Tischendorf 1860 Hermas retraction - Notitia editionis codicis Bibliorum Sinaitici - versutum te esse circa scripturas

[Steven Avery]

Latin editions from Germany

Hermae Pastor Graece Ex Fragmentis Lipsiensibus Instituta Quaestione De Vero Graeci Textus Lipsiensis Fonte (1856) (German Edition)
http://www.amazon.com/Fragmentis-Lipsiensibus-Instituta-Quaestione-Lipsiensis/dp/1162528184
https://play.google.com/books/reade...sec=frontcover&output=reader&hl=en&pg=GBS.PP7 (text visible online)

Patrum Apostolicorum Opera - Hermas (1857)
Albert Dressel
https://books.google.com/books?id=mrqThokslpcC&pg=PR54
https://books.google.com/books?id=y61pAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA56

Tischendorf medieval retranslation accusation

Quae cum ita sint, nullus dubito quin Simonideis fragmentis Graecum textum nacti simus eum, quo quis aetate media vertens Latina deperditam Graecum ipsius, qui sertur Hermae;, compensare studuerit....

In 1857 Allard Pierson (1831-1896) gave a Dutch review of the Dressel Apostolic Fathers edition on p. 47-63. And had a section on the Hermas edition of Tischendorf, listed on the title page as:

Accedit Hermae Pastor ex fragmentis graecis Lipsiensibus, instituta quaestione de vero ejus textus fonte, auctore Const. Tischendorf.

Thus on p. 55-56 we have the most germane part.

Godgeleerde en wijsgeerige opstellen, Volume 1
https://books.google.com/books?id=y61pAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA56

Pierson is quoting the Tischendorf Latin!

‘ Quae cum ita sint, nullus dubito quin Simonideis fragmentis Graecum textum nacti simus eum, quo quis aetate media vertens Latina deperditum Graecum ipsius qui fertur Hermae compensare studuerit. Quo de interprete iam subtilius viderint alii. Non deerunt quidem qui etiam tot argumentorum coniunctorum vim subterfugiant.... Poterunt illi coniicere textum fragmentorum Lipsiensium, antiquissimus quum sit, ex Latinis, i. e. ineptissime illatis nonnullorum codicum Latinorum apertis vitiis, subinde esse corruptum. Quam coniecturam cum similibus omnibus concedamus aliis. Nobis vero de ipsa re, quemadmodum exposuimus, tantopere persuasum est, ut argumentorum plus alferre supersedeamus. Invenient plura qui Palatinum codicem, haud leve editionis P. P. A. A. Dresselianae ornamentum 2), nec neglectis iis quae praeterea ex Latinis codicibus prolata sunt proferenturque, cum Graeco textu Lipsiensi contulerint.” Waar-bij Tischendorf in een noot voegt: To which Tischendorf adds in a note: “Hunc ipsum passim ex Graeco textu nostro corrigi posse non mirum est. Graecus enim interpres quum codicem Simonideum — id quod ipsa vitiorum, quibus tria folia saeculi XIV. laborant, frequentia docet — tum codicem Palatinum aetate anteit. Correctionis talis exemplum est Vis. III. 9. “Quando ergo operas matris earum servaveris,omnes poteris videre.” Scribendum est consultis Graecis:------- servaveris omnes, poteris vivere.

Eandem in rem haud scio an ea quoque converti queant quae libro Pastoris Hermae in codice indeque etiam in Simonidis apographo praeposita leguntur. Leguntur illa quidem mirum in modum corrupta; quod magnam certe partem ex imperitia fluxit Simonidis in legendis primis maxime codicis sui foliis persaepe lapsi. Ceterum ab eo textu, quem editor princeps ex falsato Simonidis apographo hausit et in prolegomenis pag. IX conatus est restituere, magnopere differt verum apographum. Nihilominus ut iam vidit editor princeps, clarum est illud, codicis notam vel potius prologum vel maxime ab eo pendere loco hist. eccl. Euseb. (III. 3), ubi Pastoris Hermae mentio fit. Illa vero verba interpres Latini textus ad significandam libri a se Graece vertendi antiquitatem gravitatemque aptissime labori suo praeponere poterat. Quae (supra) de Graecitate Hermae Lipsieusis diximus, vim suam minime eo amittunt quod unum vel alterum ex iis quae “Latina potius quam Graeca esse” significavimus, apud Graecos non inauditum est. Hoc enim si esset, unde tandem haberet Graecus Hermae Latini interpres sermonis patrii non ignarus?

(this goes on with linguistics, this might be easier text than any original Tischendorf)

These things being so, no one doubts that we have obtained the Greek text from the fragments of Simonides, with which someone in the Middle Ages, translating the Latin, endeavored to compensate for the lost Greek of the same which is attributed to Hermas. As for the translator, others have already seen more precisely. Indeed, there will not be wanting those who can subvert the force of even so many combined arguments.... They will be able to conjecture the text of the Lipsian fragments, the most ancient that exists, from the Latins, i. e. that it was from time to time corrupted by the open faults of some of the Latin codices, very unwisely brought forth. I guess we all agree with others like that. We, however, are so convinced of the matter itself, as we have explained, that we remain to bring forth more arguments. They will find more that the Palatine codex, not a light ornament of the edition of P. P. A. A. Dresseliana 2), and not neglecting those that have been brought forth from the Latin codices and brought forward, with the Greek text of Lipsiensis." Waar-bij Tischendorf in een noot voegt: “It is not surprising that this very thing can be corrected here and there from our Greek text. For the Greek translator of the codex Simonides - that is the very vices, of which the three leaves of the 14th century they work, the frequency teaches - then the Palatine code predates the age. Force is such an example of correction. III. 9. "Then when you have observed the works of their mother, you will be able to see them all." It must be written with the help of the Greeks:------- if you save all, you will be able to live.

I do not know whether those things which are read in the book of Shepherd Hermas in the codex and from thence also in Simonides' apograph are to be converted into the same matter. They are indeed read in a strange manner corrupted; which certainly flowed a great part from Simonides' inexperience in reading the first leaves of his codex. Furthermore, from that text, which the editor-in-chief drew from the falsified apograph of Simonides and in the prolegomena on p. 9 he tried to restore, the true apograph differs greatly. Nevertheless, as the editor-in-chief has already seen, it is clear that the mark of the codex, or rather the prologue, or, depending on it, instead of the hist. etc. Eusebius (III. 3), where the shepherd Hermes is mentioned. But the translator of the Latin text was able to put the words of the translator of the Latin text in order to indicate the antiquity and gravity of the book he was translating into Greek. What we have said (above) about the Greekness of Hermas of Lipsius does not lose its force in the least because one or two of those things which we have indicated to be "Latin rather than Greek" were not unheard of among the Greeks. For if this were the case, how would a Greek Hermes, who was not ignorant of the language of his country, have an interpreter of the Latin?

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

Leipziger zeitung (April 17, 1859)
Tischendorf
https://books.google.com/books?id=O...q=" bekanntlich Simonides einen fast"&f=false

" bekanntlich Simonides einen fast"

Notitia editionis codicis Bibliorum Sinaitici : accedit catalogus codicum nuper ex oriente Petropolin perlatorum,
item Origenis Scholia in Proverbia Salomonis, partim nunc primum partim secundum atque emendatius edita (1860)
Constantine Tischendorf
https://books.google.com/books?id=4Ac4AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA45

1 Lipsiensem textum in universum non veteris cuiusdam Latinorum interpretis esse, ut antea existimaveram, sed ex ipso Graeco fonte derivatum, iam primis litteris mense Martio anno 1859 de invento codice Cahira in patriam missis declaravi Cf. supra p. 10 not 1. Quam in rem haec ibi scripta sunt:

I already declared in the first letter sent to the country in March, 1859, about the discovery of the Cairo codex, that the Lipsian text was universally not that of an old Latin translator, as I had previously thought, but derived from the Greek source itself. Cf. above p. 10 note 1. (Not sure what that is a reference but we see this German in the Falkenstein April 1859 letter text). In that matter these things are written there:

„Von dem Hirten des Hermas brachte bekanntlich Simonides einen fast vollständigen griechischen Text nach Leipzig, theils in einer von ihm auf dem Athos gemachten Abschrift, theils auf drei Papierblättern aus dem 15. oder 14. Jahrhundert Nachdem dieser Text zuerst im December 1855 in einer sehr unglucklichen Entstellung herausgegeben. bald darauf auch von mir in genauerer Fassung wiederholt worden war, erhoben sich nicht geringe Zweifel darüber, ob er wirklich aus dem Alterthume stamme oder in der Hauptsache eine mittelalterliche Rückübersetzung aus dem Lateinischen enthalte. Ver allen anderen vertrat ich selbst die letztere Ansicht. Hierüber ist nunmehr durch die Handschrift, die gerade tausend Jahre älter ist als die Leipziger Blätter, volle Klarheit gewonnen; ich freue mich mittheilen zu konnen, dass der Leipziger Text nicht aus mittelalterlichen Studien, sondern aus dem alten Originaltexte hergeflowen ist. Meine entgegengesetzte Behäuptung hat sich aber insofern bewährt, als der Leipziger Text an vielen Corruptionen und auch an solchen leidet, dir ohne Zweifel aus mittelalterlicher Benutzung des lateinischen Textes, herstammen."

"As is well known, Simonides brought an almost complete Greek text of the shepherd of Hermas to Leipzig, partly in a copy made by him on Mount Athos, partly on three sheets of paper from the 15th or 14th century. After this text first appeared in December 1855 in a very unfortunate disfigurement published. soon afterwards was also repeated by me in a more precise version, no small doubts arose as to whether it really came from antiquity or whether it mainly contained a medieval translation back from Latin. To everyone else, I myself took the latter view. This has now been fully clarified by the manuscript, which is just a thousand years older than the Leipzig sheets; I am pleased to be able to announce that the Leipzig text did not come from medieval studies, but from the old original text. However, my contrary assertion has proven itself insofar as the Leipzig text suffers from many corruptions and also from such, which undoubtedly stem from the medieval use of the Latin text."

Patrum apostolicorum opera (1863)
Albert Dressel
https://books.google.com/books/about/Patrum_Apostolorum_Opera.html?id=q5TL8HznnoIC
http://www.worldcat.org/title/patrum-apostolicorum-opera/oclc/18776008

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

First there is a section around p. iv on CARM from cjab

Tischendorf himself resiles from his own arguments, saying "he does not know."
"quam utrum in Latinis an in Graecis primum aliquis instituerit ambiguum est."
https://books.google.com/books?id=q5TL8HznnoIC&pg=PR4

(Greek) Sinaiticus vero codex, Aethiops et Palatinus consentientes post (Greek) nihil additum habent. Quae in his similibusque aliis ab auctoritate Sinaitici codicis destituuntur 2, ab alia haud dubie recensione pendent, quam utrum in Latinis an in Graecis primum aliquis inslituerit ambiguum est Sed de his proxime alii videbunt, nec nobis ipsis, ut iam indicatum est, singula accuratius indagandi locum desuturum speramus. Nunc satis habemus editioni Dresselianae, diuturnis amici docti laboribus plenae, lectionibus Sinaiticis additis consuluisse, quae ut satis docent quantopere textus Lipsiensis, quamvis haud contemnendus sit, ab antiqua veritate deflexerit, ita totam eam quam praebent Pastoris partem exceptis paucis antiquo nitori reddunt.


But the Sinaitic codex, the Ethiopian and the Palatine agreeing after (Greek) have nothing added. What in these and similar others is omitted from the authority of the Sinaitic code, 2 depends, without doubt, on another review, than whether it was in the Latins or in the Greeks that someone first slipped in is doubtful. We hope that the place will be closed. Now we have enough to consult the Dresselian edition, full of the labors of a long-time learned friend, with additions to the Sinaitic readings, which sufficiently show how much the Leipzig text, although not to be despised, has deviated from the ancient truth, so that they restore the whole of it which they present to the ancient spirit, with the exception of a few of the part of the Shepherd.

1) Capite vero quarto exeunte verba gravissima "sicum scriptum est" minime Latino interpreti, ut suspicari licebat, sed ipsi scriptori vindicate codex Sinaiticus.
1) At the end of the fourth chapter, the most important words, "so it is written," were not at all to the Latin translator, as might be suspected, but to the writer himself, claiming the Sinaiticus codex.

CARM
https://forums.carm.org/threads/cod...-simonides-timeline.13239/page-7#post-1049356

The retraction is here on p. 45-46. Tischendorf had accused the Simonides Hermas, but found that embarrassing when it was time to publish the Sinai Hermas. The arguments made by him against the authenticity of the Simonides text could be adducible against Sinaiticus authenticiy.

Journal of Sacred Literature - July 1859
Leipziger Zeitung - April 17, 1859
Tischendorf from Cairo to Von Falkenstein - March 15, 1859.
https://books.google.com/books?id=ExU2AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA394

Simonides confessedly brought a very perfect Greek text to Leipzig, part copied by him from a MS. at Mount Athos, and part upon three paper leaves of the fourteenth or fifteenth century. After this text was published in December 1855, and repeated soon after by me more accurately, considerable doubt arose about it, whether it was really ancient or a mediaeval translation from the Latin. I especially opposed the last view, (see below, this is claimed to be a Cowper mistranslation) and my opinion is confirmed by these leaves', at least 1000 years older, shewing that the Leipsig text had been derived from the original, but is corrupt, and that in consequence of a mediaeval use of the Latin.

The Scottish scholar James Donaldson noted this problem.

Then we have the New Finds of 1975, showing that the Codex Sinaiticus had in fact been the full text.

Would the Sinaiticus controversies give him a motive for truncating the text?
Uspensky saw Hermas in 1845, likely the full text, there was no indication that it was just the first sections.

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

A solid 1859 summary

The Literary Churchman (1859)
Tischendorf's Recent Discovery
https://books.google.com/books?id=t84FAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA258

Dr. Tischendorf then, goes on to state that this MS. comprises, besides this perfect copy of the New Testament, two other treatises of great value. These are the epistle ascribed to Barnabas, although not really written by him, in a more perfect condition than that in which it is found elsewhere. All the Greek MSS. hitherto known—and they are of a late date—are deficient in the beginning, having lost the first five chapters, which have been hitherto known only from the bad Latin translation. The other treatise is the Greek of the "Pastor" of Hermas. Dr. Tischendorf, it will be remembered, published in the Patres Apostolici of Dressel a Greek copy of the Hermas, from the MS. obtained through Simonides. Of this edition we gave an account at the time, stating the opinion of Tischendorf as to the text, which he considered to be a mediaeval re-translation from the Latin. LIT CHURCH., vol. iii. No. .5.) He informs us now that this is not the case, but that the published text represents the original Greek. But he considers that there was, nevertheless, some ground for his suspicion in the numerous corruptions of the text, some of which arose from the use of the Latin text in the middle ages. ...

[Since the above article was in type, we have had an opportunity of reading Mr. Cowper's translation of the letter of Tischendorf, in the "Journal of Sacred Literature." We believe he has mistaken one paragraph completely. He makes Tischendorf declare that he opposed the notion that the Greek text of Simonides is a mediaeval translation. If our memory--for we have returned the letter to Messrs. W. and N. —does not deceive us, Tischendorf says exactly the contrary. At all events, such was the fact. Here are his own words in Dressel's book :—Quae cum ita sint, nullus dubito quin Simonideis fragmentis Graecum textum nacti simus eum, quo quis aetate media vertens Latina deperditam Graecum ipsius, qui sertur Hermae;, compensare studuerit. Words cannot be plainer. We have omitted a sentence of Tischendorf, in which he appears to identify the new MS. with the Codex Frederico-Augustanus, but his expressions are very ambiguous. Mr. Cowper has translated it, as relating to this MS. without any hesitation. We do not see whether he alludes to this or some other discovery. Time will shew.]

The Literary Churchman adds some warnings about the Tischendorf antiquity claims for the ms.

For ourselves, we will only say that we must be content to suspend our opinion until we have further information, without, in the meantime, entirely acceding to the statements of Dr Tischendorf as to the antiquity of the MS. He is, as we all know, the first authority in such matters, but in the first warmth of delight at so great a discovery we feel it possible that his enthusiasm may in some degree have warped his judgment. That a wonderful discovery in regard to Biblical criticism has been made, there can be no doubt; whether the MS. will eventually prove to be as old and as valuable as Dr. Tischendorf now believes it to he, must be ascertained by the result.

And a bit about how the loan-purchase-ownership question was seen at the time.

Persons who are usually very well informed on such matters have inferred, on what grounds we do not know, that the MS. itself has been purchased by the Emperor of Russia. We can only state that we do not see any grounds for such an opinion in the letter of Dr. Tischendorf. He promises to transcribe and publish the MS. under the patronage of the Emperor of Russia; this appears to be all for which his letter gives any authority

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

The Shepherd of Hermas, tr. with an intr. and notes by Charles Holland Hoole (1870)
https://books.google.com/books?id=Z-gCAAAAQAAJ&pg=PR17

Hermas... The Greek original disappeared, and it was long known only in a Latin version. But a few years ago a Greek version of the greater part of Hermas was discovered by Simonides in Mount Athos. This is now called the Codex Lipsiensis.1 The character of the discoverer caused it at first to be regarded with suspicion, and it was asserted by Tischendorf that it was in reality not the Greek original, but a translation from the Latin version into Greek, executed in the middle ages. The recently discovered Codex Sinaiticus, however, was found to contain a considerable portion of a Greek version of Hermas substantially the same as that of the Codex Lipsiensis and as the Codex Sinaiticus can hardly be put at a later date than 520 A.D., it can scarcely be doubted that the Greek version which it contains is the original of Hermas, as it cannot be supposed that the Greek version had then disappeared. The style of the Greek too is, on the whole, what might have been expected from the supposed date and authorship : Hellenistic, not entirely free from grammatical errors, by no means equal in power and dignity to the books of the New Testament, but simple and intelligible, and well adapted for popular reading.

... 1 Tischendorf has retracted his objections to the Greek text of the Codex Lipsiensis since the discovery of the Codex Sinaiticus; Hilgenfeld and Canon Westcott accept the Greek as genuine. But it is attacked at length by Mr. Donaldson in his History of Christian Literature and Doctrine, vol. i. p. 309.

The Church Review, Volume 13 (1871)
The Sinaitic Codex of the Bible
https://books.google.com/books?id=o-_NAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA718

"We conclude this portion of our inquiry with a reference to the light, thrown by the the Sinaitic Hermas upon the Greek text of Simonides, which Dr. Tischendorf now admits to have been a copy from the original, modified by a Latin Version, and not a medieval Greek retranslation of the Latin, as he supposed. This is important, because it relieves poor Simonides of one of the many sins laid to his charge."

Bibliotheca Sacra (1876)
Tischendorf
Caspar René Gregory
https://books.google.com/books?id=sdkWAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA171

This was followed by a contest about the text which Simonides had used for his Hermas. Tischendorf insisted at first that it was a text made by retranslation from the Latin; but after he found the part of Hermas in the Sinaitic manuscript, he at once said that the text used by Simonides was from the original Greek, though corrupted by use of the middle age Latin text.

Gregory was a solid supporter of Tischendorf, in a sense his protege.

History of the Christian Church, Volume II: Ante-Nicene Christianity. A.D. 100-325
Philip Schaff
https://books.google.com/books?id=WTA2AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA678
(1891)
https://books.google.com/books?id=Rqk8AAAAYAAJ&pg=PA678 (1884)

The older editions give only the imperfect Latin Version, first published by Faber Stapulensis (Par. 1513). Other Latin MSS. were discovered since. The Greek text (brought from Mt. Athos by Constantine Simonides, and called Cod. Lipsiensis was first published by R. Anger, with a preface by G. Dindorf (Lips. 1856); then by Tischendorf, in Dressels Patres Apost., Lips 1857 (p.572-637): again in the second ed. 1863, where Tischendorf, in consequence of the intervening discovery of the Cod. Sinaiticus retracted his former objections to the originality of the Greek Hermas from Mt. Athos, which he had pronounced a mediaeval retranslation from the Latin (see the Proleg., Appendix and Preface to the second ed.).... The texts from Mt. Athos and Mt. Sinai substantially agree.

This all leads into the analysis of the Scottish scholar, James Donaldson.

James Donaldson says that much of the opposition raised by Tischendorf is in fact adducible to the Sinaiticus ms, that linguistically the Hermas and Barnabas mss are not from the antiquity time supposed.

And the related questions regarding the history of the 1843 Barnabas publication.
Steven Avery

from Dressel edition, right after ‘Maximo, fix above
—Quae quem ita sint, nullus dubito quin Simonideis fragmentis Graecum textum nacti simus eum, quo quis aetate media vertens Latina depertitum Graecum ipsius, qui sertur (fertur) Hermae compensare studuerit.
https://books.google.com/books?id=9I4wAQAAMAAJ&pg=PR15
Be that as it may, no one doubts that we have obtained a Greek text from the fragments of Simonides, with which someone in the middle ages, translating Latin, endeavored to compensate for the unearthed Greek of his own, which is set by Hermas

 

[Steven Avery]

Aus Dem Heiligen Lande - (1862) "multiple corruption of text for a medieval translation from Latin ...erroneous"

In 1862 Tischendorf gave his Shepherd of Hermas retraction dance in:

Aus Dem Heiligen Lande (1862)
Constantine Tischendorf
https://books.google.com/books?id=CWlAAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA112

" ... die Fragmente des Hirten ab, einer Schrift von gleichem Ansehen mit Barnabas, die im Originaltexte für gänzlich verloren gegolten hatte, bis ihn 1855 der vielberufene Grieche Simonides, theils abschriftlich theils in drei Papierblätteru des 14. Jahrhunderts, vom Berg Athos nach Leipzig brachte. Aus mehreren Gründen hatte ich diesen an vielfacher Verderbniss leidenden Text für eine mittelalterliche Rückübersetzung aus dem Latein angesehen; der uralte Sinaitext überzeugte mich bald, dass diese Ansicht, wenigstens in Bezug auf das Ganze, eine irrthümliche gewesen."

The fragments of shepherds from, a magazine of the same view with Barnabas, who had been considered lost in the original texts for entirely until it 1855 the lot appointed Greek Simonides, partly with copies partly in three sheets of paper the 14th century. century, brought from Mount Athos to Leipzig. For several reasons, I had viewed this suffering multiple corruption of text for a medieval translation from Latin; the ancient text Sinai soon convinced me that this view, at least in relation to the whole, been an erroneous.

 

[Steven Avery]

Tischendorf was accusing his own Simonides-seized Hermas
- thus he had to retract to try to protect the similar Sinaiticus

"But the great novelty of the volume is the Greek text of Hermas, edited by Tischcndorf. Our readers are aware that Rudolf Anger and Dindorf published the Greek text of Hermas from a MS. furnished by Simonides, and that before they could bring out the volume of annotations which they promised, and their subscribers had paid for, the affair of Simonides took a somewhat unpleasant turn ! However, it is with Tischendorf, and not with Dindorf, that we are now concerned. Tischendorf’s account of the matter, if we rightly understand his statements, which are by no means so clear as they might be, is the following. He states that the moment he saw the Uranius he pronounced it a forgery, but that Simonides, in the case of Hermas, had gone to work in a different manner. He had three genuine leaves of a MS. of the Greek text of Hermas, which came from a monastery on Mount Athos, and he had transcribed the rest of the MS. in that monastery. But the MS. which he gave to Anger and Dindorf for publication was not that transcript, which he kept for himself, as a source of future fraud, but a fresh copy made from it, and he had made alterations in this copy. But Tischendorf, who never saw the falsified copy, has been favoured with the original draught of it, which Simonides is said to have copied from the MS. on Mount Athos, and from these materials he has constructed his text. His opinion is. that the MS. is of the fourteenth century, (Prolegomena, De Hermae Gr. Lips. Fonte, p. lv. note,) and that the Greek is not the original Greek text of the treatise, but a mediaeval translation from the Latin. Into this question, and the arguments adduced for it, we cannot enter here. Nor can we fail to observe that the very name of Simonides casts a doubt upon the whole matter, and that this doubt will not he cleared up until the remainder of the Greek MS. shall have been inspected in Mount Athos. Tischendorf speaks most confidently of his own power of detecting forgeries, and his familiarity with MSS.; and his reputation on these points is deservedly pre-eminent; but after the figure which Anger and Dindorf have already made on this occasion, not to mention the other German scholars, who wore equally deceived, our confidence in the acuteness of the literary detectives on the Continent is rather shaken.

Literary Churchman (1857)
March 7, 1857
https://books.google.com/books?id=gc4FAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA81

 

[Steven Avery]

From Anton Hilhorst

Here we may have the Tischendorf accusation of retroversion

2 Voir, entre autres, Dressel, Patrum Apostolicorum Opéra2, pp III-IV Dès 1856, il avait soumis cette idée à ceux qui ne pourraient admettre sa thérie d'une rétroversion (Hermae Pastor, p XV = 1857, p LIV)
https://books.google.com/books?id=ggib8P8vzXIC&pg=PR55

2 See, among others, Dressel, Patrum Apostolicorum Opéra2, pp III-IV From 1856, he submitted this idea to those who could not admit his theory of a retroversion (Hermae Pastor, p XV = 1857, p LIV)

Compare to Carlini
https://www.purebibleforum.com/inde...chendorf-contra-athous-hermas.2862/post-11851

 

[Steven Avery]

Note the Maximo and Maximus section
https://books.google.com/books?id=ggib8P8vzXIC&pg=PR54

 

[Steven Avery]

"versutum te esse circa scripturas" "Tischendorf"

Search for this after seen in
Carlini
https://www.academia.edu/37673334/Simonides_falsario5_doc
"versutum esse circa scripturas"

Era facile pensare, p. es. che(Greek) Vis. III 3, 5 fosse frutto di retroversione dal latino (versutum esse circa scripturas), soprattutto dopo aver fatto la collazione del Sinaitico che è privo di quella sequenza.

Carlini on PBF
https://www.purebibleforum.com/inde...ore-of-tischendorf-contra-athous-hermas.2862/

It was easy to think, p. ex. that (GREEK) of Vis. Ill 3, 5 was the result of retroversion from the Latin (versutum esse circa scripturas), especially after having made the collation of the Sinaitic which is devoid of that sequence

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

Hermae Pastor (1858)
https://books.google.com/books?id=osAHAAAAQAAJ&pg=PR15

Jallabert 1858
https://books.google.com/books?id=sLJWAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA113

Patrum apostolicorum opera. Textum ad fidem codicum et Graecorum et Latinorum, ineditorum copia insignium, adhibitis praestantissimis editionibus, recensuit atque emendavit, notis illustravit (1863)
https://archive.org/details/patrumapostolic02fathgoog/page/n59/mode/2up

1864 Review
https://books.google.com/books?id=1bxFNdiBbo0C&pg=PA531

Hilgenfeld 1884
https://books.google.com/books?id=rCERAAAAYAAJ&pg=RA2-PA17

Massimo Villa (2019)
http://www.fedoa.unina.it/12423/1/149-Book Manuscript-886-1-10-20200224.pdf
https://unora.unior.it/retrieve/han...geʿez di età aksumita. Il Pastore di Erma.pdf

 

[Steven Avery]

Carlini
We can follow the first phases of the dispute thanks to the very words of Tischendorf who first wrote a "Bericht" appeared in the Dresdner Journal, Nr. 30 of 5 February 1856 27 and subsequently added a large note (dated Easter 1863) to the Praefatio of the second edition of the Apostolic Patres of Albert Dressel (Dressel 1863, i-iv).

https://books.google.com/books?id=4SJVAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA14
https://books.google.com/books?id=Ct8UAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA14

maybe Allegmaine Zeitung (1856)

Allgemeine Zeitung (1856) - Bavarian State library

Digitized book by the Bavarian State Library: Allgemeine Zeitung (1856)

opacplus.bsb-muenchen.de

 

[Steven Avery]

bibliography timeline of accusation and retraction
and references to Tischendorf or James Donaldson linguistics and Maximo

Search Linkman for linguistics and Donaldson with Hermas, use separate Donaldson section

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

Dresdner Journal, Nr. 30 of 5 February 1856 27- Harvard Library
Das Ende einer Zeitung
Der Handelsvertrag mit Frankreich
Lycourgas

Enthüllungen über den Simonides-Dindorf'schen Uranios

books.google.com

Hermae Pastor (1856)
https://books.google.com/books?id=osAHAAAAQAAJ&pg=PR15

Patrum Apostolicorum Opera -
Dressel (1857)
https://books.google.com/books?id=ggib8P8vzXIC&pg=PR55
https://books.google.com/books?id=_xpWAAAAMAAJ&pg=PR54
Dressel
https://books.google.com/books?id=mrqThokslpcC&pg=PA572

Albert Pierson (1857) - German
Review of Dressel Apostolic Fathers
https://books.google.com/books?id=Nw4EAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA52

Dindorf'schen
Enthüllungen über den Simonides-dindorfschen Uranios : Zu einem Geschichtsabriss über Simonides (1856)
( 2 Editions per Gennadius )
https://archive.org/details/enthllungenberd00lykogoog
https://books.google.com/books?id=3X2B-kaniakC
Lycourgas

Jallabert (1858)

Journal of Sacred Literature, Volume 9 = 1859
https://books.google.com/books?id=ExU2AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA394

Notitia editionis codicis Bibliorum Sinaitici .(1860)
Tischendorf
http://books.google.com/books?id=4Ac4AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA45

Church Review (1861)
http://books.google.com/books?id=o-_NAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA718

Patrum apostolicorum opera
Dressel (1863)
http://books.google.com/books?id=lioVAAAAQAAJ&pg=PR39
https://books.google.com/books?id=lioVAAAAQAAJ&pg=PR54

James Donaldson

Shepherd of Hermas (1870)
http://books.google.com/books?id=Z-gCAAAAQAAJ&pg=PR17

Caspar Rene Gregory (1876)
http://books.google.com/books?id=sdkWAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA171

Schaff (1884) and (1891) and (1901)
http://books.google.com/books?id=TbkGAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA679

Classical Review (1889)
http://books.google.com/books?id=IFRJAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA65

(1891)
http://books.google.com/books?id=WTA2AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA678
http://books.google.com/books?id=Y6fBpjjN64sC&pg=PT868

Cyclopaedia (1891)
http://books.google.com/books?id=8INPAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA204

Carlini

BCHF
http://earlywritings.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1025&p=21546#p21632

David Anson Brown (2013)
http://the-jesus-realm.com/wordpress/2013/07/31/hoax-alert-codex-sinaiticus/

http://www.basicchristian.org/The%20Jesus%20Realm%20-%20The%20Emerging%20World%20Court%20System.pdf

This was on Facebook under American Protestant

James Asch

2017 Conference
Konstantinos Simonides in Leipzig: Der Hirte des Hermas
p. 127-142
Friedericke Berger
https://books.google.com/books?id=go7fDgAAQBAJ&pg=PA132

Daraufhin zog Alexandros Lykurgos, dessen Einwände von Anger und Din-
dorf ignoriert wurden, Konstantin von Tischendorf hinzu, der die Unechtheit
sofort erkannte"’. Auch Lepsius, der die Pergamente in der Berliner Akademie
der Wissenschaften prüfte, kam zum gleichen Schluss“. Als Simonides im Fe-
bruar 1856 in Berlin verhaftet wurde, gelangte die Handschrift, die auf dem
Athos entstanden war, also Cod. gr. 10a, endlich in den Besitz der Leipziger
Bibliothek, und zwar, wie Dindorf schrieb, „durch die dankbar anzuerkennende
Vermittlung des Herrn Polizeidirectors Dr. Stieber in Berlin, zu dem der erfin-
derische Grieche im Februar dieses Jahres in unfreiwillige Beziehung getreten
ist“24.
22 Tischendorf, in: Dresdner Journal 5. 2.1856, S. 117-118.
23 Lepsius, in: Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung 9.2.1856, S. 279-280.
24 Dindorf, in: Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung 6.2.1856, S. 253-254.
25 Dindorf, Wilhelm / Anger, Rudolph (1856), Nachtraglichc Bemcrkungen zu Hermas, in:
Leipziger Repertorium der deutschen und auslandischen Literatur 14, S. 129-147. - Dindorf,
Wilhelm (1857), Nachtraglichc Bemcrkungen zu Hermas, in: Leipziger Repertorium der
deutschen und auslandischen Literatur 15,1, S. 65-79.

Kevin McGrane

David W. Daniels

Pure Bible Forum
https://www.purebibleforum.com/inde...tia-editionis-codicis-bibliorum-sinaitici.93/

Kirk Di Vietro

maybe
http://www.bible.ca/history/philip-schaff/2_ch13.htm

 

[Steven Avery]

1863
Die Anfechtungen der Sinai-Bibel
two palimsests with Uranios and Hermas, until I, by proving the inner palaeographical impossibility of both products,

Erdmasse zum Verräther des Possenspiels wurde; derselbe der 1855 und 1856 durch zwei Palimseste mit Uranios und Hermas Leipziger und Berliner Gelehrte in höchliches Erstaunen versetzte, bis ich durch den Nachweis der inneren paläographischen Unmöglichkeit beider Produkte den schmachvollen Handel,

This is ONLY about the Palimpsest,
Osterreichische Nationalbibliothek, Supplementum graecum 119

 

[Steven Avery]

1863
Waffen der Finsterniss wider die Sinaibibel, etc
https://books.google.com/books?id=rd1UAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA14
file:///D:/Temp%20Download/Waffen-der-Finsternis-gegen-die-Sinaibibel.pdf

In einer Note sagt nun hierauf der Anonymus: "Freilich war hiermit eine fruhere Entdeckung Tischendorf's, daB namlich das fur die Leipz. Univ.-Bibl. von Simonides acquirirte Ms. des griech. Pastor Hermae nur eine mittelalterliche Ruckubersetzung aus dem Lateinischen sei, thatsachlich widerrufen. Es wurde einen gunstigeren Eindruck gemacht haben, wenn dies Dr. T. in einer offenherzigeren, weniger bemantelnden und beschonigenden Weise bekannt hatte. Mit diesem "thatsachlichen Widerruf' u.s.w. verhalt sichs so. Sofort bei meiner ersten Kundgebung vom glucklichen Sinaifunde, den 17. April 1859 in der Leipz. Zeitg. gedruckt, machte ich folgende Mittheilung: "Nachdem dieser Text" (der des Simonides vom Hermas) "zuerst im December 1855 in einer sehr unglucklichen Entstellung herausgegeben, bald darauf auch von mir in genauerer Fassung wiederholt worden war, erhoben sich nicht geringe Zweifel daruber, ob er wirklich aus deni Alterthume stamme, oder in der Hauptsache eine mittelalterliche Ruckllbersetzung aus dem Lateinischen enthalte. Vor alien anderen vertrat ich selbst die letztere Ansicht.

In a note, the anonymous now says: "Of course, an earlier discovery of Tischendorf's, namely that the Ms. of the Greek Pastor Hermae, acquired for the Leipzig Univ.-Bibl. from Simonides, was only a medieval retranslation from Latin, actually It would have made a more favorable impression if Dr. T. had confessed this in a more frank, less cloaked and euphemistic manner. behave like that. Immediately at my first announcement of the happy find of Sinai, April 17, 1859 in Leipzig. contemporary printed, I made the following communication: "After this text" (that of Simonides of Hermas) "was first published in December 1855 in a very unfortunate distortion, and soon afterwards it was also repeated by me in a more precise version, not a few doubts arose about whether it really stemmed from antiquity, or contained in the main a mediaeval translation back from the Latin: I, before all the others, took the latter view myself.

Hieruber ist nunmehr durch die Handschrift, die gerade 1000 Jahre alter ist als die Leipziger Blatter, volle Klarheit gewonnen; ich freue mich, mittheilen zu konnen, daB der Leipziger Text nicht aus mittelalterlichen Studien, sondern aus dem alten Originaltexte hergeflossen ist. Meine entgegengesetzte Behauptung hat sich aber insofern bewahrt, als der Leipziger Text an vielen Corruptionen und auch an solchen leidet, die ohne Zweifel aus mittelalterlicher Benutzung des lateinischen Textes herstammen."

This has now been fully clarified by the manuscript, which is just 1000 years older than the Leipziger Blatter; I am pleased to be able to announce that the Leipzig text is not derived from medieval studies, but from the old original text. However, my contrary assertion has been preserved insofar as the Leipzig text suffers from many corruptions and also from those that undoubtedly stem from the medieval use of the Latin text.

"Bemantelt" ist hierin allerdings eins, namlich, daB gerade an einer der 2 Hauptstellen, aus denen ich den lateinischen Ursprung herleitete, die Sinaihandschrift das ZeugniB des lateinischen Ursprungs bestatigt. Und daB ich Uber diese Stelle:

sogar jetzt nicht ganz "offenherzig" geschrieben, hat seinen Grund in der Schonung desjenigen Freundes des Anonymus, von dessen Seiten sich an diese Worte ein unverantwortliches Spiel anknlupft. Moglicherweise kennt es der Anonymus nicht. Ueber die weiteren "Corruptionen" ist zunachst die kurzlich erschienene 2. Aufl. der Dressel’schen PP. Apost. nachzulesen. Auf den "gunstigen Eindruck" beim Anonymus und Seinesgleichen habe ichs freilich nie und auch hier nicht abgesehen; was ich schreibe, liegt often vor Jedermanns Augen, und wird von mir allenthalben vertreten.

However, one thing is "cloaked" here, namely that precisely in one of the 2 main passages from which I derived the Latin origin, the Sinai manuscript confirms the evidence of the Latin origin. And that I have not even now written quite "open-heartedly" about this passage

has its reason in the protection of that friend of the anonymous, from whose side these words are linked to an irresponsible game. Possibly the anonymous does not know. About the other "corruptions" is the recently published 2nd edition of Dressel's PP. apost. to read. Of course, I never intended to make a "favorable impression" on the anonymous and those like him, and I didn't aim here either; what I write is often in front of everyone's eyes, and is represented by me everywhere.

 

[Steven Avery]

Looking back at

Notitia Editionis Codicis Bibliorum Sinaitici auspicis imp. Alexandri II susceptae: Accedit catal. Codicum nuper ex Oriente Petropolin perlatorum.Item Origenis Scholia in Proverbia Salomonis 1860
https://books.google.com/books?id=qBxhSegTf6YC&pg=PA45

1 Lipsiensem textum in universum nun veteris cuiusdam Latiuorum interpretis esse, ut antea existimavarum, sed ex ipso Graeco fonte derivatum, iam primis litteris mense Martio anno 1859 do inventu codice Cahira in patriam missis declaravi. Cf. supra p. 10 net 1. Quam in rem haec ibi scripta sunt: „Von dem Hirten des Hermas brachte bekanntlich Simonides einen fast volstandigcn griechischen Text nach Leipzig, tlieils in einer von ihm auf dem Athos gemachten Abschrift, theils

1 I already declared in the first letters sent to the country in the month of March, 1859, that I discovered the Cahira codex, that the Lipsian text was universally not the work of an old interpreter of one of the Latins, as I had previously thought, but derived from the Greek source itself. Cf. above p. 10 net 1. In what sense are these things written there:

"Von dem Hirten des Hermas brachte bekanntlich Simonides einen fast volstandigcn griechischen Text nach Leipzig, tlieils in einer von ihm auf dem Athos gemachten Abschrift, theils
As is well known, Simonides brought an almost complete Greek text of the shepherd of hermas to Leipzig, partly in a copy he had made on Mount Athos, partly

NOT DONE
auf drci Papierbluttern aus dem 15. oder 14. Jabrliundcrt. Nachdein dieser Text zuerst ini December 1855 in einer achr uuglucklicbeu KuMellung herausgcgolH-n, bald darauf aucli von mir in genuuorer Fassung wiederbolt wordcn war, erhobon sich nicht gcringc Zweifel da ruber, <*b er wirklich aus dem Allerthumc itarame odcr in der IlnupLviche eine uiittolalterlichc KQckUbersetzung aus detn l.ateinisehen entluilte. Vor alien amlcren vertrat ich selbst die letztere Atisicht. llierttber ist uunmehr durch die Handscbrift, die gerade tausoiid Jahrc Alter ist als die Leipziger Blatter, voile Klarhcit gewonucn; idi freue mich rnittheilcn zu kounen, dass der Leipziger Text nicht aus mittelalterlichen Stmlien. sondern aus deiu alien Originallexte hergetlossen ist. Meine entgegengrsctzte liehauptung hat sich ahcr insofcro bewihrl, als der Leipziger Text an vielen Corruptions und aurh an solchen leidet, die ohne Zweifel aua mittelalterlieher Kenutzung des lateinischen Textes lierstauinirn."

 

[Steven Avery]

The full Tischendorf 1863,
https://books.google.com/books?id=lioVAAAAQAAJ&pg=PR54
https://archive.org/details/patrumapostolic00polygoog/page/n60/mode/2up
https://archive.org/details/patrumapostolico00dresuoft/page/liv/mode/2up
https://archive.org/details/patrumapostolic02fathgoog/page/n59/mode/2up

Pierson quotes from Tisch and is here, with his own notes:
Godgeleerde en wijsgeerige opstellen, Volume 1
DE EERSTE VOLGELINGEN DER APOSTELEN. p. 47-62
https://books.google.com/books?id=y61pAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA56
Touched on here partially, can use much more.
https://purebibleforum.com/index.ph...versutum-te-esse-circa-scripturas.93/post-228

after Maximo, which should match Pierson and his earlier 1856-57 except maybe the added two footnotes.!

Above is in 1856, this next section is not.
However, it is in 1857.

 

[Steven Avery]

Pierson p. 47-62

DE EERSTE VOLGELINGEN DER APOSTELEN.
The First Followers of the Apostle

Dressel and Tischendorf 1857 Edition
https://books.google.com/books?id=Nw4EAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA55
This second one seems to be done better.
https://books.google.com/books?id=y61pAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA55

p. 55

Tot op onzen tijd vras de gtieksche tekst van den Pastor slechts bekend uit gedeelten, die er van gevonden worden bij Clemens Alexandrinus, Origenes, Eusebius en in de door Montfaucon uitgegeven supposititia van Athanasius. Door een latijnsche vertaling, die meer door getrouwheid dan door sierlijkheid uitmunt, werd het gemis van den volledigen grieksehen tekst eenigermate vergoed. Het is echter Simonides gelukt ook dien grieksehen tekst naar Leipzig te brengen, waar hij in 1856 door

Up to our time, the Pastor's Gothic text has been known only from portions of it found in Clemens Alexandrinus, Origen, Eusebius, and in the Supposititia of Athanasius edited by Montfaucon. By a Latin translation, which excels more in fidelity than in elegance, the lack of the complete Greek text has been compensated to some extent. However, Simonides also succeeded in bringing this Greek text to Leipzig, where it was published in 1856 by Rudolphus Anger, with a preface and index by G. Dindorf.

Not only did Tischendorf reproduce this Greek text, but he also demonstrated the authority to be attributed to this text found by Simonides.

Having thus briefly communicated Dressel's prologomena, we shall now give only his result from Tischendorf's treatise:

p. 56

Rudolphus Anger, met eene voorrede en index door G. Dindorf, voorzien, het licht zag.

Dezen griekschen tekst heeft Tischendorf niet slechts gereproduceerd, maar hij heeft ook aangetoond welk gezag aan dezen door Simonides gevonden tekst moet worden toegekend.

Na alzoo de prologomena van Dressel, kortelijk te hebben medegedeeld, zullen wij nu uit de verhandeling van Tischendorf slechts zijn resultaat opgeven:

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

Then we go to the section with the Tischendorf section in POST #1.

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

 

[Steven Avery]

Maria Monachesi
https://books.google.com/books?id=ofQ2AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA5

Canfora interpretation
http://www.siculorum.unict.it/views/home/article-detail.php?id=264
10. Is anyone on Simonides’ side?

Of course, it is possible to cling to the belief that Simonides’ creations were genuine, and there are those who have done so. Some scholars of African studies, for example, accepted the authenticity of the papyrus of the Periplus of Hanno, with all its alterations and final additions.

In 1923 a scholar named Maria Monachesi published The Shepherd of Hermas (Rome, Libreria di Cultura) with an Italian translation and notes. On pp. 4-5 of the introduction, she provided the reader with the following information: «The original text, in Greek, came down to us via two handwritten codices, one from the Monastery of St Gregory on Mount Athos, the other from the Monastery of St Catherine at Mount Sinai. The former (now in the Leipzig Library), which was discovered by Constantine Simonides in 1856, contains almost the whole work (except for the last part) on its 9 folios, and dates back only to the beginning of the 15th or the end of the 14th century […] but until 1856 The Shepherd was known only in the Latin – or so-called Vulgate – version (of which there are many manuscripts), etc.». It was in vain that Tischendorf produced evidence that Simonides himself, who had turned up in Leipzig in 1855,[36] had created those pages using very good imitations of medieval Greek script for his translation back into Greek of the Latin version of The Shepherd.

[36] After an extremely long journey involving stops in Athens, Constantinople, Saint Petersburg, London, Paris and Leipzig in order to try to sell his “unpublished” works.

 

[Steven Avery]

Maria Monachesi (1923)
https://books.google.com/books?id=ofQ2AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA4

The text. - The original text, in Greek, has come down to us in two manuscript codes, one from the Monastery of St. Gregory on Mount Athos, the other from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai, therefore called Sinaitic. The first, (now in the Library of Leipzig), discovered by Constantine Simonides in 1856 and containing in 9 folios almost the entire work (except the last part: Sim IX 30.3 — Sim. X 4-5) dates back only to the beginning of the sec. XV or late XIV; the II, found by Tischendorf in 1859 is much older since it is reported up to the century. IV or princ of V: it is a Greek code of the Old and New Testament and contains in the appendix a fragment of the Shepherd, that is all the visions and mandates from I to IV 3-6.

Il Testo. - Il testo originario, in lingua greca, ci è pervenuto in due codici manoscritti, uno del Monastero di S. Gregorio sul monte Athos, l’altro del Monastero di S. Caterina sul monte Sinai, detto perciò Sinaitico. Il primo, (ora nella Biblioteca di Lipsia), scoperto da Costantino Simonide nel 1856 e contenente in 9 fogli quasi tutta l’opera (eccettuata l’ultima parte : Sim IX 30.3 — Sim. X 4-5) risale soltanto al principio del sec. XV o alla fine del XIV ; il II, trovato dal Tischendorf nel 1859 è molto più antico giacché si riporta fino al sec. IV o al princ del V: è un codice greco del Vecchio e del Nuovo Testamento econtiene in appendice un frammento del Pastore, cioè tutte le visioni e i mandati dal I al IV 3-6.

 

[Steven Avery]

 

[Steven Avery]

CARM - Leipziger Zeitung

  - Codex Sinaiticus - the facts

Farmakidis points out this father-son correspondence is under suspicion of... Need we guess... Forgery! Ohhhh how coincidental... Forgery by Simonides...nooo...never happens... If I remember, the letter or letters were found with his effects in England. More information is needed.

forums.carm.org