Do we have conclusive proof that Contantine Simonides was involved in the production of the manuscript that became Codex Siniaticus? ... This catalog also confirms the very existence of Kallinikos, who wrote a letter in 1862 from Alexandria, Egypt, declaring that Simonides himself was the scribe of the manuscript which was later taken by Tischendorf from the Sinai monestary. Kallinikos not only accused Tischendorf of stealing part of the manuscript ("perusing and reperusing it frequently, abstracted secretly a small portion of it"), but also of applying lemon juice to the remainder of the manuscript to cause it to look older ("to weaken the freshness of the letters").
Greetings, Red Sky and Vigilant Citizens!
Good thread and great question quoted.
There are interconnected facts that prove that the ms. was subject to tampering in the 1850s, which cries out “fake, modern, non-ancient, 1800s.” And we can apply historical forensics to analyze what happened with the tampering of the manuscript.
We can see today that every one of the 86 pages from Leipzig 1844 (Tischendorf heisted 86 pages, five intact quires = 80 pages, and part of a sixth) is a pristine white parchment, contra normal parchment science. Oxidation, gelatinization, brittleness, is the norm. Also Leipzig has no grime, no streaks and is very supple. For the colour, see, e.g. the composite picture that is on the cover of the book by David W. Daniels. Also look at the individual pages. (Easy to do, and that is what really got David involved.!)
The British section from 1859 St. Petersburg is also in “phenomenally good condition” (Helen Shenton, British Library) as you can see in the BBC video, the Beauty of Books.Easy-peasy page turning. However the 1859 pages, unlike the 1844 Leipzig, are yellowish, streaky and stained!
So already we have a phenomenal circumstantial evidence of the BEFORE 1844 and the AFTER 1859 of an unworn manuscript, one which was subject to the oldest fakery trick in the book — tea, and/or lemon juice, coffee, herbs, applied to parchment to give the appearance of age. The whole thing was a hack job, quite transparent. And it is quite unusual, like a gift to the researcher. When is an assessor, or an authenticity or fakery researcher, ever presented with such an amazing, right before your eyes, smoking gun evidence?!
Now, here is the historical forensics kicker and ultra-clincher.
In the years 1862-1864, it was reported in writing in the English journals, by Kallinikos and Simonides, that exactly this tampering had been observed in Sinai in the 1850s. In the interim between between the 1844 Leipzig part A heist and the St. Petersburg 1859 part B “loan”. The section that went out in 1859 was coloured by Tischendorf! Lemon juice and herbs specifically mentioned.
How could Kallinikos know? How could he dare make such an amazing accusation?He was supposed to know nothing about the ms, according to the authenticity defenders. Today, with the ms. digitally reunited, we can see that what he said is 100% true!
The answer is simple. He waz dere. Kallinikos saw it in real-time.
There is so much more, but on an excellent forum like this one, I felt my responsibility to give a bit of the historical forensics backdrop!
Dutchess County, NY
Sinaiticus Authenticity Research Team - The SART team