-
LIBRARY
Wurliffe
TRONTO.
O
LK No
REGISTER No.. 2.6. ../.?.
A COMPANION
TO
THE GREEK TESTAMENT
AND
THE ENGLISH VERSION
BY
PHILIP SCIIAFF, D.D.
PRESIDENT OP THE AMERICAN COMMITTEE ON REVISION
WITH FACSIMILE ILLUSTRATIONS OF
Mss. AND STANDARD EDITIONS OF THE NEVV TKSTAUENT
NEW YORK
HARPER & BROTHERS, FRAXKLIX SQUARE
1883
Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1883. by
HARPER & BROTHERS,
In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington.
All rights reserved.
tl.U T c< I U
TO THE
MEMBEES OP THE AMEEICAN EEVISION COMMITTEE
IN REMEMBRANCE OF TEX YEARS OF HARMONIOUS CO-OPERATION
BY THE AUTHOR
PREFACE.
A MANUAL of Textual Criticism of the Greek Testament
and its application to the English Version is a desidera
tum of our literature, and meets a demand which has been
greatly stimulated and widely extended by the appearance
of the new Revision.
This book has grown out of my studies in connection
with the Revision Committee, and was prepared at the
request of several fellow-Revisers and friends whose learn
ing and judgment T highly esteem. It embodies the sub
stance (thoroughly revised) of my Introduction to the
American edition of Wcstcott and Ilort s Greek Testa
ment, and several additional chapters, besides important
contributions from Bishop Lee, Professor Abbot, Dr. Hall,
and Professor Warfickl, which are acknowledged in the
proper place. The last chapter contains a brief history
and explanatory vindication of the joint work of the two
Revision Companies, and fairly expresses, I believe, their
general views on all essential points, with a preference for
the American renderings where they differ from the English.
An official report of the American Committee will appeal-
after the revision of the Old Testament is completed.
I feel under special obligation to Dr. Ezra Abbot, of Cam
bridge, who has kindly aided me in correcting the proofs
as they passed through the press, and suggested numerous
improvements. In the department of textual criticism and
Vl PREFACE.
microscopic accuracy, tins modest and conscientious scholar
is facile princeps in America, with scarce!} 7 a superior in
Europe. Every member of the American Revision Com
mittee will readily assent to this cordial tribute.
The publishers deserve my thanks for their liberality in
incurring the great expense of fac-simile illustrations of
manuscripts and standard editions of the Greek Testament.
Some of the former and all of the latter are entirely new,
and add much to the interest of the book.
The extraordinary increase of biblical study, even among
laymen, since the Revision of 1881, is one of the most en
couraging signs of the times, and of true progress. The
New Testament is the greatest literary treasure of Christen
dom, and worthy of all the labor and study that can be
bestowed upon it to make it clearer and dearer to the mind
and heart of men.
I dedicate this book to my brother-Revisers as a memo
rial of the many happy days we spent together, from month
to month and from year to year, in the noble work of
improving the English version of the Word of God.
PHILIP SCHAFF.
NEW YORK, August, 1883.
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
CHAPTER FIRST.
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
LITERATURE
THREE ELECT LANGUAGES
SPREAD OF THE GREEK LANGUAGE . . . :
THE JE\VS AND THE GREEK LANGUAGE
CHRIST AND THE GREEK LANGUAGE 12
THE APOSTLES AND THE GREEK LANGUAGE 10
THE GREEK AND THE ENGLISH 17
THE MACEDONIAN DIALECT 1 ,)
THE HELLENISTIC DIALECT 22
THE SEPTUAGINT , 2.>
THE APOSTOLIC GREEK 25
HEBRAISMS 27
LATIN ISMS 35
NUMBER AND VALUE OF FOREIGN WORDS 38
THE CHRISTIAN ELEMENT 30
PECULIARITIES OF STYLE 43
MATTHEW 40
MARK 51
LUKE , 54
PAUL 62
JOHN 60
THE APOCALYPSE 75
EVIDENTIAL VALUE OF THE LANGUAGE OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT.. 80
VI 11 TABLE OF CONTENTS.
CHAPTER SECOND.
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. PAGE
LITERATURE ON THE SOURCES OF THE TKXT AND ox TEXTUAL CRIT
ICISM 82
SOURCES OF THE TEXT 85
FACSIMILES OF MANUSCRIPTS 91
GENERAL CHARACTER OF MANUSCRIPTS 93
A . UNCIAL MANUSCRIPTS 98
1. PRIMARY UNCIALS 102
CODEX SINAITICUS , 103
" ALEXAXDHINUS Ill
" VATICANUS 113
" EPHR/EMI 120
" BKZ.E 122
2. SECONDARY UNCIALS 124
B. CURSIVE MANUSCRIPTS 138
LIST OF PUBLISHED UNCIALS 139
CHAPTER THIRD.
ANCIENT VERSIONS.
VALUE OF VERSIONS 142
LATIN VERSIONS :
THE OLD LATIN 144
THE VULGATE 148
SYRIAC VERSIONS :
THE PESHITO , . . 152
THE HARCLEAN 1 54
THE CURETONIAN 156
THE JERUSALEM 157
EGYPTIAN VERSIONS :
THE MEMPIIITIC 158
THE THEBAIC 159
THE BASIIMURIC .159
TABLE OF CONTENTS. ix
PAGE
VERSION... . 159
GOTHIC VERSION
ARMENIAN VERSION.
CHAPTER FOURTH.
PATRISTIC QUOTATIONS.
VALUE OF PATRISTIC QUOTATIONS 1 G4
GRKEK FATHERS 167
LATIN FATHERS 1G9
CHAPTER FIFTH.
TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
NATURE AND OBJECT OF TEXTUAL CRITICISM 171
ORIGIN OF VARIATIONS , 17;-!
NUMBER OF VARIATIONS 17C,
VALUE OF VARIATIONS 177
CLASSES OF VARIATIONS 183
1. OMISSIONS 183
2. ADDITIONS 183
3. SUBSTITUTIONS 1 93
CRITICAL RULES 202
APPLICATION OF THE RULKS 205
THE GENEALOGICAL METHOD 208
CHAPTER SIXTH.
HISTORY OF THE PRINTED TEXT.
PRELIMINARY REMARKS.. . . 225
I. THE PERIOD OF THE TEXTUS RECEPTUS : FROM ERASMUS AMI
STEPHENS TO BENGEL AND WETSTEIN. A.D. 1516-1750 228
THE TEXTUS RECEPTUS 228
ERASMUS 229
COMPLUTENSIAN POLYGLOT 232
COLIN.EUS 236
STEPHENS... . 236
X TABLE OF CONTEXTS.
PAGE
BEZA , 237
ELZEVIRS 240
WALTON S POLYGLOT , 241
MILL 244
BENTLEY 245
BENGEI 246
WETSTEIN 247
II. SECOND PERIOD: TRANSITION FROM THE TEXTUS RECEPTUS TO
THE UNCIAL TEXT. FROM GRIKSUACII TO LACIIMANN. A.D.
1770-1830 249
GRIESBACII 250
MATTH Jii 252
SCIIOLZ 253
III. THIRD PERIOD: THE RESTORATION OF THE PRIMITIVE TEXT.
FROM LACHMANN AND TISOIIENDORF TO WESTCOTT AND HORT.
A.D. 1830-81 254
LACIIMANN 254
TlSCIIKNDORF 257
TREGELLES 202
ALFORD 206
WESTCOTT AND HORT 208
SCRIVENER AND PALMER 282
RETROSPECT AND PROSPECT 287
CHAPTER SEVENTH.
THE AUTHORIZED YERSIOX.
LITERATURE 299
THE BIBLE AND CHRISTIANITY , 305
ORIGIN OF KING JAMES S VERSION 312
RULES PRESCRIBED 317
PROGRESS OF THE WORK 319
RECEPTION 325
WAS KING JAMES S VERSION EVER AUTHORIZED? 330
CRITICAL ESTIMATE. MERITS 337
DEFECTS. 347
PREPARATIONS FOR REVISION... . 364
TABLE OF CONTENTS. XI
CHAPTER EIGHTH.
THE REVISED VERSION. PAGE
LITERATURE 371
ACTION OF THE CONVOCATION OF CANTERBURY 380
ORGANIZATION AND RULES OF THE BRITISH COMMITTEE 382
WORK OF THE BRITISH COMMITTEE 387
AMERICAN CO-OPERATION 391
CONSTITUTION OF THE AMERICAN COMMITTEE 396
RELATION OF THE AMERICAN AND ENGLISH COMMITTEES AND
AGREEMENT WITH THE UNIVERSITY PRESSES 398
PUBLICATION 403
RECEPTION, CRITICISM, AND PROSPECT 411
MERITS OF THE REVISION AS COMPARED WITH THE OLD VERSION.. 417
THE GREEK TEXT OF THE REVISED VERSION 420
SELECT LIST OF TEXTUAL CHANGES 428
SELECT LIST OF IMPROVED RENDERINGS 434
THE ENGLISH STYLE OF THE REVISED VERSION 455
ARCHAISMS 459
NEW WORDS 402
IMPROVEMENTS IN RHY*TIIM 464
GRAMMATICAL IRREGULARITIES 465
INFELICITIES 466
INCONSISTENCIES 468
NEEDLESS VARIATIONS 474
THE AMERICAN PART IN THE JOINT WORK , 478
THE AMERICAN APPENDIX 482
THE PUBLIC VERDICT... ,. 490
APPENDIX I. LIST OF PRINTED EDITIONS OF THE GREEK NEW
TESTAMENT 497
APPENDIX II. FAC-SIMILES OF STANDARD EDITIONS OF THE GREEK
TESTAMENT 525
APPENDIX III LIST OF ENGLISH AND AMERICAN REVISERS 571
APPENDIX IV. LIST OF AMERICAN CHANGES ADOPTED BY THE
ENGLISH COMMITTEE 579
APPENDIX V. ADOPTION OF THE REVISION BY THE BAPTISTS... 607
ALPHABETICAL INDEX 609
INDEX OF SCRIPTURE PASSAGES EXPLAINED... 615
CHAPTER FIRST.
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
Literature.
I. CRITICAL EDITIONS OF THE GKEEK TESTAMENT.
BY LACHMAXX (1842-50, 2 vols.); TISCHENDORF (ed. octava critica
major, 1804-72, 2 vols., with a vol. of Prolegomena by Gregory and Ab-
bot, 1883); TREGELLES (1857-79); WESTCOTT and HORT (1881, with a
separate vol. of Introduction and Appendix, Cambridge and New York,
Harpers ed., from English plates).
Lachmann laid the foundation for the ancient uncial instead of the
mediaeval cursive text; Tischendorf and Tregelles enlarged and sifted
the critical apparatus; Westcott and Hort restored the cleanest text
from the oldest attainable sources. All substantially agree in principle
and in results.
Bilingual editions : Novum Test amentum Greece et Germanice, by OSKAR
VON GEBHAUDT. Lips. 1881. (Tischendorf s last text with the read
ings of Tregelles, Westcott and Hort, and the revised version of Luther.)
The Greek- English New Testament, being Westcott and IforCs Greek Text
and the Revised English Version o/ 188l. New York (Harper and Broth
ers), 1882.
II. GRAMMARS OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT.
G. B.WINER (Professor in Leipsic, d. 1858) : Grammar of New-Testa
ment Greek (Grammatik des mutest. Sprachgebrauchs}, Leipsic, 1822; Gth
cd. 1855; 7th ed. by G. LUXEMANN, 18G7. American " revised and author
ized" translation from the seventh edition, bv Prof. J. H. THAYER (of
Andover Theological Seminary), Andover, 1869 (728 pages). English
translation by Rev. W. F.MOULTOX (Principal of The Leys School, Cam
bridge), with valuable additions and full indexes, Edinb. 1870 ; 2d ed. 1877
(848 pages).
Winer s work is a masterpiece of classical and Biblical learning. It
marked an epoch in New-Test, philology by checking the unbridled
license of rationalistic exegesis, and applying the principles and results
1
2 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
of classical philology to the Greek of the Xew Test. Earlier translations
by Stuart and Robinson (Andover, 1825), by Agnew and Ebbeke (1840),
and by Masson (Edinb. and Phila. 1859). All these are now superseded
by Moulton and Thayer.
ALEXANDER BUTTMANN : Grammatik des neutest. Sprachgebrauchs,
Berlin, 1859. A Grammar of the Neic-Testament Greek, translated by J.
H. THAYER. Andover, 1873 (474 pages).
The German original was an Appendix to the 20th ed. of PHILIPP
BUTTMANN S (his father s) Griechische Grammalik. Prof. Thayer gives
in the translation references to the Grammars of HADLEY, CROSBY, DON
ALDSON, and JELF, and to GOODWIN S Greek Moods and Tenses.
S. CHK. SCHIRLITZ: Grundziige der neutest ament lichen Grdcitdt nach den
besten Quellenfur Studirende der Theologie und Philologie. G lessen, 18C1
(43(5 pages). Anleitung zitr Kenntniss der neutest. Grundsprache. Erfurt,
1863 (267 pages).
THOMAS SHELDON GREEN : A Treatise on the Grammar of the New
Testament. London. 1842 ; New ed. 1862 (244 pages).
SAMUEL G. GREEN: Handbook to the Grammar of the Greek Testament;
together with a Complete Vocabulary, and an Examination of the Chief New-
Testament Synonyms. London (publ. by the Religious Tract Society),
revised ed. 1880. The Grammar contains 422 pages, the Vocabulary 180
pages. Intended for students who have not studied the classical Greek,
and well adapted for the purpose.
III. DICTIONARIES.
C. L. W. GRIMM (Professor in Jena) : Lexicon GrcEco-Laiinum in Libros
Novi Testamenti. Ed. 2da emendata et aucta. Lipsirc, 1879. Based upon
the Clavis Novi Testamenti Fhilologica of CHR. G. WILKE (d. 1856).
An English translation with many improvements by Prof. J. IL THAY
ER. of Andover, Mass., will be published by the Harpers in New York
(1883?).
S. C. SCHIRLITZ : Griechisch - deutsches Wurterbuch zum Neuen Test.
Giessen, 1851 ; 3d ed. 1868 (426 pages).
HERMANN CREMER : Biblisch-theologisches Wdrterbuch der neutest. Grd
citdt. Gotha, 1866 ; 2d ed. improved, 1872 ; 3d ed. 1882. English trans
lation, under the title Biblico-Theological Lexicon of New Testament Greek,
by William Urwick. Edinb. 1872 ; 2cl ed. 1878.
EDWARD ROBINSON (Professor in the Union Theological Seminary, New
York, d. 1863) : A Greek and English Lexicon of the New Testament. Re
vised ed. New York (Harpers), 1850. At first a translation of Wahl s
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
Clavis (1825), then an independent work (1836). So far the best Lexicon
in the English language, but in need of a thorough revision, especially as
regards textual criticism.
IV. CONCORDANCES.
CAR. HEUM. BRUPER: T/ug7ov TUIV rffQ Kaivfjg cia$t ]Kr] \t%ewv,
sive Concordantiie omnium vocum N. T. Greed, ed. ster. Lips. 1842; 3d ed.
1867, reprinted 1876. Indispensable. Based on the work of ERASMUS
SCHMID (also spelled SCHMIDT in his preface, Prof, at Wittenberg, d. 1636),
first published at Wittenberg, 1638, and again with a new preface by Ern.
Salom. Cyprian, Gotha and Leips. 1717.
GEORGE V. WIGRAM : The Englishman s Greek Concordance of the New
Testament, London (James Walton), 1844; 5th ed. 1868. The Greek
words are given in alphabetical order with the English Version (King
James s). Reprinted, New York (Harpers), 1848.
CHARLES F. HUDSON: A Critical Greek and English Concordance of
the New Testament, revised and completed by EZRA ABBOT. Boston,
1870; 7th ed. Boston and London, 1882. Very useful, but requiring
adaptation to the Revision of 1881.
V. SPECIAL TREATISES.
DOMINICUS DIODATI (a lawyer in Naples): Exercitatio de Christo
Graece loquente. Neapoli, 1767 ; republished by Dr. Dobbin ( Prof, of
Trinity College, Dublin), London, 1843.
G. BERN. DE Rossi (professor of Oriental languages in Parma) : Delia
lingua propria di Cristo e degli Ebrei nazionali della Palestina. Parma,
1772. Against Diodati.
HEIN. F. PFANNKUCHE (d. 1833) : On the Prevalence of the Aramcean
Language in Palestine in the Age of Christ and the Apostles (in Eichhorn s
"Allg. Bibliothek," via. 365-480), 1797. Based on De Rossi, and trans
lated from the German by Dr. E. Robinson, with introductory art., in the
"Biblical Repository" (Andover, Mass.), vol. i. 309-363 (1831). Still
valuable.
Jon. LEONH. HUG (R. Cath., d. 1846) : Zustand der Landessprache in
Palastina als Afatthdus sein Evavgelium schrieb, in his Einleitung in die
Schriften des N. T., ii. 30-56 ; 3d ed. Stuttgart, 1826 (a 4th ed. appeared
1847). Translated by Dr. E. Robinson in " Biblical Repository," Ando
ver, 1831, i. 530-551. He agrees with Hug in maintaining that the
Greek and Aramaean languages were both current in Palestine at the time
of Christ and the Apostles.
4: THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
G. VON ZEZSCHWITZ : Profangracitat uml biblischer Sprachgeist. Leip-
sic, 1859.
ALEXANDER ROBERTS : Discussions on the Gospels. London, 1862 ; 2d
ed. 18G3. Renews the opinion of Diodati.
WILLIAM HENRY GUILLEMARD: Hebraisms in the Greek Testament.
Cambridge, 1879. This contains the text of the Gospel of Matthew
(which appeared first in 1875 as the beginning of a Hebraistic edition of
the Greek Test.) and extracts from the other books.
See also JAMES HADLEY, art. Language of the New Test., in Ilackett
and Abbot s ed. of Smith s " Diet, of the Bible," ii. 1 590. B. F. WESTCOTT,
art. Hellenist, ibid. ii. 1039 ; art. New Test., ibid. iv. 2139. ED. REUSS, art.
Hellenistisches Idiom, in Herzog s " Real-Encyklop.," v. 711 (new ed. 1879).
FR. DELITZSCH, Ueber die paldstinische Vulkssprache, in. 4i Dalieim " for
1874, No. 27.
TIIKEE ELECT LANGUAGES.
IHZOY2 O NAZQPAI02 O BA2IAEY2 TQN IOYAAIQN.
a ^ i_ si n * n T\ b E i *n -4 2 r? ? i r .7
JESUS NAZARENUS REX JUDJEORUM.
There are three elect nations of antiquity the
Jews, the Greeks, and the Romans; three elect cities
Jerusalem, Athens, and Rome; and three elect
languages the Hebrew, the Greek, and the Latin.
These three agencies worked together for the
introduction of the Christian religion and for the
spread of Christian civilization. The threefold in
scription on the Cross, which is recorded with slight
variations by all evangelists, 1 proclaimed, in the
name of the representative of the Roman empire,
the universal destination of the Gospel. What was
written in bitter irony proved to be a true oracle
1 John xix. 19 and the parallel passages.
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 5
of heathenism ; as Caiaphas, the high-priest, uttered
an involuntary prophecy in the name of hostile
Judaism when he said of Jesus: "It is expedient
that one man should die for the people, and that
the whole nation perish not." l
" In that inscription of Pilate," says an able histo
rian, 2 " there seems to be an unconscious prophecy
of the future destiny of the world. From that Cross,
and through the channel of the Hebrew, Greek, and
Latin languages, have radiated all the influences
which have made modern civilization the precious
inheritance it is. That Cross was set up at the point
of confluence of those three great civilizations of an
tiquity which have ever since profoundly affected
the life, public and private, of the people of West
ern Europe. The Hebraic monotheistic conception
of the Deity, the Greek universal reason, and the
Roman power, and especially its language, have
been the great secondary means of the propagation
in that portion of the world of Christian civiliza
tion. In the West, Roman law, Roman Christian
ity, and Roman power went together into the most
remote regions, and won their triumphs on the same
fields and by the use of the same Latin language.
By means of this Latin language Roman civilization
was presented to the minds of the barbarians as
including many things outside the domain of force,
and conquered them, when force failed, by appeals
to their reason and their hearts. It was the Latin
1 John xi. 50, 51.
* Dr. Charles J. Stille (late Provost of the University of Pennsylvania),
in Studies on Medieval History (Philadelphia, 1882), p. 39.
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
]angnage in the service of the Church, and in the
administration of the law of the empire, which
taught the barbarians in what the true power and
glory of Rome and the perpetuity of her system
consisted ; and thus was made an important step in
their preparation for the reception of that civiliza
tion of which the Roman language was the vehicle,
as the Roman organization was the motive force."
The Hebrew is the language of religion, the
Greek the language of culture, the Latin the lan
guage of law and empire. The oldest revelations
of God to one nation are recorded in Hebrew ; but
the last revelation to all nations is recorded in
Greek, to be reproduced in the course of time in
all the languages of the earth.
SPREAD OF THE GREEK LANGUAGE.
There is a remarkable providence in the general
spread of this rich and noble tongue throughout the
civilized world before the advent of our Saviour:
first by the conquests of Alexander, the greatest of
Greeks, and afterwards by Julius Caesar, the greatest
of Romans both of them unconscious forerunners
of Christ.
The Greek was spoken in Greece, in the islands
of the ^Egean Sea, in Asia Minor, in Egypt, Syria,
Sicily, and Southern Italy.
It was at the same time the medium of inter
national intercourse in the whole Roman empire,
which stretched from the Libyan Desert to the
banks of the Rhine, and from the river Euphrates
to the Straits of Gibraltar, and embraced the civil-
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 7
ized world, with a population of about one hundred
and twenty millions of souls. It was the language
of government, law, diplomacy, literature, and trade.
It occupied the position and exerted the influence
of the Latin in the Middle Ages, of the French in
the eighteenth century, and of the English in the
nineteenth. In Paul s language the term " Ilellen,"
or Greek, is synonymous with " the civilized world,"
as distinct from the barbarians, and with " Gentiles,"
as distinct from the Jews. 1
Even in the capital of the Roman empire the
Greek was the favorite language at the imperial
court among literary men, artists, lovers, and trades
men. The Greeks and Greek-speaking Orientals
were the most intelligent and most enterprising
people among the middle classes. The Latin clas
sics were but successful imitators of Greek poets,
historians, philosophers, and orators. Paul, a Roman
citizen, wrote his Epistle to the Romans in Greek,
and the names of the converts mentioned in the six
teenth chapter are mostly Greek. The early bishops
and divines of Rome were Greeks by descent or
education, or both. Pope Cornelius addressed the
churches in the Hellenic language in the middle of
the third century. The Apostles Creed, even in
the Roman form, was originally composed in Greek.
The Roman liturgy (ascribed to Clement of Rome)
was Greek. The inscriptions in the oldest cata
combs, and the epitaphs of the popes down to the
middle of the third century, are Greek. The early
1 Rom. i. 14,"EX\7j) nat (3dpf3apoi] ver. 16, lovddioz KCII "E\\rji .
b THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
fathers of the Western Church Clemens Eonianus,
Hennas, Gajus, Irenseus, Hippolytus wrote in
Greek. The old Latin version of the Bible was not
made for Italy (although improperly called " Itala"),
but for the provinces, especially for North Africa.
It was not till the close of the second century that
Christian theology assumed a Latin dress in the
writings of the African Minutius Felix and Tertul-
lian, and even Tertullian hesitated a while whether
he should not rather write in Greek. 1
THE JEWS AND THE GREEK LANGUAGE.
The Jews of the Dispersion were all more or less
familiar with Greek, and hence called Hellenists, in
distinction from the " Hebrews " in Palestine and
from the " Hellenes," or native Greeks. 2 They were
very numerous in all the cities of the empire, espe
cially in Alexandria, Antioch, and Rome, and en-
1 On the use of the Greek language in imperial Rome, see Friedlander,
Sittengesch. Itoms, i. 142, 481 (4th ed.) ; Caspari, Quellen zur Gesch. des
Taiifsynibols (with reference to the Roman Creed), iii. 267-4GG; Lightfoot,
Com. on Philipjrians, p. 20; De Rossi, Roma Sotteran. ii. 27 sqq. (on the
Catacomb of St. Callistus) ; Renan, Marc- A urele, p. 454 sqq. Renan says
that even after the Latin language prevailed Greek letters were often
employed, and that the onlv Latin Church in the middle of the second
century was the Church of North Africa. On the origin of the Latin
Bible, see the editions and discussions of Vercellone, Ronsch, Reusch, E.
Ranke, and especially Ziegler, Die lat. Bibdubersetzungen vor Ilieronymus,
Munchen, 1870.
3 EXAji/mje, Acts vi. 1 ; xi. 20, etc., must not be confounded with
"EXXijv, comp. Acts xiv. 1 ; xviii. 4; Rom. i. 14, 16; ii. 9, 10; Gal. iii. 28,
etc. It is from t XXfjvisw, to Jlellenize, i. e. to speak the Greek language
and to imitate Greek manners; as we use the term "to Romanize" of
those who lean to the Roman Church.
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 9
joyed, since the time of Julius Caesar, who favored
them as a wise and liberal statesman, special protec
tion for the exercise of their religion. In Rome
itself they numbered from twenty to thirty thousand
souls, had seven synagogues and three cemeteries
(with Greek and a few Latin inscriptions). They
were mostly descendants of slaves and captives of
Pompey, Cassius, and Antony. They occupied a
special quarter (the Fourteenth Region) beyond the
Tiber. They were the same people then as they are
now in all countries : they carried on their little
trades in old clothes, broken glass, sulphur matches;
they observed their peculiar customs ; they emerged
occasionally from poverty and tilth to wealth and
honor, as bankers, physicians, and astrologers; and
they attracted the mingled wonder, contempt, and
ridicule of the Roman historians and satirists. But
while heathen Rome only survives in the memory
of history and the shapeless ruins of her temples,
theatres, and triumphal arches, that despised race
still lives: a burning bush which is never consumed,
an imperishable monument of a history of thousands
of years a history of divine revelations and blessings,
of human disobedience and ingratitude, of honor and
disgrace, of happiness and misery, of cruel persecu
tion and martyrdom ; a race without country, scat
tered among enemies, yet unalterable in its creed,
alone in its recollections and hopes, miraculously
preserved for some important action in the conclud
ing chapter of the history of Christianity.
As the Hellenists spoke Greek, we need not won
der that not only the Epistle to the Romans, but
10 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
even the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of
James " to the twelve tribes which are of the Dis
persion," were written in that language.
Even in Palestine and among the strict Hebrews
who preferred their native Aramaic, the Greek lan
guage was extensively known and spoken, especially
on the western sea-coast, in Galilee, and Decapolis.
Gaza, Askalon, Csesarea Stratouis, Gadara, Hippos,
Scythopolis (Bethshan), Sebaste, Csesarea Philippi
(Paneas) were Greek cities in which the Greek
was spoken exclusively or predominantly. The
northern part of Galilee, owing to its mixed popu
lation, was called Galilee of the Gentiles (Isa. ix. 1 ;
Matt. iv. 15). Palestine was, to a large extent, a
bilingual country, like some of the Swiss cantons,
Alsace, Lorraine, Belgium, Holland, Posen, Wales,
Eastern Canada, the German counties of Pennsyl
vania, and other border regions in modern times.
Many Jews had Greek names, as the seven deacons
of the congregation at Jerusalem. 1
This city was the stronghold of the Jewish faith
and language, of prejudice and bigotry, 2 but could
not resist altogether the influence of the age. The
Herodian family had foreign tastes and habits.
Jerusalem had over four hundred synagogues, and
was inhabited and visited by Jews and proselytes
J Acts vi. 5 : Stephen, Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas,
and Nicolas. They may have been Hellenists, and elected in defer
ence to the complaints of the Grecian Jews, but they resided in Jeru
salem.
2 This religious bigotry denounced all foreign learning as dangerous.
Kabbi Eliezer said: "He who teaches his son Greek is like one who eats
pork."
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 11
"from every nation under heaven." 1 The number
of Jews present at the Passover, according to Jose-
plms, sometimes exceeded two millions. 2 The Greek
translation of the Old Testament was as much used
as the Hebrew or Aramaic original. The Jewish
Apocrypha were written in Greek (though some of
them first in Hebrew). The two principal Jewish
scholars of the first century, Philo and Josephus,
wrote their works in Greek. 3
1 Acts ii. 5. The Jerusalem Talmud gives four hundred and eighty as
the number of synagogues. See Lightfoot on Acts vi. 9.
2 Josephus mentions even three millions as being present in Jerusalem
under Cestius Gallus at the Passover, A.D. G5 (Bell. Jud. ii. 14, 3). He
dlso states (vi. 9, 3) that the number of paschal lambs slain at this Pass
over, as reported to Nero, was 256,500, which, allowing no more than ten
persons to each lamb, would give us 2,565,000 as the number of persons
present. He gives the number 2,700,200, which comes nearer his former
statement, and includes all others who could not partake of the sacrifice.
3 Josephus, who was born and educated in Jerusalem, wrote his history
of the Jewish War first in Hebrew, "for the barbarians in the interior;
afterwards in Greek, for " those under Roman dominion " (Bell. Jud.
prooem. 1). He concludes his Antiquities (xx. 11, 2) with the following
passage, which is characteristic of his vanity, and shows the proud con
tempt of the Jews for foreign languages at that time : " Now, after having
completed the work, I venture to say that no other person, whether he
were a Jew or a foreigner, had he ever so great an inclination to do it,
could so accurately (ax-pi/Juic;) deliver this history to the Greeks. For
those of my own nation freely acknowledge that I far exceed them in
learning belonging to Jews; I have also taken a great deal of pains to
acquire the learning of the Greeks, and understand the elements of the
Greek language, although, on account of the habitual use of the paternal
tongue, I cannot pronounce Greek with sufficient accuracy (_a.Kpifiuciv).
For with us those are not encouraged who learn the languages of many
nations, and so adorn their discourses with the smoothness of their periods ;
because this sort of accomplishment is regarded as common, not only to
all sorts of freemen, but to as many of the servants as are inclined to
learn them. But we give those only the testimony of being wise men
12 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
From these facts, as well as from the numerous
Greek names of persons and places, Greek coins and
inscriptions, we may safely infer that during the first
two centuries of our era the higher classes in Pales
tine, especially in Samaria (Sebaste), were quite
familiar with the Greek language, and that the peo
ple generally had a partial knowledge of it sufficient
for practical intercourse and commerce. 1
CHRIST AND THE GREEK LANGUAGE.
There are two extreme views on the language
used by our Lord. The one is that he spoke only
the Hebrew vernacular; 2 the other, that he spoke
Greek only, or more than Hebrew. 3 The natural
view, which accords best with the facts already
stated, is that he used both languages the vernacu
lar Aramaic in ordinary intercourse with his disci
ples and the Jewish people, the Greek occasionally
when dealing with strangers and Gentiles. 4
who arc fully acquainted with our laws, and are able to explain the sacred
books."
1 For a thorough discussion of this subject, with references to Josephus.
Cicero, Seneca, Pliny, Strabo, Appian, Diodorus, and other authorities,
see Hug, Einleit. in die Sckr. des N. Test. (3d ed. 1826), ii. 30-60, translated
by Robinson, " Bibl. Repository," Andover, 1831, p. 530-551. Schiirer, in
his Neutestamcntl. Zeifgesch., p. 376-385, comes to the same conclusion.
2 So De Rossi (who wrote against Diodati), Pfannkuche, Mill, Michaelis,
Marsh, Kuinol, and others.
3 So Isaac Vossius, Diodati, Alex. Roberts, S. G. Green. The last states
(Grammar of the Gr. Test. p. 168) : " It was the Greek of the Septuagint,
in all probability, our Lord and his apostles generally spoke. The dialect
of Galilee was not a corrupt Hebrew, but a provincial Greek."
4 So Hug, Binterim, Wiseman (Jlorce, Syriacce, Rom. 1828. i. 69 sqq.).
Credner, Bleek, Reuss, Thiersch, Robinson (/. c. p. 316), Westcott, Hadley,
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 13
Christ was born in Judaea, but grew up in Naza
reth, and spent thirty years of his private life and
the greater part of his public ministry in Galilee.
All his apostles with the exception of the traitor
were Galilaeans, and could be known by their pro
nunciation. " Thy speech bewrayeth thee," said the
servants of the high-priest in Jerusalem to Peter
when he denied his connection with " Jesus the
Galilsean." J The woman of Samaria recognized
our Lord by his speech and dress as a Jew, and the
proud rulers contemptuously called him a Galilaean. 8
As he became like us in all things, sin only excepted,
we have no reason to exempt him from those inno
cent limitations which are inseparable from race
and nationality. He spoke, therefore, in all proba
bility the vernacular Aramaic, or Syro-Chaldaic,with
the provincialisms and the pronunciation of Galilee. 3
Delitzsch. Sec the older literature on the subject in Hase, Leben Jesu,
p. 72 (5th ed.), and Reuss, Gesch. der heil. Schr. N. Test. i. 30 (5th ed.).
1 Matt. xxvi. 73, j y \a\id aov cijXov erg Trout; Mark xiv. 70; Luke
xxii. 59. See Wetstein, in loc., for examples of various provincial dialects
of Hebrew or Aramaic. The Galilaeans (like the Samaritans) confounded
the gutturals X, S, n, and used n for IT. The Babylonian Talmud says
that, they paid no attention to the correctness of speech. The word for
thunder, ragesh, in Boanerges (Mark iii. 17), and Rabbuni (Mark x. 51 ;
John xx. 16) for Rabboni, or Ribboni, are said to be Galilaean provincial
isms. See Grimm, s. v., and Keim, Gesch. Jesu von Naz. iii. 500 note.
2 John iv. 9 ; vii. 52 ; Luke xxiii. 6.
3 Prof. Delitzsch, who is excellent authority on the languages of the
Bible and Jewish usages at the time of Christ, says, in an essay in the
" Daheim " (as quoted by Bohl, Die A litest. Citate im N. T. p. 543) :
"Der Herr hatte auch schlechthin nur ihm eigenthumliche Worte und Wen-
dungen, wie wenn er besonders feierliche A usspriiche mit amen, amena (bei
Johannes: Wahrlich, wahrlich, ich sage) zu beginnen pflegte, wesshalb er in
der Apokalypse als der treue und wahrhaftige Zeuge, l der Amen genannt
14: THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
The Evangelists have preserved a few examples
of the speech of our Lord, and these isolated sounds
from his lips still re-echo in all languages. He raised
the daughter of Jairus with the words: Talitlia cumi
("Damsel, arise"). 1 He opened the ears of the deaf
man with Eplipliatha (" Be opened"). 2 He exclaim
ed on the Cross, in the language of the 22d Psalm :
Jli 9 Eli, lama sabaclithaui ? (" My God, my God,
why hast Thou forsaken me?"). 3 He addressed Paul
on the way to Damascus in the Hebrew tongue, which
reached the quick of his sensibilities: " /Shaul, Shaftl,
wird (iii. 14). A ber ihrer Grundlage, nach war seine Sprache die seines Volkes
und Landes, Das Christenthum ist ein galildisches Geicdc/ts. Schon die
Namen, die wirfuhren, verralhen es ; der Name Thomas ist griechisch-ara-
mdisch, der Name Simon ist eigenthilmlich palastinisch-aramaisch, wid der
Name Magdalena stammt aus Magdala in der schonen Landschaft am
galildischen Afeere. Ja, wir alle reden, auch ohne es zu icisscn, in ara-
maischen, in palastiniscken Worten. Wenn wir Jesus als Messias bekennen,
wenn wir des Herrn Mahl das neutestamentliche Passa nennen, ivenn wir zu
Gott mil dem kindlichen Abba beten, so sind dies die aramaischen Worte
MESCIIICIIA, PASCHA, ABBA, und wenn wir den Namen Jesu aussprechen
und mil dem -Manarw/" RABBUNI ihm zu Fussen fallen, so sind dies pald-
stinisch-yalilaische Formen. Mil dem Friedensgrusse SCHKLAMA LECHON !
begriisste auch noch der A uferstandene seine Jiinger, und mil einem Zurvfe
in dieser Sprache: SCHAUL, SCHAUL, LEMA REDAFT JATHI? (Saul, Saul,
warum verfolgst Du mich ?) brachte der Erhohcte den Saulus vor Damask
zur Besinnung (Apg. xxvi. 14). Wie Saulus Worte horte, ohne eine Gestalt
zu sehen. so miissen auch wir zufrieden sein, uns den Klang und der Art
seiner Rede ndher gebracht zu haben Er selbst bleibt iiber die Moglichkeit
der Beschauung erhaben; nicht nur seine Herrlichkeitsgestalt, auch schon
seine Knechtsyestalt blendet uns. dass wir die A ugen abwenden miissen, ndm-
lich die Ilm sinnlich fixiren wollenden A ugen wir werden Ihn einst sehen von
A ngesicht, aber diesseits Idsst Er sich nur erschauen mit A ugen des Glaubens"
1 Mark v. 41 (TaXtiSd Kovfi in Westcott and Hort).
2 Mark vii. 34. EtipaSa. is a Greek corrupt transliteration of Ethpha-
thah, the Syriac imperative Ethpael.
8 Matt, xxvii. 46. Mark (xv. 34) gives the Aramaic form,.Eloi, Eloi.
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 15
why persecutest thou me ?" 1 In the sacred heart-
domain of religion the mother -tongue is always
more effective than any acquired speech. Paul
himself, when he wished to gain a more favorable
hearing from the excited populace at Jerusalem,
appealed to them in their native Hebrew. 2
At the same time we cannot suppose that Jesus
was ignorant of a language which was familiar to
the educated classes even in the interior of Palestine,
and in which his own disciples, the unlearned fish
ermen of Galilee, preached and wrote. And, if he
understood Greek, he must have spoken it on all
proper occasions, as when he conversed with for
eigners, with the Syro-Phoenician woman, 3 with the
heathen centurion, 4 with the Greeks who called on
him shortly before his passion, 6 and especially at
the tribunal of Pontius Pilate and King Herod.
No interpreter is mentioned, and a Roman governor
liable to be recalled at any time was not likely to
acquire the knowledge of a difficult provincial lan
guage when he could get along with Greek. 8
1 Acts xxvi. 14, SaouX, ZaouX. In all other passages the Greek form
2awXo is given ; see ix. 1, etc.
2 Acts xxi. 40; xxii. 2. Josephus did the same in the name of Titus,
as his interpreter, during the siege. Comp. Bell. Jud. v. 9, 2 ; vi. 2, 1, 5 ;
vi. 6, 2. From these examples it appears that the common people either
knew no Greek, or at all events not as well as Aramaic.
3 Who is called yvvi} EXXqvig, Mark vii. 26.
* Matt. viii. 5.
5 John xii. 20. They are called " Hellenes " ("EXX/jvs c), not Hellenists
( EXX/jviffrai ) or Grecian Jews, and were probably proselytes of the gate,
or heathens leaning to the Jewish religion.
6 The provincial governors gave judgment in Latin or Greek. Cicero,
Crassus, and Mucianus used Greek in Greece and Asia. The Greek was
16 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
THE APOSTLES AND THE GREEK LANGUAGE.
As to the apostles, they grew up with a knowl
edge of both languages, although, of course, the
Hebrew was more natural to them. Whatever may
have been the pentecostal gift of tongues, they
needed no miraculous endowment with a knowl
edge of Greek. 1 They acquired and used it like
other people of their age and nation. They learned
the Hebrew at home and in the synagogue ; the
Greek on the street and from living intercourse
with Gentiles. They had no book knowledge of
Greek, and cared only for its practical use. As
Galilaeans, they were brought into frequent contact
with heathen neighbors. Matthew, from his former
occupation as a tax-gatherer, would naturally be a
homo bilinguis. Paul was of Hebrew parentage,
and brought up in Jerusalem at the feet of Gama
liel, so that he could call himself "a Hebrew of the
Hebrews ;" yet he was not only a master of the
Greek language as applied to Christian truths, but
had also, perhaps from his early youth, as a native
of Tarsus, which was famous for Greek schools,
some knowledge of secular Greek literature, as his
quotations from three poets show. 2
the court-language of the proconsuls of Asia and Syria. The procurators
of Palestine would not make an exception. See Hug, /. c.
1 Eusebius, who as bishop (and probably a native) of Coesarea, was well
acquainted with Palestine, declares (Dem. Evany, lib. iii.) that the apos
tles, before the resurrection of Christ, knew only their vernacular Syriac
language. But this was merely his private opinion, and he himself wrote
all his books in Greek.
a Aratus, Acts xvii. 28; Menander, 1 Cor. xv. 35; and Epimenide?,
Tit. i. 12. See my Church History, revised ed. (1882). i. 285 sqq.
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 17
The most conclusive proof of tlie familiarity of
the apostles and evangelists with Greek is the fact
that they composed the Gospels and Epistles in that
language, and that they quote the Old Testament
usually from the current Greek version.
THE GREEK AND THE ENGLISH.
Thus the language of a little peninsula, by its
beauty and elasticity, vigor and grace, the wealth of
its literature, and the providential course of events,
had become at the time of Christ the lano;uao:e of
O O
the civilized world, and conquered even the conquer
ing Romans. The noblest mission of this noblest of
tongues was accomplished when it became the organ
of the everlasting gospel of the Saviour of mankind.
This fact secures to the Greek for all time to come a
superiority over all the languages of the earth, and
the first claim on the attention of the biblical scholar.
Next to the Greek, no language has a nobler and
grander mission for the extension of Christianity
and Christian civilization than the English. It lias
already spread much farther than the Greek or Latin
ever did. From its island home in the Northern
Sea it has gone forth to lands and continents un
known to the apostles, fathers, and reformers. It
carries with it the energy and enterprise of the
Saxon race, the treasures of the richest literature,
the love of home and freedom, and a profound
reverence for the Bible. It is predestinated and
adapted by its composition and history to become
more and more the cosmopolitan language of mod
ern times.
18 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
"Among all the modern languages," says a dis
tinguished German philologist, "none has, by giving
up and confounding all the laws of sound, and by
cutting off nearly all the inflections, acquired greater
strength and vigor than the English. Its fulness of
free middle sounds, which cannot be taught, but
only learned, is the cause of an essential force of
expression such as perhaps never stood at the com
mand of any other language of men. Its entire,
highly intellectual, and wonderfully happy structure
and development are the result of a surprisingly
intimate marriage of the two noblest languages in
modern Europe the Germanic and the Romance;
the former, as is well known, supplying in far larger
proportion the material groundwork, the latter the
intellectual conceptions. As to wealth, intellectual
ity, and closeness of structure, none of all the living
languages can be compared with it. In truth the
English language, which by no mere accident has
produced and upborne the greatest and most com
manding poet of modern times as distinguished
from the ancient classics I can, of course, only
mean Shakespeare may with full propriety be
called a world -language ; and, like the English
people, it seems destined hereafter to prevail even
more extensively than at present in all the ends of
the earth."
The English language is now the chief organ for
the spread of the Word of God. This has been
strikingly illustrated during the past year by the
1 Jacob Grimm, Ueler den Ursprung der Sprache (Berlin, 1852), p. 50.
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 19
extraordinary success of the Revised Version of the
New Testament, prepared by two co-operative com
mittees, in England and the United States. More
than a million of copies were ordered from the
British University presses before the day of publica
tion (May 17, 1881), and more than twenty reprints
of different sizes and prices appeared in the United
States before the close of the year, so that within a
few months nearly three millions of copies were
sold. This fact stands alone in the history of litera
ture, and furnishes the best proof that the old book
which we call the New Testament is more popular
and powerful than ever, no matter what infidels may
say to the contrary. Among the two freest and most
progressive nations of the earth the Bible is revered
as the guardian angel of public and private virtue, the
pillar of freedom and civilization, the sacred ark of
every household, the written conscience of every soul.
THE MACEDONIAN DIALECT.
The Greek language has come down to us, like
the old Teutonic language, in a number of dialects
and sub-dialects. The literature is chiefly deposited
in four : 1. The ./EoLic dialect, known from in
scriptions and grammarians, and from remains of
Alcteus, Sappho, and Erinna. 2. The DOEIC, rough
but vigorous, immortalized by the odes of Pindar
and the idyls of Theocritus. 3. The IONIC, soft
and elastic, in which Homer sang the Iliad and
Odyssey, and Herodotus told his history. 4. The
ATTIC dialect differs little from the Ionic, unites
energy and dignity with grace and melody, and is
20 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
represented by the largest literature, the tragedies
of JEschylus, Sophocles, Euripides, the comedies of
Aristophanes, the histories of Thncydides and Xen-
ophon, the philosophical dialogues of Plato, and the
orations of Demosthenes. 1
The Attic dialect, owing to its literary wealth and
the military conquests of Alexander the Great, the
pupil of Aristotle, came to be the common spoken
and written language not only in Greece proper,
but over the Macedonian provinces of Syria and
Egypt. By its diffusion it lost much of its peculiar
stamp, and absorbed a number of foreign words and
inflections, especially from the Orient. But what it
lost in purity it gained in popularity. It was eman
cipated from the trammels of nationality and intel
lectual aristocracy, and became cosmopolitan. It
grew less artistic, but more useful.
In this modified form, the Attic Greek received
the name of the MACEDONIAN or ALEXANDRIAN, and
also the COMMON or HELLENIC language (?j KOIVIJ
<aAKroc or *E\\r)riKii SiaXtKTot;). It was used by
Aristotle, who connects the classic Attic with the
Hellenic, Poly bins, Plutarch, Diodorus Siculus, Dio
Cassius, Dionysius of Halicarnassus, ^Elian, Hero-
dian, Arrian, and Lucian.
Examples of new words: ayaSoupyeTv, ai x^aXam eiv, avTiXvrpor,
iv, tXXoytiv, tuKaiptiv, diKaioKpHTia, vv^SffifJ^pov, 6X/yo-
1 On the Greek dialects, compare the large work of Ahrens, De Grcecce
Linguae Dialectis (1839, 1843, 2 vols.) ; Merry, Specimens of Greek Dialects
(Oxford, 1875) ; the well-known grammars of Prof. G. Curtius of Leipzig,
and Klihner; and Gustav Meyer, Griech. Grammatik (Leipzig, 1880), the
introduction and the literature there indicated. Also Wilkins. in " Encycl.
Brit." xi. 131-135.
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 21
oiKOCtcnroTrig, TTtTToi^riffig. From Egypt: Trcnrvpog, Trvpct/.iic,
jBd iov. From Persia: ayyapoe;, yart, /uayot, TrapdStiaoc, ridpa. From
the Latin: K/Jr<70f, KovGTwdia, Xtyiwv. From the Semitic: ctppafiiiv,
Zi Cdviov, pajSfiei. The Alexandrians had also a special orthography;
they exchanged letters as ai and a, t and 77, y and /.-and they retained
the /j, before i|/ and 03- (as in Xrjp- ^o^ai). See Moulton s Winer, p. 53.
These peculiarities are found in the best MSS. of the LXX. and Greek
Testament, and have been introduced into the text by Lachmann and
the recent critical editors.
Professor Immer (Ilermeneutics of the N. T. p. 125) gives the following
description of the distinctive characteristics of the Macedonian Greek :
" Besides the Atticisms, lonicisms, Doricisms, and /Eolicisms, the cUaXf/cror
KOIVT] shows still the following peculiarities: (<7.) Words that occur seldom
or only in poetical discourse in the old Greek now become more common,
and pass over into plain prose, as, e.g., HLGOVVKTIOV, 3o<m;y//e, j3pt%w, to
moisten, t o-^w for r37w, and others. (b.~) Words in use receive another
form, as dvaSrepa for dvd3frjp,a, ytviata for ytvtSXia, t/cTraXai for TraXni,
%Sf for t^Ssc, iKEaia for tKiTfla, ^i<r^aTroSoffia for /ur3ocW/a, jiovufy-
SaXjttcg for tTtpo^aXfioQ, vovStaia for vovSinjaic;, orrTaaia for oi//ig, t /
opKo/j.oaia for rd bpic., o Tr\r)aiov for o TrtXag, TTOTCLTTO^ for iroSaTrog, etc.
Especially frequent become verbal forms in - w, in -w pure instead of in
-jut (f.g. b^ivvd) instead of o^i vpt), formed from the perfect, as CT/)KW, sub
stantives in -jua. (c.) Words entirely new, mostly words formed through
composition, make their appearance, as dvrlXvTpov, aXeKTOpO(j><i)via,
a7roK f0rtX/4u>, ayaS OTrotew, a/^yuaXwrtt a), vvxSffjlJispov, viToptTpiov, et cil.
((/.) Words long familiar and current receive new meanings, as dva.K\iveiv
and dvaTTiTTTtiv, to recline at table; diroicp&rivai, to answer; diroTaa-
fftaSrai, to take leave; daifjuov or daifiovtov, evil spirit; fv%api<JTtiv, to
thank ; yXov, tree ; TrapctKaXt Iv, to praj r ; are yetv, to endure, to bear up ;
03a^ti , to come, to arrive; xpTifiariZtiv, to be called; ^M^i^tiv, to eat,
to nourish, et al. In a grammatical point of view the following may be
observed : (a.) Inflections of nouns and verbs occur which at an earlier
period were either entirely unknown or peculiar to a single dialect ; e. y.
the Doricism dtytwvrai for dtytlvTcti, the ^Eolic optative ending in -eta,
the ending of the second person of the present and future passive and
middle in -a instead of in -y, etc. (7;.) Infrequency of the use of the
dual, as, e.g., fivai instead of dvolv. (c.~) Infrequency of the employment
of the optative (in the Johannean writings it does not occur at all).
((7.) The construing of certain verbs with other cases, especially with the
accusative, as tTTiSvutiv TL instead of nvog, (pofittffSai diro instead of VTTO
22 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
and accusative, et aL (?.) The weakening of iva in the formula; 3-f\o>
iW, Xtyui Vi/a, io tVa, and many others. (/.) Use of the subjunctive
instead of the optative after preterites, etc. A still greater degradation
of the language finds place in the construction of iva with the indicative,
and not with the future only, but even with the present indicative, of avv
with the genitive, the confounding of the cases and tenses, etc. The
latter peculiarities do not occur, however, in authors of Greek nationality,
nor in educated authors." (The translation is by Albert II. Newman,
Andover, 1877.)
TILE HELLENISTIC DIALECT.
The Hellenic dialect assumed a strongly Hebraiz
ing character among the Grecian Jews or Hellenists,
and as spoken by them it is called the Hellenistic
dialect. It was especially current in Alexandria,
where all nationalities mingled and adopted the
Greek as their medium of commercial and social
intercourse. This city, soon after its foundation by
Alexander the Great (B.C. 332), became the chief
seat of learning next to Athens, and the birthplace
of the language of the New Testament. Immense
libraries were collected under the Ptolemies, and
every important work of dying Egypt and Oriental
learning was translated into Greek.
The literature of the Hellenistic dialect is all of
Jewish origin, and intimately connected with re
ligion. It embraces the Septuagint and the Jewish
Apocrypha, which are incorporated in the Septua
gint, and passed from it into the Latin Yulgate.
Philo (B.C. 20 to A.D. 40) and Josephus (A.D. 38-
103), who were well acquainted with Greek litera
ture, aimed at a pure style, which would commend
their theological and historical writings to scholars
of classical taste; but, after all, they could not conceal
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 23
the Hebrew spirit and coloring. The Hellenistic
writings express Jewish ideas in Greek words, and
carried the religion of the East to the nations of the
West.
THE SEPTUAGINT.
The Septuagint version of the Old Testament
Scriptures was gradually made by Jewish scholars
in Alexandria during the reign of Ptolemy II.,
B.C. 285-247, and has survived the ravages of the
Moslem conquerors. It laid the foundation for the
Hellenistic idiom. It made the Greek the vehicle
of Hebrew thought. It became the accepted Bible
of the Jews of the dispersion, spread the influence
of their religion among the Gentiles, and prepared
the way for the introduction of Christianity. Thus
an " altar was erected to Jehovah" not only " in the
midst of the land of Egypt," as the prophet foretold, 1
but all over the Roman empire.
The Septuagint is the basis of the Christian
Greek. It is a remarkable fact, not yet sufficiently
explained, that the great majority of the direct cita
tions of the Old Testament in the New, which
amount to about 2SO, 2 are taken from the Septua
gint, or at all events agree better with it than with
the Hebrew original.
Compare on this subject, David McCalman Turpie, The Old Testament
in the New (Lond. 1868); Ed. Bohl, Die A . T. lichen Citate im N. T. (Wien,
1 Isa. xix. 19, 20, 25.
2 James Scott (Principles of New Testament Quotation, Edinb. 1875,
p. 17 sq.) says : " The whole number of repeated citations amounts to 290.
Seventeen only of the twenty-seven books of the New Testament contain
quotations from the Old. The single citations may be estimated at 226,
and their whole number by repetition at 284."
24 .THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
1878), and hie Forschuiifjen nock einer Volksbibel zur Zeit Jesu und deren
Zusammenhang mil der Septuayinta-Vebersetzung (ibid. 1873). These two
scholars have very carefully examined all the quotations. Turpie states
the result (p. 266 sqq.) in live tables as follows:
A. 53 quotations agree with the original Hebrew and with the Septua-
gint (correctly rendered).
B. 10 quotations agree with the Hebrew against the Septuagint (which
is here incorrect).
C. 76 quotations differ from the Hebrew and from the Septuagint
(which has correctly rendered the passages).
D. 37 quotations differ from the Hebrew and agree with the Septuagint.
E. 99 quotations differ both from the Hebrew and the Septuagint, which
also differ from each other.
Bo hl does not sum up his results, but goes carefully over the same
number of passages, giving the New Testament quotation, the Hebrew
original, and the Septuagint Version, with learned notes. He advances
the novel theory that Christ and the apostles quoted from a popular
Aramaic Bible (VolksUbel ) which he thinks was in common use at that
time in Palestine, and which was substantially the Septuagint Version, or
based on it : " Die Scptvaginta Uebersetzwng ist die paldstinensische Bibd
oder die Bibcl im Vv Iff ar dialect geicorden, und dalier schrcibt sich die Be-
nutzung der LXX. im ..Neuen Testament." But there is no trace of an
Aramaic Targum before the time of Christ, nor of a Targum authorized
by the Sanhcdrin ; and if it was based on the Septuagint, why did the
apostles use a translation of a translation? The question still remains,
why did they not quote from the Hebrew original, and how are the de
partures of the Septuagint from the Hebrew to be accounted for? It
..seems probable that they quoted mostly from memory, and that they
were more familiar with the Septuagint than the Hebrew. The whole
subject requires further investigation, and a new critical edition of the
Septuagint on the basis of the Sinaitic and Vatican MSS. and all other
sources combined. Dr. Paul de Lagarde, of Gottingen, announces such
an edition (1882), An important contribution is furnished by E. Nestle,
Veteris Testamenti Greed Codices Vaticanus et Sinaiticus cum textu recepto
collati (Lips. 1880).
Jesus himself quotes from the Septuagint, accord
ing to the evangelists. 1 The apostles do it in their
1 Comp. Matt. iv. 4, 7, 10; ix. 13; xv. 9; xxi. 16,42; Mark vii. 6; x.
7; xii. 10, 11; Luke iii. 4-6; iv. 18, 19; xxii. 37. Luke s quotations are
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 25
discourses, 1 and in their epistles. 2 Even Paul, who
was educated at Jerusalem and thoroughly versed
in rabbinical lore, usually agrees with the Scptua-
gint, except when he freely quotes from memory,
or adapts the text to his argument. 3
THE APOSTOLIC GKEEK.
We are now prepared to assign to the New Tes
tament idiom its peculiar position. It belongs to
the Hellenistic dialect, as distinct from the classical
Greek, and it shares with the Septuagint its sacred
and Hebraizing character, as distinct from the secu
lar Hellenic literature ; but it differs from all pre
vious dialects by its spirit and contents. It is the
Greek used for the first time for a new religion. In
this respect it stands alone, and belongs to but one
period, the period of the first proclamation and intro-
all from the Septuagint with the exception of one, vii. 27. The same is
the case substantially with Mark, with the exception of i. 2, which is
-from the Hebrew, and embodies his reflection. Matthew departs from
the Septuagint and quotes from the Hebrew when he introduces a pro
phetic passage with his formula era TrXrjptmSy, as i. 23; ii. 6, 15, 18; iv.
15; viii. 17; xii. 18-21; xiii. 35; xxi. 5. This remarkable difference has
been pointed out by Bleek (Beitragezur Evangelierikritik. 1846, p. 57), and
-is confirmed by Holtzmann (Die Synoptischen Evangelien, 1863, p. 259).
1 Acts i. 20; ii. 17-21, 25-28, 34. 35; iii. 22, 25; iv. 25, 26; vii. 42-50;
xv. 15-18; xxviii. 26, 27.
2 James ii. 23; iv. 6; 1 Pet. i. 16; ii. 6, 22; iii. 10-12; iv. 18; v. 5.
8 Gal. iii. 13; Rom. ii.24; iii. 4, 10-18; iv.3; ix.27-29; x.ll, 21 ; xi.9,
10, 26, 27 ; 1 Cor. i. 19 ; vi. 16 ; Eph. v. 31 ; vi. 2. Specimens of correc
tions of the Sept. according to the Hebrew : 1 Cor. iii. 19 ; xiv. 21 ; xv.
54, 55 ; Rom. ix. 17 ; Eph. iv. 8. Comp. Weiss, Theol des N. T. 3d ed.
p. 275; Kautzsch, De Veteris Test, locis a Paulo op. alleyatis (Lips. 1869).
Kautzsch maintains that Paul never intentionally departs from the Septua
gint, although he seems to have in view sometimes both the Hebrew and
the Greek. Weiss allows a more frequent use of the Hebrew.
20 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
ductiou of Christianity. It is of itself a strong argu
ment for the genuineness of the New Testament.
The Greek of the Apostolic fathers, the Apolo
gists, and the ecclesiastical writers of the third and
fourth centuries generally, differs considerably from
that of the Xew Testament: it has much less of the
Hebrew element, and gathered during the theologi
cal controversies a number of new technical terms,
or infused new meaning into old words. 1
The New Testament idiom consists of three ele
ments, which we may compare with the three ele
ments of man the awfta, ^X 1 ^ ail( ^ vov$ or Trvtv/ua.
It has a Greek body, animated by a Hebrew soul, and
inspired and ruled by a Christian spirit. It grew
naturally out of the situation and mission of the
Apostolic Church, and was, and is still, admirably
suited for its purposes. It is more cosmopolitan
than any other Greek dialect. The New Testament
in classical Greek might have been understood and
appreciated by the learned few, but not by the
masses of Jews and Gentiles. And the same applies
to translations. King James s and Luther s versions
reach the hearts and understandings of the common
1 Especially in the Nicene age. Such terms are ovaia, VTTOGTCHTIC,
irpoaunrov (as applied to the persons of the Trinity), o/iootxriot;, bfioiov-
(Tiof , irepooiHTioQ (of the Son of God in his relation to the Father), tvaap-
Kwcrtt;, tvavSrpwirriGiSi iSionjs, aytvvrjoia, ytwrjcrla, iKTropevGic;, Trsp-^ti;
(of the Holy Spirit), SeoroKOf (of the Virgin Mary), iVwrrte vtroaTariKT],
KoiVMvia iciwfj,aTu>Vj 7rpi%it>pr]cn(; (of the inner trinitarian relations),
awTTOGTaaia or kwiroaraaia (the impersonality of the human nature of
Christ), etc. For ecclesiastical Greek, see Suicer, Thesaurus Ecdesiasticus
e Patribus Gratis, Amst. 2d ed. 1728, 2 vols. fol. ; C. du Fresne (du Cange),
Glossarium ad Scriptores Medics et Infimce Grcecitatis, Lugd. 1688, 2 torn,
fol. ; and E. A. Sophocles, Greek Lex. of the Roman and Byzantine Periods,
Boston, 1870.
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 27
people as no classical diction of Milton or Goethe
could do.
During the seventeenth century there was much
useless controversy between the " Purists," who de
fended the classical character of the New Testament
Greek, and the " Hebraists," who pointed out its
Hebraisms. Both parties ignored the necessity and
beauty of its composite character for its cosmopoli
tan mission. 1
HEBRAISMS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.
The Hebrew element is the connecting link be
tween the Mosaic and the Christian dispensation.
It pervades all the apostolic writings, but not in the
same degree. It is strongest in Matthew, Mark, the
first two chapters of Luke, and in the Apocalypse.
The hymns of the Virgin Mary (Magnificat), of
Zacharias (Benedictus), arid of Simeon (Nunc Di-
mittis) are entirely Hebrew in spirit and tone, and
can be literally rendered so as to read like Hebrew
psalms. Otherwise Luke and the author of the
Epistle to the Hebrews Hebraize least of all. Not
a few Hebrew words as Amen, Eden, Messiah,
Manna, Ilallelvjah, Sabbath have passed into mod
ern languages, and remain as perpetual memorials
of the earliest revelations of God. The Hebraisms
are not grammatical blunders or blemishes, but neces
sary supplements of the defects of the secular Greek.
1 See the literature on this controversy in Reuss, p. 87. He says:
"Das neutestameniliche Idiom ist nicht aus einer rolien Sprachenmischung
hervorgegangen, sondern stellt sich uns dar als der erste Schritt des im Osten
aufgegangenen Lichtes zur Bewdltigung und Durchdringung der abendlan-
dischen Gesitlung" Comp. also Tregelles, in Home s Introd. iv. 21-23.
28 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
They represent new ideas which require new words.
They impart to the apostolic writings the charm of
the antiqueness and elevated simplicity of the Old
Testament.
With the exception of a few pure or old Hebrew
words (Amen, Hallelujah, Uosanna, Sabbath, which
were borrowed from the temple service, and are
found in the Septuagint), the Hebraisms of the
^ew Testament belong to the later Hebrew or
Aramaic ( Syro - Chaldaic ) dialect which, after the
return from the Babylonian exile, had gradually
superseded the older as the living language of the
people. 1 The Hebrew still continued to be the
sacred language (^7P^ V ^ ), and the Scripture
lessons were read from the Hebrew text, but were
followed by Aramaic translations (Targumim) and
sermons (Midrashim). 3
I. Hebrew words for which the classical Greek
has no equivalent. I do not claim completeness for
this and the following lists, but they embrace the
most important words.
cJ/3/3a = K2X (II cb. Zty, father, Mark xiv. 36; Rom. viii. 15; Gal. iv. f>.
aKt\c>a/ia (Westcott and Hort, aKi\Ca/iax) ^^ ^^R., fidd of
blood, Acts i. 19.
aXXTjXoum^n^-^bbri, hallelujah, praise ye Jehovah (Ileb.), Rev. xix.
1, 3, 4, G. Comp. Ps. civ. 35.
1 The word t(3pa iaTi, hebraice, is used for chaldaice, John v. 2; xix. 13,
17,20; Acts ix. 11; xvi. 16; Rev. ix. 11; xvi. 16; and also in Joseph us.
2 The Talmud is written partly in Hebrew (the Mishna), partly in
Aramaic (the Gemara), but mixed with exotic words from various lan
guages Greek, Latin, Coptic, Persian, Arabic and disfigured by gram
matical irregularities and barbarous spelling. See Briill, Fremdsprachliche
Redensarten in den Talmuden und Midrashim (Leipz. 1869).
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 29
/iqi/ = ,^X (Heb.), tiuly, verily, Matt. vi. 13 (?) ; Rom. i. 25; ix. 5;
Rev. iii. 14, etc.
dppaflwv =: **-*)" (Heb.), a pledge, earnest (a mercantile term of
Phoenician origin), 2 Cor. i. 22 ; v. 5 ; Eph. i. 14.
floras = P. 2 (Heb.), i//i (a liquid measure of about 8| gallons), Luke
xvi. 5, 6.
/3X/3ot X = ?!Qf ?23 (Aram.). fortZ of dung (dens stercoris), anil
/3eXe/3oi;/3 = S13t b|3 (Heb.), ford of flies, the name of a god of the
Philistines at Ekron. The former is a contemptuous Jewish by-name of
this idol, and was applied also to the prince of demons, Matt. xii. 24, 27;
Mark iii. 22; Luke xi. 15, 18, 19.
poai tpyig = Ol iH) T!l"l 123, -Sows of Thunder, Mark iii. 17. A name
given to the sons of Zebedee (comp. Luke ix. 34).
fivffoog =. "j^S (Sept.), jlme ^e?, Luke xvi. 19; Rev. xviii. 12. Also
fluaaivov, Rev. xix. 8.
y<7/3/3a3 p a = XP25 (Gr. XiSoorpwroi ), 6ac&. ridge, pavement; the place
where Pilate gave sentence against Jesus, John xix. 13.
ykivva = Ci!"1 X^S, ^/<e valley of IJinnom, Josh. xv. 8; Gehenna, hell,
Matt. v. 22 ; Mark ix. 43 ; Luke xii. 5, etc. Not to be confounded with
Hades or Sheol, as is done in the A. V.
yoXyo3a (al. a) = fctr^ba (Heb. fib j&5), skull (Kpaviov, cah a, calva-
ria, whence our Calvary), the place of Christ s crucifixion, an elevation
(not a hill), so called from its conical form (not from skulls), Matt, xxvii.
33 ; Mark xv. 22 ; John xix. 17.
ifipa iaTL, Westcott and Hort: ifipa iaTi (from "IS?), Hebraice, in Hebrew
(Aramaic), John v. 2; xix. 13, 17, 20; Rev. ix. 11 , xvi. 16.
tXwi Awi (or r j\(i rj\ti, Heb. " 1 ?X), Xt^d cra(3ax$avei, ^fy God, my God,
u-hy hast (hou forsaken me. Quotation from Ps. xxii. 2. See Matt, xxvii.
4G; Mark xv. 34. Mark gives the Syriac form, tXwi tXw/. In Matthew
there are variations, but Westcott and Hort give tXwt in the text and
j )\ti in the margin.
tyQaSd (Aram. rt!j&F,X), diavoix^rjn, be opened, Mark vii. 34.
Kanii\o<: = ^"$ (Heb.), camel, Mark i. 6; Matt. iii. 4; xix. 24, etc.
(Sept. Gen. xii. !; xxi.v. 10).
KirvafjHjjfiov = "ji^-P (Heb.), cinnamon (an aromatic bark used for
incense and perfume), Rev. xviii. 13.
iovaiZ,d} (from iTl^n^, Judalf), to Judaize, Gal. ii. 14; also lovSa ifffiof,
i. 13 ; and iovddiicwf, ii. 14.
Kop(3av and Kop(3avas = "\^^ (Heb.), KSS Tlp (Aram.), an offering,
oblation, Mark vii. 11 ; Matt, xx vii. 6.
30 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
Kvuirov = ",533 (TIcb.), cummin (Germ. Kiimmel), a low herb of the
fennel kind, which produces aromatic seeds.
\ij3avoQ = !"!3sb (Ileb. from the verb "j , to be white), frankincense,
Matt. ii. 11 ; Ilev. xviii. 13.
HauwvaQ = Xi N ,X~, "pEX^, riches, Matt. vi. 24; Luke vi. 9. Comp.
the Heb. iT^X, Isa. xxxiii. G (^Tjffavpoi, LXX.) ; Ps. xxxvii. 3 (-\OVTOC).
Augustin says: " Lucrum punice mammon dicitur."
fjiavva (Heb. 72, in the Sept. TO p.av), manna, the miraculous food of
the Israelites in the wilderness, John vi. 31, 49, 58; Heb. ix. 4; Kev.
ii. 17.
papav ad a = inlnX ", ;"2, the Lord cometh, 1 Cor. xvi. 22.
Utaa iaq = Xlf 1 ^ (Ileb. rPlTTS), the Anointed, the Messiah, John i,
42; iv. 25. In all other passages the Greek equivalent, XjOtorog (from
, to anoint ), is used.
= rr. a (Heb.), r<M (?), Matt. v. 22.]
X)"lpQ (Heb. HDS), passover, Matt. xxvi. 17; John ii. 13;
vi. 4; xviii. 39, etc. Used in three different senses: (1) the paschal
lamb ; (2) the paschal meal ; (3) the paschal feast from the 14th to the
20th of Nisan. Mistranslated Easter in E. V., Acts xii. 4 ; correct in K. V.
ptt|3/3i or paj3(3ti, paj3j3ovi or paflfiovvi = " 1 2 ^ (Heb. from 11^, much,
great"), "^S* 1 , "2^ (Chald.), my great one, my master, (jr cat master, John
xx. C: Mark x. 51, etc. The salutation of Hebrew teachers or doctors
(cUoaffKaXoi). Comp. the French Monsieur, Monseir/neur. Rabboni or
Rabbuni, John xx. 10, is the Galihtan pronunciation for Ribboni.
paKa (or pa^a, Tischendorf ) = Kp" 1 ^ (Heb. p" 1 ^), empty, worthless,
Matt. v. 22.
(Ta/3aw3= m.ixsa: (Ileb.), hosts, armies (icvpioz (ro/3aw3, m ; X^^ Hln^
Lord of Hosts), Luke ii. 13 ; Rom. ix. 29; James v. 4.
GaflficiTov = TS J (Heb.), rest, day of rest, Mark ii. 27, etc. Also the
plural ffafifiaTct (Mark i. 21, etc.); ffa/3/3arta//oc, a keeping of Sabbath,
Sabbath rest (Heb. iv. 9); } ij^pa TOV (7/3/3arov (t^S rn Gl" 1 ), the
Sabbath day (John xix. 31; Luke iv. 16); 6^6g (ra/3/3aroi>, a Sabbat h-
1 This is usually considered as the vocative of the Greek fiwpoc,fool.
The E. E. recognizes the Hebrew derivation in the margin. The He
brew more means rebellious, heretical (Numb. xx. 10); but the Syriac more
means Kvpioc, dominus. Dr. Fr. Field objects to the Hebrew derivation
on the ground that Christ used the Syriac. Otium Norvicense (Oxf. 1881),
p. 2. If the word is Greek we must put a Hebrew meaning into it, with
reference to Ps. xiv. 1, where the atheist is called a fool ( S3, LXX. a<
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 31
day s journey, i. e. 6 stadia or 750 Roman paces, equal to about two thirds
of an English mile (Acts i. 12) ; and Trpoodfifiarov, fore-Sabbath, Sabbath-
eve (Mark xv. 42).
aarav, ffararag:^^ ^ (Heb.), adversary, devil (SiafioXog. 6 Troi j/poc),
Matt. xvi. 23; Mark viii. 33; Luke xxii. 3; 2 Cor. xii. 7, etc.
<Ta7r0ipo = "^SO (Heb.), sapphire (a precious stone, next in value to
the diamond), Rev. xxi. 19 (Sept. Ex. xxiv. 10; xxviii. 18).
ai trov XrXD (Heb. "~!Xp), a seah (a dry measure of about a peck
and a half), MattTxiiL 33.
criKepa (TO, indecl.) = ^ IJ (Heb.), sikera, strong drink, Luke i. 15.
avKi imvoQ=. Fn2p J (Heb.), a sycamine tree, Luke xvii. G (Sept. 1 Kings
x. 27, etc.).
raXiSd, Kovfi = ^p ^n^b::, maiden, arise, Mark v. 41.
uff<T<j>7ro=rintX (Heb.), hyssop, John xix. 29; Heb. ix. 29 (1 Kings v.
3, etc.).
Xfpovfii/j- = D^13 (Heb. plural from S^HS), cherubim, Heb. ix. 5.
Comp. the Greek ypwi//, ypvTrog.
biaavvd = XS tl^ ^in (Ps. cxviii. 25), Hosanna, save now a word of
joyful acclamation, Matt. xxi. 9, 15; Mark xi. 9, 10; John xii. 13.
Proper names of persons are very numerous :
K//</>dc (Syr. XB^S, Greek Hfrpot;), Mopi a (Aramaic for the Hebrew
"? * "?)> Mdp3a ((lamina). MaX^oe (7|i?^> King), Xousa (Luke viii. 3; see
Westcott and Hort s text), T/3(3d (Greek Aopicac, Acts ix. 36, 40);
Iaiai>/3 or lKo/3oc, irjaovg, itadwriQ, MeX^tfreOs/c, SaovX or ^ai)Xoc.
and many others. Also the names compounded with 13, so??, as Barabbas
(son of a father, or son of a rabbi), Bartholomew, Barjesus, Barjonas.
Bartima3iis, Barsabas, Barnabas.
Hebrew names of several places, as,
Armageddon (mount of MegiddO, Rev. xvi. 16), Bethlehem (House of
Bread), Bethany (House of Dates), Bethphage (House of Figs), Bethcsda
(House of Mercy), Bethsaida (Place of Fishing), Gethsemane (oil-press),
Jerusalem (Dwelling of Peace), Siloam (n? ^, translated a.7rta-a\nei>oc,
John ix. 7, by Robinson, an aqueduct; by Grimm, ejfusio, Wasserguss), etc.
II. Hebraizing phrases and modes of construction :
OTTO irpoawTTov, "VSS Q or *ys2"Q,from the face or presence of any one,
from before, from, Acts iii. 19; v. 41 ; vii. 45; 2 Thess. i. 9; Rev. vi. 16;
xii. 14; xx. 11.
32 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
fiaaiXtvtiv kTri (instead of gen. or dat.), b? "^"2, to reign over, Luke
i. 33; xix. 14, 17; Matt. ii. 22, etc.
ytvtaSai Savarov (Aram.), to taste of death, to die, Matt. xvi. 28;
Mark ix. 1 ; John viii. 52, etc.
duo duo (bini, for dvd Evo or tit; dvci), pair-wise, by two and two, Mark vi. 7.
tl (for ov), CX, in forms of oath, as Mark viii. 12, ii foStjatrai an/.ieiov,
no sign shall be (jiven; Heb. iv. 5, a ttatXtvffovTat, if they shall enter into
my rest (supply the apodosis, then will I not live, or be Jehovah}, i. e, they
shall not enter. Comp. Gen. xiv. 23; Deut. i. 35; and Thayer s Winer,
p. 500 (Moulton s Winer, p. G27).
t ic, d-jrdvTijaiv, FIX jp.b, for meeting (instead of inf. cnravrav, to meet),
Matt. xxv. 1, G; Acts xxviii. 15.
tvooKt tv iv TIVI, 2 "/EH, to be well pleased with, to take pleasure in some
one, Matt. iii. 17; xvii. 5; Mark i. 11 ; Luke iii. 22, etc.
\oyi v ei c (diicaioffvvi]i ~), b - rn, to reckon unto, to impute, Rom. iv. 3,
22 ; Gal. iii. G ; James ii. 23. Comp. Gen. xv. G (Sept.).
bfjLoXoyiiv tv TIVI (comp. "by FTTH, Fs. xxxii. 5, slightly differing),
to make a confession on or respecting some one (in alicuius causa~), Matt. x.
32 ; Luke xii. 8.
ou . . . TTCLQ, ?b X?, for ovCt iQ, not one. none, Matt. xxiv. 22 ; Mark xiii.
20; Rom. iii. 20; Gal. ii. 1G; Eph. v. 5, etc.
TrpoawTcov Trpbg TrpovwTror, C" 1 ^ SX f 1 ?^? face to face (nothing
intervening), 1 Cor. xiii. 12. See Sept. Gen. xxxii. 31.
irpoffijJTrov Xafifidveiv, C^DS X1T3, to accept the person of any one, to
favor, to be partial. In the New Test, only in a bad sense, Luke xx.
21 ; Gal. ii. 6 (jrpoawTrov 3tof avSpdjTrov ov Xo///3ca ().
Trpaaiai (adverbially and distributive!} , areolatim, for di>a
, in ranks. plat-wise, by plats (like beds in a garden), Mark vi. 40.
So also av/j.7roaia av^Troaia, by table parties, by companies, in ver. 39.
lv 07T/(T(t TIVOQ, llvo.1 t lQ Tl, Cf.iVVf.IV tV TIVI, 7TpOaKVVf.Iv
Ttvog, the frequent /cat iytvtTO (^7^*), etc.
viog, with the genitive in the sense of belonging to, or exposed to,
deserving of, as v tbg Sa.vd.Tov (1"V}^? *3), son of death ; v toi TOV ^ijU0a)-
VOQ, sons of the bridal chamber, bridemen; viol Trjg (3a<n\tiac,, sons of the
kingdom ; viol TOV irovnpov, subjects and followers of Satan ; VIOQ r//c
diro\fia, son of perdition, i.e. doomed to perdition (John xvii. 12); viol
TIJQ dvaaTdai o>c, partakers of the resurrection (Luke xx. 36), etc.
Foreign derivatives in imitation of the vernacular, as aya/iariw
(from dvdStna, Heb, Q^H, devoted to God, Lev. xxvii. 28, 29; but also
devoted to death, a thing accursed, Josh. vi. 17 ; vii. 1, etc.), to anathe-
THE LANGUAGE OF. THE NEW TESTAMENT. 33
matize, to lay under a curse (Mark xiv. 71; Acts xxiii. 12, 14, 21);
iyKaiv (L,tiv (from iyicaivia ), to initiate, to dedicate (Heb. ix. 18; x. 20;
in the Sept. for Tt^tl, Dent. xx. 5); OKavda\iZ,tiv (? i"2, ?^33, P^T-rt)^
to make stumble, to lead to sin, and the passive okavdaXi&aSai, to stumble,
to be led astray (Matt. v. 29; xiii. 21, etc., from GKavSaXov, a trap-stick;
a snare, a stumbling-block, in the Sept. for tZJj5*i33) ; ff7r\ayx v ^^ a ^ al (from:
a7rXayx va i D^ErH, bowels), to have compassion (Matt. xx. 34, etc.).
The intensive adverbial use of the noun ia the dative with the corre
sponding verb is counted among the Hebraisms (although it occurs occa
sionally among classical writers, even, in Plato; see.Thayer s Winer}
p. 466), as xapy \aipzi, he rejoiceth greatly (John iii. 29), ImSr-vfJiia
kTT&t Htfva, I have earnestly desired, (Luke xxii. 15).
The particles iva and orav are constructed with the present and future
indicative, Luke xi. 2; Gal. vi. 12 (?); Mark iii. 2. iva in classical writers
denotes the purpose or intention (tVa TfXiKov, in order that"); but in later
Greek and in the New Test, sometimes simply the consequence or result
(iva tKfiaTiKov, so that ). The ecbatic use has often been needlessly
pressed, but as needlessly denied by Fritzsche and Meyer. See Moulton s
Winer, p. 573 sqq., Thaycr, 457 sqq., and Robinson and Grimm sub iva.
III. Greek words with Hebrew meanings :
ayyeXog (a messenger), in the sense of angel.
(TO) ciyia ajliov (for the superlative, C" 1 w ^jp ^p), the holy of holies,
or the inner sanctuary of the temple, Ileb. ix. 3.
aiijjv OVTOQ and aiwv ntXXwi , H-T^l tsVlS/ and XSft tV", for the
two ages or eras (dispensations) before and after the Messiah s advent,.
modified in the New Test, the present and the future world. So also the
expressions to-^arai j}pepai, ta^arr] wpa, ra rt\ri TWV alwviov, avvrtXtia
TOV alojvoc, refer to the last times of the aiwv OVTOQ, in the New Test,
to the interval between the first and second advent of Christ, more
particularly the apostolic period, Matt. xiii. 39; xxviii. 20; Acts ii. 17;
Heb. i. 1 ; James v. 3 ; 1 Cor. x. 11, etc.
a1p,a tK\fiiv or tK-^vvtiv (CH 7|S^), ^ H//, Luke xi. 50; Rom. iii. 15.
aprov <f>ciytiv, to take food, to eat (fiH^ ^2^), Mark iii. 20; Luke
xiv. 1. Also taStfiv dprov, Matt, xv. 2.
a<j)itvai a^apriag (or 6<f>ti\fifjaTa, TrapaTrrw^tarnr, etc.), to forgive sins,
etc. r to pardon, Matt. vi. 12; ix. 6; Luke xi. 4, etc. Comp. the Heb.
*IB3, Sept. Isa. xxii. 14; Xb3, Gen. 1. 17.
[BanTi&iv, /3a7m<Tjuoc, /3a7rrr/ia, in the wider sense of ceremonial
washings, whether by pouring, or dipping, or immersion, Mark vii. 4 ;
Heb. vi. 2 ; ix. 10. Comp. Sept. 2 Kings v. 14.
3
34 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
yXw<T<Trt, in the sense of nation ( pTIJ b), Rev. v. ; vii. 9, etc.
cJatjuoyiso/iej Of, possessed ty a rfeww or evil spirit. Often in the
Gospels.
Siiiv and Xuav, to bind and to Zoos?, in the rabbinical sense to forbid
and to permit, Matt. xvi. 19; xviii. 18. Comp. John xx. 23, where the
same idea is expressed literally by Kpartiv and afyi tvai.
(/3oXoc (accuser, slanderer^), for Satan, Matt. iv. 1 ; ix. 34, etc. Corap.
Job i. 7, 12; Kev. xii. 9, 10.
dvva/jii^ and dwapfie, in the sense of miraculous powers (mxb5,
Sept. Job xxxvii. 14), Matt. vii. 22, and very often. See Dictionaries.
t$rt], in the sense of Gtntiles, heathen (C"? ; 5), as distinct from the Jew
ish nation (Xao, C2-), Luke ii. 32, etc.
tvXoytn), to bless (TpS), Luke i. G4; Matt. v. 44, etc.
IK KOL\iacj fir)Tp6c,from birth, from infancy (152K " S), Gal. i. 15.
Z,r\rCiv rvv Seuv, to seek God, i.e. to turn to him as a sincere worshipper,
Acts xvii. 27; Rom. x. 20. Quoted from Isa. Ixv. 1 (Sept.).
fy]T(~iv \l/vxi ]v, to seek one s life, i.e. to seek to kill him ( ^S2 p2),
Matt. ii. 10 ; Kom. xi. 3.
itiaV, to see, in the sense to experience (to suffer, or to enjoy, like !"1X ^),
Luke ii. 20; Heb. xi. 5.
6$oc, manner of life (TP n)) Matt. xxi. 32; Rom. iii. 17; Acts xviii. 25;
James v. 20.
pijpa, in the sense of thing (as ^D 1 ;?), Luke ii. 15; Acts v. 32.
<Trtjo (1w2l), in the sense of man (mortal), or human nature, or natural
descent (/cara aapKa), or frailty, or the corrupt, carnal nature, in opposition
to 7rj ef /m. Very often, especially in Paul s Epistles. See Dictionaries.
rrapZ, KO.I ol//a, for men, with the accessory idea of weakness and frailty,
Matt. xvi. 17; Eph. vi. 12; Gal. i. 16.
o-Trep/m, seed, in the sense of offspring, posterity (2?f .!)> Matt. xxii. 24,
25; Mark xii. 19-21 ; Luke i. 55; xx. 28; Rom. iv. 13, 18, etc.
Gvi aywyr), a Jewish synagogue (assembly), Luke viii. 41. etc.; a
Christian congregation, James ii. 2; synagogue of Satan, Rev. ii. 9; iii. 9.
, anointed, in the sense of the Messiah,
1Y. The Hebraizing style and construction shows
itself in the simplicity of the syntax, the absence
of long and artificial periods, the rarity of oblique
and participial constructions, the monotony of form,
emphatic repetition, and the succession of sentences
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 35
by way of a constructive parallelism rather than by
logical sequence. The Sermon on the Mount (es
pecially the Beatitudes), the parables, and even
Paul s Epistles have that correspondence of words
and thoughts which is the characteristic feature and
charm of Hebrew poetry.
We may add (with Westcott), that " calm empha
sis, solemn repetition, grave simplicity, the gradual
accumulation of truths, give to the language of the
Holy Scripture a depth and permanence of effect
found nowhere else. . . . The character of the style
lies in its total effect, and not in separate elements ;
it is seen in the spirit which informs the entire text
far more vividly than in the separate members." ]
LATINISMS.
The Greek of the apostolic writings is Hebraizing,
but not Romanizing. The Romans imposed their
military rule, their polity, and their laws, but not
their speech, upon the conquered nations. The
greatest Roman orator admitted that the Latin was
provincial, while the Greek was universal in the
empire. 2 Yet a number of Latin terms mostly
military, political, and monetary, and for some arti
cles of dress have found their way into the com
mon speech with the Roman conquest. They are
most frequent in Mark s Gospel, which was written
in Rome and for Romans.
1 In Smith s Bible Diet. iii. 2141 (Hackett and Abbot s ed.). Comp.
Westcott s Introd. to the Gospels, pp. 241-252.
2 Cicero (Pro Arch. 10): " Grceca legunlur in omnibus fere yentibus ;
Latino, suis finibus, exiguis sane, continentur."
36 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
daaapiov, as, a Roman copper coin, worth three English farthings, or
li cent (one tenth of a denarius), Matt. x. 29; Luke xii. G. Probably the
neuter form of the old Latin assarius, as Cijvdpiov is of denarius.
cijvdpiov, denarius, a Roman silver coin of the value of ten asses (as
the name indicates), and afterwards of sixteen asses (the us being re
duced), equivalent to the Attic drachma, or about sixteen cents. In the
New Test, it stands for a large sum, a day s wages; hence the transla
tion penny, which creates the opposite impression, should have been
changed by the Revisers into denarius, or denary, or shilling, Matt,
xviii. 28; xx. 2, 9, 10, 13 ; xxii. 19 ; Mark vi. 37 ; John vi. 7 ; xii. 5; Rev.
vi. G, etc.
, centurio (originally a commander of a hundred foot-soldiers,
), Mark x\ . 39, 44, 45.
, census (Greek, (nroypa^t i) ; in the New Test, tribute, poll-tax,
Matt. xvii. 25; xxii. 17; Mark xii. 14 (dovvai K))VGOV Kaiaapi).
KodpdvTijGi quadrans (from quettuor), a small copper coin, the fourth
part of an as, a farthing (i. e, fourthing), two fifths of one cent, Matt. v. 26 ;
Mark xii. 42.
KoXwvia, colonia, a Roman colony, Acts xvi. 22.
Kovffrojcia, custodia, custody, guard (of Roman soldiers), Matt, xxvii.
G5, GG; xxviii. 11. Corresponds to the Greek tyvXaKT).
KOrt/3/3ro, or /cp/3arroc (Lachmann, Tischendorf, Westcott and
Hurt), c/rabatus, a small couch or mattress, Mark ii. 4, etc.
\tytMV (Westcott and ITort, Xfyiwr), legio. legion, Mark v. 9, 15; Matt,
xxvi. 53; Luke viii.30. Also in rabbinical Hebrew ("pV5). See Buxtorf.
Xfvriov, linteum, a linen cloth, a towel or <7/;ro, worn by servants, John
xiii. 4. 5. From the Greek Xirov, ajlaxen cord.
\i(3ep~ ivoc j , libertinus, nfreedman, Acts vi. 9.
Xirpa, from libra, the Roman pound of twelve ounces, John xii. 3 ;
xix. 39.
/uajceXXor, macellum, meat-market, shambles, 1 Cor. x. 25.
f.i/ji(3pdvct, membrana (from membruni), skin, parchment, 2 Tim. iv. 13.
fj-i\iov, milliarium (for mille passuum), a thousand paces, a mile, Matt,
v. 41.
/Lio^toc, modius, a measure, the chief Roman measure for things dry, and
equal to one third of the Roman amphora (nearly one pecK), Matt. v. 15;
Mark iv. 21; Luke xi. 33.
&OTr}Q,sextarius. in the New Test, a small measure, or vessel, pot, Mark
vii. 4, 8.
irpaiTupiov, prcetorium, the general s tent in a camp ; and also the resi-
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 3 I
dence or palace of a provincial governor, Matt, xxvii. 27; Mark xv. 16;
John xviii. 28 ; xix. 9 ; Acts xxiii. 35 ; Phil. i. 13.
p jcfy, rheda, or raeda, reda (of Celtic origin), a travelling carriage with
four wheels, a chariot, Rev. xviii. 13.
(Tiicdptog, sicarius (from sica, dagger ), assassin, robber, Acts xxi. 38.
(npiKivSiov, semicinctium (from semi, half, and cingere, to gird), an apron.
Acts xix. 12. For ii^i ^djviov.
<rovcdpiov,sudarium (from sudor, sweat}, siceat-cloth, handkerchief, Luke
xix. 20; John xi. 44; xx. 7; Acts xix. 12.
(TTrg/conXorwp, speculator, a pikeman, a soldier of the body-guard cm-
ployed as watch and in messages, Mark vi. 27 ; also in later Hebrew. For
Taflepvr], taberna, tavern, Acts xxviii. 15.
T LT\OQ, titulus, inscription, superscription, John xix. 19, 20. For tm-
<j)aiv6\T]c; (^aiXuvr/c), pmntla, a woollen cloak, or mantle for travelling
(and also in rainy weather). 2 Tim. iv. 13.
(j>6pov, forum, market; part of the name of the village Appii forum,
Acts xxviii. 15.
QpayiXXtoVjjlagellum, a scourge, John ii. 15.
$payf\\oai, Jlagello, to flagellate, to scourge, Matt, xxvii. 2G; Mark
xv. 15.
, chart a. paper, 2 John 12.
., corns, or caurus, the northicest wind, Acts xxvii. 12.
Latin proper names of persons :
Agrippa, Amplias, Aquila, Caius, Cornelius, Claudia, Clemens, Crcscens.
Crispus, Drusilla, Felix, Festus, Fortunatus, Gallic, Julius, Julia, Jtinia.
Justus, Linus, Lucius, Luke (abridged from Lucanus), Marcus or Mark.
Niger, Paulus, Pilate, Priscilla or Prisca, Publius, Pudens, Quartus, Rufus,
Sergius, Silvanus (abridged Silas), Tertius, Tertullus, Titus, Urban.
Three names of Roman emperors: Augustus ( 26/3<rroc ), Tiberius.
Claudius. The generic name C?sar (Kotcrap) is applied to Augustus
(Luke ii. 1), to Tiberius (Luke iii. 1), to Claudius (Acts xi. 28), and to
Nero (Acts xxv. 8; Phil. iv. 22).
Names of places :
Appii Forum, Cresarea, Italy, Rome, Spain, Tiberias, Tres Tabernte.
38 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
NUMBER AND VALUE OF FOREIGN WORDS.
Professor Lemuel S. Pot win (of Western Reserve
College, Hudson, Ohio) lias made a list of native
words of the Kew Testament not found in classical
authors before Aristotle (who is included among the
classics, though his diction is on the boundary be
tween the Attic and the Common dialects), with the
following results : 1
O
(1.) The total number of words in the Greek
Testament (according to Tischendorfs text) not
found in the classics is no less than 882 (nouns 392,
adjectives and adverbs 171, verbs 319) ; that is, nearly
one sixth of the entire vocabulary. But a consid
erable number of these words are found in the Sept-
uagint, Josephus, Polybius, and Plutarch. In the
Septuagint 3G3 occur.
(2.) The new words are, with few exceptions,
derivatives or compounds from Greek roots. The
verbs are largely denominatives, but more largely
multiplied by composition with prepositions. The
adjectives arise mostly from composition, the alpha
privativum being very frequent, as the English
compounds with un are constantly increasing.
(3.) The rhetorical value varies. Many of these
words are clear and full of meaning, as
1 See Ribliotheca Sacra, Andover, July, 1880, pp. 503-527; and Oct.
1880, pp. 640-GGO. The results are stated on p. 652 sqq. Prof. Potwin
lias also previously published valuable lists of Latinisms in Bibl. Sacra for
Oct. 1875, p. 703 sqq., and of Hebraisms, ibid. Jan. 1876, p. 52 sqq., to
which Dr. Abbot kindly directed my attention after my lists were already
in type. I refer to them here for comparison. Potwin s lists are less
complete; he gives only twenty-four Latinisms instead of thirty-one.
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 39
double-minded, wavering, Jas. i. 8; iv. 8; also in
Clemens Kom. Ad Cor. c. 23 ; vv^vyog, or avv^v-
XGC, concors, like-minded, congenial, Phil. ii. 2;
Xoyojuaxfa, word - strife, 1 Tim. vi. 4 ; juaKjooSvjufa,
longanimity, forbearance, Rom. ii. 4, etc. ; &co$c$a-
KTOC, taught of God, 1 Thess. iv. 9 ; and the com
pounds with ayaSo-, avrt-, trfpo-, and ifrtv^o-.
(4.) The doctrinal and practical value is great in
proportion to the idea expressed. Such words as
(caritas, as distinct from tpwc, amor),
*Xa(TjUoc> TraXcyyavccr/a, crvvticriaig, have a
definite theological significance, and cannot be re
placed by classical words.
THE CHRISTIAN ELEMENT. 1
The language of the apostles and evangelists is
baptized with the spirit and fire of Christianity,
and thus received a character altogether peculiar
and distinct from the secular Greek. The genius
of a new religion must either create a new speech,
or inspire an old speech with a new meaning. The
former would have concealed the religion from the
people, like the glossolalia in the Corinthian Church,
which required an interpreter. The Greek was flex
ible and elastic enough to admit of a transformation
under the inspiring influence of revealed truth. It
furnished the flesh and blood for the incarnation of
divine ideas. Words in common use among the
1 Comp. Schleiermacher, Mermen. 66, 138; Immer, ffermen. 129; Crcruer,
Biblico-Theol. Lexicon; Trench, Synonyms of the N. Test.
40 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
classics, or in popular intercourse, were clothed with
a deeper spiritual significance ; they were trans
planted from a lower to a higher sphere, from
mythology to revelation, from the order of nature
to the order of grace, from the realm of sense to
the realm of faith.
This applies to those characteristic terms which
express the fundamental ideas of Christianity as
gospel, faith, love, hope, mercy, peace, light, life,
repentance or conversion, regeneration, redemption,
justification, sanctification, grace, humility, apostle,
evangelist, baptism, kingdom of heaven.
< Gospel .(siiayyiXiov) to a Greek Gentile was either
reward for good news (as in Homer), or good news
of any kind; but to a Greek Christian it meant the
best of all news ever heard on earth, proclaimed by
angels from heaven to all the people, that a Saviour
was born and lived, and died and rose again for a
sinful world. The word church (tKicAr?<mi, avvaywyi i)
has passed through a heathen, Jewish, and Christian
stage; it denotes first a lawful assembly of free
Greek citizens, then a religious congregation of
Jews, and at last that grand commonwealth of God
which Christ founded on a rock, and which is to
embrace the whole human family. Faith (Tn crr/e,
from TTt/3-w, to persuade, 7ruzof.iai rn>i, to trust in)
conveys the general idea of confidence in a person,
or belief in the truth of a report ; but in the New
Testament it is that gift of grace whereby we accept
Christ in unbounded trust as our Lord and Saviour,
and are urged to follow him in a life of holy obe
dience. Love (ayinrr) is not found in classical writ-
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 41
ers, but in its place 0/At a and ^tXavCjOWTr/a, and the
verb ayctTraw, which expresses regard and affection)
is much more than natural affection and philan
thropy ; it is a heavenly flame, kindled by God s
redeeming love, the crowning gift of the Spirit, the
surest test of Christian character, the fulfilling of
the law, the bond of perfectness, and the fountain
of bliss a worthy theme for the seraphic descrip
tion of the inspired Paul. Hope (i\-tc) rises from
the sphere of uncertain expectation and desire for
future prosperity to the certain assurance of the
final consummation of salvation and never-ending
happiness in heaven. The Greek terms for humility
tivofypwv, Tcnrsivofypoavvri, ra7rai>or)Cj
) designate to the proud heathen meanness
and baseness of mind, but in the New Testament a
fundamental Christian virtue. Conversion (jufravota)
signifies not simply a change of opinion, or even a
moral reformation, but a radical transformation of
the heart, whereby the sinner breaks away from his
former life and surrenders himself to the service of
God. The words holy and holiness (aytoe, ayiaw,
aytaajuo, ayfwann rj), whether applied to God or man,
rise as far above the cognate terms of secular Greek
(ayvoc, <T/iV(>f-, oatoc, lepnt;) as the God of the Bible
rises above the gods of Homer, and a Christian saint
above a Greek sage.
The purifying, spiritualizing, and elevating influ
ence of the genius of Christianity was exerted
through the Greek and Latin upon all other lan
guages into which the gospel is translated. 1 It per-
1 For the influence of Christianity on the Teutonic language, see
42 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
vades the whole moral and religious vocabulary. It
meets us in every inscription and salutation of the
apostolic letters. The formula of greeting, " Mercy
and peace be unto you," transforms the idea of
physical health and temporal happiness, as conveyed
in the Greek -^aipnv and the Hebrew skalom lecha,
into the idea of spiritual and eternal welfare, so that
Xj C an d ilpi ivri comprehend the blessings, objec
tive and subjective, of the Christian salvation. Yet
Aristotle s definition of \api (which usually means
gracefulness in form or manner, also favor, good
will) is not far from the Christian conception when
he lays the whole emphasis on the disinterested
motive of the giver without expectation or hope of
return. 1 Language is in some measure prophetic,
and the first and lower meaning of words often
points to a higher spiritual meaning; as the whole
realm of nature points to the truths of the kingdom
of heaven. The parables of our Lord are based
upon this typical correspondence.
For the proper understanding of the New Testa
ment, in the fulness of its religious meaning, much
Rudolph von Raumer, Die Einwirkung des Christenilmms (wf die althoch-
deutsche /Sprache (Stuttgart, 1845). German and English words which
refer to the external aspect of the church are borrowed from the Greek or
Latin, as Kirche, church (KvpiaKov), Bischof, bishop (f-Tn rrKOTrof;), Priesler,
priest (:T|0(T/3t rfpot;), Almosen, alms (i\ti]iio<jvvi]), Predigt, preaching
(prcedicatio*) ; but terms which express the inner life of religion are
originally German or Saxon, and impregnated with a far deeper meaning;
as Jleiland (Heliand), Ileil, Erlosung^ Bekehrunrj, Wiederyeburt, Glaube,
Liebc, JJoffnunrj, Ilimmel: atonement, new birth, love, hope, heaven.
1 Rhet. ii. 7, quoted bv Trench (p. 252), who says, " the freeness of the
outcomings of God s love is the central point of x f P l " comp. Rom. iii. 24
ry avrov %dpiTi) and other passages.
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 43
more is required than mere knowledge of the lan
guage. The most extensive and thorough familiar
ity with Greek, Hebrew, and Roman literature is
unable to penetrate from the surface of the letter
to the depth of the spirit without sympathy with
the lofty and heavenly ideas of that book. Philo
logical exegesis is the necessary basis, but only the
basis, of theological and religious exposition which
requires faith and spiritual insight. The gram
matical sense is but one definite, specific ; the
spiritual sense is as high and deep and infinite as
the truth which the word feebly indicates, and the
application of the truth is universal for all time.
It is as true to-day as it was in the da_ys of Paul that
"the natural man" (^VXIKOCJ aV^wTroc), who is guid
ed only by the light of reason (though he may not
be (TapuKoe), "receiveth not the things of the Spirit
of God, for they are foolishness unto him ; and he
cannot know them, because they are spiritually
judged."
The general unity of language admits of great
variety of style. Every man has his style, and " the
1 Or, examined, Tri iv/jartKuiQ draicpu erai, 1 Cor. ii. 14.
2 On tliis subject the following works may be consulted : Christoph
Gotthelf Gersdorf, Beitraye, zur Sprach-Charakteristik tier Schriftsteller
des N. Ttst. (Leipz. 1816 ; only the first part published). This work was
suggested by Griesbach, and opened the way for this kind of investigation.
T. G. Seyffarth, Beitrag zur Spccial-Characteristik der Johann. Schriften
(Leipz. 1823). Credner, Einleit. in das N. T. vol. i. (Halle, 1836). Wilke,
Der Urevangelist (Dresden and Leipzig, 1838), NeutestamentL Rhetorik
(1843), and Hermcneutik des N. T. (Leipzig, 1843-44, 2 Parts). Luthardt,
44 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
style is the man/ The apostolic writers were guided
by the same Spirit, but in accordance with their pe
culiarities of temper, mode of thought, and speech.
Divine grace purifies, elevates, and sanctities nature,
and is destructive only to sin and error. A gentle
man is the perfection of a man ; a Christian is the
perfection of a gentleman. !N"o two human beings
are precisely alike ; every one is a microcosmos, has
his individuality more or less marked, and his special
work more or less important, though many, alas, fail
to perceive and to perform it. There are different
types of apostolic teaching, and different styles of
apostolic writing to suit different tastes, objects, and
classes of readers.
The idiosyncrasies of the sacred writers have been
more or less felt from the beginning, and incidentally
pointed out by Irenseus, Jerome, Augustin, Chrys-
ostom, Luther, Calvin, and other great biblical scliol-
J)as Johann. Evany, (revised cd. 1875; Engl. translation by Gregory,
Edinb. 187G, vol. i. pp. 20-G3). Westcott, Introd. to the Study of the Gospels
(Lond. and Cambr. I860; Gth ed. 1881; Amer. ed. by Ilackett, Boston,
18G2, pp. 264 sqq.). Iloltzraann, Die Synopt. Evangelien (Leipz. 18G3,
pp. 271-358). Holtzmann, on the Ephesians and Colossinns (Leipz. 1872),
and on the Pastoral Epistles (ibid. 1880, pp. 84-117), where the linguistic
peculiarities and hepax legomena of Ephesians and Pastoral Epistles are
investigated for the purpose of proving their un-Pauline character. The
two critical works of Weiss on Marie and Matthew (1872 and 1876). Im-
mer, Hermeneutics of the N. Test., translated by A. H. Newman (Andover,
1877, pp. 132-144). Scholten, Das Faulinische Evangelium, translated
from the Dutch by Redepenning (Elberf. 1881, pp. 18, 31, 87, 188 sqq.).
Scholten is all wrong in ascribing Luke s Gospel and the Acts to two dif
ferent authors the first to a polemical, the second to an irenical Paulinist
and in assuming a proto-Luke which preceded the canonical Luke.
I have found Holtzmann on the Synoptists and Luthardt on John very
helpful.
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 45
ars; but a mechanical theory of inspiration pre
vented an unbiased examination of the subject till
the nineteenth century. Our English version here
errs in two opposite directions: by its vicious prin
ciple of variation it unnecessarily increases the
verbal differences of the writers ; while, on the other
hand, it obscures and obliterates characteristic pecu
liarities by using the same English term for differ
ent Greek words. It is one of the chief merits of
the revision of 1881, that it introduces consistency
of rendering.
It is the strength and merit of rationalism (whether
German, Dutch, French, or English) to investigate
the human character and history of the Bible ; it is
its weakness and error to ignore or undervalue its
divine character and history. It takes its stand
outside of the Bible, and treats it like any other
book of antiquity from a purely critical standpoint.
It denies its sanctity in order to subject it to a heart
less process of anatomical dissection. It handles
the disjointed members, but the life and spirit has
escaped ; as Goethe says of the logician :
" Er hat die The de in seiner Hand,
Fehlt leider nur das geistiye Band. 1
Rationalism lias a keen eye for all the diversities
of thought and style of the apostles and evangelists,
but is blind to the underlying unity and harmony.
It stretches the differences between the Synoptists
and John, Matthew and Luke, the fourth Gospel
and the Apocalypse, Galatians and Acts, between
James and Paul, Peter and Paul, Paul and John,
into irreconcilable contradictions, and thus tends to
4:6 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
destroy all confidence in the divine origin and au
thority of the New Testament.
But, fortunately, this is only the negative part of
the process. Whether willing or unwilling, ration
alism contributes to a better understanding and
deeper appreciation of that old and ever new Book
of books, in which, as Ileinrich Ewald once said, "is
contained the wisdom of the whole world." Ex
treme theories and errors are refuted one after
another by the different schools of rationalism, and
the sacred writers come out of the fire of critical
purgatory unsinged, and with a stronger claim than
ever upon the intelligent reverence and faith of the
Christian world. A profounder search from the
surface to the deep discovers unity in diversity,
concord in discord, a divine spirit animating the
human body, and sees in the very variety of the
sacred writers only the manifold wisdom and grace
of God. 1
The sinless perfection of Christ s humanity is the
best proof of his divinity, and brings his divinity
nearer and makes it dearer to the heart of the be
liever. What is true of the personal Word may be
applied to the written w r ord,
"Jesus, divincst when Thou most art man."
MATTHEW.
Matthew wrote a Gospel first in Hebrew for
Hebrews. But the Greek Gospel under his name
is a free reproduction and substitution rather than
1 Eph. iii. 10. TroAi TTonciAoc (rotyia TOV $eoi , 1 Pet. iv. 10,
Seov. Com p. Rom. xii. ; 1 Cor. xii.-xiv.
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 47
a translation. 1 No independent author would liter
ally translate himself. The originality of the canon
ical Matthew is evident from the discrimination in
Old Testament quotations which are freely taken
from the Septuagint in the course of the narrative,
but adapted to the Hebrew when they contain im
portant Messianic prophecies. 2 It appears also from
his use of words and phrases which have no equiva
lent in Hebrew, as the paronomasia of purest Demos-
thenian Greek: KCIKOU? KUKWC,- (pessimos pessime)
oTroAtcra avrovr, " Those wretches he will wretchedly
destroy" (xxi/41). 3
Matthew s style is simple, calm, dignified, even
majestic. He Hebraizes, but less than Mark and
the first two chapters of Luke. He is less vivid and
picturesque than Mark, more even and uniform than
Luke, who varies in expression with his sources.
1 The ancient witnesses, from Papias to Euscbius and Jerome, agree
both in ascribing to Matthew a Hebrew gospel, and in accepting the
Greek Matthew of our canon whenever they mention it as the work of
an apostle without any doubt of its genuineness.
2 This distinction has been first observed by Credner and Blcek, and
further examined and accepted by Holtzmann (Die Synopt. Evany.
p. 259), Ritschl, and Westcott. From this fact we must infer that the
author was a Jew well acquainted both with the Hebrew Bible and the
Septuagint.
3 Or, as the E. Rev. renders the Greek, " He will miserably destroy
those miserable men." The E. V. obliterates the paronomasia which
brings out the agreement of the punishment with the deed. Other ren
derings: "The naughty men he will bring to naught" (Rheims V.);
malos male perdet (Vulgate) ; iibel wird er die UMen vernichten (Ewald) ;
schlimm wird er die Schlimmen umbringen (Lange). Other paronomasias :
vi. 16, a.<f>aviZ,ovaiv TU TrpoawTra ctvruiv OTTMQ (pavwffiv rolg ctvSpw^
TTOIQ ri](FTtvovTc, " they disfigure their faces that they may figure as
men fasting ;" vi. 7, /3arroXoye< v and
48 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
He lias a preference for rubrical arrangement, prob
ably in accordance with bis previous habits of book
keeping at the custom-house. lie gives headings to
some of his sections, as B//3Xoc ytviatMQ Irjaou Xpi-
arov (i. 1-18, corresponding to the Hebrew Scplier
tJtoJedoth ; comp. Gen. v. 1 ; ii. 4), Twi/ wEtca TTO-
orroAwv T ovojaara lanv ravra (x. 2). He pays most
attention to the discourses of our Lord, and strings
them together like so many precious jewels ; one
weighty sentence follows another till the effect is
overwhelming. 1 His Gospel is eminently didactic,
and in this respect quite different from that of
Mark, which deals more with facts and incidents.
lie alone uses the term "the kingdom of heaven"
(i] jSaaiXc/a TMV ovpavuv, thirty-two times); while
the other evangelists and Paul speak of "the king
dom of God" (fi fiaviXtia TOV Stov). With this cor
responds his designation of God as " the heavenly
Father" (o 7rar/)/> o ovpaviog, or 6 ti> ro? ovpavofci)?
lie lias a peculiar formula of citing Messianic pas
sages, tVa ( or OTTWC ) 7r\r]pw^y TO jorj3"f v, or rore
tn-\r]fjw^r] TO fasti , which occurs twelve times in his
Gospel, 3 but only once in Mark, 4 seven times in John, 5
1 Chs. v.-vii.; x. ; xiii. ; xxiii.; xxiv. ; and xxv.
2 v. 1G, 45, 48; vi. 1, 9. 14, 26, 32; vii. 11, 21 ; x. 32, 33; xv. 13; xvi.
17; xviii. 14, 19, 35.
3 i. 22; ii. 15, 17, 23; iv. 14; viii. 17; xii. 17; xiii. 35; xxi. 4; xxvi.
56 (iu the plural, ii>a TrXiipwSuJcriv at ypafyai} ; xxvii. 9.
4 Mark xiv. 49, i j/a TrXqpwSujaiv at -ypa^al. The passage xv. 28.
k7r\i]pM$rj ? / ypa<f>i} ij \syovffct, is omitted by critical editors on the author
ity of XBC*, etc., as a probable insertion from Luke xxii. 37.
5 xii. 38; xiii. 18; xv. 25; xvii. 12; xviii. 9; xix. 24, 26; besides a
passage without iVa, xviii. 32.
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
and nowhere in Luke. 1 He uses rore ninety-one
times (Mark only six times, Luke fourteen times).
Matthew alone calls Jerusalem " the holy city," and
a " city of the Great King." 2 This is one of the
indications that his Gospel was written before the
destruction of Jerusalem (A.D. 70), which is fore
told in the eschatological discourses of our Lord
(ch. xxiv.) as & future, though fast-approaching judg
ment, without the least hint of the evangelist at the
striking fulfilment; while yet he is very particular
in marking the fulfilment of the Old Testament
prophecies.
WORDS PECULIAR TO MATTHEW, and not found
elsewhere in the New Testament. They number
about seventy, as I collected them from the con
cordances of Bruder and Hudson :
oyyaor, vessel, xxv. 4.
ayyoc (plur. ayy?j), vessel, xiii. 48
(Tisch.,Treg.,W.andH.).
ajKivrpov, hook, xvii. 27.
aijom ^w, to choose, xii. 18.
aK[ifiv, yet, xv. 16.
dvctj3i[3tt (jj, to draw, xiii. 48.
dvainoc;, guiltless, xii. 5, 7.
tt7rayx<>jwa, to hang one s self,
xxvii. 5.
o^m, to wash, xxvii. 24.
very precious, xxvi.
fig, tormentor, xviii. 34.
/3arroXoyw, to use vain repetitions,
vi. 7.
/3iaor7, violent, xi. 12.
cftu a, such a man, xxvi. 18.
8iciKu>\vw, to hinder, iii. 14.
<XXarrojuo(, to be reconciled, v. 24.
tUrt<T0w, to explain, to tell, xiii.
36; xviii. 31.
io<5og, with TMV oPtiv, highway,
xxii. 9.
SitrrjQ, two years old, ii. 16.
c*i0ru, to doubt, xiv. 31; xxviii.
17.
iv\i%ii), to strain out, xxiii. 24. (To
1 Except the somewhat similar phrase, TO
iv i/jioi, xxii. 37.
8 ? / ay/a TroXic? iv. 5 ; xxvii. 53 ; 7roXt row /ifyaXov /SaatXt wf;, v. 35.
The temple or the hill of Moriah is called -oTrot; ytoc, xxiv. 15.
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
strain at in the E. V. is a typo
graphical error perpetuated).
Xw, to set at variance, x. 35.
cof.tr]KovrciKi^, seventy times,
xviii. 22.
gjOcrie, resurrection, xxvii. 53.
viKoc i heathen, v. 47 (correct read
ing for T-iXwy//r); vi. 7; xviii. 17
(the plural occurs once in 3 John,
ver. 7, and the adverb t^rucwc, in
Gal. ii. 1-4).
ioi;, peacemaker, v. 9.
, to shine forth, xiii. 43.
, to adjure, xxvi. 63.
ptiHo, to intermarry, to mar
ry a brother s widow (with refer
ence to levirate marriage, accord
ing to Jewish law), xxii. 24.
tw, to forswear one s self, v. 33.
ipM, to sow among, xiii. 25.
, to agree, v. 25.
xi^dj, to make a eunuch, xix.
12; iuvou%i%iv iavrov, to make
one s self a eunuch, i. e. to live in
voluntary celibacy and abstinence,
xix. 12. "
c, broad, vii. 13.
g, wonderful, xxi. 15.
), to be wroth, ii. 10.
jot, v. 18.
i^at, to curse, xxvi. 74.
vd), to consider, vi. 28.
KaTct7rovT(%a>, Mid. or Pass., to sink,
xiv. 30 ; to be drowned, xviii. G.
K/J-of, whale, xii. 40.
KovtrrwCia, watch, xxvii. 65, 66;
xxviii. 11.
Kwvwty, gnat, xxiii. 24.
/ittXadrt, disease, iv. 23: ix. 35; x. 1.
/utXtoj , mile, v. 41.
tiw, to hire, xx. 1, 7.
Xwv (jUuXoe), mill, xxiv. 41 (but
see Rev. xviii. 22, 0wy/} pvXov).
dafiwg, by no means, ii. 6.
euw, entangle, xxii. 15.
Xiyy^(7( rt, restitution, xix. 28
(also in Tit. iii. 5, but in a differ
ent sense, regeneration of the in
dividual by the Holy Spirit).
pciKovw, neglect to hear, xviii. 17
(add Mark v. 36 for fiKouw).
po/Jioid^dJ (o^uoiao>), to be like
unto, xxiii. 27.
ic, platter, xxiii. 25. 26.
uc, wide, vii. 13.
7roXwXoy/rt, much speaking, vi. 7.
7rpo03oj w, to anticipate, xvii. 25.
TTVppdZw, to be red, xvi. 2. 3.
paTriZw, to smite with the palm of
the hand, v. 39; xxvi. 67.
ffayrjvij, net, xiii. 47.
crgXj/vfrtsGyUtti, to be lunatic (epilep
tic), iv. 24; xvii. 15.
(rmoToc; (from airoe, grain), fatted,
plur. TO. (nriaTct, fallings, xxii. 4.
avvdvrrjffic, with f/f, to meet, viii.
34. L., Tr., W. and II. read VTTCLV-
rt]tnc, meeting ; which occurs
also in xxv. 1 ; John xii. 13.
(Tvvav,dvw (Mid.), to grow together,
xiii. 30.
raXavTov, talent, xviii. 24 ; xxv.
15, 16, 20, 22, 24. 25, 28.
ii, death, ii. 15.
c:, exchanger, xxv. 27.
inrrj^a, eye of a needle (/. q. rp7]-
fj.a, Luke xviii. 25), xix. 24.
(Pass.), to smoke, xii. 20.
0pa<u, to declare, xiii. 36 (dtaaa-
0w) ; xv. 15.
0i>re< , plant, xv. 13.
\\afivc, robe, xxvii. 28, 31.
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 51
MARK.
Mark s Greek is perhaps the poorest, judged by a
classical standard, but it has a peculiar vivacity and
freshness which prove his originality and indepen
dence. The judgment of St. Augustin, Griesbach,
and Baur, that he was a mere abbreviator of Matthew,
or of both Matthew and Luke, has been thoroughly
reversed by modern research. 1
Mark, the companion and "interpreter" of Peter,
faithfully recorded, " without omission or misrepre
sentation " (as Papias says), the preaching of Peter,
and reflects his first observations and impressions.
There was a natural sympathy between the teacher
and the pupil. Both had a sanguine temperament
and a gift of quick observation ; both were fresh
and enthusiastic, but liable to sudden changes ; both
erred and recovered Peter in denying, and again
laboring and dying for Christ ; Mark in running
away in his youth at the betrayal, and leaving Paul
on his first mission tour, but returning to him as a
useful companion, and faithfully serving Peter, who
calls him his " son." Both had a restless energy
which urged them on to preach the Gospel from
place to place and land to land till they reached
Rome, the centre of the world. They were men of
action rather than thought, practical workers rather
than contemplative divines.
Mark records few of the speeches of our Lord,
and dwells chiefly on his works, selecting those which
1 Especially by Weisse, Wilke, Holtzmann, Ewald, Weiss.
52 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
excite astonishment and amazement, and would ap
peal with peculiar force to the Roman mind, so fond
of displays of conquering power. In this respect
Mark is the very reverse of Matthew.
Mark is brief and sketchy, but has a number of
graphic touches, not found in the other evangelists,
which give vividness to the scene, as i. 13 ("he was
with the wild beasts ") ; ii. 2 (" there was no longer
room for them, no, not even about the door"); iii.
10 (" they pressed upon him ") ; iii. 20 (" they could
not so much as eat oread"); iv. 37; v. 3, 4. He is
fond of pictorial participles, as ova/SXt^a
a7roaTvoc. He expresses the emo-
tions of astonishment by a reduplication of the
questions and by exclamations. He quotes words
and phrases in the original Aramaic, as Talitka,Jcumi 9
Ephphatliali, and Eloi, Eloi. He characterizes the
acting persons by names, relations, company, or situ
ation. He repeats again and again the adverb yb^A-
withi straightway (si^lwc, or cuS-up), which is char
acteristic of the rapidity and rushing energy of his
movement. This word occurs more frequently in
his Gospel than in all the other Gospels combined,
and may be called his motto, like the American
" Go ahead !" With this is connected his prefer
ence for the historical present. He loves affection
ate diminutives, as iraiS iov (little child), Kopaaiov
(damsel), Kwapiov (little dog), Zvyarpiov (little
daughter), iTfivStov (small fish), wrapiov (little ear).
He uses several Latin terms, as ^ a-jjc (sextarius, a
measure), KtvTvpiwv (centurio), KTIVGOG (census),
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
rttip (speculator, a pikeman), and the Latin
phrases ta^arM^ ^\ flv (* n 0%tremis esse, to be at the
point of death, v. 23), and TO IKUVOV iroisiv (satisfa-
cere, to make satisfaction, xv. 15). This is all the
more natural if lie wrote in Rome for Romans, as
the ancient tradition uniformly affirms; bnt most
of these Latinisms occur also in Matthew and Luke,
and even in the Talmud.
PECULIAR WORDS OF MARK, not occurring else
where in the Xe\v Test, (forty-five) :
ayptveiv, to catch, xii. 13.
f , dumb, vii. 37 ; ix. 17, 25.
ia, cockcrowing, xiii.
35.
ai/aAoe, saltless, insipid, ix. 50.
, to leap up, x. 50.
, to sigh deeply, viii.
12.
CITTO
, from far, viii. 3.
going abroad, xiii. 34.
, to uncover, ii. 4.
cuppifeiv, to foam, ix. 18, 20.
yajui<T/cv,togiveinmarriage,xii.25.
(Tisch., W. and H. read yjutov-
rai for the text,rec.ya/it<m>jTai.)
yvafavg, fuller, ix. 3.
, two thousand, v. 13.
, hard, x. 24. The adverb
cvaicu\ioQ (hardly, with difficulty)
occurs once in all the Synoptists,
in the discourse of Christ on the
difficulty for rich men to enter the
kingdom of God (Matt. xix. 23 ;
Mark x. 23 ; Luke xviii. 24).
vdffi^oQ, deadly, xvi. 18.
Kara a, one by one, xiv. 19.
(This occurs also in the disputed
passage, John viii. 9, and iv KCC&
tv in Rev. iv. 8.)
ej , then, iv. 28.
3a/i/3B<r3at, to be greatly amazed,
ix. 15; xiv. 33; xvi. 5, G.
ayKa\i%eff$ai, to take in one s
arms, ix. 36 ; x. 16.
eiXt w, to wrap in, xv. 4G.
, in the night, i. 35.
t^c nriva, suddenly, ix. 8.
6w, to set at naught, ix. 12.
, from without, vii. 15, 18.
iirippd7rT(t), to sew on, 21.
cw/i07roXi, town, i. 38.
piSopia, border, vii. 24. (But Tisch.,
Treg., W. and H. read TO. opta.)
juoytXaXoc, having an impediment
in his speech, vii. 32.
vovvtxwc;, discreetly, xii. 34.
Trpaatai irpaaiai, in ranks, vi. 40.
7rpojj.tpinvav, to take thought be
forehand, xiii. 11.
TrpoffcififlciTov, Sabbath-eve, xv. 42.
TrpoffKi (j)d\aiov, cushion, iv. 38.
7T|00(70jO/i^(T^ai, to draw to the
shore, vi. 63.
54 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
, with the fist (up to the elbow),
K. V. diligently, A. V. oft, vii. 3.
i&iv, mingle with myrrh, xv.
23.
, a soldier of the guard,
v.
fictQ , twig, XI. 8.
SXifitiv, to throng, v. 24, 31.
, clearly, viii. 25.
;, beyond measure, vii.
37.
vTro\i}viov, wine-vat, the under-vat
of a wine-press, into which the
juice of the grapes flowed, xii. 1.
\Kioj y brazen vessel, vii. 4.
(jjTapioi>, ear. xiv. 47.
LUKE.
Luke is the most literary among the evangelists. 1
He was evidently a man of considerable education,
and a congenial companion of Paul, the scholar
among the apostles. He was as admirably suited
for Paul as Mark was for Peter. He pays regard
to contemporary secular history, refers to the mem
bers of the Herod ian family, the emperors Augustus,
Tiberius, Claudius, the census of the Syrian gov
ernor Quirinius, the procurators Felix and Festus,
and furnishes us the key for several important
chronological dates.
He was a physician (Col. iv. 14). His medical
vocabulary in the accounts of miracles of healing,
and throughout the general narrative, shows famil
iarity with the ancient medical writers, or at all
events agrees with technical usage. 2
1 Renan (Les Evangiles, p. 232): " UEvangile de Luc est le plus litteraire
des Evanrjilcs" He also calls it " le f)lus beau livre qu il y ait " (p. 283). He
admires the classic style, the joyful tone, and charming poetry of the book.
2 Rev. W. K. Hobart, LL.D., of Trinity College, Dublin, has published a
work on The Medical Language of Sf. Luke (Dublin University Press. 1882,
305 pages), in which he proves, from internal evidence, that "the Gospel
according to St. Luke and the Acts of the Apostles were written by the same
person, and that the writer was a medical man." For this purpose over
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 55
He is equally familiar with nautical terms, which
are correct without being strictly technical. His
account of the voyage and shipwreck of Paul in the
last two chapters of Acts, according to the testi
mony of experts, gives us fuller and more accurate
information about ancient navigation than any other
single document of antiquity. 1
Luke s style varies considerably. Where he writes
independently, he uses the best language. The brief
historiographic preface to his Gospel the only one
in the Gospels is a period of purest Greek, and
admired for its grace, modesty, and dignity. It may
be favorably compared with the prefaces of Herod
otus and Thucydides. They excel alike in brevity,
tact, and point; but the anonymous preface of the
Evangelist is as striking for its modesty and love of
truth as the prefaces of the great heathen historians
are for vanity and love of glory. 2 In the second
four hundred words and phrases, for the most part peculiar to these two
books, are compared with the use of the same words and phrases in
Hippocrates, Aretseus, Dioscorides, and Galen.
1 See .Tames Smith, The Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul, 4th ed. 1880
(revised hy Walter E. Smith, with a Preface by the Lord Bishop of
Carlisle); the respective chapters in the biographical works of Conybeare
and Ilowson, Lewin, and Farrar, on St. Paul; and the commentaries of
Ilackett, Lechler, Howson and Spence, and others, on Ads, ch. xxvii. and
xxviii. James Smith, of Jordanhill, Scotland (b. 1782, d. 18G7), was not
a professional theologian, but a commodore of the Royal Northern Yacht
Club, and familiar by long residence in Gibraltar and Malta with naviga
tion in the Mediterranean. His book is a classic in this department, and
has a permanent evidential value.
2 The preface of Herodotus has nearly the same number of words (40)
as that of Luke (42), and is as follows: Hpocorov
5e wf /Jirjrt ~d ytvop.f.ra t% dvSrpioTr
/// ;- tpya /ztyaXo TS Kai SavfiaaTa, ~d ptv "E\\i)<n TCI
56 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
part of the Acts, where Luke writes as an eye
witness, lie likewise uses pure Greek. But where
he translates from the Hebrew, as in the history of
the infancy, in the songs of Zachariah, Mary, and
Simeon, his language has- a strongly Hebraizing
and highly poetic coloring. This proves his con
scientious fidelity. The greater part of the Gos
pel and the first part of the Acts occupy a mid
dle position between classic Greek and Hebrew
Greek, and show the frequent use of documentary
sources.
Among the minor peculiarities of Luke, as com
pared with Matthew and Mark, we may mention
the following. He has VOJKKOC or vo^o&Sadk-aXoe
for ypa[A[jiaTtv, TO iiprjjun ov in quotations for pri&ev,
for iip-i, \ifj.vr] of the lake of Galilee for ^aXao-o-a,
for o^/a. He frequently uses the attraction
of the relative pronoun and the participial construc
tion. He likes the word \apa, in accordance with
the spirit of cheerfulness which animates his books. 1
He very often speaks of the Holy Spirit, especially
in the Acts, which may be called the History of the
Spirit in the apostolic age ; and he alone relates the
pentecostal miracle. 2
There is a striking resemblance between the spirit
and style of Luke and Paul. They agree in the re-
vvv
, d/cXta yerjjrai, TO. re aXXa KCIL Si r}
a\\Y)\Ol(Tl.
1 Luke i. 14 ; ii. 10 ; viii. 13 ; x. 17 ; xv. 7. 10 ; xxiv. 41, 52 ; Acts viii. 8 ;
xiii. 52 ; xv. 3.
2 Trvti iia, either \vith of without a yior, occurs in the Acts no less than
fifty times (if I counted right).
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 57
port of the words of institution of the Lord s Supper.
They are fond of such characteristic words as
ci-ytov,
Luke has the richest vocabulary among the Sy-
noptists. The total number of words in his Gospel
is 19,209 ; that of Matthew, 18,222 ; that of Mark,
11,158. The number of words peculiar to Luke,
and not found in Matthew and Mark, is 12,969, or
26f per cent. ; that of Matthew, 10,363, or 21 J per
cent. ; that of Mark, 4314, or 9 per cent. 2 Luke s
Gospel has 55, and the Acts 135 aira^ Xtyu/umta.
The number of words in the Gospel of Luke which
do not occur elsewhere in the Greek Testament is
about 180.
WORDS PECULIAR TO THE GOSPEL OF LUKE. (It
would take too much space to add the peculiar
vocabulary of the Acts.)
dywvta, agony, xxii. 44.
i, arms, ii. 28. I dvn/<5a, importunity, xi. 8.
aypa, draught, haul, v. 4, 9. ch OTTTjpof, maimed, xiv. 13, 21.
j, to abide in the field, ii. 8. di/aTrruffcrw, to unroll, to open, iv. 17
(but the critical editors read
at, to set forth in order,
, to speak out, i. 42.
dvtK\ii7TTO, unfailing, xii. 33.
dvBvdeKTog, impossible, xvii. 1.
di Sro/j.o\oytof^at, to give thanks, ii.
38.
i, to perceive, ix. 45.
o, captive, iv. 18 (19).
, stranger, xvii. 18.
, recovery of sight, iv.
18.
avddet%ic, showing, i. 80.
, gift, xxi. 5 (di d3e^a oc
curs several times in Paul).
i. 1.
1 See a long list of parallel passages in Holtzmann, I. c. 316 sqq.
2 The above estimate is made from Tischendorfs Greek Testament, as
printed in Eushbrooke s Synopticon (1882). See my Church History,
revised ed. 1882, vol. i. p. 596.
58
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
rt/3aXXw, to cast back and forth,
to exchange, xxiv. 17.
ctXto), to bid again, xiv. 12.
, completion, with tig, to
complete, xiv. 28.
a7Tfc\7n^w, hope for again, vi. 35.
ciTToS-X/ /Soi, to press, to crowd, viii.
45.
a7ro/c\6i w, to shut, xiii. 25.
aTToXe/xw (fcTTiXei xw), to lick, xvi.
21.
a7ro/,ia(T(Topai, to wipe off, x. 11.
oTTOTrXwrw, to wash, v. 2 ; but Tisch.
(ed. viii.) reads (with X) tTrXv-
vav, Lachm. and W. and II. tTrXv-
vov (with B). See Kcv. vii. 14.
cjTrorrro^ar/^w, provoke to speak,
xi. 53.
cnro\^v\M (cxpiro), to leave off
breathing, to faint, xxi. 26 (comp.
wffa J /C|00<, Matt, xxviii. 4).
ajO / YirfXwi //c, chief among the pub
licans, xix. 2.
orp-rw, to lighten, to flash, xvii.
24; to shine, xxiv. 4.
aawrwc, riotously, xv. 13.
arejcrot-, childless, xx. 28, 29.
auroTTT^c, eye-witness, i. 2.
d(f>avTO, with yn o/iai, to vanish
out of sight, xxiv. 31.
aippoc, froth, foam, ix. 39.
cttyvTrvou), to fall asleep, viii. 23.
/3a3;i w, to deepen, vi. 48.
j3aX\ai>Tiov, purse, x. 4; xii. 33;
xxii. 35, 36.
flapvi oficu, to be overcharged, xxi.
34.
/3tXor?7, needle, xviii. 25.
r), a cast, a throw, xxii. 41.
voQ, hill, iii. 5; xxiii. 30.
daj, to laugh, vi. 21, 25.
, rng, xv. .
/i6w (text. rec. and Lachmann),
to bind, viii. 29. Tisch., Treg.,
W. H. read dtapEVM, which is
also used by Matthew (xxiii. 4),
and Luke in Acts xxii. 4.
yoyyi w, to murmur, xv. 2 ; xix.
7.
XaXfw, to commune, to converse,
i. 65; vi. 11.
, to cease, vii. 45.
to, to divide, xi. 17, 18; xii.
52, 53 ; xxii. 17.
oc, division, xii. 51.
uw, to beckon, i. 22.
viavoi]/.ia, thought, xi. 17.
Siai vKTfptvu, to continue all night,
vi. 12.
^laTrpay/jarfvoficti, to gain by trad
ing, xix. 15.
CiaGtiw, to shake throughout, to do
violence to, iii. 14.
Ciarapaacno, to trouble, i. 29.
?ia(j>vXaaauj, to keep, iv. 10.
tUY Ct) i A ai 5 ^0 depart, ix. 33.
eU//y;7<Tj, narration, i. 1.
^X*7> feast, v. 29 ; xiv. 13.
tyKaStTcg, spy, xx. 20.
tyKvoc, great with child, ii. 5.
tt>a</><o>, lay even with the ground,
xix. 44.
t3i w, to accustom; pass., to be cus
tomary, ii. 27.
iK/eo/ua, to carry out, vii. 12.
kK}JivKTi]piZ,(iJ, to deride, xvi. 14;
xxiii. 35.
tKTtXtw, to finish, xiv. 29, 30.
fcK-/3XXw, with /(,-, to cast into, xii.
5.
t/c^wpsw, to depart out, xxi. 21.
ivvivii), to make signs to. i. 62.
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
59
i, to be gathered thick
together, xi. 29.
kTreiCrjTrepj forasmuch as, i. 1.
tTTtloov, to look on, i. 25.
), to give sentence, xxiii. 24.
a), for a7ro\a \;a;,tolick over,
xvi. 21 ; see a7ro\ci ^;w.)
Tt^iiAwf , diligently, xv. 8.
mroptvonai, with Trpoc, to come
to, viii. 4.
, victuals, ix. 12.
l, to be more fierce, xxiii. 5.
to-37/tTif , garment, xxiv. 4.
t^airiofiai, to ask for, xxii. 31.
tiittOTjoaTrrw, to glister, ix. 29.
fvQoptw, to bring forth plentifully,
xii. 10.
Jl/juSavTiG, half dead, x. 30.
Sopv(3dZ,w (text. rec. Tvpj3d^w), to
confuse by noise, to disturb, x. 41.
SpauM, to bruise, iv. 18.
;, large drop, xxii. 44.
), to burn incense, i. 9.
wf , sweat, xxii. 44.
, to arm, xi. 21.
l^u), to cast down head
long, iv. 29.
aTa\i3rd%u>, to stone, xx, G.
iH*}, to beckon unto, v. 7.
, to arrive, viii. 26.
j, to drag, xii. 58.
w, to slaughter down, to
slay, xix. 27.
, to cool, xvi. 24.
^ tiling, v. 19.
Kkpdriov, husk, carob-pod, xv. 16.
icXividiov, couch, v. 19, 24.
Kopa.%, raven, xii. 24.
icopog, a measure, xvi. 7.
KpanrdXr], surfeiting, xxi. 34.
, sumptuously, xvi. 19.
Xa&vTOQ, hewn in stone, xxiii. 53.
\ao, smooth, iii. 5.
\jypof, idle tales, xxiv. 11.
Q, far, xv. 13; xix. 12.
i ig, divider, xii. 14.
oc;, hired servant, xv. 17, 19.
, hardly, ix. 39.
j o<T<7ia, brood, xiii. 34.
iu), to be steward, xvi. 2.
, shower, xii. 54.
oTr-og, broiled, xxiv. 42.
opeiroc, hilly, i. 39, 65.
ctypvc, brow, iv. 29.
7Tttju7rX?;3ei , all at once, xxiii. 18.
7ravCo%tiov, inn, x. 34.
TravCo-)(tvQ, host, x. 35.
TrapddoZog, strange thing (neut.),
v. 26.
Trrw, to hide, ix. 45.
, sea coast, vi. 17.
ia, virginity, ii. 36.
e, with TOTTO, plain, vi. 17.
oG, P oor > xx i- 2 -
, fifteenth, iii. 1.
, to hide. i. 24.
7rtpiKVK\6it), to compass around, xix.
43.
TTtpioiKiu, to dwell round about, i.
65.
TTtpioiKoc, neighbor, i. 58.
TreptrTTraw, to distract, x. 40.
Trivaicidtov, writing-tablet, i. 63.
7r\i]fj,/j.vpa, flood, vi. 48.
7rpE<r(3tia, embassy, message, xiv.
32 ; xix. 14.
Trpoaavafiaivw, to go up, xiv. 10.
Trpoaava\i(TK<t), to spend, viii. 43.
Trpoadcnravdd), to spend more, x. 35.
7rpo(T|Oyaojuat, to gain, xix. 16.
7rpo<f>tpw, to bring forth, vi. 45.
to roll up, iv. 20.
60
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
(W//y/ia, ruin, vi. 49.
<ra\o, waves, xxi. 25.
aiKtpa, strong drink, i. 15.
, to sift, xxii. 81.
, fatted, xv. 23, 27, 30.
, portion of meat, xii. 42.
cr/ca7rroj,to dig,vi,48, xiii. 8; xvi. 3.
, to leap, i. 41, 44; vi. 23.
, spoil, xi. 22.
of , bier (coffin), vii. 14.
), to wrap in swaddling
clothes, ii. 7, 12.
avyyevic, kinswoman (forayyyaj jjc ),
i.36.
cvyKaXvTTTtj), to cover, xii. 2.
<Tvymrrr3 r e/mt, to deposit together,
to consent to, xxiii. 51 (with tip}.
avyKinrTw, to be bowed together,
xiii. 11.
ffvyicvpia, cliance, x. 31.
avKa/Mt oc, sycamine tree, xvii. G.
avKOj-uopta, or -opta (the spelling
of W. and II. for -wpaia), syca
more tree, xix. 4.
auKotyai THo, to accuse falsclv, iii.
14 ; xix. 8.
(pass.), to spring up with,
musc, xv. .
, to be tetrarch, iii. 1.
a, wound, x. 34.
, a hole, the eye of a needle,
xviii. 25 (the reading of Lachm.,
Tisch., Treg., W. and H. for the
text. rec. rpv{Jia\id).
rpvywv, turtle-dove, ii. 24.
(rvp(3a%w, see SropvpdZw.)
vypog, green, xxiii. 31.
vdpwTTiKos, dropsical, xiv. 2.
, to feign, xx. 20.
, to spread, xix. 36.
o^wptw, to withdraw one s self,
v. 1G; ix. 10.
aivai, to weave, to spin, xii. 27.
Z, valley, iii. 5.
(barvri, manger, ii. 7, 12, 1G; xiii. 15.
0<X/7 (fern.), friend, xv. 9.
^fAoj afcia, strife, xxii. 24.
, fearful sight, xxi. 11.
, wisely, xvi. 8.
, gulf, xvi. 26.
, egg, xi. 12.
THE NAUTICAL VOCABULARY of Luke is rich and
remarkable. It is used mostly in the last two chap
ters of Acts. lie describes the voyage and ship
wreck of Paul evidently as an eye-witness, like a
man who was often at sea as a close and accurate
observer, but not as a professional seaman ; he no
tices effects and incidents which a seaman would
omit as unimportant, but he omits to notice causes
and details which would appear prominently in an
official report. He uses no less than sixteen verbs,
and uses them (as James Smith has conclusively
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
61
shown) most appropriately, to describe the motion
and management of a ship ; and all of them are
nautical terms, and with the exception of three are
peculiar to his two writings. They are as follows
(seven being compounds of
TfXtw, to sail, Luke viii. 23; Acts
xxi. 3 ; xxvii. 6, 24.
aTTOTrXsw, to sail from, Acts xiii. 4 ;
xiv. 26; xx. 15; xxvii. 1.
(3paSvir\okb) (from (3paCi>^, slow),
to sail slowly, Acts xxvii. 7.
CiaTrXtuj, to sail through (not "over,"
as in the A. V.), Acts xxvii. 5.
t/cTrXew, to sail away, Acts xv. 39;
xviii. 18; xx. G.
Ka.Tcnr\ ujj, to arrive, Luke viii. 2G.
{iTTOTrXsw, to sail under the lee, Acts
xxvii. 4, 7.
TrapaTrXsw, to sail by, Acts xx.
1G.
avayopai, to get under way, to put
to sea, Acts xxvii. 4.
SiaTTf paw, to sail over, Acts xxi. 2.
SiaQepojJiai, to be driven to and fro,
Acts xxvii. 27.
iTTi/aXXw, to run the ship ashore,
Acts xxvii. 41.
w, to make a straight
course, Acts xvi. 11 ; xxi. 1.
paXgyojUoi (middle), to sail by,
Acts xxvii. 8, 13.
Torptxo) (aor. 2, vTricpapov), to
run under the lee, Acts xxvii. 1C. 1
pof-iai (pass.), to be driven, Acts
xxvii. 15, 17.
To these may be added the phrases for lightening
the ship : tjc/SoXt/v ITTOIOVVTO, they began to throw
the freight overboard, Acts xxvii. 18; and tKov^i^ov
TO TrAoiW, they lightened the ship, Acts xxvii. 38.
Julius Pollux mentions EjcjSoXijy Trotriaaa&a
and Kovfyiaai TIIV vavv among the technical
terms for taking cargo out of a ship. See Smith,
I. c. pp. 114, 139.
1 Smith, /. c. p. 103, remarks on vTrodpapoi Ttc, having run under the
lee of: " St. Luke exhibits here, as on every other occasion, the most
perfect command of nautical terms, and gives the utmost precision to his
language by selecting the most appropriate ; they ran before the wind to
leeward of Clauda, hence it is inro^pa^iovrtQ : they sailed with a side wind
to leeward of Cyprus and Crete, hence it is
62 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
PAUL.
The Apostle of the Gentiles had a cosmopolitan
preparation for his work, being a Hellenist by birth,
a Roman citizen, and a Hebrew scholar. He is the
only apostle who enjoyed a regular rabbinical edu
cation, and was trained to logical reasoning. He
was also, to a limited extent, acquainted with classi
cal literature, and quotes from three heathen poets
(Aratus, Menander, and Epimenides) the only ex
amples of the kind in the Kew Testament. 1 He is
the founder of Christian theology; he had to create
a theological vocabulary by stamping a peculiar
meaning upon a number of words which express
fundamental Christian ideas, as StKaioavvrj,
TTiffTtQ, ayairri,
KaraAAcryr),
The style of Paul reflects the strongly marked
individuality of his nature purified and ennobled
by divine grace. Its chief characteristics are fire
and force, lie is intensely in earnest, and throws
his whole soul into his epistles. His ideas overflow
the ordinary boundaries of speech. The pressure
of thought is so strong that it breaks through the
~ O O
rules of grammar. Hence the anacolutha. His
style is dialectic and argumentative. He reasons
now from Scripture, now from premises, now from
analogy, or from experience, from effect, from objec-
1 Jerome hit the proper medium between the two extremes of an undue
overestimate and an underestimate of Paul s Greek learning, when he
said, ad Gal. iv. 24, that Paul knew secular literature (liter as saculares),
but imperfectly (licet non ad perfectuni).
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 63
tions, and ex absurdo. He frequently uses logical
particles and phrases, as ovv, apa, apa ovv (hinc iyi-
tur, therefore, then, so then, twelve times), yap, a 70/0,
a of, OVKTI, Ti ovv, ri ovv tpovu,ai, tpttq ovv, ov fjiovov
i . . . ctAAa. He introduces and answers objections,
and drives the opponent to the wall by close argu
ment. He is fond of antitheses, paradoxes, oxymora,
and paronomasias. Farrar counts " upwards of lift} 7
specimens of upwards of thirty Greek rhetorical
figures " in Paul. 1
Here are some of these antithetic and paradoxical
phrases : ae TO eivai avrov SiKaiov Kal SIKCIIOVVTCI TOV
IK. 7ri(jTt(ji)c; IrjrroD (Horn. iii. 26) : c)ia vouov vo[J.ty cnrt-
Savov (Gal. ii. 19) : w St OVKZTI IJM, fyj ^ tv t/nol
XpifTTOQ (Gal. ii. 20) : (j>S6vo and Quvoc; : aavvsroc;
and aavv^troc; : aQpwv and fypovi/uoz : avo/mog and
jn^i VTrspQpovtiv Trap" o 3tt typovuv, a\\a
u; TO awtftpovtiv (not to be high-minded
above what we ought to be minded, but to be so
minded as to be sober-minded, Rom. xii. 3): TO.
aopara . . . KaSoparai (invisibilia videntur, unseen
things are seen, Horn. i. 20) : Trap tXirtSa TT IXiriSi
(Rom. iv. 18) : ra firj ovra we ovra (Rom. iv. 17) :
TO [J.WpOV TOV 3"fOW (TO(j)(jL)TpOV TWM ClV^pWTTWV (1 Coi*.
i. 25) : o-av . . . aa^ivw, TOTS SvvaroQ tljjit (2 Cor.
xii. 10). Specimens of cutting sarcasm: Kararo^i
(Phil. iii. 2, with reference to the TTCJOITOJUTJ of the
carnal Judaizers of the malignant type : concision,
circumcision) ; anoKoi^ovTaL (Gal. v. 12, with refer-
1 The Life and Work of St. Paul, i. 629 sq. His two Excursuses on
the style and rhetoric of Paul are able and instructive.
G-i THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
ence to the same Judaizing perverters of the Gos
pel).
Paul disclaims classic elegance, and calls himself
"rude in speech" (i&wrije TM Aoy^), though not in
knowledge (ou TTJ yvwatt). 1 lie knew that he car
ried the heavenly treasure in earthen vessels, that
the power and grace of God might become more
manifest. 2 Ilis speech is at times rugged and irreg
ular, but always vigorous, bold, terse, expressive.
It rises now to lofty eloquence, as at the close
of the eighth chapter of Romans, now to more
than poetic beauty, as in the description of love in
1 Cor. xiii., which has no equal in all literature.
We may compare his style to a thunderstorm with
zigzag flashes of lightning that strike every project
ing point; or to a Swiss mountain torrent that now r
rushes over precipices in foaming rapids, now rests
before taking a new leap, then calmly flows through
green meadows.
Longinus, a heathen rhetorician of the third cen
tury, counted HauAoc 6 Tapatvg among the greatest
orators, and a master of dogmatic style. Jerome
charges him with using Oilician provincialisms
(solecisms), but felt when reading his epistles as if
he heard "non verla sed tonitrua" Erasmus com
pares Paul s style to thunder and lightning : " tonat,
fulgurat, meras flammas loquitur Paulus" He
1 2 Cor. xi. G. Comp. 1 Cor. i. 17 ; ii. 1 sqq. We must remember that
he thus wrote to the Corinthians, who overestimated the arts of rhetoric.
Meyer quotes Xenophon, who describes himself as an Iciwrrj^ as com
pared with the Sophists (De Venut. 14, 3).
2 2 Cor. iv. 7.
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 65
judged the closing verses of the eighth chapter of
Romans to be equal in eloquence to any passage
in Cicero : " Quid u-nquatn Cicero dixit grandilo
quentius" Calvin says of his writings: "fulmina
sunt, non verba" but he properly adds, in the very
spirit of Paul and in view of his numerous anacolutha
and ellipses, that by a singular providence of God the
highest mysteries have been committed to us "sub
contemptibili verborum humilitate" that our faith
may rest not on the power of human eloquence, but
solely on the efficacy of the divine Spirit. Baur
finds the peculiar stamp of Paul s language in pre
cision and compression on the one hand, and in
harshness and roughness on the other, which sug
gests that the thought is far too weighty for the
expression, and can hardly find a fit form for the
abundance of matter. lie compares him to Thucyd-
ides. Farrar does the same, and says that Paul has
the style of genius, if he has not the genius of style. 1
Kenan, a good judge of rhetoric, but blinded by
prejudice against Paul s theology, speaks disparag
ingly of his prose, as Voltaire did of the poetry of
Shakespeare, which he deemed semi-barbarous ; yet
Renan is obliged to mix praise with censure. " The
i L. c. i. G23. Farrar thinks, with Baur, that the style of Paul " more
closely resembles the style of Thucy elides than that of any other great
writer of antiquity." The great historian of the Peloponnesian war is by
no means free from solecisms or barbarisms, obscurities, and rhetorical ar
tificialities. Jowett (Thuc. vol. i. Intr. p. xiv.) justly says : " The speeches
of Thucydides everywhere exhibit the antitheses, the climaxes, the plays
of words, the point which is no point, of the rhetorician, yet retain amid
these defects of form a weight of thought to which succeeding historians
can scarcely show the like."
5
66 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
epistolary style of Paul," he says, 1 " is the most per
sonal that ever existed. His language is, if I dare
call it so, hackled (broyee), not a connected phrase.
It is impossible to violate more boldly, I do not say
the genius of the Greek language, but the logic of
the human language. It is a rapid conversation,
stenographically reported, and reproduced without
correction. . . . With his wonderful warmth of soul,
Paul has a singular poverty of expression. ... It is
not barrenness, it is the vehemence of mind, and a
perfect indifference as to the correctness of style."
Another Frenchman, Pressense, 2 judges more just
ly : " Paul s own moral life struggled for expres
sion in his doctrine; and to give utterance to both
at once, Paul created a marvellous language, rough
and incorrect, but full of resource and invention,
following his rapid leaps of thought, and bending
to his sudden and sharp transitions. His ideas come
in such rich abundance that they cannot wait for
orderly expression ; they throng upon each other,
and intermingle in seeming confusion ; but the con-
f u-sion is seeming only, for through it all a powerful
argument steadily sustains the mastery. The tongue
of Paul is, indeed, a tongue of fire."
JOHN.
If Paul s style resembles a rushing, foaming,
storming Alpine torrent, John s style may be com
pared to a calm, clear, deep Alpine lake in which
1 Saint Paid, ch. ix. p. 232.
3 Ajyostolic Era, p. 254.
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 67
the sun, moon, and stars are reflected as in a mirror.
The one sounds like a trumpet of war, the other like
an anthem of peace. Simplicity and depth char
acterize the Gospel and the first Epistle of John.
He is " verbis fadttimuS) sensu difficillimus"
He writes pure Greek as far as words and gram
mar are concerned, but he thinks in Hebrew ; the
Greek is, as it were, only the thin, transparent veil
over the face. Renan, looking at the outside, says
correctly that the style of the fourth Gospel "has
nothing Hebrew, nothing Jewish, nothing Tal-
mudic ;" but Ewald, looking deeper into the inside,
is more correct when he affirms that "in its true
spirit and afflatus, no language can be more genu
inely Hebrew than that of John." Keim speaks of
the remarkable combination of genuine Greek facil
ity and ease with Hebrew simplicity and figurative-
ness. 1 Westcott thinks that it is " altogether mis
leading" to speak of John s Gospel as "written in
very pure Greek ;" that it is free from solecisms
because it avoids all idiomatic expressions ; and that
its grammar is common to all language. Godet
1 Keim (Geschichte, Jesu von Nazara, i. 116) : " Die Sprache des Bucks "
[the 4th Gospel] "ist ein merlcwiirdiges Gefuge achtgriechischer Leichtig-
keit und Gewandtheit und hebraischer Ausdrucksweisen in Hirer ganzen
Schlichtheit, Kindlichkeit, Bildliclike.it und wohl auch Unbeholfenheit. So
hat sich die Union der Gegensdtze der Parteien selbst in der Sprache rer-
kurpert." What follows in Keim is a strange mixture of truth and error,
owing to his want of sympathy with the spiritual character of this
Gospel, in which he must acknowledge the simplicity of nature, the
purest morality, and celestial glories (Jiimmlische Iferrlichkeiten), while
yet he discovers in it the hidden arts of a post-apostolic literary forger.
The contradiction is not in John, but in the judgment of his critic.
63 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
characterizes the style of John as altogether unique
in all literature, profane and religious, for childlike
simplicity, transparent profundity, holy sadness, and
holy vivacity, and calls it a Hebrew body with a
Greek dress. 1 Weiss, in his recently published
Life of Jesus," likewise emphasizes the Hebrew
genius which animates the pure Greek of the fourth
Gospel, and derives from it an argument for its Jo-
1 "La tongue de Vevangeliste napas d? analogue dans toute la litterature
profane ou sacree: simplicity, enfantine et transparente profondeur, sainte
inclancolie et vivacite non moins sainte; par dessus tout, suavite d un amovr
pur et doux. . . . Dana la langue de Jean, le v element seul est grec. le corps
cst hebreu ; ou, comme le dit Luthardt, il y a une time hebra ique dans le ton-
rnge grec." Com. sur Vevang. de Saint Jean, 3d cd. thoroughly revised
(Paris, 1881), vol. i. pp. 22G. 232.
2 The passage is worth quoting in full as a contribution to the solution
of the Johannean problem : " Man hat einst wolil gemeint, das reine Grie-
cliisch des Eveingeliums passe nicht zu dem Fischer vom Gennezaretsee.
Ileute zweifelt Niemand melir daran, dass gerade die niederen Stdnde Gali-
Ida^s im taglichen Verkehr mit dem umwohnenden mid iiberallbereits mitten
in das eigene Volksthum eingedrungenen Griechenthum sich des Verstdnd-
nisses der griechischen Spr ache gar nicht entrathen konnten. llatte vollends
Johannes einige zwanzig Jahre bereits in griechisch&r Umgebung gelebt, so
musste er sich eine geioisse Gewandtheit im Gebrauch der griechischen
Sjirache angeeignet haben. In der That aber blickt durch das griechische
Gewand dieses Evangeliums iiberall der Stilcharakter des Paldstinensers
hindurch. Diese unperiodische Satzbildung, diese einfachste Verkniipfiing
der Sdtze, die von dem reichen griechischen Partikelschatz zur Andeutung
ihrer logischen Beziehung keinen Gebrauch macht, diese Vorliebefdr Anti-
thesen unel Parallelismen, diese Umstdndlichkeit der Erzahlungsiceise und
Wortarmuth im Ausdruck, diese ganz hebrdisch-artige Wortstellung zeigen
nehr als einzelne Verstosse gegen griechisches Sprachgefuhl, die doch auch
nicht ganz fehlen, dass das Evangelium wohl griechisch geschrieben, aber
hcbrdisch gedacht ist. Die mit Vorliebe eingestreutcn aramdischen Aus-
driicke, die etymologisirende Deutung eines hebrdischen Namens (ix. 7) lassen
deutlich den Paldstinenser erkemuui, dem nach einigen seiner Citate selbst der
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. GO
John s sentences are short and weighty we may
say. the shorter the weightier. They are co-ordinat
ed, not subordinated. They follow each other by a
sort of constructive parallelism, or symmetrical and
rhythmical progression, after the manner of Hebrew
poetry. There is no dialectical process of argu
mentation, no syllogistic particles (like apa), no in
volved periods, as in Paul, but a succession of asser
tions which have the self-evidencing force of truth
as perceived by immediate intuition. Hence he
often uses the words StaaSai, ^cwjoeTv, tupaKivai,
/mapTvpia. Sometimes he moves by contrasts, or
antithetic parallelisms, without connecting links :
"The law was given by Moses: grace and truth
came by Jesus Christ" (i. 17); "~No one ever saw
God : the only begotten Son revealed him " (i. 18) ;
"Ye are from beneath : I am from above" (viii. 23);
" I am the vine : ye are the branches " (xv. 5).
John s ideas and vocabulary are limited ; but he
has a number of key-words of unfathomable depth
and transcendent height, and repeats them again and
again as " life," light," " truth," love." 1 He
Grundtext derheiligen Schrift nichtganz unbekannt gewesen zu sein sclieinl.
Das Leben Jesu, Berlin, 1882, Bd. i. 90.
1 %<*)Tj occurs 36 times in the Gospel (with the verb %f)v 16 times), <pwg
23 times, dXjfitia 25 times, aXrjSivog 9 times, oa 20 times (with
dode<r&u 24 times), p.ap-rvpia 14 times (with naprvpiiv 33 times).
yivwcr/ca> 55 times, Triarevav 98 times (but TTIGTIQ only in 1 John v. 4).
See Luthardt, i. 20 sq. (Gregory s translation); Godet, i. 227 (3d ed.).
Hase (Geschichte Jesu, 1876, p. 43) makes a striking remark on this repe-
titiousness of John : "Er ist nicht ein beweglicher, der Rede machtiger Geist,
sondern still und tief, festhangend an Wenigem; aber dieses Wenige ist das
Gottliche selbst. dem sein Sirmen und seine Liebe gilt, ein A dler der still in
der Hohe schicebt."
TO THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
kisses a divine and eternal meaning into these
terms, and hence he is never weary of them. God
himself, as revealed in Christ, is life, light, and love.
And what more can philosophy and theology say in
so few words? John likes grand antitheses, under
which he views the antagonistic forces of the world
as life and death, light and darkness, truth and
falsehood, belief and unbelief, love and hatred,
Christ and Antichrist, God and the Devil. On the
other hand, we look in vain in his Gospel for some
of the most important terms, as ck*icX))<n a, tvayytXiov,
jus-avoia, TrapajSoX//, aotyia, but the substance is there
in different form. lie uses few particles, but uses
them very often namely, KCU, & , d>, Vva, and espe
cially ovv, which with him is not syllogistic, but
marks simply the progress in the narrative or re
sumes the train of thought (like the German nun). 1
lie never employs the optative. He is fond of di
minutives (as traiSapiov, valuta, rcicv/a), and the last
word reported of him is the address, "Little chil
dren, love one another." He gives many circum
stantial details in his narratives, as in the healing of
the man born blind, whose character is drawn to the
life.
He alone applies the significant term " Logos"
(which means reason and speech, ratio and oratio)
to Christ as the revealer and interpreter of God ; 2
he calls him the "only begotten Son," "the Light of
1 The English Revision renders ovv usually by " therefore, but this is
heavy and pedantic in English. " So" and " then" would answer as well
in many cases, as in John iv. 5, 28 ; xiii. 6.
- John i. 1, 14 ; 1 John i. 1 ; comp. Rev. xix. 13.
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 71
the world," " the Bread of life," " the good Shep
herd," " the Vine " figures which have guided the
Church ever since in her meditations on Christ. He
uses the double CI/UT/V (verily) in the speeches of our
Lord. lie never calls the forerunner of Christ " the
Baptist," but simply " John." lie represents the
Holy Spirit as the "Paraclete" or Advocate who
pleads the cause of the believer here on earth, while
Christ, who is also called "Paraclete," represents him
at the throne of God. 1
Westcott calls the Gospel of John " the divine
Hebrew Epic," and says of his style : 2 " The sim
plicity, the directness, the particularity, the emphasis
of St. John s style, give his writings a marvellous
power, which is not perhaps felt at first. Yet his
words seem to hang about the reader till he is forced
to remember them. Each great truth sounds like
the burden of a strain, ever falling upon the ear
with a calm persistency which secures attention.
And apart from forms of expression with which all
are early familiarized, there is no book in the Bible
which has furnished so many figures of the Person
and Work of Christ which have passed into the
common use of Christians as the Gospel of St. John."
Luthardt 3 speaks of " the calmness and serenity "
which are spread over this marvellous book, and
reveal a soul that has reached peace and tranquil
lity at mature age after a long struggle with a fiery
1 John xiv. 16, 20 ; xv. 26 ; xvi. 7 ; 1 John ii. 1.
2 In his Introduction to the Study of the Gosjxlg, p. 278. Com p. the
remarks in his Com. on John, Introd. p. i.-iii.
3 Com. on John, i. 62 (Gregory s translation).
72
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
and violent temper. " We can see his natural char
acter in his short decisive sentences, his emphatic
way of building sentences, the want of connection
in his array of sentences, and in the use of contrasts
in his speech. His nature is not destroyed. It is
purified, brightened, raised to the truth, and so taken
into the service of the loved Master. It came to
rest on the bosom of Jesus, and found peace as his
own. The fire of youth has left its calm light and
its warm enthusiasm. It breathes through the most
quiet speech, and raises the language to the rhyth
mical beauty of Hebrew poetry and to a very hymn
of praise."
WORDS PECULIAR TO JOHN (i. <?., the Gospel and
the Epistles ; for the Apocalypse, see next para
graph) :
(hebraice*), v. 2; xix. 13, 17, 20;
xx. 1G (also in Rev. ix. 11; xvi.
K/ctJTEw, to pierce, xix. 37 (also
Rev. i. 7).
tfnropiov, merchandise, ii. 1G.
j, in the very act, viii. 4
(in the disputed pericope).
, sheath, xviii. 11.
Spknnct, cattle, iv. 12.
Kfp/j,a, money, ii. 15.
KpjuarioTi7f , money-changer, ii. 14.
5c, gardener, xx. 15.
, branch, xv. 2, 4. 5, G.
, taking rest, xi. 13.
Ko\v/j(3f]$pa, pool, v. 2, 4 (?), 7 ; ix.
7,11.
Kp&ivoQ , of barley (ctfT/.), vi. 9, 13.
XtVrior, towel, xiii. 4, 5.
\6y\r], spear, xix. 34.
to fish (rendered in A. V.
and K. V. " to go a-fishing >r ), xxi.
, from elsewhere, x. 1.
a\6r], aloe, aloe-wood (greatly prized
as a perfume), xix. 39.
[avaftapTTjTOQ, sinless ("without!
sin " in A. V. and R. V.), viii. 7.]
dvrXtd), to draw, ii. 8 ; iv. 7, 15.
dvT\r]fia, haustrum, a bucket, iv.
11.
(oppa^oc), seamless, xix.
23.
, to eat, vi. 13.
an old man (seiiex), iii. 4.
, to weep, xu 35.
, to be afraid, xiv. 27.
joa/Vrrt (so W. and Hort, but the
usual spelling is tfifxiiori), He
brew, or in the Hebrew tongue
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
fiij TIQ ; or ni]Tt ; any one ? iv. 33 ;
vii. 48.
/ti y/ia, mixture, xix. 39.
(VIKI], victory, 1 John v. 4.)
vnrrrjp, basin, xiii. 5.
[vooT/^a, disease, v. 4.]
vvaaw (vvrro), to pierce, xix. 34.
5su>, to stink, xi. 39.
TrapaK\r]TO(;, advocate, xiv. 16, 26;
xv. 26 ; xvi. 7 (of the Holy Spir
it); 1 John ii. 1 (of Christ).
irerSffOog, father-in-law, xviii. 13.
Tcpo<JKvvr]Ttic,, worshipper, iv. 23.
TTTvafia, spittle, ix. 6.
pgu, to flow, vii. 38.
JOHN IN HEBREW. The following faithful and
idiomatic translation of the Prologue to John s
GospeJ, by Professor Delitzsch, will illustrate the
Hebrew genius of his Greek style. It is from the
Hebrew New Testament, published by the British
and Foreign Bible Society (1880).
John i. 1-18.
EN dp%y f(v o Xoyof, Kai o 1
, leg, xix. 31, 32, 33.
aKTjvoTTijyia, least of tabernacles,
vii. 2.
rerpuprjvof;, vov, quadrimestris,
of four months, iv. 35.
n rXo, title, xix. 19, 20.
tyavoQ, lantern, xviii. 3.
QoiviZ, palm-tree, xii. 13 (also Rev.
vii. 9).
(ppayt\\iov, scourge, ii. 15.
, paper, 2 John 12.)
, brook, \rady, xviii. 1.
, to be angry, vii. 23.
a, unction, 1 John ii. 20, 27.)
, sop, xiii. 26, 27, 30.
2 rx rwrx^a
trnna ^rx
nx rnr;
n t xri
5
TGV 2
i{V rcpoQ TOV
Qtuq f(V o Xoyof .
Ovrog iiv Iv dpxy
Qtov.
Hurra di auTOV tyn iTO, Kai 3
X<optQ avrov i^ fvtTO ovdf ev 5
yeyovtv [or, iv. o y tyovkv iv].
Ev ctVTiji ^aj) i\v, Kai t} wr) fjv 4
al TO fy&Q iv TTJ GKOTIO. 00f(V6t, 5
/cat 77 (TKOTta avro ov
Bev.
7i THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
c nir sxn rx^ rn?~ -"
: :n
"prn
err *:^N
"i-xn rnrrx? x
: -" xrrbr nx n
tof , uvopa
TO ^>wf, o\\
/.taprvpjay Trepj rou
ixn ! *Hv TO $(*><; TO ci\T]$iv6v, o tyuiTi- 9
jufroy ei t; TOV Koa/.ior.
10 !"TT"!I " "T -b"* !"Pn db"i;"2 Ei r<p Kocrp<^ ?/j , Km o ArdfTjiioc 10
, "" i^in XD E5*"ri^ 2b"rn ?i ai TOu lytvtTOjKai oK^a^og
11 !-!?X "b -,rX ?X X2 Xin ! Els TO. i?ta i/X^ev, KOI ot Toot 11
I ? np2J? X? *?~"1 I."X avTov ov 7Tflp*Xo/3oi .
12 " ^3 *i. " r: "TX ZTSX^ni | "Oaot i tXafiov CIVTOV, tCioKfv 12
tti ro? t^oi crmv r^j-a Otov
ti t TO oi 0/.ia avTOv
13 ",*E~"2 X-" 2T2 X3 "l~"X 01 oi /c ^4 aijuarwr orct IK 13
ovct t/c
ug, a\X ts
15 x^p^ ^2? n^r-: li
irx x ? n nt nri^ i^x
Ka o Xoyof (rap^ iy^j ero, /cat 14
IV >/Uf, KTOt fc^fa-
aurov,
?rapd
Trarpoc, 7r\> jpr]Q ^dptTog /cat
papTi pti TTfpi ai TOt , 15
icat jct /cpayfv Xeyaii " Oi
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. <l>
: irn
10 nan ?:ss "rs-b x-bs s
; ncn-br
j/i ov tcTrov [ W. an<l II.: o
il TTdJvJ O OTTlffM /1(JV ift^OfJLt-
vor tftirpooJtv p.ov yiyovtv
OTl TTfitoTor fJLOV //V."
()TI tK TUU ir\T)fJWp.ciTO UIJTOU 10
iff* tic TTUVTCJ i\aftop.tv, KUI
\a(nv avn x< ifjtTor
n < j vouof cid ^luttiijuijr ft(;.j7j, 17
/ X ( l ! )l ~ Kitl / n^rj- titi tiu
itfirov Xpt*rroD tytVtro.
ovcttf iwpaiCEV TTiii-ort 18
o /uovoyti>//c wto j [ ^ ami II. :
HOVOyiVTIZ ^K ^ly <> i>>V tir
riv KO\7TOV THU TTarfJi i J, tKti-
18 c*ix FIX x~ -"" " xn rx
Trx ""-- -jan -^"~^
: r-T r; x-n -xn p^na
THE APOCALYPSE.
The Apocalypse differs in temper and style very
strikingly from the fourth Gospel and the first
Epistle of John. This fact has divided modern
critics who reject the traditional view of the iden
tity of authorship into two hostile camps the one
contending for the genuineness of the Gospel, 1 the
other with equal force for that of the Apocalypse."
1 So Schleiennacher and his followers, Ncamler. Lilcke, lileck, Do Wottc,
Meyer, also Ewald and Dilsterdieck. Mofct of them are disposed to assign
the Apocalypse to the mysterious " Prthbyter" John, whose very existence
is doubtful
* So Uaur, Kenan, and the whole Tubingen and Leyden school*, and
their followers in England (Davidson, and the author of "Supernatural
Religion"), who defend the Apocalypse as the genuine work of one of the
three pillars of the Jewish Christian party described by Paul (Gal. ii.),
while they surrender the Gospel as an ideal poem of an anonymous genius
of the second century.
76 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
The Apocalypse is as vehement and warlike as
the polemic Epistles of Paul. We hear the battle
cry and the shouts of victory. 1 It is the rolling of
thunder from the Son of Thunder. 2 But the Gospel
is as sharp and uncompromising in drawing the con
trast between Christ and his enemies. On the other
hand, the Apocalypse has pauses of repose and an
thems of peace. What can be more soothing and
calming than the description of the heavenly Jeru
salem ?
The Apocalypse, moreover, has a stronger Hebrew
coloring, and departs further from classical Greek,
than any book of the ]N r ew Testament. 3 But this
does not arise from ignorance ; on the contrary, with
all the irregularities and solecisms, the author shows
a remarkable command of the Greek vocabulary
and syntax. 4 The Hebraizing character is the natti-
1 The words "war" and "to make war," TroXf/uog and TroXtyitew, occur
more frequently in the Apocalypse than in any other book of the New
Test. See ii. 16; ix. 7. 9; xi. 7 ; xii. 7, 17 ; xiii. 5, 7; xvi. 14; xvii. 14;
xix. 11, 19; xx. 8.
2 " Un eternal roulement de tonnerre sort du trone. . . . Une sorte de
Uturfjie divine sepoursuit sang Jin" (Kenan, UAntechrist. p. 381).
3 W. IT. Guillemard (Hebraisms in the Greek Testament, 1879, p. 116)
says : " The deviations from grammatical correctness in the Apocalypse
are so violent and so astonishing as to defy explanation. Some few of
them may be traceable to Hebraic influences. The style of St. John Ln
the Gospel and Epistles is so remarkably pure so comparatively free from
Hebraism, or non-classical words and forms ; so much more like the lan
guage of the best Greek authors that these peculiarities are all the more
perplexing. They have given rise to innumerable speculations, ancient
and modern ; but no satisfactory explanation of them has hitherto been
found." Guillemard s judgment of the Greek of John s Gospel is incorrect.
See above, p. 67.
4 The most striking apparent irregularity occurs in i. 4 : OTTO "QN
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 77
ral result of the prophetical contents and the close
affinity to the books of Daniel and Ezekiel. The
classical Greek offered no precedent to this species
of literature. On the other hand, the Greek of the
fourth Gospel, although much purer in form, is yet,
as we have already seen, profoundly Hebrew in
spirit, and the absence of solecisms arises from the
avoidance of idiomatic expressions.
The difference between the two books, therefore,
lies more on the surface than in the deep. It is
largely neutralized by a striking agreement in lan
guage and thought, especially in the doctrine of
Christ, who is in both styled Logos, and represented
as the atoning Lamb and the conquering Lion,
combining gentleness and strength, innocence and
majesty in perfect harmony. The resemblance is
admitted by the master of the Tubingen school,
who calls the fourth Gospel the Apocalypse spir-
Kai 6 ijv Kctl 6 tpxo/jifvog, ; from Him who is and who was and who is to
come." But this is evidently a periphrasis of the divine name i"P!"n
(comp. Exod. iii. 14, Sept, : tyw t Ifii O "QN, and in the same verse O "UN
aTTfcrraX/cs /ZE irpbg wyuac), and the nominative reflects his eternal un-
changeableness ; hence we need neither insert TOV with Erasmus and the
textus receptus (against the authority of X A C P), nor supply TOV \tyo-
n tvov before 6 ojv. The great cod. B (cod. Yat. 1209) does not contain
the Apoc. ; but B of the Apoc. (cod. Vat. 20GG) has the passage, and reads
Srtov (BY) before 6 wv. Other Hebraisms are more easy, and not con
fined to the Apocalypse, as bvo^ara (names), for persons (iii. 4);
\if.Ta (CS> GhP5), instead of Kara, to make war against (ii. 16);
WTJJ (for wffa ) = ("ITI 33, "a living soul" (xvi. 3). Comp. for
further particulars the most recent discussion of this subject by Dr.
William Lee, in his Com. on the Revel. (1882, in Speaker s C*om.), pp. 454-
464. Lee accepts the identity of authorship of the fourth Gospel and
the Apocalypse.
78 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
itualized or transfigured. 1 He thinks that only a
post-apostolic writer could rise to such a superior
height. But why not much rather John himself \
If we assume that nearly a generation intervened
between the composition of the Apocalypse (A.D. 68
or 69) and that of the Gospel (about A.D. 90), the
identity of authorship comes certainly within the
reach of literary possibilities, and is not without
analogies. What a difference between the first and
the second part of Goethe s Faust, the undoubted
productions of one and the same poet the one
heated by the fiery passions of his youth, the other
reflecting the calm serenity of his old age. Similar
differences in style may be noted in Isaiah, Dante,
Shakespeare, Milton, and nearly all writers of great
genius and long experience.
WORDS PECULIAR TO THE APOCALYPSE :
the abyss, explained by the Greek
cnroXXvwv, the destroyer, ix. 11.
(Hebrew " HX, destruc
tion), the name of the angel of
1 Baur, Die Evangelien, p. 380 . " Man kann mit Rccht sayen, das vierte
Evanyelium sei die vergeistiyte Apokalypse" And in his Gesch. der christl.
Kirche, vol. i. p. 147, he says: " Man kann nur die tiefe Genialitdt undfeine
Kunst bewundern, mit icelcher der Evanyelist die Elemente, welche vom Stand-
punkt der Apokalypse auf den freiern und Iwhem des Evanyeliums hinuber-
leiteten, in sich anfyenommen hat, urn die Apokalypse zum Evanfjelium zu
veryeistiyen. Nur vom Standpunkt des Evanyeliunis aus Idsst sich das Ver-
haltniss, in das sich der Verfasser desselben zu der Apokalypse setzte, richtvj
begreifen" Weiss turns this confession against Baur, and says most
admirably (Leben Jesu, i. 101): " Ja, das Evanyelium ist die veryeistiyle
Apokalypse, aber nicht weil ein Geistesheros des ziceiten Jahrhunderts dem
Apokalyptiker yefolyt ist, sondern weil der Donnersohn der Apokalypse
unter der Leitung des Geistes und unter den ydttlichen Fiihrunyen zum
Mystiker verklart und heranyercift ist, in dem die Flammen der Juyend zur
Gluth einer heiliyen Liebe herabycddmpft sind,"
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
79
TO *A\0a Kai TO ""Q (Westcott and
Hort ; TO X0a Kai TO w, Tisch-
endorf, ed. viii.), " The Alpha and
the Omega" (the first and the last
letters in the Greek alphabet), or
the Beginning and the End. A
name applied to God or Christ, as
a symbol of eternal divinity, three
times i. 8; xxi. G; xxii. 13 (in
the text. rec. also i. 11) ; comp. a
similar designation of Jehovah
(" the first and the last"), Isa. xli.
4; xliv. 6.
dX\t]\ovia, alleluia ( Hebrew
FP~ >! lbbi~l), i.e. praise ye Jehovah.
xix. 1, 3, 4, 6. Comp. Ps. civ. 35.
aTToXXtwy, Apollyon (i. e. Destroy
er), ix. 11.
dpKoc; (so Tischend., \V. and Hort,
for tipKTOQ of the text, rec.), a
bear, xiii. 2.
/3a<raj t<Tjuof , torment, ix. 5; xiv. 11 ;
xviii. 7, 10, 15.
/3drprt%0, frog, xvi. 13.
flrjpvXXoQ, beryl (a precious stone
of sea-green color), xxi. 20.
(3i(3\ap(Ciov, a little book, x. 2, 8, 9,
10. In ver. 8, W. and H. read
(3if3\iov.
(3i>Tpv, cluster (of grapes), xiv. 18.
fiuaaivog, byssine, of fine linen, xviii.
12, 10 ; xix. 8 (/SiWoc, fine linen,
occurs xviii. 12 in text. rec. for
PVGVLVOG, and also in Luke xvi.
19).
, dragon, xii. 3, 4, 7, 13, 1C,
17 ; xiii. 2, 4, 11 : xvi. 13 ; xx. 2.
xpiw, to anoint, iii. 18.
KtvTtw, to pierce, i. 7 (also John
xix. 37).
oc, miserable, iii. 17 (the corn-
par. tXttivoTtpoi in 1 Cor. xv.
19).
, building, xxi. 18.
tot, six hundred, xiii. 18.
, jasper, iv. 3.
, a curse (for the text. rec.
xxii. 3.
, to seal, v. 1.
f //a, heat, vii. 1C ; xvi. 9.
lavvvfJii (KtpctwiHi)^), to mix (wine
with water), to pour out, to fill (a
cup with the wine already pre
pared), xiv. 10; xviii. G.
{//, barley, vi. 6.
rtXXo, to be as crystal, xxi.
11.
Kpv(TTaXXo, crystal, iv. C ; xxii. 1.
KvicXuStv, round about, iv. 3, 4, 8 ; v.
11.
Xi/3avwro, censer, viii. 3. 5.
XiTrapoc, dainty, xviii. 14.
liaZ,oQ, breast (for fiaoToc), i. 13.
, marble, xviii. 12.
u, to gnaw, xvi. 10.
3, thigh, xix. 16.
6/xiXog, company, xviii. 17.
op/i?//*a, violence, xviii. 21.
opvtor, bird, xviii. 2; xix. 17, 21.
ovpa, tail, ix. 10, 19; xii. 4.
7Tc<paXic, leopard, xiii. 2.
sw, to bind about, xi. 44.
, garment down to the foot
ii/), i. 13.
gw, to make war, ii. 16 ; xii. 7 ;
xiii. 4; xvii. 14; xix. 11 (only
once besides in Jas. iv. 2).
irvpivoQ, of fire, ix. 17.
TrvppoQ, red, vi. 4 ; xii. 3.
peSa, chariot, xviii. 13.
puTrrtpei Ojuai, to be filthy, xxii. 11.
(TaX7riOT//t;> trumpeter, xviii. 22.
so
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
<ra7r$(|0oc, sapphire, xxi. 19.
cdpdiog, adpdiov, sardius, iv. 3 (for
cdpCivoc} , xxi. 20.
aapdowZ, sardonyx, xxi. 20.
aefiifiaXig, fine flour, xviii. 13.
, iron, xviii. 12.
, emerald, xxi. 19.
(TTpijvoc, luxury, xviii. 3.
cr0aw, (T^drrw, to slay, v. 6, 9. 12;
vi. 4, 9 ; xiii. 3, 8 ; xviii. 24 (also
3 John iii. 12).
ToXavriaioQ (adj.), weighing a tal
ent, xvi. 21.
rcoy, bo\v, vi. 2.
roirduov, topaz, xxi. 20.
VO.KIV&OQ, jacinth, xxi. 20.
vdXivoc;, of glass, iv. 6 ; xv. 2.
, glass, xxi. 18, 21.
<pap/j.aKtvc, (pappaKuc;, sorcerer, xxi.
8,15.
%a\Ki]cd)v, chalcedony, xxi. 19.
X\tapoc, lukewarm, iii. 16.
\>t QctKoaioi it,i]KovTa t, six
hundred and sixty-six, xiii. 18.
The mystical number of the
beast. Irenaeus already mentions
another reading, 616. It is re
markable that both numbers-give
the name Nero (ji) Cwsar (666
the Hebrew *1D5 "p" 1 .?, 616 = the
Latin Nero Ccesar~).
%, measure, vi. 6.
, chrysolite, xxi. 20.
, chrysoprase, xxi. 20.
, to deck, xvii. 4 ; xviii. 16.
Q, Omega, i. 8 ; xxi. 6 ; xxii. 13.
THE EVIDENTIAL VALUE OF THE LANGUAGE OF THE
GREEK TESTAMENT.
The idiosyncrasies of the New Testament writers
furnish a strong argument for the apostolic author
ship. They differ in vocabulary and style, as well
as in the depth and power of thought, from all the
preceding and all the succeeding authors. The
Christian Church has always felt this, and hence
has given to the New Testament a conspicuous
isolation among religious books.
The Apostolic Fathers, so called (Clement of
Rome, Polycarp, Ignatius), and the Apologists of
the second century (Justin Martyr and others), be
long to another generation of Christians ; their
Greek has no more the informing Hebrew spirit
and coloring of men born and bred on the soil of
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 81
the old dispensation ; they allude to secular and
ecclesiastical surroundings which did not exist in
the apostolic age, and altogether they breathe a dif
ferent atmosphere. The epistle of Clement to the
Corinthians, and that of Polycarp to the Philippians,
come nearest to the epistles of Paul and John, but
even they are separated from them by a very great
distance. Barnabas, Ignatius, Hennas, Papias, Jus
tin Martyr are still further off, and bear no com
parison with the apostles and evangelists. As to
the apocryphal, compared with the canonical, Gos
pels, the difference between them is as between
night and day.
IS r o transition in the history of the Church is so
sudden, abrupt, and radical as that from the apos
tolic to the post-apostolic age. They are separated
by a clear and sharp line of demarcation. The Chris
tian spirit is the same in kind, yet with an astonish
ing difference in degree; it is the difference between
inspiration and illumination, between creative genius
and faithful memory, between the original voice and
the distant echo, between the clear gushing fountain
from the rock and the turbid stream. God himself
has established an impassable gulf between his own
life-giving word and the writings of mortal men,
that future ages might have a certain guide and
standard in finding the way of salvation. The
apostolic age is the age of miracles, and the New
Testament is the life and light of all subsequent
ages of the church.
6
CHAPTER SECOND.
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
Literature on the Sources of the Text and on Textual Criticism
of the New Testament.
I. PROLEGOMENA TO THE CKITICAL EDITIONS.
Jo. JAC. WETSTKIN : H Kaivf) AiaSijicr]. Novum Testamentum Grcecum
editionis receptce cum Icctionibus variant ibus, etc, Amstel. 1751-52, 2 torn,
fol. Prolegomena in torn. i. pp. 1-222; torn. ii. pp. 3-15, 449-454, 741-
743.
Jo. JAC. GRIESBACII: Novum Testamentum Greece. Ed. secunda. liaise
Sax. et Loncl. 1796-1806, 2 vols. 8vo. Ed. tertiam emend, ct auctam cur.
David Schulz (vol. i. Berolini, 1827). Prafationes ct Prolegomena (vol. i.
pp. iii.-lvi., i.-cxxvii.). Also his Symbolic Critical (1785-93), with his
Mektemata, and Commentarius Criticus in Textum Grcecum N. T. (1798
and 1811).
I. MART. AUGUSTIN. SCHOLZ : N. T. Gr. Textum adfidem testium criti-
corum recensuit, etc. Lips. 1830-36, 2 vols. 4to. Prolegg. vol. i. pp. i.-clxxii. ;
vol. ii. pp. i.-lxiii. Also his Biblisch-Kritische Raise, Leipzig u. Sorau. 1823.
CAR. LACIIMANN: Novum Testamentum Greece et Latine. Berolini,
1842 and 1850, 8vo ; Prcefatio, vol. i. pp. v.-lvi. ; vol. ii. pp. iii.-xxvi.
Comp. also Lachmann s article in explanation and defence of his critical
system, in the Theol. Studien und Kritiken for 1830, No. IV. pp. 817-845.
AENOTII. ( Germ. LOBEGOTT ) FRID. CONST. TISCIIENDORF : Novum
Testamentum Greece. Ad antiquissimos testes denuo recensuit, apparatum
criticum omni studio perfecium apposuit. comment ationem isagogicam pra-
tcxuit. Editio septima. Lips. 1859, 2 vols. 8vo. Prolegomena, vol. i.
pp. xiii.-cclxxviii. The text of this edition is superseded by the editio
octava critica maior (Lips. 1869-72, 2 vols.). The new Prolegomena, which
the author did not live to finish, have been prepared by Dr. Gregory, with
the aid of Dr. Ezra Abbot, and are now in course of publication at Leipsic,
When published, they will supersede the Prolegg. of the 7th ed.
SAMUEL PRIPEAUX TREGELLES : The Greek New Testament, edited
from A ncicnt Authorities, with the Latin Version of Jerome, from the Codex
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. So
Amiatinus, London, published in parts from 1857 to 1879, 1 vol. 4 to.
The 7th part (published in 1879, after the death of Dr. Tregelles) contains
the Prolegomena, with Addenda and Corrigenda, compiled and edited by
Rev. Dr. Hort and Rev. A. W. Streane. Other works of Tregelles, see
below, sub II.
HENRY ALFORD : The Greek Testament. London. 6th ed. 1868, etc.;
Prolegomena, vol. i. chs. vi. and vii. pp. 73-148. See also vols. ii.-iv.
WESTCOTT and HOKT: Introduction and Appendix to their New Testa
ment in Greek, forming a separate vol., Cambridge and London, 1881.
Amer. ed. (from English plates), New York (Harpers), 1882. Dr. Hort
prepared the In trod, and Append. They are of the greatest value.
II. SPECIAL WORKS ON TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
SAM. PRID. TREGELLES: An Account of the Printed Text of the Greek
New Testament, with Remarks on its Revision upon Critical Principles.
London (Bagster & Sons), 1854. By the same: Introduction to the
Textual Criticism of the New Test. London, 1860. This is a separate
reprint of the first part of the fourth volume of Home s Introd., 10th ed.
London, 1856; with "Additions" and "Postscript" in the llth ed. 18GO,
14th ed. 1877. Very valuable.
SAMUEL DAVIDSON : A Treatise on Biblical Criticism, Exhibiting a Sys
tematic View of that Science. Edinb. and London, 1852, 2 vols. The sec
ond vol. treats of the New Test.
J. SCOTT PORTER : Principles of Text. Criticism. Lond. 1848 (pp. 515).
AB. KUENEN : Critices et Hermeneutices N. T. Lineamenta. L. Bat. 1858.
ED. REUSS: Btbliotheca Novi Testamenti Greed. Brunsvigte, 1*72
(pp. 318). The most complete list of all the printed editions of the Greek
Testament, supplemented in this book. See below.
FR. H. AMBROSE SCRIVENER: A Plain Introduction to the Criticism
of the New Testament, 1861 ; 2d ed., thoroughly revised, Cambridge and
London, 1874 (607 pages); 3d ed. in press (1882). Upon the whole the
best separate work on the subject in the English language. Comp. also
Scrivener s Six Lectures on the Text of the New Testament, Cambridge and
London, 1875 ; his Collation of about Twenty Greek MSS. of the Holy
Gospels, deposited in the British Museum, etc., with a Critical Introduction,
Cambridge. 1853; his Exact Transcript of the Codex Avgiensis, to which
is added a Full Collation of Fifty Manuscripts, with a Critical Introduc
tion (the latter also issued separately), Cambridge, 1859, 8vo ; and his
Collation of the Codex Sinaiticus with the Received Text of the New Testa
ment, Cambridge, 2d ed. 1867.
84: MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
THOMAS SHELDON GREEN: A Course of Developed Criticism on Passages
of the N. T. materially affect.ed by Various Readings. London (S. Bagster
& Sons), no date, but published in 1856.
C. E. HAMMOND : Outlines of Textual Criticism Applied to the Xew
T(siament. Oxford, 1872; 2d ed. 187G ; 3d ed. 1880.
EDWARD C. MITCHELL : Critical Handbook to the Xew Testament.
London and Andover. 1880 (the part on textual criticism, pp. 67-143,
revised by EZRA ABBOT); French translation, Paris, 1881. Very brief,
but. convenient.
GEORGE E. MERRILL: The Story of the Manuscripts. Boston, 1881,
ud ed. Popular.
III. CRITICAL INTRODUCTIONS TO THE NEW TESTAMENT.
The Critical Introductions usually incorporate an account of the written
and printed text of the New Test., and discuss the principles of criticism.
So EICHHORN, MICHAKLIS (ed. by HERBERT MARSH, Lond. 1823, 6 vols.),
HUG, DE WETTE, BLEEK (3d ed.), KEUSS (5th ed. 1874, ii. 351-420),
and HORNE (in the 14th ed. of the 4th vol., which was prepared by
TIIEGELLES, 1856 and 1860, see above, sub II.).
IV. ARTICLES ON BIBLE TEXT.
TISCIIENDORF and VON GEBHARDT, in Herzog s Real-Encyk. (new ed.
ii. 400-437); translated and revised by Dr. EZRA ABBOT for* Schaff s
" Relig. Encycl." 1882, vol. i. 268 sqq.
Canon WESTCOTT in Smith s Diet, of the Bible (vol. iii. 2112-2139,
Amer. ed. by Hackett and Abbot).
Dr. FREDERIC GARDINER (Prof, in the Berkeley Divinity School,
Middletown, Conn.) : The Principles of Textual Criticism, in the " Biblioth.
Sacra" of Andover for April, 1875, reprinted and revised as an Appendix
to his Harmony of the Four Gospds in Greek, Andover, 1876 and 1880.
Two essays of Dr. EZRA ABBOT (Prof, in Cambridge, Mass.) : one in
Anglo -American Bible Revision, Philadelphia, 2d ed. 1879 (pp. 86-98),
twice reprinted in London, 1880; and another in The New Revision and its
Study (reprinted from " The Sunday-School Times"), Phila. 1881 (pp. 5-37 ;
reprinted in part in Dr. B. II. Kennedy s Ely Lectures on the Revised Ver
sion of the N. T., London, 1882, pp. 91-100).
The Revision of 1881 has called forth a large number of essays on the
subject in nearly all the leading English and American Reviews, notably
among them the attacks of Dean BURGON in three articles in the London
" Quarterly Review " for Oct. 1881, and Jan. and April, 1882 ; with replies
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 15 O
from Dr. W. SANDAY in the " Contemporary Review" for Dec. 1881 ; Canon
FAKRAK, ibid. March, 1882; from an anonymous writer in "The Church
Quarterly Review," London, for Jan. 1882 ; from Prof. B. B. WARFIELD in
the "Presbyterian Quarterly Review," N.York, for April, 1882; from r.vo
members of the New Testament (English) Company (supposed to bn
Bishop ELLICOTT and Archdeacon PALMER) in The Rtcisers and the GretL-
Text of the New Testament, London, 1882, etc., etc.
SOURCES OF THE TEXT.
The text of the Ne\v Testament is derived from
three sources Greek Manuscripts, ancient Transla
tions, and Quotations of the Fathers and other
ancient writers. The Manuscripts are the most di
rect, and hence the most important, source ; although
in special cases the other two may be of equal im
portance. The concurrent testimony of all three
sources is conclusive.
The original autographs 1 of the apostolic writers,
whether written by themselves or dictated to clerks, 2
are lost beyond all reasonable hope of discovery.
They are not even mentioned by the post-apostolic
authors as being extant anywhere, or as having been
seen by them. 3 They perished probably before the
1 Autogrophct, c tp^rvTra, ISio^fipa.
2 Xotarii, amanuenses, raxuypo^ot, KaXXiypatyoi. Such are mentioned
or implied, Rom. xvi. 22 ; 1 Cor. xvi. 21 ; Col. iv. 18 ; Gal. vi. 11 ; 2 Thess.
iii. 17. A distinction was made between the notarius, or the rapid writer,
the librariiis, or calligraphisf, the beautiful writer, who carefully trans
cribed the first copy, and the corrector, who answered to our modern
proof-reader.
3 Tertullian (De Prcescr. IIce,r. c. 36), with his usual rhetorical fervor,
points the heretics to " the apostolic churches in which the very thrones
of the apostles still preside in their places (cathedra: apostolorum suis locis
pr&sident}, in which their own authentic letters are read (apud quas ipsw
authenticte litterce eorum recitantur), uttering the voice and representing
80 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
close of the first century, or soon after they were
published, that is, copied and distributed. The apos
tles and evangelists did not write on Babylonian
bricks, or Sinaitic rocks, or Egyptian walls, or stones,
or tablets of wood or brass, but on paper, with the
reed-pen and ink. 1 The paper then in common use
was made of Egyptian papyrus (hence our word
paper), and very brittle and perishable. 2 Jerome
the face of every one of them." These "authentic letters" or writings
may be either the autographs, or the Greek originals as distinct from
translations, or genuine and complete copies as opposed to the mutilated
copies of the heretics (e.y. Marcion s Luke); but in any case the testimony
is too isolated and rhetorical to be entitled to credit. Ircmous. Avho wrote
twenty years earlier (about A.D. 180), knew different copies with two dif
ferent readings of the mystical number in Apoc. xiii. 18. without being
able to appeal to John s autograph (Adv. Hcer. v. 30. 1); and Origen
knew no older text of the Gospel of John than the copy of Heracleon
(In Joli. torn. xiii. 11). The knowledge of the autographs seems to have
vanished with the autographs themselves. How few of the MSS. of mod
ern books are preserved after they have been used by the printer. See
TLschcndorf, in Herzog, ii. 400; Tregclles, in Home, iv. 24; Scrivener,
].. 440.
1 These three writing materials are mentioned in 2 John 12; 3 John 13 ;
2 Cor. iii. 3 : o ^apr^e (Lat. chart a), a leaf of paper, made of the layers
of papyrus, o KaXa/iot,* (calamus ), the reed-pen, and TO fitXav (neuter
snbst. from /isXae, black), the ink (atramentuiri). The best qualities of
paper used for letter-writing were called by the Romans chart a Augusta,
from their emperor; Liviana, from his wife; Saitica, etc. See Pliny s
Nat. Hist. xiii. 12 (23, 24).
" The papyrus (from the Egyptian papu) is a water-plant or reed
which was abundantly cultivated in the valley of the Nile, especially the
Delta (but not now), and which still grows freely in Sicily, on the Lake
of Merom in Palestine, the Niger, and the Euphrates. The paper was
made of slices of its stem. All the Egyptian books, even of the earliest
Pharaonic times, are written on such paper; in Europe it came into
common use at the time of Alexander the Great, and prevailed till the
tenth century, when cotton and linen paper took its place.
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 87
mentions that in his day the library of Pamphilus
of Cgesarea, which then was not a century old, was
already partially destroyed. All ancient books
written on that material have perished, with the
exception of the papyrus rolls that were accidentally
preserved in Egyptian tombs and mummies, or un
der the ashes of Mount Vesuvius at Ilerculaneum
(since 79). 1 Parchment, 2 made from the skin of
animals, is far more costly and durable, and was
used for the manuscripts of the Pentateuch in the
time of Josephus, but not for ordinary purposes ;
we have no MSS. of the Hebrew Scriptures older
than the tenth century, 3 and no parchment copies
of the s"ew Testament older than the fourth. The
"parchments" which Paul ordered were probably
sacred books of the Old Testament. 4
God has not chosen to exempt the Bible from the
fate of other books, but has wisely left room for the
1 The papyri of Egypt arc well preserved, and contain poems, novels,
prayers for the dead, etc. Those of Herculaneum have suffered much
from the eruption of Vesuvius, and are of little account if we judge from
the specimens which have been unrolled, and published in 15 vols. fol.
2 The name (Fr. parchemin, from Pergamenci) is derived from the city
of Pergamum in Asia Minor, and the invention is traced to Eumenes, King
of Pergamum, 197-159 B.C., but skins of animals were so used long before
that time. The common parchment is prepared from sheepskins; the finer
variety, called vellum, from the skins of young calves, goats, and antelopes.
3 The oldest MS. known is the MS. of the Prophets with the Baby
lonian punctuation, from the year A.D. 916; the oldest complete MS. of
the Hebrew Bible, preserved in the library of St. Petersburg, dates from
A.D. 1009. See Dillmann, in Herzog, ii. 397.
4 1 Tim. iv. 13. Paul ordered his cloak (0e\or7/7 ) ; and the books (TO.
ia, probably papyrus rolls), and especially the parchments (rag
88 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
diligence and research of man, who is responsible
for the use of all the facilities within his reach for
the study of the Bible. He has not provided for
inspired transcribers any more than inspired print
ers, nor for infallible translators any more than
infallible commentators and readers. He wastes no
miracles. He desires free and intelligent worship
pers. " The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth
life." " It is the spirit that quickeneth ; the flesh
profited), nothing : the words that I have spoken
unto you are spirit and are life." The Bible, in its
origin and history, is a human as well as a divine
book, and must be studied under this twofold aspect.
It is the incarnation of God s truth, and reflects the
divine-human person of Christ, to whom it bears
witness as the Alpha and Omega, as the Way, the
Life, and the Truth. Even if we had the apostolic
autographs, there would be room for verbal criticism
and difference in interpretation, since they, like
other ancient books, were probably written as a
continuous whole, without accents, with little or no
punctuation, without division of sentences or words
(except to indicate paragraphs), without titles and
subscriptions, without even the name of the author
unless it was part of the text itself. " Spirit " may
be the human spirit, or the Divine Spirit (the Holy
Ghost), and the distinction which we mark by cap
italizing the first letter cannot be decided from an
uncial manuscript where all letters are capital.
The punctuation, likewise, can be determined not
by manuscript authority, but only by the meaning
of the context, and is often subject to doctrinal
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 89
considerations, as notably so in the famous passage
affecting the divinity of Christ, Icom. ix. 5, which
admits of three, if not seven, different punctuations
and constructions. 1
The first and second generation of Christians
must not be judged after our modern standard.
Twenty years elapsed before the first book of the
New Testament was written. The spoken word,
which carries with it the magnetic power of per
sonality, was the chief instrument of promoting
Christianity (as it is to-day in heathen lands). 2
The disciples of the apostles continued to live in
the element of their living teaching and example.
Hence there are but few literal quotations from the
New Testament in the scanty writings of the Apos
tolic Fathers and Apologists down to the middle of
the second century. The} 7 had no bibliographical
curiosity ; they cared more for the substance than
the form ; they expected, at least most of them, the
speedy end of the world, when Christ himself would
1 Much has been written on this passage. The doctrinal question in
volved is whether Paul calls Christ God, or not ; in other words, whether
3re ot; refers to the preceding 6 Xjoiorof , or to God the Father. The A. V.
and the R. V. (in text) take the former view. The R. V., however,
recognizes the other construction in the margin. The whole subject has
been ably and exhaustively discussed on both sides by two members of
the American Revision Committee, Dr. Dwight and Dr. Abbot, in the
Journal of the Society of Biblical Lit. and Exeyesis for 1881, Middletown,
Conn., 1882, pp. 22-55 and 87-154.
2 Clement of Alexandria records the curious and almost incredible tradi
tion that when the Romans requested Mark to write his Gospel from the
.lips of the apostle Peter, he neither hindered nor encouraged it, as if in
his estimation it was a matter of little importance. Euseb. //. E. vi. 14;
see the note of Heinichen, i. 279.
90 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
appear in glory ; their chief concern was to prove
the power of Christ s teaching by holy living and
dying.
But this fact, of course, does not detract one iota
from the inestimable value of the primitive text
and the extreme importance of its restoration. For
us the written or printed New Testament is the
only reliable substitute for the personal teaching of
Christ and his apostles.
In the absence of the autographs, we must depend
upon copies, or secondary sources. But these are,
fortunately, far more numerous and trustworthy for
the Greek Testament than for any other book of
antiquity. "In the variety and fulness of the evi
dence on which it rests, the text of the New Testa
ment stands absolutely and unapproachably alone
among ancient prose writings." ] " In all classical
literature," says Tischendorf, " there is nothing
which even distantly may be compared in riches
with the textual sources of the New Testament." 2
Of some of the first Greek and Roman classics barely
half a dozen manuscript copies have come down to
us; while of the Greek Testament we have hundreds
of copies, besides many ancient translations and
innumerable patristic quotations.
For all intents and purposes, then, the New Testa
ment has been preserved to the Christian world by
its own intrinsic value, and by a Providence which
is equal to a miracle, without violating the ordinary
laws of history or superseding human exertion.
1 Westcott and Hort, Gr. Test. p. 561.
a Die Sinaibibel, p. 73.
SPECIMENS OF THE CHIEF MSS. OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
t
5 V_J
5-
Codex VATICAXUS: Fourth Century. Mark xvi. 8.
raaiQ Kai ovCtin ov \ ctv ti-ov ityopwv \ TO yap : |
Kara \ papKOV.
(The accents and breathings are by a later hand.)
Codex ALEXANDBINUS : Fifth Century. John i. 1.
Ev apx 1 ! n v ^y KaioXoyog rj \ Trpoc TOV ^[tQ^i KaiS\_eo^c i]i> o Xoyog.
H \rXnH
Codex CLAROMONTANUS : Sixth Century ; Greek Text. 1 Cor. xiii. 8.
r) aycnrr] \ ovcl/rore iKTriT
.CXTilTXS
u nr q iLixrh exc i d e 7
Codex CLAKOMONTANUS : Sixth Century; Latin Text. 1 Cor. xiii. 8.
caritas j numquam excidet
OK KAH GI*N
Toyicy
Codex LAUDIANUS : Sixth Century ; Greek Text. Acts xx. 28.
TT]V tKK\t]<JtaV \ TOV
to
o s
o ^
E 11
H II
O ?
ll
roy
ntury. John xv.
C
v
Six
V X
>
h
John i. 18
TOV
11
t e
It:
"
r
ir
x
3
/C/l 1
01
\ure
. of
]s
known MS.
utem d[eu
0)
co s
33
SI
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 93
GENERAL CHARACTER OF MANUSCRIPTS. 1
Before the invention of the art of printing that
is, before the middle of the fifteenth century books
could be multiplied only by the laborious and costly
process of transcription. This was the work of
slaves, professional scribes, and monks. For the
preservation of the priceless treasures of ancient
Greek and Roman literature, and the apostolic and
1 The art of reading ancient MSS. and determining their age and value
is a special science, called diplomatics, and, in a wider sense, palaeography.
The founder of it is Jean Mabillon, of the Benedictine order, in his De Re
Diplomatica, Paris, 1681, fol. ; with a supplement, 1704; new ed. 1789, 2
vols. fol. The most important work on diplomatics is the Nouveau traite
de diplomatique, par deux reliyieux benedictins [Toustain and Tassin],
Par. 1750-65, G vols. 4to. The principal works on Greek palaeography
are : Montfaucon, Palceographia, Grccca, sive de ortu et progressu littera-
rum Grcecarum, Par. 1708, fol. ; Bast, Commentatio PaloBographica, ap
pended to G. H. Schaefer s edition of Gregorius Corinthius De Dialectis,
Leipz. 1811; Silvestre, PaUoyraphie unicerselle, Par. 1839, fol., torn. ii.
(splendid fac-similes) ; Westwood, PaldBographia Sacra Pictoria, Lond.
1843; Wattenbach, Anleitung zur griech. PalceograpJiie, 2d ed. Leipz.
1877, 4to, and 12 plates, fol. ; id., Schrifttafeln zur Gesch. der griech.
Sclirift und zum Stud turn der griech. Palceogr., 2 vols., Berl. 1876-77, fol. ;
Wattenbach and A. von Velsen, Exempla Codicum Grcecorum litt. minusc.
scriptorum, Heidelb. 1878, fol., 50 photogr. plates; " Paloeographical So
ciety of London." Fac-similes of Ancient MSS., edited by Bond and
Thompson, Parts i.-xi., Lond. 1873-81, fol., still continued ; Wattenbach,
Das Schriftivesen im Mittelalter, 2d ed. Leipz. 1875, 8vo (an excellent
work); Gardthausen, Griechische Pal(KOfjraphie^ Leipz. 1879, large 8vo
(the most important recent treatise).
A good compendious introduction to Latin palaeography is Wattcnbach s
Anleitung zur lat. Palwoff?:, 3d ed. Leipz. 1878, 4to (90 pages). L. A.
Chassant s Diet, des abreviations lat. et franqaises, 3 e ed. Par. 1866, 16mo,
is very helpful in reading Latin MSS. or earl) 7 printed books. Comp. also
the great works of Wailly, Elements de paleographie ; Zangemeister and
Wattenbach s Exempla Codicum Latinorum, etc.
91 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
patristic writings, the world is chiefly indebted to
the monks of the Middle Ages.
" The hand that wrote doth moulder in the tomb ;
The book abideth till the day of doom."
The manuscripts of the Greek Testament have
come down to us not in continuous rolls, like those
of the Hebrew Scriptures and the Egyptian and
Herculaneum papyri, but in ordinary book form of
folio, quarto, or octavo, or smaller size, in sheets
folded and stitched together. Hence they are called
Codices. 1 The pages are usually broken into two,
very rarely into three or four columns.
The number of MSS. now known is over seven
teen hundred, including all classes, and is gradually
increasing with discoveries in ancient libraries and
convents, especially in the East. But many of them
have not yet been properly examined and utilized
for textual criticism. 2
They differ in age, extent, and value. They were
written between the fourth and sixteenth centuries;
1 Codex, or caudex, means, originally, the trunk of a tree, stock, stem ;
then a block oficood split or sawn into planks, leaves, or tablets (tabeUai),
and fastened together ; hence a book, as the ancients wrote on tablets of
wood smeared with wax, the leaves being laid one upon another. The
word was afterwards applied to books of paper and parchment.
2 The total number of MSS. recorded by Dr. Scrivener, including
Legionaries, is 158 uncials and 1G05 cursives {Introduction, p. 269, comp.
p. x.). But his list is incomplete. He gives an Index of about 1277
separate Greek MSS. of the New Testament, arranged according to the
countries where they are now deposited (pp. 571-584). He assigns 3 to
Denmark, 293 to England, 238 to France, 96 to Germany, 6 to Holland,
3 to Ireland, 368 to Italy, 81 to Russia, 8 to Scotland, 23 to Spain, 1 to
Sweden, 14 to Switzerland, 104 to Turkey, 39 unknown. See also Edward
C. Mitchell, Critical Handbook, Tables viii. ix. and x.
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 9o
the oldest date from the middle of the fourth cen
tury, and rest, of course, on still older copies. Few
manuscripts of Greek or Roman classics are older
than the ninth or tenth century. The Medicean
MS. of Vergilius (Virgil) is of the fourth century,
the Vatican MS. of Dion Cassius of the fifth. The
oldest MSS. of /Eschylus and Sophocles date from
the tenth, those of Euripides from the twelfth, those
of the Annals of Tacitus from the eleventh century
(Mediceus I. for the first half, and Mediceus II. for
the second half). The oldest complete copy of
Homer is from the thirteenth century, though con
siderable papyrus fragments have been recently dis
covered which may date from the fifth or sixth. Of
the Meditations of the Emperor Marcus Aurelius
only one complete MS. is known to exist, that in
the Vatican library, and it has no title, and no in
scriptions of the several books ; the other Vatican
and three Florentine MSS. contain only extracts of
the imperial book.
It is not impossible, though not very probable, that
MSS. of the Kew Testament may yet be discovered
that are older than any now known. But we must
remember that the last and most cruel persecution
of the Church under Domitian in the beginning of
the fourth century was especially destructive of
Bibles, which were correctly supposed to be the
main feeders of the Christian religion.
Some MSS. cover the whole New Testament,
some only parts; and hence they are divided into
five or six classes, according as they contain the
Gospels, or the Acts, or the Catholic Epistles, or the
96 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
Pauline Epistles, or the Apocalypse, or only the
Scripture lessons from the Gospels or Acts and
Epistles (the lectionaries). Those which cover more
than one of these classes, or the whole Xew Testa
ment, are numbered in the lists two, three, or more
times. The Gospel MSS. are the most numerous,
those of the Apocalypse the least numerous. Some
MSS. are written with great care, some contain many
errors of transcribers ; no one is free from error any
more than a printed book. Many of them are orna
mented with illustrations and pictures. Words of
frequent occurrence are usually abridged, as rr =
fioe (God), Ka = Ki>pio (Lord), w woe_(on), t(T
Irj(TOU (Jesus), ^o- = Xptoroe (Christ), 7rr]p =
(Father), 7rva = 7rvzv/uLa (Spirit); also arjp for
(Saviour), avoc; for avSpwirot; (man), and ovvov for
ovpavoQ (heaven). 1 Most of them give the Greek
text only, a few the Latin version also (hence called
codices Itilinyues or GrcBCO-Latini), e. g. Cod. D (or
Bezre) for the Gospels and Acts, Cod. D (Claromon-
tanus) for the Pauline Epistles, and Cod. A (San-
gallensis) for the Gospels.
They were mostly written in the East, where the
Greek continued to be a living language, chiefly in
Alexandria, Constantinople, and the convents of
Mount Athos, but the best have found their way to
the libraries of Rome, Paris, London, and St. Peters
burg. In Europe (with the exception of Greece,
Lower Italy, and Sicily) the knowledge of Greek dis
appeared after the fifth century till the revival of
1 See on these abbreviations Scrivener, pp. 46, 47.
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 9<
learning in the fifteenth, and the Latin Vulgate sup
plied the place of the Greek and Hebrew Bible.
A few Greek Testaments may have been written in
Italy or Gaul, as the Codex Bezge; perhaps also the
Codex Rossanensis, which was discovered in Calabria
in 18TD, but Von Gebhardt and Ilarnack date it
from the East as a gift of a Byzantine emperor.
Westcott thinks it not unlikely that Codex B repre
sents the text preserved in the original Greek Church
at Rome. 1
All the MSS., whether complete or defective, are
divided, according to the size of letters, into two
classes, uncial and cursive. The former are written
in large or capital letters (littcroe uncialcs or majus-
culce), the latter in small letters (litter<% minuscules)
or in current hand. 2 The uncial MSS. are older,
from the fourth to the tenth century, and hence
more valuable, but were discovered and used long
after the cursive. Two of them, the Sinaitic and
the Vatican, date from the middle of the fourth
century. One only is complete, the Sinaitic.
Besides the distinct MSS., there are over four
hundred Lectionaries or service-books, which contain
only the Scripture lessons read in public worship,
1 Com. on St. John, Introd. p. Ixxxix.
2 Uncialis (adj. from uncia, the twelfth part of anything; hence the
English ounce and the German Unze) means containing a twelfth, and, as
a measure of length, the twelfth part of afoot, or an inch. It is not to be
taken as literally describing the size of the letters. Jlfajusculus (adj. dimin.
from major), somewhat greater or larger, when applied to letters, had the
same meaning, and was opposed to minusculus (from minus), rather small.
But there are also very small uncials, as on the papyrus rolls of Her-
culaneum.
7
98 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
cither from the Gospels alone (called Evangelistaria
or Evangeliaria\ or from the Acts and Epistles
(Praxapostoli), or from the Epistles (Epistolaria\
or from the Gospels and Epistles (Apostoloevangelia).
They are sometimes important witnesses to the text
as far as they contain it.
A. UNCIAL MANUSCRIPTS.
The uncial MSS. are designated (since Wetstein,
1751), for the sake of brevity, by the capital letters
of the Latin alphabet (A, B, C, D, etc.), with the help
of Greek letters for a few MSS. beyond Cod. Z, and
the Hebrew letter Aleph (x) for the Sinaitic MS.,
which was discovered last and precedes Cod. A. 1
As there are different series according to the books
they contain, the same letter is sometimes used two
or three times. Thus D designates Codex Bezse in
Cambridge for the Gospels and Acts, but also Codex
Claromontanus in Paris for the Pauline Epistles.
E is used for three MSS., one for the Gospels (at
Basle), one for the Acts (at Oxford), and one for the
Epistles of Paul (at St. Petersburg). To avoid con-
1 The present usage arose from the accidental circumstance that the
Codex Alexandrimis was designated as Cod. A in the lower margin of
Walton s Polyglot (Scrivener, loc. cit, p. 72, 2d ed.). A far better system
would be to designate them in the order of their age or value, which
would place B and X before A. But the usage in this case can as little
be altered as the traditional division of the Bible into chapters and verses.
Mill cited the copies by abridgments of their names, e.g., Alex., Cant.,
Mont. ; but this mode would now take too much space. Wetstein knew 14
uncial MSS. of the Gospels, which he designated from A to O. and about
112 cursives, besides 24 Evangelistaries. See the list at the close of his
Prolegomena, I. pp. 220-222, and II. 3-15.
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
fusion, it has been proposed to mark the difference
by adding a number ; thus B is the famous Vatican
Codex which extends to Heb. ix. 14 ; but B (2) or
B 2 is the Vatican MS. which contains the Apoca
lypse ; D is the Codex Bezse for the Gospels and
Acts, I) (2) or D 2 the Cod. Claromont. for the Pauline
Epistles. The cursive MSS. are designated by Arabic
numerals, but with the same inconvenience of sev
eral series.
The uncials are written on costly and durable
vellum or parchment, on quarto or small folio pages
of one or two, very rarely of three or four, columns.
The older ones have no division of words or sen
tences except for paragraphs, no accents or orna
mented letters, 1 and but very few pause -marks.
Hence it requires some practice to read them with
ease. The following would be a specimen in English
from the Gospel of John (i. 1,2):
INTHEBEGINNINGWASTHEWORD
ANDTHE WORDWASWITH GODAX D
THEWORDWASGODTHESAMEWAS
INTHEBEGINNINGWITHGODALL
The date and place, which were not marked on
MSS. earlier than the ninth century, 2 can be only
approximately ascertained from the material, the
1 The arabesques at the end of the books in X B, etc., might be con
sidered ornaments.
2 The earliest dated New Test, uncial seems to be F of the Gospels, with
the date 844 (according to Tischendorf s explanation of the inscription;
see Scrivener, p. 140), or 979 (according to Gardthausen, p. 159) ; S of the
Gospels is dated 949. The oldest dated cursives are Cod. 461 of the Gos
pels, dated A.D. 835, Cod. 429, A.D. 978, and Cod. 148 of the Acts, A.D.
984. See Scrivener, p. 39, and Gardthausen, pp. 181, 344.
100 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
form of letters, the style of writing, the presence or
absence of the Ammonian sections (Kt<j>a\aia, capitu-
Id) in the Gospels, the Euscbian Canons (or tables
of references to the Ammonian sections, after 340,
when Eusebius died), the Euthalian sections in the
Acts and Epistles, and the stichometric divisions or
lines ((jTi\oi) corresponding to sentences (both used,
if not first introduced, by Eutlialhis, cir. A.D. 453,
in his editions of the Acts and Epistles), 1 marks
of punctuation (ninth century), etc. Sometimes a
second or third hand introduced punctuation and
accents or different readings. Hence the distinc
tion of Icctlones a prima mami, marked by a star (*);
a secunda manu (**, or 2 , or b ) ; a tertia manu (-**,
or 3 , or c ). In Cod. C Tischendorf used small figures
(C*, C 2 , C 3 ), in Cod. x he used small letters (x* ? x b , x c ).
The Codex Sinaiticus has been corrected as late as
the twelfth century.
Some MSS. (as Codd. C, P, Q, E, Z, ) have been
written twice over, owing to the scarcity and costli
ness of parchment, and are called codices rescript^
or palimpsests (iraXt^ijaToi) ; the new book being
written between the lines, or across, or in place of
the old Bible text.
Constantino the Great ordered from Eusebius,
for the churches of Constantinople, the prepara
tion of fifty MSS. of the Bible, to be written "on
artificially wrought skins by skilful calligraphists." ;
1 Afterwards these stichometric divisions were abandoned as too costly,
and gave way to dots or other marks between the sentences.
2 Eusebius, Vita Const, iv. 3G, HfvrtiKovTa aw/icino iv diQ&kpaiQ
t-yKO.Ta.GKt.VQlG , . . V7TO
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 101
To judge from this fact, the number of uncials was
once very large, but most of them perished in the
Middle Ages.
The whole number now known is less than one
hundred. Scrivener reckons 56 for the Gospels
(most of them only fragmentary), 14 for the Acts,
6 for the Catholic Epistles, 15 for the Pauline Epis
tles, 5 for the Apocalypse, exclusive of the uncial
lectionaries, which are not marked by capitals, but
by Arabic numerals, like cursive MSS. of all classes. 1
Tischendorf and Yon Gcbhardt count 67 namely, 2
of the fourth century, 7 of the fifth, 17 of the sixth,
6 of the seventh, 8 of the eighth, 23 of the ninth,
4 of the tenth (Cod. I being counted three times,
according to its different parts). 2 The latest and
most complete list was kindly furnished to me in a
private letter by Dr. Ezra Abbot, of Cambridge, as
the result of his own careful researches. lie states
the number of distinct uncial MSS. of the New
Testament (not including lectionaries) at present
known as 83. We have for the Gospels 62; for the
Acts 15; for the Catholic Epistles 7; for the Pauline
Epistles 20 ; and for the Apocalypse 5. This in
cludes the Codex Eossanensis^ the Sunderland pa
limpsest, and three or four small fragments not used
by Tischendorf. Dr. Abbot s list is as follows :
Gospels: X A B C D E FF a G H li.s.4.7. jb K I. M NO O abcdef PQ
RST T woi T bcde U V W abcdef X YZ T A e abcdef e h A A
n 2 and the Sunderland MS. (W*, Gregory) = 62.
1 Scrivener, Introd. p. 72 (2d ed. 1874).
2 In Herzog, revised ed.. ii. 410 sq. That art. was written in 1878. Dr.
Abbot revised it again in 1882 for Schaff s Rd. EncycL and for this work.
102 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
Acts : S A B C D E CO F G (/) G b II (->) 1 2 - 5 - c - L (-.) P (2) = 15.
Cath. : K A B C K (- ) L (-.-) P (2) = 7.
Paul : K A B C D Q E (s) F Q F iv G (=<) II (3) I - K (2) L (. ) M (-0 X (->)
O b (0 P CO Q CO KCO = 20.
Apoc. : X A B () C P = o.
Whole number of distinct MSS. :
X A B B n P c C D evv - act D r anl E E act E P aul F F r aul F a G G act (G P aul )
G b(act) n nm:t IlP aul I 1.2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Jb K K cath. pnul L L act. c.th. paul M
MP aul N NP nul Q O abcJef QP aul O b (P aul > P Pact. cath. paul a P oc Q Q paul
E Rpai S T (or T) T woi T bcdc U V W abcjef X Y Z T A eabcde/vh
A S II 2 and the Sunderland MS. (W=, Gregory) =83.
(T paul and A are parts of the same MS., and are here
counted as one. The Codex Sunderlandianus, as
we may call it, consists of considerable palimpsest
fragments of all the four Gospels in uncial writing
of perhaps the ninth century, found in a Mencewn
belonging to the Sunderland Library (No. 3252 of
the Catalogue), and recently sold to the British Mu
seum (Add. MSS. 31, 919). They have been de
ciphered by Processors T. K. Abbott and J. P. Ma-
haffy of Dublin. The text is not of great value.
i. PRIMARY UNCIALS.
There are four nncial MSS. which for antiquity,
completeness, and value occupy the first rank two
of the fourth, two of the fifth century ; one complete
(x), two nearly complete (A and B), one defective (C).
To these is usually added Cod. D, as the fifth of the
great uncials, but it contains only the Gospels and
Acts, and has strange peculiarities. In the Gospels
the text of C, L, T, Z, &, and of A in Mark, is better
than that of A, but in the rest of the New Testa-
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 103
mcnt A is undoubtedly, after x and B, the most im
portant MS.
CODEX SINAITICUS.
x (Aleph). Codex SINAITICUS, formerly in the
Convent of Mount Sinai (hence its name), now in
the Imperial Library at St. Petersburg. It dates
from the middle of the fourth century, is written
on fine parchment (13^ inches wide by 14| high), in
large uncials, with four columns to a page (of 4:8 lines
each). It has 346^- leaves. It was discovered and
secured by the indefatigable Prof. C. Tischendorf,
in the Convent of St. Catharine, at the foot of
Mount Sinai, from which the law of Jehovah was
proclaimed for all generations to come, and where
this precious document had been providentially pre
served for many centuries unknown and unused till
the fourth of February, 1859. It was transferred first
to Cairo, then to Leipsic, and at last to St. Peters
burg, where it is sacredly kept. The text was printed
at Leipsic, and published at St. Petersburg at the
expense of the Czar, Alexander II., in celebration of
the first millennium of the Russian empire, by typo
graphic imitation from types specially cast, in four
folio volumes. 1 A photographic fac-simile edition
1 Bibliorum Codex Sinaiticus Petropolitanus. A uspiciis august issi mis
Imperatoris A lexandri II. ex tenebris protraxit in Europam transtulit ad
iuvandas atque illustrandas sacras litteras edidit CONSTANTINUS TISCHEX-
DOUF. Petropoli, MDCCCLXII. The first volume contains the dedica
tion to the Emperor (dated Lips, jy^i 1862), the Prolegomena, Notes on
the corrections by later hands, and twenty-one plates (in fac-simile);
vols. ii. and iii. contain the Septuagint; vol. iv. the Greek Testament
leaves), the Epistle of Barnabas (foil. 135-141), and a part of the
104 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
would be still better, but would have cost over
100,000, and presented many blurred pages.
The New Testament, together with the Epistle
of Barnabas and the fragment of Hennas, was also
separately edited by Tischendorf in smaller type in
quarto (Leipsic, 1SG3), in four columns; and an
octavo edition in ordinary type (ibid. 18G5). He
issued a Collatio Critica of the Sinaitic with the
Elzevir and Vatican texts (Lips. pp. xxii. and 109).
Dr. Scrivener also published a " Full Collation of the
Sinaitic MS. with the Received Text of the New
Testament" (Cambridge, 1864; 2d ed. 1867).
Codex x is the most complete, and also (with the
exception, perhaps, of the Vatican MS.) the oldest,
or, at all events, one of the two oldest MSS., although
it was last found and used. Tischendorf calls it
"omnium codicum uncial mm solus integer omni-
umque antiquissimus" lie assigns it to the middle
of the fourth century, or to the age of Eusebius, the
historian, who died in 340. He thinks it not im
probable that it was one of the fifty copies which
Constantino had ordered to be prepared for the
churches of Constantinople in 331, and that it was
sent by the Ernperor Justinian to the Convent of
Pastor Ilermse (full. 142-14:<i). Three hundred copies of this rare and
costly edition were printed and distributed among crowned heads and
large libraries, except one third of the number, which were placed at the
disposal of Prof. Tischendorf for his private use. There are probably
about a dozen copies of this edition in the United States in the library
of the Am. Bible Society, in the libraries of the Theol. Seminaries at New
York (Union Sem.), Princeton, Andover, in the Astor Library, the Lenox
Library, in the University libraries of Harvard. Yale, Rochester, Auburn,
etc.
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 105
Mount Sinai, which he founded. 1 It contains large
portions of the Old Testament in the Septuagint
Version (199 leaves), and the whole New Testa
ment, without any omission, together with the Epistle
of Barnabas, all in Greek, and a part of the Pastor
Hernias in Greek (IttTi leaves). It is much disfig
ured by numerous corrections made by the original
scribes or several later writers, especially one of the
fourth century (s a ), whose emendations are very valu
able, and one of the seventh (s c ). It often confirms
Cod. Yaticanus in characteristic readings (
voc for wo, in John i. 18 J r/}i> t/cKArj
for Kvptov, in Acts xx. 28), and omissions, as the dox-
ology in Matt. vi. 13 ; the end of Mark (xvi. 9-20) ;
the passage of the woman taken in adultery (John
vii. 53-viii. 11) ; lv E^W, Eph. i. 1. It frequently
agrees, also, with the Old Latin Version ; but in
many and important cases it supports other witness
es, and thereby proves its independence. 2 In 1 Tim.
1 See Tischendorfs edition of the English New Test., Loips. 1869,
p. xii., and Die Sinaibibel (1871), p. 77. After a more careful inspection of
the Vatican MS. in I860, he somewhat modified his view of the priority
of the Sinaitic over the Vatican MS., and assigned them both to the middle
of the fourth century, maintaining even that one of the scribes of X (who
wrote six leaves, and whom he designates D) wrote the New Testament
part of B. Compare the learned and able essay of Dr. Ezra Abbot
(against Dean Burgon): Comparative Antiquity of the Sinaitic and
Vatican MSS., in the "Journal of the American Oriental Society," vol. x.
(1872), pp. 189-200, and p. G02. Von Gebharclt, in Herzog s Real-Ency-
klopiidie (new ed.), vol. ii. p. 414, pronounces Burgon s attempt to prove
the higher antiquity of the Vatican MS. by fifty to one hundred years
an entire failure.
2 Tischendorf says (Waffen der Finsterniss, etc., p. 22) : "A thousand
readings of the Sinaiticus, among them exceedingly remarkable and im-
106 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
iii. 1G it supports the Alexandrian and Ephraem
MSS. in reading oc tyavtpvSri for ^to^, but in this
place all three MSS. have been corrected by a later
hand. It has contributed very much towards the
settlement of the text, and stimulated the progress
of the revision movement in England, in connec
tion with Tischendorf s Tauchnitz edition of King
James s Version (1SG9), which gives in foot-notes
the chief readings of the three great uncials x, B,
and A.
Tischendorf first copied the Sinaitic MS., with
the help of two German scribes (a physician and a
druggist), at Cairo in two months. 1 But afterwards,
when he had secured its permanent possession for the
Russian government, the whole of the great edition
was printed, as Tischendorf assures us, from a copy
made by himself; and in the final revision of the
proof-sheets he personally compared every line twice
with the original manuscript. 2 Tregelles inspected
portant ones (ausserst merkiviirdige und wichliye), which are sustained by
the oldest fathers and versions, are found neither in the Vaticanus nor the
Alexandrinus."
1 Nov. Test. Greece ex Sinaitico Codice . . . ed. Lips. 1865, Prolegg. p. xii. :
" Ut erat constitution, sine mora suscepta est totius textus antiquissimi tran-
scriptio alque labor-is sociis adsumptis duobus popularibus, altero medicines
doctore, altero medicament ario, intra duo menses absoluta."
2 He says (Vorwort zur Sin. Bibdhandschrift, etc., Lips. 1862, pp. 19,
20) : " In die Druckerei gelangte nichts anderes als A bschriften meiner
Hand, die bei erneuerter Vergleichung des Originals, das nie aus meinen
Jfdnden Team, durch vielfache Zeichen fur das Verstdndniss der Setzer
eingerichtet ivurden. Ilierzu Team eine andere nichtgeringe A rbeit. Nachdem
die ersten Correkturabztige von anderer /Seite, besonders durch Dr. M uhl-
mann, den Ilerausgeber eines Thesaurus der classischen Latinitat, nach
meiner Abschrift beric/itet worden waren, blieb mir allein die Aujgabe,
diesdben Druckbogen noch zwei Mai nach dem Original zu revidiren"
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 107
the original at Leipsic in 1862 in Tischendorf s
house, and supposed himself to have discovered a
number of errors in the St. Petersburg edition ; but
Tischendorf maintains that the English critic (whose
eyesight had become seriously impaired), and Scriv
ener likewise, in his proposed corrections in the first
edition of his Collation (1864), were wrong in every
instance. 1 Considerable portions of it have been
photographed, and real fac- similes are given in
KAJ O M OAOFOyMe
N CD c H er^ecri N
TOTHceyceBeixc
MYCTHplONOCe
n N ICD<>e
OHeNKOCMCJD
SPECIMEN OF THE CODEX SINAITICUS, CONTAINING 1 TIM. in. 16:
/cat o/ioXoyovjwe | vuig jwfya tanv \ TO TH]Q ivatfitiaQ \ pvaTrjpiov og e
0avpa$jj f v oap \ KI ^t/caia>3/ iv \ nvi ai^rj ayyfXoit;
tv | Svwiv f 7ri<mv I ^TJ tv KOfffiw \ av(\t]fj-(f>^r] tv \ So^rj.
1 See Tischendorf s Nov. Test. Greece ex Sinaitico Codice (Lips. 1865),
Proleyg. pp. xliii.-li.
108 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
Tischendorf s three editions, and in Scrivener s In
troduction. Mr. Burgon, also, in his book on the
Last Twelve Verses of J\IarJi^ gives an exact fac
simile of a page, taken at St. Petersburg, which
shows the last two columns of Mark (to xvi. 8) and
the first two columns of Luke.
NOTE ON THE DISCOVERY OF CODKX SINAITICUS. The story of this
great discovery, which made Dr. Tischendorf one of the happiest men I
ever knew, reads like an heroic romance : his three journeys from Leipsic
to Mount Sinai, in pursuit of manuscript treasures, in 1844. 1853, and
1859 ; his first rescue of forty-three leaves of the Septuagint from a waste-
basket in the library of the Convent of St. Catharine in 1844 (published
as Codex Friderico-Augustanus " in 1846); his fruitless journey in 1853;
his final discovery of the whole Cod. Sinaitictis in 1859. with the powerful
aid of the recommendation of the Russian Czar, who met such a terrible
death at the hands of the Nihilists in 1881 ; his patient labor in transcrib
ing the priceless document first at Cairo, then at Leipsic, and in its pub
lication in four magnificent volumes, in connection with a great national
event of the Russian empire (1862); his controversy with the Greek
Simonides, who impudently claimed to have written the codex on Mount
Athos in 1839 and 1840; his successful vindication; his two smaller edi
tions of the New Testament with ample Prolegomena; and his thorough
utilization of the Codex and all other available sources in the eighth and
last critical edition of his Greek Testament (completed in 1872), so soon
followed by a stroke of apoplexy and death (in 1874). All these advent
ures and incidents form one. of the most remarkable chapters in the history
of biblical discoveries and scholarship. He has told the story repeatedly
and fully himself, not without some excusable vanity, in his lieise in den
Orient (1845-46), and Avs dem keil. Lande (1862, sections 9, 10. 15, 25);
his Notitia Codicis Sinaitici (1860); the Prolegomena to his editions
(1862 and 1865); his two controversial pamphlets. Die Anfechtunyen der
Sinaibibel (1863), and Waffen der Finsterniss wider die Sinaibibel (1863) ;
and most fully in his Die Sinaibibel, Hire Entdeckuny, Herausyabe und
Erwerbung (Leipzig, 1871).
He thus describes his delight when, on his third journey, he discovered,
almost by an accident on the eve of his departure, the entire MS., and
was permitted to examine it in his room :
" Not till I reached my chamber did I give myself up to the over-
MANUSCRIPTS OF TIIE NEW TESTAMENT. 109
powering impression of the reality ; my wildest hopes and dreams were
more than accomplished. I knew that in my hands I held an incompar
able treasure for Christian learning. While in the deepest emotion I now
recognized, too, on the leaves before my eyes, in pale characters, the
superscription The Shepherd. In fact, there lay before me not only the
entire Epistle of Barnabas, but also a portion of the Shepherd of Hernias.
Both these writings were regarded by many congregations before the
middle of the fourth century as constituent parts of the New Testament,
but had well-nigh disappeared after the Church had once declared them
apocryphal. The books of our New Testament were complete : what an
immense advantage over our most renowned Bible manuscripts the Vat
ican and the Alexandrine! Of the Old Testament, not only were those
eighty-six leaves recovered, but and how precious was every single
leaf one hundred and twelve others besides, including all the poetical
books.
"It was past eight in the evening; one lamp feebly lit my chamber;
there was no means of warming, although in the morning it had been icy
cold in the convent. But in the presence of the found treasure it was not
possible for me to sleep. I immediately set myself to work to copy off the
Epistle of Barnabas, whose first part was hitherto known only in a de
fective Latin translation. It was clear to me that I must copy the whole
manuscript, if I should not be able to get possession of the original." 1
1 Die Sinaibibel (1871), pp. 13, 14. As this book (one of the last from
his pen) may become very rare, I will add the original : "Erst avfmeinem
Zimmer (jab ich mick dem iibericdltigenden Eindruck der Thatsache Jiin ;
meine kiihnsten Hoffnunyen und Trdume waren iibertroffcn. Ich wusste,
dass ich einen unvergleichlichen Schatz fur die christliche Wissenschuft in
meinen lldnden hielt. Mitten in der tiefsten Ruhrunrj erkannf ich jet zt auch
anf Bldttern vor meinen Augen in blassen Schriftziigen die Aufschrift:
( Der IJirte. In der That lag aitsscr dem vollstdndigen Brief e des Barna
bas auch ein Theil vom Ilirten des Hermas vor mir : beide Schriften wur-
den vor der Mitte des 4. Jahrhunderts von vielen Seiten als Bestandtheile
des Neuen Testaments angesehen, waren dann aber. da sie die Kirche fiir
apokryph erkltirte, fast verschwunden. Die Biicher unseres Neuen Testa
ments waren vollstdn dig : welch ausserordentlicher Vorzvg vor unseren
beriihmtesten Bibelhandschriften, der Vatikanischen und der A lexandrini-
schen. Vom A Iten Testament waren nicht nurjene 86 Blatter wiedergefunden,
sondern und wie kostbar war jedes einzelne Blatt noch 112 andere mil
sdmmtlichen poetischen Buchern.
110 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
He secured first the temporary loan of the Codex. It was carried by
Bedawln on camel s back from Mt. Sinai to Cairo. There he copied,
with the help of two of his countrymen, the 110,000 lines of the Codex,
and marked the changes by later hands, which amount in all to over
12,000. In October of the same year he was permitted to take it with
him to Europe as a conditional present to the Czar for the purpose of pub
lication. He showed it first to Emperor Francis Joseph at Vienna, then
to King John of Saxony, and to the King of Prussia (now Emperor of
Germany) in Berlin, and his minister of worship (Herr von Bethmann
Holweg, who recognized a special providence in the discovery of such a
treasure at the foot of Mt. Sinai by a German Professor of the Evangelical
Church). In November he laid it before Alexander II. and the Holy
Synod at St. Petersburg, where it was kept for a while in the Foreign
Office. Then it was used by Tischendorf in the preparation of his edition
in Leipsic,and at last (18G9) permanently transferred to the imperial library.
Thus the four great Eastern uncials arc distributed throughout Europe
the Sinaitic is in St. Petersburg and the Greek Church, the Vatican in
liome and the IJoman Church, the Alexandrian in London and the
Anglican Church, Codex Ephraem in Paris and the Galilean Church.
Germany has none of these treasures, but has done more to secure and to
utilize them for the benefit of Christendom than any other country.
In March, 1877, it was my privilege to visit the Convent of St. Catherine
on Mount Sinai that awfully sublime granite pulpit of Jehovah for the
proclamation of his hoi} 7 law to all future generations. Two of the thirty
monks kindly showed me that curious building which unites the charac
teristics of a fort, a church, a mosque, and a monastic retreat, and calls to
mind some of the greatest events in the history of the race. I saw the
library of several hundred written and printed volumes, ascetic and homi-
letic treatises, mostly in Greek, some in Arabic, some in Eussian, many
of them worm-eaten, soiled, and torn. On a dusty table lay Champollion s
Pictorial Egypt (presented to the Convent by the French government),
" Es war Abends nach acht, eine Lampe erleuclitete mtr sparlich mein
Zimmer ; ein Mittel zur Ileiznng gab es nicht, obsckon es am Morgen im
Kloster sogar Eis gefroren hatte. A her es war mir nicht mdglich, gegeniiber
dem entdecTcten Reichthume zu schlafen. Ich setzte mich vielmehr sqfort
daran, den Brief des Barnabas, dessen erstcr Theil nur erst aus eimr
mangelhaften lateinischen Uebersetzung bekannt war, abzuschreiben, Es
war mir Mar, dass ich die ganze Handschrift abschreiben musste, wenn ich
sie nicht im Original sollte erwerben konnen."
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. Ill
a copy of Tischendorf s edition of the Septnagint (which was presented by
himself), and a copy of the imperial four-volume edition of the Codex
Sinaiticus (no doubt a present of the Czar). A beautiful, but rather late,
copy of an Evangelistary ( the Codex Aureus ), written in gold uncial
letters in double columns, with illuminated pictures of the Saviour, the
Virgin, and the Evangelists, is preserved in the chapel, and adorns a
reading-desk. When I inquired about the original Codex Sinaiticus,
and mentioned the name of Tischendorf, the sub -prior kindled up in
indignation and unceremoniously called him a thief, who had stolen
their greatest treasure on the pretext of a temporary loan. When I re
minded him of the large reward of the Emperor of Russia, who had fur
nished a new silver shrine for the coffin of St. Catherine, he admitted it
reluctantly, but remarked that they did not want the silver, but the
manuscript the manuscript, of which these ignorant monks had actually
burned several leaves before Tischendorf came to the rescue of the rest in
1844. But the charge of theft is false. After long delays and Oriental
formalities the Codex was formally presented (not sold) to the Czar in
1809 by the new prior, Archbishop Kallistratos, and the monks of the
Convents of St. Catherine and Cairo. The usual Oriental expectation
of backsheesh was fulfilled, although perhaps not to the extent which
Dr. Tischendorf desired. So he assured me in 1871, and showed me, at
Leipsic, two letters of Kallistratos full of Oriental compliments and ex
pressions of gratitude to the German Professor, and stating that the Codex
was presented to the Autocrat of the Eussias as "a testimony of eternal
devotion " (t/ tvEtigiv ri} d iciov t /^wv KCII TOV *2iva
See his own account of the final delivery in Die SinaiUbd, p. 91.
CODEX ALEXANDKINUS.
A. Codex ALEXANDRINUS of the fifth century, in
quarto and two columns (12f inches high, 10J broad),
given by Patriarch Cyril Lucar of Constantinople
(the unlucky Calvinistic reformer, formerly of Alex
andria) to King Charles I. (1628), now in the British
Museum, London, where the open volume of the
New Testament is exhibited in the MS. room. It
was probably written in Alexandria. It contains
on 773 leaves the Old Testament, in the Septuagint
112 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
Version (edited by Baber, London, 1816-28), and the
New Testament ; but, unfortunately, with the omis
sion of Matt. i. 1-xxv. G, John vi. 50-viii. 52, and
2 Cor. iv. 13-xii. G. It has also at the end the Greek
Epistle of Clement of Rome to the Corinthians,
with a fragment of a second epistle, or rather homily.
This was the only MS. extant of Clement before
the discovery by Philotheos Bryennios of the copy
at Constantinople (1S75). The New Testament of
V XN
i e n o
KJPHN
oc.
KOTOCG n ^N UL>T~HC &3 y c c o y
oc exe~re e XYT-O i c
no i rvfl rvi ICU-CMCOV^
xr i o M e O e-roenm c KOTTO vc
Kl<
MC
SPECIMENS OF THE CODEX ALEXAXDKINUS.
The first is in bright red, with breathings and accents, and contains
Gen. i. 1, 2, Sept. (Ev (\pxn tTrtitjatv o 3cr TOV 6v \ pavuv KCIL Trjv
y//j / ct y>) f/i> ao \ paroa KCU ciKciTanKtvaaTOG \ KCII GKOTCHF iiravd)
Ti](j afjvffffov. ). The second specimen is in common ink, and contains
Acts xx. 28 (rTpoerf^fre eavroiff /cat TTO.VTI rw \ Troiftvid) tv w i yuacr
TO Trva TO \ ayiov e3fro t iriaKOTrovcr \ Troifiaivtiv TI]V iKK\r]aiav I TOV
KV rjv TreptfTTOtT/craro ia \ TOV ai}JiaTOQ TOV ifiiov.*), A favors Kvp iov
versus Seov.
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 113
the Alexandrian MS. was published by Charles G.
"Woide in uncial type (London, 1786), and by B. II.
Cowper, in common type (ibid. 1860). We have it
now in a most beautiful photographic fac-simile,
issued by the Trustees of the British Museum, Lon
don, 1879. The Old Testament part is in course of
publication in the same style (1882).
Cod. A is the first uncial MS. that was used by
biblical scholars (although Cod. D was knoion be
fore to Beza). It stands in the third or fourth
rank of the large uncials. It presents a text which
in the Gospels occupies an intermediate position be
tween the oldest uncial and the latter cursive text,
and which seems to have been most circulated in
the fourth century; but in the rest of the New Test.
it stands next to K and B. In several books it agrees
with the Latin Vulgate in many peculiar readings
which are not attested by the older Latin ; hence
Dr. Hort (ii. 152) infers that Jerome, in his revision,
must have used to a great extent a common original
with A.
CODEX VATICANUS.
B. Codex VATICANUS, of the middle of the fourth
century, on very fine thin vellum, in small but clear
and neat uncial letters, in three columns (of 42 lines
each) to a quarto page (10 inches by 10-J), preserved
in the Vatican Library at Borne (No. 1209). It is
the most valuable of the many valuable treasures of
this great repository of ecclesiastical learning and
literature. It is more accurately written than the
Sinaitic MS., and probably a little older, but not so
8
fJ.1v TOV \i$OV tK r/}<7
| Supav TOV juj /j-
KCLI dva
aiv OTL dvaKEKv .
XiffTai o XiSotT i\v
yap | jutyatr a<po-
?pa K-dt tX \ Sovaai
HIT TO juyfj/m ov
ilcov vtaviffKOv \
V kV TOlCf
\fVKt]V | K"ai t%-
$anj3!i3i]aai> \ o Si
Asyei ouratff JLU) j
kS a^/Sti^i iv l,r]-
TII \ Tt TOV ra~a-
prjvuv TO- ! i
OIK kanv tt>C ice
\ 6 TOTTOCT OTTOV
t$i]Kd dvTov aXX
vTOV KCU TM 7T-
Titi I ort
tiff Ttjv yci-
\i\diav tKki dv
\ TOV 0.GS KCt-
SaJff tl j TTEV
KCU i^X^ov ff
CtTTO TOV
yap \ dvTacr Tpo-
fioa KCII tK 1 araaia
KUL ovdtvi 6v \ iv
tiirov ttyofidvv j ro
yap:
H
AJ
v e r xc ccb 6
OM e I AO K M ^ M fc KOM
MM6WOJ
^C TO KH M Aey KH Kl
H OH CAM
e i
M
T rrp.OAjre/ Y
-THN TAAI AXlA
C A i ed>xro Nj^n b-rpy
M N H x e i o-^
o M o C K A / e
-& - ^^
V s =
SPECIMEN OF THE CODEX VATICANUS, CONTAINING MAUK xvi. 3-8.
/Jc cittced />-om Dean Burgon s photograph of the whole page. By permission].
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 115
complete. 1 It was apparently copied in Egypt by
two or three skilful scribes. Tischendorf has ob
served the fact that the scribe of the New Test, was
the same who wrote a few pages in the New Test,
of x, together with the opening verses of the Apoc
alypse, besides corrections. This fact seems to point
to the same age and country of the two MSS. ; while
o-n the other hand the corrections, the remarkable
difference in the order of the books of the New Test., 2
and other peculiarities, as clearly indicate different
and independent sources from which they were de
rived. This makes their united testimony all the
stronger. The corrections in both enable us to
some extent to follow the history of the text.
Cod. B was brought to Home shortly after the
establishment of the Vatican Library by Pope Nich
olas V. in IMS ; perhaps ( as Dr. Scrivener and
others conjecture) by the learned Cardinal Bes-
sarion, formerly archbishop of Nicsea, who labored
at the Council of Ferrara- Florence with great zeal,
but in vain, for the reunion of the Greek and Latin
churches (d. 1472). It was entered in the earliest
catalogue of that library, made in 1475. It contains
1 Dr. Tregellcs was so much impressed with the antiquity of B that
he thought it was written before the Council of Nicaea (325). He so
informed Dr. Scrivener (Six Lect. p. 28). The Roman editors contend,
of course, for the primacy of the Vatican against the Sinaitic MS., but
admit that they are not far apart, "non magnam intercedere cetatem inter
utriusque libri editionem." See Tom. vi. p. vii.
2 In Cod. X the Pauline Epistles precede the Acts, and the Hebrews
are placed between 2 Thessalonians and 1 Timothy. In Cod. B the Catholic
Epistles are between the Acts and the Pauline Epistles, and the Hebrews
precede the Pastoral Epistles (which are lost). Both differ from the order
of the Vulgate.
116 MANUSCRIPTS. OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
the Septuagint Version of the Old Testament, with
some gaps, 1 arid the New Testament as far as Heb.
ix. 11 (inclusive), and breaks off in the middle of the
verse and of the word KaSu \ put. The Pastoral
Epistles (1 and 2 Timothy and Titus), Philemon, and
the Apocalypse are lost. Cod. B for the Apocalypse
(likewise in the Vatican, as No. 2066) is a different
MS., of the eighth century, and is marked Q by
Tregelles.
Cod. B became first known about 1533, 2 when
Sepulveda directed the attention of Erasmus to it,
but it was watched with jealous care by the papal
authorities, and kept from public use till the middle
of the nineteenth century. It was first partially
and imperfectly collated, under considerable restric
tions, by Bartolocci, librarian of the Vatican (1669),
then by the Abbate Mico for Richard Bentley (about
1720, published 1799), and by Andrew Birch of
Copenhagen (1781, published 1788, 1798, 1801).
When the MS. was transferred to Paris during the
empire of the first Napoleon, Dr. Hug, a Roman
Catholic scholar, inspected it in 1809, and first fully
recognized its paramount value (1810).
After the MS. was restored to Rome, it was for a
long time almost inaccessible, even to famous schol
ars. Dr. Tregelles was not even permitted to use
pen and ink, although he was armed with a letter
from Cardinal Wiseman. The MS. was nevertheless
1 Gen. i. 1-xlvi. 28 is wanting, and supplied by small type in the
Roman edition; also Ps. cv. (cvi.) 27-cxxxvii. (cxxxviii.) 6. and the
Books of Maccabees.
2 If not already in 1522, as Tregelles thinks, Home s Intr. iv. 107.
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 117
examined to some extent by Muralt (1844), more
thoroughly by Tischendorf (1843, 1844, 1866), Tre-
gelles (1845), Dressel (1855), Burgon (1860), Alford
(1861), and his secretary, Mr. Cure (in 1862). It was
at last printed under the supervision of the celebrat
ed Cardinal Angelo Mai (d. 1854), Rome, 1828-38,
but not published till 1857 (in 5 vols., the fifth con
taining the !New Testament) ; and so inaccurately
that this edition is critically worthless. The New
Testament was again published separately, with some
improvements, by Vercellone, Rome, 1859; more
critically by Tischendorf, Leipsic, 1867, from a par
tial inspection of fourteen days (three hours each
day) in 1866 under the constant supervision of C.
Vercellone, who learned from the German expert
some useful lessons in editorial work. 1 Xo\v, at last,
we have a complete and critical, though by no means
infallible, quasi fac-simile edition of the whole Vat
ican MS. by Vercellone (d. 1869), Jos. Cozza, and
Gaetano Sergio (who was associated for a short time
with Cozza after Vercellone s death), Rome, 1868-81,
in six stately folio volumes. The type used was cast
in Leipsic, at the expense of the Propaganda, from
the same moulds as that employed for Tischendorf s
edition of the Codex Sin aiticus, although the Vatican
Codex is written in much smaller letters. Tischen
dorf complained of the bad use which the Roman
printers made of his type. A real fac-simile, like
1 Novum Testamentum Vaticanum . . . ed. Tischendorf, Lips. 18G7, with
Prolegomena. Comp. his Appendix N. Ti Vaticani, 1869, and his Responsa
ad calumnias Romances, 1870 (in refutation of the charges of the " Civilta
cattolica ").
118 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
the one which the British Museum published of
Cod. A, would be far preferable. Nevertheless, it is
a magnificent publication, for which the papal gov
ernment deserves the thanks of the whole Church. 1
The Vatican is upon the whole the best as well
as the oldest of MSS. now known, but must be used
with proper regard to all other sources of evidence.
In this judgment most modern critics agree. Lach-
mann and Tregelles made it the chief basis of their
text as far as they then knew it. Westcott and Hort
have used it more thoroughly and systematically since
it has been published in full. Tischendorf pays the
greatest attention to it throughout, although, in his
last critical edition, he shows in many conflicting
cases a natural preference for the Sinaitic Codex of
his own discovery. B has numerous corrections by
a contemporaneous hand, and was supplied with
1 The full title of the Roman quasi fac-simile edition reads: "J3iblioriim
Sacrorum Grwcus Codex Vaticunus auspice Fio IX. Pontijice Afaximo
collatis studiis Caroli Vercellone Sodalis BarnaMtm et Josephi Cozza
Monachi Basiliani editus. Eoma 1 , typis et impensis S. Congregations de
Propaganda Fide." 18G8 to 1881. Beautifully printed on vellum paper.
Four volumes contain the Scptuagint (i. Pentateuch and Jos.; ii. Judges,
etc. ; iii. The Psalms, etc.; iv. Esther, etc.) ; one volume the New Testa
ment, which appeared in 18G8 as torn. v. It gives the original MS. down
to Heb. ix. 14, in 284 large pages, 3 columns. The rest of the Epistle to
the Hebrews and the Apocalypse (from pp. 285 to 302) are supplied from
a later text (recentiori manu) in ordinary Greek type, and have therefore
less critical value. The Pastoral Epistles and the Epistle to Philemon are
wanting altogether. The sixth volume, which was published in 1881,
" auspice Leone XIII." contains xxxvi. and 170 pages, prolegomena and
commentaries by Canon Fabiani and Jos. Cozza, together with four plates
of fac-similes selected from the Septuagint. I used the copy in the Astor
Library. The last volume is disappointing. Tischendorf would have
made much more thorough work.
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 119
accents and breathings by a third hand in the tenth
century or later. 1 It is more free from Western or
Alexandrian readings than x. It presents on the
whole, with tf, the simplest, shortest, and concisest
text. The charge of omissions of many words and
whole clauses is founded on the false assumption
that the Elzevir text is the standard. Westcott and
Hort say (p. 557) : " The fondness for omissions,
which has sometimes been attributed to the scribe
of the "Vatican, is imaginary, except, perhaps, single
petty words." The agreement of B and N is (with
few exceptions) a strong presumptive evidence for
the genuineness of a reading, and, when supported by
other ante-Kiceue testimony, it is conclusive. Their
concurrent testimony from independent sources
gives us the oldest attainable text, which may be
traced to the early part of the second century, or the
generation next to that of the autographs.
NOTE. We need not be surprised that B, as well as X, should have
incurred the special hostility of the admirers of the common text, from
which it so often departs. Dr. Dobbin, as quoted by Scrivener (p. 108),
calculated that B leaves out 2556 words or clauses. Dean Burgon (in the
" Quarterly Review " for Oct. 1881, p. 164) asserts that, in the Gospels
alone, B omits at least 2877 words, adds 536, substitutes 935, transposes
2098, modifies 1132 (total changes, 7578) , the corresponding figures in X
being severally 3455, 839, 1114, 2299, 1265 (in all 8972). This is one of
the reasons for which the Dean, in defiance of the best judges, condemns
X and B as the most corrupt of MSS., and of course all the critical
editions based on them. His list of departures is indeed formidable, but
all the worse for the common text which is his standard ; for in nine cases
1 Tischendorf says "not earlier than the tenth or eleventh century."
The Roman editors think they have identified the man (a certain monk,
Clemens or KXr//ijje), and assign his date (conjecturally) as " about the
beginning of the fifteenth century."
120 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
out of ten it is easier to account for additions and interpolations than for
omissions. Dean Burgon often refers to Dr. Scrivener, the conservative
editor of the textus receptus, as an authority; but even Scrivener accords
u to Cod. B at least as much weight as to any single document in existence"
(IntroJ. p. 108), and calls it, "in common with onr [his] opponents, the
most weighty single authority we possess" (p. 471). For a true estimate
of the comparative value of united testimony, see the convincing exposi
tion of Dr. Ilort s Introduction, pp. 212-22-4. lie arrives at the conclusion
that, with some specified exception?, the united readings of these two
oldest MSS. should be accepted as the true readings until strong internal
evidence is found to the contrary, and that no readings of X and 13 can
safely be rejected absolutely, though it is sometimes right to place them
only on an alternative footing, especially where they receive no support
from Versions or Fathers.
On this line the great battle for the purest text of the New Testament
must be fought out. The question is between the oldest MSS. and the
latest, between the uncial text and the Stephanie or Elzevir text, The
conflict has fairly begun in the Revision year 1881, with a rare amount
of learning and zeal on both sides, and before a far larger audience in two
hemispheres than ever listened to a discussion on a dry and intricate,
yet very important, department of biblical scholarship. We accept the
alternative put by the Dean of Cliichester, whose learning is only equalled
by his dogmatism, but we come to the opposite conclusion. " Codices B and
N," he says. 1 "are either among the purest of manuscripts, or else they
are among the very foulest. The text of Drs. Westcott and Hort is
either the very best which has ever appeared, or else it is the very worst ;
the nearest to the sacred autographs, or the furthest from them. There
is no room for loth opinions; and there cannot exist any middle view.
The question will have to be fought out, and it must be fought out fairlv.
Magna est veritas et prcevctlebit.
CODEX EPIIR/EMI.
C. Codex REGIUS, or EPHR.EMI SYRI, in the Nation
al Library at Paris, is a codex rescriptns, and Las its
name from the fact that the works of the Syrian
1 See his third article on the New Test. Revision in " The Quarterly
Review " for April, 1882, at the close, p. 377,
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
121
father, Eplirsem (d. 372), were
written over the original Bible
text, which is scarcely legible. 1
It dates from the fifth century,
and probably from Alexandria.
Tischendorf regards C as older
than A, and in the Gospels it has
a much better text. Unfortunate-
]y it is very defective, and con-
tains only 64 leaves of the Old
Test, and about three fifths of
the New Test. (145 out of 238
leaves), one or more sheets having
perished out of almost every quire
of four sheets. It was first collated
by Wetstein (1716), and edited by
Tischendorf (Leipsic, 1843-45, 2
vols.). Its text " seems to stand
nearly midway between A and B,
somewhat inclining to the latter"
(Scrivener). Two correctors, one
of the sixth, the other of the ninth
century (designated by Tischendorf
as C**, C***, or C 2 , C 3 ), have been
at work on the MS. (e. g., in 1 Tim.
iii. 16) to the perplexity of the
critical collator.
__
1 The owner of that MS. must have had a very
low idea of the Bible to replace it by the writings
of Ephrsem. It was making void the Word of
God by the traditions of men. Comp. Matt.
xv. 6.
122 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
CODEX BEZ.E.
D, for the Gospels and Acts, is Codex BEZ.E, or
CANTABRIGIENSIS, in the Library of the University
at Cambridge (to which Beza presented it in 1581).
It dates from the sixth century, and was written in
the Occident, probably in Gaul, by a transcriber
ignorant of Greek. It contains only the Gospels
and Acts, with a Latin version; edited in fac-simile
type by Thomas Kipling, Cambridge, 1793, 2 vols.
fol., and more accurately by Dr. Scrivener,, in com
mon type, with a copious introduction and valuable
critical notes , Cambridge, 1864.
Cod. D is the second of the uncial MSS. which
was known to scholars (B being the first). Beza
procured it from the monastery of St. Irenaens at
Lyons in 1562, but did not use it on account of its
many departures from other MSS. It is generally
ranked with the great uncials, but is the least valu
able and trustworthy of them. Its text is very
peculiar and puzzling. It has many bold and ex
tensive interpolations, e. </., a paragraph after Luke
vi. 4 (which is found nowhere else) : " On the same
day he [Jesus] beheld a certain man working on the
Sabbath, and said unto him, Man, blessed art thou
if thou knowest what thou doest; but if thou know-
est not, thou art cursed and a transgressor of the
law." It differs more than any other from the re
ceived Greek text, but it often agrees in remarkable
readings with the ancient Latin and Syriac versions.
Dr. Tregelles remarks that " its evidence, when
alone, especially in additions, is of scarcely any value
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 123
as to the genuine text ; but of the very greatest
when corroborated by other very ancient author-
itj."
Dr. Hort attaches great importance to this singu
lar MS. as a means of tracing textual corruptions up
to the fourth, and even the second century. He
says (ii. 149) : " In spite of the prodigious amount
of error which D contains, these readings, in which
it sustains and is sustained by other documents de
rived from very ancient texts of other types, render
it often invaluable for the secure recovery of the
true .text; and, apart from this direct applicability,
no other single source of evidence, except the quota
tions of Origen, surpasses it in value on the equally
important ground of historical or indirect instruc-
tiveness. To what extent its unique readings are
due to license on the part of the scribe, rather than
to faithful reproduction of an antecedent text now
otherwise lost, it is impossible to say ; but it is re
markable how frequently the discovery of fresh
evidence, especially Old Latin evidence, supplies a
second authority for readings in which D had hith
erto stood alone. At all events, when every allow
ance has been made for possible individual license,
the text of D presents a truer image of the form in
which the Gospels and Acts were most widely read
in the third and probably a great part of the second
century than any other extant Greek MS."
The same remarks apply with little deduction to
Cod. D (2) for the Pauline Epistles, which deserves
a place among the primary uncials, but is usually
ranked with the secondary. It likewise gives the
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
Western text, which in the Epistles of Pan! is of
inferior value. (See below.)
2. SECONDARY t NCIALS.
The secondary uncial MSS. are defective and of
later date from the fifth century (Q and T) to the
nintli and tenth centuries. Most of them contain
the Gospels, only five the Apocalypse. "None of
them show signs of having formed part of a com
plete Bible, and it is even doubtful whether any of
them belonged to a complete New Testament. Six
alone are known to have contained more than one
of the groups of books, if we count the Acts and
the Apocalypse as though they were each a group."
In giving a brief account of these secondary
uncials I follow chiefly the latest descriptive list of
Tischendorf, as revised by Dr. Gebhardt (1878), and
again revised and completed by Dr. Abbot (1882). 2
B (2), for the Apocalypse : Codex YATICAXTS 2066 (formerly. Basilian
Codex 105) ; eighth century. Edited by Tischendorf, imperfectly 184G,
carefully 1869. after a fresh collation made in 1866. Cozza published a
few unimportant corrections to this latest edition in Ad editionem Apoca-
lypseos S. Johannis juxta vetustissimum codicem Basil. Vat. 2066 Lips, anno
1869 evulyatam anitnadversiones, Rom. 1869. Tregelles marked this MS.
with the letter Q, to distinguish it from the far more valuable and famous
Cod. B.
D (2), for the Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews) : Codex CLAUO-
MOXTAXUS ; of the second half of the sixth century ; slightly defective,
but very valuable : in the National Library at Paris. Collated by Tregelles,
1849 and 1850. Edited by Tischendorf, Leipsic, 1852. Beza procured it
1 Westcott and Hort, ii. 75.
2 For Schaff s Rdirj. Encyclopaedia, vol. i. 271-273 (published in New
York and Edinburgh, Nov. 1882). The additions of Dr. Abbot are marked
by his initials in brackets.
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 125
from the monastery of Clermont (hence the name), and made some use
of it (1582). It is Greek and Latin, stichometric, with accents by a later
hand, but no division of words. It was retouched at different times.
The Latin text represents the oldest version (of the second century).
E (1), for the Gospels: Codex BASILEEXSIS ; eighth century; in the
library at Basle ; defective in Luke. Erasmus overlooked it. Collated
by Tischendorf and Miiller (1843), and by Tregelles (184G). It is better
than most of the second-class uncials. It approaches to the Textus Re-
ceptus,
E (-2), for the Acts: Codex LAUDIANCS; in the Bodleian Library at
Oxford; a present from Archbishop Laud in 1G36 (hence the name), with
a close Latin version on the left column ; of the end of the sixth century;
probably brought from Tarsus to England by Theodore of Canterbury
(d. 690), and used by the Venerable Bede (d. 735) ; newly published by
Tischendorf, in the ninth vol. of his 3Io:mmenta Sacra, 1870. Very valu
able for the Greek-Latin text of the Acts.
E (3), for the Pauline Epistles: Codex SAXGERMANEXSIS ; Grneco-
Latin; formerly at Saint-Germain dcs Pres (hence the name), near Paris;
now at St. Petersburg. In the Greek a mere copy of D (Claromont.)
after it had been altered by several hands. Ninth or tenth century. Of
no critical value except for the Latin text.
F (1), for the Gospels : Codex BOKEKLIANUS; once possessed by John
Boreel (d. 1629), Dutch ambassador in London under James I.; now in
the library of the University at Utrecht. Not important.
F (2), for the Pauline Epistles : Codex AUGIENSIS (named from A uyia
Dives or Major, a monastery at Eeichenau in Switzerland); bought bv
Richard Bentley at Heidelberg, and bequeathed by his nephew to Trinity
College, Cambridge; Graeco- Latin (but the Latin no translation of the
Greek) ; collated by Tischendorf, 1842, by Tregelles, 1845 ; carefully edited
by Dr. Scrivener, 1859, in common type. Ninth century.
F a : designates those passages of the Gospels, Acts, and Pauline Epistles
found copied on the margin of the Coislin Octateuch in Paris, dating from
the beginning of the seventh century. Printed by Tischendorf in 1846
(Monum. s. ined^).
G (1), for the Gospels: Codex HAKLEIANUS; collated by Wetstein,
Tischendorf, and Tregelles. Ninth or tenth century. It has many breaks.
Now in the British Museum.
G (2), for the Acts (ii. 45-iii. 8); seventh century; now in St. Peters
burg, taken there by Tischendorf in 1850. It has a few rare and valu
able readings.
126 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
G b , for the Acts (fragments of chapters xvi..xvii.,xviii.); ninth century
or earlier; now called Codex Vaticanus 9671, formerly Cryptoferratensis.
Edited by Cozza, 1877.
G (3), for the Pauline Epistles: Codex BOERNERIANUS ; was either
copied from F (Ilort), or from the same archetype (Tischendorf, Scriv
ener). Ninth century. It is a part of the same IMS. as A of the Gospels.
Purchased by Prof. C. F. Boerner at Leipsic, 1705; in the Royal Library
at Dresden.
H (1), for the Gospels: Codex SKIDEIJI , tenth century; beginning
Matt. xv. 30, and defective in all the Gospels. Now in the Public Library
of Hamburg. Collated by Trcgelles, 1850, and examined in 1854 by
Tischendorf.
H (2), for the Acts: Codex MUTIXEXSIS; ninth century; lacks about
seven chapters. Now at Modena. Carefully collated by Tischendorf,
1843, and by Tregelles. 1845.
H (3), for the Pauline Epistles: Codex COISLIXIAXUS; sixth century;
fragments of the Pauline Epistles in thirty-one leaves, all found in the
binding of manuscripts at or from the Monastery of St. Athanasius at
Mount Athos. Twelve of these leaves are in the National Librarv at
Paris; and two formerly there are now at St. Petersburg. These fourteen
leaves, containing fragments of 1 Corinthians. Galatians, 1 Timothy, Titus,
and Hebrews, were published by Montfaucon in 1715, in his Bibliotheca
Coisliniana. Two more leaves at Moscow (Bibl. S. Syn. Gl), containing
parts of Heb. x., were first described and collated by Matthaei (1784), and
have been edited in fac-simile by Sabas (Specim. palceogr,, Moscow, 1863).
They are designated as N c in Tischendorf s Greek Testament, seventh
edition (1859). Four more leaves, belonging to Archbishop Porfiri and
the Archimandrite Antony, are cited by Tischendorf in his last (eighth)
critical edition on 2 Cor. iv. 4-6; Col. iii. 5-8; 1 Thess. ii. 9-13, iv. 6-10.
Still more recently nine new leaves have been discovered at Mount Athos.
Their text, containing parts of 2 Corinthians and Galatians, has been
published by Duchesne in the Archives des missions scient. et lit., 3 e se r.,
torn. iii. p. 420 sqq., Paris, 1876. Two more leaves, containing 1 Tim. vi.
9-13, and 2 Tim. ii. 1-9, have been found attached to a MS. in the National
Library at Turin in 1881. [E. A.]
I, for the Gospels, Acts, and Pauline Epistles: Codex TISCHEXPORFI-
AXUS II., at St. Petersburg, designates a manuscript in which, under later
Georgian writing, there are twenty-eight palimpsest leaves of seven dif
ferent codices, containing fragments of the New Testament, as follows:
I 1 , of John xi., xii., xv., xvi., xix. I 2 , of 1 Cor. xv., xvi. ; Tit. i. ; Acts
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 127
xxviii. I 3 , of Matt, xiv., xxiv., xxv., xxvi. ; Mark ix., xiv. I*, of Matt,
xvii.-xix. ; Luke xviii. ; John iv.. v., xx. I 5 , of Acts ii., xxvi. I 6 , of
Acts xiii. 1 7 , of Luke vii., xxiv. I l - 2 - 3 are of the fifth century ; I*- 7 of
the sixth ; I 5 - 6 of the seventh. The text of I 1 - 2 - 3 *- 7 has a close affinity
with X A B C D L. Published by Tischendorf in his Mon. sacr. ined. N. C.,
vol. i. (1855).
I b , for John s Gospel, formerly N b ; beginning of fifth century; four
palimpsest leaves in the British Museum, containing, under two layers
of Syriac writing, fragments of seventeen verses of John xiii. and xvi.
Deciphered by Tischendorf and Tregelles, and published by the former
in his Mon. sacr. ined. N. C., vol. ii. (1857). [E. A.]
K (1), for the Gospels: Codex CYPRIUS; complete; middle or end of
ninth century; now in Paris. Text somewhat remarkable. Collated by
Tischendorf (1842) and Tregelles (1849 and 1850).
K (2), for the Pauline and Catholic Epistles: Codex MOSQUEXSIS;
ninth century; brought from Mount Athos to Moscow. Lacks a part of
Romans and 1 Corinthians. Collated by Matthan.
L (1), for the Gospels : Codex REGIUS ; published by Tischendorf, 1846 ;
written in the eighth century ; full of errors in spelling, but very remark
able for its agreement with X, B, and Origen ; now in Paris.
L (2), for the Acts, Pauline and Catholic Epistles: Codex ANGEMCUS,
or PASSIONEI (formerly G and I) ; ninth century ; now in the Angelica
Library of the Augustinian monks at Rome. Contains Acts vii. 10 to
Heb. xiii. 10. Collated by Tischendorf (1843) and Tregelles (1845).
M (1), for the Gospels : Codex CAMPJAXUS ; complete ; end of ninth
century; now in Paris. Copied and used by Tischendorf (1849).
M (2), for the Pauline Epistles: Codex RUBER; ninth century. Two
folio leaves at Hamburg (Heb. i. 1-iv. 3, xii. 20-xiii. 25). and two at
London (1 Cor. xv. 52-2 Cor. i. 15 ; 2 Cor. x. 13-xii. 5). Written in red.
Edited by Tischendorf in Anecdot. sacr. et prof.. 1855,. and,, with a few
corrections, 1861.
N (1), for the Gospels: Codex PURPUREUS; end of the sixth century;
a beautiful manuscript written on the thinnest vellum, dyed purple, with
silver letters (the abbreviations 6C = .Sr<of, K.C = Kvpioc;, etc., in gold);
four leaves in London, two in Vienna, six in the Vatican, and thirty-
three in the Monastery of St. John in Patmos. Tischendorf used in his
eighth edition of the New Testament the readings of the thirty-three
Patmos leaves transcribed by John Sakkelion, containing Mark vi. 53-xv.
23, with some gaps. These have since been published by Duchesne in
the Archives des missions scientifques, 3 e sen, torn. iii. 1876.
128 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
N (2), for Galatians and Hebrews: two leaves; ninth century; con
taining Gal. v. 1 2-vi. 4 and Heb. v. 8-vi. 10. Brought by Tischcndorf to
St. Petersburg.
N b . The manuscript now marked by Tischendorf I b .
O (1), for John s Gospel: eight leaves; ninth century; containing a
part of John i. and xx., with scholia; now in Moscow (. Syn. 120).
Edited by Matthoei (1785), and, after him, by Tregelles, Cod. ZACYNTHIUS
(1861), Appendix. Text valuable.
O (2), for 2 Corinthians: two leaves; sixth century; containing 2 Cor.
i. 20-ii. 12. Brought from the East to St. Petersburg by Tischendorf in
1859.
O a O b (1) O c O d O e O f : Psalters or other manuscripts, containing
some or all of the hymns of Luke s Gospel (i. 46 sqq., 08 sqq., ii. 29 sqq.).
O a is at Wolfenbiittel (ed. Tischendorf, Anecd. sacr, et prof., 1855). O b at
Oxford. O c at Verona, the Greek text in Roman letters (ed. Bianchini,
1740). O d at Zurich, on purple vellum in silver letters (ed. Tischen
dorf, Mon. sacr. ined. X. C., vol. iv.). O e and O f at St. Gall and St. Peters
burg (collated by Tischendorf). O c is of the sixth century; O d of the
seventh ; O a b e f of the ninth.
O b (2), for the Pauline Epistles: sixth century; a leaf, which imperfect
ly presents Eph. iv. 1-18. Collated by Tischendorf at Moscow in 18G8.
P (1), for the Gospels: Codex GuELriiERBYTAXus I.; sixth century;
a palimpsest at Wolfenbiittel. containing portions of all the Gospels (518
verses). Edited by Tischendorf {Mon. sacr. ined. N. C. vol. vi. 1869).
P (2), for the Acts, Epistles, and Revelation, with some defects : Codex
PORFIRIANUS, a palimpsest of the ninth century, in possession of Arch
bishop Porfiri at St. Petersburg (now at Kiev) ; the text is particularly
good in the Revelation. Edited by Tischendorf, 1865 and 1869. It gen-
erallv confirms A and C, but often N against all the rest.
Q(l), for Luke and John: Codex GuKLPHERBYTANUS II. ; fifth century;
a palimpsest containing fragments (247 verses) of Luke and John; now
at Wolfenbiittel. Edited by Tischendorf, Man. sacr. ined. N. C., iii. 1860.
Q (2) : PORFIRIANUS, fifth century; papyrus fragments of 1 Cor. i. 17-
20 ; vi. 13-18 : vii. 3, 4, 10-14. Collated by Tischendorf.
R, for Luke : Codex NITRIENSIS ; sixth century ; a fragmentary pal
impsest of Luke from a Coptic Monastery of the Nitrian Desert; now in
the British Museum. Collated by Tregelles (1854), and edited by Tischen
dorf {Mon. sacr. ined. N. C., vol. i. 1855).
R (2), a palimpsest leaf of about the seventh century, containing 2 Cor.
xi. 1-9 ; convent of Grotta Ferrata, near Rome ; published by Cozza in 1867.
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 129
S, for the Gospels: Codex VATICANUS 354 (A.D. 949); a complete
manuscript of the Gospels. Collated by Tischendorf for the eighth edi
tion of his Greek Testament.
T, for Luke and John : Codex BORGIANUS I. ; fifth century; now in the
College of the Propaganda in Home; fragments of Luke xxii., xxiii., and
John vi.-viii., the Greek text accompanied by a Sahidic or Thebaic ver
sion. The fragments of John were published by Giorgi in 1789. Those
of Luke were first collated by B. II. Alford.
T wo, . f ra g m ents of Luke xii. 15-xiii. 32, John viii. 23-32, formerly
owned by Woide, and published by Ford in his Append. Cod. Alex. (1799).
Similar to the preceding, but shown by Lightfoot to belong to a different
manuscript.
T b : fragments of the first four chapters of John; sixth century; now
at St. Petersburg.
T c : a fragment of Matthew (xiv. 19-xv. 8), resembling the above.
T d : fragments of a Greek -Sahidic Evangelistary (seventh century)
found by Tischendorf (18GG) in the Borgian Library at Koine. Con
tains Matt. xvi. 13-20; Mark i. 3-8; xii. 35-37; John xix. 23-27; xx.
30, 31.
T e : a bit of an Evangelistary, of about the sixth century, from Upper
Egypt ; now in the Library of the University of Cambridge, England. It
contains Matt. iii. 13-1G. Readings given in the Postscript to Tregelles s
Greek Testament, p. 1070. [E. A.]
U, for the Gospels: Codex NANIANUS; end of ninth or beginning of
tenth century ; now in Library of St. Mark, Venice. Contains the Gospels
complete. Collated by Tischendorf and Tregelles.
V, for the Gospels: Codex MOSQI:ENSIS, of the Gospels to John vii. 39;
ninth century; almost complete. Written at Mount Athos. Matthau
collated and described it in 1779.
W a and W b : the former designates two leaves, with fragments of
Luke ix., x., in the National Library at Paris; probably of the eighth
century; edited by Tischendorf in his Mon. sacr. ined., 1846. The latter
is a palimpsest of fourteen leaves found by Tischendorf at Naples, and
fully deciphered by him in 18GG.
W c : three leaves (ninth century), containing Mark ii. 8-1G; Luke 5.
20-32; 64-79 ; now at St. Gall. Edited by Tischendorf, Mon. sacr. ined.,
N. C., vol. iii. (I860).
W d : fragments of Mark vii., viii., ix. (ninth century), found in the
binding of a volume in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge. The
readings are remarkable.
130 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
AY e : a fragment containing John iv. 9-14. discovered in 18G5 in the
Library of Christ Church College at Oxford. Closely resembles O, and is
perhaps a part of the same manuscript. Alford calls it Frag. Ath. b; and
his Frag. Ath. a. containing John ii. 17-iii. 8, found by P. E. Pusey in the
cover of a manuscript at Mount Athos. probably belongs to the same Codex.
W f : so we may designate a palimpsest leaf (ninth century), contain
ing Mark v. 16-40, found by Mr. Yansittart in Cod. 192 of the Acts.
\V : the Sunderland palimpsest, ninth century; see above, p. 102.
X, for the Gospels: Codex MONACENSTS; fragmentary; end of ninth
or beginning of tenth century; now in the Munich University Library.
Collated by Tischendorf and Tregelles.
Y, for the Gospel of John : Codex BAKP.KIUNI; fragmentary: eighth
century; now in the Library of the Prince Barberini at Koine. Tischen
dorf published it in J\Ion. sacr, ined., 1846.
Z, for Matthew: Codex DUKLINENSIS; rcscriptus; sixth century; one
of the chief palimpsests; text in value next to N and 15. Edited by
Barrett, 1801, in faulty fac-simile; Tregellcs supplemented his edition in
18G3 ; re-edited with great care by T. K. Abbott, Lond. 1880. See notice
by Dr. Gregory in Schiirer s " Thcologische Literaturzeitung," Lcips. 1881,
col. 228 sq.
T, for the Gospels: Codex TISCIIENDORFIANUS IY. ; ninth or tenth
century; discovered by Tischendorf in an Eastern monastery; sold to the
Bodleian Library in 1855. Another portion of the same MS. was discovered
by Tischendorf in 1859, and taken to St. Petersburg. The two together
make a nearly complete copy of the Gospels. An inscription at the close
of John fixes the date probably at Nov. 27, 844 (according to Tischendorf),
or 979 (according to Gardthausen).
A, for the Gospels: Codex SANGAU.KNSIS (St. Gall); ninth century;
probably written by Irish monks at St. Gall. Complete, lacking one leaf,
with a Latin interlinear translation, somewhat conformed to the Yulgate.
Published by IJettig in lithographed fac-simile, Zurich, 1836.
6 a , for Matthew: Codex TISCHENDORFIANUS I.; seventh century;
now in the Leipsic University Library; containing fragments of Matt,
xiii., xiv., xv. Found by Tischendorf in the East in 1844, and published
in his Mon. sacr. ined., 1846, with a few lines of Matt, xii., published by
Tischendorf in Mon. sacr. ined., N. C., vol. ii. (1857).
b : six leaves (sixth or seventh century), fragments of Matt, xxii.,
xxiii., and Mark iv., v. Brought by Tischendorf to St. Petersburg in
1859.
6 C : two folio leaves (sixth century), with Matt. xxi. 19-24, and
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 131
John xviii. 29-35. Tischemlorf brought the first, and Archbishop Porfiri
the second, to St. Petersburg.
B (1 : a fragment (eighth century) of Luke xi. 87-45. Brought to
St. Petersburg by Tischendorf.
6 e : a fragment (sixth century) of Matt. xxvi. 2-4, 7-9.
9 f : fragments (sixth century) of Matt, xxvi., xxvii., and Mark i., ii.
6e : a fragment (sixth century) of John (vi. 13, 14, 22-24), like O (2).
6 h : Grrcco- Arabic fragments (ninth century) of Matt. xiv. and xxv.,
which, together with 9 e f s, belong to the collection of Archbishop Poriiri
formerly at St. Petersburg (now at Kiev ?).
A. for Luke and John : Codex TISCHEXDORFIAXUS III.; ninth century;
now in the Bodleian Library; collated by Tischendorf (who brought it
from the East) and Tregelles. The portion of this MS. containing
Matthew and Mark is written in cursive characters, and was brought by
Tischendorf to St. Petersburg in 1859.
?, for Luke i. 1-xi. 33 (with some gaps) : Codex ZACYXTIIIUS; a pal
impsest of the eighth century, formerly at the island of Zante; presented
in 1821 to the British and Foreign Bible Society in London ; deciphered
and published by Tregelles, 186 1. The text is very valuable, and is sur
rounded by a commentary.
IT. for the Gospels: Codex PETROPOT.ITAXUS : ninth century; brought
by Tischendorf from Smyrna ; collated by him, 18G4 and 18G5. The MS.
is nearly complete, lacking 77 verses.
2, for Matthew and Mark: Codex ROSSAXEXSIS; found by two German
scholars, Dr. Oscar von Gebhardt, of Gottingen, and Dr. Adolf Harnack,
of Giessen, in March, 1879, at Kossano, in Calabria, in possession of the
archbishop, who got it from the library of the former convent. It is
beautifully written, in silver letters, on very line purple-colored vellum,
with the three first lines in both columns, at the beginning of each
Gospel, in gold (very rare among Greek MSS.). It is also richly orna
mented with eighteen remarkable pictures in Avater-colors, representing
scenes in the gospel history; hence important for the history of early
Christian art. Its miniatures bear a striking resemblance to those of the
celebrated Vienna purple MS. of Genesis. It consists of 188 leaves of two
columns of twenty lines each, and contains the Gospels of Matthew and
Mark (Luke and John are lost). The Gospel of Matthew ends with the
words, ETAITEAION KATA MAT0AION. Gebhardt and Harnack
assign it to the sixth century. The text shows a departure from the
oldest MSS. (X and B), and an approach to the amended text of A A IT.
It frequently agrees with D and the old Latin against the mass of later
TTO Kj H P O Y O"T
NACAMHM
AM PA Ac
p Ac
AKiOr
TTAPATT
>l- iO/ xe T^Y
SPECIMEN OF THE CODEX EOSSANEXSIS, CONTAINING MATT. vi. 13. 14.
TTOVrjpOV OTl | (TOW tGTIV t] (3a \ (JlXtia KCtl T) CV \ VClfllQ KO.I f) $0 \ Z,a flQ
TOVI; at(jj \ fag a^i]v. \ Eav yap cupiiTe j TOIQ a) [^(OU)7r]oic TCI \ apctTT-
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 133
MSS. It contains, however, the doxology in the Lord s Prayer, Matt. vi.
13, which is omitted in the old Latin and Vulgate, as well as in X 13 D Z,
Origen, Tertullian, and Cyprian, and originated in liturgical use in Syria.
It accords most remarkably with N of the Gospels (Cod. Purpureus).
See Evanr/eliorum Codex argenteus jmrjmreus Rossanensis (), litteris
aryenteis sexto lit ridetur sceculo script us picturisque ornatus, by O. von
(.Jebhardt and Adolf Harnack, Leipsic, 1880; with fac-similes of portions
of the text and outline sketches of the pictures. A full edition of the
codex is promised.
We give a fac-simile from this work on the preceding page.
B. THE CURSIVE MANUSCRIPTS.
The cursive MSS. are indicated by Arabic numer
als. They were written in current hand on vellum
or parchment (membrana) ; or on cotton paper
(charta lomltycina, also charta Damasccna, from
the place of manufacture), which came into use in
the ninth and tenth centuries ; or on linen paper
(charta proper), which was employed first in the
twelfth century. Some are richly illuminated.
They date from the ninth to the middle of the fif
teenth century, when the invention of the art of
printing substituted a much easier and cheaper
mode of multiplying books. A few, however, were
written in the sixteenth century.
They are much more numerous than the uncials,
and amount in all, in round sum, to about 1000. 1
About 30 of them contain the whole New Testa
ment, others two or more groups of books. We
have, in round figures, more than 600 cursive MSS.
of the Gospels ; over 200 of the Acts and Catholic
1 Dr. Hort (ii. 7G) says: "If each MS. is counted as one, irrespectively
of the books contained, the total number is between 900 and 1000."
134: MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
Epistles; nearly 300 of the Pauline Epistles; and
about 100 of Revelation. 1
To these should be added over 400 catalogued
Lectionaries namely, about 350 Evangelistaries
and SO Praxapostoli, which contain only the Script
ure lessons for public service, and were written
mostly between the tenth and twelfth centuries.
About 70 of these Lectionaries are uncials, the rest
are cursives. None of them, however, are believed
to be older than the seventh or eighth century.
Uncial writing continued to be used for Lectiona
ries some time after it had become obsolete for
ordinary copies of the Xew Testament or parts
thereof.
Of the cursive MSS. a considerable number have
been collated in whole or in part by Mill, Wet-
stein, Griesbach, Birch, Alter, Scholz, Matthrei, Mu
ral t, Tregelles, Tischendorf, and Scrivener. Many
others are entirely unknown, but would not be
likely to affect present conclusions or the ascer
tained relations between the existing documents. 2
The critical value of the cursives is, of course, not
near so great as that of the uncials, because they are
1 See the art. of Tischendorf in Herzog (i. 272). In this last reckoning
the same MS. may be counted more than once.
2 Dr. Scrivener gives a careful description of 4G9 cursive MSS. for the
Gospels (pp. 164-209), and of a large number of MSS. for the other books
of the New Testament (pp. 209-249). Then follows a section on the
lectionaries or manuscript service-books of the Greek Church (250-2G9),
which have as yet received little attention from Biblical critics. Dean
Alford gives also a list of 469 cursive MSS. of the Gospels in convenient
columns {Froleyg. i. 120-137). Compare Table IX. in Mitchell, pp. 119-
132, Tischendorf, L c., and Wcstcott and Hort, ii. 7G sqq.
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
135
much further removed from the primitive source.
But some twenty or thirty of them are very im
portant for their agreement with the oldest authori
ties, or for some other peculiarity.
The following are the most valuable cursive MSS. :
1, for the Gospels: Codex BASILEENSIS; of the tenth century; in the
University Library at Basle; known to Erasmus, but little used by him;
collated by Wetstein, C. L. Koth, and Tregclles.
SPECIMEN OK THE CODEX BASILEENSIS, OF THE TENTH CENTURY, CON
TAINING LUKE I. 1, 2, NEARLY AS IN ALL GREEK TESTAMENTS.
tvayyk\\iov~\ Kara XOVKO.V:
TroXXoi kTrtxtip^aav apara^affjai \ ^i/yy?;rrtv irtpi TUIV m-
\ tV IJfJLlV TTpCtypCtTtoJV. KCtSll>^ TTCtft ctiOGdV l /fJ.i \ 01
civTOTTTCn KCII yTTJypgrot ytvofJitvoi.
13, for the Acts and Catholic Epistles; identical with No. 33 of the
Gospels (see below).
17, for the Pauline Epistles ; identical with No. 33 of the Gospels,
31, for the Acts and Catholic Epistles; identical with No. 69 of the
Gospels.
33, for the Gospels (the same as No. 13 for Acts and Cath. Epp., and
No. 17 for Pauline Epp.): Codex COLBERTINUS; in the National Library
at Paris (Regius 14, Colbertinus 2844) ; of the eleventh century ; called
"the queen of the cursive MSS.," or by Tregelles, "the most important
of the Biblical MSS. in cursive letters extant," and, as Scrivener says,
136 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
"deserving the utmost attention." It contains the whole New Testament
except the Apocalypse, but has suffered much "from damp and decay"
(Home, iv. 200). Collated by Gricsbach, Scholz (cursorily), and especially
by Tregellcs in 1850. It agrees most with 15, D, and L. "It has an
unusual proportion of pre-Syrian readings, chiefly non-Western" (Hort,
ii. 154).
37, for the Pauline Epistles; identical with No. 09 of the Gospels.
47, for the Pauline Epistles: Codex BODL. KOK 16; eleventh or twelfth
century. Collated by Tregellcs.
61, for the Acts and Catholic Epistles: Codex TISCIIENDORF. ; in the
British Museum; dated April 20, 1044. Collated by Tischendorf. who
discovered it, Tregelles, and Scrivener. Formerly called lo li , that is, Londi-
nensis Tischendorfianus, Dr. Hort says (ii. 154): It "contains a very
ancient text, often Alexandrian, rarely Western, with a trifling Syrian
element, probably of late introduction."
G9, for the Gospels (Acts 31, Paul 37): Codex LEICESTRENSIS; eleventh
century; collated by Tregelles (1852) and Scrivener (1855). " This manu
script, together with 13, 124, 346 of the Gospels, are regarded as derived
from an uncial archetype resembling Codex D."
81. for the Gospels; at St. Petersburg; called 2? e by Tischendorf, as
standing second in a list of documents collated by Muralt. It is pronounced
by Dr. Hort (ii. 154) "the most valuable cursive for the preservation of
Western readings in the Gospels."
95, for the Apocalypse: Codex PARIIAM 17; twelfth or thirteenth cen
tury ; collated by Scrivener.
209 : Codex VENETUS, a vellum MS. of the fifteenth century, formerly
the property of Cardinal Bessarion, containing the Gospels; perhaps
copied from the Vatican MS. It contains also the Acts and Catholic
Epistles (No. 95), Paul s Epistles (No. 108), and Revelation (No. 46), but
by different hands, and of no special value.
Other cursives deserving mention are :
For the Gospels: 22, 28, 59, 66. 102, 118, 124. 157, 201; for the Acts
and Catholic Epistles: 15, 18, 36.40, 73. 180; for the Pauline Epistles: 46,
67**, 73, 109; for the Apocalypse: 7, 14, 38, 47, 51, 82.
One more cursive MS. must be mentioned for
its historical and dogmatic interest. This is the
Codex MoNTFORTiANUSj probably written in Eng
land during the sixteenth century (certainly not
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 137
before 1500), formerly the property of Dr. Mont-
fort, then of Archbishop Ussher, now in the Trinity
College Library at Dublin, numbered 61 in the
Gospels, 3 in the Acts and Catholic Epistles, 40 in
Paul s Epistles, and 92 in Tregelles s edition of the
Apocalypse. It has no intrinsic importance, but is
celebrated in the controversy on the spurious passage
1 John v. 7, which it contains on a glazed page to
protect it. From this codex the three heavenly
witnesses passed into the third edition of Erasmus
(1522), who had promised to insert them, if any
Greek MS. were found containing them, and so be
came part of the textus receptus and all the transla
tions made from it. Erasmus, however, was not
convinced of its genuineness, and suspected that it
was interpolated by translation from the Latin
Yulgate. Luther did not translate the passage.
See a full account by Tregelles in Home, iv. 213-
217, with a fac-simile. The only other Greek MSS.
which contain the passage in any form are I^o. 162,
the Codex Ottobonianus, a Graeco- Latin MS. in
the Vatican Library (]X~o. 298) of the fifteenth or
sixteenth century, and No. 173, the Codex Regius
Neapolitanus, which contains the passage on the
margin by a hand of the seventeenth century.
Other MSS. which were formerly quoted in favor
of the passage are only transcripts from some print
ed Greek Testament. The Codex Eavianus at Ber
lin is a literary forgery, being almost entirely a mod
ern transcript from the Complutensian Polyglot,
with a few readings from the text of Erasmus. See
Tregelles, I. c. iv. 218, also 356 sqq. On the con-
138 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
troversy concerning this passage, see particularly
the Memoir of the Controversy respecting the Three
Heavenly Witnesses, 1 John v. 7, including Critical
Notices of the Principal Writers on Both Sides of the
Discussion, It/ Criticus [i. e., Rev. William Onnc].
A New Edition, with Notes and an Appendix, Ijy
Ezra Allot. New York, 1SGG, 12mo (xii. and 213
pages). Also the note of Dr. Ilort, N. T, in Greek,
vol. ii. App. p. 103 sqq.
PUBLISHED UNCIAL MANUSCRIPTS. 139
LIST OF PUBLISHED UNCIAL MANUSCRIPTS.
BY PROFESSOR ISAAC H. HALL, Hi.D.
[NOTE. This list is intended to include only those publications which give ac
curately the whole contents of Uncial Manuscripts of tho N. T. , whether in fac
simile or not; together with certain editions of the N. T. based on a single MS.
and containing it completely in text and notes.
The SMALL CAPITALS added to the large one which designates the MS. denote,
respectively : A, Acts ; P, Paul s Epistles ; R, Revelation. Where no small capi
tal is attached, the MS. contains the Gospels, or a part thereof, and sometimes
much more. I. contains palimpsest fragments of seven different MSS. Capitals
with small superior letters designate small fragments. Ei>.]
Date of MS. Name of MS. Date of Publication, and Editor.
Cent. IV. X. SIXAITICUS. 1862. Tischendorf, St. Petersburg,
i ol. (Facsimile type.}
1863. Tischendorf, Leipzig, 4to.
1865 (1864). Tischendorf, Leipzig,
8vo; Addenda, etc., 1869.
B.VATiCANUs(n. 1209). 1857. Mai, Rome, 4 to. Reprinted
(1859) in Leipzig (London,
New York) in Svo, and
1860. Kuenen & Cobct (with cor
rections), Lcyden, small Svo.
1859. Yercellone, Rome, Svo.
1867. Tischendorf, Leipzig, 4to.
Appendix, 1869, fol.
1 868-1881. Yercellone & Cozza
(and Sergio), Rome, fol.
Quasi facsimile type.)
Cent. V. A. ALEXAXDRIXUS. 1786. Woide, London, fol. (Fac
simile type.)
1860. Cowper, London, Svo.
1879. Brit. Mus., Lond. (Autotype.)
C. EPIIRAEMI. 1843. Tischendorf, Leipzig, 4to.
Q. GuELPHERBYTAXUsB. (1762.) Knittcl, Brunswick, 4to.
1860. Tischendorf (Mon. Sac. Incd.
vol. iii.), Leipzig, 4 to.
1-iO PUBLISHED UXCIAL MANUSCRIPTS.
I>ate of MS. Name of MS. Date of Publication, and Editor.
Cent. V. T. BORGIANUS I. 1789. (iiorgi, Koine, 4to.
T woi " 1790. Ford (App. Cod. Alex.}, Ox
ford, fol.
I. TISCHENDORFIANCS II. 1855. Tischendorf (Mon. Sac. Incd.
vol. i.), Leipzig, 4to.
I b . liusEi BRITAXXICI. 1857. Tischendorf (Mon. Sac. Incd.
vol. ii.), Leipzig, 4to.
Cent. VI. D. BEZJE. 1 793. Kipling, Cambridge, fol. (Fac
simile type.}
1864. Scrivener, Cambridge, 4to.
F. GUELPHERBYTAXUS A. (1702.) Knittel, Brunswick, 4to.
1809. Tischendorf (Mon. Sac. Incd.
vol. vi.), Leipzig, 4to.
R. XITRIEXSIP. 1857. Tischendorf (Mon. Sac. Incd.
vol. ii.), Leipzig, 4to.
Z. DruuxExsis. 1801. Barrett, Dublin, 4to. (Sup
plement, Tregelles, London,
1863, 4to.)
1880. Abbott, Dublin, 4to.
I. TISCHEXDORFIAXUS II. 1855. Tischendorf ( Mon. Sac. Lied.
vol. i.), Leipzig, 4to.
X. PURPUREUS. (Portions scattered.) 1846. Tischendorf
(Mon. Sac. Incd.}, Leipzig,
4to.
1870. Archives dcs Missions Scicn-
tif. etc., Paris. (Patmos
Fragments.)
O a . TISCIIEXDORFIAXUS I. 1846. Tischendorf (Mon. Sac.
Ined.}, Leipzig, 4to.
1857. Tischendorf (Mon. Sac. Incd.
vol. ii.), Leipzig, 4to.
E A . LAUDIAXUS, 35. 1715. Hearne, Oxford, 8vo.
1870. Tischendorf (Mon. Sac. Incd.
vol. ix.), Leipzig, 4to.
D p . CLAROMONTAXUS. 1852. Tischendorf, Leipzig, 4to.
H p . COISLIXIAXUS. a, b. 1715. Montfaucon ( Bibliotheca
Coislin.), Paris, fol.
(, b, c, d, e,f, are c. 1863. Sabas (Specimina Palccorjr.},
scattered portions.) Moscow, 4to.
e. 1876. Archives dcs Missions Scicn-
tif. et. Litter., Paris.
PUBLISHED UNCIAL MANUSCRIPTS. lil
Date of M.S. Name of MS. Date of Publication, and Editor.
Cent, VII. F a . COISLIXIANUS I. 1846. Tischendorf (Jfo?i.ae.7n/.),
Leipzig, 4to.
L. REGIUS. 184G. Yischendorf(]lfon.SacJned.),
Leipzig, 4to.
I. TISCHEXDORFIAXUS II. 1855. Tischcndorf ( Hon. Site. Lied.
vol. i.), Leipzig, 4 to.
R p . CRYriOFEiuiATEXSis. (1867.) Cozza (Sacror. Blbl. Vdust.
Frag., pars 2), Rome.
Cent.VIII. E. ZACYXTIIIUS. 18G1. Tregelles, London, sm. fol.
F. KHEXO-TRAJECTIXUS (Boreeli). 1843. Viukc, Utrecht, 4to.
Y. BARBERIXI. 1846. Tischendorf(Mon.Sac.Ined.),
Leipzig, 4to.
W a . REGIUS, 314. 184G. TischQndorf(Mon. Sac. Lied.},
Leipzig, 4to.
\Y C . " I860. Tischcndorf (Mon. Sac. Lied.
vol. iii.), Leipzig, 4to.
G A . VATICAXCS, 9671. 1877. Cozza (Sacror. Bill. Vetust.
Frog, pars 3), Rome, 8vo.
B R . VATICAXUS, 2066. 1846. Tiscbendorf (3fon.Sac.Licd.),
Leipzig, 4to.
1869. Tischendorf (4jt>p.CW. rat.},
Leipzig, 4to.
Cent. IX. A. SAXGALLEXSIS. 1836. Rettig, Zurich. (Facsimile.)
0. MOSQUEXSIS, 120. 1785. Matthaci (Epp. Pauli ad
Tlicss., etc., and facsimile
in Joannis Apoc. etc. ),
Riga, Svo.
1861. Tregelles (App. to Coil Za-
cynth.), London, 4to.
\Y d . (Trinity Coll., Cambridge.) ? Photographs by Brad-
shaw.
G p . BOERXERIAXUS. 1791. Matthaci, Meissen, 4to.
F p . AUGIEXSIS. 1859. Scrivener, Cambridge, 4to.
pAPR PORFIRIANUS. 1865-69. Tischendorf (Mon. Sac.
Lied. vols. v. vi.), Leipzig,
4to.
M p . RUBER. 1800. Henke, Progr. Ilelmstadt,
4to.
1855. (ed. alt. 1861). Tischendorf
(Anecd. Sac. et Prof.), Leip
zig, 4to.
CHAPTER THIRD.
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS.
VALUE OF VERSIONS.
XEXT to the study of the MSS., the most impor
tant aids in textual criticism are the ancient versions,
or translations of the Xew Testament from the
Greek into vernacular languages. They are, how
ever, only indirect sources, as we must translate
them back into the original, except in omissions and
additions, which are apparent at once. If, for in
stance, the Latin versions in Luke ii. 14 read homini-
hus IfoncG voluntatis, it is evident that the translators
found in their Greek copy the genitive ei/Soiaae, and
not the nominative tvSoKia (voluntas). The transla
tion imiycnitus Filius, in John i. 18, supports VIOQ
instead of S-to c (Dens). The translation hdbeamus
paccrn, in Rom. v. 1, presupposes the reading of the
subjunctive I\M^V (let us have), and not the indica
tive t^ojuv (hdbemuS) we have).
In point of age, some versions, being made in the
second century, antedate our oldest Greek MSS.,
which are not earlier than the fourth. But they
have undergone similar textual corruptions, and no
MS. copy of a version is earlier than the fourth cen
tury. Yet in general they represent the Greek text
from which they were made. Some of them are as
yet imperfectly edited. Even a satisfactory critical
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 43
edition of the Vulgate is still a desideratum. But,
notwithstanding these drawbacks, the ancient ver
sions are more important to the textual critic than
to the exegete. As Dr. Westcott says, "While the
interpreter of the New Testament will be fully
justified in setting aside without scruple the author
ity of early versions, there are sometimes ambiguous
passages in which a version may preserve the tradi
tional sense (John i. 3, 9 ; viii. 25, etc.), or indicate
an early difference of translation ; and then its evi
dence may be of the highest value. But even here
the judgment must be free. Versions supply au
thority for the text, and opinion only for the ren
dering." It matters comparatively little whether
they be elegant or wretched, so long as they reflect
with accuracy the original text. One service of
great importance they can be manifestly depended
upon to render to tell where insertions or omis
sions occur in the original text before the translator.
It is therefore very weighty evidence against the
genuineness of any particular passage that it is not
found in the most ancient versions, representing as
they do the text current in widely separated regions
of the Christian world.
The most important of these versions are the
Latin, the Syriac, the Egyptian, the ^Ethiopic, the
Gothic, and the Armenian.
The Vulgate was the first version made use of as
a collateral witness in the printed editions of Eras
mus and the scholars of Complutum.
1 Smith s Diet, of (he Bible, Amer. ed., vol. iv. p. 3479, art, " Vulgate."
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS.
LATIN VERSIONS.
1. The OLD LATIN (!TALA). This version is not
found complete ; but from the quotations of the
Latin fathers, especially those in Tertullian, Cyprian,
Lucifer of Cagliari, Hilary of Poitiers, Hilary the
deacon or Arnbrosiaster, Ambrose, Victorinus, Je
rome, Rufinus, Augustin, Pelagius, and in the
Apocalypse Primasius, its text can be in large meas
ure restored. See Hermann llonsch, Das JY. T. Ter-
tidliarfS) aus den Schriften des letztercn moglichst
vollstdndig reconstruct, Leipsic, 1871 (731 pages).
The version is nearest in age to the earliest form
of the Peshito, and may be assigned to the middle
or latter half of the second century. It was not the
work of one man, nor suffered to go uncorrected by
many. Hence the different accounts of it by differ
ent scholars ; some holding that there were many
versions before Jerome, in proof of which statement
they quote Augustin, De Doctr. Christ, ii. 11 ; oth
ers holding that there was only one version, and
citing in proof Jerome. But by the simple and
natural explanation that there were many revisions
of the one old translation, Augustin and Jerome can
be reconciled.
The version is made from the Septuagint in the
Old Testament ; is verbal, rough, and clumsy ; the
language is the degenerate Latin of the second cen
tury, with admixture of colloquial and provincial
forms. In the New Testament it underwent many
changes in different provinces ; partly made to im
prove the style, partly to bring it into conformity
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 145
with Greek manuscripts. The great want of uni
formity in the copies current in the latter part of
the fourth century led to the revision undertaken
by Jerome, which now bears the name of the Latin
Vulgate.
The balance of probability is in favor of North
Africa as the place of its origin, because there,
rather than in Italy, there was an immediate demand
for a Latin translation ; while in the Roman Church
the Greek language prevailed during the first and
second centuries. Hence the name "Italic" or
"Vetus Itala" is incorrect. Augustin (De Doctr.
Christ, ii. 15) speaks of a translation which he calls
the Itala, and which he preferred to all the others.
This was manifestly a recension of the same Old
Latin version, made or used in Italy.
The Old Latin version never attained to much
authority ; the Greek being regarded as the authen
tic text, even in the early Latin Church. At the
same time, the version is one of the most significant
monuments of Christian antiquity, the medium of
divine truth unto the Latin peoples for centuries,
and of great value to the Bible critic by reason of
its antiquity and literalness. The Apocryphal books
of Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Ba-
ruch, Prayer of Manasseh, and 4 Ezra (2 Esdras)
were, in a substantially unchanged form, embodied
in the Vulgate. In the Old Testament the Psalms
were similarly transferred. Jerome s translation of
the Psalms from the original Hebrew could not
force its way.
There is still lacking a really trustworthy edition
10
146 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS.
of the existing portions of the Old Latin version.
For the New Testament there exist, however, more
than twenty very ancient but fragmentary MSS. of
the Gospels, and some (imperfect) of the Acts and
the Pauline Epistles ; while there is only one com
plete MS. yet known of the Apocalypse, and of the
Catholic Epistles but few fragments remain. The
codices of this version are cited by small Latin let
ters, but there is more variation in the use of these
letters than in the use of the capital letters for the
Greek codices. The principal MSS. of the Gospels
generally regarded as representing the African text
are
Codex VERCELL.ENSIS (a), supposed to have been written by Eusebius,
Bishop of Vercelli, cir. A.D. 3G5.
VEUOXKNSIS (b), of the fourth or fifth century.
COLIJEIITINUS (c), at Paris, of the eleventh century, the only complete
MS.
Codex BRIXIANUS (f), at Brescia, of the sixth century, represents a later
revision, probably Augustine s Itala,
Codex BOBBIENSIS (k), now in Turin, of the fourth or fifth century,
collated bv Tischendorf, has a remarkable and valuable text, and the
same is true of Codex PAL.ATIXUS (e), at Vienna, fifth century.
The last two MSS. agree in a striking manner with
the quotations of Cyprian, and Dr. Hort therefore
regards them as the best representatives of the
African text ; the type of text found in a b c he
would designate as European, while f and q are
classed as Italian.
The most complete edition of the Old Latin ver
sion is Peter Sabatier s jBibliorum Sacrorum Latince
Versiones Antiques, sen Veins Italica et cceterce quce-
cunque in Codd. MS/S. et Antiquorum Libris reperiri
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 147
potuerunt (Remis, i. e. Kheims, 1743-49, 3 torn. fol. ;
new title-page, Paris, 1751). But many parts of
each Testament have been carefully collated or
edited subsequently. Worthy of special mention,
for the Gospels, are Bianchini s Evangeliarium
Quadruplex Latinos Versionis Antiquce, sen Veteris
lialicce, editum ex Codicibus Manuscriptis, Romse,
1749 4 2 torn. fol. ; Scrivener s Codex JBezce, Cam
bridge, 1864; Tischendorf s Evangelium Palatinum,
Lips. 1847; and Haase s Codex Itehdigeranus, Bres-
lau, 1865-66. For the Acts, see Scrivener s Codex
Hezce, and Belsheim s Die Apostelgeschichte und die
Offenbarung Johannis in einer alien lat. Uebersetzung
cms dem Gigas Librorum, Christiania, 1879. For the
Pauline Epistles, Tischendorf s Codex Claromonta-
nus, 1852 ; Matthaei s Codex Bo&rnerianus, Misense,
1791; and Scrivener s Codex Augiensis, Cambridge,
1859. For the Catholic and Pauline Epistles (mere
ly fragments), see Ziegler s Italafragmente, Marburg,
1876. For the Apocalypse, see Belsheim, as above.
Belsheim s Codex Aureus of the Gospels (Chris
tiania, 1878) is rather a MS. of the Vulgate than of
the Old Latin, though the text is mixed, as it is in
not a few other MSS. The Graeco- Latin MSS.
pew act DP aul E act GP &UI FP aul (mostly Vulgate), have
no independent authority except where the Latin
differs from the Greek.
The Codex Lugdunensis, published by Ulysse
Robert, Paris, 1881, contains a version apparently
of African origin (comp. Renan, Marc Aurele, p. 456,
note 2). This, however, is a MS. of the Pentateuch.
On the whole subject, consult Hermann Ronsch,
148 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS.
Itala und Vulgata. Das SpracJiidiom der urchrist-
liclicn Itala und der katholischen Vulgata, 2d ed.,
revised, Marburg, 1875 ; L. Ziegler, Die latein. J2i-
belubersetzungen vor Ilieronymus und die Itala des
AugustlnuSjM\iuclieu 7 1879 (he maintains the exist
ence of several Latin versions or revisions before
Jerome) ; O. F. Fritzsche, Latein. Hibelubersetzun-
gen, in the new ed. of Ilerzog, vol. viii. 1881, pp. 433-
472; Westcott s art. "Vulgate," in Smith s Diet, of
the Bible ; and Westcott and Hort s Greek Testa
ment^ vol. ii., Tntrod., pp. 78-84. There is a good con
densed account, revised by Dr. Abbot, in Mitchell s
Critical Handbook (1880), p. 133 sq.
2. The Latin VULGATE. In the course of time
the text of the Old Latin became so corrupt that a
thorough revision was imperative, and was intrusted
by Pope Damasus, in 383, to Jerome (d. 419), the
most learned scholar of his day, and of all the Latin
fathers best qualified, by genius, taste, and knowl
edge of Hebrew and Greek, for this difficult task.
He began upon the Xew Testament, and proceeded
cautiously, making as few changes as possible, so as
not to arouse the opposition of those who, as he
says, " thought that ignorance was holiness." But
his scholarly instincts, no less than his convictions
of duty towards the Divine Word, impelled him to
go beyond his instructions, and make a new version
of the Old Testament directly from the Hebrew, of
which, however, it does not concern us at present
to speak. In the Kew Testament he used "old"
Greek MSS., and made no alterations except such
as were required by the sense. He removed numer-
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 149
ous interpolations of parallel passages in the Gos
pels. " Internal evidence shows that the Latin MSS.
which he took as a basis for his corrections contained
an already revised text, chiefly, if not wholly, Italian
in character" (Hort, ii. 80).
Jerome s revision and new translation (finished
405) encountered much opposition, which greatly
irritated his temper and betrayed him into con
temptuous abuse of his opponents, whom he styled
"lipedcs asellos" But, by inherent virtues, rather
than by external authority, it passed into such cur
rent use that in the eighth century it was the Vul
gate, the common version, in the Western churches.
It became much corrupted by frequent copying.
Alcuin, at the instance of Charlemagne, revised it
circa 802, by the collation of various good MSS., and
substantially in this form it passed down to the time
of the invention of printing.
The first book printed was the Vulgate the so-
called Mazarin Bible (Gutenberg and Fust, Mayence,
1455). Printing, however, fixed errors and gave
them wider currency, and revision was felt once
more to be imperative.
In the Council of Trent (Dec. 13, 1545, to Dec. 4,
1563) the matter was introduced Feb. 4, 1546, and
the recommendation of revision passed on April 8 ;
but it was not until 1590, in the pontificate of Six-
tus V., that the revised edition of the Vulgate ap
peared. The scholarly pope took active interest in
the work, rejecting or confirming the suggestions of
the board of revisers, and corrected the proof-sheets
with his own hand. It was prefaced by the famous,
150 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS.
and, as the event showed, by no means infallible,
constitution ^Eternus ille (dated March 1, 1589), in
which the pope said, " By the fulness of apostolical
power, we decree and declare that this edition of the
sacred Latin. Vulgate of the Old and New Testa
ments, which has been received as authentic by the
Council of Trent, ... be received and held as true,
legitimate, authentic, arid unquestioned, in all public
arid private disputation, reading, preaching, and ex
planation." He further forbade any alteration what
ever; ordered this text, and none other, henceforth
to be printed ; and hurled anathemas against every
one disobeying the constitution. But, alas for the
pope ! the immaculate edition was full of errors and
blunders; and no sooner was he dead (Aug. 27,
1590) than the demand for a new edition arose.
Bellarmine suggested an ingenious though dishon
orable escape from the awkward predicament in
which Sixtus had placed the Church viz., that a
corrected edition should be hastily printed under
the name of Sixtus, in which the blame of the errors
should be thrown upon the printer! His recom
mendation was adopted, but it was not until 1592,
under Clement VIII. , that the revised edition ap
peared. The Clementine edition is the standard in
the Roman Catholic Church, in which this Latin
translation takes precedence of the Hebrew and
Greek originals, as the support of doctrine and guide
of life.
The materials for a more critical edition of the
Vulgate than the Clementine are very abundant.
There are numerous MSS., and much labor has al-
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 151
ready been expended upon the work. The most
famous of these MSS. are
(a) Codex AMIATINUS, from the Cistercian Monastery of Monte Amia-
tino, in Tuscany, now in the Laurentian Library at Florence; it contains
the Old and New Testaments almost complete, dates from 541, and is the
oldest and best MS. The New Testament was edited by Tischendorf,
Leipsic, 1850, 2d ed. 1854, and by Tregelles (in his edition of the Greek
Testament, with the variations of the Clementine text).
(U) Codex FULDENSIS, in the Abbey of Fulda, Hesse-Cassel ; contains
the New Testament; dates from 546. Collated by Lachmann for his
large edition of the Greek Testament, and edited by E. lianke, Marburg
and Leipsic, 1868.
(c) Codex FOUOJULIEXSIS (sixth century), at Friuli; Matthew, Luke,
and John published by Bianchini, Evany. Quadruplex, Appendix. Part
of the same MS. is at Prague (PKAGENSIS).
(W) Codex HAKLEIAX. 1775 (seventh century), of the Gospels, partially
collated by Griesbach, Symb. Crit. vol. i.
(e) Codex TOLETANUS, at Toledo; written in Gothic letters in the
eighth century; collated by the Sixtine correctors and by Vercellone. It
contains both Testaments. Its readings are given by Bianchini, Vindicice
Canon. Scripturarum, Home, 1740.
The best edition of the variations is that of Carlo
Yercellone, Varice Lectiones Vulg. Lat. Bibliorum
Editionis, Rom. torn. i. 1860; torn. ii. pars 1, 1862 ;
pars 2, 1864. Unfinished. A very important work,
but, unfortunately, without either the authorized or
the corrected text. Fritzsche says (loc. cit. p. 458),
" Even to-day there is wanting a text which answers
the demands of science ; and Protestantism alone
can and ought to accomplish this work, already too
long neglected."
152 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS.
SYRIAC VERSIONS.
1. The PESIIITO (or PESHITTO, PESIIITTA, as spelled
by many Syriac scholars), the "simple" so called
because of its simple Syriac style, or its simple form,
in distinction from the Grecized versions replete
with asterisks and obeli derived from Origen in its
present shape, dates from the fourth or third cen
tury. It supplied the wants of the Syrian Chris
tians before the unhappy schism in that church
(fifth century), and by its use in common has always
been a bond of union between the different sects,
who still read it in their church services and as a
sacred classic, though its language is no longer the
vernacular. The Peshito has been justly called
" the queen of (ancient) versions," since, while it
yields to none in accuracy and faithfulness, it is
idiomatic, and as unfettered as an original composi
tion in Syriac. Its genius is strikingly like that of
Luther s matchless German ; generally close and
literal, but not shrinking from a paraphrase when
necessary. It was first used for critical purposes by
Beza, but only occasionally and indirectly (through
the Latin version of Trernellius), more fully by Wal
ton, Mill, Wetstein, and w T ith great care by Tregel-
les. The text connects it in sundry places with D
and the Latin versions, though in more with A. Its
critical value is very great, but has been somewhat
diminished since the discovery of the still older
Curetonian Syriac. It had undergone a revision be-
1 See especially Tregelles, in Home s Introd. (14th ed. 1877), vol. iv.
258-284, and on the Syrian text, Westcott and Hort, ii. 132-146.
TIIE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 153
fore it assumed its present shape, like that of the
Old Latin by Jerome. According to the investiga
tions of Westcott and Hort, the revision took place
in the fourth century or sooner (between 250 and
350), adapting it to the Greek copies current at An-
tiocli. 1
Notwithstanding its age and value, the Peshito
was not known to Europe until 1552 ; and in 1555,
at Vienna, the first edition appeared, at the expense
of the emperor, Ferdinand I., edited by Albert Wid-
manstadt, the imperial chancellor. This edition is
the basis of all its European successors, and is not
inferior to any. It contained all that is now known
of the Peshito version that is, all of the New Test,
except 2d Peter, 2d and 3d John, Jude, and the
Apocalypse. There is testimony, however, to the
fact that these books existed in a Syriac translation
before the fourth century, and were used by Syrian
fathers who quoted the Peshito. The missing epis
tles were supplied in the modern editions from an
other version (otherwise unknown), first brought, to
light by Pococke, and published at Leyden in 1630.
The Apocalypse, likewise of unknown origin, was
first published by De Dieu, at Leyden in 1627, from
a late Indian MS. owned by Scaliger. Its text is
not of great value. The best European editions of
the Peshito, with the additions just specified, are
those of Lee, published by the British and Foreign
Bible Society, and of Greenfield, published by Bag-
1 Gr. Test., p. 552; comp. Introd. p. 135 sqq. Dr. Hort s view has been
independently confirmed by Dr. Schiirer in the "Theol. Literaturzeitung"
for 1881, No. 25, p. 594.
154: THE ANCIENT VERSIONS.
ster, in the Polyglot and separately. Rather better
than either are the American editions, one edited
by Dr. Justus Perkins at Urmiah, or Ooroomeyah, in
Persia, 184:1, and its reprint in Xew York in 1874,
both in Nestorian type, and both by the American
Bible Society. Dr. Murdock has published a "Lit
eral Translation from the Syriac Peshito Version "
(New York, 1851). A translation of the Acts and
Epistles from the Peshito, by J. W. Etheridge, ap
peared in London, 1849. Better than either is the
familiar Latin translation by Tremellius. In Schaaf
and Leusden s edition, Leyden, 1708 (also with title-
pages dated 1709, 1717, but no other change), the
Syrian text is accompanied with a close Latin ver
sion, and an appendix of various readings. Schaaf s
Lexicon Syriacwn Concordantiale, published as a
companion volume, is an invaluable help to the stu
dent.
2. The PHILOXENIAN or HARCLEAN version, so
called from its patron Philoxenus, Monophysite
bishop of Mabug (Hierapolis), in Eastern Syria
(488-518), and from Thomas of Harkel, a subsequent
reviser, who was probably likewise a Monophysite
bishop of Mabug. Scrivener calls it " the most
servile version of Scripture ever made." It may be
compared in this respect to the literal English ver
sion of Robert Young. It is based upon the Peshi
to, and forces it into rigorous conformity with the
letter of the Greek, even to the linguistic phenome
na. It dates from A.D. 508, and was revised by
Thomas of Harkel, or Heraclea, A.D. 616, who com
pared it with several ancient Greek MSS. belonging
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 155
to a library at Alexandria, the readings of which he
often notes in his margin. These are as important
as the text itself. It contains the whole New
Testament, except the Apocalypse, and is therefore
more complete than the Peshito. The only edi
tion of the Ilarclean (improperly called the Philox-
enian) is that of Joseph White, printed by the
Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1778-1803, 4 vols. 4to.
Bernstein has published the Gospel of John (Leips.
1853).
This version was chiefly used by the Jacobites.
The nrirevised Philoxenian was thought by Adier 1
to exist in a Florence Codex (in the Medicean
Library) of the eighth century ; but this opinion is
disputed by Bernstein, 2 who thought the claims of
the Vatican Codex Angelicus (twelfth to fourteenth
century) to be superior. But a Jacobite MS. of the
ninth century, originally from Mardin, at present
belonging to the Syrian Protestant College at Beirut,
brought to light by Prof. Isaac II. Hall in 1870, pos
sesses claims superior to either, and is the nearest
representative of the unrevised Philoxenian thus far
known, if indeed it is not identical with it. This
MS. originally consisted of the Gospels in that ver
sion, with the other books in the Peshito, so far as
the latter contained them. At present the MS. con
tains nearly the entire Gospels from Matt. xii. 20;
and of the rest of the New Test, lacks all of Phile
mon and Hebrew s, with large portions of the Pas-
1 N. T. Versiones Syriaca, p. 55.
3 Das heilige Ev. d. Johannes, pp. 25-30.
156 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS.
toral Epistles, besides a few other lacunce where a
leaf is lost. 1
3. The CUKETONIAN Syriac is a mere fragment of
the Gospels (consisting of S2-J- leaves), but very old
and valuable; though overestimated by Canon Cure-
ton, who thought it "retained, to a great extent, the
identical terms and expressions of St. Matthew s
Hebrew Gospel." It is regarded by most scholars
as Cureton, Payne Smith, Ilermansen, Ewald, Crow
foot, Tregelles, Westcott and Ilort as the oldest
form of the Syriac version; the "Peshito" in its
present form holding a relation to it similar to that
of the Vulgate to the Old Latin. Dean Alford calls
it " perhaps the earliest and most important of all
versions." Dr. Scrivener, however, places it decid
edly below the Peshito. It was found by Archdeacon
Tattain in 1842, with 550 other MSS., in a convent
of the Nitrian Desert (seventy miles northwest of
Cairo), and brought to the British Museum ; and
was published by Cureton in 1858, with a literal
English translation. It agrees remarkably with D
and the Old Latin, while the Peshito mostly favors
A. It contains large portions of Matthew, Luke,
and John, and the last four verses of Mark.
Dr. Brugsch, the celebrated Egyptologist, after
wards discovered three additional leaves in the bind
ing of a MS. of the Peshito which came from the
Nitrian convent (1871). They were published by
1 Trofessor Hall read a carefully prepared paper on this MS. before the
Am. Society of Bibl. Lit. and Exegesis at its meeting in New Haven,
June, 1882. It will be published in the Journal, vol. ii. 1883.
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 157
Rodiger in the Monatsbericht of the Berlin Academy
of Sciences for July, 1872 ; and also by Prof. Wright,
as an appendix to Cureton s volume. The leaves
contain Luke xv. 22-xvi. 12 ; xvii. 1-23 ; John vii.
37-viii. 19, not including, however, the disputed
passage respecting the woman taken in adultery
(vii. 53-viii. 11). The Curetonian Syriac, including
these new leaves, has been translated into Greek by
J. H. Crowfoot in his Fragmenta Evangelica, 2 parts,
London, 1870-71[72].
4. The JERUSALEM Syriac. The principal MS.
known is an Evangelistary in the Vatican, dated
A.D. 1030. This has been published at Verona
(1861-64:, 2 vols. 4to) by Count Francesco Miniscalchi
Erizzo. Fragments of two other MSS. are in the
British Museum, and of two more at St. Petersburg.
The text of these has been published by Land,
Anecdota Syriaca, vol. iv. (1875). The version is
quite independent of the Peshito, and is referred by
Tischendorf to the fifth century. It is in a peculiar
dialect, and seems to have been little used.
OLD EGYPTIAN, OR COPTIC, VERSIONS. 1
There are three Egyptian translations in three
different dialects the THEBAIC or SAHIDIC, the
1 Copt (comp. Arabic Kebf) is supposed to be of the same origin as the
Greek Al-yvTrr-ot; (Kahi Ptah, " country of Ptah "). Another derivation
is from the city Ko7rri or KoTrrog in Upper Egypt, a city of so vast
importance as to give its name to most articles of Egyptian commerce,
to the Egyptian numeral system, and (as many not unreasonably think)
even to AlyvTr-oq itself. See the authorities collected in Athanasius
Kircher s Prodromus Coptus (Romae, 1636), cap. I., De Etymo Coptos,
pp. 7-15. The name Copt (Ko;rnV7j, Latin Coptiles) is far older than
158 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS.
MEMPHITIC or BAIIIRIC, and the BASIIMUKTC. The
Thebaic and Memphitic versions are, as Bishop
Lightfoot declares/ " entirely independent ;" the
former is "rougher, less polished, and less faithful
to the original" than the latter. Both contain many
Greek words, and are of great textual value, as they
independently preserve a very ancient text from
different manuscripts, with the adoption of many
Greek words. Schwartze and Lightfoot infer from
O
historical notices that the greatest part of the New
Testament, if not all, was translated into these
Egyptian dialects in the second century. We have
no satisfactory edition of either version.
1. The cditio princeps of the MEMPHITIC Torsion
for Lower Egypt is that of Wilkins (Oxford, 1716),
based upon copious materials, but not carried out
with much critical sagacity. Still, nothing better
than his work has yet appeared, except an edition
of the four Gospels by M. G. Schwartze (Leips. 1846
and 1847, 2 vols.), and of the Acts and Epistles by
P. Boetticher, alias P. A. de Lagarde, of Gottingen
(Halle, 1852). The Apocalypse is omitted (but is
contained in Wilkins s ed.). The New Testament
in Coptic (Memphitic) arid Arabic was published
by the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge
(1847-52), under the editorial care of "Henry Tat-
tam, the presbyter of the Anglican Church for the
the Arabian dominion of Egypt. It is now applied to the descendants
of the ancient Egyptians, mostly Christians, who inherited the old Egyp
tian (demotic) language, together with their religion.
1 In the chapter on the Egyptian Versions, which he prepared for
Dr. Scrivener s Introduction, pp. 319-357.
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 159
Holy Patriarch and the Church of Christ in Egypt."
It is beautifully printed, but of no critical value,
because no various readings are recorded. The
O
basis of this edition is a copy belonging to the Cop
tic Patriarch.
2. The editio prlnceps of the TIIEBAIC Version
for Upper Egypt is that of C. G. Woide, completed
by Ford (Oxford, 1799). The version is yet in a
very fragmentary condition, and there is need of an
edition in which the fragments shall all be collected.
The Thebaic Version is less valuable than the Mem-
phitic ; its text is less pure, and shows a certain in
fusion of those readings which are called Western,
though to nothing like the same extent as the Old
O O
Latin and the Old Syriac.
3. Of the BASHMUEIC or ELEAKCIIIAN Version
(end of third century?) we have a fragment of
John s Gospel (iv. 28-53), and some portions of the
Pauline Epistles published from MSS. in the Borgian
Museum at Rome by Zoega (Catalogus, 1810) and
Engelbreth (Fragmenta Basmurico-Coptica Vet. et
Nov. Test., Havniae, 1811). It is a secondary ver
sion made from the Thebaic, but useful in passages
where that is defective.
^ETHIOPIC VERSION.
There must have been a call for a translation of
the New Testament very shortly after Christianity
entered Abyssinia. So, although the tradition which
assigns it to Abba Salama (Frumentius), the first
bishop, be unreliable, the version probably dates
from the fourth century, as Dillinann asserts. This
160 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS.
scholar likewise praises the version for its fidelity
and general smoothness.
The text in Walton s Polyglot is taken from the
first edition of this version, printed at Home, 1548-
49. The MS. used for it was defective in the larger
part of the Acts, and its gaps were supplied by the
Abyssinian editors from the Latin Yulgate or the
Greek. Bode s Latin translation (1753) of Walton s
text is the only accurate one. The Kew Testament
has been better edited by Thomas Pell Platt for the
British and Foreign Bible Society (1826-30); but
a really critical edition is still a desideratum. There
are considerable differences in the yEthiopic MSS.,
but they are all comparati\ 7 ely modern. Gilde-
meister, Professor in Marburg, collated some por
tions of the yEthiopic New Testament for Tischen-
dorf s edition of 1859.
GOTHIC VERSION.
It is the work of Ulphilas, Yulfila, or Wulfila
(311-381, or 313-383), 1 the apostle of Christianity
to the Goths, who in the fourth century translated
the Old Testament from the Septuagint and the
New Testament from the Greek into Gothic, and
founded the Gothic alphabet (resembling partly the
Greek, partly the Runic letters). It is uncertain
whether he translated the whole Bible or only por
tions ; the ancient report that he omitted the books
of Kings, because they would excite the warlike
1 The true spelling is Wuljila, i. e. Wolflein, Little Wolf. The date
318-388 is exploded; but it is not certain whether we should adopt
311-381 (Stamm, Bernhardt) or 313-383 (Krafft in Herzog, Davidson).
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 161
passions of the Goths, sounds like a myth. Bishop
Wulfila was a semi-Arian, and all the Germanic
tribes, except the Franks, received Christianity first
in that form during the Arian ascendency in the
East. His Bible accompanied the Goths on their
migrations from the lower Danube to the West.
The Gothic language and people have perished, but
this version has been fortunately recovered in mod
ern times. It is the earliest specimen of Teutonic
literature, and the starting-point of comparative
Teutonic philology, for which it is even more im
portant than for biblical learning. Comp. J. Esberg :
Uljilas, Gothorum Episcopus ( Holm. 1700 ) ; G.
"VVaitz : Vebcr das Leben und die Lehre des IJljila.
JBruchstucke aus dem mcrten Jahrh. (Hann. 1840);
W. L. Krafft : De Fontibus Ulfilce Arianismi (Bonn,
1860); W. Bessell: Das Leben des Ulfilas und die
Bekehrung der Gothen sum Christenthum(G 6iii\\^Qi\^
1860) ; Edinb. Review for October, 1877.
There are seven famous codices of this version :
(a) Codex Argenteus, beautifully written on pur
ple vellum in gold and silver letters, containing
fragments of the Gospels ; it dates from the earlier
part of the sixth century, was discovered in the
library of the Benedictine abbey of Werden, on
the Ruhr, in 1597, and, after changing hands, trans
ferred in 1648 from Prague to the University Library
at Upsala in Sweden.
(I) Codex Carolinus, in the library at Wolfen-
bu ttel, discovered by Knittel in a palimpsest, 1756,
published 1762 and 1763; contains forty verses of
the Epistle to the Romans.
11
162 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS.
(c) Palimpsest fragments of five codices in the
Ambrosian Library at Milan, discovered and pub
lished by Angelo Mai and Castiglione, Milan, 1819-
39 ; portions of Esther, Nehemiah, the Gospels, and
Paul s Epistles.
The best editions of all these fragments are by
II. C. von der Gabelentz and J. Loebe : Ulfilas. Vet.
et N. Test. Versionis Gothicce Fragmenta quce super-
sunt (Leipsic, 1836-46), with a Latin version, and a
very copious grammar and lexicon; and by E. Bern-
hard t (Halle, 1875), in which the Gothic is accom
panied by the Greek, with full critical notes.
Stamm s Vljilas, 7th ed. by Moritz Ileyne, with
grammar and lexicon (Padcrborn, 1878), is the most
convenient manual edition for the student of the
language. Bernhardt s is the best for text-critical
purposes. Massmann s edition (1855-1857) deserves
honorable mention.
The Swedish scholar, Andreas Uppstrom (d. 1865),
has published the text of all the Gothic MSS. line
for line, with the most painstaking accuracy, cor
recting many errors of his predecessors, in his Codex
Argentem, Upsala, 1854; Decem Cod. Argentei re-
diviva folia, ibid. 1857 ; Fragmenta Gothica selecta,
1861; and Codices Gotici Ambrosiani, Stockholm
and Leipsic, 1864-68. Compare also The Gothic and
Anglo-Saxon Gospels in Parallel Columns with the
Versions of Wydiffe and Tyndale, by Jos. Bos-
WORTII, assisted by GEORGE WARING, 2d ed. Lond.
1874, with a fac-simile of the Codex Argenteus.
Dr. R. Miiller and Dr. II. Iloeppe have published
the Gothic Gospel of Mark with a grammatical com-
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 163
mentary : Ulfilas: Evangelium Marci yrammatisch
erldutert, Berlin, 1881 (pp. 72), unfortunately dis
figured not only by typographical errors, but by
gross mistakes in the notes. On the other hand,
W.W. Skeat s The Gospel of Saint Mark in Gothic,
with grammar, notes, and glossary (Oxford, 1882), is
excellent.
ARMENIAN VERSION.
It belongs to the fifth century, and is the work
of Miesrob and Moses Chorenensis. It was based
on Greek MSS. probably obtained from Cappadocia,
the mother of Armenian Christianity. It has con
siderable critical value, though the existing MSS.
are not very ancient, and there are wide differences
among them ; some modern copies contain corrup
tions from the Latin Yulgate. The version em
braces the entire Bible. The first edition appeared
at Amsterdam, 1666, under the care of Bishop Uscan
of Erivan ; in this the text has been more or less
conformed to the Latin Vulgate. The best edition,
founded on manuscripts, is by Zohrab Xew Testa
ment, 1789 ; whole Bible, 1805, and again 1816. It
is now published by the British arid Foreign Bible
Society.
On the Armenian Version, see Tregelles in
Smith s Bible Diet., Am. ed., vol. iv. p. 3374.
We pass by the Slavonic, Arabic, Persic, and sev
eral other versions, which are of too late a date to
be of value for the restoration of the primitive text.
Most of them are derived from other versions, chief
ly the Latin and Syriac. The Slavonic bears traces
of ancient texts.
CHAPTER FOURTH.
PATRISTIC QUOTATIONS.
VALUE OF THE FATHERS AS WITNESSES OF THE TEXT.
THE third source of textual criticism is furnished
by the quotations in the early Christian writers,
from which the greater part of the New Testament
might be reconstructed. The Greek fathers give
direct, the Latin (and Syriac) fathers indirect, testi
mony to the original text. The former rank with
the Greek MSS. ; the latter with the Versions.
Some of them as Irenseus, Origen, Tertullian are
older than our oldest MSS., and therefore of the
greatest value. Sometimes their silence furnishes
negative evidence of the absence of a passage in
their copies.
But the fathers must be used with great care and
discrimination. They were theologians and Chris
tians rather than critics. They often quote very
loosely, simply from memory, and more for doctri
nal, polemical, and practical than critical purposes.
They had no concordances and other modern con
veniences which facilitate the finding of passages.
Their testimony is fragmentary, and fails us w T here
we most wish and need information. Besides, their
editors have so frequently thought they were doing
a service when they corrected their quotations that
PATEISTIC QUOTATIONS. 165
it is often difficult to tell just what was the text be
fore them. The chief benefit of patristic quotations
consists not so much in their independent value as
in their corroborative force, by establishing a reading
which rests on good authority of MSS. or versions.
When they are single and unbupported, they deserve
little or no credit. 1
Origen, Eusebius, and Chrysostom are the most
learned biblical scholars among the earlier Greek
fathers, and have more weight than all the rest as
witnesses of the text. They note occasionally that
" some " or " many " or " the most accurate " " copies
contain or omit a certain reading, or that the true
reading has been perverted by heretics or for some
special purpose.
The most valuable works for critical purposes are
commentaries and homilies which explain the text
consecutively. They are scanty in the ante-Nicene
age. The first commentator and the father of
Christian exegesis is the great Origen, from whom
we have expositions of several chapters of Matthew,
Luke, and John in the original Greek (partly in a
condensed Latin translation ), of Romans in the
abridged and altered version of Rufinus, and of
many scattered verses of the Epistles. Theodore
of Mopsuestia commented on the Minor Epistles of
Paul (extant only in a Latin translation) ; Chrysos
tom preached Homilies on Matthew, John, Acts, and
1 See the judicious remarks of Tregelles, in Home s Introduction (14th
ed. London, 1877), vol. iv. pp. 329-342. Comp. also Reuss, Gesch. der h.
Schr. N. T. ii. p. 125 (5th ed.).
166 PATRISTIC QUOTATIONS.
all the Epistles of Paul ; Theodoret wrote notes on
the Epistles of Paul, based chiefly on Theodore and
Chrysostom ; from Cyril of Alexandria we have
Homilies on Luke (partly in Greek, partly in a
Syriac translation) and on John. Fragments of
other Greek commentators are contained in the
Catencc Patrwn, which arc chiefly compiled from
Chrysostom and Theodoret.
Of the Latin fathers. Tertullian is the richest
source for quotations from the old Latin (African)
Version, and Jerome for the whole New Testament
as retranslated by him (the Vulgate), besides much
valuable information scattered through his exegetical
and other writings. Jerome was a born linguist and
critic, and thoroughly at home in the Hebrew and
Greek Scriptures and in Bible Lands, but somewhat
fettered by orthodox and ascetic prejudices. Angus-
tin was a profounder theologian, and had more spir
itual insight into the meaning of the Scriptures than
Jerome or any of the fathers ; but he was neither a
Greek scholar nor a textual critic, and relied on the
old Latin version witli all its imperfections and
errors. Primasius, an African writer of the sixth
century, has preserved to us, in a commentary, al
most the entire text of the Apocalypse in an old
African Latin version. " Thus, singularly enough,
the Apocalypse possesses the unique advantage of
having been preserved in a Latin text at once con
tinuous and purely African." 1
The number of ecclesiastical writers that have
1 Ilort, ii. 84.
PATRISTIC QUOTATIONS. 167
been consulted by various critics considerably ex
ceeds one hundred, but, with the exception of those
we have mentioned, only a few yield substantial
results. 1
A. GREEK FATHERS.
FIRST CENTURY till the middle of the SECOND :
The apostolic fathers, so called Clement of Rome.
Barnabas, Polycarp, Ignatius, also Hennas and
Papias.
These writers, as pupils of the apostles, would be
the oldest and most important witnesses; but they
still lived in the element of oral tradition within the
hearing of the apostles, and hence they quote few
passages from the Xew Testament. The first literal
quotation from the Xew Testament with the solemn
formula, " It is written," occurs in the Greek Epistle
of Barnabas namely, the passage in Matt. xxii. M:
" Many are called, but few are chosen." Clement
and Polycarp have allusions to Epistles. Papias,
who is also ranked with the apostolic fathers, gives
us valuable testimonies of the Gospels of Matthew
and Mark, preserved by Eusebius, but no quotations.
His work on the Oracles of the Lord is lost.
SECOND CENTURY: Justin Martyr (d. 167) comes
next in the order of time, and makes much use of
1 Alford (i. 140-143) gives an alphabetical list of over one hundred and
fifty ancient writers. See also the lists in Scholz, Tischendorf, Scrivener
(p. 372 sq.), and Mitchell (Tables XI. and XII.).
2 Ep. Barn. c. 4: 7rpoa^w/<ev HTITTOT, w ysypoTrrat, TroXXoi
/cXr/roi, oXi yoi Ce iK\EKToi u >,03u>/if v. In ch. 5 Barnabas
quotes also from Matt. ix. 13 (but without naming the writer or the book):
" He came not to call righteous men, but sinners."
168 PATRISTIC QUOTATIONS.
the four Gospels, particularly of Matthew and Luke
(also from John iii. 5, the passage on regeneration),
but in a very free and loose way. Irenaeus of Lyons
(d. 202) is the most important witness of the second
century, and his great work against the Gnostic
heresies is replete with quotations from the "New
Testament, but exists for the most part only in a
Latin version. 1
THIRD CENTURY : Clemens Alexandrinns (d. 220),
and still more Origen (184-254). See p. 105. Next
to them Ilippolytus (disciple of Irenreus, about 220),
Gregory Thaumaturgus (disciple of Origen, 243), Dio-
nysius Alexandrinus (265), and Methodius (d. 311).
In the FOURTH and FIFTH CENTURIES: Eusebius
the historian (d. 310, much used by Tischendorf and
Tregelles), Athanasius (d. 373), Basilius Magnus
(d. 379), Gregory J^azianzen (d. 389), Gregory Xys-
sen (d. 371), Epiiraem Syrus (d. 373), Cyril of Jeru
salem (d. 386), Didymus of Alexandria (d. 395),
Chrysostom (d. 407), Epiphanius (d. 403), Theodore
of Mopsuestia (d.428), Cyril of Alexandria (d. 444),
and Theodoret (\\. 458).
About the SIXTH CENTURY (or perhaps later) we
have the commentary of Andreas, bishop of Csesarea
in Cappadocia, on the Apocalypse, which he divided
into twenty-four chapters and seventy-two sections.
1 He testifies, e.g., to the last twelve verses of Mark, and to the exist
ence of two readings of the mystic number in Rev. xiii. 18 : the one is
666, which he found in the best copies, and explains to mean Lateinos
(while several modern exegetes make it out to mean, in Hebrew letters,
Neron Ccesar} ; the other 616, -which is the numerical value of Nero
(without the final 11) Cocsar.
PATRISTIC QUOTATIONS. 169
With him is closely connected a later bishop of
Oresarea, Arethas, who likewise wrote a full com
mentary on the Apocalypse, based in part on the
former; but his age is uncertain (probably the tenth
century). 1
In the SEVENTH CENTURY the most important
writer is Maximus the Confessor (d. 662).
In the MIDDLE AGES : John of Damascus (about
750, see his Parallcla Sacra), and the later com
mentators, (Ecumenius (bishop of Tricca in Thessa-
ly, end of the tenth century), Theophylact (arch
bishop of Bulgaria, 1071), Euthymius Zygadenus or
Zigabenus (d. after 1118).
B. LATIN FATHERS.
SECOND CENTURY : Tertullian (about 200), impor
tant for the Old Latin Version, though he often
translates independently, or quotes loosely.
THIRD CENTURY: Cyprian (d. 258), whose numer
ous quotations (in his Testimonies etc.) are in gen
eral carefully made from the African Old Latin
current in his time, Novatian (fl. 251), Lactantius
(306), and the anonymous writer of the treatise De
Rebaptismate, printed with the writings of Cyprian.
1 Rcttig (Die Zevgnisse dcs Andreas imd Arethas, in the "Studicn und
Kritiken" for 1831) assigns him to the close of the fifth or early part of
the sixth century. But Dr. Otto (in Corpus Apol. iii. p. xi., and more
recently in his DCS Patriarchen Gennadios Confession, nebst einem Excurs
iiber Arethas Zeitalter, Wien, 1864) quotes a MS. which states that it was
written by Baanes, VOTCJOIOQ of Arethas, archbishop of Cazsarea, in the year
of the world 6422 (A.D. 914). See the article Arethas in Smith and Wace,
Dictionary of Christian Biography, i. 154 sq., and especially Harnack. Die
UberUfferung der griech. Apoloyeten u.s.w., Leipz. 1882, p. 36 sqq.
170 PATRISTIC QUOTATIONS.
FOURTH and FIFTH CENTURIES: Hilary of Poitiers
(354:), Lucifer of Cagliari (d. cir. 370), Victorinus
Afer (d. cir. 370), Ambrose (d. 379), Ambrosiaster
or Pseudo-Ambrose, probably to be identified with
Hilary the deacon (about 384), Pelagius (417),
Augustin (d. 430), and, most of all, Jerome, the
translator of the Latin Bible from the original
Hebrew and Greek (d. 419).
SIXTH CENTURY: Primasius, already mentioned as
important for the text of the Apocalypse.
The MEDIAEVAL commentators of the Latin Church
depend almost exclusively on the Latin Vulgate, and
have therefore no value for textual criticism.
CHAPTEK FIFTH.
TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
NATURE AND OBJECT OF TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
THE variety of documentary sources, from which
the original text of the New Testament must be
derived, calls for a special branch of biblical learn
ing, called TEXTUAL or YERBAL CRITICISM. Its ob
ject is to ascertain and restore, as far as possible, the
very text of the apostolic writers, and thus to furnish
a faithful substitute for the lost autographs. It is
distinct from " higher criticism," which deals with
questions concerning the origin, authenticity, and
theology of these writings, and their organic place
in the history of the apostolic age. It does not
enter into the province of herrneneutics and inter
pretation, but furnishes a solid basis for the com
mentator. It is confined to the original form and
integrity of the text, as far as it can be established
by documentary evidence. It aims to show, not
what the apostles and evangelists might have writ
ten or ought to have written, but simply what they
actually did write. It has nothing to do with secta
rian notions and tenets, or subjective likes and dis
likes, but only with facts.
Criticism is a dry study, and requires an unusual
amount of patience and attention to the minutest
details. A 0od critic must have full command of
172 TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
all sources of evidence, an acute mind, and a clear,
sound judgment. lie must combine microscopic ac
curacy and judicial impartiality. In the nature of
the case the number of real critics is very limited.
The science of textual criticism is of compara
tively recent origin. It was matured with the dis
covery and collection of the material during the
eighteenth century, and reached its height within
the last fifty years. It has been cultivated mostly
by Protestant scholars Swiss, German, Dutch, and
English. It has received a mighty impulse by the
recent discovery and publication of the most ancient
manuscripts, and by the Anglo-American Revision
of 1881, and is beginning to excite the interest of
the Christian laity, who have a right to know the
results of learned investigation, especially if they
affect the vernacular versions of the Word of God.
A few Catholics like Hug and Scholz, Yercellone
and Cozza have nobly taken part in the work; but,
upon the whole, the Roman Church cares more for
tradition and the living church than for the Bible,
and is satisfied with the Latin Yulgate sanctioned
by the Council of Trent. Protestant Bible Societies
have been denounced as dangerous and pestiferous
by several Popes.
The importance of this branch of biblical learn
ing can hardly be overestimated ; for a pure text is
the basis of exegesis, and exegesis is the basis of
dogmatics and ethics. Protestant theology makes
the New Testament the supreme and only infallible
rule of the Christian faith and practice, and must
stand or fall with this final test.
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 173
ORIGIN OF VARIATIONS.
The necessity of criticism arises, as lias just been
stated, from the vast number of variations in the
documentary sources of the New Testament text.
It would have required a perpetual miracle to keep
the transcribers from error. iNo MS., either of the
Greek original or of any translation, is faultless any
more than any printed book. The errors are even
more numerous, since the MSS. had not the benefit
of repeated proof-readings; many of them, however,
have the marks of one or more correctors of a later
date.
The variations of the Greek text are partly unin
tentional or accidental, partly intentional or designed.
Errors of the first class proceed either from misread
ing, or from mishearing (in case of dictation), or
from fault of memory. Errors of the second class
are due either to misjudgment, or to an innocent
desire to correct supposed mistakes, to supply de
fects, to harmonize apparent discrepancies, or to
wilful corruption for sectarian or ascetic purposes.
Examples of wilful mutilation or corruption of the
text are, however, exceedingly rare. Transcribers
had too much reverence for the words of Christ
and his inspired apostles to be guilty of it, though
in making their choice between conflicting readings
they would naturally be biassed by their theological
opinions. The wide diffusion of MSS. and versions
was a safeguard against the reception of corruptions,
whether heretical or orthodox. The case of Marcion,
who mutilated the Gospel of Luke to suit it to his
174 TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
Gnostic notions, is exceptional, and was generally
understood in its true character. The mutual charges
O
of corruption made by the orthodox and heretical
parties in times of heated controversy were mostly
unfounded. 1
The variations began very early, with the first
copies, and continued to increase till the art of
printing superseded the necessity of transcribing,
and substituted typographical errors for errors of
copyists. Origen (d. 254) complained of the great
corruption of the text about the middle of the third
century. Jerome, the greatest scholar of the last
quarter of the fourth century (d. 419), says that in
his days there were nearly as many distinct forms
of the text as codices of the Latin Testament (tot
ptme exemplar-la quot codices), and that the text of
1 Examples of possible changes in the interest of dogma : the omission
or insertion of Trpwroroicoc; in Matt. i. 25 (the best authorities omit it) ; of
ouHi 6 vide, Mark xiii. 32 (which Ambrosius charged the Arians with
having inserted, De Fide, v. 7); of the tears of Christ and his drops of
blood in Gethsemane, Luke xix. 41; xxii. 43, 44 (com p. Epiphanius,
Ancor. 31); the substitution of "Joseph" for "father (jrari]p}, Luke ii.
33. Dr. Abbot writes on this subject (in a private letter) : " The charges
against the heretics of wilful corruption of the text (setting aside avowed
excision like that of Marcion) rest on no good foundation. In the definite
instances alleged by ancient writers (John i. 13 ; iii. G ; Mark xiii. 32) the
heretical reading turns out to be the true one. Epiphanius charges the
orthodox with omitting Luke xxii. 43. 44, to remove a difficulty. This
is the most plausible case of alleged wilful corruption. But Westcott and
Hort, with Mr. Norton and Granville Perm (comp. Weiss), regard the
passage as a later addition, and I am disposed to agree with them. No
case of deliberate, wilful corruption, affecting any considerable number of
MSS., on the part either of the heretics or the orthodox, can be anywhere
made out. Rash attempts to correct supposed error must not be con
founded with wilful corruption."
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 175
the Gospels especially was in confusion (apud nos
mixta sunt omnia). The further up we go, the
greater were the freedom and carelessness of the
transcribers. Copies were made first for private
use ; ecclesiastical copies were written with greater
care, and tended to settle the text, until it became
stationary, or, as it were, stereotyped. The changes
date nearly all from the first four centuries, as
we may infer from patristic quotations. Varia
tions of later origin are mostly unimportant, and
changes in the distribution of existing readings
rather than new readings. A text agreeing in
great measure with that which Erasmus first print
ed, was already current in Antioch at the close of
the fourth century, and is virtually identical with the
text used by Chrysostom (d. 407). This Antiochian
or Syrian text stands out in opposition to the text
of older date. The Gospel and Epistles of John
have suffered least, the Acts and the Apocalypse
most, from textual corruption.
Attempts for a restoration of the pure text were
made by learned fathers as early as the third cen
tury, especially by Origen, Hesychius (an Egyptian
bishop), and Lucian (a presbyter of Antioch) ; but
we are not well informed as to the character and
result of their labors, which were looked upon with
suspicion. Jerome knew beforehand that he would
be abused as &falsari us and sacrilegus for his im
provement of the Latin text.
It was natural that the copies prepared in the
same city or district as Antioch, Alexandria, Con
stantinople should assume a local coloring or cer-
176 TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
tain textual peculiarities. Hence we are justified
in dividing the authorities into different families,
and to speak of an Alexandrian or Egyptian, a Con-
stantinopolitan or Byzantine (also called Antiochian
or Syrian), a Western, and a neutral text (chiefly
represented by B and next by K, and presumably the
oldest extant). Bengel first suggested the division
into families or recensions; Griesbach carried it fur
ther, and with some excesses which created a reac
tion in Germany against it ; "Westcott and Ilort
modified and completed it. This classification is
an essential prerequisite for a just estimate of the
value of documents according to their representative
weight rather than their number.
O
NUMBER OF VARIATIONS.
The variations were gradually found out as the
collection and examination of the sources progressed.
The first editors had no idea of the number, but it
accumulated with every standard edition. Dr. John
Mill, in 1707, roughly estimated the number at
30,000. Since that time it has risen to "at least
fourfold that quantity," as Dr. Scrivener wrote in
1871, and now cannot fall much short of 150,000, if
we include the variations in the order of words, the
mode of spelling, and other trifles which are ignored
even in the most extensive critical editions.
This number far exceeds that of any ancient
book, for the simple reason that the New Testa
ment was far more frequently copied, translated,
and quoted than the most celebrated works of Greek
and Roman genius. While we have but a few copies
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 177
of the Greek and Eoman classics, on which we must
rely for the text, we have hundreds of copies of the
Greek Testament, and these are only a remnant of
many thousand copies which were destroyed during
the early persecutions (especially that of Diocletian),
or perished by use or neglect. Moreover, our old
est copies of the Greek Testament are by several
hundred years nearer the original autographs than
the oldest copies of the Greek classics are to their
originals.
VALUE OF VARIATIONS.
This multitude of various readings of the Greek
text need not puzzle or alarm any Christian. It is
the natural result of the great wealth of our docu
mentary resources ; it is a testimony to the immense
importance of the Xew Testament; it does not af
fect, but it rather insures, the integrity of the text ;
and it is a useful stimulus to study.
Only about 400 of the 100,000 or 150,000 varia
tions materially affect the sense. Of these, again,
not more than about fifty are really important for
some reason or other; and even of these fifty not
one affects an article of faith or a precept of duty
which is not abundantly sustained by other and un
doubted passages, or by the whole tenor of Scripture
teaching. The Tcxtus Receptus of Stephens, Beza,
and Elzevir, and of our English Yersion, teach pre
cisely the same Christianity as the uncial text of
the Sinaitic and Vatican MSS., the oldest versions,
and the Anglo-American Revision.
Richard Bentley, the ablest and boldest of classi-
12
ITS TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
cal critics of England, affirms that even the worst of
MSS. does not pervert or set aside " one article of
faith or moral precept."
Dr. Ezra Abbot, who ranks among the first textual
critics, and is not hampered by orthodox bias (being
a Unitarian), asserts that " no Christian doctrine or
duty rests on those portions of the text which are
affected by differences in the manuscripts ; still less
is anything essential in Christianity touched by the
various readings. They do, to be sure, affect the
bearing of a few passages on the doctrine of the
Trinity ; but the truth or falsity of the doctrine by
no means depends upon the reading of those pas
sages." ] The same scholar speaks on the subject
more fully with special reference to the English
Revision : u This host of various readings may startle
one who is not acquainted with the subject, and he
may imagine that the whole text of the Xew Testa
ment is thus rendered uncertain. But a careful
analysis will show that nineteen twentieths of these
are of no more consequence than the palpable errata
in the first proof of a modern printer; they have so
little authority, or are so manifestly false, that they
may be at once dismissed from consideration. Of
those which remain, probably nine tenths are of no
importance as regards the sense ; the differences
either cannot be represented in a translation, or af
fect the form of expression merely, not the essential
meaning: of the sentence. Though the corrections
^ ^
made by the revisers in the Greek text of the
S .
1 A nylo-A merican Bible Revision, p. 92.
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 179
Testament followed by our translators probably ex
ceed two thousand, hardly one tenth of them, per
haps not one twentieth, will be noticed by the ordinary
reader. Of the small residue, many are indeed of
sufficient interest and importance to constitute one
of the strongest reasons for making a new revision,
which should no longer suffer the known errors of
copyists to take the place of the words of the evan
gelists and apostles. But the chief value of the
work accomplished by the self-denying scholars who
have spent so much time and labor in the search for
manuscripts, and in their collation or publication,
does not consist, after all, in the corrections of the
text which have resulted from their researches.
These corrections may affect a few of the passages
which have been relied on for the support of certain
doctrines, but not to such an extent as essentially to
alter the state of the argument. Still less is any
question of Christian duty touched by the multitude
of various readings. The greatest service which the
scholars who have devoted themselves to critical
studies and the collection of critical materials have
rendered lias been the establishment of the fact that,
on the whole, the New Testament writings have
come down to us in a text remarkably free from
important corruptions, even in the late and inferior
manuscripts on which the so-called received text
was founded; while the helps which we now possess
for restoring it to its primitive purity far exceed
those which we enjoy in the case of any eminent
classical author whose works have come down to us.
The multitude of 6 various readings, which to the
180 TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
thoughtless or ignorant seems so alarming, is simply
the result of the extraordinary richness and variety
of our critical resources." !
Moreover, the large number of various readings
~ O
is a positive advantage in ascertaining the true text.
The word of the wise man may be applied here :
"In the multitude of counsellors there is safety"
(Prov. xi. 14). The original reading is sure to be
preserved in one or more of these sources. Hence
we need not, as in the case of the ancient classics,
resort to subjective conjectural criticism, which never
leads to absolute certainty.
The very multitude of readings is the best guar
antee of the essential integrity of the New Testa-
O ^
rnent.
This fact was long ago clearly stated b} T Richard
Bentley, when the resources of the text were not
nearly so abundant as now. Fertile and ingenious
as he was in his conjectural emendations of classical
authors, he yet declares, in his Prospectus for a new
edition of the Greek Testament (1720), that "in the
sacred writings there is no place for conjectures and
emendations. Diligence and fidelity, with some
judgment and experience, are the characters here
requisite." And in another place : 2 " If there had
been but one MS. of the Greek Testament at the
restoration of learning, about two centuries ago, then
1 See "Sunday-school Times." Philadelphia, May 28, 1881.
3 In his reply, under the pseudonym of Phileleutherus Lipsiensis, to the
deist Anthony Collins, who, in his Discourse of Free -thinking (1713),
represented the 30,000 variations of Mill as fatal to the authority of the
New Testament,
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 181
we had had no various readings at all. And would
the text be in a better condition then than now we
have 30,000? So far from that, that in the best
single copy extant we should have some hundreds
of faults and some omissions irreparable. Besides
that, the suspicions of fraud and foul play would
have been increased immensely. It is good, there
fore, to have more anchors than one. ... It is a
good providence and a great blessing that so many
manuscripts of the New Testament are still amongst
us; some procured from Egypt, others from Asia,
others found in the Western churches. For the
very distances of places, as well as numbers of the
books, demonstrate that there could be no collusion,
no altering, nor interpolating one copy by another,
nor all by any of them. In profane authors whereof
one manuscript only had the luck to be preserved,
as Yelleius Paterculus among the Latins, and Ilesy-
chius among the Greeks, the faults of the scribes
are found so numerous, and the defects so beyond
all redress, that, notwithstanding the pains of the
learnedest and acutest critics for two whole centu
ries, these books still are, and are like to continue, a
mere heap of errors. On the contrary, where the
copies of any author are numerous, though the vari
ous readings always increase in proportion, there
the text, by an accurate collation of them, made by
skilful and judicious hands, is ever the more correct,
and comes nearer to the true words of the author."
And again : " Make your 30,000 ( variations ) as
many more if numbers of copies can ever reach
that sum all the better to a knowing and a serious
1S2 TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
reader, who is thereby more richly furnished to
select what he sees genuine. But even put them
into the hands of a knave or a fool, and yet with
the most sinistrous and absurd choice, he shall not
extinguish the light of any one chapter, nor so dis
guise Christianity but that every feature of it will
still be the same."
Modern editors are almost unanimous on the in
applicability of subjective conjectural criticism in the
formation of the Greek text of the Xew Testament. 1
" We possess," says Dr. Tregelles, " so many MSS.,
and we are aided by so many versions, that we are
never left to the need of conjecture as the means of
removing errata." 2 " So far," says Dr. Scrivener, 3
" is the copiousness of our stores from causing doubt
or perplexity to the genuine student of Holy Script
ure, that it leads him to recognize the more fully its
general integrity in the midst of partial variation.
What would the thoughtful reader of ^Eschylus
give for the like guidance through the obscurities
which vex his patience and mar his enjoyment of
that sublime poet?" Dr. Hort, 4 however, thinks
that the evidence for corruption of texts antecedent
to extant authorities is " often irresistible," and im
poses on an editor the duty of indicating the pre
sumed unsoundness of the existing text, although
1 Comp. Tischendorf s popular tract : Ildben wir den achten Schrifttext
der Evany, und Apostel? Leipzig, 1873. Dr. O. von Gebhardt (A r of. Test.
G r. p. viii.) mentions two special Dutch essays on the subject, by W. H.
van de Sande Bakhuyzen and W. C. van Manen, Haarlem, 1880.
2 Gr. N. Test., Prolegomena, p. x.
3 Introd., p. 4. Vol. ii. p. 71.
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 183
he may be wholly unable to propose any endurable
way of correcting it, or have to offer only suggestions
in which he cannot place full confidence.
CLASSES OF VARIATIONS.
The variations which really involve the sense
may, with Dr. Tregelles, be reduced to three classes
omissions, or additions, or substitutions, of words
or phrases.
1. OMISSIONS.
Omissions occur frequently from like endings
called homoeoteleuton (o/io/ort-Xfuroy). When two
lines or sentences end with the same word, the in
tervening words were often unconsciously overlooked
and omitted. A very important case of this kind
is the sentence in 1 John ii. 23 : 6 o^uoAoywv TOV viov
Ka\ TOV TTurtpa t xa (the same ending as in the pre
ceding clause), which is not found in the Textus
Reccptus, and is italicized in the English A r ersion ;
but sustained by x, A, B, C, P, and other authori
ties, and properly restored in the English Revision.
Here the older text restores what the later lost.
2. ADDITIONS.
Additions are very numerous in the later MSS.
and in the Textus Receptus, and must be elimina
ted according to the oldest and best authorities.
They may be divided into several classes.
(a.) Additions caused by transferring a genuine
word or passage from one book to another ; first on
the margin or between the lines, and then into the
184 TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
text. These cases are most frequent in the parallel
sections of the Gospels. 1 They began probably
with the Gospel Harmonies, the oldest of which is
Tatian s Diatessaron, from the second century. By
such interpolations the idiosyncrasy of style and
manner is more or less obliterated.
For examples, see in the Text. Itec., Matt. i. 25
(supplemented from Luke ii. 7) ; Matt. v. 44 (from
Luke vi. 27, 28) ; Matt. ix. 13 (from Luke v. 32) ;
Matt. xvii. 21 (from Mark ix. 29); Matt, xviii. 11
(from Luke xix. 10) ; Matt. xix. 16, 17 (corn p. Mark
x. 17, 18; Luke xviii. 18, 19); Matt. xix. 20 (from
Mark x. 20 and Luke xviii. 21); Matt. xxi. 44
(from Luke xx. 18) ; Mark iii. 5 and Luke vi. 10
(from Matt. xii. 13); Mark vi. 11 (from Matt. x. 15);
Mark xiii. 14 (from Matt. xxiv. 15) ; Mark xv. 28
(from Luke xxii. 37); Luke iv. 2, 4, 5, 8 (comp.
Matt. iv. 2, 4, 8, 10); Luke xi. 2, 4 (from Matt. vi. 9,
10, 13); John vi. 69 (from Matt. xvi. 16); Acts ix.
5, 6 (from xxvi. 14, 15; xxii. 10), etc. By removing
these interpolations of words and clauses, otherwise
genuine, we lose nothing and gain a better insight
into the individuality of each Gospel.
(I.) Amplifications of quotations from the Old
Testament, as in Matt. ii. 18; xv. 8; Luke iv. 18,
- As was observed by Jerome in his Preface to the Gospels (Ad Dama-
sum) : " Magnus in nostris codicibus error inolevit dum, quod in eadem re
alius evangelista plus dixit, in alio quia minus putaverint addiderunt; vel
dum eundem sensum alius aliter cxpressit, ille qui unnm e quatuor primum
legerat ad ejus exemplar cceieros quoque existimaverit emendandos : itnde
accidit ut apud nos mixta sunt omnia et in Marco plura Lucas, atque Mat-
thcei, rursus in Matthceo plura Joannis ct Marci , . . inveniantur."
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 185
19 ; Rom. xiii. 9 ; Heb. ii. 7; xii. 20, etc. These are
all right in the Septuagint.
(c.) Insertions of words and proper names (instead
of pronouns) from Lectionaries for the Church ser
vice, especially those of the Gospels (Evangelistaria
or Evangeliaria). Hence the frequent interpolation
or changed position of Irjo-oue (e. /., Matt. iv. 18 ;
viii. 5 ; xiv. 22; John i. 44). Coinp. also Luke vii.
31 (the prefix ^TTE t 6 Kvpioc;}, and X. 22 (KCU arpaty^z
7T|Oor; roi) ^a^rjrac tine, omitted by Tregelles, West-
cott and Hort, but retained by Tischendorf and
Yon Gebhardt).
(d.) Additions from a love of paraphrase, which
characterizes all the sources embraced by Westcott
and Hort under the designation of the " Western "
text, of which the bilingual Codex Bezre (D) and
Codex Claromontanus (D(2)) are the best known
representatives. " The chief and most constant
characteristic of the Western readings," says Dr.
Hort, " is a love of paraphrase. Words, clauses,
and even whole sentences were changed, omitted,
and inserted with astonishing freedom, wherever it
seemed that the meaning could be brought out with
greater force and definiteness." Examples of this
paraphrastic tendency are found in the enlarged
readings in Matt. xx. 28 ; xxv. 1 (KCU rr\q vu^rjc,
after rou wjuQtov) , Luke iii. 22; xx. 34; Eph. v. 30;
in many curious interpolations in the Acts ; and in
John v. 3, 4, and viii. 1 sqq., which will be considered
separately under the next head.
1 Vol. ii. p. 122.
186 TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
In this love for explanatory expansion of the
sacred text, as if the Holy Spirit was too brief and
terse for the common understanding, the authors of
the Authorized English Version have imitated the
old Western copyists and translators, but have acted
more honestly by printing their numerous, mostly
useless, and sometimes misleading, interpolations in
italics. 1
(<?.) Additions from oral tradition, ancient litur
gies, and explanatory glosses. They were usually
noted on the margin and then incorporated with
the text. Jerome expressed his wonder at the large
number of such interpolations by the temerity of
transcribers in his day. 2 But in many cases it was
done ignorantly and innocently.
Under this head we may place the most impor
tant and serious interpolations, which are rejected
by the severer class of critics, although some may
be defended with solid arguments. They are as
follows :
1. The doxology in the Lord s Prayer, Matt. vi. 13,
which was unknown to Origen, Tertullian, and Cyp
rian (in their commentaries on the Lord s Prayer),
1 This method has been retained, but on a greatly reduced scale, in the
Revision. It is open to objection, as conflicting with modern usage of
italicizing for the purpose of emphasizing. Smaller type or brackets
would obviate misunderstanding. I heard of a famous sensation preacher
taking two words in italics for his text, as if they contained the gist of
the passage.
2 A d Suniain et Fretelam : " Miror quomodo e latere annotationem no-
stram nescio quis lemerarius scribendam in corpora putaverit quam nos pro
eruditions leyentis scripsimus. , . . Si quid pro studio ex latere additum est,
non debet poni in corpore,"
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 187
and is missing in the oldest MSS. (, B, D, Z), in the
Itala and Yulgate. 1 It probably came in from 1
Chron. xxix. 11, and from ancient liturgical usage
in Syria, as a response of the congregation. It is
found in the Syriac Version, and thence passed into
the Greek text at the time of Chrysostom, who has
the doxology. The Jewish response to the prayers
in the temple is said to have been : " Blessed be the
name of the glory of his kingdom forever and ever."
In the Liturgy of St. James the doxology of the
Lord s Prayer is expanded into a trinitarian shape :
UTL CTOU iariv 17 fiaaiXfia KOI 77 ^vva/ni^, KOL 77 3oa,
TOV TTOTjOOC KCH TOV VlOV KOL TOV CLJIOV 7TV tV fJLCLT O , VVV
KOI act . But in all the extant Latin liturgies the
doxology is omitted. 2
2. The passage on the periodical descent of the
angel of the Lord, troubling the pool of Bethesda
for the healing of the sick, John v. 3, 4 (from cicSe-
\ofjifvwv, ver. 3, to KUT^I^TO vocrYj^ari, ver. 4), is un
doubtedly an interpolation (at least ver. 4), probably
1 Cod. A cannot be quoted for or against, as the first twenty -four
chapters of Matthew are lost. The newly discovered Codex Kossanensis
has the doxology, but belongs to the sixth century. See p. 131.
2 The English Revision puts the doxology in the margin. It was a
case of honesty versus prudence. No change seems to have given wider
dissatisfaction than this, and the substitution of "the evil one" (the
tempter) for "evil," in the same prayer hallowed by daily use. The
doxology is very appropriate, and will always be used ; but this, of course,
does not affect the critical question, which is simply one of evidence.
Its insertion from liturgical usage is far more easily accounted for than its
omission. The internal evidence also is rather against it; for our Lord
immediately proceeds with "for" (iav yap) in ver. 14. His object was
to suggest proper topics for prayer rather than to give a complete formula.
188 TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
of Syrian and Western origin, and expresses a popu
lar superstition, for which John cannot be held re
sponsible. The first Greek father who shows any
knowledge of the interpolation is Chrysostorn (d.
407), but" it is wanting in x, B, C*, (D), 33, and other
authorities, and omitted by the critical editors, and
the Revisers of 18S1. 1
3. The section on the woman taken in adultery,
John vii. 53-viii. 11, in ten cursive MSS. at the end
of the Gospel of John, in four (13, 69, 124, 346) at
the end of Luke xxi. It no doubt rests on a primi
tive and authentic tradition, but was not written by
John. It is omitted by s and B, and other Greek
MSS. ; there is no room for it in A and C, which
are here defective ; it was unknown to the Greek
and older Latin fathers, but widely current in Latin
Gospels of the fourth century. It interrupts the
context, departs from the style of John, and pre
sents an unusual number of variations in the MSS.
Nevertheless, the story itself is eminently Christ-
like, and found its way into the Gospels of John
and Luke from apostolic teaching, perhaps from the
lost work of Papias of Hierapolis,who collected from
primitive disciples various traditional discourses of
our Lord with comments, and who (according to
Eusebius iii. 39) set forth "a narrative concerning a
woman maliciously accused before the Lord touch-
1 The Revision relegates it to the margin with this note: "Many
ancient authorities insert, wholly or in part, ic ait ing for the moving of the
water : 4 for an angel of the Lord went doivn at certain seasons into the
pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the
water stepped in was made whole, with whatsoever disease he was holden."
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 189
ing many sins, 1 which is contained in the Gospel
according to the Hebrews." The English Revision
properly retains the section, but in brackets, with a
marginal note, and with space between it and the
genuine part. The Christian world will never lose
it. Its best place would be at the end of the Gospel
of John as an appendix. 2
4. The concluding twelve verses of Mark (xvi. 9-
20) present a peculiar case. The section is wanting in
the two oldest MSS. (&* and B), and, according to the
testimony of Eusebius and Jerome, in almost all the
Greek MSS. of their day ; it contains seventeen un
usual words or phrases not elsewhere found in Mark
or not in that sense ; and there is a shorter conclu
sion in L and in the important old Latin MS.k, which
presupposes the same defect in older MSS. On the
other hand, the section is found in most of the uncial
1 tTTi TroXXttic apapTiaiQ, not one ufiapTia, as in the text.
2 For the details the reader may consult the critical editions (Tregelles,
p. 236-243 ; Tischendorf, ed. viii. ; Hort, ii. Notes, ii. 82-88), and the com
mentaries of Liicke, Meyer (6th ed. by Weiss), Lange, Alford, Wordsworth,
Godet, and Westcott. In my annotations to Langc s Com. on John (1872),
pp. 267 sqq., I arrived at the same conclusion namely, that " the critical
evidence, especially from the Eastern church, is against the section, the
moral evidenced/or it; in other words, it is no original part of John s
written Gospel, but the record of an actual event, which probably hap
pened about the time indicated by its position in John viii. The story
could not have been invented, as it runs contrary to the ascetic and
legalistic tendency of the ancient church. It is full of comfort to penitent
outcasts. It breathes the Saviour s spirit of holy mercy which condemns
the sin and saves the sinner. It is a parallel to the parable of the prodi
gal, the story of Mary Magdalene, and that of the Samaritan woman, and
agrees with many express declarations of Christ that he came not to con
demn, but to save the lost (John iii. 17; xii. 47; Luke ix. 56; xix. 10 ;
comp. John v. 14; Luke vii. 37 sqq.)."
190 TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
and in all the cursive MSS., in most of the ancient
versions, in all the existing Greek and Syriac lection-
aries as far as examined ; and Irenaeus, who is a much
older witness than any of our existing MSS., quotes
ver. 19 as a part of the Gospel of Mark (Adv. Ifccr.
iii. 10, 6). A strong intrinsic argument for the
genuineness is also derived from the extreme im
probability (we may say impossibility) that the
evangelist should have intentionally closed his Gos
pel with 0oj3oviro yap, "for they were afraid"
(ver. 8).
These facts leave us two alternatives : (1) The
conclusion is from the pen of Mark, but was not in
his first draft, which may have been published before
he completed the work, or it was lost from some
very early copy (being written, perhaps, on a separate
leaf), which was transcribed in this incomplete form.
(2) Mark was prevented by some accident (perhaps
the Keronian persecution of 64) from concluding
his Gospel, and the twelve verses were supplied by
the friendly hand of the last editor, perhaps from
the Gospel of Luke, or from one of his Gospel frag
ments (comp. i. 1), or from oral teaching. I take
the second alternative, and regard the conclusion as
authentic or historically true, but not as genuine.
The critical editors (and the English Revisers) prop
erly retain the section, but include it in brackets, or
leave some space between vers. 8 and 9, to indicate
the uncertainty of its origin. 1
1 For full information on this interesting case we refer to the critical
apparatus of Tischendorf and Tregdles, to the monograph of Weiss on.
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 191
5. The baptismal confession of the eunuch, Acts
viii. 37, came in from very ancient ecclesiastical use.
It supplies Philip s answer to the eunuch s question,
" What doth hinder me to be baptized?" It appears
in Western sources (Greek, Latin, and Arm.) and
in some good cursives, but is absent from the best
Greek MSS. and the Vulgate, though it soon found
its way from the Old Latin into the later text of the
Vulgate. Erasmus transferred it from the margin
"Marie (Das Marcusevang. pp. 512-515), and especially to the exhaustive
discussion of Westcott and Hurt in the second volume (Append, pp. 29-51).
All these eminent critics, as well as Griesbach and Lachmann, reject the
genuineness of the section, though they retain it in the text. The chief
defenders of the genuineness are Bleek, Lange, Ebrard, Hilgenfeld,
Broadus ("Baptist Quarterly," Phila. 1869), Wordsworth, McClellan.
Scrivener (Jntrod. pp. 507-513), M orison (Coin, on Mark, pp. 446 and
463 sqq.), Canon Cook (in the Speaker s Com. on Mark, pp. 301-308), and
especially Dean Burgon of Chichester, in his very learned and very dog
matic monograph. The Last Twelve Verses of the Gospel according to
8. Mark Vindicated a gainst Recent Critical Objections and Established,
Oxf. and Loud. 1871 (334 pages); comp. his article in the "Quarterly
Review" for Oct. 1881. Burgon lays great stress on the Lectionaries,
and on the fact that Cod. B (which he otherwise hates with a personal
animosity) leaves a blank column between ver. 8 and the Gospel of Luke,
which seems to imply the scribe s knowledge of a fuller conclusion of the
Gospel. But it is the last (third) column, and the second has the sub
scription, after ver. 8, KATA MAPKON, which indicates the close. Nor
is it the only blank column in the whole MS., as Burgon asserts; for (as
Dr. Abbot has first pointed out) two columns are left blank at the end of
Nehemiah, and a column and a half at the end of Tobit. There are
similar blanks in the Alexandrian and Sinaitic MSS. In the "Quarterly
Review," Burgon makes a savage attack upon W r estcott and Hort and the
English Revisers for daring (in common with the ablest critics) to dissent
from what he regards his unanswerable " demonstration " and infallible
judgment. He calls the marginal note of the Revisers in Mark xvi. 8,
which simply states a fact, " the gravest blot of all." Then the other
blots must be very slight indeed.
192 TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
of one of his Greek MSS., as " having been omitted
by the carelessness of scribes." The Revision rele
gates it to the margin with the note : " Some ancient
authorities insert, wholly or in part, ver. 37, And
Philip said, If tliou Itelievcst with all thy heart,
tliou mayest. And lie answered and said, f believe
that Jesus is the Son of God"
6. The passage of the three heavenly witnesses,
1 John v. 7, 8, is wanting in all the Greek MSS.,
uncial and cursive, written before the fifteenth cen
tury, in all the ancient versions (including the best
MSS. of the Vulgate), and in all the Greek fathers,
who in the Nicene age, during the Arian and semi-
Arian controversies, quoted every available proof-
text of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation for
the dogma of the Trinity, and could not possibly
have overlooked this, had they known it or found it
in any MS. It first appeared in Latin copies, and
from them passed into two very late Greek MSS.,
of no authority. The internal evidence alone is con
clusive against it; for John would not have written
" the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit," but
either " the Father, the Son," or " God, the Word,"
etc. Moreover, there is no real correspondence be
tween "the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit"
in heaven, and " the Spirit, the water, and the blood"
on earth ; the supposed analogy originated in the
fancy of some African father of the fifth century
(possibly Cyprian in the third century), and was put
on the margin by some copyist of the Latin text.
For these reasons the passage is now given up by
all critical editors and commentators. Erasmus at
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 193
first omitted it; Luther did not translate it, though
it crept afterwards into his German Bible. 1 Truth,
honesty, and piety demand its expulsion from the
Word of God. The doctrine of the Holy Trinity
does not need the support of a spurious interpola
tion ; it rests on the whole tenor of the Bible doc
trine of a God revealed as Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit. 2
3. SUBSTITUTIONS.
Very often one word is substituted for another
similar in spelling or sound, or apparently better
suited to the context. The most remarkable varia
tions under this head are the following :
1. John i. 18 : 6 juoi/oycw/c wi c (abridged TC),
1 Strange to say, it is retained in the recent authoritative revision of
Luther s text, though in brackets and with the note: "Die eingeklammer-
ien Worte fehlen in der Uebersefzitnr/ Luthers und sind ihr erst spater
be typfuyt irorden." The English Revision very properly ignores the inter
polation altogether, reading simply, with John: "For there are three who
bear witness, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood : and the three agree
in one." All the rest from " in heaven," ver. 7, to " on earth," ver. 8, is
spurious.
2 See above, p. 136 sq. More than fifty volumes and pamphlets have
been written for and against the three witnesses. It was once considered
a sure mark of heresy to doubt the genuineness of the passage; now it is
difficult to summon a corporal s guard of old fogies for its defence. Even
Dr. Scrivener, one of the most conservative critics, says ( p. 561 ), " To
maintain the genuineness of this passage is simply impossible." It is a
wonder that Dean Burgon has not come up to the defence of this forlorn
post. He might summon any number of Latin witnesses. Many sermons
on the Trinity, good, bad, and indifferent, have been preached from this
text. A high American dignitary and scholar (?) honestly believes that
the passage was written by St. John, and will yet be dug up from the dust
of some Egyptian convent. sancta simitlidtas ! O for another Tischen-
dorf or Simonides !
13
194 TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
the only-Icy otten Son (text, rec.), or /uoyoytv/ /e to c
(abridged 60), an Only-begotten One who is God. (A.
third reading, 6 /movoytinic; Stog^ the only-begotten
God," found in x c , i. e., x as corrected by the third
hand, and in K"o. 33, arose simply from a combination
of the two readings, the article being improperly trans
ferred from the first to the second.) The two readings
are of equal antiquity : Stop is supported by the old
est Greek MSS., nearly all Alexandrian or Egyptian
(x*, i. e., the original or un corrected x, B, C*, L, also
the Peshito Syr.); wo^ D J tne oldest versions (Itala,
Vulg., Curet. Syr., also by the secondary uncials,
and all known cursives except 33). The patristic
evidence is uncertain and conflicting. The usual
abbreviations in the uncial MS., 90 and TO, may
easily be confounded. The connection of juovoyeWje
with coe is less natural than with woV, although
John undoubtedly could call the Son Sto^, and did
so in ver. 1. Moi-oyti^/c &V simply combines the
two attributes of the Logos, 3-coc, ver. 1, and JUQVO-
yji j/C, ver. 14.
For a learned and ingenious defence of *or;, see
Ilort s T wo Dissertations (Cambridge, 1877), West-
cott in the Speakers Commentary on John (p. 71),
and Westcott and Ilort s Or. Test. vol. ii. (Notes,
p. 74); also Weiss in the 6th ed. of Meyer s Com. on
John (1880). l It is urged that the substitution of
for S toc is easily explained as being suggested
1 Weiss renders the passage (p. 86) thus: Gotlliches Wesen hat
memand je gesehen ; ein Eingeborenr gottlichen Wesens . . . hat davon
Kunde ffebracht" i. e.. " the Divine Being no one has ever seen ; an Only-
begotten One of Divine essence . . . has brought knowledge of it."
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 195
by the primary meaning of novoytvfa, while the
converse substitution is inexplicable by any ordi
nary motive likely to affect transcribers. But 3-a>e
in connection with [iovoytvi ic; is not sustained by
any parallel passage in the Xew Test., and sounds
strange. Tischendorf adopts V UJG, and Dr. Abbot
ably defended this reading in two essays one in
the "Bibliotheca Sacra" for 1861, pp. 810-872, and
one printed for the American Revision Committee
(and afterwards published in the " Unitarian He-
view" for June, 1875, at Boston). The Westmin
ster Revisers first adopted "God" in the text, but
afterwards put it on the margin, as the American
Committee suggested. Both readings give essential
ly the same sense, but the common reading is more
natural and free from objection. Movoytvfa does
not necessarily convey the Nicene idea of eternal
generation, but simply the unique character and
superiority of the eternal and uncreated sonship of
Christ over the sonship of believers, which is a gift
of grace. It shows his intimate relation to the
Father, as the Pauline rrpwroTOKoc (Col. i. 15) his
sovereign relation to the world.
2. Luke ii. 14: tvtioKta (nominative), or mSoKtag
(genitive), in the Gloria in Excelsis. The textus
receptus gives us an anthem with three clauses, or a
triple parallelism, the third being a substantial repe
tition of the second :
" Glory be to God in the highest,
And on earth peace,
Good pleasure among men." 1
1 iv av5pb)iroi evSoKia. The A. V. is certainly wrong in ignoring
196 TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
The other reading gives us a double parallelism
of somewhat unequal length (as often in the Psalms):
"Glory be to God in the highest,
And on earth peace among men of (his) good pleasure," l
with three corresponding ideas glory and peace,
God and men, in the highest (heaven) and on earth. 2
Intrinsically this reading is preferable, the parallel
ism being complete without a repetition. It is sup
ported by x*, A, B, D, all the Latin copies (bonce
voluntatis), the Gothic Version (godis viljins, u of
good will"), Origen, Jerome; while the nominative
evSoKta is sustained by the cursive MSS., the Syriac,
Coptic, and other versions, and many Greek fathers,
and the Greek Gloria in Excelsis, as appended to
Cod. A (which, however, in Luke ii. li reads the
genitive), and in the Apost. Constitutions. Tischen-
dorf adopts tucWae, so also Westcott and Ilort, and
the Revisers, but with the other reading on the
the preposition (as the Vulgate and Luther do), and translating "Good
will towards men" as if it were the dative.
1 evSoKiaQ, bonce volnntatis, not as a predicate of men, but men of God s
good will, men in whom he takes delight, to whom his favor, his benevo
lent purpose, is shown by the birth of the Saviour. All men are meant,
not a particular class (comp. John iii. 16; Tit. ii. 11). This relieves the
passage of a great difficulty. Comp. tvdoicia in Phil. i. 15 ; ii. 13 ; Eph. i.
5, 9; 2 Thess. i. 11; and tvSoKtw in Matt. iii. 17; xvii. 5; Mark i. 11;
Luke iii. 22.
2 Dr. Hort (Azotes on Select Readings, ii. p. 5G) suggests a more equal
division, by connecting "and on earth" with the first clause:
Aoa iv v\[/i<JTOiQ Sufi Kal tTrl y/],
tiprjvj] iv dv5pii)Troi(; evSoKias-
3 The famous "Quarterly Reviewer" (Oct. 1881), of course, denounces
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 197
3. Rom. v. 1 : t \OJUEIS we have (hdbemus), t/ jvi)r,
peace, or \wjuv (the hortative), &? -MS have (halea-
mus), peace. Here the intrinsic evidence rather
favors the received text, since the apostle states the
result of justification by faith ; moreover, it is re
spectably supported by K% B 3 , F, G, P, Didymus,
Epiphanius, etc.; and o and w may easily be con
founded. Hence Lachmann in his ed. major, and
Tischendorf in his former editions, favored e xo/ia ,
and the American Committee decided to retain "we
have " in the text, and to put " let us have " in the
margin. But the English Committee decided the oth
er way, following Lachmann in his ed. minor, Tisch
endorf in his last edition, and Westcott and Hort.
In his Critical Notes Hort does not even mention
this variation. It must be admitted that t^M/utv is,
upon the whole, better supported by s* (uncorrect-
ed), A, B*, C, D, Itala, Yulgata, and other versions ;
and it gives also good sense, since peace, like every
other gift, must be held fast and regained ever anew
to be fully possessed and enjoyed. Anxious and
timid Christians must be exhorted to realize the
benefit of the merits of Christ which are theirs by
faith.
4. Acts xx. 28 : " to feed the church of God" (r>)i>
the reading of tuSoKiag as a "grievous perversion of the truth of Scrip
ture," and holds the evidence for tvdoKia to be "absolutely decisive."
Canon Cook, the editor of the Speaker s Comment a ?-y, agrees with Dean
Burgon s general position, but admits at least that "the Revisers have
manuscript authority sufficient to prove that their reading was known and
adopted by many churches at a very early time." (The Revised Version
of the First Three Gospels, Lund. 1882, p. 27.)
198 TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
tKK\ri<riav TOV Sfiou), or "the church of the Lord"
(TOV Kvpiov). The difference derives doctrinal
importance from the addition: "which he purchased
with /US own blood" (rjv TrtpitTrou icraTO c)m TOV ai/uaTOQ
TOV l$iov). The reading Ztov would furnish a strong
argument for the divinity of Christ, but also an al
most patripassian or monophysitic view of his death. 1
The two lie vision Companies are divided here the
English put " God " in the text, and " tlie Lord " in
the margin; the Americans reverse the order. The
critical editors are also divided Westcott and Hort
adopt TOV 3-fou, Tischendorf TOV Kvpiov. The former
is supported by N, B, a number of cursives, Vulg. ;
the latter by A, C*, D, E, 13, and other cursives,
and by the Old Latin, Coptic, and Sahidic versions.
The testimony of the fathers is divided. 8 The ablest
arguments on the two sides of the question are by
Dr. Hort, in favor of 3-sou, in Notes on Select Read
ings, pp. 08-100, and by Dr. Ezra Abbot, in favor
of Kvpiov, in the " Bibliotheca Sacra," Andover, for
1876, pp. 313 sqq. 3 Dr. Hort suggests at the end of
his note that possibly vlov may have dropped out
1 Comp. Watts s "When God the mighty Maker died;" and the old
German hymn, " welche Noth ! Gott selbst ist todt."
2 Chrysostom is quoted on both sides; but Dr. Abbot writes me the
following note : " The case in regard to Chrysostom must be considered
clear. He not only reads Kvpiov without variation among the MSS. in
his Horn, on Eph. iv. 11, but (what I did not know when I wrote my arti
cle) the best MSS. of Chrysostom read Kvpiov in his homily on Ihis passage
of the Acts, and that reading is accordingly adopted in the translation of
his Homilies on the A cts in the Oxford Library of the Fathers."
3 The essay was first privately printed for the use of the Am. Revision
Committee,
TEXTUAL CKITICISM. 199
after TOV iSiov at some very early transcription, af
fecting all existing documents. This conjecture
would relieve the passage of all difficulty, and make
it conform to the apostolic doctrine that God pur
chased to himself a universal church by the precious
blood of his dear Son. But since conjecture cannot
be allowed a place in view of the multitude of read
ings, except in an extreme case, which does not exist
here, I prefer the reading Kvpiov. Paul often speaks
of " the church of God " (1 Cor. i. 1 ; xi. 22 ; 2 Cor.
i. 1 ; Gal. i. 13 ; 1 Tim. iii. 5), but nowhere of the
blood of God. On the other hand, the Church is
usually represented as the institution of Christ, as
his body, and his bride for which he shed his blood
(Matt. xvi. 18 ; 1 Cor. iii. 11 ; Eph. i. 22, etc.).
5. 1 Tim. iii. 16 : Sto? (0~C), or 6 c (O C), " God was
manifested in the flesh," or " He who [/. <?., Christ]
was manifested in the flesh." Here the weight of
external and internal evidence is decidedly in favor
of oc, and this reading has been adopted by all the
critical editors (Griesbach, Lachmann, Tregelles,
Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort), critical commenta
tors (including Alford and Ellicott), and by the
English and American Revisers. 1 The arguments
1 Dean Burgon s dictatorial protest against the nearly unanimous con
sensus of scholars is mere brutum fulmen, and can only have weight with
ignoramuses. Even Bishop Wordsworth, the most conservative of English
commentators, adopts the reading oq. So does the Bishop of London in
the Speaker s Commentary (which is likewise very conservative, yet ad
mits that " the evidence, external and internal, seems to require the
admission of oq into the text instead of Stog or o," Neio Test. iii. 780) ;
also Canon Spence, in Ellicott s Com., and Dean Plumptre, in Schaffs
Popular Com, vol. iii. (1882), p. 570.
TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
are : (1) The best MSS. (x, A*, C*, E, G) read 5 ff ,
although some have been corrected by later hands.
In x the letters E were added above the line, in the
twelfth century. The correction in C is older. A
is defaced, but has been examined by Bishop Ellicott
and other scholars with the aid of the microscope,
and found to have had originally OC without a bar
above and without a transverse stroke in O, though
both were added in comparatively recent times. 1
B cannot be quoted here, as it does not contain the
Pastoral Epistles. 2 (2) All the ancient versions of
any weight have a relative pronoun here. (3) The
Western o, quod, which is a manifest correction
of oc and adaptation to the preceding fjtvarfiptov.
(4) The oldest fathers: Origen (qui manifestatus
cst), Epiphanius, Cyril, Theodore of Mopsuestia,
Jerome. The reading 3"0(, seems not to have been
known before the last third of the fourth century ;
and even Chrysostom is here doubtful, though in one
place he probably read Scoe, as certainly did Theo-
doret. (5) It is much easier to account for the
change of the difficult o^ into the easy ccoc, than
vice versa, although the mechanical resemblance of
OC and 0C made the other change more easy.
(6) While Stoc; well suits the first of the six verbs,
1 Dean Burgon boldly perverts this testimony of experts, and asserts
without a shadow of proof: "A and C exhibited BO until ink, dirt, and
the injurious use of chemicals obliterated what once was patent." lie
does not tell us when and to whom it was patent.
2 Not " because the jealousy of Rome has prevented accurate collation,"
as the Speaker s Com. (iii. 780) strangely remarked in the year 1881,
thirteen years after the publication of the fac-simile edition of Yercellonc !
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 201
it docs not naturally harmonize with the other five.
We may say that God " was manifested in the
flesh," but not that lie was "justified in the spirit/
"seen of angels," "received up in glory." All this,
however, can be said with perfect propriety of
Christ as the God- man. And he is undoubtedly
meant by the relative pronoun. And even the first
verb suits better to the language of John, who does
^ ^> 7
not say " God was made flesh," but " the Word was
made flesh." We have in this passage no doubt a
quotation from a primitive creed or hymn in praise
of Christ, and this accounts not only for the rela
tive oc, but also for the rhythmical structure of the
whole passage, which can be arranged in three par
allel pairs :
The doctrinal importance of this variation has
been much overrated. The divinity of Christ loses
nothing by the change. It implies in any case his
pre-existence. He is the personal embodiment of
the mystery of godliness. 1
1 Comp. a sermon of Dr. Vaughan (Master of the Temple), Authorized
or Revised? Lond. 1882, p. 17 : "The Revised Version of the New Testa
ment says this to us and if it were its only change, it would have been
worth ten years of labor : The mystery of godliness, the revealed secret
which has in it reverence, the right feeling and attitude of the soul
towards God its Author and Object of being, is a Person incarnate,
justified, attested, heralded, believed, glorified a Person whom to know
202 TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
G. Apoc. xvii. 8 : Ka nrep tor/v, or KOL Trapiarai. Here
the textus receptus, by the fault of a transcriber,
gives nonsense: ; The beast that was, and is not, and
yet is" while the true reading adopted by all the
modern editors makes it quite clear: " The beast was,
and is not, and shall come" (lit., shall be present).
Other substitutions are due to the aim of harmon
izing passages, or of correcting a supposed error, as
l> TQl TTpO^llTQig fOF tV TdJ HdCUtt TliJ TT/0007/ry, ill
Mark i. 2; Br^aftapa for Brfiavia, in John i. 28
(due, perhaps, to the conjecture of Origen).
CRITICAL RULES.
Since Bengel,Wetstein, and Griesbach, the critical
process has been reduced to certain rules, but there
is considerable diversity in the mode and extent of
their application. It is not a mechanical process,
and does not lead to mathematical certainty. The
critic has often to reason upon mere probabilities,
and to ascertain what hypothesis best explains ail
the phenomena. Here the judgment may vary, and
absolute unanimity cannot be expected in every case.
The following rules may be regarded as being
sound, and more or less accepted by the best mod
ern critics :
(1.) Knowledge of documentary evidence must
precede the choice of readings.
(2.) All kinds of evidence, external and internal,
must be taken into account, according to their in
trinsic value.
is life, whom to serve is freedom. He is not a doctrine, nor a book, nor a
creed, nor a church He is a Person."
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 203
(3.) The sources of the text must be carefully
sifted and classified, and the authorities must be
weighed rather than numbered. One independent
manuscript may be worth more than a hundred
copies which are derived from the same original.
On closer inspection, the witnesses are found to
fall into certain groups, and to represent certain
tendencies. Westcott and Hort have revived, modi
fied, and perfected Griesbach s system of families or
recensions. They distinguish between the Western,
the Alexandrian, the Syrian, and the neutral texts,
and enter minutely into the genealogical relations
of the ancient documents. The Western text is
specially represented by D, the Old Latin versions,
the Greek copies on which they were based, and in
part by the Curetonian Syriac, and is characterized
by a tendency to paraphrase and to interpolate from
parallel passages or other sources. The Alexandrian
or Egyptian text is much purer, but betrays a ten
dency to polish the language; it is found in Origen,
Cyril of Alexandria, and other Alexandrian fathers,
and in the two principal Egyptian versions, especially
the Memphitic. The Syrian text is mixed, and the
result of a recension of editors who borrowed from
all sources and were anxious to remove stumbling-
blocks, and to present the New Testament in a
smooth and attractive form. The neutral (pre-
Syrian) text is best represented by B and largely
by x, and comes nearest to the apostolic original.
From a careful comparative examination, Westcott
and Hort have come to the conclusion that these
two oldest extant MSS., the Vatican and the Sinaitic,
204: TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
are derived from ancestries which "diverged from
a point near the autographs, and never came into
contact subsequently; so that the coincidence of N
and 13 marks those portions of text in which two
primitive and entirely separate lines of transmis
sion had not come to differ from each other through
independent corruption in the one or the other."
They pay supreme respect to the Vatican MS., while
Tischendorf, in his last edition, often gives the pref
erence to the Sinaitic readings.
(4.) The restoration of the pure text is founded
on the history and genealogy of the textual corrup
tions. See the special discussion of the genealogical
method below, p. 208 sqq.
(5.) The older reading is preferable to the later,
because it is presumably nearer the source. In ex
ceptional cases later copies may represent a more
ancient reading. Mere antiquity is no certain test
of superiority, since the corruption of the text be
gan at a very early date.
(0.) The shorter reading is preferable to the
longer, because insertions and additions are more
probable than omissions. " J3rcvior lectio prcefer en-
da est verbosiori" (Griesbach). Person regarded
this as the " surest canon of criticism." Transcrib
ers were intent upon complete copies, and often
inserted glosses on the margin or between the lines,
and others put them into the text.
(7.) The more difficult reading is preferable to
the easier. " Lectio difficilior principatum tenet"
1 Gr. Test. i. 556 sq.
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 205
or " Proclivi scriptioni praesiat ardua" This was
Bengel s first rule. It is always easier to account
for the change of a really or apparently difficult and
obscure reading into an easy and clear one, than
vice versa. Transcribers would not intentionally
substitute a harsh, un grammatical, or unusual read
ing for one that was unobjectionable.
(8.) The reading which best explains the origin
of the other variations is preferable. This rule is
emphasized by Tischendorf.
(9.) " That reading is preferable which best suits
the peculiar style, manner, and habits of thought of
the author ; it being the tendency of copyists to over
look the idiosyncrasies of the writer" (Scrivener).
(10.) That reading is preferable which shows no
doctrinal bias, whether orthodox or heretical.
(11.) The agreement of the most ancient witness
es of all classes decides the true reading against all
mediaeval copies and printed editions.
(12.) The primary uncials, x, B, C, and A espe
cially x and B if sustained by other ancient Greek
uncials (as D, L, T, S, Z) and first-class cursives (as
33), by ancient versions, and ante-Nicene citations,
outweigh all later authorities, and give us presuma
bly the original text of the sacred writers.
APPLICATION OF THE RULES.
The application of these critical canons decides,
in the main, against the Textus Receptus, so called,
from which the Protestant versions were made, and
in favor of an older uncial text. The former rests
on a few and late, mostly cursive MSS., which have
TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
very little or no authority when compared with much
older authorities which have since been brought to
light. It abounds in later additions, harmless as
they may be. It is essentially the Byzantine, or
Constantinopolitan, text which almost exclusively
prevailed in the Greek state- church. It is the
mixed text of the Syrian fathers of the fourth cen
tury, especially of Chrysostom, who spent the greater
part of his life in Antioch, and the last ten years as
patriarch at Constantinople (d. 407). This text was
almost exclusively copied during the ascendency of
Constantinople in the East, while the West confined
itself to the Latin version, and remained ignorant
of the Greek Testament till the fall of Constantino
ple and the revival of letters. This text was intro
duced in the West in printed form by Erasmus in
1516, with some additions from the Latin version.
It passed with many changes into the editions of
Stephens, Beza, and Elzevir, before the material for
the science of criticism was collected and examined.
Erasmus, Stephens, and Beza were good scholars,
but could accomplish little with the scanty resources
at their command. Griesbach, Lachmann, Tregelles,
Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort have the advantage
over them in the possession of an immense critical
apparatus which has been accumulating for three
hundred years. This apparatus includes not only
the oldest Greek MSS., but also the oldest versions
Syriac, Latin, Egyptian and numerous quota
tions of ante-Nicene and Nicene fathers (older than
Chrysostom); and among these various sources there
is a very remarkable agreement and departure from
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 207
the received text, though mostly of a verbal charac
ter, and seldom touching a doctrine. We are now
able to go back from the printed text of the fifteenth
century and its basis, the Byzantine text of the fifth
century, to a text of the ante-Nicene age up to the
time of Irenaeus or the middle of the second century.
It has taken a long time for scholars to become
emancipated from the tyranny of the Textus Recep-
tuSj and it will be a long time before the people can
be weaned from the authority of the vernacular ver
sions based upon it. The German Version of Luther
and the English Version of 1611 are so idiomatic
and classical, and so full of faith and the Holy
Spirit, that they have deservedly a most powerful
hold on the popular mind and heart ; and every
serious departure from them is apt to disturb asso
ciations and cherished recollections of the dearest
and most sacred character. But the truth must pre
vail at last over tradition and habit. Amicus Eras
mus, amicus Stephanus, amicus Bcza, scd magis
arnica veritas.
The loss of the traditional text is more than made
up by the gain. The substance remains, the form
only is changed. The true text is shorter, but it is
also older, purer, and stronger.
By that we must abide until new discoveries bring
us still nearer to the inspired original. If we can
not have the very best, let us have at least the next
best. If the apostolic autographs should ever be
discovered, which is extremely improbable, it would
create a new epoch in biblical learning, but it would
scarcely alter the text, which no doubt has been
208 TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
providentially preserved from all essential altera
tions.
THE GENEALOGICAL METHOD.
[This section was kindly contributed to this work by Professor BEN.T.
B. WAUFIELD, D.D., of the Theological Seminary at Allegheny, Pa. He
has made textual criticism a special study, and prepared a careful review
of Westcott and Ilort s Greek Testament in the Presbyterian Review"
for April, 1882. P. S.]
IN attempting to recover the original form of any
ancient text, the first step must always be to gather
the testimony, which in the Xew Testament is found
in the MSS., citations and versions. Just as inevita
bly the next step must be the sifting, weighing, and
classifying of the testimony. It is, indeed, conceiv
able that all witnesses might be equally important ;
but most certainly this is not a priori probable. It
is altogether likely prior to examination, rather, that
.one witness is more weighty than another; it is far
from improbable that many apparently important
witnesses may prove simply a body of repeaters.
Suppose, for instance, that printed as well as manu
script copies were included in the collected material :
one edition may have comprised ten thousand im
pressions ; another, equally good or better, only one
hundred ; and it would be clearly unfair, merely on
account of this accident of the number of impres
sions, to allow one hundred times more weight to
the one edition than to the other. Similarly, from
one MS. there may have been made a thousand
copies ; from another, equally good or better, only
ten ; and it would be equally unfair, merely on ac
count of this accident of the number of copies taken,
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 209
to allow one hundred times more weight to the one
group than to the other. Unless, however, before
using our testimony at all, we begin by sifting and
classifying it, we run continual and unavoidable
risk of perpetrating this gross injustice.
An imaginary case, illustrated by a diagram, may
make these results more apparent :
Autograph.
MM M Ml
1234 56 789
Suppose three copies, A, B, C, are made of the auto
graph, which is then destroyed. Suppose, further,
that C remains uncopied ; of B three copies, s, t, v,
are made ; and of A four, w, x, y, z, of which, again,
x, y, z become themselves the parents of the further
copies represented by numerals in the diagram.
We have now nineteen representatives of the auto
graph from which W T C are to reconstruct it. Shall
we allow equal weight to each ? Clearly A and 9,
say, for instance, stand in very different relations to
the autograph, and it would be manifestly unfair to
allow them equal weight. Clearly, again, in the
presence of A, all its copies sons and grandsons
alike are useless to us; they contain legitimately
nothing not already in A. and therefore, both in the
cases where they are like it and in those where they
are unlike it, must be absolutely neglected. The
U
210 TEXTUAL CKITICISM.
same is, of course, true of the relation of s, t, v to 13.
In other words, \\\& fourteen JM8/S., A, w, x, y, z, 1-9,
can rank in combination as only one Witness ; the
four, B, s, t, v, again as only one ; and, although we
possess nineteen documents, we have at last only
three witnesses.
Let us take another step, and suppose that as well
as the autograph, A, B, x. y, z are lost, so that we
possess only the fourteen MSS., C, s, t, v, w, 1-9 :
how would the case be altered ? We certainly do
not, in thus decreasing the number of our copies,
increase the number of our witnesses, s, t, v would
still represent only three repeating witnesses of
what was in the one witness B; w, 1-9 would be
still, in all their divergencies from one another, only
corruptions from A, and hence worthless in all
their agreements with one another only witnesses
to what was in A, and hence only one witness.
There are thus still only three witnesses to consider.
And it would be still manifestly misleading to treat
our documents as together constituting more wit
nesses than three. We could not, indeed, now as in
the former case neglect the testimony of s, t, v, or
of w, 1-9 ; but we should not be able to treat each
of them as a direct witness to the autograph co-or
dinate with the others or with C. The true method
of procedure would be to compare the various copies
among themselves, noting their affiliations, and thus
discovering that s, t, v constituted one group, while
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, each formed a sub-group,
which then united with each other and with w to
frame another group, while C stood alone. Thus,
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 211
working backward on the simple and almost self-
evident principle that community in readings means
community in origin, we would discover by the irre
fragable evidence of the mutual resemblances and
divergences of documents what we know from the
diagram namely, that we have three witnesses only
to consider, and that the whole group w, 1-9 is, in
point of originality, equal only to the one MS. C in
value. The qualifying phrase, " in point of original
ity," has been designedly inserted ; for, although
this grouping of the documents is decisive as to
the question " how many witnesses have we?" and
necessarily reduces them to three, it says not one
word as to the relative values of those three witness
ing groups. A, represented by the extant w, 1-9,
may be far better than, or it may be far worse than
C, represented by itself alone. The relative values
of the various witnesses cannot be determined until
after the grouping has been thoroughly done, and
then must be sought by testing the groups as wholes
by internal and transcriptional evidence.
By means of our diagram we have thus obtained
the two first and most important rules of critical
procedure: 1, First classify the witnesses by means
of a careful study of the affiliation of the documents,
thus discovering how many real witnesses there are ;
and, 2, Then determine the relative values of these
witnesses through the use of the only applicable
evidence i. <?., intrinsic and transcriptional. Thus
alone can we mount to the autographic form of any
ancient text by secure steps.
The application of this method universally in
212 TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
use elsewhere to the text of the New Testament
was first hinted at by Mill and Bentley, and first
actually made by Bengel, followed especially by
Griesbach. It has been reserved, however, to our
own day and to Dr. Ilort to perfect it. Dr. Hort
has pointed out that the extant MSS. of the New
Testament fall naturally into four great groups,
which he names Syrian, Western, Alexandrian, and
Neutral. The Syrian is, however, demonstrably of
late origin, and the result of a combination of the
other three. And therefore, just as in our imagi
nary case all derivative evidence was to be rejected
in the presence of its sources, so also here the whole
Syrian group is of no value as testimony to us in
the presence of the groups out of which it was
made. In the reconstruction of the autographic
text we are concerned thus only with the three co
ordinate groups, called Western, Alexandrian, and
Neutral. We have but to distribute the various
documents which have come down to us, each to its
proper group, in order to lay beneath us an impreg
nable basis for our reconstruction of the autographic
text of the New Testament.
This task of distribution proves in the New Tes
tament to be a very difficult and complicated one.
The different portions of the volume Gospels, Acts,
Catholic Epistles, Pauline Epistles, and Revelation-
must be treated separately. Allowance must be
made for progressive growth of corruption within
the bounds of each class. And, above all, the prob
lem is to an unparalleled degree complicated by
mixture between the groups, so that in many pas-
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 213
sages it is exceedingly difficult, and sometimes im
possible, to classify the readings with any certainty.
These difficulties and complications limit the appli
cation of the genealogical method, as it is called,
so far, but cannot affect it in general, and do not
throw doubt upon it wherever it is applicable.
They force us to call to our aid other methods to
decide between readings in special passages and to
test our results in all passages; but in the main
portion of the New Testament, genealogical evi
dence is thoroughly applicable and entirely decisive.
The vast majority of the extant documents all
those of the later or cursive type are assigned
definitively to the Syrian class, and hence are con
victed as of secondary value as witnesses, and of no
value at all in the presence of the primary sources.
Only five MSS. are found to be throughout pre-
Syrian viz., B, x, D, D 2 , G% of which B seems
purely Neutral in the Gospels, and D, D 2 , G 3 purely
Western throughout. In the rest of the New Testa
ment B has a Western element; and s, though large
ly Neutral, has Western and Alexandrian elements
throughout. Such MSS. as A, C, L, P, Q, E, T, Z, T,
A, and some few cursives, contain a larger or smaller
pre-Syrian element. The Old Latin Version seems
purely, the Curetonian Syriac predominatingly.
Western. The Memphitic was originally in all
probability purely pre-Syrian, and predominatingly
non- Western; the Thebaic is similar, but with a
larger Western element. The pre-Syrian element
among citations is largest in those from Origen,
Didymus, and Cyril of Alexandria. The following
TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
very rough and ideal genealogical diagram may
perhaps exhibit the above facts to the eye, as con
cerning some of the chief documents in the Gospels.
Autograph. 1
i v wan =ra i
a vi waan =
I
n x n v "=wan \van \va" w vlii w vi
waaann=wa !ii w ix D
a vn_- waann Memfi. waann
waaann = wa 1
[LJ
Old Latin.
The Alexandrian, "Western, and Xeutral groups
which each originated in a single document are
represented by the letters a, w, and n, respectively ;
the pure or mixed 2 representatives of each being
1 This diagram is meant to represent the kind, not the degree, of rela
tionship between documents. The reader must avoid being led to suppose,
for instance, that C, L, and Memplt. are as closely related to one another
as the diagram represents them to be.
2 The usual genealogical sign of marriage (=) is used in the diagram
to denote mixture.
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 215
designated by the primed or combined letters. If
a reading now, for instance, is attested by D, x, Old
Latin seeing that D and the Old Latin are pure
descendants of w, and x a mixed one, their common
inheritance of this reading may be accounted for as
coming from w, and they may therefore constitute
but a single witness for it. On the other hand, if
O
a reading is supported by B, N, 13, it necessarily has
the support of both n and w two out of three.
On the hypothesis that a, n, and w are of equal
value, the latter reading would be probably right,
and the former probably wrong.
Of course, however, the three original sources
w, n, and a are not of equal value. On testing the
groups that represent them by intrinsic and tran-
scriptional evidence which, we must remember, is
the only applicable evidence w betrays itself as
most painfully corrupt, and a as quite so, while n
approves itself as unusually pure. In cases of ter
nary variation between the groups, that reading
which represents n is probably, therefore, correct,
and is usually supported as such by internal evi
dence; in cases of binary variation that reading for
/ t5
which the group representing n throws its weight
is almost certainly correct, and is almost uniformly
proved to be such by internal evidence. (The ex
ception consists mainly of those few passages classed
as Western non-interpolations.) The relative diver
gence from the autograph of the several groups may
be roughly represented to the eye by the following
diagram, in which also we may observe anew the
value of certain combinations in the Gospels.
TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
Trur Tert
If x y represents the line of absolutely true de
scent, z q, along the course of which the various
Western documents may be ranged in growing cor
ruption, will roughly represent the Western diver
gence, t s the Neutral, and k v the Alexandrian ; w p
represents the Syrian. Now, it is evident that B,
placed at a point between k and t, or just beyond t
on the line t s, is the nearest to the originals of any
MS. B x will carry us back to a point on st x, or to
a point at, or prior to, k or z. B I) will take us to,
or prior to, z. x D, on the contrary, may le equal
to B D, and so land us on z x; or may be equal to
D alone, and so carry us only amid the abounding
corruption of z q. And so on through the list.
In putting the genealogical method to practical
use in determining the text in individual passages,
the central problem is to translate testimony ex
pressed in terms of individual manuscripts into
testimony expressed in terms of classes of manu
scripts. It would be a great help to have in our
hands a trusty edition of the New Testament pre
senting in parallel columns the four great classes of
text, each wi-th its own various readings. In such
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 217
case we should have only to turn to the passage in
our Testament and see the testimony marshalled
in order. Such an edition is, however, still a de
sideratum, 1 and, indeed, is by no means a necessity.
The information given in any good digest of read
ings is sufficient to enable us to deal with most
passages at the expense of a little trouble and
thought, as if they had place in such an edition and
we could turn to them there and see at a glance the
readings of each class. Let us suppose, for instance,
that we wished to deal with a passage in the Gospels
in which one reading was supported by B, s, C, L,
Memph., Theb., Orig., and its rival by the remainder
of the witnesses : it is easy to see that in our desid
erated edition the former reading, supported as it is
by the typical Neutral and Alexandrian documents,
would stand in those columns, and the latter, for the
same reason, in the Western and Syrian columns.
By simply noting the grouping of the documents
we can proceed, therefore, just as if all this pre
liminary work had been already done to our hand
by somebody else.
The proper procedure is something like this:
First, let the Syrian testimony which as collusive
testimony is no testimony be sifted out. This
may be done roughly by confining our attention
for the moment to the pre-Syrian documents that
is, to the earlier versions, the fathers before 250 A. D.,
and to such MSS. as B, x, C, L, D, T, &, A, Z, R, Q, 33
1 Its place is, especially in the Gospels, supplied for many purposes in a
general way by Mr. E. H. Hansell s parallel edition of the four great
MSS., A, B,C,IX
218 TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
in the Gospels ; B, x, A, C, D, E, 13, Gl in Acts ; B,
tf, A, C, 13 in the Catholic Epistles ; B, , A, C, D,
G, P, 17, 67** in Paul ; and x, A, C, P, 05, in Rev
elation. Very frequently the reading will be found
to be already settled on the completion of this first
step; on sifting out the Syrian testimony the varia
tion is sifted out too. As this amounts to proving
the non-existence of the variation before A.D. 250,
the text thus acquired is very certain. An example
may be seen in John v. 8, where the received text
reads lyttpai with support which disappears entirely
with the Syrian documents, while its rival, ty^of, is
left with the support of B, x, C, I), L, etc. A like
case is Mark i. 2, where "the prophets" is read only
by documents which sift out by this process, leaving
its rival, "Isaiah, the prophet" still testified to by
B, N, D, L, A, 33, Latt., Memph., and Syrr. Pst, Hlc.
mg. and Ilier. We add three further examples
from Mark : iv. 2-i, where B, s, C, D, L, A, Latt.,
Memph. omit " that hear" against Syrian witness
only ; xv. 28, where the whole verse is omitted by
B, N, A, C, D, Theb., against Syrian (and late West
ern) witness; iii. 29, where "sin" is read instead of
"judgment" by B, x, L, A, 33 (C, D), Latt., Memph.,
against purely Syrian opposition. In such cases,
our procedure cannot be doubtful.
Often, however, after this first step has been
taken, we seem hardly nearer our goal than at the
outset ; there are still rival readings two or some
times three among which we are to find the orig
inal one. The next step in such case is to assign
these remaining readings to their own proper classes.
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 219
This is done by noting carefully the attestation of
each, with a view to determining the class to which
the group supporting each belongs. This is not
always an easy task, but it is usually a possible
one. Suppose, for instance, we have before us at
this stage two readings in a passage of the Gos
pels the one supported by D, Old Lat., Cur. Syr.,
and the other by B, x, C, L it is very easy to see
that the former would stand in our wished -for
edition in the Western column, and the latter in
the Neutral and Alexandrian columns; or, in other
words, that the former would take us in our diagram
only somewhere on the line z q, while the latter
would carry us to the point of juncture of the
Neutral and Alexandrian lines. So, also, if the at
testation were divided rather thus : B, x, D, Old Lat.,
Vulg.,Memph., Theb., against C, L, it would be easy
to see that the former was Neutral and Western, and
the latter Alexandrian ; or, in other words, that the
former would take us to point z on the diagram, the
latter only somewhere on the line t v. Our pro
cedure in such cases, again, could not be doubtful.
The following are examples of such cases : In John
i. 4, ianv is read by x, I), Codd. mentioned by Origen,
Old Lat., Cur. Syr., Theb. ; that is, by documents typi
cally Western in conjunction with others containing
larger or smaller Western elements: it belongs on the
line z q. Its rival, r>, is read by B, C, L, r, Memph.,
Yulg., Syrr. ; or, in other words, by documents Neu
tral, or Neutral and Alexandrian : to it, therefore,
the genealogical argument points as probably the
correct reading. The interesting reading of Mark
TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
ix. 23, adopted by the Revisers of the English New
Testament, is another case in point restoring the
vivid form of the original, as it does, against the
flatter corruption supported by D, 33, Old Lat.,
Vulg., Syrr., ?*. <?., by the Western class. Other ex
amples from Mark are : Mark ix. 44, last clause of 45,
and 46, omitted by B, x, C, L, A, Mem ph. = Neutral
and Alexandrian, inserted by 1), Old Lat., Vulg.,
Syrr. = Western ; Mark ix. 49, last clause, omitted by
B, x, L, A, and inserted by C, D, Latt., Syrr., where
the defection of C to the Western side introduces
no complication, seeing that C has a Western ele
ment ; Mark xi. 26, omitted by B, K, L, A, and insert
ed by C, D, Latt., Syrr. Other examples may be
found in all the clauses omitted by the Revised
English Version from the Lord s Prayer as recorded
by Luke.
It is not asserted, of course, that the genealogical
method will do everything ; or that there are no
passages in which it leaves the true reading in doubt
or in darkness. But it is asserted, as is illustrated
by the foregoing examples, that it is easy to apply
it in the great majority of cases, and that it is sound
wherever applicable. Its results ought to be always
tested by other methods by internal evidence of
groups first, and internal evidence of readings after
wards. From this testing the method emerges tri
umphant ; although in a few rare cases we are
preserved by it from a wrong application of the
genealogical argument. Extreme and very interest
ing instances of this may be found in those passages
which are technically called by Dr. Hort " Western
TEXTUAL CKITICISM. 221
non- interpolations." There are only some half-
dozen of these, but they are very instructive.
Matt, xxvii. 49 is a fair sample. Here B, fct, C, L,
(U), F, etc., unite in inserting the sentence, "But an
other, taking a spear, pierced his side, and there came
forth water and blood" against the opposition of
Western (and Syrian) documents only. Now it is
quite impossible to accept this sentence : it looks
strange in this context, it has the appearance of
coming from John xix. 34, and it is very surprising
that the "Western class, the chief characteristic of
which is insertion, should here be the sole omitter.
Both intrinsic evidence and transcriptional evidence
speak so strongly against the sentence, indeed, that
the editors unanimously reject it. Is the genealog
ical method here at fault? No; our application
of it only is corrected. We must remember that
genealogical investigation does not itself determine
for us the relative values of the different classes; it
merely distributes the documents into these classes,
and leaves to internal evidence the other task (see
p. 210). And internal evidence determines general
and usual relations, not invariable ones. It tells us
that, the documents having been distributed into
the Neutral, Alexandrian, and Western classes on
genealogical considerations, the Neutral class is the
best, and hence is usually to be trusted the West
ern the worst, and hence is usually to be distrusted.
It does not tell us that the Western reading is neces
sarily always wrong. The significance of such ex
ceptions as the one under discussion is simply this:
in a few rare cases the stern from which the classes
222
TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
diverge received corruption after the Western diver
gence, and before the Neutral or Alexandrian diver
gence ; in other words, between z and k on the
diagram. A glance at the diagram will show how
consistent this result is with the method; it informs
us only that B D takes us to an earlier point than
B pins non-Western C, and warns us never to be
satisfied with a mechanical application of a rule,
however generally valid it may appear. So far
from such exceptions to the ordinary application
of genealogical evidence proving destructive of its
principle, therefore, they form one of the best and
strongest confirmations of it. They are the jags- in
the papers edges, the fitting of which proves that
we are on the right track.
A list of the chief variations in one chapter of
the Gospels is added below for the examination of
the student.
READINGS OF TJIK FIFTH CHAPTER OF ST. MATTHEW.!
(!) Vcr. 1
7rpoa?i\3rav
W., T., Tr.
13, S.
TrpoafiXSov
C, D, T, A Western.
(2) 4,5
order of verses (5, 4)
T., Tr.
D,33,01dLat.,Vulg.,Cr.
Syr. Western.
" (4,5)
W.
B,X,C,r,A,Mcmph.,Syrr.
(3) 9
add avroi
[W.,Tr.]
B, T, A, Cur. Syr., Mempli.
omit "
T.
X, C, D, Latt., Pst. West
ern.
(4) 11
add filjfia
C, r, A, Syrr.jOrig. .4 lex-
andrian.
omit "
W., Tr., T.
B, X, D, Latt,, Mempli.
1 In this list the third column gives the editors who have accepted
each reading W. standing for Westcott and Hort, T. for Tischendorf
(latest text), and Tr. for Tregelles. The fourth column gives the wit
nesses for each reading.
TEXTUAL CRITICISM.
223
(5) Ver. 11
add \l/tvd6[Avoi
W., T., Tr.
omit " [Tr. mg.]
(6) 13
j3\^v t^w car. \V.,Tr..T.
(7) 22
omit i ^
insert "
W.,Tr.mg,
T.
[Tr.]
(8)
^a
T.
(0) 23 Kdm
KGti fcK-ft
(10) " 25 1 omit (re TTorpaOrp
insert " "
W., Tr.
W., T., Tr.
Tr. mg.
W., T.
[Tr.J
(11) 27
omit ro7f (tpX
W.,T.,Tr.
add " -
(12) " 28
(13) 30
omit avTtjv (1st)
insert "
t . y. a-jikX^y
T.
[W.],Tr.
W..Tr.,T.
/3x^; . y .
(14) 32
TTOQ. O 7ToX.
Off tCLV aTToX.
Tr., T.
[W.]
(15)
uoi%V&r]VCti
W.,T.,Tr.
(1C) 37
tOTdi
W., T., Tr.
(17) " 39
tffTat
pcnri^a ticj
paTTlfff.1 tTTl
W. mg.
W.,T.,Tr.
Tr. mg, j
B, X, C, r, A, Vulg., Cur.
Syr., Pst., Mem ph.
D, Old Lat., Origen.
Western,
R,S,C,33,Syr.IIcl.,Orig.
D, r, A (Latt.) Western.
B, X, Vulg., Grig.
D. L, r, A, 33, Old Lat.,
Cur. Syr., Syrr., Memph.
Western.
X, 1), Old Lat., etc. West
ern.
B, etc.
B. X, L, T, 33, Orig.
D, A, etc. Western.
B,X.
(D), L, r, A, 33, Old Lat..
Vulg., Cur. Syr., Theb.,
Memph., Pst. Western.
B, X, D, r, Old Lat.,
Memph., Fst.
L, A, 33, Cur. Syr., Hcl.,
Vulg. A lexandrian ?
X, A, Clems., Orig. 3 times.
B, D, L, r.
B, X, 33, Old Lat,, Vulg.,
Cur. Syr., Memph.
L, r, A, Syrr. Alexan
drian.
B, X, L, A, 33, Vulg., Syrr.
D, Old Lat., Cur. Syr.,
Memph. Western.
B, X, D, 33, Orig.
L, A A lexandrian ?
X,D,L,A,OldLat.,Vulg.,
Clems, (once).
B, Clems, (once).
B, X (33).
D,L,A Western.
224: TEXTUAL CKITICIS]
(18) Vcr.39
omit <roi>
T.
add "
[W.] Tr.
(19) 41
dyyaptvffei
W., Tr., T.
(20) " 42
Soy
W., Tr., T.
didov
(21) " 44
omit clauses
W., Tr., T.
add clauses
(22) " 4G
TO OVTQ
W., T.
OVTUS
\V.rng.,Tr.
(23) 47
^.
W., T., Tr.
(24) " "
fatl
W., Tr., T.
Tt\wvctl
(25)
TO (IV TO
W., Tr., T.
ovrtay
(2G) 48
UJQ
\V., Tr., T.
(27)
o ovpdviog
W.. Tr., T.
iv T. ovpavoiq
[
X, 33, Orig.
B, D, L, A, Latt.
B,L, (D).
X, A, 33 Western?
B, X, D.
!L, A Alexandrian?
B, X, Latt., Mcmph., Cur.
Syr., Oritf.
D, L, A, 33, etc. West
ern.
B, N, L, A, Syrr., (Latt.).
D. Z, 33, Cur. Sy r., Memph.
Western.
B, X, D, Latt., Cur. Syv.,
Pst., Mcmph.
L, A A lexandrian ?
B, X, D, Latt., Memph.,
Cur. Syr.
L, A, Pst. A lexandrian 1
B. X,D, 33, Pst., (Latt.).
L, A, Memph., Cur. Syr.
A lexandrian ?
B, X,L,Z, 33, Clems., Orig.
D, A Wesfern.
B, X, L, Z, 33, Vulg., Syr.
Hcl.
(D),4,01dLat. ; Pst.,Cur.
Syr. Western.
CHAPTER SIXTH.
HISTORY OF THE PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TES
TAMENT.
THE history of the printed text of the Greek
Testament may be divided into three periods:
(1.) The period of the unlimited reign of the
Received Text, so called, from 1516 to 1750 or 1770.
(2.) The transition period from the Received Text
to the older Uncial Text, 1770 to 1830.
(3.) The restoration of the oldest and purest text,
1830 to 1881.
More than half a century elapsed after the inven
tion of the art of printing before the Kew Testament
was published in the original Greek. 1 The honor
1 I moan the whole Greek Testament. For the celebrated printer, Aldo
Manuzio (the elder, 1447-1515), had previously published the first six
chapters of the Gospel of John at Venice in 1504; and the Magnificat of
Mary, Luke i. 46-55, and the Benedictus of Zacharias, Luke i. 68-79, were
added to a beautiful Greek Psalter in the year 148G. The Latin Vulgate
was first published at Mayence, in 1455 (the Mazarin Bible), before any
other book. The German Bible was also printed before the Greek and
Hebrew original. No less than fourteen editions of the German Bible in
the High-German dialect were printed before 1518 (at Mayence, 1462 ; at
Strassburg, 1466; at Augsburg, 1475; at Niirnberg or Basle, 1470, etc.),
and four in the Low-German dialect from 1480 to 1522 (at Cologne, 1480;
at Liibeck, 1494, etc.). See Fritzsche s art. Deutsche Bibelubers. in Herzog
(new ed.), iii. 545 sqq., and Kehrein, Gesch.der deutschen Bibdubersetzutifj
vor Luther, Stuttg. 1851. England, which now far surpasses all other
countries in the publication and circulation of the Scriptures, was far
behind the Continent in the sixteenth century. Wiclif s version existed
15
226 PKIXTEI) TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT.
of pioneersliip in this great enterprise is divided
between a Human Catholic cardinal of Spain and a
semi -Protestant scholar of Switzerland (originally
of Holland). The former began first, with a num
ber of helpers and boundless resources of money;
but the latter, single-handed and poor, overtook him
by superior learning and enterprise. The same
pope, Leo X., who personally cared more for letters
and arts than for religion, authorized the publica
tion of both editions, and thus unconsciously pro
moted the cause of Protestantism, which appeals to
the Greek Testament as the highest and only infalli
ble authority in matters of faith, and which claims
the right and owns the duty to print and spread the
Word of God in every language on earth. The
Jews had anticipated the Christians by publishing
the Hebrew Bible several years before (in 1488 at
Soncino in Lombardy, and again at Brescia, 1494).
Dr. Eeuss, of Strassburg, who is in possession
of the largest private collection of editions of the
then only in manuscript. The first edition of William Tyndnle s English
New Testament was printed on the Continent (partly at Cologne, partly
at Worms) in 1520, secretly smuggled into England, and burned by order
of the bishop of London (Tunstall) in St. Paul s churchyard, not far from
the Oxford Bible Warehouse in Paternoster Row and the Bible House of
the British and Foreign Bible Society on the banks of the Thames, from
which thousands and millions of Bibles in all languages are now sent to
the ends of the earth. The archbishop of Canterbury (Warham) bought
a large number of copies at an expense of nearly a thousand pounds sterling
for destruction, but thereby furnished the translator the means for printing
a new edition. Hence the scarcity of the first edition, of which only two
copies and a fragment survive. Tyndale " caused the boy who driveth
the plough to know more of the Scriptures than did all the priests" of his
day. See Eadie, History of the English Bible, i. 129, 161, 173 sq., 184.
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 227
Greek Testament, gives a chronological list of 584
distinct and 151 title editions of the Greek Testa
ment (501 and 139 being complete), which were
printed from 1514 to 1870. He divides them into
twenty-seven families. 1 This list has been enlarged
in 1882 to the number of 919 by Professor Hall (sec
First Appendix). lie estimates the total number of
printed copies of the entire Greek Testament, as far
as he can trace them, on the basis of 1000 to each
edition, to be over one million. A large number,
and yet very small as compared with that of the
English New Testament, of which the American
Bible Society alone issues nearly half a million of
copies every year. 2
1 See his Bibliotheca Novi Test. Greed (1872), and Appendix I. Reuss
classifies his editions as follows:
I. Editio Complutensis; II. Editiones Erasmicne; III. Editio Compluto-
Erasmica; IV. Editio Colinaei ; V. Editiones Stephanicae; VI. Editiones
Erasmo-Stephanicje ; VII. Editiones Compluto-Stephanicae; VIII. Edi
tiones Bezaiuc; IX. Editiones Stephano-Bezanae ; X. Editiones Stephano-
riantinianse ; XI. Editiones Elzevirianae; XII. Editiones Stephano-
ElzevirianjE ; XIII. Editiones Elzeviro - Plantinianae ; XIV. Editiones
criticae ante-Griesbachianrc; XV. Editiones Griesbachianaa ; XVI. Edi
tiones Matthaeianae; XVII. Editiones Griesbachio-Elzevirianae; XVIII.
Editiones Knappianae; XIX. Editiones critics? minores post-Gries-
bachianae; XX. Editiones Scholzianse (including the Bloomfield and the
Bagster editions, London); XXI. Editiones Lachmannianas ; XXII. Edi
tiones Griesbachio-Lachmannianrc; XXIII. Editiones Tischendorfiansc :
XXIV. Editiones mixtse recentiores (Theile, Mnralt, Reithmayr, Anger.
Wordsworth, Hahn) ; XXV. Editiones nondum collatse; XXVI. Editi
ones dubiae; XXVII. Editiones spuriae. To these should be added the
Tregelles editions; the Westcott and Hort editions; the Oxford and
Cambridge editions of the Revisers text. The American editions (over
eighty) are reprints of European families, mostly of the textus receptus
and its derivatives.
2 The issues of the New Testament in English from the Bible House
228 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT.
I confine myself here to the standard editions,
which mark an epoch in the history of textual crit
icism. Compare the full titles and specimen pages
in the Second Appendix.
I. THE PERIOD OF THE TEXTUS RECEPTTJS : FROM
ERASMUS AND STEPHENS TO BENGEL AND WET-
STEIN. A.D. 1516-1750.
THE TEXTUS RECEPTUS.
This period extends from the Reformation to the
middle of the eighteenth century. The text of
Erasmus, with various changes and improvements
of Stephens, Beza, and the Elzevirs, assumed a stere
otyped character, and acquired absolute dominion
among scholars. No two editions are precisely
alike, any more than the editions of the Authorized
English Version ; but all present substantially the
same text. The changes are numerous, but rarely
affect the sense. The Greek Testaments printed in
England arc usually based on Stephens and Beza;
those on the Continent, on the Elzevirs.
The Protestant versions of the sixteenth and sev
enteenth centuries (German, French, Dutch, English)
in common use were made from this Erasmo-Elze-
nt New York, by sale and donation, for successive years ending with the
31st of March (according to information kindly furnished by Dr. Gilman.
one of the secretaries) are as follows :
12 months, to March 31, 1879, 458.385 copies.
" " " 1880, 540,065 "
" " 1881, 491,105
" 1882, 424,642 "
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 229
virian text, and gained the same authority among
the laity which the former enjoyed among scholars.
Both were practically considered to be the inspired
Word of God, and every departure from them was
looked upon with distrust. This pious superstition,
although gradually undermined during the present
century, still lingers, and will die very reluctantly;
for religious prejudices and habits are exceedingly
tenacious.
The Roman Catholic Church is not bound to a
particular Greek text, but holds instead with even
greater tenacity to Jerome s Vulgate, which, as a
translation, is still further removed from the foun
tain of inspiration, though based in part on an older
text than the textus receptus. The Council of Trent
has put this defective version even on a par with,
and virtually above, the sacred original, and thus
checked all serious progress in biblical criticism and
exegesis. Roman Catholic editions of the Greek
Testament are behind the age, and mostly mere re
prints of the Compluterisian text, either alone or
combined with the Erasmian, both having the quasi-
sanction of the pope (Leo X.). The edition of the
Roman Catholic scholar, Scholz, contains a vast crit
ical apparatus, but has no ecclesiastical sanction.
The only duly and fully authorized Roman Catholic
Bible is the Clementine Yulgate, and that needs a
thorough critical revision.
ERASMUS.
The first published (not printed) edition of the
Greek Testament is that of the famous DESIDERIUS
230 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT.
ERASMUS (urged by his enterprising publisher, Fro-
benius, who offered to pay him as much " as any
body "), at Basle, Switzerland, 1516, fol.
It was a most timely publication, just one year
before the Information. Erasmus was the best
classical scholar of his age (a better Latinist than
Hellenist), and one of the forerunners of the Refor
mation, although he afterwards withdrew from it,
and died on the division line between two ages and
two churches (1536). He furnished Luther and
Tyndale the text for their vernacular versions, which
became the most powerful levers of the Reforma
tion in Germany and England. 1
The first edition was taken chiefly from two in
ferior Basle MSS., one of the Gospels and one of
the Acts and the Epistles : they are still preserved
in the University library at Basle, and have the
corrections of Erasmus and the marks of the print
er s pas;es (as I myself observed on a visit in 18T9).
They date from the fourteenth or fifteenth century.
Erasmus compared them with two or three others
on the same books. For the Apocalypse lie had
only one MS., of the twelfth century, borrowed from
Reuchlin, then lost sight of, but found again in
The Sorbonne in 1527 condemned thirty-two articles of Erasmus
extracted from his works, after having previously forbidden the circula
tion of his Colloquia in France. But he enjoyed the pope s friendship to
the last, and was even offered a cardinal s hat, which he declined on
account of old age. He died without a priest, but invoking the mercy
of Christ, and lies buried in the Protestant Minster of Basle. Comp. on
Erasmus the monographs of Mliller (1828), Drummond (1873), Gilly (1879),
and the article "Erasmus" by Stiihelin in Herzog s "Encykl. vol. iv.
278-290, new ed. (abridged in Schaff s " Encycl." i. 753).
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 231
1861 ; l defective on the last leaf (containing the
last six verses, which he retranslated from the Vul
gate into poor Greek). Made in great haste, in less
than six months, and full of errors. Elegant Latin
version, differing in many respects from the Vulgate,
with brief annotations. Dedicated to Pope Leo X.,
who is reminded of his duty to " make known to
the Christians again the commandments of their
Master out of the evangelical and apostolic writings
themselves."
Erasmus prepared, with the aid of OEcolampadius
(the friend of Zwingli and reformer of Basle), in
all five successive editions, with improvements, all
Grseco- Latin. Second edition, 1519 (the basis of
Luther s translation); third, 1522; fourth, much im
proved, 152T; fifth, 1535. Besides, more than thirty
unauthorized reprints are said to have appeared at
Venice, Strassburg, Basle. Paris, etc.
The entire apparatus of Erasmus never exceeded
eight MSS. The oldest and best of them lie used
least, because he was afraid of it namely, a cursive
of the tenth century, numbered 1, which agrees
better with the uncial than with the received text.
He also took the liberty of occasionally correcting
or supplementing his text from the Vulgate ; and
hence in more than twenty places his Greek text is
not supported by any known Greek MS.
NOTE. Retiss gives the titles of the five Erasmian editions, and says
(Biblioth. p. 26) that they vary in sixty-two out of a thousand places
which he compared. Mill s estimate of the variations (four hundred in
1 By Dr. Delitzsch, in the library of the princely house
Wallerstein. See his Handschriftliche Funde, Heft i. and ii., 18C1 and 1862.
the second edition) is far below the mark ; see Scrivener, IntroJ. p. 385.
Of the first edition, Erasmus himself says that it was prepared with head
long haste ^ prcedpitatum fuit verius quam editum"), in order that his
publisher might anticipate the publication of the Complutensian Polyglot.
There was therefore some rivalry and speculation at work. The second
edition is more correct, but even this (as Dr. O. von Gebhardt, in his Gr.
Germ. Test., p. xvi., says) contains several pages of errors, some of which
have affected Luther s German version. The third edition n rst inserted
the spurious passage of the three witnesses (1 John v. 7), " e codice Brit an-
irico" i. e., from the Codex Montfortianus of the sixteenth century; but
Erasmus did not consider it genuine, and admitted it only from policv
"tie cui furtt unset calumniandi." The Complutensian Polyglot had it
with two slight variations. The fourth edition of Erasmus adds, in a
third parallel column, the Latin Vulgate, besides the Greek and his own
version ; it has also many changes and improvements from the Complu
tensian Polyglot, especially in Revelation. The fifth edition omits the
Vulgate, but otherwise hardly differs from the fourth ; and from these
two, in the main, the Textus Receptus is ultimately derived.
THE COMPLUTENSIAN POLYGLOT.
The Complutensian New Testament is a part of
the Polyglot Bible of Complutnm, or Alcala de
Ilenares, in Spain. This opus magnum, the great
est of the kind since the Ilexapla of Origen, was
prepared under the direction and at the expense of
Cardinal FRANCIS XIMENES DE CISNEROS, Archbishop
of Toledo, Great Inquisitor, and Prime-minister of
Spain, and published in 1520, with papal approba
tion, in 6 vols. fol. 1 The work was begun in 1502, in
celebration of the birth of Charles V., and the New
Testament was completed Jan. 10, 1514 (two years
1 See a full account of the University of Alcala, founded by the cardinal
(1508), in Hefele s Der Cardinal Ximenes, Tubingen, 1844, pp. 101 sqq.,
and of the Polyglot, pp. 120 sqq. Also in Tregelles, Account of the Printed
Text, etc., pp. 1-19.
FEINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 233
before the issue of the edition of Erasmus) ; the
fourth volume July 10, 1517 (the year of the Refor
mation), but not published till 1520 or 1521 (four
years after the first edition of Erasmus, who did not
see the Polyglot till 1522), and three years after the
cardinal s death (who died 1517, at the age of eighty-
one). Pope Leo would not give his approbation till
March 22, 1520 ; even then there was some delay,
and the work did not get into general circulation
before 1522.
The cardinal desired by this herculean work to
revive the study of the Bible, which was so deplora
bly neglected before the Reformation. Every the
ologian, he says, should draw the water of life from
the fountain of the original text. He was willing
to give up all his knowledge of civil law for the
explanation of a single passage of the Bible. He
acquired some knowledge of Hebrew and Chaldee
in his ripe years. lie employed for the Polyglot
the best scholars lie could get, at a high salary;
among them three converted Jews. The most emi
nent were Lopez de Zufiiga (Stunica, or Astunga,
known from his controversies with Erasmus), De
metrius Dukas of Crete, and Nunez de Guzman.
They again employed pupils and scribes. The cost
of the work for manuscripts, salaries, and printing
expenses exceeded the enormous sum of 50,000
ducats, or about $150,000. But this was only
one fourth of the cardinal s annual income. "He
1 This is the correct date ; not March 20, 1521 (as Hug gives it). See
Hefele, /. c. p. 142.
231 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GKEEK TESTAMENT.
had the income of a kin^ and the wants of a
monk.
Only six hundred copies were printed, and sold
at 6J- ducats per copy; so that the total sale would
not have refunded the twelfth part of the cost.
Copies are exceedingly rare and dear. (See the fac
simile in Append. II.)
The New Testament forms vol. v., and gives the
Greek and the Latin Vulgate in two columns (the
Greek being broader), with parallel passages and
quotations on the Latin margin. The chapters are
marked, but no verses (which were not known be
fore 1551). Several prefaces of Jerome and other
additions are appended, among them five Greek and
Latin poems in praise of Ximenes. The second,
third, and fourth volumes contain the Old Testa
ment with the Apocrypha. The canonical books
of the Old Testament are given in three languages:
the Latin Vulgate characteristically holds the place
of honor in the middle, between the Greek Septua-
gint and the Hebrew original. This signifies, ac
cording to the Prolegomena, that Christ, i. ^., the
Roman or Latin Church, was crucified between two
robbers, i. e., the Jewish Synagogue and the schis-
matical Greek Church ! 2 The sixth volume contains
lexica, indexes, etc.
The text of the Xew Testament is mostly derived
1 Hefele, p. 126.
2 Some have denied that Ximenes wrote this preface, since he elsewhere
gave the preference to the original text. Ilefele (p. 136) vindicates it to
the cardinal, but thinks that he meant only to disparage the Synagogue
and the Greek Church, but not the Hebrew text nor the Septuagint.
FEINTED TEXT OF THE GKEEK TESTAMENT. 235
from late and inferior MSS. not specified, and not de
scribed except in the vague and exaggerated terms
" very ancient and correct" (antiquissima ct emenda-
ti8sima),a,nd procured from Home, for which Leo X.
is thanked in the Preface. 1
The Complutensian text was reprinted, though
not without some changes, by Christopher Plantin
at Antwerp (1564:? 1573, 1574, 1584, 1590, etc.), at
Geneva (1609, 1619, 1620, 1628, 1632), in the Ant
werp Polyglot (edited by Spaniards under Philip 11.,
1571 and 1572), in the great Paris Polyglot (1630-33,
in the ninth and tenth volumes), and by Goldhagen
at Mayence (1753). More recently it was carefully
re-edited by P. A. Gratz (Roman Catholic Professor
at Tubingen, afterwards at Bonn), with changes in
the orthography and punctuation, and with the Clem
entine Vulgate (Tubingen, 1821 ; 2d ed. Mayence,
1827; 3d ed. 1851, in 2 vols.), and by Lcander van
Ess (1827), who, however, incorporated the text of
Erasmus with it. 2 By the third edition of Stephens
it is to some extent connected with the textus rc-
1 On the textual sources of the Complutensian Polyglot, see Tregelles.
/. c. pp. 12-18. Hefele (p. 132) says, the Greek text of the Polyglot
stands there without any authority, as if it were fallen from heaven.
Retiss (B Mloth. pp. 16-24) gives a list of the readings peculiar to this
Greek Testament. The great Vatican MS. (B) was not used.
2 The title of this editio Compluto-Erasmica is Novum Test. Gr. et Lot.
expression ad binas editiones a Leone X. P. M. adprobatus Compliitensem
scilicet et Erasmi Roterod., with the Clementine text of the Vulgate in
parallel columns, and readings from Stephens, Matthsei, and Griesbach in
foot-notes. Tubingne, 1827. Leander van Ess was a zealous promoter of
the study of the Bible among Roman Catholics. His invaluable library
was acquired for the library of the Union Theological Seminary in New
York through the agency of Dr. Edward Robinson.
236 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT.
ceptus of Protestants ; but in its original shape it
may be called the Roman Catholic text, as far as
there is such a text.
COLIN.EUS.
SIMON COLIX.EUS (SIMON DE COLLIES), a printer at
Paris, and step -father of Robert Stephanus, pub
lished at Paris, 1534, a Greek Testament, which is
in part an eclectic mixture of the Erasmian and
Complutensian texts, but contains many readings in
troduced for the first time on manuscript authority. 1
STEPHANUS.
The editions of the great printer and scholar,
ROBERT STEPHANUS, or STEPHENS 2 (1503-59), were
published at Paris in 1546 and 1549, 16mo (called,
from the first words of the preface, the mirificam
editions); 1550, in folio; and at Geneva, in 1551,
16mo. His son Henry (1528-98) collated the MSS.
employed for these editions, which were greatly ad
mired for their excellent type, cast at the expense
of the French government.
Stephens s "royal edition" (editio regid) of 1550
is the most celebrated, and the nearest source of the
textus receptus, especially for England. 3 The text
was mainly taken from Erasmus (the editions of
1 See Reuss, p. 4C, who indicates the sources of Colinaeus. His edition
was not reprinted, and was superseded by the editions of Stephanus.
2 This is the usual English spelling. Stephen or Stephanus would be
more correct. His French name was Estienne.
3 Reuss (p. 53) : " Est ha>c ipsa editio ex qua derivatur quern nostri
textum receptum vulgo vocant, nomine rei minus bene aptato"
FEINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 237
1527 and 1535), with marginal readings from the
Complutensian edition, and fifteen MSS. of the
Paris library, two of them valuable (D (2) and L), but
least used. It was republished by F. H. Scrivener,
1859, at Cambridge; new edition 1877, with the
variations of Beza (1565), Elzevir (1624:), Lachmann,
Tischendorf, and Tregelles. 1
The edition of 1551, which was published at
Geneva (where Robert Stephens spent his last years
as a professed Protestant), though chiefly a reprint
of the Royal edition of 1550 in inferior style, is re
markable for the versicular division which here ap
pears for the first time, and which Robert Stephens
is said to have made on horseback on a journey
from Paris to Lyons. 2 The edition contains the
Greek text in the middle of the page, with the
Latin Vulgate on the inner side, and the Erasmian
version on the outer. The versicular division is
injudicious, and breaks up the text, sometimes in
the middle of the sentence, into fragments, instead
of presenting it in natural sections ; but it is con
venient for reference, and has become indispensable
by long use. The English Revision judiciously
combines both methods.
BEZA.
THEODORE DE BEZE (Beza, 1519-1605), Calvin s
friend and successor in Geneva, and the surviving
1 Nov. Test, textus Stephanid A . D. 1550. A ccedunt varies lectiones
editionum Bezce, Elzeviri, Lackmanni, Tischendorfti, Treyellesii. Ed. nova
et emend. Cantabr. et Lond. 1877, IGmo.
2 He first introduced the present verse-division into his edition of the
Latin Vulgate of the whole Bible, in 1555 (not 1548).
238 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT.
patriarch of the Reformation, prepared four folio
editions of Stephens s Greek text, with some changes
and a Latin translation of his own, Geneva, 1565,
1582, 1588 (many copies dated 1589), 1598 (reprint
ed in Cambridge, 1642). lie also issued several
octavo editions with his Latin version and brief
marginal notes (1565, 1567, 1580, 1590, 1604). l lie
came into possession of two bilingual (Grseco-Latin)
uncials of great value, D ( i) and D (2 ) (Cod. Bezse, or
Cantabrigiensis, for the Gospels and Acts, and Cod.
Claromontanns for the Pauline Epistles), but made
very little nse of them, because they differed very
much from the Erasmian and Stephanie texts. The
time had not yet come for the safe operation of the
art of textual criticism.
Beza was an eminent classical and biblical schol
ar, and enjoyed, next to Calvin and Bullinger, the
greatest respect and authority in the Church of
England during the reigns of Elizabeth and James
I. He presented Codex D to the University of
Cambridge (1581), and received in. return a letter of
thanks with the highest compliments. 2
1 Boza called the edition of 15G5 the second; but his first, 1557, was
only his Latin version with annotations, for which he cared more than
for the Greek text. Scrivener (fntrod. 2d ed. p. 390) gives 1559 as the
date of the first edition ; but this is an error; see Reuss, Bibliolh. pp. 72 sqq.
Others speak of an edition of 1576; but, this was edited by Henry Stephens.
For a description, see Masch s Le Long, Bibl. Sacra, pars i. pp. 307-316.
2 " Nam hoc scito, post unices Scriptures sacratissimam cognitionem, radios
nnquam ex omni memoria temporum scriptores extitisse, quos memorabili
viro Johanni Cali ino tibique prceferamus" Dr. Scrivener, the editor of
Cod. D, in quoting this passage (Introd. p. 112), makes the strange re
mark that this veneration for Calvin and Beza ; boded ill for the peace of
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 239
His editions were chiefly used for the Authorized
Version of 1611, in connection with the two last
editions of Stephens. This fact gives to them a
peculiar historical value.
NOTK. Beza had already, by his Latin version and notes, suggested
several improved renderings to the authors of the Geneva Version (1557
and 15GO), from which they passed into King James s (as in Mark xiv.
72; Luke xi. 17; Acts xxiii. 27; xxvii. 9; James i. 13); but also some
arbitrary explanatory or harmonistic corrections of the text (as in Luke
ii. 22, "Mary s purification," or " her purification," for their purification ;"
Mark xvi. 2, " when the sun u-as yet rising" or "at the rising of the sun,"
for "when the sun was risen:" Rev. xi. 1, "ami the angel stood saying,"
Kcti o ayytXof <0T///m, for "one said, \iyiov or Xt yti). A more serious
charge has been inferred, though unjustly, from the probable influence of his
predestinarianism in the rendering of some passages, as Matt. xx. 23 (the
insertion, but it shall be gicen}; Acts ii. 47 ("such as should be saved,"
which cannot be the meaning of TOVQ aw^o^tvov(;, but it is the rendering
from Tyndale down, and the Rhemish Version gives likewise the future,
" them that should be saved ") ; Heb. x. 38 (" if any man draw back,"
" SIQUIS se abduxerit," for iav wTroorei Xfjrai). This charge is noi well
founded, as has been shown by Archbishop Trench in his treatise on
Revision. Bcza was undoubtedly the best cxegetical scholar on the
Continent at the time the Authorized Version was made, and his in
fluence upon it was, upon the whole, very beneficial. "In the interpreta
tion of the text," says Westcott, " he was singularly clear-sighted ; in
the criticism of the text he was more rash than his contemporaries in
proportion as his self-reliance was greater. But though it is a far more
grievous matter to corrupt the text than to misinterpret it, the cases in
the English Church. But the University of Cambridge could not have
bestowed its respect on worthier men at that time. Even Hooker, who
led the way in the high-church reaction against the Reformation, speaks
in most appreciative terms of John Calvin as being "incomparably the
wisest man that ever the French Church did enjoy" (Laics of Ecclesias
tical Polity, vol. i. pp. 158 sqq., ed. Keble). On the life and labors of
Beza, see the works of La Faye (Gen. 1606), Schlosser (Meidelb. 1809),
Baum (Leipsic, 1843 and 1851), and Heppe (Elberfeld. 1861); also the art.
"Beza" in Schaff s Herzog, vol. i. pp. 255-257.
240 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT.
which Beza has corrected the renderings of former translators are incom
parably more numerous than those in which lie has introduced false
readings; and, on the whole, his version is far superior to those which
had been made before, and so, consequently, the Genevan revisions which
follow it" (Hist, of the English Jiible, pp. 290, 297). A work on the precise
Greek text of the Authorized Version, as far as it can be ascertained, was
recently edited by Dr. Scrivener (The New Testament in the Original Greek,
according to the Text followed in the Authorized Version, together with the
Variations adopted in the Revised Version, Cambridge, 1881). The Ap
pendix, pp. G48-65G, gives a list of the passages wherein the Authorized
Version departs from the readings of Bcza s New Test. (1598). This list
is more complete and more correct than that published by Dr. Scrivener
in his Cambridge Paragraph Bible (1873), Introd., Appendix K.
ELZEVIR.
The brothers BONAVENTURE and ABRAHAM ELZE
VIR, enterprising publishers in Holland, issued, with
the aid of unknown editors, several editions at Ley-
den, 1024, 1G33, 1641 ; originally taken (not from
Stephens, but) from Beza s smaller edition of 1565,
with a few changes from his later editions. Neatly
printed, and of handy size, they were popular and
authoritative for a long period. The preface to
the second edition boldly proclaims : " Textum ergo
hdbcs, mine ab omnibus rcccptum: in quo nihil im-
mutatum aid corruptum damns." Hence the name
teidus rcccptm, or commonly received standard text,
which became a part of orthodoxy on the Con
tinent; while in England Stephens s edition of 1550
acquired this authority ; but both agree substantial
ly. 1 Erasmus is the first, Elzevirs editor the last
1 Mill observed but twelve variations. Tischendorf (p. Ixxxv. Froleg.
7th ed.) gives a list of 150 changes; Scrivener (p. 392) states the number
as 287. Most of these variations, however, are as unimportant as the
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 2il
author, so to say, of the textus rcceptus. All the
Holland editions were scrupulously copied from the
Elzevir text, and Wetstein could not get authority
to print his famous Greek Testament (1751-52) ex
cept on condition of following it. 1
WALTON S POLYGLOT.
BRIAN WALTON S Polyglot Bible, Lond. 1657, 6
torn. fol. The New Testament (torn, v.) gives the
variations of the different editions of King James s English Version,
which number over 20,000.
1 For a history of the Elzevir family and a list of their publications, see
Les Elzevier. Histoire et A nnales typographiques, par ALPHONSE WILLEMS,
Brux. et Paris, 1880, 2 vols. The titles of the first two editions (1624 and
1G33) are as follows:
H Kcnm} Aia3/7/oj. Novum Testamentvm, ex Regijs aUjsque optimis
editionibus cum curd expressum. Lvgdvni Batavorvm, ex Officina Elze-
viriana. do ID c xxiv. 12mo, or 24mo.
(" Cede edition du N. T. est reputee correct e, metis die a etc. ejfacee par
celle de 1633." Willems, i. 98.)
H Kan r) AiaSt jKr). Novum Testamentum. Ex Regiis aliisque optimis
editionibus. hue nova expressum: cui quid accesscrit, Prcpfcitio docebit. Lvgd.
Batavorvm, ex Officina Elzeviriorum. cl.) la c xxxin. 12mo, or 24mo.
The second is the most beautiful and correct edition. An edition was
printed by the Elzevirs for Whittaker of London in 1633, 8vo, with notes
of Robert Stephens, Joseph Scaliger, Isaac Casaubon, etc. It was also is
sued at Ley den with anew title-page dated 1641. Four later editions (1G56,
16G2, 1670, 1678) were printed at Amsterdam. Dr. Abbot says (in Schaff s
"Rel. Encycl." i. 274): "The text of the seven Elzevir editions, among
which there are a few slight differences, is made up almost wholly from
Beza s smaller editions of 1565 and 1580 (IJeuss): its editor is unknown.
The textus receptus, slavishly followed, with slight diversities, in hun
dreds of editions, and substantially represented in all the principal modern
Protestant translations prior to the present century, thus resolves itself
essentiall} into that of the last edition of Erasmus, framed from a few
modern and inferior manuscripts and the Complutensian Polyglot, in the
infancy of biblical criticism."
16
242 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GKEEK TESTAMENT.
Greek text of Stephens, 1550, with the Latin Vul
gate, the Peshito Syriac, the /Ethiopia, and Arabic
versions. In the Gospels a Persic version is added,
and it has the later Syriac version of the five books
not contained in the Peshito. Each Oriental ver
sion has a collateral Latin translation. At the foot
of the Greek text are given the readings of Cod. A.
The sixth or supplementary volume furnishes a crit
ical apparatus gathered from sixteen authorities (in
cluding D ( i) and D (2) cited as "Cant." and " Clar."),
by the care of the celebrated Archbishop Ussher
(1580-1656), who had been appointed a member of
the Westminster Assembly of Divines, but never
attended. Walton (1600-1661) was a royalist, dur
ing the civil war, and chaplain to Charles L, and after
the Restoration consecrated bishop of Chester (1661).
But the Polyglot was published under the patronage
of Cromwell, who allowed the paper to be imported
free of duty. This patronage was afterwards dis
owned ; hence there are two kinds of copies the
one called "republican" (with compliments to Crom
well in the preface, but no dedication), the other
"loyal," and dedicated to Charles II. 1
1 "Twelve copies were struck off on large paper. By Cromwell s per
mission the paper for this work was allowed to be imported free of duty,
and honorable mention is made of him in the Preface. On the Restora
tion this courtesy was dishonorably withdrawn, and the usual Bible
dedication sycophancy transferred to Charles II. at the expense of several
cancels; and in this, the Loyal copy, so called in contradistinction to
the Republican, Cromwell is spoken of as Maximus ille Draco. This
is said to have been the first work printed by subscription in England."
(Henry Stevens, The Bibles in the Caxton Exhibition, London, 1877,
pp. 119 sq.) Comp. H. J. Todd s Memoirs of the Life and Writings of
FEINTED TEXT OF THE GKEEK TESTAMENT. 24:3
Brian Walton was involved in a controversy with
Dr. John Owen, the famous Puritan divine, who
labored to defend, from purely dogmatic premises,
without regard to stubborn facts, the scholastic the
ory that inspiration involved not only the religious
doctrines and moral precepts, but "every tittle and
iota," including the Hebrew vocalization, and that
" the Scriptures of the Old and ~New Testaments were
immediately and entirely given out by God himself,
his mind being in them represented unto us without
the least interveniency of such mediums and ways
as were capable of giving change or alteration to
the least iota or syllable." J To this Walton re
plied, forcibly and conclusively, in The Consider ator
Considered, London, 1659. lie maintained that the
authority of the Scriptures, as a certain and sufficient
rule of faith, does not depend upon any human au
thority or any human theory of inspiration, and that
Owen s view was contrary to undeniable facts, and
contrary to the judgment of the Reformers and the
chief Protestant divines and linguists from Luther
and. Calvin down to Grotius and Cappellus. "The
truth needs not the patronage of an untruth."
Walton s Polyglot is less magnificent than the
/ C5 O
Brian Walton, together icith tlie Bishop s Vindication of the London Poly-
glott Bible, London, 1821, 2 vols.
1 Of the Integrity and Purity of the Hebrew Text of the Scriptures, with
Considerations on the Prolegomena and Appendix to the late " Biblia Poly-
glotta" Oxford, 1659. See Owen s Works, edited by Goold and Quick,
vol. ix. pp. 63-139. His theory was held by eminent Lutheran and
Reformed divines in the seventeenth century, including the learned
Buxtorfs (father and son), and was even symbolically endorsed by the
Formula Consensus Helvetia," 1675.
FEINTED TEXT OF THE GKEEK TESTAMENT.
Antwerp Polyglot (Plantin. 1569-1573, in 9 vols.),
and the Paris Polyglot (Paris, 162S-1645, in 10 vols.),
but more ample, commodious, and critical.
MILL.
JOHN MILL S Novum Testamentum Grcecum, Oxon.
1T07, fol. ; often reprinted, especially in England.
The fruit of thirty years labor. The text is from
Stephens, 1550. A vastly increased critical appa
ratus, gathered from manuscripts, versions, and espe
cially from patristic quotations. 1
It had been preceded by the New Testament of
Bishop JOHN FELL, Oxford, 1675 ; an edition " more
valuable for the impulse it gave to subsequent in
vestigators than for the richness of its own stores
of fresh materials" (Scrivener, p. 395).
Mill may be regarded as the founder of textual
criticism. He did not construct a new text, but
provided a large apparatus of about 30,000 various
readings for the use of others. He expressed the
hope, in his very learned Prolegomena (p. clxvii. b),
that the stock of evidence at the foot of his pages
would enable the reader to discover the true read
ing in almost every passage.
BENTLEY.
Proposed edition, 1720. Dr. Richard Bentley
(1662-1742), the illustrious classical scholar and
1 See the list of Mill s MSS. in Scrivener, p. 398. Kiister s reprint of
Mill, with additions and improvements, Amsterdam and Leipsic, also
Rotterdam, 1710, deserves to be mentioned. Some copies are dated 1723
and 1746. See on Mill and Kiister the Proleg. of Wetsteiu, vol. i. pp. 176 sq.
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 215
critic, made extensive and expensive preparations
for a new edition of the Greek and Latin Testa
ment. He, unfortunately, failed to execute his de
sign ; but he discovered the true principle which, a
century afterwards, was reasserted and executed by
the critical genius of Lachmann.
Bentley proposed to go back from the textus re-
ceptus to the oldest text of the first five centuries,
hoping that " by taking 2000 errors out of the
Pope s Yulgate and as many out of the Protestant
Pope Stephens s," he could " set out an edition of
each in columns, without using any book under 900
years old, that shall so exactly agree word for word,
and order for order, that no two tallies, nor two in
dentures, can agree better."
He issued his Proposals for such an edition in
1720, with the last chapter of Revelation in Greek
and Latin as a specimen. The scheme was frustrated
by an angry controversy between him and Conyers
Middleton, and other contentions in which he was
involved, by his unruly temper, at Cambridge. The
money paid in advance (two thousand guineas) was
returned to the subscribers by his nephew, whom
he made his literary executor. All that is left is a
mass of critical material in the library of Trinity
College, Cambridge, including the collation of the
Codex Yaticanus, which was transcribed by Woide
and edited by Ford in 1799.
Bentley was too sanguine in his expectations, and
too confident and hasty in his conclusions ; but his
edition, as Tregelles says, " would have been a valu
able contribution towards the establishment of a
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT.
settled text : it would at least have shaken the
foundations of the tcxtns receptus j and it might
well have formed the basis of further labors."
After Bentley s death active interest in Biblical
criticism in England ceased for nearly a century, and
the work was carried on mainly by German scholars.
BENGEL.
JOIIANN ALBRECIIT BENGEL (16S7-1752), "Pra l-
at," or Superintendent, of the Evangelical Lutheran
Church of Wiirtemberg, was a most original, pro
found, pregnant, and devout commentator, and au
thor of the invaluable Gnomon, which is a marvel of
midtiim in parvo. He edited a Greek Testament
at Tubingen, 173^, 4to, together with an Apparatus
Criticus, containing in three parts critical disserta
tions. 1
Bengel became a critic from conscientious scru
ples, but was confirmed in his faith by thorough
t/ O
research. When he studied theology at Tubingen,
his inherited faith in the plenary inspiration of the
Bible was disturbed by the thirty thousand varia
tions in Mill s Greek Testament, and he determined
to devote several years to the study of the text, and
at last to prepare a new edition, lie found that the
1 A small octavo edition appeared in the same year at Stuttgart with
out the critical apparatus. For an account of his biblical labors, see the
biography written by his great-grandson, J. Chr. Fr. Burk, Dr. Johann
Albrecht BengeVs Leben und Wirken, Stuttgart, 1831, pp. 19 sqq. and 200
sqq. Com p. also Oskar \Vtichter, Bengel s Lebensabriss, 1865 ; and a good
article by Hartmann and Burk in Herzog s " Encykl." vol. ii. pp. 295-301
(abridged in Scbaff s " Rel. Encycl.").
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 24:7
variations leave the evangelical faith intact. His
excellent motto in biblical criticism and exegesis
was :
"Tc totum applica ad textum,
Kem totam applica ad te.
lie retained the received text except in the Apoc
alypse (his favorite study), but noted the value of
the variations in the margin. He always preferred
the more difficult reading. Most of his cautions
changes have been approved. He first divided the
textual witnesses into families ; facilitated the meth
od of comparing and weighing the readings ; sug
gested true principles of criticism ; and set the ex
ample of recording the testimonies for and against
the received reading, but he did it only in rare in
stances. " The peculiar importance of Bengel s
New Testament," says Scrivener, 1 " is due to the
critical principles developed therein. Not only was
his native acuteness of great service to him when
weighing the conflicting probabilities of internal
evidence, but in his fertile mind sprang up the
germ of that theory of families or recensions which
was afterwards expanded by J. S. Semler, and grew
to such formidable dimensions in the skilful hands
of Griesbach."
WETSTEIN.
Jo. JAC. WETSTEIN (1693-1754): JVovum Testa
ment um Grcecum Editionis Reccptce cum Lectioni-
bus, etc., Arnstel. 1751-52, 2 torn, fol. 2 A herculean
1 Introd. p. 403.
3 His family name was Wettstein, but he signed himself in Latin Wet-
stenius ; and hence English, Dutch, and most German writers spell the
248 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT.
and magnificent work of forty years. The text is
mainly from the Elzevir editions, with some read
ings from Fell : but he <jives his critical iudffinent
~ Jo
in the margin and the notes. He made large addi
tions to the apparatus, and carefully described the
MSS. and other sources in the copious Prolegomena,
i. 1-222; ii. 3-15, 440-454, 741-743. His edition
contains also a learned commentary, with illustra
tions of the language and sentiment from Hebrew,
Greek, and Latin authors.
Wetstein was far inferior to Bengel in judgment,
but far surpassed him in the extent of his resources
and collations. He was neither a sound theologian
nor a safe, critic, but a most industrious worker and
collator. He had a natural passion for the study of
MSS.; made extensive literary journeys ; collated
about 102 MSS. (among then/ A, C, and D) with
name Wetstein. He was a native of Basle, in Switzerland, and for some
time assistant pastor of his father at St. Leonhard s; but, being suspected
of Arian and Socinian heresy, he was deposed and exiled from his native
city (1730). His departure from the iexlus rcceplm in 1 Tim. iii. 16
(3^o), in favor of the reading o, was made one of the grounds of this
charge. In the inquisitorial process his former teachers, Iselin and Frey,
who compared the Basle MSS. for Bengel, figured as his accusers. The
Acta were published at Basle, 1730 (466 pages, 4to, besides preface). He
obtained a professorship at the Arminian College at Amsterdam (1733),
where he died, March 2 2, 1754, at the age of sixty-one. His colleague,
J. Krighout, published a memorial discourse (Sermo funebris), which pro
voked his old antagonist, Frey, to a new attack (Epistola ad J. Krighout,
Bas. 1754), whereupon Krighout vindicated his memory (Memoria Wet-
stcniana Vindicate!, Amst. 1755). See Hagenbach, J. J. Wettstein der
Kritiker und seine Gcyner, in Illgen s " Zeitschrift fiir die hist. Theologie,"
for 1839, No. 1, pp. 13 sqq., and his article in the first edition of Herzog s
"Encykl." vol. xviii. pp. 74-76.
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 249
greater care than had been done before, and intro
duced the present system of citing the uncials by
Latin capitals and the cursives and lectionaries by
Arabic numerals. His Prolegomena are disfigured
by the long and painful history of his controversy
with his narrow and intolerant orthodox opponents,
Iselin and Frey ; he depreciated the merits of Ben-
gel ; his text is superseded, but his Kew Testament
is still indispensable to the scholar as a storehouse
of parallel passages from the ancient classics and
the rabbinical writers. Bishop Marsh calls it " the
invaluable book."
During the next twenty years little was done for
textual criticism. JOIIANN SALOMO SEMLER, the
father of German rationalism (1725-91), but, in
what he called " Privat-Frornmigkeit " (personal
piety), a pietist and an earnest opponent of deism,
re -edited Wetstein s Prolegomena with valuable
suggestions (Halle, 1764), and stimulated the zeal
of his great pupil Griesbach.
II. SECOND PERIOD: TRANSITION FROM THE TEXTUS
RECEPTUS TO THE UNCIAL TEXT. FROM GRIES-
BACII TO LACHMANN. A.D. 1770-1830.
This period shows enlarged comparison of the
three sources of the text, the discovery of critical
canons, a gradual improvement of the text us rccep-
tus, and approach to an older and better text ; but
the former was still retained as a basis on a pre
scriptive right.
250 FEINTED TEXT OF THE GEEEK TESTAMENT.
GEIESBACII.
The period is introduced by the honored name of
JOIIANN JACOB GEIESBACII (1745-1812), Professor of
Divinity at Halle and then at Jena. 1 lie made the
study of textual criticism of the Greek Testament
his life-work, and combined all the necessary quali
fications of accurate learning, patient industry, and
sound judgment. His editions (from 1775 to 1807)
and critical dissertations (Symbolce Criticce, 1785-93 ;
Commentarius Criticus, and Meletemata Critica,
1798-1811) mark the beginning of a really critical
text, based upon fixed rules. Among these are,
that a reading must be supported by ancient testi-
1 Gricsbach was the son of a Protestant pastor in Hesse-Darmstadt ;
educated in Tubingen, Leipsic, and Halle, -where he became an ardent
disciple of Semler. lie travelled in France, Holland, and England; was
appointed professor in Halle, 1773, and called to Jena in 1775, where he
spent the remainder of his life in usefulness and well-deserved honor.
Besides his critical works on the Greek Testament, he published little of
importance. His Opuscula, edited by Gabler, Jena, 1824-25, in 2 vols., con
sist chiefly of university programmes and addresses. See Augusti, Ueber
Griesbac/ts Verdienste, Breslau, 1812 ; Reuss, Itiblioili. pp. 193-204, and his
article "Griesbach" in Herzog, new ed. vol. v. pp. 430-432. Dr. Hort
(Gr. Test. ii. 185) venerates his name "above that of every other textual
critic of the New Testament," and pays him the following tribute (ii. 181) :
" What Bengel had sketched tentatively was verified and worked out
with admirable patience, sagacity, and candor by Griesbach, who was
equally great in independent investigation and in his power of estimating
the results arrived at by others. . . . Unfortunately he often followed
Semler in designating the ancient texts by the term recension, and thus
gave occasion to a not yet extinct confusion between his historical analysis
of the text of existing documents and the conjectural theory of his con
temporary, Hug, a biblical scholar of considerable merit, but wanting in
sobriety of judgment."
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 251
mony ; tliat the shorter reading is preferable to the
longer, the more difficult to the easy, the unusual to
the usual. He sifted Wetstein s apparatus with
scrupulous care ; enlarged it by collecting the cita
tions of Origen, and utilizing the Old Latin texts,
published by Bianchini and Sabatier; improved and
developed Bengel s system of families, classifying
the authorities under three heads the Western (D,
Latin versions, fathers), the Alexandrian (B, C, L,
etc., a recension of the corrupt Western text), and
the Con stan tin opolitan or Byzantine (A, flowing
from both, and the mass of later and inferior manu
scripts) ; but recognized also mixed and transitional
texts, decided for the readings of the largest relative
extent, but departed from the Elzevir text only for
clear arid urgent reasons. His critical canons are
well-considered and sound ; but he was too much
fettered by his recension theory, which was criticised
and modified, but not improved, by Hug, a Roman
Catholic scholar (1765-1846).
Principal editions, Halle, 1775-77; Halle and
London, 1796-1806, 2 torn. Svo; Leipsic, 1803-1807,
4 torn. fol. (called by Renss, p. 200, " editio omnium
quce exstant spcciosissima " ) ; reprinted, London,
1809 and 1818 (a very fine edition) ; an improved
third edition of the Gospels by David Schnlz, 1827,
with Prolegomena and an enlarged apparatus (but
differing from Griesbach s text, as Renss says, p. 200,
only in two places, Matt, xviii. 19 and Mark iv. 18).
Griesbach s text is the basis of many manual
editions by SCHOTT, KNAPP, TITTMANN, HAHN (re-
published at New York by Dr. Edward Robinson,
252 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT.
1842), TIIEILE (lltli eel. Leipz. 1875), and of several
English and American editions. 1
While Griesbach was engaged in his work, several
scholars made valuable additions to the critical ap
paratus, the results of which he incorporated in his
last edition.
MATTHJEI.
C. F. MATTII^EI (Professor at Wittenberg, then at
Moscow; d. 1811), Griesbach s opponent, ridiculed
the system of recensions, despised the most ancient
authorities, and furnished a text from about a hun
dred Moscow MSS., all of Constantinopolitan origin,
to which he attributed too great a value. The re
sult by no means justified his pretensions and pas
sionate attacks upon others. His Nomim Test. Greece
ct Latine (Vulg.) was published at Riga, 1782-88,
12 vols. Svo; an edition with the Greek text only,
in 3 vols. Svo (1803-7). " Matthsei was a careful
collator, but a very poor critic; and his manuscripts
were of inferior quality " (Abbot).
The Danish scholars BIRCH, ADLER, and MOL-
DENHAUER collected, at the expense of the King of
Denmark, a large and valuable amount of new crit
ical material in Italy and Spain, including the read
ings of the Vatican MS., published by Birch, 1788-
1801. During the same period Codd. A, D, and
other important MSS. were published.
1 Bloomfield s editions, London, 1832, 9th cd. 1855, are only in part based
on Griesbach and in part on Scholz, but mostly on Mill. He censures
Griesbach for " his perpetual and needless cancellings," etc.
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 253
F. C. ALTER, in his Greek Testament (Vienna,
1786-87, Svo), gave the readings of twenty -two
Vienna MSS., and also of four MSS. of the Slavonic
version.
The new discoveries of these scholars went far to
confirm Griesbach s critical judgment.
SCIIOLZ.
J. M. A. SCIIOLZ (a pupil of Hug, and Roman
Catholic Professor in Bonn ; d. 1852): Novwn Testa-
mentum Greece, etc., 1830-36, 2 vols. 4to; the text
reprinted by Bagster, London, with the English
version.
Scholz was a poor critic, but an extensive traveller
and collator. He examined many new Greek MSS.,
written after the tenth century, in different coun
tries, though not very accurately, and gave the
preference to the Byzantine family, as distinct from
the Alexandrian, lie frequently departed from the
received text, yet, upon the whole, preserved it in
preference to that of the Vulgate (which is remark
able for a Roman Catholic). His judgment and
ability were not equal to his zeal and industry,
and all the critics who have examined his collations
(Tischendorf, Bleek, Tregelles, and Scrivener) charge
him with a great want of accuracy.
His edition has found much more favor in England
than in Germany, and was republished by Bagster
in London. 1 It marks no advance upon Griesbach.
1 In several editions, including The English JJexapla (wliich gives, with
Scholz s Greek Testament, the versions of Wiclif, Tyndale, Cranmer, Gene-
254 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT.
At a later date (1845) Scliolz retracted his prefer
ence for the Byzantine text, and said that if a new
edition of his Greek Testament were called for, he
should receive into the text most of the " Alexan
drian" readings which he had placed in his margin.
III. THIRD PERIOD: THE RESTORATION OF THE PRIM
ITIVE TEXT. FROM LACIIMANN AND TISCIIEN-
DORF TO WESTCOTT AND HORT. A.D. 1830-81.
LACIIMANN. 1
CARL LACIIMANN (Professor of Classical Philology
in Berlin; b. 1793, d. 1851): Novum Testamentwn
Greece et Latine, Berol. 1842 -50, 2 vols. Compare his
article in the Studien und HEritiken, 1830, No. 4,
pp. 817-845. Lachmann had previously published
a small edition in 1831, with the variations of the
textus reccptm (Elz. 1624) at the end. In the larger
edition he was aided by the younger PHILIP BUTT-
MANN, who added the critical apparatus of the Greek
text, and published also another small edition based
on the Vatican MS., 1856, 1862, and 1865. The
Latin text of the Vulgate is derived from Codd.
Fuldensis, Amiatinus, and other manuscripts.
Lachmann was not a professional theologian, and
not hampered by traditional prejudice. He was a
van, Rhenrish, and King James s), and a pocket ed. of the Greek Test,
with the Authorized Version and a dictionary. See on Bagster s and
Bloomfield s editions the lists in the first Appendix, and in Reuss, fiib-
liotheca. 235-238.
1 See his Biography, by Hertz, Berlin, 1851 ; also the article Bibdtext
dcs N. T. 9 by O. von Gebhardt in Herzog, Encykl. (ed. ii.), ii. 425 sqq.
FEINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 255
classical and Teutonic philologist, and gifted with a
rare faculty for textual criticism. He distinguished
himself by critical editions of Propertius, Catullus,
Tibullus, Lucretius, Gaius, the Nicbelimgenlied^W&l-
ther von der Yogelweide, and Wolfram von Eschen-
bach, and edited Lessing s complete works. He was
a friend of Schleiermacher, Liicke, Bleek, and other
eminent theologians. He approached the task of
biblical criticism, like Richard Bentley, with the
principles and experience of a master in classical
criticism. His object was purely historical or diplo
matic namely, to restore the oldest attainable text,
i. c. the text of the fourth century, as found in the
oldest sources then known (especially in Codd. A, B,
C, D, P, Q, T, Z, Itala, Yulgate, ante-Nicene fathers,
especially Irenseus, Origen, Cyprian, Hilary of Poi
tiers) ; yet not as a final text, but simply as a sure
historical basis for further operations of internal
criticism, which might lead us in some cases still
nearer to the primitive text, lie therefore ignored
the printed text and cursive manuscripts, and went
directly to the oldest documentary sources as far as
they were made accessible at his time. He went
also beyond the Latin Yulgate to the Old Latin.
He ranged the Greek Western uncials on the Latin
or Western side. He distinguished only two types
of text the Oriental (A, B, C, Origen), and the Occi
dental (D, E, G, oldest Lat. Yerss., a, b, c, Yulg., and
Western fathers from Irenseus down to Primasius
for the Apocalypse) and took no notice of the
Byzantine authorities. As his text was intended to
be preparatory rather than final, he gave, with diplo-
256 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT.
matic accuracy, even palpable writing errors if suf
ficiently attested ; not as proceeding from the orig
inal writers, but as parts of the textus traditus of the
fourth century.
His range and selection of authorities were lim
ited. When he issued his large edition, the Sinaitic
manuscript had not yet been discovered, and Cod. 13
and other uncials not critically edited. But to him
belongs the credit of having broken a new path, and
established, with the genius and experience of a mas
ter critic, the true basis. His judgment was clear,
sound, and strong, but at times too rigid. He car
ried out the hint of Bentley and Bengel, and had the
boldness to destroy the tyranny of the textus reccptits,
and to substitute for it the uncial text of the Nicene
or ante-Nicene age. His chief authority is B.
Lachmann met with much opposition from the
professional theologians, even from such a liberal
critic as De AVettc, who thought that he had wasted
his time and strength. Such is the power of habit
and prejudice that every inch of ground in the
march of progress is disputed, and must be fairly
conquered. But his principles are now pretty gen
erally acknowledged as correct. Tischendorf, Tre-
gelles, "Westcott and Hort, build on his foundation,
but with vastly increased resources and facilities. 1
1 Tregellcs says (p. 99) : "Lachmann led the way in casting aside the
so-called textus rcceptits, and boldly placing the New Testament wholly
and entirely on the basis of actual authority." Reuss calls him (Biblioth.
p. 239) " vir doctissimus et KpmKwrarog." The conservative Dr. Scrivener
(p. 422 sqq.) depreciates his merits, for he defends as far as possible the
traditional text. But Dr. Hort (Or. Test. ii. 13) does full justice to his
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 257
TISCHENDORF.
CONSTANTIN VON TlSCHENDORF (ProfeSSOr of The-
ology at Leipsic ; b. 1815, d. 1874) : Novum Testa-
menturn Greece, etc., ed. octava critica maior, Lips. ;
issued at intervals, in eleven parts, from 186-i to
1872, 2 vols., with a full critical apparatus. A
smaller edition (ed. critica minor) in one vol. gives
the same text with the principal readings. The
best manual edition of Tischendorf, with the read
ings of Tregelles, Westcott and Hort, is by OSCAR
YON GEBIIARDT: Novum Testamentum Greece Reccn-
sionis Tischendorfianw ultimo Textum cum Tre-
gellesiano et Westcottio - Tlortiano contulit et brevi
adnotatione critica additisque locis parallelis illus-
tramt O. DE G. Ed. stereot. Lipsise, 1881. The
same text appeared also with Luther s revised Ger
man version, Leipz. 1881 (Bernh. Tauchnitz).
Tischendorf is by far the most industrious, enter
prising, and successful textual critic of the nineteenth
century. He may be called the Columbus of the
textual department in the New Testament litera-
memory: "A new period began in 1831, when for the first time a text
was constructed directly from the ancient documents without the inter
vention of any printed edition, and when the first systematic attempt was
made to substitute scientific method for arbitrary choice in the discrimina
tion of various readings. In both respects the editor, Lachmann, rejoiced
to declare that he was carrying out the principles and unfulfilled inten
tions of Bentley, as set forth in 1716 and 1720." Abbot says of Lach
mann (in Schaff s Relig. Encyd. i. 275) : " He was the first to found a
text wholly on ancient evidence; and his editions, to which his eminent
reputation as a critic gave wide currency, especially in Germany, did
much toward breaking down the superstitious reverence for the textus
receptus"
258 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GEEEK TESTAMENT.
ture. His working power, based on vigorous health
and a hopeful temperament, was amazing. lie had
the advantage of the liberal support of the Saxon,
and afterwards of the Russian, government in his
expensive journeys and publications. lie began his
preparations for a critical edition of the Greek text
of the New Testament in 1839 and 1840, and was
appointed to a chair of theology in the University
of Leipsic in 18-13. He was stimulated by the in
dustry of Scholz and by the principles of Lachmann,
and aimed at a text based on the oldest authorities
from the fourth to the sixth century. lie visited
the principal libraries of Europe in search of docu
ments; made repeated journeys to France, England,
Turkey, and three to the Orient (1844, 1853, and
1859) ; discovered, collated, copied, and edited many
most important MSS. (especially x, B, B (2 ), C, D (2) ,
E (2 ), L); and published, between 1841 and 1873, no
less than twenty-four editions of the Greek Testa
ment (including the reissues of his stereotyped editio
acadcmica). Four of these issued 1841, 1849, 1859
(editio septima critica major), and 1872 (ed. octavo)
mark a progress in the acquisition of new mate
rial. His editions of the texts of biblical manuscripts
(including some of the Septuagint) embrace no less
than seventeen large quarto and five folio volumes,
besides the Anecdota Sacra et Prof ana (1855, new ed.
1861), etc., and the catalogue of his publications, most
of them relating to biblical criticism, covers more
than twelve octavo pages in Gregory B Prolegomena. 1
1 Statement of Dr. Abbot in Schaff s Relig. Encycl i. 27G.
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GKEEK TESTAMENT. 259
Tischendorf started from the basis of Lachmann,
but with a less rigorous application of his principle,
and with a much larger number of authorities. He
intended to give not only the oldest, but also the
best, text, with the aid of all authorities. His judg
ment was influenced by subjective considerations and
a very impulsive temper; hence frequent changes in
his many editions, which he honestly confessed, quot
ing Tischendorf versus Tischendorf, but they mark
the progress in the range of his resources and
knowledge. In the first volume of his seventh
critical edition (1859) he showed a more favorable
leaning towards the received text as represented by
the cursives and later uncials ; but he soon found
out his mistake, and returned in the second volume
to the older uncial text. Soon afterwards followed
his crowning discovery of the Sinaitic manuscript
at the foot of the Mount of Legislation (1859), a
closer examination of the Vatican manuscript (1866),
and the acquisition of other valuable material. His
resources far exceeded those at the disposal of
any former editor, and were all utilized in his
eighth arid last critical edition, completed in 1872.
Here he shows a decided, though by no means
blind, preference for his favorite Sinaitic and other
uncial manuscripts of the oldest date. His crit
ical apparatus and digest below the text is the
richest now extant, and will not soon be super
seded. The edition of 1859 differs from that of
1849 in 1296 places, 595 of them being misim-
provements in favor of the textus receptus / the
edition of 1872 differs from the one of 1859 in
260 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT.
3369 places, mostly in favor of the oldest uncial
text. 1
Unfortunately lie did not live to prepare the in
dispensable Prolegomena to his edition, which were
to give a full description of his critical material
and a key to the multitudinous and at times almost
hieroglyphic abbreviations, together with such a list
of Addenda and Emendanda as might be suggested
by his own further researches and the labors of other
scholars. For in such a vast forest of quotations
numerous errors must be expected. A stroke of
apoplexy (May 5, 1873), followed by paralysis and
death (Dec. 7, 1874), arrested his labors, and termi
nated a career of indomitable industry and great
usefulness.
The preparation of the critical Prolegomena was,
after some delay, intrusted in 1876 to an American
scholar residing at Leipsic, Dr. CASPAR RENE GREG
ORY, who with the efficient aid of Dr. EZRA ABBOT,
of Cambridge, Mass., has nearly finished this delicate
and difficult task of completing the noblest monu
ment of German scholarship in the line of textual
criticism. 2
Thus America, which has none of the ancient
manuscript treasures of the Bible, is permitted to
1 Scrivener, Introd. p. 470, made the last calculation to the disparage
ment of Tischendorf ; O. von Gebhardt, I. c. vol. ii. 431 sq., gives both
figures to his credit as showing his willingness to progress in the right
direction and to learn from new sources of information.
2 The Prolegomena will be published probably early in the year 1883.
I regret that I could make no use of them for this work. I have only seen
a few proof-sheets.
FEINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 261
take a share in the great and noble work of restor
ing the oldest and purest text of the Book of books.
NOTE. Compare, on the discovery of Cod. Sinaiticus, p. 108 sqq. ; and
on the life and labors of Tischendorf, besides his own numerous works,
the following publications : J. E. Volbeding, Constantin Tischendorf in
seiner Id-jahrigenschrifistellerischen Wirksamkeit, Leips. 1862; Dr. Abbot s
article on Tischendorf in the Unitarian Review for March, 1875; Dr. Greg
ory s article in the Biblioiheca Sacra for January, 1876; Dr. Von Gebhardt
in Herzog s Encyli. (new ed. 1878). vol. ii. 429 sqq.; and for his moral
and religious character, the addresses of his pastor, Dr. Ahlfeld, and his
colleagues, Drs. Kahnis and Luthardt, Am Sarye und Grabe Tischendorf &,
with a list of his writings, Leips. 1874. These addresses bring into prom
inence his noble qualities, which were somewhat concealed to the superficial
observer by a skin disease his personal vanity and overfondness for his
many and well-earned titles (covering ten lines on the title-pages of some
of his books), and twenty or more decorations from sovereigns which
were displayed in his parlor. He was a sincere believer in the truth of
the Bible and the Lutheran creed. He regarded himself as an instrument
in the hands of Providence for the discovery and publication of docu
mentary proofs for the vindication of the original text of the New Testa
ment, and to God he ascribed the glory, "/j ei allem"lie says, in self-
defence against a malignant attack ( Wajfen der Finslerniss, p. 28)" was
mir yelungen in der Fremde icie in der Heimath. beim unermiidlichen ent-
behrungsvollen Wandern durch Lander und Vulker, Wiisten und Meere, unter
den mannigfaltigsten Erfahrungen und Gefahren, unter Arbeiten bei Tag
und Nacht, war ich freilich von yanzer Seele gliicHich mich des Herrn
riihmen zu konnex, des Herrn der in dem Schwachen mdchtig gewesen. Und
dieses Riihmen, trotz Neider, Spotter und Verleumder, soil mir denn auch
bleiben mein Lebelany, bis an des Lebens letzten A themzug. dass ich
tausend Zungen hdtte und einen tausendfachen Mund: so stimmt 1 ich damit
in die Wette vom allertiefsten Herzensgrund ein Loblied nach dem andern
an, von dem was Gott an mir gethan." 1 "
Tischendorf did good service to the cause of evangelical truth by his
able vindication of the genuineness of our canonical Gospels against the
attacks of modern scepticism (especially Strauss and Renan), in his tract,
When were our Gospels written? (1865). It was translated into all the
languages of Europe, and had an immense circulation and considerable
weight as coming from one who had the most extensive knowledge of the
oldest documentary sources of the New Testament, which he summoned
262 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT.
as witnesses for the apostolic origin of the Gospels. One of his last
public acts was the noble part he took in the united deputations of the
Evangelical Alliance to the Russian Czar and Prince Gortschakoff, at
Friedricbshafen, in behalf of the persecuted Lutherans in the Baltic
provinces, in 1871. I was brought into close personal contact with him
on that occasion, and I know his zeal for the cause at the risk of his
popularity at the Russian court. The Archduke Constantine, who was
with the emperor, expressed his great surprise that he should have joined
the deputation and remonstrance. (See Report of the Alliance Deputation
in be.half of Reliyions Liberty in Russia, New York, 1871.) In view of this
participation, and his eminent services to the cause of biblical learning, the
Evangelical Alliance of the United States invited Dr. Tischendorf to the
General Conference at New York in 1873, and sent him free tickets for the
voyage, which he gratefully accepted. He offered to prepare and read a
paper on the "Influence of the Apocryphal Gospels on the Formation of
the Roman Catholic Mariology and Mariolatry." He had already engaged
passage for himself and one of his sons in a Bremen steamer, when a fatal
stroke of apoplexy confined him to his home. He would have been treated
with great respect and kindness in America, and I had to decline a number
of competing invitations for his hospitable entertainment during the con
ference. I may also mention, as a mark of his interest in America, that
he had promised to prepare a special American Grseco-Latin edition of his
last recension of the Greek Testament, with a limited critical apparatus
such as I thought would best answer the wants of the American student.
He actually began the work in 1872, and finished about fifty pages, which
were set in type. It was probably his last literary work. His death
prevented the execution.
TREGELLES.
SAMUEL PRIDEAUX TREGELLES (b. Jan. 30, 1813,
d. April 24, 1875): The Greek New Testament,
edited from Ancient Authorities, with the Latin Ver
sion of Jerome from the Codex Amiatinus, London ;
issued in parts from 1857 to 1879, 4to. He had
previously edited The Book of Revelation in Greek,
with a New English Version and Various Readings,
London, 1844, and issued a Prospectus for his Greek
FEINTED TEXT OF THE GKEEK TESTAMENT. 263
Testament in 184S. 1 He was of Quaker descent, and
associated for a time with the "Plymouth Brethren/
He was very poor, but in his later years he received
a pension of 200 from the civil list. His Greek
Testament was published by subscription.
Dr. Tregelles has devoted his whole life to this
useful and herculean task, with a reverent and de
vout spirit similar to that of Bengel, and with a
perseverance and success which rank him next to
Tischendorf among the textual critics of the present
century. He entered upon his work with the con
viction, as lie says, 2 that "the New Testament is not
given us merely for the exercise of our intellectual
faculties," but " as the revelation of God, inspired
by the Holy Ghost, to teach the way of salvation
through faith in Christ crucified." His belief in
verbal inspiration made him a verbal critic. He
visited many libraries in Europe (in 1845, 1849, and
1862), collated the most important uncial and cursive
MSS., and published (1861) the palimpsest Codex
Zacynthius ( & on Luke ). He was far behind
Tischendorf in the extent of his resources, but
more scrupulously accurate in the use of them. 3
1 Dr. Tregelles (pronounced Tre-ghel les) wrote also An Account of the
Printed Text of the Gr. New Test. (1854), and an Introd. to the Textual
Criticism of the New Test., for the 10th edition of Home s Introd. (vol. iv.,
also issued separately). These two excellent works supply to some extent
the place of his Prolegomena. He contributed many articles for Kitto s 5
Journal of Sacred Literature, made a translation of Gesenius s Hebrew and
Chaldee Lexicon (1847), and aided in several useful biblical publications.
2 See his Preface to 10th edition of Home s Introd. vol. iv. p. xiii., dated
Plymouth, Sept. 18, 1856.
8 Dr. Scrivener remarks (p. 431) : " Where Tischendorf and Tregelles
264: PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT.
He followed Lachmann s principle, but gives a full
er critical apparatus. He ignores the received text
and the great mass of cursive MSS. (except a few),
and bases his text on the oldest uncial MSS., the
Versions down to the seventh century, and the early
fathers, including Eusebius. Within these limits he
aims at completeness and accuracy in the exhibition
of evidence.
He left behind him a monumental work of pains
taking, conscientious, and devout scholarship. But
it needs to be corrected and supplemented from the
Codex Sinaiticus, and the critical edition of the
Codex Yaticanus, which he was not permitted to
collate jn Home by the jealous authorities. 1 Like
Tischendorf, he was prevented from completing his
work, and was struck down by paralysis while en
gaged in concluding the last chapters of Revelation
(in 1870). He never recovered, and could not take
part in the labors of the English Revision Commit
tee, of which he was appointed a member. The
Prolegomena with Addenda and Corrigenda were
differ" (in collation), "the latter is seldom in the wrong." Dr. Abbot
(in Schaff s "Encycl." i. 277): "In many cases Tregelles compared his
collations with those of Tischendorf, and settled the differences by a re-
examination of the manuscript." See Dr. Hort s notice of Tischendorf
and Tregelles in the " Journal of Philology " for March, 1858.
1 The Gospels were printed 1857 and 1860, before the publication of X
(which he first inspected in Tischendorf s house at Leipsic in 1862), and
the printing of the Pauline Epistles had begun in 1865, before Vercel-
lone s edition of B (which appeared in 1868). Tregelles retained a number
of traditional misreadings of B. O. von Gebhardt mentions as examples,
Mark iii. 1, ijv (which B does not omit) ; xiii. 7, aKovtrt (B, aKOvrjre)
xiii. 21, tiTnj vulv (B has vptv <TTA/). See the long list of corrections in
the Appendix.
FEINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 265
compiled and edited in a supplementary volume
four years after bis death by Dr. Hort and Ilev. A.
W. Streane, 1879.
NOTE. TREGELLES and TISCHENDORF. The relation of these two
eminent critics to each other is very well stated by Dr. O. von Gebhardt
in his article Bibeltext (in the new edition of Herzog s "Encykl." vol. ii.
p. 428 sq.) : " The justly censured want, in the labors of Lachmann and his
predecessors, of a secure basis for the settlement of the New Testament
text, must first of all be supplied; the familiar ancient witnesses must be ex
amined in a far more conscientious method than had hitherto been done,
before any further progress could be thought of. To this problem, during
the last decades, two men of chief prominence have applied their whole
strength Tischendorf and Tregelles. Both were in like measure equipped
with the requisite qualities sharp-sightedness and an accuracy that gave
heed to the smallest particulars; and both, with their whole soul, fixed
their eyes upon the goal set before them, and strove with like zeal to
reach it. That it was not their lot to attain equal success, lay in the fact
that Tischendorf was much more enterprising, more keen-eyed for new
discoveries, and far better favored by fortune. But the success which
each of them reached, at the same time, is so great that they leave far
behind them everything that had been hitherto done in this realm. In
the toilsome work of collating manuscripts and deciphering palimpsests,
both Tischendorf and Tregelles spent many years of their life, being
thoroughly persuaded that the restoration of the New Testament text
could be striven for with success only upon the basis of a diplomatically
accurate investigation of the oldest documents. But while it was Tischen-
dorf s peculiarity to publish in rapid succession the swiftly ripened fruits
of his restless activity, and so to permit his last result to come into exist
ence, so to speak, before the eyes of the public, Tregelles loved to fix his
full energy undisturbed upon the attainment of the one great aim, and to
come into publicity only with the completest which he had to offer. So
we see Tischendorf editing the New Testament twenty times within the
space of thirty years, not to mention his other numerous publications;
while Tregelles did not believe that he could venture on the publication
of the only edition of the New Testament which we possess from him, until
after a twenty years preparation. It is, however, a tragic fate, and an
irreparable loss for science, that to neither the one nor the other was it
vouchsafed to crown the toilsome work of many years with its capstone.
266 FEINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT.
As Tischendorf bequeathed to us the Editio VIII. Critica Major of his
Greek Testament, without Prolegomena, so also did Tregelles."
Dr. Hort says (The, N. T. in Gr. ii. 13) : " Lachmaim s two distinguished
successors, Tischendorf and Tregelles, have produced texts substantially
free from the later corruptions, though neither of them can be said to
have dealt consistently, or, on the whole, successfully, with the difficulties
presented by the variations between the most ancient texts. On the
other hand, their indefatigable labors in the discovery and exhibition of
fresh evidence, aided by similar researches on the part of others, provide
all who come after them with invaluable resources not available half a
century ago."
Dean Burgon, of Chtchester (formerly Vicar of S. Mary-the-Virgin s
at Oxford), who is diametrically opposed to the principles of Tregelles
and Tischendorf. nevertheless acknowledges their great merits. In his
learned vindication of the genuineness of The Last Ticelve Verses of the
Gospel according to St. Mark (Oxford. 1871, Pref. pp. viii., ix.). he says:
"Though it is impossible to deny that the published texts of Drs. Tisch
endorf and Tregelles as texts are wholly inadmissible [?], yet is it equally
certain that by the conscientious diligence with which those distinguished
scholars have respectively labored, they have erected monuments of their
learning and ability which will endure forever. Their editions of the
New Testament will not be superseded by any new discoveries, by any
future advances in the science of textual criticism. The MSS. which
they have edited will remain among the most precious materials for future
study. All honor to them ! If in the warmth of controversy I shall ap
pear to have spoken of them sometimes without, becoming deference, let
me here once for all confess that I am to blame, and express my regret.
When they have publicly begged St. Mark s pardon for the grievous
wrong they have done him, I will very humbly beg their pardon also."
More recently (in the "London Quarterly Review" for Oct. 1881, American
edition, p. 1(57) he says of Tregelles: " Lachmann s leading fallacy has per
force proved fatal to the value of the text put forth by Dr. Tregelles. Of
the scrupulous accuracy, the indefatigable industry, the pious zeal of that
estimable and devoted scholar, we speak not. All honor to his memory !
As a specimen of conscientious labor, his edition of the New Testament
(1857-72) passes praise, and will never lose its value."
ALFORD.
Among the recent English commentators on the
Kew Testament who embody the Greek text, Dr.
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 267
HENRY ALFORD, the genial, many-sided, evangelical,
and liberal-minded Dean of Canterbury (1810-1871),
deserves honorable mention as a textual critic and
most zealous promoter of the revision of the English
Version, in which, as a member of the Committee of
the Canterbury Convocation, he took an active part
till his death, eight months after its organization. 1
In his Greek Testament (London, 1849, 6th ed.
1868) he gives a critically revised text with a digest
of various readings, and improved it in successive
editions. At first he paid too much attention to
the traditional text and to internal and subjective
considerations. But in the fifth edition he nearly
rewrote the text and digest, chiefly on the basis of
the labors of Tregelles and Tischendorf, and in the
sixth he collated also the Codex Sinaiticus and in
corporated its readings. lie praises Lachmann and
Tregelles for " the bold and uncompromising demoli
tion of that unworthy and pedantic reverence for
1 He issued a revised translation of the New Testament (1869), and was
the first among the four Anglican clergymen (with Moberly, Humphry,
and Ellicott) who prepared a tentative revision several years before the
appointment of the Canterbury Committee. Dean Stanley, shortly be
fore his death (July, 1881), in a letter on Revision to the "London Times,"
paid the following handsome and well-deserved tribute to the memory
of his fellow-Reviser: " If there is any one name which must be especially
connected with this Revision, it is that of Dean Alford. Henry Alford,
while Dean of Canterbury, by incessant writing and preaching on the
defects of the existing version, as well as by his well-known labors on the
New Testament, had constantly kept the need and the possibility of such
a revision before the eyes of the public, and, by a happy coincidence, he
was also deeply interested in all attempts at more friendly communion in
all matters with Protestant Nonconformists." See Alford s Life, by his
widow, London, 1873.
268 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT.
the received text which stood in the way of all
chance of discovering the genuine word of God ;
and the clear indication of the direction which all
future sound criticism must take, viz., a return to
the evidence of the most ancient witnesses." He
became "disposed, as research and comparison went
on, to lay more and more weight on the evidence
of our few most ancient MSS. and versions, and less
on that of the great array of later MSS. which are
so often paraded in digests as supporting or impugn
ing the commonly received text." His confidence
in subjective considerations was shaken, because
" in very many cases they may be made to tell with
equal force either way. One critic adopts a reading
because it is in accord with the usage of the sacred
writer; another holds it, for this very reason, to
have been a subsequent conformation of the text.
One believes a particle to have been inserted to give
completeness ; another, to have been omitted as ap
pearing superfluous."
WESTCOTT AND IIORT.
WESTCOTT and HORT : The New Testament in the
Original Greek, Cambridge and London (Macmillan
& Co.), 1881, 2 vols. The first volume contains
the text (580 pages), the second the Introduction
(324 pages) and Appendix (i. e., Notes on Select
Readings, 140 pages, and Notes on Orthography
and Quotations from the Old Testament which are
marked by uncial type in the text, pp. 141-188).
Gr. Test. vol. i. pp. 76, 85, 87, 88.
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 269
Both volumes are republished from duplicate Eng
lish plates, New York (Harper & Brothers), 1881. 1
The same American firm has also published, in
superior style, with large margin, a very convenient
diglot edition of Westcott and Hort s Greek text
and the English revision in exactly corresponding
pages, with a list of noteworthy variations between
the two texts, under the title : The Revised Greek-
English New Testament, New York, 1882. Dr. Oscar
von Gebhardt has issued a similar diglot edition
which presents Tischendorf s last text and the recent
revision of Luther s German version (Novum Testa-
mentum Greece et Germanice. Das JV. Test, griechisch
uncl deutsch, Leipzig, 1881). These two diglot edi
tions are exceedingly helpful for the comparative
study of the two best Greek texts with the two
most important modern versions revised.
The Greek Testament of Westcott and Hort pre
sents the oldest and purest text which can be attained
with the means of information at the command of
the present generation. It cannot, indeed, supersede
the editions of Tischendorf and Tregelles, which will
long continue to be indispensable for their critical
1 The first volume of the American edition (as also the American diglot
edition) contains an Introduction of 87 pages by Philip Schaff, which was
prepared in May and June. 1881, by previous arrangement with the
editors and publishers, before the second volume appeared, but it does not
interfere with it, still less supersede it. It contains preliminary informa
tion applicable to every Greek Testament; while Westcott and Hort s
second volume is an elaborate exposition and vindication of their system
of textual criticism, and indispensable to the advanced student, but pre^
supposes most of the elementary information contained in the shorter
Introduction prefixed to the first volume of the American edition.
270 FEINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT.
apparatus, and may deserve preference in a number
of readings, but, upon the whole, it is a decided ad
vance towards a final text on which scholars, it is
hoped, may before long unite as a new textus recep-
tus. It is the joint work of two biblical scholars and
theological professors in the University of Cain-
bridge, who have devoted to it nearly twenty-eight
years (from 1853 to 1881), and who combine in an
eminent degree the critical faculty with profound
learning and reverence for the word of God. Their
mode of co-operation was first independent study,
and then conference, oral and written. This com
bination gives a higher degree of security to the
results. The second volume was prepared by Dr.
Hort, with the concurrence of his colleague, and
occasional dissent in minor details is always indicat
ed by brackets and the initials II. or "W. It speaks
from the summit of scientific criticism to professional
students. The Introduction would be more intel
ligible and helpful if its statements were oftener
illustrated by examples.
The aim of the editors is not only to restore the
Nicene text as a basis for further operations (as
Lachmann did), but to reproduce at once (with
Tischendorf and Tregelles) the autograph text, that
is, " the original words of the ]N"ew Testament so far
as they now can be determined from surviving docu
ments." They rely for this purpose exclusively on
documentary evidence, without regard to printed
editions. They make no material addition to the
critical apparatus (like Wetstein, Scholz, Tischen
dorf, and Tregelles), but they mark a decided prog-
FEINTED TEXT OF TUE GREEK TESTAMENT. 271
ress in the science of criticism (like Bentley, Bengel,
Griesbach, and Lachmann). They follow with in
dependent judgment and sound tact in the path of
Lachmann in the pursuit of the oldest text, but go
beyond the Nicene age and as near the apostolic
age as the documents will carry them with the use
of the critical material of Tregelles and Tischendorf ;
they build on Griesbacli s classification and estimate
of documents; they advance upon all their predeces
sors in tracing the transcriptional history of the text
and in the application of the genealogical method as
the only way to rise up to the autograph fountain-
head. This prominent feature of their work has
been already discussed and tested in a special sec
tion, and need not be explained again. 1
"Westcott and Hort distinguish four types of text
in the surviving documents : a
(1.) The SYRIAN or ANTiocniAN. 3 It was matured
by the Greek and Syrian fathers in the latter part
of the fourth century. It is best represented by the
uncial Cod. A in the Gospels (but not in the Acts
and Epistles), and by the Syriac Peshito (in its re
vised shape, as distinct from the older Curetonian
Syriac) ; it is found in Chrysostom (who was first
1 See pp. 208-224.
2 The classification of the documentary sources was begun by Bengel,
who divided them into two families the Asiatic and the African ; it was
enlarged and improved by Griesbach, who distinguished three recensions
the Constantinopolitan, Alexandrian, and Western ; it is perfected up to
this time by Westcott and Hort. On the older system of recensions, see
Tregelles in Home s Introduction, vol. iv. pp. 66-107 (14th edition, 1877).
3 Bengel called it "Asiatic," Griesbach and Scholz " Constantinopolitan,"
or " Byzantine." The best term would be " Grseco-Syrian."
979
FEINTED TEXT OF THE GKEEK TESTAMENT.
presbyter at Antioch till 398, and then patriarch of
Constantinople till his death, 407), in the later Greek
fathers, and the mass of the cursive MSS. (most of
which were written in Constantinople) ; and it is
in the main identical with the printed textus recep-
tus. It is an eclectic text, which absorbs and com
bines readings from the early texts of different lands.
It seems to be the result of an authoritative "recen
sion," or rather two recensions (between 250 and
350), i. e., an attempted criticism performed by edi
tors who wished to harmonize at least three conflict
ing texts in the same region and to secure lucidity
and completeness ; hence the removal of obscurities,
the frequent harmonistic interpolations, and the
large number of what are called "conflate" readings
selected from the three principal texts. " Entirely
blameless on either literary or religious grounds as
regards vulgarized or unworthy diction, yet show
ing no marks of either critical or spiritual insight,
it presents the New Testament in a form smooth
and attractive, but appreciably impoverished in
sense and force, more fitted for cursory perusal or
recitation than for repeated and diligent study" (ii.
135). The distinctively Syrian readings must at once
be rejected and give way to " Pre-Syrian " readings.
It should be remarked, however, that the assump
tion of a deliberate and authoritative Gneco-Syrian
1 We may add his friend Theodore of Mopsuestia (d. 429). See the re
cent edition of his Commentaries on the Pauline Epistles by Dr. H. B. Swete
(Cambridge, 1880-82), and the Excursus on the text, vol. ii. pp. 340-345,
Compare Schiirer s review in the " Theol. Lit. Zeitung," 1882, No. 19,
col. 444.
FEINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 273
recension is based upon a critical conjecture of
Westcott and Hort rather than historical evidence.
The only trace of it is an obscure remark of Jerome
concerning Lucianus, a presbyter and reputed foun
der of the Antiochian school (martyred A.D. 312),
and Ilesychius, an Egyptian bishop, that certain
copies of the New Testament with questionable
readings were called after them. 1 An authoritative
recension by the learned fathers of the Kicene and
post-^icene age, who had access to much older man
uscripts than we now possess, would enhance rather
than diminish the value of the textus receptus, unless
it is counterbalanced by internal and other document
ary evidence. This, however, is strongly against it.
A careful comparison shows that the Pre- Syrian
readings are preferable, and best explain the Syrian
readings. Tiscliendorf emphasizes the rule that the
reading which explains the variations is presumably
the original.
It is very natural that the Antiochian or Constan-
tinopolitan text became the ruling text. Constanti
nople w r as the heiress of Antioch, the centre of the
1 Epist. ad Damasum : " Hoc certe cum in nostro sermone discordat et in
diver sos rivulorum tramites ducif, uno de fonte quccrendum est. Prceter-
mitto eos codices quos a Luciano et Hesychio nuncupates paucorum hominum
adserit perversa confentio, quibus utique nee in toto Veieri Instrumento jwst
LXX interprets emendare quid licuit nee in Novo prof ait emendasse, cum
multarum gentium linguis Scriptura ante translata doceat falsa esse quce
addita sunt." In De Viris illuslr. 77, Jerome says : " Lucianus. vir doc-
fissimus, Antiochence ecclesice presbyter, tantum in Scripturarum studio
labor avit, ut usque nunc qucedam exemplaria Scripturarum Lucianea
nuncupentur." Comp. Decret. Gelas. vi, 14 : ; Evaiiyelia quce falsavit
Lucianus apocrypha. "
18
274 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT.
Eastern Church, and the guardian of Greek learning,
which after the migration of nations died out in the
o
West ; and the capture of Constantinople by the
Turks was overruled by Providence for the revival
of Greek learning by fugitive scholars and the im
portation of biblical and classical manuscripts to
Europe.
(2.) The WESTERN text. It is most easily recog
nized in the Old Latin version, and in the few extant
bilingual uncials which were written in the West (in
Italy and Gaul), as D ( i } of the Gospels and Acts, and
D(2> of the Epistles. It spread very rapidly, and
diverged from the original standard before the mid
dle of the second century. The text of the ante-
jSTicene fathers not connected with Alexandria is
substantially Western (Justin, Irenseus, Hippolytus,
Methodius, even Eusebius). Its prevailing charac
teristics are a love of paraphrase (as Matt. xxv. 1 ;
Luke xx. 34; Eph. v. 30), and a disposition to enrich
the text by parallel passages in the Gospels and ad
ditions from traditional (and perhaps apocryphal)
sources (as in John v. 4; vii. 53-viii. 11; Matt. xx.
28). " Words, clauses, and even whole sentences
were changed, omitted, and inserted with astonish
ing freedom, wherever it seemed that the meaning
could be brought out with greater force and definite-
ness" (ii. 122). Jerome s Vulgate removed some of
these defects, which was one of the motives of his
revision. We find analogous phenomena in some
of the Apocrypha of the Old Testament, which
exist in two texts, the one being an amplified and
interpolated modification of the other ; also in some
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. Z<O
post-apostolic writings, as the Epistle of Barnabas,
the Shepherd of Hennas, and the Ignatian Epistles.
(3.) The ALEXANDRIAN or Egyptian text. 1 It is
found in the abundant quotations of the Alexandrian
fathers, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Dionysius,
Didymus, Cyril of Alexandria, partly, also, Eusebius
of Caesarea, and in the Egyptian versions (especially
the Memphitic). It is characterized by the absence
of extraneous matter and a delicate philological tact
in changes of language. "We often find the Alex
andrian group opposed to all other documents, often
the Alexandrian and Syrian groups combined in op
position to the others, implying an adoption of an
Alexandrian reading by the Syrian text" (ii. 132).
(4.) The NEUTRAL text. This is most free from
later corruption and mixture, and comes nearest the
autographs. It is best represented by B (which is
complete except the Pastoral Epistles, the Apoca
lypse, and the last four chapters of Hebrews), and
next by x (which contains the whole New Testa
ment without a gap). These two MSS., the oldest
and most important of all, though fully known only
in our day, seem to be independently derived from
a common original not far from the autographs, and
their concurrence is conclusive in determining the
text when not contravened by strong internal evi
dence. Dr. Hort surmises (ii. 267) that both were
written in the West, probably at Rome (where the
Greek language prevailed in the Church during the
first two centuries), that the ancestors of B were
1 Called the African text by Bcntloy and Bcngel.
276 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT.
wholly Western (in the geographical, not the textual
sense), and the ancestors of x partly Alexandrian. 1
The later corrections of clerical errors and textual
readings in these MSS. by different hands (especially
those of K a , x b , and K C ) furnish at the same time
important contributions to the history of the text.
Next to them in authority are C, L, P, T, D, , A (in
the Acts and Epistles, but not in the Gospels), Z, 33,
and in Mark A. Among these, C and L have the
largest Alexandrian element. Many Pre- Syrian
readings are supported by ancient versions or fa
thers, and commended by internal evidence, though
not contained in Greek MSS. Ainoncr the fathers
O
the Pre-Syrian and Neutral element is strongest in
Origen, Didymus, to a considerable extent in Euse-
bius, and in Cyril of Alexandria.
From these various types the apostolic text is to
be restored, not by mechanical adjustment, but by
the genealogical method or the careful study of the
history of the written text and the relations of de
scent and affinity which connect the several witnesses.
Not any of them can be exclusively and implicitly
trusted. All the extant documents are more or less
mixed, and embody a certain number of departures
from the autographs, which began to be corrupted
in the first generation after the apostles. The vast
majority of changes date from the first and second
1 The Roman origin of B would most naturally account for its being in
the Vatican Library from its very beginning, and the absence of any trace
of its being imported. But if X was likewise written in Rome, it is not
easy to explain how it ever was transported to the Convent at Mount
Sinai.
FEINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 277
centuries, and were current in the fourth, when the
text began to assume a stereotyped form in the East
through the controlling influence of Constantinople.
Patristic quotations, being definitely chronological,
are the oldest witnesses, going up to the third and
second centuries, but they are often free and loose,
and poorly edited ; next, those versions (Syriac, Latin,
Egyptian) which go back to the same date, but they
have undergone revisions; and lastly, Greek MSS.,
a few of which date from the middle of the fourth
century, but are based again upon older copies, prob
ably from the second century, and hence they are
in fact as old witnesses as the oldest fathers and
versions, besides being more complete and direct.
The process of restoration is very complicated and
difficult, and much remains confused or doubtful.
But in the majority of cases the true reading can be
fixed with certainty, as is shown by the increasing-
consensus of the most competent critics and com
mentators. With all the variations, the texts of
Lachmann, Tischendorf (his eighth and last edition),
Tregelles, and Westcott and Hort, are substantially
one and the same. If Westcott and Hort have
failed, it is by an overestimate of the Vatican Codex,
to which (like Lachmann and Tregelles) they assign
the supremacy, while Tischendorf may have given
too much weight to the Sinaitic Codex. Absolute
unanimity in cases where the evidence is almost
equally divided cannot be expected among scholars
of independent judgment, nor is it at all necessary
for the practical purposes of the New Testament.
In the absence of the apostolic autographs, and the
278 FEINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT.
extreme improbability of their recovery, we must
be content with an approximation to the original
text. Future discovery and future criticism may
diminish the doubts concerning alternative readings,
but will not materially alter the text.
Westcott and Ilort s Greek Testament derives an
additional interest from its close connection and
simultaneous publication with the Anglo-American
Revision of the English Testament. Both editors
were prominent members of the British New Tes
tament Company of Revisers, and Dr. Hort took a
leading part in the discussion of all textual ques
tions, which were always settled before the transla
tion. The method pursued was to hear first Dr.
Scrivener, as the champion of the traditional text,
and then 
