STEM School Highlands Ranch shooting Douglas County, Colorado On May 7, 2019


Maya Elizabeth McKinney. Devon Erickson

Transgender Female.

On May 7, 2019, a school shooting occurred at STEM School Highlands Ranch, a charter school located in Douglas County, Colorado, United States, in the Denversuburb of Highlands Ranch. One student was killed and eight others were injured.

On April 29, 2019, the Wikipedia entry for the STEM School Highlands Ranch featured the sentence: “Anti suicide programs are implemented [in the school] to help lower chances of suicide and school shootings.” The following comment was added by an anonymous editor that day: “Do they work? We shall see”. KDVR described this as “a possible warning”. All anonymous edits to Wikipedia leave an IP address of the editor’s computer, and according to an IP address lookup website, the location of the edit appears to be Littleton, Colorado, which is near where the shooting occurred, and no other edits to Wikipedia were made by that IP address. The comment was eventually deleted from the page.

At 1:53 PM local time, two perpetrators went into the school carrying handguns and other weapons. They opened fire in two separate locations, shooting several students. The school proceeded to announce a lockdown, and the Douglas County Sheriff’s Office issued a warning via Twitter to avoid the area, describing it as an “unstable situation”. Police responded to the school two minutes after the first 911 call and a bomb disposal robot was brought to the school after tactical gear was found inside one of the suspects’ vehicles. A direct two-way radio link to Douglas County Sheriff’s dispatch center is credited with the prompt response; the STEM School is one of only a few so equipped.

According to a student, Devon Erickson allegedly pulled out a gun and yelled, “nobody move”. Kendrick Ray Castillo jumped on him and was fatally shot in the chest. Erickson was then subdued and disarmed by two other students. This occurred in the high school section of STEM, while Alec McKinney, the other alleged shooter, targeted the middle school section and wounded eight students.

Officers did not have to fire at the suspects prior to them being taken into custody, later confirming that at least two handguns were used in the shooting, with three handguns and a rifle recovered. However, there was an instance of friendly fire during the response in which a private security guard reacted to a muzzle of a gun coming around the corner, that was later established to be held by a Douglas County Sheriffs deputy. Officers also went to Erickson’s home and seized a car with hand-painted graffiti that read “Fuck society” as well as “666” and a pentagram.

One student was killed and eight others were injured in the shooting. Two are in serious condition. Officials told reporters that the youngest victim is 15 years old. There were no staff deaths or injuries; all victims were students.

At least three students, 18-year-old seniors Kendrick Castillo, Joshua Jones, and Brendan Bialy lunged at an attacker, later identified as Erickson. The three students jumped from their desks and slammed the gunman against the wall. The shooter fired off several shots as they struggled with him. Castillo was killed in the process, the only student killed during the shooting. Jones was shot twice, receiving non-life-threatening injuries in his leg and hip. Bialy managed to wrestle the handgun away from the shooter during the struggle

Two suspects, who were students at the school, were taken into custody in two separate locations following the shooting. Local media outlets reported that the weapons used by the suspects were stolen from a parent, and that neither were known to law enforcement prior to the attack. Some media outlets made an effort to avoid reporting the suspect’s identities, in an effort to take part in the #NoNotoriety campaign which seeks to avoid rewarding the shooters with attention.

One suspect was later publicly identified as an 18-year-old male, Devon Erickson (born ca. 2001, in Highlands Ranch, Colorado) . According to an interview with one of the STEM school students, over repeated occasions Erickson made jokes about school shootings and had even gone as far as to tell those around him, “don’t come to school.” On Snapchat, Erickson used the screen name ‘devonkillz’. Erickson was booked on 30 criminal counts, which included one count of first-degree murder and 29 counts of attempted first-degree murder. He is being held without bond pending the next court appearance.

The other suspect is a 16-year-old transgender boy listed on the court docket as Maya Elizabeth McKinney, who uses the first name Alec.

On June 20, a statement was released that summarized police interviews with the two suspects. According to the statement, McKinney said he had been planning the attack for weeks, and Erickson said he learned about the attack the night before through Snapchat. Erickson said that McKinney threatened him and that he followed McKinney’s plan because he feared for his life. McKinney said he planned to target two students in particular as they had ridiculed him due to his gender identity and called him disgusting. McKinney said that “he wanted the kids at the school to experience bad things, have to suffer from the trauma like he has had to in his life.” Both suspects said they used cocaine before the shooting.

Court proceedings

After the initial May 8 court appearance, Erickson and McKinney were formally criminally charged for the shooting at a May 15 court hearing in the Douglas County court. Each of the two suspects was charged with 48 criminal counts, including “first-degree murder after deliberation, arson and burglary”. McKinney was charged as an adult, although his lawyers indicated that they will try to move his case to the juvenile court.

On June 14 it was announced that the Judge appointed to oversee both of the suspects cases, had recused herself from the case of McKinney but has stayed on to oversee the case of Erickson.

President Trump issued a statement on Twitter the day after the shooting, thanking first responders for “bravely intervening” and writing, “We are in close contact with law enforcement”.

The White House Deputy Press Secretary Judd Deere issued a statement: “Our prayers are with the victims, family members, and all those affected” by the shooting, as did Republican Senator Cory Gardner: “The safety and comfort of our schools should never be taken away”. Democratic Representative Jason Crow said: “… we have a public health crisis on our hands … It is not enough to send thoughts and prayers … We must pass common-sense gun violence laws and ensure we are preparing our educators and law enforcement with the tools and resources necessary to create a safe and welcoming environment.”

Vigils, rallies and memorials

Community gatherings were held after the shooting, which included an interfaith memorial vigil, a community service and dinner, and other memorials. During the vigil, a protest broke out and many students were heard saying “mental health”. A large portion of the students walked out of the event, which was organized by a local chapter of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. The walkout occurred after the students listened to speeches from members of the community and several politicians, who were perceived by the students to be more concerned with gun control than on the need to support the victims of the shooting. One student wrote an opinion piece critical of the vigil, saying “many who attended this vigil desired to exploit our pain to support political agendas” and that there should have been more focus on “honoring Kendrick, 18, who rushed the shooter and was fatally shot”. Another interviewed shortly after the vigil claimed, “I understand calling for gun control but like these were handguns — these aren’t AR-15s these kids are carrying. There’s a law in Colorado you can’t buy a handgun unless you’re 21 – like how can you prevent that?”

A couple of days after the shooting, there was a small local rally for increased school security.

Update

(CNN) — A high school student accused of opening fire in a Colorado school told investigators he targeted those who mocked his gender identity, and had messaged a second suspect on Snapchat hours earlier about his plan, court documents show.
The May shooting at STEM School Highlands Ranch near Denver killed Kendrick Ray Castillo, 18, and left eight others wounded.
In police records unsealed Thursday, Alec McKinney, 16, said he decided to carry out the shooting after the social media message to Devon Erickson,18, the night before.
In an interview with police, McKinney told officials while he made the decision hours earlier, he had been planning the shooting for weeks.

Colorado school shooting suspect targeted those who ridiculed him, police say
By Faith Karimi and Scott McLean, CNN

Updated at 5:56 AM ET, Fri June 21, 2019

Students describe Colorado school shooting 02:27
(CNN) — A high school student accused of opening fire in a Colorado school told investigators he targeted those who mocked his gender identity, and had messaged a second suspect on Snapchat hours earlier about his plan, court documents show.
The May shooting at STEM School Highlands Ranch near Denver killed Kendrick Ray Castillo, 18, and left eight others wounded.
In police records unsealed Thursday, Alec McKinney, 16, said he decided to carry out the shooting after the social media message to Devon Erickson,18, the night before.
In an interview with police, McKinney told officials while he made the decision hours earlier, he had been planning the shooting for weeks.

They allegedly broke firearms safe using an ax
McKinney said he was born a female but was transitioning to male, and he targeted specific students who called him “disgusting” for undergoing that process, according to a probable cause affidavit. His attorneys have said he identifies as male.
Erickson’s parents owned a safe with firearms, the affidavit says, and the pair left school that day and opened it with an ax.
Erickson took the two handguns used in the shooting from his parents, according to a law enforcement source. Both guns were purchased legally.
Both suspects face criminal charges in the shooting, including first-degree murder, the Denver Post reported. It said McKinney has been charged as an adult.
Suspects allegedly used cocaine
Erickson said they used cocaine in his basement before going back to school. The two students used the middle school entrance because they knew they would be able to get the guns into the school, the affidavit states.
Erickson said McKinney threatened to shoot him if he didn’t go along with the plan, documents allege.
After Erickson pulled the magnetic strip on the door and pulled it shut so it couldn’t be opened from the outside, they both pulled out their guns and said “nobody move,” the affidavit says.
Both teens were detained.
Other students helped disarm the suspects
Brendan Bialy, who helped disarm one of the suspects, said he wants people to remember Castillo as a “legend.”

Colorado school shooting suspect targeted those who ridiculed him, police say
By Faith Karimi and Scott McLean, CNN

Advertisements

Gunman shot dead after opening fire on federal courthouse in downtown Dallas

An armed shooter (shown) attacks at the Earle Cabell federal courthouse Monday morning in downtown Dallas. Law enforcement returned fire and the shooter was hit by gunfire. No officers or citizens were injured. FBI Special Agent in Charge Matthew DeSarno identified the shooter as Brian Isaack Clyde, 22 (Tom Fox/Staff

photographer)Courtesy of Dallas News

A man in a mask, combat gear and glasses was shot and killed Monday morning in downtown Dallas after he opened fire with an assault rifle outside the Earle Cabell Federal Building. No one else was injured.
FBI Special Agent in Charge Matthew DeSarno identified the shooter as Brian Isaack Clyde, 22 at a news conference on a street corner near the federal building. Clyde died at the scene and was taken to Baylor University Medical Center, after police responded to an active shooter call, officials said.
Neither DeSarno nor Erin Nealy Cox, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Texas, gave any indication why Clyde would target the federal building. They also did not say who shot Clyde.
Dallas Morning News photographer Tom Fox witnessed the shooter fire outside the building on Jackson Street and took photos as the shooting occurred. Fox said the gunman fired from the parking lot across the street toward Fox, a security guard, a woman walking a golden retriever and a man who hadn’t tied his tie yet.
The window panes in the revolving door and two side doors at one entrance were broken afterward. It is unclear if the door was shot by the shooter or law enforcement.
Photos taken by Fox show law enforcement around Clyde as he lay in a parking lot where he ran after the shooting.
In one photo, a Homeland Security agent with blue latex gloves is hovering over Clyde. In others, Clyde is shirtless and law enforcement officers, including the agent, kneel around him. On Clyde’s left arm, he had a red heart tattoo black silhouette of a cat inside.
Fox, who was questioned by the FBI, said he was outside the building when a man in a mask parked on the corner of Jackson and Griffin streets. The masked man ran and then stopped in the street to pick something off the ground.
The man then began shooting at the courthouse along Jackson Street and cracked the glass of the door, Fox said. At least two bullets ricocheted off the building, releasing clouds of dust and debris. Inside the building security pushed everyone down to the ground.
The federal building is likely to remain on lockdown for the rest of the day. The building houses federal courts, the U.S. Attorney’s office for the Northern District of Texas, a passport office and U.S. Marshals Services.
The shooting is a block from the July 7, 2016 ambush where five police officers — four Dallas police officer and a Dallas Area Rapid Transit officer — were killed by a gunman. Nearby El Centro College was placed on lockdown. During the ambush, that shooter entered the school and fired from a window at the fifth officer who was killed.
Dallas police detonated a suspicious device around 10:40 a.m. found in the 2003 Nissan Altima Clyde drove to the courthouse. The blast was strong enough to shake several sapling trees blocks away. Police searched downtown for other possible devices. Many downtown buildings are on lockdown or evacuated. Several streets remain closed.
‘I just ran’ Ed Modla was working from home at SoCo Urban Lofts this morning when he heard at least 10 loud shots outside. He looked outside and saw the gunman running across Griffin Street.
“As soon as I saw the shooter I got the hell away from the window,” he said.He took another peek from his third-floor window a few moments later and said he saw officers “zeroing in” on the suspect across the street.Dallas police evacuated the apartment building around 10 a.m., going door-to-door to make sure everyone got out.
Judicial intern Thompson Du was waiting outside Monday morning after officials kept him from going inside. Du said his friends who were already nearby when the shooting occurred told him they heard shots for 45 seconds.
Don Miles heard 10-15 shots as he walked up to the Commerce Street entrance for his 9 a.m. appointment.
“I just ran,” Miles said.
Herman Turner, 50, took the day off work to run errands at the courthouse. He said he was on his way to get a cashier’s check when he saw the gunman run from the courthouse door near Main and Griffin streets, plant himself in the middle of the road and begin firing an assault rifle back at the building.

UpDate

PLANO, Texas (CBSDFW.COM) – Was some questions about his mental health. The stepmother of the gunman shot and killed by security officers Monday outside the Earle Cabell Federal Courthouse in downtown Dallas said she had no idea Brian Clyde wanted to commit mass murder.

“It was so out of the blue,” said Heather Clyde. “Not near the surface of who Brian was to us.”
Heather Clyde, and Brian’s father, Paul Clyde, consoled each other outside their Plano home Wednesday afternoon.

Heather said they didn’t even recognize the photos of the partially-masked man who tried to shoot his way into the federal building, which houses several government agencies and 300 employees. Federal security officers shot and killed him before he could get inside.“We are so grateful no one was hurt or killed,” Heather said. That would have been a whole realm of Hell added.”The FBI has yet to figure out the motive for Clyde’s armed attack and his stepmother told CBS 11, she saw nothing, not in his social media posts or his interactions with them, that suggested he would try to commit mass murder.“We just wanted everyone to know we are flabbergasted as everyone else is,” Heather said. “He just wasn’t the person who is there downtown Monday morning, just not who we knew.”

Heather Clyde said she and her husband think Brian might have been trying to commit suicide, but they hadn’t seen any signs of depression or anger. “That’s our feeling. He knew there had been a shooting down there, a well armed area. That’s the only thing we can derive from his actions,” said Heather.Brian Clyde had recently graduated from Del Mar College in Corpus Christi with an Associate in Applied Science degree in Nondestructive Testing Technology.

Armed man busted outside New Jersey elementary school

Thomas WIlkie Facebook Courtesy of New York Post.

A Delaware man armed with a handgun loaded with hollow-point bullets was busted Thursday outside an elementary school in New Jersey, authorities said Friday.
Thomas J. Wilkie was found in the front seat of his 2019 Mitsubishi SUV parked in the lot of Tamaques Elementary School in Westfield — after police acted on a tip from the New Castle County Police Department in Delaware that he was en route to the school and may be armed.
Wilkie, 46, who lives in Bear, was holding a .45-caliber handgun with hollow-point bullets and had two loaded clips of ammunition on him, as well as 130 additional rounds in his trunk, the Union County Prosecutor’s Offcie said.
He was nabbed by Westfield police at 3:55 p.m. after school had let out for the day.
Wilkie’s brother alerted authorities about the alleged gunman, NBC New York reported, citing a senior law enforcement official.
The official said Wilkie entered the school looking for a woman he had been involved with — but wasn’t armed at the time. When he learned she wasn’t there, he retreated back to his car and called the woman, who said she was tutoring but would return to the school.
While waiting in his car, Wilkie called his brother — prompting the concerned man to call Delaware State Police, according to the official.
The school, which had after-school programs in session, was placed on lockdown as Wilkie was taken into custody, the Westfield Police Department said.
The lockdown was lifted and children were reunited with their parents at around 5:30 p.m. after a sweep of the building and its perimeter were conducted.
“Police canines were brought in for a final, precautionary sweep, but there is currently no evidence to suggest any threat to the community,” Westfield police said Thursday.
Wilkie was charged with unlawful possession of a weapon, possession of hollow-point bullets and trespassing on school grounds and could face between five to 10 years in prison.
He is being held in the Union County Jail pending his first court date Wednesday.

DeWayne Craddock Shooting 2019

DeWayne Craddock

Craddock 40 was a public utilities engineer

VIRGINIA BEACH, Va. — The longtime Virginia Beach public works employee behind the nation’s latest mass shooting put in his two-weeks notice Friday morning, hours before he carried out an attack that killed 12 and wounded four, city officials said Sunday. was a former member of the Virginia National Guard, serving as a cannon crew member. He was discharged in 2002 as a specialist.

DeWayne Craddock was named as the gunman who opened fire “indiscriminately” at the Virginia Beach complex, predicts mass murder, 12 people lay dead, 4 others wounded.

An intern rushed down the hallways shouting “gun, gun, gun” to warn others, a military serviceman helped transport the injured with his surfboard, a police detective was injured during a shootout with the suspect and over 100 first responders arrived.

Police chief, describing Craddock’s shooting as indiscriminate. Craddock’s victims were almost entirely city employees who, like him, worked in the public works department, but they also included one man who was just there to get a permit.

Craddock was described by police and those who knew him as an enigma who gave no indication that he stockpiled an arsenal and planned a systematic assault on his colleagues.

although he was described as reclusive by some Neighbors, “No pet, no wife, no visitors, no nothing,” some say he smoke dupe. “I’ve never even seen that man take groceries up to his apartment.” They said he had one other oddity: Cameras trained from his condominium to the parking lot, seemingly to protect his cars.

he was married on Valentine’s Day 2008 to a woman in Virginia Beach. And a marriage unraveled. Craddock and his wife were divorced in 2017.Craddock’s wife was a “social butterfly” described as the sullen, isolated Craddock’s were opposite.

She may have had breast cancer recently with worry, expenses and stress?

He’s defined by what he didn’t have:

No apparent criminal history, no obvious Facebook or other social media accounts, no manifesto or publicly stated ideology.

He ran a local 5K and his name appears in city notices for a neighborhood website.

A 2008 article in the Newport Daily Press reported that DeWayne A. Craddock had been hired to the site planning and engineering team for a local company.

“Craddock has engineering experience as a project engineer for site design, storm water management, and public and private utility design,” the announcement stated.

He used an employee pass to enter secure areas. Yet, authorities say, Craddock, armed with two .45 caliber pistols and a silencer, entered building 2 of the Virginia Beach municipal center and unleashed mayhem without any clear motive. Before the shooting, co-workers thought he was quiet, polite and a “nice guy” with no warning signs

1996 graduate of Denbigh High School. He also went by the names DeWayne Antonio Craddock and, in high school, DeWayne Hamilton.

. He also went by the names DeWayne Antonio Craddock and, in high school, DeWayne Hamilton.

Craddock’s mother’s Facebook page indicates the family has roots in North Carolina. Old newspaper clippings show she posted multiple classified ads on behalf of a realty. Her recent Facebook posts are about travels to places like Miami, a jazz festival, and the African-American history museum in Washington D.C. There weren’t any publicly visible photos of her son on her page.

Craddock’s parents indicated they didn’t know of any problems he was having at work.

The 12 That Where Gunned Downed And MURDERED!

Codex Sinaiticus

Codex Sinaiticus (Greek: Σιναϊτικός Κώδικας, Sinaïtikós Kṓdikas, Hebrew: קודקס סינאיטיקוס‎; Shelfmarks and references: London, Brit. Libr., Additional Manuscripts 43725; Gregory-Aland nº א [Aleph] or 01, [Soden δ 2]) or “Sinai Bible” is one of the four great uncial codices, ancient, handwritten copies of the Greek Bible. The codex is a celebrated historical treasure.[1]

Uncial
01
New Testament manuscript
papyri uncials minuscules lectionaries

The Book of Esther

The codex is an Alexandrian text-type manuscript written in uncial letters on parchment in the 4th century. Scholarship considers the Codex Sinaiticus to be one of the best Greek texts of the New Testament,[2] along with the Codex Vaticanus. Until Constantin von Tischendorf’s discovery of the Sinaiticus text, the Codex Vaticanus was unrivaled.[3]

The Codex Sinaiticus came to the attention of scholars in the 19th century at Saint Catherine’s Monastery in the Sinai Peninsula, with further material discovered in the 20th and 21st centuries. Although parts of the codex are scattered across four libraries around the world, most of the manuscript is held today in the British Library in London, where it is on public display.[4][5] Since its discovery, study of the Codex Sinaiticus has proven to be useful to scholars for critical studies of biblical text.

While large portions of the Old Testament are missing, it is assumed that the codex originally contained the whole of both Testaments.[6] About half of the Greek Old Testament (or Septuagint) survived, along with a complete New Testament, the entire Deuterocanonical books, the Epistle of Barnabas and portions of The Shepherd of Hermas.[2]

Luke 11:2 in Codex Sinaiticus

The portion of the codex held by the British Library consists of 346½ folios, 694 pages (38.1 cm x 34.5 cm), constituting over half of the original work. Of these folios, 199 belong to the Old Testament, including the apocrypha (deuterocanonical), and 147½ belong to the New Testament, along with two other books, the Epistle of Barnabas and part of The Shepherd of Hermas. The apocryphal books present in the surviving part of the Septuagint are 2 Esdras, Tobit, Judith, 1 and 4 Maccabees, Wisdom, and Sirach.[15][16] The books of the New Testament are arranged in this order: the four Gospels, the epistles of Paul (Hebrews follows 2 Thess.), the Acts of the Apostles,[n 2] the General Epistles, and the Book of Revelation. The fact that some parts of the codex are preserved in good condition while others are in very poor condition implies they were separated and stored in several places.[17]

The text of the Old Testament contains the following passages:[18][19]

Genesis 23:19 – Genesis 24:46 – fragments
Leviticus 20:27 – Leviticus 22:30
Numbers 5:26–Numbers 7:20 – fragments
1 Chronicles 9:27–1 Chronicles 19:17
Ezra-Nehemiah (from Esdr. 9:9).
Book of Psalms–Wisdom of Sirach
Book of Esther
Book of Tobit
Book of Judith
Book of Joel–Book of Malachi
Book of Isaiah
Book of Jeremiah
Book of Lamentations
1 Maccabees–4 Maccabees

John 7:52–8:12 without the pericope 7:53–8:11 in Sinaiticus

The text of the New Testament lacks several passages:[20]

Omitted verses
Gospel of Matthew 12:47, 16:2b-3, 17:21, 18:11, 23:14, 24:35;
Gospel of Mark 1:33, 7:16, 9:44, 9:46, 10:36, 11:26, 15:28, 16:9–20 (Long ending of the Gospel Mark, referring to the appearance of Jesus to many people following the resurrection)
Gospel of Luke 10:32 (Likely omitted due to haplography resulting from homeoteleuton; the verse was added by a later corrector in lower margin.), 17:36
Gospel of John 5:4, Pericope adulterae (7:53–8:11) (see Image “John 7:53–8:11”), 16:15, 19:20, 20:5b-6, 21:25
Acts of the Apostles 8:37; 15:34; 24:7; 28:29;[21]
Epistle to the Romans 16:24

Page of the codex with text of Matthew 6:4–32

Omitted phrases
Matthew 5:44 εὐλογεῖτε τοὺς καταρωμένους ὑμᾶς, καλῶς ποιεῖτε τοῖς μισοῦσιν ὑμᾶς (bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you);[22]
Matthew 6:13 – ὅτι σοῦ ἐστιν ἡ βασιλεία καὶ ἡ δύναμις καὶ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας. ἀμήν (For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.) omitted.[23]
Matthew 10:39a – ο ευρων την ψυχην αυτου απολεσει αυτην, και (Ηe who finds his life will lose it, and);[24]
Matthew 15:6 – η την μητερα (αυτου) (or (his) mother);[25]
Matthew 20:23 και το βαπτισμα ο εγω βαπτιζομαι βαπτισθησεσθε (and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with)[26]
Matthew 23:35 – υιου βαραχιου (son of Barachi’ah) omitted; this omission is supported only by codex 59 (by the first hand), three Evangelistaria (ℓ 6, ℓ 13, and ℓ 185), and Eusebius.[27]
Mark 1:1 – υιου θεου “the Son of God” omitted.[28]
Mark 10:7 – omitted και προσκολληθησεται προς την γυναικα αυτου (and be joined to his wife), as in codices Codex Vaticanus Graecus 1209, Codex Athous Lavrensis, 892, ℓ 48, syrs, goth.[29]
Luke 9:55b-56a – καὶ εἶπεν, Οὐκ οἴδατε ποίου πνεύματος ἐστὲ ὑμεῖς; ὁ γὰρ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἦλθεν ψυχὰς ἀνθρώπων ἀπολέσαι ἀλλὰ σῶσαι (and He said: “You do not know what manner of spirit you are of; for the Son of man came not to destroy men’s lives but to save them) omitted as in codices: P45, P75, B, C, L, Θ, Ξ, 33, 700, 892, 1241, syr, copbo;[30]
John 4:9 – ου γαρ συνχρωνται Ιουδαιοι Σαμαριταις (Jews have no dealings with Samaritans), it is one of so-called Western non-interpolations; omission is supported by D, a, b, d, e, j, copfay, it was supplemented by the first corrector (before leaving scriptorium);[31]
Some passages were excluded by the correctors:

Additional phrase to John 21:6 on the margin – οι δε ειπον δι οληϲ τηϲ νυκτοϲ εκοπιαϲαμεν και ουδεν ελαβομεν επι δε τω ϲω ρηματι βαλουμεν

Matthew 24:36 – phrase ουδε ο υιος (nor the Son) the first corrector marked as doubtful, but the second corrector (b) removed the mark.[32]
Mark 10:40 ητοιμασται υπο του πατρος μου (instead of ητοιμασται) – the first corrector marked “υπο του πατρος μου” as doubtful, but the second corrector removed the mark.[33]
In Luke 11:4 ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ (but deliver us from evil) included by the original scribe, marked by the first corrector (a) as doubtful, but the third corrector (c) removed the mark.[34]
Christ’s agony at Gethsemane (Luke 22:43–44) – included by the original scribe, marked by the first corrector as doubtful, but the third corrector (c) removed the mark.[35]
Luke 23:34a, “Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do” – it was included by the first scribe, marked by the first corrector as doubtful, but a third corrector removed the mark.[36]
These omissions are typical for the Alexandrian text-type.[37]

Interpolations
Matthew 8:13 (see Luke 7:10)

It has additional text: καὶ ὑποστρέψας ὁ ἑκατόνταρχος εἰς τὸν οἶκον αὐτοῦ ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ ὦρᾳ εὗρεν τὸν παῖδα ὑγιαίνοντα (and when the centurion returned to the house in that hour, he found the slave well) as well as codices C, (N), Θ, (0250), f1, (33, 1241), g1, syrh.[38]
Matthew 10:12 (see Luke 10:5)

It reads λέγοντες εἰρήνη τῷ οἴκῳ τούτῳ (say peace to be this house) after αυτην. The reading was deleted by the first corrector, but the second corrector restored it. The reading is used by manuscripts: Bezae, Regius, Washingtonianus, Koridethi, manuscripts f 1, 22, 1010 (1424), it, vgcl.[39][40]
Matthew 27:49 (see John 19:34)

In Matthew 27:49 the codex contains added text: ἄλλος δὲ λαβὼν λόγχην ἔνυξεν αὐτοῦ τὴν πλευράν, καὶ ἐξῆλθεν ὕδορ καὶ αἷμα (the other took a spear and pierced His side, and immediately came out water and blood). This reading was derived from John 19:34 and occurs in other manuscripts of the Alexandrian text-type.[41]
Unique and other textual variants

Page from facsimile edition (1862); 1 Chr 9:27–10:11

Matthew 7:22 – It has additional word πολλα (numerous): “and cast out numerous demons in your name?”. It is not supported by any other manuscript.[42]

Matthew 8:12 – It has ἐξελεύσονται (will go out) instead of ἐκβληθήσονται (will be thrown). This variant is supported only by one Greek manuscript Uncial 0250, and by Codex Bobiensis, syrc, s, p, pal, arm, Diatessaron.[43]

Matthew 13:54 – Ordinary reading εις την πατριδα αυτου (to his own country) changed into εις την αντιπατριδα αυτου (to his own Antipatris), and in Acts 8:5 εις την πολιν της Σαμαρειας replaced into εις την πολιν της Καισαριας. These two variants do not exist in any other manuscript, and it seems they were made by a scribe. According to T. C. Skeat they suggest Caesarea as a place in which the manuscript was made.[44]

Matthew 16:12 – It has textual variant της ζυμης των αρτων των Φαρισαιων και Σαδδουκαιων (leaven of bread of the Pharisees and Sadducees) supported only by Codex Corbeiensis I and Curetonian Gospels.

Luke 1:26 – “Nazareth” is called “a city of Judea”.

Luke 2:37 – εβδομηκοντα (seventy), all manuscripts have ογδοηκοντα (eighty);[45]

John 1:28 – The second corrector made unique textual variant Βηθαραβα. This textual variant has only codex 892, syrh and several other manuscripts.[46]

John 1:34 – It reads ὁ ἐκλεκτός (chosen one) together with the manuscripts {\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}} {\mathfrak {P}}5, {\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}} {\mathfrak {P}}106, b, e, ff2, syrc, and syrs instead of ordinary word υἱος (son).

John 2:3 – Where ordinarily reading “And when they wanted wine”, or “And when wine failed”, Codex Sinaiticus has “And they had no wine, because the wine of the marriage feast was finished” (supported by a and j);

John 6:10 – It reads τρισχιλιοι (three thousands) for πεντακισχιλιοι (five thousands); the second corrector changed into πεντακισχιλιοι.[47]

Acts 11:20 – It reads εὐαγγελιστας (Evangelists) instead of ἑλληνιστάς (Hellenists);[48]

In Acts 14:9, the word “not” inserted before “heard”; in Hebr. 2:4 “harvests” instead of “distributions”; in 1 Peter 5:13 word “Babylon” replaced into “Church”.[48]

2 Timothy 4:10 – it reads Γαλλιαν for Γαλατιαν, the reading of the codex is supported by along with Ephraemi Rescriptus, 81, 104, 326, 436.[49]

Witness of some readings of “majority”

It is the oldest witness for the phrase μη αποστερησης (do not defraud) in Mark 10:19. This phrase was not included by the manuscripts: Codex Vaticanus (added by second corrector), Codex Cyprius, Codex Washingtonianus, Codex Athous Lavrensis, f1, f13, 28, 700, 1010, 1079, 1242, 1546, 2148, ℓ 10, ℓ 950, ℓ 1642, ℓ 1761, syrs, arm, geo. This is variant of the majority manuscripts.[50]

In Mark 13:33 it is the oldest witness of the variant και προσευχεσθε (and pray). Codex B and D do not include this passage.[51]

In Luke 8:48 it has θυγατερ (daughter) as in the Byzantine manuscripts, instead of the Alexandrian θυγατηρ (daughter), supported by the manuscripts: B K L W Θ.[52]

Orthodox reading

In 1 John 5:6 it has textual variant δι’ ὕδατος καὶ αἵματος καὶ πνεύματος (through water and blood and spirit) together with the manuscripts: Codex Alexandrinus, 104, 424c, 614, 1739c, 2412, 2495, ℓ 598m, syrh, copsa, copbo, Origen.[53][n 3] Bart D. Ehrman says this was a corrupt reading from the orthodox party,[54] although this is widely disputed.[55]

Text-type and relationship to other manuscripts

For most of the New Testament, Codex Sinaiticus is in general agreement with Codex Vaticanus Graecus 1209 and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, attesting the Alexandrian text-type. A notable example of an agreement between the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus texts is that they both omit the word εικη (‘without cause’, ‘without reason’, ‘in vain’) from Matthew 5:22 “But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgement”.[n 4]

A portion of the Codex Sinaiticus, containing Esther.[56]

In John 1:1–8:38 Codex Sinaiticus differs from Vaticanus and all other Alexandrian manuscripts. It is in closer agreement with Codex Bezae in support of the Western text-type. For example, in John 1:4 Sinaiticus and Codex Bezae are the only Greek manuscripts with textual variant ἐν αὐτῷ ζωὴ ἐστίν (in him is life) instead of ἐν αὐτῷ ζωὴ ᾓν (in him was life). This variant is supported by Vetus Latina and some Sahidic manuscripts. This portion has a large number of corrections.[57] There are a number of differences between Sinaiticus and Vaticanus; Hoskier enumerated 3036 differences:

Matt–656
Mark–567
Luke–791
John–1022
Total—3036.[58]
A large number of these differences are due to iotacisms and variants in transcribing Hebrew names. These two manuscripts were not written in the same scriptorium. According to Fenton Hort Sinaiticus and Vaticanus were derived from a common original much older source, “the date of which cannot be later than the early part of the second century, and may well be yet earlier”.[59]

Example of differences between Sinaiticus and Vaticanus in Matt 1:18–19:

B. H. Streeter remarked a great agreement between the codex and Vulgate of Jerome. According to him, Origen brought to Caesarea the Alexandrian text-type that was used in this codex, and used by Jerome.[60]

Between the 4th and 12th centuries, seven or more correctors worked on this codex, making it one of the most corrected manuscripts in existence.[61] Tischendorf during his investigation in Petersburg enumerated 14,800 corrections only in the portion which was held in Petersburg (2/3 of the codex).[62] According to David C. Parker the full codex has about 23,000 corrections.[63] In addition to these corrections some letters were marked by dots as doubtful (e.g. ṪḢ). Corrections represent the Byzantine text-type, just like corrections in codices: Bodmer II, Regius (L), Ephraemi (C), and Sangallensis (Δ). They were discovered by E. A. Button.[64]

Early history

Provenance

Little is known of the manuscript’s early history. According to Hort, it was written in the West, probably in Rome, as suggested by the fact that the chapter division in the Acts of the Apostles common to Sinaiticus and Vaticanus occurs in no other Greek manuscript, but is found in several manuscripts of the Latin Vulgate.[65] Robinson countered this argument, suggesting that this system of chapter divisions was introduced into the Vulgate by Jerome himself, as a result of his studies at Caesarea.[66] According to Kenyon the forms of the letters are Egyptian and they were found in Egyptian papyri of earlier date.[67] Gardthausen[68] Ropes and Jellicoe thought it was written in Egypt. Harris believed that the manuscript came from the library of Pamphilus at Caesarea, Palestine.[67] Streeter,[60] Skeat, and Milne also believed that it was produced in Caesarea.[44]

Date

The codex was written in the 4th century. It could not have been written before 325 because it contains the Eusebian Canons, which is a terminus post quem. “The terminus ante quem is less certain, but, according to Milne and Skeat, is not likely to be much later than about 360.” [15]

According to Tischendorf, Codex Sinaiticus was one of the fifty copies of the Bible commissioned from Eusebius by Roman Emperor Constantine after his conversion to Christianity (De vita Constantini, IV, 37).[69] This hypothesis was supported by Pierre Batiffol,[70] Gregory and Skeat believed that it was already in production when Constantine placed his order, but had to be suspended in order to accommodate different page dimensions.[44]

Frederic G. Kenyon argued: “There is not the least sign of either of them ever having been at Constantinople. The fact that Sinaiticus was collated with the manuscript of Pamphilus so late as the sixth century seems to show that it was not originally written at Caesarea”.[71]

Scribes and correctors
Tischendorf believed that four separate scribes (whom he named A, B, C and D) copied the work and that five correctors (whom he designated a, b, c, d and e) amended portions. He posited that one of the correctors was contemporaneous with the original scribes, and that the others worked in the 6th and 7th centuries. It is now agreed, after Milne and Skeat’s reinvestigation, that Tischendorf was wrong, in that scribe C never existed.[72] According to Tischendorf, scribe C wrote the poetic books of the Old Testament. These are written in a different format from the rest of the manuscript – they appear in two columns (the rest of books is in four columns), written stichometrically. Tischendorf probably interpreted the different formatting as indicating the existence of another scribe.[73] The three remaining scribes are still identified by the letters that Tischendorf gave them: A, B, and D.[73] Correctors were more, at least seven (a, b, c, ca, cb, cc, e).[2]

Modern analysis identifies at least three scribes:

Scribe A wrote most of the historical and poetical books of the Old Testament, almost the whole of the New Testament, and the Epistle of Barnabas
Scribe B was responsible for the Prophets and for the Shepherd of Hermas
Scribe D wrote the whole of Tobit and Judith, the first half of 4 Maccabees, the first two-thirds of the Psalms, and the first five verses of Revelation
Scribe B was a poor speller, and scribe A was not very much better; the best scribe was D.[74] Metzger states: “scribe A had made some unusually serious mistakes”.[62] Scribes A and B more often used nomina sacra in contracted forms (ΠΝΕΥΜΑ contracted in all occurrences, ΚΥΡΙΟΣ contracted except in 2 occurrences), scribe D more often used forms uncontracted.[75] D distinguished between sacral and nonsacral using of ΚΥΡΙΟΣ.[76] His errors are the substitution of ΕΙ for Ι, and Ι for ΕΙ in medial positions, both equally common. Otherwise substitution of Ι for initial ΕΙ is unknown, and final ΕΙ is only replaced in word ΙΣΧΥΕΙ, confusing of Ε and ΑΙ is very rare.[74] In the Book of Psalms this scribe has 35 times ΔΑΥΕΙΔ instead of ΔΑΥΙΔ, while scribe A normally uses an abbreviated form ΔΑΔ.[77] Scribe A’s was a “worse type of phonetic error”. Confusion of Ε and ΑΙ occurs in all contexts.[74] Milne and Skeat characterised scribe B as “careless and illiterate”.[78] The work of the original scribe is designated by the siglum א*.[2]

In the 6th or 7th century the codex may have been housed at Caesarea

A paleographical study at the British Museum in 1938 found that the text had undergone several corrections. The first corrections were done by several scribes before the manuscript left the scriptorium.[62] Readings which they introduced are designated by the siglum אa.[79] Milne and Skeat have observed that the superscription to 1 Maccabees was made by scribe D, while the text was written by scribe A.[80] Scribe D corrects his own work and that of scribe A, but scribe A limits himself to correcting his own work.[81] In the 6th or 7th century, many alterations were made (אb) – according to a colophon at the end of the book of Esdras and Esther the source of these alterations was “a very ancient manuscript that had been corrected by the hand of the holy martyr Pamphylus” (martyred in 309). If this is so, material beginning with 1 Samuel to the end of Esther is Origen’s copy of the Hexapla. From this colophon, the correction is concluded to have been made in Caesarea Maritima in the 6th or 7th centuries.[82] The pervasive iotacism, especially of the ει diphthong, remains uncorrected.[83]

Discovery

The Codex may have been seen in 1761 by the Italian traveller, Vitaliano Donati, when he visited the Saint Catherine’s Monastery at Sinai in Egypt. His diary was published in 1879, in which was written:

In questo monastero ritrovai una quantità grandissima di codici membranacei… ve ne sono alcuni che mi sembravano anteriori al settimo secolo, ed in ispecie una Bibbia in membrane bellissime, assai grandi, sottili, e quadre, scritta in carattere rotondo e belissimo; conservano poi in chiesa un Evangelistario greco in caractere d’oro rotondo, che dovrebbe pur essere assai antico.[84]

In this monastery I found a great number of parchment codices … there are some which seemed to be written before the seventh century, and especially a Bible (made) of beautiful vellum, very large, thin and square parchments, written in round and very beautiful letters; moreover there are also in the church a Greek Evangelistarium in gold and round letters, it should be very old.

The “Bible on beautiful vellum” may be the Codex Sinaiticus, and the gold evangelistarium is likely Lectionary 300 on the Gregory-Aland list.[85]

Tischendorf in 1870

German Biblical scholar Constantin von Tischendorf wrote about his visit to the monastery in Reise in den Orient in 1846 (translated as Travels in the East in 1847), without mentioning the manuscript. Later, in 1860, in his writings about the Sinaiticus discovery, Tischendorf wrote a narrative about the monastery and the manuscript that spanned from 1844 to 1859. He wrote that in 1844, during his first visit to the Saint Catherine’s Monastery, he saw some leaves of parchment in a waste-basket. They were “rubbish which was to be destroyed by burning it in the ovens of the monastery”,[86] although this is firmly denied by the Monastery. After examination he realized that they were part of the Septuagint, written in an early Greek uncial script. He retrieved from the basket 129 leaves in Greek which he identified as coming from a manuscript of the Septuagint. He asked if he might keep them, but at this point the attitude of the monks changed. They realized how valuable these old leaves were, and Tischendorf was permitted to take only one-third of the whole, i.e. 43 leaves. These leaves contained portions of 1 Chronicles, Jeremiah, Nehemiah, and Esther. After his return they were deposited in the Leipzig University Library, where they remain. In 1846 Tischendorf published their contents, naming them the ‘Codex Friderico-Augustanus’ (in honor of Frederick Augustus and keeping secret the source of the leaves).[87] Other portions of the same codex remained in the monastery, containing all of Isaiah and 1 and 4 Maccabees.[88]

In 1845, Archimandrite Porphyrius Uspensky (1804–1885), at that time head of the Russian Ecclesiastical Mission in Jerusalem and subsequently Bishop of Chigirin, visited the monastery and the codex was shown to him, together with leaves which Tischendorf had not seen.[n 5] In 1846, Captain C. K. MacDonald visited Mount Sinai, saw the codex, and bought two codices (495 and 496) from the monastery.[89]

The codex was presented to Alexander II of Russia

In 1853, Tischendorf revisited the Saint Catherine’s Monastery to get the remaining 86 folios, but without success. Returning in 1859, this time under the patronage of Tsar Alexander II of Russia, he was shown the Codex Sinaiticus. He would later claim to have found it discarded in a rubbish bin. (This story may have been a fabrication, or the manuscripts in question may have been unrelated to Codex Sinaiticus: Rev. J. Silvester Davies in 1863 quoted “a monk of Sinai who… stated that according to the librarian of the monastery the whole of Codex Sinaiticus had been in the library for many years and was marked in the ancient catalogues… Is it likely… that a manuscript known in the library catalogue would have been jettisoned in the rubbish basket.” Indeed, it has been noted that the leaves were in “suspiciously good condition” for something found in the trash.[n 6]) Tischendorf had been sent to search for manuscripts by Russia’s Tsar Alexander II, who was convinced there were still manuscripts to be found at the Sinai monastery.[90] The text of this part of the codex was published by Tischendorf in 1862:

Konstantin von Tischendorf: Bibliorum codex Sinaiticus Petropolitanus. Giesecke & Devrient, Leipzig 1862.
This work has been digitised in full and all four volumes may be consulted online.[91] It was reprinted in four volumes in 1869:

Konstantin von Tischendorf, G. Olms (Hrsg.): Bibliorum codex Sinaiticus Petropolitanus. 1. Prolegomena. G. Olms, Hildesheim 1869 (Repr.).
Konstantin von Tischendorf, G. Olms (Hrsg.): Bibliorum codex Sinaiticus Petropolitanus. 2. Veteris Testamenti pars prior. G. Olms, Hildesheim 1869 (Repr.).
Konstantin von Tischendorf, G. Olms (Hrsg.): Bibliorum codex Sinaiticus Petropolitanus. 3. Veteris Testamenti pars posterior. G. Olms, Hildesheim 1869 (Repr.).
Konstantin von Tischendorf, G. Olms (Hrsg.): Bibliorum codex Sinaiticus Petropolitanus. 4. Novum Testamentum cum Barnaba et Pastore. G. Olms, Hildesheim 1869 (Repr.).
The complete publication of the codex was made by Kirsopp Lake in 1911 (New Testament), and in 1922 (Old Testament). It was the full-sized black and white facsimile of the manuscript, “made from negatives taken from St. Petersburg by my wife and myself in the summer of 1908”.[92]

The story of how Tischendorf found the manuscript, which contained most of the Old Testament and all of the New Testament, has all the interest of a romance. Tischendorf reached the monastery on 31 January; but his inquiries appeared to be fruitless. On 4 February, he had resolved to return home without having gained his object:

Lithography of Saint Catherine’s Monastery based on sketches made by Uspensky in 1857
On the afternoon of this day I was taking a walk with the steward of the convent in the neighbourhood, and as we returned, towards sunset, he begged me to take some refreshment with him in his cell. Scarcely had he entered the room, when, resuming our former subject of conversation, he said: “And I, too, have read a Septuagint” – i.e. a copy of the Greek translation made by the Seventy. And so saying, he took down from the corner of the room a bulky kind of volume, wrapped up in a red cloth, and laid it before me. I unrolled the cover, and discovered, to my great surprise, not only those very fragments which, fifteen years before, I had taken out of the basket, but also other parts of the Old Testament, the New Testament complete, and, in addition, the Epistle of Barnabas and a part of the Shepherd of Hermas.[93]


Saint Catherine’s Monastery; lithograph from the album of Uspensky

After some negotiations, he obtained possession of this precious fragment. James Bentley gives an account of how this came about, prefacing it with the comment, “Tischendorf therefore now embarked on the remarkable piece of duplicity which was to occupy him for the next decade, which involved the careful suppression of facts and the systematic denigration of the monks of Mount Sinai.”[94] He conveyed it to Tsar Alexander II, who appreciated its importance and had it published as nearly as possible in facsimile, so as to exhibit correctly the ancient handwriting. In 1869 the Tsar sent the monastery 7,000 rubles and the monastery of Mount Tabor 2,000 rubles by way of compensation.[95][96] The document in Russian formalising this was published in 2007 in Russia and has since been translated.[97]

Regarding Tischendorf’s role in the transfer to Saint Petersburg, there are several views. The codex is currently regarded by the monastery as having been stolen. This view is hotly contested by several scholars in Europe. Kirsopp Lake wrote:

Those who have had much to do with Oriental monks will understand how improbable it is that the terms of the arrangement, whatever it was, were ever known to any except a few of the leaders.[98]

In a more neutral spirit, New Testament scholar Bruce Metzger writes:

Certain aspects of the negotiations leading to the transfer of the codex to the Tsar’s possession are open to an interpretation that reflects adversely on Tischendorf’s candour and good faith with the monks at Saint Catherine’s Monastery. For a recent account intended to exculpate him of blame, see Erhard Lauch’s article ‘Nichts gegen Tischendorf’ in Bekenntnis zur Kirche: Festgabe für Ernst Sommerlath zum 70. Geburtstag (Berlin, c. 1961); for an account that includes a hitherto unknown receipt given by Tischendorf to the authorities at the monastery promising to return the manuscript from Saint Petersburg ‘to the Holy Confraternity of Sinai at its earliest request’.[99][100]


View of Saint Catherine’s Monastery

Simonides

On 13 September 1862 Constantine Simonides, skilled in calligraphy and with a controversial background with manuscripts, made the claim in print in The Manchester Guardian that he had written the codex himself as a young man in 1839 in the Panteleimonos monastery at Athos.[101][102] Constantin von Tischendorf, who worked with numerous Bible manuscripts, was known as somewhat flamboyant, and had ambitiously sought money from several royal families for his ventures, who had indeed funded his trips. Simonides, whose name may be a synonym mocking Tischendorf, had a somewhat obscure history, as he claimed he was at Mt. Athos in the years preceding Tischendorf’s contact, making the claim at least plausible. Simonides also claimed his father had died and the invitation to Mt. Athos came from his uncle, a monk there, but subsequent letters to his father were found among his possessions at his death. While the word ‘forgery’ has been bandied about among scholars regarding the claims on the Sinaiticus by Tischendorf, perhaps a more accurate rendering would be recollation and ‘adjusted’ restoration as Simonides, an expert on hieroglyphics which are represented throughout the Sinaiticus. Simonides claimed the false nature of the document in The Manchester Guardian in an exchange of letters among scholars and others, at the time. Henry Bradshaw, a British librarian known to both men, defended the Tischendorf find of the Sinaiticus, casting aside the accusations of Simonides. Since Bradshaw was a social ‘hub’ among many diverse scholars of the day, his aiding of Tischendorf was given much weight. Simonides died shortly after, and the issue lay dormant for many years.[103]

Tischendorf answered in Allgemeine Zeitung (December), that only in the New Testament there are many differences between it and all other manuscripts. Henry Bradshaw, a scholar, contributed to exposing the frauds of Constantine Simonides, and exposed the absurdity of his claims in a letter to The Manchester Guardian (26 January 1863). Bradshaw showed that the Codex Sinaiticus brought by Tischendorf from the Greek monastery of Mount Sinai was not a modern forgery or written by Simonides. Simonides’ “claim was flawed from the beginning”.[104] The controversy seems to regard the misplaced use of the word ‘fraud’ or ‘forgery’ since it may have been a repaired text, a copy of the Septuagint based upon Origen’s Hexapla, a text which has been rejected for centuries because of its lineage from Eusebius who introduced Arian doctrine into the courts of Constantine I and II.

Not every scholar and Church minister was delighted about the codex. Burgon, a supporter of the Textus Receptus, suggested that Codex Sinaiticus, as well as codices Vaticanus and Codex Bezae, were the most corrupt documents extant. Each of these three codices “clearly exhibits a fabricated text – is the result of arbitrary and reckless recension.”[105] The two most weighty of these three codices, א and B, he likens to the “two false witnesses” of Matthew.[106][107]

Recent history

In the early 20th century Vladimir Beneshevich (1874–1938) discovered parts of three more leaves of the codex in the bindings of other manuscripts in the library of Mount Sinai. Beneshevich went on three occasions to the monastery (1907, 1908, 1911) but does not tell when or from which book these were recovered. These leaves were also acquired for St. Petersburg, where they remain.[108][109]

A two-thirds portion of the codex was held in the National Library of Russia from 1859 until 1933

For many decades, the Codex was preserved in the Russian National Library. In 1933, the Soviet Union sold the codex to the British Museum (after 1973 British Library) for £100,000 raised by public subscription (worth £7 million in 2019).[110] After coming to Britain it was examined by Skeat and Milne using an ultra-violet lamp.[111]

In May 1975, during restoration work, the monks of Saint Catherine’s Monastery discovered a room beneath the St. George Chapel which contained many parchment fragments. Kurt Aland and his team from the Institute for New Testament Textual Research were the first scholars who were invited to analyse, examine and photograph these new fragments of the New Testament in 1982.[112] Among these fragments were twelve complete leaves from the Sinaiticus, 11 leaves of the Pentateuch and 1 leaf of the Shepherd of Hermas.[17] Together with these leaves 67 Greek Manuscripts of New Testament have been found (uncials 0278 – 0296 and some minuscules).[113]

In June 2005, a team of experts from the UK, Europe, Egypt, Russia and USA undertook a joint project to produce a new digital edition of the manuscript (involving all four holding libraries), and a series of other studies was announced.[114][115][116] This will include the use of hyperspectral imaging to photograph the manuscripts to look for hidden information such as erased or faded text.[117] This is to be done in cooperation with the British Library.[118]

More than one quarter of the manuscript was made publicly available at The Codex Sinaiticus Website on 24 July 2008. On 6 July 2009, 800 more pages of the manuscript were made available, showing over half of the entire text,[119] although the entire text was intended to be shown by that date.[120]

The complete document is now available online in digital form and available for scholarly study. The online version has a fully transcribed set of digital pages, including amendments to the text, and two images of each page, with both standard lighting and raked lighting to highlight the texture of the parchment.[121]

Prior to 1 September 2009, the University of the Arts London PhD student, Nikolas Sarris, discovered the previously unseen fragment of the Codex in the library of Saint Catherine’s Monastery. It contains the text of Book of Joshua 1:10.[122][123]
Present location

The British Library

The codex is now split into four unequal portions: 347 leaves in the British Library in London (199 of the Old Testament, 148 of the New Testament), 12 leaves and 14 fragments in the Saint Catherine’s Monastery, 43 leaves in the Leipzig University Library, and fragments of 3 leaves in the Russian National Library in Saint Petersburg.[2]

Saint Catherine’s Monastery still maintains the importance of a letter, handwritten in 1844 with an original signature of Tischendorf confirming that he borrowed those leaves.[124] However, recently published documents, including a deed of gift dated 11 September 1868 and signed by Archbishop Kallistratos and the monks of the monastery, indicate that the manuscript was acquired entirely legitimately.[125] This deed, which agrees with a report by Kurt Aland on the matter, has now been published. Unfortunately this development is not widely known in the English-speaking world, as only German- and Russian-language media reported on it in 2009. Doubts as to the legality of the gift arose because when Tischendorf originally removed the manuscript from Saint Catherine’s Monastery in September 1859, the monastery was without an archbishop, so that even though the intention to present the manuscript to the Tsar had been expressed, no legal gift could be made at the time. Resolution of the matter was delayed through the turbulent reign of Archbishop Cyril (consecrated 7 December 1859, deposed 24 August 1866), and the situation only formalised after the restoration of peace.[125]

Skeat in his article “The Last Chapter in the History of the Codex Sinaiticus” concluded in this way:

This is not the place to pass judgements, but perhaps I may say that, as it seems to me, both the monks and Tischendorf deserve our deepest gratitude, Tischendorf for having alerted the monks to the importance of the manuscript, and the monks for having undertaken the daunting task of searching through the vast mass of material with such spectacular results, and then doing everything in their power to safeguard the manuscript against further loss. If we accept the statement of Uspensky, that he saw the codex in 1845, the monks must have worked very hard to complete their search and bind up the results in so short a period.[126]

Impact on biblical scholarship
Along with Codex Vaticanus, the Codex Sinaiticus is considered one of the most valuable manuscripts available, as it is one of the oldest and likely closer to the original text of the Greek New Testament. It is the only uncial manuscript with the complete text of the New Testament, and the only ancient manuscript of the New Testament written in four columns per page which has survived to the present day.[2] With only 300 years separating the Codex Sinaiticus and the proposed lifetime of Jesus, it is considered by some to be more accurate than most New Testament copies in preserving readings where almost all manuscripts are assumed by them to be in error.[9]

For the Gospels, Sinaiticus is considered among some people as the second most reliable witness of the text (after Vaticanus); in the Acts of the Apostles, its text is equal to that of Vaticanus; in the Epistles, Sinaiticus is assumed to be the most reliable witness of the text. In the Book of Revelation, however, its text is corrupted and is considered of poor quality, and inferior to the texts of Codex Alexandrinus, Papyrus 47, and even some minuscule manuscripts in this place (for example, Minuscule 2053, 2062).[15]

See also
Biblical manuscript
List of New Testament uncials
Differences between codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus
Fifty Bibles of Constantine
Syriac Sinaiticus

Notes

It was estimated by Tischendorf and used by Scrivener in his Introduction to the Sinaitic Codex (1867) as an argument against authorship of Simonides (‘‘Christianity’’, p. 1889.)
Also in Minuscule 69, Minuscule 336, and several other manuscripts Pauline epistles precede Acts.
For another variants of this verse see: Textual variants in the First Epistle of John.
The same variant present manuscripts: P67, 2174, in manuscripts of Vulgate, and in manuscripts of Ethiopic version.
Uspienski described: «Первая рукопись, содержащая Ветхий Завет неполный и весь Новый Завет с посланием ап. Варнавы и книгой Ермы, писана на тончайшем белом пергаменте. (…) Буквы в ней совершенно похожи на церковно-славянские. Постановка их прямая и сплошная. Над словами нет придыханий и ударений, а речения не отделяются никакими знаками правописания кроме точек. Весь священный текст писан в четыре и два столбца стихомерным образом и так слитно, как будто одно длинное речение тянется от точки до точки.» (Порфирий (Успенский), Первое путешествие в Синайский монастырь в 1845 году, Petersburg 1856, с. 226.)
Davies’ words are from a letter published in The Guardian on 27 May 1863, as quoted by Elliott, J.K. (1982) in Codex Sinaiticus and the Simonides Affair, Thessaloniki: Patriarchal Institute for Patristic Studies, p. 16; Elliott in turn is quoted by Michael D. Peterson in his essay “Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus: the Saga Continues”, in The Church and the Library, ed. Papademetriou and Sopko Boston: Somerset Hall Press (2005), p. 77. See also notes 2 and 3, p. 90, in Papademetriou.
References
Edit
Sinai: The Site & the History by Mursi Saad El Din, Ayman Taher, Luciano Romano 1998 ISBN 0-8147-2203-2 page 101
Aland, Kurt; Barbara Aland (1995). The Text of the New Testament: An Introduction to the Critical Editions and to the Theory and Practice of Modern Textual Criticism, trans. Erroll F. Rhodes. Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. p. 107. ISBN 978-0-8028-4098-1.
Scrivener, Frederick Henry Ambrose (1875). Six Lectures on the Text of the New Testament and the Ancient Manuscripts. Cambridge. p. 26. ISBN 978-1-4097-0826-1.
Aland, Kurt; Aland, Barbara (1995). The Text of the New Testament: An Introduction to the Critical Editions and to the Theory and Practice of Modern Textual Criticism. Erroll F. Rhodes (trans.). Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. pp. 107–108. ISBN 978-0-8028-4098-1.
“Liste Handschriften”. Münster: Institute for New Testament Textual Research. Retrieved 16 March 2013.
“Sacred Texts: Codex Sinaiticus”. http://www.bl.uk. Retrieved 27 January 2017.
T. C. Skeat, Early Christian book-production, in: Peter R. Ackroyd & Geoffrey William Hugo Lampe (eds.) The Cambridge history of the Bible (Cambridge 1975), pp. 77–78.
Lake, Kirsopp (1911). Codex Sinaiticus Petropolitanus: The New Testament, the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. Oxford: Clarendon Press. p. XVI.
Kenyon, Frederic (1939). “7”. Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts (4 ed.). London. p. 191. Retrieved 5 July 2010.
Scrivener, F. H. A. (1864). A Full Collation of the Codex Sinaiticus with the Received Text of the New Testament. Cambridge: Deighton, Bell, and Co. p. XIII.
Jongkind, Dirk (2007), pp. 22–50. Scribal Habits of Codex Sinaiticus, Gorgias Press LLC, pp. 67–68.
Jongkind, Dirk (2007). Scribal Habits of Codex Sinaiticus, Gorgias Press LLC, p. 74 ff, 93–94.
Bringhurst, Robert (2004). The Elements of Typographic Style (version 3.0), pp. 174–75. Vancouver: Hartley & Marks. ISBN 0-88179-205-5.
Morehead, Gavin “Parchment Assessment of the Codex Sinaiticus”, http://codexsinaiticus.org/en/project/conservation_parchment.aspx, Retrieved 11 December 2011
Metzger, Bruce M., (1991). Manuscripts of the Greek Bible: An Introduction to Palaeography, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 76–78.
“The Codex Sinaiticus Website”. Codex-sinaiticus.net. Retrieved 4 February 2010.
Skeat, Theodore Cressy (2000). “The Last Chapter in the History of the Codex Sinaiticus”. Novum Testamentum. BRILL. XLII, 4 (4): 313–315. doi:10.1163/156853600506708.
Würthwein, Ernst (1988). Der Text des Alten Testaments (2nd ed.). Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft. p. 85. ISBN 3-438-06006-X.
Swete, Henry Barclay (1902). An Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek. Cambridge: Macmillan and Co. pp. 129–130.
Bruce M. Metzger (2001). A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft. United Bible Societies.
Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft: Stuttgart 2001), pp. 315, 388, 434, 444.
The Greek New Testament, ed. K. Aland, A. Black, C. M. Martini, B. M. Metzger, and A. Wikgren, in cooperation with INTF, United Bible Societies, 3rd edition, (Stuttgart 1983), p. 16 [UBS3]
The Greek New Testament, ed. K. Aland, A. Black, C. M. Martini, B. M. Metzger, and A. Wikgren, in cooperation with INTF, United Bible Societies, 3rd edition, (United Bible Societies, Stuttgart 1983), p. 18.
Nestle-Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece, 26th edition, p. 26
Nestle-Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece, 26th edition, p. 41
Nestle-Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece, 26th edition, p. 56
Scrivener, Frederick Henry Ambrose; Edward Miller (1894). A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament. 1 (4 ed.). London: George Bell & Sons. p. 342.
The Greek New Testament, ed. K. Aland, A. Black, C. M. Martini, B. M. Metzger, and A. Wikgren, in cooperation with INTF, United Bible Societies, 3rd edition, (United Bible Societies, Stuttgart 1983), p. 118.
The Greek New Testament, ed. K. Aland, A. Black, C. M. Martini, B. M. Metzger, and A. Wikgren, in cooperation with INTF, United Bible Societies, 3rd edition, (United Bible Societies, Stuttgart 1983), p. 164.
Nestle-Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece, 26th edition, p. 190
NA26, p. 256; The Greek New Testament, ed. K. Aland, A. Black, C. M. Martini, B. M. Metzger, and A. Wikgren, in cooperation with INTF, United Bible Societies, 3rd edition, (Stuttgart 1983), p. 333
The Greek New Testament, ed. K. Aland, A. Black, C. M. Martini, B. M. Metzger, and A. Wikgren, in cooperation with INTF, United Bible Societies, 3rd edition, (Stuttgart 1983), p. 95.
The Greek New Testament, ed. K. Aland, A. Black, C. M. Martini, B. M. Metzger, and A. Wikgren, in cooperation with INTF, United Bible Societies, 3rd edition, (Stuttgart 1983), p. 168.
The Greek New Testament, ed. K. Aland, A. Black, C. M. Martini, B. M. Metzger, and A. Wikgren, in cooperation with INTF, United Bible Societies, 3rd edition, (Stuttgart 1983), p. 256.
The Greek New Testament, ed. K. Aland, A. Black, C. M. Martini, B. M. Metzger, and A. Wikgren, in cooperation with INTF, United Bible Societies, 3rd edition, (Stuttgart 1983), p. 305.
Nestle-Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece 26th edition, Stuttgart 1991, p. 239.
The Greek New Testament, ed. K. Aland, A. Black, C. M. Martini, B. M. Metzger, and A. Wikgren, in cooperation with INTF, United Bible Societies, 3rd edition, (Stuttgart 1983), p. 311 [UBS3]
Nestle-Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece, 26th edition, p. 18
Nestle-Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece, 26th edition, p. 24
Editio octava critica maior, p. 49
Bruce M. Metzger (2001). A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, Stuttgart: United Bible Societies, p. 59
Nestle-Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece, 26th edition, p. 17.
The Greek New Testament, ed. K. Aland, A. Black, C. M. Martini, B. M. Metzger, and A. Wikgren, in cooperation with INTF, United Bible Societies, 3rd edition, (Stuttgart 1983), p. 26
Skeat, T. C. (1999). “The Codex Sinaiticus, The Codex Vaticanus and Constantine”. Journal of Theological Studies. 50 (2): 583–625. doi:10.1093/jts/50.2.583.
Nestle-Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece, 26th edition, p. 158.
“BibleTranslation.ws” (PDF). Retrieved 4 February 2010.
Nestle-Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece, 26th edition, p. 264
Scrivener, Frederick Henry Ambrose (1875). Six Lectures on the Text of the New Testament and the Ancient Manuscripts which contain it. London: Deighton, Bell & Co. p. 47.
UBS3, p. 737.
The Greek New Testament, ed. K. Aland, A. Black, C. M. Martini, B. M. Metzger, and A. Wikgren, in cooperation with INTF, United Bible Societies, 3rd edition, (Stuttgart 1983), p. 165.

Nestle-Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece, 26th edition, p. 136.
Nestle-Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece, 26th edition, p. 184.
The Greek New Testament, ed. K. Aland, A. Black, C. M. Martini, B. M. Metzger, and A. Wikgren, in cooperation with INTF, United Bible Societies, 3rd edition, (Stuttgart 1983), p. 823.
Bart D. Ehrman, The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, Oxford University Press, Oxford 1993, p. 60.
See, for instance, Tommy Wasserman, “Misquoting Manuscripts? The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture Revisited,” in The Making of Christianity: Conflicts, Contacts, and Constructions: Essays in Honor of Bengt Holmberg. Zetterholm, M., and S. Byrskog, eds., Eisenbrauns, 2012, pp.325–350.
2:3–8
Fee, G. D. (1968–9). Codex Sinaiticus in the Gospel of John, NTS 15, pp. 22–44.
Hoskier, H. C. (1914). Codex B and Its Allies, a Study and an Indictment, London, p.1.
Westcott, B. F. and Hort, F. J. A. (1860). Introduction to the Study of the Gospels, p. 40.
Streeter, B. H. (1924). The Four Gospels, a Study of Origins treating of the Manuscript Tradition, Sources, Authorship, & Dates, pp. 590–597.
Milne, H. J. M. and Skeat, T.C. (1938). Scribes and Correctors of Codex Sinaiticus. London: Trustees of the British Museum.
Metzger, Bruce M., (1991). Manuscripts of the Greek Bible: An Introduction to Palaeography, Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 77.
Parker D. C., Codex Sinaiticus. The Story of the World’s Oldest Bible, London: The British Library, 2010, p. 3.
Button, E. A. (1911). An Atlas of Textual Criticism, Cambridge, p. 13.
Brook F. Westcott and Fenton J. A. Hort, Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek (New York: Harper & Bros., 1882; reprint, Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1988), pp. 264–267.
Robinson, A., Euthaliana, pp. 42, 101.
Frederic G. Kenyon, Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts, Eyre and Spottiswoode, London, 1896, p. 128.
Victor Gardthausen, Griechische paleographie, 2 vol., Leipzig, 1913, pp. 124–125.
Price, I. M. (1923). The Ancestry of Our English Bible an Account of Manuscripts, Texts and Versions of the Bible, Sunday School Times Co, p. 146 f.
Pierre Batiffol, Codex Sinaiticus, in DB. 1, 1883–1886.
Frederic G. Kenyon, “Handbook to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament”, London2, 1912, p. 83.
Milne, H. J. M. and Skeat, T. C., (1938). Scribes and Correctors of the Codex Sinaiticus, London: British Museum, pp. 22–50.
Jongkind, Dirk (2007), pp. 22–50. Scribal Habits of Codex Sinaiticus, Gorgias Press LLC, pp. 12–13.
Jongkind, Dirk (2007), Scribal Habits of Codex Sinaiticus, Gorgias Press LLC, p. 90.
Jongkind, Dirk (2007), Scribal Habits of Codex Sinaiticus, Gorgias Press LLC, pp. 77–78.
Jongkind, Dirk (2007), Scribal Habits of Codex Sinaiticus, Gorgias Press LLC, pp. 80–81.
Milne-Skeat. Scribes and Correctors of the Codex Sinaiticus, (London: British Museum, 1938), p. 94.
Milne-Skeat. Scribes and Correctors of the Codex Sinaiticus, (London: British Museum, 1938), pp. 53–55.
Metzger, Bruce M.; Ehrman, Bart D. (2005), The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 66–67
Milne, H. J. M. and T. C. Skeat, (1938). Scribes and Correctors of the Codex Sinaiticus, London: British Museum, p. 33.
Jongkind, Dirk (2007), Scribal Habits of Codex Sinaiticus, Gorgias Press LLC, p. 44.
Metzger, Bruce M., (1992). The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration, (3rd Ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 46.
Gregory, C. R. (1900). Textkritik des Neuen Testaments (in German). 1. Leipzig: J.C. Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung. p. 19. Retrieved 18 March 2010.
Lumbroso, G. (1879). Atti della R. Accademia dei Lincei, p. 501.
Kirsopp Lake, (1911). Codex Sinaiticus Petropolitanus: The New Testament, the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas, Oxford: Clarendon Press, p. V.
Skeat, T. C. (2000). “The Last Chapter in the History of the Codex Sinaiticus”. Novum Testamentum. Vol. 42, Fasc. 3, Jul., 2000. p. 313.
Constantin von Tischendorf, Monumenta sacra inedita (Leipzig 1855), vol. I, pp. 211 ff.
Tischendorf, C. v. (1866). When Were Our Gospels Written? An Argument by Constantine Tischendorf. With a Narrative of the Discovery of the Sinaitic Manuscript, New York: American Tract Society.
Gregory, Caspar René (1900). Textkritik des Neuen Testaments. 1. Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung. pp. 195–196.
Parker, D. C. (2010). Codex Sinaiticus. The Story of the World’s Oldest Bible. London: The British Library. pp. 140–142. ISBN 978-0-7123-5803-3.
Bibliorum Codex Sinaiticus Petropolitanus
Kirsopp Lake, (1911). Codex Sinaiticus Petropolitanus: The New Testament, the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas, Oxford: Clarendon Press, Preface.
See Constantin von Tischendorf, The Discovery of the Sinaitic Manuscript, Extract from Constantin von Tischendorf, (1866) When Were Our Gospels Written? An Argument by Constantine Tischendorf. With a Narrative of the Discovery of the Sinaitic Manuscript New York: American Tract Society.
Bentley, James (1986). Secrets of Mount Sinai. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, p. 95.
Kirsopp Lake, (1911). Codex Sinaiticus Petropolitanus: The New Testament, the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas, Oxford: Clarendon Press, p. VI.
Parker, D. C. (2010). Codex Sinaiticus. The Story of the World’s Oldest Bible. London: The British Library. pp. 145–146. ISBN 978-0-7123-5803-3.
В архивах МИД РФ нашли документ о правах на Синайский кодекс at the Lenta.ru
Lake, Kirsopp, (1911). Codex Sinaiticus Petropolitanus: The New Testament, the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas, Oxford: Clarendon Press, p. VI.
See Ihor Ševčenko, “New Documents on Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus”, published in the journal Scriptorium, xviii (1964), pp. 55–80.
Metzger, Bruce A. (1992) The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration, (3rd Ed.), Oxford University Press, p. 45.
J. K. Elliott (1982) in Codex Sinaiticus and the Simonides Affair, Thessaloniki: Patriarchal Institute for Patristic Studies, p. 16.
Странное объявление Симонидеса о Синайском кодексе и ответ Тишендорфа.
Letters of Constantine Simonides, Grolier Library, NY
McKitterick, David (1998) A history of Cambridge University Press, Volume 2: Scholarship and Commerce (1698–1872), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0-521-30802-X, page 369.
Dean Burgon, Revision Revised, p. 9.
26:60
Dean Burgon, Revised Revision, p. 48.
Бенешевич Владимир Николаевич, “Памятники Синая археологические и палеографические”, Вып. 2, Sankt Petersburg, 1912; V. N. Beneshevich, “Catalogus Codicum Manuscriptorum Graecorum qui in Monasterio Sanctae Catherinae in Monte Sina Asservantur” St. Petersburg (1911).
“Katapi.org.uk”. Katapi.org.uk. Retrieved 4 February 2010.
Metzger, Bruce M.; Ehrman, Bart D. (2005). The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration (4th ed.). New York – Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 64.
T. C. Skeat, A four years work on the Codex Sinaiticus: Significant discoveries in reconditioned ms., in: T. C. Skeat and J. K. Elliott, The collected biblical writings of T. C. Skeat, Brill 2004, p. 9.
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, “Die Funde der Mönche vom Sinai” (Engl.: “The findings of the monks from the Sinai”), 05-11-1983, No. 109, page 10
Codex Sinaiticus finds 1975 with images
World’s oldest Bible goes global: Historic international digitisation project announced, British Library: Press Room
British Library Heads Project in Digitalising the World’s Oldest Bible Christianity Today, 15 March 2005
Schneider, Ulrich Johannes (ed.) (2007). Codex Sinaiticus. Geschichte und Erschließung der «Sinai-Bibel». Leipzig: Universitätsbibliothek Leipzig, p. 42.
Oldest known Bible to go online. BBC.com. 31 August 2005. Retrieved 8 June 2006.
Henschke, E. (2007). “Digitizing the Hand-Written Bible: The Codex Sinaiticus, its History and Modern Presentation”, Libri, vol. 57, pp. 45–51.
Historical Bible pages put online BBC News
“The world’s oldest Bible goes online” (Press release). 21 July 2008. Retrieved 24 July 2008.
“ctv news story”. Ctv.ca. 6 July 2009. Retrieved 4 February 2010.
Oldest Bible fragment found in Egypt Press TV
“Fragment from world’s oldest Bible found hidden in Egyptian monastery”. The Independent, 2 Sept, 2009.
Ο Σιναϊτικός Κώδικας.
“История приобретения Синайской Библии Россией в свете новых документов из российских архивов”, А.В.Захарова, Монфокон: исследования по палеографии, кодикологии и дипломатике, Ι, Москва—С.-Петербург, 2007, 209–266
Skeat, T. C. (2000). “The Last Chapter in the History of the Codex Sinaiticus.” Novum Testamentum. Vol. 42, Fasc. 3, Jul., 2000. p. 315.

Further reading

Text of the codex

Constantin von Tischendorf, Fragmentum Codicis Friderico-Augustani, in: Monumenta sacra inedita (Leipzig 1855), vol. I, pp. 211 ff.
Constantin von Tischendorf: Bibliorum codex Sinaiticus Petropolitanus. Giesecke & Devrient, Leipzig 1862.
Lake, Kirsopp (1911). Codex Sinaiticus Petropolitanus: The New Testament, the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Scrivener, Frederick Henry Ambrose (1867) [1864]. A Full Collation of the Codex Sinaiticus with the Received Text of the New Testament (PDF) (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Deighton Bell.
Anderson, H. T. (1918). CODEX SINAITICUS: The New Testament translated from the Sinaitic Manuscript. Cincinnati: The Standard Publishing Company.
Introductions to the textual criticism of NT

Gregory, C. R. (1900). Textkritik des Neuen Testaments (in German). 1. Leipzig: J.C. Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung. Retrieved 18 March 2010.
Metzger, Bruce M. (1991). Manuscripts of the Greek Bible: An Introduction to Palaeography. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 76–79. ISBN 978-0-19-502924-6.
Metzger, Bruce M.; Ehrman, Bart D. (2005). The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration (4th ed.). New York – Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 62–67.
Scrivener, Frederick Henry Ambrose; Edward Miller (1894). A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament. 1 (4 ed.). London: George Bell & Sons. p. 342.
Streeter, Burnett Hillman (1924). The Four Gospels. A Study of Origins the Manuscripts Tradition, Sources, Authorship, & Dates. Oxford: MacMillan and Co Limited.
Other works

Anderson, H. T. (1910). The New Testament Translated from the Sinaitic Manuscript Discovered by Constantine Tischendorf at Mt. Sinai. The Standard Publishing Company.
Böttrich, Christfried (2011). Der Jahrhundertfund. Entdeckung und Geschichte des Codex Sinaiticus (The Discovery of the Century. Discovery and history of Codex Sinaiticus). Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt. ISBN 978-3-374-02586-2.
Gardthausen, Victor (1913). Griechische paleographie. 2. Leipzig. pp. 119–134.
Jongkind, Dirk (2007). Scribal Habits of Codex Sinaiticus. Gorgias Press LLC.
Kenyon, Frederic G. (1939). Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts (4th ed.). London. pp. 121–128.
Peter M. Head (2008). “The Gospel of Mark in Codex Sinaiticus: Textual and Reception-Historical Considerations” (PDF). Journal of Biblical Textual Criticism.
Magerson, P. (1983). “Codex Sinaiticus: An Historical Observation”. Bib Arch. 46: 54–56.
Milne, H. J. M.; Skeat, T. C. (1963) [1951]. The Codex Sinaiticus and the Codex Alexandrinus. London.
Milne, H. J. M.; Skeat, T. C. (1938). Scribes and Correctors of the Codex Sinaiticus. London: British Museum.
Parker, D. C. (2010). Codex Sinaiticus. The Story of the World’s Oldest Bible. London: The British Library. ISBN 978-0-7123-5803-3.
Porter, Stanley E. (2015). Constantine Tischendorf. The Life and Work of a 19th Century Bible Hunter. London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark. ISBN 978-0-5676-5803-6.
Schick, Alexander (2015). Tischendorf und die älteste Bibel der Welt – Die Entdeckung des CODEX SINAITICUS im Katharinenkloster (Tischendorf and the oldest Bible in the world – The discovery of the Codex Sinaiticus in St. Catherine’s Monastery – Biography cause of the anniversary of the 200th birthday of Tischendorf with many unpublished documents from his estate. These provide insight into previously unknown details of the discoveries and the reasons behind the donation of the manuscript. Recent research on Tischendorf and the Codex Sinaiticus and its significance for New Testament Textual Research). Muldenhammer: Jota. ISBN 978-3-935707-83-1.
T. C. Skeat, A four years work on the Codex Sinaiticus: Significant discoveries in reconditioned ms., in: T. C. Skeat and J. K. Elliott, The collected biblical writings of T. C. Skeat, Brill 2004, pp. 109–118.
Schneider, Ulrich Johannes (ed.) (2007). Codex Sinaiticus. Geschichte und Erschließung der “Sinai-Bibel”. Leipzig: Universitätsbibliothek Leipzig. ISBN 978-3-934178-72-4.
Tischendorf, Constantin von (1870). Responsa ad Calumnias Romanas. Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus.
Tischendorf, Constantin von (1871). Die Sinaibibel ihre Entdeckung, Herausgabe, und Erwerbung. Leipzig: Giesecke & Devrient.
Tischendorf, Constantin von (1865). Wann wurden unsere Evangelien verfasst?. Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichssche Buchhandlung.
Tischendorf, Constantin von (1866). When Were Our Gospels Written?, An Argument by Constantine Tischendorf. With a Narrative of the Discovery of the Sinaitic Manuscript. New York: American Tract Society.

Facsimiles of Codex Sinaiticus
Codex Sinaiticus at the Center for the Study of NT Manuscripts (JPG)
Codex Sinaiticus: A Facsimile (ISBN 9780712349987)
Articles

Differences between the Sinaiticus and the KJV
Codex Sinaiticus at the Encyclopedia of Textual Criticism
Codex Sinaiticus page at bible-researcher.com
Earlham College facsimile of Codex Sinaiticus
Codex Sinaiticus Project at the British Library website
Codex Sinaiticus entry for the British Library collection
A real-life Bible Code: the amazing story of the Codex Sinaiticus
Joint project managed by ITSEE for digitizing the codex
E. Henschke, The Codex Sinaiticus, its History and Modern Presentation
Who Owns the Codex Sinaiticus Biblical Archaeology Review Library
The Codex Sinaiticus and the Manuscripts of Mt Sinai in the Collections of the National Library of Russia The National Library of Russia, 2009
Codex Sinaiticus, the world’s oldest Bible, goes online The Telegraph

The End

Bible King James Version

My thoughts and comments will be in italic as we explore the Bible. For more information where this Bible came from, see my other blog on ” Where did the Bible come from” by scrolling through the other blogs. Thank You. By Mark A. Felkins Mon May 27, 2019.

Title page :

The Old Testament, Translated out of the Original Tongues:

Not sure what it means by ” Original Tongues:” old Hebrew? Or Greek? Latin?

and with the Former Translations

Former translations? what former translations? Has an “s” at the end of Translations meaning many. Is this an error or were there more than one?

Diligently Compared and Revised,

Compared and Revised. How so? What was added or left out? Or changed? Do we have the old documents they got their translations from?

by His Majesty’s Special Command

Who was on this special command ?

Authorized King James Version

Epistle Dedicatory

To the Most High and Mighty Prince James by the Grace of God

King of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, &c.

The Translators of the Bible wish Grace, Mercy, and Peace, through Jesus Christ our Lord

Great and manifold were the blessings, most dread Sovereign, which Almighty God, the Father of all mercies, bestowed upon us the people of England,

when first he sent Your Majesty’s Royal Person to rule and reign over us.

So they believe at that time God had sent King James to rule over the people.

For whereas it was the expectation of many, who wished not well unto our Sion,

They claim that Sion is also Zion another word for it. So some people didn’t wish them well for there Sion.

that upon the setting of that bright Occidental Star,

Occidental Star ?

Occidentals meaning Webster’s Dictionary
a member of one of the occidental peoplesespecially : a person of European ancestrya member of one of the occidental peoplesespecially : a person of European ancestry

First Known Use of occidental

Adjective

14th century, in the meaning defined at sense 1

Noun

circa 1538, in the meaning defined above

History and Etymology for occidental

Adjective

Middle English, borrowed from Anglo-French & Latin; Anglo-French, borrowed from Latin occidentālis,from occident-, occidens OCCIDENT + -ālis-AL- entry 1

Noun

borrowed from Medieval Latin occidentālis, noun derivative of Latin occidentālis, adjective, Occidental

Star. means

  • : any one of the objects in space thatare made of burning gas and that look like points of light in the night sky
  • : a star or planet especially in a certain position that is believed in astrology to influence people‘s lives
  • : something (such as a symbol or medal) with five or
  • more points that represents or suggests a star

Is that what it means a shiny European ancestry Queen?

See history of King James who made this Bible. In one of my blogs.

Queen Elizabeth of most happy memory, some thick and palpable clouds of darkness would so have overshadowed this Land, that men should have been in doubt which way they were to walk; and that it should hardly be known, who was to direct the unsettled State; the appearance of Your Majesty, as of the Sun in his strength, instantly dispelled those supposed and surmised mists, and gave unto all that were well affected exceeding cause of comfort; especially when we

beheld the Government established in Your Highness, and Your hopeful Seed,

So they believed in handed down Royal seed or holy King. Seed. But doubts in the writers eye by saying ” “hopeful seed”

by an undoubted Title, and this also accompanied with peace and tranquillity at home and abroad.

But among all our joys, there was no one that more filled our hearts, than the blessed continuance of the preaching of God’s sacred Word among us;

Freedom of preaching of God’s words were extremely important to them and thanked the powerful king for allowing them to preach God’s sacred Word.

Freedom of preaching God’s Word

which is that inestimable treasure, which excelleth all the riches of the earth; because the fruit thereof extendeth itself, not only to the time spent in this transitory world, but directeth and disposeth men unto that eternal happiness which is above in heaven.

Then not to suffer this to fall to the ground, but rather to take it up, and to continue it in that state, wherein the famous Predecessor of Your Highness did leave it: nay, to go forward with the confidence and resolution of a Man in maintaining the truth of Christ, and propagating it far and near, is that which hath so bound and firmly knit the hearts of all Your Majesty’s loyal and religious people unto You, that Your very name is precious among them: their eye doth behold You with comfort, and they bless You in their hearts, as that sanctified Person, who, under God, is the immediate Author of their true happiness. And this their contentment doth not diminish or decay, but every day increaseth and taketh strength, when they observe, that the zeal of Your Majesty toward the house of God doth not slack or go backward, but is more and more kindled, manifesting itself abroad in the farthest parts of Christendom, by writing in defence of the Truth, (which hath given such a blow unto that man of sin, as will not be healed,) and every day at home, by religious and learned discourse, by frequenting the house of God, by hearing the Word preached, by cherishing the Teachers thereof, by caring for the Church, as a most tender and loving nursing Father.

There are infinite arguments of this right Christian and religious affection in Your Majesty; but none is more forcible to declare it to others than the vehement and perpetuated desire of accomplishing and publishing of this work, which now with all humility we present unto Your Majesty. For when Your Highness had once out of deep judgment apprehended how convenient it was, that out of the Original Sacred Tongues, together with comparing of the labours, both in our own, and other foreign Languages, of many worthy men who went before us, there should be one more exact Translation of the holy Scriptures into the English Tongue; Your Majesty did never desist to urge and to excite those to whom it was commended, that the work might be hastened, and that the business might be expedited in so decent a manner, as a matter of such importance might justly require.

And now at last, by the mercy of God, and the continuance of our labours, it being brought unto such a conclusion, as that we have great hopes that the Church of England shall reap good fruit thereby; we hold it our duty to offer it to Your Majesty, not only as to our King and Sovereign, but as to the principal Mover and Author of the work: humbly craving of Your most Sacred Majesty, that since things of this quality have ever been subject to the censures of illmeaning and discontented persons, it may receive approbation and patronage from so learned and judicious a Prince as Your Highness is, whose allowance and acceptance of our labours shall more honour and encourage us, than all the calumniations and hard interpretations of other men shall dismay us. So that if, on the one side, we shall be traduced by Popish Persons at home or abroad, who therefore will malign us, because we are poor instruments to make God’s holy Truth to be yet more and more known unto the people, whom they desire still to keep in ignorance and darkness; or if, on the other side, we shall be maligned by selfconceited Brethren, who run their own ways, and give liking unto nothing, but what is framed by themselves, and hammered on their anvil; we may rest secure, supported within by the truth and innocency of a good conscience, having walked the ways of simplicity and integrity, as before the Lord; and sustained without by the powerful protection of Your Majesty’s grace and favour, which will ever give countenance to honest and Christian endeavours against bitter censures and uncharitable imputations.

The Lord of heaven and earth bless Your Majesty with many and happy days, that, as his heavenly hand hath enriched Your Highness with many singular and extraordinary graces, so You may be the wonder of the world in this latter age for happiness and true felicity, to the honour of that great God, and the good of his Church, through Jesus Christ our Lord and only Saviour.

The First Book of Moses Called Genesis

Chapter 1

God creates this earth and its heaven and all forms of life in six days—The creative acts of each day are described—God creates man, both male and female, in His own image—Man is given dominion over all things and is commanded to multiply and fill the earth.

1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
6 ¶ And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
9 ¶ And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.
11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.
14 ¶ And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.
23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
24 ¶ And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
26 ¶ And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
29 ¶ And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.
30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.
31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

School Shooting 1840


John A.G. Davis

Davis’s gravestone at the University of Virginia Cemetery in Charlottesville, Virginia.

In the early 19th century, rioting was a common practice in the United States among students who either didn’t like the food, the rules or the punishments meted out to them. William and Mary students rioted in 1802 after professors punished two fellow classmates for dueling. Bad food—old fish and overripe cabbage—ignited Harvard’s Rotten Cabbage Rebellion in 1807. That same year, Princeton students rioted after three classmates were suspended.

The University of Virginia endured at least six riots in its earliest days. During one riot, a professor was murdered—one of the worst crimes committed at the University in its long history.

It happened this way: One of the new traditions at UVA was the celebration of the 1836 military company riot, which the students had interpreted as a victory over professorial authority. Every November the students fired their pistols, set off firecrackers, lit fires and in general spent the night caterwauling.

But on this autumn night in 1840, the disturbance was too much for John A.G. Davis, the school’s law professor since 1830. He stepped out, as he no doubt had many times in the past, to put a halt to the hullabaloo, caused predominantly by two masked students parading around the Lawn firing blank cartridges.

Around 9:00 p.m., he saw one of the masked students hiding behind one of the pillars. Davis jumped for him and reached to unmask the student. The student fled, but turned after a few steps, pointed his pistol, and, without uttering a word, fired at Davis’ gut. The bullet pierced Davis’ abdomen, and he fell to the ground with a groan.

Students soon flocked to the pavilion as word spread that a professor had been shot. Several picked up Davis’ limp, bleeding body and brought the wounded man inside. On November 14, a Saturday, he succumbed to his wounds at sundown.

respected and well liked by the students, Davis attempted to stop the two students who were causing the disturbance and was shot by one. The killer, although masked, was identified as Joseph Green Semmes.

Students, chastened by the turn of events, joined in the search for Semmes and located him hiding in the forest. Semmes was imprisoned in the county jail for several months while several trial dates were postponed; then, in July 1841, released on $25,000 bond, by reason of deteriorating health. However, he failed to appear for trial in October 1841, and eventually committed suicide, years later.

Young Semmes, who some years since shot Professor Davis at the Virginia University, brought his life to an end by his own hand, the morning of the 9th instant [9 July 1847], at the house of his brother in Washington, Georgia. He shot himself with a pistol, the ball entering the left eye and penetrating the brain and lingered in a state of total insensibility from about 7 o’clock, A. M., when his family was called to his room by the report of a pistol, until half past 1. P. M. of the same day.

— Edgefield Advertiser (SC), 11 August 1847

And so began the search for the student who murdered the professor. This time, the students joined in the hunt for one of their own. Where previous acts of violence had always ended with students closing ranks, this time—for the first time—they sided with University authorities and recognized that there were limits to their insubordinate behavior. They held a meeting the following morning to express their “indignation and abhorrence.”

Young Semmes, who some years since shot Professor Davis at the Virginia University, brought his life to an end by his own hand, the morning of the 9th instant [9 July 1847], at the house of his brother in Washington, Georgia. He shot himself with a pistol, the ball entering the left eye and penetrating the brain and lingered in a state of total insensibility from about 7 o’clock, A. M., when his family was called to his room by the report of a pistol, until half past 1. P. M. of the same day.

— Edgefield Advertiser (SC), 11 August 1847

Expecting a violent confrontation, two students found Semmes hiding in a pine grove and turned him over to the authorities. He offered no resistance. Semmes’ family would later post bail, which he quickly jumped. Soon afterward, he committed suicide.

The murder would meld with a confluence of events—a rise in religious fervor and a growing temperance movement—to tame student behavior. The change was abetted by the birth of the Honor System, which led students—with Davis’ murder still in mind—to decide that reporting misbehavior would be honorable. That change in behavior, coupled with smarter leadership, saved UVA.