: itt inh \ - it iy
; ell + Went
=
fe it
— - = ==
ie rH
wit Hie nt slay preety ie ie co ia si i cae Hea ills ite He : = a. oi iat Be ian os in it indole he wt sistelaltbarovaigt Mutha
oS sai a vit aay a Lj ’
iti tl Hi iti Ha i a i H tHARitha i
HA .
— vie.
pee seeeae ees:
SS
3 SS
nit oo
—— a ~ == peacotet
- >
it
<> = oes
<= === =
—.
Bi
a a
A itt {Hh Q aS ha
——
= >. 2 =
i" st i i t _o
oF a . ial
= =
— si =
—,
i i ie die But Ht a le . i i in a yieaty ei th Hi
22
—— <7.
f ‘d i HI Ce aa Wi Pa a ts phase tstohitetaaatety Hee tai i tt ta i i eae tf th Hi i f | nt ws te ! Geli tinh AE ihn a AAE HAUT il 7 ; Ha artista iC ait if Mt i u unlit he i a fide i
SS Ste
= ss
h ae Hath HM ait Ne = My ih ; Wath , q i fealiete
yt) is tit hi HL 1 uit ih My ty \ it ff ihe r nt) a Ne ‘ihe if ui ae HOHE i 1 Hi : (4h i fits yee tt bit ae th RRNA oe si ih i
rit
ih il i ;
i
= Sess San SSS ESTE
bey cH i
sys
Ist ut Raa liana bitatt | tt ret i Nt eR Widest tht | ject Trt haelenpte state Ie Hi ‘heel Merete taraceaer vt Pee Beeb Me te Healey nat filha st ait ili if i in i Ht iy W reenter ; isi i fstarits
i He is
A . :
(tie shal Hk ; ii rat Hf! i Hin ‘ Hi sh ie it me it sit ti He ae ith Ht i op a ae AN 1 i ie Mi ily bath : a i} Hn iit it rue aap LG = " ine a ia wth ht ¥ ah rin a ib Y! ii os it ru ne ott i La Ha Hi f it it Hi a a Hi wl th os My a uit i ms i un hehe A uit ti i
ies
apt
S55 E = pa patesesesaes Stee Spetiteeyes tae
re ==
HAROLD B. LEE LIBRARY BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY PROVO, UTAH
Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2011 with funding from Brigham Young University
https://archive.org/details/nexaglotbiblecom01 rich
Biblia Hexaglotta;
CONTINENTIA
SCRIPTURAS SACRAS VETERIS ET NOVI TESTAMENTI:
SCILICET :
TEXTUS ORIGINALES, UNA CUM VERSIONIBUS PROBATISSIMIS, SEPTUAGINTA, SYRIACA (NOVI
TESTAMENTI), VULGATA, ANGLICANA, GERMANICA, ET GALLICA ;
PARALLELO ORDINE POSITOS.
(*,* Cuique tomo Veteris Testamenti Annotationes Masoretice additee sunt.>
EDIDIT EDUARDUS RICHES DE LEVANTE, A.M., Ph.D.,
ALUMNIS LITERARUM SACRARUM ADJUTORIBUS.
Opus totum in sex tomos disiributum.
Tomus I.—PENTATEUCHUS.
NEO- EBORACI:
APUD FUNK ET WAGNALLS, MDCCCOVI
me ; wy f
&
i ay at iy
iu f i 7 fi if i fH i I ;
\ The
exaglot Bible;
COMPRISING THE
HOLY SCRIPTURES
OF THE
OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS
IN THE
ORIGINAL TONGUES:
TOGETHER WITH
THE SEPTUAGINT, THE SYRIAC (OF THE NEW TESTAMENT), THE VULGATE, THE AUTHORIZED ENGLISH, AND GERMAN, AND THE MOST APPROVED FRENCH VERSIONS ;
ARRANGED IN PARALLEL COLUMNS.
(*,* The Masoretic Notes are appended to each Volume of the Old Testament.)
EDITED BY THE REV. EDWARD RICHES DE LEVANTE, A.M., Ph.D., ASSISTED BY COMPETENT BIBLICAL SCHOLARS.
In Sia Volumes.
VoL. I—THE PENTATEUCH.
ARI ISD
NEW YORK:
FUNK & WAGNALLS COMPANY, 1906
HAROLD B. LEE LIBRARY BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY PROVO, UTAH
To Her Masestry
QUEEN VICTORIA
This Hexaglot Lartion
OF THE
HONY SGRIPTURES
Is
BY HER MAJESTY’S GRACIOUS PERMISSION
HUMBLY DEDICATED.
GENESIS. EXODUS. LEVITICUS.
NUMERI. DEUTERONIUM.
Cy SH ERIN ar at etd» ste, Saas Ne heal aah hate Pate atte swt Mises ke ceo a fy
ara i 5 lane rp bred pa eeieciss Ue feRvtecr~s meatal eh = Aaj oe aah
SH 714 vt
et y : t
eet ad Bek A LL OT BelB dE.
PROLEGUMENON.
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS.
HE number of Polyglot editions of the whole Bible which have been printed is sufficiently limited, and the history
of them and their promoters is sufficiently interesting, to deserve passing notice in the foremost pages of the
Prolegomenon to this, the latest work of the kind. The Polyglot Bibles already published vary in utility and
excellence with their authors, with the place and period of their production, with the texts and versions produced, and with the general plan and execution thereof. They may be thus briefly described :—
I. Biblia Sacra Polyglotta, complectentia Vetus Testamentum Hebraico, Graco, et Latino idiomate; Novum Testantentum Grecum et Latinum, et vocabularium Hebraicum et Chaldaicum Veteris Testamenti, cum Grammatica Hebraica, necnon Dictionario Greco; studio, operé et impensis Cardinalis Francisci Ximenez de Cisneros. Compluti, 1514—-1517. Six vols., folio. This is called the Complutensian Polyglot, and its chief promoter and patron was Cardinal Ximenes. The following learned men were employed in the undertaking :—Ailius Antonius Nebrissensis, Demetrius Ducas, Ferdinandus Pincianus, Lopez de Stunica, Alfonsus de Xamora, Paulus Coronellus, and Johannes de Vergera, a physician of Alcala or Complutum.
II. Biblia Sacra Polyglotta, Hebraice, Chaldaice, Greece et Latine. Philippi II. Regis Catholici jussu edita ac impressa; cura Benedicti Ariz Montani, Christophorus Plantinus excudebat. Antverpiz, 1569—1572. Eight vols., folio. This is generally known as the Antwerp Polyglot ; sometimes as the Biblia Regia. The paper and type are superior to those of the Complutensian. No fewer than sixty learned men were occupied on this work, which was at one time highly applauded, at another time ignominiously denounced. The Pope had declared this to be a work truly regal, ‘Opus vere regium,” and the doctors of Paris, Madrid and Louvain proceeded so far as to place it in the catalogue of wonders. Subsequently the Editor, Montanus, was required to make an apology for his heresy ; and the bitterness of his brethren grew to such a pitch, that he escaped but with difficulty the horrors of the Inquisition. The projector of the Antwerp Polyglot was Plantin, the printer; and in this instance, it would appear, it was the printer who incurred the pecuniary risk. (This is not generally the case.) Plantin soon discovered that he had entered upon an expensive undertaking, and found himself in want of funds to enable him to defray his expenses. He applied to
Philip II. of Spain, and, through the influence of tne celebrated Carainal Spinosa, obtained the money us @ eoan;
i 1x
i THE HEXAGLOT BIBLE. and then, presently, overwhelmed with a debt which he made every effort, unsuccessfully, to repay, he struggled on beneath the burden until he stumbled and fell into a premature grave.
IIL. Sacra Biblia, Hebraice, Grace et Latine, cum aunotationibus Francisci Vatabli, Hebraice Lingue quondam Professoris Regii Lutetia. Latina Interpretatio duplex est; altera vetus, altera nova. Omnia cum ediuone Vomplutensi diligenter collata ; additis in margine, quos Vatablus in suis annotationibus nonnunquam omiserat, idiotismis verborum- que difficiliorum radicibus. Ex Offic. Sanctandreana, Heidelb., 1556. Three vols., folio. ‘Lhis is commonly known as Vatable’s Bible. The editorship has been ascribed by some to Robert Stephen the younger; by others, with greater propriety, to Bertramus, Professor of Hebrew at Geneva. Reprints of this Polyglot appeared in 1599 and 1616.
IV. Opus Quadripartitum Sacre Scripture, continens S. Biblia sive Libros Veteris et Novi Testamenti omnes, quadruplici lingua, Hebraica, Greca, Latina et Germanica. Cura et studio Davidis Wolderi. Hamburg, 1596. Four vols., folio.
V. Vetus Testamentum: Hebr., Chald., Gr., Lat., Germ., Sclav., Ital., Saxon., Gallice. Novum Testamentum Dni. Nri. Jesu Christi. Syr., Ital., Ebr., Hisp., Gr., Lat., Gall., Angl., Germ., Dan., Bohem., Polon. Studio et labore Eliz Hutteri, Germani, cum gratia et privilegio Sac. Coes. Mtis. ad qguindecim annos. Norimb. 1591, Three vols., folio. Hutter had meditated a Polyglot edition of the Old and New Testaments in twelve languages, but he never pro- ceeded with the Old Testament farther than the Book of Ruth. The New Testament was completed in twelve languages. This work was reprinted in four vols. 4to, 1599—1610.
VI. Biblia Sacra Polyglotta, Hebraica, Samaritana, Chaldaica, Greca, Syriaca, Latina, Arabica. Quibus textus
originalibus totius Scripture Sacra, quorum pars in editione Complutensi, deinde in Antverpiensi regis sumptibus extat, nunc integri, ex manuscriptis toto fere orbe quesitis exemplaribus, exhibentur. Lutet. Parisior. 1645. Ten vols., folio. A magnificent edition, but abounding in typographical errors. Dr. Kennicott says “It was the misfortune of our translators to want these very valuable versions, from which the learned have since derived many and eminent advantages for correcting as well as illustrating the Old Testament.” This, which is known as the “ Parisian Polygiot,” was completed by the care and at the expense of Michael Le Jay, who had to endure the persecution of the powerful Cardinal Richelieu, a persecution which ultimately succeeded in working Le Jay’s humiliation and ruin, and in causing many copies of his valuable work to be sold as waste paper or destroyed. Richelieu is charged with having coveted the honour of being considered the author of this work, and with having, for that purpose, made Le Jay an offer of 10,000 crowns, an offer which the latter is said to have rejected; hence the persecution.
VIL. Biblia Sacra Quadralingua Veteris Testamenti Hebraici, cum Versionibus e regione positis, utpote versione Greca LXX. Interpretum ex Codice Manuscripto Alexandrino, a J. Ern. Grabio primum evulgata. [tem Versione Latina Sebast. Schmidii noviter revisa et textui Hebrzo accuratius accommodata, et Germanica beati Lutheri ex ultima beati viri revisione et editione 1544-5 expressa. Adjectis textui Hebrxo notis Masorethicis, et Greece versione lectionibus codicis Vaticani; notis philologicis et exegeticis aliis, ut et summariis capitum ac locis parallelis locuplet. ornata. Accurante M. Christ. Reineccio. Sumptibus Heredum Lanckisianorum. Lipsie, 1750. Three vols. folio. This excellent Polyglot was begun as early as 1713. The delay of publication was owing to a part of the MSS. remmin- ing undiscovered till 1747. Besides the Latin version ot Schmid, it contains the German version of Luther from the edition of 1554-5, with marginal notes and parallel passages. Dr. A. Clarke says that it is an excellent and useful
work edited with great care and accuracy.
PROLEGOMENON.
VIII. Biblia Sacra Polyglotta, complectentia Textus Originales, Hebraicum cum Pentateucho Samaritano, Chaldaicum, Grecum, Versionumque antiquarum Samaritane, Grece LXXII Interpretum, Chaldaice, Syriace, Arabice, Aithiopice, Persice, Vulgate Latin quicquid comparari poterat. Cum textuum et Versionum Orientalium Translationibus Latinis. Ex vetustiss. MSS. undique conquisitis, optimisque exemplaribus impressis summa fide collatis. Quz in prioribus editionibus deerant, suppleta: multa antehac inedita, de novo adjecta; omnia eo ordine disposita, ut Textus cum Versionibus uno intuitu conferri possit. Cum apparatu, Appendicibus, Tabulis, Varus Lectionibus, Annotationibus, Indicibus, etc. Opus totum in sex Tomos tributum. LEdidit Brianus Waltonus, 8.T D. Imprimebat Thomas Roycroft. Londini, 1657. Six vols. folio—Castelli (E.), Lewicon Heptaglotton Hebraicum, Chaldaicum, Syriacum, Samaritanum, Aithiopicum, Arabicum, conjunctim, et Persicum separatim, etc., etc.. Londini, 1669. Two vols. folio.
This is the most valuable and convenient of all the Polyglots hitherto produced. Nine languages are found in it; though no one book of the Bible is printed in so many. Besides all the languages in which the Scriptures had been published in former Polyglots, this one contains the Psalms, Solomon’s Song, and the New Testament in Aithiopic, and the four Gospels in Persic. The Chaldee Paraphrase is also more complete than in any former publication. The learned Bishop was rewarded for his colossal labour. He was patronised by the Protector, as well as by King Charles II., and richly did he deserve the patronage of them both. The double dedication, of which so much has been said, was without question a prudent yielding to the inspired injunction of the Apostle Paul :— Ilaca wy eEovoias brrepeyovoats vrotaccécOw ov yap éotw eEovoia ei wi UTO Geod. “Let every soul subject himself to the highcr powers, for there is no power except under God, and the existing powers are ordained by God.” Castell, whose Lexicon to Bishop Walton’s Polyglot is now admitted to be the most elaborate work of the kind ever produced, was less fortunate than the Bishop. Castell, for seventeen years of his life, laboured at his book, and at his own expense employed and maintained no fewer than fourteen literary men. Ultimately, having spent £14,000, and being involved in debt, he laid his case before King Charles II. The king graciously recommended his work to the archbishops and bishops ; these officially recommended it to their clergy; and the clergy, the working body, by dint of strenuous efforts raised the small sum of £700. At the death of Castell, about 100 copies of his most meritorious work passed into the hands of Compton, then Bishop of London. Had it not been for this providential circumstance, the whole might have perished; for, of the rest, some were gnawed by rats and sold as waste paper, others perished in the memorable fire of London.
IX. Biblia Sacra Polyglotta, Textus Archetypos Versionesque precipuas, ab Kcclesia antiquitus receptas com- plectentia. Impensis S. Bagster, Londini, 1818-21. One vol. 4to. and five vols. small 8vo. Another edition appeared in 4831, exhibiting eight languages at one view, with Prolegomena by the Rev. Dr. Samuel Lee, Professor of Hebrew at the University of Cambridge. This is entitled :—Biblia Sacra Polyglotta, Textus Archetypos, Versionesque precipuas ab
Ecclesia antiquitus receptas; necnon versiones recentiores Anglicanam, Germanicam, Italicam, Gallicam et Hispanicam
complectentia. Accedunt Prolegomena in Textuum Archetyporum Versionumque antiquarum crisin literalem. Auctore Samuele Lee, S.T.B. Londini, S. Bagster. The Prolegomena, however, have no particular reference to the texts, which, as far as we have been able to ascertain, are scarcely alluded to. An able reviewer of this Polyglot remarks :--‘‘Had Mr. Bagster commenced the Bible as a complete work in eight languages, it is
probable that he would not have succeeded in his undertaking: instead of this he first published each of the
THE HEXAGLOT BIBLE. versions separately ; the English and one or two of the others were remarkably successful, and when the eight were placed together they formed an elegant and compact volume, and the work deservedly obtained a great reputation at home and abroad.”
X. Polyglotten-Bibel gum prafttfdhen Handgebraud. Die Heilige Schrift Alten und Neuen Teftaments in tiberfidtlicer Nebeneinanderftellung des Urtertes, der Septuaginta, BVulgata und Luther-leberfesung, fo wie die widhtigften BVarianten der yornehmften deutfden Ueberfepungen; bearbeitet yon RN. Stier, Dr. der Theologie und Superintendent in Cisleben, und K.G. W. Theile, weiland Dr. und Profeffor der Kheologie in Leipzig. This excellent work has passed through several editions between 1847 and 1864. It consists of five vols. large 8vo. The New Testament is a Triglot only, containing the Greek, the Latin Vulgate, and Luther’s German.
The year 1874 adds ancther to the comparatively small list just given, viz., The Hexaglot Bible, or Biblia Hexaglotta, a title which has been assigned to this work, not only to express the number of languages which it presents, but also to distinguish it at once from other Polyglot Bibles. This work, which was commenced by Mr. Henry Cohn, has been in hand for several years. Had it not been for the approval with which the design and general execution of the work met at the hands of a few, the indifference of the multitude as to the success or the failure of an enterprise of this description would have permitted the undertaking to collapse at the very outset. Owing to the generous co-operation of those few, who thought that such an edition of the Holy Scriptures might be useful in the present age, “ when men run to and fro in the earth, and knowledge is increased,” the promoters were enabled to bring out the first two volumes, Vol. I., containing the Pentateuch ; Vol. II., the books from Joshua to 2 Kings inclusive. For some time after the appearance of these volumes the work came to a stand-still, until, in 1871, the active co-operation of the present publishers, Messrs. Dickinson and Higham, was fortunately secured. The first result of this was the appearance, in 1872, of Vol. III., comprising the books from 1 Chronicles to the Song of Solomon, inclusive (the English order of the Sacred Books being preserved in this volume, as in the others). In 1873, appeared Vol. V., the first of the New Testament, containing the four Gospels; and in 1874 Vol. 1V., which embraces the Books from Isaiah to Malachi, and Vol. VI., Acts to Revelation.
The aim and intention of the promoters and publishers of The Hexaglot Bible is to place within the reach of all
as genuine a copy as can be obtained of the Word of God in various languages. The polyglotist, even when no pre- tension is made to originality of thought, and comparatively little labour is bestowed on the collecting of materials, has an arduous work to do. He requires the best services of the eye, the hand, the head, the heart. He wants an eye that will not readily allow errors to escape its observation, a hand that will correct errors without tampering with the text, a head sufficiently sound and capacious to contain 4 knowledge of the Word of Truth presented under various aspects, and written in various languages; a heart sufficiently right to love truth in itself, sufficiently large to make an | effort to disseminate truth, as far as possible, throughout the world. Very few, we imagine, would have the boldness to assert that those men, whose names have been mentioned above, were actuated by no higher than sordid motives when, in the face of unprecedented difficulties, and when, in some instances, the art of printing was only in its infancy, they betook themselves to the laborious and almost thankless task of printing a Polyglot edition of the Holy Scriptures. Who can doubt that Ximenes, the father of Polyglots, was actuated by higher than worldly motives when, at his own expense and labour, he brought out his marvellous work? Not satisfied with employing learned men to do the work for
him, he threw himself so thoroughly into his subject that, at the advanced age of sixty, he made himself master of the
PROLEGOMENON.
Hebrew language! There is a little story recorded in connection with him, which is, perhaps, worthy of being recorded again: ‘1 have often,” says Gomecius, “heard John Brocarius, whose father printed the Complutensian Polyglot relate to his friends, that when the work was finished, he was deputed to carry it to the Cardinal. John Brocarius was then a lad, and having dressed himself in an elegant suit of clothes, he approached Ximenes and delivered the volume into his hands. ‘I render thanks unto thee, O God!’ exclaimed Ximenes, ‘ that thou hast
protracted my life to the completion of these biblical labours.’” A few weeks afterwards he expired. But
his work has lived through three centuries, and still lives to stimulate, not to discourage, those who enter upon similar labours.
The next point to which we have to draw attention is the arrangement of the text. The Complutensian Polyglot contains in the first four volumes the Hebrew, Vulgate, and Greek text of the Old Testament, in parallel columns, and the Chaldee paraphrase at the bottom of the page, with a Latin translation. The fifth volume contains the Greek New Testament with the Vulgate Latin version in a parallel column; in the margin there is a kind of concordance referring to similar passages in the Old and New Testaments.
We have not space to enter minutely into details of the order observed in all the Polyglots. For the most part this is indicated in the titles which they bear.
Bagster presents eight different texts at one view; but he presents the texts in blocks, not in columns, and the effect produced is as singular as it is truthful; it is the exhibition of eight books in one volume. Moreover, the different versions do not always harmonise, 7. e., do not terminate with the same clauses on the same page; thisis a defect, and the type is so small that very few, we imagine, except tnose whose eyes are young and vigorous, can consult it with comfort.
It will be found that the Hexaglot Bible is unique in design, the various languages being placed in parallel columns, and so carefully arranged, particularly in the New Testament, that the words representing the same ideas stand as nearly as possible side by side across the whole of the two pages which the six columns occupy. Each column terminates with the same verse; not unfrequently with the same word. The types employed possess the advantage of being bold in character as well as pleasing to the eye. Of the New Testament, the type is even bolder than that of the Old, and it is to be hoped that this typographical excellence will be warmly appreciated.
We have now to advert to the particular languages introduced into the Hexaglot Bible.
The value of the original Hebrew and Greek texts and of the ancient Syriac, Greek and Latin versions is incon- testable. The value of the various Semitic versions which find place in Walton’s Polyglot, is not sufficiently great, and the number of students in Persic, Arabic and Aithiopic is not sufficiently large to command the reproduction of those versions in a modern Polyglot. There are copies enough of these still extant for scholars to consult. And as to the modern versions which find place in Bagster’s Polyglot, Diodati’s Italian, Scio’s Spanish, and Greenfield’s Hebrew New Testament, if they possess any value—we do not say any intrinsic value, that they do possess—but any value as forming part of a Polyglot Bible, it is strange that the learned Professor Lee should have passed over the subject in his elaborate prolegomena. But our object is not to attack the course adopted by others; it is simply to defend the choice of languages made by the promoters of the Hexaglot Bible. Here we have, in the Old Testament as well as in the New, three ancient and three modern languages. In the Old Testament, the original Hebrew occupies column 1; the Septuagint,
column 2; the Latin Vulgate, column 3; the English, German and French, columns 4, 5 and 6 respectively. In the
THE HEXAGLOT BIBLE.
New Testament, the Hebrew naturally disappears from column 1, and the original Greek takes its place. Next to the Greek stands that ancient and valuable version, the Syriac Peschito, the other versions retaining the same order of
position as in the Old Testament.
Before entering more fully into the consideration of the particular texts employed in this work, it will be
convenient to offer a few observations upon the texts in general.
OF THE ANTIQUITY OF THE HEBREW LANGUAGE.
According to Bishop Walton and others, the word Hebrew is derived from the verb 72, to pass over, because Abram passed over the river Euphrates into the land of Canaan. Others are of opinion that the word is derived from the proper name 739, Heber, the progenitor of Abram. Whatever be the derivation of the word ‘729, the antiquity of the language is very great. Into this question Walton enters at considerable length in his Prolegomenon. He proves the antiquity of the Hebrew language by the names of men and places from the creation to the dispersion at Babel. Thus man is called 078, Adam, because taken from the ground, 7278, adama. The first woman is called Eve, 4n, because she is the mother of all living, mm. Peleg, 298, is so called because in his days the earth was divided, myPby, In these and similar instances the connection between the proper name and the event from which it takes its origin is
obvious. It is desirable, however, that the biblical student should not confound historical narration with grammatical
derivation. Adam was so called because he was taken from the ground; yet the derivation of the word DN is not
2s, but some monosyllable, probably either 78, a vapour, or 57, blood. In like manner 77 is derived from ‘1, not
trom 7. We draw attention to this subject because, singularly enough, the learned Bishop Walton himself falls more than once into the error of confusing history with’etymology. Speaking of Noah, he observes: “ Noachus, 7 consolator, a verbo 0173, abjecto , quia dixit Lamechus, consolabitur nos ab opere nostro.” The connection between the words ™3 and OFM) is clear, but it is equally clear that the former is the root, not the latter. The sacred historian no more affirms, at Gen. v. 29, that M2 is derived from 073, than he affirms, at chapter iv. 1, that 7)? is derived from ‘71°3}, or, at chapter x. 25, that 178 is derived from 73952. In spite of this oversight of the venerable Bishop, his main argument as to the antiquity of the Hebrew language must be admitted to have great force. In addition to the names of individuals, he adduces the names of nations and peoples as having some significance in Hebrew, none in other languages, eg., Assyrian from Assur, Elamite from Elam, Aramean from Aram, Lydian from Lud, Mede from Madai, Ionian from Javan. He further adduces the names of heathen gods in support of this antiquity. He asserts, ‘‘ Japetum filium Celi et err, patrem Atlantis,” to have been no other than Japhet, son of Noah. Saturn, so called because when he fled from Jupiter, he hid himself at Latium, is associated with “9, to hide; Jove with the sacred name 7; Belus with 5Y2, Vulcan with 11? Daan (Tubal Cain, the inventor of the use of brass and iron); Ceres with Y73, crops pushed for- ward by the influence of the moon.* Walton further argues that the facilities for preserving the original language amongst the worshippers of the true God were great; for, assuming the vulgar reckoning to be correct (rather a serious
assumption), Shem, who was living before the confusion of tongues, was still alive in the days of Abraham and Isaac.
* In like manner, Apollo. from SOB. to intercede; Pytho, from MI, to deceive; Admetus, from OTS; Didcvoc, from mw Adonis, from 278,
PROLEGOMENON. 1
But whatever may be the age of the Hebrew language, it was that language upon which was first conferred by God the honour of being the medium through which the revelation of His will was made known to man. According to Jerome, Eusebius, the Talmudists and ancient Rabbins, the written characters originally employed were those which are now called the Samaritan; and Walton and others are of opinion that these continued in use amongst the Jews until the destruction of the first temple.
The first critical hand that touched the Hebrew text is supposed to have been that of Ezra, whom the Jews vall the second Moses, and whom Jerome calls the “ Legis Instaurator.” He is said to have introduced the Assyrian
characters in place of the Samaritan.
OF HEBREW MANUSCRIPTS.
Of Hebrew manuscripts there are two classes in existence: the rolled manuscripts which are used in the Synagogues, and the square used by private individuals. All of these are apographs or copies, the autographs having long perished. A specimen of the Synagogue rolls may be found amongst the Harleian manuscripts in the British Museum. The most ancient Hebrew manuscripts were written without division of words; hence arose the Rabbinical tradition that the Law was one verse and one word. Modern printed editions follow the recensions of Ben Asher, Cent. XI. The first division into chapters was made by Hugo de Sancto Victore, about a.p. 1250. The scarcity of Hebrew manuscripts and their comparatively modern date is thus accounted for by Bishop Walton: “After the general reception of the critical edition of the Masorites and their method of punctuation, the Jewish masters condemned all manuscripts not conforming to these as profane and illegitimate. The manuscripts were consequently destroyed.” Owing to this monstrous act, if indeed it were ever’ perpetrated, there are few Hebrew manuscripts in existence more than 500 or 600 years old, whereas the Greek manuscripts, e. g., the Vatican and the Alexandrian, are at least 1,200 years old. Since Kennicott’s edition there are known to be extant nearly 700 Hebrew manuscripts. Those which are most in repute among the Jews are the Codex Hillelis, or the Spanish, a.p. 1200; the Codex Ben Asher, followed by the Palestinians; the Codex Ben Naphtali, followed by the Babylonians; about a.p. 1034. In addition to these is the Codex Sinai, which is a revision of the Pentateuch and a treatise on the accents; and, finally, the Jericho Pentateuch, which treats of words redundant and defective.
It would far exceed the proposed limits of this Prolegomenon, to mention all the editions of the Hebrew Bible that have appeared at various epochs. We shall content ourselves with mentioning a few of the principal editions, especially those which have led to the present received Hebrew text.
The oldest edition of the whole Hebrew Bible is that of Abraham Ben Chaim, printed at Soncino, 1488. Next . in order is that of Gerson, son of Rabbi Moses, Brescia, 1494. The first edition of Daniel Bomberg was printed by
him, and edited by Felix Fratensis, Venice, 1518. The second edition of Daniel Bomberg was printed by him, and
edited by Jacub Ben Chaim, Venice, 1525-6. The first Hebrew Bible printed in Germany was Sebastian Munster’s, Basle, 1534. Buxtorf’s great Bibie was published at the same place, 1618-20. The edition of Joseph Athias, Amsterdam, 1671-7, is worthy of special notice, not only on account of its
intrinsic merit, but because on this is founded the celebrated edition of Van Der Hooght, Amsterdam, 1705; an
THE HEXAGLOT BIBLE.
— ——___-
edition which has been followed by Hahn, Leipsic, 1831, and by nearly all modern editors. Athias reprinted and revised the text of Jacob Ben Chaim, and as a token of approbation the States General of Holland conferred on him a gold chain and medal.
The modern Hebrew text then may be thus traced back: Hahn, 1831; Van Der Hooght, 1705; Athias, 1661; Bomberz, 1525; Bea Asher, Cen. XI.
The editors of the Hexaglot Bible have used the text of Van der Hooght; they have moreover consulted the editions of the learned Letteris (yyy .omyoYS ‘TD UD SY FYI TAT DDD) DD) AN NWT wapT 7DboO 2/1n ~Vienna, 1852. Two vols. 8vo.) ; and of Luzzatto .(Amuan ay mn waz mwan, Il Pentateucho colle Haftardt volgarizzato ...daS. D. Luzzatto; Trieste, 1858-61. Five vols. 8vo.) Many inaccuracies pointed out by these critics
as having crept into the accents of modern editions have been carefully corrected.
OF THE MASORAH.
The word Masorah, 730%, signifies tradition; and the Masorah is an elaborate collection of notes made from Hebrew manuscripts and commentaries, by Jewish doctors of the school of Tiberias, during and after the sixth century. These notes refer principally to irregularities of consonants, vowels and accents in the Hebrew text. At one time they were of such magnitude, that they formed a volume greater than the text itself, “In tantam molem excrescebant ut Textum Biblicum superarent” (Walton). The greater part of the Masoretic notes have perished. The Masorah consisted of two parts, the Textual and the Final. The notes of the Textual were introduced into the margin, and were abridged to save space; hence arose the Masorah Parva. Subsequently these notes were given in a fuller form above, below and at the side of the text; hence arose the Masorah Magna. The omissions placed at the end of the
volume received the name of Masorah Finalis. In modern editions of the Hebrew Bible the textual Masoretic notes,
including the “j? (read) and 2D (written) are usually placed at the foot of the page. This was found unsuitable to the plan of the Hexaglot Bible, and therefore the notes have been affixed at the end of each volume of the Old
Testament. As to the notes themselves very few of them are of any importance.
OF VOWEL-POINTS AND ACCENTS.
With regard to the system of Hebrew accentuation and punctuation, it may be observed that the date of the introduction of accents and vowels is involved in uncertainty. Some have affirmed that these are coeval with the text, and have ascribed them to Moses; others have ascribed them to Ezra; others to the Masorites of Tiberias, about A.D. 500; others again to Ben Asher and Ben Naphtali, a.p. 1040.
Bishop Walton shows tolerably clearly that the Hebrew vowels and accents are of comparatively modern date. He bases his argument against their antiquity upon the testimony of learned men, the absence of points from the Samaritan as well as from the ancient copies of the Jewish Synagogues, the evidence of the most learned of the Jews themselves, Elias Levitas and Aben Ezra; the Talmud, which makes no mention of points; the Keri and Ketib, which
refer to words and letters, never to vowels or accents; the ancient versions, etc.
PROLEGOMENON.
It is, we think, now generally conceded that these were first introduced after the Hebrew language had ceased to be vernacular, the object being simply to facilitate the reading of the text, and the credit of the invention is attributed to the Masorites, about the tenth or eleventh century. Whatever doubt there muy be as to the antiquity of the vowel-points and accents, there can be none as to their general utility now in determining the pronunciation and accentuation of syllables, the signification of words, and the construction of sentences.
We shall shew now, from internal evidence, that the Greek translation, 7. e., the Septuagint, was made either from an unpointed text, or from a text pointed differently from the present. This we shall endeavour to establish by examples, some of which have been adduced before, others not, as far as we are aware.
Take Gen. iv. 7: “If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door; and unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.” This is a fair rendering of the Hebrew, as it is now pointed: ‘a ~wen mas) inpwm aN) yao ONem moe2 men XD os) ON menos Xo But in addition to not being very intelligible or connected, this is ungrammatical; for MN@T is a feminine form, whereas YR is a participle masculine, and therefore does not agree with the substantive, as it should. Now it appears to us that the Greek throws great light upon the passage. It runs thus: Ov« éav op0as mpocevéynys, opOas dé wn Suédys, Haptes ; novyacov x.t.X. This is not a paraphrase on the Hebrew, it is manifestly a translation either from an unpointed text, or from one pointed quite differently: y2] Osem mms? aon Xo oN) Os Don oN koO “If thou doest well in offering, but if thou doest not well in setting forth, hast thou not erred? Be still, and unto thee,” ete. Nsw is a feminine form of the infinitive, governed by 26’. For the signification of mp compare Amos viil. 5, TATMAD, avoiEowev Ojcavpov, aperiemus frumentum, Korn feil haben, set forth wheat.
Gen. iv. 15. For 72? the Septuagint reads 72 N ody oftw, Vulg , Nequaquam ita fiet.
Gen. xxvi. 12. “Then Isaac sowed in that land and received in the same year an hundredfold.”” Here the Hebrew, as at present pointed, is OTYW MNO; the Greek has éxatoorevovcav xpiOynv, and therefore the translator must have read OM YW, barley. Compare Ruth i. 22, OY xp, barley-harvest.
Gen. xlvii. 31. ‘And Israel bowed himself upon the bed’s head.” Septuagint: Kai mpocexvvycev ’Iopanr émi to axpov THs paBdov avtod. ‘And Israel worshipped on the top of his staff.” The Hebrew has 7057, which, unpointed, may signify either the bed or the staff; as it is pointed in our copies, M57, it signifies the bed; as it is rendered in
the Greek, ris pdSdov, it must have been read as if pointed 749M. Cited from the Septuagint, Heb. xi. 21. The
Vulgate follows the Hebrew in the Old Testament, “ad lectuli caput;” in the New Testament we find, “et adoravit
fastigium virgee ejus ;” “and he adored the top of his staff!”
Gen. xlix. 10. ‘The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nora lawgiver from between his feet until Shiloh come.” The word Shiloh (Fw) is here translated by the Septuagint, ra dzoxeiyeva avT@, or, as the Alexandrian MS. renders it, 6 daoxevtav; “until the things laid up in store for him,” or, “he for whom it is laid up in store, shall come.” In this sense daréxewpae is employed in the New Testament, e.g., 2 Tim. iv. 8: “ Henceforth there is laid up for me (a7oxevrai yor) a crown of righteousness.” The words xai avtos mpocdoxia éOvev, “and he shall be the expectation of nations,” indicate that the translators understood Shiloh to be a person, although instead of Tw they must have read ‘iwi, Possibly they had an eye to an old Talmudic tradition respecting the glory laid up for the Messiah.
Gen. xlix. 21. ‘“Naphtali is a hind let loose; he giveth goodly words.” This is a literal translation of the oI
= THE HEXAGLOT BI#LS.
Hebrew, as at present pointed: "bw-71M8 7] Mw ms “mp2 But the Septuagint translates thus: Nedb@ani TTEAEYOS avermévov emrLdid0rs ev TH yevynwate Kadddos ; “ Naphtali is a well spread tree, which puts out beautiful branches.” The latter is a great improvement on the former. For 7?°8 the translators must have read 7), a tree. The verb Tow, in the Piel, signifies to send forth, as a bough; Psalm lxxx. 12, BY TW mYYS/? nun, ‘she sendeth forth her boughs unto the sea.” The first meaning of 728 is a branch; the second, a discourse, is metaphorical, that which branches from the subject. The verb 702 is applied to the giving forth of fruit, rather than words, eg., Psalmi. 3: JAY. TAY MP WR, “that bringeth forth his fruit in his season.” All this is well expressed in the words of the Septuagint.
Exod. xiii. 18. “And the children of Israel went up harnessed out of the land of Egypt.” The Hebrew is Asia sby owrem. The Greek is réumrn 8 yeved dvéByoav of viol Icpajd; “And the children of Israel went up in the fifth generation.” Consequently for pwn, armed or harnessed, the translators must have read DOW. We find a striking parallel at Exodus xx. 5: “ Visiting the sins of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation;”? O°Y27 OM awh dy; Septuagint, éws tpitns Kal Teraptns yeveds; Vulg., “in tertiam et quartam generationem.” So in all versions. Now if this rendering of the Septuagint be correct, and by the consent of nations unto whom the word of God has come, it is correct; is it not highly probable that wéuarn dé yevea is the real meaning of the word own, in the passage under consideration? And if this be so, then the whole of the argument of Bishop Colenso against the historical truth of the Pentateuch, based on this difficult word (Part I., chap. ix., page 48—52) must inevitably fall to the ground. The theory of the Israelites going up out of Egypt armed, is supported by the Vulgate armati alone. The English version has harnessed; German, geriiftet, both of which may signify equipped, or, with a good outfit; and with this the French agrees, “en bon ordre,” in good order. Had the Hebrew but been pointed from the outset, the unfortunate question to which we have referred, would, perhaps, never have been raised.
Psalm Ixxvii. 10 (11). “And I said, This is my infirmity, but I will remember the years of the right hand of the Most High.” Hebrew: 7*>y pa) IW NT smibo aN). Greek: Kal éma Nov npEaunv, avtn addAolwows THs deEvas Tob tricrov; “And I said, Now I have begun, this és the changing of the right hand of the Most High.” The Vulgate follows the Greek. Here the word ‘1>0, which in our English Version is rendered my infirmity, is treated as the first person singular preterite Kal of 427, to begin; the word SY, which now has the athnach, 7, was separated from ‘15M and joined to 3w; while 3W, which in the English is translated the years, i e¢., as a substantive, was treated as the infinitive Kal of 728, to change. The true meaning seems to lie between the two: And I said, It is my infirmity to change the right hand of the Most High. However this may be, the accents, if they existed at all when the Greek translation was made, must have been different from those which are found in our present copies.
Isaiah xxiv. 23. ‘Then the moon shall be confounded and the sun ashamed.” Hebrew, as now pointed, mao min man mpm; Greek, Kai taxnoetar 7 ally bes Kal weoeitas TO Tecyos. ‘And the brick shall be dissolved, and the wall shall fall.” The translators must have read M2277, the brick, and MAN7, the wall, for 72277, the moon, and MAM, the sun.
Ezekiel xlviii. 835. “And the name of the city from that day shall be The Lord is there.” Hebrew, 97 ou maw MM OD; Greek, cal 7d dvopa Ths moAcws agp’ is av nuépas yévntar Eota TO dvowa avtns; “And the name
of the city from the day when it happens shall be its name.” Some copies have Kupvos éxet, but the majority have
PROLEGOMENON.
not; and hence it would seem that the translators read T72W MM, shall be its name, for TW MM, the Lord is there. The confusion may be traced to the Bava Bathra (fol. 75, col. 2): “Read not 7W, read 72wW.”’
Zephaniah i. 11. “Howl, ye inhabitants of Maktesh.” Hebrew, WO2aT vaws DT; Greek, Opnvncate ot KaTouKobvTes THV KaTaKeKoupevnv. The translators must have read WMDAT, pounded, brayed, as in a mortar.
Zeph. ii. 9. “ Moab shall be as Sodom, and the children of Ammon as Gomorrah, even the breeding of nettles,” etc. Hebrew, 2M pwn Miya Wey 1) MIM OTD. aNiN; Greck, Mod@ as Yodoua éorar Kai viol’ Aupov ds Popoppa, cai Aapackos «.7.r. In this place the translators must have read for PW, a breeding or possession, pat, Damascus.
Zech. v. 6. “This is their resemblance through all the earth.” Hebrew, YI8T 2D OY Mt. Greek, Airy % adixia avtov év taon TH yp. The translators must have read for O2Y, their resemblance, eye, 2.Y, their iniquity.
Zech. vi. 10. ‘‘ Take of them of the captivity, even of Heldai, Tobijah and of Jedaiah.” Hebrew, mia mse mir MYT Aye Ama Aw storm; Greek, AdBe ra éx THS alxyuartwcias Tapa TOV apYoVTwV Kal Tapa TOY YXpPnTiWov
auris Kai Tapa THV éTeyvwxoTwy avTyv. The translators must have read TPT ANA pw OND oe - Comp. v. 14: wea mypoy main por? mia my; Latin, Et corone erunt Helem et Tobie et Idaize et Hem; Greek, ‘O 8é
atépavos éaTat TOIs UTOpevoucL Kal Tols XpHaimols a’THS Kal ToOls éeTEyvMKOTLW avTHY Kal cis yapita. “The crowns shall be for those who wait, and for her benefactors, and for those who have recognised her, and for grace.”
Zech. x. 4. ‘‘OQut of him came forth the corner; out of him the nail;” Hebrew, 1) 329 72) 9999; Greek, Kat am’ avtod améBree kai ar’ avtov éra€e. For the substantives 722, corner, and 10), nail, the translators must have read the verbs 1125, ¢o turn, look, and 1), to fiz.
Zech. xii. 5. “The irhabitants of Jerusalem shall be my strength.” Hebrew, O7wm) vayhy o> mens; Greek, Evpnoopev éavtois Tods Katosxodvras “Iepovoadju. The translators must have read N¥k, first sing. future Kal of the verb NZ, to find, for the substantive T3N, strength.
Zech. xiv. 5. ‘‘And ye shall flee to the valley,” etc. Hebrew, 772 59D2; Greek, cal dpayOjoetar 7 papayé Tov opéwy (ter.). The translators must here have read 0D), third sing. pret. Niphal of B09, ¢o obstruct, instead of 5%D2), second plur. Kal of 543, to flee.
Malachi ii. 12. “‘The Lord will cut off the man that doeth this, the master and the scholar,’ etc. Hebrew, May) WY Mwy) AWS wars Mmm 322; Greek, "E€o\0@pevoe Kvpios tov avOpwrov tov trowdvta tavTa éws Kal raTrewwOy, «.T.’. In this case, it is clear, the translators must have read for 729) 7Y, master and scholar, 7129) ‘TY, until he shall be humbled.
So at ver. 13. “And this have ye done again,” etc. Hebrew, WY M2 ON; Greek, cal tadta & euicouy éroveire. The translators evidently treat ™2W as part of the verb 7W, to hate, and appear to have read (WN Ost Sopaw.
Many other passages might be adduced, but these are probably enough to establish the proposition that the
Septuagint translation was made from an unpointed text, or from a text pointed differently from the present.
THE HEXAGLOT BIBLE.
OF THE SEPTUAGINT.
Various accounts are given of the origin of this ancient and valuable translation of the Old Testament Scriptures One story, which long obtained credence, but which is now generally discredited, is so intimately associated with the Greek version, and the name which it bears, viz. the Septuagint, that we may be excused for recording it here. The story is that Ptolemy Philadelphus wishing to add to his library the sacred writings of the Jews, sent an embassy to Eleazer, their high priest, with a request that he might be furnished with a copy of the books, and with a number of men competent to translate them into Greek. Eleazer, accordingly, despatched to the king six men from each of the 12 tribes, 72 in all, and with them an elegant copy of the Hebrew Scriptures. The envoys were received most courteously by King Ptolemy, and placed in a convenient building in the Isle of Pharos, where the work of translation was accomplished in 72 days. Lach of the translators is said to have been shut up in a different cell by order of the king, that he might ascertain the truth of the translation from the common consent of all; and all of them are said to have agreed upon the same sentences, and written the same words. On the testimony of Justin Martyr, to the effect that the ruins of the cells were shewn to him by the inhabitants, the account was long received as true, but it has since been satisfactorily demonstrated from internal evidence, from numerous defects in the translation, from passages irreconcileable with the original, from varieties of style and different methods of spelling words, that the Greek version was the work of different men at’ different epochs; men endowed with a greater or less degree of zeal and ability, but neither assisted by miraculous agency nor gifted with divine inspiration.
Of the Septuagint, the Pentateuch stands first in order of merit; Proverbs next, Jeremiah next; Daniel being so inferior, that at a very early period, the Version of Theodotion was adopted in its place. The translation was begun about B.c. 280, and was probably not finished for several centuries. The dialect is Macedonic, mingled with a number of Hebraisms, being similar in style to the Greek of the New Testament. The Septuagint translation is the connecting link between the original texts. While it often explains and illustrates, sometimes even corrects and supplies the Hebrew of the Old Testament, it not unfrequently enables us to understand the peculiar sense in which words or phrases are employed in the Greek of the New Testament.
Like all works which are merely human, the Greek translation has its defects as well as its merits, and some of both of these will be pointed out by us in due course. In the main it agrees with the Hebrew text as we have it this day ; and the fact that it has always been received in the Jewish as well as in the Christian Church, adds no little weight to its authority.
The Septuagint is said to have been used by our Lord and His Apostles. Bishop Walton, with whom the majority of writers agree, observes: “Maximum vero auctoritatis huic versioni accedit, quod Christo et apostolis in usu fuerit, qui pleraque testimonia, que ex Veteri Testamento proferunt, secundum hance versionem citant, immo cum verba ab Hebraico textu differre videntur.” But the greatest authority has been added to this version because it was used by Christ and His Apostles, who cite most of the testimonies which they adduce from the Old Testament according to this version, and that even when the words seem to differ from the Hebrew text. Again, referring to that remarkable incident recorded in Luke iv. 18, when our Lord went into the synagogue on the Sabbath-day, and stood up to read, and found the place where it is written: “IIvedua Kupiov x.7.d.” Walton remarks: ‘Hic videmus verba Evangeliste ab
Hebreo textu differre ; que tamen cum interpretatione Graeca exacte congruunt. Unde videtur colligi posse Dominum
PROLEGOMENON. Xiik
versionem Gracam in synagoga usurpasse, quam postea lingua vernacula (Syriaca) populo explicavit.” Here we see that the words of the Evangelist differ from the Hebrew text, while they exactly agree with the Greek interpretation; whence, it appears, one may infer that our Lord used the Greek version in the Synagogue, and afterwards explained it to the people
in the vernacular tongue (Syriac).
That the Septuagint was quoted by Apostles and Evangelists is indisputable; that it was sometimes cited, even when
the words seemed to differ from the Hebrew text, is explicable; that it was read by our Lord in the Synagogue is improbable; that it was cited by Him and His Apostles in preference to the Hebrew, is impossible. What could be more natural than that men, writing in Greek, should, when they had occasion to refer to the Old Testament Scriptures, cite from a translation they found ready at hand, a translation, the authority of which was recognized by Jews as well as by Christians ? What could be more natural than that they should occasionally quote from this translation, even when the precise words differed from the Hebrew, so long as the words conveyed the general sense of the original passage? We lay emphasis on this proviso, because in numerous instances where the Greek translation does not convey the sense present in the mind of the inspired writer, he drops the Septuagint and substitutes a translation of his own. What could be more unnatural than that our Lord, Himself a Jew, should enter a Jewish Synagogue in Palestine, read a text in Greek, and then preach a sermon in Syriac? as Bishop Walton has suggested. The gospel of St. Luke was written in Greek, and the Evangelist, who records the incident under consideration, gives the passage, which is a long one, in Greek. What else could he do? Whenever our Lord’s actual utterances are given, they are given in Hebrew, or Syro-Chaldaic; these utterances, as might be expected in a book written in a different language, are short, and are generally accompanied with @ Greek translation ; thus Mark v. 41, Christ took the damsel by the hand, and said unto her, YA) TN")D 6 éorr ucOepunvevopevov' TO Kopdovov éyerpat, “ Talitha cumi, which is being interpreted, Damsel, arise.” - Mark vii. 34: He opened the eyes of the blind, and said, MMBMS, 6 dors SiavoiyOnt. “ Ephphatha, that is, Be opened.” Matt. xxvii. 46: He was expiring on the cross, and He cried with a loud voice, saying, 272W 799 Ys de, rouT éoTt, Océ you, Océ pov, ivati pe éyxatédurres; “ Eli, Eli, Lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?” In two out of the three accounts of the conversion of St. Paul, viz., Acts ix. 4, and xxii. 7, we are simply informed that the voice from heaven said, S'aovA Saovr, ti we Sioxets. Hence, had these been the only two accounts given, some might have concluded that the Greek words were the very words addressed to the Apostle by the Lord from heaven; but in the third account, 7.e., in Paul’s defence of himself before King Agrippa, he says, Acts xxvi. 14: “I heard a voice, saying unto me in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul,” ete. And, without doubt, that same voice which restored the girl to life, which opened the eyes of the blind, cried out in the agonies of death, and called to Saul from heaven in the Hebrew tongue, also read in solemn tones in the Synagogue, on the Sabbath day, the sublime words of the Evangelical prophet, 2? 73wW2) Wan? vmbw onay mwad sok Tim mw py by Tim, ty OM “The spirit of the Lord God is upon me,” etc. In case, however, a doubt should be left on the reader’s mind, we draw his attention to the fact that both Tischendorf and Alford have expunged as spurious the clause facacGau tovs ovVTETpLLBEVoUS THY Kapdiav, found in the Septuagint, from the text of the New Testament, and that they have both retained as genuine the clause drocteiAas Tods TeOpavapevous év adécer, which is not found in the Septuagint. They have also xnopvEau for the xcaréoau of the Septuagint.
No unprejudiced man will affirm in the presence of these facts that our Lord quoted the Septuagint in the
Jewish Synagogue.
THE HEXAGLOT BIBLE.
Finally, however great may be the excellence of any translation of the Scriptures, one can hardly be justified in exalting it to a level with the original Word. That Apostles and Evangelists used the Septuagint, is enough to stamp it with honour as well as authority, and yet that they used it under the circumstances referred to, is nothing more extraordinary than that a modern English theologian, writing for Dissenters as well as for members of the Established Church, should cite passages from neither the Hebrew nor the Greek, but from our authorized version (which is received by all), even when those passages differ in some respect from the original.
The four principal texts of the Septuagint are :—
I. The Complutensian, 1514.
II. The Aldine, 1518.
III. The Vatican or Roman, 1587.
IV. The Alexandrian, 1707—20.
Besides the Septuagint there were no other Greek versions until the second century of the Christian era. In the year 130, Aquila, a Hebrew proselyte, made a new and literal translation. Shortly after, Symmachus, a Samaritan, made another and a freer translation. Next to this appeared the translation of Theodotion, which was superior to both its predecessors. ‘These three versions formed the groundwork of Origen’s Hexapla. Origen’s Hexapla consisted, as the name implies, of six columns; the first of which was occupied by the Hebrew in Hebrew characters, the second by the Hebrew in Greek characters, the third by the version of Aquila, the fourth by that of Symmachus, the fifth by the Hexapla text, i.e, by Origen’s own edition, the sixth by the version of Theodotion. After this appeared the version of Eusebius and Pamphilius, which was distributed in the provinces between Antioch and Egypt, and was called the Palestine version. Next came that of Lucian, a Presbyter of Antioch, which was read in the provinces between Constantinople and Antioch; and finally that of Hesychius, an Egyptian Bishop, which was in use at Alexandria and throughout Egypt.
The Complutensian text appeared shortly before Erasmus’s fifth edition, and was used by him in correcting his fourth. The Greek text of the Antwerp Polyglot, and of Vatable’s Bible is based on that of the Complutensian. Bishop Walton adopted the Greek of the Venice edition of 1518, which is identical with the Vatican, printed at Rome, 1587. Hutter’s Greek is merely a reprint of the Antwerp edition. Bagster’s is the Vatican edition, edited by Carafa, Stier and Theile’s is based on the Complutensian.
In the Hexaglot Bible the text of Tischendorf has been followed. This text, which is founded on the Vatican, has
been adopted intact, although it has been found expedient to make certain transpositions, to place at the foot of
some of the columns a few interpolations, and to supply, within brackets, a considerable number of important
omissions. The various peculiarities of the Greek text of the Hexaglot Bible will be now more particularly pointed out.
In Vol. I., which contains the Pentateuch, no transpositions have been made; the lacune in the Greek text are marked by asterisks. Throughout the work, the division of the Hebrew chapters has not been interfered with, even when the division has differed from the Greek and the other versions. Thus, Exodus viii. 1 of the Hebrew is chap. viii. 5, of the others; but, in spite of this, the different columns terminate with the same clause; Hebrew, jt. Oy PITS vw; Greek, Kai é&érewev "Aapov tiv xetpa; Latin, Et extendit Aaron manum; English, And Aaron stretched out his hand; German, Und Aaron reidjte feine Hand; French, Alors Aaron étendit sa main. It will be readily
perceived that the irregularity in this, as in all similar cases, is apparent, not real. At Exodus xxviii. we meet with
PROLEGOMENON.
a discrepancy of more importance. Verse 23 of the Greek is verse 29 of the Hebrew, and vv. 23 (26), 27, 28, 29, are wanting. A space has been left for these in our Greek column, but as they have not been inserted in the text, it may be well to supply them in this place :—
Kai rroumoes emi To Noyetov dvo SaxtuALovs ypuaods, Kal émiOjoets Tovs Svo SaxtuAious ém audhotépas Tas apyas tod Noyeiov. Kai roumoes Svo0 daxtyriovs ypucots, Kal ériOjoets Er audotépous Tovs Buous THS emwpidos, KaTwOEV avTod, KaTa& Tpdcwmov, Kata cuuPoriv avwbev THs cuvudhs Ths émwpidos. Kai cvadiyfovot Td doyeiov aro TeV daxtudlwov TaV ém avTOD Eis TOs SaKTUALOUS THS ETw@pidos ev KAWoMATL LaKLVOiVo, va 4 emt TOD wnYaVHWaToS, Kai iva Ha) XaAGTaL TO Aoyelov emi THS ETwpIO0s.
A serious discrepancy in the arrangement of the Greek verses commences at Exodus xxxvi. 8, and continues to the end of the book. It will be found, however, that these verses have double numbers, and may consequently be easily compared with the corresponding verses of the other languages. Take, e.g., Exodus xl. 29 (Greek). This is verse 35 of the other versions, and the small figure (35), at the beginning of the Greek line, at once connects Kat ovx jduvdcOn Mevojs with the Hebrew mw 42) 82), and the Latin, Nec poterat Moyses.
Again, the Hebrew of Leviticus v. has 26 verses, while in the versions chap. v. terminates at ver. 19. The result of this is, that chap. vi. 1 of the Hebrew is chap. vi. 8 of the other languages. Still the words at the end of the page correspond, 22M N>, ov checOjoerar, nunquam deficiet in altari, shall never go out, nimmer verléfcen, point s'éteindre.
The clause DD TT 7s M7 38, which, in common with the modern versions, forms part of the last verse of Lev. xxv., commences chap. xxvi. of the Greek and Latin.
Numbers xvii. 1 of the Hebrew is chap. xvi. 36 of the other languages, but here again the words at the end of the page correspond, WBN? TAWaby TIM 7BM, Kal ciwe Kipios pos Mavojy, Locutusque est Dominus ad Moysen, dicens, etc.
Similarly Numbers xvii. 16 of the Hebrew is chap. xvii. 1 of the versions, but the phrases at the foot of the columns correspond, 77w p25 ty, Where I will meet you.
In Deuteronomy there are no discrepancies of this description.
There are certain passages of the Hebrew upon which the Greek throws light, and vice versd. There are cy,
many passages of the Old Testament cited in the New. It will be convenient to notice these as we proceed from book to book.
Gen. i. 27. “Apoev cal OfAv émolinoev avtouvs; “ Male and female created He them,” cited in the New Testament, Matt. xix. 4.
Gen. i. 2. Kai xarémavoe 7H nuépa Th ERSoun, x.T.r., cited Heb. iv. 4.
Gen. ii. 7. Kai éyéveto 6 dvO@pwrros eis Yruxnv Caoay, cited 1 Cor. xv. 45.
Genesis li. 24. “Evexa tovtou xatadeipet, x.T.,, “ For this cause shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.” The Greek has of dvo, the two. This is cited by St. Matthew (xix. 5), and is considered to be a protest against polygamy.
Gen. iii. 15. “He shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.” Gesenius explains 7520) 8171 thus: ‘“‘He (the seed of the woman, man) shall lie in wait for thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for his heel;” he shall
endeavour to crush thy head, and thou shalt endeavour to crush his heel. Tregelles adds in a note: “The above
THE HEXAGLOT BIBLE.
explanation is purely neologian; the passage applies not to man generally, but to Christ, the seed of the woman; bruise is the simple meaning in each part of the verse.” Here, we think, Gesenius is right, and Tregelles is wrong. Christ, the seed of the woman, was not merely a man, He was the representative of man, the second Adam; “Ecce homo.” As to bruise being the only meaning of *W, it is questionable whether it possesses any such meaning. Most of the Greek copies have tnpjce, which signifies fo hie in wait for, not to bruise.
Gen. iv. 8. “And Cain talked with Abel, his brother.” Here the Hebrew is, ‘TS Dar DP Wk, And Cain said (not talked) to Abel, his brother. The verb “’a8 is active, and requires the objective case after it to complete the sense. There is therefore something wanting in the Hebrew text. This we find supplied in the Septuagint, Aved Popev eis TO Trediov; Let us pass through the field. The Hebrew of this would be, MW2 Way or 35). Probably the Hebrew transcriber omitted the clause by accident, his eye having been deceived by falling on the second word 77Wa. The clause is found in the Syriac version, the Jerusalem Targum, the Samaritan Pentateuch, and the Latin Vulgate, “ egre-
diamur foras.”’
Gen. ix. 20. “Noah began ¢o be an husbandman;” Hebrew, 72187 Ws; Greek, dvOpwios yewpyds yijs. The
original rendering of the Septuagint was, dvOpw7ros ys, but the expression admitting of two senses, the word yewpyds was placed first in the margin, to explain the meaning, then in the text, to the detriment of the sense. This is one of the numerous double renderings with which we meet in the Septuagint.
Gen. xi. 12, 13. “And Arphaxad lived five-and-thirty years and begat Salah. And Arphaxad lived after he begat Salah four hundred and three years,” etc. This is a literal translation of the Hebrew; but the Greek runs thus: “And Arphaxad lived a hundred and thirty-five years, and begat Cainan; and Arphaxad lived after he begat Cainan four hundred years, and begat sons and daughters; and he died. And Cainan lived a hundred and thirty years, and begat Salah, and Cainan lived after he begat Salah three hundred and thirty years,” etc. Throughout this chapter the Greek dates are irreconcileable with the Hebrew. This and other points, upon which we cannot enter now, indicate clearly either that the translators’ copy was different from that which we possess, or else that the Hebrew or the Greek has been corrupted since.
Gen. xv. 5. Odtws éoras 76 omépya cov, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited by St. Paul, Rom. iv. 18.
Gen. xv. 6. Kai ériorevoev “ABpap TO Oem, kal édoyicOm adt@ eis Sinavocvvnv. This passage, which agrees with the Hebrew, is cited by St. Paul, Rom. iv. 3.
Gen. xv. 15. Mai M22 737M, “thou shalt be buried in a good old age.” The Greek has tpadels, obviously erroneously written for tadeis.
Gen. xvi. 13. “And she called the name of the Lord that spake unto her, Thou God seest me.” Hebrew, 7 OS TMS; Septuagint, 3d 6 Oeds 6 éiddv we. In this and similar instances ‘N7 is an abstract substantive, signifying vision ; she called the name of the Lord, the God of vision; just as the well was called ‘7 °11'2 182, Beer- lahai-roi, vision to the living.
Gen. xvil. 5. “Ori wratépa Troddov eOvav Teka oe, agreeing with the Hebrew, cited by St. Paul, Rom. iv. 17.
Gen. xviii. 10. “Hf mpos cé kata Tov Kaupov TobTov eis @pas, Kal Ge viov Sdppa. At Rom. ix. 9, we have Kara Tov Kalpov TOvTov éhevoouat Kat éotar TH appa vids. If we assume that for 77 the Apostle read 737. this ritation agrees with the Hebrew, 7) yaM2am mn ny sos awe. (Comp. Gen. xviii. 14.)
Gen. xviii. 22. Here we have one of the eighteen ODD 71PN, or corrections of the Jewish scribes:—-“ But
PROLEGOMENON. XV
Abraham stood yet before the Lord.” The true reading is said to be, “But the Lord stood yet before Abraham.”
The correction, which was unnecessary, has been adopted in all versions.
(jen. xxi. 10. “ExBare tHv matdloxny tavTnv Kal Tov viov adThs’ od yap ua) KANpOVvoUNHoEL 6 Vids THS TraLdiaKNsS TAUTNS peta Tod viod pov ‘Ioadk, agreeing with the Hebrew, and cited by St. Paul, Gal. iv. 30, except that for the last clause, Tov viod ov ‘Ioadk, he substitutes tns édevbépas.
Gen. xxi. 12. Ev Icaax xr Onoerai oor omrépua, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited by St. Paul, Rom. ix. 7.
Gen. xxi. 16. “And she (Hagar) sat over against him, and lift up her voice, and wept.” This is a translation of the Hebrew, J291 7778 NWI; the Greek has, dvaBojcav 88 7d maSiov éxravoev, “And the child lifted up his voice and wept.” At ver. 17 we read, “And God heard the voice of the lad.” It has been said that it was evidently the child who wept, and not the mother, and that the Greek in this case corrects the Hebrew. Is it not more probable that mother and child wept together, till the child, at the point of death, could weep no more? and then, when the mother wept alone for her son, he wept by and through her, and the Lord heard his voice ?
Gen. xxii. 14. “And Abraham called the name of that place Jehovah-jireh; as it is said to this day, In the mount of the Lord it shall be seen.”” The Hebrew of the last clause is, M87). 7i7) 772, and with this the Greek agrees, Ev 7@ oper Kipios ab0n, the Lord appeared. There evidently is, and was when the Greek translation was made, some confusion with the reading of 787. The place is called TN) TMT, because TN), MIT. Kupios eidev because Képios &60n. The real meaning is obvious from ver. 8, “My son, God will provide,’ M7. ot. The present English rendering is nonsense.
Gen. xxii. 17. "H pév evroyav edrdoyjow ce cal TrANOiVwv TANOUVG 76 oTépua Gov, agreeing with the Hebrew ; cited by St. Paul, Heb. vi. 14, except that for To omépua cov he substitutes ce.
Gen. xxii. 18. Kai etrgoynPnoovras év tH orépwati cov Twacar ai dural THs yns. Comp. xii. 3, xviii. 18, xxvi. 4. St. Luke has (Acts iii. 25) Kai év 7@ oréppari cov évevAoynOnoovtas Tacas ai watpial THs yns; and St. Paul (Gal. ii1. 8),"Ore évevroynOjcovtas év coi mavta ta €Ovn. Neither of these is an exact citation, although both embody the sense and spirit of the oft repeated promise that in Abraham’s seed all the families of the earth shall be blessed.
Gen, xxv. 23. ‘O peifwv dSovrdedoes TO éXaooov, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited by St. Paul, Rom. ix. 12.
At Gen. xxxv. 4, there is a clause added to the Greek text which, if true, must have been of greater moment to the patriarch Jacob than to ourselves. ‘They gave unto Jacob all the strange gods which were in their hands, and the earrings which were in their ears; and Jacob hid them under the oak which is by Shechem;” the Greek adds, xal am@Xecev adta Ews THs onuepov iyuepas; And he lost them unto the present day.
Gen. xliv. 4,5. The English version, following the Hebrew, begins thus abruptly, ‘“‘Is not this it in which my lord drinketh?” The Greek prefixes the words, ’Ivari éxAépaté wou Td Kovdu TO apyupody; Why have ye stolen my silver cup? We may imagine, without being very speculative, that the words of the original were OM222 m2? FDZT V2] WAAR.
Gen. xlvi. 20. “Eyevovro 8 viol Mavacon, ots érexev avt@ ..... EdSwpu. We have an interpolation here in the Septuagint of some moment, because it has led to é8Sopunxovtarévte, seventy-five, instead of seventy, v. 27, contrary to the Hebrew and the other versions, an error which reappears in the New Testament, Acts vii. 14.
Gen. xlix. 6. “In their anger they slew a man, and in their self-will they digged down a wall.” Hebrew,
5K
THE HEXAGLOT BIBLE.
wepy oD wee wT oBNa; Greek, Ev 76 Ouuo adbrav dréxrewav avOpdmovs (men), Kal év Th érrOuuia avTav evevpoxoTnaav tadpov, “In their self-will they castrated a bull.” The Vulgate has, Suffoderunt murum; Eng., They digged down a wall; Germ., Haben fie ben Ochfen verderbet; French, Mutilé les taureaux. None of these interpretations throw much light upon the passage. Some have taken the words -1w and tadpos in the sense of prince, viz., Shechem, who was thus cruelly punished in revenge for his ignominious conduct.
Exodusi.11. Kai "Av, 4 éotw ‘Hdwotrods. This clause is tound neither in the Hebrew text nor in the other versions, but is interpolated in the Septuagint apparently with a view to support the dignity of the place.
Ex. ili. 6. “Eyo elu... . Oeds ABpadp Kat Oeds Ioadk Kai Oeds 'TaxHP, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited Matt. xxii. 32, and Mark xii. 26, but with the article repeated before Geds.
Ex. ix. 16. Kai &vexev tovro SuerepnOns iva évdeiEwpar ev cot THv loxyuy mov, Kai Orrws SiayyeAy TO dvowa pou év maon TH yh. St. Paul (Rom. ix. 17) follows the Hebrew, FATS Nt WIV, eis adrd TovTo éEnyeipa ce, “ For this very purpose have I raised thee up,” contrary to the Greek SvernpyjOns, “thou wast reserved.” In addition to this the Apostle substitutes the dvvauv of the Alexandrian for the éoydv of the Vatican.
Ex. xi. 46. Kal dotodv ov cuvtpipete am’ avtod, agreeing with the Hebrew; but St. John has (xix. 36), Oorody ov cuvTpiSyncetat avTod.
Ex. xiii. 2. The Hebrew, as at present pointed, and with which the Septuagint and all the versions agree, reads thus: OF>D meA rivad> > wap, « Sanctify unto me all the first-born, whatsoever openeth the womb;” but at Luke ii. 23 we read, Ka@os yéyparrrae év vou Kupiov oti wav apoev dvavotyov untpav &yvov to Kupio «drnOjoeras, “ As it is written in the law of the Lord, Every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord.” It is manifest that the Evangelist read Wp, holy, for WIP, sanctify.
Ex. xvi. 18. Ovx érdeovacev 6 76 Trodw, Kal 6 To EXaTTOV OvK NraTTOVHCEV, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited almost verbatim by St. Paul, 2 Cor. viii. 15.
Ex. xx. 12, or Deut. v.16. Tiva rév ratépa cov Kai thy wntepa cov, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, Matt. xv. 4 and Mark x. 19.
Ex. xx. 13. Od pouyedoess, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, Matt. v. 27.
Ex. xx. 15. Ov dovetceis, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, Matt. v. 21; but St. Mark has, My MOLyEvoNS, K.T.A» 6 dl
Kx. xxi. 16 (17). ‘O xaxodoyav tratépa adtod % untépa abtod TedeuTH}cer OavaTe, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, but with some variation, Matt. xv. 4, ‘0 caxodoyav watépa } untépa Oavat@ TedevTdTH.
Ex. xxi. 24, or Ley. xxiv. 20. Og0aryoy avti bpbarpod, dd0vra avti ddovros, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, Matt. v. 38.
Ex. xxii. 28. Apyovra tod Naovd cod od Kaxds épeis, agreeing with the Hebrew (27); cited, Acts xxiii. 5.
Ex. xxiv. 8. [dod 76 aiwa ris SiaOjnns, iis Su€Oero Kupios mpos twas, agreeing with the Hebrew; but at Heb. ix. 20, we find robo for i600, and Oeds for Kupzos.
Ex. xxv. 40. “Opa roujoes kata tov tuov tov Sedevypevcv co ev 7S Spex. The Hebrew runs thus: MYY) ANA TAZ TMT MHS Ws 059302; “And see and make according to the pattern of those things which thou wast made to see in the mount.” St. Luke has (Acts vii. 44) roujoas attiv cata tov TUmov bv éwpdxe. Here the verb éwpdxe is
substituted for the dedevyuévov of the Septuagint, and is a nearer approach to the Hebrew. At Heb. viii. 5 we read,
PROLEGOMENON.
"Opa ydp dnow rroinces mdvra Kata Tov Térov Tov Sey Oévta cou év TH Spe. This agrees with the Septuagint, except that mavra is introduced, and deyOévra is substituted for dedevypévov.
Ex. xxxii. 1. oinoov jyiv Oeods of mporropeicovtas juav: 6 yap Mavots obtos 6 avOpwios 0 éEnyayev nuas ex ys Aiyurrrov, ob« olSapev Ti yéyovev ate, agreeing with the Hebrew, and cited almost verbatim, Acts vii. 40.
Ex. xxxii. 6. “ExdOucev 6 dads ayetv Kal tieiv, Kal avéotnoay Traitew, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited by St. Paull Cor. x7.
Ex. xxxiii. 19. Enero bv av ded Kal oixterpnow dv dy oixtepa, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited by St. Paul, Rom. ix. 15.
Lev. v. 4. ‘H Wuyi) 1) dvowos 4 SuactédXovea, «.7.r. This clause is utterly at variance with the Hebrew %> wh] IN ounpia nia yawn. There can be no doubt that both the Vatican and the Alexandrian copies are incorrect in-this instance, and that the proper rendering in Greek is, the same in letters very different in words: ‘H wvy7 i) av opoon, «.7.r., the soul that shall swear, not, the lawless soul. The confusion is easily accounted for, inasmuch as, originally, there was no perceptible division of words. The transcribers made a false division. Humanum est errare !
Lev. xix. 18. Ayamrnoes tov TAnciov cov ws ceavTov, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited by St. Matthew, xxi 39.
Lev. xxvi. 12 (comp. Ezek. xxvii. 27). Kal @couas duav Beds, kai tycis eceoOé por dads, agreeing with the Hebrew ; adapted to his subject by the Apostle Paul, 2 Cor. vi. 16.
Numbers xi. 15. One of the D%5DD 7177, corrections of the Scribes, “Let me not see my wretchedness.” It is said that the original reading was, 7NYI2, “thy wretchedness.” This is doubtful, for all the versions agree with the present Hebrew text.
Num. xii. 12. “Let her not be as one dead, of whom the flesh is half consumed when he cometh out of his mother's womb.” It is affirmed that iS and i772 have been substituted for 1728 and 27Y2. But the Greek and all the versions agree with the Hebrew text as we now have it.
Numbers xxiv. 7. The Greek, "Efenetoetar dvOpwros éx Tob oméppatos avTod, Kal Kuptevoer EOvav ToddOy, “A man shall come forth from his seed, and shall rule over many nations,” is said to be a paraphrase of the Hebrew, on oa :ma7 ova ipa wos. Is it not more probable that the Greek translation was made from a copy containing a different reading, something like this: 0.27 DvAya om jy wos ba. We are aware that there is not much similarity in the words 0° and Ws, as they appear here; but in Rabbinical there is a very close resemblance between o'P and of, 27 is an incorrect form.
Numbers xxxv.2—5. It is remarkable that the word W772 is rendered in the Septuagint by four different words in four consecutive verses; ver. 2, Td mpoacreia; ver. 3, Ta aboplawata; ver. 4, 74 svyKupobya ; ver. 5, Ta duopa. The Vulgate has “suburbana”; English, “suburbs”; German, ,,Borftddte “; French, ‘‘territoires.” In addition to this obvious defect in the rendering of the Septuagint, it is manifest that the passage is corrupt. At ver. 4, we read,
« And the suburbs of the cities, which ye shall give unto the Levites, shall reach from the wall of the city and outward
a thousand cubits round about.” Instead of a thousand cubits, 728 7s, the Greek has dicydlovs mryyas, two
thousand cubits. This matter has been well explained by Dr. Owen, in “An Enquiry into the Present State of the Septuagint ” (London, 1769). He says, “‘ The fourth verse may be considered as a geometrical problem, whereby the
Jews are required to circumscribe a space, reaching from the wall of the city outwards, a thousand cubits round about.
THE HEXAGLOT BIBLE.
————— OO Oe —
“The fifth verse contains the solution of this problem .... Let us draw the figure according to the directions given,
and see whether the problem is not thereby actually solved :—
F G
‘Let a BCD represent the city, standing in the midst, and not to be estimated in the mensuration. Then, says the text, measure on the east side (Bc) 2000 cubits. That is, draw the line KG, viz., KB + CG = 2000 cubits. Draw, likewise, on the south side (pc) the line ep + cu = 2000 cubits. In the same manner, draw on the west side (a D) the line LF, viz., L A + DF = 2000 cubits, and on the north side (a B) the line m1, viz., MA + BI = 2000 cubits. Through the extremities of these lines draw the periphery EFGH1xKLM, and it will circumscribe a space reaching from the wall of the city outwards just a thousand cubits round about, that is, every way; Q. E.F. Corollary: Hence, then, it necessarily follows that the Septuagint reading is false; for to make the space from the wall outwards two thousand cubits round about, the measure on the sides must needs be four thousand cubits.”
Deut. iv. 26. “Ot. Kupios 6 eds cov mip Katavarioxov, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, but not verbatim, Heb. xii. 29.
Deut. vi.5. “Ayamnoes Kupiov tov Oedv cov €& Gdns Tis Siavolas cou Kal é& GANS THS Wuyns cou Kai eF bANS Tis duvapews cou, agreeing with the Hebrew ; cited, with some variation, by St. Matthew (xxii. 37), and St. Luke (x. 27).
Deut. vi. 16. Ovk éxmretpdces Kvpuov tov Oedv cov, dv Tpotrov é&erretpacate ev To Teipacu@. The Hebrew has 1323, which the modern versions treat as a proper name; the Vulgate has “in loco tentationis.” The former part of this
verse, which agrees with the Hebrew, is cited at Matt. iv. 7.
ae é : , a , , Deut. vill. 38. Ovx én” dpte pove Sjoerar 6 avOpwiros, GAN’ ert mavtl pnwate TO extropevowevm Sua oTomatos Oeod,
agreeing with the Hebrew ; cited, Matt. iv. 4.
Deut. xvii.6. This passage, in which the Greek agrees with the Hebrew, is referred to, but not cited, by St. John (vili. 17), Avo avOpeérwv 1) waptupia adnOns eorwv.
Deut. xvii. 15. The Greek accords with the Hebrew. St. Luke (Acts iii. 22, 23) cites the words, “ A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you, of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear ;” but adds, “inall things what- .
soever he shall say unto you,” found neither in the Septuagint nor in the Hebrew. At Acts vii. 37, the words of the
PROLEGOMENON.
Septuagint are given without this addition. At Deut. xviii. 18, we read, “I will raise them up a prophet from the midst of their brethren like unto.thee, and will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.” Then follows ver. 19, Kai 6 dvOpwmos bs éav ut) dxovon doa dv Nadjon 6 meopyTys Eéxeivos emi TS ovopwaTt pou éym exdiucnow é€ aitod, which St. Luke thus paraphrases (iii. 23), "Lora: 5¢ raca ~uy) iris éav wn axovon Tov mpodyrou éxeivou eEoroOpevOrjceras ex Tod aod. It is manifest that the Evangelist read yp, “from his people,” for yoy “of him;” a strong argument against the antiquity of the vowel-points.
Deut. xix. 15. "Eml ordpatos S00 waptipwv Kal eri orduatos tpiav waptipwv otjoerar av pyua. There is no word in the Hebrew corresponding to 7ray, although it finds place in the New Testament (2 Cor. xiii. 1). The passage, however, is not an exact citation from the Septuagint.
Deut. xxi. 23. Kexatnpapévos td tov Oeod tras xpeudmevos emi EdNov. The Hebrew has A oy Oop >, and
with this not only the Septuagint but all the versions agree. At Gal. iii. 13, we find évcatdparos for xexatnpapévos,
and the words u7o Tov Geod are omitted.
Deut. xxiii. 18. Osby 22m WIP MYT ND) Obs baa mp mrvs>. Here again the Vatican furnishes us with one of those extraordinary double renderings which critics have allowed to stand (ver. 17) :—
Ovn éotat Topvn amo Ovyatépwv ’Iopanr, Kat ove Extras Topvevwv — aro via ’Iapann. Ovx éorat tercohopos ard Ovyatépwv Icpanr, Kal ove extras TeMaoKopevos amo viav Iopanh.
Deut. xxv. 4. Ov dipoces Bodv arodvta, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited by St. Paul, | Cor. ix. 9; but Tischendorf and Alford have xcnuocers for dyswoers.
Deut. xxv.5. The substance of this passage, which is in agreement with the Hebrew, is given at Matt. xxii. 24, Eay Ts aTrobavn py Exov Téxva, éemuyapBpevoe 6 adeAPds adTOD THY Yyuvaika aUTOD Kai dvacTHoEL OTTépHA TH AbEAPO avTOD.
Deut. xxvii. 26. ‘Emuxatdpatos mwas avOpwrros bs ovK éupéver ev maa Tols NOLS TOD VOuoU TOVTOU TOLHoAL aUTOUs, agreeing in the main with the Hebrew. St. Paul has (Gal. iii. 10), Emuxarapatos Os ovx eupéver Tao Tots yeypappe- vos év TH BiBriw TOD vo“ou. TOV TroLncaL aUTa.
Deut. xxx. 22. Tis avaBnoetar jpiv eis Tov odpavev ; agreeing with the Hebrew; cited by St. Paul, Rom. x. 6. Tis KataBnoetat eis THY a8vocov (Rom. x.7); contains the substance of Deut. xxx. 13; while the words of Deut. xxx. 14, Eyyus cov éott TO pha opodpa év TS oTOpati cov Kal év TH Kapdia cov, are cited from the Septuagint.
Deut. xxxi. 6. Odre un ce avi, odte pn ce éyxatadirn, and at ver. 8, ovK avijce ce, ovdé my oe eyKaTahirn. The promise is here given in the third person, “ He will not fail thee,” ete. At Joshua 1. 5, a similar promise is given in the first person, “I will not fail thee, nor forsake thee,’ Ov« éycatareipw oe ovd vmepoowat oe. St. Paul adopts the terms of the former text, the person of the latter, Ov wx ce ava ovd’ ov yun oe éyxatareitw (Heb. xiii. 5).
Deut. xxxii.21. Kayo trapatnroéow adtovs én’ ove eOver, emi EOver acvvéTw Tapopylw avTovs, agreeing with the Hebrew ; cited by St. Paul, Rom. x. 19, except that he substitutes juds for avtovs.
Deut. xxxii. 385. ‘To me belongeth vengeance and recompense.” Hebrew, new) om2 ‘9, Septuagint, Ev nuéoe exduxnoews avtatrodéow, St. Paul keeps closer to the Hebrew, Epoi éxdicnors, éyw avtatrodwow (Heb. x. 30).
Deut. xxxii. 40. ‘Ore dpa eis Tov ovpavov THY xeipa pou, Kal 6uoduar tiv SeEvdv pov. This is not exactly a double rendering, but the latter clause is obviously a gloss taken from the margin, where it was inserted to inform the reader that to lift up the hand signifies to swear.
Deut. xxxii.43. WY O2 2297. The Greek has evfpavOnre éOvor eta Tod Aaod avrov. Some have charged the
xxi THE HEXAGLOT BIBLE.
Jews with corrupting the text here, and translate the passage as it stands in the Hebrew, “ Praise, ye Gentiles, his
people”; Vulgate, “‘Laudate gentes populum ejus” Luther took a different view, for he has ,,$audet alle, die ihr fein Bolt feid,” “ Exult, all ye who are his people.” The English and French versions follow the Septuagint. In this place, again, there is something like a double rendering.
Evd¢pavOnre ovpavoi awa avT@, Kab TpocKUVnTaTwTaY avT® TavTES ayyeror Oeod.
EvdpavOnte éOvn peta Tov aod avTov, Kal évicxvodtTwoav avT@ TavTEs viol _—_‘Deod. The clause ‘“ Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people,” is cited according to the Septuagint by St. Paul, Rom. xv. 10.
The following verses are wanting in Tischendorf and in the Cod. Vat.: Josh. viii. 12, 13, 26. Kai wapevéBarov aro Boppa tis Tai, cai 4 xotdas ava pécov avtod Kal ava péoov THs Tai. Kai édaBev ws révte ytdiddes avdpav Kai EOeTo avtovs évedpav ava péoov THs BasOyr Kai tHS Tat, Oddacoav THs Tai. Kal éra€ev 0 Nads Tacav tiv TapewBornv, 1) Hv amo Bopp& TH Tor«L, Kal TA Eryata avTOU Odraccav Tis TOdews. Kal éropevOn Inoods tv vucta éxeivnv év péow THs KouNaoos. Kai ’Inoots ov« éréctpewe yeipa avtod, ty é&érewvev év TO yaro@, Ews aveDewatioe oUuTTaVTas TOs KaTOUKOdVTas év TH Tat.
Joshua x. 15, 43. Kai éméotpewev "Inoods cal ras "Iopann pet’ avtod eis tv TwapeuBornv eis Tddyada. Kai avéotpewev ‘Inoots eis Tadyana.
Joshua xii. 88. Kat 17 dvdn Aevt ove &axe Mavons xrnpovom.av, Kupuos 6 Geos "Iopannd avtos KAnpovouia avTav, xaQas édhadnoev adtois. Of the above verses, portions, together making up the whole, are found in the Alexandrian, Oxford and Complutensian Codices.
Joshua xii. 15—22. Some Greek copies run all these short verses into one. The gap is marked in the Hexaglot Bible, but there is no real omission, for, in the Greek, all the names of the kings mentioned are summed up as twenty and nine (mdvtes otro. Bacunels eixootevvéa), whereas, in the Hebrew and in the other versions, all the kings are thirty and one.
The following passage does not exist in the Hebrew. Joshua xxiv. 30: “Exei €0nxav.... Tis onpmepov uépas. “There they placed with him, on the tomb where they buried him, the flint knives with which he circumcised the children of Israel in Gilgal, when he led them out of Egypt, as the Lord commanded, and there they are unto this day.”
There is rather a long interpolation in the Greek at verse 33 of this same chapter. We shall merely give it in English: “In that day the children of Israel took the ark of God and carried it about amongst them, and Phinees exercised the office of priest instead of Eleazar, his father, until he died, and was buried in Gabaar, his native place. Then the children of Israel went each one to his own place and to his own city, and the children of Israel worshipped Astartes and Ashtaroth and the gods of the nations round about them. And the Lord delivered them up into the hands of Eglon, King of Moab, and he ruled over them eighteen years.”’
Judges xviii. 80. Kat TwvdOav vidos Inpcop vids Mavacoy x.t.X. This reading is in accordance with the Hebrew; but the Vulgate has for Manasseh, “Moysi.” The Hebrew is somewhat doubtful. for above the letters mrp, 2 18 suspended, thus myn. It has been affirmed, but whether upon good authority or not we cannot presume to say, that the Jews, in order to take away the reproach of their Lawgiver’s grandson being the first idolatrous priest among them, inserted the 5 for the purpose of changing the name from Moses to Manasseh.
1 Samuel ii. 22. The latter clause is wanting in most Greek copies: «al Sts cvvexoyudvo of viol adtod ueTa TOV yuvaikav Tov TaperTyKULaY Tapa Tas Bdpas THs oKnvis Too waptupiov. A story which the transcriber probably
considered too scandalous to be recorded.
PROLEGOMENON.
i Sam. iii. 13. “His sons made themselves vile.”” This is enumerated amongst the DDD 717N or Corrections of the Scribes; for P22 5777 o'99M, the original reading is said to have been Y. The Septuagint would certainly lead us to the conclusion that the text has been tampered with, for there we read, ét1 KaxadXoyovvtes Dedv ot viol avTod. The translator must have read for 87 or %, OTN.
1 Sam. xiii. 1. This verse is wanting in the Cod. Vaticanus, Tids évavtod SaovA ev TO Bactrevew atov, Kai dvo étn €Bacinevoev ev 'Iopagn.
1 Sam. xvii. 12—31. The whole of these verses are wanting in the Cod. Vat. They relate the incident of David, Jesse’s youngest son’s first meeting with Goliath of Gath, and the reproach which the youth received from his eldest brother: “ With whom hast thou left those few sheep in the wilderness? I know thy pride and the naughtiness of thine heart.” The omission in this case is of considerable importance, because there is no other record of this most interesting story. It will be found that the whole of the missing verses have been supplied in the Hexaglot Bible, with this foot-note, almost the only note in the entire work: ‘ Desunt hi versus (12—32) Cod. Vat., quem Tisch. secutus est. Lacunam explet Alex.” From this point in the Hexaglot Bible it will be found that all omissions of importance in the text of Tischendorf have been supplied from other sources, within brackets. Of this kind are :—
1 Sam. xvii. 41. The advance of the Philistine, preceded by his shield-bearer.
1 Sam. xvii. 50. David’s triumph over the Philistine with a sling and a stone.
1 Sam. xvii. 55 to xviii. 6. David’s interview with Saul, which was brought about by Abner; also Jonathan’s great love for David.
1 Sam. xviii., part of ver. 8 to end of ver. 11. Saul’s envy of David, and attempt to smite him with his javelin.
1 Sam. xviii. 17—19. Saul’s promise to give his eldest daughter, Merab, to David to wife; and his violation of that promise by giving her to Adriel, the Meholathite.
1 Sam. xviii. 29, 830. David’s behaving himself more wisely than all the servants of Saul before the princes of the Philistines, and the esteem which he gained thereby.
1 Sam. xxiii. 12. David’s enquiry of the Lord, “‘ Will the men of Keilah deliver me and my men into the hand of Saul?” And the Lord’s answer, “ They will deliver thee up.”
It will be observed that 1 Sam. xxiii. 29 of the English corresponds to chap. xxiv. 1 of the other languages.
1 Sam. xxix. 10 (part) is in most of the Greek copies, not in the Hebrew. Achish says to David: And depart
unto the place where I have appointed you, and put no mischievous imagination in thy heart, for thou art good in
my sight.
2 Sam.i.23. “Saul and Jonathan were lovely and pleasant in their lives, and in their death they were not divided.” Here we find a vain repetition in the Septuagint, @paios ov Sivaxeywpiopévor, and evmperrets SueywpicOncav, a double rendering of the Hebrew 17752 Nb mya.
2Sam. vii. 14. "Eyo écowas ate eis matépa kal avros eorat por eis viov, agreeing with the Hebrew ; cited, Heb.i. 5.
2 Sam. vii. 8. “Of it (viz., the brass which David took trom Hadadezer), Solomon made the brazen sea, and the pillars, and the lavers and all the vessels.”” Not in the Hebrew or in the other versions.
There is another addition in the Codex Vaticanus at 2 Sam. xi. 22: And David was wroth with Joab, and said to the messenger, Why did ye approach near to the city to fight? Did ye not know that ye would be smitten from the wall? Who
amote Abimelech, the son of Jerubbesheth? Did not a woman cast upon him a piece of a millstone from the wall, that he died in
XX1V THE HEXAGLOT BIBLE.
Thebes « Why went ye near the wall? This is an almost verbatim repetition of Joab’s charge to the messenger, verses 20, 21, and is evidently an interpolation.
There is another little addition at 2 Sam. xiii. 34: “And the watchman came and told the king, and said, [ see men from the way of Orona (?) from the hill-side.”’
At 2 Sam. xv. 18, there is a curious addition to the Greek, which looks like a double translation of the same passage: ‘And all his servants passed on beside him; and all the Cherethites, and all the Pelethites, and all the Gittites, six hundred men, which came after him from Gath, passed on before the king.” This is a fair translation of the Hebrew. The double reading of the Codex Vaticanus may be exhibited thus :—
lal “ lal lal nr a 4 lal 1. Kai wavres of maides avtov ava yelpa avtov maphyov, Kal mas 6 XercOi nal was 6 PereOi, nal wavres of
e oO
e oO
2. Kai was 6 Xacds maperopevero éxyouevos av’tTov, Kal Twas 6 XereOl kat was 6 PereOl, nai wavtes of
1. payntai éEaxoowo dvdpes, Kal mapjoav éml yeipa avrod.
2. TeBaiou oi éEaxdovor avdpes oi éXOovtes ois mrociv avTav.
We look to critical scholars for an explanation of their tolerance of this vain repetition.
2 Sam. xvi. 12. “It may be that the Lord will look upon my affliction, and that the Lord will requite me good for his cursing this day.” Here the present Hebrew reading is °21¥2, the Masorah has ‘2»Y2. The former, to render any sense at all, should be pointed ‘492, on my affliction; the latter signifies on my eye, i.e., on my tears. ‘The true reading, according to the DDD 7PN, is DIYB, on their affliction. The Greek has, Ei ras ido. Kupios év tH tTameweoer pov, Without doubt this is the correct rendering, and with this the English version agrees.
1 Kings ii. 35. After this verse there is a very long interpolation in the Codex Vaticanus, which we have transferred from the text to the foot of the Greek column. There is another, after verse 45 of the same chapter. Both relate to the wisdom, works, wealth and power of King Solomon. Some of the incidents are introduced into the text of the Hexaglot Bible, 1 Kings iv. 20, 21, 25, 26, to correspond to the other languages. Other incidents are recorded twice in the Septuagint. Thus 1 Kings iv. 34, And Solomon took the daughter of Pharaoh to him to wife, and brought her to the city of David, until he had finished the house of the Lord, and his own house, and the wall of Jerusalem. The same incident had been recorded in the same words after chap. ii. 85. The passage is found once in the Hebrew, chap. iii. 1. There is considerable confusion and repetition in the Greek.
1 Kings iv. of the Hebrew ends at verse 20. The versions take back fourteen verses of chap. v. of the Hebrew to chap. iv., hence there is a discrepancy in the numbering of verses, and 1 Kings v. 15 of the Hebrew is 1 Kings v. 1 of the versions; but still the verses correspond in the Hexaglot Bible, and 773, the last word of the Hebrew, verse 29, is identical with the last word of ver. 15 of the other languages: dpe, monte, mountains, Berge, montagne.
Several gaps have ‘been supplied in this book. Thus we have 1 Kings vi. 11—14, the Lord’s promise to Solomon, while he was building the temple, not to forsake Israel, if the divine statutes were observed.
1 Kings vi. 18, 21, 31—838, and vii. 22, 26, certain particulars respecting the construction of the temple.
1 Kings vii. 12,18. ‘Then spake Solomon, The Lord said, that he would dwell in the thick darkness; I have surely built thee an house to dwell in, a settled place for thee to abide in for ever.” (Compare 2 Chronicles vi. 1, 2.)
1 Kings viii. 538. Then Solomon spake about the house, when he had finished building it, he beheld the sun in the heaven. The Lord said, that he would dwell in darkness, build my house, a house fit for thyself to inhabit, while it is new (continually 2),
oehold, is this not written in the book of the Song? This looks like the interpolation of an uninspired transcriber.
PROLEGOMENON. XXV
—— en
1 Kings ix. 15—26. Here we have introduced the reason of the levy which king Solomon raised, the number of officers that presided over the building, the arrival of Pharaoh’s daughter to abide in the house which had been built for her, and the offerings of Solomon three times a year upon the altar.
1 Kings xi. 5. Solomon’s going after Ashtoreth, the goddess of the Zidonians, and after Milcom, the abomination of the Ammonites ; and, verse 23, the adversary whom God stirred up against him, viz., Rezon, son of Eliadah. who fled from (Tov BapapecO) his lord, Hadadezer, king of Zobah.
1 Kings xii. 17. “But as for the children of Israel which dwelt in the cities of Judah, Rehoboam reigned over them.”
1 Kings xiii. 26. Referring to the disobedient prophet: ‘‘ Therefore the Lord hath delivered him unto the lion, which hath torn him, and slain him, according to the word of the Lord, which he spake unto him. And he spake to his sons, saying: Saddle me the ass, and they saddled him.”
1 Kings xv. 5, 6. Where David is said to have done what was right in the sight of the Lord, “except in the matter with Uriah the Hittite; and there was war between Rehoboam and Jeroboam, all the days of his (their) life.” Also ver. 32: “ And there was war between Asa and Baasha, king of Israel, all their days.” All the above omissions have been supplied from the text of Stier and Theile.
On comparing 1 Kings xii. 1—19 with 2 Chron. x., it will be found that the two accounts are identical, with the exception of a few words. We have another example of this at 2 Kings xviii. 13—xx. 19 and Isaiah XxXvi.—xxxix. It is worthy of observation that the Greek translation of these chapters, which are nearly the same in the original, is so different, that one can only conclude that the translation was the work of different men. One translator would naturally have given but one translation, unless he loved to labour in vain.
1 Kings xii. 16. ‘‘ To your tents, O Israel.” The Hebrew has, Day TPOFIND. spor’? to thy tents, is said to be a correction of the Scribes for 7°7tON2 to thy God. The Greek copies have 7@ cxnvepata cov, thy tents, which is probably the correct rendering of the true text.
1 Kings xii., between verses 24 and 25, the Codex Vaticanus contains an account of the visit of Jetoboam’s wife to the prophet Ahijah, and also of Rehoboam’s impolitic reception of the deputation from the ten tribes, and their consequent revolt under Jeroboam. This again, is a vain repetition, for the latter event is recorded at verses 4—24, i. e., according to this Codex, twice in one chapter! The interpolated words are printed in small type at che foot of our Greek columns. The visit of Jeroboam’s wife to the prophet, is recorded at 1 Kings xiv. 1—20, the Greek of which is supplied within brackets in the Hexaglot Bible from the text of Stier and Theile.
1 Kings xvi. 22, Joram, brother of Tibni, is said to have died with him ‘not in the Hebrew). After verse 28, there
is an account of Jehoshaphat, his birth, parentage, accession to the throne of Judah, alliance with Ahab, King of
Israel, the breaking up of his ships at Ezion-geber, his death, and the accession of his son Jehoram. The account, which is not in the Hebrew, nor in the other versions, is evidently borrowed from 2 Chronicles xx. 31—37, and xxi. l.
1 Kings xix.10. Td @vovacrnpia cov Katécxarpav Kai tTovs mpopytas cov améxteivav ev poudaig, kus UToNENE- Aeympar eyo povwrtatos, Kai Cnrovor THv uynv pov. This agrees with the Hebrew; but St. Paul, at Rom. xi. 3, transposes the first two clauses, and for the third substitutes xay@ vmedeiPOnv povos, Kk. 7. 2.
1 Kings xix. 18. Kai xatadeieis, “thou shalt leave,” év Topayr értd xiduddas, TavtTa yovata & ovK wKAaCAY
wévu ~@ Baad. This differs from the Hebrew H7NWIN, “but I have left.” St. Paul gives the substance of the D1.
THE HEXAGLOT BIBLE.
es
ne ad > Af UY 0 » la lo) . . original in these words: Karédurov éuavt@ értaxicyidiovs avopas, oitives ovK Exaprpay yovu TH Baar. The princizel
difference here is the substitution of 77 Baad for to Bdad (Rom. xi. 4).
2 Kingsi. 18. After the record of Ahaziah’s death, particulars are given in the Septuagint, not in the Hebrew, of the accession and character of Jehoram. As the history is given again at chap. ii. 1—4, it is difficult to understand why it should be introduced here. Tischendorf has not explained or improved these matters. We will give the two narratives literatim et verbatim, as they stand in the Codex Vaticanus and in Tischendorf’s text.
2 Kings i. 18, Kai Iwpau vids AyaaB Bacidrever emt “Icpanr év Sapuapeia ern Sexadvo ev éren
» li. 1, Kal "Lwpdw vids AyaaB éBacirevoev év “Icparjn (iii. 2, wai éBaclrevce dwdexa ern) ev ere i. 18, oxtwxadexat@ "Iwoadat Bacikews ‘Tova’ Kal éroince TO Trovnpov évwmriov Kupiov, mAnv ody i. 1, oxctwxadexadt ‘Iwcapat Baciréas Iovda, iii. 2, cal évroinoe 76 Trovnpov év dpOarpors Kupiov, rrjv ov i. 18, @s of adedpoi adtod ovde ws puNTNP a’TOU, Kal atécTnoE Tas aTHAas TOD Baad as émoincey 6 lil. 2, @s 6 matHp avTov Kal ovx ws % NTN alTOdD, Kal peTéoTnCE TAS aOTHAAaS TOU Bdad As éemoincev 6 i. 18, watnp avtod Kai ouvétprpey adrds TAnV ev Tais duaptias olKov ‘IepoBoap ds éEnwapte Tov Iaparjr ill. 2, 7TaTHp avrov. . wv ev =e apaptia ‘IepoBoap vio NaBar bs éEnuapte tov Iopanr i 18, éxkodrAnOn, ovK améotn am’ avrov. lil. 38, €xoAANON, OVK aTréoTH aT’ avUTis.
2 Kings xxiii. 13. ‘“ The high places that were before Jerusalem, which were on the right hand of the Mount of Corruption.” It is pretended that the Jews, in detestation of Solomon’s idolatrous conduct, changed the name of the mountain TTwWaM 77, Mount of Olives, to MTWI 7, Mount of Corruption. The Septuagint and the German take mrmw as a proper name. The Vulgate has “offensionis;” the English, “corruption,” but the French version has “Ja montagne des oliviers.”
We pass on now to 1 Chroniclesi. 11—16. Here, in the genealogical table of Ham, many of the names are omitted in the Codex Vaticanus; so also, verses 17—24, in the genealogical table of Shem, #.c., all the names between Lud and Arphaxad. At ver. 27 of the same chapter, the words A@pdy, avrés, are left out before ABpadw. These have all been supplied, within brackets, in the Hexaglot Bible from Stier and Theile.
2 Chron. xxvii. 8, the words xai e’xoou kal révte éTaV tv Bacihevoas, K.T.r., are also supplied from the same source.
2 Chron. xxxv. 20. There is a long paragraph in the Cod. Vat. which is not found in the Hebrew, and which is probably taken from 2 Kings xxiii. 24—27. Josiah puts away the various abominations of Judah, that he may perform the words of the Book of the Law, which Hilkiah the priest found in the house of the Lord. Josiah, in an earnest manner, turns to the Lord, but the Lord determines notwithstanding, in consequence of the provocations of Manasseh, to remove Judah and Jerusalem out of his sight.
2 Chron. xxxvi. 2. Referring to Jehoahaz, “And his mother’s name was Hamutal, the daughter of Jeremiah of Libnah, and he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord, according to all that his fathers had done.” This passage is not found in the Hebrew or in the other versions, and is probably taken from 2 Kings xxiii. 31, 32.
2 Chron. xxxvi. 4. After the words, ‘“‘Necho took Jehoahaz to Egypt,” the Cod. Vat. has, “ And he died there, and gave the silver and gold to Pharaoh, but’ taxed the land to give the money according to the commandment of Pharaoh; he exacted the silver and gold of the people of the land, of every one according to his taxation, to give it
unto Pharaoh-Necho.” This passage is obviously borrowed from 2 Kings xxiii. 34, 35.
PROLEGOMENON.
2 Chron. xxxvi. 5. Here there is a long interpolation in the Cod. Vat. in reference to the coming up of
Nebuchadnezzar against Jehoiakim, and ‘of bands of the Chaldees, Syrians, Moabites and Ammonites, to destroy Judah
for the unpardonable crimes of Manasseh. This interpolation is taken from 2 Kings xxiv. 1—4. As so many of the parallel passages seem to have been intermixed in the Books of the Kings of Israel and Judah, the following table, copied by Horne from Professor Turner’s and Mr. Whittingham’s translation of Jahn, may be
conveniently and profitably introduced, to assist the reader in the further collation of these books :—
1 Chron. x. 1—12 and 1 Sam, xxxi. 2 Chron. v. 2; vii. 10 and 1 Kings viii. 2 Chron. xxv. 1—4, 11, and 2 Kings xiv.1—14, 19, xi. 1—9 2 Sam. y. 1—10. vil. 11—22 ,, ix. 1—9. 17—24, 27, 28 20. xi. 10—41 1 Sam. xxiii. 8—39. viii. ix. 15—28. xxvi. 1, 2 “5 Xly. 21), 22: xiii. 1—14 2 Sam. vi. 3—11. ix. 1—12 x. 1—13. xxvii. 1—3 _ _,, xv. 38—36. xiv. 1—7__.. v. 11—25. ix. 183—31 x. 14—39, xxviii. 1—4 Xvi. 2—4, xvii. vii. x. 1; xi.4 xii. 1—- 24, xxix, 1, 2 ss Xvi. 2; 3: xviii. viii. xii. 2—11 xiv. 25—28. XXxii. 9—21 ,, xviii. 17—37. xix. x. xvi. 1—6 KV. (22 xxxiil. 24—31 ,, soe, JIG).
xxl—3 xi. 1; xii. 30, xviii. xxii. 2—35. xxxiii. 1—10 ,, xxi. 1—10. et seq. xx. 81—37 » xxii. 41—50. pooh, Il, VA xx. 4—8 xxi. 18—22. xxi. 6 —10 2 Kings viii. 17—24. 8—28 »” XXil, xxi. pn ae KEV xxii. 2—6 vane 2629) xxxiv. 29—33 ,, xxiii. 1—20. 2 Chron. i. 3—13 1 Kings iii. 4—14. xxii. 10; xxiii. xxxy. 18, eee A Ry, 21 a Be eel 20—25 xxiii. 22, 23. ii » v. 15—32. xxiv. i—14 ,, lea 16: xxxvi. 1 PA xxiii. 29, 30. aia vale xxxvi. 2—4 ,, xxiii, 31—34.
The Greek of Ezra will be found to agree very closely with the Hebrew.
Of the Book of Ezra the Rev. T. H. Horne observes:—‘ The zeal and piety of Ezra appear, in this Book, in a most conspicuous point of view. His memory has always been held in the highest reverence amongst the Jews, who consider him a second Moses. Though not expressly styled a prophet, he wrote under the influence of the Divine Spirit, and the canonical authority of his book has never been disputed. He is said to have died in the hundred and twentieth year of his age, and to have been buried at Jerusalem. In Justin the Martyr’s conference with Trypho the Jew, there is a very extraordinary passage respecting the typical import of the Passover, cited by that father, in which Ezra, in a speech made before the celebration of the Passover, expounds the mystery of it as clearly relating to Christ, and which Justin concludes, was expunged from the Hebrew copies by the Jews at a very early date, as too manifestly favouring the cause of Christianity. The passage may be thus translated: ‘And Hzra said unto the people, This Passover is our Saviour and our Refuge; and if ye shall understand and ponder it in your heart, that we are about to humble Him in this sign, and afterwards shall believe in Him, then this place shall not be made desolate for ever, saith the Lord of hosts. But if ye will not believe in Him, nor hear His preaching, ye shall be a laughing-stock to the Gentiles.’” This passage is properly regarded as a Gentile interpolation rather than a Jewish expulsion.
Nehemiah iii. 33 of the Hebrew is iv. 1 of the Greek and the other versions, consequently iv. 6 of the Hebrew, at the end of page 246, vol. iii., is chap. iv. 12 of the versions, but the words correspond.
The following verses, wanting in the Vaticanus and in Tischendorf, are supplied within brackets in the Greek text of the Hexaglot from the text of Stier and Theile: Neh. vii. 68, 69, giving the number of horses, mules, camels and asses of the whole congregation. Neh. xi. part of 15, 16, part of 17, part of 18, 20, 21, part of 23, 24, 25, parts of 26 and 27, 28, 29, part of 30, part of 31, 32—34, being omissions from the list of the names of the children of Judah,
XXVill THE HEXAGLOT BIBLE. etc., who were dwelling at Jerusalem in the days of Nehemiah; Neh. xii. 2—6, portions of 7, 9, 25 and 387, the whole of 38, part of 39, 40, 41 and 42, omissions from the names of the Priests and Levites that went up with Zerubbabel to Jerusalem. The book of Esther, according to the original Hebrew and the modern versions, consists of ten chapters, and chapter x. of three verses only, ending with an account of the greatness and goodness of Mordecai; to this the Latin Vulgate adds ten verses and six chapters besides. ‘The additions, supposed to have been the work of some Hellenistic Jew, are
found in some of the Greek copies. In the Codex Vaticanus, and consequently in the text of Tischendorf, the first of
these addenda is placed at the head of chap. i. In the Hexaglot Bible this is printed, in common with the others, in
small type at the foot of the Greek column. The subject is Mordecai’s Vision. It may not be out of place here to give a translation of it: “In the first year of Nisan, the second of the reign of Artaxerxes, the great king; Mordecai, a Jew of the tribe of Benjamin, of Nebuchadrezzar’s captivity, dwelling in the city of Shushan, a great man, serving in the king’s palace, saw a vision. And, behold, there were voices and tumult, thunderings and earthquake, disturbance upon the earth. And, behold, two great dragons came forth prepared to struggle. And the voice of these was great, and at their voice every nation prepared for war, so as to war against the nation of the righteous. And, behold, a day of darkness and gloom, aifliction and anguish, evil and great disturbance upon the earth. And the whole of the righteous nation (the Latin, gens justorum, explains the Greek, may vos dixacov, which properly signifies ‘ every righteous nation,’) were disturbed, being afraid of their evils, and prepared themselves to perish, and cried out ‘unto God. And from their cry there came as it were from a little source a great stream, much water. Then light and the sun arose, and the humble were exalted, and the noble were devoured.” Hereupon follows the history of the conspiracy of Gabatha (Bigthana) and Teresh, two eunuchs of the king, keepers of the palace; Mordecai’s warning the king of the conspiracy ; the taking, examination, confession and execution of the conspirators; the record that was made of the event in the chronicles, and Haman’s resolve to take revenge on Mordecai and his people, for the death of his friends, the two eunuchs. These circumstances occupy chap. xi. xii. of the Latin Vulgate. Again, after verse 13 of chap. iii. of the Greek we have a copy of the letter sent by the king to all his provinces, commanding, at the instigation of Haman, the destruction of all Jews. This forms chap. xiii. 1—7 of the Latin Vulgate.
At the end of chap. iv. the prayers of Mordecai and Esther are severally recorded. Mordecai supplicates the Lord, the omnipotent King, whose will to save Israel none can resist, to save his people from the destruction which Haman had devised against them. Queen Esther, on the other hand, having stripped herself of her ornaments, beseeches the Lord God of Israel, saying: O Lord, thou alone art our King, help me, a solitary being, having no help, but in thee. She further prays that the counsels of their enemies may be turned against themselves. Her prayer closes with these words: O God, ruler over ail, hear the voice of the desperate (amnAmicpévev); deliver us from the hand of wicked- doers, and deliver me from my fear. This prayer forms chap xiv. of the Latin Vulgate. Next to this, in the Latin, these words are introduced, chap. xv. “ Et mandavit ei (haud dubium quin esset Mardocheus) ut ingrederetur ad regem, et rogaret pro populo suo et pro patria sua. Memorare (inquit) dierum humilitatis tue, quomodo nutrita sis in manu mea, quia Aman, secundus a rege, locutus est contra nos in mortem: et tu invoca Dominum, et loquere regi pro nobis, et libera nos de morte.” These words are not even in the Codex Vaticanus. The phrase haud dubium guin esset Mardocheus has a modern sound connected with it.
At the beginning of chap. v. of the Greek there is a rather graphic account of Esther’s timid entry into the
PROLEGOMENON. XX1X
presence of this terrible king, Artaxerxes or Ahasuerus. Esther is accompanied by two female attendants, upon one of whom she gracefully reclines, while the other supports her flowing train. With flushed cheeks and glistening eyes she presents herself before the king, who is clothed with robes glittering with gold and precious stones. At his terrible aspect, Esther grows pale with fear; she swoons. The king rising hastily from his throne reassures her; holds out the golden sceptre to her; she touches it; but after having exchanged a few words, Esther swoons again, to the great disconcertment of the king. The whole account bears the stamp of theatrical fiction, rather than of bible history. After verse 13 of chap. viii. we have, in the Greek, another letter of the king to all the provinces of his kingdom, annulling the decree against the Jews, and ordering the execution of Haman and his partisans, and the celebration
of the day under pain of death. This forms chap. xvi. of the Vulgate.
After chap. x. 3 of both versions, we have Mordecai’s recognition that these things are of God, and his
interpretation of his own dream. Esther is the little fountain, the two dragons are Mordevai and Haman, the enemies of Jerusalem are the assembled nations, and Israel the righteous people, who cried unto the Lord, and were delivered.
The whole of this has such an apocryphal and Jewish air about it, that one can only feel astonished how it could make its way into the Greek and [atin versions, and yet find no place in the Hebrew text.
Esther v. 1, 2 are wanting in the Codex Vaticanus. This is the generally received account of Esther's entry into the king’s presence, and of his holding out to her the golden sceptre. The simplicity and subdued tone of this, the Hebrew, and, without doubt, the genuine narrative, form a striking contrast to the elaborate working up, and high colouring of the apocryphal story which has just been noticed. We have restored the verses to the text, within brackets.
Esther ix. 5, 80. These verses are wanting in the Greek, and we have been unable to supply them from any of the Codices. This is unusual. We will therefore draw attention to the particular words. Ver. 5. “Thus the Jews smote : ll their enemies with the stroke of the sword, and slaughter and destruction, and did what they would unto those that hated them.” Ver. 30. “ And he sent the letters unto all the J ews, to the hundred twenty and seven provinces of the kingdom of Ahasuerus, with words of peace and truth.” The gaps in both these instances are marked by asterisks in the Greek text of the Hexaglot Bible.
Job ii. 9. Here we have rather a long interpolation in our Greek. In place of the words addressed to Job by his wife, M2) OTOY FR ANAND pra AY, “Dost thou still retain thine integrity ? curse God and die,” all the Greek copies, which we have seen, have the following: ‘ How long wilt thou persevere, saying, Behold, I will still endure a little time, waiting for the hope of my salvation? for, behold, thy memory hath disappeared from the earth; sons and daughters, the pangs and toils of my womb, for whom I have laboured with trouble in vain. And thou thyself, in rottenness of worms, sittest passing the night in the open air, while I, a fugitive and slave from place to place, and from house to house, await the setting of the sun, that I may rest from my labours and the pangs which torment me; but say something to the Lord, and die.” These are pathetic words, and may have been the actual utterance of Job’s wife ; it is only the last clause which gives them the appearance of an interpolation, viz., elrov TL pha eis Kupiov kai TeXevTa ; say something to the Lord, and die. Does not this look like an evasion of the difficult expression OM 7B? The difficulty of this passage seems to have been universally felt. The Greek has, say something to or against the Lord; the Latin “benedic Deo;” the English “curse God ;” the German “fegne @ott;” the French “ maudis Dieu.” Some suppose the meaning to be bless idols. Probably, the real meaning is, “ bless God, and die ;” put an end to your
sufferings.
THE HEXAGLOT BIBLE. :
There is another interpolation at the end of the book, chap. xlii. 17. The words are as follow: “ But it is written that he shall rise again with those whom the Lord raiseth again. This man is related, in a book written in Syriac, to have been a sojourner in the land of Auris, on the boundaries of Idumea and Arabia. His first name was Jobab. Having taken an Arabian wife, he begat a son whose name was Ennon. But he himself was, on the father’s side, son of Zara one of the sons of Esau, and on the mother’s side, of Bosorah; so that he was the fifth from Abraham. And these are the kings who reigned in Edom, over which territory he also ruled; first Balak, son of Beor, and the name of his city was Dennaba; and after Balak, Jobab called Job. And after him Ason, who was governor of the territory of the Temanites; and after him, Adad, son of Berad, who cut off Madian in the land of Moab, and the name of his city was Gethaim. And the friends, who came to him, were Eliphaz, of the sons of Esau, king of the Temanites ; Bildad, tyrant of the Shuhites, Sophar, king of the Naamathites.” If this account be genuine, Job must have been a great man, and not only a great man, but in some respects, as fortunate as he was afflicted and patient. Three kings came to condole with him, and that after he had lost his all! Rather different this from the experience expressed in the Latin proverb :—
“ Donec eris felix, multos numerabis amicos, Tempora si fuerint nubila solus eris.”
The Greek story of the three kings is irreconcilable with the interpolation at chap. 1.9, so that, regardless of other considerations, it may be safely pronounced a myth.
Job xix. 20. “For I know that my [tedeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth,” etc. A precious passage of Holy Writ, but somewhat difficult to comprehend. The English Version supplies no fewer than seven words, three of them, viz., day, worms, body, of paramount importance. All the versions understand the words to refer to the resurrection. The Septuagint translate Oida yap 6Tu devvads éoTw 6 éxdveW pe péd\rOV ETT YAS ; “For I know that a daysman exists who will deliver me on earth.” The Vulgate has, In novissimo die de terra surrecturus sum; “I shall rise from the earth at the last day;” but the Hebrew has D9), he shall rise. OS 372 TY ATs) which the English Version renders, “And though after my skin worms destroy this body;” the Septuagint translate avacThicat TO Sépya pov 70 avavTdobv Tabra; ‘‘To raise my skin which endures these things;” Vulgate, Et rursum circumdabor pelle mea; “And again I shall be surrounded with my skin.” In this sense ‘7? is used, Isaiah xxix. 1,
Ps. xxii. 17. Luther has, und werbde darnad) mit diefer meiner Haut umgeben werden (be surrounded). The French follows
the English, “ce corps aura été rongé.” The last clause, IR 9D 19D, is rendered by the Septuagint, wdvra Sé pou
cuvteTédeotas év Kokm@; “All things are accomplished in my bosom;” Vulg., Reposita est hac spes in sinu meo; “This hope is placed in my bosom.” The French has, Mes reins se consument dans ce désir; “ My reins are consumed with this desire.” Here we have avery good commentary on the English, ‘Though my reins be consumed within me.”
The Psalms. The first point, to which we have to invite attention, is the different division of the lPsalms in the Hebrew and the Greek.
The difference commences at Psalm x. of the Hebrew, which forms part of Ps. ix. of the Greek. After this, Psalm xi.—cxili. of the Hebrew,=Psalm x.—cxii. Greek. Psalms exiv., cxv. Hebrew = Psalm exiii. Greek. Psalm exvi. Hebrew, = Psalm cxiv., exv. Greek. Psalm cxvii—cxlvi.=cxvi.—cxlv. Psalm exlvii. =cxlvi., cxlvii.
The Greek division is wrong, for Psalm ix. was obviously one of the alphabetical Psalms, consisting of twenty-two verses ; although we have it now in an imperfect state. We have made the Greek uniform with the Hebrew and
the other versions. Again, in many instances, the heading of a Psalm, to which, it appears, the Jews
PROLEGOMENON.
bave attached considerable importance, is numbered verse 1 in the Hebrew, and in a few instances verses 1, 2; not so in the versions. Hence arises a discrepancy in the numbering of the verses of many of the Psalms. The Hebrew will appear to have an extra verse in Psalm 1i.—ix!) xii.) Xi. Xvill., Xix.—xXxXll., XKX., XXXI., XXKIV, XXXVI, XXXVilL., xli1., xliv.—xlix., li., lii. (2 verses) liii., liv., (2 verses) lv.—lix., lx. (2 verses) lxi—lxv., Ixvu.—lxx., Ixxv.—lxxvil., ]xxx., Ixxxi., lxxxili.—lxxxv., lxxxviii., lxxxix., xcii. eviii., cxx.— cxxxiv., cxli., cxlii. In every instance, however, it will be found, that, though differently numbered, the verses at the end of the several columns of the Hexaglot Bible correspond.
The titles to the Psalms are deserving of special notice, as they have presented no trifling difficulty in the way of Biblical students; and it is hoped, that the annexed list of titles, as they appear in the various languages, will furnish an illustration, both, of the facility of comparison afforded by the arrangement of the texts of the Hexaglot Bible, and of the advantage which the comparison itself secures from the light which one language reflects upon the other.
Six of the Psalms bear the title of OND viz., xvi. lvi—lx. The Greek has Yrndoypadia, “ an inscription on a pillar ;” Latin, Tituli inscriptio. Gesenius says that DMD is the same as 2MD9, :omething written. Dr. Tregelles calls
this a very bold conjecture. But Gesenius is borne out by the Greek and Latin versions. Luther alone derives O93 from mn> gold; for he has ein giilben Rleinod. The English and French throw no light upon the title. If O92 be not
here employed in the sense of 2D, to which conclusion the old Greek and Latin versions would lead the modern
student ; then we must be permitted to make another, and perhaps bolder conjecture, viz., that the Greek translator had before him a text containing a different reading, probably the correct one, 24129, and that the 2 was subsequently converted into © by ignorant or careless transcribers. We cannot agree with Horne’s suggestion, borrowed from D’Herbelot, that the six Psalms which bear the title of “ Michtam,”’ or golden, are so called on account of their having been, on some occasion or other, written in letters of gold, and hung up in the sanctuary.
Forty-five of the Psalms are entitled 7\10, Song or Poem, viz. ili.—vi., vill, ix., Xil., Xlll., XV., XIX.—xXxXiV., XXiX.—-xXXxi., XXXVii., xxxix.—xli., xlvii., xlix.—li., lxii., lxiv., Lxxiii., Ixxv., lxxvii., lxxix., lxxx., lxxxii., lxxxiv., lxxxv., octhiece Cl., CixX., CX., CXXx1x.—cxlii.
Psalm xlvi. is entitled 7*w, “A song,” rendered in all the versions as the equivalent of 7}.
Seven Psalms bear the title W 7219, viz., xxx., lxv., lxvii., lxviii., lxxv., xxvi., xcii. adpos @67, Psalmus cantici ; Gin Pfalmlied, appear to us to express the real meaning, viz., a Psalm to be sung, or a Poem set to music. The English, “‘ A Psalm or Song,” and the French ‘‘ Psaume ow Cantique” are clearly incorrect.
Five Psalms are entitled “iar 7w, “ A song adapted to poetry,” or, as Gesenius well expresses it, “adapted to rhythmical numbers.” These are Psalms xlviii., lxvi., lxxxiii., 1xxxviii., eviii. The Greek has (267 \adwyod, the ode or subject of the song; the term 5: clearly referring to the words of the Psalm which follows. The English and French renderings, Song or Psalm, Cantique ow Psaume, would require the addition of ‘SX, or, in the original; moreover, if the expressions be synonymous, one of them must be superfluous throughout the book.
Four Psalms have the title of mpm (T’phillah) pocevyy, Oratio, Prayer, Gebet, Pritre; viz., xvil., Ixxxvi., xc., cil. Properly speaking, these are not yradoi, they are rpocevyai. The whole, however, come under the general appellation of anol, which term itselfis borrowed from the Hebrew pbrn 72D (Sepher T’hillim), the name given to the entire book, and said to be taken from Psalm cxlv., a magnificent Psalm, and the only one which bears the title mon praise.
Fifteen of the Psalms cxx.—cxxxiv., bear the title of Mivyt ww (Shir Hammaghaloth). Upon this title, the versions ‘289 rév avaBafuav, Canticum graduum, A song of degrees, Gin Lied im hibern Chor, Cantique de Mahaloth
XXXii : THE HEXAGLOT BIBLE.
throw very little light. Horne says, “These Psalms are supposed to have derived this name from their being sung, when the people came up, either to worship in Jerusalem at the annual festivals, or from the Babylonish captivity. The Jews went up to Jerusalem, which, it will be recollected, stood on a steep, rocky ascent, in large companies, after the oriental manner, and perhaps beguiled their way by singing these Psalms. For such an occasion, Jahn remarks, the appellation of ‘ascensions’ was singularly adapted, as the inhabitants of the east, when speaking of a journey to the metropolis of their country, delight to use the word ascent.” Gesenius argues, that this supposition is far from the truth, inasmuch as the ascent to Jerusalem is mentioned in two only out of the fifteen Psalms (cxxii., cxxvi.) To refute the hypothesis that they were sung by the Israelites on their return from exile, he refers to Ezra vii. 9, from whence it appears that the ascent occupied no less than four months. We assume in this instance, that the silence of Tregelles implies consent to Gesenius’s view, and with his view we fully concur. These Psalms are so called, says Gesenius, “‘ because of the metre and rhythm found in them; the sense goes on progressively ; the first or the last words of a preceding sentence are often repeated at the beginning of those that follow.” As illustrations he cites Psalms cxxi. and exxiv. We are certainly disposed to think that Psalm cxxi. may be properly called a Song of degrees, because it rises from step to step, until it reaches a climax. A man in deep distress cries, “I will lift up mine eyes unto the hills, from whence cometh my help, my help from the Lord, which made heaven and earth.” The reply follows: “ He will not suffer thy foot to be moved ; He will keep thee, preserve thee (7. e. thy body) ; preserve thy soul, preserve them both for evermore.” This is the climax.
Twelve Psalms bear the title of Spine (root U2), xxxii., xlii., xliv., lii—lv., Lxxiv., lxxviii., lxxxviii., lxxxix., exlii. Gesenius considers the easiest explanation of this term to be a didactic poem. The LXX. render the word by Svveows; Latin, Intellectus; German, Eine Unterwetjung. These combined give us a clue to the true sense. The ain is something that makes wise, is understood, taught. What is that? We have the answer in the Greek cwveats, from cuvinms, the first meaning of which is, “to put together.” Thus ctveows is a putting together, or a composition. This word will make sense in every case. The English and French, Maschil or Maskil, throw no light upon the subject.
Ten of the Psalms are entitled mT CV1., CX1., CXil., cxiii., cxxxv., cxlvii—cl. In these instances, the English and French follow the Hebrew, by making the title part of verse 1.
The word 229 is used before 177? alone in twenty-six cases; Psalms Xi., Xili., Xiv., XVill.—XXi., XXXI., XXXVi., xl., xli., xlii., xliv., xlvii., xlix., li., lit, Lxiv.—lxvi., Ixviii., lxx., Ixxxv., cix., cxxxix., cxl.
As to the meaning of the term, it is difficult to decide. The Greek has Eis 76 rédos; Latin, In finem; English, To the Chief-Musician ; French, Au Maitre-chantre. Gesenius says that the opinion of Kimchi, Rashi and Aben Ezra is the best which has been advanced, viz., To the precentor. This is highly probable, for it explains eds 76 TéXos, in the sense of to the authority, as that of a superintendent; although it must be confessed the Latin expression “In finem,” looks a little like a misconception of the Greek rédos. The English and French are correct according to this view. Luther has vorjufingen, evidently taking the word M232 as the Syriac form of the Infinitive. Gesenius thinks that this is excluded by the article implied after the prefix. This exclusion, however, depends upon the acceptance or the rejection of the vowel-points as they now stand.
M29? is used: 1.—Before M3222 in six instances; viz., Psalm iv., vi., liv., lv., lxvii., lxxvi.; once also before nin Dy, Psalm lxi. The Greek has Ev duvow; Latin, In hymnis; the German has, %uf Saitenfpielen, On stringed instruments ; and this is probably ie meaning.
/
PROLEGOMENON.
2.—Once before MIMI ON, Ps. v. This is an ambiguous term. Gesenius conjectures that mr is for mr, from “om to bore, and suggests “a pipe or flute,” because perforated. This is far-fetched. The Greek, Latin and German agree in treating the word as a derivative from Om to receive as an inheritance. ‘Vrrép THS KAnpovowovans, Pro ea quae hereditatem consequitur, §lir Das Erbe Luther’s for the inheritance is the most intelligible. As usual the English throws no light upon the title. But here, as in many other instances, the French has ‘‘ Psaume de David, envoyé au Maitre-chantre pour étre chanté sur Nehiloth.” This certainly makes the title in general a little clearer than the English.
3.—Three times before MAaM Yy, viii., Ixxxi., xxxiv. Gesenius says, “A kind of musical instrument, either used by the people of Gath, or as it were éziAnjwov; as used in the vintage with the songs of the wine-dressers and press-treaders.” The Greek has ‘Tvrep rév Anvev ; the Latin, Pro torcularibus, ‘‘ For the vintage, the wine-press.” We have no doubt that any one who will take the trouble to read the three Psalms which bear this title, will concur with us in the view that these convey the trae meaning; viz, To the precentor, a song of praise of David for the vintage, or the blessings of Providence in general. We would just suggest, that as 111? Psalm viii., and ADS? Psalm Ixxxi., are
rendered in the English version, of David, of Asaph, so T7P2R? Psalm Ixxxiv., should be rendered of, not for, the
sons of Korah.
4.—Three times before D3Wiw-OY, xlv., Ixix., xxx. Gesenius explains this to bean instrument of music resembling
a lily. Mr. Harmer and others doubt this, and suggest that “the lily ” is the title of the Psalm. The Greek and Latin furnish us with a very different idea, inasmuch as they associate the word: with 72W “to change.” ‘Ymep tav ddAoLwOn- gowevov; Latin, Pro iis qui commutabuntur. Luther has Bor den Mofen. The English rendering is unintelligible. Perhaps the meaning is, To the Precentor, a composition of the sons of Korah, a nuptial-song (ein Brautlied) to be accompanied (pour étre chanté) on the instrument called the Shoshannim.
-.—Once before 22-99 Psalm liii. Here the Greek has i7ep pacré0, Latin, pro Maeleth; English and French, Mahalath. But the question is, what does MOM mean? Gesenius says, @ harp; others say, a aance; Luther has im Ghor um einander vorzufingen. Possibly the meaning is, To the Precentor, a composition of David to be uceumpumed on the harp, or (according to Luther), to be sung antiphonally.
6. Once before M9Yy Psalm xlvi. Here, the Greek has émép t&v xpudiwr, as if from DY to conceal; Latin, pro areanis, “about hidden things.” The German has yon der Sugend, “of youth,” as if the abstract substantive of D2Y. The sense seems to be, To the Precentor, a song cf the sons of Korah, about the hidden things, viz., of God.
7.—Once before 12? misdy, Ps. ix. Here we meet with a very perplexing title. Tregelles says: “Some take 722 asa name of one of David’s enemies, others regard 5 as servile, and 72 as the proper name of a Levite, as in 1 Chron. xv. 18.” (But in this case the pointing should be 73%.) ‘Some moderns suppose 72? 799 to be the name ot a musical instrument. Better read jz? MD>Y.” So far we agree; but as to the rendering, With virgins’ voice for the Joys, to be sung by them, to us it appears sheer nonsense. The Greek has imép tv xpudiwy Tov viov; the Latin, pro occultis filii, about the hidden things of the son; evidently reading myaby as from 02Y, to hide, and supplying 9Y. Thus the sense would be, To the Precentor, on the hidden things of the Son, a Psalm of David.
8.—Twice before PIOW, Ps. vi., xii. There seems to be no doubt that this was an instrument with eight strings.
9.—Twice before POAT, Dy, Ps. lxii. 1, lxxvii. 1; once before yunaq), Ps. xxix. 1. The Greek, Latin and German treat this as a proper name. Gesenius says, “ Proper nawe of a Levite set by David as chief over a choir.”
»M
XXXIV THE HEXAGLOT SIBLE.
Twenty-six Psalms have no title in Hebrew: i, ii., x., xxiv., xxxili., xliil., lxxi., xci., xcil.—xcix., Civ., cv., cvii., civ.—cix., Cxxxvi., cxxxvii. The Talmud calls these Orphan Psalms. Some of them, however, have titles in the Greek and Latin, viz., Psalm lxxi.. Té Aavid, vidv "IwvadaB8 Kai tov Tp@Twv aixwarwticbévtov, Psalmus David filiorum Jonadab et priorum captivorum; “A Psalm of David, of the sons of Jonadab and the first captives.” Ps. xciii., Eis thv jpépav tov tmpocaBBatov, te KaT@Kicta 7 yh, aivos eons T@ Aavid, Laus Cantici ipsi David in die ante sabbatum, quando fundata est terra; “A Hymn of praise of David, on the day before the Sabbath when the world was founded.” Ps. xcix., Parpos t@ Aavid; Psalmus ipsi David. Ps. cv., evil., cxiv., cxvi.—cxix., CXX., CXXXVi., AAAnAoWa, Alleluia. Ps. exxxvii., Té Aavid ‘Iepeuiov; Psalmus David Jeremie. Thus the Greek and Latin translators have supplied or restored thirteen out of the twenty-six titles to the Hebrew “ Orphan Psalms.”
To the Hebrew titles of Psalms cxxxviii., cxlvii., and exlviii., the Greek adds, Ayyaiouv cai Zayapiov. Ps. cxlii., the Greek adds, 6re avtov 6 vids Kateduoxes, when his son was persecuting him; to which the Latin adds, Absalom. Ps. cxliv., 1177; the Greek and Latin add, mpos tov Toddd, adversus Goliath. Ps. exlvi., the Greek and Latin add, Ayyatov kal Zaxapiov, Aggei et Zacharie. So much for the titles to the Psalms.
Hight of the Psalms are arranged in alphabetical order, the order being now more or less complete. These are Psalms ix., xXv., XXXIV., XXXVIL., CXi., CXii., cxix., and cxlv.
Of Psalm ix., every clause of verses 2, 3 commences with k, ver. 4 with 2, ver. 6 with 4, ver. 7 with 7, ver. 8— 11 with 5, ver. 12 with +, ver. 14 with n, ver. 16 with u, ver. 18 with», ver. 19 with 5, ver. 13 again with 5, ver. 15 with 5, ver. 17 with 3, ver. 20 with », ver. 21 with w. The acrostic, if it may be so called, is imperfect.
Of Psalm xxv. the letter > is hidden in 73, after 8 ver. 2; yis found in the middle of ver. 5, 7 takes the place of p ver. 18, 5 is affixed at the end, and, if we may form an opinion from the context, is an interpolation.
Ps, xxxiv. is regular, except that ) is found in the middle of ver. 5, and 5 is again subjoined.
Ps. xxxvil. Every alternate verse begins with a letter of the Hebrew alphabet, as far as ver. 27. At ver. 29 8 takes the place of. y; then ver. 380 begins with 5, ver. 32 with x, ver. 34 with p, ver. 35 with 7, ver. 37 with w, 7 is concealed behind 4 at ver. 59.
Psalms cxi. and exii. are antiphonal; each verse consists of two clauses, each clause commencing with a consecutive letter of the alphabet; but the last two verses consist of three clauses each. In these there is no irregularity.
Ps. cxix., as is well known, contains 176 verses, é.e., 8 times 22, the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet ; the first eight verses begin with x, the second with 2, and so on without any interruption.
The last of the alphabetical Psalms is cxlv.; this is perfect also with the exception of one verse, viz., ver. 14, which should commence with 9. Curiously enough, this verse is actually found in the Septuagint: [Tvotds Kupuos év trois Noyors
adtod, Kal bovos év maot Tos &oyous adtod. The Hebrew of this is obviously: YWYS PB O97) YIIT2 TIT Py2.
“The Lord is faithful in his words, and merciful in all his works.” That this or a similar versicle was in existence when
the Septuagint translation was made, is highly probable. It is now wanting in the Hebrew.
Finally, there is Ps. cli., which, as it finds a place in the text of Tischendorf, and we have taken the liberty to reject, we feel bound to insert here :—
Udtos 6 Warwos iSudypados eis David Kai &-wOev Tod apiOuod, 6te Eeuovopaynoe TO Todad.
Muxpos junv ev tois adedpois rou, Kal vewtepos ev TO olkw TOD TaTPds jou’ ETTOLWaLVOY TA TPOBATA TOU TaTpOS
, a 3 / if lal “ * ov, aL YelpEs Wou Errolnaay Opyavov, Kai ot SaxTvAOL wou Hpuocav Wadtypiov. Kai Tis avayyedel TO KUIUD LOU; AUTOS
PROLEGOMENON.
Kupuos. avtos eicaxover* avtos eEamréoteine Tov ayyedov avTod, Kai Hpé we ex TOV TpoBaTwV TOD TaTpOS mou, Kul éxpiC me €v TO EXalw THs yploews avTov. Oi adeApot pov Kadoi Kal peyddoL, Kal ovK evdoKnoev ev adTois Kupuos. "EEFAGor €is TUVaVTNTW TH GdOPUA, Kal ETLKATHPATATO WE év TOIS ELdWdOLS AUTOD' eyw SE GTraTduEVOS THY Tap’ a’TOD UdxaLpas atrekehadica avrov, Kat Hpa dverdos €& viav Topann. a
Translation. ‘This Psalm was written by David himself, although beyond the number, when he fought in single combat with Goliath.
“JT was little amongst my brethren, and very young in the house of my father; I used to keep my father’s sheep; my hands made an organ, and my fingers fitted up a psaltery, and who shall tell my lord? The Lord himself, he heareth. He sent his angel, and took me from my father’s sheep, and anointed me with the oil of his anointing. My brethren were fair and great, yet the Lord did not take pleasure in them. I went out to meet the Philistine, and he cursed me by his idols. But I, having unsheathed his sword, beheaded him, and took away the reproach from the children of Israel.”
This does not read like one of the Psalms of David; but yet it is found in the Syriac, Arabic and Ethiopic versions, as well as in the Septuagint.
We proceed to notice passages in the Psalms cited in the New Testament, and a few other points worthy of attention.
Ps. ii. 1, 2. ‘Ivari ébpvakav evn Kai aol euedétnoav Kevd; tapéotncav oi Baordeis THs ys Kal of apxovTes auvnyOnoayv éi TO avTO Kata TOV Kupiou kai kata Tod Xptotod avrov, agreeing with the Hebrew ; cited verbatim, Acts iv. 25, 26.
Ps. ii. 7. Yios wou ef ov, ey orpepov yeyévvnka ce, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, Acts xiii. 33 and Heb. i. 5.
Ps.ii.9. IToupavets avtods év paBdm ovdnpa, as cKedos Kepapéws ouvTpipers avTovs, agreeing with the Hebrew ; cited in substance, Rev. ii. 27.
Ps. vill. 3 (2). “Ore ek ordmatos vytriwv kat Onralovtwv Katnpticw aivov, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, Matt. xxi. 16.
Ps. vii.4—6. Ti dori dvOpwrros Ore pipvnoKn avTov mTavTa uTeTakas UTO TOY Tod@V avTOU, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, Heb. ii. 6—8.
Ps. xiv. 2—4. At Rom. iii. 10—19 we meet with a long citation from various parts of the Old Testament, which
are placed together in the Greek and Latin versions of Psalm xiv. Taos avewypévos .. . of0ardpuov adrav, Sepulchrum
patens... ante oculos eorum. The words of the New Testament agree literally with those of the Vatican edition of the Old Testament; but as they do not exist in the Hebrew, not even in Origen’s Hexapla, there is reason to suspect that the passage was foisted into the Psalm from the Epistle. |
Ps. xvi. 8—11. Ilpowpoyny tov Kupsov éveirriov wou bia mavtos .... tepmvorntes év TH de&a cov eis TéXos, agreeing with the original; cited, Acts 11. 25—28.
Ps. xvi. 10. Ov daceis tov daudv cov ideiv SuapOopav, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, Acts xiii. 35.
Ps, xviii. 2. Edi én’ avrov, cited, but only in sense, Heb. ii. 18, “Eye écouar Terroibas én’ ate.
Ps. xviii. 35. Kai 9 raideia cov avapbwoé fee €ls TENOS,
Kai % taideia cov avtTn pe didakev.
We meet here with a double rendering, the former from the Septuagint, the latter from Theodotion.
THE HBX AGLOT BIBLE.
Ps. xvili. 49. Aud todo eEoporoyjoouci cor ev Overt (Kiipie), kai TH dvdpati cov ade, agreeing with the Hebrew ; cited, Rom. xv. 9.
Ps. xix. 4. Els racav thy viv c&jrOev 6 POdyyos aitav, Kai eis TA TépaTa TIS CiKoUMEVNS TA PjyaTa av’ToV, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, Rom. x. 18.
Ps. xxii. 1. ‘O Oeds 6 Oeds pov, mpdoyes pou iva Tl éyxaténureés pe; “My God, my God, look upon me, why hast thou forsaken me?” Here we have a double rendering of the Hebrew sos cbs; cited, Matt. xxvii. 46, but with Oeé wou for 6 eds. St. Mark has (chap. xv. 34) ‘O Oeos pou 6 Beds pov els TU éyKaTénLTEs [ME.
Ps. xxii. 18. Atewepicavto ta iwatiad pov éavtois Kal emt Tov iwaticpov pov éEBadrov KAAjpov, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited by St. Matthew, chap. xxvii. 35, but rejected there by Tischendorf and Alford.
Ps. xxii. 22. Aunyijoopas 7d dvoud cou Tois adeAots pou, ev weow exKAnolas vuvyow oe, agreeing with the Hebrew ; cited, Heb. ii. 12, but the Apostle has admayyero for dunynoopas.
Ps. xxix. 1. Here we have a double rendering in the Vulgate as well as in the Septuagint :—
Evéycate T@ Kupio, vioi Oeod, évéyxate T® Kupiw viovs Kpiav, Afferte Domino, filii Dei, afferte Domino filios arietum. It is obvious that the Hebrew O>N ‘22 is translated both ‘sons of God” (vocative) and ‘‘sons of rams” (objective). The-former is the true reading of the Septuagint. Ps. xxxii. 1, 2. Maxdpioe dv apéOncav ai avouiat Kal av érexadvpOnoay ai duaptia. Maxdpwos avnp @ od mi
Aoyicntat Kvpos awaptiav, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, Rom. iv. 7, 8.
Ps. xxxiv. 12—17. Tis éotw dvOpwiros 6 Oédav Swnv mpoowrrov o¢ Kupiov émi mowvvtas Kaxd, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited substantially, 1 Pet. iii. 10—12.
Ps. xl. 6. Ovctav kai mpoodopav ov nOédnaas x.T.X., cited Heb.x.5—7. The Hebrew has ‘DOD Dk, Vulg. aures autem perfecisti mihi. Gesenius says, “ears hast thou digged for me,” a poetical and also a stronger expression
for %) oa Tis, “thou hast opened the ear for me,” i.e., ‘ thou hast revealed this to me.” “ But,” Tregelles adds,
“does not this refer to the law in Exod. xxi., relative to the servant whose ear had been bored, and who was thus made a servant for ever?” Weare disposed to think that it does. How can we account otherwise for the cua 8é xatnpticw po of the Septuagint and of the Apostle? The Syriac has wihaaX\ —» l-y2 ‘« Thou hast clothed me with a body ;” Vulg., Corpus aptasti mihi; German, Den Leib aber haft du mir gubereitet; French, Tu m’as formé un corps; all denoting that Christ Jesus, who was in the form of God, took upon Him the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of man. A body was prepared Him, and thus His ears were pierced as well as His hands, His feet, His side.
Ps. xli. 9. ‘O éoOiav dprovs pov éuaydduvev ém’ éué mrepvicpov. This passage is thus rendered by St. John, chap. xill. 18, 'O tpwywv per’ éuod Tov dptov, émipev én’ ews rv mrépvav avrod.
Ps, xliv. 22. “Oru &vexev cov Oavatoducba odnv TH iyuépav, edroyicOnuey ws mpdBata chayfs, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, Rom. viii. 36.
Ps. xlv. 6, 7. ‘O Opévos cov, 6 Oebs, eis alava . .. Tapa Tovs weTOXoUS cov, agreeing with the Hebrew ; cited, Heb. i. 8, 9.
Ps. li. 4. “Oras dv dixawwOjs ev Tots Aoyous cov Kai vices év TS KpiverOal ce, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited,
Rom ii 4
PROLEGOMENON.
Ps. lv. 22. ‘Emipperov emi Kupiov tiv pepruvav cov, cai avtos oe Siabpérer, agreeing with the Hebrew; adapted by St. Peter (1 Ep. v. 7).
Ps. lxviii. 18. AvaBas eis ios yyparwrevoas aiywarwaiay, éhaBes Sopata ev avOpom@, agreeing with the Hebrew ; cited thus by St. Paul, Eph. iv. 8, AvaBas ... . éwxev Sopuata tois avOpa@rrots.
Ps, Ixix. 9,10. ‘O GijXos Tob oixou cou Katépayé pe, Kai of dverdtopoi TAY dvetdifovTwV ce érrérrecoV em” eue, agreeing with the Hebrew; the former clause cited, John ii. 17, but with catafdyeras for xatépaye, the latter cited by St. Paul, Rom. xv. 3.
Ps. lxix. 22. DTevnOnta ) tpdrefa a’tav évotriov abtav eis Tayida, Kal eis avtamddocw Kal eis cxavSanov, agreeing with the Hebrew; but St. Paul has (Rom. xi. 9), Tevn@jrw 4 tpamefa aitav eis Twayida Kai eis Onpav Kal eis oxdvSadov
\ >] > , b) aA Kal eis avTaTrooopLa avTots.
Ps. lxix. 23. SxwticOjtwcayv of opFarpol abtav Tod wn Brérew, Kat Tov vOToy avtav Siatravros obvKaprpov, agreeing
with the Hebrew; cited, Rom. xi. 10.
Ps. Ixix. 25 (26), and cix. 8. Devn@jtw 7 éravds abtav jpnwopmévn, Kal év tols oKnvopacw avTav pn goto 6 catouxov. This agrees with the Hebrew. At Acts i. 20, St. Luke applies this general prophetic denunciation to the particular case of Judas, PevnOntw 7 émavdus adtod Epnuos Kal un EoTw 6 KATOLKOY eV AUTH.
Ps. Ixxvili. 2. ‘Avoifm év mapaBonrals 7o oTdua wou, POéyCouar mpoBAnpaTa an’ apyqs, agreeing with the Hebrew ; paraphrased thus by St. Matthew, chap. xii. 35, "Epedfouar Kkexpuppéva amo cataBoryjs; “I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation.” ‘The English Version, following the Textus Receptus, adds, “of the world” (xocjov), rejected by Tischendorf and Alford.
Ps. Ixxviil. 24. ‘Aptov ovpavod édwxev avdrois, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited by St. John, chap. vi. 31, Aprov é« TOU ovpavod, K.T.A.
Ps. Ixxxix. 20 and 1 Sam. xiii. 14. The words are not given in the New Testament, but they are referred to by St.’Paul, Acts xiii. 22, Etpov Aaveid tov tod Iecoat, dvépa kata tiv Kapdiav mou, os Toujoet TavTa TA OedAnpaTa pov.
Ps. xci. 11, 12. “Oru tois adyyédous avtov évtedeirar, «.7..., “For he shall give his angels charge over thee,” agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, with some omissions, Matt. iv. 6.
Ps. xciv. 11. Kupwos yweone tovs Siadoyiopovs Tov avOpwirev OTL eicl paras, agreeing with the Hebrew. St. Paul, at 1 Cor. iii. 20, changes avOpa7wyv to copav.
Ps. xcv.8—11. Srjpepov éav tis dwvns avtod axovonte.... ei eicedevoovTat cis THY KaTdavoly pov, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, Heb. iii. 7—11.
Ps. xevii. 7. IIpooxuvijcate aité wavtes dyyedor avtod. The Hebrew has Ow os>D, “all ye gods.” St. Paul, at Heb.1. 6, follows the Septuagint, but substitutes pocxvvncatwoav for mpookuvijcate.
Ps. cil. 25—27. Kar’ apyas thv ynv ov Kupie éOepediooas Kal Ta éTn Gov ovK éxdeipouow, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, Heb. i. 10—12.
Ps.civ.4. ‘O rowv tods ayyédous a’tov mvevuata, Kal Tovs NeToupyovs aidTod Tip Pdéyov, agreeing with the Hebrew ; cited, Heb.i. 7, with mrupos proya (Ald. Comp.) for wip réyov (Alex. rupos pdéya).
Ps. cx. 1. Etmev 6 Kipuos té Kupio pov Kddou éx defiav pov gas dv 06 Tods éxOpovs cou wroTddi0v TOV NodaY Gov, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, Matt. xxii. 44, but with the article omitted before Kvpvos, and with the substitution
of wroKxdta for b7roTosuiov.
THE HEXAGLOT BIBLE.
Ps. cxii.9. ‘Eoxopricev, €dwxe Tots mévycw, 7) Suxatocbvn avTod péves Els TOV ai@va, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, 2 Cor. ix. 9.
Ps. cxvi. 10. ‘Emiorevoa, 506 éXadqoa, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited with «ai introduced, 2 Cor. iv. 18.
Ps. exviil.l. Aivere tov Kupiov mavra ta éOvn, érrawvécate avtov mavtes of Naol, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited with some variation, Rom. xv. 11.
Ps. exvili.6. Kupios éuot Bones, Kat ov poBnOjcomat ti Trojces por dvOpwrros, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, Heb. xiii. 6.
Ps. cxvili. 26. Eddoynpuévos 0 épyouevos év ovouate Kupiov, agreeing with the Hebrew ; cited, Matt. xxi. 9.
Proverbs.—Tischendorf, following the Codex Vaticanus, has the subjoined omissions : —
Prov. iv. 5. ‘‘ Get wisdom, get understanding; forget it not; neither decline from the words of my mouth.” Ver. 7, Apyy copias xthcar codiay Kal év racn KTHTEL Gov KTHoaL cvveow, “ Wisdom is the principal thing, therefore get wisdom,” etc.
Prov. viii. 29. ‘When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment.” Vers. 32, 33, “ Blessed are those who keep my ways;” ‘“‘ Hear instruction and be wise; refuse it not.”
Prov. xiii. 6. ‘‘ Righteousness keepeth him that is upright in the way ; but wickedness overthroweth the sinner.”
Prov. xv.31. “The ear that heareth the reproof of life abideth among the wise.”’
Prov. xvi. 1, 3. “The preparation of the heart in man, and the answer of the tongue is from the Lord.” <“ Commit thy works unto the Lord, and thy thoughts shall be established.”
Prov. xviii. 23, 24. “The poor useth entreaties ; but the rich answereth roughly. A man that hath friends must shew himself friendly; and there is a friend that sticketh closer than a brother.”
Prov. xix. 1, 2. “ Better is the poor that walketh in his integrity, than he that ts perverse in his lips, and is a fool. Also that the soul be without knowledge is not good,” ete. |
Prov. xxi. 5. “The thoughts of the diligent tend only to plenteousness; but of every one that is hasty only to want.”
Prov. xxii. 6. ‘Train up a child in the way he should go; and when he is old, he will not depart from it.”
Such omissions as these are serious ; we have supplied them, with one exception, from Stier and Theile.
Prov. xi. 31. Ei 6 pév dSixavos worss catetar, 6 aceBns Kal auapTwros Tov daveita, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, 1 Pet. iv. 18.
From Prov. xv. 27, to ver. 10, of the following chapter, Tischendorf retains the arrangement of the Codex Vaticanus. In the Hexaglot Bible the verses are arranged in the same order as the Hebrew.
The interpolations in this book are as numerous as the omissions, but we think the former a poor substitute tor the latter; our readers will judge for themselves.
Prov. vi.8. After “Go to the ant, thou sluggard,” etc., we find, ‘‘ Or go to the bee, and learn how industrious
she is, and how grave a work she doeth ; whose labours kings and private men take to themselves for health. She is
desired and renowned of all, although she is feeble in strength; having regarded wisdom, she hath been brought to
honour (po7y8n).” Prov. vii. 1. ‘Son, fear the Lord and be strong, and fear no other beside him.”
Prov. ix. 12. ‘“ He who leaneth on falsehood teedeth the winds, and shall pursue flying birds ; for he hath left
PROLEGOMENON.
the paths of his own vineyard, and hath misled the wheels of his own ploughed fields; he passeth through a parched
desert, and a land situated in dry places; he gathereth in his hands unfruitfulness.”” Ver. 18, ‘‘ But withdraw thyself quickly, do not tarry in the place, nor make known thy name to her, for thus thou shalt pass through strange water. But abstain from strange water, and drink not of a strange fountain, that thou mayest live a long time, and years of life may be added to thee.”
Prov. xv. 5. “The beginning of a good way is, to do that which is just, and is more acceptable before God than to offer sacrifice. He who seeketh the Lord shall find knowledge with righteousness, and those who seek him aright shall find peace.”
Prov. xviii. 22. ‘‘Whoso putteth away a good wife, putteth away good; but he that keepeth an adulteress is foolish and ungodly.”
Prov. xxii. 8. “God blesseth a cheerful and liberal man; and he will accomplish the variety of his works.” Ver. 14, ‘“ There are evil ways before a man, and he loveth not to turn away from them; but it is necessary to turn from a crooked and evil way.”
Proy. xxvi. 11. ‘There is a shame which leadeth to sin, and there is a shame which is a glory and grace.” Prov. xxvii. 20. “He that fixes the eye is an abomination to the Lord; so are the undisciplined and unrestrained in tongue.” Ver. 21, “ The heart of the lawless seeketh after evil, but the heart of the upright seeketh after knowledge.” Prov. xxviii. 17. “ Chastise a son and he will love thee, and will give an ornament to thy soul; he will by no means listen to a transgressing nation.
Prov. xxix. 25. “ Ungodliness bringeth to a man calamity, but he that trusteth in the Lord shall be saved; ” and ver. 27, ‘A son that guardeth his speech shall be without destruction, and the receiver hath received him. Let nothing false be said with the tongue to the king, neither let any falsehood proceed from his tongue. The king’s tongue is a sword, and not made of flesh, and whosoever is delivered up shall be broken to pieces. For, if his wrath be kindled, he consumeth men with their sinews, and devoureth the bones of men, and they burn together as a flame, so that they are unfit for food for young vultures.”
Isaiah.—A prophet first in order of merit; fifth in order of time.
The Hexaglot supplies chap. u. 22, [Iavcacde avros, wanting in the Cod. Vat., from the Cod. Compl.
Is. viii. 23, the last verse of the Hebrew, D137... . AYA ND OD, is variously placed in the different versions. In the Greek and Latin it forms part of chap. viii. 23, and part of chap.ix.1. In the English and German it forms chap. ix. 1; and in the French, chap. viii. 23. In the Hexaglot Bible, the Greek and Latin have been arranged according to the Hebrew, and the French according to the English and German.
Is. ix. 6 (5). In the important prophecy referring to the Messiah, after weyadyns Bovdjjs ayyedos, the attributes Gavuacros, cbpBovdos, ioyupos, eEovaovacTys, apyev Eipyvns, TaTNpP TOD wéovTOS aiavos, found in the Hebrew and in the other versions, are wanting in the Vatican, these words being substituted: “A&w yap Elpyvnv emt TOUS ApKXovTas Kal vylevay ait@. The Alexandrian contains both the correct translation of the Hebrew DY2W7W T9738 733 OS VPP NDB Sow NID, and the interpolation, Eyo yap a&w «.T. X.
Is.i.9. Ei ux Kupios caB8awl éyxarédurev nuiv omépwa, «.T.r., “ “ Except the Lord of hosts had left unto us a
very small remnant,” etc., agreeing nearly with the Hebrew; cited, Rom. ix. 29.
xi THE HEXAGLOT LIBLE
Is. vi. 9, 10. Axoh axovoeTe Kal ov fa) cuvATe K.T.Xr., agreeing nearly with the Hebrew; cited verbatim, Matt. xii. 14, 15, Acts xxviii. 26, 27; partially and variously, Mark iv. 12, and Luke viii. 10.
Is. vii. 14. ’Idou % wap0évos év yaortpi AnWerar Kai 1€FeTas vidv, Kal Kadécets TO dvowa abTov 'Eppayounnr ; cited, Matt. i. 23, but with &ec for Ny eras, and Kadécovow for Karécets.
Is. viii. 14, and xxviii. 16. “Eorau cou els ayiaocpa, Kai ovx ws Aiov mpocKoupate cuvavTicecbe ovdE ws TéETPAS mrowatt. And, 4ia todto ottw réyer Kuvpsos Kupuos Idod eyo euBadrw eis Ta Oewédca Yrvwv ALGov TodvTENH K. T,X. St. Paul gives the sense, not the words, of these two passages, Rom. ix. 33: ’Id0d tiOnus év Xi@v AiWov mpocKoppaTos, Kal MTéTpaV TKAaVOdOV Kai O TLOTEUMY ET AUTM OV KaTALTXUVOrCETau.
Ts. ix.1, 2. “The land of Zebulon and the land of Naphtali, by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles,” etc. The Greek is not in exact accord with the Hebrew, and is cited thus by St. Matthew (iv. 15, 16), who departs slightly from both, 7 ZaBovrav Kai yn NepOareip, 6d0v Pardons wépav Tod “Iopdavov Tadidaia tav éOvev. ‘O Aads 6 KaOnwevos ev cKoTEr Has cidev péya, Kal Tois KAOnWEvoLs ev YOPA Kal oKLa DavaTov Pas avéTerrev adTois.
Is. x. 22, 23. “Hav yévntas 6 Aads "Iopayr as 1) dumos Ths Oadacons, TO KaTdrEYpa avTav TwOnceTAL, K.T.r., “Though thy people Israel be as the sand of the sea,” etc., agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, but not verbatim, Rom. ix. 27, 28.
Is.xi.1, 10. Kai é&erevoeras paBdos éx rhs pitns Ieccal ... kal 6 avictduevos apxew Over, én’ adT@ EOvn Edrrioda4, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, Rom. xv. 12.
Is.xv.3. The word 72772) “and in their streets,” is rendered by the Septuagint, cat év tails pias adris, and by Aquila, «al év tais mNaTelas adtiis. The two readings are joined together both in the Codex Vaticanus and in the Codex Alexandrinus.
Is. xix. 7. Kai To ay TO yAwpov wav. The word dye in the Alexandrian dialect denotes “a green flag.” This was first explained in the margin by 7d yAwpov, and then introduced into the text. Jerome says, “ Cumque ab eruditis quererem, quid hic sermo significaret ; audivi ab Xgyptiis hoc nomine lingua eorum omne quod in palude virens nascitur appellari.”
Is. xix. 18. ‘In that day shall five cities in the land of Egypt speak the language of Canaan, and swear to the Lord of hosts; one shall be called, The city of destruction.” Here there is a remarkable discrepancy in the texts. The Hebrew has 077771 1, of which Gesenius observes, “The Jews of Palestine, who approved of this reading, applied it to Leontopolis and the temple there, which they hated, and the destruction of which they supposed to be here foretold.”
He then adds, “‘The more probable reading is 07%] which is found in sixteen codices, and in some editions, and is
expressed by the Compl. dyepés; Sym. wé\s jdlov; Vulg. civitas solis; Saadiah Qw,> “33 and is also confirmed by the Talmudists in Menachoth, fol. 1104.: this must mean the City of the Sun; 7.e., Heliopolis, in Egypt.” The Vatican reading is 7ods aoedéx; and it is worthy of observation that the Jews in Egypt, after the building of the temple at Heliopolis, called that city, then become the rival of Jerusalem, PT3T7 WY “the city of righteousness.”
It seems that the rivalry between the Jews of Palestine and those of Egypt led to these two opposite and irreconcilable
readings. Is. xxii. 22. Kai d00@ adtd tiv xrelda olxov Aavid, «.7.r., agreeing with the Hebrew; applied to our Lord Jesus Christ, Rev. iii. 7.
Is, xxv. 8 and Hos. xii. 14. Karémvev 6 Odvaros ioytpas, mob 7 Sixn cov, Odvate; Tov TO Kévtpov cov, adn. The
°
PROLEGOMENON,. xii
Apostle has, nearer to the Hebrew 332, eis vixos; and for xatémuev, katero0n. In the second passage he has twice, in common with the Septuagint, wou, ‘UO death, where is thy sting?” while the Hebrew has 78, ‘O death, I will be thy plagues.” We doubt very much, however, whether the true reading in the Hebrew was not 78, where. The full future of 7, to be, is MIN; the apocopated form, so far as we are aware, is only employ-d with 4 (vau) conversive, or else it is used imperatively.:
Is. xxviii. 11,12. Ava davriopov yerréwv, dia yAooons éETépas, OTL AaANNTOVEL TO aw TOUT... . Kal ovK HOEAncav axovewv, agreeing with the Hebrew; adapted to his subject by St. Paul, 1 Cor. xiv. 21.
Is. xxvill. 16. "Sov éym éuBadrr\.@ cis Ta Oepétia Yiwv AiMov, x.7.r., agreeing with the Hebrew ; cited, but with considerable variation, 1 Pet. i. 6.
Is.xxix.13. ‘Eyylter pos 6 Nads ovTos ev TH GTOMaTL avTOD «.T.r., agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, but not verbatim, Matt. xv. 8, 9.
Is. xxix. 14. Azor@ thy codiav tav copay, Kal THY cUverW TeV cuveTov Kpiiyw, and xxxill. 18, IIod ecw of ypaupatixol ; Tov Eiclv oi cuuPovArcvovTes ; Tov éaTiv 6 apiOuay Tos Tpedouevous ; not in exact accordance either with the Hebrew or with St. Paul, 1 Cor.i.19, 20.
Is. xxxv. 3. Toyvoare yeipes dvewmévar Kal yovata mapadedvpéva, agreeing with the Hebrew; rendered thus by St. Paul, Heb. xii. 12, 4d tas mapespévas yeipas Kal Ta Trapaderupéva yovata avopfwcate.
Is. xl.3. wv Bowvtos ev TH épjnuw ‘Etowwdoarte tHv 6d0v Kupiov x.7.d., agreeing with the Hebrew ; cited, Matt. 11. 3; Mark i.3; Luke ii. 4; and John i. 23 ; with slight variations.
Is. xl. 6—8. I[ldca cap& yoptos, cal maca So€a avOperrov as avOos yoprouv .... eis TOV ai@va, agreeing with the Hebrew ; cited, but not verbatim, 1 Pet. i. 24, 25.
Is.xl.13. Tis éyvw vodv Kupiov, nai tis adtod cvuPBovnros éyévero; agreeing with the Hebrew ; cited, Rom. xi. 34.
Is. xli. 4. ’Eyo Ocos mp@rtos, cal eic Ta érrepyoueva eyo eius, and chap. xliv. 6, Eye mpdtos Kai eyo peta TadTa ; referred to, Rev. 1. 17, ii. 8, and xxii. 13.
Is. xlii.1. “Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth”; this is in exact accord with the Hebrew; but in the Septuagint we find Iax@B 6 mais pou, avridyrouar avtod" "Iapaid 6 €xdexTOos pou k.t.rX. The words Jacob and Israel, found in no other version, must be pronounced spurious. Some have charged the Jews with wilfully corrupting the text; this may be the case, but it is remarkable that the Chaldee paraphrast applies the passage to the Messiah srown stay Nm. St. Matthew does the same (chap. xii. 18—21). The Evangelist has scarcely a word the same as the Septuagint.
Is. xlv. 23. Kai éuavrod duvio, ore éwol capper Trav. yovu, Kal ouelta, Taca yAaooa Tov Geov, agreeing with the Hebrew ; cited, but not verbatim, Rom. xiv. 11.
Is. xlix.6. AéSwxd ce els Svabrjxnv yévous, eis das €Ovav (double rendering) Tod civai ce eis owrnpiav Ews éoxdTou ths yas. At Acts xiii. 47, we find té@ecna tor dédwxa.
Is. xlix.8 Kaipw Sexté émjxovod cov, kal év juwepa cwrtnpias €BoryjOyoa cou, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, 2 Cor. vi. 2.
Is. xlix. 10 and xxv. 8. Ov rewdoovow oddé Siynoovow .... Kal wadw adeide Kupios 0 Geos mav Saxpvov aro mavTos TpocwTov, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited and commented upon, Rev. vii. 16, 17.
Is. lit. 7. ‘Qs Spa él rdv dpéwv, s odes evayyedloudvou axonv elpnvns, @s evayyedifouevos ayafa. The Apostle
5 N
xii THE HEXAGLOT BIBLE.
=
-_——— ———__
(Rom. x. 15) keeps closer to the Hebrew ‘Qs wpaiou of rodes Tov evayyediXouévov [eipyvny, TOV edaryyedttouevan | ta ayaba. “How beautiful upon the mountains,” etc. The present reading of the Septuagint is hardly intelligible.
Is. lii. 11 and Jer. xxx. 25. “Amoornte, amoatnte, é&éXOate exeiVev, Kai axabdptov pn arvvnobe, K.t.r..... Ev TO pov exeiver, etre Kupros, écopar eis Ocov TH yéver “Icoann, «.7.d., agreeing with the Hebrew; adapted to his subject by St. Paul, 2 Cor. vi. 17, 18.
Is. lii. 15. Ofs od« avnyyérn rep! adtod dWovrat, Kai of ovK aKnKdact cvvjcouvcL, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, Rom. xv. 21.
Is. iti. 1. Kupve tis émictevce TH axon nudv cat 6 Bpayiwv Kupiov tive amexadidOn, so cited, John xii. 38, but there is no Kvgie in the Hebrew or in the other versions.
Is. liii. 4. OAD ADNDDA NI NAT AT 72s, “Surely he hath taken upon him our weaknesses, and borne our sorrows.” The Septuagint translate Otros tas dpaptias nuav Péper, Kat Tept nucdv odvvaras, “This one bears our sins, and is afflicted for us.” St. Matthew (viii. 17), follows the Hebrew, Adtés tas aceveias jwaov édaBev, Kai Tas vecous. éBaotacev.
Is. lil. 5. To porwr avtod ypeis iaOnuev, agreeing with the Hebrew ; ‘cited, but not verbatim, 1 Pet. 11. 24.
Is. liii. 7, 8. ‘Qs mpoBarov éri cpaynv nxn x.T.r., “ He is led as a lamb to the slaughter,” etc., agreeing with the Hebrew ; cited, Acts viii. 32, 33.
Is. iii. 8. “Ev 1H tatrewooe 7 Kpicts avtod 7p0n, x.7.r. ; Hebrew, mp2 mpwarn zZyp. No greater discrepancy
could exist. The English Version makes it worse, “He was taken from prison and from judgment ;” but the other
versions, to some extent, reconcile the two: “ De angustia et de judicio sublatus est;” ,,€r ift aber aus der Angft und Geridjt genommen;“ “Ila été enlevé par la violence et la condamnation.” The French translator understands the » of 789% instrumentaliter, by violence and by condemnation. We cannot enter as fully as we could wish into this subject, but the versions combined suggest some such rendering of the original as this: ‘‘ By humiliation (straits, anguish, violence) and a judicial sentence he was taken off.” Upon the next clause, TIM) “9 377M}, we must frankly confess, the versions shed no light. The real meaning of 737 is the period of human life, and of maw, to meditate; the sense therefore may be, Who will take thought for his life? For 159 ¥22 YAY DWE, the Septuagint have do Tay dvoulov Tov Naovd pov HYOn eis Oavatov, a remarkable circumstance, shewing that they read mind, to death, for i, to him. In the next verse, it has been suggested that the words 2) and 163 have been transposed, “ He was lifted up with wicked men in his death, and with a rich man was his sepulchre.” The reading of the Septuagint is very wide of the mark, Kai d0ow rovnpovs avti ths Tadys avTov, Kal Tods TAovaious avTi Tod Oavdtov aitod. What these words signify we are not able to divine.
Is. lili. 9. “Ore avopiav ove érotncev, otSe SddoV ev TW oTOuaTL avTOv, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, but not verbatim, 1 Pet. ii. 22.
Is. lili. 12. Kat éy tois avowows édoyic8n, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited in the Textus Receptus, Mark xv. 28, but the citation is rejected by Alford and Tischendorf.
Is. liv. 1. EvdpavOnre oreipa 4 od Tixtovoa, x.7.r., agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, Gal. iv. 27.
Is.liv.18. Kat mavras rods viovs cov Sidaxtovs Geod, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, but not literally, John vi. 45.
PROLEGOMENON.
—s
Is. lv. 10. Kal 80 orépya to orelpovts kai dptov eis Bpdow, agreeing with the Hebrew; referred to bv St. Paul,
2 Cor. 1x. 10. Is. lvi. 7, and Jer. vu. 11. The substance of these two passages is given by St. Matthew (xxi. 13), ‘O olxds
ov oikos Tpocevxys KANOjoeTAL, Ywels SE avTOV ToLEiTe OmHAraLoV AnoTaY, “ My house shall be called a house of prayer,” etc.
Is. lvi., part of vers. 11 and 12, am dxpov............. opodpa, wanting in Tischendorf and the Cod. Vat., are supplied from the Cod. Compl.
Is. lix. 20. Kat &ec évexev Ziv 6 puopevos x. T. X., agreeing with the Hebrew ; cited, but not literally, Rom. xi. 26.
Is. lx. 1. Dwrifov dwrifov ‘Iepovoadyu, «.7.r., differing considerably from the Hebrew, 7758 S2™>D 78 DAD, supposed to be alluded to by St. Paul, Eph. v. 14.
Is. lx. 19. Kat ov« éoras cou étt 6 HrLos els PHS Hépas ovSE advaTorAH cEAnVNS dwTLel THY VUKTA, K.T-X., agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, but not verbatim, Rev. xxi. 23—27.
Is. lxi 1, 2. IIvedpa Kupiov én’ éué, «.7.r., cited, Luke iv. 18 (noticed page xii.)
Is. Ixii. 11, and Zech.ix.9. The substance of these two passages is given by St. Matthew (xxi.5). Elmare rf Ouyatpi Siwv ’[dov 6 Basihev’s cov Epyetai cou Tpavs Kal émiPeBnxws eri dvov Kat em TaXov viov UTotvylov.
Is. lxiv. 3. ‘Azro tod aidvos ovK jnKovoapev ovd€ of OpParpot judy cidov Geov TAY cod Kal TA épya cov & Tromoels TONS UTromévovatv, not in exact accord either with the Hebrew or with St. Paul, 1 Cor. ii. 9.
Is. lxv.1, 2. “Eudavns éyevnOnv trois eve un ErrepwTa@owv K.T.Xr., agreeing with the Hebrew ; cited, Rom. x. 20, 21.
Is. levi. 1, 2. ‘O ovpavds pou Opovos Kai » yi brorddiov TaV Toddv pov K.T.r., “The Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool,” etc., agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, Acts vii. 49, 50.
Jeremiah.—It appears, according to Horne, that there were four collections of the prophecies of Jeremiah :—
1. In the reign of Jehoiakim, comprising chaps. i. to xx., xxv., XKVi., xxxv., xxxvi., xlv.—li. (See Jer. XXXVI. 2).
2. In the reign of Zedekiah, comprising chaps. xxvii. to xxxi. (See Jer. xxx. 2).
3. At the period of the destruction of Jerusalem, comprising chaps. xxi —xxiv., xxxiii—xxxiv., xxxvii.—xxxix. (See chap. i. ]—3).
4. After the captivity, comprising chaps. xl. to xliv., being the history of Jeremiah and the Jews who remained in Judea.
Horne says (Introd. Vol., iv.) that it is impossible to ascertain the reason why the prophecies of Jeremiah have not heen retained in the chronological order in which they were originally delivered; but he also observes of the first collection: ‘In this collection were contained all the predictions which he (Jeremiah) had delivered and published ts that time, as well against other nations as against the Jews. The prophecies against the Gentiles are, in our Bibles, placed by themselves at the end of the book, as being in some measure unconnected with those denounced against the Jews ; but in the present copies of the Septuagint they follow immediately after ver. 13, of chap. xxv.”
Here, then, we have a clue to the serious discrepancy in the arrangement of the Hebrew and Greek texts. The Hebrew and the modern versions place the prophecies against the Gentiles together at the end of the book, while the Greek places them in chronological order. In this work the Hebrew order has been followed.
The discrepancy in the arrangement commences at chap. xxiii. The Greek places vers. 7, 8, Hebrew, after ver. 40.
xliv THE HEXAGLOT BIBLE.
xxv. 15—38, Hebrew = xxxii.1—24,Greek | xxxv. Hebrew == xiii. Greek xlvy. Hebrew = li.3l—end, Greek KXVi. = se.o.ctb XXXVi. = xiiii. | xlvi. = xxvi.
XXVii. = XXxiy. XXXVil. == liv. | xlvii. = xxix.
XXVill. = XXXV. Q XXXVili = xiv. | xlviil. = XXxi.
5.40. = XXXVI. | XXxix. = xlyi ; xix. = xxx. 1—6, xxix. 7—12, XXX. = XxXxvil. xl, = xlvil xxx. 23—27, 25—33, XXXi. == XXXviil. xli. = x\ivili xxv. 34—end
XXxil. = XXXxiXx. | Sadbti, = xlix. 1. eh
xxxiii. = xi. xliii. 5h li. — xxviii.
XXXIV. = xii. xliv. = li.1—80 li. elie
There are a few minor points to be observed with regard to our arrangement of verses in Jeremiah.
Chap. ix. 1, of the versions is chap. viii. 23. of the Hebrew.
Chap. x.5, of Tischendorf has been transferred to part of ver. 4 in te Hexaglot Bible.
Chap. xiii. 9. The 9 is placed before rade Neyer Kupios in the Hexaglot instead of after, as in Tischendorf.
Chap. xxxi. 35, 36, are transferred to their proper place, viz., before ver. 37.
Chap. xxvii. 1, tade Aéyer Kupios, part of ver. 1 in Tischendorf, begins ver. 2 in the Hexaglot.
There are many passages in this book wanting in Tischendorf and the Cod. Vat., which have been supplied, within
brackets, in the Hexaglot, principally from the Complutensian and Alexandrian texts. Such are the following :—
No. of Words. No. of Words. Jer. ii. 1, 2, eai tyévero ..-.- 2s @oiv ’lepovoadip .. .. 14 Jers xcs LOM kai corayenswens se) ations Opia alter 48 11 Vals Us 2 OME ocdadsdbe ROP GOEUG wer. dabvich) pclehate eee 5.6.0 Ola ATO! (0). cds OW Oat Gy Cl doe tee poy warevOdunre ph RG Ss nti viii. 10, 12, dru dwd 2. 2... Cie Kiptog .. oe ee 88 Xxxii.1l, rijy ivrodny ... eee TO aveyvwopivoy .. .. 8 x.6—8, wd0ev buowdg .. 1. ~~~ EdNoveoTiv .. 2s oe 54 KKK MO eka meres iel cys oie émuTnoOevmaTwy avTou .. xi. 7, 8, dru Oiapaprupspevoc . . . Toimoat avrote esti eien BOL Loose CU ONT) Wale cleo 6 Op 6 ONC) KUPtOC! si) eval xvii. 1—4, duapria’lotda .... aidvocKxavOnoera .. 104 Xxxili. 14— 26, (dot rpépar. . . . oikTepm atrotc.. .. .. 284 xxy. 1, adréc évavroc «1. - Baowsi BaBvdAdvoc.. .. 7/ xxxiv. 10, éA\evOépove mpdc . . . . Kai éwhKovoar.. . 9 xxy. 7, @noi KUpuoc ....--.. kaxoy vuly = ww Swe esd xxxiy. 1, cal émectpadyoay,. « . KAbEoyOV .. .. ws «2 LG xxv. 14, 671 éOovAEvoaY. ..... éitnoevpatuy tay .. 28 reer ISS HE WIE ooo 8 oo ae OM TOEGICR ane aoe ng lb RVG eC UELCH natn ete oo» Hpépay TadTHY.. 2. « 7 569.07, Mila GH) (OP 5 Gg alo oS --. oukamexplOncay .; .. 14 xxv. 26, kai Baowete .. 2 2 ss - EoXaTOC aTGY.. «1 «. 6 esa IG Tan Go a 64 aa a ay Gre Topann, sa ee ce 2 xxv. 29, dnoi Ktpuoc ray Ouvapewy.. .. 2s ee ee oe 4 RKO MOL ET OUT ONE) os) ee eles GOcdculapanN Voc! tees Le, REVI ly EV: GVO wees siete) tonal Kupiov AéEywrv . tae LG OO.Qihe My Mt) OHS TPOOCID) COR Ba O60 Oo. .00 ba ne 4 Xxvii. 7, kai OovNedcovow .. . - Baordeic eyene as age XXXVi. 29, zpdc ’lwaksiu Baoiita’lovda .. .. «2 «2 oe 4 xxvii. 10, cai duaorep& bwae Kai amodicbe .. «2 we we 5 LER VL Go GACUNEVE LOUOM IED, TUDE lal iilsie, sie le Allelic sinmn-e xxvii. 12—14, cai dovdetoare ... Baorrei BaBudOvoc ia 1D RAR VAL le a OOG LUTON.) 2) = (1 « NELDOY TOU Bey bOoe oc hel xxvii. 17—22, py axovere. ... - romoyv Tourov ,. .. «. 116 XXXVill. 16, TO ZynTobr Toy THY WuyHy cov ety Gels 9 tere EXVili. 2, THY Ouvdpewy 6 Ode "Iopair Neywv.. .. «e+ 6 xxxix. 4—138, kai tyévero ... . Baoréwe BaBvddvog .. 254 TRVill oy OANA GEV Eo ene sic BaBudava .. .. «. 14 ROK OMKOUECOM TCLs gis eo els WOLORat) oe oo oe CS XxViii. 4, rove ciceAMObvTac .... gnoi Kipwcg .. .. « 12 KI MCS PCCLULEVEDIETONeyalie 6 s)u/9) 15) (6 Meer Bd sa ee Exviii. 8, cai cic Kawa Kai sic Odvarov «www ee ee eG xl.4,naiei ............ &xmopevOnvat topevou .. 28 XXVili. 14, kai dovreioovor ... OédweaaiTm .. .. «. 10 xl. 12, éwéorpepay ot... ~~... éxéi cai Seep cee iar, Ll XXViii. 16, Ore ExKAiowy EAaANoac Tpdg Kipwov.. .. +. +. 9 RM OVIRGUM-OUCIMa suis) 3) ss) <4) «3 ETTATAGED loo ai Nw seinen nO rogaine Uy UNIS Og 1 0 90 Oo tviauT@p Exeivyp ata 7 xli. 6, vioc NaOaviov....... Hyywevatroic.. .. .. Il xxix. 1, oc dmwkucev. . 22. 5 ie BUIGNOV Clan Ge soo.) 7 Kli.7,@UTOG Kat 1 1 1 we oo PET QbTOU nye Seine tal xxix. 12, cai exucaécecbé pe kai wopetoec0e 5 xia graelo!: 2... .. «+» « avactpewayrec mNGoy 6. 12 Exix, L4;i¢not Kuptocs «ole -) = I LGIGHEREU Dem tse) pele) |e sO KITINO HO) CEOCIMINE fog) ae)» eres. o EVAUTLOVILUTOUE Mn emmys ane Xx1x, 16 — 20) OrviriOe 1. . oo sic BaBuAdva.. .. .. 139 A xlii.19, dre Ouenaprupapny bpiv onpepor MAGARIN xxix. 32, Agyec Kiptoc .....- row K upiou Suttiaet! haste ZO xlii. 20, rpdc Kiptoy roy Geo tudy tod RE RA eee ote xxx. 10, 11, oj O&......... dOwwow oe Mee Oo arate 1) xliv. 11, ray duvdpewy .. 2... Tov’ lovda Are tod ee ee! xxx. 15, ri Gogo .....++ ++ GAyOgGov.. w+ os 0» 10 xliy. 12, kat NyWomat. . . « 2 « « MAPOLKELY EKEL.. os we LG xxx. 19, cai inyed 2.2.22... pp opixpuvOdow «2 « 7 XUV 2 c@MUpGAG! so c'e site) ol AO YOLLOUl- (omelette ancien LO xxx. 22. wal focoOe . 2 sc ce ss CLC DECOY 2. 2o ce oe LE xlv. 4, kai o¥pracay THY yy Exeivny .. 4. see oe oe «(CS
PROLEGOMENON. ely
No. of Words. No. of Words
Jer. xlvi. 1, 6 Adyoc APS aE ee ae Jer. 1. 2, yoxivOn cidwra Boedbypara abrifc ..
xlvi. 25, siaev Kisptoc OrdeulonanN Yee) cen le 1, 12, kai dvvdpoc kai GBaroc
xlvi. 26, rai rapadwow gnoi Ktpiog «. ww ee : 1, 14, dre Te Kupip tpaprev
xlvii. 1, we éyévero Tny Talay wid! abate Boies 1. 28, éxdixnow vaov adrov
xlviii. 1, rv Suvdpewy 6 Oedg’lopayd «wee 1. 39, kai od kai yevedv
xlviii. 15, pnoiv 6 dvoua air@ .. «2 oe li. 37, kai ei¢ el¢ CUpLypov
wiviti 40. (Sou oe ee ay ke li. 44—49, kaiye reiyoc Tpavpatiag 'lopanr
xlviii. 41, nai orau yuvaikoc wouvovane ae li. 64, kai Eornoav Aoyor ‘Tepepion ..
xlvili. 45, év omg erp ae cunt ar li. 2, 8, kai érroinoer Baciiéwe BaBurAdvoe
xlix. 6, kai pera ; gnoi Kuptog .. .. oe lii. 15, azo 6é 0 apxXyayepoc..
xlix. 17, ixorioera Kai HAHYY QUTAC 2. 6. we lil, 18, kai rove Tove dvahnaTijpac ..
xlix. 24, kai wdivec WC TUKTOUVONG .. «+ «we lil. 27—30, kai drwxioOn Kai é£akootat
xlix. 34, ty apy TGININ CO? oh oe Oc li. 34, rdoag rac ZwHne avrou
1. 1, éai yijv TOU Tpopnrov ..
From this list, which we believe to be complete, it will appear that the omissions in the Greek (Cod. Vat.) of the Book of Jeremiah are both numerous and important. The reader will perceive that we have had no little
labour to supply these omissions, and yet to preserve the text of Tischendorf intact ; for in many instances, where there
is a gap, which it would have been comparatively easy to fill up as a whole, this gap has been of necessity examined
in all its parts; we say of necessity, because every now and th ‘ye midst of an omitted paragraph, one meets with a sentence or a phrase or simply a word, which nevertheless finds place in our Codex, and this has been marked by the removal and replacing of the brackets before and after the sentence, &c.
The more serious omissions are, xvii. 1—4. ‘‘The sin of Judah is written with a pen of iron - . . and I will cause thee to serve thine enemies in a land which thou knowest not.”
xxix. 16—20. Where the Lord threatens to send upon the king that sitteth on the throne of David, and upon
’
the people who said, ‘‘ the Lord hath raised us up prophets in Babylon,” sword, famine, pestilence, dispersion and reproach among the nations.
xxxiii. 14—26. The remarkable prophecy concerning the Branch of righteousness, the duration of the throne of David, the stability of the covenant with the seed of Jacob, and the return from captivity.
xxxix, 4—13. The flight of Zedekiah, king of Judah, and his army ; their pursuit and capture by the Chaldeans in the plains of Jericho, the cruelty of Nebuchadnezzar to Zedekiah, the destruction of Jerusalem, the carrying away of the remnant into captivity, and the king of Babylon’s charge concerning the protection of Jeremiah.
li. 44—49. God’s denunciations against Babylon; His exhortation to His people, ‘“‘Go ye out of the midst of her,”
lii. 27—30. The carrying away captive by Nebuchadnezzar of four thousand and six hundred people of Judah.
There is only one passage in our Greek which is not in the Hebrew; ii. 28, “ According to the number of | travellers through Jerusalem have they sacrificed to Baal.”
Many of the headings of the Greek, in capitals in Tischendorf and in the Cod. Vat., are printed in small type in the esate ible wiz, Jer x bs xiv L; xvii. 1; xx. 1))xxy.1,13; xxvi.1; xxx. 14; xxxu. 1,6; xxxii.\1; wamive ery, be mei xh dle xl. 6: xliv. 1; 'xly. Ps xlvs. 2; 19; xlix. 7, 28, 28, 30:5 1. Ps. ly, 59.
The following passages are cited in the New Testament :—
Jer. ix. 24, agreeing with the Hebrew; the substance is given 1 Cor. i. 31, ‘O cavywpevos ev Kupio xavyacbe.
Jer. xvii. 10. Eye Kupios érafwv xapdias Kal Soxiudfwv veppots Tob Sodvat ExdoTw KaTa Tas ddovs avToOd, agrecing
with the Hebrew; cited, with some variations, Rev. ii. 23.
xlvi THE HEXAGLOT BIBLE.
Jer. xxxi. 14. Dwvyn ev ‘Paya jxovcOn Opyvov xai KravOpwod Kai dduppod, x.7.r. St. Matthew, chap. ii. 18, gives the precise meaning of the Hebrew and the Septuagint, but cites neither literally.
Jer. xxxi. 80—34. ’Idou tdépar Epyovtar, pnoi Kupios, cai SiaOnoopat To oik@ Icpanr Kai T@ oixw ‘Iovda SiaOnenv KaUvnV, K.T.r., agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, with some variations, from the Septuagint, Heb. viii. 8—18.
Lamentations—The Book of Lamentations consists of five elegies, each of them, except the last, composed of verses commencing with consecutive letters of the Hebrew alphabet.
There is a heading to the Book in the Greek and Latin versions, which does not exist in the Hebrew. As this heading is omitted in our text, we give it here:—Kail éyevero peta TO aiypwarwticOqvar tov ’Iopair Kal ‘Iepovoadnp EpnuwOhvar éexdOicev ‘Iepewias xraiwv, cai éOpnvnce tov Ophvov tovtov emi ‘Iepovoadi Kal eirev. “And it came to pass, after Israel was taken captive and Jerusalem was made a desolation, Jeremiah sat weeping and uttered this lamentation over Jerusalem, and said.”
Hereupon follows chapter i., which consists of twenty-two verses, the number of letters of the Hebrew alphabet, all arranged in order. The second chapter also consists of twenty-two verses, but in the Hebrew the letters 5 and y (verses 16, 17) are transposed ; ver. 16 of the Hebrew commences thus: O79 FY 2, ver. 17, TIT Tby. Strangely enough, the Greek copies mark these y and 5: Tisch., Aiv and $7; Bagster, AIN and @H. The French has adopted this error. The same transposition of y and 5 occurs at chapters ii., iii. and iv., and in every instance the Greek and the French reproduce the same error. The Latin is correctly marked, Phe, Ain.
Chap. ill. consists of twenty-two triplets, each triplet beginning with a consecutive letter of the Hebrew alphabet. Here the grouping of the verses in Micchondort and in our Codex is very incorrect. Under x, or ‘Aded, there are four verses, one of which belongs to 3, By@; under 3 there are three verses, one of which belongs to 3, Ime; the third belonging to 3 is grouped with 7. Ver. 12, which begins with 7, is marked 7, "H; ver. 15 begins with 7, but is grouped with }, Ovad. The letter », T70, is marked twice, once at ver. 25 and again at ver. 27. Ver. 28, which begins with », "Iwd, is grouped with ». Ver. 29 is omitted entirely, thus spoiling the triplet. This verse we have supplied from the Codex Compl.: @yjcer év Kovopt@ To oToua avtov cimote 4 édmis. Ver. 30, which commences with», is grouped with 5, Kad. From this point the confusion increases; no fewer than five verses are grouped under 4, Add, two of which commence with the following letter », Miu. The verses beginning with 9, Nodv, are correctly grouped. The verses commencing with D, Yapex, y, "Aiv, and 5, Oy, are strangely jumbled: y is placed in the middle of a verse which belongs to 0; vv. 47, 48 (46, 47 Tisch.) are grouped under y instead of ». Verses 49, 50, 51 (48, 49, 50 Tisch.), which should come under y, are grouped under ». The verses under &, p and “ are correctly grouped, but w, Xoev,
encroaches upon , Oat. In the Hexaglot Bible these verses will be found properly grouped in threes and arranged in order of the Hebrew text.
We cannot tell upon what principles modern critics proceed, or by what rules they are guided in furnishing us with a superior Greek text of the Old Testament, but we should naturally expect that the principles and rules would be
identical with those which regulate the criticism of the New Testament. Those who have the opportunity and the
privilege of obtaining access to the various manuscripts, and of weighing the evidence for and against particular passages of the New Testament, ¢.g., Matt. vi. 13; xviii.11; xxiv. 36, and many others of considerable moment, do not scruple to reject those passages, valued as they may have been, against which there is an overpowering weight of
evidence. But while the original Greek of the New Testament is thus freely and fearlessly criticised, the translation
PROLEGOMENON. of the Old Testament appears to be handled with such fear and trembling by the same critics, that they would rather reproduce errors and glosses like those which we have more than once pointed out, mistakes proceeding from the ignorance or negligence of former transcribers, than violate the reading of a favourite codex. What we want in both Testaments and in every language is as pure a copy of the Word of God as we can obtain.
There is one more remark we have to make before leaving this Book, viz., that the omission of chap. iii. 29 is denoted in most Greek copies by the verses being numbered 28, 30; Tischendorf has numbered the verses straight on, 28, 29. We think that this is a step in the wrong direction; to ignore or to conceal a palpable omission like this, is hardly consistent with sound biblical criticism.
Ezekiel—The Book of Ezekiel, unlike that of Jeremiah, is arranged in chronological order in the Greek as well as in the Hebrew text.
Chap. i.—iii. The son of man, viz., Ezekiel, receives the commission to deliver God’s message to the house of Israel. Chap. iv.—xxiv., God’s denunciations against the rebellious house. Chap. xxv.—xxxii. His denunciations against the Moabites, the Edomites, the Philistines, against Tyre and Zidon, and against Egypt and its Pharaoh. Chap. xxxiii.—xlvili. Divine warnings to the wicked, and promises to the righteous, and predictions of the first and the second restoration of the Jewish people.
Although there is no alteration in the order of chapters in the Book of Ezekiel, it has been found necessary, occasionally, to re-arrange the verses. There is no little confusion, not only in the arrangement, but in the numeration of the verses in different editions of the Codex Vaticanus. The excellent Oxford edition of 1848 numbers the beginning of Ezekiel vii. thus: (blank) 3, 7, 8, 9, 7, 4,5; Bagster numbers the same verses: (blank) 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 7, 4,5; Tisch., 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 8, 4,5; we have ventured to arrange and number these verses in order of the Hebrew.
Chap. xxi. of the Hebrew corresponds to chap. xx. 45 of the other languages. In this instance the French, which followed the Hebrew division, has been altered for the sake of uniformity.
Chap. xxxii. 20. Here again there is great discrepancy in the numeration of verses in the Greek copies, all of which appears to arise from the omission, or from an attempt to conceal the omission, of ver. 19. Verses 19 and 20 in Tischendorf form ver. 20 in the Hexaglot, as in the Hebrew.
Chap. xxxvi. The first clause of ver. 30 in Tisch., cal wAnOuv@ ... . twas Auwov, has been transferred to the end of rer. 29 in the Hexaglot.
Chap. xli. The first clause of ver. 2 in Tisch., cai mny@v, x.T.r., has been transferred to the end of ver. 1.
Chap. xlvi. The first clause of ver. 3 in Tisch., cai mpooxtvynoes .... &ws éo7répas, has been transferred to ver. 2.
In Tischendorf and the Codex Vaticanus there are numerous omissions of greater or less moment, all of which have been supplied within brackets in the Hexaglot, chiefly from the Complutensian and Alexandrian Codices. Subjoined is a list of these passages :—
No. of Words. No. of Words Ezekiel i. 8, 9, kai ai mpoownaavrav .. .. 12 Ezekiel vi. 8, cai voXeipopac i ODN SECERPTMMclanieisin Helene i. 9, ri) arooTdoy am iuov .. i gwr7) tapeuBorAmo .. «.. 18 TeMLOWOUKIELE: oie) « Kaka Tavra i. iy Tw mrépuyec adr@v .. .. 8 li, 5—7, kakia pia i KEpadyc AUTM@Y .. oe | ii. 11—14, kat ov« TAN90¢ avTHc..
iy. 13, oF dtackopme® abrotvc ixei .. 5. wwe ewe | li. 16, We wepiorepat pedErrekai ..
v. 165, év dpyy kal ev Oup@ wai SG) T1Sd1 OG) SOCRMTOCAREOC Ree! li. 19, 76 apyvdp.oy éoync Kupiov ..
vi. 5, kal dwow dwrwy avray dee viele li, 24, cai a&w oikoue avUTwY ..
THE HEXAGLOT BIBLE.
No. 01 Wor Is, | Ezekiel vii. 27, 6 BaotNehe mevOnoe eald.. 1. 2 oe «2 «es O | Ezekiel xxvi. 21, «ai CnrnOijoy. . 2. . . EvpeOnay Ere
i. 2, avpac WEiETOOE ta Lk. i ee tae : XXvVil. 23, Kat Aaday, LaBa fe ete Ui. 35 TH CLeTWTEDAC «| s) sv [le TOU CHANOUCH ee) vive) ec XXVii. 31, 32, kai Padaxpwaovery . peop Dadacon¢ ii. 5, rov Ouctacrnoiov. .... BAEmOVTaY 5 ees xxxil. 19, ¢% bdarwy META ATEPITMITWY .. 1 CriaChOloleocnlapanN 11) Nach ACERM Ente ALA coe ee XXXii. 23, of EOwkay ...... . Whrrovrec mayalog.. . 7, «ad Wor TADATOUY Gini Caled Mhsis ysis Xxxil. 25, :060n Koirn TPaULATLWY payatog SET GIICOLN, Picton Musts) | sare) cove XXXii. 28, cvyrpiBiay Kai . 10, taoa bpoiwore EpTETOU Kai KTHVOUG.. 1. 1s oe XXxil. 31, rpavparia payaipa. . d’vapte avTor.. lil. 17, kai éxéoroeWav Me ae) Git XXXill. 25—27, oUrwe cime. . . « ElOY avToic Vill. 18, kat kadécovor elaakobow auTay .. .. Xxxiy. 9, acovoare NOyor Kupiou .. Ts LOsUTENEC DON Mery Went MeeMey MEE Pear aeiah (eral auniien ays xxxv. ll, kai cara év alrotc .. 1b. GOEOCk PRO 66) oer eeehiibe! oon eho) Ao xxxv. 13, kal éxmAnPnoag .... TOU Ka’ ee x. 14, kai réooapa TPOTWTOV METOU .. ve xxxvy. 15, cafwe nippavOne . . . Torjow oor x. 16, katye avrot. we. tYOueva avror sis) es 6 xxxvi. 15, kat ro arexvwOnoerat eve .. > 6 OPS iP CNC GING on oo be oo on ao 66 oO 3 xxxvi. 18, epi rou Eplavay auTiyy xi. 11, 12, adrn bpiv Uuwv éontare .. ee Xxxix. 28, cal cvvatw OUKETL EKEL XVili. 32, eal émuarpiare kai Zacare .. .. 20 oe oe xl. 80, cai aitawpwo ... . TEVTE THXEWY .. xxiv. 10, kai 74 d07& ouudpvynowvrat.. .. se we oe xl. 38, 39, éxei wNovotvotw ... « &k xpuolov xxiv. 13, &v ht) CERIO CD (GIT: G5 65 on GoM Ob xliii. 12, odro¢ 6 vopog Tov oiKov .. XXiv. 16, ovOE jr) EXOy Gor Odkpva.. .. .. we oe xliv. 12, cai AyWovra rv avopulay airay ..
xxvi. 18, cal rapayOijoovrar. . . odlag gov .. wes xlvii. 16, kai rd 2... 2. 2 es Spor Boppa
A few of these are of considerable importance; viz., x. 14. “And every one had four faces: the first was the face of a cherub, and the second face was the face of a man, and the third, the face of a lion, and the fourth, the face of an eagle.”
xii. 11,12. “This city shall not be your caldron; neither shall ye be the flesh in the midst thereof; but I will judge you in the border of Israel. And ye shall know that I am the Lord: for ye have not walked in my statutes, neither executed my judgments, but have done after the manners of the heathen that are round about you.”
xxvil. 31, 82. ‘“ And they shall make themselves utterly bald for thee, and gird them with sackcloth, and they shall weep for thee with bitterness of heart, and bitter wailing . . . saying, What city is like Tyrus, like the destroyed in the midst of the sea ?”
Xxxill. 25—27. ‘Thus saith the Lord God, Ye eat with the blood, and lift up your eyes towards your idols, and shed blood: and shall ye possess the land? Ye stand upon your sword, ye work abomination, and ye defile every one his neighbour’s wife: and shall ye possess the land? Say thou thus unto them.”
xxxix. 28. ‘‘ But I have gathered them” (Hebrew and Greek, But I will gather them) unto their own land, and have left (Hebrew and Greek, and will leave) none of them any more there.”
xl. 38, 389. “ Where they washed the burnt-offerimg. And in the porch of the gate were two tables on this side, and two tables on that side.”
At Ezekiel viii. }7, we meet with one of the O 72D 3A or fis corrections of the Scribes, Dany “to their face” or “nose,” for ‘BS UN “to my nose.” Upon this the Greek pveTnpifovtes throws no light. We mention this here merely because we have given the other corrections.
The Book of Daniel consists of two parts; Ist, Historie chap. 1.—vi., 2nd, Prophetical, vii.—xii. This Book was so badly translated in the Septuagint, that, in its stead, the version of Theodotion was early adopted by the Greek
churches. ‘Tischendorf gives at the end of his work david xara Tods O, but we have preferred to adopt Theodotion’s
translation.
PROLEGOMENON.
Sixty-four verses find place at the commencement of the Book, recounting the story of Susannah; and at the end. after chap. xii., forty-two verses relating the story of Bel and the Dragon. Of these verses Horne observes: “ That they were originally written in Greek by some Hellenistic Jew, without having any higher source whence they could be derived, is evident from this circumstance, that, in the history of Susannah, Daniel, in his replies to the elders, alludes to the Greck names of the trees, under which they said the adultery charged upon Susannah was committed, which allusions cannot hold good in any other language.” Then he subjoins in a note, ‘In the examination of the elders, when one of them said he saw the crime committed 70 oyivov, under a mastich tree, Daniel is represented as answering, in allusion to cyivov, The angel of God, [who] hath received sentence of God, cxice ae wecor, will cut thee in two. And when the other elder said, it was t7d mpivov, under a holm-tree; Daniel is made to answer, in allusion to the word zpivov, The angel of the Lord waiteth with the sword, mpioas ce péaov, to cut thee in two.”
This double play on the words oyivov and zpivov does not sound like a translation from the Hebrew ; and the whole incident, though it may be founded on fact, must be regarded as apocryphal. Our readers will not be surprised to find that we have omitted these addenda.
We may just point out, that a considerable portion of the Book of Daniel is written in NY28 Syro-Chaldaic, viz., chap. ii. 4, to the end of chap. vii. The Chaldeans are said to have spoken to the king in Syriac. This includes the straightforward confession of the Chaldeans that they could not interpret the king’s dream, unless he first told his servants what the dream was; the anxiety and prayer of Daniel and his companions, that they might not perish with the rest of the wise men of Babylon; the revelation of the secret to Daniel in a night-vision ; Daniel’s exposition and interpretation of the dream to Nebuchadnezzar; the consequent promotion of Daniel and his companions; the setting up of the golden image which Shadrach, Meshach and Abed-Nego refused to worship; their being cast into,
and miraculously rescued from, the burning fiery furnace; Nebuchadnezzar’s second dream about the hewing down of
the tree, and Daniel’s interpretation thereof; Belshazzar’s feast, the handwriting on the wall, Daniel’s interpretation
and increased promotion; the king’s death and succession by Darius; the plot of the presidents and princes against Daniel’s life, and his providential deliverance from the den of lions; Daniel’s dream of the four beasts, including that remarkable passage ; “I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one. like the son:of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.”
Hosea i. 10. Kat éorae év 7) rome ob éppéOn adtois od Aads pov pels, «.7.r., agreeing with the Hebrew, chap. 11. 1; cited Rom. ix. 26.
Hosea ii. 28. Kal dyariow tiv ob ayarnuévny, Kal ép@ TO ov Aa@ pov Aads ov «i cv, agreeing with the Hebrew; referred to, but not cited, by St. Paul, Rom. ix. 26.
Hosea vi. 6. Avdre édeos OéXw 1) Guciav, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited Matt. ix. 13.
Hosea xi. 1. "E& Alyiarouv perexddeca ta Téxva avtod (his son); the Hebrew has 22) CONTR Oye. St. Matthew, chap. ii. 15, follows the Hebrew, “Out of Egypt have I called my son.”
There is a short paragraph in the Greek of Hosea xiii. 4, which is not found in the Hebrew, “‘ Who established the heavens and created the earth, whose hands created all the host of heaven; but I shewed them not unto thee that thou shouldest go after them, and I brought thee” (out of the land of Egypt).
Joel ii, 23—32. Kal éoras peta tadta Kal éxyed ard rvebwatos pov én) wacav capka, x.7.r., agreeing with the
Hebrew (chap. iii.) ; cited for the most part according to the Septuagint, Acts ii. 17--21. 5):
THE HEXAGLOT BIBLE.
Amos v. 25—27. My cdaya nai Ovaias mpoonvéyxaté uot, otkos ’Iapand, teccapdxovta én ev TH epnue, K.T.D. Here we meet with considerable discrepancy between the Septuagint and the Hebrew. The Evangelist (Acts vii. 43) has, with the Septuagint, Remphan, for the Hebrew Chiwn; and contrary both to the Hebrew and the Septuagint, BaBvrevos for Aayackod.
Amos ix. 11, 12. ’Ev 1H muépa éxetvn avacticw thy oxnviv Aavid thv wemtwxviay, x.t... The Septuagint here render OVN ON, “the remnant of Edom,” by of catadouro: Tov avOpwTrav; “the residue of men.” The Evangelist follows the Septuagint, Acts xv. 16,17. We strongly suspect that the correct Hebrew reading is oqN, not ow. The words tov Kupiov, found in the Alexandrian Codex, and cited by St. Luke, are not in the Hebrew, but they complete the Greek sentence, éx&ntnowow of KaTdnovtros, K.T.X.; moreover the word éxfntjowew of the Septuagint and of the Evangelist does not correspond to the Hebrew 17, “they shall possess,” but to W771, “they shall seek.” These variations impart to the passage under consideration two totally different aspects, the one in favour of the Jews, the other in favour of the Gentiles. We are unwilling to charge either side with wilful corruption; but when we meet with discrepancies of so serious a description, we are impressed and saddened with these two reflections, that the earthly heart will ever and anon deceive the head, and that the heavenly treasure is committed to us only in earthen vessels.
Micah v. 2. Kat ov BnOréu oixos ’Edpadd, odvyootds ei, «.7.r. This agrees with the Hebrew, but St. Matthew
has, chap. il. 6, ovdauas éAayiorn ei, apparently a direct contradiction to the words of the Prophet, ‘OND fala) YE
mim. Hence some have inferred that the text has been corrupted in this place. We have no doubt that this inference has proceeded from a misconception of the Hebrew idiom. For under the positive 1")S there is implied a very strong negative. Bethlehem, smallest in size, fewest in number, was yet by no means the least in quality and in honour among the thousands of Judah; and why? because from thence the Saviour was to come.
Hab. i. 5. “Jdere of katappovntal cai émiBrérate, «.7.X. For xatadpovntal the Hebrew and the other versions ,
have O23, “among the Gentiles ;’ informed (ver. 42) that the Gentiles besought that the words might be preached to them the next Sabbath. In this
and although the Evangelist follows the Septuagint (Acts xiii. 41), yet we are
case, certainly, the Gentiles were not catadpovnrtai.
Hab. i. 12. One of the oD 71pn, where for MMM Os thou shalt not die, 7722 89, we shall not die, is said to be substituted.
Hab. ii. 38. "Eay torepnon, vropewvov avtov, bts épyouevos, x.T.r., agreeing with the Hebrew. The sense of this passage is given Heb. x. 37.
Hab. ii. 4. ‘O 6€ dixasos éx Tictews ov Sjoerar. Strangely enough, most Greek copies have wou for cov. All the other versions follow the Hebrew. St. Paul cites the passage without the pronoun: “The just shall live by faith” (Rom. i. 17; Gal. i.11; Heb. x. 38).
Zephaniah i. 5. The Hebrew phrase 02782 O'VDWIT is rendered by the Septuagint, «al tods duviovtas Kata tod Bacidéws adtev; “ And those who swear by their king.” The Latin and modern languages treat 0D as a proper name, ‘“‘ Melcom,”’ etc.
At verse 11, we have 23 ny-bp m7] %D, English Version, For all the merchant people are cut down. The Greek takes 727) in the sense of to be Kke, and }¥2> as a proper name of place: 6t. @uo1wOn Tas 6 Nads Kavdav; “For all the people of Canaan are assimilated;” Luther has, Denn das ganze RKramervolf ift dabin; “For all the
cradespeupie are there, ”’
PROLEGOMENON.
We have another instance of this at chap. 1.5: OU2 a; Knglish Version, “The nation of the Cherethites ; Greek, mdpovxo. Kpnraév; Latin, Gens perditorum; “nation of the lost or destroyed,” as if from 2, to cut off. Luther has den Rriegern; ‘the warriors.”
Zeph. iii. 18. Here we meet with a somewhat obscure passage: 577 iby nya YT FI MIPON TWN 22; English Version, ‘I will gather them that are sorrowful for the solemn assembly, who are of thee, to whom the reproach of it was a burden.” The Greek throws light upon this, the translators having read 7, woe, instead of 17, they were; Kal cuvdtw tovs cuvterpimpévors cov, oval tis éraBev er’ abriv dvedicpdv; “And I will gather together thy crushed ones (Heb., the afflicted of the assembly); woe to him that lifteth up a reproach against her.” That MNw signifies a lifting up, and not a thing to be lifted up, or a burden, is clear from Psalm exli. 2, TTY" BD OS, the lifting up of my hands is an evening sacrifice.
We have made but one trifling addition to the Greek text in this Book, viz., chap. i. 9, éwl mdvras. (Alex., Compl.)
Haggai.—We have transferred the first clause of chap. ii. 1, Greek and German, to chap. i. 15.
Hag. i1.5. The clause, Kai o... . is Atyvrrou, “According to the word that I covenanted with you when ye came out of Egypt,” wanting in Tischendorf and the Codex Vaticanus, is found, but with variations, in the Alexandrian and Complutensian texts. We have adopted the reading of Stier and Theile. .
Hag. ii. 6. "Ere ara€ eyo ceiow Tov ovpavov Kal Thy yhv, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited, substantially, Heb. xii. 26.
Hag. ii. 9. The phrase, “And peace of soul in abundance to every one that laboureth to raise this my temple,” occurs in the Septuagint alone. So also chap. ii. 14: That which they offer shall be unclean “on account of their early burdens; they shall be pained because of their labours, and ye hated him that reproveth at the gates.”
Zechariah.—Chap. 1. 18 of the versions is chap. ii. 1 of the Hebrew.
Zech. iti. 2. "Erretyijoat Kupsos év cot duaBone, agreeing with the Hebrew; cited Jude, ver. 9.
Zech. iv. 14. Odrov ot 8¥0 viol ris mubTHTOs TapectyKxacr Kupio raons Ths yAs, agreeing with the Hebrew; applied by St. John to the two candlesticks, Rev. xi. 4.
Zech. ix.9. Xaipe opodpa Ovyatep Yiwyv, kijpvoce Ovyarep Tepovoadyp, «.7.r., agreeing with the Hebrew;
condensed by St. John in his Gospel, chap. xii. 15.
Zech. xi. 13. Kav éXaBov tods tpiaxovta apyupods, x.7.d., “ And I took the thirty pieces of silver,” etc., agreeing with the Hebrew; cited by St. Matt. (chap. xxvii. 9), as from Jeremiah, the name of the prophet being probably a gloss, written first Zpwov, then Ipiov, then in full, ‘Tepeuiov.
Zech. xii. 10. PTAWY OSX YP DM. Curiously enough, the Septuagint have dv dv Katwpyjcavto, “for what they have danced,” shewing that they read 1777 for 777, to the serious injury of the sense. St. John has ‘Owpovrat eis bv éEexévtnoayv, “They shall look upon him whom they have pierced,” viz., Christ (John xix. 37).
Zech. xiii. 5. The word O18, adv@pwiros, man, is rendered by the proper name, Adam, in the Latin: “ Adam exemplum meum ab adolescentia mea” (comp. other versions). Better, with Gesenius, “a man bought me.”
Zech. xiii. 7. - Taradfate tovs troupévas xai éxomdoate ta tpoPata, agreeing with the Hebrew. St. Matt., chap. xxvi. 31, has matd&, «.7.r., “I will smite,” for smite ye.”
Malachi i., the Hebrew SONDID 12, by Malachi, is translated in the Greek, év xXElpL ayyédou avTov, “by the hand of his messenger.” Of course, saxon signifies my messenger. The latter clause of ver. 1 of the Greek, “lay it
then to your hearts,” does not exist in the present Hebrew copies.
lu THE HEXAGLOT BIBLE.
Mal. iii. 1. [Sou dzroarédXw Tov ayyedov pou, «.T.r., agreeing with the Hebrew. Three evangelists, Matt. (xi. 10), Mark (i. 2), Luke (vii. 27) cite the words with the substitution of cov for pov. Mal. iv. 6. ‘Os amoxatactyjce: Kapdiav TaTpos Tpos viov, «.T.r., NOt in exact accord with the Hebrew, or with the
citation, Luke i. 17.
OF THE LATIN VULGATE.
Many Lutin versions are said (Walton, Proleg. x.) to have been in existence at the time of St. Augustine. The most excellent of these was that which bore tbe threefold title; Itala or Italian, Vulgata or Common, Vetus or Ancient. It is probable that this was in use, in the church of Rome, from the days of the apostles themselves. Jerome first corrected this from the Septuagint, and produced a new translation of the books of Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Song of Solomon. This version was not considered absolutely authentic in the Christian church. The modern Latin Vulgate was the work of Jerome alone. In his youth he studied Hebrew and Chaldee under the most able scholars of the age, and at the same time made himself master of Greek and Latin. To assist him in-his great undertaking he had at hand Origen’s Hexapla, the Septuagint and the versions of Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion. But although these were of great assistance to him, Jerome discovered that their defects were too numerous for the Greek to form the basis of his proposed work; he therefore resolved, with the advice and
at the request of his friends, to make a new translation into Latin from the original Hebrew text. The undertaking
which was of a purely private character, was speedily and happily accomplished. In addition to all the canonical nooks of the Old Testament which he translated from the Hebrew, he translated from the Greek the -books of Judith and Tobit ; the other apocryphal books he did not touch. The New Testament, Jerome is said not to have re-translated,
but simply revised. The superior excellence of his work has been justly admitted by Jews as well as by Christians. Bishop Walton informs us that Rabbi Azarias calls Jerome “Interpretem Christianorum xar’ é€oynv;” and he adds, “Sic Kimchius ad Psalm. ex. vocat Intefpretem absoluté, Aben Ezra ad Psalm. iii. Interpretem preputiatorum, R. Jos. Alb. in Fundamentum sapientem translatorem, Elias Levita, doctum Hieronymum.”
To many in the Christian church, Jerome’s version at first was unacceptable. The appearance of seeking to undermine the authority of the Septuagint gave offence to sensitive minds, and caused the translator no little sorrow. He managed, however, to surmount the reproaches of friends and the attacks of enemies, and after his death his noble work gradually gained authority and continued in use till the time of Gregory the Great. As to the present Latin Vulgate, Bishop Walton says it is certain that the book of Psalms was not translated by Jerome from the Hebrew; (although he did translate the Psalms from the Hebrew, and that version is still extant amongst his works); but is from the old Septuagint version according to the emendation of Lucian Martyr; the other books are principally from Jerome’s translation. As to the authority of the Vulgate in the Church of Rome, it was affirmed at the Council of Trent, Ses. 4, Can. 2, “ Authenticam esse et summe auctoritatis,” and it was decreed that “hac ipsa vetus et Vulgata editio, qu longo tot seeculorum usu in ipsa ecclesia probata est, in publicis lectionibus, disputationibus, preedicationibus, et expositionibus pro authentica habeatur, et ut nemo eam rejicere quovis pretextu audeat vel presumat.” This same
ancient and Vulgate edition, which by the tong use of so many centuries has been approved in the church itself, ts to be
PROLEGOMENON. hii
held authentic in public readings, disputations, sermons and expositions; and no one is to dare or presume to reject tt und r any pretext whatever. That the real meaning of this decree was not that the Vulgate was infallible, but that it was, in the main, a good translation, and contained nothing contrary to the faith or to sound morals, seems tolerably clear from the fact that Popes Sixtus V. and Clement VIII. subsequently brought out new and revised editions. There was—
Ist. Biblia Sacree Vulgate editionis ad Concilii Tridentini prescriptum emendata et a Sixto V. P. M. recognita et approbata. Rome, ex Typographia Apostolica Vaticana. Folio, 1590.
2nd. Biblia Sacra Vulgate editionis Sixti V. Pontificis Max. jussu recognita et edita. Rome, ex Typographia
Apostolica Vaticana, 1592. This edition, printed under the auspices of Clement VIII., is known as the Clementine
edition.
Many editions of the Vulgate have appeared in modern times, none of which can make the high pretension of being free from errors of various kinds, yet upon the whole, we are disposed to consider the Latin Vulgate one of the most magnificent translations of the Holy Scriptures that the Christian world has produced.
In the Old Testament of the Hexaglot Bible, we have reproduced the “ Biblia Sacra Vulgate editionis Sixti V. Pontificis Maximi jussu recognita et Clementis VIII. auctoritatis edita. Parisiis, Jouby et Roger, Editores.
In the New Testament, out of deference to the opinion and advice of friends, we have adopted the “Codex Amiatinus, Novum Testamentum Latine, Interprete Hieronymo. Ex celeberrimo Codice Amiatino omnium et antiquissimo et prestantissimo, edidit Constantius Tischendorf. Lipsiz, Avenarius et Mendelsohn, 1854.”
It will be necessary to give our readers some account of this Codex; and this we can best do by presenting, in as brief a form as possible, the interesting story recorded by Tischendorf himself. He tells us in his Prolegomena that in his travels, which he undertook recently for five years under the patronage of Frederic Augustus, King of Saxony, his first care was everywhere to bring to light ancient records, whether Greek or Latin, referring to the text of the sacred books. Amongst the number of Latin books one, which was formerly called Amiatine, in modern times Laurentian, stands pre-eminent ; and that this has been preserved to our time he attributes to the remarkable beneficence of Divine Providence. For that book contains the biblical interpretation of Jerome, written not more than 120 years after the death of Jerome himself. A.M. Bandinius, towards the end of the eighteenth century described this codex with learning and skill, and Ferd. Flor. Fleck, in the 33rd year of the present century, himself partly collated it with the Vulgate text, and partly had it collated by his friends. The work, however, was badly done; and in the autumn of 1848, Tischendorf went to Florence, and took it in hand; he was subsequently assisted in bringing out the text by the learned S. P. Tregelles, LL.D. Of the removal of the Codex Amiatinus to the Laurentian library Bandinius observes: ‘Quod autem in Laurentianam bibliothecam transierit, gratiz immortales munificentize Petri Leopoldi, magni ducis nostri, nunc augustissimi imperatoris, sunt referendz, qui rebus omnibus servandis que sacris et profanis studiis quoquo modo conferre possunt semper intentus, quum ipsi innotuisset inter suppressi Monachorum Cisterciensium montis Amiatz ccenobii suppellectiles hoc pretiosum monumentum reperiri, religiose jussit ut cum aliis codicibus. ibidem existentibus in hoc Mediceum sacrarium toto terrarum orbe celeberrimum transferretur ?” But that it (the Codex Amiatinus) was transferred to the Laurentian library, undying thanks are due to the munificence of Peter Leopold, our Grand-duke, now our most august Emperor; who, always intent upon preserving
whatever can in any way contribute to sacred as well as secular learning, as soon as it was intimated to him that amongst
THE HEXAGLOT BEBLE.
the property of the suppressed order of the Cistercian Monks of Mount Amiata, this precious monument was found, religiously commanded that it should be removed, with other MSS. which were there, to this sacred repository, the most celebrated in the whole world.
The Amiatine Monastery was built about the year 750 on the lofty mount of Amiata, the modern Delle Fiore, situate on the boundaries of Tuscany and the States of the Church. It was in the possession of the Benedictine Mouks for about five centuries, when by order of Gregory IX. the Cistercians succeeded in their place. The question has been discussed, how the Codex came into the possession of this Monastery. The most probable story is that Peter, an Amiatine Monk, a Longobardian by birth, a man of extraordinary influence, who flourished at the end of the ninth, and the beginning of the tenth century, conferred great benefits upon his order, and amongst other benefits, this Codex. In corroboration of this view, it appears that on the first page of the Codex the following verses are written in large letters :—
Coenobium ad eximii merito venerabile Salvatoris, Quem caput ecclesie dedicat alta fides,
Petrus Longobardorum extremis de finibus abbas Devoti affectus pignora mitto mei,
Meque meosque optans tanti inter gaudia patris
In celis memorem semper habere locum.
To the venerable cloister of the deservedly illustrious Saviour (Salvator, name of convent, Tisch.), whom ancient Jaith consecrates head of the church; I, Peter, abbot, send from the remotest regions of the Longobards this pledge of my affection, with the desire that both I and mine may ever find a humble (mindful) place in heaven amid the joys of such a father.
It has been tolerably clearly proved that these lines appear not as they were originally written, but as they were interpolated by Peter the Longobard. The two Hexameters (lines 1 and 3) are spoilt by the interpolation.
The correct reading is supposed to be according to the learned Tischendorf :
Culmen ad eximii merito venerabile Petri
Quem caput ecclesie dedicat alta fides,
Servandus Latii extremis de finibus abbas
To the venerable summit of the deservedly illustrious Peter, whom ancient faith consecrates head of the church, 1 Servandus, abbot, send from the remotest regions of Latium,’ etc.
Servandus was a disciple of St. Benedict, and abbot of a library built by the patrician Liberius in honour of St. Sebastian, in the remotest confines of Latium. He is related to have been in the habit of paying visits, and to have paid one visit in particular, in company with a few of his disciples, to his venerable master at Casinum (San Germano) A.D. 541. On this occasion, Servandus presented St. Benedict with this pledge of his devoted affection. There is another account that Servandus, when he was old, heard of the election of Gregory to the Popedom, and sent him this Codex asa present. Tnere is also a tradition, dating as far back as the 11th century, that the Codex itself is in Gregory
the Great’s handwriting.
PROLEGOMENO™N.
At the end of the Codex, after the list of the Canonical books, which is the same as that of the Clementine
edition, the foilowing verses are written :—
Hieronyme interpres variis doctissime linguis Te Bethlehem celebrat, te totus personat orbis. Te quoque nostra tuis promet bibliotheca libris, Qua nova cum priscis condis donaria gazis. Jerome, interpreter skilled, in various languages learned, Thee Bethlehem celebrates, thy praise in the wide world resoundeth. Thee too, enriched with thy works, our library ever shall publish,
Where thou hast stored new gifts with revered antiquity’s treasures.
The text of the Codex Amiatinus, as it differs in many respects from the Clementine edition, so, with few
exceptions, it is, as Tischendorf thinks, such as Jerome wrote it. Throughout the world there is no greater vindicator
of ancient truth. In many instances, where the Vulgate has no authority, or at most but very little, from the Greek,
this Codex is in accord with abundant Greek authorities. The style is old ecclesiastical, not classical; the orthography is peculiar, and differs from most printed books. Letters are confused, such as the labials b, v, p, and the dentals d, ¢; the aspirate is omitted or inserted without distinction. Sometimes the consonants of compounds are assimilated, sometimes not ; sometimes the same word is spelt in two or three different ways in the same page.
In the Hexaglot Bible, the same plan has been adopted with this Latin text, as with the Greek. The important passages which find place in the original, but which are wanting in our Codex, are supplied from the Vulgate, within brackets, and the words which are grossly misspelt have been corrected.
On this subject, Tischendcorf remarks: ‘‘ Emendationes in codice Amiatino maximam partem antiqua manu, seculi fere octavi vel noni facte sunt, pauce recentiores sunt: passim difficile dictu est utrum emendatio ad ipsum auctorem an manum ejus equalem an ad correctorem posteriorem sit referenda. Correctoris studio quum multa debentur quibus ipse textus amplificatur vel in aliam lectionem mutatur, tum permulta quibus dictio ad leges antiquas grammaticas convenientior est reddita: quamquam sat multa per errorem aut solecismum scripta intacta manserunt. Non inutile esset emendationes eas que in re critica aliquid momenti haberent colligere, quo melius is textus ad quem corrector codicem conformare studebat cognosci posset. Nos quidem in edendo textu nec ubique illas arcendas nec plerumque recipiendas curavimus.” The corrections in the Codex Amiatinus were made for the most part by an ancient hand, about the eighth or ninth century, a few of them are more recent. It is everywhere difficult to say whether the correction is the work of the author himself, or of one of his contemporaries, or of a later writer. To the zeal of the corrector much must be attributed whereby the text itseif has been amplified or changed into a different reading, and much whereby the wording has been rendered more agreeable to the ancient laws of grammar: although much that was written by error or solecism, has remained untouched. It would not be unprofitable to collect those emendations which have any critical importance, so that the text to which the corrector desired to conform this Codex might be known. We, indeed, in editing our text, have not been careful either to reject them (the corrections), or, as a rule, to accept them. The wisdom of reproducing any codex as it is, absolutely (unless the object be generously to place within the reach of all an equivalent for that to
which only few can obtain access), is doubtful. But to go on multiplying copies abounding with errors and
THE HEXAGLOT BIBLE
inconsistencies, especially in spelling and grammar, would be absurd. We have not hesitated in our Latin text to
modify the spelling of certain words, which, to say the least, would have presented an inharmonious appearance in
such a work as the Hexaglot Bible. For instance, we have substituted scripsi for scribsi, aliud for aliut, inquit for
inquid, hi or ii for hii, prétiosa for preetiosa, quérella for querella, hebraice for ebraice, amare for amare, scribe for scribe, (imperative), cum exercitu for cum exercitum, and the like. And here we may quote Tischendorf’s words:
“Qua in re paullo majorem constantiam vellem adhibitam esse.”
DIFFERENT READINGS.
It will be convenient here to give a list of the different readings which find place in the Clementine Edition and in the Codex Amiatinus, and of words and phrases supplied within brackets to the latter from the former in the
Hexaglot Bible.
CLEMENTINE Ep. Vute. Matt. i.
TIscHENDORF, Cop. AMIAT. CLEMENTINE Ep. Vute.
Zarad
TiscHENDORF, Cop. AMIAT.
3, Zaram .. me Matt. iii. 11, caleeamenta calciamenta ( freq.)
8, Esron .. 5, Rahab .. 5, Obed .. 7, Abias .. 10, Manassen
11, transmigratione
13, Eliacim 14, Sadoc .. 15, Mathan
20, apparuit in somnis
ii. 1, Bethlehem
UGE 56
1, Jerosolymam
5, Jude ..
6, regat ..
6, Israé]l thus 11, myrrham 13, somnis 17, Jeremiam
19, angelus Domini apparuit
22, quod .. 22, illo 22, Nazarseus
lii. 1, Joannes
=}
2, peenitentiam
38, Isaiam
t, pelliceam t, locuste. . 5, Jordanem
6, ab eo in Jordane
9, potens est 11, baptizo vos
2, appropinquavit
.
Esrom
Racab
Obeth
Abia
Manassem transmigrationem Eliachim
Saddoc
Matthan
in sompis apparuit Bethleem ( freq.) Bethlem (Luke ii. 15). Judez
Hierosolymam ( freq.) Judez
reget
Israhel ( freq.)
tus
murram
somnio
Hierimiam
apparuit angelus Domini quia
illuc
Nazareus
Johannes ( freq.) peenitentiam (freg.) adpropinquavit (adp. freg ) Esaiam ( freq.) pelliciam
lucuste
Jordanen ( freq.)
in Jordane ab eo potest
vos baptizo
11, baptizabit 12, permundabit 16, et si 1a oe 1, tentaretur 3, tentator 6, assumpsit 7, tentabis 8, assumpsit 10, Satana.. 10, enim .. 12, Jesus .. 18, maritima 13, Nephthalim .. 15, Galilea G0 16, vidit lucem magnam . 16, umbre 23, and ix. 35, circuibat .. 25, Decapoli 1, Jesus .. 12, exsultate nc 16, opera vestra bona 18, fiant .. oe 22, Raca .. 23, offers .. 24, ante .. 24, reconciliari 24, offeres .. 27, quia .. 29, projice.. 29, mittetur 33, perjurabis 50 oe 39, dexteram maxillam tuam 41, angariaverit .. 41, et : a
baptizavit permundavit (deest)
ab
temtaretur (freg.) temtator (freg.) assumsit
temtabis
assumit
Satanas
(deest)
(deest) maritimam Nepthalim ( freq.) Galilee
lumen vidit magnum et umbra circumibat Decapolim
(deest)
exultate
vestra bona opera fiunt
Racha
offeres
ad
reconciliare
offers
quoniam
proice (freg.) mittatur
pejerabis
dextera maxilla tua angariaverit (deest)
PROLEGOMENON. lv
——— SSS
CLEMENTINE Ep. Vuue. TiscHENDORF, Cop. Amrat.
(deest)
TiscHENDoRF, Cop. AMIAT.
diligatis Matt.
CuiEMENTINE Ep. Vue.
Matt. v. 46, diligitis oe LX Oy tA) are 00
47, et oe 06 Wi) 2;)1acis 1. -