Codex Sinaiticus and Constantine Simonides - St Catherine's manuscripts Catalogue(s) plural

TwoNoteableCorruptions said:
Pure imagination and fantasy.
Where is it written by Kyrillos himself that he knew the manuscript was written by Simonides and had been delivered from the Princes Islands to St Catherine's?
Absolutely no where!
Click to expand...

I did not say he knew the manuscript was written at Mt. Athos, with Simonides involved.
 
Steven Avery said:
I did not say he knew the manuscript was written at Mt. Athos, with Simonides involved.
Click to expand...

Maybe so.

Steven Avery said:
Far more likely, Kyrillos knew the manuscript which had come over from Antigonus c. 1841, and not pretending to repeat the big lie of Tischendorf about finding the manuscript being discarded, burned, saved by fire, etc.
Click to expand...

Your version of the events doesn't stack up with Simonides version.

Firstly, Simonides said Tischendof's librairian died of typhoid in 1844, so it can't be Tischendorf's Kyrillos of 1844 - and you specifically said "Kyrillos" Mr Avery.

Secondly, Simonides second (and therefore non-Kyrillos) librarian doesn't know "anything" (note: "any-thing of the matter").

Thirdly, Simonides himself told him "nothing" (note: "nothing") at all about the story of how it got there. So how could he know if he wasn't A. the original librarian that Germanus delivered the manuscript to, or B. that Simonides himself told him "nothing"?


THE JOURNAL OF SACRED LITERATURE AND BIBLICAL RECORD.
Edited by B. Harris Cowper
VOL. III
1863.
Miscellanies, April
Page 216

Letter from Simonides

"In 1852, I saw it there myself, and begged the librarian to inform me how the monastery had acquired it; but he did not appear to know anything of the matter, and I, for my part, said nothing."​
 
Last edited:
Steven Avery said:
And Kyrillos says, contra Tischendorf, that it was in the Catalogues too. Yet there is no known record anywhere, not in the ancient ones, not even in the 1840 one by Kyrillos! (Seen by Georg Ebers.)
Click to expand...

You're version, again, does not stack up with Simonides'.

You're unwittingly admitting that Simonides was wrong on at least one count!


The Journal of Sacred Literature and Biblical Record
1863
Misceleanies, July, Pages 492-49
The Literary Churchman, June 16th, 1863
Letter from Simonides
Page 495
Paragraph 2

“I emphatically deny that the Codex Sinaiticus was inscribed in the Ancient Catalogue, for the good reason that no ancient catalogue exists ; there was none there whatever, till I made a catalogue, during my first visit [18???], for the Patriarch of Constantinople, Constantius, who before was Archbishop of Mount Sinai.”

​

Simonides says there was, how many catalogues? = "NONE ... WHATEVER"!

Yet you say there was one witnessed to have been there before Simonides first visit in 1840!

Steven Avery said:
not even in the 1840 one by Kyrillos! (Seen by Georg Ebers.)​
Click to expand...

Which you say was: "by Kyrillos"!

So (by your own deductive reasoning) at least one part of this story, by your version and testimony, has got to be a lie (a falsehood, an untruth) on Simonides part.
 
Steven Avery said:
not in the ancient ones, not even in the 1840 one by Kyrillos! (Seen by Georg Ebers.)​
Click to expand...


So now we have an unwitting (or tacit) admission by Steven Avery that there was in fact at least one catalogue in existence (putting the lie to at least one count with-in Simonides catalogue claim) written by a "Kyrillos" at Mt Sinai, apparently before Simonides first visit, and witnessed by a George Ebers.

That's a keeper folks!

So we're left with two questions folks.

  1. So who was the George Ebers that Steven Avery mentions?
  2. Where does he mention a catalogue at Mt Sinai in 1840?
 
TwoNoteableCorruptions said:
Correction! It's called untruth and fiction, Mr Avery.
Click to expand...

To see the connection of the three consecutive entries in the catalog working on the same manuscript involving John of Damascus with a special holy day, first Simonides then Kallinikos twice -- very simple, deductive reasoning.

Your stuck because Kevin McGrane blundered on this point and you cannot acknowledge his error. So you bluster trying to make the same blunder.

It is actually a little humorous to watch.
 
Last edited:
Steven Avery said:
To see the connection of the three consecutive entries in the catalog working on the same manuscript involving John of Damascus with a special holy day, first Simonides then Kallinikos twice -- very simple, deductive reasoning.

Your stuck because Kevin McGrane blundered on this point and you cannot acknowledge his error. So you bluster trying to make the same blunder.

It is actually a little humorous to watch.
Click to expand...

Another interesting Kevin McGrane quirk is seen in his efforts to explain the whireness of the Leipzig pages as being a result of reagents used in Leipzig. This is like a back-door acknowledgement of the manuscript differences that were actually caused by the coloring and staining of the 1859 heist.
 
Steven Avery said:
Another interesting Kevin McGrane quirk is seen in his efforts to explain the whireness of the Leipzig pages as being a result of reagents used in Leipzig. This is like a back-door acknowledgement of the manuscript differences that were actually caused by the coloring and staining of the 1859 heist.
Click to expand...

And a third quirk is his total rejection of the 4th century Tischendorf con date, going up about 300 years. McGrane does not realize that this destroys the Sinaiticus palaeographic house of cards. (Which falls apart anyway by many infallible proofs.)
 
Steven Avery said:
David Daniels in his 2nd book feels that Simonides was not being accurate and truthful on his accounts of his visits to the monastery.​

And I tend to agree.
Click to expand...

There it☝️?☝️ is folks!

Steven Avery finally admits (though round-aboutly) that Simonide's was...

Was what?

Steven?

Tell us Steven what you "agree" on?

That Simonide's was?


"NOT ... TRUTHFUL"​


Steven Avery said:
David Daniels in his 2nd book feels that Simonides was not being accurate and truthful on his accounts of his visits to the monastery.

And I tend to agree.
Click to expand...


That's a keeper!☝️?☝️
 
Steven Avery said:
...the Catalogues .... not even in tihe 1840 one by Kyrillos! (Seen by Georg Ebers.)​
Click to expand...

So. Steven Avery, discloses that he had prior knowledge of a catalogue at St Catherine's at Mt Sinai, dated 1840, which is before Simonides' first visit in March 1844 (according to David Daniels timeline, Page 84, IWOBAF) which also, was seen by Georg Ebers.

Two questions folks.

  1. So who was the George Ebers that Steven Avery mentions?
  2. Where does he mention a catalogue at Mt Sinai in 1840?
 
How about this then.

Steven also knew about this catalogue as well.

Steven Avery (2022)

Then around 36:00 on to the "ancient catalogue". "There is no record of an ancient catalogue, per se" however there is a record of a catalogue dating to 1734, referenced by a Danish librarian Pierre Evald. Research continues. Nikephoros Marthalis Glykos is said to have set up a catalogue in 1734. Hmmmm... If Sinaiticus is there, we have probative authenticity. Case closed.

https://purebibleforum.com/index.ph...facebook-nt-textual-criticism.271/#post-11400
Click to expand...

Well, well, well.

Another catalogue known to exist before Simonides' first visit in March 1844, which he said there was "none ... whatever, till I made a catalogue during my first visit".

More questions to add to the previous ones.

  1. So who was the George Ebers that Steven Avery mentions?
  2. Where does he mention a catalogue at Mt Sinai in 1840?
  3. Who is, and which Kyrillos (a common name) was it who is said to have made a catalogue at St Catherine's in 1840?
  4. Who is the Danish librarian Pierre Evald that Steven mentions?
  5. Where does he mention a catalogue dating to 1734?
  6. Who is Nikephoros Marthalis Glykos?
  7. Where is it said, and by whom, that he set up a catalogue in 1734?
 
Two catalogues both dated prior to March 1844 Simonides alleged first visit to St Catherine's.

  1. A catalogue by Nikephoros Marthalis Glykos dated 1734
  2. A catalogue by (a) Kyrillos dated 1840

Are there more?

My point?

That at least part (note part) of Simonides' claim is untrue. He lied on at least one count in his multi-faceted claim about manuscript catalogues (and his own catalogue) EVER existing at St Catherine's monastery.

As for a fully intact, complete and undamaged catalogue, or catalogues being extant today (2023), well, that remains to be seen, and we'll cover that later.
 
More catalogues?

What else does Mr Avery know about other catalogues at St Catherine's?

How about this...

Steven Avery
Bénéchevitch, Les manuscrits Grecs (see n. 8), 25–31, mentions a first but incomplete catalog prepared by Cosmas, later patriarch of Constantinople, of 1704; this catalog does not include the codex. The same is true for the new catalog by the librarian Cyrillos in the 1840s; further work in cataloging the manuscripts (after Tischendorf’s first visit) was done by Porfirij Uspenskij (1845 and 1850), Archimandrite Antonin Capustin (1850), Victor Gardthausen (1886), and Vladimir Nikolaevicˇ Bénéchevitch (1911); the most comprehensive now is M. Kamil, Catalogue of All Manuscripts in the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai (Wiesbaden, 1970; Arab. original, 1951).

https://purebibleforum.com/index.ph...34-catalog-by-nikephoros-marthalis-glykos.88/
Click to expand...

Well, well, well.

Yet another catalogue known to exist before Simonides' first visit in March 1844, which he said there was "none ... whatever, till I made a catalogue during my first visit".

More questions to add to the previous ones.

  1. So who was the George Ebers that Steven Avery mentions?
  2. Where does he mention a catalogue at Mt Sinai in 1840?
  3. Who is, and which Kyrillos (a common name) was it who is said to have made a catalogue at St Catherine's in 1840?
  4. Who is the Danish librarian Pierre Evald that Steven mentions?
  5. Where does he mention a catalogue dating to 1734?
  6. Who is Nikephoros Marthalis Glykos?
  7. Where is it said, and by whom, that he set up a catalogue in 1734?
  8. Who is Cosmas, later Patri-Arch of Constantinople, of 1704?
  9. What does Bénéchevitch, say in Les manuscrits Grecs (see n. 8), 25–31 about Cosmas, who made the first, but incomplete catalogue of manuscripts at St Catherines?
 
Now Mr Avery let's us know that there are THREE catalogues (at least) which are dated prior to March 1844 Simonides alleged first visit to St Catherine's.

  1. A first, but incomplete, catalogue by Cosmas in the 1700's
  2. A catalogue by Nikephoros Marthalis Glykos dated 1734
  3. A catalogue by (a) Kyrillos dated 1840

Are there yet more?

My point again?

That at least part (note part) of Simonides' claim is untrue. He lied on at least one count in his multi-faceted claim about manuscript catalogues (and his own catalogue) EVER existing at St Catherine's monastery.

I reiterate, that as for a fully intact, complete and undamaged catalogue, or catalogues being extant today (2023), well, that remains to be seen, and we'll cover that later.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top