John Prodromos, coffee-house in Galata, church in Trebizond

Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Administrator
British Quarterly Review (1863)
https://books.google.com/books?id=TMNjkkJZw8UC&pg=PA354

Some time afterwards he removed to Constantinople, and showed the volume to the patriarchs Anthimus ( Anthimos ) and Constantius, and to John Prodromus, ‘who kept a coffee-house at Galata, and probably does so still. Constantius, after thoroughly examining it, urged him to present it to the library of Sinai, which he accordingly promised to do. He subsequently left it at the house of Constantius during his absence, for the purpose of being sent to Sinai ; and he produces a copy of the letter he received from Constantius acknowledging its safe receipt. In 1846 he visited Constantinople, and saw Constantius again, who informed him that the MS. had been forwarded to Sinai. In 1852 he saw it there himself, and found that the librarian knew nothing whatever of the origin of the MS., and he for his part said nothing. He examined the MS., however, and found it altered, having an older appearance than it ought to have.
Click to expand...

John Prodromos - coffee house in Galata, family, son of Pappa Prodromos, who was a minister of the Greek Church
in Tebizond (Trebizon, Trabzon).
"John Prodromos kept a coffee-house in Galatas, Constantinople, and probably does so still."

Hadji John Prodromus - coffee shop in Galata, outskirts of Constantinople
Pappa Prodromus had church in Trebizond on the northern coast (unclear if he saw manuscript)

John Prodromos 'who perused it with attention'

John Prodromos - coffee house in Galata, family, son of Pappa Prodromos, who was a minister of the Greek Church
in Tebizond (Trebizon, Trabzon).
"John Prodromos kept a coffee-house in Galatas, Constantinople, and probably does so still."

The Journal of Sacred Literature - April, 1863
https://books.google.com/books?id=kR82AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA217
https://archive.org/details/journalsacredli15cowpgoog/page/217/mode/1up
https://books.google.com/books?id=zz1KAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA250
Elliott p. 29

The name of the professional caligraphist to the monastery at St. Panteleemon was Dionysius; the name of the monk who was sent by the Patriarch Constantius to convey the volume from the island of Antigonus to Sinai was Germanus. The volume, whilst in my possession, was seen by many persons, and it was perused with attention by the Hadji John Prodromos, son or Pappa Prodromos,who was a minister of the Greek Church in Trebizond. John Prodromos kept a coffee-house in Galatas, Constantinople, and probably does so still. The note from the Patriarch Constantius, acknowledging the receipt of the MSS., together with 25,000 piastres, sent to me by Constantius as a benediction, was brought to me by the deacon Hilarion. All the persons thus named are, I believe, still alive, and could bear witness to the truth of my statement.


==========================================

David Daniels
Sometime in early-mid 1841, 251 Patriarchs Constantius and Anthimus viewed the Codex in Hadji John Prodromos’ coffee shop in Galatas, Constantinople.

Who Faked p. 21
https://books.google.com/books?id=Ap83EAAAQBAJ&pg=RA1-PA21
1697105875265.png

p. 29
1697106092979.png

p. 54
1697106224135.png
1697106176640.png
 
Last edited:
Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Administrator
Die Grenzboten
German
https://brema.suub.uni-bremen.de/grenzboten/periodical/structure/244120?lang=de
1697104534565.png

https://books.google.com/books?id=ahpGAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA209
p. 209
1697104185042.png

https://books.google.com/books?id=ahpGAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA215
p. 215
1697104242097.png

https://www.purebibleforum.com/inde...imonides-includes-causidicus.3280/#post-13590

Personen gesehen, und er wurde mit Aufmerksamkeit von Hadschi Johannes Prodromos, Sohn des Pappa Prodromos durchgegangen, welcher ein Geistlicher der griechischen Kirche in Trapezunt war. Johannes Prodromos hielt ein Kaffeehaus zu Galata bei Konstantinopel und hält es wahrscheinlich jezt noch.

Das Kaffeehaus des Popensohnes' Hadschi Prodromos und der Berg Athos liegen zwar fern von Leipzig, aber doch nicht außer der Welt und außer dem Bereich der russischen Gönner Tischendoifs, und die Aussagen griechischer Kafedschis und Kaluger mögen sehr verdächtig, aber sie dürften hier doch einigermaßen beachtenswerth sein.

The volume was seen by many persons while in my possession, and was gone through with the attention of Hajji John Prodromos, son of Pappa Prodromos, who was a cleric of the Greek Church in Trebizond. Johannes Prodromos kept and probably still keeps a coffee-house at Galata near Constantinople. ... All of the persons named here are, I believe, still alive and could bear witness to the truth of my statements.

Simonides' assertions about the genesis of the manuscript appear in a more than dubious light. But his witnesses could at least be heard. The coffee house of the priest's son Hadji Prodromos and Mount Athos are far from Leipzig, but not out of the world and out of the reach of the Russian patrons of Tischendorf,
 
Last edited:
Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Administrator
Prodromos
Prodromus

Pappa
Hadji John Prodromos -
Greek - "ηαδξη ξώην Πρόδρομος"
Russian - "Ядксис Хоин Продромос"




Greek search - Προδρόμου

Evangelisk ugeskrift, Volume 8
Danish
https://books.google.com/books?id=6-UZAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA302
1713571064736.png

1713570924660.png

==========================

Combine with
Simonides
Κωνσταντίνος Σιμωνίδης
Κωνσταντίνος Σιμωνίδης

and Trebizond etc.

=============================

πρόδρομος - forerunner precursor

Marilisa Mitsou
www.academia.edu

Η επινόηση της φιλολογίας. Ένας πλαστογράφος, ο Κωνσταντίνος Σιμωνίδης, στην Αθήνα (1847-1851), Κονδυλοφόρος 14/2015, σ. 39-67

Η επινόηση της φιλολογίας. Ένας πλαστογράφος, ο Κωνσταντίνος Σιμωνίδης, στην Αθήνα (1847-1851), Κονδυλοφόρος 14/2015, σ. 39-67
www.academia.edu

The invention of philology. A forger, Konstantinos Simonidis, in Athens (1847-1851), Kondyloforos 14/2015, pp. 39-67

70. Κωνσταντίνος Σιμωνίδης, Συμαΐς ή Ιστορία της εν Σύμη Απολλωνιάδος Σχολής,
ιδίως δε της αγιογραφικής καθέδρας και πρόδρομος των ανεκδότων ελληνικών χειρογρά-
φων […] υπό Μελετίου ιερομονάχου του εκ Χίου, Αθήνα 1849. Η αφιέρωση: «Τω κλεινώ
Ανδρέα Μουστοξύδη, αγλαΐσματι Κερκύρας, παιδεία και αρετή κεκοσμημένω παντοία, και
γηραιώ της αρχαιολογίας ταμία, τον πρόδρομον των ελληνικών ανεκδότων χειρογράφων
ευσεβάστως ανατίθησιν. Ο εκδότης».
 
Last edited:
Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Administrator
Danish
p. 299
En Indsigelse mod Betydningen af Tischendorfs finaitiske Bibelhaandskrift.

J » Guardian» har C. Simonides offentliggjort følgende Skrivelse, der indeholder en meget mærkelig Fremstilling af det sinaitiske Bibelhaandskrifts Oprindelse.
„Deres Correspondent har beæret Dem med nogle Uddrag af et Brev fra Dr. Tregelles, hvori findes følgende Yttring: „Jeg troer, det er overflødigt at bemærke, at Simonides's Fortælling om, at han har skrevet dette Manuscript, er saa falsk og absurd som mulig".
„Dette Manuscript" refererer sig til den saakaldte Codex Sinaïticus, som nu bliver offentliggjørt under Tilsyn af Professor Tischendorf paa den russiske Regjerings Bekostning. Det, som Dr. Tregelles falder min „Fortælling", har ikke været offentliggjort, og da denne Herre alene kan have hørt derom gjennem indirecte Meddelelser, maa det interessere Dr. Tregelles og Deres Læsere at faae "Fortællingen" directe fra mig selv. Jeg skal berette den saa kort, som muligt.
Henimod Slutningen af Aaret 1839 ønskede min Onkel Benedict, Abbed i den hellige Martyr Panteleemons Kloster paa AthosBjerget, at tilstille Keiser Nikolaus I. af Rusland en Gave fra det hellige Bjerg, som en taknemmelig Anerkjendelse af de Foræringer, denne fra Tid til anden havde skjenket Martyrens Kloster. Da han ikke var i Besiddelse af Noget, som syntes ham passende, raadførte han sig med Gesandten Prokopius og den russiske Munk Paul, og saaledes blev det bestemt, at Gaven skulde være et Exemplar af det gamle og nye Testamente, skrevet i Overeensstemmelse med gammeldags Skik med Uncialbogstaver paa Pergament. De besluttede, at dette tilligemed de efterladte Skrifter af de syv apostoliske Fædre Barnabas, Hermas, Clemens af Rom, Ignatius, Polykarp, Papias og Dionysius Areopagita skulde indbindes i Guld og tilstilles Keiseren ved en fælles Ven. Dionysius, som var Klostrets egentlige Kaligraph, blev anmodet om at paatage sig dette Arbeide; men han undslog sig. Han sagde, at dette Værk var overordentlig vanskeligt, og derfor foretrak han, iffe at indlade sig derpaa. Følgen heraf var, at jeg selv besluttede


An Objection to the Meaning of Tischendorf's Finite Bible Manuscript. J » Guardian » C. Simonides has published the following writing, which contains a very strange presentation of the origin of the Sinaitic Bible manuscript. "Your Correspondent has honored you with some extracts from a letter from Dr. Tregelles, in which the following statement is found: "I think it is superfluous to note that Simonides's story that he wrote this Manuscript is as false and absurd as possible". "This Manuscript" refers to the so-called Codex Sinaiticus, which is now being published under the supervision of Professor Tischendorf at the expense of the Russian Government. What Dr. Tregelles calls my "Tale" has not been published, and as this gentleman alone can have heard about it through indirect messages, it must interest Dr. Tregelles and your readers to get the "Tale" directly from myself. I will tell it as briefly as possible. Towards the end of the year 1839, my uncle Benedict, abbot of the monastery of the holy martyr Panteleemon on Mount Athos, wished to present Emperor Nicholas I of Russia with a gift from the holy mountain, as a grateful acknowledgment of the gifts he had given from time to time Martyr's Monastery. As he was not in possession of anything that seemed suitable to him, he consulted with the envoy Procopius and the Russian monk Paul, and thus it was decided that the gift should be a copy of the Old and New Testaments, written in accordance with the old fashioned Custom with uncial letters on parchment. They decided that this together with the writings left behind by the seven apostolic fathers Barnabas, Hermas, Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Polycarp, Papias and Dionysius the Areopagite should be bound in gold and presented to the emperor by a common friend. Dionysius, who was the actual Calligrapher of the monastery, was requested to undertake this work; but he escaped. He said that this work was exceedingly difficult, and therefore he preferred not to undertake it. The consequence of this was that I decided for myself

================



Text translation​










Source text​















3,281 / 5,000


Translation results​

Translation result​

Although the presentation in the above writing, especially in its detailed execution, appears with a strong appearance of credibility, we believe that there is reason to receive it with distrust. The letter writer Simonides is, as he himself suggests at the end of the letter, notorious as a fraud who has published his own works for old manuscripts, and can therefore in and of himself have only a small claim to trust. On the other hand, Professor Tischendorf is known as one of today's greatest authorities in everything that pertains to biblical palaeography; if the case was, as Simonides says, that the Sinaitic manuscript had to be recognized by anyone who knows something about palaeography as a work of the present, it becomes completely incomprehensible how Tischendorf could have attributed it to the fourth century. Should he have been wrong to that extent, palaeographic science will in any case suffer a blow that could hardly be overcome. Tischendorf is also not alone in his fine perception of the manuscript's antiquity. Dr. Tregelles, who is mentioned at the beginning of Simonides' letter, has had the opportunity to examine the disputed manuscript; he has also known Simonides' tale, and he declares, as the letter shows, that this is as false and absurd as possible. He has probably not made such a statement without having good reasons for it. Simonides's letter also contains several points which in and of themselves seem apt to arouse suspicion. His Work was intended as a present for the Emperor Nikolaus, but as it is completed, there is no longer any question of sending it to the Russian Emperor; on the other hand, it comes to the Library on Sinai by chance. No reasons are given why the original provision was waived. Maybe you want to look for these in that The work was not good enough and that, as the letter says, it should be rewritten. But then it is not likely that Simonides would have completed this difficult work, which must already have proved to be a failure at an earlier stage. It is therefore suspicious that both the uncle Benedict and the calligrapher Dionysius should have made corrections in the manuscript, and this circumstance inevitably arouses the thought that we are dealing here with an attempt to explain the peculiarities of the manuscript, which Tischendorf calls "the very old Marginal Remarks of the First and Second Corrector", which the learned Professor intends to include in the Text printed with diplomatic accuracy 1). But Tischen= dorf further says that Everything that has subsequently been changed in the original Text must is announced in a Commentary, where, as far as possible, a strict distinction is made between the various authors concerned". In addition to the corrections by the two oldest correctors, the manuscript contains corrections by various others; but of these corrections we find in Simonides' letter absolutely no explanation. We believe that these observations would be sufficient to warn readers against hastily placing credence in Simonides' presentation of the matter. But Science demands that, after Suspicion is aroused, it is put in a perfectly clear Chs. Reliable investigations of Simonides's claim therefore probably dare to be faced.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top