Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

If you are only talking about conditions after 1844 then say so clearly. ====== Explain how you think the 1859 St. Petersburg pages became uneven in colour, and generally much yellower and picked up stains. Coffee? Vodka? Explain why the Leipzig pages never yellowed in 1650 years. Explain why neithe...

Also obvious: portions of the codex were separated and experienced differing storage environments, with differing preservation outcomes. Why is this obvious? Uspensky saw one manuscript/codes in 1845. So first, let’s discuss the supposed 1500 years of heavy use. ====== The uneven color of pages tha...

StephenGoranson wrote: ↑Tue Jan 09, 2024 7:30 am--11QTemple Scroll had replacement sheets at its beginning, so the bulk of sheets in that case was older, and the whole not truly dated by newer replacements.

The cancel sheets in Sinaiticus are basically the same as the main sheets, so this is not relevant.

If a couple of pages were Used for a palimpsest (possible plan on Judith page) Taken out with the laundry Attacked by moisture and rodents Torn to shreds That does not somehow age 450 other pages. You could find such pages in a 10-year-old manuscript. You can never find new pages in a 1650+ year-old...

So what type of old age would leave 450 pages in beautiful,

Phenomenally good condition
Perfect conservation

And rip one page too shreds?

The manuscript is the age of its “newest” pages.

Also obvious: portions of the codex were separated and experienced differing storage environments, with differing preservation outcomes. Portions of Joshua did not fare well. As is also similarly seen with other ancient manuscripts. There are not "portions" of Joshua. One torn-up fragment...

And the fragment that one of those two monks used in the binding was already a fragment when it was reused; in other words, in the 1700s, that fragment was already worn and already quite OLD. We often have a Sinaiticus anomaly. Hundreds of leaves are like new, beautiful pristine parchment, often wi...

StephenGoranson wrote: ↑Mon Jan 08, 2024 11:22 am The binding is a creation made by one of two known contemporary monks in that monastery.

Sarris says two or more.
Two monks are named in other books.

However, the bookbinding techniques do not have to abruptly end.

"Coincidences" abound, everywhere :) e.g. Barnabas just happens to coincidentally have been published in Greek by Simonides in 1843, before the 1859 Sinaiticus publication by Tischendorf. There are solid links between the 1843 Simonides text and the 1859 text, the discovery of the suppose...

The book binding with the Sinaiticus fragment included in the cover (inside surface) material was made in the eighteenth century, that is, in the 1700s, which is earlier than the claim that the manuscript was forged in the nineteenth-century, that is, in the 1800s. Where this fragment resided in wh...