#' 
 
 0)V 
 
 ( j EIBRARY P 
 
 HBRHKY FttliD. 
 
 jutiin i i i minui i Hiimi i iiiimmii i ini i mFnfTgiiimui i mmiiiuiniiiinin- 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2007 with funding from 
 
 IVIicrosoft Corporation 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/companiontogreekOOscharich 
 
A COMPANION 
 
 TO 
 
 THE GREEK TESTAMENT 
 
 AND 
 
 THE ENGLISH VERSION 
 
 BY 
 
 PHILIP SCHAFF, D.D. 
 
 PRESIDENT OF THE AMERICAN COMHITTBB ON REYISIOIT 
 
 With Facsimile Illustrations of 
 Mss. AND Standard £ditions of the New Testament 
 
 FOURTH EDITION, REVISED 
 
 NEW YORK AND LONDON 
 
 HARPER & BROTHERS PUBLISHERS 
 
 1903 
 
6^ 
 
 
 Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1883, by 
 
 HARPER & BROTHERS, 
 
 [a the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington. 
 
 Copyright, 1885, by Harper & Brothers. 
 Copyright, 1887, by Harper & Brothers. 
 
 All right* reterved. 
 
TO THE 
 
 MEMBEES OF THE AMEEIOAN EEVISION COMMITTEE 
 
 IN REMEMBRANCE OF TEN TEARS OF HARMONIOUS CO-OPERATION 
 
 ffllebicateb 
 
 BY THE AUTHOR 
 
 140368 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 A Manual of Textual Criticism of the Greek Testament 
 and its application to the English Version is a desidera- 
 tum of our literature, and meets a demand which has been 
 greatly stimulated and widely extended by the appearance 
 of the new Kevision. 
 
 This book has grown out of my studies in connection 
 with the Revision Committee, and was prepared at the 
 request of several fellow-Revisers and friends whose learn- 
 ing and judgment T highly esteem. It embodies the sub- 
 stance (thoroughly revised) of my Introduction to the 
 American edition of Westcott and Hort's Greek Testa- 
 ment, and several additional chapters, besides important 
 contributions from Bishop Lee, Professor Abbot, Dr. Hall, 
 and Professor Warfield, which are acknowledged in the 
 proper place. The last chapter contains a brief history 
 and explanatory vindication of the joint work of the two 
 Revision Companies, and fairly expresses, I believe, their 
 general views on all essential points, with a preference for 
 the American renderings where they differ from the English. 
 An official report of the American Committee will appear 
 after the revision of the Old Testament is completed. 
 
 I feel under special obligation to Dr. Ezra Abbot, of Cam- 
 bridge, who has kindly aided me in correcting the proofs 
 as they passed through the press, and suggested numerous 
 improvements. In the department of textual criticism and 
 
VI PREFACE. 
 
 microscopic accuracy, this modest and conscientious scholar 
 is facile princeps in America, with scarcely a superior in 
 Europe. Every member of the American Revision Com- 
 mittee will readily assent to this cordial tribute. 
 
 The publishers deserve my thanks for their liberality in 
 incurring the great expense of fac-simile illustrations of 
 manuscripts and standard editions of the Greek Testament. 
 Some of the former and all of the latter are entirely new, 
 and add much to the interest of the book. 
 
 The extraordinary increase of biblical study, even among 
 laymen, since the Revision of 1881, is one of the most en- 
 couraging signs of the times, and of true progress. The 
 New Testament is the greatest literary treasure of Christen- 
 dom, and worthy of all the labor and study that can be 
 bestowed upon it to make it clearer and dearer to the mind 
 and heart of men. 
 
 I dedicate this book to my brother-Revisers as a memo- 
 rial of the many happy days we spent together, from month 
 to month and from year to year, in the noble work of 
 improving the English version of the Word of God. 
 
 PHILIP SCHAFF. 
 
 New York, August^ 1883 
 
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. 
 
 The call for a new edition of this Manual of Textual 
 Criticism has made it my duty to give it a careful revision. 
 The chief improvements are the corrected lists of MSS. 
 (pp. 94, 101, 102, 133, 134), the additions to the literature 
 (pp. 379, 524, etc.), and a number of changes in Appendixes 
 L, III., and IV. 
 
 It is a pleasure to express my thanks for letters of ap- 
 proval and encouragement from many of the most compe- 
 tent judges.* Those from English Revisers were especially 
 
 * I received such letters from nearly all the English Revisers, and a num- 
 ber of Continental scholars— as Drs. von Gebhardt, then of Gottingen ; Dor- 
 ner, Dillmann, and Weiss, of Berlin ; Gregor)', of Leipzig ; Grimm, of Jena ; 
 Bertheau, of Hamburg ; Reuss and Holtzmann, of Strassburg; Schiirer, of 
 Giessen ; Doedes, of Utrecht ; Godet, of Neuchatel, etc. The following re- 
 markable letter from the octogenarian, Dr. Reuss, who possesses the largest 
 collection of Greek Testaments, and furnished the basis for Dr. Hall's list 
 (Append. I.), will be read with interest. 
 
 ,, „ , I , rr D y " Strassburg, 21 Fe&r., 1884. 
 
 ^^ Hochgeehrter Herr Professor : 
 
 " Ich werde so eben in hochst angenehmer Weise uberrascht durch das 
 
 schone Geschenk welches Sie mir bestimmt haben, und wofiir ich Sie 
 
 bitte, meinen verbindlichsten Dank entgegenzunehmen. Ich sage Ihnen 
 
 nicht, dass ich es mit Vergniigen lesen werde, denu ich hahe es bereits ganz 
 
 gelesen, und zwar in einem Exemplar, das ich der GUte des Herrn Dr. 
 
 Isaac Hall in Philadelphia verdanke. Und ich sage Ihnen, dass, trotzdem 
 
 mir vieles in Ihrem Buche, wie naturlich, liingst bekannt ist, es fUr mich 
 
 einen reichen Schatz neuer Belehrung enthalt theils in den Mittheilungen 
 
 Uber die vorhandene englische Literatur, die uns Continental-Europaern 
 
 ja fast ganz unbekannt bleibt, theils namentlich durch die grlindliche 
 
 Darstellung alles dessen was sich auf die Revision der engl. Bibel-Ueber* 
 
Vlll PREFACE. 
 
 gratifying, as 1 could not avoid discussing the delicate re- 
 lations of the two Committees and the merits of the Araeri- 
 
 setzung bezieht, wovon mir bisher nur ein etwas schwaches Echo durch 
 die HH. Hort u. Westcott zugekommen ist. Es ist Uberhaupt fUr uns 
 deutsche Gelehrte beschamend zu sehen, wie man jenseits des Kanals und 
 des Oceans so genau und verstandnissvoU mit der deutschen Bibel-Litera- 
 tur bekannt ist, wahrend wir selbst kaum den zwanzigsten Theil (vielleicht 
 noch weniger) nur der Buchertitel kennen, die dort in diesem Fache er- 
 Bcheinen, geschweige dass sie uns zu Handen kamen. Aber es hat Ihr 
 Werk, so wie das klirzlich erschienene bibliographische von Herm Hall, 
 das ich ebenfalls seiner GUte verdanke, einen sehr deprimirenden Ein- 
 druck auf mich gemacht. Sie wissen, dass ich mich des Besitzes einer 
 bedeutenden Sammlung griechischer N. T. erfreue, und dass ich auch ein 
 bischen stolz darauf bin und gross damit gethan habe. Nun die beiden 
 Werke, das Hall'sche und das Ihrige, haben mich in dieser Hinsicht Be- 
 scheidenheit gelehrt, und nicht nur dieses, sondem auch muthlos gemacht, 
 denn wenn ich auch die Kosten nicht scheute, wurde mir doch jetzt in 
 meinem SOsten Jahre die Zeit mangeln, meine Lucken (die ungeahnten !) 
 auszufilllen. Ich habe desswegen Herrn Hall den Vorschlag gemacht, von 
 meiner ' Bibliotheca N. T. Gr.' eine englische, durch ihn vervollstandigte, 
 Ausgabe zu veranstalten und ihm dazu meinerseits Supplemente angeboten, 
 da meine Sammlung seit 1872 sich bedeutend vermehrt hat. 
 
 " Was nun Ihr Geschenk betrifft so versteht es sich von selbst, dass ich 
 Ihr Exemplar, mit Ihrer Handschrift, behalte, und mit dem friiher erhal- 
 tenen einen CoUegen glucklich mache. 
 
 "Ich schliesse, unter wiederholtera Danke, mit meinen aufrichtigsten 
 Wunschen fur Ihre fernerc gesegnete Wirksamkeit ; die Hoifnung, Sie noch 
 einmal an den Ufern des Rheins zu sehn, welche ja auch Ihre Heimat sind, 
 darf ich wohl nicht hegen. Immerhin darf ich Sie versichern, dass die 
 sich immer mehr kundgebende Vermahlung deutscher und englischer 
 Wissenschaft, an welcher Sie namentlich in so bedeutender Weise Theil 
 genommen haben, mir seit lange eine erfreuliche Erscheinung ist, eine um 
 so anspruchslosere meinerseits, da ich dabei eine ganz passive Rolle spiele, 
 und nur die Ehre dabei habe, kein Verdienst. Vor kurzem ist nun auch 
 meine Geschichte des Kanons durch einen Prediger in Glasgow ubersetzt 
 worden ; ob er damit Anklang gefunden, weiss ich nicht. 
 
 " Genehmigen Sie, verehrtester Herr Professor, die Versicherung def 
 unwandelbaren Hochachtung und Ergebenheit womit ich verharre 
 
 " Ihr dankbarer, £d. Rbuss." 
 
PREFACE. IX 
 
 can preferences.* I do not even except that venerable mem- 
 ber of the Old Testament Company, who, in a scholarly and 
 courteous printed letter addressed to me, pronounces the 
 Revision of the New Testament a practical failure, because 
 it departs too much from the old version, and sacrifices its 
 poetic beauty and archaic flavor to pedantic fidelity.' But 
 
 Dr. W. Grimm (the author of the Clavis Novi Test., and one of the Re- 
 visers of Luther's Bible) brings the book in contact with the new German 
 revision, and writes : 
 
 "Jena, 30 Z)ec., 1883. 
 " Hochgeehrtester Herr College : 
 
 " Das Jahr 1883 ist im Scheiden begriffen. Ich darf aber dessen letzte 
 Stunde nicht herankommen lassen, ohne Ihnen meinen allerherzlichsten 
 Dank zu sagen fiir Ihr ausgezeichnetes Werk A Companion to the Greek 
 Testament and the English Version^ rait welchem Sie mich zu beehren und 
 zu erfreuen die Glite gehabt haben. Dasselbe wird einen Ehrenplatz in 
 meiner Bibliothek einnehmen. 
 
 " Die sogenannte ' Probebibel ' oder der mit Aenderungen der Revisions- 
 Commission versehene Abdruck der lutherischen Uebersetzung ist vor 
 Kurzera erschienen und wahrscheinlich auch Ihnen zu Gesicht gekommen. 
 Er soil dem theologischen Publicum Anlass geben zu Ausstellungen und 
 zu Vorschlagen von weiteren Verbesserungen. Die Urtheile werden, wie 
 diess in der Natur der Sache liegt, wohl sehr weit auseinander gehen." . . . 
 
 * I may be permitted to quote as a specimen an extract from a letter 
 of the late Thomas Chenery, editor of the Times, and a member of the 
 Old Testament Company. He wrote me, from "Printing House Square," 
 London, Oct. 8, 1883 : '* Allow me to thank you most sincerely for the copy 
 of your most valuable book. ... I rejoice that the defence of the principle 
 of revision, and of the actual results attained by the New Testament Com- 
 pany, has been so thoroughly and successfully made." . . . 
 
 " A Letter to the Reverend Philip Schaff, D.D., President of the Ameri- 
 can Committee on Revision, hy Frederick Field, M.A ., LL.D., Honorary FeU 
 low of Trinity College, Cambridge. Oxford, 1883 (15 pages). Dr. Field 
 had previously published a criticism of the Revised New Testament in his 
 Otium Norvicense. He attributes the failure chiefly to the self-chosen 
 isolation of the Revisers from public opinion. They formed a corporation 
 in which a few leading men, oi Sokovvteq otvKoi slvai, controlled the de- 
 bate, and so the Revisers " lost the touch." 
 
X PREFACE. 
 
 1 still believe that the foundation will stand, while grant- 
 ing (as I intimated before, on p. 477) that the Revision 
 may need a final editing by the Committee, with proper 
 regard to the criticism of competent scholars and the con- 
 servative feelings of Christian people. The opposition has 
 spent its force and fnry without being able to point out 
 any serious error. The Revised Old Testament, which was 
 finished in December, 1884, will be published in a few 
 weeks (May 21, 1885), and produce a favorable reaction. 
 It includes few changes of the Hebrew text, and carefully 
 retains the old idiom. 
 
 The churches will now be able to form a just estimate 
 of the whole work, and to decide whether it shall take the 
 place of the old Version. 
 
 The Revision movement must succeed. So much time 
 and labor cannot have been spent in vain. It is not con- 
 fined to the English-speaking churches, but extends over 
 the whole Protestant world. The German commission has 
 been at work for twenty years in revising Luther's Version, 
 and has published, tentatively, the Frobebibel, so called 
 (Halle, 1883), which is submitted to public examination be- 
 fore its final adoption. It is as severely criticised as the 
 English Revision, but for the opposite reason. It is more 
 cautiously, but far less thoroughly, done. The same German 
 scholars who disregard the authority of the textus receptus 
 closely adhere in this popular work to the text of the sec- 
 ond edition of Erasmus which was used by Luther, and 
 depart from it only in a few places (Acts xii. 25 ; Heb. x. 
 34 ; 1 John ii. 23 ; Rev. xi. 2). Even the spurious passage 
 of the three witnesses in 1 John v. 7 is retained, though in 
 small type and in brackets, with the note that it was want- 
 ing in Luther's editions! This tioiid coQservatism can* 
 
PREFACil. Xl 
 
 not satisfy the just demands of scholarship. Luther's Ver- 
 sion holds the same front rank among German classics as 
 King James's Version among English classics ; but while 
 the former is the product of one towering genius, the latter 
 is the result of three generations of scholars, and far more 
 accurate. The English Revision must retain the suprem- 
 acy for faithfulness to the original, without sacrificing 
 the charm of freedom, beauty, and force of the Authorized 
 Version. 
 
 I cannot close this Preface without a tribute of friend- 
 ship to the memory of one who strongly urged me to write 
 this Companion, who carefully read the proof-sheets of the 
 first edition as they passed through the press, and whose last 
 work on earth, in spite of weakness and pain, was to bring 
 down to the latest date his own classified lists of uncial and 
 cursive MSS. (pp. 101 and 133). Dr. Ezra Abbot died 
 peacefully, as he had lived, March 21, 1884, sixty -four years 
 of age. His name Ezra is significant. He was beyond 
 dispute the first textual critic of the Greek Testament in 
 America ; while in thoroughness and minuteness of knowl- 
 edge he hardly had a superior in the world. His consci- 
 entious accuracy was proverbial. His bibliographical in- 
 formation, as shown in The Literature of the Doctrine of 
 a Future Life, and his numerous additions to Smith's Dic- 
 tionary of the Bible, was astonishing. His revision of Hud- 
 son's Critical Greek and English Concordance of the New 
 Testament is most useful for reference. His book on the 
 Authorship of the Fourth Gospel is the best vindication of 
 the Johannean origin within the limits of external evidence. 
 His services in the American Revision Committee, which 
 he attended most regularly from beginning to end, were 
 invaluable. He took the deepest interest with pen and 
 
Xll PREFACE. 
 
 purse in Dr. Gregory's Prolegomena to Tischendorf's Greek 
 Testament, and followed them page for page, but did not 
 live to see them published. The crowning traits of his 
 pure and noble character were his modesty and generosity. 
 He was always ready to give others the benefit of his own 
 investigations. If only the work was done and the truth 
 promoted, no matter by whom, he was satisfied and re- 
 joiced. His loss to Biblical scholarship seems irreparable. 
 His name will be associated with that small but select com- 
 pany of scholars who have devoted their lives to the res- 
 toration of the pure text of the Book of books. 
 
 The Author. 
 New York, Apyil 10, 1885. 
 
PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION. 
 
 I AM thankful for another opportunity of revising and 
 improving this book, which has been introduced in several 
 institutions as a manual of instruction on the Language 
 and Text of the Greek Testament, and its English Version 
 and Revision. 
 
 Within the last few years several new editions of the 
 Greek Testament (see pp. 1 and 524) and other important 
 works have appeared, such as Dr. Thayer's Greek-English 
 Lexicon, Dr. Warfield's Introduction to the Textual Criti- 
 cism of the N. T., and the voluminous Critique Textuelle 
 of Abbe Martin.^ The Second Part of Dr. Gregory's 
 Prolegomena to Tischendorf may soon be expected. 
 
 * As I have no room on p. 84 for the full title of this extraordinary 
 work, I shall give it here (from a copy in the Astor Library). Abbe J. 
 P. P. Martin (professeur a r6cole superieure de theologie de Paris): 
 Introduction a la Ci'Uique textuelle du Nouveau Testament, Partie theorique. 
 Lefons professees a VEcole superieure de theologie de Paris, 1882-'83. 
 Paris, 1883 (712 pages, 4to). The other five volumes are published under 
 the same general title, but as Partie pratique, and are numbered sepa- 
 rately. Tom. I. (II.), publ. 1884 (327 pp.), contains an account of the 
 uncial Codd. K, A, B, C, D, and Origen as a textual witness ; torn. II. 1884 
 (654 pp.), is devoted to the disputed section of Mark xvi. 9-20, which he 
 defends with as much learning and ingenuity as Dean Burgon ; torn. IIL 
 1885 (512 pp.), to Luke xxii. 43,44; xxiii. 34; a Supplement, 1884 (204 pp.), 
 to a description of New Test. MSS. in the libraries of Paris; torn. IV. 1886 
 (549 pp.), to the interpolations in John v. 3, 4, and vii. 53-viii. 11, both of 
 which he sustains; torn. V. 1886 (248 pp.), to the spurious passage on the 
 three witnesses, 1 John v. 7, which he thinks Catholics are at liberty to 
 
XIV 1»REFACE. 
 
 I have brought down the literature to the latest date, 
 and made other improvements (especially on pages 1, 2, 3, 
 80, 83, 84, 101, 102, 138, 147, 151, 167, 208, 379, 391, 396, 
 397, 417, 524, 609). 
 
 In the third Appendix (pp. 571 sqq.) I had to record 
 the death of several Revisers, among them Archbishop 
 Trench, whose funeral I attended in Westminster Abbey 
 (April 2, 1886), Professor Short, of Columbia College, 
 New York, and Bishop Lee, of Delaware, the senior of his 
 brethren in the Protestant Episcopal Church, and one of 
 
 accept, to question, or to reject. The whole work is photo-lithographed, 
 enriched with numerous photo-lithographic fac-similes, and full of rare 
 learning. If the Practical Part is to discuss all the other disputed read- 
 ings, it will require many more volumes. A limited number of copies was 
 struck off, and the Partie theorique is exhausted. The same author has 
 published : Quatre Manuscrits du Nouveau Testament auxquels on pent en 
 ajouter un cinquieme {Extrait de la Revue des Sciences Ecclesiastiques). 
 Amiens and Paris (quai Voltaire, 25), 1886 (62 pp., with fac-similes). He 
 traces the four cursive MSS., 13, 69, 124, and 346, which belong to the 
 family of the oldest uncials (as shown by W. H. Ferrar and T. K. Abbott, 
 of Dublin, 1877), and perhaps also MS. 348 (in the Ambrosian library of 
 Milan), to a Greek Church in Calabria or Sicily, chiefly because the 
 synaxarion or catalogue of church lessons of the cursive MS. 13 contains 
 the names of several Calabrian and Sicilian saints not known elsewhere 
 (pp. 14, 16). 
 
 Abb6 Martin is an advocate of the traditional (Latin) text of the 
 Roman Church, he depreciates the oldest MSS. (X, A, B, C, D) as texts 
 " fabricated " from Origen and other Greek fathers, and gives the highest 
 authority to the lectionaries, although he knows them to be incomplete 
 and full of liturgical additions and changes ! His extraordinary learning 
 is controlled by dogmatic prepossessions and strange eccentricities, which 
 shake confidence in his conclusions. Some years ago (in Des Veisions 
 Syriennes) he amused the learned world by the hoax (accepted by Dr. 
 Scrivener, in the third ed. of his Introduction, pp. 323, 325, 328, 331, in sober 
 earnest) that the (older) Curetonian Syriac Version was a corruption of 
 the (younger) Peshitto made in the sixth century with the aid of a 
 Greek MS. resembling Codex Bezie ! 
 
I'REFACfi. tV 
 
 the most faithful members of the New Testament Company. 
 The number of Revisers is fast diminishing, but their work 
 will survive. 
 
 The library, records, and documents of the American 
 Revision Committee have been donated to the American 
 Bible Society, and are kept in a separate book-case in the 
 Bible House, New York, for future use. 
 
 The Author. 
 Union Theological Seminary, 
 New York, Nov.j 1887. 
 
 Postscript. — In "The Independent," New York, Aug. 25, 1887, 
 Dr. Caspar Rene Gregory, of Leipzig, gives an account of the discovery 
 of a number of important palimpsest leaves by Abbe Pierre Batiflfol, the 
 Parisian priest who examined at Berat the purple manuscript $ (Codex 
 Beratinus) at the instance of his teacher. Abbe Louis Duchesne, and 
 during the last winter made a special study of the Basilian MSS. in the 
 Vatican Library. The new MS. is the Codex Vaticanus Graecus 2061, on 
 parchment containing upon 316 leaves the sermons of Gregory Nazianzen 
 written by Basil, a priest, in the 10th or 11th century, and beneath them 
 on twenty-one leaves in three columns considerable fragments of the New 
 Testament, which Dr. Gregory is inclined to assign to the age of Constan- 
 tine the Great as parts of one of the fifty copies prepared by Eusebius, at 
 the command of the emperor, for the churches of Constantinople. This 
 would make them, as far as they go, of equal authority with the Sinaitic 
 and Vatican MSS. Batiffol expects to publish these palimpsest leaves 
 about three or four years hence. They contain the following passages: 
 Acts xxvi. 4-xxvii. 10 ; xxviii. 2-31 ; James iv. 14-v. 20 ; 2 Peter ii. [2 ?]- 
 iii. 15 ; 1 John iv. 6-v. 2 1 ; 2 John 1-13 ; 3 John 1-15 ; Rom. xiii. 4-xv. 9 ; 
 1 Cor. iv. [4?]-vi. 16-xii. 23-xiv. 21-xv. 3-xvi. 1 ; 2 Cor. iv. 7-vi. 8-vii. 
 15-x. 6-Eph. V. [5?]-vi. [22?]; Phil. i. l-ii.9; Col. i. 20-iv. 6; 1 Thess 
 i. 1, 2 ; 1 Tim. v. 6-vi. 45 ; 2 Tim. i. 1-ii. 25 ; Tit. iii. 13-15 ; Philem. 1-25; 
 Heb. xi. 32-xiii. 4. 
 
 2 
 
PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION. 
 
 Since the publication of the third edition of this 
 volume (1888), the following noteworthy works on 
 the textual history of the Greek Testament have 
 appeared : 
 
 1. A photographic fac-simile edition, of 100 copies, 
 of the New Testament of the Codex Yaticanus 
 (No. 1209), at Rome, 1889, which confirms the gen- 
 eral accuracy of the more convenient quasi-fac-simile 
 edition previously published (1881). See pp. 117 sq. 
 I bought a copy from the photographer, Danesi, in 
 Rome, May, 1890. 
 
 2. The Second Part of Dr. Gregory's Prolegom- 
 ena to Dr. Tischendorf s eighth critical edition of 
 the Greek Testament, Leipsic, 1890 (pp. 441-800), 
 which greatly enlarges the number and increases 
 our knowledge of the cursive MSS., together with 
 a supplement of additional uncial fragments. See 
 pp. 101 sq., 135 sq. The Third and last Part has not 
 yet appeared. 
 
 3. A Full Account and Collation of the Greek 
 Cursive Codex Evangelium 604, together with fac- 
 similes and several critical Appendices, by Herman 
 C. HosKiER, London (David Nutt), 1890. 
 
 4. A fifth edition of Hammond's Outlines of Text- 
 ual Criticism of the New Testament^ Oxford (Clar- 
 
XVUl PREFACE. 
 
 endon Press), 1890 (pp. 155). In Appendix B, 
 Hammond discusses some disputed readings — 1 
 John V. 7, 8 ; John v. 3, 4; vii. 53-viii. 11 ; 1 Tim. 
 iii. 16; Mark xvi. 9-20 — against the received text 
 and in favor of the uncial text. 
 
 5. Three scholarly and useful Appendices of Dr. 
 William Sand ay of Oxford to a revised edition of 
 Lloyd's Greek Testament, Oxford (Clarendon Press), 
 1889. The first appendix gives a collation of the 
 Westcott-Hort text with that of Stephanus of 1550 
 (pp. 1-92) ; the second, a selection of the most note- 
 worthy readings (pp. 93-181) ; the third, certain read- 
 ings of the Meraphitic, Armenian, and ^thiopic ver- 
 sions (pp. 182-199). 
 
 6. Dr. Bernhard Weiss (Prof, in Berlin) : Die 
 Johannes-Ajpokalyjpse. Texthritische Untersuehun- 
 gen und Textherstellung^ Leipsic, 1891 (225 pp.), 
 in " Texte und Untersuchungen zur Gesch. der alt- 
 christl. Literatur v. O. v. Gebhardt und Ad. Harnack," 
 Bd. vii. Heft 1. 
 
 This is a most elaborate and painstaking attempt 
 to restore the original text of the Apocalypse frotn 
 the five remaining uncial MSS., namely, the Sinaitic 
 (6<), of the fourth ; the Alexandrian (A) and Ephraemi 
 (C), of the fifth ; the Porfirianus Chiovensis (P) and 
 the Yaticanus Komanus 2066 (B^p"^-, or Q Tregeiiesii^^ 
 both of the eighth or ninth century. The famous 
 Vatican Codex (B) is here missing, as it extends 
 only to Heb. ix. 14. 
 
 These five MSS. present nearly 1650 variations 
 in the 400 verses of the Apocalypse. Cod. A shows 
 about 210, C (a defective palimpsest) 110, &< over 
 
PREFACE. XIX 
 
 515 variations. Dr. Weiss records, classifies, and dis- 
 cusses these textual variations with minute care and 
 exhaustive fulness. At the close he gives the 
 amended text with critical notes which amount 
 almost to a commentary. He follows chiefly the 
 Alexandrian MS., which, upon the whole, is the 
 best for the Apocalypse. He agrees substantially 
 with Westcott and Hort, who follow that MS. still 
 more closely, while Tischendorf favored too much 
 the Sinaitic MS., which he was himself so fortunate 
 as to discover. But the agreement of Weiss with 
 Westcott and Hort is not so great in the Apocalypse 
 as in the Gospels, where they have a more reliable 
 common basis in the Vatican MS. Dr. Weiss has 
 been confirmed by the textual investigation in his 
 conviction of the unity of the Apocalypse against 
 the recent hypothesis which would make it a Jew- 
 ish production worked over and supplemented by a 
 Christian hand. This is an important result. 
 
 In this fourth edition I have made several other 
 additions to the literature, and brought it down to 
 date. I am indebted for the correction of a few 
 slight errors on pp. 37, 133, and 140 to my friend 
 Dr. Oscar von Gebhardt (a most competent judge), in 
 liis appreciative notice of the third edition in Har- 
 nack and Schiirer's " Theologische Literaturzeitung," 
 March 8, 1890. 
 
 In the Third Appendix, I have had to record the 
 death of several members of the Kevision Com- 
 panies: Dr. F. W. Gotch, Prof. William Wright, 
 Bishop Lightfoot, and Dr. F. H. A. Scrivener, of the 
 English Revisers; Dr. Woolsey, Dr. Thos. J. Co- 
 
XX PREFACE. 
 
 nant, and Dr. Howard Crosby, of the American 
 Kevisers. 
 
 Of the American ]N*ew Testament Company only 
 six members remain among the living. But the 
 two Companies have kept up their organization for 
 the purpose of preparing an American standard 
 edition of the Revised Version, which is to be pub- 
 lished as soon as the term of their agreement with 
 the University Presses of England shall have come 
 to an end. 
 
 It is hoped that the authorized American edition 
 of the New Testament will appear in 1894 or 1895, 
 with the American Appendix incorporated in the 
 text, and with chapter headings, parallel passages, 
 and other auxiliaries necessary for popular use. A 
 new Appendix, stating the precise relation of the 
 American and English texts, will be added. 
 
 Philip Sohapf. 
 
 N«w ToBK) November^ 1891. 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER FIRST. 
 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. p^^. 
 
 Literature 1 
 
 Three Elect Languages 4 
 
 Spread op the Greek Language 6 
 
 The Jews and the Greek Language 8 
 
 Christ and the Greek Language 12 
 
 The Apostles and the Greek Language 16 
 
 The Greek and the English 1*7 
 
 The Macedonian Dialect 19 
 
 The Hellenistic Dialect 22 
 
 The Septuagint 23 
 
 The Apostolic Greek 25 
 
 Hebraisms 21 
 
 Latinisms 35 
 
 Number and Value op Foreign Words 38 
 
 The Christian Element 39 
 
 Peculiarities op Style 43 
 
 Matthew 46 
 
 Mark 51 
 
 Luke 54 
 
 Paul 62 
 
 John 66 
 
 The Apocalypse 76 
 
 Evidential Value op the Language of the Greek Testament. 80 
 Summary of the Peculiar Vocabularjes of thjs N. T. W^IT|CR§,609 
 
XXU TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER SECOND. 
 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. ^^^^ 
 Literature on the Sources of the Text and on Textual Crit- 
 icism 82 
 
 Sources op the Text 85 
 
 Facsimiles op Manuscripts 91 
 
 General Character op Manuscripts 93 
 
 A. Uncial Manuscripts 98 
 
 1. Primary Uncials 102 
 
 Codex Sinaiticus 103 
 
 " Alexandrinus Ill 
 
 " Vaticanus 113 
 
 " EPHRiEMI 120 
 
 " Bez^ 122 
 
 2. Secondary Uncials '. 124 
 
 B. Cursive Manuscripts 133 
 
 List op Published Uncials. By Prof L H. Hall 139 
 
 CHAPTER THIRD. 
 
 ANCIENT VERSIONS. 
 
 Value op Versions 142 
 
 Latin Versions: 
 
 The Old Latin 144 
 
 The Vulgate 148 
 
 Syriac Versions: 
 
 The Peshito 152 
 
 The Harclean 154 
 
 The Curetonian 156 
 
 The Jerusalem 157 
 
 Egyptian Versions: 
 
 The Memphitic 168 
 
 The Thebaic 159 
 
 The Bashmuric 169 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. XXUl 
 
 FAOa 
 
 -^THiopic Version 159 
 
 Gothic Version 160 
 
 Armenian Version 163 
 
 CHAPTER FOURTH. 
 PATRISTIC QUOTATIONS. 
 
 Value of Patristic Quotations 164 
 
 Greek Fathers 167 
 
 Latin Fathers. 169 
 
 CHAPTER FIFTH. 
 TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 
 Nature and Object op Textual Criticism 171 
 
 Origin of Variations 173 
 
 Number of Variations 176 
 
 Value of Variations 177 
 
 Classes of Variations 183 
 
 1. Omissions 183 
 
 2. Additions 183 
 
 3. Substitutions 193 
 
 Critical Rules 202 
 
 Application of the Rules 205 
 
 The Genealogical Method. (By Prof. B. B. Warfield, D.D.). 208 
 
 CHAPTER SIXTH. 
 
 HISTORY OF THE PRINTED TEXT. 
 
 Preliminary Remarks 226 
 
 I. The Period of the Textus Receptusi From Erasmus and 
 
 Stephens to Bengel and Wetstein. — A.D. 1516-1750 228 
 
 The Textus Receptus 228 
 
 Erasmus 229 
 
 Complutensian Polyglot 232 
 
 COLINiEUS 236 
 
 Stephens 236 
 
XXIV TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGB 
 
 Beza 237 
 
 Elzevirs 240 
 
 Walton's Polyglot 241 
 
 Mill 244 
 
 Bentley. 245 
 
 Bengel 246 
 
 Wetstein 24*7 
 
 II. Second Period : Transition from the Textds Receptus to 
 the Uncial Text. From Griesbach to Lachmann. — A.D. 
 IVVO-ISSO 249 
 
 Griesbach 250 
 
 MATTH.EI 252 
 
 ScHOLZ 253 
 
 III. Third Period: The Restoration of the Primitive Text. 
 From Lachmann and Tischendorf to Westcott and Hort. — 
 A.D. 1830-81 254 
 
 Lachmann 254 
 
 Tischendorf 257 
 
 Tregelles 262 
 
 Alford 266 
 
 Westcott and Hort 268 
 
 Scrivener and Palmer 282 
 
 Retrospect and Prospect 287 
 
 CHAPTER SEVENTH. 
 
 THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 
 
 Literature 299 
 
 The Bible and Christianity 305 
 
 Origin of King James's Version 312 
 
 Rules Prescribed 317 
 
 Progress of the Work 319 
 
 Reception 326 
 
 Was King James's Version ever Authorized ? 330 
 
 Critical Estimate. — Merits 337 
 
 Defects 347 
 
 Preparations for JIevisjon. , 364 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. XXV 
 
 CHAPTER EIGHTH. 
 
 THE REVISED VERSION. p^o. 
 
 Literature 371 
 
 Action of the Convocation op Canterbury 380 
 
 Organization and Rules of the British Committee 382 
 
 Work op the British Committee 387 
 
 American Co-operation 391 
 
 Constitution of the American Committee 396 
 
 Relation of the American and English Committees and 
 
 Agreement with the University Presses 398 
 
 Publication 403 
 
 Reception, Criticism, and Prospect 411 
 
 Merits op the Revision as Compared with the Old Version.. 417 
 
 The Greek Text of the Revised Version 420 
 
 Select List of Textual Changes 428 
 
 Select List op Improved Renderings 434 
 
 The English Style op the Revised Verjsion 455 
 
 Archaisms 459 
 
 New Words 462 
 
 Improvements in Rhythm 464 
 
 Grammatical Irregularities 465 
 
 Infelicities 466 
 
 Inconsistencies 468 
 
 Needless Variations 474 
 
 The American Part in the Joint Work 478 
 
 The American Appendix 482 
 
 The Public Verdict 490 
 
 Appendix I. — List op Printed Editions op the Greek New 
 
 Testament. (By Prof. I. H. Hall, Ph. D.) 497 
 
 Appendix II. — Fac-similes of Standard Editions of the Greek 
 
 Testament . 525 
 
 Appendix III. — List of English and American Revisers 571 
 
 Appendix IV. — List of American Changes Adopted by the 
 
 English Committee. (By Bishop Alfred Lee, D.D.) 579 
 
 Appendix V. — Adoption of the Revision by the Baptists... 607 
 
 Alphabetical Index 609 
 
 Judex, of Scripture Passages Explained 61$ 
 
ILLUSTRATIONS. 
 
 PAOB 
 
 Spbcimens of the most Important Manuscripts of the Greek 
 Testament 91, 02 
 
 Specimen of Codex Sinaiticus 107 
 
 " " Alexandrinus 112 
 
 " " Vaticanus 114 
 
 « " Ephiuemi 121 
 
 " " ROSSANENSIS. 132 
 
 " " Basileensis 135 
 
 Jerusalem Chamber. 389 
 
 Specimen Pages of Standard Editions of the Greek Testa- 
 ment: 
 
 COMPLUTENSIAN POLYGLOT, 1514 530, 531 
 
 Erasmus, 1516 532, 533 
 
 CoLiN^us, 1534 534, 535 
 
 Stephens, 1550 636, 537 
 
 Stephens, 1551 538, 539 
 
 Beza, 1598 , 540, 541 
 
 Beza, 1604 542, 543 
 
 Elzevir, 1633 544, 545 
 
 Walton's Polyglot, 1657 546, 547 
 
 Mill, 1707 648, 549 
 
 Bengel, 1734 550, 551 
 
 Wetstein, 1751 552, 553 
 
 Griesbach, 1796-1806 554, 555 
 
 ScHOLZ, 1830-1836 556, 557 
 
 Lachmann, 1831 558, 569 
 
 Lachmann, 1842-1850 560, 561 
 
 Tischendorf, 1841 562, 563 
 
 Tischendorf, 1869-1872 564, 565 
 
 Tregelles, 1857-1879 566, 567 
 
 Westcott and Hort, 1881 568, 569 
 
 Title-page of the Authorized English Version, 1611 570 
 
CHAPTEE FIKST. 
 
 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 Literature. 
 I. Critical Editions of the Greek Testament. 
 
 I. By Lachmann (1842-50, 2 vols.) ; Tischendorf (ed. octava critlca 
 major, 1864-72, 2 vols., with a vol. of Prolegomena by Gregory and A h- 
 bot, P. I., 1884); Tregelles (1857-79); Westcott and Hort (1881, 
 with a separate vol. of Introduction and Appendix, Cambridge, and New 
 York, Harpers' ed., from English plates, with SchaflPs Introduction ; revised 
 Engl. ed. of the text, 1885 ; revised Amer. ed. 1889) ; Palmer (the text of 
 the Revisers, 1881) ; Weymouth (7'/te Resultant Greek Testament, 1886, 
 the agreed text of critical editors, with variations); Scrivener (the 
 text of Stephanas, 1550, with other readings, 1887); O. de Gebhardt 
 (A^. T. Gr. ex ultima Tischendorjii recensione, 1887). 
 
 Lachmann laid the foundation for the ancient uncial (instead of the 
 mediaeval cursive) text; Tischendorf and Tregelles enlarged and sifted 
 the critical apparatus; Westcott and Hort restored the cleanest text 
 from the oldest attainable sources. All substantially agree in principles 
 and results. 
 
 n. Bilingual editions : Novum Testamentum Greece et Germanice, by 
 Oscar von Gebhardt. Lips. 1881 ; second ed. 1884. (Tischendorfa 
 last text with the readings of Tregelles, Westcott and Hort, and the re- 
 vised version of Luther.) 
 
 The Greek-English New Testament, being Westcott and Hort's Greek Text 
 and the Revised English Version of 1881. New York (Harper and Broth- 
 ers), 1882; revised ed. 1889. The Oxford Parallel New Testament gives 
 the Greek text of the Revisers with the Authorized and Revised Version, 
 1882. The Cambridge ed. of P. N. T. gives the Textus Receptus with the 
 readings of the Revisers and the Authorized and Revised Version, 1882. 
 
 U. Grammars of the Greek Testament. 
 G. B. Winer (Professor in Leipsic, d. 1858) : Grammar of New-Testa' 
 went Greek (firammatik des neutest. Sprachiffebrauchs'), Leipsic, 1822 ; 6th 
 
2 THE LAJStGtJAGE OE THE KEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 ed. 1855 ; 7th ed. by G. LCnemann, 1867. American " revised and author- 
 ized " translation from the seventh edition, by Prof. J. H. Thayer (of 
 Andover Theological Seminary, now of Harvard University, Mass.), An- 
 dover, 1869, etc. (728 pages). English translation by Rev. W. F. Moui. roN 
 (Principal of The Leys School, Cambridge), with valuable additions and 
 full indexes, Edinb. 1870 ; 2d ed. 1877 (848 pages). 
 
 Winer's work is a masterpiece of classical and Biblical learning. It 
 marked an epoch in New-Test, philology by checking the unbridled 
 license of rationalistic exegesis, and applying the principles and results 
 of classical philology to the Greek of the New Test. 
 
 Alexander Buttmann: Grammatik des neutest. Sprachgebrauchs, 
 Berlin, 1859.— yl Grammar of the New-Testament Greek, translated by J. 
 H. Thayer. Andover, 1873 (474 pages). Several editions. 
 
 Thomas Sheldon Green : A Treatise on the Grammar of the New 
 Testament. London, 1842 ; New ed. 1862 (244 pages). 
 
 Samuel G. Green: Handbook to the Grammar of the Greek Testament; 
 together with a Complete Vocabulary, and an Examination of the Chief New- 
 Testament Synonyms, London (publ. by the Religious Tract Society), 
 1870 ; 4th revised ed. 1885. The Grammar contains 422 pages, the Vocab- 
 ulary 180 pages. Intended for students who have not studied the classical 
 Greek, and well adapted for the purpose. 
 
 W. H. SiMCOx : Grammar of New Testament Greek. (Announced, 
 London, 1887.) 
 
 III. Dictionaries. 
 
 C. L. W. Grimm (Professor in Jena): Lexicon Grceco-Laiinum in 
 Libros Novi Testamenti. Ed. Ida emendata et aucta. Lipsiae, 1879. 
 Based upon the Clavis Novi Testamenti Philologica of Chr. G. Wilkb 
 (d. 1856). Third ed. with reference to the readings of Westcott and 
 Hort, 1887. 
 
 Hermann Cremer : Biblisch-theologisches Worteibuch der neutest. Grd- 
 citdt. Gotha, 1866; 2d ed. improved, 1872; 3d ed. 1883; 4th ed. 1886; 
 5th ed. 1887. English translation of the 2d ed. under the title Biblico- 
 Theological Lexicon of New Testament Greek, by William Urwick. 
 Edinb. 1872 ; 2d ed. 1878 ; 3d ed. 1886, with additions from the third 
 German ed. 
 
 Edward Robinson (Professor in the Union Theological Seminary, New 
 York, d. 1863) : A Greek and English Lexicon of the New Testament. Re- 
 vised ed. New York (Harpers), 1850. At first a translation of WahVs 
 Clavis (1825), then an independent work (1836). Very good, but in need 
 Of a thorough revision (in course of preparation, 1887). 
 
iHBi LAiJfiUAGE OF THE NJBlW TESTAMENT. 3 
 
 J. IT. Thayer: A Greek-English Lexicon oj the New Testament, etc. 
 New York and Edinburgh, 1886. A translation of Grimm's second ed. 
 with many valuable additions. The best in the English language. 
 
 rv. Concordances. 
 
 Car. Ubrm. Bruder : Ta/iteTov twv Trig KaiviJQ dia^fjKrjQ Xl^ewv, 
 sive Concordantice omnium vocum N. T. Greed, ed. ster. Lips. 1842 ; 3d ed. 
 1867, 4th ed. 1887. Indispensable. Based on the work of Erasmus 
 ►ScHMiD (also spelled Schmidt in his preface, Prof, at Wittenberg, d. 1636), 
 first published at Wittenberg, 1638, and again with a new preface b}' Ern. 
 Salom. Cyprian, Gotha and Leips. 1717. 
 
 George V. Wigram : The Englishman's Greek Concordance of the New 
 Testament, London (James Walton), 1844 ; 8th ed., with a Concordance of 
 various readings, 1883. The Greek words are given in alphabetical order 
 with the Eng. "Version (King James's). Reprinted, N. Y. (Harpers), 1848. 
 
 Charles F. Hudson : A Critical Greek and English Concordance of 
 the New Testam^ent, revised and completed by Ezra Abbot. Boston, 
 1870; 7th ed. Boston and London, 1882. Very useful, but requiring 
 adaptation to the Revision of 1881. 
 
 V. Special Treatises. 
 
 DoMiNicus Diodati (a lawyer in Naples): Exercitatio de Christo 
 Graece loquente. Neapoli, 1767; republished by Dr. Dobbin (Prof, of 
 Trinity College, Dublin), London, 1843. 
 
 G. Bern, de Rossi (professor of Oriental languages in Parma) : Delia 
 lingua propria di Cristo e degli Ebrei nazionali della Palestina. Parma, 
 1772. Against Diodati. 
 
 Hein. F. Pfannkuche (d. 1833) : On the Prevalence of the A ramcean 
 Language in Palestine in the Age of Christ and the Apostles (in Eichhorn's 
 " Allg. Bibliothek," viii. 365-480), 1797. Based on De Rossi, and trans- 
 lated from the German by Dr. E. Robinson, with introductory art., in the 
 "Biblical Repository" (Andover, Mass.), vol. i. 309-363 (1831). Still 
 valuable. 
 
 Joh. Leonh. Hug (R. Cath., d. 1846) : Zustand der Landessprache in 
 Paldstina als Matthdus sein Evangelium schrid>, in his Einleitung in die 
 Schriftm des N. T., ii. 30-56 ; 3d ed. Stuttgart, 1826 (a 4th ed. appeared 
 1847). Translated by Dr. E. Robinson in " Biblical Repository," Ando- 
 ver, 1831, i. 530-551. He agrees with Hug in maintaining that the 
 Greek and Aramaean languages were both current in Palestine at the time 
 of Christ and the Apostles. 
 
4 THE LAKGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 Alexander Roberts: Discussions on the Gospels. London, 1863 
 Greek the Language of Christ and the Apostles. 1888. Renews the opin. 
 ion ot Diodati. 
 
 William Henry Guillemard : Hebraisms in the Greek Testament. 
 Cambridge, 1879. This contains the text of the Gospel of Matthew 
 (which appeared first in 1875 as the beginning of a Hebraistic edition of 
 the Greek Test.) and extracts from the other books. 
 
 Edwin Hatch (d. 1889) : Essays in Biblical Greek. Oxford, 1889. 
 
 See also James Hadi^ey, art. Language of the New Test., in Hackett 
 and Abbot's ed. of Smith's " Diet, of the Bible," ii. 1590. B. F. Westcott, 
 art. Hellenist, ibid. ii. 1039 ; art. New Test., ibid. in. 2139. Ed. Reuss, art. 
 Hellenistisches Idiom, in Herzog's " Real-Encyklop.," v. 741 (new ed. 1879). 
 Fr. Delitzsch, Ueber die paldstinische Volkssprache, in " Daheim " lor 
 1874,No.27. Bleek, Einl.i.d. N. Test.,U\i ed. by Mangold, 1886 (p.778qq.). 
 
 THREE ELECT LANGUAGES. 
 IH20Y2 O NAZQPAIOS O BASIAEY2 TON lOYAAION. 
 
 JESUS NAZARENUS REX JUD^ORUM. 
 
 There are three elect nations of antiquity — the 
 Jews, the Greeks, and the Romans ; three elect cities 
 — Jerusalem, Athens, and Rome; and three elect 
 languages— the Hebrew, the Greek, and the Latin. 
 
 These three agencies worked together for the 
 introduction of the Christian religion and for the 
 spread of Christian civilization. The threefold in- 
 scription on the Cross, which is recorded with slight 
 variations by all evangelists,* proclaimed, in the 
 name of the representative of the Roman empire, 
 the universal destination of the Gospel. What was 
 written in bitter irony proved to be a true oracle 
 
 * John xix. 19 and the parallel passages. 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 5 
 
 of heathenism ; as Caiaphas, the high-priest, uttered 
 an involuntary prophecy in the name of hostile 
 Judaism when he said of Jesus : " It is expedient 
 that one man should die for the people, and that 
 the whole nation perish not." * 
 
 " In that inscription of Pilate," says an able histo- 
 rian,^ " there seems to be an unconscious prophecy 
 of the future destiny of the world. From that Cross, 
 and through the channel of the Hebrew, Greek, and 
 Latin languages, have radiated all the influences 
 which have made modern civilization the precious 
 inheritance it is. That Cross was set up at the point 
 of confluence of those three great civilizations of an- 
 tiquity which have ever since profoundly affected 
 the life, public and private, of the people of West- 
 ern Europe. The Hebraic monotheistic conception 
 of the Deity, the Greek universal reason, and the 
 Homan power, and especially its language, have 
 been the great secondary means of the propagation 
 in that portion of the world of Christian civiliza- 
 tion. In the West, Roman law, Eoman Christian- 
 ity, and Koman power went together into the most 
 remote regions, and won their triumphs on the same 
 fields and by the use of the same Latin language. 
 By means of this Latin language Roman civilization 
 was presented to the minds of the barbarians as 
 including many things outside the domain of force, 
 and conquered them, when force failed, by appeals 
 to their reason and their hearts. It was the Latin 
 
 * John xi. 50, 51. 
 
 " Dr. Charles J. Stille (late Provost of the University of Pennsylvania), 
 in Studies on Mediceval History (Philadelphia, 1882), p- 39- 
 
 2— 
 
6 THE LANGUAGE OE THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 language in the service of the Church, and in the 
 administration of the law of the empire, which 
 taught the barbarians in what the true power and 
 glory of Eome and the perpetuity of her system 
 consisted ; and thus was made an important step in 
 their preparation for the reception of that civiliza- 
 tion of which the Roman language was the vehicle, 
 as the Roman organization was the motive force." 
 
 The Hebrew is the language of religion, the 
 Greek the language of culture, the Latin the lan- 
 guage of law and empire. The oldest I'evelations 
 of God to one nation are recorded in Hebrew ; but 
 the last revelation to all nations is recorded in 
 Greek, to be reproduced in the course of time in 
 all the languages of the earth. 
 
 SPREAD OF THE GREEK LANGUAGE. 
 
 There is a remarkable providence in the general 
 spread of this rich and noble tongue throughout the 
 civilized world before the advent of our Saviour; 
 first by the conquests of Alexander, the greatest oi 
 Greeks, and afterwards by Julius Csesar, the greatest 
 of Romans — both of them unconscious forerunners 
 of Christ. 
 
 The Greek was spoken in Greece, in the islands 
 of the ^gean Sea, in Asia Minor, in Egypt, Syria, 
 Sicily, and Southern Italy. 
 
 It was at the same time the medium of inter- 
 national intercourse in the whole Roman empire, 
 which stretched from the Libyan Desert to the 
 banks of the Rhine, and from the river Euphrates 
 to the Straits of Gibraltar, and embraced the civil- 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 7 
 
 ized world, with a population of about one hundred 
 and twenty millions of souls. It was the language 
 of government, law, diplomacy, literature, and trade. 
 It occupied the position and exerted the influence 
 of the Latin in the Middle Ages, of the French in 
 the eighteenth century, and of the English in the 
 nineteenth. In Paul's language the term " Hellen," 
 or Greek, is synonymous with " the civilized world," 
 as distinct from the barbarians, and with " Gentiles," 
 as distinct from the Jews.* 
 
 Even in" the capital of the Koman empire the 
 Greek was the favorite language at the imperial 
 court among literary men, artists, lovers, and trades- 
 men. The Greeks and Greek-speaking Orientals 
 were the most intelligent and most enterprising 
 people among the middle classes. The Latin clas- 
 sics were but successful imitators of Greek poets, 
 historians, philosophers, and orators. Paul, a Roman 
 citizen, wrote his Epistle to the Eomans in Greek, 
 and the names of the converts mentioned in the six- 
 teenth chapter are mostly Greek. The early bishops 
 and divines of Eome were Greeks by descent or 
 education, or both. Pope Cornelius addressed the 
 churches in the Hellenic language in the middle of 
 the third century. The Apostles' Creed, even in 
 the Roman form, was originally composed in Greek. 
 The Roman liturgy (ascribed to Clement of Rome) 
 was Greek. The inscriptions in the oldest cata- 
 combs, and the epitaphs of the popes down to the 
 middle of the third century, are Greek. The early 
 »»- — — 
 
 * Rom. i. 14, "E\Xijv€ff Kai SdpfSapoii ver. 16, 'lovSaioe leai "EXXqj/. 
 
8 THE LAKGtJAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 fathers of the Western Church — Clemens Komanus, 
 Hennas, Gajiis, Irenseus, Hippoljtus — wrote in 
 Greek. The old Latin version of the Bible was not 
 made for Italy (although improperly called " Itala"), 
 but for the provinces, especially for North Africa. 
 It was not till the close of the second century that 
 Christian theology assumed a Latin dress in the 
 writings of the African Minutius Felix and Tertul- 
 lian, and even Tertullian hesitated a while whether 
 he should not rather write in Greek.' 
 
 THE JEWS AND THE GREEK LANGUAGE. 
 
 The Jews of the Dispersion were all more or less 
 familiar with Greek, and hence called Hellenists^ in 
 distinction from the " Hebrews " in Palestine and 
 from the " Hellenes," or native Greeks.^ They were 
 very numerous in all the cities of the empire, espe- 
 cially in Alexandria, Antioch, and Rome, and en- 
 
 ^ On the use of the Greek language in imperial Rome, see Friedlander, 
 Sittengesch. Roms, i. 142, 481 (4th ed.) ; Caspari, Quellen zur Gesch. des 
 Taufsyvibols (with reference to the Roman Creed), iii. 267-466; Lightfoot, 
 Com. on Pkilippians, p. 20 ; De Rossi, Roma Sotteran. ii. 27 sqq. (on the 
 Catacomb of St Callistus) : Renan, Marc- A urele, p. 454 sqq. Renan says 
 that even after the Latin language prevailed Greek letters were often 
 employed, and that the only Latin Church in the middle of the second 
 centurj' was the Church of North Africa. On the origin of the Latin 
 Bible, see the editions and discussions of Vercellone, Ronsch, Reusch, E. 
 Ranke, and especially Ziegler, Die lat. Biheluhersetzungen vor Hieronymus, 
 Munchen, 1879. 
 
 ^ 'W<\r]vi<jTr]Q, Acts vi. 1 ; xi. 20, etc., must not be confounded with 
 "EXX»;v, comp. Acts xiv. 1 ; xviii. 4; Rom. i. 14, 16 ; ii. 9, 10 ; Gal. iii. 28, 
 etc. It is from cWj^vt^w, to Hellenize, i. e. to speak the Greek language 
 and to imitate Greek manners ; as we use the term " to Romanize " of 
 those who lean to the Roman Church. 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 9 
 
 joyed, since the time of Julius Caesar, who favored 
 them as a wise and liberal statesman, special protec- 
 tion for the exercise of their religion. In Rome 
 itself they numbered from twenty to thirty thousand 
 souls, had seven synagogues and three cemeteries 
 (with Greek and a few Latin inscriptions). They 
 were mostly descendants of slaves and captives of 
 Pompey, Cassius, and Antony. They occupied a 
 special quarter (the Fourteenth Region) beyond the 
 Tiber. They were the same people then as they are 
 now in all countries : they carried on their little 
 trades in old clothes, broken glass, sulphur matches ; 
 they observed their peculiar customs ; they emerged 
 occasionally from poverty and filth to wealth and 
 honor, as bankers, physicians, and astrologers; and 
 they attracted the mingled wonder, contempt, and 
 ridicule of the Roman historians and satirists. But 
 while heathen Rome only survives in the memory 
 of history and the shapeless ruins of her temples, 
 theatres, and triumphal arches, that despised race 
 still lives: a burning bush which is never consumed, 
 an imperishable monument of a history of thousands 
 of years — a history of divine revelations and blessings, 
 of human disobedience and ingratitude, of honor and 
 disgrace, of happiness and misery, of cruel persecu- 
 tion and martyrdom ; a race without country, scat- 
 tered among enemies, yet unalterable in its creed, 
 alone in its recollections and hopes, miraculously 
 preserved for some important action in the conclud- 
 ing chapter of the history of Christianity. 
 
 As the Hellenists spoke Greek, we need not won- 
 der tliat not only the Epistle to the Rorpaps, but 
 3 
 
10 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 even tlie Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of 
 James " to the twelve tribes which are of the Dis- 
 persion," were written in that language. 
 
 Even in Palestine and among the strict Hebrews 
 who preferred their native Aramaic, the Greek lan- 
 guage was extensively known and spoken, especially 
 on the western sea-coast, in Galilee, and Decapolis. 
 Gaza, Askalon, Csesarea Stratonis, Gadara, Hippos, 
 Scythopolis (Bethshan), Sebaste, Csesarea Philippi 
 (Paneas) were Greek cities in which the Greek 
 was spoken exclusively or predominantly. The 
 northern part of Galilee, owing to its mixed popu- 
 lation, was called Galilee of the Gentiles (Isa. ix. 1 ; 
 Matt. iv. 15). Palestine was, to a large extent, a 
 bilingual country, like some of the Swiss cantons, 
 Alsace, Lorraine, Belgium, Holland, Posen, Wales, 
 Eastern Canada, the German counties of Pennsyl- 
 vania, and other border regions in modern times. 
 Many Jews had Greek names, as the seven deacons 
 of the congregation at Jerusalem.^ 
 
 This city was the stronghold of the Jewish faith 
 and language, of prejudice and bigotry," but could 
 not resist altogether the influence of the age. The 
 Herodian family had foreign tastes and habits. 
 Jerusalem had over four hundred synagogues, and 
 was inhabited and visited by Jews and proselytes 
 
 ' Acts vi. 5 : Stephen, Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Tirtion, Parmenas, 
 and Nicolas. They may have been Hellenists, and elected in defer- 
 ence to the complaints of the Grecian Jews, but they resided in Jeru- 
 salem. 
 
 ^ This religious bigotry denounced all foreign learning as dangerous. 
 Rabbi Eliezer said : " He who teaches his son Greek is like one who eats 
 pork." 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. II 
 
 * from every nation under heaven." ' The number 
 of Jews present at the Passover, according to Jose- 
 phus, sometimes exceeded two millions." The Greek 
 translation of the Old Testament was as much used 
 as the Hebrew or Aramaic original. The Jewish 
 Apocrypha were written in Greek (though some of 
 them first in Hebrew). The two principal Jewish 
 scholars of the first century, Philo and Josephus, 
 wrote their works in Greek.^ 
 
 ^ Acts ii. 5. The Jerusalem Talmud gives four hundred and eighty as 
 the number of sj'^nagogues. See Lightfoot on Acts vi. 9. 
 
 '^ Josephus mentions even three millions as being present in Jerusalem 
 under Cestius Gallus at the Passover, A.D. 65 {Bell. Jud. ii. 14, 3). He 
 also states (vi. 9, 3) that the number of paschal lambs slain at this Pass- 
 over, as reported to Nero, was 256,500, which, allowing no more than ten 
 persons to each lamb, would give us 2,565,000 as the number of persons 
 present. He gives the number 2,700,200, which comes nearer his former 
 statement, and includes all others who could not partake of the sacrifice. 
 
 ' Josephus, who was born and educated in Jerusalem, wrote his history 
 of the Jewish War first in Hebrew, " for the barbarians in the interior ;" 
 afterwards in Greek, for " those under Roman dominion " {Bell. Jud. 
 prooem. 1). He concludes his Antiquities (xx. 11, § 2) with the following 
 passage, which is characteristic of his vanity, and shows the proud con- 
 tempt of the Jews for foreign languages at that time : " Now, after having 
 completed the work, I venture to say that no other person, whether he 
 were a Jew or a foreigner, had he ever so great an inclination to do it, 
 could so accurately {(iKpijSwg) deliver this history to the Greeks. For 
 those of my own nation freely acknowledge that I far exceed them in 
 learning belonging to Jews; I have also taken a great deal of pains to 
 acquire the learning of the Greeks, and understand the elements of the 
 Greek language, although, on account of the habitual use of the paternal 
 tongue, I cannot pronounce Greek with sufficient accuracy (afCjOt/3«av). 
 For with us those are not encouraged who learn the languages of many 
 nations, and so adorn their discourses with the smoothness of their periods; 
 because this sort of accomplishment is regarded as common, not only to 
 all sorts of freemen, but to as many of the servants as are inclined to 
 learn them. But we give those only the testimony of being wise men 
 
12 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 From these facts, as well as from the numerous 
 Greek names of persons and places, Greek coins and 
 inscriptions, we may safely infer that during the first 
 two centuries of our era the higher classes in Pales- 
 tine, especially in Samaria (Sebaste), were quite 
 familiar with the Greek language, and that the peo- 
 ple generally had a partial knowledge of it sufficient 
 for practical intercourse and commerce.^ 
 
 CHRIST AND THE GREEK LANGUAGE. 
 
 There are two extreme views on the language 
 used by our Lord. The one is that he spoke only 
 the Hebrew vernacular;' the other, that he spoke 
 Greek only, or more than Hebrew.^ The natural 
 view, which accords best with the facts already 
 stated, is that he used both languages — the vernacu- 
 lar Aramaic in ordinary intercourse with his disci- 
 ples and the Jewish people, the Greek occasionally 
 when dealing with strangers and Gentiles.* 
 
 who are fully acquainted with our laws, and are able to explain the sacred 
 books." 
 
 ^ For a thorough discussion of this subject, with references to Josephus, 
 Cicero, Seneca, Pliny, Strabo, Appian, Diodorus, and other authorities, 
 see Hug, Einleit. in die Schr. des N. Test. (3d ed. 1826), ii. 30-60, translated 
 by Robinson, " Bibl. Repository," Andover, 1831, p. 530-551. Schiirer, in 
 his Neutestamentl. Zeitgesch., p. 376-385, comes to the same conclusion. 
 
 ' So De Rossi (who wrote against Diodati), Pfannkuche, Mill, Michaelis, 
 Marsh, Kuinol, and others. 
 
 ^ So Isaac Vossius, Diodati, Alex. Roberts, S. G. Green. The last states 
 {Grammar of the Gr, Test. p. 168): "It was the Greek of the Septuagin^., 
 in all probability, our Lord and his apostles generally spoke. The dialect 
 of Galilee was not a corrupt Hebrew, but a provincial Greek." 
 
 * So Hug, Binterira, Wiseman (Horce Syriacce, Rom. 1828, i. 69 sqq.), 
 Credner, Bleek, Reuss, Thiersch, Robiiison {I.e. p. 316), Westcott, Hadley, 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 13 
 
 Christ was born in Judaea, but grew up in Naza- 
 reth, and spent thirty years of his private lif« and 
 the greater part of his public ministry in Galilee. 
 All his apostles — with the exception of the traitor 
 — were Galilseans, and could be known by their pro- 
 nunciation. " Thy speech bewrayeth thee," said the 
 servants of the high-priest in Jerusalem to Peter 
 when he denied his connection with " Jesus the 
 Galilaean." ' The woman of Samaria recognized 
 our Lord by his speech and dress as a Jew, and the 
 proud rulers contemptuously called him a Galilaean.'' 
 As he became like us in all things, sin only excepted, 
 we have no reason to exempt him from those inno- 
 cent limitations which are inseparable from race 
 and nationality. He spoke, therefore, in all proba- 
 bility the vernacular Aramaic, or Syro-Chaldaic, with 
 the provincialisms and the pronunciation of Galilee.' 
 
 Delitzsch. See the older literature on the subject in Hase, Lehen Jesu, 
 p. 72 (5th ed.), and Reuss, Gesch. der heil. Schr. N. Test. i. 30 (5th ed.). 
 
 - Matt. xxvi. 73, r) \a\id cov SfjXov ce ttojei; Mark xiv. 70; Luke 
 xxii. 59. See Wetstein, in loc, for examples of various provincial dialects 
 of Hebrew or Aramaic. The Galilaeans (like the Samaritans) confounded 
 the gutturals X, 3J, tn, and used n for U}. The Babylonian Talmud says 
 that they paid no attention to the correctness of speech. The word for 
 thunder, ragesh, in Boanerges (Mark iii. 17), and Rabbuni (Mark x. 51 ; 
 John XX. 1 6) for Rabboni, or Ribboni, are said to be Galilaean provincial- 
 isms. See Grimm, s. v., and Keira, Gesch. Jesu von Naz. iii. 560 note. 
 
 "^ John iv. 9 ; vii. 52; Luke xxiii. 6. 
 
 ® Prof. Delitzsch, who is excellent authority on the languages of the 
 Bible and Jewish usages at the time of Christ, says, in an essay in the 
 "Daheim" (as quoted by Bohl, Die Alttest. Citate im N. T. p. 543): 
 " Der Herr haite auch schleckthin nur ihm eigenthitmliche Worte und Wen- 
 dungen, wie wenn er besonders feierliche A usspriiche mit amen, amena (bei 
 JohariTies : Wahrlick, wahrlich, ich sage) zu beginnen pflegte, wesshalb er in 
 ier Apokalypse als der ireue und wahrhaftiae Zeuge, ^der Amen* 
 
14: THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 The Evangelists have preserved a few examples 
 of the speech of our Lord, and these isolated sounds 
 from his lips still re-echo in all languages. He raised 
 the daughter of Jairus with the words : Talitha cumi 
 (" Damsel, arise ").' He opened the ears of the deaf 
 man with Ephphatha (" Be opened ").'* He exclaim- 
 ed on the Cross, In the language of the 22d Psalm : 
 Eli^ Eli^ lama sabachthani ? (" My God, my God, 
 why hast Thou forsaken me ?").^ He addressed Paul 
 on the way to Damascus in the Hebrew tongue, which 
 reached the quick of his sensibilities: ^'/Shaul, Shaul, 
 
 wird (iii. 14). A her ihrer Grundlage nach war seine Sprache die seines Volkes 
 und Landes. Das Christenthum ist ein galildisches Gewdchs. Sckon die 
 Namen, die wirjiihren, verrathen es; der Name Thomas ist griechisch-ara- 
 mdisch, der Name Simon ist eigenthiimlich paldstinisck-aramdisch, und der 
 Name Magdalena stammt aus Magdala in der schonen Landschaft am 
 galildischen Meere. Ja, wir alle reden, auch ohne es zu wissen, in ara- 
 mdischen, in paldstinischen Worten. Wenn wir Jesus als Messias bekennen, 
 wenn wir des Herm Mahl das neutestameniliche Passa nennen, wenn wir zu 
 Gott mit dem kindlichen Abba beten, so sind dies die aramdischen Worte 
 MESCHiCHA, PASCHA, ABBA, und wenn wir den Namen Jesu aussprecken 
 und mit dem Mariaruf Rabbuni ihm zu Fiissen fallen, so sind dies pald- 
 stinisch-galildische Formen. Mit dem Friedensgrusse Schelama lechOn ! 
 hegrusste auch noch der A uferstandene seine Junger, und mit einem Zurufe 
 in dieser Sprache: Schaul, Schaul, lema red aft jathi? (Saul, Saul, 
 warum verfolgst Dii mich ?) hrachte der Erhohete den Saulus vor Damask 
 zur Besinnung QApg, xxvi. 14). Wie Saulus Worte horte, ohne eine Gestalt 
 zu sehen, so miissen auch ivir zufriedeii sein, uns den Klang und der Art 
 seiner Rede ndher gebracht zu hahen — Er selbst bleibt iiher die Moglichkeit 
 der Beschauung er hahen; nicht nur seine Herrlichkeitsgestalt, auch schon 
 seine Knechtsgestalt hlendet uns, dass wir die A ugen ahwenden miissen, ndm- 
 lich die Ihn sinnlich jixiren wollenden A ugen — wir werden Ihn einst sehen von 
 Angesicht, aher diesseits Idsst Er sich nur erschauen mit A ugen des Glaubens." 
 
 ^ Mark v. 41 (TaXccS-d kov/i in Westcott and Hort). 
 
 * Mark vii. 34. 'E00a^d is a Greek corrupt transliteration of Ethpha- 
 thah, the Syriac imperative Ethpael. 
 
 ' Matt, xxvii. 46. Mark (xv. 34) gives the Aramaic form, Eloi, Eloi, 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 15 
 
 why persecutest thou me ?" * In the sacred heart- 
 domain of religion the mother -tongue is always 
 more effective than any acquired speech. Paul 
 himself, when he wished to gain a more favorable 
 hearing from the' excited populace at Jerusalem, 
 appealed to them in their native Hebrew." 
 
 At the same time we cannot suppose that Jesus 
 was ignorant of a language which was familiar to 
 the educated classes even in the interior of Palestine, 
 and in which his own disciples, the unlearned fish- 
 ermen of Galilee, preached and wrote. And, if he 
 understood Greek, he must have spoken it on all 
 proper occasions, as when he conversed with for- 
 eigners, with the Syro-Phoenician woman,' with the 
 heathen centurion,* with the Greeks who called on 
 him shortly before his passion,* and especially at 
 the tribunal of Pontius Pilate and King Herod. 
 No interpreter is mentioned, and a Roman governor 
 liable to be recalled at any time was not likely to 
 acquire the knowledge of a difficult provincial lan- 
 guage when he could get along with Greek.' 
 
 * Acts xxvi. 14, XaovX, ^aovX. In all other passages the Greek form 
 ^avXog is given ; see ix. 1, etc. 
 
 ' Acts xxi. 40 ; xxii. 2. Josephiis did the same in the name of Titus, 
 as his interpreter, during the siege. Comp. Bell. Jud. v. 9, § 2 ; vi. 2, § 1, 5 ; 
 vi. 6, § 2. From these examples it appears that the common people either 
 knew no Greek, or at all events not as well as Aramaic. 
 
 ' Who is called yvvi^ 'EKXrivig, Mark vii. 26. 
 
 * Matt. viii. 6. 
 
 * John xii. 20. They are called " Hellenes " ('EXXtiveq), not Hellenists 
 ('EXXtjvtOTat) or Grecian Jews, and were probably proselytes of the gate, 
 or heathens leaning to the Jewish religion. 
 
 * The provincial governors gave judgment in Latin or Greek. Cicero, 
 Crassus, and Mucianus used Greek in Greece and Asia. The Greek was 
 
16 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 THE APOSTLES AND THE GREEK LANGUAGE. 
 
 As to the apostles, thej grew up with a knowl- 
 edge of both languages, although, of course, the 
 Hebrew was more natural to them. Whatever may 
 have been the pentecostal gift of tongues, they 
 needed no miraculous endowment with a knowl- 
 edge of Greek.' They acquired and used it like 
 other people of their age and nation. They learned 
 the Hebrew at home and in the synagogue; the 
 Greek on the street and from living intercourse 
 with Gentiles. They had no book knowledge of 
 Greek, and cared only for its practical use. As 
 Galila3ans, they were brought into frequent contact 
 with heathen neighbors. Matthew, from his former 
 occupation as a tax-gatherer, would naturally be a 
 homo hilinguis. Paul was of Hebrew parentage, 
 and brought up in Jerusalem at the feet of Gama- 
 liel, so that he could call himself " a Hebrew of the 
 Hebrews ;" yet he was not only a master of the 
 Greek language as applied to Christian truths, but 
 had also, perhaps from his early youth, as a native 
 of Tarsus, which was famous for Greek schools, 
 some knowledge of secular Greek literature, as his 
 quotations from three poets show.'' 
 
 the court-language of the proconsuls of Asia and Syria. The procurators 
 of Palestine would not make an exception. See Hug, I. c. 
 
 ^ Eusebius, who as bishop (and probably a native) of Caesarea, was well 
 acquainted with Palestine, declares {Dem. Evang. lib. iii.) that the apos- 
 tles, before the resurrection of Christ, knew only their vernacular Syriac 
 language. But this was merely his private opinion, and he himself wrote 
 all his books in Greek. 
 
 " Aratus, Acts xvii. 28 ; Menander, 1 Cor. ^v. 35 ; and Epimenides, 
 Tit. i. 12. See my Church ffistor^, reviged ed. ^1882), i. 285 sqq. 
 
THfi LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. l7 
 
 The most conclusive proof of the familiarity of 
 the apostles and evangelists with Greek is the fact 
 that they composed the Gospels and Epistles in that 
 language, and that they quote the Old Testament 
 usually from the current Greek version. 
 
 THE GREEK AND THE ENGLISH. 
 
 Thus the language of a little peninsula, by its 
 beauty and elasticity, vigor and grace, the wealth of 
 its literature, and the providential course of events, 
 had become at the time of Christ the language of 
 the civilized world, and conquered even the conquer- 
 ing Romans. The noblest mission of this noblest of 
 tongues was accomplished when it became the organ 
 of the everlasting gospel of the Saviour of mankind. 
 This fact secures to the Greek for all time to come a 
 superiority over all the languages of the earth, and 
 the first claim on the attention of the biblical scholar. 
 
 Next to the Greek, no language has a nobler and 
 grander mission for the extension of Christianity 
 and Christian civilization than the English. It has 
 already spread much farther than the Greek or Latin 
 ever did. From its island home in the Northern 
 Sea it has gone forth to lands and continents un- 
 known to the apostles, fathers, and reformers. It 
 carries with it the energy and enterprise of the 
 Saxon race, the treasures of the richest literature, 
 the love of home and freedom, and a profound 
 reverence for the Bible. It is predestinated and 
 adapted by its composition and history to become 
 more and more the cosmopolitan language of mod- 
 ern times. 
 
18 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 "Among all the modern languages," says a dis- 
 tinguished German philologist, " none has, by giving 
 up and confounding all the laws of sound, and by 
 cutting off nearly all the inflections, acquired greater 
 strength and vigor than the English. Its fulness of 
 free middle sounds, which cannot be taught, but 
 only learned, is the cause of an essential force of 
 expression such as perhaps never stood at the com- 
 mand of any other language of men. Its entire, 
 highly intellectual, and wonderfully happy structure 
 and development are the result of a surprisingly 
 intimate marriage of the two noblest languages in 
 modern Europe — the Germanic and the Komance; 
 the former, as is well known, supplying in far larger 
 proportion the material groundwork, the latter the 
 intellectual conceptions. As to wealth, intellectual- 
 ity, and closeness of structure, none of all the living 
 languages can be compared with it. In truth the 
 English language, which by no mere accident has 
 produced and upborne the greatest and most com- 
 manding poet of modern times as distinguished 
 from the ancient classics — I can, of course, only 
 mean Shakespeare — may with full propriety be 
 called a world -language ; and, like the English 
 people, it seems destined hereafter to prevail even 
 more extensively than at present in all the ends of 
 the earth." ' 
 
 The English language is now the chief organ 
 for the spread of the Word of God. This has 
 been strikingly illustrated in the year 1881 by the 
 
 ^ Jacob Grimm, Ueher den Urspimng der Sprache (Berlin, 1852), p. 50. 
 Comp. Schaff, The English Language (Nashville, 1887). 
 
THE LAI^GUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 19 
 
 extraordinary success of the Ee vised Version of the 
 New Testament, prepared by two co-operative com- 
 mittees, in England and the United States. More 
 than a million of copies were ordered from the 
 British University presses before the day of publica- 
 tion (May 17, 1881), and more than twenty reprints 
 of different sizes and prices appeared in the United 
 States before the close of the year, so that within a 
 few months nearly three millions of copies were 
 sold. This fact stands alone in the history of litera- 
 ture, and furnishes the best proof that the old book 
 which we call the New Testament is more popular 
 and powerful than ever, no matter what infidels may 
 say to the contrary. Among the two freest and most 
 progressive nations of the earth the Bible is revered 
 as the guardian angel of public and private virtue, the 
 pillar of freedom and civilization, the sacred ark of 
 every household, the written conscience of every soul. 
 
 THE MACEDONIAN DIALECT. 
 
 The Greek language has come down to us, like 
 the old Teutonic language, in a number of dialects 
 and sub-dialects. The literature is chiefly deposited 
 in four : 1. The ^olic dialect, known from in- 
 scriptions and grammarians, and from remains of 
 Alcceus, Sappho, and Erinna. 2. The Doric, rough 
 but vigorous, immortalized by the odes of Pindar 
 and the idyls of Theocritus. 3. The Ionic, soft 
 and elastic, in which Homer sang the Iliad and 
 Odyssey, and Herodotus told his history. 4. The 
 Attic dialect differs little from the Ionic, unites 
 energy and dignity with grace and melody, and is 
 
20 THE LANGtJAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 represented by the largest literature, the tragedies 
 of JEschjlus, Sophocles, Euripides, the comedies of 
 Aristophanes, the histories of Thncydides and Xen- 
 ophon, the philosophical dialogues of Plato, and the 
 orations of Demosthenes/ 
 
 The Attic dialect, owing to its literary wealth and 
 the military conquests of Alexander the Great, the 
 pupil of Aristotle, came to be the common spoken 
 and written language not only in Greece proper, 
 but over the Macedonian provinces of Syria and 
 Egypt. By its diffusion it lost much of its peculiar 
 stamp, and absorbed a number of foreign words and 
 inflections, especially from the Orient. But what it 
 lost in purity it gained in popularity. It was eman- 
 cipated from the trammels of nationality and intel- 
 lectual aristocracy, and became cosmopolitan. It 
 grew less artistic, but more useful. 
 
 In this modified form, the Attic Greek received 
 the name of the Macedonian or Alexandrian, and 
 also the Common or Hellenic language (17 Koivfi 
 ^laXtKTOQ or 'EWnviKTj ^iclXektoc:). It was used by 
 Aristotle, who connects the classic Attic with the 
 Hellenic, Polybius, Plutarch, Diodorus Siculus, Dio 
 Cassius, Dionysius of Halicarnassus, ^lian, Hero- 
 dian, Arrian, and Lucian. 
 
 Examples of new words: ayaBrovpydv, atx/iaXwrt^eiv, avTiKtrpov^ 
 cLTroKapadoKeiv, sWoysiv, svKaipsiv, diKaioKpiaria, vvx^fjixepov, oXiyo- 
 
 ^ On the Greek dialects, compare the large work of Ahrens, De Grcecce 
 Linguce Dialectis (1839, 1843, 2 vols.) ; Merry, Specimms of Greek Dialects 
 (Oxford, 1875) ; the well-known grammars of Prof. G. Curtius of Leipzig, 
 and Kuhner; and Gustav Meyer, Griech. Grammatik (Leipzig, 1880), the 
 introduction and the literature there indicated. Also Wilkins, in " Encycl. 
 Brit." xi. 131-135. 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 21 
 
 iriiTTOQ, oiKoSEffTTOTTig, TreToi^rjffiQ. From Egypt: vdnvpogy irvpafiiij 
 fidiov. From Persia : dyyapog, yd^a, fxdyoi, Trapd^uaoQy rtdpa. From 
 the Latin: Krjvffog, Kovcrrwdia, Xeytwv. From the Semitic: dppa^tHtVf 
 Ki^dviov, pa(il3ei. The Alexandrians had also a special orthography; 
 they exchanged letters — as at and «i, e and »;, y and k — and they retained 
 the fi before \p and ^ (as in Xrjfiipofiai). See Moulton's Winer, p. 53. 
 These peculiarities are found in the best MSS. of the LXX. and Greek 
 Testament, and have been introduced into the text by Lachmann and 
 the recent critical editors. 
 
 Professor Immer (^Hermeneutics of the N. T. p. 125) gives the following 
 description of the distinctive characteristics of the Macedonian Greek : 
 " Besides the Atticisms, lonicisms, Doricisms, and iEolicisms, the SioKiktoq 
 Koivi] shows still the following peculiarities : (a.) Words that occur seldom 
 or only in poetical discourse in the old Greek now become more common, 
 and pass over into plain prose, as, e.g., fisaovvKTiov, ^coorvyije, jSptxw, to 
 moisten, torBu) for tV^tw, and others. (6.) Words in use receive another 
 form, as dva^t^ia for dvd^Tjfiaj yevkffia for yevt^Xia, tKiraXai for naXaif 
 X^fQ for ix^sg, iKEcia for iKiTEia, fiiff^aTroSoaia for pna^oSoaia, fiovoip- 
 SraXfiog for £r€|Oo03'aX/iof , vov^Effia for vov^trriixig, onraaia for o\pig, ij 
 bpKOfxoaia for rd bpK., 6 TrXrjaiov for 6 TrtXac, TToranog for Trodairog, etc. 
 Especially frequent become verbal forms in -i^w, in -w pure instead of in 
 -/It (e.ff. ofivvio instead of ofivvfii), formed from the perfect, as <Tr/;/cw, sub- 
 stantives in -fxa. (c.) Words entirely new, mostly words formed through 
 composition, make their appearance, as dvriXvTpov, dX{KTopo^wpia, 
 d7roKe<paXi^u), dya^oTroisu), aixfiaXwTevui, wx^ftepov, mrofikrpiov, et al, 
 (d.) Words long familiar and current receive new meanings, as dvaKXivHV 
 and dvairiTTTeiv, to recline at table; diroKptSriivai, to answer; dirorda- 
 ata^ai, to take leave ; Saifnov or daifioviov, evil spirit ; ivxapiOT^v, to 
 thank; ^vXov, tree; TcapaKaXiiv, to pray; areyeiv, to endure, to bear up; 
 (p^dvtiv, to come, to arrive ; x|0»7/*art^eiv, to be called ; xf^wfii^tiVy to eat, 
 to nourish, et al. In a grammatical point of view the following may be 
 observed : (a.) Inflections of nouns and verbs occur which at an earlier 
 period were either entirely unknown or peculiar to a single dialect ; e. g. 
 the Doricism d<pk.(i)VTai for dtpCivrai, the iEolic optative ending in -eia, 
 the ending of the second person of the present and future passive and 
 middle in -ft instead of in -y, etc. (6.) Infrequency of the use of the 
 dual, as, c. g., Svoi instead of Svoiv. (c.) Infrequency of the employment 
 of the optative (in the Johannean writings it does not occur at all), 
 (d) The construing of certain verbs with other cases, especially with the 
 accusative, as cTrt^v/teTv ri instead of rtvo^, (pojitiaSrai diro instead of vv6 
 
22 THE LANGTTAGE OF TfiE NEW TESTAMENt. 
 
 and accusative, et al. (e.) The weakening of 'iva in the formulae Sf'sXut 
 'ivoy Xtyw 'iva, d^tog 'iva, and many others. (/.) Use of the subjunctive 
 instead of the optative after preterites, etc. A still greater degradation 
 of the language finds place in the construction of 'iva with the indicative, 
 and not with the future only, but even with the present indicative, of avv 
 with the genitive, the confounding of the cases and tenses, etc. The 
 latter peculiarities do not occur, however, in authors of Greek nationality, 
 nor in educated authors." (The translation is by Albert H. Newman, 
 Andover, 1877.) 
 
 THE HELLENISTIC DIALECT. 
 
 The Hellenic dialect assumed a strongly Hebraiz- 
 ing character among the Grecian Jews or Hellenists, 
 and as spoken by them it is called the Hellenistic 
 dialect. It was especially current in Alexandria, 
 where all nationalities mingled and adopted the 
 Greek as their medium of commercial and social 
 intercourse. This city, soon after its foundation by 
 Alexander the Great (B.C. 332), became the chief 
 seat of learning next to Athens, and the birthplace 
 of the language of the !N"ew Testament. Immense 
 libraries were collected under the Ptolemies, and 
 every important work of dying Egyptian and Orien- 
 tal learning was translated into Greek. 
 
 The literature of the Hellenistic dialect is all of 
 Jewish origin, and intimately connected with re- 
 ligion. It embraces the Septuagint and the Jewish 
 Apocrypha, which are incorporated in the Septua- 
 gint, and passed from it into the Latin Yulgate. 
 Philo (B.C. 20 to A.D. 40) and Josephus (A.D. 38- 
 103), who were well acquainted with Greek litera- 
 ture, aimed at a pure style, which would commend 
 their theological and historical writings to scholars 
 of classical taste; but, after all, they could not conceal 
 
tfiE LANGUAGE Of THIJ NEW TESTAMENT. 23 
 
 the Hebrew spirit and coloring. The Hellenistic 
 writings express Jewish ideas in Greek words, and 
 carried the religion of the East to the nations of the 
 West. 
 
 THE SEPTUAGINT. 
 
 The Septuagint version of the Old Testament 
 Scriptures was gradually made by Jewish scholars 
 in Alexandria during the reign of Ptolemy II., 
 B.C. 285-247, and has survived the ravages of the 
 Moslem conquerors. It laid the foundation for the 
 Hellenistic idiom. It made the Greek the vehicle 
 of Hebrew thought. It became the accepted Bible 
 of the Jews of the dispiersion, spread the influence 
 of their religion among the Gentiles, and prepared 
 the way for the introduction of Christianity. Thus 
 an " altar was erected to Jehovah " not only " in the 
 midst of the land of Egypt," as the prophet foretold,* 
 but all over the Roman empire. 
 
 The Septuagint is the basis of the Christian 
 Greek. It is a remarkable fact, not yet sufficiently 
 explained, that the great majority of the direct cita- 
 tions of the Old Testament in the New, which 
 amount to abdut 280,'* are taken from the Septua- 
 gint, or at all events agree better with it than with 
 the Hebrew original. 
 
 Compare on this subject, David McCalman Turpie, The Old Testament 
 in the New (Lond. 1868); Ed. Bohl, Die A . T. lichen Citate im N. T. (Wien, 
 
 » Isa, xix. 19, 20, 25. 
 
 ^ James Scott {Principles of New Testament Quotation, Edinb. 1875, 
 p. 17 sq.) says: "The whole number of repeated citations amounts to 290. 
 Seventeen only of the twenty-seven books of the New Testament contain 
 quotations from the Old. The single citations may be estimated at 226, 
 and their whole number by repetition at 284." 
 
34 THE LAl^GItAGE OF TifE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 1878), and his Forschungen nach einer Volksbihel zur Zeit Jesu und deren 
 Zusammenhang mit der Septuaginta-Uehersetzung (ibid. 1873); C. H. Toy, 
 Quotations in the New Testament (New York, 1884). Turpie states the 
 result of his examination (p. 266 sqq.) in five tables as follows: 
 
 A. 53 quotations agree with the original Hebrew aiid with the Septua- 
 
 gint (correctly rendered). 
 
 B. 10 quotations agree with the Hebrew against the Septuagint (which 
 
 is here incorrect). 
 
 C. 76 quotations difiFer from the Hebrew and from the Septuagint 
 
 (which has correctly rendered the passages). 
 
 D. 37 quotations differ from the Hebrew and agree with the Septuagint. 
 
 E. 99 quotations differ both from the Hebrew and the Septuagint, which 
 
 also differ from each other. 
 Bohl does not sum up his results, but goes carefully over the same 
 number of passages, giving the New Testament quotation, the Hebrew 
 original, and the Septuagint Version, with learned notes. He advances 
 the novel theory that Christ and the apostles quoted from a popular 
 Aramaic Bible (Volksbihel^ which he thinks was in common use at that 
 time in Palestine, and which was substantially the Septuagint Version, or 
 based on it : " Die Septvaginta Uebersetzung ist die paldsiinensische Bibel 
 oder die Bibel im Vulgar dialect geworden, vnd daher schreibt sich die Be- 
 nutzung der LXX. im Neuen Testamentr But there is no trace of an 
 Aramaic Targum before the time of Christ, nor of a Targum authorized 
 by the Sanhedrin ; and if it was based on the Septuagint, why did the 
 apostles use a translation of a translation ? The question still remains, 
 why did they not quote from the Hebrew original, and how are the de- 
 partures of the Septuagint from the Hebrew to be accounted for ? It 
 seems probable that they quoted mostly from memory, and that they 
 were more familiar with the Septuagint than the Hebrew. The whole 
 subject requires further investigation, and a new critical edition of the 
 Septuagint on the basis of the Sinaitic and Vatican MSS. and all other 
 sources combined. Important contributions are furnished by E. Nestle, 
 Veteris Testamenti Greed Codices Vaticanus et Sinaiticus cum textu 7-ecepto 
 collati (Lips. 1880 ; 2d ed. 1886), and P. de Lagarde, Libri V. T. Greece 
 (Pt. I. Gottingen, 1883). 
 
 Jesus himself quotes from the Septuagint, accord- 
 ing to the evangelists.' The apostles do it in their 
 
 * Corap. Matt. iv. 4, 7, 10 ; ix. 13 ; xv. 9 ; xxi. 16, 42 ; Mark vii. 6 ; x. 
 7 ; xii. 10, 11 ; Luke iii. 4-6 ; iv. 18, 19 ; xxii. 37. Luke's quotations are 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 25 
 
 discourses/ and in their epistles.^ Even Paul, who 
 was educated at Jerusalem and thoroughly versed 
 in rabbinical lore, usually agrees with the Septua- 
 gint, except when he freely quotes from memory, 
 or adapts the text to his argument.^ 
 
 THE APOSTOLIC GREEK. 
 
 . We are now prepared to assign to the New Tes- 
 tament idiom its peculiar position. It belongs to 
 the Hellenistic dialect, as distinct from the classical 
 Greek, and it shares with the Septuagint its sacred 
 and Hebraizing character, as distinct from the secu- 
 lar Hellenic literature ; but it differs from all pre- 
 vious dialects by its spirit and contents. It is the 
 Greek used for the first time for a new religion. In 
 this respect it stands alone, and belongs to but one 
 period, the period of the first proclamation and intro- 
 
 all from the Septuagint with the exception of one, vii. 27. The same is 
 the case substantially with Mark, with the exception of i. 2, which is 
 from the Hebrew, and embodies his reflection. Matthew departs from 
 the Septuagint and quotes from the Hebrew when he introduces a pro- 
 phetic passage with his formula 'iva 7^Xl;pw^y, as i. 23; ii. 6, 15, 18; iv. 
 15; viii. 17; xii. 18-21; xiii. 35; xxi. 5. This remarkable difference has 
 been pointed out by Bleek {Beitrdge zur Evangelienkritik, 1846, p. 57), and 
 is confirmed by Holtzmann {Die Synoptischen Evangelien, 1863, p. 259). 
 
 ^ Acts i. 20; ii. 17-21, 25-28, 34, 35; iii. 22, 25; iv. 25, 26 ; vii. 42-50; 
 XV. 15-18; xxviii. 26, 27. 
 
 " James ii. 23; iv. 6; 1 Pet. i. 16; ii. 6, 22; iii. 10-12; iv. 18; v. 5. 
 
 •Gal. iii. 13; Rom. ii.24; iii. 4, 10-18; iv.8; ix. 27-29; x. 11,21 ; xi. 9, 
 10, 26, 27; 1 Cor. i. 19; vi. 16; Eph. v. 31; vi. 2. Specimens of correc- 
 tions of the Sept. according to the Hebrew : 1 Cor. iii. 19 ; xiv. 21 ; xv. 
 64, 65; Rom. ix. 17; Eph. iv. 8. Comp. Weiss, Theol des N. T. 3d ed. 
 p. 275; Kautzsch, De Veteris Test, locis a Paulo ap. allegatis (Lips. 1869). 
 Kautzsch maintains that Paul never intentionally departs from the Septua- 
 gint, although he seems to have in view sometimes both the Hebrew and 
 the Greek. Weiss allows a more frequent use of the Hebrew- 
 
 4 
 
26 THE LANGUAGE OF THE KEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 duction of Christianity. It is of itself a strong argu- 
 ment for the genuineness of the New Testament. 
 
 The Greek of the Apostolic fathers, the Apolo- 
 gists, and the ecclesiastical writers of the third and 
 fourth centuries generally, differs considerably from 
 that of the New Testament: it has much less of the 
 Hebrew element, and gathered during the theologi- 
 cal controversies a number of new technical term's, 
 or infused new meaning into old words.' 
 
 The New Testament idiom consists of three ele- 
 ments, which we may compare with the three ele- 
 ments of man — the awiuLa, \pvxv, ^^^^ vovg or Trvcujua. 
 It has a Greek body, animated by a Hebrew soul, and 
 inspired and ruled by a Christian spirit. It grew 
 naturally out of the situation and mission of the 
 Apostolic Church, and was, and is still, admirably 
 suited for its purposes. It is more cosmopolitan 
 than any other Greek dialect. The New Testament 
 in classical Greek might have been understood and 
 appreciated by the learned few, but not by the 
 masses of Jews and Gentiles. And the same applies 
 to translations. King James's and Luther's versions 
 reach the hearts and understandings of the common 
 
 * Especially in the Nicene age. Such terms are ovata, VTroaraaig, 
 irpoamirov (as applied to the persons of the Trinity), o^ioovaiOQ, ojxotov' 
 ffioc, iTBpoovffiog (of the Son of God in his relation to the Father), evffop- 
 KwaiQ, evavBfp(t}-7rr]aig, idiorriQ, ayevvrjaia. yevvTjaia, tKiropivaiQ, Trk^ypiq 
 (of the Holy Spirit), ^botokoq (of the Virgin Mary), ivioaiQ vtrotTTariKriy 
 Koiviov'ia iSno^drwv, Trepix^opi^aig (of the inner trinitarian relations), 
 dvvTTOffraaia or kwirooTaaia (the impersonality of the human nature of 
 Christ), etc. For ecclesiastical Greek, see Suicer, Thesaurus Ecdesiasticus 
 
 e Patrihus Greeds, Amst. 2d ed. 1728, 2 vols. fol. ; C. du Fresne (du Cange), 
 
 Glossarium ad Slcriptores Medice et Infimce GrcBcitatis, Lugd. 1688, 2 torn. 
 
 fol. ; and E. A. Sophocles, Greek Lex. of the Rnnum and Byzantine Periods. 
 
 Boston^ 1670 ; now in cour&e of revision bv Dr. * hayer (i887J 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 27 
 
 people as no classical diction of Milton or Goethe 
 could do. 
 
 During the seventeenth century there was much 
 nseless controversy between the " Purists," who de- 
 fended the classical character of the New Testament 
 Greek, and the " Hebraists," who pointed out its 
 Hebraisms. Both parties ignored the necessity and 
 beauty of its composite character for its cosmopoli- 
 tan mission.^ 
 
 HEBRAISMS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 The Hebrew element is the connecting link be- 
 tween the Mosaic and the Christian dispensation. 
 It pervades all the apostolic writings, but not in the 
 same degree. It is strongest in Matthew, Mark, the 
 first two chapters of Luke, and in the Apocalypse. 
 The hymns of the Virgin Mary {Magnificat)^ of 
 Zacharias {Benedictus), and of Simeon {Nunc Di- 
 mittis) are entirely Hebrew in spirit and tone, and 
 can be literally rendered so as to read like Hebrew 
 psalms. But on the whole Luke and the author of 
 the Epistle to the Hebrews Hebraize least of all. 
 Not a few Hebrew words — as Amen, Eden, Messiah, 
 Manna, Hallelvjah, Sabbath — have passed into mod- 
 ern languages, and remain as perpetual memorials 
 of the earliest revelations of God. The Hebraisms 
 are not grammatical blunders or blemishes, but neces- 
 sary supplements of the defects of the secular Greek. 
 
 * See the literature on this controversy in Reuss, p. 37. He says: 
 " Das neutestamentliche Idiom ist nicht aus einer rohen Sprachenmischung 
 hervorgegangen, sondern stellt sick uns dar als der erste Schritt des im Osten 
 aufgegangenen Lichtes zur Bewdltigung und Durchdringung der abendldn- 
 dischen Gesittung." Comp. also Tregelles, in Home's Tntrod. iv. 21-23; 
 and Bleek-Mangold's Einl. i. d. N. Test. p. 78 (4th ed. X886). 
 
28 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 They represent new ideas which require new words. 
 They impart to the apostolic writings the charm of 
 the antiqueness and elevated simplicity of the Old 
 Testament. 
 
 With the exception of a few pure or old Hebrew 
 words {Amen, Hallelujah, Hosanna^ Sabbath, which 
 were borrowed from the temple service, and are 
 found in the Septuagint), the Hebraisms of the 
 New Testament belong to the later Hebrew or 
 Aramaic ( Syro - Chaldaic ) dialect which, after the 
 return from the Babylonian exile, had gradually 
 superseded the older as the living language of the 
 people.' The Hebrew still continued to be the 
 sacred language (la'^i^•'^ "p'^c'), and the Scripture 
 lessons were read from the Hebrew text, but were 
 followed by Aramaic translations (Targumim) and 
 sermons (Midrashim).' 
 
 I. Hebrew words for which the classical Greek 
 has no equivalent. I do not claim completeness for 
 this and the following lists, but they embrace the 
 most important words. 
 
 a^aSS<ov = 'J'l'^S^ii (destruction), pr. name of the angel prince of the 
 infernal regions, Rev- ix. 11. 
 
 ai3/3a=6<aK (Heb. ^i<), father, Mark xiv. 36; Rom. viii. 15, Gal. iv. 6. 
 
 uKeXdafid (W. and H., a/cEX^a/Ltdx)=!}<^? ''?^'n,JieM of blood, Acts i. 19. 
 
 aXXijXovia=«n''"1^^«^, hallelujah, praise ye Jehovah (Heb.), Rev. xix. 
 1, 3, 4, 6. Comp.'Ps. civ. 35. 
 
 * The word i^pa'iari, hebraice, is used for chaldaice, John v. 2 ; xix. 13, 
 17, 20; Acts ix. 11 ; xvi. 16 ; Rev. ix. U ; xvi. 16 ; and also in Josephus. 
 
 ' The Talmud is written partly in Hebrew (the Mishna), partly in 
 Aramaic (the Gremara), but mixed with exotic words from various lan- 
 guages — Greek, Latin, Coptic, Persian, Arabic — and disfigured by gram- 
 matical irregularities and barbarous spelling. See Briill, Fremdsprachliche 
 Ifeden^arten in den Talmuden und Midrashim (Leipz. 1869). 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 29 
 
 afir]vz=:']'Di< (Heb.), trult/, verily, Matt. vi. 13 (?), Rom. i. 25; ix. 5; 
 Rev. iii. 14, etc. 
 
 dppafitjjv = "(1^'^? (Heb.), a pledge, earnest (a mercantile term of 
 Phoenician origin), 2 Cor. i. 22 ; v. 5 ; Eph. i. 14. 
 
 (ioLTOQ = na (Heb.), bath (a liquid measure of about 8^ gallons), Luke 
 xvi. 5, 6. 
 
 /3e6\^€/3oi;\ = b^l3t b^S (Aram.), lord of dung (deus stercoris), and 
 /3€€X?€/3ot'/3 = 5i*l3t ^:^^a (Heb.), lord of flies, the name of a god of the 
 Philistines at Ekron. The former is a contemptuous Jewish by-name of 
 this idol, and was applied also to the prince of demons, Matt. xii. 24, 27 ; 
 Mark iii. 22 ; Luke xi. 15, 18, 19. 
 
 (ioavepyig = (^.^i?) Tvl'n ^^IJSI, Sons of Thunder, Mark iii. 17. A name 
 given to the sons of Zebedee (comp. Luke ix. 54). 
 
 (ivaaog=.y^^ (Sept.),^we linen, Luke xvi. 19; Rev. xviii. 12. Also 
 (3vff(Tivov, Rev. xix. 8. 
 
 ya(3(3a5rd:=i<D^t (Gr. XiSdorpwror), back, ridge, pavement,' the place 
 where Pilate gave sentence against Jesus, John xix. 13. 
 
 ysevva =: CSIl Ui'^iS, the valley of Hinnom, Josh. xv. 8; Gehenna, hell, 
 Matt. V. 22 ; Mark ix. 43 ; Luke xii. 5, etc. Not to be confounded with 
 Hades or Sheol, as is done in the A. V. 
 
 yoXyo^d (al. d) = &<Jnb^bi (Heb. thtihf), skull {Kpaviov, calva, calva- 
 ria, whence our Calvary), the place of Christ's crucifixion, an elevation 
 (not a hill), so called from its conical form (not from skulls), Matt. xxviL 
 33 ; Mark xv. 22 ; John xix. 17. 
 
 fj3|oat(Tn, Westcott and Hort efSpdiffri (from ^5??)> Uebraice, in Hebrew 
 (Aramaic), John v. 2; xix. 13, 17,20; Rev. ix. 11, xvi. 16. 
 
 t\o)i tXwi (or ^Xfi »)\f<, Heb. "^bx), Xefxa ca(iax^avf.i, My God,my God, 
 why hast thou forsaken me. Quotation from Ps. xxii. 2. See Matt, xxvii. 
 46 ; Mark xv. 34. Mark gives the Syriac form, IXwi tXw/. In Matthew 
 there are variations, but Westcott and Hort give IXm in the text and 
 ijXei in the margin. 
 
 i(})<paBa. (Aram. nn&niJi), havoix^rfri, he opened, Mark vii. 34. 
 
 Z,i^dviov (Arab., Syr., Talm.), bastard wheat, tares, Matt. xiii. 25, etc. 
 
 KafxriXog ^^'S^ (Heb.), camel, Mark i. 6, Matt. iii. 4; xix. 24, etc. 
 (Sept. Gen. xii. 16; xxiv. 10). 
 
 Kivvdfiiofiov = )']'Q^p (Heb.), cinnamon (an aromatic bark used for 
 incense and perfume), Rev. xviii. 13, 
 
 lovSat^w (from •T^1l^^, Judah), to Judaize, Gal. iL 14; also iovdaifffiog, 
 i. 13; loiiddiKoig, ii. 14; iovdaiKoc, Tit. i. 14; lovdaiog, Acts x. 18, etc. 
 
 Kopjidv and Kop^avdQ=*'\^'^'^ (Heb.), K^a^lp (Aram.), an offering, 
 oblation, Mark vii. 11 ; Matt, xxvii. 6. 
 
30 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 KVfiivov =: ^'B^ (Heb.), cummin (Germ. Kiimmel), a low herb of the 
 fennel kind, which produces aromatic seeds. 
 
 \i(3avoQ = S^SSb (Heb. from the verb )'2h, to be white), frarJcmcensej 
 Matt. ii. 11 ; Rev. xviii. 13. 
 
 fiafiiovag = Xai^QX^, "jiafi^^, riches, Matt. vi. 24; Luke vi. 9. Comp. 
 the Heb. il3Sia5<, Isa. xxxiii. 6 (Brjeavpoi, LXX.) ; Ps. xxxvii. 3 (TrXovTog). 
 Augustin says : " Lucrum punice mammon dicitur." 
 
 ftdvva (Heb. "i^, in the Sept. ro fictv), manna, the miraculous food of 
 the Israelites in the wilderness, John vi. 31, 49, 58; Heb. ix. 4; Rev. 
 ii. 17. 
 
 ftapdv d^d =: "inX "Jltt, the Lord cometh, 1 Cor. xvi. 22. 
 
 fiEffffiag = i<n^'^'Q (Heb. 11*^^^), the Anointed, the Messiah, John i, 
 41 (42) ; iv. 25. In all other passages the Greek equivalent, Xptoroc 
 (from XP^^t '^ anoint), is used. 
 
 [/iw|0£= rrib (Heb.), rebel (?), Matt. v. 22.] * 
 
 Trdaxa = i<T^'0^ (Heb. HDS), passover. Matt. xxvi. 17; John ii. 13; 
 vi. 4; xviii. 39, etc. Used in three different senses: (1) the paschal 
 lamb ; (2) the paschal meal ; (3) the paschal feast from the 14th to the 
 20th of Nisan. Mistranslated Easter in E. V., Acts xii. 4 ; correct in R. V. 
 
 pafi^i or j6aj3/3£i', pa^^ovi or pafi^ovvi = '^S'n (Heb. from IS'n, much, 
 great), ■j12'1, ISII (Chald.), my great one, my master, great master, John 
 XX. 6; Mark x. 51, etc. The salutation of Hebrew teachers or doctors 
 (^Si^daKokoi). Comp. the French Monsieur, Monseigneur, Rdbboni or 
 Rabbuni, John xx. 16, is the Galilaean pronunciation for Ribboni. 
 
 paKd (or paxd, Tischendorf ) = fi<j5i'n (Heb. p'''^), empty, worthless, 
 Matt. V. 22. 
 
 ffaj3ox3'avt = '^?^p5P (Chal.), thou hast forsaken me. Matt. xxii. 46. 
 
 aa(3a(jj^=T)M<'22i (Heb.), hosts, armies (Kvpiog oajiaw^, WX^^ •^^•^7 
 Lord of Hosts), Luke ii. 13 ; Rom. ix. 29 ; James v. 4. 
 
 <Td(3(3aT0v = raui (Heb.), rest, day of rest, Mark ii. 27, etc. Also the 
 plural adlSfSara (Mark i. 21, etc.); aa^^aria^oQ, a keeping of Sabbath, 
 Sabbath rest (Heb. iv. 9); rj -qfiipa tov aa(3(3dT0v (niaisn t3T^), the 
 Sabbath day (John xix. 31 ; Luke iv. 16) ; bSbg <Tal3(3dT0v, a Sabbath- 
 
 * This is usually considered as the vocative of the Greek fiiopog, fool. 
 The E. R. recognizes the Hebrew derivation in the margin. The He- 
 brew more means rebellious, heretical (Numb. xx. 10) ; but the SjTiac mo7'e 
 means Kvpiog, dominus. Dr. Fr. Field objects to the Hebrew derivation 
 on the ground that Christ used the Syriac. Otium Norvicense (Oxf. 1881), 
 p. 2. If the word is Greek we must put a Hebrew meaning into it, with 
 reference to Ps, xiv. 1, where the atheist is called a fool (^!23, LXX. d^puiv). 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 31 
 
 day's journey, t. e. 6 stadia or 750 Roman paces, equal to about two thirds 
 of an English mile (Acts i. 12) ; and irpoad^^aTov, fore-Sahhath, Sabbath' 
 eve (Mark xv. 42). 
 
 aarav, aaravag^^)'^^ (Heb.), adversary, devil (SidlioXoQ, 6 Trovrjpog), 
 Matt. xvi. 23 ; Mark viii. 33 ; Luke xxii. 3 ; 2 Cor. xii. 7, etc. 
 
 aaTTtpeipog = "l^'Qb (Heb.), sapphire (a precious stone, next in value to 
 the diamond), Rev. xxi. 19 (Sept. Ex. xxiv. 10; xxviii. 18). 
 
 ffttTov = !}<ri!SD (Heb. "^^Jlp), a seak (a dry measure of about a peck 
 and a half), Matt. xiii. 33. 
 
 aiKipa (to, indecl.) = "^^^J (Heb.), sikera, strong drink, Luke i. 15. 
 
 ffVKdfiivog = tn^p^ (Heb.), a sycamine tree, Luke xvii. 6 (Sept. 1 Kings 
 X. 27, etc.). 
 
 raXt^d, Kovjx = "^^^p &<n*^?S3, maiden, arise, Mark v. 41. 
 
 va(y^s)^roQ = 'y\^^ (Heb.), hyssop, John xix. 29 ; Heb. ix. 29 (1 Kings v. 
 3, etc.). 
 
 XBpovjSifi = 0*^^51*13 (Heb. plural from S^'^S), cherubim, Heb. ix. 5. 
 Comp. the Greek ypv\l/, ypvTrog. 
 
 woavvd = K3 n^i^in (Ps. cxviii. 25), Hosanna, save now — a word of 
 joyful acclamation, Matt. xxi. 9, 15; Mark xi. 9, 10; John xii. 13. 
 
 Proper names of persons are very numerous : 
 
 Kr](paQ (Syr. JJtS*^?, Greek Jlfrpog), Mapia (Aramaic for the Hebrew 
 B^'n'a), Mdp^a (domino), MaXxoQ (Tj?*?* King)> Xoi»^a (Luke viii. 3 ; see 
 Westcott and Hort's text), Tafii^d (Greek AopKdq, Acts ix. 36, 40); 
 'IaKw/3 or 'laKwj3oc, 'li]O0VQ, 'lujdvvrjg, MEKxiffsSsK, '2aov\ or ^avXog, 
 and many others. Also the names compounded with 'la, son, as Barabbas 
 (son of a father, or son of a rabbi), Bartholomew, Barjesus, Barjonas, 
 Bartimaeus, Barsabas, Barnabas. 
 
 Hebrew names of several places, as, 
 
 Armageddon (mount of Megidd6, Rev. xvi. 16), Bethlehem (House of 
 Bread), Bethany (House of Dates), Bethphage (House of Figs), Bethesda 
 (House of Mercy), Bethsaida (Place of Fishing), Gethsemane (oil-press), 
 Jerusalem (Dwelling of Peace), Siloam (H?^, translated aTreffTaXusi'og, 
 John ix. 7, by Robinson, an aqueduct ; by Grimm, effusio, Wasserguss), etc. 
 
 II. Hebraizing phrases and modes of construction : 
 
 airb irpoffMirov, '^SB'^S or '^pti's'D,/rom the face or presence of any one, 
 from before, from. Acts iii. 19; v. 41 ; vii. 45; 2 Thess. i. 9; Rev. vi. 16; 
 xiL 14; XX, 11, 
 
32 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 l^affiKiviiv BTTi (instead of gen. or dat.), h^ "Hc^j ^^ reign over, Luke 
 i. 33 ; xix. 14, 17 ; Matt. ii. 22, etc. 
 
 ysvtaBaL Bravdrov (Aram.), to taste of death, to die. Matt. xvi. 28 ; 
 Mark ix. 1 ; John viii. 52, etc. 
 
 dvo Svo (bini, for dvd dvo or tig dvo'), pair-wise, by two and two, Mark vi. 7. 
 
 tl (for oi)), DJSl, in forms of oath, as Mark viii. 12, ti doBffaerai arifiuov, 
 no sign shall he given; Heb. iv. 5, ei eiatXEVffovrat, if they shall enter into 
 my rest (supply the apodosis, then will I not live, or be Jehovah), i. e. they 
 shall not enter. Comp. Gen. xiv. 23 ; Deut. i. 35 ; and Thayer's Winer, 
 p. 500 (Moulton's Winer, p. 627). 
 
 fig aTTavTrfffiv, Di^'npb, for meeting (instead of inf. dTravrdv, to nieef). 
 Matt. XXV. 1, 6 ; Acts xxviii. 15. 
 
 ivdoKiiv iv Tivi, 3 VSH, to be well pleased with, to take pleasure in some 
 one, Matt. iii. 17; xvii. 5; Mark i. 11 ; Luke iii. 22, etc. 
 
 Xoyi^uv HQ (SiKaio(Tvvr)v), b ^^'H, to reckon unto, to impute, Rom. iv. 3, 
 22 ; Gal. iii. 6 ; James ii. 23. Comp. Gen. xv. 6 (Sept.). 
 
 6/ioXoye7v iv rivi (comp. ^5 '^'^'l'^, Ps. xxxii. 5, slightly diflfering), 
 to make a confession on or respecting some on£ (in alicuius causa), Matt. x. 
 32 ; Luke xii. 8. 
 
 ov . . . TTOLQ, ^b &<b, for ovdeig, not one, none. Matt. xxiv. 22 ; Mark xiii. 
 20; Rom. iii. 20; Gal. ii. 16; Eph. v. 5, etc. 
 
 Trpoounrov rrpbg TrpooiOTrov, D^^pQ ?&t tD'ipQ, ^ace to face (nothing 
 intervening), 1 Cor. xiii. 12. See Sept. Gen. xxxii. 31. 
 
 TrpoawTTov \afi(idvEiv, C^SSl !^^3, io accept the person of any one, to 
 favor, to be partial. In the New Test, only in a bad sense, Luke xx. 
 21 ; Gal. ii. 6 (TrpoawTTOv Bebg dvBpwTrov ov Xafx^dvei). 
 
 Trpamai irpaaiai (adverbially and distributively, ai-eolatim, for dvd 
 •Kpaoidg), in ranks, plat-wise, by plats (like beds in a garden), Mark vi. 40. 
 So also avfiTToaia avfiTroma, by table parties, by companies, in ver. 39. 
 
 Also uKoXov^ilv oniau) rivog, tlvai t"ig ti, ofxvveiv iv tivi, TTpooKvvdv 
 kvMTriov Tivog, the frequent Kai iytvETO O'Tj.^y), etc. 
 
 viog, with the genitive in the sense of belonging to, or exposed to, 
 deserving of, as vibg bavuTov (ri."]^ "(S), son of death; viol rov vvfKpio- 
 vog, sons of the bridal chamber, bridemen; viol Trjg f^aaiXEiag, sons of the 
 kingdom ; viol tov Trovijpov, subjects and followers of Satan ; v'log Ttjg 
 airoXiiag, son of perdition, i. e. doomed to perdition (John xvii. 12) ; vioi 
 r^C dvaardanjjg, partakejs of the resurrection (Luke xx. 36), etc. 
 
 Foreign derivatives in imitation of the vernacular, as dvaBEfiaTiKo) 
 (from dvd^Bfia, Heb. tJ^^t^, devoted to God, Lev. xxvii. 28, 29; but also 
 devoted to death, a thing accursed, Josh. vi. 17 ; vii. 1, etc.), to anath^ 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 33 
 
 matize, to lay under a curse (Mark xiv. 71; Acts xxiii. 12, 14, 21); 
 iyKaivi^nv (from tyKaivia), to initiate, to dedicate (Heb. ix. 18; x. 20; 
 in the Sept. for Tjil^, Deut. xx. 5); oKavdaXi^tiv (^^'2, ^T????, bi^sn), 
 to make stumble, to lead to sin, and the passive (TKavSaXi^eaSfai, to stumble^ 
 to be led astray (Matt. v. 29 ; xiii. 21, etc., from aKavdaXov, a trap-sticTc, 
 a snare, a stumhling-bloch, in the Sept. for UJj!5'i?3) ; ffTrXayxvt'^etrS'at (from 
 CTrXayxva, D'^^ri'n, bowels), to have compassion (Matt. xx. 34, etc.). 
 
 The intensive adverbial use of the noun in the dative with the corre- 
 sponding verb is counted among the Hebraisms (although it occurs occa- 
 sionally among classical writers, even in Plato; see Thayer's Winer, 
 p. 466), as xap^ xaipn, he rejoiceth greatly (John iii. 29), tiriBvfiig. 
 iTreSrvfirjtra, I have earnestly desired (Luke xxii. 15). 
 
 The particles 'iva and orav are constructed with the present and future 
 indicative, Luke xi. 2; Gal. vi. 12 (?); Mark iii. 2. 'iva in classical writers 
 denotes the purpose or intention (iva tsXikov, in order that) ; but in later 
 Greek and in the New Test, sometimes simply the consequence or result 
 (^iva tK^ariKov, so that). The ecbatic use has often been needlessly 
 pressed, but as needlessly denied by Fritzsche and Meyer. See Moulton's 
 Winer, p. 573 sqq., Thayer, 457 sqq., and Robinson and Grimm sub 'iva. 
 
 III. Greek words with Hebrew meanings : 
 
 ayyeXog (a messenger), in the sense of angel. 
 
 (ja) uyia ayiiov (for the superlative, tS'^UT'lp IZJilp), the holy o/holieSf 
 or the inner sanctuary of the temple, Heb. ix. 3. 
 
 aiwv ovTog and aiojv fieXXiov, ri-Trt qVis? and JtSlil tsVlS, for the 
 two ages or eras (dispensations) before and ajler the Messiah^s advent, 
 modified in the New Test, the present and the future world. So also the 
 expressions iffx^Tai t'lfiepai, IffxaTr] iopa, to. TtXi) rujv aiwvtov, awTtXEia 
 Toi) aiwvoQ, refer to the last times of the aiwv ovtoq, in the New Test, 
 to the interval between the first and second advent of Christ, more 
 particularly the apostolic period. Matt. xiii. 39 ; xxviii. 20 ; Acts ii. 17 ; 
 Heb. i. 1 ; James v. 3 ; 1 Cor. x. 11, etc. 
 
 alfia tKxeeiv or Ikxvvhv (CJ'I TJ5T^)> to Mil, Luke xi. 50; Rom. iii. 15. 
 
 dprov (payEiv, to take food, to eat (tsnb ^^Nl), Mark iii. 20; Luke 
 xiv. 1. Also tffBieiv dprov, Matt. xv. 2. 
 
 d(piivai ajjiapriaQ (or 6^HXr]fiaTa, TrapairTtofiara, etc.), to forgive sins, 
 etc., to pardon. Matt. vi. 12; ix. 6; Luke xi. 4, etc. Comp. the Heb. 
 •IBS, Sept. Isa. xxii. 14; ISiaa, Gen. 1. 17. 
 
 ^aTrrt^eir, /SaTrriffjUog, (idTrriefia, in the wider sense of ceremonial 
 washings, whether by pouring, or dipping, or immersion, Mark vii. 4j 
 Heb. vi. 2 ; ix. 10. Comp. Sept. 2 Kings v. 14. 
 
 ^ or THt 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
^4 THfi LANGtJAGlfe OF tflE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 yXoDfTo-a, in the sense of nation ("(i^^)) Rev. v. 9 ; vii. 9, etc. 
 
 dainovii^ofispogf possessed hy a demon or evil spirit. Often in the 
 Gospels. 
 
 Siuv and \vhv, to bind and to loose, in the rabbinical sense to forbid 
 and to permit, Matt. xvi. 19; xviii. 18. Comp. John xx. 23, where the 
 same idea is expressed literally by Kpartiv and d^ikvai. 
 
 Sid(3oXog (accuser, slanderer), for Satan, Matt iv. 1 ; ix. 34, etc. Comp. 
 Job i. 7, 12; Rev. xii. 9, 10. 
 
 ovvafxig and dwdfiEig, in the sense of miraculous powers (m&tPB3, 
 Sept. Job xxxvii. 14), Matt. vii. 22, and very often. See Dictionaries.' 
 
 t^vr}, in the sense of Gentiles, heathen (Q'?iil), as distinct from the Jew- 
 ish nation (kaoQ, dS), Luke ii. 32, etc. 
 
 evXoykio, to bless (T|']^2), Luke i, 64; Matt. v. 44, etc. 
 
 iK Koikiag fir]Tp6g,/rom birth, from infancy (i!!2&< *(I32ltl), Gal. i. 15. 
 
 Kr\Tiiv Tov ^f.6v, to seek God, i. e. to turn to him as a sincere worshipper, 
 Acts xvii. 27 ; Rom. x. 20. Quoted from Isa. Ixv. 1 (Sept.). 
 
 Z,riTCiv y\wxnv, to seek one's life, i. e. to seek to kill him (^B.3 ^|53), 
 Matt. ii. 10 ; Rom. xi. 3. 
 
 idEiv, to see, in the sense to expe7'ience (to suffer, or to enjoy, like Mfi<*1), 
 Luke ii. 26; Heb. xi. 5. 
 
 odog, manner of life (Tj'^'!?)> Matt. xxi. 32 ; Rom. iii. 17 ; Acts xviii. 25 ; 
 James v. 20. 
 
 prjfjia, in the sense o{ thing (as '^^'H), Luke ii. 15; Acts v. 32. 
 
 adp^ (^iU3), in the sense of man (mortal), or human nature, or natural 
 descent (Kara ffdpKa), or frailty, or the corrupt, carnal nature, in opposition 
 to TTVEVfia. Very often, especially in Paul's Epistles. See Dictionaries. 
 
 (Tap^ Kttl alfia, for men, with the accessory idea of weakness and frailty, 
 Matt. xvi. 17; Eph. vi. 12; Gal. i. 16. 
 
 GTr'tpfxa, seed, in the sense of offspring, posterity (iS'l^t), Matt. xxii. 24, 
 25; Mark xii. 19-21 ; Luke i. 55; xx. 28; Rom. iv. 13, 18, etc. 
 
 avvaywyfi, a Jewish sj'nagogue (assembly), Luke viii. 41, etc.; a 
 Christian congregation, James ii. 2 ; synagogue of Satan, Rev. ii. 9 ; iii. 9. 
 
 Xpiarog, anointed, in the sense of the Messiah. 
 
 lY. The Hebraizing style and constrnction shows 
 itself in the simplicity of the syntax, the absence 
 of long and artificial periods, the rarity of oblique 
 and participial constructions, the monotony of form, 
 emphatic repetition, and the succession of sentences 
 
TflE LAJirGtrAGE OF TflE NEW TESTAlitENT. 35 
 
 by way ot a constructive parallelism rather than by 
 logical sequence. The Sermon on the Mount (es- 
 pecially the Beatitudes), the parables, and even 
 Paul's Epistles have that correspondence of words 
 and thouo^hts which is the characteristic feature and 
 charm of Hebrew poetry. 
 
 We may add (with Westcott), that " calm empha- 
 sis, solemn repetition, grave simplicity, the gradual 
 accumulation of truths, give to the language of the 
 Holy Scripture a depth and permanence of effect 
 found nowhere else. . . . The character of the style 
 lies in its total effect, and not in separate elements ; 
 it is seen in the spirit which informs the entire text 
 far more vividly than in the separate members." * 
 
 LATINISMS. 
 
 The Greek of the apostolic writings is Hebraizing, 
 but not Romanizing. The Romans imposed their 
 military rule, their polity, and their laws, but not 
 their speech, upon the conquered nations. The 
 greatest Roman orator admitted that the Latin was 
 provincial, while the Greek was universal in the 
 empire." Yet a number of Latin terms — mostly 
 military, political, and monetary, and for some arti- 
 cles of dress — have found their way into the com- 
 mon speech with the Roman conquest. They are 
 most frequent in Mark's Gospel, which was written 
 in Rome and for Romans. 
 
 * In Smith's Bible Diet. iii. 2141 (Hackett and Abbot's ed.). Comp, 
 Westcott's Introd. to the Gospels, pp. 241-252. 
 
 'Cicero {Pro Arch. 10): " Grceca leguntur in omnibus fere gerUibusi 
 Latina suisJinibuSf exiguis sane, corUinenturJ* 
 
36 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 aaaapiovt as, a Roman copper coin, worth three English farthings, or 
 1| cent (one tenth of a denarius). Matt. x. 29; Luke xii. 6. Probably the 
 neuter form of the old Latin assarius, as drjvdpiov is of denarius. 
 
 dtjvdpiov, denarius, a Roman silver coin of the value of ten asses (as 
 the name indicates), and afterwards of sixteen asses (the as being re- 
 duced), equivalent to the Attic drachma, or about sixteen cents. In the 
 New Test, it stands for a large sum, a day's wages ; hence the transla- 
 tion penny, which creates the opposite impression, should have been 
 changed by the Revisers into denarius, or dendi-y, or shilling, Matt, 
 xviii. 28 ; xx. 2, 9, 10, 13 ; xxii. 19 ; Mark vi. 37 ; John vi. 7 ; xii. 5 ; Rev. 
 vi. 6, etc. 
 
 KEVTvpiioVy centurio (originally a commander of a hundred foot-soldiers, 
 tKaTovrapxog), Mark xv. 39, 44, 45. 
 
 KfjvaoQ, census (Greek, c'nroypa^rj) ; in the New Test, tribute, poll-tax^ 
 Matt. xvii. 25; xxii. 17; Mark xii. 14 (Sovvai Ktjvaov Kaiaapi). 
 
 KoSpdvTijg, quadrans (from quatuor), a small copper coin, the fourth 
 part of an as, a farthing (i. e. fourthing), two fifths of one cent. Matt. v. 26; 
 Mark xii. 42. 
 
 KoXiovia, colonia, a Roman colony. Acts xvi. 22. 
 
 KovffTwSia, custodia, custody, guard (of Roman soldiers), Matt, xxvii. 
 65, 66; xxviii. 11. Corresponds to the Greek (pyXaKq. 
 
 Kpd(5l3arog, or Kpa^arroQ (Lachmann, Tischendorf, Westcott and 
 Hort), grahatus, a small couch or mattress, Mark ii. 4, etc. 
 
 Xeyiujv (Westcott and Hort, Xeytwv), legio, legion, Mark v. 9, 15; Matt. 
 xxvi. 53; Luke viii. 30. Also in rabbinical Hebrew ('ji"'5b). See Buxtorf. 
 
 \kvTiov, linteum, a lin^n cloth, a towel or apron, worn by servants, John 
 xilL 4, 5. From the Greek \ivov, a. flaxen cord. 
 
 \i^epT7voQ, libertinus, afreedman, Acts vi. 9. 
 
 Xirpa, from libra, the Roman pound of twelve ounces, John xii. 3 ; 
 xix.39. 
 
 fiaKiWov, macellum, meat-market, shambles, 1 Cor. x. 25. 
 
 fiEfifipdva, membrana (from membrum), skin, parchment, 2 Tim. iv. 13. 
 
 fiiXiov, milliarium (for mille passuum), a thousand paces, a mile. Matt. 
 T.41. 
 
 juiodiog, modius, a measure, the chief Roman measure for things dry, and 
 equal to one third of the Roman amphora (nearly one peck^. Matt. v. 15; 
 Mark iv. 21 ; Luke xi. 33. 
 
 K^aTTjg, sextarius, in the New Test, a small measure, or vessd, pot, Mark 
 vii. 4, 8. 
 
 irpaiTutpiov, prcetorium, the general's tent in a camp ; and also the resi' 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 37 
 
 dence or palace of a provincial governor, Matt, xxvii. 27 ; Mark xv. 16 ; 
 John xviii. 28 ; xix. 9 ; Acts xxiii. 35 ; Phil. i. 13. 
 
 pidri^ rheda, or raeda, reda (of Celtic origin), a travelling carriage with 
 four wheels, a chariot, Rev. xviii. 13. 
 
 oiKapiog, sicarius (from sica, dagger), assassin, robber, Acts xxi. 38. 
 
 aifiiKivBiov, semicinctium (from semi, half, and cingere, to gird), an apron. 
 Acts xix. 12. For t/fii^wviov. 
 
 aovddpiov, sudarium (from sudor, sweat), sweat-cloth, handkerchief, Luke 
 xix. 20 ; John xi. 44 ; xx. 7 ; Acts xix. 12. 
 
 (77r£Koi;\dra>jO, speculator, a pikeman, a soldier of the body-guard em- 
 ployed as watch and in messages, Mark vi. 27 ; also in later Hebrew. For 
 awHaTO^vXa^. 
 
 Ta(iepvT}, tabema, tavern, Acts xxviii. 15. 
 
 rirXog, titulus, inscription, superscription, John xix. 19, 20. For iiri- 
 ypaipfi. 
 
 ^ai\6vT]Q {^aLv6\r]Q), pcenula, a woollen cloak, or mantle for travelling 
 (and also in rainy weather), 2 Tim. iv. 13. 
 
 ^bpov, forum, market; part of the name of the village Appii forum, 
 Acts xxviii. 15. 
 
 ^paytXXiov, flagellum, a scourge, John ii. 15. 
 
 ^paye\\6(o,Jlagello, to flagellate, to scourge, Matt, xxvii. 26; Mark xv.l5. 
 
 (X^PT^Q)'! charta, paper, 2 John 12. 
 
 XutpoQ, corus, or caurus, the northwest wind, Acts xxvii. 12. 
 
 Total, 31 Latinisms. Potwin gives 24, Thayer 30 (omitting x"PT-»?e)« 
 
 Latin pi'oper names of persons : 
 
 Agrippa, Amplias, Aquila, Caius, Cornelius, Claudia, Clemens, Crescens, 
 Crispus, Drusilla, Felix, Festus, Fortunatus, Gallio, Julius, Julia, Junia, 
 Justus, Linus, Lucius, Luke (abridged from Lucanus), Marcus or Mark, 
 Niger, Paulus, Pilate, Priscilla or Prisca, Publius, Pudens, Quartus, Rufus, 
 Sergius, Silvanus (abridged Silas), Tertius, TertuUus, Titus, Urban. 
 Three names of Roman emperors: Augustus ( 2f/3a(Troe ), Tiberius, 
 Claudius. The generic name Caesar (Kaitrap) is applied to Augustus 
 (Luke ii. 1), to Tiberius (Luke iii. 1), to Claudius (Acts xi. 28), and to 
 Nero (Acts xxv. 8 ; Phil. iv. 22). 
 
 Names of places : 
 
 Appii Forum, Caesarea, Italy, Rome, Spain, Tiberias, Tres Tabemfle. 
 
 Latin phrases: 
 
 spyaaiav Sovvai, operam dare (Luke xii. 58); avfijiovXioi' \afi(3dv£iv, 
 consilium capere (Matt. xii. 14, etc.); to hcavov irouiv nvi, satisfacere 
 alicui (Mark xv. 15). 
 
38 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 NUMBER AND VALUE OF FOREIGN WORDS. 
 
 Professor Lemuel S. Potwin (of Western Reserve 
 College, Hudson, Ohio) has made a list of native 
 words of the New Testament not found in classical 
 authors before Aristotle (who is included among the 
 classics, though his diction is on the boundary be- 
 tween the Attic and the Common dialects), with the 
 following results : * 
 
 (1.) The total number of words in the Greek 
 Testament (according to Tischendorfs text) not 
 found in the classics is no less than 882 (nouns 392, 
 adjectives and adverbs 171, verbs 319) ; that is, nearly 
 one sixth of the entire vocabulary. But a consid- 
 erable number of these words are found in the Sept- 
 uagint, Josephus, Poly bins, and Plutarch. In the 
 Septuagint 363 occur. 
 
 (2.) The new words are, with few exceptions, 
 derivatives or compounds from Greek roots. The 
 verbs are largely denominatives, but mo.re largely 
 multiplied by composition with prepositions. The 
 adjectives arise mostly from composition, the alpha 
 jprivativum being very frequent, as the English 
 compounds with un are constantly increasing. 
 
 (3.) The rhetorical value varies. Many of these 
 words are clear and full of meaning, as ^(xPvxoq^ 
 
 ^ See Bibliotheca Sacra, Andover, Julj-, 1880, pp. 503-527 ; and Oct, 
 1880, pp. 640-660. The results are stated on p. 652 sqq. Prof. Potwin 
 has published lists of Latinisms in Bibl. Sacra for Oct. 1875, p. 703 sqq., 
 and of Hebraisms, ibid. Jan. 1876, p. 52 sqq. I made my lists indepen- 
 dently, from Bruder, Hudson, etc. Comp. also Thayer's Append, to his 
 ed. of Grimm (1886) See p. 80, 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 39 
 
 double-minded, wavering, Jas. i. 8; iv. 8; also in 
 Clemens Rom. Ad Cor. c. 23 ; avfjixpvxoQ, or (Tvv\pv- 
 ^oc, concors, like-minded, congenial, Phil. ii. 2; 
 Aoyo/ioxtoj word -strife, 1 Tim. vi. 4; fjiaKpo^vfxta, 
 longanimity, forbearance, Hom. ii. 4, etc. ; ^eodi^a- 
 KToc, taught of God, 1 Thess. iv. 9 ; and the com- 
 pounds with aya^o-, avri-, knpo-, and \pevdo-. 
 
 (4.) The doctrinal and practical value is great in 
 proportion to the idea expressed. Such words as 
 ayarrrj {caritas, as distinct from tpwg, amor), aTroKa- 
 Xvkf^igf a7ro\vTpit)(TiQ, afxaprwXoQ, ^aTTTKJfJLa, ^airTLafiogy 
 (daiTTKyTrigf iXaajuoQ, iraXiyyeveaia, (rvvei^r}(Tig, have a 
 definite theological significance, and cannot be re- 
 placed by classical words. 
 
 The language of the apostles and evangelists is 
 baptized with the spirit and fire of Christianity, 
 and thus received a character altogether peculiar 
 and distinct from the secular Greek. The genius 
 of a new religion must either create a new speech, 
 or inspire an old speech with a new meaning. The 
 former would have concealed the religion from the 
 people, like the glossolalia in the Corinthian Church, 
 which required an interpreter. The Greek was flex- 
 ible and elastic enough to admit of a transformation 
 under the inspiring influence of revealed truth. It 
 furnished the flesh and blood for the incarnation of 
 divine ideas. Words in common use among the 
 
 Comp. Schleiermacher, Hermen. 66, 138; Immer, Hermen. 129; Cremer^ 
 BiblicO'Theol, Lexicon; Trench. Synonyms of the N. Test, 
 
40 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 classics, or in popular intercourse, were clothed with 
 a deeper spiritual significance ; they were trans- 
 planted from a lower to a higher sphere, from 
 mythology to revelation, from the order of nature 
 to the order of grace, from the realm of sense to 
 the realm of faith. 
 
 This applies to those characteristic terms which 
 express the fundamental ideas of Christianity — as 
 gospel, faith, love, hope, mercy, peace, light, life, 
 repentance or conversion, regeneration, redemption, 
 justification, sanctification, grace, humility, apostle, 
 evangelist, baptism, kingdom of heaven. 
 
 Gospel {evayyiXiov) to a Greek Gentile was either 
 reward for good news (as in Homer), or good news 
 of any kind ; but to a Greek Christian it meant the 
 best of all news ever heard on earth, proclaimed by 
 angels from heaven to all the people, that a Saviour 
 was born and lived, and died and rose again for a 
 sinful world. The word church (kicXr^dfa, awaywyii) 
 has passed through a heathen, Jewish, and Christian 
 stage; it denotes first a lawful assembly of free 
 Greek citizens, then a religious congregation of 
 Jews, and at last that grand commonwealth of God 
 which Christ founded on a rock, and which is to 
 embrace the whole human family. Faith {ttiotiq, 
 from irei^tj, to persuade^ Trti^o/uai rivi, to trust in) 
 conveys the general idea of confidence in a person, 
 or belief in the truth of a report ; but in the New 
 Testament it is that gift of grace whereby we accept 
 Christ in unbounded trust as our Lord and Saviour, 
 and are urged to follow him in a life of holy obe- 
 dience. Zove {ayairrt is not found in classical writ- 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 41 
 
 ers, but in its place ^tXm.and (juXav^ptj-rria, and the 
 verb ayawaw, which expresses regard and affection) 
 is much more than natural affection and philan- 
 thropy; it is a heavenly flame, kindled by God's 
 redeeming love, the crowning gift of the Spirit, the 
 surest test of Christian character, the fultilling of 
 the law, the bond of perfectness, and the fountain 
 of bliss — a worthy theme for the seraphic descrip- 
 tion of the inspired Paul. Hope {eXiric;) rises from 
 the sphere of uncertain expectation and desire for 
 future prosperity to the certain assurance of the 
 final consummation of salvation and never-ending 
 happiness in heaven. The Greek terms for humility 
 {TaiTiivog, TaTreiv6(l)p(i)v, raTreivoipporTvvri, TairuvoTrig, 
 TairdvojcTig) designate to the proud heathen meanness 
 and baseness of mind, but in the New Testament a 
 fundamental Christian virtue. Rejpentance (juieTavoia) 
 signifies not simply a change of opinion, or even a 
 moral reformation, but a radical transformation of 
 the heart, whereby the sinner breaks away from his 
 former life and surrenders himself to the service of 
 God. The words holy and holiness {ayiog, ayiaZ,w, 
 ay/oo-juoc, ayni)a\)vr\\ whether applied to God or man, 
 rise as far above the cognate terms of secular Greek 
 {ayvog, atiivoc, octloq, hpoq) as the God of the Bible 
 rises above the gods of Homer, and a Christian saint 
 above a Greek sage. 
 
 The purifying, spiritualizing, and elevating influ- 
 ence of the genius of Christianity was exerted 
 through the Greek and Latin upon all other lan- 
 guages into which the gospel is translated.* It per- 
 
 * For the influence of Christianitjr on the Teutonic language, see 
 
 5 ' 
 
42 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 vades the whole moral and religious vocabulary. It 
 meets us in every inscription and salutation of the 
 apostolic letters. The formula of greeting, '* Mercy 
 and peace be unto you," transforms the idea of 
 physical health and temporal happiness, as conveyed 
 in the Greek ^aipuv and the Hebrew shalom lecha^ 
 into the idea of spiritual and eternal welfare, so that 
 XapiQ and elprivt] comprehend the blessings, objec- 
 tive and subjective, of the Christian salvation. Yet 
 Aristotle's definition of x«ptc (which usually means 
 gracefulness in form or manner, also favor, good- 
 will) is not far from the Christian conception when 
 he lays the whole emphasis on the disinterested 
 motive of the giver without expectation or hope of 
 return.^ Language is in some measure prophetic, 
 and the first and lower meaning of words often 
 points to a higher spiritual meaning; as the whole 
 realm of nature points to the truths of the kingdom 
 of heaven. The parables of our Lord are based 
 upon this typical correspondence. 
 
 For the proper understanding of the ^N^ew Testa- 
 ment, in the fulness of its religious meaning, much 
 
 Rudolph von Raumer, Die Einwirhing des Christenthums aufdie althoch- 
 deutsche Sprache (Stuttgart, 1845). German and English words which 
 refer to the external aspect of the church are borrowed from the Greek or 
 Latin, as Kirche, church (KvpiaKov), Bischof, bishop (I'tt'kjkottoq), Priesfer, 
 priest (TrpEfffivTepog), Almosen, alms (^eXsTJUoavvrj), Predigt, preaching 
 (prcedicatio) ; but terms which express the inner life of religion are 
 originally German or Saxon, and impregnated with a far deeper meaning; 
 as Heiland (Heliand), fJeil, Erlosung, Bekehrung, Wiedergeburf, Glaube, 
 Liebe, Hoffnung, Himmel: atonement^ new birth, love, hope, heaven. 
 
 ^ Rhet. ii. 7, quoted by Trench (p. 252), who says, " thefreeness of the 
 outcomings of God's love is the central point of x"pit>" comp. Rom, iii. 24 
 (J^wpwv ry avTOv xdpin) an4 other passages. 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 43 
 
 more is required than mere knowledge of the lan- 
 guage. The most extensive and thorough familiar- 
 ity with Greek, Hebrew, and Roman literature is 
 unable to penetrate from the surface of the letter 
 to the depth of the spirit without sympathy with 
 the lofty and heavenly ideas of that book. Philo- 
 logical exegesis is the necessary basis, but only the 
 basis, of theological and religious exposition which 
 requires faith and spiritual insight. The gram- 
 matical sense is but one — definite, specific; the 
 spiritual sense is as high and deep and infinite as 
 the truth which the word feebly indicates, and the 
 application of the truth is universal for all time. 
 It is as true to-day as it was in the days of Paul that 
 "the natural man" {iPvxiKog ayS-pwTroc), who is guid- 
 ed only by the light of reason (though he may not 
 be (TapKtKog), " receiveth not the things of the Spirit 
 of God, for they are foolishness unto him ; and he 
 cannot know them, because they are spiritually 
 judged." ' 
 
 PECULIARITIES OF STYLE.* 
 
 The general unity of language admits of great 
 variety of style. Every man has his style, and " the 
 
 ' Or, examined, TrvevfiaTiKutQ civaKpiveTai, 1 Cor. ii. 14. 
 
 ' On this subject the following works may be consulted : Christoph 
 Gotthelf Gersdorf, Beitrdge zur Sprach-Charakteristik der Schi-ifisteller 
 des N. Test. (Leipz. 1816 ; onlj^ the first part published). This work was 
 suggested by Griesbach, and opened the way for this kind of investigation. 
 T. G. Seyffarth, Beitrog zur Special-Characteristik der Johann. Schrifien 
 (Leipz. 1823), Credner, Einkit, in das N. T. vol. i. (Halle, 1836). Wilke, 
 Der Urevangelist (Presden and Leipzig, 1838), Neutestamentl. RhetoHk 
 (1843), and Htrmeneutik ile.s N. T. (Leipzig, 1843-4*, 2 Parts). Zeller, 
 \\\ the MThepl. Jaljrbticher," Tiibingeii, 1843 (pp. 445-525). IvUthardt, 
 
44 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 style is the man." The apostolic writers were guided 
 by the same Spirit, but in accordance with their pe- 
 culiarities of temper, mode of thought, and speech. 
 Divine grace purifies, elevates, and sanctities nature, 
 and is destructive only to sin and error. A gentle- 
 man is the perfection of a man ; a Christian is the 
 perfection of a gentleman. No two human beings 
 are precisely alike ; every one is a microcosmos, has 
 his individuality more or less marked, and. his special 
 work more or less important, though many, alas, fail 
 to perceive and to perform it. There are different 
 types of apostolic teaching, and different styles of 
 apostolic writing to suit different tastes, objects, and 
 classes of readers. 
 
 The idiosyncrasies of the sacred writers have been 
 more or less felt from the beginning, and incidentally 
 pointed out by Irenseus, Jerome, Augustin, Chrys- 
 ostom, Luther, Calvin, and other great biblical schol- 
 
 Das Johann. Evang. (revised ed. 1875; Engl, translation by Gregory, 
 Edinb. 1876, vol. i. pp. 20-63). Westcott, Introd. to the Study of the Gospels 
 (Lond. and Cambr. 1860; 6th ed. 1881; Amer. ed. by Hackett, Boston, 
 1862, pp. 264 sqq.). Iloltzmann, Die Synopt. Evangelien (Leipz. 1863, 
 pp. 271-358). Holtzmann, on the Ephesians and Colossians (Leipz. 1872), 
 and on the Pastoral Epistles (ibid. 1880, pp. 84-117), where the linguistic 
 peculiarities and hapax legomena of Ephesians and Pastoral Epistles are 
 investigated for the purpose of proving their un-Pauline character. The 
 two critical works of Weiss on Mark and Matthew (1872 and 1876). Im- 
 mer, Hermeneutics of the N. Test., translated by A. H. Newman (Andover, 
 1877, pp. 132-144). Scholten, Das PauUnische Evangelium, translated 
 from the Dutch by Redepenning (Elberf. 1881, pp. 18, 31, 87, 188 sqq.). 
 Scholten is all wrong in ascribing Luke's Gospel and the Acts to two dif- 
 ferent authors — the first to a polemical, the second to an irenical Paulinist 
 —and in assuming a proto-Luke which preceded the canonical Luke. 
 I have found Holtzmann on the Synoptists, and Luthardt on John very 
 jielpful, Comp, the U.sta of Thayer-Griinm, Append., made since* 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 45 
 
 ars; but a mechanical theory of inspiration pre- 
 vented an unbiased examination of the subject till 
 the nineteenth century. Our English version here 
 errs in two opposite directions : by its vicious prin- 
 ciple of variation it unnecessarily increases the 
 verbal differences of the writers; while, on the other 
 hand, it obscures and obliterates characteristic pecu- 
 liarities by using the same English term for differ- 
 ent Greek words. It is one of the chief merits of 
 the revision of 1881, that it introduces consistency 
 of rendering. 
 
 It is the strength and merit of rationalism (whether 
 German, Dutch, French, or English) to investigate 
 the human character and history of the Bible ; it is 
 its weakness and error to ignore or undervalue its 
 divine character and history. It takes its stand 
 outside of the Bible, and treats it like any other 
 book of antiquity from a purely critical standpoint. 
 It denies its sanctity in order to subject it to a heart- 
 less process of anatomical dissection. It handles 
 the disjointed members, but the life and spirit has 
 escaped ; as Goethe says of the logician : 
 
 " Er hat die Theile in seiner Hand, 
 Fehlt leider nur das geistige BandP 
 
 Rationalism has a keen eye for all the diversities 
 of thought and style of the apostles and evangelists, 
 but is blind to the underlying unity and harmony. 
 It stretches the differences between the Synoptists 
 and John, Matthew and Luke, the fourth Gospel 
 and the Apocalypse, Galatians and Acts, between 
 James and Paul, Peter and Paul, Paul and John, 
 into irreconcilable contradictions, and thus tends to 
 
46 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 destroy all confidence in the divine origin and au- 
 thority of the New Testament. 
 
 But, fortunately, this is only the negative part of 
 the process. "Whether willing or unwilling, ration- 
 alism contributes to a better understanding and 
 deeper appreciation of that old and ever new Book 
 of books, in which, as Heinrich Ewald once said, " is 
 contained the wisdom of the whole world." Ex- 
 treme theories and errors are refuted one after 
 another by the different schools of rationalism, and 
 the sacred writers come out of the fire of critical 
 purgatory unsinged, and with a stronger claim than 
 ever upon the intelligent reverence and faith of the 
 Christian world. A profounder search from the 
 surface to the deep discovers unity in diversity, 
 concord in discord, a divine spirit animating the 
 human body, and sees in the very variety of the 
 sacred writers only the manifold wisdom and grace 
 of God.' 
 
 The sinless perfection of Christ's humanity is the 
 best proof of his divinity, and brings his divinity 
 nearer and makes it dearer to the heart of the be- 
 liever. What is true of the personal Word may be 
 applied to the written word, 
 
 " Jesus, divinest when Thou most art man." 
 MATTHEW. 
 
 Matthew wrote a Gospel first in Hebrew for 
 Hebrews. But the Greek Gospel under his name 
 is a free reproduction and substitution rather than 
 
 * Eph. iii. 10, TroXvTToiKiKoQ ao^ia tov S^eov, 1 Pet. iv, 10, TTOiKiXn 
 Xoptg ^iov, Comp. Rom, xii.; 1 Cor. xii,-xiv, 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 47 
 
 a translation/ No independent autlior would liter- 
 ally translate himself. The originality of the canon- 
 ical Matthew is evident from the discrimination in 
 Old Testament quotations which are freely taken 
 from the Septuagint in the course of the narrative, 
 but adapted to the Hebrew when they contain im- 
 portant Messianic prophecies.' It appears also from 
 his use of words and phrases which have no equiva- 
 lent in Hebrew, as the paronomasia of purest Demos- 
 thenian Greek: KOKovrj icaicwc {pessimos pessime) 
 airoXiati avTovg, " Those wretches he will wretchedly 
 destroy '* (xxi. 41).' 
 
 Matthew's style is simple, calm, dignified, even 
 majestic. He Hebraizes, but less than Mark and 
 the first two chapters of Luke. He is less vivid and 
 picturesque than Mark, more even and uniform than 
 Luke, who varies in expression with his sources. 
 
 * The ancient witnesses, from Papias to Eusebiiis and Jerome, agree 
 both in ascribinjc to Matthew a Hebrew Gospel, and in accepting the 
 Greek Matthew or' our canon whenever they mention it as the work of 
 an apostle without any doubt of its genuineness. 
 
 * This distinction has been first observed by Credner and Bleek, and 
 further examined and accepted by Holtzmann (Die Synopt. Evang. 
 p. 259), RitschI, and Westcott. From this fact we must infer that the 
 author was a Jew well acquainted both with the Hebrew Bible and the 
 Septuagint. 
 
 ' Or, as the IJev. V. renders the Greek, " He will miserably destroy 
 those miserable men." The A. V. obliterates the paronomasia which 
 brings out the agreement of the punishment with the deed. Other ren- 
 derings: "The naughty men he will bring to naught" (Rheims V.) 
 malos male perdet (Vulgate) ; iibel wird er die Ueblen vemichten (Ewald) 
 schlimm wird er die Schlimmen umhringen (Lange). Other paronomasias 
 vi. 16, a^av'tl^ovaiv rd Trpoawira avrCjv oTtiog ^avCJaiv rolg av^put- 
 iroig i^trrfvovrec, " they disfif/ure tht-ir faces that %\\ey may figure ^ 
 paen fating ;" vi. 7, (SaTToXoydv and wu\v\oyia. 
 
48 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 He has a preference for rubrical arrangement, prob- 
 ably in accordance with his previous habits of book- 
 keeping at the cnstom-honse. He gives headings to 
 some of his sections, as B//3Xoc yevUedyg 'Irjaov Xpi- 
 (7TOV (i. 1-18, corresponding to tlie Hebrew jSepher 
 iholedoth ; comp. Gen. v. 1; ii. 4), Twp ^w^cfca aTro- 
 o-roXwv ra o\miiara lariv ravra (x. 2). He pays most 
 attention to the discourses of our Lord, and strings 
 them together like so many precious jewels ; one 
 weighty sentence follows another till the effect is 
 overwhelming.^ His Gospel is eminently didactic, 
 and in this respect quite different from that of 
 Mark, which deals more with facts and incidents. 
 He alone uses the term "the kingdom of heaven^^ 
 (17 jSao-tXcm Tuw ovpavCov, thirty-two times); while 
 the other evangelists and Paul speak of " the king- 
 dom of God''^ {t] f5a(Tt\eia tov ^aov). With this cor- 
 responds his designation of God as "the heavenly 
 Father" (a irarrip o ovpaviog, ov 6 ev toTq ovpavolo).* 
 He has a peculiar formula of citing Messianic pas- 
 sages, *iva (or oTTWc) TrXrfpdJ^y to pY}^iv, or tote 
 eir\r)pw^r) to pr}^iv, which occurs twelve times in his 
 Gospel," but only once in Mark," seven times in John,^ 
 
 * Chs. v.-vii. ; x. ; xiii. ; xxiii. ; xxiv. ; and xxv. 
 
 "" V. 16, 45, 48; vi. 1, 9. 14, 26, 32; vii. 11, 21 ; x. 32, 33; xv. 13; xvi. 
 17 ; xviii. 14, 19, 35. 
 
 M. 22; ii. 15, 17, 23; iv. 14; viii. 17; xii. 17; xiii. 35; xxi. 4; xxvi, 
 56 (in the plural, 'iva TrXrjpwSfuxriv a'l ypa<pai) ; xxvii. 9. 
 
 * Mark xiv. 49, 'iva TrXrjpojB^uxnv al ypa^ai. The passage xv. 28, 
 tTrXr^pio^t] ri ypafi) r) Xkyovaa, is omitted by critical editors on the author- 
 ity of XBC*, etc., as a probable insertion from Luke xxii. 37. 
 
 * xii. 38 ; xiii. 18 ; xv. 25 ; xvii. 12 ; xviii. 9 ; xix. 24, 26 ; besides a 
 passage without 'ivUf xviii. 32. 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 49 
 
 and nowhere in Luke.* He uses t6t£ ninety-one 
 times (Mark only six times, Luke fourteen times). 
 Matthew alone calls Jerusalem " the holy city," and 
 a *' city of the Great King." ^ This is one of the 
 indications that his Gospel was written before the 
 destruction of Jerusalem (A.D. 70), which is fore- 
 told in the eschatological discourses of our Lord 
 (ch. xxiv.) as sifiiture, though fast-approaching judg- 
 ment, without the least hint of the evangelist at the 
 striking fulfilment ; while yet he is very particular 
 in marking the fulfilment of the Old Testament 
 prophecies. 
 
 Words peculiar to Matthew, and not found 
 elsewhere in the New Testament. They number 
 about 130. I give the most important, as collected 
 from the concordances of Bruder and Hudson : 
 
 dyyelov, vessel, xxv. 4. 
 
 dyyoQ (plur. dyyr]\ vessel, xiii. 48 
 
 (Tisch., Treg., W. and H.). 
 dyKiffrpov, hook, xvii. 27. 
 d^tllog, innocent of, xxviii. 24. 
 atjoert^w, to choose, xii. 18. 
 dK^rjv, yet, XV. 16. 
 ava/3tj3d^a>, to draw, xiii. 48. 
 dvaiTioQ, guiltless, xii. 5, 7. 
 aTrdy)(oixai, to hang one's self, 
 
 xxvii. 5. 
 aTToviTTTOfiai, to wash, xxvii. 24. 
 jSapvTffieg, very precious, xxvi. 7. 
 jSaaavKTTTjg, tormentor, xviii. 34. 
 
 (BuTToXoysio, to use vain repetitions, 
 
 vi. 7. 
 (Siaarrje, violent, xi. 12. 
 Suva, such a man, xxvi. 18. 
 diaKwXvu), to hinder, iii. 14. 
 SiaWaTTOfiai, to be reconciled, v. 24. 
 Siaaaipsio, to explain, to tell, xiii. 
 
 36; xviii. 31. 
 Sd^oSog, with riov odwv, highway, 
 
 xxii. 9. 
 Surrig, two years old, ii. 16. 
 diffTa^ojy to doubt, xiv. 31 ; xxviii. 
 
 17. 
 SlvXH^oj, to strain out, xxiii. 24. (To 
 
 * Except the somewhat similar phrase, rb yeypajxixsvov Sal TsXeaBrjvai 
 tv kfxoi, xxii. 37. 
 
 " r) dyia iroXig, iv. 5 ; xxvii. 53 ; voXig rov jxeydXov jSaaiXewg, v. 35. 
 The temple or the hill of Moriah is called roTrog uyiog, xxiv. 15. 
 
50 THE LAKGTJAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 strain at in the E. V. is a typo- 
 graphical error perpetuated). 
 
 dixiiKi*^, to set at variance, x. 35. 
 
 k^^OjxriKOVTaKiQy seventy times, 
 xviii. 22. 
 
 tyepmg, resurrection, xxvii. 53. 
 
 i^viKOQ, heathen, v. 47 (correct read- 
 ing for Tt\u)vr]tf) ; vi. 7 ; xviii. 17 
 (the plural occurs once in 3 John, 
 ver. 7, and the adverb t^vucdg in 
 Gal. ii. 14). 
 
 ilprjvoTroLoc, peacemaker, v. 9. 
 
 iKXdfiTTijj, to shine forth, xiii. 43. 
 
 i^opKt^ii), to adjure, xxvi. 63. 
 
 i7riyaix(3ptvio, to intermarry, to mar- 
 ry a brother's widow (with refer- 
 ence to levirate marriage, accord- 
 ing to Jewish law), xxii. 24. 
 
 tTTiOjOKtw, to forswear one's self, v. 33. 
 
 tTriarreipu), to sow among, xiii. 25. 
 
 Evvosoj, to agree, v. 25. 
 
 ii/vou;^i?w, to make a eunuch, xix. 
 12 ; ivvovxi^uv kavTov, to make 
 one's self a eunuch, i. e. to live in 
 voluntary celibacy and abstinence, 
 xix. 12. 
 
 e.vpv')(y)poQ, broad, vii. 13. 
 
 Bavfidaiog, wonderful, xxi. 15. 
 
 S-v/Ltow, to be wroth, ii. 16. 
 
 taJr«, jot, V. 18. 
 
 KaTaBefxaTiK<ti, to curse, xxvi. 74. 
 
 Karafiav^dvu), to consider, vi. 28. 
 
 KaraTTovTi^io, Mid. or Pass., to sink, 
 xiv. 30 ; to be drowned, xviii. 6. 
 
 KrJTOQy whale, sea-monster, xii. 40. 
 
 Kov(TTo)d\a, watch, xxvii. 66, 66; 
 xxviiL 11. 
 
 Ktjvb)^, gnat, xxiii. 24. 
 
 fiaXaKia, disease, iv. 23 ; ix. 35 ; x. 1. 
 
 ^iXiov, mile, v. 41. 
 
 /ui<T^o(u, to hire, xx. 1, 7. 
 
 fivXcjv (jivXoe), mill, xxiv. 41 (but 
 see Rev. xviii. 22, ^Mvrj fivXov). 
 
 ovdafxwg, by no means, ii. 6. 
 
 Trayihvuit entangle, xxii. 1 5. 
 
 7raXtyy€V€(7ta, restitution, xix. 28 
 (also in Tit. iii. 5, but in a differ- 
 ent sense, regeneration of the in- 
 dividual by the Holy Spirit). 
 
 TrapaKovw, neglect to hear, xviii. 17 
 (add Mark v. 36 for aKovui). 
 
 TTapofioidKo^ (ufjioidZw), to be like 
 unto, xxiii. 27. 
 
 7rajOoi//if , platter, xxiii. 25, 26. 
 
 TrXarvQj wide, vii. 13. . 
 
 iroXvXoyia, much speaking, vi. 7. 
 
 TTjOo^S'aj/w, to anticipate, xvii. 25. 
 
 TTVppd^ii), to be red, xvi. 2, 3. 
 
 paTTii^iOy to smite with the palm of 
 the hand, v. 39 ; xxvi. 67. 
 
 (TayrjvTi, drag-net, xiii. 47. 
 
 (TeXrivid^ofiai, to be lunatic (epilep- 
 tic), iv. 24; xvii. 15. 
 
 aiTiffTOQ (from alrog, grain), fatted, 
 plur. rd (TiTiffrd, fallings, xxii. 4. 
 
 avvdvTtiaiQy with tig, to meet, viii. 
 34. L., Tr.,W. and H. read vTTav- 
 TTjaig, meeting; which occurs 
 also in xxv. 1 ; John xii. 13. 
 
 ffvvav^dvuj (Mid.), to grow together, 
 xiii. 30. 
 
 ToXavTov, talent, xviii. 24; xxv. 
 15, 16, 20, 22, 24, 25, 28. 
 
 TeXtvTT], death, ii. 15. 
 
 Tparre^iTTfg, exchanger, xxv. 27. 
 
 Tpv7rT)na, eye of a needle (i. q. Tpfj- 
 fxa, Luke xviii. 25), xix. 24. 
 
 Tv^u (Pass.), to smoke, xii. 20. 
 
 0pd^<o, to declare, xiii. 36 {Siaaa- 
 0£u>) ; XV. 15. 
 
 ipvreia, plant, xv. 13. 
 
 xXafxvgj robe, xxvii. 28, 31. 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 51 
 
 MARK. 
 
 Mark's Greek is perhaps the poorest, judged by a 
 classical standard, but it has a peculiar vivacity and 
 freshness which prove his originality and indepen- 
 dence. The judgment of St. Augustin, Griesbach, 
 and Baur, that he was a mere abbreviator of Matthew, 
 or of both Matthew and Luke, has been thoroughly 
 reversed by modern research.* 
 
 Mark, the companion and "interpreter" of Peter, 
 faithfully recorded, "without omission or misrepre- 
 sentation " (as Papias says), the preaching of Peter, 
 and reflects his first observations and impressions. 
 There was a natural sympathy between the teacher 
 and the pupil. Both had a sanguine temperament 
 and a gift of quick observation ; both were fresh 
 and enthusiastic, but liable to sudden changes ; both 
 erred and recovered — Peter in denying, and again 
 laboring and dying for Christ; Mark in running 
 away in his youth at the betrayal, and leaving Paul 
 on his first mission tour, but returning to him as a 
 useful companion, and faithfully serving Peter, who 
 calls him his "son." Both had a restless energy 
 which urged them on to preach the Gospel from 
 place to place and land to land till they reached 
 Home, the centre of the world. They were men of 
 action rather than thought, practical workers rather 
 than contemplative divines. 
 
 Mark records few of the speeches of our Lord, 
 and dwells chiefly on his works, selecting those which 
 
 * Especially by Weisse, Wilke, Holtzmann, Ewald, Weiss. 
 
52 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAAIENT. 
 
 excite astonishment and amazement, and would ap- 
 peal with peculiar force to the Roman mind, so fond 
 of displays of conquering power. In this respect 
 Mark is the very reverse of Matthew. 
 
 Mark is brief and sketchy, but has a number of 
 graphic touches, not found in the other evangelists, 
 which give vividness to the scene, as i. 13 (" he was 
 with the wild beasts ") ; ii. 2 (" there was no longer 
 room for them, no, not even about the door"); iii. 
 10 (" they pressed upon him ") ; iii. 20 (" they could 
 not so much as eat bread ") ; iv. 37 ; v. 3, 4. He is 
 fond of pictorial participles, as avafdXexpag, i/ij3Xfi//ac, 
 TTf/otjSXf^ajUfvoc, ava7rr]^ri(Tag, Kvxpag, Ifx^pifxriGaiiEvoQ, 
 tTriaTpa(f)£ig, airocrTeva^ag. He expresses the emo- 
 tions of astonishment by a reduplication of the 
 questions and by exclamations. He quotes words 
 and phrases in the original Aramaic, as Talitha Jcumi^ 
 Ephfphathah^ and Eloi Eloi, He characterizes the 
 acting persons by names, relations, company, or situ- 
 ation. He repeats again and again the adverb/b>/'^A- 
 with^ straightway {ev^iwg, or av^vg), which is char- 
 acteristic of the rapidity and rushing energy of his 
 movement. This word occurs more frequently in 
 his Gospel than in all the other Gospels combined, 
 and may be called his motto, like the American 
 " Go ahead !" With this is connected his prefer- 
 ence for the historical present. He loves affection- 
 ate diminutives, as irat^iov (little child), Kopacriov 
 (damsel), Kwapiov (little dog), ^vyarpiov (little 
 daughter), tx^^^'or (small fish), wrapiov (little ear). 
 He uses several Latin terms, as ^scttijc {sextarius^ a 
 measure), KivTvpiwv (centurio), Kfivaog (census), 
 
THE LAKGUAGE OF TflE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 53 
 
 GireKovXaTiop {speculator, a pikeman), and the Latin 
 phrases to-xarwc '^x^tv {in extremis esse, to be at the 
 point of death, v. 23), and to ikuvov iroieiv {satisf'a- 
 cere, to make satisfaction, xv. 15). This is all the 
 more natural if he wrote in Rome for Romans, as 
 the ancient tradition uniformly affirms; but most 
 of these Latinisms occur also in Matthew and Luke, 
 and even in the Talmud. 
 
 Peculiar words of Mark, not occurring else- 
 where in the New Test, (in all about 100) : 
 
 aypeveiv, to catch, xii. 13. 
 
 dXaXog, dumb, vii. 37 ; ix. 17, 25. 
 
 d\EKTopo(f)(t)via, cockcrowing, xiii. 
 35. 
 
 avaXog, saltless, insipid, ix. 50. 
 
 dvaTrrjddej, to leap up, x. 50. 
 
 dvaarevd^etv, to sigh deeply, viii. 
 12. 
 
 cTTo fiaKpoBev, from far, viii. 3. 
 
 dTTodrifiog, going abroad, xiii. 34. 
 
 dTroareyd^siv, to uncover, ii. 4. 
 
 d^jOi^eiv, to foam, ix. 18, 20. 
 
 ya/it(r«:etv,togiveinmarriage,xii.25. 
 (Tisch., W. and H. read yaixi^ov- 
 rai for the text.rec. yafiicKovrai.) 
 
 yva^Evg, fuller, ix. 3. 
 
 ^KT^iXtoi, two thousand, v. 13. 
 
 SvaKoXog^ hard, x. 24. The adverb 
 SvaKoXiog (hardly, with difficulty) 
 occurs once in all the Synoptists, 
 in the discourse of Christ on the 
 difficulty for rich men to enter the 
 kingdom of God (Matt. xix. 23 ; 
 Mark x. 23 ; Luke xviii. 24). 
 
 ^avdffifiog, deadly, xvi. 18. 
 
 ilg Kara tig, one by one, xiv. 19. 
 (This occurs also in the disputed 
 
 passage, John viii. 9, and cV Ka^ 
 
 'iv in Rev. iv. 8.) 
 eiTsv, then, iv. 28. 
 iK^ajxlSEia^at, to be greatly amazed, 
 
 ix. 15 ; xiv. 33 ; xvi. 5, 6. 
 ivayKaXi^eaBfaif to take in one's 
 
 arms, ix. 36 ; x. 16. 
 tveiXiu), to wrap in, xv. 46. 
 ivvvxa, in the night, i. 35. 
 e^dmva, suddenly, ix. 8. 
 t^ovdevou), to set at naught, ix. IS;. 
 e^ujSfev, from without, vii. 15, 18. 
 tTTLCwTptx^iVyto run together, ix. 25. 
 tTTippdiTTtx), to sew on, 21. 
 KCJfxoTToXig, town, i. 38. 
 fieBopia, border, vii. 24. (But Tisch., 
 
 Treg., W. and H. read rd opia.) 
 fioyiXdXog, having an impediment 
 
 in his speech, vii. 32. 
 vovvEx^Qf discreetly, xii. 34. 
 TTpatnai Trpaaiai, in ranks, vi. 40. 
 Trpofispiixvdvy to take thought be- 
 forehand, xiii. 11. 
 7rpo(Td(3l3aroVy Sabbath-eve, xv. 42. 
 TTpooKt^dXaiov, cushion, iv. 38. 
 7rpo(Topfiit^e<TSrai, to draw to the 
 
 shore, vi. 53. 
 
54 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 •jrvyfiy,yfith the fist (up to the elbow), 
 R. V. diligently, A. V. oft, vii. 3. 
 
 afivpvi^Eiv, mingle with myrrh, xv. 
 23. 
 
 airtKovXaTtopf a soldier of the guard, 
 vi. 27. 
 
 (TTijidg, twig, xi. 8. 
 
 avv^XifitiVj to throng, v. 24, 31. 
 
 rrfkavyuiQ, clearly, viii. 25. 
 
 vTrepwepiaaoig, beyond measure, vii 
 37. 
 
 vTroX-qviov, wine-vat, the under- vat 
 of a wine-press, into which the 
 juice of the grapes flowed, xii. 1, 
 
 XaXfciov, brazen vessel, vii. 4. 
 
 uirdptov, ear, xiv. 47. 
 
 LUKE. 
 
 Luke is the most literary among the evangelists.* 
 He was evidently a man of considerable education, 
 and a congenial companion of Paul, the scholar 
 among the apostles. He was as admirably suited 
 for Paul as Mark was for Peter. He pays regard 
 to contemporary secular history, refers to the mem- 
 bers of the Herodian family, the emperors Augustus, 
 Tiberius, Claudius, the census of the Syrian gov- 
 ernor Quirinius, the procurators Felix and Festus, 
 and furnishes us the key for several important 
 chronological dates. 
 
 He was a physician (Col. iv. 14). His medical 
 vocabulary in the accounts of miracles of healing, 
 and throughout the general narrative, shows famil- 
 iarity with the ancient medical writers, or at all 
 events agrees with technical usage.* 
 
 ^ Renan (^Les Evangiles, p. 232): " VEvangile de Luc est leplus littiraire 
 des Evangiles,^'' He also calls it " leplus beau livre quHl y ait " (p. 283). He 
 admires the classic style, the joyful tone, and charming poetry of the book. 
 
 ' Rev. W. K. Hobart, LL.D., of Trinity College, Dublin, has published a 
 work on The Medical Language of St. Luke (Dublin University Press, 1882, 
 305 pages), in which he proves, from internal evidence, that " the Gospel 
 according to St. Luke and the Acts of the Apostles were wrirten by the same 
 person, and that the writer was a medical man." For this purpose over 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 55 
 
 He is equally familiar with nautical terms, which 
 are correct without being strictly technical. His 
 account of the voyage and shipwreck of Paul in the 
 last two chapters of Acts, according to the testi- 
 mony of experts, gives us fuller and more accurate 
 information about ancient navigation than any other 
 single document of antiquity.' 
 
 Luke's style varies considerably. Where he writes 
 independently, he uses the best language. The brief 
 historiographic preface to his Gospel — the only one 
 in the Gospels — is a period of purest Greek, and 
 admired for its grace, modesty, and dignity. It may 
 be favorably compared with the prefaces of Herod- 
 otus and Thucydides. They excel alike in brevity, 
 tact, and point ; but the anonymous preface of the 
 Evangelist is as striking for its modesty and love of 
 truth as the prefaces of the great heathen historians 
 are for vanity and love of glory.'* In the second 
 
 four hundred words and phrases, for the most part peculiar to these two 
 books, are compared with the use of the same words and phrases in 
 Hippocrates, Aretaeus, Dioscorides, and Galen. 
 
 * See James Smith, The Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul, 4th ed. 1880 
 (revised by Walter E. Smith, with a Preface by the Lord Bishop of 
 Carlisle) ; the respective chapters in t;he biographical works of Conybeare 
 and Howson, Lewin, and Farrar, on St. Paul; and the commentaries of 
 Hackett, Lechler, Howson and Spence, and others, on Acts, ch. xxvii. and 
 xxviii. James Smith, of Jordanhill, Scotland (b. 1782, d. 1867), was not 
 a professional theologian, but a commodore of the Royal Northern Yacht 
 Club, and familiar by long residence in Gibraltar and Malta with naviga- 
 tion in the Mediterranean. His book is a classic in this department, and 
 has a permanent evidential value. 
 
 " The preface of Herodotus has nearly the same number of words (40) 
 as that of Luke (42), and is as follows: 'Hpo^orov 'AXiKapvaffijoQ icrTopirjg 
 dTToSeiKiQ V^£ ' we jxriTe to. yevofieva t^ av^/owTrwr r<^ XP^'^V t^tVj/Xa 
 ytvijrai, uriTS tpya fxeyuXa rs Kai Bavixaard, to. fitv "EWrjai rd dk 
 
56 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 part of the Acts, where Luke writes as an eye- 
 witness, he likewise nses pure Greek. But where 
 he translates from the Hebrew, as in the history of 
 the infancy, in the songs of Zachariah, Mary, and 
 Simeon, his language has a strongly Hebraizing 
 and highly poetic coloring. This proves his con- 
 scientious fidelity. The greater part of the Gos- 
 pel and the first part of the Acts occupy a mid- 
 dle position between classic Greek and Hebrew 
 Greek, and show the frequent use of documentary- 
 sources. 
 
 Among the minor peculiarities of Luke, as com- 
 pared with Matthew and Mark, we may mention 
 the following. He has vojutjcoc or vofxodi^aGKoXog 
 for jpa/ufxaTavg, to uprmivov in quotations for pr]^iv, 
 vvv for apTi, XiiuLVT} of the lake of Galilee for ^aXacraa, 
 iairipa for o^pia. He frequently uses the attraction 
 of the relative pronoun and the participial construc- 
 tion. He likes the word xapa, in accordance with 
 the spirit of cheerfulness which animates his books.^ 
 He very often speaks of the Holy Spirit, especially 
 in the Acts, which may be called the History of the 
 Spirit in the apostolic age ; and he alone relates the 
 Pentecostal miracle.'' 
 
 There is a striking resemblance between the spirit 
 and style of Luke and Paul. They agree in the re- 
 
 ^ap(3apoi<n CLTroStix^evTa, aKktd ykvqrai, ra re aXKa kuI Si r/v aiTirjv 
 ITT o\i 1X1)0 av aWrfKoim, See Schaff. Church History, 1. 656. 
 
 ' Luke i. 14; ii. 10; viii.13; x. 17 ; xv.7,10; xxiv.41,62; Acts viii.8; 
 xiii. 52 ; xv. 3. 
 
 ^ TTveu/Lia, either with or without tiyiov, occurs in the Acts no less than 
 fifty times (if I counted right). 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 57 
 
 port of the words of institution of the Lord's Supper. 
 They are fond of such characteristic words as x"P'C, 
 eXfoc, TTLaTLQ, ^LKaioavvY}, ^iKaiog, Trvev/ua ayiov, yvibcfig, 
 ^vva/iig Kvpiov,^ 
 
 Luke has the richest vocabulary among the Sy- 
 noptists. The total number of words in his Gospel 
 is 19,209 ; that of Matthew, 18,222 ; that of Mark, 
 11,158. The number of words peculiar to Luke, 
 and not found in Matthew and Mark, is 12,969, or 
 26f per cent. ; that of Matthew, 10,363, or 21^ per 
 cent. ; that of Mark, 4314, or 9 per cent.' Luke's 
 Gospel has 55, and the Acts 135 aira^ Xeyofi^va. 
 The number of words in the Gospel of Luke which 
 do not occur elsewhere in the Greek Testament is 
 about 300. The peculiar vocabulary of Acts num- 
 bers about 470.^ 
 
 WOEDS PECULIAR TO THE GoSPEL OF LuKE I 
 
 dyKokai, arms, ii. 28. 
 
 dypa, draught, haul, v. 4, 9. 
 
 aypavkkix), to abide in the field, ii. 8. 
 
 dyiovia, agony, xxii. 44. 
 
 aiaBfdvofiai, to perceive, ix. 45. 
 
 aixfid\u)Tog, captive, iv. 18 (19). 
 
 dXXoyevrig, stranger, xvii. 18. 
 
 dvdlSXexl/iQj recovery of sight, iv. 
 18. 
 
 dvdSsi^ic, showing, i. 80. 
 
 dvoB'Tjixa, gift, xxi. 5 (avd^Efia oc- 
 curs several times in Paul). 
 
 dvaidiia, importunity, xi. 8 
 dvdTTTjpog, maimed, xiv. 13, 21. 
 dvaiTTvaffu), to unroll, to open, iv. 17 
 
 (but the critical editors read 
 
 dvoi^ag). 
 dvardffffofiai, to set forth in order, 
 
 1.1. 
 dva<J>u)vs(jt}, to speak out, i. 42. 
 dvsKXtnrrog, unfailing, xii. 33. 
 dvkvdfKTog, impossible, xvii. 1. 
 dv^ofioXoytofiai, to give thanks, ii. 
 
 38. * 
 
 ' See a long list of parallel passages in Holtzmann, l. c. 316 sqq. 
 
 * The above estimate is made from TischendorPs Greek Testament, as 
 printed in Rushbrooke's Synopticon (1882). See my Church History, 
 revised ed. 1882, vol. i. p. 596. 
 
 ' See lists in Thayer-Grimm, p. 703, 
 
 6 
 
58 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 dvTi(3a\\(o, to cast back and forth, 
 
 to exchange, xxiv. 17. 
 dvTiKaXito, to bid again, xiv. 12, 
 aTrapTiafiog, completion, with eig, to 
 
 complete, xiv. 28. 
 direkTrH^Wy hope for again, vi. 35. 
 a7ro^X(/3w, to press, to crowd, viii. 
 
 45. 
 dvoKXeiiOj to shut, xiii. 25. 
 d'7ro\eix<*> (sTriXei'xw), to lick, xvi. 
 
 21. 
 dTTOfidffffofiai, to wipe ofF, x. 11. 
 dironXvvu), to wash, v. 2 ; but Tisch. 
 
 (ed. viii.) reads (with X) £7r\v- 
 
 vav, Lachm. and W. and H. tirXv- 
 
 vov (with B). See Rev. vii. 14. 
 dTTOffTOfxaTii^u), provoke to speak, 
 
 xi. 53. 
 d'rro\\n)X'^ (expiro), to leave off 
 
 breathing, to faint, xxi. 26 (comp. 
 
 wgft VEKpoi, Matt, xxviii. 4). 
 dpxiTikiovrjQ, chief among the pub- 
 licans, xix. 2. 
 dffTpdTTTU), to lighten, to flash, xvii. 
 
 24 ; to shine, xxiv. 4. 
 dawTiog, riotously, xv. 13. 
 aTEKvoQ, childless, xx. 28, 29. 
 avTowTTig, eye-witness, i. 2. 
 d<l>avTog, with yivofxaij to vanish 
 
 out of sight, xxiv. 31. 
 d<pp6g, froth, foam, ix. 39. 
 d(pvvv6(o, to fall asleep, viii. 23. 
 /So&vvoi, to deepen, vi. 48. 
 j^aXXdvTiov, purse, x. 4; xii. 33; 
 
 xxii. 35, 36. 
 I^apvvofiai, to be overcharged, xxi. 
 
 34. 
 (3tX6vrj, needle, xviii. 25. 
 fioXrf, a cast, a throw, xxii. 41. 
 ^ovvng, hill, iii. 5 ; xxiii. 30. 
 yiXdwy to laugh, vi. 21, 25. 
 
 SaKTvXiog, ring, xv. 22. 
 
 hafi'tit) (text. rec. and Lachmann), 
 to bind, viii. 29. Tisch., Treg., 
 W. H. read defffiEvio, which is 
 also used by Matthew (xxiii. 4), 
 and Luke in Acts xxii. 4. 
 
 diayoyyvi:^uj, to murmur, xv. 2 ; xix. 
 7. 
 
 SiaXaXfuif to commune, to converse, 
 i. 65; vi. IL 
 
 diaXeiTru), to cease, vii. 45. 
 
 diafiipi^u), to divide, xi. 17, 18 ; xii. 
 62, 53 ; xxii. 17. 
 
 diafiEpiandg, division, xii. 51. 
 
 Siavevio, to beckon, i. 22. 
 
 Siavorjfia, thought, xi. 17. 
 
 diavvKTepevio, to continue all night, 
 vi. 12. 
 
 diaTrpay/xaTEvofiai, to gain by trad- 
 ing, xix. 15. 
 
 Siaaeio), to shake throughout, to do 
 violence to, iii. 14. 
 
 diarapdorau), to trouble, i. 29. 
 
 Sia(l)vXd<Tait), to keep, iv. 10. 
 
 diax(opiKoiJ.at, to depart, ix. 33. 
 
 diTjyriffig, narration, i. 1. 
 
 Soxn, feast, V. 29 ; xiv. 13. 
 
 lyKa^ETogy spy, xx. 20. 
 
 eyKvog, great with child, ii. 5. 
 
 tda(f)i^u), lay even with the ground, 
 xix. 44. 
 
 l^i^it), to accustom; pass., to be cus- 
 tomary, ii. 27. 
 
 tKKOfii^ii), to carry out, vii. 12. 
 
 tKfivicTijpi^io, to deride, xvi. 14; 
 xxiii. 35. 
 
 tKTeXsit), to finish, xiv. 29, 30. 
 
 tK(idXXa), with eig, to cast into, xiL 
 5. 
 
 Uxiopso), to depart out, xxi. 21. 
 
 ivptvo), to make signs to, i. 62. 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 59 
 
 «?ra3'potso/xai, to be gathered thick 
 
 together, xi. 29. 
 tTTEidrjTrep, forasmuch as, i. 1. 
 tTTtidov, to look on, i. 25. 
 tiriKpivu), to give sentence, xxiii. 24. 
 (t7ri\«xw,for d7roX£tx;aj,tolick over, 
 
 xvi. 21 ; see d7roX€i;!^a>.) 
 tTnueXwg, diligently, xv. 8. 
 «7ri7rojO£uo/iai, with npog, to come 
 
 to, viii. 4. 
 iTTKTiTifffiog, victuals, ix. 12. 
 iTTiffxvM, to be more fierce, xxiii. 5. 
 tffSrijfftg, garment, xxiv. 4. 
 i^aiHofxai, to ask for, xxii. 31. 
 s^aaTpaTTTiOj to glister, ix. 29. 
 (iftpopkujj to bring forth plentifully, 
 
 xii. 16. 
 rifii^avrig^ half dead, x. 30. 
 ^opvfid^u) (text. rec. rvplidi^io), to 
 
 confuse by noise, to disturb, x. 41. 
 ^pavio, to bruise, iv. 18. 
 S'po/ujSof, large drop, xxii. 44. 
 S'v/iidw, to burn incense, i. 9. 
 idpittg, sweat, xxii. 44. 
 Ka^oirXi^vjy to arm, xi. 21. 
 KaraKprjiJivi^oj, to cast down head- 
 long, iv. 29. 
 KaraXtBd^it), to stone, xx, 6. 
 KaTaveiKOj to beckon unto, v. 7. 
 KaTaTrXeio, to arrive, viii. 26. 
 KaraffvpiOj to drag, xii. 58. 
 icara(T0d^w, to slaughter down, to 
 
 slay, xix. 27. 
 Kara\fjvx(»^, to cool, xvi. 24. 
 Kspafiog, tiling, v. 19. 
 KtpaTiov, husk, carob-pod, xv. 16. 
 kXiviSiov, couch, V. 19, 24. 
 KopaKy raven, xii. 24. 
 Kopog, a measure, xvi. 7. 
 KpaindXr], surfeiting, xxi. 34. 
 Xafjnrpdgj sumptuously, xvi. 19. 
 
 XaKfVTogf hewn in stone, xxiiL 53. 
 Xeiog, smooth, iii. 5. 
 Xifpog, idle tales, xxiv. 11. 
 fiUKpog, far, xv. 13 ; xix. 12. 
 fitpiaTrjg, divider, xii. 14. 
 fiiffBiog, hired servant, xv. 17, 19. 
 fioyig, hardly, ix. 39. 
 voffaid, brood, xiii. 34. 
 oiKovofieojy to be steward, xvi. 2. 
 ofi^pogy shower, xii. 54. 
 oTTTog, broiled, xxiv. 42. 
 opetvog, hilly, i. 39, 65. 
 otppvg, brow, iv. 29. 
 TrafiTrXrjS'ei, all at once, xxiii. 18. 
 Travdox^^ov, inn, x. 34. 
 Travdoxsvgj host, x. 35. 
 Trapddo^og, strange thing (neut.), 
 
 v. 26. 
 TrapaKaXvTTTiOj to hide, ix, 45. 
 TrapdXiog, sea coast, vi. 17. 
 TrapBtvia, virginity, ii. 36. 
 TreSivog, with roTTog, plain, vi. 17, 
 Trevixpog, poor, xxi. 2. 
 TTEVTBKaidkKaTog, fifteenth, iii. 1. 
 TrspiKpvTrrw, to hide, i. 24. 
 TTspiKVKXvw, to compass around, xix. 
 
 43. 
 TTtpioiKsu), to dwell round about, i. 
 
 65. 
 rrepioiKog, neighbor, i. 58. 
 rrspimrdo), to distract, x. 40. 
 TTivaKidioVf writing- tablet, i. 63. 
 TrXtffifivpay flood, vi. 48. 
 TTpea^eia, embassy, message, xiv. 
 
 32; xix. 14. 
 7rpoaava(3aivu)j to go up, xiv. 10. 
 7rpo(TavaXi(TK(t}, to spend, viii. 43. 
 TrpoaduTravdoi, to spend more, x. 35. 
 TTpoaepydKoiiat, to gain, xix. 16. 
 7rpo0£/oa>, to bring forth, vi. 45. 
 irTvdffOjj to roll up, iv. 20. 
 
60 
 
 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 pijyfia, ruin, vi. 49. 
 oaXogj waves, xxi. 25. 
 a'lKipa, strong drink, i. 15. 
 fjiviaZ,ix}j to sift, xxii. 31. 
 OLTEVTog, fatted, xv. 23, 27, 30. 
 aiTO^ETpiov, portion of meat, xii. 42. 
 (TKaTTTU), to dig, vi.48, xiii. 8 ; xvi. 3. 
 ffKipTcut), to leap, i. 41, 44 ; vi. 23. 
 CKvXov, spoil, xi. 22. 
 aopog, bier (coffin), vii. 14. 
 (nrapyavoiOj to wrap in swaddling 
 
 clothes, ii. 7, 12. 
 (Tvyyfvte, kinswoman (foravyytvrjg), 
 
 i.36. 
 avyKaXvTTTiOj to cover, xii. 2. 
 avyKaTaTiBefiai, to deposit together, 
 
 to consent to, xxiii. 51 (with eifxi). 
 (TvyKVTTTCjj to be bowed together, 
 
 xiii. 11. 
 avyKvpiuy chance, x. 31. 
 avKafitvog, sycamine tree, xvii. 6. 
 avKOfiiopea, or -opsa (the spelling 
 
 of W. and H. fur -wpaia), syca- 
 more tree, xix. 4. 
 avKO(pavT€w, to accuse falsely, iii. 
 
 14 ; xix. 8. 
 
 ovfKpvio (pass.), to spring up with, 
 
 viii. 7. 
 ffvfx^ojviaj music, xv. 25. 
 TSTpapx^iOy to be tetrarch, iii. 1. 
 Tpavjia, wound, x. 34. 
 Tp^fia, a hole, the eye of a needle, 
 
 xviii. 25 (the reading of Lachm., 
 
 Tisch., Treg., W. and H. for the 
 
 text. rec. rpvixaXia). 
 rpvywv, turtle-dove, ii. 24. 
 (TvpjSd^oj, see 2ropv(3d^w.) 
 vypoQ, green, xxiii. 31. 
 vdpiOTTLKOQ, dropsical, xiv. 2. 
 vTTOKpivofiaiy to feign, xx. 20. 
 VTToaTpujvvvb}, to Spread, xix. 36. 
 vnoxapeu), to withdraw one's self, 
 
 V. 16; ix. 10. 
 v(paiv(o, to weave, to spin, xii. 27, 
 <pdpay^, valley, iii. 5. 
 (pdrvrj, manger, ii. 7, 12, 16; xiii. 15. 
 ^iXrj (fem.), friend, xv. 9. 
 (piXovEiKia, strife, xxii. 24. 
 ^ufirjTpov, fearful sight, xxi. 11. 
 (ppovifiiOQ, wisely, xvi. 8. 
 xdofxa^ gulfj xvi. 26. 
 i^ov, egg, xi. 12. 
 
 The Nautical Yocabulaey of Luke is rich and 
 remarkable. It is used mostly in the last two chap- 
 ters of Acts. He describes the voyage and ship- 
 wreck of Paul evidently as an eye-witness, like a 
 man who was often at sea as a close and accurate 
 observer, but not as a professional seaman ; he no- 
 tices effects and incidents which a seaman would 
 omit as unimportant, but he omits to notice causes 
 and details which would appear prominently in an 
 official report. He uses no less than sixteen verbs, 
 and uses them (as James Smith has conclusively 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 61 
 
 shown) most appropriately, to describe the motion 
 and management of a ship ; and all of them are 
 nautical terms, and with the exception of three are 
 peculiar to his two writings. They are as follows 
 (seven being compounds of ttXcw) : 
 
 ttXew, to sail, Luke viii. 23; Acts 
 
 xxi. 3 ; xxvii. 6, 24. 
 aTTOTrXew, to sail from, Acts xiii. 4 ; 
 
 xiv. 26 ; XX. 15 ; xxvii. 1. 
 ^padvTrXoeio (from ^paSvg, slow), 
 
 to sail slowly, Acts xxvii. 7. 
 ^ta7r\€a;,to sail through (not "over," 
 
 as in the A. V.), Acts xxvii. 5. 
 tKTrkkio, to sail away, Acts xv. 39 ; 
 
 xviii. 18 ; xx. 6. 
 KUTaTrXko), to arrive, Luke viii. 26. 
 vTroirkkii), to sail under the lee, Acts 
 
 xxvii. 4, 7. 
 TTapaTcXkix), to sail by, Acts xx. 
 
 16. 
 
 dvdyofxai, to get under way, to put 
 
 to sea, Acts xxvii. 4. 
 StaTTipdw, to sail over. Acts xxi. 2. 
 Sia(pepofiai, to be driven to and fro, 
 
 Acts xxvii. 27. 
 tTTtfCfiXXw, to run the ship ashore, 
 
 Acts xxvii. 41. 
 tv^vdpojxkiOj to make a straight 
 
 course. Acts xvi. 11; xxi. 1. 
 TrapaXkyofxai (middle), to sail by, 
 
 Acts xxvii. 8, 13. 
 VTTOTpexit) (aor. 2, vTreSpafiov), to 
 
 run under the lee, Acts xxvii. 16.^ 
 (}>epop,aL (pass.), to be driven, Acts 
 
 xxvii. 15, 17. 
 
 To these may be added the phrases for lightening 
 the ship : Ik^oXyiv Iwoiovvto, they began to throw 
 the freight overboard, Acts xxvii. 18 ; and tKovipit^ov 
 TO ttXoXov, they lightened the ship. Acts xxvii. 38. 
 Julius Pollux mentions tK^oXriv iToir]Ga<j^ai tCjv 
 (popTi(i)v and Kovipiaai ttiv vavv among the technical 
 terms for taking cargo out of a ship. ISee Smith, 
 I G. pp. 114, 139. 
 
 * Smith, I. c. p. 103, remarks on vTrodpa/xovreQ, having run under the 
 lee of: " St. Luke exhibits here, as on every other occasion, the most 
 perfect command of nautical terms, and gives the utmost precision to his 
 language by selecting the most appropriate ; they ran before the wind to 
 leeward of Clauda, hence it is vTrodpafiovrtg : they sailed with a side wind 
 to leeward of Cyprus and Crete, hence it is vTrcTrXeuca/iCv." 
 
62 THE LAI^GUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 PAUL. 
 
 The Apostle of tlie Gentiles had a cosmopolitan 
 preparation for his work, being a Hellenist by birth, 
 a Roman citizen, and a Hebrew scholar. He is the 
 only apostle who enjoyed a regular rabbinical edu- 
 cation, and was trained to logical reasoning. He 
 was also, to a limited extent, acquainted with classi- 
 cal literature, and quotes from three heathen poets 
 (Aratus, Menander, and Epimenides) — the only ex- 
 amples of the kind in the New Testament.^ He is 
 the founder of Christian theology ; he had to create 
 a theological vocabulary by stamping a peculiar 
 meaning upon a number of words which express 
 fundamental Christian ideas, as SiKaioavvrj, diKaiwcrig, 
 iricfTiq, ayairrj, aap^, irvevjuia, aTToXvTpwaLQ, Wadfxog, 
 KaTaXXayri, xapig, eXcoc, elprivrj. 
 
 The style of Paul reflects the strongly marked 
 individuality of his nature purified and ennobled 
 by divine grace. Its chief characteristics are fire 
 and force. He is intensely in earnest, and throws 
 his whole soul into his epistles. His ideas overflow 
 the ordinary boundaries of speech. The pressure 
 of thought is so strong that it breaks through the 
 rules of ^ammar. Hence the anacolutha. His 
 style is dialectic and argumentative. He reasons 
 now from Scripture, now from premises, now from 
 analogy, or from experience, from effect, from objec- 
 
 * Jerome hit the proper medium between the two extremes of an undue 
 overestimate and an underestimate of Paul's Greek learning, when he 
 said, ad Gal. iv. 24, that Paul knew secular literature (literas sceculares), 
 but imperfectly Qicet non ad perfectum). 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 63 
 
 tions, and ex absurdo. He frequently uses logical 
 particles and phrases, as ovv, apa, apa ovv {hinc igi- 
 tur, therefore then, so then, twelve times), yap, u yap, 
 el ^i, ovKtTi, Tt OVV, TL OVV Ipovfxai, eptig ovv, ov fiovov 
 St . . . aXAa. He introduces and answers objections, 
 and drives the opponent to the wall by close argu- 
 ment. He is fpnd of antitheses, paradoxes, oxymora, 
 and paronomasia^?. Farrrxcuunts " upwards of lifty 
 specimens of upwards of thirty Greek rhetorical 
 figures " in Paul.' 
 
 Here are some of these antithetic and paradoxical 
 phrases : elg to eivai avrov ^iKaiov Koi ^iKaiovvra rov 
 iK iriGTewg 'Iijo-ou (Kom. iii. 26) : Sm vo/iov vojuiti) airt- 
 ^avov (Gal. ii. 19) : ^ai dl ovkItl lyw, tiy Sc iv ifxol 
 XpiGTOQ (Gal. ii. 20) : ^^6vog and (jiovog : acrvverog 
 and acrvv^eTog : a^piov and ^poviiuog : avojuog and 
 ivvo/Jiog : fjiri v7r£p(l)povtXv irap o ^u (ppovHv, aXXa 
 (j>povHv elg TO aiotppovtiv (not to be high-minded 
 above what we ought to be minded, but to be so 
 minded as to be sober-minded, Rom. xii. S): to. 
 aopaTa . . . Ka^opaTai {invisihiUa videntur, unseen 
 things are seen, Rom. i. 20) : irap IXiri^a Iw iXiri^i 
 (Rom. iv. 18) : tu /xr) ovtu wc ovra (Rom. iv. 17) : 
 TO fiwpov Tov ^eov (TO<j)(i)Tepov tCjv av^p(x)Tr(i)v (1 Cor. 
 i. 25) : OTGV . . . aa^ivo), tote ^vvaTog ilfxi (2 Cor. 
 xii. 10). Specimens of cutting sarcasm : KaTaTojir] 
 (Phil. iii. 2, with reference to the irepLTOfii] of the 
 carnal Judaizers of the malignant type: concision, 
 circumcision); a7roico;//oi;rat (Gal. v. 12, with refer- 
 
 * The Life and Work of St. Paul, i. 629 sq. His two Excursuses on 
 the style and rhetoric of Paul are able and instructive. 
 
64: "teE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 ence to' .(:he same Judaizing perverters of the Gos- 
 pel). •_ 
 
 Paul disclaims classic elegance, and calls himself 
 "rude in speech" (tStwrije rtjJ Xoytj)), though not in 
 knowledge {ov ry yvtoaei).^ He knew that he car- 
 ried the heave-:ily treasure in earthen vessels, that 
 the power and grace of God might .become more 
 manifest.'' His sp^fecii-is at tijues rugged and irreg- 
 ular,- but always vigorous, bold, terse, expressive. 
 It rises now to lofty eloquence, as at the close 
 of the eighth chapter of Romans, now to more 
 than poetic beauty, as in the description of love in 
 1 Cor. xiii., which has no equal in all literature. 
 We may compare his style to a thunderstorm with 
 zigzag flashes of lightning that strike every project- 
 ing point ; or to a Swiss mountain torrent that now 
 rushes over precipices in foaming rapids, now rests 
 before taking a new leap, then calmly flows through 
 green meadows. 
 
 Longinus, a heathen rhetorician of the third cen- 
 tury, counted IlauXoc 6 Tapaevg among the greatest 
 orators, and a master of dogmatic style. Jerome 
 charges him with using Cilician provincialisms 
 (solecisms), but felt when reading his epistles as if 
 he heard " non verba sed tonitruaP Erasmus com- 
 pares Paul's style to thunder and lightning : " tonat^ 
 fulgurate meras flammas loquitur Paulus^ He 
 
 * 2 Cor. xi. 6. Comp. 1 Cor. i. 17 ; ii. 1 sqq. We must remember that 
 he thus wrote to the Corinthians, who overestimated the arts of rhetoric. 
 Meyer quotes Xenophon, who describes himself as an Idiwrijg as com- 
 pared with the Sophists (Z>e Venat. 14, 3). 
 
 » 2 Cor. iv. 7, 
 
THE LAI^GUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 65 
 
 judged the closing verses of tlie eighth chapter of 
 Romans to be equal in eloquence to any passage 
 in Cicero : " Quid unquam Cicero dixit grandilo- 
 quentiusP Calvin says of his writings : ^'-fulmina 
 sunt^ non verha^^ but he properly adds, in the very 
 spirit of Paul and in view of his numerous anacolutha 
 and ellipses, that by a singular providence of God the 
 highest mysteries have been committed to us ''^ sub 
 contem/ptihili verborum humilitate^^ that our faith 
 may rest not on the power of human eloquence, but 
 solely on the efficacy of the divine Spirit. Baur 
 finds the peculiar stamp of Paul's language in pre- 
 cision and compression on the one hand, and in 
 harshness and roughness on the other, which sug- 
 gests that the thought is far too weighty for the 
 expression, and can hardly find a fit form for the 
 abundance of matter. He compares him to Thucyd- 
 ides. Farrar does the same, and says that Paul has 
 the style of genius, if he has not the genius of style.* 
 Penan, a good judge of rhetoric, but blinded by 
 prejudice against Paul's theology, speaks disparag- 
 ingly of his prose, as Yoltaire did of the poetry of 
 Shakespeare, which he deemed semi-barbarous ; yet 
 Penan is obliged to mix praise with censure. " The 
 
 » L. c. i. 623. Farrar thinks, with Baur, that the style of Paul " more 
 closely resembles the style of Thucydides than that of any other great 
 writer of antiquity." The great historian of the Peloponnesian war is by 
 no means free from solecisms or barbarisms, obscurities, and rhetorical ar- 
 tificialities. Jowett (Thuc, vol. i. Intr. p. xiv.) justly says : " The speeches 
 of Thucydides everywhere exhibit the antitheses, the climaxes, the plays 
 of words, the point which is no point, of the rhetorician, yet retain amid 
 these defects of form a weight of thought to which succeeding historians 
 can scarcely show the like." 
 
66 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 epistolary style of Paul," he says/ " is the most per- 
 sonal that ever existed. His language is, if I dare 
 call it so, hackled (hroyee), not a connected phrase. 
 It is impossible to violate more boldly, I do not say 
 the genius of the Greek language, but the logic of 
 the human language. It is a rapid conversation, 
 stenographically reported, and reproduced without 
 correction. . . . With his wonderful warmth of soul, 
 Paul has a singular poverty of expression. ... It is 
 not barrenness, it is the vehemence of mind, and a 
 perfect indifference as to the correctness of style." 
 Another Frenchman, Pressense,' judges more just- 
 ly : " Paul's own moral life struggled for expres- 
 sion in his doctrine ; and to give utterance to both 
 at once, Paul created a marvellous language, rough 
 and incorrect, but full of resource and invention, 
 following his rapid leaps of thought, and bending 
 to his sudden and sharp transitions. His ideas come 
 in such rich abundance that they cannot wait for 
 orderly expression ; they throng upon each other, 
 and intermingle in seeming confusion ; but the con- 
 fusion is seeming only, for through it all a powerful 
 argument steadily sustains the mastery. The tongue 
 of Paul is, indeed, a tongue of fire." 
 
 JOHN. 
 
 If Paul's style resembles a rushing, foaming, 
 storming Alpine torrent, John's style may be com- 
 pared to a calm, clear, deep Alpine lake in which 
 
 » Saint Paul, ch. ix. p. 232. 
 ' Apostolic Era, p. 264. 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 67 
 
 the snn, moon, and stars are reflected as in a mirror. 
 The one sounds like a trumpet of war, the other like 
 an anthem of peace. Simplicity and depth char- 
 acterize the Gospel and the first Epistle of John. 
 He is " verbis facilUmus^ sensu difficillimus.^^ 
 
 He writes pure Greek as far as words and gram- 
 mar are concerned, but he thinks in Hebrew ; the 
 Greek is, as it were, only the thin, transparent veil 
 over the face. Kenan, looking at the outside, says 
 correctly that the style of the fourth Gospel " has 
 nothing Hebrew, nothing Jewish, nothing Tal- 
 mudic ;" but Ewald, looking deeper into the inside, 
 is more correct when he affirms that "in its true 
 spirit and afflatus, no language can be more genu- 
 inely Hebrew than that of John." Keim speaks of 
 the remarkable combination of genuine Greek facil- 
 ity and ease with Hebrew simplicity and figurative- 
 ness.' Westcott thinks that it is " altogether mis- 
 leading" to speak of John's Gospel as "written in 
 very pure Greek ;" that it is free from solecisms 
 because it avoids all idiomatic expressions ; and that 
 its grammar is common to all language. Godet 
 
 * Keim (Geschichte Jesu von Nazara, i. 116) : " Die Sprache des Bucks " 
 [the 4th Gospel] "w< ein merhwurdiges Gejuge dchtgriechischer Leichtig- 
 keit und Gewandtkeit und h^raischer Ausdrucksweisen in ihrer ganzen 
 Schlichtheit, Kindlichkeit, BUdlichkeit und wohl auch Unbehol/enheit. So 
 hat sick die Union der Gegensdtze der Parteien selbst in der Sprache ver- 
 horpert." What follows in Keim is a strange mixture of truth and error, 
 owing to his want of sympathy with the spiritual character of this 
 Gospel, in which he must acknowledge the simplicity of nature, the 
 purest morality, and celestial glories (Jiimmlische Herrlichkeiten), while 
 yet he discovers in it the hidden arts of a post-apostolic literary forger. 
 The contradiction is not in John, but in the judgment of his critic. 
 
68 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 characterizes the style of John as altogether unique 
 in all literature, profane and religious, for childlike 
 simplicity, transparent profundity, holy sadness, and 
 holy vivacity, and calls it a Hebrew body with a 
 Greek dress/ Weiss, in his recently published 
 "Life of Jesus," likewise emphasizes the Hebrew 
 genius which animates the pure Greek of the fourth 
 Gospel, and derives from it an argument for its Jo- 
 hannean origin.'^ 
 
 * "Za langue de Vevangeliste rCapas d' analogue dans toute la litterature 
 profane ou sacree : simplicite enfantine et transparente profondeur, sainte 
 melancolie et vivacite non moins sainte ; par dessus tout, suavite d'lin amour 
 pur et doux. . . . Dans la langue de Jean, le vetement seul est grec, le corps 
 est kebreu , ou, comme le dit Luthardt, il y a une dme hehraique dans le Ian- 
 gage grec." — Com. sur Vevang. de Saint Jean, 3d ed. thoroughly revised 
 (Paris, 1881), vol. i. pp. 226, 232. 
 
 ^ The passage is worth quoting in full as a contribution to the solution 
 of the Johannean problem : " Man hat einst wohl gemeint, das reine Grie- 
 chisch des Evangeliums passe nicht zu dem Fischer vom Gennezaretsee. 
 Heute zweifelt Niemand m^hr daran, dass gerade die niederen Stdnde Gali- 
 lda''s im tdglichen VerJcehr mit dem umwohnenden und iiherallhereits mitten 
 in das eigene Volhsthum eingedrungenen Griechenthum sich des Verstdnd- 
 nisses der griechischen Sprache gar nicht entrathen konnien. Hatte vollends 
 Johannes einige zwanzig Jahre hereits in griechischer Umgehung gelebt, so 
 musste er sich eine gewisse Gewandtheit im Gebrauch der griechischen 
 Sprache angeeignet hahen. In der That aher hlicht durch das griechische 
 Gewand dieses Evangeliums iiberall der Stilcharakter des Paldstinensers 
 hindurch. Biese unperiodische Satzbildung, diese einjachste Verhnupfung 
 der Sdtze, die von dem reichen griechischen Partikelschatz zur Andeutung 
 ihrer logischen Beziehung keinen Gebrauch macht, diese Vorliebejur Anti- 
 thesen und Parallelismen, diese Umstdndlichkeit der Erzdhlungsweise und 
 Wortarmuth im Ausdruck, diese ganz hebrdisch-artige Wortstellung zeigen 
 mehr als einzelne Verstosse gegen griechisches Sprachgejuhl, die doch auch 
 nicht ganz fehlen, dass das Evangelium wohl griechisch geschrieben, aber 
 hehraisch gedacht ist. Die mit Vorliebe eingestreuten aramdischen Aus- 
 di'ucke, die etymologisirende Deutung eines hebrdischen Namens (ix. 7) lassen 
 deutlich den Paldstinenser erkennen, dem nach einigen seiner Citate selhst der 
 
THE LANGUAGE OJ^ THE NEW TESTAMENT. 69 
 
 John's sentences are short and weighty — we may 
 say, the shorter the weightier. They are co-ordinat- 
 ed, not subordinated. They follow each other by a 
 sort of constructive parallelism, or symmetrical and 
 rhythmical progression, after the manner of Hebrew 
 poetry. There is no dialectical process of argu- 
 mentation, no syllogistic particles (like apa\ no in- 
 volved periods, as in Paul, but a succession of asser- 
 tions which have the self-evidencing force of truth 
 as perceived by immediate intuition. Hence he 
 often uses the words ^icKr^ai, ^ttjpiiv, iwpaKivai, 
 fiaprvpia. Sometimes he moves by contrasts, or 
 antithetic parallelisms, without connecting links: 
 "The law was given by Moses: grace and truth 
 came by Jesus Christ" (i. 17); "No one ever saw 
 God : the only begotten Son revealed him " (i. 18) ; 
 "Ye are from beneath : I am from above" (viii. 23); 
 " I am the vine : ye are the branches " (xv. 5). 
 
 John's ideas and vocabulary are limited ; but he 
 has a number of key-words of unfathomable depth 
 and transcendent height, and repeats them again and 
 again— as "life," "light," "truth," "love."* He 
 
 Gnindtext derheiligen Schrift nichtganz unhekannt gewesen zu sein scheint." 
 Bos Leben Jesu, Berlin, 1882, Bd. i. 90. 
 
 ^ ^lotf occurs 36 times in the Gospel (with the verb ^rjv 16 times), <pwQ 
 23 times, a.\r]Sreia 25 times, d\i]Biv6g 9 times, do^a 20 times (with 
 So^d^ta^ai 24 times), fxaprvpia 14 times (with ^aprupiiv 33 times), 
 yivuxTKut 55 times, ttkttevuv 98 times (but TriariQ only in 1 John v. 4). 
 See Luthardt, i. 20 sq. (Gregory's translation) ; Godet, i. 227 (3d ed.). 
 Hase (Geschichte Jesu, 1876, p. 43) makes a striking remark on this repe- 
 titiousness of John: '^£r ist nickt ein beweglicher, der Rede machiiger Geist, 
 sondem still und tief,festhangend an Wenigem; aber dieses Wenige ist das 
 Gottliche selbst, dem sein Sinnen und seine Liebe gilt, ein Adler der still in 
 der Hohe schwebt,'^ 
 
70 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 kisses a divine and eternal meaning into these 
 terms, and hence he is never weary of them. God 
 himself, as revealed in Christ, is life, light, and love. 
 And what more can philosophy and theology say in 
 so few words? John likes grand antitheses, under 
 which he views the antagonistic forces of the world 
 — as life and death, light and darkness, truth and 
 falsehood, belief and unbelief, love and hatred, 
 Christ and Antichrist, God and the Devil. On the 
 other hand, we look in vain in his Gospel for some 
 of the most important terms, as IjcjcAi^crm, evayyiXiov, 
 luLETavoia, 7rapa(5oXr], ero0ta, but the substance is there 
 in different form. He uses few particles, but uses 
 them very often — namely, Kai, di, wg, *iva, and espe- 
 cially ovv, which with him is not syllogistic, but 
 marks simply the progress in the narrative or re- 
 sumes the train of thought (like the German nun).^ 
 He never employs the optative. He is fond of di- 
 minutives (as irai^apiov, irai^ia, tekvio), and the last 
 word reported of him is the address, "Little chil- 
 dren, love one another." He gives many circum- 
 stantial details in his narratives, as in the healing of 
 the man born blind, whose character is drawn to the 
 life. 
 
 He alone applies the significant term " Logos " 
 (which means reason and speech, ratio and oratio) 
 to Christ as the revealer and interpreter of God ; ' 
 he calls him the " only begotten Son," " the Light of 
 
 ^ The English Revision renders ovv usually by " therefore," but this is 
 heavy and pedantic in English. " So" and " then" would answer as well 
 in many cases, as in John iv. 5, 28 ; xiii. 6. 
 
 ' John i. 1, 14 ; 1 John i. 1 ; comp. Rev. xix. 13. 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 71 
 
 the world," " the Bread of life," " the good Shep- 
 herd," " the Vine " — figures which have guided the 
 Church ever since in her meditations on Christ. He 
 uses the double afxriv (verilj) in the speeches of our 
 Lord. He never calls the forerunner of Christ " the 
 Baptist," but simply " John." He represents the 
 Holy Spirit as the "Paraclete" or Advocate who 
 pleads the cause of the believer here on earth, while 
 Christ, who is also called "Paraclete," represents him 
 at the throne of God.' 
 
 Westcott calls the Gospel of John "the divine 
 Hebrew Epic," and says of his style : ^ " The sim- 
 plicity, the directness, the particularity, the emphasis 
 of St. John's style, give his writings a marvellous 
 power, which is not perhaps felt at first. Yet his 
 words seem to hang about the reader till he is forced 
 to remember them. Each great truth sounds like 
 the burden of a strain, ever falling upon the ear 
 with a calm persistency which secures attention. 
 And apart from forms of expression with which all 
 are early familiarized, there is no book in the Bible 
 which has furnished so many figures of the Person 
 and Work of Christ which have passed into the 
 common use of Christians as the Gospel of St. John." 
 Luthardt ' speaks of " the calmness and serenity " 
 which are spread over this marvellous book, and 
 reveal a soul that has reached peace and tranquil- 
 lity at mature age after a long struggle with a fiery 
 
 * John xiv. 16, 26 ; xv. 26 ; xvi. 7 ; 1 John ii. 1. 
 
 ' In hi8 Introduction to the Study of the Gospels, p. 278. Comp. the 
 remarks in his Com. on John, Introd. p. i.-iii. 
 ' Com. on John, i. 62 (Gregory's translation). 
 
72 
 
 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 and violent temper. " We can see his natural char- 
 acter in his short decisive sentences, his emphatic 
 way of building sentences, the want of connection 
 in his array of sentences, and in the use of contrasts 
 in his speech. His nature is not destroyed. It is 
 purified, brightened, raised to the truth, and so taken 
 into the service of the loved Master. It came to 
 rest on the bosom of Jesus, and found peace as his 
 own. The fire of youth has left its calm light and 
 its warm enthusiasm. It breathes through the most 
 quiet speech, and raises the language to the rhyth- 
 mical beauty of Hebrew poetry and to a very hymn 
 of praise." 
 
 Words peculiar to John (about 130 in the Gospel 
 and the Epistles; for the Apocalypse, see next para- 
 graph): 
 
 dXuvu), to fish (rendered in A. V. 
 and R. V. " to go a-fishing "), xxi. 
 3. 
 
 aXXaxo^ev, from elsewhere, x. 1. 
 
 dXoijy aloe, aloe- wood (greatly prized 
 as a perfume), xix. 39. 
 
 [avafiapTr]TOQ, sinless ("without 
 sin " in A. V. and R. V.), viiL 7.] 
 
 avrXku), to draw, ii. 8 ; iv. 7, 15. 
 
 dvTXrjfia, haustrum, a bucket, iv. 
 11. 
 
 dpa<poQ (^dppa<poQ), seamless, xix. 
 23. 
 
 ^i(3p(ljaK(t), to eat, vi. 13. 
 
 yipiov, an old man (senex), iii. 4. 
 
 daKpvWf to weep, xi. 35. 
 
 deiXidb), to be afraid, xiv. 27. 
 
 ifipaUrri (so W. and Hort, but the 
 usual spelling is kfipdioTi), He- 
 brew, or in the Hebrew tongue 
 
 (hebraice}, v. 2; xix. 13, 17, 20; 
 
 XX. 16 (also in Rev. ix. 11 ; xvi. 
 
 16). 
 tKKEVTBio, to pierce, xix. 37 (also 
 
 Rev. i. 7). 
 ifiTTopiov, merchandise, ii. 16. 
 £7ravro0W(oy, in the very act, viii. 4 
 
 (in the disputed pericope). 
 BriKT], sheath, xviii. 11. 
 ^psfxfia, cattle, iv. 12. 
 Kfpfia, money, ii. 15. 
 KepfiaTi(TTr)Q, money-changer, ii. 14. 
 Kr{7rovp6g, gardener, xx. 15. 
 KXiJixa, branch, xv. 2, 4, 5, 6. 
 Kol/iiTjffig, taking rest, xi. 13. 
 KoXvfji(iriSrpaj pool, v. 2, 4 (?), 7 ; ix. 
 
 7,n. 
 
 KpiSrivog, of barley (adj.'), vL 9, 13. 
 XivTLOv, towel, xiiL 4, 5. 
 Xoyxn, spear, xix. 34. 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 73 
 
 fir] riQ ; or firiTig ; any one ? iv. 33 ; 
 vii. 48. 
 
 fiiyfiUf mixture, xix. 39. 
 
 (viKT], victory, 1 John v. 4.) 
 
 VLTrrfjp, basin, xiii. 5. 
 
 [^vomjfia, disease, v. 4.] 
 
 vvffau) (vvTTwi), to pierce, xix. 34. 
 
 o^w, to stink, xi. 39. 
 
 TrapaKXrjTOQ, advocate, xiv. 16, 26 ; 
 XV. 26 ; xvi. 7 (of the Holy Spir- 
 it) ; 1 John ii. 1 (of Christ). 
 
 TTEv^epoQ, father-in-law, xviii. 13. 
 
 TrpoaKVvtiTTjQy worshipper, iv. 23. 
 
 TTTvcTfiay spittle, ix. 6. 
 
 psu), to flow, vii. 38. 
 
 (TKiXog, leg, xix. 31, 32, 33. 
 ffKrjvoTTTjyiaj feast of tabernacles, 
 
 vii. 2. 
 TSTpdfirjvog, — vov, quadrimestris, 
 
 of four months, iv. 35. 
 titKoq, title, xix. 19, 20. 
 <pav6g, lantern, xviii. 3. 
 0ocVi5, palm-tree, xii. 13 (also Rev. 
 
 vii. 9). 
 (PpayeWiov, scourge, ii. 15. 
 (x<ipTr]g, paper, 2 John 12.) 
 Xeifiappog, brook, wady, xviii. 1. 
 XoXdu), to be angry, vii. 23. 
 (Xpi<TiJ,a, unction, 1 John ii. 20, 27.) 
 xpiofiiov, sop, xiii. 26, 27, 30. 
 
 John in Hebeew. The following faithful and 
 idiomatic translation of the Prologue to John's 
 Gospel, by Professor Delitzsch, will illustrate the 
 Hebrew genius of his Greek style. It is from the 
 Hebrew New Testament, published by the British 
 and Foreign Bible Society (1880). 
 
 John i. 1-18. 
 
 T T - T T 
 
 .... XT 
 
 v: T 
 
 ^ "Tj^nrji Tj^^na v^thr, ^i&<rii 
 
 'EN ctpxy vv 6 Xoyog, Kal 6 1 
 
 \oyoc 17V TTpbg tov Geoi/, Kal 
 
 Otbg 7/v 6 \6yog. 
 OvTog r]v iv ctp^y irpbg tov 2 
 
 6eov. 
 HdvTa Si avTOv tykvtro, Kal 3 
 
 X<'ip'ig avTov lyfViTO ovSf 'iv o 
 
 ysyovsv [or, 'iv. o ysyovsv trj. 
 'Ev avT(p ^io-q rjv, Kal if ^w^ i/r 4 
 
 TO ^utg TWV dv^pWTTWV. 
 Kal TO (pu>g tv Ty okotic^ <paivu, 5 
 
 Kal 1) GKOTia avTo ov KCfreXflf- 
 
74 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 6 c'lfT^i^n T\i<T2 n^i^ia w^i( "^m^^ 
 
 .... X .... - T • • !- 
 
 T - 
 
 T T V T T T T T 
 
 • • T T : T T 
 
 11 rtb&<i ib '^^Ni'^ !s<5 &t!;n 
 14 12)12:^1 im n^na ^s^m 
 
 ' :■- TT t:- TT-: 
 
 *ii^D3 i^ins ntriji ^ssina 
 
 15 fi^'np^i 1*1^5 ^'iSJ^ 'janii'i 
 
 'Eygvcro av3|0W7roe direffTaX/ie- 6 
 
 vog Trapd 6«oi), ovo/ia airrp 
 
 'lujdvrjg. 
 OvTOQ ^X^ev eig naprvpiavy 'iva 7 
 
 fxaprvpritTy Trepi rov ^wrof, 
 
 'iva TTOLVTeQ TTiaTevauxTiv di 
 
 avTOv. 
 OvK rjv Ikhvoq to 0uie, aXX' "iva 8 
 
 fiapTvprjay irEpi rov ^wtoq. 
 ^Hv TO (poJg TO d\T]^iv6vf o 0a»ri- 9 
 
 ^« TTCiVTa dvBpa)7rov, tpx^- 
 
 fitVOV Eig TOV KOffflOV. 
 
 'Ev T(^ KoofUji ijv, Kal 6 Koafiog 10 
 5i avTov lyeveTO, Kai 6 KOffjiog 
 avTov OVK iyvit). 
 
 Eig Td tdia ijX^EV, Kal oi Idiot 11 
 avTOV ov TrapkXa^ov. 
 
 "Offoi de tXafiov avTov^ edioKev 12 
 avTolg i^ovaiav TtKva Qtov 
 yevs(T^ai, Tolg iriaTtvovaiv 
 tig TO ovofia avTOv ' 
 
 01 OVK t| aifiaTCJv ovSk Ik 13 
 SreXrffiaTog aapKog ovSk bk 
 SreXrjfiuTog dvSpog, dXX' Ik 
 Qeov kyevvr}^r]ffav. 
 
 Kai 6 Xoyog adpK tyevero, Kai 14 
 IffKTfVioffev iv t'lfiiv, Kai sBea- 
 ffdfiE^a Trjv So^av avTOVy 
 do^av bjg /xovoyevovg trapd 
 •jraTpog, TrXjjprjg xdptTog Kai 
 dXri^Eiag. 
 
 'Itodvrig fiaprvpti Tiipi avroVf 15 
 Kai ffkicpayev Xtyiuv " Ovtoq 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 75 
 
 ils-D-ip 'IS ''a 5^ n^rj 
 
 T T 
 
 16 'i&n !i3^3 «npb is<iba^5i 
 
 V ••• T •. : '- T : • 
 
 17 ntt:?:-n;:a naria si^inn "^3 
 
 18 C3'^^5 n&^"i-xb D%^'^&<n ns^ 
 
 T T T T • V: T 
 
 r}v ov tiTTOv • [W. and H. : 6 
 
 vog efiTTpoa^kv fiov ysyovev ' 
 
 oTi Trpwroc fjf^ov ^v." 
 "On tK Tov TrXripwfiaroc avTov 16 
 
 rjfielQ TrdvTfQ kXdIiofiev, Kai 
 
 Xdpiv avTi x^ptroQ ' 
 oTi 6 vofioQ Sid Miovffibjg ido^i], 17 
 
 '\r](Tov Xpiorrov lyevtro. 
 Qtov ovdelg kwpaKtv Trwnore ' 18 
 6 fiovoyEvrjg vlog [W. and H. : 
 liovoyivriQ OeofJ, 6 u)v tig 
 TOV koXttov rov irarpogy Uei- 
 voQ i'^TjyriaaTO. 
 
 THE APOCALYPSE. 
 
 The Apocalypse differs in temper and style very 
 strikingly from the fourth Gospel and the first 
 Epistle of John. This fact has divided modern 
 critics who reject the traditional view of the iden- 
 tity of authorship into two hostile camps — the one 
 contending for the genuineness of the Gospel/ the 
 other with equal force for that of the Apocalypse.' 
 
 1 So Schleiermacher and his followers, Neander, LUcke, Bleek, De Wette, 
 Meyer, also Ewald and Diisterdieck. Most of them are disposed to assign 
 the Apocalypse to the mysterious " Presbyter" John, whose very existence 
 is doubtful. 
 
 ' So Baur, Renan, and the whole Tubingen and Leyden schools, and 
 their followers in England (Davidson, and the author of " Supernatural 
 Religion"), who defend the Apocalypse as the genuine work of one of the 
 three pillars of the Jewish Christian party described by Paul (Gal. ii.), 
 while they surrender the Gospel as ^n ideal poem of 411 anonymous genius 
 pf thp second century. 
 
76 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 The Apocalypse is as vehement and warlike as 
 the polemic Epistles of Paul. We hear the battle 
 cry and the shouts of victory.^ It is the rolling of 
 thunder from the Son of Thunder.' But the Gospel 
 is as sharp and uncompromising in drawing the con- 
 trast between Christ and his enemies. On the other 
 hand, the Apocalypse has pauses of repose and an- 
 thems of peace. What can be more soothing and 
 calming than the description of the heavenly Jeru- 
 salem ? 
 
 The Apocalypse, moreover, has a stronger Hebrew 
 coloring, and departs further from classical Greek, 
 than any book of the New Testament.' But this 
 does not arise from ignorance ; on the contrary, with 
 all the irregularities and solecisms, the author shows 
 a remarkable command of the Greek vocabulary 
 and syntax." The Hebraizing character is the natu- 
 
 ^ The words "war" and "to make war," 7r6\e/Jiog and TroXs/ieoj, occur 
 more frequently in the Apocalypse than in any other book of the New 
 Test. See ii. 16; ix. 7, 9; xi. 7; xii. 7, 17 ; xiii. 5, 7; xvi. 14; xvii. 14; 
 xix. 11, 19; XX. 8. 
 
 ' " Un eternel roulement de tonnerre sort du trone. . . . Une sorte de 
 liturgie divine sepoursuit sansjin''^ (Renan, UAntechrist, p. 381). 
 
 ' W. H. Guillemard {Hebraisms in the Greek Testament, 1879, p. 116) 
 says : " The deviations from grammatical correctness in the Apocalypse 
 are so violent and so astonishing as to defy explanation. Some few of 
 them may be traceable to Hebraic influences. The style of St. John in 
 the Gospel and Epistles is so remarkably pure — so comparatively free from 
 Hebraism, or non-classical words and forms ; so much more like the lan- 
 guage of the best Greek authors — that these peculiarities are all the more 
 perplexing. They have given rise to innumerable speculations, ancient 
 and modern ; but no satisfactory explanation of them has hitherto been 
 found." Guillemard's judgment of the Greek of John's Gospel is incorrect. 
 See above, p. 67. 
 
 * The most striking apparent irregularity occurs in i. 4 ; dTTo '0 "QN 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 77 
 
 ral result of the prophetical contents and the close 
 affinity to the books of Daniel and Ezekiel. The 
 classical Greek offered no precedent to this species 
 of literature. On the other hand, the Greek of the 
 fourth Gospel, although much purer in form, is yet, 
 as we have already seen, profoundly Hebrew in 
 spirit, and the absence of solecisms arises from the 
 avoidance of idiomatic expressions. 
 
 The difference between the two books, therefore, 
 lies more on the surface than in the deep. It is 
 largely neutralized by a striking agreement in lan- 
 guage and thought, especially in the doctrine of 
 Christ, who is in both styled Logos, and represented 
 as the atoning Lamb and the conquering Lion, 
 combining gentleness and strength, innocence and 
 majesty in perfect harmony. The resemblance is 
 admitted by the master of the Tiibingen school, 
 who calls the fourth Gospel the Apocalypse spir- 
 
 Kai 6 fjv Kai q spxafxtvog, ** from Him who is and who was and who is to 
 come." But this is evidently a periphrasis of the divine name ^l^l^^ 
 (comp. Exod. iii. 14, Sept. : iyo) ci'/ui 'O "QN, and in the same verse 'O 'QN 
 aTTBiTTaXKe fie Trpog vfiag), and the nominative reflects his eternal un- 
 changeableness ; hence we need neither insert tov with Erasmus and the 
 textus receptus (against the authority of 5< ACP), nor supply rov \iyo- 
 fitvov before 6 wv. The great cod. B (cod. Vat. 1209) does not contain 
 the Apoc. ; but B of the Apoc. (cod. Vat. 2066) has the passage, and reads 
 Beov (OY) before 6 iov. Other Hebraisms are more easy, and not con- 
 fined to the Apocalypse, as ovofiuTa (names), for persons (iii. 4); TroXf/icIj/ 
 fierd (D^ ari?3), instead of Kara, to make war against (ii. 16) ; xpvxT^ 
 ZftfiJQ (for ^ioffa') = tl'^'n ^B3, "a living soul" (xvi. 3). Ck)mp. for 
 further particulars the most recent discussion of this subject by Dr. 
 William Lee, in his Com, on the Revel, (1882, in Speaker's Com,), pp. 454- 
 464. Lee accepts the identity of authorship of tl^e fourth Gospel and 
 the Apocalypse, 
 
78 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 itualized or transfigured/ He thinks that only a 
 post-apostolic writer could rise to such a superior 
 height. But why not much rather John himself? 
 If we assume that nearly a generation intervened 
 between the composition of the Apocalypse (A.D. 68 
 or 69) and that of the Gospel (about A.D. 90), the 
 identity of authorship comes certainly within the 
 reach of literary possibilities, and is not without 
 analogies. What a difference between the first and 
 the second part of Goethe's Faust, the undoubted 
 productions of one and the same poet — the one 
 heated by the fiery passions of his youth, the other 
 reflecting the calm serenity of his old age. Similar 
 differences in style may be noted in Isaiah, Dante, 
 Shakespeare, Milton, and nearly all writers of great 
 genius and long experience. 
 
 Words peculiar to the Apocalypse (c. 150 in all): 
 
 'A^adSwv (Hebrew ']i''^?^j destruc- I the abyss, explained by the Greek 
 tion), the name of the angel of I aTroWvwVy the destroyer, ix. 11. 
 
 * Baur, Die Evangelien, p. 380 . " Man Tcann mit Recht sagen, das vierte 
 Evangelium sei die vergeistigte ApoTcalypse." And in his Gesch. der christl. 
 Kirche, vol. i. p. 147, he says: "Man hann nur die tiefe Genialitdt undfeine 
 Kunst bewundern, mit welcher der Evangelist die Ekmente, v^elche vom Stand- 
 punkt der ApoTcalypse aufdenfreiem und hohern des Evangeliums kiniiber- 
 kiteten, in sich aufgenommen hat, urn die ApoTcalypse zum Evangelium zu 
 vergeistigen. Nur vom Standpunht des Evangeliums aus Idsst sich das Ver- 
 hdltniss, in das sich der Verfasser desselhen zu der Apohalypse setzte, richtig 
 hegreifen." Weiss turns this confession against Baur, and says most 
 admirably {Leben Jesu, i. 101) : " Ja, das Evangelium ist die vergeistigte 
 ApoTcalypse, aber nicht weil ein Geistesheros des zweifen Jahrhunderts dem 
 ApoTcalyptiTcer gefolgt ist, sondern weil der Donnersohn der ApoTcalypse 
 tinter der Leitung des Geisies und unter den goitlichen Euhrungen zum 
 MystiTcer verTcldH und herangereift ist, in dem die Flammen der Jugend zut 
 Gluth einer heiligen Liebe Tierabc^eddmpft siiid*" 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 79 
 
 ro 'A\^a Kai to ""Q (Westcott and 
 Hort; TO ak<pa Kai to w, Tisch- 
 endorf, ed. viii.), " The Alpha and 
 the Omega" (the first and the last 
 letters in the Greek alphabet), or 
 the Beginning and the End. A 
 name applied to God or Christ, as 
 a symbol of eternal divinity, three 
 times — i. 8; xxi. 6; xxii. 13 (in 
 the text. rec. also i. 11) ; comp. a 
 similar designation of Jehovah 
 (" the first and the last"), Isa. xli. 
 4; xliv. 6. 
 
 aXAj/XowVa, alleluia ( Hebrew 
 }n^"^b^il), i.e. praise ye Jehovah, 
 xix. 1, 3, 4, 6. Comp. Ps. civ. 35. 
 
 avoXXviov, Apollyon (». e. Destroy- 
 er), ix. 11. 
 
 dpKog (so Tischend., W. and Hort, 
 for dpKTOQ of the text, rec), a 
 bear, xiii, 2. 
 
 ^aaaviofioQ^ torment, ix. 5; xiv. 11 ; 
 xviii. 7, 10, 15. 
 
 (BaTpaxog, frog, xvi. 13. 
 
 ^ripvWog, beryl (a precious stone 
 of sea-green color), xxi. 20. 
 
 ^i(i\apidiov, a little book, x. 2, 8, 9, 
 10. In ver. 8, W. and H. read 
 pi(3\iov. 
 
 l^oTpvQ, cluster (of grapes), xiv. 18. 
 
 ^vffffivog, byssine, of fine linen, xviii. 
 12, 16 ; xix. 8 (jfivaaog, fine linen, 
 occurs xviii. 12 in text. rec. for 
 ^vcaivoQy and also in Luke xvi. 
 19). 
 
 SpcLKioVf dragon, xii. 3, 4, 7, 13, 16, 
 17 ; xiii. 2, 4, 11 ; xvi. 13 ; xx. 2. 
 
 lyxpia, to anoint, iii. 18. 
 
 kKKEVTSiOy to pierce, i. 7 (also John 
 xix. 37). 
 
 |X£€(vof , misera|)le, iii. 17 (the corn- 
 
 par. tXesivoTSpoi in 1 Cor. xv. 
 
 tvdofxriaig, building, xxi. 18. 
 
 t^aKoaioi, six hundred, xiii. 18. 
 
 "laffiriQ, jasper, iv. 3. 
 
 KaTo^ena, a curse (for the text, rec 
 KaTavaBend), xxii. 3. 
 
 Karac^jOayi'^w, to seal, v. 1. 
 
 Kavfia, heat, vii. 16 ; xvi. 9. 
 
 Kipdvvvfii (jztpavvvix)), to mix (wine 
 with water), to pour out, to fill (a 
 cup with the wine already pre- 
 pared), xiv. 10 ; xviii. 6. 
 
 Kpi^T], barley, vi. 6. 
 
 /cpvcrraXXi^w, to be as crystal, xxi. 
 11. 
 
 KpixTTaWog, crystal, iv. 6 ; xxii. 1. 
 
 kvkXo^ev, round about, iv. 3, 4, 8 ; v. 
 11. 
 
 \ij3av(OT6g, censer, viii. 3, 5. 
 
 Xnrapog, dainty, xviii. 14. 
 
 Ha(^6gj breast (for fxaoTog'), i. 13. 
 
 Hapnapog^ marble, xviii. 12. 
 
 fiaaffdofiaiy to gnaw, xvi. 10. 
 
 firipog, thigh, xix. 16. 
 
 ofiiKog, company, xviii. 17. 
 
 opliriHa, violence, xviii. 21. 
 
 opveov, bird, xviii. 2 ; xix. 17, 21. 
 
 ovpci, tail, ix. 10, 19; xii. 4. 
 
 TrapdaXig, leopard, xiii. 2. 
 
 TTspidsu), to bind about, xi. 44. 
 
 TToSrjprjg, garment down to the foot 
 (XiTiov), i. 13. 
 
 TToXefi^o), to make war, ii. 16 ; xii. 7; 
 xiii. 4; xvii. 14; xix. 11 (only 
 once besides in Jas. iv. 2). 
 
 irvpivog, of fire, ix. 17. 
 
 TTvppogj red, vi. 4 ; xii. 3. 
 
 psSa, chariot, xviii. 13. 
 
 pvirapEvofxai, to be filthy, xxii. 11. 
 
 aaXTTKTTfjgy trumpeter, xviii. 22. 
 
80 
 
 THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 (Tair<pupoQ, sapphire, xxi. 19. 
 
 adpdiog, adpdwv, sardius, iv. 3 (foi 
 ffdpdivoi;) , xxi. 20. 
 
 capSovv^, sardonyx, xxi. 20. 
 
 fftfiidaXigy fine flour, xviii. 13. 
 
 cidrjpog, iron, xviii. 12. 
 
 fffidpaydog, emerald, xxi. 19. 
 
 ffTpfjvog, luxury, xviii. 3. 
 
 a(pd^o), (TcpdTTojj to slay, v. 6, 9, 12; 
 vi. 4, 9 ; xiii. 3, 8 ; xviii. 24 (also 
 3 John iii. 12). 
 
 raXavTLalog (adj.), weighing a tal- 
 ent, xvi. 21. 
 
 To^ov, bow, vi. 2. 
 
 TOTrdZiov, topaz, xxi. 20. 
 
 vaKtvB^og, jacinth, xxi. 20. 
 
 vdXivog, of glass, iv. 6 ; xv. 2. 
 
 vaXog, glass, xxi. 18, 21. 
 
 (papfiaKevg, (papfiaKog, sorcerer, xxi, 
 8,15. 
 
 Xa.\Kr]d(t)v, chalcedony, xxi. 19. 
 
 X^iapSg, lukewarm, iii, 16. 
 
 X?e' = c?«'fo<Ttoi k^r]K0VTa «^, six 
 hundred and sixty-six, xiii. 18. 
 The mystical number of the 
 beast. Irenaeus already mentions 
 another reading, 616. It is re- 
 markable that both numbers give 
 the name Nero (n) Ccesar (666 = 
 the Hebrew nD;5 'j'^l3,616=the 
 Latin Nero CcBsar\ 
 
 Xotvi^, measure, vi. 6. 
 
 XpvaoXiBog, chrysolite, xxi. 20. 
 
 XpvaoTrpaoog, chrysoprase, xxi. 20. 
 
 Xpv<r6(o^ to deck, xvii. 4 ; xviii, 16. 
 
 Q, Omega, i. 8 ; xxi, 6 ; xxii. 13. 
 
 THE EVIDENTIAL VALUE OF THE LANGUAGE OF THE 
 GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 The idiosyncrasies of the New Testament writers 
 furnish a strong argument for the apostolic author- 
 ship. They differ in vocabulary and style, as well 
 as in the depth and power of thought, from all the 
 preceding and all the succeeding authors. The 
 Christian Church has always felt this, and hence 
 has given to the New Testament a conspicuous 
 isolation among religious books. 
 
 The Apostolic Fathers, so called (Clement of 
 Rome, Polycarp, Ignatius), and the Apologists of 
 the second century (Justin Martyr and others), be- 
 long to another generation of Christians ; their 
 Greek has no more the informing Hebrew spirit 
 and coloring of men born ^ud bred on, the soil of 
 
THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 81 
 
 the old dispensation ; they allude to secular and 
 ecclesiastical surroundings which did not exist in 
 the apostolic age, and altogether thej breathe a dif- 
 ferent atmosphere. The epistle of Clement to the 
 Corinthians, and that of Poly carp to the Philippians, 
 come nearest to the epistles of Paul and John, but 
 even they are separated from them by a very great 
 distance. Barnabas, Ignatius, Hermas, Papias, Jus- 
 tin Martyr are still further off, and bear no com- 
 parison with the apostles and evangelists. As to 
 the apocryphal, compared with the canonical, Gos- 
 pels, the difference between them is as between 
 night and day.* 
 
 No transition in the history of the Church is so 
 sudden, abrupt, and radical as that from the apos- 
 tolic to the post-apostolic age. They are separated 
 by a clear and sharp line of demarcation. The Chris- 
 tian spirit is the same in kind, yet with an astonish- 
 ing difference in degree ; it is the difference between 
 inspiration and illumination, between creative genius 
 and faithful memory, between the original voice and 
 the distant echo, between the clear gushing fountain 
 from the rock and the turbid stream. God himself 
 has established an impassable gulf between his own 
 life-giving word and the writings of mortal men, 
 that future ages might have a certain guide and 
 standard in finding the way of salvation. The 
 apostolic age is the age of miracles, and the New 
 Testament is the life and light of all subsequent 
 ages of the church. 
 
 ^ The style and vocabulary of the Didache, first published in 1883, 
 come nearest the Greek of* the N. T. See SchaflF, The Teaching of the 
 Twelve Apostles, N. Y., 3d ed. 1889, pp. 95-113. 
 
CHAPTER SECOND. 
 
 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT, 
 
 Idterature on the Sources of the Text and on Textual Criticism 
 of the New Testament. 
 
 I. Prolegomena to the Critical Editions. 
 
 Jo. Jac. Wktsthin : 'H Kaiv^ Aia^rjKTf. Novum Testamentum Grcecum 
 editionis receptee cum lectionihus variantibus^ etc. Amstel. 1751-52, 2 torn, 
 fol. Prolegcmiena in torn. i. pp. 1-222 ; torn. ii. pp. 3-15, 449-454, 741- 
 743. 
 
 Jo. Jac. Griesbach: Novum Testamentum Grace. Ed. secunda. Halae 
 Sax. et Lond. 1796-1806, 2 vols. 8vo. Ed. iertiam emend, et auctam cur, 
 David Schulz (vol. i. Berolini, 1827). Prcefationes et Prolegomena (vol. i. 
 pp. iii.-lvi., i.-cxxvii.). Also his SymholoB Critica (1785-93), with his 
 MeletemaiOf and Commentarius Criticus in Textum Grcecum N. T. (1798 
 and 1811). 
 
 I. Mart. Auqustin. Scholz : N. T. Gr. Textum adjidem testium criti- 
 corum recensuit, etc. Lips. 1830-36, 2 vols. 4to. Prolegg. vol. i. pp. i.-clxxii. ; 
 vol. ii. pp. i.-lxiii. Also his Biblisch-Kritiscke Reiser Leipzig u. Sorau, 1823. 
 
 Car. Lachmann: Novum Testamentum Greece et Latine. Berolini, 
 1842 and 1850, 8vo ; Prcefatio, vol. i. pp. v.-lvi. ; vol. ii. pp. iii.-xxvi. 
 Comp. also Lachmann's article in explanation and defence of his critical 
 system, in the Theol. Studien und Kritiken for 1830, No. IV. pp. 817-S45. 
 
 Aenoth. {Germ. Lobegott) Frid. Const. Tischendorf: Novum 
 Testamentum Greece. Ad antiquissimos testes denuo recensuit^ apparatum 
 criticum omni studio perfectum apposuit, commentationem isagogicam pra- 
 texuit. Editio septima. Lips. 1869, 2 vols. 8vo. Prolegomena, vol. L 
 pp. xiii.-cclxxviii. The text of this edition is superseded by the editio 
 octavo critica maior (Lips. 1869-72, 2 vols.). The new Prolegomena, which 
 the author did not live to finish, have been prepared by Dr. Caspar Reni£ 
 Gregory, with the aid of Dr. Ezra Abbot. The first Part was pub- 
 lished in June, 1884, at Leipsic (440 pages). 
 
 Samuel Prideaux Tregelles : The Greek New Testament, edited 
 from Ancient Authorities, with the Latin Version of Jerome, from the Codex 
 
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 83 
 
 Amiatinus. London, published in parts from 1857 to 1879, 1 vol. 4to. 
 The 7th part (published in 1879, after the death of Dr. Tregelles) contains 
 the Prolegomena, with Addenda and Corrigenda, compiled and edited by 
 Rev. Dr. Hort and Rev. A. W. Streane. Other works of Tregelles, sec 
 below, sub II. 
 
 Henry Alford : The Greek Testament. London, 6th ed. 1868, etc. ; 
 Prolegomena, voL i. chs. vi. and vii. pp. 73-148. See also vols, ii.-iv. 
 
 Wkstcott and Hort : Introduction and Appendix to their New Testa- 
 ment in Greek, forming a separate voL, Cambridge and London, 1881. 
 Amer. ed. (from English plates). New York (Harpers), 1882. Dr. Hort 
 prepared the Introd. and Append. They are of the greatest value. 
 
 II. Special Works on Textual Criticism. 
 
 Sam. Prid. Tregelles: An Account of the Printed Text of the Greek 
 New Testament, with Remarks on its Revision upon Critical Principles. 
 London (Bagster & Sons), 1854. By the same; Introduction to the 
 Textual Criticism of the New Test. London, 1860. This is a separate 
 reprint of the first part of the fourth volume of Home's Introd., 10th ed. 
 London, 1856; with "Additions" and "Postscript" in the Uth ed. 1860, 
 14th ed. 1877. Very valuable. 
 
 Samuel Davidson : A Treatise on Biblical Criticism, Exhibiting a Sys- 
 tematic View of that Science. Edinb. and London, 1852, 2 vols. The sec- 
 ond vol. treats of the New Test. 
 
 Ab. Kuenen: Critices et Hermeneutices N. T. Lineamenta. L. Bat. 1858. 
 
 Ed. Reuss: Bibliotheca Novi Testamenti Greed. Brunsvigae, 1872 
 (pp.313). The most complete list of all the printed editions of the Greek 
 Testament, supplemented in this book. See Appendix I. 497 sqq. 
 
 Fr. H. Ambrose Scrivener : A Plain Introduction to the Criticism 
 of the New Testament, 1861 ; 2d ed., thoroughly revised, Cambridge and 
 London, 1874 (626 pages) ; 3d ed. 1883 (751 pages). Upon the whole the 
 best separate work on the subject in the English language. Comp. also 
 Scrivener's Six Lectures on the Text of the New Testament, Cambridge and 
 Liondon, 1875 ; his Collation of about Twenty Greek MSS. of the Holy 
 Gospels, deposited in the British Museum, etc., with a Critical Introduction, 
 Cambridge, 1853 ; his Exact Transcript of the Codex A ugiensis, to which 
 is added a Full Collation of Fifty Manuscripts, with a Critical Introduc- 
 tion (the latter also issued separately), Cambridge, 1859; and Collation 
 of the Codex Sinaiticus with the Received Text of the N. T. 2d ed. 1867. 
 
 Ezra Abbot: Notes on Scrivener's "Plain Introduction," etc., edited 
 by Dr. Jos. H. Thayer. Boston and New York, 1885. (Points out numer- 
 ous errors in Scrivener.) 
 
84 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE iJEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 Thomas SheldokGrekn: A Course of Developed Criticism on Passages 
 of the N. T. materially affected by Various Readings. London (S. Bagster 
 & Sons), no date, but published in 1856. 
 
 C. E. Hammond: Outlints of Textual Criticism Applied to the New 
 Testament. Oxford, 1872; 2d ed. 1876; 3d ed. 1880; 5th ed. 1890. 
 
 Edward C. Mitchell: Critical Handbook to the New Testament, 
 London and Andover, 1880 (the part on textual criticism, pp. 67-143, 
 revised by Ezra Abbot); French translation, Paris, 1881. Very brief. 
 
 George E. Merrill : The Story of the Manuscripts. Boston, 1881. 
 
 Abbe J. P. P. Martin : Introduction a la Critique Textuelle du Nouveau 
 Testament. Paris, 1883-86, 6 vols. Lithographed, with numerous fac-similes. 
 
 Benjamin B. Warfield : An Introduction to the Textual Criticism of 
 the New Testament. London and New York, 1886 (225 pp.). 
 
 III. Critical Introductions to the New Testament. 
 The Critical Introductions usually incorporate an account of the written 
 and printed text of the New Test., and discuss the principles of criticism. 
 So EiCHHORN, MiCHAELis Ccd. b}' HERBERT Marsh, Lond. 1823, 6 vols.), 
 Hug, De Wette, Bleek (4th ed. 1886), Reuss (6th ed. 1888), Holtzmann 
 (1885, 2d ed.l886), B. Weiss (1886, 2d ed. 1889), G. Salmon (3d ed. 1888). 
 
 IV. Articles on Bible I'ext. 
 
 TiscHENDORF and Von Gebhardt, in Herzog's Real-EncyTc. (new ed. 
 ii. 400-437); translated and revised by Dr. Ezra Abbot for SchaflF's 
 " Relig. Encycl." 1882, vol. i. 268 sqq. 
 
 Canon Westcott in Smith's Diet, of the Bible (Vt)l. iii. 2112-2139, 
 Amer. ed. by Hackett and Abbot). 
 
 Dr. Frederic Gardiner (Prof, in the Berkeley Divinity School, 
 Middletown, Conn.) : The Principles of Textual Criticism, in the " Biblioth. 
 Sacra " of Andover for April, 1875, reprinted and revised as an Appendix 
 to his Harmony of the Four Gospels in Greek, Andover, 1876 and 1880. 
 
 Two essays of Dr. Ezra Abbot (Prof, in Cambridge, Mass.) : one in 
 Ar^lo - American Bible Revision, Philadelphia, 2d ed. 1879 (pp. 86-98), 
 twice reprinted in London, 1880; and another in The New Revision and its 
 Study (reprinted from » The Sunday-School Times"), Phila. 1881 (pp. 5-37; 
 reprinted in part in Dr. B. H. Kennedy's Ely Lectures on the Revised Ver- 
 sion of the N. T., London, 1882, pp. 91-100). 
 
 The Revision of 1881 has called forth a large number of essays on the 
 subject in nearly all the leading English and American Reviews; notably 
 among them the attacks of Dean Burgon in three articles in the London 
 "Quarterly Review" for Oct. 1881, and Jan. and April, 1882 (enlarged in 
 Revision Revised, with reply to Bishop Ellicott, Lond. 1883); with defences 
 
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 85 
 
 from Dr. W. Sanday in the " Contemporary Review" for Dec. 1881 ; Canon 
 Farrak, ibid. March, 1882; from an anonymous writer in "The Church 
 Quarterly Review," London, for Jan. 1882 ; from Prof. B. B. Warfield in 
 the " Presbyterian Quarterly Review," N. York, for April, 1882 ; from two 
 members of the New Testament (English) Company (supposed to be 
 Bishop Ellicott and Archdeacon Palmer) in The Revisers and the Greek 
 Text of the New Testament, London, 1882, etc., etc. 
 
 SOURCES OF THE TEXT. 
 
 The text of the IN^ew Testament is derived from 
 three sources — Greek Manuscripts, ancient Transla- 
 tions, and Quotations of the Fathers and other 
 ancient writers. The Manuscripts are the most di- 
 rect, and hence the most important, source ; altliough 
 in special cases the other two may be of equal im- 
 portance. The concurrent testimony of all three 
 sources is conclusive. 
 
 The original autographs^ of the apostolic writers, 
 whether written by themselves or dictated to clerks,' 
 are lost beyond all reasonable hope of discovery. 
 They are not even mentioned by the post-apostolic 
 authors as being extant anywhere, or as having been 
 seen by them.^ I^hey perished probably before the 
 
 * Autographa, dpxsTVTra, Idioxnpa. 
 
 ' Notarii, amanuenses, Taxvypa<poi, Ka\\iypa(j>oi. Such are mentioned 
 or implied, Rom. xvi. 22 ; 1 Cor. xvi. 21 ; Col. iv. 18 ; Gal. vi. 11 ; 2 Thess. 
 iii. 17. A distinction was made between the notarius, or the rapid writer, 
 the librarius, or calligraphist, the beautiful writer, who carefully trans- 
 cribed the first copy, and the corrector, who answered to our modern 
 proof-reader. 
 
 ^ TertuUian {De Prcescr. Hcer. c. 36), with his usual rhetorical fervor, 
 points the heretics to "the apostolic churches in which the very thrones 
 of the apostles still preside in their places {cathedrce apostolorum suis locis 
 prcesident), in which their own authentic letters are read (apud quas ipsce 
 authenticce litterce eorum recitantur), uttering the voice and representing 
 
86 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 close of the first century, or soon after they were 
 published, that is, copied and distributed. The apos- 
 tles and evangelists did not write on Babylonian 
 bricks, or Sinaitic rocks, or Egyptian walls, or stones, 
 or tablets of wood or brass, but on .paper, with the 
 reed-pen and ink.^ The paper then in common use 
 was made of Egyptian papyrus (hence our word 
 jpajper\ and very brittle and perishable.' Jerome 
 
 the face of every one of them." These " authentic letters " or writings 
 may be either the autographs, or the Greek originals as distinct from 
 translations, or genuine and complete copies as opposed to the mutilated 
 copies of the heretics (e.g. Marcion's Luke); but in awy case the testimony 
 is too isolated and rhetorical to be entitled to credit. Irenaeus, who wrote 
 twenty years earlier (about A.D. 180), knew different copies with two dif- 
 ferent readings of the mystical number in Apoc. xiii. 18, without being 
 able to appeal to John's autograph {A dv. Hcer. v. 30, 1) ; and Origen 
 knew no older text of the Gospel of John than the copy of Heracleon 
 (/« Joh. tom. xiii. 11). The knowledge of the autographs seems to have 
 vanished with the autographs themselves. How few of the MSS. of mod- 
 ern books are preserved after they have been used by the printer. See 
 Tischendorf, in Herzog, ii. 400 ; Tregelles, in Home, iv. 24 ; Scrivener, 
 p. 503 ; Harris, in the " Amer. Journal of Philologj-," N. 12, Baltimore, 1882. 
 
 ^ These three writing materials are mentioned in 2 John 12; 3 John 13 ; 
 2 Cor. iii. 3 : 6 x^P'^V^ (Lat. charta), a leaf of paper, made of the layers 
 of papyrus, 6 KoKafiog (^calamus), the reed-pen, and to fii^Xav (neuter 
 subst. from fiiXag, black), the ink (atramenturn). The best qualities of 
 paper used for letter- writing were called by the Romans charta Augusta, 
 from their emperor; Liviana, from his wife; Saitica, etc. See Pliny's 
 Nat. Hist. xiii. 12 (23, 24). 
 
 ' The papyrus (from the Egyptian papu') is a water-plant or reed 
 which was abundantly cultivated in the valley of the Nile, especially the 
 Delta (but not now), and which still grows freely in Sicily, on the Lake 
 of Merom in Palestine, the Niger, and the Euphrates. The paper was 
 made of slices of its stem. All the Egyptian books, even of the earliest 
 Pharaonic times, are written on such paper; in Europe it came into 
 common use at the time of Alexander the Great, and prevailed till the 
 tenth century, when cotton and linen paper took its place. 
 
manuscrii>t8 of the new testament. 8T 
 
 mentions that in his day the library of Pamphilns 
 of Csesarea, which then was not a century old, v\ as^ 
 already partially destroyed. All ancient books 
 written on that material have perished, with the 
 exception of the papyrus rolls that were accidentally 
 preserved in Egyptian tombs and mummies, or un- 
 der the ashes of Mount Yesuvius at Herculaneum 
 (since 79).' Parchment,'* made from the skin of 
 animals, is far more costly and durable, and was 
 used for the manuscripts of the Pentateuch in the 
 time of Josephus, but not for ordinary purposes ; 
 we have no MSS. of the Hebrew Scriptures older 
 than the tenth century,^ and no parchment copies 
 of the New Testament older than the fourth. The 
 "parchments" which Paul ordered were probably 
 sacred books of the Old Testament.* 
 
 God has not chosen to exempt the Bible from the 
 fate of other books, but has wisely left room for the 
 
 * The papyri of Egypt are well preserved, and contain poems, novels, pray- 
 ers for the dead, etc. Those of Herculaneum (publ. in 21 vols, fol!) have suf- 
 fered from the eruption of Vesuvius. The Fayum papyri deposited in Vienna 
 contain fragments of the Copto-Greek Gospels, and a portion of a homily 
 quoting from our Gospels. See Woodruff, in " Ando ver Rev." for Sept. 1885. 
 
 ' The name (Fr. parchemin, from Pergamena) is derived from the city 
 of Pergamum in Asia Minor, and the invention is traced to Eumenes, King 
 of Pergamum, 197-159 B.C., but skins of animals were so used long before 
 that time. The common parchment is prepared from sheepskins; the finer 
 Variety, called vellum, from the skins of young calves, goats, and antelopes. 
 
 =• The oldest MS. known is the MS. of the Prophets with the Baby- 
 lonian punctuation, from the year A.D. 916; the oldest complete MS. of 
 the Hebrew Bible, preserved in the library of St. Petersburg, dates from 
 A.D. 1009. See Dillmann, in Herzog, ii. 397. 
 
 * 2 Tim. iv. 13. Paul ordered his cloak (0e\o^??i/), and the books (tcl 
 l3i(iX(a, probably papyrus rolls), and especially the parchments (rdf 
 fUfijipdvac:). 
 
88 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 diligence and research of man, who is responsible 
 for the use of all the facilities within his reach for 
 the study of the Bible. He has not provided for 
 inspired transcribers any more than inspired print- 
 ers, nor for infallible translators any more than 
 infallible commentators and readers. He wastes no 
 miracles. He desires free and intelligent worship- 
 pers. " The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth 
 life." " It is the spirit that quickeneth ; the flesh 
 profiteth nothing: the words that I have spoken 
 unto you are spirit and are life." The Bible, in its 
 origin and history, is a human as well as a divine 
 book, and must be studied under this twofold aspect. 
 It is the incarnation of God's truth, and reflects the 
 divine-human person of Christ, to whom it bears 
 witness as the Alpha and Omega, as the Way, the 
 Truth, and the Life. Even if we had the apostolic 
 autographs, there would be room for verbal criticism 
 and difference in interpretation, since they, like 
 other ancient books, were probably written as a 
 continuous whole, without accents, with little or no 
 punctuation, without division of sentences or words 
 (except to indicate paragraphs), without titles and 
 subscriptions, without even the name of the author 
 unless it was part of the text itself. " Spirit " may 
 be the human spirit, or the Divine Spirit (the Holy 
 Ghost), and the distinction which we mark by cap- 
 italizing the first letter cannot be decided from an 
 uncial manuscript where all letters are capital. 
 The punctuation, likewise, can be determined not 
 by manuscript authority, but only by the meaning 
 of the context,, and is often subject to doctrinal 
 
MANUSCKIPT8 OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 80 
 
 eonsiderations, as notably so in the famous passage 
 affecting the divinity of Christ, Rom. ix. 5, which 
 admits of three, if not seven, different punctuations 
 and constructions.^ 
 
 The first and second generation of Christians 
 must not be judged after our modern standard. 
 Twenty years elapsed before the first book of the 
 New Testament was written. The spoken word, 
 which carries with it the magnetic power of per- 
 sonality, was the chief instrument of promoting 
 Christianity (as it is to-day in heathen lands).' 
 The disciples of the apostles continued to live in 
 the element of their living teaching and example. 
 Hence there are but few literal quotations from the 
 New Testament in the scanty writings of the Apos- 
 tolic Fathers and Apologists down to the middle of 
 the second century. They had no bibliographical 
 curiosity ; they cared more for the substance than 
 the form ; they expected, at least most of them, the 
 speedy end of the world, when Christ himself would 
 
 * Much has been written on this passage. The doctrinal question in- 
 volved is whether Paul calls Christ God, or not; in othf : w oals, whether 
 ^(.oQ refers to the preceding 6 XpioTOQ, or to God the Fiii lu r. The A. "V. 
 and the R. V. (in text) take the former view. The i;. V., however, 
 recognizes the other construction in the margin. The whole subject has 
 been ably and exhaustively discussed on both sides by two members of 
 the American Revision Committee, Dr. Dwight and Dr. Abbot, in the 
 Journal of the Society of Biblical Lit. and Exegesis for 1881, Middletown, 
 Conn., 1882, pp. 22-55 and 87-154. 
 
 ' Clement of Alexandria records the curious and almost incredible tradi- 
 tion that when the Romans requested Mark to write his Gospel from the 
 lips of the apostle Peter, he neither hindered nor encouraged it, as if in 
 his estimation it was a matter of little importance, "the end of all things 
 being at hand" (1 Pet. iv. 7). Euseb. H. E. vi. 14; note of Heinichen, i. 279. 
 
90 MANUSCKIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 appear in glory ; their chief concern was to prove 
 the power of Christ's teaching by holy living and 
 dying. 
 
 But this fact, of course, does not detract one iota 
 from the inestimable value of the primitive text 
 and the extreme importance of its restoration. For 
 us the written or printed New Testament is the 
 only reliable substitute for the personal teaching of 
 Christ and his apostles. 
 
 In the absence of the autographs, we must depend 
 upon copies, or secondary sources. But these are, 
 fortunately, far more numerous and trustworthy for 
 the Greek Testament than for any other book of 
 antiquity. " In the variety and fulness of the evi- 
 dence on which it rests, the text of the l^ew Testa- 
 ment stands absolutely and unapproachably alone 
 among ancient prose writings." ^ " In all classical 
 literature," says Tischendorf, " there is nothing 
 which even distantly may be compared in riches 
 with the textual sources of the New Testament." * 
 Of some of the first Greek and Roman classics barely 
 half a dozen manuscript copies have come down to 
 us; while of the Greek Testament we have hundreds 
 of copies, besides many ancient translations and 
 innumerable patristic quotations. 
 
 For all intents and purposes, then, the New Testa- 
 ment has been preserved to the Christian world by 
 its own intrinsic value, and by a Providence which 
 is equal to a miracle, without violating the ordinary 
 laws of history or superseding human exertion. 
 
 ' Westcott and Hort, Gr. Test. p. 561, 
 ' Pie Sinaibibel, p. 73. 
 
Specimens of the Chief MSS. of the New Testament. 
 *t iS^€NeinON6<po&OYN 
 
 t 
 
 Codex Vaticanus : Fourth Century. — Mark xvi. 8. 
 OTaaig Kai ovdevi ov \'dev httov etpo^ovv \ to yap: \ 
 Kara | fiapKov. 
 ^r, (The accents and breathings are by a later hand.) 
 
 X t^NApx^r-iMNOxorocKAioxorbcir 
 ^ xi t^ocnro KeT<'KA.i ec h nox o ro c • 
 
 Codex Alexandrinus : Fifth Century. — John i. 1. 
 Ev apx?; r\v o \oyoq koi o Xoyog ^ | Trpot; tov ^■[eojv * kui ^[eo]^" ijv o Xoyog. 
 
 o\AenoTeeKninTGi / 
 
 Codex Claromontanus : Sixth Century; Greek Text. — 1 Cor. xiii. 8. 
 Tj dydTTT] I ovderroTe iKTrivrrEi 
 
 CVRTrxs 
 
 Codex Claromontanus: Sixth Century; Latin Text.— 1 Cor. xiii. 8. 
 caritas | numquam excidet 
 
 Toyccy 
 
 Cpdex Laudianus : Sixth Century ; Greek Text.— Acts xx. 28. 
 Tfjv eiCKXtjffiav \ tov K:[v/Oio]y 
 
1 
 
 I 
 i 
 
 t 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 » <^ 
 •"* s 
 
 4, JO 
 
 J » 
 
 •II 
 
 «- b 
 
 O JIT 
 
 a »- 
 
 $ b 
 
 ^ 'O 
 
 a> o 
 
 c « 
 
 'I' -s 
 
 > lO 
 
 g I 
 
 ^ s> 
 
 K lo 
 
 W ^ 
 
 ^ I 
 
 
 -} 
 
 
 
 U 2 
 
 ^ « 
 
 el 
 
 
 
 u " 
 
 
 
 < 
 
 5 5. 
 
 
 [i 
 
 
 h 
 
 4 00 
 
 am 
 
 o P 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 I 
 
 Z 
 
 
 C o 
 S I / 
 
 o 
 
 ^ r— I 
 ., o 
 
 
 Ij ^ B 
 
 (3! J 
 
 Ob 
 
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 93 
 
 GENERAL CHARACTER OF MANUSCRIPTS.* 
 
 Before the invention of the art of printing — that 
 is, before the middle of the fifteenth century — books 
 could be multiplied only by the laborious and costly 
 process of transcription. This was the work of 
 slaves, professional scribes, and monks. For the 
 preservation of the priceless treasures of ancient 
 Greek and Roman literature, and the apostolic and 
 
 ^ The art of reading ancient MSS. and dietermining their age and value 
 is a special science, called diplomatics, and, in a wider sense, palceography. 
 The founder of it is Jean Mabillon, of the Benedictine order, in his De Re 
 Diplomatica, Paris,, 1681, fol. ; with a supplement, 1704 ; new ed. 1789, 2 
 vols. fol. The most important work on diplomatics is the Nouveau traiti 
 de diplomatique, par deux religieux benedictins [Toustain and Tassin], 
 Par. 1750-65, 6 vols. 4to. The principal works on Greek palaeography 
 are : Montfaucon, Palceographia Grceca, sive de ortu et progressu littera- 
 rum GrcBcarum, Par. 1708, fol.; Bast, Commentatio Palceographica, ap- 
 pended to G. H. Schaefer's edition of Gregorius Corinthius De DialectiSy 
 Leip2. i811 ; Silvestre, Paleographie universelle. Par. 1839-41, fol., torn. ii. 
 (splendid fac-sirailes) ; Westwood, Palceographia Suc7-a Pictoria, Lond. 
 1843-45; Wattenbach, Anldtung zur griech. Palveographie, 2d ed. Leipz. 
 1877, 4to, and 12 plates, foL ; id., Schrifttafeln zur Gesch.der griech. Schrift 
 und zum Studium der griech. Palceogr., 2 vols., Berl. 1876-77, fol. ; new ed., 
 1883, under the title oi Scriptures Grcecce Specimina ; Wattenbach and A. von 
 Velsen, Exempla Codicum Grcecorum lift, minusc. scriptorum, Heidelb. 1878, 
 fol., 50 photogr. plates ; " Palaeographical Society of London," Facsimiles of 
 Ancient MSS., edited by Bond and Thompson, Parts i.-xii., Lond. 1873-82, 
 fol., still continued ; Wattenbach, Das Schriftwesen im Mittelalter, 2d ed. 
 Leipz. 1875, 8vo (an excellent work) ; Gardthausen, Griechische Pakeo- 
 graphie, Leipz. 1879, large 8vo (the most important recent treatise). 
 
 A good compendious introduction to Latin palaeography is Wattenbach's 
 Anleitung zur lat. Palceogr., 3d ed. Leipz. 1878, 4to (90 pages). L. A. 
 Chassant's Diet, des abriviations lat. et fran^aises, 4. 6d. Par. 1876, 16mo, 
 is very helpful in reading Latin MSS. or early printed books. Comp. also 
 the great work of Wailly, Elements de paleographie ; Zangemeister and 
 Wattenbach's Exempla Codicum Latinorum ; Egger, Histoire du livre 
 (1880) ; Birt, Das antike Buchwesen (1882). 
 
94 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 patristic writings, the world is chiefly indebted to 
 the monks of the Middle Ages. 
 
 " The hand that wrote doth moulder in the tomb ; 
 The book abideth till the day of doom." 
 
 The manuscripts of the Greek Testament have 
 come down to us not in continuous rolls, like those 
 of the Hebrew Scriptures and the Egyptian and 
 Herculaneum papyri, but in ordinary book form o± 
 folio, quarto, or octavo, or smaller size, in sheets 
 folded and stitched together. Hence they are called 
 Codices} The pages are usually broken into two, 
 very rarely into three or four columns. 
 
 The number of MSS. now known is not far from 
 two thousand, including all classes, and is gradually 
 increasing with discoveries in ancient libraries and 
 convents, especially in the East. But many of them 
 have not yet been properly examined and utilized 
 for textual criticism.'* 
 
 They differ in age, extent, and value. They were 
 written between the fourth and sixteenth centuries ; 
 
 ^ Codex, or caudex, means, originally, the ti-unk of a tree, stock, stem ; 
 then a block of wood split or sawn into planks, leaves, or tablets (tabelloe), 
 and fastened together ; hence a book, as the ancients wrote on tablets of 
 wood smeared with wax, the leaves being laid one upon another. The 
 word was afterwards applied to books of paper and parchment. 
 
 ' The total number of MSS., including Lectionaries, is stated by Dr. 
 Scrivener, in the second ed. of his Introduction (1874, p. 269, com p. p. x.), 
 to be 158 uncials and 1605 cursives. But in the third edition (1883, p. 
 XXX.), he swells the number of the cursives to 1997, and the total num- 
 ber of uncial and cursive MSS. of all classes to 2094. He assigns (p. 661) 
 to England, 373; to Italy, 417; to France, 238; to Denmark, 3; to Ger- 
 many, 96; to Greece, 1; to Holland, 6; to Ireland, 3; to Russia, 79; to 
 Scotland, 8 ; to Spain, 23 ; to Sweden, 7 ; to Switzerland, 15 ; to Turkey, 
 120 ; to the United States, 3 ; unknown, 37. But this gives only 1429, to 
 Wbiph should be added about 300 discovered by Pean Burgon in 1883. 
 
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TEST ANIENT. 95 
 
 the oldest date from the middle of the fourth cen- 
 tury, and rest, of course, on still older copies. Few 
 manuscripts of Greek or Eoman classics are older 
 than the ninth or tenth century. The Medicean 
 MS. of Yergilius (Yirgil) is of the fourth century, 
 the Yatican MS. of Dion Cassius of the fifth. The 
 oldest MSS. of ^schylus and Sophocles date from 
 the tenth, those of Euripides from the twelfth, those 
 of the Annals of Tacitus from the eleventh century 
 (Mediceus I. for the first half, and Mediceus II. for 
 the second half). The oldest complete copy of 
 Homer is from the thirteenth century, though the 
 Harris papyrus fragments in the British Museum are 
 " perhaps of the Ist century B.C.," and the Bankes 
 papyrus of the " 2d century " A.D. Of the Medita- 
 tions of the Emperor Marcus Aurelius only one com- 
 plete MS. is known to exist, that in the Yatican library, 
 and it has no title, and no inscriptions of the several 
 books ; the other Yatican and three Florentine MSS. 
 contain only extracts from the imperial book. 
 
 It is not impossible, though not very probable, that 
 MSS. of the New Testament may yet be discovered 
 that are older than any now known. But we must 
 remember that the last and most cruel persecution 
 of the Church under Diocletian in the beginning of 
 the fourth century was especially destructive of 
 Bibles, which were correctly supposed to be the 
 main feeders of the Christian religion. 
 
 Some MSS. cover the whole New Testament, 
 some only parts ; and hence they are divided into 
 five or six classes, according as they contain the 
 Gospels, or the Acts, or the Catholic Epistles, or the 
 
96 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 Pauline Epistles, or the Apocalypse, or only the 
 Scripture lessons from the Gospels or Acts and 
 Epistles (the lectionaries). Those which cover more 
 than one of these classes, or the whole New Testa- 
 ment, are numbered in the lists two, three, or more 
 times. The Gospel MSS. are the most numerous, 
 those of the Apocalypse the least numerous. Some 
 MSS. are written with great care, some contain many 
 errors of transcribers ; no one is free from error any 
 more than a printed book. Many of them are orna- 
 mented with illustrations and pictures. Words of 
 frequent occurrence are usually abridged, as ^(t=. 
 3'€oc (God), K(j= Kvpiog (Lord), v<j = vi6g (Son), 40-= 
 'Iri&ovg (J esus ), ^a = XpKJTog (Christ), nr^p = irarrip 
 (Father), TTva = TrvEVfia (Spirit); also (yr\p for awrrip 
 (Saviour), avoq for av^pwwog (man), and oui/oa for 
 ovpavog (heaven).^ Most of them give the Greek 
 text only, a few the Latin version also (hence called 
 codices hilingues or Groeco-Latini)^ e. g. Cod. D (or 
 Bezge) for the Gospels and Acts, Cod. D (Claromon- 
 tanus) for the Pauline Epistles, and Cod. A (San- 
 gallensis) for the Gospels. 
 
 They were mostly written in the East, where the 
 Greek continued to be a living language, chiefly in 
 Alexandria, Constantinople, and the convents of 
 Mount Athos, but the best have found their way to 
 the libraries of Rome, Paris, London, and St. Peters- 
 burg. In Europe (with the exception of Greece, 
 Lower Italy, and Sicily) the knowledge of Greek dis- 
 appeared after the fifth century till the revival of 
 
 * See oil these abl)reviations Scrivener, pp. 46, 47, 2d ed. j pp. 48, 49, 
 3d ed. ; and Gregory, Proleg. i. 341 sq. 
 
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 97 
 
 learning in the fifteenth, and the Latin Yulgate sup- 
 plied the place of the Greek and Hebrew Bible. 
 A few Greek Testaments may have been written in 
 Italy or Gaul, as the Codex Bezse ; perhaps also the 
 Codex Rossanensis, which was discovered in Calabria 
 in 1879, but Yon Gebhardt and Harnack date it 
 from the East as a gift of a Byzantine emperor. 
 Westcott thinks it not unlikely that Codex B repre- 
 sents the text preserved in the original Greek Church 
 at Rome.^ 
 
 All the MSS., whether complete or defective, are 
 divided, according to the size of letters, into two 
 classes, uncial and cursive. The former are written 
 in large or capital letters {titterm unciales or majus- 
 cuIcb), the latter in small letters {litter cb minusculw) 
 or in current hand.^ The uncial MSS. are older, 
 from the fourth to the tenth century, and hence 
 more valuable, but were discovered and used long 
 after the cursive. Two of them, the Sinaitic and 
 the Vatican, date from the middle of the fourth 
 century. One only is complete, the Sinaitic. 
 
 Besides the distinct MSS., there are over ^ve 
 hundred Lectionaries or service-books, which contain 
 only the Scripture lessons read in public worship, 
 
 ^ Com, on St, John, In trod. p. Ixxxix. 
 
 ^ Uncialis (adj. from uncia, the twelfth part of anything ; hence the 
 English ounce and the German Unze^ means containing a twelfth, and, as 
 a measure of length, the twelfth part of afoot, or an inch. It is not to be 
 taken as literally describing the size of the letters. Majusculus (adj. dimin. 
 from major"), somewhat greater or larger, when applied to letters, had the 
 same meaning, and was opposed to minusculus (from minus), rather small. 
 But there are also very small uncials, as on the papyrus rolls of Her- 
 pulaneum. 
 
98 MANlTSCRiPtS O^ Tfllfi NEW TtiSTAMEN'T. 
 
 either from the Gospels alone (called Evangelistaria 
 or Evangeliaria)^ or from the Acts and Epistles 
 {Praxajpostoli)^ or from the Epistles {Epistolarid)^ 
 or from the Gospels and Epistles {Aposioloevangelia^ 
 or simply Evangelion and Ajpostolos). They are some- 
 times important witnesses to the text as far as they 
 contain it. 
 
 A. UNCIAL MANUSCRIPTS. 
 
 The uncial MSS. are designated (since Wetstein, 
 1751),^for the sake of brevity, by the capital letters 
 of the Latin alphabet (A, B, C, D, etc.), with the help 
 of Greek letters for a few MSS. beyond Cod. Z, and 
 the Hebrew letter Aleph (x) for the Sinaitic MS., 
 which was discovered last and precedes Cod. A.* 
 As there are different series according to the books 
 they contain, the same letter is sometimes used two 
 or three times. Thus D designates Codex Bezae in 
 Cambridge for the Gospels and Acts, but also Codex 
 Claromontanus in Paris for the Pauline Epistles. 
 E is used for three MSS., one for the Gospels (at 
 Basle), one for the Acts (at Oxford), and one for the 
 Epistles of Paul (at St. Petersburg). To avoid con- 
 
 ^ The present usage arose from the accidental circumstance that the 
 Codex Alexandrinus was designated as Cod. A in the lower margin of 
 Walton's Polyglot (Scrivener, loc. cit. p. 75, 3d ed.). A far better system 
 would be to designate them in the order of their age or value, which 
 would place B and K before A. But the usage in this case can as little 
 be altered as the traditional division of the Bible into chapters and verses. 
 MiU cited the copies by abridgments of their names, e.g., Alex., Cant., 
 Mont. ; but this mode would now take too much space. Wetstein knew 14 
 uncial MSS. of the Gospels, which he designated from A to O, and about 
 112 cursives, besides 24 Evangelistaries. See the list at the close of his 
 Prolegomena, I. pp. 220-222, and XL 3-15. 
 
MAN0SCE1PTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 99 
 
 fusion, it has been proposed to mark the difference 
 by adding a number; thus B is the famous Vatican 
 Codex which extends to Heb. ix. 14 ; but B (2) or 
 Bg is the Vatican MS. which contains the Apoca- 
 lypse ; D is tlie Codex Bezse for the Gospels and 
 Acts, D (2) or D2 the Cod. Claromont. for the Pauline 
 Epistles. The cursive MSS. are designated by Arabic 
 numerals, but with the same inconvenience of sev- 
 eral series. 
 
 The uncials are written on costly and durable 
 vellum or parchment, on quarto or small folio pages 
 of one or two, very rarely of three or four, columns. 
 The older ones have no division of words or sen- 
 tences except for paragraphs, no accents or orna- 
 mented letters,' and but very few pause -marks. 
 Hence it requires some practice to read them with 
 ease. The following would be a specimen in English 
 from the Gospel of John (i. 1, 2) : 
 
 INTHEBEGINNINGWASTHEWORD 
 ANDTHEWORDWASWITHGODAND 
 THEWORDWASGODTHESAMEWAS 
 INTHEBEGINNINGWITHGODALL 
 
 The date and place, which were not marked on 
 MSS. earlier than the ninth century,'* can be only 
 approximately ascertained from the material, the 
 
 » The arabesques at the end of the books in S B, etc., might be con- 
 sidered ornaments. 
 
 ^ The earliest dated New Test, uncial seems to be F of the Gospels, with 
 the date 844 (according to Tischendorf's explanation of the inscription; 
 see Scrivener, p. 140), or 979 (according to Gardthausen, p. 159) ; S of the 
 Gospels is dated 949. The oldest dated cursives are Cod. 461 of the Gos- 
 pels, dated A.D. 835, Cod. 429, A.D. 978, and Cod. 148 of the Acts, A.D. 
 984. See Scrivener, p. 40, and Gardthausen, pp. 181, 344. 
 
100 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 form of letters, the style of writing, the presence or 
 absence of the Ammonian sections (Kf^aXam, cajpitu- 
 la) in the Gospels, the Eusebian Canons (or tables 
 of references to the Ammonian sections, after 340, 
 when Eusebius died), the Euthalian sections in the 
 Acts and Epistles, and the stichometric divisions or 
 lines {arixoi) corresponding to sentences (both used, 
 if not first introduced, by Euthalius, cir. A.D. 458, 
 in his editions of the Acts and Epistles),' marks 
 of punctuation (ninth century), etc. Sometimes a 
 second or third hand introduced punctuation and 
 accents or different readings. Hence the distinc- 
 tion of lectiones a prima manu^ marked by a star (*) ; 
 a secunda manu (*^, or 2, or *^) ; a tertia manu (*^*, 
 or ^, or ^). In Cod. C Tischendorf used small figures 
 (C*, C^, C^), in Cod. wS he used small letters («*, x\ x^). 
 The Codex Sinaiticus has been corrected as late as 
 the twelfth century. 
 
 Some MSS. (as Codd. C, P, Q, E, Z, ^) have been 
 written twice over, owing to the scarcity and costli- 
 ness of parchment, and are called codices rescripti^ 
 or palimpsests {TTa\ijji^r]GT(n) ; the new book being 
 written between the lines, or across, or in place of 
 the old Bible text. 
 
 Constantino the Great ordered from Eusebius, 
 for the churches of Constantinople, the prepara- 
 tion of fifty MSS. of the Bible, to be written " on 
 artificially wrought skins by skilful calligraphists." ' 
 
 ^ Afterwards these stichometric divisions were abandoned as too costly, 
 and gave way to dots or other marks between the sentences. 
 
 ' Eusebius, Vita Const, iv. 36, IltvTr]KovTa aiofidria iv dup^kpaic 
 iyKaraaKivoiQ . . . vnb rtX'^iTwv KaWiypd^uv. 
 
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 101 
 
 To judge from this fact, the number of uncials was 
 once very large, but most of them perished. Only one 
 contains the whole New Testament (Cod. Sinaiticus). 
 
 The whole number now known is over one hun- 
 dred. The statements vary. Scrivener reckons 
 97 in all — viz., 57 for the Gospels (in another place 
 he counts 61), 14 for the Acts, 6 for the Catholic 
 Epistles, 15 for the Pauline Epistles, 5 for the Apoc- 
 alypse, exclusive of the uncial lectionaries, which 
 are not marked by capitals, but by Arabic numerals, 
 like cursive MSS. of all classes.^ Dr. Abbot, in his 
 last communication to me, Jan., 1884 (a few months 
 before his death), counted 105 classified or 85 dis- 
 tinct MSS. of the New Testament (exclusive of 
 lectionaries) — viz., 64 for the Gospels, 15 for the Acts, 
 7 for the Catholic Epistles (16 for Acts and Cath. 
 Epistles together), 20 for the Pauline Epistles, 5 for 
 the Apocalypse. Dr. Gregory agreed with this 
 statement in 1884, but added two Gospel fragments 
 (T^ and W^^).^ 
 
 Since then several more uncial MSS. have been 
 discovered — namely, by Dr. Zahn (1884), two small 
 fragments in the Egyptian Museum of the Louvre, 
 containing 1 Tim. iii. 15, 16 (confirming the reading 
 09), and vi. 2 ; by Abb^ Batiffol (1885 and 1886), the 
 purple codex O at Berat (Codex Beratinus) contain- 
 ing Matthew and Mark, and a number of important 
 but as yet unpublished palimpsest leaves of portions 
 of Acts and Epistles." 
 
 » Introd. 3d ed. (1883), p. 75. But he contradicts himself, p. 307. 
 * Prolegomena to Tischendorf, Pt. I. pp. 337 sq. and pp. 439 sq. 
 ^ See postscript to the preface of the 3d ed., p. xv. 
 
102 MANUSCRIPTS OF THfi NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 With these additions the whole number of dis- 
 tinct uncial MSS., including all fragments, was stated 
 in our last edition (1888) to be 91, as follows: 
 
 Jt A B B »P<>« C D «'^- ^^ D P»»^ E E »«* E ?»"• F F p»"' F * G G **=* (G p*"') 
 
 Q b (act) H H *<=* H P»"l I 1. 2.3.4. 5, 6. 7. I b K K <=»*^- P*"* L L »*'*• c****- P»«l M 
 
 ]yi paui N N * N P*"' 00**"'*^*'^kO p*"' O ** (p*"1) P P **=*• <'**^- p»"1- *po<^ Q Q p*«i 
 RRp»«iST(orT»)Two*T»>«=defuvW*^<=defghxYZrAe»»>'=<***K^ 
 A S n 2 <t> Zahn and BatifFol fragment8=91. 
 
 This list must now again be enlarged by the new 
 discoveries which have been made chiefly by Dr. 
 Gregory, on his journeys to Italy and Greece in 
 1886, and described by him in 1890, as follows : * 
 
 Oh T« (W« X V) W' W^ W' W" W" W" (^, Beratinus) ^ (Athous 
 Laurae) Q (Athous Dionysii) !l (Athous Andreae) G** (Vaticanus Ro- 
 manus Gr. 2302) S (Athous Laurae) S (Romae Vatic. Gr. 2061) S and 3 
 (numbered again for Paul Epp.) X** (Monacensis bibl. reg. 208, formerly 
 numbered among the cursives) T^ (Cairo). 
 
 The total number of uncial MSS. at this date 
 (1891) may be roughly estimated at about 110. 
 
 I. PRIMARY UNCIALS. 
 
 There are four uncial MSS. which for antiquity, 
 completeness, and value occupy the first rank — two 
 of the fourth, two of the fifth century ; one complete 
 (x), two nearly complete (A and B), one defective (C). 
 To these is usually added Cod. D, as the fifth of the 
 great uncials ; but it contains only the Gospels and 
 Acts, and has strange peculiarities. In the Gospels 
 the text of C, L, T, Z, k, and of A in Mark, is better 
 than that of A, but in the rest of the New Testa- 
 
 ^ Prolegomena, Pars II. Supplementum, pp. 441-450. His supplement- 
 ary list includes W* X V and 4> (Cod. Beratinus, published 1886) which 
 I have numbered in the preceding list. We must await the third Part 
 for Gregory's final list. 
 
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 103 
 
 iijent A is undoubtedly, after 5< and B, the most im- 
 portant MS. 
 
 CODEX SINAITICUS. 
 
 K (Aleph). Codex Sinaiticus, formerly in the 
 Convent of Mount Sinai (hence its name), now in 
 the Imperial Library at St. Petersburg. It dates 
 from the middle of the fourth century, is written 
 on fine parchment (13J inches wide by 14-^ l^igli)) ^^ 
 large uncials, with four columns to a page (of 48 lines 
 each). It has 346J leaves. It was discovered and 
 secured by the indefatigable Prof. C. Tischendorf, 
 in the Convent of St. Catharine, at the foot of 
 Mount Sinai, from which the law of Jehovah was 
 proclaimed for all generations to come, and where 
 this precious document had been providentially pre- 
 served for many centuries unknown and unused till 
 the fourth of February, 1859. It was transferred first 
 to Cairo, then to Leipsic, and at last to St. Peters- 
 burg, where it is sacredly kept. The text was printed 
 at Leipsic, and published at St. Petersburg at the 
 expense of the Czar, Alexander II., in celebration of 
 the first millennium of the Russian empire, by typo- 
 graphic imitation from types specially cast, in four 
 folio volumes.^ A photographic fac-simile edition 
 
 ^ Bibliorum Codex Sinaiticus Petropolitanus. Auspiciis augustissimis 
 Imperatoris A lexandri II. ex tenuis protraxit in Europam transtulit ad 
 iuvandas alque illustrandas sacras littera^ edidit Constantinus Tischen- 
 dorf. Petropoli, MDCCCLXII. The first volume contains the dedica- 
 tion to the Emperor (dated Lips, j-y-^' 1862), the Prolegomena, Notes on 
 the corrections by later hands, and twenty-one plates (in fac-simile); 
 vols. ii. and iii. contain the Septuagint ; vol. iv. the Greek Testament 
 (134^ leaves), the Epistle of Barnabas (foil. 135-141), and a part of the 
 
104 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 would be still better, but would have cost over 
 $100,000, and presented many blurred pages. 
 
 The New Testament, together with the Epistle 
 of Barnabas and the fragment of Hermas, was also 
 separately edited by Tischendorf in smaller type in 
 quarto (Leipsie, 1863), in four columns; and an 
 octavo edition in ordinary type {ibid. 1865). He 
 issued a Collatio Critica of the Sinai tic with the 
 Elzevir and Vatican texts (Lips. pp. xxii. and 109). 
 Dr. Scrivener also published a '' Full Collation of the 
 Sinaitic MS. with the Received Text of the New 
 Testament" (Cambridge, 1864; 2d ed. 1867). 
 
 Codex &^ is the most complete, and also (with the 
 exception, perhaps, of the Vatican MS.) tlie oldest, 
 or, at all events, one of the two oldest MSS., although 
 it was last found and used. Tischendorf calls it 
 "'omnium codicum, uncialium solus integer omni- 
 umque antiquissimus.''^ He assigns it to tlie middle 
 of the fourth century, or to the age of Eusebius, the 
 historian, who died in 340. He thinks it not im- 
 probable that it was one of the fifty copies which 
 Constantino had ordered to be prepared for the 
 churches of Constantinople in 331, and that it was 
 sent by the Emperor Justinian to the Convent of 
 
 Pastor Hermae (foil. 142-147^). Three hundred copies of this rare and 
 costly edition were printed and distributed among crowned heads and 
 large libraries, except one third of the number, which were placed at the 
 disposal of Prof. Tischendorf for his private use. There are probably 
 about a dozen copies of this edition in the United States — in the library 
 of the Am. Bible Society, in the libraries of the Theol. Seminaries at New 
 York (Union Sem.), Princeton, Andover, Hartford, Rochester, Auburn, 
 in the Astor Library, the Lenox Library, New York, in the University 
 libraries of Harvard, Yale, etc. 
 
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 105 
 
 Mount Sinai, which he founded.* It contains large 
 portions of the Old Testament in the Septuagint 
 Version (199 leaves), and the whole New Testa- 
 ment, without any omission, together with the Epistle 
 of Barnabas, all in Greek, and a part of the Pastor 
 Hermse in Greek (147^ leaves). It is much disfig- 
 ured bj numerous corrections made by the original 
 scribes or several later writers, especially one of the 
 fourth century (i<*), whose emendations are very valu- 
 able, and one of the seventh (^t^). It often confirms 
 Cod. Yaticanus in characteristic readings {?lb /Liovoyevrig 
 3"€oc ^or vl6g,\n John i. 18; riiv 8»cicXi]cr/av rou ^eov 
 for Kvpiov, in Acts xx. 28), and omissions, as the dox- 
 ology in Matt. vi. 13 ; the end of Mark (xvi. 9-20) ; 
 the passage of the woman taken in adultery (John 
 vii. 63-viii. 11) ; Iv 'E^co-tji, Eph. i. 1. It frequently 
 agrees, also, with the Old Latin Version ; but in 
 many and important cases it supports other witness- 
 es, and thereby proves its independence." In 1 Tim. 
 
 * See Tischendorfs edition of the English New Test., Leips. 1869, 
 p. xii., and Die Sinaibibd (1871), p. 77. After a more careful inspection of 
 the Vatican MS. in 1866, he somewhat modified his view of the priority 
 of the Sinaitic over the Vatican MS., and assigned them both to the middle 
 of the fourth century, maintaining even that one of the scribes of &5 (who 
 wrote six leaves, and whom he designates D) wrote the New Testament 
 part of B. Compare the learned and able essay of Dr. Ezra Abbot 
 ( against Dean Burgon ) : Comparative A ntiquity of the Sinaitic and 
 Vatican MSS., in the "Journal of the American Oriental Society," vol. x. 
 (1872), pp. 189-200, and p. 602. Von Gebhardt, in Herzog's Real-Eivcy- 
 Uopddie (new ed.), vol. ii. p. 414, pronounces Burgon's attempt to prove 
 the higher antiquity of the Vatican MS. by fifty to one hundred years 
 an entire failure. 
 
 " Tischendorf says ( Waffen der Finsterniss, etc., p. 22) : " A thousand 
 readings of the Sinaiticus, among them exceedingly remarkable and im- 
 9 
 
106 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 iii. 16 it supports the Alexandrian and Ephraern 
 MSS. in reading 6c l(l)av(pw^rj for ^eog, but in this 
 place all three MSS. have been corrected by a later 
 hand. It has contributed very much towards the 
 settlement of the text, and. stimulated the progress 
 of the revision movement in England, in connec- 
 tion with Tischendorfs Tauchnitz edition of King 
 James's Version (1869), which gives in foot-notes 
 the chief readings of the three great uncials k, B, 
 and A. 
 
 Tischendorf first copied the Sinaitic MS., with 
 tlie help of two German scribes (a physician and a 
 druggist), at Cairo in two months.^ But afterwards, 
 when he had secured its permanent possession for the 
 Russian government, the whole of the great edition 
 was printed, as Tischendorf assures us, from a copy 
 made by himself; and in the final revision of the 
 proof-sheets he personally compared every line twice 
 with the original manuscript." Tregelles inspected 
 
 portant ones (ausserst merhwiirdige und wichtige), which are sustained by 
 the oldest fathers and versions, are found neither in the Vaticanus nor the 
 Alexandrinus." 
 
 1 Nov. Test. Greece ex Sinaitico Codice . . . ed. Lips. 1865, Prolegg. p. xii. : 
 " Ut erat constitutum, sine mora suscepta est iotius textus antiquissimi tran- 
 scriptio atque lahoris sociis adsumptis duohus popularibus, altera medicinas 
 doctore, altera medicamentario, intra duo menses absoluta." 
 
 ' He says (^Vorwort zur Sin. Bibelhandschrifi, etc., Lips. 1862, pp. 19, 
 20): "In die Druckerei gelangte nichts anderes als Ahschriften meiner 
 Hand, die bei erneuerter Vergleichung des Originals, das nie aus meinen 
 Hdnden Team, durch vielfache Zeichen fur das Versfdndniss der Sefzer 
 eingerichiet wurden. Ilierzu kam eine andere nicht geringe A rbeit. Nachdem 
 die ersten Correkturabziige von anderer Seite, besonders durch Dr. Miihl- 
 mann, den Herausgeber eines Thesaurus der classischen Latinitdt, nach 
 meiner Abschrift berichtet warden waren, blieb mir allein die Aufgabe^ 
 dieselben Druckbogen noch zwei Mai nach dem Original ?m revidiren,'^ 
 
MANUSCKIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 107 
 
 the original at Leipsic in 1862 in Tischendorf s 
 house, and supposed himself to have discovered a 
 number of errors in the St. Petersburg edition ; but 
 Tischendorf maintains that the English critic (whose 
 eyesight had become seriously impaired), and Scriv- 
 ener likewise, in his proposed corrections in the first 
 edition of his Collation (1864), were wrong in every 
 instance.' Considerable portions of it have been 
 photographed, and real fac- similes are given in 
 
 Kf^\ o M OAoroyMe 
 N CD c H erAecTi n 
 TOTHceyceBeixc 
 
 MYCTHpiONOCe 
 <|>ANepOD0HeNcxp 
 
 KPCAIK^IODeHeM 
 n N ICJOC^e HXTRA?I«: 
 
 €KHfYxeHeNe 
 e Neci Nen I cTey 
 
 eHeNKOCMCJD- 
 
 ANeXHM4>OH€N 
 
 2L02:H 
 
 Specimen of the Codex SiNAiticus, containing 1 Tim. hi. 16 1 
 Kai ofioXoyovfxe \ vtog fiEya sariv \ to rijg svffE(3eiaQ \ fivffTtipiov og e | 
 ^avspio^r] IV aap \ ki " sdiKatio^ri tv | wvi o}(p^ri ayytXoig \ tKrjpvx^n 
 IV c 1 ^VEffiv tTTLOTEv \ ^J/ Ev KOfffid) ' \ aveXi]ft<f>Brj ev I do^T]. 
 
 ^ See Tischendorf s Nov, Test. Greece eg: Sinaitko Codice (Lips, X865), 
 ProUg^. pp, 3^^ii,-^, 
 
108 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 Tischendorf's three editions, in Scr'wener^s IfUroduc- 
 tion, and in Abbe Martin's Critique Textuelle. Dean 
 Burgon, also, in his book on the Last Twelve Verses 
 of Marh^ gives an exact fac-siraile of a page, taken at 
 St. Petersburg, which shows the last two columns of 
 Mark (to xvi. 8) and the first two columns of Luke. 
 
 Note on the Discovery of Codex Sinaiticus. — The story of this 
 great discovery, which made Dr. Tischendorf one of the happiest men I 
 ever knew, reads like an heroic romance : his three journeys from Leipsic 
 to Mount Sinai, in pursuit of manuscript treasures, in 1844, 1853, and 
 1859 ; his first rescue of forty-three leaves of the Septuagint from a waste- 
 basket in the library of the Convent of St. Catharine in 1844 (published 
 as " Codex Friderico- Augustan us" in 1846) ; his fruitless journey in 1853 ; 
 his final discovery of the whole Cod. Sinaiticus in 1869, with the powerful 
 aid of the recommendation of the Russian Czar, who met such a terrible 
 death at the hands of the Nihilists in 1881 ; his patient labor in transcrib- 
 ing the priceless document first at Cairo, then at Leipsic, and in its pub- 
 lication in four magnificent volumes, in connection with a great national 
 event of the Russian empire (1862) ; his controversy with the Greek 
 Simonides, who impudently claimed to have written the codex on Mount 
 Athos in 1839 and 1840 ^ his successful vindication ; his two smaller edi- 
 tions of the New Testament with ample Prolegomena; and his thorough 
 utilization of the Codex and all other available sources in the eighth and 
 last critical edition of his Greek Testament (completed in 1872), so soon 
 followed by a stroke of apoplexy and death (in 1874). All these advent- 
 ures and incidents form one of the most remarkable chapters in the history 
 of biblical discoveries and scholarship. He has told the story repeatedly 
 and fully himself, not without some excusable vanity, in his Reise in dm 
 Orient (1845-46), and A us dem heil. Lande (1862, sections 9, 10, 15, 25) ; 
 his Notitia Codicis Sinaitid (1860); the Prolegomena to his editions 
 (1862 and 1865); his two controversial pamphlets, Die Anfechtungen der 
 SinaiMbel (1863), and Waffen der Finstemiss wider die Sinaibibel (1863) ; 
 and most fully in his Die Sinaibibel, ihre Entdeckung, Heruusgdbe und 
 Erwerbung (Leipzig, 1871). 
 
 He thus describes his delight when, on his third journey, he discovered, 
 almost by an accident on the eve of his departure, the entire MS., and 
 was permitted to examine it in his room : 
 
 ^'Not till I reacUQ4. ^>y chamber did I give myself up to the over- 
 
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 109 
 
 powering impression of the reality; my wildest hopes and dreams were 
 more than accomplished. I knew that in my hands I held an incompar- 
 able treasure for Christian learning. While in the deepest emotion I now 
 recognized, too, on the leaves before my eyes, in pale characters, the 
 superscription ' The Shepherd.' In fact, there lay before me not only the 
 entire Epistle of Barnabas, but also a portion of the Shepherd of Hermas. 
 Both these writings were regarded by many congregations before the 
 middle of the fourth century as constituent parts of the New Testament, 
 but had well-nigh disappeared after the Church had once declared them 
 apocryphal. The books of our New Testament were complete : what an 
 immense advantage over our most renowned Bible manuscripts — the Vat- 
 ican and the Alexandrine ! Of the Old Testament, not only were those 
 eighty-six leaves recovered, but — and how precious was every single 
 leaf— one hundred and twelve others besides, including all the poetical 
 books. 
 
 "It was past eight in the evening; one lamp feebly lit my chamber; 
 there was no means of warming, although in the morning it had been icy 
 cold in the convent. But in the presence of the found treasure it was not 
 possible for me to sleep. I immediately set myself to work to copy off the 
 Epistle of Barnabas, whose first part was hitherto known only in a de- 
 fective Latin translation. It was clear to me that I must copy the whole 
 manuscript, if I should not be able to get possession of the original." * 
 
 * Die Sinaihihel (1871), pp. 13, 14. As this book (one of the last from 
 his pen) may become very rare, I will add the original : ^^Erst aufmeinem 
 Zimmer gab ich mich dem uherwdltigenden Eindruck der Thatsache hin; 
 meine kiiknsten Hojfnungen und Trdume waren ubertroffen. Ich wiisste, 
 dass ich einen unvergleichlichen Schatzfur die ckristlicke Wissemchafi in 
 meinen Hdnden hielt. Mitten in der tiefsten Riihrung erkannt^ ichjetzt auch 
 auf Bldttern vor meinen A ugen in hlassen Schriftzugen die A ufschrift : 
 *Der Hirte.'' In der That lag ausser dem vollstdndigen Brief e des Barna- 
 bas auch ein Theil vom Hirten des Hermas vor mir: beide Schriften wur- 
 den vor der Mitie des 4. Jahrhunderts von vielen Seiten als Bestandtheile 
 des Neuen Testaments angesehen, waren dann aber, da sie die Kirche fur 
 apolcryph erkldrte, fast verschwunden. Die Biicher unseres Neuen Testa- 
 ments vmren vollstdndig : welch ausserordentlicher Vorzug vor unseren 
 beriihmtesten BibelhandschHften, der Vatikanischen vnd der Alexandrini' 
 schen, Vom A lien Testament waren nicht nurjene 86 Blatter wiedergefunden^ 
 sondern — und wie kostbar war jedes einzelne Blatt — nock 112 andere mil 
 tdnmtlichen poetischen Biichern. 
 
110 MANUSCEIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 He secured first the temporary loan of the Codex. It was carried by 
 Bedawln on camel's back from Mt. Sinai to Cairo. There he copied, 
 with the help of two of his countrymen, the 110,000 lines of the Codex, 
 and marked the changes by later hands, which amount in all to over 
 12,000. In October of the same year he was permitted to take it with 
 him to Europe as a conditional present to the Czar for the purpose of pub- 
 lication. He showed it first to Emperor Francis Joseph at Vienna, then 
 to King John of Saxony, and to the King of Prussia (now Emperor of 
 Germany) in Berlin, and his minister of worship (Herr von Bethmann 
 Holweg, who recognized a special providence in the discovery of such a 
 treasure at the foot of Mt. Sinai by a German Professor of the Evangelical 
 Church). In November he laid it before Alexander II. and the Holy 
 Synod at St. Petersburg, where it was kept for a while in the Foreign 
 Office. Then it was used by Tischendorf in the preparation of his edition 
 in Leipsic,and at last (1869) permanently transferred to the imperial library. 
 
 Thus the four great Eastern uncials are distributed throughout Europe 
 —the Sinaitic is in St. Petersburg and the Greek Church, the Vatican in 
 Rome and the Roman Church, the Alexandrian in London and the 
 Anglican Church, Codex Ephraem in Paris and the Gallican Church. 
 Germany has none of these treasures, but has done more to secure and to 
 utilize them for the benefit of Christendom than any other country. 
 
 In March, 1877, it was my privilege to visit the Convent of St. Catherine 
 on Mount Sinai— that awfully sublime granite pulpit of Jehovah for the 
 proclamation of his holy law to all future generations. Two of the thirty 
 monks kindly showed me that curious building which unites the charac- 
 teristics of a fort, a church, a mosque, and a monastic retreat, and calls to 
 mind some of the greatest events in the history of the race. I saw the 
 library of several hundred written and printed volumes, ascetic and homi- 
 letic treatises, mostly in Greek, some in Arabic, some in Russian, many 
 of them worm-eaten, soiled, and torn. On a dusty table lay Champolliou's 
 Pictorial Egypt (presented to the Convent by the French government), 
 
 "£"5 war Abends nach acht, eine Lampe erleuchtete nur spdrlich mein 
 Zimmer ; ein Mittel zur Heizung gab es nicht, obsckon es am Morgen im 
 Kloster sogar Eis gefroren hatte. A ber es war mir nicht moglick, gegeniiber 
 dem entdeckten Reichthume zu schlafen. Ich setzte mich vielmehr soj'ort 
 daran, den Brief des Barnabas, dessen erster Theil nur erst aus einer 
 wtangelhaften lateinischen Uebersetzung bekannt war, abzuschreihen. Es 
 war mir Mar, dass ich die ganze Handschrift g,b$chreiben mv?ste, wenn ich 
 tie nicht im Original sollte erwerben konnen.^' 
 
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. Ill 
 
 a copy of Tischendorfs edition of the Septuagint (which was presented by 
 himself), and a copy of the imperial four-volume edition of the Codex 
 Sinaiticus (no doubt a present of the Czar). A beautiful, but rather late, 
 copy of an Evangelistary (the Codex Aureus), written in gold uncial 
 letters in double columns, with illuminated pictures of the Saviour, the 
 Virgin, and the Evangelists, is preserved in the chapel, and adorns a 
 reading-desk. When I inquired about the original Codex Sinaiticus, 
 and mentioned the name of Tischendorf, the sub -prior kindled up in 
 indignation and unceremoniously called him a thief, who had stolen 
 their greatest treasure on the pretext of a temporary loan. When I re- 
 minded him of the large reward of the Emperor of Russia, who had fur- 
 nished a new silver shrine for the coffin of St. Catherine, he admitted it 
 reluctantly, but remarked that they did not want the silver, but the 
 manuscript — the manuscript, of which these ignorant monks had actually 
 burned several leaves before Tischendorf came to the rescue of the rest in 
 1844. But the charge of theft is false. After long delays and Oriental 
 formalities the Codex was formally presented (not sold) to the Czar in 
 1869 by the new prior, Archbishop Kallistratos, and the monks of the 
 Convents of St. Catherine and Cairo. The usual Oriental expectation 
 of backsheesh was fulfilled, although perhaps not to the extent which 
 Dr. Tischendorf desired.^ So he assured me in 1871, and showed me, at 
 Leipsic, two letters of Kallistratos fuU of Oriental compliments and ex- 
 pressions of gratitude to the German Professor, and stating that the Codex 
 was presented to the Autocrat of the Russias as " a testimony of eternal 
 devotion" (f/<; evdei^LV ttjq d'idiov t)ixu)V Kai tov Siva EvyvMfxoavvr]q). 
 See his own account of the final delivery in Die Sinaibihel, p. 91. 
 
 CODEX ALEXANDRINUS. 
 
 A. Codex Alexandeinus of the fifth century, in 
 quarto and two eohmins (12f inches high, lOJ broad), 
 given by Patriarch Cyril Lucar of Constantinople 
 (the unlucky Calvinistic reformer, formerly of Alex- 
 andria) to King Charles I. (1628), now in the British 
 Museum, London, where the open volume of the 
 New Testament is exhibited in the MS. room. It 
 was probably written in Alexandria. It contains 
 on 773 leaves the Old Testament, in the Septuagint 
 
 * The Czar gave 7000 roubles to the library, and gOOO roubles to the 
 convent, Gregory, Prokg. i. 352 sq. 
 
112 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 Version (edited by Baber, London, 1816-28), and the 
 New Testament ; but, unfortunately, with the omis- 
 sion of Matt. i. 1-xxv. 6, John vi. 50-viii. 52, and 
 2 Cor. iv. 13-xii. 6. It has also at the end the Greek 
 Epistle of Clement of Kome to the Corinthians, 
 with a fragment of a second epistle, or rather homily. 
 This was the only MS. extant of Clement before 
 the discovery by Philotheos Bryennios of the copy 
 at Constantinople (1875). The New Testament of 
 
 e 
 
 H^pxn€nolHCGNoec^-oMOY 
 
 p^NONK^^iT^H KJPHN MA.erHH|slAo' 
 pATOCKAI>^»<^TA.CKeyACn OC. 
 
 KAiC l<6~rocenXr>iLOT-HCA^fiycooy. 
 TTToCexenreexVT^OIC KA^ iTr^Mj-rn 
 
 xr I o M e o ei^oeTT-i c KOTTo vc- 
 TTOiKf A.I rsiei rNinrmrNiOKKXHicixM 
 
 nrOY i< YM MT-nB]> 8 eTTOi i-i c xnro-^l X 
 •nrOYXI MX-irOCn^OVLXiOY- 
 
 Specimens of the Codex Alexandrinus. 
 The first is in bright red, with breathings and accents, and contains 
 Gren. i. 1, 2, Sept. (Ev cip^V tTronjtrev 6 Bn tov ov \ pavbv Kai rriv 
 yiiv ij Sk yrj i/v do \ parocr /cat aKaraaKEvaaToa ' \ kui ckotoo lirdvui 
 Trja a(3v(T<Tov.). The second specimen is in common ink, and contains 
 Acts XX. 28 (JJpoaexfTi eavroia kui navri no \ Troifivno ' fv w ijfiao 
 TO TTva TO I ayiov eSrtTO nriaKOTrova ' \ TTotfiaiviiv Ttjv EKKXrjmav | tov 
 Kv r\v n^puTTOirfffaTO Sia \ tov aifioTog tov idiov.'). A favors Kvpiov 
 versus Beov. 
 
MAKUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 113 
 
 the Alexandrian MS. was published by Charles G. 
 Woide in uncial type (London, 1786), and by B. H. 
 Cowper, in common type (ibid. 1860). We have it 
 now in a most beautiful photographic fac-simile, 
 issued by the Trustees of the British Museum, Lon- 
 don, 1879. The Old Testament part is in course of 
 publication in the same style (1882). 
 
 Cod. A is the first uncial MS. that was used by 
 biblical scholars (although Cod. D was known be- 
 fore to Beza). It stands in the third or fourth 
 rank of the large uncials. It presents a text which 
 in the Gospels occupies an intermediate position be- 
 tween the oldest uncial and the latter cursive text, 
 and which seems to have been most circulated in 
 the fourth century ; but in the rest of the New Test, 
 it stands next to x and B. In several books it agrees 
 with the Latin Yulgate in many peculiar readings 
 which are not attested by the older Latin ; hence 
 Dr. Hort (ii. 152) infers that Jerome, in his revision, 
 must have used to a great extent a common original 
 with A. 
 
 CODEX VATICANUS. 
 
 B. Codex Yaticanus, of the middle of the fourth 
 century, on very line thin vellum, in small but clear 
 and neat uncial letters, in three columns (of 42 lines 
 each) to a quarto page (10 inches by 10^), preserved 
 in the Vatican Library at Rome (No. 1209). It is 
 the most valnable of the many valuable treasures of 
 this great repository of ecclesiastical learning and 
 literature. It is more accurately written than the 
 Sinaitic MS., and probably a little older, but not so 
 
uiv rbv Xi^ov Ik Trjff 
 I dvpaa Tov fivrj- 
 fitlov I Kcii c'lva 
 (3\k^aaai Beio\poi)- 
 <TIV OTl dvuKeKv 
 Xiarai 6 XiB^off ffv 
 yap I fityaa CKfto- 
 Spa Kdi tX ! ^ovaai 
 iia TO fjLvr]ph | uv 
 ilSov vsaviaKOV | 
 Ka^ftfiivov Iv rotor 
 I de^ima Tre.pil3e- 
 ^Xrjfis I vov oToXriv 
 
 XtVKTlV I KtU i^t- 
 
 ^afijiq^riaav \ 6 ds 
 Xeyei avTUKT fXTj \ 
 UBapjSlKrBf: \v Kv- 
 Tti i re rbv vaZa- 
 prfvov TO- I tarciv- 
 piofisi'ov riyfp j ^/; 
 6vK I'ariv wde ide 
 
 I 6 TOTTOtT OTTOV 
 
 i^7]Kd ' avTOv aXXa 
 virdytrt. \ Hirare. 
 Toia pa^Tjrdicr \ 
 dvTOV Kat ru) irk- 
 rpu) I on Trpodyii 
 Vfida ha \ Ti]v ya- 
 XiXdiav tKti dv 
 I rbv oxpsa^e ku- 
 
 S'WC si j TTSV VfUV 
 
 Kat t^eXBbv \ aat 
 e<pvyov dirb rbv \ 
 fivr]fikiov ilx^v 
 yap \ dvrda rpo- 
 fio(T Kai EK i araffia 
 Kui ovdevl dv \ dkv 
 
 tlTTOP 
 
 yap. 
 
 l(pol3bvv 1 TO ^^t V^V.Vi< 
 
 oyfKCToyM w h Meloy 
 
 KXi A.N A<8 A.€ ll^AC A,? GC^u* 
 
 AiCTXIOAIGOCHMrAf 
 
 eOYCA.ieiCT'OMMHM?! 
 O Kl € 1 A O Ki M € >^ N f'c KON 
 kXO HM6lsJOM'€M-r6|C 
 
 NOH^c -TO XH N /^ey kAki 
 6 A.^ A €Ve I ^y -r A,' cm ►^ 
 
 ^ K AM K G I CO e^l Kl-ZlHT^r 
 T€-rdN MA:21/kJ»HNdN-T5^ 
 
 € cx'Ay fcUMe M o N Kl r«f 
 g H 6y K e c 7^1 M c£ AG i i^j^ 
 o nro'n o c 6'n o ye© H K A 
 AyT<iNi/wAA'Y'nKr6Te 
 ei n ^-re-ro re M ^eHT-^i* 
 
 onri nfOA^ref'Y'MAceic 
 
 TH N TA A I A a' I A N e K6 1 A.y 
 
 xo N o>p ec e 6 KAocuc^e| 
 CAiecpyroNjA^nb-Toy 
 
 M N H M 6 I O^ elx 6 N rAf 
 
 AyXAcnrpoMOCKAieK 
 c T^c 1 c k!a I d Y-^e Hj oy 
 ^^N einoM€<po&oY>< 
 
 Kard 
 Mapicov. 
 
 m 
 m 
 
 X 
 
 
 Specimen of the Codex Vatican us, containing Mark xvi. 3-8. 
 [Bedxtced from Dean Burgori'a photograph of the whole page. By permission). 
 
MANUSCRIPTS Oi' THE NEW TESTAMENT. Il5 
 
 complete.' It was apparently copied in Egypt by 
 two or three skilful scribes. Tischendorf has ob- 
 served the fact that the scribe of the New Test, was 
 the same who wrote a few pages in the New Test. 
 of K, together with the opening verses of the Apoc- 
 alypse, besides corrections. This fact seems to point 
 to the same age and country of the two MSS. ; while 
 on the other hand the corrections, the remarkable 
 difference in the order of the books of the New Test.," 
 and other peculiarities, as clearly indicate different 
 and independent sources from which they were de- 
 rived. This makes their united testimony all the 
 stronger. The corrections in both enable us to 
 some extent to follow the history of the text. 
 
 Cod. B was brought to Rome shortly after the 
 establishment of the Vatican Library by Pope Nich- 
 olas Y. in 1448; perhaps (as Dr. Scrivener and 
 others conjecture) by the learned Cardinal Bes- 
 sarion, formerly archbishop of Nicsea, who labored 
 at the Council of Ferrara- Florence with great zeal, 
 but in vain, for the reunion of the Greek and Latin 
 churches (d. 1472). It was entered in the earliest 
 catalogue of that library, made in 1475. It contains 
 
 ' Dr. Tregelles was so much impressed with the antiquity of B that 
 he thought it was written before the Council of Nicaea (325). He so 
 informed Dr. Scrivener (^Six Led. p. 28). The Roman editors contend, 
 of course, for the primacy of the Vatican against the Sinaitic MS., but 
 admit that they are not far apart, "won magnam intercedere cetatem inter 
 utHusque lihri editionem." See Tom. vi. p. vii. 
 
 ' In Cod. X the Pauline Epistles precede the Acts, and the Hebrews 
 are placed between 2 Thessalonians and 1 Timothy. In Cod. B the Catholic 
 Epistles are between the Acts and the Pauline Epistles, and the Hebrews 
 precede the Pastoral Epistles (which are lost). Both differ from the order 
 of the Vulgate. 
 
116 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 the Septuagint Version of the Old Testament, with 
 some gaps/ and the New Testament as far as Heb. 
 ix. 14 (inclusive), and breaks off in the middle of the 
 verse and of the word »ca^a | pul. The Pastoral 
 Epistles (1 and 2 Timothy and Titus), Philemon, and 
 the Apocalypse are lost. Cod. B for the Apocalypse 
 (likewise in the Vatican, as No. 2066) is a different 
 MS., of the eighth century, and is marked Q by 
 Tregelles. 
 
 Cod. B became first known about ISSS,"" when 
 Sepulveda directed the attention of Erasmus to it, 
 but it was watched with jealous care by the papal 
 authorities, and kept from public use till the middle 
 of the nineteenth centur3^ It was first partially 
 and imperfectly collated, under considerable restric- 
 tions, by Bartolocci, librarian of the Vatican (1669), 
 then by the Abbate Mico for Richard Bentley (about 
 1720, published 1799), and by Andrew Birch of 
 Copenhagen (1781, published 1788, 1798, 1801). 
 When the MS. was transferred to Paris during the 
 empire of the first Napoleon, Dr. Hug, a Eoman 
 Catholic scholar, inspected it in 1809, and first fully 
 recognized its paramount value (1810). 
 
 After the MS. was restored to Borne, it was for a 
 long time almost inaccessible, even to famous schol- 
 ars. Dr. Tregelles was not even permitted to use 
 pen and. ink, although he was armed with a letter 
 from Cardinal Wiseman. The MS. was nevertheless 
 
 ^ Gen. i. 1-xlvi. 28 is wanting, and supplied by small type in the 
 Roman edition; also Ps. cv. (cvi.) 27-cxxxvii. (cxxxviii.) 6, and the 
 Books of Maccabees. 
 
 ' If not already in 1522, as Tregelles thinks, Home's Intr. iv. 107. 
 
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 117 
 
 examined to some extent by Miiralt (1844), more 
 thoroughly by Tischendorf (1843, 1844, 1866), Tn- 
 gelles (1845), Dressel (1855), Burgon (1860), Alfunl 
 (1861), and his secretary, Mr. Cure (in 1862). It was 
 at last printed under the supervision of tlie celebrat- 
 ed Cardinal Angelo Mai (d. 1854), Kome, 1828-38, 
 but not published till 1857 (in 5 vols., the fifth con- 
 taining the New Testament); but so inaccurately 
 that this edition is critically worthless. The New 
 Testament was again published separately, with some 
 improvements, by Yercellone, Kome, 1859 ; more 
 critically by Tischendorf, Leipsic, 1867, from a par- 
 tial inspection of fourteen days (three hours each 
 day) in 1866 under the constant supervision of C. 
 Vercellone, who learned from the German expert 
 some.useful lessons in editorial work.* 
 
 A critical, though by no means infallible, quasi- 
 fac-simile edition of the whole Vatican MS. by Yei-- 
 cellone (d. 1869), Jos. Cozza, and Gaetano Sergio 
 (who was associated for a short time with Cozza 
 after Yercellone's death), was published at Rome, 
 1868-81, in six stately folio volumes. The type 
 used was cast in Leipsic, at the expense of the Pro])- 
 aganda, from the same moulds as those employed for 
 Tischendorf s edition of the Codex Sinaiticus, al- 
 though the Vatican Codex is written in much smaller 
 letters. Tischendorf unjustly complained of the bad 
 use which the Roman print<jrs made of his type.'' 
 
 ^ Novum Testamenium Vaticanum . . . ed. Tischendorf, Lips. 1867, with 
 Prolegomena. Conip. his Appendix N. T. Vaticani, 1869, and his Responsa 
 ad calumnias Romanas, 1870 (the charges of the " Civiltk Cattolica "). 
 
 *'' The full title of the Roman quasi-fac-simile edition reads : " Bibliorum 
 
118 MANTJSCEIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 At last a photographic fac-simile edition has ap- 
 peared in Rome, 1889 (one hundred copies only).* 
 
 The Vatican is, upon the whole, the best as well 
 as the oldest of MSS. now known, but must be used 
 with proper regard to all other sources of evidence. 
 In this judgment most modern critics agree. Lach- 
 mann and Tregelles made it the chief basis of their 
 text as far as they then knew it. Westcott and Hort 
 have used it more thoroughly and systematically since 
 it has been published in full. Tischendorf pays the 
 greatest attention to it throughout, although, in his 
 last critical edition, he shows in many conflicting 
 cases a natural preference for the Sinaitic Codex of 
 his own discovery. B has numerous corrections by 
 a contemporaneous hand, and was supplied with 
 
 Sacrorum Grcecus Codex Vaticanvs auspice Pio IX. Pontifice Maximo 
 collatis studiis Caroli Vercellone Sodalis Barnabitce et Josephi Cozza 
 Monachi Basiliani editus. Romae, typis et impensis S. Congregationis de 
 Propaganda Fide." 1868 to 1881. Beautifully printed on vellum paper. 
 Four volumes contain the Septuagint (i. Pentateuch and Jos. ; ii. Judges, 
 etc. ; iii. The Psalms, etc. ; iv. Esther, etc.) ; one volume the New Testa- 
 ment, which appeared in 1868 as torn. v. It gives the original MS. down 
 to Heb. ix. 14, in 284 large pages, 3 columns. The rest of the Epistle to 
 the Hebrews and the Apocalypse (from p. 286 to 302) are supplied from 
 a later text (recentiori vianu) in ordinary Greek type, and have therefore 
 less critical value. The Pastoral Epistles and the Epistle to Philemon are 
 wanting altogether. The sixth volume contains prolegomena. 
 
 ^ Under the title: H NEA AIAGHKH | A'ouMm Testamentum \ e 
 Codice Vaticano 1209 | nativi iextus graeci primo omnium | photo- 
 typice repraesentatum \ auspice \ lkone xiii. font. max. | curante j 
 Josepho Cozza-Luzi Abate Basiliano \ S. Rom. Ecclesiae Vicebibliothe- 
 carib | Romae \ E BiUiotheca Vaticana \ Agente Photographo Danesi i 
 MDCCCLXXXIX. I compared it carefully with the original in the 
 Vatican Library, April, 1890, and gave an account of it in " The Sunday- 
 School Times," Philadelphia, May 17, 1890. Comp. O. v. Gebhardt in the 
 " Theol. Literoturzeitung " for Aug. 9, 1890. 
 
MANUSCEIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 119 
 
 accents and breathings by a third hand in the tenth 
 century or later.' It is more free from Western or 
 Alexandrian readings than 5<. It presents on the 
 whole, with ^t, the simplest, shortest, and concisest 
 text. The charge of omissions of many words and 
 whole clauses is founded on the false assumption 
 that the Elzevir text is the standard. Westcott and 
 Hort say (p. 557) : " Tlie fondness for omissions, 
 which has sometimes been attributed to the scribe 
 of the Vatican, is imaginary, except, perhaps, single 
 petty words." The agreement of B and k is (with 
 few exceptions) a strong presumptive evidence for 
 the genuineness of a reading, and, when supported by 
 other ante-Nicene testimony, it is conclusive. Their 
 concurrent testimony from independent sources 
 gives us the oldest attainable text, which may be 
 traced to the early part of the second century, or the 
 generation next to that of the autographs. 
 
 Note. — We need not be surprised that B, as well as X, should have 
 incurred the special hostility of the admirers of the common text, from 
 which it so often departs. Dr. Dobbin, as quoted by Scrivener (p. 108), 
 calculated that B leaves out 2556 words or clauses. Dean Burgon (in the 
 " Quarterly Review " for Oct. 1881, p. 164) asserts that, in the Gospels 
 alone, B omits at least 2877 words, adds 536, substitutes 935, transposes 
 2098, modifies 1132 (total changes, 7578) ; the corresponding figures in X 
 being severally 3455, 839, 1114, 2299, 1265 (in all 8972). This is one of 
 the reasons for which the Dean, in defiance of the best judges, condemns 
 6< and B as the most corrupt of MSS., and of course all the critical 
 editions based on them. His list of departures is indeed formidable, but 
 all the worse for the common text which is his standard ; for in nine cases 
 
 ^ Tischendorf says "not earlier than the tenth or eleventh century." 
 The Roman editors think they have identified the man (a certain monk, 
 Clemens or KXrjfiTjg), and assign his date (conjecturally) as " about the 
 beginning of the fifteenth century." 
 
120 MANUSCRIPTvS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 out of ten it is easier to account for additions and interpolations than for 
 omissions. Dean Burgon often refers to Dr. Scrivener, the conservative 
 editor of the textus receptus, as an authority; but even Scrivener accords 
 " to Cod. B at least as much weight as to any single document in existence" 
 (^hitrod. p. 108), and calls it, "in common with our [hisj opponents, the 
 most weighty single authority we possess" (p. 471). For a true estimate 
 of the comparative value of united testimony, see the convincing exposi- 
 tion of Dr. Hort's Introduction, pp. 212-224. He arrives at the conclusion 
 that, with some specified exceptions, the united readings of these two 
 oldest MSS. should be accepted as the true readings until strong internal 
 evidence is found to the contrary, and that no readings of N and B can 
 safely be rejected absolutely, though it is sometimes right to place them 
 only on an alternative footing, especially where they receive no support 
 from Versions or Fathers. 
 
 On this line the great battle for the purest text of the New Testament 
 must be fought out. The question is between the oldest MSS. and the 
 latest, between the uncial text and the Stephanie or Elzevir text. The 
 conflict has fairly begun in the Revision year 1881, with a rare amount 
 of learning and zeal on both sides, and before a far larger audience in two 
 hemispheres than ever listened to a discussion on a dry and intricate, 
 yet very important, department of biblical scholarship. We accept the 
 alternative put by the Dean of Chichester, whose learning is only equalled 
 by his dogmatism, but we come to the opposite conclusion. " Codices B and 
 N," he says,* "are either among the purest of manuscripts, or else they 
 are among the very foulest. The text of Drs. Westcott and Hort is 
 either the very best which has ever appeared, or else it is the very worst ; 
 the nearest to the sacred autographs, or the furthest from them. There 
 is no room for both opinions; and there cannot exist any middle view. 
 The question will have to be fought out, and it must be fought out fairly." 
 
 Magna est Veritas et prcevalebit. 
 
 CODEX EPHR^MI. 
 
 C. Codex Eegius, or Ephbjemi Syri, in the IN'ation- 
 al Library at Paris, is a codex rescriptns, and has its 
 name from the fact that the works of the Syrian 
 
 * See his third article on the New Test. Revision in " The Quarterly 
 Review " for April, 1882, at the close, p. 377 ; or The Revision Revised, pi 
 865. 
 
MANUSCEIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 121 
 
 father, Epbraem (d. 372), were 
 written over the original Bible 
 text, which is scarcely legible.' 
 It dates from the fifth century, 
 and probably from Alexandria. 
 Tischendorf regards C as older 
 than A, and in the Gospels it has 
 a much better text. Unfortunate- 
 ly it is very defective, and con- 
 tains only 64 leaves of the Old 
 Test, and about three fifths of 
 the New Test. (145 out of 238 
 leaves), one or more sheets having 
 perished out of almost every quire 
 of four sheets. It was first collated 
 by Wetstein (1716), and edited by 
 Tischendorf (Leipsic, 1843-45, 2 
 vols.). Its text '^ seems to stand 
 nearly midway between A and B, 
 somewhat inclining to the latter" 
 (Scrivener). Two correctors, one 
 of the sixth, the other of the ninth 
 century (designated by Tischendorf 
 as C**, 0***, or C^, C^), have been 
 at work on the MS. ie.g.^ in 1 Tim. 
 iii. 16) to the perplexity of the 
 critical collator. 
 
 ^ The owner of that MS. must have had a very 
 low idea of tlie Bible to replace it by the writings 
 of Ephraem. It was making void the Word of 
 God by the traditions of men. Comp. Matt. 
 XV. 6. 
 
 JO 
 
 •ft H 
 
 IQ 
 
 O ^\ 
 
 r> 
 
 en. 
 
 h 
 
122 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 CODEX B-EZM. 
 
 D, for the Gospels and Acts, is Codex Bez^, or 
 Cantabrigiensis, in the Library of the University 
 at Cambridge (to which Beza presented it in 1581) 
 It dates from the sixth century, and was written in 
 the Occident, probably in Gaul, by a transcriber 
 ignorant of Greek. It contains only the Gospels 
 and Acts, with a Latin version ; edited in fac-simile 
 type by Thomas Kipling, Cambridge, 1793, 2 vols. 
 foL, and more accurately by Dr. Scrivener, in com- 
 mon type, with a copious introduction and valuable 
 critical notes, Cambridge, 1864. 
 
 Cod. D is the second of the uncial MSS. which 
 was known to scholars (B being the first). Beza 
 procured it from the monastery of St. Irenseus at 
 Lyons in 1562, but did not use it on account of its 
 many departures from other MSS. It is generally 
 ranked with the great uncials, but is the least valu- 
 able and trustworthy of them. Its text is very 
 peculiar and puzzling. It has many bold and ex- 
 tensive interpolations, e. g., a paragraph after Luke 
 vi. 4 (which is found nowhere else) : " On the same 
 day he [Jesus] beheld a certain man working on the 
 Sabbath, and said unto him, Man, blessed art thou 
 if thou knowest what thou doest; but if thou know- 
 est not, thou art cursed and a transgressor of the 
 law." It differs more than any other from the re- 
 ceived Greek text, but it often agrees in remarkable 
 readings with the ancient Latin and Syriac versions. 
 
 Dr. Tregelles remarks that " its evidence, when 
 alone, especially in additions, is of scarcely any value 
 
MANiJSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 123 
 
 as to the genuine text; but of the very greatest 
 when corroborated by other very ancient author- 
 ity." 
 
 Dr. Hort attaches great importance to this singu- 
 lar MS. as a means of tracing textual corruptions up 
 to the fourth, and even the second century. He 
 says (ii. 149) : " In spite of the prodigious amount 
 of error which D contains, these readings, in which 
 it sustains and is sustained by other documents de- 
 rived from very ancient texts of other types, render 
 it often invaluable for the secure recovery of the 
 .true text ; and, apart from this direct applicability, 
 no other single source of evidence, except the quota- 
 tions of Origen, surpasses it in value on the equally 
 important ground of historical or indirect instruc- 
 tiveness. To what extent its unique readings are 
 due to license on the part of the scribe, rather than 
 to faithful reproduction of an antecedent text now 
 otherwise lost, it is impossible to say ; but it is re- 
 markable how frequently the discovery of fresh 
 evidence, especially Old Latin evidence, supplies a 
 second authority for readings in which D had hith- 
 erto stood alone. At all events, when every allow- 
 ance has been made for possible individual license, 
 the text of D presents a truer image of the form in 
 which the Gospels and Acts were most widely read 
 in the third and probably a great part of the second 
 century than any other extant Greek MS." 
 
 The same remarks apply with little deduction to 
 Cod. D (2) for the Pauline Epistles, which deserves 
 a place among the primary uncials, but is usually 
 ranked with the secondary. It likewise gives the 
 
124 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 Western text, which in the Epistles of Paul is of 
 inferior value. (See below.) 
 
 2. SECONDARY tJNCIALS. 
 
 The secondary uncial MSS. are defective and of 
 later date — from the fifth century (Q and T) to the 
 ninth and tenth centuries. Most of them contain 
 the Gospels, only five the Apocalypse. "None of 
 them show signs of having formed part of a com- 
 plete Bible, and it is even doubtful whether any of 
 them belonged to a complete New Testament. Six 
 alone are known to have contained more than one 
 of the groups of books, if we count the Acts and 
 the Apocalypse as though they were each a group." * 
 
 In giving a brief account of these secondary 
 uncials I follow chiefly the latest descriptive list of 
 Tischendorf, as revised by Dr. von Gebhardt (1878), 
 and again revised by Dr. Abbot (1882 and 1884).'* 
 
 B (2), for the Apocalypse : Codex Vaticantts 2066 (formerly Basilian 
 Codex 105); eighth century. Edited by Tischendorf, imperfectly 1846, 
 carefully 1869, after a fresh collation made in 1866. Cozza published a 
 few unimportant corrections to this latest edition in Ad ediHonem Apoca- 
 lypseos S. Johannis juxta vetustissimum codicem Basil. Vat. 2066 Lips, anno 
 1869 evulgatam animadversiones, Rom. 1869. Tregelles marked this MS. 
 with the letter Q, to distinguish it from the far more valuable and famous 
 Cod. B. 
 
 D (2), for the Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews) : Codex Clako- 
 MONTANUS ; of the second half of the sixth century slightly defective, 
 but very valuable : in the National Librarj' at Paris. Collated by Tregelles, 
 1849 and 1850. Edited by Tischendorf, Leipsic, 1852. Beza procured it 
 
 * Westcott and Hort, ii. 75. 
 
 * For SchaflF's Rdig. Ena/clopcedia, vol. i. 271-273 (published in New 
 York and Edinburgh, Nov. 1882, revised ed. 1886). Comp. also (iregory's 
 Troleg. i. 372 sqq., and the second vol. of the great work of Abbe Martin, 
 
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 125 
 
 from the monastery of Clermont (hence the name), and made some use 
 of it (1582). It is Greek and Latin, stichometric, with accents by a later 
 hand, but no division of words. It was retouched at different times. 
 The Latin text represents the oldest version (of the second century). 
 
 E (1), for the Gospels: Codex Basileensis ; eighth century; in the 
 library at Basle; defective in Luke. Erasmus overlooked it. Collated 
 by Tischendorf and Miiller (1843), and by Tregelles (1846). It is better 
 than most of the second-class uncials. It approaches to the Textus Re- 
 ceptus. 
 
 E (2), for the Acts : Codex Laudianus ; in the Bodleian Library at 
 Oxford; a present from Archbishop Laud in 1636 (hence the name), with 
 a close Latin version on the left column , of the end of the sixth century; 
 probably brought from Tarsus to England by Theodore of Canterbury 
 (d. 690), and used by the Venerable Bede (d. 735) ^ newly published by 
 Tischendorf, in the ninth vol. of his Monumenta Sacra, 1870. Very valu- 
 able for the Greek-Latin text of the Acts. 
 
 E (3), for the Pauline Epistles: Codex Sangermanensis; Graeco- 
 Latin; formerly at Saint-Germain des Pres (hence the name), near Paris; 
 now at St. Petersburg. In the Greek a mere copy of D (Claromont.) 
 after it had been altered by several hands. Ninth or tenth century. Of 
 no critical value except for the Latin text. 
 
 F (1), for the Gospels : Codex Boreelianus ; once possessed b}'^ John 
 Boreel (d. 1629), Dutch ambassador in London under James I.; now in 
 the library of the University at Utrecht. Not important. 
 
 F (2), for the Pauline Epistles: Codex Augiensis (named from Augia 
 Dives or Major, a monastery at Reichenau in Switzerland) ; bought by 
 Richard Bentley at Heidelberg, and bequeathed by his nephew to Trinity 
 College, Cambridge; Graeco- Latin (but the Latin no translation of the 
 Greek) ; collated by Tischendorf, 1842, by Tregelles, 1845 ; carefully edited 
 by Dr. Scrivener, 1859, in common type. Ninth century. 
 
 F*: designates those passages of the Gospels, Acts, and Pauline Epistles 
 found copied on the margin of the Coislin Octateuch in Paris, dating from 
 the beginning of the seventh century. Printed by Tischendorf in 1846 
 (^Afonum. s. ined.'). 
 
 G (1), for the Gospels : Codex Harleianus ; collated by Wetstein, 
 Tischendorf, and Tregelles. Ninth or tenth century. It has many breaks. 
 Now in the British Museum. 
 
 O (2), for the Acts (ii. 45-iii. 8) ; seventh century ; now in St. Peters- 
 burg, taken there by Tischendorf in 1850, It has a few rare and vi»li*- 
 jible readings. 
 
126 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 G '', for the Acts (fragments of chapters xvi., xvii., xviii.) ; ninth century 
 or earlier; now called Codex Vaticanus 9671, formerly Cryptoferratensis. 
 Edited by Cozza, 1877. 
 
 G(3), for the Pauline Epistles: Codex Boernerianus ; was either 
 copied from F (Hort), or from the same archetype (Tischendorf, Scriv- 
 ener). Ninth century. It is a part of the same MS. as A of the Gospels. 
 Purchased by Prof. C. F. Boemer at Leipsic, 1705 ; in the Royal Library 
 at Dresden. Published by Matthaei, Meissen, 1791. 
 
 H (1), for the Gospels: Codex Seideliij tenth centurj'^; beginning 
 Matt. XV. 30, and defective in all the Gospels. Now in the Public Library 
 of Hamburg. Collated by Tregelles, 1850, and examined in 1854 by 
 Tischendorf. 
 
 H (2), for the Acts: Codex Mutineissis; ninth century; lacks about 
 seven chapters. Now at Modena. Carefully collated by Tischendorf, 
 1843, and by Tregelles, 1845. 
 
 H (3), for the Pauline Epistles : Codex Coislinianus ; sixth century ; 
 fragments of the Pauline Epistles in thirty-one leaves, all found in the 
 binding of manuscripts at or from the Monasterj' of St. Athanasius at 
 ISIount Athos. Twelve of these leaves are in the National Library at 
 I'aris; and two formerly there are now at St. Petersburg. These fourteen 
 leaves, containing fragments of 1 Corinthians, Galatians, i Timothy, Titus, 
 and Hebrews, were published by Montfaucon in 1715, in his Biblioiheca 
 Coisliniana. Two more leaves at Moscow (^Bihl. S, Syn. 61), containing 
 parts of Heb. x., were first described and collated by Matthaei (1784), and 
 have been edited in fac-simile by Sabas (^Specim. palceogr., Moscow, 1863). 
 They are designated as N*= in Tischendorf 's Greek Testament, seventh 
 edition (1859). Four more leaves, belonging to Archbishop Porfiri and 
 the Archimandrite Antony, are cited hy Tischendorf in his last (eighth) 
 critical edition on 2 Cor. iv. 4-6 ; Col. iii. 5-8 ; 1 Thess. ii. 9-13, iv. 6-10. 
 Still more recently nine new leaves have been discovered at Mount Athos. 
 Their text, containing parts of 2 Corinthians and Galatians, has been 
 published by Duchesne in the A rehires des missions scient. et lit., 3® sen, 
 tom. iii. p. 420 sqq., Paris, 1876. Two more leaves, containing 1 Tim. vL 
 9-13, and 2 Tim. ii. 1-9, have been found attached to a MS. in the National 
 Library at Turin in 1881. [E. A.] 
 
 I, for the Gospels, Acts, and Pauline Epistles: Codex Tischendorfi- 
 ANUS II., at St. Petersburg, designates a manuscript in which, under later 
 Georgian writing, there are twenty-eight palimpsest leaves of seven dif- 
 ferent codices, containing fragments of the New Testament, as follows : 
 V, of John xi., xii., xv., xvi., xix. I' of 1 Cor, xv., xvi.; Tit, i,; Act* 
 
MANUSCKIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 127 
 
 xxviii. I ', of Matt, xiv., xxiv., xxv., xxvi. ; Mark ix., xiv. I *, of Matt. 
 xvii.-xix. ; Luke xviii. ; John iv., v., xx. I*, of Acts ii., xxvi. I«, of 
 Acts xiii. I \ of Luke vii., xxiv. I '• '^^ =* are of the fifth century ; I *• ' of 
 the sixth ; I *• * of the seventh. The text of 1 1-2. 3 4. 7 jj^g ^ gj^gg affinity 
 with K A B C D L. Published by Tischendorf in his Mon. sacr. ined. N. C, 
 vol. i. (1355). 
 
 I •», for John's Gospel, formerly N ^ ; beginning of fifth century ; four 
 palimpsest leaves in the British Museum, containing, under two layers 
 of Syriac writing, fragments of seventeen verses of John xiii. and xvi. 
 Deciphered by Tischendorf and Tregelles, and published by the former 
 in his Mon. sacr. ined. N. C, vol. ii. (1857). [E. A.] 
 
 K (1), for the Gospels: Codex Cyprius; complete; middle or end of 
 ninth century; now in Paris. Text somewhat remarkable. Collated by 
 Tischendorf (1842) and Tregelles (1849 and 1850). 
 
 K (2), for the Pauline and Catholic Epistles: Codex Mosquknsis; 
 ninth century; brought from Mount Athos to Moscow. Lacks a part of 
 Romans and 1 Corinthians. Collated by Matthaei. 
 
 L (1), for the Gospels : Codex Regius ; published by Tischendorf, 1846 ; 
 written in the eighth century ; full of errors in spelling, but very remark- 
 able for its agreement with 5<, B, C, and Origen ; now in Paris. 
 
 L (2), for the Acts, Pauline aad Catholic Epistles : Codex Angelicus, 
 or Passionei (formerly G and I) ; ninth century ; now in the Angelica 
 Library of the Augustinian monks at Rome. Contains Acts vii. 10 to 
 Heb. xiii. 10. Collated by Tischendorf (1843) and Tregelles (1845). 
 
 M (1), for the Gospels : Codex Campianus ; complete ; end of ninth 
 century; now in Paris. Copied and used by Tischendorf (1849). 
 
 M (2), for the Pauline Epistles: Codex Rubek; ninth century. Two 
 folio leaves at Hamburg ( Heb. i. 1-iv. 3, xii. 20-xiii. 25 ), and two at 
 London (1 Cor. xv. 62-2 Cor. i. 15 ; 2 Cor. x. 13-xii. 5). Written in red. 
 Edited by Tischendorf in Anecdot. sacr. et prof., 1855^ and» with a few 
 corrections, 1861. 
 
 N (1), for the Gospels : Codex Purpureus ; end of the sixth century ; 
 a beautiful manuscript written on the thinnest vellum, dyed purple, with 
 silver letters (the abbreviations 9 C=^i6q, lLQ, = KvpioQ, etc., in gold); 
 four leaves in London, two in Vienna, six in the Vatican, and thirty- 
 three in the Monastery of St. John in Patmos. Tischendorf used in his 
 eighth edition of the New Testament the readings of the thirty-three 
 Patmos leaves transcribed by John Sakkelion, containing Mark vi. 53-xv. 
 23, with some gaps. These have since been published by Duchesne in 
 the Archives des viissions scientijigues, 3* sen, tom. iii. 1876, 
 
128 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 N (2), for Galatians and Hebrews: two leaves; ninth century; con- 
 taining Gal. V. 12-vi. 4 and Heb. v. 8-vi. 10. Brought by Tischendorf to 
 St. Petersburg. 
 
 N ••. The manuscript now marked by Tischendorf I ^ 
 
 O (1), for John's Gospel : eight leaves ; ninth century ; containing a 
 part of John i. and xx., with scholia, now in Moscow (^S. Syn. 120). 
 Edited by Matthaei (1785), and, after him, by Tregelles, Cod. Zacynthius 
 (1861), Appendix. Text valuable. 
 
 O (2), for 2 Corinthians : two leaves ; sixth century , containing 2 Cor. 
 i. 20-ii. 12. Brought from the East to St. Petersburg by Tischendorf in 
 1859. 
 
 O* ©""(l) O*^ O"* O* O': Psalters or other manuscripts, containing 
 some or all of the hymns of Luke's Gospel (i. 46 sqq., 68 sqq., ii. 29 sqq.). 
 O * is at WolfenbUttel (ed. Tischendorf, A need. sacr. et prof., 1855). O *> at 
 Oxford. O *^ at Verona, the Greek text in Roman letters (ed. Bianchini, 
 1740). O* at Zurich, on purple vellum in silver letters (ed. Tischen- 
 dorf, Mon. sacr, ined. N. C, vol. iv.). O * and O ^ at St. Gall and St. Peters- 
 burg (collated by Tischendorf). O •= is of the sixth century ; O "^ of the 
 seventh ; O * '' * ' of the ninth. 
 
 O'' (2), for the Pauline Epistles: sixth century ; a leaf, which imperfect- 
 ly presents Eph. iv. 1-18. Collated by Tischendorf at Moscow in 1868. 
 
 P (1), for the Gospels: Codex Guelpherbytanus I.; sixth century; 
 a palimpsest at WolfenbUttel, containing portions of all the Gospels (518 
 verses). Edited by Tischendorf (Mon. sacr. ined. N. C. vol. vi. 1869). 
 
 P (2), for the Acts, Epistles, and Revelation, with some defects : Codex 
 PoKFiRiANUS, a palimpsest of the ninth century, in possession of Arch- 
 bishop Porfiri at St. Petersburg (now at Kiev) ; the text is particularly 
 good in the Revelation. Edited by Tischendorf, 1865 and 1869. It gen- 
 erally confirms A and C, but often X against all the rest. 
 
 Q (1), for Luke and John : Codex Guelpherbytanus II. ; fifth century ; 
 a palimpsest containing fragments (247 verses) of Luke and John ; now 
 at WolfenbUttel Edited by Tischendorf, Mon. sacr. ined. N. C, iii. 1860. 
 
 Q (2) : PoRFiRiANUS, fifth century ; papyrus fragments of 1 Cor. i. 17- 
 20 ; vi. 13-18 : vii. 3, 4, 10-14. Collated by Tischendorf. 
 
 K, for Luke : Codex Nitriensis ; sixth century ; a fragmentary pal- 
 impsest of Luke from a Coptic Monastery of the Nitrian Desert ; now in 
 the British Museum. Collated by Tregelles (1854), and edited by Tischen- 
 dorf (il/on. sacr. ined. N. C, vol. i. 1855). 
 
 R (2), a palimpsest leaf of about the seventh century, containing 2 Cor, 
 3^1, 9-19 ; convent of Grotta Ferrata, near Rome ; published by Cozza in 1867. 
 
MANirSCllIl»T8 OF THE NEW TEStAMEl^T. 129 
 
 S, for the Cxospels: Codex Vaticanus 354 (A.D. 949); a complete 
 manuscript of the Gospels. Collated by Tischendorf for the eighth edi- 
 tion of his Greek Testament. 
 
 T, for Luke and John : Codex Bougianus I. ; fifth century ; now in the 
 College of the Propaganda in Rome, fragments of Luke xxii., xxiii., and 
 John vi.-viii., the Greek text accompanied by a Sahidic or Thebaic ver- 
 sion. The fragments of John were published by Giorgi in 1789. Those 
 of Luke were first collated by B. H. Alford. 
 
 Twoi. fragments of Luke xii. 15-xiii. 32, John viii. 23-32, formerly 
 owned by Woide, and published by Ford in his Append. Cod. Alex. (1799). 
 Similar to the preceding, but shown by Lightfoot to belong to a different 
 manuscript. 
 
 T'': fragments of the first four chapters of John ; sixth century; now 
 at St. Petersburg. 
 
 T « : a fragment of Matthew (xiv. 19-xv. 8), resembling the above. 
 
 T^: fragments of a Greek -Sahidic Kvangelistary (seventh century) 
 found by Tischendorf (1866) in the Borgian Library at Rome. Con- 
 tains Matt. xvi. 13-20 ; Mark i. 3-8 ; xii. 35-37 ; John xix. 23-27 ; xx. 
 30, 31. 
 
 T ^ : a bit of an Evangelistary, of about the sixth century, from Upper 
 Egypt; now in the Library of the University of Cambridge, England. It 
 contains Matt. iii. 13-16. Readings given in the Postscript to Tregelles's 
 Greek Testament, p. 1070. [E. A.] 
 
 U, for the Gospels: Codex Nanianus; end of ninth or beginning of 
 tenth century ; now in Library of St. Mark, Venice. Contains the Gospeli 
 complete. Collated by Tischendorf and Tregelles. 
 
 V, for the Gospels : Codex Mosquensis, of the Gospels to John vii. 39; 
 ninth century; almost complete. Written at Mount Athos. Matthaei 
 collated and described it in 1779. 
 
 W * and W *» : the former designates two leaves, with fragments of 
 Luke ix., x., in the National Library at Paris; probably of the eighth 
 century; edited by Tischendorf in his Mon. saa\ ined., 1846. The latter 
 is a palimpsest of fourteen leaves found by Tischendorf at Naples, and 
 fully deciphered by him in 1866. 
 
 W^: three leaves (ninth century), containing Mark ii. 8-16; Luke i. 
 20-32, 64-79; now at St. Gall. Edited by Tischendorf, Mon. sacr. ined.y 
 N. C, vol. iii. (1860). 
 
 W * : fragments of Mark vii., viii., ix. (ninth century), found in the 
 binding of a volume in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge. The 
 readings are remarkable. 
 
130 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 W * : a fragment containing Jolin iv. 9-14, discovered in 1865 in the 
 Library of Christ Church College at Oxford. Closely resembles O, and is 
 perhaps a part of the same manuscript. Alford calls it Frag. Ath. b; and 
 his Frag. Ath. a, containing John ii. 17-iii, 8, found by P. E. Puse}^ in the 
 cover of a manuscript at Mount Athos, probably belongs to the same Codex. 
 
 W^: so we may designate a palimpsest leaf (ninth century), contain- 
 ing Mark v. 16-40, found by Mr. Vansittart in Cod. 192 of the Acts. 
 
 W ^ : the Sunderland palimpsest, ninth century ; see above, p. 102. 
 
 X, for the Gospels : Codex Monacensis ; fragmentary ; end of ninth 
 or beginning of tenth century ; now in the Munich University Library. 
 Collated by Tischendorf and Tregelles. 
 
 Y, for the Gospel of John: Codex Barberini; fragmentary; eighth 
 century; now in the Library of the Prince Barberini at Rome. Tischen- 
 dorf published it in Mon. sacr. ined., 1846. 
 
 Z, for Matthew: Codex Dublinensis; rescriptus; sixth century; one 
 of the chief palimpsests; text in value next to &< and B. Edited by 
 Barrett, 1801, in faulty fac-simile; Tregelles supplemented his edition in 
 1863 ; re-edited with great care by T. K. Abbott, Lond. 1880. See notice 
 by Dr. Gregory in SchUrer's " Theologische Literaturzeitung," Leips. 1881, 
 col. 228 sq. 
 
 r, for the Gospels: Codex Tischendorfianus IV.; ninth or tenth 
 century ; discovered by Tischendorf in an Eastern monastery ; sold to the 
 Bodleian Library in 1855. Another portion of the same MS. was discovered 
 by Tischendorf in 1859, and taken to St. Petersburg. The two together 
 make a nearly complete copy of the Gospels. An inscription at the close 
 of John fixes the date probably at Nov. 27, 844 (according to Tischendorf), 
 or 979 (according to Gardthausen). 
 
 A, for the Gospels: Codex Sangallensis (St. Gall); ninth century; 
 probably written by Irish monks at St. Gall. Complete, lacking one leaf, 
 with a Latin interlinear translation, somewhat conformed to the Vulgate. 
 Published by Rettig in lithographed fac-simile, Zurich, 1836. 
 
 0», for Matthew: Codex Tischendorfianus I.; seventh century; 
 now in the Leipsic University Library; containing fragments of Matt, 
 xiii., xiv., XV. Found by Tischendorf in the East in 1844, and published 
 in his Mon. sacr. ined., 1846, with a few lines of Matt, xii., published by 
 Tischendorf in Mon. sacr. ined., N. C, vol. ii. (1857). 
 
 e**: six leaves (sixth or seventh century), fragments of Matt, xxii., 
 xxiii., and Mark iv., v. Brought by Tischendorf to St. Petersburg in 
 1859. 
 
 e'': two folio leaves (sixth centurj')* with Matt. xxi. 19-24, and 
 
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 131 
 
 John xviii. 29-35. Tischendorf brought the first, and Archbishop Porfiri 
 the second, to St. Petersburg (now at Kiev). 
 
 6<^: a fragment (eighth century) of Luke xi. 37-45. Brought to 
 St. Petersburg by Tischendorf. 
 
 e * : a fragment (sixth century) of Matt. xxvi. 2-4, 7-9. 
 
 e ^ : fragments (sixth century) of Matt, xxvi., xxvii., and Mark i., ii. 
 
 e s : a fragment (sixth century) of John (vi. 13, 14, 22-24), like O (2). 
 
 *> : Graeco- Arabic fragments (ninth century) of Matt. xiv. and xxv., 
 which, together with 6 ^ ^^, belong to the collection of Archbishop Porfiri 
 formerly at St. Petersburg (now at Kiev). 
 
 A, for Luke and John : Codex Tischendorfianus III. ; ninth century ; 
 now in the Bodleian Library ; collated by Tischendorf (who brought it 
 from the East) and Tregelles. The portion of this MS. containing 
 Matthew and Mark is written in cursive characters, and was brought by 
 Tischendorf to St. Petersburg in 1859. 
 
 ;S, for Luke i. 1-xi. 33 (with some gaps) : Codex Zacynthius ; a pal- 
 impsest of the eighth century •, formerly at the island of Zante ; presented 
 in 1821 to the British and Foreign Bible Society in London ; deciphered 
 and published by Tregelles, 1861. The text is very valuable, and is sur- 
 rounded by a commentary. 
 
 IT, for the Gospels: Codex Petropolitanus ; ninth century; brought 
 by Tischendorf from Smyrna ; collated by him, 1864 and 1865. The MS. 
 is nearly complete, lacking 77 verses. 
 
 2, for Matthew and Mark : Codex Rossanensis ; found by two German 
 scholars, Dr. Oscar von Gebhardt, of Gottingen, and Dr. Adolf Harnack, 
 of Giessen, in March, 1879, at Rossano, in Calabria, in possession of the 
 archbishop, who got it from the library of the former convent. It is 
 beautifully written, in silver letters, on very fine purple-colored vellum, 
 with the three first lines in both columns, at the beginning of each 
 Gospel, in gold (very rare among Greek MSS.). It is also richly orna- 
 mented with eighteen remarkable pictures in water-colors, representing 
 scenes in the gospel history; hence important for the history of early 
 Christian art. Its miniatures bear a striking resemblance to those of the 
 celebrated Vienna purple MS. of Genesis. It consists of 188 leaves of two 
 columns of twenty lines each, and contains the Gospels of Matthew and 
 Mark (Luke and John are lost). The Gospel of Matthew ends with the 
 words, EYArrEAION KATA MATGAION. Gebhardt and Harnack 
 assign it to the sixth centurj'. The text shows a departure from the 
 oldest MSS. (X and B), and an approach to the amended text of A A II. 
 It frequently agrees with D and the old Latin against the mass of later 
 
yvpOY 
 
 coyecnriKHB^ 
 nrrx n xTrTcjo M ATX 
 
 xe -loy. 
 
 Spkcimkn of the Codex Rossanensis, containing Matt. vi. 13, 14. 
 
 TTOvrfpov OTL I <Tov tOTiv tj /3a I aiXtia kui tj dv \ va/iig kul ij do\^a eig 
 rovg aid) \ vag aurjv. \ Eav yap atpijre \ toiq av^^putrrloig ra | Trapair- 
 runara. 
 
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 133 
 
 MSS. It contains, however, the doxology in the Lord's Prayer, Matt. vi. 
 13, which is omitted in the old Latin and Vulgate, as well as in X B D Z, 
 Origen, Tertullian, and Cyprian, and originated in liturgical use in Syria. 
 It accords most remarkably with N of the Gospels (Cod. Purpureus). 
 
 See Evangeliorum Codex Grcecus purpureus Rossanensis (2), litteris 
 argenteis sexto ut videtur sceculo scriptus picturisque omatus, by O. von 
 Gebhardt and Adolf Harnack, Leipsic, 1880; with fac-similes of portions 
 of the text and outline sketches of the pictures. The whole text has 
 been published from the original collation by O. v. Gebhardt in Texte und 
 Untersuchungen zur Gesch, der altchristl. Lit., vol. i.. No. 4. Paris, 1886. 
 
 $, for Matthew and Mark, with lacunae : Codex Beratinus ; sixth or 
 seventh century; publ. by Pierre BatifFol, Rome, 1885. See O. von Geb- 
 hardt, in "Theol. Litztg." for Dec. 12, 1885. 
 
 B. THE CURSIVE MANUSCRIPTS. 
 
 The cursive MSS. are indicated by Arabic numer- 
 als. They were written in current hand on vellum 
 or parchment {membrana)\ or on cotton paper 
 {charta hombydna^ also charta Damascena^ from 
 the place of manufacture), which came into use in 
 the ninth and tenth centuries; or on linen paper 
 {charta proper), which was employed first in the 
 twelfth century. Some are richly illuminated. 
 They date from the ninth to the middle of the fif- 
 teenth century, when the invention of the art of 
 printing substituted a much easier and cheaper 
 mode of multiplying books. A few, however, were 
 written in the sixteenth century. 
 
 Some of these MSS. contain the whole New Tes- 
 tament, others only the Acts and Catholic Epistles, 
 or the Pauline Epistles, or the Kevelation. 
 
 Besides, there are over a thousand lectionaries, 
 which contain only the Scripture lessons for the 
 public service, either the Gospels {Evangelistaria) 
 
134 MANUSCEIPTS O^ THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 or the Epistles {Praxapostoli). They date mostly 
 from the tenth to the twelfth century. Uncial writ- 
 ing continued to be used for lectionaries some time 
 after it had become obsolete for ordinary copies. 
 
 Many cursive MSS. have been collated in whole 
 or in part by Mill, Wetstein, Griesbach, Birch, Alter, 
 Scholz, Matthsei, Muralt, Tregelles, Tischendorf, 
 Scrivener, Hoskier,' and Gregory. 
 
 Their number has lately very much increased, 
 especially by the discoveries of Dean Burgon and 
 Dr. Gregory. Hence the estimates of Tischendorf, 
 Scrivener, and Abbot are superseded.' 
 
 Dr. Gregory, in the second part of his Prolegomena 
 (1890). gives the latest and fullest account of cursive 
 MSS. He numbers in all 3553, as follows : 
 
 Gospels 1273 
 
 Acts and Catholic Epistles 416 
 
 Pauline Epistles 480 
 
 Apocalypse 183 
 
 Lectionaries I ,^T^' ' ^f M 1201 
 
 \ Apostles, 265 ) 
 
 3553 
 
 The critical value of the cursive MSS. is, of course, 
 far inferior to that of the uncials, because they are 
 
 1 See Hoskier's Collation of the Greek Cursive Codex Evang. 604 (in 
 the British Museum, numbered Egerton 2610), London, 1890. Hoskier 
 is a defender of the traditional text, and an admirer of the late Dean 
 Burgon, to whose memory he dedicated his work. 
 
 2 Dr. Abbot's statement of Jan. 20, 1884 (furnished to me, shortly be- 
 fore his death, for the second edition), counted only 1600 cursive MSS. 
 and over 500 lectionaries. Dr. Scrivener counts 1997 cursives, including 
 300 new ones discovered by Dean Burgon. Many more MSS. may yet 
 be discovered, but will not alter present conclusions, or the ascertained 
 relations between the existing documents. 
 
MAiTUSCRlPtS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 135 
 
 much further, removed from the primitive source. 
 But some twenty or thirty of them are very im- 
 portant for their agreement with the oldest authori- 
 ties, or for some other peculiarity. 
 The following are the most valuable cursive MSS. : 
 
 1, for the Gospels : Codex Basileensis ; of the tenth century ; in the 
 University Library at Basle ; known to Erasmus, but little used by him ; 
 collated by Wetstein, C. L. Roth, and Tregelles. 
 
 
 .3M • v^ttftyfcnaqrfrpr'roBTy p ui < fu;X 
 
 1 1 VKf^cry^fy^iT 
 
 > 
 
 €3t 
 
 Specimen of the Codex Basileensis, of the Tenth Century, con- 
 taining Luke i. 1, 2, nearly as in all Greek Testaments. 
 
 lvayyk{\iov] Kara Xovkclv: 
 tTTEidriirsp iroWol kirexfipriffav dvaTd^atrBai | dirjyriaiv rrepi tuiv tti- 
 rrXrjpoipoprjfikvojv \ iv riiMV irpayfiaTiov. Ka^ihg Trapkdoffav Tjfu \ 6i 
 aTrapx^o" avTOTrrai Koi v7rT]peTai yf.v6fii.voi. 
 
 13, for the Acts and Catholic Epistles ; identical with No. 33 of the 
 Gospels (see below). 
 
 17, for the Pauline Epistles ; identical with No. 33 of the Gospels. 
 
 31, for the Acts and Catholic Epistles ; identical with No. 69 of the 
 Gospels. 
 
 33, for the Gospels (the same as No. 13 for Acts and Cath. Epp., and 
 No. 17 for Pauline Epp.) : Codex Colbertinus; in the National Library 
 at Paris (Regius 14, Colbertinus 2844); of the eleventh century; called 
 " the queen of the cursive MSS.," or by Tregelles, " the most important 
 of the Biblical MSS. in cursive letters extant," and, as Scrivener says, 
 
136 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 " deserving the utmost attention." It contains the whole New Testament 
 except the Apocalypse, but has suffered much "from damp and decay" 
 (Home, iv. 209). Collated by Griesbach, Scholz (cursorily), and especially 
 by Tregelles in 1850. It agrees most with B, D, and L. " It has an 
 unusual proportion of pre-Syrian readings, chiefly non- Western " (Hort, 
 ii. 154). 
 
 37, for the Pauline Epistles ; identical with No. 69 of the Gospels. 
 
 47, for the Pauline Epistles : Codex Bodi- Roe 16 ; eleventh or twelfth 
 century. Collated by Tregelles. 
 
 61, for the Acts and Catholic Epistles: Codex Tischkndorf. ; in the 
 British Museum ; dated April 20, 1044. Collated by Tischendorf, who 
 discovered it, Tregelles, and Scrivener. Formerly called lo*', that is, Londi- 
 nensis Tisckendorfianus. Dr. Hort says (ii. 154): It "contains a very 
 ancient text, often Alexandrian, rarely Western, with a trifling Syrian 
 element, probably of late introduction." 
 
 69, for the Gospels (Acts 31, Paul 37): Codex Leicestrensis; eleventh 
 «entury; collated by Tregelles (1852), Scrivener (1855), and Harris (1886). 
 This manuscript, together with 13, 124, 346 of the Gospels, are derived from 
 jin old uncial archetype (perhaps of Calabria). See T. K. Abbott: Collation 
 of Four Important MSS. of the Gospels, Dublin, 1877; Abbe Martin : Quatre 
 MSS. importants du IV. T., Paris, 1886; J. R. Harris: The Origin of the 
 Leicester Cod. of the N. T., Lond. and Camb. 1887 (66 pages, with fac-simile). 
 
 81, for the Gospels; at St. Petersburg; called 2p« by Tischendorf, as 
 standing second in a list of documents collated by Muralt. It is pronounced 
 by Dr. Hort (ii. 154) " the most valuable cursive for the preservation of 
 Western readings in the Gospels." 
 
 95, for the Apocalypse : Codex Parham 17 ; twelfth or thirteenth cen- 
 tury ; collated by Scrivener. 
 
 209 : Codex Venetus, a vellum MS. of the fifteenth century, formerly 
 the property of Cardinal Bessarion, containing the Gospels; perhaps 
 copied from the Vatican MS. It contains also the Acts and Catholic 
 Epistles (No. 95), Paul's Epistles (No. 108), and Revelation (No. 46), but 
 by different hands, and of no special value. 
 
 Other cursives deserving mention are : 
 
 For the Gospels: 22, 28, 59, 66, 102, 118, 124, 157, 201; for the Acts 
 and Catholic Epistles: 15, 18, 36, 40, 73, 180; for the Pauline Epistles: 46, 
 67**, 73, 109; for the Apocalypse : 7, 14, 38, 47, 51, 82. 
 
 One more cursive MS. must be mentioned for 
 its historical and dogmatic interest. This is the 
 
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 137 
 
 Codex MoNTFORTiANUS, probablj written in Eng- 
 land between 1519 and 1522 (certainly not be- 
 fore 1500), formerly the property of Dr. Montfort, 
 then of Archbishop Ussher, now in the Trinity 
 College Library at Dublin, numbered 61 in the 
 Gospels, 34 in the Acts and Catholic Epistles, 40 in 
 Paul's Epistles, and 92 in Tregelles's edition of the 
 Apocalypse. It has no intrinsic importance, but is 
 celebrated in the controversy on the spurious passage 
 1 John V. 7, which it contains on a glazed page to 
 protect it. From this codex the three heavenly 
 witnesses passed into the third edition of Erasmus 
 (1522), who had promised to insert them, if any 
 Greek MS. were found containing them, and so be- 
 came part of the textus receptus and all the transla- 
 tions made from it. Erasmus, however, was not 
 convinced of its genuineness, and suspected that it 
 was interpolated by translation from the Latin 
 Yulgate. Luther did not translate the passage. 
 See a full account by Tregelles in Home, iv. 213- 
 217, with a fac-simile. The only other Greek MSS. 
 which contain the passage in any form are No. 162, 
 the Codex Ottobonianus, a Grseco- Latin MS. in 
 the Vatican Library (No. 298) of the fifteenth or 
 sixteenth century, and No. 173, the Codex Regius 
 Neapolitanus, which contains the passage on the 
 margin by a hand of the seventeenth century. 
 Other MSS. which were formerly quoted in favor 
 of the passage are only transcripts from some jf?Wn^ 
 ed Greek Testament. The Codex Raviaiius at Ber- 
 lin is a literary forgery, being almost entirely a mod- 
 ern transcript from the Complutensian Polyglot, 
 U 
 
138 MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 with a few readings from the text of Erasmus. See 
 Tregelles, I, c. iv. 218, also 356 sqq. On the con- 
 troversy concerning this passage, see particularly 
 the Memoir of the Controversy respecting the Three 
 Heavenly Witnesses^ 1 John v, 7, including Critical 
 Notices of the Principal Writers on Both /Sides of the 
 Discussion^ hy Criticus [i. e., Rev. William Ornie]. 
 A New Edition^ with Notes and an Appendix^ hy 
 Ezra Abbot. New York, 1866, 12mo (xii. and 213 
 pages). Also the note of Dr. Hort, N, T. in Oreeh^ 
 vol. ii. App. p. 103 sqq., and Armfield, The Three 
 Witnesses. The Disputed Text in /St. John, London, 
 1883 (pp. 230). The most recent and most learned 
 defence of those three heavenly witnesses is by 
 Abbe Martin, who devotes to it a volume of 248 
 pages: Int7'oduction a la Critique Textuelle du N. 
 Test. Partie pratique. Tome cinquihme. Paris, 
 1886. He admits, however, that Catholics may 
 question or reject the disputed verse, and that it is 
 not a part of the Catholic creed, ^'quod semper^ q'liod 
 ubique, quod db omnibus creditum esf'' (Yincentius 
 Lirinensis). All Protestant critics, even Scrivener 
 and Burgon, give it up. The Revised Yersion ig- 
 nores it. 
 
 Prof. J. Rendel Harris, in his monograph, The Origin of the Leicester 
 Codex of the New Test. (London and Cambridge, 1887), devotes a chapter 
 to the Montfort Codex (pp. 46 sqq.), and assigns to it a Franciscan origin 
 through the common ownership of William Clark and the similarity of 
 the text of the Apocalypse. He thinks that Roy, who was a friar of the 
 Franciscan convent of Greenwich, but joined Tyndale at Hamburg, and 
 suffered martyrdom in Portugal in 1531, apparently on the charge of 
 heresy, wrote the Codex Montfortianus, including the forgery in 1 John 
 V. 7, in opposition tp E;rfi§«ius. 
 
PUBLISHED UNCIAL MANUSCEIPTS. 
 
 139 
 
 LIST OF PUBLISHED UNCIAL MANUSCRIPTS. 
 
 By Professor Isaac H. Hall, Ph.D. 
 
 [Note. — This list is intended to include only those publications which give ac- 
 curately the whole contents of Uncial Manuscripts of the N. T., whether in fac 
 simile or not ; together with certain editions of the N. T. based on a single MS. 
 and containing it completely in text and notes. 
 
 The SMALL CAPITALS added to the large one which designates the MS. denote, 
 respectively : A, Acts , P, Paul's Epistles ; R, Revelation. Where no small capi- 
 tal is attached, the MS. contains the Gospels, or a part thereof, and sometimes 
 much more. L contains palimpsest fragments of seven different MSS. Capitals 
 with small superior letters designate small fragments.— P. S.] 
 
 Date of MS. Name of MS 
 
 Cent. IV. K. SiNAiTicus. 
 
 Date of Publication, and Editor. 
 
 1862. Tischendorf, St. Petersburg, 
 
 fol. {Facsimile type.) 
 
 1863. Tischendorf, Leipzig, 4to. 
 1865 (1864). Tischendorf, Leipzig, 
 
 8vo ; Addenda, etc., 1869. 
 B.VATiCANUs(n. 1209). 1857. Mai, Rome, 4to. Reprinted 
 
 (1859) in Leipzig (London, 
 New York) in 8vo, and 
 1860. Kuenen & Cobet (with cor- 
 rections), Leyden, small 8vo. 
 
 1859. Vercellone, Rome, 8vo. 
 1867. Tischendorf, Leipzig, 4to. 
 
 Appendix, 1869. 
 
 1868-1881. Vercellone & Cozza 
 (and Sergio), Rome, fol. 
 Quasi facsimile type.) 
 
 1786. Woide, London, fol. (Fac- 
 simile type.) 
 
 1860. Cowper, London, 8vo. 
 1879. Brit. Mus.jLond. (Autotype.) 
 1843. Tischendorf, Leipzig, 4to. 
 
 Q. GuELPHERBYTANUsB. (1762.) Knittel, Brunswick, 4to. 
 
 1869. Tischendorf (Mon. Sac. Jned. 
 vol. iii.), Leipzig, 4to. 
 T. BoRGiANUS I, 1789. Giorgi, Rome, 4to. 
 
 T'^^l << 1799. Ford (App. Cod. Alex.), Ox. 
 
 ford, fol. 
 
 Cent. V A. Alexandrinus. 
 
 C. Ephraemi. 
 
140 
 
 PUBLISHED UNCIAL MANUSCRIPTS. 
 
 Date of MS. 
 
 Cent. V. 
 
 Cent. VI. 
 
 Name of MS. Date of Publication, and Editor. 
 
 I. TiscHENDORFiANTis II. 1855. Tischondorf {Mon. Sac. Ined. 
 
 vol. i.), Leipzig, 4to. 
 
 P. MusEi Britannici. 1857. Tischendorf {Mon. Sac. Ined. 
 
 vol. ii.), Leipzig, 4to. 
 
 D. Bezje. 1793. Kipling,,Cambridge, f ol. {Fac- 
 
 simile type.) 
 1864. Scrivener, Cambridge, 4to. 
 
 P.GuELPHERBYTANUS A.(1762.) Knittel, Brunswick, 4to. 
 
 1869. Tischendorf (3fow. Sac. Ined. 
 
 vol. vi.), Leipzig, 4to. 
 R. NiTRiENsis. 1857. Tischendorf {Mon. Sac. Ined. 
 
 vol. ii.), Leipzig, 4to. 
 Z. Ddblinensis. 1801. Barrett, Dublin, 4to. (Sup- 
 
 plement, Tregelles, London, 
 
 1863, 4to.) 
 1880. Abbott, Dublin, 4to. 
 I. TiscHENDORFiANUS II. 1855. Tischcndorf ( J/ow. Sac. Ined. 
 
 vol. i.), Leipzig, 4to. 
 N. PuRPUREUS. (Portions scattered.) 1846. Tischendorf 
 
 {Mon. Sac. Ined.), Leipzig, 
 
 4to. 
 1876. Archives des Missions Scien- 
 
 tif. etc., Paris. (Patmos 
 
 Fragments.) 
 G*. TISCHENDORFIANUS I. 1846. Tischendorf {Mon. Sac. 
 
 Ined.), Leipzig, 4to. 
 1857. Tischendorf {Mon. Sac. Ined 
 
 vol. ii.), Leipzig, 4to. 
 1715. Hearne, Oxford, 8vo. 
 
 1870. Tischendorf {Mon. Sac. Ined. 
 vol. ix.), Leipzig, 4to. 
 
 1852. Tischendorf, Leipzig, 4to. 
 1715. Montfaucon ( Biblioiheca 
 
 Coislin.), Paris, fol. 
 1863. Sabas {Specimina PalcBogr.), 
 Moscow, 4to. 
 e. 1876. Archives des Missions Scien- 
 tif. et Litter., Paris, 
 S. RosSANENSis. 1883. Gebhardt. Leipzig. 
 
 <I>. Beratinus, 1886. Batiffol, Paris. 
 
 E^. Laudianus, 35. 
 
 D^ . Claromontanus. 
 HP . Coislinianus. «, 
 
 (a,6,c,rf,e,/,are 
 scattered portions.) 
 
PUBLISHED UNCIAL MANUSCKIPTS. 
 
 141 
 
 Date of MS. Name of MS. Date of Publication, and Editor. 
 
 Cent. VII. F». Coislinianus I. 1846. Tischendorf{Mon.Sac.Ined.), 
 
 Leipzig, 4to. 
 L. Regius. 1846. Tischendorf (J/b?i./Sac./w6c?.), 
 
 Leipzig, 4to. 
 I. TiscHENDORFiANUS II. 1855. Tischendorf (Mon. Sac.Ined. 
 
 vol. i.), Leipzig, 4to. 
 R^ . Cryptoferratensis. (1867.) Cozza {Sacror. Bibl. Vetust. 
 
 Frag.^ pars 2), Rome. 
 CentVIIL S. Zactnthius. 1861. Tregelles, London, sm. fol. 
 
 F. Rheno-Trajectinus (Boreeli). 1843. Vinke, Utrecht, 4to. 
 Y. Barberini. 1846. Tischendorf (Jfow.^S'ac./nerf.), 
 
 Leipzig, 4to. 
 W«. Regius, 314. 1846. Tischendorf(J!fow.>Sac./we<7.), 
 
 Leipzig, 4to. 
 W. Sangallensis 18 etl860. Tischendorf (Jfon. Sac. Ined. 
 
 45. 
 G^. Vaticanus, 9671. 
 
 RR. Vaticanus, 2066. 
 
 vol. iii.), Leipzig, 4to. 
 1877. Cozza {Sacror. Bibl. Vetust. 
 
 Frag, pars 3), Rome, 8vo. 
 1 846. Tischendorf {Mon. Sac.Ined.), 
 
 Leipzig, 4to. 
 1869. Tischendorf (^j»jo. Cod Fa^.), 
 
 Leipzig, 4to. 
 Cent. IX. A. Sangallensis. 1836. Rettig, Zurich. {Facsimile.) 
 
 0. MosQUENSis, 120. 1785. Matthaei {Fpp. Pauli ad 
 
 Thess.y etc., and facsimile 
 
 in Joannis Apoc. etc. ), 
 
 Ri^a, 8vo. 
 1861. Tregelles {App. to Cod. Za- 
 
 cynth.\ London, 4 to. 
 W^. (Trinity Coll., Cambridge.) ? Photographs by Brad- 
 
 shaw. 
 1791. Matthaei, Meissen, 4to. 
 1859. Scrivener, Cambridge, 4to. 
 1865-69. Tischendorf {Mon. Sac. 
 
 Ined. vols. v. & vi.), Leipzig, 
 
 4to. 
 1800. Ilenke, Progr. Helmstadt, 
 
 4 to. 
 1855. (ed. alt. 1861). Tischendorf 
 
 {Anecd. Sac, et Fro/.), Leip- 
 zig, 4to, 
 
 G^. BOERNERIANUS. 
 F^ . AUGIENSIS. 
 pAPR PoRFIRIANUS. 
 
 M^. Ruber. 
 
CHAPTER THIRD. 
 
 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 
 VALUE OF VEESI0N8. 
 
 Next to the study of the MSS., the most impor- 
 tant aids in textual criticism are the ancient versions, 
 or translations of the New Testament from the 
 Greek into vernacular languages. They are, how- 
 ever, only indirect sources, as we must translate 
 them back into the original, except in omissions and 
 additions, which are apparent at once. If, for in- 
 stance, the Latin versions in Luke ii. 14 read Jwmini- 
 hus honcB voluntatis, it is evident that the translators 
 found in their Greek copy the genitive ev^oKtag,'dr\d 
 not the nominative evdoKia (voluntas). The transla- 
 tion unigenitus Filius, in John i. 18, supports vloq 
 instead of ^-foc {Deus). The translation hdbeamus 
 jpacem, in Rom. v. 1, presupposes the reading of the 
 subjunctive iyj.o}xw (J^et us have), and not the indica- 
 tive ix^t^^^ {habemus, we have). 
 
 In point of age, some versions, being made in the 
 second century, antedate our oldest Greek MSS., 
 which are not earlier than the fourth. But they 
 have undergone similar textual corruptions, and no 
 MS. copy of a version is earlier than the fourth cen- 
 tury. Yet in general they represent the Greek text 
 from which they were made. Some of them are as 
 yet imperfectly edited. Even a satisfactory critical 
 
THE AKCIENT VERSIONS. 143 
 
 edition of the Vulgate is still a desideratum. But, 
 notwithstanding these drawbacks, the ancient ver- 
 sions are more important to the textual critic than 
 to the exegete. As Dr. Westcott says, " While the 
 interpreter of the l^ew Testament will be fully 
 justified in setting aside without scruple the author- 
 ity of early versions, there are sometimes ambiguous 
 passages in which a version may preserve the tradi- 
 tional sense (John i. 3, 9 ; viii. 25, etc.), or indicate 
 an early difference of translation ; and then its evi- 
 dence may be of the highest value. But even here 
 the judgment must be free. Versions supply au- 
 thority for the text, and opinion only for the ren- 
 dering." ^ It matters comparatively little whether 
 they be elegant or wretched, so long as they reflect 
 with accuracy the original text. One service of 
 great importance they can be manifestly depended 
 upon to render — to tell where insertions or omis- 
 sions occur in the original text before the translator. 
 It is therefore very weighty evidence against the 
 genuineness of any particular passage that it is not 
 found in the most ancient versions, representing as 
 they do the text current in widely separated regions 
 of the Christian world. 
 
 The most important of these versions are the 
 Latin, the Syriac, the Egyptian, the ^thiopic, the 
 Gothic, and the Armenian. 
 
 The Vulgate was the first version made use of as 
 a collateral witness in the printed editions of Eras- 
 mus and the scholars of Complutum. 
 
 * Smith's Diet, of the Bible, Amer. ed., vol. iv. p. 3479, art. " Vulgate," 
 
144 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 
 
 LATIN VERSIONS. 
 
 1. The Old Latin (Itala). This version is not 
 found complete ; but from the quotations of the 
 Latin fathers, especially those in Tertullian, Cyprian, 
 Lucifer of Cagliari, Hilary of Poitiers, Hilary the 
 deacon or Ambrosiaster, Ambrose, Yictorinus, Je- 
 rome, Rufinus, Augustin, Pelagius, and in the 
 Apocalypse of Primasius, its text can be in large 
 measure restored. See Hermann Ronsch, Das N. T. 
 Tertullian^ s^ aus den Schriften des letzteren moglichst 
 vollstdndig reconst/ruirt, Leipsic, 1871 (731 pages). 
 
 The version is nearest in age to the earliest form 
 of the Peshito, and may be assigned to the middle 
 or latter half of tlie second century. It was not the 
 work of one man, nor suffered to go uncorrected by 
 many. Hence the different accounts of it by differ- 
 ent scholars ; some holding that there were many 
 versions before Jerome, in proof of which statement 
 they quote Augustin, De Doctr. Christ ii. 11 ; oth- 
 ers holding that there was only one version, and 
 citing in proof Jerome. But by the simple and 
 natural explanation that there were many revisions 
 of the one old translation, Augustin and Jerome can 
 be reconciled. 
 
 The version is made from the Septuagint in the 
 Old Testament ; is verbal, rough, and clumsy ; the 
 language is the degenerate Latin of the second cen- 
 tury, with admixture of colloquial and provincial 
 forms. In the New Testament it underwent many 
 changes in different provinces i partly made to im- 
 prove the style, partly to bring it into conformity 
 
TITE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 145 
 
 with Greek manuscripts. The great want of uni- 
 formity in the copies current in the latter part of 
 the fourth century led to the revision undertaken 
 hy Jerome, which now bears the name of the Latin 
 Vulgate. 
 
 The balance of probability is in favor of I^orth 
 Africa as the place of its origin, because there, 
 rather than in Italy, there was an immediate demand 
 for a Latin translation ; while in the Eoman Church 
 the Greek language prevailed during the first and 
 second centuries. Hence the name " Italic " or 
 " Yetus Itala " is incorrect. Augustin {De Doctr. 
 Christ, ii. 15) speaks of a translation which he calls 
 the Itala^ and which he preferred to all the others. 
 This was manifestly a recension of the same Old 
 Latin version, made or used in Italy. 
 
 The Old Latin version never attained to much 
 authority ; the Greek being regarded as the authen- 
 tic text, even in the early Latin Church. At the 
 same time, the version is one of the most significant 
 monuments of Christian antiquity, the medium of 
 divine truth unto the Latin peoples for centuries, 
 and of great value to the Bible critic by reason of 
 its antiquity and literalness. The Apocryphal books 
 of Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Ba- 
 ruch. Prayer of Manasseh, and 4 Ezra (2 Esdras) 
 were, in a substantially unchanged form, embodied 
 in the Vulgate. In the Old Testament the Psalms 
 were similarly transferred. Jerome's translation of 
 the Psalms from the original Hebrew could not 
 force its way. 
 
 There is still lacking a really trustworthy edition 
 
146 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 
 
 of the existing portions of the Old Latin version. 
 For the New Testament there exist, however, more 
 than twenty very ancient but fragmentary MSS. of 
 the Gospels, and some (imperfect) of the Acts and 
 the Pauline Epistles ; while there is only one com- 
 plete MS. yet known of the Apocalypse, and of the 
 Catholic Epistles but few fragments remain. The 
 codices of this version are cited by small Latin let- 
 ters, but Dr. Westcott, art. " Vulgate " in Smith's Diet 
 of the Bible (iv. 3455 sqq., Amer. ed.), often differs 
 widely in his use of these letters from Tischendorf, 
 whom we follow. The principal MSS. of the Gos- 
 pels generally regarded as representing the African 
 text are — 
 
 Codex Vercellensis (a), supposed to have been written by Eusebius, 
 Bishop of Vercelli, cir. A.D. 365. 
 
 Codex Veronensis (b), of the fourth or fifth century. 
 
 Codex CoLBERTiNus (c), at Paris, of the eleventh century, the only 
 complete MS. 
 
 Codex Brixianus (f ), at Brescia, of the sixth century, represents a later 
 revision, probably Augustine's Itala. 
 
 Codex BoBBiENSis (k), now in Turin, of the fourth or fifth century, 
 collated by Tischendorf, has a remarkable and valuable text; and the 
 same is true of Codex Palatinus (e), at Vienna, fifth century. 
 
 The last two MSS. agree in a striking manner with 
 the quotations of Cyprian, and Dr. Hort therefore 
 regards them as the best representatives of the 
 African text ; the type of text found in a b c he 
 would designate as European, while f and q are 
 classed as Italian. 
 
 The most complete edition of the Old Latin ver- 
 sion is Peter Sabatier's Bihliorum Sacrorum Latinm 
 Versiones Antiquw, seu Vetus Italica et coeteroe qum- 
 cunque in Oodd. MS/S. et Antiquorum Libris reperiri 
 
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 147 
 
 fotuerunt (Kemis, i. e. Rheims, 1743-49, 3 torn. fol. ; 
 new title-page, Paris, 1751). But many parts of 
 each Testament have been carefully collated or 
 edited subsequently. Worthy of special mention, 
 for the Gospels, are Bianchini's Evangeliarium 
 Quadrujple'X Latinoe Versionis Antiquce, seu Veteris 
 Italicce^ editum ex Codicihus Manuscriptis, Romse, 
 1749, 2 torn. fol. ; Scrivener's Codex Bezm, Cam- 
 bridge, 1864; Tischendorf's Evangelium Palatinum^ 
 Lips. 1847 ; and Haase's Codex Rehdigeranus^ Bres- 
 lau, 1865-66. For the Acts, see Scrivener's Codex 
 BezcB^ and Belsheim's Die Apostelgeschichte und die 
 Offeribarung Johannis in einer alien lat. Uebersetzung 
 aus dem Gigas Lihrorum^ Christiania, 1879. For the 
 Pauline Epistles, Tischendorf's Codex Claromonta- 
 nus, 1852 ; Matthsei's Codex Bmrnerianus, Misenge, 
 1791; and Scrivener's Codex Augiensis, CsLxnhridge, 
 1859. For the Catholic and Pauline Epistles (mere- 
 ly fragments), see Ziegler's Italqfragmente, Marburg, 
 1876. For the Apocalypse, see Belsheim, as above. 
 Belsheim's Codex Aureus of the Gospels ( Chris- 
 tiania, 1878) is rather a MS. of the Vulgate than of 
 the Old Latin, though the text is mixed, as it is in 
 not a few other MSS. The Grseco- Latin MSS. 
 ][)evvact Dpaui j^act Qpaui ^paui (mostly Yulgate), have 
 no independent authority except where the Latin 
 differs from the Greek. Bishop John Wordsworth's 
 /Series of Latin Biblical Texts was begun, Oxford, 
 1883, with The St. Germain St. Matthew. 
 
 The Codex Lugdunensis^ published by Ulysse 
 Robert, Paris, 1881, contains a version apparently 
 of African origin (comp. Penan, Marc Aurlle^ p. 456, 
 note 2). This, however, is a MS. of the Pentateuch. 
 
148 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 
 
 On the whole subject, consult Ilennaun Tvonscli, 
 Itala und Vulgata. Das Sprachidiom der urchrist- 
 lichen Itala und der katholischen Vulgata, 2d ed., 
 revised, Marburg, 1875 ; L. Ziegler, Die latein. Bi- 
 helubersetzungen vor Hieronyr)ius und die Itala des 
 Augustinus, Miinchen, 1879 (he maintains the exist- 
 ence of several Latin versions or revisions before 
 Jerome) ; O. F. Fritzsche, Latein. Bihelubersetzun 
 gen, in tlie new ed. of Herzog, vol. viii. 1881, pp. 433- 
 472; Westcott's art. " Yulgate," in Smith's Diet, of 
 the Bible ; and Westcott and Hort's Greeh Testa- 
 ment, vol. ii., Tntrod., pp. 78-84. There is a good con- 
 densed account, revised by Dr. Abbot, in Mitchell's 
 Critical Handbook (1880), p. 133 sq. 
 
 2. The Latin Yulgate. In the course of time 
 the text of the Old Latin became so corrupt that a 
 thorough revision was imperative, and was intrusted 
 by Pope Damasus, in 383, to Jerome (d. 419), the 
 most learned scholar of his day, and of all the Latin 
 fathers best qualified, by genius, taste, and knowl- 
 edge of Hebrew and Greek, for this difficult task. 
 He began upon the New Testament, and proceeded 
 cautiously, making as few changes as possible, so as 
 not to arouse the opposition of those who, as he 
 says, " thought that ignorance was holiness." But 
 his scholarly instincts, no less than his convictions 
 of duty towards the Divine Word, impelled him to 
 go beyond his instructions, and make a new version 
 of the Old Testament directly from the Hebrew, of 
 which, however, it does not concern us at present 
 to speak. In the New Testament he used " old " 
 Greek MSS., and made no alterations except such 
 as were required by the sense. He removed numer- 
 
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 149 
 
 ous interpolations of parallel passages in the Gos- 
 pels. '' Internal evidence shows that the Latin MSS. 
 which he took as a basis for his corrections contained 
 an already revised text, chiefly, if not wholly, Italian 
 in character " (Hort, ii. 80). 
 
 Jerome's revision and new translation (finished 
 405) encountered much opposition, which greatly 
 irritated his temper and betrayed him into con- 
 temptuous abuse of his opponents, whom he styled 
 " hvpedes asellosP But, by inherent virtues, rather 
 than by external authority, it passed into such cur- 
 rent use that in the eighth century it was the Vul- 
 gate, the common version, in the Western churches. 
 It became much corrupted by frequent copying. 
 Alcuin, at the instance of Charlemagne, revised it 
 circa 802, by the collation of various good MSS., and 
 substantially in this form it passed down to the time 
 of the invention of printing. 
 
 The first book printed was the Yulgate — the so- 
 called Mazarin Bible (Gutenberg and Fust, Mayence, 
 1455). Printing, however, fixed errors and gave 
 them wider currency, and revision was felt once 
 more to be imperative. 
 
 In the Council of Trent (Dec. 13, 1545, to Dec. 4, 
 1563) the matter was introduced Feb. 4, 1546, and 
 the recommendation of revision passed on April 8 ; 
 but it was not until 1590, in the pontificate of Six- 
 tus v., that the revised edition of the Yulgate ap- 
 peared. The scholarly pope took active interest in 
 the work, rejecting or confirming the suggestions of 
 the board of revisers, and corrected the proof-sheets 
 with his own hand. It was prefaced by the famous, 
 
150 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 
 
 and, as the event showed, by no means infallible, 
 constitution JEternus ille (dated March 1, 1589), in 
 which the pope said, " By the fulness of apostolicai 
 power, we decree and declare that this edition of the 
 sacred Latin Yulgate of the Old and New Testa- 
 ments, w^hich has been received as authentic by the 
 Council of Trent, ... be received and held as true, 
 legitimate, authentic, and unquestioned, in all public 
 and private disputation, reading, preaching, and ex- 
 planation." He further forbade any alteration what- 
 ever; ordered this text, and none other, henceforth 
 to be printed ; and hurled anathemas against every 
 one disobeying the constitution. But, alas for the 
 pope! the immaculate edition was full of errors and 
 blunders; and no sooner was he dead (Aug. 27, 
 1590) than the demand for a new edition arose. 
 Bellarmine suggested an ingenious though dishon- 
 orable escape from the awkward predicament in 
 which Sixtus had placed the Church — viz., that a 
 corrected edition should be hastily printed under 
 the name of Sixtus, in which the blame of the errors 
 should be thrown upon the printer! His recom- 
 mendation was adopted, but it was not until 1592, 
 under Clement YIII., that the revised edition ap- 
 peared. The Clementine edition is the standard in 
 the Roman Catholic Church, in which this Latin 
 translation takes precedence of the Hebrew and 
 Greek originals, as the support of doctrine and guide 
 of life. 
 
 The materials for a more critical edition of the 
 Vulgate than the Clementine are very abundant. 
 There are numerous MSS., and much labor has al-. 
 
THE AKCIENT VEESIOKS. 151 
 
 ready been expended upon the work. The most 
 famous of these MSS. are — 
 
 (a) Codex Amiatinus, from the Cistercian Monastery of Monte Amia- 
 tino, in Tuscany, now in the Laurentian Library at Florence; it contains 
 the Old and New Testaments almost complete, dates from c. 700, and is the 
 oldest and best MS.' The New Testament was edited by Tischendorf, 
 Leipsic, 1850, 2d ed. 1854, and by Tregelles (in his edition of the Greek 
 Testament, with the variations of the Clementine text). 
 
 (6) Codex FuLDENSis, in the Abbey of Fulda, Hesse-Cassel ; contains 
 the New Testament; dates from 546. Collated by Lachmann for his 
 large edition of the Greek Testament, and edited by E. Ranke, Marburg 
 and Leipsic, 1868. 
 
 (c) Codex FoROJULiENSis (sixth century), at Friuli; Matthew, Luke, 
 and John published by Bianchini, Evang. Quadruplex, Appendix. Part 
 of the same MS. is at Prague (Pragensis). 
 
 (d) Codex Harleian. 1775 (seventh century), of the Gospels, partially 
 collated by Griesbach, Si/mb. Crit. vol. i. 
 
 (c) Codex ToLETANUS, at Toledo ; written in Gothic letters in the 
 tenth century ; collated by the Sixtine correctors and by Vercellone. It 
 contains both Testaments. Its readings are given by Bianchini, Vindicice 
 Canon. Scripturarum, Rome, 1740. 
 
 The best edition of the variations is that of Carlo 
 Yercellone, Varioe Lectiones Yulg. Lai. Bibliorum 
 Editionis^ Rom. torn. i. 1860; torn. ii. pars 1, 1862; 
 pars 2, 1864. Unfinished. An important work, but 
 without either the authurized or the corrected text. 
 The MSS. of the Vulgate are quoted by abbrevia- 
 tions of their names, as am (Cod. Amiatinus), /t^^c^ 
 ovfn (Fuldensis),yb/', harl^ tol, 
 
 ^ It was formerly dated 541, but was written between 690 and 716. 
 probably by an Italian scribe, in the monastery of Wearmouth, Englanvl. 
 and presented by Abbot Ceolfrid to Pope Gregory II. See the interesting 
 correspondence between John Wordsworth, Sanday, and Hort in the 
 hon^on Academy for Feb., 1887, The Guardian, and the Durham University 
 Journal for March, 1887, and £. Ranke in the Theol. LiteraturzeitUTiff loi 
 June. 1887. 
 
152 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 
 
 SYEIAC VERSIONS/ 
 
 1. The Peshito (or Peshitto, Peshitta, as spelled 
 by many Syriac scholars), the " simple " — so called 
 because of its simple Syriac stylo, or its simple form, 
 in distinction from the Grecized versions replete 
 with asterisks and obeli derived from Origen — in its 
 present shape, dates from the fourth or third cen- 
 tury. It sup|)lied the wants of the Syrian Chris- 
 tians before the unhappy schism in that church 
 (fifth century), and by its use in common has always 
 been a bond of union between the different sects, 
 who still read it in their church services and as a 
 sacred classic, though its language is no longer the 
 vernacular. The Peshito has been justly called 
 " the queen of (ancient) versions," since, while it 
 yields to none in accuracy and faithfulness, it is 
 idiomatic, and as unfettered as an original composi- 
 tion in Syriac. Its genius is strikingly like that of 
 Luther's matchless German ; generally close and 
 literal, but not shrinking from a paraphrase when 
 necessary. It was first used for critical purposes by 
 Beza, but only occasionally and indirectly (through 
 the Latin version of Tremellius), more fully by Wal- 
 ton, Mill, Wetstein, and with great care by Tregel- 
 les. The text connects it in sundry places with D 
 and the Latin versions, though in more with A. Its 
 critical value is very great, but has been somewhat 
 diminished since the discovery of the still older 
 Curetonian Syriac. It had undergone a revision be- 
 
 ^ See especially Tregelles, in Home's Introd. (14th ed. 1877), vol. iv. 
 258-284, and on the Syrian text, Westcott and Hort, ii. 132-146. 
 
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 153 
 
 fore it assumed its present shape, like that of the 
 Old Latin by Jerome. According to the investiga- 
 tions of Westcott and Hort, the revision took place 
 in the fourth century or sooner (between 250 and 
 350), adapting it to the Greek copies current at An- 
 tioch.' 
 
 Notwithstanding its age and value, the Peshito 
 was not known to Europe until 1552; and in 1555, 
 at Vienna, the first edition appeared, at the expense 
 of the emperor, Ferdinand I., edited by Albert Wid- 
 manstadt, the imperial chancellor. This edition is 
 the basis of all its European successors, and is not 
 inferior to any. It contained all that is now known 
 of the Peshito version — that is, all of the New Test, 
 except 2d Peter, 2d and 3d John, Jude, and the 
 Apocalypse. There is testimony, however, to the 
 fact that these books existed in a Syriac translation 
 before the fourth century, and were used by Syrian 
 fathers who quoted the Peshito. The missing epis- 
 tles were supplied in the modern editions from an- 
 other version (otherwise unknown), first brought t© 
 light by Pococke, and published at Leyden in 1630. 
 The Apocalypse, likewise of unknown origin, was 
 first published by De Dieu, at Leyden in 1627, from 
 a late Indian MS. owned by Scaliger. Its text is 
 not of great value. The best European editions of 
 the Peshito, with the additions just specified, are 
 those of Lee, published by the British and Foreign 
 Bible Society, and of Greenfield, published by Bag- 
 
 ' Gr. Test., p. 552 ; comp. Introd. p. 135 sqq. Dr. Hort's view has been 
 independently confirmed by Dr. SchUrer in the "Theol. Literaturzeitung " 
 for 1881, No. 25, p. 594. 
 12 
 
154: THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 
 
 ster, in the Polyglot and separately. Eather better 
 than either are the American editions, one edited 
 by Dr. Justin Perkins at Urmi, or Ooroomeyah, in 
 Persia, 1841, and its reprint in New York in 1874, 
 both in Nestorian type, and both by the American 
 Bible Society. Dr. Murdock has published a " Lit- 
 eral Translation from the Syriac Peshito Version " 
 (N^ew York, 1851). A translation of the Acts and 
 Epistles from the Peshito, by J. W. Etheridge, ap- 
 peared in London, 1849. Better than either is the 
 familiar Latin translation by Tremellius. In Schaaf 
 and Leusden's edition, Leyden, 1708 (also with title- 
 jpages dated 1709, 1717, but no other change), the 
 {Syriac text is accompanied with a close Latin ver- 
 sion, and an appendix of various readings. Schaafs 
 Lexicon Syriacum Concordantiale^ published as a 
 companion volume, is an invaluable help to the stu- 
 dent. 
 
 2. The Philoxenian or Haeclean version, so 
 called from its patron Philoxenus, Monophysite 
 bishop of Mabug ( Hierapolis ), in Eastern Syria 
 (488-518), and from Thomas of Harkel, a subsequent 
 reviser, who was probably likewise a Monophysite 
 bishop of Mabugo Scrivener calls it " the most 
 servile version of Scripture ever made." It may be 
 compared in this respect to the literal English ver- 
 sion of Eobert Young. It is based upon the Peshi- 
 to, and forces it into rigorous conformity with the 
 letter of the Greek, even to the linguistic phenome- 
 na. It dates from A.D. 508, and was revised by 
 Thomas of Harkel, or Heraclea, A.D. 616, who com- 
 pared it with several ancient Greek MSS. belonging 
 
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 155 
 
 to a library at Alexandria, the readings of which he 
 often notes in his margin. These are as important 
 as the text itself. It contains the whole ^N'ew 
 Testament, except the Apocalypse, and is therefore 
 more complete than the Peshito. The only edi- 
 tion of the Harclean (improperly called the Philox- 
 enian) is that of Joseph White, printed by the 
 Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1778-1803, 4 vols. 4to. 
 Bernstein has published the Gospel of John (Leips. 
 1853). 
 
 This version was chiefly used by the Jacobites. 
 The unrevised Philoxenian was thought by Adler* 
 to exist in a Florence Codex (in the Medicean 
 Library) of the eighth century ; but this opinion is 
 disputed by Bernstein,'' who thought the claims of 
 the Vatican Codex Angelicus (twelfth to fourteenth 
 century) to be superior. But a Jacobite MS. of the 
 ninth century, originally from Mardin, at present 
 belonging to the Syrian Protestant College at Beirut, 
 brought to light by Prof. Isaac H. Hall in 1876, pos- 
 sesses claims superior to either, and is the nearest 
 representative of the unrevised Philoxenian thus far 
 known, if indeed it is not identical with it. This 
 MS. originally consisted of the Gospels in that ver- 
 sion, with the other books in the Peshito, so far as 
 the latter contained them. At present the MS. con- 
 tains nearly the entire Gospels from Matt. xii. 20 ; 
 and of the rest of the New Test, lacks all of Phile- 
 mon and Hebrews, with large portions of the Pas- 
 
 * A^. T. Versiones SyriaccB, p. 55. 
 
 ' Pas heilige Ev. d. Johannes^ pp. 25-30, 
 
156 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 
 
 toral Epistles, besides a few other lacuncB where a 
 leaf is lost/ 
 
 3. The CuRETONiAN Syriac is a mere fragment of 
 the Gospels (consisting of 82^ leaves), but very old 
 and valuable ; though overestimated by Canon Cure- 
 ton, who thought it " retained, to a great extent, the 
 identical terms and expressions of St. Matthew's 
 Hebrew Gospel." It is regarded by most scholars — 
 as Cureton, Payne Smith, Hermansen, Ewald, Crow- 
 foot, Tregelles, Westcott and Hort — as the oldest 
 form of the Syriac version ; the " Peshito " in its 
 present form holding a relation to it similar to that 
 of the Yulgate to the Old Latin. Dean Alford calls 
 it " perhaps the earliest and most important of all 
 versions." Dr. Scrivener, however, places it decid- 
 edly below the Peshito. It was found by Archdeacon 
 Tattam in 1842, with 550 other MSS., in a convent 
 of the Nitrian Desert (seventy miles northwest of 
 Cairo), and brought to the British Museum; and 
 was published by Cureton in 1858, with a literal 
 English translation. It agrees remarkably with D 
 and the Old Latin, while the Peshito mostly favors 
 A. It contains large portions of Matthew, Luke, 
 and John, and the last four verses of Mark. 
 
 Dr. Brugsch, the celebrated Egyptologist, after- 
 wards discovered three additional leaves in the bind- 
 ing of a MS. of the Peshito which came from the 
 Nitrian convent (1871). The}^ were published by 
 
 ' Professor Hall read a carefully prepared paper on this MS. before the 
 Am. Society of Bibl. Lit. and Exegesis at its meeting in New Haven, 
 June, 188^. It was published in the Journal, vol. ii. 1883. 
 
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 157 
 
 Rodiger in the Monatsbericht of the Berlin Academy 
 of Sciences for July, 1872 ; and also by Prof. Wright, 
 as an appendix to Cureton's volume. The leaves 
 contain Luke xv. 22-xvi. 12; xvii. 1-23 ; John vii. 
 37-viii. 19, not including, however, the disputed 
 passage respecting the woman taken in adultery. 
 
 The Curetonian Syriac, including these new leaves, 
 has been translated into Greek by J.E.Crowfoot in his 
 Fragmenta Evangelica, 2 parts, London, 1870-71[72], 
 and better by Fred. Baethgen in JEvangelienfrag- 
 mente, etc., Leipzig, 1885. 
 
 4. The Jerusalem Syriac. The principal MS. 
 known is an Evangelistary in the Vatican, dated 
 A.D. 1030. This has been published at Yerona 
 (1861-64, 2 vols. 4to) by Count Francesco Miniscalchi 
 Erizzo. Fragments of two other MSS. are in the 
 British Museum, and of two more at St. Petersburg. 
 The text of these has been published by Land, 
 Anecdota Syriaca^ vol. iv. (1875). The version is 
 quite independent of the Peshito, and is referred by 
 Tischendorf to the fifth century. It is in a peculiar 
 dialect, and seems to have been little used. 
 
 OLD EGYPTIAN, OR COPTIC, VERSIONS.^ 
 
 There are three Egyptian translations in three 
 different dialects — the Thebaic or Sahidic, the 
 
 * Copt (comp. Arabic Keh{) is supposed to be of the same origin as the 
 Greek Ai-yvTrT-ot; {Kahi Ptah, " country of Ptah "). Another derivation 
 is from the city Kotttiq or Kotttoq in Upper Egypt, a city of so vast 
 importance as to give its name to most articles of Egyptian commerce, 
 to the Egyptian numeral system, and (as many not unreasonably think) 
 (»ren to AiyvTCTOQ itself. See the authorities collected in Athanasius 
 Kircher's Prodromus Coptus (Romae, 1636), cap. I., De Etymo Coptos, 
 pp. 7-15. The name Copt (KoTTTiTrjg, Latin Coptites) is far older thaji 
 
158 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 
 
 Memphitic or Bahiric, and the Bashmuric. The 
 Thebaic and Memphitic versions are, as Bishop 
 Lightfoot declares/ " entirely independent ;" the 
 former is " rongher, less polished, and less faithful 
 to the original " than the latter. Both contain many 
 Greek words, and are of great textual value, as they 
 independently preserve a very ancient text from 
 different manuscripts, with the adoption of many 
 Greek words. Schwartze and Lightfoot infer from 
 historical notices that the greatest part of the New 
 Testament, if not all, was translated into these 
 Egyptian dialects in the second century. We have 
 no satisfactory edition of either version. 
 
 1. The editio ^princeps of the Memphitic Version 
 for Lower Egypt is that of Wilkins (Oxford, 1716), 
 based upon copious materials, but not carried out 
 with much critical sagacity. Still, nothing better 
 than his work has yet appeared, except an edition 
 of the four Gospels by M. G. Schwartze (Leips. 1846 
 and 1847, 2 vols.), and of the Acts and Epistles by 
 P. Boetticher, alias P. A. de Lagarde, of Gottingen 
 (Halle, 1852). The Apocalypse is omitted (but is 
 contained in Wilkins's ed.). The New Testament 
 in Coptic (Memphitic) and Arabic was published 
 by the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge 
 (1847-52), under the editorial care of " Henry Tat- 
 tam, the presbyter of the Anglican Church for the 
 
 the Arabian dominion of Egypt. It is now applied to the descendants 
 of the ancient Egyptians, mostly Christians, who inherited the old Egyp- 
 tian (demotic) language, together with their religion. 
 
 ^ In the chapter on the Egyptian Versions, which he prepared for Dr. 
 Scrivener's Introduction, pp. 319-357, 2d ed. ; revised in 3d ed. pp. 365-405. 
 
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 159 
 
 Holy Patriarch and the Church of Christ in Egypt." 
 It is beautifully printed, but of no critical value, 
 because no various readings are recorded. The 
 basis of this edition is a copy belonging to the Cop- 
 tic Patriarcli. 
 
 2. The editio princejps of the Thebaic Version 
 for Upper Egypt is that of C. G. Woide, completed 
 by Ford (Oxford, 1799). The version is yet in a 
 very fragmentary condition, and there is need of an 
 edition in which the fragments shall all be collected. 
 The Thebaic Version is less valuable than the Mem- 
 phitic ; its text is less pure, and shows a certain in- 
 fusion of those readings which are called Western, 
 though to nothing like the same extent as the Old 
 Latin and the Old Syriac. 
 
 3. Of the Bashmuric or Elearchian Version 
 ( end of third century ? ) we have a fragment of 
 John's Gospel (iv. 28-53), and some portions of the 
 Pauline Epistles published from MSS. in the Borgian 
 Museum at Rome by Zoega {Catalogus, 1810) and 
 Engelbreth {Fragmenta Basmurico-Coptica Yet et 
 Nov. Test.^ Havniae, 1811). It is a secondary ver- 
 sion made from the Thebaic, but useful in passages 
 where that is defective. 
 
 ^ETHIOPIC VERSION. 
 
 There must have been a call for a translation of 
 the New Testament very shortly after Christianity 
 entered Abyssinia. So, although the tradition which 
 assigns it to Abba Salama (Frumentius), the first 
 bishop, be unreliable, the version probably dates 
 from the fourth century, as Dillmann asserts. This 
 
160 THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 
 
 scholar likewise praises the version for its fidelity 
 and general smoothness. 
 
 The text in Walton's Polyglot is taken from the 
 first edition of this version, printed at Rome, 1548- 
 49. The MS. used for it was defective in the larger 
 part of the Acts, and its gaps were supplied by the 
 Abyssinian editors from the Latin Yulgate or the 
 Greek. Bode's Latin translation (1753) of Walton's 
 text is the only accurate one. The New Testament 
 has been better edited by Thomas Pell Piatt for the 
 British and Foreign Bible Society (1826-30); but 
 a really critical edition is still a desideratum. There 
 are considerable differences in the ^thiopic MSS., 
 but they are all comparatively modern. Gilde- 
 raeister, Professor in Marburg, collated some por- 
 tions of the ^thiopic New Testament for Tischen- 
 dorf's edition of 1859. 
 
 GOTHIC VERSION. 
 
 It is the work of Ulphilas, Yulfila, or Wulfila 
 (311-381, or 313-383),' the apostle of Christianity 
 to the Goths, who in the fourth century translated 
 the Old Testament from the Septuagint and the 
 New Testament from the Greek into Gothic, and 
 founded the Gothic alphabet (resembling partly the 
 Greek, partly the Runic letters). It is uncertain 
 whether he translated the whole Bible or only por- 
 tions ; the ancient report that he omitted the books 
 of Kings, because they would excite the warlike 
 
 1 The true spelling is Wulfila, i. e. Wolflein, Little Wolf. The date 
 318-388 is exploded; but it is not certain whether we should adopt 
 311-381 (Stamm, Bernhardt) or 313-383 (KraflFt in Herzog, Davidson). 
 
THE AKCIENT VERSIONS. 161 
 
 passions of the Goths, sounds like a myth. Bishop 
 Wulfila was a semi-Arian, and all the Germanic 
 tribes, except the Franks, received Christianity first 
 in that form during the Arian ascendency in the 
 East. His Bible accompanied the Goths on their 
 migrations from the lower Danube to the West. 
 The Gothic language and people have perished, but 
 this version has been fortunately recovered in mod- 
 ern times. It is the earliest specimen of Teutonic 
 literature, and the starting-point of comparative 
 Teutonic philology, for which it is even more im- 
 portant than for biblical learning. Comp. J. Esberg : 
 Ulfilas^ Gothorum Episcopus ( Holm. 1700 ) ; G. 
 Waitz : Ueber das Lehen und die Lehre des TJlfila, 
 Bruchstiicke aus dem vierten Jahrh. (Hann. 1840) ; 
 W. L. Krafft : De Fontibus UlfilcB Ariaiiismi (Bonn, 
 1860) ; W. Bessell : Das Lehen des TJlfilas und die 
 BekeJiTung der Gothen zum C/iristeiithum {GottiugeHf 
 1860) ; Minh. Review for October, 1877. 
 
 There are seven famous codices of this version : 
 {a) Codex Argenteus, beautifully written on pur- 
 ple vellum in gold and silver letters, containing 
 fragments of the Gospels ; it dates from the earlier 
 part of the sixth century, w^as discovered in the 
 library of the Benedictine abbey of Werden, on 
 the Euhr, in 1597, and, after changing hands, trans- 
 ferred in 1648 from Prague to thelJniversity Library 
 at Upsala in Sweden. 
 
 (b) Codex Carolinus, in the library at Wolf en- 
 biittel, discovered by Knittel in a palimpsest, 1756, 
 published 1762 and 1763; contains forty verses of 
 the Epistle to the Bomans. 
 
 or THl 
 
 UNIYERSJTY 
 
162 THE ANCIEKT VERSIONS. 
 
 (c) Palimpsest fragments of five codices in the 
 Ambrosian Library at Milan, discovered and pub- 
 lished by Angelo Mai and Castiglione, Milan, 1819- 
 39 ; portions of Esther, Nehemiah, the Gospels, and 
 Paul's Epistles. 
 
 The best editions of all these fragments are by 
 H. C. von der Gabelentz and J. Loebe : Ulfilas, Yet, 
 et N. Test. Versionis Gothicoe Fragmenta quae sujper- 
 sunt (Leipsic, 1836-46), with a Latin version, and a 
 very copious grammar and lexicon ; and by E. Bern- 
 hardt (Halle, 1875), in which the Gothic is accom- 
 panied by the Greek, with full critical notes. 
 Stamm's Ulfilas, 7th ed. by Moritz Heyne, with 
 grammar and lexicon (Paderborn, 1878), is the most 
 convenient manual edition for the student of the 
 language. Bernhardt's is the best for text-critical 
 purposes. Massmann's edition (1855-1857) deserves 
 honorable mention. 
 
 The Swedish scholar, Andreas TJppstrdm (d. 1865), 
 has published the text of all the Gothic MSS. line 
 for line, with the most painstaking accuracy, cor- 
 recting many errors of his predecessors, in his Codex 
 Argenteus, Upsala, 1854 ; Decern Cod. Argentei re- 
 diviva folia, ibid. 1857 ; Fragmenta Gothica selecta^ 
 1861 ; and Codices Ootid Anibrosiani, Stockholm 
 and Leipsic, 1864-68. Compare also The Gothic and 
 Anglo-Saxon Gospels in Parallel Columns with the 
 Versions of Wycliffe and Tyndale, by Jos. Bos- 
 worth, assisted by George Waring, 2d ed. Lond. 
 1874, with a fac-simile of the Codex Argenteus. 
 
 Dr. R. Miiller and Dr. H. Hoeppe have published 
 the Gothic Gospel of Mark with a grammatical com- 
 
THE ANCIENT VERSIONS. 163 
 
 mentary : TJlfilas : Evangelium Marci grammatisch 
 erldutert^ Berlin, 1881 (pp. 72), unfortunately dis- 
 figured not only by typographical errors, but by 
 gross mistakes in the notes. On the other hand, 
 W. W. Skeat's The Gospel of Saint Mark in Gothic^ 
 with grammar, notes, and glossary (Oxford, 1882), is 
 excellent. 
 
 ARMENIAN VERSION. 
 
 It belongs to the fifth century, and is the work 
 of Miesrob and Moses Chorenensis. It was based 
 on Greek MSS. probably obtained from Cappadocia, 
 the mother of Armenian Christianity. It has con- 
 siderable critical value, though the existing MSS. 
 are not very ancient, and there are wide differences 
 among them ; some modern copies contain corrup- 
 tions from the Latin Yulgate. The version em- 
 braces the entire Bible. The first edition appeared 
 at Amsterdam, 1666, under the care of Bishop Uscan 
 of Erivan ; in this the text has been more or less 
 conformed to the Latin Vulgate. The best edition, 
 founded on manuscripts, is by Zohrab — New Testa- 
 ment, 1789 ; whole Bible, 1805, and again 1816. It 
 is now published by the British and Foreign Bible 
 Society. 
 
 On the Armenian Version, see Tregelles in 
 Smith's Bihle Diet, Am. ed., vol. iv. p. 3374. 
 
 We pass by the Slavonic^ Arabic^ Persic^ and sev- 
 eral other versions, which are of too late a date to 
 be of value for the restoration of the primitive text. 
 Most of them are derived from other versions, chief- 
 ly the Latin and Syriac. The Slavonic bears traces 
 of ancient texts. 
 
CHAPTER FOURTH. 
 
 PATRISTIC QUOTATIONS. 
 VALUE OF THE FATHERS AS WITNESSES OF THE TEXT. 
 
 The third source of textual criticism is furnished 
 bj the quotations in tlie early Christian writers, 
 from which the greater part of the New Testament 
 might be reconstructed. The Greek fathers give 
 direct, the Latin (and Syriac) fatliers indirect, testi- 
 mony to the original text. Tlie former rank with 
 the Greek MS8. ; the latter with the Versions. 
 Some of them — as Irenseus, Origen, Tertullian — are 
 older than our oldest MSS., and therefore of the 
 greatest value. Sometimes their silence furnishes 
 negative evidence of the absence of a passage in 
 their copies. 
 
 But the fathers must be used with great care and 
 discrimination. They were theologians and Chris- 
 tians rather than critics. They often quote very 
 loosely, simply from memory, and more for doctri- 
 nal, polemical, and practical than critical purposes. 
 They had no concordances and other modern con- 
 veniences which facilitate the finding of passages. 
 Their testimony is fragmentary, and fails us where 
 we most wish and need information. Besides, their 
 editors have so frequently thought they were doing 
 a service when they corrected their quotations that 
 
PATRISTIC QUOTATIONS. 165 
 
 it is often diflSciilt to tell just what was the text be- 
 fore them. The chief benefit of patristic quotations 
 consists not so much in their independent value as 
 in their corroborative force, bj establishing a reading 
 which rests on good authority of MSS. or versions. 
 When they are single and uubupported, they deserve 
 little or no credit.* 
 
 Origen, Eusebius, and Chrysostom are the most 
 learned biblical scholars among the earlier Greek 
 fathers, and have more weight than all the rest as 
 witnesses of the text. They note occasionally that 
 " some " or " many " or " the most accurate " " copies " 
 contain or omit a certain reading, or that the true 
 reading has been perverted by heretics or for some 
 special purpose. 
 
 The most valuable works for critical purposes are 
 commentaries and homilies which explain the text 
 consecutively. They are scanty in the ante-Nicene 
 age. The lirst commentator and the father of 
 Christian exegesis is the great Origen, from whom 
 we have expositions of several chapters of Matthew, 
 Luke, and John in the original Greek (partly in a 
 condensed Latin translation), of Romans in the 
 abridged and altered version of E-ufinns, and of 
 many scattered verses of the Epistles. Theodore 
 of Mopsuestia commented on the Mi nor Epistles of 
 Paul (extant only in a Latin translation) ; Chrysos- 
 tom preached Homilies on Matthew, John, Acts, and 
 
 * See the judicious remarks of Tregelles, in Home's Introduction (14th 
 ed. London, 1877), vol. iv. pp. 329-342. Comp. also Reuss, Gesch. der h. 
 Schr. N. T. ii. p. 125 (5th ed.). 
 
l66 PATRISTIC QUOTATIONS. 
 
 all the Epistles of Paul ; Theodoret wrote notes on 
 the Epistles of Paul, based chiefly on Theodore and 
 Chrysostoin ; from Cyril of Alexandria we have 
 Homilies on Luke (partly in Greek, partly in a 
 Syriac translation) and on John. Fragments of 
 other Greek commentators are contained in the 
 CateMoe Patrum, which are chiefly compiled from 
 Chrysostom and Theodoret. 
 
 Of the Latin fathers, Tertullian is the richest 
 source for quotations from the old Latin (African) 
 Version, and Jerome for the whole New Testament 
 as retranslated by him (the Yulgate), besides much 
 valuable information scattered through his exegetical 
 and other writings. Jerome was a born linguist and 
 critic, and thoroughly at home in the Hebrew and 
 Greek Scriptures and in Bible Lands, but somewhat 
 fettered by orthodox and ascetic prejudices. Augu&- 
 tin was a profounder theologian, and had more spir- 
 itual insight into the meaning of the Scriptures than 
 Jerome or any of the fathers ; but he was neither a 
 Greek scholar nor a textual critic, and relied on the 
 old Latin version with all its imperfections and 
 errors. Primasius, an African writer of the sixth 
 century, has preserved to us, in a commentary, al- 
 most the entire text of the Apocalypse in an old 
 African Latin version. " Thus, singularly enough, 
 the Apocalypse possesses the unique advantage of 
 having been preserved in a Latin text at once con- 
 tinuous and purely African." ^ 
 
 The number of ecclesiastical writers that have 
 
 * Hort, ii. 84. 
 
PATRISTIC QUOTATIONS. 167 
 
 been consulted by various critics considerably ex- 
 ceeds one hundred, but, with the exception of those 
 we have mentioned, only a few yield substantial 
 results.* 
 
 A. GREEK FATHERS. 
 
 First Century till the middle of the Second : The 
 apostolic fathers, so called — Clement of Rome, Bar- 
 nabas, Poly carp, Ignatius, Hermas, and Papias. Also 
 the newly discovered " Teaching of the Apostles." 
 
 These writers, as pupils of the apostles, would be 
 the oldest and most important witnesses ; but they 
 still lived in the element of oral tradition within the 
 hearing of the apostles, and hence they quote few 
 passages from the New Testament. The first literal 
 quotation from the New Testament with the solemn 
 formula, " It is written," occurs in the Greek Epistle 
 of Barnabas — namely, the passage in Matt. xxii. 14: 
 " Many are called, but few are chosen." ^ The 
 Didache contains about twenty reminiscences from 
 Matthew." Clement and Polycarp have allusions 
 to Epistles. Papias gives us valuable testimonies 
 of the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, preserved by 
 Eusebius, but no quotations. His work on the Ora- 
 cles of the Lord is lost. 
 
 Second Century : Justin Martyr (d. 167) comes 
 next in the order of time, and makes much use of 
 
 ^ Alford (i. 140-143) gives an alphabetical list of over one hundred and 
 fifty ancient writers. See also the lists in Tischendorf, Scrivener, and 
 Mitchell. Biographical sketches of the chief fathers in the second and 
 third vols, of Schaff 's Church History^ revised ed., N. Y., 1883, '84. 
 
 •^ Ep. Barn. c. 4: Trpoaf^w/xei/ firjiroTej <jjq yeypwTrrai, ttoXXoi 
 kXt] Toi, oXiyoi 8k sKXeKToi evps^wfitv. In ch. 5 Barnabas 
 quotes also from Matt. ix. 13 (but without naming the writer or the book). 
 
 ^ See Schaff: The Oldest Church Manual, etc., 2d ed. 1886, pp. 82 sqq. 
 
168 PATRISTIC QUOTATIONS. 
 
 the four Gospels, particularly of Matthew and Luke, 
 but in a very free and loose way. From John he 
 quotes the passage on regeneration (iii. 5). Irenseus 
 of Lyons (d. 202) is the most important witness of the 
 second century, and his great work against the Gnos- 
 tic heresies is replete with quotations from the New 
 Testament, but exists for the most part only in a 
 Latin version.* 
 
 Third Century : Clemens Alexandrinus (d. 220), 
 and still more Origen (184-254). See p. 165. Next 
 to them Hippolytus (disciple of Irenseus, about 220), 
 Gregory Thaumaturgus (disciple of Origen, 243), Dio- 
 nysius Alexandrinus (265), and Methodius (d. 311). 
 
 In the Fourth and Fifth Centuries: Eusebius 
 the historian (d. 340, much used by Tischendorf and 
 Tregelles), Athanasius (d. 373), Basilius Magnus 
 (d. 379), Gregory Nazianzen (d. 389), Gregory Nys- 
 sen (d. 371), Ephraem Syrus (d. 373), Cyril of Jeru- 
 salem (d. 386), Didymus of Alexandria (d. 395), 
 Chrysostom (d. 407), Epiphanius (d. 403), Theodore 
 of Mopsuestia (d. 428), Cyril of Alexandria (d. 444), 
 and Theodoret (d. 458). 
 
 About the Sixth Century (or perhaps later) we 
 have the commentary of Andreas, bishop of Csesarea 
 in Cappadocia, on the Apocalypse, which he divided 
 into twenty- four chapters and seventy-two sections. 
 
 * He testifies, e. g.^ to the last twelve verses of Mark, and to the exist- 
 ence of two readings of the mystic nunaber in Rev. xiii. 18 : the one is 
 666, which he found in the best copies, and explains to mean Lateinos 
 (while several modern exegetes make it out to mean, in Hebrew letters, 
 Neron Ccesar) ; the other 616, which is the numerical value of Nero 
 (without the final n) Ccesar. 
 
PATRISTIC QUOTATIONS. 169 
 
 With him is closely connected a later bishop of 
 Osesarea, Arethas, who likewise wrote a full com- 
 mentary on the Apocalypse, based in part on the 
 former; but his age is uncertain (probably the tenth 
 century).* 
 
 In the Seventh Century the most important 
 writer is Maximus the Confessor (d. 662). 
 
 In tlie Middle Ages : John of Damascus (about 
 750, see his Parallela Sacra\ and the later com- 
 mentators, CEcumenius (bishop of Tricca in Thessa- 
 ly, end of the tenth century), Theophylact (arch- 
 bishop of Bulgaria, 1071), Euthymius Zygadenus or 
 Zigabenus (d. after 1118). 
 
 B. LATIN fathers. 
 
 Second Century : Tertullian (about 200), impor- 
 tant for the Old Latin Version, though he often 
 translates independently, or quotes loosely. 
 
 Third Century: Cyprian (d. 258), whose numer- 
 ous quotations (in his Testimonia, etc.) are in gen- 
 eral carefully made from the African Old Latin, 
 current in his time, Novatian (fl. 251), Lactantius 
 (306), and the anonymous writer of the treatise De 
 Bebaptismate^ printed with the writings of Cyprian. 
 
 » Rettig {Die Zeugnisse des Andreas und Arethas, in the "Studien und 
 Kritiken" for 1831) assigns him to the close of the fifth or early part of 
 the sixth century. But Dr. Otto (in Corpus Apol. iii. p. xi., and more 
 recently in his Des Patriarchen Gennadios Covfession, nebst einem Excurs 
 iiber Arethas' Zeitalter, Wien, 1864) quotes a MS. which states that it was 
 written by Baanes, vordpioQ of Arethas, archbishop of Caesarea, in the year 
 of the world 6422 (A.D. 914). See the article Arethas in Smith and Wace, 
 Dictionary of Christian Biography, i. 154 sq., and especially Harnack, D\$ 
 Uberlieferung der griech. Af)olo(jtten u.s.w., Leip. 1882, p. 36 sqq, 
 
 13 
 
170 PATRISTIC QUOTATIONS. 
 
 Fourth and Fifth Centuries: Hilary of Poitiers 
 (354), Lucifer of Cagliari (d. cir. 370), Yictoriims 
 Afer (d. cir. 370), Ambrose (d. 379), Ambrosiaster 
 or Pseudo- Ambrose, probably to be identified with 
 Hilary the deacon (about 384), Pelagius (417), 
 Augustin (d. 430), and, most of all, Jerome, the 
 translator of the Latin Bible from the original 
 Hebrew and Greek (d. 419). 
 
 Sixth Century: Primasius, already mentioned as 
 important for the text of the Apocalypse. 
 
 The Medieval commentators of the Latin Church 
 depend almost exclusively on the Latin Vulgate, and 
 have therefore no value for textual criticism. 
 
CHAPTER FIFTH. 
 
 TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 NATURE AND OBJECT OF TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 
 The variety of documentary sources, from which 
 the original text of the New Testament must be 
 derived, calls for a special branch of biblical learn- 
 ing, called Textual or Verbal Criticism. Its ob- 
 ject is to ascertain and restore, as far as possible, the 
 very text of the apostolic writers, and thus to furnish 
 a faithful substitute for the lost autographs. It is 
 distinct from " higher criticism," which deals with 
 questions concerning the origin, authenticity, and 
 theology of these writings, and their organic place 
 in the history of the apostolic age. It does not 
 enter into the province of hermeneutics and inter- 
 pretation, but furnishes a solid basis for the com- 
 mentator. It is confined to the original form and 
 integrity of the text, as far as it can be established 
 by documentary evidence. It aims to show, not 
 what the apostles and evangelists might have writ- 
 ten or ought to have written, but simply what they 
 actually did write. It has nothing to do with secta- 
 rian notions and tenets, or subjective likes and dis- 
 likes, but only with facts. 
 
 Criticism is a dry study, and requires an unusual 
 amount of patience and attention to the minutest 
 details. A good critic must; h^ve fuJJ pominaijd of 
 
172 TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 
 all sources of evidence, an acute mind, and a clear, 
 sound judgment. He must combine microscopic ac- 
 curacy and judicial impartiality. In the nature of 
 the case the number of real critics is very limited. 
 
 The science of textual criticism is of compara- 
 tively recent origin. It was matured with the dis- 
 covery and collection of the material during the 
 eighteenth century, and reached its height within 
 the last fifty years. It has been cultivated mostly 
 by Protestant scholars — Swiss, German, Dutch, and 
 English. It has received a mighty impulse by the 
 recent discovery and publication of the most ancient 
 manuscripts, and by the Anglo-American Kevision 
 of 1881, and is beginning to excite the interest of 
 the Christian laity, who have a right to know the 
 results of learned investigation, especially if they 
 affect the vernacular versions of the Word of God. 
 A few Catholics — like Hug and Seholz, Yercellone 
 and Cozza — have nobly taken part in the work; but, 
 upon the whole, the Roman Church cares more for 
 tradition and the living church than for the Bible, 
 and is satisfied with the Latin Yulgate sanctioned 
 by the Council of Trent. Protestant Bible Societies 
 have been denounced as dangerous and pestiferous 
 by several Popes. 
 
 The importance of this branch of biblical learn- 
 ing can hardly be overestimated ; for a pure text is 
 the basis of exegesis, and exegesis is the basis of 
 dogmatics and ethics. Protestant theology makes 
 the New Testament the supreme and only infallible 
 rule of the Christian faith and practice^ and must 
 stand or faU with, this final test. 
 
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 173 
 
 ORIGIN OF VARIATIONS. 
 
 The necessity of criticism arises, as has just been 
 stated, from the vast number of variations in the 
 documentary sources of the New Testament text. 
 It would have required a perpetual miracle to keep 
 the transcribers from error. No MS., either of the 
 Greek original or of any translation, is faultless any 
 more than any printed book. The errors are even 
 more numerous, since the MSS. had not the benefit 
 of repeated proof-readings; many of them, however, 
 have the marks of one or more correctors of a later 
 date. 
 
 The variations of the Greek text are partly unin- 
 tentional or accidental, partly intentional or designed. 
 Errors of the first class proceed either from misread- 
 ing, or from mishearing (in case of dictation), or 
 from fault of memory. Errors of the second class 
 are due either to misjudgment, or to an innocent 
 desire to correct supposed mistakes, to supply de- 
 fects, to harmonize apparent discrepancies, or to 
 wilful corruption for sectarian or ascetic purposes. 
 Examples of wailful mutilation or corruption of the 
 text are, however, exceedingly rare. Transcribers 
 had too much reverence for the words of Christ 
 and his inspired apostles to be guilty of it, though 
 in making their choice between conflicting readings 
 they would naturally be biassed by their theological 
 opinions. The wide diffusion of MSS. and versions 
 was a safeguard against the reception of corruptions, 
 whether heretical or orthodox. The case of Marcion, 
 who fnutilated the Gospel of Luke to suit it to his 
 
174 TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 
 Gnostic notions, is exceptional, and was generally 
 understood in its true character. The mutual charges 
 of corruption made by the orthodox and heretical 
 parties in times of heated controversy were mostly 
 unfounded.^ 
 
 The variations began very early, with the first 
 copies, and continued to increase till the art of 
 printing superseded the necessity of transcribing, 
 and substituted typographical errors for errors of 
 copyists. Origen (d. 254) complained of the great 
 corruption of the text about the middle of the third 
 century. Jerome, the greatest scholar of the last 
 quarter of the fourth century (d. 419), says that in 
 his days there were nearly as many distinct forms 
 of the text as codices of the Latin Testament {tot 
 poene exem^laria quot codices)^ and that the text of 
 
 ^ Examples of possible changes in the interest of dogma : the omission 
 or insertion of Trpwroro/cog in Matt. i. 25 (the best authorities omit it) ; of 
 ovbt 6 viog, Mark xiii. 32 (which Ambrosius charged the Arians with 
 having inserted, Be Fide, v. 7) ; of the tears of Christ and his drops of 
 blood in Gethsemane, Luke xix. 41; xxii. 43, 44 (comp. Epiphanius, 
 Anco7\ 31); the substitution of "Joseph" for "father" (Trarrip), Luke ii. 
 33. Dr. Abbot writes on this subject (in a private letter) : " The charges 
 against the heretics of wilful corruption of the text (setting aside avowed 
 excision like that of Marcion) rest on no good foundation. In the definite 
 instances alleged by ancient writers (John i. 13; iii. 6; Mark xiii. 32) the 
 * heretical' reading turns out to be the true one. Epiphanius charges the 
 orthodox with omitting Luke xxii. 43, 44, to remove a difficulty. This 
 is the most plausible case of alleged wilful corruption. But Westcott and 
 Hort, with Mr. Norton and Granville Penn (comp. Weiss), regard the 
 passage as a later addition, and I am disposed to agree with them. No 
 case of deliberate, wilful corruption, affecting any considerable number of 
 MSS., on the part either of the heretics or the orthodox, can be anywhere 
 made out. Rash attempts to correct supposed error must not be con- 
 fujinded with wilful corruption." 
 
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 175 
 
 the Gospels especially was in confusion {apud nos 
 mixta sunt omnia). The further up we go, the 
 greater were the freedom and carelessness of the 
 transcribers. Copies were made first for private 
 use; ecclesiastical copies were written with greater 
 care, and tended to settle the text, until it became 
 stationary, or, as it were, stereotyped. The changes 
 date nearly all from the first four centuries, as 
 we may infer from patristic quotations. Varia- 
 tions of later origin are mostly unimportant, and 
 changes in the distribution of existing readings 
 rather than new readings. A text agreeing in 
 great measure with that which Erasmus first print- 
 ed, was already current in Antioch at the close of 
 the fourth century, and is virtually identical with the 
 text used by Chrysostom (d. 407). This Antiochian 
 or Syrian text stands out in opposition to the text 
 of older date. The Gospel and Epistles of John 
 have suffered least, the Acts and the Apocalypse 
 most, from textual corruption. 
 
 Attempts for a restoration of the pure text were 
 made by learned fathers as early as the third cen- 
 tury, especially by Origen, Hesychius (an Egyptian 
 bishop), and Lucian (a presbyter of Antioch) ; but 
 we are not well informed as to the character and 
 result of their labors, which were looked upon with 
 suspicion. Jerome knew beforehand that he would 
 be abused as a,falsarius and saci'ilegus for his im- 
 provement of the Latin text. 
 
 It was natural that the copies prepared in the 
 same city or district — as Antioch, Alexandria, Con- 
 stantinople—should assume ^ local coloring or cer- 
 
176 TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 
 tain textual peculiarities. Hence we are justified 
 in dividing the authorities into different families, 
 and to speak of an Alexandrian or Egyptian, a Con- 
 stantinopolitan or Byzantine (also called Antiochian 
 or Syrian), a Western, and a neutral text (chiefly 
 represented by B and next by 5<, and presumably the 
 oldest extant). Bengel first suggested the division 
 into families or recensions ; Griesbach carried it fur- 
 ther, and with some excesses which created a reac- 
 tion in Germany against it ; Westcott and Hort 
 modified and completed it. This classification is 
 an essential prerequisite for a just estimate of the 
 value of documents according to their representative 
 weight rather than their number. 
 
 NUMBER OF VARIATIONS. 
 
 The variations were gradually found out as the 
 collection and examination of the sources progressed. 
 The first editors had no idea of the number, but it 
 accumulated with every standard edition. Dr. John 
 Mill, in 1707, roughly estimated the number at 
 30,000. Since that time it has risen to "at least 
 fourfold that quantity," as Dr. Scrivener wrote in 
 1874, and now cannot fall much short of 150,000, if 
 we include the variations in the order of words, the 
 mode of spelling, and other trifles which are ignored 
 even in the most extensive critical editions. 
 
 This number far exceeds that of any ancient 
 book, for the simple reason that the New Testa- 
 ment was far more frequently copied, translated, 
 and quoted than the most celebrated works of Greek 
 and Roman genius. While we have but a few copies 
 
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 177 
 
 of the Greek and Koman classics, on which we must 
 relj for the text, we have hundreds of copies of the 
 Greek Testament, and these are only a remnant of 
 many thousand copies which were destroyed during 
 the early persecutions (especially that of Diocletian), 
 or perished by use or neglect. Moreover, our old- 
 est copies of the Greek Testament are by several 
 hundred years nearer the original autographs than 
 the oldest copies of the Greek classics are to their 
 originals. 
 
 VALUE OF VARIATIONS. 
 
 This multitude of various readings of the Greek 
 text need not puzzle or alarm any Christian. It is 
 the natural result of the great wealth of our docu- 
 mentary resources; it is a testimony to the immense 
 importance of the New Testament ; it does not af- 
 fect, but it rather insures, the integrity of the text ; 
 and it is a useful stimulus to study. 
 
 Only about 400 of the 100,000 or 150,000 varia- 
 tions materially affect the sense. Of these, again, 
 not more than about fifty are really important for 
 some reason or other; and even of these fifty not 
 one affects an article of faith or a precept of duty 
 svhich is not abundantly sustained by other and un- 
 doubted passages, or by the w^hole tenor of Scripture 
 teaching. The Textus Heceptus of Stephens, Beza, 
 and Elzevir, and of our English Version, teach pre- 
 cisely the same Christianity as the uncial text of 
 the Sinaitic and Vatican MSS., the oldest versions, 
 and the Anglo-American Revision. 
 
 Richard Bentley, the ablest and boldest of classi- 
 
178 TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 
 cal critics of England, affirms that even the worst of 
 MSS. does not pervert or set aside " one article of 
 faith or moral precept." 
 
 Dr. Ezra Abbot, who ranks among the first textual 
 critics, and is not hampered by orthodox bias (being 
 a Unitarian), asserts that " no Christian doctrine or 
 duty rests on those portions of the text which are 
 affected by differences in the manuscripts ; still less 
 is anything essential in Christianity touched by the 
 various readings. They do, to be sure, affect the 
 bearing of a few passages on the doctrine of the 
 Trinity ; but the truth or falsity of the doctrine by 
 no means depends upon the reading of those pas- 
 sages." ^ The same scholar speaks on the subject 
 more fully with special reference to the English 
 Revision : " This host of various readings may startle 
 one who is not acquainted with the subject, and he 
 may imagine that the whole text of the New Testa- 
 ment is thus rendered uncertain. But a careful 
 analysis will show that nineteen twentieths of these 
 are of no more consequence than the palpable errata 
 in the first proof of a modern printer ; they have so 
 little authority, or are so manifestly false, that they 
 may be at once dismissed from consideration. Of 
 those which remain, probably nine tenths are of no 
 importance as regards the sense ; the differences 
 either cannot be represented in a translation, or af- 
 fect the form of expression merely, not the essential 
 meaning of the sentence. Though the corrections 
 made by the revisers in the Greek text of the New 
 
 * Anglo-American Bible Revision^ p. 92. 
 
tiJXTtlAL CRIltCISM. 179 
 
 Testament followed by our translators probably ex* 
 ceed two thousand, hardly one tenth of them, per- 
 haps not one twentieth, will be noticed by the ordinary 
 reader. Of the small residue, many are indeed of 
 sufficient interest and importance to constitute one 
 of the strongest reasons for making a new revision, 
 which should no longer suffer the known errors of 
 copyists to take the place of the words of the evan- 
 gelists and apostles. But the chief value of the 
 work accomplished by the self-denying scholars who 
 have spent so much time and labor in the search for 
 manuscripts, and in their collation or publication, 
 does not consist, after all, in the corrections of the 
 text which have resulted from their researches. 
 These corrections may affect a few of the passages 
 which have been relied on for the support of certain 
 doctrines, but not to such an extent as essentially to 
 alter the state of the argument. Still less is any 
 question of Christian duty touched by the multitude 
 of various readings. The greatest service which the 
 scholars who have devoted themselves to critical 
 studies and the collection of critical materials have 
 rendered has been the establishment of the fact that, 
 on the whole, the New Testament writings have 
 come down to us in a text remarkably free from 
 important corruptions, even in the late and inferior 
 manuscripts on which the so-called 'received text' 
 was founded ; while the helps which we now possess 
 for restoring it to its primitive purity far exceed 
 those which we enjoy in the case of any eminent 
 classical author whose works have come down to us. 
 The multitude of ' various readings,' which to the 
 
180 TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 
 thoughtless or ignorant seems so alarming, is sim pi j? 
 the result of the extraordinary richness and variety 
 of our critical resources." ^ 
 
 Moreover, the large number of various readings 
 is a positive advantage in ascertaining the true text. 
 The word of the wise man may be applied here: 
 ''In the multitude of counsellors there is safety" 
 (Prov. xi. 14). The original reading is sure to be 
 preserved in one or more of these sources. Hence 
 we need not, as in the case of the ancient classics, 
 resort to subjective conjectural criticism, which never 
 leads to absolute certainty. 
 
 The very multitude of readings is the best guar- 
 antee of the essential integrity of the New Testa- 
 ment. 
 
 This fact was long ago clearly stated by Richard 
 Bentley, when the resources of the text were not 
 nearly so abundant as now. Fertile and ingenious 
 as he was in his conjectural emendations of classical 
 authors, he yet declares, in his Prospectus for a new 
 edition of the Greek Testament (1720), that " in the 
 sacred writings there is no place for conjectures and 
 emendations. Diligence and fidelity, with some 
 judgment and experience, are the characters here 
 requisite." And in another place : ^ "If there had 
 been but one MS. of the Greek Testament at the 
 restoration of learning, about two centuries ago, then 
 
 * See "Sunday-school Times," Philadelphia, May 28, 1881. 
 
 ^ In his reply, under the pseudonym of Phileleutherus Lipsiensis, to the 
 deist Anthony CJoUins, who, in his Discourse of Free - thinking (1713), 
 represented the 30,000 variatiotis of Mill as fafcal to the authority of the 
 New Testament. 
 
TEXTUAL CRlTICtSir. 18l 
 
 we had had no various readings at all. And would 
 the text be in a better condition then than now we 
 have 30,000? So far from that, that in the best 
 single copy extant we should have some hundreds 
 of faults and some omissions irreparable. Besides 
 that, the suspicions of fraud and foul play would 
 have been increased immensely. It is good, there- 
 fore, to have more anchors than one. ... It is a 
 good providence and a great blessing that so many 
 manuscripts of the New Testament are still amongst 
 us; some procured from Egypt, others from Asia, 
 others found in the Western churches. For the 
 very distances of places, as well as numbers of the 
 books, demonstrate that there could be no collusion, 
 no altering, nor interpolating one copy by another, 
 nor all by any of them. In profane authors whereof 
 one manuscript only had the luck to be preserved, 
 as Yelleius Paterculus among the Latins, and Hesy- 
 chius among the Greeks, the faults of the scribes 
 are found so numerous, and the defects so beyond 
 all redress, that, notwithstanding the pains of the 
 learnedest and acutest critics for two whole centu- 
 ries, these books still are, and are like to continue, a 
 mere heap of errors. On the contrary, where the 
 copies of any author are numerous, though the vari- 
 ous readings always increase in proportion, there 
 the text, by an accurate collation of them, made by 
 skilful and judicious hands, is ever the more correct, 
 and comes nearer to the true words of the author." 
 And again : " Make your 30,000 ( variations ) as 
 many more — if numbers of copies can ever reach 
 that sura — all the better to a knowing and a serious 
 
182 TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 
 reader, who is thereby more richly furnished to 
 select what he sees genuine. But even put them 
 into the hands of a knave or a fool, and yet with 
 the most sinistrous and absurd choice, he shall not 
 extinguish the light of any one chapter, nor so dis- 
 guise Christianity but that every feature of it will 
 still be the same." 
 
 Modern editors are almost unanimous on the in- 
 applicability of subjective conjectural criticism in the 
 formation of the Greek text of the New Testament.* 
 " We possess," says Dr. Tregelles, " so many MSS., 
 and we are aided by so many versions, that we are 
 never left to the need of conjecture as the means of 
 removing errata." ^ " So far," says Dr. Scrivener,' 
 " is the copiousness of our stores from causing doubt 
 or perplexity to the genuine student of Holy Script- 
 ure, that it leads him to recognize the more fully its 
 general integrity in the midst of partial variation. 
 What would the thoughtful reader of ^schylus 
 give for the like guidance through the obscurities 
 which vex his patience and mar his enjoyment of 
 that sublime poet?" Dr. Hort,* however, thinks 
 that the evidence for corruption of texts antecedent 
 to extant authorities is "often irresistible," and im- 
 poses on an editor the duty of indicating the pre- 
 sumed unsoundness of the existing text, although 
 
 * Comp. Tischendorf' s popular tract : Hahen wir den dchten Schri/ltext 
 der Evang. und Apostelf Leipzig, 1873. Dr. O. von Gebhardt (^Nov. Test. 
 Gr. p. viii.) mentions two special Dutch essays on the subject, by W. H. 
 van de Sande Bakhuyzen and W. C. van Manen, Haarlem, 1880. 
 
 ^ Gr. N. Test., Prolegomena, p. x. 
 
 » IiUrod., p. 4. • Vol. ii. p. 71. 
 
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 183 
 
 he may be wholly unable to propose any endurable 
 way of correcting it, or have to offer only suggestions 
 in which he cannot place full confidence. 
 
 CLASSES OF VARIATIONS. 
 
 The variations which really involve the sense 
 may, with Dr. Tregelles, be reduced to three classes 
 — omissions, or additions, or substitutions, of words 
 or phrases. 
 
 1. OMISSIONS. 
 
 Omissions occur frequently from like endings 
 called hor}i(Boteleuton {ofioioTtXiVTov). When two 
 lines or sentences end with the same word, the in- 
 tervening words were often unconsciously overlooked 
 and omitted. A very important case of this kind 
 is the sentence in 1 John ii. 23 : 6 ofioXoywv rbv vlov 
 Koi Tov irartpa f'xft (the same ending as in the pre- 
 ceding clause), which is not found in the Textus 
 jReceptus^ and is italicized in the English Version ; 
 but sustained by x, A, B, C, P, and other authori- 
 ties, and properly restored in the English Kevision. 
 Here the older text restores what the later lost. 
 
 2. ADDITIONS. 
 
 Additions are very numerous in the later MSS. 
 and in the Textus Recejptus^ and must be elimina- 
 ted according to the oldest and best authorities. 
 They may be divided into several classes. 
 
 (a.) Additions caused by transferring a genuine 
 word or passage from one book to another ; first on 
 the margin or between the lines, and then into the 
 
184 tfixTtiAL cRincisit. 
 
 text. These cases are most frequent in the parallel 
 sections of the Gospels.* They began probably 
 with the Gospel Harmonies, the oldest of which is 
 Tatian's Diatessaron^ from the second century. By 
 such interpolations the idiosyncrasy of style and 
 manner is more or less obliterated. 
 
 For examples, see in the Text. Rec.^ Matt. i. 25 
 (supplemented from Luke ii. 7) ; Matt. v. 44 (from 
 Luke vi. 27, 28) ; Matt. ix. 13 (from Luke v. 32) ; 
 Matt. xvii. 21 (from Mark ix. 29); Matt, xviii. 11 
 (from Luke xix. 10) ; Matt. xix. 16, 17 (comp. Mark 
 X. 17, 18; Luke xviii. 18, 19); Matt. xix. 20 (from 
 Mark x. 20 and Luke xviii. 21 ) ; Matt. xxi. 44 
 (from Luke xx. 18) ; Mark iii. 5 and Luke vi. 10 
 (from Matt. xii. 13) ; Mark vi. 11 (from Matt. x. 15) ; 
 Mark xiii. 14 (from Matt. xxiv. 15); Mark xv. 28 
 (from Luke xxii. 37); Luke iv. 2, 4, 5, 8 (comp. 
 Matt. iv. 2, 4, 8, 10); Luke xi. 2, 4 (from Matt. vi. 9, 
 10, 13) ; John vi. 69 (from Matt. xvi. 16) ; Acts ix. 
 6, 6 (from xxvi. 14, 15; xxii. 10), etc. By removing 
 these interpolations of words and clauses, otherwise 
 genuine, we lose nothing and gain a better insight 
 into the individuality of each Gospel. 
 
 (5.) Amplifications of quotations from the Old 
 Testament, as in Matt. ii. 18; xv. 8; Luke iv. 18, 
 
 ^ As was observed by Jerome in his Preface to the Gospels {Ad Dama- 
 mm) : " Magnus in nostris codicibus error inolevit dum, quod in eadem re 
 alius evangelista plus dixit, in alio quia minus putaverint addiderunt; vel 
 dum eundem sensum alius aliter expressit, ille qui unum e quafuor primum 
 legerat ad ejus exemplar cteteros quoque exisHmaverit emendandos : unde 
 accidit ut apud nos mixta sunt omnia et in Marco plura Lucce atque Mat- 
 thcei, rursus in Matthceo plura Joannis et Marci . . inveniantur.^' 
 
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 185 
 
 19 ; Rom. xiii. 9 ; Heb. ii. 7 ; xii. 20, etc. These are 
 all right in the Septuagint. 
 
 (c.) Insertions of words and proper names (instead 
 of pronouns) from Lectionaries for the Church ser- 
 vice, especially those of the Gospels (Evangelistaria 
 or Evangeliaria). Hence the frequent interpolation 
 or changed position of ^Ir^cTovg (e. g.^ Matt. iv. 18 ; 
 viii. 5 ; xiv. 22 ; John i. 43). Comp. also Luke vii. 
 31 (the prefix Jttc Se 6 Kvpiug), and x. 22 (ica/ aTpa(j)i'ig 
 irpog rovQ lua^Yirag eiTre, omitted bj Tregelles, West- 
 cott and Hort, but retained by Tischendorf and 
 Von Gebhardt). 
 
 (d.) Additions from a love of paraphrase, which 
 characterizes all the sources embraced by Westcott 
 and Hort under the designation of the " Western " 
 text, of which the bilingual Codex Bezse (D) and 
 Codex Claromontanus (D(2)) are the best known 
 representatives. " The chief and most constant 
 characteristic of the Western readings," says Dr. 
 Hort, " is a love of paraphrase. Words, clauses, 
 and even whole sentences were changed, omitted, 
 and inserted with astonishing freedom, wherever it 
 seemed that the meaning could be brought out with 
 greater force and definiteness." * Examples of this 
 paraphrastic tendency are found in the enlarged 
 readings in Matt. xx. 28 ; xxv. 1 {koI Trjg vvfKj^rig, 
 after tov wiuKpiov); Luke iii. 22; xx. 34; Eph. v. 30; 
 in many curious interpolations in the Acts ; and in 
 John V. 3, 4, and viii. 1 sqq., which will be considered 
 separately under the next head. 
 
 ' Vol. ii. p. 122. 
 
 14 
 
186 TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 
 In this love for explanatory expansion of the 
 sacred text, as if the Holy Spirit was too brief and 
 terse for the common understanding, the authors of 
 the Authorized English Version have imitated the 
 old Western copyists and translators, but have acted 
 more honestly by printing their numerous, mostly 
 useless, and sometimes misleading, interpolations in 
 italics.' 
 
 (e.) Additions from oral tradition, ancient litur- 
 gies, and explanatory glosses. They were usually 
 noted on the margin and then incorporated with 
 the text. Jerome expressed his wonder at the large 
 number of such interpolations by the temerity of 
 transcribers in his day.'' But in many cases it was 
 done ignorantly and innocently. 
 
 Under this head we may place the most impor- 
 tant and serious interpolations, which are rejected 
 by the severer class of critics, although some may 
 be defended wath solid arguments. They are as 
 f ollow^s : 
 
 1. The doxology in the Lord's Prayer, Matt. vi. 13, 
 which was unknown to Origen, Tertullian, and Cyp- 
 rian (in their commentaries on the Lord's Prayer), 
 
 * This method has been retained, but on a greatly reduced scale, in the 
 Revision. It is open to objection, as conflicting with modern usage of 
 italicizing for the purpose of emphasizing. Smaller type or brackets 
 would obviate misunderstanding. I heard of a famous sensation preacher 
 taking two words in italics for his text, as if thej' contained the gist of 
 the passage. 
 
 ^ Ad Suniam et Fretelam, : " Miror quomodo e latere annotationem no- 
 stram nescio quis temerarius scribendam in corpore pvtaverit quant nos pro 
 ervditione legentis scripsimus. . . . Si quid pro studio ex latere additum est, 
 nan debet poni in corpore." 
 
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 187 
 
 and is missing in the oldest MSS. (i<, B, D, Z), in the 
 Itala and Yulgate.' It probably came in from 1 
 Chron. xxix. 11, and from ancient liturgical usage 
 in Syria, as a response of the congregation. It is 
 found first in the Didache and the Syriac Yersion, 
 and thence passed into the common text at the time 
 of Chrysostom. The Jewish response to the prayers 
 in the temple is said to have been : " Blessed be the 
 name of the glory of his kingdom forever and ever." 
 In the Liturgy of St. James the doxology of the 
 Lord's Prayer is expanded into a trinitarian shape : 
 on (Tou \ar\v 17 jBacriXiia Koi 17 ^vvafxig, koI t) So^a, 
 Tov iraTpog koi tov vlov »cai tov ayiov irvtiffiaTog, vvv 
 Koi aei. But in all the extant Latin liturgies the 
 doxology is omitted.'* 
 
 2. The passage on the periodical descent of the 
 angel of the Lord, troubling the pool of Bethesda 
 for the healing of the sick, John v. 3, 4 (from ckSc- 
 ^ofxivtjv, ver. 3, to KaTei\eTo vo<jr]fxaTi, ver. 4), is un- 
 doubtedly an interpolation (at least ver. 4), probably 
 
 * Cod. A cannot be quoted for or against, as the first twenty -four 
 chapters of Matthew are lost. The newly discovered Codex Rossanensis 
 has the doxology, but belongs to the sixth century. See p. 131. 
 
 ^ The English Revision puts the doxolOgy in the margin. It was a 
 case of honesty versus prudence. No change seems to have given wider 
 dissatisfaction than this, and the substitution of " the evil one " (the 
 tempter) for "evil," in the same prayer hallowed by daily use. The 
 doxology is very appropriate, and will always be used ; but this, of course, 
 does not affect the critical question, which is simply one of evidence. 
 Its insertion from liturgical usage is far more easily accounted for than its 
 omission. The internal evidence also is rather against it; for our Lord 
 immediately proceeds with "for" {tdv yap) in ver. 14. His object was 
 to suggest proper topics for prayer rather th^u to give a complete formula. 
 
188 TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 
 of Syrian and Western origin, and expresses a popu- 
 lar superstition, for which John cannot be held re- 
 sponsible. The first Greek father who shows any 
 knowledge of the interpolation is Chrysostom (d. 
 407), but^it is wanting in k, B, C*, (D), 33, and other 
 authorities, and omitted by the critical editors, and 
 the Eevisers of 1881.' 
 
 3. Tlie section on the woman taken in adultery, 
 John vii. 53-viii. 11, in ten cursive MSS. at the end 
 of the Gospel of John, in four (13, 69, 124, 346) at 
 the end of Luke xxi. It no doubt rests on a primi- 
 tive and authentic tradition, but was not written by 
 John. It is omitted by k and B, and other Greek 
 MSS. ; there is no room for it in A and C, which 
 are here defective ; it was unknown to the Greek 
 and older Latin fathers, but widely current in Latin 
 Gospels of the fourth century. It interrupts the 
 context, departs from the style of John, and pre- 
 sents an unusual number of variations in the MSS. 
 Nevertheless, the story itself is eminently Christ- 
 like, and found its way into the Gospels of John 
 and Luke from apostolic teaching, perhaps from the 
 lost w^ork of Papias of Hierapolis, who collected from 
 primitive disciples various traditional discourses of 
 our Lord with comments, and who (according to 
 Eusebius iii. 39) set forth " a narrative concerning a 
 woman maliciously accused before the Lord touch- 
 
 * The Revision relegates it to the margin with this note : " Many- 
 ancient authorities insert, wholly or in part, waiting for the moving of the 
 water: 4: for an angel of the Lord went down at certain seasons into the 
 pool, and troubled the water : whosoever then first after the troubling of the 
 water stepped in was made whole, with whatsoever disease he was holden." 
 
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 189 
 
 ing many sins/ which is contained in the Gospel 
 according to the Hebrews." The English Kevision 
 properly retains the section, but in brackets, with a 
 marginal note, and with space between it and the 
 genuine part. The Christian world will never lose 
 it. Its best place would be at the end of the Grospel 
 of John as an appendix.' 
 
 4. The concluding twelve verses of Mark (xvi. 9- 
 20) present a peculiar case. The section is wanting in 
 the two oldest MSS. (&< and B), and, according to the 
 testimony of Eusebius and Jerome, in almost all the 
 Greek MSS. of their day ; it contains seventeen un- 
 usual words or phrases not elsewhere found in Mark 
 or not in that sense ; and there is a shorter conclu- 
 sion in L and in the important old Latin MS.k, which 
 presupposes the same defect in older MSS. On the 
 other hand, the section is found in most of the uncial 
 
 ^ tTTi TToWaig afiapriaig, not one afxapTia, as in the text. 
 
 ^ For the details the reader may consult the critical editions (Tregelles, 
 p. 236-243 ; Tischendorf, ed. viii. ; Hort, ii. Notes, ii. 82-88), and the com- 
 mentaries of LUcke, Meyer (6th ed. by Weiss), Lange, Alford, Wordsworth, 
 Godet, and Westcott. In my annotations to Lange's Com. on John (1872), 
 pp. 267 sqq., I arrived at the same conclusion— namely, that " the critical 
 evidence, especially from the Eastern church, is against the section, the 
 7noral evidence /or it; in other words, it is no original part of John's 
 written Gospel, but the record of an actual event, which probably hap- 
 pened about the time indicated by its position in John viii. The story 
 could not have been invented, as it runs contrary to the ascetic and 
 legalistic tendency of the ancient church. It is full of comfort to penitent 
 outcasts. It breathes the Saviour's spirit of holy mercy which condemns 
 the sin and saves the sinner. It is a parallel to the parable of the prodi- 
 gal, the story of Mary Magdalene, and that of the Samaritan woman, and 
 agrees with many express declarations of Christ that he came not to con- 
 demn, but to save the lost (John iii. 17 ^ xii. 47; Luke ix. 56; xix. 10; 
 comp. John v. 14 ; Luke vii. 37 sqq.)." 
 
190 TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 
 and in all the cursive MSS., in most of the ancient 
 versions, in all the existing Greek and Sjriac lection- 
 aries as far as examined ; and Irenseus, who is a much 
 older witness than any of our existing MSS., quotes 
 ver. 19 as a part of the Gospel of Mark {Adv. Hcer, 
 iii. 10, 6). A strong intrinsic argument for the 
 genuineness is also derived from the extreme im- 
 probability (we may say impossibility) that the 
 evangelist should have intentionally closed his Gos- 
 pel with £0oj3ovvro yap, " for they were afraid " 
 (ver. 8). 
 
 These facts leave us two alternatives: (1) The 
 conclusion is from the pen of Mark, but was not in 
 his iirst draft, which may have been published before 
 he completed the work, or it was lost from some 
 very early copy (being written, perhaps, on a separate 
 leaf), which was transcribed in this incomplete form. 
 (2) Mark was prevented by some accident (perhaps 
 the Neronian persecution of 64) from concluding 
 his Gospel, and the twelve verses were supplied by 
 the friendly hand of the last editor, perhaps from 
 the Gospel of Luke, or from one of his Gospel frag- 
 ments (comp. i. 1), or from oral teaching. I take 
 the second alternative, and regard the conclusion as 
 authentic or historically true, but not as genuine. 
 The critical editors (and the English Revisers) prop- 
 erly retain the section, but include it in brackets, or 
 leave some space between vers. 8 and 9, to indicate 
 the uncertainty of its origin.^ 
 
 * For full information on this interesting case we refer to the critical 
 apparatus of Tischendorf and Tregeiles, to the monograph of Weiss on 
 
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 191 
 
 5. The baptismal confession of the eunuch, Acts 
 viii. 37, came in from very ancient ecclesiastical use. 
 It supplies Philip's answer to the eunuch's question, 
 " What doth hinder me to be baptized ?" It appears 
 in Western sources (Greek, Latin, and Arm.) and 
 in some good cursives, but is absent from the best 
 Greek MSS. and the Vulgate, though it soon found 
 its way from the Old Latin into the later text of the 
 Vulgate. Erasmus transferred it from the margin 
 
 Mark {Das Marcusevang. pp. 512-515), and especially to the exhaustive 
 discussion of Westcott and Hort in the second volume {Append, pp. 29-51). 
 All these eminent critics, as well as Griesbach and Lachmann, reject the 
 genuineness of the section, though they retain it in the text. The chief 
 defenders of the genuineness are Bleek, Lange, Ebrard, Hilgenfeld, 
 Broadus ( " Baptist Quarterly," Phila. 1869 ), Wordsworth, McClellan, 
 Scrivener (Jntrod. pp. 507-513), Morison {Com. on Mark, pp. 446 and 
 463 sqq.), Canon Cook (in the Speaker's Com. on Mark, pp. 301-308), and 
 especially Dean Burgon of Chichester, in his very learned and very dog- 
 matic monograph, The Last Twelve Verses of the Gospel according to 
 S. Mark Vindicated against Recent Critical Objections and Established, 
 Oxf. and Lond. 1871 (334 pages) ; comp. his article in the " Quarterly 
 Review" for Oct. 1881. Burgon lays great stress on the Lectionaries, 
 and on the fact that Cod. B (which he otherwise hates with a personal 
 animosity) leaves a blank column between ver. 8 and the Gospel of Luke, 
 which seems to imply the scribe's knowledge of a fuller conclusion of the 
 Gospel. But it is the last (third) column, and the second has the sub- 
 scription, after ver. 8, KATA MAPKON, which indicates the close.. Nor 
 is it the only blank column in the whole MS., as Burgon asserts ; for (as 
 Dr. Abbot has first pointed out) two columns are left blank at the end of 
 Nehemiah, and a column and a half at the end of Tobit. There are 
 similar blanks in the Alexandrian and Sinaitic MSS. In his " Revision 
 Revised," Burgon makes a savage attack upon Westcott and Hort and the 
 English Revisers for daring (in common with the ablest critics) to dissent 
 from what he regards his unanswerable "demonstration" and infallible 
 judgment. He calls the marginal note of the Revisers in Mark xvi. 8, 
 which simply states a fact, " the gravest blot of all." Then the other 
 blofs must be very slight indeed. 
 
192 TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 
 of one of his Greek MSS., as " having been omitted 
 by the carelessness of scribes." The Eevision rele- 
 gates it to the margin with the note : " Some ancient 
 authorities insert, wholly or in part, ver. 37, And 
 Philijp said^ If thou helievest with all thy heart, 
 thou may est. And he answered and said, I believe 
 that Jesus is the Son of GodP 
 
 6. The passage of the three heavenly witnesses, 
 1 John V. 7, 8, is wanting in all the Greek MSS., 
 uncial and cursive, written before the fifteenth cen- 
 tury, in all the ancient versions (including the best 
 MSS. of the Yulgate), and in all the Greek fathers, 
 who in the Nicene age, during the Arian and semi- 
 Arian controversies, quoted every available proof- 
 text of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation for 
 the dogma of the Trinity, and could not possibly 
 have overlooked this, had they known it or found it 
 in any MS. It first appeared in Latin copies, and 
 from them passed into two very late Greek MSS., 
 of no authority. The internal evidence alone is con- 
 clusive against it; for John would not have written 
 "the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit," but 
 either " the Father, the Son,'' or " God, the Word," 
 etc. Moreover, there is no real correspondence be- 
 tween " the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit " 
 in heaven, and " the Spirit, the water, and the blood" 
 on earth ; the supposed analogy originated in the 
 fancy of some African father of the fifth century 
 (possibly Cyprian in the third century), and was put 
 on the margin by some copyist of the Latin text. 
 For these reasons the passage is now given up by 
 all critical editors and commentators. Erasmu^> at 
 
TEXTUAL CRlTiClsM. l93 
 
 first omitted it; Luther did not translate it, though 
 it crept afterwards into his German Bible.' Trutli, 
 honesty, and piety demand its expulsion from the 
 Word of God. The doctrine of the Holy Trinity 
 does not need the support of a spurious interpola- 
 tion ; it rests on the whole tenor of the Bible doc- 
 trine of a God revealed as Father, Son, and Holy 
 Spirit.'* 
 
 3. SUBSTITUTIONS. 
 
 Yery often one word is substituted for another 
 similar in spelling or sound, or apparently better 
 suited to the context. The most remarkable varia- 
 tions under this head are the following : 
 
 1. John i. 18: 6 fxovoyevyQ viog (abridged YC), 
 
 ^ Strange to say, it is retained in the recent authoritative revision of 
 Luther's text, though in brackets and with the note t " Die eingeklammer- 
 ten Worte fehlen in der Uebersetzung Luthers und sind ihr erst spdter 
 heigefiigt wordenJ" The English Revision very properly ignores the inter- 
 polation altogether, reading simply, with John : " For there are three who 
 bear witness, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood : and the three agree 
 in one." All the rest from " in heaven," ver. 7, to " on earth," ver. 8, is 
 spurious. 
 
 2 See above, p. 136 sq. More than fifty volumes and pamphlets have 
 been written for and against the three witnesses. It was once considered 
 a sure mark of heresy to doubt the genuineness of the passage; now it is 
 difficult to summon a corporal's guard of old fogies for its defence. Even 
 Dr. Scrivener, one of the most conservative critics, says (p. 561), "To 
 maintain the genuineness of this passage is simply impossible." It is a 
 wonder that Dean Burgon has not come up to the defence of this forlorn 
 post. He might summon any number of Latin witnesses. Many sermons 
 on the Trinity, good, bad, and indifferent, have been preached from this 
 text. A high American dignitary and scholar (?) honestly believes that 
 the passage was written by St. John, and will yet be dug up from the dust 
 of some Egyptian convent. sancta simplicitas ! O for another Tiachen- 
 dorf or Simonides ! 
 
194 TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 
 the only-hegotten Son (text, rec), or fiovoysvriQ ^toQ 
 (abridged ec), «^ Only-hegoUen One who is God, (A 
 third reading, 6 jULovojEvrig ^tog, " the only-begotten 
 God," found in i<^, i. e.^ k as corrected by the third 
 hand, and in No. 33, arose simply from a combination 
 of the two readings, the article being improperly trans- 
 ferred from the first to the second.) The two readings 
 are of equal antiquity : Srcoc is supported by the old- 
 est Greek MSS., nearly all Alexandrian or Egyptian 
 (k^, ^. ^., the original or uncorrected x, B, C"^, L, also 
 the Peshito Syr.) ; vi6q by the oldest versions (Itala, 
 Yulg., Curet. Syr., also by the secondary uncials, 
 and all known cursives except 33). The patristic 
 evidence is uncertain and conflicting. The usual 
 abbreviations in the uncial MS., 9C and YC, may 
 easily be confounded. The connection of juovoysvijc 
 with S-Eoc is less natural than with moc? although 
 John undoubtedly could call the Son ^eoc, and did 
 so in ver. 1. Moi^oysvf/c ^£oc simply combines the 
 two attributes of the Logos, S-fo^, ver. 1, and /xovo- 
 yevriQ, ver. 14. 
 
 For a learned and ingenious defence of ^eoQ, see 
 Hort's Two Dissertations (Cambridge, 1877), West- 
 cott in the Speakers Commentary on John (p. 71), 
 and Westcott and Hort's Gr. Test. vol. ii. {JV^otes, 
 p. 74); also Weiss in the 6th ed. of Meyer's Com. on 
 John (1880).^ It is urged that the substitution of 
 viog for 3"£oc is easily explained as being suggested 
 
 ^ Weiss renders the passage (p. 86 ) thus : ** Gottliches Wesen hat 
 niemand je gesehen ; ein Eingehorener gottlicken Wesens . . . hat davon 
 Kunde gebracht" i. e., " the Divine Being no one has ever seen; an Onlr- 
 begott€n One of Divine Being .... has brought knowledge of it." 
 
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 195 
 
 by the primary meaning of fiovoyevrig, while the 
 converse substitution is inexplicable by any ordi- 
 nary motive likely to affect transcribers. But ^eog 
 in connection with ij,ovoyevrig is not sustained by 
 any parallel passage in the New Test., and sounds 
 strange. Tischendorf adopts vlog, and Dr. Abbot 
 ably defended this reading in two essays — one in 
 the '' Bibliotheca Sacra " for 1861, pp. 840-872, and 
 one printed for the American Eevision Committee 
 (and afterwards published in the " Unitarian Re- 
 view" for June, 1875, at Boston). The "Westmin- 
 ster Revisers first adopted " God " in the text, but 
 afterwards put it on the margin, as the American 
 Committee suggested. Both readings give essential- 
 ly the same sense, but the common reading is more 
 natural and free from objection. Movoyevrig does 
 not necessarily convey the Niceiie idea of eternal 
 generation, but simply the unique character and 
 superiority of the eternal and uncreated sonship of 
 Christ over the sonship of believers, which is a gift 
 of grace. It shows his intimate relation to the 
 Father, as the Pauline ttjowtotokoc (Col. i. 15) his 
 sovereign relation to the world. 
 
 2. Luke ii. 14 : tv^oKia (nominative), or evdoKiag 
 (genitive), in the Gloria in Excelsis. The textus 
 receptus gives us an anthem with three clauses, or a 
 triple parallelism, the third being a substantial repe- 
 tition of the second : 
 
 "Glory be to God in the highest, 
 And on earth peace, 
 Good pleasure among noen." ^ 
 
 * iv dv^pdjTTOie sifSoKia. The A. V. is certainly wrong in ignoring 
 
1S6> tEXTtJAL CRITICISM. 
 
 The other reading gives us a double parallelism 
 of somewhat unequal length (as often in the Psalms): 
 
 " Glory be to God in the highest, 
 And on earth peace among men of (his) good pleasure," * 
 
 with three corresponding ideas — glory and peace, 
 God and men, in the highest (heaven) and on earth." 
 Intrinsically this reading is preferable, the parallel- 
 ism being complete without a repetition. It is sup- 
 ported by t<*, A, B, D, all the Latin copies {bonon 
 voluntatis)^ the Gothic Version {godis vilji7is,"of 
 good will"), Origen, Jerome; while the nominative 
 ev^oKia is sustained by the cursive MSS., the Syriac, 
 Coptic, and other versions, and many Greek fathers, 
 and the Greek Gloria in Excelsis^ as appended to 
 Cod. A (which, however, in Luke ii. 14 reads the 
 genitive), and in the Apost. Constitutions. Tischen- 
 dorf adopts svdoKiag, so also Westcott and Hort, and 
 the Revisers, but with the other reading on the 
 
 margin.^ 
 
 the preposition (as the Vulgate and Luther do), and translating "Good 
 will towards men," as if it were the dative. 
 
 ^ evdoKiag, bonce voluntatis, not as a predicate of men, but men of God^s 
 good will, men in whom he takes delight, to whom his favor, his benevo- 
 lent purpose, is shown by the birth of the Saviour. All men are meant, 
 not a particular class (comp. John iii. 16; Tit. ii. 11). This relieves the 
 passage of a great difficulty. Comp. tvSoKia in Phil. i. 15 ; ii. 13 ; Eph. i. 
 5, 9; 2 Thess. i. 11; and evdoKsio in Matt. iii. 17; xvii. 5; Mark i. 11; 
 Luke iii. 22. 
 
 ^ Dr. Hort {Notes on Select Readings, ii. p. 56) suggests a more equal 
 division, by connecting " and on earth " with the first clause : 
 Ao^a iv v^iiTTOiQ ^stp koI Itti yije, 
 elprivT] Iv dv^pdjTTOig evdoKiag. 
 
 ' The famous "Quarterly Reviewer" (Oct. 1881), of course, denounces 
 
tEXTtlAL CRITICISM. l9? 
 
 3. Rom. V. 1 : ix^inev, we have {/lahemus), tlp{ivr)v, 
 peace, or i^wju^v (tbe hortative), let us have (hahea- 
 mus), peace. Here the intrinsic evidence rather 
 favors the received text, since the apostle states the 
 result of justification by faith ; moreover, it is re- 
 spectably supported by {;<% B^, F, G, P, Didymus, 
 Epiphanius, etc. ; and o and w may easily be con- 
 founded. Hence Lachmann in his ed. major, and 
 Tischendorf in his former editions, favored 8;^ojUfv, 
 and the American Committee decided to retain "we 
 have" in the text, and to put " let us have" in the 
 margin. But the English Committee decided the oth- 
 er way, following Lachmann in his ed. minor, Tisch- 
 endorf in his last edition, and Westcott and Hort. 
 In his Critical Notes Hort does not even mention 
 this variation. It must be admitted that t'xw/ifv is, 
 upon the whole, better supported by fi<* (uncorrect- 
 ed), A, B*, C, D, Itala, Yulgata, and other versions ; 
 and it gives also good sense, since peace, like every 
 other gift, must be held fast and regained ever anew 
 to be fully possessed and enjoyed. Anxious and 
 timid Christians must be exhorted to realize the 
 benefit of the merits of Christ w^hich are theirs by 
 faith. 
 
 4. Acts XX. 28 : " to feed the church of God'' (rriv 
 
 the reading of svdoKiag as a " grievous perversion of the truth of Scrip- 
 ture," and holds the evidence for tvSoKta to be "absolutelj' decisive." 
 Canon Cook, the editor of the Speaker's Commentary, agrees with Dean 
 Burgon's general position, but admits at least that *' the Revisers have 
 manuscript authority sufficient to prove that their reading was known and 
 adopted by many churches at a very early time." (The Revised Version 
 of the First Three Gospels, Lond. 1882, p. 27.) 
 
198 TEXTUAL CRiTICISM. 
 
 tKKkricriav tov ^-fo v), or " the church of the Zord^^ 
 {to if Kvpiov). The difference derives doctrinal 
 importance from the addition: '' which he purchased 
 with Ms own hlood^^ (fivirepiEiroiriGaTo dia tov aijuiaTog 
 TOV iBiov). The reading ^eov would furnish a strong 
 argument for the divinity of Christ, but also an al 
 most patripassian or monophysitic view of his death/ 
 The two Revision Companies are divided here — the 
 English put " God " in the text, and " the Lord " in 
 the margin ; the Americans reverse the order. The 
 critical editors are also divided — Westcott and Hort 
 adopt TOV ^eoit, Tischendorf tov Kvplov. The former 
 is supported by k, B, a number of cursives, Yulg. ; 
 the latter by A, C*, D, E, 13, and other cursives, 
 and by the Old Latin, Coptic, and Sahidic versions. 
 The testimony of the fathers is divided.'* The ablest 
 arguments on the two sides of the question are by 
 Dr. Hort, in favor of ^eov, in Notes on Select Read- 
 ings^ pp. 98-100, and by Dr. Ezra Abbot, in favor 
 of Kvpiov, in the " Bibliotheca Sacra," Andover, for 
 1876, pp. 313 sqq." Dr. Hort suggests at the end of 
 his note that possibly vlov may have dropped out 
 
 * Comp. Watts's "When God the mighty Maker died;" and the old 
 German hymn, " welche Noth ! Gott selhst ist todt." 
 
 ^ Chrysostom is quoted on both sides; but Dr. Abbot writes me the 
 following note : " The case in regard to Chrysostom must be considered 
 clear. He not only reads Kvpiov without variation among the MSS. in 
 his Horn, on Eph. iv. 11, but (what I did not know when I wrote my arti- 
 cle) the best MSS. of Chrysostom read Kvpiov in his homily on this passage 
 of the Acts, and that reading is accordingly adopted in the translation of 
 his Homilies on the A cts in the Oxford Library of the Fathers." 
 
 ^ The essay was first privately printed for the use of the Am. Revision 
 Committee. 
 
I'KXTUAL CRITICISM^ 199 
 
 Sifter Tov i^iov at some very early transcription, af- 
 fecting all existing documents. This conjecture 
 would relieve the passage of all difficulty, and make 
 it conform to the apostolic doctrine that God pur- 
 chased to himself a universal church by the precious 
 blood of his dear Son. But since conjecture cannot 
 be allowed a place in view of the multitude of read- 
 ings, except in an extreme case, which does not exist 
 here, I prefer the reading icvpiov, Paul often speaks 
 of " the church of God " (1 Cor. i. 1 ; xi. 22 ; 2 Cor. 
 i. 1 ; Gal. i. 13 ; 1 Tim. iii. 5), but nowhere of the 
 blood of God. On the other hand, the Church is 
 usually represented as the institution of Christ, as 
 his body, and his bride for which he shed his blood 
 (Matt. xvi. 18 ; 1 Cor. iii. Jl ; Eph. i. 22, etc.). 
 
 5. 1 Tim. iii. 16 : ^eog (GC), or 6g (O C), " God was 
 manifested in the flesh," or " He who [i. e., Christ] 
 was manifested in the flesh." Here the weight of 
 external and internal evidence is decidedly in favor 
 of 6c, and this reading has been adopted by all the 
 critical editors (Griesbach, Lachmann, Tregelles, 
 Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort), critical commenta- 
 tors (including Alford and Ellicott), and by the 
 English and American Revisers.* The arguments 
 
 * Even Bishop Wordsworth of Lincoln, the most conservative of Eng- 
 lish commentators, adopts the reading og. So the Bishop of London, in 
 the Speaker's Commentary, in loc. ; Canon Spence, in Ellicott's Com., and 
 Dean Plumptre, in Schaflf' s Popular Com., vol. iii. (1882), p. 570. Canon 
 Farrar, St. Paul, ii. 522, regards it as "a certain reading." In opposi- 
 tion to the almost unanimous consensus of modern critics and commenta- 
 tors, Dean Burgon {The Revision Revised, 1883, pp. 424-501) boldly vtiit- 
 ures upon a long dissertation in defence of the reading ^eog. His inde- 
 fatigable researches in the Libraries of Europe have increased the number 
 
200 TlSXTUAL CKITICISM. 
 
 are : (1) The best MSS. (i<, A-, C*, F, G) read 5c, 
 although some have been corrected by later hands. 
 In 5< the letters ^e were added above the line, in the 
 twelfth century. The correction in C is older. A 
 is defaced, but has been examined by Bishop Ellicott 
 and other scholars with the aid of the microscope, 
 and found to have had originally OC without a bar 
 above and without a transverse stroke in O, though 
 both were added in comparatively recent times. B 
 cannot be quoted here, as it does not contain the 
 Pastoral Epistles.^ (2) All the ancient versions of 
 any weight have a relative pronoun here. (3) The 
 Western 6, quod, which is a manifest correction 
 of dg and adaptation to the preceding fAvariipiov, 
 (4) The oldest fathers: Origen (qui manifestatus 
 est), Epiphanius, Cyril, Theodore of Mopsuestia, 
 Jerome. The reading ^eog seems not to have been 
 known before the last third of the fourth century ; 
 and even Chrysostom is here doubtful, though in one 
 place he probably read ^eog, as certainly did Theo> 
 doret. (5) It is much easier to account for the 
 change of the diflScult og into the easy 3"foc, than 
 vice versa, although the mechanical resemblance of 
 OC and 0C made the other change more easy. 
 (6) While 3-«oc well suits the first of the six verbs, 
 
 of cursive MSS. of the Pauline Epistles, including lectionaries which read 
 BtoQ or 6 BeoQ (4), to 290 (258 -f32). He has found two others which read 
 Of Beog, and 3 lectionari&s which read oc, which are to be added to the 3 
 cursives before cited for that reading. But the evidence for bg he neither 
 states fairly nor fully, and he fails to account for this reading. See p. 298. 
 ^ Not " because bhe jealousy of Rome has prevented accurate collation," 
 as the Speaker's Com. (4ii. 780) strangely remarked in the year 1881, thir- 
 teen years after the publication of the fac-simile edition of Vercellone .' 
 
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 201 
 
 it does not naturally harmonize with the other five. 
 We may say that God " was manifested in the 
 flesh," but not that he was "justified in the spirit," 
 "seen of angels," "received up in glory." All this, 
 however, can be said with perfect propriety of 
 Christ as the God- man. And he is undoubtedly 
 meant by the relative pronoun. And even the first 
 verb suits better to the language of John, who does 
 not say " God was made flesh," but " the Word was 
 made flesh." We have in this passage no doubt a 
 quotation from a primitive creed or hymn in praise 
 of Christ, and this accounts not only for the rela- 
 tive 6c, but also for the rhythmical structure of the 
 whole passage, which can be arranged in three par- 
 allel pairs : 
 
 "Og itpavtpw^T] tv aapKi, 
 idiKaiMBrtj iv TTvtvfxaTij 
 w<pBfT] dyyeXoig, 
 
 kKT]pVX^Tj tv t^VE(TlVj 
 tTTKTTevBt] tv KOafKp, 
 
 dvi\r)fi(p^rj tv So^y. 
 
 The doctrinal importance of this variation has 
 been much overrated. The divinity of Christ loses 
 nothing by the change. It implies in any case his 
 pre-existence. He is the personal embodiment of 
 the mystery of godliness.' 
 
 ^ Comp. a sermon of Dr. Vaughan (Master of the Temple), AuthoHzed 
 or Revised? Lond. 1882, p. 17 : "The Revised Version of the New Testa- 
 ment says this to us — and if it were its only change, it would have been 
 worth ten years of labor ; The mystery of godliness, the revealed secret 
 which has in it 'reverence,' the right feeling anc^ attitude of the soul 
 towards God its Author ajid Object of being, is a Person — incarnate, 
 jpstified, attested, her^lde^, believed, glorified— a Person whom to know 
 
 15 
 
202 TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 
 6. Apoc. xvii. 8 : Kaiirep iGTiv, or koL Trapiarai. Here 
 the textus receptus, by the fault of a transcriber, 
 gives nonsense: " The beast that was, and is not, and 
 yet is^^ — while the true reading adopted by all the 
 modern editors makes it quite clear: " The beast was, 
 and is not, and shall come " (lit., shall be present). 
 
 Other substitutions are due to the aim of harmon- 
 izing passages, or of correcting a supposed error, as 
 Iv Totg 7rpo(j)i]Taig for Iv rtjt ^Hcraiq. T(jji Tr/oo^rirr/, in 
 Mark i. 2 ; Brj^ajSapa for Bri^avia, in John i. 28 
 (due, perhaps, to the conjecture of Origen). 
 
 CRITICAL RULES. 
 
 Since Bengel, Wetstein, and Griesbach, the critical 
 process has been reduced to certain rules, but there 
 is considerable diversity in the mode and extent of 
 their application. It is not a mechanical process, 
 and does not lead to mathematical certainty. The 
 critic has often to reason upon mere probabilities, 
 and to ascertain what hypothesis best explains all 
 the phenomena. Here the judgment may vary, and 
 absolute unanimity cannot be expected in every case. 
 
 The following rules may be regarded as being 
 sound, and more or less accepted by the best mod- 
 ern critics: 
 
 (1.) Knowledge of documentary evidence must 
 precede the choice of readings. 
 
 (2.) All kinds of evidence, external and internal^ 
 must be taken into account, according to their in- 
 trinsic value. 
 
 is life, whom to serve is freedom. He is uot * doctrine, nor a book, nor a 
 preed, nor a church— |I§ is a Person." 
 
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 203 
 
 (3.) The sources of the text must be carefully 
 sifted and classified, and the authorities must be 
 weighed rather than numbered. One independent 
 manuscript may be worth more than a hundred 
 copies which are derived from the same original. 
 
 On closer inspection, the witnesses are found to 
 fall into certain groups, and to represent certain 
 tendencies. Westcott and Hort have revived, modi- 
 fied, and perfected Griesbach's system of families or 
 recensions. They distinguish between the Western, 
 the Alexandrian, the Syrian, and the neutral texts, 
 and enter minutely into the genealogical relations 
 of the ancient documents. The Western text is 
 specially represented by D, the Old Latin versions, 
 the Greek copies on which they were based, and in 
 part by the Curetonian Syriac, and is characterized 
 by a tendency to paraphrase and to interpolate from 
 parallel passages or other sources. The Alexandrian 
 or Egyptian text is much purer, but betrays a ten- 
 dency to polish the language; it is found in Origen, 
 Cyril of Alexandria, and other Alexandrian fathers, 
 and in the two principal Egyptian versions, especially 
 the Memphitic. The Syrian text is mixed, and the 
 result of a recension of editors who borrowed from 
 all sources and were anxious to remove stumbling- 
 blocks, and to present the New Testament in a 
 smooth and attractive form. The neutral (pre- 
 Syrian) text is best represented by B and largely 
 by K, and comes nearest to the apostolic original. 
 From a careful comparative examination, Westcott 
 and Hort have come to the conclusion that these 
 two oldest extant MSS., tlje Vatican and the Sipaitic, 
 
204 TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 
 are derived from ancestries which "diverged from 
 a point near the autographs, and never came into 
 contact subsequently ; so that the coincidence of k 
 and B marks those portions of text in which two 
 primitive and entirely separate lines of transmis- 
 sion had not come to differ from each other through 
 independent corruption in the one or the other." ^ 
 They pay supreme respect to the Vatican MS., while 
 Tischendorf, in his last edition, often gives the pref- 
 erence to the Sinaitic readings. 
 
 (4.) The restoration of the pure text is founded 
 on the history and genealogy of the textual corrup- 
 tions. See the special discussion of the genealogical 
 method below, p. 208 sqq. 
 
 (5.) The older reading is preferable to the later, 
 because it is presumably nearer the source. In ex- 
 ceptional cases later copies may represent a more 
 ancient reading. Mere antiquity is no certain test 
 of superiority, since the corruption of the text be- 
 gan at a very early date. 
 
 (6.) The shorter reading is preferable to the 
 longer, because insertions and additions are more 
 probable than omissions. "' Brevior lectio proeferen- 
 da est verhosiori^^ (Griesbach). Porson regarded 
 this as the " surest canon of criticism." Transcrib- 
 ers were intent upon complete copies, and often 
 inserted glosses on the margin or between the lines, 
 and others put them into the text. 
 
 (7.) The more difficult reading is preferable to 
 the easier. " Lectio difficilior principatuTn tenet^'' 
 
 Gr, Test. i. 556 sq. 
 
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 205 
 
 or " Proclivi scriptioni jprcestat arduaP This was 
 Bengel's first rule. It is always easier to account 
 for the change of a really or apparently difficult and 
 obscure reading into an easy and clear one, than 
 vice versa. Transcribers would not intentionally 
 substitute a harsh, ungrammatical, or unusual read- 
 ing for one that was unobjectionable. 
 
 (8.) The reading which best explains the origin 
 of the other variations is preferable. This rule is 
 emphasized by Tischendorf. 
 
 (9.) " That reading is preferable which best suit^ 
 the peculiar style, manner, and habits of thought of 
 the author; it being the tendency of copyists to over- 
 look the idiosyncrasies of the writer " (Scrivener). 
 
 (10.) That reading is preferable which shows no 
 doctrinal bias, whether orthodox or heretical. 
 
 (11.) The agreement of the most ancient witness- 
 es of all classes decides the true reading against all 
 mediaeval copies and printed editions. 
 
 (12.) The primary uncials, x, B, C, and A — espe- 
 cially 5< and B — if sustained by other ancient Greek 
 uncials (as D, L, T, S, Z) and first-class cursives (as 
 33), by ancient versions, and ante-Nicene citations, 
 outweigh all later authorities, and give us presuma- 
 bly the original text of the sacred writers. 
 
 APPLICATION OF THE RULES. 
 
 The application of these critical canons decides, 
 in the main, against the Textus Meceptus, so called, 
 from which the Protestant versions were made, and 
 in favor of an older uncial text. The former rests 
 on a few and late, mostly cursive MSS., which havQ 
 
206 TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 
 very little or no authority when compared with much 
 older authorities which have since been brought to 
 light. It abounds in later additions, harmless as 
 they may be. It is essentially the Byzantine, or 
 Constantinopolitan, text which almost exclusively 
 prevailed in the Greek state - church. It is the 
 mixed text of the Syrian fathers of the fourth cen- 
 tury, especially of Chrysostom, who spent the greater 
 part of his life in Antioch, and the last ten years as 
 patriarch at Constantinople (d. 407). This text was 
 almost exclusively copied during the ascendency of 
 Constantinople in the East, while the West confined 
 itself to the Latin version, and remained ignorant 
 of the Greek Testament till the fall of Constantino- 
 ple and the revival of letters. This text was intro- 
 duced in the West in printed form by Erasmus in 
 1516, with some additions from the Latin version. 
 It passed with many changes into the editions of 
 Stephens, Beza, and Elzevir, before the material for 
 the science of criticism was collected and examined. 
 Erasmus, Stephens, and Beza were good scholars, 
 but could accomplish little with the scanty resources 
 at their command. Griesbach, Lachmann, Tregelles, 
 Tischendorf , Westcott and Hort have the advantage 
 over them in the possession of an immense critical 
 apparatus which has been accumulating for three 
 hundred years. This apparatus includes not only 
 the oldest Greek MSS., but also the oldest versions 
 — Sjriac, Latin, Egyptian — and numerous quota- 
 tions of ante-Nicene and Nicene fathers (older than 
 Chrysostom); and among these various sources there 
 is a very remarkable agreement aud departure from 
 
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 207 
 
 the received text, though mostly of a verbal charac- 
 ter, and seldom touching a doctrine. We are now 
 able to go back from the printed text of the fifteenth 
 century and its basis, the Byzantine text of the fifth 
 century, to a text of the ante-Nicene age up to the 
 time of Irenseus or the middle of the second century. 
 
 It has taken a long time for scholars to become 
 emancipated from the tyranny of the Textus Recejp- 
 tus, and it will be a long time before the people can 
 be weaned from the authority of the vernacular ver- 
 sions based upon it. The German Version of Luther 
 and the English Version of 1611 are so idiomatic 
 and classical, and so full of faith and the Holy 
 Spirit, that they have deservedly a most powerful 
 hold on the popular mind and heart; and every 
 serious departure from them is apt to disturb asso- 
 ciations and cherished recollections of the dearest 
 and most sacred character. But the truth must pre- 
 vail at last over tradition and habit. Amicus Eras- 
 mus^ amicus Stephanus^ amicus Beza^ sed magis 
 amica Veritas. 
 
 The loss of the traditional text is more than made 
 up by the gain. The substance remains, the form 
 only is changed. The true text is shorter, but it is 
 also older, purer, and stronger. 
 
 By that we must abide until new discoveries bring 
 us still nearer to the inspired original. If we can- 
 not have the very best, let us have at least the next 
 best. If the apostolic autographs should ever be 
 discovered, which is extremely improbable, it would 
 create a new epoch in biblical learning, but it would 
 gc^rcely alter the text, which no doubt has been 
 
208 TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 
 providentially preserved from all essential altera- 
 tions. 
 
 THE GENEALOGICAL METHOD. 
 
 [This section was kindly contributed to this work by Professor Benj. 
 B. Warfield, D.D., of the Theological Seminary at Allegheny, Pa., now 
 at Princeton, N. J. He has made textual criticism a special study, and 
 has published since an able hUroduction to the Textual Criticism of the N. T. 
 (London, 1886). Comp. chs. ii. and iii. — P. S.} 
 
 In attempting to recover the original form of any 
 ancient text, the first step must always be to gather 
 the testimony, which in the New Testament is found 
 in the MSS., citations and versions. Just as inevita- 
 bly the next step must be the sifting, weighing, and 
 classifying of the testimony. It is, indeed, conceiv- 
 able that all witnesses might be equally important ; 
 but most certainly this is not ajpriori probable. It 
 is altogether likely prior to examination, rather, that 
 one witness is more weighty than another ; it is far 
 from improbable that many apparently important 
 witnesses may prove simply a body of repeaters. 
 Suppose, for instance, that printed as well as manu- 
 script copies were included in the collected material : 
 one edition may have comprised ten thousand im- 
 pressions ; another, equally good or better, only one 
 hundred ; and it would be clearly unfair, merely on 
 account of this accident of the number of impres- 
 sions, to allow one hundred times more weight to 
 the one edition than to the other. Similarly, from 
 one MS. there may have been made a thousand 
 copies ; from another, equally good or better, only 
 ten ; and it would be equally unfair, merely on ac- 
 count of this accident of t}ie nuniber of copies tafeen. 
 
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 209 
 
 to allow one hundred times more weight to the one 
 group than to the other. Unless, however, before 
 using our testimony at all, we begin by sifting and 
 classifying it, we run continual and unavoidable 
 risk of perpetrating this gross injustice. 
 
 An imaginary case, illustrated by a diagram, may 
 make these facts more apparent : 
 
 Autograph. 
 
 I 
 
 
 r 
 
 A 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 B 
 
 1 
 
 <! 
 
 1 1 
 
 N X 
 
 1 
 
 
 i 
 
 y 
 i 
 
 z 
 
 1 
 
 s 
 
 1 
 t 
 
 1 
 
 V 
 
 I I I I I I I I I 
 
 1234 56 789 
 
 Suppose three copies. A, B, C, are made of the auto- 
 graph, which is then destroyed. Suppose, further, 
 that C remains uncopied ; of B three copies, s, t, v, 
 are made ; and of A four, w, x, y, z, of which, again, 
 X, y, z become themselves the parents of the further 
 copies represented by numerals in the diagram. 
 We have now nineteen representatives of the auto- 
 graph from which we are to reconstruct it. Shall 
 we allow equal weight to each ? Clearly A and 9, 
 say, for instance, stand in very different relations to 
 the autograph, and it would be manifestly unfair to 
 allow them equal weight. Clearly, again, in the 
 presence of A, all its copies — sons and grandsons 
 alike — are useless to us; they contain legitimately 
 nothing not already in A, and therefore, both in the 
 cases where they are like it and in those where they 
 are unlike it, must be absolutely neglected. The 
 
210 TEXTUAL cntticUii. 
 
 same is, of course, true of the relation of s, t, V to B« 
 In other words, the fourteen MiSJS., A, w, x, y, z, 1-9, 
 can rank in combination as only one witness ; the 
 four, B, s, t, V, again as only one ; and, although we 
 possess ni7teteen documents, we have at last only 
 three witnesses. 
 
 Let us take another step, and suppose that as well 
 as the autograph, A, B, x, y, z are lost, so that we 
 possess only the fourteen MSS., C, s, t, v, w, 1-9 : 
 how would the case be altered? We certainly do 
 not, in thus decreasing the number of our copies, 
 increase the number of our witnesses, s, t, v would 
 still represent only three repeating witnesses of 
 what was in the one witness B; w, 1-9 would be 
 still, in all their divergencies from one another, only 
 corruptions from A, and hence worthless — in all 
 their agreements with one another only witnesses 
 to what was in A, and hence only one witness. 
 There are thus still only three witnesses to consider. 
 And it would be still manifestly misleading to treat 
 our documents as together constituting more wit- 
 nesses than three. We could not, indeed, now as in 
 the former case neglect the testimony of s, t, v, or 
 of w, 1-9 ; but we should not be able to treat each 
 of them as a direct witness to the autograph co-or- 
 dinate with the others or with C. The true method 
 of procedure would be to compare the various copies 
 among themselves, noting their affiliations, and thus 
 discovering that s, t, v constituted one group, while 
 1, 2, 3, 4, — 5, 6, — 7, 8, 9, each formed a sub-group, 
 which then united with each other and with w to 
 frame another group, while C stood alone. Thus, 
 
fEXTtJAL CRITICISM. 21 1 
 
 Working backward on the simple and almost self- 
 evident principle that community in readings means 
 community in origin, we should discover by the irre- 
 fragable evidence of the mutual resemblances and 
 divergences of documents what we know from the 
 diagram — namely, that we have three witnesses only 
 to consider, and that the whole group w, 1-9 is, in 
 point of originality, equal only to the one MS. C in 
 value. The qualifying phrase, " in point of original- 
 ity," has been designedly inserted ; for, although 
 this grouping of the documents is decisive as to 
 the question " how many witnesses have v^^e ?" and 
 necessarily reduces them to three, it says not one 
 word as to the relative values of those three witness- 
 ing groups. A, represented by the extant w, 1-9, 
 may be far better than, or it may be far worse than 
 C, represented by itself alone. The relative values 
 of the various witnesses cannot be determined until 
 after the grouping has been thoroughly done, and 
 then must be sought by testing the groups as wholes 
 by intrinsic and transcriptional evidence. 
 
 By means of our diagram we have thus obtained 
 the two first and most important rules of critical 
 procedure: 1, First classify the witnesses by means 
 of a careful study of the affiliation of the documents, 
 thus discovering how many real witnesses there are ; 
 and, 2, Then determine the relative values of these 
 witnesses through the use of the only applicable 
 evidence — i, e.^ intrinsic and transcriptional. Thus 
 alone can we mount to the autographic form of any 
 ancient text by secure steps. 
 
 The application of this method — universally in 
 
212 I'EXTtJAL CRITICISM. 
 
 use elsewhere — to the text of the New Testament 
 was first liinted at bj Bentley and Mill, and first 
 actually made by Bengel, followed especially by 
 Griesbach. It has been reserved, however, to our 
 own day and to Dr. Hort to perfect it. Dr. Hort 
 has pointed out that the extant MSS. of the New 
 Testament fall naturally into four great groups, 
 which he names Syrian, Western, Alexandrian, and 
 Neutral. The Syrian is, however, demonstrably of 
 late origin, and the result of a combination of the 
 other three. And therefore, just as in our imagi- 
 nary case all derivative evidence was to be rejected 
 in the presence of its sources, so also here the whole 
 Syrian group is of no value as testimony to us in 
 the presence of the groups out of which it was 
 made. In the reconstruction of the autographic 
 text we are concerned thus only with the three co- 
 ordinate groups, called Western, Alexandrian, and 
 Neutral. We have but to distribute the various 
 documents which have come down to us, each to its 
 proper group, in order to lay beneath us an impreg- 
 nable basis for our reconstruction of the autographic 
 text of the New Testament. 
 
 This task of distribution proves in the New Tes- 
 tament to be a very difficult and complicated one. 
 The different portions of the volume — Gospels, Acts, 
 Catholic Epistles, Pauline Epistles, and Revelation — 
 must be treated separately. Allowance must be 
 made for progressive growth of corruption within 
 the bounds of each class. And, above all, the prob- 
 lem is to an unparalleled degree complicated by 
 mixture between the groups, so that in many pas- 
 
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 213 
 
 sages it is exceedingly difficult, and sometimes im- 
 possible, to classify the readings with any certainty. 
 These difficulties and complications limit the appli- 
 cation of the genealogical method, as it is called, 
 so far, but cannot affect it in general, and do not 
 throw doubt upon it wherever it is applicable. 
 They force us to call to our aid other methods to 
 decide between readings in special passages and to 
 test our results in all passages; but in the main 
 portion of the New Testament, genealogical evi- 
 dence is thoroughly applicable and entirely decisive. 
 The vast majority of the extant documents — all 
 those of the later or cursive type — are assigned 
 definitively to the Syrian class, and hence are con- 
 victed as of secondary value as witnesses, and of no 
 value at all in the presence of the primary sources. 
 Only five MSS. are found to be throughout pre- 
 Syrian — viz., B, 5<, D, D2, G3 — of which B seems 
 purely Neutral in the Gospels, and D, D2, G3 purely 
 Western throughout. In the rest of the New Testa- 
 ment B has a Western element ; and x, though large- 
 ly Neutral, has Western and Alexandrian elements 
 throughout. Such MSS. as A, C, L, P, Q, K, T, Z, r, 
 A, and some few cursives, contain a larger or smaller 
 pre-Syrian element. The Old Latin Version seems 
 purely, the Curetonian Syriac predominatingly, 
 Western. The Memphitic was originally in all 
 probability purely pre-Syrian, and predominatingly 
 non- Western; the Thebaic is similar, but with a 
 larger Western element. The pre-Syrian element 
 among citations is largest in those from Origen, 
 Didymus, and Cyril of Alexandria. The following 
 
214 TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 
 very rough and ideal genealogical diagram may 
 perhaps suggest the above facts to the eye, as con- 
 cerning some of the chief documents in the Gospels. 
 
 Autograph.^ 
 
 I 
 
 I I I 
 
 an w 
 
 I I I 
 
 . I. I.. I I I I I I III 
 
 w'=a' a" a»" n» n" n"' n" w'=a' w" w'>' w'* 
 
 II II 
 
 II III 
 
 a'» a''"' n*''» n'* n'' n" = wa' wa w'" w' 
 
 a^ wan'=a'* B ii^ n*''=wan wan' wa'' w^'" w* 
 
 a*» waan = n*' 5t waaann=:wa'" w'* D 
 
 a'^'izrwaann Memph. waann' w* 
 
 I I 
 
 II -I 
 
 C waaann = wa'" w*' 
 
 [L] Old Latin, 
 
 The Alexandrian, Western, and Neutral groups — 
 which each originated in a single document — are 
 represented by the letters a, w, and n, respectively ; 
 the pure or mixed' representatives of each being 
 
 * This diagram is meant to represent the hind, not the degree, of rela- 
 tionship between documents. The reader must avoid being led to suppose, 
 for instance, that C, L, and Memph. are as closely related to one another 
 as the diagram represents them to be. 
 
 ' The usual genealogical sign of marriage (=) is used in the diagram 
 to denote mixture. 
 
TEXT0AL CRITICISM. 215 
 
 designated by the primed or combined letters. If 
 a reading now, for instance, is attested by D, &<, Old 
 Latin — seeing that D and the Old Latin are pure 
 descendants of w, and ^5 a mixed one, their common 
 inheritance of this reading may be accounted for as 
 coming from w, and they may therefore constitute 
 but a single witness for it. On the other hand, if 
 a reading is supported by B, x, D, it necessarily has 
 the support of both n and w — two out of three. 
 On the hypothesis that a, n, and w are of equal 
 value, the latter reading would be probably right, 
 and the former probably wrong. 
 
 Of course, however, the three original sources — 
 w% n, and a — are not of equal value. On testing the 
 groups that represent them by intrinsic and tran- 
 scriptional evidence — which, we must remember, is 
 the only applicable evidence — w betrays itself as 
 most painfully corrupt, and a as quite so, while n 
 approves itself as unusually pure. In cases of ter- 
 nary variation between the groups, that reading 
 which represents n is probably, therefore, correct, 
 and is usually supported as such by internal evi- 
 dence ; in cases of binary variation that reading for 
 which the group representing n throws its w^eight 
 is almost certainly correct, and is almost uniformly 
 proved to be such by internal evidence. (The ex- 
 ception consists mainly of those few passages classed 
 as Western non-interpolations.) The relative diver- 
 gence from the autograph of the several groups may 
 be roughly represented to the eye by the following 
 diagram, in which also we may observe anew the 
 value of certain combinations in the Gospels. 
 
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 
 TirugTkxt 
 
 If X y represents the line of absolutely true de- 
 scent, z q, along the course of which the various 
 Western documents may be ranged in growing cor- 
 ruption, will roughly represent the Western diver- 
 gence, t s the Neutral, and k v the Alexandrian ; w p 
 represents the Syrian. Now, it is evident that B, 
 placed at a point between k and t, or just beyond t 
 on the line t s, is the nearest to the originals of any 
 MS. B 5< will carry us back to a point on st x, or to 
 a point at, or prior to, k or z. B D will take us to, 
 or prior to, z. 5< D, on the contrary, may he equal 
 to B D, and so land us on z x; or may he equal to 
 D alone, and so carry us only amid the abounding 
 corruption of z q. And so on through the list. 
 
 In putting the genealogical method to practical 
 use in determining the text in individual passages, 
 the central problem is to translate testimony ex- 
 pressed in terms of individual manuscripts into 
 testimony expressed in terms of classes of manu- 
 scripts. It would be a great help to have in our 
 hands a trusty edition of the New Testament pre- 
 senting in parallel columns the four great classes of 
 text, each with itfi own various readings. In such 
 
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 217 
 
 case we should have only to turn to the passage in 
 our Testament and see the testimony marshalled 
 in order. Such an edition is, however, still a de- 
 sideratum,^ and, indeed, is by no means a necessity. 
 The information given in any good digest of read- 
 ings is sufficient to enable us to deal with most 
 passages at the expense of a little trouble and 
 thought, as if they had place in such an edition and 
 we could turn to them there and see at a glance the 
 readings of each class. Let us suppose, for instance, 
 that we wished to deal with a passage in the Gospels 
 in which one reading was supported by B, 5<, C, L, 
 Memph., Theb., Orig., and its rival by the remainder 
 of the witnesses : it is easy to see that in our desid- 
 erated edition the former reading, supported as it is 
 by the typical ]S"eutral and Alexandrian documents, 
 would stand in those columns, and the latter, for a 
 like reason, in the Western and Syrian columns. 
 B}^ simply noting the grouping of the documents 
 we can proceed, therefore, just as if all this pre- 
 liminary work had been already done to our hand 
 by somebody else. 
 
 The proper procedure is something like this: 
 First, let the Syrian testimony — which as collusive 
 testimony is no testimony — be sifted out. This 
 may be done roughly by confining our attention 
 for the moment to the pre-Syrian documents — that 
 is, to the earlier versions, the fathers before 250 A.D., 
 and to such MSS. as B, x, C, L, D, T, S, A, Z, K, Q, 33 
 
 ^ Its place is, especially in the Gospels, supplied for many purposes in a 
 general way by Mr. E. H. Hansell's parallel edition of the four great 
 MSS., A, B, C, b, 
 16 
 
218 TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 
 in the Gospels ; B, », A, C, D, E, 13, 61 in Acts ; B, 
 «, A, C, 13 in the Catholic Epistles ; B, x, A, C, D, 
 G, P, 17, 67** in Paul ; and k, A, C, P, 95, in Kev- 
 elation. Very frequently the reading will be found 
 to be already settled on the completion of this first 
 step ; on sifting out the Syrian testimony the varia- 
 tion is sifted out too. As this amounts to proving 
 the non-existence of the variation before A.D. 260, 
 the text thus acquired is very certain. An example 
 may be seen in John v. 8, where the received text 
 reads tyeipm with support which disappears entirely 
 with the Syrian documents, while its rival, tyeips, is 
 left with the support of B, i<, C, D, L, etc. A like 
 case is Mark i. 2, where ''the prophets ^^ is read only 
 by documents which sift out by this process, leaving 
 its rival, "Isaiah, the prophet^'' still testified to by 
 B, K, D, L, A, 33, Latt., Memph., and Syrr. Pst, Hlc. 
 mg. and Hier. We add three further examples 
 from Mark : iv. 24, where B, fi<, C, D, L, A, Latt., 
 Memph. omit 'Hhat hear^'^ against Syrian witness 
 only ; xv. 28, where the whole verse is omitted by 
 B, fi<, A, C, D, Theb., against Syrian (and late West- 
 ern) witness; iii. 29, where "^m" is read instead of 
 "-judgment " by B, x, L, A, 33 (C, D), Latt., Memph., 
 against purely Syrian opposition. In such cases, 
 our procedure cannot be doubtful. 
 
 Often, however, after this first step has been 
 taken, we seem hardly nearer our goal than at the 
 outset ; there are still rival readings — two or some- 
 times three — among which we are to find the orig- 
 inal one. The next step in such case is to assign 
 these remaining readings to their own proper classes. 
 
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 219 
 
 This is done by noting carefully the attestation of 
 each, with a view to determining the class to which 
 the group supporting each belongs. This is not 
 always an easy task, but it is usually a possible 
 one. Suppose, for instance, we have before us at 
 this stage two readings in a passage of the Gos- 
 pels — the one supported by D, Old Lat., Cur. Syr., 
 and the other by B, 5<, C, L — it is very easy to see 
 that the former would stand in our wished -for 
 edition in the Western column, and the latter in 
 the Neutral and Alexandrian columns ; or, in other 
 words, that the former would take us in our diagram 
 only somewhere on the line z q, while the latter 
 would carry us to the point of juncture of the 
 Neutral and Alexandrian lines. So, also, if the at- 
 testation were divided rather thus : B, x, D, Old Lat., 
 Yulg.,Memph., Theb., against C,L, it would be easy 
 to see that the former was Neutral and Western, and 
 the latter Alexandrian ; or, in other words, that the 
 former would take us to point z on the diagram, the 
 latter only somewhere on the line t v. Our pro- 
 cedure in such cases, again, could not be doubtful. 
 The following are examples of such cases : In John 
 i. 4, e(TTiv is read by &^,D, Codd. mentioned by Origen, 
 Old Lat., Cur. Syr., Theb. ; that is, by documents typi- 
 cally Western in conjunction with others containing 
 larger or smaller Western elements: it belongs on the 
 line z q. Its rival, i^v, is read by B, C, L, r, Memph., 
 Yulg., Syrr. ; or, in other words, by documents Neu- 
 tral, or Neutral and Alexandrian : to it, therefore, 
 the genealogical argument points as probably the 
 correct readiu]^. The interesting reading of Mark 
 
220 TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 
 ix. 23, adopted by the Eevisers of the English New 
 Testament, is another case in point — restoring the 
 vivid form of the original, as it does, against the 
 flatter corruption supported by D, 33, Old Lat., 
 Yulg., Syrr., i. e.^ by the Western class. Other ex- 
 amples from Mark are : Mark ix. 44, last clause of 45, 
 and 46, omitted by B, x, C, L, A, Mem ph. = Neutral 
 and Alexandrian, inserted by D, Old Lat., Yulg., 
 Syrr. = Western; Mark ix. 49, last clause, omitted by 
 B, K, L, A, and inserted by C, D, Latt., Syrr., where 
 the defection of C to the Western side introduces 
 no complication, seeing that C has a Western ele- 
 ment ; Mark xi. 26, omitted by B, x, L, A, and insert- 
 ed by 0, D, Latt., Syrr. Other examples may be 
 found in all the clauses omitted by the Revised 
 English Version from the Lord's Prayer as recorded 
 by Luke. 
 
 It is not asserted, of course, that the genealogical 
 method will do everything; or that there are no 
 passages in which it leaves the true reading in doubt 
 or in darkness. But it is asserted, as is illustrated 
 by the foregoing examples, that it is easy to apply 
 it in the great majority of cases, and that it is sound 
 wherever applicable. Its results ought to be always 
 tested by other methods — by internal evidence of 
 groups first, and internal evidence of readings after- 
 wards. From this testing the method emerges tri- 
 umphant ; although in a few rare cases we are 
 preserved by it from a wrong application of the 
 genealogical argument. Extreme and very interest- 
 ing instances of this may be found in tliose passages 
 which are technically called by Dr. Hort " Western 
 
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 221 
 
 non - interpolations." There are only some half- 
 dozen of these, but they are very instructive. 
 Matt, xxvii. 49 is a fair sample. Here B, x, C, L, 
 (U), r, etc., unite in inserting the sentence, '''But an- 
 other^ taking a s^ear^ pierced his side, and there came 
 forth water and 'blood^'' against the opposition of 
 Western (and Syrian) documents only. Now it is 
 quite impossible to accept this sentence: it looks 
 strange in this context, it has the appearance of 
 coming from John xix. 34, and it is very surprising 
 that the Western class, the chief characteristic of 
 which is insertion, should here be the sole omitter. 
 Both intrinsic evidence and transcriptional evidence 
 speak so strongly against the sentence, indeed, that 
 the editors unanimously reject it. Is the genealog- 
 ical method here at fault? No; our application 
 of it only is corrected. We must remember that 
 genealogical investigation does not itself determine 
 for us the relative values of the different classes ; it 
 merely distributes the documents into these classes, 
 and leaves to internal evidence the other task (see 
 p. 211). And internal evidence determines general 
 and usual relations, not invariable ones. It tells us 
 that, the documents having been distributed into 
 the Neutral, Alexandrian, and Western classes on 
 genealogical considerations, the Neutral class is the 
 best, and hence is usually to be trusted — the West- 
 ern the worst, and hence is usually to be distrusted. 
 It does not tell us that the Western reading is neces- 
 sarily always wrong. The significance of such ex- 
 ceptions as the one under discussion is simply this: 
 in a few rare cases the stem from which the classes 
 
il22 
 
 TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 
 diverge received corruption after the Western diver- 
 gence, and before the Neutral or Alexandrian diver- 
 gence ; in other words, between z and k on the 
 diagram. A glance at the diagram will show how 
 consistent this result is with the method; it informs 
 us only that B D takes us to an earlier point than 
 B phis non-Western C, and warns us never to be 
 satisfied with a mechanical application of a rule, 
 however generally valid it may appear. So far 
 from such exceptions to the ordinary application 
 of genealogical evidence proving destructive of its 
 principle, therefore, they form one of the best and 
 strongest confirmations of it. They are the jags in 
 the papers' edges, the fitting of which proves that 
 we are on the right track. 
 
 A list of the chief variations in one chapter of 
 the Gospels is added below for the examination of 
 the student. 
 
 Readings of thk Fifth Chapter of St. Matthew.* 
 
 (I)Ver. 1 
 
 TrpoffTJXSrav 
 
 W.,T.,Tr. 
 
 B,K. 
 
 
 
 TrporrriX^ov 
 
 
 C,T>,r, A— Western. 
 
 (2) " 
 
 4,5 
 
 order of verses (5, 4) 
 
 T., Tr. 
 
 D, 33, Old Lat.,Vulg., Cur. 
 Syr.— Western. 
 
 
 
 " « " (4,5) 
 
 W. 
 
 B, X, C, r, A, Memph., Syrr. 
 
 (3) « 
 
 9 
 
 add avroi 
 
 [W., Tr.] 
 
 B, r, A, Cur. Syr., Memph. 
 
 
 
 omit " 
 
 T. 
 
 i<, C, J), Latt.,Fst.— West- 
 
 (4) " 
 
 11 
 
 add prjfia 
 
 
 em. 
 C, r. A, Syrr.,Orig.— ^ lex- 
 andrian. 
 
 
 
 omit " 
 
 W., Tr., T. 
 
 B, ^«, D, Latt., Memph. 
 
 » In this list the third column gives the editors who have accepted 
 each reading — W. standing for Westcott and Hort, T. for Tischendorf 
 (latest text), and Tr. for Tregelles. The fourth column gives the wit- 
 i^esses for each reading. 
 
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 
 223 
 
 (5) Ver. 11 
 
 (6) " 13 
 
 (7) « 22 
 
 (8) « « 
 
 (9) " 23 
 
 (10) « 26 
 
 (11) « 27 
 
 (12) " 28 
 
 (13) " 30 
 
 (14) " 32 
 
 (15) " " 
 
 (16) « 37 
 
 (17) " 39 
 
 add ^tvSonEVoi 
 omit " 
 
 omit €('*c»7 
 insert " 
 
 paKo. 
 
 KOLKtl 
 
 Kai tKtl 
 
 omit (TE 7rapad<^ 
 
 insert " " 
 
 omit to7q apX' 
 
 add " « 
 
 omit avTr]V (Ist) 
 insert " 
 
 /5X?;3y €. y. 
 
 Trac 6 ttTToX. 
 oa iav clttoX. 
 
 fioixaa^at 
 
 tOTit) 
 
 effrai 
 
 pairiZ.H etc 
 paTTiatt ini 
 
 W.,T.,Tr. 
 
 [Tr.mg.] 
 
 W.,Tr.,T. 
 
 W.,Tr.mg., 
 T. 
 [Tr.] 
 
 W., Tr. 
 
 W.,T.,Tr. 
 
 Tr. mg. 
 
 W.,T. 
 
 [Tr.J 
 
 W.,T.,Tr. 
 
 T. 
 
 [W.],Tr. 
 W.,Tr.,T. 
 
 Tr., T. 
 
 [W.] 
 
 W.,T.,Tr. 
 
 W.,T.,Tr. 
 
 W. mg. 
 
 W.,T.,Tr. 
 
 Tr. rag. 
 
 B, X, C, r, A, Vulg., Cur. 
 
 Syr., Pst., Memph. 
 D, Old Lat., Origen.— 
 
 Western. 
 B,K,C,33, Syr.Hcl.,Orig. 
 D, r, A (L&tt.')— Western. 
 B,K,Vulg.,Orig. 
 
 D, L, r, A, 33, Old Lat., 
 Cur. Syr., Syrr., Memph. 
 — Western. 
 
 X, D, Old Lat., etc.— West- 
 em. 
 
 B, etc. 
 
 B, fi<, L, r, 33, Orig. 
 
 D, A, etc. — Western. 
 
 B,5<. 
 
 (D), L, r, A, 33, Old Lat., 
 Vulg., Cur. Syr., Theb., 
 Memph., Pst. — Western. 
 
 B, X, D, r. Old Lat., 
 Memph., Pst. 
 
 L, A, 33, Cur. Syr., Hcl., 
 Vulg. — A lexandrian ? 
 
 fi<. A, Clems., Orig. 3 times. 
 
 B, D, L, r. 
 
 B, &t, 83, Old Lat., Vulg., 
 Cur. Syr., Memph. 
 
 L, r. A, Syrr. — Alexan- 
 drian. 
 
 B, &<,L,A,33,Vulg.,Syrr. 
 
 D, Old Lat., Cur. Syr., 
 Memph. — Western. 
 
 B, K, D, 33, Orig. 
 
 Ij, a — A lexandrian ? 
 
 i<,D,L,A,01dLat.,Vulg., 
 Clems, (once). 
 
 B, Clems, (once). 
 
 B, K (33). 
 
 D,L, A— Western* 
 
224 
 
 TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 
 
 (18)' 
 
 Ver.39 
 
 (19) 
 
 « 
 
 41 
 
 (20) 
 
 « 
 
 42 
 
 (21) 
 
 <( 
 
 44 
 
 (22) 
 
 (( 
 
 46 
 
 (23) 
 
 (( 
 
 47 
 
 (24) 
 
 « 
 
 (t 
 
 (25) 
 
 (( 
 
 « 
 
 (26) 
 
 (( 
 
 48 
 
 (27) 
 
 a 
 
 « 
 
 omit aov 
 add « 
 dyyapevau 
 dyyapevay 
 
 SiSov 
 omit clauses 
 
 add clauses 
 
 ro avTo 
 ovTiog 
 
 ddaXtp. 
 
 (piXovQ 
 kBviKoi 
 
 TtXiovai 
 
 TO aVTO 
 OVTtt)Q 
 
 d)g 
 
 ioainp 
 
 6 ovpdvioQ 
 
 iv T. ovpavdiQ 
 
 T. 
 [W.] Tr. 
 W.,Tr.,T. 
 
 W.,Tr.,T. 
 
 W.,Tr.,T. 
 
 W.,T. 
 W.mg.,Tr. 
 
 W.,T.,Tr. 
 
 W.,Tr.,T. 
 
 W.,Tr.,T. 
 
 W.,Tr.,T. 
 W.,Tr.,T. 
 
 N, 33, Orig. 
 
 B, D, L, A, Latt. 
 
 B,L,(D). 
 
 X, A, 33_Pre«tem? 
 
 B, K, D. 
 
 L, A — Alexandrian^ 
 
 B, &t, Latt., Memph., Cur. 
 
 Syr., Orig. 
 D, L, A, 33, ittc— West- 
 ern. 
 B, K, L, A, Syrr., (Latt.). 
 D, Z,33, Cur. Syr., Memph. 
 
 — Western. 
 B, X, D, Latt., Cur. Syr., 
 
 Pst., Memph. 
 L, A — A lexandrian ? 
 B, K, D, Latt., Memph., 
 
 Cur. Syr. 
 L, A, Pst. — A lexandrian f 
 B, X, D, 33, Pst., (Latt.). 
 L, A, Memph., Cur. Syr. — 
 
 A lexandrian ? 
 B, X, L, Z, 33, Clems., Orig. 
 D, A — Western. 
 B, K, L, Z,33,Vulg., Syr. 
 
 Hcl. 
 (D),A,01dLat.,Pst.,Cuii 
 
 ^yt,— Western, 
 
CHAPTER SIXTH. 
 
 HISTORY OF THE PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TES. 
 TAMENT. 
 
 The history of the printed text of the Greek 
 Testament may be divided into three periods : 
 
 (1.) The period of the unlimited reign of the 
 Received Text, so called, from 1516 to 1750 or 1770. 
 
 (2.) The transition period from the Received Text 
 to the older Uncial Text, 1770 to 1830. 
 
 (3.) The restoration of the oldest and purest text, 
 1830 to 1881. 
 
 More than half a century elapsed after the inven- 
 tion of the art of printing before the New Testament 
 was published in the original Greek.' The honor 
 
 * I mean the whole Greek Testament. For the celebrated printer, Aldo 
 Manuzio (the elder, 1447-1515), had previously published the first six 
 chapters of the Gospel of John at Venice in 1504; and the Magnificat of 
 Mary, Luke i. 46-55, and the Benedictus of Zacharias, Luke i. 68-79, were 
 added to a beautiful Greek Psalter in the year 1486. The Latin Vulgate 
 was first published at Mayence, in 1455 (the Mazarin Bible), before any 
 other book. The German Bible was also printed before the Greek and 
 Hebrew original. No less than fourteen editions of the German Bible in 
 the High-German dialect were printed before 1518 (at Mayence, 1462; at 
 Strassburg, 1466 ; at Augsburg, 1475 ; at NUrnberg or Basle, 1470, etc.), 
 and four in the Low-German dialect from 1480 to 1522 (at Cologne, 1480; 
 at LUbeck, 1494, etc.). See Fritzsche's art. Deutsche Bibeliibers. in Herzog 
 (new ed.), iii. 545 sqq., and Kehrein, Gesch. der deutschen Biheluhersetzung 
 vor Luther, Stuttg. 1851. England, which now far surpasses all other 
 countries in the publication and circulation of the Scriptures, was far 
 behind the Continent in the sixteenth century. Wiclif's version existed 
 
226 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 of pioneership in this great enterprise is divided 
 between a Roman Catholic cardinal of Spain and a 
 serai -Protestant scholar of Switzerland (originally 
 of Holland). The former began first, with a num- 
 ber of helpers and boundless resources of money; 
 but the latter, single-handed and poof, overtook him 
 by superior learning and enterprise. The same 
 pope, Leo X., who personally cared more for letters 
 and arts than for religion, authorized the publica- 
 tion of both editions, and thus unconsciously pro- 
 moted the cause of Protestantism, which appeals to 
 the Greek Testament as the highest and only infalli- 
 ble authority in matters of faith, and which claims 
 the right and owns the duty to print and spread the 
 Word of God in every language on earth. The 
 Jews had anticipated the Christians by publishing 
 the Hebrew Bible several years before (in 1488 at 
 Soncino in Lombardy, and again at Brescia, 1494). 
 
 Dr. Reuss, of Strassburg, who is in possession 
 of the largest private collection of editions of the 
 
 then only in manuscript. The first edition of William Tyndale's English 
 New Testament was printed on the Continent (partly at Cologne, partly 
 at Worms) in 1526, secretly smuggled into England, and burned by order 
 of the bishop of London (Tunstall) in St. Paul's churchyard, not far from 
 the Oxford Bible Warehouse in Paternoster Row and the Bible House of 
 the British and Foreign Bible Society on the banks of the Thames, from 
 which thousands and millions of Bibles in all languages are now sent to 
 the ends of the earth. The archbishop of Canterbury (Warham) bought 
 a large number of copies at an expense of nearly a thousand pounds sterling 
 for destruction, but thereby furnished the translator the means for printing 
 a new edition. Hence the scarcity of the first edition, of which only two 
 copies and a fragment survive. Tyndale " caused the boy who driveth 
 the plough to know more of the Scriptures than did all the priests " of his 
 day. See Eadie, History of the English Bible, i. 129, 161, 173 sq., 184. 
 
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 227 
 
 Greek Testament, gives a chronological list of 584 
 distinct and 151 title editions of the Greek Testa- 
 ment (501 and 139 being complete), which were 
 printed from 1514 to 1870. He divides them into 
 twenty-seven families.' This list has been enlarged 
 in 1882 to the number of 924 by Professor Hall (see 
 First Appendix). He estimates the total number of 
 printed copies of the entire Greek Testament, as far 
 as he can trace them, on the basis of 1000 to each 
 edition, to be over one million. A large number, 
 and yet very small as compared with that of the 
 English New Testament, of which the American 
 Bible Society alone issues nearly half a million of 
 copies every year.'* 
 
 ' See his Bihliotheca Novi Test. Greed (1872), and Appendix I. Reuss 
 classifies his editions as follows: 
 
 I. Editio Complutensis ; II. Editiones Erasmicae ; III. Edido Compluto- 
 Erasmica ; IV. Editio Colinaei ; V. Editiones Stephanicae ; VI. Editiones 
 Erasmo-Stephanicse ; VII. Editiones Compluto-Stephanicae ; VIII. Edi- 
 tiones Bezanae ; IX. Editiones Stephano-Bezanae ; X. Editiones Stephano- 
 Plantinianffi ; XI. Editiones Elzevirianae ; XII. Editiones Stephano- 
 Elzevirianae ; XIII. Editiones Elzeviro - Plantinianae ; XIV. Editiones 
 criticse ante-Griesbachianae ; XV. Editiones Griesbachianae; XVI. Edi- 
 tiones Matthaeianae; XVII. Editiones Griesbachio-Elzevirianae; XVIII. 
 Editiones Knappianse; XIX. Editiones criticae nainores post-Grieft- 
 bachianae ; XX. Editiones Scholzianae (including the Bloomfield and the 
 Bagster editions, London); XXI. Editiones Lachmannianae; XXII. Edi- 
 tiones Griesbachio-Lachmannianae; XXIII. Editiones Tischendorfianae ; 
 XXIV. Editiones mixtae recentiores (Theile, Muralt, Reithmayr, Anger, 
 Wordsworth, Hahn); XXV. Editiones nondum coUatse; XXVI. Editi- 
 ones dubiae ; XXVII. Editiones spuriae. To these should be added the 
 Tregelles editions; the Westcott and Hort editions; the Oxford and 
 Cambridge editions of the Revisers' text. The American editions (over 
 one hundred and fifty) are reprints of European families, mostly of the 
 textus receptus and its derivatives. 
 
 '■^ The issues of the New Testament in English from tlie Bible House 
 at New York, by sale and donation, are as follows; 
 
228 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 I confine myself here to the standard editions, 
 which mark an epoch in the history of textual crit- 
 icism. Compare the full titles and specimen pages 
 in the Second Appendix. 
 
 I. The Period of the Textus Kecepttjs: from 
 Erasmus and Stephens to Bengel and Wet- 
 stein.— A.D. 1516-1750. 
 
 the textus receptus. 
 
 This period extends from the Reformation to the 
 middle of the eighteenth century. The text of 
 Erasmus, with various changes and improvements 
 of Stephens, Beza, and the Elzevirs, assumed a stere- 
 otyped character, and acquired absolute dominion 
 among scholars. No two editions are precisely 
 alike, any more than the editions of the Authorized 
 English Version ; but all present substantially the 
 same text. The changes are numerous, but rarely 
 affect the sense. The Greek Testaments printed in 
 England are usually based on Stephens and Beza; 
 those on the Continent, on the Elzevirs. 
 
 The Protestant versions of the sixteenth and sev- 
 enteenth centuries (German, French, Dutch, English) 
 in common use were made from this Erasmo-Elze- 
 
 A.D. 1880, 540,065 copies. 
 
 1881, 491,105 " 
 
 1882, 424,642 " 
 
 A.D. 1883, 524,416 copies. 
 - , 1884, 552,629 « 
 1885, 397,177 « 
 
 In 1886 the British and Foreign Bible Soc. published 568,610 whole Eng- 
 lish Bibles, and 1,123,903 English New Tests.; the American Bible Soa 
 295,769 English Bibles, and 326,918 English New Tests. 
 
PRINTED TEXT Or THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 229 
 
 virian text, and gained the same authority among 
 the laity which the former enjoyed among scholars. 
 Both were practically considered to be the inspired 
 Word of God, and every departure from them was 
 looked upon with distrust. This pious superstition, 
 although gradually undermined during the present 
 century, still lingers, and will die very reluctantly ; 
 for religious prejudices and habits are exceedingly 
 tenacious. 
 
 The Koman Catholic Church is not bound to a 
 particular Greek text, but holds instead with even 
 greater tenacity to Jerome's Vulgate, w^hich, as a 
 translation, is still further removed from the foun- 
 tain of inspiration, though based in part on an older 
 text than the textus receptus. The Council of Trent 
 has put this defective version even on a par with, 
 and virtually above, the sacred original, and thus 
 checked all serious progress in biblical criticism and 
 exegesis. Roman Catholic editions of the Greek 
 Testament are behind the age, and mostly mere re- 
 prints of the Complutensian text, either alone or 
 combined with the Erasmian, both having the quasi- 
 sanction of the pope (Leo X.). The edition of the 
 Roman Catholic scholar, Scholz, contains a vast crit- 
 ical apparatus, but has no ecclesiastical sanction. 
 The only duly and fully authorized Roman Catholic 
 Bible is the Clementine Yulgate, and that needs a 
 thorough critical revision. 
 
 ERASMUS. 
 
 The first published (not printed) edition of the 
 Greek Testament is that of the famous Desiderius 
 
230 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 Erasmus (urged by his enterprising publisher, Fro 
 benius, who offered to pay him as much " as any- 
 body "), at Basle, Switzerland, 1516, fol. 
 
 It was a most timely publication, just one year 
 before the Reformation. Erasmus was the best 
 classical scholar of his age (a better Latinist than 
 Hellenist), and one of the forerunners of the Refor- 
 mation, although he afterwards withdrew from it, 
 and died on the division line between two ages and 
 two churches (1536). He furnished Luther and 
 Tyndale the text for their vernacular versions, which 
 became the most powerful levers of the Reforma- 
 tion in Germany and England.' 
 
 The first edition was taken chiefly from two in- 
 ferior Basle MSS., one of the Gospels and one of 
 the Acts and the Epistles : they are still preserved 
 in the University library at Basle, and have the 
 corrections of Erasmus and the marks of the print- 
 er's pages (as I myself observed on a visit in 1879). 
 They date from the fourteenth or fifteenth century. 
 Erasmus compared them with two or three others 
 on the same books. For the Apocalypse he had 
 only one MS., of the twelfth century, borrowed from 
 Reuchlin, then lost sight of, but found again in 
 
 ' The Sorboiine in 1527 condemned thirty-two articles of Erasmus 
 extracted from his works, after having previously forbidden the circula- 
 tion of his Colloquia in France. But he enjoyed the pope's friendship to 
 the last, and was even oflFered a cardinal's hat, which he declined on 
 account of old age. He died without a priest, but invoking the mercy 
 of Christ, and lies buried in the Protestant Minster of Basle. Com p. on 
 Erasmus the monographs of MUller (1828), Drumraond (1873), Gilly (1879), 
 and the article " Erasmus " by Stahelin in Herzog's " Encykl." vol. iv, 
 278-290, new ed. (abridged in Schaff's « EncycL" L 763). 
 
1»RINTED TEXT OE THE Gl^EEK TESTAMENT. 231 
 
 1801 ; ' defective on the last leaf (containing the 
 last six verses, which he retranslated from the Vul- 
 gate into poor Greek). Made in great haste, in less 
 than six months, and full of errors. Elegant Latin 
 version, differing in many respects from the Vulgate, 
 with brief annotations. Dedicated to Pope Leo X., 
 who is reminded of his duty to " make known to 
 the Christians again the commandments of their 
 Master out of the evangelical and apostolic writings 
 themselves." 
 
 Erasmus prepared, with the aid of QEcolampadius 
 (the friend of Zwingli and reformer of Basle), in 
 all ^ve successive editions, with improvements, all 
 Grseco- Latin. Second edition, 1519 (the basis of 
 Luther's translation) ; third, 1522; fourth, much im- 
 proved, 1527 ; fifth, 1535. Besides, more than thirty- 
 unauthorized reprints are said to have appeared at 
 Venice, Strassburg, Basle, Paris, etc. 
 
 The entire apparatus of Erasmus never exceeded 
 eight MSS. The oldest and best of them he used 
 least, because* he was afraid of it — namely, a cursive 
 of the tenth century, numbered 1, which agrees 
 better with the uncial than with the received text. 
 He also took the liberty of occasionally correcting 
 or supplementing his text from the Vulgate ; and 
 hence in more than twenty places his Greek text is 
 not supported by any known Greek MS. 
 
 Note. — Reuss gives the titles of the five Erasmian editions, and says 
 (Biblioth. p. 26) that they vary in sixty-two out of a thousand places 
 which he compared. Mill's estimate of the variations (four hundred in 
 
 ^ By Dr. Delitzsch, in the library of the princely house of Oettingen% 
 Wallerstein. See his Handschriftliche Funde, Heft i. and ii., 1861 and 1862. 
 
232 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 the second edition) is far below the mark ; see Scrivener, Introd. p. 385. 
 Of the first edition, Erasmus himself says that it was prepared with head- 
 long haste Q^ prcecipitatum fuit verius quam editum"'), in order that his 
 publisher might anticipate the publication of the Complutensian Polyglot. 
 There was therefore some rivalry and speculation at work. The second 
 edition is more correct, but even this (as Dr. O. von Gebhardt, in his G?\ 
 Germ. Test., p. xvi., says) contains several pages of errors, some of which 
 have affected Luther's German version. The third edition first inserted 
 the spurious passage of the three witnesses (1 John v. 7), " e codice Britan- 
 nico" i. e., from the Codex Montfortianus of the sixteenth century ; but 
 Erasmus did not consider it genuine, and admitted it only from policy^ 
 "we cui/oret ansa calumniandi." The Complutensian Polyglot had it 
 with two slight variations. The fourth edition of Erasmus adds, in a 
 third parallel column, the Latin Vulgate, besides the Greek and his own 
 version ; it has also many changes and improvements from the Complu- 
 tensian Polyglot, especially in Revelation. The fifth edition omits the 
 Vulgate, but otherwise hardly differs from the fourth; and from these 
 two, in thu main, the Textus Receptus is ultimately derived. 
 
 THE COMPLUTENSIAN POLYGLOT. 
 
 The Complutensian New Testament is a part of 
 the Polyglot Bible of Complutum, or Alcala de 
 Hen ares, in Spain. This opus 7nagnum, the great- 
 est of the kind since the Hexapla of Origen, was 
 prepared under the direction and at the expense of 
 Cardinal Francis Ximenes de Cisneros, Archbishop 
 of Toledo, Great Inquisitor, and Prime-minister of 
 Spain, and published in 1520, with papal approba- 
 tion, in 6 vols, fol.^ Tlie work was begun in 1502, in 
 celebration of the birth of Charles Y., and the New 
 Testament was completed Jan. 10, 1514 (two years 
 
 * See a full account of the University of Alcala, founded by the cardinal 
 (1508), in Hefele's Der Cardinal Ximenes, Tubingen, 1844, pp. 101 sqq., 
 and of the Polyglot, pp. 120 sqq. Also in Tregelles, Account of ike Printed 
 Text, etc., pp. 1-19. 
 
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 233 
 
 before the issue of the edition of Erasmus) ; the 
 fourth vohime July 10,- 1517 (the year of the Eefor- 
 mation), but not published till 1520 or 1521 (four 
 years after the first edition of Erasmus, who did not 
 see the Polyglot till 1522), and three years after the 
 cardinal's death (who died 1517, at the age of eighty- 
 one). Pope Leo would not give his approbation till 
 March 22, 1520;' even then there was some delay, 
 and the work did not get into general circulation 
 before 1522. 
 
 The cardinal desired by this herculean work to 
 revive the study of the Bible, which was so deplora- 
 bly neglected before the Keformation. Every the- 
 ologian, he says, should draw the water of life from 
 the fountain of the original text. He was willing 
 to give up all his knowledge of civil law for the 
 explanation of a single passage of the Bible. He 
 acquired some knowledge of Hebrew and Chaldee 
 in his ripe years. He employed for the Polyglot 
 the best scholars he could get, at a high salary; 
 among them three converted Jews. The most emi- 
 nent were Lopez de Zuniga (Stunica, or Astunga, 
 known from his controversies with Erasmus), De- 
 metrius Dukas of Crete, and Nunez de Guzman. 
 They again employed pupils and scribes. The cost 
 of the work for manuscripts, salaries, and printing 
 expenses exceeded the enormous sum of 50,000 
 ducats, or about $150,000. But this was only 
 one fourth of the cardinal's annual income. "He 
 
 * This is the correct date ; not M^rcU 20, 1621 (as Hug gives \t), S^q 
 Hefele, I. c. p. 142. 
 
 17 
 
234: PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 had the income of a king and the wants of a 
 monk." ' 
 
 Only six hundred copies were printed, and sold 
 at 6J ducats per copy ; so that the total sale would 
 not have refunded the twelfth part of the cost. 
 Copies are exceedingly rare and dear. (See the fac- 
 simile in Append. II.) 
 
 The IS'ew Testament forms vol. v., and gives the 
 Greek and the Latin Yulgate in two columns (the 
 Greek being broader), with parallel passages and 
 quotations on the Latin margin. The chapters are 
 marked, but no verses (which were not known be- 
 fore 1551). Several prefaces of Jerome and other 
 additions are appended, among them five Greek and 
 Latin poems in praise of Ximenes. The second, 
 third, and fourth volumes contain the Old Testa- 
 ment with the Apocrypha. The canonical books 
 of the Old Testament are given in three languages: 
 the Latin Yulgate characteristically holds the place 
 of honor in the middle, between the Greek Septua- 
 gint and the Hebrew original. This signifies, ac- 
 cording to the Prolegomena, that Christ, i, e., the 
 Roman or Latin Church, was crucified between two 
 robbers, i. e., the Jewish Synagogue and the schis- 
 matical Greek Church ! "" The sixth volume contains 
 lexica, indexes, etc. 
 
 The text of the New Testament is mostly derived 
 
 ' Hefele, p. 126. 
 
 ^ Some have denied that Ximenes MTote this preface, since he elsewhere 
 gave the preference to the original text. Hefele (p. 136) vindicates it to 
 the cardinal, but thinks that he meant only to disparage the Si/nagogup 
 and tl^e Greek Church, but not the ffehew text nor tlte Septua^nt, 
 
PEINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 235 
 
 from late and inferior MSS. not specified, and not de- 
 scribed except in the vague and exaggerated terms 
 *' very ancient and correct " {antiquissima et emenda- 
 tissima), and procured from Eome, for which Leo X. 
 is thanked in the Preface/ 
 
 The Complutensian text was reprinted, though 
 not without some changes, by Christopher Plantin 
 at Antwerp (1564? 1573, 1574, 1584, 1590, etc.), at 
 Geneva (1609, 1619, 1620, 1628, 1632), in the Ant- 
 werp Polyglot (edited by Spaniards under Philip 11., 
 1571 and 1572), in the great Paris Polyglot (1630-33, 
 in the ninth and tenth volumes), and by Goldhageji 
 at Mayence (1753). More recently it was carefully 
 re-edited by P. A. Gratz (Roman Catholic Professor 
 at Tiibingen, afterwards at Bonn), with changes in 
 the orthography and punctuation, and with the Clem- 
 entine Yulgate (Tiibingen, 1821 ; 2d ed. Mayence, 
 1827; 3d ed. 1851, in 2 vols.), and by Leander van 
 Ess (1827), who, however, incorporated the text of 
 Erasmus with it.'' By the third edition of Stephens 
 it is to some extent connected with the textus 're- 
 
 * On the textual sources of the Complutensian Poh^glot. see Tregelles, 
 I. c. pp. 12-18. Hefele (p. 132) says, the Greek text of the Polypi. .t 
 stands there without any authority, as if it were fallen from heaven. 
 Reuss (Biblioth. pp. 16-24) gives a list of the readings peculiar to (liis 
 Greek Testament. The great Vatican MS. (B) was not used. 
 
 ' The title of this editio Compluto-Erasmica is Novum Test. Gr. et T.nf. 
 expressum ad hinas edifiones a Leone X. P. M. ndprohatus Comphtfen.'"'-'i 
 scilicet et Erasmi Roterod.. with the Clementine text of the Vulgate in 
 parallel columns, and readings from Stephens, Matthaei, and Griesbach in 
 foot-notes. Tubingae, 1827. Leander van Ess was a zealous promoter of 
 the study of the Bible among Roman Catholics. His invaluable librirv 
 was acquired for the library of the Union Theological Seminftiy \xi New 
 ^prk tl^PHgh the ageocy of Dr, Edwar^ Jlobinson, 
 
236 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 ce^tus of Protestants ; but in its original shape it 
 may be called the Roman Catholic text, as far as 
 there is such a text. 
 
 COLIN^US. 
 
 Simon Colin^us (Simon de Colines), a printer at 
 Paris, and step -father of Pobert Stephanus, pub- 
 lished at Paris, 1534, a Greek Testament, which is 
 in part an eclectic mixture of the Erasmian and 
 Complutensian texts, but contains many readings in- 
 troduced for the first time on manuscript authority.* 
 
 STEPHANUS. 
 
 The editions of the great printer and scholar, 
 Robert Stephanus, or Stephens'* (1503-59), were 
 published at Paris in 1546 and 1549, 16mo (called, 
 from the first words of the preface, the mirificam 
 editions) ; 1550, in folio ; and at Geneva, in 1551, 
 16mo. His son Henry (1528-98) collated the MSS. 
 employed for these editions, w^hich were greatly ad- 
 mired for their excellent type, cast at the expense 
 of the French government. 
 
 Stephens's " royal edition " (editio regia) of 1550 
 is the most celebrated, and the nearest source of the 
 textus reeejptus^ especially for England.' The text 
 was mainly taken from Erasmus (the editions of 1527 
 
 ' See Reuss, p. 46, who indicates the sources of Colinaeus. His edition 
 was not reprinted, and was superseded by the editions of Stephanus. 
 
 ' This is the usual Ensrlish spelling. Stephen or Stephanus would be 
 more correct. His French name was Estienne. 
 
 ' Reuss (p. 53) : " Est hxec ipsa editio ex qua derivatur quern nostri 
 fextum receptiim vulg^ v.^Wt^ nomine rei minus hem aptaio," 
 
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 237 
 
 and 1535), with marginal readings from the Complu- 
 tensian edition, and fifteen MSS. of the Paris h'brarj, 
 two of them valuable (D(2) and L), but least used. It 
 was republished by F. H. A. Scrivener, 1859, at Cam- 
 bridge; new edition 1877, and again 1887, with the 
 variations of Beza (1565), Elzevir (1624), Lachmann, 
 Tischendorf, Tregelles [W. and H. and Kevisers].' 
 
 The edition of 1551, which was published at 
 Geneva (where Robert Stephens spent his last years 
 as a professed Protestant), though chiefly a reprint 
 of the Royal edition of 1550 in inferior style, is re- 
 markable for the versicular division which here ap- 
 pears for the first time, and which Robert Stephens 
 is said to have made on horseback on a journey 
 from Paris to Lyons." The edition contains the 
 Greek text in the middle of the page, with the 
 Latin Vulgate on the inner side, and the Erasmian 
 version on the outer. The versicular division is 
 injudicious, and breaks up the text, sometimes in 
 the middle of the sentence, into fragments, instead 
 of presenting it in natural sections ; but it is con- 
 venient for reference, and has become indispensable 
 by long use. The English Revision judiciously 
 combines both methods. 
 
 BEZA. 
 
 Theodore de Beze (Beza, 1519-1605), Calvin's 
 friend and successor in Geneva, and the surviving 
 
 * Nov. Test. Textus Stephanici A ./>. 1650, cum variis lectionibus editio- 
 num Bezos, Elzeviri, Lachmanni, Tischendorfii, Tregellesii, Westcott-Hortii, 
 Versionis Anglicance emendatorum. Cantabr. et Lond. 1887. 
 
 ' He first introduced the present verse-division into his edition of the 
 Latin Vulgate of the whole Bible, in 1555 (not 1548), 
 
238 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 patriarch of the Reformation, prepared four folio 
 editions of Stephens's Greek text, with some changes 
 and a Latin translation of his own, Geneva, 1565, 
 1582, 1588 (many copies dated 1589), 1598 (reprint- 
 ed in Cambridge, 1642). He also issued several 
 octavo editions with his Latin version and brief 
 marginal notes (1565, 1567, 1580, 1590, 1604)/ He 
 came into possession of two bilingual (Grseco-Latin) 
 uncials of great value, D (i) and D (2) (Cod. Bezge, or 
 Cantabrigiensis, for the Gospels and Acts, and Cod. 
 Claromontanus for the Pauline Epistles), but made 
 very little use of them, because they differed very 
 much from the Erasmian and Stephanie texts. The 
 time had not yet come for the safe operation of the 
 art of textual criticism. 
 
 Beza was an eminent classical and biblical schol- 
 ar, and enjoyed, next to Calvin and Bullinger, the 
 greatest respect and authority in the Church of 
 England during the reigns of Elizabeth and James 
 L He presented Codex D to the University of 
 Cambridge (1581), and received in return a letter of 
 thanks with the iiigiiest cumpliiiients.' 
 
 * Beza called the edition of 1565 the second ; but his first, 1557, was 
 only his Latin version with annotations, for which he cared more than 
 for the Greek text. Scrivener Qfntrod. 2d ed. p. 390) gives 1559 as the 
 date of the first edition ; but this is an error ; see Reuss, Biblioth. pp. 72 sqq. 
 Others speak of an edition of 1576; but this was edited by Henry Stephens. 
 See Masch's Le Long, Bihl. Sacra, pars i. pp. 307-316 ; and Abbot's Notes 
 on Scrivener's Introd. pp. 48-50. 
 
 ' " Nam hoc scito, post unicce ScripturcB sacratissimam cogmtionem, nuUos 
 vnquam ex omni memoria temporum scriptores extitisse, quos memorahili 
 viro Jokanni Calvino iihique proeferamus" Dr. Scrivener, the editor of 
 Cod. D, in quoting this passage (^Introd. p. 112), makes the strange re- 
 mark that this yei)eration for Cftjyjp »nd Bez^ <* ^oded jU for the pe§c^ of 
 
FEINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 239 
 
 His editions were chiefly used for the Authorized 
 Version of 1611, in connection with the two last 
 editions of Stephens. This fact gives to them a 
 peculiar historical value. 
 
 Note.— Beza had already, by his Latin version and notes, suggested 
 several improved renderings to the authors of the Geneva Version (1557 
 and 1560), from which they passed into King James's (as in Mark xiv. 
 72 ; Luke xi. 17 ; Acts xxiii. 27 ; xxvii. 9 ; James i. 13) ; but also some 
 arbitrary' explanatory or harmonistic corrections of the text (as in Luke 
 ii. 22, ^'•Marys purification," or " her purification," for " their purification ;" 
 Mark xvi. 2, " when the sun was yet rising^^ or "a< the rising of the sun," 
 for " when the sun was risen ;" Rev. xi. 1, " and the angel stood saying," 
 Kal 6 dyytXog EKTTrjKeij for "one said," Xfyojv or Xt'yei). A more serious 
 charge has been inferred, though unjustly, from the probable influence of his 
 predestinarianism in the rendering of some passages, as Matt. xx. 23 (the 
 insertion, but it shall be given) ; Acts ii. 47 (" such as should be saved," 
 which cannot be the meaning of rovg aoj^ofj-ivovg, but it is the rendering 
 from Tyndale dov/n, and the Rhemish Version gives likewise the future, 
 " them that should be saved ") ; Heb. x. 38 (" if any man draw back," 
 " siQUis se abduxerif," for lav viroaTdXrfTai). This charge is not well 
 founded, as has been shown by Archbishop Trench in his treatise on 
 Revision. Beza was undoubtedly the best exegetical scholar on the 
 Continent at the time the Authorized Version was made, and his in- 
 fluence upon it was, upon the whole, very beneficial. " In the interpreta- 
 tion of the text," says Westcott, " he was singularly clear-sighted ; in 
 the criticism of the text he was more rash than his contemporaries in 
 proportion as his self-reliance was greater. But though it is a far more 
 grievous matter to corrupt the text than to misinterpret it, the cases in 
 
 the English Church." But the University of Cambridge could not have 
 bestowed its respect on worthier men at that time. Even Hooker, who 
 led the way in the high-church reaction against the Reformation, speaks 
 in most appreciative terms of John Calvin as being "incomparably the 
 wisest man that ever the French Church did enjoy " (Laws of Ecclesias- 
 Meal Polity, vol. i. pp. 158 sqq., ed. Keble). On the life and labors of 
 Beza, see the works of La Faye (Gen. 1606), Schlosser (Heidelb. 1809), 
 Baum (Leipsic, 1843 and 1851), and Heppe (Elbf'|f('|(|, 1861); also the art, 
 "Bwj^" iw Scbaff's Herzog, vol i. pp. 255-267, 
 
240 PKLNTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 which Beza has corrected the renderings of former translators are incom- 
 parably more numerous than those in which he has introduced false 
 readings; and, on the whole, his version is far superior to those which 
 had been made before, and so, consequently, the Genevan revisions which 
 follow it " {Hist, of the English Bible, pp. 296, 297). A work on the precise 
 Greek text of the Authorized Version, as far as it can be ascertained, was 
 recently edited by Dr. Scrivener {The New Testament in the Original Greek, 
 according to the Text followed in the Authorized Version, together with the 
 Variations adopted in the Revised Version, Cambridge, 1881). The Ap- 
 pendix, pp. 648-656, gives a list of the passages wherein the Authorized 
 Version departs from the readings of Beza's New Test. (1598). This list 
 is more complete and more correct than that published by Dr. Scrivener 
 in his Cambridge Paragraph Bible (1873), Introd., Appendix E. 
 
 ELZEVIR. 
 
 The brothers Bonaventure and Abraham Elze- 
 vir, enterprising publishers in Holland, issued, with 
 the aid of unknown editors, several editions at Ley- 
 den, 1624, 1633, 1641 ; originally taken (not from 
 Stephens, but) from Beza's smaller edition of 1565, 
 with a few changes from his later editions. J^eatly 
 printed, and of handy size, they were popular and 
 authoritative for a long period. The preface to 
 the second edition boldly proclaims : " Textum ergo 
 habes, nunc ah omnibus recejptum: in quo nihil im- 
 mutatum aut corruptum damusP Hence the name 
 textus receptus^ or commonly received standard text, 
 which became a part of orthodoxy on the Con- 
 tinent; while in England Stephens's edition of 1550 
 acquired this authority ; but both agree substantial- 
 ly.' Erasmus is the first, Elzevirs' editor the last 
 
 ^ Mill observed but twelve variations. Tischendorf (p. Ixxxv. Proleg. 
 7th ed.) gives a list of 150 changes; Scrivener (p. 392) states the number 
 US 287. Most of these variations, however, are as unimportant as the 
 
PEIKTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 241 
 
 author, so to say, of the textus recejptus. All the 
 Holland editions were scrupulously copied from the 
 Elzevir text, and Wetstein could not get authority 
 to print his famous Greek Testament (1751-52) ex- 
 cept on condition of following it.' 
 
 Brian Walton's Polyglot Bible, Lond. 1657, 6 
 torn. fol. The New Testament (torn, v.) gives the 
 
 variations of the different editions of King James's English Version, 
 which number over 20,000. 
 
 ^ For a history of the Elzevir family and a list of their publications, see 
 Les Elzevier. Histoire et Ann ales iypographiques, par Alphonse Willems, 
 Brux. et Paris, 1880, 2 vols. The titles of the first two editions (1624 and 
 1633) are as follows : 
 
 H' Kaivri ALa^rjKi]. Novum Testamentvm, ex Regijs alijsque optimis 
 editionihus cum curd expressum. Lvgdvni Batavorvm, ex Officina Elze- 
 virian a. do lo c XXIV. 12mo, or 24mo. 
 
 (" Cette edition du N. T. est iSpuiee correcte, mais elle a ete effacee par 
 celle de 1633." Willems, i. 98.) 
 
 H' KoLvrj Aia^Tjicr]. Novum Testamentum. Ex Regiis aliisque optimis 
 editionihus, hac nova expressum : cui quid accesserit, Prcefatio docebit. Lvgd. 
 Batavorvm, ex Officina Elzeviriorum. do lo c xxxiii. 12mo, or 24mo. 
 
 The second is the most beautiful and correct edition. An edition was 
 printed by the Elzevirs for Whittaker of London in 1633, 8vo, with notes 
 of Robert Stephens, Joseph Scaliger, Isaac Casaubon, etc. It was also is- 
 sued at Leyden with a new title-page dated 1641. Four later editions (1656, 
 1662, 1670, 1678) were printed at Amsterdam. Dr. Abbot says (in Schaff's 
 "Rel. Encycl." i. 274): "The text of the seven Elzevir editions, among 
 which there are a few slight differences, is made up almost wholly from 
 Beza's smaller editions of 1565 and 1580 (Reuss): its editor is unknown. 
 The textus receptus, slavishly followed, with slight diversities, in hun- 
 dreds of editions, and substantially represented in all the principal modem 
 Protestant translations prior to the present century, thus resolves itself 
 essentially into that of the last edition of Erasmus, framed from a few 
 modern and inferior manuscripts and the Complutensian Polyglot, in the 
 infancy of biblical criticism." 
 
242 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 Greek text of Stephens, 1550, with the Latin Vul- 
 gate, the Peshito Syriac, the ^thiopic, and Arabic 
 versions. In the Gospels a Persic version is added, 
 and it has the later Syriac version of the ^\e books 
 not contained in the Peshito. Each Oriental ver- 
 sion has a collateral Latin translation. At the foot 
 of the Greek text are given the readings of Cod. A. 
 The sixth or supplementary volume furnishes a crit- 
 ical apparatus gathered from sixteen authorities (in- 
 cluding D(i) and D(2) cited as " Cant." and " Clar."), 
 by the care of the celebrated Archbishop Ussher 
 (1580-1656), who had been appointed a member of 
 the Westminster Assembly of Divines, but never 
 attended. Walton (1600-1661) was a royalist, dur- 
 ing the civil war, and chaplain to Charles I., and after 
 the Eestoration consecrated bishop of Chester (1661). 
 But the Polyglot was published under the patronage 
 of Cromwell, who allowed the paper to be imported 
 free of duty. This patronage was afterwards dis- 
 owned ; hence there are two kinds of copies — the 
 one called "republican" (with compliments to Crom- 
 well in the preface, but no dedication), the other 
 " loyal," and dedicated to Charles IL' 
 
 ^ " Twelve copies were struck off on large paper. By Cromwell's per- 
 mission the paper for this work was allowed to be imported free of duty, 
 and honorable mention is made of him in the Preface. On the Restora- 
 tion this courtesy was dishonorably withdrawn, and the usual Bible 
 dedication sycophancy transferred to Charles II. at the expense of several 
 cancels ; and in this, the * Loj'al ' copy, so called in contradistinction to 
 the ' Republican,' Cromwell is spoken of as 'Maximus ille Draco.' This 
 is said to have been the first work printed by subscription in England." 
 (Henry Stevens, The Bibles in the. Caxton Exhibition, London, 1877, 
 pp. 119 sq.) Comp. H. J. Todd's Memoirs of the Life and Writings of 
 
i^RINTEi) TfiXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 243 
 
 Brian Walton was involved in a controversy with 
 Dr. John Owen, the famous Puritan divine, who 
 labored to defend, from purely dogmatic premises, 
 without regard to stubborn facts, the scholastic the- 
 ory that inspiration involved not only the religious 
 doctrines and moral precepts, but "every tittle and 
 iota," including the Hebrew vocalization, and that 
 "the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments were 
 immediately and entirely given out by God himself, 
 his mind being in them represented unto us without 
 the least interveniency of such mediums and ways 
 as were capable of giving change or alteration to 
 the least iota or syllable." ' To this Walton re- 
 plied, forcibly and conclusively, in The Gonsiderator 
 Considered^ London, 1659. He maintained that the 
 authority of the Scriptures, as a certain and sufficient 
 rule of faith, does not depend upon aiiy human au- 
 thority or any human theory of inspiration, and that 
 Owen's view was contrary to undeniable facts, and 
 contrary to the judgment of the Eeformers and the 
 chief Protestant divines and linguists from Luther 
 and Calvin down to Grotius and Cappellus. " The 
 truth needs not the patronage of an untruth." 
 
 Walton's Polyglot is less magnificent than the 
 
 Brian Walton, together with the Bishop's Vindication of the London Poly- 
 ghtt JBtft/e, London, 1821, 2 vols. 
 
 * Of the Integrity and Purity of the Hebrew Text of the Scriptures, with 
 Considerations on the Prolegomena and Appendix to the late " Biblia Poly- 
 glotta," Oxford, 1659. See Owen's Woi'ks, edited by Goold and Quick, 
 vol. ix. pp. 63-139. His theory was held by eminent Lutheran and 
 Reformed divines in the seventeenth century, including the learned 
 Buxtorfs (father and son), and was even symbolically endorsed by the 
 ♦'Formula Consensus Helvetici," 1675. 
 
244 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 Ajitwerp Polyglot (Plantin. 1569-1573, in 9 vols.), 
 and the Paris Polyglot (Paris, 1628-1645, in 10 vols.), 
 but more ample, commodious, and critical. 
 
 MILL. 
 
 John Mill's Novum Testamentum Grcecum, Oxon. 
 1707, fol. ; often reprinted, especially in England. 
 The fruit of thirty years' labor. The text is from 
 Stephens, 1550. A vastly increased critical appa- 
 ratus, gathered from manuscripts, versions, and espe- 
 cially from patristic quotations.^ 
 
 It had been preceded by the New Testament of 
 Bishop John Fell, Oxford, 1675 ; an edition " more 
 valuable for the impulse it gave to subsequent in- 
 vestigators than for the richness of its own stores 
 of fresh materials" (Scrivener, p. 395). 
 
 Mill may be regarded as the founder of textual 
 criticism. He did not construct a new text, but 
 provided a large apparatus of about 30,000 various 
 readings for the use of others. He expressed the 
 hope, in his very learned Prolegomena (p. clxvii. b), 
 that the stock of evidence at the foot of his pages 
 would enable the reader to discover the true read- 
 ing in almost every passage. 
 
 BENTLEY. 
 
 Proposed edition, 1720. Dr. Hichard Bentley 
 (1662-1742), the illustrious classical scholar and 
 
 ^ See the list of Mill's MSS. in Scrivener, p. 398. Kiister's reprint of 
 Mill, with additions and improvements, Amsterdam and Leipsic, also 
 Rotterdam, 1710, deserves to be mentioned. Some copies are dated 1723 
 and 1746. See on Mill and Kuster the Proleg. of Wetsteiu, vol. i. pp. 176 sq. 
 
1*RINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 245 
 
 critic, made extensive and expensive preparations 
 for a new edition of the Greek and Latin Testa- 
 ment. He, unfortunately, failed to execute his de- 
 sign ; but he discovered the true principle which, a 
 century afterwards, was reasserted and executed by 
 the critical genius of Lachmann. 
 
 Bentley proposed to go back from the textus re- 
 ce^ptus to the oldest text of the first five centuries, 
 hoping that " by taking 2000 errors out of the 
 Pope's Yulgate and as many out of the Protestant 
 Pope Stephens's," he could " set out an edition of 
 each in columns, without u^ing any book under 900 
 years old, that shall so exactly agree word for word, 
 and order for order, that no two tallies, nor two in- 
 dentures, can agree better." 
 
 He 'issued his Proposals for such an edition in 
 1720, with the last chapter of Eevelation in Greek 
 and Latin as a specimen. The scheme was frustrated 
 by an angry controversy between him and Conyers 
 Middleton, and other contentions in which he was 
 involved, by his unruly temper, at Cambridge. The 
 money paid in advance (two thousand guineas) was 
 returned to the subscribers by his nephew, whom 
 he made his literary executor. All that is left is a 
 mass of critical material in the library of Trinity 
 College, Cambridge, including the collation of the 
 Codex Yaticanus, which was transcribed by Woide 
 and edited by Ford in 1799. 
 
 Bentley was too sanguine in his expectations, and 
 too confident and hasty in his conclusions ; but his 
 edition, as Tregelles says, " would have been a valu- 
 able contribution towards the establishment of a 
 
246 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 settled text : it would at least have shaken the 
 foundations of the textus receptus ; and it might 
 well have formed the basis of further labors.'* 
 
 After Bentley's death active interest in Biblical 
 criticism in England ceased for nearly a century, and 
 the work was carried on mainly by German scholars. 
 
 BENGEL. 
 
 JoHANN Albrecht Bengel (1687-1752), " Pral- 
 at," or Superintendent, of the Evangelical Lutheran 
 Church of Wiirtemberg, was a most original, pro- 
 found, pregnant, and devmit commentator, and au- 
 thor of the invaluable Gnomon,w\nQ\i is a marvel of 
 multum in jparvo. He edited a Greek Testament 
 at Tiibingen, 1734, 4to, together with an Ajpparatus 
 Criticus, containing in three parts critical disserta- 
 tions.' 
 
 Bengel became a critic from conscientious scru- 
 ples, but was confirmed in his faith by thorough 
 research. When he studied theology at Tiibingen, 
 his inherited faith in the plenary inspiration of the 
 Bible was disturbed by the thirty thousand varia- 
 tions in Mill's Greek Testament, and he determined 
 to devote several years to the study of the text, and 
 at last to prepare a new edition. He found that the 
 
 * A small octavo edition appeared in the same year at Stuttgart with- 
 out the critical apparatus. For an account of his biblical labors, see the 
 biography written by his great-grandson, J. Chr. Fr. Burk, Dr. Johann 
 Albrecht BengeVs Lehen und WirJcen, Stuttgart, 1831, pp. 19 sqq. and 200 
 sqq. Comp. also Oskar Wachter, BengeVs Lebensabriss, 1865 ; and a good 
 article by Hartmann and Burk in Herzog's "Encykl." vol. ii. pp. 295-301 
 (abridged in Schaff's " Rel. Encycl."). 
 
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 247 
 
 variations leave the evangelical faith intact. His 
 excellent motto in biblical criticism and exegesis 
 was: 
 
 " Te totum applica ad textum, 
 Rem totam applica ad te." 
 
 He retained the received text except in the Apoc- 
 alypse (his favorite study), but noted the value of 
 the variations in the margin. He always preferred 
 the more difficult reading. Most of his cautious 
 changes have been approved. He first divided the 
 textual witnesses into families ; facilitated the meth- 
 od of comparing and weighing the readings; sug- 
 gested true principles of criticism ; and set the ex- 
 ample of recording the testimonies for and against 
 the received reading, but he did it only in rare in- 
 stances. " The peculiar importance of Bengel's 
 New Testament," says Scrivener,^ " is due to the 
 critical principles developed therein. ISTot only was 
 his native acuteness of great service to him when 
 weighing the conflicting probabilities of internal 
 evidence, but in his fertile mind sprang up the 
 germ of that theory oi families or recensions which 
 was afterwards expanded by J. S. Semler, and grew 
 to such formidable dimensions in tlie skilful hands 
 of Griesbach." 
 
 WETSTEm. 
 
 Jo. Jag. Wetstein (1693-1754): Novum Testa- 
 mentum Gr cecum Editionis BecejptcB cum Lectioni- 
 hus^ etc., Amstel. 1751-52, 2 torn, fol.' A herculean 
 
 * Introd. p. 403. 
 
 * His family name was Wettstein, but he signed himself in Latin Wet- 
 §tenius ; and hence English, Dutch, and most German writers spell the 
 
248 PRIKTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 and magnificent work of forty years. The text is 
 mainly from the Elzevir editions, with some read- 
 ings from Fell ; but he gives his critical judgment 
 in the margin and the notes. He made large addi- 
 tions to the apparatus, and carefully described the 
 MSS. and other sources in the copious Prolegomena, 
 i. 1-222 ; ii. 3-15, 449-454, 741-743. His edition 
 contains also a learned commentary, with illustra- 
 tions of the language and sentiment from Hebrew, 
 Greek, and Latin authors. 
 
 Wetstein was far inferior to Bengel in judgment, 
 but far surpassed him in the extent of his resources 
 and collations. He was neither a sound theologian 
 nor a safe critic, but a most industrious worker and 
 collator. He had a natural passion for the study of 
 MSS. ; made extensive literary journeys ; collated 
 about 102 MSS. (among them A, C, and D) with 
 
 name Wetstein. He was a native of Basle, in Switzerland, and for some 
 time assistant pastor of his father at St. Leonhard's; but, being suspected 
 of Arian and Socinian heresy, he was deposed and exiled from his native 
 city (1730). His departure from the textus receptus' in 1 Tim, iii. 16 
 (3'«6e), in favor of the reading o, was made one of the grounds of this 
 charge. In the inquisitorial process his former teachers, Iselin and Frey, 
 who compared the Basle MSS. for Bengel, figured as his accusers. The 
 Acta were published at Basle, 1730 (466 pages, 4to, besides preface). He 
 obtained a professorship at the Arminian College at Amsterdam (1733), 
 where he died, March 22, 1754, at the age of sixty-one. His colleague, 
 J. Krighout, published a memorial discourse {Sermo funehris), which pro- 
 voked his old antagonist, Frey, to a new attack {Epistola ad J. Krighout, 
 Bas. 1754), whereupon Krighout vindicated his memory (MemoHa Wet- 
 steniana Vindicata, Amst. 1755). See Hagenbach, J. J. Wettsfein der 
 Kritiker und seine Gegner, in Illgen's " Zeitschrift fiir die hist. Theologie," 
 for 1839, No. 1, pp. 13 sqq., and his article in the first edition of Herzog's 
 " Encykl." voL xviii. pp. 74-76. 
 
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 249 
 
 greater care than had been done before, and intro- 
 duced the present system of citing the uncials by 
 Latin capitals and the cursives and lection aries by 
 Arabic numerals. His Prolegomena are disfigured 
 by the long and painful history of his controversy 
 with his narrow and intolerant orthodox opponents, 
 Iselin and Frey ; he depreciated the merits of Ben- 
 gel ; his text is superseded, but his New Testament 
 is still indispensable to the scholar as a storehouse 
 of parallel passages from the ancient classics and 
 the rabbinical writers. Bishop Marsh calls it " the 
 invaluable book." 
 
 During the next twenty years little was done for 
 textual criticism. Johann Salomo Semler, the 
 father of German rationalism ( 1725-91 ), but, in 
 what he called " Privat - Frommigkeit " (personal 
 piety), a pietist and an earnest opponent of deism, 
 re -edited Wetstein's Prolegomena with valuable 
 suggestions (Halle, 1764), and stimulated the zeal 
 of his great pupil Griesbach. 
 
 II. Second Period : Transition from the Textus 
 Receptus to the Uncial Text. From Gries- 
 bach to Lachmann. — A.D. 1770-1880. 
 
 This period shows enlarged comparison of the 
 three sources of the text, the discovery of critical 
 canons, a gradual improvement of the textus recejp- 
 tus, and approach to an older and better text ; but 
 the former was still retained as a basis on a pre- 
 scriptive right. 
 18 
 
250 FEINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 GRIESBACH. 
 
 The period is introduced by the honored name of 
 JoHANN Jacob Griesbach (1745-1812), Professor of 
 Divinity at Halle and then at Jena/ He made the 
 study of textual criticism of the Greek Testament 
 his life-work, and combined all the necessary quali- 
 fications of accurate learning, patient industry, and 
 sound judgment. His editions (from 1775 to 1807) 
 and critical dissertations {SyniboloB Criticce, 1785-93 ; 
 Commentarius Griticus, and Meletemata Critica^ 
 1798-1811) mark the beginning of a really critical 
 text, based upon fixed rules. Among these are, 
 that a reading must be supported by ancient testi- 
 
 * Griesbach was the son of a Protestant pastor in Hesse-Darmstadt ; 
 educated in Tubingen, Leipsic, and Halle, where he became an ardent 
 disciple of Semler. He travelled in France, Holland, and England ; was 
 appointed professor in Halle, 1773, and called to Jena in 1775, where he 
 spent the remainder of his life in usefulness and well-deserved honor. 
 Besides his critical works on the Greek Testament, he published little of 
 importance. His Opuscula, edited by Gabler, Jena, 1824-25, in 2 vols., con- 
 sist chiefly of university programmes and addresses. See Augusti, Ueber 
 GrieshacVs Verdienste, Breslau, 1812 ; Reuss, Biblioth. pp. 193-204, and his 
 article "Griesbach" in Herzog, new ed. vol. v. pp. 480-432. Dr. Hort 
 (Gr. Test. ii. 185) venerates his name " above that of every other textual 
 critic of the New Testament," and pays him the following tribute (ii. 181) : 
 "What Bengel had sketched tentatively was verified and worked out 
 with admirable patience, sagacity, and candor by Griesbach, who was 
 equally great in independent investigation and in his power of estimating 
 the results arrived at by others. . . . Unfortunately he often followed 
 Semler in designating the ancient texts by the term ' recension,' and thus 
 gave occasion to a not yet extinct confusion between his historical analysis 
 of the text of existing documents and the conjectural theory of his con- 
 temporary, Hug, a biblical scholar of considerable merit, but wanting in 
 sobriety of judgment." 
 
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 251 
 
 mony ; that the shorter reading is preferable to the 
 longer, the more difficult to the easy, the unusual to 
 the usual. He sifted Wetstein's apparatus with 
 scrupulous care ; enlarged it by collecting the cita- 
 tions of Origen, and utilizing the Old Latin texts, 
 published by Bianchini and Sabatier; improved and 
 developed BengePs system of families, classifying 
 the authorities under three heads — the Western (D, 
 Latin versions, fathers), the Alexandrian (B, C, L, 
 etc.), a recension of the corrupt Western text, and 
 the Constantinopolitan or Byzantine (A, flowing 
 from both, and the mass of later and inferior manu- 
 scripts) ; but recognized also mixed and transitional 
 texts, decided for the readings of the largest relative 
 extent, but departed from the Elzevir text only for 
 clear and urgent reasons. His critical canons are 
 well-considered and sound; but he was too much 
 fettered by his recension theory, which was criticised 
 and modified, but not improved, by Hug, a Eoman 
 Catholic scholar (1765-1846). 
 
 Principal editions, Halle, 1775-77; Halle and 
 London, 1796-1806, 2 tom. 8vo; Leipsic, 1803-1807, 
 4 tom. fol. (called by Reuss, p. 200, " editio omnium 
 qu(B exstant speciosissima " ) ; reprinted, London, 
 1809 and 1818 (a very fine edition) ; an improved 
 third edition of the Gospels by David Schulz, 1827, 
 with Prolegomena and an enlarged apparatus (but 
 differing from Griesbach's text, as Reuss says, p. 200, 
 only in two places. Matt, xviii. 19 and Mark iv. 18). 
 
 Griesbach's text is the basis of many manual 
 editions by Schott, Knapp, Tittmann, Hahn (re- 
 published at New York by Dr. Edward Pobinson, 
 
252 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 1842), Theile (11th ed. Leipz. 1875), and of several 
 English and American editions/ 
 
 While Grriesbach was engaged in his work, several 
 Bcholars made valuable additions to the critical ap- 
 paratus, the results of which he incorporated in his 
 last edition. 
 
 MATTHuEI. 
 
 C. F. Matth^i (Professor at Wittenberg, then at 
 Moscow ; d. 1811), Griesbach's opponent, ridiculed 
 the system of recensions, despised the most ancient 
 authorities, and furnished a text from about a hun- 
 dred Moscow MSS., all of Constantinopolitan origin, 
 to which he attributed too great a value. The re- 
 sult by no means justified his pretensions and pas- 
 sionate attacks upon others. His Novum Test. Greece 
 et Latine (Yulg.) was published at Riga, 1782-88, 
 12 vols. 8vo; an edition with the Greek text only, 
 in 3 vols. 8vo (1803-7). " Matthsei was a careful 
 collator, but a very poor critic; and his manuscripts 
 were of inferior quality " (Abbot). 
 
 The Danish scholars Birch, Abler, and Mol- 
 DENHAUER collcctcd, at the expense of the King of 
 Denmark, a large and valuable amount of new crit- 
 ical material in Italy and Spain, including the read- 
 ings of the Vatican MS., published by Birch, 1788- 
 1801. During the same period Codd. A, D, and 
 other important MSS. were published. 
 
 * Bloomfield's editions, London, 1832, 9th ed. 1855, are only in part based 
 on Griesbach and in part on Scholz, but mostly on Mill. He censures 
 Griesbach for " his perpetual and needless cancellings," etc. 
 
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 253 
 
 F. C. Alter, in his Greek Testament (Vienna, 
 1786-87, 8vo), gave the readings of twenty -two 
 Vienna MSS., and also of four MSS. of the Slavonic 
 version. 
 
 The new discoveries of these scholars went far to 
 confirm Griesbach's critical judgment. 
 
 SCHOLZ. 
 
 J. M. A. ScHOLz (a pupil of Hug, and Roman 
 Catholic Professor in Bonn ; d. 1852): Novum Testd- 
 mentum GroBee, etc., 1830-36, 2 vols. 4to ; the text 
 reprinted by Bagster, London, with the English 
 version. 
 
 Scholz was a poor critic, but an extensive traveller 
 and collator. He examined many new Greek MSS., 
 written after the tenth century, in different coun- 
 tries, though not very accurately, and gave the 
 preference to the Byzantine family, as distinct from 
 the Alexandrian. JHe frequently departed from the 
 received text, yet, upon the whole, preserved it in 
 preference to that of the Vulgate (which is remark- 
 able for a Boman Catholic). His judgment and 
 ability were not equal to his zeal and industry, 
 and all the critics who have examined his collations 
 (Tischendorf , Bleek, Tregelles, and Scrivener) charge 
 him with a great want of accuracy. 
 
 His edition has found much more favor in England 
 than in Germany, and was republished by Bagster 
 in London.' It marks no advance upon Griesbach. 
 
 * In several editions, including The English Hexapla (which gives, with 
 Scholz's Greek Testament, the versions of Wiclif, Tyndale, Cranmer, Gene- 
 
254: PKINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 At a later date (1845) Scholz retracted his prefer- 
 ence for the Byzantine text, and said that if a new- 
 edition of his Greek Testament were called for, he 
 should receive into the text most of the " Alexan- 
 drian " readings which he had placed in his margin. 
 
 III. Third Period : the Restoration of the Prim- 
 itive Text. From Lachmann and Tischen- 
 DORF TO WeSTCOTT AND HoRT. — A.D. 1830-81. 
 
 Carl Lachmann (Professor of Classical Philology 
 in Berlin ; b. 1793, d. 1851) : Novutyi Testamentum 
 Greece et Latine^ Berol. 1 842 -50, 2 vols. Compare his 
 article in the Studien und Kritihen, 1830, No. 4, 
 pp. 817-845. Lachmann had previously published 
 a small edition in 1831, with the variations of the 
 textus receptus (Elz. 1624) at the end. In the larger 
 edition he was aided by the younger Philip Butt- 
 MANN, who added the critical apparatus of the Greek 
 text, and published also another small edition based 
 on the Vatican MS., 1856, 1862, and 1865. The 
 Latin text of the Yulgate is derived from Codd. 
 Fuldensis, Amiatinus, and other manuscripts. 
 
 Lachmann was not a professional theologian, and 
 not hampered by traditional prejudice. He was a 
 
 van, Rhemish, and King James's), and a pocket ed. of the Greek Test, 
 with the Authorized Version and a dictionary. See on Bagster's and 
 Bloonafield's editions the lists in the first Appendix, and in Reuss, Bib- 
 liotheca, 235-238. 
 
 * See his Biography, by Hertz, BerUn, 1851 ; also the article Bibdtext 
 des N, T., by O. von Gebhardt in Herzog, Encykl. (ed. ii.), ii. 425 sqq. 
 
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 255 
 
 classical and Teutonic philologist, and gifted with a 
 rare faculty for textual criticism. He distinguished 
 himself by critical editions of Propertius, Catullus, 
 Tibullus, Lucretius, Gains, the Niehelungenlied^ 2X- 
 ther von der Yogelweide, and Wolfram von Eschen- 
 bach, and edited Lessing's complete works. He was 
 a friend of Schleiermacher, Liicke, Bleek, and other 
 eminent theologians. He approached the task of 
 biblical criticism, like Eichard Bentley, with the 
 principles and experience of a master in classical 
 criticism. His object was purely historical or diplo- 
 matic — namely, to restore the oldest attainable text, 
 i. e. the text of the fourth century, as found in the 
 oldest sources then known (especially in Codd. A, B, 
 C, D, P, Q, T, Z, Itala, Yulgate, ante-Nicene fathers, 
 especially Irenseus, Origen, Cyprian, Hilary of Poi- 
 tiers) ; yet not as a final text, but simply as a sure 
 historical basis for further operations of internal 
 criticism, which might lead us in some cases still 
 nearer to the primitive text. He therefore ignored 
 the printed text and cursive manuscripts, and went 
 directly to the oldest documentary sources as far as 
 they were made accessible at his time. He went 
 also beyond the Latin Yulgate to the Old Latin. 
 He ranged the Greek Western uncials on the Latin 
 or Western side. He distinguished only two types 
 of text — the Oriental (A, B, C, Origen), and the Occi- 
 dental (D, E, G, oldest Lat. Yerss., a, b, c, Yulg., and 
 Western fathers from Irenseus down to Primasius 
 for the Apocalypse) — and took no notice of the 
 Byzantine authorities. As his text was intended to 
 be preparatory rather than final, he gave, with diplo- 
 
256 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 matic accuracy, even palpable writing errors if suf- 
 ficiently attested ; not as proceeding from the orig- 
 inal writers, but as parts of the textus traditus of the 
 fourth century. 
 
 His range and selection of authorities were lim- 
 ited. When he issued his large edition, the Sinaitic 
 manuscript had not yet been discovered, and Cod. B 
 and other uncials not critically edited. But to him 
 belongs the credit of having broken a new path, and 
 established, with the genius and experience of a mas- 
 ter critic, the true basis. His judgment was clear, 
 sound, and strong, but at times too rigid. He car- 
 ried out the hint of Bentley and Bengel, and had the 
 boldness to destroy the tyranny of the textus receptus^ 
 and to substitute for it the uncial text of the Nicene 
 or ante-Nicene age. His chief authority is B. 
 
 Lachmann met with much opposition from the 
 professional theologians, even from such a liberal 
 critic as De Wette, who thought that he had wasted 
 his time and strength. Such is the power of habit 
 and prejudice that every inch of ground in the 
 march of progress is disputed, and must be fairly 
 conquered. But his principles are now pretty gen- 
 erally acknowledged as correct. Tischendorf, Tre- 
 gelles, Westcott and Hort, build on his foundation, 
 but with vastly increased resources and facilities.* 
 
 ^ Tregelles says (p. 99) : " Lachmann led the way in casting aside the 
 80-called textus receptus, and boldly placing the New Testament wholly 
 and entirely on the basis of actual authority." Reuss calls him {Bibliotk. 
 p. 239) " vir doctissimus et KpiTuciorarog." The conservative Dr. Scrivener 
 (p. 422 sqq.) depreciates his merits, for he defends as far as possible the 
 traditional text. But Pr. Hort {Gr. Test. ii. 13) does full justice to his 
 
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GKEEK TESTAMENT. 257 
 
 TI8CHEND0RF. 
 
 CoNSTANTiN VON TiscHENDOEF (ProfessoF of The- 
 ology at Leipsic ; b. 1815, d. 1874) : Novum Testa- 
 mentum Greece, etc., ed. octava critica maior. Lips. ; 
 issued at intervals, in eleven parts, from 1864 to 
 1872, 2 vols., with a full critical apparatus. A 
 smaller edition {ed. critica minor) in one vol. gives 
 the same text with the principal readings. The 
 best manual edition of Tischendorf, with the read- 
 ings of Tregelles, Westcott and Hort, is by Oscar 
 VON Gebhardt: Novum Testamenium Greece Recen- 
 sionis Tischendorfianoe ultimce Textum cum, Tre- 
 gellesiano et Westcottio - Hortiano contulit et hrevi 
 adnotatione critica additisque locis parallelis illus- 
 travit O. de G. Ed. stereot. Lipsise, 1881. The 
 same text appeared also with Luther's revised Ger- 
 man version, Leipz. 1881 (Bernh. Tauchnitz). 
 
 Tischendorf is by far the most industrious, enter- 
 prising, and successful textual critic of the nineteenth 
 century. He may be called the Columbus of the 
 textual department in the New Testament litera- 
 
 memory : " A new period began in 1831, when for the first time a text 
 was constructed directly from the ancient documents without the inter- 
 vention of any printed edition, and when the first systematic attempt was 
 made to substitute scientific method for arbitrary choice in the discrimina- 
 tion of various readings. In both respects the editor, Lachmann, rejoiced 
 to declare that he was carrying out the principles and unfulfilled inten- 
 tions of Bentley, as set forth in 1716 and 1720." Abbot says of Lach- 
 mann (in Schaff 's Relig. Encycl. i. 275) : " He was the first to found a 
 text wholly on ancient evidence ; and his editions, to which his eminent 
 reputation as a critic gave wide currency, especially in Germany, did 
 much toward breaking down the superstitious reverence for the textiu 
 receptus.^' 
 
258 FEINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 ture. His working power, based on vigorous health 
 and a hopeful temperament, was amazing. He had 
 the advantage of the liberal support of the Saxon, 
 and afterwards of the Kussian, government in his 
 expensive journeys and publications. He began his 
 preparations for a critical edition of the Greek text 
 of the New Testament in 1839 and 1840, and was 
 appointed to a chair of theology in the University 
 of Leipsic in 1843. He was stimulated by the in- 
 dustry of Scholz and by the principles of Lachmann, 
 and aimed at a text based on the oldest authorities 
 from the fourth to the sixth century. He visited 
 the principal libraries of Europe in search of docu- 
 ments; made repeated journeys to France, England, 
 Turkey, and three to the Orient (1844, 1853, and 
 1859) ; discovered, collated, copied, and edited many 
 most important MSS. (especially x, B, B (2), C, D (2), 
 E(2), L) ; and published, between 1841 and 1873, no 
 less than twenty -four editions of the Greek Testa- 
 ment (including the reissues of his stereotyped editio 
 academica). Four of these — issued 1841, 1849, 1859 
 {editio sejptima critica major), and 1872 {ed. octavo) 
 — mark a progress in the acquisition of new mate- 
 rial. His editions of the texts of biblical manuscripts 
 (including some of the Septuagint) embrace no less 
 than seventeen large quarto and five folio volumes, 
 besides the Anecdota Sacra et Prof ana (1855, new ed. 
 1861), etc., and the catalogue of his publications, most 
 of them relating to biblical criticism, covers nearly 
 fifteen octavo pages in Gregory's Prolegomena,^ 
 
 ' Pars i. pp. 7-22. His first publication was a poem, 1835. 
 
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 259 
 
 Tischendorf started from the basis of LaclnnariD, 
 but with a less rigorous application of his principle, 
 and with a much larger number of authorities. He 
 intended to give not only the oldest, but also the 
 best, text, with the aid of all authorities. His judg- 
 ment was influenced by subjective considerations and 
 a very impulsive temper ; hence frequent changes in 
 his many editions, which he honestly confessed, quot- 
 ing Tischendorf versus Tischendorf, but they mark 
 the progress in the range of his resources and 
 knowledge. In the first volume of his seventh 
 critical edition (1859) he showed a more favorable 
 leaning towards the received text as represented by 
 the cursives and later uncials ; but he soon found 
 out his mistake, and returned in the second volume 
 to the older uncial text. Soon afterwards followed 
 his crowning discovery of the Sinaitic manuscript 
 at the foot of the Mount of Legislation (1859), a 
 closer examination of the Vatican manuscript (1866), 
 and the acquisition of other valuable material. His 
 resources far exceeded those at the disposal of 
 any former editor, and were all utilized in his 
 eighth and last critical edition, completed in 1872. 
 Here he shows a decided, though by no means 
 blind, preference for his favorite Sinaitic and other 
 uncial manuscripts of the oldest date. His crit- 
 ical apparatus and digest below the text is the 
 richest now extant, and will not soon be super- 
 seded. The edition of 1859 differs from that of 
 1849 in 1296 places, 595 of them being misim- 
 provements in favor of the textus recejptus ; the 
 edition of 1872 differs from the one of 1859 in 
 
260 PRINTED TEXT OF TfiE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 3369 places, mostly in favor of the oldest uncial 
 text.* 
 
 Unfortunately he did not live to prepare the in- 
 dispensable Prolegomena to his edition, which were 
 to give a full description of his critical material 
 and a key to the multitudinous and at times almost 
 hieroglyphic abbreviations, together with such a list 
 of Addenda and Emendanda as might be suggested 
 by his own further researches and the labors of other 
 scholars. For in such a vast forest of quotations 
 numerous errors must be expected. A stroke of 
 apoplexy (May 5, 1873), followed by paralysis and 
 death (Dec. 7, 1874), arrested his labors, and termi- 
 nated a career of indomitable industry and great 
 usefulness. 
 
 The preparation of the critical Prolegomena was, 
 after some delay, intrusted in 1876 to an American 
 scholar residing at Leipsic, Dr. Caspar Rene Greg- 
 ory, who with the efficient aid of Dr. Ezra Abbot, 
 of Cambridge, Mass., has nearly finished this delicate 
 and difficult task of completing the noblest monu- 
 ment of German scholarship in the line of textual 
 criticism.' 
 
 Thus America, which has none of the ancient 
 manuscript treasures of the Bible, is permitted to 
 
 ' Scrivener, Introd. p. 470, made the last calculation to, the disparage- 
 ment of Tischendorf ; O. von Gebhardt, /. c. vol. ii. 431 sq., gives both 
 figures to his credit as showing his willingness to progress in the right 
 direction and to learn from new sources of information. 
 
 - The first Part of the Prolegomena appeared in Leipsic, 1884; the second 
 Part in 1890 ; a third and last Part is promised. Dr. Gregory examined 
 the libraries of Europe and the East, and is now Professor in Leipsic 
 
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 261 
 
 take a share in the great and noble work of restor- 
 ing the oldest and purest text of the Book of books. 
 
 Note. — Compare, on the discovery of Cod. Sinaiticus, p. 108 sqq. ; and 
 on the life and labors of Tischendorf, besides his own numerous works, 
 the following publications : J. E. Volbeding, Constantin Tischendorf in 
 seiner 25'jdhrigen schriftstellerischen Wirksamkeit, Leips. 1862 ; Dr. Abbot's 
 article on Tischendorf in the Unitarian Review for March, 1875; Dr. Greg- 
 ory's article in the Bibliotheca Sacra for January, 1876 ; his Prolegomena, 
 1884, Part I. 1-22 ; and in Schaff-Herzog, iii. 2363 sq. , for his moral 
 and religious character, the addresses of his pastor. Dr. Ahlfeld, and his 
 colleagues, Drs. Kahnis and Luthardt, A m Sarge und Grabs Tischendorf^ s, 
 with a list of his writings, Leips. 1874. These addresses bring into prom- 
 inence his noble qualities, which were somewhat concealed to the superficial 
 observer by a skin disease— his personal vanity and overfondness for his 
 many and well-earned titles (covering ten lines on the title-pages of some 
 of his books), and twenty or more decorations from sovereigns which 
 were displayed in his parlor. He was a sincere believer in the truth of 
 the Bible and the Lutheran creed. He regarded himself as an instrument 
 in the hands of Providence for the discovery and publication of docu- 
 mentary proofs for the vindication of the original text of the New Testa- 
 ment, and to God he ascribed the glory, "^et allem^^ — he says, in self- 
 defence against a malignant attack {Waffen der Finstemiss, p. 28)— "was 
 mir gelv.ngen in der Fremde wie in der Heimath, beim unermudlichen ent- 
 hehrungsvollen Wandern durch Lander und Volker, Wiisten und Meere, unter 
 den mannigfaltigsten Erfahrungen und Gefahren, unter Arbeiten bei Tag 
 und Nacht, war ich freilich von ganzer Seele gliicklich mich des Herm 
 riihmen zu konnen, des Herm der in dem Schwachen mdchtig gewesen. Und 
 dieses Ruhmen, trotz Neider, Spotter und Verleumder, soil mir denn auch 
 bleiben inein Lebelang, bis an des Lebens letzten A themzug. ' dass ich 
 tausend Zungen hdtte und einen tausendfachen Mund: so stimmf ich damit 
 in die Wette vom allertiefsten Herzensgrund ein Loblied nach dem andem 
 an, von dem icas Gott an mir gethanJ* " 
 
 Tischendorf did good service to the cause of evangelical truth by his 
 able vindication of the genuineness of our canonical Gospels against the 
 attacks of modern scepticism (especially Strauss and Renan), in his tract. 
 When were our Gospels written ? (1865). It was translated into all the 
 languages of Europe, and had an immense circulation and considerable 
 weight as coming from one who had the most extensive knowledge of the 
 oldest documentary sources of the New Testament, which he summoned 
 
262 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 as witnesses for the apostolic origin of the Gospels. One of his last 
 public acts was the noble part he took in the united deputations of the 
 Evangelical Alliance to the Russian Czar and Prince Gortschakoff, at 
 Friedrichshafen, in behalf of the persecuted Lutherans in the Baltic 
 provinces, in 1871. I was brought into close personal contact with him 
 on that occasion, and I know his zeal for the cause at the risk of his 
 popularity at the Russian court. The Archduke Constantine, who was 
 with the emperor, expressed his great surprise that he should have joined 
 the deputation and remonstrance. (See Report of the Alliance Deputation 
 in behalf of Religious Liberty in Russia, New York, 1871.) In view of this 
 participation, and his eminent services to the cause of biblioa] learning, the 
 Evangelical Alliance of the United States invited Dr. Tischendorf to the 
 General Conference at New York in 1873, and sent him free tickets for the 
 voyage, which he gratefully accepted. He offered to prepare and read a 
 paper on the " Influence of the Apocryphal Gospels on the Formation of 
 the Roman Catholic Mariology and Mariolatrj'." He had already engaged 
 passage for himself and one of his sons in a Bremen steamer, when a fatal 
 stroke of apoplexy confined him to his home. He would have been treated 
 with great respect and kindness in America, and I had to decline a number 
 of competing invitations for his hospitable entertainment during the con- 
 ference. I may also mention, as a mark of his interest in America, that 
 he had promised to prepare a special American Graeco-Latin edition of his 
 last recension of the Greek Testament, with a limited critical apparatus 
 such as I thought would best answer the wants of the American student. 
 He actually began the work in 1872, and finished about fifty pages, which 
 were set in type. It was probably his last literary work. His death 
 prevented the execution. 
 
 TREGELLES. 
 
 Samuel Prideaux Tregelles (b. Jan. 30, 1813, 
 d. April 24, 1875): The Greek New Testament, 
 edited from Ancient Authorities, with the Latin Yer- 
 sion of Jerome from the Codex Amiatinus, London; 
 issued in parts from 1857 to 1879, 4to. He had 
 previously edited The Book of Revelation in Greek, 
 with a New English Version and Various Readings, 
 London, 1844, and issued a Prospectus for his Greek 
 
l^femTEt) T£XT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 263 
 
 Testament in 1848.' He was of Quaker descent, and 
 associated for a time with the "Plymouth Brethren." 
 He was very poor, but in his later years he received 
 a pension of £200 from the civil list. His Greek 
 Testament was published by subscription. 
 
 Dr. Tregelles has devoted his whole life to this 
 useful and herculean task, with a revere;it and de- 
 vout spirit similar to that of Bengel, and with a 
 perseverance and success which rank him next to 
 Tischendorf among the textual critics of the present 
 century. He entered upon his work with the con- 
 viction, as he says,'* that " the New Testament is not 
 given us merely for the exercise of our intellectual 
 faculties," but " as the revelation of God, inspired 
 by the Holy Ghost, to teach the way of salvation 
 through faith in Christ crucified." His belief in 
 verbal inspiration made him a verbal critic. He 
 visited many libraries in Europe (in 1845, 1849, and 
 1862), collated the most important uncial and cursive 
 MSS., and published (1861) the palimpsest Codex 
 Zacynthius ( ^ on Luke ). He was far behind 
 Tischendorf in the extent of his resources, but 
 more scrupulously accurate in the use of them.' 
 
 ' Dr. Tregelles (pronounced Tre-ghel'les) wrote also An Account of the 
 Printed Text of the Gr. New Test. (1854), and an Introd. to the Textual 
 Criticism of the New Test., for the 10th edition of Home's Introd. (vol. iv., 
 also issued separately). These two excellent works supply to some extent 
 the place of his Pfolegomena. He contributed many articles for Kitto's 
 Journal of Sacred Literature, made a translation of Gesenius's Hebrew and 
 Ckaldee Lexicon (1847), and aided in several useful biblical publications. 
 
 ' See his Preface to 10th edition of Home's Introd. vol. iv. p. xiii., dated 
 Plymouth, Sept. 18, 1856. 
 
 ' Dr. Scrivener remarks (p. 486) : " Where Tischendorf and Tregelles 
 
264 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 He followed Lachmann's principle, but gives a full- 
 er critical apparatus. He ignores the received text 
 and the great mass of cursive MSS. (except a few), 
 and bases his text on the oldest uncial MSS., the 
 Yersions down to the seventh century, and the early 
 fathers, including Eusebius. Within these limits he 
 aims at completeness and accuracy in the exhibition 
 of evidence. 
 
 He left behind him a monumental work of pains- 
 taking, conscientious, and devout scholarship. But 
 it needs to be corrected and supplemented from the 
 Codex Sinaiticus, and the critical edition of the 
 Codex Vaticanus, which he was not permitted to 
 collate in Rome by the jealous authorities.^ Like 
 Tischendorf, he was prevented from completing his 
 work, and was struck down by paralysis while en- 
 gaged in concluding the last chapters of Revelation 
 (in 1870). He never recovered, and could not take 
 part in the labors of the English Revision Commit- 
 tee, of which he was appointed a member. The 
 Prolegomena with Addenda and Corrigenda were 
 
 differ" (in collation), "the latter is seldom in the wrong." Dr. Abbot 
 (in Schaff's "Encycl." i. 277): "In many cases Tregelles compared his 
 collations with those of Tischendorf, and settled the differences by a re- 
 examination of the manuscript." See Dr. Hort's notice of Tischendorf 
 and Tregelles in the " Journal of Philology " for March, 1858, and G 
 Bertheau in Herzog, rev. ed. vol. xv. 844. 
 
 ^ The Gospels were printed 1857 and 1860, before the publication of St 
 (which he first inspected in Tischendorf s house at Leipsic in 1862), and 
 the printing of the Pauline Epistles had begun in 1865, before Vercellone'a 
 edition of B (which appeared in 1868). Tregelles retained a number of tradi- 
 tional misreadings of B. O. von Gebhardt mentions as examples, Mark iii. 
 1, r\v (which B does not omit)^ xiii. 7, aKovtrs (B, aKOvr}Tt) ; xiii. 21, dint 
 vfiiv (B has vfiiv enrrf). See the long list of corrections in the Appendix, 
 
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 265 
 
 compiled and edited in a supplementary volume 
 four years after his death by Dr. Hort and Rev. A. 
 W. Streane, 1879. 
 
 Note. — Tregelles and Tischendorf. The relation of these two 
 eminent critics to each other is very well stated by Dr. O. von Gebhardt 
 in his article Biheltext (in the new edition of Herzog's " Encykl." vol. ii. 
 p. 428 sq.) : " The justly censured want, in the labors of Lachmann and his 
 predecessors, of a secure basis for the settlement of the New Testament 
 text, must first of all be supplied ; the familiar ancient witnesses must be ex- 
 amined in a far more conscientious method than had hitherto been done, 
 before any further progress could be thought of. To this problem, during 
 the last decades, two men of chief prominence have applied their whole 
 strength — Tischendorf and Tregelles. Both were in like measure equipped 
 with the requisite qualities — sharp-sightedness and an accuracy that gave 
 heed to the smallest particulars; and both, with their whole soul, fixed 
 their eyes upon the goal set before them, and strove with like zeal to 
 reach it. That it was not their lot to attain equal success, lay in the fact 
 that Tischendorf was much more enterprising, more keen-eyed for new 
 discoveries, and far better favored by fortune. But the success which 
 each of them reached, at the same time, is so great that they leave far 
 behind them everj'thing that had been hitherto done in this realm. In 
 the toilsome work of collating manuscripts and deciphering palimpsests, 
 both Tischendorf and Tregelles spent many years of their life, being 
 thoroughly persuaded that the restoration of the New Testament text 
 could be striv^en for with success only upon the basis of a diplomatically 
 accurate investigation of the oldest documents. But while it was Tischen- 
 dorf's peculiarity to publish in rapid succession the swiftly ripened fruits 
 of his restless activity, and so to permit his last result to come into exist- 
 ence, so to speak, before the eyes of the public, Tregelles loved to fix his 
 full energy undisturbed upon the attainment of the one great aim, and to 
 come into publicity only with the completest which he had to ofFer. So 
 we see Tischendorf editing the New Testament twenty times within the 
 space of thirty years, not to mention his other numerous publications; 
 while Tregelles did not believe that he could venture on the publication 
 of the only edition of the New Testament which we possess from liim, untU 
 after a twenty years' preparation. It is, however, a tragic fate, and an 
 irreparable loss for science, that to neither the one nor the other was it 
 vouchsafed to crown the toilsome work of many years with its capstone. 
 
 19 
 
266 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 As Tischeiidorf bequeathed to us the Editio VIII. Critica Major of his 
 Greek Testament, without Prolegomena, so also did Tregelles." 
 
 Dr. Hort says (The N. T. in Gr. ii. 13) : *• Lachmann's two distinguished 
 successors, Tischendorf and Tregelles, have produced texts substantially 
 free from the later corruptions, though neither of them can be said to 
 have dealt consistently, or, on the whole, successfully, with the difficulties 
 presented by the variations between the most ancient texts. On the 
 other hand, their indefatigable labors in the discovery and exhibition of 
 fresh evidence, aided by similar researches on the part of others, provide 
 all who come after them with invaluable resources not available half a 
 century ago." 
 
 Dean Burgon, of Chichester (formerly Vicar of S. Mary- the- Virgin's 
 at Oxford), who is diametricalh'^ opposed to the principles of Tregelles 
 and Tischendorf, nevertheless acknowledges their great merits. In his 
 learned vindication of the genuineness of The Last Twelve Verses of the 
 Gospel according to St. Mark (Oxford, 1871, Pref. pp. viii., ix.), he says: 
 "Though it is impossible to deny that the published texts of Drs. Tisch- 
 endorf and Tregelles as texts are wholly inadmissible [?], yet is it equally 
 certain that by the conscientious diligence with which those distinguished 
 scholars have respectively labored, they have erected monuments of their 
 learning and ability which will endure forever. Their editions of the 
 New Testament will not be superseded by any new discoveries, by any 
 future advances in the science of textual criticism. The MSS. which 
 they have edited will remain among the most precious materials for future 
 study. All honor to them ! If in the warmth of controversy I shall ap- 
 pear to have spoken of them sometimes without becoming deference, let 
 me here once for all confess that I am to blame, and express my regret. 
 When they have publicly begged St. Mark's pardon for the grievous 
 wrong they have done him, I will verj-^ humbly beg their pardon also." 
 More recently (in the "London Quarterly Review" for Oct. 1881', American 
 edition, p. 167) he says of Tregelles: " Lachmann's leading fallacy has per- 
 force proved fatal to the value of the text put forth by Dr. Tregelles. Of 
 the scrupulous accuracy, the indefatigable industry, the pious zeal of that 
 estimable and devoted scholar, we speak not. All honor to his memory !" 
 
 Comp. also two able articles of Dr. Carl Bertheau on Tischendorf and 
 Tregelles, tn the revised ed. of Herzog, voL xv. (1885), 672 sqq. and 841 sqq, 
 
 ALFORD. 
 
 Among the recent English commentators on the 
 New Testament, 'vyho embody the Greek text, Dr. 
 
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 267 
 
 Henry Alford, the genial, many-sided, evangelical, 
 and liberal-minded Dean of Canterbury (1810-1871), 
 deserves honorable mention as a textual critic and 
 most zealous promoter of the revision of the English 
 Version, in which, as a member of the Committee of 
 the Canterbury Convocation, he took an active part 
 till his death, eight months after its organization/ 
 In his Greek Testament (London, 1849, 6th ed. 
 1868) he gives a critically revised text with adigest 
 of various readings, and improved it in successive 
 editions. At first he paid too much attention to 
 the traditional text and to internal and subjective 
 considerations. But in the fifth edition he nearly 
 rewrote the text and digest, chiefly on the basis of 
 the labors of Tregelles and Tischendorf, and in the 
 sixth he collated also the Codex Sinaiticus and in- 
 corporated its readings. He praises Lachmann and 
 Tregelles for " the bold and uncompromising demoli- 
 tion of that unworthy and pedantic reverence for 
 
 * He issued a revised translation of the New Testament (1869), and was 
 the first among the four Anglican clergymen (with Moberly, Humphry, 
 and Ellicott) who prepared a tentative revision several years before the 
 appointment of the Canterbury Committee. Dean Stanley, shortly be- 
 fore his death (July, 1881), in a letter on Revision to the "London Times," 
 paid the following handsome and well-deserved tribute to the memory 
 of his fellow-Reviser: " If there is any one name which must be especially 
 connected with this Revision, it is that of Dean Alford. Henry Alford, 
 while Dean of Canterbury, by incessant writing and preaching on the 
 defects of the existing version, as well as by his well-known labors on the 
 New Testament, had constantly kept the need and the possibility of such 
 a revision before the eyes of the public, and, by a happy coincidence, he 
 was also deeply interested in all attempts at more friendly communion in 
 all matters with Protestant Nonconformists," See Alford's Lift, by hi^ 
 widow, Lojidon, 1873. 
 
268 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 the received text which stood in the way of all 
 chance of discovering the genuine word of God; 
 and the clear indication of the direction which all 
 future sound criticism must take, viz., a return to 
 the evidence of the most ancient witnesses." He 
 became "disposed, as research and comparison went 
 on, to lay more and more weight on the evidence 
 of our few most ancient MSS. and versions, and less 
 on that of tlie great array of later MSS. which are 
 so often paraded in digests as supporting or impugn- 
 ing the commonly received text." His confidence 
 in subjective considerations was shaken, because 
 " in very many cases they may be made to tell with 
 equal force either way. One critic adopts a reading 
 because it is in accord with the usage of the sacred 
 writer; another holds it, for this very reason, to 
 have been a subsequent conformation of the text. 
 One believes a particle to have been inserted to give 
 completeness ; another, to have been omitted as ap- 
 pearing superfluous." ^ 
 
 WESTCOTT AND HORT. 
 
 Westcott and Hort : The New Testament in the 
 Original Greeks Cambridge and London (Macmillan 
 & Co.), 1881, 2 vols. The first volume contains 
 the text (580 pages), the second the Introduction 
 (324 pages) and Appendix {i. e.^ Notes on Select 
 Readings, 140 pages, and Notes on Orthography 
 and Quotations from the Old Testament which are 
 marked by uncial type in the text, pp. 141-188). 
 
 * Gr. Test. vol. i. pp. 76, 85, 87, 88. 
 
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 269 
 
 The first volume appeared in a corrected issue, Dec. 
 1881, and in smaller size (618 pp.) in 1885. Both 
 volumes were republished from duplicate English 
 plates. New York (Harper & Brothers), 1881, the 
 first in a revised ed. 1886.' 
 
 The same American firm has also published, in 
 superior style, with large margin, a very convenient 
 diglot edition of Westcott and Hort's Greek text 
 and the English revision in exactly corresponding 
 pages, with a list of noteworthy variations between 
 the two texts, under the title: The Revised Greek- 
 English New Testament, New York, 1882. Dr. Oscar 
 von Gebhardt has issued a similar diglot edition 
 which presents Tischendorf 's last text and the recent 
 revision of Luther's German version {Novum Testa- 
 mentum Oroece et Germanice. Das N. Test, griechisch 
 und deutsch, Leipzig, 1881). These two diglot edi- 
 tions are exceedingly helpful for the comparative 
 study of the two best Greek texts with the two 
 most important modern versions revised. 
 
 The Greek Testament of Westcott and Hort pre- 
 sents the oldest and purest text which can be attained 
 with the means of information at the command of 
 the present generation. It cannot, indeed, supersede 
 the editions of Tischendorf and Tregelles, which w^ill 
 long continue to be indispensable for their critical 
 
 * The first volume of the American edition (as also the American diglot 
 edition) contains an Introduction by Philip Schaff, which was prepared 
 by previous arrangement with the editors and publishers, before the sec- 
 ond volume appeared, and contains preliminary information applicable to 
 every Greek Testament; while Westcott and Ilort's second volume is an 
 elaborate exposition and vindication of their system of textual criticism, 
 and indispensable to the advanced student. 
 
270 PEENTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 apparatus, and may deserve preference in a number 
 of readings, but, upon the whole, it is a decided ad- 
 vance towards a final text on which scholars, it is 
 hoped, may before long unite as a new textus recep- 
 tus. It is the joint work of two biblical scholars and 
 theological professors in the University of Cam- 
 bridge, who have devoted to it nearly twenty-eight 
 years (from 1853 to 1881), and who combine in an 
 eminent degree the critical faculty with profound 
 learning and reverence for the word of God. Their 
 mode of co-operation was first independent study, 
 and then conference, oral and written. This com- 
 bination gives a higher degree of security to the 
 results. The second volume was prepared by Dr. 
 Hort, with the concurrence of his colleague, and 
 occasional dissent in minor details is always indicat- 
 ed by brackets and the initials H. or W. It speaks 
 from the summit of scientific criticism to professional 
 students. The Introduction would be more intel- 
 ligible and helpful if its statements were oftener 
 illustrated by examples. 
 
 The aim of the editors is not only to restore the 
 Nicene text as a basis for further operations (as 
 Lachmann did), but to reproduce at once (with 
 Tischendorf and Tregelles) the autograph text, that 
 is, " the original words of the New Testament so far 
 as they now can be determined from surviving docu- 
 ments." They rely for this purpose exclusively on 
 documentary evidence, without regard to printed 
 editions. They make no material addition to the 
 critical apparatus (like Wetstein, Scholz, Tischen- 
 dorf, and Tregelles), but they mark a decided prog- 
 
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 271 
 
 ress in tlie science of criticism (like Bentley, Beugel, 
 Griesbach, and Lachmann). They follow with in- 
 dependent judgment and sound tact in the path of 
 Lachmann in the pursuit of the oldest text, but go 
 beyond the Nicene age and as near the apostolic 
 age as the documents will carry them with the use 
 of the critical material of Tregelles and Tischendorf ; 
 they build on Griesbach's classification and estimate 
 of documents; they advance upon all their predeces- 
 sors in tracing the transcriptional history of the text 
 and in the application of the genealogical method as 
 the only way to rise up to the autograph fountain- 
 head. This prominent feature of their work has 
 been already discussed and tested in a special sec- 
 tion, and need not be explained again.* 
 
 Westcott and Hort distinguish four types of text 
 in the surviving documents : ' 
 
 (1.) The Syrian or Antiochian.' It was matured 
 by the Greek and Syrian fathers in the latter part 
 of the fourth century. It is best represented by the 
 uncial Cod. A in the Gospels (but not in the Acts 
 and Epistles), and by the Syriac Peshito (in its re- 
 vised shape, as distinct from the older Curetonian 
 Syriac) ; it is found in Chrysostom (who was first 
 
 * See pp. 208-224. For an adverse criticism see Burgon and Scrivener. 
 
 ' The classification of the documentary sources was begun by Bengel, 
 who divided them into two families — the Asiatic and the African ; it was 
 enlarged and improved by Griesbach, who distinguished three recensions — 
 the Constantinopolitan, Alexandrian, and Western ; it is perfected up to 
 this time by Westcott and Hort. On the older system of recensions, see 
 Tregelles in Home's Introduction, vol. iv. pp. 66-107 (14th edition, 1877). 
 
 ' Bengel called it "Asiatic," Griesbach and Scholz " Constantinopolitan," 
 pr " Byzantine," The best term would be " Graeco-Syrian." 
 
272 PKINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 presbyter at Antioch till 398, and then patriarch of 
 Constantinople till his death, 407),* in the later Greek 
 fathers, and the mass of the cursive MSS. (most of 
 which were written in Constantinople) ; and it is 
 in the main identical with the printed textus recep- 
 tus. It is an eclectic text, which absorbs and com- 
 bines readings from the early texts of different lands. 
 It seems to be the result of an authoritative " recen- 
 sion," or rather two recensions (between 250 and 
 350), i. e.^ an attempted criticism performed by edi- 
 tors who wished to harmonize at least three conflict- 
 ing texts in the same region and to secure lucidity 
 and completeness ; hence the removal of obscurities, 
 the frequent harmonistic interpolations, and the 
 large number of what are called "conflate" readings 
 selected from the three principal texts. " Entirely 
 blameless on either literary or religious grounds as 
 regards vulgarized or unworthy diction, yet show- 
 ing no marks of either critical or spiritual insight, 
 it presents the New Testament in a form smooth 
 and attractive, but appreciably impoverished in 
 sense and force, more fitted for cUrsory perusal or 
 recitation than for repeated and diligent study " (ii. 
 135). The distinctively Syrian readings must at once 
 be rejected and give way to " Pre-Syrian " readings. 
 It should be remarked, however, that the assump- 
 tion of a deliberate and authoritative Grseco-Syrian 
 
 ^ We may add his friend Theodore of Mopsuestia (d. 429). See the re- 
 cent edition of his Commentaries on the Pauline Epistles by Dr. H. B. Swete 
 (Cambridge, 1880-82), and the Excursus on the text, vol. ii. pp. 340-345. 
 Compare Schurer's review in the "TbeoL Lit. Zeitung," 1882, No. 19, 
 col. 444. 
 
1»BINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 273 
 
 recension is based upon a critical conjecture of 
 Westcott and Hort rather than historical evidence. 
 The only trace of it is an obscure remark of Jerome 
 concerning Lucianus, a presbyter and reputed foun- 
 der of the Antiochian school (martyred A.D. 312), 
 and Hesychius, an Egyptian bishop, that certain 
 copies of the New Testament with questionable 
 readings were called after them.' An authoritative 
 recension by the learned fathers of the Nicene and 
 post-Nicene age, who had access to much older man- 
 uscripts than we now possess, would enhance rather 
 than diminish the value of the textus receptus^ unless 
 it is counterbalanced by internal and other document- 
 ary evidence. This, however, is strongly against it. 
 A careful comparison shows that the Pre -Syrian 
 readings are preferable, and best explain the Syrian 
 readings. Tischendorf emphasizes the rule that the 
 reading which explains the variations is presumably 
 the original. 
 
 It is very natural that the Antiochian or Constan- 
 tinopolitan text became the ruling text. Constanti- 
 nople was the heiress of Antioch, the centre of the 
 
 ' Epist. ad Damasum: "Hoc certe cum in nostra sermone discordat et in 
 diversos rivulorum tramites ducit, uno de fonte qucerendum est, Picetei' 
 mitto eos codices quos a Luciano et Hesychio nuncupatos paucorum hominum 
 adserit pei-versa contentio, quibus utique nee in toto Veteri Instrumento post 
 LXX interpretes emendare quid licuit nee in Novo profuit emendasse, cum 
 multarum gentium Unguis Scriptura ante translata doceat falsa esse qvm 
 addita sunt.^' In De Viris illustr. 77, Jerome says : " Lucianus, vir doc- 
 tissimus, Antiochence ecclesicB presbyter, tantum in Sa'ipturarum studio 
 laboravit, ut usque nunc qucedam exemplaria Sa'ipturarum Lucianea 
 twncupentur" Com p. Decret. Gelas, vi. 14 ; " Evangelia quce falsavit 
 Lucianus apocrypha.^^ 
 
274 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMEKt. 
 
 Eastern Church, and the guardian of Greek learning, 
 which after the migration of nations died out in the 
 West; and the capture of Constantinople by the 
 Turks was overruled by Providence for the revival 
 of Greek learning by fugitive scholars and the im- 
 portation of biblical and classical manuscripts to 
 Europe. 
 
 (2.) The Western text. It is most easily recog- 
 nized in the Old Latin version, and in the few extant 
 bilingual uncials which were written in the West (in 
 Italy and Gaul), as D(i) of the Gospels and Acts, and 
 D(2) of the Epistles. It spread very rapidly, and 
 diverged from the original standard before the mid- 
 dle of the second century. The text of the ante- 
 Nicene fathers not connected with Alexandria is 
 substantially Western (Justin, Irenseus, Hippolytus, 
 Methodius, even Eusebius). Its prevailing charac- 
 teristics are a love of paraphrase (as Matt. xxv. 1 ; 
 Luke XX. 34; Eph. v. 30), and a disposition to enrich 
 the text by parallel passages in the Gospels and ad- 
 ditions from traditional (and perhaps apocryphal) 
 sources (as in John v. 4 ; vii. 53-viii. 11 ; Matt. xx. 
 28). " Words, clauses, and even whole sentences 
 were changed, omitted, and inserted with astonish- 
 ing freedom, wherever it seemed that the meaning 
 could be brought out with greater force and definite- 
 ness " (ii. 122). Jerome's Yulgate removed some of 
 these defects, w^hich was one of the motives of his 
 revision. We find analogous phenomena in some 
 of the Apocrypha of the Old Testament, which 
 exist in two texts, the one being an amplified and 
 interpolated modification of the other ; also in some 
 
fRINtfiD TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 275 
 
 post-apostolic writings, as the Epistle of Barnabas, 
 the Shepherd of Herraas, and the Ignatian Epistles. 
 
 (3.) The Alexandrian or Egyptian text.' It is 
 found in the abundant quotations of the Alexandrian 
 fathers, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Dionysius, 
 Didymus, Cyril of Alexandria, partly, also, Eusebius 
 of Csesarea, and in the Egyptian versions (especially 
 the Memphitic). It is characterized by the absence 
 of extraneous matter and a delicate philological tact 
 in changes of language. "We often iind the Alex- 
 andrian group opposed to all other documents, often 
 the Alexandrian and Syrian groups combined in op- 
 position to the others, implying an adoption of an 
 Alexandrian reading by the Syrian text " (ii. 132). 
 
 (4.) The Neutral text. This is most free from 
 later corruption and mixture, and comes nearest the 
 autographs. It is best represented by B (which is 
 complete except the Pastoral Epistles, the Apoca- 
 lypse, and the last four chapters of Hebrews), and 
 next by x (which contains the whole JSTew Testa- 
 ment without a gap). These two MSS., the oldest 
 and most important of all, though fully known only 
 in our day, seem to be independently derived from 
 a common original not far from the autographs, and 
 their concurrence is conclusive in determining the 
 text when not contravened by strong internal evi- 
 dence. Dr. Hort surmises (ii. 267) that both were 
 written in the West, probably at Kome (where the 
 Greek language prevailed in the Church during the 
 first two centuries), that the ancestors of B were 
 
 * Called the African text by Bentley and BengeL 
 
276 TKINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 wholly Western (in the geographical, not the textual 
 sense), and the ancestors of k partly Alexandrian.* 
 The later corrections of clerical errors and textual 
 readings in these MSS. by different hands (especially 
 those of K% x^, and x^) furnish at the same time 
 important contributions to the history of the text. 
 Next to them in authority are C, L, P, T, D, S, A (in 
 the Acts and Epistles, but not in the Gospels), Z, 33, 
 and in Mark A. Among these, C and L have the 
 largest Alexandrian element. Many Pre -Syrian 
 readings are supported by ancient versions or fa- 
 thers, and commended by internal evidence, though 
 not contained in Greek MSS. Among the fathers 
 the Pre-Syrian and Neutral element is strongest in 
 Origen, Didymus, to a considerable extent in Euse- 
 bius, and in Cyril of Alexandria. 
 
 From these various types the apostolic text is to 
 be restored, not by mechanical adjustment, but by 
 the genealogical method or the careful study of the 
 history of the written text and the relations of de- 
 scent and affinity which connect the several witnesses. 
 Not any of them can be exclusively and implicitly 
 trusted. All the extant documents are more or less 
 mixed, and embody a certain number of departures 
 from the autographs, which began to be corrupted 
 in the first generation after the apostles. The vast 
 majority of changes date from the first and second 
 
 ^ The Roman origin of B would most naturally account for its being in 
 the Vatican Library from its very beginning, and the absence of any trace 
 of its being imported. But if !?< was likewise written in Rome, it is not 
 easy to explain how it ever was transported to the Convent at Mount 
 Sinai. 
 
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 277 
 
 centuries, and were current in the fourth, when the 
 text began to assume a stereotyped form in the East 
 through the controlling influence of Constantinople. 
 Patristic quotations, being definitely chronological, 
 are the oldest witnesses, going up to the third and 
 second centuries, but they are often free and loose, 
 and poorly edited; next, those versions (Syriac, Latin, 
 Egyptian) which go back to the same date, but they 
 have undergone revisions ; and lastly, Greek MSS., 
 a few of which date from the middle of the fourth 
 century, but are based again upon older copies, prob- 
 ably from the second century, and hence they are 
 in fact as old witnesses as the oldest fathers and 
 versions, besides being more complete and direct. 
 
 The process of restoration is very complicated and 
 difficult, and much remains confused or doubtful. 
 But in the majority of cases the true reading can be 
 fixed with certainty, as is shown by the increasing 
 consensus of the most competent critics and com- 
 mentators. With all the variations, the texts of 
 Lachmann, Tischendorf (his eighth and last edition), 
 Tregelles, and Westcott and Hort, are substantially 
 one and the same. If Westcott and Hort have 
 failed, it is by an overestimate of the Vatican Codex, 
 to which (like Lachmann and Tregelles) they assign 
 the supremacy, while Tischendorf may have given 
 too much weight to the Sinaitic Codex. Absolute 
 unanimity in cases where the evidence is almost 
 equally divided cannot be expected among scholars 
 of independent judgment, nor is it at all necessary 
 for the practical purposes of the New Testament. 
 In the absence of the apostolic autographs, and the 
 
278 PRINTED T£XT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 extreme improbability of their recovery, we must 
 be content with an approximation to the original 
 text. Future discovery and future criticism may 
 diminish the doubts concerning alternative readings, 
 but will not materially alter the text. 
 
 Westcott and Hort's Greek Testament derives an 
 additional interest from its close connection and 
 simultaneous publication with the Anglo-American 
 Revision of the English Testament. Both editors 
 were prominent members of the British New Tes- 
 tament Company of Eevisers, and Dr. Hort took a 
 leading part in the discussion of all textual ques- 
 tions, which were always settled before the transla- 
 tion. The method pursued was to hear first Dr. 
 Scrivener, as the champion of the traditional text, 
 and then Dr. Hort for additional remarks and in 
 favor of any changes that seemed desirable. The 
 task could not have been intrusted to more compe- 
 tent hands. Dr. Hort advocated his side with con- 
 summate skill and complete mastery of the whole 
 field, yet he was never followed slavishly by the 
 Kevisers, several of whom are experienced textual 
 critics as well as exegetes, and were thoroughly pre- 
 pared for each meeting. The American Company 
 likewise devoted many days and hours to discussions 
 of various readings, and sent a few elaborate papers 
 to their English brethren. Parts of the Greek text 
 were printed for private and confidential use of the 
 English and American Revisers — the Gospels, with 
 a temporary preface, in 1871, the Acts and Catholic 
 Epistles in 1873, the Pauline Epistles in 1875, the 
 Apocalypse in 1876; but the second volume was 
 
l»EI»tTEt) tEXT Ot TUfi GRfiEK TESTAMENT. 279 
 
 withheld till the Kevision was completed. The 
 editors, while thus materially aiding the two Com- 
 panies of Revisers, received in turn the benefit of 
 their criticism, which enabled them to introduce 
 into the stereotype plates "many corrections deal- 
 ing with punctuation or otherwise of a minute kind, 
 together with occasional modifications of reading" 
 (ii. 18). The result is that in typographical accuracy 
 the Greek Testament of Westcott and Hort is prob- 
 ably unsurpassed,' and that it harmonizes essentially 
 with the text adopted by the Kevisers ; for, although 
 they differ in about two hundred places, nearl}^ all 
 these variations are recognized in the margin either 
 of the Greek text or the English Revision as alter- 
 nate readings.'' It is one of the chief merits of the 
 Revised Version that it puts the English reader in 
 possession of an older and purer text than any other 
 version, ancient or modern. It is the first, and so 
 far the only, popular version which embodies the 
 results of the latest discoveries and investigations 
 of the original form of the Greek Testament. 
 
 Note. — Dr. Brooke Foss Westcott was born Jan. 12, 1825; educated 
 at Trinity College, Cambridge \ appointed Canon at Peterborough in 1869, 
 and Regius Professor of Divinity at Cambridge in 1870. He has written 
 
 ' A few insignificant errors of the first edition, as w/icDv for vixwv in 
 Matt. X. 9 (p. 23), have since been corrected. 
 
 ' E. g., Westcott and Hort read in John i. 18, fiovoyevrjc ^eoq in the 
 text, 6 fiovoyivi^g viog on the margin ; while the Revisers read " the only 
 begotten Son " in the text, and " God only begotten " on the margin. In 
 Acts xvi. 32, Westcott and Hort: tov Sreov, text, Kvpiov, margin; Revis- 
 ers : " of the Lord," margin " God." See the convenient list of noteworthy 
 variations in Harpers' diglot edition, pp. xci.-cii. 
 
280 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 a number of able and useful works, as a History of the English Bible, a 
 History of the Canon of the New Testament, an Introduction to the Study 
 of the Gospels (republished by H. B. Hackett, Boston), a Commentary on 
 the Gospel of St. John (which ranks among the very best parts in the 
 " Speaker's Commentary "), the Epistles of St. John, and valuable con- 
 tributions to Smith's " Bible Dictionary." Dr. Fentox John Anthony 
 HoRT was bom April 23, 1828, educated at Trinity Collf^iro, Cambridge 
 and appointed Hulsean Professor of Divinity in the University of Cam- 
 bridge in 1878. He wrote Two Dissertations on fj,ovoyivii)g Oeog and on 
 the Constantinopolitan Creed (a singularly able and acute plea for the read- 
 ing •' only begotten Cotf," in John i. 18), the Introduction and Appendix to 
 the Greek Testament (a masterpiece of critical learning and sagacity), 
 and a number of valuable articles in Smith and Cheetham's " Dictionary 
 of Christian Antiquities," and Smith and Wace's " Dictionary of Christian 
 Biography." Both belong to what may be called the Evangelical Cath- 
 olic School of Anglican Divines, but they take no part in the ecclesiastical 
 party controversies of the age. 
 
 The Greek Testament of Westcott and Hort was well received by 
 competent scholars in England and other countries. It was virtually 
 (not formally) endorsed even before its publication by the English. Re- 
 vision Company, which includes some of the ablest biblical critics and 
 exegetes of the age. This is the highest commendation. Bishop Light- 
 foot acknowledged the benefit of their assistance in the revision of the 
 text of his Commentary on Galatians (p. viii.) as early as 1865. When 
 the work was at last given to the public, the somewhat captious and 
 fault-finding "Saturday Review" for May 21, 1881, greeted it as ''prob- 
 ably the most important contribution to biblical learning in our genera- 
 tion." " The Church Quarterly Review " (for Jan. 1882, pp. 419-450), 
 and other leading organs of public opinion in England too numerous 
 to mention, with one signal exception (" The Quarterly Review," of 
 which we shall speak in the next section), contained highly appre- 
 ciative notices. In America, it met likewise a warm welcome. Dr. Ezra 
 Abbot (a most competent judge) says: "It can hardly be doubted that 
 their [Westcott and Hort's] work is the most important contribution to 
 the scientific criticism of the New Testament text which has yet been 
 made " (Schaff's " Rel. Encycl." i. 277). Prof. Benj. B. Warfield con- 
 cludes a lengthy notice, which betrays a thorough mastery of the sub- 
 ject, with the judgment that the text of Westcott and Hort is "the 
 best and purest that has ever passed through the press, and, for the 
 future, must be recognized as the best basis for further work" ("The 
 
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 281 
 
 Presbyterian Review " of New York for April, 1882, p. 355). The new 
 text has already secured a recognized status on the Continent. It was 
 hailed as an " epoch-making " work by the most competent textual critic 
 of Germany, since the death of Tischendorf, and his successor in this 
 department, Dr. Oscar von Gebhardt. He has incorporated Westcott and 
 Hort's readings in his recent issue of Tischendorf 's latest text (both the 
 Greek and the Graeco-German edition, Lips. 1881), and pays them this 
 weighty tribute {Nov. Test. Gr. et Germ.y Introd. p. vii.) : " Wie Tregelles, 
 so huldigen auch Westcott und Hort im wesentlichen den Grundsdfzen, welche 
 in die KritiTc des Neuen Testaments eingejuhrt zu haben, das bleibende Ver- 
 dienst Lackmanns ist. Was aber die neuste englische A usgabe vor alien ihren 
 Vorgdngerinnen auszeichnet, ist die systematische, in solchem Umfang bisher 
 unerrdchte Verwerthung der Textesgeschichte zur Classifidrung und Ah- 
 schdtzung der verschiedenen Zeugen, und die conseguente Handhabung der so 
 gewonnenen Grundsdtze bei A usfuhrung der kritischen Operation.^'' Dr. Carl 
 Bertheau notices Westcott and Hort most favorably in Harnack and 
 Schlirer's " Theologische Literatur-Zeitung " for Oct. 21, 1882, col. 487, 
 and places their text not only on a par with those of Tregelles and 
 Tischendorf (ed. viii.), but even above them in regard to method and 
 extraordinary accuracy {"wegen der angewandten Methode und der aus- 
 serordentlichen Genauigkeit der Arbeit^^). The same critic (col. 494) ex- 
 presses his amazement at the vehement attack of Dean Burgon in the 
 "Quarterly Review," which he thinks needs no refutation. I may add 
 that Professor Bernhard Weiss, of Berlin, one of the ablest living com- 
 mentators, and editor of the new editions of Meyer on the Gospels and on 
 Romans, not only agrees with the uncial text as a whole, but frequently 
 sides with Cod. B and Westcott and Hort versus Cod. X and Tischendorf, 
 e.g., in John i. 18 (fiovoysvrjg SrsSg) ; Rom. i. 27, 29; ii. 2, 16; iii. 28. 
 
 These are Protestant judgments. But what is even more remarkable, 
 is the equally favorable judgment of Roman Catholic scholars. Dr. Hund- 
 hausen, of Mainz, declares in the ^^ Literariscker Handweiserfiir das Katko- 
 lische Deutschland," MUnster, 1882, No. 19, col. 590 : " Unter alien bisher 
 auf dem Gebiete der neutestamentlichen Texthritik erschienenen Werken 
 gebUhrt dem Westcott- Hortscken unstreitig die Palmed The same intel- 
 ligent writer says (col. 585): '■'■Die einfachen und klaren Grundprincipien 
 Lachmann^s in Verbindung mit den verbesserten und richtig angewandten 
 Ideen Griesbach^s, die umfassendeii und zuverldssigen documentarischen 
 Forschiingen Tischendorf^ s, Tregelles^ u. A. und die eindringenden krit- 
 ischen Operationen der beiden Cambridger Professoren haben sich vereinigt, 
 urn in den vorliegenden zwei Banden ein Werk von grosser VoUendung zu 
 
 20 
 
S82 PRINTED TEXT OF THE <5REEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 schajjfen:' He objects, as a Catholic, to the critical treatment of Mark 
 xvi. 9-20, and John vii. 53-viii. 11, but adds (col. 586) that, as to the rest, 
 Westcott and Hort present the New Testament text " in a purity and 
 primitiveness (in einer Eeinheit und UrsprungHchlceW) superior to any 
 critical edition which "has as yet appeared." The same opinion has been 
 expressed by an eminent French Catholic scholar. Louis Duchesne opens 
 a review of Westcott and Hort in the "Bulletin Critique" of Paris for 
 Jan. 15, 1882 (as quoted by Hundhausen), with the words: " Void un 
 livre destine a f aire epoque dans la critique du Nvuveau-Testament.^^ 
 
 SCRIVENER AND PALMER. 
 
 Simultaneously with the edition of Westcott and 
 Hort there appeared two other editions of the Greek 
 Testament, which make no claim to be independent 
 critical recensions of the text, but have a special 
 interest and value in connection with the English 
 Revision, and supplement each other. They were 
 carefully prepared by two members of the New 
 Testament Company of the Canterbury Revisers; 
 but it is distinctly stated that " the Revisers are not 
 responsible" for the publication. They were under- 
 taken by the English University Presses. 
 
 The first is by Dr. F. H. A. Scrivener (Prebenda- 
 ry of Exeter and Yicar of Hendon), and is published 
 by the University Press of Cambridge under the 
 title : The New Testament in the Original Greek, 
 according to the Text followed in the Authorized 
 Version [i. e., the textus recejptus of Beza's edition 
 of 1598], together with the Variations adopted in the 
 Revised Version. He puts the new readings at the 
 foot of the page, and prints the displaced readings 
 of the text in heavier type. In an Appendix 
 (pp. 648-656), he gives a list of the passages where- 
 in the Authorized Version departs from Beza's text 
 
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 283 
 
 of 1598, and agrees with certain earlier editions of 
 the Greek Testament. The departures of King 
 James's Version from Beza are only about a hun- 
 dred and ninety in all, and of comparatively little 
 importance; while the departures of the Eevision 
 from the textus receptus are said to number over- 
 five thousand.' 
 
 Dr. Scrivener is favorably known from his pre- 
 vious edition of the Received Text with the varia- 
 tions of modern editors, and from valuable contribu- 
 tions to the material as well as the science of textual 
 criticism, to which we have often referred. He is 
 the most learned representative of the conservative 
 school of textual criticism, but is gradually and stead- 
 ily approaching the position of the modern critics in 
 exchanging the textus receptus for the older uncial 
 text. He frankly confesses " that there was a time 
 when he believed that the inconveniences and dan- 
 gers attending a formal revision of the Bible of 1611 
 exceeded in weight any advantages which might ac- 
 crue from it;" that "his judgment has been influ- 
 
 * I have not seen an authentic estimate of the whole number of textual 
 changes; but the following are two specimens: in the Sermon on the 
 Mount (Matt, v.-vii.), which contains 111 verses, the Revisers have made 
 44 changes of text, in 38 of which they agree with Lachmann, Tischen- 
 dorf, and Tregelles; in the First Epistle to Timothy, they have made in 
 about the same number of verses nearly the same number of changes — viz., 
 48, of which 41 had been previously adopted by the three eminent critics 
 named. See The Revisers and the Greek Text of the New Testament, Lond. 
 1882, p.38 sq. Dean Burgon asserts ("Quarterly Review," No.304, Oct. 188 ! , 
 ]). 307) that " the textus receptus has been departed from (by the Revisers) 
 far more than 50()(» tiines,alm()st invariably for the worse." Aceonling to Dr. 
 Scrivener and CaMoii Cool; the who)e nuipber oJ" textual changes is 5788, 
 
284 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 enced, though slowly and with some reluctance, by 
 the glowing necessity for a change imposed by the 
 rapid enlargement of the field of biblical knowledge 
 within the last forty years ;" and that " his new 
 opinion has been not a little confirmed by the ex- 
 perience he has gained while actually engaged upon 
 the execution of the work." ' And as regards the 
 text, he says, after enumerating the recent discov- 
 eries of MSS. : " When these and a flood of other 
 documents, including the more ancient Syriac, Latin, 
 and Coptic versions, are taken into account, many 
 alterations in the Greek text cannot but be made, 
 unless we please to close our eyes to the manifest 
 truth. Of these changes some will not influence 
 the English version at all, many others very slight- 
 ly ; some are of considerable, a few of great, im- 
 portance ; yet not one of them sufiicient to disturb 
 a single article of the common faith of Christen- 
 dom."' 
 
 * In an article written for the " Sunday-School Times" of Philadelphia, 
 1880, and reprinted in The Bible and its Study, Philadelphia (725 Chestnut 
 Street), p. 29. 
 
 ' L. c. p. 33 sq. His Six Lectures on the Text of the New Testamenif 
 published in 1875, mark a little progress beyond the second edition of his 
 Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament, 1874, and the third 
 edition published in 1883, occupies substantially the same position. He 
 gives up the spurious interpolation of the three witnesses as hopelessly 
 untenable, and on the disputed reading in 1 Tim. iii. 16, where his 
 friend. Dean Burgon, so strenuously insists on Btog, Scrivener, in his 
 Lectures, p. 192 sq., makes the following admission : " On the whole, if 
 Codd. A, C, be kept out of sight (and we know not how more light can 
 l)e thrown on their testimony), this is one of the controversies which 
 the discovery of Cod. fi< ought to have closed, since it adds a first-rate un- 
 ci{4 witness to ^ case already very strong through the support of versions. 
 
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 285 
 
 The other edition is edited by Dr. E. Palmer 
 (Archdeacon of Oxford), and published by the Clar- 
 endon Press under the title: H KAINH AIAGHKH. 
 The Greek Testament with the Readings adopted 
 hy the Revisers of the Authorised Version, Oxford, 
 1881.^ 
 
 Palmer pursues the opposite method from that 
 of Scrivener : he presents the Greek text followed 
 by the Revisers, and puts the discarded readings of 
 the textus recejptus (^. ^., the edition of Stephens, 
 1550)' and of the version of 1611 in foot-notes. 
 The Revisers state, in the Preface from the Jerusa- 
 lem Chamber (p. xiii., royal-octavo edition), that they 
 did not esteem it within their province " to construct 
 a continuous and complete Greek text. In many 
 cases the English rendering was considered to repre- 
 sent correctly either of two competing readings in 
 the Greek, and then the question of the text was 
 
 Slowly and deliberately, yet in full confidence that God in other passages 
 of his written word has sufficiently assured us of the Proper Divinity of his 
 Incarnate Son, we have yielded up this clause as no longer tenable against 
 the accumulated force of external evidence which has been brought against 
 it." In his Introd. ed. iii. p. 637-642, he speaks hesitatingly. In his la&t 
 ed. of the Stephanie text (1887) he records the readings of Westcott and 
 I^ort, but calls their ed. a " splendidum peccatum, non Krfjfia Eig dei !" 
 
 * The University Presses of Oxford and Cambridge have also published 
 The Parallel New Testament, Greek and English, giving the Authorised 
 Version, the Revised Version, the Revised Greek text, and the Readings 
 displaced by the Revisers, in parallel columns (with space for MS. notes), 
 Nov. 1882. Very elegant and useful editions. 
 
 ' The text of Stephens, as reprinted by Mill in 1707, formed the basis 
 of all Oxford editions down to Scrivener's edition (1877), of which Palmer 
 has made free use. But the Authorized Version of 1611 follows Beza's 
 text (1598) rather than that of Stephens, although the difference is not 
 ver^ ^retitf 
 
286 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 usually not raised." Palmer, with the aid of lists 
 of readings prepared by the Revisers in the progress 
 of their work, has constructed a continuous text, 
 taking for the basis the third edition of Stephens 
 (1550), and following it closely in all cases in which 
 the Revisers did not express a preference for other 
 readings ; even the orthography, the spelling of 
 proper names, and the typographical peculiarities 
 or errors of Stephens are, with a few exceptions, re- 
 tained. The chapters are marked as in Stephens's 
 edition, the distribution into verses accords with 
 that in the Authorized Version, and the division into 
 paragraphs is conformed to the English Revision. 
 
 The year 1881 has been fruitful above any other 
 in editions of the New Testament in Greek and the 
 Revised English Version ; and the demand for the 
 latter in Great Britain and the United States has 
 been beyond all precedent in the history of litera- 
 ture. We may well call it the year of the repub- 
 lication of the Gospel. The immense stimulus thus 
 given to a careful and comparative study of the 
 words of Christ and his apostles must bear rich 
 fruit. 
 
 The first printed edition of the Greek Testament 
 in 1516 was followed by the great Reformation of 
 1517. May the numerous editions of 1881 lead to a 
 deeper understanding and wider spread of the Chris- 
 tianity of Christ I 
 
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 287 
 
 RETROSPECT AND PROSPECT. 
 
 The history of the printed text from Erasmus 
 down to the Westminster Revision is a gradual re- 
 covery of the original text. It follows the stream 
 of tradition from late copies of the Middle Ages up 
 to Nicene and ante-Nicene copies, and as near as pos- 
 sible to the very fountain of the autographs, as fast 
 as ancient documents come to light and as the science 
 of textual criticism advances. But every inch of 
 progress had to be conquered against stubborn op- 
 position. The story of the crucifixion and resurrec- 
 tion is repeated again and again in the history of 
 the Bible, which is the standard-bearer of the Church 
 militant. Every new truth, every discovery and in- 
 vention, has to fight its way through hostile prejudice 
 and ignorance, and pass the ordeal of martyrdom be- 
 fore it is recognized. "No cross, no crown." The 
 word, " Blood is the seed of Christians," ' was liter- 
 ally or figuratively true in all ages. Persecution 
 may proceed from priest or people, from the San- 
 hedrin or the Sorbonne or the mob ; it may be 
 orthodox or heretical, bloody or unbloody, accord- 
 ing to circumstances and the spirit of the times. 
 The persecution of the Bible and Bible versions has 
 been of all kinds. 
 
 The first edition of the Greek Testament was 
 deprecated by the crowd of monks as a great calam- 
 ity, and Erasmus was violently assailed by the arro- 
 gant ignorance of Archbishop Lee of York and the 
 
 * This is the literal rendering of TertuUian's well-known " Semen eH 
 ianguis Christianorum " (^Apologeticus, last chapter). 
 
288 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 envious traditional learning of the Coraplutensian 
 rival editor, Stunica, who charged him with the 
 crime of omitting the spurious witnesses in 1 John 
 V. 7, and even with intentional insult to Spain for 
 misspelling 27ravm for 'lo-Travm in Kom. xv. 28. 
 Robert Stephanus had to flee from the wrath of 
 the doctors of the Sorbonne to Protestant Geneva. 
 "Walton's critical apparatus roused the orthodox op- 
 position of the great Puritan, Dr. Owen. Mill was 
 assailed after his death, w^hich soon followed the 
 issue of his Greek Testament with 30,000 various 
 readings, by the distinguished commentator Whit- 
 by ; Bentley by Conyers Middleton ; Bengel by 
 Wetstein (who could not appreciate the classifica- 
 tion of authorities into families) ; Wetstein in turn 
 by Frey and Iselin, who charged him with heresy 
 and drove him from Basle to Amsterdam. Gries- 
 bach was overwhelmed with abusive epithets by his 
 rival, Matthsei. Lachmann was scornfully criticised 
 by the learned rationalist, C. F. A. Fritzsche, who 
 called him " the ape of Bentley." Tregelles was 
 long ignored and allowed almost to starve in rich 
 England, till he lost his eyesight in deciphering 
 old MSS. for his Greek Testament. Tischendorf 
 was annoyed and slandered by Simonides, who im- 
 pudently claimed to have written the Codex Sinaiti- 
 cus with his own hand. 
 
 Translations of the Bible made for public use 
 have fared still worse in proportion to the number 
 of their judges. Jerome's irritable temper was 
 sorely tried by the braying of " the two-legged don- 
 keys" ij)i;pedes aselli), as he rather coarsely called 
 
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 289 
 
 his ignorant opponents; even the great and good 
 St. Augustin feared more liarrn than good from his 
 friend's attempt to revise the Latin Bible after the 
 Hehraica Veritas^ and continued to use the old ver- 
 sion vi'ith all its blunders, v^^hieh he had not Greek 
 or Hebrew learning enough to correct. He was 
 highly offended at Jerome's substituting hedera 
 (ivy) for cucurbita (gourd) in the Book of Jonah 
 (iv. 6) ; and a certain bishop nearly lost his charge 
 for venturing to defend the new rendering. For 
 two hundred years the old Itala was quoted, even 
 by popes. But eleven centuries after Jerome's death 
 (419), the Council of Trent (April 8, 1546) raised his 
 Vulgate to equal dignity with the original (which, 
 of course, was a most serious blunder in the opposite 
 direction). 
 
 John Wiclif of Oxford, " the Morning Star of the 
 Reformation," and the chief author of the first com- 
 plete version of the whole Bible into the English 
 tongue (though only from the Latin Yulgate), was 
 denounced by the Archbishop of Canterbury and 
 High Chancellor of England (Arundel) as "that 
 pestilent wretch of damnable memory, son of the 
 old serpent, yea the forerunner and disciple of anti- 
 christ, who, as the complement of his wickedness, 
 invented a new translation of the Scriptures into 
 his mother tongue." The Council of Constance 
 (1415), which burned John Hus and Jerome of 
 Prague, condemned both the writings and the bones 
 of Wiclif to the flames ; and in 1428 his remains 
 were solemnly ungraved, burned to ashes, and cast 
 into the brook Swift, which, as Fuller says, " con' 
 
290 PBli^TEt) T£XT O^ Tflfi GRfiEK TESTAilEN'r. 
 
 vejed them into the Avon, Avon into Severn, Severn 
 into the narrow seas, they into the main ocean; and 
 thus the ashes of Wiclif are the emblem of his doc- 
 trine, which now is dispersed all the world over." 
 In 1880, five hundred years after the completion of 
 his English Bible, Wiclifs memory was celebrated 
 in five continents. 
 
 The first edition of William Tyn dale's translation 
 of the Greek Testament from the newly published 
 text of Erasmus had to be smuggled into England, 
 and was publicly burned by order of the Bishop of 
 London (Tunstall), in St. Paul's Church-yard ; the 
 next ^ve editions which were printed before 1530 
 fared not much better; hence there remain of the 
 first edition only one fragment, of the second one 
 copy, wanting the title-page, and another very im- 
 perfect, and of the other four two or three copies.* 
 Tyndale himself was strangled and then burned in 
 his prison at Yilvorden (Oct. 6, 1536), praying, ^* Lord ! 
 open the King of England's eyes." Yet he is now 
 universally revered as the chief author of the idiom 
 
 ^ See Westcott, Hist, of the E. Bible, p. 45. The final edition of Tyndale's 
 translation of the New Testament hailed from his prison (1535). Luther's 
 German Version met with extraordinary success in Germany. Yet it 
 was forbidden in the Duchy of Saxony (by Duke George), in Bavaria, 
 Austria, Brandenburg, and other countries. The theological faculty of the 
 University of Leipsic pronounced unfavorable judgment; and the Roman 
 Catholic, Emser, wrote a book against it in 1523, in which he charged it 
 with no less than 1400 errors and heresies (mostly departures from the 
 Latin Vulgate on the ground of the Greek original). Afterwards Emser 
 published a translation of his own, in which he copied whole pages of 
 Luther's version, adapting it only to the Latin Vulgate. The very enemies 
 of Luther when writing in German were forced to use his language. See 
 Kostlin, Martin Luther^ i. 607. 
 
PRINTED Ti:xT O^ THE GltEEK TESTAMENT. 291 
 
 of our English Bible, and as the man who " caused a 
 boy that driveth the plough to know more of the 
 Scripture" than the priest and the pope of his day. 
 And from the banks of the Thames, near the very 
 spot where his English Testament went up in a liery 
 chariot, like Elijah, more Bibles are now sent to all 
 parts of the globe in one year than were copied in 
 the first fifteen centuries of our era. 
 
 The authors of the Geneva Version were fugitives 
 from persecution ; but their great improvements 
 upon the preceding versions passed into our Au- 
 thorized Version, notwithstanding the prejudice and 
 hatred of King James, who thought it the worst 
 translation ever made. 
 
 The Authorized Version itself was received with 
 indifference from churchmen and violent opposition 
 from all quarters, as the translators predicted in the 
 first sentence of their Preface ; it was charged with 
 bad theology, bad scholarship, and bad English; for 
 fifty years it had to fight its way into general recog- 
 nition ; and Hugh Broughton, the greatest Hebraist 
 of his day, but a bad-tempered and " unclubbable " 
 man, and hence omitted in the selection of the 
 Translators, attacked it with the tomahawk, and 
 sent word to King James that he " had rather be 
 rent in pieces with wild horses " than help to bring 
 such a mistranslation into public use.* And yet 
 
 > Westcott (^Hist. of the English Bible, p. 160, note 2) says : " The labors 
 of Hugh Broughton on the English Bible ought not to be passed over 
 without notice. This great Hebraist violently attacked the Bishops' 
 Bible, and sketched a plan for a new version which his own arrogance 
 was sufficient to make impracticable. He afterwards published transla- 
 
292 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 this same version is now universall}^ recognized as 
 one of the best, if not the very best, ever made, and 
 has proved for more than two hundred years the 
 greatest blessing which Providence has bestowed 
 upon the English-speaking race. 
 
 It would be a bad omen for the revised text and 
 version of 1881 if they had escaped the fate of their 
 predecessors and been received without opposition. 
 The days of bloody persecution are over, but the 
 human passions which instigated them survive. 
 
 tions of Daniel, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations, and Job, and offered his help 
 towards the execution of the royal version. His overbearing temper, as 
 it appears, caused him to be excluded from the work; but his printed 
 renderings were not without influence upon the Revisers — e.g., Dan.iii.6." 
 I have examined (in the Astor Library) the works of Hugh Broughton 
 which were published in London, 1662, in one folio volume of 732 pages, 
 under the high-sounding title : " The Works of the Great A Ibionean Divine, 
 Renowned in Many Nations for Rare Shill in Salems and Athens Tongues, 
 and Familiar A cguaintance with all Rabbinical Leaming.^^ John Light- 
 foot says of him, in the preface, that " among his friends he was of a very 
 sweet, affable, and loving carriage," but "sharp, severe, and exceeding 
 bold against error, and impiety." His judgment of King James's Bible is 
 given on p. 661. It is addressed to the King's attendant, and begins as 
 follows : " The late Bible {Right WorshipfuU) was sent to me to censure, 
 which bred in me a sadnesse that will grieve me while I breath. It is so ill 
 done. Tell his Majestic that I had rather be rent in pieces with wild horses, 
 than any such translation, by my consent, should be urged upon poor churches." 
 Then follow various objections, and the first reveals at once the motive 
 and animus of the critic, namely : " My advisement they regarded not, but 
 still make Seth a fool, to name his son sorrowfull Enosh [Gen. iv. 26]." 
 He even charges the translators with leaving " atheism in the text." 
 He protests (p. 663) : " I will suffer no scholar in the M'orld to cross me in 
 Ebrew or Greek, when I am sure I have the truth." Broughton's criticism 
 was a brutum fulmen, and is only remembered now as a curiosity in the 
 history of the odium theologicum, which is not likely to die out until 
 human nature is transformed. 
 
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GKEEK TESTAMENT. 293 
 
 There are many lineal descendants of those priests 
 who, in the reign of Henry YIII., preferred their 
 old-fashioned Mumjpsimus^ Domine, to the new- 
 fangled Sum^simus, Even in the enlightened State 
 of Connecticut a pious deacon is reported to have 
 opposed the revision of 1881 with the conclusive 
 argument, " If St. James's Yersion was good enough 
 for St. Paul, it is good enough for me." There are 
 also not a few heirs of the spirit of Archbishop 
 Arundel and Bishop Tunstall who, if they had the 
 power, would gladly commit the Westminster Ee- 
 vision, Greek and English, to the flames admajorem 
 Dei gloriam^ and shout a Te Deum. 
 
 Foremost among the learned opponents of the 
 latest progress in biblical science is the anonymous 
 author of three famous articles on "New Testament 
 Kevision " in the London " Quarterly Review." * 
 
 ^ For Oct. 1881, Jan. and April, 1882— Nos. 304, 305, 306. The articles 
 have since been republished under the title : The Revision Revised, by 
 John William Burgon, B.D., Dean of Chichester, London, 1883. The 
 book is enlarged by a very sharp reply to Bishop Ellicott (as a " Textual 
 Critic," not as a " Successor of the Apostles "). The severity of tone is in- 
 creased rather than softened, and the Revision is unsparingly condemned, 
 in italics, as " the most astonishing, us well as the most calamitous, literary 
 blunder of the age " (Preface, p. xi.). Dean Burgon is the author of a 
 most elaborate vindication of the genuineness of The Last Tioelve Verges 
 of the Gospel according to 8. Mark, Oxford, 1871 (334 and xv. pages). In 
 this work he clearly foreshadowed his animus towards the revision move- 
 ment on p. 264, where he says : " I cannot so far forget the unhappy cir- 
 cumstances of the times as to close this note without the further sugges- 
 tion (sure therein of the approval of our trans- Atlantic brethren [i. e., 
 Episcopalian churchmen]) that, for a Revision of the Authorized Version 
 to enjoy the confidence of the nation, and to procure for itself acceptance 
 at the hands of the Church — it will be found necessary that the work 
 
294 PRINTIiD TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 They abound in patristic quotations, polemical skill, 
 and oracular assertions. The modern Broughton 
 Bmelled the battle afar off, and rushed into the 
 arena, like Job's war-horse, with extended nostrils, 
 rejoicing in his strength, mocking at fear, swallow- 
 ing the ground with fierceness and rage, and saying 
 among the trumpets. Ha, ha ! He boldly denounces 
 the oldest and most valuable manuscripts of the 
 Greek Testament, including the Sinaitic and the 
 Vatican, as "a handful of suspicious documents," 
 and condemns the Greek text of Westcott and Hort 
 and of the Revisers (for he regards the two as iden- 
 tical) as "utterly untrustworthy," "entirely undeserv- 
 ing of confidence," and " demonstrably more remote 
 from the Evangelic verity than any which has ever 
 yet seen the light." And as to the English Revision 
 (which he characteristically calls a version " of the 
 Church and the sects"), he denounces it as " a prodig- 
 ious blunder," as a translation "which, for the most 
 part, reads like a first-rate school-boy's crib — tasteless, 
 
 should be confided to Churchmen. The Church may never abdicate her 
 function of being ' a Witness and a Keeper of Holy Writ.' Neither can 
 she, without flagrant inconsistency and scandalous consequence, ally her- 
 self in the work of Revision with the Sects. Least of all may she associ- 
 ate with herself in the sacred undertaking an Unitarian teacher. . . . What 
 else is this but to offer a deliberate insult to the Majesty of Heaven in the 
 Divine Person of Him who is alike the Object of the everlasting Gospel 
 and its Author?" When it appeared, ten years afterwards, that not only 
 the one " Unitarian teacher " (Dr. George Vance Smith), but such ortho- 
 dox churchmen as Westcott and Hort, and the whole body of Revisers, 
 decided the question of the closing verses of Mark against the " demon- 
 stration " of this Doctor irrefutdbilis, he regarded this as " a deliberate 
 insult to the Majesty of Heaven." Hinc illce laaymce. 
 
PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 295 
 
 nnlovely, harsh, unidiomatic ; — servile without being 
 really faithful, pedantic without being really learned ; 
 — an unreadable translation, in short ; the result of 
 a vast amount of labor, indeed, but wondrous little 
 judgment." * He wantonly charges the Revisionists 
 with having violated their instructions by revising 
 the received text (when they were expressly directed 
 by their rules to do so), and made themselves " the 
 dupes of an ingenious theory-monger" (Dr. Hort), un- 
 der whose manipulations they decided textual ques- 
 tions " at a moment's notice " (when, as the writer 
 might have learned or taken for granted, they spent 
 days and weeks and months on their consideration). 
 Such intemperance stands self-condemned. Over- 
 done is undone. It requires an amazing amount of 
 self-confidence to indulge in a wholesale condemna- 
 tion of the joint work of such veteran and renowned 
 scholars as Archbishop Trench, Bishops Ellicott, 
 Lightfoot, and Moberly, Deans Alford, Stanley, and 
 Scott, Archdeacons Lee and Palmer, and Drs. West- 
 cott, Hort, Scrivener, Kennedy, Humphry, etc., not 
 to mention any of the eminent divines who have the 
 misfortune to belong to the uncovenanted "sects" 
 of England, Scotland, and the United States. But 
 worse than this, the "Reviewer" expressly involves 
 in his condemnation Tischendorf, Tregelles, Lach- 
 mann, Griesbach, Bengel, and Bentley fully as much 
 as Westcott and Hort and the Revisionists, and 
 
 * See No. 304, p. 368 ; No. 306, pp. 312, 313. An American Bishop of 
 considerable rhetorical culture has taken inspiration as well as comfort 
 from the English Dean, and pronounces the style of the Revision to b« 
 " wilful Greek and woful English." 
 
296 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 would turn the wheels of biblical learning back for 
 at least fifty, if not a hundred, years/ For among 
 the readings of the revised text which he rules out 
 as utterly untenable by his ijpse dixit and a string 
 of post-Nicene quotations, there is scarcely one which 
 has not the unanimous support of these great editors 
 and the best modern commentators — Continental, 
 English, and American. His criticism, therefore, is 
 not only a sad exhibition of the odium theologicum^ 
 but a glaring anachronism. He seems to feel that he 
 is doing himself injustice, for he upsets his own dish 
 by two reluctant admissions — first, that the tradition- 
 al text for which he fights " cries aloud for revision 
 in respect of many of its subordinate details ;" ^ and, 
 secondly, that the revised translation has "never se- 
 riously obscured a single feature of Divine Truth," 
 and that it " bears marks of an amount of conscien- 
 tious (though misdirected) labor which those only 
 can fully appreciate who have made fhe same prov- 
 ince of study to some extent their own." ' It is a 
 pity that he was not taken into the company of Ee- 
 visers. The discipline and experience of ten years 
 could not have been without a wholesome effect. 
 
 * He summons all his rhetoric to denounce the critical method of 
 Lachmaun, Tregelles, and Tischendorf. "Anything more nnscientific," 
 he says, "anything more unphilosophical, more transparently ybo/isA than 
 such a method, can scarcely be conceived ; but it has prevailed for fifty 
 years, and is now at last more hotly than ever advocated by Drs. Westcott 
 and Hort " (No. 306, p. 332). Contrast with this isolated condemnation, 
 which can only condemn itself, the unanimous commendations of impartial 
 and thoroughly competent critics — English, German, French, American, 
 Catholic, and Protestant— on p. 280 sq. 
 
 '"■ "Quarterly Review," No. 306, p. 331. 
 
 3 No. 305, p. 63 (Revision Revised, p. 232). 
 
^ Of TMl 
 
 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 297 
 
 Westcott and Hort, having anticipated in their 
 second volume a full vindication of their method, 
 can afford to preserve a dignified silence. The 
 " Quarterly Reviewer " may construe this into an 
 acknowledgment of defeat, after the fashion of the 
 great Heinrich Ewald who, in an open letter to 
 Pius IX., "demonstrated" to him that it was high 
 time to resign his triple crown, and, on being asked 
 why the pope took no notice of his advice, coolly 
 replied, " He dare not {Er wagt es nicht) !" 
 
 But two of the learned Revisers (Bishop Ellicott 
 and Archdeacon Palmer) have calmly, soberly, and 
 convincingly vindicated the disputed readings of 
 the New Version against this vehement assault, 
 without noticing "flouts and gibes," and conclude 
 with these words :^ "It has been the desire of the 
 Revisers to bring back the text to its original shape. 
 Tliey do not claim the title of discoverers. They 
 have done little more than verify and register the 
 most certain conclusions of modern textual criticism. 
 In this, as in other respects, they have endeavored 
 to make knowledge which has hitherto been accessi- 
 ble only to the learned a part of the common heritage 
 of Englishmen." 
 
 Note. — To this reply the Dean devotes no less than 159 pages in his 
 Revision Revised (pp. 369-528). The personal attack on the venerable 
 Bishop Ellicott (Archdeacon Palmer is kindly or contemptuously ignored) 
 is simply scandalous, and the new defense of the received text in 1 Tim. 
 iii. 16 (dEoc,')> against the consensus of modern critics is a learned fiasco 
 and brutum fulmen. 
 
 ' The Revisers and the Greek Text of the New Testament , by Two Revisers 
 of the New Testament Company (London, 1882, 78 pages). 
 
 21 
 
298 PRINTED TEXT OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 I may here make a little contribution, from personal inspection during 
 the summer of 1884, in addition to the remarks on pp. 199-201. 
 
 On p. 444 Dean Burgon casts doubt on the testimony of the valuable 
 Upsala Codex Paul. 73 (Act. 68, bought at Venice by Sparfvenfeld) in favor 
 of OQ (who), and against Beoq (God). But on a visit to the University 
 Library at Upsala, July 21, 1884, I examined the famous Gothic Codex 
 Argenteus, and also Cod. 73, carefully, and found that it reads og as plainly 
 as pen and ink can make it. My friend Dr. Myrberg, Professor of Greek 
 exegesis in Upsala, who was with me, agreed that there could be no room 
 for doubt. The passage in question is on p. 364, about the middle of the 
 page. The librarian showed me two letters of inquiry from Dr. Gregory 
 (dated Feb. 8 and 21, 1884), called forth by Burgon's doubts, and in- 
 formed me that a photograph of the page containing the reading had 
 been sent to him. This testimony is all the more important as Codex 
 73 agrees in the Pauline Epistles with the famous Cod. 33 (Gospels, or 
 Paul. 17), and contains comments of Chrysostom and Oecumenius from 
 the Cetena Patrum. But for this reason it should be transferred from the 
 MS. witnesses to the patristic authorities. (See my letter from Upsala 
 in the New York "Independent" for Oct. 2, 1884.) 
 
 As to Codex A (Alexandrinus) in the British Museum, on which Bur- 
 gon lays so much stress, I examined it again, July 2, 1884, together with 
 one of the librarians and Dr. Chambers of New York (one of the Revisers), 
 and we came unanimously to the conclusion that it had been tampered 
 with, and that the middle and upper strokes in BC (^eof) were added by 
 a later hand and in different ink. The fac-simile edition issued by the 
 authorities of the Museum shows this almost as plainly as the original. 
 
 I may add that Prof. Zahn, in Erlangen, discovered recently two frag- 
 ments of a very old (4th-6th century) MS. of First Timothy, in the Egyp- 
 tian Museum of the Louvre at Paris, one of which reads in 1 Tim. iii. 16, 
 w, that is, 6 (certainly not ^to^). Forschungen zur Gesch. des N. Tlichen 
 Kanons, vol. iii. (1884), p. 277 sq. : "Bus ut in der vorletzten Zeile bedeufet 
 sicherlich nichts anderes ah o. Diese hisher nur durch die Lafeiner, dvrch 
 andere zweideuiige oder zweifelhafte Zeugen und wahrscheinlich durch die 
 erste griechische Hand des Claromontanus vertretene Lesart hat hiedurch 
 ein sehr altes, echt griechisches Zeugniss fiir sich gewonnen^ 
 
 I was surprised to learn in England, in 1884, from several of the first 
 Biblical divines and Church dignitaries, that the Revision Revised, owing 
 to the well-known eccentricities and extravagances of the learned au- 
 thor, made no impression whatever upon critical scholars, who think that 
 it best refutes itself, like the charge of "atheism" and "popery" whicl^ 
 WW brought agaiqst tjie Authorized Version of 16X1, 
 
CHAPTER SEVENTH. 
 
 THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 
 Literature. 
 The literature is immense. We give only a selec- 
 tion, including, however, works which cover the 
 whole ground of English Bible Versions. 
 
 I. General History of the English Bible. 
 
 John Lewis, A.M. (IMinister of Margate in Kent, Church of England) ; 
 A Complete History of the Several Translations of the Holy Bible and Neio 
 Testament into English, both in MS. and in Print, etc. London, 1731, fol. 
 (of which only 140 copies were printed); 2d ed. 1739, 8vo; 3d ed. 1818 
 ('1 15 pages). The last edition contains extracts from Bishop Newcome's 
 " Historical View of English Biblical Translations." Westcott (1st ed., 
 p. 415, note) says : " Lewis's was an admirable work for the time when it 
 was written; but his materials for the early history of the Bible were 
 wholly inadequate." Eadie (Pref. p. vii.): "Lewis has many merits, . . . 
 but its blunders have led some noted historians far astray." 
 
 Bagster's Hexapla,with an Account of the Principal English Transla- 
 tions. London, 1841. Introduction: Historical Account of the English 
 Versions of the Scriptures [by S. P. Tregelles], pp. 1-160. " Independent 
 and valuable " (Westcott). In a later, undated issue of the Hexapla, a 
 different account (ascribed to Mr. Anderson) was substituted. 
 
 Christopher Anderson ( Baptist ) : A nnals of the English Bible. 
 English ed. 1845, 2 vols.; new and revised ed. Lond. 1862. Eadie (in his 
 work, vol. i. p. viii.) calls this book " the fruit of independent investiga- 
 tion, . . . but wholly external, filled to overflowing with extraneous or 
 collateral matter." Arber (in his reprint of Tyndale, p. 69) says: "Ander- 
 son errs as often as he is right;" but adds: " One excuse is the difficulty 
 of the search." The American edition by Dr. Samuel Iren^us Prime, 
 >Jew York (Carter & Brothers), 1849, is much abridged, and brought 
 down to 1844 in one volume of 549 pages. 
 
 Mrs. H, C, Coj^ANT (Baptist): The Popular ffistor^ of the Tran^htiori 
 
300 THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 
 
 of the Holy Scriptures. New York, 1856; new edition, revised by Dr. 
 Thomas J. Conant (a member of the Old Testament Revision Company), 
 New York (Funk & Wagnalls), 1881. A condensed and popular account, 
 continued to the publication of the Revised New Testament (282 pages). 
 
 Brooke Foss Westcott (Episcopalian, and member of the New Tes- 
 tament Revision Company) : A General View of the History of the English 
 Bible. London and Cambridge (Macmillan & Co.), 1868 (527 pages); 
 2d ed. 1872 (359 pages). Very scholarly and accurate ; the first attempt 
 of an internal and critical history. 
 
 John Stoughton, D.D. (Independent) : Our English Bible. London 
 (Religious Tract Society), no date, but about 1878. A popular account, 
 with interesting illustrations (310 pages). 
 
 W. F. MouLTON (Wesleyan, and member of the New Testament Re- 
 vision Company): History of the English Bible. London (Cassell, Fetter, 
 & Galpin), 1878. Chiefly a reprint of the author's articles in Professor 
 Plumptre's "Bible Educator." The result of careful comparative study 
 of the characteristics of the several versions (232 pages). 
 
 John Eadie, D.D., LL.D. (United Presbyterian, and member of the 
 New Testament Revision Company, d. 1876) : The English Bible. London 
 (MacmiUan & Co.), 1876, 2 vols. (444 and 540 pages). FuU of valuable 
 and, upon the whole, reliable information. 
 
 Blackford Condit (Presbyterian, Terre Haute, Ind.) : The History 
 of the English Bible : Extejiding from the Earliest Saxon Translations to 
 the Present A nglo - A merican Revision ; with Special Reference to the 
 Protestant Religion and the English Language. New York and Chicago, 
 
 1882 (469 pages). Comes down to the Revision of 1881, is written in good 
 spirit, but disfigured by many errors in facts, dates, and spelling (e. ^., 
 W^ittemburgh for Wittenberg, Ximines for Ximenes). 
 
 J. I.MoMBERT, D.D. (Episcopalian): A Hand-Book of the English Fler- 
 sions of the Bible. New York (Randolph & Co.) and London (Bagsters), 
 
 1883 (509 pages). The result of independent research, to be followed by 
 a history of all other versions made directly from the original. Compare 
 the author's article on English Bible Versions in SchafPs " Rel. Encycl," 
 vol. i. 731-739. 
 
 II. Bibliographical Works on the English Bible. 
 
 Rev. Henry Cotton (Archdeacon of Cashel) : Editions of the Bible and 
 
 Parts thereof in English (from 1525 to 1850). Oxford (University Press), 
 
 2d ed. corrected- and enlarged, 1852 (8vo, 420 pages). By the same 
 
 author: Rhemes and Doway. An Attempt to show what has been done by 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 301 
 
 Roman Catholics for the Diffusion of the Holy Scriptures. Oxford (Uni- 
 versity Press), 1855 (8vo, 410 pages). 
 
 W. J. LoFTiE, B.A., F.S.A. : A Century of Bibles, or the Authorized Ver- 
 sion from 1611 to 1711. London (Basil Montague Pickering, 196 Piccadilly), 
 1872 (249 pages). 
 
 The Bibles in the Caxton Exhibition MDCCCLXXVIL, or a Bibliograph- 
 ical Description of nearly One Thousand Representative Bibles in Various 
 Languages Chronologically A rranged,from t/ie First Bible Printed by Guten- 
 berg in 1450-1456 to the Last Bible Printed at the Oxford University Press 
 the 30<A June, 1877. By Henry Stevens (an American residing in Lon- 
 don). London (Henry Stevens, 4 Trafalgar Square), 1878. 
 
 For fac-similes of the first editions of the Authorized and earlier English 
 versions see: A Description of the Great Bible, 1539, and the Six Editions 
 of Cranmsr's Bible, 1540 and 1541, Printed by Grafton and Whitchurch: 
 also of the Editions, in Large Folio, of the Authorized Version of the Holy 
 Scriptures, Printed in the Years 1611, 1613, 1617, 1634, 1640. By Francis 
 Fry, F.S.A . Illustrated with Titles, and with Passages from the Editions, 
 the Genealogies, and the Maps, Copied in Facsimile ; also with an Identifi- 
 cation of Every Leaf of the First Seven, and of Many Leaves of the Other 
 Editions ; on Fifty-one Plates. Together with an Original Leaf of Each 
 of the Editions Described. London (Willis and Sotheran) and Bristol (Las- 
 bury), 1865. With a picture of Cranmer. A copy of this superb book is 
 in the library of the American Bible Society. 
 
 For American editions of the Bible see the following two works : 
 
 E. B. O'Callaghan (d. 1880) : A List of Editions of the Holy Scriptures 
 and Parts thereof, Printed in America previous to 1860 : with Introduction 
 and Bibliographical Notes. Albany (Munsell & Rowland), 1861 (415 
 pages, royal 8vo). 
 
 John Gilmary Shea : A Bibliographical A ccount of Catholic Bibles, 
 Testaments, and other Portions of the Scripture Translations from the Latin 
 Vulgate, and printed in the United States. New York, 1859 (12mo, 48 pages). 
 
 IIL Standard Editions of the Chief English Versions. 
 
 1. Anglo-Saxon. 
 
 Benjamin Thorpe, F.S.A.: Da Halgan Godspel on Englisc. The Anglo- 
 Saxon Version of the Holy Gospels. London and Oxford (Parker), 1842. 
 The first edition of the Saxon Gospels was by Archbishop Parker, 1571, 
 the second by Dr. Marshall, Dortrecht, 1665. 
 
 Joseph Bosworth (Professor of Anglo - Saxon, Oxford, assisted by 
 George Waring): The Gothic and Anglo-Saxon Gospels in Parallel 
 Columns with the Versions of Wycliffe and Tyndale. 2d ed., London, 1874. 
 
302 THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 
 
 Anglo-Saxon and Northumberland versions of the Gospels, published 
 by the Syndics of tlie University Press, Cambridge : St. Matthew, by 
 Kemble and Hardwick, 1858 ; St. Mark, by Walter W. Skeat, 1871 ; 
 St. Luke, by the same, 1874; St. John, by the same, 1878. This is the 
 standard edition. 
 
 2. Anglo-Norman : Wiclif, Hereford, and Purvey. 
 
 Rev. JosiAH FoRSHALL, F.R.S. (late Fellow of Exeter College), and 
 Sir Frederic Madden, K.H., F.R.S. (Keeper of the MSS. in the British 
 Museum) : The Holy Bible, Containing the Old and New Testaments, with 
 the Apocryphal Books, in the Earliest English Versions made from the Latin 
 Vulgate hy John Wycliffe and his Followers. Oxford (at the University 
 Press), 1850. In 4 vols., royal 4to. This is the first complete and relia- 
 ble print of this great work, begun by Wiclif and his friends, completed 
 and improved by Purvey. It is based upon a careful comparison of MSS. 
 The earlier editions, including that in Bagster's Hexapla, 1841 (which is 
 a reprint of Baber's edition of the New Testament, 1810, as this is of that 
 of Lewis, 1731), are incorrect and misleading. The Oxford editors have 
 spent a considerable portion of their time during twenty-two years in 
 accomplishing this laborious task. In the first volume they give a list 
 of 770 MSS. (pp. xxxix.-lxiv.). 
 
 3. Modern English : Tyndale. 
 
 New Testament. Tyndale' s First Edition, supposed to have been Printed 
 at Worms by Peter Schceffer in 1526 ; a Facsimile on Vellum, Illumined, 
 Reprinted from the Copy in the Baptist College, Bristol. With an Intro- 
 duction hy Francis Fry. 1862. " Mr. Fry has rendered a great service in 
 reproducing this rare volume with so much care and fidelity " (Stevens). 
 
 The First Printed English New Testament. Translated hy William 
 Tyndale. Photo - lithographed from the Unique Fragment, now in the 
 Grenville Collection, British Museum. Edited hy Edward Arber, F.R.G.S. 
 (Associate, King's College, London). London (5 Queen Square, Blooms- 
 bury), Feb. 15, 1871. This is a reprint of the quarto - fragment of the 
 first edition of 1525. It contains also an account of Tyndale's antecedent 
 career, of the printing at Cologne and Worms, and other important in- 
 formation. The photo-lithographed text contains only the prologue, a 
 list of the books contained in the New Testament, a wood-cut, and the 
 Gospel of St. Matthew from ch. i. to xxii. 12, with marginal notes. The 
 title-page is lost. The inner marginal references, several glosses, and a 
 portion of the preface are taken from Luther's German Testament, 1522 
 (see p. 67 ). This would seem to settle tlie disputed question of Tyndale'^ 
 relation to Luther. ' 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 303 
 
 Francis Fry, F.R.S. : A Bibliographical Description of the Editions 
 of the New Testament, Tyndale's Version in English [1525-1566], with 
 Numerous Readings, Comparisons of Texts, and Historical Notices, the Notes 
 in full of the Edition of 1534. . . . Illustrated with Seventy-three Plates^ 
 Titles, Colophons, Pages, Capitals, London (Henry Sotheran & Co., 36 
 Piccadilly), 1878, 4to. A magnificent work. (American Bible Society.) 
 
 4. Then followed : Coverdale's Bible (1535, etc.) ; Matthew's Bible 
 (Grafton and Whitchurch, 1537, etc.) ; Taverner's (1539) ; "The Great 
 Bible" (1539; the second edition, 1540, contains Preface by Archbishop 
 Cranmer, and is hence called also " Cranmer's Bible ") ; The Geneva Bible 
 (New Testament, Geneva, 1557 ; the Old and New Testaments, Geneva, 
 1660, very often reprinted in London and on the Continent) ; The Bishops' 
 Bible ("The Holie Bible, containing the Old Testament and the New : The 
 New Testament of our Saviour Jesus Christe. 1568. Richard Jugge. Cum 
 Privilegio Regiae Majestatis "). See for full titles and descriptions of these 
 versions the bibliographical works above quoted, especially Stevens, 
 pp. 68 sqq. 
 
 5. The Authorized Version (King James's). 
 
 (a) The editio princeps, 1611 The | Holy \ Bible, \ Conteyning the Old 
 
 Testa- I mcTif, and the New: \ Newly Translated out of \ the Originall 
 Tongues : and with } the former Translations diligently \ compared and 
 reuised, by his \ Maiesties speciall Commandement. | Appointed to be read 
 in Churches. \ Imprinted \ at London by Robert \ Barker, Printer to the \ 
 Kings most Excellent Maiestie. \ Anno Dom. 1611. Fol. The title-page is 
 a wood-cut which had done duty before, especially in the Bishops' Bible 
 of 1602. It represents the four Evangelists with their emblems (Matthew 
 with the winged angel and Mark with the Lion above, Luke with the ox 
 and John with the eagle below), the Twelve Tribes with tents and armorial 
 bearings on the left, the Twelve Apostles on the right of the letter-press, 
 the Paschal Lamb slain on the altar beneath the title, and at the top of 
 the page the Lamb triumphant and the name Jehovah (fl^«T^). 
 
 In some copies the title-page is an elegant copperplate engraving (repro- 
 duced by Mr. Fry), which represents Moses cornutus on the left, Aaron on 
 the right of the letter-press title, the Apostles and Evangelists above and 
 below, and other ornaments. It was executed, as the subscription shows, 
 by Cornelius Boel of Antwerp, then working at Richmond in Surrey. 
 Perhaps this plate was not ready when the earliest copies were printed. 
 
 It is worthy of notice that the special title to the New Testament of 
 1611 omits the line ^^ Appointed to be read in Chinches'' (printed in very 
 Binall italics), and reads thus; ** The \ Newe \ Testamefi^ of\ our Lord an4 
 
304 THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 
 
 Sauiour \ Jesvs Christ. | Newly Translated out of | the Originall Greehe: 
 and with \ the former Translations diligently \ compared and reuised, by 
 his I Maiesties speciall Com- \ mandement. | Imprinted \ at London hy 
 Robert \ Barker, Printer to the \ Kings most Excellent \ Maiestie. \ Anno 
 Dom. 1611." ^ I have also seen (in the library of the American Bible So- 
 ciety) two quarto editions of 1613, which omit said line in the New Testa- 
 ment title, and one even in the general title. There is, therefore, no uni- 
 formity in this matter. 
 
 There are two editions of 1611, differing in every' signature, but it is 
 unknown which is the first. See Francis Fry, A Description of the Great 
 Bible, etc. (Lond. 1865), and Scrivener, Paragraph Bible, p. xi. sqq. and 
 Ixxxvi.-xc. Besides the folio edition, there was published in 1611 a 
 12mo edition (in black-letter) of the New Testament, the only known 
 copy of which is in the Lenox Library of New York (see Loftie, p. 57). 
 
 (6) The Oxford Reprint, 1833.— The folio edition of 1611 was reprinted 
 from an Oxford copy, page for page, in quasi fac-simile, by the Oxford 
 University Press, 1833. It gives the Dedication and the Preface, and a 
 list of variations between the editions of 1611 and 1613. But the follow- 
 ing preliminary matter of the original edition is omitted : (1) an Almanac 
 for thirty-nine years ; (2) a Table of Psalms and Lessons for Morning and 
 Evening Prayer; (3) the Genealogies of Holy Scripture (with curious 
 illustrations), ending with an account of the Holy Family. 
 
 (c) The Cambridge Edition, 1873.— The best (not to say the only) 
 critical edition of King James's Version is by Dr. Scrivener, but with 
 modern spelling, under the following title : 
 
 The I Cambridge Paragraph Bible \ of the \ A uthorized English Version, \ 
 with the text revised by a collation of its early and other \ principal editions, \ 
 the use of the italic type made uniform, \ the marginal references remodelled, \ 
 and a critical introduction prefixed \ by \ the Rev. F. H. Scrivener, M.A ., 
 LL.D., I Rector of St. Gerrans, Editor of the Greek Testament, Codex 
 A ugiensis, etc. \ one of the New Testament Company of Revisers of the 
 Authorized Version. \ Edited for the Syndics of the University Press. 
 Cambridge (at the University Press), 1873, 4to. 
 
 * Loftie observes the same fact (J. c. p. 45), and regards it as "an addi- 
 tional and valuable proof, although apparently unknown to Mr. Westcott, 
 that he is right in saying the present version was never in reality sepa- 
 rately sanctioned by Council, Convocation, or Parliament. In the strict 
 sense of the word, the only version ever authorized was the Great Bible 
 referred to especially in a proclamation of Henry VIII., dated in 1538." 
 
THE AtJTHORIZED VERSION. SOS 
 
 This edition is based upon a comparison of the editions of 1611, 1612, 
 1613, 1616, 1617, 1629, 1638, 1701, etc., and the revisions of Dr. Paris (1762) 
 and Dr. Blayney (1769), also the edition of the American Bible Society 
 of 1867. The Introduction and Appendices give information on the history 
 of the text of the Authorized Version, punctuation, orthography. The 
 text is arranged in paragraphs accommodated to the sense, the poetry is 
 printed according to the structure of Hebrew poetry, and the margin is 
 filled with a revised list of the traditional parallel references. The edition 
 was undertaken before, and completed during, the Revision of King James's 
 Version, in prospect of " a race of generous and friendly rivalry " between 
 the two versions " for the space of at least one generation before the elder of 
 the two shall be superseded." Revised ed. of the Introd. Cambridge, 1884. 
 
 (d) The standard edition of the American Bible Society is the imperial 
 octavo of 1882, which is based upon the Society's final revision of 1860. 
 
 THE BIBLE AND CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 We have no intention of writing a history of the 
 Bible in general, or of the English Bible in particu- 
 lar, but only to add two chapters on the Authorized 
 and on the Eevised Version in their relation to the 
 Greek New Testament, and thereby to make the 
 preceding chapters practically useful to the English 
 reader. 
 
 The history of the Bible is to a large extent a 
 history of revealed religion and of the Christian 
 Church. Its estimate and neglect mark the degrees 
 of temperature in the thermometer of piety and 
 virtue. The Church of God, the Book of God, and 
 the Day of God are a sacred trinity on earth, the 
 chief pillars of Christian society and national pros- 
 perity. Without them Europe and America would 
 soon relapse into heathenism and barbarism. The 
 Bible occupies a conspicuous isolation among books, 
 and is more indispensable to the moral welfare of 
 mankind than all the libraries of genius and learn- 
 
306 THE AtJTHOmZED VtlESIOK. 
 
 ing. It 18 not a book simply, but an institution, an 
 all-pervading and perennial force in the Church ; it 
 is the voice of the living God ; it is the message of 
 Christ, v^hose divine-human nature it reflects; it is 
 the chief agency of the Holy Spirit in illuminating, 
 converting, warning, and cheering men. It rules 
 from the pulpit, it presides at the family altar, it 
 touches human life at every point from the cradle 
 to the grave, and guides the soul on its lonely jour- 
 ney to the unseen world. It has moulded the lan- 
 guages, laws, habits, and home-life of the nations of 
 Europe, and inspired the noblest works of literature 
 and art. The Bible retains with advancing age the 
 dew and freshness of youth, and readapts itself in 
 ever improving versions to every age in every civil- 
 ized land. It is now more extensively studied than 
 ever before, and it will be the standard-bearer of 
 true progress in all time to come. 
 
 The Bible was originally intended for all the peo- 
 ple that could hear and read, and was multiplied in 
 the early centuries by translations into the Greek, 
 Syriac, Coptic, Latin, Gothic, and other languages, 
 as the demand arose. But during the Middle Ages 
 the ruling hierarchy, fearing abuse and loss of power, 
 withheld the book from the people, except the lessons 
 and texts in the public service. Yernacular versions 
 were discouraged or even forbidden. The result 
 was the spread of ignorance and superstition. 
 
 The Keformers of the sixteenth century kindled 
 an incredible enthusiasm for the word of the living 
 God. They first fully appreciated its universal des- 
 tination, and, with the aid of the art of printing and 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 307 
 
 the general education of the people, this destination 
 is carried out more and more. Even in Rome, since 
 1870, the book may be freely sold and bought and 
 preached in spite of papal denunciations of Bible 
 Societies. The Reformers declared the Scriptures 
 to be the supreme and infallible rule of the Chris- 
 tian faith and life, which must guide the individual 
 and the Church at large. They went to the fountain- 
 head of truth, and removed the obstructions which 
 prevent a direct access of the believer to the word 
 of God and the grace of Christ. They reconquered 
 the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free, and 
 more martyrs died for the cause of evangelical free- 
 dom in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries than 
 for the Christian faith in the first three centuries. 
 The Christians of the present age are as near to 
 Christ as the Christians of the first generation. He 
 stands in the centre, and all his disciples in the cir- 
 cumference. He does not recede as the ages advance, 
 but has promised his unbroken presence to his peo- 
 ple to the end of the world, even where only two 
 or three are assembled in his name. In the Gospels 
 he speaks to us now as he spoke to the Twelve, and 
 in the Acts and Epistles his inspired apostles teach 
 us the same truths with the same authority and 
 force as they did on the day of Pentecost. This 
 unspeakable privilege of direct communion with 
 Christ and his Word can never be wrested from 
 the Christian people. 
 
 To the Reformation we owe the best translations 
 of the Bible ; not mechanical transfers, but fresh re- 
 productions made under the influence of a secondary 
 
308 THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 
 
 inspiration. The sixteenth century was an age of 
 the republication of the gospel. Foremost among 
 the popular model versions are the German, the 
 Dutch, and the English. They have gained such a 
 hold on the people that it is difficult to replace them 
 by any new one, however superior it may be in 
 accuracy. 
 
 The English race has never been entirely without 
 the Bible since the time when Augustine, with his 
 thirty Benedictine monks from Home, landed at the 
 Isle of Thanet and preached the Gospel to King 
 Ethelbert (597). And the different versions mark 
 the different epochs of the English language and 
 literature. Csedmon's Metrical Paraphrase (680), the 
 Durham Book (parts of the Gospels), the Venerable 
 Bede's Version of John (735), and several Psalters, 
 represent the Anglo-Saxon ; the Version of Wiclif 
 and his followers (1380), the Norman-English ; the 
 several versions of the sixteenth century, the modern 
 English ; and the Authorized Version of 1611 still 
 occupies the first place among the English classics, 
 though many of its words and phrases are antiquated. 
 
 But the Anglo-Saxon versions covered only por- 
 tions of the Scriptures, and never attained a popu- 
 lar circulation. Wiclif and the Lollards were con- 
 demned by the Koman Church, and his version, 
 which was derived from the Latin Vulgate, passed 
 out of sight. England was slow in adopting the 
 new^ light of the Keformation in the sixteenth cen- 
 tury ; but, once reformed, she took the lead in zeal 
 for the Bible. One effort after another was made 
 to Anglicize it. William Tyndale, one of the cap- 
 
THE AUTHOKIZED VERSION. 309 
 
 tains in "the noble army of martyrs," opened the 
 new Bible era under much persecution (1525), and 
 was followed by Miles Coverdale (1535), Thomas 
 Matthew {alias John Eogers, the martyr, 1537), 
 Hichard Taverner (1539), the authors of the Great 
 Bible (1540, with a preface by Archbishop Cranmer; 
 hence often called Cranmer's Bible), the Genevan 
 Bible (1560), the Bishops' Bible (1568 and 1572), 
 and King James's Version (1611). 
 
 NOTES. 
 
 The following testimonies to the value of the 
 Scriptures from different schools of thought are 
 worth comparing. 
 
 From the Preface of King James's Translators (now rarely printed) : 
 "The Scriptures then being acknowledged to be su full and so perfect, 
 how can we excuse ourselves of negligence, if we do not study them, of 
 curiosity, if we be not content Avith them? Men talk much of eipe(Tio)VT}, 
 how many sweet and goodly things it had hanging on it; of the Philoso- 
 pher's stone, that it turneth copper into gold ; of Cornu-copia, that it had 
 all things necessary for food in it; of Panaces the herb, that it was good 
 for all diseases; of Catholicon the drug, that it is instead of all purges; 
 of Vulcan's Armor, that it was an armor of proof against all thrusts, and 
 all blows, etc. Well, that which they falsely or vainly attributed to these 
 things, for bodily good, we may justly and with full measure ascribe unto 
 the Scripture for spiritual. It is not only an armor, but also a whole 
 armory of weapons, both offensive and defensive ; whereby we may save 
 ourselves and put the enemy to flight. It is not an herb, but a tree, or 
 rather a whole paradise of trees of life, which bring forth fruit every 
 month, and the fruit thereof is for meat, and the leaves for medicine. 
 It is not a pot of manna or a cruse of oil, which were for memory only, or 
 for a meal's meat or two, but as it were a shower of heavenly bread 
 sufficient for a whole host, be it never so great, and as it were a whole 
 cellar full of oil-vessels ; whereby all our necessities may be provided for, 
 and our debts discharged. In a word, it is a Panary of wholesome food 
 
310 THE AtJTHOKIZED VEESION. 
 
 against fenowed ' traditions ; a Physician's shop (St. Basil calleth it) of 
 preservatives against poisoned heresies; a Pandect of profitable laws 
 against rebellious spirits; a treasury of most costly jewels against beg- 
 garly rudiments ; finally, a fountain of most pure water springing up unto 
 everlasting life. And what marvel? the original thereof being from 
 heaven, not from earth ; the Author being God, not man ; the Enditer, the 
 Holy Spirit, not the wit of the apostles or prophets ; the penmen, such as 
 were sanctified from the womb, and endued with a principal portion of 
 God's Spirit; the matter, verity, piety, purity, uprightness; the form, 
 God's Word, God's testimony, God's oracles, the word of truth, the word 
 of salvation, etc. ; the effects, light of understanding, stableness of persua- 
 sion, repentance from dead works, newness of life, holiness, peace, joy in 
 the Holy Ghost ; lastly, the end and reward of the study thereof, fellow- 
 ship with the saints, participation of the heavenly nature, fruition of an 
 inheritance immortal, undefiled, and that never shall fade away. Happy 
 is the man that delighteth in the Scripture, and thrice happy that medi- 
 tateth in it oay and night." 
 
 Dr. Christopher Wordsworth (Bishop of Lincoln), who represents 
 the reverent, devout, patristic, high-Anglican type of exegesis, closes the 
 Preface to his Commentary on the New Testament thus: "Some have dis- 
 paraged the style of Scripture as barbarous, and others have apologized 
 for it as the work of illiterate and unlearned men. But surely these 
 notions concerning it are very erroneous. The diction of Scripture, it is 
 true, is not the language of any other composition in the world. The 
 Greek of the New Testament is not the Greek of Xenophon, Plato, or 
 Demosthenes. It is a language of its own. And we need not scruple to 
 affirm that, in precision of expression, in pure and native simplicity, in 
 delicacy of handling, in the grouping of words and phrases, in dignified 
 and majestic sublimity, it has no rival in the world. 
 
 " The more carefully it is studied, the more clearly will this appear. 
 * Nihil otiosum in Sacra Scripturd ' (Origen, in Epist. ad Roman, c. 1). 
 ' Nihil vacuum, neque. sine signo, apiid Deum ' (Irenaeus, iv. 21). Every 
 sentence — we might almost say every phrase — is fraught with meaning. 
 As it is in the book of Nature, so is it in the pages of Holy Writ. Both 
 are from the same Divine Hand. And if we apply to the language of 
 Holy Scripture the same microscopic process which we use in scrutinizing 
 the beauties of the natural world, and which reveals to us exquisite colors 
 and the most graceful texture in the petals of a flower, the fibres of a 
 
 ^ /. e., mouldy. 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VERSIOK. 311 
 
 plant, the plumage of a bird, or the wings of an insect, we shall discover 
 new sources of delight and admiration in the least portions of Holy Writ, 
 and believe that it may be one of the employments of angels and beati- 
 fied saints, in another state of existence, to gaze on the glorious mysteries 
 of God's Holy Word." 
 
 Rev. F. W. Robertson, the genial and eloquent preacher of Brighton, 
 of broad and liberal sympathies, pays this tribute to the Bible (in his sermon 
 on Inspiration) : " This collection of books has been to the world what 
 no other book has ever been to a nation. States have been founded on 
 its principles. Kings rule by a compact based on it. Men hold the Bible 
 in their hands when they give solemn evidence affecting life, death, or 
 property : the sick man is almost afraid to die unless the Book be within 
 reach of his hands; the battle-ship goes into action with one on board 
 whose oflSce is to expound it ; its prayers, its Psalms, are the language we 
 use when we speak to God ; eighteen centuries have found no holier, no 
 diviner language. If ever there has been a prayer or a hymn enshrined 
 in the heart of a nation, you are sure to find its basis in the Bible. There 
 is no new religious idea given to the world, but it is merely the develop- 
 ment of something given in the Bible. The very translation of it has 
 fixed the language and settled the idioms of speech. Germany and Eng- 
 land speak as they speak because the Bible was translated. It has made 
 the most illiterate peasant more familiar with the history, customs, and 
 geography of ancient Palestine than with the localities of his own country. 
 Men who know nothing of the Grampians, of Snowdon, or of Skiddaw, are 
 at home in Zion, the Lake of Genesareth, or among the rills of CarmeL 
 People who know little about London, know by heart the places in 
 Jerusalem where those blessed feet trod which were nailed to the cross. 
 Men who know nothing of the architecture of a Christian cathedral, can 
 yet tell you about the pattern of the Holy Temple. Even this shows us 
 the influence of the Bible. The orator holds a thousand men for half an 
 hour breathless — a thousand men as one, listening to his single word. 
 But this Word of God has held a thousand years spell-bound ; held them 
 by an abiding power, even the universality of its truth ; and we feel it to 
 be no more a collection of books, but the Book." 
 
 Dr. Wayland (Baptist, late President of Brown University, Rhode 
 Island) : " That the truths of the Bible have the power of awakening an 
 intense moral feeling in man under every variety of character, learned or 
 ignorant, civilized or savage ; that they make bad men good, and send a 
 pulse of healthful feeling through all the domestic, civil, and social rela- 
 tions ; that they teach men to love right, to hate wrong, and to seek each 
 
312 THE AUTHORIZED VEKSION. 
 
 other's welfare, as the children of one common Parent; that they control 
 the baleful passions of the human heart, and thus make men proficient in 
 the science of self-government; and, finally, that they teach him to aspire 
 after a conformity to a Being of infinite holiness, and fill him with hopes 
 infinitely more purifying, more exalted, more suited to his nature, than 
 any other which this world has ever known, are facts as incontrovertible 
 as the laws of philosophj' or the demonstration of mathematics." 
 
 Goethe : " I am convinced that the Bible grows in beauty the more 
 we understand it, i. e., the more we see that every word to which we give 
 a general meaning and a particular application to ourselves has had a 
 specific and direct reference to definite conditions of time and place." In 
 another place the great poet says (in the Gesprdche mit Eckermann, shortly 
 before his death) : " We cannot estimate the debt of thanks we owe to 
 Luther and the Reformation. No matter how much intellectual culture 
 may progress, how much the natural sciences in ever-growing expansion 
 and depth may grow, and the human mind expand to its utmost capacity, 
 it will never be able to exceed the height and moral culture of Christian- 
 ity as it shines in the Gospels." 
 
 Heinrich Ev^ald, the great Hebrew scholar, and one of the boldest 
 and most independent critics and commentators, when Dean Stanley, then 
 a student from Oxford, called on him, grasped a small Greek Testament 
 and said with intense earnestness : " In this little book is contained all the 
 wisdom of the world." Stanley never forgot the deep impression which 
 this remark made upon him (see Preface to the third volume of his 
 Lectures on the History of the Jewish Church, p. x.). 
 
 ORIGIN OF THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 
 
 King James's Version is the last and the best of 
 the English versions of the Reformation period, and 
 hence it finally superseded all its predecessors. It 
 is the mature fruit of three generations of Bible 
 students and translators, and embodies the best ele- 
 ments of the older versions. 
 
 It originated in the Hampton Court Conference, 
 in January, A.D. 1604.* When King James I., the 
 
 ^ Old style, January, 1603. 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 313 
 
 son of Mary Stuart, by the death of Queen Elizabetli 
 was raised from the throne of Presbyterian Scotland 
 to tliat of Episcopal England, he summoned the lead- 
 ers of the conservative or Conformist and the radi- 
 cal or Puritan parties to his presence, that he might 
 act as umpire on the points of dispute between them. 
 Dr. Eeynolds, President of Corpus Christi College, 
 Oxford, as the spokesman of the Puritans, proposed 
 among other reforms a new translation of the Bible. 
 The Bishop of London (Bancroft) objected ; but the 
 king — moved, as it seems, chiefly by theological 
 vanity and intense dislike of the popular Geneva 
 Version — accepted the proposition, and afterwards 
 appointed the translators and prescribed the rules, 
 though he took good care that the enterprise should 
 not cost him a penny. By granting the request for 
 a new version he pleased the Puritans, and hoped 
 to stop their complaints ; while by abusing the 
 Geneva Version, with its alleged "seditious and 
 traitorous notes," he conciliated the Churchmen and 
 allayed their suspicion. Both parties heartily ac- 
 quiesced and united in what proved to be a most 
 useful work. It is the only result of the Hampton 
 Court Conference, and the greatest event, we ma}' 
 say, the only redeeniing feature, of the inglorious 
 reign of the monarch whose name it bears. It pre- 
 sents a striking instance of the wisdom of Providence 
 in overruling even the weakness and folly of men 
 for the general good. 
 
 The following is the report of the characteristic 
 discussion which led to so great a result : 
 
314 THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 
 
 " Dr. Reynolds. — May your Majesty be pleased that there might be 
 a new translation of the Bible, such as are extant being corrupt, and not 
 answering the original. 
 
 "And he instanced three particulars: Gal. iv. 25, in the original, 
 avaroixei, is ill translated, ' hordereth.'' Psa. cv. 28, in the original, ' They 
 were not disobedient,' is ill translated, ' They were not obedient.^ Psa. cvi. 
 30, in the original, ' Phinehas executed judgment,' is ill translated, 
 * Phinehas stood up and prayed.^ 
 
 " Bishop of London.— If every man's humour might be followed, there 
 would be no end of translating. 
 
 " His Majesty. — I profess I could never yet see a Bible well translated 
 in English ; but I think that, of all. that of Geneva is the worst. I wish, 
 some special pains were taken for a uniform translation ; which should be 
 done by the best learned in both Universities, then reviewed by the Bish- 
 ops, presented to the Privy Council, lastly, ratified by Royal Authority, to 
 be read in the whole Church, and no other. 
 
 " Bishop of London. — But it is fit that no marginal notes should be 
 added thereunto. 
 
 "His Majesty.— That caveat is well put in ; for in the Geneva trans- 
 lation (given me by an English lad\'), some notes are partial, untrue, 
 seditious, and savouring too much of dangerous and traitorous conceits. 
 As, for example, in Exod. i. 19, disobedience to kings is allowed in a 
 marginal note , and, 2 Chron. xv. 16, King Asa is taxed in the note for 
 only deposing his mother for idolatry, and not hilling her. To conclude 
 this point: let errors in matters of faith be amended, and indifferent 
 things be interpreted, and a gloss added unto them. For as Bartolus de 
 Regno saith, that *a king with some weakness is better than still a change;' 
 so rather a church with some faults than an innovation. And surely if 
 these were the greatest matters that grieved you, I need not have been 
 troubled with such importunities and complaints. 
 
 "And withal, looking upon the lords, his Majesty shook his head, 
 smiling." 
 
 NOTES. 
 
 1. The connection of King James with the Authorized Version fortu- 
 nately did not go beyond the permission and the initial arrangements. 
 It was very natural and necessary at a time when the king was the 
 spiritual as well as the temporal ruler of England. James I. was shrewd, 
 quick-witted, and well-read in all the mysteries of kingcraft, priestcraft, 
 witchcraft, and the tobacco controversy, but destitute of personal dignit^^ 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 315 
 
 as ugly as his mother was beautiful, pedantic, despotic, cowardly, and 
 contemptibly mean. His motto in church polity was, " No bishop, no 
 king;" and his short method with Dissenters, "Just hang them, that's 
 all." Henry IV., of France, called him " the wisest fool in Christendom." 
 Macaulay remarks that England " owes more to the weaknesses and mean- 
 nesses of James than to the wisdom and courage of much better sovereigns," 
 and that this monarch exhibited to the world English royalty " stammer- 
 ing, slobbering, shedding unmanly tears, trembling at a drawn sword, and 
 talking in the style alternately of a buffoon and a pedagogue." And yet 
 his courtiers and bishops thought him as wise as Solomon, and the trans- 
 lators of the Bible, in the dedication which used to be printed in front 
 of every copy, salute his appearance as the rising "of the Sun in his 
 strength," call him " a most tender and loving nursing father " of the 
 Church, humbly crave his " approbation and patronage " for their work, 
 and wish that, being endowed " with many singular and extraordinary 
 graces," he " may be the wonder of the world in this latter age." 
 
 It IS a great advantage of the Revision of 1881 that it owes nothing to 
 royal favor, and is independent of Erastian theories. The days of royal 
 supremacy in matters of religion are gone forever. 
 
 2. There are two accounts of the conference at Hampton Court, both flat- 
 tering to James and unfavorable to the Puritans : (1) one in a Letter from 
 Court by Toby Matthew, Bishop of Durham, to Archbishop Hutton, of York, 
 printed in Strype, Whitgift, vol. iii. pp. 402-407, and in Edward Cardwell, 
 A History of Conferences . . .from 1558 to 1690 (Oxford, 1841), pp. 161- 
 166 ; and (2) one much fuller, by William Barlow, D.D., Dean of Chester, 
 under the title : The Summe and Substance of the Conference which it Pleased 
 his Excellent Majestie to have with the Lords, Bishops, and Others of his 
 Clergie . . .in his Majesties Privie-chamber, at Hampton Court, Jan. 14, 1603, 
 reprinted in Cardwell, I. c, pp. 167-212. Barlow was one of the translators, 
 and was employed by Archbishop Whitgift to draw up the account. 
 Besides, we have a short letter of King James to some person unknown, 
 in Scotland (Cardwell, pp. 160, 161), in which he boasts that he had "pep- 
 pered the Puritans here " (in England) " as soundly as ye have done the 
 Papists there " (in Scotland), and adds : " It were no reason, that those 
 that will refuse the airy sign of the Cross after baptism should have their 
 purses stuflFed with any more solid and substantial crosses." Thomas 
 Fuller, in his charming Church History of Britain (1656), book x. sect. 1, 
 gives a good abridgment from Barlow's account, with which I have com- 
 pared it, inserting a few words from the same (see Cardwell, pp. 187, 188). 
 Barlow was so impressed with the " admirable speeches of his excellent 
 
316 THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 
 
 Majestic," that he compared them to Solomon's "apples of gold, with 
 pictures of silver " (p. 169). " His Majestie's gracious conclusion was so 
 piercing, as that it fetched tears from some on both sides" (p. 212). The 
 translators, in their Preface, give a brief and unsatisfactory account of the 
 origin of their work, as follows (Scrivener's edition, p. cxii. sq.) : " The 
 very historical truth is, that upon the importunate petitions of the Puri- 
 tans at his Majesty's coming to this crown, the conference at Hampton 
 Covrt having been appointed for hearing their complaints, when by force 
 of reason they were put from all other grounds, they had recourse at the 
 last to this shift, that they could not with good conscience subscribe to 
 the Communion-book, since it maintained the Bible as it was there trans- 
 lated, which was, as they said, a most corrupted translation. And although 
 this was judged to be but a very poor and empty shift, yet even hereupon 
 did his Majesty begin to bethink himself of the good that might ensue by 
 a new translation, and presently after gave order for this translation, 
 which is now presented unto thee. Thus much to satisfy our scrupulous 
 brethren." 
 
 3. Of Dr. Reynolds, the originator of the Authorized Version, Dr. Thomas 
 Fuller gives the following interesting account (jChurch History of Britain, 
 bk. X. sect. 3) : " In the translating of the Bible, one of the eminent persons 
 employed therein was translated Into a better life. May 21st— namely. Dr. 
 John Reynolds, King's Professor in Oxford, born in Devonshire with Bishop 
 Jewel and Mr. Hooker, and all three bred in Corpus Christi College in 
 Oxford. No one county in England bare three such men (contemporary 
 at large), in what college soever they were bred ; no college in England 
 bred such three men, in what county soever they were born. 
 
 " This John Reynolds at the first was a zealous Papist, whilst William, 
 his brother, was as earnest a Protestant; and afterwards Providence so 
 ordered it, that by their mutual disputation, John Reynolds turned an 
 eminent Protestant, and William an inveterate Papist, in which persuasion 
 he died. 
 
 " This gave the occasion to an excellent couplet of verses, concluding 
 with this distich : 
 
 * Quod genus hoc pugnce ? uhi victus gaudet uterque^ 
 
 Et simul alteruter se superasse doletJ 
 'What war is this? when conquer'd both are glad, 
 And either to have conquer'd other sad.' 
 
 " Daniel saith, * Many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be 
 increased,' Dan. xii. 4. But here, indeed, was a strange transcursion, and 
 remarkable the effects thereof. 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 317 
 
 "His memory was little less than miraculous, he himself being the 
 iruest table to the multitude of voluminous books [works?] he had read 
 over; whereby he could readily turn to all material passages in every leaf, 
 page, volume, paragraph — not to descend lower, to lines and letters. As 
 his memory was a faithful index, so his reason was a solid judex of what he 
 read ; his humility set a lustre on all (admirably that the whole should 
 be so low, whose several parts were so high) ; communicative of what he 
 knew to any that desired information herein, like a tree loaden with fruit, 
 bowing down its branches to all that desired to ease it of the burden 
 thereof; deserving this epitaph: ^ Incerium est utrum doctior an melior.^ 
 
 "His disafifection to the discipline established in England was not so 
 great as some bishops did suspect, or as more nonconformists did believe. 
 No doubt, he desired the abolishing of some ceremonies for the ease of the 
 conscience of others, to which in his own practice he did willingly submit, 
 constantly wearing hood and surplice, and kneeling at the sacrament. On 
 his deathbed he earnestly desired absolution, according to the form of the 
 Church of England, and received it from Dr. Holland, whose hand he 
 affectionately kissed, in expression of the joy he received thereby. Dr. 
 Featley made his funeral oration in the college ; Sir Isaac Wake in the 
 university." 
 
 INSTRUCTIONS TO THE TRANSLATORS. 
 
 The rules for the execution of the translation, or 
 revision, rather, were drawn up by an unknown 
 hand, probably under the direction of Bancroft, in 
 the name of the King, and are as follows : ^ 
 
 1. The ordinary Bible read in the Church, commonly called the Bishops' 
 Bible, to be followed, and as little altered as the truth of the original will 
 permit. 
 
 2. The names of the prophets and the holy writers, with the other 
 names of the text, to be retained as nigh as may be, accordingly as they 
 were vulgarly used. 
 
 3. The old ecclesiastical words to be kept, viz.^ the word Church, not to 
 be translated Congregation^ etc. 
 
 * The text varies in different books. The English delegates to the 
 Synod of Dort reduced the final number of the rules to seven. See Weat 
 cott, pp. 150 sqq. ; Eadie, ii. 191 sqq. 
 
318 THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 
 
 4. When a word hath divers significations, that to be kept which hath 
 been most commonly used by the most of the ancient fathers, being agree- 
 able to the propriety of the place and the analogy of the faith. 
 
 5. The division of the chapters to be altered either not at all or aa 
 little as may be, if necessity so require. 
 
 6. No marginal notes at all to be affixed, but only for the explanation 
 of the Hebrew or Greek words which cannot, without some circumlocu- 
 tion, so briefly and fitly be expressed in the text. 
 
 7. Such quotations of places to be marginally set down as shall serve 
 for the fit reference of one Scripture to another. 
 
 8. Every particular man of each company to take the same chapter or 
 chapters; and having translated or amended them severally by himself 
 where he thinketh good, all to meet together, confer what they have done, 
 and agree for their parts what shall stand. 
 
 9. As any one company hath dispatched any one book in this manner, 
 they shall send it to the rest, to be considered of seriously and judiciously ; 
 for his majesty is very careful in this point. 
 
 10. If any company, upon the review of the book so sent, doubt or differ 
 upon any place, to send them word thereof, note the place, and withall 
 send the reasons; to which if they consent not, the difference to be com- 
 pounded at the general meeting, which is to be of the chief persons of 
 each company at the end of the work. 
 
 11. When any place of special obscurity is doubted of, letters to be 
 directed by authority to send to any learned man in the land for his judg- 
 ment of such a place. 
 
 12. Letters to be sent from every bishop to the rest of his clergy, ad- 
 monishing them of this translation in hand, and to move and charge as 
 many as being skillful in the tongues and having taken pains in that 
 kind, to send his particular observations to the company, either at West- 
 minster, Cambridge, or Oxford. 
 
 13. The directors in each company to be the Deans of Westminster 
 and Chester, for Westminster, and the king's professors in Hebrew or 
 Greek in the two universities. 
 
 14. These translations to be used when thej'^ agree better with the text 
 than the Bishops' Bible : Tyndale's, Matthew's, Coverdale's, Whitchurch's 
 [Cranmer's], Geneva. 
 
 15. Besides the said directors before mentioned, three or four of the 
 most ancient and grave divines in either of the universities, not employed 
 in translating, to be assigned by the vice-chancellor, upon conference with 
 the rest of the heads, to be overseers of the translations, as well Hebrew 
 AS Greek, for the better observation of the fourth rule above specified. 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 319 
 
 PROGRESS OF THE WORK. 
 
 Six months after the Hampton Court Conference 
 the king commissioned fifty-four dignitaries and 
 scholars who had been selected by some competent, 
 though unknown, authority (probably the Universi- 
 ties), as translators, and directed Bancroft, who in 
 the meantime had become Archbishop of Canter- 
 bury,* to make provision for their compensation by 
 church preferments. Instead of setting a good ex- 
 ample by a liberal subscription, he requested the 
 bishops and chapters to subscribe, which was not 
 done. The translators " received nothing but free 
 entertainement in the colleges till some of them met 
 in London for the final revision of the work." ' The 
 necessary expenses were mostly borne by the printer 
 and publisher, Kobert Barker, to the extent of £3500.' 
 But several of the translators were indirectl}^ reward- 
 ed by being promoted to deaneries or bishoprics, dur- 
 ing or after the completion of their labors.* 
 
 ' The translators, in their Preface, call him " the chief overseer and 
 ipyoSidjKTTjg under his Majesty, to whom not only we, but also our whole 
 Church, was [were] much bound." Bancroft was not one of them, but is 
 said to have " altered the translation in fourteen places to make it speak 
 prelatical language" (Westcott, p. 146). He showed a violent temper at 
 the Hampton Court Conference, so that even the king rebuked him. He 
 died Nov. 2, 1610. 
 
 ' Anderson, ii. 381 ; Westcott, 145 sq. 
 
 ' Eadie, ii. 201. Matthew Barker (the son of Robert, citizen and 
 stationer of London) paid afterwards £600 for a reversionary right of the 
 monopoly of printing the Bible in 1635. 
 
 * Eadie (ii. 190 sq.) gives an account of these ecclesiastical preferments. 
 Those rewarded by bishoprics are Andrewes, Overall, Miles Smith, Ravis, 
 Abbot, Tomson, ftarlow. Henry Savile was knighted. 
 
320 THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 
 
 The actual number of scholars engaged in the 
 work was only forty-seven ; the remaining seven 
 may have declined, or resigned, or died before the 
 work began. The translators embraced many of 
 the best Hebrew and Greek scholars of England at 
 the time. Dr. Reynolds, the real mover of the 
 enterprise, is described by Anthony Wood as a 
 prodigious n:|an, who "had turned over all writers, 
 profane, ecclesiastical, and divine, all the councils, 
 fathers, and histories of the Church." He was 
 assigned to the company which had in charge the 
 prophetical books of the Old Testament; but he 
 died in May, 1607, four years before the publication 
 of the work, and his place was supplied by Dr. John 
 Harding, Regius Professor of Hebrew. Dr. An- 
 dre wes. Dean of Westminster, afterwards Bishop of 
 Winchester (d. 1618), who acted as head of the 'com- 
 pany intrusted with the translation of Genesis to 
 2 Kings, was distinguished for learning and piety, 
 and his sermons and Preces Privatoe (in Greek and 
 Latin, translated by Dean Stanhope, 1826) are still 
 read with profit. Overall, Dean of St. Paul's, and 
 afterwards Bishop of Norwich (d. 1619), compiled 
 the "Convocation Book," and WTote the sacramental 
 part of the Church Catechism. . Sir Henry Savile, 
 Provost of Eton, was an eminent Greek and Latin 
 scholar. Bed well was master of Arabic. Dr. Saravia, 
 Prebendary of Westminster, of Spanish descent, a 
 Belgian by birth, the bosom friend of Richard 
 Hooker, was well versed in modern languages. 
 Miles Smith, of the first Oxford Company, elect- 
 ed Bishop of Gloucester ip 1612 (d. 1624), bad 
 
TflE AUTHORIZED VERSlOH. 321 
 
 " Hebrew at his finger ends," was " well versed 
 in patristic writings and rabbinical glosses," but 
 is best known as the final editor and reputed au- 
 thor of the Preface ( " The Translators to the 
 Header")/ Thomas Wilson, Bishop of Winchester, 
 was, along with Miles Smith, appointed final reviser, 
 and prepared the summary of contents or chapter 
 headings. Most of the other members are now for- 
 gotten ; but they live in their work, which is more 
 important than the workmen. 
 
 The translators were divided into six companies — 
 two of them met at Westminster (London), two at 
 Cambridge, and two at Oxford. The Scriptures, 
 including the Apocrypha, were in like manner di- 
 vided into six portions, and one portion assigned to 
 each company. In this respect the arrangement of 
 the modern revisers, who were divided into two 
 companies only, one for the Old and one for the 
 New Testament, was wiser, and secured greater unity 
 and consistency of translation. 
 
 Of the method of work we know very little. The 
 translators left no record of their labors. " Never," 
 says Dr. Scrivener, " was a great enterprise, like the 
 production of our Authorized Version, carried out 
 with less knowledge handed down to posterity of 
 the laborers, their method and order of working." 
 If the author of the Preface, instead of a heap of 
 
 * It is a noteworthy coincidence that his successor in the see of Gloucester, 
 as chairman of the New Testament Company, prepared the first draft of 
 the Preface to the Revision of 1881. It makes no show of irrelevant 
 learning, and is much shorter, but far more to the point than the old 
 Preface. 
 
322 THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 
 
 quotations from the fathers, had given a clear ac- 
 count of the mode of procedure, he would have done 
 better service to posterity. He mentions, however, 
 the time of work — viz., "twice seven times seventy- 
 two days " (with reference to the seventy-two days' 
 work on the Septuagint), and the use of " Chaldee, 
 Hebrew, Syrian, Greek, Latin, Spanish, French, 
 Italian, and Dutch [German] translators or com- 
 mentators." John Selden, who was about twenty- 
 five years old when the translation appeared, has 
 preserved a significant hint. He says, in his " Table- 
 Talk:" "The English translation of the Bible is 
 the best translation in the world, and renders the 
 sense of the original best, taking in for the English 
 translation the Bishops' Bible as well as King 
 James's. The translation in King James's time took 
 an excellent way. That part of the Bible was given 
 to him who was most excellent in such a tongue (as 
 the Apocrypha to Andrew Downs), and then they 
 met together, and one read the translation, the rest 
 holding in their hands some Bible, either of the 
 learned tongues, or French, Spanish, Italian, etc. ; 
 if they found any fault, they spoke ; if not, he read 
 on." ' 
 
 The enumeration of these translations agrees with 
 the Translators' Preface. The French version was 
 probably that of Olivetan (1535) as revised by the 
 Pastors of Geneva (1588) ; the Spanish those of De 
 Eeyna (1569) and De Yalera (1602) ; the Italian that 
 
 * Published after his death (1654) by his amanuensis, Richard Milward, 
 in 1689. I quote from the edition of Edward Arber, London, 1862, p. 20l 
 Selden represented the University of Oxford in the Long Parliament. 
 
THE AtJTHOKlZED VERSION. 323 
 
 of Diodati (1607); the "Dutch" (omitted by Seidell, 
 but mentioned by the Translators) those of Leo Jndse 
 (in the Swiss-German dialect. Zurich, 1524-29, 1531, 
 1536, 1540), and of Luther (1522-1534, last edition 
 by Luther himself, 1545), both of which had already 
 been used in previous versions. 
 
 The new version was completed seven years after 
 the Hampton Court Conference, but, owing to some 
 delay, it was not actually undertaken till 1607, and 
 did not occupy more than two years and three 
 quarters. It was published in a large folio volume 
 at London, 1611, with a dedication " To the Most 
 High and Mighty Prince James, by the Grace of 
 God King of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, 
 Defender of the Faith, etc.," and with a very long 
 and learned, but pedantic and tedious, preface by 
 Dr. Miles Smith. Two folio editions were printed 
 in that year, and also a duodecimo edition of the 
 New Testament ; how many copies of each is not 
 known (probably less than ten thousand), nor is it 
 known which of the two folio editions is the first. 
 They differ in a great many places,* and the folio edi- 
 tion of 1613 again differs from both.' All three are 
 disfigured by numerous and serious typographical 
 errors. Translators, editors, and printers are not in- 
 fallible," lest any should boast. The Bible is not an 
 
 * See the list of variations between the two editions of 1611 in Scrivener, 
 Appendix B, Ixxxvi. sqq. 
 
 ' The Oxford fac-simile reprint of the edition of 1611 gives a list cover- 
 ing sixteen columns of variations between one of the editions of 1611 and 
 the one of 1613. 
 
 ' Not even the Pope of Rome, when he undertakes to edit the Scriptures^ 
 as Sixtus V. did. See p. 150. 
 
324 TfiE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 
 
 idol to be worshipped, but a book of life, to be 
 studied again aud again by every generation to the 
 end of time. 
 
 Note. — Dr. Scrivener speaks of the " shameful" editing of the first two 
 editions, and charges both with " innumerable errors of the press, some 
 peculiar to a single issue, not a few (including nearly all the false textual 
 references in the margin) common to both " (p. xii.). Among the typo- 
 graphical errors are such as "Judas" for "Jesus" (in Matt. xxvi. 36); 
 " serve thee " for " serve me " (Exod. ix. 13) ; " hoops " for " hooks " (Exod. 
 xxxviii. 11); "plaine" for "plague" (Lev. xiii. 56); "ye shall not eat" 
 for " ye shall eat " (Lev. xvii. 14) ; " he went into the citie " for " she went " 
 (Ruth iii. 15, where " she " is preferred by Jerome in the Vulgate, ingressa 
 est, btit the Hebrew verb is masculine, &^h^1); "shewed" for "hewed" 
 (Hos. vi. 5), etc. 
 
 The folio edition of 1613 varies from the one of 1611 in more than four 
 hundred places; and, while correcting some of the old errors, it has a 
 larger number of new ones as bad as the old — e.g., " the fast of the beast" 
 for "the fat of the beast" (Lev. vii. 25); "water" for "matter" (1 Sam. 
 x. 16) ; " were " for " year " (2 Kings xxii. 3) ; " in the throne of David " 
 for " in the room of David " (2 Chron. vi. 10) ; " we would not leave " for 
 " we would leave " (Neh. x . 31) ; " shined through darkness " for " walked " 
 (Job xxix. 3); "she delighted herself" for "she defiled herself" (Ezek. 
 xxiii. 7) ; "I praise you " for " I praise you not " (1 Cor. xi. 17) ; " doings " 
 for "things" (1 Cor. xvi. 14); "continue your love" for "confirm your 
 love" (2 Cor. ii. 8); "selves" for "souls" (1 Pet. i. 22); "may be laid 
 to their charge " for " may not be laid " (1 Tim. iv. 16). In many edi- 
 tions " enticed " is substituted for " enriched," " eject " for " elect," " leadeth 
 them not " for " leadeth them out." See the long lists of errors in the 
 Oxford reprint of the first edition ; in Loftie, I. c. 53 sqq. ; in Scrivener, I. c, 
 pp. Ixviii. sqq. ; and in Eadie, The English Bible, ii. 291 sqq. 
 
 Later editors made some improvements which have held the ground : 
 as "help thou mine unbelief" for "help my unbelief" (Mark ix. 24); 
 " let us run with patience the race set before us " for " let us runne with 
 patience unto the race " (Heb. xii. 1) ; " Drusilla which was a Jewess " for 
 " Jew " (Acts xxiv. 24) ; " appointed to death " for " approved to death " 
 (1 Cor. iv. 9). On the other hand, they introduced many new typograph- 
 ical blunders, some of which are both curious and ominous, and have 
 given nicknames to the copies containing them. Everybody has heard 
 of the "Vinegar Bible" ("the most sumptuous of aU Oxford Bibles," 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 325 
 
 printed by J. Baskett, Oxford, 1717, in 1 vol., imperial fol. ; also called 
 " a Baskett- full of printer's errors "), which has " virieffar " for " vineyard " 
 in the heading of the column containing the parable of the vineyard 
 (Luke XX.). The worst error is in the " Wicked Bible," printed by Robert 
 Barker and John Bill, London, 1631, 8vo, which omits, perhaps from sheer 
 deviltry of the printer, the "not" in the seventh commandment (Exod. 
 XX. 14). The printer was fined £300 by Archbishop Laud for changing 
 the prohibition of adultery into a command, and the money was used for 
 the purchase of a font of Greek type for the Oxford University. Four 
 copies of this Bible are left, one in the Lenox Library, New York. There 
 is a German edition of the Bible in Wolfenbuttel of 1731, with the same 
 extraordinary omission. (See Bibles in the Caxton Exhibition, p. 114 sq.) 
 We have a standard translation, but not a standard text. There are no 
 two editions alike, unless those printed from the same stereotype plates, 
 and there is no absolute standard edition. A committee of the American 
 Bible Society, in examining six different editions of the Authorized Ver- 
 sion, discovered nearly 24,000 variations in the text and punctuation. See 
 " Report of the History and Recent Collation of the English Version of the 
 Bible, presented by the Committee on Versions to the Board of Managers 
 of the American Bible Society, and adopted May 1st, 1851 " (printed in 
 the American Bible House, p. 31). Dr. Blayney's revision (1769) is the 
 standard of the Oxford University Press, but has undergone various modi- 
 fications and corrections (see Eadie, ii. 305). Eyre and Strahan's quarto 
 edition of 1812 was adopted as the standard by the Protestant Episcopal 
 Church of the United States, but it has several errors — e.g., "about" for 
 "above" (2 Cor. xii. 2); "holy body" for "whole body" (Eadie, ii. 306). 
 Dr. Scrivener's Cambridge Paragraph Bible is no doubt the most critical 
 edition, but his text is eclectic, and his departures from the editions of 161 1 
 and 1613 are very numerous. See the lists in his Appendix A, pp. Ixviii.- 
 Ixxxvi. 
 
 RECEPTION OF THE NEW VERSION. 
 
 The new version was received with cold indiffer- 
 ence by some, and with violent opposition by others.* 
 
 * Compare here Trench, On the Authorized Version of the New Testa- 
 ment, chap. xi. (p. 163 sqq. in Harpers' edition), and Eadie, The English 
 Bible, ii. 264 sqq. Archbishop Trench shows that the charges of Roman- 
 ists and Arminians are mostly unfounded. 
 
326 THE AUTlIORIZli:D VERSION. 
 
 This is just what the translators expected. They 
 begin their Preface to the Reader with this sentence: 
 
 " Zeal to promote the common good, whether it be by devising any 
 thing ourselves, or revising that which hath been laboured by others, de- 
 serveth certainly much respect and esteem, but yet findeth but cold enter- 
 tainment in the world. It is welcomed with suspicion instead of love, 
 and with emulation instead of thanks : and if there be any hole left for 
 cavil to enter (and cavil, if it do not find a hole, will make one), it is sure 
 to be misconstrued, and in danger to be condemned. This will easily be 
 granted by as many as know story, or have any experience. For was 
 there ever any thing projected, that savoured any way of newness or re- 
 newing, but the same endured many a storm of gainsaying or opposition ?" 
 
 The first attack came from the famous Hebraist, 
 Dr.Broiighton,and was an unqualified condemnation 
 inspired by personal animosity, which neutralized 
 its effect.^ Yet John Lightfoot, who edited his 
 works, and had no superior in his age for Hebrew 
 and Rabbinical lore, seems to have sympathized 
 with him in his low estimate of the version ; for in a 
 sermon preached before the House of Commons in 
 August, 1645, he urged them " to think of a review 
 and survey of the translation of the Bible," which 
 should be " exact, vigorous, and lively." ^ 
 
 Most of the objections in that polemical age were 
 raised against the theology of the version rather 
 than its scholarship. Roman Catholics accused it 
 of falsifying the Scriptures in favor of Protestant 
 heresy.^ Arminians discovered in it a Calvinistic 
 
 ' See above, pp. 291, 292. 
 
 ^ WorJc^, vol. i. p. XV., quoted by Eadie, ii. 344. 
 
 ' Gregory Martin had made a most elaborate attack against the older 
 English versions in 1582. Afterwards Thomas Ward, a convert to Rome, 
 and at last a soldier in the Papal Guards, wrote Eriata of the Protestant 
 
Tni: AttH0Rl2:ED VEESIOK. 327 
 
 bias, owing to the great influence which Beza's Greek 
 Testament and Latin notes had upon the transla- 
 tors. Dr. Kobert Gell, a decided Arminian, who 
 had been chaplain to Archbishop Abbot of Canter- 
 bury, wrote as late as 1659 a folio volume of more 
 than eight hundred pages to disparage the version.* 
 Puritans agreed with its theology, but found fault 
 with its Church polity and ritual, on the ground of 
 retaining such terms as "church," "bishop," "or- 
 dain," " Easter." ^ Arians and Socinians of a later 
 
 Bible, in 1683; 2d ed. 1688; reprinted in Dublin, 1807; with a Preface 
 by Lingard, 1810; and with a letter by Milner, 1841. Ward calls his 
 work an abridgment, but exceeds Martin in ferocity. He " accuses King 
 James's translators of blasphemy, most damnable corruptions, intolerable 
 deceit, and vile imposture " (Eadie, ii. 267). The best answer to such 
 calumnies is the eulogy of the Authorized Version by such a fervent con- 
 vert as Dr. Faber. 
 
 * Essay towards the Amendment of the Last English Translation of the 
 Bible, London, 1659. Gell charged the translators with deliberate mis- 
 translation in favor of Calvinism, for inserting the words it shall be given, 
 in Matt. xx. 23. Dr. Trench says of Gell that he was " a really learned 
 man, but cross-grained, ill-tempered, and in his reaction against Calvinistic 
 excesses running into dangerous extremes on the other side; and his 
 works have their bushels of chaflF with scarcely their grains of wheat." 
 Dr. Eadie (ii. 266) : "Some of his [Gell's] accusations are very trivial, 
 and many of his statements are drawn out into prolix allegorical sermons. 
 He objects to their inversion of the order of words, to their undue use of 
 supplemental terms, and to their translation, as being moulded to suit their 
 own opinions, while they put the better and truer rendering in the margin. 
 Especially does he censure their Bible as obscuring on purpose the doctrine 
 of perfection, for he regarded such a state as attainable in the present 
 life." 
 
 ' " Easter " for " Passover " (Acts xii. 4) was inherited from Tyndale's 
 first edition, and has been corrected in the Revision. "Bishop" ought 
 to have been used throughout, including Acts xx. 28, where it is identical 
 with "presbyter" or "elder" (ver. 18), but rendered "overseer" in the 
 old version. This inconsistency is likewise removed in the Kevision. 
 
82^ THE AUTHORIZED VERSIOISr. 
 
 date would naturally object to the retention, without 
 italics, of the three heavenly witnesses in 1 John v. 
 7 (which is justly dropped in the Eevision). One 
 of the most curious objections is that the translators 
 introduced the terms "familiar spirit," "witch," and 
 " wizard " into the Bible in order to flatter King 
 James's notions about witchcraft and demonology, 
 on which he wrote a treatise; but all these terms 
 occur also in the older versions.^ With the same 
 right republicans might charge them with having 
 flattered his high monarchical notions by turning 
 every Oriental sheikh or chief into a "duke" or 
 "prince." 
 
 King James's Version had a powerful rival in the 
 Geneva Bible, which was never authorized, but had 
 taken strong hold on the affections of the people be- 
 cause it was made by the English exiles in times of 
 fierce persecution, and under the eyes of the great 
 Eeformers, Calvin and Beza, and was accompanied 
 with convenient explanatory notes. It continued tON 
 be reprinted, even ^' cum privilegio RegicB majesta- 
 tis^'^ till after the middle of the seventeenth cen- 
 tury, and many copies were brought to America by 
 the early immigrants. It passed in all through about 
 one hundred and sixty editions, and when it finally 
 disappeared, the people, according to Fuller, com- 
 plained that " they could not see into the sense of 
 
 " Church " (probably derived from tlie Greek KvpiaKov, belonging to the 
 Lord) has been retained, although *' congregation " is a better translation 
 of ecclesia. 
 
 ^ See Bishop Hutchinson, Historical Essay on Witchcraft, and Eadie, 
 ii. 268 sq. 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 329 
 
 the Scripture for lack of the spectacles of those 
 Genevan annotators." ^ 
 
 The Long Parliament seriously thought of a 
 new revision. A bill was introduced in April, 
 1653, to the effect that a committee, consisting of 
 Drs. Owen, Cudworth, and several other scholars, 
 be appointed to revise King James's Version un- 
 der the supervision of Dr. Thomas Goodwin, Dr. 
 Tuckney, and Mr. Joseph Caryl. But the project 
 
 ^ Eadie (ii. 37) : " The Bishops' Bible was not issued beyond 1606, five 
 years before the date of the publication of the Authorized Version, though 
 its New Testament was printed in 1608, 1614, 1615, 1617, 1618. But the 
 Genevan Bible continued to be printed after 1611. Nay, in that very year 
 it was issued in folio by Barker himself, the king's printer. Besides four 
 editions of the Nxiw Testament, the Bible was reprinted in quarto in 1613, 
 both at London and Edinburgh ; again at London in 1614 ; with two edi- 
 tions in 1615, and a last issue in folio in 1616, it appeared in quarto, 
 Amsterdam, in 1633 ; in folio, 1640 ; with two more editions in 1644. In 
 1649 the Authorized Version was printed in quarto, with the Genevan 
 notes, as if to promote^ the circulation. An edition of this nature was 
 published in 1679 in folio, and as late as 1708 and 1715; but the one of 
 1679 and the other two tell a falsehood on their title-page — '-which notes 
 have never been before set forth with this new translation.' " Dr. Eadie 
 mentions also an American edition of 1743, without stating the place of 
 publication (ii. 310). But this is a mistake ; the book referred to is a 
 German Bible, printed by Christoph Saur, a native of Germany, who set- 
 tled in Germantown, Pa., near Philadelphia. The work was printed in 
 German town. See O'Callaghan, A List of Editions of the Holy Scriptures 
 Printed in A merica (Albany, 1861), p. xii. sq. and p. 22. No English Bible 
 was printed in America until after the Revolution, in 1782 (Philadelphia, 
 priijted and sold by R. Aitken, at Pope's Head, in Market Street, with a rec- 
 ommendation of Congress, dated Sept. 12, 1782). Before that time the Eng^ 
 lish copyright prevented the reprint; and, in the judgment of Mr. Bancroft 
 and others, the story is not worthy of credit that a popy was secretly 
 printed in Boston about 1752 with the London imprint. See O'Callaghan, 
 p. xiii. sqq. John Eliot's Indian Bible was printed in C{^mbridj;e, 1663, 
 preceded by the New Testament in 1661, 
 
 g3 
 
330 THE AUTHORIZED VEliSION. 
 
 failed because of the dissolution of the Parlia- 
 ment.' 
 
 With the Eestoration of the Stuarts the opposition 
 passed away, and the Version of 1611 quietly super- 
 seded all its predecessors and rivals in the family 
 and the Church. It owes its authority and popular- 
 ity not to royal favor or legal enactments, but, what 
 is far better, to its intrinsic merits and the verdict 
 of the English-speaking race. 
 
 One of the earliest and most potent voices in its 
 favor was that of Thomas Fuller, who, in his quaint, 
 charming style, thus welcomed it in 1658 : ^ 
 
 •' And now, after long expectation and great desire, came forth the new 
 translation of the Bible (most beautifully printed), by a select and com- 
 petent number of divines, appointed for that purpose; not being too many, 
 lest one should trouble another, and yet many, lest, in any, things might 
 haply escape them : who, neither coveting praise for expedition, nor fear- 
 ing reproach for slackness (seeing, in a business of moment, none deserve 
 blame for convenient slowness), had expended almost three years in the 
 work, not only examining the channels by the fountain, translations with 
 the original, which was absolutely necessary; but also comparing channels 
 with channels, which was abundantly useful, in the Spanish, Italian, 
 French, and Dutch languages. So that their industry, skilfulness, piety, 
 and discretion, have herein bound the Church unto them in a debt of 
 special remembrance and thankfulness. These, with Jacob, ' rolled away 
 the stone from the mouth of the well ' of life. Gen. xxix. 10; so that now 
 even Rachels, weak women, may freely come, both to drink themselves, 
 and water the flocks of their families at the same." 
 
 This question has recently been raised after the 
 issue of the Revision in 1881. The title-page of 
 King James's Version announces it as "appointed 
 
 * See the bill in Eadie, ii. 344-346. 
 ? Church History of Britain^ iii. 274. 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. .331 
 
 to be read in churches," and it goes universally by 
 the name of " the Authorized Version." But no 
 trace of such authorization can be found in the rec- 
 ords, ecclesiastical or civil, of the year 1611. !N"either 
 Parliament, nor convocation, nor privy council, nor 
 king have given it public sanction as far as is 
 known.' 
 
 The present Lord Chancellor of England (Lord 
 Selborne) defends the popular opinion by the fol- 
 lowing considerations : ( 1 ) that the authorization 
 may have been by order of Council ; (2) that, if so, 
 the record of the order probably perished in the fire 
 at Whitehall, Jan. 12, 1618; (3) that the king's 
 printer would not have inserted on the title-page 
 the words " appointed to be read in churches," with- 
 out good reason to do so.** 
 
 But this is mere assertion based upon probabili- 
 ties, which appear very improbable in view of the 
 following facts : 
 
 (1.) The words "appointed to be read in churches" 
 are absent from the special title of the New Testa- 
 ment in the first edition of 1611, and in the general 
 title-page of at least eight editions of the first five 
 years after the publication of James's Yersion.' 
 Moreover, it is not stated by whom and how the 
 version was " appointed ;" nor does the word seem 
 
 ' Dr. Lightfoot states positively that King James's Version was never 
 authorized (^Fresh Revision, p. 30 in Harpers' edition). I was told by the 
 late Dean Stanley that a clergyman in P^ngland might be prosecuted for 
 using in public worship King James's Bible instead of the Bishops' Bible, 
 
 ' See his letter to Bishop Wordsworth in Notes below, 
 
 ^ gee ante, p. 303 so. , 
 
332 THE AUTHORIZED VEKSION. 
 
 to be equivalent to " authorized," which came into 
 use in 1574.' 
 
 (2.) The Genevan Version was used in England 
 more than twenty years after 1611, not only in 
 private, but in public, worship. Of fifty sermons 
 preached between 1611 and 1630, and examined by 
 the Rev. Handall T. Davidson,'' the text is taken 
 from the Genevan Version in 27, from the Bishops' 
 Bible in 5, and from other sources in 11. Among 
 those who preached from the Genevan Version were 
 Bishop Andrewes (one of King James's translators), 
 Bishop Laud, Bishop Carleton, Bishop Hall. Some 
 of these sermons were preached on solemn public 
 occasions, even in the presence of the king, by bish- 
 ops "ready above all things to uphold the king's 
 commandment." In Scotland the Genevan Version 
 was likewise used on important public occasions in 
 1628 and 1638, and printed in part (the Psalms) at 
 Edinburgh in 1640.^ 
 
 (3.) In more than a hundred official documents of 
 bishops and archdeacons of the first half of the sev- 
 enteenth century, containing the usual inquiry as to 
 the Bible, King James's Version is not mentioned, 
 but only " the whole Bible," or a " Bible of the 
 largest volume," or "the latest edition."* 
 
 ' The phrase "Appoynted to the use of the churches" occurs for the 
 first time in the second edition of the " Great Bible," 1540, and seems to 
 refer to the Scripture lessons pointed out in the almanac for every day in 
 the year. The " Bishops' Bible," after 1572, bore both the words " author- 
 ized" and "appointed," but never was the word "authorized" so used 
 before 1574. See The Bibles in the Caxton Exhibition, p. 20 sq. 
 
 ' See his article in " MacmiUan's Magazine " for October, 1 88 1 , pp. 440 sqq. 
 
 ' Eadie, ii. 51, * So stated b^ K, T, Davidson, /. c, 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 333 
 
 (4.) The long-continued opposition to King James's 
 Bible, which is an undoubted fact/ cannot be easily 
 explained if it had received the formal sanction of 
 the government. 
 
 When, at the restoration of the Stuart dynasty, 
 the Book of Common Prayer was revised and re- 
 introduced in 1661, the Ten Commandments, the 
 evangelic hymns (the Magnificat^ the Benedictus^ 
 and the Nunc dimiUis\ and especially the Psalter 
 of the earlier version of Coverdale, kept their place, 
 and are used to this day in America as well as in 
 England in public worship. The Presbyterians re- 
 quested " that the new translation of the Bible should 
 alone be used in the portions selected in the Prayer- 
 book." But their proposition was rejected. Only 
 the introductory sentences and the Gospel and 
 Epistle lessons were taken from King James's Ver- 
 sion. So far it may be said to be legally authorized 
 in England, but no further." 
 
 The American Episcopal Church, however, took 
 a step beyond this partial endorsement, and com- 
 mitted itself, by action of the General Convention, 
 to a particular edition of King James's Version. 
 In both houses of the General Convention in 1823 
 a report was presented by a joint committee appoint- 
 ed three years before, recommending the adoption 
 
 * See preceding section, p. 328 sq. 
 
 " See Arch. J. Stephens: The Book of Common Prayer (Lond. 1849), 
 Introd. p. clxix. ; and Fr. Procter : A History of the Book of Common 
 Prayer (11th ed. Lond. 1874), 116. The Black-letter Prayer-book (1636) 
 which contains the ISIS, alterations and additions made in 1661 was after 
 long search discovered in the Library of the tioyse of Lords, and photo- 
 zincographed, London, 1871, 
 
334 THE AUTHOEIZED VERSION. 
 
 as a standard Bible of an edition printed by Eyre 
 and Strahan in 1812. The report was accepted, 
 and a canon was passed providing for the appoint- 
 ment of suitable persons to " correct all new editions 
 of the Bible by the standard edition agreed upon by 
 the General Convention." * 
 
 Note. — The correspondence between the Bishop of Lincohi (Dr. Words- 
 worth) and Lord Selborne was published in the London Times, June 10, 
 1881, and is as follows : 
 
 •' RiSEHOLME, Lincoln, May 26. (1881.) 
 
 "My dear Lord, — The question which Lord Carnarvon has given 
 notice of, to be put to your Lordship in the House of Lords on Friday — 
 (viz., whether it is legal for a clergyman to read the Lessons from the new 
 Revised Version in a church) — is one of great importance, both to the 
 clergy and laity. May I be allowed to submit a few remarks upon it? 
 
 " There seems to be a presumption against such a practice ah incon- 
 venienti. 
 
 " The new Revised Version, however valuable in itself, is not distin- 
 guishable as to authority from any private venture of the kind. It has 
 received no sanction from the Crown, from the Church, or from Parliament. 
 If a clergyman may use it in the public services of the Church, why might 
 he not use any other revised version, such as Archbishop Newcome's or 
 Dean Alford's, or the revised version put forth not long ago by 'Five 
 clergymen,' or even a revised version framed by himself? And so, in 
 fine, might we not have almost as many 'revised versions' as clergymen 
 or churches? 
 
 " That the Crown and Church of England contemplated the use of one 
 uniform translation of the Bible in churches is, I think, clear from Royal 
 Proclamation in Henry VlII.'s time, and from Royal Injunctions in the 
 reigns of Edward VI. and Queen Elizabeth, and from Canons of the Church 
 in 1571 (Wilkins's Concilia., iv. 266) and in 1603 (Can. 80, see Bishop 
 Gibson's Codex, p. 201, Oxford ed. 1761). Also, Archbishop Whitgift, in 
 his letter to the Bishop of Lincoln in 1587, 'About Bibles,' speaks of 'the 
 translation of the Bible authorized by the Synods of Bishops,' and desires 
 him to take care that ' every one of the churches in his diocese is provided 
 with one or more copies of the translation of the Bible allowed as afore- 
 
 * See Perry's Journals of General Co^ventiQns, vo|. ii, pp. 54, 58, 73, 95. 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 335 
 
 aaid' (Wilkins's Concilia, iv. 328; Cardwell, 'Documentary Annals,' 
 No. cv.). 
 
 "As to our present Authorized Version of the Bible, which was first 
 printed in 1611 at London by Robert Barker, ' Printer to the King's Most 
 Excellent Majesty,' the words in its title, ' Appointed to be read in 
 churches,' appear to show that the public reading of it rests upon some 
 authority which appointed it, and the universal reception of that transla- 
 tion in our churches for two hundred and seventy years is confirmatory 
 of that opinion, and corroborates that appointment. 
 
 "The special exception also (in the preface of our Prayer-book), in 
 favour of reading the Psalms in churches from the older version, seems to 
 point to the use of some other translation as authorized for the rest of the 
 service of the Church ; and universal usage proves that this other version 
 can be no other than the Authorized Version of 1611. 
 
 "Accordingly, at the last revision of the Book of Common Prayer, at 
 the Restoration, the older version of the Epistles and Gospels in the Prayer- 
 book was displaced, and the translation of them in the Authorized Version 
 of 1611 was substituted for it. And the public use of this version of the 
 Epistles and Gospels is required by the Act of Uniformity and by the recent 
 Act on the Declarations of Conformity to be made by the clergy. 
 
 "As to the legal bearing of the question, I would not venture to pro- 
 nounce an opinion. But I see it stated in some books on copyright, not, 
 however, without some hesitation, that ' the Sovereign, by a prerogative 
 vested in the Crown, has the exclusive privilege of printing i7iter alia the 
 Holy Bible for public use in the divine service of the Church ' (Godson on 
 Copyright, p. 432, 437, 441, 454), and that the Queen's printer and the two 
 ancient Universities now exercise that right by virtue of patents from the 
 Crown. 
 
 "The copyright of the new Revised Version of the New Testament has, 
 I believe, been purchased from the Revisers by the two Universities exclu- 
 sively. The Queen's printer has, I think, taken no part in the transaction. 
 
 " If, therefore, the new Revised Version is to supplant the Authorized 
 Version and take its place in our churches without any grant from the 
 Crown, or any authorization from the Church, this might be regarded as 
 an invasion of the prerogative and as a contravention of the Church's 
 authority, and also perhaps as an injury to the Queen's printer, who now, 
 concurrently with the two Universities, enjoys the exclusive right of sup- 
 plying all copies of the Bible (in the Authorized Version of 1611) for 
 general use in the public service of the Church. 
 
 " I am, my dear Lord, very faithfully yours, 
 
 ♦* C. Lincoln, 
 *' To the Right Hon. the Lord Chancellor," 
 
336 THE AUTHOKIZED VERSION. 
 
 "30 Portland-place W., May 27, 1881. 
 
 "My dear Lord,— Lord Carnarvon, finding that the facts were not 
 exactly as he understood them to be, decided not to put the question to 
 me of which he had given notice. 
 
 " I agree, generally, with what you say. If any clergyman reads in his 
 church the lessons appointed for the Sunday and other services from the 
 'Revised' Version, before it has been recommended or authorized by some 
 sufficient public authority, he will, I think, incur a serious risk of being 
 held to be an offender against law. 
 
 " It is, I dare say, true that no documentary proof of the authority of 
 the version commonly reputed to be authorized is now forthcoming. But 
 this proves very little. If (for example) it was 'appointed to be read in 
 churches' (as is expressly stated on the title-page of 1611), at the time 
 of its first publication, nothing is more probable than that this may have 
 been done by Order in Council. If so, the authentic record of that order 
 would now be lost, because all the Council books and registers from the 
 year 1600 to 1613 inclusive were destroyed by a fire at Whitehall on the 
 r2th of January, 1618 (O. S.). 
 
 " Nothing, in my opinion, is less likely than that the King's printer 
 should have taken upon himself (whether with a view to his own profit 
 or otherwise) to issue the book (being what it was, a translation unques- 
 tionably made by the King's commandment, to correct defects in earlier 
 versions, of which the use had been authorized by Royal injunctions, etc., 
 in preceding reigns), with a title-page asserting that it was ' appointed to 
 be read in churches,' if the fact were not really so. That this should have 
 been acquiesced in by all the ecclesiastical and civil authorities of the 
 Church and realm, instead of being visited with the punishment which 
 (in those days of the Star Chamber and the High Commission Court) was 
 so readily inflicted upon the despisers of authority, is to my mind absolutely 
 incredible upon any hypothesis except that of the use of the book being 
 really commanded. 
 
 " At the Savoy Conference, the eighth * general exception ' of the Pu- 
 ritan divines related to the use in certain parts of the Liturgy of the 
 * Great Bible ' version. They desired that, instead thereof, the new trans- 
 lation ' allowed by authority ' might ' alone be used.' The Bishops an- 
 swered, ' We are willing that all the Epistles and Gospels, etc., be used 
 according to the last translation ;' and this promise they performed, 
 stating, in the preface to the book established by the Act of Uniformity, 
 that < for a more perfect rendering ' the Epistles and Gospels, and other 
 portions of Holy Scripture, inserted 'i« sundry other places' of the Liturgy, 
 
tHE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 337 
 
 were ' now ordered to be read according to the last translation ;' while as 
 to the Psalter, they ' noted ' that it followed ' the translation of the Great 
 English Bible set forth and used in the time of King Henry VIII. and 
 Edward VI.' 
 
 *' The calendar of ' Lessons ' in this book of 1661-2 must, I suppose, be 
 admitted to refer to some English Bible. The question is, what English 
 Bible? Uniformity in the order of public worship was the purpose of the 
 whole book ; therefore, it cannot have been meant to leave every clergy- 
 man to translate for himself, or to select for himself among any existing 
 translations at his discretion. The same lessons were to be read in all 
 churches. It is not, on the other hand, conceivable that any version 
 earlier than that of 1611, and confessedly less accurate (else wherefore 
 adopt the 'last translation ' for the Epistles and Gospels?), can have been 
 intended. The question has practically been answered by the subsequent 
 reception, understanding, and use of above two hundred years. During 
 all that time the version of 1611 has been universally treated as being 
 what it purported to be when first issued in 1611 and ever since — i, c, 
 ' appointed to be read in churches.' It is one of the best established and 
 soundest maxims in law that, for a usage of this kind, a legal origin is to 
 be presumed when the facts will admit of it. It is no argument to the 
 contrary that some divines, accustomed to the use of earliest versions, may 
 have continued to use them in their sermons or other writings after 1611. 
 The appointment that this version only should be 'read in churches' 
 would not take away that liberty. 
 
 " There may, of course, be other arguments which I do not know or 
 have not considered. My object in saying so much has been only to 
 point out the fallacy of the assumption (if there are many who make it) 
 that the English Bible of 1611 is to be regarded as without authority 
 unless some Royal injunction, proclamation, or order, appointing it to be 
 read in churches can be produced. 
 
 " Believe me ever, my dear Lord, yours faithfully, 
 
 " Selborne. 
 
 "The Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of Lincoln." 
 
 THE MERITS OF THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 
 
 1. The aim of the Kevisers is clearly stated in the 
 Preface. It was not to make "a new translation, 
 nor yet to make of a bad one a good one . . . but 
 
^38 Tilfi AtTHOKtZEt) VERSIOi^.* 
 
 to make a good one better, or out of many good 
 ones one principal good one." Altliough usually 
 called a translation, it is in fact merely a revision of 
 the Bishops' Bible, as this itself was a revision of 
 the Great Bible, and the Great Bible a revision of 
 Coverdale and Tyndale. A great deal of praise, 
 therefore, which is given to it, belongs to its prede- 
 cessors. The Revisers made good use of all available 
 sources, even the Koman Catholic New Testament 
 of Rheims, which appeared in 1582, and is not men- 
 tioned in the king's instruction, but furnished a num- 
 ber of happy Latin terms, derived from the Vulgate.* 
 For the idiom and vocabulary Tyndale deserves 
 the greatest credit, for the melody and harmony 
 Coverdale, for scholarship and accuracy the Geneva 
 Version.'' King James hated the last as " the worst 
 of all," but the translators showed their superior 
 learning and judgment by following it very often 
 in preference to the Bishops' Bible. The examples 
 
 ^ Such as hymn (Matt. xxvi. 30), blessed (ver. 26), decease (Luke ix. 
 31), reprobate (Rom. i. 28), impenitent (ii. 5), unction (1 John ii. 20), mys- 
 tery (1 Cor. ix. 7), contemptible (2 Cor. x. 10), confess, propitiation, seduce 
 (all in I John). Other Latin terras, as concupiscence, lucre, salute, super- 
 fluity, tradition, tribulation, etc., were in the older Protestant versions. 
 The Old Testament of the Roman Catholic Version, though prepared 
 before the New, was for lack of means not published till 1609 and 1610 
 at Douay, under the title: The Ilolie Bible Faithfully Translated into 
 English out of the Authenticall Latin, etc., 2 vols. 
 
 ^ Eadie, i. 302 : " Tyndale gave us the first great outline distinctly and 
 wonderfully etched; but Coverdale added those minuter touches which 
 soften and harmonize it. The characteristic features are Tyndale's in all 
 their bqjdness of form and expression, the more delicate lines and shadings 
 are the contribution of his successor, both in his own version and in the 
 Kreat Bible, revised and edited by him." 
 
THE AtJTHORIZED VEltSIOlT. 339 
 
 of mistranslations, which Dr. Reynolds qnoted at 
 the Hampton Court Conference as arguments for 
 the need of a new version, are all taken from the 
 Great Bible and the Bishops' Bible, and were cor- 
 rected in the Geneva Bible.' 
 
 2. The merits are not the same in all the books. 
 From the division of the work among six indepen- 
 dent companies, there arose naturally a considerable 
 inequality in the execution. In the Old Testament 
 the historical books are much better translated than 
 the prophetical books, which present greater difficul- 
 ties. The Book of Job is the most defective, and 
 in many places unintelligible. The rendering of 
 Isaiah, especially in the earlier portions, contains 
 many errors and obscurities. The version of the 
 Psalms is, upon the whole, less musical and rhythmi- 
 cal, though much more accurate, than Coverdale's, 
 which still holds its place in the Book of Common 
 Prayer. In the New Testament the Gospels and 
 Acts, and even the Apocalypse, are far better done 
 
 * " It is obvious," says Dr. Moiilton {History of the English Bible, p. 207), 
 " that the Genevan and Rhemish versions have exercised much greater 
 influence than the Great and the Bishops' Bible." He gives as a specimen 
 a passage from Isa. liv. 11-17, which contains 182 words; of these, 86 
 words are the same in five or six English versions; 96 vary, and among 
 these variations more than 60 are taken from the Genevan Bible, and only 
 12 from the Bishops' Bible (pp. 201-206). In the familiar fifty-third chap- 
 ter of Isaiah seven eighths of the variations are due to the Genevan, 
 according to Westcott (p. 345). No authority was more frequently fol- 
 lowed, both for text and interpretation, than Beza of Geneva, whose Greek 
 Testament (the fourth edition, 1588, and the fifth edition, 1598) was the 
 chief basis of the Authorized Version. See ante, pp. 238 sqq. ; Westcott, 
 /. c 294 sqq. ; Eadie, ii. 16 sqq. 
 
340 THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 
 
 than the Epistles, notably Komans and Corinthians, 
 which abound in minor inaccuracies. 
 
 3. The style of the Authorized Version is uni- 
 versally admired, and secures to it the first rank 
 among English classics. It resembles in this respect 
 tlie version of Luther, which is the purest and strong- 
 est expression of the German language, and forced 
 even his papal enemies to imitate it in their rival 
 translations. The Englisli Bible hails from the gold- 
 en age of English literature. It coincides in time 
 with the greatest and almost inspired poet of human 
 nature in all its phases, but rises above Shakespeare 
 as grace rises above nature, and religion above poetry. 
 It is elevated, venerable, and sacred, like the Anglican 
 Liturgy as reproduced by Cranmer and his associates, 
 in their hours of devotion. The Bible is beautiful 
 in any language, but it is pre-eminently beautiful in 
 the English, the most cosmopolitan of all languages. 
 The translators called to their aid with esisy mastery 
 all its marvellous resources of Saxon strength, Nor- 
 man grace, and Latin majesty, and blended these 
 elements in melodious harmony. Their language 
 is popular without being vulgar, and dignified with- 
 out being stiff. It reads like poetry and sounds 
 like music. It is thoroughly idiomatic, and free 
 from Latin barbarisms.' It is as true to the genius 
 
 ^ So frequent in the Roman Catholic Version, owing to its slavish 
 conformity to the Latin Vulgate — e. g,, " impudicity " (Gal. v. 19), " coin- 
 quination " (2 Pet. ii. 13, 20), " contristate " (to make sad, Eph. iv. 30), 
 "exinanite" (Phil. ii. 7), " domestical" (1 Tim. v. 8), " repropitiate " (Heb. 
 ii. 17), "zealatours" (Acts xxi. 20), "azymes," "dominator," "pasche," 
 "prepuce," "pupilles," " scenopegia," " supersubstantial bread" (Matt. vL 
 
THE AtJTHOKIZED VERSION. 341 
 
 of the English as to the genius of the Hebrew and 
 Greek. We hear in our Bible Moses and the proph- 
 ets, Christ and the apostles, speaking to us in our 
 own mother-tongue. From this " well of English 
 pure and undefiled " poets, orators and historians 
 have drunk inspiration for more than two hundred 
 and fifty years. It has done more than any great 
 writer, not excluding Shakespeare and Milton, to 
 fix the character of the language beyond the possi- 
 bility of essential change, and the idiom of this ver- 
 sion will always remain the favorite organ for the 
 oracles of God to the English-speaking race. 
 
 At the same time it is necessary to modify the 
 praise in minor particulars. The Authorized Ver- 
 sion occasionally sacrifices the truth of the original 
 to the beauty of the English, as in Kom. xii. 2, " Be 
 not conformed to this world : but be ye transformed 
 by the renewing of your mind " (where the Greek 
 requires : '' Be not fashioned . . . but be ye trans- 
 formed," juLrj (TV(TxniuiaTi!^B(T^e . . . aXXa jUfra/xop^ouo-^t), 
 and in Acts xxvi. 28, '^ Almost thou persuadest me to 
 be a Christian " (which cannot be the meaning of 
 Iv oXiyii^, but would require oXiyov or irap' oXiyov 
 or oXiyov Sa). More serious are blemishes in the 
 opposite direction, as unseemly phrases in the Old 
 
 11, for daily or needful bread in the Lord's Prayer). Fuller says that the 
 Rheims and Douay translation " needs to be translated ;" and Trench says 
 that the Roman Catholic translators •' seem to have put oflf their loyalty 
 to the English language with their loyalty to the English crown." The 
 Douay Bible has, however, undergone in the course of time so many 
 transformations, that, in the language of Cardinal Wiseman, " scarcely any 
 verse remains as it was originally published." (See his Essai/s, vol. i. 73-75.) 
 
342 THE AUTHORISED VERSION. 
 
 Testament (1 Sara. xxv. 22, 34; 1 Kings xiv. 10; 2 
 Kings ix. 8; xviii. 27; Isa. xxxvi. 12, etc.), which 
 can scarcely be read in the pulpit or the family, and 
 might have been avoided by the use of the same 
 liberty which the translators claimed in so many 
 passages. We meet with an almost profane use of 
 the name of God in the phrases "Would God" and 
 " Would to God " (1 Cor. iv. 8 ; Deut. xxviii. 67 ; 
 Josh. vii. 7, otc), for which there is no equivalent in 
 the original, and in the unwarrantable rendering, 
 " God forbid " for /if/ yivoiro (" may it not be," or 
 " never happen," " far from it," Luke xx. 16; Rom. 
 iii. 4, 6, 31 ; vi. 2, 15 ; vii. 7, 13 ; ix. 14 ; xi. 1, 11 ; 
 1 Cor. vi. 15 ; Gal. ii. 17; iii. 21 ; vi. 14). There are 
 occasional violations of English grammar, as the 
 double plurals " cherubim^," " seraphim^," " ana- 
 kim^;" the Latinizing '^whom [for "who"] say ye 
 that I am " (Matt. xvi. 15 ; Mark viii. 27, 29) ; the 
 archaic "his'' for "its" (Matt. v. 13; Mark ix. 50; 
 Luke xiv. 34, etc.); and the connection of the singu- 
 lar verb with a plural noun, as " This people who 
 knoweth not," for " know not " (John vii. 4*9). A con- 
 siderable number of words and phrases have become 
 obsolete and unintelligible — as "to fetch a com- 
 pass" (for " to make a circuit"), "shamefastness" (for 
 " shamef acedness "),^ "bosses" ("knobs"), "clouts" 
 
 * Fast in "shamefast" (=bashful, modest, Eccles. xxvi. 15), and in 
 "shamefastness" (1 Tim. ii. 9), has the same meaning as the German fcsf, 
 and as in " steadfastness." The Revised Version has returned to " shaine- 
 fastness" of the Authorized Version of 1611. But "modesty" would be 
 as good a rendering of aidutg in 1 Tim. ii. 9, and far more intelligible, at 
 least in America. 
 
TflE AtTHOJUZEI) VERSION. 34^ 
 
 ("patches"), "daysman" ("arbitrator"), "dulcimer" 
 (a musical instrument), "earing" ("ploughing"), 
 "habergeon" ("coat of mail"), "kine" (the old 
 plural of " cow "), " knop " (" bud," compare the 
 German Knospe\ " ouches " (" sockets "), " sackbut " 
 (a wind instrument), " swaddle" (" bandage"), " tab- 
 ret" (a small drum), "tache" (a fastening or catch 
 = tack), "ware" (for "aware"), etc. Other words 
 have changed their meaning — as " to let " (for " to 
 hinder"), "to prevent" (for "to precede"), "to wit" 
 (for " to know "), " atonement " (for " reconciliation "), 
 " by and by " (for " immediately "), " careful " (for 
 " anxious "), " carriage " (for " baggage "), " charger " 
 (for "dish"), "coast" (for "border"), "conversa- 
 tion" (for "conduct"), "damnation" (for " con- 
 demnation ")," lucre " (for "gain ")," nephews " 
 (for " grandchildren " or " descendants "), " room " 
 (for "place").' 
 
 Such and similar changes, which are inevitable in 
 a living language, would alone be sufficient to de- 
 mand a revision. For the Bible is not an antiquarian 
 curiosity-shop, but a book of life for the benefit of 
 the people. The German, French, and Dutch lan- 
 guages have undergone similar changes. 
 
 4. The Authorized Version is a truly national 
 work, and has even an oecumenical character for 
 the English-speaking world. It resembles in this 
 respect the Apostles' and the Nicene creeds, which 
 cannot be traced to any individual authorship. 
 
 » See The Bible Word-Book: A Glossary of Old English Bible Words^ 
 by J. Eastwood and W. Aldis Wright, 1866. Also the article of Dn 
 Crosby on Archaisms, in *' Anglo- Amer. Bible Kev." p. 144 sqq. 
 
344 THE AUTHORIZED VERSlOl^. 
 
 Nearly all the Continental versions were the pro- 
 duction of a single mind — as Luther, Leo Judse, 
 Olivetan, Diodati — and bear more or less the linea- 
 ments of tlie translator. But tlie English Bible is 
 not the version of Wiclif, or Purvey, or Tyndale, or 
 Matthews, or Rogers, or Coverdale, or Cranmer, or 
 the Elizabethan Bishops, or King James's forty- 
 seven Translators. It is the work of the English 
 Church in the period of the greatest revival of prim- 
 itive Christianity. The sacred memories of three 
 generations of martyrs and confessors are treasured 
 up in its pages. Tyndale, who devoted his life to 
 the single task of Anglicizing the Word of God, 
 and was strangled and burned for it at Yilvorde ; 
 Rogers, who, like him, left the world in a chariot of 
 fire as the protomartyr of the bloody reign of Mary ; 
 Coverdale, who a fortnight later escaped the same 
 fate by flight to Denmark; Cranmer, who, after ^ve 
 humiliating recantations, triumphed over his weak- 
 ness and sealed his faith at the stake in Oxford ; 
 the Marian confessors, who found a hospitable ref- 
 uge in the city of Calvin and Beza; the leaders in 
 the Elizabethan restoration of the Reformation, and 
 their learned and pious successors in the following 
 reign — all speak to us through the English Bible, to 
 which they have contributed their share of devout 
 labor. No version has such a halo of glory around 
 it, none is the child of so many prayers, none has 
 passed through severer trials, none is so deeply root- 
 ed in the affections of the people that use it, and 
 none has exerted so great an influence upon the 
 progress of the Christian religion and true civiliza- 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 345 
 
 tion at home and abroad. It is interwoven with all 
 that is most precious in the history and literature 
 of two mighty nations which have sprung from the 
 Saxon stock. It is used day by day and hour by 
 hour in five continents, and carries to every mission 
 station in heathen lands the unspeakable blessings 
 of the gospel of peace. 
 
 NOTES. 
 
 The beauty of the English style of the Authorized Version is well- 
 nigh unanimously conceded by competent scholars, though not without 
 some qualifications. The following judgments represent different schools 
 of thought : 
 
 Henry Hallam : " The style of this translation is in general so en- 
 thusiastically praised, that no one is permitted either to qualify or even 
 explain the grounds of his approbation. It is held to be the perfection 
 of our English language. I shall not dispute this proposition ; but one 
 remark as to a matter of fact cannot reasonably be censured, that, in con- 
 sequence of the principle of adherence to the original versions which had 
 been kept up ever since the time of Henry VIIL, it is not the language 
 of the reign of James I. It may, in the ej'es of many, be a better English, 
 but it is not the English of Daniel or Raleigh or Bacon, as any one may 
 easily perceive. It abounds, in fact, especially in the Old Testament, with 
 obsolete phraseology, and with single words long since abandoned, or 
 retained only in provincial use. On the more important question, whether 
 this translation is entirely, or with very trifling exceptions, conformable 
 to the original text, it seems unfit to enter" {Introduction to the Literature 
 of Europe, etc., vol. ii. 445, New York edition, 1880). 
 
 George P. Marsh calls the Authorized Version "an anthology of all 
 the beauties developed in the language during its whole historical exist- 
 ence " {Lectures on the English Language, p. 630, New York, 1860). 
 
 Archbishop Trench has a special chapter on the English of the 
 Authorized Version (ch. iii.), and praises its vocabulary, which he deems 
 to be " nearl}' as perfect as possible," but finds " frequent flaws and faults " 
 in its grammar. " In respect to words," he says, " we everywhere reco;^- 
 nize in it that true delectus verborum on which Cicero insists so earnestly, 
 and in which so much of the charm of style consists. All the words used 
 are of the noblest stamp, alike removed from vulgarity and pedantry ; 
 
346 THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 
 
 they are neither too familiar, nor, on the other side, not familiar enough; 
 they never crawl on the ground, as little are they stilted and far-fetched. 
 And then how happily mixed and tempered are the Anglo-Saxon and 
 Latin vocables ! No undue preponderance of the latter makes the language 
 remote from the understanding of simple and unlearned men." 
 
 F. William Faber. This glowing hymnist, who passed from Oxford 
 Tractarianism to the Church of Rome, felt keenly that he had gained 
 nothing by the change as far as the English Bible was concerned, and 
 pronounced a most eloquent eulogy on the Authorized Version, which 
 is all the more forcible as coming from an opponent. It first appeared in 
 1853, in his essay on The Interest and Characteristics of the Lives of the 
 Saints, p. 116 (prefixed to a Life of St. Francis of Assisi, which forms 
 vol. XXV. of the Oratory series of the Lives of Modem Saints), then in the 
 " Dublin Review " for June, 1853, p. 466, and has often been quoted since, 
 sometimes under the name of John H. Newman. It is as follows : 
 
 " Who will sslj that the uncommon beauty and marvellous English of 
 the Protestant Bible is not one of the great strongholds of heresy in this 
 country? It lives on the ear like a music that can never be forgotten, 
 like the sound of church bells, which the convert hardly knows how he 
 car forego. Its felicities often seem to be almost things rather than mere 
 words. It is part of the national mind, and the anchor of national serious- 
 ness. Nay, it is worshipped with a positive idolatry, in extenuation of 
 whose grotesque fanaticism its intrinsic beauty pleads availingly with 
 the man of letters and the scholar. The memory of the dead passes info 
 it. The potent traditions of childhood are stereotyped in its verses. 
 The power of all the griefs and trials of a man is hidden beneath its 
 words. It is the representative of his best moments, and all that there 
 has been about him of soft, and gentle, and pure, and penitent, and good, 
 speaks to him forever out of his English Bible. It is his sacred thing, 
 which doubt has never dimmed, and controversy never soiled. It has 
 been to him all along as the silent, but oh, how intelligible voice of his 
 guardian angel, and in the length and breadth of the land there i3 not a 
 Protestant, with one spark of religiousness about him, whose spiritual 
 biography is not in his Saxon Bible. And all this is an unhallowed 
 power !" (How lame and inconsistent such an objection, which is suffi- 
 ciently refuted by the preceding praise. For if the Protestant translators 
 produced such a marvellous work, they must have been in full sympathy 
 with the Bible and its divine Source ; and where the Bible is, there is the 
 truth.) 
 
 Dr. Eadie (ii. 226) : " The English style is above all praise. . . . While 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 347 
 
 it has the fahiess of the Bishops' without its frequent literalism or its 
 repeated supplements, it has the graceful vigor of the Genevan, the quiet 
 grandeur of the Great Bible, the clearness of Tyndale, the harmonies of 
 Coverdale, and the stately theological vocabulary of the Rheims." 
 
 John Stoughton : " As a specimen of English style this Bible has 
 received enthusiastic praise ; and here, perhaps, admiration for its sacred 
 contents, and the delightful associations with its very phraseology which 
 piety and devotion cannot fail to form, may warp our judgment on the 
 question of its literary merits; yet, after all that can be said against it in 
 this point of view (and that it has literary defects as well as excellences 
 it were uncandid to deny), we must surely be struck with the fact that 
 while our Bible possesses numberless specimens of English diction, full 
 of rhythm, beauty, and grandeur, there are to be found in it so few words 
 and modes of expression which the lapse of between two and three cen- 
 turies has rendered obsolete or dubious " (jOur English Bible, p. 252 sq.). 
 
 The number of words in the Authorized Version, either obsolete or 
 changed in sense, is variously estimated, but seems to exceed two hundred 
 and fifty. This is less in proportion than the corresponding number of 
 obsolete words in Shakespeare, Bacon, and Milton. Booker, in his 
 Scripture and Prayer-book Glossai-y (as quoted by George P. ISIarsh, 
 Ledwes on the English Language, p. 630, note), states the number of such 
 words in the Authorized Version, including the Apocrypha, to be three 
 hundred and eighty-eight. Of these, more than one hundred belong to 
 the Apocrypha and the Prayer-book. According to Marsh (p. 264), more 
 than five or six hundred words of Shakespeare's vocabulary of fifteen 
 thousand words, and about one hundred of Milton's vocabulary of eight 
 thousand, have gone out of use. The Authorized Version inherited a 
 number of obsolete or obsolescent words from previous versions. It 
 represents not the language of 1611 in its integrity, but the collective 
 language of the three preceding generations. 
 
 DEFECTS OF THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 
 
 No perfect work can be expected from imperfect 
 men. The translators made the best use of the 
 materials at their disposal, as well as their knowl- 
 edge of biblical philology and exegesis, and they 
 were in the main led by sound principles; but tlieir 
 materials wejre scanty, their knowledge limited, an4 
 
348 THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 
 
 among their principles was one which is now uni- 
 versally rejected as vicious. Hence, wliile actual 
 and serious mistranslations are comparatively few, 
 and these mostly derived from the Latin Yulgate, 
 the minor errors and inaccuracies are innumerable. 
 Tested by the standard of general faithfulness, idio- 
 matic style, and practical usefulness, the Authorized 
 Version is admirable ; but tested by the standard of 
 modern scholarship it is exceedingly defective, and 
 imperatively calls for a revision. 
 
 1. As regards the material for the texty the trans- 
 lators used no documentary sources as far as is 
 known, and were confined to a ie^ printed editions 
 of the Greek Testament, which present a text de- 
 rived from comparatively late cursive MSS. of the 
 fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. They relied 
 chiefly on the text of Beza (fourth or fifth edition, 
 1598), from which they departed only in about one 
 hundred and ninety places, and these departures are 
 nearly all unimportant.* 
 
 The science of textual criticism was not yet born 
 in the seventeenth century, because the material was 
 not yet discovered or accessible. Of the oldest uncial 
 manuscripts only two — the Codex Bezse for the Gos- 
 pels and Acts, and the Codex Claromontanus for the 
 
 ' See above, pp. 239, 283 ; the detailed statement of Dr. Abbot in SchafPs 
 Introduction to the Revision Essays, p. xxix. ; and Scrivener's New Testa- 
 ment in Greek, pp. 648-656. According to Dr. Abbot's investigations, the 
 Authorized Version agrees with Beza's text (fourth edition) against that 
 of Stepliens in about ninety places, with Stephens against Beza in about 
 forty, and differs from both in thirty or forty places, where the variations 
 i^e mostlpr trivial.. 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VEESION. 349 
 
 Epistles — were known, and even they were scarcely 
 used by Beza, who came into possession of them. 
 The Alexandrian MS. (A) did not reach England 
 till seventeen years after the publication of the 
 Authorized Version ; and the still older and more 
 important Codex of Ephrsem, the Vatican, and the 
 Sinaitic were entirely unknown, having come to 
 light or been made properly available only in the 
 nineteenth century. As to ancient versions, the 
 translators were, of course, very familiar with Je- 
 rome's Vulgate, which they used as much as the 
 original Hebrew and Greek (often copying its er- 
 rors).* They were also acquainted to some extent 
 with the Peshito, first published in 1555 (and with 
 its Latin version by Tremellius, which appeared in 
 1569), not to speak of many modern versions which 
 have no textual authority. But no critical edition 
 of the ancient versions existed before Walton's Lon- 
 don Polyglot (1657), and even this left a great deal 
 of work for future discoveries and researches. The 
 ancient fathers were known, but their critical exam- 
 ination for textual purposes did not begin till the 
 
 ' The Translators' Preface makes very honorable mention of Jerome : 
 "They [the old Latin Versions] were not out of the Hebrew fountain (we 
 speak of the Latin translations of the Old Testament), but out of the 
 Greek stream ; therefore, the Greek being not altogether clear, the Latin 
 derived from it must needs be muddy. This moved S. Hierome, a most 
 learned Father, and the best linguist, without controversy, of his age or of 
 any that went before him, to undertake the translating of the Old Testa- 
 ment out of the very fountains themselves ; which he performed with that 
 evidence of great learning, judgment, industry, and faithfulness, that he 
 hath forever bound the Church unto him in a debt of special remembrance 
 apd thankfulness/' 
 
350 THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 
 
 time of Mill (1707), whose labors were carried on 
 much further by Wetstein, Griesbach, and the mod- 
 ern editors. 
 
 With such a defective apparatus we need not be 
 surprised at the large number of false readings and 
 .interpolations which obscure or mar the beauty and 
 weaken the force of the primitive text.^ 
 
 2. The Greek and Hebrew learning of the trans- 
 lators was suflScient to enable them to read the oris:- 
 inal Scriptures with ease ; while with the Latin 
 Yulgate they were probably more familiar than 
 with the earlier English versions. But the more 
 delicate shades of the Greek and Hebrew syntax 
 were unknown in their age, and the grammars, dic- 
 tionaries, and concordances very imperfect. Hence 
 the innumerable arbitrary and capricious violations 
 of the article, tenses, prepositions, and little particles. 
 The impression often forces itself upon the student 
 that they translated from the Latin Yulgate, where 
 there is no article and no aorist, rather than from 
 the Hebrew and Greek. Their inaccuracy increases 
 in proportion as the Greek departs from the Latin. 
 And yet the English (at least the Saxon-English) has 
 greater affinity with the Greek than with the Latin. 
 
 {a) The article. — The mass of English readers 
 will hardly notice the difference between a virgin 
 and the virgin, a mountain and the mountain, a feast 
 
 ' For a convenient comparison of the authorized and critical texts, see 
 C. E. Stuart : Textual Criticism of the New Testament for English Bible 
 Students; being a succinct comparison of the Authorized Version with the 
 Critical Texts of Griesbach, Scholz, Lachmann, Tischendorf Tregelles, A l- 
 ford^ and the Uncial MSS, Second edition, London (Bagster & Sons), n, d. 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 351 
 
 and the feast, a falling away and the falling away, 
 « confession and the confession, (Z light and ^Ae light, 
 a crown and the crown ; the Son of God and a Son 
 of God, the woman and a woman, the root of all evil 
 and a root. But the careful student, looking into 
 his Greek Testament, or comparing the Autliorized 
 Version with the Revised Version, will feel at once 
 the force of the presence or absence of the definite 
 article, and the unaccountable carelessness with which 
 it is now omitted, now inserted, by the translators. 
 As a rule, the definite article in all languages indi- 
 cates, as Winer says, " that the object is conceived 
 as definite, either from its nature, or from the con- 
 text, or by reference to a circle of ideas which is 
 assumed to be familiar to the reader's mind." 
 
 A few examples will illustrate the difference. 
 " The Christ " is an oflScial title, meaning the prom- 
 ised and expected Messiah (the Anointed), and is so 
 used generally in the Gospels; while "Christ," with 
 or without "Jesus," is a proper name of our Saviour, 
 as very often in the Epistles. Thus, Herod asked 
 where ''Hhe Christ" should be born (Matt. ii. 4), and 
 John wrote his Gospel that his readers might be- 
 lieve that "Jesus is the Christ" (John xx. 31, where 
 the English Version correctly gives the article); 
 while Paul calls himself a servant or apostle of 
 " Jesus Christ " (Rom. i. 1, 3 ; Gal. i. 1, etc.). " A 
 law " is a rule or principle, natural or revealed ; while 
 " the law" is the written law of Moses. " 2>^ many " 
 (ot TToXXof) is used by Paul in Rom. v. repeatedly in 
 the sense of "all," as distinct from "the one" (6 Jc, 
 Adam or Christ) ; while " many," in the Authorized 
 
352 THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 
 
 Version, conveys the wrong idea of a limitation, or 
 of a large number simply, as distinct from a " few." 
 The love of money is " a root of all kinds of evil," 
 but not "^A^" only root (1 Tim. vi. 10); pride (as 
 in the case of Satan) is also a root of all evil. 
 
 Compare as examples of omissions of the definite 
 article where the sense is weakened or changed : 
 Matt. i. 23 ; iv. 5 ; v. 1, 15 ; vii. 25 ; viii. 23 ; ix. 11 ; 
 xii. 41 ; xiii. 42 ; xix. 14; xxiii. 24 ; xxiv. 12 ; Mark 
 iv. 21; Luke vii. 5; viii. 6, 7; xvii. 17; xviii. 11,15; 
 John iii. 10 ; vi. 4 ; xii. 36, 46 ; xviii. 3, 5, 15 ; Acts 
 i. 13, 17 ; iv. 12 ; Kom. v. 2, 9, 15, 17, 19 (ot ttoAXoO ; 
 ICor. V. 9; vii. 17; ix. 5; 2Cor. vii. 8: x.9; Col. i. 
 19; 2Thess.ii.3; 1 Tim. vi. 12, 13; 2 Tim. iv. 7, 8; 
 Heb. xi. 10 ; Eev. vii. 14. 
 
 Examples of wrong insertion of the definite arri- 
 cle, giving emphasis to a noun which the writer did 
 not intend: Matt. i. 20 ("^^6? Angel" for "an angel"); 
 ix. 13 (and the parallel passages, ZiKaiovQ)\ xxvi. 74; 
 xxvii. 54; John iv. 27 Qii.ra yuvaticoc, the wonder of 
 the disciples was that Christ should, contrary to 
 Kabbinical custom, converse not with that particu- 
 lar woman of Samaria, but with a woman or any 
 woman) ; xvii. 19 ; Acts xxvi. 2 ; Rom. ii. 14 i^i^vr\. 
 Gentiles, some, not all) ; 1 Thess. iv. 17 ; 1 Tim. vi. 
 10 ; Eev. xx. 12. 
 
 There are, of course, idiomatic uses of the Greek 
 article which are not admissible in English — e. g.^ 
 where the article is generic, as 17 afiapTia and 6 ^ava- 
 TOQy " sin " and " death," as a principle or power, in 
 Rom. V. 12. Here the English idiom requires the 
 absence (the German, like the Greek, the presence) 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VERSIOK. 353 
 
 of the definite article. Matt. vii. 6 belongs to the 
 same category, although the English Hevision re- 
 tains the article {^^HJie dogs" and ^Hhe swine"). In 
 connection with proper names the Greek admits of 
 the definite article when the person is known, or 
 has been previously mentioned (as o ^\r\aovqy 6 Ilau- 
 Xoc) ; while the English and German require the 
 omission. In Greek, countries (and cities) have the 
 article (11 Vakaria^ 77 'IraXt'a), but not in English, except 
 when the place is qualified by an adjective {e.g.^ "the 
 New Jerusalem "). Names of rivers have always the 
 article in Greek and in English ; but the Authorized 
 Version makes an exception with the Jordan, which 
 occurs always without the article. The English Re- 
 visers have corrected this inconsistency, but retained 
 it in the compound phrases " beyond Jordan," 
 "round about Jordan." 
 
 (J) The verb. — The Greek language is unusually 
 rich in verbal forms, having three voices (Active, 
 Passive, and Middle), five modes (Indicative, Conjunc- 
 tive, Optative, Imperative, Infinitive ; the Participle 
 being a verbal adjective), and seven tenses (Present, 
 Future, Future perfect, Aorist, Imperfect, Perfect, 
 and Pluperfect). The tenses are carried also into par- 
 ticipial forms. The English has no Middle voice, no 
 Optative mode, and only five tenses ; but the Middle 
 voice can be rendered by adding the personal pro- 
 noun, the Optative mode by may or mighty and the 
 Imperfect tense by the aid of the auxiliary verb. 
 Absolute accuracy is impossible; and no modern 
 version can ever supersede the study of the Greek 
 Testament. Not unfrequently euphony and rhythm 
 
354 tHfi AUTHORIZED VfiJlSlOf^f. 
 
 require the English Perfect for the Greek Aorist. 
 Yet we should conform to the Greek as far as Eng- 
 lish usage and rhetoric will permit. 
 
 Considering that the writers of the New Testa- 
 ment, with the single exception of Luke, were Jews, 
 and brought up in the Hebrew or Aramaic tongue, 
 which is very poor in verbal forms, their precision 
 in the use of the Greek tenses, especially the dis- 
 tinction between the Aorist and Imperfect, is very 
 remarkable. The Greek has, it is well known, four 
 tenses to express the past time — namely, (1) the 
 Aorist^ or narrative tense, which expresses a mo- 
 mentary and completed act or event ; (2) the /m- 
 jperfect^ a descriptive and relative tense, denoting 
 an action which is either contemporaneous, or con- 
 tinuous, or incomplete, or attempted ; (3) the Perfect^ 
 which combines the past with the present, and ex- 
 presses an act or event which continues in its effect ; 
 (4) the Pluperfect, which is relative, like the imper- 
 fect, but refei's to subordinate actions or events as 
 having already passed before the principal action. 
 In English the difference can be easily reproduced : 
 the Aorist is best rendered by the simple Past or 
 Preterite (/ went, 1 wrote), the Perfect by the Per- 
 fect (/ have gone, I have written), the Imperfect by 
 the use of the auxiliary verb (/ was going, I was 
 writing), the Pluperfect by the Pluperfect (/ had 
 gone, I had written). 
 
 Justice requires that this distinction should be re- 
 produced at least in all cases where the sense is affect- 
 
 ' Aorist, i. e., indefinite, is properly a misnomer, unless it signifies the 
 indefinite relation of this tense to the other tenses. 
 
TllK AtJTHOfilZED VEESlOJf. 355 
 
 ed. But the translators of King James were eitlier 
 ignorant or careless of these distinctions, for they 
 indiscriminately confound the tenses in every chap- 
 ter. We give some illustrations. 
 
 The Greek Present is often misrendered by the 
 English Perfect, e. g., Matt. xxv. 8, at Xaiunra^Eg riiiGiv 
 a^evvvvrai, " our lamps are going out^^ not " are gone 
 out;" 2 Cor. iv. 3, Iv rolq cnroXXv/uLevoig, "in those 
 who are perishing ^^'^ not "are lost." 
 
 The Present nn'stranslated by the simple Past: 
 Heb. ii. 16, liriXafx^aviTai, " he takes hold," not "took 
 on him ;" Kev. xii. 2, Kpat^ei, " she cries," not "cried." 
 So often in the Gospel of Mark, who is fond of the 
 present tense to give vivacity to his narrative. 
 
 The Perfect misrendered by the Present: Matt. 
 V. 10, ^t^itjyfiivoi, " they that have been persecuted," 
 not " are persecuted ;" Gal. ii. 20, GvvtaTavpu)iiai, " I 
 have heen crucified with Christ," not " I am crucH- 
 fied." 
 
 The Aorist misrendered by the Present : Matt. xv. 
 24, aTTctrraXTjv, " I was sent," not " I am sent;" 1 Cor. 
 xii. 13, t(5a7rTi(T^Y}iuiev, " we were baptized," not " are 
 baptized;" Rom. vi. 2, oinvsg ain^avoiuLev ry afiapTia, 
 "we who died to sin" (at our conversion and bap- 
 tism), not " are dead ;" so also ver. 7 and 8 ; Gal. ii. 
 19, ka vo/uiov vo/i(ti inre^avov, " through the law I 
 died to the law," not " am dead ;" so also Col. ii. 20 ; 
 iii. 1, 3. The Authorized Version substitutes the 
 state of death for the act of dying. 
 
 The Perfect mistaken for the Aorist: John vi. 65, 
 Hpi}Ka, " I have said,^^ not " said." 
 
 The Aorist misrendered by the Perfect : Matt. ii. 
 
356 THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 
 
 2, a^o/i£v, " we saw^^'^ not " have seen ;" Luke vii. 6, 
 (j»fco^o/i»jo-fv, " he huilt us our synagogue," not " he 
 hath built ;" John i. 16, IXa^oji^v, " we received^'' not 
 " have received ;" iii. 33, ttr^joayttrev, " he sealed ;" 
 ver. 34, aTrtartfAfv, " he sent ;" viii. 52, aTrk^avi, " he 
 died;" Eom. ii. 12; iii. 23; v. 12, rnuaprov, "they 
 sinnedy^^ not " have sinned ;" vii. 6, airo^avovTeg, 
 " having died," not " being dead ;" 2 Cor. v. 14, tTg 
 VTTip 7ravT(i)v aire^avev, apa ot Travreg airt^avov, "one 
 died for all, therefore all died," not "then were all 
 dead." In the sacerdotal prayer there are several 
 emphatic aorists which are exchanged for the per- 
 fect in the Authorized Version, but are restored in 
 the Revised Version, John xvii. 4, 6, 12, 18, 23, 25, 26. 
 
 The Imperfect misrendered by the simple Past : 
 Luke i. 59, iKaXow, " they were calling,^^ not " called ;" 
 V. 6, ^lepriaaiTO ra ^iKTva avTwv, " their nets were 
 breaking,''^ not " brake ;" viii. 23, awiTrXripovvTo, 
 " they were Jilling with water," for " they were 
 filled ;" xviii. 3, ri/oxtro, " she kept coming^'' or " she 
 came oft^'^ to the unjust judge, for "she came;" 
 ver. 13, cruTrrs to aty\^oq avTov, " he kept smiting his 
 breast," for " smote " (retained in the Revised Ver- 
 sion) ; John vi. 17, ripxovTo, " they were going,'^^ for 
 "they went;" Gal. i. 13, irrop^ow, "' I was destroy- 
 ing^^ (attempted to destroy), not "destroyed" or 
 " wasted ;" so also ver. 23. 
 
 (c) The prepositions are often confounded or mis- 
 translated. Thus iv is indiscriminately rendered 
 "in," "within," "among," "through," "with," 
 " by," " at," " under," " into," " unto," " toward," 
 etc. ; and often mistaken in the instrumental (He- 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 357 
 
 braistic) sense, " by," "through," where it signifies 
 the life-element, the vital union with Christ, " in " 
 (as Eom. vi. 11, iv Xpi(TTt[i ^lri<j, ; xiv. 14, iv Kvpit^ 'Irj- 
 o-ou ; XV. 17 ; 1 Cor. xii. 3, 9, 13) ; while in other pas- 
 sages it is correctly rendered (as Rom. viii. 1,2; ix. 1 ; 
 xii. 5, etc.). Elg is variously translated " into," " to," 
 " unto," " toward," " upon," " among," " through- 
 out," "by," "with," "against," "till," "until." 
 Both prepositions, the one expressing rest in, the 
 other motion into, are sometimes confounded, as in 
 Luke ii. 14, " towards men" for "among men" {iv 
 av^ptjiroig), and vice versa, as in the baptismal for- 
 mula. Matt, xxviii. 19, " in the name," instead of 
 "into" {elg TO ovofjia) ; Luke xvi. 8 ; xxiii. 42. The 
 omission of the preposition in 2 Pet. i. 5-7 (tv ry 
 irictrei — ev ry yvtJGu), turns the organic development 
 of the Christian graces and their causal dependence 
 one upon another into a mechanical accumulation. 
 In 1 Pet. ii. 12 and iii. 16, tv (J is rendered " where- 
 as," instead of " wherein." Rom. xi. 2, we have 
 "of Elias," instead of "in (the history of) Elijah" 
 (f y 'HX/ci). The instrumental ^la with the Genitive, 
 " through," and the causal ^la with the Accusative, 
 "because of" or "on account of," are likewise con- 
 founded — e. g., Gal. iv. 13 (2t' aa^ivuav, the infirmity 
 of the flesh being the cause of Paul's detention and 
 preaching in Galatia, not his condition during his 
 preaching); compare also John vi. 57; Rom. iii. 25 
 (Sta rryv irapetriv, because of the pretermission or 
 passing by) ; 1 Cor. vii. 5. The distinction between 
 ciTTo, " away from " (=ah), k, "out of," vtto, "from 
 under," " by," napa, " from beside," is often disre- 
 
3S8 THE AUTHORIZED VEKSlOif. 
 
 garded. The same is true of the difference between 
 viroy which signifies the remote agency or source, 
 and dia, which designates the instrumental agency 
 or channel, as in quotations from the Old Testa- 
 ment, which are always traced b}^ the evangelists 
 and apostles to God or the Holy Spirit through 
 Moses and the prophets — e. g., Matt. i. 22 {to pri^lv 
 vTTo Tov Kvpiov 3m Tov 7rpo(j>r)Tov)', ii. 5, 17, 23; iii. 3; 
 iv. 14, etc. In 2 Cor. v. 20, virlp Xpicrrov, '' in behalf 
 of Christ," is falsely rendered "in Christ's stead" 
 (as if it were avTi). 
 
 (d) The same inaccuracy meets us in the render- 
 ing of pronouns, conjunctions, and adverbs. " But " 
 is used indiscriminately for aWa, yap, ^av, fl pri, 
 iKTo^, ri, pivToi, lav pi), povov, ovv, ttAtjv. The con- 
 nective ^i (and and hut) is rendered indifferently by 
 " and," " now," " but," " then," " nevertheless," 
 " moreover," " notwithstanding," or dropped alto- 
 gether. In Gal. ii. 20, the Greek ^w ^l ovketi lyu) 
 requires the rendering: "It is no longer I that live, 
 but Christ liveth in me ;" but the Authorized Ver- 
 sion reads : " Nevertheless I live ; yet not I, but 
 Christ liveth in me." In Paul's Epistles the whole 
 argument sometimes turns on the proper distinction 
 between the logical and illative apa, apa ovv (so then), 
 the adversative aWa (but), and the simple continua- 
 tive or retrospective ovv (then). The last is John's 
 favorite narrative particle, and denotes the natural 
 or providential sequence of events; but the English 
 Version indiscriminately uses for it " and," " and 
 80," "then," "so then," "so," "now then," "there- 
 fore," " wherefore," " truly," " verily," " but." Eu- 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 359 
 
 ^iwg, which is Mark's favorite adverb, and well 
 expresses the rapidity of his motion, is variously 
 rendered " straightway," " immediately," " forth- 
 with," " as soon as," "anon," " by and by," " shortly." 
 
 {e) Not only has biblical philology made enormous 
 progress, and been carried almost to a state of per- 
 fection in the nineteenth century, all other depart- 
 ments of biblical learning — geography, natural his- 
 tory, archaeology, critical introduction, and exegesis 
 proper — have advanced in proportion, and shed new 
 light on many a passage which could but obscurely 
 be rendered in the seventeenth century. 
 
 3. King James's translators adopted and professed 
 the false principle of variation^ by which a large 
 number of artificial distinctions are introduced. 
 The first and last duty of a translator is faithfully 
 and idiomatically to reproduce the original, especial- 
 ly in dealing with the Word of God. Moreover, 
 the Greek language is rich enough to give ample 
 margin for every style of composition. Many of 
 the useless or misleading variations of the Author- 
 ized Version no doubt arose from the separation of 
 the translators into half a dozen separate companies. 
 The final revising committee failed to harmonize 
 them, and attempted to justify the result in the 
 Preface, without saying a word about their error in 
 the opposite direction.' 
 
 - ' " Another thing," says Dr. Smith, towards the close, " we think good 
 to admonish thee of, gentle Reader, that we have not tied ourselves to an 
 uniformity of phrasing, or to an identity of words, as some peradventure 
 would wish that we had done, because they observe that some learned 
 men somewhere have been as exact as they could that way. Truly, that 
 
360 THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 
 
 Within proper limits variation is justifiable. We 
 do not advocate a mechanical uniformity of render- 
 
 we might not vary from the sense of that which we had translated before, 
 if the word signified the same thing in both places (for there be some 
 words that be not of the same sense everywhere), we were especially care- 
 ful, and made a conscience according to our duty. But that we should 
 express the same notion in the same particular word — as, for example, if 
 we translate the Hebrew or Greek word once by purpose, never to call it 
 intent; if one yfhere journeying, never travelling ; if one where think, never 
 suppose; if one where jamw, never ache; if one where joy, never gladness, 
 etc. — thus to mince the matter, we thought to savour more of curiosity 
 than wisdom, and that rather it would breed scorn in the atheist, than 
 bring profit to the godly reader. For is the kingdom of God become 
 words or syllables? Why should we be in bondage to them if we may 
 be free? use one precisely when we may use another no less fit, as coni- 
 modiously ? A godly Father in the primitive time shewed himself greatly 
 moved, that one of newfangleness called Kpa^fiarov aKifiTrovg, though 
 the diflference be little or none ; and another reporteth that he was much 
 abused for turning cucurhita (to which reading the people had been used) 
 into hedera. Now, if this happen in better times, and upon so small occa- 
 sions, we might justly fear hard censure, if generally we should make 
 verbal and unnecessary changings. We might also be charged (by scoff- 
 ers) with some unequal dealing towards a great number of good English 
 words. For as it is written of a certain great philosopher, that he should 
 say, that those logs were happy that were made images to be worshipped ; 
 for their fellows, as good as they, lay for blocks behind the fire ; so if we 
 should say, as it were, unto certain words. Stand up higher, have a place 
 in the Bible always, and to others of like quality, Get ye hence, be ban- 
 ished for ever, we might be taxed peradventure with St. James his words 
 — namely, To he partial in ourselves, and judges of evil thoughts. Add here- 
 unto, that niceness in words was always counted the next step to trifling, 
 and so was to be curious about names too: also that we cannot follow a 
 better pattern for elocution than God himself; therefore he, using divers 
 words in his holy writ, and indifferently for one thing in nature, we, if we 
 will not be superstitious, may use the same liberty in our English versions 
 out of Hebrew and Greek, for that copy or store that he hath given us. 
 Lastly, we have on one side avoided the scrupulosity of the Puritans, who 
 leave the old ecclesiastical words and betake them to other, as when they 
 put washing for Baptisme, and Congregation instead of Church , as also oo 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 361 
 
 ing, but would allow considerable freedom in the use 
 of the cosmopolitan wealth of the English language, 
 especially of synonyms, in which it abounds. Where 
 we have a Latin and a Saxon term for the same idea, 
 we may alternate as rhetoric and rhythm suggest — 
 e, g.^ between " act " and '' deed," *' chief " and 
 "head," "justice" and "righteousness," "liberty" 
 and " freedom," " power " and " might," " remis- 
 sion" and "forgiveness," "celestial" and "heaven- 
 ly," " mature " and " ripe," " omnipotent " and 
 " almighty," " priestly " and " sacerdotal," " royal " 
 and "kingly," " terrestrial" and "earthly" — though 
 even in these examples usage has established slight 
 shades of difference. 
 
 But the Authorized Version varies simply for the 
 sake of variation in a great many cases where faith- 
 fulness to the original absolutely requires the same 
 word. Thus mwvioq is rendered "eternal" and 
 "everlasting" in one and the same verse (Matt. xxv. 
 46) ; liriaKOTTOQ is " bishop " in Phil. i. 1 and the 
 Pastoral Epistles, but " overseer " in Acts xx. 28, 
 where it designates the same office, and proves the 
 identity with that of presbyter or elder (comp. ver. 
 
 the other side we have shunned the obscurit}' of the Papists, in their 
 A zymes, Tunike, Rational, Holocausts, Picepuce, Pasche, and a number of 
 Buch like, whereof their late translation is full, and that of purpose to darken 
 the sense, that since they must needs translate the Bible, yet by the lan- 
 guage thereof, it may be kept from being understood. But we desire that 
 the Scripture may speak like itself, as in the language of Canaan, that it 
 may be understood even of the very vulgar." 
 
 The thrust at the " Puritans " and the ". Papists " is ungenerous and 
 unjust ; for the Puritan Reynolds was the prime mover of the Authorized 
 Version, and the RUeiojs Version was of great use to the translators. 
 
 25 
 
362 THE AUTIIOKIZED VERSION. 
 
 17) ; TTcicTxa is correctly translated " Passover," but 
 in Acts xii. 4 " Easter " (which did not exist in the 
 apostolic age); KaraWayri is now "atonement" 
 (Rom. V. 11), now " reconciling" (xi. 15), now " rec- 
 onciliation " (2 Cor. V. 18, 19) ; irapaKXrtTOQ, when 
 used of the Holy Spirit, is " comforter " (John xiv. 
 16, 26 ; XV. 26 ; xvi. 7), but when used of Christ, 
 " advocate " (1 John ii. 1) ; "EXXijv is now " Greek," 
 now "Gentile;" airoKoXv^ig is "revelation," "man- 
 ifestation," "coming," and "appearing;" ^povog is 
 " throne " and " seat :" irpoGKonna is " offence," 
 "stumbling," "stumbling-block," and "stumbling- 
 stone." Aoyoc has no less than twenty-three ren- 
 derings in the English Version, tvttoq eight, o^oq 
 six, iraL^iGKri five, ttoXcjuoc three, Xi"^*" nine, -^vxri 
 four, Karapyiu) seventeen, julvw ten, irapioTrini six- 
 teen, (^ipu) sixteen. 
 
 The principle of variation, with its inevitable con- 
 fusions, is carried even into proper names of persons, 
 countries, and places. Thus — if we inchide the 
 Old Testament — we have Agar and Hagar, Elijah 
 and Elias, Elisha and Eliseus, Gedeon and Gideon, 
 Isaiah, Esaias, and Esay, Jeremiah, Jeremias, and 
 Jeremy, Hosea and Osee, Jonah and Jonas, Judas, 
 Judah, and Jude, Korah and Core, Noah and Noe, 
 Zechariah and Zacharias. Jesus is substituted for 
 Joshua in Acts vii. 45 and Heb. iv. 8. Sometimes 
 the Latin or Greek, sometimes the English, termi- 
 nation is used ; so that we have for one and the 
 same person both Marcus and Mark, Lucas and 
 Luke, Judas and Jude, Timotheus and Timothy. 
 As to countries and places, the English Version 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VERSIOl^'. 363 
 
 varies between Grecia and Greece, Judea and Jewry, 
 Tj^rus and Tyre, Sodom and Sodoma. 
 
 4. On the other hand, the Authorized Version 
 fails in the opposite direction, and obscures or de- 
 stroys imjportant distinctions by using one and the 
 same word for two or more Greek and Hebrew 
 words which convey different meanings. 
 
 Thus the words " Hades " (^. 6., the spirit-world) 
 and "Gehenna" (the place of the lost) are both 
 translated by "hell," which occurs twice as often 
 in the English New Testament as it ought. Every 
 little " demon " (8a/juwv, ^aiixoviov) or evil spirit is 
 raised to the dignity of a " devil," although there is 
 but one SeajSoXoc. In like manner the difference 
 between " the living creatures" worshipping before 
 the throne of God and " the beasts " from the abyss 
 warring against Christ (the ^wa and ^r\pia of the 
 Apocalypse, both rendered " beasts " ), between a 
 "crown" and a "diadem" {oTi^avog and ^La^r]ixa\ 
 "servants" and "bondmen" {^iukovol and SouXot, in 
 the parable Matt. xxii. 1-14, where the former are 
 angels, the latter men) is obliterated. The word 
 " child " is used for no less than seven Greek words 
 ()3/o£^oc, babe, vtittioq, infant, 7ratc> boy, slave, irai^iov, 
 little child, rrai^apiov, little boy, reKvov, child, viog, 
 son), " conversation " for three {avacTTpofj)!}, rpoirog, 
 TToXiTfiUjua), " world " for two {Koafxog and aidjv, age), 
 "Godhead" for three (^BioTr^g, to ^hov, S-corrjc), 
 " people" for four (Xaoc, ^v/uloq, i^vog, oxXoc), " tem- 
 ple " for three {vaog, ispov, oIkoc), " light " for six 
 (^oic, (jttyyog, \v\vog, Xafiirag, (jtuxTrrip, (^(jjTiafiog)^ 
 "repeut" for two yerb§ (^trovolw, to change op§'§ 
 
364 THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 
 
 mind, and fueTa/uLiXofiai, to regret, used of Judas, 
 Matt, xxvii. 3), " worship" for six (fuo-fjSfw, ^epairtvd), 
 Xarpevu), irpoaKvvtw, ai^aZ,OfJLai, ai^ofxai)^ " command" 
 for eight, ''declare" for fourteen, "desire" for thir- 
 teen, " depart " for twentj-one, '' finish " for seven, 
 ''mighty" for seven, "raiment" for five, "perceive" 
 for eleven, " receive " for eighteen, " servant " for 
 seven, "shame" for six, "take" for twenty-one, 
 "think" for twelve, "yet" for ten, "at" for eleven, 
 "by" for eleven, "even" for six, "even as" for 
 six, "afterward" for six, " wherefore" for twelve, 
 " therefore" for thirteen, " as" for twenty, " come" 
 for no less than thirty-two. We cannot plead the 
 poverty of the English language, which furnishes 
 equivalents for nearly all these varieties. The worst 
 effect of this carelessness is the obliteration of real 
 distinctions, some of them quite important and even 
 involving doctrine, and the obscuring of the idiosyn- 
 crasies of the sacred writers, every one of whom has 
 a style of his own, and has a claim to be correctly 
 represented by the translator. 
 
 PREPARATIONS FOR REVISION. 
 
 The defects of the English Bible became more 
 and more apparent as biblical scholarship progressed 
 in the nineteenth century. First, an older and purer 
 text was brought to light b}^ the discovery and pub- 
 lication of manuscripts, and the critical researches 
 and editions of Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, 
 Alford, Westcott and Hort. Secondly, the Greek 
 and Hebrew grammars and dictionaries of Winer, 
 PuttmanUj Cre^Qwius, Ewald, and the multiplying 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 365 
 
 pliilological commentaries of De Wette, Liicke, 
 Bleek, Meyer, Lange, Alford, Eadie, Ellicott, Light- 
 foot, and many others, furnished accurate render- 
 ings, some of them being accompanied with full 
 translations.^ 
 
 These textual, grammatical, and exegetical im- 
 provements greatly stimulated the zeal for new 
 translations of the whole Bible or the New Testa- 
 ment in all Protestant countries. Among German 
 versions we mention those of Joh. Fr. von Meyer, 
 Stier, De Wette, H. A. W. Meyer, Weizsacker, and 
 the official revision of Luther's Version {the Probe- 
 
 ' Canon Cook, the editor of The Speaker's Commentary (London, 10 
 vols., 1871-1882) claims for his contributors to have "anticipated, both 
 in conception and execution, the purpose of the Revisea f ersion now in 
 progress " (see Preface to the last volume, p. iv.). The resemblance is 
 natuially most striking in those parts which were prepared by members 
 of the Revision Committee (John, Hebrews, James, Revelation). The 
 forty contributors to the English edition of Lange's Commentary (New 
 York and Edinburgh, 1864-1881, 25 vols.) might set up the same claim, 
 without any reflection upon the Revisers, and furnish ample proof. 
 Dr. Riddle, a member of the American New Testament Company, and a 
 contributor to Lange s Commentary, after a careful comparison, arrived 
 at the conclusion that on an average more than one half (from fifty to 
 seventy-five per cent.) of the changes in the Revised New Testament were 
 anticipated in the English translation and adaptation of that Commen- 
 tary, which was nearly completed (in the New Testament part) before 
 the Revision began. The percentage increased as the Commentary went 
 on. In the Gospel of Matthew (published N. Y. 1864) it is about one 
 half; in the Gospel of John (published 1871) two thirds to three fourths; 
 in Romans (1869), Galatians, and Ephesians (1870), more than two thirds. 
 See Dr. Riddle's detailed statement in the American edition of Dr. Rob- 
 erts's Companion to the Revised Version, p. 190. I arrived at the same con- 
 clusion by comparison during the progress of Revision. But while the two 
 Revision Committees have carefully used all available helps, they had to go, 
 like all conscientious scholars, through the whole process of investigation, 
 ,and to act on each change according to their own independent judgment 
 
366 THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 
 
 hihel^ 1883). The number of English versions is 
 much larger, and began as early as the last century 
 with Campbell (the Gospels, 1788), Macknight (the 
 Epistles, 1795), Archbishop Newcome (1796). From 
 the present century we have several translations 
 of widely differing merits, by Charles Thomson 
 (1808), John Bellamy (1818), ISToah Webster (New 
 Haven, 1833), Nathan Hale (Boston, 1836, from 
 Griesbach's text), Granville Penn (London, 1836), 
 Edgar Taylor (London, 1840), Andrews Norton 
 (the Gospels, Boston, 1855), Kobert Young (Edin- 
 burgh, 1863, very literal), Samuel Sharpe (1840, 
 6th ed. London, 1870, from Griesbach's text), L. A. 
 Sawyer (Boston, 1858), J. Nelson Darby (published 
 anonymously, London, 2d ed. 1872), T. S. Green (Lon- 
 don, 1865), G. R. Noyes (Professor in Harvard Uni- 
 versity, Boston, 1869 ; 4th ed. 1870, published by 
 the American Unitarian Association ; a very good 
 translation from the eighth edition of Tischendorf 
 in Matthew, Mark, and part of Luke; Dr. Ezra Abbot 
 added a list of Tischendorf's readings from Luke 
 xviii. 10 to John vi. 2, 3, and critically revised the 
 proofs), Alford (London, 1869), Joseph B. Rotherham 
 (London, 1872, text of Tregelles), Samuel Davidson 
 (prepared at the suggestion of Tischendorf from his 
 last Greek text, London, 1875), John Brown Mc- 
 Clellan (the Gospels, London, 1875, on the basis of 
 the Authorized Version, but with a " critically re- 
 vised" text), the "Revised English Bible," prepared 
 by four English divines (London, 1877),' the Gospel 
 
 » The Old Testament was translated by Dr. F. W. (lotch and Dr. Benja- 
 min Davies ; the New T^^t^acRent by Dr. G. A. Jacob a,^^ Dr. Samuel G, 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. 367 
 
 of John and the Pauline Epistles, by Five Anglican 
 Clergymen (Dean Henry Alford, Bishop George 
 Moberly, Rev. William G-. Humphry, Bishop Chas. 
 J. Ellicott, and Dr. John Barrow, 1857, 1861). Nor 
 were these attempts confined to individuals. " The 
 American Bible Union," a Baptist association in 
 America, spent for nearly twenty years a vast amount 
 of money, zeal, and labor on an improved version, 
 and published the New Testament in full (second 
 revision, New York and London, 1869, with " im- 
 merse," "immersion," and "John the Immerser"), 
 and the Old Testament in part (with learned com- 
 ments, the best of them by Dr. Conant, on Job, 
 Psalms, and Proverbs). Last, though not least, we 
 must mention The Variorum Bible for Bible Teach- 
 ers^ prepared by five Anglican scholars (T. K. 
 Cheyne, R. L. Clarke, S. R. Driver, Alfred Good- 
 win, and W. Sanday), and published by Eyre and 
 Spottiswoode, London, 1880 (in very small print) ; 
 it contains a judicious selection of various readings 
 and renderings from the best critical and exegetical 
 authorities — we may say a full apparatus for the 
 reader of the English Version. 
 
 Of these translators. Dean Alford and the ^s^ An- 
 glican clergymen came nearest to the Canterbury 
 Revisers, as far as tlie idiom and the reverential 
 handling of the Authorized Version is concerned.' 
 
 Green. The work was published by the Queen's Printers, Eyre and 
 Spottiswoode, London, 1877. The first two scholars are Baptists, and 
 members of the Old Testament Company of Revisers, but were engaged 
 in this work long before. Dr. Da vies died 1875. 
 
 ' Tbe London Times, in a semi-official article of May 20, 1881, says <»f 
 
368 THE AUTHOKIZED VERSION. 
 
 It may well be said, without the least disparage- 
 ment of the merits of the Revising Committees, that 
 the great majority of the changes of text and version 
 (probably more than four fifths) which they finally 
 adopted had been anticipated by previous translators 
 and commentators, and had become the common 
 property of biblical scholars before the year 1870. 
 
 But these improvements were scattered among 
 many books, and lacked public recognition. They 
 had literary worth, but no ecclesiastical authority. 
 They were the work of individuals, not of the 
 Church. A translator may please himself, but not 
 many others who are equally competent. " If there 
 was one lesson," says Dean Alford, "which the Five 
 Clergymen" (he being one of them) "learned from 
 
 this tentative effort of the Five (afterwards Four) Episcopal clergymen : 
 " The work was very favorably received both in England and America. 
 It received the commendation of Archbishop Trench, and was spoken of 
 in America by Mr. Marsh, in his Lectures on the English Language, as ' by 
 far the most judicious modern recension' that was known to him. It 
 passed through several editions, and, though now almost forgotten, must 
 certainly be considered as the germ of the present Revision. It showed 
 clearly two things — first, that a revision could be made without seriously 
 interfering with either the diction or rhythm of the Authorized Version ; 
 secondly, that a revision, if made at all, must be made by a similar co-op- 
 eration of independent minds and by corporate and collegiate discussion. 
 A third fact also was disclosed, which had a salutary effect in checking 
 premature efforts — viz., that, as these Revisers themselves said, the work 
 was 'one of extreme difficulty,' and a difficulty which they believed was 
 * scarcely capable of being entirely surmounted.' And they were right. 
 The present Revision, good in the main as we certainly believe it will be 
 found to be, confirms the correctness of their experience. As we shall 
 hereafter see, there are difficulties connected with a conservative revision 
 of the existing translation of the Greek Testament that are practically 
 insuperable." 
 
THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. S60 
 
 their sessions, it was that no new rendering is safe 
 until it has gone through many brains, and been 
 thoroughly sifted by differing perceptions and 
 tastes." ' Ministers without number — learned, half- 
 learned, and illiterate, especially the last class — un- 
 dertook to mend King James's Version in the pul- 
 pit, and to display a little Greek and less Hebrew, 
 at the risk of disturbing the devotion of their hear- 
 ers and unsettling their belief in verbal inspiration. 
 The conservative and timid held back and feared to 
 touch the sacred ark. A very moderate attempt of 
 the American Bible Society to purify and unify the 
 text of the old version was defeated (1858), though 
 some improvements were saved. Nevertheless, the 
 demand for an authorized emendation of the popu- 
 lar versions steadily increased in all Protestant coun- 
 tries, especially in England and the United States, 
 where the Bible is most deeply lodged in the affec- 
 tions of the people. The subject of an authoritative 
 revision w^as discussed with great ability by W. Sel- 
 wyn (1856), Trench (1858), Alford, Ellicott, Light- 
 foot, and many others. Different opinions prevailed 
 as to the extent of the changes, but the vast majority 
 deprecated a new version, and desired simply such 
 a revision of the time-honored old version as would 
 purge it of acknowledged errors and blemishes, 
 conform it more fully to the original Greek and 
 Hebrew, adapt it to the language and scholarship of 
 the present age, and be a new bond of union and 
 strength among all English-speaking churches. 
 
 * Preface to his Revised Version of the New Testament, p. vi. 
 
3^0 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 This is the object of the Anglo-American Revision 
 movement, which began in 1870, and was completed, 
 the New Testament in the year 1881, the Old Testa- 
 ment in 1885. 
 
 King James's Version can never recover its for- 
 mer authority, for revolutions never go backward. 
 It is slowly but surely declining, and doomed to a 
 peaceful death and honorable burial ; but it will rise 
 to a new life of usefulness in the Revision that is, or 
 that is to come. Its imperfections will disappear, 
 its beauties and excellences will remain. 
 
CHAPTER EIGHTH. 
 
 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 Literature. 
 . I. English Editions. 
 
 The I New Testament, j of | our Lord and Saviour | Jesus Christ | trans- 
 lated out of the Greek: \ being the Version set forth A.D. 1611 | compared 
 with the most ancient authorities and revised \ A.D. 1881. | Printed for the 
 Universities of \ Oxford and Cambridge \ Oxford \ at the University Press \ 
 1881. The same issued under the same title from the Cambridge Univer- 
 sity Press. 
 
 The work was published May 17, 1881, in various styles and at various 
 prices, from sixteen dollars down to fifteen cents, and sold in enormous 
 quantities. The University editions are copyrighted in the British do- 
 minions and have the approval of the American Committee, which im- 
 ported a memorial edition in the best style of paper and binding, for dis- 
 tribution among subscribers. 
 
 The University Presses have also issued, in various sizes, The Parallel 
 New Testament, giving the Authorized Version and the Revised Version 
 in parallel columns, and " The Parallel New Testament, Greek and English 
 (1882)." The last is the most convenient for the student of the Greek 
 Testament. The Oxford edition gives the Greek text of the Revised 
 Version, by Archdeacon Palmer ; the Cambridge edition gives the Greek 
 text (Beza's) of the Authorized Version, by Dr. Scrivener, on one page, 
 with one column blank for readings ; and both give on the opposite page 
 the Authorized Version and the Revised Version in parallel columns. 
 
 II. American Editions. 
 In the absence of an authorized American edition and an international 
 copyright there appeared in rapid succession over thirty reprints, one (by 
 photographic process) even a few hours after the publication of the Eng- 
 lish edition. Some of these reprints are exact reproductions of the Uni- 
 versitv editions ; some are Americanized, and reverse the Appendix ; some 
 
372 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 have introduction and notes ; some have the Old Version in parallel col- 
 umns or on corresponding pages ; some are remarkably correct ; some 
 full of blunders. I mention the following editions from my collection : 
 
 Harper & Brothers, New York, 1881. Three editions in different sizes, 
 one in Pica, Demy 8vo (pp. 652), which precisely corresponds to the 
 Oxford edition except that the American renderings of specific passages 
 are printed as foot-notes, and the fourteen changes of classes of passages 
 are printed on the page preceding the text. (The Harpers have also 
 published from English plates the two volumes of Westcott and Hort's 
 Greek Testament, and a Greek-English Testament, giving the Greek text 
 with the Revised Version on opposite pages.) 
 
 Fords, Howard, & Hulbert, New York, 1881 (Long Primer, crown 
 8vo). Edited by Rev. Roswell D. Hitchcock, D.D., with a Preface, The 
 readings and renderings, both general and specific, of the American Com- 
 mittee are incorporated with the text, and " while " is twice substituted 
 for " whiles." The first edition was defective and cancelled ; the second 
 is carefully done. The editor says in the Preface (p. x.) : " Probably this 
 Revision will not be accepted just as it is, in either form. But in all the 
 essentials of close and faithful rendering, it will be recognized as an im- 
 mense improvement upon the King James Revision of nearly three hun- 
 dred years ago, which must now begin to be laid aside. And as to the 
 points of difference between the two Companies of Revisers, the renderings 
 preferred by the American Revisers will, in most cases, be considered more 
 exact and self-consistent than those preferred by their Anglican brethren." 
 
 RuFus Wendell (" Minister of the Gospel "), Albany, N. Y., 1882 
 (pp. 616). Called " Student's Edition." It has several ingenious and 
 convenient peculiarities, showing what is common to the Revision and 
 Authorized Version, and, by diacritical marks and foot-notes, what is 
 peculiar to each. At the end is given a Numerical Summary, showing the 
 number of chapters, paragraphs, verses, and words in each book of the 
 Authorized Version and Revised Version. 
 
 Hubbard Brothers, Philadelphia, 1881. With Introduction of 119 
 pages. The same publishers issued an Americanized edition by Rev. Dr. 
 Henry G. Weston and Bishop William R. Nicholson, who state in the Pref- 
 ace : " It is certain that the American suggestions have received the almost 
 universal approval of American Christians. There can be no question that 
 if the Revision comes into general use in this country, it will be in the 
 form preferred by the American Committee." 
 
 American Baptist Publication Society, Philadelphia, 1881. With 
 this prefatory notice : " In this edition the changes suggested by the 
 
fflfi ItEVlSED rEESlOfr. 373 
 
 American Committee have been incorporated into the text. The English 
 preferences will be found in the Appendix. No other changes have been 
 made, except that the spelling of a few words, such as 'judgement,' 
 ' cloke,' etc., have been conformed to the American usage." 
 
 People's Edition. The Revised New Testament, Embracing the Com- 
 plete Text of the Revised Version ; also, a Concise Histoi-y of this Revision 
 and of previous Versions and Translations. Edited by Francis S. Hoyt, 
 D.D., American Editor of Angus's Handbook of the Bible. With more 
 than one hundred engravings. New York: Phillips & Hunt, 1881 
 (Methodist Episcopal Book Concern). 
 
 Porter & Coates, Philadelphia, 1881 and 1882. Comparative Edition, 
 The Authorized Version and the Revised Version in parallel columns. 
 
 Funk & Wagnalls, New York, 1882. Teachers' Edition, The read- 
 ings of the American Appendix introduced into the margin, and the 
 parallel passages (selected from Bagster's Reference Bible and Scripture 
 Treasury) printed in full. Edited by W. F. Crafts. 
 
 DoDD, Mead, & Co., New York, 1881. Two editions, one with the 
 Authorized Version and the Revised Version on opposite pages. 
 
 American Tract Society, New York, 1881. Same as Dodd and 
 Mead's. 
 
 Other editions by Lee & Shepard (Boston) ; Lothrop & Co. (Bos- 
 ton) ; Henry Bill Publishing Company (Norwich, Conn.) ; A. J. Hol- 
 MAN & Co. (Philadelphia, several editions) ; Ziegler & Co. (Philadelphia 
 and Chicago) ; Scammell & Co. (St. Louis) ; Leggo Brothers & Co. 
 (New York) ; George Munro (in the " Seaside Library," New York, 
 1881, with Tischendorf 's Tauchnitz edition of the Authorized Version) ; 
 R. Worthington (New York) ; American Book Exchange (New York, 
 defunct) ; Call, Calkins, & Co. (Chicago), etc., etc. 
 
 in. Concordances of the Revised Version. 
 
 A Complete Concordance to the Revised Version of the New Testament, 
 embracing the Marginal Readings of the English Revisers as well as those 
 of the American Committee. By John Alexander Thoms. London (W. 
 H. Allen & Co., 13 Waterloo Place), 1882. (Small 4to, pp. 532.) Repub- 
 lished from English plates by Charles Scribner's Sons, New York, 1883. 
 
 This Concordance is " published under the authorization of Oxford and 
 Cambridge Universities." It contains a brief Preface with the following 
 remark (p. vi. sq.) : " I have included the more important of the marginal 
 readings of the English Revisers as well as those of the American Com- 
 mittee. And here I may venture to regret that the Revisers, while alter- 
 
374 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 ing so much, hav^e not gone a little further, many of the marginal read- 
 ings being manifestly superior to those of the accepted text. The Ameri- 
 can notes are also, most of them, very valuable, and deserve far better 
 treatment than to be relegated to the end of the book without so much as 
 a reference mark in the text to indicate their existence." But this re- 
 flection is unjust. The English Revisers are not to be blamed for carrying 
 out an arrangement with the American Committee. 
 
 The StudmCs Concordance to the Revised Version 1881, of the New TeS' 
 tament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Compiled upon an Original 
 Plan, shewing the changes in all words referred to. London and Derby 
 (Bemrose and Son. 441 pages). Republished from English plates by 
 D. Appleton & Co., New York, 1882. 
 
 The compilers say in the Preface that they " began this work, conscious 
 of the defects of the Authorized Version, yet with a predilection for it in 
 the main," but came to " a growing appreciation of the value " of the 
 Revised Version, '* as carrying within itself the evidence that it is a 
 translation of a purer text, by the hands of a company of devout and 
 more able men than has ever before been joined together for a like pur- 
 pose." The Concordance includes a Genealogical Table of the principal 
 early editions of the Greek Testament and their connection with the 
 Version of 1611, a list of omitted words of the Authorized Version, and of 
 new words in the Revised Version. A convenient feature of this edition 
 is the addition of the corresponding words of the Authorized Version, 
 which facilitates the comparison, showing the superior consistency of the 
 Revised Version. The American Appendix is entirely ignored, but the 
 Appletons have properly added it at the close of their edition. 
 
 What is still needed in this line is a Critical Greek and Comparative 
 English Concordance of the New Testament (or a revised and enlarged edi- 
 tion of Hudson — Abbot). Such a work should give, in the alphabetical 
 order of the Greek words, the rendering of both the Authorized Version 
 and the Revised Version. 
 
 IV. Books on the Revision. 
 
 The Revision literature is very large, and constantly growing. 
 
 A. Works published before the publication of the Revised Version, 
 but with reference to the Revision : 
 
 The essays of Archbishop Trench {The A uthorized Version of the 
 New Testament in Connection with some Recent Proposals for its Revision, 
 revised ed. Lond. 1859), Bishop Ellicott (^Considerations on the Revision 
 of the English Version of the New Testament, Lond. 1870), and Dr. (now 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 375 
 
 Bishop) LiGHTFOOT (On a Fresh Revision of the New Testament, 2d ed. 
 Lond. 1871) ; authorized American edition, in 1 vol., with introduction 
 by Philip Schaff, New York (Harpers), 1873. All these authors are 
 members of the Revision Committee. The Introduction of the American 
 editor was several times separately published by the American Revision 
 Committee as a programme of their work. 
 
 William Milligan (Professor of Divinity and Biblical Criticism in 
 Aberdeen, Member of the N. T. Revision Company) and Alex. Roberts 
 (Professor of Humanity, St. Andrews ; Member of the N. T. Revision Com- 
 pany) : The Words of the New Testament as A Itered by Transmission and 
 Ascertained by Modem Criticism. Edinburgh, 1873 (262 pages). 
 
 W. Millar Nicolson, M.A., D.S.C. (Edinb.) : Classical Revision of the 
 Greek New Testament Tested and Applied on Uniform Principles, with 
 Suggested Alterations of the English Version. London (Williams and 
 Norgate), 1878 (149 pages). 
 
 A nglo-A merican Bible Revision, by members of the American Revision 
 Committee. Philadelphia (American Sunday-School Union) and New 
 York (42 and 44 Bible -House), 1879. Second ed., revised, 192 pages. 
 Contains nineteen short essays by as many American Revisers on various 
 aspects of the Revision then going on. It was twice republished in 
 England, h\ Nisbet & Co., and by the " London Sunday-School Union," 
 under the title : Biblical Revision, its Necessity and Purpose. London (56 
 Old Bailey), 1879 (186 pages). 
 
 B. Works published after the publication of the Revision (1881). 
 
 (a) Friendly criticisms by Revisers and others. 
 
 Alex. Roberts, D.D. (Professor of Humanitj% St. Andrews; Member 
 of the N. T. Revision Company) : Companion to the Revised Version of 
 the New Testament. London, 1881 (Cassell, Petter, Galpin, & Co.). With 
 Supplement by a Member of the American Committee of Revision 
 [P. SchaflF]. New York (published by Cassell, Petter, Galpin, & Co., 
 and jointly by Funk & Wagnalls), 1881 (213 pages). 
 
 Frederick Field, M.A., LL.D. (Member of the O. T. Revision Com- 
 pany) : Otium Noi-vicense. Notes on Select Passages of the Greek Testa- 
 ment. Oxford, 1881. Scholarly and able. 
 
 The New Revision and its Study. By Members of the A merican Revision 
 Committee (Drs. Abbot, Riddle, D wight, Thayer, Kendrick, Crosby). 
 Reprinted from " Sunday-School Times," Philadelphia, 1881 (107 pages). 
 
 Dr. Samuel Newth (Princ. New College) : Lectures on Bible Revision, 
 London, 1881. 
 
 G. Vance Smith : Texts and Margins of the Revised New Testament 
 a£ecting Theological Doctrine. London, 1881 (61 pages). 
 
376 THE EETI8ED VERSION. 
 
 B. H. Kennedy (Canon of Ely ; Hon, Fellow of St. John's College, 
 Cambridge ; Member of the N. T. Revision Company) : The Ely Lectures 
 on the Revised Version of the New Testament. Lond. 1882 (xxi. and 165 
 pages). Three Sermons on the Interpretation of the Bible, on the Re- 
 vised Text, and on the Revised Version, with three Appendices, a prefa- 
 tory Letter to Dr. Scrivener, and a Postscript against the attack of the 
 " Quarterly Reviewer." " The furor theologicus^'' says Canon Kennedy 
 (p. 155), " never amuses, it only saddens me. I know what it has done 
 in the ages ; I see what it is doing in the present day ; I dread what it 
 may do in the times that are coming." 
 
 The Revisers and the Greek Text of the New Testament. By Two Mem- 
 bers of the New Testament Company [Bishop Ellicott and Archdeacon 
 Palmer]. London (Macmillan & Co.), 1882 (79 pages). A semi-official 
 vindication of the Greek text of the Revisers against the assault of the 
 " Quarterly Review." Calm, dignified, and convincing. 
 
 Edward Byron Nicholson, M. A. : Our Nev) New Testament. A n 
 Explanation of the Need and a Criticism of the Fulfilment. London (Riv- 
 ingtons), 1881 (80 pages). Favorable, but advocates further revision. 
 
 Bishop Alfred Lee (of the Diocese of Delaware, Member of the N. T. 
 Revision Company): Co-operative Revision of the New Testament. New 
 York, 1882. Contains a valuable list of changes due to the American 
 Committee. 
 
 Dr. Charles Short (Professor in Columbia College, New York, and 
 Member of the N. T. Revision Company) : The New Revision of King 
 James' Revision of the New Testament. Several articles in " The Ameri- 
 can Journal of Philology," edited by Gildersleeve, Baltimore, 1881 and 
 1882. The second paper is a careful and minute examination of the re- 
 vision of St. Matthew. 
 
 C. J. Vaughan, D.D. (Dean of Llandaff, and Master of the Temple, 
 Member of the N. T. Revision Company) : Authorized or Revised? Ser- 
 mons on Some of the Texts in which the Revised Version Differs from the 
 A uthorized. London (Macmillan & Co.), 1882 (xviii. and 335 pages). 
 
 The passages discussed in these sermons are 1 Tim. iii. 16 ; John v. 35, 
 36,39, 40 ; xvii. 2, 11, 24; Luke xxi. 16-19; Col. ii. 18, 23; Phil. ii. 5-10; 
 Heb. X. 19-22 ; Rom. v. 18, 19 ; Col. iii. 1-4 ; John vi. 12 ; 1 Pet. i. 13 ; 
 Heb. xii. 17 ; Eph. v. 1 : John v. 44 ; Matt. xxv. 8 ; Acts ii. 24 ; Rev. xxii. 
 14; Eph. iii. 14, 15. The distinguished author advocates favorable action 
 of the Anglican Church before the Revision is adopted by Dissenters and 
 Americans. " There are not wanting indications " (he says. Preface, p. 
 xvii.) " of a probable acceptance by the American people on the one 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 377 
 
 hand, and by the great English Nonconformist bodies on the other, of 
 the Revised Version, in the formation of which, by an act of simple jus- 
 tice, they have been admitted to an honorable participation. No mis- 
 fortune could be more lamentable, no catastrophe is more earnestly to be 
 deprecated, than that which should destroy the one link of union which 
 has hitherto bound together the English-speaking race, amidst whatever 
 rarieties of place or thought, of government or doctrine — the possession 
 of a common Bible. Hitherto there has been one intelligible sense, at 
 all events, in which we could speak of transatlantic or even of non-con- 
 forming members of the one Church of England. A heavy blow will 
 have been struck at this unity of feeling and worship, if unhappily the 
 time should ever arrive when the race shall have its two Bibles— more 
 especially if it shall come to be known that the Bible of America and of 
 the Nonconformist is far nearer in accuracy, however it may be in beauty, 
 to the original Word itself, than the Bible tenaciously clung to by the 
 English Episcopalian." 
 
 Rev. W. A. Osborne (Rector of Dodington) : The Revised Version of the 
 New Testament. A Critical Commentary with Notes upon the Text. Lon- 
 don (Kegan Paul, Trench, & Co.), 1882 (200 pages). Mostly favorable. 
 " I was struck, as all candid critics must be, with the greater accuracy of 
 the text and the wonderful fidelity of many of the renderings, and felt 
 proud of the triumph of English scholarship, notably in the Epistles to 
 the Romans and Corinthians. . . . While, with others, I was startled at 
 first by the great number of minor alterations and transpositions, I found 
 that in most cases the Revisers were justified by the concurrent testi- 
 mony of MSS., versions, and Fathers, and that in many of the attacks 
 made upon them, there was either gross exaggeration, or a curious igno- 
 rance of the idioms of the Greek and Hebrew languages" (Preface, v. and 
 vi.). Then the author goes on to object to " light inaccuracies or incon- 
 sistencies." 
 
 W. G. Humphry, B.D. (Vicar of St. Martin-in-the-Fields, Prebendary 
 of St. Paul's Cathedral, and Member of the N. T. Revision Company) : 
 A Commentary on the Revised Version of the New Testament. Lon- 
 don and New York (Cassell, Petter, & Co.), 1882 (xxi. and 474 pages). 
 Notes, stating briefly and clearly the reasons for the changes that have 
 been made in the Authorized Version from Matthew to Revelation, with 
 constant reference to the renderings of the earlier English versions- A 
 useful book. 
 
 (6) In opposition to the Revision. 
 
 [Dean John William Burgon, B.D.] : Three Articles on New festa^ 
 
 ?6 • ■ 
 
378 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 merit Revision in the London "Quarterly Review" for October, 1881, Jan- 
 uarj'-, and April, 1882. Republished under the author's name in The Re- 
 vision Revised. London (John Murray), 1883 (549 pages). The book is 
 enlarged by a reply to Bp. EUicott in vindication of the traditional read- 
 ing of 1 Tim. iii. 16. By far the most learned, able, and vigorous as well 
 as the most sweeping and intemperate attack on the Revised Text and 
 Version. See above, pp. 119 sq. and 293 sqq. 
 
 Sir Edmund Beckett: Should the Revised New Testament he Au- 
 thorized"? London, 1882 (194 pages). Condemns with more wit than 
 learning the English style of the R. V., and prefers even the " beasts," for 
 ^uia. Rev. iv. 6. The ablest attack on the R. V. by a layman. 
 
 G. Washington Moon, F.R.S.L. : The Revisers' English. With PhoiKr- 
 graphs of the Revisers. A Series of Criticisms, Showing the Revisers^ Vio- 
 lations of the Laws of the Language. London (Hatchards, Piccadilly), 
 1882 (145 pages). Republished, New York (Funk & WagnaUs), 1882. 
 Mr. Moon is the author of The Dean's English versus Dean Alford's Essays 
 on The Queen's English, and was answered by Alford in Mr. Moon's English, 
 to which Mr. Moon again replied. He severely criticises the Revision 
 according to the strict rules of modern grammar; but most of the de- 
 partures which he condemns are found in the old version and sustained 
 by classical usage. The book is amusing, and not without some good 
 points. 
 
 F. C. Cook, M.A. (Canon of Exeter, and Editor of The Speaker's Com- 
 mentary') : The Revised Version of the First Three Gospels Considered in 
 its Bearings upon the Record of our Lord's Words and of Incidents in his 
 Life. London (John Murray), 1882 (250 pages). Moderately and re- 
 spectfully opposed. Canon Cook wrote also A Protest Against the Change 
 in the Last Petition of the Lord's Prayer (London, 1881 ; 3d ed. 1882) ; to 
 which Bishop Lightfoot replied in defense of the masculine rendering of 
 Tov TTovrjpov (" the evil One "), in " The Guardian," London^ Nos. 1866- 
 1868 (September, 1881). Canon Cook rejoined in A Second Letter to the 
 Lord Bishop of London, London, 1882 (107 pages). 
 
 T. H. L. Leary (D.C.L., Oxford) : A Critical Examination of Bishop 
 Lightfoot' s Defence of the Last Petition in the Lord's Prayer. London (11 
 Southampton Street), 1882 (23 pages). 
 
 Robert Young, LL.D. (author of the Analytical Concordance of the 
 Bible) : Contributions to a New Revision, or A Critical Companion to the 
 New Testament. Edinburgh (G. A. Young & Co.), 1881 (390 pages). He 
 notices the alterations of the Revisers and the American Appendix, but 
 Ipirea more literal and uniform renderings as "a help to a future Peyision." 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 379 
 
 Dr. S. C. Malan: Seven Chapters of the Revision q/*1881 revised; and 
 Select Readings, etc., revised. London, 1881-82. 
 
 Dr. (J. W. Samson : The English Revisers' Greek Text Shown to be 
 Unauthorized Except by Egyptian Copies Discarded by Greeks, and to be 
 Opposed to the Historic Text of all Ages and Churches. Cambridge, Mass. 
 (132 pages). A curious anachronism. The "blind" author advocates 
 "the true light" of Hug, "the master watchman," and opposes "the 
 false lights" of the "misleading Tregelles and the ambitious Tischen- 
 dorf " (whose name is invariably misspelled with ff). 
 
 (c) Friendly and unfriendly criticisms, mostly by divines of the Church 
 of P^ngland, appeared in two weekly periodicals : 
 
 Public Opinion, London (11 Southampton Street, Strand), from May 21 
 to December, 1881. 
 
 Christian Opinion and Revisionist (edited by Learj'), London (Hatchards, 
 Publisher, etc., 187 Piccadilly), from Jan. 7, 1882, to June 17, 1882. 
 
 Besides, almost every religious newspaper and quarterly review in the 
 English language for 1881 and 1882 had critical notices of the Revised 
 Version ; notably so " The Quarterly Review," " The Church Quarterly 
 Review," " The Contemporary Review," " The Nineteenth Century," 
 "The British Quarterly," "The Edinburgh Review," "The Expositor," 
 " The Homiletic Quarterly," " The Catholic Presbyterian," " The Presby- 
 terian Quarterly Review," " The Bibliotheca Sacra," " The North Ameri- 
 can Review," " The New-Englander," " The American Church Review," 
 " The Baptist Quarterly," " The JNIethodist Quarterly Review," etc., etc. 
 Some of these review articles are by Sanday, Farrar, Newth, Angus, 
 Perowne, Stanley, Plumptre, Evans, G. Vance Smith, M. R. Vincent, War- 
 field, Gardiner, Daniel R. Goodwin, and other able scholars. 
 Additional (since 1883). 
 
 Elias Riggs: Suggested Modifications of the Revised Version. Ando- 
 ver, 1883 (94 pages). Friendly and valuable. 
 
 Fr. T. Bassett : An Examination of some of the more important Texts 
 in the New Testament that relate to (he Deity of our Lord, etc. London, 
 1883. Charges Revisers with an " Arianizing " tendency for not admit- 
 ting fiovoytvriQ « 6 <; into the text, John i. 18. See notice in " Church 
 Quarterly Review " for October, 1883, pp. 209 sq. 
 
 Daniel R. Goodwin (Prof, in the Episcopal Divinity School, Phila.) : 
 Notes on the Late Revision of the New Testament. N. Y., 1883 (212 pages). 
 He approves of the changes of text, but objects to many renderings. 
 
 B. F. Westcott, D.D. : Some Lessons of the Revised Version of the New 
 Testament. Several articles in "The Expositor" for 1887. Very valuable. 
 He says: "Most of the popular objections to the Revision are eithei 
 altogether groundless, or outweighed by corresponding gains." 
 
380 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 THE ACTION OF THE CONVOCATION OF CANTERBURY. 
 
 A new version of the Holy Scriptures for public 
 use was a much easier task in the days of King 
 James than in our age. Then English Christendom 
 was confined to one Church in a little island, and 
 under the sovereign rule of the crowm ; now it is 
 spread over five continents, and divided into many 
 independent organizations. Then the rival versions 
 were but of recent date ; now the version to be re- 
 placed is hallowed by the memories of nearly three 
 centuries, and interwoven with the literature of two 
 nations. To bring a new version within the reach 
 of possible success, it must not only be far better 
 than the old, but the joint work of repi'esentative 
 scholars from the various churches of Great Britain 
 and the United States. In other words, it must 
 have an interdenominational, international, and in- 
 tercontinental character and weight. 
 
 The obstacles in the way of such an undertaking 
 seemed to be irremovable before the 3^ear 1870. 
 Nothing but a special providence could level the 
 mountains of old traditions and prejudices, of mod- 
 ern rivalries and jealousies. But in that year the 
 Spirit of God emboldened the most conservative of 
 the English churches to venture upon the uncertain 
 sea of Revision, inspired that Church with a large- 
 hearted and far-sighted liberality towards the other 
 branches of English-speaking Christendom at home 
 and across the ocean, and brought about a combina- 
 tion of men and means such as had never existed 
 before in the history of the Bible, and as is not 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 381 
 
 likely to be repeated for a long time to come. A 
 calm retrospect presents the origin of this move- 
 ment almost in the light of a moral miracle. 
 
 Tlie new Revision was boru in the mother Church 
 of English Christendom. She made the Authorized 
 Yersion, and had an hereditary right to take the lead 
 in its improvement and displacement. She still 
 represents the largest membership, the strongest in- 
 stitutions, the richest literature, among those eccle- 
 siastical organizations which have sprung from the 
 Anglo-Saxon stock. She would never accept a Re- 
 vision from any other denomination. She has all 
 the necessary qualifications of learning and piety to 
 produce as good a version for our age as King 
 James's Revisers produced for their generation. It 
 is to be regretted that the Clmrch of England could 
 not act as a unit in this matter, and that the Con- 
 vocation of York refused to co-operate. But the 
 movement had to begin somewhere, and it did begin 
 in the strongest and most influential quarter, and 
 with as much authority as can be expected in the 
 present state of that Church. No royal decree, no 
 act of Parliament, could nowadays inaugurate such 
 a work of Christian scholarship, which is destined 
 to be used as far as the dominion of the English 
 language extends. 
 
 The Upper House of the Convocation of Canter- 
 bury, under the impulse of some of the ablest and 
 wisest divines, started the long -desired Revision 
 movement on the 10th of February, 1870, by adopt- 
 ing a cautious resolution offered by the late Dr. S. 
 Wilberforce (Bishop, first of Oxford, theft of Win- 
 
382 THE REVISED VEESION. 
 
 Chester), and seconded by Dr. Ellicott (Bishop of 
 Gloucester and Bristol), to the effect — 
 
 " That a Committee of both Houses be appointed to report on the 
 desirableness of a Revision of the Authorised Version of the Old and New 
 Testaments, whether by marginal notes or otherwise, in those passages 
 where plain and clear errors, whether in the Hebrew or Greek text 
 originally adopted by the translators, or in the translations made from 
 the same, shall on due investigation be found to exist." 
 
 In accordance with this resolution a report was 
 laid before the Convocation of Canterbury at its 
 session in May, 1870, and was accepted unanimously 
 by the Upper House and by a large majority of the 
 Lower House. The report is as follows : 
 
 " 1. That it is desirable that a revision of the Authorised Version of 
 the Holy Scriptures be undertaken. 
 
 " 2. That the revision be so conducted as to comprise both marginal 
 renderings and such emendations as it may be found necessarj' to insert 
 in the text of the Authorised Version. 
 
 "3. That in the above resolutions we do not contemplate any new 
 translation of the Bible, nor any alteration of the language, except where, 
 in the judgment of the most competent scholars, such change is necessary. 
 
 " 4. That in such necessary changes, the style of the language employed 
 in the existing version be dlosely followed. 
 
 " 6. That it is desirable that Convocation should nominate a body of 
 its own members to undertake the work of revision, who shall be at 
 liberty to invite the co-operation of any eminent for scholarship, to what- 
 ever nation or religious body they may belong." 
 
 OKGANIZATION AND RULES OF THE BRITISH COMMITTEE. 
 
 These are "the fundamental resolutions" adopted 
 by Convocation. The work now passed entirely 
 into the hands of the Commission which was appoint- 
 ed by that body, and consisted of eight Bishops' and 
 
 ^ The Revisers appointed by the Upper House, May 3, 1870, were the 
 Bishops of Winchester (Samuel Wilberforce), St. David's (Connop Thirl- 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 383 
 
 eight Presbyters/ with power to enlarge. They held 
 the first meeting a few weeks afterwards, May 25 
 (the Bishop of Winchester presiding), effected an or- 
 ganization, and took the following action : 
 
 " Resolved : I. That the committee, appointed by the Convocation 
 of Canterbury at its last session, separate itself into two companies, the 
 one for the revision of the Authorised Version of the Old Testament, the 
 other for the revision of the Authorised Version of the New Testament. 
 
 " II. That the company for the revision of the Authorised Version of 
 the Old Testament consist of the Bishops of St. David's, Llandaff, Ely, and 
 Bath and Wells, and of the following members from the Lower House — 
 Archdeacon Rose, Canon Selwyn, Dr. Jebb, and Dr. Kay. 
 
 " III. That the company for the revision of the Authorised Version of 
 the New Testament consist of the Bishops of Winchester,' Gloucester and 
 Bristol,' and Salisbury,^ and of the following members from the Lower 
 House, the Prolocutor,' the Deans of Canterbury* and Westminster,' and 
 Canon Blakesley. 
 
 " IV. That the first portion of the work to be undertaken by the Old 
 Testament Company be the revision of the Authorised Version of the 
 Pentateuch. 
 
 "V. That the first portion <>f the work to be undertaken by the New 
 Testament Company be the revision of the Authorised Version of the 
 Synoptical Gospels. 
 
 "VI. That the following scholars and divines be invited to join the 
 Old Testament Company : 
 
 wall), Llandaff (Alfred OUivant), Gloucester and Bristol (Charles John 
 Ellicott), Salisbury (George Moberly), Ely (Edward Harold Browne, af- 
 terwards successor of Wilberforce in the See of Winchester), Lincoln 
 (Christopher Wordsworth, who soon afterwards withdrew), Bath and Wells 
 (Lord Arthur Charles Hervey). 
 
 * Appointed by the Lower House : The Prolocutor (Edward Henry 
 Bickersteth), the Deans of Canterbury (Alford) and Westminster (Stan- 
 ley), the Archdeacon of Bedford (Henry John Rose), Canons Selwyn 
 and Blakesley, Dr. Jebb, and Dr. Kay. 
 
 » Dr. Wilberforce. ' Dr. Ellicott. * Dr. Moberly. 
 
 * The Very Rev. Edward Bickersteth, • Peim Alford. 
 ' Pean Stanley, 
 
384 
 
 THE REVISED VEESIOI^ 
 
 Alexander, Dr. W. 
 
 L. 
 Chenery, Professor. 
 Cook, Canon. 
 Davidson, Professor A. 
 
 B. 
 Davies, Dr. B. 
 Fairbairn, Professor. 
 
 Field, Rev. F. 
 GiNSBURG, Dr. 
 GoTCH, Dr. 
 
 Harrison, Archdea- 
 con. 
 Leathes, Professor. 
 McGiLL, Professor. 
 Payne Smith, Canon.* 
 
 Perowne, Professor J. 
 H. 
 
 Plumptre, Professor. 
 
 PusEY, Canon. 
 
 Wright, Dr. (British 
 Museum). 
 
 Wright, W. A. (Cam- 
 bridge).'* 
 
 " VII. That the following scholars and divines be invited to join the 
 New Testament Company : 
 
 Angus, Dr. 
 Brown, Dr. David. 
 Dublin, Archbishop of. 
 Eadie, Dr. 
 HoRT, Rev. F. J. A. 
 Humphry, Rev. W. G. 
 Kjjnnedy, Canon. 
 Lee, Archdeacon. 
 
 Lightfoot, Dr. 
 Milligan, Professor. 
 Moulton, Professor. 
 Newman, Dr. J. H. 
 Newth, Professor. 
 Roberts, Dr. A. 
 Smith, Rev. G. Vance. 
 
 Scott, Dr. ( Balliol 
 
 College). 
 Scrivener, Rev. F. H. 
 St. Andreav's, Bishop 
 of. (Dr. Wordsworth.) 
 Tregelles, Dr. 
 Vaughan, Dr. 
 Westcott, Canon.' 
 
 * Afterwards Dean of Canterbury. 
 
 * The following gentlemen were afterwards added to the Old Testament 
 Company : Mr. R. L. Bensly, Prof. BirreU, Dr. Chance, Rev. Th. K. Cheyne, 
 Principal Douglas, Dr. Driver, Prof. Geden, Prof. Lumby, Prof. W Robertson 
 Smith, Prof. Weir, Prof. W. Wright, making the total number of members 
 thirty-seven.— Bishops Thirlwall and OUivant, Canon Selwyn, Archdeacon 
 Rose, Drs. Fairbairn, McGill,Weir, and Davies, and Prof. Chenery died dur- 
 ing the progress of the work. Bishop Wordsworth of Lincoln, Dr. Jebb, and 
 Dr. Plumptre resigned. Dr. Pusey and Canon Cook declined the invitation. 
 
 ' Cardinal Newman declined. Dr. Tregelles (d. 1875) was prevented 
 by feeble health from attending, but was present in spirit by his critical 
 edition of the Greek Testament, to which he had devoted the strength 
 of his life. Dean Alford died a few months after the beginning of the 
 work (January, 1871) which lay so near his heart, and which he did so 
 much to set in motion ; his place was supplied by Dean Merivale (the 
 historian of the Roman empire), who, after attending a few sessions, re- 
 signed, and was succeeded by Professor (afterwards Archdeacon) Palmer, 
 of Oxford. Bishop Wilberforce 'attended only once, and died in 1873. 
 Dr. Eadie attended regularly, but spoke seldom, and died in 187G, after 
 completing his History of the English Bible, The total number of wor^- 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 2(85 
 
 " VIII. That the general principles to be followed by both companies 
 be as follows : 
 
 " 1. To introduce as few alterations as possible in the text of the Au- 
 thorised Version, consistently with faithfulness. 
 
 " 2. To limit, as far as possible, the expression of such alterations to the 
 language of the Authorised and earlier English versions. 
 
 "3. Each company to go twice over the portion to be revised, once 
 provisionally, the second time finally, and on principles of voting as here- 
 inafter is provided. 
 
 "4. That the text to be adopted be that for which the evidence is 
 decidedly preponderating; and that when the text so adopted differs 
 from that from which the Authorized Version was made, the alteration be 
 indicated in the margin. 
 
 " 5. To make or retain no change in the text on the second final revision 
 by each company, except two thirds of those present approve of the same, 
 but on the first revision to decide bj'^ simple majorities. 
 
 " 6. In every case of proposed alteration that may have given rise to 
 discussion, to defer the voting thereupon till the next meeting, when- 
 soever the same shall be required by one third of those present at the 
 meeting, such intended vote to be announced in the notice for the next 
 meeting. 
 
 *' 7. To revise the headings of chapters and pages, paragraphs, italics, 
 and punctuation. 
 
 " 8. To refer, on the part of each company, when considered desirable, 
 to divines, scholars, and literary men, whether at home or abroad, for 
 their opinions. 
 
 " IX. That the work of each company be communicated to the other 
 as it is completed, in order that there may be as little deviation from 
 uniformity in language as possible. 
 
 "X. That the special or by rules for each company be as follows: 
 
 " 1. To make all corrections in writing previous to the meeting. 
 
 "2. To place all the corrections due to textual considerations on the 
 left-hand margin, and all other corrections on the right-hand margin. 
 
 "3. To transmit to the chairman, in case of being unable to attend, the 
 corrections proposed in the portion agreed upon for consideration. 
 
 " May lUhy 1870. S. Winton., Chairman:' * 
 
 ing members of the New Testament Company varied from twenty-four 
 to twenty-eight. 
 
 ' Samuel Wilberforce^ Bishoi2.of Winchester. The general and special 
 
386 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 These resolutions were faithfully carried out, with 
 the exception of the revision of the chapter-head- 
 ings (viii. 7), which were omitted, as involving too 
 much direct and indirect interpretation. They will 
 probably be supplied in future editions by the Uni- 
 versity Presses. 
 
 From the list of names, it will be seen that the 
 Committee, in enlarging its membership, has shown 
 good judgment and eminent impartiality and catho- 
 licity. Under the fifth resolution of the Convoca- 
 tion of Canterbury it was empowered " to invite 
 the co-operation of any eminent for scholarship, 
 to whatever nation or religious hody they may he- 
 long.''^ The Committee accordingly solicited the 
 co-operation of some of the ablest and best-known 
 biblical scholars, not only from all schools and par- 
 ties of the Church of England, but also from the 
 other religious denominations of England and Scot- 
 land. There is a commonwealth — we may say, an 
 apostolic succession — of Christian life and Christian 
 scholarship which transcends all sectarian boundaries, 
 however useful and necessary these may be in their 
 place. The Committee proved to be remarkably 
 harmonious. The members co-operated on terms 
 of equality, but the Episcopalians had, of course, 
 the majority, and a bishop presided over each of the 
 two companies. The whole number of Revisers in 
 1880 amounted to fifty-two (27 in the Old Testa- 
 ment Company, 24 in the New Testament Com- 
 pany). Of these thirty-six were Episcopalians (18 
 
 rules had been previously prepared in draft by Bishop Ellicott, and were 
 accepted with but slight modifications. 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 387 
 
 in the Old Testament Company, 18 in the New Tes- 
 tament Company), seven Presbyterians, four Inde- 
 pendents (or Congregationalists), two Baptists, two 
 Wesleyans (or Methodists) and one Unitarian.' 
 
 THE WORK OF THE BRITISH COMMITTEE. 
 
 The British Committee, thus enlarged and organ- 
 ized, began its work after an act of divine worship 
 in Westminster Abbey (in the Chapel of Henry 
 YII.) on the 22d of June, 1870. Every session was 
 opened with united prayer. The two companies 
 worked independently, except for occasional con- 
 ference on matters of common interest. They 
 did not divide the books among sub - committees, 
 but each Company assumed its whole share, thus 
 securing greater uniformity and consistency than 
 could be attained under the less judicious plan of 
 the version of King James. The New Testament 
 Company met in the historic Jerusalem Chamber, 
 the Old Testament Company likewise, unless the 
 meetings were held simultaneously, when it assem- 
 bled in the Chapter Library of the same venerable 
 deanery, under the shadow of Westminster Abbey. 
 
 The New Testament Company held regular 
 monthly meetings of four days each (except in 
 August and September) for ten years and a half. 
 The first Revision occupied about six years; the 
 second, about two years and a half ; the remaining 
 time was spent " in the consideration of the, sugges- 
 tions from America on the second Revision, and of 
 
 1 See the list in Appendix III. 
 
388 tilE EEtlSED VERSlOlSf. 
 
 many details and reserved questions." The Com- 
 pany held in all one hundred and three monthly 
 sessions, embracing four hundred and seven days, 
 with an average daily attendance of sixteen out 
 of twenty-eight (afterwards of twenty-four), mem- 
 bers. Four of the original number were removed 
 by death before 1880.' The chairman (Bishop Elli- 
 cott) was the most faithful attendant, being absent 
 only for two days — a very rare instance of con- 
 scientious devotion to a long and laborious work. 
 The last meeting was held at the Church of St. Mar- 
 tin-in-the-Fields, on St. Martin's day, November 11, 
 1880, and, as Dr. Scrivener says, " will be one of the 
 most cherished remembrances of those who were 
 privileged thus to bring to its end a purpose on 
 which their hearts were fondly set." The Preface 
 is dated from " Jerusalem Chamber, Westminster 
 Abbey, 11th November, 1880." 
 
 There is a special poetic and historic fitness in 
 the assembly-room where this important work was 
 done. "What place more proper for the building 
 of Sion," we may ask with Thomas Fuller, when 
 speaking of the Westminster Assembly of Divines,* 
 " than the Chamber of Jerusalem, the fairest in the 
 Dean's lodgings, where King Henry lY. died, and 
 where these divines did daily meet together ?" The 
 Jerusalem Chamber is a large hall in the Deanery, 
 plainly furnished with a long table and chairs, and 
 ornamented with tapestry (pictures of the Circum- 
 
 ' Wilberforce, Alford, Tregelles, Eadie. Dean Stanley died a few 
 months after the publication (July, 1881). 
 
 ^ Church History of Britain, book xi., cent, xvii., A.D. 1643. 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 389 
 
 cision, the Adoration of the Magi, and the Passage 
 through the Wilderness). It was originally the with- 
 drawing room of the abbot, and has become famous 
 in romance and history as the cradle of many 
 memorable schemes and events, from the Refor- 
 mation down to the present time. There, before 
 the fire of the hearth — then a rare luxury in Eng- 
 land — King Henry lY., who intended to make a 
 pilgrimage to Jerusalem, died March 20, 1413. 
 When informed of the name of the chamber, he 
 exclaimed, 
 
 "... Bear me to that chamber; there I'll lie: 
 In that Jerusalem shall Harry die." 
 
 There, under the genial warmth of the fire which 
 had attracted the dying king, the grave Puritan 
 Assembly prepared, during the Long Parliament, 
 its standards of doctrine, worship, and discipline, to 
 be disowned by England, but honored to this day by 
 the Presbyterian churches of Scotland and America. 
 
 There the most distinguished biblical scholars of 
 the Church of England, in fraternal co-operation 
 with scholars of Dissenting denominations, both 
 nobly forgetting old feuds and jealousies, were en- 
 gaged month after month, for more than ten years, 
 in the truly catholic and peaceful work of revising 
 the common version of the Bible for the general 
 benefit of English-speaking Christendom.* 
 
 ' I venture to insert an interesting incident connected with that room. 
 At the kind invitation of the late Dean Stanley, the delegates to the 
 International Council of Presbyterian Churches, then meeting in London 
 for the formation of a Presbyterian Alliance, repaired to the Jerusalem 
 Chamber on Thursday afternoon, July 22, 1875, and, standing around the 
 
390 THE REVISED VERSIOI?^. 
 
 The Revision of the New Testament was finished 
 in November, 1880, just five hundred years after 
 the first complete translation of the whole Bible 
 into English by Wiclif, whose memory was cele- 
 brated in that year. The Revision of the Old Testa- 
 ment was completed in December, 1884, and will 
 be published by the English University Presses in 
 May, 1885. 
 
 The Revision of the Apocrypha was not in the 
 original scheme, but was afterwards intrusted by 
 the University Presses to a special company, com- 
 posed of members from the two British Companies, 
 who are now engaged in the work. " It is well 
 known," says Dr. Scrivener,' " to biblical scholars 
 that the Apocrypha received very inadequate atten- 
 tion from the Revisers of 1611 and their predeces- 
 sors, so that whole passages remain unaltered from 
 
 long table, were instructed and entertained by the Dean, who, modestly- 
 taking '•' the Moderator's chair," gave them a graphic historical description 
 of the chamber, interspersed with humorous remarks and extracts from 
 Bailli'e. He dwelt mainly on the Westminster Assembly, promising, in 
 his broad-church liberality, at some future time to honor that Assembly 
 by a picture on the northern wall. Dr. McCosh, of Princeton, as Modera- 
 tor of the Presbyterian Council, proposed a vote of thanks for the courtesy 
 and kindness of the Dean, which was, of course, unanimously and heartily 
 given. The writer of this expressed the hope that the Jerusalem Cham- 
 ber may yet serve a still nobler purpose than any in the past — namely, 
 the reunion of Christendom on the basis of God's revealed truth in the 
 Bible; and he alluded to the fact that the Dean had recently (in the 
 Contemporary Reviev), and in an address at St. Andrew's) paid a high 
 compliment to the Westminster Confession by declaring its first chapter, 
 on the Holy Scriptures, to be one of the best, if not the very best, sj'm- 
 bolical statement ever made. — From Schaff's Creeds of Christendom, L 
 749 sq. 
 
 ' In the Tlomiletic Quarterly for October, 1881, p. 512. 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 391 
 
 the racy, spirited, rhythmical, but hasty, loose, and 
 most inaccurate version (being the first published 
 in England) made by Coverdale for his Bible of 
 1636." 
 
 AMERICAN CO-OPERATION.' 
 
 Soon after the organization of the English Com- 
 mittee an invitation was extended to American 
 scholars to co-operate with them in this work of 
 common interest. The first suggestion of Amer- 
 ican co-operation was made in the Canterbury Con- 
 vocation before the work began, and was favorably 
 received.'^ The invitation was unsolicited, and was 
 no doubt prompted by genuine feelings of kind- 
 ness and courtesy, which characterized all the sub- 
 sequent correspondence. It was at the same time 
 good policy, For the American churches have 
 too much self-respect and sense of independence to 
 
 ^ Documentai-y History of the A merican Committee on Revision. Prepared 
 by order of the Committee for the use of the Members. N. York, 1885 (186 pp.). 
 Of this book (compiled by the President, P. S.) only 100 copies were printed 
 for the Revisers, but an extract of it, entitled : Historical Account of the Work 
 of the American Revisers, N. York (Ch. Scribner's Sons), 1885, was sent to 
 each subscriber to the Memorial ed. of the R. V. of the O. T. in May, 1885. 
 
 2 A well-informed writer in the London Times, May 20, 1881, says, " On 
 July 7, 1870, it was moved in the Lower House of Convocation by the 
 present Prolocutor (Lord Alwyne Corapton) that the Upper House should 
 be requested to instruct the Committee of Convocation ' to invite the co- 
 operation of some American divines.' This was at once assented to by 
 the Upper House. It was, we believe, afterwards unofficially agreed 
 that Bishop Wilberforce and the Dean of Westminster should undertake 
 to act for the Committee in opening communications — the Bishop with 
 the Episcopal Church, the Dean with the leading members of other com- 
 munions. The result of this was that towards the close of 1871, two com- 
 mittees were formed in America to communicate with the two English 
 Companies on th<? rules t-hat had been already laid down in this pountry," 
 
 27 
 
392 THE REVISED VERSION^ 
 
 accept for public use a new versiou of the Bible in 
 which they had no lot or share. 
 
 The correspondence was opened by a letter from 
 Bishop EUicott, chairman of the New Testament 
 Company, who authorized the Eev. Dr. Angus, one 
 of the Revisers, on his visit to the United States in 
 August, 1870, to prepare the way for official action. 
 Dr. Angus conferred with American scholars, and 
 asked Dr. Schaff to draw up a plan of co-operation 
 and to suggest a list of names. This plan, together 
 with a list that contained nearly all the American Re- 
 visers and a few others, was in due time submitted to 
 and approved by the British Committee. In view 
 of the great distance, it was deemed best to organize 
 a separate committee, that should fairly represent 
 the biblical scholarship of the leading churches and 
 literary institutions of the United States. Such a 
 Committee, consisting of about thirty members, was 
 formally organized, December 7, 1871, and entered 
 upon active work on October 4, 1872, after the First 
 Revision of the Synoptical Gospels was received from 
 England. It was likewise divided into two Com- 
 panies, which met every month (except in July and 
 August) in two adjoining rooms rented for the pur- 
 pose in the Bible House at New York (but without 
 any connection with the American Bible Society),* 
 and co-operated with their English brethren on the 
 same principles and with the intention of bringing 
 
 * The American Bible Society is by its constitution forbidden to circu- 
 late any other English Bible except the Authorized Version. This con- 
 stitution, however, may be changed by the Society whenever the Re- 
 yision be^^Qm^jS ftu^hg^zed hy the action of the churches. 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 393 
 
 out one and the same Kevision for both countries. 
 Dr. Schaff, of New York, was chosen president, and 
 Dr. Day, of New Haven, secretary, of the whole 
 Committee, and they were charged with the man- 
 agement of the general interests of the two Com- 
 panies, which held joint meetings from time to time. 
 The former was to conduct the foreign correspond- 
 ence. Ex -president Dr. Woolsey, of New Haven, 
 was elected permanent chairman of the New Testa- 
 ment Company, Dr. Green, Professor in Princeton, 
 chairman of the Old Testament Company. The 
 American and British Committees exchanged the 
 results of their labors in confidential communica- 
 tions. The Preface, which hails from the Jerusalem 
 Chamber, thus describes the mode of co-operation : 
 
 " Our communications with the American Committee have been of the 
 following nature. We transmitted to them from time to time each 
 several portion of our First Revision, and received from them in re- 
 turn their criticisms and suggestions. These we considered with much 
 care and attention during the time we were engaged on our Second Re- 
 vision. We then sent over to them the various portions of the Second 
 Revision as they were completed, and received further suggestions, which, 
 like the former, were closely and carefully considered. Last of all, we 
 forwarded to them the Revised Version in its final form ; and a list of 
 those passages in which they desire to place on record their preference of 
 other readings and renderings will be found at the end of the volume. 
 We gratefully acknowledge their care, vigilance, and accuracy ; and we 
 humbly pray that their labors and our own, thus happily united, may be 
 permitted to bear a blessing to both countries, and to all English-speaking 
 people throughout the world." 
 
 If it be asked, then, by what authority the Ameri- 
 can Committee was appointed, we can only say, 
 by the authority of the British Committee, vested 
 jn it fron; fb^ l^eginning by the Convocation of 
 
394 THE KEVISED VERSION. 
 
 Canterbury, under the fifth resolution. The Ameri- 
 can churches were not consulted, except the Prot- 
 estant Episcopal Church, which, for reasons not 
 stated, declined to act ofiicially.^ The selection was 
 carefully made from expert biblical scholars (mostly 
 Professors of Greek and Hebrew), and with an eye 
 to a fair representation of the leading denomina- 
 tions and theological institutions of the country, 
 within the necessary limits of convenience for 
 united work. As there is no established or national 
 Church in America, and all denominations are equal 
 before the law, it was impossible to give the Epis- 
 copal Church, which is far outnumbered by several 
 other churches, the same preponderance as it has in 
 the English Committee, but several bishops were in- 
 vited to take part, one of whom accepted, and proved 
 one of the most faithful and valuable members. 
 
 To secure the co-operation of scholars from the 
 far East, West, and South, who could not be ex- 
 
 ^ Bishop Wilberforce, as chairman of the Revision Committee of the 
 Convocation of Canterbury, addressed a letter, dated August 7, 1871, to 
 the senior bishop, requesting the American bishops to take part in the 
 Revision; but the House of Bishops, at the triennial convention held in 
 Baltimore, October, 1871, passed the resolution oflFered by the Bishop of 
 New York, that " this House, having had no part in originating or or- 
 ganizing the said work of Revision, is not at present in a condition to 
 deliver any judgment respecting it," etc. (See Journal of the General 
 Convention for 1871, pp. 358 and 615 sq.) The Bishop of New York was 
 afterwards requested to propose Episcopal divines for the Committee, but 
 he likewise declined ; whereupon the whole task of organizing the Amerir 
 can Committee was intrusted by the English Committee to Dr. Schaff^ 
 who had previously, at the request of Dr. Angus, drawn up a plan of co- 
 operation and suggested a list of names. The Documentary History, 
 issued by the American Committee after the completion of the whole 
 work, contains the oiHcial correspondence. 
 
THE REVISED VEKSION. 395 
 
 pected to make monthly journeys to New York, the 
 American Committee wished also to elect a number 
 of corresponding members, but the British Com- 
 mittee declined to furnish confidential copies for 
 the purpose. 
 
 With this exception the Committee is as large 
 and representative as could well be secured. Ex- 
 perience and public sentiment have fully approved 
 the choice.^ 
 
 There never was a more faithful and harmonious 
 body of competent scholars engaged in a more im- 
 portant work on the American Continent. Eepre- 
 sentatives of nine dijfferent denominations — Episco- 
 palians, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Baptists, 
 Methodists, Beformed, also one Lutheran, one Uni- 
 tarian, and one Friend — have met from month to 
 month and year to year, at great personal incon- 
 venience and without prospect of reward, to dis- 
 cuss innumerable questions of text and rendering. 
 They never raised a sectarian issue. Their simple 
 purpose was to give to the people in idiomatic 
 English the nearest equivalent for the Greek and 
 Hebrew Scriptures, on the basis of the idiom and 
 vocabulary of the Authorized Version. Christian 
 courtesy, kindness, and genuine catholicity of spirit 
 have characterized all their proceedings. They will 
 ever look back upon these monthly meetings in the 
 Bible House with unmingled satisfaction and thanks 
 to God, who gave them health and grace to go 
 through such a difficult and laborious task with un- 
 
 ^ See tUe Ust of members in Appeudi^ m, 
 
396 THE BE VISED VEKSIOK. 
 
 broken and ever-deepening friendship. After con- 
 cluding their work (October 22, 1880), the members 
 of the New Testament Company parted with min- 
 gled feelings of joy and sadness. Four of their 
 number (the Kev. Drs. Horatio B. Hackett, Henry 
 B. Smith, Charles Hodge, and Professor James Had- 
 ley) had died before the work was completed ; two 
 (the Rev. Dr. Washburn and the Eev. Dr. Burr) 
 died soon afterwards; others are near the end of 
 their earthly journey, and will soon join their com- 
 panions where faith is changed into vision and 
 earthly discords are lost in the harmony of the one 
 kingdom that has no end. 
 
 The funds for the necessary expenses of travel- 
 ling, printing, room-rent, books, and clerical aid were 
 cheerfully contributed by liberal donors, who re- 
 ceived in return a handsome inscribed memorial 
 copy of the first and best University edition of the 
 Revised Version. The financial management was in 
 the hands of well-known Christian laymen of New 
 York. Their final account forms a part of the Doc- 
 umentary History which was printed for the use of 
 the Revisers in 1885. 
 
 THE CONSTITUTION OF THE AMERICAN COMMITTEE. 
 
 The Constitution of the American Committee 
 was first submitted in draft by its president to 
 several leading members of the English Committee, 
 in the summer of 1871, and adopted, with some 
 modifications, at the meeting for organization on 
 December 7, 1871. It is as follows : 
 
 " I. The American Committee, invited by the British Committee en- 
 l^aged in the Kevisioa of the Authorized Eu^liiih Yersioa of the Holy 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 397 
 
 Scriptures to co-operate with them, shall be composed of biblical scholars 
 and divines in the United States. 
 
 " II. This Committee shall have the power to elect its officers, to add 
 to its number, and to fill its own vacancies. 
 
 " III. The officers shall consist of a President, a Corresponding Secre- 
 tary, and a Treasurer.* The President shall conduct the official corre- 
 spondence with the British Revisers. The Secretary shall conduct the 
 home correspondence. 
 
 " IV. New members of the committee and corresponding members 
 must be nominated at a previous meeting, and elected unanimously by 
 ballot.''' 
 
 " V. The American Committee shall co-operate with the British Com- 
 panies on the basis of the principles and rules of Revision adopted by the 
 British Committee. 
 
 "VI. The American Committee shall consist of two Companies, the 
 one for the Revision of the Authorized Version of the Old Testament, the 
 other for the Revision of the Authorized Version of the New Testament. 
 
 "VII. Each Company shall elect its own Chairman and Recording 
 Secretary. 
 
 "VIII. The British Companies will submit to the American Com- 
 panies, from time to time, such portions of their work as have passed the 
 First Revision, and the American Companies will transmit their criticisms 
 and suggestions to the British Companies before the Second Revision. 
 
 " IX. A joint meeting of the American and British Companies shall 
 be held, if possible, in London, before final action. 
 
 "X. The American Committee to pay their own expenses, and to have 
 the ownership and control of the copyright of the Revised "Version in the 
 United States of America." ' 
 
 » The first treasurer was one of the Revisers, Professor Short; bat 
 after the organization of a Finance Committee of laymen, they elected one 
 of their number, Mr. Andrew L. Taylor, who acted as treasurer till the 
 close. He was also treasurer of the American Bible Society till 1886. 
 The 'expenses of the Committee were all met, mostly from the sale of 
 Memorial copies of the Revised Scriptures bought from the English Uni- 
 versity Presses, and imported free of duty by a special act of Congress. 
 
 ' No corresponding members were nominated, owing to the adverse 
 action of the British Committee, above alluded to (p. 395). 
 
 ^ The last article, as far as it refers to the publication of the Revision, 
 was abandoned by the American Committee in the course of negotiations 
 )yith the British Universities, as will be shown below. 
 
398 THE REVISED VEKSION. 
 
 THE RELATION OF THE AMERICAN AND ENGLISH COM- 
 MITTEES, AND THE AGREEMENT WITH THE UNIVER- 
 SITY PRESSES. 
 
 The Americans, as may be inferred from the pre- 
 ceding Constitution, accepted the invitation and 
 entered upon the work with the understanding on 
 their part that they were to be not simply advisers, 
 but fellow-revisers, like tlie new members of the 
 English Committee who had been appointed by the 
 original commission, May 25, 1870, under the fifth 
 resolution of Convocation. 'No respectable scholars, 
 abundantly engaged in useful work, would have been 
 willing to bestow ten years' labor on any other 
 terms; nor would the American churches, repre- 
 senting a larger population than that of England, 
 ever accept a Revision of their Bible in which they 
 had no positive share and influence. The friends of 
 Revision contributed towards the expenses, expect- 
 ing it to be in some way a joint work of both Com- 
 mittees. The whole American community seems to 
 have been under the same impression, and this ex- 
 plains the enormous demand for the Revised New 
 Testament in this country, which has no parallel 
 in the histol-y of the book trade. 
 
 The natural mode of exercising the full right of 
 membership is by a vote on the changes to be 
 adopted. But absent members have no vote in the 
 British Committee, and the intervening ocean made 
 it impossible for the two Committees to meet jointly. 
 The ninth article of the American Constitution con- 
 templates " a joint m^^ting " to ^^ held in London 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 before final action, " if possible." But such a meet- 
 ing was found impracticable, and was superseded by 
 another and better arrangement. 
 
 Here, then, was a diflSculty, which made itself felt 
 at an early stage of the work. It led to delicate 
 negotiations with the British Committee, and the 
 Delegates and Syndics of the University Presses of 
 Oxford and Cambridge, who in the meantime had 
 acquired from the British Revisers the sole right of 
 publication, in consideration of paying all their ex- 
 penses. The British Companies declared, in July, 
 1873, that they would " attach great weight and 
 importance to all the suggestions of the American 
 Committee," and give them " the most careful con- 
 sideration," but that " they are precluded by the 
 fundamental rules of their Constitution as well as 
 by the terms 'of their agreement with the University 
 Presses from admitting any persons, not members 
 of their bod}^, to take part in their decisions." 
 
 The Americans were unwilling to proceed on that 
 basis, and sent one of their members to London to 
 advocate their literary rights as fellow-Revisers, and 
 to represent to the English brethren that much of 
 the success of the enterprise with the American 
 public depended upon a clear understanding of this 
 point. After a full and manly exchange of views 
 in the Jerwsalem Chamber, the British Companies 
 proposed a plan (July 15, 1875) to consolidate the 
 English and the American Committees into one 
 corporation, by the appointment of four American 
 Revisers as members of the English Revision Com- 
 panies, and vice versa. 
 
400 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 This plan was certainly all that the Americans 
 could ask or wish, and more than they could expect, 
 considering that the English began the work and 
 had the larger share of responsibility. The pro- 
 posal of the British Companies is the best evidence 
 of their sincere desire to continue the connection 
 on the most honorable and liberal terms. 
 
 The University Presses, which have sovereign 
 control over all questions involving the publication, 
 agreed to ratify the proposed plan, but made a com- 
 mercial condition which the Americans were unable 
 to accept at the time, and so the plan fell through. 
 For several months communication was suspended, 
 and the American Committee went on independent- 
 ly (revising Isaiah and the Epistle to the Hebrews). 
 But in July, 1876, the University Presses of their 
 own accord courteously reopened correspondence, 
 and invited the Americans to make any proposal, 
 promising to take it into respectful consideration. 
 The negotiations resulted at last in an agreement, 
 dated August 3, 1877, which is probably the best 
 compromise that could be made in justice to all the 
 parties concerned. It is in substance as follows : 
 
 The English Revisers promise to send confideu' 
 tially their Revision in its various stages to the 
 American Revisers, to take all the American sug- 
 gestions into special consideration befoie the con- 
 clusion of their labors, to furnish them before pub- 
 lication with copies of the Revision in its final form, 
 and to allow them to present, in an Appendix to the 
 Revised Scriptures, all the remaining differences of 
 reading and rendering of importance, which the 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 401 
 
 English Committee should decline to adopt ; while, 
 on the other hand, the American Revisers pledge 
 themselves to give their moral support to the author 
 ized editions of the Universit}^ Presses, with a view 
 to their freest circulation within the United States, 
 and not to issue an edition of their own, for a term 
 of fourteen years. 
 
 By this arrangement the Americans secured the 
 full recognition of their rights as fellow-Revisers. 
 In a joint meeting in London the changes proposed 
 in the Appendix would probably all be voted down, 
 for the English Committee is much more numerous, 
 and knows best what public opinion and taste in 
 England require and can bear. On the other hand, 
 the Americans may claim the same advantage as 
 regards the views of their countrymen. In consid- 
 eration of this honorable concession, they were quite 
 willing to forego any other advantage. 
 
 The American Committee at one time, as the last 
 article in the Constitution shows, considered the 
 expediency of securing a copyright for the purpose 
 of protecting the purity and integrity of the text 
 against irresponsible reprints, and also as a means 
 of defraying the necessary expenses of the work, in 
 the expectation of making an arrangement with an 
 American publisher similar to that which the Eng- 
 lish Committee made with the University Presses, 
 instead of relying on voluntary contributions of 
 friends. Beyond this they had no interest in the 
 question of copyright. But after careful discust 
 sion the American Revisers concluded to abandon 
 the plan of legal protection, even for the Appendix 
 
402 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 (which is exclusively their own literary property), 
 and to give the Eevised Scriptures free to the 
 American public. The University Presses, which 
 are the authorized publishers of King James's Yer- 
 sion in Great Britain, have the best possible facil- 
 ities of publication, and have issued the Revised 
 New Testament in a variety of forms and with the 
 greatest typographical accuracy. They have, more- 
 over, a claim on the public patronage, in view of 
 their large outlay, not only for printing and pub- 
 lishing, but also for the payment of the expenses 
 ($100,000) of the British Committee, which they 
 assumed at a time when the success of the enter- 
 prise was altogether uncertain. The American Ee- 
 visers, having paid their own expenses from volun- 
 tary contributions, are under no obligation to any 
 publishing firm. 
 
 Tlie new version, then, as to copyright, stands 
 precisely on the same footing with the Authorized 
 Version : it is protected hy law in England, it is free 
 in America. 
 
 The American Revisers have been blamed in some 
 quarters for abstaining from the publication of an 
 authorized American edition, and exposing even their 
 own Appendix to inevitable piracy and mutilation. 
 But would they not be still more blamed if they 
 had given any publisher, even for a very short term, 
 a monopoly over all the rest? The plan adopted 
 is undoubtedly the best for the widest and cheap- 
 est possible circulation of the Revised Scriptures 
 throughout America and the world. The only in- 
 convenience is the confusion which arises from the 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 403 
 
 nnlimited license of unauthorized publications in 
 America; but the Authorized Version is exposed 
 to the same danger, and the success of any edition 
 depends ultimately on its accuracy. Before many 
 years the American Bible Society may issue a stand- 
 ard edition of the new version for those who prefer 
 it to the old. In the meantime the University edi- 
 tions of Oxford and Cambridge, which cannot be 
 surpassed in accuracy and beauty, are the only au- 
 thorized standards sanctioned by the British and 
 American Committees. 
 
 PUBLICATION. 
 
 Tuesday, the 17th of May, and Friday, the 20th 
 of May, of the year 1881, deserve to be remembered 
 as the publication days of the Revised English New 
 Testament — the first in England, the second in the 
 United States. They form an epoch in the history 
 of the Bible, and furnish a valuable testimony to its 
 absolute sovereignty among literary productions. 
 In those days the Gospel was republished to the 
 whole English-reading world with the aid of all the 
 modern facilities which the printing-press and the 
 telegraph could afford. The eagerness of the pub- 
 lic to secure the Revision, and the rapidity and ex- 
 tent of its sale, surpassed all expectations, and are 
 without a parallel in the history of the book trade. 
 In the year 30 of our era the Great Teacher ad- 
 dressed twelve disciples and a few thousand hearers 
 on the hills of Galilee and in the temple court at 
 Jerusalem, while the Greek and Roman world out- 
 side of Palestine were ignorant of His very exist- 
 
404: THE KEVlSEt) VEltSlOK. 
 
 ence; in the year 1881, He addressed the same 
 words of truth and life in a fresh version to mill- 
 ions of readers in both hemispheres. Who will 
 doubt that the New Testament has a stronger hold 
 upon mankind now than ever before, and is be- 
 yond all comparison the most popular book among 
 the two most civilized nations of the earth ? 
 
 On the 17th of May, the Bishop of Gloucester 
 and Bristol laid the first copy of the Kevised New 
 Testament before the two houses of the Convoca- 
 tion of Canterbury assembled in Westminster, and 
 then, in an address to the House of Bishops, gave a 
 succinct history of the Revision. 
 
 On the same day the sale began, but it was im- 
 possible to supply the demand. " Orders for a mill- 
 ion Oxford copies " ( including the orders from 
 America) had been received before publication.' 
 Probably the same number was ordered from the 
 Cambridge University Press ; for a telegram from 
 London, May 21, 1881, reported the sale of "two 
 million copies of the Revised New Testament" in 
 that city. In the United States the sale of the 
 University editions began on the 20th of May be- 
 fore day-break, and the pressure to the salesrooms 
 in New York and Philadelphia was without a prec- 
 edent. The New York agent of the Clarendon 
 Press sold 365,000 copies of the Oxford edition 
 before the close of the year, mostly during the first 
 
 * This I learned from Mr. Henry Frowde, the London agent of the 
 Clarendon Press. After the appearance of American reprints the demand 
 for English copies greatly diminished. 
 
THE BEVISEB VEKSION. 405 
 
 few days.' Messrs. Lippincott & Co., the agents 
 of the Cambridge Press, sold about 80,000 copies 
 in Philadelphia, and Messrs. A. J. Holman & Co. 
 about 30,000 in the same city (besides 20,000 of 
 their own issue). 
 
 To this sale of the English editions must be added 
 the sale of the American reprints. A few days 
 after publication the book was reproduced in differ- 
 ent shapes. Edition followed edition, and before 
 the close of 1881 thirty or more American reprints, 
 good, bad, and indifferent, were in the market. One 
 firm sold during the summer over 100,000 copies, 
 another 65,000 copies. 
 
 It is probably not too much to say that within 
 less than one year three million copies of the book, 
 in all editions, were actually bought and more or 
 less read in Great Britain and America. 
 
 This estimate does not include the immense cir- 
 culation through the periodical papers of the United 
 States, which published the Revised New Testament 
 in whole or in part, and did for two or three weeks 
 the work of as many Bible Societies. Two daily 
 papers in Chicago {The Tribune and The Times) had 
 the book telegraphed to them from New York, and 
 sent it to their readers two days after publication, at 
 a distance of nine hundred and seventy-eight miles.'' 
 
 * So the agent informed me. His annual sales of the Oxford editions 
 of the Authorized Version average 150,000. 
 
 ^ The Tribune employed for the purpose ninety-two compositors and 
 five correctors, and the whole work was completed in twelve hours. The 
 Times boastfully says of its own issue: "Such a publication as this is 
 entirely without precedent. It indicates on the one hand the wide-spread 
 desire to see the Revised Version, and on the other the ability of The 
 
406 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 Sucli facts stand isolated and alone in the whole 
 history of literature, and furnish the best answer to 
 the attacks and sneers of modern infidelity, which 
 would fain make the world believe that the Bible 
 is antiquated. All the ancient and modern classics 
 together, if they were reissued in improved editions 
 and translations, could not awaken such an interest 
 and enthusiasm. England and America have hon- 
 ored themselves by thus honoring the Bible, and 
 proved its inseparable connection with true freedom 
 and progress. 
 
 NOTES. 
 
 The following extracts from New York papers give a lively impression 
 of the extraordinary sensation caused by the publication of the Revised 
 New Testament. Making due allowance for the unpleasant, but inevita- 
 ble, admixture of the commercial aspect, there still remains an unusual 
 amount of religious interest, which even the most secular papers had to 
 acknowledge. Curiosity had been raised to the highest pitch by the 
 silence of the Revisers. With the exception of the premature publica- 
 tion of the principal changes, by the indiscretion of a London newspaper 
 (Jan. 7, 1881)j the public were kept ignorant of the character of the Revi- 
 sion, in spite of repeated attempts of enterprising reporters in London and 
 New York to secure a copy. One such reporter ingeniously approached 
 the President of the American Committee by special messenger from one 
 of the first hotels in New York, under the assumed name of Mr. Henry 
 Frowde, the London agent of the Oxford Press, who pretended to have 
 just arrived to superintend the sale, and requested the loan of a copy for 
 a few minutes before he could get access to his boxes on the steamer ! 
 
 Times to supply the public with what is wanted. The Four Gospels, the 
 Acts of the Apostles, and the Epistle to the Romans were telegraphed 
 from New York. This portion of the New Testament contains about one 
 hundred aind eighteen thousand words, and constitutes by manyfold the 
 largest dispatch ever sent over the wires. The remainder of the work was 
 printed from the copies of the Revised Testament received here last night." 
 See The Tribune and The Times, of Chicago, for May 22, 1881. 
 
THE REVISED VEESION. 407 
 
 Mr. Frowde was invited to tea, but failed to make his appearance, and left 
 for unknown parts. 
 
 From The N. Y. Herald, May 21, 1881. 
 
 "The publishing house of Thomas Nelson & Sons, corner of Mulberry 
 and Bleecker streets, was the scene of unusual excitement yesterday morn- 
 ing. The firm are the agents in this country for the Oxford Bibles, and, 
 as might naturally be inferred, their business is ordinarily decorous and 
 solemn. To say that this was reversed yesterday is saying very little. 
 Long before daylight the doors were opened for the delivery of the Re- 
 vised Testament, and at four o'clock the scene about the building was an 
 animated one. Trucks of all sizes and character were backed up around 
 the place, and truckmen discussed the situation in language that would 
 not have been, it is safe to say, entirely pleasing to the biblical revisers 
 had they heard it. Huge boxes were rolled out and carted away, the 
 vacancy left by each departing wagon to be filled at once by a new one. 
 This went on for hours with little or no abatement. The members of the 
 firm and the clerks and porters were utterly fagged out before noon ; but 
 the work went on until late in the day, when a rest was had by shutting 
 the doors, and letting all hands go home until this morning. 
 
 "the bible by wholesale. 
 " The orders yesterday aggregated about 175,000 copies, of various styles 
 and prices, and these were for the most part large orders, it being abso- 
 lutely impossible to find time to attend to the smaller ones. The retail 
 prices of the books range from 15 cents to $16; and the firm state that 
 they were surprised at the unusual demand for the higher-priced and 
 finer bindings. So great was this demand that the first supply of these 
 finer books received from England was almost exhausted. The demand 
 from city dealers was large, and included all of the various styles. Many 
 thousands of the books were shipped to the West, but the greatest num- 
 ber of orders were received from the Eastern States. These orders were 
 mostly for a limited number, at the lower prices, and it appears as if the 
 New England dealers intended to first satisfy themselves of the selling 
 quality of the books before investing largely. The styles of the books 
 purchased were as follows: Nonpareil 32mo, paper cover, retails for 15 
 cents per copy; cloth, limp, cut flush, red edges, retailed for 20 cents. 
 Nonpareil 32mo, French morocco, gilt edges, 65 cents ; Venetian morocco, 
 limp, gilt edges, 80 cents; Turkey morocco, limp, gilt edges, $1 75; Tur- 
 key morocco, circuit, gilt edges, $2 50 ; Levant, $4. Brevier, 16mo, cloth. 
 
 28 
 
408 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 limp, red edges, 50 cents ; Levant, $5 25. Long primer, 8vo, cloth, bnar.ls, 
 red edges, $1 ; Levant, $7 50. Pica, demy 8vo, cloth, bevelled board?, red 
 edges, $2 50; Levant, $10. Pica, royal 8vo, cloth, bevelled boards, reil 
 edges, $4 ; Levant, $16. The largest order was for 16,000 copies and the 
 smallest one copy. 
 
 "Almost with the break of day came men who wanted to buy single cop- 
 ies. None were sold, and the demand, after a time, became so great that 
 the following sign was posted on the door : 
 
 NO GOODS AT RETAIL. 
 
 " Even this did not have the desired effect in individual cases, though 
 it succeeded in keeping away the larger number of would-be purchasers. 
 The clerks managed to keep their tempers, though sorely tried by the 
 thousand and one questions put to them about the Testament and its 
 revision. ... 
 
 "the bible in wall street. 
 
 " It was certainly an unaccustomed if not an unprecedented sight which 
 was witnessed in Wall street yesterday morning, when a half-dozen enter- 
 prising street venders appeared, carrying trays loaded with small and 
 neatly bound volumes, and shouting, * Bibles, only a quarter !' ' The Re- 
 vised New Testament for only twenty-five cents !' The pedlers, who were 
 mostly active young men, were apparently very successful. The sidewalk 
 merchant who first took his stand at the corner of Wall and Uroad streets 
 was speedily surrounded by a crowd. Passers-by stopped first to investi- 
 gate and then to invest ; and scores of brokers and bankers, young clerks 
 and Stock Exchange operators, were seen to walk away witli a copy of the 
 book in their hands or bulging from their pockets. Some of the dealers 
 sold out all they had on their trays, and went away to return with a fresh 
 supply. Altogether, several hundred New Testaments must have been 
 disposed of in the neighborhood of the Stock Exchange during the day. 
 In fact, the book went off at such a rapid rate as to inspire one with the 
 suspicion that perhaps the brokers were about to get up a ' corner ' in the 
 Scriptures. 
 
 " The novelty of the scene excited much comment. One old gen- 
 tleman, as he alighted from a cab in front of his banker's oflSce, ex- 
 claimed : 
 
 " ' Well, the millennium must be at hand, sure enough ! I never ex- 
 pected to live to see the Bible sold in Wall street. They need it here 
 badly enough, Lord knows! Here, young man, I'll take two copies, Just 
 to set a good example,' " 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 409 
 
 From The N. Y. Tribune, May 21, 1881. 
 
 "The sales of the Revised Testament yesterday exceeded 300,000 cop- 
 ies, and great eagerness was shown, by clergymen in particular, to obtain 
 them. The fact that a number of preachers propose to use the new ver- 
 sion in their services to-morrow, proves that there is a strong disposition 
 to accept it promptly. It remains to be seen, however, whether this dis- 
 position will be general, or whether the revised text must win its way 
 slowly into the affections of the Christian world, which has learned to re- 
 gard the King James translation with almost as much reverence as if it 
 were itself inspired." 
 
 From The N. Y. Times, May 22, 1881. 
 
 *' The demand for the revised edition of the New Testament continued 
 with unabated activity all day yesterday. The street venders did a 
 thriving business in the cheap styles of binding, and the principal book- 
 stores were thronged with purchasers. Mr. Thomas Nelson,^ of Thomas 
 Nelson & Son, Bleecker Street, said that orders continued to flow in on 
 pretty much the same scale as on Friday. He had been compelled to 
 decline new orders unless the persons ordering consented to wait their 
 turns. He was constantly receiving telegraphic orders from all parts of 
 the country. One house in Philadelphia telegraphed for five thousand 
 copies of one style, besides copies of other styles. ... In speaking of the 
 extraordinary demand for the book, he said that the efforts of publishers 
 and newspapers to obtain advance copies bordered on the ludicrous. It 
 was his belief that he could have got $6000 for a single copy as late as 
 twelve o'clock on Thursday night. 
 
 " The store of I. K. Funk & Co., Nos. 10 and 12 Dey Street, was crowded 
 all day yesterday. Mr. Funk said that the retail trade and the demand 
 for job lots were even greater than on Friday. Especially remarkable 
 was the demand of street venders. Some of these men had sold as many 
 as five hundred copies of the twenty-cent style up to two o'clock Saturday 
 afternoon." 
 
 From The (New York) Itidependent, May 26, 1881. 
 "'Here's yer New Testament, jist out,' is the crj' of the newsboy on 
 the street. This is the first time in the history of the world that the 
 Holy Scriptures were sold in this way. The demand for the Revised 
 
 ^ [Mr. Nelson, who resides in Edinburgh, was represented by Mr, Garvin 
 Honston.— 'JS^dj 
 
410 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 Version, though not greater than was expected, is very great; people 
 who had scarcely read a chapter in the King James Version buying copies 
 of the new book, ' jist out,' to examine it for themselves. Everywhere — 
 on the cars, on the ferry-boats, and in other public conveyances and 
 places — attentive readers of the revised book are to be seen; and the 
 most frequent question, when two friends meet, is, * Have you seen the 
 New Testament? How do you like it ?' In church, and particularly in 
 the Sunday-school, copies of the new book were to be seen last Sunday, 
 and a number of ministers gave their views of it from the pulpit. One 
 of the New York dailies says it will take the place of the dime novel for 
 a while on the news-stands." 
 
 From The New York Observer, May 26, 1881. 
 
 " No event of modern times has excited more universal interest among 
 the English-speaking nations than the publication of the Revised New 
 Testament. The number of copies sold in England and in the United 
 States within a few days has been unprecedented in the history of books, 
 amounting in England to two millions, and in this countrj' to the extent 
 of the edition imported, which was 350,000. Already the book has been 
 reprinted, and various editions will be sold by the hundred thousand. In 
 addition to the sales at the book-stores and book-stands, the strange 
 spectacle was seen, on Friday and Saturday, of the New Testament, beau- 
 tifully printed and handsomely bound, sold by volunteer colporteurs by 
 the hundred on Broadway and Wall Street, and in other marts of business. 
 The amount of attention it has received in private reading and in conver- 
 sation is equally amazing. Whatever shall be the fate of the New Re- 
 vision, it forms a new era in the history of the Bible, and shows the 
 universal and intense hold which the book of God has upon the minds, if 
 not the hearts, of the people." 
 
 From The American Bookseller, June 1, 1881. 
 
 " Philadelphia, May 26, 1881. 
 •* The publication of the New Revision of the New Testament has been 
 attended with more interest in this city than that of any other work ever 
 published. The consignment to Messrs. J. B. Lippincott, who were the 
 agents of the Cambridge University Press, came in two lots, one by the 
 steamer Montreal into New York, and the other by the Lord Clive to the 
 port of Philadelphia. Those by the New York boat were not put on the 
 wharf till after twelve o'clock the morning of the 20th, and were delivered 
 at saurise to New York parties by their brokers. Those by Philadelphia 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 411 
 
 steamer arrived at their warehouse at noon on the 19th, and gave them 
 just time enough with their large force to pack and ship before eight 
 o'clock on the morning of the 20th. There was not much time to spare, 
 and some anxiety was felt that they would be too late for the day fixed 
 for publication. 
 
 " The reporters of the newspapers seemed to vie with each other in 
 gathering the facts and fancies in relation to its publication. And in 
 these reports there is much to amuse, believe, and to be largely dis- 
 counted. . . . 
 
 " Next in interest to the publication and sale of the Testament printed 
 by the University is the enterprise among publishers and electrotypers in 
 the production of reprints. Fagan is making thirteen sets of plates; 
 Fergusson, successor to S. A. George & Co., is making seven sets; A. J. 
 Holman & Co. inform us that they will have three diiferent reprints, and 
 will also issue it in quarto form with the Old Testament. The National 
 Publishing Company, Hubbard Bros., and Potter & Co. announce editions 
 to be sold only by subscription. Porter & Coates have ready The Com- 
 parative Edition, embracing the New Revision and the King James 
 Version." 
 
 It is proper to add that after this immense rush the sale of the Uni- 
 versity editions and of all American editions fell off rapidly, and a reaction 
 took place in favor of the old version. This is due in part to the un- 
 favorable criticisms on the Revision, and in part, as I am informed by one 
 of the leading Bible publishers, to " the great change in the typographical 
 appearance and the substitution of paragraphs for the familiar verses." 
 He thinks "that the people would have accepted the changes in the 
 translation much more readily had the general appearance of the old 
 Bible been adhered to." 
 
 RECEPTION, CRITICISM, AND PROSPECT. 
 
 The Revisers, familiar with the history of pre* 
 vious revisions from Jerome's Yulgate down to 
 King James's Version, were prepared for a great 
 deal of opposition, though hopeful of ultimate suc- 
 cess. They well knew that their work was imper- 
 fect, and that it is impossible to please all. They 
 jthe^nselves had to sacrifice their individual prefer- 
 
412 THE EEVISED VERSION. 
 
 ences to the will of the itiajoritj/ A product of so 
 many minds and intended for so many churches 
 must necessarily be a compromise, but for this very 
 reason is more likely to satisfy the general wants 
 and demands. 
 
 The extraordinary interest of the Anglo-Amer- 
 ican public in the Revision showed itself at once in 
 the number and diversity of criticisms. Never was 
 any book, within so short a time, so much discussed, 
 reviewed, praised, and condemned by the press, from 
 the pulpit, in private circles, and public meetings. 
 In the language of a British scholar, " there never 
 was a time when the attention of so great a variety 
 of well-qualified critics has been concentrated on 
 the problem of the relation between the Greek text 
 and the English version, and the best way of repre- 
 senting the one by the other." ' 
 
 The first and the prevailing impression was one 
 of disappointment and disapproval, especially in 
 England. The expectations of the public were un- 
 reasonable and conflicting. Many were in hopes 
 that the revision would supersede commentaries, 
 and clear up all the difficulties ; instead of that, they 
 found the same obscurities, and a perplexing number 
 of marginal notes, raising as many questions of read- 
 ing or rendering. The liberals looked for more, 
 the conservatives for fewer, departures from the old 
 
 ^ The Bishop of Salisbury, himself one of the Revisers, says (in his 
 Charge, 1882, p. 18) : " The Version as it stands does not exhibit the real 
 judgment of any of the Revisers. Each one was, many times, outvoted in 
 points which he greatly valued." 
 
 ' ftova. " The Church Quarterly Review," London, January, 1883, p. 34j5. 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 413 
 
 version. Some wanted the language modernized, 
 others preferred even the antiquated words and 
 phrases, including the " whiches" and the "devils." 
 A few would prefer a more literal rendering ; but 
 a much greater number of critics, including some 
 warm friends and even members of the Committee, 
 charge the Eevision with sacrificing grace and ease, 
 poetry and rhythm, to pedantic fidelity. The same 
 objection is made by literary critics who care more 
 for classical English than the homely Hebraistic 
 Greek of the Apostles and Evangelists. The only 
 point in which the adverse critics agree is opposition 
 to the new version as wholly unfit to displace the 
 old. 
 
 The strongest condemnation and the most formi- 
 dable assaults have come from conservative admirers 
 of the received Greek text and the Authorized Ver- 
 sion. Most of them had previously resisted all at- 
 tempts at revision as a sort of sacrilege, and found 
 their worst fears realized. They were amazed and 
 shocked at the havoc made with their favorite notions 
 and pet texts. How many sacred associations, they 
 said, are ruthlessly disturbed ! How many edifying 
 sermons spoiled ! Even the Lord-s Prayer has been 
 tampered with, and a discord thrown into the daily 
 devotions. The inspired text is changed and un- 
 settled, the faith of the people in God's holy "Word 
 is undermined, and aid and comfort given to the 
 enemy of all religion. We need not be surprised 
 at such talk, for to the great mass of English readers 
 King James's Version is virtually the inspired Word 
 of God. So for Koman Catholics, the Vulgate of 
 
414 THE EE VISED VERSION. 
 
 Jerome, with all its blunders, occupies the place of 
 the original, and the voice of the infallible Church 
 or Pope is to them the very voice of God. Religious 
 prejudices are the deepest of all prejudices, and re- 
 ligious conservatism is the most conservative of all 
 conservatisms. It may take a whole generation to 
 emancipate the mass of the people from the tyranny 
 of ignorance and prejudice. In all this opposition 
 we should not forget that its extent and intensity 
 reveal a praiseworthy attachment to the Bible. In 
 no other nation would a new version have met with 
 so many and such earnest protests as among the 
 English and Americans, for the simple reason that 
 there is not among any other people the same de- 
 gree of interest in the book. 
 
 In the meantime, however, the Eevision has been 
 steadily gaining ground among scholars and thought- 
 ful laymen who take the trouble to compare the 
 rival versions with the Greek original. This, of 
 course, is the only proper test. With a few con- 
 spicuous exceptions, the verdict of competent judges 
 has been favorable, and the force of the exceptions 
 is broken by the intemperance and bitterness of the 
 opposition. Whatever be the defects of the Re- 
 vision, it must in all fairness be admitted that it is 
 the most faithful and accurate version ever made for 
 popular use, and that it brings the English reader 
 far nearer to the spirit and words of Christ and his 
 Apostles than any other version. This is its chief 
 merit, and it alone is sufficient compensation for all 
 the labor and expense devoted to it. An able writer 
 from the Church of England, after reviewing the 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 415 
 
 short history and large literature of the Revision 
 during the first eighteen months, emphatically de- 
 clares his " unshaken conviction that, after all rea- 
 sonable deductions have been made, the Revisers 
 have earned the deep respect and gratitude of all 
 who can appreciate the importance of supplying the 
 English reader with an exact interpretation of the 
 Word of God." ' 
 
 Upon the whole, the Revision is more popular in 
 America than in England, although it is more an 
 English work. Many ministers (especially among 
 Congregationalists and Baptists, who are not ham- 
 pered by church authority) use it already in the 
 pulpit, either alone or alongside of the old ver- 
 sion. The rising generation is familiarized with it 
 in Sunday-schools, Bible-classes, and through popular 
 comments. Religious periodicals present from week 
 to week the international lessons in both versions 
 in parallel columns; and the comparison of the two 
 
 ^ In " The Church Quart. Review" for 1883, p. 345; comp. the conclusion, 
 p.368, where the critic protests "against the absohite indecorum of assailing 
 the work of these distinguished scholars with words of disrespect and con- 
 tumely," and adds : " In all the qualities that are most requisite for such 
 an undertaking, they tower high above the heads of all but a very small 
 number among their assailants. For their protracted, patient, generous 
 labors, they deserve the gratitude of all to whom God's Word is precious, 
 and who wish the Gospel to be proclaimed in England with the utmost 
 clearness which the most exact translation of the message can impart." 
 To this may be added the judgment of Canon F. W. Farrar, who says 
 (in the " Contemp. Review " for March, 1882, p. 380) : " In spite of the 
 bitter attacks which have been made upon the version, it will come to 
 be regarded by ever-increasing numbers as one of the best boons which 
 has been bestowed upon them by the learning, the fearlessness, and the 
 faithfulness of the ripest scholars and divines whom the nineteenth 
 century can boast." 
 
416 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 is found stimulating and profitable. Even opponents 
 use the E-evision, and admit its value as a commentary. 
 It would be premature to predict the course of 
 the Convocation of Canterbury. No one can tell 
 whether, when, and how it will act. Three ways 
 are open — to reject, to recommit, to adopt. The 
 Convocation is not likely to disown and destroy 
 her own child. A revision of the Revision, by 
 recommitment to the old, or by the appointment 
 of a new. Committee, is surrounded by almost as 
 many difiiculties as the original movement. If 
 the adverse critics could agree among themselves 
 about a limited number of changes backward or 
 forward, it would be an easy matter for the old 
 Committee to reconvene and vote on these specific 
 changes ; but there is no such agreement. A new 
 Committee (which would have to be composed, like 
 the old, of scholars of all theological schools and 
 denominations), to do justice to themselves and to 
 the work, w^ould have to go through the whole 
 laborious and expensive process of ten or more 
 years, and could at best only produce another com- 
 promise between conflicting principles and opinions. 
 The adoption of the Revision as it is will be strongly 
 opposed by an able and influential party. But it 
 would be sufficient, and perhaps the wisest course 
 (we speak with becoming modesty, as an outsider), 
 if Convocation would authorize the optional use of 
 the Revised Version, and leave the ultimate result 
 to the future, as in the case of King James's Version, 
 which gradually and slowly superseded, by its own 
 merits, the Bishops' Bible and the Geneva Bible. 
 
THE ItEVlSED VERSION. 417 
 
 Acknowledged incoDsistencies and other minor 
 blemishes ought to be corrected bj the Eevisers 
 themselves. But the English Companies have dis- 
 banded, and are not likely to meet again. 
 
 The non-episcopal denominations are more free 
 to use the Revision, even without special legislation. 
 They had no share in King James's Version, though 
 strongly attached to it by long habit ; they are not 
 bound by canons and rubrics, and an obligatory 
 liturgy. Some may formally authorize the Re- 
 vision, others will leave its use to the option of 
 pastors and congregations. It will certainly be used 
 more and more in public and private as the highest 
 standard of accuracy and fidelity, until it shall be 
 superseded by a better one at some future genera- 
 tion. It would be well to revise the Bible every fifty 
 years, and thus to renew its youth, that the people 
 might read it with increased interest. 
 
 The Anglo-American Revision is not the best 
 possible, but the best existing version, and as good 
 as the present generation of scholars hailing from 
 different churches and countries can produce. If 
 we cannot have the very best, let us prefer the bet- 
 ter to the good. 
 
 THE MERITS OF THE REVISION AS COMPARED WITH 
 THE OLD VERSION. 
 
 The changes which distinguish the Revised Eng- 
 lish Testament from the Authorized Version may 
 be classified as follows : 
 
 1. An older and purer text in the place of the 
 traditional text. 
 
418 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 2. Correction of acknowledged errors of transla- 
 tion. 
 
 3. Accuracy and consistency in the rendering of 
 the article, modes, voices, tenses, prepositions, and 
 particles, etc. 
 
 4. Removal of artificial distinctions caused by 
 needless variations in words and proper names. 
 
 5. Restoration of real distinctions, which are ob- 
 literated by rendering two or more distinct terms in 
 the same way. 
 
 6. Intelligible words and phrases in place of mis- 
 leading and obsolete archaisms. 
 
 7. Revision and reduction of words supplied in 
 italics ; rectification of punctuation. 
 
 8. Sectional arrangement combined with the ar- 
 bitrary capitular and versicular division, which is 
 put in the margin. 
 
 9. Poetical quotations from the Old Testament 
 arranged metrically according to the parallelism of 
 Hebrew poetry. 
 
 10. An increased number of alternate marginal 
 readings and renderings in cases where evidence 
 and argument are nearly equally balanced. 
 
 These improvements occur in every chapter, and 
 almost in every verse. It is stated that there are in 
 all over 36,000 departures from King James's Yer- 
 sion, including nearly 6000 changes in the Greek 
 text. This is probably an exaggerated estimate, since 
 there are only 7960 verses in the New Testament. 
 It includes no doubt the changes in punctuation, and 
 all the alternate readings and renderings in the mar- 
 gin, and the American suggestions in the Appendix. 
 
 Upon examination, however, the importance of 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. ^11) 
 
 the alterations falls far below their number. They 
 do not unsettle a single article of the Christian faith 
 or precept of Christian duty. They will hardly be 
 observed by the majority of readers. Very few 
 affect the sense materially. They may be compared 
 to the 150,000 variations in the textual sources and 
 critical editions of the Greek Testament which do 
 not affect the integrity of the book, and only increase 
 the facility and stimulate the zeal for ascertaining 
 the original text. But, nevertheless, in the Word of 
 God even the "jots" and "tittles" are important, 
 and every effort to bring the English Bible nearer 
 the original is thankworthy. In this respect the 
 Kevisers are not behind any of their predecessors. 
 
 Note. — I have stated the number of alterations in round figures on the 
 ground of actual calculations made in England. A correspondent of " The 
 Guardian " (a leading journal of the Church of England) for Aug. 10, 1881, 
 p. 1136, and again p. 1675, estimated the number of changes in the English 
 text at 36,191, or an average of four and a half changes in every one of 
 the 7960 verses. The alterations of the Greek text are 5788, according 
 to Dr. Scrivener's notes (as stated by Canon Cook. The Revised Version 
 of the First Three Gospels, p. 222, or 6000 on p. 230). A correspondent 
 of " The Expositor," iii. 435, has discovered that not one verse out of ten 
 has escaped correction, that sixteen entire verses disappear, that one hun- 
 dred and twenty-two sentences or parts of sentences are omitted, and that 
 only ten new passages, mostly very brief, are added. Dean Burgon found 
 that in 2 Pet. i. 5-7 the Revisers have "introduced thirty changes into 
 thirty-eight words;" and the Bishop of Salisbury (one of the Revisers) 
 mentions one verse in which "not fewer than eight changes are made," 
 but he adds that " only one of them would be discovered in reading the 
 verse aloud or hearing it." See all these facts and figures apparently 
 endorsed by a friendly critic in "The Church Quarterly Review" for 
 January, 1883, p. 348 sq. If these figures are correct, the venerable chair- 
 man of the New Testament Company, in his address to Convocation, 
 underestimated the changes "at least one half," but he was correct in 
 adding that " the effect to the general hearer or reader will really hardly 
 be perceptible." 
 
420 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 The Rev. Rufus Wendell, editor of the "Student's Edition" of the 
 Revised New Testament (Albany, N. Y., 1882), has counted the words 
 of the Revised New Testament, and states their number to be 179,914, 
 of which 154.526 are retained from the Authorized Version. The 25,388 
 words thus shown to have been introduced by the Revisers are by the 
 same writer classified as follows : 
 
 18,358 are substituted renderings of the Received Greek Text; 
 
 1604 are substituted renderings of the Critical Greek Text ; 
 
 4654 are added renderings of the Received Greek Text ; 
 
 550 are added renderings of the Critical Greek Text ; and 
 
 222 are renderings adopted from the Margin of the Authorized Version. 
 
 In Mr. Wendell's work. The Speeches of the New Testament (Albany, 
 1876), p. 573 compared with p. xi., the number of words in the Old Ver- 
 sion of the N. T. (the count being based upon the American Bible So- 
 ciety's pica octavo edition of 1870) is given as 180,373— an excess of 359 
 words over the Revised Version. 
 
 THE GREEK TEXT OF THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 This subject has been so fully discussed in previ- 
 ous chapters that a summary of the chief points of 
 difference between the traditional text of the Author- 
 ized Yersion and the critical text of the Revised 
 Version will be sufficient.^ 
 
 1. An infallible text is impossible ; for the apos- 
 tolic autographs are lost, and most of the variations 
 date from early transcription in the first two cen- 
 turies. Dogmatism may ignore, but cannot deny 
 the fact. Even if we had an infallible text, it would 
 not be available without an infallible interpretation. 
 We must therefore be content with an approximate 
 approach to the original by means of the most care- 
 ful and conscientious study of the existing docu- 
 ments — i. e.^ Manuscripts, Versions, and Patristic 
 
 ' See chapters ii.-vi., and especially pp. 253-298. 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 421 
 
 Quotations. It is best that it is so ; for such study 
 keeps Christian scholarship in constant motion, and 
 prevents stagnation, and the idolatry of the letter 
 that kills, while the spirit alone makes alive. The 
 Apostles themselves dealt very freely with the Old 
 Testament quotations, and yet had the profoundest 
 reverence for the Word of God. 
 
 2. The history of textual criticism is a gradual 
 ascent from the river to the fountain, from the 
 mediaeval to the Nicene, from the Nicene to the 
 ante-Nicene, and from the ante-Nicene to the Apos- 
 tolic text. This movement began with Bentley and 
 Bengel, and has been steadily pursued by their suc- 
 cessors, with a corresponding accumulation, classifi- 
 cation, and sifting of material. It is analogous to 
 the Eeformation, which went back from the school- 
 men to the fathers, from the fathers to the apostles; 
 in other words, from mediaeval traditions and cor- 
 ruptions to the primitive sources of Christianity. 
 
 3. The traditional text is derived from Beza and 
 other printed editions of the sixteenth century, as 
 these again were derived from a few cursive manu- 
 scripts of the Middle Ages which happened to fall 
 into the hands of Erasmus and his successors. 
 
 The critical text is derived from the combined 
 use of all the documentary sources which have been 
 brought to light within the last three hundred years, 
 and especially in the present century. 
 
 4. The traditional text can be traced through the 
 Byzantine ( Constantinopolitan ) family of manu- 
 scripts to the middle of the fourth century, or the 
 Nicene age. 
 
422 'THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 The critical text can be traced to the third and sec- 
 ond centuries, or the ante-Nicene age; that is, as near 
 the apostolic source as the documents enable us to go. 
 
 5. The traditional text is supported, {a) among 
 manuscripts, by Cod. A (Alexandrinus) of the fifth 
 century (but only in the Gospels), several of the later 
 uncials, and the great mass of the mediaeval cursives, 
 with some very weighty exceptions ; ih) among ver- 
 sions, by the Syriac Peshito in its present revised 
 shape (whose authority, however, has been weakened 
 by recent discoveries and researches); and (c) among 
 the fathers, by St. Chrysostom (d. 407) and most of 
 the later Greek fathers, who drew from the same 
 Syrian and Byzantine MSS., and therefore cannot 
 be counted as indejpendent witnesses. 
 
 The critical text is supported, (a) by the two old- 
 est MSS., namely, B (Vaticanus) and &t (Sinaiticus), 
 both of the fourth century ; also by Cod. A and the 
 oldest uncials generally, in the Acts, Epistles, and 
 Apocalypse; and very often in the Gospels by L, T, 
 S, Z (A in Mark), D, C, Q, P, E, X (and even by A 
 in many cases, especially in John) ; (Z>) by the jpre- 
 'vailing testimony of the oldest Versions, viz., the 
 Curetonian Syriac (partly also by the Peshito), the 
 Coptic or Egyptian (especially the Memphitic), the 
 Old Latin, and Jerome's Vulgate ; and {c) by the 
 ante-Nicene fathers, especially Eusebius (" the father 
 of church history," d. 340) and Origen (the father 
 of exegesis, d. 254), who were the most learned men 
 of their age.^ 
 
 * Canon Cook (p. 145) admits that both the Memphitic and Thebaic 
 
THE •REVISED VERSION. 423 
 
 6. The traditional text is abandoned, and the crit- 
 ical text accepted, by all the standard editors of the 
 present century, Griesbach, Lachniann, Tischendorf, 
 Yon Gebliardt,Trege]les, Alford,Westcott and Hort.' 
 
 7. The traditional text is longer on account of in- 
 versions (which are among the most ancient) most closely agree with B, 
 but accounts for it by deriving them from " the same school " and " the 
 same recension," without any proof. He also admits that the MSS. of the 
 Old Latin Version "agree with B more frequently than with A" (p. 144), 
 and that even the much-lauded Peshito " agrees with B sufficiently often 
 to prove that both the translator and the transcriber had before them 
 ancient documents of the same general character" (p. 143). 
 
 1 To these may be added such writers on textual criticism as Thomas 
 Sheldon Green (in his Developed Critidsni), Samuel Davidson (^Biblical 
 Criticism), the two American scholars Abbot and Gregory (see the criti- 
 cal Prolegomena to the eighth edition of Tischendorf, prepared by the 
 latter with the constant co-operation of the former), and the ablest critical 
 commentators, as Meyer (prevailingly), Bernhard Weiss (in the new edi- 
 tions of Meyer on the Gospels and on Romans, and in his critical mono- 
 graphs on the Matthceusevangelium and the Marcusevangelium), Dean 
 Alford (in the last editions of his Commetiiary), Bishop EUicott {Commen- 
 taries on the Minor Pauline Epistles), and Bishop Lightfoot (^Commentaries 
 OH Galatians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon). Dean Burgon and 
 Canon Cook claim Dr. Scrivener on their side; but he is identified with 
 the Revision as one of the members of the New Test. Company. In the 
 second edition of his Introduction (1874), and still more in his later Six 
 Lectures on the Text of the New Testament (1875), he already departs in 
 gome very important cases from the textus receptus, as in 1 Tim. iii. 16; 
 1 John V.7, 8 ; Matt. xvii. 21 ; xix. 17 ; Mark vi. 20 ; xv. 28 ; Luke xi. 2, 4; 
 John v. 4, 5 ; vii. 53-viii. 11 ; Acts xvi. 7 ; Rom. xvi. 5 ; 1 Pet. iii. 15; Heb. 
 iv. 2. Even the doxology of the Lord's Prayer (Matt. vi. 13) he now 
 thinks "can hardly be upheld any longer as a portion of the sacred text" 
 (Lectures, p. 124). Compare his hesitating judgment in the second edi- 
 tion of his Jntrod. p. 495, with the third edition, p. 569, where he says: 
 " I can no longer regard this doxology as certainly an integral part of 
 S. Matthew's Gospel f but I am not yet absolutely convinced of its spuri- 
 ousness." He stands midway between the textus receptus and the text of 
 the Revisers. See his latest edition of the Stephanie text of 1550 in 1887. 
 
 29 
 
424 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 terpolations from parallel passages (especially in the 
 Gospels), supplements of abridged quotations from the 
 Septuagint, liturgical usage, and explanatory glosses. 
 
 The critical text is shorter from the absence of 
 these interpolations. And this is a strong internal 
 evidence of its priority. For additions once made 
 would not be easily omitted : scribes and purchasers 
 being naturally zealous for complete copies. But 
 what is lost in spurious additions is more than made 
 up by greater purity, simplicity, and force. 
 
 The number of textual critics who are competent 
 to judge of the principles and complicated details is 
 exceedingly small, even in Germany and England. 
 It takes many years of the most minute and patient 
 study to master the immense apparatus. 
 
 Of the opponents of the Greek text of the Ee- 
 visers, only two or three have shown the requisite 
 learning and ability to entitle them to a respectful 
 hearing on such questions ; but they occupy a reac- 
 tionary standpoint, and place themselves in opposi- 
 tion to all the authoritative critics of the present 
 century. They swim against the stream, and kick 
 against the pricks. They take the same antagonistic 
 attitude towards the modern school of criticism 
 which Dr. Owen took towards Walton's Polyglot, 
 Dr. Whitby towards Mill's Greek Testament, Frey 
 and Iselin towards Wetstein,Matth8ei towards Gries- 
 bach ; and the result of the opposition will be the 
 same. The Council of Trent anathematized all the 
 doctrines of the Reformation, and the Inquisition 
 condemned the science of Galileo Galilei; but Prot- 
 estantism still lives, and the earth still moves, Thq 
 
THE REVISED VEESION. 425 
 
 reactionary critics and anti-Eevisionists labor under 
 a delusion. They profess to defend the old fort, 
 but there is an older fort still. They appeal to the 
 fathers of the dark ages, but not to the grandfathers 
 of the Apostolic age. If they proceed a little far- 
 ther in the search for the " evangelic verity," they 
 will arrive at last at the same conclusion as the Re- 
 visers, and will shake hands with them over the 
 oldest and purest attainable text, which they equal- 
 ly revere and love as the infallible standard of the 
 Christian faith and practice. 
 
 " Es kommt der durst'ge Geist auf Wegen der Erfahrung 
 Durch Ueberliefrungsgrund zum Quell der Offenbarung." 
 
 Note. — The champions of the textus receptus make special efforts to 
 undermine the value of Codd. B and N, which are the most weighty 
 witnesses against it. They feel that they are the very best sources of the 
 text unless they can be proven to be the very worst (as Dean Burgon puts 
 the case). fi< and B are admitted to be the oldest known MSS., as well 
 as the most complete ; K being the only complete MS. of the New Testa- 
 ment among the uncials, and B complete as far as Heb. ix. 14, including 
 the Catholic Epistles, which follow the Acts, though not the Pastoral 
 Epistles. But both are also remarkable for brevity. Now the question 
 arises : Is this brevity due, in the great majority of cases, to non-interpo- 
 lations (and hence a proof of greater purity), or to omissions and mutila- 
 tions ? All the critical editors from Griesbach to Hort take the former 
 view ; the opponents of the Revisers' text take the latter. 
 
 The most recent attack upon these MSS. hails from the scholarly pen 
 of Canon F. C. Cook (editor of The Speaker's Commentary), who follows 
 in the track of Dean Burgon (without his dash and audacity, but with 
 more moderation and courtesy). In his book. The Revised Version of the 
 First Three Gospels, London, 1882, he derives the omissions of fi< and B 
 partly from " extreme haste," partly (and this was never done before) even 
 from heretical bias. He conjectures that X and B are the only remain- 
 ing survivors of the fifty MSS. of the Holy Scriptures which Constan- 
 tine the Great requested Eusebius to provide "on carefully prepared 
 parchments or vellum, ip easily legible characters, and in portable and 
 eouvenienti form," for the rapidly grp>vjng churches of Constaotinople or 
 
426 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 New Rome (Eusebius, Vita Const, iv. 36, 37). This would definitely fix 
 the date of these MSS. between the year 330, when Constantinople was 
 founded, and the year 340, when Eusebius died. (Cook here differs widely 
 from Dean Burgon, who, in his The Last Twelve Veises qfS. Mark, 1871, 
 p. 293 sq., had categorically denied the Eusebian origin of B, and asserted 
 on what he considered " infallible " notes of antiquity, that S was written 
 from fifty to one hundred years later. " I am fully persuaded," he says, 
 " that an interval of at least half a century, if not of a far greater span of 
 years, is absolutely required to account for the marked dissimilarity be- 
 tween them.") But Canon Cook further assumes (p. 161 sqq.) that the 
 MSS. were not only hastily, but " carelessly," prepared, under the direc- 
 tion of Eusebius and under the influence of the Arian heresy to which 
 Eusebius leaned, and which was in the ascendency in the later years of 
 Constantine (who, it is well known, was baptized by an Arian bishop). 
 
 In reply to this hypothesis of Canon Cook we offer the following objec- 
 tions : 
 
 1. There is no evidence whatever of a Eusebian recension of the text, 
 much less than for a Syrian recension (which Dr. Hort makes extremely 
 plausible, but which Canon Cook, with Dean Burgon, utterly denies). 
 
 2. Eusebius was, we may say, a latitudinarian in his age, but no 
 doctrinal Arian, although after the Nicene Council he connected himself 
 with the Arian party; and he certainly would not have dared to pervert 
 the sacred text in the interest of dogma. See the exhaustive article of 
 Bishop Lightfoot in Smith and Wace, Dictionary of Christian Biography, 
 ii. 308-348, especially p. 347, where he says : " If we except the works 
 written before the Council of Nicaea, in which there is occasionally much 
 looseness of expression, his language is for the most part strictly orthodox, 
 or at least capable of explanation in an orthodox sense." 
 
 3. K and B, in the two strongest passages which bear on the divinity 
 of Christ, favor the more orthodox reading — namely, John i. 18 (jiovoy^vriQ 
 ^EOQ. instead of 6 jxovoyEviqg viog), and Acts xx. 28 (r^v EKKXijaiav rev 
 Beov, j/r 7repieTT0Lr]<TaT0 did rev a'lfiarog rev ISiov, instead of . . . row 
 Kvpiov . . .). In the first passage a subsequent corrector of 5< put viog 
 above ^tog. It is very surprising, by the by, that such a scholar as Canon 
 Cook should suppose that " the asterisks " after 5< and B, which mark the 
 first hand, " mean that the reading in the text was noted as incorrect by 
 a critical scholar at the time when the manuscript was written''^ (p. 27). 
 In the particular case of which he is treating, as is pointed out in " The 
 Church Quarterly Review " for October, 1882, p. 136, they mean that the 
 feading iv^QKiag i?^ Luke ii. 14 was changed to tvSoKia m S. by a cor- 
 
THE REV^ISED VEKSION. 427 
 
 rector of the seventh century, and in B by a corrector of the tenth or 
 eleventh century at the earliest (so Tischendorf), or rather of the fifteenth, 
 according to the Roman editors. 
 
 4. The haste with which, according to the order of Constantine, the 
 fifty .copies were to be prepared does not necessarily imply cul|)ahi care- 
 lessness ; on the contrary, it is incompatible with the express direction 
 of Constantine to employ " calligraphers thoroughly acquainted with their 
 art," as also with the costliness and beauty of the materials used, the care 
 and grace of the handwriting, by which ^^ and B confessedly excel all 
 other MSS. They are indeed disfigured by many errors, but such 
 are found in greater or less number in all ancient MSS., and were as 
 unavoidable as modern typographical errors; moreover, both 5< and B 
 contain many valuable corrections by later hands. 
 
 5. K and B are sufficiently different in the arrangement of books and 
 in a great many characteristic readings to justify the conclusion that they 
 are independently derived from distinct originals. "They are cousins, 
 not sisters." This makes their concurrent testimony all the stronger. 
 This result is not at all affected by the interpretation of the terms rpiaaa 
 Kai TiTpaaGO. (i. e., triple and quadruple) in the Eusebian description of 
 the MSS. ordered by Constantine, which are usually understood (by 
 Montfaucon and Gardthausen) to refer to quires of three or four sheets 
 (Jerniones and quatemiones), but which Canon Cook (with Wattenbach 
 and Von Gebhardt) refers to the three or four vertical columns respectively 
 of the Vatican and Sinaitic MSS. Eusebius would not have sent two 
 different texts to the emperor, and still less if, as Cook assumes without a 
 shadow of proof, he was the editor of a recension. 
 
 I had some correspondence on this subject with Dr. Ezra Abbot, a most 
 careful student of the ancient MSS., and I am permitted to add the follow- 
 ing extract from his letter : " The representations of Canon Cook as to 
 the extreme haste and carelessness with which X and B were written 
 are greatly exaggerated. The Vatican was more carefully written than 
 the Sinaitic, which has a rather unusual number of omissions from hotnoe- 
 otdeuton. But in both of these MSS., the transcriptional errors dimin- 
 ish but little their value for critical purposes, as most of them betray their 
 character at once, and cause no more difficulty or uncertainty than the 
 typographical errors in a printer's first proof. Leaving out of view the 
 obviously accidental omissions from the occasion just mentioned, most of 
 the so-called 'omissions' or 'mutilations' in these MSS., when critically 
 examined, on the principles which would guide us in determining the 
 fext in the case of an ancient classical author, aflford the clearest evidence 
 
428 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 of the remarkable freedom of their text from the glosses and interpola- 
 tions which vitiate so many of the later MSS. In most of the important 
 cases where they present a shorter text as compared with the great ma- 
 jority of MSS., their testimony is so corroborated by our other oldest in- 
 dependent authorities — ancient versions and quotations by early fathers 
 — and by internal evidence, as to demonstrate the pre-eminent value of 
 these MSS., especially in questions of omission or addition." 
 
 SELECT LIST OF TEXTUAL CHANGES. 
 
 Corap. here ch. v. p. 183 sqq. 
 
 I. Omissions from Text without Marginal Note. 
 
 Matt. i. 25 : "^er^r5<&om" son (rovvibv aifTtjg rbv TrpwTOTOKOv)- 
 for v'lov, " a son.-^ 
 
 Omitted by X, B, Z, 1, 33, a^"*, b, c, g ', k, Sah., Cop., Cur. Syr., etc. ; sup- 
 ported by Pesh. Syr., C, D, and later uncials (A is here wanting). In- 
 serted from Luke ii. 7, where all authorities have it (" ubi nemo lectionem 
 mutavit," says Tischendorf ). Some trace the omission to dogmatic inter- 
 est in the perpetual virginity of Mary, as " firstborn " seems to imply the 
 birth of younger children; but why then was Luke ii. 7 left untouched? 
 
 Matt. ii. 18: ^lamentation and" (SrpfjvoQ Kai). 
 
 Omitted by X, B, Z, 1, 22, Itala, Vulg., Sah., Cop., Pesh. Syr., Jerus. Syr., 
 Justin M. Inserted from the Septuagint, Jer. xxxi. (xxxviii.) 15, to com- 
 plete the quotation. 
 
 Matt. V. 44 : " bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you . . , 
 which de-spitefully use you and." 
 
 These beautiful words are undoubtedly genuine in Luke vi. 27, 28, and 
 have been inserted here in whole or in part by later authorities, contrary 
 to the testimony of N, B, 1, 22, 209, Itala, Vulg., Cop., Cur. Syr., Theophil., 
 Athenag., Clem. Alex., Orig., Euseb. 
 
 Matt. XX. 16 : ^*/or many be called, but few chosen." 
 
 Omitted by X, B, L, Z, Sah., Cop. (The Cureton Syr. has it.) In- 
 serted by Western and Syrian authorities (also by Origen) from Matt. xxii. 
 14, the close of a similar parable (ttoXXoi yap tlaiv kXtjtoi, oXiyoi Sk 
 SKXeKToi), where all authorities have the passage. 
 
 I^uke xxiii. 38 : " in letteis of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew." 
 
 Omitted by X", B, C*, L, a, Sah., Cop., Cur. Syr., but added by later 
 authorities in whole or in part from John xix. 20. In justice to the nu- 
 merous witnesses for the clause (several uncials, all cursives, Itala [except 
 a], Vulg., Pesh., Cyr.. of Alex.), it deserves a place pn th§ margin. 
 
 Acts jijf, 6, 6 : " it is hard . . . said unto him." 
 
THE EEVI8ED VERSION. 429 
 
 Omitted in all Greek MSS., interpolated from Acts xxii. 10 ; xxvi. 14 
 (first by the Vulgate and then by Erasmus). 
 
 Rom. viii. 1 : ^^who walk not after the fleshy but after the Spi7it" 
 
 Derived from yen 4, where the words are genuine. 
 
 1 Cor. xi. 24 : " take, eat " (XajStre, ^dycre). 
 
 Omitted by X, A, B, C*, D, E, F, G, d, e, f, g, Sah., Cop., Armen. In- 
 serted from the parallel passage in Matt. xxvi. 26. " Broken " (icXw/it- 
 vov), being better supported, is retained in the margin. 
 
 1 John V. 7, 8: "in heaven, the Father, the Word [sic!], and the Holy 
 Ghost : and these three are one, A nd there are three that bear witness in 
 earth''' 
 
 Contrary to the context and the trinitarian terminology (which would 
 require " the Son," instead of " the Word ") ; not found in any Greek MS. 
 before the fourteenth or fifteenth century, nor in the genuine text of any 
 ancient translation, nor in any lectionary, nor Greek patristic quotation, 
 and universally given up as a clumsy interpolation (probably from a Latin 
 gloss, derived perhaps from Cyprian, on the assumption of a purely fanci- 
 ful analogy). It was first printed in the Complutensian Polyglot, 1514, 
 and in the third edition of Erasmus (1522, against his better judgment), 
 from which it passed into the textus receptus. Every consideration of 
 truth and honesty requires the expulsion of these spurious witnesses from 
 the text. The doctrine of the Trinity needs no such support, and could 
 only be injured by it. See p. 136 sqq. and 192 sq. ; also Tischendorf, and 
 the notes of Alford, and Wordsworth in loc. I add a note from Dr. Hort 
 (Select Readings, ii. 104) : " There is no evidence for the inserted words 
 in Greek, or in any language but Latin, before the fourteenth century, 
 when they appear in a Greek work written in defence of the Roman com- 
 munion, with clear marks of a translation from the Vulgate. For at least 
 the first four centuries and a half Latin evidence is equally wanting. 
 Tertullian and Cyprian use language which renders it morally certain 
 that thej' would have quoted these words had they known them ; Cyprian 
 going so far as to assume a reference to the Trinity in the conclusion of 
 verse 8 Qet iterum de Patre et Filio et Spiritu Sancto scriptum est Et 
 tres unum sunt'), as he elsewhere finds ^sacramenta Trinitatis' in other 
 occurrences of the number three {Dom, Orat. 34), and being followed in 
 his interpretation more explicitly by Augustin, Facundus, and others. But 
 the evidence of the third century is not exclusively negative, for the 
 treatise on Kebaptism contemporary with Cyprian quotes the whole pas- 
 sage simply thus (15 : cf. 19), ^quia tres testimonium perhibent, spirit us et 
 aqua et sanguis, et isti tr^ vnum sunt,' The silence pf the controversial 
 
430 THE KEVISED VERSION. 
 
 writings of Lucifer, Hilary, Ambrose, Hieronymus, Augustin, and others 
 carries forward the adverse testimony of the Old Latin through the 
 fourth into the fifth century ; and in 449, shortly before the Council of 
 Chalcedon, Leo supplies positive evidence to the same effect for the Ro- 
 man text by quoting verses 4-8 without the inserted words in his epistle 
 to Flavianus (^Ep. xxviii. 5). They are absent from the Latin Vulgate, 
 according to its oldest MSS., am,fu [Cod. Amiatinus at Florence, and Cod. 
 Fuldensis at Fulda], and many others, as also from the (Vulgate) text 
 of the Gallican (Luxeuil) Lectionary." 
 
 Rev. i. 8 : ^Hhe beginning and the ending" (apyri Kai TtXog). 
 
 Supported by K*, Vulg., Cop., and a few cursives ; but absent in K^ A, 
 B (Ap.), C, P, Syr., Aeth., Arm., Ambrose, Primasius, and most cursives. 
 Inserted from ver. 17 and xxii. 13, as an explanation of "the Alpha and 
 the Omega." 
 
 Rev. 1.11: ^^ I am Alpha . . . last: and" (tyw . . . Kai). 
 
 Omitted by S, A, B, C, Vulg., Cop., Syr., Aeth., Arm., and about fifty 
 cursives ; inserted from xxii. 13 ; corap. also i. 8 and 17. 
 
 The following list includes the more important remaining examples, and 
 will well repay a critical examination: Matt. xv. 8; xx. 7, 22, 23; xxv. 
 13; xxvii. 35; xxviii. 9; Mark vi. 11; vii.8; xiii. 14; xiv. 27, 70; Luke 
 iv.8, 18; v. 38; ix. 10; xi. 44, 54 ; xix. 45 ; xx.23,30; xxii. 64, 68; xxiv. 
 1 ; John i. 27 ; iii. 15 ; v. 16 ; vi. 11, 22, 51 ; x. 12, 13, 26 ; xi. 41 ; xvi. 16 ; 
 xvii. 12; Acts ii. 30; iii. 11; vii.37; x. 6,21,32; xv. 24; xviii.21; xxi. 
 8,22,25; xxii. 9, 20, 30 ; xxiii. 9; xxiv. 26; xxvi.30; Rora.ix.28; xi.6; 
 xiii. 9 ; xiv. 6 ; xv. 24 ; 1 Cor. vi. 20 ; vii. 5 ; x. 28 ; Phil. iii. 16 ; Col. i. 2, 
 14; iThess. i. 1; ITim. iv. 12; vi.5; Heb. vi. 10; vii. 21; xii.20; IPet. 
 i. 22, 23 ; iii. 16 ; iv. 3, 14 ; 2 Pet. iii. 10 ; 1 John ii. 7 ; iv. 3 ; v. 13 : Rev. 
 iL 9, 13 ; v. 14 ; xi. 1, 17 ; xiv. 5 ; xv. 2 ; xxi. 24. 
 
 IL Passages Omitted from Text, but Transferred to the Margin. 
 
 Matt. vi. 13. The doxology of the Lord's Prayer : " Many authorities, 
 some ancient, but with variations, add For thine is the kingdom, and the 
 power, and the glory, forever. A men." 
 
 See the authorities on p. 186 sq. 
 
 Luke i. 28 : " blessed art thou among women." 
 
 Inserted from ver. 42, where all authorities agree. 
 
 John V. 4, 5 : " waiting for the moving of the water. For an angel went 
 down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever 
 then first after the troubling of the water stepped in, was made whole qf 
 V)hatsoever disease he had" 
 
THE REVlS£t) VliRSiOK. 4'M 
 
 A popular superstition, for which John should not be held responsible. 
 The authorities for the interpolation vary, which always looks suspicious. 
 See p. 187 sq. Even the conservative Dr. Scrivener thinks it " well-nigh 
 impossible, in the face of evidence so ancient and varied, to regard it as a 
 genuine portion of St. John's Gospel " (^Six Lectures, etc., p. 158). 
 
 Actsv\\\.^7'.'' And Philip . . . Son of God:' 
 
 The baptismal confession of the eunuch inserted wholly or in part 
 from old ecclesiastical usage. See p. 191. 
 
 III. Doubtful Sections Retained in Text, but with Marginal 
 Note, stating the Facts in each Case. 
 
 Mark xvi. 9-20. The evidence for and against is given on p. 189 sq., in 
 the critical apparatus of Tischendorf, Tregelles, and in the second volume 
 of Westcott and Hort. On the conservative side, see Burgon and Scrivener. 
 
 John vii. 53-viii. 11. 
 
 The pericope of the woman taken in adultery. See the discussion, 
 p. 189 sq. 
 
 According to the judgment of the best critics, these two important sec- 
 tions are additions to the original text from apostolic tradition. 
 
 IV. Substitutions. 
 
 Matt. X. 4 (and Mark iii. 18): "Simon the Cananaean" (Kavavaloe, 
 from an Aramasan word meaning " Zealot ;" compare Luke vi. 15 ; Acts i. 
 13), instead of " the Canaanite " (KavaviTrjo). 
 
 None of the apostles belonged to the race of the Canaanites. 
 
 O. V. : " Why callest thou me good? 
 (rt fie XeyeiQ ciya^ov;) There is 
 none good but one, that is God (pvSetc 
 dyaSrog, el firi tig, o Gcog)." 
 
 Matt. xix. 17 : " Why askest thou 
 me concerning that which is good? 
 {ri fie IpwT^Q TTEpi Tov dya^ov ;) 
 One there is who is good (elg iariv 
 6 dya^og)" 
 
 The old text is conformed to the parallel passages, Mark x. 18 and 
 Luke xviii. 19, and is retained in margin. Dean Burgon recklessly calls 
 the Revisers' reading an " absurd fabrication," and Canon Cook (p. 92) 
 unjustly traces it to "doctrinal bias and Alexandrian subtlety;" but it is 
 well supported by the oldest authorities, N, B, D, L, Cur. Syr., Cop.,Vulg., 
 Orig. (who expressly vouches for the first clause), Euseb. ; it is adopted 
 by Tischendorf, Tregelles, Westcott and Hort, and even by Scrivener 
 (^Six Lectures, p. 130). It gives excellent sense, and sheds new light on 
 the whole conversation with the rich young ruler, whether we assume 
 that the ruler asked two questions and received two answers, or that 
 Matthew gives this form to bring out the true sense. The ruler (from a 
 
 OF Trtt 
 
432 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 purely humanitarian and moral standpoint) had asked Christ (ver. 16) 
 "what good thing''^ he should do to have eternal life; and Christ directed 
 him to the supreme source of all goodness, God himself, and thereby struck 
 at the root of his besetting sin, the love of riches (ver. 22). 
 
 Mark i. 2 : "As it is written in O. V. ; " As it is written in the 
 Isaiah the prophet Qv ry 'Hcrat^ prophets Qv Toig Trpo(pr)TaiQ')" 
 r(p 7rpo<pr}Ty)." 
 
 The old text is evidently a correction to suit the quotation (verses 2 and 
 3), which combines two prophetic passages, Mai. iii. 1 and Isa. xl. 3 ; but 
 Mark mentions Isaiah as the older and more important of the two prophets, 
 who struck the key-note to the later prophecy of Malachi. The revised 
 text is amply supported (by X, B, D, L, A, 33, Itala,Vulg., Cop., Pesh., Iren., 
 Orig.), yet the Revisers put the textus receptus on the margin. 
 
 Mark iii. 29 : " Whosoever shall 
 blaspheme against the Holy Spirit 
 hath never forgiveness, but is guilty 
 of an eternal sin {afiapTrjfiaTog)" 
 
 O. V. : " He that shall blaspheme 
 against the Holy Ghost, hath never 
 forgiveness, but is in danger of eter- 
 nal damnation (judgment, Kpiffsiog)." 
 
 An important change, which sheds light on the sin against the Holy 
 Spirit, and suggests the reason why it is unpardonable. It may culminate 
 in an act of blasphemy, but it ends in a state of absolute hardening and 
 final impenitence or perpetual persistence in sin. As long as sin con- 
 tinues, guilt and punishment continue ; there can be no pardon without 
 repentance and cessation from sin. Kpirreojg is supported by A, C '^, Syr. ; 
 afiaprrip.aTOQ by K, B, L, A, Itala, Vulg. (Some MSS. read afiapriag, an- 
 other early correction.) 
 
 Luke ii. 14. The angelic anthem. On this much-disputed passage 
 (ivdoKiag or evdoKia), see p. 195 sq. The old rendering, "towards men," 
 is wrong, at all events (instead of " among men," I v av^pw-KoiQ) ; but the 
 Revised Version is not wholly satisfactory in rendering the genitive 
 iucoKiag, " in whom he is well pleased." This periphrase destroj'^s the 
 terse brevity in the threefold parallelism of the Greek (66^a correspond- 
 ing to eipr)VTi, iv vxpiazoig to t tti yrjg, and 9f^ to tv dvBputTroig ^doKiag). 
 "Among men of his [God's] good pleasure" would be shorter than the 
 R. v., and more correct than the "bonce voluntatis" (men of good-will) of 
 the Vulgate ; but the Revisers wished to conform to the rendering of the 
 verb ivdoKSii) in Matt. iii. 17; xvii. 5. 
 
 John i. 18: "God only begotten" (ixovoyEvijg 9 cog) was originally 
 adopted by the Revisers in the text (as in Westcott and Hort), but after- 
 wards relegated to the margin, and the common reading, " the only begotten 
 Son" (p jiovoyivrig vlog), retained in text (as in Tischendorf, and as sug^ 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 433 
 
 jested by the American Committee). The evidence is nearly equally 
 balanced. See p. 194 sq., and the special discussions of Dr. Hort and 
 Dr. Abbot there quoted. 
 
 Rom. V. 1 : " let us have (£;^w/i«') peace with God ;" for *' we have ** 
 (txofiev). See p. 197. 
 
 1 Tim. iii. 16 : " He who was manifested in the flesh ;" for " God was 
 manifest in the flesh." 
 
 On the difference of reading between og and ^eog, see p. 199 sqq., and 
 an article by Dr. William H. Ward in the Bibliotheca Sacra, Andover, 
 Mass., for Jan., 1865. The chief defender of ^s6g is Dean Burgon. 
 
 Rev. xvii. 8 : " how that he (the beast) was, and is not, and shall come" 
 (or " be present ") ; for " that was, and is not, and yet is." 
 
 A manifest improvement, kuI vapkaTai (!S, A, B, P, forty cursives), 
 for Kaiirep iffriv, which is an error of transcription, and makes nonsense. 
 
 V. Passages Gained by the Revision. 
 
 1 John ii. 23 : " He that confesseth the Son hath the Father also " (6 
 ofioXoydv rbv v'lbv Kal rbv iraripa exsi). 
 
 A very important passage, supplementing the preceding clause ; lost in 
 the Greek textus receptus by hoim&oteleuton (Jxu stands at the end of each 
 clause in verse 23) ; italicized in the A. V. (which inserted it from the Latin 
 Vulgate, " g-wi confitetur Filium, et Patrem kabet"); amply sustained by 
 the best uncial MSS., and restored bj'^ Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, 
 Westcott and Hort. See p. 183. 
 
 Acts iv. 27: "in this city" Qv ry ttoKh ravry), sustained by X, A, B, 
 D, E, Vulg., Syr., Sah., Cop., Eus., Chrys., Iren. (Lat.), Tert., Lucif., Hil. 
 
 Acts viii. 10: "This man is that power [better, 'Power'] of God which 
 is called (^KaXovfievrf) Great." KaXovfitvT] is important to characterize 
 the boastful title as a self-designation of Simon the sorcerer, and rests on 
 the authority of the oldest MSS. (X, A, B, C), versions, and fathers (Iren., 
 Orig.). 
 
 Acts xvi. 7: "The Spirit of Jesus suffered them not." 'Iijaov is well 
 sustained and adopted by the best editors. 
 
 Acts XX. 4: "as far as Asia" (a^/oi Trjc 'Aciag). This is supported 
 by many authorities, but not by 6< and B, and omitted by Tisch. in his 
 eighth edition. 
 
 Col. i. 6 : " bearing fruit and increasing" (kui av^avofitvov), supported 
 by 8t, A, B, C, D, Ital., Vulg., Sah., Cop., Syr., etc. 
 
 1 Thess. iv. 1: "even as ye do walk" {Ka^wg kui TrepnraTUTt), sup- 
 ported by X, A, B, D*, F, G, Ital., Vulg., many cursives, and versions. 
 Internal as well as external evidence favors the addition. 
 
434 THE REVISED VERSIOI^. 
 
 James iv. 12: "and judge" after "lawgiver." The omission of km 
 KpiTrjg is perhaps owing to homceoteleuton (see vofioBsTrj f). Tischendorf 
 and Westcott and Hort likewise retain it with N, A, B, P, Syr., etc. 
 
 1 Pet. ii. 2 : " that ye may grow thereby unto salvation" (iig au)Tr]piav). 
 Abundantly sustained by N, A, B, C, K, P, Vulg., Syr. 
 
 1 John iii. 1 : ^^and such we are'' (fcai iafxtv). We are not only called 
 (KXriBfUj/xtv), but we really are children of God. 
 
 K, A, B, C, P, and many cursives have Kai ia/jiev, and the Vulg. et sumus. 
 
 Jude 25 : " before all time " Qn-pb Travrbg tov aiuivog). Well sustained 
 byit,A,B,C,L,Vulg.,Syr. 
 
 Rev. i. 8 : " God " after " the Lord." 
 
 All uncial MSS.of the Apoc. read Kvpiog 6 Seoc, "the Lord God,'" in- 
 stead of 6 KVpiOQ. 
 
 Rev. iii. 2 : " before my God " (ivu)Triov tov Qiov fi o v), instead of " be- 
 fore God." 
 
 Rev. viii. 7 : " and the third part of the earth was burnt up " (mt to 
 rpiTov Ttjg yfjg KUTtKari). 
 
 This important clause dropped out from the repetition of Kai to Tp'iTov. 
 
 Rev. xiv. 1 : " Having his [i. e. the Lamb's] name, and the name of his 
 Father," instead of "having his Father's name." The words avTov Kai 
 TO bvofxa dropped out from homceoteleuton (ovo/ia twice), and have been 
 restored with the best authorities. 
 
 Rev. XX. 14 : " even the lake of fire " (r) Xifxvr] tov rrvpog^. 
 
 The words lost in the textus receptus are sustained b}'^ K, A, B (Ap.), P., 
 Vulg. (best MSS.), Sah., Syr., Hippol., Andr., Areth., and many cur- 
 sives. 
 
 SELECT LIST OF IMPROVED RENDERINGS. 
 
 Far more numerous than the textual changes are 
 the corrections of errors, inaccuracies, and incon- 
 sistencies of the Authorized Version, wliich have 
 been discussed in chap. vii. pp. 347-364. These im- 
 provements occur in ahnost every verse, altliough a 
 superficial reader would hardly notice them. We 
 must confine ourselves to a selection of various kinds. 
 
 Matthew. 
 Matt. i. 18 : " When his mother Mary had been betrothed (jivr\aTiv 
 ^linrjg) to Joseph ;" for " espoused to Joseph." 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 435 
 
 The betrothal preceded the discovery, the espousal followed it; but aftei 
 betrothal, unfaithfulness on the part of the woman was deemed adul- 
 tery. 
 
 I. 20 : " an angel of the Lord " (Gabriel ; see Luke i. 26) ; instead of " the 
 angel of the Lord." 
 
 One of the innumerable cases where the Authorized Version (under the 
 influence of the Latin Vulgate, which has no article) disregards the article 
 either by substituting the definite for the indefinite, or vice versa. 
 
 1.22: "spoken by (i>7r6) the Lord through (diet) the prophet;" for 
 " spoken of the Lord 6y the prophet." 
 
 Important distinction between the primarj' agency of God and the 
 secondary or instrumental agency of man, in inspiration. The American 
 Committee desired to carry this distinction through (see Appendix No. V.). 
 
 I. 23 : " the virgin " (r) irapBkvoc) ; for " a virgin." 
 
 The Virgin Mary is meant by the Evangelist, who so understands the 
 prophecy of Immanuel in Isa. vii. 14. See note on Matt. i. 20. Mark also 
 the stichometrical arrangement which has been adopted throughout (as 
 first suggested by the American Committee) in the poetical quotations 
 from the Old Testament, to indicate the metrical structure and the paral- 
 lelism of Hebrew poetry. Much of the beauty of the Bible is lost to the 
 common reader by the usual typography, which prints poetry like prose, 
 and cuts up the prose into verses. 
 
 II. 2: "to worship him," with margin (Am. Com.). 
 
 Probably here in the sense of religious adoration ; yet the American 
 Committee is right in directing attention to the fact that the Greek verb 
 irpoaKvvkh) denotes an act of homage or worship (usually by kneeling 
 or prostration), whether paid to man (as in Matt, xviii. 26; comp. Sept. in 
 Gen. xlii. 6, Joseph's brethren kneeling before Joseph ; xlviii. 12, Joseph 
 before Jacob), or to God (as in iv. 10). The English verb "to worship " 
 was formerly likewise used in a wider sense (as in the Anglican marriage 
 service: "with my body I thee worship"), but is now confined to acts of 
 divine adoration. 
 
 II. 6: "which [better 'who'] shall be shepherd of (fioriQ iroifiavel) 
 my people Israel ;" for " that shall rule my people Israel." 
 
 The Greek includes both ruling and feeding. 
 
 II. 11 : "And they came into the house and saw the young child with 
 Mary his mother; and they fell down and worshipped him" (or more 
 literally, " And coming into the house they saw . . ., and falling down they 
 worshipped him," Kai iXBovreg . . . tJdov . . . Kai TreaovTsg irpoasKvpt)- 
 cav) ; for " when they were come . . ., they saw . . ., and fell down . . ." 
 
4r36 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 II. 16: "and slew all the male children" (tovq ndiSag)] for "all the 
 children." 
 
 The Authorized Version doubles the number of the slaughtered inno- 
 cents and the cruelty of the act. The Geneva Version has " male children," 
 and the Vulgate pueros. Herod had nothing to fear from the female 
 children. In the same verse " borders " for " coasts" which is now con- 
 fined to the seashore. This change is made throughout. 
 
 II. 17: "by [better 'through'] Jeremiah;" for ^^ by Jeremi/." 
 
 The Authorized Version varies — as in many other proper names — be- 
 tween Jeremiah, Jeremias, and Jeremy. This inconsistency is indefensi- 
 ble. The proper rule is: Hebrew spelling for Hebrew names, Greek 
 spelling for Greek names, with few exceptions where usage has invariably 
 fixed two forms (as Jesus and Joshua, Mary and Miriam, James and Jacob). 
 
 III. 3 : "by Isaiah the prophet " (the order of the Greek) ; for " by the 
 prophet Esaias." 
 
 Anothir variation of spelling : Esaias (Greek) and Isaiah (Hebrew). 
 So Elijah and Elias. See ii. 17. 
 
 III. 4 : " Now John himself" (avroQ Se 6 'lojdvvijg) ; for "And the same 
 John." 
 
 III. 4 : " his food " (rpoipr]) ; for " his meat." 
 
 " Food " is more comprehensive, but the English Revisers often re- 
 tained " meat " where the American Revisers would have preferred " food." 
 The Authorized Version has " food " about forty times in the Old Testa- 
 ment, but only four times in the New Testament, and " meat " about sixty 
 times in the New Testament. 
 
 III. 6: "They were baptized in the river Jordan" (tv rt^ 'lopSavy no- 
 TUfit^) ; for " in Jordan." irorafxCJ is added by Lach.,Tisch.,Treg., W.and H. 
 
 The Authorized Version, contrary to English (and Greek) usage, omits 
 the article before the river Jordan. The English Revisers have restored 
 it, except in the phrases " round about Jordan " and " beyond Jordan ;" 
 the American Revisers would have preferred the article all through. 
 The question of baptism was scarcely raised in the American Committee. 
 All agreed that it was best to retain the Greek word which has long since 
 been naturalized in English (like so many other Hebrew and Greek 
 words), and to leave the controversy about the mode (immersion, pouring, 
 sprinkling) to exegesis and church history. 
 
 HI. 7 : " Ye offspring (yEVvrjixara) of vipers ;" for " O generation.*' 
 
 III. 11 : " with water," with marg. " Or, in.'" 
 
 The marginal rendering, being more literal (tv vSan), should have been 
 put in th»2 text, as recommended by the American Committee (Appendix 
 
THE KEVISED VERSION. 437 
 
 Ko. IX.). So in the last clause of this verse. Luke differs from Matthew 
 
 by using sintiply the dative (vdari) of water-baptism ; but when speaking 
 
 of the baptism of the Spirit he likewise uses the preposition {Iv nvevfiarit 
 
 iii. 16 ; Acts i. 5 ; xi. 16). 
 
 III. 12 : " threshing-floor " (jijv aXwva) ; for " floor." 
 
 The Eastern threshing-floor is meant, or the circular space on the farm 
 
 where the grain is trodden out by oxen or horses. "Fan" (to tttvov) 
 
 should have been changed into " winnowing-shovel." 
 
 III. 13: "John would have hindered him;" for "John forbade him." 
 diEKCjXvev is here the imperfect of the attempt, as tKoXovi^j Luke i. 59; 
 
 avvqWaffffev, Acts vii. 26; kirop^ei, GaL i. 23. 
 
 III. 15 : " Then he suflfereth him " (tots cKpirjmv aurov) ; for " then he 
 
 suffered him." 
 
 III. 17. The rendering of this verse has been retained, except "out of 
 the heavens " (tie tCjv ovpavuiv), for " from heaven." But the Committees 
 labored long on the phrase tv y (.vdoKTjffa (Hebraizing construction, 
 a ySH), which means literally, " in whom I delighted," or " with whom 
 I was (instead of a7ti) well pleased." The aorist refers to some definite act 
 in the past, when the Son assumed the office of Mediator and Saviour, 
 and under this character became the object of the Father's delight. 
 Ciftnp. xii. 18 (from Isa. xlii. 1), where ivdoKriatv is parallel with ypknaa ; 
 also xi. 27 ; John xvii. 24; Eph. i. 4. 
 
 IV. 21, 22, and often : " boat" (ttXoTov, TrXotdpiov, used in the Gospel* 
 of small fishing- vessels on the lake of Galilee) ; for " ship." 
 
 IV. 24: "epileptic" (trfXi/rta^o/ievoi) ; for "lunatic'' (moonstruck). 
 Epilepsy was traced to the influence of the moon, or of evil spirits. 
 
 In the same verse the inaccurate rendering, " possessed with devils " (for 
 daifioviKofitvoi) is retained, but with the marginal alteniate " demoniacs," 
 which ought to have been put into the text, since there is but one Devil, 
 with a good many demons or evil spirits under his control. See American 
 Appendix No. VIII. The word " lunatic " now denotes an insane person, 
 which is not the meaning of asXijvia^ofievogy notwithstanding the ety- 
 mological correspondence. 
 
 V. 15 : " Neither do men light a lamp (Xvxvov) and put it under the 
 oushel, but on the stand " (Xvxviav) ; for " candle " and " candlestick." 
 
 The portable lamp supplied with oil was used by the Jews, and is still 
 used in the East instead of the candle. The seven-armed candlestick in 
 the temple was supplied with oil-lamps. " Lamp-stand" (Conant, Noyes, 
 1 avidson) would be better than "stand," though the preceding "lamp" 
 prevents any ambiguity. 
 
4B8 THE REVISED VEKSION. 
 
 V. 21 : " It was said to them of old time " (rott; apxaioig) ; instead of 
 " bi/ them." So also ver. 38. 
 
 VI. 2, 5 : " They have received their reward ;" for " they have theii 
 reward." The Greek is not ixovai, but aTrexovai, i. e., they have re- 
 ceived all the reward they sought from men, and need not expect any 
 more. 
 
 VI. 9-13. The Lokd's Prayer. No less than six changes. They have 
 given by far the greatest offence, which might have been avoided if they 
 had been put on the margin ; but the Revisers sacrificed prudence and 
 expediency to a conscientious sense of duty. The changes are as follows: 
 
 1. "As in heaven, so on earth ;" for " in earth, as it is in heaven." Re- 
 quired by the order of the Greek (wg tv ovpav(p, Kai kn-i yijg), and by 
 the direction of the petition from the divine will in heaven to its accom- 
 plishment on earth. The same order in the Old Version, Luke xi. 2 in 
 text (in the Revised Version on the margin). 
 
 2. " Our daily bread " is retained in the text, but " our bread for the 
 coming day " is put in the margin, as the correct rendering of the Greek. 
 But we do not need to-morrow's bread " this day." I prefer the American 
 margin, " our needful bread.^^ The derivation of the difficult tinovaioQ 
 (either from knuvai through tTriwv, iTTiovaa, or from tirsivai, as a com- 
 pound of tTTi and ova'ia) is elaborately discussed by Lightfoot in the Ap- 
 pendix to his work on Revision, p. 195-242. Meyer, in loc, like Fritzsche 
 and Lightfoot, derives the word from tTruvai, " to-morrow's bread," and 
 objects to the derivation from sTreTvai that it would require lirovaioQ. But 
 this is refuted by such examples as tTriopKog (connected with sTriopKsw), 
 ImEiKijg, iir'iovpog, eirioydoog. Dr. Weiss, in the seventh edition of 
 Meyer's Matthew (1883), dissents from him, and explains: "the bread 
 which belongs to our daily need," thus sustaining the American margin. 
 Origen, Chrysostom, Tholuck, Ewald, Bleek, Keim, and Holtzmann adopt 
 substantially the same view. 
 
 3. "As we also have forgiven [literally, we forgave] our debtors;" for 
 " as we/orgive our debtors." There is here a difference of reading, d<prjKa- 
 fiiv or d(pieix€v. The aorist implies that we must have forgiven our 
 debtors before we can consistently ask forgiveness from God. In the par- 
 allel passage, Luke xi. 3, all authorities read the present tense, " We for- 
 give," which gives as good sense, and implies simultaneous or habitual 
 forgiveness to our neighbor.^ 
 
 ' Meyer and Weiss defend dtprjKafitv : " Jesus setzt mit Recht voraus, 
 dass der Gldubige, welcher Gott um Schuldeverlass bittet, bereits denen 
 'ferziehen habe (_Sir, xxviii. 2«; Mark xi. 25), welche sich an ihm verschuldei 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 439 
 
 4. "Bring us not into temptation;" for "lead us not" (Vulgate, ne nos 
 inducas, etc.). So also in Luke xi. 4. The fornoer verb better expresses 
 EiffEvkyKyf; (from elffipepw), and may refer here more to outward circum- 
 stances; while "lead" (which would require elaaydyyt;, from elffdyio) is 
 a stronger word, and implies action on the consenting will. The slight 
 change relieves the petition of a difficulty which is often felt, and is apt 
 to lead into error. God cannot directly and inwardly (through our will) 
 tempt us (Jas. i. 13) — i. e., solicit us to sin — but he may permit us to get 
 into tempting positions which are under the control of his providence.^ 
 €l(T<pspio is, with this exception, and in Luke xL 4, always in the Author- 
 ized Version rendered to bring in (with ei'^, to bring into, or to), Luke v. 18, 
 ]9; xii. 11 ; Acts xvii. 20 ; 1 Tim. vi. 7 ; Heb. xiii. 11. The Revised Ver- 
 sion carries the same rendering through all the passages, and uses "lead" 
 for ayo> (Rom. ii. 4), or aTrayuj (Matt. vii. 13, 14) ; but it is inconsistent 
 in rendering dadyia (with and without dg) like fin^ipu), to bring (Luke ii. 
 27 ; xiv. 21 ; John xvii. 16 ; Acts vii. 45 ; xxi. 28, 29, 87 ; Heb. i. 6), instead 
 of to lead, to lead into (as in Acts ix. 8). 
 
 6. " Deliver us from the evil owe" (i. e., Satan, the great tempter), with 
 margin, "Or, evil;" for "from evil." This is the most serious and most 
 unpopular change in the whole book. It is especially offensive to those 
 who are disposed to deny the existence of a personal devil (although no 
 one can deny the existence of many devils in human shape ^). But Canon 
 Cook, also, in the name of high Anglican orthodoxy, strongly protests 
 against the innovation.^ The Greek (tov Trovr\pov and puta^ai with aTro) 
 
 haben, und giebt dem Beter dadurch A nlass zur Selbstprufung, ob er das 
 auch getkan und sick dadurch als ein rechtes Gotteskind bewdhrt habe, wie 
 es allein dies Gebet sprechen kann." 
 
 ' Meyer and Weiss, in loc. : " Gottfuhrt in Versuchvng, in so fern die, 
 versuchlichen, d. i. die zur S'unde A nlass gebenden Lagen und Unutdnde durch 
 ihn, vermoge seiner Regierung hergestellt werden, und es also von Gott 
 geschieht und er es macht (1 Kor. x. 13), wenn der Mensch in solche Seelenge- 
 Jahren gerdth. . . . So lost sich zugleich der scheinhare WiderspruchmitJak. 
 i. 13, wo von der svbjectiven, inneren Versuchung die Rede isf, deren wirkendes 
 Princip nicht Gott, sondem die eigene Begierde ist. In letzterer liegt auch 
 beim Gldubigen vermoge seiner aapK {xxvi. 41 ; Gal. v. 17) die grosse sittliche 
 Gefahr, welche dieses Gebet immer wieder nothv^endig macht." 
 
 ' As Goethe admirably says of the Rationalists : 
 " Den Bosen sind sie los. 
 Die Bosen sind geblieben." 
 
 ' He speaks of " the extreme surprise and grief" which this change ha* 
 
 30 
 
440 THE KEVISED VERSIOI^. 
 
 admits of both the masculine and the neuter rendering; and hence the 
 Revisers retain the old as an alternative in the margin. The case in- 
 volves the following points : 
 
 (a) In nearly all the passages 6 Trovrjpog, as a noun, designates Satan, 
 who is emphatically the Evil One, the Wicked One — namely, Matt. xiii. 
 19, 38 ; Eph. vi. 16 ; 1 John ii. 13, 14 ; iii. 12 ; v. 18, 19 (probably also 
 Matt. V. 37 ; John xvii. 15 ; 2 Thess. iii. 3) ; while to Trovqpov, as a noun, 
 occurs only twice in the New Testament — Luke vi. 45 and Rom. xii. 9. 
 In Matt. V. 39 o Ttovijpng is used of an evil man. 
 
 (6) The preposition dno with the verb pma^ai more naturally suggests 
 a person, the preposition tK a danger, but not necessarily.^ 
 
 (c) The close connection of " not " and " but " (/a?) . . . aWa) favors 
 the masculine rendering. And this is strengthened by the fact that Christ 
 shortly before came out of the mysterious conflict with his great antago- 
 nist. Hence there is great force in the petition in this sense, " Bring us 
 not into temptation, but deliver us from the Temvpter^'' i. e. from the power 
 of him w'no is the author of all sin and misery in the world. Several 
 fathers remark that Luke omits the last petition because it is practically 
 included in the former. 
 
 (d) All the Greek fathers (Origen, Chrysostom, etc.), and most of the 
 Reformed or Calvinistic commentators (from Beza to Ebrard), support 
 the masculine rendering; ^ while the post-Nicene Latin Church, under the 
 lead of Augustin (a malo)^ and the Lutheran Church, under the lead of 
 Luther, favor the neutral rendering. The Heidelberg Catechism (Re- 
 caused to him and will cause to " millions of devout and trustful hearts." 
 To which Bishop Lightfoot aptly replies that the cause of truth is more 
 sacred even than the sentiments of our fellow-Christians. " If transla- 
 tors are not truthful, they are nothing at all." 
 
 * pvtaSrai occurs seventeen times in the New Testament with drro and 
 Ik. Lightfoot lays no stress on the preposition. 
 
 ^ Lightfoot saj^s (in "The Guardian" for Sept. 21, 1881): "Among 
 Greek writers there is, so far as I have observed, absolute unanimity on 
 this point. They do not betray the slightest suspicion that any other 
 interpretation is possible." Then he quotes from the Clementine Homilies, 
 Origen, Dionysius of Alexandria, Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory Nyssen, 
 Didymus of Alexandria, Chrysostom, and Isidore of Pelusium. 
 
 ' TertuUian and Cyprian, however, used malus of the Evil One, and so, 
 according to Lightfoot, understood the Lord's Prayer. But Canon Cook 
 claims Cyprian on the other side, and not without reason (^Second Letter^ 
 p. 87 sq.). 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 441 
 
 A)rmed) translates vom Bosen ; Luther, in his Bible and Small Catechisna, 
 vom Uebel, but in his Large Catechism he refers the word to " the evil 
 one, or the malicious one," so that " the entire substance of all our prayer 
 should be directed against our chief enemy" (Expos, of the Seventh 
 Petition). 
 
 (e) The testimony of ancient versions and liturgies is prevailingly for 
 the masculine rendering, as Lightfoot has shown. 
 
 (J") Modem commentators are divided ; the most exacting philological 
 exegetes (Fritzsche, Meyer, also Keim and Hilgenfeld) prefer the mascu- 
 line rendering, and Meyer urges that it better suits " the concrete concep- 
 tion of the New Testament " (referring to ten passages) ; but Tholuck, 
 Olshausen, Bleek, Ewald, Keil, and Weiss (in the seventh edition of Meyer 
 on Matthew) are on the other side. 
 
 {g) In any case, tov Trovrjpov here refers to moral, not physical, evil, 
 although the latter is a consequence of the former. Comp. the contrast 
 between to irovrjpov and to dya^ov in Rom. xii. 9, where both 
 versions render "Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is 
 good.'' 
 
 6. The doxology. Here the Revisers are undoubtedly right in relegat- 
 ing it to the margin. The entire silence about it in the earliest patristic 
 expositions of the Lord's Prayer, by Tertullian, Cyprian, and Origen, is 
 alone conclusive against its being a part of the original text, and far out- 
 weighs the authority of Chrysostom, who lived two hundred years later. 
 It is, no doubt, a liturgical insertion (from 1 Chron. xxix. 11, where nearly 
 the same doxology is found). Its omission in the most ancient authori- 
 ties, including the Latin versions, is inexplicable otherwise. The Saviour 
 did not 80 much intend to enjoin a complete formula of prayer as to sug- 
 gest the essential topics, and to teach us the right spirit of all prayer, 
 whether free or liturgical. 
 
 The changes in the Lord's Prayer have been fully discussed between 
 Canon Cook and Bishop Lightfoot. See above, p. 378. The former is 
 totally opposed to all changes, especially the omission of the doxology. 
 In his last book on The Revised Version he again opposes it, but makes 
 the wrong statement that the reference of the last petition to Satan is 
 "opposed by all the churches of Western Christendom" (p. 61), ignoring 
 the fact that the German and the Dutch Reformed churches, which hold 
 to the Heidelberg Catechism, belong to Western Christendom. The 
 Dutch Bijbel translates, *' verlos ons van den booze " (from the evil one), in 
 agreement with the Heidelberg Catechism in the German original (vom 
 Bosen). It is not likely that the Revision will change the habits of the 
 
442 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 people. The Episcopalians use the prayer in two forms, with and with- 
 out the doxology, and still adhere to the older version : " Forgive us our 
 trespasses as we forgive theno that trespass against us" (instead of, "For- 
 give us our debts, as we forgive our debtors"), and the double "ever" at 
 the close, contrary to King James's Version. 
 
 VI. 25 : " Be not anxious for your life " (jiri fiepifivdrt) ; for " take no 
 thought." So also ver. 34. 
 
 Removal of an archaic phrase which now reads like an exhortation to 
 improvidence. Shakespeare and Bacon use "thought" in the sense of 
 anxiety, melancholy : e. g., " to die of thought," " sicklied o'er with the 
 pale cast of thought." 
 
 IX. 17: "wine-skins" (daKoi)', for '' bottles:' 
 
 In Egypt and Palestine wine and water are put into bottles made of 
 the skin of an animal taken off whole, and carriers of such skin-bottles 
 are still constantly seen in the streets of Cairo and Jerusalem. 
 
 XL 23: "Hades," for "hell," and so in nine other passages where the 
 word occurs in the New Testament — Matt. xvi. 18 ; Luke x. 16 ; xvi. 23 ; 
 Acts ii.27, 31; Rev. i. 18; vi. 8; xx. 13, 14. 
 
 Restoration of an important distinction between Hades (or SheoT) — »'.«., 
 the realm of the dead, the spirit-world — and Hell (or Gehenna^ also once 
 Tartarus, 2 Pet. ii. 4) — i. e., the state and place of future punishment (in 
 twelve passages). The American Committee insisted upon this change 
 from the beginning, but the English Committee resisted it till they 
 reached the passages in Revelation. 
 
 XIV. 8: " She [the daughter of Herodias] being put forward [or, urged 
 on, impelled, Trpofii^aa^daa from 7rjOo/3t/3d^(«>] by her mother;" instead 
 of " being before instructed" (from the Vulgate, ^rcewomVa). 
 
 XV. 27 : " Yea, Lord, for even (/cat yap) the dogs eat of the crumbs 
 which fall from their master's table;" instead of "Truth, Lord: yet the 
 dogs," etc. The woman put in her plea on the very ground of the Lord's 
 words. Not as one of the children, but as an humble dependant, she 
 asked only the crumbs. 
 
 XVI. 13 : " Who do men say that the Son of man is?" for " whom," etc. 
 An error of grammar. 
 
 XVI. 26 : " What shall a man be profited, if he shall gain the whole 
 world, and forfeit his life? or what shall a man give in exchange for his 
 life?" instead of "lose his own soul ... for his soul" So also Mark viii. 
 36, 37. 
 
 The Greek i/zu^^ means both life and soul, but consistency with ver. 25, 
 where the Authorized Version itself translates life, requires the same ren- 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 443 
 
 dering in ver. 26. The difference in the text is between the lower physi- 
 cal or temporal life and the higher spiritual or eternal life, and the warning 
 is against sacrificing the latter to the former. There is indeed a fearful 
 sense in which one may lose his soul; but the usual inferences based upon 
 this phrase are just as applicable to life in its higher sense (life eternal). 
 
 XXI. 41 : " He will miserably destroy those miserable men ;" for " mis- 
 erably destroy those wicked men." 
 
 The Greek kukovq kukCjq {=pe$simos pessime) airoXiffH is a parono- 
 masia of purest Greek, and brings out the agreement of character with 
 the punishment. Compare the English phrase, " Evil be to him that evil^ 
 thinks." It might also be rendered, " These wretches will he wretchedly 
 destroy." 
 
 XXIII. 24: "Strain out the gnat, and swallow the camel;" for "strain 
 at a gnat." 
 
 A typographical error which became stereotyped. The older English 
 versions have " out." A proverbial sentence for pedantic scrupulosity in 
 trifles. The Jews were in the habit of filtering wine and other beverages 
 to avoid swallowing a small insect pronounced unclean by the law. So 
 the Buddhists to-day. 
 
 XXV. 8 : " Our lamps are going out " (the present, v^ivvvvTm) ; for 
 " are gone out." 
 
 The flax was still smoking, as is apparent from the virgins trimming 
 the wick (ver. 7). 
 
 XXV. 46: "Eternal punishment;" for «et7er/a5f%." • 
 
 The same word, aitoviog, is used in both clauses, and the variation of 
 the Authorized Version in the same verse creates a false distinction. 
 
 XXVI. 28: "This is my blood of the [new] covenant;" for ^'testa- 
 ment." 
 
 So also in all other passages where ha^rjKri ( = r'i'72) occurs, except 
 Heb. ix. 16, 17, where the meaning is disputed. The English Revisers 
 retained " testament " in the margin, but the American Committee objected 
 to this alternative except in Heb. ix. 15-17. The error came from the 
 Vulgate, and has affected the designation of the two parts of the Bible, 
 which has become stereotyped in all modern languages beyond the power 
 of change, although Old Testament (as implying the death of the testator) 
 is a misnomer. 
 
 XXVIII. 19: " Baptizing them into (elt:) the name of the Father, and 
 of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost;" for " wi the name" (from the Vulgate, 
 in nomine). 
 
 Compare GaL iii. 27 (baptized into Christ) ; 1 Cor. x. 2 (into Moses) ; 
 
444 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 Acts viii. 16 (into the name) ; 1 Cor. i. 13 (into the name). The Greek 
 preposition fit,- denotes motion and direction. Baptism is an introduction 
 into the covenant and communion with the triune God. " To be baptized 
 into that name was to be consigned to the loving, redeeming, sanctifying 
 power of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost." — Humphry (p. 68). 
 
 Luke. 
 
 II. 2 : " This was the first enrolment {uTroypa^ri Trpibrrf) made when 
 Quirinius was governor of Syria;" for "this taxing was Jirst'' (which 
 would require Trpwrov) "made when Cyrenius," etc. 
 
 Luke distinguishes this enrolment from another which took place ten 
 years afterwards under the same governor, Acts v. 37. The chronological 
 difficulty ought not to affect the translation. 
 
 II. 49 : " In my Father's house ;" for " business." 
 
 The Greek (tv rolg rov, literally, in the things of) admits of both ver- 
 sions, but the Revised Version is more probable in the context; for the 
 parents sought him in a place. See the reasons which influenced the 
 Revisers in Humphry's Commentary, p. 98. 
 
 III. 23 : " Jesus himself, when he began to teach, was about thirty 
 years of age ;" instead of " Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of 
 age." 
 
 VII. 2 : "At the point of death " (ijfieWe teXevt^.v) ; for " ready to die," 
 which, in the sense here used, is an archaism. In the modern sense of the 
 term, we should always be ready to die, in health as well as sickness. 
 " Readiness is all " (Shakespeare). 
 
 XXIII. 15 : " Nothing worthy of death hath been done by him [Je- 
 sus] ;" for " done unto him." 
 
 The Greek is ambiguous (jrETrpayfiivov avT<^, but the context leaves 
 no doubt as to the meaning of Pilate. 
 
 John. 
 
 V. 35 : " He [John the Baptist] was the lamp (6 Xvyyoq) that burneth 
 and shineth ;" instead of the " light" 
 
 Christ was the self-luminous light (jb tpioQ, lux) ; John the Baptist was 
 a lamp lighted and supplied with oil for the purpose of bearing witness to 
 the light. Compare John i. 8. 
 
 V. 39 : " Ye search the Scriptures," for " Search the Scriptures." 
 
 The Greek ^psvvdTS admits of both translations, but the context 
 (especially the on, the emphatic vfiEig, the position of iv avralq, and the 
 contrast expressed in fcat ov ^kXETi) decidedly favors the indicative rather 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 445 
 
 than the imperative rendering. The Jews really did search the Scriptures 
 very diligently, though slavishly, pedantically, and superstitiously ; it 
 was their boast and pride, and they used this very word (compare vii. 52, 
 where they tell Nicodemus, " Search [kptvvrjaov^ and see," etc.) ; but they 
 studied the letter only and missed the spirit, and do so to this day. 
 Christ turns the tables against them, saying : " Ye do [indeed J search the 
 Scriptures [rag ypaipdc, not tov Xoyov tov Btovl, because ye think that 
 in them [not through them, as a mere means] ye have eternal life; and 
 these are they which bear witness of me ; and [yet] ye will not come to 
 Me [who am the Life and Light of the Scriptures], that ye may have 
 [that eternal] life." The contrast brings out the inconsistency and hy- 
 pocrisy of the Pharisees. The two interpretations are fully discussed in my 
 edition of Lange on John, p. 194 sq. See also Beza, Bengel, Godet, Meyer, 
 Weiss (sixth edition of Meyer), Luthardt (in his new edition), Westcott, 
 Milligan and Moulton, who all take the verb in the indicative sense. 
 The English Revisers give the imperative rendering (supported by 
 Chrysostom, Augustin, Luther, Tholuck, Hengstenberg, Ewald, Alford) 
 the benefit of the margin. 
 
 VIIL 58: " Before Abraham was born (yevsffSrai),! am" (flfii); for 
 " before Abraham was, I am." 
 
 This correction is only made in the margin, but ought to have been put 
 into the text. There is an important distinction between yevsnBai, which 
 signifies temporal or created existence, beginning in time and presupposing 
 previous non-existence, and slvai, which expresses here, in the present 
 tense, the eternal, uncreated existence of the Divine Logos. The same 
 distinction is observed in the prologue of John, where yv is applied to the 
 Logos, ver. 1, while lyevero is used of the genesis of the world, ver. 3, 
 the birth of John the Baptist, ver. 6, and the incarnation of the Logos, 
 ver. 14. 
 
 X. 16: "They shall become (ytvrtffovTai) one flock (ttoI^vti), one 
 shepherd;" instead of "There shall be one fold'' (which would require 
 avXr], occurring in the same verse) "and one shepherd." 
 
 There may be, and there are, many folds (denominations and church 
 organizations) for the one flock under the one shepherd. The error of the 
 Authorized Version, derived from the Vulgate (ovile), is mischievous, and 
 has often been used in favor of an outward visible unity culminating in 
 the pope. Dr. Westcott says {Commentary, in loc.) : " The translation 
 'fold' for 'flock' has been most disastrous in idea and influence. The 
 obliteration of this essential distinction has served in no small degree to 
 confirm and extend the false claims of the Roman See. It would perhaps 
 
446 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 be impossible for any correction now to do away with the effects which a 
 translation umkniahly false has produced on ecclesiastical ideas." 
 
 XIII. 2: "During supper" (or, "as supper was beginning," ^eiVrov 
 yivo/itvov), for "Supper being ended^^ (which is inconsistent with ver. 
 26, where the meal is still going on). The Shttvov was the principal 
 meal of the ancients, and corresponds to our late dinner. 
 
 XIV. 16 : " Comforter," used here, ver. 26, xv. 26, and xvi. 7 of the Holy 
 Spirit, was retained, but with a marginal note. It is an inadequate ren- 
 dering of 7rapdK\r}Tog, which means advocate, helper, intercessor, coun- 
 sellor. It is passive, one called to aid (advocatus), not active {TrapaKXt}- 
 T(t)p) ; but after long deliberation the Revisers retained the dear old word 
 which expresses one important function of the Spirit. In 1 John ii. 1, 
 where it is used of Christ, the Revisers retained Advocate in the text, 
 with Comforter in the margin. Rather inconsistent. It would be better 
 to use Advocate all through, with Paraclete in the margin. See the long 
 discussion in Lange on John xiv. 16 (English edition, p. 440 sq.), and 
 Lightfoot on Revision (p. 50 sqq., in favor o{ Advocate). 
 
 XVI. 8 : " Convict ;" for " reprove.'' 
 
 The verb kXtyxuv implies both a convincing unto salvation and a con- 
 victing unto condemnation. 
 
 Acts. 
 
 II. 3 : " And there appeared unto them tongues parting asunder " (or, 
 dividing, distributing themselves, dia/xspi^ofievat), "like as of fire;" for 
 " cloven tongues " (from Tyndale, giving the wrong idea that each tongue 
 was forked). 
 
 II. 31 : " neither was he left in Hades " (or, abandoned unto Hades, 
 ovTe tvKare\ei(pBT] tig ^Sov, the realm of the dead, the abode of departed 
 spirits) ; instead of " his soul was not left in hell." So also ver. 27. 
 
 Christ was certainly in the realm of the dead, and in Paradise between 
 his death and resurrection, as we know from his own lips, Luke xxiii. 43 
 (" To-day shalt thou be with me in Paradise ") ; but we do not know 
 whether he was in hell. The wording of the clause in the Apostles' 
 Creed, according to its original meaning, ought to be corrected, "De- 
 scended into Hades." The omission of " his soul" is due to a change of 
 reading; r) ^vxrj avrov of the textus receptus is not supported by any of 
 the oldest authorities, and was probably inserted in contrast to rj adp^ avrov. 
 
 II. 47 : " The Lord added to them day by day those that were being 
 saved " (in the process of salvation, or, with American Committee, " were 
 saved ") ; instead of " such as should he saved." 
 
 The false rendering of the present participle, tovq ffto^ofikvovg, as indi- 
 
THE REVISED VERSION". 447 
 
 eating a class of persons predestinated for salvation, has been traced to a 
 Calvinistic bias of the Authorized Version and the influence of Beza, but 
 it is derived from Tyndale and other versions. The same word is used in 
 1 Cor. i. 18, and contrasted with aTroXXvfiEvoiy " those that are perish- 
 ing." 
 
 III. 19, 20 : " that so (pTriog) there may come (^tX^ujcti) seasons of re- 
 freshing from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send (dTrooTfiX^) 
 the Christ (rov Xp.), who hath been appointed (TrpoKixtipioixivov) for 
 you ;" instead of " when the times of refreshing shall come. . . . And he 
 shall send Jesus Christ which before was preached (jrpoKiKtipvynkvov) 
 unto you." 
 
 Both verbs depend upon ottwq, which never means wlien. The Author- 
 ized Version and older English versions were misled by the Vulgate (vt 
 cum venerini). The season of refreshing refers to the second coming of 
 the Messiah. 
 
 III. 21 : " Until the times of restoration of all things ;" for " restitution " 
 (from the Vulgate). 
 
 The word cnroKaTcifframg refers to the general renovation of the world 
 at the glorious coming of the Messiah. Compare Matt. xvii. 11 (diroica- 
 Ta(yri]<TH Travra), and xix. 28 (iv ry naXivyeveffig.'). 
 
 XII. 4: "Passover;" for "Easter." 
 
 The Jewish festival is meant. Easter is of mediaeval Germanic origin, 
 but was regarded as the precise equivalent for Passover. Luther made 
 the same mistake (Ostern), and the German Revisers did not correct it. 
 
 XVIL 22 : " Ye are somewhat superstitious " (margin, " Or, religious ") ; 
 for " ye are too superstitious " (from Tjmdale). 
 
 Paul was too much of a gentleman and had too much good sense to 
 begin his address to the Athenian philosophers with an insult rather than 
 a captatio henevolenticB. SHmdaifioveffTtpoi (the comparative of deiaidaC- 
 p,u)v, literally, " demon-dreading," but almost equivalent to our " God-fear- 
 ing "), is ambiguous, but is no doubt used here in a good sense to designate 
 the scrupulous religiosity of the Athenians in erecting an altar for an un- 
 known god, lest they might neglect one. The American suggestion is 
 still better, " very religious." We might say " over-religious," for the 
 comparative intensifies rather than weakens ("somewhat") the idea. In 
 the same address, " What (o) ye worship in ignorance " (unknowingly, 
 dyvoovvTEo), for "whom (ov) ye ignorantly worship." Compare John iv. 
 22 : " Ye (Samaritans) worship that which ye know not." 
 
 XX. 28: "Bishops" {iTnaKoirovQ), for ''overseers." 
 
 This important change (ignored by Humphry) is required by con- 
 
448 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 sistency with the uniform rendering of the word in Philippians and the 
 Pastoral Epistles, and bj' the undoubted fact that bishops (overseers) and 
 presbyters (elders) in the apostolic age were identical. The same officers 
 at Ephesus, who are here called tiriffKoiroi, are in ver. 17 called Trpta^unpot. 
 The change was strongly urged by the American Committee upon the 
 English Revisers. 
 
 XXI. 15 : " We took up our baggage ;" instead of " carriages," which 
 formerly had the passive sense, " the thing carried." 
 
 XXVI. 28 : " With but little persuasion (tv oXi'yy) thou wouldest fain 
 make me a Christian." 
 
 The Authorized Version, "A Imost [from the Geneva Version and Beza's 
 propemodum^ thou persuadest me to be a Christian," gives very good 
 sense, and has furnished the text for many excellent sermons; but is 
 against the Greek, both classic and Hellenistic, though supported by 
 Chrj'sostom, lixxfh&r (es fehlet nickt viel), and Grotius. "Almost" would 
 require irap' oXiyov or oXiyov. It assumes, moreover, that Agrippa, a 
 most frivolous character, was in earnest and on the very point of conver- 
 sion, which is contradicted by his later history. The phrase iv oXiy^t 
 means "in a little," and this may be understood either in a temporal 
 sense, " in a short time," or in a quantitative sense, " in a few words " (as 
 Eph. iii. 3). The former is preferred by Neander, De Wette, Hackett, 
 and is suggested by the American Committee as a marginal alternative ; 
 the latter is the interpretation of Meyer (" mit wenigem uherredest du mich 
 ein Christ zu werden "), Lechler (in Lange), Wendt, Plumptre, etc., and 
 corresponds better to the quantitative iv fteydX<i> in Paul's answer (adopted 
 by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort, and English Revisers, in- 
 stead of tv TToXX^). The periphrastic rendering, " with little persuasion " 
 (or " effort "), is not quite satisfactory, but it is extremely difficult to trans- 
 late the terse and sententious Greek. Agrippa spoke ironically, or per- 
 haps in playful courtesy ; at all events evasively. 
 
 The change in ver. 28 requires a corresponding change in Paul's answer, 
 ver. 29 : " whether with little or with much " (^Kat iv oXiyq) Kai iv fieydXtfi), 
 for " almost and altogether " (also from the Geneva Version). The Re- 
 vised Version requires the supply of the word persuasion. The American 
 Committee suggests in the margin, " Or, both in little and in great, i. e., in 
 all respects." The exquisite courtesy of Paul's answer is obvious whether 
 Agrippa was in earnest or not, and all the more striking if he was not. 
 
 Romans. 
 1. 18 : " Who hold down [or better, " hinder," kut £;^6vrwv] the truth 
 in unrighteousness ;" instead of " hold,^^ 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 449 
 
 The preposition Kara in the verb has the sense of suppressing, not of 
 holding fast; compare Luke iv. 42; 2 Thess. ii. 6. 
 
 III. 25 : " Because of the passing over [or, praetermission, did ri^v irdpi- 
 aiv, from Trapiriixi, to let pass] of sins done aforetime ;" instead of " for the 
 remission of sins that are passed." Compare Acts xvii. 30 ; Heb. ix. 15. 
 
 The praetermission {Trdpeoig) of sins is an act of God's long-suffering or 
 forbearance (dvoxh)i remission (d<})Eaig) an act of God's mercy (xapig) ; 
 the former is a postponement, the latter a granting, of pardon. The 
 Vulgate, Luther, and Beza confounded the two. 
 
 V. 12 : " For that all sinned ;" instead of " have sinned." 
 
 The aorist (ijfiapTOv) points to a definite act in the past, whether this 
 be the potentFal fall of all men in Adam, or the actual fall of each de- 
 scendant. The Revisers ought to have made the same correction in iii. 
 23. 
 
 V. 15 : " But not as the trespass (jb 
 irapdnriofia'), so also is the free 
 gift (to x^ptcTfJia). For if by the 
 trespass of the one (tov ivog) the 
 many died (ot TroXXot aTrk^a- 
 vov), much more did the grace 
 of God, and the gift by the grace 
 of the one man (tov Ivba dvS'/o.), 
 Jesus Christ, abound unto the 
 
 16 many (eig Tovg ttoWovq). And 
 not as through one that sinned, 
 so is the gift: for the judgement 
 came of one unto condemnation, 
 but the free gift came of many 
 
 17 trespasses unto justification. For 
 if, by the trespass of the one (tov 
 hog), death reigned through the 
 one; much more shall they that 
 receive the abundance of grace 
 and of the gift of righteousness 
 reign in life through the one, even 
 
 18 Jesus Christ. So then as through 
 one trespass the judgement came 
 unto all men to condemnation; 
 even so through one act of right- 
 eousness (^t' tvbg SiKaiwfiarog) 
 
 V. 15 : " But not as the offence, so 
 also is the free gift : for if through 
 the offence of one many be dead: 
 much more the grace of God, and 
 the gift by grace, which is by one 
 man Jesus Christ, hath abounded 
 unto many. 
 
 16. And not as it was by one that 
 sinned, so is the gift : for the judg- 
 ment was by one to condemnation : 
 but the free gift is of many offences 
 unto justification. 
 
 17. For if by one man's offence 
 death reigned by one, much more 
 they which receive abundance of 
 grace and of the gift of righteous- 
 ness, shall reign in life by one, Jesus 
 Christ. 
 
 18. Therefore as by the offence 
 of one judgment came upon all men 
 to condemnation: even so by the 
 righteousness of one the free gift 
 came upon all men unto justification 
 
 the free gift came unto all men I of life. 
 
450 THE REVISED VEUSloK. 
 
 19. For as by one man's disobe- 
 dience many were made sinners: so 
 by the obedience of one shall many 
 be made righteous." 
 
 19 to justification of life. For as 
 
 through the one man's disobe- 
 dience the many (oi ttoWoi) 
 
 were made sinners, even so 
 
 through the obedience of the one 
 
 shall the many (^ol ttoXXoi) be 
 
 made righteous." 
 
 The important improvements here are apparent at once to every reader 
 of the Greek. The chief defect of the Authorized Version is the omission 
 of the definite article before " many," whereby a false distinction is created 
 between many and few, instead of the real distinction between the many— 
 i. e., all ( = 7ravret;, compare ver. 18 and 1 Cor. xv. 22) and the one (6 do), 
 The whole force of Paul's argument is weakened, and a narrow particu-" 
 larism substituted for a grand universalism. For in this wonderful section 
 (verses 12-21), which may be called a grand outline of a philosophy of his- 
 tory, Paul draws a bold parallel between the first and the second Adam, be- 
 tween the universal reign of sin and death introduced by the one and the 
 universal reign of righteousness and life brought to light by the other ; and 
 he emphasizes by the repeated " much more " (TroXX^ fidWov, a dynamic 
 plus) the greater efficacy or more abundant power of the second Adam, 
 whose gain far exceeds the loss. The same parallel is brought out more 
 briefly in 1 Cor. xv. 22 : "As in Adam all (7raj/r«t) die, so also in Christ 
 shall all (Trdvrtt) be made alive." Paul does not indeed teach an actual 
 salvation of all men — for that depends on moral conditions, the free con- 
 sent of the individual, and is a matter of the future known to God — but 
 he does teach here a universalism of divine intention and divine provision 
 for salvation, or the inherent power and intrinsic sufficiency of Clirist's 
 atonement to save all sinners. All men may be saved, God wills all men 
 to be saved, Christ is abundantly able to save all, but only those will be 
 saved who accept Christ's salvation by a living faith. See Lange on' 
 Romans, p. 171 sqq., where these questions are fully discussed. Light- 
 foot (on Revision^ p. 97) quotes a good remark from Bentley, who pleads 
 for the correct rendering, and says: *' By this accurate version some hurt- 
 ful mistakes about partial redemption and absolute reprobation had been 
 happily prevented. Our English readers had then seen, what several of 
 the fathers saw and testified, that oi TroXXot, the many, in an antithesis to 
 the one, are equivalent to ttuvtsq, all, in ver. 12, and comprehend the 
 whole multitude, the entire species of mankind, exclusive only oithe one.'^ 
 In several other places the omission of the article by the Authorized 
 Version before TroXXot changes the sense materially — e.g., Matt. xxiv. 12* 
 1 Cor. ix. 4. 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 451 
 
 VI. 2: "We who died (onrsBavofiev^ to sin, how shall we any longer 
 live therein ;" for •' How shall we that are dead to sin," etc. 
 
 The apostle refers to a definite act in the past, namely, that critical 
 turning-point of the conversion and baptism (verses 3 and 4) when the 
 Christians renounced sin and consecrated themselves to God. The Au- 
 thorized Version substitutes a state for an act, and makes the question 
 superfluous. The same neglect of the aorist in ver. 4 (ffweTafptj^sv), 
 G (jcTvveaTavpioBr)), 7 {cnro^avwv), 8 (aTreS^ttvo/Ltev) ; also vii. 6 ; 2 Cor. v. 
 14; Col. ii. 20; iii. 1, 3. 
 
 VI. 5 : "If we have become united with him by the likeness of his 
 death ;" for " have been planted together." 
 
 The Authorized Version, following the Vulgate (complantati), mistook 
 the etymology of avfKpvToi., literally grown together, which comes from 
 0t»(u, to grow, not from tpvrtvu}, to plant. Compare Heb. xii. 15 (piKa 
 TTiKpiaQ (pvovaa, a root of bitterness springing up). 
 
 VI. 17 : "To that form [or, pattern] of teaching whereunto ye were de- 
 livered " {I'lQ ov Trapedo^TjTe tvttov didaxriQ) ; for " form of doctrine which 
 was delivered unto you." 
 
 The Apostolic teaching is represented as a mould or pattern after which 
 the Christians were to be fashioned. Beza : " Hoc dicendi genus magnam 
 quandam emphasin habere videtur, Ita enim signijicatur evangelicam 
 doctrinam quasi instar typi cuiusdam esse, cui veluti immittamur, ut eius 
 Jigurce conformemur, et totam istam transforviationem aliunde venire." 
 
 XII. 2 : "Be not fashioned ((rv(TX7;)uari^f ct^c) according to this world ; 
 but be ye transformed (jitTaiiop(pova^e) by the renewing of your mind ;" 
 for " be not conformed . . . but be ye transformed." 
 
 The Authorized Version is an attempt to improve upon the original by 
 introducing a beautiful play on words, but at the sacrifice of accuracy and 
 the special adaptation of the first verb to the changing and transitory 
 fashion (<Tx>?/ta) of this world. Compare 1 Cor. viL 31 (^Trapdyei to (TxvfJia 
 Tov Koafxav tovtov). 
 
 XIII. 2: "They that withstand shall receive to themselves judgment" 
 (Kplfia) ; for " They that resist, shall . . . damnation." 
 
 According to the usual sense of damnation, the Authorized Version 
 would send to hell all rebels to any existing political government {t^ov- 
 tri'a), however bad, and the passage has often been abused by tyrants, who 
 never look at the other apostolic precept that " we must obey God rather, 
 than men" (Acts v. 29). Paul, of course, has reference only to temporal 
 punishment by the civil power. The Authorized Version uses damnation 
 (eleven times), damned (three times), damnable (once, 2 Pet. ii. 1), iotjudg- 
 
462 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 ment, condemnation^ etc. Compare Rom. xiv. 23 ; 1 Cor. xi. 29 ; 1 Tim. v. 
 12 ; Mark xii. 40 ; Luke xx. 47. In the Revised Version these words 
 never occur, but are replaced by condemnation, judgment^ condemned, judged^ 
 destructive (2 Pet. ii. 1). 
 
 Corinthians. 
 
 1 Cor. iv. 4: "I know nothing against myself" (tfiavrtp avvoidd); for 
 " by mi/self" A misleading archaism. 
 
 XI. 29: "He that eateth and drinketh [unworthily, compare ver. 27], 
 eateth and drinketh judgment (Kpifxa) unto himself, if he discern (Gr. 
 discriminate) not the body ;" for " damnation.'" 
 
 The same mischievous archaism as Rom. xiii. 2 and in other passages. 
 The apostle does not mean to damn everj'^ unworthy communicant, but to 
 warn them of temporal judgments and punishments, such as divers dis- 
 eases (see ver. 30). 
 
 XIII. In this wonderful chapter, " love " (^dyaTrri) has been substituted 
 for ^^ charity'^ (from the Latin caritas), to the great offence of multitudes 
 of Bible readers. The change was absolutely required by the restricted 
 sense which *' charity " has assumed (i. e., active benevolence towards the 
 needy and suffering), and which is inapplicable to the ever-enduring char- 
 acter of the greatest of Christian graces (compare ver. 8). Besides, ver. 3 
 would be a flat contradiction ; for to bestow all one's goods to feed the 
 poor is the greatest exercise of charity. Tyndale and the older versions 
 used love, a word as sacred as the other, besides being a strong Saxon 
 monosyllable. Yea, it expresses the very essence of God himself. Who 
 would think of changing such passages as " God is love," " Love your 
 neighbor," '' Love one another," " Love the brethren," etc. In all these 
 and many other cases the substitution of charity and have charity would 
 weaken the force. It has been objected that " faith, hope, charity " of the 
 old version sounds more rhythmical than "faith, hope, love" of the new; 
 but this is a mere matter of habit. Good rhetorical taste will ultimately 
 decide in favor of the strong monosyllabic trio. 
 
 2 Cor. V. 14 : " One died {airkbavtv) for all, therefore all died " (aTre- 
 ^avov) ; for " If one died for all, then were all dead." 
 
 The same serious mistake by neglect of the aorist as in Rom. vi. 2 and 
 often. Paul assumes that potentially all Christians died with Christ on 
 the cross to sin, and rose again to a new life in God. He means an act of 
 death to sin, not a state of death through sin. 
 
 VIII. 1 : " We make known to you the grace of God ;" for " We do you 
 to wit of the grace of God." 
 
 An obsolete phrase, which meant " to cause to know." 
 
THE REVISED VERSlOK. 453 
 
 Galatians. 
 
 II. 20 : "I have been crucified with Christ ( (wviaTavpiofiai, at the 
 time of my conversion) ; yet I live (^u> ^s) ; and yet no longer I (pvKkri 
 iyci, with a comma after ot), but Christ liveth in me ;" for " I am crucified 
 with Christ. Nevertheless, I live, yet not I, but Christ liveth in me." 
 
 The "nevertheless," which is not represented in Greek, makes the 
 passage contradictory. But I agree with the American Committee that 
 the Revisers ought to have put their marginal rendering into the text — 
 namely, "and it is no longer I that live (^a) ^l ovketi fcyw, without a 
 comma), but Christ liveth in me." At his conversion Paul was crucified 
 and died to the law {aTre^avov, not " am dead,'' ver. 19), according to his 
 old man of sin under the curse of the law, but he rose with Christ, who was 
 henceforth his very life ; he had no longer a separate existence, but was 
 identified with Christ dwelling in him as the all-controlling principle. 
 Compare iii. 27 ; iv. 19 ; 2 Cor. xiii. 6 ; Col. iii. 4. Yet this life-union with 
 Christ is not a pantheistic absorption of the personality of the believer ; 
 hence the explanatory clause in the same verse : " and that life which I 
 now live in the flesh " (i. e., in this bodily, temporal form of existence) " I 
 live in faith," etc. 
 
 rV. 13 : " Because of an infirmity of the flesh (Si da^kvEiav Trjg aapKoq) 
 I preached the gospel unto you," instead of " through infirmity " (which 
 would require di da^evdag). 
 
 The physical infirmity was the occasion, not the condition, of Paul's 
 preaching to the Galatians. The passage throws some light on the char- 
 acter of the mysterious disease of Paul, which he calls his "thorn in the 
 flesh." Compare 2 Cor. xii. 7-9, and the commentaries (e.g., the Excursus 
 of Lightfoot, and in my Commentary). 
 
 VI. 11 : "See with how large letters (or, characters, TrryXtKoif ypdfifia- 
 aiv) I have written unto you with mine own hand ;" instead of" how large 
 a letter:' 
 
 Paul refers to his peculiar, large-sized (perhaps bold and awkward) 
 handwriting, not to the contents. The Authorized Version would require 
 the accusative, y/oa/iiftara. 
 
 From the Remaining Books. 
 
 Phil. ii. 6, 7 : " Who being in the form of God, counted it not a prize 
 {apiraynov, a thing to be grasped) to be on an equality with God, but 
 emptied himself" {kavrbv iKivwat); for "thought it not robbery to be 
 equal with God: but made himself of wo reputation:' 
 
 This locus classicus on the important doctrine of the kenosis of the 
 
454 THE REVISED VERSTOt^. 
 
 Logos is far better rendered than in the Authorized Version, though' 
 there was rauch dispute about a proper equivalent for apTzayfxo^. See 
 the Anaerican note, and the Commentaries. 
 
 Phil. ii. 10 : " In the name of Jesus" {iv riji ovufiari) ; for " at the name." 
 
 Phil. iii. 20 : " Our citizenship (TroXiTsvfia) is in heaven ;" for " our con- 
 versation " (in the obsolete sense for conduct). 
 
 Phil. iii. 21 : " Who shall fashion anew the body of our humiliation 
 {to awfia TrjQ TaTTEivwcrewQ), that it may be conformed {avixfiop^ov) to 
 the body of his glorj'- ;" for " who shall change our vile body that it may 
 he fashioned like unto his glorious body." 
 
 The body of the believer, far from being vile, is the temple of the 
 Holy Spirit, but passes, like Christ, through two stages— a state of hu- 
 miliation, and a state of exaltation or glory beginning with the resurrection. 
 
 1 Tim. V. 4 : " If any widow hath children or grandchildren " {tKyova) ; 
 instead of " nephews," in the obsolete sense. 
 
 1 Tim. vi. 5 : " Supposing that godliness is a way of gain ;" instead of 
 "gain is godliness." The Authorized Version turns the subject into the 
 predicate and makes nonsense or bad sense. 
 
 1 Tim. vi. 10 : " The love of money is a root {pl^a^ without the article) 
 of all kinds of evil ;" for " the root of all evil." 
 
 There are other roots of all kinds of evil besides love of money. 
 
 Heb. ii. 16 : " Not of angels doth he take hold, but he taketh hold of the 
 seed of Abraham ;" for " He took not on him the nature of angels : but he 
 took on him the seed of Abraham." 
 
 Here the Authorized Version makes (besides the wrong punctuation) 
 two errors, changing both the tense (i7ri\a/i/3ai^€rai) and the meaning 
 of the verb, as if it referred to the incarnation. tTnXanlSdvtaBai in the 
 middle and with the genitive has the sense, to take by the hand, to help, 
 and corresponds to the deliverance spoken of in ver. 15, and to " succour " 
 (j5or}Srrjaai), ver. 18. See the elaborate note of Bleek given by Alford in loc. 
 
 Heb. ix. 27 : " It is appointed unto men once to die, and after this cometh 
 judgment" (Kjoicig) ; instead of "//^f judgment." 
 
 The definite article would point to the general judgment at the end 
 of the world. 
 
 Heb. xi. 13 : " Having seen them and greeted them [the promises] from 
 afar " (affTraadfievoi) ; instead of " embraced them." 
 
 1 Pet. iii. 21 : " The interrogation (^tirspioTijfia) of a good conscience 
 toward God ;" instead of " the answer.''^ 
 
 Whatever be the sense of this difficult passage, iTrepwrrjixa cannot 
 mean an answer, but must mean inquiry or seeking after God. 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 455 
 
 Rev. vi. 6-9 : " Living creatures" (^wa) ; for " beasts." 
 This change is necessary to distinguish the four representatives of the 
 whole creation before the throne of God from the two antichristian beasts 
 Qtjpia) of the abj'ss, Rev. xi. 7 ; xiii. 1 ; and several other passages down 
 to XX. 10. 
 
 THE ENGLISH STYLE OF THE REVISION. 
 
 A good translation must be both true and free, 
 faithful and idiomatic. It is not a photograph made 
 by mechanical process, but a portrait by the hand 
 of an artist. It is not simply a transfer from one 
 language to another, but a vernacular reproduction, 
 in the very spirit of the writer, and reads like an 
 original work. This requires full mastery of the 
 two languages and intelligent sympathy with the 
 subject. Only a poet can reproduce Homer or Ver- 
 gil, only a philosopher can translate Plato or Aris- 
 totle, only an orator can do justice to Demosthenes 
 or Cicero. The best versions of the Bible are from 
 men who most heartily believed in the Bible and 
 were inspired by its genius. 
 
 The Revisers, in obedience to their rules and to 
 public sentiment, have faithfully adhered to the 
 idiom of the Authorized Version, which is classical 
 English from the golden age of English literature, 
 and has indelibly impressed itself upon the memory 
 and heart of two great nations. The Revision has 
 the familiar ring and flavor of the old version, and 
 whole chapters may be read witliout perceiving the 
 difference between the two. 
 
 But some changes were imperatively required by 
 faithfulness, consistency, and the progress of the 
 English language. Fidelity to the original must 
 
io6 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 overrule fidelity to the vernacular in translating the 
 Oracles of God. The Apostles did not write clas- 
 sical Greek, but the then prevailing Greek of the 
 common people; and translators have no right to 
 improve it, or to break up the long and often anaco- 
 luthic periods of Paul {e. g., Eph. i. 3-14) into short, 
 smooth sentences, although these would be more 
 congenial to the genius of the English language. 
 
 1. Archaisms. — Every living language changes 
 more or less by throwing out old words, adopting 
 new words, and modifying the meaning of words, 
 sometimes turning the sense into the very opposite. 
 Obsolete words and phrases ought to be removed 
 from a popular version for practical use, and replaced 
 by intelligible equivalents. The people's Bible is not 
 a museum of linguistic antiquities and curiosities. 
 It is not a herbarium, but a flower-garden. The sa- 
 cred authors wished to be understood by their hear- 
 ei'g and readers, and wrote in the language familiar 
 to their contemporaries, as clearly and forcibly as 
 they could. They used no antiquated words and 
 phrases. The Hebraisms of the Greek Testament 
 are no exception, for they were unavoidable for He- 
 brew ideas, and werQ familiar to readers of the Old 
 Testament and the Septuagint. 
 
 But there is a difference between what is antir* 
 quated and what is antique, or between the obsolete 
 and the old. One class of archaisms is obscure 
 and misleading, the other is clear and harmless. 
 The English Kevieers removed the former, but re- 
 tained and even increased the latter ; the American 
 Eevisers wo^\4. prefer mod^rA forms of speech 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 457 
 
 throughout, and have put their protest to a number 
 of remaining archaisms on record in the Appendix 
 (Classes of Passages, No. YII.). In this difference 
 the two Companies represent the diverging tastes 
 of two nations ; jet there is a dissenting minority 
 in England which sympathizes with the American 
 Committee. One reason why the English Revisers, 
 the majority of whom belong to the Church of Eng- 
 land, more closely adhere to archaic forms, is the 
 daily use of the Book of Common Prayer, which has 
 the same idiom as King James's Bible and is its in- 
 separable companion. The American Episcopalians 
 have submitted it to a modernizing recension, which 
 was adopted by the General Convention of 1801. 
 
 (1.) Misleading Archaisms. — The two Commit- 
 tees were unanimously of the opinion that these 
 should be removed, and differed only as to their 
 precise number. The following is a list of obsolete 
 words in the Authorized Version, and their substi- 
 tutes in the Revised Version of the Kew Testament: 
 
 '■^Atonement" in the sense of "reconciliation," Rom. v. 12 (compare xi. 
 15 ; 2 Cor. v. 18, 19). Etymologically " at-one-meiit " is a correct rendering 
 of KaTaWayri, but theologically it is now used in the sense of expiafion 
 OT propitiation (IXaafioQ, 1 John ii. 2; iv. 10; iXaarripiov, Rom. iii. 25). 
 
 ^^ By-andrhy," for "immediately" or "forthwith" (iv^vq or ev^fwc), 
 Matt. xiii. 21; Mark vi. 25; Luke xvii. 7; xxi. 9. 
 
 " By myself," for " against myself," 1 Cor. iv. 4. 
 
 " Carriages,'' for " baggage," Acts xxi. 15. 
 
 " Coasts'' (opia, fifpj], x*^P«)> ^^r " borders," " parts," "country," Matt. 
 ii. 16 ; xvi. 13 : xix. 1 ; Mark vii. 31 ; Acts xix. 1 ; xxvi. 20. 
 
 *^ Conversation" (ai-affr/oo^r/), in the sense of "conduct," or "manner 
 of life," Gal. i. 13; Eph. iv. 22; Phil. i. 27; Heb. xiii. 5; James iiL 13; 
 iPet. i. 15; ii. 12; iii. 1,2, 16; 2Pet. ii. 7; iii. 11. In Phil. iii. 20 " con • 
 versation" is replaced by "citizenship" (iroXirsvixa). 
 
 'i^Damn" and "J)amnatiQn" foy "condemn," " copdempatiou," pr " judg? 
 
458 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 ment," Rom. xiii. 2 ; 1 Cor. xi. 29. " Damnable " has been replaced by 
 "destructive" (2 Pet. ii. 1). 
 
 " Diddest;' for " didst," Acts vii. 28. 
 
 " To fetch a compass" for "to make a circuit," or "to go round," Acts 
 xxviii. 13. 
 
 " His," for " its," Matt. v. 13 ; 1 Cor. xv. 38, etc. 
 
 "//07-se bridles" for "liorses' bridles," or "bridles of the horses," Rev. 
 xiv. 20. The other form is not a typographical error, but archaic ; com- 
 pare " horse heels," Gen. xlix. 17, and " horse hoofs," Judges v. 22. 
 
 ^^ Instantly " for " urgently," Luke vii. 4 {aTrovbaiuiQ) ; Acts xxvi. 7 {}i> 
 
 IKTiVEiq). 
 
 ''John Baptist," for "John the Baptist," Matt. xiv. 8; Luke vii. 20. 
 Elsewhere the A. V. prefixes the article. 
 
 " To let," in the sense " to hinder," or " to restrain," Rom. i. 13; 2 Thess. 
 ii. 7. The word means now the reverse, except in the phrase " without let 
 or hindrance." 
 
 "■Lewd" (originally " ignorant," then " vicious," then " profligate"). Acts 
 xvii. 5, " lewd fellows," now " vile fellows." Also " lewdness," Acts xviii. 14 
 (" wicked villany "). 
 
 " Lively," in the sense of " living." Acts vii. 38, " lively oracles ;" 1 Pet. 
 i. 3, " lively hope ;" ii. 5, " lively stones." 
 
 "■Nephews," for "grandchildren," 1 Tim. v. 4. 
 
 " To prevent" (from prcevenire, to come before, to forestall), for "precede," 
 1 Thess. iv. 15 (ov /xij ^S'affw/iEv), or "spake first," Matt. xvii. 25 (wpo- 
 k<l>^a<Ttv avTov). Now the verb has the opposite meaning, " to hinder." 
 
 "Proper," for "beautiful,"Heb. xi.23(a<rrf »oi',or Moses,"a goodly child"). 
 
 " Room," in the sense of " place," Luke xiv. 7, etc. 
 
 " To do to wit," for " to make known," 2 Cor. viii. 1. 
 
 " Sometimes," for " some time," i. e., once, formerlj'^, Eph. v. 8. 
 
 " Thought," in the obsolete sense of " anxiety." Matt. vi. 25 : " Be not 
 anxious," for "take no thought" (pr/ nepipvart). Compare Phil. iv. 6, 
 where the Authorized Version renders the same Greek verb by " Be care- 
 ful for nothing," which is consistently rendered in the Revised Version, 
 " In nothing be anxious." 
 
 " Wa7'e of" (literally, wary, cautious), for "aware of," Matt. xxiv. 50; 
 Acts xiv. 6 ; but retained in 2 Tim. iv. 15. 
 
 We add two more archaisms which have been re- 
 tained in the Revised Version, but against the pro- 
 test of the American Committee ; 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 459 
 
 " Charger,'' in the sense of a "large dish" or "platter," Matt. xiv. 8; 
 Mark vi. 25, 28. The American Ck)mmittee proposed "platter" (in their 
 notes on Mark vi. 25). " Charger " is now almost exclusively used of a 
 war-horse. 
 
 " To hale'' and ^^ haling," in the sense "to drag" (hauV), Luke xii. 58; 
 Acts viii. 3. Entirely antiquated in America. 
 
 Some intelligible words also have disappeared 
 from the Revised Version and are replaced by more 
 accurate renderings — e. g.^ hanquetings^ hishopric^ 
 bottles^ hottomless jpit^ hrawlers^ damn, damnation 
 (replaced bv condemn, condemnation), flux, heretical, 
 hinder-part (stern), pillow, stuff, whoremonger (five 
 times, replaced hy fornicator, consistent with other 
 passages), witchcraft (Gal. v. 20, replaced by sorcery, 
 (papfxaKBta). 
 
 (2.) Innocent aechaisms are words and gram- 
 matical forms which have gone out of use, but do 
 not affect the sense, and have become familiar to 
 the reader of the Bible, and even carry with them 
 a certain charm to a great many people. Here be- 
 long the uniform use of the " th " ending of the 
 verb {hath for has), the very frequent use of "which^^ 
 (as applied to persons) for " who," the occasional use 
 of " the which," " they " for " those," " they which " 
 and " them which,'' " unto'' for " to," " rf" for " by," 
 the old-fashioned forms of conjugation, "' spake,^' 
 ''brake," ''drave," ''digged,^' '' holpen," ''stricken," 
 etc., " throughly " for " tlioroughly," " alway " for 
 " always," " howbeit " for " yet " or " however," 
 "how that" for "that," "for to" for "to," "be" (in 
 the indicative) for "are," "hewasanhungred" for "he 
 hungered " (Matt. iv. 2; xii. 1), "whiles" for " while" 
 (Matt. V. 25 ; Acts v. 4), " wot" for "know" (retained in 
 
460 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 Actsiii.l7;vii.40;Koni.xi.2;Phil.i.22),and"m5r' 
 for " knew " (Mark ix. 6 ; xiv. 40 ; Luke ii. 49, and sev- 
 eral other passages), " entreat " for " treat," " amhas- 
 sage'''' for " embassy" (Luke xiv. 32; xix. 14), ^'ensam- 
 jple^^ for "example" (Phil. iii. 17, and in six other pas- 
 sages), ^^often^^ used as plural adjective for "frequent" 
 (1 Tim. V. 23, " thine often infirmities"), ''hut and 
 if'' (1 Pet. iii. 14 ; changed in three other places). 
 
 Here, however, there is a slight difference of 
 taste between the two Committees, as already re- 
 marked. The English Revisers, representing an 
 ancient nation that is fond of old things and nurses 
 its very ruins, naturally adhere to these archaisms, 
 and have even unnecessarily increased them ; ^ w^hile 
 the American Kevisers, who share in the young, 
 fresh, progressive spirit of their nationality, prefer 
 to modernize the diction, deeming it unwise to per- 
 petuate a conflict between the language of the church 
 and the language of the school. They object espe- 
 cially to the use of "be" for "are" in the indicative, 
 and of " which " for " who " when applied to per- 
 sons, as " God which," " Our Father which," " Christ 
 which," "Abraham which is dead," etc. The one 
 is just as good old English as the other is good 
 new English, but each in its proper place. Why 
 should we censure a boy for violation of grammar 
 when he imitates the language of the Bible ? The 
 demonstrative that is the old English relative and 
 the most common in Wiclif, but was often replaced 
 
 ' E.g.^ they have introduced the archaic '■'■ hmcbeit'" in many passages 
 for "but/' "yet," " j^eyejrthejess," " notwitbstanUing," or, be it »8 it may. 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 461 
 
 in the Elizabethan age by "which" and "who," and 
 is now again used as a relative, sometimes for the 
 sake of euphony, sometimes with a slightly defining 
 force. " T^A^cA" was originally an adjective {qualis, 
 "of what quality"), and was used of all genders and 
 both numbers, but is now confined by all good writers 
 to the neuter gender and also used as an interroga- 
 tive. "TFAc?" (<qui, og, welcher) w^as indiscriminately 
 used for " that " and " which," but is now confined 
 to persons of either sex and in both numbers. The 
 Revisers have often changed " which " into " who " 
 or " that," according to euphony and English taste, 
 and thus conceded the principle; but sometimes 
 they are strangely inconsistent in the same connec- 
 tion, as Matt. vii. 24, " every one which heareth," but 
 in verse 26, " every one that heareth ;" Col. iv. 11, 
 "Jesus, which is," and in the next verse, "Epaphras, 
 who is" (following in both cases the Authorized 
 Version). But matters of national taste and habit 
 are very tenacious.* 
 
 * Two of the most eminent English statesmen (W. E. Gladstone, who is 
 a devout Episcopalian, and John Bright, who is a Friend) told me some 
 years ago that they liked all archaic forms in the Bible, and would rather 
 pray " Our Father which art in heaven " than " w^o art in heaven." But 
 the American Episcopalians have long since made the change in their 
 liturgy. The German Lutherans always address God, not in the more 
 correct modern style, " Unser Vater " (although Luther so translated the 
 Lord's Prayer in Matt. vi. 9), but in the old-fashioned and now ungram- 
 matical form, " Vater un$ei\''^ which Luther retained in his Catechism, in 
 accordance with the old German and with the Latin ^'' Pater nosterr The 
 Pennsylvania German farmers, when asked what is the difference between 
 the Lutherans and the German Reformed, reply: The Lutherans pray, 
 " Vater unser" and " Erlose urn vom Uehel ;" the Reformed, " Umer Vater ^^ 
 gnd " Erlose urn vom Bosen" The English Ijutherans adopt <* Our Father," 
 
462 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 Ill this connection I may mention another case 
 which is not archaic, but involves a change of mean- 
 ing as used by the two nations. The Americans 
 wished to substitute ^^ grain'''' for " corn " (Matt. xii. 
 1 ; Mark ii. 23 ; 1 Cor. ix. 9, etc.), because " corn " in 
 American English designates Indian corn or maize, 
 which was not cultivated in Palestine ; but the 
 English still use it in its generic sense, and over- 
 ruled the Americans. 
 
 The Americans also repeatedly protested in vain 
 against the overstrong idiomatic rendering of the 
 phrase of repulsion jlii) 7lvo(ro, by " God forbid^'' 
 which has been retained from the Authorized Ver- 
 sion in all the fifteen passages where it occurs (ex- 
 cept Gal. vi. 14, "Far be it from me"). There is 
 neither " God " nor " forbid " in the original, and it 
 can be sufficiently rendered by such phrases as " be 
 it not so," " let it never happen," " by no means," 
 "far from it" (Luther: '-'das self erne''''). The pro- 
 fane use of the name of God in the Elizabethan age 
 and by Queen Elizabeth herself {e. ^., in her letter 
 to the Bishop of Ely : " By God, I will unfrock 
 you"), as well as by her successor James, should 
 receive no aid and comfort from the English Bible. 
 
 II. New Words Introduced. — While the reader 
 of the Authorized Version will miss some old words, 
 he will find a larger number of new words. The 
 following is a selection : 
 
 and adhere to "evil;" the English Reformed retain the address, but dis- 
 miss "the evil one;" both naturally foUp','^ the Authorized Yeysion and 
 the American custom. 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 463 
 
 Abyss, active, actually, advanced, aforepromised, aim, ancient, anew, 
 animals, announce, anxiety, anxious, apparitioi., apportioned, aright, 
 arisen, ashore, assassin, aught, awe. 
 
 Balance (in the singular), bank (rampart), bathed, bay, beach, befitting, 
 believer (in the singular, 1 Cor. ix. 5 ; 2 Cor. vi. 15 ; the plural occurs twice 
 in the Authorized Version), bereave, betrothed, billows, blows, boastful, 
 bondservant, boon, bowl, boy, branded, break your fast, broken pieces, 
 burnish. 
 
 Carousings, cell, cellar, circuit, citizenship, clanging, cleanness, coasting, 
 collections, concealed, conduct (noun), confuted, continency, copy, crowd, 
 cruse, crush, cushion. 
 
 Daring, dazzling, deathstroke, decide, decision, define, defilement, de- 
 meanor, depose, diadems, difficulty, disbelieve, discharge, discipline, dis- 
 paragement, dispersion, dispute, disrepute, doomed, drift, dysentery. 
 
 Earnestness, effulgence, embarking, emperor (Acts xxv. 21), emptied, 
 enacted, encourage and encouragement, enrol and enrolment, enslaved, 
 ensnare, epileptic, explain. 
 
 Faction, factious, fainthearted, fellow-elder, fickleness, flute-players, 
 foregoing, foresail, foreshewed, forfeit, foster-brother, freight, full-grown. 
 
 Games, gangrene, gear, goad, goal, grandchildren, gratulation. 
 
 Hades, hardship, haughty, healings, hindrance. Holy of holies, holy 
 ones (Jude 14), hyacinth (in the Authorized Version "jacinth ")• 
 
 Imitate and imitators, implanted, impostors, impulse, indulgence, inside, 
 insolent, interest, interposed, interrogation, intru«^Ci, irksome, its. 
 
 .Justice. 
 
 Kinswoman. 
 
 Late, later, lawlessness (2 Thess. ii. 7 ; 1 John iii. 4, avofxia), lawsuits 
 (1 Cor. vi. 7), lee, life-giving, listening, love-feasts. 
 
 Mantle, mariners, meddler, mess, midheaven, mirror, moored. 
 
 Narrative, neighborhood, north-east. 
 
 Onset, onward, overboard, overflow, overlooked, over-ripe. 
 
 Pangs, planks, plead, plot, praetorian guard, precede, prejudice, proba- 
 tion, proconsul (for deputy), progress, prolonged, pronounce, put to sea. 
 
 Rabble, race (generation), reclining, refined, reflecting, regret, regular, 
 reminded, rid, riding, roll (noun), roused, rudder. 
 
 Sabbath rest, sacred, seemly, self-control, senseless, setting sail, shame- 
 fastness (for shamefacedness ; rather archaic), sharers, shekel, shrink, 
 shudder, skins (wine-skins), sluggish, snatch, sojourner, solid, somewhere, 
 wuth-east, springs (noun), steersman, story (loft), strict, strolling, stupor, 
 .succeeded, sum (verb), sunrising, surger surpass, suspense, swearers. 
 
464 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 Tablet, temple -keeper, tend, tents, threshing-floor, tilled, toll, train, 
 tranquil, treated. 
 
 Unapproachable, unbeliever (the plural occurs in the Authorized Ver- 
 sion), unceasing, undressed, unfaithful, unlifted, unmixed, unripe, unsettle, 
 unstedfast, unveiled, useful. 
 
 Victorious, vinedresser, vote, vouchsafed. 
 
 Wallet, welcome, wet, wheel, wine - bibbings, wine -skins, workings, 
 world-rulers, wranglings, wrong-doer, wrong-doing. 
 
 III. Improvements in Ehythm. — Rhythmical 
 flow and musical charm are generally regarded as 
 among the great excellences of the Authorized Ver- 
 sion which cannot be surpassed. This is, no doubt, 
 true as a rule, but there are not a few exceptions. 
 The ear may become so used to a favorite passage 
 that all sense of imperfection is lost. The following 
 are a few specimens of improvement in rhythm as 
 well as in fidelity : 
 
 Matt. v. 6. 
 Revised Version. Authorized Version. 
 
 Blessed are they that hunger and 
 thirst after righteousness : for they 
 shall be filled. 
 
 Blessed are they which do hunger 
 and thirst after righteousness: for 
 they shall be filled. 
 
 Matt. viii. 32. 
 
 (Compare Mark v. 13 ; Luke viii. 33.) 
 
 Revised Version. Authorized Version. 
 
 And behold, the whole herd rushed 
 down the steep into the sea, and per- 
 ished in the waters. 
 
 And behold, the whole herd of 
 swine ran violently down a steep 
 place into the sea, and perished in 
 the waters. 
 
 Acts ii. 20. 
 Revised Version. Authorized Version. 
 
 The sun shall be turned into dark- 
 
 And the moon into blood, 
 
 Before the day of the Lord come, the Lord come. 
 
 'Chat great and notable day. I 
 
 The sun shall be turned into dark- 
 ness, and the moon into blood, be- 
 fore that great and notable day of 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 465 
 
 Col. IV. 10. 
 
 Revised Version. Authorized Version. 
 
 Mark, the cousin of Barnabas. | Marcus sister's son to Barnabas. 
 
 2 Thess. I. 11. 
 Revised Version. Authorized Version. 
 
 That our God may count you 
 worthy of your calling, and fulfil 
 every desire of goodness and every 
 work offaiih^ with power. 
 
 That our God would count you 
 worthy of this calling, and fulfil all 
 the good pleasure of his goodness, and 
 the work of faith with power. 
 
 Revelation vii. 17. 
 Revised Version. Authorized Version. 
 
 For the Lamb which is in the 
 midst of the throne shall be their 
 shepherd, and shall guide them unto 
 fountains of waters of life : and God 
 shall wipe away every tear from their 
 eyes. 
 
 For the Lamb, which is in the 
 midst of the throne, shall feed them, 
 and shall lead them unto living foun- 
 tains of waters: and God shall wipe 
 away all tears from their eyes. 
 
 IV. Grammatical Irregularities. — A number 
 of passages in the Eevised Yersion are too closely 
 rendered from the Greek or retained from the Au- 
 thorized Yersion at the expense of strict rules of 
 English grammar. These irregularities have been 
 violently assailed, but mostly by critics who are 
 either ignorant of Greek, or have not taken the 
 trouble to compare the version with the Greek, or 
 even with the Authorized Yersion, which is guilty 
 of the same faults. It is not to be supposed for a 
 moment that the Revisers do not know the English 
 language fully as well as their critics; some of them 
 are themselves classical writers, and authorities on 
 the subject of style. Good English, moreover, is 
 determined by classical usage as well as by the rules 
 of grammar, and the greatest authors take some 
 liberties. Nevertheless, compliance with the rules 
 
466 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 is better than violation, unless there is a good rea- 
 son for the exception. 
 
 The singular verb is repeatedly used with two or 
 more subjects. The following are examples : 
 
 Matt. vi. 19 : " Where moth and rust doth (for do) consume." So in the 
 Greek (a^at'i^ti) and the Authorized Version. Moth and rust are taken 
 as one conception. 
 
 Matt. xxii. 40 : " On these two commandments hangeth the whole law, 
 and the prophets." Here the Authorized Version has hang, following the 
 iextus receptus (jcpk^iavraC) ; but the Revised Version adopts the reading 
 Kpsfiarai after vofioQ. 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 56: "Among whom was (for were) Mary Magdalene, and 
 Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of the sons of 
 Zebedee." Washington Moon, the special champion of "The Queen's 
 English " versus " The Dean's English," facetiously asks : " If two Marys 
 are plural, how can three Marys be singular?" But the Greek has the 
 singular r/v, and the Authorized Version was. The verb is adjusted to 
 the first name, and is silently repeated. The case is different when two 
 or more nouns precede, as in Matt. vi. 19. 
 
 Mark iii. 33 : " Who is (rig tanv) my mother and my brethren ?" Mr. 
 Moon exclaims : " Who is they !" and refers to Matt. xii. 48 : " Who is my 
 mother? and who are (t'iveq Eiaiv) my brethren?" But in both cases the 
 Revisers simply followed the Greek. 
 
 Acts xvii. 34 : " Among whom also was Dionysius the Areopagite, and 
 a woman named Daraaris, and others." 
 
 Rom. ix. 4 : " Whose is the adoption, and the glorj'," etc. Here the 
 Greek omits the verb, and the Authorized Version &u^\)\\qs pei'taineth. 
 
 Compare also 1 Cor. xiii. 13 ; Eph. iii. 18 ; 1 Tim. i. 20 \ James iii. 10, 16 ; 
 Heb. ix. 4. 
 
 An example of the reverse irregularity we have in Rev. xx. 13 : " And 
 they were judged every man according to their works." Mr. Moon thinks 
 jt ought to be " his works," but the Greek has avra>v, as required by the 
 plural verb lKpiSrri<Tav. The fKaffroQ individualizes the judgtnent. A 
 comma before and after " every man " would make all plain. 
 
 Y. Infelicities. — Here belong some harsh and 
 clashing renderings which arise mostly from a slav- 
 ish adherence to the Greek, and could be avoided 
 without injury to the sense. 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 467 
 
 John xvii. 24, in the sacerdotal prayer: "Father, that which thou hast 
 given me, I will that, where I am, they also may be with me; that they 
 may behold my glory." This is perhaps the most objectionable rendering 
 in the whole book. It is literal after the emphatic order of the Greek, 
 *ind the true reading o (for ovi;'), which expresses the undivided totality 
 of believers; compare ver. 2 {T:av-avToi<S). But the English idiom per- 
 emptirrily requires here a slight change, or a return to the Authorized 
 Version : " I will that they also whom thou hast given me, be with me 
 where I am," etc. Westcott (in the Speaker's Commentary') proposes: 
 " As for that which thou hast given me, I will that . . . they." This 
 does not relieve the difficulty. Better, though less literal, "As for those 
 whom," etc., with a marginal note : Gr. " As for that which." ' 
 
 1 Thess. iv. 15: '^that we that are alive, that are left unto the coming 
 of the Lord." Here the triple that could have been avoided by substitut- 
 ing who for the second and third. The Greek has the participles (rj/jelg 
 01 ^utvrec, ot TrepiXenrofifvoi). 
 
 Heb. xii. 13 : " that that which is lame be not turned out of the way." 
 Avoided in the Authorized Version by " lest that " (iva jxi]). Or, " that 
 the lame " (Noyes and Davidson). 
 
 Heb. xi. 19 : " he did also in a parable receive him back." Literal {iv 
 7raf)alioXy)f but unintelligible to the English reader. Davidson's render- 
 ing, "in a symbol," is no improvement. Noyes: "figuratively." The 
 old version is preferable, except that it puts the words " in a Jigure " 
 wrongly after the verb. Better in The Speaker'' s Commentary: "from 
 whence he did also in a figure receive him back," 
 
 2 Pet. i. 7 : " in your love of the brethren love " (Jv ry <pi\adtX<pi^ dyd- 
 ■Krjv). Intolerable. Better with the Authorized Version and the Amer- 
 ican Committee, " brotherly kindness " for (}>i\adtX<pia (so also Alford, 
 Noyes, Davidson), or "universal love" for dyctTrr]. 
 
 Matt. V. 35 : " footstool of his feet " (vTroTro^ioi^ twv Trodwv avTOv) ; for 
 "his footstool." From the Hebrew, Ps. xcix. 5; ex. 1; Isa. Ixvi. 1, and 
 the Septuagint. So also Mark xii. 36 ; Luke xx. 43 ; Acts ii. 35 ; vii. 49 ; 
 
 ' Other modern translations — Dean Alford and Dr. Davidson : " Father, 
 I will that what thou hast given me, even they may be with me where 
 I am;" Dr. Noyes: "Father, as to that which thou hast given me, I de- 
 sire that they also," etc. ; Milligan and Moulton (two of the Revisers, in 
 Schaffs Illustr. Commentary) ; " Father, what thou hast given me, I desire 
 that where I am they also may be with me." This is the best rendering, 
 if we must reproduce in English the reading o for org, 
 
4:68 THE REVISED VERSlOir. 
 
 Heb. i. 13 ; x. 13. Reproduced in the Vulgate (scabellum pedum ejus), 
 Luther (Schemel seiner Fiisse, retained by De Wette and Weizsacker), the 
 Dutch Version (yoetbank zijner voeten). But in English the phrase sounds 
 lumbering and pleonastic (as there is no ybo^stool for any other member 
 of the body), and hence it has been rightly omitted in the Authorized 
 Version, and also by Alford, Noyes, and Davidson. 
 
 In the Lord's explanation of the parable of the tares. Matt. xiii. 37-39, 
 and in the passage of Paul, 1 Cor. xii. 8-10, the connecting particle (ind 
 is introduced no less than six times in one sentence in scrupulous lidelity 
 to the original. The repetition of the little dk does not offend the Greek 
 ear, while the repetition of and offends the English ear, unless it is em- 
 phatic, which is not the case in these two instances. It should be borne 
 in mind, however, that the English Testament, even in the Authorized 
 Version, is full of " ands," and that it would be a vicious principle to sacri- 
 fice fidelity to sound. The Revisers have here simply carried out con- 
 sistmtly the only general rule which can be defended in regard to the 
 rendering of ^L and the rule vsually followed in the Authorized Version. 
 If "and^^ is to be left out when its omission or some other particle in its 
 place is more agreeable to the English ear, it must be left out in a hundred 
 places where it now stands in the Authorized Version as well as the Re- 
 vised Version, and the Hebraistic character of the New Testament style 
 is changed. And we must remember that what might be justified in a 
 professedly modern version, not aiming at great literalness, cannot be jus- 
 tified in a version like the Authorized Version and the Revised Version, 
 which aim at closeness rather than elegance. 
 
 INCONSISTENCIES. 
 
 These are very few and insignificant, while in the 
 Authorized Version they are 
 
 " Thick as autumnal leaves that strew the brooks in Vallambrosa." 
 
 The Kevisers have been much censured by some 
 for inconsistency, by others for pedantry, in the ren- 
 dering of the Greek article and the Greek tenses : 
 while it is admitted by nearly all critics that in both 
 respects they have generally been as careful and 
 accurate as the old translators were negligent and 
 inaccuriite. No scholar of good taste and judg- 
 
TflE REVISED VEESIOK. 469 
 
 ment, in view of the idiomatic peculiarities of the 
 two languages, would advocate a pedantic uniform- 
 ity. Ehetorical and rhythmical considerations must 
 often decide whether the definite article is to hv 
 retained or omitted, and whether the Greek aorist 
 is to be rendered by the simple preterite or by the 
 perfect. It is the duty of the translator to retain 
 the definite article whenever it strictly defines the 
 noun — e. g., the Christ, as the official designation of 
 the promised Messiah or the Anointed, in the Gos- 
 pels ; " the many " in Rom. v. 15-19, as equivalent 
 to " all," and opposed to " the one " (not to '' a few ") ; 
 " the falling away " and " the man of sin " in 2 Thess. 
 ii. 3 (instead of " a falling away " and " that man of 
 sin ") ; " the city " (namely, the heavenly Jerusalem), 
 Heb. xi. 10 (instead of " a city ") ; " the good fight " 
 of faith, " tlie course," " the crown of righteousness," 
 2 Tim. iv. 7, 8 (instead of " a good fight," " a crown ") ; 
 " the crown of life," Rev. ii. 10 (for " a crown of 
 life"). On the other hand, the definite article 
 should be omitted in English where in the Greek 
 it is used idiomatically, as frequently (not always) 
 in the proper names of persons (toy 'laoaic, but 
 'A/3/oaaft in Matt. i. 1, 2 sqq.) or countries (// 'lov^afa, 
 17 FaXiXa/a, 17 'Aer/a, 17 A'/yuTrroc *) ; in the designa- 
 tion of a class or genus (6 av-^^owTroc, man, ai aX'/»- 
 7r£K£c> foxes) ; in Rom. v. 12, 17 a/LtapTia and 6 ^avoTog^ 
 sin and death, as a principle or all-pervading power. 
 But it is used in English where it is omitted in 
 
 * Winer says AiyvTTTog never takes the article, but Lachmann, Tregelles, 
 Westcott and Hort admit it in Acts vii. 36, on the authority of B, C, etc.} 
 while Tischendorf, eighth edition, omits it with N, A, E, H, P. 
 
470 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 Greek in a number of adverbial phrases {Iv apxyyin 
 the beginning, h ayopa, in the market-])laee) ; be- 
 fore ^eog (while the plural ol ^eoi must be rendered 
 ^'the gods"); and in other cases. Upon the whole, 
 the Greeks used the article more freely than the 
 English ; the translators of King James, following 
 the Latin Yulgate, too often neglected it; but in 
 both languages it may often be either inserted or 
 omitted with equal correctness, and the choice is 
 determined by subjective considerations or the feel- 
 ings of the writer.^ 
 
 As to the verb, the Greek aorist should be repro- 
 
 ^ See Moulton's Winer, p. 131 sqq. (eighth edition), and two able essays 
 on the Use of the Article in the Revised Version by expert Greek scholars, 
 one by Professor J. S. Blackie, of Edinburgh University, in "The Con- 
 temporary Review" for Julj-^, 1882, and one by Professor William S. Tyler, 
 of Amherst College, in the " Bibliotheca Sacra " of Andover, Mass., for 
 January, 1882. Both charge the Revisers with minute micrology or 
 trifling acribology, but differ among themselves in several details. Tyler 
 defends the restoration of the article in Heb. xi. 10 (" the city which hath 
 ikb foundations"), and in Rev. vii. 13, 14 Q^tke white robes . . . the great 
 tribulation"); while Blackie condemns it as "simply bad English." If 
 philologists differ, what shall theologians do? Blackie objects to Middle- 
 ton's principle of the emphatic use of the Greek article, and rather leans to 
 Scaliger's view, who sarcastically called it ^' loquacissimcB gentis Jlahellum.'^ 
 But he is certainly wrong in censuring the Revisers for omitting the ar- 
 ticle in John iv. 27- "a woman," /itrd yvvaiKOQ, for "/Ae woman" (the 
 wonder of the disciples being not, as Blackie thinks, that their Lord was 
 talking to that particular woman of the heretical Samaritan people, but 
 to any woman in a public place, in violation of the rabbinical and 
 Oriental etiquette which forbids conversation even with one's own wife in 
 the street), and in 1 Tim. vi. 10 : "a root of all evil," piZ,a, for " the root," 
 which he explains to mean " a verj'^ big root." He says that " a root " is 
 un-English, and yet admits that there are many other roots of all evil be- 
 sides love of money, " such as envy, hatred, anger, and even the contempt 
 of money exhibited in the squanderer and the spendthrift." 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 471 
 
 duced by the English preterite not only in a con- 
 secutive narrative, but also in didactic discourse, 
 whenever the writer refers to a definite act in the 
 past, as crucilixion and resurrection (Rom. iv. 25 ; 
 vi. 10 ; Gal. iii. 21, etc.), or the conversion and bap- 
 tism of the readers (Rom. vi. 3, 4 ; Gal. ii. 19 ; iii. 27 ; 
 2 Cor. V. 14, 15, etc.). As to the imperfect tense, it 
 is easy in most cases to express in English, with the 
 aid of the auxiliary verb, the continued or repeated 
 or contingent past action which is implied in the 
 Greek imperfect. 
 
 But in a number of cases there is room for a dif- 
 ference of opinion and taste among the best of 
 scholars. The following are instances where the 
 treatment of the article and tenses may be dis- 
 puted : 
 
 " God's righteousness " in Rom. i. 17 would be more exact for diKaioavvi) 
 S'gou than " a righteousness " (or " the righteousness " in the Authorized 
 Version), and the contrasted "God's wrath," opyif S-eoi), in the following 
 verse, instead of "//ie wrath of God," which the Revised Version incon- 
 sistently retained from the Authorized Version, with " a wrath " in the 
 margin. 
 
 In Matt. vii. 6 the definite article before Kvvkg and xotpoi is generic 
 (as before a/xapria and ^avarog in Rom. v. 12), where the CJerraan idiom 
 resembles the Greek, but where the English idiom requires the absence of 
 the article. Hence, "unto dogs" and "before swine" would be better 
 than " unto the dogs " and " before the swine." (The Authorized Ver- 
 sion renders the article before "dogs" and omits it before "swine.") 
 When we use the definite article of the genus of animals, we do it in the 
 singular, as "the horse," "the cat," "the fox." 
 
 In Matt. viii. 20, and the parallel passage, Luke ix. 58, the article is 
 likewise generic in ai aXwireKeQ, and hence should be omitted, although 
 the Revised Version corrects the inconsistency of the Authorized Version, 
 which retains it in the first and omits it in the second passage. 
 
 Matt. viii. 12 and in several other passages, " the weeping and gnash- 
 
 32 
 
472 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 ing " (consistency would require " the gnashing "), for 6 Kkav^fibg Kal 6 
 (ipvyfibg twv ddovrtov. The Authorized Version, which omits the article 
 in both cases, is preferable. 
 
 Other questionable uses of the definite article are : " the bushel," Matt. 
 \. !y5; "iAe rock," Matt. vii. 24; 'Uhe sower," *'/Ae rocky places," "<Ae 
 thorns," *^the good ground," in the parable of the Sower; ^Hhe breaking 
 of the bread and the prayers," Acts ii. 42 ; " the dogs," Phil. iii. 2 and Kev. 
 xxii. 15. Conapare also the important class of passages mentioned in 
 No. XIII. of the American Appendix. 
 
 One of the most difficult questions connected with the article is the 
 Pauline use of the anarthrous vofiog. The Revisers vary between " the 
 law," " a law," and " law." On general principles we would say that 6 
 vofxoQ, " the law," means the Mosaic or written law (moral and ceremonial), 
 while vofiog, " law," without the article, means the natural law, or law in 
 general, law as a principle. But it is impossible to carry this distinction 
 through, and for a good reason. The term vonog had, like Qeog, Kvpiogy 
 ypa<pai ciyiai (see Rom. i. 2) and the Hebrew Thora, assumed the char- 
 acter of a proper name with the Jews, who regarded the Mosaic law as the 
 perfection of all law, moral as well as ceremonial. So we use in English 
 " holy Scripture," " holy writ," and " the holy Scriptures " alternately with- 
 out any discrimination. In addressing readers of Jewish descent, Paul 
 could alternate between vofiog and 6 vSfxog without danger of being mis- 
 understood. In Galatians he uses vofiog without the article even more 
 frequently than with it.^ In Gal. ii. 16, t^ tpywv vofxov, and in ver. 19, 
 did vofiov v6fi(i) airkBavov, he can hardly mean any other law but that 
 of Moses, and hence the Revisers have correctly rendered the passages 
 " by the works of the law," and " I through the law died unto the law," 
 although they have put "law " on the margin. So in vi. 13: ovSk oi Trepi- 
 Ttpvo/MEvoi avToi vofiov ^vKaaaovaiv, " not even they who receive cir- 
 cumcision do themselves keep the law " (so the Revised Version, with the 
 useless margin, " Or, a law "). The same holds true in Rom. ii. 17 : " Thou 
 art called a Jew and restest upon the law " (yoinji) ; compare ver. 23 (tv 
 »'o/i^ and Tov vofiov) and ver. 27 ; vii. 1 : yiviixjKovm vofiov XaXw, " I 
 speak to men that know the law " (again with the useless margin, " Or, 
 law''); X. 4; xiii. 8, 10.'' 
 
 * From my counting in Bruder's Greek Concordance the figures are 
 these: in the six chapters of Galatians the anarthrous vofiog occurs twen- 
 tv times, 6 vofiog ten times; in the sixteen chapters of Romans vofiog 
 occurs thirty-four times, 6 vopog thirty-five times. 
 
 ' Compare here Winer's Gi-ammar, and the discussions of Meyer and 
 
THE REVISED VEIISIOX. 473 
 
 As to the Greek tenses, the Revisers are as accurate and consistent as 
 the English idiom will admit. They seldom depart from the Greek with- 
 out good reason. In Matt. vi. 12 they translate the aorist d(f>r}Kafiav (which 
 is better supported than the present a(j)'ufitv) by the perfect: "we have 
 forgiven," because it conveys the idea of a completed act more forcibly in 
 English than the more literal " we forgave." So John xx. 2 : " they have 
 taken away {ripav) the Lord," and ver. 3 : " they have laid him (t^r}Kav),'' 
 is better than the more literal but less faithful and idiomatic " took" and 
 *' laid." Compare Matt. xi. 27 : " all things have been delivered unto me " 
 {jravTa fxot iraptdu^r], in the Authorized Version "all things are deliv- 
 ered," which is certainly wrong) ; xxv. 20 : "I have gained " (tKipdrjaa). 
 But in Matt, xxvii. 4 the rendering "I sinned in betraying innocent 
 blood," seems better adapted to the terse Greek (rjfiapTOV irapaSovg) and 
 the desperate state of Judas than " I have sinned in that I [have] betiayed 
 innocent blood," which the Revisers retained from the Authorized Version 
 with the exception of the second " have." In Rom. iii. 23, rjfiapTov should 
 h«ve been rendered "sinned" for "have sinned," consistently with Rom. 
 V. 12; the aorist pointing in both passages to a definite act in the past, 
 whether it be the fall of the race in Adam or the individual transgressions 
 of his descendants. 
 
 We add a few inconsistencies of a different kind, 
 trifling oversights resulting, perhaps, from weariness 
 of the flesh after hours of hard stud}^, quite excusa- 
 ble in scholars as well as in poets. ^^ Aliquando 
 dormitat bonus Ilornerus.^^ 
 
 •' Thy house " in Matt. ix. 6 and Luke v. 24, but " thine house " in Luke 
 
 Weiss on Romans ii. 12 sqq., Wieseler and Lightfoot on Galatians ii. 15, 
 19, etc. Bishop Middleton, in his famous Doctrine of the Greek A rticle (1808, 
 new edition, 1841), censures the Authorized Version for obliterating the 
 distinction between vofioQ and 6 vofiog ; while Professor Blackie, on the 
 contrary, expresses the opinion that the Authorized Version in this case 
 is generally right, the Revised Version, in so far as it departs from it, gen- 
 erally wrong. Professor Tyler, on the whole, sides here with the Revised 
 Version, yet he, too, thinks that in the whole paragraph, Rom. ii. 11-29, 
 the rendering of the Authorized Version is more consistent and more cor- 
 rect. I dare say, however, that if these eminent Grecians had heard the 
 debates in the Companies, they would judjge less confidently. 
 
474 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 vii. 44. " Quick " (Z,i!Jv) is changed to " living," Heb. iv. 12, but left in 
 Acts X. 42 ("judge of quick and dead," perhaps in deference to the Apos- 
 tles' Creed) ; " quickening " (^wo7rotoi)v) is changed to " life-giving," 1 Cor. 
 XV. 45; but ^^quickeneth" is retained in John vi. 63. The obsolete form, 
 "he was an hungred," is changed in Matt. iv. 2, xxi. 18 into "he hiin- 
 yere(i," but retained in Matt. xii. 1, 3 ; xxv. 35, 37, 42. The older ver- 
 sions vary between " hungered," " was hungry," " was an hungred." 
 
 NEEDLESS VARIATIONS. 
 
 Much complaint is made of mere verbal depart- 
 ures from, the Authorized Version which convey no 
 benefit to the English reader, but offend his ear or 
 taste, and disturb his sacred associations connected 
 with his familiar Bible. The Revisers have even 
 been charged on this point with a violation of their 
 own rule: "to introduce as few alterations as possi- 
 ble into the text of the Authorized Version consist- 
 ently with faithfulness." This is thought to be the 
 more censurable as the English Bible is not simply a 
 translation, but a national classic and inestimable 
 treasure of the people. Why, for example, it is asked, 
 should " the fowls of the air" be changed into " the 
 birds of the heaven"?^ Why should the "vials" 
 w^hich contain the incense of the prayers of saints 
 and the "vials" of wrath (in the Apocalypse) be 
 turned into "bowls"?" Why should the phrase 
 
 ^ Matt. vi. 26 : tcc TTETiiva tov ovpavov. So also Matt. viii. 20 ; Luke 
 ix. 58, etc. The Authorized Version is here, as often, inconsistent in using 
 five times bird (Matt. viii. 20; xiii. 32; Luke ix. 58; Rom. i. 23; James 
 iii. 7), and nine times fowl (Matt. vi. 26; xiii. 4; Mark iv. 4, 32; Luke 
 viii. 5 ; xii. 24 ; xiii. 19 ; Acts x. 12 ; xi. 6). ovpavog is in most passages 
 translated heaven, four times skg, nine times air. 
 
 ^ Rev. V. 8 ; xv. 7, and in ten other passages of the same book. The 
 Greek ^uiXt], corresponding in the Septuagint to p^ifS, is a broad, fiat, 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 475 
 
 "which, being interpreted, is God with us," Matt. i. 
 23, be made to run, " which is, being interpreted, 
 God with us"?' Why should the ordei of words 
 be reversed in slavish conformity to the Greek, 
 even in the Lord's Prayer : " As in heaven, so on 
 earth"?' 
 
 In reply to these charges, we have to submit (1) 
 that in nearly all the examples which have been 
 singled out by friendly and unfriendly critics, there 
 is a good reason for the change ; (2) that a <yreat many 
 alterations were required by consistency or necessi- 
 tated by the sound rule of uniform rendering, which 
 
 shallow howl or cup (Latin patera, German Schaale) for drinking or pour- 
 ing liquids ; in the Old Testament, for receiving the blood of sacrifices or 
 frankincense. The English vial or phial is, no doubt, derived from the 
 Greek <pid\r] through the Latin phiala, but is commonly used of a small 
 bottle, or little glass vessel with a narrow aperture intended to be closed 
 with cork, as a vial of medicine (see Webster). Hence, here, too, the 
 Revisers are right. 
 
 '■ This is simjjly to conform to the Greek order (o tan ne2r(pfir]vtv6fi£- 
 vov), and to make the translation consistent with the five other parallel 
 passages where the much-lauded Authorized Version itself observes the 
 same order ; see IMark v. 41 ; xv. 22, 34 ; John i. 41 (42) ; Acts iv. 36. And 
 yet, in culpable ignorance of this fact. Sir Edmund Beckett, a special plead- 
 er for the superior excellency of the English style of the Authorized Ver- 
 sion, calls this change an illustration of " the capacity of the Revisers 
 for spoiling sentences with the smallest possible exertion, and for no visi- 
 ble object. Here the mere transposition of that little ' is ' makes all the dif- 
 ference between a lively, solemn, and harmonious sentence, and one as flat, 
 inharmonious, and pedantic as a modern Act of Parliament or the Revisers' 
 Preface." (^Should the Revised New Testament be A ufhorized f p. 50.) 
 
 ^ Matt. vi. 10. The critics forget that the Authorized Version has pre- 
 cisely the same order in the parallel passage, Luke xi. 2, with the single 
 difference of "iw earth" instead of "on earth;" but the Revised Version, 
 with all critical editors, omits this passage in Luke as an interpolation 
 from Matthew, 
 
476 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 must be carried out wherever the Greek words have 
 precisely the same meaning or are emphatically re- 
 peated. 
 
 We would not deny that the Kevisers may occa- 
 sionally have overdone the changing by an over- 
 anxious or over-conscientious desire to be faithful to 
 the original. But if they have erred here, they have 
 certainly erred on the right side. And this is the 
 laudatory censure of Bishop Wordsworth, of Lincoln, 
 who said of the Revisers: "They would have suc- 
 ceeded better and have performed more if they had 
 attempted less. Not by doing, but by overdoing, 
 their work has been less happily done." 
 
 In many instances it is simply impossible to secure 
 unanimity, or to satisfy even one's own taste, in mak- 
 ing or omitting changes. And the adverse critics 
 have certainly shown no better tact or promised bet- 
 ter success. In most cases the laboring mountains 
 have only produced a " ridiculus mus.^^ An anony- 
 mous, but very able and fair-minded reviewer of 
 these critics, gives the following amusing specimens 
 of a revision of the Revision : ' 
 
 " We hasten to turn away from these irksome records of fault-finding 
 to acknowledge the great and manifold obligations under which the Re- 
 visers have laid all English-speaking people. The critics have not pro- 
 pitiated our assent to their arguments by the alternative translations 
 which they have sometimes been good enough to offer. We are not sure 
 that the Bishop of Lincoln himself would be applauded for the correction 
 which he suggests on Rom. xii. 11, 'in your hurry be hot lazy' (p. 29). 
 The new Bodleian Librarian would scarcely have improved the fortunes 
 of the Revised Version if he had been a member of the Company, with 
 influence enough to induce them to begin the New Testament, the * Roll 
 
 In " The Church Quarterly Review " for January, 1883, p. 38^. 
 
THE EEVIS^ VEKSION. 477 
 
 of birth, or Birth-roll, or Roll of descent, or Family-roll, of Jesus Christ;' 
 and if they had yielded to the * regret ' which he expresses, that the Re- 
 visers did not further improve the Lord's Prayer, by rendering ' Give us 
 our morrow's bread to-day ' in their text. Mr. J. A. Beet, who complains 
 of the ' almost total absence of poetic instinct ' in the Revisers, addresses 
 himself to the difficult text, Phil. ii. 6 ; and after toiling over the passage 
 for four large pages, produces at last his own rendering (' in lack of a bet- 
 ter,' as he modestly says) : ' Not high-handed self-indulging did He deem 
 His equality with God.' " 
 
 Making every allowance for imperfections which 
 adhere to the best works of fallible men (including 
 the Pope — remember the revised edition of the Vul- 
 gate corrected by Sixtus Y.), a minute, careful, and 
 impartial examination of the Revision of 1881 must 
 lead to the conclusion that in text and rendering it 
 is a very great improvement upon the Version of 
 1611, and the most faithful and accurate version of 
 the Greek Testament ever made from Jerome down 
 to the present date. Its merits are many and great; 
 its defects are few and small, and mostly the result 
 of overfidelity to the Greek original and to the Eng- 
 lish idiom of King James's Version. Such defects 
 are an excess of virtue, and have their redeeming 
 advantage. They place the English reader in the 
 position of the Greek scholar, and give him at the 
 same time the assurance of the substantial accuracy 
 of the old version. 
 
 Faithfulness must be the supreme law of a trans- 
 lator of the Bible, which is the inspired record of 
 God's revelation to man, and the original charter of 
 our faith. To this law all other considerations must 
 bend. Faithfulness was the ruling principle and 
 highest aim of the Revisers. Their revision will 
 be modified and improved at some future day, but 
 the foundation will stand and outlast the critics. 
 
478 THE REVISICD VERSION. 
 
 We have so far reviewed the Revision as a unit. 
 We must now, in justice to the American Commit- 
 tee and the American community, speak of the 
 American share of the work as far as it is incor- 
 porated in the text or relegated to the Appendix. 
 
 THE AMERICAN PART IN THE JOINT WORK. 
 
 The Revised New Testament, as authoritatively 
 printed and published by the two English Univer- 
 sity Presses, is the joint work of both Committees. 
 The English Revisers began nearly two years earlier, 
 and the American Revisers worked on the basis of 
 the first English revision, which was a great advan- 
 tage; but they had to go through precisely the 
 same process of textual criticism and exegesis, to 
 examine the same authorities, and to discuss the 
 same differences of reading and rendering. They 
 have spent probably the same amount of time and 
 labor since they began to co-operate. They trans- 
 mitted to England only the points of difference and 
 suggestions of new changes. These were printed 
 from time to time for the exclusive use of the Re- 
 visers, and would make altogether an octavo volume 
 of about four hundred pages. Occasionally an elab- 
 orate essay was included, in justification of a partic- 
 ular point, as the difference of reading in John i. 18 
 (inovnyevrig ^Eog, or 6 iJ,ovoyevriQ vIoq) \ on Acts XX. 
 28 (^fou, or Kvpiov); on John viii. 44; on Acts xxvi. 
 28 ; Matt. xxvi. 50, see Pres. Woolsey in the " Bibl. 
 Sacra" for April, 1874; on Luke ii. 2 (Quirinius, 
 not Quirinus), see Pres. Woolsey in " Bibl. Sacra " 
 for July, 1878 ; and on Tit. ii. 13 (the last not sent to 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 479 
 
 the English Revisers, but published in the " Journal 
 of the Society of Bibl. Lit. and Exegesis" for Jnne 
 and December, 1881). In the great majority of 
 cases the result only was stated. 
 
 In order to form a just estimate of the American 
 share of the work, and the degree of harmony of the 
 two Committees, it is necessary to compare those 
 parts which were done independently. For such an 
 estimate we have the materials at hand. 
 
 When the communication between the two Com- 
 mittees was interrupted for a few months in 1877 
 (in consequence of negotiations with the Univer- 
 sity Presses), the American Committee took up the 
 first revision of a portion of Isaiah and of the Epis- 
 tle to the Hebrews, and finished them before the 
 first English revision of the same books was re- 
 ceived. 
 
 On a comparison it was found that in about one 
 lialf of the changes the two Committees had arrived 
 at the same conclusions. 
 
 The result as to the Epistle to the Hebrews is 
 more particularly stated in the following letter from 
 Bishop Lee, a member of the New Testament Com- 
 pany, to the writer : 
 
 "Wilmington, Dkl., Ajyril 25, 1881. 
 
 " My Deak Sir : My examination of the independent revisions of the 
 Epistle to the Hebrews by the English and the American Companies, 
 resulted in the estimate that out of 913 changes made by the American 
 Company, 476 were exactly coincident with those of the English. There 
 were others substantially the same, but not precisely identical. 
 
 " The variations were largely in punctuation and minor points. 
 
 "I do not claim, of course, perfect accuracy, but I think this statement 
 is not far from the truth. 
 
480 THE REVISED VEUSIO:f^. 
 
 "My estimate of the American suggestions adopted is, in 
 
 The Gospels 318 
 
 Acts 186 
 
 Epistles and Revelation 400 
 
 904 
 
 " In the calculation I aimed to count each new suggestion but once, 
 although in many cases it was often repeated — as food for meat, Hades for 
 hell, tomb for sepulchre, etc. I omitted returns to the Authorized Version 
 and differences of punctuation, except in a few important instances, and 
 metrical arrangements, presuming that these would have been done by the 
 British Company even without our calling their attention to them. 
 
 "If you wish for more particular information upon any of these points, 
 I shall be happy to supply it as far as I can. 
 
 " Very truly yours, 
 
 "Alfked Lee." 
 
 See Bishop Lee's list of American changes adopt- 
 ed by the English Company in text or margin, in 
 Appendix IV. 
 
 Again, in the year 1880, the American Old Testa- 
 ment Company went through the first revision of 
 the Book of Job, and printed it (for private use) 
 before the first English revision of the same book 
 was received. Copies were transmitted by the Pres- 
 ident to the Secretary of the British Old Testament 
 Company, February 4, 1881, with the remark : " I 
 send you to-day by European express twenty-seven 
 copies of the American revision of Job, for distribu- 
 tion among the members of your Company. The 
 revision was completed before your revision came 
 to hand. Hence, it has been printed in full, which 
 will give you a better idea of the character of our 
 work and the measure of its agreement with yours." 
 
 A careful comparison was made between the Eng- 
 lish and the American revision of Job, by Professor 
 
THE REVl8i:D -^^ERSIOi^. 4B1 
 
 Mead, of Andover, Mass., a member of the Old Tes- 
 tament Company, and the result is stated in the 
 following letter addressed to the Chairman of the 
 Old Testament Company : 
 
 "Andover, Fe&. 5, 1881. 
 "My Dear Prof. Green: . . . You may be interested in knowing 
 the result of my collation of the two revisions of Job. Of course it is 
 impossible to be very exact, it being often difficult to determine how to 
 designate a change, or to decide how far to analyze a change — i. e., whether 
 to call it one, two, or three, when a whole clause is transformed. In gen- 
 eral I have adopted the plan of being minute in the matter, though doubt- 
 loss not consistent with myself either in this or in any other respect. 
 Still, the general proportion of things is probably indicated with tolerable 
 exactness. The result is as follows : 
 
 "Whole number of changes made by the American Revisers 1781 
 
 Whole number of changes made by the English Revisers 1004 
 
 Changes identical in both 455 
 
 Changes substantially the same in both 134 
 
 Passages diflFerently changed by both 289 
 
 Changes in Amer. Revision where there are none in English Revision 913 
 Changes in English Revision where there are none in Amer. Revision 236 
 
 American readings found in English margin 53 
 
 English readings found in American margin 12 
 
 " The general result is that in about half the cases we coincide. More 
 exactly, the identical changes form about 45^ per cent, of the changes 
 made by the English. Adding the cases of substantial coincidence, we 
 have made 68f per cent, of the changes which they have made. In 
 multitudes of other cases there would be a ready acquiescence on out 
 part in their changes— many of them having reference to very small 
 matters, while many of ours also are of a similar sort. 
 
 " Yours truly, 
 
 « C. M. Mead." 
 
 On the basis of these facts it may be said that the 
 two Committees, if they had acted independently, 
 would have produced two recensions of the same 
 revision, agreeing in about one half of the changes 
 
482 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 and improvements, while the other half in the great 
 majority of cases would have admitted of easy ad- 
 justment, so as to leave only a small residuum of 
 minor differences. 
 
 Both Committees, therefore, may look upon the 
 Revision as their own work. The English Com- 
 mittee, however, has a just claim to priority and a 
 primacy of honor. The mother took the lead, the 
 daughter followed. The Americans gave to the 
 vast majority of the English changes their hearty 
 approval, and the whole weight of their independent 
 research and judgment. On the other hand, a large 
 number of the remaining changes which they re- 
 garded as most important have been, after due de- 
 liberation, accepted by the English, so that with a 
 few exceptions the points of difference set forth in 
 the Appendix are of comparatively little interest 
 and importance. These mutual concessions are of 
 vital account for the international character and suc- 
 cess of the work. 
 
 THE AMERICAN APPENDIX. 
 
 The American Appendix is short, and contains 
 only those renderings which the English Company, 
 in its final action, was unwilling to accept, and which 
 the American Committee deemed of sufficient im- 
 portance to be recorded for future use. It is pro- 
 vided for by the fourth article of the agreement of 
 August 3, 1877, which is as follows : 
 
 " If any differences shall still remain, the American Committee will 
 yield its preferences for the sake of harmony ; provided that such diflFer- 
 ences of reading and rendering as the American Committee may represent 
 
tHE REViSfiD VERSiOi^. 483 
 
 to the English Companies to be of special importance, be disttnctly stated 
 either in the Preface to the Revised Version, or in an Appendix to the 
 volume, during a term of fourteen years from the date of publication, 
 unless the American Churches shall sooner pronounce a deliberate opinion 
 upon the Revised Version with the view of its being taken for public 
 use." ^ 
 
 The material for an Appendix was gradually re- 
 duced, by honorable and liberal concessions of both 
 parties. The Americans yielded at least six hun- 
 dred and eighty preferences (according to Bishop 
 Lee's calculation). The best part of the American 
 labor is incorporated in the book, and there it will 
 remain, whatever may become of the Appendix. 
 
 The remaining differences are still more reduced 
 when we consider that the English Kevisers have 
 
 * The introductory note to the Appendix was carefully drawn up by 
 the American Company and transmitted to the English Company in the 
 following terms: 
 
 " The American New Testament Revision Company, having in many cases 
 yielded their preferences for certain readings and renderings, present the 
 following instances in which they differ from the English Company as in 
 their view of sufficient importance to be appended to the Revision, in accord- 
 ance with an understanding between the Companies.''^ 
 
 The English Company, for reasons best known to themselves, have 
 taken the liberty to set this heading aside, and to substitute for it the 
 following : 
 
 "List of readings and renderings preferred by the American Committee, 
 recorded at their desire. See Preface, page ix." 
 
 This heading has been strangely misunderstood and misinterpreted by 
 many, as conveying the idea that the printing of the Appendix was a 
 favor rather than a right, and that it contained all the work of the 
 American Company. Fault has been found also with the Preface from 
 the Jerusalem Chamber (which was not submitted to the American Com- 
 pany), because it does not state expressly that any of the American 
 suggestions were adopted; but this may be fairly inferred from the terms 
 in which they are spoken of, as having received " much care and atten- 
 tion," and having been " closely and carefully considered." 
 
484 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 recognized on the margin many of the American 
 changes. 
 
 The Appendix consists of two parts. The first 
 contains fourteen classes of passages, and implies 
 general rules;' the second suggests about three hun- 
 dred specific changes or alternate renderings. The 
 former require many alterations in the text; the 
 latter are mostly of the same nature as the marginal 
 notes, and might have been distributed to the sev- 
 eral passages if the English Company had thought 
 proper to do so. The most important have already 
 been discussed in the preceding pages, especially the 
 archaisms. We will only notice the first and the 
 twelfth of the general rules." 
 
 1. The Titles and Headings of Books. 
 " Omit the word * Saint ' from the title of the Gospels and the Revela- 
 tion of John, the word * the Apostle' from the title of the Pauline Epistles, 
 and * Paul the Apostle ' from the Epistle to the Hebrews, the word * Gen- 
 eral ' from the title of the Epistles of James, Peter, 1 John, and Jude." 
 
 The Committee had no express authority to revise 
 the titles of the books, and hence the English Com- 
 pany retained those given in the Authorized Version 
 as printed in 1611. But the American Company 
 
 ^ In Rule XIII. the reference to " Col. i. 3 " ought to be stricken out, 
 because the Revisers read r^ ^cy iraTpl without the intervening Kai of 
 the textus receptus. 
 
 * For a fuller vindication of the Appendix, see the writer's additional 
 chapter in the American edition of Dr. Roberts's Companion to the Revised 
 New Testament, pp. 192-206, and in an article contributed to " Christian 
 Opinion r.-nd Revisionist" (Lond., Nos. 22 and 23, June, 1882), also two 
 articles of Dr. Timothy Dwight in the "N. Y. Independent" for May 19 
 and May 26, 1881. 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 485 
 
 embraced this opportunity to conform the titles to 
 the ancient authorities and critical editions of the 
 Greek text, and to make them consistent. Their 
 conclusions were determined by the following con- 
 siderations : 
 
 (a.) There is no documentary evidence whatever 
 for the title '' /SainV^ The best Greek and Latin 
 MSS. (i<, B, D, a, b, e, q, etc.) read simply : " Accord- 
 ing to Matthew " (Kara Ma^^aiov), or " The Gospel 
 according to Matthew^'' (EvayyAtov to Kara M.). 
 Some of later date add the title to the book (not the 
 author) : " The Holy Gospel according to Matthew J^ 
 
 (b.) The technical ecclesiastical use of " Saint,^^ as 
 one of a spiritual nobility or aristocracy distinct 
 from ordinary Christians, is not biblical, but belongs 
 to a much later age. The sacred writers apply the 
 term aytoc to all believers, as being separated from 
 the world, consecrated to God, and destined for holi- 
 ness. See Rom. i. 7 ; xii. 13 ; xvi. 15 ; 1 Pet. ii. 9 ; 
 Acts ix. 13, 32, 41 ; Jude 3. In the text of the 
 New Testament the apostles and their disciples are 
 simply called by their names, and this ought to be 
 sufficient. They themselves would protest against 
 the claim to exclusive saintship ; nor should we, on 
 the other hand, put them on a level with the innu- 
 merable saints of later ages. They stand far above 
 them. 
 
 (c.) The Authorized Version is inconsistent: it 
 prefixes the title ^^ Saint ^^ to the Gospels and to 
 Eevelation, but omits it in the Acts and Epistles, as 
 if James, Peter, and Paul were not saints as well as 
 Matthew, Mark, and Luke, or as if the St. John of 
 
486 THE REVISED VEKSION. 
 
 the Gospel and of the Revelation were not the same 
 as the John of the Epistles. The inconsistency is, 
 of course, an inadvertency. The Bishops' Bible re- 
 tained the title " Saint ^^ from the Yulgate in twen- 
 ty-six books of the New Testament; the Geneva 
 Bible consistently omitted it in all ; the first edition 
 of the Authorized Version of 1611 omitted it in all 
 but ^ye. 
 
 (d.) The title " Apostle " is likewise wanting in 
 the oldest Greek MSS. (x, A, B, C), which read sim- 
 ply, "To the Romans^'^ (n^ooc 'Vhina[ovq\ etc., al- 
 though some insert " of Paul^'' or " of the Apostle 
 Paul^'' or " of the holy Apostle PaulP Moreover, 
 the title "Apostle^'' belongs to Peter and John as 
 well as to Paul, and should be given to all or none. 
 Here, too, the Authorized Version is strangely in- 
 consistent or careless in omitting "the AjpostW'' in 
 the heading of the Catholic Epistles and the Epistles 
 to the Galatians, Titus, and Philemon, while insert- 
 ing it in all the other Pauline Epistles. 
 
 (^.) The present title of the Epistle to the Hebrews 
 (" the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews ") 
 prejudges the open question of the authorship of 
 this anonymous epistle. The best MSS. (J^, A, B, K) 
 read simply, " To the Hebrews " (Iljooc 'Ej5paiovQ). 
 The majority of modern scholars regard it as the 
 production of a pupil or friend of Paul. The opin- 
 ions of the ancient Church were divided on the 
 question of authorship between Paul, Luke, Barna- 
 bas (and Clement of Eome). A translator has no 
 right to decide that question in the absence of docu- 
 mentary evidence. 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 487 
 
 (/.) The title " GeneraV (" Catholic^' Ka^oXiKv) 
 of the Epistles of James, Peter, John, and Jude is 
 likewise of later date, and omitted bj critical editors. 
 It is misleading, and applies no more to those Epis- 
 tles than to Ephesians and Hebrews, which have an 
 encyclical character; while the second and third 
 Epistles of John are each addressed to an individual. 
 
 An objection will be made to this part of the 
 Appendix by those w^ho deem it reverent to retain 
 the time-honored " Saint " in connection with the 
 evangelists and apostles. But then, let us at least 
 be consistent, and use it uniformly, or drop it alto- 
 gether. The sacred writers must be our standard 
 of reverence, and they speak of each other simply 
 as Matthew, Marh, Luke, John, Peter, and Paul. 
 The highest order of merit and distinction needs no 
 epithet of honor. 
 
 2. Rendering of Terms Denoting Coins. 
 " Let anoapiov (Matt. x. 29 ; Luke xii. 6) be translated '' penny ^ and 
 Srjvdpiov 'shilling,'' except in Matt. xxii. 19; Mark xii. 15; Luke xx. 24, 
 where the name of the coin, ' a denarius,^ should be given." 
 
 The rendering of coins in our English Version is 
 very objectionable, and makes a false impression 
 upon the popular reader. '' Mite^^ may be retained 
 for Xetttov (the eighth part of an aaaapiov, or ace, 
 half a quadrans, or about one fifth of one cent), and 
 '''farthing'^'^ for KoZpavTr)^ {quadrans, the fourth part 
 of an ac^, equivalent to two mites, ^vo XtTrra), as in 
 Mark xii. 42, "a poor widow cast in tw^o mites which 
 make a farthing." But the more valuable coins are 
 mischievously perverted and belittled. Bishop Ligh t 
 foot, one of the niost influential of the English Re 
 33 
 
4:88 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 visers, has shown this so well that I can do no better 
 than quote him in full justification of the American 
 view. He says : * 
 
 " Why dffffdpiov, the late Greek diminutive used for the as, of which, 
 therefore, the KoSpdvTijg is a fourth part, should still be translated a 
 farthing (which elsewhere represents Kodpdvrrig') rather than penni/, it is 
 difficult to see (Matt. x. 29; Luke xii. 6). And as we advance in the 
 scale, the disproportion between the value of the original and the English 
 substitute increases. Thus the denarius, a silver piece of the value orig- 
 inally of ten and afterward of sixteen ases, is always rendered a penny. 
 Its absolute value, as so much weight in metal, is as nearly as possible the 
 same as the French franc. Its relative value as a purchasing power, in 
 an age and a country where provisions were much cheaper, was considera- 
 bly more. Now it so happens that in almost every case where the word 
 Srjvapiop occurs in the New Testament it is connected with the idea of a 
 liberal or large amount ,- and yet in these passages the English rendering 
 names a sum which is absurdly small. Thus the Good Samaritan, whose 
 generosity is intended to appear throughout, on leaving, takes out 'two 
 pence,' and gives them to the inn-keeper to supply the further wants of 
 the wounded man. Thus, again, the owner of the vineyard, whose liber- 
 ality is contrasted with the niggardly, envious spirit, the ' evil eye ' of 
 others, gives, as a day's wages, ' a penny ' to each man. It is unnecessary 
 to ask what impression the mention of this sum will leave on the minds 
 of an uneducated peasant or shopkeeper of the present day. Even at the 
 time when our Version was made, and when wages were lower, it must 
 have seemed wholly inadequate. The inadequacy again appears, though 
 not so prominently, in * the two hundred pence,' the sum named as insuf- 
 ficient to supply bread to the five thousand (Mark vi. 37 ; John vi. 7), and 
 similarly in other cases (e.g., Mark xiv. 5; John xii. 5; Luke vii. 41). 
 Lastly, in the Book of the Revelation (vi. 6), the announcement, which in 
 the original implies famine prices, is rendered in our English Version, * A 
 measure of wheat for a penny, and three measures of barley for a penny.' 
 The fact is that the word xoivt^, here translated ' measure,' falls below the 
 amount of a quart, while the word drjvdpiov, here translated * a penny,' 
 approaches toward the value of a shilling. To the English reader the 
 words must convey the idea of enormous plenty." 
 
 * " A Fresh Revision of the English New Testament" London, 1871, 
 pp. 165-167; Amer.ed. (Harpers), 1873, pp. 141-143. 
 
THE REVISED VEKSION. 489 
 
 But in this case, again, the scholarship of the 
 English Revisers was overruled by the timid con- 
 servatism of the majority, and custom was allowed 
 to prevail against truth. So the '''farthing'^'* was 
 retained twice for aaaapiov (Matt. x. 29 ; Luke xii. 
 6), and twice for Ko^pavrr\q (Matt. v. 26 ; Mark xii. 
 42), and the ^^jpenny^^ (with '^pence^^ and '-''jpenny- 
 worth'^^) for ^r\vapLov in fifteen places. Where the 
 penny occurs for the first time. Matt, xviii. 28, the 
 marginal note is added with killing effect on the 
 text : " The word in the Greek denotes a coin worth 
 about eight pence half-penny," i. e.^ in plain Saxon, 
 worth eight and a half times more than the text in- 
 dicates. But in all other passages the reader, unless 
 he looks up that marginal note, will still be at a loss 
 to understand how a penny or tv^o cents can be fair 
 wages for a day's labor, or a liberal gift to save a 
 sick man, or a famine price for a whole measure of 
 wheat and three measures of barley. 
 
 Yet, in justice to the English refusal of so reason- 
 able a change, it should be remembered that it is 
 impossible, without circumlocution, to find a precise 
 idiomatic equivalent in English for the Greek Sijva- 
 piov and the Latin denarius. Sometimes a little 
 matter gives great trouble. This is an instance. 
 The inevitable jpenny was discussed over and over 
 again in the Jerusalem Chamber and in the Bible 
 House. The English Company at an early stage 
 was about to adopt the Anglicized form " denary," 
 when the late Dean Alford killed it by the humor- 
 ous objection that denary might be mispronounced 
 cleanery, and giye rise to the jest that the Reviser^ 
 
490 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 sold a deanery for a penny. The precise rendering 
 would be " eight pence and a half," but this is no 
 single coin. '' Six jpence " in this respect would do 
 better, but falls short of the full value. Still less 
 would Englishmen tolerate " sixteen cents," nor 
 would Americans intrude their coins into the Bible. 
 The Americans wavered between " shilling^'' '''-franG^ 
 " silverling^'' " drachma^'' " denarius^'' " denary, ^^ 
 " denarP The Latin " denarius^'' with a marginal 
 explanation, would have been unanimously adopted 
 but for the passages where the word occurs in the 
 plural (Matt, xviii. 28; Mark vi. 37; xiv. 5; Luke 
 vii. 41 ; X. 35 ; John vi. 7 ; xii. 5) ; for denarii sounds 
 too much like Latin for an English Bible. They 
 agreed at last upon '-'- shilling^'' but would prefer any 
 other of the proposed renderings to ''pennyP A 
 shilling is not absolutely correct, but is a genuine 
 English silver coin, and does not convey the idea of 
 a ridiculously small sum. There can be no doubt 
 whatever that, if found in the old version, shilling 
 would have been retained by both Companies. 
 
 THE PUBLIC VERDICT. 
 
 The Revision is subject to the verdict of the 
 Christian public, which will be pronounced by the 
 official action of churches and Bible societies. In 
 England an Act of Parliament or Order of Council 
 may be necessary in addition to the votes of the 
 Convocations of Canterbury and York before it can 
 be used in public worship. All other churches can 
 act independently, or leave the matter with minis- 
 ter^ and (jQngregatioqs, If approved, the Revision 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 491 
 
 will gradually supersede the old version ; if reject- 
 ed, it will still remain a most important help for the 
 private use of ministers and Bible readers, and be 
 made the basis of some future revision ; and such re- 
 vision will become inevitable in case of rejection ; for 
 the churches will never be contented with the version 
 of 1611 after all its innumerable defects have been 
 made known. " Revolutions never go backward." 
 The American Appendix will be printed, accord- 
 ing to agreement, in every copy of the Universit}^ 
 editions till the expiration of the term of fourteen 
 years — i. e., till May, 1895. If approved, it will be 
 incorporated in the text, if not, it will be dropped. 
 The Church of England is not likely to surrender 
 her love for the archaic forms of language, as 
 " which " for " who," " be " for " are," " Ghost " for 
 "Spirit," "devils" for "demons," "wot" and "wist" 
 for "know" and "knew," etc., but she may possibly 
 give to the specific renderings a place among the 
 marginal notes, though they are already very nu- 
 merous. Of English critics, some sublimely ignore 
 the Appendix,' some approve it,* none has eon- 
 
 * So Dean Burgon, Canon Cook, and even Mr. Humphry in his Com- 
 mentary on the Revised Version. One of the adverse critics naively con- 
 fesses that till the year 1882 he was happily ignorant of the existence of 
 any eminent biblical scholars and critics in America. 
 
 ' Dr. Angus, one of the English Revisers, says: "The first three sug- 
 gestions of the American Committee ought in consistency to be accepted," 
 and speaks favorably of the rest. A critic in the London Athenceum (May 
 28, 1881) saj's: "Several of the recommendations of the American Com- 
 mittee might have been adopted with advantage. The general excellence 
 of the suggestions of the American Revisers is undoubted, and they ought 
 not to have been so often neglected."' Mr. Thoms, the compiler of the 
 Cotnplete Concordance to the Revised Version of the New Testament, Pub* 
 
492 
 
 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 demned it. In the United States public opinion 
 seeras unanimously in favor of the American readings 
 and renderings.^ Several editions have already incor- 
 porated them into the text with an Appendix reversed ; 
 but such a reductio ad absurdum does great injus- 
 tice to the English Kevisers, for they only retained 
 certain words and phrases of the old usage which is 
 still preferred by the majority of Englishmen." 
 
 lished under the Authorization of Oxford and Cambridge Universities 
 (London, 1882), notices the American suggestions throughout, and says 
 (Preface, p. vii.) that " most of them are very valuable, and deserve far 
 better treatment than to be relegated to the end of the book without so 
 much as a reference mark in the text to indicate their existence." 
 
 1 A very competent Greek scholar. Professor W. S. Tyler, D.D., says 
 (in the "Bibliotheca Sacra," Andover, January, 1882, p. 161): "We think 
 the feeling is wide in Great Britain, and it is almost universal in this 
 country, that the greater part of the changes which were proposed by the 
 American Committee and rejected by the Anglican Committee should 
 have been accepted, and that consistency, not less than the intrinsic merits 
 of the proposed emendations, required their adoption." 
 
 ' The following are specimens from the Appendix in one of these 
 Americanized editions : 
 
 American Edition. 
 " List of Readings and Renderings 
 preferred by the English Committee. 
 
 II. In the title of the Pauline 
 Epistles (except those to the 
 Galatians, Titus, and Phile- 
 mon) insert ^the Apostle;'' in 
 the title of the Epistle to the 
 Hebrews insert * of Paul the 
 Apostle;' in the title of the 
 Epistles of James, Peter, 1 
 John, and Jude insert the 
 word ' General ;' and let the 
 title of the Revelation run, 
 * The Revelation of S. John the 
 Divine,^ 
 
 University Edition. 
 " List of Readings and Renderings 
 preferred hy the American Commit- 
 tee, recorded at their desire. 
 
 II. Strike out * the Apostle ' from 
 the title of the Pauline Epis- 
 tles, and * of Paul the Apostle ' 
 from the title of the Epistle 
 to the Hebrews ; strike out 
 the word * General* from the 
 title of the Epistles of James, 
 Peter, 1 John, and Jude ; and 
 let the title of the Revelation 
 run, ' The Revelation of John^ 
 
THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 493 
 
 It is barely possible that there may be ultimately 
 two standard editions, an English and an American. 
 But tjiese would be only two slightly different re- 
 censions of one and the same revised version (as we 
 have different editions of the Greek text), and the 
 changes will no more affect the unity of the version 
 than the differences of English and American spel- 
 ling now affect the unity of the English language. 
 On the contrary, the essential unity will be all the 
 more apparent and effective for the variety in un- 
 essential details. 
 
 American Edition. 
 
 III. Wherever ^ Holy Spirit' oc- 
 curs, substitute ' Holi/ Ghost,' 
 except in Mark iii. 29 , Luke 
 ii.25,26; iv.l; x.21; xi.l3; 
 xii. 10, 12 ; John i. 33 ; xiv. 
 26; Acts ii. 4; vi. 5; 1 Cor. 
 xii. 3 ; Ephes. i. 13 ; iv. 30 ; 1 
 Thess. iv. 8 ; Jude 20. 
 
 "VI. Use ^ which' of persons as well 
 as ' who ' or * that;' ' 6e ' as well 
 as 'are' in the present indica- 
 tive ; * wot' or ' wist' as well as 
 * know ' or * knew ;' and ' hale ' 
 for * drag' 
 
 VII. Substitute for 'demon' Q de- 
 mons') the word 'devil' Q dev- 
 ils') \ and for 'demoniac' or 
 'possessed with a demon ' Q de- 
 mons') substitute 
 with a devil' Q devils')," 
 
 University Edition. 
 III. For 'Holy Ghost' adopt uni- 
 formly the rendering 'Holy 
 Spirit: 
 
 VI. Substitute modern forms of 
 speech for the following ar- 
 chaisms, viz., 'who' or 'that' 
 for ' which ' when used of per- 
 sons; 'are' for 'he' in the 
 present indicative ; ' know J 
 'knew' for 'wot,' 'wist;' 'drag' 
 or * drag away ' for * hale.' 
 VII. Substitute for * devil ' (' devils ') 
 the word 'demon' {'demons') 
 wherever the latter word is 
 given in the margin (or repre- 
 sents the Greek words Sai- 
 fiiov, Saifioviov); and for 'pos- 
 sessed with a devil' (or devils') 
 substitute either 'demoniac* 
 or 'possessed with a demon ' (or 
 'demons'):' 
 
494 THE REVISED VERSION. 
 
 But whatever may be the ultimate fate of the 
 American Appendix, it is of very little account as 
 compared with the text of the Revision as it now 
 stands. It is a matter of wonder and congratulation 
 that two distinct Companies of scholars of various 
 denominations and schools of theological thought, 
 divided by the ocean, and representing two inde- 
 pendent and high-minded nations, should have ar- 
 rived, after several years of unbroken and conscien- 
 tious labor, at such harmonious conclusions in the 
 translation of their most sacred book, which is recog- 
 nized by both as their infallible guide in all matters 
 of Christian faith and duty. 
 
 The Anglo-American Revision is the noblest 
 monument of Christian union and co-operation in 
 this nineteenth century. 
 
 And herein is the finger of Providence, and the 
 best guarantee of ultimate success. The Revisers 
 of 1881 will ere long be forgotten, like their prede- 
 cessors of 1611, and some of them have already 
 passed beyond the reach of praise or blame; but 
 their united work will live until it is superseded by 
 a better one. 
 
APPEISTDIXES 
 
APPENDIX I. 
 
 LIST OF PRINTED EDITIONS OF 
 
 THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 By Professor Isaac H. Hall, New York. 
 
 Note.— The following list consists of the " Index I. Editio- 
 rum" from the BiUiotheca Novi Testamenti Greedy Brunsvigae, 
 1872 (pp. 289-301), by Professor Eduard Reuss, D.D., of 
 Strassburg, with a few bracketed remarks or additions, and 
 a * to mark the more noted, or the epoch-making publica- 
 tions; omitting, however, the Gospel Harmonies and other 
 mere portions of the N. T. Editions not enumerated (or not 
 known) by Reuss, but within his plan, are added in brackets, 
 in chronological place. 
 
 A supplementary list of editions published since 1870, the 
 date of his compilation, is added, down to the present time. 
 
 The plan of Dr. Reuss included all published editions of 
 the entire N. T., together with such larger portions thereof 
 (Gospels. Harmonies, Epistles, etc.) as exhibited editorial care 
 in text or form, but omitting uncritical school-books. He 
 also omitted published copies of MSS., and editions based on 
 a single MS. Repetitions of the same edition, with changes 
 only in the title-page, or by minute corrections in the text, 
 were denoted by the same number in the "Index," but put- 
 ting the repeated number in parentheses. This method is 
 followed here also, as far as his numbers reach or apply. 
 
 It is not claimed that this list is perfect, but diligence has 
 been exercised to make it as complete as possible. 
 
 The number of Harmonies and other forms of the Four 
 Gospels, omitted, as above stated, from the list of Dr. Reuss, 
 is about fifty ; while that of other portions of the N. T. is 
 rather less than twenty-five. A list of each, supplemented 
 and continued to the present time, would add at least half as 
 
498 EDITIONS OF THE GKEEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 many more Harmonies, etc., and more than quadruple the 
 number of other portions of the N. T. 
 
 Estimating each edition of the entire Greek N. T. at 1000 
 copies, the whole number of copies printed would exceed 
 1,000,000, besides a vast multitude of repetitions, etc., which 
 are beyond the reach of estimate. 
 
 I. EDITIONS OF THE ENTIRE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT 
 
 FROM 1514 TO 1870. 
 
 List of Reuss enlarged. 
 
 (The numbers are Reuss's; editors' names in small capitals; publishers' in 
 heavy type; places of publication in italics.) 
 
 *1. 1514. Biblia polyglotta Complutensia. fol. [Card. Ximenks. 
 Alcala. The first printed, published 1522.] 
 
 "►2. 1516. Erasmi I. gr. lat. Basil. Froben. fol. [The first pub- 
 lished.] 
 
 *3. 1518. Biblia gr. Aldina. Venet fol. 
 
 4. 1519. Erasmi II. gr. lat. Basil. Froben. fol. 
 
 5. 1521. Gerbelii. Hagenoce. Anshelm. 4. 
 
 *6. 1522. Erasmi III. gr. lat. Basil. Froben. fol. [1 John v. 7 
 admitted. The basis of the textiis receptus, except in Revelation.] 
 
 7. 1524. Cephalaei. Argent. 8. 
 
 8. 1524. Bebelii I. Basil. 8. 
 
 9. 1527. Erasmi IV. gr. lat. Basil. Froben. fol. [WithVulg.] 
 
 10. 1531. Bebelii II. Basil. 8. 
 
 11. 1531. Rescii. Lovan. 8. 
 
 13. 1534. Colinaei. Paris. 8. [The first attempt at a critical 
 edition,] 
 
 14. 1535. Erasmi V. gr. lat. Basil. Froben. fol. 
 16. 1535. Bebelii III. Basil. 8. 
 
 16. 1536. Valderi. Basil. 32. [The first miniature-sized.] 
 
 18. 1538. Plateri I. Basil. 8. 
 
 19. 1538. Ant. de Sabio II. Venet. 8. [Ed. I., 1533, contained 
 only part of the N. T.] 
 
 20. 1540. Plateri II. Basil. 8. 
 
 21. 1641. (al. 1539, 1540.) Erasmi VI. gr. lat. Basil. Froben. fol. 
 
 22. 1641. (al. 1542.) Erasmi VII. gr. lat. Basil. Froben. fol. 
 
 23. 1541. Brylingeri I. gr. lat. Basil. 8. 
 
 24. 1542. Brylingeri II. gr. lat. Basil. 8. 
 
EDITIONS OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 499 
 
 25. 1543. BryUngeri III. Basil 8. 
 
 26. 1543. Bogardi. gr. lat. Paris. Guillard. 12. [Toussaint. 
 Displays some critical effort.] 
 
 (26.) 1543. Roignyi. gr. lat. Paris. Guillard. 12. [Toussaint.] 
 
 Platerilll. Basil. 8. 
 
 Plateri III. Basil 8. 
 
 Brylingeri IV. gr. lat. Basil 8. 
 
 Erasmiana. Honter. gr. lat. CoroncB. 4.] 
 
 Curionis. Basil 16. 
 
 Frobenii. Basil 4. 
 
 Biblia gr. Basil Hervagii. fol. [Mklanchthon's ed.] 
 
 Brylingeri V. gr. lat. Basil 8. 
 
 Rob. Stephani I. Paris. 16. [" Mirificam."] 
 
 Froschoveri I. Tiguri. 8. 
 
 Brylingeri VI. Basil 8. 
 
 Brylingeri VII. gr. lat. Basil 8. 
 
 Dupuisii. gr. lat. Paris. 16. 
 
 Granjon (Marnef, Fezandat). gr. lat. Paris. 16. 
 
 Rob. Stephani II. Paris. 16. [" Mirificam " II.] 
 
 Prevotii. Paris. Haul tin. 16. 
 
 Prevotii. Parin. Birkmann. 16. 
 
 Rob. Stephani III. Pam. fol. [" Editio regia." Eng- 
 lish textus receptus, so called.] 
 41. 1550. Brylingeri VIIT. gr. lat. Basil 8. 
 ♦42. 1551. Rob. Stephani IV. gr. lat. {Genev.)!^. [First divided 
 into modem verses.] 
 
 43. 1552. Oporini. Basil 16. 
 
 Brylingeri IX. Basil 8. 
 
 Brylingeri X. gr. lat. Basil 8. 
 
 Jo. Crispini I. (Genev.) 16. 
 
 Brylingeri XI. gr. lat. Basil 8. 
 
 Brylingeri XII. gr. lat. Basil 8. 
 
 Brylingeri XIII. Basil 8. 
 
 Froschoveri II. Tiguri. 8. 
 
 Tornaesii. gr. lat. Lugd. 8. 
 
 Barbirii. gr. lat. Basil fol. [Pseudo-BEZJE. It has 
 Beza's Latin only.] 
 (52.) 1559. Tiguri. gr. lat. fol. 
 (52.) 1560. Barbirii. gr. lat. Basil fol. 
 
 64. 1562. Brylingeri XIV. gr. lat. Basil 8. 
 
 65. 1563, Brylingeri XV. Bajiil 8. 
 
 27. 
 
 1543. 
 
 (27.) 
 
 1544. 
 
 28. 
 
 1544. 
 
 [ 
 
 1544. 
 
 29. 
 
 1545. 
 
 30. 
 
 1545. 
 
 31. 
 
 1545. 
 
 32. 
 
 1546. 
 
 ♦33. 
 
 1546. 
 
 34. 
 
 1547. 
 
 35. 
 
 1548. 
 
 36. 
 
 1549. 
 
 37. 
 
 1549. 
 
 (37.) 
 
 1549. 
 
 38. 
 
 1549. 
 
 39. 
 
 1549. 
 
 (39.) 
 
 1549. 
 
 ♦40. 
 
 1550. 
 
 44. 
 
 1553. 
 
 45. 
 
 1553. 
 
 46. 
 
 1553. 
 
 47. 
 
 1556. 
 
 48. 
 
 1558. 
 
 49. 
 
 1558. 
 
 50. 
 
 1559. 
 
 61. 
 
 1559. 
 
 62. 
 
 1559. 
 
500 EDITIOI^S OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 56. 1563. Voegelini I. gr. lat. Lips. 8. 
 
 57. 1563(1564). Voegelini II. Lips.S. 
 
 58. 1564. Brylingeri XVI. gr. lat. Lips. 8. 
 Jo. Crispini II. {Genev.)\&. 
 Jo. Crispini II. (Genev.) 16. 
 BEZ.E major. I. gr. lat. ( Genev.) Steph. fol. 
 Bez.e minor. I. gr. lat. (Genev.) Steph. 8. 
 Voegelini III. gr. lat. Lips. 8. 
 Froschoveri III. Tiguri. 8. 
 Brylingeri XVII. gr. lat. Basil. 8. 
 Bez^ minor. II. gr. lat. {Genev.) Steph. 8. 
 Rob. Stephani jun. Paris. 16. 
 Rob. Stephani jun. Paris. 16. 
 Tremellii triglotton. ( Genev.) Steph. fol. 
 Flacii I. Ferna. Basil, fol. 
 Voegelini IV. gr. lat. Lips. 8. 
 Brylingeri XVIII. gr. lat. Basil. 8. 
 Tremellii triglotton. Lugd. fol. 
 Biblia polyglotta. Antwerp. Flantin. fol. [Antwerp 
 
 Plantini I. gr. lat. Antwerp, fol. 
 Plantini II. Antwerp. 8. 
 Plantini III. Antwerp. 32. 
 Vignonii I. ( Genev. ) 1 6. 
 
 Henr. Stephani I. {Genev.) 16. [Preface contains 
 his celebrated essay on the style of the Gr. N. T.] 
 Brylingeri XIX. gr. lat. Basil. 8. 
 Steinmanni I. gr. lat. Lips. 8. 
 Bez^ minor. III. gr. lat. {Genev. Steph.) 8. 
 Burgis Araconensium. fol. [Same as No, 72 ?] 
 Bez^ major. II. gr. lat. ( Genev. Steph. ) fol. 
 Steinmanni II. gr. lat. Lips. 8. 
 Plantini IV. gr. lat. Antwerp. 8. 
 Selflschii I. gr. lat. Viteh. 8. 
 Jegeri. gr. lat. Amst. 8. 
 Plantini V. gr. lat. Antwerp, fol. 
 Vignonii II. {Genev.) \&. 
 Boderiani triglotton. Paris. Frevoteau. 4. 
 BoDERiANi triglotton. Paris. Le Bouc. 4. 
 Ostenii I. Basil. 8. 
 Henr. Stephani II. ( Genev.) 16. 
 
 59. 
 
 1564. 
 
 (59.) 
 ♦60. 
 
 1565. 
 1565. 
 
 61. 
 
 1565. 
 
 62. 
 
 1565. 
 
 63. 
 
 1566. 
 
 64. 
 
 1566. 
 
 65. 
 
 1567. 
 
 66. 
 
 1568. 
 
 (66.) 
 67. 
 
 1569. 
 1569. 
 
 68. 
 
 1570. 
 
 69. 
 
 1570. 
 
 70. 
 
 1571. 
 
 (67.) 
 *71. 
 
 1571. 
 1571. 
 
 Polyglott.] 
 72. 1572. 
 
 73. 
 
 1573. 
 
 74. 
 
 1574. 
 
 76. 
 
 1574. 
 
 76. 
 
 1576. 
 
 his ce 
 
 lebrate 
 
 77. 
 
 1577. 
 
 78. 
 
 1578. 
 
 79. 
 
 1580. 
 
 ? 
 
 1581. 
 
 80. 
 
 1582. 
 
 81. 
 
 1582. 
 
 82. 
 
 1583. 
 
 83. 
 
 1583. 
 
 (83.) 
 84. 
 
 1583. 
 1584. 
 
 86. 
 
 1584. 
 
 ♦86. 
 
 1584. 
 
 (86.) 
 87. 
 
 1 1586. 
 1586. 
 
 88. 
 
 1687. 
 
EDITIONS OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 501 
 
 VautroUerii. Lond. 16. [First Gr. N. T. pub. in Eng.] 
 Vignonii III. {Oenev.) \&. 
 ^Ostenii II. gr. lat. Basil. 8. 
 Steinmanni III. gr. lat. Lips. 8. 
 Stoerii. [gr. lat. Masch.] Omev. fol. [Same as No. 80 ?] 
 Bez^e major. III. gr. lat. {Genev. 
 
 89. 
 
 1587. 
 
 90. 
 
 1587. 
 
 91. 
 
 1588. 
 
 92. 
 
 1588. 
 
 ? 
 
 1588. 
 
 ♦93. 
 
 1588. 
 
 fiteph.) 
 
 fol. 
 
 *(93.) 
 
 1589. 
 
 [With No. 106, 
 
 ■ the chief basis of 
 
 our A. V. N. T.] 
 
 BEZiE major. III. gr. lat. {Sine 
 loco et typog. sed Genev. Steph.) fol. 
 *[(93.) 1589. Bez^ major. III. gr. lat. Genev. 
 Henr. Steph. fol] 
 
 94. 1590. Bez^ minor. IV. gr. lat. {Genev. Vigiion.)8. 
 Plantiniana. Antwerp. 8. [Doubtful.] 
 Kaphelengii I. Lugd. Bat. 32. 
 Lanzenbergeri I. gr. lat. Lips. 8. 
 Londinensis e typogr. regia. 16. 
 Mylii. gr. lat. Colon. Birkmann. 8. 
 Voegelini V. gr. lat. Lips. 8. 
 1594). Voegelini VI. Lips. 8. 
 vel antea). Rihelii. gr. lat. Argent. 8. 
 Palthenii. gr. lat. Franco/. 8. 
 Wolderi trilinguis. Hamh. Lucius, fol. 
 Biblia gr. Wecheliana. Franco/, fol. 
 Roussini. gr. lat. Lugd. 8. 
 Bez^ major. IV. gr. lat. {Genev.) Vignon. fol. [See 
 
 BEZi£ major. Sine loco et typog. fol. [Other varie- 
 
 Biblia Commeliniana. gr. lat. Heidelh. fol. 
 Commelini. gr. lat. {Heidelb.) 8. 
 Vincentii. gr. lat. Lugd. 8. 
 Genev. gr. lat. 8. 
 Harsyi I. gr. lat. Lugd. 8. 
 Lanzenbergeri II. gr. lat. Lips. 8. 
 Hutteri dodecaglotton. Norimb. fol. 
 Wechelii II. Franco/ 16. 
 Wechelii III. Franco/ fol. 
 Raphelengii II. Lugd. Bai. 48. 
 Commelini. gr. lat. {Heidelb.) 8. 
 Hutteri tetraglotton. Norimb. 4. 
 P. StephaniI. (6'mey.) 16. 
 
 ? 
 
 1590. 
 
 95. 
 
 1591. 
 
 96. 
 
 1591. 
 
 97. 
 
 1592. 
 
 98. 
 
 1592. 
 
 100. 
 
 1594. 
 
 101. 
 
 1595 
 
 102. 
 
 1596 
 
 103. 
 
 1596. 
 
 104. 
 
 1596. 
 
 105. 
 
 1597. 
 
 (51.) 1597. 
 
 ♦106. 
 
 1598. 
 
 No. 93. 
 
 ] 
 
 *(106.) 
 
 1598. 
 
 ties exist.] 
 
 107. 
 
 1599. 
 
 108. 
 
 1599. 
 
 (108.) 
 
 1599. 
 
 (108.) 
 
 1599. 
 
 109. 
 
 1599. 
 
 110. 
 
 1599. 
 
 *111. 
 
 1599. 
 
 112. 
 
 1600. 
 
 113. 
 
 1601. 
 
 114. 
 
 1601. 
 
 (108.) 
 
 1602. 
 
 115. 
 
 1602. 
 
 116. 
 
 1604. 
 
502 EDITIONS OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 BEZiE minor, V. gr, lat. {Genev. Vignon.) 8. 
 
 Selflschii II. gr. lat. Viteb. Seuberlich. 8. 
 
 Selflschii II. gr. lat. Viteb. Seuberlich. 8. 
 
 Kaphelengii. gr. lat. Liigd. Bat. 8. 
 
 Lond. 8.] 
 
 Roverii I. gr. lat. ( Genev.) fol. 
 
 Boverii II. gr. lat. Aurel. Allobrog. 8. 
 
 Roverii III. {Genev.) 24t. 
 
 Stoerii I. gr. lat. {Genev.) 12. 
 
 Boverii IV. gr. lat. Aurel. Allobrog. 16. 
 
 Harsyi II. gr. lat. Lugd. 16. 
 
 Bezje minor. VI. gr. lat. ( Genev. Vignon.) 8. 
 
 Bez^ minor. VI. gr. lat. {Genev. Crispin.) 8. 
 
 Baphelengii III. Lugd. Bat. 32. 
 
 Sam. Crispini I. gr. lat. Genev. 12. 
 
 Baphelengii IV, gr. lat, Lugd. Bat. 8. 
 
 LuBiNi trilinguis. Rost. Pedanus. 4. 
 
 LuBiNi trilinguis. Amst. Janson. 4. 
 
 Vignonii IV. Genev. 16. 
 
 HuTTERi tetraglotton. Amst. 4. 
 
 Biblia Commeliniana. gr. lat. {Heidelh.) fol. 
 
 P. Stephani II. S.Crispin. {Genev.) \Q. [Text same 
 
 LuBiNi trilinguis. Rost. Hallerfeld. 4. 
 Hafenrefferi. gr. lat. Tub. "Werlin. 4. 
 Selflschii III. gr. lat. Viteb. Seuberlich. 8. 
 Roverii V. gr. lat. {Genev.) i6\. 
 Roverii VI. gr. lat. Aurel. Allobrog. 8. 
 Boverii VI. gr. lat. Sine loco. 8. 
 Boverii VII. Col. Allobrog. 4. 
 Boverii VII. Col. Allobrog. 4. 
 Boverii VII. Genev. 4. 
 
 Gergani. Witteb. Borheck. 4. [For use in Greece.] 
 Billii. Lond. 8. [R. Whittaker.] 
 Sam. Crispini II. gr. lat. {Genev.) 12. 
 Selflschii IV. gr. lat. Viteb. 8. 
 Elzevirorum [ Elzeviriorum ] I. Ljugd. Bat. 24. 
 [European textus receptus., though not so called till after 1633.] 
 
 145. 1625. Stoerii II. gr. lat. Genev. \% 
 [(158.) 1625, Buckii, Cantab. 8.] 
 (130.) 1626. LuBiNi trilinguis. Rost. Ferber. 4. 
 
 117. 
 
 1604. 
 
 118. 
 
 1605. 
 
 (118.) 
 
 1 1606. 
 
 ? 
 
 1609. 
 
 120. 
 
 (1609. 
 1609. 
 
 121. 
 
 1609. 
 
 122. 
 
 1609. 
 
 123. 
 
 1609. 
 
 124. 
 
 1610. 
 
 125. 
 
 1611. 
 
 126. 
 
 1611. 
 
 (126.) 
 127. 
 
 1611, 
 1612. 
 
 128. 
 
 1612. 
 
 129, 
 
 1613. 
 
 130. 
 
 1614. 
 
 (130.) 
 131. 
 
 1614. 
 1615. 
 
 (115.) 
 
 1615. 
 
 (107.) 
 133. 
 
 1616. 
 1617. 
 
 as Vignon.] 
 (130.) 1617. 
 134. 1618. 
 
 135. 
 
 1618. 
 
 136. 
 
 1619. 
 
 137. 
 
 1619. 
 
 (137.) 
 138. 
 
 1619. 
 1619. 
 
 (138.) 
 
 (138.) 
 
 139. 
 
 1620. 
 1620. 
 1622. 
 
 140. 
 
 1622. 
 
 141. 
 
 1622. 
 
 143. 
 
 1623. 
 
 ♦144. 
 
 1624. 
 
EDITIONS OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 603 
 
 146. 1626. [Henrici Laur(entii), not] Laurii I. gr. lat. Arnst. 8. 
 
 147. 1627. Stoerii III. gr. lat. Getuv. ^. 
 
 149. 1628. Tournesiil. (Genev.) 24. . 
 (149.) 1628. Tournesii I. Aurel. Allohrog. i4. 
 
 150. 1628. Tournesii II. trilinguis. Genev. 8. 
 
 151. 1628. Jannonii. Sedan. 32. [The smallest ever published, 
 except No. 450.] 
 
 152. 1628. MoRiNi biblia graeca. Paris. io\. [4 edd.; Sonnius. 
 Chappelet, Buon, and A. Steph.] 
 
 (150.) 1629. Tournesii II. Genev. 8. 
 
 153. 1629. Wechelii IV. Banov. 12. 
 
 *154. 1630, 1633. Biblia polyglotta Farisiensia. Vitr6. fol. 
 
 ? 1630. Janssonii. Amst. 16. 
 
 (137.) 1631. Roverii [VI.] gr. lat. Aurel. Allobrog. 8. 
 
 155. 1632. Janssonii I. Amst. 16. 
 
 156. 1632. Jac. Crispini. {Genev.) \Q. 
 (156.) 1632. Tournesii III. 16. 
 
 157. 1632. Tournesii IV. {Genev.) 24. 
 
 158. 1632. Buckii. Cantahr. 8. 
 
 159. 1632. GoRDONi. gr. lat. Paris. Cramoisy. fol. 
 
 *160. 1633. El2evirorum[Elzeviriorum,andsoNo. 167]II. Lv^d, 
 Bat. 24. [The famous textits receptus.] 
 
 161. 1633. WMttakeri. Lond. 8. [Elzevir.] 
 
 162. 1633. Blaeuii. Amst.S2. 
 
 163. 1635. Selfischii V. gr. lat. Viteb.8. 
 [ 1635(?). R Whittakeri. 4.] 
 
 164. 1638. Cyrilli Lucaris bilinguis. Sine loco. [With the 
 first Modern Greek version.] 
 
 165. 1639. Janssonii II. Amst. 16. 
 
 166. 1639. Janssonii III. Amst. 8. 
 
 (152.) 1641. MoRiNi biblia graeca. Paris. Piget. fol. 
 
 167. 1641. Elzevirorum III. Lugd. Bat. 24. 
 
 (161.) 1641. Whittakeri. Lugd. Bat. Elzevir [1633]. 8. 
 
 168. 1642. Danielis I. gr. lat. Cantahr. fol. 
 
 169. 1642. Mazariniana. Paris, typ. reg. foL 
 ? 1643. Amsterd. 8. [Henr. Laurentii?] 
 
 170. 1645. BoECLERi I. Argent. Miilb. 24. 
 
 172. 1647. [Laurentii, not] Laurii II. gr. lat. Amst, 8. 
 
 173. 1648. Frerii. Lond. 12. 
 176. 1652. Danielis II. Lond. 12. 
 
 [ (1652.) Danielis. Lo7id. 32.] 
 
 H 
 
504 EDITIONS OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 Danielis III. [IV.] Lond. 4. 
 
 Witteh. RoeteL gr. lat. 8. 
 
 HooLii I. Lond. Norton. 12. 
 
 Leersii I. Roterd. 12. 
 
 Ammonii. Hamh. 12. 
 
 Elzevirorum [Elzeviriorum,and sobelow] IV. ^ms^.32. 
 
 Eirchneri. gr. lat. Lips. fol. 
 
 Biblia poljglotta Waltoni. Lond. Boycroft foL 
 
 Leersii II. Roterd. 12. 
 
 CuRCELL^i I. Amst. Elzevir. 12. 
 
 Er. Schmidii. gr. lat. Norimh. fol. 
 
 Flacii II. gr. lat. Franco/. Beyer, fol. 
 
 Pricjsi Comment. Lnnd. Flesher. foL 
 
 BoECLERi II. Argent. Staedel. 24. 
 
 Wustii I. gr. lat. Viteh. 8. 
 
 Endteri. gr. lat. Franco/. 8. 
 
 Elzevirorum V. Amst. 16. 
 
 Bodmeri I. gr. lat. Tiguri. 8. 
 
 HooLii II. Lond. Norton. 12. 
 
 Pearsonii. Cantahr. Field. 12. 
 
 Hampelii. gr. lat. Giss. 4. 
 
 Elzevirorum VI. Amst. 16. 
 
 Bodmeri II. gr. lat. Tiguri. 8. 
 
 HooLii III. Lond. Banew. 12. 
 
 HooLii. Lond. 12. (Wrongly suspected by Reuss.)] 
 
 Montensis trilinguis. Migeot. 8. 
 
 Wustii II. gr. lat. Franco/ 4. 
 
 Wiistii 11. gr. lat. Franco/ 8. 
 
 Molini. Lugd. 12. 
 
 HooLii IV. Lond. Meame. 12. 
 
 Redmainii I. Lond. 8. 
 
 Wustii III. gr. lat. Franco/ 8. 
 
 CoccEii I. Am^t. Van Someren. fol. 
 
 Fellii. Oxon. Sheldon. 8. 
 
 CuRCELLiEi II. Amst. Elzevir. 12. 
 
 Leusdenii I. Trajecti. Smytegelt. 16. 
 
 Pseudo-Leusdeniana. Trajecti. Smytegelt. 24, 
 
 Bodmeri III. Tiguri. 16. 
 
 Elzevirorum VII. Amst. 16. 
 
 CuRCELL^i III. Amst. Blaeu. 12 
 
 Wustii IV. gr. lat. Franco/. 12. 
 
 111. 
 
 1653. 
 
 178. 
 
 1653. 
 
 179. 
 
 1653. 
 
 180. 
 
 1654. 
 
 (158.] 
 
 I 1655. 
 
 181. 
 
 1656. 
 
 182. 
 
 1657. 
 
 ♦183. 
 
 1657. 
 
 184. 
 
 1658. 
 
 »185. 
 
 1658. 
 
 186. 
 
 1658. 
 
 187. 
 
 1659. 
 
 188. 
 
 1660. 
 
 189. 
 
 1660. 
 
 190. 
 
 1661. 
 
 191. 
 
 1661. 
 
 192. 
 
 1662. 
 
 193. 
 
 1663. 
 
 194. 
 
 1664. 
 
 195. 
 
 1665. 
 
 196. 
 
 1669. 
 
 197. 
 
 1670. 
 
 198. 
 
 1671. 
 
 199. 
 
 1672. 
 
 r 
 
 1673. 
 
 "200. 
 
 1673. 
 
 >196.) 
 
 1 1673. 
 
 (196.) 
 
 1673. 
 
 201. 
 
 1674. 
 
 202. 
 
 1674. 
 
 203. 
 
 1674. 
 
 204. 
 
 1674. 
 
 205. 
 
 1675. 
 
 ♦206. 
 
 1675. 
 
 207. 
 
 1675. 
 
 208. 
 
 1675. 
 
 209. 
 
 1675. 
 
 210. 
 
 1677. 
 
 211. 
 
 1678. 
 
 212. 
 
 1685. 
 
 213. 
 
 1686. 
 
EDITIONS OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 505 
 
 Dulci biblia graeca. Tenet, fol. 
 Leusdenii IL Amst Boom. 16. 
 Leusdenii II. Lond. Smith. 16. 
 Gezklii, Aboce. 8. 
 CoccEii IL Franco/. Wust. fol, 
 Rechenbergii I. Liineb. Lipper. 12. 
 Rechenbergii I. Lips. Heinichen. 12. 
 Patavina I. Cagnolini. 16. 
 RuD. Leusdenii. Franco/. Wiist. 8. 
 RuD. Leusdenii. Franco/ Wiist. 8. 
 Wiistii V. gr, lat. Franco/. 12. 
 WiNKLERi. gr. germ. Liineb. Lipper. 8. 
 Rechenbergii II. Lips. Kichter. 12. 
 Frickii, Lips. Eoenig. 8. 
 
 Waltoni N. T. polygl. Lond,. Smith & Walford. foL 
 [Other copies of the N. T. vol. exist with different titles.] 
 Leusdenii III. (Wetstenii I.) Anist. 12. 
 Leusdenii III. (Wetstenii I.) gr. lat. Amst. 12. 
 Leusdenii III. (Wetstenii I.) gr. belg. Amst. 12. 
 CuRCELL^i IV. Anut. Blaeu. 12. 
 Leusdenii IV. LMffd. Bat. Lnchtmans. 24. 
 Wiistii VI. gr. lat. Franco/ 12. 
 Cantabrigice. Jeffray. 12. 
 
 HooLii. Ijond. 8. (Suspected and omitted by Reuse.)] 
 Cocceii III. Am^t. Blaeu. fol. 
 Euddimanorum. Edinb. 16.] 
 Wetstenii IL Am^t. 16. 
 Londini. Churchill. 8. 
 Londini. Churchill. 12. 
 Frankii. Lips. Eoenig. 8. 
 Rechenbergii III. Lij)s. Bichter. 12. 
 Gregorii. Oxon. Sheldon, fol. 
 Pritii I. Lips. Gleditsch. 12. 
 Quillau. Paris. 24. 
 Mail Gissce. Vulpius. 12. 
 Mail gr. germ. Gissw. Vulpius. 12. 
 Erasmi VII. gr. lat. Van der Aa. Ltigd. Bat. fol 
 Bedmainii II. Lond. 8. 
 MiLLii. Oxon. Sheldon. f<il. 
 Bodmeri IV. Tiguri. 12. 
 Bodmeri IV. gr. lat. Tiguri. 12, 
 
 214. 
 
 168Y, 
 
 215, 
 
 1688. 
 
 (216.) 
 
 1688. 
 
 216. 
 
 1688. 
 
 217. 
 
 1689, 
 
 218. 
 
 1691. 
 
 (218.) 
 
 1691. 
 
 219. 
 
 1692. 
 
 220. 
 
 1692. 
 
 (220.) 
 
 1693. 
 
 221. 
 
 1693. 
 
 222. 
 
 1693. 
 
 224. 
 
 1697. 
 
 225. 
 
 1697. 
 
 (183.) 
 
 1698. 
 
 Other 
 
 copies 
 
 226. 
 
 1698. 
 
 (226.) 
 
 1698. 
 
 (226.) 
 
 1698. 
 
 22Y. 
 
 1699. 
 
 228. 
 
 1699. 
 
 231. 
 
 1700. 
 
 232. 
 
 1700. 
 
 [ 
 
 1701. 
 
 233. 
 
 1701. 
 
 [ 
 
 1701. 
 
 234. 
 
 1701. 
 
 235. 
 
 1701. 
 
 236. 
 
 1701. 
 
 23Y. 
 
 1702. 
 
 238. 
 
 1702. 
 
 239. 
 
 1703. 
 
 240. 
 
 1703. 
 
 242. 
 
 1704. 
 
 243. 
 
 1705. 
 
 (243.) 
 
 1 1705. 
 
 244, 
 
 1705. 
 
 245. 
 
 1705. 
 
 ♦246. 
 
 1707. 
 
 248. 
 
 1708. 
 
 (248.) 
 
 1 1708. 
 
506 EDITIONS OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 249. 1708. Reyheri. gr. lat. Goth. 12. 
 
 250. 1709. Pbitii II. Lip&. Gleditsch. 12. 
 
 251. 1709. Rechenbergii IV. Lijps. Bichter. 12. 
 *252. 1710. KiJSTERi. Armt fol. [KUster's Mill.] 
 (252.) 1710. KtisTERi. Roterd. fol. 
 
 253. 1710. Orphanotrophei I. bilinguis. Hal. 12. 
 (249.) 1710. Hanschii. gr. lat. Goth. 12. 
 
 254. 1711 [error for 1709]. Wellsii. gr. eng. Oxf. Knaptoii. > 
 [First English attempt at a critical text; 10 parts, 1709-19.] 
 
 ♦265. 1711. GerhardiI. ["G.D.T.M.D."] Armt. Wetstein. 8. 
 (255.) 1711. Gerhardi I. Amst. Wetstein. 8. [Varied in pag- 
 ing, etc. The editor was Gerhard von Mastkicht.J 
 (249.) 1712. Hanscliii. gr. lat. Goth. 12. 
 
 Reineccii quadrilinguis. Zips. Lankisch. fol. 
 
 Maittairii I. Lorid. Tonson. 12. 
 
 BowYERi I. Zond. 12. 
 
 Cypriani. Goth. Eeyher. 12. 
 
 Emeryi. Faru. 8. 
 
 Leusdenii IV. Lugd. Bat. Luchtmans. 24. 
 
 L^on. Sacy. 32.] 
 
 Wetstenii III. Amst. 12. 
 
 Wetstenii III. gr. lat. Amst. 12. 
 
 WiLiscHii. gr. lat. Chemnitz. Stoessel. 8. 
 
 WiLiscHii. gr. germ. Chemnitz. Stoessex. 8l 
 
 Bentleii specimen. Zond. 8. 
 
 Aboce. 8. 
 
 Brocasii. Paris. 16. 
 
 Vossii I. gr. lat. Zips. 12. 
 
 KiJSTERi. Zips. Gleditsch. fol. 
 
 Vossii II. Zips. 12. 
 
 Pritii ni. Zips. Gleditsch. 12. 
 
 Reineccii I. Zips. Breitkopf. 8. 
 
 Patavina II. Manfre. 12. 
 
 Vossii III. gr. lat. Zips. 12. 
 
 BowTERi II. Zond. 12. 
 
 Zond. Enaplock. 8. 
 
 Maittairii II. Zond. Tonson. 12. 
 
 (Macii.) gr. ang. Zond. Roberts. 8, 
 
 Neudeckeri. Hal. Renger. 8. 
 
 Vossii IV. Zips. 12, 
 
 Maittairii III. Zond. Tonson. 12. 
 
 256. 
 
 1713. 
 
 257. 
 
 1714. 
 
 258. 
 
 1715. 
 
 259. 
 
 1715. 
 
 260. 
 
 1715. 
 
 (228.) 
 
 1 1716. 
 
 [ 
 
 1716. 
 
 261. 
 
 1717. 
 
 (261.) 1717. 
 
 262. 
 
 1717. 
 
 263. 
 
 1717. 
 
 * 
 
 1720. 
 
 264. 
 
 1720. 
 
 265. 
 
 1722. 
 
 266. 
 
 1722. 
 
 (252.) 
 
 1 1723. 
 
 267. 
 
 1724. 
 
 268. 
 
 1724. 
 
 269. 
 
 1725. 
 
 270. 
 
 1725. 
 
 271. 
 
 1727. 
 
 272. 
 
 1728. 
 
 273. 
 
 1728. 
 
 274. 
 
 1728. 
 
 275. 
 
 1729. 
 
 276. 
 
 1730. 
 
 277. 
 
 1730. 
 
 278. 
 
 1730. 
 
EDITIONS OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 507 
 
 (262.) 1730. WiLiscHii. gr. lat. Chemnitz. Stoessel. 8. 
 
 (263.) 1730. WiLisCHii. gr. germ. Chemnitz. Stoessel. 8. 
 
 279. 1731. Stockii. Jence. HL&yer. 8. 
 
 280. 1732. Vossii V. gr. germ. lAps. 12. 
 
 281. 1733. Reineccii II. Lips. Breitkopf. 8. 
 *282. 1734. Bengelii I. Tubing. Cotta. 4. 
 
 283. 1734. Bengklii II. Stuttff. Faber. 8. 
 
 284. 1735. Pritii IV. Zips. Gleditsch. 12. 
 
 285. 1735. Gerhardi [Mastrichtii] II. Amst. Wetstein. 12. 
 
 286. 1736. Rechenbergii V. Zips. Heinsius. 12. 
 
 287. 1736. Georgii I. Witteb. Teubner. 8. 
 
 288. 1737. Georgii II. gr. lat. Witteb. Teubnei. 8. 
 
 289. 1737. BuTTiGii. Zips. Weidmann. 8. 
 
 290. 1737. Vossii VI. gr. lat. Zips. 12. 
 (283.) 1738. Bengelii II. Tubing. Berger. 8. 
 
 291. 1739. Vossii VII. Zips. 12. 
 
 292. 1740. Ruddimanorum I. Edinb. 8. 
 
 293. 1740. Debielii. gr. lat. Vindob. Kaliwoda. 8. 
 
 294. 1740. Orphanotrophei II. Hal. 12. 
 
 295. 1740. Wetstenii IV. Amst. 12. 
 
 296. 1740. MuTHMANNi. Zullichov. Orphanotr. 4. 
 
 (296.) 1740. MuTHMANNi. gr. germ. Zullichov. Orphanotr. 4. 
 
 (295.) 1741. Wetstenii IV. gr. lat. Amst. 12. 
 
 (294.) 1741. Halle, gr. germ. Waisenhans. 12. 
 
 297. 1741. Taurini. typogr. regia. 12. 
 
 298. 1742. Oxonii. Broughton. 8. 
 
 299. 1742. Reineccii III. Jyips. Breitkopf. 8. 
 
 300. 1743. BowTERi III. Zond. 12. 
 
 301. 1744. ScHOETTGENii I. Zips. March. 8. 
 
 302. 1745. Patavina III. Manfre. 12. 
 
 303. 1745. Vossu VIII. gr. lat. Zips. 12. 
 
 304. 1746. Ewingii I. Zhiblin. 12. 
 (252.) 1746. KtJSTERi. Amst. Wetstein. fol. 
 (256.) 1747. Reineccii quadrilinguis. Zips. fol. 
 
 305. 1749. BiRRii. Basil. Mechel. 8. 
 
 306. 1750. Vossu IX. Berol. 12. 
 
 307. 1750. Euddimanorum II. Minb. 8. 
 
 308. 1750. Glasffuce. Urie. 8. 
 809. 1751. Venetiis. BortoU. 12. 
 
 (228.) 1751. Leusdknii IV. Zugd. Bat. Luchtmans. 24. 
 ♦310. 1751, 1752. J. J. Wktstenu, Amst. Dommer. fol. 
 
508 EDITIONS OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 311. 1753. Bengelii III. Tubing. Berger. 8. 
 
 312. 1753. Keineccii IV. Lips. Breitkopf. 8. 
 
 313. 1753. GoLDHAGENii. Mog. Varrentrapp. 
 
 314. 1753. Vossii X. gr. lat. Berol. 12. 
 
 315. 1755. Patavina IV. Manfre. 12. 
 
 316. 1756. Orphanotrophei III. Hal. 12. 
 
 (316.) 1756. Orphanotrophei III. gr. germ. Hal. 12. 
 
 317. 1756. Maittairii IV. Lond. Tonson, 12. 
 
 318. 1757. Vossii XL Berol. 12. 
 (318.) 1757. Vossii XI. gr. lat. Berol. 12. 
 
 319. 1758. Stregnesice. Collin. 8. 
 
 320. 1759. Charnleyi. Glasg. Foulis. 
 
 321. 1760. BowYERi IV. Lond. 12. 
 
 322. 1761. Vossii XII. gr. lat. Berol. 12. 
 
 323. 1762. Patavina V. Manfre. 12. 
 
 324. 1762. Patavina VI. {sine typog.) 12. 
 
 325. 1762. Bengelii IV. Tubing. Berger. 8. 
 
 326. 1762. Orphanotrophei IV. Hal. 12. 
 
 327. 1763. BowYERi V. Lond. 12. 
 
 328. 1763. Baskervillii I. Oown. Clarend. 4. 
 
 329. 1763. Baskervillii II. Oxon. Clarend. 8. 
 
 330. 1765. ScHOETTGENii II. Vratisl. Gampert. 8. 
 (228.) 1765. Leusdenii IV. Lugd. Bat. Luchtmans. 24. 
 
 331. 1766. Reineccii V. Lips. Breitkopf. 8. 
 
 332. 1768. (Hardyi I.) Lond. Richardson. 8. 
 
 333. 1770. BowYERi VI. Lond. 12. 
 
 334. 1771. Ruddimanorum III. LJdinb. 8. 
 
 335. 1772. Wetstenii V. gr. lat. Lugd. Bat. 12. 
 
 336. 1774. Vossii XIII. Berol. 12. 
 
 337. 1774. Patavina VII. Manfre. 12. 
 
 *338. 1774. Griesbachii Synopsis I. Hal.'] ._, 
 Curt. 8. [Matt. Marc. Luc] I ^These two together 
 
 *339. 1775. Griesbachii L Hal. Curt. 8. [ form Gnesbach s 
 
 r T u A * t:' * n J first edition. J 
 
 [Jon. Act. Epp. Apoc.J -^ ■' 
 
 340. 1775. Ewingii II. L>ublin. 12. 
 
 341. 1775. Orphanotrophei V. Hal. 12. 
 
 342. 1775. Maittairii V. Loud. Rivington. 12. 
 
 343. 1776. Bengelii V. Tubing. Berger. 8. 
 
 344. 1776. Harwoodil Lond. Johnson. 8. [Critical edition of 
 some merit, but neglected.] 
 
 (338.) 1776. Griesbachii Synopsis L Hal. Curt. 8. [Vol. 2. Epp. 
 Apoc. 1776.] 
 
EDITIONS OF THE GREEK ]^EW TESTAMENT. 509 
 
 [ 1776. Lond. J. D. Cornish. 8.] 
 
 (339.) 1777. Griesbachi I. Hal. Curt. 8. [Mt., Mc, Lc. not in 
 Synopsis; 1775, Joh., Act. ; vol. 2, Epp., Apoc] 
 (339a.) 1777. Griesbachi I. Hal Curt. 4. 
 345. 1777. BowTERi VII. Lond. 12. 
 ? 1777. Stregnesice. 8. 
 
 347. 1777. FiscHERi. Prag. Hagen. 8. 
 
 348. 1778. Hardyi II. Lond. Kichardson. 8. 
 
 349. 1778 sqq. Koppii I. Goetting. Dietrich. 8. [Sine Evv.] 
 
 351. 1779. E. Stephani. Argent. Stein. 8. 
 
 352. 1782. ScHOETTGENii III. Vratisl. Korn. 8. 
 
 *353. 1782-1788. Matth^i I. gr. lat. Riga. Hartknoch. 8. 
 
 354. 1783. BowYERi VIII. Lond. Nichols. 4. 
 
 355. 1783. Reineccii VI. Lips. Breitkopf. 8. 
 (228.) 1785. Leusdenii IV. Lv^d. Bat. Luchtmans. 24. 
 
 356. 1786. Maittairii VI. Lond. Rivington. 12. 
 *357. 1786, 1787. Alteri. Vimnce. De Trattnern. 8. 
 
 358. 1787. Detmold. Helwing. 8. 
 
 359. 1787. BowTERi IX. Lond. Nichols. 12. 
 
 *360. 1788. BiRCHii. [Evangelia.] Havn. Schulz. 4. 
 
 361. 1789. Patavina VIII. Bettinelli. 12. 
 
 362. 1790. Bengelii VI. Tubing. Heerbrandt 8. 
 
 364. 1794. Londini. Longman. 12. 
 
 365. 1794. Londini. gr. lat. Wingrave. 12. 
 
 366. 1794. Ihiblinii. Ekshaw. 12. 
 
 [ 1794. BowYERi. Lond. Nichols. 12. This deranges Reuss'a 
 
 numbering of the Bowyer editions.] 
 
 367. 1795. ScHOETTGENii IV. Vratisl. Korn. 8. 
 
 368. 1796. Patavina IX. Vend. Fracasso. 12. 
 
 369. 1796-1806. Griesbachii II. Hal. Curt. 8. 
 (369.) 1796-1806. Griesbachii II. Hal. Curt. 4. 
 
 371. 1797. Knappii I. Hal. Orphanot. 8. 
 
 372. 1798. Whitii. Oxon. Collingwood. 12. 
 [ 1798-1808. Whitii. Oxon. 2 voll. 8.] 
 
 373. 1800. WigornicB. [Alexander. Milliana.] Thomas. 12. 
 [First American edition.] 
 
 374. 1800-1802. Paulus I. Liib. Bohn. 8. 
 
 375. 1801. Londini. Woodfall. 12. 
 
 [ 1801. Bowyeri. Lond. Nichols. 12. This again deranges 
 
 Reuss's numbering of the Bowyer editions.] 
 876, 1803. Londini. ^eves. 12, 
 
510 EDITIONS OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 311. ISOS-ISOV. Griesbachii III. Lips. Goeschen. fol, 
 
 378. 1803-1807. Matth^i II. Witteb. etc. [Matthaei, vol. 2, at 
 end, says this is an error for Curies Variscorum.'\ 
 
 379. 1804. Londin. gr. lat. Wingrave. 12. 
 (358.) 1804. DuisburgcB. Baedeker. 8. 
 
 380. 1804. Paulus II. Liih. Bolin. 8. 
 
 381. 1805. Biblia gr. Ozon. Clarendon. 4. 
 [ 1805. Oxon. £ typ. Clarend. 16.] 
 
 383. 1805. ScHOTTii I. gr. lat. Lips. Marker. 8. 
 
 384. 1805. Griesbachii III. Lips. Goeschen. 8. 
 
 385. 1806. [Leusdeniana. gr. lat.] PhiladelphicB. Bradford. 12. 
 [(385.) 1806. [Leusdeniana. gr. only.] Philadelphice. Bradford. 12.] 
 
 386. 1806. UpsalicB. Edman. 8. 
 
 387. 1807. Edinhurgi. Bell. 12. 
 
 388. 1808. Dakinsii. Lond. 12. 
 
 389. 1808. Whitii. Oxon. Clarendon. 8. 
 
 390. 1808. WiLSONii. Neo-Ebor. Wallis. 12. [An error. Wil- 
 son's N. T. first appeared in 1822.] 
 
 391. 1809. Londini. Longman. 12. 
 
 392. 1809. Griesbachii II. Lortd. M'Kinlay. 8. 
 
 »93. 1809. Griesbachiana III. Cantabr. [Mass.'] Wells. 8. 
 
 395. 1809. Griesbachiana. gr. lat. Lips. (Linz.) 8. 
 
 396. 1809. AiTTONi. Lugd. Bat. Luchtmans. 12. 
 
 397. 1810. ChelsecB. bilinguis. Tilling. 12. 
 (397.) 1810. Londini. bilinguis. Tilling. 12. 
 
 398. 1810 sqq. Koppii II. Goett. Dietrich. 8. [The various 
 parts of this edition have different editors' names ; and some parts 
 passed to a 3d ed.] 
 
 ? 1810. Constantinopolitana. 
 
 [(388.) 1810. Dakinsii. Lo7id. 12.] 
 
 399. 1811. Schottii II. gr. lat. Lips. Marker. 8. 
 [(414.) 1811. DiCKiNsoNii. JSdinb. 12.] 
 
 401. 1812. BowYERi X. Lond. 
 
 (888.) 1812. Dakinsii. Lond. Wilson. 12. 
 
 [(380.) 1812. Paulus II. Lips. Barth. 8.] 
 
 402. 1812. Gailii I. Paris. Delalain. 12. 
 
 403. 1813. Londini. Bagster. 32. 
 
 404. 1813. Oxonii. Clarendon. 8. 
 
 405. 1813. Gaillardi. Genev. Bonnant. 12. 
 
 406. 1813. Knappii II. ffal. Orphanot. 8. 
 (397.) 1814. Londini bilinguis. Tillinff. 12. 
 
EDITIONS OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 511 
 
 408. 1814. [MiLLiANA.] Bostonii. Thomaa. 12. 
 
 409. 1814. Gailii II. Paris. Delalain. 12. 
 
 410. 1814. London. Pytt. 12. 
 
 [(382.) 1814. Mastrichtiana. Minb. Carol. Stewart. 12.] 
 
 411. 1816. BowYERi XL Lond. Nicliols. 12. 
 
 412. 1816. Valpyi I. Lond. Valpy. 8. 
 [ 1816. AiTTON. Olasguoe. 12.] 
 
 413. 181Y. Olasguce. Duncan. 24. 
 
 414. 1817. DiCKiNSONii. Edinh. 12. 
 
 415. 1818. Griesbachii II. Lond. Eivington. 8. 
 
 417. 1819. Londini. bilinguis. Tilling. 12. 
 
 418. 1819. Oxonii. Clarendon. 12. 
 [(414.) 1819. DiCKiNSONii. Minb. 12.] 
 [(397.) 1819. Bilinguis. Chelsece. Tilling. 12.] 
 
 419. 1820. Fatavina X. typ. Semin. 8. 
 
 420. 1820. Hardyi III. Lond. Bliss. 8. 
 (420.) 1820. Hardyi III. Lond. Allman. 8. 
 
 421. 1820. Gaillii III. Faris. Delalain. 12. 
 
 422. 1820. TiTTMANNi I. Lipa. Tanclinitz. 16. 
 [ 1820. (Polyglott.) Bagster. Lond. 12.] 
 
 423. 1821. Gratzii I. gr. lat. Tubing. Fues. 8. 
 
 424. 1821. Biblia gr. Mosquemia. 4. 
 (388.) 1821. Dakinsii. Lond. Wilson. 12. 
 (405.) 1821. Gaillardi. Lugd. Rusand. 12. 
 [ 1821. AiTTON. Olasguce. 32.] 
 
 [ 1821. Leusdeniana. gr. lat. Neo.-Ebor. Long. 12.] 
 
 425. 1822. OlasgucB. typ. acad. 24. 
 
 426. 1822. [Griesbachiana.] Kneelandii. [gr. angl] PhUadeU 
 phice. Fry. 8. 
 
 [(426.) 1822. (Griesbachiana.) Kneelandii. (gr. only.) Fhiladel- 
 phice. Fry. 8.] 
 
 (390.) 1822. WiLSONii. Hartford. Wallis. [error for Cooke.] 12. 
 
 428. 1823. Londini. Bagster. 8. 
 
 [(426.) 1823. (Griesbachiana.) Kneelandii. FhUadelphice. Fry. 8.] 
 
 429. [563.] 1824. [Pseudo - Leusden. gr. lat] Neo-Ebor. Col- 
 Uns. 12. 
 
 (417.) 1824. Londini, bilinguis. Tilling. 12. 
 
 (428.) 1824. Londini. Bagster. 8. 
 
 431. 1824. BoissoNADii. Faris. Eberart. 24. 
 
 432. 1824. TiTTMANNi II. Lips. Tauclinitz. 8L 
 
 433. 1824. Londini. Whittaker. 12. 
 
512 EDITIONS OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 434. 1824. Knappii III. Hal Orphanot. 8. 
 
 435. 1824. Knappiana III. Lond. Valpy. 8. 
 
 436. 1824. Vateri. Hal. Gebauer. 8. 
 43 Y. 1825. Basilece. Thurneisen. 8. 
 
 (428.) 1825. Londini. Bagster. 8. 
 
 438. 1825. Boothii. gr. angl. Londini. 8. 
 (390.) 1825. WiLsoNii. Hartford. Cooke. 12. 
 
 439. 1825. ScHOTTii III. gr. lat. Ups. Marker. 8. 
 
 440. 1825. Griesbachii IV. Lips. Goeschen. 8. 
 [ 1825. MiLLiANA. Oxon. E typ. Clarend.J 
 
 442. 1826. Valpyi II. Lond. Valpy. 8. 
 
 444. 1827. Gratzii II. gr. lat. Mogunt. Kupferberg. 8. 
 
 445. 1827. Van Essii. gr. lat. Tubing. Fuea. 8. 
 
 446. 1827. Londini. bilinguis. Watts. 8. 
 
 447. 1827. Griesbachiana ScHULZii. [Vol.I.Evv.J J5ero?. Laue. d 
 
 448. 1827. Paris. Delalain. 12. 
 
 [(390.) 1827. WiLSONii. Hartford. Cooke. 12.] 
 
 450. 1828. Londini. Pickering. 64. [Smallest edition.] 
 
 451. 1828. Londini. bilinguis. Tilling. 12. 
 
 452. 1828. Lloydii. Oxon. Clarendon. 12. 
 
 453. 1828. Leutschii. gr. lat. Lips. Serig. 8. 
 (422.) 1828. TiTTMANNi I. Lips. Tauchnitz. 16. 
 
 455. 1828[-29]. [Triglotta. Bagsteri.] Lond. Watts. 4. 
 [ 1828-30-32. HiLARiON. bilinguis. Lond. 8.] 
 
 (414.) 1829. DiCKiNSONii. Edinh. 12. 
 
 (388.) 1829. Dakinsii. Lond. Cadell. 12. 
 
 456. 1829. Londini. Bagster. 12. 
 
 457. 1829. Greenheldii. Lond. Bagster. 32. [Polymicrian.] 
 (390.) 1829. WiLSONii. Hartford. Cooke. 12. 
 
 (390.) 1829. WiLSONii. Wallis [error f©r Towar]. Philadelphite. 
 12. 
 
 (446.) 1829. Londini. bilinguis. Watts. 8. 
 
 458. 1829. Knappii IV. Hal. Orphan. 8. 
 
 459. 1829. Meyeri. gr. germ. Ooett. Vandenhoeck. 8. 
 [(462.) 1829. Glasguce. Hutchison. 24.] 
 
 [ 1829. Griesbachiana. Lond. Rivington. 12.] 
 
 [(455 ?) 1829. (N. T. Polyglott.) Bagster. Lond. 4.] 
 
 461. 1830. Lloydii. Oxon. Clarendon. 12. 
 (446.) 1830. Jjmdini. bilinguis. Watts. 8. ^ 
 
 462. 1830. OlasguoB. Hutchison. 24. 
 
 *463. 1830-1836. Scholzii. Lips. Fleischer. 4, 
 
EDITIONS OF THE GKEEK NEW TESTAMENT. 513 
 
 464. 1830. Londini. Valpy. 48. 
 
 466. 1830. Paris. Delalain. 32. 
 
 [ 1830. Duncan. Mitib. 12.] 
 
 466. 1831. BuRTONi I. Oxoii. 8. 
 
 467. 1831. Brossetii. Paris. Didot. 24. 
 
 468. 1831. Valpyi III. Lond. Valpy. 8. 
 
 469. 1831. Naebii. gr. lat. lAps. Koehler. 8. 
 *4'70. 1831. Lachmanni I. £e7'oL Reimer. 12. 
 (432.) 1831. TiTTMANNi II. lAps. Tauchnitz. 8. 
 
 [(390.) 1831. WiLSONii. Towar. Philad. 12.] 
 
 [ 1831. (Bibl. Polyglott.) Bagster. Lond. fol] 
 
 [457. 1831. Greenfieldii. Lond. Bagster. 82. Polymicrian.] 
 
 471. 1832. GoESCHENii. gr. lat. Lips. Weidmann. 8. 
 
 472. 1832. Jaumanni. Monach. Lindauer. 8. 
 474. 1832. Bloomfieldii I. Cantab. 8. 
 
 (462.) 1832. Olasguce. Brookman. 24. 
 
 476. 1833. Venetiis. 
 
 (390.) 1833. WiLSONii. Philad. Towar. 12. 
 
 477. 1834. BoEKLiNi. Christianstadt. Schmidt. 8. 
 
 478. 1834. Smithii. Lond. Hurst. 12. 
 
 [ 1834. ScHOLEFiELD. gr. angl. Cambridge. 12.] 
 
 482. 1835. Burtoni II. Ozon. 8. 
 
 483. 1835. [Knappiana.] Pattonii. Neo-Ebor. Starr. 4. 
 (414.) 1835. DiCKiNSONii. Edinb. Stirling. 12. 
 
 [(429, 563.) 1835. Pseudo-Leusden. Collins, gr. lat. Neo-Ebor. 12.] 
 
 486. 1836. Bloomfieldii II. Lond. Longman. 8. 
 
 487. 1836. Valpyi IV. Lond. Valpy. 8. 
 
 488. 1836. Oxonii. typ. acad. 12. 
 
 (472.) 1836. Jaumanni. Monach. Lindauer. 8. 
 
 (462.) 1836. Olasguce. Brookman. 24. 
 
 [ 1836. Scholefield. gr. angl. Deighton & Bell. Cambridge. 
 
 16.] 
 
 491. 1837. Cardwellii. Oxon. typ. acad. 8. 
 
 492. 1837. Trollopii. Lond. Eickerby. 8. 
 498. 1837. Berol. Nauck. gr. germ. 8. 
 
 494. 1837. Bloomfieldii [Amer. I.]. Boston. Perkins. 8. 
 
 (470.) 1837. Lachmanni I. Berol. Reimer. 12. 
 
 (467.) 1837. Brossetii. Paris. Didot. 24. 
 
 [(536.) 1837. GRiESBACHLiNA. Lond. Taylor & Walton. 16.] 
 
 [(627.) 1837. Bloomfieldii minor L Lond. 12.] 
 
 [ 1837. Aitton. Lond. 12.1 
 
514 EDITIONS OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 496. 1838. Londini. Parker. 16. 
 
 (390.) 1838. WiLSONii. rhilad. Haswell. 12.. 
 
 497. 1839. Kerstenii. Leod. Kersten. 8. 
 
 498. 1839. Belezii. Paris. Delalain. 12. 
 
 499. 1839. ScHOTTii IV. gr. lat. Lips. Earth. 8. 
 (453.) 1839. Leutschii. gr. lat. Lips. Serig. 8. 
 
 [ 1839. Griesbachiana. Aitton. Glasguce. 24.] 
 
 [ 1839. Bloomfieldii III. Lond. 8.] 
 
 501. 1840. Darollii. Tolos. Delsol. 32. 
 
 502. 1840. Knappii V. Hal. Orphan. 8. 
 
 503. 1840. Hahnii I. Lips. Tauchnitz. 8. 
 (388.) 1840. Dakinsii. Lond. Cadell. 12. 
 
 [(429, 563.) 1840. (Pseudo-Leusden.) Dean. gr. lat. Neo-Ebor.\2.] 
 
 504. 1841. Hahnii II. Lips. Tauchnitz. 16. 
 *505. 1841. Tischendorfii I. Lips. Koehler. 16. 
 
 506. 1841. Bloomfieldii IV. Lond. 8. 
 
 (473.) 1841. Greenfieldii. [Engles.] Philadelphiai. Perkins. 82. 
 
 [ 1841. Griesbachiana. Jjynd. 12.] 
 
 [(519.) 1841. ScHOLZiANA. Eng. Hexapla. Bagster. Lond. 4.] 
 
 508. 1842. [Hahn.] Robinsonii. Neo-Ebor. Leavitt. 12. 
 *609. 1842-1850. Lachmanni II. gr. lat. Berol. Reimer. 8. 
 
 510. 1842. Tischendorfii II. Paris. Didot. 12. 
 
 511. 1842. Tischendorfii III. gr. lat. Paris. Didot. 8. 
 
 512. 1842. Tischendorfii IV. [T's own No. III.] Pam. Didot. 12 
 
 515. 1842. Pharmacidis. Athen. 8. 
 
 [(567.) 1842. ScHOLZiANA. gr. angl. Bagster. Lond. 16.] 
 
 516. 1843. JowETTii. Cantabr. Pitt. 16. 
 
 517. 1843. Grinfieldii. Lond. Pickering. 8. 
 
 [(527.) 1843. Bloomfieldii minor III. Lond. Longman. 8.] 
 [ 1843. Bloomfieldii V. Lond. Longman. 8.] 
 
 518. 1844. [MiLLiANA.] Oxonii. typ. acad. 16. 
 
 519. 1844 [error for 1841]. Bagsteri Hexapla. Lond. 4. 
 
 520. 1844. Venetiis. 
 
 521. 1844. Theilii L Lips. Tauchnitz. 16. 
 
 [(563.) 1844. (Pseudo-Leusden.) gr. lat. Dean. Neo-Ebor. 12.] 
 
 [(527.) 1845. Bloomfieldii minor IV. Lond. Longman. 12. 
 
 523. 1845. Theilii Polyglott. Bielefeld. Velhagen. 8. 
 (508.) 1845. [Hahn.] Robinsonil Neo-Ebor. Leavitt. 12. 
 [ 1845. Valpyi minor. Whittaker. Lond. 12.] 
 
 [(483.) 1845. Knappiana. Pattonii. Neo-Ebor. Riker. 4. J 
 
 624. 1846. MuRALTi minor. Hamburg. Meissner. 16. 
 
EDITIONS OF tflE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 515 
 
 (470.) 1846. Lachmanni I. BeroL Reimer. 12. 
 
 525. [(494)] 1846. Bloomfieldii. Boston. Perkins. 8. 
 (473.) 1846. Greenfieldii. [Engles.] Philad. Perkins. 32. 
 
 [(473.) 1846. Greenfieldii. [Engles.] Philad. Perkins & Purves. 
 32.] 
 
 [(519.) 1846. ScHOLZiANA. Eng. Hexapla. Bagster. 4.] 
 
 [ 1847. Lloydii. Oxon. E Typ. Acad. 18.] 
 
 526. 1847. Reithmayri. Monach. Weiss. 8. 
 
 (612.) 1847. Tischendorfii IV. [T.'s No. III.] Paris. Didot. 12. 
 
 527. 1847. Bloomfieldii [minor] V. Land. Longman. 12. 
 628. 1847. Veneiiis. Phoenix. 8. 
 
 (516.) 1847. JowETTii. Cantabr. Pitt. 16. 
 
 530. 1847. Spenceri. Neo-Ebor. Harper. 12. 
 [ 1847. Theilii (Polyglott.). Biel^.^ 
 
 [ 1847. Bloomfieldii VI. Lond. 8.] 
 
 [ 1847. ValpyiV. Lond. Bolin. 8.] 
 
 531. 1848. BuRTONi III. Oxon. Parker. 8. 
 (621.) 1848. Theilii II. Lips. Tauchnitz. 16. 
 (624.) 1848. MuRALTi major. Hamb. Meissner. 16. 
 
 [(511.) 1848. Tischendorfii V. (T.'s No. III.) gr. lat. Parh. 8.] 
 
 [(494.) 1848. Bloomfieldii (Amer. V.). Boston. Perkins. 8.] 
 
 *533. 1849. Tischendorfii V. [T.'s own No. IV.] Lips. Winter. 8. 
 *534. 1849-1861. Alfordii. Lond. 8. 
 
 (623.) 1849. Theilii triglott. [Polyglott.] Bielef. Velhagen. 8. 
 
 [(624.) 1849. MuRALTi. Hamb. Meissner. 16.] 
 
 [(663.) 1849. (Pseudo-Leusden.) gr. lat. Dean. Neo-Ebor. 12.] 
 
 536. 1850. [Griesbachiana.] Londini. Taylor & Walton. 16. 
 
 537. 1850. Tischendorfii VI. [T.'s own No. V.] Lips. Taucho 
 nitz. 8. 
 
 (521.) 1850. Theilii III. Lips. Tauch. 16. 
 
 (462.) 1860. Glasffuce. Brookman. 24. 
 
 [ 1850. Ex ed. Steph. Cambridge. 18.] 
 
 [ 1850. Scholefield. gr. engl. Cambridge. 16.] 
 
 [ 1850. Scholefield. gr. engl. Cambridge. 4.] 
 
 (512.) 1851. Tischendorfii IV. [T.'s own III.] Paris. Didot. 12. 
 
 616. 1861. Jowettil Cantabr. Pitt. 12. 
 
 (444.) 1851. Gratzii II. gr. lat. Mog. Kupferberg. 8. 
 
 540. 1851. Oxonii. 
 
 641. 1861. Veneiiis. 
 
 [ 1851. Large Print. Grit. Lond. Bagster. 8. J 
 
 642. 1852. Bdrtoni IV. Oxon. 8. 
 
516 EDITIONS OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 543. 1852. Theilii. gr. germ. Lips. Tauchnitz. 16. 
 
 (521.) 1862. Theilii IV. Lips, Tauchnitz. 16. 
 
 [ 1852. Large Print. Crit. Lond. Bagster. 8.] 
 
 [(530.) 1852. Spenceri. Neo-Ehor. Harper. 12.] 
 
 546. 1853. Valpyi V. [VI] Lond. Valpy. 8. 
 
 54V. 1853. Stuttgardt. gr. germ. Liesching. 8. 
 
 549. 1854. TiscHENDORFii VII. [T.'s own No. VI.] triglott 
 Lips. Avenarius. 8. 
 
 550. 1854. Theilii. gr. lat. Lips. Tauchnitz. 16. 
 
 551. 1854. Macmichaelis. [Whittaker. Lond.~\ 16. 
 
 (508.) 1854. [Hahniana.] Robinsonii. Neo-Ebor. Loavitt. 12. 
 553, 1854 [etc.]. Neo-Ebor. Amer. Bible Union, gr. angl. 4. 
 (523.) 1854. Theilii Polyglott. Bielef. Velhagen. 8. 
 (521.) 1854. Theilii V. Zips. Tauchnitz. 16. 
 [ 1854 sqq. Alford II. Lond. 8,] 
 
 [ 1854. Large Print. Crit. Lond. Bagster. 8.] 
 
 [(390.) 1854. WiLSONii. Philad. Lippincott, Grambo, & Co. 12.] 
 [(390.) sine anno (sed 1854.) Wilsonii. Phila. Barrington & 
 Haswell. 12.] 
 
 (549.) 1855. TiscHENDORFn VIL (T.'s own No. VI.] Ups. Men- 
 delssohn. 16. 
 (523.) 1855. Theilii Polyglott. Bielef. Velhagen. 8. 
 (536.) 1855. Londini. Walton & Maberly. 16. 
 
 555. 1855-61. Websteri [& Wilkinsonii]. Lond. Parker. 8. 
 [ 1855. Bloomfieldii IX. Lond. Longman. 8.] 
 
 [ 1855. Bloomfieldii minor VII. Lond. Longman. 12. 
 
 [(563.) 1855. (Pseudo-Leusden.) gr. lat. Lippincott. Philad. 12.] 
 
 556. 1856. Colonics Agripp. Soc. Bibl. 32. 
 
 557. 1856. BuRTONi V. Oxon. 8. 
 
 558. 1856. BuTTMANNi I. Lips. Teubner. 16. 
 (521.) 1856. Theilii VL Lips. Tauchnitz. 16. 
 
 1856. Jowettii. Colon. Brit. Bibl. Soc. 12.] 
 
 1856. MiLLiANA. Oxon. 16.] 
 
 1856. Dakinsii. Lond. Longmans.] 
 
 560. 1857. Cantabrigice. gr. angl. 12. 
 
 (508.) 1857. [Hahniana.] Robinsonil Neo-Ebor. Leavitt. 12. 
 (549.) 1857. Tischendorfii VIL [T.'s own No. VL Ed. acad. V.] 
 Lips. Mendelssohn. 16. 
 
 561. 1857 [1856-60]. Wordsworthii L Lond. Rivington. 4. 
 [(567.) 1857. ScHOLZiANA. gr. lat. Lond. Bagster. 4.] 
 
 [ 1857. Scholefieldiana. " R. 0." gr. angl. Lond. 16.] 
 
EDrnONS OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 517 
 
 [ 1857-79. Tregellesii. Bagster. LondA.] 
 
 662. 1858. Londini. gr. angl. Bagster. 18. 
 
 (523.) 1858. Theilii Polyglott. Bielefeld. Velhagen. 8. 
 
 (521.) 1858. Theilii VII. Lij)s. Tauchnitz. 16. 
 
 (549.) 1858. TiscHENDORFii VII. [T.'s ed. VI.] gr. lat. Lips. 
 MendelsBolin. 8. 
 
 563. 1858. [Pseudo-Leusden.] Fhiladelphice.gr. l&t Lippincott. 
 12. 
 
 (390.) 1858. WiLSONii. Philad. Lippincott. 12. 
 
 (512.) 1859. Jageri [Tischendorfiana]. Paris. Didot. 12. 
 
 ♦565. 1859. Tischendorfii VIII. [crit. maj., T.'s ed. VII.] Lips. 
 Winter. 8. 
 
 (565.) 1859. Tischendorfii VIII. [crit. min., T.'s ed. VII.] Lips. 
 Winter. 16. 
 
 566. 1859. Bloomfieldii [minor] VIII. [Zone?.] 
 (457.) 1859. Greenfieldii. Lond. Bagster. 32. 
 (530.) 1859. Spenceri. Neo-Ebor. Harper. 12. 
 (536.) 1859. [Griesbachiana.] Lwidini. Bolin. 16. 
 
 567. 1859. [Bagster. Scholziana.] Neo-Ebor. Wiley. 16. 
 [ 1859 sqq. Wordsworthii II. Lortd. 8.] 
 
 [(563.) 1859. (Pseudo-Leusden.) gr. lat. Fhila. Lippincott. 12.] 
 
 [ 1859. MiLLiANA. E typ. Clarend. 4.] 
 
 [ 1859. MiLLiANA. E typ. Clarend. 16.] 
 
 [(390.) 1859. WiLSONii. Philad. Lippincott. 12.] 
 
 [ 1859. Scriveneri I. Cantabrigice. 16.] 
 
 568. 1860. BuTTMANNi II. Lips. Teubner. 16. 
 (524.) 1860. MuRALTi major. Hamb. Meissner. 16. 
 
 569. 1860 sqq. Alfordii IV. Lond. 8. 
 
 (519.) 1860. [Scholziana.] Bagsteri Hexapla. Lond. 4. 
 
 [(563.) 1860. (Pseudo-Leusden.) gr. lat. Phila. Lippincott. 12.] 
 
 [ 1860. Ornsbyi. Dublin. 8.] 
 
 [ 1860. Scriveneri IL Cantabr. 16.] 
 
 [(492?) 1860. Trolloph. Tegg. Lond. S.^ 
 
 [(524.) 1860. Muralti minor. Hamb. Meissner. 16.] 
 [ 1860, etc. Amer. Bibl. Union, gr. angl. Neo-Ebor. 4.] 
 [ 1860-61. Giles, gr. angl. Lmid. 12.] 
 
 [ 1861. "Narrowed." Scholziana. Land. Bagster. 12.] 
 
 [551?) 1861. Macmichaelis. Lond. Bell & Daldy. 16.] 
 
 [(511.) 1861. Tischendorfii IV. [T.'s No. III.] gr. lat. Didot 
 Paris. 8.] 
 
 [(649.) 1861. Tischendorfii VU. (T.'s ed. VL) Ups. Mendels. lU 
 
518 EDITIONS OF THE GKEEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 (53V.) 1862. TiscHENDORFii VL [T.'s ed. V.] Lips. Tauchnitz. 8. 
 
 672. 1862. BuTTMANxNi III. Berol Decker. 8. 
 [ 1861-63. WoRDSWORTHii III. Zone?. 8.] 
 
 573. 1862. LocHii. Ratisb, Manz. 8. 
 
 (550.) 1862. Theilii. gr. lat. Lips. Tauchnitz. 16. 
 
 [ 1862. ScRiVENERi III. Cantabr. 16.] 
 
 574. 1863, Colon. Agr. gr. angl. 16. 
 [ 1863 Lloydii. Oxon. 18.] 
 
 [ 1863. Lloydii. Oxow. 4.] 
 
 [(491.) 1863. Cardwellii. gr. angl. Oxoru Macmillan. 8.] 
 
 [(577.) 1863 & 64. B. Wilsonii Emphat. Diaglott. Geneva, HI.] 
 
 575. 1864. Colon. Agr. gr. germ. 16. 
 
 (549.) 1864. TISCHENDORFII VII. [T.'s ed. VI.] Lips. Mendels. 16L 
 
 [(527.) 1862. Bloomfieldii niinor IX. Lond. Longman. 12.] 
 
 (549.) 1864. TiscHENDORFii YII. [T.'s ed. VL] gr. germ. Lips. 
 
 Mendelssohn. 8. 
 
 (568.) 1864. BuTTMANNi. Lips. Teubner. 16. 
 
 [ 1864. Hansellii. Oxon. 8.] 
 
 [ 1864. WoRDSWORTHii IV. Lond. 8.] 
 
 (568.) 1865. BuTTMANNi. lAps. Teuhner. 16. 
 
 577. 1865. [B. Wilsonii Emphat. Diaglott.] Neo-Ebor. "Fowler. 
 
 [ 1865. Ornsbyi. Dublin. Duffy. 16.] 
 
 [ 1865. WORDSWORTHII V. Lond. 4.] 
 
 [ 1865. Theilii Polyglott. 8.] 
 
 (521.) 1865. Theilii VIIL Lips. Tauchnitz. 16. 
 [ 1865. The Twofold N. T. Green. Bagster. Lond. 8.] 
 
 [ 1866. WORDSWORTHII VI. Lond. 4.] 
 
 [ 1866. Candyl Lond. 8.] 
 
 [ 1866. Duncan. Simpkin.] 
 
 [(549.) 1867. TiscHENDORFii ed. acad. V. Lips. Mendelssohn. 16.] 
 [ 1867. ScRiVENERi IV. Cantabr. 16.] 
 
 [ 1867. Candyi. Lond. 8.] 
 
 [ 1867. Candyi minor. Lond. 8.] 
 
 [ 568. 1867. BUTTMANNI III. Lips. Teubner. 16.] 
 [(508.) 1867. [Hahn.] KoBiNsoNii. Neo-Ebor. Appleton. 12.] 
 [(508.) 1868. [Hahn.] Robinsonii. Neo-Ebor. Appleton. 12.] 
 [ 1868. MiLLiANA. Oxon. 12.] 
 
 [ 1868. MiLLiANA. Oa;ow. 4.] 
 
 [(494.) 1868. Bloomfieldii (Amer. XIV.). PUla. Lippincott. 8.] 
 
 *581. 1869[-72]. Tischendorfii IX. [ed. crit. maj. VIIL] Lips. L 
 Winter [post., Giesecke & Devrient]. 8. 
 
EDITIONS OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 519 
 
 [ 1869. Alfordii minor. Fhiladelphice. Lippincott. 8.] 
 
 [ 1869. Alfordii ►minor. Lond. Bivington. 8.] 
 
 [ 1869. Lloydii. Oxon. Clarend. 16.] 
 
 582. 18Y0 [-1876]. Westcottii & Hortii. Caniabr. 12. [Pri- 
 vate issue.] 
 
 Bloomfieldii minor XII. Lor^. Longmans. 12. 
 Bagster. gr. angl, Lond. 4.] 
 Lloydii. Oxon. E typ. Clarend. & Macmillan. 12.] 
 MiLLiANA. 0x011. Macmillan. 16.] 
 WoRDSwoRTHii. Lond. Rivington. (ed. vii.) 8.] 
 Tregellesii. Parts I.-V. Gospels, Acts, Epistles. 
 Bagster. Lond. Also, Neo-Ebor. "Wiley. 4.] 
 [ 1870. Travelers' N. T. gr. angl. Neo-Ebor. Wiley. 16.] 
 
 [ 1870. Tischendorfu. ed. acad. Lips. Mendelssohn. 16.] 
 
 
 1870. 
 
 
 (1870.) 
 
 
 1870. 
 
 
 1870. 
 
 
 1870. 
 
 
 1870. 
 
 SINE ANNI NOTA. 
 
 (470.) Lachmanni. Berol. Beimer. 12. 
 
 (457.) Greenfieldii. Lond. Bagster. 32. [Also, Neo-Ehor. Wiley; 
 also, Phila. Lippincott.] 
 (567.) Lond. Bagster. 16. 
 
 583. Fix. Paris. Dezobry. 12. 
 
 584. (Lefranc.) Paris. Belin. 24. 
 
 (473.) Greenoeldil [EiNgles.] Philadelphice. Peck. 32. 
 [(473.) Greenfieldii. [Engles.] Philadelphice. Bliss. 473.] 
 [(473.) Greenfieldii. [Engles.] Philadelphice. Lippincott. 32.] 
 [(455.) Bagsteri triglotta. Lond. 4.] 
 
 [(390.) WiLSONii. Philadelphice. Barrington & Haswell. 12.] 
 [ The Twofold N. T. Green. Lond. Bagster. 8.] 
 
 [ E typ. acad. Cantabr. & Lond. Rivington. 16 (no paging).] 
 
 [ Large Print Grit. Lond. Bagster. 8.] 
 
 [(567.) ScHOLZiANA. Grit. gr. angl. Bagster. Lond. 16.] 
 [(667.) ScHOLZiANA. Grit. gr. angl. Wiley. Neo-Ebor. 16.] 
 [(508.) [Hahn.] RoBiNSONii. Neo-Ebor. Leavitt & Allen. 12] 
 [ SCHOLZIANA. "Narrowed." Lond. Bagster. 12.] 
 
 [ Lond. Bagster. 16 (ex Polyglottis.)] 
 
 [ Lond. Bagster. 32.] 
 
 [(483.) Pattonii. Neo-Ebor. Riker. 4. (In " The Student's Bi 
 ble.")] 
 
 35 
 
520 EDITIONS OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 II. SUPPLEMENTARY LIST OF EDITIONS, 1871 TO 1882. 
 
 1871. B. Wilson. Emphatic Diaglott. Geneva^ III. (Reuss, 677.) 
 1871. Twofold N. T. Green. London. Bagster. 8. (With App.) 
 1871. AxFORD. Boston. Lee & Shepard. 8. (Reuss, 534.) 
 
 1871. JowETT. Colonice, 12. 
 
 1872. Scrivener V. Cantahr. 16. 
 1872. Theile X. Lips. Tauchnitz. 16. 
 1872. Wordsworth VI. Lond. 8. 
 
 1872-77. Tischendorf VIII. (new ed. crit. minor.). Lips. Mendels- 
 sohn. 16. 
 
 1872. Tischendorf. Lips. Tauchnitz. 8. 
 
 1873. Scrivener VL Cantahr. 16. 
 
 1873. MiLLiANA. Oxon. E typ. Clarend. & Macmillan. 16. 
 1873. Alford. Boston. Lee & Shepard. 8. (Reuss, 534.) 
 1873. Tischendorf (ad ed. VIII. conformata). Lips. Tauchnitz. 8. 
 1873. Tischendorf IX. (ad ed. VIIL conformata). Lips. Brock- 
 hans. 8. 
 
 1873. Tischendorf. ed. acad. lAps. Mendelssohn. 16. 
 
 1874. BuTTMANN. Teuhner. Lips. 8. 
 
 1874. Analytical Gr. T. Lond. Bagster. 16. 
 
 1875. Lond. Geo. Bell. 16. (Reuss, 536.) 
 1875. Scrivener VII. Cantahr. 16. 
 1875. Tischendorf. ed. acad. Lips. 16. 
 
 1875. Hahn IL Kelly. Duhlin. 16. (Reuss, 504.) 
 1875. [Hahn.] Robinson. Neo-Ehor. Appleton. 12. (Reuss, 508.) 
 1875. PsEUDO - Leusden. gr. lat. Philadelphia. Lippincott. 12. 
 (Reuss, 563.) 
 
 1875. ScHOLzi ANA. gr. engl. New Ywk. Wiley. 16. (Reuss, 567.) 
 
 1875. The same. Lond. Bagstey; and iV(?w York. Wiley. 
 
 1876. Brit. & For. Bib. Soc. (In Paragraphs.) Cambridge. Univ 
 Press. 32. 
 
 1876. Tischendorf. Lips. Tauchnitz. 8. 
 
 1877. ScHOLZiANA. gr. engl. New York. Wiley. 16. (R^uss, 507.) 
 1877. Englishman's Gr. Test. Bagster. Lond. 8. 
 
 1877. MiLLiANA. Oxon. Clarend. 16. 
 
 1877. Lloydii. Oxon. Clarend. & Macmillan. 16. 
 
 1877. Scrivener VIII. Cantahr. 16. 
 
 1877i Wqrps WORTH VII, loKid, Bivittgton. 4, 
 
EDITIONS OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 521 
 
 1877. JowETT. Lond. Brit. & For. Bib. Soc. 16. 
 
 1877. TiscHENDORF. ed. acad. Lips. Mendelssohn. 16. 
 
 1878. Alford. Boston. Lee & Shepard. 8. (Reuss, 534.) 
 
 1878. Pseudo-Leusden. gr. lat. Philada. Lippincott. 12. (Reuss, 
 568.) 
 
 1878. B. Wilson. Emphatic Diaglott. N. Y. Wells. (Reuss, 577.) 
 
 1878. Tischendorf. Lips. Tauchnitz. 8. 
 
 1878. Tischendorf. ed. acad. Lips. Mendelssohn. 16. 
 
 1878. ScHOLEFiELDiANA. " E. A." gT. engl. lA)nd.. <k Cambridge. \%. 
 
 1879. ScHOLEFiELDiANA. " E. A." gr. ctigl. Lond. <t Cambridge. 16. 
 1879. Tischendorf. Lips. Tauchnitz. 8. 
 
 1879. Lond. Geo. Bell. 16. (Reuss, 536.) 
 1879. Lloyd. Oxon. Clarendon. 16. 
 
 1879. ScRiTENER. New York. Holt. 16. 
 
 1880. Tischendorf, LAps. Brockhaus. 8. 
 
 1880. Tischendorf. ed. acad. LAps. Mendelssohn. 16. 
 1880. B. Wilson. Emphatic Diaglott. N. Y. Wells. (Reuss, 577.) 
 1880. Pseudo-Leusden. gr. lat. Phila. Lippincott. 12. (Reuss, 563.) 
 1880. ScHOLZiANA. gr. engl. Neio York. Wiley. (Reuss, 567.) 
 1880. Alford. Boston. Lee & Shepard. 8. (Reuss, 534.) 
 
 1880. 'Ev BatriXet'^ \^Basel\ (Bibelgesellschaft.) sine editoris no- 
 mine. 16. Also, the same, Riggenbach & Stockmeyer, Also, an 
 edition with Greek church-lessons and Psalms appended. 
 
 1881. Tischendorf. Lips. Tauchnitz. 8. 
 
 1881. Tischendorf. ed. acad. Lips. Mendelssohn, 16. 
 1881. Scrivener, (A. V, text,) Cambridge. Univ. Press. 16. 
 1881. Palmer. (Rev. V. text.) Oxford. Clarendon. 16. 
 ♦1881. Westcott & HoRT. Cambr. & Lond. Macmillan. 16. 
 1881-82, Westcott & Hort (Schaff). New York. Harpers. 16. 
 1881, Tischendorfiana, Von Gebhardt. LAps. Tauchnitz, 8. 
 1881. Tischendorfiana, Von Gebhardt. gr, germ. (Luther, Rev.) 
 lAps. Tauchnitz, 8. 
 
 1881, Perowne. Cambridge. (Only part yet published.) 
 
 1882, Palmer. (Rev, Vers, text with marginal references.) Ox- 
 ford. Clarendon, 8, 
 
 1882, Westcott & Hort. gr. engl, (Rev, Vers,) New York. Har- 
 pers, 16. 
 
 WITHOUT DATE. 
 The Student's Analytical. Scholziana, Lond. Bagster. Small 4. 
 (Tischendorfiana.) Cohn's Hexaglott. Lond, Abraham J. Jai. 4. 
 
522 EDITIONS OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 ADDITIONS TO REUSS's LIST, UP TO 1870.* 
 
 [(457 ) 1830. Greenfieldii Polymicrian. London. Bagster. 32.] 
 
 [(563.) 1838. Pseudo-Leusden. Neo-Ebor. Collins, also Dean. 12.] 
 
 [(473.) 1840. Greenfieldii. (Engles.) PhUadelphioB. Perkins. 32.] 
 
 [ 1840. Griesbachiana. Londini. Taylor & Wliittaker. 12.] 
 
 [(473.) 1844. Greenfieldii. (Engles.) Fhiladelphice. Perkins. 32. J 
 
 [(508.) 1845. [Hahn.] Robinsonii. Neo-Ebor. Leavitt 8.] 
 
 [ 1847. Lloydii. Oxon. E typ. acad. 18.] 
 
 [(494.) 1848. Bloomfieldii (Amer. V.). PhiladelphicB. Perkins. 8.] 
 
 Also, the same with a slightly different title-page.] 
 
 [ 1851. Trollopii JI. Lond. Tegg. 8.] 
 
 [(563.) 1853. Pseudo-Leusden. Gr.-Lat. Neo-Ebor. Dean. 12.] 
 
 [(473.) 1854. Greenfieldil (Engles.) Phila. Clark ftHesser. 32.] 
 
 [(527.) 1854. Bloomfieldii minor. London. Longman. 8.] 
 
 [(390.) 1860. Wilson. Phila. Lippincott. 12.] 
 
 [(563.) 1863. Pseudo-Leusden. Phila. Lippincott. 12. 
 
 [(508.) 1870. [Hahn.] Robinsonii. Neo-Ebor. Appleton. 12.] 
 
 ADDITIONS TO SUPPLEMENTARY LIST, SINCE 1870.* 
 
 1873. Gr.-Eng. Cologne. Brit. & For. Bible Soc. Sq. 16. 
 
 1876. MiLLiANA. Oxon. E typ. Clarend. & Macmillan. 16. 
 
 1876 (misdated 1866). Cologne. Brit. & For. Bible Soc. 1 6. 
 
 1876. B. Wilson. Emphatic Diaglott. New York. Wells. 12. 
 (Reuss, 577.) 
 
 1876. In Paragraphs. Gr.-Eng. Cambridge. Univ. Press for Brit 
 & For. Bible Soc. Sq. 16. 
 
 1878. Theile (Von Gebhardt). Lipsice. Tauchnitz. 16. 
 
 1879. Hahn. Lipsice. P. Bredt. 12. 
 
 1880. Theile (Von Gebhardt). Gr.-Lat. Lipsice. Tauchnitz. 12. 
 1880. Wilson. Fhiladelphice. Claxton, Kemsen, & Haffelflnger. 
 
 12. (Reuss, 390.) 
 
 1880. Gr.-Germ. Berlin. Brit. & For. Bible Soc. 16. 
 
 1881. Gr.-Eng. London. Soc. Prom. Chr. Knowledge. 16. 
 1881. Lloyd. Oxon. E typ. Clarend. & Macmillan. 16. 
 
 * These additions have beeu »ade since the foregoing pages were 
 electrotyped. 
 
EDITIONS OF THE GKEEK NEW TESTAMENT. 523 
 
 1882. SciiOLZiANA. Critical Gr.-Eng. New York. Wiley. 16. 
 
 1882. Scrivener. The Parallel N. T. Gr.-Eng. (A. V. text, with 
 A. V. and R. V.) Cambridge. Univ. Press. Small 4. 
 
 1882. Palmer. The Parallel N. T. Gr.-Eng. (R. V. text, with 
 A. V. and R. V.) Oxford. Clarendon Press. Small 4. 
 
 1883 (printed 1882). Theile(Von Gebhardt). XIII. lAps. Tauch- 
 nitz. 16. 
 
 Note. — Eight editions in the list of Dr. Reuss, denoted by a ? in- 
 stead of a number, were classed by him as " Editiones Dubije," 
 because he had not been able personally to verify or disprove their 
 existence. Eighty-four others, mentioned by former bibliographers, 
 he classed as '* Editiones SpuRiiE," and excluded from his list, having, 
 as he thinks, disproved their existence. His list (the " Index Editio- 
 num" above referred to) comprises 757 editions. Of these, 83 are 
 here omitted, being only portions of the N. T., with two others, found 
 to be English, leaving 672. Two of the portions, however, are re- 
 tained, to show their historical place: viz., Bentley's Specimen, 1720 ; 
 and Birch's Gospels, 1788 — all that the burning of the royal press at 
 Copenhagen suffered to appear. The new additions to this list of 
 672, made above, number 169. 
 
 The Supplementary List, 1870-1883, comprises 82 editions, making 
 the entire total 924. 
 
 This list discloses the fact that many repetitions exist which have 
 been either not catalogued separately, or not catalogued at all. (See, 
 for example, Nos. 106, 152, 183 [anno 1698], in the list above, as well 
 as the editions of Bloomfield and Alford.) The undated editions 
 have mostly been many times reissued. Besides this, the English 
 presses at Oxford, Cambridge, and London, the Scotch at Glasgow 
 and Edinburgh, the British and Foreign Bible Society's at Cologne 
 and elsewhere on the Continent, have all been busy in printing the 
 Greek Testament; and it is scarcely to be supposed that all their 
 issues have been here enumerated. The same is true of the Ameri- 
 can editions. 
 
 It is beyond question that the total number of printed copies of 
 the entire New Testament, estimated on the basis of 1000 for each 
 edition, must exceed one million. Beyond that we can only guess ; 
 but the number must be great. The British and Foreign Bible Soci- 
 ety has issued as many as 60,000 of a single edition; so that the 
 basis of 1000, here taken, must be smaller than the average. 
 
624 EDITIONS OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 The number of editions of the entire Greek New Testament issued 
 in America, including reprints of European editions, together with 
 (the comparatively few of) those actually printed abroad, but bearing 
 an American imprint, is over a hundred and fifty. The number of 
 editions of harmonies, and other portions of the Greek text, issued in 
 America is a little over one hundred. See my article, " The Greek 
 Testament as Published in America," Trans. Amer. Philol. Assoc.^ vol. 
 xiii., 1882; and "American Greek Testaments: A Critical Bibliogra- 
 phy of the Greek New Testament as Published in America (Philadel- 
 phia, Pickwick & Comp.), 1883." 
 
 Postscript to Third Edition.— The number of new editions of flie 
 Greek New Testament issued since 1883, which have come to my knowl- 
 edge, is rather more than thirty; but many are repetitions from stereotype 
 plates, or impressions in stock furnished with a new date. The better 
 editions are driving the incorrect ones from the field. Of the older ones, 
 the various cheap Cambridge and Oxford editions, the critical Greek- 
 English (^Scholz), with some of the British Cologne editions, seem still to 
 hold their ground. The 1881 editions of Scrivener and Palmer respec- 
 tively, and the " Parallel " editions of each, have been issued a few times 
 with later dates. Von Gebhardt's Tischendorf, Von Gebhardt's Theile, 
 and Tischendorfs small "Editio Academica" have likewise been reissued 
 twice or more. Westcott and Hort's edition was reprinted again in 1881, 
 with the verse-division conformed to the original one of K. Stephen, 1551, 
 and the table of Old Test, quotations removed to the first volume. A 
 school edition of Westcott and Hort was published by Macmillan & Co., 
 Cambridge and London, 1885, and again in 1887. A second issue of the 
 American (Harpers') Westcott and Hort appeared in 1885 ; and a school 
 edition (without Dr. SchafTs Introduction) the same year. Another new 
 issue of the American edition, with improvements in the text communi- 
 cated by the editors, and with Dr. SchafTs Introduction revised, appeared 
 in 1886. The Greek-English, also, reappeared in 1885, and again in 
 1886. Von Gebhardt's Tischendorf, editio minor, Tauchnitz, Leipzig, 
 1887; and The Resultant Greek Testament, by Richard Francis Wey- 
 mouth, D. Lit., Elliott Stock, London (71. d., but 1886). Scrivener's 
 " editio major " of his Greek New Test, appeared in 1887 ; Bell, Cam- 
 bridge and London, and Holt, New York. An edition of the Greek New 
 Test., with notes based on De Wette's, is in progress ; E. Anton, Haller 
 Gospels (all thus far), 1886. 
 
 Isaac ^. Hai4^ 
 
 New York, June 6, 1887, 
 
APPENDIX 11. 
 
 FAC-SIMILES OF^ STANDARD EDITIONS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 GEEEK TESTAMENT. 
 
 I. CoMPLUTENSiAN PoLYGLOT, 1514. The first printed Greek Testa- 
 
 ment. 
 
 1. Fac-simile of title-page (reduced). Hat and Shield of Car- 
 
 dinal Ximenes. Size of original, 11^ in. X 1 in. 
 
 2. Fac-simile of Colophon (reduced), Rev. xxii. 17-21. Size of 
 
 original, ll^g in. X 7 in. 
 
 II. Erasmus, 1516. The first published Greek New Testament. 
 
 1. Fac-simile of title-page (reduced). Size of original, 8f in. X 
 
 4/^ in. 
 
 2. Fac-simile of last page (reduced), Rev. xxii. 8-21, showing the 
 
 last six verses translated into Greek from the Vulgate. 
 Size of original, 9 in. X 6 in. 
 
 III. CoLiN^us's New Testament, 1534. Text of Erasmus, with vari- 
 
 ations, partly from the Complutensian, partly from exam- 
 ination of new MSS. Transition to the edition of Stephens. 
 
 1. Fac-simile of title-page. Full size. 
 
 2. Fac-simile of page containing 1 John. v. 7. Full size. 
 
 rV. Stephens's Editio Regia^ 1550. 
 
 1. Fac-simile of title-page of Gospels and Acts (reduced). Size 
 
 of original, 10^ in. X 5f in. 
 
 2. Fac-simile of page containing Matt. viii. 12-30, with readings 
 
 contrary to all his authorities. Size of original, lljij in- 
 X 7^5 in., including marginal notes, 
 
526 LIST OF FAC-SIMILES. 
 
 V. Stephens's Edition of 1551. The first edition with the modern 
 
 versicular division. 
 
 1 . Fac-simile of title-page. Size of original, 4^g in. X 23^^ in. 
 
 2. Fac-simile of fol. 18 b, Matt. vi. 13-17. The version of Eras- 
 
 mus always occupies the outer, the Yulgate always the in- 
 ner, column. The latter shows the absence of the Doxology 
 at the end of the Lord's Prayer, which is present in the 
 other texts. Size of original, 43-^ in. X 85-^^ in., including 
 marginal notes. 
 
 VI. Beza's Edition, 1598. The latest M Beza's folio editions, and 
 
 one of those which formed the basis of the common Eng- 
 lish version of 1611. 
 
 1. Fac-simile of title-page. Size of original, 10| in. x 5^| in. 
 
 2. Fac-simile of page containing Rev. x. 9-xi. 8, showing the 
 
 unauthorized addition to the Greek text of 6 dyyeXog eiffrnKH, 
 and the corresponding Latin " adstititque Angelus," in xi. 1, 
 which has passed into our common English version. Size 
 of original, 11^^ in. X 6| in. 
 
 VII. Beza's Edition, 1604. The latest of Beza*s smaller editions 
 
 which could have aided in forming the text followed in our 
 common English version of 1611. 
 
 1. Fac-simile of title-page. Size of original, 6| in. X 3| in. 
 
 2. Fac-simile of page containing Heb. x. 36-xi. 6, showing Beza's 
 
 interpolation of " quis " in x. 38, Size of original, 6J in. X 
 3f in. 
 
 VIIL Elzevirs' Edition, 1633. The "Textus Receptus." 
 
 1. Fac-simile of title-page. Full size. 
 
 2. Fac-simile of page containing Rom. vi. 19-vii. 4, showing the 
 
 omission of tov vofiov in vii. 2. Full size. 
 
 IX. Walton's Polyglot Bible. 
 
 1. Fac-simile of general title-page. This is the title-page to the 
 first volume. The sixth volume has a full title-page like 
 the first. The other volumes, including the fifth volume 
 which contains the New Testament, are prefaced by sub- 
 titles only. Size of original, 14| in. X 9^ in. 
 % Fac-simile of left-hand page containing the Greek text, and 
 the Syriac and part of the Ethiopic versions, with corre- 
 sponding Latin translation, of 1 Tim. iii. 1 o-iv. 4. The opposite 
 
LIST OF FAC-SIMILES. 527 
 
 \ 
 (right-hand) page contains the " Versio Vulgata Latina," the 
 " Versio Arabica cum Interpietatione Latina," and the con- 
 tinuation of the "Versio ^thiopica cum Interpretations 
 Latina," of the same passage. Size of original, 15^^ in. 
 X 9^ in. 
 
 X. Mill's Edition, 1707. 
 
 1. Fac-simile of title-page (reduced). Size of original, 12| in. 
 
 X 7i in. 
 
 2. Fac-simile of page containing James ii, 12-23, with note at- 
 
 tempting to defend and justify a false reading in verse 18. 
 Size of original, 1 1^ in. x &l in. 
 
 XL Bengel's Edition, 1734. The first German critical edition. 
 
 1. Fac-simile of title-page. Size of original, 7| in. X 5| in. 
 
 2. Fac-simile of page containing Gal. vi. 7-18; Eph. i. 1-6; the 
 
 notes showing Bengel's judgment on the words iv 'E^go-y 
 in Eph. i. 1. Size of original, 7 J in. X 5^ in. 
 
 XIL Wetstein's Edition, 1751. 
 
 1. Fac-simile of title-page (reduced). Size of original, lOJ in. 
 
 X 5| in. 
 
 2. Fac-simile of p. 891, John vii. 51-viii. 2, showing a part of the 
 
 disputed HEPI M0IXAAIA02 HEPIKOnH. Size of orig- 
 inal, 10|^ in. X 5| in. 
 
 Xin. Griesbach's Second Edition, Halle and London, 1796-1806. 
 The first edition appeared at Halle, 1774 and 1775. 
 
 1. Fac-simile of title-page. Size of original, 6i| in. X 3| in. 
 
 2. Fac-simile of page containing Matt. xix. 29 -xx. 6, showing 
 
 some of the signs used to denote different grades of prob- 
 ability. Size of original, 6| in. X 3f in. 
 
 XIV. ScHOLz's Edition, 1830-1836. 
 
 1. Fac-simile of title-page. Size of original, 7 J in. X 5^ in. 
 
 2. Fac-simile of page containing 1 Tim. iii. 13-16. The notes 
 
 show the close following of Griesbach, even to an accidental 
 appropriation of the authorship of Griesbach's "Symbolas 
 Criticae." Size of original, 7J| in. X 5 J| in. 
 
 XV. Lachmann's Edition, 1831. The first text constructed accord- 
 
 ing to actual documentary evidence, without reference to the 
 " Textus Receptus." 
 
628 LIST OF PAC-SIMILE8. 
 
 1. Fac-simile of title-page. Size of original, 5^| in. X 3| in. 
 
 2. Fac-simile of page containing Mark xvi. 14-20 ; Luke i. 1-8. 
 
 Size of original, 5| in. X 3f in. 
 
 XVI. Lachmann's Edition, 1842-1850. 
 
 1. Fac-simile of title-page. Size of original, 6f in. X 3| in. 
 
 2. Fac-simile of page containing 1 Thess. iii. 2-8, showing the 
 
 division of the uncial writing followed in ver. 7 {to firjdtv 
 dffaivEaOai). The Latin version is the Vulgate, with the 
 readings of the most noted Codices. Size of original, 1^ in. 
 X 4 in. 
 
 XVIL Tischendorf's Edition, 1841. Made before the editor's jour- 
 neys, or established reputation as a critic. 
 
 1. J'ac-simile of title-page. Size of original, 5 J in. X 4 in. 
 
 2. Fac-simile of page containing 1 Tim. iii. 13-16, showing in 
 
 the note to ver. 16 the uncial variation which would produce 
 the reading of Sreog for og. Size of original, 5f in. X 3| in. 
 
 XVin. Tischendorf's Edition, 1869-1872. 
 
 1. Fac-simile of title-page. Size of original, 5| in. X 3f in. 
 
 2. Fac-simile of page containing 1 John v. 6-8, showing the 
 
 interpolated passage of the three heavenly witnesses. Size 
 of original, 6| in. X 3f in. 
 
 XIX. Tregellus's Edition, 1857-1879. 
 
 1. Fac-simile of title-page. Size of original, 7f in. X 6^ in. 
 
 2. Fac-simile of page containing Apocalypse i. 1-5. Size of 
 
 original, 7^^ in. X 6^^ in. 
 
 XX. Westcott and Hort's Edition, 1881. London and New York. 
 
 1. Fac-simile of title-page of the Harper edition from EngUsh 
 
 plates. Full size. 
 
 2. Fac-simile of p. 14, containing the Lord's Prayer. Full size. 
 
 XXI. Fac-simile of the engraved title (by C. Boel) in some copies of 
 
 the first edition of the Authorized Version of the Holy Bible. 
 Size of original, 13f in. X 8J| in. See description, p. 303. 
 
 In the preparation of these facsimiles the author has been kindly 
 aided by the Rev. Dr. Conant, of Brooklyn, Dr. Ezra Abbot, of Cam- 
 bridge, and Professor Isaac H. Hall, of Philadelphia, who are in pos- 
 session of some of the rarest editions of the Greek Testament. 
 
(L-1.) 
 
 IHouumtcrtatiicntum 
 
 flrccc t brine in acadetnta 
 
 coJnplutcnfiTiouiter 
 
 tmp3e(Tunit 
 
 i^lcverodginaffmtpcroidinem m totoopc 
 
 ^«ai>cn.inttur.bic(hidiefc Ifcioiooilie lui? fubijciuntur. 
 Vumuoij iibioffurrct ep\» eufcbi»pipbili ad larpianuoc 
 cjandigquiiiuojeuagdioiu . Sr quiturbtmcepa piolo«u9 
 •aN^ll^*" r*'' t««rmfu5 psppi j ah) f infdri t>«cton6 paologi. 
 ♦ oil Dec racff Jut qumtuoi eu»^cli« greco rrrmoe in lutina 
 »! »lfroiiymftrSn»io«fcopporiIo Dt-idtffijuuturbuoort 
 mn, .i. i"'' f *'F"'*'"'"'"'o< *"• TP»"'':i euibtlii bia« 
 £!"'*"■'?? •I?''" Pdicseioir. t martyjio ciufde.Gufrtdui po 
 "«OrP«tt><ftfl Hut arjumcu ibcodowi iociciie grcci tmi 
 
 naillimi ■■ epTaa btipMiii : Un tpbe canoniat: t iie ar9iht 
 alia in cafdcalienue soctoiie greet tanowMMi.K^kofl Uec if* 
 qull(urcpleip^cbH-p9ull:cur((^»llc>u«tcA«oplbue;oMcii 
 interpKtanone latma t^udi beah Nwowymie re^tdt 2>«d< 
 fubtugilur vocabulanu gr^ cu i-6t»ie« oee bictioc e tohu^aa 
 lulcdainfnli r infupcr fapienlie » <:<■< riaflici gircc t |««m« fU 
 btcuifTima quada in initio ad grt rae Imcnjettroddciio*. "po 
 nrcmo loco libiu ilaudunt wierpi««ide» oirt toMM now te 
 (tanienti vorabnloiuin queianisrecam qua bcbxaica i ch«l' 
 daicam ibintafunjttjTnolosiQabinwomattbMvfujad fin* 
 %pooitvpriB. 
 
 680 
 
(I. -2.) 
 
 Spocalppfis. 
 
 Ca^Fpir. 
 
 \J/d>p*£pXE<J8a3/o'©E^cop*AaBETco*Cf2la3p*2coH^ 
 *Au3p£at». 'oiapTvpcD "'cyto ' cjapTi'aKovo^iTi 
 /■Tov^'A6you<;/"fH(;'"njpoq)HT£i'a(;/"Tou'BiBAi 
 ov'louTOu'£diili<;'Einon'En'avTd'ETneHOQi*eir 
 *cwT6p/ o*0£6<;/Ta(;' ETT{d'iTAHyd(;na<;' ye YP°^ 
 ja8vaq*£p/'Tco'BiBAicDMouTQ>.'Kai"EdiJ"7K'a96 
 TkM'onriTCDp^ Aoyooy/Tov ' Bi0Aiou/TH(; ' ajpo=» 
 9HTE«aQ'TavTw<;,"a9£Pvo>/o'e£o<;/To'aiEpo<;'av 
 TO V ■ ono/Tov * Ivi Ao v/TH (;'3coH<;"'Kar £K / TH (j'no 
 AecD<;/THC*ay ta(;/TCDp''yE ypcumEj;cDp'E|;/Tco*^ fl i 
 BAias'TO\JrTco.'"AEy£i/o " juapTvpcbii'TauTcfpcxi 
 ^Xoxiai ' TaXv.•aAlH^/.'^;al .* EpXov ' Kvpi e'ih^ 
 00v./M'xdpi<;/TOVKvpiou*iHao\>'XpiOTOv*ju8 
 ToCrodjrrasp/TCDij'ayicDji.'omHii. 
 
 TeAoq/lHt; *craioKcu\u^/Ea5<. 
 
 •wmat:r\VfuIt'flccip(at*aquam*v&ci» 
 'srctie- ' lContcfte:"ouni*omn«*auJiaiU 
 •'virrb3»'p:cp|?crie'Iibn cyxocccoctONXa) 
 'bui'>.'Si'4» 'appofumi'aci'bcc'appona 
 • ofueTiip .T ' illu)'pl3^a6' fcnpraa cccoccd 
 ,*m libio'ilto. 'JSiTrquw'oiminucritoco 
 'oe'vcrbia ' libji'pzopbcft'c .ccccecccccco 
 'l)niun:"aufcrct'bcuo' partcs'cius ccoa» 
 •ocMibio'vitc t'pc'duitatc ccccooooccoo 
 »fctartbcfcH0''quc»f<:ript3"'fQ:'m'libK3 ccoo 
 'irto.'"Z3icif4Tcftimomii"pbibcrifto?.'e 
 ria''vaiio' dro:'ame.'®eni'oik'idu.coco 
 ' iSraria'oni noftn''icru 'd?a(h 'cuj cocoao 
 •omnibue'vobie/ 2lmcn» 
 
 explidi liber *ap(KalYpfie. 
 
 i^eo0rdcf99» 
 
 ^^^s^z^M^^mr^m 
 
 ^d pcrpctuam laudemcr g(o:iamj 
 
 tax bonumnonh kSudytittiboc dcrofzaaamopm noui tdla 
 
 sntati t liba vitt ^Ktia Iaiiiiiiq5 djaractcnbue noutter impzcf 
 
 film atq; (tudiofiflime anoidatuimfeltd fine abfolutli dl to 
 
 tMcptedarffltnta Coplutnifi vmucrfitate : oe madato x 
 
 fimipdbua "^xaaenMixni tn cbnflo patrist iliuDnf 
 
 finubftiMmun fttttne -f i^fd Xtmcnc; be Cifne 
 
 foedoAI/aiKir l&albuicfsnaciRomane ecdie 
 
 pidbTtehCarduialte bifpanieSrcbicpi to 
 
 kcuu * feifpan-ap pamarie acrcgnoy 
 
 calleUearcbicaceIlan):indunha tfokr 
 
 tia bonoubibe vrh Hmsldi gitiU4 
 
 mi t>fS»ocuio arris impztfoae 
 
 ma^jftri.SffliobDmmi ^bfl 
 
 kfimo qum^entdlmo &e« 
 
 cimo qumo . Jt>tnSa 
 
 Motar^Dicbedmo* 
 
 531 
 
NO VVM IN 
 
 flfamentiiQmnftdiIigHHrrabER.ASMO roteuodamo 
 
 imJjgnifaimfiCemcadamnijiio g)Itimadgraaamueritatcin,«c* 
 
 nimftiam admiilcomm vanaf^ lingua codicum, eonimc^ uo 
 
 CEnimfimol dl cmendaromm fidem , poftremo ad pre 
 
 bariffimoramautonmi dtationem,emendadonem 
 
 &mt5apt€tarionem^f2qpur,Origenis, Chiy 
 
 £iflomi,CyriIIi,Vu!garii, Hieronymi^C^' 
 
 prianiVAmbrofii, Hilarii, Auguftii 
 
 tn,utt2Lxu.Annota.tionibus,(^az 
 
 leAorem doceant,quid qua 
 
 radonemutatumiic 
 
 QuiTqufs igitur 
 
 amasuc' 
 
 ram 
 
 Theolo/ 
 
 giam,Icge,cogno 
 
 fee, ac ddnde fudica, 
 
 Neq^ ftatun offendere, fi 
 
 quidmutatum offenderiSjled 
 
 expende.num in melius mutatutti (iCt 
 
 APVD INCLYTAM 
 GBRAANIAE BASII^ABAAfc 
 
 CVPl PRIVIUEGIO 
 MAXmiLIANI CAESARIS AVGVST1L 
 NB Q.V1S AI>IVS IN SACRA ROMA<^ 
 Nl IMPERII DITIONE, INTRA Q.VATV 
 OR ANN'OS EXCVDAT, AVT BkLilEI 
 BXCVSVn IfflPORTHT* 
 
 532 
 
(11.-2.) 
 
 AnOKAA.lt-|S 
 
 APOCALYPSIS 
 
 iflffOiaVW /aKVUOlTos iiot TauTct,)(Oci Xl' 
 rajBu)i,oja/*.jl.aru»J^otfXo5 o-a faf «/<.< *) -ffi/ 
 
 C<rt>(pW/J tfO\>'3IJO<})KTMjU,C^T5/JTXJOUirTop 
 
 TOVft ^07005 Tou /li«6Aiow Tov'rov, 1^ ^j5 
 
 ?IwbV^§ 9SI TijOfpxTtiai; T £.ieAi» "reTov^oTi 
 
 1^0 rwrw/ijfUTtuffaTu'VTi.iyo (T/xoaostTixeO: 
 •»6ifro iTi, ngr) a-y/o? et^fao&iiTM tr/, ng^ 
 
 V*ov,a'7ro<r»irrtitx«5o>wc'P tfVoju 5iuT<n/* 
 
 '''I^TOgjUgtlj'V^aTO^.Maxaf/oi oi -jroiouw / 
 TIC To^ <VV7*Xa$ iuTW^yfa VscftC jl o'^ouff/a ^u 
 
 01 M(fcoXoAa';T«a,Mai'wa5 (^"Xap^fuu-noi 
 Xo/»/A.oBjtJwyTj»jK(rfltt vjxJp Tonn-oCTCtti \x/ 
 
 ?.ofi^<tJSJSimra If ucTof ^"lic; <ro)jio/;» ov^- 
 /fcOfrujotSartJTctip warri iROu'ofTi TDUe.Xo7 
 
 Tie a<feufi «3^5r Xwu;! ShSM ^ 'it^o^HfuM^ 
 5y«niil5WTHZOT.«Xaf'5''»xujfcMV3p ™/ 
 
 angelf cpi mihi hac oftendebat E^ du 
 cicmihi. Videne feceris. Coferuuscni 
 ruus fii,&fratxuiuo^^phetai^8C cojr 
 quf fcruant uerba ^phetia: Iibri huius. 
 Dcum adora. Ec dicit mf hi. Nc figna^ 
 ueris uerba propheri^ Iibri huius.Tc* 
 pus enim prope efi:. Qulnocer, nooeaC 
 adhuc . SL qui in fordibus eii: , fordefcac 
 adhucK qui iuftus eft , iuftificetur ad/ 
 hue, & fetus fcrificetur adhucK eccc uc 
 nio cito,& merces mea mecii eft.ut red/ 
 da unJcuiqjut opus illius erit- Ego fum. 
 alpha K.f2,primus SC nouiflimus, prin/ 
 ripium 8cfiiiis.Beati qulfcruantman/' 
 dataillius ut (iC poteftaseoranunlL^ 
 gnouita^.Kperportas intrentmciuiia 
 tcni.lBoris autem canes K ucncfici 6i 
 impudidKhomiddsfi^idoIis feniien 
 res,8C omnis qui amat& facit menda' 
 a'um.Ego lelusmiCangelii meiiteftifi 
 cari uobis hxc in ecdefiis . Ego fum ge/ 
 nus & radixDauid/ftellafplendida Si, 
 nacutina>Et(piritusfiC fponfa dicunr, 
 iienLEcquiandicdicacuem.EequLfiac 
 ueniat.&quiiiuult.acdpiataquam uitx 
 gratis ► Cqnteftor enjm omni audicnti 
 uetba^phctiJB Iibri huius . Si quis ap 
 pofueritad haec.apponetdeus fuperil 
 lum plagas faiptasin Iibroifto.Etfi qs 
 diminueutdeucrbisIibri^phetiaE hu/ 
 ius»auferet deus parte dusdc libro ui/ 
 te.K deduftate fandla. Kdehis q fctC/ 
 pta funt in libro ifto.Drdt qui teftimo 
 niu phibet ifto^.Etiaaienio dtoA ma. 
 En'atn Veni dne Ie(u. GTaria dnitio* 
 fin lefiiChtiftLdi oibus uobis. Amen. 
 
 BntS Tcftamenti totios ad grarca ucritate netuftiffimoraqj Codicum "Laskurf 
 fldemfid ad,pbati{7imoipauthor£i dtanone SCinterpretadonem acOL 
 xaceiecogiuQ(» <^pci^34hidio(^ .D^EcafnsLRocaodanu, 
 533 
 
(III.-1.) 
 
 H K Al N H Zi.I A O H K Ilr 
 
 A9y/W yOt. (p. A. </l. 
 
 534 
 
(nT.-2.) 
 EPT2T0AH 
 
 hid §' vJit-n /uivoy , «M' c* ITSMk/^ 
 30 535 ^'^'^"'^ 
 
(IV.-l.) 
 
 Tiis KAiNris aia0Hk:hs Xhanta. 
 
 ^ ETArt^AXON 
 "KcfcTra. Mctr^Jtfo*'. 
 
 Ka/ta Aoimav. 
 
 npAHEis txIn /LnosroAiiN. 
 
 NouumlESVClirifliD.N. 
 Tcftamentum. 
 
 EX BIBLIOTHECA REGIA, 
 
 LV.TETIAE. 
 
 BoffidruRobcttiStcghani typographi Reglf,Tl.egus ijrpt 
 
 iL D. !• 
 
 536 
 
(IV.-2.) 
 
 KATA MAT0. 13 ^r 
 
 eZ'^X Cm/j8/jIu> xs^ TiufiiojovaeUy jCf n'y^'to ^^po( ew-ms, KSl^ *- 
 ^ o^«CctA€ ^ m^fjLOTti A9>A», 1^ TRtmf ^li Aatx^f 'i-^rm^ fe- 
 
 _ ^^ Tor aangpe upi/. (3 jj jfnoDi? amy <wfl8j,X»)Af oS^yUw^^ 
 
 Ton lyip^i imvfMtoi ^If <*w€/>C9'ff <^ to SaAfltA» . ^ l><- 
 
 Tknemg *^v cw,' ov ^ oi ^ifjun ^ v duMf-awi. VTraxovaiott 
 ^ dut^i Kojf g3ov7X avnS «V -^ Wpa^c «c ^)^pcvi t Tipyian- 
 fUV, vmvnatu auni '^0 JkjfJ^vi^oju^oi , €x 7^ fxvnfXii'u}^ 
 $ip^fj^Di^^^i7to)?JM/f caeiiuiii^ivltvci. Tia/p^^v Am 
 ^6<wi3t-ivyif^i(^lJhutxp(i^oufXtyv'ni,Tt'rifiv (t Ql^UnS 
 iJ^tS Wi«A3sc aAtate)Kff^poS(ietasufimi ijfmfiiif 3 fta 
 »fa**ff rf4;TOrA>iA»;^'e9!FTOMa>^^ocxo/V'»'«0 -^^ 
 
 537 
 
(V.-l.) 
 
 Nouum TESV CliriiHD-K 
 Teftamentum. 
 
 Cnm duplid mterpretat[one,D. Erafmi, ^^et» 
 ris in terpreds : Harmonia item £uatigeUcd^> ^ 
 copiofo Indice. 
 
 JExofFicina Roberti Stephani 
 
 538 
 
(V.-20 
 
 Cap. V I. E^ 
 
 Ct ne induces 
 Tios in tentatlo^ 
 ncm , fed libera 
 iBfri ii.c..^ nos a I malo. 
 Quia tuu eft re- 
 gnu m,&poten> 
 tia, & gloria in 
 fccula.Amcn. 
 
 ^'ultX iProindeiirc- 
 
 '*** miferitis homi- 
 Hibuserrata fua, 
 remittet & vo- 
 bis Pater veftcr 
 cxlettis: 
 
 Qu<3d a no rc- 
 mifcrlris homi-^ 
 tiib' errata fui, 
 nee Pater vefter 
 remittct errata 
 veftra. 
 
 Hann.i.tf ^orrd quum 
 jeiunaueritiStne 
 fitisvcluti hypo 
 critztetrjd : ob- 
 fcurantenim fa 
 ciesfuatftjuo per 
 rpicuum fit ho- 
 minibus ipfosie 
 funare.ainmdi- 
 Co^obi«^habent 
 ^ercede foanu 
 Tirver3ijuum 
 iefUnu ^ vD^e 
 
 Z V A K O. 
 
 /lag eig vni^ffpLOfjC^^cc 
 
 pod, 071 ffoS *^IY » /3iXW- 
 
 ifi^cL «V 5ff ajuYOi;'* 
 
 t/yU/KO TOtTTf/) l/^tcjw OU- 
 
 /jLamtouj'mf^ovA o^Tta.' 
 
 CKv^ai'm)/ 1 ci(poLiflI^oun 
 yavfuvoTiefm^im tbk 
 
 Et Be B0m 
 
 lodacas la 
 tentitioai, 
 fed libera 
 nos a mg» 
 lo.i 
 
 M 
 
 di'mifcrltiv 
 homfniba* 
 peccata co» 
 cum, dimic 
 tct & vobis 
 Pacer vtft»r 
 caleflis dfr* 
 
 Si sntcnti 
 non dimif* 
 tttli homl-* 
 BJbus, nee 
 Pater veftcr 
 dimlttet vo 
 bU prccata 
 ▼«ftr«. 
 
 trrnicluna* 
 tis . Dollte 
 fieri ficathf 
 poerits tri 
 iles: cxtcr- 
 infDalcnint 
 facies fua5« 
 ^c pareant 
 bominibut 
 ieiuoantrj. 
 SfDicn dico 
 Tobisga re* 
 cepcruimer 
 cede raam. 
 luaiiteia 
 
 P39 
 
CVi.-i.) 
 lEST 
 
 CHRISTI 
 
 DOMINI NOSTHl 
 
 Nouum Teftamentam, 
 
 fiieKouumfaduf, 
 
 Ci&asGneco coflieztuire^ndent iatei]pretatIones Jus:viui,YetDS 
 aIten,Theodoti B czx. 
 
 Eiy^SDETd TH.IBEZAE JNKOTAT lO'NZSi 
 
 in^uilmtrationeJnxmreutiorusvoctm ndJiu^delitwSynapfadolhiStdi 
 taEiuf^elica hi^riay&EpiJhlis Apo^lids amfraenf^p 
 
 tmoexflicatftn 
 
 4coiina;'vI(imaadhIbifanuna,quam accutatiiCia^ emcBHuftlrO' 
 ^Yt ^uodaQunpdo nouum cfut y ideti£ofli& 
 
 SYMPTIBYS 
 
 KL D, XCYIIl. 
 540 
 
(VI.-2.) 
 
 Cap.Xlj44^ 
 
 
 
 lOANNIS 
 
 hi, Acclpt& fcion erni I 
 marinoinem idferet vftrituoi' 
 bd in ore. tuo crit daldi 
 |iMm mel< 
 
 Accepi igtnir Tibellain ^ ira 
 ou Angcli I & dcuoriul eami 
 eric(jue ia oie meo dulcii 
 noquam inel i led qwio d&i 
 •oriBeni enm t irauait vem« 
 
 
 •kiDiiSiAa d/kaXni ^ tvm Ai aarit 
 ytmvttiftv ,> ; , 
 
 tS^ mc «e»«ii«fa*' toy agsMur f - 
 KiV IV* Tili»MSn» tmi9f^ nic?0ut- 
 
 
 Turn dixinnllil • Oponeiie 
 tterum prophente .'coram po> 
 pull's &g«itiboi t&liogoiu& 
 egjbusroului. 
 
 GaTi «!• 
 
 DAtui eft. autem mlhl ea- 
 lamiu nmilit virg|.~adftN 
 iitqiie AngclDt,dicensiSurge & 
 metireteraplura Dei &altarci 
 & cof quiadonnt in eoi 
 
 Sed atrlum'quod extra lem 
 ^iim eft 'extrude. & ne metia- 
 rii illud: mm datum eft Gcnti- 
 buf. & Vrbem fanftara calea- 
 bunt fficnbui 9uadraginuduo< 
 bulk 
 
 Scd dabo ilUm i duoloi UTil 
 ceftibuj meis , qui propbeiabut 
 diebus miile duccnris fcxagin- 
 Riamidi ficcit. 
 
 Hi Tunc dux ilfz oTcc.Jk due 
 candelabra iaconlpefitt' J^ei 
 <errzporita» 
 
 Quid CqultvcTitvosTzdere 
 
 Ignii prodit ex ore ipforuro S: 
 dcoorac iairoicos eorum : nacn 
 (iqais velii cosizdercju opoi 
 « cum ocddi4 
 
 Hi pmeftatf hatnmr danden 
 di cxlum,nerige( /nr4M pluaia 
 diebus prophecix ipraru:& po 
 (cftnem hibcni m aquai , con 
 uerteodi eai'in ranguinccDi& 
 percuiiendi tcrramomniplaga 
 quotiefconque voluerinr. 
 
 Porropoftqua peregcrtnt'fuu 
 illud ceft (momura, bcftia ilia aC. ^ 
 cendcnaex abyflb.gerct aduer- 
 Tus eos bellun, & vincac(M,Sc 
 accideteo5i I 
 
 Etcadauera eorum lacebuntg 
 
 ilrawo ' 
 
 9 tlUH , ^taatiM 
 
 ^rjdtortftiMr*, 
 
 imHsmgn 
 
 fttu imfltm ijnfint^ 
 
 f^J&fHf*MMldif 
 
 itHMmiBipiaiu 
 
 
 monentm-^fmm-m. 
 
 Whahuutasa, 
 
 
 tauOretram. 
 
 futrcmiUd,dyl^.f$ 
 tilt aiuafttt eu ifffMy 
 
 Stcmfnaunmitttk 
 
 t i<MM*kfiMa<4/*<«.»eF>«-Hcbr.-an[tf <»«-7pro Icaio.auz cxui ipuH Arctium, & in Cooif huenficodiU 
 
 ynTiil[in.r«riir(irMri<rmiflr fn rrrrf tfft inn frinrl cc ^Uurfi'tcoimiilaiitumilludcxrcnut ,i]uQ(litiaia 
 
 ^imiuttt ^ populirfictbuur.qtiooimomnibiiipiic'bit, fExaif 
 
 a . Orj«J«j*lii.Se.t*'»»i;AeSitTfiinanirE«aj»« ^,i'«C«ii Ib^A rerbum. Cjm/w*. Aiquj intuf non ciK 
 
 InlMMKr ll H ^ l T\m*^ l Puco(ii{quiacmiItq(Utcoui.Nitii&in{Ua(SiD<ai(ia« 
 
 Coram jS hoc itnoeriotfeioofti, fed iimtBioromi* 
 
 IH CAPVT XL pfuiDxAificium nomine TeB)pljCgaifitibjiur.Nuo«»«. 
 
 V V^fbilM*^apIw«£mMM.',>aiiai«wj,w>«.Tt> liquwUmmodofcnieiicdKritur.gudrfunquimproM 
 
 ItUnoknnclocuinrz Complincolicditioiic.quiiinin ooroncgli^ituiiDiTKticodoTeiniilo.Hocauinon coiH 
 
 ^J^lcnlMtuilunLUitw>»AnM^«fiuljiniMiprclo&lcruuni,p<iunim Icgradnm M^mitU *mtmimrJ 
 
 MsilllMliimK. ijtiolfnibt Jiimmin liietvtjkSaium wJ^aimi<i»Uimmumrlmnf:itKtiiottii^luitm,'^mt 
 
 ^pirfmonnn togiurr.Vcrif inicrprti If git mi mi'xZk fiimenini hoc tiMcictort 
 
 (MftdiOtRneftmihi.TxIaD Biincniercnicmii. Vd 4 Oninri.Ti oufnD^iVuXg.nnaicmA* I»elt> 
 
 mmfi Caiflkhct poRirar >{>«?, rtrpondcb^i Hrbr Ipfi- n'l i^jn num li^uuiis cditione Complutnfi, quad cfl 
 ^aJimiH l'<«». J dieendo , & ad com refcinyr a <^m " magit rfiutum. 
 
 • Oia««Miwf »wiri>.ih;/{»a"«'«**H«« til m* exuoiianfiuiasbicfuu 
 
 641 
 
(VII.-l.) 
 
 NOVVM 
 
 lESVCHRISTI 
 
 TESTAMENTVM^ 
 
 Gr^ce&iatifte; 
 
 Theodora Bc^^ interptete 
 
 Addit^/unt ab codem fumms breuesdocSrinar vno- 
 quoque Eu3ngeliorum^& Adorum loco cbrapre- 
 hen/ae. Item, MethodiApofloJicaruniepllloIoruitt 
 bfeuis explicatio. 
 
 ^idc afitm ^uinU' ediumt,vr£ur mnltmm laeonm 
 recognitioTjeiK^aceeJferHntoreMsd0ctfiorumphrac* 
 fean expopf tones , (fr alU ^ma^cUm^ amjot^wjfulii^ 
 cwn ex maioribui ipfina JBe'}^ 4nrtotAhQtatfts ^ titm 
 aliunde excerpu* 
 
 Anno, M: DOT IT t. 
 
 542 
 
CVII.-2J 
 
 CapXL 
 
 AD HEBR^OS. 
 
 14tf 
 
 
 C<iirr.t.i, 
 
 EtI }af /jU Xf OV OOSV OT IT 6 
 
 Nam paticflteanimaTBf 
 bis eft opus , vt voluatatt 
 Dei obre<iuutl repotcetii 
 promimgnem illam^ 
 
 Adhuc enim f pufiHuia 
 quaTitulu(ncunquc,£^;qai 
 venturuscfl v«oiet,ne^ue 
 cacdabit.*' 
 
 ? " luHut autem cxfide 
 viuec ; at d f kw fe fubdu- 
 xerit , oon eft gratuoi «- 
 nimomeo. 
 
 •'At nos non ij [utom ^ui 
 nos fubducamus ad «xU 
 tium.fed qui crcdamut ad 
 axiimxraiuteiB. 
 
 Cap. XI, 
 
 I. Traffat vpjueadfintm cafitit nen aliunde Jalutem aieftts 
 effi patres .tfnicuncjiit ab initit midi Dto prolmu fuerSt.qiwaix 
 fide:vrfa'atIudathacfiUfec«lliggripaTrt6tumfan^avnitati. 
 
 
 E2t| df 77lV't«l*X7II^O^'a» 
 
 Er TouTjf jay ijustpTv^nSni^ 
 
 nit e^ihof fifAs^'n Q%oS , «c 
 
 n/r« TTktioia. ^aiajf A- 
 
 «ut7i«c ^^ da I Mr 171 xaah- 
 
 "^fh Gtii ibSf y*f ""f /ftttu 
 
 
 t JPMtmImm 
 
 mim* 
 (Iciprxiljotii 
 
 Sal 
 
 ■p Si "autcm fides, •lHud 
 ~quoi iubfiftunf qu{ 
 rperantur,& quz dempn- 
 ftrat qaz noa ccrnuntur. 
 ?Ob cam eaim teftimo- 
 nio fuecuot oinati *> ma- 
 iotei. 
 
 * * Per fidetn inrelligi- 
 mus compa^um fuiflc 
 mundum verbo Dei , *, vt 
 quz videmus non.fiotrx 
 appareatibus h&id 
 
 ♦♦ Abel pet fidem , ma- 
 iotis prcii) facriiiciun] ob 
 tulie Deo quam Cain: 
 per quam tcftimonium 
 obtinuitquodelTetiuftus, 
 (eAimohium pcrhibentc 
 Deo de donis eius:8c mor 
 tuus ad^uc per. cam la* 
 quicur. 
 
 '* Per fidem Enoch fuit 
 traQiTtutiQe^vidctct mor* 
 tern : oec fiiit ianentus, 
 propterea quod tcanftu- 
 lerat earn Dcus:priufqua 
 enim ttansfcrrciur , te(t 
 raoniumobtiaucrat quod 
 gratus fucrit Deo. 
 
 i^tqui fieri nSpoleftvt 
 
 abfqi fide quifqua De» fit 
 
 ^ratut : nam qaiacccdit 
 
 T ii 
 
 a 
 
 ■topp«. 
 
 r Escellcm 
 6i*k Otktt- 
 ptio 4b cfc. 
 Ais .^Md rcB 
 adhuc ia tpt 
 
 » Ud-wnl. 
 
 rMi]M^«« 
 
 » I>acftPa> 
 trcacsluode 
 
 cffc 
 
 dot. 
 
 M#« fMmt 
 •rii/san/kCr 
 
 mim cMM 
 utfifmtfl, 
 I ProMtem 
 6<W«ficadK» 
 propoGUi fc- 
 
 %"» 
 
 plis 
 
 ic« 
 
 dotn f cctefe 
 
 •sctiltaenaN. 
 
 c lU'Vtmmm' 
 
 Jmi if* fMM 
 
 frtutt «c|a» 
 
 4 AbrL 
 t Enoch. 
 
 543 
 
(Vlll.-l.) 
 
 A I A ^ H' K H. 
 
 Novum 
 
 Teftamgntumb^. 
 
 J£x RBgiis alilsque aptlmU editionibtifMe 
 ItQva fxj>repim: cut quid accefferift 
 TrAfatio docebitj. *• 
 
 Lyod. BatAtohvi^ 
 Ex Officina Elzcviriorurxu 
 
 Cl3 l3 C XXZIXI. 
 
 544 
 
(vm.-^.) 
 
 !Jxxo:s POM. 515 
 
 lire Tvi o^Kce^offzwrii 
 
 «5 otytuvfAsV iv Q TiX^,^e^lw cciayter* 
 
 5 -^^ir>^5>^;S*«yj^tff^;^A/f^»^A{^- 
 Titriitcw^ii^ h^\ Irifu* W''^ ^jw^w'H 
 
 545 
 
(IX. -1.7 
 
 BIBLIA SACRA 
 
 POLYGLOTTA, 
 
 COMPLECTENTIA 
 
 . ^Hebraicum, cumPen- 1 J Chaldaicum, 
 T«tusOng«.aT«,^ uteucho Samaritan o," SIGkjecvlu. 
 
 ■ AHABIC^, 
 j^THtOPIC^ 
 
 Persic^* 
 
 .VVLLG, L/JlT, 
 
 SAMARITANiE, 
 Verfionumque G R X C ^ LXXII IntCrp. 
 
 andquanun, JChALDAIC^, 
 .SYRIACiE, 
 
 Quicquid comparari poccrar. 
 
 Qm 7extuum, O- Verfiomm OrttntJ'tum TranJlatlomiiU Latimt. 
 EX 
 VETUSTISSIMrS MSS. UNDIQ.UE CONQUISITIS. 
 
 optimlfque Excmplaribus imprefsis , fumma Bdc collatis. 
 
 Qnz in prioiibus Editionibus Jeeranc fupplcta. 
 
 Mtiluanteiuc inediu, denovo adjcfU. 
 
 Omnia CO otdincdilponta, utTcxtus cum VcrConibiuuno intuitu confernpofimt^ 
 
 Cum App ARATU) Appendicibus, Tabulis, Varjis 
 
 Lbctionibus, Aitnotatiohibus, Indicibuj^, &c. 
 
 Opus tonim infexTomos tributum. 
 Edidit BRIANUS VVALTONUS, S. T. D. 
 
 %gtmes quibtu Ofus hoc fufce^ium. 
 Quorum yJu/piciis O* munificentia promotvm. 
 Quorum collatis Jlu Jits O" lahorihuj j^rftSuttty 
 Qwdijiiu in hac Sditione frst reliquu ^ttflitum, 
 Se^uens*Prafatioindicabiu 
 
 L o :^v I :HiT, 
 faiptimetatTHOMAS ROYCROET, 
 
 M DC LVII. 
 546 
 
(IX. -2.) 
 
 iti 
 
 SPISTULJ 18. 'PJULl 
 
 Cx,.X7, 
 
 
 «t lokb IVi 
 
 »i <> ^ !■ cmt. >**«.. * 1. 1 
 
 A. <» aw, k hnm. FU<IM- Q>~. > aad icofnom <lw^ h 
 t«:»T«l W. %'»»iU*«»M. Il«M *-»»)»«. ^•MKiwAxil •?»»•. til' 
 
 «» Ul-fi «i <"•-»* . ^ (0 '-»f<imS(, »T. «,i»^ ;.< 1^ 
 
 _» «i .• ..low <^«m bain. «M U,li«, fa,^ ,^ 
 
 tr {Wn. »i ia mrit ma-mr miSf^mr, rmtrm man. Htnr'MimT^ ,f 
 
 HJ H.lkm. MUut Cf tSTMimO- U-Tt^-nm'- «IM m®- yn'| 
 
 »M mSt if »«>»', t» <tMWa«; , if (J) «>^ , if mi^i , i> ^, 
 
 V «l»^p '*« •«•(«• »t»«» »• •f«3f»f« I T> ^c^uant. T|/ub-l| 
 
 r/MUf, i itif imiCuin, Hf^ mx 
 
 'Verfio Sr^I^C^ com fattipmagoM L>i:TiNi/« 
 
 , * . , . r "if ».* r .• ;. ••.§ .S »*,•««< nionipj<tanit«nparimCl>iip»j.(ltoiola« 
 
 '''^- - ^ J r^ >r tV ,V » r ^ » i ^ » ," », l)0.fpcfM.inel)fr«wnnirui..iltc Sioif 
 
 , - ," - . .• ''.^-» ■. • , w • » »^ • . /• »irfUa».y»d»MaaCifti.cin»»tifc 
 
 •I^KA^AiiMliAljo .| nJf vfti HnmIjo .caaeva (oii)}<x . 1 tn 1 ft t^Xj^Mi •'""V^Jj.^^i^^'SSir"' ^ ' — 
 
 g .aL,^n-aoi^ ^^ A'to » .yo<»m&j» ^ a n "t o .lta3i|j ---'-• • - r* ... » . 
 
 |l£eu|B sioite )i«LaJ ^! fr^} ^ilVq • ."liAJlaa .,i^al <a.iio .N^A^f (i^^; ^^^f^fJir^'uSS'^" 
 y K > ) o )ja Uls)} •.4!^} V^focui' e>^ *»-?«> .jUoio /oj*' '^^ ^J*™**" ''"^ 
 
 'M **^ vL!i!w»«i»^ ti^'ii* • jrftN^^^oirnNn^^ a'jiiiik ,^1 .j:uit/ f„^^!:r* uit;j2-^^i" 
 
 " tt^aY^.i'ri-wirf.aT tnii,VIWnniatbteo>r 
 
 adoWctnlijmniam ; Ad* 
 
 T«fia MTH10PIC4 cam Intc«preauone r.^riirjL 
 
 M*«ll*t^«W(t>nt«(tM:: = ' OAff»0 : T-T«SV ! >W» : :^A/»C : HTXR ! + 7,';, "„• /'.^ Tr '"^ ■ " ?"'"* rTf* '•^~' •*-— ^•'T 
 9i(HlA:«A(t»inil»V<n:aArH-C,V<»>':AJ«Vvni':«rrtB:»/»!(P-iM-!A;h'«. 'i- •-»' «~w. <» >». «« ^». i - i. ag ^ ~A, '^ .ttMim» 
 
 547 
 
(X.-1.) 
 
 H K A I N H 
 
 A I A H K H 
 
 NOVUM 
 
 TESTAMENTUM. 
 
 CxTM Lectionibus Vailiantibu-s 
 
 MSS Exemplariura, Verfionum, Editiodiin!, SS Fattumfic 
 
 Scrlptomm Ecclefiafllcorum ; & m eafdem NoTis. 
 
 ^^ ACCEDVHT 
 
 Ii}ca Scariptunc Parallel a, aliaque l^m^* & ApikhdiT 
 ad Vanantes Le^Lones^ 
 
 FKJruKXTzrujL DxssixTATrc^ 
 
 bfmAUMt N. T. ef C»wa» Confiitutione tgfturt KJlma S. TtxUttJlL Ftederlt tul m^ 
 
 i^tu>>fora dtdtttitar: It fud in toEsiXLOiUB tr^fiitmfif e:fli(aw. 
 
 Studio et Laboke 
 
 0X0 iV//, 
 
 HTHEATRO SHE L D O NI ASTO. MiXIOTOL 
 
 548 
 
(X.-20 
 
 KB^. gS, 2^ I A K n B o r. 6^ 
 
 a^ ^vdfuu iTiSJis^oci fj[£Jf\.ov!ag ve/K^ai. i ^ H •;^ xe/^ '^^tl&^ffiie'^ 
 
 fth hdarm h m^e narai aMvi JS ^^ *^" a^TwJ^ a dSih^ yutali 
 ^d^mi, hi^' T^pSpai Sol ™ «p»/tlgpi» '^d&y 1 6 ''-fiZD) ^^^ W 
 
 Si ayroTo ^mt QmS^Wi g« ow/wt'S?, 2i <P Sp^axiji 1 7 Otna .6 w msi^ 
 Uu iJua f^oL i^y m^ Ri ;cs^ loMaZti iS AnC \h V vd a-iflf 
 
 fx^*-*?y^ ^^ ^x**' ^^^^' ^' "^ ^'^^ ^" '°^'' '^^?y^ "fi/*^ 
 
 71:911 
 
 yiw.ii.ij.d- 18.27. yei.S2<f,7,9>io>»i-^*/»"'S-t'*'7''4>»7>«S..^«.c.7* VerC i4-^»^r.U} J»/r, 
 iw. 1 7, 10,34,0^. Mut.y.iSn VeTi.1^,16' Ltt.iM.Cal.f.tij. iyt.j.ij,ii..*Fi<le'f»i.Jt.20^ *tnr.6.9, 
 Verf.17. S«i)>r.TCl4^I»/»-.r,20,a(J. Veri:iy- .D»r.(r.4.. ^/'"•.i2.2p,*3Z. *c&'i.iK<i-T7i4a«»r.8.2o» 
 X«4-34. wrfff.itf. 17. cS'iy.iy. PbiU.io. % Pet.i4- J'il-v.6, j1foc:zo.t<3:. . VaC 3<}..Siin.v.lj.JitfKV.aSi 
 Verf.2i; I»/r.w.24.«G*«;2z.y»l2,l(J. VcrC 22. He:r.ULU 7. jj^« Vc£^2T; CokJruSuJBwMt. 2r 
 Q«4s^ iiit«M£^f2.. •^ 
 
 4< B'SyjfVwrfnr.^r. S AilMarM5i.i.C«7.j, decrqal conftetfennis? nam'G^erDRetiflriioa 
 
 P^Rj, Kiiuu Alex. B*roc. LtudA. , Lin. N;^. poieifcnifi faftisj inqait lEnt/nax. A'dd^j^qDoA 
 
 Tet.r. Cfv-^Gfenev. Otcumein, c^MefBaraci Lcftio lecepta fenlum "prxbcar omnmo &cl» 
 
 'PtTb.^N-i. fet.j. Colb.7. Coh /Deeft Altx^ lem. & Apoltoli fcopo congruentiflimuBBj 2?i« 
 
 jAui.2. CoU>,7. Cant. 2. Cov.2.3 .4. f ff.i.J. G«- «rif, inquit, f'mvnique Cbriftidtiut aliqtir, b»s 
 
 fitv, Miigd.i. N.I. 2. JJn. Vulg. Sjr. e lk<tnyj/u- mini inani ijli qui tx nuda fidei prefejJitne^^egU- 
 
 y,fi^ AUx.Ctvt^Xjttuv. f At 'Mfjtltx.Bnb,t^ Bt fin*tiiftudit , fe falutem cenfccuturum srttm 
 
 Vulg.Artb.. EAiOf IJB. W.I.2. £«rBf-Ctfy.2.3.4. nttuf. Age vert, tu fidim h^bts, tdmijiie mitl 
 
 Ltud.2.B)irb.t^.G€ntY.0ecumetT. g'i-X't'.Cnij. iMiias; ego, de fide met laceiis. oferaJiabetj R. 
 
 b T>ee&Cor.i^. Arab, • Deeft Ce/*.7* X^^nc ^iqite\quitm aepu) Ugemiffamiittacmnibm 
 
 %AUx./irab.y£iliiop. • k. Kot/«Tf yif«f.Cj/i.7.G*- exprime, Ofiende wihifidem tuam exfjSii thiii 
 
 Ktv.Sn.Attib.jEthiop. J OmitiitLwr. wExTte Ex faSit,tnqiiam; tteque enim aHitneritnttfTt' 
 
 Codd. al. G Eflio Fides. Ego quidenrimiullos dere. return btc tton petet : opera non buler, qu* 
 
 haacnas inddi, qui ita legant: nee putb fie eftendat. Eg» vera interim ex pperibut tneir.nant 
 
 {cripfiiTe jfactbum, tuiii , pro fine, liarquain negotie Ftdem meant indnaboi O/er* tpfa an* ii» 
 
 occuirii in N. T. uti nee apnd Lxx quidem (9, ftmt Opera Fidel', prtduntque tuculentl ftt'ut 
 
 Intcrpretes, quod fciam. Xa^/V Stepb. w. Altx, tttamme taiepte, fiintem ipfiim ex qm preflumif. 
 
 Cav.2. Barb.i. Colb-7. 0/. Ediri al. Vulg. Sjr. Clara bic omnia: nee recedcndum ah'Editii 
 
 JEtbiop. F4iiy?iw il<'5ir«/)j, in Epiftoia-quldam. ooftris. « Det^ Alex\ Barb.i. Colt. 7 * Vnlg, 
 
 ^dionem banc ideo certi^invedam atbicror, Sjr. Totom illud U^ cpjw ao onuccit Otnmtn* 
 
 ^abdalceraillaabfardialiquidinfe habere vi- * T* {p>a tu Ik <; wWc f>« O1V.4. Gfurr. omoiao 
 
 deretur. Quomodoenimfidein«e^«r«iMJbfteo- perperam. p VciSt Vulg. Ctlb.7, ^Otoiw* 
 
 dai, qui verbis proximfe prscedentibus ope- C»K.j.' r A^fCov.^Gtnev.. jf Kai' iauilia ti- 
 
 fusa expcrs dcfcribitur? Ad evitandam banc dit^&i*^. ex verf.i7» t'Dee&.L$rr, Scd ad 
 
 difficolutem. muiacum U in x^C''- in antiquif- oram Libri pofuit receDUOccaUmur:^'* ^s^/Me 
 
 Cmis aliij. Exemplaribus. Quanquam neque >« Alex,, x Noa rcddunt Vulg. Sfr, An^t 
 
 fic czpediu omnia. Si legas/iM tfttitm,iioa ri* JEtbitp. 
 
 Tcct s>fl^ 
 
 549 
 
(XI.-1.) 
 
 H KAINH AIA0HKH 
 
 N O V VM 
 
 TESTAMENTVM 
 
 G R AE C V M 
 
 ITA ADORNATVM 
 
 TEXTVS 
 
 PROBATARVM EDITXONVM MEDVXLAM 
 
 MARGO 
 
 VARIANTIVM LECTIONVM 
 
 IN SVAS CLASSES DI S TRl B V T ARYM 
 
 LOCORVMQVE PARALLELORVM 
 
 DELECTVM 
 
 APPARATVS SVBIVNCTVS 
 
 CRISEOS SACRAE MILLTANAE PRAESERTIM 
 COMP£NDlVM,LIMAM,SVPPLEMENTVM AC ERVCTVM 
 
 EXHIBEAT 
 INSERVIENTE 
 
 10^ ALBERTO BENGEUa 
 
 T VBINGAE 
 
 BVMPTiavs lO. GEORGII COTTAE 
 A."D,M)CCXXX1V« 
 
 550 
 
(XI.-2.) 
 
 YI. 
 
 IT P O U r A A A T A & 
 
 i7r 
 
 vt 
 
 : or Tif vfitrt^ec nt^Ki 1 jMtf- 
 
 Mi9-f ) 3-fW I? /ioxTijg/^a/' e y«^ cay 
 
 ^Ulf Hi T« XvivfUtt OK, Tit TrrSVfMT^ 
 
 9 ^fgyc<r« §rfv' cuuttou Tfl «^e!x«Aflr 
 7r<»5»Tff f«ir OKKeucuitei' xcu^a yap U 
 
 S* «« iMM^or tXfifUv , ^yei^a/*s3-et to aarw jyj/ #Af^j 1(9^ «r« T«r iVgJ^A 
 
 ayo^oK 'isi^^ 3r<«vr«( > fui^cr* ^ "o^ iTV S^ftf. 
 
 Ti**f arjtftyi: t^? 3r/W«f. I t2 Aoora » >e«r»? /wr /«l^tf «?•- * ^ 
 
 X t iJIetc jdJA/jm/? vulyy^fifuuiv ty^l^na' iya yua t« ^tyiuvret rS\»vg/at 
 1» 4*06 T^ e/*y >:«^- are* Si^aaif tu-\'n)ri^c$ ru rufjutxt fiit ^t^ciCfit H If 
 
 VOTOTTticxi oTm^Ki, ifr« ee»tvyKa^-\xAt^'f>* '^C/*' ^H^ i^r^ XC/"^ f"''* 
 
 my vfteii Ta^tfAveeSsiff fM»e» hit. fuf . tk 3rr««/t«T^ i;/**ir uJiX(poU «/*^r. 
 X^ Tw 9fl«;^ t5 %C/5-5 ^tuKurroi, vJi 
 
 ftytSeeft 
 
 ya^ el iaB*Ttfi¥«i*fvet etvre) i/o/^v ^u- 
 
 Ilff » fAMttu Vt^ «»• /•?••*• 
 
 npox e^exioy:s 
 
 EmSTOAH nAYAOY. 
 
 I 1 //« ^f A>;'««T©- 3'« », Tfll^.i- 
 yteti TO if amy cf i<^ia-u tig^ vt- 
 
 3 EoAoy>fro< o 5-f o< >(flt/ smrif^ ti< ico^a 
 
 J 
 
 itiumiTKf i 
 
 c* 9nt0-9 eoA^yjfP mtvfjuiriKff crren ^ 
 
 TO >j/*rt{ c* owrJ «8e? KarecOo^^i-Koir/iit^t 
 Avtq ijfMi tLyiiSi Kffi aita/jtui iKetrevu^ 
 met ai/ii/' at iyetTT)} » ^ ig&eg/a-eti if- S 
 fiui Hi vieS-truuf <A« iflri? Xe/'^^ **^ 
 ttvToVi ic«T« T^H. ew^xio* tS B-t?JlfiCl^ 
 
 Mm ir 
 
 t^ 
 
 37 
 
 551 
 
(XII.-1.) 
 
 H KAINH AIA0HKH 
 NOVUM TESTAMENTUM 
 
 G R A E C U M 
 
 EDITlONCa iECEPTAE 
 
 CUM LECTlONlBCrS YARIANTIBU5 
 GoDicaif MSS> Edttionum a.XTAJLTni» 
 
 VBB.SXOWUM ET FA-TH/TTM; 
 
 >IEC NOK COMMENTARI O PLENIORE 
 
 Ex SciLIPTORIBUS ySTEKlBVS HeBRAXI5, GrAECCS EX I.AXIIUS 
 HXST0B.IA1££T vrM VERBOKtJM TtLlTS TRANTB 
 
 Ot'ERA.ET STUDIO 
 
 JOANNIS JACOBI WETSTENri 
 
 T o m: IT 9 L 
 C o ir 1 1 w a N «Lu A T COR. EV ax a »x iji. 
 
 AMSTEt AEDA'MTi 
 
 Ex ciiryxciKJL DoatKJsat.AXA. 
 
 MD CCXfL 
 652 
 
(XII. -2.) 
 
 vnr. 
 
 % •— »«« TO itjor I XS^ zrcU o Aooj vx*TO wpoj dCxw' <5« .xaSins l^liajna ajuroif, 
 
 jkitit iceollntitint il)IbTTit,^ipre prsecipiens d , tit jam -peecart aelmeiet. Atgafiin. it Aiuher. CoDjng. llTftTl 
 Poftouun Chriilui ait idulterac : ncc ego te condemnibo t qais non intelhgit, debere ignofcere nuiitura , «|uo4 
 videt ignavifle Dommum amborum , ncc jatn & dcbetc adulteram diceie , cujus poenittntii crimen divin* crtx 
 dit muentioDe dcletum ! Scd hoc videlicet inSdelium fenibj exhorret , ita ut nonnulli modicae , ye\ potiut inU 
 mici verae fidci, credo metuentes peccati itnpuniUtrm dari mulieribuj fuit, illudquod deadulterac mdulf^tia 
 domimu fecit, tuferrent de Codicibus Ciij. Hitrtmymus cum omnia conquircret iidverfu} IVkgiano] L il. etiank 
 liaec fcripCt: In Evangeiio Iccuudum Joaiuiem in. muhis- fie Giaecit £(. i-atinii Codicibus invenitur de tuluftcn 
 mulicre , quae accufiita ell apud Dommum. Hieon c. Armenios : iwit «J n' >><>/« rv iiijmurxt vjsSf , ■< wfr» 
 •ir>xS Ta tiro-* yum i ^mxtirJiiV-a . riA ii»o.t0-, Trs m^ •i''>pi'> « ^*^>''« V«<» ir" ^vT»-, «rt}:u(«ra> >>9'arr<( , aj 
 •v^ aa^ ri Xf>'i lOTaiixfiTai, ixGoXiiwi^. <3Aafitf«i iw« *i'7iiiTii T^i rgAAnt t»« fwoi^nr ufi<rio Joannn (|B<»' 
 que Orrgonut in praefatione ad obfervationej tcras narrat , fe » (juodam jfrmtHtrum facerdote accepilTe , nee 
 jpfo$ Pericopae ds aduitera m Evangeiio locum concedere, fed ad calcem rejicere confueffe, tanmum fufpe* 
 dam. jiiUmiJuis m Syiuspfi banc pencopenmemorat. fed fatcnte Scldeno <fe uxore Hebr. Ill, If. iu ut mani< 
 fellam interim dubilandi notam relinquat, iVralflo. »a nifi r >aTarof«»iia'«( i>i ^oij-i/a. Infeiiul H. B. HI. )9> 
 de Papiai i»Tifliir«a <fl ij oAXiir w-cpiBr «jpi tv/ouoj /ir» xc)Aa!f d^apTta{ ;^fifiXiA«-i|» >Tt rv xvp » , « t1 en* ^aiof 
 •E» I7rt>i» •%"'* • . S"" "J* Wlloria adulterae inteUigunt RxJmuJ , Emfmus , Camtnriiu , Bti» , Vnjfmj_,yBMfmat , Si- 
 VKaiiui, TtarfMtHt.Tabridui, atque inde infenmt, £(</Jiii«», quod in EvangelioadHebraeo* extaremonet , in Evasge- 
 lio joannij non leg^fe. Denique fufpeita etiam haec hiftoria fuit Jxtfmo, rtttiamo, OUvttano , Gijtfno, Mm- 
 (mi,Calymt,^tz.<Uy Janfinio CitnJavmJi , H. Cretio , H. MtmmonJo , J: CUrin. BnM,ya)it. haec funt: Ad me 
 quidem quod atlinet> non diflimulo , mihi' jnerito fufpeSum efle, quod veteres iDi tanto ronienfu vel rejeci- 
 tunt, vel ignorarunt, Deinde quod narrat Jcfum. folumfuilTe lelidlum cum muliere in templo, nefcio qoamiiC 
 -probabile , nee litis coluetet cum. eo quod mox id eft ji. li. dicitur eos rurfus alltcutus : & quod fcribit jefusi 
 digito fcripfilTe in terram , novum mihi Stinfolem videturj nee poffiim conjicere, ouomodo poflit fitit Conw 
 mode expucari. Tanda denique leAionis varietas facit, at de lotiui iflus narrationis fide dubitem, MaUammtmi, 
 Confului veteret Graecorum Codices multos, nullus ex MSS. habebat ptaeter unum, in quo I^ontii font coma 
 mentarii, &. ifle ipl'e ita habebal, ut ton Wftoria veru transfolli eflet, &: Leon«iu»noinn«t>anem.qpi<lan da 
 h>fa ullam. Secret > fed ea praeterila reliqua explicaret.. Non habebat antiquilTunus ille Vatican! rodex, fira^ 
 iaepe nominavimui , non Giaeca Catena , in qua cum tres & vigmti auflorej flnt , nemo ejuj meminit, 
 
 Quid qaod. ipfe ftylus a Joanne diflientil? Joannes enim t«ro conjunaiones , ratiui A habet s quod hie nmnu 
 I, «. J. J. 6. 7- ?• lo. II. bij occunit. joannis ftyhu valde eft fimplex, hie vero omatiot comm. ^ »o. Ncn 
 pauca etiam hie narrantur , quae difficulter cum veriute roncifiari poflimc : lege MoCs adulteras fiiifle hpidandK| 
 Jefiun pinxiife in terra, quod haerentis eft, gc ad aJiquid excogitandum tempuj fibi fumentuv judicem, quit. 
 )udem deKtU commifli bbi iple fit conTciut, <lon debere animadverteie in delinquentem | Jefum tempore fe. 
 Ai hor» matutina Iblum cum muliere in templo fiiifle-, &c non damnandam judicalTe, quam lex Mofudanmare* 
 rat. Porro hac hiftoiis e Textu fublata, connedetur comma i». fie Xeqq- Capitii Vlll. cum Vil, ft.JO. ia« 
 (elliniitnx omnia dRta fuifle eodem tempore , fdhcet die fefti ultimo, quae etiam eft Graecorum FMramfinteita 
 li»: eadem rero inferta iwcellario confequeretur, rem geftam e0e die fea«enti ultimum diem fcftivid. cap.VU, 
 jy.VlU.a.fic. quae acommaie la. dicuntur usque ad finem capitir, diaa fiiifle fcfi fifium- Jam fiorhper. 
 penderit, JiidaeoJ toto illius fcfti tempore fe jaflaffi de effiiCone aquarum, de hicernij acccofit fie face Writ, d« 
 iberlate fit de peccalomm venia die jejui"'" proximo iropetrala, facile intelhget , non folum quae de aqnalpiritu* 
 all dicunlQT "VII. 17. fed clum qoae habenfur de tanebrii in quibus Judaei rerlirentur VIII. ii, de peccatisjn? 
 daeoram nondum condon^tis comm. ii. 8c de ferritutc judteomm coram, ji. mullo aptiori tempore fit ron« 
 Yenientiiudici,dum agebantur dies fefti, quam poftea. Deinde tamen apud Graecos puhlice leOa eft, ^el in/if 
 tBmitrm infciipU Coi i. fir ly. vel i>i tw'/-"' Evang. i+j Vel Oftobrij VIII. fefto t ivi»t ni»ar«« ji, »i, 
 1). l6- 17- iB. IS- »o. vel Tc- TaKoTo.y, «i/p«f4n •» t| vurt^coty 17. vel pnmo Apribi, fefto iiixaaX.^ff 
 '-^CM. j)r>«veli«in vertitMonij Amidac Epi&opas, quod teftatur I>. 5ar^/iiac«x, 
 
 un«Ml»V« ] 1^ . lie«. Colb. doo 40- ^4- 71- 7*. 7«., 80. 87. 89. so. 91. 4 ''»"••» «• ^»- ** 
 
 'bam: qoiS 3et TriDu diTdpnhim lipietttk? monde- papvdo \mit. 
 
 lem eniantafiniu. Non quododilTet (apientn, %i, Eurfptd. HeradM. i8e. tii ar A>» t^nm» 
 
 led qnia'putftbatt «ot fuparbire &infolercciccon- 1 r«<<) ^.f,»i,. „ m%f *»P<3 /t:t^'j:t^uir»»J,jll 
 
 tta popiuOSteinev & quia difcipuli fapientum o- r|j^(7^MM in Vcfp. 714. are rtAi h. itn i0.«ar. 
 
 deianueof;:itQm. etiaiu nv» non permitleljant fe ».iV/m i^.i ••x^nV »■ »r tuirm^. ^n»a«.'B» 
 
 tan&i ab VS» ^bctb 11. f. Populus terrae non aft C. III. {>. 911. . ^ xfxt.N « «(»,, ^^^.^ t\rtJn 
 
 jpiitt myV Utarsim Hot, IV. 14- & cum eeo»- •Im** »»/- J.>V«i » vm m^rr/^Vx, •„ i^ntrfmC^ 
 
 jatione* quae nM siovit in. Its: JtAotfiar* 1 1)» ,<«^ i*'^ ;.»« mfnhtm. j./ ji. Xiy. 9. > W 
 
 I ]iaa«l>t IcminiflaiB Pteerifawf cum I wnin ifl B a jr>//jl{w« < ni »ht '£?<tuuixftiM vSim^ 
 
 Ymnr* «*• 
 
 553 
 
(XIII.— 1.) 
 
 N O V VM 
 
 TESTAMENTVM 
 
 G R A E C E. 
 
 T E X T V M 
 
 AD HDEM CODICVM VERSIONVM ET PATRVKt 
 RECENSVIT 
 
 LECTIOJS^IS YARIETATElVr 
 
 ADJECIT 
 
 D* JO. JAG. GRIESBAC It 
 
 VOLVMEN T. 
 IV. EVANGELIA 
 
 COMELECTENS. 
 XDITIO SECVNDA. 
 
 BEMEWlJATIOn MVXTOQVE I, O C r^ 1 1 T I O K. 
 
 HALAE SAXONVM 
 
 AJPVD JO, yA.C. CVR.TII HAEKEDS9 
 
 ETT LONDINI 
 
 A.? YD VEiTUU KliTMSiT, 
 
 554: 
 
(xm.— 2.) 
 
 cAP.xix.xx. KATA MAT0AION. 
 
 vaTxa,'* ^ rixva, ^ ay^ouj, 3 TrfXcvva auToui Koi f^£^- 
 
 ^ inarovTairXaaioya" Xj'^e- * iJJfv" a'AXou? iVrcora; fv 
 
 T«i , Ktti /I^w5;y attovioy kXv^ 4 ''^ ^y^$^ agyovf' , ^ cfO Ka- 
 
 30 povoiLtjforf t. IloXXoi 2i fccTov- x£/voi?" sTrfV i57ra7€Ts xal 
 
 Tm ^TfcuTOi ibyjxTOi' •aoI t- aJjLif Tj f/c /rov apceXcova ^* xai 
 
 'f-ccQ hriv'-vj jiamXsfa ^uJ-J ou- ^ 01 51 a7r^X5ov,'7raXiV ™ i^tX- 
 f ovcutf oN^gvi-KUi oiKohaTroT^y 3(u9 irsg} Fkti^v -koI n op hv- 
 oOTig I^J/i?fV ojiiUr ir^ail' jxt' vonjv'" wgav, hm/)ja£V cocxau- 
 
 2 c(}XTEX(uva'avrGv. £00 "Sup ** rr wjav" l^tX^wv, P fu- 
 CpcuvvfffafSe" ^xsrar -Tcoy.ipYa- p?v" aXAouf sffTwrac ^ f, 
 TuJv w S>jvap/ou r/jv ^fxi^aV, xat Xlysi auroTj* t/" tu5f «tt<j- 
 
 fi* 5 xara 
 
 (e) tzalSD. I. Syr. hier. cant verc. veron. corb./i. a- clar. 
 Oiig. clif. Iren. Hilar. Ambr. femel. Paulin. (f) «oXXairA««ov«. 
 L. Barb. i. Syr. hier. Sahid. Orig. Cyr. 1 1 -\- iJusSn. Ev. 44, 
 (g) EFGHKM. 12. 17. 77. log- ii8' 12^- 127. i3i- 218 (cwn^ 
 al. 3.) £v- I. 2- 18- 19- 33- S6. al. 59. Mt, BHV. z** al. 13. 
 Ed. Arm. Antioch. Chryf. etiara in Mt- 6 codd. (h) Z! 
 BDEFGHKLMS. 1. 13. 17. 69- 124. T3r.' 157. Ev. r. 2. 1 5- 
 18- 32. 33- 36' al. 5r. Mt. BH. al. ig. Ed. Orig. Cyr. Theo- 
 phyl. (i) tupiv. D. Mt. o. cane veron. -verc. colb. xorb. 2- clar. 
 Juv. (K) FGH. alii. Mt. BHV. alii. Ed. Theophyl. (0 + i^ov. 
 13' I?' 33- ^9' 124- 23S« al» g. Mt. n. %f>.i£d. Arc AetkArin. 
 iSahid/Syr. p mf. SIav.'ap*Beug. Vulg. mf, verc. corb. 1.2. 
 clar. brix. colb. germ. gat. Chryf. Op. jmp. Gregoc (m) -f- 
 I'u CDL» 5r. 77. Mt. w. Ed. Syr. Arr. Aeth. Arm.^lav.'opf. Beng. 
 Syr. p. cum alb Vulg; cant. verc. veron, rorb, p. for. Cyr. 
 Op. imp. (11) CE. alii. Mr. HV. alii- Ed. (o) -BDU Aetb. 
 SahidL Slav. 2- Vulg- Ir. (eicr. brbr. colb.) Orig. Cyr. Op. imp. 
 (p) i&v. 60. ap. Mill. 90.X16J Sahid. Chrj-il inMt^ 6 codd. 
 ((Q — BC*DL. Copt. Sahid. Aeth.iArr. Yulg.iSax. It (exc. 
 brix. clar.) Oris;. Cyr. Arnnh. 1 1 Ante tenwm hzbeat 76, 
 Mt. q. 
 
 655 
 
(XIV.— I.) 
 
 TV O V U M 
 
 T E S T A M E ]\ T U M 
 
 G R A E G EU 
 
 Textom a£L fidem testiimi cnticonun 
 
 1 e_c ti o n Htm fii:mill«ft 
 
 e graecTs coXciInis namiscri^tis, qui In Eoropae et Jlsiae liIblioiEtecii 
 
 Kjgeriunhn* fere omnibusr, e 'versTombos antlqais, concHiis, . sancHs Patnlmi 
 
 el scTlptatibm ecclesiasttcis qulbnsGunque -veT piimo tcI itenua 
 
 iMillatis cqplas criticas 
 
 alqnB ccmditumem honxni testium crlUcorom 1ustiimam^[ra texba ISoil 
 Testamenti in ptolf^^omenls fiiuua 
 
 pcaelecea. Synaxaria cocficum K9I .2624 274 fjpis irwTTIiPnif^ 
 
 Dh I. VABT. AUGUSTIHUS SCSOL^ 
 
 Vol I. 
 
 TV ETAngella. com^lecteiLb 
 LIPSIAB 1830, 
 
 MVMWXXMVB £AXDI&lfiX E X M.Z ■ OJK ■ li. 
 (7^ A>d«.&MfkAvaO 
 
 556 
 
SM 
 
 (XTV.— 2.) 
 
 EPTSTDLA 1. AD TEMOrni CAPITr HI 
 
 iumnajaeneSi fia^por * iamo'g xaXor" Tcegmoiovyiai, xol noUijr mtQ^Jjalea 
 tk* ^ alata «n ^" ^totif Y/pffoi).] Tavrd • aoi" YQOKpa', Unl^otv iX9eZt 
 U'mpos M * raaww*" '-Soy di ' P(^vm", twt «. «'%"» m5s'd«I'»' «» o&y ^eou 
 
 imngi(p»a9<u, iptts iatir ixxXijola ^eoS ^anog, ' a-rvlog xoi ig^utfid rig ' cAiy- 
 
 ii ales, if tana, n) alcx. og miSt. et ne. ^eoff. 
 
 «) ir 46*. rf>' Ir Tt^To Chi7» (b cmiuaeBt) ck 
 
 e) a* I/ect. 8**. ' " 
 
 lOl =s EC<r- 6. (>7**. tS? aL inatliite £l5t:»poiut 
 
 -«^ « repi iCV 17. 71. 73 aL rajplor 93. ra;rA« 
 
 /) pMtUtmm v;. 
 
 ») -t»'i»^0'' Jlrm. VuJr. Clar. On AmbrosiatU 
 
 nutSiHh oTlrBl ^wS twytot ayaar(iiftit9ai, Jrij (oon??) 
 |»ri» aruloa ttcU ijtHio^vfJrux a. t. I, omissis. i«- 
 ia>fa<a *#o5 iE3«r« jet •"» Woaiiii^dr r^t aX)j9ila( , (ot 
 ■ddito C<<>>'rof pO«K 9iau) Sahid. 
 
 Hie intersting^uAt 75j edd. 
 
 » h/lijaCai 66 in Qt Post lii/jSiiat jiovam |>einO>' 
 dUffl iachoanb Codd. Verss. Patr. f;i'. ctlab iBdd> 
 
 /) S^ai bu ftt qiu'Jem AmbrosiasU 
 
 »n) XuxltjaCai 73^ iiuOfiae Syr. Erp. initfiitf ft Wrt- 
 iBtu Aeth. Aniiu pHiuuis Aml>co«tast, 
 
 «} 9toi hab. codices a me eraminati I 6. t<u 33. 
 05. 44. 46. 67. 68. 69. 70. 7«, 80. 81, 83. 85. 8fc 87* 
 ■ 94. ^, 96! 97. 98. 99. jou row io3. io4i 
 
 ». 44- 4« 
 io5.. 106. 
 
 p37. i38. lit. ,43, i44- 145. 149 »63. iSa iBoi i6& 
 167. 169.' »7o. 171,- 177. 178. 179; 180. i89 mit \B& 
 189- »9». "9^ 19^ >95^ '97- >9^ ifh foa aoa «c& 
 ■o3- zo6< 108. i>i. ai>- *i3. 119. i3o. ><ii «3t< i33. 
 938 et reliqui codices ab''aIiU collati fere nmnest 
 Ltfctionaria, ed«l, Arab p.SIatr.ms. Georg; Tgn- (ep; 
 ad Epbes, V 19111)! forean Terliis 9tot ayi^unirioi 
 maytfovutrot nostrum locum rctpicit) Clir7tusl..Thco: 
 Idorel. DidTfrt. (d« Irinv p. 830 Eulhal.,Nyi». Cq>»« 
 
 Eereaepel 9toa^ kernel c« leeisse vid«tur) Macedoiu 
 lamasc, Qec,uiifc Theoph*!, oe ACFGeri 177 73. 181. 
 (Uiant hoc locd BEH aliique Donnulli; codicev AC 
 B nrirnvmaTniuon 52". ut nonauUis vaunt "fucrat. 
 sea OZhabuisie< in codice lauicinvn pTlmiiAs^O 
 Icctum idipie ■ corrcctore mulioiuniore »a ^2 ti»h 
 tatum tate'i Griesbachus in STmbolar(un criticaruni 
 tomo I. pa^ VlIl-UV et'lomo or* pag. 56 - Bfl 
 demonstrare shiduit. codicci ponim, qui Mae« 
 doDium tub Anastasio . imp^ St, in ><ac mutass4 
 narraruni, add. Copr. 6a1iid»Syn p. m m. Cyr- alei. 
 TlicodoreL Mop». bpipb. Serma uUee lBpp> Chryi. 
 liup.764) Vulgi le (Claf-BaeciCl 6cl8f (TtTcpiu & 
 Macar. hieros. ap. Gclas. tn arc roiwa ^ " 
 a3. Sermo de iocamnl. iotrr opp. Chi 
 • 14. Apu5 Cji-. scylhopol. legituc; « 
 so fiija. t^ tvatfitiaf hfarifift) irmrr^f 
 
 fd 1. fW $jt^ uu. Er^ A«tb. et Ara. Eatcca 
 
 latini oimiiina tecnlorum vmncs I«gerimi -mgtterftm 
 t. tacranuntum quodmanifeitatitm etc. licet du ClirijtO 
 intclligcrent. Sic Hilar. Aug. I'clag. lutian. pelag 
 I'ulgent, "Idadurt Ainbro«iasler„ l«o M. Victorini 
 Cassiaoi Grpgor^ IVt Vigil, taps. Beda.. Clirvsologio* 
 Martina* t. (i° ep'sU ad loannem Pliiladclph. iq 
 Mansi collect amplisa. concilior. toI loi pag. 8i34 
 sed irt versione graeca ibidem exUl <J«) dici*. (irt 
 Es^ 53) \\\ et Acta concilii constantinoik s. (ro1la> 
 tion^ 4 in ciccrpto 53. c Theodori mops. rest, libro 
 J3 i<) incarnationc ap. Maauoni \oh g pa© 'ti^ 
 laUae habent: Qui manifistauu hi in ea)-ne, iutUfit 
 eataa »tt m ipirit^ De Patribus graecis haec notanda 
 Unqtsab. antiqulssimia rarissime bie locna excitaturj 
 ne contra Acianoa quidetn , initia coiitraTersiaa 
 Arianae; .iieo Cyr. alex. provuca* M hi l contra 
 luiianum Imp. negantem Jesum a Eaulo nn^uanl 
 $ppellatum tuissa Deum; neque vocabulum 9to» 
 opponil Nestorio. Ad Christum rcforri potuit boo 
 dictum a Patribus , sive S legerenl sive Sfi "Hmfl 
 Cbristum ipsum nonnulU /n/ar^^io* nnmijiaco Bolet 
 bant, ct scribcre potuit v. c. Iu;tiiiua ad Diognel.j 
 unioTtiU iovor ira xoa/ia farj^ Bt.iia anoQXolmt 
 K)ie«X^iU Sizi i»nSy biunti^n Orig. C. CcU. 3. 'fn- 
 n.oit ir Soin iralafi^aiftafai. it'yirau Idem in Rom. 
 B, a. interprCle Bufino": 1 1 fpu reri%m earo fw 
 Btef ppparuit pnttUs in canai ticut apostottu. Otcit, 
 yuia (fortasse pa) numi/ctlatul etc in carnr^^msbfi,. 
 ca<w etc. TheodotuB cpitom 18. 'i uux^; o(p9>i *a- 
 WMt toK ajjiiois. Basil. Ep. 65. Toi fieyiilou ^wotb- 
 \laii DtJ m xilfioe iifttreca^n ir cagxl. Erga simill 
 irationc scribere ctiam potuit I^aL ad EpJi. 9ioi 
 lSr?f<intrat ^awi^i/piyov. Auctor Conslitul. aposl. 7. 
 36. 9 tie Kwpi' ■ mi^ari\t nf'' ^' eaext Hippol. t: 
 Noet. «7- oJroB rn;o««hli' e<e toafmv Stat iy «">«"< 
 (sod 9iot MtA Sr»furcet idema so. Theodoret.) lf«rr- 
 pw'5ijr . Gregor. thaumat «. Apollinaria polios ap. 
 phot; cod. 4k3o Bl aliii 9tag 1 oae*\ ifartft3ik B 
 laKbus igitur pbrasibus et e locutioanm bi eommato 
 hoc citonliiiri ad Cbristum applicatione neutiquain 
 colligere licctj patrea hosce Icgisw Side NannuUi 
 patrcs l^aeci certe non legci jnt &t6u Clem. »l«x 
 Ipv Oecnni in b. locnrao /i o o 1 ij j itm jitS^ ^9/"^' 
 aSoy t,l ^niloi t t o T Xf JOT or.' Cyr; ■let (qui 
 Hape quiaen\ habet »ro« in Opcmm ertitionUiusj 
 ted perpecam, uti ^luiumim in Synkbniis.- ^iticii 
 (DA. fc. ps£ KTinL) da rurti daa ad TSieodoaiumJ 
 iSftp TM nL^^/oo fm^igw, woiniart XfOtet, •< 
 
 ., ^ lixTg fftir i U\t^ Atoi 0nn^ l^,oi. S, 
 artftiiq etc. Ct ad Regia. 1. -tT( it »r »ao*>. ftf^* 
 i«; 6 Jiiai itt adug ti ani maMsm A im tui m^ 
 
 557 
 
(XV.-l.) 
 
 NOVUM 
 
 TESTAMENTUM 
 
 G R A E C E 
 
 sx kxcensiouk 
 
 CAROIil LACHMANNL 
 
 KiiHo sitreotypth 
 
 BEROLINI 
 
 0^ B Z I M B B* 
 
 UDGCCXXXZ; 
 
 558 
 
(XV.— 2.) 
 ^^ KATA MAPKOIV. 99 
 
 ^oxttQSiay, ow roTg d-eaffaftivotg cwtov fyijyiQfiivoy ix 
 yv^qiav ovk inicrwaav, *'xa« elmv avvoTg JIoQivd-iVTig 
 itg rbv xSof^ov unavrob jitiQv^aTe to tvayytktoir ndan 
 Tjj XT/a«i. % moTivaag xal ^aTixiad-e)^ trw^'afxai, o 
 d^ dmoTTjattg jxaraxQid^atTat, "arnjuXa di roTg ntaTn- i 
 camv nagaxoXovd^jaH. ravra. ^y x^ Mfjiaxi p.ov Sai-^ 
 fMvta Ix^aXovatv, yXcjacatg Xdkijaovatv xatvaTg , ^'*o(petg 
 aQOvatV-xav d^avdatfiov zt nliociv,, ov /a^ aviovg y^Xa- 
 y/Tj' im d^QatOTOvg x^^0^^ imd-^aovaiv , xal xaXwg 
 "tiovatV, ^®6 fiiy ovy xvgiog ''Iijaovg fdsrd, to XaJL^aat 10 
 avToTg dviXi^ncp^ tig ibv ovQavov x«i ixu^taev ix J'e- 
 $<tov rov &tov* ^HxtTyot. Ji i'ieXS^ovitg ixrjqv'iay Tiav 
 taxov, Tov jcvQiov ovvtQyovvzog xal joy Xoyoy fiipat^ 
 ovrsog difib tuv InaxoXov^ovvTuv^afjfuhy*, 
 
 EYArrEAION KATA AQYKAN. 
 
 'JSntiSrj niQ noXXol Inix^tgriffat'^dvaxa'^aa^aii SiTjyriatyti 
 iuqI tdy 7imX7iqo(poQrifiivu)v iy ti^uv TtQo^/f^dttay y *xa- 
 d-wg noQidoaay rjf^ty ol an aQxW o-viomac- xal-vnTjgi-^ 
 Tat yivofievoi^ tov Xoyov^ H'dol^s xd/aol nagTjxoXovd-Tjxori 
 avwb^iy naaiy dxgt^wg xa^t^f\g aot ygdif/afj XQaitare 
 QeocpiXs, *5Va imyvtug jtigi uty ifaTTj/^^d^g Myay t^v»> 
 dogidXetdym 
 
 ^^Eyivixa iy TaTg ^fi{oaig *JTgiu(^ov tov fiaaiXlcJ^ 
 Tijg \Iovdttiag. Ugivg rig ovofian Za^oigiag t^ ig)7]fie» 
 gtag ''j4§tdyxai fwrj avviS ix Tuiv OvyaH^wy Zi4aqwy, 
 xal TO ovofia avTrjg^JEXiad^tT^ ^aav di Sixatot dfi'is 
 (poregof htumoy jov d^eov, nogtvofxevot h ndaaig ratg 
 iyroXatg xal dixataiftaaty tov xvgi'ov afuiinroi, ''xal 
 pvx ^y avTOig jtxvov, xa^oxt ^y ""EXtod/Set ariTgaf xol 
 d/xcporegot ngo^e^tjxoieg iy tatg ^(Jiigaig a/vrcSv ^fjcay, 
 *iyevno di iv iQ hqauvity aixby iV '^fj To^f* jijgso 
 
 24. Xai i ywri avtoxi 
 
 E 2 
 
 559 
 
(XVI.— 1.) 
 
 NOVVM TESTAMENTVM 
 
 GBAECE ET LATIXE 
 
 CAROLVS LACHMANNYS BECENSVIT 
 
 PHILIPPVS BVTTMTANNVS Ptt F, GRAECAB 
 LECTIONIS AYCTOBITATES APPOSVll? 
 
 T0JUV5 TWSXS^ 
 
 BEROUNl 
 
 IN ACDIBTS OKO&OII RXIMIBl 
 A. MDCCCXXXXir 
 
 560 
 
(XVI. -2.) 
 nrot BKBAAOmKETg A. O.^-^) 62l 
 
 "inlq '^c.nlaums vfiSit ^ii ftijdh ioatvia&ai'h jate- 9Xiy/tai¥ 
 •stminu;* uvtol yig ofSata Sxi tU tQVXo KtifuS'a- *xal fclp 8n 
 nifdg vnuQ ^na, n^oiXiyofiiv,vfiTv art niXUfuv &Ufita9tti, Ma&tug 
 vol lyinxQ xa\ oltTaT?. ^bidi tovto xiy^ fujuhi oxiymY tnfftij/a* 
 ifg thiyfOvat jfjv nlatiy.vftuVf fi^ Jifoi imfgaaiy vfias S ntifd- 
 Karp %b1 tie xvhv y/y^jai o xonog ^jiQv, ^agxi 3l IXdhxoQ Tifto^ 
 <Hb9 ngds ^5? Ai^ vftSiv xal tiaYytXiaafiiyov ^^ff tijv nlaxiV 
 ia).T]fv iydnjjv viiwy, nal 5ii I'xtxt fivtlav riiiSi* iya^^p ndyxoxt 
 imnSvSnte ^ftag Uitv xu$dnig xal ^fiitf ifiuft "^dta, xovto nar-M 
 ^o^i^ilfUTt 'dStX^t, ?<p' VfiTv Inl ndajf Tjj &vdyitj}ixal 9Xltpu 
 ^Sr fii i^g viuSr nlaxiaSt ^oxt vvr {|a//ur iaat ifuTg at^jitjxi Ir 
 
 J. maqmaikujan ABJGfgv, oEivftas f il vntQ ABAO, nig) g, 
 pD fgf> %a AA, xo) B;, tvu Q fA'^6fvauairta9ai BAi nTjdiva 
 cvJne9ai g^ itriHivnatPia^s A, ftrfitv aatifia^m (id at nj]6ha 
 9ia(fiv9ai) &, nemo mo^entarffa aid reltetreatur^, nenoreatiir / 
 4. esBEmns gv, iuimoi f /ngodyvitiv ABog, praedicaYimus fy, 
 
 tiQaaAt^ofuv A cxt tuXXoiiiv BXifiia^at ABAGggt passuros nos 
 trilmlatioDeia / 4<5. T/ca^ug xaf ABAvg^ xaS-iae Gfg 6. maxtP 
 Wfuw AAOfgvg, vfuov maxa B t, tif Kairov G, inaais fgo 
 
 renknte fgn jnattheo pr g, tiffloiheo coff g Q, bene {pm fv) 
 AmiiDtiante fgv imtv BAGfffog^ vfuv A 9. f;c"f i^nfiav Tj^uitr 
 AB^^ yjfiar rjcfxai ^uap AGgf memoriain nostri habetis fv 
 %Q. vfUMg ABAGgg, et vo» f nagi^f}»i]f4iv BJGg, nagaxixXij- 
 fikOa A a An tobu fgv tnt,(£y Ggvg) naaij ttj avayxtj xa» 
 &lttyu (dX. Moii 4v, g) ABAGgvg, pa omnem necessitatem et tri- 
 Inlationeni f 12. fjiimy S^ta xijg vftay inaxnag BAGfgg, vftaar 
 Mai Sua xfjg matuug vyiuiy A axnxiixt BAGg, ax^xiit J, statia 
 gp, Ateteritis f 
 
 gelio Cbiisti, ad conibitandos (eonfirmandos L) nos it exbortandoa 
 (exoTt.) pro .fide uestra, 'ut nemo nioaeatur in tribulationibas istis: 
 ipaL(ipse) enim stitis quod in Jioc poaiti samira. ^nam et cum aput (-d) 
 tna essemus, praedicebamua^aobis passuros . noa tribolationes , sicut 
 et factum est et scitis. (10) ^Fropterea et ego amplius non:sustineiu 
 vnsi ed cogooscendam fidem uestram^ ne forte temptanerit nos ii 
 (his F) qui temptat> et iiuuiiM fiat labor noster. (l])ONunc auteiD 
 neniente Timotheo ad nos a oobis ti adountiante nobis fidem et ca- 
 B^tem aestram, et quia memoriam nostri habetis bonam semper 
 desiderantes nos utdere fticot [et L] run quoqne mus, ''ideo consolati 
 ■HDiuSy iratres^ in oobis in omni necessitaie et tribalaUone (t. et n.) 
 juistia per ueitram fidem (C u. F '>})» Vqaamun nunc uiuimusi id 
 
 561 
 
(3tVII.— 1.) 
 
 NOVUM 
 
 TESTAMBNTUM 
 
 G R A E C E. 
 
 TEXTDM AD USESL ANTIftUORIlM TESTIDM: 
 
 JBLKCKffSVIT 
 
 BREVEM APEARATEft CRHICUM 
 
 VNX CXm VARUS leciionibus 
 
 SliZBVIBXOSIIBi; KSAFPU, BCKOiaJO^MjACEStAina 
 
 SUffJUNXXT 
 
 AKGUMENTA ETXOCOS EARALLEIiOS 
 
 XNDICXSIS 
 
 COMMENTATIONEM ISAGOGICAM 
 
 ROTATTS PHQPnnS LECTIONIBDS^ 
 
 EDD. STEPHAMCAE TERTIAE ATQTJE MLLIANAE, 
 MATTHAETANAE, GaiESBACHUNAE 
 
 EAAHMISIT 
 
 AXarOTK FBm. COSriiT. TlSCHEimDaBF 
 
 TBESOjj IJC^I!HIL. JUL SOGIET. BIST. TB£OIL UPS< SODAUS^ 
 
 UESIAE^ MDCCCXLL 
 aUKPTUS 1F£CIX C £* ILOKHItEE. 
 
 562 
 
(XVIL— 21.:) 
 
 fiSainmii 3octrinae fleC^a lervalotelttViteTjjW^oiiUaiAXTIM. Ill, 16, .543 
 
 pa^iiov iccvTOig xalov nsQiTtoiovvtai xcu noklrjjniaqo^dav iv m- 
 
 Tavz(k xjoiyqacfao, iX7tCC,(ov H&eTv fftQO^ cs ivtaxst' ^^ iav }J 
 Si §Qa8vvG3y iva ^id^g naig dd iv oi:xca ^sov avaaTQiqi€ad:ai, ^rts 
 icxw £xxli](Tia ^£ov ^mrogy ctvXoq y.al idottuancc tijg aXij^eiag, 
 ^ *» xal ofioXoyovfiEvcog ueya hxlv to ^^g (vae^euxg ftrffTT/^wr, og is 
 iq}av8Q(6&t] ivaaQXif idLnaw&Tj ivnvEvnaxty wtp&ij ayyiXoigj iiiwv- 
 •^Orj iv E^vBcnv, iniazsv&j] iv ^oaiKp, avsX^rpd'rj iv do^fj^ 
 
 J4. Om. n-^. ae'FGal. Atmr; etlam ante cA^^, ;gon. — l^cKK^SH^wx^of*. 
 
 15, Hab. dii o~b D* Arm.Tj. cf. Or, Ambrst. 
 
 IG. Kc. Kn. Sz.pro o'q h. &e6i;.,\ og (OC^^edionem^haec commenSant: 
 I.) o? li. A*C* (oq lectionem veram. cdd. A et C esscy alVoidio aliisq. 
 adduhilatam illam quidcm, confirmanint IVtst. ct Griesb.')FGgr. 17. 
 (S.XI.) 73. (s. XI.) 181. (8. XIII.) [^hiant BEH aliiquc] cdd. eorum qui 
 (ut Victortun., Liberatus, Hincmarus,) JVIacedoniumsub Anastasio 
 imp. o? Ill 0{6i; mutasse referunt; Cpt. Sah* Syr. p. in nt, Cyr. alex.- 
 (ro fiiya ^l^<; tvo^^^ /cvqtJq. rovxioTcv X^toroq, o q itpavt^tad-ri etc. 
 et alibi; eilitiones repiignantihiis iriss. saepe ^eoq hab.) XUdr. niopsv. 
 Epiph.^ .Gelas. cyz. s. Mac. hr.ap. Galas.; Hier. ; Acta concil. citinop^2. 
 (cilatam e Thdr.mopsv.) il.) h. o D* Vg. It. HiL Augr.Pel. Arahrst. 
 omnesq. reliq^ praetec Hier. modo .citatum, jll.) s. c; 0. o liab. Syr. 
 ■utr.£rp.\Aeth; Atin4 IV.) cette non /^fo? legisse vldentun Thdolui 
 (6 atoT^fj ui(pOf] xatfwv TOi? dyyiXoiq^^ Just.' ad Diogn. (dniaxeiktv 
 koyov^i 'ivcc nootiiif g)(»yfj^ »? cTtcc dno<ix6X<ov y.riQvx0^d<i vno^&viav 
 ercioriv&tjj) CJem^^ap. Oec» (nvaT^Qtor4ie&'* rjfiQv tldov otuyytloi 
 zov X^iazov.) Or, (^Jtiaovq iv So^ij dvaXafijpdvaa&at^iyezcu,) ek 
 Or. intj Bufino (Js qui Verbum caro f actus mpparuit poiiUt (al. 
 -potitns) art earner^ sicut apostolus Hi'citf quia manffestatut est t'n 
 carnej juiVJicatut etc;>j Gr. nyu. (to sAvox'^qiov h oa^xl Iqiavt^ 
 ^u&ij' xaJtw© Touta Xf'yoiVf.ovTOii 6 TifiitfQOi 26yoi;.) Ba». (toC ^€- 
 ydXoO fjevqtyjQioV ore 6 yv^toq i^ctvtqutd-if iv ad^ni.') Keitor. ap. 
 ^mob'ivaiti^o iv vfiMaQla ycvv*}d-iv etc. iqxxvegw&rj-ydQf qiTiaiv, iv 
 cotQui^ iiStr,am9-ij ii^ 7iv.) Sermo inter 0pp. Chr8.(o^oAoj^ov/*^yw?;<iy» 
 iotvv/to r,ivoe^\ nvatji^tov* w^^j^j ayyeAotcv imoxevd-ijiv noap^.).'*' 
 H9^i>? (0C) "hi let eddy reliqul lil. miiravcttlig «cr. practer tre« supra 
 fOIatoi fere oraneii Lectt; Ar.\p:.SI* to«. CHti. Thdrel, Did.Eulhal. 
 |llac«<l. Damsc, Qec. Thphyl. Praetereaque huJc lecironi favere pu- 
 tant; Igii* (a3 EpH. &eov dvd-qwnUxaq <pavfqovixhQv.) Cstitt. apoat. 
 (A^oA*^VQi>t 6 imq>avfh ^M^v iv aaqni.) Hlppol. (&t6q iv au/iaxt iq)avt* 
 f^A^.) Gr« tbaum. i. potiut ApoUin. ap.Phot.'C^ed; iv aa^M favt^oi'' 
 ^'tO — ^ ^9^^ ^v d-fUTiots ii Clero, ap. Oee» 
 
 563 
 
(XVIII. ~1.) 
 
 NOVUM TESTAMENTUM 
 GRAECE 
 
 AD ANTiaUTSSIMOS TESTES DEOTORECENSUTE 
 ikEEARATUMCHrriCTJM OMNI STUDIO PERFECTDM 
 
 APfosmr 
 
 COMMENTAnONEM ISAGOGICAM 
 
 SRAKTEXTJIT 
 
 CONSTJlNTINUS tischendoep. 
 
 IDmO OCIAYA. CRUICAJlCAlDfi. 
 
 TOLXTBOSIN' JL 
 
 LIPSIAE 
 
 CrIESECXE &DEYR1EBT. 
 
 ISO. 
 
 564 
 
(XVIIL— 2.) 
 IQANNOr A' 5, 8. S37 
 
 ^Qiaroa' oux sy rco vdati [iOvoy, aJJi; iy t^ vdari xai w «y a/)iar( * 
 xal TO mevfid iativ to jtaQzv^ovy, outo Ttvsvftoi ionv ij aXj&sta, 
 7 oTi TpcMT eiatv 01 ftoQTVQOvyjsff, 8 w nrn'iMC. xcu ro vdcoa x«i 
 
 cum XABL al plu arm CyrJol»i««. "» etne*"** eta"»«- ThpTiyl Dec ... 
 KP h 15. 22. 33. 34. 36. 32. 56. 100. 192. cat sah Ambspir' ;r?«;r. 
 »>j<r. . . . «■ »»;<r. o ;irpMrT. eum minusc ,^ix mu syrP (Tbphyl et Oec in 
 comm»*n>«i) | fiovop: B ftovot | a^A cum kbkep etc ...a oAAa ... 6. 
 6. 8. 66** 80. al*«or aXXaxat, item syrP | tv r. vdaxt>-.'^aiitart (cav 
 tol aeth add el spiritu): p 31* 83. arm e. t. a(/(ar< - - vSati ... A 81. 
 41. Cyrioli"8 f^ T.-viax^ - - -nvev/iaTif 66** SO. rt.moar*';- - nvur- 
 /««« I tv tert cum ablp 4. 6. 13. 17. 18. 2U 33. 40, 41. 66** 80. 83. 
 118. j8cr kscr cat Cyr»o»i378 ... 5 om cum KK al plu vg Cyr"e»«'*« (om 
 et-Tw) etJoJ»»26 etactM ThphyLOec JlebaptS" j to^rtvfiaacc et. m'" 
 Bebapt3«8 Ambspir''" al . . . 34. "vg (et. am fu cav dendd "harl lux tol 
 et ppaliqlat) arm«9o ChristuSf 'xqusxoa (:: quae Jectiq Latina Gracce 
 in codicem 34. Dublinensem ilium Montfortianum recepta Juculentef 
 testaiur Tersionem°vnIgatam ad eum conficiendum valuisse.^ 
 
 T. OT* xqua (et. Cyrne8t»*» etaetw) ...k 69. a*" oxt o» t(». 
 
 7 et 8. o» fiaqxvqovvxta'. i (= 6b Sz) add iv tw ovqavi^y o Itaxriq, 6 
 yt6yo(:, xai to oyior Tlvtvuot ' Jtoi outo*. oI Tpttc ?»» tl(S%, "KoJ rpiTc 
 {tVtv o» /(a^TK^ot/fTCC ^v T/} /^: baec verba er omnibus cdd 6raeci» 
 duo tantura iuentur, alter saeculi 16. alter Oraecus Latiuus fere 
 15. saeculi, numeris signati 34 (Dublin.) et 162 (Vat.). lu singulis 
 -vero satis ab editis differunt. Sic enim 34. : ort rgtcff new o» ftoQtV' 
 Qovvxia tv TO) ovgavo), naxrjQ Xoyod xa* nvtvua, aymr^ «o» ovti»» 0* 
 xQita tv iMW. xpt» Tftto «M7i.v Ok /tapTvpowwtc ' «i» xtf ^ij, pergcns: 
 TTvti'fxa vdo)Q xoft atfia^ <» tj;» ftaQXVfiiav. Item 162: iTy t^*kt. ttatf 
 01 noiixviiovvxia ano lov ovQavov, naxri^ Xoyoa xa« jtrtv/tct oy«oi», 
 xai. o( Tf «*<f tKT TO «v tiffi. xat Tpucr <»o«v o* fiaQxy^iovvxia ano i-jjer 
 7»j(r, pergens: to trvivfta to'vJw^ xai. to ai/ta. « Tiji* ftaQxvgtav. 
 His dnobus accedere videbatur, Birchioiet Scholzio lestibns, 173. 
 At is verba ista non habet nisi in margine manu recenti. nnius ufc 
 Xnihi videtur ex bibliothecariis, sacc. fete 17. adscripta: id quod 
 alienum'ab antiquorum codicum auctoritate'esseapparet. Praebct 
 autem xaargo eius codicis locum sic ut ex solis editis innotuitt.<i' xai 
 i>tQavw, TiaxtiQ xa» (ita multi ediderunt, ut Beza 1590, Goldha^on 
 1753. atque lam antea Compl.) o Aoyocr xa*/TO ayiov ^nvftct' »o* 
 oito* OKXQHtT tv it(r»,-xa( XQua tiaiv 01 ftaqxvQowxta tvt^ ytj. Simi^ 
 liter ex ed. Complut. eundem locum, exscriptum labeb codex qui 
 dicitur Ravianus: tv/t(i> ovqavo}, o Ttaxr^Q xak o Jioyoa.xairrta uytov 
 tTrtv}ia, i^cu ot^'tgna tta ro tv ttat. xat xoikt tiatV o* aaqxugwixKT 
 f«T^<r^ij(r, post quae verba pergitur: to nviiiua xa»To vSu^ «o» to 
 ««/ia, rt.xriv ftaf^vgiav, Vulgata* codicesi qnoram plBs»« a, 
 AVetsttSb (in diatribe insigUL hunc in locum adOitft fedilioni ». 1806. 
 P- 1 — 25.) aliisque notati cum eisque qui-posfhacumotuernntromninia 
 latiqnissimi am et fu, itemque qui Alcuiiu fuissa creditur valiic«lL% 
 llucajESDORF, N. T. ed. 8. tt^ 
 
 565 
 
(XIX.-1.) 
 
 TEE 
 
 GREEK NEW TESTAMENT, 
 
 ■EDITED FROlf ANCIENT AUTHORITIES, WITH THEIR 
 VARIOUS READINGS IN FULL, 
 
 LATIN VERSION OF JEROME, 
 
 SAKUEL FEIDEAUX TBEGELLES^ LLD. 
 
 L 02? DON. 
 
 fiAMUEL BAGSTEE AND SONS: PATEENOSTER EOW: 
 
 a f, 6XEWABT: EXNG WILLIAM eTEEET, WEST fiIEAin>. 
 
 1857—1879. 
 
 bm 
 
(XIX— 2.) 
 
 AlIOKAAY^i:^ IQA.NOY* 
 
 PQ. o Ofoff Sei^ai TQ19 SovXois avrou a Set yfVfirBcu iv 
 
 ■_^~^-~ Ta\ei, Kot (o-fjiLavtv airooTtlXa^ Sia tov ayyfXov 
 An»."jBth.83Tj avTov' Tu 8ov\(o avrov ''Iwavjj*, *^or e/xapTvprjirev 
 ■TOV Xoyov TOV dfov ^Koi rfjv ftapTvpiav 'lr)<rov x/"" 
 OToD, o(ra * elSev. ^ fiaKapios 6 avayivdxTKav, koX oV 
 aKovovTfs row Aoyour r^p TrporprjTdaf^ Koi rqpovvris 
 ra (P avT^ yfypap.p.iva- it yap Katpof iyyv?. 
 
 * * 'Xadvrjf' TOtf iirra fKKXrjcriaif raif iv rrj 'Atr/a* 
 J(apif Vfuv Koi elp^vT} airo ^ ' 6 (uV kou 6 rju kolL 6 
 fpXopfvor, KoL airo rav t-Trra Trvevpdraiv * rav" iveo- 
 
 TTIOV TOV OpoVOV aVTOV, _ KOLl OTTO ^IrjfTOV Xpi(T70V, "* 6 
 
 ndprvs o TTtcTTOf , 6 Tcpunoraxog * rwv vtKpm', kui 6 
 
 .SSI&, 
 
 i" 
 
 >Es.3:T4. 
 
 i4. a {vwnov 
 
 <in*m dedit illi dcnir, palam 
 tacera tervia mil qnae oportct 
 fieri dto.et tigniliciiTitfliitten* 
 per sn|;clnni saiim terra no 
 
 perlribnit rerho il*i ct te»ti. 
 iDoniom !en ChriMi,(|iiaecnin« 
 que vidit. 'Beuut qui legit 
 et qui andioDt rerba 'pro- 
 phetiaa haiot ct (crTsnt oa 
 quae in ilia icrlpu (not : tent* 
 pns cnim prope c* 
 
 qnae sunt in Asia. GratU 
 Tobia et pax ab co qni est eC 
 qnl erat et qai i-cnttirua ett, M 
 a tepcem ipiritibnii qui in eoo- 
 spectu throni cius aunt, * et ab 
 Ir<a Chriito, qui cat testis 
 fidelia, primogchitnt 
 
 TD(eriptia> 
 JLHOKAATflS IdANOY K(C-ayvav 
 
 et A. in aabaer.) 
 ^nOKAAYSkir TOT AU IQANKOT 
 
 KAI EYArrKAtS TOT l\ 
 
 >nOKAAYfI£ 10 TOY OEOAOrOT 
 
 KAI ETAITEAISTOY Q. 
 
 ■ItKttfvev tttntaXtrtfnc 95. 
 
 ■mcoXtnliic laMnvsn r*« BtoXayov 14. 
 
 9>. 
 
 Ivarvoa reo dioXayoo ancaX>4'<C 8- 
 
 IncaXvi^iC Tou o-jrioB c« irletam a«-«- 
 
 CTvXav cat ivayyiXiorev IiMWOir ro» 
 
 9<aX«rM ijr (» ITar/iy ri| vvffu'aSta- 
 
 ••rs 7« 
 
 ?n«. 
 
 0nm\wf,tt^»» aytan Isavvsv (lir) rov 
 OaaXayou £r. 
 
 % Mfy Dim. .^frA BN EujL ItE. vU. 
 
 tS.<359.) I aani Q. 
 — t sa«»ic Dlm..Alu. I avuHC K* 
 
 1 . rffi rot^X^I TOV tct\np A# 
 
 — o Cfoc 11 li ^fi yiH«0ai] om. Dion, 
 AlfT. »p. Kna. 11. B. 
 
 — luarn sh tt. in inacriptiotie] Juavtt 
 N». I : lunviT, c-> AK«. rel. [Ii. C] 
 
 2. Ii(<rotr xP'<rri(>»] a»m J[>im. Alex. ap. 
 Kua. 
 
 — iim cm. 95.] f ndJ. n C". l- Arm. 
 erfrf. «o«i«k//i. £r. om. AKC. 6. 7. 14. 
 88. I'Q. 91. 05. Vulg. Memph. Arm. 
 erf</. JKth. Srr. Dion. Alex. Cmpl. 
 
 — „in C,i,v AX. 7. Q.) C. 1, «. 14. 38. 
 1*. 91. 9;i.] ail.l. rai artva nnxmi 
 (arrva .18) xpit ytvivOai fura raiva 
 7. (38.) 9 1. Arm. Cmnl. Er. in Annot. 
 I om. rel. Vnlg. Memph. JBA. Bvr. 
 Er. 
 
 S. TOLc Xoyoi'f A(0. rel. Vnlg." | rev 
 XnjroK KQ..,Kth. (rovcXoyoKcrewaifC 
 O.) 
 
 — irpo<>7riiof] add. raimre 7, Vnlg. CL 
 Am. Xlf mph. Ana cdd. Svr. Ftm$. om. 
 luld. Tol. 
 
 4.; li.«v))( }C. I J l««*,t ^. AC rsl. 
 
 4. V «v] t p™*™. te» S.' Sn I 
 «»v 14. Q. Arm. edd. Prmt. \ nihil 
 hahcnt AKC. 1. 6. 7. 38. P. 91. 9S. 
 Vulg. Memph. Arm.crfi jBth. Syr. 
 Cmpl. Er. la Anrmt.. 
 
 — rpxeM't'oc] »dd. omnipotent Prmti 
 
 — » n»] «C <1» AV. 
 
 — r«.A»«..l dC. 6.14.Q. I tBtenia 
 ?. 1. 7. 38. P. 91. 99. Maiqph. Arm< 
 Er. Copt. qn$ in conqMct* ibntA «joi> 
 iant Vulff. 
 
 — arroK] Domtol Jesa ChrM Ah. \ 
 dei aunt /Vai» 
 
 5. T»v v.rpwv] t pruflh-n^V. 1. n, 
 Arm. crfrf. jEth. uf vid. Hipp. (Ijo^rd* 
 180.)er.O»p/. (.id.CoLL) I om. 
 AKC. «. 7. 14. 38, PQ, 95.Y«!g> 
 Memph. Syr. ,V>rt. (Jahn. 67* »8;j 
 iV«». in mortois Anii.t«b 
 
 I aa aoiina a,. - * 
 
 Ma 
 
 38 
 
 567* 
 
(XX.-1.) 
 
 THE NEW TESTAMENT 
 
 IN THE 
 
 ORIGINAL GREEK 
 
 THE TEXT REVISED BY 
 
 BROOKE FOSS WESTCOTT, D.D. 
 
 CANON OF PETERBOROUGH, AND RKGICS PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY, CAMBRIDGE 
 AND 
 
 FENTON JOHN ANTHONY HORT, D.D. 
 
 HDLSEAN PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY, CAMBRIDGE 
 
 AMERICAN EDITION 
 
 "WITH AN" INT R,ODXJCT ION 
 By PHILIP SCHAFF, D.D., LL.D. 
 
 PROFESSOR IN THE UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, NEW YORK 
 PRBSIDKNT OF THE AMERICAN BIBLE REVISION COMMITTEE 
 
 NEW YORK 
 
 HARPER & BROTHERS, FRANKLIN SQUARE 
 
 1896 
 
 568 
 
(XX.-2.) 
 
 14 KATA MAGOAION VI 
 
 auTwv. crov Sc Trotovvrog cXeTj/jioa-vvyjv firj yvtoTw >; apt- 3 
 OTcpa cov Tt TTOtet >/ Be^id crov, ottw? t; crov >; eXerjfxoavvr} 4 
 
 €V TO) KpVTTTO)' Kttl O TTaTTJp aoV 6 (SXeTTiOV iv TO) KprTTTO) ttTTO- 
 
 S(i>oret (Tot. Kat orai/ TTpocr^vyrjaO^y ovk eaecrOc s 
 
 o)S ot viroKpLTar on ^tXovcrii/ ei/ rat? o-vvaytuyats Kat €»/ 
 Tats ycovtats tujv TrAarctwi/ €0Tt3res 7rpoo-€v;(ea^at, ottcds 
 ^avwcrtv rots dvOptoTroLS' dpiijv Xiym v/xtv, d7r€)(ov(rL tov 
 fiLorOov avTOiV. <rv 8e orav Trpoo-evxrjy eiceA96 eic TO 6 
 TAMeloN COY KAi kA€i'cac thn GypAN COY npoccYlAi 
 Tw Trarpi crov t<3 cv T(p KpvTTT^' koI 6 Trarrjp crov 6 
 pXiTTOiv iv TO) KpvTTTO) aTToScuoTCt o-Qt. IIpocrcv;(0/>t€vot SI J 
 firj ^arTaXoytja-rjTe txxnrep ol kOviKoi^ Bokovctlv yap otl cv 
 Tj) TToXvXoyta avTOtv eiaaKovaOrjO-ovraL' /xy ovv opioUiiOrjji 8 
 aurots, otScv yap [o ^cos] o irarrjp vfjLwv wv ^p^iav €)(€T€ 
 TTpo TOV vfjids aiT^craL avTw. Outws ovv 7rpoa€V)(t(r6e 9 
 
 VMCtS 
 
 TLaTcp Tjfi^v 6 Iv rots ovpavots* 
 *Ayiaar6iJT(a to ovofid crov, 
 
 cXOdro) yj (^acnX^ia (toVj j9 
 
 y€vr)6r]T0i to $iX-qp.d aov, 
 
 o>s cV ovpavta Kat eirt y^s* 
 Toi' aprov rjfiiov tov iTnovaLOV n 
 
 Sos i;/xtv (rrjfiepov 
 Kol a^cs >7/Atv Tct ocfietXyixaTa rjpioiv, 22 
 
 ws Kat 7y/x€ts d<^rjKap.€.v Tots o<;f)€tX6Tats ij/w-wi/* 
 Kat /AiJ eia-eveyKT)^ yfid<s cts 7r€tpao-/xoV, ,3 
 
 aAAa pvaaL 17/xas aVo tov irov-qpov. 
 Fiav yap a^rjT€. Tots ai/^pcj7rots Tct TrapaTTTcojaaTa avToJy, 14 
 a^o-et Kat v)u,tv d iraTrjp vfXiav 6 ovpaytos* eav Sc /miJ 15 
 a<t>rJT€ TOt9 av^pcoTTots [tci TrapairTwfxaTa avTwvJ , ovSc d Tra- 
 Ti^p v/A<ov a<l>rjcr€L tu TrapaTrrw/jiaTa v/xcui/. "OTav 16 
 
 Sc vr)(rT€vr}Te, firj yivzaOe oj's ot VffOK,?tTat aKvOptDiroi, 
 o^avifovo-ti/ yap tu Trpdo-coTra aurcGv ottws ^avwo-tv tois 
 
 669 
 
(XXI.) 
 
 570 
 
APPENDIX III. 
 
 LIST OF REVISERS. 
 
 This is the most complete list ever published, and includes all who ac- 
 cepted the appointment and have at any time taken part in the work of re- 
 vision. The members are given the titles and positions held by them during 
 the progress of the Revision. For further biographical information see the 
 Supplement to the Schaff-Herzog Rel. Encyclop., published at N. York and 
 Edinburgh, 1887. 
 
 I. ENGLISH REVISION COMMITTEE. 
 
 (1) Old Testament Company. 
 
 Right Rev. Edward Harold Browne, D.D., Bishop of Winchester 
 
 (Chairman), Farnham Castle, Surrey. (Born March 6, 1811.) 
 Right Rev. Lord Arthur Charles Hervey, D.D., Bishop of Bath and 
 
 Wells, Palace, Wells, Somerset. (Born Aug. 20, 1808.) 
 Rii;ht Rev. Alfred Ollivant, D.D., Bishop of LlandaflF, Bishop's Court, 
 
 Llandaff. (Born in Manchester in 1798 ; died Dec. 16, 1882.) 
 Right Rev. Connop Thirlwall, D.D., Bishop of St. David's, Bath. 
 
 (Born Feb. 11, 1797, at Stepney, Middlesex; died at Bath, July 27, 1875.) 
 Right Rev. Christopher Wordsworth, D.D., Bishop of Lincoln. 
 
 (Boni in 1807 at Ashby, Norfolk; resigned 1870; died March 21, 188.^) 
 Very Rev. John James Stewart Perowne, D.D., Dean of Peter- 
 borough, Deanery, Peterborough. (Born March 13, 1823, at Bunlwan, 
 
 Bengal.) 
 Very Rev. Edward Hayes Plumptre, D.D., Dean of Wells, Wells. 
 
 (Born Aug. 6, 1821 ; resigned March 17, 1874.) 
 Very Rev. Robert Payne Smith, D.D., Dean of Canterbury, Deanerj', 
 
 Canterbury. (Born November, 1818, in Gloucestershire.) 
 Ven. Benjamin Harrison, M.A., Archdeacon of Maidstone, Canon of 
 
 Canterbury, Canterbury. 
 Ven. Henry John Rose, Archdeacon of Bedford. (Died Jan. 1, 1873, 
 
 at Bedford.) 
 
572 LIST OF REVISERS. 
 
 Rev. William Lindsay Alexander, D.D., Professor of Theology, Con- 
 gregational Church Hall, Edinburgh. (Born Aug. 24, 1808, at Edin- 
 burgh ; died Dec. 22, 1884.) 
 
 Robert Lubbock Bensly, Esq., Fellow and Hebrew Lecturer, Gonville and 
 Caius College, Cambridge. (Born Aug. 24, 1831, at Eaton, near Norwich.) 
 
 Rev. John Birrell, Professor of Oriental Languages, St. Andrews, Scot- 
 land. (Born Oct. 21, 1836, near St. Andrews.) 
 
 Frank Chance, Esq., M.D., Burleigh House, Sydenham Hill, London. 
 (Born June 22, 1826, in London.) 
 
 Thomas Chenery, Esq., Reform Club, London, S. W. Editor of " The 
 Times." (Born in 1826, in Barbadoes; died Feb. 11, 1884.) 
 
 Rev. Thomas Kelly Cheyne, Fellow and Hebrew Lecturer, Balliol Col- 
 lege, Oxford. (Born Sept. 18, 1821, in London.) 
 
 Rev. Andrew Bruce Davidson, D.D., Professor of Hebrew, Free Church 
 College, Edinburgh. 
 
 Rev. Benjamin Davies, D.D., LL.D., Baptist College, London. (Born 
 Feb. 26, 1814; died July 19, 1875.) 
 
 Rev. George Douglas, D.D., Professor of Hebrew and Principal of Free 
 Church College, Glasgow. (Born March 2, 1826, at Kilbrachan, Scotland.) 
 
 Rev. Samuel Rolles Driver, D.D., Regius Professor of Hebrew, and Can- 
 on of Christ Church, Oxford. (Born Oct. 2, 1846, at Southampton.) 
 
 Rev. C. J. Elliott, Winkfield Vicarage, Windsor. (Died 1882.) 
 
 Rev. Patrick Fairbairn, D.D., Principal of the Free Church College, 
 Glasgow. (Born January, 1805, at Greenlaw d. Aug. 6, 1874, at Glasgow.) 
 
 Rev. Frederick Field, M.A., LL.D., Hon. Fellow of Trinity College, Cam- 
 bridge. (Born in 1801, in London ; died April 19, 1885, at Norwich.) 
 
 Rev. John Dury Geden, Professor of Hebrew, Wesleyan College, Dids- 
 bury, Manchester. (Born May 4, 1822, at Hastings ; died March, 1886.) 
 
 Rev. Christian D. Ginsburg, LL.D., Elmlea, Wokingham, Berks. 
 
 Rev. Frederick William Gotch, D.D., LL.D., Principal of the Baptist 
 College, Bristol. (Born in 1807, at Kettering ; d.at Bristol, May 17, 1890.) 
 
 Rev. John Jebb, Canon of Hereford. (Born 1805, in Dublin ; resigned 1870.) 
 
 Rev. William Kay, D.D., Chelmsford. (Born April 8, 1820, at Pickering.) 
 
 Rev. Stanley Leathes, D.D., Professor of Hebrew, King's College, Lour 
 don. (Born March 21, 1830, at Ellesborough, Bucks.) 
 
 Rev. Joseph Rawson Lumby, D.D., Norrisian Professor of Divinity, 
 Cambridge. 
 
 Rev. — McGiLL, Professor at St. Andrews. (Died March 16, 1871.) 
 
 Rev. Archibald Henry Sayce, Deputy Professor of Comparative Phi- 
 lology, Oxford. (Born Sept. 25, 1846, at Shirehampton.) 
 
 Rev. William Selwyn, D.D.. Canon of Ely. (B. 1806; d. April 24, 1876.) 
 
LIST OF REVISERS. 673 
 
 Rev. William Robertson Smith, LL.D., Lord Almoner's Professor of 
 Arabic, Cambridge (formerly of the Free Church College, Aberdeen). 
 (Born at Keig, Aberdeenshire, Nov. 8. 1846.) 
 
 ftev. Duncan Hakkness Weir, D.D., Professor of Hebrew in the Uni- 
 versity of Glasgow. (Born in 1822, at Greenock ; died Nov. 24, 1876, 
 in Glasgow.) 
 
 William Wright, LL.D., Professor of Arabic, Cambridge. (Born Jan. 
 17, 1830, in presidency of Bengal, India ; d. May 22, 1889.) 
 
 William Aldis Wright, Esq. (Secretary), Fellow and Bursar of Trinity 
 College, Cambridge. 
 
 Old Test. Company, 37. 
 
 (2) New Testament Company. 
 
 Right Rev. Charles John Ellicott, D.D., Bishop of Gloucester and 
 Bristol (Chairman), Palace, Gloucester, (Born April 25, 1819, at Whit- 
 well, near Stamford.) 
 
 Right Rev. Samuel Wilberforce, D.D., Bishop of Winchester (for- 
 merly of Oxford). (Bom Sept. 7, 1805, at Clapham, near London ; at- 
 tended only a few sessions ; died July 19, 1873.) 
 
 Most Rev. Richard Chenevix Trench, D.D., Archbishop of Dublin, 
 Palace, Dublin. (Bom Sept. 9, 1807; died March 28, 1886, in London.) 
 
 Right Rev. Joseph Barber Lightfoot, D.D., LL.D., Bishop of Dur- 
 ham. (Born April 13, 1828, at Liverpool ; d. Dec. 21, 1889.) 
 
 Right Rev. George Moberly, D.C.L., Bishop of Salisbury, Palace, Salis- 
 bury. (Born Oct. 10, 1803, at St. Petersburg ; d. July 6, 1885, at Salisburj'.) 
 
 Right Rev. Charles Wordsworth, D.C.L., Bishop of St. Andrews, Bish- 
 opshall, St. Andrews, Scotland. (Born Aug. 22, 1806, at Bocking, Engl.) 
 
 Very Rev. Henry Alford, D.D., Dean of Canterbury. (Born Oct. 7, 
 1810, in London \ died Jan. 12, 1871, at Canterburj'.) 
 
 Very Rev. Edward Bickersteth, D.D., Dean of Lichfield, Deanery, Lich- 
 field. (Born Oct. 23, 1814, at Acton, Suffolk.) 
 
 Very Rev. Joseph Williams Blakesley, B.D., Dean of Lincoln, Deanery, 
 Lincoln. (Born March 6, 1808, in Lond. ; died April 18 1885, at Lincoln.) 
 
 Very Rev. Charles Merivale, D.D., Dean of Ely. (Bora March 8, 1808, 
 in London ; resigned 1873.) 
 
 Very Rev. Robert Scott, D.D., Dean of Rochester, Deanery, Rochester. 
 (Born Jan. 26, 1811, at Bondleigh, Devonshire.) 
 
 Very Rev. Arthur Penrhyn Stanley, D.D., Dean of Westminster, 
 Deanery, Westminster. (Born Dec. 13, 1815, at Alderley, Cheshire; 
 (fled July 18, 1881, in London.) 
 
574 LIST OF KEVISERS. 
 
 Very Rev. Charles John Vaughan, D.D., Dean of Llandaff. (Born 
 Aug. 6, 1816, at Leicester.) 
 
 Ven. William Lee, D.D., Archdeacon of Dublin, Dublin. (Born in 1815. 
 in Ireland; died May 11, 1883.) 
 
 Ven. Edwin Palmer, D.D., Archdeacon of Oxford, Christ Church, Ox- 
 ford. (Born July 18. 1824, at Mixbury, Oxfordshire.) 
 
 Rev. Joseph Angus, D.D., President of the Baptist College, Regent'* 
 Park, London. (Born Jan. 16, 1816, at Bolara, Northumberland.) 
 
 Rev. David Brovs^n, D.D., Principal of the Free Church College, Aber- 
 deen. (Born Aug. 17, 1803, at Aberdeen.) 
 
 Rev. John Eadie, D.D., LL.D., Professor of Biblical Literature in the 
 United Presbyterian Church, Glasgow. (Born May 9, 1810, at Alva, 
 Stirlingshire, Scotland ; died Jan. 3, 1876, in Glasgow.) 
 
 Rev. Fenton John Anthony Hokt, D.D., Hulsean Professor of Di- 
 vinity, Cambridge. (Born April 23, 1828, in Dublin.) 
 
 Rev. William Gibson Humphry, B.D., Vicar of St. Martin - in - the 
 Fields, Prebendary of St. Paul's Cathedral, London. (Born Jan. 30, 1815, 
 at Sudburj-^, Suffolk; died Jan. 10, 1885, in London.) 
 
 Rev. Benjamin Hall Kennedy, D.D., Canon of Ely and Regius Pro- 
 fessor of Greek in the University of Cambridge. (Born Nov. 6, 1804, 
 at Summer Hill, near Birmingham.) 
 
 Rev. William Milligan, D.D., Professor of Divinity and Biblical Crit- 
 icism in the University of Aberdeen. (Born March 15, 1821, at Edinb.) 
 
 Rev. William Fiddian Moulton, D.D., Master of The Leys School, 
 Cambridge. (Born March 14, 1835, at Seek, Staffordshire.) 
 
 Rev. Samuel Newth, D.D., Principal of New College, Hampstead, Lon^ 
 don. (Born Feb. 15, 1821, in London.) 
 
 Rev. Alexander Roberts, D.D., Professor of Humanity in the Uni- 
 versity of St. Andrews. 
 
 Rev. Frederick Henry Ambrose Scrivener, LL.D., D.C.L. Preben- 
 dary, Hendon Vicarage, London. (B. Sept. 29, 1813 ; d. Oct. 27, 1891.) 
 
 Rev. George Vance Smith, D.D., Professor, Parade, Carmarthen, Wales 
 (Born June 13, 1816, at Portarlington, Ireland.) 
 
 Mr. Samuel Prideaux Tregelles, LL.D. (Prevented by ill-healtb 
 from attending ; born Jan. 30, 1813, at Falmouth ; died April 24, 1875.) 
 
 Rev. Brooke Foss Westcott, D.D., Regius Professor of Divinity, Trinity 
 College, Cambridge. (Born Jan. 12, 1825, near Birmingham.) 
 
 Rev. John .Troutbeck (Secretary), Dean's Yard, Westminster, London. 
 (Born Nov. 12, 1832, at Blencow, Eng.) 
 
 New Test, Company, 30. 
 Members in both Companies, 67, 
 
LIST OF REVlSEItS. 575 
 
 II. AMERICAN REVISION COMMITTEE. 
 
 General Officers of the whole Committee. 
 Philip Schaff, D.D., LL.D., President. 
 George E. Day, D.D., Secretary. 
 
 (1) Old Testament Company. 
 
 Rev. William Henry Green, D.D., LL.D. (Chairman), Professor of 
 Hebrew in the Theological Seminar}', Princeton, N. J. (Born Jan. 27, 
 1825, in Groveville, N. J.) 
 
 Rev% George E. Day, D.D. (Secretary), Professor of Hebrew in the Di- 
 vinity School of Yale College, New Haven, Conn. (Born March 19, 
 1815, in Pittstield, Mass.) 
 
 Rev. Charles A. Aiken, D.D., Professor of Old Test. Criticism in the 
 Theological Seminary, Princeton, N. J. (Born Oct. 30, 1827, in Man> 
 Chester, Vt.) 
 
 Rev. Talbot W. Chambers, D.D., Collegiate Reformed Dutch Church, 
 N. Y., and Lecturer in the Theological Seminary at New Brunswick, 
 N.J. (Born Feb. 25, 1819, in Carlisle, Pa.) 
 
 Rev. Thomas Jefferson Conant, D.D., Brooklyn, N. Y., formerly Profess- 
 or of Hebrew in the Theological Seminary at Rochester, N. Y. (Born 
 Dec. 13, 1802, in Brandon, Vt. ; d. at Brooklyn, N. Y., April 30, 1891.) 
 
 Rev. John De Witt, D.D., Professor of Hebrew in the Theological Semi- 
 nary, New Brunswick, N. J. (Born Nov. 29, 1821, in New Brunswick, 
 N.J.) 
 
 Rev. George Emlen Hare, D.D., LL.D., Professor of Hebrew in the 
 Divinity School, Philadelphia. (Born Sept. 4, 1805, in Philadelphia.) 
 
 Rev. Charles Porterfield Krauth, D.D., LL.D., Vice-Provost of the 
 University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and Professor in the Evan- 
 gelical Lutheran Theological Seminary in Philadelphia. (Born March 
 17, 1823, in Martinsburg, Va. ; died Jan. 2, 1883, in Philadelphia.) 
 
 Tayler Lewis, LL.D., Professor of Greek and Hebrew, Union College, 
 Schenectady, N. Y. (Born March 27, 1802, in Northumberland, N. Y. ; 
 died May 11, 1877, in Schenectady.) 
 
 Rev. Charles Marsh Mead, D.D., formerly Professor of Hebrew in the 
 Theological Sem. at Andover, Mass. (Born Jan. 28, 1836, at Cornwall, Vt.) 
 
 Rev. Howard Osgood, D.D., LL.D., Professor of Hebrew in the Theo- 
 logical Seminary, Rochester, N. Y. (Born Jan. 4, 1831, in the Parish 
 of Plaquemines, La.) 
 
 Rev. Joseph Packard, D.D., Professor of Hebrew in the Theological 
 Seminary, Alexandria, Va. (Bom Dec. 23, 1812, in Wiscasset, Maine.) 
 
576 LIST OF KEVISERS. 
 
 Rev. Calvin Ellis Stowe, D.D., Hartford, Conn., formerly Proiesaor of 
 
 Hebrew in Andover, Mass. (Born April 26, 1802, at Natick, Mass. ; 
 
 resigned 1876; died Aug. 22, 1886.) 
 James Strong, S.T.D., LL.D., Professor of Hebrew in Drew Theological 
 
 Seminary, Madison, N. J. (Born Aug. 14, 1822, in New York.) 
 Rev. Cornelius V. A. Van Dyck, D.D., M.D., Professor in the American 
 
 College at Beiriit, Syria. (Born Aug. 18, 1818, in Kinderhook, N. Y. 
 
 Advisory Member on questions of Arabic.) 
 
 Old Test. Company, 15. 
 
 (2) New Testament Company. 
 
 Rev. Theodore D. Woolsey, D.D., LL.D. (Chairman), Ex-President of 
 Yale College. (Born Oct. 31, 1801, in New York ; d. at New Haven, 
 July 5, 1889.) 
 
 Rev. J. Henry Thayer, D.D. (Secretary), formerly Professor of New 
 Test. Exegesis in the Theological Seminary at Andover, now in Cam- 
 bridge, Mass. (Born Nov. 7, 1828, in Boston, Mass.) 
 
 Charles Short, LL.D., Professor of Latin in Columbia College, N. York. 
 (Born May 28, 1821, in Haverhill, Mass.; died Dec. 24, 1886, at N. York.) 
 
 Ezra Abbot, D.D., LL.D., Professor of New Test. Exegesis in the Divin- 
 ity School of Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. (Born April 28, 
 1819, in Jackson, Maine ; died at Cambridge, Mass., March 21, 1884.) 
 
 Rev. J. K. Burr, D.D., Trenton, N. J. (Born Sept. 21, 1825, in Middle- 
 town, Conn.; died at Trenton, N. J., April 24, 1882.) 
 
 Thomas Chase, LL.D., President of Haverford College, Pa. (Born June 
 16, 1827, in Worcester, Mass.) 
 
 Rev. George R. Crooks, D.D., Professor in Drew Theological Seminary, 
 Madison, N. J. (Accepted the original appointment, but found it impos- 
 sible to attend, and resigned. Born Feb. 3, 1822, in Philadelphia, Pa.) 
 
 Rev. Howard Crosby, D.D., LL.D., Ex-Chancellor of the University of 
 New York. (Born Feb. 27, 1826, in N. Y. ; d. in N. Y., March 29, 1891 .) 
 
 Rev. Timothy Dwight, D.D., Professor of New Test. Exegesis in the 
 Divinity School of Yale College, New Haven, Conn. (Born Nov. 16, 
 1828, in Norwich, Conn.) 
 
 James Hadley, LL.D., Professor of Greek, Yale College, New Haven, 
 Conn. (Born March 30, 1821, in Fairfield, N. Y. ; died Nov. 14, 1872, 
 in New Haven.) 
 
 Rev. Horatio Balch Hackett, D.D., LL.D., Professor of New Test. 
 Exegesis in the Theological Seminary at Rochester, N. Y. (Born Dec. 
 27, 1808, in Salisbury, Mass. ; died Nov. 2, 1875, in Rochester.) 
 
 Rev. Charles Hodge, D.D., LL.D., Professor of Theology in the Theo- 
 logical Seminary at Princeton, N. J. (Never attended the meeting^ 
 
LIST OF REVISERS. 577 
 
 but corresponded with the Committee. Born Dec. 18, 1797, in Phila- 
 delphia ; died June 19, 1878, in Princeton, N. J.) 
 
 Rev. AsAHEL Clark Kendrick, D.D., LL.D., Professor of Greek in the 
 University of Rochester, N. Y. (Born Dec. 7, 1809, in Poultney, Vt.) 
 
 Biffht Rev. Alfred Lee, D.D., LL.D., Bishop of the Protestant Episco- 
 pal Diocese of Delaware. (Bom Sept. 9, 1807, in Cambridge, Mass. ; 
 died April 12, 1887, at Wilmington, Del.) 
 
 Rev. Matthew B. Riddle, D.D., Professor of New Test. Exegesis in the 
 Theological Seminary, Hartford, Conn. (Born Oct. 17, 1836, in Pitts- 
 burgh, Pa.) 
 
 Rev. Philip Schaff, D.D., LL.D., Professor of Sacred Literature in the 
 Union Theological Seminary, New York. (Born Jan. 1, 1819, in Coire, 
 Switzerland.) 
 
 Rev. Henry Boynton Smith, D.D., LL.D., Professor of Systematic 
 Theology in the Union Theological Seminary, New York. (Attended 
 one session, and resigned from ill-health. Born Nov. 21, 1815, in Port- 
 land, Me. ; died Feb. 7, 1877, in New York.) 
 
 Rev. William Fairfield Warren, D.D., President of Boston Univer- 
 sity, Boston Mass. (Accepted the original appointment, but found it 
 impossible to attend, and resigned. Born March 13, 1833, in Boston.) 
 
 Rev. Edward Abiel Washburn, D.D., LL.D., Rector of Calvary Church, 
 New York. (Born April 16, 1819, in Boston; died Feb. 2, 1881, in 
 New York.) 
 
 New Test. Company, 19. 
 In both Companies, 34. 
 
 [A number of Bishops and Professors of sacred learning, who had been in 
 vited to join the American Committee at its flrst organization in 1871, de 
 clined, from want of time, or other reasons, but expressed interest in tht 
 work and confidence in its success. Among these may be mentioned Bish- 
 ops McHvaine, Whittinghara, and Williams, Dr. Whedon ( Methodist ), Dr. 
 Neviu (Reformed), Dr. Shedd (Presbyterian.)] 
 
 Number of English and American Revisers on the Old Test. Com- 
 pany 52 
 
 Number of English and American Revisers on the New Test. Com- 
 pany 49 
 
 Total 101 
 
 The English Committee up to June, 1887, lost by death and resigna- 
 tion 27 members ; leaving the number still living 40 
 
 The American Committee up to June, 1887, lost by death and resig- 
 nation 14 members ; leaving the number still living 20 
 
 Total 60 
 
APPENDIX IV. 
 
 LIST OF CHANGES 
 
 PROPOSED BY THE AMERICAN COMMITTEE AND 
 ADOPTED BY THE ENGLISH COMMITTEE. 
 
 By Alfred Lee, D.D., 
 
 BIBHOP OF THB PKOTKBTANT EPISCOPAL BIOOBSB OF DRLAWABE. 
 
 [This list was prepared from the oflScial records of the American Commit- 
 tee (printed, bnt not published), and kindly placed at onr disposal by the 
 venerable Bishop Lee, one of the most faithful and regular members of the 
 New Testament Company of Revisers. He wishes it to be understood that 
 the list is far from complete. The A. V. is placed first, the R. V. second. In 
 some cases, slight diflferences between the rendering suggested and that 
 adopted are not noticed.] 
 
 I. AMERICAN SUGGESTIONS ADOPTED IN TEXT. 
 
 Matthew. 
 
 I. 18. "When as his mother . . . was" : "When his mother . . . 
 had been " 
 
 20. " while " : " when " 
 
 22. Instead of, " of the Lord by the prophet," read " by the 
 Lord through the prophet." This change is placed in 
 the Appendix, General Rule, No. V , as preferred through- 
 out. 
 
 24. " from sleep " : " from his sleep " 
 11. 9. " went on before " : " went before " 
 
 10. **When": "And when" 
 
 18. " would not " : " she would not " 
 
580 LIST OF CHANGES. 
 
 II. 20. " which sought " : " that sought " 
 
 23. " shall be called » : " should be called " 
 
 III. 4. "meat" : "food" ; and so elsewhere for rpotpri. 
 13. "Jordan" : "the Jordan" ; and so elsewhere. 
 
 IV. 24. " lunatic " : " epileptic " ; and so elsewhere. 
 V. 1. " was seated " : " had sat down " 
 
 15. " candle " : " candlestick " ; *' lamp " : " stand " ; and so in 
 
 Mark iv. 21 ; Luke xi. 33. 
 26. "lest at any time" : "lest haply"; and so often for 
 
 (xfiirore. 
 35. "neither" : "nor" 
 VI. 6. " when thou hast shut " : " having shut " 
 
 7. " But in praying " : " And in praying " 
 
 8. " Be not ye therefore " : dele " ye " 
 
 16. "sour" : "sad" ; and new paragraph. 
 
 26. " much better " : " of much more value " ; and Luke xii. 24. 
 
 VII. 9. " of whom if his son shall ask bread, will he give" : " who, 
 
 if his son shall ask him for a loaf, will give" 
 
 10. "a fish": "for a fish" 
 "will he give" : "will give" 
 
 VIII. 1. " came down " : " was come down " (A. V.). 
 
 9. " this man " : " this one " ; and Luke. 
 
 11. " and west " : " and the west" 
 
 18. "multitudes" : " great multitudes " 
 
 " other shore" : '* other side" ; and so elsewhere. (With A. V.) 
 34. " the whole city " : " all the city " 
 IX. 31. "And they" : "But they" 
 
 "that country" : "that land" 
 X. 21. "and father shall deliver up child" : "and the father his 
 
 child" 
 XI. 5. " the gospel " : " good tidings " ; and so in Luke vii. 22. 
 7. " look upon " : " behold " ; and so in Luke vii. 24. 
 10. " order thy way " (E. I.)» : " prepare " (A. V.).« 
 23. " Hell " : " Hades " ; and so elsewhere. This change was 
 urged by the American Revisers from the outset, and 
 acquiesced in by the British at the last review. 
 26. " that so " : " for so " ; from margin. 
 XII. 2. Read, " But the Pharisees, when they saw it, said," 
 
 4. " save for the priests alone " : ' but only for the priests " 
 
 * First English Revision. ' Authorized Version. 
 
LIST OF CHANGES. 681 
 
 XII. 12. ! instead of ? 
 
 28. " but if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God " : " but if 
 
 I by the Spirit of God cast out devils " 
 46. "is" : "becometh" 
 
 XIII. 2. " the whole " : " all the " 
 12. "taken" : "taken away" 
 
 15. " should understand " : " understand " 
 
 21. "is offended" : pro. "falleth away" : ad. "stum- 
 
 bleth" 
 26. "amidst the wheat" : "among" 
 83. Margin, " is " (E. I.) : " denotes " 
 44. "for joy thereof" : "in his joy" ; from margin. 
 
 XIV. 1. " report of Jesus " : " report concerning Jesus " 
 19. " and took " : " and he took " 
 
 22. " his disciples " : " the disciples " 
 26. "in their fear" : "for fear" 
 
 XV. 13. *'A11 plants" : "Every plant" 
 26. "to cast" : dele "to" 
 XVII. 4. "good that we be here" : "good for us to be here" 
 (A. V.) ; and so in Mark and Luke. 
 8. " no man " : " no one " ; and Mark ix. 8. 
 11. "truly" : "indeed" 
 XVIII. 3. " be converted " : " turn " ; and John xii. 40, etc. 
 
 22. " seventy times and seven " : " seventy times seven " 
 Exchange text and margin. 
 XIX. 5. " For this " : " For this cause " (A. V.) ; and Mark x. 1. 
 
 8. "the hardness of your hearts" : "your hardness of 
 
 heart " ; and so Mark x. 5. 
 
 9. " whoso marrieth " : " he that marrieth " 
 10. "be so" : "is so" 
 
 XX. 6. " the sixth and ninth " : " the sixth and the ninth * 
 1. " hired " : " hath hired " (A. V.). 
 
 14. " that is thine " : " that which is thine " 
 " it pleaseth me " : " it is my will " 
 
 XXL 10. "moved" : "stirred" 
 
 15. " And when " : "But when " 
 86. "likewise" : " in like manner " 
 
 88. " But when the husbandmen saw . . . they said " : " But 
 the husbandmen, when they saw . . . said " 
 "keep his inheritance" : pro. "have" : ad. "take" 
 
682 LIST OF CHANGES. 
 
 XXI. 41. "his vineyard" : "the vineyard" 
 
 42. " this was the Lord's doing " : " this was from the Lord " ; 
 
 and so Mark xii. 11. 
 XXn. 13. "ministers" : pro. "attendants" : ad. "servants" 
 26. " the seven " : " the seventh " (A. V.). 
 34. "were gathered" : pro. "gathered" : ad. "gathered 
 themselves " 
 
 43. " in spirit " : " in the Spirit " 
 
 XXIIL 8. "master" : "teacher" : (Another reading.) The Amer- 
 ican Revisers preferred always to translate SiddaKa- 
 Xoe, "teacher." 
 14. Margin, "and that" : "even while" ; and so Mark 
 xii. 40. 
 
 23. " to leave the other " : " to have left the other " 
 26. "maybe" : "may become" 
 
 33. " escape from the judgment " : dele " from " 
 XXIV. 8. " pains" : pro. "pangs " : ad. "travail" ; and Mark xiii.8. 
 14. "this gospel" : margin, "Or, these good tidings" 
 16. " which be " : " that are " 
 22. " should have been " : " would have been " 
 25. " foretold you " : " have told you beforehand " ; and so 
 Mark xiii. 23. 
 
 43. " the thief cometh " : " was coming " 
 XXV. 9. Dele "iVay" 
 
 XXVI. 16. " betray him" : "deliver him unto them'''' ; and elsewhere. 
 
 24. " good were it for him if that man had not been born " : 
 
 " good were it for that man if he had not been born " 
 (A. v.). 
 39. " praying and saying " : " and prayed saying " 
 
 44. " saying the same words again " : " saying again the 
 
 same words " 
 
 49. " forthwith " : " straightway " 
 
 "kissed him" : margin, *'Gr., kissed him much" ; and 
 elsewhere. 
 
 50. "/s it thu for which thou art come?" : Do that for 
 
 which thou art come." 
 66. " guilty " (of death) : " worthy " ; and so Mark xiv. 64. 
 
 XXVII. 6. " silver pieces " : " pieces of silver " 
 21. "They said " : " And they said " 
 
 24. "a tumult was made" : "a tumult was arising" 
 
LIST OF CHANGES. 583 
 
 XXVII, 44. "cast the same in his teeth" : "cast upon him the 
 
 same reproach " 
 47. "Some" : "And some" 
 50. " And Jesus, when he had cried again . . . yielded " : 
 
 "And Jesus cried again . . . and yielded" 
 58. "begged" : " asked for" ; and so in other places for a/riw. 
 61. "And there was there Mary Magdalene " : "And Mary 
 
 Magdalene was there " 
 XXVIII. 11. " were done" : "were come to pass " 
 16. "appointed" : "had appointed" 
 
 Mark. 
 
 I. 4. "there came John" : pro. "John appeared" : ad. 
 "John came" 
 26. " having torn him, and cried " : " tearing him and crying " 
 43. "solemnly" : pro. "sternly" [Put in margin] : ad. 
 " strictly " ; and Matt. ix. 80. 
 II. 3. " carried " : " borne " 
 
 15. " Cometh to pass " : " came to pass " 
 
 III. 8. " all the things " : " what great things " 
 
 10. " for to touch him " : " that they might touch him " 
 26. "riseth up" : "hath risen up" 
 
 IV. 8. " thirty . . . sixty ... a hundred " : " thirtyfold . . . 
 
 sixtyfold ... a hundredfold " 
 22. "but rathei' that" : "but that" 
 30. " place it ?" : " set it forth ?" 
 32. " it groweth up " : dele " it " 
 " all herbs " : " all the herbs " 
 
 " putteth forth " : pro. " maketh " : ad. " putteth ^ut " 
 36. "take him" "take him with them" 
 89. " arose " : " awoke " 
 V. 3. " among the tombs " : " in the tombs " 
 
 11. "nigh unto the mountain" pro. "by the mountain" : 
 
 ad. " on the mountain side " 
 36. " Be not afraid " : " Fear not " 
 88. ^^ people " : pro. Roman type : ad. " man^ " 
 40. " when he had " : " having " 
 VI. 2. "the many"«(E. I.) : "many" and change margin. 
 
 22. "his daughter Herodias" : substitute margin, "tUf 
 daughter of Herodias herself " 
 3it 
 
584 LIST OF CHANGES. 
 
 VI. 24. "should I ask" : "shall I ask" 
 
 54. "they" : '' the people'' 
 
 VII. 8. " lay aside " : pro. " let go " : ad. " leave " 
 
 18. "Is it so that ye also are" : pro. "So then are ye also" : 
 
 ad. " Are ye so . . . also " 
 21. "proceed all evil thoughts" : "evil thoughts proceed" 
 VIII. 13. " neither had they " : " and they had not " 
 
 18. " remember, when " : "remember? When" 
 
 19, 20. " ye took up ?" : " took ye up ?" 
 
 IX. 3. " such that no fuller . . . can so whiten them " : " so as 
 no fuller on earth can whiten them " 
 8. " when they had looked " : " looking " 
 12. "truly" : "indeed" 
 
 18. Exchange margin and text, "rendeth him" : "dasheth 
 
 him down " ; and Luke ix. 42. 
 X. 2. " and they asked " : dele " they " 
 3Y. " thy left hand " : " thy " italics. 
 XI. 8. " leaves " : pro. " boughs with leaves " ; and dele margin • : 
 
 ad. " branches " 
 XII. 9. "shall": "will" 
 
 10. "so much as this" : "even this" 
 
 XIII. 2. " on another " : " upon another " 
 
 11. "lead you" : pro. "lead you away" : ad. "lead you to 
 
 ptdgement " 
 14. " which be " : " that are " 
 
 19. " as hath not been " : as there hath not been " 
 
 20. " should have been saved " : " would have been saved " 
 23. "foretold you all things" : "told you all things before- 
 hand" 
 
 27. "from the end" (E. I.) : "from the uttermost part" 
 35. "either" : "whether" 
 
 XIV. 8. " to the burying " : " for the burying " 
 25. " drink no more " : " no more drink " 
 32. " while I shall pray " : " while I pray " 
 
 55. " all the council " : " the whole council " 
 
 XV. 37. "when he had uttered . . . gave up" : "uttered . . . and 
 
 gave up " 
 43. "begged" : "asked for" 
 " counsellor " : " councillor " 
 XVI. 7. " go your way " : " go " 
 
LIST OF CHANGES. 585 
 
 Luke. 
 
 I. 21. " was waiting " : " were waiting '* 
 
 28. Exchange margin and text. " Endued with grace " : " high- 
 
 ly favoured " 
 30. "grace" : "favour" 
 87. "from God no word" : "no word from God" 
 
 58. "how" : "that" 
 
 59. "were calling" : pro. "were about to call" : ad. "would 
 
 have called " 
 II. 2. " Quirinus " : " Quirinius " 
 
 8. " keeping " : " and keeping " 
 
 9. " stood over " : " stood by " 
 
 35. " shall pierce " : " shall pierce through " 
 49. Read, " in my father's house ?" with E. I. 
 
 III. 8. " worthy of your repentance " : dele " your " ; put in margin. 
 18. " Many other things, therefore, in his exhortation preached 
 
 he unto the people " : " With many other exhortations, 
 therefore, he preached good tidings unto the people " 
 
 35. "Salah" : "Shelah" 
 
 IV. 25. " a great famine came " : " there came a great famine " 
 41. "forbade them" : "suffered them not" 
 
 V. 22. " What " : " Why " ; put in margin. 
 VI. 3. " so much as this " : " even this " 
 
 27. "do well" : "do good" 
 VII. 1. " After that " : dele " that " 
 
 2. " held in honor by " (E. I.) : pro. " highly valued by " : ad. 
 " dear unto " 
 "Ready to die" : pro. "about to die" : ad. "at the point 
 of death" 
 
 36. "was justified" : pro. "hath been" : ad. "is" 
 VIII. 1. "proclaiming" : "preaching" 
 
 6. " fell down on the rock " : dele " down " 
 14. "as they go" : "as they go on their way" 
 25. " who then is this ? for he " : " who then is this, that he " 
 
 29. "caught" : "seized" ; and Acts vi. 12, and elsewhere. 
 
 "Bound, being kept with chains" : "kept under guard 
 and bound with chains " 
 IX. 7,8. "of":"by"(^«r). 
 
 12. " here we are" : " we are here" 
 
586 LIST OF CHANGES. 
 
 IX. 58. Margin: " roosting places ":" lodging places " 
 
 X. 1. " seventy and two " E. I. : " seventy " and change margin, 
 and V. 17. 
 
 Y. "workman" : "labourer" 
 
 21. "that so" : "for so" Ex. text and margin. 
 
 22. "to whomsoever" : "he to whomsoever" 
 29. "willing" : pro. "wishing" : ad. "desiring" 
 41. "careful" : "anxious" 
 
 XI. 39. "dish": "platter" 
 
 45. " thus saying," : " in saying this " 
 XII. 11. "unto": "before" 
 
 36. "and ye yourselves" : "and be ye yourselves" 
 
 46. "faithless" : "unfaithful" 
 58. "exactor" : "officer" 
 
 XIII. 4. " debtors " E. I. : " offenders " ; margin, " Gr. debtors." 
 9. Insert "weW" after "thenceforth" 
 
 16. "to be loosed" : "to have been loosed" 
 
 XIV. 1. "chief Pharisees" : " rulers of the Pharisees" 
 
 23. " compel " : " constrain " 
 XV. Y. " just " : " righteous " 
 
 13. "a country afar off" : "a far country" (and Luke xix. 
 
 12, A. v.). 
 XVI. 2. " mayest be " : " canst be " 
 
 3. " I cannot dig " : " I have not strength to dig " 
 
 14. " mocked " : " scoffed " 
 
 16. " the kingdom" : pro. "the glad tidings of the kingdom " : 
 
 ad. "the gospel of" 
 28. " warn " : " testify unto " 
 XVn. 2. " profitable " : pro. " gain " : ad. " well " 
 6. " would obey " : " would have obeyed " 
 
 17. " were there not the ten " : " were not the ten " 
 33. " shall quicken it " : " shall preserve it " (A. V.). 
 
 XVIII. 9. " the rest " : " all others " 
 
 22. " Yet lackest thou one thing " : " One thing thou lackest 
 yet " 
 
 XIX. 2. " bmig himself also rich " : " and he was rich " 
 
 XX. 46. "Take heed of" : "Beware of" 
 
 XXI. 25. " waves " : pro. " the swelling waves " : ad. " the billows " 
 
 35. "break in" E. I. : "come" 
 
 XXII. 29. Read "I appoint unto you a kingdom" 
 
LIST OF CHANGES. 587 
 
 XXII. 37. "for indeed that" : dele "indeed" 
 
 XXIII. 1. "number" : pro. "multitude" : ad. "company" 
 12. "together" : "with each other" 
 
 " with each other " : " between themselves " 
 23. "requiring" : pro. "demanding" : ad. "asking" 
 35. " derided " : " scoffed at " 
 55. "sepulchre " : " tomb" ; and so elsewhere for fivrifiiiov. 
 
 XXIV. 22. " made us astonished " : " amazed us " 
 39. " behold me have " : " behold me having " 
 
 John. 
 
 I. 5. Exchange text and margin. " overcame " : " appre- 
 
 hended" 
 6. " There was " : pro. " appeared " : ad. " came " 
 1. "through him might believe" : "might believe throuiv i 
 
 him" 
 8. " but that he might " : " but came that he might " 
 12. Exchange text and margin, "power" : "the right" 
 
 14. "the glory" : "glory" 
 
 15. "spake" : "said" 
 
 18. Exchange text and margin. " God only begotten" : "the 
 only begotten Son " 
 
 33. "Holy Ghost" : "Holy Spirit" ; and Acts vi. 5. 
 42. " (Which is by interpretation, Peter)," 
 
 48. "before that Philip" : "before Philip" 
 
 II. 6. " the manner of the purifying of the Jews " : " the Jews' 
 
 manner of purifying " 
 ■ 10. " largely " (E. I. ) : " freely " 
 
 III. 8. Exchange margin and text, "The Spirit breatheth" : 
 
 " The wind bloweth " 
 
 IV. 21. "at Jerusalem" : "in Jerusalem" 
 22. "of the Jews" : "from the Jews" 
 25. " tell us " : " declare unto us " 
 
 2Y. "talked" : pro. " was talking" : ad. " was speaking" 
 
 34. "perfect" : "accomplish" ; and xvii. 4. 
 39. " for the word " : " because of the word " 
 
 V. 6. " Wilt thou " : " Wouldest thou " 
 
 30. " of mine own self " : " of myself " 
 
 39. "scriptures; foryethink": "scriptures, because ye think" 
 
 VI. 1. " over" ; " to the other side of " 
 
588 LIST OF CHANGES. 
 
 VI. 39. " all which " : " all that which " 
 
 41. "at" : "concerning" 
 
 66. "After this" : "Upon this" 
 VII. 6. " present " : " come " (A. V.). 
 16, 17. "doctrine" : "teaching" 
 
 18. "his glory that sent him" : " the glory of him that sent 
 him"" 
 
 45. " Why have ye not brought him ?" : " Why did ye not 
 
 bring him ?" 
 
 51. "hear him" : "hear from himself" 
 
 52. Exchange margin and text. " see : for out of Galilee " : 
 
 " see that out of Galillee " 
 Vm. 3. " when they had " : " having " 
 
 12. " Jesus therefore again " : " Again therefore Jesus " etc. 
 
 42. " came out " : " came forth " 
 
 46. " say the truth " : dele " the " 
 
 49. "ye do dishonour" : dele "do" 
 IX. 5. "Whensoever" : "When" 
 
 X. 12. "scattereth^Ae/ocA;" : " scattereth <Acm " 
 38. "If I do": "If I do them" 
 41. "John did" : "John indeed did" 
 XI. 12. "he shall be saved" : "he will recover" 
 20. " Mary sat still " : " Mary still sat " 
 28. " her sister, saying secretly " : " her sister secretly, saying" 
 4Y. "miracles" : "signs" Exchange margin and text. 
 
 50. " reckon " : pro. " consider " : ad. " take account " 
 XII. 28. " from heaven " : " out of heaven " 
 
 36. " was hidden " (E. I.) : " hid himself " 
 38. " who believed " : " who hath believed " 
 50. "whatsoever" : "the things which" 
 Xill. 18. " I chose " : " I have chosen " 
 23, 28. " at meat " : " at the table " 
 34. " I loved you " : " I have loved you 
 " may love" (E. I.) : dele " may" 
 XV. 3. " Even now " : " Already" 
 
 5. " without me " : " apart from me " 
 15. "have heard" : "heard" 
 XVI. 8, " of sin " : " in respect of sin " 
 
 18. Return to A. V. 
 XVII. 13. "And now" : "But now" 
 
LIST OF CHANGES. 589 
 
 XVIL 24. " they also may be with me where I am " : " where I am, 
 
 they also may be with me " 
 XVIIL 6. " As soon then as " : " When therefore " 
 9. "of them which" : "of those whom" 
 15. " and that disciple" : " Now that disciple" 
 20. " whither all the Jews resort " : " where all the Jews 
 
 come together " •• 
 
 30. " would not " : " should not " 
 XIX. 12. "whosoever" : "every one that" 
 
 17. "a place" : "the place" 
 
 30. "gave up the ghost" : "gave up his spirit" {irapeSuKs 
 
 TO irvEVfia). 
 39. "which": "he who" 
 XXI. 11. " went up ":" went aboard " (In margin.) 
 IV. "seest" : "knowest" 
 
 20. " leaned on his breast " : " leaned back on bis breast " 
 
 Acts. 
 I. 4. "saithhe'': "said he'' 
 13. "room" : "chamber" 
 
 18. "acquired" : "obtained" 
 
 21. " Wherefore of the men " : " Of the men therefore" 
 
 23. " appointed" : pro. " set forth " : ad. " put forward " 
 II. 6, 11. "speak" : "speaking" 
 
 20. " before the great and notable day of the Lord come" : 
 " before the day of the Lord come, that great and no- 
 table day'' 
 
 22. Exchange text and margin. " powers " : "mighty works " 
 
 24. " pains " : " pangs " 
 26. "rest" : "dwell" 
 
 32. "of whom" : "whereof" ; and so iii. 16. 
 
 38. " for the remission " " unto the remission " 
 
 39. " unto you " : " to you " 
 
 47. "suchas were in the way of salvation. "(E. I.): "them that 
 were being saved." [Further change suggested by 
 American Committee and not adopted.] See Appendix. 
 III. 1. " for the hour " (E. I.) : " at the hour " 
 10. "gate" : "Gate" 
 20. " which was " : " who hath been " 
 22. " say " : " speak " 
 
590 LIST OF CHANGES. 
 
 rV. 2. " being troubled " : "being sore troubled"; and xvi. 18. 
 
 9. " be examined " : " are examined " 
 
 12. " our salvation is not in any other " (E.jl.) : " in none other 
 
 is there salvation " 
 
 24. " hast made " : " didst make " 
 
 26. "hast said" : "didst say" 
 
 27. "hast anointed" : "didst anoint" 
 
 28. " to be done " : " should come to pass " : a'd. " to come to 
 
 32. " and one soul " : dele " one " 
 
 V. 15. " some of them " : " some one of them " 
 
 21. "early in the morning" : pro. "about the dawn of day" : 
 
 ad. " about daybreak " 
 30. " ye hanged on a tree, and slew " : " ye slew, hanging him 
 
 on a tree " 
 
 33. " wished " : " were minded " 
 
 34. "reputation" : "honour" 
 
 " little space " : " little while " 
 
 35. " intend to do " : " are about to do " 
 
 36. " brought to nought " : " came to nought " 
 VI. 1. "And in these days" : "Now in these days'* 
 
 14. " delivered us " : " delivered unto us " 
 VII. 4. " he removed " : " God removed " 
 
 1 1. " dearth " : " famine " ; also xi. 28. 
 
 1 2. " first " : " the first time " — — - 
 16. "Emmor" : "Hamor" 
 
 33. "from off thy feet" : dele "off" 
 
 40. "brought" :'*led" 
 
 45. "receiving it after," : " received in their turn, and" 
 52. " ye were even now " : " ye have now become " 
 VIII. 10. "great" : "Great" 
 
 21. "this word" : "this matter" (A. V.). 
 23. " for gall " : " in the gall " Margin, pro. " art become bitter 
 gall " : ad. " wilt become gall (or, a gal 1 root) of bitterness " 
 38. " went down both " : " both went down " 
 IX. 17. " mightest " : " mayest " 
 
 23. " counsel ":" counsel together " 
 
 32. " passed " : pro. " was going " : ad. " went " 
 
 33. " and was sick of the palsy " : " for he w?is palsied " 
 
 34. " maketh thee whole " : " healeth thee " 
 
 41. " when he had called " : "calling " 
 
LIST OF CHANGES. 591 
 
 X. 10. "would have eaten" : pro. " wished to eat" : ad. "desired 
 to eat " 
 17. "porch" : "gate" 
 28. " and to me " : " and yet unto me " 
 
 33, " are coramanded " : " have been commanded " 
 
 36. " He sent the word " : " The word which he sent " : " he is 
 Lord of all " in ( ). 
 XI. 4. " rehearsed " : pro. " set forth " : ad. " expounded " 
 13. "which stood and said" : "standing . . . and saying" 
 
 19. "They then which" : pro. "Now they that" : ad. "They 
 
 therefore that " 
 23. " in the purpose of their heart " : " with purpose of heart " 
 26. "assembled themselves" : pro. "came together" : ad. 
 " were gathered together " 
 " in the church " : " with the church " 
 XIIL 5. "minister" : pro. "assistant" : ad. "attendant" 
 
 7. " who called " : " The same called " 
 10. "thou child" : "thou son" 
 
 13. " sailed " : " set sail " ; also xvi. 11, xx. 3. 
 
 16. "with his hand" : "with the hand" 
 
 20. " about the space of " ; " for about " 
 
 34. " faithful " : " sure " 
 
 46. "waxed bold" : "spake out boldly" 
 " have been spoken " : " be spoken " 
 XIV. 6. " perceived it " : " became aware of it '^ 
 19. "And": "But" 
 
 " came thither certain Jews " : " came Jews thither " 
 " drew " : " dragged " 
 XV. 1. "manner" : "custom" ; also xvii. 2. 
 
 10. " to put " : pro. " by putting " : ad. " that ye should put " 
 
 17. 18. Read "who maketh these things known " ; and margin. 
 25. " being assembled with one accord " : pro. " having come 
 
 to one mind " with marg., " having come together " : 
 ad. "having come to one accord" 
 31. "at the exhortation" : "for the consolation" (A. V.). 
 38. " not right " : pro. " meet not " : ad. " not good " 
 XVI. 4. " that were ordained " : " which had been ordained " 
 6. " preach " : " speak " 
 
 8. " and they passed by Mysia, and came " : " and passing by 
 
 Mysia, they came " 
 
 18. " the spirit came out" : " it came out" 
 
592 LIST OF CHANGES. 
 
 X VII. 28. " things that ye worship " (E. I.) : "objects of your worship '* 
 XVIII. 10. "hurt": "harm" 
 
 18. " unto Syria " : " for Syria " 
 
 24. " born at Alexandria " : " an Alexandrian by race ** 
 
 25. "in the spirit" : "in spirit" ; and xix. 21, same change 
 
 proposed. 
 
 26. " John. The same " : " John : and he " 
 
 " synagogue : but " : " synagogue. But " 
 21. Exchange text and margin : "helped much through 
 grace them which had believed " : " helped them 
 much which had believed through grace " 
 XIX. 2. In margin for " be a Holy Ghost " : " is " etc. 
 
 7. " all the men were " : " they were in all " 
 
 8, 9. " disputing " : pro. " discoursing " : ad. " reasoning " 
 15. "Jesus I acknowledge" : "Jesus I know" 
 
 31. " which were his friends " : " being his friends " 
 39. " enquire " : pro. " seek for " : ad. " seek " 
 XX. 3. " three months were past " : " he had spent three months 
 there'' 
 6. " had come " : " had gone before " : change of text. 
 10. " Trouble not yourselves " : " Make ye no ado " 
 2*7. " all the counsel " : " the whole counsel " 
 
 28. Exchange text and margin. " overseers " : " bishops " 
 XXI. 9. " Now the same man " : " Now this man " 
 
 20. " zealous of the law " : " zealous for the law" 
 
 26. " strangled " : " what is strangled " 
 31. "sought" : "were seeking" 
 
 "chief captain" : margin, "military tribune" 
 " an uproar " : " confusion " 
 XXII. 13. " standing over me " : " standing by me" 
 15. "his witness" : "a witness for him" 
 
 19. "believe" : "believed" 
 
 XXIII. 6. " of the hope " : pro. " for the hope " : ad. " touching " etc 
 15. "for that ye would" ; "as though ye would" 
 
 27. " would have been slain " : " was about to be slain " 
 " my soldiers " : " the soldiers " 
 
 29. " touching " : pro. " concerning " : ad. " about " 
 
 XXIV. 11. "understand" : pro. "ascertain" : ad. "take knowledge" 
 12. " gathering " : " stirring up " 
 
 14. " 80 worship I " : " so serve I " 
 
LIST OF CHANGES. 593 
 
 XXIV. 14. " and written " : " and which are written *• 
 
 18. ( : ) after " offerings " instead of ( . ) 
 24. " his own wife ''^ : " his wife " 
 
 XXV. 1. "the province" : "his province" : ad. in margia 
 8. " answered for himself " : " said in his defence " 
 11. "I be a wrong-doer" : "I am" etc. 
 16. " that he which is accused " : " that the accused " 
 
 19. "superstition" : "religion" : text in margin. 
 22. " should wish " : " could wish " 
 
 XXVL 3. " because thou art specially expert " : " especially be* 
 cause thou art expert " : pro. for margin, ad. in text. 
 14. "pricks" : "goad" 
 
 16. "wherein thou hast seen me": "which thou hast 
 
 seen " ; put in margin. 
 
 22. " the succour of " : " the help that is from " 
 XXVII. 9. "already past" : "gone by" : ad. "already gone 
 
 by" 
 
 17. " run into " : " fall away into " : ad. " be cast upon " 
 19. " furniture " : pro. " movables " : ad. " tackling " (A. V.). 
 21. " not set sail " : " not have set sail " 
 
 XXVIII. 4. "justice" : "Justice" 
 6. "mind": "minds" 
 
 8. " it came to pass " : pro. " it happened " : ad. " it was so " 
 " to whom " : " unto whom " 
 17. " were of the Jews first " : " were chief of the Jews " \ 
 
 ad. " were the chief of the Jews " 
 19. " not because " : " not that " 
 
 Romans. 
 
 L 1. " bondman " : " servant " ; marg. " Or, bond-servant" 
 2. " holy scriptures " : " the holy scriptures " 
 4. " resurrection " : " the resurrection " 
 17. "the righteousness" : "a righteousness" 
 
 26. " affections " : " passions " 
 
 32. " do " : " practise " {his) : " commit " : " do " 
 II. 1. "inexcusable" : "without excuse" 
 17. "art named" : "bearest the name of" 
 
 23. "in a law" : "in the law" 
 
 27. " through the letter " : " with the letter " 
 III. 6. " as a man " : " after the manner of men " 
 
594 LIST 0$^ CSANGES. 
 
 III. 20, 28. " works of law " : " the works of the law " ; from 
 
 margin. 
 31. " law " : " the law " (bis) ; dele margin, 
 "through the faith" : "through faith" 
 
 IV. 12. Dele " that he might be " (E. I.). 
 
 18. "was spoken" : "had been spoken" 
 
 19. "regarded" : "considered" 
 
 V. 5. " maketh not ashamed " : " putteth not to shame " 
 
 8. " establisheth " : "commendeth" 
 
 11. " our reconciliation " : " the reconciliation" 
 
 20. " a law " : " the law " 
 
 VI. 2. " live any longer " : " any longer live " 
 
 4. "even so we" : "so we" 
 
 13. "from being dead" : "from the dead" 
 
 21. " therefore had ye then " : " then had ye at that time" 
 VII. 1. " know law " : " know the law " 
 
 5. " by the law " : " through the law " 
 1. " lust " : " coveting " 
 
 12. " Wherefore " : " So that " 
 VIII. 2. Dele margin, " thee " for " me " 
 
 28. " with them " : " to them " 
 IX. 1. "therewith bearing me witness" : "bearing witness with 
 me" 
 
 6. A marginal rendering was suggested (see American Ap- 
 
 pendix), for which three others were substituted. 
 21. " one vessel " : " one part a vessel " ; from margin. 
 X. 7. "deep" : "abyss" 
 
 12. Pro. "being rich" : ad. "and is rich" 
 
 14. Dele margin, "of whom" 
 16. "obey" : "hearken to" 
 
 XL 22, 23. "abide" : "continue" 
 
 30. "yet" : "but" 
 XII. 3. " not to be highminded above what he ought to be minded ; 
 but to be so minded as to be soberminded " : " not to 
 think of himself more highly than he ought to think ; 
 but so to think as to think soberly " 
 
 13. " following after hospitality" : "given to hospitality" 
 16. "Be not highminded " : pro. " Mind not high things " : ad. 
 
 " Set not your mind on high things " 
 XIV. 23. " it is not " : " he eateth not " (A. V.). 
 
LIST OF CHANGES. 596 
 
 1 Corinthians. 
 
 I. 2. Insert " them that are " before " sanctified " 
 3. "grace" : "Grace" 
 
 11. "shewn" : pro. "made known" : ad. "signified" 
 
 12. "And this I say" : "Now this I mean" 
 22. Dele "likewise" before "Greeks" 
 
 II. 4. "my message" : "my preaching" (A. V.). 
 VII. 26. " necessity " (E. I.) : " distress " (A. V.). 
 
 37. " virgin " : " virgin daughter " 
 IX. 17. "willingly" : "of mine own will" 
 
 " unwillingly " : " not of mine own will " 
 19. " being" free : pro. " though I am " : ad. " though I was " 
 X. 2. **into Moses" : "unto Moses" 
 XI. 7, " a man " : " a man indeed " (A. V.). 
 
 XIII. 1, 2, 3. " and have not " : " but have not " 
 
 5. " reckoneth not the evil" (E. I.) : " taketh not account of evil" 
 
 12. "in a glass" : "in a mirror" ; and 2 Cor. iii. 18. 
 
 13. " greater " : " greatest " ; margin, " Gr., greater " 
 
 XIV. 22. " wherefore the tongues " : dele " the " 
 XV. 1. " declare " : " make known " 
 
 Dele " as touching " before " the gospel " 
 34. " as is right " : " righteously " 
 XVI. 12. " God's will " (E. I.) : " his will " 
 
 " that he should come " : " to come " 
 
 2 Corinthians. 
 
 III. 18. "Moses put" : "Moses, who put" 
 
 IV. 8. " afflicted " : " pressed " 
 
 16. "having multiplied may through the many" : "being 
 
 multiplied through the many may " 
 V. 21. " sin for us " : " sin on our behalf " 
 VII. 2. Margin, " Gr., Contain us " : " Make room for us" 
 
 " defrauded " : " took advantage of " 
 Vni. 3. " of their own " : " they gave of their own " 
 
 4. " they offered the grace " : " for the grace " : ad. " in regard 
 of" etc. 
 
 17. "for he accepted" : "for indeed he accepted" 
 
 IX. 13. " for the subjection of your prof ession to the gospel ":" for 
 the obedience of your confession unto the gospel " 
 
596 LIST OF CHANGES. 
 
 X. 8. Dele "aw authority''^ and enclose "which . . . down'* 
 in( ). 
 9. " as it were to " : " as if I would " (A. V.). 
 10. "forcible": "strong" 
 
 12. "do not understand" : "are without understanding" 
 XI. 2. " have espoused " : dele " have " 
 
 "may present" : "might present" 
 6. " in everything we have made manifest the gospel among 
 all men unto you " : " in everything we have made it 
 manifest among all men to you- ward " 
 
 20. "taketh you" : pro. "catcheth you" : ad. "taketh you 
 
 captive " 
 23. " I am more than they " : " I more " 
 
 "exceedingly": pro. "beyond measure": ad. "above measure" 
 XIII. 3. "mighty" : "powerful" 
 
 4. "might" (E. I.) : "power" bis. 
 1, "should": "may" 6m. 
 
 Galatians. 
 
 II. 6. "what they once were" (E. I.) : "whatsoever they were" 
 (from margin), 
 "imparted nothing more" : "imparted nothing" 
 ' 16. " works of law " : " works of the law " ier^ and iii. 2, 6, 10. 
 
 III. 11. "in the law " : " by the law " ; margin, " Gr., in" 
 
 IV. 11. "I have toiled for you" : "I have bestowed labour upon 
 
 you" (A. v.). 
 IT. " zealously court you " (E. I.) : " zealously seek you " 
 
 18. "courted" (E.I.) : "sought"; (.) after "you" instead 
 
 of(,). 
 
 19. "my": "My" 
 
 V. 4. "put away" : " severed" 
 "fallen" : "fallen away" 
 
 13. "For ye were called . . . brethren" : "For ye, brethren, 
 
 were called " 
 
 21. " do such things " : " practise such things " 
 
 Ephksians. 
 
 II. 6. " raised us up " : " raised us up with him ' 
 "to sit together" : " to sit with him " 
 
LIST OF CHANGES. 597 
 
 n. 15. *^even the enmity, in his flesh, having abolished" : "having 
 abolished in his flesh the enmity " 
 
 16. "slain the enmity in it" : "slain the enmity thereby" 
 in. 17. "ye being rooted" : "to the end that ye," etc. 
 
 18. " that ye may have strength " : pro. " may be fully able " : 
 ad. "may be strong" 
 
 21. Insert "Amen" at end of verse. 
 rV. 21. "by him" : "in him" 
 
 22. " decayeth according to " : " waxeth corrupt after " 
 
 V. 19. "speaking to yourselves" : "speaking one to another" ; 
 
 and Colos. iii. 16. 
 VI. 13. " take up unto you " : " take up " 
 
 24. "in incorruption " : pro. "in love incorruptible" : ad. "in, 
 uncorruptness " 
 
 Philippians. 
 I. 8. " compassions " (E. I.) : pro. " tenderness " : ad. ** tender 
 mercies " 
 10. " giving no offence " : " void of offence " 
 
 17. "supposing" : "thinking" 
 20. " ashamed " : " put to shame " 
 28. "to them": "for them" 
 
 II. 3. " themselves " : " himself " 
 
 4. "on his own" : "to his own" 
 
 8. " unto death " : " even unto death " 
 
 10. " in earth " : " on earth " 
 
 12. ( ; ) after " trembling " instead of ( . ). 
 22. " unto " : " in furtherance of " 
 
 IV. 7. " keep your hearts " : " guard your hearts " 
 
 8. "make account of" (E. I.) : "think on" (A. V.). 
 
 13. "enableth me" : pro. "giveth me power" : ad. "strength- 
 
 eneth me" (A. V.). 
 
 22. "chiefly" : "especially" 
 
 COLOSSIANS. 
 
 I. 2. " holy " : exchange with margin, " saints " 
 
 14. " the redemption " : " our redemption " 
 
 23. " be not moved away " : dele " be " 
 
 n. 1. " with how great striving I contend " : pro. " how great a 
 contest I have" : ad. "how greatly I strive" 
 
598 LIST OF CHANGES. 
 
 II. 10. " fulfilled " : " made full " 
 
 18. "taking his stand upon" : "dwelling in" 
 
 23. " not of any value " : " b\it are not of any value" 
 
 IV. 2. " instant " : pro. " stedfast " : ad. " stedfastly " 
 
 3. "would open" : "may open" 
 
 " a door of utterance " : "a door for the word " ; frona 
 margin. 
 
 1 Thessalonians. 
 
 II. 2. " with much contention " : " in much conflict " 
 
 4. " put in trust " : " intrusted " 
 
 7. "babes" : "gentle" 
 
 13. "of us" : "from us" 
 
 IV. 6. " forewarned you " : pro. " told you before " : ad. in margin, 
 " told you plainly " 
 
 2 Thessalonians. 
 
 I. 11. " the calling ":" your calling " 
 
 II. 4. " an object of worship " : "that is worshipped*" (A. V). 
 6. " to the intent " : " to the end " 
 " his season " : " his own season '' 
 
 8. " appearing of his presence " (E. I.) : " manifestation of his 
 
 coming " 
 III. 9. " power " : " the right " 
 
 1 TiMOTHT. 
 
 I. 5. "Now" : "But" 
 
 10. " whoremongers ":" fornicators " 
 
 12. "to minister" (E. I.) : "to his service" 
 
 III. 7. " a good report of " : " good testimony from " 
 
 V. 6. " liveth in pleasure " : " giveth herself to pleasure " 
 
 11. "come to wax" : pro. "have grown" : ad. "have waxed" 
 
 14. " women " : " widows " Text and margin exchanged. 
 22. "thine own self" : "thyself" 
 
 25. " be otherwise " : " are otherwise " 
 VI. 2. " the more " : " the rather " 
 3. "other" : "a different" 
 10. " all evil " : " all kinds of evil " ; so E. I. 
 
LIST OF CHANGES. 599 
 
 2 Timothy. 
 I 14. "by": "through'* 
 II. 14. " testifying unto " : " charging " 
 
 18. " who concerning the truth " : " men who" etc. 
 
 19. " iniquity " : " unrighteousness " 
 25. "might": "may" 
 
 III. 9. " Howbeit " : pro. " Yet " : ad. " But " 
 
 IV. 1. " I protest " : " I charge thee " (A. V.). 
 
 3. " having itching ears " after " but," instead of " teachers " 
 
 6. In margin, " poured " : " poured out " 
 
 16. "supported me" : pro. "was by my side" : ad. "took my 
 part " 
 
 Titus. 
 I. 5. " are wanting " : " were wanting " 
 
 8. " a lover of hospitality " : " given to hospitality " 
 
 12. " slow bellies " : " idle gluttons " 
 IL 1. "become": "befit" 
 
 4. dele margin " discipUne " 
 
 7. " a pattern " : " an ensample " 
 
 III. 1. "principalities" : pro. "governments" : ad. "rulers" 
 
 6, " the laver"(E. I.) : pro. "a washing" : ad. "the washing" 
 " the renewing " : pro. " a renewing " : ad. " renewing " 
 
 Philemon. 
 
 2. " our sister " : " the sister " Put in margin. 
 
 Hebrews. 
 L 2. " by whom " : " through whom " 
 
 8. " a sceptre of thy kingdom " : " the sceptre " etc. 
 
 II. 10. " having brought " : " in bringing " Text in margin. 
 14. "Forasmuch then as" : "Since then" 
 
 III. 2, 6, 6. " his house " : pro. " His house " : margin added, " That is 
 
 God's house " 
 
 3. " in so much " : pro. " by as much " : ad. " by so much " 
 
 13. "daily" : "day by day" 
 
 14. dele ( ). 
 
 " partakers of Christ " : add in margin, " Or, with Christ" 
 
 IV. 2. " a gospel " : " good tidings " 
 
 8. " would he not " : " he would not " 
 10. "himself also hath" : "hath himself also" 
 40 
 
600 LIST OF CHAIJGES. 
 
 IV, 12, " of joints and marrow " : " of both joints and marrow " 
 
 14, "profession" : "confession" 
 
 15. " but that" : " but one that " 
 
 V. 9. Arrangement (that of A. V.) changed. 
 VI. 13. " because " : " since " 
 
 20. " as our forerunner " : " as a forerunner " 
 VII. 19. "bringing in" : "bringing in thereupon" 
 
 VIII. 4. " have been a priest " : " be a priest " 
 
 5. " serve an example " : " serve tJmt which is a copy " 
 
 6. " was established " : pro. " hath been established " : ad. 
 
 " hath been enacted " 
 IX. 1. "Even the first covenant then" : "Now even the first 
 covenant " 
 2. '^are'* : ''were" 
 4. "is": "wfos" 
 9. " unto the time " : " for the time " 
 
 "perfect . . . him that doeth the service" : "make the 
 worshipper perfect " 
 
 10. " (which rest only on meats and drinks and divers wash- 
 
 ings)" : ''being only (with meats, etc.)" 
 
 11. In margin, "have come" : "are come" 
 
 12. "gained": "obtained" 
 
 22. " blood is " : " blood there is " 
 
 24. " to be manifested " : " to appear " (A. V.). 
 28. "without sin" : "apart from sin" 
 
 X. 16. Arrangement changed : " upon their mind also will I write" 
 
 25. " manner ":" custom " 
 
 34. " ye have yourselves for a better possession " (E, I.) : " ye 
 yourselves have a better " etc. Exch. marg. and text. 
 XL 1*7, "and he that had received" : pro, "yea, he that had ac- 
 cepted " : ad, " yea, he that had gladly received " 
 XII. 15. "many be defiled" : "the many" etc. 
 
 22. " innumerable hosts " ; add in marg., " Gr., myriads " 
 XIII, 20. "by the blood" : "with the blood" 
 
 James. 
 
 I. 2. "among": "into" 
 
 21. "superfluity" : pro. "excess" : ad. "overflowing" 
 
 23. " any be " : " any one is " 
 
 II. 3. " in honour " : " in a good place " (A. V.) : pro. for marg. 
 
LIST OF CHANGES. 601 
 
 n. 8. " Yet if " : pro. " If however " : ad. " Howbeit if " 
 9. " work sin " : " commit sin " (A. V.)* 
 13. "glorieth over" : "glorieth against" (A. V.). 
 22. " his faith wrought " : dele " his " 
 m. 15. " This wisdom is not one that " : pro. " Thisio not a wisdom 
 that " : ad. " This wisdom is not a wisdom that " 
 Vl. "doubtfulness" : pro. " partiality " (in marg.) : ad. "vari- 
 ance" 
 rV. 4. " desireth to be " : pro, " chooseth to be " : ad. " would be" 
 5. "planted" : "made to dwell" ; both in text and margin. 
 
 12. "The lawgiver and judge is one, even he" : "One only is 
 
 the lawgiver and judge, he " 
 V. 13. " psalms " : pro. " praises " : ad. " praise " 
 
 1 Peter. 
 
 I. 12. "reported" : pro. "declared" : ad. "announced" 
 
 13. "entirely" : "perfectly" 
 
 20. " verily was foreknown " : " was foreknown indeed " 
 
 22. " with a clean heart " : " from the heart " Exchange marg. 
 
 and text. 
 
 23. " born again " : " begotten again " 
 
 24. " For " put at end of line preceding : " all " : " All " 
 II. 2. " sincere " : pro. " pure " : ad. " which is without guile " 
 
 12. " whereas " : " wherein " : and so iii. 16. 
 20. "be buffeted" : "are buffeted" 
 
 25. " overseer " : " Bishop " (A. V.). 
 III. 3. " that outward " : " the outward " 
 
 V. 2. " feed " : " tend " 
 
 3. " exercising lordship " : " lording it " ; from margin. 
 
 2 Peter. 
 
 I. 1. " Symeon " : " Simon " Exchange margin and text. 
 
 8. "being yours and abounding unto you''^ : pro. "belonging 
 unto you and abounding " : ad. " are yours and abound " 
 II. 1. " were ":" arose " 
 
 4. "into dungeons " ; pro. "into the abyss" : ad. "to hell" 
 7. " oppressed " : pro. " wearied out " : ad. " sore distressed " 
 
 10. " dignities " ; add marg., " Gr., glories " ; and so Jude 8. 
 15, " Beor " ; add marg. note of the reading Bosor, 
 
602 LIST OF CHANGES. 
 
 III. 12. "hastening" : pro, "eagerly desiring" : ad. "earnestly de- 
 siring" ; margin, "Or, hastening" 
 
 1 John. 
 
 II. 1. " sin not " : " may not sin " 
 
 3. " perceive we " : " know we " ; and so vs. 5, 18, etc. 
 V. 16. "sin a sin" : "sinning a sin" 
 
 " of " : " concerning " 
 
 2 John. 
 
 9. goeth "before" : pro. "forward" : ad. "onward" 
 
 3 John. 
 
 8. " I rejoice greatly, when brethren come and bear witness " : 
 " I rejoiced greatly, when brethren came and bare wit- 
 ness " 
 
 8. "support" : pro. "sustain" : ad. " welcome" 
 
 JUDK. 
 
 4. "sentence" : pro. "judgement" : ad. "condemnation" 
 
 7. " as an example of eternal fire, suffering punishment " : " as 
 an example, suffering the punishment of eternal fire " 
 Text and margin exchanged. 
 8 " dreamers also " : pro. " also, dreaming " : ad. " also in their 
 
 dreamings " 
 12. " shepherds to themselves " : " shepherds that feed them- 
 selves" 
 
 Reyelation. 
 I. 2. " of the witness " : "of the testimony " ; and ver. 9, vi. 9. 
 16. " went " : pro. " went forth " : ad. " proceeded " 
 19. "after them" : "hereafter" ; and so iv. 1. 
 II. 19. "faith and love" : "love and faith" 
 
 III. 2. " perfect " : pro. " perfected " : ad. " fulfilled " 
 
 IV. 1. " open " : " opened " 
 
 V. 1. " sitteth " : " sat " ; and v. 7. 
 
 9. " out of every tribe " : " men of every tribe " 
 VI. 8. " sat thereon " : "sat upon him " 
 
 9. " beneath the altar " : " underneath the altar " 
 VII. 12. "all blessing" : pro. "the blessing" from margin : ad. 
 blessing " 
 " unto our God " : " 6e unto our God *' 
 
LIST OF CHANGES. 603 
 
 VII. 15. " tabernacle among them " : " spread his tabernacle over 
 them " ; from margin. 
 IX. 6. " mankind shall seek " : " men shall seek " 
 XI. 4. " which are before the Lord of the earth, and there stand " : 
 " standing before the Lord of the earth " 
 
 n. SUGGESTIONS OF THE AMERICAN COMMITTEE PUT 
 IN MARGIN. 
 
 Matthew. 
 
 I. 1. "The book of the generation" : "The genealogy" 
 11, 12, 1 v. " carrying away " : " removal " 
 
 V. 35. "by" Jerusalem : add marg. "Or, toward" 
 VI. 19. " break through " : Gr., " dig through " ; and xxiv. 43. 
 Vm. 8. " say in a word " (E. I.) : Gr., " with a word " 
 20. " nests " : Gr., " lodging places " 
 IX. 6, 8. " power " : « authority " 
 
 X. 21. "cause them to be put to death" : add marg. "Or, put 
 them to death " ; and so Luke xxi. 16 ; Mark xiii. 12. 
 XI. 11. did not "mourn" : Gr., "beat the breast" 
 XIL 32. "world" : add marg. "Or, age" ; so elsewhere. 
 XIV. 19. "sit down" : Gr., "recline" ; and so elsewhere. 
 
 This explanation becomes important in such passages as 
 Luke vii. 38 and John xiii. 23. 
 XVII. 4. " tabernacles " : add marg. " Or, booths " ; and Mark ix. 5. 
 XXm. 23. " anise " : add marg. " Or, dill " 
 XXVI. 41. add margin, "Watch ye, and pray that ye enter not" ; 
 
 and so Mark xiv. 38. 
 XXVII. 28. " stripped " : Some ancient authorities read " clothed " 
 
 Mark. 
 XIV. 68. " porch " : Gr., " forecourt " 
 
 Luke. 
 
 II. 1 9, 51. " sayings " : add marg. " Or, things " 
 
 49. restore in marg. " about my Father's business " 
 VI. 35. (A. V.) " hoping for nothing again " (E. L) : " never de- 
 spairing " ; add margin, as a various reading, " de- 
 spairing of no man " 
 XV. 16, " husks " : Gr., " pods of the carob tree" 
 
604 LIST OF CHANGES. 
 
 XVII. 18. "stranger" : "alien" 
 XX. 16. " God forbid " : Gr., " Be it not so»' 
 
 John. 
 II. 19, 20, 21. "temple" : add marg. " Or, sanctuary " ; and so 
 in other places where vaog occurs. 
 VII. 21, 22. " marvel. For this cause hath Moses given " : " mar- 
 vel because of this. Moses hath given " 
 VIII. 58. " Abraham was " : " was born " : ad. marg. " Gr., was 
 born " 
 XI. 38. "against it" : add marg. "Or, upon it" 
 
 45. " that which " : Many ancient authorities read " the 
 things which" 
 XII. 27. "hour" : add marg. " Or, hour ?" 
 XVIII. 12. " chief captain " : add marg. " Or, military tribune ; Gr., 
 chiliarch " ; and so elsewhere. 
 XIX. 23. "coat" : add marg. "Or, tunic" 
 XX. 11. " Touch me not " : add marg. " Or, Take not hold on me " 
 
 Acts. 
 II. 23. " lawless men " : add marg. " Or, men without the law " 
 III. 13. "Servant" : add marg. "Or, Child," etc. 
 
 22. " like unto me " : "as he raised up me " : text in marg. 
 V. 6. "young" : "younger" 
 
 VI. 2. "fit" : "pleasing" : marg. "Gr., pleasing" 
 VII. 35. "deliverer" : "redeemer" : marg. "Gr., redeemer" 
 XIV. 16. "passions " : "nature" ; and so James v. 17. 
 XVII. 31. "the man" : "a man" 
 
 XVIII. 4. " persuaded " : pro. " exhorted " : with marg. " Or, strove 
 to persuade " : ad. marg. " Gr., sought to persuade " 
 XXI. 15. " put up our baggage " : " made ready " etc. 
 XXIV. 17. "many" : "some" 
 
 18. "amidst which" : add marg. "Or, m presenting which" 
 25. "temperance" : add marg. " Or, self-control" ; and so 
 Gal. V. 23 ; 2 Pet. i. 6. 
 
 Romans. 
 I. 20. " that they may be" : add marg. "Or, so that they are" 
 II. 13. "just" : add marg. "Or, righteous" 
 
 "justified" : add marg. " Or, accounted righteous" 
 
LIST OF CHANGES. 605 
 
 1 Corinthians. 
 IX. 26. "fight": Gr., "box" 
 
 XV. 2. " in vain " : add marg. " Or, without cause ** 
 
 2 Corinthians. 
 
 V. 17. "he is & new creature" : add marg. "Or, there is a new 
 
 creation " 
 XII. 1. Some ancient authorities read, "Now to glory is not expe- 
 dient, but I will come" 
 
 Galatians. 
 I. 18. "visit" : "become acquainted with** 
 
 Ephesians. 
 I. 4, B. add marg. " Or, him : having in love foreordained us " 
 10. '• in the heavens" : Gr., "upon" etc. 
 
 Philippians. 
 II. 15. "lights": Gr., " luminaries " 
 IV. 20. " for ever and ever " : Gr., " unto the ages of the ages " 
 
 1 Thessalonians. 
 IV. 14. add. marg. " Or, will God through Jesus " 
 
 1 Timothy. 
 III. 16. "he who": Some ancient authorities read " which " 
 
 Philemon. 
 6» " thy love, and of the faith " : " thy love and faith " 
 
 Hebrews. 
 II. 7, 9. add marg. " Or, for a little while lower " 
 
 18. Or, " For having been himself tempted in that wherein he 
 hath suffered " 
 V. 11. " of whom " : add marg. " Or, of which " 
 
 VI. 11. *'full assurance" : "fulness" ; and so x. 22. 
 
 IX. 15, IT. The Greek word here used signifies both covenant and 
 testament. 
 
606 LIST OF CHANGES. 
 
 IX. 26. "by the sacrifice of himself" : "by his sacrifice" 
 X. 11. "priest" : Some ancient authorities read, "high priest" 
 12. Or, " sins, for ever sat down " 
 
 38. "my righteous one" : Some ancient authorities read, "the 
 righteous one " 
 XIII. 7. " life " : Gr., " manner of life " 
 
 James. 
 I. 13. "of God" : "from God" : ad. marg. "Gr.,from" 
 II. 4. "are ye not divided in your own mhid " : "do ye not make 
 
 distinctions among yourselves " 
 TIL 15. add to margin, "Or, animal" ; and Jude 19. 
 V. 1. " it receive " : add marg. " Or, he receive " 
 
 1 Peter. 
 r. 23. Or, " God who liveth " 
 
 II. 24. " bare our sins . . . upon the tree " : " carried up our 
 sins ... to the tree" : pro. "upon the tree" 
 
 2 Peter. 
 
 I. 4. " the divine nature " : "a divine nature " 
 
 17. " excellent glory " : " majestic glory " 
 11. 20. Many ancient authorities read, " our Lord " 
 
 1 John. 
 III. 2. Or, " it shall be manifested " 
 
 2 John. 
 
 8. Many ancient authorities read, "ye have wrought" 
 
 Jude. 
 4. add marg. " Or, the only Master, and our Lord Jesus Christ " 
 22. " who are in doubt " : " while they dispute with you " 
 
 Revelation. 
 VI. 1. Some ancient authorities read, " Come and see." So ver. 
 3, 5, 7. 
 8. " death " : add marg. " Or, pestilence " 
 
APPENDIX V. 
 
 ADOPTION OF THE KEYISION BY THE 
 BAPTISTS. 
 
 A FEW days after this book was completed an important event took 
 place — the first formal act of adoption of the Revised Version by an 
 ecclesiastical body. 
 
 The American Baptists, the most numerous denomination in the 
 United States next to the Methodists, and the pioneers in the Bible 
 Revision work, who spent much money and labor on a revision of 
 their own for more than thirty years, held a Bible Convention in 
 Saratoga in May, 1883 — the most widely representative Baptist Conven- 
 tion ever held ; and after a full discussion of the whole subject, came 
 to the unanimous conclusion to adopt and circulate through their 
 Publication and Missionary Societies the Anglo-American Revision^ 
 with the American changes incorporated in the text^ together with the 
 Authorized Version and that of the Baptist " American Bible Union " 
 (Dr. Conant's), according to the desire of the purchasers and donors. 
 The scene of rejoicing over this unexpected result of a long and ex- 
 cited contest was remarkable ; and the assembly which crowded the 
 church sang "Blessed be the tie that binds," and "Praise God from 
 whom all blessings flow," with an enthusiasm rarely witnessed. 
 
 The action was undoubtedly the wisest that could be taken by that 
 body. Let the three versions be used together in friendly rivalry and 
 co-operation, until the best will supersede the others, or a still more 
 perfect one will take the place of all. A liberal gentleman has already 
 donated to the Baptist Board of Publication electrotype plates of an 
 Americaniaed edition of the Revised New Testament of 1881, and 
 much money has been contributed towards its gratuitous circulation. 
 It is also extensively used in the pulpits. The Baptists have broken 
 the ice and showed the way to other denominations. 
 
 The following is the adopting act, as furnished to me on the spot 
 by the Secretary, the Rev. Dr. Morgan : 
 
608 ADOPTION OF THE REVISION BY THE BAPTISTS. 
 
 " At a meeting of The Baptist Bible Convention, held in Saratoga, 
 N. Y., May 22, 23, 1883, at which there were present and voting four 
 hundred and thirty-six delegates, the following resolution was adopted 
 unanimously : 
 
 " ' Resolved (4th), That, while in the judgment of the Convention 
 the work of revision is not yet completed, whatever organization or 
 organizations shall be designated as the most desirable for the prose- 
 cution of Home Bible work among American Baptists should now 
 circulate the commonly received version, The New Revised Versioriy 
 with the corrections of the American Revisers incorporated in the text^ 
 and the translation of " The American Bible Union," according to de- 
 mand; and that all moneys specially designated for circulation of 
 either of these versions should be faithfully appropriated in keeping 
 with the wish of the donor.' 
 
 "Attest: Thomas J Morgan, Secretary." 
 
ADDENDA TO PAGE 80. 
 
 Summary of Peculiar Words of the New Testa- 
 ment AND ITS Several Writers, According to 
 Dr. Thayer. {Gr. Engl. Lex. of the N. T., 
 Appendix, pp. 691-710.) 
 
 Post-Aristotelian words (used after 322 B.C.) in the New Test, 318 
 (16 doubtful). 
 
 Borrowed words, which make their first appearance in the New Test. : 
 From the Hebrew, 57. 
 " '* Latin, 30. 
 
 " other foreign tongues (Jiatov and pkSa)^ 2. 
 Biblical, i. e. New Testament, Greek words, 767 (89 ?). 
 Greek words peculiar to 
 
 Matthew, 137 (2 from Sept., 21 ?). 
 
 Mark, 102 (1 from Sept., 32 ?). 
 
 Luke, 312 (11 from Sept., 52 ?). 
 
 All three Synoptists, 78 (1 from Sept., 10 ?). 
 
 John (Gospel), 114 (12 ?). 
 
 John (including Epistles), 133 (13 ?). 
 
 Acts, 478 (15 from Sept., 49 ?). 
 
 Luke and Acts, 61, total in both, 851. 
 
 (a.) Paul (excluding Pastoral Epistles), 627 (21 from Sept., 34 ?). 
 
 (6.) Pastoral Epistles of Paul, 168 (10 ?). 
 (1 Tim. 82 ; 2 Tim. 53 ; Tit. 33.) 
 
 (c.) Both to Pastoral and the other Pauline Epistles, 63 (6 ?), 
 
 Hebrews, 168 (11 from Sept., 10 ?). 
 
 James, 73 (1 from Sept., 9 ?). 
 
 Peter, 121. 
 
 Jude, 20 (1 ?). 
 
 Apocalypse, 156 (7 from Sept., 33 ?). 
 
 Apocalypse and Fourth Gospel, 9 (1 ?). 
 
ALPHABETICAL INDEX. 
 
 Abbot, Dr. Ezra, 84, 101 sq., 105 n., 
 138, 178 sq., 191 n., 195, 198, 
 241 n., 252, 260, 366, 576. 
 
 Abbott, T. K., 102, 136. 
 
 Adier, 252. 
 
 ^thiopic Version, 159 sq. 
 
 Aiken, Dr., 675. 
 
 Aleph, Codex. See Siiiaitic MS. 
 
 Alexander, Dr. W. Lindsay, 384, 
 572. 
 
 Alexander II., connection with 
 Sinaitic MS., 103, 108, 261. 
 
 Alexandrian or Egyptian text, 275. 
 
 Alexandrian MS. (A), 111 sq. 
 
 Alford, Dr. Henry, 83, 266 sqq., 
 383, 367, 467, 573. 
 
 Alter, F. C, 253. 
 
 American Bible Society, 392. 
 
 American Revision Committee, 
 when and how appointed, 391 ; 
 constitution, 396 ; relation to 
 British Committee and Univer- 
 sity Presses, 398 ; share in the 
 work, 478 ; Appendix, 482 ; list 
 of members, 575-577 ; list of 
 changes adopted, 579-606. 
 
 American Editions of Revised 
 New Testament, 371. 
 
 American Episcopal Church, en- 
 dorsed King James's Version, 
 333 ; invited to co-operate with 
 Revision, 394. 
 
 Anderson, Christopher, 299. 
 
 Andrewes, Bishop, 320, 332. 
 
 Angus, Dr., 384, 392, 491, 574. 
 Anthem, the angelic (Luke ii. 14), 
 
 195. 
 Apocalypse, style of, 75 sqq. 
 Apocrypha, revision of, 390. 
 Apostle, 485. 
 Apostles and the Greek Language, 
 
 16 sq. 
 Apostolic Greek, 25 sqq. 
 Archaisms, 342 sq., 456 sqq. 
 Armenian Version, 163. 
 Augustin, St., 144, 145. 
 Authorized Version, 299, 303; ori. 
 
 gin, 312; instructions to the 
 
 translators, 317 ; reception, 325 ; 
 
 merits, 337 ; English style, 345 ; 
 
 defects, 347. 
 
 B. 
 Bagster's Hexapla, 299. 
 Bancroft, Bishop, 313 sq., 317, 319, 
 Barker, printer of Authorized Ver« 
 
 sion, 319, 329. 
 Bashmuric Version, 159. 
 Batiffol, Pierre, 133. 
 Beckett, Sir Edmund, 378, 474. 
 Bengel, 246 sq., 203. 
 Bensly, Robert L., 572. 
 Bentley, Richard, 244 sqq. 
 Beza, 237 sqq. 
 Bezae, Codex (D), 122 sq. 
 Bible and Christianity, 305. 
 Bibliographical Works on the 
 
 English Bible, 300. 
 Bickersteth, Dr. E. H., 383, 573. 
 Birch, 252. 
 Birrell, Prof., 572. 
 
612 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Blackie, on the Greek article, 470, 
 
 472. 
 Blakesley, Dean, 573. 
 Blayney's Revision, 325. 
 British Committee, organization 
 
 and rules of, 382 sqq. ; work 
 
 of, 387 sqq. 
 Broughton, Hugh, 291 sq., 326. 
 Brown, Dr. David, 384, 574. 
 Browne, Bishop, 383, 571. 
 Bruder's Concordance, 3. 
 Burgon, Dean, 84, 108, 119 sq., 
 
 191, 293 sq., 378, 425, 491. 
 Burr, Dr., 576. 
 Buttmann, Alexander, 2. 
 
 C. 
 
 Cambridge Paragraph Bible, 804. 
 
 Canterbury Convocation, action 
 of, 380 sqq. 
 
 Chambers, Dr., 575. 
 
 Chance, Frank, 572. 
 
 Chase, Prof., 576. 
 
 Chenery, Thomas, 384, 572. 
 
 Cheyne, Thomas Kelly, 572. 
 
 Christ and the Greek Language, 
 12 sqq. 
 
 Christian Element in New Testa- 
 ment Greek, 39 sqq. 
 
 Christian Opinion and Revision- 
 ist, 379. 
 
 Chrysostom, 165, 168. 
 
 Codex Alexandrinus (A), 111; 
 Bezae ( D ), 122 ; Claroraonta- 
 nus (Da), 124; Ephrasmi (C), 
 120; Sinaiticus (fi<), 103; Vati- 
 canus(B), 113. /See Manuscripts. 
 
 Coins, rendering of, 487 sqq. 
 
 Colinaeus, 236. 
 
 Complutensian Polyglot, 232 sqq. 
 
 Conant, Dr., 299, 575. 
 
 Conant, Mrs. H. C, 299 sqq. 
 
 Concordances of the Revised Ver- 
 sion, 373 sqq. 
 
 Condit, 300. 
 
 Convocation of Canterbury, action 
 on Revision, 380 sqq. 
 
 Cook, Canon, 191, 365, 378, 384^ 
 
 419, 425 sqq., 491. 
 Coverdale, 303, 338, 339. 
 Cremer's Lexicon, 2. 
 Critical Rules, 202 sqq. 
 Crooks, Dr., 576. 
 Crosby, Dr., 343, 576. 
 Curetonian Syriac, 156. 
 Cursive Manuscripts, 133 sqq. 
 
 D. 
 
 Davies, Benjamin, 366, 384, 572. 
 
 Davidson, Andrew Bruce, 572. 
 
 Davidson, Randall T., 332. 
 
 Davidson, Samuel, 83, 366, 384. 
 
 Day, Dr., 393, 575. 
 
 Delitzsch, 4, 13. 
 
 De Witt, Dr., 575. 
 
 Diodati, 3. 
 
 Douglas, Principal, 572. 
 
 Doxology of the Lord's Prayer, 
 
 186. 
 Driver, Samuel R., 572. 
 Dwight, Dr. Timothy, 488, 576. 
 
 Eadie, Dr., 300, 324, 325, 329, 346, 
 384, 574. 
 
 Egyptian Versions, 157 sqq. 
 
 Ellicott, Bishop, 85, 297, 374, 376, 
 388, 392, 573. 
 
 Elzevir, 240 sq. 
 
 English Bible, literature on the 
 history of the, 299. 
 
 English Style of the Authorized 
 Version, 345 sqq. ; of the Re- 
 vised Version, 455 sqq. 
 
 Ephraemi, Codex, 120 sq. 
 
 Erasmus, 229 sqq. 
 
 Eusebius, 165, 168. 
 
 Evidential Value of the Language 
 of the Greek Testament, 80. 
 
 Ewald, 297, 312. 
 
 F. 
 
 Faber, P. William, on the Author- 
 ized Version, 346. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 di3 
 
 f airbairn, Dr., 384, 572. 
 
 Farrar, Canon, 65, 85, 
 
 Field, Dr., 3*75, 384, 672. 
 
 Five Anglican Clergymen, 367. 
 
 Foreign Words in New Testament, 
 
 number and value of, 38 sq. 
 Forshall, 302. 
 Fry, 301, 302, 303. 
 Fuller, Thomas, 316, 316, 328, 330. 
 
 G. 
 
 Gardiner, F., 84. 
 
 Gebhardt, Oscar von, 1, 84, 2. J 5. 
 
 Geden, Prof., 572. 
 
 Gell, Robert, 327. 
 
 Genealogical Method, 208 sqq. 
 
 Geneva Bible, 328, 332. 
 
 Ginsburg, Dr., 384, 572. 
 
 "God"* manifested in the flesh, 
 199. 
 
 Godet, Dr., 68. 
 
 Goethe, 45, 312. 
 
 Gospel, meaning of, 40. 
 
 Gotch, Dr., 366, 384, 572. 
 
 Gothic Version, 160 sqq. 
 
 Greek and English compared, 
 17 sqq. 
 
 Greek Fathers, quotations of, 
 167 sqq. 
 
 Greek Language, spread of, 4 sqq. 
 
 Greek Testament, style of, 43 sqq. ; 
 evidential value of, 80 sqq. 
 
 Greek Text of the Revised Ver- 
 sion, 420 sqq 
 
 Green, Dr. William Henry, 398, 
 480, 575. 
 
 Green, Samuel G., 2. 
 
 Gieen, Thomas Sheldon, 2, 84. 
 
 Gregory, Dr. C. R., 44, 82, 260. 
 
 Griesbach, 82, 250 sqq. 
 
 Grimm, C. L. W., 2. 
 
 Grimm, Jacob, 18. 
 
 Guillemard, 4. 
 
 H. 
 
 Hackett, Dr.,.576. 
 
 Hadley, Prof.. 4, 576. 
 
 Uall, Dr. I. II., 139 sqq., 497-524. 
 
 Hallam, on the Authorized Ver- 
 sion, 345. 
 
 Hammond, 84. 
 
 Hampton Court Conf., 312 sqq. 
 
 Hare, Dr., 575. 
 
 Harris,J. Rendel, 136, 138. 
 
 Harrison, Archdeacon, 571. 
 
 Hebraisms in the New Testament, 
 27 sqq. 
 
 Hellenistic Dialect, 22 sq. 
 
 Hervey, Bishop, 383, 571. 
 
 Hitchcock, Dr., Editor of Revised 
 Version, 372. 
 
 Hobart, on the Medical Language 
 of Luke, 54. 
 
 Hodge, Dr. Charles, 576. 
 
 Holtzmann, 44. 
 
 Hort, 120, 123, 185, 194, 268, 
 280, 384, 574. See Westcott 
 and Hort. 
 
 Hudson's Concordance, 3, 
 
 Hug, 3, 11, 251, 253. 
 
 Humphry, 377, 384, 491, 574. 
 
 I. 
 
 Itala, 144 sqq. 
 
 James, King, 312 sqq. 
 
 James's Version. See Authorized 
 
 Version. 
 Jebb, Canon, 572. 
 Jerome, 1, 148 sq., 170 and passim. 
 Jerusalem Chamber, 388 sq. 
 Jerusalem Syriac, 167. 
 Jesus Nazarenus Rex Judaeorum, 
 
 4 sqq. 
 Jews and the Greek Language, 
 
 8 sqq. 
 John, style of, 66 sqq. 
 Josephus, 11. 
 
 K. 
 Kay, Dr., 573. 
 Keim, 67. 
 
 Kendrick, Dr., 577. 
 Kennedy, Dr., 376, 384, 574. 
 
614 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Krauth, Dr., 6V6. 
 Kuenen, 83. 
 Kiister, 244. 
 
 L. 
 
 Lachmann, 1, 82, 254 sqq. 
 
 Lange's Commentary, 366 (note). 
 
 Latin Fathers, quotations of, 169 
 sq. 
 
 Latinisms, 35 sqq. 
 
 Latin Versions, 144 sqq. 
 
 Law and the law, 472. 
 
 Leary, 378. 
 
 Leathes, 384, 572. 
 
 Lee, Archdeacon, 384, 574. 
 
 Lee, Bishop, 376, 479, 677, 579-606. 
 
 Leo Judge, 323. 
 
 Lewis, Dr. Tayler, 576. 
 
 Lightfoot, Bishop, 331, 376, 384, 
 487, 573. 
 
 Lightfoot, John, 326. 
 
 Lincoln, Bishop of. See Words- 
 worth. 
 
 Loftie, 301. 
 
 London Times, 367. 
 
 Luke, style of, 54 sqq. 
 
 Lumby, Dr., 572. 
 
 Liineraann, 1. 
 
 Luther, 323. 
 
 M. 
 
 Macedonian Dialect, 19 sqq. 
 
 McClellan, John Brown, 366. 
 
 McGill, Prof., 572. 
 
 Madden, 302. 
 
 Malan, S. C, 379. 
 
 Manuscripts, Uncial, 82 sqq. ; 
 specimens of, 91 sq.; descrip- 
 tion of, 93 sqq.; Cursive, 133 
 sqq. 
 
 Mark, style of, 51 sqq. ; last 
 verses of, 189 sq. 
 
 Marsh^Dr. G. P., 345. 
 
 Martin, Abbe, xiii, 84, 102, 108, 138. 
 
 Matthsei, 252. 
 
 Matthew, style of, 46 sqq. 
 
 Matthew's Bible, 303. 
 
 McGill, 384, 572. 
 
 Mead, Dr., 480, 576. 
 
 Medical Vocabulary of Luke, 64. 
 
 Memphitic Version, 158. 
 
 Merivale, Dean, 673. 
 
 Merrill, 84. 
 
 Middleton, on the Greek articleS| 
 
 472. 
 Mill, 244. 
 
 Milligan, 375, 384, 674. 
 Mitchell, 84. 
 
 Moberly, Bishop, 383, 673. 
 Moldenhawer, 252. 
 Mombert, Dr., 300. 
 Montfortianus, Codex, 136. 
 Moon, G. Washington, 378. 
 Moulton, Dr. W. F., 1, 300, 339, 
 
 384, 470, 574. 
 
 N. 
 Nautical Vocabulary of Luke, 60 
 
 sq. 
 Neutral Text, 275 sqq. 
 Newman, Cardinal, 384. 
 Newth, Dr., 375, 384, 574. 
 Nicholson, Edward Byron, 376. 
 Nicolson, W. Millar, 376. 
 Norton, Andrews, 366. 
 Noyes, G. R., 366. 
 
 0. 
 
 O'Callaghan, 301, 329 (note). 
 
 Ollivant, 383, 571. 
 
 Origen, 164, 165, 168 and passim 
 
 Osborne, 377. 
 
 Osgood, Dr., 575. 
 
 Overall, 320. 
 
 Oxford and Cambridge University 
 Editions of Revised New Testa- 
 ment, 371. 
 
 P. 
 Packard, Dr., 676. 
 Palmer, Archdeacon, 86, 286, 297, 
 
 376, 574. 
 Papias, 51. 
 Patristic Quotations, 1 64 sqq. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 616 
 
 Paul, style of, 62 sqq. 
 
 Peculiarities of style of New Tes- 
 tament writers, 43 sqq. 
 
 Penny, 487 sqq. 
 
 Peshito Version, 152 sqq. 
 
 Perowne, 384, 571. 
 
 Pfannkuche, 3. 
 
 Philoxenian or Harclean Version, 
 154. 
 
 Plumptre, 384, 571. 
 
 Porter, J. Scott, 83. 
 
 Pressense, 66. 
 
 Public Opinion, 379. 
 
 Pusey, 384. 
 
 Printed Text of the Greek Testa- 
 ment, history of, 225 sqq. 
 
 R. 
 
 Renan, on Luke, 54 ; on Paul, 66. 
 
 Reuss, 4, 84. 
 
 Revision, preparations for, 364; 
 books on, 374; publication, 
 403; criticised, 411 sqq. 
 
 Reynolds, Dr., 313 sqq., 320. 
 
 Riddle, Dr., 365, 577. 
 
 Roberts, Alexander, 4, 375, 384, 
 574. 
 
 Robertson,F. W., 311. 
 
 Robinson, Edward, 2. 
 
 Ronsch, 144. 
 
 Rose, Archdeacon, 571. 
 
 Rossanensis Codex, 131 sq. 
 
 Rossi, G. Bern, de, 3. 
 
 Rules, critical, 202 sqq. ; of Au- 
 thorized Version, 317; of Re- 
 vised Version, 382, 383. 
 
 S. 
 Saint, in the titles, 484. 
 Samson, 379. 
 Sanday, 85. 
 Saravia, 320. 
 Sayce, Prof., 572. 
 Schaff, Dr., 375, 393, 577. 
 Schirlitz, 2. 
 Scholz, 82, 253 sq. 
 Scott, Dean, 384, 573, 
 41 
 
 Scrivener, Dr., 83, 96, 104, 120, 
 
 192, 282 sqq., 304, 321, 324, 
 
 325, 384, 390, 419, 423, 574. 
 Scrivener and Palmer, 282 sqq. 
 Selden, John, on the Authorized 
 
 Version, 322, 
 Selwyn, W., 369, 672. 
 Semler, 249. 
 Selborne, Lord, 337; letter on 
 
 Authorized Version, 336. 
 Septuagint, 23 sqq. 
 Shea, 301. 
 
 Short, Dr., 376, 397, 576. 
 Sinaitic MS., 103 sqq., 425 sqq. 
 
 See Tischendorf . 
 Smith, Dr. Henry Boynton, 577. 
 Smith, George Vance, Prof., 574. 
 Smith, Miles, Bishop, 321, 323, 
 
 359. 
 Smith, Robert Payne, Dean, 384, 
 
 571. 
 Smith, W. Robertson, Prof., 573. 
 Stanley, Dean, 383, 389, 573. 
 Stephanus (Stephens), 236 sq. 
 Stoughton, John, 300, 347. 
 Stowe, Dr., 576. 
 Strong, Dr., 576. 
 Stunica, 233. 
 
 Syriac Versions, 152 sqq. 
 Syrian and Antiochian Text, 271 
 sqq. 
 
 T. 
 
 Tavemer's Bible, 303. 
 
 Text, sources of the New Testa- 
 ment, 85 sqq. ; of the Revision, 
 420 sqq. 
 
 Textual Criticism, 171 sqq. 
 
 Textus Receptus, 205 sq., 228 sqq. 
 
 Thayer, Dr., 1, 2, 576. 
 
 Thebaic Version, 159. 
 
 Thirlwall, Bishop, 382, 571. 
 
 Thoms, Concordance of the Re- 
 vised Version, 373 sq. 
 
 Thorpe, 301. 
 
 Tischendorf, 1, 82, 84, 103 sqq., 
 108 sqq., 257 sqq., 265. 
 
616 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Tregelles, 1, 82, 83, 122, 256, 2fl52 
 
 sqq., 266, 574. 
 Trench, Archbishop, 39, 42, 327, 
 
 345, 374 sq., 573. 
 Troutbeck, Canon, 574. 
 Tyler, W. S., 470, 472, 492. 
 Tyndale, 290, 302, 308, 338. 
 
 U. 
 
 Ulphilas, 160. 
 
 Uncial MSS., 98 sqq.; list of, 
 139 sq. ; primary, 102 ; second- 
 ary, 124. 
 
 University Presses, agreement 
 with, 398. 
 
 V. 
 
 Van Dyck, Dr., 576. 
 
 Variations, Classes of, 1 83 sqq. ; 
 origin of, 173 sqq. ; in the R. V., 
 473 sqq. 
 
 Vatican MS., 113 sqq., 425 sqq. 
 
 Vaughan, Dr., 376, 884, 574. 
 
 Vercellone, 117,151. 
 
 Versions, value of, 142 sqq.; 
 -(Ethiopic, 159 sqq. ; Armenian, 
 163 ; Gothic, 160 sqq. ; Latin, 
 144 sqq. ; Old Egyptian or 
 Coptic, 157 sqq. ; Syriac, 152 sqq. 
 
 Vulgate, Latin, 148 sqq. 
 
 W. 
 
 Walton's Polyglot, 241 sqq. 
 Warfield, Benjamin B., 84, 86, 208 
 
 sqq., 280. 
 Warren, Dr. W. F., 577. 
 Washburn, Dr., 577. 
 Wayland, 311. 
 
 Weir, Prof., 573. 
 
 Weiss, Bernhard, on the style of 
 John, 68. 
 
 Wendell, Rufus, 372. 
 
 Wetstein, 82, 247 sqq. 
 
 Westcott, 4, 44, 71, 84, 291, 384, 
 574. See Westcott and Hort. 
 
 Westcott and Hort, 1, 83, 118, 268 
 sqq., 279 sq. 
 
 Western Text, 274 sqq. 
 
 Wiclif, 289. 
 
 Wigram, 3. 
 
 Wilberforce, Bishop, 381, 385, 394, 
 673. 
 
 Winer's Grammar, 1, 470, and 
 passim. 
 
 Witnesses, Three Heavenly, pas- 
 sage on the, 136 sqq,, 192. 
 
 Woolsey, Dr., 393, 478, 576. 
 
 Wordsworth, Bishop of Lincoln, 
 310,334,475,476,571. 
 
 Wordsworth, Bishop of St. An-. 
 drews, 384, 573. 
 
 Wordsworth, Prof. John, 147. 
 
 Wright, William, Prof., 573. 
 
 Wright, W. Aldis, 384, 573. 
 
 Woman Taken in Adultery, sec- 
 tion of, 188 sq. 
 
 X. 
 
 Ximenes, Cardinal, 232. 
 
 Young, Robert, 378. 
 
 Z. 
 
 Zahn, Prof., 102, 278. 
 
 Zezschwitz, G. von, 4. 
 
SCEIPl'URE PASSAGES EXPLAINED. 
 
 Page 
 Matt. i. 18, 434 
 
 " i. 20, 435 
 
 " i. 22, 357,435 
 
 " i. 23, 435 
 
 " i. 25, 428 
 
 " ii. 2, 355, 435 
 
 " ii. 4, 351 
 
 " ii.5,1'7,23, 357 
 
 " ii. 6, 435 
 
 " ii. 11, 435 
 
 " ii. 16, 17, 436 
 
 " ii. 18, 428 
 
 " iii. 3, 357, 436 
 
 " iii. 4, 436 
 
 " iii. 6, 436 
 
 " iii. 7, 436 
 
 " iii. 11, 436 
 
 " iii. 12, 437 
 
 " iii. 13, 437 
 
 " iii. 15, 437 
 
 " iii. 17, 437 
 
 " iv. 14, 357 
 
 « iv. 21, 22, 437 
 
 " V. 10, 355 
 
 " V. 13, 342 
 
 " V. 15, 437 
 
 " V. 21, 438 
 
 " V. 35, 467 
 
 " V. 44, 428 
 
 " vi. 2, 5, 438 
 
 " vi. 9-13, 438 
 
 " vi. 12, 473 
 
 " vi.l3,184sq.,464 
 
 " vi. 25, 442 
 
 " vi. 26, 474 
 
 " vii. 6, 471 
 
 Page 
 
 Matt. viii. 20, 471 
 
 " ix. 17, 241 
 
 " X. 4, 432 
 
 " xi. 23, 442 
 
 " xiii. 37-39, 468 
 
 " xiv. 8, 442 
 
 " XV. 24, 355 
 
 " XV. 27, 442 
 
 " xvi. 13, 442 
 
 " xvi. 15, 342 
 
 " xvi. 26, 442 
 
 " xix. 17, 431 
 
 " XX. 16, 428 
 
 " xxi.41, 47,443 
 
 " xxii. 1-14, 363 
 
 " xxii. 37, 49 
 
 " xxiii. 24, 443 
 
 " XXV. 8, 355,443 
 
 " XXV.46, 361,443 
 
 " xxvi. 28, 443 
 
 " xxvi. 73, 13 
 
 " xxvii. 3, 364 
 
 " xxvii. 46, 14 
 
 " xxviii. 19, 357, 
 432 
 
 Mark i. 2, 202, 432 
 
 " iii. 17, 13 
 
 " iii. 18, 431 
 
 " m. 29, 432 
 
 " v. 41, 14 
 
 " vii. 34, 14 
 
 " viii. 27, 29, 342 
 
 " ix. 50, 342 
 
 " X.51, 13 
 
 " xiv. 70, 13 
 
 Pagb 
 Mark xv. 34, 14 
 
 " xvi. 9-20, 
 
 189 sq., 431 
 
 Luke i. 6, 59, 356 
 
 " i. 28, 430 
 
 " ii. 2, 444 
 
 " ii. 14, 195 sq., 
 357, 432 
 
 " ii.49, 444 
 
 " iii. 23, 444 
 
 " vii. 2, 444 
 
 " vii. 5, 356 
 
 " viii. 23, 356 
 
 " xiv. 34, 342 
 
 " xvi. 8, 357 
 
 " xviii. 3, 13, 356 
 
 " XX. 16, 342 
 
 " xxii. 59, 13 
 
 " xxiii. 6, 13 
 
 " xxiii. 15, 444 
 
 " xxiii. 38, 428 
 
 " xxiii. 42, 357 
 
 John i. 16, 356 
 
 " i.l8, 193 sqq., 
 
 432 
 " iii. 33, 34, 356 
 " iv. 9, 13 
 
 " V. 3,4, 187 sq., 
 
 430 
 " V. 35, 444 
 
 " V. 39, 444 
 
 " vi. 17, 356 
 
 " vi. 57, 357 
 
 " vi. 65, 355 
 
618 
 
 SCRIPTURE PASSAGES EXPLAINED. 
 
 Pagk 
 John vii. 49, 342 
 
 " vii. 52, 13 
 
 " vii. 53-viii. 11, 
 
 188 sq., 431 
 " viii. 52, 356 
 
 " viii. 58, 445 
 " X. 16, 445 
 
 " xiii. 2, 446 
 
 " xiv. 16, 26, 362, 
 446 
 " XV. 26, 362 
 
 " xvi. 1, 362 
 
 " xvii. 24, 46*7 
 " XX. 31, 351 
 
 Acts ii. 3, 446 
 
 " ii. 31, 446 
 
 " ii.4V, 446 
 
 " iii. 19, 20, 447 
 " iii. 21, 447 
 
 " iv. 27, 433 
 
 " viii. 10, 433 
 " viii. 37, 191 sq., 
 
 431 
 " ix. 5, 6, 428 
 " xii. 4, 362 
 
 " xvi. 14, 15 
 
 " xvi. 17, 433 
 " xvii. 22, 447 
 " XX. 4, 433 
 
 " XX. 28, 197,361, 
 
 447 
 " xxvi. 28, 341 
 
 Rom. i. 1, 3, 351 
 " ii. 12, 356 
 " iii. 4, 6, 31, 342 
 " iii. 23, 356 
 " iii. 25, 449 
 " V. 1, 197, 433 
 " V. 11, 362 
 " V. 12, 449 
 " V. 15-18, 449, 
 
 450 
 ♦* Vi, 2, 7, 8, 355, 
 
 451 
 
 Page 
 
 Rom. vi. 2, 15, 342 
 
 " vi. 11, 357 
 
 " vi. 17, 451 
 
 " vii. 6, 356 
 
 " vii. 7, 13, 342 
 
 " viii. 1, 2, 357, 
 429 
 
 " ix. 1, 357 
 
 " ix. 1, 11, 342 
 
 " xi. 2, 357 
 
 " xi. 15, 362 
 
 " xii. 2, 341,451 
 
 " xiii. 2, 451 
 
 " xiv. 14, 357 
 
 " XV. 17, 357 
 
 1 Cor. iv. 4, 452 
 " iv. 8, 342 
 " vi. 15, 342 
 " vii. 5, 357 
 " xi. 24, 429 
 " xi. 29, 452 
 " xii.3,9, 13,357 
 " xii. 13, 355 
 " xii. 8-10, 468 
 " xiii. 1-13, 452 
 
 2 Cor. iv. 3, 355, 452 
 
 " V. 14, 356 
 
 " V. 18, 19, 362 
 
 " V. 20, 358 
 
 Gal. i. 1, 351 
 
 " i.13,23, 356 
 
 " ii. 17, 342 
 
 " ii. 19, 855 
 
 " ii. 20, 355, 
 358, 453 
 
 " iv. 13,357,453 
 
 " vi. 11, 453 
 
 Phil. i. 1, 361 
 
 " ii. 6, 7, 453 
 
 " ii. 10, 454 
 
 " iii. 20, 454 
 
 " iii. 21. 454 
 
 or TMC 
 
 Page 
 
 Col. i. 6, 438 
 
 " ii. 20, 355 
 
 " iii. 1,3, 355 
 
 1 Thess. iv. 1, 433 
 " iv. 15, 467 
 
 1 Tim. iii. 16, 199, 
 
 298,433 
 
 " V. 4, 454 
 
 " vi. 5, 454 
 
 " vi. 10, 352,454 
 
 Heb. ii. 16, 355,454 
 
 " ix. 27, 454 
 
 " xi. 13, 454 
 
 " xi. 19, 467 
 
 " xii. 13, 467 
 
 Jas. iv. 12, 
 
 434 
 
 1 Pet. ii. 2, 434 
 " ii. 12, 357 
 " iii. 16, 357 
 " iii. 21, 454 
 
 2 Pet. i. 5-7, 357 
 " i. 7, 467 
 
 1 John ii. 1, 362 
 
 " ii. 23, 433 
 
 " iii. 1, 434 
 
 " v.7,8, 192sq., 
 
 429 
 
 Jude 25, 
 
 434 
 
 Rev. i. 8, 430,434 
 
 " i. 11, 430 
 
 " iii. 2, 434 
 
 " V. 8, 474 
 
 " vi. 6-9, 465 
 
 " viii. 7, 434 
 
 " xii. 2, 355 
 
 " xiv. 1, 434 
 
 " xvii. 8,202,433 
 
 " XX. 14, 434 
 
Tie New Testament in tlie Oripal Greet 
 
 The New Testament in the Original Greek. The Text Re- 
 vised by Bkooke Foss Westcott, D,D., Regius Professor 
 of Divinity, Canon of Peterborough; and F. J. A. Hort, 
 D.D., Hulsean Professor of Divinity, late Fellow of Trinity 
 College, Cambridge. American Edition. With an Introduc- 
 tion by Philip Schaff, D.D., LL.D. Two Volumes. Vol. 
 I. Text. Vol. II. Introduction and Appendix. Post 8vo, 
 Cloth, $2 00 each. 
 
 It is the result of the best scholarship of a day which has reached a raeas- 
 nre of exact knowledge of the Greek, and of the New Testament dialect 
 and times, never reached hefore. * * * Every preacher of the Gospel owes it 
 to his Master, even much more than to himself, to master this latest contri- 
 bution to an exact and thoroughly defensible knowledge of what the Word 
 of God actually teache8.—Congregationalist, Boston. 
 
 A text over whose formation learning and impartial candor have pre- 
 pided, and to which the Biblical student may give implicit trnst.— Church- 
 man, N. Y. 
 
 We say to all ministers and students who wish to search the New Testa- 
 ment oracles of God in their original language, get Westcott and Hort— 
 Christian A dvocate, N. Y. 
 
 We regard this edition of the Greek Testament as superseding all others 
 hitherto published.— J&pwcopai Register, Philadelphia. 
 
 The best and finest text of the Greek Testament. * * * Dr. Schaff's intro- 
 duction condenses into seventy or eighty pages, with astonishing clearness, 
 all the latest results of Biblical investigation and criticism — iV. V. World. 
 
 A trustworthy edition of the Greek Testament, which could be accepted 
 by ministers generally as practically final, has been a great desideiaiuni, 
 and this need seems to us to be well supplied by the edition before us. 
 • * * The present is by far the purest and best edition of the Greek Testa- 
 ment in existence. — Christian Union, N. Y. 
 
 Should be in the hands of all who criticise the present English transla- 
 tion of the New Testament.— CArtsWan Observer, Louisville. 
 
 Msei (Jreei-Enilisli New Testament. 
 
 Revised Greek-English New Testament. Being Westcott & 
 Hort's Revised Text of the New Testament in the 
 Original Greek, and the Revised English Version op 
 THE New Testament, printed on opposite pages. Crown 
 8vo, Half Leather, $3 50. 
 
 Published by HARPER & BROTHERS, New York. 
 
 ■ Sent by mail, postage prepaid, to any part of the United States, on 
 receipt of the price. 
 
THE REVISED VERSION 
 
 OP 
 
 THE NEW TESTAMENT 
 
 OP 
 
 OUR LORD AND SAVIOUR 
 
 JESUS CHRIST 
 
 TRANSLATED OUT OF THE GREEK: 
 
 Being the Version set forth A.D. 1611, compared with tJie most 
 Ancient Authorities and Revised A.D. 1881. 
 
 HAEPEK'S AMERICAN EDITIONS. 
 
 I. Franklin Square Library, 4to, Brevier, 20 cents. 
 II. Brevier, 16nio, Black Cloth, 45 cents ; Full Leather, Flexi- 
 ble, with Gilt Edges, 90 cents. 
 
 III. Brevier, 12mo, Cloth, 60 cents. 
 
 IV. Pica, 8vo, Cloth, $2 00. 
 
 V. Pica, 8vo, Divinity Circuit, Full Morocco, Flexible, with 
 Flaps, $9 00. 
 
 In Harper's Editions of the Revised Version of the New Testament, the 
 Readings and Renderings preferred by the American Revisers (which were 
 consigned to an Appendix by the English Committee) are placed as foot- 
 notes—thus facilitating reference and comparison. All Harper's Editions 
 have marginal notes. 
 
 ReYision of tlie Enilisli Version of tlie New Testament. 
 
 THE REVISION OF THE ENGLISH VERSION OF THE 
 NEW TESTAMENT. With an Introduction by the Rev. 
 Philip Schaff, D.D., LL.D. 618 pages. Crown 8vo, Cloth, 
 $3 00. 
 
 This work embraces in one volume : 
 
 1. ON A FRESH REVISION OF THE ENGLISH NEW TESTA- 
 MENT. By J. B. LiGHTFOOT, D.D. Second Edition, Revised. 
 
 2. ON THE AUTHORIZED VERSION OP THE NEW TESTA- 
 MENT, in Connection with some Recent Proposals for its Revision. 
 By RioHARi) Chenevix Tkench, D.D., Archbishop of Dublin. 
 
 .3. CONSIDERATIONS ON THE REVISION OP THE ENGLISH 
 VERSION OP THE NEW TESTAMENT. By J. C. Elucott. D.D. 
 
 Published by HARPER & BROTHERS, New York. 
 
 4®=* Sent by mail, postage prepaid, to any part of the United States, on 
 receipt of the price. 
 
THE CREEDS OF CHRISTENDOM. 
 
 BibliotJieca Symbolica Ecdemi Zfniversalis. The Creeds of 
 Christendom, with a History and Critical Notes. By the 
 Rev. Philip Schapp, D.D., LL.D., Professor of Biblical 
 Literature in the Union Theological Seminary, N. Y. Three 
 Volumes. Vol. I. The History of Creeds. Vol. II. The 
 Greek and Latin Creeds, with Translations. Vol. III. The 
 Evangelical Protestant Creeds, with Translations. 8vo, 
 Cloth, $15 00. 
 
 No work from the pen of Dr. Schaff needs commendation. His reputa- 
 tion for ability, learning, and accuracy is thoroughly established. The work 
 consists of three large octavo volumes, elegantly printed. The first contains 
 the history, analysis, and critical judgment of the creeds of the great histor- 
 ical churches. The second and third volumes contain the creeds themselves. 
 Every theologian needs to have access to the authentic and acknowledged 
 doctrines of the great bodies into which Christendom has been divided. 
 Familiarity with these different phases of belief enlarges and, within due 
 bounds, liberalizes the mind, by showing that " the precious faith of God's 
 elect" underlies ail these great historical symbols.— Rev. Chabl.es Houob, 
 D.D., LL.D., Princeton, N. J. 
 
 These volumes appear to me immensely valuable. Wherever I have 
 dipped I have found the author's statements carefully and accurately made. 
 They will help us very much in our lectures in the university.— Rev. C. A. 
 SwAiNSON, D.D., Professor of Divinity, Cambridge, England. 
 
 There is nothing like it in comprehensiveness of plan and execution in 
 the English language. It contains matter which it would be very diflicult 
 even for the professional scholar to find elsewhere, and places within reach 
 of the ordinary reader immense stores of information, which, so far as I 
 know, are alone to be seen gathered together in this treasure-house of 
 learning and painstaking research.— The Rt. Rev. Gkobob F. Skymodb, D.D., 
 Bishop of Springfield. 
 
 No work has appeared for years of more importance than this. It is a 
 history of the Church expressed in its most vital form— the doctrinal. The 
 life-blood of the Church flows through the channel of creed. * * * It was a 
 wise thought to bring these faiths together, to see wherein they agree and 
 wherein they differ, to find out what must be eliminated to bring about a 
 universal consensus of Christendom, and what must be retained to make this 
 consentniJi Christian. Dr. Schaff has done the Church and the world his 
 best bervice i.i uiaking this colled ion. Here, at last, are gaihered the mate 
 rials for a true comparative theology.— CAriafian Advocate, N. Y 
 
The Greeds of Christendom. 
 
 After a careful reading of these volumes, we have come to the conclusion 
 that no work of greater interest and importance for the study of theology 
 has issued from the press in our generation. Dr. Schaff has, by his thor- 
 ough, careful, and discriminating "History of the Creeds of Christendom," 
 tilled a blank in our theological literature, and conferred a priceless boon 
 on all students of theology.— Z)ai7y Review, Edinburgh. 
 
 A better apparatus for studying the " symbols " of Christendom no reader 
 can desire. * * * Never was there so complete a collection. The work ia 
 unique, and everything has been done by skilful arrangement, by schol- 
 arship, by notes and indexes, to make it available and helpful both for 
 scholars and for ordinary xea.diQT&.— British and Foreign Quarterly Review, 
 London. 
 
 We cordially commend the compiler's workmanship. His notices of the 
 times and authors of the creeds, as well as of the circumstances in which they 
 originated, are accurate and good. * * * The work before us Alls a bhiuk 
 in ecclesiastical WievaXxwQ.— A thenceum, London. 
 
 This is the most elaborate and complete work of its kind in the En- 
 glish language, and as such deserves careful attention at the hands of all 
 who call themselves Christians. • • * Dr. Schaff has given not only the full- 
 est and most complete account of the various confessions of faith, but also 
 one of the most reliable as well as the most readable. * * * His tone is 
 manly, and his words of praise are freely and happily expressed.— C/iwrc/i- 
 •man, N. Y. 
 
 The first volume is really a doctrinal history of the Church, so far as doc- 
 trine has taken shape in dogma, and will be found not only extremely help- 
 ful in regard to past centuries, but especially valuable for the minuteness 
 and exactness of its later chapters. We should not know where else to go 
 to find many of the details, for example, which are given here with regard 
 to the Old Catholic and Eeformed Episcopal movements, and those later 
 Romanist developments connected with the Vatican Council of 1870. It is 
 an important feature of this work that it is so full and so late in its details 
 in these respects— extending even to the pointing out of articles in magazines 
 and reviews, shedding light upon questions at issue — Dr. Dextbb, in The 
 Congregationalist, Boston. 
 
 The book is a most complete work of reference to a vast and various lit- 
 erature. We know not whether to admire most the great erudition and 
 wide theological learning, the sound judgment, or the faculty of compressed 
 exposition which has reduced that heap of material into an orderly whole. 
 Nothing of importance is left out, the narrative flows on clear and lucid, 
 moving with swift precision to its destined end.— Scotsman, Edinburgh. 
 
 Published by HARPER & BROTHERS, New York. 
 
 ^T" Sent by mail, postage prepaid, to any part of the United States, on 
 receipt of the price. 
 
 ■-v. \ N A /TT 
 
THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 STAMPED BELOW 
 
 AN INITIAL FINE OF 25 CENTS 
 
 WILL BE ASSESSED FOR FAILURE TO RETURN 
 THIS BOOK ON THE DATE DUE. THE PENALTY 
 WILL INCREASE TO SO CENTS ON THE FOURTH 
 DAY AND TO $1.00 ON THE SEVENTH DAY 
 OVERDUE. 
 
 NOV i^l^Bb 
 
 -isuaa — NOV 3 9 
 
 FfOv y 
 
 •7 pno 
 
 188^ 
 
 '^TmmARy LOAN 
 
 ^rf ; , ^i 
 
 ^'^^^ 2 i 1986 
 
 '^f^'V- OF CAUF.. bEm. 
 
 IN STACKS 
 
 L 
 
 f lM lCP IIRRftQVlO''iN 
 
 FEB 22 1356 
 
 MAR 7 1989 
 
 Wt(t2mG LU 
 
 JNtV. OF CAUF., BERK. 
 
 ^9Apr'62TDpi 
 
 REC'D LD 
 
 . - V MAY 3 
 
 
 U ^ - S^< 
 
 ^r*^' 
 
 >> 
 
 s^ 
 
 ^. 
 
 # 
 
 NJ 
 
 DD 21-100m-7,'33 
 
0^^- 
 
 'rtZ 
 
 VB 3005] 
 
 GENERAL LIBRARY - U.C. BERKELEY 
 
 
 BQaDB3l3b7Q