Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

To say "the discovery didn't surprise the monks"
is bogus
A) because you don't know that, and
B) because you don't show that they (all?!) even knew of the "discovery," which Smith didn't inform them of, and
C) which wasn't a "discovery" but a plant.

If Seraphim was somewhere at Mar Saba in 1958, that does not solve the question.
Again, nobody claimed to know the Letter before 1958.

The lists of books do not include the Voss book.

As I have repeatedly written, the front cover, the front page, and the spine binding had all gone missing, erasing potential marks of previous, non Mar Saba ownership.

On the analogy of no D-Day until D-Day,
no "Letter" before "Letter."

Retrospectively, maybe someone, like you, imagines.
Evidence before 1958, absolutely and utterly, none.

K. was mistaken, as A.T. showed.

Monks (later) arguing ownership, in Jerusalem, is not news.

Again, no person said the manuscript was at Mar Saba before 1958.
Tselikas is additionally relevant for indicating modern forgery.

Tselikas is relevant because he evaluated the hand as fake, modern imitation.
Among other inaccuracies, e.g.,: "everyone" there 1958-1960 knew they had "a value manuscript".......utterly evidence-less, besides false and ridiculous.