The history of the "Leningrad Code" - how did the Torah become a cult of worship?

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

We have already written about the Leningrad manuscript, which strangely appeared in Russia and about the Sinai Codex, which no less strangely came to us precisely in the 19th century, when Russia was forced to accept the Old Testament as a holy book.

The creation and active activity of the Bible Society for the publication and dissemination of the Old Testament was suppressed by Nicholas I, after which this process was mothballed for 30 years. But the fermentation process could not be stopped, and the pressure on society continued. Suddenly, a manuscript of the Hebrew Bible appears in Russia, which Firkovich found:

“The Leningrad Codex is the most ancient copy of the fully preserved text of the Old Testament in Hebrew. And although there are much more ancient manuscripts containing biblical books or their fragments, none of them contains the entire Old Testament. The Leningrad Codex is considered one of the best versions of the Masoretic text. The manuscript was written about AD 1010, probably in Cairo, and was later sold to Damascus. Since the middle of the 19th century, it has been in the Russian State Public Library named after V. I. Saltykov-Shchedrin in Saint Petersburg. (…)

The manuscript belongs to a group of Hebrew texts called the Masoretic. (…)

The importance of the Leningrad Code lies in the fact that today it is the basis for most printed editions of the Old Testament in the Hebrew language (or the Hebrew Bible), since it is the oldest manuscript containing the generally accepted Masoretic text”(§1).

Avraam Samuilovich Firkovich (1786-1874) was a Karaite writer and archaeologist. In 1839, a society of history and antiquities was founded in Odessa, and Firkovich was instructed to collect Karaite antiquities. After a two-year wandering in the Crimea, the Caucasus, as well as in Palestine and Egypt, Firkovich managed to compile a rich collection of old books, manuscripts and gravestone inscriptions, among which the most remarkable manuscript of the Old Testament found in Chufut-Kala.

Of course, it is quite difficult to prove that this manuscript was made in the XI century, and is not a forgery of the XIX century, but nevertheless it underlies most of the printed editions of the Old Testament.

No less interesting story of the appearance of the Sinai Code in Russia. Here is the history of its discovery (§2):

“In 1844, traveling in search of ancient manuscripts, the young German scientist Konstantin von Tischendorf arrived at the monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. He was a tireless manuscript seeker to restore the original text of New Testament scripture. In a letter to his bride, Tischendorf wrote: "I have a sacred goal - to recreate the true form of the New Testament text." In the monastery of St. Catherine there were then three libraries, housed in three separate rooms, and in them, according to Tischendorf, there were about 500 ancient manuscripts. However, he will write in his diary entries that he did not find anything related to the early stage of the formation of the New Testament text.

Further events are reconstructed by biographers from Tischendorf's diary. One day, while working in the main library of the monastery, he saw a basket full of sheets of an ancient manuscript. The scientist examined the sheets - it was an ancient copy of the Septuagint, written in beautiful uncial script. The librarian monk who approached said that two such baskets had already been set on fire and the contents of this basket should also be burned, Tischendorf asked not to do this, referring to the value of the ancient manuscript.

There were 43 sheets in the basket, and the scientist found 86 more sheets of the same code in the library. In terms of content, these were: the 1st book of Kings, the book of the prophet Jeremiah, the book of Ezra and Nehemiah, the book of the prophet Isaiah, the 1st and 4th Maccabean books. At the monastery, Tischendorf was allowed to take 43 sheets, which he then published in Germany. The Codex was named "Frederico Augustinian" in honor of the king of Saxony, who at that time patronized the scientist. Subsequently, Tischendorf visited Sinai twice more, for the third time under the auspices of Russia, which resulted in a complete facsimile edition of the Codex Sinai in 1862 under the title “Codex Bibliorum Sinaiticus Petropolitanus, rescued from darkness under the auspices of His Imperial Majesty Alexander II, delivered to Europe and published for the greater good and glory of Christian teaching by the writings of Konstantin Tischendorf.

There are more questions than answers here, for example, why wasn’t the manuscript given the first time? Why was Russia suddenly forced to patronize and keep this code? etc.

The scientist-encyclopedist N. A. Morozov, whose works, which became the basis for fans of alternative history and new chronology, had his own view of Tischendorf's activities. Tischendorf brought a handwritten copy of the Bible from Sinai and printed it in 1862 as a document of the 4th century. Morozov believed that Tischendorf had specially donated the manuscripts to the Russian library, far from cultural centers at that time, which was difficult for European scholars to get into and expose his swindle. … Morozov personally examined the Sinai Code and saw (§3) that:

“The parchment sheets of this document are not at all frayed at the lower corners, not creased or dirty with fingers, as it should be during the millennial use of it in divine services by the Sinai monks, who, like all Eastern monks, were never distinguished by their cleanliness. … While the middle sheets of parchment in it are completely new (in the sense of being unspoiled and unadorned), all the initial and last ones are torn off and even lost… The inner state of its parchment seemed especially interesting to me in the Sinai Codex. Its sheets are very thin, beautifully crafted and, what is most striking, retained their flexibility, did not become fragile at all! And this circumstance is very important for the definition of antiquity.

When we are dealing with documents that have really lain for a millennium, at least under the best climatic conditions, then often, at the slightest touch of their sheets, they break into tiny pieces, as if we touched the ashes of a book, imperceptibly decayed by the action of atmospheric oxygen … The excellent condition of the inner sheets of the Codex Sinai, with obvious traces of careless treatment of it by the monks, who tore off its binding and tore off the outer sheets, suggests that this manuscript came from some pious lover of ancient religious samples already at a time when there were new samples in use, that is, after the X century. He was not spoiled inside by constant reading, probably precisely because they had already lost the habit of reading such a letter and preferred a new one. Only from this was the manuscript preserved in Sinai until the time when Tischendorf found it there."

Morozov also speaks about the Leningrad Code found by Firkovich:

“I examined the material of this book and came about its qualities to the same conclusions that I expressed already here about the Sinai Code: its sheets are too flexible for unusual antiquity.”

But what if Tischendorf is believed in the sincerity of his actions, because he set a goal to find a genuine New Testament? So it turns out that there was no genuine New Testament at that time? It turns out - it was not. In the middle of the 19th century, a young scientist researched this issue and came to the conclusion (or someone suggested to him) that there are no genuine manuscripts of the New Testament in Europe, but there certainly are in Sinai. But the New Testament of the authors of the biblical project was already of little interest, but when the opportunity arose to use a well-meaning scientist for their own purposes, it was quickly implemented. The search for the New Testament led to a slightly different result: the Old Testament was found in a wastebasket.

Why did the monks throw the manuscript into the trash can? You can't explain it by the fact that they were illiterate.

Monastery of St. Catherine, although she is in Egypt, is Orthodox and Greek monks live in it. If they threw away the manuscripts of the Old Testament, then this means that at that time these manuscripts did not yet belong to the scriptures.

The journal "Pravoslavnoye Obozreniye" (§4) No. 9 for 1862 published an article "Strange announcement of Simonides (§5) on the Sinai Code", which brings some clarity to this issue. Let's give it in full.

“There is a strange announcement in the English newspaper Gardian about the Codex Sinai. It belongs to the famous Simonides, a suspected palaeographer and seller of ancient manuscripts; he writes that the codex discovered by Tischendorf does not belong to the IV century, but to 1839 A. D. Chr. and written by himself! “Towards the end of 1839,” he says, my uncle, abbot of the monastery of St. Martyr Panteleimon on Mount Athos, Benedict, wished to bring a worthy gift to the Russian Emperor Nicholas I for his donations to the monastery of St. martyr.

Since he did not have an object that could be considered decent for this purpose, he turned to Hieromonk Procopius and the Russian monk Pavel for advice, and they decided that it would be best to write the Old and New Testaments, in the likeness of old samples, with an uncial and on parchment. … This copy, together with passages from the seven "men of the apostles"; Barnabas, Herma, Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Polycarp, Papias and Dionysius the Areopagite, in a magnificent binding, was appointed to be presented to the emperor by means of a friendly hand. Dionysius, the secretary of the monastery, was asked to start the work; but he refused, finding it difficult for himself. As a result, I decided to take on it myself, since my dear uncle, apparently, very much desired this. Having compared the most important manuscripts preserved on Athos, I began to practice the techniques of the old monastic writing, and my scholarly uncle compared a copy of the Moscow edition of both Testaments (it was published by the famous brothers Zosimos and was appointed for the Greek people) with several old manuscripts, purified it on the basis of these the latter from many mistakes and handed it over to me for correspondence.

With these two Testaments cleared of errors (the old spelling was, however, withheld), I did not have enough parchment, and with the permission of Venedict I took from the monastery library a very thick, old-bound, almost unwritten book, in which the parchment was preserved remarkably well and was great work. This book was obviously prepared by the secretary or abbot of the monastery, over several centuries, for special purposes; it bore the inscription "a collection of words of praise" and on one page a short, time-damaged speech. I took out the sheet on which the speech was, as well as some other damaged ones, and set to work. First I copied the Old and New Testaments, then the Epistle of Barnabas and the first part of the Shepherd Herma.

I postponed the correspondence of the rest of the creations, since my parchment was all out. After a grievous loss for me, the death of my uncle, I decided to give my work to the monastery binder, so that he bound the manuscript into boards covered with leather, since I took apart the sheets for convenience, and when he did this, the book came into my possession. Some time later, after my resettlement to Constantinople, I showed the work to the Patriarchs Anfim and Constantine and explained to them its purpose. Constantius took him to him, examined him, and asked me to convey to the library of the Sinai Monastery, which I did. Soon thereafter, at the request of both patriarchs, I was awarded the patronage of the most resplendent Countess Etleng and her brother A. S. Sturdza; but before leaving for Odessa, I once again visited the island of Antigone to visit Constantius and finally explain about my promise - to transfer the manuscript to the library of Mount Sinai. But the patriarch was absent and I left him a packet with a letter. On his return, he wrote the following letter to me (the letter says that the manuscript has been accepted). Upon receipt of this letter, I again visited the patriarch, who did not leave me with his benevolent, paternal advice and gave letters to Sturdze; I returned to Constantinople, and from there in November 1841 I arrived in Odessa.

Returning to Constantinople in 1846, I immediately set out for Antigone to visit Constantine and present him with a large bundle of manuscripts. He received me with great favor, and we talked about a lot and, by the way, about my manuscript; he informed me that he had sent him to Sinai some time ago. In 1852 I saw the manuscript at Sinai and asked the librarian how it got to the monastery? But he, apparently, did not know anything about the course of the case, and I also did not tell him anything. Examining the manuscript, I found that it appears to be much older than one would expect. The dedication to Emperor Nicholas, which stood at the beginning of the book, was torn out. Then I began my philological studies, as there were many precious manuscripts in the library that I wanted to look through. Incidentally, I found here the shepherd of Hermas, the Gospel of Matthew and the controversial letter of Aristeus to Philoctetes; they were all written on Egyptian papyrus from the first century. I reported all this to Constantine and my confessor Callistratus in Alexandria.

Here is a short and clear account of the Simonides codex which Professor Tischendorf, who was at Sinai, took, I do not know why; then he was sent to St. Petersburg and issued there under the name of the Sinai Code. When I saw for the first time, two years ago, the Facsimile of Tischendorf at Mr. Newton in Liverpool, I immediately recognized my work and immediately informed Mr. Newton about it."

In conclusion, Simonides points to several still living witnesses who have seen and even re-read the code; explains that the amendments to the text of the manuscript belong partly to Uncle Benedict, partly to Dionysius, who once again wanted to rewrite the codex, and to whom the calligraphic signs belong. He undertakes to prove all this in detail. Simonides himself also made some signs on the margin and in the titles to indicate the manuscripts from which he took the variants. Tischendorf, however, invented the strangest hypotheses to explain these signs. Simonides remembers two passages of the manuscript so well, although he has not seen it for several years, that this alone can already prove who the author of this manuscript is."

In his answer, Tischendorf, as one would expect, accuses Simonides of charlatanism. The above article confirms Morozov's conclusion about the alleged antiquity of the manuscripts found in the monastery of St. Catherine, and confirms his version that this is a forgery. In 1933, the original of the Sinai Code was sold to England for 100,000 rubles, which made it almost impossible for domestic researchers to work with it, including the answer to the question of its exact dating. This is advisable in relation to the solution of the problem "so as not to find ends" …

Here are some more quotes from the work "Tischendorf in Search of the Authentic New Testament" (§6):

"Even before ordination, he firmly set himself the goal of proving the authenticity of the Gospels and restoring the original Gospel edition of the sacred texts."

“He now considered it the most important task to focus attention on texts relating to the first five centuries of Christianity. He convincingly argued that this is the only way to get to the text earlier than the officially “approved” Byzantine New Testament, which he considered nothing more than a derivative, falsified version."

"… that the earliest surviving versions convey to us the true word of the apostles?"

“However, Tischendorf decided to take a closer look at the manuscripts. Before him were parchment pages inscribed in calligraphic uncial script, each containing four columns of text. It was a list of the Greek Old Testament - the Septuagint, which, judging by the style of writing, seemed to Tischendorf the most ancient of all that he had seen: foundations of new Greek paleography. Some of them, like part of the Vatican Bible, I copied with my own hand. Perhaps no one was as familiar with the ancient spelling of Greek letters as I am. And yet I have never seen manuscripts that could be considered more ancient than these Sinai plates."

"However, since he was deprived of his own funds, unlike some English aristocrat, and did not have the powerful support of the British Museum, he had to look for generous like-minded people and patrons."

And these patrons were found, along with like-minded people "the bankers of Frankfurt and Geneva also came to the rescue," as he himself wrote to his bride.

After examining the above material, we are surprised to find that in the middle of the 19th century they did not believe in the authenticity of the New Testament texts. This is quite consistent with our version. Tischendorf, out of his naivety, hoped to find earlier apostolic versions of the Gospels, and for this purpose undertook a trip to biblical places, however, the first time was unsuccessful. Then suddenly, with the funds of bankers, Tischendorf went on a journey and found in the trash can of the monastery, not the New, but the Old Testament. Tischendorf fraudulently takes these manuscripts to Europe (the monks of the monastery of St. Catherine on Sinai have a negative attitude towards Tischendorf's activities, since they found a receipt in which Tischendorf promised to return the manuscripts) and gives them to the Russian emperor, just at the right time, when the Old Testament is translated into Of Russia into Russian.

But in order for everything to look natural, the Russian emperor was involved in this business in advance. Alexander II was approached through the Minister of Public Education Abraham Norov. Tischendorf wrote a letter to Abraham Norov, in which he described his achievements in the discovery of lost manuscripts and invited the Russians to take part in the search for manuscripts related to the field of Greek literature and Byzantine history. Norov himself was fond of travel and even wrote a book about it (they knew through whom to act), so he turned to the Imperial Academy in St. Petersburg. However, the Russian clergy did not believe the Protestant German Tischendorf. By that time, Abraham Norov had already become a former minister, but did not calm down. Here is a quote from the Codex Sinai (§7):

“However, the former minister retained access to the royal family and won over the king's brother, Constantine. Over time, Tsarina Maria Alexandrovna and the Dowager Empress were also involved in a small conspiracy. … orders were given to provide Tischendorf with the necessary funds (which included both the cost of travel expenses and a significant amount for acquisitions). All this in golden Russian currency was given to Tischendorf by the imperial envoy in Dresden. The money was transferred without any written commitment. They didn’t even demanded a receipt from Tischendorf.”

After a while, the manuscripts, and then their translations, were accepted by the emperor himself, since he was previously involved in this process in such a cunning way and felt himself an accomplice in this matter. The first edition was executed with typographic luxury under the direction of Tischendorf himself, at the expense of the Emperor Alexander Nikolaevich in 1862, in St. Petersburg.

Thus, another forgery appeared in Russia, raised out of ignorance to the rank of "historical antiquity", which played a role in giving authority to the Old Testament and turning it into a holy book.

(§1) - Dm. Yurevich. Leningrad code and its meaning.

(§2) - Priest Maxim Fionin. THE HISTORY OF THE OPENING OF THE SINAI CODE..

(§3) - N. A. Morozov. "Prophets", doverchiv.narod.ru.

(§4) - The journal "Orthodox Review" for 1862No. 9, "Notes of the Orthodox Review", December 1862, Heading: "Foreign Notes", pp. 162 - 166. rapidshare.com.

(§5) - Palaeographer and seller of ancient manuscripts.

(§6) - "Tischendorf in Search of the True New Testament", www.biblicalstudies.ru.

(§7) - See Code of Sinai, www.biblicalstudies.ru.