Ulan wrote:So who did the tests on the manuscript to demonstrate this alleged lemon juice/herbs/tea business? I guess nobody. It's all speculation.
Three are major component elements and we end up with trivially easy deduction.
===================
KALLINIKOS 'CALLED SHOTS' OF LEMON-JUICE TAMPERING
1)
The report a bit after 1860 from Sinai that the manuscript had been tampered in the 1850s with lemon-juice given by Kallinikos. This would be the section that went to St. Petersburg as the Leipzig section had left in 1844. Note that at this time very few had seen the ms, so accurate reports from Sinai have special authority and pizazz and significance. In fact, few had seen the ms. until the pictures of 2009, and those who did handle it were usually in the employ of the owners, so there was little incentive to raise questions, or even let out the salient information that would lead to questions. Kallinikos made a number of statements about Tischendorf and the manuscript, every one of which we know today is accurate and consistent with on-site experience. The video above touches on some of these coincidences.
MEANS, MOTIVE and OPPORTUNITY plus HISTORY/PROVENANCE and CHARACTER
2) Three main methods historically of tampering are lemon-juice, tea and herbs.
Means, motive and opportunity existed for this
manuscript crime.
Tischendorf was well connected at the monastery in the 1850s. Also he had extra private time with the ms. in Cairo in 1859 which allowed for various checks and clean-ups, including trimming the ms.
Tishendorf lied right and left about the history. The whole 'saved from burning' sham. In actuality he heisted the 1844 leaves secretly, without permission, simple theft. The elaborate lying schema is consistent with untoward practices. He also has a documented history of ms. theft. And he had a lot to gain or loss in completing the heist, ergo the 1859 lies about borrowing the ms (as also called by Kallinikos.)
The "poof provenance", appearing unexpectably in Sinai, gives us nothing before 1844. A non-provenance unique among the major ancient NT ms. group. Various ms. hunters and adventurers having been in St. Catherine's in Sinai in the preceding years and nobody saw or was told of this ms.
BEFORE AND AFTER
3) Leipzig was pristine white parchment (as reported by Uspensky and later Ernst von Dobschütz in 1913 and we can see today on the CSP.) The CSP shows us every page, pristine white parchment and unstained. This left Sinai was before the 1850s colouring so could not be changed. The after ms. is now at the British Library.
Since 2009, we can compare the pages of the sections. And compare pages with many other ancient mss. The uneven discolouring, the rather light physical nature of the discolouring, the ms. remaining easy to turn and supple, are attributes that match tampering and not what you would see if it was a real age of 1500 years of supposed heavy use. (Morozov pegged it as a recent ms. largely because he did handle it in St. Petersburg and was not in the land of textual gaga over Tischendorf.) This condition of the ms sections and the
Before and After has one good explanation -- 1850s colouring of the St. Petersburg-British-Library section.
PHENOMENALLY GOOD CONDITION
3) Both mss are in a physical condition of suppleness and youth that are consistent with 1859 British Library being artificially given the appearance of age. And not consistent with the supposed 1500 years of heavy use. Thus Morozov pegged it as much younger.
USPENSKY, SCRIVENER REPORTS
4) Uspensky corroborates that the full ms remaining in 1845 is white parchment. This went to St. Petersburg. Yet Scrivener reports it as "the vellum leaves, now almost yellow in colour" in 1864. The change occurred between 1850 (Uspensky's second visit) and the St. Petersburg delivery. The Leizpig section, every single page, was and is today pristine white parchment (matching what Uspensky saw in 1845 of the remainder.) There was no opportunity to change that, ergo.
5) Tischendorf kept the two sections separate and generally quite inaccessible. He pointed everybody to his facsimile edition, which hid the colour and staining and condition issues.
NO SCIENTIFIC TESTING
And when it was planned for Leipzig, 1915, the tests were canceled.
===================
The many coincidental evidences, including the accurate words written c. 1860, and the visible
before and after of the two sections of the ms are types of amazing evidences, that blow up the cover stories. There many other coincidences and corroborations with Hermas, the 1841 Barnabas, New Finds and other areas.
Steven
Even the edgier fellows (David Trobisch, one or two others who really are ahead of the curve) find it very hard to get out of the box. That is why the breakthrough is just as likely to come from journalists and historians as from textual shmexperts. The scientists can hardly help, because they are kept at a distance, especially after the planned 2015 tests were cancelled.