Documents on the Acquisition of the Codex Sinaiticus by Russia

(The Archive of Foreign Policy of the Russian Empire, the Russian State History Archives)

Memorandum of Collegiate Councilor Kumani's discussion of
the Sinai Bible case with Archbishop Cyril

Evidence on the Sinai Bible case provided by Professor Tischendorff, and described in the letter by Baron Korff to Adjutant General Count Adlerberg 2nd, is not fully consistent with explanations offered by Cyril Archbishop of Sinai and Archimandrite German, secretary of Mt Sinai Monastery at the time of the discovery and transfer of the above manuscript. Rather amazingly, both divines maintain that Mt Sinai community never wished, nor even intended to present the Bible to His Majesty the Emperor. In witness of Mr. Tischendorff's undoubted awareness of the fact, the Archbishop refers to his letter of 18 November 1867, in particular:¹ preuve de son dévouement respectueux à la Maison Impériale de Russie qu’en Lui déférant le patronage de la publication de ce trésor. Pour le reste, aucune decision n’étant prise, Vous comprenez bien que, dans l’état de désordre où elle se trouve et en l’absence d’un conseil normal, ce n’est point le moment de lui soumettre une affaire de cette nature”.² To this the Archbishop [fol. 86] adds that, considering the conditions of manuscript loan to Mr. Tischendorff, stipulated by Prince Lobanov, Mt Sinai community wrote to Greek Consul in Egypt soon after misunderstandings with Right Rev. Cyril arose, asking to reclaim the original Bible manuscript via diplomatic channels. Thanks to the Archbishop's exhortations only, no action was taken on this petition.

In response to the comment that from the very beginning and up to now, ^** there has been repeatedly talk about giving a steamer to the Sinai Monastery in return for the final donation of the Bible, the Archbishop explained that the steamboat was not proposed by Mt Sinai brethren but only by Mr. Tischendorff. In private conversations with Right Rev. Cyril and Father Agathangelos, the Leipzig scholar emphasized the advantages of regular and easy communications between Tor and Raithu (Sinai landing stage) and Suez, by a small boat, , and hinted at the possibility of providing this boat for the community. As regards the brethren, they never decided either to accept or to deny the offer, many being completely in the dark about it.

How does the Archbishop's statement correlate with the evidence derived by Professor Tischendorff from his correspondence with Right Rev. Cyril and confirmed by Active Privy Councillor Norov, who visited Sinai in 1862 and asserted that "the father superior and brethren insist on passing the manuscript into Russian ownership"? May one assume, by pure conjecture, that both visiting scholars communicating with the Archbishop alone [fol. 87v. mistook his private desire for common decision? Be as it may, Right Rev. Cyril admits this desire on his own part, while repeats that he could not fulfill it just because the brethren still show no inclination whatever to pass the Bible to Russia.

The argument takes the case to another ground and raises the question: would the already ordained Archbishop of Mt Sinai Callistratus or another newly elect follow the way of his predecessor, and would he succeed where Right Rev. Cyril failed with the best will in the world? The latter doubts it [fol. 88] because his successor would hardly choose to confront the whole community, which is particularly true of Callistratus who was among the most relentless accusers of Right Rev. Cyril for the alleged alienation of the manuscript for Russian benefit. It is probable, the Archbishop adds, that damaging me by this slander and encouraged by the Patriarch of Jerusalem, Callistratus would wish to complete evil doings with opposite means, supporting what he so bitterly opposed before, in particular for his own advantage. The implication of potential acknowledgement of Callistratus by the Synod I preferred to ignore out of prudence, concluding that, hopefully, the Imperial Government, motivated by inherent justice, will never disregard the feelings expressed by Right Rev. Cyril on this and some other matters.

Back to the article of A. Zahkarova

Hereinafter original underline.

Notice that, regarding the matter in question, the Community believed that they could not provide greater proof of their faithful respect to the Russian Imperial House than by relying on His patronage for publication of this treasure. For the rest, no decision having been made, You will admit that, with current disagreements and in the absence of adequate council, now is not the time for them to handle a case of this nature. Full text of the letter is published in: Peradze, "Dokumenty…", p. 147.

Note in the text: If I am not mistaken, the steamboat was first mentioned by Mr. Tischendorff announcing his discovery when introducing himself to Grand Duke Constantine Nikolaevich during His Highness' voyage from Jaffa to Jerusalem.