re ae ' ; Taye
ee Mets shi Reyes Lt
Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2008 with funding from Microsoft Corporation
https://archive.org/details/introductiontoteOOnestrich
THEOLOGICAL TRANSLATION LIBRARY
VOL. XIII.
NESTLE’S INTRODUCTION TO THE TEXTUAL CRITICISM OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
INTRODUCTION
TO THE
PEATUAL CRITICISM OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
BY EBERHARD NESTLE, PH. AND Tu.D.
‘" MAULBRONN
TRANSLATED FROM THE SECOND EDITION (With Corrections and Additions by the Author) BY WILLIAM EDIE, B.D.
KING EDWARD
AND EDITED WITH A PREFACE BY
ALLAN MENZIES, D.D.
PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY AND BIBLICAI. CRITICISM IN THE UNIVERSITY OF ST. ANDREWS
WILLIAMS AND NORGATE
14 HENRIETTA STREET, COVENT GARDEN, LONDON 20 SOUTH FREDERICK STREET, EDINBURGH AND 7 BROAD STREET, OXFORD New York: G. P, PUTNAM’S SONS
Igo
438
PRINTED BY NEILL AND COMPANY LIMITED BELLEVUE, EDINBURGH
MOFFITT
EDITORS PREFACE:
PROFESSOR EBERHARD NESTLE of Maulbronn is one of the distinguished company of philologists who have in recent years directed their attention to the study of the New Testa- ment. He is by no means a stranger in this country. Readers of the Expositor and the Exfosztory Times are familiar with his name, and are accustomed to receive from him original and independent discussions of New Testament textual problems. He is consulted by scholars both in this country and on the Continent on questions of Aramaic and Syriac scholarship, and has contributed, in the way of criticism and careful proof reading, to many important publications of English scholars,-such as Professor Swete’s edition of the Septuagint,’ the publications of Mrs. Lewis and Mrs. Gibson (Zhe Sznaitic Palimpsest, etc.), and the Gospel of the Twelve Apostles recently published by Pro- fessor Rendel Harris.
The readers of this volume may be glad to know a little more of its author. A native of Wiirttemberg, he was educated at the Gymnasium of Stuttgart and then at the Theological Seminary of Blaubeuren, the latter being one of the four old cloister schools of Wiirttemberg, in which, far from the distractions of large towns, a thorough philological train-
1 See the Dedication to Dr. Nestle of Professor Swete’s /itroduction to the Old Testament in Greek, just published.
rs 109298
vi EDITOR’S PREFACE.
ing is provided for the future clergy of that kingdom. It was as “ Praeceptor” of one of these schools that Albrecht Bengel, that great textual critic and unaffectedly pious man, spent the best part of his life, and in his Warginalien und Materialien Dr. Nestle gives an interesting account of Bengel as a scholar, and describes the studies of the school over which he pre- sided. Our author studied divinity and oriental languages at the Universities of Tiibingen and Leipzig, and considers it one of the happy dispensations of his life that he was per- mitted to live in England for two years, working in the British Museum and preaching to German congregations in London. He was then Repetent or Tutor at the Theological Seminary of Tibingen, and, after a short period of work as a preacher, was called to the Gymnasium of Ulm to teach Greek, German, Hebrew, and Religion. For two years he filled the vacant professorship of Semitic languages at the University of Tiibingen, but, not being appointed to the chair, he returned to Ulm. From there he moved to the Seminary at Maulbronn, which offered better opportunities for combined philological and theological studies.
Dr. Nestle’s principal works are :—Dée ¢sraelitischen Eugen- namen nach threr religionsgeschichtlichen Bedeutung (Proper Names in Israel: their significance for the history of religion), the Prize Essay of the Leiden Tyler Society, 1876. An earlier Prize Essay at Tiibingen on the Septuagint and Massorah of Ezekiel was also successful, but was not published.
Psalterium Tetraglottum (Graece, Syriace, Chaldaice, Latine), 1879. Sixth and Seventh Editions of Tischendorf’s Septuagint (with new collation of Codices Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, and Alex- andrinus) 1880, 1887.
Septuagintastudien, iii, 1886, 1896, 1898.
EDITOR’S PREFACE. Vii
Syriac Grammar (Latin, 1881; German, 1888; English, 1889).
Novi Testamenti Graect Supplementum, 1896 (Collation of Codex Bezae: Apocryphal Gospels).
Philologica Sacra, 1896.
Minor publications collected in J/. arginalien und Materiatien, 1893.
Edition of the Greek New Testament for the Stuttgart Bible Society, 1898, of which a third edition is now in pre- paration.
Numerous contributions to theological and literary Journals (Jahrbiicher fiir deutsche Theologie, Studien una Kvritiken, Theologische Literaturzeitung, Literarisches Centralblatt) and to Herzog-Hauck, Encyklopidie fiir Protestantische Theologie.
The Introduction now brought before the English public in Mr. Edie’s translation is thus the work of one who is, and has long been, actively engaged in the studies belonging to several parts of the great subject of the text of the New Testament, and who possesses an exact and practised know- ledge of the words of the sacred books of Christianity. The present manual accordingly shows the instruments of criticism in actual operation in the hands of a master. It was meant originally for the Goschen-Sammlung, a collection of small manuals for the general public, and arose out of the wish of the author to tell his pupils with whom he read the Greek Testa- ment, as well as others, more about the history of the New Testament text than was at the time generally accessible. The handbook was brought out by the theological publishers Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, literary references being then added to fit it for use by students of theology. It met with a warm welcome from such readers, and the second edition
Vili EDITOR’S PREFACE.
was largely recast so as to meet still further the purposes. of students. The long experience of Professor Nestle as a teacher of younger pupils has no doubt enabled him to pre- sent the subject so clearly that his book may find favour in the eyes of the general reader, and commend itself to all who care for the New Testament.
The absence of theological bias will not be thought by any wise judge a disadvantage in a work of this character. It will be observed that Professor Nestle does not regard the texts recently formed by great scholars as constituting, either singly or jointly, a Zexrtus Receptus in view of which textual enquiry may now desist from its labours, but that he believes that much is still to be learned about the text both of the Gospels and of the other books of the New Testament.
This translation, as the title-page indicates, has been made from the second, enlarged, edition, and the author has kindly furnished various corrections and additions, bringing the book in its English form up to date. Some additional references to English books and periodicals have been
inserted by the translator. ALM.
GON DENTS:
CHAPTER I.
PAGES
History of the Printed Text since 1514,_.. : . 1-27
Complutensian Polyglot — Aldus — Erasmus — Collections of editions—Literature—First critical edition: Colinaeus— Stephen—Verse division—Beza—Polyglots: Antwerp: Paris: London—Elzevir—7extus Receptus—Critical at- tempts : Caryophilus : Courcelles: Saubert : Simon—Mill —Toinard—Bentley—Gerhard von Maestricht—Bengel— Wettstein— Griesbach— Matthaei— Birch— Moldenhauer —Adler—Scholz— Lachmann— Tischendorf—Tregelles— Westcott and Hort: their types of text—Weymouth—B. Weiss —von Gebhardt — Stuttgart New Testament — Schjett—Baljon—Catholic editions: Gratz—van Ess— Gehringer — Patricius — Jaumann — Reithmayer — Hetze- nauer—Brandscheid—A pocrypha and Pseudepigrapha.
CHAPTER II.
Materials of the Textual Criticism of the New Testa- ment, . ; ; : : : . : ; 28-155
Autographs—Manuscripts—Versions—Quotations—N umber of Manuscripts—Uncial and Cursive Script—Age— Material —Scriptiocontinua—Accentuation—Stichometry—Palimp- sests — Punctuation — Size — Contents — Lectionaries — Parchment— Ink— Papyrus— Paper— Pen— Manuscripts
x CONTENTS.
PAGES de luxe—Illustration—Uncials: of the whole New Testa- ment: of the Gospels: of the Acts and Catholic Epistles : of the Pauline Epistles: of the Apocalypse—Muinus- cules —Ferrar Group —Lectionaries —Versions : Syriac : Peshitto : Curetonian: Lewis: Tatian: Philoxenian : Hark- lean: Gwynn: Jerusalem: Literature of Syriac Versions —Latin Versions : Old Latin manuscripts: Fathers: The Vulgate: Jerome: Alcuin: Theodulf: Harding: Correc- toria Bibliorum: Mazarin Bible: Sixtine and Clementine Vulgate—Egyptian Versions: Bohairic: Sahidic : Middle Egyptian — Gothic— Ethiopic — Armenian — Georgian — Arabic—Patristic Quotations.
CHAPTER III.
Theory and Praxis of the Textual Criticism of the New Testament, : y . ; ; ; 156-246
Task and method—Internal criticism—Conjecture—Eclectic method — Genealogical method — External testimony —Lucian: his relation to the Peshitto— Hesychius : Codex B—Eusebius: Pamphilus: Origen: Euthalius : Evagrius: Athos manuscript — Later revisers — Pre- Origenic texts—Heretics : Artemonites, Marcosians, Basil- ides, Noetus, Valentinians, Gnostics, Marcionites, Arians— Marcion : his relation to the Western text—Tatian : ques- tion as to a Greek Harmony: his relation to the Western text—The Western text: theory of Blass: the Lucan writ- ings in Codex Bezae: conclusion of Luke’s Gospel: the Apostolic Decree—Rules of Textual criticism: sources of error: illegibility : homoioteleuton : transposition of letters and words: itacism: substitution of synonymous terms : additions: conscious alterations: stylistic, liturgic, and dogmatic changes : critical canons: proper names: textus brevior—Conclusion.
CONTENTS. xi
Critical Notes on Various Passages of the New ig Testament, . ; : ; ; : : : 247-335 Appendix I. List of Greek and Latin Writers, . - 336 Appendix II. List of Passages referring to dyr- ypada, . : : : ; : ‘ : . 340 Index of Subjects, . : : ‘ ; : fath@ae
Index of New Testament Passages referred to, . » | Va50:
ae ; ae _ Pe
ee Syise * oe
ae |
ie) ~~
‘omy bby, Peake) -
.
i» a jets
tT ¥ A a 7 @ » Ss : ’ 7 , H : , = ca eb : oe ee ? - <p . é A [ te! nae - Rae as rn = > Ps ==) j oad uh ,s = Lp - a = a. te —s. rs ais : 1 ' 7 7 , ene ae - £ ‘eb ae _ on
ABBREVIATIONS.
The symbols used to indicate the various manuscripts and versions will be found in the chapter on Materials. The student will compare the Notes in Tischendorf’s Zito octava minor and the Index in the Octava maior, vol. iii. The following contractions are employed in the course of this work :—
GGA. = Gédttinger gelehrte Anzeigen.
GK. = Zahn’s Geschichte des neutestamentlichen Kanons. See ps 590rn, 2:
LC. = Literarisches Centralblatt.
PRE. = Protestantische Real-Encyklopaddie. See p. 7.
ThLbl. = Theologisches Literaturblatt.
ThLz. = Theologische Literaturzeitung.
ThStKr. = Theologische Studien und Kritiken.
TiGr. = Tischendorf’s V.Z7. Graece, editio octava mator, vol. iil. see p. 6.
rU. = Texte und Untersuchungen.
Ort. = Urtext und Uebersetzungen der Bibel. See p. 6f.
W-H. = Westcott and Hort. See p. 21.
W-W. = Wordsworth and White. See pp. 123, 131.
ZdmG. = Zeitschrift der morgenlandischen Gesellschaft.
ZfdPhil. = Zeitschrift fiir deutsche Philologie. ZfwTh. = Zeitschrift fiir wissenschaftliche Theologie.
ADDENDA.
Page 6. To the Literature add: Ritiegg, Die neutestamentliche _ Texthritik seit Lachmann, Zurich, 1892. | age 74. Two fragments of N.T. text have been published by ) Grenfell and Hunt in Zhe Amherst Papyri, Part I.: The Ascension g of Isaiah and other theological fragments (London, 1900). The first } consists of Hebrews 1. 1, written, along with Genesis i. 1, in a small } uncial hand of the late third, or more probably early fourth, century at the top of a papyrus leaf containing a letter from Rome. The verse _ from the N.T. exhibits the reading tots zatpaow jpov, which is not } found in any of the manuscripts. The other fragment consists of Acts ii. 11-22 with lacunae, written on vellum and dating apparently _ from about the fifth or sixth century. It contains a few singular readings such as: (verse 12) mpos t Ov GAXov ; (13) éxAevalov A€yovres, which is practically the reading of D, the only difference being that D has the compound verb d:exAevaLov ; (14) yrworov tpiv, apparently ; (17) pera tadra with B instead of év rats éoxaras Hpepacs, and also, apparently, év’mma with the fextus recepfus; (20) zpw 7 with the textus receptus ; (21) ds dy with the fextus receptus.
Page 91. Add: J. R. Harris, Further Researches into the History of the Ferrar Group, 1900.
Page 106 (5). Add: Hilgenfeld, Zhomas von Heraklea und die Apostelgeschichte, in the ZfwTh., 1900, 3.
Page 137. Add: Forbes Robinson, Coptic Apocryphal Gospels, in Texts and Studies, iv. 2, 1896.
Page 139. To Kauffmann’s Beitrage must now be added: v. Der codex Brixianus (ZfdPhil. xxxii. pp. 395-335). In this important
XVi ADDENDA.
contribution Kauffmann corroborates the view expressed by Burkitt in the Journal of Theological Studies, i. pp. 129-134, that Wordsworth and White were mistaken in regarding the text of codex Brixianus (f) as a recension of the Old Latin closely allied to Jerome’s revision. Burkitt holds that the text of Brixianus was corrected from the Vulgate, and afterwards altered in conformity with the Gothic. The only difference between Burkitt and Kauffmann is that the latter believes that the text of Brixianus was derived from an earlier Latin manuscript which had been altered in conformity with the Gothic, and that it was afterwards assimilated to the Vulgate. This view must also be noted in connection with the Old Latin codex gue (see p. 118). For an example of the connection between ee and the Gothic see the note to p. 289, below.
Page 162. Add: (9) John, Luke, Matthew, Mark, in cod. min. go.
Page 289. John vii. 15. For “Iovdator f here reads ¢ur+bae, which is interesting as agreeing with the Gothic, which has mazageius. Com- pare the view of Burkitt and Kauffmann in the note to p. 139 above. The variant is not mentioned in Tischendorf.
INTRODUCTION
TO THE
TEXTUAL CRITICISM OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT.
G€HAPTER I. HISTORY OF THE PRINTED TEXT SINCE I514.
IT is not quite creditable to Christian scholarship at the close of the Middle Ages that not a single printed edition of the Greek New Testament appeared during the course of the fifteenth century. The Jews printed their Hebrew Psalter as early as 1477, and the entire Hebrew Bible in 1488.
I. The honour of producing the first edition belongs to the Editio prin- Spanish Cardinal Francis XIMENES de Cisneros (1437-1517). Gompittere It was included in the so-called Complutensian Polyglot, which sian Polyglot. takes its name from Complutum (now Alcala de Henares), where it was printed. The plan of the work was conceived as early as 1502, in celebration of the birth of the future Emperor Charles V. The scholar who had the principal part in it was James Lopez de Stunica. The printing of the New Testament was completed on the roth January 1514, and of the remaining five volumes, comprising the Old Testament with Grammar and Lexicon, on the 1oth July 1517. On the 8th November of the same year the Cardinal died. It was not, however, till
2 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [ CHAP, 1e
the 22nd March 1520 that Pope Leo X. sanctioned the publi- cation of the work, the two Vatican manuscripts of the Greek Old Testament, which had been borrowed in the first year of | Leo’s papacy, having been returned on the oth July 1519." On the 5th December 1521, the presentation copy designed | for the Pope, printed on parchment and bound in red velvet, was placed in the Vatican Library. No copies seem to have reached Germany through the trade till the year 1522. Only 600 copies were printed, which were sold at 6} ducats per copy—about 43 of our present English money. The Cardinal, who enjoyed the income of a king but was content to live like. a monk, expended over 50,000 ducats on the undertaking. At the present time, copies of the Complutensian Polyglot, especially those printed on parchment, are counted among the rarest treasures of libraries. The Old Testament is printed in three columns, the Latin text of the Bible used in the Church of the Middle Ages standing between the original Hebrew text of the Synagogue and the Alexandrian Greek version, “like Jesus between the two thieves.” The New Testament has only two columns, that on the left containing the Greek text, that on the right the Latin version. For the sake of | those learning Greek the corresponding words in each are: indicated. The type is modelled on the characters found in good manuscripts. Of accents, the acute alone is used to. mark the tone syllable. |
LITERATURE.—Scrivener, Jztroduction, ii. c. 7; Hoskier (see be- low, p. 5); Frz. Delitzsch, Studien sur Entstehungsgeschichte der Poly- glottenbibel des Cardinals Ximenes, Leipzig, 1871; Fortgesetzte Studien, 1886; Urtext und Uebersetzungen der Bibel, p. 64. A facsimile of the title-page and colophon will be found in Schaff’s Companion to the Greek Testament and the English Version. ‘The decree of Pope Leo X. is printed in the Greek and Latin Testament of Van Ess, Tubingen, 1827.
Previous to Ximenes, however, the famous Venetian printer Aldus Manutius had conceived the idea of such a Polyglot.
1 They were reinserted in the library on the 23rd August.
CHAP. I.]} THE PRINTED TEXT SINCE 1514. 3
In the Preface to his undated Greek Psalter (cérca 1497), a triglot Bible was promised. Of this he was reminded from London by Grocyn on the 6th October 1499. On the gth July 1501 he wrote about it to the German humanist Conrad Celtes, to whom he sent the first specimen page on the 3rd September of the same year. (Facsimile in Renouard, Z’/m- primerte des Aldes**.)
Still earlier, the Magnificat and the Benedictus! had been printed among the hymns at the end of the Greek Psalter (Milan, 1481; Venice, 1486). These were the first portions of the Greek New Testament to be printed, while the first printed in Germany appeared at Erfurt in 1501-2. The first edition of the Greek New Testament for sale was Erasmus’s edition of 1510.
LITERATURE.—On Aldus, see Nestle, Septuagintastudien, i. 2; mir On Aldus’ s well-known device, the anchor and dolphin, see Léon Dorez, Etudes Aldines, Revue des bibliotheques, vi. (1896), part 5-6, p. 143 ff.; part 7-9; also J. R. Harris, Zhe Homeric Cen- tones, London, 1898, p. 24. The device is emblematic of the favour- ite motto of Augustus and Titus, dei o7etde Bpadéws, Semper festina lente.
2. Froben, the printer of Basel, was anxious to forestall the a
costly edition of the Spanish Cardinal, and with this object ee
appealed on the 15th March 1515 to the famous humanist
Desiderius ERASMUS (1467-1536), then in England. His
edition appeared as early as the tst March 1516, and was
dedicated on the Ist February to Pope Leo. The printing
was begun in the previous September, and was partly super-
intended by Zwingli’s friend, John Oecolampadius of Weins-
berg. Erasmus himself confessed afterwards that his New
Testament was “pracipitatum verius quam editum,” though
he boasted that he had employed in its preparation not any
sort of manuscripts, but the oldest and most correct copies.”
As early as 1734, J. A. Bengel recognised that in the Apoca- 1 Mary’s Hymn, Luke i. 46-55 ; and Hymn of Zacharias, Luke i. 68-70.
3
2 ‘© Nec eis sane quibuslibet, sed vetustissimis simul et emendatissimis.” >
4 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. Ie
lypse Erasmus must have used only one manuscript, and that partly mutilated, so that he was unable to read it correctly and was obliged to supply its lacune by means of a retrans- lation from the Latin into Greek. And this conclusion was confirmed in 1861 by the rediscovery of that very manuscript by Franz Delitzsch in the Oettingen-Wallerstein Library at Mayhingen."
In a parallel column Erasmus gave a translation of the Greek into elegant Latin. The Emperor protected the edition for four years by copyright, but as early as February 1518 it was reprinted by Aldus Manutius in his Greek Bible. It was sanctioned by the Pope on the roth September 1518. Four successive editions were afterwards prepared by Erasmus: the second in 1519, the third in 1522, the fourth (improved) in 1527, and the fifth in 1535.
In his third edition, Erasmus for the first time incorporated the well-known “comma Johanneum,” the passage about the Three Witnesses (1 John v.7). He did so on the evidence of a manuscript now in Dublin (Montfortianus, 61), in which the
1 At the present time this text of Erasmus is still disseminated by tens and even hundreds of thousands by the British and Foreign Bible Society of London. To this day the word aka@dprytos is printed in their editions at Apoc. xvii. 4, though there is no such word in the Greek language as dxa@dprys, meaning uncleanness. In the concluding verses of the New Testament, which were retranslated by Erasmus from his Latin Bible, there stands the lovely future ddaiphoe: for a@ere?t. We find also constructions like ot« @o71, xalmep éotty, inc. xvii. 8, where, however, the accentuation éorfy makes Erasmus responsible for an additional error he did not commit, seeing that he at least printed @ormw. Every college lad knows that kalrep is construed with the participle, though it is not perhaps every one that will see just at once that kal mdpeors is the correct reading. [Cf Mark xv. 6, where the MSS. fluctuate in like manner between dy rapyrodyro and byrep Hrovvto (ON- TMIAPHTOYTNTO.)] Other instances where the Textus Receptus has adopted the reading of Erasmus in spite of the fact that it is unsupported by any known MS. are to be found, e.g, in I Pet. ii. 6 (Kal wepséxes) and in 2 Cor. i. 6, Luther, who used Erasmus’s second edition of 1519, followed him in saying of the Beast, ‘that is not although it is.” This, however, is not so remarkable as that in the year 1883 such things were still allowed to stand in the first impression of the Re- vised Version of Luther’s Bible issued by the Conference of German Evangelical Churches, and only removed in their last Revision of 1892. The error in Apoc. xvii. 8 was copied into the English Authorised Version of 1611 (‘is not and yet. is”) but was corrected by the Revisers of 1884 (‘‘is not and shall come”).
CHAP. I.] THE PRINTED TEXT SINCE I514. 5
passage had probably been inserted from the Vulgate by the English Franciscan monk Roy. From the Vulgate it had already been received, in a slightly different form, into the Complutensian Polyglot. Luther himself purposely omitted it from his version. The first edition of his translation to contain it was that printed at Frankfurt by Feyerabend in 1576. It was not inserted in the Wittenberg editions till 1596. After 1534 no Greek edition appeared without it for the space of 200 years.
LITERATURE.—Scrivener, vol. ii. p. 182 ff. ; Frz. Delitzsch, Hand- schriftliche Funde, i., Leipzig, 1861 ; H. C. Hoskier, 4 full Account and Collation of the Greek Cursive Codex Evangelium 604 together with ten Appendices containing ....(B).. . . the various readings by the five editions of Erasmus, 1516, 1519, 1522,1527, 1535. .... (F) Report of a Visit to the Public Library at Bale, with fac- simile of Erasmus’s second MS. Evan. 2, ... . London, 1890. On Erasmus’s supplementary matter, the New Version, Annotationes, Paraclesis ad lectorem, Methodus and Apologia, as also on the entire practical and reforming aim of his N.T., see R. Stihelin in the Protestantische Real-Encyvklopidie, third edition, v. 438. Froude, Life and Letters of Erasmus, p. 126 ff.
3. The number of editions of the Greek New Testament Collections which have been brought out since the time of Ximenes is % “Ts about 1000. No library in the world contains them all. In the last century the Danish Pastor Lorck possessed perhaps the largest private collection of Bibles. This was purchased by Duke Charles of Wiirttemberg, and has found a place in the Royal Public Library at Stuttgart. Unfortunately, it is not possible to supplement or enlarge it in the way that it deserves.
The largest collection of the present century is that of the late Prof. Ed. Reuss of Strassburg. In his descriptive cata- logue he established the genealogy of the separate editions by a collation of the readings in 1000 selected passages. Several editions he was unable to obtain: some he was obliged to regard as of doubtful existence: others, again, mistakenly quoted by previous collectors, he was able to discard once for
6 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. I.
all. His labours form the basis of those further researches prosecuted with much ardour chiefly in England and America: in the latter by the German-Swiss scholar Philip Schaff (d. 2oth Oct. 1893), and his American friend I. H. Hall (d. 1896), in England by F. H. A. Scrivener (d. 26th Oct. 1891), and in Germany by the American C. R. Gregory. Mention can be made of only a few of these printed editions.
LITERATURE.—Ed. Reuss, Bibliotheca Novt Testamenti Graect, cuius editiones ab initio typographiae ad nostram aetatem impressas guotquot reperiri potuerunt collegit digessit illustravit E. R. Argentora- tensis, Brunsvigae, 1872. Tischendorf, ovum Testamentum Graece ad antiguissimos testes denuo recensuit apparatum criticum apposutt Constantinus de Tischendorf, Lipsiae (Hinrichs), vol. i. 1869 ; vol. 11. 1872; vol. iii, Prolegomena scripsit Caspar Renatus Gregory additts curis Ezrae Abbot, 1894, 8vo. (vol. iii. cited in the following part of this work under the symbol Z/Gy.). F. H. A. Scrivener, A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament. Fourth edition, edited by Ed. Miller, 2 vols, London, 1894. P. Schaff, Companion to the Greek Testament and the English Version. Fourth edition revised, New York, Harper, 1892. Schaff’s Com- panion gives, in an Appendix, Reuss’s list of printed editions of the Greek N.T., with additions bringing it down to 1887, by I. H. Hall. It also contains an interesting set of facsimile illustra- tions of twenty-one standard editions of the Greek N.T., showing in each case the titleppage and a page of the print. I. H. Hall, A Critical Bibliography of the Greek New Testament, as published in America, Philadelphia, 1883. Also, by the same author, Some Remarkable Greek New Testaments, in the Journal of the Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis, Dec. 1886, 40-63. S. P. Tregelles, Account of the Printed Text of the Greek New Testament with remarks on its revision and a collation of the critical texts with that in common use, 1854. Copinger, Zhe Bible and its Transmission, being an historical and bibliographical view of the Hebrew and Greek Texts, and the Greek, Latin, and other Versions of the Bible (both manuscript and printed) prior to the Reformation. With 28 facsimiles. London, Sotheran, 1897, large 8vo. H. J. Holtzmann, Linlettung in das Neue Testament (Allgemetner Teil, Geschichte des Textes), ¥rei- burg, 1886. Urtext und Uebersetzungen der Bibel in tibersichtlicher
CHAP. I.] THE PRINTED TEXT SINCE I514. 7
Darstellung, a reprint of the article ‘ Bibeltext und Bibeliibersetz- ungen,” in the third edition of the Real-Encyklopadie fir protes- tantische Theologie und Kirche, Leipzig, Hinrichs, 1897, pp. 15-61 (Tischendorf), O. v. Gebhardt, “ Bibeltext des Neuen Testamentes,” PRE, ii. 728-773 (cited hereafter as Ur7.). C. R. Gregory, Zexthritik des Neuen Testamentes, vol. i. Leipzig, 1900. Vol. ii. in the press.
4. The first to prepare a really critical edition of the Greek First critical
New Testament, ze. one based on a collation of manuscripts, “!“°™ was Simon de Colines (COLINAEUS), the father-in-law of the Parisian printer Robert Stephen (Estienne). In his edition,' _ which appeared in 1534, he adopted for the first time a number of readings that are now generally accepted, though naturally he did not succeed in gaining credit for them. Up till the time of Mill and Bengel the publishers and their more or less uncritical coadjutors simply reprinted the text of Ximenes and Erasmus, mostly the latter, with trifling variations.
Among the innovations introduced by these editors was the choice of a more convenient form. The first editions were all in folio. Butin 1521, Anselm, then in Hagenau but previously in Tiibingen, reduced the size to quarto; in 1524 Cephaleus in Strassburg still further to octavo ; while Valder printed the first miniature edition in Basel in 1536. The smallest edition printed previous to this century is that of Jannon, 1628 (Sedan) ; the smallest of this century is that of Pickering, 1828 (London).
But a much more important feature was the collation of fresh manuscripts. The credit of being pioneer in this respect rests with the Parisian Typographer-Royal, Robert STEPHEN Stephen (1503-1559). He was assisted by his son Henry Stephen (1528-1598), particularly in the preparation of his third edition of 1550, the Eaitio Regia, which takes its name from the inscription on its title-page in honour of Henry II., BaowAeé 7’ aya0e, kpatepo 7 aixunrn.! The first edition, called O mrz- ficam, from the opening words of its preface, appeared in 1546.
The Editio Regia was the first to contain a critical apparatus
1 Facsimile in Schaff’s Companion.
Verse division.
Chapters.
8 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. L@
f
in which fifteen manuscripts indicated by the Greek letters —
§—t were collated with the text of the Complutensian which
was designated a. All the manuscripts employed were of ©
late date, with two exceptions, viz., the Codex Bezae, of which we shall have a good deal to say in the sequel, and a Parisian MS. of the eighth century, now known as L,
An important innovation of another sort is due to the same Robert Stephen, who printed at Geneva in the following year (1551) a fourth edition containing the Greek text with the Latin version of Erasmus on the outer side and the Vulgate on the inner. With a view to carrying out this arrangement conveniently, he divided the text into separate verses or very small sections, which he numbered on the margin. In this way he introduced into the New Testament not only a con- venient verse-enumeration—there are 7959 verses in all—but also the unfortunate practice of printing the text in separate verses. Mill in 1707, and notably Bengel in 1734, were the first to revert to the practice of printing the text in paragraphs divided according to the sense while retaining the enumeration of the verses in the margin. The customary division of the New Testament books into chapters is much earlier, having been first invented in Paris for the Latin Bible by Stephen Langton (died Archbishop of Canterbury in 1228), and at once adopted in the earliest printed editions of the Vulgate. It was employed in the Complutensian Polyglot with a sub- division of the various chapters into A B C etc.
LITERATURE.— LVov. Test. textus Stephaniti A.D. 1550, ed. Scrivener, Camb., 1859, 1871 etc. Hoskier (as above). ... (B) A Reprint with corrections of Scrivener’s list of differences between the editions of Stephen 1550 and Elzevir 1624, Beza 1565 and the Complutensian, together with fresh evidence ... . by the other editions of Stephen of 1546, 1549, 1551... . Ezra Abbot, De Versibus, in 7iGr. 167-182. I. H. Hall, Modern Chapters and Verses, in Schaff's Religious Ency- clopedia, i. 433. Journal of the Soc. of Bib. Lit. and Exeg., 1883, 60; 1891, 65.
1 Facsimile in Schaff’s Companion.
CHAP. I.] THE PRINTED TEXT SINCE 1514. 9
It is frequently stated that copies exist of Stephen’s edition of 1551 (the first to contain the verse enumeration) bearing on the title- page the date MDXLI. In the two I examined belonging to the col- lections of Lorck and Reuss, the two halves of the number MD and LI are far apart. In the case of the Lorck copy it is possible to suppose that a letter has been erased from the middle, but not in the Reuss copy. In his Preface, Stephen says: ‘‘Quod autem per quosdam ut vocant versiculos opus distinximus, id, vetustissima Graeca Latinaque ipsius Novi Testamenti exemplaria secuti, fecimus : eo autem libentius ea sumus imitati, quod hac ratione utraque trans- latio posset omnino eregione Graeco contextui respondere.” As Ezra Abbot pointed out, Stephen gave a double number }% to the verse Twes O€.... mpds pé in Acts xxiv. <A similar double enumeration occurs in the previous chapter, where the verse Tpawas ...+. xaipevw is numbered 33. Accordingly, Abbot’s supposition becomes pretty certain, that the verse division was originally made for a Latin copy which, at the passage in Acts xxiv., contained the additional sentence: Et apprehenderunt me clamantes et dicentes, Tolle inimicum nostrum. And in chapter xxiii. several Latin editions show an extra sentence at the place marked with the double number: et ipse postea calumniam sustineret tanquam accepturus pecuniam. But what edition it was from which Stephen took the enumeration into his Greek copy is not yet known. Unfortunately, as Abbot shows (Zc. 173-182), later editions frequently deviated from Stephen’s enumeration. Even Oscar v. Gebhardt, in his editions of Tischendorf’s text, followed in eight instances a different verse division from that recommended by Gregory in his Emendanda (p. 1251 ff.).
Several mistakes in numbering crept into the Stuttgart edition of the N.T., but the division and enumeration have been carefully compared with that of the Reuss copy for the second edition. There are differences in verse-division even in the reprint of Westcott and Hort’s Greek Testament (Macmillan fount, 1895), Heb. xii. 22, 23: in Swete’s Gospel of St. Mark (Mk. ii. 18, 19), and in Cronin’s edition of Codex Purpureus Petropolitanus (Lk. iii. 23, 24, 1x. 7, 8.)
The Textus Receptus is usually indicated by the Greek letter ¢, the initial of Stephen’s name.
Following Stephen, the French theologian Theodore de Béze (BEZA 1519-1605), the friend and successor of Calvin
Beza.
Polyglots. 1. Antwerp.
fe) GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. I.
in Geneva, prepared, between 1565 and 1611, four folio and six octavo editions, which are noteworthy as forming, with the last two editions of Stephen, the basis of the English Authorised Version. Beza was the owner of two valuable Greek-Latin manuscripts of the Gospels with the Acts and Pauline Epistles, one of which, the now so famous Codex Bezae, he presented to the University of Cambridge in 1581. He himself, however, made little use of these in his editions, as they deviated too far from the printed texts of the time. Beza seems also, in the preparation of his Geneva edition, to have been the first to collate the oriental versions. For this purpose he employed the Syriac edition of Emmanuel Tremellius (1569), and for Acts and 1 and 2 Corinthians the Arabic version put at his disposal by Franciscus Junius.
LITERATURE.—Scrivener, ii. 188 ff ; Hoskier (as above) : the various readings... . by the remaining three Bezan editions in folio of 1582, 1588-9, 1598, and the 8vo. editions of 1565, 1567, 1580, 1590, 1604.
5. The credit of presenting these oriental versions in a con- venient combination for the interpretation of the Bible belongs to the so-called Antwerp Polyglot, the Biblia Regia, printed in eight folio volumes between 1569 and 1572 by Christopher Plantin, a French printer residing in Antwerp. In this work the Greek New Testament is printed twice, first in vol. v., alongside the Vulgate and the Syriac text with its Latin translation, and again in vol. vi. with the interlinear version of Arias Montanus. Plantin was aided in this enterprise by a grant of 12,000 ducats from King Philip II. It was carried out under the supervision of the Spanish theologian Benedict Arias, called Montanus from his birth-place Frexenal de la Sierra.
“‘ Labore et Constantia” was the motto of this celebrated family of printers, who continued to carry on their trade on the same premises till August 1867. Nine years later the house was sold to the city and converted into the ‘‘ Musée Plantin.”
1 Facsimiles of Folio 1598 and Octavo 1604 in Schaff’s Companzon.
CHAP. I.] THE PRINTED TEXT SINCE 1514. II
Of the Antwerp Polyglot 960 ordinary copies were printed, 200 of a better quality, 30 fine, ro superfine, and 13 on parchment, for which last 16,263 skins were used. One of these Montaigne saw and admired in the Vatican Library ; another, the copy dedicated to the Archduke Alba, is in the possession of the British Museum. The undertaking was the glory of Plantin’s life, but it was also the beginning of his financial difficulties. Copies were sold to book- sellers at 60 gulden each, and to the public at 70 gulden (about 46 and £7). Ordinary copies now fetch from £6 to £7 or £8. At the sale of the Ashburnham Collection in 1897 a parchment copy realised £79. The supplements, including lexical and other matter, are still valuable to a certain extent. But here the collector must note that certain parts have been reprinted.
On the Polyglots, see: Déscours historique sur les principales editions des Bibies Polyglottes. Par PAuteur de la Bibliotheque Sacrée, Paris, 1713; especially pp. 301-554, ‘‘ Pieces justificatives du dis- cours précédent.” Also, Ed. Reuss, Polyglottenbibein, PRE*, xii. 95-103 (1883). Max Rooses, Christophe Plantin, Imprimeur Anversois, Antwerp, 1884. Fol. 100 plates. Also Correspondance de Plantin, edited by Rooses. 2 vols. 1886. L. Degeorge, Za Maison Plantin a Anvers. 3rd ed. Paris, 1886. R. Lorck, Das Plantin-Haus in Antwerpen. Vom Fels zum Meer, 1888-9, ix. 328-346. On the double imprint see Rooses, p. 123; A. Rahlfs in Lagarde’s Bibliotheca Syriaca, p. 19. On Plantin’s connection with the Familists see PRE, v. 751-755.
A still more extensive undertaking than the Antwerp Polyglot is that brought out in Paris by the advocate Guy
| Michel LE Jay. This Paristan Polyglot extends to ten folio | volumes of the largest size, furnished externally in the most
sumptuous manner. Le Jay expended his whole fortune on the edition, and was obliged at last to sell it as waste paper,
| being too proud to accept the offer of Cardinal Richelieu, who | wished to purchase the patronage of the enterprise for a large | sum and thereby acquire the credit of it. The scholars who | gave most assistance in the preparation of the oriental texts
were Jean Morin and the Maronite Gabriel Sionita, the latter of whom superintended the Syriac portion. The two volumes of the New Testament, viz. vol. v. 1, comprising the Gospels,
2. Parisian.
I2 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. I.
and vol. v. 2, the Acts, Epistles, and Apocalypse, appeared in ‘I 1630 and 1633. In addition to the texts printed in the — Antwerp Polyglot, the Parisian contained a Syriac version of the so-called Antilegomena, ze. those parts of the New Testament at one time disputed (2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and Apocalypse), and it had also an Arabic version, each one being accompanied with a Latin translation.
3. London. Less sumptuous, but more copious, convenient, and criti- cally valuable, is the last, and at the present day still most used of the four great Polyglots—the London Polyglot of Brian WALTON (1600-1661). It contains in all nine languages. In the New Testament (vol. v.) there is the Greek text of Stephen with slight alterations, the version of Arias, the Vulgate, Syriac, Ethiopic, Arabic, and (for the Gospels only) Persic versions, each with a literal translation into Latin. The sixth volume also contains Walton’s Apparatus, which was re-issued at Leipzig in 1777, and again at Cambridge by F. Wrangham in two volumes in 1828. It is really a kind of Introduction to Biblical Criticism. Finally, in two supple- — mentary parts, there is Edmund Castle’s Lexicon Heptaglotton, a thesaurus linguae semiticae such as no one since has ventured to undertake.
The London Polyglot first appeared in 1657, under the patronage of Cromwell, but after the Restoration it received a new Preface from the editor, who was raised to the See of Chester by Charles II. In this Preface Cromwell is styled “ Magnus Draco ille.” Accordingly, bibliophiles draw a sharp line of distinction between republican and loyalist copies. One of the former costs considerably more than the latter, the most recent prices running from £22 to £31. This is said to have been the first work brought out in England by subscription. See Schaff’s “ Companion” for facsimiles of title- page and page of text. Todd: Li of Brian Walton with the Bishop's Vindication of the London Polyglot Bible. Wondon, 1821. 2 vols.
For this Polyglot, in addition to the critical works of
1 Copies of the Parisian Polyglot now cost about £6.
CHAP. I.] THE PRINTED TEXT SINCE I514. 13
previous scholars, the Codex Alexandrinus of the Greek Bible, sent by Cyril Lucar to Charles I. in 1628, was also employed for the first time. Its readings are set at the foot of the Greek text and indicated by the letter A. This was the origin of the modern custom of indicating manuscripts with Roman letters in the apparatus of critical editions not only of the New Testament but of other books as well, a custom which has generally prevailed since the time of Wett- stein. That gift of Cyril Lucar seems really to have awakened for the first time a general desire for critical editions. At the same time it was Walton’s edition that made Stephen’s text of 1550 the “ textus receptus” in England.
6. On the Continent a similar result was attained by the Evevir. enterprising Dutch printers Bonaventura and Abraham ELZEVIR of Leyden. What scholars had a hand in their edition, if we may speak of scholars at all in this connection, is not known. In 1624 the Elzevirs published, in a handy form and beautifully printed, an edition the text of which was taken mainly from Beza’s octavo edition of 1565. In their Preface to a new issue in 1633 they said “textum ergo habes nunc ab omnibus receptum, in quo nihil immutatum aut corruptum damus,” while they professed that even the smallest errors—“vel minutissimae mendae”—had been eliminated with judgment and care. By means of this catchword they actually succeeded in making their text the most widely disseminated of all during 200 years. The English Bible Society alone have issued not fewer than 351,495 copies of it in the 90 years of their existence, and at the present time are still printing this text alone. They issued 12,200 copies of it in the year 1894. For several centuries, therefore, thousands of Christian scholars have contented themselves with a text based ultimately on two or three late manuscripts lying at the command of the first editors—Stephen, Erasmus, and Ximenes —a text, moreover, in which the erroneous readings of Erasmus, already referred to, are retained to this day.
Critical attempts.
14 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. L
LITERATURE. —Scrivener, ii. 193. Hoskier. . . . (C) a full and exact comparison of the Elzevir editions of 1624 and 1633, doubling the number of the real variants hitherto known, and exhibiting the support given in the one case and tn the other by the subsequent editions of 1641, 1656, 1662, 1670, avd 1678. On the Elzevirs see G. Berghman, Nouvelles Etudes sur la Bibliographie Elzevirienne. Supplément a Pouvrage sur les Elzevier de M. Alphonse Willems, Stockholm, 1897. Also, A. de Reume, Recherches historiques, genealogiques et biblio- gvaphiques sur les Elsevier, Brussels. Facsimile of the edition of 1633 in Schaff’s Companion.
7. Even those who were impelled by a greater spirit of research did not yet get back to the oldest attainable sources. In Rome, CARYOPHILUS set about preparing a new edition. With this view, about the year 1625 he collated twenty-two manuscripts with the Antwerp Polyglot—ten for the Gospels, eight for the Acts and Epistles, and four for the Apocalypse. Among these were the most celebrated manuscript of the Vatican Library, the “ Codex Vaticanus” far excellence, and another of the same collection, dating from the year 949 (Tischendorf’s S), one of the oldest manuscripts of the Greek New Testament whose date is known with certainty. The results of this collator’s labours were printed at Rome in 1673. But such collations were not then made with that exactitude which is the primary condition of works of this nature at the present day, though even now it is not always observed. In 1658 Stefan de COURCELLES (Curcel- laeus, 1586-1659), a native of Geneva, brought out an edition which was printed by the Elzevirs, and which is valuable for its scholarly Introduction, its careful collection of parallel passages, and its fresh collation of manuscripts. In this edition the “Comma Johanneum” was included in brackets. The editor also expressed the opinion that even conjectural readings deserve consideration. Courcelles had further pro- jects in view, but these were interrupted by his death.
In 1672, in Germany, John SAUBERT published a collection of various readings in St. Matthew’s Gospel which he had com-
eILAP.'T.| THE PRINTED TEXT SINCE 1514. 15
piled from printed editions, manuscripts, ancient versions, and quotations in the Greek and Latin Fathers.
In 1675 John FELL, afterwards Bishop of Oxford, pub- lished anonymously at the Sheldonian Theatre, ze. the Oxford University Press, an edition in the preparation of which more than too Greek manuscripts were employed. Among the ancient versions the Gothic of Ulfilas and the Coptic were also made use of.
About the same time (1689) there appeared anonymously at Rotterdam a Histoire Critique du Texte du Nouveau Testa- ment, by Richard SIMON, a member of the French Congrega- tion of the Oratory. Simon is the father of the historical method of critical introduction to the New Testament. With his work, what might be called the infancy of New Testament criticism comes to a close. With Mill’s New Testament begins the period of its maturity, especially if Simon’s works are taken as belonging to it. Such, at least, was the judgment expressed in 1777 by the Gottingen scholar J. D. Michaelis. But we would say rather the period of its youth, for otherwise we should now have reached the time of its old age, and much work still remains to be done.
8. Encouraged by Bishop Fell, John MILL (1645-1707), about 1677, set to work upon an edition which appeared in the year of his death The value of Mill’s New Testament lies in its extended critical apparatus, and particularly in its Prolegomena. An enlarged edition was brought out in 1710 by Ludolf Kiister of Westphalia (1670-1716), which, however, had sucha small sale that it had to be reissued with a new title- page at Leipzig in 1723, and again at Amsterdam in 1746. _ In Mill’s time the number of various readings in the New Testament was estimated at 30,000: a competent estimate will now make them more than four or five times as many. That is to say, there are almost more variants than words.
Mention must also be made of Nicolaus TOINARD’S Latin-
1 Facsimile in Schaff’s Companion,
Mill, 1707.
Bentley.
Bengel.
16 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. (CHAP, I.
Greek Harmony of the Gospels, which appeared at Orleans in the same year as Mill’s New Testament, and which was the fruit of nearly as many years’ labour. Toinard was the first Catholic after Erasmus, and the last previous to Scholz, to undertake a critical edition of the New Testament. He was also the first editor after Beza to estimate properly the critical value of the Vulgate.
It was Edward Wells who set the example of greater free- dom in the adoption into the text of new readings from the manuscripts. His famous countryman, the great philologist Richard BENTLEY (1662-1742), projected a great critical edi- tion of the New Testament, but unfortunately got no further than the preparation of materials and the publication of his “Proposals” in 1720. He undertook to remove two thousand errors from the Pope’s Vulgate, and as many from that of the Protestant Pope (Stephen), without using any manuscript under 900 years old. But as his edition never appeared, his nephew had to refund the 2000 guineas prepaid by the subscribers.
In 1729 MACE published an edition anonymously, in which, perhaps, most courage was shown in departing from the ordinary text. Thereafter, English work in this department was suspended for nearly a century. It was transferred to Germany and the Netherlands by the Swabian scholar Ben- sel and by Wettstein of Basel.
LITERATURE.—A. A. Ellis, Bentleti Critica Sacra, Camb., 1862. R. C. Jebb, Bentley, London, 1882. ZiGr., 229-240. Wordsworth- White, I. pp. xv-xxviii (see below, p. 123).
g. As early as 1711, G.D.T.M.D., ze. Gerhard de Trajectu Mosae (Maestricht) Doctor, a Syndic of Bremen, published at Amsterdam an edition prefaced by 43 canons or rules of criticism. Thereafter, in 1725, J. A. BENGEL (1687-1752) issued his Prodromus Novi Testamenti Graeci recte cauteque adornandt, in which he unfolded a most carefully thought-out scheme for a new edition, undertaking to reduce all Gerhard von Maestricht’s 43 canons to one comprehensive rule of
CHAP. I.] THE PRINTED TEXT SINCE I514. 17
four.words. That was the principle now commonly expressed in the shorter but less satisfactory form—/ectio difficilior placet. Bengel himself chose a more careful mode of ex- pression—froclivi scriptiont praestat ardua. Six years later he was able to issue his Motitia Novi Testamenti Graeci recte cauteque adornati. It was published in 1734 at Tiibingen by Cotta in a handsome quarto.! In the same year a small octavo edition appeared at Stuttgart in which he urged the duty expressed in the motto,
Te totum applica ad textum, Rem totam applica ad te.
Of the latter, four editions were afterwards brought out. Of the large edition, the Apparatus, pronounced by Hauss- leiter to be a “ memorable work of most solid and productive learning,” was reprinted separately after his death. Bengel was too timid. He was unwilling to admit into the text any reading which had not already appeared in some printed edition. But he inserted new readings in the margin and classified them. Out of 149 readings pronounced by Bengel to be genuine, only 20 are not now generally approved. Out of 118 whose genuineness appeared to him probable but not quite certain, 83 are now accepted.
But Bengel’s most important contribution to the textual criticism of the Greek New Testament consists in the sound critical principles which he laid down. He recognised that the witnesses must not be counted but weighed, z.e. classified, and he was accordingly the first to distinguish two great groups or families of manuscripts. His principles were re- affirmed by the celebrated philologist Lachmann, the first great textual critic of our time, and the advance which the latest English critics have made on Tischendorf is really due to the fact that they have gone back to Bengel.
LITERATURE.—Eb. Nestle, Bengel als Gelehrter, ein Bild fiir
1 Facsimile in Schaff's Companzon.
Wettstein. *
Griesbach,
18 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. I.
unsere Tage. (In Marginalien und Materialien: also printed sepa- rately, Tiibingen, 1893.) Scrivener, ii, 204.
For the time, however, Bengel’s rival, John WETTSTEIN (1693-1754), outdid him. His treatise on the Various Read- ings of the New Testament was published as early as 1713, to be followed by his Prolegomena, which appeared anony- mously in 1730, and later by his New Testament,’ which was issued in two folio volumes in 1751 and 1752. His Apparatus is fuller than that of any previous editor, while he also gives a detailed account of the various manuscripts, versions, and Patristic writers. It was he who introduced the practice, already referred to, of indicating the ancient MSS. by Roman letters and the later MSS. by Arabic numerals. He too, however, still printed the Elzevir text, following Maestricht’s edition of 1735. At the foot of the text he placed those readings which he himself held to be correct.
LITERATURE.—Scrivener, Jztroduction, ii. 213; Carl Bertheau, PRE’, xvii. 18-24, 1886.
10. J. J. GRIESBACH (1745-1812) was the first in Germany who ventured to print the text of the New Testament in the
_ form to which his criticism led him. He was the pupil of
Salomo Semler, who had combined the principles of Bengel and Wettstein. These principles were adopted and carried out by Griesbach. He enlarged the Apparatus by a more exact use of citations from the Fathers, particularly from Origen, and of various versions, such as the Gothic, the Armenian, and the Philoxenian. In his classification of the witnesses, Griesbach distinguished a Western, an Alexandrian, and a
Byzantine Recension. The edition, in four folio volumes, |
printed by Géschen at Leipzig (1803-1807), is rightly de-
scribed by Reuss as “editio omnium quae extant specios-
issima.”2 His text was more or less faithfully followed by 1 Facsimile in Schaff’s Companion.
2 Facsimile of the second edition, Halle and London, 1796, in Schaff’s Companion.
CHAP. I.] THE PRINTED TEXT SINCE I514. 19
_ many later editors like Schott, Knapp, Tittmann, and also by Theile.
Griesbach’s opponent, Christian Friedrich MATTHAEI, a Thiiringian (1744-1811), was misled into attributing a too great value to a large number of manuscripts in Moscow of the third, the Byzantine, class.
A considerable amount of critical material was collected at the expense of the King of Denmark by Andreas Birch (afterwards Bishop of Lolland, Falster, and Aarhuus), by D. G. Moldenhauer, and by Adler.
A similar service was rendered, though not with sufficient care, by J. M. Augustin SCHOLZ, Professor of Catholic Theology in Bonn.
LITERATURE.—On Matthaei see O. v. Gebhardt, Christian Friedrich Matthei und seine Sammlung griechischer Handschriften, Leipzig, 1898.
It was Carl LACHMANN (1793-1851) who first broke with the Textus Receptus altogether. He was a master in the domain of textual criticism. He distinguished himself first in the department of classical and Teutonic philology, but came afterwards to render equal service to the textual criti- cism of the New Testament. His object was to restore the text to the form in which it had been read in the ancient Church about the year 380, going on the ground of the oldest known Greek and Latin manuscripts, ze. the oldest Eastern and Western authorities! He did not claim to go further back than that date with any certainty. But it was still open to question whether that were not possible, and whether the grounds on which Lachmann’s work was based might not be still further extended and confirmed.
11. The task which Lachmann set before him was prose- cuted with the most brilliant success in and from Germany by | Gottlob (Aenotheus) Friedrich Constantin von TISCHENDORF (b. 18th January 1815, d. 7th December 1874). In the course
1 Facsimile in Schaff’s Companion.
Matthaei
Lachmann.
Tischendoef.
Tregelles,
20 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP I.
of several tours, first in Europe and afterwards in the East, from the year 1841 onwards, he discovered and collated a number of the most important and ancient manuscripts of the Bible. Among these the most notable was the Codex Sinaiticus, found by him on Mount Sinai in 1859, and now in St. Petersburg, the oldest known manuscript of the present day which contains the entire Greek New Testament. On the basis of the material collected by himself and others, Tischendorf prepared eight different editions between 1841 and 1872.1 His seventh edition, consisting of 3500 copies, appeared in 1859, previous to the discovery of the Sinaiticus. The text of this edition differed from that of 1849 in 1296 instances, of which no fewer than 595 were reversions to the Textus Receptus. The text of the last edition, the octava critica maior, which was issued complete in eleven parts between 1864 and 1872, differed from that of the seventh in 3572 places. The third volume of the editio octava maior, containing the Prolegomena, was completed in three parts, extending to 1428 pages, by Caspar René Gregory between 1884 and 1894, a work which affords the most complete survey of what has been done on the Greek New Testament up to the present time.
LITERATURE.—Scrivener, li. 235; Z7iGr7., 1-22; Urt, 49-52. Apart from the Editio Octava Maior, the most useful editions will be found to be those of O. v. Gebhardt (see below, p. 23), or the Editio Aca- demica ad editionem oct. maior. conformata, Leipzig, Mendelssohn, 16mo, 1855, twentieth edition, 1899.
While the editions of Tischendorf were appearing on the Continent, an edition began to be issued in England, which was completed in the course of twenty years. It was the work of a Quaker, Samuel Prideaux TREGELLES (b. 1813, d. 1875), who, while reaping no profit from his undertaking, has left in it a monument to his fidelity. In this edition (1857-1879)?
1 Facsimiles of the edition of 1841, and the octava maior 1872, in Schafi’s
Companion. 2 Facsimile in Schatf’s Companion.
CHAP. L.] THE PRINTED TEXT SINCE 1514. 21
those passages in which the editor was unable to pronounce a final judgment from the accessible material are indicated by the form of the type.
A still more important advance was made by Brooke Foss Westcott and WESTCOTT (b. 1825), now Bishop of Durham, and Fenton 2 John Anthony Hort (b. 23rd April 1828, d. 30th November 1892). In 1881, these Cambridge scholars, after nearly thirty years of joint labour, published two volumes, the first contain- ing the Text with a brief survey of its history and resulting criticism, the second giving a detailed exposition of their critical principles by Hort himself. They were led by their investigation to distinguish four main types of text :—
(1) A late type, originating in Syria about the year 300, which, issuing from Constantinople, became the prevailing text in later manuscripts, and corresponds essentially with the textus receptus of early printed editions:
(2) A type originating in Alexandria, characterized by lin- guistic emendations:
(3) A type originating in Syria but reaching the West pre- vious to the year 200, represented essentially by the Old Latin versions on the one hand and by the Syriac on the other, and displaying all sorts of remarkable additions :
(4) The Neutral text, which displays no sort of corrup- tions.
Westcott and Hort’s work is the latest and most thorough | attempt yet made at a complete edition of the New Testament.
LITERATURE.— Zhe New Testament in the original Greek. The text revised by Brooke Foss Westcott, D.D., and Fenton John Anthony Hort, D.D., Cambridge and London. Vol. i. Text (Fourth Edition, 1898). Vol. ii, Introduction and Appendix (Third Edition, 1896). A smaller edition of the text, 1885. Text, from new type, in larger form, 1895. For “Some trifling Correc- tions to W.-H.’s New Testament,” see Nestle in the Zxfository Times, Vili. 479; ix. 95, 333, 424. See Life and Letters of F. J. A. fiort, by his son, A. F. Hort, 2 vols., London, 1896; also article on Hort, by Gregory in the PRE®, viii. 368. Facsimile of the American Edition with Introduction by Schaff, in Schaff’s Companion.
Weymouth.
Weiss.
Von Geb- hardt.
22 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. I.
The “Resultant Greek Testament” of R. F. WEYMOUTH affords a convenient comparison of the text of the most im- portant editions.
LITERATURE.—TZ%e Resultant Greek Testament, exhibiting the text in which the majority of modern editors are agreed, and containing the readings of Stephen (1550), Lachmann, Tregelles, Tischendorf, Lightfoot, Ellicott, Alford, Weiss, the Bile edition (1880), Westcott and Hort, and the Revision Committee. By Richard Francis Weymouth. With an Introduction by the Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of Worcester. London, 1886. . . . Cheap Edition, 1892, pp. xix. 644. Besides the editions mentioned in the title, the Complutensian, Elzevir (1633), Scrivener and others are compared in several places.
Quite recently, Bernhard WEISS, of Berlin, began a new and independent revision of the text, which has been published in three large volumes with introduction and ex- planatory notes.
LITERATURE.—Das Neue Testament. Texthritische Untersuch- ungen und Textherstellung von D. Bernhard Weiss. LErster Theil, Apostelgeschichte: Katholische Briefe: Apocalypse. Leipzig, 1894. Zweiter Theil, Die paulinischen Briefe einschliesslich des Hebraerbriefs, 1896. Dritter Theil, Die vier Evangelien 1900. Vol. i. is compiled from Zexte und Untersuchungen, ix. 3, 43 Vill. 3; vii. 1. The section in vol. ii. entitled Zexthkritik der paulinischen Briefe, is taken from TU. xiv. 3, and the corresponding section in vol. iii. from ZU. xix. 2 (New Series, iv. 2). See “B. Weiss and the New Testament,” by C. R. Gregory in the American Journal of Theology, 1897, i. 16-37.
In Germany, O. von GEBHARDT has done good service by issuing the text of Tischendorf’s last edition, with the necessary corrections, and giving in the margin the readings adopted by Tregelles and Westcott-Hort, when these differ from the text. In the “editio stereotypa minor,” the differ- ences of Westcott-Hort alone are shown. In his Greek- German New Testament, he also exhibits at the foot of Luther’s German text those readings wherein the text of Erasmus’s second edition of 1519, used by Luther, differs
CHAP. I.] THE PRINTED TEXT SINCE 1514. 23
from that of the last edition of Tischendorf. In this diglot of v. Gebhardt, therefore, one can see at a glance not only how far the Greek text of the present day differs from that printed at the beginning of the sixteenth century, but also the amount of agreement between present-day editors work- ing on such different principles as Tischendorf and Westcott and Hort. In the Adnotatio Critica found in the Appendix to the larger edition, there is a brief digest of the critical Apparatus, but it extends only to those passages where Tischendorf and Westcott-Hort disagree. The editio minor contains 600 pages. One of these, p. 501, shows not a single disagreement between these great editors, while 18 pages exhibit only one variation each, and these, for the most part, mere grammatical trifles.
LITERATURE.—LVovum Testamentum Graece recensionis Tischen- dorfianae ultimae textum cum Tregellesiano et Westcottio-Hortiano contulit et brevi adnotatione critica additisgue locis parallelis illustravit Oscar de Gebhardt. Editio stereotypa. Lipsiae (Tauchnitz), 1881. Seventh edition, 1896.
NV. T. Graece et Germanice. Leipzig, 1881. Fourth edition, 1896. In this edition the Greek is that of Tischendorf’s last edition, and the German is the Revised text of Luther (1870). The various readings are shown for both texts, and a selection of parallel passages is also given.
N. T. Graece ex ultima Tischendorfii recensione edidit Oscar de Gebhardt. Editio stereotypa minor. Lipsiae, 16mo., 1887. Fourth | edition, 1898.
The text of the Greek and Greek-German New Testa- Stuttgart ments prepared by me, and issued by the Wiirttemberg 7 Oyen, Bible Institute, is based on a comparison of the three editions of Tischendorf, Westcott-Hort, and Weymouth. The varia- tions of these editions are shown at the foot of the page, | where are given also the readings inserted by Westcott and Hort in their Appendix and omitted by O. v. Gebhardt.
From Acts onwards, the readings adopted by Weiss are | indicated as well. In a lower margin, a number of important
Schjott.
Baljon.
24 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. lie
manuscript readings are given. In the Gospels and Acts, these are taken mainly, though not exclusively, from Codex
Bezae. In the Greek-German edition, the text (German)
is that of the Revised Version of 1892. Below it are given the readings of Luther's last edition (1546), with several of his marginal glosses and earlier renderings.
LITERATURE.—lVovum Testamentum Graece cum apparatu critico ex edttionibus et libris manu scriptis collecto. Stuttgart, 1898. Second corrected edition, 1899. Also issued in two and in ten parts, and interleaved. Third edition in preparation.
Fr. SCHJOTT published an edition at Copenhagen in 1897 the text of which was determined by the agreement between the Codex Vaticanus (Claromontanus, from Heb. ix. 14 onwards) and the Sinaiticus. Where they disagreed he called in the next oldest manuscript as umpire. For this purpose he employed for the Gospels the manuscripts AC DE FHI? KLPQTUVXZTIA, for the Acts and Catholic Epistles ACDEH K'L P, forthe’ Paulme’ Epistles A"€ DE Tis H L P, and for the Apocalypse A C P 1, 18, 38, 49, 92, 95. At the foot of the text his edition gives, in two divisions, a comparison with the Elzevir text and with that of Tischendorf- Gebhardt (1894). From what source Schjott derived his knowledge of the Vaticanus and the Sinaiticus is not men- tioned. The photograph of the former seems not to have been employed.
LITERATURE. —Vovum Testamentum Graece ad fidem testium vetustissimorum recognovit necnon variantes lectiones ex editionibus Elzeviriana et Tischendorfiana subjunxit Fr. Schjott. Hauniae, 1897,
pp. xi. 562.
The edition of J. M.S. BALJON is in the main an abridg- ment of Tischendorf’s octava maior. He avails himself, how- ever, of later discoveries, such as the Sinai-Syriac Palimpsest for the Gospels, and the Syriac version published by Gwynn for the Apocalypse. In Acts, Blass’s restoration of the so- called Forma Romana is regularly indicated. No other edition,
CHAP. I.]} THE PRINTED TEXT SINCE I514. 25
for one thing, shows more conveniently where recent scholars recognise glosses or other interpolations, or propose trans- positions or conjectural emendations and such like. So far, therefore, it may be commended to those who do not possess an edition witha more copious critical apparatus. But even Baljon’s New Testament fails to realise the ideal of a practical edition.
LITERATURE.—Vovum Testamentum Graece praesertim in usum studtosorum recognovit J. M. S. Baljon, Groningae, 1898, pp. xxiii. 731. The first 320 pages are also issued separately as Volumen primum continens Evangelia Matthaei, Marci, Lucae et Ioannis. Vide Bousset in the Theologische Rundschau for July 1898.
From the Catholic side little has been done in Germany in Catholic this department of scholarship for a long time. In 1821 “tons Aloys GRATZ reprinted the Complutensian at Tiibingen ; while Leander van Ess issued an edition which combined the Complutensian and Erasmus’s fifth edition.!. This alsoappeared at Tubingen in 1827. Both of these contained the Vulgate, and showed where recent editions gave a different text.
Reuss mentions two Synopses, one by Joseph GEHRINGER
(Tubingen, 1842, 4°), the other by Fr. X. PATRICIUS (Freiburg, 1853, 4°), and two small editions, one of which, by A. JAUMANN (Munich, 1832), was the first to be printed in Bavaria. The other is by Fr. X. REITHMAYER (Munich, 1847), and closely follows the text of Lachmann.
There has also appeared recently at Innsbruck a Greek-
Latin edition in two volumes by Michael HETZENAUER, a Capuchin. The first volume contains the Evangelium and the second the Apostolicum. But as the strict Catholic is bound by the decision of the Holy Office, Hetzenauer’s edition hardly falls to be considered here. A resolution of
1 Van Ess’s edition was issued with two different title-pages. One of these gives the names of the Protestant editors, Matthaei and Griesbach. But the other omits the names together with the Notanda on the back of the title-page, so that the reader is left in the dark as to the meaning of the symbols Gb, M, etc., in the margin. Most copies omit the Introduction, which contains the Pope’s sanction of the editions of Erasmus and Ximenes,
Apocrypha and
Pseud- epigrapha.
26 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. I.
the Holy Office of 13th January 1897 pronounced even the Comma Johanneum (1 John v. 7) to be an integral part of the New Testament. This was confirmed by the Pope on the 15th January, and published in the JJ/onztore Ecclestastico of the 28th February of the same year. An edition in Greek and Latin was issued by BRANDSCHEID at Freiburg in 1893.
It is impossible to enumerate here editions of separate books of the New Testament. Many of these are in the form of Commentaries. In addition to the works of Blass, to which reference will be made later, mention may be made here of a recent and most thorough piece of work—viz., The Gospel according to St. Mark: The Greek Text, with Introduction and Notes, by Henry Barclay SwWETE, D.D., pp. cx. 412 (London, Macmillan, 1898); also of Zhe Gospel according to St. Luke after the Westcott-Hort text, edited with parallels, tllustrations, various readings, and notes, by the Rev. Arthur Wright : London, Macmillan, 1900 ; and of Hilgenfeld’s edition of the Acts in Greek and Latin. Berlin, 1899.
Nor can we enter particularly the field of early Christian Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha. Those who cannot obtain Hilgenfeld’s Vovum Testamentum extra Canonem Receptum, or Resch’s Agrapha, or the editions of Tischendorf, Lipsius, and Bonnet, will find a handy and inexpensive selection in my Swpplement to Gebhardt’s editions of Tischendorf.
LITERATURE.—WVowi Testamenti Graect Supplementum editionibus de Gebhardt-Tischendorfianis adcommodavit Eb. Nestle. Insunt Codicis Cantabrigiensis Collatio, Evangeliorum deperditorum Frag- menta, Dicta Salvatoris Agrapha, Alia. Lipsiae (Tauchnitz), 1896, pp. 96.
There can be no question that in these last mentioned editions which have been brought out at the end of the nineteenth century, we have a text corresponding far more closely to the original than that contained in the first editions of the Greek New Testament issued at the beginning of the sixteenth century, on which are based the translations into
CHAP. I.] THE PRINTED TEXT SINCE 1514. 27
modern languages used in the Christian churches of Europe at the present time. It would be a vast mistake, however, to conclude from the textual agreement displayed in these latest editions, that research in this department of New Testament study has reached its goal. Just as explorers, in excavating the ruined temples of Olympia or Delphi, are able from the fragments they discover to reconstruct the temple, to their mind’s eye at least, in its ancient glory—albeit it is actually in ruins—so too, much work remains to be done ere even all the materials are re-collected, and the plan determined which shall permit us to restore the Temple of the New Testament Scriptures to its original form.
*Chiivr DER
MATERIALS OF THE TEXTUAL CRITICISM OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
EVEN in the age of printing, and with all the security afforded by that invention, it is not always easy or even possible to exhibit or restore the literary productions of a great mind in their original form. One has but to think of the obscurity in which the works of Shakespeare and their early editions are enveloped, or the questions raised over the Weimar edition of Luther’s works. And even when the author’s original manuscript is still preserved, but the proof-sheets, as is usual, destroyed, we cannot always be certain whether occasional discrepancies between the print and the manuscript are inten- tional or not. Nay, even when the two agree, there is still the possibility that what the author wrote and allowed to be printed was not what he thought or intended to be read. Did Lessing, ¢g., mean us to read in Nathan ii. 5, 493, “the great man requires always plenty of room,” or “the great zvee” does so? Various writers, in speaking of this or that artist’s talents or dexterity, have used the words “haud impigre.” To take them at their word, the object of their praise had no such endowment beyond the common. We may be certain that what they meant to convey was the very opposite of what they actually wrote, viz. “haud pigre” or “impigre.” Asa rule, however,-the purchaser of a modern classic may rely upon reading it in the form in which the author intended it to be circulated. It is quite different in the case of those works
CHAP. II.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 29
which were composed at a time when their multiplication was only possible by means of copying, and specially so in the case of those that are older by a thousand years than the invention of printing. For then every fresh copy was a fresh source of errors, even when the copyist was as painfully exact as it was possible for him to ba It is simply astonishing, in view of all the perils to which literary works have been ex- posed, to find how much has been preserved, and, on the whole, how faithfully.
The matter is, of course, quite a simple one, when by good fortune the author’s own manuscript, his autograph, is extant. The abstract possibility of this being so in the case of the New Testament writings cannot be denied. Thanks to the dryness of the climate of Egypt and the excellence of ancient writing material, we have documents more than twice the age that the New Testament autographs would be to-day did we possess them. Now and again we find a report circulated in the news- papers that such an original document has been found,—of Peter, ¢.g., or some other Apostle. About the year 489 it was asserted that the original copy of Matthew had been discovered in the grave of Barnabas in Cyprus. And to the eyes of the devout there are still exhibited not only the Inscription from the Cross, but works from the artist hand of Luke. In reality, however, we have no longer the autograph of a single New Testament book. Their disappearance is readily understood when we consider that the greater portion of the New Testa- ment, viz. the Epistles, are occasional writings never intended for publication, while others were meant to have only a limited circulation. Even in the early ages of the Christian Church, when there must have been frequent occasion to appeal to them, the autographs were no longer in existence.
Tertullian (De Praescriptione Haereticorum, 36) mentions Thessa- lonica among the cities in which he believed the letters of the Apostles that were addressed there were still read from autograph copies! “Percurre ecclesias apostolicas, apud quas ipsae adhuc
1 Zahn, Geschichte des. N.T. Kanons, i, 652; Einlettung, i. 153.
Autographs.
30 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. II.
cathedrae apostolorum suis locis praesident, apud quas ipsae authen- ticae literae eorum recitantur, sonantes vocem et repraesentantes faciem uniuscuiusque.” But when the same author, in his De Monogamia, speaks of “Graecum authenticum,” he refers not to the autograph, but to the original text as distinguished from a version.
On the copy of Matthew’s Gospel found in the grave of Barnabas in Cyprus, vide Theodorus Lector (Migne, 86, 189); Severus of Antioch in Assemani, Bibliotheca Orientalis, ii. 81; Vitae omnium 13 Apostolorum: BapvaBas 6 kal “Iwons . . . . otros TO Kata Mar@aiov charyyé\uov oixewwxeipws ypdipas ev TH THS Kurpov vyjow teXevovtau.! In the Imperial Court Chapel the lessons were read from this copy on Holy Thursday of every year. Vide Fabricius, Zvv. Apocr., 341.
On the supposed autograph of Mark in Venice see Jos. Dobrowsky, Fragmentum Pragense Ev. S. Marci, vulgo autographi, Prague, 1778. It is really a fragment of a Latin manuscript of the Vulgate, dating from the seventh century, of which other fragments exist in Prague.
In the Chronicon Paschale there is a note on the reading rpiry for éxry in John xix. 14, to the following effect :—xafws Ta dxpiBn BuBdria mepiexeL AUTO TE TO idvdxeLpov Tod evayyEeALOTOD, Srep péxpt rod viv mepiraktar xdpite Geod ev TH Edeoioy dywwraty éxxAnoia Kai Sard Tov TioTOV éxeloe TpoTKuveirar. Bengel himself said on r John v. 7:—‘ Et tamen etiam atque etiam sperare licet, si non autographum Johanneum, at alios vetustissimos codices graecos, qui hanc periocham habeant, in occultis providentiae divinae forulis adhuc latentes, suo tempore productum irl, (N.T. 420, 602, 770.)
In disproof of an alleged autograph of Peter, see Lagarde, Aus dem deutschen Gelehrtenleben, Gottingen, 1880, p. 117 f. On legends of this sort among the Polish Jews, on the autograph copy of the Proverbs that Solomon sent to the Queen of Sheba, and now in the possession of the Queen of England, etc., wde S. Schechter, Dre Hebraica in der Bibliothek des Britischen Museums, in the Jiidisches Literatur-Blatt for 1888, No. 46.
At the Sixth Ecumenical Council of 680-1, which Harnack (DG. ii, 408) says might be called the “Council of Antiquaries and Palaeo- graphers”, investigations were instituted in this department with some success.
J. G. Berger, De Autographis Veterum, Vitenio., 1723.0 ot
J. R. Harris, Mew Testament A utographs (Supplement to the
1 From the Cod. Monac. 255 and 551, published by Aug. Thenn in the Zezéschrif? fiir wissenschaftliche 7 heologie 29 (1887), 453-
CHAP. II. | MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 31
American Journal of Philology, No. 12), Baltimore, 1882, With three plates.
In this connection reference might be made to the falsifications of Constantine Simonides: Fucstmiles of certain portions of the Gospel of St. Matthew, and of the Epistles of St. James and St. Jude, written on papyrus of the first century. London, 1862. Fol.
Seeing, then, that the autographs of the New Testament Manuscripts. books have all perished, we have to do as in the case of the Greek and Latin classics, viz. apply to later copies of them, the so-called manuscripts of which frequent mention has already been made. But while in the case of most literary products of antiquity these manuscript copies are the only sources whence we may derive our knowledge of them, we are happily more fortunate in regard to the New Testament.
The new faith very early and very rapidly spread to distant Versions. peoples speaking other languages than that in which the Gospel was first preached. Indeed, even in its native land of Palestine, several languages were in use at the same time. Accordingly, at a very early date, as early as the second, and perhaps, in the case of fragments, even in the first century, there arose in the East, and in the South, and in the West, versions of the Christian books very soon after their composi- tion. At first only separate portions would be translated, but as time went on versions of the entire New Testament made their appearance. Manifestly, the value for our purpose of these versions depends on their age and accuracy. It is impossible, without further knowledge, to be certain whether a Greek copyist of later centuries followed his original quite faithfully or not. But a Latin version of the New Testament which dates from the second century, ¢.g., will represent with tolerable certainty the second century Greek manuscript from which it is derived, even supposing that our present copy of that version is not earlier than the sixth century or even later. But these versions confer yet another advantage. In the case of most, and certainly of the oldest Greek manu- scripts, we do not know in what country they originated.
Quotations
32 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. it
But it is quite certain that a Latin version could not have originated in Egypt, or a Coptic version in Gaul. In this way we may learn from the versions how the text of the Bible read at a particular time and in a particular region. Lastly, if it should happen that several versions originating in quite isolated regions, in the Latin West, and in the Syrian East, and in the Egyptian South, agree, then we may be certain that what is common to them all must go back to the earliest times and to their common original.
In addition to the Greek manuscripts and the versions, we have still a third and by no means unimportant class of material that we can employ in reconstructing our text of the New Testament. We possess an uncommonly rich Christian literature, which gathers volume from the second half, or, at all events, from the last quarter of the first century onwards. Now, what an early Church teacher, or, for that matter, what any early writer quotes from the New Testa- ment will have for us its own very peculiar importance, under certain conditions. Because, as a rule, we know precisely where and when he lived. So that by means of these patris- tie quotations we are enabled to locate our ancient manuscripts of the Bible even more exactly, and trace their history further than we are able to do with the help of the versions. Here, of course, we must make sure that our author has quoted accurately and not loosely from memory, and also that the quotations in his book have been accurately pre- served and not accommodated to the current text of their time by later copyists or even by editors of printed editions, as has actually been done even in the nineteenth century. We shall now proceed to describe these three classes of auxiliaries.
LITERATURE.—W. Wattenbach, Av/ettung sur griechischen Palaeo- graphie, 2nd ed., Leipzig, 1877 ; V. Gardthausen, Grzechesche Palaeo- graphie, Leipzig, 1879; Fr. Blass, Palaeographie, Biicherwesen, und Handschriftenkunde, in 1. v. Miiller’s Handbuch der klassischen Alterthumswissenschaft, 2nd ed., vol. i, Munich, 1892; E. M.
CHAP. II.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 33
Thompson, Handbook of Greek and Latin Palaeography, London, 1891; T. Birt, Das antike Buchwesen, Berlin, 1882; W. A. Cop- inger, Zhe Bible and its Transmission; F. G. Kenyon, Our Bible and the ancient Manuscripts, London, third edition, 1897 ; F. H. A. Scrivener, Szx Lectures on the Text of the N.T. and the ancient Manuscripts which contain it, Cambridge and London, 1875; 4 Collation of about 20 Manuscripts of the Holy Gospels, London, 1853 ; Adversaria critica sacra, Cambridge, 1893 ; Hoskier ; Urz., pp. 16, 54; O. Weise, Schrift- und Buchwesen in alter und neuer Zeit, Leipzig (Teubner), 1899 (with Facsimiles: a popular work) ; F, G, Kenyon, Zhe Palaeography of Greek Papyri, Oxford, 1899 (with 20 Facsimiles and a Table of Alphabets, pp. viii., 160) ; Ulr. Wilcken, Zafeln zur alteren griechischen Palaeographie, Nach Origi- nalen des Berliner K. Museums, Berlin and Leipzig, 1891 (with 20 photographs) ; G. Vitelli e C. Paoli, Collezione Fiorentina di facsimtli paleografict grecit e latini, Firenze, 1884-1897 (with 50 Greek Plates and 50 Latin, Folio) ; Charles F. Sitterly, Praxis tn Manuscripts of the Greek Testament : the mechanical and literary processes involved tn their writing and preservation (with table of Manuscripts and 13 Facsimile Plates), New York and Cincinnati, 1898, second enlarged edition, 1900 ; F. Carta, C. Cipolla e C. Frati, Monumenta Palaeo- graplica sacra: Atlante paleografico-artistico composto sut manu- seritti, Turin, 1899 ; Karl Dziatzko, Untersuchungen iiber ausgewdhite Kapitel des antitken Buchwesens. Mit Text, Uebersetzung und Erkla- rung von Flinit Histor. Nat., lib. xiii. § 68, 69, Leipzig, Teubner, 1900.
1. MANUSCRIPTS.
For no literary production of antiquity is there such a Number of wealth of manuscripts as for the New Testament. Our ™™°"P™ classical scholars would rejoice were they as fortunate with Homer or Sophocles, Plato or Aristotle, Cicero or Tacitus, as Bible students are with their New Testament. The oldest complete manuscript of Homer that we have.dates from the thirteenth century, and only separate papyrus fragments go back to the Alexandrian age. All that is extant of Sophocles we owe to a single manuscript dating from the
eighth or ninth century in the Laurentian Library at C
Uncial,
34 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [ CHAP. Il.
Florence. But of the New Testament, 3829 manuscripts have been catalogued up till the present. A systematic search in the libraries of Europe might add still more to the list ; a search in those of Asia and Egypt would certainly do so. Gregory believes that there are probably some two or three thousand manuscripts which have not yet been collated, and every year additional manuscripts are brought | to light. Most of these are, of course, late, and contain only separate portions, some of them mere fragments, of the New Testament.! Not a few, however, go much further back than our manuscripts of the Hebrew Old Testament and most of the Greek and Latin Classics. Only in the case of the Mohammedan sacred books is the condition of things more favourable. These came into existence in the seventh century, and the variations between separate manuscripts are a vanishing quantity, because the text of the Koran was officially fixed at a very early date and regarded as inviol- ably sacred. Fortunately, one might almost say, it is quite different with the New Testament, which was put together in a totally different way. In its case the very greatest freedom prevailed for at least a century and a half.
The manuscripts of the New Testament being so numerous, it becomes necessary to arrange them. One of the most im- portant considerations hitherto has been that of age, and therefore manuscripts have been divided into Uneials (or Majuscules) and Cursives (or Minuscules), according to the style of writing in use at earlier or later times.
In early times, as at the present day, inscriptions on monu- ments and public buildings were engraved in capital letters. This form of writing was also employed for books, especially those containing valuable or sacred writing. The letters were not joined together, but set down side by side.” They
1 The most convenient survey of these is given in Vollert’s ‘‘ Tabellen zur neutesta- mentlichen Zeitgeschichte: mit einer Uebersicht iiber die Codices in denen die N.T. Schriften bezeugt sind.” Leipzig, 1897. Given in Sitterly (see above, p. 33).
2 See e.g. Plate I.
CHAP. II.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 35
were called /ztterae majusculae, capitales, unciales, te. “inch- high,” as Jerome says with ridicule—ancialibus ut vulgo aiunt litterts onera magis exarata quam codices. Alongside of this there arose, even previous to the Christian era, a smaller Cursive form (J/zzusculae), for use in common life, in which the letters were joined! This running hand found its way into manuscripts of the Bible in the course of the ninth century. In some cases, in Codex A eg., both styles are found alongside or following each other.’
The oldest Cursive manuscript of the New Testament, the exact date of which is known, is 481°"; it bears the date 835. The great majority of New Testament manuscripts belong to this later date, seeing that out of the 3829 manu- scripts there are only 127 Uncials to 3702 Minuscules. Greek copyists not being accustomed to date their manu- scripts exactly, it becomes the task of palzeography to settle the criteria by which the date and place of a manuscript’s origin may be determined. These are the style of writing— whether angular or round, upright or sloping, the punctuation —whether simple or elaborate, and the different material and form of the book. These distinctions, however, are often very misleading. The following table will show the distribu- tion of the manuscripts according to the centuries in which they were written, as given by Vollert, Scrivener, and von Gebhardt ? :—
Vollert. Scrivener. v. Gebhardt. IVth Century, : ; 5 vis 2 Vth - : : 4 10 15 With, »,, : : 18 22 24 MiEIth -.,, ; ; 6 9 17 With 5 5 : 8 8 1g iXth ,, : : 23 or 31 Xth Ks ; : 4 cae 6
1 See e.g. Plate X,
2 See Scrivener, i. p. 160; Rahlfs, Gottinger gelehrte Nachrichten, 1808, i. 98-112.
3 7iGr., pp. 1233 ff. ; Warfield, Textual Criticism of the N.T., p. 47.
and Cursive script.
Papyrus and parchment.
Paper.
36 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. II.
Manuscripts are distinguished according to the material on which they are written, which may be either parchment or paper.
Parehment* derives its name from Pergamum, where it was introduced in the reign of King Eumenes (197-159 B.C.). But prior to the use of parchment, and to a certain extent alongside of it, papyrus” was used, especially in Egypt, down to the time of the Mohammedan Conquest. Papyrus books were originally in the form of rolls (volumina). Only a few fragments of the New Testament on papyrus remain. The use of parchment gave rise to the book or Codex form. In the case of parchment codices, a further distinction is drawn between those made of vellum manufactured from the skins of very young calves, and those made of common parch- ment from the skins of sheep, goats, and antelopes.
As early as the eighth century (not the ninth), the so-called cotton paper (charta bombycina) was introduced from the East. This, however, never consisted of pure cotton, but rather of flax and hemp. It had been in use for a long time in China and the centre of Eastern Asia, but seems to have been un- known in Syria and Egypt till after the fall of Samarcand in 704. From the thirteenth century onwards, paper made of linen was employed.°
In the New Testament, both papyrus and parchment are referred to. In 2 Tim. iv. 13, Paul asks that the deAovns he had left at Troas might be brought to him, and ra 8:8Néa, but specially tras peuBoavas. Here, gerovns means cloak rather than satchel; +a 8i8dia are the papyrus books, pos- sibly his Old Testament, while tas weuBpavas are clean sheets of parchment.4 In 2 John 12 the word yaprys is used of papyrus. There, and in 3 John 13, ro meAa is the ink, and the xaXapos (Zaz. canna) is the reed pen, still used for writing in the East. The quill pen, strange to say, is not mentioned prior to the time of Theodoric the Ostrogoth in the sixth century.© The size of a sheet of writing paper may be in-
« The references are to the extended notes at the end of this section, pp. 40 ff.
CHAP. II.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 37
ferred from the passages in 2nd and 3rd John alluded to above.
In order to economize space, the writing was continuous, Scriptio
with no break between the words (seriptio eontinua),! breath- °°°'"" ings and accents being also omitted.¢ This is a frequent source of ambiguity and misunderstanding. In Matt. ix. 18, e.g., EIXEAOQN may be either cfs €X@ayv or etreNOwv. In Mark x. 40, AAAOISHTOIMASTAT was rendered “ aliis praeparatum,” a\Aas being read instead of GAN’ ofc. In Matt. xvi. 23, AAAA may be taken either as ad\Aa or add’ & = In I Cor. xii. 28, again, the Ethiopic translator read ois instead of ove. The Palestinian-Syriac Lectionary translates 1 Tim. iii. 16 as though it were duoroyotpev ws wéya éeoriv. There is something to be said for this, but Naber’s proposed reading of Gal. ii. 11, Ott KaTéyvwmev Os Fv, Cannot be accepted.
Most manuscripts show two eolumns to the page. The Columns.
Sinaitic, however, has four, while the Vatican has three. Columns vary considerably in width. They may be the Lines. width of a few letters only, or of an average hexameter line of sixteen to eighteen syllables or about thirty-six letters. Such a line is called a otixos, and as the scribe was paid according to the number of oriyo:, we find at the end of several books a note giving the total number of ¢riyor contained in them. In carefully written manuscripts, every hundredth, sometimes every fiftieth oriyos is indicated in the margin. These stichometric additions were afterwards adopted for the entire Bible. Their value in many respects will be obvious."
As the church increased in wealth and prestige, New Testa- ment manuscripts acquired a more sumptuous form, either from the luxury of the rich or the pious devotion of kings and churches.'
Parchment, however, grew more and more expensive, and Palimpsests. so the practice arose of using an old manuscript a second time. The original writing was erased by means of a sponge or pumice stone or a knife, and the sheets were then em- ployed to receive other matter, or it might even be the same
Punctuation.
Size.
Contents.
38 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. IL.
matter over again. And so we have Codices Reseripti or Palimpsesti as they were called, a term known to Cicero, who says, though of a wax tablet, “quod in palimpsesto, laudo parsimoniam ” (ad Dzversos vii. 18). Some manuscripts were used as often as three times for distinct works in three different languages eg. Greek, Syriac, and Iberian. Codex I” is one of these thrice used manuscripts, being written first in Greek and then twice in Syriac.*
Marks of punctuation are hardly to be found in the earliest times. It was frequently, therefore, a question with church teachers whether a sentence was to be taken interrogatively or indicatively, or how the sentences were to be divided, as in the case of John i. 3 and 4. In the general absence of punctuation, the appearance of quotation marks in some of the oldest manuscripts, like Codex Vaticanus ¢.g., to indicate citations from the Old Testament, is remarkable.!
The size of a manuscript varies from a large folio, which in the case of a parchment codex must have been very ex- pensive, to a small octavo. In regions inhabited by a mixed population we find bilingual manuscripts, Greek-Latin, Greek- Coptic, Greek-Armenian, and such like. If the manuscript was designed for use in church, the two languages were written in parallel columns, the Greek frequently occupying the left column or reverse side of the sheet, being the place of honour. In manuscripts intended for use in schools, the translation was written between the lines. Codex A is an ex- ample of a manuscript with an interlinear version of this sort.
Of more importance is the distinction of manuscripts ac- cording to their contents. Of all our recorded Uncials, only one contains the whole of the New Testament complete. That is the Codex Sinaiticus discovered by Tischendorf in 1859. A few others, like Codices Vaticanus, Alexandrinus, Ephraemi, were once complete, but are no longer so. Of the later Minuscules, some twenty-five alone contain the entire New Testament. Of the English Minuscules, five are complete. The fragmentary nature of our manuscripts is
CHAP. II. ] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 39
intelligible on two grounds. One is that a New Testament codex written in uncial characters is a very bulky and ponderous volume running to about 150 sheets. Compara- tively few would be in a position to procure such a costly work all at once. The other reason is that the New Testa- ment itself is not a single book, but a series of different collections, which at first, and even afterwards, were circulated separately. To the same reason is due the great variety in the order of the several parts of the New Testament found in the manuscripts, and still, to a certain extent, in our printed editions." It is not exactly known who it was that first collected and inscribed in one volume the books and the parts that now make up the New Testament. Such a single volume of the entire New Testament was afterwards known as a wavdextys, and in Latin, d¢blotheca™ The parts into which the New Testament is divided are—
1. The four Gospels. 2. (a) The Acts of the Apostles.
(4) The so-called Catholic Epistles, ze. those not ad- dressed to any particular church or individual, wiz Jaiies, 0 ,and 2 Peter, 1, 2, and 3 John, Jude.
3. The thirteen Pauline Epistles, or, including Hebrews, fourteen. 4. The Apocalypse.
Among these incomplete manuscripts of the New Testa- Lectionaries, ment may be classed the so-called leetionaries—z.e. manu- scripts containing only those portions read at church services. Following the custom of the Synagogue, in which portions of the Law and the Prophets were read at divine service each Sabbath day, the practice was early adopted in the Christian Church of reading passages from the New Testament books at services. A definite selection of such extracts was formed at an early date from the Gospels and Epistles, and the custom arose of arranging these according to the order of
a Parchment.
40 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. IL.
Sundays and Holy days, for greater convenience in use. A collection of selected passages from the Gospels was called a EvayyéXuov, and in Latin Evangeliarium, in distinction to the books containing the continuous text, which were called Terpaevayyédcov, while the selections from the Epistles were known as ’AzdotoAos or Ipagardarodos. These lectionaries, though mostly of later origin, are nevertheless important as indicating the official text of the various provinces of the Church. They show, moreover, how sundry slight alterations found their way into the text of the New Testament.
We can easily understand why it is that manuscripts of the Gospels are by far the most numerous, while those of the last book of the New Testament are the fewest. Among the Uncials, 73 contain the Gospels, and only 7 have the Apoca- lypse. Of these 73 Uncials, again, only 6, viz.®% BK MS U, or, if we include Q, only 7 are quite complete; 9 are almost so; II exhibit the greater part of the Gospels, while the remainder contain only fragments. Of the 20 Uncials of the Pauline Epistles, only 1 is entirely complete—viz., &; 2 are nearly complete, D G; 8 have the greater part. It is plain that our resources are not so great, after all, as the number of manuscripts given above would lead us to expect. Here also there are zoAXol KAnTol, OALyot ékNEKTOL.
The manufacture of parchment is perhaps older than that of papyrus. It is said to owe both its name and wide circulation as writing material to the encouragement given to its manufacture by Eumenes II. of Pergamum (197-159 B.c.). Pliny’s story,” which he gives on the authority of Varro, is that Eumenes wished to found a library which should, as far as possible, excel that of Alexandria. To frustrate this intention Ptolemy Epiphanes prohibited the expor- tation of papyrus to Asia Minor. (In the list of principal exports of Alexandria, Lumbroso® mentions BiéBAos and xaprn in the second
1 To obviate confusion, it would be well to use the Latin name Evangeliarium. EvayyeAtordpioy means a Table of Lections. (See Brightman, in the Journal of Theological Studies, 1900, p. 448, and now Gregory, Zexthriizk, i. p. 334 f.)
2 Nat. Hist., xiii. 11.
3 Boitto, 2nd ed., p. 125.
CHAP. I1.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 41
place after t€Ava, and :8Aca in the seventh.) Eumenes was accord- ingly obliged to prepare parchment at Pergamum, and hence its name, tepyayznvy. The name first occurs in Diocletian’s Price- list,! and in Jerome. The word used in earlier times was di6épai, or d€ppeis,® Or wewBpavac as in 2 Tim. iv. 13, which last was taken from the Latin. At first parchment was less valuable than papyrus, and was used more for domestic and school purposes than for the making of books, as the writing was easier erased from the skin. But it gradually supplanted papyrus, and with its employment came also the change from the roll to the ‘‘codex” form of book. If papyrus was the vehicle of Pagan Greek literature, parchment was the means whereby the literature of the new faith became known to mankind, and the remnant of the ancient culture at the same time preserved. Origen’s library, which still consisted for the most part of papyrus rolls, was re-written in parchment volumes (cwpdrwor, corpus) by two priests shortly before the time of Jerome. Our principal manuscripts of Philo are derived from one of these codices.‘ When Constantine ordered Eusebius to provide a certain number of Bibles for presentation to the churches of his Empire, he sent him, not rolls, but codices, revrixovra cwparia ev dipb€pais.
Parchment was prepared from the skins of goats, sheep, calves, asses, swine, and antelopes. Our oldest manuscripts of the Bible ex- hibit the finest and whitest parchment. The Codex Sinaiticus, ¢.g., displays the very finest prepared antelope skin, and is of such a size that only two sheets could be obtained from one skin. As a rule, four sheets were folded into a quire (quaternio), the separate sheets having been previously ruled on the grain side. They were laid with the flesh side to the flesh side, and the grain side to the grain side, beginning with the flesh side outermost, so that in each quaternio, pages 1, 4, 5, 8, 9, 12, 13, 16 were white and smooth with
' Vide Th. Mommsen, Das Diokletianische Edikt wiber die Warenpreise (Hermes, xxv. 17-36, 1890); on the fragments recently discovered in Mega- lopolis, see W. Loring, Journal of Hellenic Studies, 1890, 299; also, Revue Archéologique, Mars-Avril, 1891, 268.
* Herodotus v. 58. On the connection of /étera and dip6épa, see M. Bréal, Rev. des Et. grecques, iii. 10, 1890, 121 ff., and Rev. Crit., 1892, Vee ital Cyprus the schoolmaster was called the d:fAepdrados.
3 Cf. Codex D, Mark i. 6.
+ Cf. Victor Schultze, Ro//e und Codex, in the Greifswalder Studien, Giitersloh,
1895, p. 149 ff.
Ink.
b Papyrus.
42 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. II.
the lines showing in relief, while the others, 2, 3, 6, 7, 10, 11, 14, 15 were darker and rough, with indented lines.1
For writing on papyrus, ink made of soot was employed. Three parts of lamp-black were mixed with one part of gum and diluted with water. This ink, however, was easily washed off, and did not stick well to parchment, and therefore recourse was had to ink made of gall nuts. Sulphate of iron was afterwards added to it, with the result that the writing material is frequently corroded with the ink. From its having been boiled the mixture was also called éyxavoror, hence our word ‘‘ink” (encre). Many old recipes for making ink are still preserved.2, Even in early Egyptian writing, coloured inks, specially red, were used. One of the most beautiful manuscripts extant is a Syriac Codex in the British Museum, of date 411, in which the red, blue, green, and yellow inks are still quite fresh. Eusebius used cinnabar for numbering the paragraphs, and Jerome makes mention of minium or vermilion. In times of great wealth parchments were dyed purple and inscribed with gold and silver letters.
Among ancient writers, Pliny gives the fullest description of the preparation of papyrus, in his Astoria Naturalis, xiii, 11.2 The sheets were prepared, not from the bark, but from the pith of the plant. This was cut into strips (cx/das) as thin and broad, and,
1 Vide C. R. Gregory, Sur les cahiers des manuscrits grecs, Académie des Inscriptions, Aug. 1885 ; Berliner Phil. Wochenschrift, 1886, v. 159 ff.
2 Z.g. in Cod. Barocc. 1 in the Bodleian, and in several Syriac manuscripts.
3 Vide G. Ebers, Katser Hadrian: also The Writing Material of Antiquity, by Ebers, in the Cosmopolitan Magazine, New York, Nov. 1893 ; and especially Dziatzko (see above, p. 33). On the papyrus plant (Cyperus papyrus L., Papyrus Antiquorum Willd.), see Bernard de Montfaucon, Dessertation sur la plante ap- pelée Papyrus, sur le papier d’ Egypte, etc. Memoires de Académie Royale des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, T. vi. Paris, 1729, 4to., pp. 592-608; Franz Woenig, Die Pflanzen im alten Aegypten, thre Heimat, Geschichte, Kultur, Leipzig, 1886, pp. 74-129. J. Hoskyns-Abrahall pointed out that it is found in Europe, not only in the neighbourhood of Syracuse in Sicily, but also on the shores of Lake Trasimene : see Zhe Papyrus in Europe, in the Academy, 19th Mar. 1887. Lagarde raised a question as to the etymology of the word papyrus (which has not yet been explained), whether it might not be derived from Bura on Lake Menzaleh, where it was first manufactured, fa being the article in Egyptian ; see his MZitte’/ungen, ii. 260. If this is so, there is the more reason for pronouncing the y long, as ancient writers did, and not short as the modern fashion is— papyrus, not pdpyrus. Cf Juvenal, iv. 24; vii, 101; Mart. iii, 2; vill. 443 x. 97. Catull. xxxv. 2. Ovid, Met. xv. 7533 T7ést. iil. 10, 27.
CHAP. I1.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 43
according to some, as long as possible. ‘These were laid side by side as firmly as might be, to form the first layer (oyéda). On'this a second layer was laid crosswise and fastened to the lower with moisture or gum. The two layers were then compressed to form the writing sheet (ceXis), which was carefully dried and polished with ivory or a smooth shell. The roll (roj0s, x’Awdpos) consisted of a number of ceAides joined together to make one long strip— sometimes as much as 20 or 4o feet long, or even longer. The upper side, the side used for writing on, was the one in which the fibres ran in a horizontal direction parallel to the edge of the roll.' The under or outer side was only used in cases of necessity.2, The first sheet (zpwrdxohAov) was made stronger than the rest, and its inner edge was glued to a wooden roller (éu¢ados), with a knob at the end (xépas). The margin of the roll, what corresponds to the edge of our books, was frequently glazed and coloured, while the back was protected against worms and moths by being rubbed with cedar oil. The title was inscribed on a separate label of parchment (cirrvBos or cidAvBos). The separate rolls were enclosed in a leather case (dufOepa or PavdAns, see 2 Tim. iv. 13), and a number of them kept in a chest (xiBwrds or kiorn).
On the literature cf. also Paul Kriiger, Ueber die Verwendung von Papyrus und Pergament fiir die juristische Litteratur der Romer, Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung fiir Rechtsgeschichte. Roman section, | viii. pp. 76-85 (1887). Wilcken, Archiv fiir Papyrus-Forschung und verwandte Geliete, Leipzig, Teubner. F. G. Kenyon, Pa/aeography of Greek Papyri. C. Haeberlin, Griechische Papyri, Leipzig, 1897: “Nearly 150 years have fled since 432 complete Rolls and 1806 Papyrus Fragments were discovered in the year 1752 at Herculaneum, in the Villa of L. Calpurnius Piso Caesoninus, the pupil and friend of the Epicurean philosopher Philodemus. Then twenty-five years later the soil of Egypt, that home and nursery of | literature, opened for the first time to vouchsafe to us a Greek Papyrus Roll, destined to be the forerunner of a series of discoveries often interrupted but never ceasing altogether. It was, perchance, not the only one of its kind; but out of the fifty rolls accidentally
1See U. Wilcken, Recto oder Verso, Hermes, 1887, 487-492.
? Apoc. v. I can no longer be cited in support of this practice, seeing we must take kal dmioev with kareoppayicuevoy, according to Grotius and Zahn. On émcOdypapov, cf. Lucian, Vitarum Auctio, 9; Pliny, 3, 5; @ ¢ergo Juvenal, 1, 6; 2 aversa charta, Martial, 8, 22.
c Paper.
Lead.
44 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. II.
discovered in the year 1778 by Arabian peasants in the neighbour- hood of Memphis, it alone had the fortune to come into the possession of Cardinal Stefano Borgia. The rest were burned by their unsuspecting discoverers, who found a peculiar pleasure in the resinous odour that arose from their smoking pyre.”
The collection of manuscripts brought from the East by the Arch- duke Rainer gave a stimulus to the study of the early history of paper-making, and at the same time supplied the materials for a more exact investigation of the subject than had previously been possible. Earlier works, therefore, like that of G. Meerman, De Chartae vulgaris seu lineae Origine, ed. J. v. Vaassen, Hagae Comitum, 1767, have been superseded. The manufacture of paper seems to have been introduced into Europe by the Moors in Spain, where it went by the name of fexgameno de panno to distinguish it from the ferga- meno de cuero. In the Byzantine Empire it was called €vAoyaprvov or évAdrevxtov, as being a vegetable product. It came afterwards to be known as xdprns Aapacknves, from its chief place of manufacture. The Arabs introduced it into Sicily, whence it passed into Italy. After 1235, we find paper mentioned as one of the exports of Genoa. European paper is distinguished from that of Eastern manufacture chiefly by the use of water marks, such as ox-heads, e¢.g., which were — unknown in the East. Older sorts of paper bear a great resemblance to parchment. The Benedictine monks, who owned the fragments of Mark’s Gospel preserved in Venice, asserted that they were written on bark. Montfaucon declared the material to be papyrus. Massei said it was cotton paper. But the microscope shows it to be parchment. In many manuscripts a mixture of parchment and paper is found. ‘This is so in the Leicester Codex, in which the leaves are regularly arranged in such a way that the outer and inner sheets of a quire are of parchment, while the three intermediate — sheets are of paper. See J. R. Harris, Zhe origin of the Leicester Codex of the New Testament, 1887, p. 14 ff.
Lead was also employed in early times for writing on. Budde sees a reference to this practice in the well-known passage, Job xix. 24. He holds that the lead there mentioned is not to be supposed as run into letters cut out in the rock, which would be a very un- likely thing to do, and a practice for which there is no evidence. He would therefore correct the text so as to read “with an iron pen on lead.” Hesiod’s "Epya, ¢.g., was preserved on lead in the
a HLAP, II. ] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM, 45
temple of the Muses on Helicon.!_ A leaden tablet from Hadrumet contains an incantation showing strong traces of O.T. influence.” At Rhodes there was recently discovered a roll of lead inscribed with the 80th Psalm, which was used as a charm to protect a vineyard.*
Clay and brick were also used as writing material, a fact which Clay.
Strack has omitted to mention in his article on Writing in the Realencyklopidie (see Ezek. iv. 1). So far, however, no traces of N.T. writing have been discovered in the Ostraca literature of which we have now a considerable quantity. We have tiles of this sort dating from a period of over a thousand years from the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus onwards, inscribed with ink and a reed pen. Several of these contain portions of literary works such as those of Euripides.*
Linen was also written on. It was used, e.g., for the Sibylline Oracles (lintea texta, carbasus: Ovac. Sid. ed. Alexandre, lis; 259, 178, 189). But up to the present no N.T. writing has been found on linen.
On Paul’s “‘books and parchments,” see Zahn, Kanon il., 938 ff. I am not aware if J. Joseph takes up this point or not in his La Bibliotheque de l’Apotre Paul (Chrétien Evang., 1897, v. 224-227). In the Theol. Tijdschrift, 1898, p. 217, the view that the pen Bpavar Paul sent for were blank sheets of parchment is called in question. The most natural explanation, certainly, is that they were.
The N.T. makes no mention of the metal, wood, or bone stilus. By “the wild beast of the reeds” (Ps. Ixviii. 31) the Rabbis under- stood the reed pen, which in Syriac also is commonly denoted by Jp, and they took it as referring to Rome and the Emperor, who decided the fate of nations with a single stroke of his pen.® Luther, moreover, was not without precedent in speaking of “governors with the pen” in Jud. v. 14, as the Syriac version renders it in the same way. In Ps. xlv. 2, the Hebrew MY is rendered xéAapos (LXX), oxowvos (Aquila), and ypadetov (Symmachus). It is also rendered
1 Pausanias, ix. 31, 4.
2 Deissmann, Bzdelstudien, 26-54.
® Hiller von Gaertringen, Ber/. Sttz.-Ber., 21st July 1898.
4See Wilcken, Verein von Alterstumsfreunden im Rheinland. Weft lxxxvi. p- 234; also the Berl. Phil. Wochenschrift, 1889, 26.
® Cf. Livy, B. iv. c. 7; Pliny, xiii. 11, “ postea publica monumenta plumbeis voluminibus mox et privata linteis confici coepta sunt.”
6 Juidisches Literaturblatt, 1889, 10.
Linen.
d Paul’s ** books.”
Pen.
Reading and wiuiting.
46 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. IT,
cxoivos by the translator of Jeremiah viii. 8, where Aquila has ypadetov. Sxoivos must therefore be added to the Bible names for pen. Tpadis for ypadeiov, mentioned alongside of ovve a0apavTwos in Jer. xvii. 1, seems to belong to the Spanish-Greek of the Complutensian, but is really classic, as also its diminutive ypadiduov. According to the Rabbis, pens were among the things God made in the evening of the last day of the creation. They were also venerated by the Egyptians and the Greeks as an inven- tion of the Deity.! According to Antisthenes? or Democritus,® a young man, in order to enter the school of wisdom, requires to have a BuBAvapiov Kawvov (= Kal vod) Kat ypadetov Katvov Kal TLVaKLOLOU xavov. In Cyprus, the stilus is called dXeurryjpioy, and the ypapparodiddoKkados in like manner dupGe_pddordos.* In the recently discovered fragments of Diocletian’s List of Wares, the section zepi zhovpov (goose, swan, and peacock feathers) is followed by that mept kadduov Kat peAaviov, and then by that zepi éo6jros. Ink costs 12 drachmae the quart; Paphian and Alexandrian xéAapou° cost 4 drachmae; and xdAapor Sevt[épas] pHp[uns] the same. Baruch, the dévayvworyjs, purchased ink and a pen in the market of the Gentiles, in order to write his letter to Jeremiah (dzooretAas «is tyv dyopav [v. 1, duacropas] trav eOvav jveyKe XapTyY Kat pedava [v. 1. wedav]).6 Demosthenes was not the only possessor of a silver stilus. Boniface, e.g., had one of that sort sent him from England.
The following is a list of expressions relating to reading and writ- ing taken from the Greek Versions of the O.T. It makes no claim to be complete. The passages will be found in Hatch and Redpath’s Concordance to the Septuagint.
> / > , > / > / 3 id > axpipow, avaylyvwcKM, avayvwols, avayvworTys, avtlypadov, O7TOKG-
Avrrew ; BuBriabdpos (ByBd0-), BiBArwos, ByBdrvoypados (Est. iii. 13, Complut.), BiBrvobjx«n, BBdiov (Bv-), ByBdrv.oPprrdxvov, BiBAos (Bv-) ;
1 Cf, the verses inscribed on a marble tablet discovered in Andros by Ross in 1844 :— eye xpucdOpovos “Ios . .
adaréwv “Epuavos andxpuda ctuBoda d€ATwy eipdueva ypapldecow & 7 evoe act xapdtas ppikaréov uvorass lepdby Adyov . .. -
2 See Nestle, Bengel, p. 105.
3 Zeitschrift fiir das Humanistische Gymnasium, 1896, p. 27.
40. Hoffmann, Griéechische Dialekte, i. 107.
5 Probably pens of the first quality—povoydvaro..
6 Harris, Last Words of Baruch, vi. 17, p. 56.
CHAP. II.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 47
yald, ypappa, ypappareia, ypayparevey, ypappareds, ypappatiKos, ypap- paroacaywye’s, ypatrov, ypapew (ava-, azo-, ért-, KaTa-, cuv-), ypadecov (cvdypodv), ypadeds (raxwvds), ypadpy (ava-, dzro-, cuv-), ypadiKds, ypadis ; SipOepwma, SudKew ; €iAnua, cis- Or evyaparrew, éxito, Epunveto, émioTamevos ypdupata; OnoavpodirAas; KaAXapos (KkaAapapiov, vide Field’s Hexapfla on Ezek. ix. 2) xaorv, xepadris; paxOdp, pédayv, peAavodoxetov, pidtos, pvnpocvvov, moAiBos, moAcBdivos ; Evpds; dvvé adapavrwos, d&vypados ; twakis, twakidiov, wTvé, TTVXY), TuEiov ; TEAés, opin, otnAoypadgia, oppayiew, cppayis, cxoivos ; TO0s (yxapTod KaLvod peydAou, Isa. vill. 1; also r Esdras vi. 23 for rézos), redxos, Tvs ; xapTys, xaptiov, xapTypia.
Ancient Homeric grammarians used to debate whether contiguous f letters were to be read as one word or not. To obviate misunder- erie and standing, they employed the izoduacroAy as the mark of division sh ee (6, tu, é.g.), and the id’ & as the mark of combination (Avécxovpor, not Avos kovpor). Such marks are also found in manuscripts of the Bible, in the Septuagint, e.g., in the case of proper names. It goes without saying that the scriptio continua made the reading as well as the copying of manuscripts a matter of some difficulty. Hermas (Visio ii. z) says of the book given him to copy peteypawdunv ravra Tpos ypdmpa odx yUpirxov yap Tas cvAAaBds.1 For two instructive mistakes in the Latin interlinear version of Codex Boernerianus ip. 77.
Breathings and accents were found in various manuscripts of the 2 Bible as early as the time of Epiphanius and Augustine. In our map oldest manuscripts they seldom occur before the seventh century.
They were inserted by the first hand of the Ambrosian Hexateuch (Swete’s F), which is ascribed to the first half of the fifth century by Ceriani. They seem to have been added to the Codex Vaticanus by the third hand, probably in the twelfth century, and do not always conform to our rules. Augustine, commenting on the rival readings filiis and porcina, in Psalm xvi. 14, says: “quod (porcina) alii codices habent et verius habere perhibentur, quia diligentiora exemplaria per accentus notam eiusdem verbi graeci ambiguitatem graeco scribendi more dissolvunt, obscurius est” (ii. 504-5, in Lagarde’s Probe ciner neuen Ausgabe, p. 40). Similarly, speaking of the difference between paBdov abrod and paBdov atrod, Gen. xlvii. 31, he says :—“ fallit enim eos verbum graecum, quod eisdem literis scribitur sive ezws sive swae ;
1 Vide Harnack, 7. und U., ii. 5, p. 68,
Abbreviation.
Divisions.
h Stichometry.
48 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. II.
sed accentus [ =spiritus] dispares sunt et ab eis qui ista noverunt, in codicibus non contemnuntur” (iv, 53 ed. Lugd. 1586, cited by Scrivener, i. p. 47).
The practice of abbreviating words of frequent occurrence like @, XS, ANOS goes back to very early times. So, too, does the use of letters as numerals, I for ro, etc.
In dividing syllables the Greek copyists in general observed the rule of beginning each new line with a consonant. A good many exceptions occur however, especially in the Vaticanus, most of which have been corrected by a later hand. These are indicated in the third volume of Swete’s edition of the LXX. A good instance of this is seen in Jer. xiv. 12, where the Vaticanus and Marchalianus both originally had zpoo eveykwow, which in the former is corrected to zpo ceveyxwou, and in the latter to tpooe veykwow. For examples from the O.T. portion of the Codex Vaticanus see Nestle’s Septua- gintastudien, ii. 20.
Carefully written manuscripts of the Old and New Testaments are provided with a system of stichometry just as occurs in the better manuscripts of the classics, as e.g. Herodotus and Demosthenes, In the N.T. it is found specially in those Pauline Epistles that go back to the recension of Euthalius. One of the writers of the Codex Vaticanus has copied, in several of the books of the O.T., the sticho- metric enumeration which he found in his original, and the numbers show that the manuscript he copied contained almost twice as much matter in a line as the one he himself wrote. See Nestle, SeAtwa- gintastudien, ii. 20 f.; Lagarde, Die Stichometrie der syrisch-hexa- Plarischen Uebersetzung des alten Testaments (Mitteilungen, iv. 205-208). On the stichometric list in the Codex Claromontanus of the Pauline Epistles (D,), see p. 76.
American scholars have counted the number of words in the Greek N.T. In Matthew the number is 18,222, in Mark 11,158, in Luke 19,209. Unfortunately, I am unable to give the total number in the N.T. See Schaff's Companton, pp. 57, 176.
Graux (Revue de Philologie, i.) has counted not only the words but the letters in the various books. The numbers are given in Zahn’s Geschichte des N.T. Kanons, 1, 76. They are as follows :—
Letters. Stichoi.
Matthew, : : if : 89,295 2480 Mark, . : : . 55,559 1543
CHAP. II. ] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 49
Letters. Stichoi. Eaikey .-% , : 97,714 2714 John; . . : ‘ 70,210 1950 Acts, : , : 4 , 94,000 2610 @ pe@hing *« ‘ ‘ , é I,I00 31 Apocalypse, . : : ; 46,500 1292 For Philemon, Zahn gives ‘ 1,567 44
In this last epistle I find that my edition has 1538 letters, or in- cluding the title 1550. The lines in my edition happen to coincide as near as may be with the ancient stichoi. 41 stichoi at 36 letters to the stichos would give a total of 1476. Now in the 41 complete lines which my edition gives to Philemon I find 1469 letters, that is, only 7 fewer. In Jude, again, Graux enumerates 71 stichoi, while my edition shows exactly 70 lines or 71 with the title. For stichometric calculations, therefcre, this edition will prove very convenient.
For a “Table of Ancient and Modern Divisions of the New Testament,” see Scrivener, i. 68 ; also Westcott, Cazon, Appendix D, xix., xx.; Bible in the Church, Appendix B, 4.
The Cola and Commata were quite different from the stichoi. The length of the latter was regulated according to the space (space-
lines), that of the former by the sense and structure of the sentence
(sense-lines). On cola and commata see Wordsworth and White, De colis et commatibus codicis Amiatini et editionis nostrae, in the Lpilogus to their edition of the Vulgate, i. pp. 733-736. On the stichometry proper see Jéid., p. 736, De stichorum numeris in euangellts.
Solomon perfumed with musk the letter he sent to Bilqis, Queen of Sheba, who herself could both read and write.t Mani inscribed characters on white satin in such a way that if a single thread was drawn out the writing became invisible.” On gold and silver writing among the Syrians see Zahn, Zatian, Forschungen, 108, n. 1; also R. Wessely, “conographie (Wiener Studien, xii. 2, 259-279). The earliest mention of this kind of writing that I know is in the Epistle of Aristeas,? civ . . - tats duaddpois dipGépars, ev ais [Hv] 7) vopobecia yeypapmevn Xpvroypadia Tots Lovdaixots ypdppacr, Oavpacins eipyacpéevov
1 Socin, Arabic Grammar, 2nd ed., p. 55, line 14; p. 56, line 12.
2 ZdmG., xiiii. 547.
* Konstantin Oikonomos, zep! tay 6 Epunvevtay, Bk. iv. p. 975. D
Cola and commata,
i Manuscripts
de luxe.
50 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. Il.
rod tyuevos Kal THS mpos GAAyAAG TvpPodAjs dveratoOntov KaTecKevac- pévns. In Alexander’s copy of the Pentateuch the name of God was written in gold letters.’
On the fineness of the parchment and the beauty of the writing see Chrysostom, Hom. 32 in Joannem: onovdis wept tiv tov bpyevov Nerréryta kai Td TOV ypappatov Kdddos. Ephraem Syrus commended this Christian munificence, as is pointed out in the Astor. Poltt. Blatter, 84, 2, 104. -Gold writing is also mentioned in the Targum on Ps. xlv: re.
The passage in the Epistle of Theonas to Lucian referring to the use of purple-dyed parchment is thought by Batiffol to be derived from that in Jerome’s Commentary on Job, and he founds on this an argument against the genuineness of the Epistle.” In the Martyrium of Qardagh the Persian, particular mention is made of the remarkable beauty and whiteness of the parchment (cwpdrov) on which he wrote his epistles.*
For the preparation of his Bible, Origen procured the services not only of rapid writers (raxvypadpor) but also of girls who could write beautifully (xaAAvypdor). Cassiodorus pleads—qui emendare prae- sumitis, ut superadjectas literas ita pulcherrimas facere studeatis, ut potius ab Anfiguariis scriptae fuisse judicentur.* We also find him making proposals for expensive bindings in the De Jusz., c. 30, a passage which, according to Springer,’ has been overlooked in the literature on illustrated bindings in modern histories of art.
On various decorated manuscripts see W. Wattenbach, Ueder die mit Gold auf Purpur geschriebene Evangelien-handschrift der Hamit- tonschen Bibliothek, in the Berliner Sitz.-Ber., 7th March 1889, xiii. 143-156. Cf. Berl. Phil. Wochenschrift, 1889, 33, 34. This manu- script purported to be a gift to Henry VIII. from Pope Leo X., but was rather from Wolsey. Bishop Wilfrid of Ripon (670-688) had the four Gospels written with the finest gold. Boniface requested his English friends to send him the Epistles of Paul written with gold in order therewith to impress the simple-minded Germans (Ep. 32, p- 99), a fact of which Gustav Freitag makes use in his Ingo und Ingraban, p. 476. (See Die Christliche Welt, 1888, 22.) Cf, also the manuscripts of Theodulf in Paris and Puy (see below,
1 Hody, 1684, p. 254 ff.
2 Vide Harnack in the 7/Zz., 1885, cols. 321, 324, n. 5.
3 Ed. Feige, p. 53. aT Drain. Lele Cn XV 5 Sachs. Sitz.-Ber. (1889), xi. 4, 369.
CHAP. II.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 51
p- 125). The Cistercians forbade the use of gold and silver bind- ings or clasps (firmacula) and also of different colours.
Illustrations must have made their appearance in Greek manu- scripts a whole century earlier than has hitherto been supposed if H. Kothe is right in his interpretation of the passage in Diogenes Laertius, ii. 3, 8 (=Clem., Stvom., i. 78, p. 364, Potter): mpa&ros 8& "Avaaydpas kai BiBd<ov eédwxe civ ypady (“ with a picture ” : formerly read as ovyypagjs). In addition to the works of Aristotle and the obscene poems of Philainis, illustrated manuscripts were known to exist of the works of the astronomers Eudoxus and Aratus, of the botanist Dioscorides, of the tactician Euangelos, and of the geographer Ptolemy. A description of the earliest illustrated Bibles is given by Victor Schultze in the Dakeim, 1898, No. 28, 449 ff., with good facsimiles. On the horses in the chariot of Elijah in a Greek manuscript of the ninth century in the Vatican Library, and on the pictures of the horsemen in the codex of Joshua also contained there, see F. aus’m Weerth in the Jahrbuch des Vereins von Altertums- Freunden im Rheinland, Heft 78 (1884), Plate VI.
Cassiodorus had a Pandectes Latinus—/.e. a manuscript of the Old Latin Bible of large size—which contained pictures of the Tabernacle and the Temple. There is an old work on this subject by P. Zornius entitled istoria Bibliorum pictorum ex antiguitatibus Ebraeorum et Christianorum illustrata cum figuris, Lipsiae, 1743, 4to ; and by the same author, Von den Handbibeln der ersten Christen, Lips. 1738, also fiistoria Bibliorum ex Ebraeorum diebus festis et jejunets tllustrata, Lips., 1741. See also Georg Thiele, De antiguorum libris pictis capita quattuor, Marburg, 1897.
Palimpsests of Bible manuscripts came to be prohibited by the Church. The Sixth Ecumenical Council (Trullan, Concilium quini- sextum, 680-681), in its 68th canon, [epi rod pi e&etvad tun Tov ardvtw Biria THs wadaas Kai véas dvabyKys dvapGetpe, forbids the sale of old manuscripts of the Bible to the BuBdAoxéwrndAo or the pupevot, Or to any persons whatever.! There was naturally a special aversion to letting such manuscripts fall into the hands of Jews ; but yet there were discovered, in the lumber room of the Synagogue of Old Cairo, fragments of a Greek MS. of the Gospels, which had
} Balsamon, the Canonist (c. 1200), complains that twés 81 aloxpoxépdecay BiBAlwv trav Ociwy ypaday éumopevduevor amfdrccpor, and he requests onuelwoa TaITa 51a Tovs BiBAtoKamhAous Tovs amarelPovtas Tav Velwy ypapar.
Illustration.
k Palimpsests.
l ; Punctuation,
m Contents.
52 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. II.
been afterwards employed to receive Jewish writing. Parchments of this sort were at first used only for rough drafts and such like, instead of wax tablets from which the writing could be erased again.
A good example of the importance of punctuation will be found in Lk. i. 35, on which see p. 201. Compare also Lk. xxi. 8, 1 Tim. ii. 5, where Lachmann punctuates kat év@porwv avOpwros,. By a different punctuation in Heb. i. 9, Tischendorf and Westcott-Hort make 5 @eds vocative and nominative respectively. In the former case the Messiah is God, in the other God is the one who anoints him. This difference was not observed at first by O. v. Gebhardt. Similarly there is a difference between the text and the margin of Westcott and Hort in verse 8, where by the insertion or omission of the two commas before and after 6 @eds the meaning is either that Messiah is God or that God is Messiah’s throne. Considering the importance of such marks of division, the rule laid down by Ephraem Syrus in the year 350, and again emphasized by Bengel and Lagarde, should be carefully attended to in the New Testament: € xéxryoar BuBd<éov, eboTixés KTHTAL adTO: pyToTeE ebpEebh ev adiTG TpdcKoppa TE avaywooKovTL ) peraypapovre (see Nestle, Bengel als Gelehrter, p. 24). Compare also what Chrysostom says regarding punctuation on Mt. vill. 9 : tues 8& Kal otTws dvaywwcKover ToT! TO xwpiov" €i yap eyo avOpwros dy, Kal peraéy origavtes erayovow iro eovoiav éxwv tr éuavTod oTparwras. See also Victor (or whoever it is) on Mk. xvi. 9. On the change of the sense by means of false emphasis or punctuation see below, pp. 204(7), 276. J. A. Robinson thinks it probable that 6 ’Ayamnros is a separate title of the Messiah, and would point 6 vids pov, 6 "Ayamnros in Mk. i. 11, ix. 7 on the authority of the Ascensio ELsatae and the Old Syriac (see Hastings’ Bible Dictionary, ii. 501).
On the contents of Bible manuscripts see Zahn, GA. 1. 62 f. According to him Jerome’s Old Testament was in 14 volumes. In addition to some entire Bibles Cassiodorus had the Scriptures written out ing codices. Of these vol. VII. comprised the Gospels, VIII. the Epistles, and IX. the Acts and Apocalypse. Leontius speaks of 6 books of the New Testament, of which probably I. was Mt. and Mk., II. Lk. and Jn., III. Acts, IV. Catholic Epistles, V. Pauline Epistles, VI. Apocalypse. Asa rule the Gospels and the Pauline Epistles made two codices.
In cod. 8 we find that the different parts of the New Testament display a different type of text, from which we may conclude that the codex was copied, not from a single manuscript but from several.
CHAP. II.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. se
Similarly, the singular type of text exhibited by cod. A in Mark would show that this codex, or that from which it was copied, was transcribed from different rolls or codices, each containing one Gospel. See Zahn, GX. i. 63.
On the designation Bibliotheca and Pandectes for Bible manuscripts, see Zahn, GX. 1. 65. On redyxos, zbéd. 67. He informs us that the earliest mention of a Christian dzb/io¢heca and its armaria is in the heathen protocol of the year 304, in the Gesta apud Zenophilum given in Dupin after Optatus, p. 262. The next earliest notice is in Augustine. The custodians of the bibliothecae were probably the Readers. In Ruinart’s Acta Saturnint a certain Ampelius is men- tioned. as “custos legis, scripturarumque divinarum _fidelissimus conservator.” From Irenaeus, iv. 33, 2 Lessing concluded that at that time the few existing copies of the Scriptures were in the custody of the clergy, and were only to be perused in their presence. (Zusatze su einer notigen Antwort. Works, ed. Maltzahn, x1. 2, 179.) On this point see Zahn, GK. i. 140.
(a.) UNCIAL MANUSCRIPTS.
& CODEX SINAITICUS, now in St. Petersburg, contains the entire New Testament written in the fourth or more probably at the beginning of the fifth century. The story of its dis- covery and acquisition is quite romantic. When Tischendorf, under the patronage of his sovereign King Frederick Augustus of Saxony, came to the Convent of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai for the first time in 1844, he rescued from a basket there forty-three old sheets of parchment which, with other rubbish, were destined for the fire. In this way he obtained possession of portions of one of the oldest MSS. of the Old Testament, which he published as the Codex Frederico-Augustanus (F-A) in 1846. At the same time he learned that other por- tions of the same Codex existed in the Monastery. He could find no trace of these, however, on his second visit in 1853. But on his third visit, undertaken with the patronage of the Emperor of Russia, the steward of the monastery brought him, shortly before his departure on the 4th February 1859, what
n Bibliotheca,
N
54 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. II.
surpassed all his expectations, the entire remaining portions of the Codex comprising a great part of the Old Testament and the whole of the New, wrapped up in a red cloth. Not only was the New Testament perfect, but in addition to the twenty- seven books, the MS. contained the Epistle of Barnabas and part of the so-called Shepherd of Hermas, two books of the greatest repute in early Christian times, the Greek text of which was only partially extant in Europe. Tischendorf managed to secure the MS. for the Emperor of Russia, at whose expense it was published in four folio volumes in the year 1862 on the thousandth anniversary of the founding of the Russian Empire. In return for the MS. the monastery received a silver shrine for St. Catherine, a gift of 7000 roubles for the library and 2000 for the monastery on Mount Tabor, while several Russian decorations were distributed among the Fathers.
Unfortunately the art of photography was not so far ad- vanced thirty-eight years ago as to permit a perfect facsimile to be made of the MS., and Tischendorf had to be content with a printed copy executed as faithfully as the utmost care and superintendence would admit.
To what date does the manuscript belong? There is still extant a letter of the first Christian Emperor Constantine dating from the year 331, in which he asks Eusebius, Bishop of Caesareain Palestine, to provide him with fifty copies of the Old and New Testament for use in the principal churches of his empire (zevt}Kovta cwuartia ev dipOépats eyKatacKevors) and puts two public carriages at the bishop’s disposal for their safe transport. We have also the letter that Eusebius sent along with these Bibles, in which he consigns them ép TOAVTEAGS HoKNMEVOLS TEVYETL TplTTa Kal TeTpacca—Z~.e. “in expensively prepared volumes of three and four.” With former scholars Tischendorf understood the expression tpicoa kai tetpacoa of the number of sheets in the quires of the manu- scripts, as though they had been composed of ternions and quaternions of twelve and sixteen pages respectively. Others took it as referring to the number of columns on the pages,
«
CHAP. II.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 55
Codex Sinaiticus, which Tischendorf believed to be one of these fifty Bibles, being unique in showing four columns to the page. The most probable explanation of the phrase is, how- ever, that it indicates the number of volumes each Bible com- prised, and means that each Bible of three or four parts, as the case might be, was packed in a separate box.! Tischendorf, as has been said, saw in Codex Sinaiticus one of these fifty Bibles. He also thought that 8 was the work of four different scribes, and was confident that one of these, the one who had written only six leaves of the New Testament, was the scribe of Codex Vaticanus. But other authorities bring » down to the beginning of the fifth century.
One can understand how it was that Tischendorf was led to overrate the value of this manuscript at first, and to call it by the first letter of the Hebrew alphabet to signify its pre- eminence over all other manuscripts. The claim is so far justified that it is at least one of the oldest manuscripts, and of the oldest the only one that contains the entire New Testament. The order is that of the Gospels, Pauline Epistles (among which Hebrews is found after 2 Thess.), Acts, Catholic Epistles, Apocalypse, after which come Barnabas and Hermas.2. This same order is observed in the Old Syriac Bible, and in the first printed Greek New Testa- ment, the Complutensian Polyglot. The fact that Barnabas is still tacitly included in the books of the New Testament
10On Constantine’s Bibles, see Westcott, Canon, c. ii. p. 426; Bible tn the Church, c. vi. p. 185 ff. ; Zahn, Geschichte des N. 7. Kanons, i. 64. Zahn com- bats the supposition that the entire Bible was contained in each Codex, pointing out quite rightly that in that case the latter could not have been edueTakduloTa, and moreover that Constantine speaks of swudria, which does not mean codices but something much more indefinite. Nor does he believe that Eusebius intended to specify the number of sheets in each quire of the Codex or of the columns in which it was written. ‘‘ The fifty Bibles might and would be distributed in 200 to 4oo volumes.” According to the view taken above there would be from 150 to 200 of these. Cf. Scrivener, i. p. 118,.n. 2.
2 For the order of the books in x, see Westcott, Bible in the Church, Appendix B, ‘* Contents of the most ancient MSS. of the Bible (A, B, x, D, Amiat.)” ; Hist. of the Canon, Appendix D, ‘‘ Catalogues of Books of the Bible during the first eight Centuries.” = ~
ad
Canons.
56 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. II.
may be taken equally as indicating the age of w itself or that of the exemplar from which it was copied.’ Jerome's recen- sion of Origen’s Lexicon of Proper Names in the Greek New Testament is still extant, and in it Barnabas is cited like the other books. In the Catalogus Claromontanus, which is a very old list of the books of the New Testament, Barnabas is even found before the Apocalypse, an arrangement which is not found again in the succeeding centuries.
x is also the oldest MS. that has the so-called Ammonian Sections and Eusebian Canons. In order to facilitate the study of the Gospels, Ammonius of Alexandria arranged, alongside of Matthew’s Gospel, the parallel passages. in Mark, Luke, and John. For this purpose he was obliged of course to dislocate these last.2 Eusebius, however, simply divided the four Gospels into 1162 sections—viz., 355 in Matthew, 233 in Mark, 342 in Luke, and 232 in John. These he numbered consecutively in each Gospel, and then arranged the numbers in ten Canons or Tables. The first contained those passages which are found in all the four Gospels ; the second, third, and fourth those common to any particular combination of three; the fifth to the ninth com- prised the passages common to any two, and the tenth those peculiar to each one. The number of its Canon was then set under that of the section in the margin, and the Table inserted at the beginning or end of the manuscript. By this means it was possible to know in the case of each section whether a parallel was to be found in the other Gospels,and where. In the margin opposite John xv. 20, eg., we find the numbers prd y is also found in Matthew and Luke. For on referring to Canon 3 we find that it contains the passages common to John,
; te. ve Fe This tells us that this 139th section of John
1 Six leaves are now wanting between Barnabas and Hermas. What did these contain, shall we suppose? Perhaps the Didache. Schmiedel makes a different conjecture in the Zzterardsches Centralblatt, 1897, N. 49.
2 Vide Wordsworth and White, Zfz/ogus, p. 737, De Sectionibus Ammonianis tn Evangeliis.
CHAP: I1.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 57
Matthew, and Luke, and that this section numbered 139 in John, is 90 in Matthew and 58 in Luke. And the sections being numbered consecutively in each Gospel, we easily ascer- tain that the former is Matthew x. 24, and the latter Luke vi. 40. These, or similar numbers, were afterwards inserted in the lower margin of manuscripts, as, e.g., in Codex Argenteus of the Version of Ulfilas. They are still printed alongside the text in our larger editions, though, of course, owing to the introduction of our system of chapter and verse division they have lost their main significance.
Now, a Codex like s represents to us not one manuscript only, but several at once. It embodies first of all the manu- script from which its text was immediately derived, and then also that or those by which it was revised. That is to say, after the manuscript was written by the scribe, either to dicta- tion or by copying, it was, particularly in the case of a costly manuscript, handed over to a person called the diopAwrij¢ and revised. This might be done several times over; it might be done by a later owner if he were a scholar. But it might happen, as in the case of 8 ¢.g., that the exemplar by which the manuscript was revised was not the identical one from which it had been copied but a different one, perhaps older, perhaps exhibiting another form of text altogether. Tischen- dorf distinguished no fewer than seven correctors in x. One of these, belonging, it may be, to the seventh century, adds a note at the end of the book of Ezra to the following effect,— “This codex was compared with a very ancient exemplar which had been corrected by the hand of the holy martyr Pamphilus ; which exemplar contained at the end the sub- scription in his own hand: ‘Taken and corrected according to the Hexapla of Origen: Antonius compared it: I, Pamphilus, corrected it.”1 A similar note is found appended to the
1 ’AvreBAnOn mpos madatdtatoyv Alay avtiypapov Sed:0pOwuevoy yep) Tod ayiov paptupos Maudlrov: Smep avtiypadoy mpds Ta TéAEL bmognuciwais Tis ididyxeELpos avTov trexerto €xovea ows’ weTeATH UPON Kal SiopAGOn mpds Ta EEaMAG 'Apiyévous* *Avtwvivos avtéBadev" TMdaudidos didpbwoa.
Revisions,
58 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. IL.
Book of Esther, where it is also pointed out that variants occurred in the case of proper names. Traces are still dis- coverable in the Psalms which go to prove that the corrector’s Bible agreed with that of Eusebius, while the manuscript itself had been copied from one that was very different.
A considerable number of scholars are of opinion that s was written in the West, perhaps in Rome. (See Plate 1)
Tischendorf: (1) Wotitia editionis, 1860 ; (2) Bibliorum Codex Sin- aiticus Petropolitanus, Petropoli, 1862, fol. Vol. I., Prolegomena et Commentaria; Vol. 1V., Novum Testamentum. (3) JV. 7: Sinazticum, Lips. 1863. (Die Anfechtungen der Sinaibibel, Lips. 1863; Waffen der Finsterniss wider die Sinaibibel, Lips. 1863.) (4) W. TZ. Graece ex Sinaitico Codice omnium antiquissimo, Lips. 1865. Collatio textus graeci editionis polyglottae cum Novo Testamento Sinaitico. A | ppenadix editionis Novi Testamenti polyglottae, Bielefeldiae. Sumptibus Vel- hagen et Klasing, 1894, large 8vo, pp. iv. 96. (Preface only by Tischendorf.) On Kenyon’s showing, the recent papyrus discoveries give no occasion for abandoning the conclusions formerly.come to regarding the age of these parchment manuscripts (Padaeography, p. 120). Scrivener, A full Collation of the Codex Sinaiticus with the Received Text of the N. Testament, 2nd edition, 1867. Ezra Abbot, “On the comparative antiquity of the Sinaitic and Vatican Manu- scripts of the Greek Bible,” Jowrnad of the American Oriental Society, vol. x., i. 1872, pp. 189 Ff.
A. CODEX ALEXANDRINUS: middle or end of the fifth century: written probably at Alexandria: contains a note in Arabic stating that it was presented to the library of the Patriarch of Alexandria in the year 1098. The Codex was sent by Cyril Lucar, Patriarch of Constantinople, to Charles I. of England in 1628, and was deposited in the library of the British Museum on its foundation in 1753, where it has been ever since. It has been employed in the textual criticism of the New Testament since the time of Walton. It was printed in 1786 by Woide in facsimile from wooden type. The Old Testament portion of it was also published in 1816-1828 by Baber. The entire manuscript was issued in autotype fac- simile in 1879 and 1880.
CHAP. IL. ] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 59
The Codex is defective at the beginning of the New Testa- ment, the first twenty-six leaves down to Matthew xxv. 6 being absent, as also two containing John vi. 50-viii. 52, and three containing 2 Cor. iv. 13-xii. 6. It also contains after the Apocalypse the (first) Epistle of Clement of Rome and a small fragment of the so-called second Epistle, which is really an early sermon. In the Codex these are recognised as parts of the New Testament, inasmuch as in the table of contents prefixed to the entire work they are included with the other books under the title 4 caw diaOnxn After them is given the number of books ouov 6:8da, only the figures are now, unfortunately, torn away. The contents indicate that the Psalms of Solomon should have followed, but these have been lost with the rest of the manuscript.
A is distinguished among the oldest manuscripts by the use of capital letters to indicate new sections. But in order to economize room and to obviate spacing the lines, the first letter of the section, if it occurs in the middle of a line, is not written larger, but the one that occurs at the beginning of the next whole line is enlarged and projects into the margin. (See Plate [. 2.) Later scribes have copied this so slavishly that they have written these letters in capitals even when they occur in the middle of the line in their manuscripts. The Egyptian origin of this Codex is shown by its use of Coptic forms for A and M. In several books A displays a remark- able affinity with Jerome in those very passages where he deviates from the older Latin version.
The books in A follow the order—Gospels, Acts, Catholic Epistles, Pauline Epistles, Apocalypse. (Westcott, Cazon, Appendix D. xii.; Bzble tn the Church, Appendix B.)
Woide, 1786; eiusdem, (Votitia codicis Alexandrini, Recud. cur. notasque adjecit G. L. Spohn, Lipsiae, 1788; Cowper, 1860; Hansell, 1864; Photographic facsimile by Thompson, 1879 ; and in the Facsimiles of the Palzeograpical Society, Pl. 106.
1 This agrees with the last of the so-called Apostolic Canons (85), which includes
KAnuevtos EmotoaAat S00 among the Books of the New Testament after the Epistles of James and Jude. See Westcott, Cason, Appendix D. iii. a.
60 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. IL
The mixed character of the text of A was early observed ; see Lagarde, Gesammelte Abhandlungen, p. 94.
C. F. Hoole ascribes the Codex Alexandrinus to the middle of the fourth century (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1891; see Academy, July 25, 1891, 73).
B. CODEX VATICANUS far excellence, No. 1209 in the Vatican Library at Rome, inserted there shortly after its foundation by Pope Nicolas V., and one of its greatest treasures. Like A it once contained the whole of the Old Testament with the exception of the Books of Maccabees. The first 31 leaves, containing Gen. i. I-xlvi, 28, are now wanting, as well as 20 from the Psalms containing Ps. cv. (cvi.) 27-cxxxvii. (cxxxviii.) 6. The New Testament is complete down to Heb. ix. 14, where it breaks off at xa9a[piec]. 1 and 2 Tim., Titus, Philemon, and the Apocalypse are, therefore, also wanting. Rahlfs supposes that the manu- script may have originally contained the Didache and the Shepherd of Hermas as well. Erasmus obtained some account of this manuscript, and Pope Sixtus V. made it the basis of an edition of the Greek Old Testament, which was published in 1586, thereby determining the JZertus receptus of that portion of the Bible—Would he had done the same for the New Testament! This task was undertaken afterwards, specially by Bentley and Birch. Professor Hug of Freiburg recognised the value of the Codex when it was removed from Rome to Paris by Napoleon in 1809. Cardinal Angelo Mai printed an edition of it between 1828 and 1838, which, how-- ever, did not appear till 1857, three years after his death, and which was most unsatisfactory. After Tischendorf had led the way with the Codex Sinaiticus, Pope Pio Nono gave orders for an edition, which was printed between 1868 and 1872 in five folio volumes. Not till 1881, however, did the last volume of this edition appear containing the indispensable commentary prepared under the supervision of Vercellone, J. Cozza, C. Sergio, and H. Fabiani, with the assistance of U. Ubaldi and A. Rocchi, Then at last the manuscript was
CHAP. II.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 61
photographed, the New Testament in 1889, and the Old Testament, in three volumes, in 1890—a veritable 7X/ov avaOnua. No facsimile now can give any idea of its original beauty, because a hand of the tenth or eleventh century—or as the Roman editors say, a monk called Clement in the fifteenth century—went over the whole manuscript, letter by letter, with fresh ink, restoring the faded characters and at the same time adding accents and breathings in accordance with the pronunciation of his time (aua€a, for example, and adwrné, dé). The Old Testament is the work of at least two scribes, one of whom wrote down to I Sam. ix. 11, and the other to the end of 2 Esdras, Tischendorf’s opinion with regard tothe writer of the New Testament has been already noticed. There can be no question that B is more carefully written than ». In the Gospels the Vatican exhibits a peculiar division into 170, 62, 152, and 80 sections respec- tively, which is found also in ®; in the Acts there is a double division into 36 and 69.1 The enumeration affixed to the Pauline Epistles shows that these were copied from a manuscript in which Hebrews came after Galatians, though in B its position has been changed so as to follow 2 Thessa- lonians. The copyist has also retained in part of the Old Testament the enumeration of the stichoi which he found in his original. In the New Testament the order of the books is Gospels, Acts, Catholic Epistles, Pauline Epistles. An increased interest would be lent to this manuscript if, as has been supposed, it represents the recension of the Egyptian Bishop and Martyr Hesychius, of which Jerome makes men- tion in two places. (Bousset, Zertkritische Studien zum Neuen Testament, pp. 74-110, see especially p. 96.) On the Egyptian character of B, see also Burkitt in 7erts and Studies, v. p. viii. f., and compare below, p. 183 f. (See Plate IV.) Hug, Commentatio de antiquitate codicis Vaticant, 1810. Vercellone, Dell antichissimo codice Vaticano della Bibbia Greca, 1859 ; reprinted
1 On the Alexandrian division of the Gospels into 68, 48, 83, and 18 sections respectively, see Kenyon in the Journal of Theological Studzes, i. 149.
62 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. (CHAP. II.
in his Dissertazioni accademiche, Roma, 1864, 15 ff. First facsimile reproduction, Bibliorum sacrorum Graecus Codex Vaticanus . collatis studtis Caroli Vercellone et Josephi Cozza editus, vol. v., Rome, 1868 ; vol. vi. (Proleg. Comment. Tab. ed. Henr. Fabiani et Jos. Cozza), 1881; of. ZhLz., 1882, vi. 9. A. Giovanni, Dela Jllus- trazione del? edizione Romana del Codice Vaticano, Rome, 1869. Photographic edition, Vouvwm Testamentum e Codice Vaticano 1209... . phototypice repraesentatum ... . curante Jos. Cozza- Luzi, Rome, 1889, fol.; see H. C. Hoskier, Zhe Expositor, 1889, vol. x. 457 ff.; O. v. Gebhardt, 7%Zz., 1890, 16; Nestle, Se/.-Sz,, ii. 16 ff. Alf. Rahlfs, Alter und Heimat der Vatikanischen Bibel- handschrift (Nachrichten der Gesell. der Wiss. zu Gottingen, Philo- logisch-historische Klasse, 1889, Heft i. pp. 72-79). In this article Rahlfs seeks to prove that the number and order of the books in the Old and New Testaments contained in B correspond exactly to the Canon of the Scriptures given by Athanasius in his thirty-ninth Festal Letter of the year 367. In it, Athanasius, after mentioning all the canonica!’ books of the Bible, including those of the N. T., cites the extra-canonical books of the O. T. which are allowed to be read, putting them after the second group, BiBrAou orix7ypets, because two of these books, Wisdom and Sirach, were to be written otixndov. In the N. T. the Greek and Syriac forms of the Festal Letter put Hebrews expressly between the Epistles to the Churches and the Pastoral Epistles. In the Sahidic version of the Letter, however, Hebrews stands before Galatians. This latter arrangement is evidently the survival of a pre-Athanasian order which has been longer preserved in the Sahidic translation.! But if B is the work of Athanasius, it follows that it cannot be one of the Bibles ordered by Constantine. In this case it would rather be written in Egypt, and we should have in it the Recension of Hesychius, as Grabe supposed was the case in the O. T., while Hug held the same view in regard to the N. T. text of this manuscript (see below, c. III.). Against the theory of Rahlfs, see O. v. Gebhardt in the Zheologische Litteraturseitung, 1899, Nn. 20.
1 For the Festal Letter, see Westcott, Cazoz, App. D. xiv., p. 5543; idle in the Church, p. 159 ff. ; Preuschen’s Azalecta, pp. 144 ff. ; Burgess, Festal Letters of Athanasius translated from the Syriac, p. 137. Sahidic published by C. Schmidt in the Nachrichten mentioned above, 1898, p. 167 ff. He holds it to be the original form of the Letter.
CHAP. II.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 63
C. CODEX EPHRAEMI RESCRIPTUS, No. g in the National Library at Paris, the most important of the palimpsests. This manuscript receives its name from the fact that in the twelfth century thirty-eight treatises of Ephraem, the Syrian Father (d. 373), were written over the original text. After various attempts had been made at its decipherment by Wett- stein and others, Tischendorf in 1843 and 1845 published as much of the New and Old Testaments as he was able to make out after eighteen months’ labour, thereby establishing his reputation as a textual critic.
The manuscript once contained the entire Bible, but the whole of I and 2 Thessalonians has been lost, as also some 37 chapters from the Gospels, 10 from the Acts, 42 from the Epistles, and 8 from the Apocalypse. There is no trace of a chapter division in Acts, Epistles, or Apocalypse. This last seems to have been copied from an exemplar consisting of about 120 small leaves, one of which had been displaced by some mistake. The Codex dates from the fifth century, and may possibly have been written in Egypt. Its earliest correc- tions are important, and were inserted in the sixth century.
A detailed list of the contents of C is given by Scrivener, vol. i. 121. Facsimile, zdzd@., Plate X. p. 121.
Tischendorf, 7%. St. und Kr., 1841, 126 ff; N.T. edited 1843, O. T. 1845. Lagarde, Ges. Abhandlungen, p. 94. The page of the O. T. which Tischendorf issued in facsimile has most unfortunately dis- appeared, as Martin points out in his Description technique des manuscrits grecs relatifs au NV. T., ett., Paris, 1884, p. 4. A. Jacob, Notes sur les MSS. grecs palimpsestes de la Bibliotheque Nationale, in Melanges Julien Havet, 759-770.
The foregoing is what remains of the four great manuscripts which once contained the whole Bible. It will be observed that at the present time they are distributed among the Capitals of the great branches of the Christian Church—viz., St. Petersburg (Greek), Rome and Paris(Roman), and London (Anglican). German scholars have taken a foremost place in the work of their investigation.
64 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. II.
D. CopEX BEZAE CANTABRIGIENSIS, inferior to the fore- going in age, compass, and repute, but perhaps surpassing all of them in importance, by reason of its unique character. The manuscript was presented to the University of Cambridge in 1581 by Calvin’s friend Theodore Beza, “ut inter vere chris- tianas antiquissimae plurimisque nominibus celeberrimae.” It is not earlier than the beginning of the sixth century, but is of peculiar importance as the oldest of the Greek-Latin manuscripts of the Bible. It now contains, with certain lacune, the Gospels (in the order Matthew, John, Luke, Mark), the con- cluding verses of the Latin text of 3 John, followed immedi- ately by the Acts, showing that in this manuscript the Epistle of Jude either stood somewhere else or was absent altogether. At least nine later hands can be distinguished in it. The first scribe was more familiar with Latin than Greek, and therefore inserts a Roman letter here and there in the middle of a Greek word, and has frequently to use the sponge to wash out the mistakes he makes in writing his manuscript.! Innumerable passages occur, particularly in Luke and Acts, where the text of D differs in the most remarkable manner from that of all the Greek manuscripts we are acquainted with. It alone, eg., contains after Luke vi. 4 the incident of the man working in the field on the Sabbath day, to whom Jesus said, “O Man, if thou knowest what thou doest, blessed art thou, but if thou knowest not, thou art cursed and a transgressor of the Law.” It is the only one also that has the words in Luke xi. 2, “ when ye pray, use not vain repetitions as the Noroi.” In Luke xxiii. 53, it says that the stone before the grave of Jesus was of such a size by moyls etkoot exUALov, an addition in which it has the support of only one Latin MS. and the Sahidic Version. Again in Acts xii. 10, it is alone in recording that there were seven steps down from the prison in Jerusalem (xatéBnoay Tous éxta Bauovs). Other examples might be given of similar peculiar interpolations for the explanation of which reference must be made to c. III. below.
1 Bie. ATIECTALKEN, 122d, 4.
CHAP. II.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 65
Its companion Latin text d is not translated directly from its own Greek but from the Greek of the parent manuscript. Seeing that the manuscript was discovered in the Monastery of Irenzeus at Lyons, and that its text agrees with the Scripture quotations found in that Father even in the matter of clerical mistakes, it is possible that the Greek text is derived from his copy. The Greek occupies the left-hand page of the open volume, which is the place of honour. (See Plates [I and III.)
Kipling, Facsimile edition, Codex Th. Bezae Cantabrigtensis, 1793, 2 vols. ; Scrivener, Bezae Codex Cantabrigiensis. An exact copy in ordinary type... with critical introduction, annotations, and fac- similes. to, pp. lxiv+453, 1864. Collation of the same by Nestle, Supplementum, 1896 (see p. 26). Cambridge University Press, Photographic facsimile. Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis Quattuor Evan- gelia et Actus Apostolorum continens Graece et Latine. 2 vols., pp. 830, 1899. 12 guineas. (See Lzterature, 29th April 1899, p. 451 ff.); Dav. Schulz, Disputatio de Codice D., 1827; K. A. Credner, Beitrige zur Einleitung, vol. 1.. 1832, pp. 452-518; J. R. Harris, Codex Bezae. A study of the so-called Western Text of the N. T. (Texts and Studies, vol. i.) Cambridge, 1891 ; also Credner and the Codex Bezae. A Lecture delivered in the Divinity School, Cambridge, 19th Nov. 1892. (Zhe Classical Review, vol. vii. 6, June 1893, pp. 237-243); Chase, Zhe Old Syriac Element in the text of Codex Bezae, London, 1893; also Zhe Syro-Latin Text of the Gospels, London, 1895 ; Nestle, Some Observations on the Codex Bezae in the Expositor, v. 2, 1895, p. 235; H. Trabaud, Ux curieux manuscrit du NV. T. in the Revue de théologie et de philosophie, Lausanne, 1896, p. 378; Fr. Blass: 1. Die zwiefache Textiiberlieferung in der A postelgeschichte (Th, St. Kr., 1894, p. 86 ff.); 2. Acta Apostolorum sive Lucae ad Theophilum Liber alter. Editio philologica, Gottingen, 1895; 3. Acta Apostolorum ... secundum formam quae videtur Romanam, Leipzig, 1896; 4. Ueber die verschiedenen Textformen in den Schriften des Lukas (Neue Kirchliche Zeitschrift, 1895, p. 712) ; 5. De duplici forma Actorum Lucae (Hermathena, Dublin, 1895, p. 121); 6.De varits formis Evangelit Lucani (Lbid., Dublin, 1896, p. 291) ; 7. Neue Texteszeugen fiir die Apostelgeschichte (Th. St. Kr., 1896, p- 436); 8. Bvangelium secundum Lucam sive Lucae ad Theophilum Liber prior. Secundum formam quae videtur Romanam, Leipzig, 1897; B. Weiss, Der Codex D in der Apostelgeschichte. Textkritische
E
Gospels.
66 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. II.
Untersuchung, Leipzig, 1897, (=Texte und Untersuchungen. N. F. Zweiter Band, Heft 1); F. Graefe, Der Codex Bezae und das Lucas- evangelium, Th. St. Kr., 1898, 1. 116-140 ; compare especially, Ox the Italian Origin of Codex Bezae, 1. Codex Bezae and cod, 1071, by the Rev. K. Lake; 2. The Marginal Notes of Lections, by the Rey. F. E. Brightman in the Journal of Theological Studies, i. 3 (April 1900) pp. 441-454. Codex 1071 is a minuscule on Mt. Athos, in which the text of the Pericope Adulterae (John viii.) is essentially the same as the singular text exhibited by D. It seems to have come from Calabria. The lectionary indicated in the margin of D points toa mixed Greek and Latin population such as that in the South of Italy.
In what follows the manuscripts are grouped according to their contents as copies of the Gospels, Acts and Catholic Epistles, Pauline Epistles, or of the Apocalypse.
E. CODEX BASILIENSIS, by some ascribed to the seventh century, but belonging more probably to the eighth: brought to Europe by Cardinal John de Ragusio, who was sent on a mission to the Greeks by the Council of Basel (1431): used by Mill, Bengel, and Wettstein: Luke iii. 4-15 and xxiv. 47-53 wanting: has been in the University Library at Basel since E550: (Serivenet, 1.\p. 131,Plate-X1. 27)
F. BOREELIANUS, written in the ninth century: so called as belonging at one time to a Dutchman named John Boreel: now in Utrecht: has many lacune, some Of which have arisen since Wettstein collated the manuscript in 1730. (Scrivener, i. 131, Plate XI. 28.)
F*, COISLINIANUS, of the seventh century, though some say the sixth and others the eighth: consists of only 26 verses from Matthew, Luke, John, Acts, 1 and 2 Cor., Gal., Col., and Heb., written on the margin of a famous Parisian manuscript of the Octoteuch in Greek containing Gen.—Deut., Josh., Jud., and Ruth. List of contents of F* in Scrivener, i. 134.
G. SEIDELIANUS, of the tenth century: part of it in the British Museum in London and part in Trinity College, Cambridge: brought from the East by Seidel and presented in 1718 by the Berlin Librarian La Croze to J. Chr. Wolf, a
CHAP. II.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 67
clergyman in Hamburg who cut out half a page to send to Bentley in 1721. (Scrivener, i, 131, Plate XI. 29.)
H, SEIDELIANUS II., of the ninth century, in Hamburg: bequeathed with his library to his native city by Wolf, and rediscovered there in 1838. (Scrivener, i. 134, Plate XII. 31.)
I. TISCHENDORFIANUS IL., fragments of seven manuscripts in St. Petersburg found by Tischendorf in the Monastery of Mar Saba, near the Dead Sea: consists of 28 palimpsest leaves with Greek writing of the tenth century containing only 255 verses of the New Testament, of which 190 are from the Gospels: the three oldest leaves are of the fifth century ; some of them are perhaps parts of a once complete Bible : detailed list of contents in Scrivener, i. 134 f.
I, So indicated by Tischendorf in his eighth edition, formerly known as N°, of the fourth or more probably the fifth century: a threefold palimpsest written first in Greek and afterwards twice in Syriac: contains 17 verses from John’s Gospel: now in the British Museum: list of verses in Scrivener, 1. 141.
K. Cyprius, No. 63 in the National Library at Paris: middle of the ninth century : purchased in Cyprus for Colbert in 1673: one of the six, or including Q seven, complete uncial manuscripts of the Gospels, the others being s BMSU (Q). Facsimile in Scrivener, i., Plate VII. p. 153.
L. Reatus, No. 62 in the National Library at Paris: of the eighth century: contains the four Gospels complete with the exception of five lacunz in Matthew iv. v. and xxviii, Mark x. and xv., and in John xxi.: important as showing the double conclusion of Mark’s Gospel which is exhibited as yet, except in versions, in only three other uncials (", p, and VY) and one minuscule (see Plate X.). Facsimile of L, Mark xvi, 8, 9, in Scrivener, i., Plate IX. 21, p. 137. The conclusions, as found in L, 1, p, and Y, are printed and discussed in Swete’s Gospel according to St. Mark, pp. xcviii, xcix. See also West- cott and Hort’s Introduction, Appendix, p. 28 ff; Scrivener, 11. 337; Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible, iii, p. 13.
68 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. II.
M. CAMPIANUS, 48 in the National Library, Paris: of the ninth century: presented to Louis XIV. by the Abbé Francois de Camps, 1st January 1706: contains the four Gospels com- plete: one of the oldest manuscripts, with the exception of D, that exhibit the pericope of the adulteress, John vii. 53 ff. Facsimile in Scrivener, i., Plate XII. p. 134.
N. PURPUREUS, belonging to the end of the sixth century: one of the most lovely manuscripts, consisting of 45 leaves, of which 6 are in the Vatican Library at Rome, 4 in the British Museum, 2 in Vienna, and the remaining 33 in the Monastery of St. John in Patmos, from which, in all probability, the others were carried off. The manuscript is written with silver letters on a purple ground, only the letters are not printed on it with movable type as was formerly supposed in the case of the similar Codex Argenteus of Ulfilas. The contents are given in Scrivener, i. 139 f., and a facsimile at p. 98, Plate V. 182 other leaves belonging to this manuscript were recently acquired in Cappadocia for Russia.
The Vienna fragment is most beautifully printed in facsimile in that superb work, Die Wiener Genesis, edited by Wilh. Ritter von Hartel and Franz Wickhoff: Supplement to vols. xv. and xvi. of the Jahrbuch der kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des Allerhichsten Kaiserhauses. Vienna, 1895. Hartel (p. 142) sees no reason why the manuscript should not be ascribed to the fifth century.
The text of Codex N, including the new Russian fragments, has been published with Introduction and Appendix by the Rev. H. S. Cronin in Zexts and Studies, v. 4, 1899. The Appendix contains a collation of the Gospel of Mark in the Codex Imperatricis Theodorae (Scriv. 473 : Hort 81: Tisch. 2”°: Greg. 565 ; seenoteonp.151). See Nestle in the Zeitschrift fiir wiss. Theologie, 42 (1859), pp. 621-623.
Some leaves of another purple manuscript have been acquired in Paris. See H. Omont, Acad. des Inscr., Mars—Avril 1900.
O. In Moscow, consists of a few leaves taken from the binding of a book: contains 15 verses from John’s Gospel i, and xx.: written in the ninth century.
O*-}, Psalters, in whiclt are found, after the Psalms among
CHAP. IL] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 69
the poetic selections from the Bible, the Magnificat, the Benedictus, and the Nunc Dimittis from the first and second chapters of Luke’s Gospel. O*% is a Greek Psalter of the sixth century written in Latin characters and is at Verona. O*isa purple Psalter of the seventh century at Zurich. O* at St. Gall is a Psalter of the ninth century, written partly in Latin and partly in Greek.
P and Q. Two palimpsests at Wolfenbiittel, the former belonging to the sixth and the latter to the fifth century. P, it appears, came from Bobbio and was afterwards at Weissen- burg, Mayence, and Prague. Q, together with a portion of Ulfilas’s Gothic Bible, has been employed to receive the works of Isidore of Seville. The codices were edited with great care by Tischendorf in 1869.
R. NITRIENSIS, of the sixth century: in the British Museum: consists of 48 leaves containing some 516 verses from Luke’s Gospel, over which and a manuscript of 4000 verses of the Iliad, the Syriac works of Severus of Antioch were written in the ninth century. The palimpsest was brought from the Nitrian Desert in 1847, and deposited in the British Museum. (Scrivener, i. 145, Plate VI, 17.) |
S. VATICANUS 354: one of the earliest manuscripts of the Greek New Testament that bears an exact date. At the end is written, éypady 4 tTyula déATOs alTy dia xetpos Euod Muyanr movaxod dmapTwroo unvi Mapriw a, nuépa & wpa ¢, Erous cw’, ivéixtiovos (, Ze. at six o’clock on Thursday, 1st March 6457 in the 7th Indiction! or 949 A.D.
T* Of the fifth century: in the Museum Borgianum at Rome: written probably by a Coptic monk: unfortunately a mere fragment containing only 17 leaves from Luke and John: is written in two columns, that on the left con- taining a Sahidic version. T”, similar small fragments of John in St. Petersburg of the sixth century. T°, also of
1An Indiction is a cycle of fifteen years, computed by the Greeks from Ist
September 312 A.D. Its introduction was ascribed to Constantine the Great. See Scrivener, i., App. C, p. 380,
FO GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. II.
the sixth century, a fragment of Matthew, formerly in the possession of Bishop Porfiri Uspenski of Kiev, and now at St. Petersburg. T“, of the seventh century, in Rome, part of a Sahidic-Greek Evangeliarium, containing a few verses from Matthew, Mark, and John. T°, of the sixth century (?), at Cambridge, consists of four verses, Matthew iii. 13-16. T* (T* in ZiGr. p. 450), three leaves from Matthew xx. and xxii. T', fragments of six Greek-Coptic and three Greek Gospels of the ninth and tenth centuries, but possibly the seventh and eighth, published by Ameélineau in vol. xxxiv. of the WVotices et Extraits de la Bibliotheque Nationale, 1895, 363 ff. ; cv. Dobschitz in the Zz. Cent.-Blatt., 1895, 42, 1857. T' contains the double conclusion of Mark’s Gospel. Tv%, similar leaves at Oxford which once belonged to Woide, but by a different hand from T°.
To these Greeco-Coptic fragments there is now to be added two chapters of John’s Gospel (iii. 5-iv. 49), in Greek and Middle Egyptian, written in the sixth century. They are published by W. E. Crum and F. G. Kenyon in the /ournal of Theological Studies, i. 3 (April 1900), pp. 415-433. The find contains no remarkable readings. The editors call its text neutral, and think it helps to show that Egypt was the home of such correct and upright texts. (T™ Greg.)
U. NANIANUS, so called from a former possessor: of the end of the ninth or beginning of the tenth century: in Venice: a very beautiful and complete manuscript of the Gospels, with ornamentations in gold. (Scrivener, i. 137, Plate IX. 22.)
V. Formerly at Mount Athos, now in Moscow: of the ninth century: first employed by Bengel and Wettstein through the medium of G. B. Bilfinger.
W. Various small fragments: W* of the eighth century in Paris: a fragment of Luke. W?” of the eighth century (or the ninth) in Naples: a palimpsest with parts of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. W¢° of the ninth century at St. Gall: a palimpsest, containing fragments of Mark and Luke, per- haps once bilingual, Greek-Latin. W° of the ninth century
CHAP. I1.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM, 71
in Cambridge. W® of the ninth century: part of John, at Mount Athos, Oxford, and Athens. W*‘ of the ninth century : in Oxford: fragment of Mark. Wé of the ninth century: consisting of 36 palimpsest leaves with 497 verses from Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, in the British Museum. W* of the ninth century: in Oxford: part of Mark. Wi in Paris, of the seventh to the eighth or ninth century: frag- ments of Mark and Luke, of which W' and W* are printed in Omont’s Catalogue des Manuscrits Grecs, Latins, Francais, et Espagnols et des Portulans, recueillis par feu Emmanuel Miller, Paris, 1897. W” of the seventh century, in Vienna: fragments of John. W° of the ninth century, in Milan: 16 mutilated palimpsest leaves, containing portions of Matthew, Mark, and Luke.
X. MONACENSIS, written at the end of the ninth or beginning of the tenth century, now in Munich, contains the Gospels, with lacune, and a commentary, in the order Matthew, John, Luke, Mark. Scrivener, i. 343, Plate XIII. 38; for contents see zézd., p. 152.
X?. Fragment containing Luke i. I-ii. 40, hitherto reckoned among the minuscules and numbered 429; also in Munich.
Y. Belonging to the eighth century, in the Barberini Library at Rome: 6 leaves containing John xvi. 3-xix. 41.
Z. A palimpsest in Dublin of the fifth or sixth century, con- taining 295 verses of Matthew’s Gospel. Scrivener, i. 153; Plate VII. 18.
The Roman alphabet not being sufficient for the number of uncial manuscripts, recourse was taken to those letters of the Greek and Hebrew which have a distinct form from those already employed. It was proposed by others to reserve the Greek letters for those manuscripts no longer extant, whose text can be reconstructed from a number of kindred manu- scripts as their common archetype.
I’. Of the ninth or tenth century: part in Oxford and part in St. Petersburg, the former having been obtained from Tischendorf in 1855 and the latter in 1859: contains the
72 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. II.
whole of Luke and John, but Mark is defective from iii. 34 to vi. 20, while Matthew is still more defective. The writing of the manuscript was finished on a certain Thursday, the _ 27th November, in the eighth year of anindiction. Tischendorf accordingly fixed its date as 844. It was previously assigned by Gardthausen to the year 979. Scrivener, i. 134, Plate XII. 35.
A. SANGALLENSIS, written at the end of the ninth or beginning of the tenth century: now at St. Gall, where it was probably transcribed by an Irish monk: has an interlinear Latin version, and was not, therefore, like D, intended for church but for school purposes. The Codex has the four Gospels complete with the exception of John xix. 17-35. In Mark the text shows a closer agreement with CL than in the other Gospels. The manuscript has been copied from one written scrzptione continua, and in consequence the words are often wrongly divided. See G, below, p. 77.
6*~4, Small fragments brought from the East by Tischendorf, of which 6° belongs to the seventh century, and 0” to the seventh, sixth, and seventh or eighth century respectively. The first is in Leipzig, the others in St. Petersburg. 0%" were formerly in the possession of Bishop Porfiri of Kiev.
A. Of the ninth century : contains the Gospels of Luke and John entire: evidently the second part of a minuscule brought to St. Petersburg by Tischendorf, No. 566 °Y (Greg.)+: mar- ginal scholia are affixed to four passages in Matthew—viz. iv. 5, xvi. 17, xviii. 22, xxvi. 74, giving the readings of ro ‘Tovédaixov, ze. the lost Gospel according to the Hebrews, and its subscription runs, éypagy cat avteBAHOn ék THY’ leporoAVmors Tadaov avTiypapwv Tav év To Oper ayiw a7roKemévov- & orixots Bd’ (2514) kepadais Tvé (345). The manuscript is in the Bodleian Library at Oxford. Scrivener, i. 131, Plate XI. 30.
Cf. von Dobschiitz, Zwet Bibelhandschriften mit doppelter Schriftart (7h. L2z., 1889, iii. 74 f.).
1 See Scrivener, i. p. 160, under A. This minuscule seems to be omitted from Scrivener’s list. See below, p. 185.
CHAP. II.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 73
=. ZACYNTHIUS, a palimpsest of the eighth century from Zante, now in the Library of the British and Foreign Bible Society in London : the earliest manuscript with a commentary : -has the same system of chapter division as B, and is oftener found supporting B against A than vice versa.
II. Of the ninth century: contains the Gospels almost complete: once the property of a Greek of Smyrna called Parodos: procured by Tischendorf for the Emperor of Russia.
>. Of the sixth century: written on purple with gold and silver lettering and 17 miniatures, being the earliest manu- script to contain such: rescued from obscurity in 1879 by Oscar v. Gebhardt and A. Harnack, who discovered it at Rossano in Calabria: hence designated as Codex Rossanensis : is nearly related toN. Scrivener, i. 124, Plate XIV. 43.
O. v. Gebhardt, Die Evangelien des Matthius und des Marcus aus dem Codex Purpureus Rossanensis herausgegeben (T. und U., i. 4, 1883). A. Haseloff, Cod. Pur. Rossanensis, Die Miniaturen der &riechischen Evangelien-Handschrift in Rossano. Nach photograph- ischen Aufnahmen herausgegeben. Leipzig, 1898 (contains 14 facsimiles of the text and 15 photographic plates). Vide S. Berger in Bull. Crit., 1899, 6: also F. X. v. Funk, Dre Zezt. des Cod. Rossanensis in the Hist. Jahrbuch der Gorresgeschellschaft, xvii. 2, 1896, 331-344.
®. CODEX BERATINUS, of the sixth century: at Berat in Albania: like the last a purple Codex with silver writing : contains portions of Matthew and Mark: seen and published by Batiffol. Scrivener, i. 166, Plate XV.
. Fragments of the eighth or ninth century at Athos: con- tains Mark ix. 5 to the end, Luke, John, Acts, seven Catholic Epistles, Romans to Philemon, and Hebrews: exhibits after Mark xvi. 8 the same double conclusion as is found in L and one Sinai manuscript. On some readings of VY, see Lake in the Journal of Theological Studies, No. i. p, 88 ; ii. pp. 290-292.
Q. Of the eighth or ninth century: in the Monastery of Dionysius at Athos : contains the Gospels entire.
Acts and Catholic Epistles.
74 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. IL.
The last-mentioned codices have not yet been thoroughly collated, some of them having been only recently discovered.
The following are indicated by Hebrew letters.
3. Of the ninth or tenth century: in the Monastery of St. Andrew at Athos: contains the Gospels with lacune.
a. GREGORIANUS, a purple manuscript from Cappadocia now admitted to be part of N.
“3°15, Several leaves dating from the fifth to the ninth century, discovered at Sinai by J. R. Harris and published by him (Biblical fragments from Mount Sinai, 1890): “V* contains the double conclusion of Mark: “V8 is a purple fragment of the seventh century containing a few verses from the first chapter of Luke, perhaps only a quotation.
p. Swete indicates with this letter the fragment cited above as T!, which exhibits the double conclusion of Mark’s Gospel. See his Gospel according to St. Mark, pp. xcii., xcix.
“|. An Oxyrhynchus fragment of the fifth or sixth century, published by Grenfell and Hunt, The Oxyrhynchus Papyrt, Part I. with eight Plates, London, 1898: contains only Mark x, 50 f, and xi. 10 f.: cited by Swete. (1® Gres)
Part II. of The Oxyrhynchus Papyri (1899, pp. 1-8) contains a fragment of John’s Gospel (cc. i. and xx.) from a sheet of a papyrus codex written between 200 and 300 A.D. This is one of the earliest fragments that have been discovered of a papyrus dook (not a roll). It exhibits already the abbrevia- tions usually found in theological manuscripts, such as Q>, IHS, X>, ITNA. The Codex agrees with » in several readings not found elsewhere. (T* Greg.) See Addenda, p. xv.
The second group is composed of manuscripts of the Acts and Catholic Epistles which are distinguished from those in the first by affixing the exponent, at the bottom of the symbol.
sx A B exhibit the Acts and Catholic Epistles complete:
E, D have the Acts all but entire:
K L have the Catholic Epistles complete:
C P have the greater part of them.
CHAP. II.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. as
For s ABCD F* (a few verses of the Acts), see above.
E,. LAUDIANUS 35,in Oxford, written at the end of the sixth century: bilingual, Latin-Greek, the Latin occupying the place of honour on the left: breaks off at Acts xxvi. 29: the text very peculiar and somewhat like that of D. The manuscript was formerly in Sardinia, and was_ probably brought to England by Theodore of Tarsus in 668. It was employed by the Venerable Bede (d. 735) in his Exposztio of the Acts and afterwards in his Exposztio Retractata. Archbishop [aud presented the manuscript with many others to the University of Oxford. Fell and Mill made use of it. menivener, i. 121, Plate X; 25.
G,. Of the seventh century, a single leaf in St. Petersburg containing Acts ii.45-1ii.8, torn from the cover of a Syriac manuscript.
G”. Of the ninth century, a palimpsest of six leaves in Rome containing portions of Acts xvi. 32—xviii. 20. (Vat. Gr. 2302.)
H,. Ninth century, in Modena, has the Acts with some lacune.
I,. Fragments in St. Petersburg of the fifth and seventh cen- turies: four leaves from three different manuscripts of the Acts.
K,. Of the ninth century: brought to Moscow from Athos:
contains the Catholic and Pauline Epistles. ' L,. Written at the end of the ninth century: in the Angelica Library at Rome: contains the Acts from c. viii. onwards, the Catholic Epistles, and the Pauline down to Hebrews xiii.
P,. Of the ninth century: formerly in the possession of Bishop Porfiri of Kiev and now at St. Petersburg: published by Tischendorf : contains Acts, Catholic and Pauline Epistles, and Apocalypse, with several lacunz.
S, Of the eighth or ninth century: at Athos: contains Acts, Catholic Epistles, Romans, portions of I and 2 Corinthians, and Ephesians.
3,. A palimpsest of the fifth century: in Rome: rediscovered by Batiffol: consists of fragments of Acts, James, I and 2 Peter, 1, 2, and 3 John, Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians,
Pauline Epistles.
76 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. II.
Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, and Hebrews.
The third group is composed of manuscripts of the Pauline Epistles. Of these there is a comparatively large number, which may be taken as indicating the important position ascribed to Paul even in early times. s, however, is the only Codex that contains his Epistles complete ; in D L they are almost com- plete, and A BC EF G K exhibit the greater part of them.
For s A BC, see above.
A is defective in 2 Cor. iv. 13—xii.6 inclusive.
B breaks off at Hebrews ix. 14, consequently 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, and Philemon are wanting.
D,. CODEX CLAROMONTANUS: takes its name from Cler- mont near Beauvais. The manuscript was written in the sixth century, and is bilingual in Greek and Latin, having the Greek on the left-hand page. The Greek is wanting in Rom.. i. 1-7; 27=30, and in. 2 (Cor. xiv:-3=22) 9 fneieae v. 9 D, reads dodo?, and in verse 14 éy vi, in both places agreeing with Marcion. At least nine hands are distin- suishable in the manuscript, one of whom corrected the text in over 2000 places in the ninth or tenth century. Two leaves are palimpsest, their text being written over part of a play of Euripides. Hebrews has evidently been copied into the Codex from a different manuscript by a later scribe. Before it is a list of “versus scribtuarum sanctarum,” one of the oldest stichometric catalogues of the books of the Old and New Testaments, which is derived from an early Greek original. This Catalogus Claromontanus is given in West- cott’s History of the Canon, App. D, xx. p. 563, and in his Bible in the Church, App. B, p. 309. See also Zahn, Geschichte des N. T. Kanons, Il. 157-172, 1012; Jiilicher, Einleitung, § 40. Thirty-five leaves of Codex D, were stolen by John Aymont in 1707, but afterwards restored by their purchasers, some of them in 1720, and the others in 1729. (See Plates II. and [11.)
CHAP. II.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 77
E,. SANGERMANENSIS, of the ninth century: also Greek- Latin: brought from St. Germain de Prés to St. Petersburg during the Revolution : in the Greek merely an incorrect tran- script of D,, and may therefore be dismissed. See p.179 n. I.
F,. AUGIENSIS, of the ninth century: another Greek- Latin manuscript: defective in Rom. i. I-iii, 1g; 1 Cor. iii. 8-16; vi. 7-14; Col. ii. 1-8; Philemon 21-25: Hebrews from the first only in the Latin. The manuscript was formerly at Reichenau (Augia Dives, hence its name). It was purchased by Bentley in 1718 for 250 Dutch florins, and is now at Cambridge. An edition of it was published by Scrivener in 1859. For F*, see above, p. 66.
Scrivener, Am exact transcript of the Codex Augiensis. . . to which ts added a full collation of fifty manuscripts containing various portions of the Greek N. T.,1859. F. Zimmer, Der Codex Augiensis eine Adbschrift des Boernerianus (ZfuTh., 1887, i. 76-91).
G,. BOERNERIANUS, of the ninth century, so called from Professor C. F. Boerner of Leipzig, who purchased it in 1705 : now in Dresden. It is a Greek-Latin manuscript, the Latin being interlinear. It is manifestly the second part of A, and has a close affinity with F,, though the Greek of F was not copied from G, as Zimmer and Hort assert. The fact is rather that both are derived from one and the same original, in which ag. ws yayypa wa vouny e€er, Sicut cancer ut serpat, was found in 2 Tim. ii. 17, and nueOa de SovAwmevor, eramus autem servientes, in Gal. iv. 3. This manuscript contains some interesting Irish verses! At the end of Philemon there stands the title mpos Aaovdaxycas, ad laudicenses, but the Epistle that should have followed has been lost.
P. Corssen, Zpistularum Paulinarum codices graece et latine scriptos Augtensem, Boernerianum, Claromontanum examinavit, inter se
1 **To Rome to come, to Rome to come, Much of trouble, little of profit, The thing thou seekest here, If thou bring not with thee, thou findest not” ; etc., etc. See Scrivener, i. 180.
Euthalian Recension.
78 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. II,
comparavit, ad communem originem revocavit. Specimen primum, 1887. <Alterum, 1889.
H,. Written in the sixth century, one of the most valuable manuscripts, but unfortunately incomplete. Its leaves were used in 975 and 1218 to cover some manuscripts at Mount Athos. Forty-one of these have been rescued, of which 22 are now in Paris, 8 at Mount Athos, 3 in St. Petersburg, 3 in Moscow, 2 in Turin, and 3 in Kiev. They contain portions of 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, and Hebrews. The value of the manuscript is indicated in the subscription, which runs, “I, Euthalius,' wrote this volume of the Apostle Paul as carefully as possible in stichoi, so that it might be read with intelligence: the book was compared with the copy in the library at Czesarea, written by the hand of Pamphilus the saint”? The subscription may of course have stood in the original of H, and simply been copied into it along with the text, as in the case of the minuscules 15, 83, and 173 of the Acts. But no matter, it serves to locate the text of this manuscript, and it is one of our main witnesses for the so-called Euthalian Recension of the Acts and Catholic Epistles.
In or previous to the year 396, a deacon called Euthalius, afterwards known as Bishop of Sulce,? published an edition of the Acts and Catholic and Pauline Epistles, in which, following the rules laid down by the Greek schools of oratory, the text was carefully broken up into lines, the length of which depended on the sense (sezse-clauses), and divided into paragraphs or chapters. Euthalius also pro- vided a system of Church lections, added a summary of contents to the various chapters, and catalogued the quota-
1 Or Evagrius. The name is difficult to decipher. See below, pp. 188 ff.
2 “Eypaa kal e&eOeuny kata dtvauw oterxnpdy té5« Td Tedxos MlatAou Tov Groctékov mpds eyypauudy kal evkaTdAnumtoy avdyywow ... dvTeBANOn dt F BiBdos mpds rd év Katoapia avtiypadov tis BiBArobAKns Tod aylov Maudiaou xeiph eypaumevov avTov.
3 Perhaps in Sardinia, see below. Cf. Scrivener, i. p. 63 n. 1.
CHAP. II. ] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 79
tions from the Old Testament and elsewhere in the separate Epistles and in the entire group. This edition became a sort of model for later times, and seems to have been made use of for the Armenian version among the rest. The comparison of the manuscript with those of Pamphilus, as well as other additions, would seem then to have been made on the occasion of a later revision. Ehrhard, however, thinks that we have the autograph edition of this system in Codex H, but that Evagrius is to be read instead of Euthalius in the place where the name has been erased. This view is combated by Dobschiitz, and in part rightly. Working independently of both, Conybeare, from Armenian sources, establishes the year 396 as the date of Euthalius, But in a parchment manuscript of the eleventh century in the library of the Laura at Mount Athos, Wobbermin found a fragment of a dogmatic treatise with the inscription, Ev@aXiov émisxorov LovAkys omoroyia Tept Ths opOodo€ov tictews, from which he makes out that Euthalius lived in the second half of the seventh century and that Sulce was in Sardinia. See G. Kriiger in the Lzt. Cent. Blatt 1899, No. 14.
Omont, LVotice sur un tres ancien manuscrit grec en onciales des épitres de S. Paul, Paris, 1889. J. A. Robinson, Zuthaliana, Texts and Studies, iii. 3, 1895. (See S. Berger, Bull. Crit., 96, 8.) Th. Zahn, Euthaliana, Theol. Lit. Blatt., 1895, 593,601. Ehrhard, Der codex HT ad Epistolas Pauli und Euthalius diaconus, Eine palaeo- graphisch-patrologiscthe Untersuchung in the Centralblatt fiir Biblio- thekswesen, 1891, pp. 385-411. E. y. Dobschutz, Ein Beitrag zur Luthaliusfrage, in the same magazine, 1893, pp. 49-70; Luthalius- studien in the ZKG, xix. pp. 107-154 (1898) : also, Zuthalius, in the PRE*%, v. pp. 631-633 (1898). Islinger, Dre Verdienste des Euthalius um den neutestamentlichen Bibeltext, Hof. 1867 (Prog.). Conybeare, On the Codex Pamphili and date of Euthalius, in the Cambridge Journal of Philology, xxiii. 241 (1895). R. L. Bensly, Zhe Harhk- lean Version etc., pp. 9, 27 (1889). See also J. A. Robinson, Zexts and Studies, vi. 1; C. Butler, The Lausiac History of Palladius, p-. 104 ff., and note 2, p. 188 below.
Apocalypse.
80 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP., II.
I, Ky |. See above, p. 75. L, ‘
Py
M,. CODEX RUBER, of the ninth century: four leaves written in bright red ink or other colouring matter, two of them in London and the other two in Hamburg.
N,. Of the ninth century, consisting of two leaves with por- tions of Galatians and Hebrews: in St. Petersburg.
O,. Of the ninth century, two leaves in the same library - | containing portions of 2 Corinthians. |
O>. Of the sixth century, one leaf with part of Ephesians : in Moscow.
Q,. Of the fifth century, five papyrus leaves with fragments of 1 Corinthians: in St. Petersburg.
R,. Of the seventh century, a single leaf with part of 2 Corinthians: in Grotteferrata.
Ss. See above, p. 75.
Ts. A few sentences from 1 Timothy. See 77G™~., p. 441.
T’, Two leaves containing 1 Corinthians i. 22-29, written in the ninth or tenth century, and published simultaneously with Ti. Gregory now designates TS as T* P#!, and T® as T? Paul.
a), See above, p. 75;
“34, A fragment of papyrus containing part of 1 Corinthians, cc. i., ii., iii, written in the fifth century.
The first seven verses of the first chapter of Romans have been published in The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Part II. (pp.8 f,, Plate IT.). The fragment is probably a schoolboy’s exercise. It is written in a large rude uncial hand, and dates from the first half of
the fourth century. In verse 7 it reads KY XPY IHY.
There are fewest manuscripts of the Apocalypse. It is found entire only in s A B, while C and P exhibit portions of it. In the Apocalypse, however, it is to be observed that Codex B is not the famous Codex Vaticanus 1209, but a much later manuscript 2066, dating from the end of the
CHAP. II.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 81
eighth century. It would be better, therefore, with some editors, to call it Q or B,,
Altogether the number of Greek manuscripts is as follows ! :—
UNCIALS : Gospels, . : : ; 73 Acts and Catholic Epistles, . : 19 Pauline Epistles, . ; ; 28 Apocalypse, . ; : é 7 Total, » 127 CURSIVES, 3702
In closing our survey of the extant uncials, it is to be borne Book-hand in mind that we are not at liberty to regard even the oldest Se of them as presenting the very form of the New Testament life. _ autographs. The books of the New Testament, at all events the majority of them, were not originally intended for publi- cation at all, while the others were meant for only a limited circle of readers. Now these recent papyrus discoveries have shown conclusively what a vast difference existed even in those days between the book-hand and what we may call the hand of common life and business. A glance at Kenyon’s Paleography of Greek Papyri will show how fundamental is the distinction between literary and non-literary papyri. That writer states that in many cases the difference is just as marked as between handwriting and print at the present day, and he instances also the distinction between the book- hand and the charter-hand of the Middle Ages. Of course documents of this or the other class may occasionally be found written in the hand that is not the usual one, a pre- scription, ¢g., in book-hand, or conversely a literary text in the hand of common life. The greater part of Aristotle’s work on the Poltty of the Athenians, for instance, has been pre- served in the common hand. This papyrus, which is
1 See Scrivener (Miller), i. p. 397%. F
Uncial and minuscule script.
82 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. II.
attributed to the first century of the Christian era, is the work of four scribes. But only one of these writes in a style approximating to the book-hand ; the other parts are written in a very cursive style on the back of an old account, probably by one who had borrowed a copy of the work for a short time and transcribed it with the help of two or three friends or slaves. Kenyon quite properly instances this as an illus- tration of the manner of the origin and propagation of the New Testament books, and suggests that this mode of pro- pagation has to be considered in connection with times of persecution. Our very oldest manuscripts are superb codices, editions de luxe, such as could be prepared only in an age when the Church had attained a position of affluence and power. The distinction referred to above is one that has had but little attention paid to it hitherto, as is shown by the illustration given in Harris’s excellent work on the New Testament autographs. It is manifest at the same time that this consideration is of great importance in trying to under- stand the origin and dissemination of the various readings that occur in our manuscripts. It is just a pity that Kenyon has not given a sample of this manuscript of Aris- totle in his book, seeing that the latter is more accessible to the ordinary student than the complete facsimile edited in 1891 by the Trustees of the British Museum, or the Plate published in the second volume of the work of the Palzo- graphical Society.
A further consideration is emphasised by means of these papyrus discoveries—viz. that no distinction of time can be drawn between the uncial and cursive hands found in the manuscripts. Even in the very earliest documents the hand of common life displays a very cursive character, and a fairly cursive uncial hand with ligatures is not necessarily later than an uncial hand without ligatures. It is somewhat different in the case of writing on parchment: here the old distinction of uncial and minuscule manuscripts is rightly maintained, only we must guard against supposing that the
CHAP. II.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 83
minuscule hand and the cursive are quite the same thing ; nor must we forget that for a considerable time the older uncial and the later minuscule scripts were in use together.) The sharp line of demarcation, therefore, which has hitherto been drawn in the textual criticism of the New Testament between these two classes of manuscripts has no real justification in fact. The present account, however, is intended merely as a survey of the position of things up to the present, and the following description of the minuscules is subject to that limitation.
(2.) SOME OF THE MORE IMPORTANT MINUSCULES.
When the Greek New Testament began to be printed, the editors had necessarily to be content with indifferent and late minuscules, and even those who followed them, like Bentley and Lachmann, thought they were at liberty to disregard these altogether and to found their text exclusively on the oldest uncials. They forgot that the text of alate manuscript may be derived from a very early and good source through compara- tively few intermediaries, and that it is possible to reconstruct a lost original by means of a comparison of several witnesses. Accordingly, in more recent times, English editors like Tregelles, Burgon, Ferrar, Hoskier, and Scrivener have rendered great service in the way of collating manuscripts, and the last- mentioned as well as Gregory in Germany has also catalogued them. At the present moment a systematic investigation in this department is being carried on in Berlin. Most of the minuscules are still written on parchment which began to be mixed with paper in the ninth century,and was ultimately super- seded by it. Various minuscules contain commentaries and other additional matter,such as the List of the Seventy Apostles, short Biographies of the Apostles, Summaries of the journeys of St. Paul, or notes as to the date and place of the composition of the different books. When dates are given in the manuscripts,
1Compare the remarks of Grenfell-Hunt on the papyrus (and vellum) books and their respective handwritings in Part II. of the Oxyrhynchus Papyr?, p. 2 f.
Minuscules.
Ferrar Group,
84 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. Il.
they are still as a rule computed in the Byzantine manner, reckoning from the Creation of the world (5508 B.c.). In only a few cursives is the date reckoned from the Birth of Christ.
Since the time of Wettstein the minuscule manuscripts have been indicated by Arabic numerals, the numbers in each of the four groups beginning with 1, so that one and the same manuscript may have three or four numbers—18evwv. e.g. being 113Acts, 132Paul, and 51Apoc., while 209¢vv is the same as g5 Acts, 108 Paul, and 4g6Apoc. It is still more awkward that in the two principal works on the minuscules, that of Scrivener and of Gregory, the recently discovered manu- scripts are numbered differently. Our enumeration will follow that of Scrivener.
MINUSCULES OF THE GOSPELS.
1 (Acts 1, Paul 1). Of the tenth century, but according to others of the twelfth or the thirteenth, in Basel, with beautiful miniatures which were stolen prior to 1860. The manuscript was borrowed by Reuchlin and used by Erasmus for his second edition. (Scrivener, i. 137, Plate IX. 23.)
2. Of the twelfth century, though some strangely suppose the fifteenth: also in Basel: formerly purchased for two Rhenish florins: printed by Erasmus.
3. Of the twelfth century, in Vienna, lent to Erasmus for his second edition.
4-41 are all in the National Library at Paris. 4-9 and 38 were used by Stephen. The most notable among them is 13, together with 69, 124, 211, 346, 348, 556, 561 (788), 624, and 626, which are remarkable for their very peculiar form of text and their additions! Luke xxii. 43, 44 is found after Matthew xxvi. 39, and John vii. 5 3—viii. 11 after Luke xxi. 38. The subscriptions, moreover, state that Matthew was written in Hebrew eight years after our Lord’s Ascension, and contained 2522 pywata and 2560 stichoi, Mark powuaore ten years
1 Facsimiles of 13, 69, 124, 346 are given in Abbott’s Co//ation of Four Im- portant Manuscripts (Dublin, 1877); see Scrivener, i. 343, Plate XIII, 40,
CHAP. I1.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 85
after the Ascension with 1675 pyuara and 1604 stichoi, Luke ehAnuiori fifteen years after with 3803 (/ege 3083) pyuata and 2750 stichoi, and John thirty-two years after with 1938 PNMara. These manuscripts were referred to a common archetype by the Irish scholar Ferrar, and were accordingly denominated the Ferrar Group, and indicated by the letter @ before that symbol was appropriated to the Codex Beratinus. Most of them came from Calabria, and another has lately been added to thenumber. Their additions, however, as Rendel Harris shows, are rather of Syrian origin. In the first edition I ventured to suggest that these manuscripts might go back to Lucian the Martyr (d. 312) of whom Jerome makes mention, saying that he knew of codices quos a Luciano (et Hesychio) nuncupatos paucorum hominum adserit perversa contentio, quibus.. .
nec in novo testamento profuit emendasse, cum multarum gentium linguis scriptura ante translata doceat falsa esse quae addita (cod. E edzta) sunt. That, however, is not possible in the event of the so-called Syrian recension being the work of Lucian, which Hort indicates as possible. In any case, these minuscules have preserved to us a very early attempt to restore the text.
16 is noteworthy as being written in four different colours according to the contents. The continuous narrative is written in green, the words of Jesus and the Angels are in red and occasionally in gold, the words of His followers are in blue, while those of the Pharisees, the multitude, and of the devil, are written in black.
28. Contains relics of a very ancient text and bears some resemblance to D.
33. Written about the tenth century: the “queen of the cursives”: its text bears a greater resemblance to that of B, D, L than does that of any other cursive. The manuscript is much damaged, but 34, which is equally old, is still in splendid condition, as though it were fresh from the hand of the artist. (Scrivener, i. 343, Plate XIII. 39.)
38. Sent by the Emperor Michael Palaologus to St. Louis (d. 1270).
86 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. IL.
51. At Oxford: text resembles that of the Complutensian.
59. At Cambridge: has many points of connection with D.
61. Of the fourteenth or fifteenth century. This is the notorious Codex Montfortianus, now in Dublin, which derives its name from one of its later possessors. It was this manu- script, “codex apud Anglos repertus,” that decided Erasmus to insert in his third edition of 1522 the passage of the Three Heavenly Witnesses, 1 John v. 7, 8. It was probably written by a Franciscan monk of the name of Froy or Roy. Its twin brother, the parchment codex Ravianus (Rau), formerly numbered 110, and now in Berlin, which also contains the passage, proves to be nothing more than a transcript of the text of the Complutensian. Manuscripts, it may be observed, continued to be prepared long after the invention of printing. Melanchthon, e,g., wrote out the Epistle to the Romans three times in Greek ; and the manuscript in the Zurich Library hitherto cited as 56/!au! is nothing else than a copy of Erasmus’s printed edition of 1516 made by Zwingli in the following year.
69. Cf 13 above, and see J. R. Harris, Ovigin of the Leicester Codex of the New Testament, 1887. (Scrivener, i, 343, Plate XIIT. 40.)
77 and 78. Formerly in the fine library of Matthias Corvinus, King of Hungary (d. 1490).
90. In this manuscript the Gospels are in the order John, Luke, Matthew, Mark.
106. Would be important, but has been lost sight of since the time of Wettstein.
140. Presented to Pope Innocent VII. by the Queen of Cyprus. This manuscript reads dmp@po@y in Luke i. 64, therein agreeing with the Complutensian.
146-153. In Rome, came from Heidelberg.
154-156. Once the property of Christina, Queen of Sweden.
157. In Rome: its text is said to bear a considerable resemblance to the quotations found in the early Christian writer Marcion. See below, p. 211.
CHAP. II.) MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 87
164. The subscription of this manuscript states that it was compared with certain ancient manuscripts in Jerusalem.
205-215 and 217 are in Venice, being part of the donation of Cardinal Bessarion. 209 contains the whole of the New Testament, and was the Cardinal’s own copy which he had with him at the Council of Florence in 1439.
218-225 are in Vienna.
226-233 are in the Escorial.
237-289 are at Moscow, with the exception of four at Dresden.
263-320 are in Paris, with the exception of 272, which was removed thence to the British Museum.
274 exhibits the shorter conclusion of Mark’s Gospel in the lower margin. (See Plate X.)
405-418 are now in Venice, and, like U, once belonged to the Nani family.
422-430. In Munich.
431. This manuscript is sometimes stated to have perished at Strassburg, in the war of 1870, like 180Acts. This, how- ever, is incorrect.
452. In Parma, one of the most superb codices.
473. Of the ninth and tenth centuries, a purple manuscript with gold lettering, said to have been written by the Empress Theodora. See under N. above, and note, p. 151.
481, dated 7th May 835, is the earliest manuscript of the Greek New Testament bearing an exact date.
531. Written in a microscopic hand.
604. Written in the twelfth century, now in the British Museum, exhibits 2724 variations from the Textus Receptus, and has besides 270 readings peculiar to itself. It is the only witness we know that supports that peculiar form of the second petition of the Lord’s Prayer found in Marcion in the second century, and in Gregory of Nyssa in the fourth, é\@éTw vo diylov Trvetua cov ep’ yas Kat KaBapicatw juas (Luke xi. 2)
1 See Blass’s Praefatzo to his edition of Luke, pp. Ixix f. (1897), and compare Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible, iii. p. 144 ; Hoskier, above, p. 5 ; below, p. 211.
88 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. II.
743 has the double conclusion in Mark.
1071. See under D, p. 66.
In his Gospel according to St. Mark, Swete cites frequently, in addition to those just mentioned and those of the Ferrar Group, I, 28, 33, 66, 109, 118, 131, 157, 209, 238, 242, 299, 435, 473, 475, 556, 570, 736.
ACTS.
2 and 4. Used by Erasmus.
7-10. Used by Stephen.
15, 83, 173. These, like x» in the Old Testament and Hg, were compared with the Codex of Pamphilus—ze, were faithfully copied from such an exemplar.
33. The parent manuscript of Montfortianus. See above, p. 86.
42. Closely related to the Complutensian.
52. Once in the possession of Stunica, the chief editor of the Complutensian. It has now disappeared.
61 has been designated the most important minuscule of the Acts. This, however, is an exaggeration.
137 supplements D E where these are defective.
158. Used by Cardinal Mai to supply the defects of Codex B in the Pauline Epistles.
162. Of the fourteenth or fifteenth century, now in Rome: a bilingual in Latin and Greek : contains the passage 1 John v. 7.
182. Numbered 110 by Hort, who calls it one of the best of the cursives,
220. One of the finest manuscripts of the latter part of the New Testament.
232. An equally superb copy, on which a monk called Andreas bestowed three years’ labour.
246. Written in gold letters for Charlotte, Queen of Cyprus (d. 1487).
419. Written in 800 by the Empress Maria, after being divorced by Constantine VI.
CHAP. I1.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 89
PAULINE EPISTLES.
7. Used by Erasmus.
56 and 66 are quite worthless, being simply copies of Erasmus’s printed text. (See above under 61°’).
67. A valuable manuscript on account of its corrector having evidently made use of an exemplar with a text very closely akin to that of B M.
80 bears a close resemblance to 69°’,
APOCALYPSE.
1. This was the only manuscript at Erasmus’s command for this part of the New Testament. It is defective in the last chapter from verse 16 to the end. For the rest it exhibits a fairly good text. (See p. 3 f.)
36. A text akin to ».
38 has a text resembling that of A C.
68. Resembles A.
95 does so still more. This last has the reputation of being one of the best minuscules of the Apocalypse.
The number of minuscules under each class is, according to Scrivener (Miller), as follows :—
Gospels, : : ; 1326 Acts and Catholic Epistles, . : . 422 Pauline Epistles, . ; 497 Apocalypse, : : ; : 184
2429
A great many New Testament manuscripts are in England. Some are in the possession of private individuals, like those at Parham Park in Sussex belonging to Lord de la Zouche. In 1870-72 the Baroness Burdett Coutts brought with her from Janina in Epirus over one hundred manuscripts, of which sixteen were of the Gospels, one of them belonging to the Ferrar Group, and as many were Evangeliaria. There are
go GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. II.
136 manuscripts of the New Testament in the British Museum.
The number in Great Britain is . ; 438 In the National Library of Paris, . : 298 In Germany, . : : ; ; 140 In Italy, : : ; 644
For the total number of Greek manuscripts arranged accord- ing to countries, see Scrivener, i., Indices I., II., pp. 392 ff.
What a vast number of manuscripts are still waiting to be examined is shown by the account given by Dr. von der Goltz. Accompanied by Dr. G. Wobbermin, he made a journey to Athos in the winter of 1897-98, and there in that ancient Monastery, the Laura of St. Athanasius, he found, among about 1800 manuscripts altogether, including Lectionaries, some 250 codices of the New Testament, of which only a very few have been noted by Gregory. And these manuscripts may be of the very utmost importance, as witness the further statement of the same explorer. He was looking through the manu- scripts of the Apostolos, to which he and his companion had to give most of their attention, when his eye fell on one written in the tenth or eleventh century, containing the following note before the Pauline Epistles: yeypapOa: a0 avtvypapov Tadao- TATOU, OU Teipav éAaBouev ws ETITETEVYMEVOU EK TOV Els NUaS eMOovtav ‘QOpryévovs TOMov 7) OutAtov ely TOV aTOTTONOY ... « év ois ovv TapadXaTTet pyTois TPOs TA Vov aTOTTONKA, OiTARY Thy Neyouevyy TrapeOijxauev &Ewber, va uy vouicOn KaTa Tpoc- Onkny 7 Netw jyuapthicOa Tovtt TO amooroNKkor. And from the subscription at the end of the Pauline Epistles we learn that the manuscript, or, as von der Goltz believes, the exemplar from which it was copied, was written by a monk called Ephraim. See further in von der Goltz, Eine tertkritische Arbeit des zehnten bezw. sechsten Jahrhunderts herausgegeben nach einem Kodex des Athosklosters Lawra. Mit einer Doppel- tafel in Lichtdruck. Leipzig, 1899. (Texte und Untersuch- ungen, Neue Folge, ii. 4); and compare below, p. 190.
CHAP. II.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. gI
LITERATURE.—On 2®’Y, see Hoskier, above, p. 5.
On 13, see W. H. Ferrar, Collation of four important Manuscripts of the Gospels, edited by T. K. Abbott, Dublin, 1877. J. P. P. Martin, Quatre manuscrits du N. T., auxquels on peut ajouter un cinquiéme, Amiens, 1886. J. R. Harris, Ox the Origin of the Ferrar Group, London, 1894. K. Lake, ‘Some new members of the Ferrar Group of MSS. of the Gospels,” in the Journal of Theological Studies, I. i. pp. 117-120. The well-known manuscript of the pre-Lutheran German Bible, the Codex Teplensis, has the words from John viii. 2, “‘in the morning he came again into the temple,” after Luke xxi. 38, an arrangement similar to that which is characteristic of the Ferrar Group, in which John vii. 53-vili. 11 is found after Luke xxi. 38. See S. Berger, Bul/. Crit., 1894, p. 390. See Addenda, p. xv.
On 561, Codex Algerinae Peckover, see J. R. Harris in the Journal of the Exegetical Society, 1886, 79-96.
On 892¢-v, see Harris, “An Important Manuscript of the N. T.” in the Journal of Biblical Literature, ix., 1890, 31 ff.
On Minuscules of the Apocalypse, see Bousset, Zextkritische Studien in T. und U., xi. 4.
C. R. Gregory, “Die Kleinhandschriften des N. Testaments ” (Theologische Studien fiir B. Weiss., Gottingen, 1897, 274-283).
E. J. Goodspeed, “A Twelfth Century Gospel Manuscript” (Biblical World, x. 4).
(c.) LECTIONARIES.
Till quite recently the Lectionaries, or Books of Church Pericopae, were even more neglected than the minuscules. And yet they are reliable witnesses to the text of the Bible in the provinces to which they belong, on account of their official character and because their locality can be readily distinguished. The slight alterations of the text occurring at the beginning of the pericopae, and consisting usually in the insertion of the subject of the sentence or of an introductory clause, are easily recognisable as such, and deceive no one. It is not always easy to determine the date of such books, because the uncial hand was employed in this sort of manuscript much longer than in the others. Among the oldest, perhaps,
Lectionaries.
92 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP. De
is 135, a palimpsest (of which there is a considerable number among the Lectionaries), assigned by Tischendorf to the seventh century, and 968, written on papyrus and ascribed to the sixth century, which was found in Egypt in the year 1890. When these Lectionaries originated has not yet been clearly made out.1 Up till the present 980 Evangeliaria—z.e. Lessons from the Gospels—have been catalogued, and 268 Apostoli or Praxapostoli—z.e. Lessons from the Acts and Epistles. Some of them are magnificently executed ; some, alas, have been sadly mutilated. 117,in Florence, is a very beautiful codex ; and 162, in Siena, is perhaps “one of the most splendid Service-books in the world.” 235 may have been written in part by the Emperor Alexius Comnenus (1081-1118). 286is the Golden Evangeliarium on Mount Sinai, dating from the ninth to the eleventh century, though the tradition of the monks says that it was written by no less a per- sonage than the Emperor Theodosius (d. 395). Tischendorf’s 352-360 are nowin the National Libraryat Paris. 355 isprinted in Omont’s Catalogue (see above, p. 71). 45°v! is a fragment of black parchment inscribed with gold letters preserved at Vienna? 40 is kept in the Escorial along with the reliques of St. Chrysostom, and regarded as his autograph.* Bilingual Lectionaries are also found, in Greek and Arabic for example. The arrangement of these Service-books varies with the time and region in which they were composed. Several fragments which were formerly regarded as parts of manuscripts of the
1 Zahn asserts that traces of a system of Lections are to be found as early as in Irenaeus, and likewise in Codex D, zzleztung, ii. 355, on Luke i. 26.
2 On Luke viii. 15 Tischendorf observes that in 49! (a Lectionary of the tenth or eleventh century, now in Moscow, presented to the Monastery of the Mother of God rod Bpovtoxtov by Nicephorus, Metropolitan of Crete, and Antistes of Lacedzemon, in 1312) the lection e/s tas %w éexxAnotas ended with this verse (15) and the words attached to it, ‘‘ Andso saying He cried, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear,” and that the additional verses were not read e/s rihy peydanv exxAnolay, but vv. 20, 21-25 followed immediately after the words év brouovn (Vv. 15).
® On the “‘ Livre d’Evangiles reputé avoir appartenu 4 S., Jean Chrysostome,” of. Ch. Graux, in the Reve de Philologie, Avril 1887.
CHAP. I1.] MATERIALS OF CRITICISM. 93
Gospels should perhaps beclassed among the Evangeliaria—e.g. the solitary leaf of a Bible manuscript Wiirtemberg is known to possess, and the Tiibingen Fragment, formerly classed among the uncials as R of the Gospels, but now enumerated as 48r1evl, An important Syriac Lectionary will fall to be considered under the head of the Versions.
For further details, reference must be made to Scrivener, to 7zGr., and now especially to Gregory, Textkrittk, 1. pp. 327-478.
2. VERSIONS.
Our second source of material for the reconstruction of the Versions. text of the New Testament is the early Versions. The value of their testimony depends on their age and fidelity. When did the first versions originate? This question reminds us of the Inscription on the Cross, a portion of which is still exhibited in Rome. It was written in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin. But we may get further back still. Palestine at the time of Christ was a country where the most diverse lan- guages and dialects came into contact with each other. In the last century B.C. a transformation had occurred, which might be regarded as a counterpart to the supplanting of Norman French by English, or of Low by High German. Aramaic had already taken the place of the old Hebrew, and after the time of Alexander came the intrusion of Greek, and later still of Latin. Some of the disciples of Jesus bore old Hebrew names, like James (‘Iaxwos) and John (Twavyys) ; others had names wholly or partly Aramaic, as Cephas (= Peter), the cognomen of Simon, and Bartholomew; while others, again, had Greek names, as Philip (@iAvwzog) and Andrew (’Avdpéas). To the question what language Jesus Himself spoke, the most probable answer is that it was Aramaic with a Galilean colouring. “Thou art a Galilean, thy speech bewrayeth thee,” said the Jerusalem girl to Peter. The Galileans, like the Babylonians and the Samaritans, were recognisable by their not distinguishing the gutturals so sharply as the pure Jews did. At the same time, Jesus
East.
West,
South.
94 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. [CHAP, II.
certainly understood the Hebrew of the Old Testament. But those words of His that have been preserved are Aramaic—talitha, abba, and so is sabagtani in Matthew xxvii.