Transcript
Ute Feller Graduate Conservator, University of Leipzig August 20091. Special features of the Leipzig leaves At the end of 2002, following up the idea of the British Library of uniting virtually the differentparts of the Codex Sinaiticus which are dispersed over four countries, a first examination of the Leipzig leaves from a conservation point of view took place. The Leipzig leaves srcinallyhad a red goat-skin binding from the beginning of the 20th century. CODEX SINAITICUS Leipzig University Library Image 1: Binding of the Leipzig Codex Sinaiticus All the parchment leaves of the manuscript suffered from major cockling, probably resultingfrom bad storage conditions during World War II, and the binding was rather tight.The Leipzig manuscript comprises 43 leaves, each of which has a foliation at the bottom rightrecto applied with pencil.Each leaf has a Leipzig University Library stamp on the recto.On some leaves (1, 9, 17, 20, 28 and 36) quire numbers are applied at the upper right siderecto, which leads us to the assumption of a former binding consisting of eight leaves per quire. (This is consistent with the findings of our British colleagues.) The text on the 85 pagesis written exclusively in four columns with 48 lines each, but leaf 34 recto (part of Jeremiah)has 47 lines. Some ink corrosion is visible on 37 leaves, with varying intensity.In June 2003, expecting a more intensive usage of the manuscript due to the internationalproject, we decided to disbind the manuscript to lessen the tensions of the leaves. After disbinding the Leipzig leaves the following features became visible. Image 2: Text block – the sewing guards and the spine glued with gauze are stillvisible The block was sewn on three common sewing tapes.There were units of four single leaves glued together with linen guards forming two doubleleaves. These two double leaves make up one quire.The last leaf (43) was held together with the two preceding leaves 41 and 42 with linenguards.The spine was encrusted with hot glue and a gauze spine lining attached. In some instances,torn and missing parts of the parchment were mended with Japanese paper, strips of parchment or soft tissue. Traces of five parchment strips from the red leather binding are stillvisible. Image 3: Spine margin inside - the remains of the parchment strips are still visible We conclude from this evidence that before the binding on three sewing tapes, the Codex hadbeen bound on five parchment strips in the same cover. This was probably the first bindingafter Tischendorf had brought the leaves to Leipzig. Through additional research andcomparisons with other bindings we found out that the first binding of the Leipzig leaves wascarried out by the former University bindery. We think it possible that Leipzig UniversityLibrary or even Tischendorf himself gave instructions to bind the Codex.The question arises, who rebound the Leipzig leaves and why? Who did the partialrestoration of the leaves?In the archives of Leipzig University Library we discovered an invoice from a Leipzig binderyfor some work on the Codex Sinaiticus done in June 1928. We assume that in this bindery theblock was separated from the cover. The five parchment guards were cut and the singleleaves were hung on the folds, sewn on three sewing guards. Then the block was put back inits old cover and became the item which we found. Around 1930, a permanent exhibition was established at the University Library. It is more thanlikely that the Codex Sinaiticus was among the objects exhibited and it was restored for thedisplay. Image 4: Codex Sinaiticus in a display case at Leipzig University Library about 1930 2. Leipzig observationsWorking on the documentation designed by our British colleagues we noted that the scarringof the skin is never the same. To our eyes, it sometimes looks like calf, sometimes it appearsmore like goat or sheep.Since the indent of the backbone is visible only on a few leaves, it had to be the skin of a verybig animal in order to be able to take only those parts of its skin where there is no indent. Wedo not know of other reasons to account for this fact.The director of the parchment manufactory in Altenburg, Mr. Steffen Kerbs, is a renownedspecialist in parchment and its fabrication. In his opinion there is a high probability we havesheep parchment. Not only the scarring, but the many fat deposits which are visible on mostof the leaves led him to this conclusion. Other animal skins do not show fat deposits to such agreat extent.With today's knowledge of parchment manufacturing, the extreme thinness of the Codexparchment is very rare considering it is made from sheep skin. To obtain a thin parchmentone would normally pare it. However, this is impossible with sheep skin; it would crumblebecause of its high percentage of fat. So if the Codex Sinaiticus is indeed made of sheepskin, there must have been another way of producing extremely thin parchment.Dr Erika Eisenlohr from Marburg University is a specialist in animal skins. She thinks that thefabrication of parchment in the Orient was far more advanced than in Europe. Whileparchment makers in Europe pared the parchment to achieve a thin quality, the Orientals splitit. We think that this could easily explain the uncommon thinness of the Codex leaves.To support this hypothesis, I have two other experts on my side: in a 1991 article on splitparchment Zeger Hendrik de Groot quotes Menahem Haran, who in turn wrote about biblescrolls in Eastern and Western Jewish Communities. [1] Haran states that the splitting of animal skin into two usable layers was almost certainly common practice in the first centuries AD; and maybe even during a period shortly before. Sheep skin is easy to split, a fact wellknown to the leather industry. It is the fat between the reticular and the papillary skin layersthat makes splitting possible. [2]
