tischendorf and the codex sinaiticus (art)
TRANSCRIPT
7/30/2019 Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus (Art)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/tischendorf-and-the-codex-sinaiticus-art 1/16
G R E E K O R T H O D O X T H E O L O G I C A L R E V I E W 53:1-4 2008
Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticusi
The Saga Continues*
MICHAEL D . PETERSON
Libraries around the world share the problem of how tosafeguard their treasures from an ever-growing number of
threats. In the case of the library of St. C athe rine's M onastery
at Mount Sinai, in the mid-nineteenth century the most in-
sidious threat was political intrigue. Because of international
political machinations, St. Catherine's irretrievably lost one
of its most valuable treasures, the Codex Sinaiticus. It is a
case whose ramifications are heatedly discussed to this day.Lobegott Friedrich Constantin Tischendorf (1815-1874),
commonly known as Constantin von Tischendorf (the "von"
was added later), was the principal in the affair. He was a
gifted and ambitious New Testament scholar of German
Lutheran persuasion, who pitted himself against David
Friedrich Strauss (1808-1874), Ferdinand Christian Baur
(1792-186 0), and the T ubingen School - all at their height
of infiuence in the 184O's. Tischendorf believed that the one
effective antidote to Strauss and to T ubingen and its impiou s
ilk was to compile and publish a critical edition of the New
Testament based on the most pristine resources. Therefore,
after having surveyed the great Bible manuscripts located
throughout Europe, he set out in 1844 to uncover the forgot-
ten manuscripts of the libraries of the Middle East. His itin-
* This article was initially published in The Church and the Library:
7/30/2019 Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus (Art)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/tischendorf-and-the-codex-sinaiticus-art 2/16
126 GOTR 53:1-4 2008
erary included Alexandria, Cairo, Sinai, Jerusalem, Patmos,
Constantinople, and Athens.
It was in the Monastery of St. Catherine's, Sinai thatTischendorf stumbled upon tbe document tbat was to estab-
lisb bis fame in tbe world of biblical scbolarsbip. He de-
scribed the discovery in his popular account:
It was at the foot of Mount Sinai, in the Convent of St.
Catherine, that I discovered the pearl of all my researches.
In visiting the library of the monastery, in the month of
May, 1844, I perceived in the middle of the great hall alarge and wide basket full of old parchments; and the
librarian [Kyrillos], who was a man of information, told
me that two heaps of papers like these, mouldered by time ,
had been already committed to the fiâmes. What was my
surprise to find amid this heap of papers a considerable
number of sheets of a copy of the Old Testament in Greek,
which seemed to me to be one of the most ancient that I
had ever seen. The authorities of the convent allowed meto possess myself of a third of these parchments, or about
forty-three shee ts, all the more readily as they w ere destined
for the fire. But I could not get them to yield up possession
of the rem ainde r The too lively satisfaction which 1 had
displayed had aroused their suspicions as to the value of
this manuscript. I transcribed a page of the text of Isaiah
and Jeremiah, and enjoined on the monks to take religious
care of all such remains which might fall in their
What Tischendorf brougbt out of Sinai was a collec-
tion of 43 leaves from a fourtb century uncial codex of the
Septuagint version of the Old Testament. The text contains
part of I Chronicles and Jeremiah, and all of Nehemiah and
Esther. When he returned to Saxony he refused to disclose
the provenance of the fragments for fear, he claimed, that
others might snatch up the remaining parts of tbe codex. He
7/30/2019 Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus (Art)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/tischendorf-and-the-codex-sinaiticus-art 3/16
Peterson: Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus 127
he published the texts in 1846 as a deluxe facsimile edi-
tion. However exemplary Tischendorf's story may seem,
doubts still remain. His account of rescuing the fragments
from the flames has always elicited strong support for their
removal from St. Catherine's, but the story may be con-
trived. According to J.K, Elliott in Codex Sinaiticus and the
Simonides Affair.
One detail that was given about the finding of Codex
Frederico-Augustanus was that it was found in a rubbish
basket. A letter published in The Guardian on 27 May 1863from the Revd. J. Silvester Davies one-time chaplain to the
British Consul in Alexandria ... quotes a monk of Sinai w ho
... stated that according to the librarian of the monastery
the whole of Codex Sinaiticus had been in the library for
many years and was marked in the ancient catalogues ...
Is it likely, [scholars] wondered, that a manuscript known
in the library catalogue would have been jettisoned in the
rubbish basket.-^
Indeed, the 43 parchment leaves were in suspiciously good
condition for something consigned to the trash.-*
In 1853, Tischendorf retumed to St. Catherine's but was
unable to gain access to the fragments he had left behind. He
retumed a third time in late January 1859, under the patron-
age of Tsar Alexander II of Russia. This time he was success-
ful beyond expectation, as he recounted in Codex Sinaiticus:
After having devoted a few days in turning over the
manuscripts of the convent, not without alighting here
and there on some precious parchment or other, 1 told
my Bedouins, on the 4* February, to hold themselves in
readiness to set out with their dromedaries for Cairo on the
7*, when an entirely fortuitous circumstance carried me at
once to the goal of all my desires. On the afternoon of thisday I was taking a walk with the steward of the convent
7/30/2019 Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus (Art)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/tischendorf-and-the-codex-sinaiticus-art 4/16
128 G O TR 53:1-4 2008
former subject of conversation, he said: "And I, too, have
read a Septuagint" - i.e. a copy of the Greek translation
made by the Seventy. And so saying, he took down fromthe comer of the room a bulky kind of volume, wrapped
in a red cloth, and laid it before me. I unrolled the cover,
and discovered, to my great surprise, not only those very
fragments which, fifteen years before, I had taken out of
the basket, but also other parts of the Old Testament, the
New Testament complete, and, in addition, the Epistle of
Barnabas and a part of the Pastor of Hermas. Full of joy,
which this time 1 had the self-command to conceal fromthe steward and the rest of the community, I asked, as if in
a careless way, for permission to take the manuscript into
my sleeping chamber to look over it more at leisure. There
by myself I could give way to the transport of joy which
1 felt. I knew that I held in my hand the most precious
Biblical treasure in existence - a docum ent whose age and
importance exceeded that of all the m anuscripts which I had
ever examined during twenty years' study of the subject."
Tischendorf asked permission to take the codex to St .
Cather ine 's s is ter monastery in Cairo where he could get
assistance copying the text. The sacristan Vitalios refused.
"Tischendorf therefore now embarked on tbe remarkable
piece of duplicity wbicb was to occupy bim for tbe next de-
cade, which involved the careful suppression of facts and
the systematic denigrat ion of the monks of Mount Sinai ."^
As a last resort , Tischendorf requested to make an appeal to
the abbot , wbo was in Cairo on bis way to Constant inople
to participate in tbe election of a new archbisbop. Tbe elec-
tion was a sensitive issue because tbe Patriarcb of Jerusalem
opposed Cyri l , tbe candidate favored by tbe abbots . I t was
an ideal polit ical opportunity for Tischendorf 's purposes,
given that be bad tbe support of tbe influential RussianOrtbo dox ruler, A lexand er I I . Tiscbendorf, accom panied
7/30/2019 Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus (Art)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/tischendorf-and-the-codex-sinaiticus-art 5/16
Peterson: T ischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus 129
Cairo and was able to persuade the gathered abbots to allow
him to copy the manuscript in Cairo. Sheik Nasser rushed
back to St, Catherine's and in a remarkable twelve days wasback with the codex. Tischendorf was allowed to take eight
leaves at a time to his Cairo quarters, where he had the as-
sistance of two G erman nationals, a doctor and a pharm acist,
who had knowledge of Biblical Greek. It took the trio two
months, through M arch and April, to copy and proofread the
transcription. There were 110,000 lines from the original
scribes, to which Tischendorf added 12,000 lines made bysubsequent correctors.
Once the project was completed, he departed Cairo until
the end of July, at which time he redoubled his efforts to
obtain the codex on behalf of the Russian Tsar. Tischendorf
came up with the proposal that the Tsar would support the
cause of Cyril, the popular candidate for archbishop, if in
retum the monks deeded the codex to the Russians. Theydid not agree to the plan but did allow him to borrow the
codex for a period of time to produce a facsimile edition at
St. Petersburg, projected for publication by autumn 1862, in
time for the 1,000-year anniversary of the Russian monar-
chy. Through much trial and perseverance Tischendorf man-
aged to com plete the project jus t after Easter 1862. The final
publication was an exact reproduction of the original and
consisted of 1,232 copies of four folio volum es each, the first
copies of which were presented to the Tsar and Tsarina at
Tsarkoe-Selo in early October 1862. The original codex was
exhibited in the Imperial Public Library in St. Petersburg.
Through the murkiness of political waters the codex re-
mained in St, Petersburg and became known as Codex
Sinaiticus Petropolitanus after the title of Tischendorf's fac-
simile edition. The Russian govemment finally resolved theloan quandary in 1869 by regularizing the status to dona-
7/30/2019 Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus (Art)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/tischendorf-and-the-codex-sinaiticus-art 6/16
130 GOTR 53:1-4 2008
It is still there. So just how did a treasure on loan from St.
Catherine's to the Tsar of Russia through the agency of
Constantine Tischendorf end up as a permanent possessionof the British Museum? In particular, by what authority did
Tischendorf present the codex to the Tsar when the codex
was not his to present? Before attempting to resolve some
of these very complex issues, it might be helpful to consider
a certain blind spot in Tischendorf's character that could
prompt this unusual d ilemm a.
At this juncture it would be remiss not to interject a fewwords about Tischendorf's attitudes, shared by many of
his scholarly contemporaries, toward non-Western societ-
ies. Several writers have commented on his caustic opin-
ion of Middle Eastem Orthodox Christians. Specifically,
James Bentley had some very sobering observations on
Tischendorf's feelings about the monks of St. Catherine's:
Religious life on Mount Sinai, said Tischendorf, "hasdeteriorated into a daily burden of prescribed and
ungraciously observed devotions, and to a meager bill of
fare according to detailed rules for fast days." Soon he
was attributing to the monks positive hypocrisy over their
religious way of life. The awkward truth is that this great
German Christian scholar soon grew to hate the monks
of Mount Sinai to an astonishing degree. Only eight days
after he had arrived at the monastery of St. Catherine, hewrote to Angelika, "Oh, these monks! If I had the military,
strength and power, I should be doing a good deed if 1 threw
this rabble over the walls. It is sad to see how man can
carry his baseness and wretchedness into the lofty grandeur
of this mountain world." He continually described them as
"ignorant." The Greek servant they provided for him was
a "half-witted fellow." Their library was "a poor place, to
which no-one in the monastery paid much attention." Thenew room in which they kept some of their books and
7/30/2019 Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus (Art)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/tischendorf-and-the-codex-sinaiticus-art 7/16
Peterson: Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus 131
from them their greatest treasure.^
OnApril 16 ,19 93 , the German B iblical scholar Kurt Alanddelivered a pub lic lecture to defend Tischendorf's reputation
from people like Bentley. In fact, Aland was particularly sen-
sitive to criticisms leveled at Tischendorf by Ihor Sevcenko
in his "New D ocuments on Constantine Tischendorf and the
Codex Sinaiticus" (1964). Although he had originally intend-
ed to talk about the course of New Testament textual criti-
cism in the 150 years since the appearance of Tischendorf's
first edition of the Greek New Testament, he altered his ap-
proach after coming across transcriptions of Tischendorf's
letters to his wife from the period 1859-1869. In Aland's
opinion, these letters prove beyond a doubt that Tischendorf
had acted honorably in the Sinaiticus affair. Some critics -
among them J.N. Birdsall, J.K. Elliott, F. Neirynck - find
Aland's argument on Tischendorf's behalf to be reasonably
convincing. In general, however, most have reserved theirjudgm ent about Aland's conclusions. Birdsall stated:
No final udgment can be given in the reading of this lecturealone. In addition to the other materials, the whole corpusof these recently discovered letters [from Tischendorf tohis spouse] will need to be assessed. The lecturer speaksof "coming upon" them {vorfand) in a typewritten copy.
Of the originals and any previous history, such as even theprovenance of the modern copy, he says nothing in thislecture. A preliminary impression alone can be registered... I bring away the conviction that Aland has made at leasta prima facie case for Tischendorf's defence [sic]. Yet,without further access to Sevcenko's indictment, or themany other relevant documents at first- and second-hand, itwould be premature to register any final assessment of thisdelicate and sensitive historical issue.^
Then again, even the combative and defensive tone of
7/30/2019 Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus (Art)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/tischendorf-and-the-codex-sinaiticus-art 8/16
132 GOTR 53:1-4 2008
"sondern auch das negative bei T ischendorfs Gegnern, "
"dass seine Sevcenko Argumentation sich als von falschen
Vorausetzungen ausgehend wie sein Resultat als irrig erwi-esen haben" u.s.w.) Aland wants to wrap up the Sinaiticus
controversy once and for all in Tischendorf's favor. To
that end, he concluded his defense with a quote from
Tischendorf's unwavering supporter, C.R. Gregory (1846 -
1917): "It gives me great pleasure to be able to say that in no
instance (not just in the case of the Codex Sinaiticus) have I
found any indication that Tischendorf behaved dishonestly."Gregory then goes on to call on all Christian scholars to give
Tischendorf his proper exalted place, and to put a stop to all
those who treat him with mocking, contempt, and slander -
to which Aland responds Amen.*
Sevcenko's argument in "New Documents on Constantine
Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus" is more dispassion-
ate, less single-minded, and better documented. The occa-sion for the essay is the rediscovery, by Sevcenko in 1960,
of several documents at St. Catherine's that contradict what
Sevcenko refers to as the "vu lgate" or conventional version
of the Sinaiticus story as presented by Tischendorf's sup-
porters. "The docum ents about to be presented in this article
indicate, to my satisfaction at least, that the vulgate story
offers a too schematic and partly incorrect version of the
events and that the conventional image painted in that story
is not a portrait of the real Tisc hendorf'"
The most important item he uncovered is Tischendorf's
holograph note, written on September 28, 1859, in Greek,
promising to return the codex to St. Catherine 's. It is a docu-
ment that Tischendorf conveniently omitted from his version
of the story:
I the undersigned, Constantin von Tischendorf, now on
7/30/2019 Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus (Art)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/tischendorf-and-the-codex-sinaiticus-art 9/16
Peterson: Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus 133
the letter of His Excellency [the Russian] Ambassador [to
Turkey] Lobanov, has delivered to me as a loan an ancient
manuscript of both Testaments, being the property of theaforesaid monastery and containing 346 folia and a small
fragment. These 1 shall take with me to St. Petersburg in
order that I may co llate the original at the time of publication
of the manuscript.
This manuscript has been entrusted to me under the
conditions stipulated in the aforementioned letter of
Mr.Lobanov, dated September 10, 1859, Num ber 510. Thismanuscript I promise to return, undamaged and in a good
state of preservation, to the Holy Confraternity of Mount
Sinai at its earliest request.^"
Tbe "conditions stipulated" by Lobanov referred to in
Tiscbendorf's promissory receipt are tbat, "I declare tbat in
supporting tbis desire [for tbe loan of tbe codex] of Monsieur
Tiscbendorf, I declare that, if it is judged possible to agreeto tbis, tbis manuscript remains tbe property of tbe confra-
temity of Mount Sinai, until sucb time as tbe superior in tbe
name of tbat confratemity bas officially offered it to His
Imperial Majesty. It goes witbout saying tbat if unforeseen
circumstances prevent tbe confraternity from putting tbis
into effect, the manuscript would be returned witbout fail."^^
If tbe terms of the agreement appear to be perfectly straigbt-forward, tbe follow-up was most certainly not.
To unravel tbe vulgate position's support of Tiscbendorf,
Sevcenko proposed four questions: "(1) Wbat were tbe
exact conditions under wbicb Tiscbendorf received tbe
Sinaiticus on September 28, 1859? (2) By wbat autbority
did Tiscbendorf offer tbe Sinaiticus to tbe Tsar in 1862, if
tbe official donation of tbe manuscript occurred in 1869?
(3) Wby did tbis act of donation require a whole decade to
7/30/2019 Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus (Art)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/tischendorf-and-the-codex-sinaiticus-art 10/16
134 GOTR 53:1-4 2008
act of donation, while Callistratus, his successor and enemy,
who had nothing to do w ith the negotiations o f 1859, did?"^^
Aland dismissed Sevcenko's four questions out of hand be-cause the argument proceeds from false assumptions and,
therefore, the results are erroneous." Is Sevcenko's argu-
ment really so misguided?
To the contrary, Sevcenko's argum ent is compelling for the
very reason that it counters the narrow, defensive, yet wor-
shipfully elevated view of the vulgate version - and Aland
is very much a subscriber to the vulgate school. Gregoryand Aland, as the earliest and latest representatives of the
vulgate position, verge on hagiolatry whenever they discuss
Tischendorf. Tischendorf as the ideal German scholar is very
much a mark of the vulgate school as a whole. Sevcenko is
obnoxious to Aland because he painstakingly and deliber-
ately takes Tischendorf to task in the process of answering
the four questions. Sevcenko's answers expose Tischendorf
as human and flawed: "as a brilliant, erudite, quick-minded,
devoted, resourceful person, but, also as a vain, cantanker-
ous, and, on occasion, unfair man."^"*
Briefly to summarize Sevcenko's findings: Tischendorf's
promissory receipt (quoted above) provides the answer
to the first question, Tischendorf formally borrowed the
Sinaiticus from St, Catherine's and promised to retum it.
"But Tischendorf was a careful negotiator. The Sinaiticus -
so the receipt states - was to be entmsted to him under the
terms outlined in Prince Lobanov's letter of September 10
(partly quoted above). In this letter, the Russian A mbassador
did say that, from what he had heard, the monks intended
to present the manuscript to the Tsar."^^ However, Lobanov
heard that it was to be donated to the Tsar from Tischendorf
himself - hardly a disinterested party. The leaders of Sinainever formally promised to donate the codex. In addition,
7/30/2019 Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus (Art)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/tischendorf-and-the-codex-sinaiticus-art 11/16
Peterson: Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus 135
that the monks ever intended to donate the Sinaiticus to the
Tsar. Thus, by extension, Tischendorf had no right to donate
the codex. These documents also explain why, for politicalexigency, after a ten-year period the Tsar finally made token
restitution and thus more or less legitimized a "donation"
of the Sinaiticus under the rule of Archbishop Callistratus,
some years after the deposition of the ill-favored Cyril. One
must peruse the docum ents to do justice to Sevcenko's argu-
ment.
Yet, for all the conviction of their arguments, Aland andSevcenko remain at an impasse. Aland allowed one witness
to speak about the Sinaiticus affair: Tischendorf himself,
largely through selections from letters to his wife and quotes
from his brief work (92 pages), Sinaibibel {IS1\). Aland was
never neutral on the subject of Tischendorf He presented no
objectively independent witnesses because he believes that
Tischendorf's character and conduct are inherently unassail-able and require no outside substantiation. Sevcenko, on the
other hand, fully admitted that his evidence is incomplete.
He categorically stated that a comprehensive account of the
Sinaiticus affair will have to rely, among other things, on
a published edition of Tischendorf's correspondence with
his wife (which is not yet available), on Archbishop Cyril's
correspondence with Tischendorf, on Porfirij Uspenskii's
account of Tischendorf and the Sinaiticus (Uspenskii was
the author of a pamphlet that condemned the Sinaiticus as
heretical), on the correspondence of Am bassador Prince N.P.
Ignat'ev (the Russian am bassador to the Sublime Porte, who
in 1868 was a negotiator with St. Catherine's for the codex)
with Archimandrite Antonin, as well as on the evidence al-
ready made available in Sevcenko's "New Documents." "In
addition, this account would have to draw upon materialsthat perhaps still slumber in diverse archives relating to the
7/30/2019 Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus (Art)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/tischendorf-and-the-codex-sinaiticus-art 12/16
136 GOTR 53:1-4 2008
Mediterranean and the Balkans in the fifties and sixties of
the [nineteenth] century, it must have left some traces in dip-
lomatic or governm ental records."^^ Sevcenko without ques-tion does the better job of placing the Sinaiticus affair in the
deeper context of contemporary issues. East and West.
Another murky chapter in the Tischendorf saga is connect-
ed to the recently auctioned Archimedes palimpsest. The pa-
limpsest was made by a Greek Byzantine copyist in the tenth
century and contains several works by Archimedes, including
the only known copy of "Method of Mechanical Theorems"and "On Floating Bodies." Sometime around the twelfth or
thirteenth centuries, the decision w as made to use the parch-
ment for the text of a prayer book. Accordingly the old text
was scrubbed off, the leaves were cut in half and rotated 90
degrees, and the text of the euchologion was copied onto the
parchment. At some point the manuscript was deposited in
the Greek Orthodox monastery ofSt.
Savas near Jerusalem.From there it was transferred to the Jerusalem Patriarchate
library in the early 19th century, then to the nearby Church of
the Holy Sepulchre, and finally to the Sepulchre 's M etochion
(sister house) library in Constantinople sometime before
1844. It was in Constantinople in 1899 that the paleogra-
pher and Byzantinist Athanasios Papadopoulos-Karameus
catalogued it. In 1907 Archimedes's text was translated (as
far as legibility would allow) and published by J.L. Heiberg.Christies of New York sold the Codex at auction on October
29, 1998 to an unidentified buyer for over $2,000,000 - to
the great disappointment of the Patriarch of Jerusalem, who
still claimed ownership - while the scientific community
hailed the recovery of Archimedes's texts as a major event.
The manuscript is lacking one leaf. In 1844, Tischendorf,
on his first hunt for manuscripts in the Middle East, man-
7/30/2019 Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus (Art)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/tischendorf-and-the-codex-sinaiticus-art 13/16
Peterson: Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus 137
Patriarch of Jerusalem. There is no mention of a stray m anu-
script leaf, either as gift or purchase.
I now w ent direct with the proffered introduction to the
patriarch of Jerusalem. The bishop only was at home, a
man of considerable intellectual activity, and not deficient
in literary attainments. We went through the catalogue
of the library together; but precisely of the manuscripts
there was no account. After this he allowed me to inspect
the library myself, and permitted me to make any use of
the manuscripts I found. They were thirty in number, butthey were altogether without any especial interest, with the
exception of a palimpsest upon mathematics.^^
In his Codex Sinaiticus, Tischendorf mentioned that upon
his return home to Leipzig in January 1845, "I handed over
to the Saxon Government my rich collection of Oriental
manuscripts, in return for the payment of all my traveling
expenses. I deposited in the library of the University ofLeipzig, in shape of a collection, which bears my name, fifty
manuscripts, some of which are very rare and interesting."^*
For whatever personal reasons, Tischendorf retained the pa-
limpsest leaf for himself.
In 1876, Tischendorf's heirs sold the leaf, along with 43
other leaves from as many individual manuscripts, to the
Cambridge University Library. Interestingly enough, neither
Tischendorf nor subsequent scholars were able to attribute au-
thorship to the palimpsest text until Nigel Wilson of Lincoln
College, Oxford University, identified it in 1983. He realized
that it was an extract from Archimedes's "On the Sphere and
the Cylinder," and that it belongs to the Archimedes palimp-
sest between folios 2 and 3. There are those who are con-
vinced that Tischendorf did not come by the leaf honestly.
The Greek mathematician Michael Lambrou stated that inall probability Tischendorf stole not just the palimpsest leaf,
7/30/2019 Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus (Art)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/tischendorf-and-the-codex-sinaiticus-art 14/16
138 GOTR 53:1-4 2008
ings with St. Catherine's - not to mention the Jerusalem
Patriarch's Metochion library in Constantinople, among oth-
ers - because the definitive study on Tischendorf has yet to
be written. One has to imagine, nevertheless, that the verdict
will be a complex one. Of course, it is possible to rational-
ize a mixed verdict with the jaundiced or euphemistic view
that, as some Biblical scholars see it, he was just one more
plunderer in an age of plunderers - and at least this plunder
resulted in scholarly advance. Librarians are not likely to be
so dismissive, for reasons that are obvious and very close tohome.
NO T E S
^ Constantin Tischendorf, Codex Sinaiticus: the Ancient Biblical Manu-
script Now in the British Museum. Tischendorf's Story and Argument
Related by Himself, 2"'' impression of the 8* ed. (London: Lutterworth
Press, 1934), p. 24.
^ James Keith Elliott, Codex Sinaiticus and the Simonides Affair: an Ex-
amination of the Nineteenth Century Claim That Codex Sinaiticus Was
Not an Ancient Manuscript (Thessaloniki: Patriarchal Institute for Pa-
tristic Studies, 1982), (Analekta Vlatadon, 33), p. 16.
^ James H. Charlesworth, foreword. Secrets of Mount Sinai: the Story of
the World's Oldest Bible - Codex Sinaiticus, by James Bentley (Garden
City, New York: Doubleday, 1986), pp. 87-88.
" Tischendorf, op. cit., pp. 27-28.
^Bentley, op. c/'/.,p. 95.
*/6/i/., pp. 84-85.
'' J.N. Birdsall, "Review of Kurt Aland's Konstantin von Tischendorf
(1815-1874): Neutestamentliche Textforschung Damals und Heute,"
Journal of Theological Studies (1997), n.s. vol. 48, pp. 229-230.
* Kurt Aland, Konstantin von Tischendorf (1815-1874): Neutestamentli-
che Textforschung Damals und Heute (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1993).
(Sitzungsberichte der Sachsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu
7/30/2019 Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus (Art)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/tischendorf-and-the-codex-sinaiticus-art 15/16
Peterson: Tischendorf and the C odex S'maitkus 139
Codex Sinaiticus," Scnp/onwrn, vol. 18 (1964), pp. 55-80, Reprinted in
the author's Byzantium and the Slavs in Letters and Culture (Cambridge,
Massachusetts: Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute; Napoli: IstitutoUniversitario Orientale, 1991), p, 191.
^°/è/W,,p. 61,fti.28.
" Bentley, op. cit., p. 97.
^̂ Sevcenko, op. cit., p. 58.
^̂ Aland, op. cit., p. 35.
^'' Sevcenko, op. cit., p. 80.
' 5 / è / r f ,p , 61 .
^^ Ibid, p. 75.
'^ Constantine Tischendorf, Travels in the East, trans, from the Ger-
man W.E. Shuckard (London: Printed for Longman, Brown, Green, and
Longm ans, 1847), p. 274.
'* Tischendorf, Codex Sinaiticus: the Ancient B iblical Manuscript, p. 24,
^' M ichael Lam brou, "Re: [HM ] Archimedes Palimpsest," Internet mes-
sage at http://sunsite.utk.edu/math_archives/,http/hypennail/historia/
jul99/0034,html, 3,
Other sources:
Caspar Rene Gregory, "Tischendorf," Bibliotheca Sa cra, vol, 33 (Janu-ary 1876), pp, 153-193.
Ludwig Schneller, Search on Sinai: the Story of Tischendorf's Life and
the Search for a Lost M anuscript, trans. Dorothée Schroder (London:
Epworth Press (Edgar C, Barton), 1939),
7/30/2019 Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus (Art)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/tischendorf-and-the-codex-sinaiticus-art 16/16
Copyright of Greek Orthodox Theological Review is the property of Holy Cross Orthodox Press and its content
may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express
written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.