"In visiting the library of the monastery, in the
month of May, 1844, I perceived in the middle
of the great hall a large and wide basket full of
old parchments, and the librarian, who was a
man of information, told me that two heaps of
papers like these,
mouldered by time, had been
already committed to the flames. 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
The authorities of the convent allowed
me to possess myself of a third of these parchments,
or about forty-three sheets, all the more
readily as they were destined for the fire.
But I could not get them to yield up possession
of the remainder.
The too lively satisfaction
which I had displayed, had aroused their suspicions
as to the value of this manuscript."
(Tischendorf p.23/24 Narrative of the Discovery/"When were our Gospels written," 1867 (2nd edn.)/Relgious Tract Society.)
If you look at the Codex Frederico Augustanus in Leipzig
here, you can see that some parts of it are in v. poor condition. Then there is the matter that circa 350 leaves have disappeared, presumably "committed to the flames." It is this latter matter that substantiates Tischendorf's account. How can a volume as big as what is in the British library today simply "disappear" without being comitted to the flames?
___________________
You have committed yourself to prove the underlined part of the account above is false. It relates Tischendorf's interactions with the librarian, not other monks, who may provide different accounts. We don't which other "authorities" Tischendorf alludes to.
These monks surely wanted to protect themselves from the charge of neglect or stupidity. Given the sheer scale of the disposal, it is interesting to reflect on what other valuable parchments they might have disposed of. I wouldn't be surprized if a very large fortune in old parchments and papyri was burnt by these ignorant and monks in the years preceding Tischendorf's visit.
When the monks realized the value,
it was they who started changing their story. e.g. as told to J Rendel Harris. However any refutation of parchments being committed to the flames by the monks will need to account for what happened to the missing 350-odd leaves. It is they who have to give account, in the first instance.
Your idea that Tischendorf simply
purloined this stuff under the noses of the monks
doesn't ring true. OTOH Tischendorf's account does: i.e. that the monks were simply burning worn out (i.e. mouldered by time) parchments that they assumed had no monetary value.