Codex Sinaiticus and Constantine Simonides timeline

D. W. Daniel's gives this date above:

  • 1820, November 5, Constantine Leonidas Photios was born

This is Simonides original family name (in contrast to the later step-family).

Simonides himself proclaimed, according to Lycurgos' "Enthullungen", Page 45, in 1856, that he was "thirty three years old", meaning he would have to have been born in 1823, to be that age in 1856.

  • 1856, Simonides says he's "thirty three years old"

So, now, we have, not just two inconsistencies, but three, for the year of his birth:

  1. 1820, year Simonides was born
  2. 1823, year Simonides was born
  3. 1824, year Simonides was born

And we have two inconsistencies for the day of his birth:

  1. November 5th, day Simonides was born
  2. November 11th, day Simonides was born

There are a lot of inconsistencies and discrepancies in Simonides ever-shifting narrative. Normal people don't have a problem remembering there birth date/day - at all.
 
Kevin McGrane
Page 84, Footnote 191

K. Simonides, Ἡ πρὸς τοὺς ἐξ Ἑβραίων πιστοὺς Ἐπιστολὴ τοῦ Ἀποστολικοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν Βαρνάβα (Smyrna, 1843 claimed; probably England, 1863). “The Epistles of the Apostolic Father Barnabas.” In Smyrna, in 1843.
Note the claim that it was ‘discovered complete’ by Simonides in 1838, the year before his first arrival in Athos as independently attested and according to his own accounts until at least 1860.
After 1862 Simonides advanced his arrival at Athos to extend his time for writing the Codex to 20 months from his originally stated 6 months, and to make himself older and fully experienced in calligraphy. He thus later claimed that his arrival at Athos in November 1839 was his fifth visit to the holy mountain! This evidence in Barnabas thus points to a post-1862 production. [Emphasis added]

https://www.academia.edu/37556820/A...iled_background_of_the_discovery_of_the_Codex

This seems to be mixing up the Epistle of Barnabas history with that of Sinaiticus.

============

“as independently attested and according to his own accounts”

What independent attestation and specifically what “own accounts”?

==========

And I find McGrane interesting on this topic, and for many reasons look forward to his planned book claiming a c. 7th century Sinaiticus.
 
Steven Avery said:
It is clear from Lykurgos that Simonides was especially interested in the CFA manuscript.
One source on this is Luciano Canfora.

So far, additional information on whether he saw the manuscript, and what discussions may have ensued, is not available.

I read somewhere (and I'll find it when I get time) that Simonides [1850's] was a regular (daily) visitor of the Codex Sinaiticus while on public display in Leipzig.

He was, in all probability, already planning (and researching) his revenge on Tischendorf for his role in exposing his prior forgeries.


RÜDIGER SCHAPER

"Forschen, Finden, Fälschen. Der zivilisatorische Dreisatz am Beispiel des griechischen Schriftgelehrten Konstantin Simonides"

RÜDIGER SCHAPER

"Research, find
[Or: "locate" "spot" Perhaps "target"], falsify [Or: "forge" "fake"]. The civilizational rule of three using the example of the Greek scribe Konstantin Simonides."



A very accurate description of Simonides slimy tactics "research, find/target, falsify", don't you think?

Secondly.

Research is not limited by your finite perimeters or abilities (in other words limited by what information you have found or currently know about) Mr Avery.

This daily viewing/visiting of the Codex Sinaiticus on public display in Leipzig prior to 1862, should definitely be noted clearly on the timeline.
 
Hat tip to Maestroh, for this excellent post about chronological anomalies in the Simonides timeline.

Please click to expand and read the post below.

Simonides Begins To Change His Story With A New Letter
(January 21, 1863)

An excerpt of this can be read here:

But because some observations of the frivolous defenders of the pseudo-Sinaitic Codex would fain lead us to believe that I contemplated receding from my statement respecting the genuineness of the manuscript, I am obliged to say briefly the following, particularly in reply to W.A. Wright.

Note he says he's not backing away from his statement out it being a fourth century manuscript.
Of course, he's about to step away and change his story about everything else but what's 1,000 story alterations, right?

Or is that "Wright"? LOL!!

First, that my uncle Benedict being by profession a theologian and versed in twelve languages, intending to publish both the Old and New Testaments, and the writings of the Apostolic Fathers, with exegetical scholia of the ancient commentators and specially to reply to what had been written against the Septuagint, began this work while Professor in the College of Cydon in the year 1784.

Wow, this is amazing.

Want to know what makes it more amazing?

Steven Avery's blog (wrongly called a forum) dates Benedict's birth to 1768. So he began this WHILE A COLLEGE PROFESSOR at 16 years old?
Not buying this one.

But there's another problem. Keep reading.

Having removed to Mt. Athos in 1819 for the sake of retirement

Except that's not what Stewart's Biography of Simonides - pushed by Simonides himself - said.

On page 5, we're told that Benedict was forced to flee Caluaria due to "the death of Capodstrias."

One problem...Capodistrias died in 1831, so there's no way Benedict left 12 years beforehand.

So let's see, we have:
1) a change of birth date
2) changing the story from SIMONIDES doing this "prep work" in 1839 to Benedict doing it when (according to Avery) Benedict was 16
3) changing the story from "retirement" to being "necessitated" to remove from the island to Athos.

and embraced the monastic life in the monastery of Esphigmenos

Except in the biography (page 5), it says the "monastery of Rhosos".
In his 1862 letter, it says the monastery of Panteleemon.

Now he says Ephigmenos.

Rhosos and Ephismenos are two different monasteries, so which was it?

Or did he have a split personality?

Now as we continue - the story is going to continue changing, with Simonides coming up with new explanations that contradict (not supplement) his prior lying claims.

https://forums.carm.org/threads/the...egarding-sinaiticus.11880/page-15#post-918856

Let's analyze this again for timeline purposes.
 
Another hat tip to Maestroh, for this excellent post about even more chronological anomalies in the Simonides timeline.

Please click to expand and read the post below.

he was named Benedict (for surely they who adopt monastic life ought to change themeselves and their names as well as their lives), having formerly had two names, Basileus and Bessarion. While at Athos, he gave himself up particularly to the study of the Sacred Scriptures. He collected the most ancient MSS of both Testaments and of their commentators and at considerable expense prepared his work for the press. The Greek Revolution interfered: he withdrew after a little time to the isle of Hydra, thence to Cythera, thence to Petzaris, and finally to Caulaurrea, now Paros, where there is a famous monastery of the Virgin, in which he remained a long time, teaching theology to twelve Greek youths by the command of Capo D'Istrias, Governor of Greece. After the assassination of the Governor, he again removed to Mount Athos

ha ha ha ha ha.....

isn't this story with zero verification incredibly convenient? He didn't "take up residence" (as the biography asserts on page 5), he RETURNED in this changing of the story.

Is everyone keeping score at home?
Lied about the birth date
Lied about the collation
Lied about the monastery name
Lied about when, where, and why "Benedict" was on Athos
Lied about how many times he was there

Next he's probably gonna tell me that his "reached that celebrated place....November 1839" wasn't HIS first trip there, either, right?

THIS is exactly what liars do, folks. They throw in irrelevant material after irrelevant material to distract you from the fact they're lying - as Simonides is here.

where he continued until his death.

I was then sojourning at Aegina, and thence set out to Naupila, thence to Syme, Syria, back to Aegina, and other places.


Who cares? Tell us more about this so-called manuscript you didn't write.

I also visited Mount Athos in 1837

Except in the biography he first arrives on Athos at age 15 in 1839.

So are you now telling me this 13-year old was the Magellan of Greece?

He does this, of course, to fill in the gaps of "this didn't happen."

in which year the discovery of the library took place.

Except in the biography, this doesn't occur until after Simonides arrives in 1839.
Not one word is said about 1837 and Simonides being on Athos.

I remained fourteen months at Mount Athos, increasing my theological knowledge under my uncle, at the same time studying, scientifically, paleography and archaeology. When I say "scientifically," I do not mean mean what Mr Wright understands, but what he does not comprehend, and concerning which he is silent.

Yes, let's do nothing, call it science and oh yeah, insult the inquirer in the process.

Uh, Mr Wright wasn't the one backtracking from his wild fanciful stories here.


He's gone from his doing all this starting in November 1839 to changing his story to 1837.
I won't be the slightest bit surprised if he starts inventing OTHER trips to Athos just to make his colossal lie sound believable.

https://forums.carm.org/threads/the...egarding-sinaiticus.11880/page-15#post-918945

Let's analyze this also for timeline purposes.
 
Strangely (not really ?) this discovery isn't part of D. Daniel's timeline either.

This should definitely be included in the timeline!


The Mount Sinai manuscript of the Bible
With Four Illustrations
Fourth Edition
Revised
For The Trustees of The British Museum, 1935
Page 5-6, Footnote 2


“What Porphyrius did do was, after Tischendorf’s first visit, to find in the binding of another book fragments of two leaves. This was in 1845...”

Emphasis added by me.

Page 5
https://archive.org/details/mountsinaimanusc0000brit_e2m8/page/5/mode/1up
Page 6
https://archive.org/details/mountsinaimanusc0000brit_e2m8/page/6/mode/1up

Link's Steven Avery's gave
https://archive.org/details/mountsinaimanusc0000brit_e2m8/page/n11/mode/2up
https://apostolicbible.com/mountsinai.pdf

Previous post link
https://forums.carm.org/threads/the...egarding-sinaiticus.11880/page-16#post-920084


NOTE: This was already damaged, and sown into the bindings of another book...... only, how long after the manuscript allegedly arrived (via Simonides intervening travels, i.e. Syme, Constantinople, etc etc) at St Catherine's when allegedly? 1840? 1841? Just circa. three years later?
 
Actually, if we go by David Daniel's timeline, largely reproduced on the first page of this thread, the above (my last post's) scenario, gets much worse.

The pro-Simonidal version of the time, narrative, and context for it to (both) end up in those places by suspicious conspiratorial means, or for the parchment itself (contrasted to the text/ink only) to have deterriated by those means (i.e. the alleged lemon juice cleaning or tobacco/herbal solutions alone), becomes totally implausible.
 
Last edited:
Simonides claims of multiple ancient copies and palimpsest manuscripts of Hermas in his failed magazine, "Memnon", published in Munich in 1857 (the year after his arrest and imprisonment in Berlin).


ΚΑΛΛΙΣΤΡΑΤΕΙΟΝ
ἀπόγραφον ( α )
ΑΙ ΠΟΙΜENIΚΑΙ ΓΡΑΦΑΙ ΕΡΜΑ ΑΣΥΓΚΡΙΤΟΥ ΛΑΟΔΙΚΕΩΕ ΤΟΥ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΟΥ.

KALLISTRATEION
Copy ( a )
"HOLY SHEPHERDS, A WRITING OF HERMAS FROM THE PEERLESS WORD OF THE LAODICIAN APOSTLE"

Discovery location: Τὸ ἀπόγραφον τοῦτο ἐν τῇ κατὰ τὸ Σίναιον ὄρος μονῇ τῷ 1852 ἀνακαλυφθὲν, "this copy was discovered in the monastery on Mt Sinai in 1852"
Discovery date: 1852
Date written: 1st century A.D./C.E.
Material: Papyrus
Manuscript type: ἀπόγραφον "a copy"
Language: Egyptian (Egyptian Greek?)
Script: Unicial/Majuscule
Format: Four columns, fifty two verses,
Copyist: Καλλίστρατος ἐκαλεῖτο ἐξ Ἀντιοχείας



APTEMEION
ἀπόγραφον ( β )
Ο ΠΟΙΜΗΝ ΕΡΜΑ ΔΟΥΛΟΥ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΟΥ ΙΗΣΟΥ ΧΡΙΣΟΥ

ARTEMEION
Copy ( b )
"THE SHEPHERD HERMAS SERVANT OF THE APOSTLE OF JESUS CHRIST"
Alternately:
"THE SHEPHERD HERMAS A SERVANT [AND] APOSTLE OF JESUS CHRIST"

Discovery location: Τοῦτο ἐν ῎Αθω ἀνεκαλύφθη "this was discovered at Mt Athos"
Discovery date: 1839-40?
Date written: 272 [3rd century] A.D./C.E.
Material: ?
Manuscript type: ἀπόγραφον "a copy"
Language: Greek?
Script: Unicial/Majuscule
Format: One hundred and twenty two two-fold pages, unspecified amount of columns plural, forty nine verses
Copyist: Αρτέμιός τίς ἐστιν, Ολύνθιος τὸ γένος



ΝΕΣΤΩΡΕΙΟΝ
παλίμψηστον ( γ )
Ο ΠΟΙΜΗΝ ΤΗΣ ΜΕΤΑΝΟΙΑΣ ΕΡΜΑ ΤΟΥ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΟΥ

NESTORION
Palimpsest ( c )
"THE SHEPHERD OF REPENTANCE HERMAS OF THE APOSTLE"
Alternately:
"THE SHEPHERD, THE REPENTANCE OF HERMAS THE APOSTLE"

Discovery location: τοῦτο, ἐν Αθῷ ἀνακαλυφθὲν "this was discovered at Mt Athos"
Discovery date: 1839-40?
Date written: 4th century A.D./C.E.
Material: ?
Manuscript type: παλίμψηστον "palimpsest"
Language: Greek?
Script: Unicial/Majuscule
Format: Eighty seven pages
Copyist: Νεστώριος



ΤΟ ΠΟΛΥΚΡΟΤΟΝ
Λειψιανὸν παλίμψηστον ( δ )
EPMA ΠΟΙΜΗΝ.

THE POLYCROTON [Or: "THE FAMOUS" "THE WELL KNOWN" "HIGHLY PUBLICIZED"]
Lipsian palimpsest ( d )
"HERMAS THE SHEPHERD"

Fake: "Uranius’ Historia Aegyptiae"

Discovery location: Allegedly among the secret stash on "Mt Athos", but actually stolen from the Monastery of St. Gregory
Discovery date: Allegedly 1852
Date of alleged over-writing: Hermas text written (1457) 15th century A.D./C.E.
Date of alleged under-writing: ? century A.D./C.E.
Material: Parchment?
Manuscript type: Λειψιανὸν παλίμψηστον "Lipsian" Palimpsest
Language: Greek
Script: Cursive/Miniscule and Unical/Majuscule
Format: Four columns
Copyist: ?
Real origin: Torn from the Codex Athous Gregoriou 96 (Lampros 643)
Current location/designation: Deutschland, Leipzig, UB, gr. 09

These will have to fit in with Simonides overall timeline.
 
I’ve got the kindle edition of both his Sinaiticus books.

What are you specifically looking for?

Page 84 in his appendix timeline.

From:

"1843 continued"

To:

[…] Volume 1, pp. 213-216; Tischendorf made a list of people who could move the Tsar to pay for a 3rd trip to St. Catherine's.

1856 in next box.

See the timeline on the first page of this thread.
 
"Constantinos Simonidis in the Gennadius Library"
By Pasquale Massimo Pinto
Page 99
Footnote 26


The letter is pasted onto the front endpaper of the volume bearing the call number BB 1226.69 and containing the works described just below under D. Here is the text of the letter from Farrer to Hodgkin: “50, Ennismore Gardens, Prince’s Gate. / Dear Mr. Hodgkin, I am leaving all the papers I took away the other day, except the curious uncial tracing, which seems to be from the Shepherd of Hermas. This I am anxious to compare at the Brit. Museum / with Tischendorf’s Facsimile of the same at the end of his Codex. I expect your volume of Lithograph letters contains a treatise by Simonides on Aγιογραφια, on the Church Art of Mt. Athos. A letter I found / from Alexander Sturzas (at least I think he is meant by A. S. S.) is dated from Odessa, April 14, 1852, and acknowledges the receipt of it. If so, the presumption is that the other letters were really also lithographed about that time. My arrangement of the papers is quite [a word was probably left out], but will, I hope, / facilitate reference for future use, should such ever be required. Yours very truly J. A. Farrer».

https://www.academia.edu/899443/Constantinos_Simonidis_in_the_Gennadius_Library

If I remember rightly, there is some dispute over the printed date in this material, if it contains the alleged Kallinikos correspondence. That it might be backdated, or that there's some discrepancy in Simonides story regarding the events described.
 
Page 84 in his appendix timeline.

From:

"1843 continued"

To:

[…] Volume 1, pp. 213-216; Tischendorf made a list of people who could move the Tsar to pay for a 3rd trip to St. Catherine's.

1856 in next box.

See the timeline on the first page of this thread.
Ok you’re missing 5 pages (kindle edition). Will try to get them to you tonight.
 
Wow. Five pages...

Didn't think it was that much.

Thanks. Look forward to it.

……into the Codex for the Tsar of Russia


1844 - Before 1844 no record of a Codex like this belonging to the monks March – Simonides’ 1st imaginary visit to St. Catherine’s; April – Tischendorf left Livorno for Egypt; May 12-24 – Tischendorf journeyed to St. Catherine’s; May 24 – Tischendorf arrived at St. Catherine’s monastery; My theory – May – Simonides’ acrostics were removed; May – Tischendorf said he “discovered” the Codex sheets in a basket; May – Evidence shows Tischendorf found a bound book; May – Tischendorf told Cyril/Kyrillos he would “draw the Imperial Russian Government into the interests of this”; May – Tischendorf copied down a single page of the Codex (Q46 f3), probably in his room; May – Kallinikos saw Tischendorf with the Codex;


1844 Cont. - May – Tischendorf couldn’t have colored the Codex then Tischendorf took the 43 white folia of the Codex from St. Catherine’s; Tischendorf missed the first Jeremiah quire (Q46) June 15 – Tischendorf wrote to brother, Julius, that he’d “come into possession” of 43 parchment folia”; After leaving St. Catherine’s, Tischendorf met Patriarch Germanus IV; Tischendorf called the 43 sheets Codex Friderico-Augustanus; 1844 was the year occultist Manly P. Hall referred to as when “we” tried to put out a Bible that was “reasonably correct”; Drawing of an 1844 photograph of Tischendorf


1845 - Tischendorf wrote of his goals to a patroness, shown in 1847 Travels in the East (1847); Tregelles attempted to see and transcribe Codex Vaticanus Uspensky examined and gave a detailed description of the Codex that matches from 1859 on, except that it was “white”; October 8 - John Newman revealed he had become a Roman Catholic


1845-1872 - Konstantinos Kritikos served as Cyril II, Patriarch of Jerusalem


1846 - John Newman was made a Catholic Priest; Tischendorf published 5 quires and 3 folia as Codex Friderico-Augustanus (CFA); Codex Q46 f3r was not published in the CFA, though Tischendorf had copied it; Simonides gave a large packet of manuscripts to Constantius I , Simonides claimed Constantius informed him the Codex was sent to St. Catherine’s, but he’d known that since 1843


1847- Tischepublished Travels in the East;


1850 - Uspensky’s 2nd visit to St. Catherine’s By this time Uspensky had his bookmark of Genesis 24 It does not appear that the Arabic writing was in the Codex


1852 - Simonides’ 2nd imaginary visit to St. Catherine’s;


1853 Crimean war of 1853-56 began Tischendorf’s 2nd visit to St. Catherine’s; Tischendorf found a piece of Genesis 24 used as a bookmark; Tischendorf didn’t find the Codex; Cyril/Kyrillos acted ignorant of the matter I do not believe Kallinikos was at St. Catherine’s this time;


1855 - Tischendorf published his transcription of Q46 f3r in his Monumenta Sacra Inedita Volume 1, pp. 213-216; Tischendorf made a list of people who could move the Tsar to pay for a 3rd trip to St. Catherine’s


1856 - Tischendorf published glowing statements recommending Simonides Evidence published favoring Simonides’ 1820 birth date; Uspensky published a book about his 1845 visit to St. Catherine’s; Autumn – Tischendorf visited St. Petersburg to…..
 
Now take note of the incredulous use of the same name "Callistratus" in his two different account's of the same alleged discovery "at the Mt. Sinai monastary" (i.e. St. Catherine's) below.



"The Journal of sacred and Biblical Literature"
Vol. 3, 1863
"Miscellanies"
Page 216-217


"In 1852 [...] [Page 217] I then began my philological researches, for there were several valuable MSS. in the [St. Catherine's Mt. Sinai] library, which I wished to examine. Amongst them, I found the pastoral writings of, Hermas, the Holy Gospel according to St. Matthew, and the disputed Epistle of Aristeas to Philoctetes (all written on Egyptian papyrus of the first century), with others not unworthy of note,
All this I communicated to Constantius, and afterwards to my spiritual father, Callistratus at Alexandria..."

[St. Catherine's, Mt. Sinai added by me]

https://www.google.co.nz/books/edit...AAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA215&printsec=frontcover


Did you note the name "Callistratus"?

Which in Greek would be Καλλίστρατος

This is the same fake name (supposedly) of his "spiritual father" in "Alexandria", which somehow, is the same name of the alleged writer - of the very same fake Hermas manuscript, which he's supposedly describing as being discovered, in his failed 1857 magazine "Memnon":


"Memnon"
By Constantine Simonides

[No page numbers are in this magazine]
Munich, 1857
[the year after Simonides' arrest and imprisonment in Berlin]
My summary

ΚΑΛΛΙΣΤΡΑΤΕΙΟΝ
ἀπόγραφον ( α )
ΑΙ ΠΟΙΜENIΚΑΙ ΓΡΑΦΑΙ ΕΡΜΑ ΑΣΥΓΚΡΙΤΟΥ ΛΑΟΔΙΚΕΩΕ ΤΟΥ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΟΥ.

KALLISTRATEION
Copy ( a )
"HOLY SHEPHERDS, A WRITING OF HERMAS FROM THE PEERLESS WORD OF THE LAODICIAN APOSTLE"

Discovery location: Τὸ ἀπόγραφον τοῦτο ἐν τῇ κατὰ τὸ Σίναιον ὄρος μονῇ τῷ 1852 ἀνακαλυφθὲν, "this copy was discovered in the monastery on Mt Sinai in 1852"
Discovery date: 1852
Date written: 1st century A.D./C.E.
Material: Papyrus
Manuscript type: ἀπόγραφον "a copy"
Language: Egyptian (Egyptian Greek?)
Script: Unicial/Majuscule
Format: Four columns, fifty two verses,
Copyist: Καλλίστρατος ἐκαλεῖτο ἐξ Ἀντιοχείας "Callistratus, so-called, from out of Antioch"




This same name coincidence, is more than a little weird.

I thought I'd just point this out, to show the snowballing incredulity in his continuous lies, and the characteristic anomalies that he unwittingly creates - as he creates yet more and more lies to cover over his even older lies, and as he gets roasted in the media, and called out, yardy yardy ya...along the way.
 
There's also this, which was available from 1846 onwards for Simonides and Scholars to examine:


"Codex Friderico-Augustanus, sive, Fragmenta Veteris Testamenti : e codice graeco omnium qui in Europa supersunt
facile antiquissimo in Oriente detexit, in patriam attulit, ad modum Codicis Edidit.”
Sumtibus Caroli Francisci Koehleri,
E Lithographeo J. J. Uckermanni
Lipsiae, 1846

“The Codex Friderico-Augustanus, or, Fragments of the Old Testament : From, what is easily, the Oldest Surviving Greek Codex in the East
[Or: “Orient”], and brought to the Fatherland, published in the form of a Codex.”
At the undertaking of
[Or: “Published by”] Charles Francis Koehler
From a lithograph by J. J. Uckermann
Leipzig, 1846



Worldcat listing:

https://www.worldcat.org/title/code...ente-detexit-in-patriam-attulit/oclc/26928232

Saxon State Library — Dresden State and University Library (SLUB)

https://digital.slub-dresden.de/wer...ter]=0&cHash=0656119e1fb17a7d9dc598e890da9b91


Note: 1846...

In one of Tregelles letters, he refers to this very lithograph and how he believed Simonides used (i.e. abused) it for forgery purposes.


Plymouth
Jan 15.1863

"In 1846, you will remember that the portion of the Old Test. of א brought to Leipsic two years before was published in a lithographed facsimile; and I quite believe that in some of the forgeries of Simonides, he tried to imitate the writing thus engraved: but it was like his imitation of Mr. Babington's editions of the Papyri of Hyperides clumsily managed: it was a continued attempt to disguise his own fine strokes. [...]

I remain
yours most truly
S. P. Tregelles.

Note also the comment:

Plymouth
Jan 15.1863

"and I quite believe that in some of the forgeries of Simonides, he tried to imitate the writing thus engraved: but it was like his imitation of Mr. Babington's editions of the Papyri of Hyperides clumsily managed: it was a continued attempt to disguise his own fine strokes. [...]

I remain
yours most truly
S. P. Tregelles.​


The same conclusion drawn, more recently, by Malcolm Choat and Tommy Wassermann in:


“THE CABLE GUY”: CONSTANTINE SIMONIDES AND CODEX MAYERIANUS"
Tommy Wasserman Ansgar University College and Theological Seminary and Malcolm Choat Macquarie University
Bulletin of the American Society of Papyrologists 57 (2020)
Page 200, Paragraph 2
Page 2003, Paragraph 2


"It is quite apparent from the characteristics of the Hyperides papyrus as well as Babington’s ensuing edition that Simonides used the manuscript and its edition as models for Mayerianus. [...] [Page 203] It is thus likely that the Hyperides papyrus was the model not only for the format of Simonides’ biblical papyri, but also elements of their script. Simonides’ edition of Mayerianus also shares many similarities with Babington’s 1858 Hyperides edition. [...] It is interesting to note that two of Simonides’ worst critics, Constantine von Tischendorf and Samuel Tregelles, were included in the list of subscribers of Babington’s 1858 edition among many prominent scholars of the time. No doubt Simonides knew that his enemies would compare the two papyri..."

And he certainly did!
 
Last edited:
"Codex Friderico-Augustanus, sive, Fragmenta Veteris Testamenti : e codice graeco omnium qui in Europa supersunt
facile antiquissimo in Oriente detexit, in patriam attulit, ad modum Codicis Edidit.”
Sumtibus Caroli Francisci Koehleri,
E Lithographeo J. J. Uckermanni
Lipsiae, 1846​

I think this represents the sense a bit better:

“The Codex Friderico-Augustanus, or, Fragments of the Old Testament : From, what is easily, the Oldest Surviving Greek Manuscript in the East [Or: “Orient”] that has been produced in the form [Or: "manner"] of a Codex, brought to the Fatherland.”
Published by Charles Francis Koehler
From a lithograph by J. J. Uckermann
Leipzig, 1846​
 
"Memnon"
By Constantine Simonides

[No page numbers are in this magazine]
Munich, 1857
[the year after Simonides' arrest and imprisonment in Berlin]
My summary

ΚΑΛΛΙΣΤΡΑΤΕΙΟΝ
ἀπόγραφον ( α )
ΑΙ ΠΟΙΜENIΚΑΙ ΓΡΑΦΑΙ ΕΡΜΑ ΑΣΥΓΚΡΙΤΟΥ ΛΑΟΔΙΚΕΩΕ ΤΟΥ ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΟΥ.

KALLISTRATEION
Copy ( a )
"HOLY SHEPHERDS, A WRITING OF HERMAS FROM THE PEERLESS WORD OF THE LAODICIAN APOSTLE"

Discovery location: Τὸ ἀπόγραφον τοῦτο ἐν τῇ κατὰ τὸ Σίναιον ὄρος μονῇ τῷ 1852 ἀνακαλυφθὲν, "this copy was discovered in the monastery on Mt Sinai in 1852"
Discovery date: 1852
Date written: 1st century A.D./C.E.
Material: Papyrus
Manuscript type: ἀπόγραφον "a copy"
Language: Egyptian (Egyptian Greek?)
Script: Unicial/Majuscule
Format: Four columns, fifty two verses,
Copyist: Καλλίστρατος ἐκαλεῖτο ἐξ Ἀντιοχείας "Callistratus, so-called, from out of Antioch"

You can get directly to the palaeographic description footnote referencing 1852 and Sinai using this url:

Memnon
https://books.google.com/books?id=Rh9BAAAAcAAJ&pg=PT13

Alternatively you can put the book in PDF format and it is page 74 of 101.

This was written in 1857 and it gives support to Simonides being in Sinai in 1852.

===========================

As to the Callistratus text, I would not yet make any claims of authenticity or not. (Any writing can claim to be from a first-century author.) Some of the columns Simonides has in this book are clearly authentic.

The name appears rather common, so its appearing in a few spots is no surpise.

===========================

Overall, in Memnon, it is very interesting to see how Simonides approaches the Maximus issue raised by Tischendorf.

And it is also interesting that the Anger-Dindorf edition did not follow the Athous manuscript on Maximus.

===========================
 
Back
Top