Steven Avery
Administrator
The various accounts given by Tischendorf, and some based on his representations, can be compared one to another.
Thus anomalies can be seen.
========================================
Sevcenko in his excellent 1964 article on p. 56-57 is the first one to fairly systematically look at some elements of the "vulgate" version propagated by Tischendorf and supporters. However, he was more interested in the loan issues from 1859 on, not the authenticity and theft and fabrication issues up to 1859. Note that he only starts the Tischendorf accounts at 1860, by which time new elements, especially to the 1844 history, had begun to appear. He also is not concerned with issues like the colour and condition and Tischendorf's reluctance to connect the CFA to Sinaiticus.
========================================
Major Elements of Tischendorf Stories that came later and/or need Special Examination
condition and colour of the two mss are barely mentioned, and never in one unit
CFA called simply fragments (a large section originally of 5 full quires plus 3 leaves, Tischendorf likely disassembled them to leaves)
"a basket of old papers and parchments, eaten away by damp" (reference in CFA English Chamber's Journal from Tischendorf writings)
saved from burning idea
red cloth fabric-ation
how the heists were achieved, including the two months in Germany
silence --> what happened to the labours of the two months with the two (German?) helpers
the Simonides involvement position attacked
and more. On this thread we hope to place the appropriate writings (from Tischendorf or based on Tischendorf) that have fed the myths. By getting hold of some of the more difficult to find ones, we may be able to develop a chronology of when various fabrications arose.
========================================
Special: The Tischendorf Family Correspondence
Two sources are more general and span a longer period.
Tischendorf family correspondence
This starts with two bombshells that, until recently, were not included in the literature.
1) the 1844 leaves simply came into his posession
2) fretting about the Simonides stories while rushing en route to Sinai in January, 1859
(It should be noted that much of this has not been published, and any plans for publication may or may not be directly from the primary source material, and may or may not be complete.)
========================================
Special: German-Russian writings 1844-1870s
Russian and German writings, by, with or about Tischendorf, in the 1846-1870s period.
(any Latin writings, publications, should be identifiable.)
========================================
Uspensky Corrective
Covered separately. Uspensky has been kept away from most histories. His 1845 account essentially shows the 1844 (and ongoing) Tischendorf account to be fabrications.
Post 1870s Corrections
It should be noted that some of the most important major potential corrections came later:
William George Thorpe (1828-1903)
Bernard Janin Sage (1821-1902) - Sage helps with the Thorpe account and relates it to some cryptic elements in the Scrivener account
Nikolai Alexandrovich Morozov (1834-1946)
While others cast doubt on the veracity of elements of the Tischendorf story (e.g. James Rendell Harris), the three above looked at the very basic representations.
========================================
1840s-1870s Chronologies
========================================
1840s
Codex Frederico-Augustanus (1846)
https://books.google.com/books?id=juBwuAAACAAJ
Worldcat
Rechenschaft ?ber meine handschriftlichen Studien auf meiner wissenschaftlichen Reise 1840 bis 1844 (1845)
An account of my manuscript studies on my scientific journey from 1840 to 1844
https://books.google.com/books?id=z2FAkgAACAAJ
Worldcat
http://www.worldcat.org/title/reche...haftlichen-reise-1840-bis-1844/oclc/254622315
(mentioned by Parpulov, may have something re: CFA)
Reise in den Orient
translated into English as:
Travels in the East
==========================
Die Anfechtungen der Sinai-Bibel - (Assaults on the Sinai Bible)
http://www.purebibleforum.com/showthread.php?t=155
Memoir on the discovery and antiquity of the Codex sinaiticus -(1865)
(also French is a bit different, e.g liquor)
==========================
Tischendorf
Notitia editionis Codicis Bibliorum Sinaitici : accedit catalogus codicum nuper ex oriente Petropolin perlatorum, item Origenis Scholia in Proverbia Salomonis, partim nunc primum partim secundum atque emendatius edita cum duabus tabulis lapidi incisis (1860)
https://books.google.com/books?id=4Ac4AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA5
==============================================
resources
https://www.purebibleforum.com/index.php/threads/b.87
When Were Our Gospels Written?: An Argument by Constantine Tischendorf. With a narrative of the discovery of the Sinaitic manuscript.(1867)
Translation of 1865 - Wann wurden unsere Evangelien verfasst?
http://books.google.com/books?id=uJ0HAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA23
Origin of the Four Gospels (1867)
Translated by William Leonard Gage from the 4th German edition
https://archive.org/details/originoffourgosp00tisc
============================
Aus Dem Heiligen Lande (1862)
https://books.google.com/books?id=CWlAAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA108
https://books.google.com/books?id=TW5CAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA108
https://books.google.com/books?id=SDkBAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA108
https://archive.org/stream/ausdemheiligenl01tiscgoog#page/n125/mode/2up
was put together by Tischendorf by 1862, so he had some time to get his cover stories in order,
and he called it:
"the most accurate information about the codex"
https://books.google.com/books?id=vvgDAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA12
Despite the fact that the information on basics like colour and condition are totally sketchy.
Note: apparently he was still hiding the fact that the CFA was actually Sinaiticus, this continues to 1865,
probably because he was concerned that the colouring of the St. Petersburg section would be noticed.
Of course others had no such problem, the same issue of Christian Rememrancer as below uses that as a weak argument contra Simonides
Recent Editions of the Septuagint
https://books.google.com/books?id=rPQDAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA310
Aus Dem Heiligen Lande - On p. 112 he is discussion Simonides in 1855, possibly a meeting?
What is curious is that this 1863 review uses Aus Dem Heiligen Lande along with the 1862 Bibliorum
Christian Remembrancer (1863)
Imperial Edition of the Codex Sinaiticus - p. 374-402
https://books.google.com/books?id=rPQDAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA374
and has a number of interesting points, like sufflava in p. 377
And this in 1862 says it is using only Heiligen Lande, but that may not be accurate, (e.g. the new 1871 writing on Sinai was out.)
Chamber's Journal (1871) p. 465-467
https://books.google.com/books?id=G9cXAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA467
This has some doozies, such as:
"from the fifth to the fifteenth century, has escaped the ravages of time"
"the copyists were engaged ... Hotel des Pyramides" (normally he talks a bit more of the two Germans, and does not give the hotel)
"caligrapher of Alexandria ... 4th century"
"basket of old manuscripts, eaten away by damp - "one of these fragments...Leipsic"
eaten away by damp? The CFA is pristine. This is pretty late in the day for such a bald-faced lie. .
(And it is hardly one fragment)
.
So the question is, where was the Chamber's Journal article getting its info?
Bibliorum? Heiligen Lande? Sinaibibel? other
Die Sinaibibel: Ihre Entstehung, Herausgabe und Erwerbung (1871)
http://books.google.com/books?id=uhhKAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA1
(which has an important facsimile note on p. 3, which may relate to a note on p. 466 of Chambers)
Any help on finding the German matching the Chamber's article would be very helpful.
(Our friends in Switzerland might be able to help as well -- this can be forwarded to them.)
Note: the whole issue of Tischendorf in Rome is often masked as well. Two visits? 1843 and 1846?
============================
Frye collection - Tregelles info
http://archives.li.man.ac.uk/ead/search?operation=full&recid=gb133fry
============================
Thus anomalies can be seen.
========================================
Sevcenko in his excellent 1964 article on p. 56-57 is the first one to fairly systematically look at some elements of the "vulgate" version propagated by Tischendorf and supporters. However, he was more interested in the loan issues from 1859 on, not the authenticity and theft and fabrication issues up to 1859. Note that he only starts the Tischendorf accounts at 1860, by which time new elements, especially to the 1844 history, had begun to appear. He also is not concerned with issues like the colour and condition and Tischendorf's reluctance to connect the CFA to Sinaiticus.
========================================
Major Elements of Tischendorf Stories that came later and/or need Special Examination
condition and colour of the two mss are barely mentioned, and never in one unit
CFA called simply fragments (a large section originally of 5 full quires plus 3 leaves, Tischendorf likely disassembled them to leaves)
"a basket of old papers and parchments, eaten away by damp" (reference in CFA English Chamber's Journal from Tischendorf writings)
saved from burning idea
red cloth fabric-ation
how the heists were achieved, including the two months in Germany
silence --> what happened to the labours of the two months with the two (German?) helpers
the Simonides involvement position attacked
and more. On this thread we hope to place the appropriate writings (from Tischendorf or based on Tischendorf) that have fed the myths. By getting hold of some of the more difficult to find ones, we may be able to develop a chronology of when various fabrications arose.
========================================
Special: The Tischendorf Family Correspondence
Two sources are more general and span a longer period.
Tischendorf family correspondence
This starts with two bombshells that, until recently, were not included in the literature.
1) the 1844 leaves simply came into his posession
2) fretting about the Simonides stories while rushing en route to Sinai in January, 1859
(It should be noted that much of this has not been published, and any plans for publication may or may not be directly from the primary source material, and may or may not be complete.)
========================================
Special: German-Russian writings 1844-1870s
Russian and German writings, by, with or about Tischendorf, in the 1846-1870s period.
(any Latin writings, publications, should be identifiable.)
========================================
Uspensky Corrective
Covered separately. Uspensky has been kept away from most histories. His 1845 account essentially shows the 1844 (and ongoing) Tischendorf account to be fabrications.
Post 1870s Corrections
It should be noted that some of the most important major potential corrections came later:
William George Thorpe (1828-1903)
Bernard Janin Sage (1821-1902) - Sage helps with the Thorpe account and relates it to some cryptic elements in the Scrivener account
Nikolai Alexandrovich Morozov (1834-1946)
While others cast doubt on the veracity of elements of the Tischendorf story (e.g. James Rendell Harris), the three above looked at the very basic representations.
========================================
1840s-1870s Chronologies
========================================
1840s
Codex Frederico-Augustanus (1846)
https://books.google.com/books?id=juBwuAAACAAJ
Worldcat
Codex Friderico-Augustanus, sive, Fragmenta Veteris Testamenti : e codice graeco omnium qui in Europa supersunt facile antiquissimo in Oriente detexit, in patriam attulit (Book, 1846) [WorldCat.org]
Get this from a library! Codex Friderico-Augustanus, sive, Fragmenta Veteris Testamenti : e codice graeco omnium qui in Europa supersunt facile antiquissimo in Oriente detexit, in patriam attulit. [Constantin von Tischendorf;]
www.worldcat.org
Rechenschaft ?ber meine handschriftlichen Studien auf meiner wissenschaftlichen Reise 1840 bis 1844 (1845)
An account of my manuscript studies on my scientific journey from 1840 to 1844
https://books.google.com/books?id=z2FAkgAACAAJ
Worldcat
http://www.worldcat.org/title/reche...haftlichen-reise-1840-bis-1844/oclc/254622315
(mentioned by Parpulov, may have something re: CFA)
Reise in den Orient
translated into English as:
Travels in the East
==========================
Die Anfechtungen der Sinai-Bibel - (Assaults on the Sinai Bible)
http://www.purebibleforum.com/showthread.php?t=155
Memoir on the discovery and antiquity of the Codex sinaiticus -(1865)
(also French is a bit different, e.g liquor)
==========================
Tischendorf
Notitia editionis Codicis Bibliorum Sinaitici : accedit catalogus codicum nuper ex oriente Petropolin perlatorum, item Origenis Scholia in Proverbia Salomonis, partim nunc primum partim secundum atque emendatius edita cum duabus tabulis lapidi incisis (1860)
https://books.google.com/books?id=4Ac4AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA5
==============================================
resources
https://www.purebibleforum.com/index.php/threads/b.87
When Were Our Gospels Written?: An Argument by Constantine Tischendorf. With a narrative of the discovery of the Sinaitic manuscript.(1867)
Translation of 1865 - Wann wurden unsere Evangelien verfasst?
http://books.google.com/books?id=uJ0HAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA23
Origin of the Four Gospels (1867)
Translated by William Leonard Gage from the 4th German edition
https://archive.org/details/originoffourgosp00tisc
============================
Aus Dem Heiligen Lande (1862)
https://books.google.com/books?id=CWlAAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA108
https://books.google.com/books?id=TW5CAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA108
https://books.google.com/books?id=SDkBAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA108
https://archive.org/stream/ausdemheiligenl01tiscgoog#page/n125/mode/2up
was put together by Tischendorf by 1862, so he had some time to get his cover stories in order,
and he called it:
"the most accurate information about the codex"
https://books.google.com/books?id=vvgDAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA12
Despite the fact that the information on basics like colour and condition are totally sketchy.
Note: apparently he was still hiding the fact that the CFA was actually Sinaiticus, this continues to 1865,
probably because he was concerned that the colouring of the St. Petersburg section would be noticed.
Of course others had no such problem, the same issue of Christian Rememrancer as below uses that as a weak argument contra Simonides
Recent Editions of the Septuagint
https://books.google.com/books?id=rPQDAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA310
Aus Dem Heiligen Lande - On p. 112 he is discussion Simonides in 1855, possibly a meeting?
What is curious is that this 1863 review uses Aus Dem Heiligen Lande along with the 1862 Bibliorum
Christian Remembrancer (1863)
Imperial Edition of the Codex Sinaiticus - p. 374-402
https://books.google.com/books?id=rPQDAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA374
and has a number of interesting points, like sufflava in p. 377
And this in 1862 says it is using only Heiligen Lande, but that may not be accurate, (e.g. the new 1871 writing on Sinai was out.)
Chamber's Journal (1871) p. 465-467
https://books.google.com/books?id=G9cXAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA467
This has some doozies, such as:
"from the fifth to the fifteenth century, has escaped the ravages of time"
"the copyists were engaged ... Hotel des Pyramides" (normally he talks a bit more of the two Germans, and does not give the hotel)
"caligrapher of Alexandria ... 4th century"
"basket of old manuscripts, eaten away by damp - "one of these fragments...Leipsic"
eaten away by damp? The CFA is pristine. This is pretty late in the day for such a bald-faced lie. .
(And it is hardly one fragment)
.
So the question is, where was the Chamber's Journal article getting its info?
Bibliorum? Heiligen Lande? Sinaibibel? other
Die Sinaibibel: Ihre Entstehung, Herausgabe und Erwerbung (1871)
http://books.google.com/books?id=uhhKAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA1
(which has an important facsimile note on p. 3, which may relate to a note on p. 466 of Chambers)
Any help on finding the German matching the Chamber's article would be very helpful.
(Our friends in Switzerland might be able to help as well -- this can be forwarded to them.)
Note: the whole issue of Tischendorf in Rome is often masked as well. Two visits? 1843 and 1846?
============================
Frye collection - Tregelles info
http://archives.li.man.ac.uk/ead/search?operation=full&recid=gb133fry
============================
Last edited: