ca et cb correctoribus nostris ineunte fere saeculo septimo in illis libris mutata sunt. lllo tempore codex Sinaiticus, qui etiamnum, i. e. duodecim saeculis post, maximam partem pulcherrimus est, haud dubie satis novus videbatur. Pamphili vero exemplar a manu eius certissimjm venerandae vetustatis indicium habebat.
But in the fourth bag, when we ascribe to the Sinaitic Bible, we ask whether perhaps they convince us of error which were written by a later hand in the books of Esdras and Esther. For Hare, who wrote as a witness, said that both of those books in the Sinaitic codex were "the most ancient," reviewed by the captive Pamphilus himself. For they look to those things which were changed in those books by our correctors ca and cb about the beginning of the seventh century. At that time the codex Sinaiticus, which still exists, i. e. twelve centuries later, for the most part it is very beautiful, and no doubt it seemed quite new. But the copy of Pamphili, by his hand, had certain indications of venerable antiquity.
Praterea exemplar illud minime tum videtur
Last edited: