Page 2 of 2

Posted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 9:30 pm
by stephan huller
Agamemnon Tselikas' detailed analysis
Detailed but with no apparatus. He makes assertions but nothing in the way of supporting evidence. With that said I begged, implored whatever to get the Toronto conference to bring him over there. I even called Peter Jeffery to help convince those knuckleheads to make him feel special, wine him dine him to make him feel important so that he would work to find the text. I knew what his position was but I didn't care. I just wanted to solve the mystery. Couldn't convince anyone to change the schedule. Another dumb moment in the history of this debate. In spite of whatever I or anyone else has to say about him - he is the only one who could solve this thing tomorrow. The text exists, I am told. The question of whether matching handwriting exists in the Greek monasteries (he only focuses on mar Saba which admittedly did not produce many manuscripts in the period). It's all up to him and the organizers of the Toronto conference blew an opportunity - probably in the interest of 'fairness' i.e. keeping it 'even' with respect to those pro and con. Stupid, stupid, stupid.