Steven Avery
Administrator
Have you been able to confirm whether the "Pages 362-366" match up to the page numbers on the Russian Wikisource?
Православное Обозрение, 1863, Volume 10, Pages 362-366
Is a reference to what Kevin McGrane has in p. 56-67 nine times referenced in his Bill Cooper book.
Footnote 133 on p. 156 - word for boy, barely relevant
Footnote 134 on p. 156 - "denied hospitality"
Footnote 135 on p. 156 - information on Amphilochius who entered Panteleimon in 1843
’. The Panteleimon monastery subsequently made it a matter of public knowledge: ‘Benedict, who died in 1841, was neither Simonides’ uncle, nor a relative, but only a compatriot. This kind old man, whose example he should have followed, really interceded here for his fellow countryman, so that he could stay here for some time for his spiritual good. But on account of his behaviour the young man did not justify the care of the elder Benedict, and therefore the future glorious adventurer was soon denied further hospitality here.’
p. 57 - Simonides was accepted under the patronage of Mr Sturdza, and in his dependency placed in the Odessa Richelieu Lyceum to learn to read and write…But…was soon expelled from the Lyceum with dishonour.136
p. 66 - Simonides, having spent time at the Panteleimon monastery, knew well that the monks on Mount Athos did not take The Manchester Guardian. But within a few months an article in the Russian journal Православное Обозрение [‘Orthodox Review’] reproduced much of Simonides’ letter of September 3, 1862, and the reaction of Tischendorf appearing in the Allgemeine Zeitung of December 22, 1862,156 both translated into Russian.157 Clearly irritated by Simonides’ false account to have produced the Codex under their noses and with their full approval and authority, and to have grossly misidentified their hegumen, they responded (in Russian) to the editors of Православное Обозрение: 158
Footnotes 157 158
p. 67
the elder Gerasim—who is hegumen to this day. If he had been cognizant of the matter, then of course Simonides would not have been allowed to write even two lines from the Bible; because what sort of hegumen would agree to promote his monastery as a perpetrator of lies and forgery and, moreover, in the eyes of the co-religionist Emperor?160 Suppose he did not know? But Simonides himself says that the case was not secretly conducted, but solemnly and for an important purpose. In any case, one does not need to talk at length. The matter is easily resolved: ‘come and see.’ The hegumen from Simonides’ time is still alive. And besides, there are still quite a few persons in the monastery who knew Simonides and who saw his deeds. Go to whomever you wish, and ask them!
Last edited: