.^^tt^iam 
 
 mmmfr::^ 
 
 vTACiv l^*'' ■ " i 
 
 AKfstX 
 
 ;:v.i^'-»yix?x ^: 
 
 EW Testamen 
 
 rn 
 
 TOGBAPHS 
 
 BY 
 
 ^ 
 
 J. RENDEL HARIRIS 
 
 [SUPPLKMEN r TO THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY, NO. 12.] 
 f 
 
 alifornia 
 
 rional 
 
 ility 
 
 PRES9-OF Isaac FRinniiNWALn, 
 Baltimore. 
 
 PUHLICATIO5I AG^CY, JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY, 
 
 BALTIMORE. 
 
 PRICE 50 CENTS.
 
 CONTENTS OF AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PFIILOLOCtV, No. 12. 
 I. — Eggelin'g's Translation of the ^atapatha-Brahmana. 15y W. D. 
 
 Whitney, Yale College, . . . . . . . - 391 
 
 II. — On the Locality to which the Treatise ot l^alladius De Agi iniltm ,1 
 must be assigned. By J. Rendei. IIakuis, Johns Hopkins 
 University, . . . . . . . . . . .411 
 
 III. — On some Points of Usage in English. By Fitzeuvvard Hall, .. 422 
 IV. — Studies in Pindaric Syntax. By the Editor, ..... 434 
 
 V. — On a Probable Error in Plutarch, Per. c. 23. By C. D. Morris, 
 
 Johns Hopkins University, ........ 456 
 
 Notes: — A Peculiarity of Keltic (Irish) Ritual. (J M. Hart.)— The 
 Dialect of Assos. (F. I). Allen.)— " Occlude." (H. E. Shep- 
 herd.) ... . . . . . . . . .461 
 
 Reviews and Book Notices: ......... 465 
 
 Haupt's Akkadische Sprache — Zahn's Cyprian v. Antiochien — Mon- ■ 
 ro's Grammar of the Homeric Dialect — Kluge's Etymologisches 
 Worterbuch — Horstmann's Altenglische Legenden — Hauler's Ter- 
 entiana — Seuffert's Deutsche Litteraturdenkmale — Biicheler's Pe- 
 tronius. 
 
 REPORTS: 484 
 
 Fleckeisen's Jahrbi'icher — Revue de Philologie — Mnemosyne. 
 Correspondence: — M. Bloomfield and L. H. Mills on a forthcoming 
 
 Edition of the Gathas, ......... 486 
 
 Recent Publications 505 
 
 Index, . 517 
 
 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 
 Open to original communications in all departments of philology, classical, 
 comparative, oriental, modern ; condensed reports of current philological work ; 
 summaries of chief articles in the leading philological journals of Europe ; 
 reviews by specialists ; bibliographical lists. Four numbers constitute a vol- 
 ume, one volume each year. Subscription price $3.00 a year, payable to the 
 editor in advance. For single numbers ($1.00 each) address Messrs. Macmillan 
 & Co., 22 Bond Street, New York, who have also charge of the interests of the 
 Journal in England. 
 
 Special Offer to New Subscribers. — The management of the Amer- 
 ican Journal of Philology offers to new subscribers the two back volumes 
 of the Journal for $2.00 a volume, payment in advance. Vol. I, 535 pp.. 
 Vol. II, 570 pp. Specimen numbers 50 cents. 
 
 P. O. Drawer 18. B. L. Gildersleeye, Baltimore, Md.
 
 New Testament Autographs 
 
 BY 
 
 J. RENDEL HARRIS 
 
 [Supplement to The American Journal of Philology, No. 12.J 
 
 Press of Isaac Friedknwald, 
 Baltimoke.
 
 /
 
 otir. 
 
 <» OUIf. UB»m, MS AKOWS
 
 1 
 
 orrpecB^TepocsKAe 
 
 KTHKyplAKiSvirOICTe 
 
 KNOicAyTHCOycepoo 
 
 ArATT6ieNAAH06IAK<M 
 
 oyKepcoA\ONocAAA& 
 
 KAITTANreCOiepiMCOKO 
 
 recTHNAAinQeiANAiA 
 
 rHNAAri0eiANTHN/v\6 
 NOyCANeNHMIN KA I 
 A\e9HMONGCTAieiC 
 TONAIttNi^eCTAIMe 
 
 BHMcoNXApiceAeoc 
 
 6ipH NHTTA [=> A^ITATpOC 
 KAITTApAiyy^TOy)'! 
 
 oyroylTATpoceNAAH 
 
 GeiAKAli-pATTH eVA 
 
 pHNAeiANoTieypHKA 
 
 G KT<i> IS/re K N CD N CO Y 
 TtePITTATOyNTACeNA 
 
 AHdeiAKAGuceNTO 
 
 AHNeAABoMGNTTApA 
 TT AT P O C K A I N y N e POO 
 
 TcoceKypi^oyKCiceN 
 
 ToAHNrPAdiOJNCOIKAl 
 NHNAAAAHNel VOMSN 
 ATTAP)(HCINAA|-ATTOD 
 
 MeNAAXHAoycKAiAy 
 
 THeCTINHArATTHINJv 
 
 nepiTTATcaMeNKATA 
 
 TAceNToAACAyToy 
 
 AyTHHSNTOAHeCTIN 
 KASoCHKOyCATeATT 
 Apj^HCINASNAYTH 
 TTePITTATHTeOTITToA 
 
 AolTr^ANOle2HA9oN 
 
 e I crow KOC/MONOIMH 
 
 oAAo A o roy N TG c I N iTn 
 epvo/neNONeNCAPKi 
 oyrocecTiNOTrAANoc 
 
 KMOANTI j(piCTOC 
 
 BAeTrereeAyroy CI 
 
 NAMHATTOAeCHTeAHp 
 
 rACA/»\e0AAAAAM IC Go 
 TTAHpHAnoAABHTeiTAC 
 OTTpoApCONKAIMHMe 
 NCDfMeNTH2ilAA)(HT0y 
 
 )(Y6Noyi<e;(ei o/ABNON 
 eNTHAiAAVHoyrocKAi 
 
 TONTTArepAKAl TONy 
 
 ioNe)(eieTic e^^eT 
 
 A/Trpoc y/A AC KAlTAy 
 THNTHNAlAA)(HNOy 
 
 <bepeiA\ HAAMBANere 
 
 AyrONGICOIKIANKAl 
 
 ;(Ai pe I N Ay t©m hA e pe 
 TeoAe pcjN TA pA y T6> 
 
 J^A/PeiNKOIN«Ni6/T0IC 
 e ppO I C A yTOYTO I C TTO 
 
 NH po I C IT oAA A e KCO N 
 
 yMiNppAcbeiNoyKS&oy 
 
 AH8HNAlAj(ApTOyKAI 
 
 MeAANOc AAAAeAmzo 
 
 piSNecBAITTpOCy/AAC 
 KMCTOMATTpOCTO/AA .,sl 
 
 aLAHCAI INAH^ApAy *-f*^ 
 
 /AjBNTreTTAHpooMeN ri 
 
 HiAClTAZeTAICeTA 
 
 TeKNATHCAAeAcf>HCCOY 
 
 THCGKAeKTHC
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 A few words of introduction are necessary to the investigations 
 contained in the following pages, in order to remove some of the 
 perplexity which may hang around the enunciation of the theory 
 which they contain. 
 
 In the course of an examination of the columnar arrangement of 
 the text of the oldest MS of the New Testament, my attention 
 was drawn to a remarkable numerical peculiarity in the arrange- 
 ment of the lines and columns of the several books, and from this 
 my mind was forced to the conclusion that the scribes of the New 
 Testament produced epistles more uniformly written and at the 
 closing page more frequently filled than is the custom at the 
 present day ; and that it was, in fact, possible to reproduce the 
 original pages by a simple process of numerical subdivision, if only 
 the MS had preserved the lines of the original writing. Further 
 study of the Vatican Codex showed that a large number of the 
 books of the New Testament were capable of this subdivision (by 
 the very simple process of dividing the column of the MS into 
 three equal parts), and that the pages resulting from the subdivi- 
 sion were very closely related to the original pages. 
 
 Perhaps this will become easier to apprehend by a simple varia- 
 tion of the statement. Imagine a printed book, in which there are, 
 let us say, ten equal pages, of thirty lines to each page, printed 
 uniformly. If a reprint be made of this book in any other form, 
 i. e. on pages and with lines of a different size to the copy, it is 
 evident that the original arrangement of the book will be lost, and 
 it is very unlikely that the last page of the new book will be a 
 complete one. If, however, the printer adheres to the original 
 lines, no matter how he may change his pages or his type, we shall 
 always be able to restore the book to its original shape by simple 
 
 1090856
 
 ii PREFACE. 
 
 subdivision of its 300 lines into ten pages, although, of course, the 
 subdivision may not be easy to detect, nor to demonstrate. This 
 is what has happened in the Vatican MS ; the scribe has retained 
 the original line, and in a certain sense has preserved the original 
 page also, since he made his column (as the investigation will 
 show) by placing three of the original pages in a vertical line. 
 This fundamental fact is the key to the method of textual criticism 
 to which these pages form an introduction.
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 A. I. In the course of the first lecture, which I had the honor of 
 deHvering in this University, on the Textual Criticism of the New 
 Testament, I pointed out that the material of the second and third 
 Epistles of St. John was probably a sheet or series of sheets of 
 papyrus ; and not only so, but that in the two documents mentioned, 
 the sheet of paper was of a given size, capable of holding a given 
 quantity of uncials. The first of these statements was based upon 
 the allusion which the writer makes to paper, pen, and ink (Sm 
 
 XdpTov Koi fieXavos, II }ohn. 12 ; 8ia fieXavns kol /caXd/xou, III John. 1 3) ,' 
 
 while the second statement was an inference from the equality in 
 the contents of the two Epistles, which in Westcott and Hort's edi- 
 tion of the New Testament occupy twenty-nine lines of type apiece, 
 and from the evidence that in each case the writer had completely 
 filled the sheet on which he was writing, since he complains of the in- 
 sufficiency of his writing materials (woXXa e^wi/ ipi/ yfjdcjieiv, noXXd elxou 
 ypd'^ni aoi). From this point we are led to the enquiry as to the 
 usual size of the sheets of paper employed in the New Testament 
 documents, and the number employed in the autographs of the 
 several books. 
 
 2. In order to make the enquiry carefully, we will first tabulate the 
 number of columns and lines occupied by the uncial letters of the 
 separate texts, as they are presented in the oldest known manuscripts. 
 We begin, then, with the Vatican Codex, B. This manuscript is 
 written in columns, three to the page, and each column contains 
 42 lines of uncial writing. Omitting the Epistle to the Hebrews, 
 the latter part of which is m a later cursive hand, and the Apocalypse 
 which is also supplied in cursive character,' we construct the follow- 
 ing table : 
 
 ' Scrivener adds the Pastoral Epistles (Introduction, p. 96), apparently follow- 
 ing Cardinal Mai, but I can find no trace of them in the Roman edition. The 
 Palaeographical Society, in the description accompanying their facsimile, follow 
 Scrivener.
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 
 Table I. 
 
 
 
 
 Columns 
 
 Lines 
 
 Tofa/ Lines 
 
 Matthew 
 
 127 
 
 9 
 
 5343 
 
 Mark 
 
 77 
 
 31 
 
 3265 
 
 Luke 
 
 136 
 
 41 
 
 5753 
 
 John 
 
 97 
 
 6 
 
 4080 
 
 Acts 
 
 130 
 
 3 
 
 5463 
 
 Romans 
 
 49 
 
 16 
 
 2074 
 
 I Corinthians 
 
 46 
 
 6 
 
 1938 
 
 II Corinthians 
 
 31 
 
 28 
 
 1330 
 
 Galatians 
 
 15 
 
 27 
 
 657 
 
 Ephesians 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
 694 
 
 Philippians 
 
 II 
 
 
 
 462 
 
 Colossians 
 
 II 
 
 15 
 
 477 
 
 I Thessalonians 
 
 10 
 
 28 
 
 448 
 
 II Thessalonians 
 
 5 
 
 34 
 
 244 
 
 James 
 
 12 
 
 26 
 
 530 
 
 I Peter 
 
 12 
 
 30 
 
 534 
 
 II Peter 
 
 8 
 
 32 
 
 368 
 
 I John 
 
 13 
 
 27 
 
 573 
 
 II John 
 
 I 
 
 27 
 
 69 
 
 III John 
 
 I 
 
 27 
 
 69 
 
 Jude 
 
 3 
 
 27 
 
 153 
 
 The first thing that strikes us on examining this table is that the 
 compositions do not end, as one might suppose, at different points 
 of the page according to random distribution, but they show a 
 preference for ending at particular points, and especially at the 27th 
 line. Out of the 21 documents cited, five end on the 27th line of 
 the page, two on the 28th and one on the 26th. This is very 
 remarkable. 
 
 3. If the compositions were of arbitrary length, the probability 
 that five out of the twenty-one should end on the same particular 
 line is small indeed. Unless I am mistaken, it would be repre- 
 sented by the fraction 
 
 21 . 20. 19. 18. 17 
 
 I .2.3.4.5 
 
 which is evidently much less than ^.-i.-i.^.h • k or ^ • ^^^ ^^Y ^^ 
 sure then that the odds are at least four thousand to one against 
 such a conjunction of endings being the work o{ chance.
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 3 
 
 It is evident that the eight compositions alluded to, viz. II Corin- 
 thians, Galatians, I Thessalonians, James, the three Epistles of John, 
 and Jude, are each written on an integral number of sheets of a 
 given size ; and further, this sheet of given size must bear a pecu- 
 liar relation both to the whole column of the Vatican Codex consist- 
 ing of 42 lines, and to the fractional column of 27 lines ; for, otherwise, 
 it would not be possible for documents of different length, even 
 though written on sheets of given size, to end at the same place on 
 the Vatican page. If we allow a line for the subscription of those 
 Epistles which end at the 27th line, we have to seek a submultiple 
 of 28 and 42 ; and we at once see that 14 lines of the Vatican Codex 
 bears some multiple proportion to the size of a page of the original 
 writing, and in all probability, in the cases referred to, we may say 
 that 14 lines of the Vatican Codex represents exactly the page of 
 the autograph, the only submultiples of 14 being 7 and 2. This 
 provides us with a unit upon which to base our calculations, which 
 for convenience we will denominate a V-page. 
 
 4. We see, then, that of the Epistles especially referred to, 
 
 II Corinthians = 95 V-pages exactly. 
 Galatians = 47 V-pages, wanting one line. 
 
 I Thessalonians = 32 V-pages exactly. 
 James ^ 38 V-pages, wanting two lines. 
 
 I John =41 V-pages, wanting one line. 
 
 TTTT h f^^ch = 5 V-pages, wanting one line. 
 
 Jude ^11 V-pages, wanting one line. 
 
 With regard to these conclusions, the single line left blank in the 
 letter is probably left for subscription ; in the case of the Epistle to 
 the Galatians we have the additional explanation that there was a 
 sentence in it written in large letters by the Apostle Paul's own 
 hand, and when this sentence is copied there is a slight contraction 
 in the copy as compared, with the original. 
 
 With regard to St. James, we find two lines wanting; either, , 
 therefore, his handwriting is larger than ordinary, or we may assume 
 that he actually left a somewhat larger blank space than was usual 
 with the other writers, who evidently economized every inch of 
 paper. The sheet of paper, too, is noticeably a small one ; it is only 
 capable of containing 14 lines of average length, about 17 letters 
 each : this also is explicable by the supposition of economy, for 
 the cost of a sheet of papyrus increases with the size of a sheet, but
 
 4 NEIV TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 in a much greater ratio than the sheet, on account of the difficulty 
 of finding plants or reeds of a very great length and section. We 
 can see, then, that the cheapest paper is used, and no space spared. 
 Now turn to the table again, and observing that our manuscript- 
 unit is fourteen lines of the Vatican Codex, we see that in the 
 autograph 
 
 Philippians = 33 V-pages exactly. 
 
 We come, then, to a group of three Epistles which run slightly over 
 an exact number of pages ; thus : 
 
 Romans occupies 148 V-pages and two lines. 
 Colossians 33 V-pages and one line. 
 
 I Peter 38 V-pages and two lines. 
 
 With regard to the Epistle to the Romans, it is not inconceivable 
 that in 148 pages the copy should have gained two lines on the 
 autograph ; the study of the Epistle is, however, complicated by the 
 existence of important various readings, and by the doubtful char- 
 acter of its concluding portion, which seems rather to be addressed 
 to an Ephesian than a Roman community, and by the questionable 
 authenticity of its doxologies. We content ourselves, for the present, 
 by saying that the Epistle, as it stands in Codex B, probably repre- 
 sents 148 pages of the autograph. 
 
 With regard to the Epistle to the Colossians the question is more 
 simple, as the document is shorter. Four lines of this Epistle, at 
 least, are from the hand of Paul himself, and would therefore be in 
 larger characters than usual ; this would make the original document 
 longer than 33 V-pages and one line. Either, therefore, the greater 
 part of a page was left blank, which is unlikely ; or Codex B has 
 inserted words in the text, or the amanuensis of Paul (Tychicus, 
 Onesimus ?) must have written a smaller hand than was normal. 
 
 We leave the matter for the present undecided. 
 
 Similar remarks will apply to the ist Epistle of Peter. 
 
 We annex the 2d Epistle of John, as we imagine it to have stood 
 on the original sheets. 
 
 When we turn to the Gospels we have a much more difficult 
 question to examine, on account of the multitude of various readings. 
 We shall simply remark that the Gospel of Luke, in Codex B, is 
 within a line of the end of a column, so that 
 
 Luke = 411 V-pages, wanting a single line.
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 5 
 
 In the Gospel of St. John, if we omit the last verse, we find our- 
 selves at the end of a page, and 
 
 John = 291 V-pages exactly. 
 
 It will have been noticed that the number of V-pages occupied 
 by the documents discussed is more often odd than even, which is 
 more consistent with the hypothesis of papyrus sheets written on 
 one side only, than with the supposition of a material capable of 
 being written on both sides.' 
 
 5. We shall now turn our attention to the Sinaitic Codex, which is 
 written in columns, four to each page, and in lines, 48 to each column.'^ 
 The difficulty in this case will arise from the fact that the lines of 
 the text are not nearly so uniform as in the Codex Vaticanus, and 
 in the first two Gospels in particular the text is broken up into 
 paragraphs, and the recurrence of short lines, unless it be a genea- 
 logical feature of the successive MS, will prevent us from tracing 
 the structure of the original documents. We proceed, however, to 
 form our second table, constructed in the same way as the previous 
 one, and containing a larger collection of books. The lines in this 
 manuscript are shorter than in B, by several letters. 
 
 ' The more delicate papyri are quite unsuited to the reception of writing 
 on both sides : that species, in particular, which was held in the highest 
 Roman estimation, and honored with the name of Augustus, was so fine as 
 to be almost transparent, so that its extreme tenuity came to be regarded as 
 a defect. 
 
 For a document to be written on both sides seems to be a mark of the 
 poverty of the writer or the over-productiveness of his brain : thus we find 
 in Juvenal I 5 : 
 
 " Summa pleni jam margine libri 
 Scriptus et in tergo, necdum finitus Orestes." 
 
 Lucian, Vit. Auct. 9, represents Diogenes as saying ?/ iriipa ^t cot depftuv 
 eoTCi) ueary Kal oKLadoyfidcbuv [iip?Juv. 
 
 Scripture students will call to mind an illustration of a similar kind in the 
 Apocalypse, where the plenitude of coming judgments and tribulations is 
 represented by a book or paper-roll written both outside and inside (Rev. 
 Vi). 
 
 ^ This is not always true ; in the Catholic epistles the scribe has frequently 
 contented himself with a column of 47 lines. I do not know whether this 
 peculiarity has ever been noted. Scrivener, in his collation of the Sinaitic MS, 
 does not seem to allude to it. Our results, as given in the table, must be cor- 
 rected for the aberration of the scribe, when we come to analyse the documents 
 more closely.
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 
 Table II. 
 
 
 
 
 Columns 
 
 Lines 
 
 Total Lines 
 
 Matthew 
 
 139 
 
 I 
 
 6672 
 
 Three letters only in the residual line 
 
 
 
 
 Mark 
 
 85 
 
 4 
 
 4084 
 
 Luke 
 
 149 
 
 24 
 
 7176 
 
 John 
 
 107 
 
 35 
 
 5171 
 
 Acts 
 
 146 
 
 10 
 
 7018 
 
 Romans 
 
 53 
 
 6 
 
 2550 
 
 I Corinthians 
 
 51 
 
 12 
 
 2460 
 
 II Corinthians 
 
 35 
 
 6 
 
 1686 
 
 Galatians 
 
 16 
 
 45 
 
 813 
 
 Ephesians 
 
 18 
 
 5 
 
 869 
 
 Phihppians 
 
 12 
 
 9 
 
 585 
 
 Colossians 
 
 12 
 
 13 
 
 589 
 
 I Thessalonians 
 
 II 
 
 21 
 
 549 
 
 II Thessalonians 
 
 6 
 
 3 
 
 291 
 
 Hebrews 
 
 40 
 
 24 
 
 1944 
 
 I Timothy 
 
 13 
 
 40 
 
 664 
 
 II Timothy 
 
 10 
 
 3 
 
 483 
 
 Titus 
 
 5 
 
 37 
 
 277 
 
 Philemon 
 
 2 
 
 24 
 
 120 
 
 James 
 
 13 
 
 33 
 
 657 
 
 I Peter 
 
 14 
 
 9 
 
 681 
 
 II Peter 
 
 9 
 
 24 
 
 456 
 
 I John 
 
 15 
 
 12 
 
 732 
 
 II John 
 
 I 
 
 39 
 
 87 
 
 III John 
 
 I 
 
 39 
 
 87 
 
 Jude 
 
 4 
 
 6 
 
 198 
 
 Revelation 
 
 68 
 
 12 
 
 3276 
 
 Barnabas 
 
 53 
 
 18 
 
 2562 
 
 The first thing we notice is that the distribution of the concluding 
 lines of the books is much more varied and irregular. The only 
 thing that is remarkable is the recurrence of the multiples of twelve ; 
 three books end at the twelfth line, viz. I Corinthians, I John, Rev- 
 elation ; four end on the 24th line : Luke, Hebrews, Philemon, and 
 II Peter ; the Gospel of John ends on the 35th line, which may 
 practically be counted as the 36th.' This, again, can hardly be 
 
 ' It may be asked why, in discussing this table, we pay no attention to the 
 repetition of the sixth line as an ending of three books, nor to the double 
 recurrence of the number three. I have no theoretical objection to urge
 
 NEIV TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 7 
 
 accidental ; we may assume that in the cases alhided to, with the 
 exception of the ist Epistle of John, which, on account of the 
 irregular length of the columns, furnishes an accidental coinci- 
 dence, there is a unit sheet of paper employed, capable of con- 
 taining 1 2 lines of the Sinaitic Codex ; we shall therefore have a 
 new leaf of paper, (for reference to which we adopt the expression 
 S-page, in order to distinguish it from the previous V-page), by 
 means of which to measure our documents. 
 
 With regard to the comparative sizes of the two pages, it is 
 evident at a glance that the S-page is smaller than the V-page, for it 
 contains twelve lines where the other has fourteen, and has a smaller 
 number of letters to the line. 
 
 6. We thus get the key to the method by which the text of the 
 papyrus leaves was reduced into the shape in which we find it in the 
 oldest manuscripts. Codex B selects the larger type of page, and 
 arranges them nine on a page, or three in a side ; while the Sinaitic 
 Codex selects the smaller leaf, and arranges them sixteen on a page, 
 
 against either of these numbers, seeing that they are both submultiples of 
 the whole column of 48 lines ; but practically they are too small subdi- 
 visions, and their recurrence is accidental. The probability that out of 28 
 books, one number should recur in the line-endings three times (I do not 
 say this time a particular number) is represented by 
 
 48. 
 
 28 . 27 . 26 
 
 (48) • (48) 
 
 whose value is nearly |i. 
 
 It is almost certain, then, that such an event as the recurrence alluded to 
 will be found in our table. Those who are interested in observing these 
 recurrences may study the following table from the Codex Sinaiticus : 
 
 Tobit ends on line 3 
 
 Judith " " 23 
 
 Mace. I " " 38 
 
 Mace. IV " " 37 
 
 Isaiah " " 14 
 
 Joel " " 19 
 
 Obadiah " " 28 
 
 Here every ending is formed by random distribution (unless we except 
 the book of Judith and the Maccabees), for the works referred to are trans- 
 lations, and have therefore no pattern ; yet there is a double recurrence of 
 the 3, and of the 38 with its submultiple 19. These are, of course, purely 
 accidental. The recurrence would have to be more frequent before we 
 should notice it, or look for any concealed cause at work to produce such a 
 result. 
 
 Jonah 
 
 ends 
 
 on line 45 
 
 Nahum 
 
 
 15 
 
 Habakkuk 
 
 
 " 21 
 
 Zephaniah 
 
 
 16 
 
 Haggai 
 
 
 3 
 
 Zachariah 
 
 
 " 38 
 
 Malachi 
 
 
 " 20
 
 8 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 four in a side. And it is this arrangement which Eusebius ' de- 
 scribes when he says that the accurate MSS, prepared by order 
 of Constantine, were written Tpia-ara koI Terpaaa-d ; t. e. as we should 
 say, in a square whose side is three, or in a square whose side is 
 four. The V-pages, then, are arranged Tpia-a-d, and the S-pages 
 
 TfTpaaa-'i. 
 
 7. Now, examining our second table, we see at once that the 
 Sinaitic Codex gives 
 
 Gospel of Matthew = 556 S-pages, and three letters. 
 Gospel of Luke = 598 S-pages. 
 
 I Corinthians = 205 S-pages exactly. 
 Hebrews = 162 " ■ 
 Philemon ^10 " " 
 
 II Peter = 38 
 Revelation =: 273 " " 
 
 We may perhaps conjecture that Titus should be added to the 
 list, as containing 23 S-pages and one line ; while the Epistle to the 
 Colossians is again doubtful, comprising 49 leaves and one line. 
 We have thus deduced the type of almost all the Epistles, some 
 of them with great exactness ; and we observe that they fall into 
 two groups, with the exception of some four or five Epistles, which 
 either are not written so as to fill the paper, or are written on paper 
 of a different size to the two sorts we have been considering, or on 
 a different pattern. 
 
 8. When we turn to the Gospels we have a harder problem to 
 solve, but I think we may say that if the two principal types of the 
 early MSS are those indicated as rpia-a-a and rerpaaa-d, then it is far 
 more likely that those types were found in the Gospels than that they 
 were merely adopted from the Epistles. We may therefore expect 
 to find some of the Gospels written rpia-ad and some Terpacra-d, or 
 rather some on the V-page and some on the S-page. The question 
 is, how shall we determine the type of the autograph for any par- 
 ticular Gospel ? And here an important remark must be made. I 
 am aware that every one of these results and suggestions is subject 
 to a disturbing factor of the greatest moment, viz. the question of 
 various readings in the text, and of accidental omissions or insertions 
 of passages or lines in the great Codices. The disturbance will be 
 most to be apprehended in the case of the longer compositions, and 
 with regard to these all our results must be looked upon at first as 
 
 ' Eusebius, Vit. Const. IV 37.
 
 NE]V TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 tentative. But in the smaller writings the various readings are gen- 
 erally so few and unimportant that the majority of our results may 
 be regarded as unaffected by them. We will, however, examine the 
 effect of these various readings in each of the separate books. It 
 is the more important to do this carefully, because the Sinaitic and 
 Vatican Codices are known to contain a number of apparent inser- 
 tions and omissions and repetitions, which have been held up by a 
 certain school as convincing proof of their unreliable character as 
 witnesses to the text of the New Testament. 
 
 Dr. Dobbin gave in the Dublin University Magazine for Novem- 
 ber, 1859, a calculation of the omissions of Codex B in the different 
 books of the New Testament, in which we find for 
 
 Matthew 
 
 330 omissions. 
 
 Jude 
 
 1 1 omissions 
 
 Mark 
 
 365 
 
 Romans 
 
 106 " 
 
 Luke 
 
 439 
 
 I Cor. 
 
 146 " 
 
 John 
 
 357 
 
 II Cor. 
 
 74 
 
 Acts 
 
 384 
 
 Gal. 
 
 37 
 
 James 
 
 41 
 
 Eph. 
 
 53 
 
 I Peter 
 
 46 
 
 Philip. 
 
 21 
 
 II Peter 
 
 20 
 
 Coloss. 
 
 36 
 
 I John 
 
 16 
 
 I Thess. 
 
 21 " 
 
 II John 
 
 3 
 
 II Thess. 
 
 10 " 
 
 III John 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 An appalling table, certainly, and one which, if we did not remem- 
 ber that the figures are the result of a collation with the Textus 
 Receptus, and that the majority of them refer to wholly insignificant 
 readings, would almost make us despair of finding in the Vatican 
 or Sinaitic MSS any traces of the original style and size of the books 
 of the New Testament. We will, however, discuss any important 
 readings that may occur, and after having first carefully dissected 
 the text of St. John, and examined the bearing, of our investigation 
 upon the stichometry of the New Testament, we will proceed to 
 the Epistles, beginning with the smaller ones, and so working up to 
 the longer Epistles, the Acts and the Gospels. And no result of 
 the previous tentative examination is to be allowed to pass unchal- 
 lenged or unverified. 
 
 9. We begin with the Gospel according to John. In the Vatican 
 Codex this occupies 97 columns and six lines. In the Sinaitic 
 Codex it occupies 107 columns and 35 lines. At first sight, there- 
 fore, it seems that the Gospel is written on the S-page, with only a
 
 lO NJilV TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 deficiency of one line from a total of 431 S-pages. But here comes 
 in the question of the last verse of the Gospel, which Tischendorf 
 observed to be written in the Sinaitic MSS by a different hand, and 
 many scholia to different MSS affirm to be an addition. Removing 
 this verse, eight lines of the Codex, the S-page is of course no longer 
 apparent. But strange to say, when the verse is also removed from 
 Codex B, in which it occupies six lines at the top of a page, we are 
 left with a Gospel terminating at the end of a page, and in our 
 notation occupying exactly 291 V-pages. The Gospel of John is, 
 therefore, probably written on the V-page, and the apparent contra- 
 diction of this statement by the Sinaitic Codex may be due to the fact 
 that in the type of MSS which that Codex has been following some 
 one has utilized part of the blank space at the latter half of a column 
 for the insertion of a sentence as to the number of books that might 
 have been written. The addition must have been earlier than 
 the age of vellum MSS, and may have arisen in the transcription 
 of the Gospel of John from the larger-sized paper to the smaller, 
 since it nearly fills the blank in a smaller sheet, and that sheet not 
 the lowest in a Sinaitic column. 
 
 10. This conclusion with regard to the autograph of St. John leads 
 to very important consequences with regard to the celebrated peri- 
 cope of the woman taken in adultery. An examination of this 
 passage shows that there are 908 letters either inserted in the 
 text or dropped from it. Now the average number of letters to the 
 line in St. John's Gospel in the Codex Vaticanus is 16.4, from 
 whence we conclude that the passage in question is equi\'alent to 
 about 56 lines of Codex B, i. e. to four V-pages exactly. Now it 
 is obvious that four such pages could not by any possibility have 
 been excised from a document in which the V-pages are arranged 
 nine in a square. They must, therefore, have been lost from the 
 original document before it came into the shape represented by 
 Codex B. Their reinsertion has been characterized by great awk- 
 wardness in later manuscripts, and breaks the continuity of the 
 narrative. They have been, in fact, restored to a place which they 
 did not previously occupy. 
 
 Before going further we insert a reproduction of the four pages 
 which we have reason to believe the lost passage to have occupied. 
 
 As a restoration of the text of B, it is not quite a successful effort. 
 I have not, I find, done justice to the syllabic division followed by 
 the scribe, who has a distinct custom in ending his lines and dividing 
 his words, and prefers, if possible, to write a seven-syllabled line.
 
 ^'-ff^ 
 
 KAieiTopeyQHC&Ns ka 
 
 CTOCe/C TO NO I KON&yT 
 
 oyicAesTTopeySHe icro 
 
 OpoCTWfMeAAICONOpfl 
 
 poYAeTr«i,AiNTTAPer 
 eiMeToeicToiepoNKA 
 
 ITTACOAAOCHPyerOTT 
 poCAyrONKAIKAOlCA 
 
 ceAiAAC KeN/^Y'TOY 
 cApoyciNAeoirpAM 
 
 MATeiC KA lOIC^A pic 
 AlOipYNAIKAerriMOl 
 )(eiAKATeiAHMMe NH 
 NKAICTHCANTeCAyTH 
 
 NGNA^eccoAepoyc i Nd, 
 
 yTCOAlAACKAAe A yTH 
 HpYI^HKATe iAhUT 
 
 iX I err A Y To<^ CO pwMo I )( 
 eYOMSNHeN AercoNo 
 
 /AOOH/^INAAmYCHCeNe 
 rei AATOTACTOI AYT 
 
 iXcAiSazs I NC Y^Y 
 NTiAereicTOY to A 
 eeAeroNTTeipAzoN 
 Tec AY TON I N Aeyfflc 
 
 I N K AT H po p e ( N AvY "I" 
 OYOAe IC K ATCOKy "f <>^ 
 CTCOAAK TYACOKATep 
 
 pAcbeNeiCTMNpH NQ 
 
 c A e e TT e /^ 6 N o N 6 p o 
 
 TOJNTeC AyTON ANe K 
 
 YfeNKAieiTTGNAyTO 
 
 ICO ANA/^ ApTH TOCy 
 
 A\aiN1TpuTOCAl9oNe 
 
 TTAYTHNBAAeTCJK.A 
 
 mAAINKATCJKYt'^^ 
 
 eppAcbeNeicTHN pn 
 
 N0lAe<XKOYCA^NTGC 
 e?Hpj{ONTOe I C K(X 
 
 Qeic ApiiXMe N o I ATT 
 OTcoNirpecBYTepwN 
 
 e CO CTCO N e C ¥ A TCO N K A 
 
 IKATeAe lc|3yH/v\ONOCO 
 fc KA I H p Y '"J " ^ NM e C 60 
 OYCAANAKY^fACAe O 
 ICK<XIAAHAeNA9eAC 
 A/AeNOClTAHNTHCp 
 
 YNAi KOceiTTeNAy 
 
 THpyNAITTOYeiCIN 
 GKeiNOIGIKATHpopO 
 
 icoyoyAeicceKATe 
 Kpi NGN HA6 eiTreNOYA 
 eicKYpieeirreNAeoic 
 oYAeepcoc e K ATA Kp 
 
 IN COTTO p 6 Y O Y K ^^ I ^ '-' 
 KGTI AMA pT AN 6 
 
 T^l
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. H 
 
 Moreover, some of the most capriciously concluded lines are meant 
 to be syllabically. divided, such as those which end with ov and leave 
 the K of the oW to be carried to the next line. This division occurs 
 so frequently that it is evident that the scribe, in writing such words 
 as ovK eariv, really regards the k as a sort of prefix to the verb. 
 
 We may now proceed to determine the place where the celebrated 
 pericope should be reinserted. Turning to the end of the fifth chap- 
 ter, we find that it closes with the words : " There is one that accuseth 
 you, even Moses on whom ye trust. For if ye had believed Moses, 
 ye would have believed me ; but if ye do not believe his writings, how 
 can ye believe my words ? " The scene then changes abruptly to 
 Galilee: "After these things Jesus departed to the other side of 
 the sea of Galilee from Tiberias." It is between these chapters that 
 I would locate the pericope. The fifth chapter narrates how Jesus 
 found in the temple the man whom he had healed at the pool of 
 Bethesda ; it describes the long subsequent discussion with the 
 Pharisees, which must have taken nearly all day, after which they 
 depart, each man to his own house, but Jesus to the Mount of 
 Olives. Appropriately the Pharisees bring him next morning the 
 woman for judgment, with the remark that " Moses in the law said 
 . . . but what say est thou ? " Codex D, which gives the pericope 
 in somewhat shorter form, is even more forcible, n' Be vdv Xeyeis ; we 
 conclude, then, that this is a far more likely place to locate the 
 pericope than at the end of the seventh chapter. 
 
 This readjustment of the text at once removes many of the 
 objections urged against its authenticity, and it also helps to fill up 
 that unsightly chasm at the close of the fifth chapter. It is unne- 
 cessary to discuss in detail the objections which had been raised by 
 critics to the passage as it originally stood, but we will quote a 
 single one out of many difficulties urged, as given by Davidson in 
 his Introduction to the New Testament, I 363. He says : " The 
 greatest perplexity connected with the passage lies in the reason 
 for bringing the case before Jesus. No adequate motive appears 
 to induce the Scribes and Pharisees to employ this woman for the 
 purpose of embarrassing the Redeemer, and thence extracting a 
 ground of accusation against him. It is evident that they wished 
 to entrap him ; the narrative itself states that they tempted him in 
 order to procure a tangible charge, but how they expected to do 
 so by means of the adulteress is exceedingly obscure." I hope 
 the obscurity disappears in the new arrangement of the text, and
 
 12 NEW lliSTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 that the passage is more harmoniously placed with regard to the 
 context than previously. 
 
 Moreover there is this difficulty, that in the ordinary supposition 
 these lost V-pages would begin four lines from the top of the page, 
 and we should have to assume that Codex B had either added 
 four lines to the autograph, or lost ten lines in the first seven chap- 
 ters, before we could rectify the pages so as to reintroduce the lost 
 columns of the papyrus. Neither of these suppositions seems likely, 
 as the text of John in these chapters is remarkably good, and the 
 text of B is more likely to be marked by omissions than insertions. 
 
 On our hypothesis they .begin on the last line of the left-hand 
 column of the page, and we have only to assume that a single line has 
 been lost from Codex B in the first five chapters. We proceed to go 
 in search of this lost line. The Gospel of John in B has comparatively 
 few various readings in the shape of insertions or omissions. The 
 majority of them consist of transpositions and changes of rierely 
 verbal importance. We proceed to tabulate those of them which 
 affect our enquiry, from the principal editors and MSS. 
 
 
 
 Letters 
 
 Text. Ret 
 
 N 
 
 B. 
 
 W.H. 
 
 r. Tr. 
 
 I 5. 
 
 ru>v dvdpcoTTCov 
 
 II 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 H- 
 
 + + 
 
 I 13- 
 
 oiiSe €K deXrifxaros avdpos 
 
 r 21 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 + 
 
 + + 
 
 I 27. 
 
 OS efXTvpoadev . . . 
 
 21 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 II 2. 
 
 A long variant in the Sinaitic, but 
 
 very 
 
 ' doubtful 
 
 
 Ill 13. 
 
 6 U3V fV TW ovpavu) 
 
 13 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 + + 
 
 Ill 31. 
 
 ilTUVU) TTcivTCOV ((TTIV 
 
 16 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
 - + 
 
 IV 9. 
 
 oil yap avv)(putVTai . . . 
 
 . 34 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 ^- 
 
 + 
 
 + + 
 
 IV 14. 
 
 ov pfj 8i\f/ija7] . . . 
 
 40 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
 + + 
 
 V 12. 
 
 TOV KpaficlTTOV GOV 
 
 15 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 -[-f] 
 
 V 16. 
 
 Kai e^iiTovv . . . 
 
 25 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 V 45. vpos TOV irarepa repeated 13 — — -|- — — — 
 
 Reviewing the variants of the text of B thus far, we find four cases 
 of probable omission, and two of insertion. If we allow that B is 
 right in omitting t6v Kpa^arTov a-ov, the result is a balance of a line 
 to be added, which suits our case exactly. 
 
 II. We must now examine the remainder of the Gospel in the 
 same manner. 
 
 VI II. 
 
 roi? padrjTOLS . . . 
 
 23 
 
 + 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 VI 22. 
 
 eKfivo els 6 . . . 
 
 27 
 
 + 
 
 + - 
 
 — — — 
 
 VII 30. 
 
 ayiov BeSopevov 
 
 14 
 
 + 
 
 — — 
 
 [ + ] 
 
 VII 46. 
 
 COS OVTOS 6 avdpMTTOS 
 
 16 
 
 + 
 
 + - 
 
 - +[+]
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 13 
 
 VIII 52. B reads incorrectly, but the passage is of the same length 
 
 as the ordinary reading. 
 VIII 59. hie\6i^v ... 34 -j- — — — — — 
 
 IX 7. B has dropped a line by 6fioi^Ti\evTov. 
 
 IX 36. an,Kpi6n ... 23 ■ -f- + — [-f ] -f 4- 
 
 X 13. Ta TTpafiaTa ... 26 -|- ■ — — — 
 
 X 26. Kaduis fiTTOv v[uv 14 ~|~ — — — — — 
 
 XI 40. ov fju 6 TedvrjKw 21 -|- — — — — — 
 
 XIII 10. el fxr) Tovs TToSas 13 + — + L~\~l — 4" 
 
 XIII 14. B repeats two lines and a half. 
 XIII 24. B has a slightly longer reading. 
 
 XIII 32. el 6 0e6i ... 21 + — — — +[+] 
 
 XIV 4. Kill- olBcire 9 I — — — — — 
 XIV 5. Svpcifieda 8 -j- -f — — — — 
 XVI 16. oTi VTvayoi ... 21 -|- — — — — — 
 
 XVII 15. (/<)oo-/ioua\Xa... omitted 35 -|- -j" — H" + -f- 
 
 XVII 18. Kayio aTrea-reiXa repeated 31 — — -\- — — — 
 
 The total result of our examination of this passage is that perhaps 
 one or two lines might be added to the text of B, but the text has 
 repeated more than five lines and dropped only three, so the total 
 result is hardly affected. 
 
 It will be seen that we have made no allusion to the account of 
 the troubling of the waters at Bethesda, which does not occupy a 
 distinct number of V-pages. 
 
 But we must not altogether pass the passage by, for it enables 
 us to see why the pericope de adu/^era came to be inserted in the 
 wrong place. There is no doubt whatever that the gloss in ques- 
 tion is very early, seeing that we find a striking reference to it in 
 Tertullian, De Baptism. 9. Written on the V-pattern, the passage 
 John V 3, 4 would occupy about 10 lines of manuscript. Bearing 
 in mind that the passage to which the pericope de adidicra has 
 been wrongly restored is four lines from the beginning of a column, 
 and adding the gloss on the Troubling of the Water to the fifth 
 chapter, we have now moved the inserted pericope to the beginning 
 of a V-page. Each of the three errors, viz. the omission of the 
 pericope, its reinsertion, and the insertion of the gloss in chapter 
 V, is therefore anterior to the age of vellum manuscripts, and we 
 can even arrange the errors in their proper chronological order. 
 Perhaps we ought to have added that in the same interval of time 
 a balance of a single line was lost from the first five chapters of B.
 
 14 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 The majority of the errors are of the V-type, that is, there 
 are more V-Hnes than S-hnes inserted or omitted. And this is 
 just what we should expect, if the MSS were originally of the 
 V-pattern ; and we may jlay down the following general prin- 
 ciple : A manuscript originally written on a certain pattern will 
 generally show a majority of errors of the pattern on which it is 
 written. The advantage of this proposition is that it will help us 
 to determine the original character of a MS, whether the MS occupy 
 an exact number of pages of its pattern or not. We are now in the 
 position to print the Gospel of John, approximately, from the origi- 
 nal sheets. 
 
 No one can study the Gospel carefully without noticing the dis- 
 continuity of many of its sequences. The probability is that some 
 passages are still lost from the 500 original sheets of the Gospel. 
 
 12. Now let us turn to the close of the Gospel and examine the 
 endings of the 20th and 2 ist chapters : the similarity of the 30th verse 
 of the 20th chapter to the last verse of the 21st chapter is unmistak- 
 able. The Gospel has apparently two endings. And here comes in 
 the remarkable fact that Tertullian calls the 30th verse of the 20th 
 chapter the close of the Gospel, although he quotes from the 21st 
 chapter in at least two places : " Ipsa quoque clausula Evangelii 
 propter quid consignat haec scripta, nisi, ut credatis, inquit lesum 
 Christum filium Dei?"' The proper place for the two closing 
 verses of the 20th chapter is most likely at the end of the 21st 
 chapter. 
 
 For the expression that there were " many other signs not recorded 
 which Jesus wrought " implies (just as the expression " I had many 
 things to write to you " in the II and III of John) an insufficiency 
 of writing material ; we are close to the end of the roll of paper. 
 
 In the next place, the restoration of the closing verses of the 20th 
 chapter to the end of the 21st is strikingly harmonious with the 
 introduction of the Gospel, to which it returns as a keynote, and 
 with the 24th verse of the 21st chapter which precedes it. 
 
 And thirdly there is room for a single conjectural emendation 
 which adds vividness to the narrative. In XXI 30, after evamov 
 Tcov fiadrjTcov, many important MSS, especially those which exhibit a 
 Western text, insert airov. It is a lawful suggestion that the original 
 reading was simply iva>Tviov uvtov, which was altered as soon as the 
 verse had become severed from its proper connection. 
 
 ' Tertullian, Adv. Praxeam, 25.
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 15 
 
 The Gospel now closes as follows : 
 
 ovTOi icrriv 6 jj-adrfTris 6 fiaprvpav Trepi tovtcov 
 Koi 6 ypdyj^as ravra, koL ol'Sa/iei' on dXrjdqs 
 aiiTov fj fiapTvpia icrrlv ' iroWa fxev oiiv Ka\ aK\a 
 crrjfieia eTTOiTjaev 6 Ir](Tovs evaiTrtov avTov a ovk 
 i'rmv yeypiifxpeva ii> T<a /3t/3Xia) tovtco ' ravra 8e 
 yiypanraL tva nKrrfvrjre on Irjcrovs eartv 6 Xpicrros 
 6 vlos rov Qeov Kal iva TfiarevovTes C^rjv 
 eXT''^ ^^ ■'"'? ov6p.aTi avrov. 
 
 13. We now proceed to state the further results at which we have 
 arrived for the several books of the New Testament, postponing 
 the critical details to a subsequent page. It will be convenient to 
 tabulate, as far as possible, the whole of the results in a form suitable 
 to a critical comparison. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Table 
 
 III. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 SlNAITIC 
 
 Col. Line Total 
 
 Vatican. 
 
 > 
 
 in 
 
 a 
 
 s s 
 
 3 fcO 
 C a 
 
 ^^ 
 
 
 
 u 
 
 i4 ^ 
 
 If 
 
 4) '" 
 
 a u - 
 —>-.(/) 
 
 T ^- c 
 
 > 8.2 
 
 3.i2 
 
 •s c ° 
 
 > 
 
 
 Col. 
 
 Line 
 
 Total 
 
 ^ 
 
 Matthew 
 
 139 
 
 I 
 
 6672 
 
 127 
 
 9 
 
 5343 
 
 
 
 
 
 1.249 
 
 13.2. 
 
 Mark 
 
 85 
 
 4 
 
 4084 
 
 77 
 
 31 
 
 3265 
 
 
 
 
 
 1.250 
 
 13.0. 
 
 Luke 
 
 149 
 
 24 
 
 7176 
 
 136 
 
 41 
 
 5753 
 
 s 
 
 600 
 
 
 600 
 
 1.247 
 
 13.6 
 
 John 
 
 107 
 
 35 
 
 517I 
 
 97 
 
 6 
 
 4080 
 
 V 
 
 
 29s 
 
 300 
 
 1.267 
 
 133 
 
 Acts 
 
 146 
 
 10 
 
 7018 
 
 130 
 
 3 
 
 5463 
 
 s 
 
 578 
 
 
 600 
 
 1.284 
 
 
 I Thess. 
 
 II 
 
 21 
 
 549 
 
 10 
 
 28 
 
 448 
 
 sv 
 
 46 
 
 32 
 
 50 
 
 1.225 
 
 
 11 Thess. 
 
 6 
 
 3 
 
 291 
 
 5 
 
 34 
 
 244 
 
 s 
 
 24 
 
 
 
 1. 192 
 
 
 I Corinthians 
 
 51 
 
 12 
 
 2460 
 
 46 
 
 6 
 
 1938 
 
 s 
 
 205 
 
 
 
 1.269 
 
 
 II Corinthians 
 
 35 
 
 6 
 
 1686 
 
 31 
 
 28 
 
 133° 
 
 V 
 
 
 95 
 
 100 
 
 1.267 
 
 
 Galatians 
 
 16 
 
 45 
 
 813 
 
 15 
 
 27 
 
 657 
 
 V 
 
 
 47 
 
 so 
 
 1.236 
 
 
 Romans 
 
 53 
 
 6 
 
 2550 
 
 49 
 
 16 
 
 2074 
 
 V 
 
 
 147 
 
 150 
 
 1.229 
 
 
 Ephesians 
 
 j8 
 
 5 
 
 869 
 
 16 
 
 22 
 
 694 
 
 s 
 
 73 
 
 
 
 1.252 
 
 
 Philippians 
 
 12 
 
 9 
 
 585 
 
 II 
 
 
 
 462 
 
 sv 
 
 49 
 
 33 
 
 50 
 
 1.266 
 
 
 Colossians 
 
 12 
 
 13 
 
 589 
 
 11 
 
 IS 
 
 477 
 
 s 
 
 49 
 
 
 5° 
 
 1.232 
 
 
 Philemon 
 
 2 
 
 24 
 
 120 
 
 
 
 
 s 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 
 
 I Tim. 
 
 13 
 
 40 
 
 664 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 II Tim. 
 
 10 
 
 3 
 
 483 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Titus 
 
 5 
 
 37 
 
 277 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Hebrews 
 
 40 
 
 24 
 
 1944 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 James 
 
 13 
 
 33 
 
 657 
 
 12 
 
 26 
 
 530 
 
 V 
 
 
 38 
 
 40 
 
 1.237 
 
 
 1 Peter 
 
 14 
 
 9 
 
 68 1 
 
 12 
 
 30 
 
 534 
 
 s 
 
 57 
 
 
 60 
 
 1-275 
 
 
 II Peter 
 
 9 
 
 24 
 
 456 
 
 8 
 
 32 
 
 368 
 
 s 
 
 38 
 
 
 40 
 
 1-239 
 
 
 I John 
 
 15 
 
 12 
 
 732 
 
 13 
 
 27 
 
 573 
 
 V 
 
 
 41 
 
 
 1.277 
 
 
 II John 
 
 I 
 
 39 
 
 87 
 
 I 
 
 27 
 
 69 
 
 V 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 1.260 
 
 
 III John 
 
 I 
 
 39 
 
 87 
 
 I 
 
 27 
 
 69 
 
 V 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 1.260 
 
 
 Jude 
 
 4 
 
 6 
 
 198 
 
 3 
 
 27 
 
 153 
 
 V 
 
 
 II 
 
 
 1.294 
 
 
 Revelation 
 
 68 
 
 12 
 
 3276 
 
 
 
 
 s? 
 
 273 
 
 
 
 
 
 V 
 
 16.8 
 
 16.4 
 
 16.5 
 
 16.7 
 
 16.4 
 16 s 
 
 15.2
 
 l6 NEIV TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 We have, on the basis of the previous investigation, constructed 
 a column in the table showing the ratio of the V-line to the S-line 
 for different books. 
 
 If a book contain in lines in the Sinaitic and n in the Vatican 
 Codex, we have, other things being equal, mS = nV , or 
 
 S 71 
 
 where V and S represent the V- and S-line respectively. But this 
 ratio must be corrected for omissions and insertions ; if, for example, 
 
 B omits g lines of the original, the ratio ought to be ■ — -. — , or it is 
 
 diminished in the ratio n:n-\- g, or giving p either sign, and 
 reserving the -f- sign for omissions, the ratio is altered by the frac- 
 tion . Similarly, if the Sinaitic Codex omits p lines, the ratio 
 
 is altered by ^ . Change in the style of a writer will also affect 
 
 tn 
 
 the number of lines, etc., but at any rate we can see that, as a gen- 
 eral rule, books ivritten in the same style and by the same author 
 ivill be similarly affected by the processes of transcription. 
 .Referring to our table we have ratios as follows ; 
 
 John 1.267 I John 1.277 
 
 II John 1.260 III John 1.260 
 
 results so nearly coincident that they suggest the same hand in 
 the original documents. 
 
 But this remark must not be unduly pressed ; for, strictly speak- 
 ing, if any book is written out on the same two given patterns, the 
 
 ratio of the lines is fixed, for V and S are fixed, and — = -^ . 
 
 n S 
 
 Hence, when the text has been corrected, the column of ratios 
 ought to be the same for all books. And the normal value of the 
 ratio, if we allow 36 letters to the V-type for 28 to the S-type, 
 is f, or 1.285. The first use of this table is to show, or rather 
 suggest, omissions or insertions in a codex. When these are cor- 
 rected for, there remains a residual effect upon the ratio produced 
 by the variation in the hand of a scribe, induced by his copy being 
 somewhat different from his normal style. And this residual effect 
 may perhaps help us to classify the scribes of the different books. 
 
 We have grouped the Pauline Epistles in chronological order, 
 and it is interesting to observe that those Epistles written at the
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 1 7 
 
 same time show traces of being written in the same manner. Thus 
 Galatians and Romans are both written on the V-page ; between 
 them they occupy 200 sheets of paper. 
 
 Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon are all written 
 on the S-page (unless we must except Philippians). And the four 
 Epistles together occupy 200 sheets of paper. The three pastoral 
 Epistles show traces of being written in the same style, but we have 
 not been able to identify it. The two Epistles of Peter agree in 
 this, that they are both written on the S-page. 
 
 B. I. The resolution of the books of the New Testament into two 
 main groups, characterized as the S-type and V-type respectively, 
 has an important bearing upon the stichometry of the New 
 Testament. 
 
 Professor Gildersleeve has drawn my attention to the analysis 
 by which M. Ch. Graux showed in the Revue de Philologie for 
 April, 1878, that the (ttLxos, both in sacred and profane writers, rep- 
 resented not a verse, nor a clause, nor sentence, but a fixed quan- 
 tity of writing. Evidence is offered in this article that copyists were 
 paid at a fixed legal rate per 100 lines. Such a law would have been 
 vain and illusory if early and constant tradition had not established 
 what was to be understood by the length of the line. M. Graux 
 estimates as nearly as possible the number of letters contained in a 
 given work of some sacred or profane author, and divides this 
 number by the number of o-rt^ot which the manuscript of the work 
 declares it to contain. The results at which he arrives are very 
 remarkable, being almost all of them included between 35 and 38 
 letters to the (xtixo^. From 50 consecutive lines in the Iliad opened 
 at random, he deduces that the average Homeric line contains 
 37.7 letters. 
 
 The significance of these results can hardly be mistaken : they 
 imply that the ar'ixo^ is equivalent to the Homeric line. Now if 
 we apply this result of M. Graux to the case of the Codex Vati- 
 canus, it is almost impossible to resist the conclusion that two lines 
 of the Codex Vaticanus aie meant to represent the same quantity ; 
 we have found by selecting 25 lines at random in Codex B that 
 the average lor a single line is nearly 17 letters; twq- such lines 
 come very near to the average obtained by M. Graux. But if this 
 be correct, what shall we say of the much shorter lines of the 
 Sinaitic Codex ? We arc inclined to believe that they represent 
 the half of an iambic line. Taking the average of 25 lines from
 
 1 8 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 the Medea of Euripides, we have 29.96 letters ; but we have 
 already found for the Codex Sinaiticus the number of letters to 
 be nearly 14, which is not far from the half of the iambic line. 
 These must therefore be two of the principal types of writing- 
 employed both before and after the time of the composition of the 
 books of the New Testament : and these are the two principal 
 types employed in the New Testament. The origin of what we 
 have called the S-page and V-page respectively is therefore to be 
 lound in the iambic and hexameter lines. 
 
 These results admit of a very simple test. In the Epistle of 
 James, I 17, we have an almost perfect hexameter: 
 
 TTCKTa docris ayuOrj Koi irav 8a>pT]fia reXeiov. 
 
 Now this occupies exactly two lines in Codex B, as the following 
 transcript will show : 
 
 nASAAO 
 
 SISArAGHKAinANAfi 
 
 PHMATEAEIONANQGEN 
 
 In the same way the iambic which St. Paul quotes in I Cor. XV 
 34 from Menander : 
 
 <f)6€lpovcnv f]6r) xprjaTO. o/xtXi'at KOKai, 
 
 is exactly two lines in the Sinaitic Codex. 
 
 It will be noticed that our lines, as a general rule, fall a little short 
 of the average hexameter and iambic. The reason for this lies in the 
 fact that a scribe paid at so much a hundred lines, when copying 
 some other work than Homer, selected a short line of Homer for his 
 pattern. By this means the conventional arixos is a little smaller. 
 These o-tIxoi must not be confounded with the divisions of the text 
 made by Euthalius, an Alexandrian deacon; in the fifth century, 
 which does not proceed by letters, but apparently by words and 
 sentences. 
 
 2. The allusion which we have made to the existence of an 
 iambic a-rixos explains a difficulty in Josephus. At the close of 
 the Jewish Antiquities the writer says, 'Enl tovtois re KaraTrdvcro) rfjv 
 
 dpxaioXoyiav, ^i/3Xots fih e'lKoai TrepLeiXrjiJ-fitVJjv, e^ de fiupida-t. aTixoiV' M. 
 
 Graux remarks on this that if we were to take the assertion of 
 Josephus liberally, that his work contained 60,000 aTixoi, we should 
 find for the value of the o-t-i'xos the inadmissible quantity 28 or 29 
 letters. He therefore proceeds to explain away the statement of 
 Josephus, as being a rough expansion of the assertion that each of 
 the twenty books of the Antiquities contained 2000 to 3000 a-rlxoi.
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. I9 
 
 Birt, on the other hand (Buchwesen, p. 204), attempts to evade 
 the difficulty by changing e| Se ^vpuia-i into t 8e fivpidai, by means 
 of which he deduces the Josephus-line to be 34.2 letters. 
 
 We have only to assume, however, that Josephus employs the 
 iambic verse as his model, and the result arrived at by M. Graux 
 needs no further explanation. 
 
 A singular corroboration of this assumption will be found by 
 examining the lengths of some of Josephus' own letters as given 
 by himself. I will here only briefly allude to one result out of 
 many. If we examine the six letters contained in the life of Jose- 
 phus, we shall find that the 
 
 Letter of Jonathan to Josephus (Vita 44) contains 26 S-lines. 
 Josephus to Jonathan (Vita 44) " 33 " 
 Jonathan to Josephus (Vita 45) " 12 " 
 Josephus to Jonathan (Vita 45) " 12 " 
 Agrippa to Josephus (^Vita 65} " 12 " 
 Agrippa to Josephus (Vita 65) " 12 " 
 
 The recurrence of the number 12 is very remarkable, and four 
 out of the six letters reduce at once to the S-pattern, while one 
 of the remaining letters is only two lines in excess. 
 
 A similar remark will possibly apply to one or two other results 
 of M. Graux. In calculating the value of the a-rixos for the Epistles 
 of Clement, as given in Gebhardt's editio minor, by means of the 
 data supplied by Nicephorus and Anastasius, he comes to the con- 
 clusion that the a-rixos h 29 letters to which he affixes the mark of 
 doubtfulness. We need only assume that the writing is based on 
 the iambic arixos and all is clear. M. Graux appears to accept as 
 the mean result for the a-rlxos based on the Homeric line, a number 
 of letters between 34 and 38 as limits, and with 36 for the normal 
 type. If we allow the same latitude of limits, say take the normal 
 iambic arrlxos at 28 or 29 letters and allow limits 27 to 31 letters, we 
 can at once explain several either results which were rather rejected 
 by M. Graux as inconsistent with his theory, or were marked by 
 him with a query. 
 
 3. But now let us return for a moment to M. Graux's estimate of 
 36 letters to the <ttIxos.. The following passage from Eustathius, 
 Bishop of Antioch in the fourth century, will perhaps be a good 
 test as far as the New Testament is concerned. In his treatise De 
 Engastrimutho ' we read as follows : ^pav oSv Xidovs tva ^dXaa-iv in 
 
 1 Migne, Patrol. XVIII 657.
 
 20 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 avTov ' U)s Se Tavra 7rpovypa\j/€v ev ro3 fxera^ii TTivre ttov koX TpiuKOvrn Trpos 
 Tols eKarov arixovs vTrep^as eTTKpepei. npoade'is ' ifiacrTacrav ovv oi lovbaloi 
 
 \l6ovs 'iva Xidtiauxnv avTov, that is to Say, between two given passages of 
 the Gospel of John, VIII 59 and X 30, Eustathius reckons about 
 135 (TTixot. Now if we count these intervening Hnes in Codex B 
 we have 326 lines, which is more than twice 135, and in the Sinaitic 
 Codex the passage occupies 414 lines. If, however, we count the 
 actual letters in the passage, we find from the Sinaitic Codex 5375 
 letters, which when divided by 135 gives us 39.9 letters to the 
 a-Tixos, a result somewhat too large, but still confirmatory of M. 
 Graux's conclusion. It will be noticed that Eustathius is approxi- 
 mate.' Probably he mistook 135 for 145. The number of inter- 
 vening a-TLxoi is really nearer to 150, and at 36 letters to the (ttlxos 
 is almost exactly 149. From this last result it will be easy to 
 express any book in the New Testament in o-n'xoi, for we may say 
 approximately : 
 
 326 Vatican lines = 414 Sinaitic lines 
 
 = 149 arixoi. of 36 letters each. 
 
 The calculations are given in a subsequent table, and are compared 
 with estimates derived from various codices. 
 
 4. The same supposition of a normal iambic a-rixos explains the 
 statement of Dionysius of Halicarnassus (on the superiority of 
 the elocution of Demosthenes) that Demosthenes' works contain 
 50,000 or 60,000 o-Tt'xoi, M. Graux dismisses this statement with 
 the words, ' on voit que Denys ne tenait pas a I'exactitude absolue 
 des chiffres.' But even if we admit the estimate to be a rough 
 one, we have a right to assume that the accurate number of art'^oi 
 should fall behveen the assigned limits. That it does not so fall is 
 pointed out by W. Christ in his Atticusausgabe des Demosthenes, 
 in which he calculates from the stichometric indications of certain 
 manuscripts of Demosthenes that the whole number of (tt'ixoi- is 
 not much above 42,000. The conclusion drawn by the writer (as 
 given by M. Weil in the Revue Critique for Nov. 27, 1882) is that 
 the exemplar on which the reckoning is based is one of shorter 
 lines than is usual. 
 
 But the question immediately arises whether this case is not 
 explicable by the hypothesis of the iambic line : increasing the 
 
 > This supposition is unnecessary. Very interesting cases can be given, 
 especially from Galen, of hexameter lines measured at over 40 letters.
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 21 
 
 estimated 42,000 arlxoi in the proportion of 7 to 9, which we have 
 seen to be the ratio of the normal tragic verse to the heroic, we 
 have 54,000 o-Ti'xoi, which falls nearly half-way between the limits 
 suggested by Dionysius of Halicarnassus. We may study these 
 stichometric indications in the important Munich MS of Demos- 
 thenes, known as Bavaricus, where the o-W^ot are marked by hun- 
 dreds on the margin by the letters A, B, etc. They are given by 
 Reiske in his edition of Demosthenes, and we have only to take 
 the average o-r/;^os' from the space intervening between two succes- 
 sive letters. 
 
 It is necessary to show that these stichometric marks do actually 
 refer to a line measured by the longer model. As I have not been 
 able to obtain a copy of M. Christ's work, I have calculated the 
 oTixo? from the data given by Reiske, where the marks are given 
 at p. xcii of the preface, with the lines to which they refer. It 
 would be difficult to mark the stichometric intervals even if the 
 series were perfect (which is not the case by any means), for, first, 
 we cannot tell to what part of Reiske's line the indication applies, 
 neither can we be sure that Reiske knew to what part of the line 
 of the MS they applied. Thus there is a chance of error four 
 times repeated, twice for the beginning of the stichometric interval, 
 and twice for its close. 
 
 As an example, let us take the oration against Timocrates. Reiske 
 gives the following references to his pages and lines for the sticho- 
 metric marks : 703, 17 A ; 705, 17 B ; 711, pen. r ; 715, 10 a ; 722, 
 14 z ; 725, 19 H ; 728, 22 e ; 731, 26 i ; 738, 18 a ; 741, 26 M ; 744, 
 I N ; 746, 18 z ; 752, 8 o ; 755, 13 n ; 761, 22 2 ; 764, 25 T. Here 
 the second A should be A, and the second z should be S. From 
 these, by means of Reiske's 29-lined page, we at once get intervals 
 58, 185, 98, 207, 92, 90, 91, 193, 95, 62, 75, 184, 92, 183, 90 lines. 
 Of these fifteen results, the first, fourth, tenth, and eleventh are 
 clearly not a multiple of the stichometric interval, either because 
 Reiske's text is not the text to which the marks can properly apply, 
 or because the marks are wrongly placed. From the remaining 
 results we get the value of the interval, the second being clearly 
 the double of such an interval, and the mean of the results is 92.4 
 Reiske-lines. But the average Reiske-line is 40.2 letters ; the sticho- 
 metric interval is therefore 3714,48 letters, from which it at once 
 appears that the marks are meant to represent the successive hun- 
 dreds of hexameter lines, each line being 37 letters. This establishes 
 the nature of the stichometry of Bavaricus.
 
 22 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 5. It is from the edict of Diocletian, de pretiis vena/ium, that M. 
 Graux derived the statement as to the pay of the scribe by the 
 given amount of writing. We proceed to examine the edict more 
 closely. It is given in many exemplars, more or less complete, 
 in the Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, Vol. Ill, S. 800, the most 
 important being an inscription from Stratonice. The following are 
 the lines that affect our enquiry : 
 
 Membranario in [qua] t[r]endone pedali pergamena. [xl denarii] 
 
 Scriptori in scriptura optima versus n" centum. [xxv] 
 
 Se[quent]is scripturae versuum n° centum. [xx] 
 Tabellanioni in scriptura libelli bel tabular[um] in 
 
 versibus n" centum. [x] 
 
 The prices are wanting in the inscription from Stratonice, but 
 they are supplied from a Phrygian inscription marked H in the 
 Corpus.' 
 
 The first thing to observe is the existence of two distinct types 
 of writing, denoted respectively optima and sequens. These are, 
 as we should say, large and small size ; a study of the whole 
 inscription gives many instances of this. Take for example the 
 price of apples in the edict : 
 
 Mala optima Mattiana sive Saligniani n" decern * quattuor. 
 
 Sequentia n° viginti * quattuor. 
 
 Mala minora n" quadraginta * quattuor. 
 
 This establishes the use of the words opthnus and segicens as 
 relating to the res venules. Next observe that the prices of the two 
 styles of writing are in the ratio of 25 to 20 or 5 : 4. Now the 
 ratio of the heroic verse to the iambic is, as we have shown, very 
 nearly 36 : 28 or 9 : 7, which is a very close approximation to the 
 previous ratio. The two types of writing of the Diocletian edict 
 are therefore our two standard verses.^ 
 
 ^ M. Graux gives the prices differently, quoting apparently fromWaddington, 
 and is followed by Birt (Buchwesen, p. 208). They write as follows : 
 Scriptori in scriptura optima versuum No. centum . . . 
 Sequentis scripturae XL 
 
 Tabellanioni, etc. XXV 
 
 Birt also seems to assume that " sequens " refers to quality rather than quan- 
 tity: "das Monument unterscheidet hier wie iiberall nur zwei Sorten und 
 bezeichnet die schlechtere als sequens." 
 
 ^ Dr. Bloomfield furnishes me with the following note : 
 
 In India, MSS are now copied and paid for "by ^.lokas ox grantkas . The 9loka 
 is an iambic meter consisting of four times eight syllables, and any MS, whether
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. . 23 
 
 6. We observe that this table enables us to determine, to a close 
 degree of approximation, the cost of the original transcription of 
 the Codex Sinaiticus. Each page contains 96 iambic o-ri^ot, or 
 almost the legal hundred; the cost is therefore 20 denarii a 
 page : allowing 345^ leaves to the manuscript, the expense is 
 3452 X 40 denarii, or 13,820 denarii. And the date of the edict 
 of Diocletian is so little anterior to the production of the MS 
 that we cannot be far wrong in our estimate. But here we have 
 only taken account of the actually existing portion of the MS, and 
 have left out of the reckoning those portions of the Old Testa- 
 ment which are lost, and the 43 leaves of the Cod. Friderico- 
 Augustanus. 
 
 Scrivener estimates the total number of leaves of the MS down 
 to the place where Hermas breaks off at 724 at the outside : and 
 admitting this estimate, we should have 28,960 denarii for cost of 
 transcription. 
 
 Then comes the question of the cost of the vellum, and here 
 again the Diocletian edict helps us to an estimate. According to 
 the first of our quoted lines, a quaternion of four sheets or eight 
 leaves of parchment, a foot in length, was to be sold for 40 denarii ; 
 now the Codex Sinaiticus is just over the foot in length (the Roman 
 foot being taken to be 11.69 inches): and the vellum is of very 
 fine quality. Allowing, then, 90 quaternions to the complete work, 
 we put at least 3600 denarii for the material, which added to our 
 previous reckoning gives 32,560 denarii for the complete work. If, 
 however, we only regard the portion properly known as the Codex 
 Sinaiticus, we have to add 1720 denarii to 13,820, giving a total of 
 15,540 denarii. 
 
 We conclude that the cost of a complete Bible must have been 
 about 30,000 denarii ; and Constantine's fifty Bibles for the churches 
 of Constantinople muft have been produced at an expense not very 
 different from 1,500,000 denarii. To represent this in modern 
 
 prose or poetry, is now generally copied upon this basis of count. I received, 
 myself, about a month ago two texts of the Kdncika-sutra, a ritualistic work 
 written in short condensed sentences, and in prose. These sentences contain 
 mnemonic rules for the conduct of sacrifices and sacraments, and are in form 
 and context as far removed from poetry as possible. One of the MSS was 
 estimated at 1700 9lokas, the other at 1750. The difference in the number is 
 due to actual differences in the text, and to the fact that the count is made in 
 round numbers. 
 
 A similar statement will be found in Gardthausen; Griech. Palaographie, 
 p. 132.
 
 24 NEW TESTAMFaYT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 money is more difficult ; perhaps we shall not be far wrong in 
 taking the estimate of M. Waddington, that the denarius = .062 
 francs. 
 
 Birt (Antikes Buchwesen, p. 209) sets the denarius down at .024 
 marks of modern money. This would make the scribe's pay, for 
 100 lines of hexameter size, .96 mark, sufficiently small to be a 
 correct estimate of scrivener's pay ; for the shorter pattern, .6 
 mark per hundred ; while the cost of production of a complete 
 Sinaitic Codex stands at 720 marks or thereabouts. It is not a 
 little curious that the estimate which we have made of the cost of 
 production of the books ordered by Constantine should approach 
 so nearly to the price set by Tischendorf on the splendid edition 
 of Sinaiticus produced by order of the Emperor Alexander II of 
 Russia. 
 
 7. There remains one line of our edict to discuss. The notary 
 (observe the curious form tabellanio for tabellio) or writer of the 
 small book (libellus) or of tablets, is paid at a lower rate. Accord- 
 ing to the edict, he is paid only 10 denarii per 100 verses. We 
 cannot be far wrong in assuming his lines to be half as short as the 
 previous type ; in other words, his lines are sensibly the same as 
 the Sinaitic line, two of which go to the iambic urlxo^' Now it is 
 not unworthy of note that we find not a few manuscripts of the 
 New Testament written on a model very little different from the 
 Sinaitic Codex. They are a little shorter, averaging 1 1 letters to 
 the line, and indicate an original written on very narrow strips of 
 paper. To this type belong the MSS known as l, N, r (which are, 
 perhaps, fragments of the same original) ; they are written in 
 double columns, 16 lines to the page, and eleven letters to the 
 line. Codex W is, perhaps, a little longer, 12 letters to the line, 
 and in double columns, of 23 lines to the column. 
 
 8. The table which contains our calculatiofi of the o-r/xoi for the 
 separate books is deserving of a careful study. The first column 
 is taken from Scrivener, p. 63 of Introduction to N. T. Criti- 
 cism. He states that for the Gospels his figures are taken 
 from Codd. G. S. and 27 Cursives named by Scholz. It will 
 be observed that as a general rule the results of the second 
 column exceed those of the third. But in the case of the Acts 
 the order is nearly reversed. Probably the explanation is that 
 the Acts is written more closely in Codex B than any other 
 book, and so we have a smaller number of lines from which to 
 calculate our o-r/^oi. The first column is at the beginning much
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 25 
 
 in excess of the second and third, probably in consequence of 
 interpolations in the Gospels followed by Codices G. S, etc., or 
 omissions in the great uncials. For the succeeding Epistles the 
 second and third columns give as a rule results slightly in excess 
 of the first, except for the Hebrews, where the Sinaitic Codex has 
 some omissions to account for, and in James and I John. 
 
 We may actually test the results in the case of such short com- 
 positions as Philemon and the two shorter Epistles of John. By 
 actual reckoning then on the II and III Epistles of John as given 
 in Westcott and Hort's edition, we find 30 and 31 (nlxoi respec- 
 tively. The abbreviated forms are taken for ^eoD, lr}<Tov, xp^<^rov, but 
 these abbreviations will not affect the result arrived at. For Phile- 
 mon the same text gives 42 o-tlxoi ; but if we do not abbreviate 
 we must add nearly sixty letters; the last arixos numbered 15 
 letters ; and we have therefore to add about 39 letters or just over 
 a verse, which brings the result very close to the calculation from 
 the Sinaitic, or the estimate of M. Graux. 
 
 The result arrived at by M. Graux, and confirmed by our own 
 researches, is in the first instance deduced from the fact that the 
 average value of the o-tlxos, as calculated, fluctuates between very 
 narrow limits. And I can imagine some one objecting that such 
 a result would be a thing that any one might anticipate, and that 
 we might just as well calculate the average length of a verse in the 
 English Bible, and then draw the inference that these verses were 
 constructed according to a pattern, which can hardly be believed 
 in any strict sense. To reply to this objection, perhaps the simplest 
 counter-argument would be to observe that, if there were really an 
 average number of letters to the verse, fluctuating between limits 
 as narrow in proportion as in the case of the number of letters to 
 the arixos, there ought to be an approximately uniform ratio 
 between the number of o-ri^ot and the number of verses in the sep- 
 arate books; for if is approximately constant, where ?n is the 
 
 P 
 whole number of letters in a book, and p the number of (rri;toi, and 
 
 if — is also approximately constant, where ^ is the number of 
 
 verses, then p : q is approximately a constant ratio. We can at 
 once test this point by taking the number of o-tixoi- and verses as 
 given by Scrivener, Introduction to N. T., p. 63. The result of 
 the enquiry is as follows :
 
 26 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 Ratio. 
 2.390 
 
 2-383 
 2.380 
 2.300 
 2.506 
 2.240 
 2.247 
 
 2.524 
 2.514 
 2.307 
 
 2.133 
 2.720 
 2.124 
 1.990 
 2.304 
 1.966 
 2.013 
 2.000 
 2.189 
 2.168 
 2.255 
 2.035 
 2.072 
 2.130 
 1.520 
 2.320 
 4.444 
 
 That is (leaving out the case of Revelation, where the number 
 o( (TTixoi is obviously apocryphal), the ratio varies between 1.52 and 
 2.72, which is more divergent than 3 to 5. In the longer compo- 
 sitions the ratio tends to uniformity, as we should expect. It is 
 clear, then, that the average of M. Graux's results is something 
 more than a^iere numerical average, and implies the existence of 
 an underlying type. 
 
 9. It is important that we should grasp the bearing of the previous 
 researches upon the antiquity of the texts contained in the two 
 great Uncials. Scrivener, in his collation of the Codex Sinaiticus, 
 draws attention to the remarkable resemblance of the writing to 
 that of the Herculanean papyri, none of which, as he ingeniously 
 remarks, can be dated below A. D. 79. He draws a similar com- 
 
 
 arlxo!. 
 
 Modern Verses. 
 
 Matthew 
 
 2560 
 
 107 1 
 
 Mark 
 
 1616 
 
 678 
 
 Luke 
 
 2740 
 
 II51 
 
 John 
 
 2024 
 
 880 
 
 Acts 
 
 2524 
 
 1007 
 
 James 
 
 242 
 
 108 
 
 I Peter 
 
 236 
 
 105 
 
 II Peter 
 
 154 
 
 61 
 
 I John 
 
 274 
 
 105 
 
 II John 
 
 36 
 
 13 
 
 III John 
 
 32 
 
 15 
 
 Jude 
 
 68 
 
 25 
 
 Romans 
 
 920 
 
 433 
 
 I Cor. 
 
 870 
 
 437 
 
 II Cor. 
 
 590 
 
 256 
 
 Galat. 
 
 293 
 
 149 
 
 Ephesians 
 
 312 
 
 155 
 
 Philipp. 
 
 208 
 
 104 
 
 Coloss. 
 
 208 
 
 95 
 
 I Thess. 
 
 193 
 
 89 
 
 II Thess. 
 
 106 
 
 47 
 
 I Tim. 
 
 230 
 
 "3 
 
 II Tim. 
 
 172 
 
 83 
 
 Titus 
 
 98 
 
 46 
 
 Philemon 
 
 38 
 
 25 
 
 Hebrews 
 
 703 
 
 303 
 
 Revelation 
 
 1800 
 
 405
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 27 
 
 parison with regard to the almost entire absence of marks of punc- 
 tuation/ " The two manuscripts are near akin. In the Hyperides 
 papyri are no stops at all, in the Herculanean very few." " With 
 regard to the columnar arrangement his remarks are even more 
 suggestive. " Still more striking is the likeness which Cod. Sinai- 
 ticus bears to these records of the first century in respect to its 
 outward form and arrangement. The latter are composed of nar- 
 row slips of the papyrus, the writing on which is seldom more 
 than 2 or 2 J inches broad, glued together in parallel columns, and 
 kept in scrolls which were unrolled at one end for the purpose of 
 reading, and when read rolled up at the other . . . the appearance 
 of the Sinai manuscript, with its eight narrow columns (seldom 
 exceeding two inches in breadth, exhibited on each open leaf, sug- 
 gests at once the notion that it was transcribed line for line from 
 some primitive papyrus, whether written in Egypt or elsewhere." ' 
 The main point to be noted is that the papyri from which our 
 great manuscripts are transcribed must have been closely related, 
 almost line for line, to the original papyri of the Gospels and 
 Epistles, or it is extremely unlikely that they would end in any 
 other way on the pages than by random distribution. And thus 
 our investigation constitutes the proof of the important statement 
 of Westcott and Hort, that " the ancestries of these two manu- 
 scripts diverged from a point near the autographs." They might 
 almost have said " from the autographs." But when we establish 
 this result, we reserve the important qualification, that these MSS 
 are not exempt from occasional errors of omission or insertion of 
 whole sheets and lines ; nor are they entirely free from that error 
 which arises from a derangement of the order of the sheets of 
 which the original document was composed. The latter I believe 
 to be peculiarly the case with the Gospel of John. How far such 
 omissions and excisions are wilful, it is impossible to say ; it is to 
 such a case that the remark of TertuUian applies when he accuses 
 Marcion of using not the pen, but the knife in his dealing with 
 documents. He probably means to imply that whole strips of 
 papyrus had disappear-^d from the rolls. But I think it will be 
 found upon a closer examination of this difficult point, that the 
 character of Marcion has been unnecessarily blackened, and that 
 in many respects he will turn out to be almost a champion of 
 textual purity. It became the fashion to brand every omission from 
 
 ' Scrivener, Collation of Codex Sinaiticus, p. xiv. 
 
 •2 P. xxviii. ^ r. XXX.
 
 28 NEIV TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 the ordinary Church MSS with the name ofMarcion. We find this 
 charge made even by so noble a spirit as Origen with regard to 
 the conchiding verses of the Epistle to the Romans. 
 
 We now annex the table which gives the comparison between 
 the number of o-Tt'xoi as quoted from early codices, and the number 
 as calculated from the lines enumerated in tables I and II for the 
 s'everal books of the New Testament, on the basis of a number of 
 lines in St. John's Gospel actually measured into o-n'xot. Since we 
 find our results frequently in coincidence or near it, and seldom 
 differing from one another more than 5 per cent., the result is con- 
 firmatory of the previous statements made as to the fixed length of 
 the uTixo'i. When allowance has been made for the omissions and 
 insertions in the MSS, we may perhaps find it useful to recalculate 
 
 the figures given. 
 
 Table IV. 
 
 ON C 
 
 '5 s 
 
 1^ 
 
 -a 
 
 ^°g 
 
 c 
 
 S 5 M m tc 2. 
 
 
 
 £.5 
 -:« . 
 
 •"T3-0 
 
 
 rli'? Tl"i" 
 
 
 xop. 
 b 
 
 Vol 
 '- V- ^ 
 b 
 
 
 0I 
 
 Matthew 
 
 2560 
 
 2442 
 
 2401 
 
 
 2560 
 
 Mark 
 
 I616 
 
 1492 
 
 1470 
 
 
 I616 
 
 Luke 
 
 2740 
 
 2629 
 
 2583 
 
 
 2750 
 
 John 
 
 2024 
 
 1865 
 
 1861 ■ 
 
 
 2024 
 
 Acts 
 
 2524 
 
 2497 
 
 2526 
 
 
 2556 
 
 Romans 
 
 920 
 
 944 
 
 918 
 
 
 920 
 
 I Cor. 
 
 . 870 
 
 886 
 
 885 
 
 
 870 
 
 II Cor. 
 
 590 
 
 608 
 
 607 
 
 612 
 
 590 
 
 Galatians 
 
 293 
 
 293 
 
 293 
 
 312 
 
 293 
 
 Ephesians 
 
 312 
 
 317 
 
 313 
 
 312 
 
 312 
 
 Philippians 
 
 20S 
 
 216 
 
 210 
 
 200 
 
 208 
 
 Colossians 
 
 208 
 
 219 
 
 212 
 
 300 
 
 208 
 
 I Thess. 
 
 193 
 
 205 
 
 198 
 
 
 193 
 
 II Thess. 
 
 106 
 
 112 
 
 105 
 
 180 
 
 106 
 
 I Tim. 
 
 230 
 
 
 239 
 
 250 ? 
 
 230 
 
 II Tim. 
 
 172 
 
 
 174 
 
 180 
 
 199 
 
 Titus 
 
 98 
 
 
 ICO 
 
 96 
 
 97 
 
 Philemon 
 
 38 
 
 
 43 
 
 
 42 
 
 Hebrews 
 
 703 
 
 
 670 
 
 750 
 
 703 
 
 James 
 
 242 
 
 242 
 
 236 
 
 
 242 
 
 I Peter 
 
 236 
 
 244 
 
 245 
 
 
 236 
 
 II Peter 
 
 154 
 
 168 
 
 164 
 
 
 
 I John 
 
 274 
 
 262 
 
 263 
 
 
 274 
 
 II John 
 
 30 
 
 31 
 
 31 
 
 
 32 
 
 III John 
 
 32 
 
 31 
 
 31 
 
 
 31 
 
 Jude 
 
 68 
 
 70 
 
 71 
 
 
 68 
 
 Revelation 
 
 1800 
 
 
 1179 
 

 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 29 
 
 C. I. When we proceed to examine in detail the various read- 
 ings and errors of the principal manuscripts in the Catholic Epis- 
 tles, we come to the conclusion that there is nothing to affect 
 our results in the two smaller Epistles of John, nor in the Epistle 
 of James. With regard to the first Epistle of John, the only pas- 
 sage where we can regard the text of B as uncertain is in 
 IV 3, where the words xp'-'^'^^v iv aapKi eKrjkvdoTa are omitted, the 
 length of the omission being a V-line, and the passage being 
 retained by the Sinaitic Codex; and at IV 21 there is a line 
 omitted by B. Then we come to the question of the cele- 
 brated passage I John V 7, or the " Three Heavenly Witnesses " ; 
 the text of this would occupy about five V-lines. Our method of 
 investigation agrees with every other applied critical test in rejecting 
 the words. The abnormal excess of the number of (rrixot noted in 
 some early codices of St. John over the number as calculated by 
 ourselves, leads to the suspicion that there may have been Greek 
 codices, now lost, in which the words occurred. The defenders 
 of the passage, if there are any left, can actually count the arlxoi in 
 the first Epistle of John and compare their results with the number 
 as given by Scrivener. The disputed passage is a matter of 3 
 ittIxoi- 
 
 2. The Epistle of Jude is an interesting study from our point of 
 view. There are no various readings that are likely to affect the 
 arrangement of the Epistle; in the 15th verse the text of the Sina- 
 itic is perplexing, and in the 25th verse both the oldest codices 
 agree in the addition of two V-lines to the ordinary text. But the 
 significant feature of the examination of the text is the discovery 
 that the scribe of the Sinaitic Codex has in v. 12 mistaken the olroi 
 elaiu of the verse for the same words in v. 16, and has consequently 
 interpolated four lines from that verse before detecting his error 
 and returning to the proper passage. His eye has, apparently, 
 wandered from the top of a column nearly to the bottom in search 
 of the words which he had either recently transcribed or was pro- 
 posing to transcribe. We need scarcely say that such a supposition 
 is extremely unlikely. When, however, we restore the pages to 
 the S -form, as they may be easily exhibited, we see that the scribe's 
 eye has really only wandered from the first line of the column he 
 was transcribing to the first line of a column not very remote from 
 it, and commencing with the very same words. And this is so 
 thoroughly likely that it must be regarded as no slight confirmation 
 of our theory of the subdivision of the columns.
 
 30 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 It is not to be necessarily inferred that the Epistle was originally- 
 written on the S-page ; we have already seen reason to assume the 
 opposite type (unless, indeed, the doxology should be shown not 
 to be genuine) ; but the point that we press is the fact of the reduc- 
 tion of smaller pages into the form given in the Sinaitic Codex. 
 From the same enquiry another result follows : the ratio of the 
 S-lines to the V-lines for this Epistle was abnormally high, but 
 when we proceed to subtract the four lines inserted by the Sinaitic, 
 and recalculate the ratio, we find 1.268 instead of 1.293. 
 
 3. We proceed to examine the text of the first Epistle of Peter, 
 which we do more in detail in order to illustrate the methods by 
 which we restore the text, prior to dividing it into the smaller 
 pages. 
 
 I Peter. 
 
 Letters. Text Rec. X B. W. H. Tr. 
 
 I 22. but irvevfiaros 12 -f- — — — — 
 
 I 23. els Tov alwva 1 1 -p — — — — 
 
 III 5- fKOdfiovv eavTiis 1 4 1 — ~r~ "T" "T 
 
 III 7- Kci^a yvwatv lO -{- — -|- ~p -|- 
 
 IV 5' aTrobuicrovcnv \6yov ID -f- — -|- -j- -j- 
 
 III 16. vfJLmv w? KaKOTTOiwv 15 r" r — — [ — J 
 
 IV 14. KM bvvdixtcos II — -p — — — 
 IV 14' Kara fxfp avrovs j3\a(r<prj- 
 
 fieirai Kara 8e iifxas 8o^d- 
 
 (frai 44 -f- — — — — 
 
 V 2. eiTiaKOTVovvTes 1 3 r" — — — \ 
 
 V 5* vTTOTaaaofievoi 1 3 "7" — — — — 
 
 V 10. defXfXiQxrai ID -f- -f" — — — 
 
 In addition B omits the whole of V 3, containing 58 letters, z. e. 
 between 3 and 4 Vatican lines, which will certainly make the text 
 eight Vatican columns, and 36 lines, but it does not fill the page. 
 In the Sinaitic we have, besides the variants noted, and some 
 smaller ones, six short columns, so that in S-pages we have 14 
 columns and one or two lines, which seems to indicate 56 S-pages. 
 The letters missed or inserted look like complete Sinaitic lines, 
 which again confirms our opinion that the original form of the 
 document is the S-page. 
 
 When we add the missing lines to the texts and calculate afresh 
 the ratio of the V-line to the S-line, we have 1.250.
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 3 1 
 
 Another remarkable confirmation of our subdivision of the 
 Sinaitic pages is found at II 12 of this Epistle. The scribe left his 
 work at the beginning- of the 21st S-page, where he was about to 
 transcribe the words bo^iiauyai rw deov. These words stand at pres- 
 ent at the second line of the page. But, in returning to his task, 
 he opened at the second Epistle of Peter by mistake, and here at 
 the nth verse of the second chapter he found the key-word 86^as 
 and began to write 86^as ol rpefxovcriv, thus transcribing what would 
 be the first line of the 19th S-page in the second Epistle of Peter. 
 The traces of the error still remain. And it is impossible to give 
 a rational explanatioii of the aberration of the scribe unless we 
 subdivide the pages in the manner we have indicated. 
 
 3. In the 2d Episde of Peter we rectify the text in a similar 
 manner, the two most important phenomena being that the Sinaitic 
 scribe has in I 12, 13, omitted 8 lines, from bih /xeXXijo-w to buyeipuv, 
 and that the error is almost balanced by the existence of nine short 
 columns. 
 
 More important still is the light which the rectification of the 
 pages throws on a very difficult passage in III 10, where the read- 
 ing adopted by Westcott and Hort is a source of immense merri- 
 ment to Dr. Burgon. The ordinary reading in this passage is 
 
 /cat yri koi to. iv aiiTrj epya KaTaKaTja-erai. 
 
 For KaTaKm](xeTin (which is the reading of A, L, the Clementine 
 Vulgate, the Memphitic, and some other versions) the two earliest 
 MSS read evpedrja-erai, and are supported by sundry versions and 
 by Codex K, Codex C suggests dcfjavia-dqa-oprai. 
 
 Tregelles and Westcott and Hort import the utterly meaningless 
 €vpe6fjaeTni into the text, apparently on the ground that it is safe to 
 follow ten times in succession a group of manuscripts which is 
 demonstrated to be reliable in nine cases out of ten. 
 
 Burgon, on the other hand, will have the ordinary reading to be 
 correct, and affirms the reading of Codices x to B to be a rude 
 attempt of some Western scribe to translate or transliterate the 
 Latin word tireyitur ! More strangely still, so judicious a critic as 
 Farrar is found supporting this peculiar suggestion, and even 
 claims the paternity of the monster. Thus he remarks : " It had 
 occurred to me, before I saw it remarked elsewhere, that it might 
 be some accidental confusion with the Latin urentur" (Early 
 days of Christianity, p. 121). 
 
 We now turn to the Sinaitic Codex, and observe that exactly 24 
 lines beyond the disputed passage lie the words airw d<pi6r] \ vai iv
 
 32 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 f-lpiivrj. Moreover, the passage in dispute occurs within a line of 
 the bottom of one of the Sinaitic columns, and, in all probability, 
 when the passage is rectified, the words are either the highest or 
 the lowest line of an S-page. The scribe's eye, therefore, wanders 
 laterally two columns, and hence the word (vfifdrjaeTai. This ex- 
 plains the origin of the variant. We infer also from the discrep- 
 ancy of later copies that we have here a case in which the original 
 reading is entirely lost and the text has been restored by a con- 
 jectural emendation. 
 
 Further, since the error took place in a MS of the S-type, it 
 follows that that type is nearer to the autograph of the Epistle 
 than any other, which is exactly in accordance with our previous 
 enquiry ; for, otherwise, some manuscript would, doubtless, have 
 conserved the original reading. The conjectural restoration made 
 by the early MSS is not based upon any critical study of the text ; 
 and in order to fill the blank left by the removal oi evpiOrj, we must 
 endeavor to determine the causes which led to the error. These 
 are (i) the similarity of avrrj in v. lo to avr(^ in v. 14 ; (2) the 
 similarity either to eye or ear of the words which have become 
 confounded. 
 
 A reading which would satisfy both conditions would be 
 eKpvr]6rj(T€Tai, which Professor Gildersleeve suggests.' We find a 
 similar word dnoppvijdrja-eTaL in some MSS of Barnabas c. 11, the 
 passage being really a quotation from the first Psalm ; and e^epirjpev 
 is the word used for the fading leaf in Isaiah 64, 5. This exactly 
 expresses the idea of the writer. 
 
 4. We now turn to the Pauhne Epistles, in which we return to our 
 first approximation to the number of the original pages of the auto- 
 graphs, and examine the manner in which the results are affected 
 by the principal errors, reserving all our conclusions for a closer 
 scrutiny in connexion with the original documents at some later 
 time. It is extremely unfortunate that there is no critical apparatus 
 to the New Testament except Scrivener's collation of the Sinaitic, 
 which records the accidental omissions or repetitions of the great 
 uncials ; we are, therefore, obliged to collate for ourselves the text 
 ot every book, in order to see that no lines are dropped or repeated. 
 And this, in spite of the compensations arising from a close study 
 of the early arrangement of the text, is somewhat tedious and de- 
 mands a great deal of time. 
 
 ' I see that Westcott & Hort make a similar suggestion in their introduction, 
 and disown the very reading which they adopt.
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 33 
 
 
 
 
 I Thessalonians. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Letters. Text Rcc. 
 
 N 
 
 B. 
 
 I 
 
 I. 
 
 OTTO ^eov TTarpos rjficbv 
 
 KOi 
 
 
 
 
 
 Kvpiov 'lijaoi Xpia-Tov 
 
 ?24 + 
 
 + 
 
 
 
 II 
 
 16. 
 
 Tcis duaprias 
 
 
 II + 
 
 + 
 
 
 
 III 
 
 2. 
 
 Knl avvepybv t'jpcou 
 
 
 15 + 
 
 — 
 
 [+] 
 
 V 
 
 8. 
 
 Kcil ciyaTnjs 
 
 
 9 + 
 
 — 
 
 + 
 
 Tr. 
 
 + + 
 
 These are the only three readings of any importance. The Epistle 
 is written on the V-page to the full, and will not bear any additions ; 
 we agree with the editors in rejecting the first reading. The second 
 reading is remarkable, as there has been a conflation by the Textus 
 Receptus and late copies of the two simple readings km 8uikovov tov 
 6eov and koI awepyov 7]p.cov. Either of the alternative readings may 
 be taken, and the length of the Epistle is not affected by our choice, 
 provided we do not make the error of conflation and take them 
 both. 
 
 The third reading is an omission on the part of the Sinaitic. 
 At II 13 the Sinaitic has repeated 10 lines by opoiorlX^vTov of the 
 letters avrovOeov. We have thus to reduce the estimate made for 
 the Sinaitic Codex by 11 lines, and leaves us with 11 columns and 
 10 lines, or very nearly 45 S-pages. 
 
 But now the question arises, why should the scribe have wan- 
 dered back 10 lines in search of tov 0€ov ? The interval is a very 
 improbable one as the MS is written, but when the pages are rec- 
 tified it will be found that the aberration of the scribe's eye is 
 almost entirely lateral, and does not amount to a couple of lines 
 vertically. 
 
 5. II Thessalonians : Here we have both codices ending unevenly, 
 the Sinaitic at the third line, and the Vatican at the 34th line. The 
 text, moreover, is extremely exact. Marcion is said to have omitted 
 in I 8 (V 0Xoyt TTvpos, 13 letters; in II 4 the Sinaitic omits Kal 
 vnepaipop-evos, 16 letters ; and in II 15 it omits 6 uyamja-as rjfjias, 12 let- 
 ters. In III 4 the Vatican text has inserted koI fTroiija-aTe, 12 letters. 
 These seem to be all the readings of any importance. 
 
 A reference to the Codex Sinaiticus shows us the following- 
 peculiarity : it has twice made a single line of the two letters x^, and 
 twice made a single line of iv x^', the four instances are as follows: 
 
 I 2. IV xv a fresh line, probably rendered necessary by the inser- 
 tion of the word r};uwj/, 
 
 I 8. evayyeXi \ a tov kv i]fj.wv iv \ xv, where the word ;^u is rejected 
 by all the editors.
 
 34 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 I 12. KaTarr]vxo-{»-VTOv \ 6u rjfjLcov Kai kv iv | ;^{J, whcrC the VVOl'd SCemS 
 
 genuine. 
 
 II 14. TrepnroiT)(Tiv So | ^t)s tov kv tjjjlwv \ iv x^, where the last hne is 
 genuine. 
 
 There are one or two other very short Hnes. It is probably in 
 these short lines that the explanation is to be sought of the three 
 extra lines above pattern in the Sinaitic Codex. It will be observed 
 that the errors of the Epistle are mainly S-errors. We conclude 
 that the Epistle is probably represented by 24 S-pages. The result 
 is confirmed by observing that in III 4, B has conflated the two 
 
 readings Troieire kqI TToirjaeTe, f7ron']<TaTe kgI nouire mtO fTTOLTjo-are Kn\ TTOieire 
 
 Kai noi^afTt. It seems unlikely that this would happen if the text 
 of B in this Epistle were modelled on the original tradition. 
 
 6. I Corinthians : The text is very good. At the beginning of 
 c. XIII the scribe of the Sinaitic has dropped 134 letters, from ytyova 
 XoXkos to aydnrjv 8e fxr] e'xo). The error, which is almost exacdy 10 
 S-lines, was due to the fact that a previous sentence ended also 
 with firj exoo- Moreover, the error is facilitated, as in the case men- 
 tioned above, by the existence of the smaller pages, which bring 
 the two similar passages into contiguity. Other errors are the 
 repetition of four lines in I 8, the omission of four lines in II 15, 
 the omission of a line in X 19 ; of two lines in XV 13, and of four 
 lines in XV 26, 27. 
 
 + + + 
 
 Our table must now be corrected so as to make the epistle 206 
 S-pages and several lines. 
 
 7. II Corinthians: The principal errors are as follows: 
 
 Letters. Text. Rec. ^ B- ^^- ^'- ^''■ 
 
 VIII 4. ^i^atreai fj/j-as 12 -\- — — — — 
 
 IX 4* '''1^ Kavxf]crea>s 12 -j— — 
 
 XII 7* '''" F*) ^irepaipo) fiat 1 6 -\- — -\- ~\~ \_ J 
 
 XII II. Kavxo^p-fvos lO -|- — — 
 
 Here the errors, though few, are chiefly of the S-type ; from the 
 readings given we might perhaps add i6 letters to the Sinaitic text. 
 But this would still leave a large blank in a sheet. On the other hand, 
 
 
 
 
 Letters. 
 
 Text Rec. 
 
 N 
 
 I 
 
 27. 
 
 lua Tovs (Totpovs . . 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 e^eXe^aro 6 6s 
 
 54 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
 III 
 
 3- 
 
 Kai dixoaraa-lai 
 
 14 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 ^11 
 
 5- 
 
 TTj vrjcrreia koI 
 
 12 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 XI 
 
 24. 
 
 Xd/3eTe (payere 
 
 12 
 
 + 
 
 —
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 35 
 
 the V-pages fit exactly, only we must allow for the omission by B 
 of a line in I 13 and the repetition of four lines in III 16. 
 
 8. The Epistle to the Romans does not seem to conform, as yet, 
 very closely to any type. 
 
 Perhaps the explanation of this fact may be in the repetition by 
 Codex B of four lines at IV 4, from 6 ixia-Bos to epyaCofievco. This 
 would make the Epistle 148 V-pages. 
 
 There is a further difficulty about the concluding salutations and 
 doxology, the consideration of which is very important, because 
 in the first place Origen ' distinctly charges Marcion with hav- 
 ing excised them ; secondly, we find them inserted in some co- 
 dices at the end of the fourteenth chapter; thirdly, some codices, 
 notably Codex A, which can hardly ever resist an opportunity of 
 conflation of documents, have retained the doxology in both places ; 
 fourthly, Marcion is also charged with the excision of the remainder 
 of the Epistle from the end of the fourteenth chapter. It becomes 
 interesting to examine the length of this portion in Vatican type. 
 At present it does not look as if Marcion had done anything of the 
 kind attributed to him. 
 
 The doxology starts at the top of a column, tqaeaynamenqymas, 
 and occupies in the manuscript 16 lines and 4 letters. Moreover, 
 the portion from Rom. XVI i to the end which contains all those 
 very doubtful salutations to people whom one can hardly believe 
 to have been at Rome, contains very nearly 10 V-pages with the 
 doxology ; or nearly g V-pages without it. We may conjecture that 
 these 9 V-pages are really a part of the subscription to another 
 Epistle. It is not, however, a point material to our hypothesis, 
 viz. that the Epistle to the Romans was written on the V-page. 
 
 In Romans the text is very exact. 
 
 Letters. Text. Rec. X B. IV. H. Tr 
 
 VIII I. ^i.r] Kara crdpKa . . . Kara 
 
 
 TTvevfxa 
 
 37 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 IX 28. 
 
 iv SiKmoavvy] . . . awTfTfirjuevov 33 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 XI5. 
 
 TOiv fvayy. eipTjVTjv 
 
 25 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 XI 6. 
 
 el 8f e^ epyoav . . . ovk fTi earlv 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 epyov 
 
 53 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 [ + ] 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 XII 17. 
 
 eVcoTTtoj/ TOV 6v Kai 
 
 15 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 XIII 9. 
 
 ov \lrev8ofinpTvprjaeis 
 
 18 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 XIV 6. 
 
 Kal p.f) (ppovcop . . . ov (f)povei 3 1 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 XIV 21. 
 
 17 (TKavdnXi^eraL fj dadevel 
 
 22 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 + 
 
 XV 13. 
 
 eh TO Trepi(Taeveii> vfids 
 
 20 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
 
 -f 
 
 + 
 
 XV ^2. 
 
 Kul (TvvavmraixTuipai vpiu 
 
 21 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 -f- 
 
 + 
 
 XVI \2. 
 
 aa-ndcraade liepdiba k. r. X. 
 
 49 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
 XVI 24. 
 
 'Orig. Int. 
 
 39 
 IV 6S7 
 
 + 
 
 
 ~ 
 
 
 ~
 
 36 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 The majority of these readings are of the V-type, and the text 
 can now be easily rectified. The question of the salutations is 
 more difficult ; as already stated, we conjecture that they are a 
 separate document, really intended as a codicil to the Ephesian 
 Epistle ; but, having been written on the V-type, a mistake easily 
 arose in reducing the documents, and finding an Epistle of the 
 S-type carrying final leaves of the V-pattern. 
 
 9. Galatians: The only reading of any importance is in III i : 
 
 Letters. Text. Rec. J< B. IV. H. Tr. 
 
 Tt] aki)6i.[a fxrj neideaBai 20 -|- — — — — 
 
 We can, at the most, add one line to the Vatican text ; but this we 
 must not do, first, because of the consensus of authorities and editors 
 against the reading ; and, secondly, because the large writing of 
 St. Paul in the close of the Epistle would run over into another 
 page if the reading w^ere admitted, a most improbable event. On 
 the other hand, B has repeated a line in I 11. 
 
 There is no reasonable conclusion other than that the Epistle to 
 the Galatians was written on 47 V-pages. The single reading 
 quoted seems to be of the V-type. 
 
 10. Ephesians : At first sight this Epistle seems not to be writ- 
 ten on full sheets ; or, if so, not on sheets of the V- and S-type. 
 In one Codex, B, it occupies 16 columns and 22 lines, i. e. six 
 lines less than 50 V-pages; and in the other it occupies 18 
 columns and five lines, /. e. seven lines less than 73 S-pages. 
 We proceed to examine the codices, and to discuss those varia- 
 tions of the text which may affect seriously the space that it 
 occupies. 
 
 And first of all we find that the scribe of n has omitted the seventh 
 verse of the second chapter, which has been inserted in a footnote. 
 The reason of this error lies in the fact that both the sixth and 
 seventh verses close with the words t^v x^ *■'^'^ ^^^ probably at the 
 same part of the Sinaitic line. The loi letters of this verse show 
 that it would occupy about seven or eight lines of Sinaitic type. 
 Adding them we correct our table, which now states that Ephe- 
 sians in the Sinaitic Codex occupies 73 S-pages and one line. 
 Further, he has repeated three lines in VI 3, in the words iva ev 
 
 trot I yeprjrai Kai ear] | jxaKpoxpovios \ em rrjs y^f. At 111 1 8 he haS 
 
 again repeated a line. This makes the Epistle 73 S-pages, all but 
 three lines.
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 37 
 
 We now proceed to discuss the various readings. 
 
 
 
 Letters. 
 
 Text. Rec. 
 
 N 
 
 B. 
 
 IV. H. 
 
 Tr. 
 
 I I. 
 
 iv i(j)((Tm 
 
 7 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 [+] 
 
 [+] 
 
 + 
 
 I 3. 
 
 Koi (TcoTrjpos 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 + 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 lis- 
 
 Ti]V aydiTTjv 
 
 9 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 
 
 + 
 
 III 14. 
 
 rod Kv Tjfiav x^ '"^ 
 
 13 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 V 22. 
 
 vTTorucraecrde 
 
 II 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 or vTZOTa(T(Tt(TQ(i)aav 
 
 14 
 
 
 
 + 
 
 
 
 
 
 + 
 
 V30. 
 
 iK Trfs arapKos airov 
 
 Koi €/C 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 T0)V oa-reau avTOV 
 
 35 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 VI 12. 
 
 rov aloavo^ 
 
 9 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 VI 20. 
 
 Tov €vnyye\iov 
 
 13 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 [+] 
 
 + 
 
 These are the principal passages, and we see that on the most 
 extreme methods of criticism it would be possible to add five to 
 seven lines to the Sinaitic Codex, or in the opposite direction to 
 remove two lines. But it is evident that there are really only two 
 passages to discuss, the one a question of adding a line to the Sina- 
 itic text, the other of subtracting two lines. These readings can 
 hardly affect our result, which gives us 73 S-pages. This Epistle is 
 a good illustration of the rule that a document originally written on 
 the V- or S-pattern will show a majority of V- or S-errors, as the 
 case may be. 
 
 11. Philippians: Here there are only two important readings : 
 
 Letters. Text. Rec. X ^- ^^- f'- ^''• 
 
 III 16. Kavovi, TO avTo (ppovfiv 1 9 i~ — 
 
 III 21. els TO yeveadat avTo IJ -\- — — 
 
 Its errors are both of the V-type. The Codex B shows us 33 
 V-pages in the Epistle, which will not, therefore, admit of an extra 
 line being inserted. But in noticing this apparent leaning to the 
 V-type, we must not forget that the Epistle is only three lines short 
 of a page in the S-type, which allows us, if we think proper, to 
 admit one or both of the longer readings. Moreover x has dropped 
 a line at II 18. 
 
 12, Colossians : Here we had 1 1 columns and 15 lines in Codex B. 
 
 12 " 13 " Sinaitic. 
 
 In either case just over the page, which is the most improbable 
 thing that can happen.
 
 38 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 The principal readings are : 
 
 
 
 Letters. 
 
 Text. Re 
 
 ■^. s 
 
 I 2. 
 
 Kai TOV KV )(V IV 
 
 9 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
 I 6. 
 
 Koi av^avofJLivov 
 
 H 
 
 
 
 + 
 
 I 14. 
 
 8ia TOV aluaros avrov 
 
 15 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 I 25. 
 
 f-yoj nauXof 5ia 
 
 12 
 
 
 
 + 
 
 II 2. 
 
 KCll nilTpOS KQl TOV 
 
 15 
 
 + 
 
 [+] 
 
 II II. 
 
 TO)V afxapTiav 
 
 II 
 
 + 
 
 — 
 
 II 6. 
 
 enl Toiis vlovs Trjs dneideias 24 
 
 + 
 
 + 
 
 + + + 
 
 Of these readings I 2 is an exact line in the Sinaitic, it is probably 
 an addition. I 6 is also an exact line, and has been dropped by a 
 few codices. I 14 is generally admitted to be an interpolation. 
 At I 23 and at I 25 a line has been added by n. II 2 is very 
 doubtful. II II is probably an addition. Ill 6, the passage is re- 
 jected by B only, and perhaps D ; it is very likely genuine. We 
 infer that of three places where the Sinaitic contradicts the Vatican, 
 it is incorrect in two of them. The Epistle is now one or two 
 lines short of 49 pages of the S-type. The errors are about evenly 
 divided between the two types. The result is confirmed by ob- 
 serving that in I 12, Cod. B has been guilty of conflation of the 
 
 two readings iKavoiauvri and KoXea-avTi, so as to make KaXea-auTi Koi 
 
 iKavacTavTi. ; it seems hardly likely, then, that B contains the original 
 type of the text of Colossians. 
 
 13. Philemon is, as already shown, 10 S-pages exactly. 
 
 14. Now let us examine the arrangement of the Gospel of Luke. 
 Our enumeration of columns and lines gives us for the Gospel 401 
 V-pages or 598 S-pages. But neither of these results can be 
 accepted, on account of the numerous and important variants which 
 have to be considered. It is interesting to notice that the two 
 results are very nearly in the ratio of 2 : 3. This would be exactly 
 the case if two codices were written, one on a 12-lined page and 
 with 14 letters to the line, and the other on a 14-lined page and 
 with 18 letters to the line, for 12 X 14 : 14 X 18 = 2 : 3, Now 
 the two great MSS very nearly fulfil this condition; it does not, 
 therefore, surprise us if, when one codex suggests 400 V-pages, the 
 other suggests 600 S-pages. 
 
 Now, turning to the Gospel of Luke, we notice in the first place 
 that the passage containing the account of the Agony in the Garden 
 has been excised from or is wanting in the chief exemplars. The 
 Vatican Codex ornits, the Sinaitic brackets it. I pointed out in my 
 recent lectures that it was conceivable, as Epiphanius states, that
 
 \J^Ua^ ' 
 
 KMGKAAyce 
 
 peAocATroy[^ANOY 
 
 eNICJ(y6)N(XY"T"0N 
 K(Mf6N0MeN0Ce 
 NATONIAeKTeNS 
 
 crep^oNTTpocHY 
 ^eroKAiepeNero 
 
 GpomBoiai/^atoc 
 kataBainontsc 
 
 GTriTHNrHN
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 39 
 
 the passage was excised for doctrinal reasons, and that there were 
 probably other words, koI eKXavae, which had never found their way- 
 back into the text.' Counting the letters of the doubtful passage, 
 and adding, if it be thought necessary, 10 letters for Knl eKXavae, we 
 have 155 letters, or almost exactly an S-page. Here we have a 
 strong intimation that the Gospel was originally written on the 
 S-page, and that the account of the Agony is an authentic part of 
 the text, easily lost or excised. 
 
 Turning to the Sinaitic Codex we find that the passage occupies 
 eleven lines exactly, without the words added by us, and is evidently 
 easily detached from the main body of the text. In the plate annexed 
 the passage is completed, and given as a specimen of the S-page. 
 
 Assuming for the present that the S-page is the original form 
 of Luke, we examine the next important passage, bracketed 
 by Westcott and Hort, Luke XXII ig, 20 from to itrep Ifiau 8i86- 
 fiivov ... to TO vTTep vp.u)v fKxvvv6fi.evov. At first sight it sccms that 
 the omission of this passage by the Western text might be 
 due to ofxoioTeXiVTov, but a closer examination shows that it con- 
 tains 152 letters, or almost exactly an S-page; in the Sinaitic 
 Codex it occupies 12 lines and 7 letters, but one of the lines is a 
 very short one and has only three letters. It looks again as if an 
 S-page had been either omitted or inserted ; if both the passages 
 which we have discussed were actual pages of the original docu- 
 ment, the intervening space ought to be an exact number of S-pages, 
 i. e. the space between the iKxywuiiivov of the second passage and 
 the commencement of the account of the agony in the garden. 
 Examination of the MS shows the intervening space to be a column 
 and 33 lines, or within three lines of being 7 S-pages. It is doubtful, 
 therefore, whether this passage be an integral part of the original 
 document ; and bearing in mind the suspicious resemblance to a 
 passage in I Cor., we leave the matter in suspense until we have 
 examined the remaining variants. If we see reason to conclude 
 that it is really a part of the text, we shall most probably find that 
 there has been some displacement of the text in the neighborhood. 
 Before passing we observe that the 34th verse of the XXIII chapter, 
 which Westcott and Hort bracket, is also marked with suspicion 
 in the Sinaitic and occupies four lines of the text. 
 
 The doubtful 1 2th verse of chap. XXIV in the Sinaitic Codex 
 begins a line, and occupies 8 lines all but four letters ; moreover, 
 the passage has dropped four letters from the text en route in the 
 word nova after odovia. 
 
 ' Epiph. Ancor. xxxi.
 
 40 NEIV TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 We now proceed to examine the text in detail, much in the same 
 way as we discussed the Gospel of John ; the list of variants is very- 
 long, as the text is many times more corrupt than that of John, and 
 we therefore content ourselves with giving approximate results, 
 deduced from a long array of doubtful passages. 
 
 The first thing that strikes us in studying the portentous list of 
 various readings is that the greater part of the book is marked by 
 omissions, but when we come to the last two chapters we find a 
 large number of suspicious additions, contradicted by the Western 
 text. It looks painfully like as if the space lost by omissions in the 
 early parts of the book had been utilized in the latter part for some 
 additional matter. Examining the cases where the Sinaitic text is 
 erroneous, or probably erroneous, we have on the whole, up to 
 XXII 25, forty-six lines to add, the criticism of the text being 
 comparatively easy. Now the doubtful passage contained in 
 XXII 43, 44 begins on the tenth line from the bottom of a column, 
 but when the forty-six lines are added it falls at once into the 
 proper place, the last section of a column. This would leave the 
 Gospel, if undisturbed, to finish on the 23d line of a column ; but 
 now the criticism becomes extremely difficult. 
 
 In XXII 31. The MS is probably correct. 
 
 XXII 64. 
 
 XXII 68. 
 
 XXII 62. Two lines have perhaps been added. 
 
 XXIII 17. Three lines must be removed. 
 
 XXIII 38. Correct. 
 
 XXIII 34. Probably four lines have been inserted, but the 
 
 passage is very difficult. 
 
 XXIV 12. Eight lines perhaps added, 
 XXIV 31. A line lost. 
 
 XXIV 4. A line probably added. 
 
 XXIV 6. Two lines probably added. 
 
 XXIV 40. Four lines perhaps added. 
 
 XXIV 36. Two 
 
 ^ ■ \ Text correct. 
 49-) 
 
 XXIV 51. Text probably correct. 
 XXIV 52. Probably two lines added. 
 XXIV 53. Text probably correct. 
 
 The result being that 23 lines have been probably added, if we 
 retain the passage XXIII 34 as probably authentic. That is to
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 4 1 
 
 say, 2 S-pages, all but a line, have now to be removed. But we 
 added previously 4 S-pages, all but a line (if we reckon Ka\ eKXavae 
 in XXII 43) ; we have therefore on the whole added two S-pages, 
 together with a lost page. Our original estimate was 598 S-pages, 
 it is now 601 S-pages. Nothing can be more significant than this 
 number of the fact that an S-page too many has crept in, and it can 
 hardly be any other than the passage which we were in doubt 
 about in XXII 19; we therefore finally decide to remove it. 
 
 The analysis has been extremely suggestive to our own mind ; 
 we started out with the prospect of reinserting the majority of the 
 passages usually reckoned as doubtful, but the singular predomi- 
 nance of additions in the closing chapters over omissions has finally 
 led us to reject those passages, or the majority of them, in accord- 
 ance with the Western text ; and we have finally ended with a book 
 of 600 pages almost exactly, which we are now prepared to print 
 on what we believe will represent, qiiam proxinie, the original 
 sheets of uncial writing. It will be observed that the frequency of 
 errors of the S-type in the analysis of this Gospel confirms our 
 supposition that this is the original form of the Gospel. 
 
 15. The Acts of the Apostles is one of the books which we have 
 indicated to ourselves as likely, from its abrupt conclusion, to be 
 written on full sheets. When we proceed to examine the principal 
 doubtful passages, we shall find that the majority of the errors are 
 of the S-type. There are nearly fifty passages that have to be 
 examined, and from these, by the use of the best critical apparatus, 
 we proceed to correct the text of the Sinaitic Codex, in which the 
 S-type, if it exists, is preserved. 
 
 The following are the passages requiring change : 
 
 11 9* l~ ""' eXafjurai. 
 II 20, -f- Koi inKpavrj. 
 
 II 21. A whole verse has been omitted, 4 S-lines. 
 
 1 1 43. A sentence has been inserted, 38 letters : iv 'UpovaaXfjfi 
 
 (jiojSos re rjv fJ.eyas eVi TTupTas Kcii. 
 VII 60. -|- (f)a>vrj fxeydXrj. 
 
 IX 12. -|- eV opafiari. 
 
 XI II 23. ~\~ niTo Tov crnepfJLaTos. 
 
 XIV 20, 21. Two verses omitted, 66 letters, 5 S-lines. 
 
 XV 32. -|- Kcti iTTeaTqpL^nv. 
 
 XXI I3. ~\~ <XalovTes Koi. 
 
 XXI 22. — Sft nXrjdus crvviXdi'iv. 
 
 XX V HI 2J. -\- Kill T?] Kap8ui (Tvva>aiv.
 
 42 NE^V TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 This leaves us on the whole with about 14 lines to add to the Sin- 
 aitic text, which now occupies (a result by no means aimed at, and 
 scarcely anticipated) 144 columns and 24 lines, or 578 S-pages. I 
 do not however regard this result as more than a rough prelimi- 
 nary examination. 
 
 I am inclined to believe that a number of pages have been lost 
 from the conclusion of the book. The celebrated passage VIII 
 37 consists of about 96 letters, perhaps 8 S-lines ; so it cannot be 
 restored, on the ground of a page having been lost from the origi- 
 nal document. It is not unworthy of note that we have seen 
 reason to refer the Gospel of Luke to the same type and to an 
 original document of about 600 unit sheets. 
 
 16. We shall now defer the examination of the remaining books, 
 reserving the discussion of them, together with the important ques- 
 tion of the closing verses of St. Mark, and some other points of 
 interest, for another occasion ; and we shall conclude this present 
 article by a brief examination of one or two early uncial texts by 
 the light of the results already obtained, and by indicating a more 
 general method of determining the autograph forms of any given 
 collection of letters. 
 
 D I. Codex Alexandrinus is written in tolerably uniform lines, and 
 in double columns. The number of lines to the page is normally 50, 
 but sometimes 51, and in one or two instances we note 49. In other 
 words, the normal size of the page copied has been affected by 
 omissions and additions, but principally the latter. The table for 
 this codex is as follows : 
 
 
 Columns 
 
 Lints 
 
 Matthew begins at c. XXV 6 
 
 ? 
 
 6 
 
 Mark 
 
 50 
 
 17 
 
 Luke 
 
 86 
 
 20 
 
 John 
 
 53 
 
 48 
 
 or counting the two leaves lost VI 50 to VIII 52 
 
 61 
 
 48 
 
 Acts 
 
 80 
 
 7 
 
 James 
 
 7 
 
 48 
 
 I Peter 
 
 7 
 
 47 
 
 II Peter 
 
 5 
 
 II 
 
 I John • 
 
 10 
 
 26 
 
 II John 
 
 
 49 
 
 III John 
 
 
 51 
 
 Jude 
 
 2 
 
 6 
 
 Romans 
 
 28 
 
 32
 
 Columns 
 
 Lines 
 
 28 
 
 21 
 
 19 
 
 38 
 
 9 
 
 39 
 
 10 
 
 39 
 
 6 
 
 48 
 
 6 
 
 48 
 
 6 
 
 27 
 
 3 
 
 23 
 
 23 
 
 16 
 
 7 
 
 31 
 
 6 
 
 14 
 
 3 
 
 19 
 
 I 
 
 18 
 
 34 
 
 28 
 
 NEIV TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 43 
 
 I Cor. 
 
 II Cor. 
 Galatians 
 Ephesians 
 Philippians 
 Colossians 
 
 I Thessalonians 
 
 II Thessalonians 
 Hebrews 
 
 I Tim. 
 
 II Tim. 
 Titus 
 Philemon 
 Revelation 
 
 It will be observed that II John and III John no longer agree in 
 the number of lines, the column on which the second Epistle is 
 written being wider than that on which the third Epistle is written ; 
 this latter column has been narrowed in order to make room for a 
 much wider column in the Epistle of Jude, which sometimes con- 
 tains as many as 29 letters to the line. 
 
 In this MS the books do not begin uniformly at the top of the 
 page, which shows that the orderly arrangement of the original 
 matter is disappearing. Thus, I John does not begin at the head 
 of a page ; we have first 29 lines, then 9 columns, then 47 lines, 
 and so we end near the foot of a column. II Cor. begins in the 
 middle of a page ; we have 21 lines, then a column of 49 lines only, 
 then 18 more columns counting the three lost leaves, and then 18 
 lines. One thing, however, is very remarkable in the table, and 
 that is the way in which the concluding lines group themselves 
 around the numbers which are multiples of ten. It will be worth 
 while examining this point. 
 
 Theoretically, the terminal digits of the lines i, 2, 3, . . . o ought 
 to be tolerably evenly distributed, but when we examine we find 
 
 occurs once. 5 occurs not at all. 
 
 1 " 4 times. 6 " 4 times. 
 
 2 " once. 7 " 4 times. 
 
 3 " once. 8 " 8 times. 
 
 4 " once. 9 " 4 times.
 
 44 NEJF TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 Now this extraordinary preference for the numbers i, 6, 7, 8, 9 is 
 not accidental, but is a survival of the original methods of arranging 
 the documents. 
 
 The fact is that this document was probably originally reduced 
 from documents of which one page is equivalent to the fifth part 
 of the Alexandrian column ; and the matter of the original docu- 
 ments was so arranged that the final page was more than half filled. 
 This explains the preference for the endings which occupy the 
 latter halves of the decades. The question arises, was this arrange- 
 ment of the matter arbitrary, or are there any residual traces of 
 the original pages ? 
 
 An examination of this point will, I think, show that there was 
 a time when the fifth of the column of Codex A was a V-page, but 
 the traces have almost disappeared. This may be seen to be 
 roughly the case by calculating the letters for 10 Alexandrian lines, 
 which amount to something over 230, not far from the average letters 
 of a V-page. And the suspicion is confirmed by remarking that the 
 II and III of John, which are a column in A, are 5 V-pages. The 
 arrangement would be suggested by the fact that the number of 
 pages in so many of the different Epistles is a multiple of five or near 
 it. We may detect the residual traces of the primitive form by 
 taking some portion of an Epistle and examining its texts side by side 
 for the two codices. Let us take the beautifully uniform writing 
 of Codex B as our measuring line ; and begin with one of the 
 shortest Epistles, say the II John. By hypothesis 10 lines of A 
 ought to be one V-page. Actually the first ten lines of A have 
 lost two letters from the first fourteen lines of B. The scribe 
 crowds the next line with five or six extra letters, and by the end 
 of his 20th line is two letters ahead of the pattern. By the 30th 
 line he is 6 or 7 letters ahead, and by the 40th line he is 12 letters 
 ahead, thus enabling him to finish the epistle in nine more lines. 
 
 Next, let us try the first Epistle of John. The loth line of A 
 does not agree with the 14th of B in its ending, but we note a 
 coincidence in ending of the 
 
 II of A and the 14 of B 
 
 and the following successive coincidences at ending — 
 
 23 of A and the 31 of B 60 of A and the 76 of B 
 
 33 " 44 " 62 " 79 " 
 
 48 " 64 " 65 " 83 "
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 45 
 
 These give us the following and other relations between the A and 
 B line : 
 
 A = ltB 
 
 A= f B 
 
 A = HB 
 
 A =3 |B 
 
 A = I B 
 
 A= IB 
 so A = li B, and so on, 
 
 the variety of which is striking ; and the results vary much from 
 our hypothesis A ^ | B. 
 
 The same irregularity in the text of A may be illustrated by 
 studying the Epistle to the Galatians. The first 10 lines are 
 exactly a V-page. The next 11 lines are a V-page and 8 letters. 
 The next 10 lines bring us into agreement with the foot of the 
 Vatican column all but a single letter ; so that in these three V- 
 pages Codex A has gained a line on its normal type. Or take 
 the Gospel of John : The first 11 lines of A contain the V-page 
 and 2 letters. The first 22 lines contain exactly the two V-pages. 
 The next twelve lines contain a V-page and 2 letters. The next 
 eleven lines end five lines in advance of the V-page ; and finally 
 the scribe succeeds in ending his page exactly with the 8th line of 
 a V-page. So that A is exactly six lines behind time on its first 
 column. 
 
 It is a wonder, when we examine the irregular writing of A, 
 that we were able to find any trace at all of its original pattern, if 
 indeed we have found it correctly. 
 
 2. The following table, in which, by the hypothesis, the pages of 
 Codex A are approximately reduced to V-pages and compared 
 with the Vatican Codex, will be useful : 
 
 
 A 
 
 B 
 
 Mark 
 
 251 
 
 232 
 
 Luke 
 
 432 
 
 411 
 
 John 
 
 310 
 
 292 
 
 Acts 
 
 401 
 
 391 
 
 James 
 
 40 
 
 38 
 
 I Peter 
 
 40 
 
 38 
 
 II Peter 
 
 26 
 
 26 or 27 
 
 I John 
 
 52 or 
 
 53 51 
 
 II John 
 
 5 
 
 5
 
 46 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 
 A 
 
 B 
 
 Ill John 
 
 5 
 
 5 
 
 Jude 
 
 II 
 
 II 
 
 Romans 
 
 194 
 
 148 
 
 I Corinthians 
 
 132? 
 
 139 
 
 II Corinthians 
 
 99 
 
 95 
 
 Galatians 
 
 49 
 
 47 
 
 Ephesians 
 
 54 
 
 49 
 
 Philippians 
 
 35 
 
 33 
 
 Colossians 
 
 35 
 
 34 
 
 I Thessalonians 
 
 33 
 
 32 
 
 II Thessalonians 18 18 
 
 It will be seen that the type has almost disappeared except from 
 the shorter writings. Codex A, then, is a document degenerate in 
 type, but bearing traces of a distant genealogical relation to MSS 
 of the pattern conserved by B. 
 
 3. If we take another instance, say Codex Augiensis, a bilingual 
 codex collated by Scrivener, we have a tolerably even Greek text, 
 containing 27 or 28 lines to the column, but the number of letters 
 to the line fluctuates between wider limits than in previous cases. 
 We may put — 
 
 
 Columns. 
 
 Lines, 
 
 Romans 
 
 — 
 
 15 
 
 I Corinthians 
 
 50 
 
 27 
 
 II Corinthians 
 
 34 
 
 27 
 
 Galatians 
 
 17 
 
 15 
 
 Ephesians 
 
 18 
 
 9 
 
 Philippians 
 
 12 
 
 22 
 
 Colossians 
 
 13 
 
 6 
 
 I Thessalonians 
 
 II 
 
 17 
 
 II Thessalonians 
 
 5 
 
 25 
 
 I Timothy 
 
 13 
 
 18 
 
 II Timothy 
 
 10 
 
 2 
 
 Titus 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 Philemon 
 
 2 
 
 16 
 
 Here all trace of the ancient endings has disappeared, and the 
 only thing noticeable in the endings is an accidental recurrence of 
 multiples of 9. 
 
 E. I. Leaving for a while the criticism of the New Testament, 
 we now proceed to discuss and apply the general method of 
 determining the forms of autographs of any series of letters.
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 47 
 
 If there were but a single size of letter-paper in use, and a single 
 model to intimate the breadth and number of the lines which 
 ought normally to be found upon each separate sheet, the follow- 
 ing phenomena would present themselves in the study of any given 
 collection of letters : 
 
 First, there would be a very great scarcity of letters ending at 
 the first few lines of a page ; and secondly, as we move down the 
 length of the page, we should find a greater number of letters 
 ending at the successive places in the page. Let us call the 
 number of epistles which occupy approximately any given space 
 (the space itself being measured either by the lines of the 
 paper or in any other way) the frequency for the space. Then 
 we say that for letters occupying between n and 7i-\-i standard 
 pages, the frequency would be a maximum somewhere near the 
 close of the w -f" ith page, because there is a tendency, other 
 things being equal, to end one's epistles rather at the bottom of 
 a page than near the top. 
 
 For convenience, we shall now change slightly our method of 
 statement ; we reserve the word letter for printed or written type, 
 and use epistle for the document ; this will save confusion ; and we 
 define as follows : 
 
 2. If X be the size of an epistle, expressed in lines of some standard 
 length, or in actual letters, then the number of epistles in a given 
 collection which occupy sizes between ;tr dz e where e is some small 
 arbitrary quantity, is called the frequency for that size, and is 
 denoted by /{x'). We construct the curve of frequency in the 
 usual manner, and according to our reasoning it runs in the manner 
 expressed by the small curve in the corner of the annexed plate. 
 The meaning of this curve is simply this, that if any length ON 
 be taken representing the length of a given epistle, then /W repre- 
 sents the frequency of epistles of that size. 
 
 In our figure OA is a single page, OB two pages, and so on ; 
 and the curve intimates that the frequency is a maximum just 
 before we reach OA, OB, OC, etc., and that the frequency dimin- 
 ishes precipitately when we pass the points A, B, C, etc. 
 
 If now we assume a second size of paper and corresponding pat- 
 tern, we should simply have to trace a second curve with its series 
 of maxima over the first, and the complete system would repre- 
 sent the frequency. And the same would be the case if there were 
 three, four or more patterns.
 
 48 
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 3. Conversely, if the curve were traced for us we ought to be able 
 to determine very closely the normal sizes of the patterns of original 
 writing. And it is to this problem that we address ourselves, since 
 we have not a few collections of such ancient writings, and have 
 strong evidence that the writers of those epistles used fixed models 
 by which to write. Not to spend time in giving well-known quota- 
 tions, we simply refer to Isidore, Orig. VI 12 : " Quaedam genera 
 librorum certis modulis conficiebantur ; breviori forma carmina 
 atque epistulae "; and observe with Birt, Das Antike Buchwesen, 
 p. 288, and Reifferscheid, that the expression of Isidore is really 
 taken from Suetonius. We will now commence to analyse the 
 epistles of Pliny and to determine their modulus or pattern. 
 
 4. The table which follows will express the size of the different 
 epistles as nearly as possible in terms of the number of lines which 
 they occupy in the Teubner edition. Then from the complete 
 tabulated results we will construct our curve, roughly to scale, and 
 deduce the size of the normal Pliny epistle in terms of the Teubner 
 line. 
 
 No. of 
 Tettbnet 
 Lines, 
 
 
 l-H 
 
 "OS 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 > 
 
 1 
 
 > 
 
 > 
 
 1 
 
 > 
 
 
 x: 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 2 
 
 10 
 
 14 
 
 6 
 
 3 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 18 
 
 28 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 3 
 
 
 3 
 
 7 
 
 16 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 I 
 
 13 
 
 20 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 3 
 
 8 
 
 19 
 
 10 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 I 
 
 4 
 
 
 3 
 
 7 
 
 20 
 
 II 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 
 7 
 
 8 
 
 20 
 
 12 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 II 
 
 13 
 
 3 
 
 I 
 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 16 
 
 14 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 
 I 
 
 4 
 
 10 
 
 15 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 7 
 
 16 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 
 2 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 10 
 
 17 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 8 
 
 18 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 6 
 
 19 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 20 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 8 
 
 21 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 22 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 6
 
 It \"> W lap bi- \Jo \iy '*» I^J" l^g jf^ l^° l^-»' It" I>'^ I^'" !?■)" lye |yj- |<oo |/oj- ^/g |/«- |/jo \/3f \/jo \/3i- \/*o \/*a-\yi-v 
 
 m 
 
 J
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 49 
 
 No. of 
 
 Teubner 
 
 Lines. 
 
 
 1— 1 
 
 1 
 
 >— 1 
 p— 1 
 
 1 
 
 > 
 i-i 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1—! 
 > 
 
 1 
 
 > 
 
 1 
 
 > 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 x" 
 
 1 
 
 
 23 
 
 3 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 8 
 
 24 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 7 
 
 25 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 5 
 
 26 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 27 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 28 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 3 
 
 29 
 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 30 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 31 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 4 
 
 32 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 33 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 I 
 
 5 
 
 34 
 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 4 
 
 35 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 36 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 37 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 'i 
 
 38 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 39 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 40 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 41 
 
 
 
 T 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 42 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 43 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 44 
 
 1 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 45 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 46 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 47 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 I 
 
 2 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 48 
 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 3 
 
 49 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 50 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 51 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 52 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 53 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 54 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 55 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 56 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 57 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 58 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 59 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 60 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 61 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 62 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 63 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 64 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 65 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 66 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 50 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 Xs.,-"' ^ ^ '-^ > > > ^ ^ >^ 
 
 ^ "^ ^ <^ <^ <^ fc*^ ..... 
 
 >■ 
 
 > 
 
 > 
 
 •<« 
 
 << 
 
 <i. 
 
 'i 
 
 <a 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 "i 
 
 <a 
 
 «:; 
 
 Oq 
 
 "^ 
 
 67 o 
 
 68 o 
 
 69 o 
 
 70 o 
 
 71 o 
 
 72 II 
 
 73 I 1 
 
 74 o 
 
 75 o 
 
 76 I I 
 
 77 o 
 
 78 o 
 
 79 I I 13 
 
 80 o 
 
 81 o 
 
 82 o 
 
 83 o 
 
 84 o 
 
 85 • o 
 
 86 o 
 
 87 II 2 
 8S o 
 89 o 
 qo o 
 
 91 o 
 
 92 o 
 
 93 o 
 
 94 o 
 
 95 I I 
 
 96 o 
 
 97 I I 
 
 98 o 
 
 99 o 
 
 100 o 
 
 101 o 
 
 102 o 
 
 103 o 
 
 104 o 
 
 105 I I 
 
 106 o 
 
 107 o 
 
 108 o 
 
 109 o 
 no o
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 51 
 
 ■>8o,-'-H HH HH H. > > > > G X! 
 
 >■ 
 
 > 
 
 > 
 
 > 
 
 << 
 
 ■^ 
 
 -^ 
 
 -t< 
 
 s 
 
 5 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 .<a 
 
 ■i 
 
 <a 
 
 S 
 
 «Q 
 
 =Q 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 'S L^ Li ,N^ ,s'=^ ^ ^ ."=> '=^ "S 'S « S .'5 
 
 111 o 
 
 112 o 
 "3 o 
 
 114 • o 
 
 115 o 
 
 116 o 
 
 117 o 
 "8 . II 
 "9 o 
 
 120 o 
 
 121 o 
 
 122 o 
 
 123 o 
 
 124 o 
 
 125 o 
 
 126 o 
 
 127 o 
 
 128 I I 
 
 129 o 
 
 130 o 
 
 131 I I 
 
 132 ' o 
 
 133 o 
 
 134 o 
 
 135 o 
 
 136 o 
 
 137 o 
 
 138 o 
 
 139 o 
 
 140 o 
 
 141 I I 
 
 142 o 
 
 143 o 
 
 144 o 
 
 145 o 
 
 146 I I 
 
 5. The curve is now approximately constructed, and is given in 
 the annexed plate. 
 
 From the arrangement of the maxima in the curve of frequency 
 we have now to deduce the normal form. 
 
 Our largest epistle is 146 lines of Teubner type ; now we have 
 
 Pliny's own statement that there are never more than twenty sheets
 
 52 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 to a scapus or roll, and although this statement is not strictly 
 accurate, we have a right to assume it to be so for Pliny him- 
 self. Suppose then that this 146 lines is just under 20 sheets, this 
 would make the single sheets just over 7.3 lines ; and we should 
 expect to find successive maxima near the points x = 7.3, x = 14.6, 
 X = 21.9, X = 29.2, and so on; or, beginning with the figures in 
 reverse order, we look for maxima at the points 139.7, 1324, 125.1, 
 117.8, 110.5, 103.2, 95.9, 88.6, 81.3, 74, 66.7, 59.4, 52.1,44.8 and so 
 on. This is found to be almost exactly the case for many of the 
 places indicated. The higher maxima above x = ^o are at 
 once seen to be parts of the same system ; but the lower numbers 
 of the system seem to be a little too small. 
 
 The single sheet estimated at 7.3 Teubner lines is a little wrong in 
 its decimal place, and probably should be 7.5 or 7.6. For it is 
 evident that the 20th page of the letter in question (III 9) was not 
 quite filled. He says, " Hie erit epistolae finis, re vera finis ; 
 litteram non addam." Taking the latter estimate, and observing 
 that the average Teubner line may be put at 50 letters (which is 
 very nearly the case), we have 380 letters to the Pliny page, which 
 is just over 10 average hexameters ; in all probability, then, the 
 majority of the Pliny epistles, especially the longer ones, are written 
 on a 20-lined page of half-hexameters. Whether in the smaller 
 epistles a smaller pattern is sometimes used does not at present 
 appear ; but certainly almost all the long ones are very nearly of 
 the pattern indicated.' 
 
 6. We are able to apply our result to one interesting example. 
 
 In Pliny IV 11 we have an epistle of about 61 Teubner lines, 
 in which the writer concludes by demanding an equally long reply, 
 and threatens to count not only the pages of the answer, but the 
 lines and syllables. " Ego non paginas tantum sed versus etiam 
 syllabasque numerabo." From the fact that the epistle is not quite 
 61 Teubner lines, and since 8 X 7.6 = 60.8, we infer that he actually 
 finished the last sheet very closely. The allusion, then, to counting 
 lines and syllables does not refer, as one might have at first sup- 
 posed, to a superfluous page, but to his purpose not to be satisfied 
 with an eight-paged epistle in reply unless the pages contain 20 
 good lines to the page, and each line of a proper length. 
 
 ' For instance, if the normal page were 7.4 lines, there would not be more 
 than about 3 out of the 20 longest epistles in which the concluding page 
 was not more than half filled.
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 53 
 
 Birt (Das Antike Buchwesen, p. 161) has curiously under- 
 estimated the length of this epistle ; he describes it as a long epistle, 
 which must have occupied over two pages, and infers that the 
 desired reply is to have at least three pages, the third of which is 
 to carry ten additional lines, together with a half line of ten 
 syllables. 
 
 It may be interesting to note that the celebrated letter of Pliny 
 to Trajan (X 96) is written on a roll of seven sheets, wanting a 
 couple of lines or thereabouts. The answer occupies about a sheet 
 and a half of the same style of writing. 
 
 There are traces of the use of a smaller page of 20 half-iambics, 
 or about 5.7 Teubner lines. Perhaps it is to this model and a roll 
 of 5 sheets that Pliny refers, when he says (III 14), about the 
 22d line, " Charta adhuc superest." The whole letter is not -30 
 lines. But it may almost as well be taken as a 4-paged letter of 
 the larger size. 
 
 We can now print the Pliny letters from their autographs approxi- 
 mately. 
 
 7. It will be observed that the previous investigation enables us at 
 once to fix a superior limit to the number of pages in the separate 
 books to which the letters are reduced. A full page of the Teubner 
 edition is 38 lines or 5 Pliny pages. The first book cannot therefore 
 contain more than 105 Pliny pages. The second book gives precisely 
 the same estimate, so does the third, and the fourth, and the fifth ; the 
 sixth gives 120 as the superior limit, the seventh 1 10, the eighth 105, 
 the ninth 120, the tenth 150. Could we have a more forcible sug- 
 gestion that, in the majority of cases, the letters were actually 
 reduced into rolls of igo sheets apiece when they came to be edited ? 
 
 8. A precisely similar analysis applied to the Tauchnitz text of 
 Josephus enables us to determine the original form of many of the 
 documents embedded in his writings. We have extracted between 
 60 and 70 letters and decrees from the Life and the Antiquities. 
 
 The results arrange themselves as follows : 
 
 Tatichnitz 
 lines. 
 
 No. of Epistles 
 of that length. 
 
 Tauchnitz 
 lines. 
 
 No. 
 o/i 
 
 of Epistles 
 ■hat length. 
 
 3 
 
 I 
 
 8 
 
 
 5 
 
 4 
 
 7 
 
 9 
 
 
 2 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 
 I 
 
 6 
 
 I 
 
 II 
 
 
 5 
 
 7 
 
 6 
 
 12 
 
 
 5
 
 k. ■■■' 
 
 ? 
 
 54 
 
 NEW TESTAMENT AUTOGRAPHS. 
 
 Tauchnitz 
 lines. 
 
 No 
 of 
 
 of Epistles 
 that length. 
 
 13 
 
 
 I 
 
 14 
 
 
 2 
 
 15 
 16 
 
 
 2 
 I 
 
 17 
 
 18 
 
 
 3 
 
 I 
 
 19 
 
 
 
 
 20 
 
 
 4 
 
 21 
 
 
 I 
 
 22 
 
 
 I 
 
 23 
 
 
 2 
 
 24 
 
 
 3 
 
 25 
 26 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 Taitcfinitz 
 lilies. 
 
 217 
 
 2| 
 
 3b 
 31 
 
 ^; 
 
 i4 
 35 
 37 
 43 
 
 54 
 
 N'o. of E.pistles 
 of that length. 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 O 
 
 2 
 
 O 
 
 O 
 
 O 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 2 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 Here we are at once struck with the recurrence of the multiples of 
 four, and examination at once shows that four lines of Tauchnitz 
 type in Josephus are 12 half-iambics or an S-page very exactly. 
 Similar examination will show that a page of 20 half-iambics is 
 6.6 Tauchnitz lines, and a page of 20 half-hexameters is 11.6 lines. 
 From these results the majority of the writings indicated are at 
 once reduced to their original patterns. The recurrence of the 
 S-type simply means that Josephus has manufactured not a few of 
 them, as letters would have been written by his own hand, for we 
 have already determined, from the stichometry of the Antiquities, 
 and confirmed the result by the examination of certain letters, that 
 Josephus uses the iambic verse as his model. 
 
 Univei 
 
 Sou 
 
 Lit 
 
 ERRATA. 
 
 P. 3, lines 10 and 11 from bottom, \tz.6. passage iox "sentence." 
 P. 7, line 22 from top, read is roughly represented by for " is represented 
 by." 
 
 P. 19, last line, read Engastrimytho for " Engastrimutho." 
 P. 22, line 21 from top, read Saligniana for " Saligniani." 
 P. 24, lines 16 and 15 from bottom, read To this type belong the MSS for- 
 merly known as I, N, P {which are fragvients of the same original);