: "Igivetfe/eWpate:
I far iAe f blinding t)f a. CDlUg^intMsQolon.^

\ • YALE-^M^IBSffinr-

¦ssMwswt*ggaBS!w

J 9 02

SIX LECTURES

ON THE

TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

"As man is formed by nature with an incredible appetite for
Truth ; so his strongest pleasure, in the enjoyment, arises from the
actual communication of it to others. Without this, it would be a
cold purchase, would abstract, ideal, solitary Truth, and poorly repay
the labour and fatigue of the pursuit."
Warbcbton, Dedication to the Divine Legation.

SIX LECTURES

ON THE

TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT

THE ANCIENT MANUSCRIPTS WHICH
CONTAIN IT,

CHIEFLT ADDEESSED TO THOSE WHO DO NOT BEAD
GBEEK.

Br F. II. SGRIVENEE, M.A., LL.D,
RECTOK OF ST. GEEEANS.

©amfttfogj; DEIGHTON, BELL, AND CO.
Sontion: GEORGE BELL AND SONS.
1875

ffiambriStft :
PPJNTJSD BY C. J. CLAY, M.A.
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.

m

TO
THE BARONESS BURDETT-GOUTTS
THE FOLLOWING PAGES
BEING THE SUBSTANCE OF POPULAR LECTURES ON A BRANCH
OF SACRED LEARNING
IN WniCH SHE TAKES A LIVELY AND PRACTICAL INTEREST
ARE RESPECTFULLY DEDICATED
BY HER CRATEFUL FRIEND AND SERVANT
THE AUTHOR.
Xovembcr 2, 1S74.

CONTENTS.

LECTURE I.
PAG1J
PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS AND GENERAL VIEW OF
THE SUBJECT ... ... ... ... 1
1. Study of Textual criticism neither difficult nor unfruitful.
2. Holy Scripture, like all other ancient books, preserved to
our times by means of manuscripts, 3. which, in the course
of ages, necessarily came to differ from each other. 4. Extent
of these differences roughly estimated. 5. Purpose of this
science hence inferred. The sacred autographs utterly lost.
6. Sources of information open to us for the centuries before
our oldest extant manuscripts existed, by means of versions
and ecclesiastical writers. 7. Vast number of known copies
of the New Testament. 8. Necessity for collating them, and
mention of certain collators. 9. Modes of discriminating the
date of manuscripts. 10. Shape and material of the oldest of
them : palimpsest defined. 11. Styles of writing described :
uncial distinguished from cursive. 12. How to detect false
or supposititious documents. A visit of adventure to the
Bodleian Library. LECTURE II.
ON THE PRINCIPAL GREEK MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW
TESTAMENT ... •¦• ••• ... 25
Method of notation employed for uncial manuscripts.
Codex Yaticanus (B) described : its history, character, date,

viii CONTENTS. PAGE
and collators. Cod. Sinaiticus (H) similarly described. His
tory of Constantine Simonides, who claimed to be the writer
of it. Codd. B and N compared, their special excellencies
and defects. Danger of resting on ancient authorities alone
illustrated from Addison, and from examples of their own
readings. Cod. Alexandrinus (A) described, its history, date,
character, and collators. Specimens in English (and Greek)
of each of the three great codices, B, N and A, with observa
tions. LECTURE III.
ON THE PRINCIPAL GREEK MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW
TESTAMENT : SUBJECT CONTINUED ... ... 60
Codex Ephraemi (C), Cod. Bezte (D), Cod. Claromontanus
(D of S. Paul), Cod. Sangermanensis (E of S. Paul), and Cod.
Laudianus (E of Acts) described and illustrated by specimens
in English (and Greek). The sister manuscripts of S. Paul,
Cod. Augiensis (F) and Cod. Boernerianus (G: being Cod. A
of the Gospels) described and compared. Cod. Begius (L) of
the Gospels, with certain palimpsest and other fragments,
briefly noticed (for these see Index I). Their needless dis
persion complained of. A few chief cuesive manuscripts
described (for these see Index I). The notation adopted
for them. Bemarks on medieval scribes.

LECTURE IV.
ON THE ANCIENT VERSIONS AND OTHER MATERIALS FOR
THE CRITICISM OF THE GREEK TEXT ... ... 8G
1. Principal use of ancient versions and ecclesiastical
writers resumed from Lect. i. § 6. The case illustrated from
Acts xiii. 18. 2. The chief ancient versions introduced with
a caution. 3. Peshito Syriac described. 4. Curetonian Syriac
with a specimen. 5. Philoxenian or Harelean Syriac. 6.
Jerusalem Syriac. 7, 8. Egyptian versions, Memphitic and
Thebaic. 9. Latin versions derive their origin from Africa.

CONTENTS. ix
PAQE
Cardinal Wiseman's investigations. 10, 11. The Old Latin
Bible and its extant manuscripts (for these see Index I). 12.
History of the Latin Vulgate ; 13. its chief manuscripts and
Papal editions. 14. Short notices of the Gothic, Armenian,
^Ethiopic, Georgian, Persic, Arabic, Slavonic, Fraukish, and
Anglo-Saxon versions (for these see Index I). 15. Critical
advantages and defects of ancient translations of Scripture ;
16. as also of ecclesiastical writers. Subject illustrated from
Matt. i. 18, 17. and from Luke xv. 21. 18. Great Fathers
whose works are most available for critical purposes : Justin
Martyr, Irenseus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, 19. Euse-
bius, Jerome and the Latins, Chrysostom and John Dama
scene in their oldest manuscripts, Cyril of Alexandria and
his Homilies in Syriac. 20. Internal distinguished from ex
ternal evidence. Subjective impressions, why they must not
be excluded from view. 21. Occasions for the lawful use of
internal evidence. Five Canons proposed and illustrated by
examples. Cautions requisite in applying them.
LECTURE V.
DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN THE HOLY GOSPELS 118
Comparative purity of the sacred text: Bentley's state
ment. Passages selected for special examination. (1) Matt.
v. 22. (2) ib. vi. 13. (3) ib. xi. 19. (4) ib. xvi. 2, 3. (5) ib.
xvii. 21. (6) ib. xvii. 20. (7) ib. xix. 16, 17. (8) ib. xxvii.
35. (9) Mark vi. 20. (10) ib. vii. 19. (11) ib. ix. 29. (12)
ib. xv. 28. (13) ib. xvi. 9—20. (14) Luke ii. 14. (15) ib.
vi. 1. (16) ib. x. 42. (17) ib. xi. 2, 4. (18) ib. xiv. 5. (19)
ib. xxii. 43, 44. (20) ib. xxiii. 34. (21) John i. 18. (22) ib.
iii. 13. (23) ib. v. 1. (24) ib. v. 3, 4. (25) ib. vii. 8. (26)
ib. vii. 53 — viii. 11. LECTURE VI.
DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN THE PORTIONS OF
THE NEW TESTAMENT WHICH FOLLOW THE GOSPELS . 164
Explanation. Passages selected for special examination.
(1) Acts xi. 20. (2) ib. xiii. 32, 33. (3) ib. xiii. 33. (4) ib.

CONTENTS.
PAGE
xv. 34. (5) t&. xvi. 7. (G) ib. xx. 28. (7) ib. xxvii. 37. (8)
Rom. v. 1. (9) ib. xiii. 9. (10) ib. xvi. 5. (11) ib. xvi. 25—27.
(12) 1 Cor. xi. 24. (13) ib. xv. 49. (14) ib. xv. 51. (15)
Phil, iii. 3. (16) Col. ii. 2. (17) 1 Tim. iii. 16. (18) Heb. ii. 7.
(19) ib. ii. 9. (20) ib. iv. 2. (21) ib. ix. 1. (22) ib. xi. 13.
(23) James ii. 18. (24) 1 Pet. iii. 15. (25) 1 John ii. 23.
(20) ib. v. 7, 8. (27) Iter. xvi. 7. General conclusion.

INDEX I.
MANUSCRIPTS AND ANCIENT VERSIONS OF THE NEW TESTA
MENT DESCRIBED IN THESE LECTURES ... ... 211

INDEX II.
TEXTS OF HOLY SCIilPTURE ILLUSTRATED OR REFERRED TO
IS THESE LECTURE'j .. ... ... 21 -i

LECTUEE I.
; PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS AND GENERAL VIEW
OF THE SUBJECT.
I AM much afraid that some of those to whom I am
about to address a course of Lectures on the Sacred
Text, and especially on the ancient manuscripts, of
the New Testament, will think that I might easily
have chosen a more popular and interesting subject,
however highly they may be disposed to estimate its
importance as a branch of theological study. Nor am
I much encouraged by the representations of a pious
and learned person who has recently laboured, not
quite unsuccessfully, over a new version of the inspired
writings, and who frankly uses the following language
in describing his own impressions respecting this kind
of work : "In the translation I could feel delight — it
gave me the word and mind of God more accurately :
in the critical details there is much labour and little
food" (J. N. Darby, K T., Preface). Much labour and lit
tle fruit is no very cheering prospect for any one, and
I should utterly despair of gaining the attention of my
hearers after so plain an intimation of what they have
to expect, unless the experience of a life-time had
assured me that this gpod man's opinion is the very
S.L. 1

2 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
reverse of the truth. Is it a small reward for any toil
we may have spent upon the investigation to discover
the process by which the Scriptures have been handed
down to us through threescore generations and more,
or the grounds of our assurance that in their present
condition the copies which are now preserved are, in
the main, not unfair representations of the originals
as they left the hands of the holy penmen ? Is it
nothing to possess an intelligent, even though it be but
a general knowledge, of the critical principles whereby,
in doubtful cases, the genuine words of the Apostles
and Evangelists can be discriminated from the accre
tions of later times, often and in nearly all capital
instances to a moral certainty, always with a degree
of probability adequate for practical purposes? Nor
need the labour be excessive, or the strain on the
attention unduly prolonged. The science of verbal or
Textual criticism (for by this name, perhaps, it is best
known) has nothing in its nature which ought to be
thought hard or abstruse, or even remarkably dry and
uninviting. It is conversant with varied and curious
researches, which have given a certain serious pleasure
to many accomplished minds: it is a department of
knowledge in which it is peculiarly easy to learn a
little well, and to apply what is learnt to immediate
use. The more industry is brought to bear upon it,
the larger the stores of materials accumulated, so much
the more trustworthy the results have usually proved,
although beyond question the full and true application
both of its facts and principles calls for discretion, keen
ness of intellect, innate tact ripened by constant use, a
sound and impartial judgment. No man. ever attained

AND GENERAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT. S
to eminence in this, or in any other worthy pursuit,
without much trouble and some natural aptitude for it:
but the criticism of the New Testament is a field which
the humblest student of Holy Writ may cultivate with
profit to himself and others; it is capable of affording
those who have not much time to bestow upon working
it, both an early and an abundant reward for their
pains. Such is the testimony which more than thirty
years' happy devotion to these studies might have given
me some right to bear, were not this a matter upon
which every person will inevitably judge for himself. To
your verdict the appeal must ultimately be made, and
I have a cheerful hope that it will be a favourable
one, for the divine science whose claims upon your
regard I am thus earnestly pressing. I make with you
but a single condition, that I shall be fortunate enough
to win your attention to a few simple preliminary con
siderations, the plain and indeed necessary consequence
of which may not hitherto have been duly weighed,
even by some who are no strangers to the bare facts of
the case.
2. The several writings of the New Testament
were published to the world at various times during
the latter part of the first century of the Christian era;
the art of printing was first practised in some German
city in the middle of the fifteenth century: the first
fruit of typography, the beautiful Latin Bible known
as Cardinal Mazarin's, of which we have a copy in the
British Museum, appeared at Mentz scarcely before
A.D. 1455. During that long period of fourteen hun
dred years, through the fading light of the decline of
ancient literature, through the deep gloom of the middle
1—2

4 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
ages, even till the dawn of better days had almost
brightened into the morning sunshine of the revival of
learning, Holy Scripture was preserved and its study
kept alive in the same way as were the classical writings
of Greece and Rome, by means of manuscript copies
made from time to time as occasion required, some
times by private students, more often by professional
scribes called calligraphers or fair-hand writers, who
were chiefly though by no means exclusively members
of religious orders, priests or monks, carrying on their
honourable and most useful occupation in the scripto
rium or writing-chamber of their convents. And here
I must say in passing, that whensoever the mind shall
attempt to strike a balance between the good and ill
effects of the monastic system during the thousand
years and more which separated the Council of Nice
from the dayspring of the Reformation, this one great
service rendered by ecclesiastical communities ought to
be thankfully remembered, that to their wise diligence
we owe, under Providence, all or nearly all that we
know not of the Bible only, but of those precious
remains of profane literature, which so powerfully tend
to illustrate our study of the sacred volume, and to
enhance, even by way of contrast, its priceless value.
3. Thus then it appears that the several books of
the New Testament come down to us through the mid
dle ages by means of manuscript copies. Hence arises
a grave and important enquiry, on the correct solution
of which our whole subject depends. Whensoever a
book issues forth from the printing-press, all exemplars
of the same edition resemble each other in the minu
test particulars, except in the rare instances in which

AND GENERAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT. 5
changes have been deliberately introduced as the work
goes on ; when once that work is printed off, it remains
unaltered as though it had been graven with an iron pen
upon the rock for ever. On the contrary, in transcrib
ing with the hand from another document no such per
fect similarity between the copy and the original can
be depended upon, nor, in the vast majority of in
stances, does it actually exist. No transcript of any
considerable length can well be found which does not
differ from its prototype in some small points, and that
in spite of all the care and skill which may have been
engaged in producing it. Some of the original words
or letters will have been mistaken by the copyist, or
his eye may have wandered from one line to another,
or he may have omitted or repeated whole sentences,
or have fallen into some other hallucination for which
he would find it hard to account even to his own mind.
Human imperfection will be sure to mar the most
highly-finished performance, and to leave its mark on
the most elaborate efforts after accuracy. Now it is
obvious that the pernicious effects of this natural fault
will propagate themselves rapidly, when several tran
scripts have to be taken from the same original by dif
ferent persons, or by the same person at different pe
riods; and that when the original shall have disappeared,
and these several copies shall have become the parents
of other copies made independently of each other, the
process of deterioration may be carried on for many
generations, each separate transcript having its charac
teristic failings, until two several manuscripts, which
sprang from the same progenitor a thousand years be
fore, may come to differ from each other very materially,

6 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
and that without any other blame to be imputed to the
many scribes who have been employed upon them,
save that they were not exempt from the common fail
ings of humanity. It is thus that variations between
different copies of the classical authors have arisen —
various readings they are usually called — which some
times affect the writer's general sense but little, and
may safely be disregarded by the majority of readers,
while occasionally, as in the dramas of the Greek trage
dian iEschylus, they prove a serious drawback to our
enjoyment of the most sublime passages of a prince
among poets.
4. And now comes a still closer and more search
ing question. These natural blemishes and imperfec
tions which prevail in all extant copies of all other
works of antiquity, do they extend their baneful influ
ence to manuscripts of Holy Scripture also ? We must,
of course, confess that, respect being had to the vast im
portance of preserving a pure text of the sacred writers,
the answer might well be looked for in the negative,
if we closed our senses to existing facts. God might,
beyond a doubt, have so guided the hand or fixed the
devout attention of successive races of copyists, that
no jot or tittle should have been changed in the Bible of
all that was first written therein. But this result
could have been brought about only in one way, so far
as we can perceive, — by nothing short of a continuous,
unceasing miracle : by making fallible men, nay, many
such in every generation, for one purpose absolutely in
fallible. That the Supreme Being should have thus far
interfered with the course of His Providential arrange
ments, seems, prior to experience, very improbable, not

AND GENERAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT. 7
at all in accordance with the analogy of His ordinary
dealings with mankind, while actual experience amply
demonstrates that He has not chosen thus to act. If
we look, however slightly, into the manuscript copies
of the New Testament which abound in every public
library in Christendom, we shall find them differing
not a little from each other in age and correctness and
purity of text, yet the oldest and the very best of them
full of variations, such as we must at once impute
to the fault of the scribe, together with certain here
and there of a graver and more perplexing nature,
regarding which we can form no safe judgment with
out calling to our aid the resources of critical learning.
As in the case of the classical writings, so with those of
the sacred penmen, the great mass of these various
readings are in themselves quite insignificant, and
scarcely affect the sense at all; while some to which
your special attention will be directed hereafter, are of
a widely different complexion. But important or not,
the more numerous and venerable the documents within
our reach, the more extensive is our view of them.
Our great Oxford critic, Dr John Mill, computed them
at thirty thousand for the New Testament alone a hun
dred and seventy years ago: those noted up to the pre
sent epoch amount to at least fourfold that quantity.
5. You will, I trust, ere this, have come to under
stand the nature and conditions of the problem which
Textual criticism sets itself to solve. It is no less than
this: — how best to clear all existing copies of Scripture,
whether in manuscript or printed, from the errors and
corruptions of later times, and to restore it if possible
to the condition in which it first left the hands of the

8 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
original authors. If an autograph of S. John's Gospel,
for example, or of S. Paul's epistle to the Romans, as it
came from his secretary Tertius (Rom. xvi. 22), were
yet in existence, criticism would have no function to
perform with regard to those inspired productions,
except to compare modern reprints with the precious
originals. But, in spite of vague rumours in a contrary
sense, it can hardly be doubted that the sacred auto
graphs perished in the very infancy of Christian history.
The early Church, which was privileged to enjoy the oral
teaching of Apostles and Apostolic men, attached no
peculiar sanctity to their written compositions. Add to
this the circumstance that the "paper," or prepared leaf
of the papyrus, spoken of by S. John (2 John 12), which
was the usual material employed by scribes at that
period, is of so frail and brittle a quality that almost no
specimens of it have been preserved, save those that have
lain long buried in Egyptian tombs, and other like safe
receptacles. Vellum, the manufactured skin of young
calves or antelopes, on which all our best manuscripts
were subsequently written, was in S. Paul's age reserved
for documents or records of exceptional value ; " bring
with thee," he writes to Timothy, "the books" (of the
biblus or papyrus plant), "but especially the parchments"
(2 Tim. iv. 13). And the self-same fate which befell the
autograph books of the New Testament was that also
of the earliest copies derived from them, though for a
different reason. In the last and most cruel of the per
secutions to which believers were subjected throughout
the Roman empire, I mean that of Diocletian, during a
shameful period of ten years at the beginning of the
fourth century of our era (A.D. 303 — 312), the tyrant,

AND GENERAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT. 9
being resolved, so far as in him lay, to root out the
Christian Faith, with a true instinct directed his efforts
to the destruction of the Christian Scriptures. They
were everywhere sought out and burnt; those who pos
sessed them were bidden to give them up, and that on
pain of death. The timid brethren who so far com
plied with the Imperial decrees composed a class nume
rous enough to be designated by a special name of dis
honour : they were called " deliverers up," traditores, of
which term our English traitor is the suitable represent
ative. The result was deplorable enough, though in
God's mercy the worst effects of the enemy's malice
were frustrated. When the Church had rest again, the
volumes of Holy Scripture that could be got together
were comparatively few. But these were made the
archetypes of a host of others, some of them now sur
viving, whose date may be assigned with certainty to
the fourth and fifth centuries. The orderly succession
of copy after copy was never broken, although it may
be fairly doubted whether any, and certainly but a few
inconsiderable fragments of the New Testament still
extant, are older than the fiery reign of Diocletian.
6. We are thus compelled by the force of truth to
admit that a wide space of little less than three centu
ries separates the lost autographs of Apostles and Evan
gelists from the earliest manuscripts of their works in
full yet remaining to us. A vital question is yet to
be answered, how this yawning gulf is to be bridged
over, and the continuity restored between what they
wrote and what we receive ? We are thankful to know
that our reply to this reasonable enquiry is at once
brief, simple, and wholly satisfactory. We have two

10 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
other distinct sources of information, besides the evi
dence of Greek manuscripts, whereby the condition of
the inspired text during the first three centuries can be
readily ascertained, not indeed in complete detail, as
manuscripts would have enabled us to do, but to an ex
tent amply sufficient for all practical ends, quite enough
to assure us of their general integrity, and of the reve
rence in which they were held in the first ages of the
Faith: — and these are primitive versions of their text,
and quotations made from them by ecclesiastical wri
ters whose productions yet remain with us. The pre
cise character of the proof afforded us from these sources
will most conveniently be dwelt upon in another Lec
ture ; all I now seek is to impress upon your minds
their exceeding value for illustrating the literary his
tory of those remote ages, for which direct documentary
evidence has failed us. Nor is the great general ser
vice they render us in this respect materially impaired
by certain peculiarities to be detailed hereafter, which
render it peculiarly necessary to sift their testimony
before implicitly receiving it on every point: still less
by the fact that manuscripts of the translations of
Scripture into Syriac, Coptic, Latin and other ancient
tongues, like those of the original Greek and of the Fa
thers of the Church, themselves bear no higher date
than the fourth century, and in the great majority of
cases are considerably later. It is enough to know that
their evidence is entirely independent of the later Greek
copies, and has never been assimilated to them since
each primitive version was first made or each Patristic
work first published. Hence it arises that manuscripts
of the Old Latin or Syriac, though themselves of the

AND GENERAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT. 11
fourth or fifth century, express and unmistakeable quo
tations made by Irenseus in the second, by Origen in
the third century, present us for the passages actually
before us with a representation of the readings known
to them, as reliable as if the Greek text which they
used had survived to this day.
7. It is time to return from a necessary digression to
describe the manuscript copies of the Greek New Testa
ment itself, which will claim our attention for the re
mainder of the present, and in the two next ensuing Lec
tures. After all, antiquity has bequeathed to us nothing
else that can be compared with them for interest and
intrinsic worth : they have been called by some one
"the title deeds of our Christian inheritance," and
well do they deserve the name. Now it is very
memorable that written copies of the Greek Scriptures,
including those of the Septuagint translation of the
Old Testament, far exceed in age and number those
of all the classical writings of antiquity put together.
Homer may be supposed to have flourished at least
eight hundred years before Christ, yet we have no
complete copy of his two great poems prior to the
thirteenth century, although some considerable frag
ments of the Iliad have been recently brought to
light, which may plausibly be assigned to the fifth or
sixth : while more than one work of deserved and
high repute has been preserved to our times only in
a single transcript. The case of the Hebrew Scriptures
is yet more remarkable. Careful as the Jews have
been, at least from the period that their Masoretic notes
were formed, and probably long before, to secure minute
accuracy in the act of transcribing their sacred books,

12 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
none of their extant manuscripts can be regarded as
older than the eleventh century, and only a few are
so old: the apparent reason for this unexpected fact
being partly found in a Talmudical law which ordains
that synagogue rolls which were faulty, torn, or injured
through age, should be at once destroyed. Of the
Christian Scriptures, on the contrary, we have several
copies which may fairly be attributed to the fourth
century, at least two with complete certainty ; not a few
must be assigned to the fifth and sixth centuries, after
which time their number increased so prodigiously,
down to the epoch of the invention of printing and a
little beyond it, that those known at present to exist in
public and private libraries throughout Christendom
can hardly be less than from eighteen hundred to two
thousand. With regard to manuscripts more recent
than the tenth century it may truly be said that, the
more they are sought for, the more come to light.
The accumulated stores buried in the monasteries of
Mount Athos, though they have been largely drawn
upon in modern times, even after the sweeping raid
made by that ardent collector, the late Lord de la Zouche,
better known as the Hon. Robert Curzon, are no doubt
very far from exhausted. I have been recently informed
on excellent authority that in Roumania, the houses of
the noble families whose ancestors fled from Constanti
nople before the last agony of the Imperial city are full
of works both Biblical and theological which they brought
with them to the land of their exile. From quite a dif
ferent part of the Greek peninsula, from Janina in
Epirus, the Baroness Burdett-Coutts has just imported a
collection of Greek volumes dating from the ninth to

AND GENERAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT. 13
the seventeenth century, whereof between thirty and
forty, being about a third part of the whole, relate
to the New Testament. Their soiled and mutilated
condition tells too plainly their recent history, as being
poor reliques snatched from the sack of some Christian
convent during the troubles which closed Ali Pasha's
rule (A. D. 1822).
8. It will of course have occurred to you that the
very abundance of these materials for sacred criticism
may easily become a source of embarrassment to the
Biblical student. " The real text of the sacred writers,"
to cite very well-known words of Richard Bentley, the
greatest scholar England has produced, " does not now
(since the originals have been so long lost) lie in any
manuscript or edition, but is dispersed in them all."
Yet to collate the whole mass, that is to compare their
mutual variations with some common standard (usually
a printed edition) which has been previously agreed
upon, would be indeed an herculean task, to which
not one life but many must needs be devoted, and
which, even when completed, might not be very fruitful
of important results. The plan that has been adopted
thus far is to expend great pains and labour upon a
comparatively small number of manuscripts the most
venerable for age, or which otherwise promise to afford
more help than the average for the correction of the
text. Hence have originated those elaborate facsimile
editions of the chief codices (codex, you will be aware,
is the Latin word whereby a manuscript is called)
by which Tischendorf and other critics have conferred
on us signal benefit. Every line, every word, every
error, every correction of the original scribe and his

14 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
successors, is carefully reproduced, so that the reader at
a distance may be put as nearly as possible into the
condition of the editor who is working with the manu
script before him. But it obviously would not do to
stop here, or to leave the great mass of copies wholly
unexamined. Conclusions arrived at by the deliberate
shutting out of a large, indeed by far the larger portion
of available evidence, must be eminently untrustworthy,
and could not stand the test of time and impartial
enquiry. Hence have several persons in successive
generations undertaken to collate many of those docu
ments of secondary value which it was not easy or
perhaps desirable to publish in full. In this quiet and
humble labour the pious Archbishop Ussher employed
the doleful leisure of his later years, when reduced to
silence in the evil days of the Great Rebellion. Our
countryman Mill, Wetstein and Matthaei on the conti
nent, to say nothing of the Dane Andrew Birch and other
lesser names, willingly gave up ten, twenty, or thirty
years together to this task. In our own time it has fired
and prematurely worn out the energy of one never
to be named but with respect and gratitude, Dr
Samuel Prideaux Tregelles. I have striven hard myself
to contribute what I have been able, not all I have
desired and once hoped for, to the same good cause of
sacred learning, and if life and health be granted me, I
aspire to accomplish yet a little more. In their selection
of manuscripts on which to work from the mass which
still lie disregarded and virtually unknown, collators
have naturally given the preference to such as seemed
to them for some cause or other to possess special
claims on their attention : yet as this motive would

AND GENERAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT. 15
operate but to a limited extent, I doubt not that my
predecessors have mostly followed the same plan as
myself, and have studied those copies first which lay
nearest at hand, or to which they could obtain most
ready access. In this way, at any rate, if we have
sometimes taken up a manuscript of little interest
or intrinsic value, we have presented to the reader only
the more faithful specimen of what would result from a
complete collation of the whole mass.
9. It now remains to shew the manner of dis
criminating really ancient codices, written in the fourth
and two succeeding centuries, from others of com
paratively recent date ; and this matter is the more
important, inasmuch as the older the manuscript, the
fewer, in all probability, the successive transcripts
between the sacred autograph and the document before
us. Indeed we can do little towards forming any con
sistent notion of the history of the text until we shall
have made some progress in fixing the age of the
principal witnesses which attest to it. Not a few
manuscripts have the year of the Greek era, and some
times the proper Indiction of that year, appended by
the original scribe in the colophon or subscription of
the volume, and thus they form instructive guides for
settling the epoch of others which more or less resemble
them in style of writing. This advantage however does
not attach to codices earlier than the ninth century,
and we must dispense with its aid as we best can.
10. Our attention, therefore, should be directed
in the first place to the shape and material of the
document under investigation. There can be little
doubt, as we said before, that the autographs of the

16

PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS

Apostles were written on the cheap and plentiful
Egyptian papyrus, which was employed for most pur
poses in their day. Since this material was manufac
tured in slips which could seldom exceed four inches in
breadth and a very few in length, it was the usual
practice to join the short and narrow columns laterally,
so that each piece might be parallel to each other piece

throughout the book, which was read by gradually
unrolling the volume at one end and rolling it up at
the other, just as the book of the Law is arranged to
this day in the Jewish synagogues. In this manner,
the open volume would afford the appearance of
several parallel columns exhibited to the eye at once,
as may be seen to this day in the Museum at
Naples, in the case of the papyrus fragments rescued
from the ruins of Herculaneum. As the more durable
fine vellum of our oldest extant codices came gradu-

AND GENERAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT. 17
ally to take the place of the perishable papyrus in
transcribing works so important as the Holy Scriptures,
this practice of writing in parallel columns, which
w-hen the papyrus was used was a pure necessity, seems
to have been for some time retained through mere
habit, so that on vellum pages of the fourth century
we still see three, and in one instance, four columns on
a single page, or six and eight on the open leaf. This
peculiarity, wheresoever it appears, is very striking, and
lends to the document which exhibits it a genuine sem
blance of high antiquity.
Regard should be had also to the material, as well as
to the shape of the volume under examination. As a
general rule, the older the document, the more white,
thin, and transparent is the vellum : we shall hereafter
have to notice two or three books whose skins are
conspicuous for their delicate beauty. As we come
lower down in the scale of time, the fine vellum de
generates, until in the middle ages it is often no better
than coarse parchment made from sheep's skins. • Then
again, about the ninth century, a rough, brown, un
sightly paper, made of cotton rags, and sometimes called
Damascene from the place where it was invented, crept
gradually into use. For this, about the twelfth cen
tury, linen paper came to be substituted, which was
at once stouter, more white and crisp, than that pre
pared from cotton : when glazed and well-wrought it
is especially elegant, and by an unpractised eye can
scarcely be distinguished from vellum.
Once more, we may fairly infer the high antiquity
of a document, if it be what is called a palimpsest, that
is, when for the sake of putting so precious a material
S. L. 2

18 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
as vellum to the utmost use, the older writing which
it contained has been washed out (a process all the
more easy inasmuch as the ancient ink was purely
vegetable, without any metallic base), and later matter
put over it in its room. In course of time the earlier
writing, which had never been entirely obliterated, will
come again to the surface, and can thus be read
beneath the more modern letters, and may be traced
by an attentive and diligent student with more or less
facility. Few employments call for so much patience,
or task the eyesight and skill of a collator so much as
this, but as it almost always happens that the older
writing is by far the more valuable, he is pretty sure
to find his labour rewarded in the end. In one or two
known instances this habit of washing out the first
written letters has been twice repeated, and to decipher
a double palimpsest (as it is then termed) calls for the
masterhood of a Tischendorf. When attempts have
been made to revive the faded characters by means of
such washes as prussiate of potash, the experiment has
succeeded for a while, but the palimpsest has too often
been rendered illegible ever after.
11. Another and more comprehensive method of
approximating to the date of a manuscript is by scru
tinizing the style of its writing. The oldest extant
codices of formal works exhibit the whole text in
capital or uncial letters, that name beino- derived
from the Latin uncia, an inch, to which size some of
them come very near. These uncial letters were
originally written without stops or even breaks between
the words, and look the more strange inasmuch as the
words themselves are divided at the end of the neces.

AND GENERAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT. 19
sarily narrow lines without much regard to the
syllables which compose them. Let us take for our
example the opening of S. Luke's Gospel, wherein the
sentence at first sight hardly looks like English.
FORASMUCHASMANYHAVETAKENIN HAN DTOSETFORTH
and so on. Our earliest extant model of writing of
this kind has been preserved by means of that awful
catastrophe which the genius of Lytton-Bulwer has
made so familiar to us, the burial of the Campanian
town of Herculaneum beneath a stream of lava, A. D.
79. The liberality of the kings of Naples (let us speak
one good word for a dynasty at any rate not worse
than that which has displaced it) has presented to
scholars exact facsimiles of papyri, which, scorched and
shrivelled as they are, and unfortunately comprising
treatises of small interest in themselves, are the only
undoubted volumes of the first century which have
survived the wreck of time. Certain dissertations of
the Epicurean Philodemus which they contain may be
used the more conveniently, inasmuch as he was a
contemporary of Cicero, and must have written about
a century before the fatal event. After making due
allowance for the papyrus having shrunk from the
heat, these uncials attract the eye for their minuteness
as well as for the elegance of their shape. They are
authentic specimens of a fashion which prevailed in
the first century of our era, the letters square, upright,
simple, graceful, singularly clear, none being larger
than the rest, or intruding into the margin, without
2—2

20 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
breathings or accents, the stops very rare and only a
single point at the utmost, the clauses and sentences
being separated from each other either by a very small
space or not at all. Between these exquisite relics
of the past and the earliest known manuscripts of
Scripture little less than three centuries must have
elapsed, yet we find that those Biblical codices which
most resemble the Herculanean papyri are precisely
such as for other reasons we should be led to judge the
most ancient. In later ages, letters larger than the rest
came gradually into use to serve the same purpose as
our capitals at the beginning of sentences ; subsequent
ly they encroached upon the margin, and grew more
conspicuous for size and illuminations ; then the shape
of the ordinary letters became more and more ornate,
the words being separated from each other either by
points or by blank spaces, as in modern writing. Then
again, as time went on, punctuation became more
heavy, and quite as complicated as what we now
employ ; breathings and accents were added, at first
very irregularly, afterwards with as much uniformity
and correctness as in a printed Greek book; and at
length, about the ninth century, the letters themselves
became no more upright but leaning, like our own
handwriting, sometimes to the left, more frequently
to the right. This was the last stage of uncial cal
ligraphy, which, about the beginning of the tenth
century or a few years before, gave way to the cursive
or running hand, which had been employed all along
for ordinary purposes, and was now deemed not unfit
to be introduced into copies of Holy Scripture, even
those which were most splendidly written on the finest

AND GENERAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT. 21
vellum, and were the most sumptuously furnished with
pictures and arabesque scrolls set off in rich purple,
vermilion and gold. The cursive style also had its
stages and local fashions, not indeed so strongly marked
as in the uncial, but well known to adepts ; though it
is not necessary for our present purpose to speak much
about manuscripts which date as late as from the tenth
century downwards.
12. I feel quite sure that, before I have done,
some of my hearers will press upon me the awkward
question whether we ought to be so very positive about
the authenticity of these venerable monuments of re
mote antiquity, especially in an ingenious age, wherein
some public and most private Museums are half full of
pictures of "the Old Masters" executed by living hands,
of spurious medals, and of flint implements made to
order. Now on this point I should like to speak ex
plicitly. I believe it to be quite feasible to pass off
the forgeries of some clever and intelligent scribe, who
may have devised means to imitate so closely the
decaying vellum, the fading ink, the precise shape and
fashion of primitive writings, as to deceive those who
ought to be the best, as they are the most experienced,
judges. Such a fraud is difficult, but is not impossible
to be carried out ; and if I am not mistaken, the
archives of the British Museum itself contain some
codices, bought at a high price, which never will
appear in the Catalogue, or be submitted to public
inspection. But while I freely grant that the outward
semblance of ancient documents may be assumed by
skilful manipulation, I am sure that their internal
character will always defy imposture. Over and over

22 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
again it has been found that manuscripts which from
their general appearance have been accepted without
scruple, have been found at once to be spurious the
moment their contents came to be scrutinized by com
petent scholars. Such was the case with the Egyptian
History of Uranius the son of Anaximenes — a purely
imaginary person — palmed upon the wise men of
Berlin (one likes the Germans to be taken in some
times) about twenty years ago by the notorious Con-
stantine Simonides, a native of the Greek isle of Syme.
As a work of the calligraphic art it is perfect, but the
careful study of the subject-matter but for a few
pages sufficed to shew its true nature. With respect
to Biblical manuscripts in particular, we may con
fidently assert that there are fifty persons at least
now in England, who on internal grounds alone, from
their intimate knowledge of what a genuine record
ought to and must contain, would at once detect
with perfect ease any the most highly finished imita
tion that dishonest skill could execute, provided the
document extended beyond the length of a very few
lines. Scholars too there are, especially if propitious
fortune has cast their lot in the midst of those ma
gazines of literary wealth, the chief public libraries,
to whom ripe experience has imparted a kind of
intuition, an instinctive faculty of discerning the true
from the false at a moment's glance, for which they
can scarcely assign a cause even to themselves : the
eye in this case outstrips the slower conclusions of
reason and of science. Some of you may be hearinc-
for the first time of the single visit paid to Oxford

AND GENERAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT. 23
by that Constantine Simonides of whom we have
already spoken. He had just then beguiled two
celebrated Pundits indeed ; Professor Lepsius of Berlin,
and Sir Frederick Madden of the British Museum,
when one morning, unintroduced and then unknown
to fame, he presented himself at the Bodleian to Mr
H. 0. Coxe, now most worthily placed at the head of
that magnificent library, as the bearer of certain Greek
manuscripts which he seemed willing to sell. He
produced two or three, unquestionably genuine, but
not at all remarkable either for age or character, and
readily agreed with the librarian in assigning them
severally to the tenth, twelfth, or thirteenth centuries.
He then proceeded to unroll, with much show of
anxiety and care, some fragments of vellum, redolent
of high antiquity, and covered with uncial writing
of the most venerable form. Our wary critic nar
rowly inspected the crumbling leaves ; smelt them,
if haply they might have been subjected to some
chemical process: then quietly handed them back to
their vendor with the simple comment that these, he
thought, might date from about the middle of the
nineteenth century. The baffled Greek forthwith ga
thered up his wares, walked straight to the railway
station, and bent his course to a well-known country-
house in Worcestershire, whose accomplished owner
became their happy purchaser. Under his hospitable
roof I inspected those treasures a few weeks later,
and must confess that, regarded as mere specimens of
calligraphy, they were worth any moderate sum they
may have cost him. There was Anacreon writ small
so as to fit into a nutshell ; portions of Hesiod in

24 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS, &c.
zigzag fashion as the ox ploughs ; and other curiosities
more marvellous still, respecting whose price I could
get no other answer than this from my courteous host,
"I gave little enough for them if they are what I
took them to be, a great deal too much if your sus
picions are true."
The present Lecture has of necessity been devoted
to the consideration of abstract principles or of broad
and general facts. If you think that I have not yet
proved against my will the melancholy allegation that
my subject promises " much labour and little food,"
I will next ask leave to introduce to your notice a few
of the precious manuscripts of the Greek Scriptures
which are the pride and honour of the great libraries
of Europe.

LECTUKE II.
ON THE PRINCIPAL GREEK MANUSCRIPTS OF THE
NEW TESTAMENT.
Our subject now leads me to present to you a ge
neral description of the principal Greek manuscripts of
the New Testament. You are already aware that these
documents are of the very highest value and importance
when we come to examine the text of Holy Scripture.
Hence, in the case of a few of them that hold the
first rank, it will be necessary to enter into some details
respecting their literary history, as well as the date and
internal character of each, so far as these latter points
can be made intelligible to a general company; pre
mising that the uncial or elder codices are commonly
distinguished from each other by the several letters of
the alphabet, A, B, C, &c. Since what is called Codex A
is inferior to two others both in age and intrinsic worth.
we will place it but third in our list and begin with the
world-renowned Codex B, the glory of the Vatican library at
Rome, where its class mark is 1209. Whence it came
thither, who were its previous owners, in what coun -
try it was written, are alike unknown to us, except
that, from certain peculiarities in the spelling, Alex-

2G ON THE PRINCIPAL GREEK
andria has been conjecturally assigned as its native
place. All that can be said amounts to this, that the
Vatican library was founded in 1448 by that eminent
scholar and vigorous statesman Pope Nicolas V., and
that this manuscript appears in the earliest extant
catalogue, compiled in 1475. Until within the last
fifteen years it was without a rival in the world, and
Tischendorf's great discovery, the Codex Sinaiticus,
which will be spoken of next in order, has not much
disturbed its supremacy in the judgment of any one,
unless we except that illustrious German Professor
himself. Codex B is comprised in a single quarto
volume containing 759 thin and delicate vellum leaves,
and is so jealously guarded by the Papal authorities
that ordinary visitors see nothing of it but the red
morocco binding. We should not grudge the suspicious
care of its custodians, knowing as we do full well the
unique preciousness of their treasure, if they had not
also withdrawn it from the use of persons the most
competent to study it aright. The precautions taken
against such a man as Tregelles, who, armed with a
letter from Cardinal Wiseman, went to Rome in 1845
for the express purpose of consulting it, would be
ludicrous if they were less discreditable. " They would
not let me open the volume," he writes, " without
searching my pockets, and depriving me of pen ink and
paper." The two prelati, or dignified clergymen, who
had been told off to watch him, would talk and laugh
aloud in order to distract his attention, and if he looked
at a passage too long, would abruptly snatch the book
out of his hand. Dean Alford, who in 1861 must have
been pretty well known even to Roman ecclesiastics,

MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 27
states in a letter recently published by his widow .in
her pleasant Life of him, that having extorted from the
minister Cardinal Antonelli a special order " per veri-
ficare," to verify passages, he found his license inter
preted by the librarian to mean that he was to see the
book, but not to use it. With these hindrances to
contend against, aggravated by the fact that library
hours in the Vatican are only three daily, and that its
attendants devoutly keep all Italian Church holidays,
we need not wonder if our acquaintance with this noble
monument of extreme antiquity has long been superfi
cial and imperfect, and to this hour is far from complete.
It contains, as do the next three manuscripts we shall
have to describe, the Old Testament in the Greek
Septuagint translation as well as the original of the
New, but the ravages of time have deprived us of the
book of Genesis down to ch. xlvi. 48, of Psalms cv. —
cxxxvii., and in the New Testament of the Epistle to
the Hebrews from ch. ix. 14 to the end, of the four
Pastoral Epistles as they are called (1, 2 Timothy,
Titus, Philemon), which, in this and in the next three
copies, were placed after that to the Hebrews, and
finally of the Book of the Revelation ; all these last
portions being supplied in quite a modern hand of the
fifteenth century. Every open leaf presents to the eye
six narrow columns of simple, elegant and distinct
uncial letters, three columns standing on each page,
as we see in a fragment of the historian Dio Cassius
also preserved in the Vatican, and in a very few
other documents, mostly but not all of the same re
mote date ; a date which, judging not only from the
form of the volume, but also from the purity of the

28 ON THE PRINCIPAL GREEK
vellum, from the faded condition of the ink where
soever the letters have not been retouched, from the
primitive shape of those letters themselves, from the
complete lack of capitals and from the extreme paucity
of the stops, in all which particulars it has very few
compeers, and in the whole put together none what
ever except the Herculanean papyri of the first cen
tury whereof we spoke before (p. 19), cannot be placed
later than the first half of the fourth century. Indeed,
Tregelles, a consummate and experienced authority on
such matters, was so deeply impressed with the general
appearance of Codex B, as being far more venerable
than anything else he had ever seen, that he once
told me, what I do not observe that he has ever pub
lished, that while he felt quite sure that it was already
written at the time of the council of Nice (a. d. 325),
he did not like to say how much earlier it might very
well be. Throughout the New Testament it exhibits
a division of the text into chapters or paragraphs (in
the Acts and Epistles into two separate series) to which
we have hardly anything corresponding elsewhere, and
which in the Gospels became quite obsolete after the
adoption of the sections and canons of Eusebius about
A. D. 340, the year when that celebrated ecclesiastical
writer and critic died. The mistaken diligence whereby
the original writing has been retraced by a scribe who
lived not earlier than the eighth or later than the
eleventh century, and who added those breathings and
accents and elaborate capitals which now deform the
document, has rendered an accurate acquaintance with
its true readings a matter of unusual difficulty, de
manding and promising to reward the utmost care and

MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 29
skill of an experienced collator. The work of the first
hand can best be judged of in those places which the
later pen has left untouched, as being or presumed to
be errors of the pen, but the cases are probably very
few wherein leisurely examination by a thorough scholar
would leave any considerable doubt as to testimony of
the original manuscript. The misfortune is that oppor
tunities for such an exhaustive study of its contents
have of late years been granted only to those who were
quite incompetent to make the best use of them. We
need not here repeat the curious history of the several
attempts that have been made to collate the Vatican
Codex, from the time that the Papal Librarian Paul
Bombasius sent some account of it to the great Erasmus
in 1521, down to the abortive Roman editions which
vainly struggled for existence after the death of another
Papal Librarian, Cardinal Mai, in 1854. That dis
tinguished person, whose services rendered both to
classical and ecclesiastical learning are justly re
nowned throughout Europe, devoted his scanty spare
hours for ten whole years in carrying through the
press five quarto volumes, professing to represent the
contents of our manuscript both in the Old and New
Testament. He subsequently added a reprint of the
New Testament portion in a cheap octavo form. Yet
although his main work, to which the interest of
Christendom had been invited by many a puff pre
liminary, had been completed as early as 1838, it was
not published till three years after the Cardinal's death,
and it was then perceived at once by those who had
any knowledge of the subject, that it never would have
appeared so long as he lived. If Angelo Mai had neither

30 ON THE PRINCIPAL GREEK
the patience nor the special skill to accomplish well
his self-imposed task, he was far too good a scholar
not to know that he had done it very ill : so ill in fact
that it would be hard to account for his numberless
blunders and glaring incompetency did we not re
member that Biblical criticism, by reason of the rigid
impartiality and exactness that it calls for, is so alien
to the taste and mental habits fostered by the theology
of the Church of Rome, that examples are rare indeed
wherein it has been cultivated in her communion with
even moderate success : from among living names,
Ceriani, curator of the Ambrosian library at Milan,
occurs to the memory as a solitary exception. The
untrustworthy character of Mai's attempt was manifest
from the first, yet it was not till nine years after, in
1866, that the dauntless Tischendorf resolved to re
present its demerits to Pius IX. in person, and to
seek from him permission to undertake a fresh and
more satisfactory edition, at least of the New Testa
ment. The Pope could not deny the substantial truth
of his impeachment, but evaded the heretic's request
by declaring that he reserved a better edition as a work
for himself to carry out, while yet he gracefully allowed
Tischendorf to consult the manuscript in such pas
sages—and they are pretty many — as present any
special difficulty, or respecting which previous collators
had been at variance. For eight days our critic
freely enjoyed this valued privilege, but in the course
of his task he could not refrain — few of us perhaps
could have refrained — from copying at length sixteen
of these precious pages. Such a licence being not
unnaturally regarded as a breach of covenant, the.

MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 31
manuscript was then taken from him, but on appealing
to the generosity of Vercellone, to whom the Pope
had entrusted the care of the projected work, he was
permitted to resume his labours for six days more,
the Italian being always present at this latter period,
and receiving instruction for the preparation of his
own volumes by watching the processes of a master
workman. In spite of all his disadvantages, these
fourteen days of just three hours each, used zealously
and intelligently, enabled Tischendorf to put forth a
representation of Codex B far superior to any that pre
ceded it. Five superb volumes of the Roman edition
have since appeared, whereof the genial and learned
Vercellone lived long enough to superintend two, that
containing the New Testament happily being one. The
rest have fallen into other and obviously less skilful
hands. The concluding volume, which may perhaps
be looked for in the course of the present year, will
be that which is at once the most important, and will
test most decisively the capacity of the editors ; it
is that which will attempt to discriminate the ori
ginal readings of the manuscript from the corrections
of later scribes. If we trace in this department of
their labours anything approaching to critical discern
ment we may rest content for the present, and await
that unrestrained access to the document which future
and hardly distant events will not fail to gain for
Biblical students. It is not very pleasant to reflect
that, during the most brilliant period of the first
French Empire, this great treasure was deposited for
years in the Royal Library at Paris, unexamined and
uncared for save by one who proved hardly able

32 ON THE PRINCIPAL GREEK
to do its merits complete justice, the Roman Catholic
J. L. Hug, whose treatise on the "Antiquity of the
Vatican Manuscript," which appeared in 1810, first
attracted general attention to its remote date and
paramount importance, although Tischendorf pithily
observes that he adopts its conclusions "non propter
Hugium sed cum Hugio," in Hug's company, though
not for the reasons assigned by him. But the internal
characteristics of Codex B will be more conveniently
discussed together with those of its most considerable
rival, which stands next on our list, namely
Codex Sinaiticus, at St Petersburg, rather awk
wardly designated as Aleph (H), the first letter of the
Hebrew alphabet. This manuscript was happily lighted
upon by Tischendorf in the Convent of St Catharine
on Mount Sinai only fifteen years ago. The history
of its discovery is so romantic as to have seemed at
first almost incredible, but there is no reason to doubt
that the first accounts that reached the public ear
were in the main correct. When travelling in 1844
under the patronage of his own sovereign, Frederick
Augustus of Saxony, a bountiful friend of learning and
of learned men, Tischendorf states that he picked out of
a basket full of papers destined to light the Convent
oven, some forty-three leaves of the Greek Septuagint
translation of the Old Testament, whose high antiquity
he recognised at a glance, and which he published in
1846 under the name of the Codex Friderico-Augustanus.
These leaves he got at once for the asking,but fmdingthat
further portions of the same manuscript still survived,
he rescued them from their probable fate by giving the
monks some notion of their value. He repeated his

MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 33
visit to Sinai in 1853, hoping that he might be allowed
to purchase the whole volume ; but his hints had alarmed
the brotherhood, and he could gather no further in
formation about it. He even seems to have concluded
that his prize had been secured by some more fortunate
collector and had already been carried away into Europe.
Returning to the Convent once more early in 1859,
no longer as an obscure private traveller, but as an
accredited agent of the Emperor of Russia, the gracious
protector of the Eastern Church, the treasure which he
had twice missed was, on the occasion of some chance
conversation, spontaneously laid before him. Mutilated
as the Codex then was, it still consisted of more than
300 large leaves of the finest vellum, with four columns
on every page and eight on the open leaf, containing,
besides certain portions of the Septuagint version, the
whole New Testament, followed by the Epistle of
Barnabas and a considerable fragment of the Shepherd of
Hermas, two works of the Apostolic age or of that which
immediately followed it, which were read in the Church
Service as Scripture up to the latter part of the fourth
century. Tischendorf touchingly describes his surprise,
his joy, his midnight studies over the priceless book —
for indeed it seemed a sin to sleep on that memorable
4th of February 1859. The rest was easy; he was
allowed to transfer his prize to Cairo, to copy it there,
and ultimately to take it to Russia, as a tribute of
duty and gratitude to Alexander II. The Russian
Emperor's munificence enabled him in 1862 to publish
a costly edition of the manuscript, partly in facsimile,
with an elaborate Introduction and critical notes.
The remote locality of its present resting-place,
S. L. 3

34 ON THE PRINCIPAL GREEK
and some little difficulty in obtaining access expe
rienced by visitors at St Petersburg, have rendered
us largely dependent on Tischendorf's own representa
tions for our knowledge of the Codex Sinaiticus. Yet
Tregelles and other very competent judges examined
it carefully when it was for a while at Leipsic in
Tischendorf's possession, and never entertained a doubt
that it was a genuine relic of the fourth century,
though not, as its discoverer seemed to imagine, more
ancient than its competitor at the Vatican. Almost
every mark of extreme age which we noticed in the
latter, may be seen also in the copy at St Petersburg :
— the papyrus-like arrangement of several columns on
the open leaf; the singular fineness of the material,
which consists of the skins of young antelopes ; the
extreme simplicity of the characters employed; the
total absence of capitals (although in both an initial
letter occasionally stands a little out of the line after
a break in the sense), of breathings and accents ; the
rare occurrence even of the single stop. While the
presence of those venerable uncanonical books of
Barnabas (whose Greek text is here read complete
for the first time these thousand years) and of Hermas'
Shepherd might seem to indicate a prior date for the
Sinaitic, yet, on the other hand, the peculiar chapters
of the Vatican book have now made room for the
Eusebian sections and canons, which are placed in
the margin of the Gospels in their accustomed ver
milion ink, if not by the original writer (for the
rubricator was seldom the same person as the scribe),
yet certainly by a contemporary. The age of Codex
Aleph is thus brought down to the middle of the

MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 3,5
fourth century, though it is not at all necessary, or
indeed reasonable, to refer it to a later generation
than that in which Eusebius flourished.
The strangest part of this remarkable story has yet to
be told. You remember Constantine Simonides, of Syme,
his History of Uranius the son of Anaximenes, and his
bootless visit to the Bodleian. Certain of his earlier mis
adventures had brought him into collision with Tischen
dorf, to whose researches he had first rendered some real
aid, and whom he subsequently but in vain endea
voured to deceive. No sooner had the German issued
in 1860 his earliest facsimiles of Codex Sinaiticus
than Simonides at once declared that venerable monu
ment of early Christianity to be the work of his own
hands ; making merry, as you may suppose, with those
self-called critics, who after rejecting the old manu
scripts in his possession as modern forgeries, had
proved ignorant enough to receive as genuine remains
of extreme antiquity a book innocently copied by a
youth who neither wished to mislead, nor had imagined
that its true character could be mistaken by any one.
Like the gay old beadsman in Scott's Antiquary Simo
nides " minded the bigging " of this marvellous relic of
long-past ages, and was in truth himself the builder.
Among the many accomplishments of his pregnant wit,
he alleged that he was gifted with exquisite skill as a
calligrapher, and on this point at any rate there can be no
mistake. Hence he was naturally selected by his uncle
Benedict, head of the monastery of Panteleemon ("the All-
merciful") on Mount Athos, whom he went to visit in
November, 1839, to make in manuscript, from a printed
Moscow Bible, a copy of the whole Scrip tures,which might
3—2

36 ON THE PRINCIPAL GREEK
be worthy of the acceptance of the Russian Emperor
Nicolas, in dutiful acknowledgment of benefits he had
conferred on that house. The letters were uncial, the
material vellum, the style antique. He had gone
through both the Old and New Testament, the Epistle
of Barnabas and the first part of Hermas, and would
have added the whole of the Apostolic Fathers, but
that in August 1840 his materials failed and his uncle
died. He therefore broke off his task by simply writ
ing an inscription purporting that "the whole was
the work of Simonides," and though he retained the
dedication to the Emperor in the beginning of the
volume, he found another patron in Constantius, ex-
Patriarch of Constantinople and Archbishop of Sinai,
who in 1841 accepted the gift in a fatherly letter,
with which he sent his benediction and 25,000 piastres,
some £250 sterling. In 1844 Simonides heard from
the lips of Constantius himself that he had long since
sent the Codex to St Catharine's on Mount Sinai,
where the scribe saw his own work in 1844 and again
in 1852. It is humiliating to recall the circumstances of the
controversy which ensued in England, where our Greek
was then sojourning, for elsewhere the fable was re
ceived with blank and absolute incredulity. One of
our so-called religious periodicals, which we will name,
if you please, "The Illiterate Churchman," without
absolutely committing itself to the correctness of Simo
nides' statement, persisted to the last in regarding it as
a matter demanding the gravest investigation. That
love of Biblical study, which is the glory of our nation,
leads many to take a deep interest in this class of

MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 37
subjects who have received no such special training
as would enable them unassisted to form a true
estimate of the facts of a case like this : not to mention
the honest prejudice excited, as the controversy went
on, in favour of a stranger who was single-handed and
obviously over-matched. It soon appeared, however,
that living witnesses on his behalf he could produce
none. Constantius the ex-Patriarch, whose evidence
would have been unexceptionable, had died only the
year before (1859) : a prelate so liberal in rewarding the
labours of a poor student was plainly not long for this
world. The monks at Mount Sinai, including him who
had been librarian from 1841 to 1858, protested that
they had seen or heard of no such person as Simonides ;
and declared that the manuscript had been duly en
tered in the ancient catalogues. For anything that
appears to the contrary, it might have been brought
thither at the foundation of the monastery by the Em
peror Justinian, about A.D. 530, though by what means
those precious leaves which comprise the Codex Fride-
rico-Augustanus came into the place where Tischendorf
found them is as perplexing as ever to account for.
When the story of Simonides came to be more closely
examined, and its internal probabilities minutely scruti
nized, nothing came to light which could compensate
for its lack of external support. In the first place it
was observed that at the period when he undertook, in
November, 1839, what must certainly be regarded as a
considerable task, he could only have been fifteen years
old, since it is stated in his Life written by one Mr
Steuart but circulated by himself that he was born
"about the hour of sunrise, Nov. 11, 1824." This date,

38 ON THE PRINCIPAL GREEK
however, was soon explained to be an error : it was, he
alleged, the birthday of his brother Photius, his own
being four years earlier, on "Nov. 5, 1820, the sixth
hour before noon," and he supports this suspicious
correction by publishing a letter he wrote to Mr Steu-
art, pointing out the mistake, dated in January 1860,
before he laid claim to the authorship of Codex Sinai
ticus. Another difficulty, started at the time, which
does not involve the credibility of a second person, you
will form your own judgment about. It is easy to
reckon that our manuscript, when complete, must have
consisted of no less than 700 leaves or 1400 pages of con
siderable size, and that to have finished it as Simonides
declares he did within the space of eight or nine
months, he must have written at least twenty thousand
large and separate uncial letters every day. When
this fact was represented to him, the Greek frankly
acknowledged it, and offered to execute the same task
again for the modest stake of £10,000. Wagers, we
know, are not wise men's arguments, and no one was
found weak enough to close with his proposal ; yet
before we pronounce his success impossible, we should
bear in mind the wonderful exploit of a certain " Nico-
demus the stranger," who records in a manuscript
containing both the Old and New Testament, recently
seen at Ferrara by Mr Burgon, that beginning his work
(certainly in the cursive or running hand, not in
uncials) on the 8th day of June, he ended it on the
15th day of July 1334, "working very hard" he adds,
which beyond question he must have done. Could
Briareus the hundred-handed have achieved more ?
But in truth it is useless to waste words about

MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 39
the mere accessories of the case, when the main issue
is so plain and unmistakeable. It is absolutely im
possible that the best scholar in Europe — to say nothing
of a lad of fifteen or nineteen, — could have drawn from
a modern Moscow Bible, or from any other source at
that time open, the sort of text which is exhibited in
the Codex Sinaiticus. In many respects that text is
questionable enough, but it is evidently very ancient
and unique in its faults no less than in its excellencies.
In not a few places we find a few words left out, whose
omission reduces the passage to mere nonsense, but
which would just fill up a line in an old papyrus, the
error being palpably due to the shifting of the copyist's
eye from one line to the next: accidents like these
making it clear that the scribe had before him for his
model no printed book, but a roll answering to the
manuscript line for line. Then again, Codex X is
full of itacisms, that is, of instances of false spelling,
especially through the substitution of one vowel or
diphthong for another which in process of time had
grown to resemble it in sound. In this respect it
agrees more or less with every other genuine Greek
manuscript known to us, especially those of very remote
date, but then these orthographical blunders have no
place in printed works, and no sane copyist would have
introduced them save for the purpose of deception,
whereas the charge of fraud is here excluded by the
nature of the case. Simonides assures us that he had
no thought of misleading any one : — it' is through mere
ignorance and stupidity on the part of Tischendorf and
the rest of us who call ourselves scholars or critics that
his exercise in penmanship has been mistaken for a

40 ON THE PRINCIPAL GREEK
real relic of antiquity ! But it cannot be necessary
to pursue this enquiry into further detail, and it shall
be dismissed with one word about the person whose
strange history has detained you so long. Those of
us who had pressed him the hardest were rather
shocked to learn in 1867 that Constantine Simonides
had just perished at Alexandria of the cruel disease
of leprosy : — he had died and given no sign ! Pro-
portionably great was our relief about two years after
to be told on the authority of the Rev. Donald Owen
of St Petersburg that he had turned up again under
a feigned name in that capital, where we will gladly
leave him in the hope that, like Psalmanazar, he has
found grace and time to amend his ways. You will
all know something of George Psalmanazar, who ap
peared in London as a foreigner above a century ago, and
proved quite as clever and rather more successful than
our Simonides. The poor man pretended to be a
native of the Chinese island of Formosa, and published
a most plausible description of that country, its re
ligion, customs, and manners : he even devised a new
alphabet and a new language, and translated the Creed
and the Lord's Prayer into Formosan. Very few doubted
his integrity, and to those few he triumphantly replied
in the Preface to a second edition " answering every
thing that had been objected against the author and
the book." At length came remorse, then contrition,
then reparation as its meet fruit. Who and whence
he was have never been clearly ascertained, nor ought
we to be curious about what he had a right to conceal
if he pleased. But his fraud was publicly recanted :
henceforth he earned his bread by honest labours of

MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 41
his pen, and long before his death in 1763 his meek
and simple piety had power to edify even Dr Johnson,
who hated a lie as he hated the father of lies.
Our digression fairly ended, we come at length to
consider the Vatican and Sinaitic manuscripts, each of
them productions of the fourth century of the Christian
era, in reference as well to the resemblances as to the
contrasts exhibited by their text. In both respects they
are very peculiar, and will call for and (as I hope) be
found to repay our best attention. Codex ^, as was
manifest on our first acquaintance with it, is very
roughly written, being full of gross transcriptural blun
ders of the pen, of the eye, and of the mind : the habit
I mentioned just now, that of leaving out whole lines of
the original whence it was derived, is but one specimen
of an over numerous class. It was long supposed that
Codex B was singularly free from slips of this kind,
and inferences were freely drawn from its presumed
accuracy which will no longer be pressed. It is cer
tainly less faulty than its compeer, but the labours
of Tischendorf and Vercellone have brought to light
much of this sort, that was hitherto unsuspected. It
is especially prone to the kind of error we recently
termed an itacism, that of confounding similar vowel
sounds to the ruin of the sense, especially in the
instance of the Greek pronouns, personal or possessive,
of the first and second persons plural, in which case
its evidence is worth almost nothing. We will take
just one example by way of specimen, the rather as
certain critics of great eminence have perceived a certain
subtil excellence in a variation which to us appears
utterly void of meaning : it is our Lord's question in

42 ON THE PRINCIPAL GREEK
Luke xvi. 12, "If ye have not been faithful in that
which is another's, who will give unto you that which
is your own ?" Codex B, supported by one other uncial
manuscript and by scarcely any other authority, chang
ing a single letter in the Greek, as in the English, would
have us read "who will give unto you that which is
our own ?" Here, of course, the itacism is patent to
every one who is not ready to admit the principle that
when the Vatican has spoken, the world has only to
believe in silence ; or who has not come to regard the
very defects of that document as beauties, just like the
lover in Horace did those of his mistress. No less
improbable is an addition found a few chapters later,
which is countenanced by Codex B and the self-same
uncial (Cod. L of the eighth or ninth century) and by
hardly any other evidence. In Luke xxi. 24, where
our Lord declares that "Jerusalem shall be trodden
down by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles
be fulfilled," these authorities add "and they shall be,"
without any tolerable significance, so far as we can
perceive, the words "and they shall be," with which
the next verse begins, being here repeated out of their
proper order. Nay, even such a glaring blunder as
the corruption of the Greek letter K into N in Matth.
xxvii. 28 has not been without its apologists ; yet there,
in the room of " And they stripped him," Codex B and
a very few witnesses of real importance would have
us substitute "And they clothed him," thus rendering
the verse completely unintelligible. One or two other
instances of the same nature shall be added, and that
from no wish to disparage the Codex Vaticanus or to
depose it from its rightful place at the head of all our

MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 43
textual authorities, but to shew that, like its less
distinguished compeers, it is liable to err and has
committed errors of the most palpable character. At
the end of the eleventh chapter of the Acts, Barnabas
and Saul are represented as going up from Antioch
to Judsea, carrying with them to the Church there
the contributions of the Syrian disciples for its relief.
Then follows, evidently in the order of time, that
interesting narrative respecting the deliverance of
Peter from prison by the angel, the death of the
persecutor Herod, and the growth and prosperity of
the infant Church. The concluding verse of the
twelfth chapter, in perfect consistency with the whole
narrative, accordingly runs on thus : " And Barnabas
and Saul returned from Jerusalem, when they had
fulfilled their ministry," or service. Instead of "from
Jerusalem" the impossible variation "to Jerusalem"
appears in Codex B and its familiar associate L, and
not in them only in this case, but also in the Codex
Sinaiticus, and indeed in so many other considerable
authorities that we ought not to refuse to accept their
testimony, if any testimony could suffice to convince us
of the truth of a moral impossibility. The same three
manuscripts Codd. N, B, L, with two other uncials of
great value (D and A, which we shall describe here
after) and two cursive copies of some importance, by
the simple change of two letters, thus transforming the
feminine pronoun into the masculine, in Mark vi. 22, both
set at defiance contemporary history and violate every
dictate of reason and natural feeling. You remember
the shocking details of the murder of John the
Baptist. Herodias, as we learn from Josephus, who

44 ON THE PRINCIPAL GREEK
knew the facts well and was living at the time, was
married to her uncle Herod Philip and had by him
a daughter named Salome, " after whose birth Herodias
took upon her to confound the laws of her country, and
divorcing herself from her husband, went through the
form of a marriage with another Herod, tetrarch of
Galilee, her husband's brother on the father's side"
{Jewish Antiquities, Book xviii. Chap. v. § 4). In
her wicked resolution to avenge herself on the Baptist,
who was ever rebuking the tetrarch for their common
sin, she even allowed her daughter to dance before
Herod and his nobles on his birth-day : " the daughter
of the said Herodias came in, and danced, and pleased
Herod," as our common Bibles have it. The Vatican
manuscript, however, upheld by the six others we have
enumerated, would read "his daughter Herodias came
in," &c, thus at once displaying ignorance of the
poor girl's lamentable history, changing her name from
Salome into Herodias, and imputing to the tetrarch
feelings which not even a Herod would have been base
enough to cherish in the case of his own child, for no
European can conceive the infamy implied when a
royal maiden took part in the abominable dances which
defile an Eastern festival. Here we have the teachings
of history set at nought by these weighty critical authori
ties. In the very next chapter (Mark vii. 31) geography
would fare just as ill if the selfsame five uncial copies,
two cursives and even a version or two, sufficed to
persuade us that the Lord, on leaving the borders of
Tyre, where he had just healed the Syrophcenician
woman's daughter, "came through Sidon to the sea
of Galilee," a progress which may fairly be compared

MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 45
to that of a traveller who leaving London should pass
through Oxford to Dover. The ordinary text, as you
need not be told, is perfectly consistent in representing
the Saviour's course : " and again, departing from the
coasts of Tyre and Sidon, he came unto the sea of
Galilee." In emergencies of this kind, when evidence, which
in itself would be irresistible, draws us one way and
common sense another, the old-fashioned admirer of
classical English may call to "mind that paper in the
Spectator (No. 470), wherein the delicate humour of
Addison amuses itself by a parody on the performances
of textual scholars of his day, the giant Bentley, it
may be presumed, being chiefly in his view. The
pretty verses on which he tries his hand are unfortu
nately a little out of keeping with the passages of
Scripture we have been discussing; but his mirth is
harmless, his illustration very happy, and scarcely an
exaggeration of the spirit of such criticism as we have
just been concerned with. We will read first the text,
then Addison's commentary.
My love was fickle once and changing,
Nor e'er would settle hi my heart ;
From beauty still to beauty ranging,
In every face I found a dart.
'Twas first a charming shape enslav'd me,
An eye then gave the fatal stroke :
Till by her wit Corinna sav'd me,
And all my former fetters broke.
But now a long and lasting anguish
For Belvidera I endure;
Hourly I sigh, and hourly languish,
Nor hope to find the wonted cure.

46 ON THE PRINCIPAL GREEK
For here the false unconstant lover,
After a thousand beauties shown,
Does new surprising charms discover,
And finds variety in one.
Most of the ancient manuscripts have in the last line "and finds
variety in two." Indeed so many of them concur in this last reading,
that I am very much in doubt whether it ought not to take place.
There are but two reasons which incline me to the reading as I have
published it: first, because the rhyme; and secondly, because the
sense is preserved by it. It might likewise proceed from the osci-
tancy of transcribers, who, to despatch their work the sooner, used to
write all numbers in cipher, and seeing the figure I followed by a
little clash of the pen, as is customary in old manuscripts, they per
haps mistook the dash for a second figure, and by casting up both
together, composed out of them the figure II. But this I shall leave
to the learned, without determining any thing in a matter of so great
uncertainty. The solitary variations of the Codex Vaticanus from
the ordinary Greek text are now and then so happy, that
were it possible in common prudence to accept read
ings thus slenderly supported, we should be almost
inclined to accept them for true. So much cannot be
said for those vouched for by Codex Sinaiticus alone,
though some of these too are very suggestive. Let us take
for instance 1 Peter v. 13, which our Authorized Bibles
render, "The Church that is at Babylon, elected to
gether with you, saluteth you," the word "Church"
being printed in what is called italic type (not indeed
in the original edition of 1611, but in those published
twenty or thirty years later), to intimate that it is
not found in the Greek. Thus the passage might very
well be translated "She that is in Babylon," &c,
whether " she " refer to the Church, or (as some
moderns have thought more likely) to Peter's wife, who

MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 47
certainly seems to have attended him on his missionary
journeys (1 Cor. ix. 5). In this dilemma Codex Sinai
ticus, by receiving the word "Church" into the text,
supplies us with what is at least a very early exposition
of it, which deserves the more regard inasmuch as our
best ancient versions, the Latin Vulgate and the elder
Syriac, as well as an inferior one, the Armenian, inter
polate the selfsame word. Some of the variations hitherto
known to exist in this copy and in no other deserve
small consideration, and are probably mere lapses of a
careless pen. Such are "Caasarea" for "Samaria" in
Acts viii. 5; "Evangelists" for "Hellenists," that is
"Grecian Jews," Acts xi. 20; "not" inserted in Acts
xiv. 9 before "heard"; "harvests" instead of "distri
butions" (the marginal rendering) in Heb. ii. 4, this
last being a change of but one letter in the Greek.
In Luke i. 26 Nazareth is called "a city of Judaea,"
with only one cursive copy favouring the mistake.
Occasionally a terse expression of the true text is
diluted into a weak paraphrase, as in John ii. 3, where
in the place of the ordinary reading "And when they
wanted wine," or "And when wine failed," Codex &,
certainly with some support from Old Latin and some
inferior versions, would have us substitute "And they
had no wine, because the wine of the marriage feast
was finished." Now and then too we come on what must
be regarded as the worst fault a copy of Holy Scripture
can have, an attempt at wilful correction to evade
a real or seeming difficulty. Such is the omission of
the perplexing "son of Barachiah" after "blood of
Zachariah," in Matt, xxiii. 35, the person referred to
being to all appearance the son of Jehoiada, whose fate

48 ON THE PRINCIPAL GREEK
and dying words are recorded in 2 Chron. xxiv. 20 — 22.
In this instance, since the appendage " son of Bara
chiah" is absent from the parallel passage Luke xi. 51,
we might have looked for much support of Codex K's
ready solution ; but in fact we find scarcely any, and
a later hand, of about the seventh or eighth century
(facsimile 2, Plate 1), annexes the missing words in
the great uncial itself. And here it may be observed
once for all, that every known manuscript of high
antiquity is thus altered by later scribes, usually for
the purpose of amending manifest faults, or of con
forming the reading to the one in vogue at a more
recent date. In Codex B we trace two or three such
revisers; in Codex X at least ten, some of whom spread
their work systematically over every page, others
made only occasional corrections, or were limited to
separate portions of the manuscript; some again being
nearly if not quite contemporaneous with the original
document, but far the greater part belonging either to
the sixth or seventh century, a few being as recent as
the twelfth. It is obvious to remark that these several
classes of emendations, widely differing from each other
in style, shape of letters, and colour of the ink, could
have had no place in a modern manuscript such as
Simonides describes if fraud was not intended, and
must have been very hard to carry out, if gratui
tously introduced by a clever impostor.
We will enumerate only one more instance of deli
berate and wilful correction which may be imputed to
Codex Sinaiticus, and is too remarkable to be over
looked. In Mark xiv. 30, 68, 72 we have before us a
set of passages which bear clear marks of designed and

MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 49
critical revision, thoroughly carried out in Codex H,
partially so in Codex B and some of its allies, the
object being so far to assimilate the narrative of Peter's
three denials with that of the other Evangelists, as to
suppress the fact, vouched for by S. Mark only, that
the cock crew twice. This end was effected by boldly
expunging "twice" in verse 30, " and the cock crew " in
verse 68, " the second time " and " twice " in verse 72.
In these four separate changes one Old Latin copy
designated c alone goes the whole way with Codex N :
Cod. B is with it once only, Cod. C (of which we
shall have to speak ere long) twice, our old acquaint
ance Cod. L also twice: it meets with some slight
countenance from other quarters, but is beyond ques
tion to be set aside as a false witness, and so far
as a vicious harmoniser of the Gospel histories. Ne
charge so damaging can be substantiated against the
Codex Vaticanus, and however jealous we may be of
admitting any variation into the text on its solitary
evidence, we shall meet with not a few cases where
in, seconded by the Sinai copy and by that copy
almost alone, the intrinsic goodness of the reading it
exhibits will hardly lead us to hesitate to receive it
as true. Codex Alexandrinus, or Codex A of the critics,
prefers the next claim on our interest, as the earliest
that was thoroughly applied to the recension of the
text, and the third in point of merit and antiquity.
It is now deposited in the Manuscript Room of the
British Museum, where the open volume of the New
Testament may be seen every public day secured in
a glass case which stands in the middle of that room.
s.L. 4

50

ON THE PRINCIPAL GREEK

All that is known of its history may soon be told.
It came into the Museum on the formation of the

Library in 1753, having previously formed a part of
the sovereign's private collection. Sir Thomas Roe,
our Ambassador in Turkey, received it in 1628 as a
truly royal gift to Charles I. from Cyril Lucar, then
Patriarch of Constantinople, the rash and hapless re
former of. the Eastern Church. Cyril had brought
the book from Alexandria, where he had before been
Patriarch, and had himself inserted and subscribed
in it a note importing that he had learnt from tra
dition that it was written by the hand of Thecla,

MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 51
a noble lady of Egypt, thirteen hundred years before,
a little later than the Council of Nice, A.D. 325. This
information he seems to have obtained from an Arabic
inscription on the reverse of the first leaf of the manu
script, also ascribing it to Thecla the martyr, while a
recent Latin note on a fly-leaf declares that it was
given to the Patriarchal Chamber (at Alexandria, as"
is stated in a much older and obscure scrawl in Moorish
Arabic) in the year of the Martyrs 814, which is
A.D. 1098. Thus it appears certain, in spite of some
doubts that have been expressed, that Codex A came
to us from Alexandria, which was probably its native
place. Its connection with Thecla is less easy to be
accounted for. A holy lady of that name was an early
martyr for our faith, far too early indeed to be the
writer of the book, and a namesake of hers, a friend
of the great Gregory of Nazianzus in the fourth century,
whom the probable date of the writing might suit, is
not known to have been a martyr. Hence one is
inclined to acquiesce in the acute conjecture of Dr
Tregelles, that whereas the New Testament portion
of Codex A begins at Matt. xxv. 6, which in the Greek
Church forms a part of the proper lesson for the festival
of that wise virgin S. Thecla, her name once stood in
its usual place on that first page high in the upper
margin, which has since been ruthlessly cut down,
and thus led the writer of the Arabic inscription, from
which Cyril derived his "tradition," to assume that she
was the actual scribe.
This celebrated manuscript, by far the best de
posited in England, is now bound in four volumes,
whereof three contain the Septuagint Greek version of
4—2

52 ON THE PRINCIPAL GREEK
the Old Testament, with the complete loss of only ten
leaves ; the fourth volume the New Testament with
several lamentable defects. It begins, as we have just
stated, with Matt. xxv. 6 ; two leaves are lost from
John vi. 50 to viii. 52 ; three more from 2 Cor. iv. 13
to xii. 6. After the book of the Revelation, and in the
' same hand with the latter part of the New Testament,
we meet with a treasure indeed in the only extant copy
of that most precious work of the earliest of the
Apostolic Fathers, the Epistle of S. Clement of Rome
to the Corinthians, followed by a fragment of a second
Epistle of less undoubted authenticity. The book is in
quarto, and now consists of 773 leaves (whereof 639
comprise the Old Testament), each page being divided
(as may be observed in the wood- cut, p. 50) into two
columns of fifty lines each, having about twenty letters
or more in each line. The vellum has fallen into holes
in many places, and since the ink peels off for very age
whensoever a leaf is touched a little roughly, no one
is allowed to handle the manuscript except for good
reasons. The characters are uncial in form, of elegant
shape, but a little less simple than those in Codd. N and
B. The punctuation is more frequent, yet still consists
of a single stop, usually on a level with the top of the
preceding letter, while a vacant space, proportionate to
the break in the sense, follows the end of a paragraph.
Codex Alexandrinus is the earliest in which we find
capital letters, strictly so called. They abound at the
beginning of books and sections, some being larger
than others, but they are written in common ink by
the original scribe, not painted as in later copies. At
the end of each book we notice pretty arabesque orna-

MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 53
ments in ink by the first hand : that in our wood-cut
occurs at the conclusion of Deuteronomy.

T
Vermilion is freely used in the initial lines of the
several books, and has stood the test of time better
than the black ink, which has long since turned
into a yellowish-brown. Another note of somewhat
lower date than the two preceding codices is to be
found in the presence of numerals indicating the larger
Greek chapters throughout the Gospels, in addition
to the so-called Ammonian sections and the Euse-
bian canons which occur in Codex Sinaiticus. It
should be kept in mind that the larger oriental
chapters bear no resemblance to those in our modern
Bibles, which were first adopted in the west of Europe
about the middle of the thirteenth century. The
Greeks divide the text very unequally: S. Matthew
into 68 portions, S. Mark into 48, S. Luke into
83, S. John into 18. A list of titles describing their

54 ON THE PRINCIPAL GREEK
contents stands before each of the last three Gospels
(those of S. Matthew being wanting), and fragments of
the titles repeated may be traced at the head of the
several pages in their proper places, wheresoever the
binder has withheld his cruel shears. In the Acts and
Epistles we find no such chapter divisions, nor indeed
did these, whose authorship is ascribed to Euthalius
Bishop of Sulci, come into vogue before the middle of
the fifth century. Since, besides the Eusebian canons,
Codex Alexandrinus contains the Epistle of the great
S. Athanasius on the Psalms to Marcellinus, it cannot
well be considered earlier than A.D. 373, the year when
that great champion of the Faith was lost to the
Church. The presence of the Epistle of Clement,
which was once read in Churches like the works of
Barnabas and Hermas contained in Cod. H, recalls us
to a period when the canon of Scripture was in some
particulars not quite settled, that is, about the time
of the Councils of Laodicea (364) and of Carthage (397).
Codex A was certainly written a generation after Codd.
X and B, but it may still belong to the fourth century ;
it cannot be later than the beginning of the fifth.
When Codex A arrived in England, it came into
the custody of a very good scholar, Patrick Young,
librarian to Charles I. He at once saw its value, and
collated the New Testament after the loose fashion of
the times. Alexander Huish, Prebendary of Wells
(one loves to revive the memory of men who have
faithfully laboured before us and are now at rest),
examined it afresh for the use of Walton's Polyglott.
Bentley's collation, made in 1716, is yet in manuscript
at Trinity College, Cambridge. J. E. Grabe had sent

MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 55
forth an edition of the Old Testament portion some
years before ; but exact representations of this manu
script in a semi-facsimile uncial type were completed
for the New Testament by Charles Godfrey Woide, a
German, and assistant librarian in the British Museum,
by public subscription in 1786; for the Old Testament,
but at the national expense, by H. H Baber, who held
a similar office to Woide, between the years 1816 and
1828. Both publications are sufficiently accurate for
practical purposes, though Woide's bears the higher
reputation of the two. The Epistles of Clement were
edited from this manuscript first by Patrick Young in
1633, and recently by Bishop Jacobson, Tischendorf, and
Canon Lightfoot. Codex Alexandrinus has been judged
to be carelessly written, but that is the case to some
degree with nearly all the old copies, with the Sinaitic,
as we have seen, most of all. Besides other corrections
by later hands there are not a few instances in which
the original scribe altered what he had first written,
and these changes are to the full as weighty as the
primitive readings which they amend. Of the character
of its text we shall only say at present that it ap
proximates much more closely to that found in later
copies, especially in the Gospels, than any other ap
proaching it in respect of antiquity. Hence it is per
petually at variance with Codd. X and B in their
characteristic and more conspicuous various readings,
and being thus shewn to have had an origin perfectly
independent of these cognate copies, its agreement with
either or both of them supplies great strength of
probability to any reading thus favoured. Its testi
mony, when it stands nearly or quite alone among

56 ON THE PRINCIPAL GREEK
ancient authorities, may be safely disregarded, save in
a few cases wherein it is sustained by the pressure of
internal evidence.
There are two or three more manuscripts of the
first rank yet to be considered, the description whereof
will be more conveniently postponed until the next
Lecture. We will now endeavour to convey to one
unacquainted with Greek some general notion of each
of the documents we have already passed under review,
by giving line for line an over-literal translation of
the facsimiles of the original on the opposite page ;
selecting for this purpose important passages of the
New Testament to which we shall have to look back
hereafter, on account of the various readings which are
contained in them. We begin with Mark xvi. 6 (part)
— 8 from the Codex Vaticanus (facsimile, No. 1) :
THEPLACEWHERETHEYLAIDHIMBUTGOYOURWAYTELLTOTHEDISCIPLE3THATHEGOETHBEFOREYOUTOTHEGALILEETHEREHIMSHALLYESEEASHESAIDTOYOUANDOUTsO
INGTHEYFLEDFROMTHE SEPULCHREHELDFOR THEMTREMORANDAMAZEMENTANDTONONENO
THINGSPAKETHEYWEREAF RAIDFOR: AFTER MARK.

(1)
b nron oc 6'n o Ye©H ka~
A^y t <^n k A A A Y n jH re t<f
eiriAT-e-roicM AeMT*i«
fy rd y k a i ~ra> n €T;i»a>
oti n j>o a rei y*iac€ic
THNTAMA^IANe K61^)T
tonoY ec 66Kxeu>^
n6N^?MlN KAI61.&AQ-Y
c a 1 6<J>y ro M^Cn 6*rpy
m n h m 6 i-o y,€J2ce n rA|»
iy TA C TfO M O C K A I ^K
c t: a. c | c ica < <S Yi^e n} 6y
a.<gn e i n OM€<pO fcoYN
~ XorA'f: v>~~

b i ahma^u ^fv •**"»» "in yi.i Kcu v/w* pfl^u >fcv" ?*J^K#I *
(2)

MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 57.
The subscription "After Mark" is by a later hand,
as the shape of the letter M compared with those
in the text abundantly proves. We have no stops
at all in the body of the passage, but : and the follow
ing > >- seem to be original, although the arabesque
(which, as well as the subscription, is touched with
vermilion) was subsequently added. Like all other
good copies, Cod. B omits "quickly" in ver. 8. Al
though Codex Vaticanus ends S. Mark's Gospel with
ver. 8, at the 31st line of the second column of a page
(its columns, when full, containing 42 lines), it leaves
the third column entirely blank, this being the only
instance of a vacant column throughout the whole
manuscript. To illustrate Codex Sinaiticus we employ another
passage of the deepest interest (facsimile, No. 3), 1 John
v. 6 (part) — 9 (part) :
THEWATERONLYBUTBYTHEWATERANDTHEBLOODAND THESPTISTHE
WITNESSINGFORTHE

SPTISTHETRU
THFORTHETHREEAR
ETHEWITNESS

INGTHESPTANDTHEWA TERANDTHEBLOOD
ANDTHETHREEINTOTHE ONEAREIFTHEWITNESSOFGDREC

58 ON THE PRINCIPAL GREEK
There is no vestige in Codex Sinaiticus, nor indeed
in any other manuscript worth naming, of the famous
interpolation of what are called the Three Heavenly
Witnesses in vers. 7, 8, which yet deforms our Authorised
translation, and will call for our special attention here
after: but we here observe an instance of correction by
a later hand of about the seventh century, amending
one of the original scribe's countless blunders, caused
by his eye having wandered two lines down the papy
rus he was copying (p. 39), which led him to write
"God" for "men." Here again we perceive no marks
of punctuation, but ought to notice a peculiarity, com
mon to all Biblical manuscripts though seen least in
the earliest, of abridging the names of the Divine
Persons after a fashion we should think a little
irreverent. We shall meet with other examples in
Codex Alexandrinus, from which we select the single
verse Acts xx. 28 (facsimile, No. 4).
Takeheedtoyourselvesandtoallt1113 flock-inwhichyouthesptthe holymadeoverseers-tofeedthecongregation
oftheldwhichhepurchasedthrough
thebloodhisown' "The Lord" in the room of "God" we shall here
after see cause to reject as a false variation from the
Received text. Here, however, in the compass of a
few lines, we meet with as many as three stops, two
of them over against the middle of the letters, and
apparently of less power than the final one which is

MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 59
set higher up. As a further mark of lower date we
should notice the initial capital, about double the size
of the rest, and standing out in the margin by itself.
The lines in our translation could not, of course, be
made as nearly of the same length as in the Greek,
where the letters are often written smaller at the end
of a line, and in less ancient documents than these
are compressed in shape. Speaking generally, the cha
racters in Codex B are somewhat less in size than
those of Codex A, considerably smaller than those
in Cod. X, though they all vary a little in this respect
in different parts. Finally, the Sinaitic manuscript
is written with four columns on a page (p. 17), each
rather more than two inches broad, with from 12 to 14
letters in each. Although the Vatican manuscript has
but three columns on a page (p. 27), yet the volume
being somewhat smaller, the breadth of each column is
about the same as those of its rival, though the letters
vary from 16 to 18. The columns of Codex Alexan-
drinus are but two on a page, and, having an average
breadth of 3 \ inches, allow room for twenty letters and
upwards in each. The attempt to keep up a resem
blance to the style of the old writing on papyrus (p. 16)
was by this time given over1: in fact the poetical books
of the Old Testament are necessarily arranged in pages
of two columns even in Codices B and X.
i The Utrecht Latin Psalter, which contains the Athanasian Creed,
and has been assigned by some to the sixth, by others to the ninth
or tenth century, is also written in three columns, but bears marks
of having been transcribed from an archetype which had but two
columns on a page. It would seem probable indeed that the three-
column arrangement is less a presumption of great antiquity in Latin
manuscripts than in Greek.

LECTURE III.
THE PRINCIPAL MANUSCRIPTS OF THE GREEK
testament : — Continued.
The next great manuscript of the Holy Bible which
calls for our attention is the Codex of Ephraem, or
Codex C of our critical notation, now No. 9 in the
Greek department of the National Library at Paris,
having been brought into France from Florence, to
gether with several other copies of less value, by
Queen Catharine de' Medici, of evil memory. It was
imported from the East by Andrew John Lascar, a
learned Greek patronised by Lorenzo de' Medici, and
for a while belonged to Cardinal Nicolas Ridolphi of the
same illustrious house. This document is a palimpsest,
such as has been described to you before (pp. 17, 18),
and the primitive writing (which dates from the fifth
century) being first washed out as far as might be, the
vellum received in about the twelfth century some
Greek works of the celebrated Syrian Father S.
Ephraem, from which it derives its distinctive name.
The portions of the Old Testament in the Septuagint
version which yet survive cover only 64 leaves. Far
more precious are 145 leaves of fragments of every
part of the New Testament, although more than one-

PRINCIPAL MANUSCRIPTS: CONTINUED. 61
third of the volume has utterly perished, comprising
some 37 chapters of the Gospels, 10 of the Acts, 42 of
the Epistles (2 John and 2 Thessalonians are entirely
lost), and 8 of the Apocalypse. Even of what remains
much the greater part is barely legible under the
modern writing. I had this document chiefly in view,
though the remark would apply to at least one other,
when I complained of attempts to revive the nearly ob
literated characters by means of chemical washes (p. 18).
Fleck tried the experiment on it in 1834, and has
defaced it with dark stains of various colours, from
green or blue to brown or black. The older writing
was first noticed by Peter Allix two centuries ago ;
various readings extracted from it were communicated
by Boivin to Kuster, who published them in 1710
in his edition of Mill's Greek Testament. As their
high value was readily perceived by our great Bentley,
he employed Wetstein, then young in spirit and
in eye-sight, to collate the New Testament fully in
1716. To Wetstein's manuscript report now pre
served with Bentley's other books in the Library of
Trinity College, Cambridge, is affixed in the Master's
hand-writing the grumbling note, "this collation cost
me £50." It might very well have done so and yet
have been worth the money, since it often takes two
hours or more to read a single page. Complete editions
of the New Testament from this manuscript in 1843,
of the Old in 1845, were among the earliest and best
of Tischendorf's labours, and leave biblical scholars not
much more to desire in regard to it.
From the four-column arrangement of Codex Sinai
ticus, the three columns of Codex Vaticanus, and the

62 THE PRINCIPAL MANUSCRIPTS OF THE
two of Codex Alexandrinus, we come to the single
column in a page of the Codex Ephraem, which, with
but few exceptions, was the fashion adopted in Greek
Biblical manuscripts in later times, save that Leciion-
aries or Church lesson-books were mostly written in
two columns down to the period that printing was
invented. In shape Codex C is about the same size
as Cod. A, but the vellum, though sufficiently good,
is hardly so fine as that of its predecessors. The
characters too are a little larger than those of B or A,
and somewhat more elaborate, the latter circumstance
always being a token of somewhat lower date. Our
facsimile (No. 5) is chosen from another famous passage
to which we must return by and by, being portions of
1 Timothy iii. 15, 16. The writing in dark ink and
double columns in the cursive or running hand belongs
to Ephraem's treatise, and affects us nothing.
UNDOFTHETRUTH:
A.NDCONFESSEDLYGREATISTHEOFGODLINESSMY STERY WASMANIFESTEDINFLESHJUSTIFIEDINSF
We have left a vacant space in the third line where
the primitive reading is quite uncertain: the word of
two letters may either have been WHO (OC) or GD
i. e. GOD (@C), the difference in sense being evidently
a considerable one. Here again we observe the capital
letter in the margin, as in Cod. A, and two middle
stops in the last line : the double stop before the para
graph break in the first line may be of later date, as
the Greek breathings and accents certainly are. The
strange marks under ©C in the Greek compose a

(*) pi.h.

N CD QM 6 I

(8)
|ie9eRe noiMeweiN
6ocnmi Toyicy
(10)

GREEK TESTAMENT: CONTINUED. 63
musical note, inserted by some one who understood
the word to be GD. Codex C should be regarded as
slightly junior to Codex A, and may be referred to the
first half of the fifth century. An ancient reviser, who
went through the manuscript about a hundred years
after it was written, has preserved readings which are
sometimes hardly inferior to those of the first hand,
but two or three later correctors deserve little con
sideration for their labours. Here again, as in Cod. A,
there are no traces of chapter divisions in the Acts,
Epistles, or Apocalypse ; but titles (p. 53), or tables of
the contents of the larger Greek chapters are prefixed to
the several Gospels, the Ammonian sections being set in
the margin without the Eusebian canons, which latter,
being usually written in vermilion paint, may have
been washed out by the rough process to which this
palimpsest has been subjected. The critical value of
Cod. C, where its evidence is to be had, is very highly
prized. It stands in respect of text about midway
between A and B, and is evidently quite independent
of both, to an extent which could not be asserted of
Cod. X in reference to B ; so that the support, whether
of A or C, or better still, of the two united, lends an
authority to the readings of B, which it is not easy
to gainsay or set aside.
Codex Bezje or Cod. D, that copy of the Gospels and
Acts in Greek and Latin arranged in parallel columns,
which was presented in 1581 by the French Protestant
leader Theodore Beza to the University of Cambridge,
is the last of the great uncial copies we shall consider
in detail. The open volume stands under a glass case
in the New Library, and is probably worth all the

64 THE PRINCIPAL MANUSCRIPTS OF THE
other manuscripts there deposited put together: for
Cambridge, though rich in grateful sons, is less for
tunate than Oxford in one respect, that she found no
Bodley or Laud or Selden to make collections for her,
at a period when the wreck of English monastic
libraries could be picked up almost for the asking.
Codex Bezse has been twice edited ; in 1793 by Thomas
Kipling, afterwards Dean of Peterborough, in two folio
volumes and in type imitating the style of the primi
tive writing, in 1864 by myself in a less costly, but
not, I hope, a less useful form. The manuscript is now
splendidly bound and forms a quarto of 406 original
and nine later vellum leaves: about 128 leaves have
been lost, containing portions of the Gospels of S.
Matthew and S. John, and no inconsiderable part of
the Acts of the Apostles, some of the missing passages
being supplied on the more recent leaves in a hand
more modern by at least 300 years.
A Latin fragment of the third epistle of S. John,
from ver. 11 to the end, stands on the first page of
a leaf on the reverse of which the Acts commence,
so that the Catholic Epistles or some of them must
have preceded that book when the Codex was yet
perfect. The order also in which the Gospels stand
is uncommon, though not unexampled in the West,
those of the two apostles S. Matthew and S. John
taking precedence of the writings of the Apostolic men
S. Luke and S. Mark. Three of the best codices of
the Old Latin versions exhibit the same arrangement,
to us a very strange one, — Matthew, John, Luke,
Mark. In Codex Bezse, as our facsimile (No. 6) will shew,

GREEK TESTAMENT: CONTINUED. 65-
the Greek text stands on the left page of each open
leaf, the Latin translation on the right, opposite to it,
and corresponding with it line for line; the whole
being distributed into metrical lines of not very un
equal length, which in the venerable archetype from
Which it was derived doubtless suited the sense closer
than it does at present. There are thirty-three such
lines on every page, that in our specimen being taken
from John xxi. 21, 22.
HIMTHEREFORESEEINGPETERSAITHTOJS-LDANDTHISMANWHATSAITHTOHIMIS IFIWISHHIMTOREMAINTHUSTILLICOMEWHATTOTHEE FOLLOWTHOUME
The insertion of THUS in the third line enables us
to trace a little of the history of this remarkable
manuscript before it fell into Beza's hands. William
a Prato, Bishop of Clermont in the Auvergne, is known
to have produced to the Council of Trent in 1546
"a very ancient Greek codex," which confirmed the
reading of the Latin Vulgate " Thus I wish" instead
of " If I wish." Since Cod. D is the only known Greek
which even seems to do so (as it reads both "if" and
"thus" with some other Latin authorities), the inference
is a natural one that a Prato had brought it to Trent
from his own country. In or about the same year
1546, Henry Stephens collated what cannot but be the
self-same copy "in Italy," for the use of his father
Robert Stephens' celebrated Greek Testament of 1550.
All else we know about the book is told by Beza in
his letter to the University of Cambridge which ac
companied his noble gift, and in an autograph note of
S.L. 5

66 THE PRINCIPAL MANUSCRIPTS OF THE
his still to be seen in it, whose statements are yet
more explicit. Hence we learn that he obtained this
precious treasure from the monastery of S. Irenseus in
Lyons, at the first breaking out of the French religious
wars in 1562 ; and since we learn from the annals of
those miserable times that Lyons was sacked and the
monastery desecrated by the Huguenots that very year,
we need not go far to conjecture how it came into the
possession of Beza, who was serving as chaplain general
of the Reformed army during that very campaign. He
adds indeed that it had long lain there buried in the
dust, which might be true enough in the main, for
Beza is little likely to have heard of the loan made
to the Bishop of the neighbouring Clermont sixteen
years before. Nothing is more likely than that this
most venerable document, a relic of the end of the
fifth or the beginning of the sixth century, was a
native of the country in which it was found. The
Latin version bespeaks its western origin; its style
and diction are exactly suitable to a province like Gaul,
where the classical language was fast breaking up into
the vernacular dialect from which the modern French
derives its origin, to whose usage indeed a few of its
words and phrases approximate in a manner which can
not well be accidental. For it will be observed that
the Latin version of Cod. D has less affinity to the
Vulgate than any other yet known. It seems to have
been made either from the existing Greek text of the
manuscript, or from a yet earlier form very closely
allied with it.
But for the character of its parallel Latin trans
lation, the Codex Bezse might have been dated a little

GREEK TESTAMENT: CONTINUED. 67
earlier than we have ventured to place it. Its uncials
are firm, simple, and elegant ; the punctuation consists
mainly of a single point over against the middle of the
letters ; the capitals are not much larger than the other
letters, though they sometimes occur in the middle of a
line, a practice we have not had to notice before. The
text has none of the usual divisions into chapters or
sections, but is distributed into paragraphs peculiar
to this copy, indicated by the initial letters running
slightly into the margin. In some parts this manu
script is quite fresh, the red ink especially being as
bright as if it were new : in others it is barely legible.
It has suffered many emendations by numerous hands,
some of which have dealt with it very violently. The
Ammonian sections were placed in the margin by a
scribe of about the ninth century.
The chief interest attached to Codex Bezse arises
from the very peculiar character of its Greek text,
which departs much further from that of the common
editions than does that of any other manuscript. No
known copy contains so many bold and extensive in
terpolations, either absolutely unsupported, or counte
nanced only by some Old Latin manuscript or Syriac
version. In the Acts of the Apostles we seem in many
places to be reading a kind of running commentary on
the narrative as given by other authorities, rather than
S. Luke's history itself, and some of its additions are
very interesting, from whatever source they were de
rived, though we must not venture to regard them as
authentic. Such, for example, is the touching circum
stance preserved by Cod. D and the margin of a late
Syriac version, and by these alone, that Simon Magus,
5—2

68 THE PRINCIPAL MANUSCRIPTS OF THE
after his earnest request for S. Peter's intercession that'
his sin might be forgiven him (Acts viii. 24), ceased not
to shed many a bitter tear. But the most remarkable
passage in this manuscript, in regard to which it stands
quite alone, is that which follows Luke vi. 4, on the
leaf which is usually kept open at Cambridge for the
inspection of visitors. It runs thus :
"On the same day he beheld a certain man work
ing on the sabbath, and said unto him, Man, blessed
art thou if thou knowest what- thou doest ; but if thou
knowest not, thou art cursed and a transgressor of the
law.'' I was present when this passage was shewn at
Cambridge to a learned Greek Archimandrite, Philippos
Schulati of Kustandje. He had never heard either of
it or of the manuscript before, but after a moment's
thought his comment was ready : " This cannot be :
the Lord cursed no man."
Codex Claromontanus, or Cod. D of S. Paul's
Epistles, now No. 107 in the National Library at Paris,
bears a strange resemblance to Cod. D of the Gospels
and Acts in regard to its country, its history, its
date, genius, and general appearance. This copy also
was brought to light by Beza, who first mentions it in
1582, the year after he had sent its fellow to Cam
bridge. He had obtained it,, he says not how, at the
other Clermont near Beauvais, and from him it passed
into the hands of those distinguished scholars, Claude
Dupuy, Councillor of Paris, and his sons Jacques and
Pierre. Jacques, who was the king's librarian, sold it
in 1656 to Louis XIV, to form part of the great collec
tion which it still adorns. In 1707 John Aymont, an

GREEK TESTAMENT: CONTINUED. 69
apostate priest, stole 35 of its 533 leaves, of the thinnest
and finest vellum known to exist. One leaf, which he
disposed of in Holland, was restored in 1720 by its pos
sessor Stosch; the rest were sold to the bibliomanist
Harley, Earl of Oxford, Queen Anne's Lord Treasurer,
but were sent back to Paris in 1729 by his son, who
had learnt their shameful story. This noble volume,
like the other Cod. D, is in two languages, the Greek
and Latin being on different pages in parallel lines, the
Greek on the left side of the open leaf. It contains
all S. Paul's Epistles except a few missing leaves, that.
to the Hebrews standing last as in our modern Bibles,
rather than as in Codd. NABC (p. 27). Each page is
covered with about 21 lines of uncial writing, the words
being continuous both in Greek and Latin, the letters
square, regular and beautiful, perhaps a little simpler
than those in Codex Beza?. Our facsimile (No. 7)
contains 1 Cor. xiii. 5, 6 :
ISNOTUNSEEMLY
SEEKETHNOTHEROWN ISNOTIRRITATEDTHINKETHNOTEVIL
REJOICETHNOTINWRONG BUTREJOICETHINTRUTH
Here again, but more correctly and clearly than in
Codex Bezse, we have an example of what is technically
called stichometry, that is, the division of prose sentences
into lines of about equal length corresponding as nearly
as possible to the sense. This elegant but artificial
arrangement, though not unknown in the third and
fourth centuries, was first formally applied to S. Paul's

70 THE PRINCIPAL MANUSCRIPTS OF THE
writings by Euthalius the deacon, A. D. 458. The pre
cious fragment Cod. H of S. Paul, once belonging to
Coislin, Bishop of Metz, and now also in the National
Library at Paris, is similarly divided to Cod. D, and
the two must be referred to the same period, the early
part of the sixth century, a date which will suit well
enough the Latin version in the parallel column, as it
did that of Codex Bezse (p. 66). There are few stops
in this copy, the breathings and accents are by a hand
two or three centuries later. The letters at the begin
ning of words and sections are plain, and not much
larger than the rest. The Greek text is far purer than
that of Cod. Bezse, and inferior in value only to that of
its four great predecessors, Codd. XABC : the Latin
version is more independent of the parallel Greek, and
of higher critical worth. This manuscript also was
excellently edited in 1852 by the indefatigable Tischen
dorf, who found his task all the more difficult by reason
of the changes the text had successively undergone
at the hands of no less than nine different correctors,
ancient and modern.
In connection with the Codex Claromontanus we
are bound to name another Greek and Latin copy,
Codex Sangermanensis or Cod. E of S. Paul, if only
to point out its utter uselessness. In the worst days
of the first French Revolution the Abbey of S. Ger
main des Prez by Paris, which had been turned into a
saltpetre manufactory, was burnt down, and many of its
books were lost in the act of removal. Out of their
number Cod. E and two leaves of Cod. H of S. Paul,
which we just now referred to, have turned up, together
with others, in the Imperial Library at St Petersburg,

GREEK TESTAMENT: CONTINUED. 71
that common receptacle of literary property which
has gone astray. We may wish the Russians joy of a
purchase which is of no value to any one. Cod. E is a
large volume, written in coarse uncial letters of about
the tenth century, with breathings and accents by the
first hand, the two languages standing on the same
page, but the Greek still on the left hand. In respect
to the Greek column, it is demonstrably nothing but a
servile transcript from Cod. D made by a very ignorant
scribe after Cod. D had suffered its more violent correc
tions, which are incorporated with the text of Cod. E in
as blundering a fashion as can be conceived. The Latin
too is derived from that of Cod. D, but is a little more
mixed with the new or Vulgate Latin, and may be
of some service in criticism, whereas the Greek cannot
possibly be of any.
Another manuscript in which the prose text of the
Acts of the Apostles is broken up into stichometry was
given to the Bodleian Library by its great Chancellor
and benefactor, Archbishop Laud. It is designated
Cod. E of the Acts, which book alone it contains,
though with a serious gap of the 73 verses between
ch. xxvi. 29 and ch. xxviii. 26. This copy also is in Greek
and Latin, or more properly in Latin and Greek, for
here the two languages are found in parallel columns
on the same page (not on different pages as in the two
Codd. D), the Latin in the post of honour on the left,
in which particular it is almost unique among Biblical
•manuscripts. It was, therefore, manifestly written in
the West of Europe. An edict of Flavius Pancratius,
Duke of Sardinia, which with the Apostles' Creed in
Latin is annexed to it, shews that it must have been

72 THE PRINCIPAL MANUSCRIPTS OF THE
in that island not earlier than the sixth century. The
very peculiar readings which he cites from it suffi
ciently prove that it was in the possession of our Vener
able Bede, who died A.D. 735, and the conjecture is a
probable one that it is one of the Greek books brought
from Rome to England A.D. 668 by our great Arch
bishop of Canterbury, Theodore of Tarsus, the fellow- •
countryman of S. Paul. The style of this manuscript
shews that its date is somewhat lower than those we
have yet considered (except of course the S. Germain's
transcript of Codex Claromontanus), perhaps early in
the seventh century or late in the sixth. The charac
ters are large and somewhat rude, the vellum thick
and coarse, the 226 extant leaves have from 23 to 26
lines each, every line containing one or two words only,
so that the stichometrical arrangement is rather one
of name than of fact. Capital letters, running into
the margin, occur after a break in the sense, but there
are no formal paragraphs or indications of chapter
divisions. Our facsimile (No. 8) comprises a portion
of Acts xx. 28, with the same various reading as we
noted above (p. 58) in Cod. A.
TOFEED THECHURCH OFTHELD
The Laudian manuscript (E) has been twice edited, by
Thomas Hearne the antiquarian in 1715, by Tischen
dorf in 1870. Its text exhibits numberless rare and
bold variations from that of ordinary copies, and in
places is near akin to that of Cod. Bezse (D), but
has a yet stronger affinity than the latter to the Greek

GREEK TESTAMENT: CONTINUED. 73
margin of the later Syriac version. One cursive manu
script of the eleventh century in the Ambrosian Library
at Milan (137 of Scholz's notation) resembles it so
closely in the latter part of the Acts, that it may
almost serve as a substitute for D or E, where either of
them is mutilated. Cod. E is our earliest and chief
Greek authority for the interesting verse Acts viii. 37,
"And Philip said, If thou believest from all thine heart,
thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe
that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." This verse is
familiar to the English reader from having been brought
into the Received Greek text by its first editor Eras
mus, who frankly confesses that he found it not in his
Greek copies, save in the margin of a single one.
Hence its authenticity cannot be maintained, although
Irenseus, who wrote in Gaul in the second century,
recognised it without hesitation, as did Cyprian in the
third century, Jerome and Augustine in the fourth.
Many forms of the Latin version also contain the verse,
which at any rate vouches for the undoubted practice
of the early Church, of requiring a profession of
faith, whether in person or by proxy, as ordinarily an
essential preliminary to Baptism.
Two other considerable Greek-Latin manuscripts,
which contain S. Paul's Epistles, merit a brief and passing
notice, although they are neither of them prior to the
latter part of the ninth century; namely, the Codex
Augiensis (F), once Richard Bentley's, and bequeathed
by his nephew to Trinity College, Cambridge, and the
Codex Boernerianus (G) in the Royal Library at Dres
den. The former member of this pair I had the pleasure
of editing in 1859, the latter was published by the

74 THE PRINCIPAL MANUSCRIPTS OF THE
great critic Matthaei as far back as 1791. Cod. Augi
ensis derives its name from the monastery of Augia
Dives, Reichenau, the rich meadow, on a fertile island
in the lower part of the Lake of Constance, to which it
long appertained, and where it may even have been
written about a thousand years ago. The origin of
Cod. Boernerianus (so named from a former owner, and
Professor at Leipsic, C. F. Boerner) is yet better ascer
tained, inasmuch as what is demonstrably the earlier
portion of it, comprising the four Gospels, was disco
vered at the great monastery of S. Gall, and published
in 1836 by Rettig, being known as the very curious and
weighty Cod. A (delta, p. 43) of the Gospels. On a leaf
now at Dresden were found a stanza or two of Irish verse,
doubtless written by one of the students of that nation
who crowded to S. Gall in the middle ages, which, as
translated by Dr Reeves, the eminent Celtic scholar,
may suggest that his countrymen had hardly yet be
come the blind slaves of the Papal court that unhappy
circumstances have made them since.
To go to Rome, to go to Rome,
Much trouble, little good,
The King thou seekest there
To find, thou must bring with thee.
The connection between the Greek text as exhibited
by Cod. F and that of Cod. G is of the most intimate
character. That of Augia has all the defects of. the
sister copy and two peculiar to itself, since its first
seven leaves are completely lost ; both break off at
Philemon ver. 20, thus omitting the Epistle to the
Hebrews, although Cod. F affixes the Vulgate Latin
version of that letter, while Cod. G has at the end Of

GREEK TESTAMENT: CONTINUED. 75
Philemon the title "Here beginneth the Epistle to
the Laodiceans," which, had it been preserved, would
have been very interesting. Since the Epistle to the
Colossians had already been given in its proper place,
it could not have been that letter under another
name. But the Greek text in both copies is chiefly to be
noticed. On comparing Matthaei's edition of G with
the original of F, I could count only 1982 places wherein
they differ, whereof only 200 were true various readings,
the rest being mere blunders of the respective scribes,
slips of the pen, or interchanges of vowels by reason of
itacisms (pp. 39, 41). This affinity between the two has
but one parallel, and that a less complete one, in this
branch of literature, for Cod. E of S. Paul is only an
unskilful transcript of Cod. D after it had suffered ex
tensive corrections (p. 71). The truth is, that they were
both taken from the same archetype by scribes who were
miserably ignorant of Greek, and in that archetype the
words must have been written continuously as in Codd.
NABC, the two Codd. D, and E of the Acts. But a habit
had long been growing which in the ninth century be
came confirmed, of setting a space between the words,
and to this habit the scribes of both copies wished to
conform, and even put a single point or stop at the end
of each word (see p. 20), as if to shew that the practice
was not yet familiar. Now the thing to be noticed is
this; while in their almost complete darkness as to the
meaning of the Greek they both made most ludicrous
errors in the process of separating the words, the blun
ders of the one are by no means identical with those of
the other, though just as gross and absurd. Hence it

76 THE PRINCIPAL MANUSCRIPTS OF THE
follows that both F and G were transcribed separately
from the same older codex, and, except in the places
where they differ from each other, must be regarded
not as two witnesses but one. The text thus pre
served is both ancient and valuable, marked by many
peculiarities of its own, and not to be rejected, if re
jected at all, without much thought and some hesi
tation. In respect to their Latin versions the two are quite
independent. Cod. F has a pure form of the Latin
Vulgate, as current at the period, in parallel columns on
the same page with the Greek, but so arranged that
the two Latin should always stand in the outward
columns of each open leaf, the two Greek inside, and
next to each other. In Cod. G the Latin is of an older
type, set over the Greek and much conformed to
it. Cod. G also preserves, by means of capital letters
in the middle of the lines, the stichometrical arrange
ment of the archetype from which it was taken.
It would be too much to tire your patience by de
scribing other uncial manuscripts of lower date and less
eminent merit. For their age, history, and character
istics I must be content to refer you to works which
have been specially devoted to the subject, among which
the second edition of my " Plain Introduction to the
Criticism of the New Testament," whatever be its other
merits, is at least the most recent. Suffice it to say that
the palimpsest fragments (p. 17) Codd. P and Q at Wolf-
enbiittel, Cod. R (Nitriensis, see p. 90) of S. Luke in
the British Museum, Cod. Z of S. Matthew at Trinity
College, Dublin, must be assigned to the sixth century,
or the opening of the seventh, and, so far as they carry

GREEK TESTAMENT: CONTINUED. 77
us, are only less weighty than Codd. NABCD. But
the coryphaeus of these lesser authorities, though not
earlier than the eighth century; is Codex L, or No. 62
in the National Library at Paris, of which we have had
occasion to speak in connection with Codex B (pp. 42,
43, 49). In number the uncials amount to fifty-six in
the Gospels, far the greater part of which are fragments,
and many of them inconsiderable fragments ; in the Acts
and Catholic Epistles to six ; in the Pauline Epistles to
fifteen, chiefly fragments ; in the Apocalypse to only
five ; to eighty-two in all. We do not here include
Church lesson-books or Lectionaries, of which about
sixty-eight survive in uncial characters ; inasmuch as
this style of writing, which became obsolete in other
books towards the end of the ninth century, was in
volumes used for reading in Churches, for motives of
obvious convenience, kept up about two hundred years
longer. I have just said that much of our elder and uncial
writing is merely fragmentary. This arises in part
from the nature of the case. A few leaves, or per
haps a single leaf, of precious Biblical vellum, had been
barbarously mangled to make up the binding of some
comparatively modern book. Thus a portion of the
beautiful Codex Ruber or Cod. M of S. Paul has been
made up into fly-leaves for a volume of small value in
comparison, among the Harleian manuscripts in the
British Museum : Griesbach identified it at a glance as
belonging to a fragment at Hamburg, by the exquisite
semicursive writing and the bright red ink. Again, that
interesting leaf of S. Mark's Gospel (Wd) which is now
arranged on glass at Trinity College, Cambridge, consists

78 THE PRINCIPAL MANUSCRIPTS OF THE
of 27 several shreds, picked out of the binding of a
volume of Gregory Nazianzen in 1862 by the University
Librarian, Mr Bradshaw. Too often, however, the scat
tering of various parts of the same manuscript is the
work of mere fraud or greed. Of what was once a very
fine copy of the Gospels written late in the sixth cen
tury on thin purple-dyed vellum in letters of silver and
gold, four leaves are among the Cotton manuscripts in
the British Museum, six are in the Vatican, two in the
Imperial Library at Vienna. Thirty-three more leaves
of the self-same codex (known as N of the Gospels)
have lately been discovered at the monastery of S.
John at Patmos, whence the other twelve were no
doubt stolen, then divided for the purpose of getting a
higher price for them from three several purchasers
than from one. One would be sorry indeed to utter a
word of disparagement about a person who has done so
much for Biblical learning as Tischendorf, yet it is hard
to acquit him of blame for having dispersed needlessly
the several portions of certain documents he has brought
to light. The case of Codex Sinaiticus seems to have
admitted of no alternative. He was glad to get posses
sion of its separate parts when and how he could. Yet
the effect abides, that the 43 leaves which go by the
name of the Codex Friderico-Augustanus (p. 32) are
now at Leipsic, the remainder of the manuscript at St
Petersburg. But it is hard to account in this way for
his procedure in another matter. In 1855 he sold to the
University of Oxford for the Bodleian, at a good price,
two uncial codices of some importance, probably written
in the ninth- century, and each containing about half of
the Gospels. They are known as Codd. T (gamma) and A

GREEK TESTAMENT: CONTINUED. 79
(lambda), and were stated by him to have been found in
some eastern monastery — he is in the habit of describ
ing in this general way the original locality of treasures
which he met with on his various journeys. Four years
later, on his return from the expedition during which he
lighted on Codex Sinaiticus, he took to St Petersburg
the remaining half of each of these documents, which
are thus separated from their other portions by the
breadth of Europe, and that without giving Oxford a
chance of acquiring the whole, so far at least as we are
aware. Without doubt the course which Tischendorf
adopted was the more advantageous to himself, but to
the Biblical student it is vexatiously inconvenient.
Little can here be said about manuscripts written
in the cursive or running hand, which style from the
tenth century downwards (p. 20) was almost exclusively
. employed in copying manuscripts of the New Testa
ment. They are very numerous — sixteen hundred at
least having been entered in formal Catalogues, whereof
hardly a hundred have been collated or even examined
as they ought — but they will not enter largely into
discussion when we come to apply our materials to the
solution of critical difficulties. A very brief account of
a few of them is all we shall find time for. As the
uncials are designated by letters of the alphabet, so are
the cursives for the most part by the Arabic numerals.
Cod. 1 contains the Gospels, Acts, aud all the Epistles,
written in an elegant and minute hand, and on account
of certain beautiful miniatures which have now been
abstracted from it was assigned to the tenth century:
the handwriting might lead us to think that it is a little
more recent. Our facsimile (No.' 9, Plate 1) represents

80 THE PRINCIPAL MANUSCRIPTS OF THE
the title and first words of S. Luke's Gospel, and the
graceful illuminations are set off by bright colours and
gilding. It is deposited in the Public Library of Basle,
in which city it was used, only too slightly, by Erasmus,
when he was preparing the first published edition of
the Greek New Testament, 1516.
The Apocalypse, or Book of the Revelation, is not
often contained in the same volume as the Gospels ; so
that Cod. 1 of the Apocalypse is quite a different manu
script, of less value and antiquity, and being the only
one to which Erasmus had access when' forming his
Greek text, its manifold errors and its defect in the
six concluding verses rendered his text of this book the
least satisfactory portion of his great work. This Cod. 1
then belonged to John Reuchlin (or Capnio, as he was
called, after the fanciful humour of his times), the
famous scholar whose death in 1522 was bewailed by
his loving friend Erasmus in one of the most exquisite
of his Colloquies. It was subsequently lost, but was
happily re-discovered b)r Professor Delitzsch in 1861,
in the library of the Prince of Oettingen-Wallerstein,
to the great gain of sacred literature.
Cod. 33 of the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles, although
much less beautiful than the Basle Cod. 1, is in respect
of its contents far more valuable. For its store of
excellent various readings, and its textual resemblance
to the most venerable uncials, it has been justly styled
" Queen of the cursives." It once belonged to the great
French minister Colbert, and is now in the National
Library at Paris, No. 14. It is written in a fine round
hand of the eleventh century, with 52 long lines on
each page (see facsimile No. 10, Luke i. 8 — 11), but has

GREEK TESTAMENT : CONTINUED. 81
been shamefully misused in former times. By reason
of the damp, the ink has in many places left its proper
page blank, so that, to the dismay of Tregelles, who
persistently collated it anew in 1850, the writing can
only be read as set off on the opposite page.
The next copy we shall speak of, Cod. 69 of the
Gospels, is one of the comparatively few cursives —
some twenty-five in all — which embrace the whole
New Testament, although with numerous defects. It
is a folio volume, peculiar for having been written,
apparently with a reed, on inferior vellum and coarse
paper, arranged in the proportion of two parchment to
three paper leaves, recurring at regular intervals : the
handwriting is a wretched scrawl, always tiresome and
sometimes difficult to decipher. Our facsimile (No. 11)
contains 1 Tim. iii. 15 — 16, selected for the sake of a
reading to which we have previously made reference,
and shall have occasion to speak more about hereafter.
Its wide variations from the Received text have drawn
much attention to this document, which was presented
to the Town Council of Leicester in 1640 by a neigh
bouring clergyman, Thomas Hayne. Its present owners
allowed both Tregelles and myself to take it home with
us for the laborious task of complete collation, but it is
ordinarily kept with reverent care in the Town Library
by those who take an honest pride in their treasure.
A few years since some friends of mine were in
specting it with strangers' curiosity, while the old lady
appointed to exhibit it expatiated loudly on its merits.
It was, of course, in her oration, one of the wonders
of the world, a precious relic coming down to us from
the fourth century of the Christian era. Then sud-
s. L. 6

82 THE PRINCIPAL MANUSCRIPTS OF THE
denly changing countenance, and sharpening the tones
of her voice, she proceeded, to the lively amusement of
her audience, " And yet that famous Doctor Scrivener
pretends that it is no older than the fourteenth cen
tury : — much he knows about it !" If you will glance
again at our facsimile, and compare it with others that
I have laid before you, it may probably occur to you
that the date I venture to assign to it is not far wrong ;
but it might have comforted the zealous guardian of
the Leicester manuscript, had she been told that mere
age is but one element in assigning to a document its
proper value. This very copy has recently been demon
strated by the late Professor Ferrar, of Trinity College,
Dublin, and his colleague there, Mr. T. K. Abbott, to
have so close a connection with three others of the
twelfth century, one being now at Paris, another at
Vienna, the third at Milan1, that the four must have
been transcribed, either directly or perhaps at second
hand, from some archetype of very remote antiquity,
which in Mr Abbott's judgment may have equalled
Codex Bezse in age, while it exceeded it in the purity
of its text. One point of resemblance between the four
is a very startling one. These manuscripts, and these
alone, coincide in removing the history of the woman
taken in adultery, which we shall have to discuss
hereafter, from the beginning of the eighth chapter of
S. John's Gospel to the end of the twenty-first chapter
of S. Luke.
Two other very important copies of the Gospels
are Cod. 157 in the Vatican, which is next in weight
1 The other three copies are, Cod. 13 of the Gospels, Paris No. 50;
Cod. 124, Vienna, Lambece. 31 ; Cod. 346, Milan, Ambros. S. 23 sui.

GREEK TESTAMENT: CONTINUED. 83
among the cursives to Cod. 33, and from its miniatures
in colours and gold is seen to belong to the early part
of the twelfth century; and a Church lesson-book, dated
A.D. 1319, abounding with readings found elsewhere
only in Cod. B and the best uncials, which has been
named by others Scrivener's y, because I was fortunate
enough to light upon it nearly thirty years ago among
the Burney manuscripts in the British Museum. In
the same great library is deposited another cursive, as
remarkable as any in existence, Cod. 61 of the Acts of
the Apostles only, but with 297 verses missing. This
also is dated (a.d. .1044), and seems once to have con
tained the Catholic Epistles, since a table of the chap
ters in S- James yet remains. Tischendorf discovered
it in Egypt in 1853, and sold it to the Trustees of the
British Museum. In consideration of its singular cri
tical value in a book whose readings are at times much
disturbed, independent collations have been made of it
by Tischendorf, Tregelles, and myself.
The last cursive we shall mention at present is one
of about the twelfth century, Cod. 95 of the Apocalypse,
manuscripts of which book are much scarcer than those
of any other portion of the New Testament. The late
Lord de la Zouche, then Mr Curzon, found it in 1837
on the library floor at the monastery of Caracalla, on
Mount Athos, and begged it of the Abbot, who sug
gested that the vellum leaves would be of use to cover
pickle-jars. This " special treasure," as Tregelles justly
calls it, contains also, between the portions of its pre
cious text, an epitome of Arethas' commentary on the
Apocalypse, and breaks off at ch. xx. 11. This copy,
and one less valuable from the same place (Cod. 96),
6—2

84 THE PRINCIPAL MANUSCRIPTS OF THE
Mr Curzon allowed me to collate in 1855 at his seat,
Parham Park in Sussex.
Manuscripts of every kind and date will often be
found to contain very interesting matter respecting
their scribes and the times when they were written.
Many of them are adorned with pictures in miniature
or of full size, as also with arabesque and other illu
minations, in paint of blue or purple, green or ver
milion or gold, both beautiful in themselves, and
illustrative of the history of art. But these things ap
pertain rather to the antiquarian than to the Biblical
critic, and must not detain us now. A pretty little
notice of the Scriptorium, or writing-room in monas
teries (see p. 4), of its tenants and its furniture, may be
seen in so unlikely a place as the Appendix to the
"Golden Legend" of the American poet Longfellow,
who fairly quotes the authorities whence his informa
tion is taken. In two writers of manuscripts, who have
repeatedly crossed my path, I cannot help feeling a
special interest: one is Theodore of Hagios Petros in
the Morea, which little town even yet furnishes pupils
to the German Universities, in whose firm bold hand
no less than six manuscripts still survive, bearing date
between A.D. 1278 and 1301: the other is Angelus Ver-
gecius, a professional scribe of the sixteenth century,
on whose elegant style was modelled the Greek type
cast for the Royal Printing Office at Paris, and to
whose excellence in his art is due the oddly-sounding
proverb, " he writes like an angel." The colophon oi
concluding note to an extensive work is sometimes
very touching in its quaint simplicity, whether it be
a burst of thankfulness that the toil is ended- or a

GREEK TESTAMENT: CONTINUED. 85
request for the reader's prayers in behalf of the sinful
penman ; or a description of his personal peculiarities,
such as "the one-eyed Cyprian;" or some obvious
moral reflection, which hardly reads like a common
place, now that it is verified before our eyes. Take,
for example, the following distich, extracted from a
manuscript in the collection of the Baroness Burdett-
Coutts (n. 10) :
rj liiv x^P V ypd^paffa mjirerai rdi/ap,
¦}) li /3i'/3Xos Urartu. ../itxP1 ripnarav.
The hand that wrote doth moulder in the tomb,
The Book abideth till the day of doom.

LECTUEE IV.

ON THE ANCIENT VERSIONS AND OTHER MATERIALS FOR
THE CRITICISM OF THE GREEK TEXT.

1. I tried to explain in the course of my first
Lecture (pp. 9 — 11) the important service rendered to
sacred criticism by the primitive versions of Holy Scrip
ture and by the express citations from it preserved in
early ecclesiastical writers ; inasmuch as these help to
bridge over the space of nearly three centuries which
separates the lost autographs of the Apostles and Evan
gelists from the most venerable of those manuscripts
which my second and third Lectures were designed to
render familiar to you. In plain truth, the versions and
the Fathers of the second and third century stand in
the place of copies of the New Testament which were
then in common use, but have long since utterly disap
peared beyond all hope of discovery: and, speaking
generally, they fill up the vacant room, if not at all
times so completely as we might wish, yet in a way
abundantly sufficient for all practical purposes. A sin
gle example shall illustrate my meaning, and it shall be
taken in preference from one of the few passages (they
are only twenty-five through the New Testament)

CRITICISM OF THE GREEK TEXT. 87
wherein the translators of our Authorized Bible notice
in their margin a difference of reading. In Acts xiii. 18
our ordinary text runs "And about the time of forty
years suffered he their manners in the wilderness,"
where the margin, instead of " suffered he their man
ners," intimates as a possible alternative "bore them
as a nurse beareth or feedeth her child," supplying
for once to the English reader both the Greek words
eTpoiro(f)op7)<Tev and iTpo<po<j)6pr)<rev, which differ only in
a single letter, pi or phi. When we come to examine
our best manuscripts we find them not unequally di
vided. For pi of our English text are Codd. KB, the
very ancient second hand of C (p. 63), the Greek of
D against its own parallel Latin version, the great cur
sive 61 (p. 83), three lesser uncials and most cursives.
For phi of our margin stand Codd. AC (by the first
hand), E or Bede's copy, the Latin of D (p. 66), that
admirable cursive numbered as 33 in the Gospels (p. 80)
and several others of a superior class. In this state of
perplexity, since either reading would give us a fair
sense, we naturally desire to know which of them was
extant in ages prior to the fourth century, the date of
our earliest codices K and B. Now several translations
which yet survive were made at an early period, and
this is just such a case as versions would have peculiar
weight in deciding, because in no other language save
Greek would two words so widely apart in meaning be
so close to each other in form. We notice therefore
that the elder Syriac of the second century, the two
Egyptian of the third, conspire in representing phi, the
form upheld in our margin, and these facts would go
far to decide the question, which happens to be one

88 ANCIENT VERSIONS AND OTHER MATERIALS
rather curious than very important, but that we observe
both readings in the works of the celebrated Greek
critic and theologian Origen, who died in the middle of
the third century. Both readings, therefore, were well
known and supported long before Codd. NB existed,
and the parallel in Deut. i. 31, to which our translators
make a seasonable reference, and which in the Hebrew
admits of no ambiguity, will probably incline us to
prefer phi of the Authorized margin to pi of the text.
2. I have dwelt the longer on the foregoing pas
sage, that you may see distinctly how prominent a part
the primitive versions and Fathers must always bear
in the Textual criticism of the New Testament. My
hearers, therefore, will not suppose that I am exhaust
ing their attention to no purpose, if I now seek to
trace these fruitful sources of information with some
pains and care, before entering upon the practical ap
plication of the principles we shall have established to
an examination of certain leading passages of the New
Testament itself, which examination will form the sub
ject-matter of our fifth and sixth, or concluding Lec
tures. In regard to versions one thing ought to be
well borne in mind, that we here employ them in the
service of the criticism of Holy Scripture, not as guides
to its right interpretation. We endeavour to discover
the general character and precise readings of the lost
manuscripts of the original which the translators had
before them, and are concerned with nothing more.
Hence a very wretched version like the iEthiopic or one
form of the later Syriac may afford us considerable
aid, whereas an excellent one, such as our English
Authorized Bible, inasmuch as it is derived from a

FOR TEE CRITICISM OF THE GREEK TEXT. 89
modern and well-known text, will prove for our present
end of no use at all. The chief ancient versions we
shall describe are those in the Syriac, Egyptian, and
Latin tongues.
3. The Aramaean or Syriac, employed to this day
in the public service of several Eastern Churches, is a
branch of the great Semitic family of languages, and
as early as Jacob's age was distinct from the Hebrew:
Laban the Syrian called the stony heap of witness
" Jegar-sahadutha," but Jacob called it "Galeed" (Gen.
xxxi. 47). As we now find it in books, it was spoken
in the north of Syria and in Upper Mesopotamia, about
Edessa, the native country of the patriarch Abraham.
It is, compared with the Hebrew, which ceased to be
Vernacular six centuries before Christ, at the time of
the Captivity to Babylon, a copious, flexible, and elegant
language. It is so near akin to the Chaldee as spoken
in Babylon, and brought back by the Jews into Pales
tine, that the latter was popularly known by its name
(2 Kings xviii. 26; Isai. xxxvi. 11; Dan. ii. 4). Hence
the Syriac of literature, though long since passed away
from common use, very nearly represents the dialect
spoken by our Lord during his earthly ministry, and
by those who then lived in the Holy Land ; and was
on that account regarded with the deeper interest
by Albert Widmanstadt, Chancellor to the Emperor
Ferdinand I., and by its other first students in modern
times. The oldest Syriac version, distinguished from
those that followed it by the name of the " Peshito "
or " Simple," comprised both the Old and New Testa
ments, except the second Epistle of S. Peter, the second
and third of S. John and the Apocalypse, and seems

90 ANCIENT VERSIONS AND OTHER MATERIALS
to have been executed (at least in some portions) as
early as the end of the first or the beginning of the
second century, from manuscripts which have of course
long ago perished : it is cited under the familiar ap
pellation of "the Syrian" by Melito about A.D. 170.
Christianity, as we know, spread early from Antioch,
the Greek capital (Acts xi. 19 — 27; xiii. 1, &c), into the
native interior of Syria, where the Apostle Thaddaeus
is alleged to have preached the Gospel to Abgarus,
toparch of Edessa. The Peshito would be readily
conceded to be by far the chief of all versions of
Scripture, but for certain appearances of revision under
gone by its text in ancient times, which slightly impair
its critical value ; although we have copies of it which
bear date in the sixth century, and, even as it stands,
in weight and authority it is exceeded by none, while
for perspicuity of style, for ease and freedom combined
with precision and correctness — but these qualities make
little for our immediate purpose — it is quite without a
rival. The first printed edition of the New Testament,
out of many that succeeded, was put forth at Vienna
in 1555 by Widmanstadt, at the expense of his Imperial
master ; the Old Testament was first published in
1645 by the Maronite Gabriel Sionita, in the magni
ficent Paris Polyglott.
4. A strong light was thrown upon the history of
the Syriac versions by the happy discovery made by
the late Canon Cureton, then an officer in the Manu
script Department of the British Museum, while en
gaged upon the task of examining and arranging the
Syriac and other manuscripts (see p. 76) brought to
England by the late Archdeacon Tattam about 1847

FOR THE CRITICISM OF THE GREEK TEXT. 91
from the convent of S. Mary the Mother of God in the
Nitrian Desert, seventy miles N.W. of Cairo. It con
sists of the single known copy of a version of the
Gospels, neither itself the Peshito nor yet independent
of it, which after ten years' delay was published by
Cureton in 1858, with a translation and copious notes.
The original manuscript has been reasonably assigned
to the fifth century. It is a fragment, containing on
fine vellum leaves, written with two columns on a
page, large portions of the other Gospels, but only one
precious passage of S. Mark (ch. xvi. 17 — 20), so
arranged that S. John immediately follows it and pre
cedes S. Luke. Beyond question the Curetonian Syriac
is a document of high importance in criticism, often
lending powerful support to the very best of our other
authorities ; although, considered as a translation, where
it quits the footsteps of the Peshito, it is often loose,
careless, paraphrastic, or wholly erroneous. Its text bears
so strong a resemblance in many places to that of Codex
Bezee and the older forms of the Latin version, which
we shall soon have to speak about, that they must
doubtless be referred to some common- origin, as far
back as the second century, and thus afford us a plain
proof that readings may be very ancient without being
in the least degree good or even probable. Take for
instance the following palpable interpolation, mani
festly grounded on Luke xiv. 8 — 10, which the Cure
tonian Syriac (as it is usually called), in company with
Codex Bezse, some Old Latin Manuscripts and writers,
and one other witness, annexes to Matt. xx. 28. The
rendering (which is somewhat rugged) is Cureton's, not
mine.

92 ANCIENT VERSIONS AND OTHER MATERIALS
But you, seek ye that from little things ye may become great, and
not from great things may become little. Whenever ye are invited to
the house of a supper, be not sitting down in the honoured place,
lest should come he that is more honoured than thou, and to thee
the Lord of the supper should say, Come near below, and thou be
ashamed in the eyes of the guests. But if thou sit down in the little
place, and he that is less than thee should come, and to thee the
Lord of the supper shall say, Come near, and come up and sit down,
thou also shalt have more glory in the eyes of the guests.
5. The Peshito and Curetonian Syriac versions, in
whatever relation they may stand to each other (for
this point must be regarded as still unsettled), carry us
back to a text of the second century, not by any means
necessarily the purest, yet claiming special attention on
the score of its mere antiquity. About four other
translations of Scripture into Syriac, but of a later date,
are extant, either complete or in a fragmentary shape,
two of which have considerable worth as instruments
of criticism. The Philoxenian or Harclean Syriac is
the principal, and includes the whole New Testament.
At the end of the manuscript from which the printed
text is derived (and we find independent testimony to
the fact in another quarter), a colophon or subscription
by the first hand declares that the translation was
made A. D. 508 (by one Polycarp, a Rural or Suffragan
Bishop, as we learn elsewhere) for Xenaias or Philoxe-
nus, Bishop of Mabug or Hierapolis, of the Monophysite
communion, the chief of those semi-heretical sects into
which the Syrian Church has been divided from the
fifth century to this day. The subscription goes on to
state that, this version was collated by the writer,
Thomas of Harkel, A. D. 616 (who subsequently became
himself Monophysite Bishop of Mabug), by the help of

FOR THE CRITICISM OF THE GREEK TEXT. 93
two approved Greek manuscripts (perhaps of three,
for the reading varies), belonging to the convent of
Antonia, in Alexandria. We have here, therefore,
a version of the sixth century, diligently corrected a
hundred years later by venerable Greek copies found in
Egypt, whose variations are set in the margin. It is
this margin which renders the Philoxenian version
as valuable as it is to textual critics, for the body of
the work consists of a servile accommodation of the
noble and free Peshito, the vernacular Bible of all
Syria, to the very letter of the Greek. A note in the
Philoxenian margin is the solitary witness we have not
yet spoken of as vouching for the paragraph affixed to
Matt. xx. 28 (p. 91) ; it much resembles Cod. L in its
more characteristic variations, and in the Acts is the
almost constant associate of Codd. DE. 137 (see p. 73),
whether each singly or all together. Certain passages in
the Philoxenian text are distinguished by asterisks and
obeli, which may be due to Thomas of Harkel, although
their precise purpose is a little uncertain, unless it be
to indicate suspicion of the possible spuriousness of
the passages to which they are attached. Two manu
scripts of the Philoxenian translation were sent to
England from Diarbekr in 1730, and made known by
a tract published by Dr. Gloucester Ridley in 1761.
He bequeathed them to New College, Oxford, whose
library they now adorn, and several other copies of the
Gospels only have been since discovered elsewhere.
The version was published at Oxford by Professor
Joseph White in 1788—1803.
6. The only other Syriac version we shall notice was
found in a single Vatican manuscript, dated A.D. 1030,

94 ANCIENT VERSIONS AND OTHER MATERIALS
by the great Danish scholar Adler, and was published
in full by the Count F. Miniscalchi Erezzo in 1861 — 4.
It is distinguished as the Jerusalem Syriac, because
the dialect in which it is written seems to be rather
that of Southern than of Northern Syria. It appears to
be made immediately from the Greek, not grounded on
the Peshito, like the Philoxenian. Although the copy
we possess is so recent, it must have been derived from
a pure source, and is the more valuable from its obvious
independence of our other critical materials: it often
sides with Codd. BD against the mass of authorities.
Being only a Church lesson-book of the Gospels, it often
fails us where we should most desire its help, but is
very interesting as enabling us to compare the Lec-
tionary of the Syrian Church with that of the Greek.
The general features are common to both, with many
characteristic variations, as well in the passages chosen
for public reading, as in the lesser Festivals and Saints'
days appointed to be kept holy.
7. Next to Syria in geographical position stands
Egypt, once a Christian land, though now given up,
by the mysterious ordinance of an allwise Providence,
to the false creed of the impostor Mohammed. The
handful of native Egyptians who still abide in the
faith of Christ comprises a poor, down-trodden, scat
tered and divided remnant, discriminated from its
conquerors the Arabs by the appellation of Copts, a
term whose origin is uncertain : every one knows that
the Old Testament name of the people was Mitzri. By
the Coptic versions of the Bible, therefore, we mean
those made for the use of the primitive Christians of
Egypt, possibly as early as the second century, when

FOR THE CRITICISM OF THE GREEK TEXT. 95
the Gospel had already spread from Alexandria far into
the interior ; certainly before the middle of the third,
when the Christian population had grown very nume
rous, whereas even their chief rulers, eminent abbots
and bishops celebrated as mighty in the Scriptures,
knew no language except their own.
By comparing our existing translations of the Bible
with all we know of the ancient language of Egypt, it is
evident that their diction does not differ materially from
the demotic, or vulgar speech of the nation a few cen
turies before the Christian era; and that the demotic
again is but a modernized form of the elder or sacred
tongue, from which it varied — to employ the illustration
of Canon Lightfoot, who has devoted much labour to the
investigation of the whole subject — much as the Italian
does from the Latin. The three in fact, the sacred, the
demotic, and the Coptic, represent three successive
stages of a language fundamentally the same, only that
the demotic in some degree, and the Coptic to a far
greater extent, have been enriched or corrupted, as the
case may be, by a large admixture of Greek words,
derived from the Greek colonies, of which Alexandria
was by far the most considerable. The Coptic, again,
must be subdivided into two principal dialects, one
being in use in Lower Egypt two or three centuries
after Christ, and hence called the Memphitic from the
old northern capital of Memphis; the other in Upper
Egypt, called the Thebaic, from the hundred-gated
Thebes, the metropolis of the south. These two dialects
are sometimes designated respectively as the Bahiric
and the Sahidic, from Arabic names of the north and
south provinces, but it is an error to apply the general

96 ANCIENT VERSIONS AND OTHER MATERIALS
term Coptic to either of them exclusively, as it some
times is applied to the Memphitic or Bahiric alone.
The Memphitic and Thebaic dialects, in each of which
a perfectly independent version of the New Testament
is extant, are well-defined and separate from each other.
The small fragments of a translation of both Testaments
in a third dialect, the Bashmuric, which seems to have
been vernacular either in the Oasis of Ammon in the
west, or among certain rude tribes in the Delta of the
Nile, are of the less importance, inasmuch as they
belong only to a secondary version grounded upon the
Thebaic. 8. The other two versions, however, the Mem
phitic and the Thebaic, have now established their
claim to be regarded among the very first of the
aids to sacred criticism, subsidiary to manuscripts of
the original : I say subsidiary, inasmuch as it is a
principle universally acknowledged, that no reading,
vouched for by versions alone, can be safely regarded as
genuine. It may easily have arisen from the licence
assumed by translators, or may have been the result of
subsequent and ill-advised corrections. The Egyptian
versions are for the end of the second and the beginning
of the third century guides as faithful and trustworthy
as the Syriac versions for a period earlier by eighty or
a hundred years. The Memphitic bears some marks of
being the prior in date, but it is under the heavy disad
vantage of being known to us only through codices
comparatively recent ; many of them are dated after
the Coptic notation of the era of the Martyrs who fell in
Diocletian's persecution, A. D. 284. Out of upwards of
fifty which Canon Lightfoot has catalogued and for the

FOR THE CRITICISM OF THE GREEK TEXT. 97
most part examined, only a few fragments in the British
Museum (Additional MS. 14,740 A) can be earlier than
the tenth century, and far the greater number are a
good deal later. Manuscripts of the Thebaic, on the
other hand, which was always rough and unpolished,
and has long since become obsolete as a language, are
usually of venerable antiquity, though so few and
fragmentary that a complete version of the New Testa
ment cannot be made up from all of them put together.
They were chiefly found in the museum of Cardinal
Borgia, at Velletri, the contents of which are now re
moved to the College of the Propaganda at Rome, and
were made known piecemeal by scholars whose obscure
diligence well deserves our grateful praise, namely, by
R. Tuki, Roman Bishop of Arsinoe, in 1778, by Mingarelli
in 1785, by the Augustinian eremite Giorgi in 1789,
and in a posthumous work by Woide, who edited for
us the New Testament portion of Codex A (p. 55).
The Memphitic version stands in pressing need of a
critical reviser, who will find abundant materials ready
for him. The first edition, published in 1716 by David
Wilkins, a Prussian by birth, by adoption an Oxonian,
faulty as it is, has not been superseded by the recent
one of Schwartze (1846) and Boetticher (1852), much
less by inferior reprints for native use. The support
frequently accorded by the Memphitic to Codd. NB
jointly, by the Thebaic to Codd. B D, or to one of the two,
in their characteristic readings, cannot fail to be of
weight, as well in maintaining the evidence of these
great manuscripts when supported by the Egyptian
versions, as in throwing suspicion upon it where Coptic
testimony goes the contrary way.
S.L. 7

98 ANCIENT VERSIONS AND OTHER MATERIALS
9. The Latin versions of Holy Scripture demand
and will reward our special attention. Although we
know that a branch of the Christian Church existed
at Rome "many years" before S. Paul's first visit to
the city (Rom. xv. 23), and already flourished there
in the first century, it probably was not for the use
of converts in the capital that the earliest Latin trans
lation was made. To them S. Paul wrote his noble
Epistle in Greek ; the earliest Bishops of that Church
were mostly Greek : even Clement their first or one
of their first Bishops, and Caius the presbyter at a
later period, whose names intimate a pure Roman origin,
yet chose to write in Greek, a language more or less
familiar even to the lowest classes in that great centre
of the civilized world. In the provinces, especially at
a distance from the chief seats of commerce, Latin was
the only language generally spoken, and in such places
the necessity must have first arisen of rendering at
least the New Testament into a tongue to be " under
stated of the people." The name of Cardinal Wise
man must, I fear, be handed down in English history
as that of an ecclesiastic, whose rashness and vanity
sorely damaged the cause which his heart was set upon
serving: by Biblical students he will be commemor
ated, like a far greater Cardinal whom in some respects
he resembled, as being, almost "from his cradle a
scholar, and a ripe and good one." The Latin version
has naturally a deep interest for members of his com
munion, and indeed, for obvious reasons, it has hardly
been treated in this country with the consideration it
deserves. It was Cardinal Wiseman's merit to de
monstrate, some forty years since, what had been faintly

FOR THE CRITICISM OF THE GREEK TEXT. 99
conjectured by Eichhorn and others, that the Old Latin
Bible, so far as we can restore it to its primitive shape
by the help of materials yet surviving, had its origin
not in Italy at all, but in northern Africa, and in that
province of Roman Africa where Tertullian declaimed
late in the second century, where Cyprian Bishop of
Carthage became a martyr in the third, where Augus
tine, Bishop of Hippo, compiled his huge tomes of
dogmatic theology and devotional lore about the end
of the fourth. To this conclusion the Cardinal was led
by the style of the Old Latin version itself, which
abounds in words and grammatical constructions that had
long ago grown obsolete at Rome, but can be illustrated
from African writers, such as the heathen Appuleius
of the second century, the Christians Arnobius and
Lactantius of the fourth. Rude and unclassical as
the Old Latin translation no doubt is, the palpable
lack of polish is not ill atoned for by a certain terseness
and vigour which characterise this whole school of
writers, but never degenerate into vulgarity or absolute
barbarism. 10. But while it must be admitted, on grounds
simply philological, that Africa was the parent of the
Old Latin Bible, it is a remarkable fact that nearly all
its chief manuscripts have been discovered in a different
quarter, within quite a limited region in the north of
Italy. Thus the most ancient and best of them, the
Codex Vercellensis, called in our critical notation the
italic a (a.), was brought to light at Vercelli in 1726
by that illustrious labourer in this department of study,
Joseph Bianchini (latinized into Blanchinus), when
Canon of Verona. This copy of the Gospels, unfortu-
7-2

100 ANCIENT VERSIONS AND OTHER MATERIALS
nately much mutilated, may date from the fourth
century, that is, it is not more recent than Cod. A,
nearly contemporary with Codd. KB. In his own city
Bianchini met with Cod. Veronensis (b. of the critics),
which is hardly less ancient or valuable than its com
peer. .Another more modernized in regard to text (/.),
yet still of the sixth century, was found by Bianchini
at Brescia. Another very beautiful copy (7c), com
prising the latter half of S. Mark followed by portions of
S. Matthew, full of precious readings much resembling
those of Codd. KB, as early in date as b., has since
been discovered among the books — a fine collection
indeed — brought from Bobbio to Turin. Only two years
back a fresh manuscript, Cod. Sarzannensis (j.), in the
Church of Sarezzano near Tortona, was published by
Guerrino Amelli, of the Ambrosian Library at Milan.
This also belongs to the fifth century, and, like Cod. N.
of the Greek (p. 78), codd. a. b. f and some, others, is
written on purple vellum, in letters of silver and gold.
The locality of all these copies might seem to indicate
that they belonged to the Italic recension of the text,
a modification which Augustine, though by nation an
African, in a passage which has been tampered with by
Bentley for no adequate reason, pronounces to be pre
ferable to the other forms of the Latin, as being at
once "closer to the words of the original, and more
perspicuous in expressing the meaning." The Latin
version of Cod. Claromontanus (d. of S. Paul, see
p. 70) may be referred to the African recension.
11. Besides the afore-named manuscripts, found
almost in a heap in Lombardy and Piedmont, we shall
name in passing a few others hardly inferior to them

FOR THE CRITICISM OF THE GREEK TEXT. 101
in date or intrinsic worth. At Paris is cod. c, edited by
Sabatier (1713 — 9), the text being quite remarkable,
though the writing is no older than the eleventh century.
Two are at Vienna, cod. e. of the fourth or fifth century,
whose style is very rugged and antique, and cod. i. of
a century later, a fragment in purple and gold. Codd.
ff1., ff2., were once in the Abbey of Corbey in Picardy,
where Martianay edited the former in 1695. Like
some other French manuscripts (p. 70), ff1. has found
its way to S. Petersburg, but its fellow is still safe at
Paris. Two others, formerly in the Abbey of S. Ger
main des Prez (g1., g2.), have disappeared altogether,
unless they too are at S. Petersburg : their contents are
partially known by readings extracted by Martianay,
then by Sabatier and Bianchini. Since truth obliged us
to speak slightingly of Cardinal Mai when he tried
his prentice hand on the famous Cod. B (p. 30),. we should
be the more forward to acknowledge his services with
reference to the Latin version, wherein he possessed
the skill and knowledge of a master. To him we owe
not only Cod. A. in the Vatican, of which Sabatier had
given some specimens, but what is one of the most
valuable and interesting of all documents of this class,
a Speculum or Book of Quotations, from almost every
part of the New Testament (being all the more prized,
inasmuch as our main Old Latin authorities contain
the Gospels alone), edited in 1843 from a manuscript
of the sixth century (cod. m. of our critical notation)
in the monastery of S. Croce at Rome, and conspicuous
for being the earliest in which the clause about the
Three Heavenly Witnesses (1 John v. 7, 8) is con
tained : it is here found in two different places.

102 ANCIENT VERSIONS AND OTHER MATERIALS
12. The various copies which we have just enume
rated, as well as some others of hardly less importance,
exhibit to us a text substantially one, though with
countless variations peculiar to each single copy. They
must have sprung from a common source, inasmuch as
the general form, both in respect to words and con
struction, is the same in all : occasional divergency,
however extensive, cannot weaken the impression pro
duced by resemblance, if that be too close or too con
stant to be attributed to chance. Yet the very amount
of these variations suffices to prove at how early a
period they took their rise, and it can hardly be ques
tioned that the readings preserved in codd. a. b. e. and
a few others, were already current before the close of
the second century, and thus, to our instruction and
infinite satisfaction, represent to us the contents of
Greek manuscripts centuries older than themselves.
The critical value of such documents can scarcely be
estimated too highly, yet, by the time the end of the
fourth century was reached, the lack of uniformity
between the several types of the Old Latin version
became a practical inconvenience which was no longer
tolerable. " There are almost as many models as there
are copies," exclaims S. Jerome to Pope Damasus in
A.D. 384 ; and for once the facts of the case left no
room for Jerome's characteristic habit of exaggeration.
To him, as to the chief Biblical scholar then living, the
Pope had entrusted the grave office of revising the
older translation by the help of ancient Greek manu
scripts, and of thus producing a translation which might
become the standard as well for public as for private
reading. Such is the origin of the New Latin, the

FOR THE CRITICISM OF THE GREEK TEXT. 103
Common, or (as it is usually designated) the Vulgate
version of the New Testament, which Jerome com
pleted about A.D. 385, substantially, though by no
means precisely, in the form that it is now known, as
the "authentic" translation of the Church of Rome.
Jerome did not put it forth as a new translation made
from the Greek, as he did twenty years later that of
the Old Testament taken from the Hebrew ; but he
retained, so far as faithfulness to the sacred original
permitted, the diction, the idiom, the general tone of
the elder Latin, which was endeared to Christians by
long and familiar use. Even with all this caution to
avoid offence, his work at first encountered vigorous
opposition, and came into ordinary use only by slow and
painful degrees. As an interpretation his Vulgate far
surpasses its prototype ; as an instrument of criticism
it is decidedly inferior, where the evidence of the Old
Latin may be had : for it does not, like its predeces
sor, bring before us the testimony, good or bad, of
documents of the second century, but only that of
manuscripts which Jerome deemed correct and ancient
at the end of the fourth.
13. The literary history of the Vulgate is a vast
study by itself, on which we have fortunately no need
to enter now. In its purest form that version appears
in the Codex Amiatinus, a noble copy of the whole
Bible, stichometrically written (p. 69) by the hand of
the Abbot Servandus, A. D. 541. It was brought from the
great Cistercian monastery of Monte Amiatmo into the
Laurentian Library at Florence, and has been edited
more than once. Only five years younger is the Codex
Fuldensis, in the famous Abbey of Fulda in Hesse

104 ANCIENT VERSIONS AND OTHER MATERIALS
Cassel, first applied to the recension of the text by
Lachmann in 1839. Since the Vulgate was the sole
Bible of Western Europe for above one thousand
years, it is not surprising that more copies of it exist
in public libraries than of almost all other books put
together ; many of them being of much use for eluci
dating Jerome's text, but the greater part more remark
able for the illuminations and embellishments which
have been lavished upon them by skilful or pious
hands. The noble volume exhibited open in the Manu
script Room of the British Museum as Charlemagne's
Bible, is probably some fifty years later than his reign,
although it may possibly contain certain corrections made
about A.D. 797 at his request by our learned country
man Alcuin. The first printed book, as we had occa
sion to mention before (p. 3), was the Latin Bible of
the Vulgate version ; and after the Council of Trent in
1546 had stamped this translation with its sanction,
in terms however ambiguous, it became the obvious
duty of the Church of Rome to provide an authorized
standard for general use. Sixtus V. in 1590, and after
him Clement VIII. in 1592, put forth separate edi
tions, each executed with anxious care, yet the former
at least so full of errors both textual and typographical,
as to have exposed the Popes and their confident yet
purblind criticism to the derision of zealous polemical
writers (such as Dr Th. James in his Bellum Papale, sire
Concordia Biscors, 1600), who could not let slip what
appeared to them a suitable occasion for vexing the
enemies they had failed to convince. We profess no
sort of sympathy with this gibing spirit, especially when
exercised upon topics so sacred ; yet it is only right to

FOR THE CRITICISM OF THE GREEK TEXT. 105
state that neither Sixtus' nor Clement's Bible, the latter
of which is adopted for "authentic" in the Roman
communion, can be relied upon in the least for critical
purposes. They are constructed in a loose and unin
telligent fashion, on manuscripts too recent to be trust
worthy. If Codex Amiatinus was consulted for Pope
Sixtus, as has been stated, it had little or no influence
in forming the text. The true readings must still be
sought for in the older copies among which it is para
mount. 14. The Syriac, the Coptic and the Latin : — these
are the principal versions, the rest being quite sub
sidiary or of slight consideration. To us of the Teutonic
stock the Gothic is the most interesting, although more
so on linguistic than critical grounds. It was made by
Ulphilas, a Cappadocian, about B.C. 350, while the Goths
still inhabited Mcesia, now called Bulgaria, and its
dialect is marvellously akin to that of modern Germany.
Besides some fragments from Bobbio discovered by
Mai in 1817, and others in the Wolfenbiittel library in
the same volume as the fragments Codd. PQ of the
Gospels (p. 76), there is extant the superb but incom
plete Codex Argenteus in the University of Upsal, on
purple vellum with silver and gold letters. It was
taken by the Swedes at the siege of Prague in 1648,
and has been several times edited. Ten leaves, stolen
about 1821, were given up by the penitent thief, more
gracious than Aymont (p. 68), on his death-bed, to
Uppstrdm, who published them in 1857. The remain
ing versions might do us better service, if we knew
better how to use them. The Armenian and iEthiopic,
composed, in or about the fifth century, in languages

106 ANCIENT VERSIONS AND OTHER MATERIALS
known to few, labour under the suspicion of having
been conformed in later times to the Latin Vulgate, and,
considered as versions, they have been alleged to'possess
little merit. The Georgian, which is said to date from
the sixth century, pertains to the Armenians of the
orthodox faith, and we know of no one in England who
can read it, except Prebendary Malan of Broadwindsor.
The Georgian is even stated to have been corrupted
from the Slavonic, the version of the sister communion
in Russia, made from the Greek as late as the ninth
century. A secondary translation, not made from the
Greek at all, can be applied only to the criticism of its
own primary. Such are the Frankish and the Anglo-
Saxon or Old English, various modifications of which
are derived from what were considered the best copies
of the Vulgate between the eighth and eleventh cen
turies ; such too are the Persic in Walton's Polyglott
and several Arabic versions, which are translated from
the Peshito Syriac. Another Persic version, edited by
Wheelocke (1653-7), and perhaps some out of the
many Arabic versions extant (especially the Gospels in
the excellent one published by Erpenius in 1616 and
called from Fayum, a province in Egypt), were rendered
from Greek manuscripts too modern to be of much
account. 15. The advantage we derive from versions such
as most of those we have been describing, as making
known to us the contents of manuscripts of the
original older than any at present existing, is too
great not to be held in constant remembrance. In
other respects important deductions must be made
before we apply their evidence to the criticism of the

FOR THE CRITICISM OF THE GREEK TEXT. 107
sacred books. It may prove as difficult to arrive at
the primitive text of the version as of the Greek itself:
the variations subsisting in the copies are sometimes
quite as considerable, and suspicions of subsequent
correction from other sources are easily raised and hard
to refute. Even so late a version as the Fayyumiyeh
of Erpenius has been thought to be revised from the
Coptic. Then again, if we take into our reckoning
the genius of the language into which the Greek is
turned, the skill, the care, the peculiar habits of the
translator, and our own defective knowledge of the
special dialect of the version, we shall perhaps never
feel so secure in the application of this kind of testi
mony as when we come to determine the genuineness
of whole sentences or clauses inserted in some Greek
copies and omitted in others. " Scripture, by being
translated into the tongues of many nations, assures us
of the falsehood of additions," as Jerome writes to
Pope Damasus in his Preface to the Vulgate Gospels.
This is even now the surest benefit which versions can
render to the critic.
16. Still more precarious, in the majority of
cases, is the aid to be looked for from ecclesiastical
writers of the early ages. These venerable persons
frequently quoted Scripture loosely from memory, and
usually no more of its words than suited their imme
diate purpose. What they actually wrote has proved
peculiarly liable to change at the hand of careless
scribes, who followed mechanically the readings of the
New Testament they were most familiar with, instead
of those set down in the model which they were tran
scribing. Hence it arises that, both in ordinary manu-

108 ANCIENT VERSIONS AND OTHER MATERIALS
scripts and in printed editions, the same author is
perpetually found to cite the self-same text in two or
three various forms, whether in different places or on
the same page of his work. Yet there are occasions
when the testimony of the Fathers is so direct and full
that it is absolutely conclusive as to the true reading
of the copy of Scripture which lay before their eyes.
Witness the representation of Matt. i. 18, as given by
S. Irenaeus, the light of the Church of Gaul towards
the close of the second century, the disciple too of
Polycarp who had conversed with the Evangelist S.
John. The five books of Irenseus against Heresies,
though extant chiefly in a bald Latin translation, com
pose, the man and his circumstances considered, one of
the most precious reliques of Christian antiquity. The
common reading of S. Matthew's words is " Now the
birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise ;" but the
Curetonian Syriac, the Old Latin copies a. b. c.f.ff1.,
and d. the Latin version of Codex Bezae (the corre
sponding Greek being lost), with the Vulgate or New
Latin, its satellites the Frankish and Anglo-Saxon, and
Wheelocke's Persic, omit the word " Jesus." All this
would signify little, inasmuch as every extant Greek
manuscript has either " Jesus Christ " or " Christ
Jesus," if the grave authority of Irenssus were not
thrown into the opposite scale. That profound theo
logian, in the course of his demonstration that Jesus
and Christ are the same Person (a doctrine which
certain heretics had denied), presses the fact that
whereas the Evangelist might very well have stated,
"Now the birth of Jesus was on this wise," the
Holy Spirit, foreseeing and guarding against the

FOR THE CRITICISM OF THE GREEK TEXT. 109
fraud of depravers, saith through Matthew, "Now
the birth of Christ was on this wise." We say
nothing for the logical validity of this writer's inference,
or for the probability of the reading he vouches for,
but here at any rate is a suggestive variation from the
common text adopted as if it were beyond question by
such a man as Irenaeus, within little more than a
century after the Gospel of S. Matthew was published.
17. One more example of the value of express
citation by an eminent Father shall suffice, and here
it confirms the common text instead of tending to
disturb it. In Luke xv. 18, 19 the prodigal, resolving
to go back to his Father, frames to himself a speech
fitting to the emergency, " Father, I have sinned against
heaven and before thee ; I am no more worthy to be
called thy son : make me as one of thy hired servants."
When he carries his determination into happy effect in
ver. 21, he addresses to his gracious Father the rest of
his prepared speech, but drops the last clause, " make
me as one of thy hired servants." S. Augustine, whose
intellect was probably the most keen that ever yielded
up its best powers to the exact study of the Bible, fails
not to point out that delicate touch of true nature, in
that the son, after he had once enjoyed his parent's
forgiving kiss, disdains the ignoble condition of servi
tude Avhich once he deemed almost too good to hope
for. Yet this very clause is thrust into the text by
great codices usually of the highest authority (H BD.
33 and a few others), whose tasteless interpolation is
thus rebuked by one who knew the mind of the Spirit
as few indeed in any age have been privileged to
know.

110 ANCIENT VERSIONS AND OTHER MATERIALS
18. It would serve no good purpose to lay before
you a mere list of the ecclesiastical writers who are
more or less available as instruments of criticism.
Among the Greeks, the fragments of the Apostolic
Fathers and their immediate followers are too scanty
to supply us with much detailed information, though
they afford us priceless evidence that the several books
of the New Testament were familiar to the writers.
Justin Martyr, who died for the faith about A.D. 149,
the earliest Christian of whom any considerable re
mains survive the wreck of time, has a habit of rather
referring to than quoting the " Memorials composed by
the Apostles and their immediate followers," which he
elsewhere calls " Gospels ; " so that although his re
ferences are often very close and even verbally exact,
an opinion, very unreasonable I must be allowed to
call it, has grown up among certain in recent times,
that he had before him some other compositions rather
than those that now bear that holy name. Irenaeus
we have spoken of before. The first mention we have
of various readings in Scripture occurs in his fifth book
against Heresies, where he discusses the question whether
the true number is 666 or 616 in Rev. xiii. 18, and ex
pressly imputes the Apocalypse to S. John the Apostle,
as Justin Martyr had done before him. Clement of
Alexandria brings us into the third century, and his
volumes abound with citations from Scripture, more
or less precise. But the greatest name among the
ancients in this branch of sacred learning is Origen,
his pupil, the son of a martyr, himself a sufferer for
the name of Christ (d. 254). Seldom have such
warmth of fancy and so bold a grasp of mind been

FOR THE CRITICISM OF THE GREEK TEXT. Ill
associated with the life-long patient industry which
procured for Origen the honourable appellation of
Adamantius. His copious works (some of them now
extant only in a poor Latin version) have been ran
sacked, especially by the celebrated German critic
Griesbach, for the quotations or allusions to Scripture
which cover every page. Often enough the results
have proved merely negative. Origen may be alleged
in the same disputed passage, twice or thrice on either
side ; or his citation is but a passing one, and no great
stress can be laid on the actual words he uses. Fre
quently, however, the case is otherwise. Either the
context proves beyond a doubt which reading he
adopted, or else he formally discusses the variations
which he found in his copies, and expresses a definite
judgment upon their relative merits. In instances of
this latter description there is no authority to compare
with his for fulness of knowledge and discriminating
care. 19. Coming down to the fourth century, we now
have Eusebius and Jerome, both of them in regard to
criticism disciples of Origen, and inclined to defer
rather too much to his arbitrary decisions. The labour
of Eusebius in compiling his Canons of Harmony of the
Gospels (p. 34), and those of Jerome in regard to the
Latin Vulgate (p. 102), we have spoken of before.
Since Jerome made habitual use of Greek codices for
his work of revision, he is to be regarded as a witness
for the original text, not, like his western predecessors,
Tertullian or Cyprian or their lesser contemporaries,
for their native Old Latin translation only. Of the
rest, Chrysostom's expositions frequently render it cer-

112 ANCIENT VERSIONS AND OTHER MATERIALS
tain what readings he follows, and since his Homilies
on S. Matthew are at Wolfenbiittel in a codex of the
sixth century, we are so far better protected than usual
from the subsequent corruption of his text (see p. 107).
The same advantage belongs to those works of John
Damascene of the eighth century, which are preserved
at Paris in a manuscript apparently contemporaneous :
while the Homilies on S. Luke by Cyril of Alexandria,
of the fifth century, whose critical worth is greater
than his age might lead us to expect, have been lately
published from a Syriac version by Dr Payne Smith,
the Dean of Canterbury, in such a shape that we may
use them with confidence, as virtually unchanged during
the lapse of so many centuries. But these instances
of good fortune are exceptional and rare.
20. These, therefore, are the main sources of in
formation : manuscripts of the original, versions, and
Fathers. Our materials, abundant upon the whole, though
in some directions still partial and incomplete, have
been slowly accumulated by the diligence of successive
generations of scholars, the principal of whom we have
already enumerated (p. 14). To apply these materials
wisely and soberly to the task of constructing afresh
the text of the New Testament calls for critical dis
cernment and acuteness, such as fall to the lot of few.
This happy faculty has proved very deficient in the
case of some that have toiled patiently and successfully
at the work of collation : on the other hand, it has
been bestowed in a high degree on men who as colla
tors have accomplished comparatively little, as on
Bentley, Bengel, Griesbach, and (if I may venture to
refer to an elaborate edition of the New Testament

FOR THE CRITICISM OF THE GREEK TEXT. 113
not yet given to the public) on the joint counsellors,
Canon Westcott and Mr Hort. For, in fact, the results
of all the external evidence that can be brought together
to support any particular various reading are seldom so
conclusive on one side or the other, as to enable us to
dispense with considerations drawn from internal evi
dence : where by internal evidence we mean that exer
cise of the reason upon the matter submitted to it
which will often prompt us, almost by instinct, to reject
one alternative and to embrace another. Nor have we
much cause to fear that we shall thus come to substitute
our own impressions, — our own subjective impressions,
if one must use that rather affected but convenient
term — in the room of the conclusions which mere
written records would dictate. Whether we will or
not, we unconsciously adopt that one out of two oppo
site statements, in themselves not unequally attested
to, which we judge the better suited to recognised phe
nomena, and to the common course of things. Were
we to try ever so much to do so, we should not find it
easy to dispense with the dictates of discretion and
good sense : nature would prove too strong for the
dogmas of a wayward theory. Some things indeed
may be very powerfully maintained, which we would
not receive upon any testimony that could be produced
(pp. 41 — 6) : but the appeal to internal probabilities
will be chiefly made where external evidence is evenly,
or at any rate not very unevenly, balanced.
21. This just and rational use of internal testi
mony he is the best critic who most judiciously em
ploys. We can say little more than this as a guide to
the thoughtful student. What degree of preponderance
S.L. 8

114 ANCIENT VERSIONS AND OTHER MATERIALS
in favour of one out of several forms of reading (all of
them affording a tolerable sense) shall entitle it to
reception as a matter of right ; to what extent rules of
subjective criticism may be allowed to eke out the
scantiness of documentary authority, are points that
cannot well be defined with strict accuracy. Men's
decisions respecting them will always vary according
to their temperament and intellectual habits; the
judgment of the same person will fluctuate from time
to time as to the same evidence brought to bear on the
self-same case. All we can hope to do is to set forth
two or three general principles, or canons as they are
called, which of course are only so far true as they are
grounded on reason or taught by experience, the appli
cation of which, in spite, perhaps even in consequence,
of their extreme simplicity, has proved a searching test
of the tact and sagacity of all that have handled
them. Canon I. The harder reading is preferable to the
easier. This is Bengel's prime rule, and looks fair
enough in itself. It would seem more likely that
a copyist should try to explain an obscure expres
sion, or to relieve a harsh construction, than that he
should make that perplexed which before was easy.
Thus in John vii. 39, where the true reading stands
" the Spirit (or " the Holy Spirit ") was not yet," we
are not at all surprised to find the word "given" sup
plied by all the versions, including our English Bible
in its italic type. The difficulty would be to discover
how it could have fallen out of the text, if it had ever
been there, as Cod. B and one cursive of no great value
would fain persuade us to believe.

FOR THE CRITICISM OF THE GREEK TEXT. 115
Canon II. The shorter reading is more probable than
the longer, it being the tendency of most scribes (though
certainly not of all) rather to enlarge than to abridge.
This rule applies to the case, among others, where two
or more accounts of the same event or speech occur,
and the fuller narrative is used to amplify the more
brief. Thus in some copies of Acts ix. 5, 6, are found the
words, " It is hard for thee to kick against the goads.
And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt
thou have me to do 1 And the Lord said unto him," yet
all this does not belong to the passage at all, but is trans
ferred, with some change, from S. Paul's own narrative
of his conversion, Acts xxvi. 14. In the parallel places
of the three early or Synoptic Gospels the tendency to
such accretions is very strongly marked, and its effect
is of course to smooth down seeming discrepancies
between them, and to bring into the other two forms or
expressions belonging of right only to one. A simple case
is that of the Lord's solemn declaration, " I came not
to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." Thus
it really is in Luke v. 32, from which the concluding
explanation "unto repentance" has been interpolated
into the two parallel passages Matt. ix. 13 ; Mark ii. 17.
Canon III. In deciding on the probability of a
various reading regard should be had to the peculiar
style, manner, and habits of thought of the author,
which copyists are very prone to overlook and so un
consciously to withdraw from sight. Thus S. Mark,
though never obscure, is often singularly concise and
abrupt ; S. Luke in his Acts of the Apostles is fond of
omitting "saith" or "said" after the word indicating
the speaker, which verb is duly supplied in recent
8—2

116 ANCIENT VERSIONS AND OTHER MATERIALS
copies in at least six places; the pointed energy of
S. James leads him perpetually to neglect connecting
particles, and these have been erroneously brought into
the common text. Yet even this canon has a
double edge, since habit or the love of critical correc
tion will sometimes tempt the scribe to alter the text
into his author's usual manner, as well as to depart
from it through inadvertence.
Canon IV. Attention must also be paid to the
genius and usage of each several authority, and to the
independence or otherwise of the testimony borne by
each. Thus the evidence of Cod. B is of the less in
fluence in omissions and that of Cod. D or Beza's in
considerable additions to the text : even so good a copy
as Cod. C, by adding the clause "into repentance" in
Matt. ix. 13 ; Mark ii. 17, displays a proneness to the
assimilation of unlike passages a little damaging to its
character for purity. Again, as it would be manifestly
unfair to estimate Codd. DE or FG of S. Paul's
Epistles, or the four members of Ferrar's group (p. 82)
when in accordance with each other, as more witnesses
than one, so, even where the resemblance is less per
petual, as in the case of Codd. KB, it is impossible to note
their close correspondence in places where they stand
almost alone, without indulging the suspicion that there
is some recondite connection between them of a nature
which we do not fully understand, and for which some
allowance is required to be made.
Canon V. would be the most valuable of all, if it
were more capable of application to particular in
stances. It has been said that "when the cause of a
various reading is known, the variation itself disap-

FOR THE CRITICISM OF THE GREEK TEXT. 117
pears," and this language hardly exaggerates what may
be effected by internal evidence, when it is clear,
simple, and unambiguous. Hence springs the rule that
" that reading out of several is to be chosen, from which
all the rest may have been derived, although it could not
be derived from any of them." Thus in James iii. 12,
if we suppose that form of the second clause to be
the true one, which is supported by Codd. KABC and
other good authority, "neither can salt water yield
sweet," it is easy to understand how a somewhat
rugged construction was gradually made to assume the
shape in which it is seen in our Authorized Bible, " so
can no fountain both yield salt water and fresh."
In our two concluding lectures we shall have fuller
opportunity for tracing the influence of these rules in
their practical application to the texts we shall then
undertake to examine. The first canon especially, that
of preferring the harder of two readings, may obviously
be over-strained, and must be applied with especial
caution. " To force readings into the text merely be
cause they are difficult" — I adopt thankfully the
forcible language of the Bishop of Lincoln, Dr Christo
pher Wordsworth, — "is to adulterate the divine text
with human alloy ; it is to obtrude upon the reader of
Scripture the solecisms of faltering copyists, in the
place of the word of God."

LECTURE V.
DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN THE HOLT
GOSPELS.
We come at length to apply the principles and facts
we have hitherto been concerned with to the examina
tion of select passages in the New Testament, in which
the Received reading of the Greek text, and conse
quently of our own English translation of it, has been
called in question with more or less reason. As we
stated at the outset, the great mass of variations made
known to us from the enlarged study of critical authori
ties are quite insignificant, scarcely affecting the sense
at all (p. 7), while some are of a wholly different
character, so grave and perplexing that we can form no
safe judgment about them without calling all available
resources to our aid. Yet this last statement must be
made with an important reservation, which I have
purposely kept back until you can see for yourselves that
it is strictly true. Be the various readings in the New
Testament what they may, they do not in any way alter
the complexion of the whole book, or lead us to modify
a single inference which theologians have gathered from
the common text, as it is now extant in our Authorized
version. " Even put them into the hands of a knave or
fool" — I employ the pointed language of Bentley, in

PASSAGES IN THE HOLY GOSPELS. 119
the sequel of a passage I have cited before (p. 13) —
"and yet with the most sinistrous and absurd choice, he
shall not extinguish the light of any one chapter, nor
so disguise Christianity, but that every feature of it
will still be the same." Certain passages, it may be,
will no longer be available to establish doctrines whose
proof rests secure upon a hundred besides, and this is
the very worst that can happen : others, upon whose
genuineness suspicion has been rashly thrown, will be
cleared and vindicated by the process of exact dis
cussion : some will assume in their new form a vigour
and beauty they possessed not before. The main result
of all investigations will be a thankful conviction that
God's Providence has kept from harm the treasure of
His written word, so far as is needful for the quiet
assurance of His Church and people.
In the present lecture we shall limit our examina
tion to passages of the Holy Gospels, reserving the
other books of the New Testament for our next and
concluding one. Taking them in order, the first varia
tion of moment which meets us, is at once very in
structive, and, we must add in fairness, of somewhat
doubtful decision.
(1) MATTH. v. 22. "Whosoever is angry with his
brother without a cause." The single Greek word
rendered "without cause," or "lightly," is removed from
the text by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Westcott and
Hort : it is retained by Griesbach and Tregelles, the
latter placing it within brackets as of questionable
genuineness, although neither he nor Griesbach knew of
the adverse testimony of the Codex Sinaiticus. I shall
name these chief critical editors of the Greek Testa-

120 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT
ment from time to time, through no wish to bias your
judgment by the weight of their authority, for in truth
the conclusions I would have you come to will often be
contrary to theirs, but that you may be aware of the
results arrived at by scholars who have devoted
strong natural powers or persevering industry, and in
more than one instance both these qualities, to the
illustration of the subject on which we are engaged.
The limiting word "without cause" is not found in
Codd. KB, or in two ordinary cursives of the twelfth
century or later : it was erased from Cod. A by a later
hand. Justin Martyr as usual (p. 110) refers to the
verse too loosely to be depended on, but he has no vestige
of "without cause:" the same maybe said of Tertullian.
Origen twice cites the passage without it, but makes no
comment; and his follower Jerome, a century later,
expressly states that, although found in certain manu
scripts, the true copies (which we may suppose to be
Origen' s) have it not. Accordingly he proceeds to erase
it from his Vulgate or New Latin translation, although
every known manuscript of the Old Latin version, and
the early Latin writers, Cyprian, Hilary and Lucifer,
retained it. The only other versions omitting the term,
are just those of small account which are ascertained to
have been made or corrected by the Vulgate, namely,
the iEthiopic, Frankish, Anglo-Saxon, Arabic of the
Polygiott, all in this instance distinctly traceable to the
influence of Origen over Jerome's mind. Augustine
also, who had once dwelt upon it, when late in life he
had come to write his famous book of Eetractationes,
adopted after Jerome a reading so congenial to his
taste. It unfortunately happens that we are here de-

PASSAGES IN THE HOLY GOSPELS. 121
prived of the help, not only of Cod. A (which begins with
ch. xxv. 6), but also of C : but all other known Greek
codices save the four above-named read "without cause,"
comprising D and L, the usual ally of B, the cursives
1. 33, and the whole host besides. In questions like the
present, versions, we know, are of special use (p. 107),
but all versions save those named above have the word:
the Old Latin, all the four Syriac, the Memphitic (the
Thebaic being wanting), the Armenian, the Gothic. Of
the Fathers, Chrysostom presses the fact that not all
anger is prohibited, but what is unseasonable, causeless,
in vain. Irenaeus, even Origen once in the Latin (p. Ill),
Eusebius, Cyril of Alexandria, retain the word in their
quotations. Much like this omission is the expunging
of "falsely," (ver. 11), which is not in the corresponding
place of S. Luke (ch. vi. 22), by Cod. D and some Latins
only. We will not hesitate to say that on the whole
external evidence preponderates in favour of the reten
tion of " without cause." It is the earlier, fuller, less
equivocal : internal considerations are possibly more am
biguous. "Griesbach and Meyer," says Dean Alford,
" hold it to have been expunged from motives of moral
rigorism — De Wette to have been inserted to soften the
apparent rigour of the precept," which would bring it
under our first, or Bengel's, canon (p. 114). Different
critics of the highest rank, all very competent to judge
if they would but agree in their judgment, come each
to the conclusion which best suits his own temperament
and tone of mind. My esteemed friend, Professor Milli-
gan, perhaps a little over-states the matter when he
says " The precept, if we omit the phrase, is in striking

122 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT!
harmony with the at first sight sharp, extreme, almost
paradoxical character of various other precepts of the
' Sermon on the Mount.' " The common text is best as
it stands. (2) Matt. vi. 13 (part). " For thine is the king
dom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen."
The question here is whether these words formed
originally a portion of the Lord's Prayer, and conse
quently of S. Matthew's Gospel, or whether they are an
early addition to it, brought in from the Liturgies
which from the earliest times were in solemn use in the
Church. It is so far in favour of this doxology that its
absence from S. Luke's Gospel might lead to its rejection
here, and it makes nothing against it that it was
moulded upon such passages as 1 Chr. xxix. 11 ;
2 Chr. xx. 6 ; to which we are not disposed to add with
some the Apocryphal 1 Esdras (or " The Priest," as the
Greeks call that book) iv. 59, or the last clause of the
Prayer of Manasses, which latter may very well have
been borrowed from the Gospel. Yet, looking to the
documentary evidence, it is hard to suppress the growing
conviction that modern editors have done right in re
moving it from the text. Codd KBD and the Dublin
palimpsest Z (p. 76) omit the clause, Codd. AC are
defective here, so that Cod. L is really the best uncial
that reads it, although Cod. A and all the later side
with L, as do all cursives (even Cod. 33) except five,
whereof Cod. 1 alone is of much account, and another
(Cod. 209, at Venice) is little more than a transcript of
B. A few others exhibit the obelus, a mark of possible
spuriousness, set in the margin,- and the valuable
Cod. 157 (p. 82) with two or three more annex to "glory"

PASSAGES IN THE HOLY GOSPELS. 123
the impossible addition "of Father, Son, and Holy
Ghost," obviously taken from the Liturgies. Here again
is a point on which versions may be used with safety
(p. 107), and the doxology is wanting in the chief Old
Latin codices a. b. c. ff.' g! and others, in the Vulgate
(only that Pope Clement's edition ends the Lord's
Prayer with "Amen"), and its satellites the Frankish
and Anglo-Saxon. Its absence from the Latin versions
caused the doxology to be unknown in Latin service-
books, nor indeed is it found in those portions of our
own Book of Common Prayer which were derived
immediately from the Latin. It is contained in all
four Syriac versions (Cureton's omitting "and the
power"), in the Thebaic (omitting "and the glory"),
in the text of most Memphitic and in the margin of
others, in the very excellent Old Latin k. (omitting "the
kingdom" "and the glory "),_/! and others, in the iEthiopic
and Armenian, here at any rate free from Latin influ
ence, the Gothic, Georgian, Sclavonic, one form of the
Persic, and the Arabic of Erpenius. Of the Fathers,
Origen in the third century, Cyril of Jerusalem in the
fourth, formally expound the Lord's Prayer without
shewing any knowledge of its existence, while Chryso-
stom, a little later than Cyril, comments upon it without
displaying the least consciousness of its doubtful charac
ter. It is first met with in the Apostolical Constitu
tions, a work which, in its existing shape, dates from the
fourth century, or possibly a little sooner, and is full of
Liturgical matter. That the doxology, in its place at
the end of the Lord's Prayer, existed as early as the
second century, is evident from the testimony of the
versions, although the variations observed in the Cure-

124 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT
tonian Syriac, the Thebaic, and Cod. Jc. may lead us to
believe that it had not yet received its ultimate form.
It can hardly be upheld any longer as a portion of the
sacred text.
(3) Matth. xi. 19. " But wisdom is justified of her
children:" "of," as one scarcely needs say, being here
the archaic English for "by," the clause intimates that
Divine wisdom is justified, or acquiesced in, by those
who are nurtured therein. Now this whole passage, from
ver. 2 downwards, so closely resembles Luke vii. 18 — 35,
both in matter and in language, that we may be quite
sure that the two Evangelists are relating the same holy
discourse, delivered by the Lord under the self-same
circumstances. No more exact parallel can be conceived
to exist between two writers, who probably derived
their information from the same source, whether oral or
documentary, without having seen each the other's Gos
pel. Hence, in the midst of so much similarity through
out, it is inconceivable that the closing words of each
narrative should for the first time be entirely unlike,
and give quite a different sense, if indeed it can be said
of one of them that it affords any satisfactory sense at
all. Yet for "children," which all retain in S. Luke,
Tischendorf and Tregelles, Westcott and Hort, would
here read "works." One has no wish to deny the
general tendency of scribes to assimilate the very ex
pressions of the several Evangelists, and, as a rule, this
tendency ought to be fully allowed for; but on the
present occasion such a consideration can have no place:
verbal variation is one thing, complete divergency of
meaning is another. The Lord must have said either
"children" or "works" (the two words do not differ

PASSAGES IN THE HOLY GOSPELS. 125
much in the Greek), He cannot have employed both
terms in the same breath. This was so plainly seen
by the scribe of Cod. Sinaiticus that, with a bold con
sistency which we noted in him in regard to another pas
sage (p. 49), he adopts " works " in S. Luke also, where
he is countenanced by no authority save S. Ambrose,
who alleges that "most Greeks so have it." In S.
Matthew, while the external testimony is insufficient
against the weight of internal evidence, yet is by no
means insignificant in itself: the combination of the
Peshito and Memphitic versions would alone eutitle
what they vouch for to grave attention. We find
"works" in Codd. KB (but B has been subsequently
altered) 124 (yet not its two fellows, Codd. 13. 346 ;
Cod. 69 being here deficient : see p. 82), some Greek
scholia or notes, manuscripts known to Jerome, in the
Peshito and text of the Philoxenian Syriac, the Mem
phitic, certain Armenian codices, the iEthiopic (some
forms of which present us with the two readings united),
and in the Persic of the Polyglott, which is derived
from the Peshito. In defence of "children" are cited
Codd. CDLA and all other uncials and cursives (in
cluding 1. 33), Cureton's Syriac and the margin of the
Philoxenian, all the Latin versions Old and New, Origen
and Chrysostom.
Those who defend the variation "works" naturally
press into their service Bengel's canon (p. 114), that the
harder reading is to be preferred to the easier ; but this
is just an instance in which the interests of common
sense compel us to set bounds to its operation. A resort
to the forced explanation of referring the expression
"works" to the life of Jesus or the life of John, where-

126 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT
by wisdom is or was justified, commended, vindicated,
can satisfy no one who has not made up his mind
beforehand that the common reading is unquestionably
false. (4) Matt. xvi. 2, 3. It is not hard to see why these
verses, the first clause of ver. 2 excepted, have been
treated as doubtful by the most recent editors of the
New Testament. The words run, with a slight varia
tion from our Authorized version, "When it is evening,
ye say, It will be fair weather : for the heaven is red.
And in the morning, It will be foul weather to day :
for the heaven is red and lowring. Ye know how
to discern the face of the heaven ; but can ye not
discern the signs of the times ?" The exclamation " 0 ye
hypocrites" of the common text, is undoubtedly
spurious. Once before, in ch. xii. 38 — 40, the same
request had been made by gainsayers, "Shew us a sign
from heaven," and the answer rendered was the same
in substance as in this passage, save that the sentences
we have quoted are not found in the earlier place :
hence the temptation to pass them by on the part of
copyists, whose climate moreover the natural phenomena
described therein did not very well suit. Yet it really
seems impossible for any one possessed of the slightest
tincture of critical instinct to read the verses thought
fully, without feeling sure that they were actually
spoken by the Lord; so that, internal evidence in
their favour being clear and well-nigh irresistible, the
opposing witnesses rather damage their own authority
than impair our confidence in our conclusion. These
witnesses, however, are in themselves considerable —
Codd. &$B and three other late but ordinarily good uncials

PASSAGES IN THE HOLY GOSPELS. 127
(one other uncial marking the whole with an asterisk),
that excellent cursive 157, two of Ferrar's group (13.
124 : see p. 82, note) and some eleven others : the
verses are noticed, however, in the commentary annexed
to two copies which omit them. Of the versions, the
Curetonian and the Armenian (before it was corrupted
from the Latin) reject the passage, and (as it would
seem from Mill) some codices of the Memphitic.
Origen does not comment upon it, while Jerome, in his
sweeping way, alleges that it is not contained in most
manuscripts. All other authorities side with the com
mon text, which Jerome in his Vulgate does not
venture to tamper with. Eusebius acknowledges the
verses, inasmuch as he adapted to them his system of
canons and sectional divisions of this Gospel: he
rightly makes them parallel with Luke xii. 54 — 56.
Examples of this kind — of which we shall hereafter
meet with not a few, where testimony, which on the
whole cannot possibly be admitted, is both weighty
in itself and comes to us from several sources apparently
independent of each other — suggest the suspicion that
the Holy Gospels, like other works both in ancient
and modern times, may have circulated in more than
one edition, the earlier wanting some passages which
the sacred writers inserted in the later. Sufficient
attention has hardly been paid to a supposition which
would account for discrepancies otherwise very per
plexing ; and it is evident that transcripts might have
been made from the first issue which, being propagated
in distant lands, would always keep up the difference
between the several recensions, each as it came from
f,he author's hand. Some such process as this may be

128 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT
seen by comparing the song of David in 2 Sam. xxii.
with Ps. xviii., the historical book obviously exhibiting
an early draft of the more finished composition in the
Psalm. Matt. xvii. 21. "Howbeit this kind goeth not

o.

s1-

out but by prayer and fasting." We have here a
striking exemplification of the second rule laid down in
our last lecture (p. 115), there being reason to think
that this verse is but an accretion, taken, with some
slight variation, from the parallel place, Mark ix. 29.
Otherwise the omission is not imperatively demanded
by the state of the evidence, although that is ancient
and drawn from various quarters. It consists of Codd.
K (by the first hand) B. 33, the Curetonian and Jeru
salem Syriac, the Thebaic and one or more copies of the
Memphitic known through Mill, e. and ff.1 of the Old
Latin, both of high value, some forms of the iEthiopic,
and Eusebius, as seen from his arrangement of his
canon in S. Mark. We are attaching great force to
internal probabilities when we allow such a scanty roll
to outweigh the far more numerous and equally varied
authorities that uphold the verse, namely Codd. K (by
an early second hand) CDL, all other uncials, every
cursive save one, the Peshito and Philoxenian Syriac,
the Memphitic in most copies, the Armenian, all other
forms of the Old and Vulgate Latin, followed by the
Latin Fathers Hilary, Ambrose, and Augustine, by
Origen among the Greeks and Chrysostom in his
commentary very distinctly.
(6) In the preceding verse occurs another doubtful
question, in reference to which we have to choose
between "Because of your little faith," the gentler,

PASSAGES IN 'THE HOLY GOSPELS. '12~9
intrinsically perhaps the more likely reading, and
"Because of your faithlessness" or "unbelief," the more
emphatic term. In the Greek, of course, the two words
are much alike, and in point of moral feeling the varia-
¦ tion much reminds us of ch. v. 22 (p. 119), only that
- the chief witnesses for the stronger form in that place
¦ here advocate what might seem to be the weaker.
"Little faith" is the reading of Codd. K B. 1. 22 (the
valuable cursive, Paris 72), 33, the three here extant of
Ferrar's group (13. 124. 346 : see p. 82, note), of Cureton's
Syriac, both Egyptian, the Armenian and iEthiopic
versions, of Origen, Chrysostom (very expressly, but in
one manuscript only), John Damescene in his oldest copy
: (p. 112), but among the Latins of Hilary alone. All the
rest, Codd. CDL, the host of later uncials and cursives,
the Peshito and Philoxenian Syriac, the Latins and one
Armenian copy after them, maintain the common
text. On the one hand it may be urged that "faith
lessness" was suggested by the epithet "faithless" in
ver. 17, on the other that although "little faith" occurs
nowhere else as a noun in the New Testament, yet
the epithet "0 thou" or "ye of little faith" had been
already met with in this Gospel four times over. The
¦ choice is delicate, and the difference small.
(7) Of a widely different character is the grave
discrepancy of our authorities in Matt. xix. 17, which
runs in our Authorized Bible "Why callest thou me
good ? there is none good but one, that is God," which
precisely corresponds with the wording of the two
parallel places, Mark x. 18 ; Luke xviii. 19. In all the
three "Why callest thou me good?" has a distinct re
ference to the address " Good Master " in the preceding
S.L. 9

130 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT
Terse. But in S. Matthew the adjective "good" before
>' Master" is more than doubtful, while he stands alone
in representing the question to be "what good thing
shall I do?", the other two simply putting the inquiry
"what shall I do?" This divergency in the verse
before prepares the mind for the larger one in ver. 17,
"Why askest thou me of that which is good? One
there is who is good :" the diseussion of which various
reading is the more important, inasmuch as the altera
tion cannot be accidental. On the one parfc or the
other it must have been made designedly for obvious
reasons; and I am the more called upon to lay before
you the state of the case as clearly as I can, because
I once strove hard to vindicate the common Greek text,
and can now do so no longer.
It may be seen that the key of the whole position
is the epithet "good" before "Master" in ver. 16, for if
this be genuine, the only pertinent answer is contained
in the Received text. Now this first "good" is omitted
in Codd. KBDL and in four cursives, two of them
being very excellent (1. 22), in three chief copies of
the Old Latin (a. e. ff1.), in the iEthiopic, in Origen
twice, and of the early Latin in Hilary also. Regard
being had to its presence in the other Gospels, the
uncials alone would suffice to justify its omission,
by virtue of Canon II. (p. 115). The new and now
most appropriate form of the answer "Why askest
thou me of that which is good ? One there is who
is good," is vouched for by the same great uncials
Codd. KBDL, by 1. 22., and to some extent by another
cursive, and by versions far more numerous and im
portant than those which only omit the first "good"

PASSAGES IN THE HOLY GOSPELS. 131
in ver. 16, namely by Cureton's and the Jerusalem
Syriac, by the Memphitic and Armenian, by the Old
Latin a. b. c. e. ff1. ff2. g1. and others, by the New or
Vulgate Latin, after Jerome, with the Frankish and
Anglo-Saxon in its wake. A few of these versions
add "that is God" at the end, while the Philoxenian
Syriac, the iEthiopic, Codd. g\ m. and others of the Old
Latin, take the first clause from the amended, the second
from the Received text : " Why askest thou me of
that which is good? There is none good but one,
that is God." The evidence of Origen also, on which
great stress has been deservedly laid, avails for the first
of the two clauses, not at all for the second. "Now
Matthew," he says, "wrote on the supposition that the
Saviour was asked about a good work in the question,
What good shall I do? But Mark and Luke state
that the Saviour said, Why callest thou me good?
there is none good but One, that is God." Nothing
can be more explicit, so far as the question extends
"Why askest thou me of that which is good ?" Thus
far also goes Augustine, who, like Origen, expressly
discriminates the language of the Evangelists.
We cannot refuse to admit a complex reading
which is consistently upheld by considerations so
powerful, yet the case for the Received text even
now looks strong, consisting as it does of Cod. C and
all uncials except the aforesaid four, of Codd. 33. 69
(which commences with Matt, xviii. 15), all cursives
but two, of the Peshito Syriac and Thebaic versions,
and of Fathers ancient as Justin Martyr (in spite of
his looseness in citation), and , Irenaeus in the second
century, of Hilary, Optatus, and Ambrose against all
9—2

132 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT
their own Latin copies except two (/ however, being
one), of Eusebius, Chrysostom, and a host of later
ecclesiastical writers.
(8) The next passage to which ' your notice will
be directed is very easily dealt with : in fact, it is
mentioned chiefly to shew on what slight grounds
a gloss will sometimes find its way into the text and
continue there. In Matt, xxvii. 35, after the Evan
gelist's words "And they crucified him, and parted
his garments, casting lots : " is added in our common
Bibles a clause not belonging to this Gospel, but
borrowed from John xix. 24, with just one expression
assimilated to S. Matthew's usual manner, "That it
might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet,
They parted my garments among them, and upon my
vesture did they cast lots (Ps. xxii. 18)." Uncial autho
rity the passage has absolutely none before Cod. A of
the ninth century (p. 74). Since Erasmus found it in his
Cod. 1 (p. 80), it crept into his, the first published edi
tion of the New Testament : it is not found in the great
Complutensian Polyglott of Cardinal Ximenes, which
was printed in 1514, but did not appear before 1522,
too late to have the influence it well deserved over
the Greek text then issuing from the press in various
forms. Besides Codd. A. 1, nine other cursives (Ferrar's
69. 124 being among them) have been alleged in its
support, though with some small variations of reading.
Of the Fathers Eusebius cites it in this Gospel nearly
alone. Its main support rests on certain forms of
the Latin, a. b. c. g2. &c, Pope Clement's Vulgate
after the great Codex Amiatinus, but not Pope Sixtus'
or the majority of the Vulgate manuscripts. The

PASSAGES IN THE HOLY GOSPELS. 133
versions which depend on or have been corrected from
the Vulgate also contain it, as the Armenian, Frankish,
Anglo-Saxon, the Roman Arabic, and Persic of the
Polyglott. Tremellius first interpolated the Peshito
with this sentence, by turning the Greek words into
Syriac : it is wholly unknown to Syriac codices and
to Widmanstadt's primary edition (p. 90). The Phi
loxenian text too contains it, but with a marginal
note which strongly condemns it.
A case resting on such evidence cannot stand for
a moment; but if the testimony were anything like
equally divided, a plea might be set up for the addi
tional sentence on the ground that the clause before
it and its own conclusion both end in "cast lots."
Those who have any experience in the collation of
manuscripts of every kind are familiar with a source
of error technically called homoeoteleuton, that is, like
ending, whereby the eye of the scribe or the press
compositor is apt to wander from the end of the
first clause to the similar ending of the second, com
pletely overlooking all the words that lie between
them. (9) Mark vi. 20. "For Herod feared John, know
ing that he was a just man and a holy, and observed
him; and when he heard him, he did many things,
and heard him gladly." Perhaps no one ever pondered
over this verse without feeling that the clause "he
did many things " is very feeble in so clear and vigorous
a writer as S. Mark, and indeed hardly intelligible
as it stands. Conjecture has been employed upon
it to no purpose, and we may say at once that mere
conjecture seldom does effect any thing for a passage

134 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT
like this. But four of our best authorities here exhibit
a reading which, once heard, can hardly fail of im
mediate acceptance : instinct in such cases taking
the lead of reasoning. The Greek for "he did" is
epoiei (eVotet) : in its place Codd. KBC and the
Memphitic version have eporei (ij-rropei) "he was
perplexed," a word dissimilar neither to the eye nor
the ear. I say "to the ear" in case any one may think,
which I do not, that ancient manuscripts were tran
scribed rather from dictation than by the immediate
act of copying: of the slovenly practice of dictation I
can discern no considerable traces. Fewas our autho
rities here are, they are many enough and good enough
for our purpose, when the sense so powerfully recom
mends them; for the passage now reads admirably:
"when he heard him, he was much perplexed, and
heard him gladly," a lively picture indeed of the
inward struggle of conscience in a bad man's mind,
enslaved by sinful indulgence, yet not void of admira
tion for what was pure and noble. The Greek word
rendered "much" (ttoWo) is so used in five other
places in this Gospel (ch'. iii. 12; v. 10, 23, 38; ix. 26).
(10) Mark vii. 19. "Because it entereth not into
his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the
draught, purging all meats." Here again we have a
verse which affords, in its last clause, no satisfactory
meaning. What is it that "purgeth all meats" ? The
Greek participle, being in the neuter gender, can
be in concord with none of the nouns in the verse,
but must be referred to that which entereth into a
man from without in the preceding verse: yet how
that can in any way be said to "purge all meats" it

PASSAGES IN THE HOLY GOSPELS. 135
is not at all easy to determine. In this dilemma we
have but to turn to the various readings annexed to
critical editions to see our way clear at once. We
there discover that the participle is not neuter at all,
but masculine, the difference between the forms being
only the substitution of the long omega (w) for the
short omicron (o), a minute change abundantly ac
counted for by the itacism (p. 39). The masculine
form is that of Codd. KABL, of Ferrar's four cursives
(13. 69. 124. 346) and a large number of others, as
well as of Erasmus in his first two editions ; while the
neuter has far less support. The Latin versions are
necessarily neutral, the Peshito Syriac falsely refers
the participle to the noun immediately preceding.
The masculine participle has the Divine Speaker for
its subject, and is not a part of the Lord's discourse,
but a brief passing comment of S. Mark himself, "This
he said, pronouncing all things clean," much in the
same way as the writer interposes in ch. iii. 30 "Be
cause they said, He hath an unclean spirit." Thus
simply and expressively the Greek Fathers, such as
Origen and Chrysostom, understood the sense, and
it is strange that their exposition should have been
lost sight of, illustrated as it is by Acts x. 15 "What
God hath cleansed, that call not thou common."
(11) Mark ix. 29. "This kind can come forth by
nothing, save by prayer and fasting." In discussing the
parallel place, Matt. xvii. 21, we assented to the opinion
of recent critics that the verse was interpolated from
the present passage : we must resist their wish to ex
punge from this verse the concluding words " and fast
ing." The evidence on which, internal considerations

136 . DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT
inducing us, we were content to act in the former case
was far from considerable : in this instance it is even
weaker, being Codd. K (by the first hand) B, the Latin
h, and the silent help of Clement of Alexandria: literally
nothing more. It is indeed true that in two places in
the New Testament (Acts x. 30 ; 1 Cor. vii. 5) "fasting"
has been joined on to "prayer" in the common text,
whereas it is not recognized by the best authorities, but
the case against the word " fasting" is much stronger in
them than here. The genuineness of both terms in
Acts xiii. 2, 3 ; xiv. 23, has never been disputed, and
we cannot deny too earnestly an unjust charge occasion
ally brought against the copyists of our Greek manu
scripts, that they accommodated the text before them
to the ascetic practices of their own times.
(12) MARK xv. 28. "And the scripture was fulfilled,
which saith, And he was numbered with the trans
gressors." Just as the clause from Ps. xxii. 18 has been
wrongly transferred from its proper place in John xix. 24
to Matt, xxvii. 35 (p. 132), so must we confess that the
present citation from Isai. liii. 12 has been brought into
S. Mark's text from Luke xxii. 37. Appeals to the Old
Testament Scriptures are not much in this Evangelist's
manner, and the tendency to enlargement from other
Gospels would alone render the passage suspicious (p.
115). The verse is wanting in Codd. KABCD, in
another good uncial, while in A and one other it is
alleged to be marked as doubtful by means of an obelus
or asterisk. As many as 25 cursives are said to make
for omission, as well as about 20 Church lesson-books,
some of them being uncials (but see p. 77). Of the
versions, only the Thebaic and the Old Latin k. reject it,

PASSAGES IN THE HOLY GOSPELS. 137
but it seems doubtful whether Eusebius acknowledged
ver. 28 in arranging his canon. The mass of the later
uncials (including Codd. LP), the most and best cursives,
and almost all the versions retain the verse : internal
considerations, however, are somewhat adverse to it/
and, that being the case, the united testimony of the
five chief uncials is simply irresistible.
(13) Mark xvi. 9 — 20. We have now reached the
most important passage in the New Testament upon
which the researches of modern criticism have tended
to throw a doubt, and we rejoice in the assurance that, the
more closely it is scrutinized, the more manifestly it will
be seen to form a genuine portion of the second Gospel.
The paragraph is not found at all in Codd. KB, the two
oldest of all, but in the case of B with the suggestive
peculiarity of the -vacant column described in a former
lecture (p. 57) 1, which leads Mr Burgon of Oriel not very
unreasonably to claim Cod. B as a witness in favour of
these twelve verses, whose existence its scribe was
plainly aware of, if he had them not in the archetype
before him. The case of Cod. L, B's close ally, must be
stated at length, and I may say in passing that I trust
that no one will think his pains thrown away upon this
whole most interesting discussion. At the end of ver. 8
the copyist breaks off with the words "for they were
afraid," on the last line but one of a column. Then at
1 We prefer to lay no stress on Tischendorf's opinion that the leaves
containing Mark xvi. in X and B were written by the same scribe, yet
besides the similarity of handwriting, on which no one would like to
insist too confidently, there are other circumstances, apparently un
noticed by Tischendorf, which corroborate his judgment. In that case
Codd. KB would for this passage make but one witness, not two,

138 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT
the top of the next column, but in the same hand (of
the eighth century be it remembered) the following
note occurs : — "And this also is somewhere extant :
And they briefly announced all that was bidden them
to Peter and his company. And after this also Jesus
himself from the east even to the west sent forth
through them the holy and incorruptible proclamation
of eternal salvation. And this also is extant after 'for
they were afraid:'" then follow ver. 9 — 20 in their usual
form. The scribe knew of two separate endings of
S. Mark's Gospel, and lacked the critical skill required to
discern the true from the false. The Old Latin k. also,
so often the associate of Codd. KB, sets in the room of
the last twelve verses a loose translation of the note
given in Cod. L, as also do two JEthiopic manuscripts.
Besides the aforenamed, ver. 9 — 20 are omitted in some
old Armenian codices and an Arabic Church lesson-
book of the ninth century ; and L's note is found in
the margin of one cursive of the tenth century (Cod.
274), of one Memphitic copy, and of the Philoxenian
Syriac. The proofs of the genuineness of ver. 9 — 20 seem
quite overwhelming. They are contained in Codd. ACD
(which last is defective from ver. 15), in all other
uncials, in all cursives without exception ; in the Syriac,
in the Curetonian (which, by a singular happiness,
contains ver. 17 — 20, though no other portion of
S. Mark), the Peshito, the Jerusalem, and Philoxenian
text, in the Thebaic (ver. 20 alone being preserved),
the Memphitic, all the Old Latin except k. ( but a. by
the first hand and b. e. are defective), the Vulgate, the
Gothic (to ver. 12), the Georgian and lesser versions,

PASSAGES IN THE HOLY GOSPELS. 139
even the iEthiopic and Armenian1 with the exceptions
stated above. Of ancient writers, the paragraph was
known possibly to Papias, probably to Justin Martyr,
certainly to Irenaeus in the second century ; to Hippo-
lytus and apparently to Celsus in the third ; to the
Persian sage Aphraates (in a Syriac Homily dated
A.D. 337), to Cyril of Jerusalem, Epiphanius, Ambrose,
Augustine, Chrysostom, in the fourth. Add to this the
fact of which Mr Burgon has made such excellent use,
that in the Calendar of Church lessons, which existed
unquestionably in the fourth century, very probably
much earlier, the passage formed part of a special ser
vice for so high.a feast as Ascension Day, and was used on
other occasions in the ordinary course of Divine service.
Unless Eusebius is retailing at second-hand the
views of Origen, whom he much imitated, we meet with
the earliest hint of doubt thrown on the paragraph in a
treatise of his, first published by Cardinal Mai, in 1847,
his " Questions to Marinus." He is busily engaged in
his attempt to harmonize the Synoptic Gospels, a study
which gave rise to his system of canons we have spoken
of so often. Like every one else who has made the
attempt, he found the enterprise full of difficulties,
although they, as the critics often tell us, only make the
genuineness of a passage the more sure (p. 114). He is
perplexed how to reconcile the time of the Resurrection
as described in Matt, xxviii. 1 with what is stated in
Mark xvi. 9. His solution is two-fold : the second we
1 But we ought to add that some Armenian codices which contain
the paragraph have the subscription " Gospel after Mark" at the end
of ver. 8 as well as of ver. 20, as though they (like Cod. L) recognized
a double ending to the book.

140 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT
need not concern ourselves with ; it is a curious device
of punctuation invented for those who might reject
his first, which, in Eusebius' own language, runs as
follows : —
" He who is for getting rid of the section which speaketh of this
[i.e. ver. 9] would say that it is not met with in all the copies of
S. Mark's Gospel : the accurate copies, at any rate, circumscribe the
end of S. Mark's history in the words of the young man who was
seen by the women and said unto them, 'Fear not, ye seek Jesus of
Nazareth, ' and so on : to which he adds ' and when they heard it they
fled, neither told they any thing to any man, for they were afraid.'.
For at this point, in nearly all the copies of S. Mark's Gospel, the end
is circumscribed. What follows, being met with rarely in some, but
not in all, would be superfluous, especially if it contained a contra
diction to the testimony of the other Evangelists. This one would
say if he deprecated and would entirely get rid'of a superfluous
question." Just so : the short way with objectors to the varia
tion of this passage from the other Gospels would be to
deny the genuineness of the paragraph, which Eusebius
hardly chooses to do himself, though most of the copies
known to him — Codd. KB might very well be among
them — did not contain the disputed verses. Jerome,
as usual, repeats and almost exaggerates his prede
cessor's statement, although he did not venture to act
upon it when revising the Latin Vulgate. Mr Burgon
abundantly demonstrates that all the subsequent evi
dence which has been collected against the verses,
whether bearing the name of Severus of Antioch, of
Hesychius, or any other, down to Euthymius Zigabenus
in the twelfth century, is a mere echo of Eusebius,
deriving all knowledge of the matter from him.
Directly opposed to his statements are those of
Victor of Antioch, who in the fifth century wrote a

PASSAGES IN THE HOLY GOSPELS. 141
commentary on S. Mark's Gospel, which fills the ample
margins of not a few of the cursive manuscripts. He
too, like Eusebius, found many copies in which the
twelve verses were wanting. This set him upon looking
into the matter, and he fairly tells us. the result : " but
since We found them in most of the accurate copies and
in the Palestine copy of S. Mark's Gospel," we' have
used them, as the truth required. This Palestine copy
to which Victor refers is probably of the same character
with the ancient Jerusalem copies to which certain
other scribes appeal in their margins in defence of the
self-same paragraph. Now it is a sad token of the
heedlessness with which important subjects of sacred
criticism have sometimes been handled, that those very
manuscripts of this Gospel — they are no less than
twenty-four in all — which contain in their several mar
gins Victor's decided judgment in favour of the genuine
ness of ver. 9 — 20, have, for this very reason and no other,
¦ been cited by one editor after another as adverse to them.
It is absolutely impossible that S. Mark's Gospel
can have ended abruptly with the words " for they were
afraid." Mr Kelly puts this very well when he asks
" Can any one, who knows the character of the Lord
and of His ministry, conceive for an instant that we
should be left with nothing but a message baulked
through the alarm of women?" Accordingly, certain
theologians, who feel unable to conclude that S. Mark
wrote the passage, are willing to concede that it was
appended to his unfinished work in primitive times,
and that it is rightly entitled to be regarded as Canoni
cal. These writers urge against us a certain difference
of- style subsisting between the twelve1 verses- and the

142 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT
rest of S. Mark's Gospel, a difference, we are persuaded,
more apparent than real, and from which no safe con
clusion can be drawn within so small a compass. This
Evangelist's pregnant brevity is conspicuous enough in
them, and, for the rest, nothing can well be more pre
carious than objections grounded on minutiae of this
kind. Professor Broadus of South Carolina, for in
stance, has established quite a strong case in favour of
the identity of authorship by reason of the similarity
of the phraseology, and Mr Burgon, to whose splendid
monograph on the subject we thankfully recur for the
last time, justifies in full detail his deliberate conviction
that the supposed adverse argument drawn from peculi
arities of language "breaks down hopelessly under
severe analysis."
I fear that some of those I am trying to interest in
these studies have found the foregoing discussion rather
tedious and dry, although I have aimed throughout to
limit my view to the broad issues of the question, over
looking, as much as possible, many an interesting by-
point which seemed less relevant to the main topic of
our examination. I venture, however, to hope that I
have carried those who have followed me throughout to
the conclusion announced from the first, that the last
twelve verses of this second Gospel are, beyond all
doubt or misgiving, an original and genuine portion of
the Evangelist's divine work.
(14) Luke ii. 14. It is well known to those who
love ecclesiastical music, that the first clause of the
Angelic Hymn appears in a different form in the
Roman Mass-book and in the English Communion
Service. The cause of this variation is that the

PASSAGES IN THE HOLY GOSPELS. 143
former follows the Vulgate Latin version of the New
Testament, the latter the Received text of the Greek.
This, the common text, is transparently clear.
Glory to God in the highest,
And on earth peace :
Good will among men.
The words are distributed, after the Hebrew fashion,
into a stanza consisting of three members. In the
first and second heaven and earth are contrasted;
the third refers to both the preceding, and alleges
the efficient cause which has brought to God glory and
on earth peace. By the addition of a single letter
(c, sigma) to the end of the last line, so as to turn
the Greek word rendered "good will" from the nomi
native into the genitive case, the rhythmical arrange
ment is sorely marred, and the simple shepherds sent
away with a message, whose diction no scholar has yet
construed to his mind. Let us look to the evidence
upon which rests a change so slight in itself, so mo
mentous in its results. Of the five great uncials C is
defective here, but the sigma indicating the genitive
is found in Codd. KABD, and in no other Greek
manuscript whatsoever. Of these, however, K and B
have been corrected by later hands, D is much
associated with the Latin version, in every form of
which the genitive occurs, and the testimony of A
may be cited on both sides, inasmuch as in the primi
tive 14th or Morning Hymn, a cento of Scripture texts,
annexed to the Book of Psalms, it actually reads the
nominative, and such was no doubt the form used in
Divine Service by the early Greek Church. The

144 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT
Gothic version and the Latin Fathers Hilary and
Augustine, the translator of Irenseus and the rest,
naturally follow the Latin translations, and Jerome
manifestly adopts the same form when rendering from
Origen a passage not extant in the Greek. Origen's
own text, in three several places, has the nominative,
although no special stress is laid upon it by him. For
the common text we allege Cod. L and all other uncials
as yet unnamed, including Cod. H (xi) of Tregelles, a
palimpsest fragment of S. Luke which often favours
B1, all cursives of every kind, the three Syriac versions
here extant, and that most explicitly, with the Armenian
and iEthiopic. Here too comes in the evidence of
the Greek Fathers — their virtually unanimous evidence,
from which, in a matter of this kind, there ought to be
no appeal. Of Origen we have already spoken : but
the Apostolical Constitutions and Methodius, at the
end of the third century or early in the fourth; Euse
bius, Aphraates the Persian, Titus of Bostra, Gregory
Nazianzen, Cyril of Jerusalem, Epiphanius and Chry
sostom throughout the fourth; Cyril of Alexandria
in three places, other authorities less weighty because
less ancient, all maintain the text as we find it in
the ordinary Greek copies.
If the genitive were taken, it would of course be
necessary to extract from it some tolerable sense, an
endeavour which has hitherto met with small success.
1 Called Cod. Zacynthius, as brought from Zante in 1821 into the
library of the British and Foreign Bible Society. It has around the
text a copious commentary or catena, and although not earlier than
the eighth century, exhibits the Vatican chapters (see p. 28) in its
margin. It contains 342 verses down to Luke xi. 33, and was edited
by Tregelles in 1861.

PASSAGES IN THE HOLY GOSPELS. US
Arranged as Hebrew poetry it would then consist of
only two very unequal members :
Glory to God in the highest,
And on earth peace among men of good pleasure.
God's glory is in the highest places, peace among
them in whom He is well pleased; or, as the Vulgate
suggests, "among those disposed to receive it," a limita
tion of the grace of the Gospel, which, as Dean Alford
justly remarks, is as untenable in Greek as in theology.
Yet what else than this the genitive can mean it is
hard indeed to say.
(15) Luke vi. 1. The phrase "second sabbath
after the first " has perplexed every commentator, and
being one which occurs nowhere else, will probably
never be satisfactorily explained. Since the season
is early harvest, no conjecture is more probable than
that it was the sabbath immediately after the first
or great Paschal sabbath, on the morrow after which
day was waved the sheaf of the first-fruits (Lev. xxiii.
10, 11) : thus corresponding to our Saturday in Easter
week. The expression "on another sabbath " (ver. 6)
seems to favour the notion that the previous one
had been definitely indicated, and here, at any rate,
Bengel's canon may find a fit place, which declares that
a reading is not the less probable because it is difficult.
The epithet " second after the first," however, is wholly
omitted in Codd. KBL 1. 22. 33. 69. 118. 157. 209
(see p. 122). Two of the usual associates of Cod. 69,
namely 13. 124, together with Codd. Rr and a few
others, exhibit a form differing from that of the
Received text only by a familiar itacism. Since this
verse commences an ecclesiastical lesson, all Church
S. L. 10

146 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT
Lectionaries (the Jerusalem Syriac among them) omit
the note of time, as they usually do in such cases.
Nor ought we to wonder if some versions, according to
their wont, pass over altogether an expression which
their translators could not understand. Hence its
absence from the Peshito Syriac and Memphitic (the
Thebaic is not extant), the Old Latin b. c. and two or
three other copies, from both Persic, and some forms
of the iEthiopic and Arabic. How such a term could
have got into the text unless it were genuine has
baffled and must baffle conjecture. We retain it
without hesitation on the evidence of Codd. ACD,
of all other uncials and cursives not named before,
the best Old Latin codices (a.f.ff2. g1.2), all manuscripts
of the Vulgate, the Armenian, Gothic and Philoxenian
Syriac versions, although this last notes in the margin
its absence from some copies. Add to this list the
ecclesiastical writers and scholiasts who have tried their
hand, with whatever success, upon various explana
tions : such are Cajsarius, Epiphanius, Ambrose, Chry
sostom in the fourth century, Isidore of Pelusium and
perhaps Clement of Alexandria in the fifth.
(16) Luke x. 42. "One thing is needful." This
solemn speech of our Divine Master has shaken many
a pulpit and sanctified many a life. No nobler sermon
was ever preached upon it than that by S. Augustine
which he sums up in the emphatic comment "the
toil for many things passeth away, the love of the
one thing abideth." Our Lord's language may well
have shocked the timorous by its uncompromising
exclusiveness, much as Matt. v. 22 might do (p. 121),
but it almost moves our indignation to see it diluted

PASSAGES IN THE HOLY GOSPELS. 147
into the feeble paraphrase1 of Codd. fc$BL, the very
ancient second hand of C (p. 63), 1. 33, "there is need of
few things, or [rather] of one," where K omits " need "
in its blundering fashion (p. 41). With these agree
the Memphitic, iEthiopic, and margin of the Philoxenian
version, Jerome, and Origen as cited in a catena or
commentary by various hands. One ordinary cursive,
the Jerusalem Syriac, and Cyril of Alexandria in his
Syriac version, have only "there is need of few things,"
and so the Armenian nearly. The chief purely Latin
authorities fail us here, inasmuch as Cod. D, with
a. b. e. ff1., Ambrose, and some others retain out of
the whole passage no more than the words "Martha,
Martha" (ver. 41), with or without the verb "thou art
troubled." So powerfully is this pregnant dictum supported
by internal evidence, that we doubt not here to reject
the testimony, not of Cod. D and the Latins only,
but of the more formidable array which supports Cod.
B. The Received text is that of Codd. AC, of all
other uncials and cursives not before mentioned, of
the Peshito and Cureton's Syriac (the latter so often
an ally of D), of the Philoxenian text, of g1. and others
of the Old Latin, including/., which is of a more recent
type (p. 100), of the Vulgate or New Latin. Chrysostom,
Augustine in two places, John Damascene and others
1 Just as frigid a gloss, self-condemned one would suppose by
its own wordy feebleness, is found in Codd. XBCS. 33. 157, copies
of the Memphitic, the Philoxenian margin and Cyril of Alexandria
in Luke vi. 48, where in the room of ' ' for it had been founded upon
the rock," they read " because it had been built well," the iEthiopic
retaining both forms. It is not sufficient to say in defence of this
poor stuff that the Received text is also that of Matt. vii. 25.
10—2

148 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT
complete the list : S. Basil sides once in silence with
the Received text, but once puts on the clause an
ingenious comment, which may be best understood
by assuming that he had before him the reading of
Cod. B and its fellows.
(17) Luke xi. 2, 4. The probability is so strong
that the form of the Lord's Prayer here given, doubt
less on a later and different occasion, should have
been interpolated from that in Matt. vi. 9 — 13, that
the authority produced for omitting no less than three
clauses here, considerable in itself, is entitled to our
deference also on other grounds. Instead of "Our
Father, which art in heaven," we find simply "Father''
in Codd. KBC. 1. 346 (but not its fellows, see p. 82
note), and four other good cursives, in two Old Latin
copies (g1. g2.), nearly all those of the Vulgate Latin,
and its follower the Armenian. Origen and various
scholia after him expressly discriminate the fuller
expression of the other Gospel from the short one
here. For omitting "Thy will be clone, as in heaven,
so in earth" (ver. 2), as also "but deliver us from evil"
(ver. 4), we find in substance the same testimony,
weakened in the former of these places (ver. 2) by the
desertion of the first hand of Cod. K and one cursive,
strengthened by the additional support of Cureton's
Syriac, and another form of the Old Latin (ff2.). In
ver. 4, the evidence against the last clause is strongest
of all. Although the Curetonian contains it, Cyril
of Alexandria now echoes the express evidence of
Origen and the scholiasts before referred to. Ter-
tullian also, who in controversy with Marcion would
use S. Luke's Gospel, cites none of the three doubtful

PASSAGES IN THE HOLY GOSPELS. 149
clauses, while Augustine expressly affirms that in
this Evangelist the Lord's Prayer embraced but five
petitions, in S. Matthew seven. The mass of copies
and versions must yield in a case like this.
(18) Luke xiv. 5. " Which of you shall have an
ass or an ox fallen into a pit...?" For "ass" of the
Received text, a vast array of imposing authorities
substitutes "son," which in Greek is not very unlike
it in form, and thus renders the Lord's question an
example of bathos that is so tasteless as to be almost
ludicrous, "Which of you shall have a son or an ox?";
not, be it observed, "a son, nay even an ox," for the
original will bear no such means of evasion. The
reference in the common text is, of course, to Ex. xxi.
33, the order of the words being changed from what
stands there and in Ex. xxiii. 4, ch. xiii. 15 of this
Gospel, because the argument here rises from the less
esteemed animal to one more valuable. It is instructive
to observe how hopelessly authorities of all ages and
degrees of importance are divided on a point about
which it might be thought that common sense would
forbid even a moment's hesitation. For "son" may
be alleged Codd. AB united (p. 55), ten lesser uncials,
no less than 125 cursives cited by name (our y has
"your son:" see p. 83), against Codd. KL (the usual
allies of B), three other uncials, quite as many cursives
as on the other side, and those of the best (1. 33, &c).
Cureton's Syriac and one cursive combine both read
ings "son or ox or ass"; one form of the Arabic with
another cursive have "ox" only; one of Mr Burgon's
Venice cursives has "son or ass," without "ox." Cod.
C is unfortunately defective here, as it so often is when

150 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT
we need it most, Cod. D has " sheep or ox," at any
rate excluding "son." Versions are just as much at
variance as Greek manuscripts. For "son" we can cite
the Peshito (with its Persic imitator) and the Philo
xenian Syriac, the Thebaic, the Old Latin e. f g., and
some Slavonic manuscripts: for "ass" the Memphitic
and Jerusalem Syriac, the three best codices of the
Old Latin (a. b. c.) and two others, the Vulgate,
Armenian, and ^Ethiopic ("his ox or ass"). The com
mentators, Titus of Bostra in the fourth century,
Clement of Alexandria in the fifth, recognised and
laboured to explain "son." Their expositions are
followed by late writers, as Theophylact in the eleventh
century, Euthymius Zigabenus in the twelfth, and the
language of one or other of them is repeated in catenas
and scholia set in the margin of some manuscripts,
whose own text exhibits the adverse, and, in our judg
ment, the true reading.
(19) Luke xxii. 43, 44. "And there appeared
an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him.
And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and
his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling
down to the ground." No more grateful fruit of
modern criticism can well be named, than the rescuing
these verses, whose sacred words the devout reader
of Scripture could so ill spare, from the doubt which
once seemed to hang about them. They are not found
in Codd. ABRT1, 124 (in Cod. 13 only the first two
words are by the first hand), nor inf. of the Old Latin,
1 Cod. Borgianus (T), now in the Propaganda at Rome, is a
small but precious fragment of 13 leaves or more (177 verses), with a
Thebaic version on the left or opposite page, of the fifth century.

PASSAGES IN TffE HOLY GOSPELS. 151
in perhaps the majority of Memphitic, in some Thebaic
and Armenian copies. Cod. A, however, by affixing
to the end of ver. 42, to which they cannot possibly
belong, the proper Ammonian section and Eusebian
canon (see pp. 127, 128, 153), shews that its scribe was
acquainted with the passage. It is read in all other
uncials and cursives, Codd. KDLQ 1 being the chief,
in all the four Syriac versions (Cureton's omitting
"from heaven"), in the Old Latin a. b. c. e. ff2. g1. g'\
and others, the Vulgate and iEthiopic, in some Mem
phitic, Thebaic, and Armenian manuscripts. It has
been said that these verses are rejected in Cod. K by
a hand so ancient as to be little less authoritative than
that of the first scribe, and certainly Tischendorf's
language lends some countenance to the notion. I
possess, however, through Mr Burgon's kindness, a
photograph of the whole page, which exhibits rude slight
curves at the beginning and end of the passage only,
and points nearly invisible throughout, both as likely
to have been scrawled fifty years since as fourteen
hundred. In the present case we are able to form such a
reasonable judgment on the origin of the variation, as is
seldom in our power. Cod. 69, the kinsman of 13. 124
named above (p. 82), transfers the two verses from their
proper place so as to follow Matt. xxvi. 39, and they
are thus found in the margin of Cod. C, set there by a
later hand, C itself being defective in this place. Now
when we look into Church Lectionaries, we discover that
this is the position the two verses occupy in every one
of them. They form a regular part of the late service
for the Thursday in Holy Week (Matt.xxvi. 21 — xxvii. 2),

152 DISCUSSION OF. IMPORTANT
and there, not elsewhere in lesson-books of the Gospels,
do they occur : these lessons, be it remembered, were
certainly settled in or before the fourth century.
Hence it arises that in ordinary manuscripts adapted
to liturgical use, as are so many of the later uncials
and cursives, asterisks (*), or obeli ( ~ ), whose use was
pretty much the same, were set in the margin to indi
cate the practice of passing them over in public reading.
A scholion in the margin of one cursive states that
some copies have them not, but pleads good authority
in their behalf: one manuscript of the Philoxenian
alleges in the margin that Gospels circulated at Alex
andria did not contain them, the fact being that they
are not found in Cyril's Homilies in Syriac, nor does
Athanasius refer to them. Yet the evidence of the
Fathers is early and express in their favour : namely,
Justin Martyr (with rare precision) and Ireneeus in
the second century, Hippolytus and Dionysius of Alex
andria in the third, Didymus and Epiphanius, Gregory
Nazianzen and Chrysostom in the fourth, Theodoret
a little later. Hilary, on the other hand, in the fourth
century, declared that the passage is wanting in very
many codices Greek and Latin, an assertion which
Jerome, as usual, repeats to the echo.
(20) Luke xxiii. 34. "Then said Jesus, Father,
forgive them, for they know not what they do." No
holy passage has been called into question on much
slighter grounds than this one, so fraught with religious
feeling, and approving itself to every true critical
instinct. It is omitted by Codd. BD and two not
very important cursives : one late uncial marks it
with an asterisk. Here again Cod. K seems to have

PASSAGES IN THE HOLY GOSPELS. 153
been touched by a recent hand, even more slightly
than in ch. xxii. 43, 44 : on the other side, the clause
was brought into D by a writer of about the ninth
century. To this scanty list against its genuineness
must be added the two Old Latin copies a. b. (though
doubtless the best of all), the Thebaic version, and
two Memphitic manuscripts examined by Canon
Lightfoot; eleven others exhibit the clause in their
text, two more in the margin. All other manuscripts,
uncials and cursives, have the passage without a
vestige of suspicion : Codd. KACLQ. 1. 33. 69 and
the rest, the four Syriac versions, the Old Latin codices
c. e. f. ff2. &c, the Vulgate, Armenian and iEthiopic
translations. As might have been anticipated, Patristic
authorities in its favour are express, varied, and
numerous : such are the dying words of S. James the
Just, reported by Eusebius after Hegesippus "who
lived," he says, "in the first succession to the Apostles";
Irenaaus and Origen in their Latin versions; the Apo
stolic Constitutions twice, the Clementine Homilies,
Chrysostom often, Hilary, Theodoret, John Damascene :
it is also recognised in the canons of Eusebius. The
difficulty really is to know how Cod. B and any Egyp
tian version came to omit the words ; for as to Cod. D
and certain Latins, there is quite a forest of short
clauses not contained in them, in the last chapter of
this Gospel, of the same kind as that noted in ch. x. 41,
42 (p. 147), as if they had followed some early recension
wherein such additions were not yet inserted ; an hy
pothesis (for it can be called no more) which we hazarded
before when speaking of Matt. xvi. 2, 3 (p. 127).
(21) John i. 18. "The only begotten Son, which

154 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT
is in the bosom of the Father." Instead of " the only
begotten Son" Tregelles, with Westcott and Hort,
ventures to set in the text what Lachmann had long
since placed in his margin, the startling novelty "God
only begotten," an expression whose doctrinal import
ance is obvious, and which it will require much proof
before we can persuade ourselves to accept it as
genuine. The testimony in its behalf is at first sight
very imposing, being Codd. KBC (by the first hand)
L. 33, Cod. ^ also omitting "which is"; of the versions
the Peshito and margin of the Philoxenian, the Roman
iEthiopic, and a host of Fathers, some expressly, as
Clement of Alexandria in the second century, Didymus
and Epiphanius in the fourth ; others by apparent
reference, as Gregory of Nyssa. Of the Coptic versions,
the Thebaic is defective here, the Memphitic reading
what may either be " God " or " of God," probably the
latter. The heretic Arius also upholds " God only be
gotten," which circumstance does not help to reconcile
us to a term that reverential minds instinctively shrink
from. For the Received text, since Cod. D is here
wanting, can be produced among manuscripts Cod. A
and the thirteen other uncials not yet enumerated, all
cursives except 33, the Curetonian and Jerusalem Syriac,
with the Philoxenian text, every copy of the Latin, the
Georgian and Slavonic, the Armenian and one form
of the iEthiopic, the Anglo-Saxon and Arabic. Of the
Greeks Athanasius repeatedly and Chrysostom, all
Latins from Tertullian downwards, make for "Son."
Origen and Eusebius might be cited on both sides.
"The only begotten Son" is a term familiar to S.
John (ch. iii. 16, 18; 1 John iv. 9); the alternative,

PASSAGES IN THE HOLY GOSPELS. 155
which one hardly likes to utter with the voice, occurs
absolutely nowhere else. Bengel's canon (p. 114) might
therefore seem applicable, and lead us to choose the
harder expression, but that it is a rule which must have
its limit somewhere, and has found it here. Every
one must feel the new reading to be false, even though
for the sake of consistency he may be forced to up
hold it. We are bound by no such stern law, and note
the present as a case wherein Cod. A and the mass
of copies, well supported by versions, afford us a purer
text than Codd. KBCL 33.
(22) John iii. 13. "The Son of man, which is in
heaven." Here again we have nearly the same manu
script evidence as in the preceding passage supporting
the novel reading, for removing from the text the
weighty clause "which is in heaven," this being the
most mysterious, yet one of the most glorious glimpses
afforded to us in Scripture of the nature of the Re
deemer on the side of His proper Divinity. Codd. CD
are here lacking to us, but Codd. KBC. 33 omit the
words, supported by a small fragment of the sixth
century, now at St Petersburg, called by the critics
Tb. Of the versions only the iEthiopic and one Mem
phitic manuscript are on this side. There is really
no Patristic evidence to set up against the clause,
for it can matter nothing that Eusebius might have
cited it and did not. Silence in such a case is of little
or no weight, as may appear from the circumstance
that Cyril of Alexandria, who alleges the words once,
passes them over once : Origen also (in the Latin)
neglects them once, but quotes them twice, once very
expressly. "Which is in heaven" appears in Cod. A

156 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT
(with a very slight variation by the first hand), all
other uncials and cursives, in all the rest of the versions,:
including the four Syriac, the Memphitic (the Thebaic
here failing us), the Latin and Armenian. Among the
Fathers it is quite a theological commonplace. Hip-
polytus (A.D. 220) draws from the passage its obvious
doctrinal inference, wherein he is followed twice
over by Hilary and after him by Epiphanius. In
Dionysius of Alexandria and Novatian of the third
century, Aphraates (A.D. 330), Didymus, Lucifer and
Chrysostom of the fourth, Theodoret of the fifth,
we have presented to us a consent of ecclesiastical
writers, as we had before of versions, from every part
of the Christian world, such as few impartial minds can
resist. Beyond all doubt, the Received text in this
instance rests on far surer ground than in ch. i. 18.
(23) John v. 1. " After this there was a feast
of the Jews." In S. John's Gospel we have clear
notices of three several passovers (ch. ii. 13; vi. 4;
xii. 1). Since "the feast of the Jews," even alone,
would probably, almost certainly indeed, mean another
passover, the second out of four during the Lord's
ministry, it is well to know on what authority rests the
definite article prefixed to " feast " in the Aldine frag
ment (John i. — vi.) published as early as 1504, as well as
in the Complutensian, the first printed New Testament
(1514), and upheld by Tischendorf, but which never
found a place in the Received text, because it was
not adopted by Erasmus. Internal evidence appears
to be in abeyance here, and it must be confessed that
manuscripts are very evenly balanced. For "the feast"
we can cite Codd. KCLA, at least six other uncials, the

PASSAGES IN THE HOLY GOSPELS. 157
cursives Codd. 1. 33 and full fifty-four others, with the
Memphitic and Thebaic versions, which alone of their
class can be employed in regard to the article, since the
Coptic language has both the definite and indefinite
in use. Irenseus (in the Latin) insists on this being
the second passover, but so does Cod. A (which reads
"of unleavened bread" for "of the Jews") and another
authority, although they omit the article. It is wanting
in Codd. ABD and seven other uncials, in Cod. 69
and pretty many other cursives. Of the Fathers,
Cyril of Alexandria varies, Origen looks doubtful,
Chrysostom and Cyril once understand the feast as
the Pentecost, and so would not read the article. With
some hesitation we shall incline to take "the feast"
•as on the whole the more likely reading.
(24) John v. 3, 4. The last clause of ver. 3
"waiting for the moving of the water" and the whole
of ver. 4 are omitted, not without considerable reason,
by Tischendorf, Tregelles, Westcott and Hort. Codd.
KBC (by the first hand) 157 and another cursive reject
the whole; Cod. A (by the first hand) L and one recent
cursive pass over the last clause of ver. 3, which cer
tainly wears the semblance of a gloss : Codd. D. 33
do not contain ver. 4, and this alone is called into
suspicion by means of asterisks or obeli (employed
without much discrimination) in two uncials, nineteen
cursives, the margin of the Philoxenian, and Armenian
manuscripts. One other uncial has an asterisk in
the margin throughout, but the passage is contained
in C (by the third hand), in twelve uncials, (Cod. I,
a fragment taken by Tischendorf to St Petersburg, alone
being as old as the sixth century), and all known

158 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT
cursives not before referred to, but all with that ex
treme variation in details which experience shews to
be itself a symptom unfavourable to genuineness. The
versions are not so unequally divided. The passage
is absent from Cureton's Syriac, the Thebaic, thirteen
of Canon Lightfoot's Memphitic manuscripts (three
others, however, contain it in the text, two in the
margin), from some Armenian codices,/, and others of
the Old Latin and a few of the Vulgate. The Roman
iEthiopic leaves out as much as the Philoxenian
margin obelizes. The Peshito and Jerusalem Syriac,
with the Philoxenian text, acknowledge the verses in
full, as do nearly all the Latins. Tertullian, in par^
ticUlar, plainly speaks of the angel's interposition to stir
the pool of Bethsaida (as it is in Cod. B, the Latin c„
and the Vulgate) ; Ambrose twice quotes the place : it
was known to Didymus, to Chrysostom and Cyril, to
Euthymius and Theophylact in later times. Nonnus,
however, who made a metrical paraphrase of the
Gospel history in the fifth century, does not touch an
incident so well calculated to adorn his poem. The
last clause of ver. 3 stands on a different footing from
ver. 4, which Dean Alford regarded as "an insertion to
complete what the narrative implied with reference to
the popular belief." It is evident that the passage
was known early, widely diffused, and extensively
received : but it is well-nigh impossible, in the face of
hostile evidence so ancient and varied, to regard it as a
genuine portion of S. John's Gospel.
(25) John vii. 8. '' I go not up yet unto this
feast." " Yet " is omitted by the critical editors Tischen
dorf and Tregelles, though Westcott and Hort are

PASSAGES IN THE HOLY GOSPELS. 15D
sufficiently satisfied with it to retain it in the text,
placing the simple "not" in their margin. The
latter reading must surely be the true one. This
passage, as is well known, was one of several which
provoked the " bark " of Porphyry, the most acute
adversary encountered by Christianity in early times
[d. 304]. " He said he would not go, yet did what he
said he would not do : " thus Jerome represents Por
phyry's objection to the conduct of our Lord, who
on this ground is impeached of levity and fickleness.
It is manifest, therefore, that both Porphyry the foe
and Jerome the champion of our faith, must have read
"not" in their copies: "not yet" would rather be
a gentle intimation that what He would not do then,
He would do hereafter. Accordingly we find " not " in
Codd. KD, in four other uncial copies and three or
four cursives, Codd. AC being both defective here : to
these add Cureton's Syriac, the Memphitic, the best
codices of the Old Latin (a. b. c. e. ff2., &c), and Vul
gate, the Armenian and iEthiopic, the Georgian and
Slavonic, Anglo-Saxon and Persic. Thus also Epi-
phanius and Chrysostom in the fourth century, Cyril
in the fifth, each of them feeling the difficulty, and
meeting it in his own way. No hesitation would have
been felt in adopting a reading, at once the harder in
itself, and the only one that will suit the circumstances
of the case, had not the wilful and palpable correction
" not yet" been upheld by Codd. BLT (see p. 150, note),
the mass of later uncials, all cursives save four, by the
Peshito Syriac and the Arabic of Erpenius, which even
in the Gospels is much moulded on it, by the Jerusalem
and Philoxenian Syriac both text and margin, the

160 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT
Thebaic, Gothic, a few Old Latin codices (as /), and
some of the Vulgate. Basil cites the same reading,
but not, as it would seem, expressly. It is seldom that
we can trace so clearly as in this instance the date
and origin of aD important corruption, which could not
have arisen accidentally, but was rather the work of
injudicious, if not of dishonest, zeal.
(26) John vii. 53 — viii. 11. The last passage
which time will permit us to examine in the Gospels
is the celebrated paragraph concerning the adulteress,
which has been interposed between ch. vii. 52 and
ch. viii. 12. We may broadly assert that modern critics
have come to a unanimous, or almost unanimous, con
clusion, first, that it does not belong to the place where
it is usually read ; secondly, that it is no idle fable, no
vulgar forgery, but a genuine apostolic or primitive
record of what actually took place. The state of the
evidence is so utterly unlike what we have found or
shall find elsewhere in the New Testament, that no
other verdict than this can well be pronounced. As
we saw in the text last considered, Codd. AC are de
fective just here, but by estimating the vacant room
left by the lost leaves of each, it is quite certain that
so long a passage as this one of twelve verses could
not have been contained in them. Thus we can say
that Codd. KABCT (see p. 150, note) omit them alto
gether ; Codd. LA do the same, but leave a void space
too small to hold them, before which space the first
hand of A had begun to write ch. viii. 12. One other
uncial also omits them (Cod. X at Munich, of the
ninth or tenth century), yet "since this Codex is
nothing but a commentary on the Gospel, as read in

PASSAGES IN THE HOLY GOSPELS. 161
public," to use Mr Burgon's language, it could not well
do otherwise. Of cursive manuscripts no less than
fifty-eight are cited as not containing the paragraph,
although eight of them have it in a later hand ; while
three more omit ch. viii. 3 — 11, though not the three
preceding verses. The passage (all or a part of it) is
noted as doubtful by asterisks or obeli in five uncials
and fifty-nine cursives, in the margin of many of which
are scholia, explaining that the section so obelized is
not in some, or in many, or in most, copies, but is ac
knowledged in the Apostolic Constitutions, whose ge
nuineness the ancients did not question : other scholia
note its absence from the commentaries of Chrysostom,
Cyril of Alexandria, and Theodore of Mopsuestia. Next
come the manuscripts which have the verses, though
not in their present place. One cursive sets them
after ch. vii. 36. The case of Ferrar's group (13. 69.
124. 346) has been stated before (p. 82), and that
arrangement may be either supported or accounted for
(as the case may be) by certain verbal similitudes
subsisting between Luke xxi. 37, 38 and John viii. 1, 2
in the Greek. Cod. 1 and ten more cursives banish
the whole paragraph to the end of S. John's Gospel :
four or five others supply only ch. viii. 3 — 1 1 at the
end, as if ch. vii. 53 — viii. 2 were not doubtful. In
Lectionaries the section was never read as a part of
the lesson for the day of Pentecost, but was reserved
for the Saints' days of penitent women, such as Theo
dora (Sept. 18), or Pelagia (Oct. 8). In the Jerusalem
Syriac (see p. 94), the lesson for Pentecost ended at
ch. viii. 2, ver. 3 — 11 being assigned to S. Euphemia's
day (Sept. 16). Against this weight of hostile testi-
jnony we can oppose but Cod. D as the most ancient
S. L. 11

162 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT
which contains the passage in any shape, six later
uncials, and 308 cursives expressly cited, mainly by
Scholz. But here again (see p. 158), the variations of
the manuscripts from Cod. D and from each other far
exceed any thing of the kind observed elsewhere, and
largely subtract from the authority which mere numbers
might have lent to their united evidence.
With regard to the versions, the case of the Jeru
salem Syriac has been stated. Neither the genuine
Peshito nor the Philoxenian contain the paragraph,
although it was forcibly brought into the former in
Walton's or the London Polyglott (1657) from a manu
script (now lost) which belonged to Archbishop Ussher,
and was inserted in the latter from another source : it
is also found in a Syriac codex now at Paris, the respec
tive additions being referred to Maras, Bishop of
Amida, A.D. 622, and to the Abbot Mar Paulus. The
twelve verses are not in the Thebaic, but in many, per
haps most, copies of the Memphitic, an unlooked-for
result of Canon Lightfoot's recent enquiries. The Old
Latin too is divided. The passage is wanting in a. f.
and two others : in b the whole text from ch. vii. 44 to
ch. viii. 12 has been wilfully erased ; but c. e. ff2. g.
and others, together with the Vulgate in all its forms,
retain the section, as do the iEthiopic, Slavonic,
Anglo-Saxon, Arabic and Persic, whereof one copy
transfers it to ch. x. It does not exist in the Gothic,
.or in the best Armenian codices or editions.
Of Patristic support also the passage is singularly
void. As was mentioned by the scholia, the Apostolic
Constitutions, a work in its existing shape dating from
.the third or fourth century, clearly allude to it ; but it
.is overpassed most unaccountably by Chrysostom and

PASSAGES IN THE HOLY GOSPELS. 163
the younger Cyril. Euthymius Zigabenus in the
twelfth century is the first of the Greeks to cite it in
its place, yet even he declares that in the correct copies
it is either not found at all or obelized, as being an in
terpolation and addition. Even when the history itself
is named, as by Eusebius after Papias, it is regarded as
an extract from the Gospel to the Hebrews, not as
a portion of canonical Scripture. Add thereto, that it is
not until the ninth century that we find the number of 18
Greek chapters in S. John increased to 19 by the inser
tion in manuscripts of ch. x, " concerning the adulteress."
Among the Latins, its place in so many copies of
their vernacular translation procured it more general
favour. Jerome declares that it was found in his time
" in many Greek and Latin codices." Ambrose cites
it, and Augustine complains of certain persons "of weak
faith, or rather enemies of the true faith " who removed
it from their copies (perhaps after the rude fashion
seen in cod. b), "fearing, I suppose, that impunity for
sin might be given to their women."
We are far from denying that the ethical scruple
glanced at by Augustine was entirely without weight,
and the absence of the paragraph from the lesson for
the day of Pentecost probably favoured its omission
from late codices accommodated, as most of them were,
to ecclesiastical use; but the great preponderance of
the best Greek manuscripts against it, the wide varia
tions observed between the copies which contain it,
-the ambiguous verdict of the best translations, and the
deep silence of the Greek Fathers about so remarkable
a narrative, forbid our regarding this most interesting
and beautiful section as originally, or of right, belong
ing to the place wherein it stands. 11—2

LECTURE VI.

DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN THE PORTIONS
OF THE NEW TESTAMENT WHICH FOLLOW THE GOSPELS.
In the preceding Lecture I brought before you some
of the most interesting questions which have reference
to the text of the Holy Gospels, selecting for your
consideration out of a far greater number those pas
sages which have been the subjects of the most anxious
controversy, or which, by reason of their intrinsic
importance, an intelligent student of the sacred Scrip
tures would most desire to examine and be instructed
in. The same plan shall be followed in the present
Lecture with regard to those books of the New Testa
ment which follow the Gospels, not indeed in the
order of the dates at which they were severally written,
but according to the distribution of subjects and the
arrangement of our common Bibles. Let us first take
a few specimens from the last of the historical books,
the Acts of the Apostles, more than one place of which
(ch. viii. 37; xii. 25; xiii. 18) we have already submitted
to your scrutiny (pp. 43, 73, 87).
(1) Acts xi. 20. "And some of them were men
of Cyprus and Cyrene, which, when they were come
to Antioch, spake unto the Grecians, preaching the

DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES. 165
Lord Jesus." The careful scholars who made our
Authorized version of the New Testament, departing
in this respect from earlier English translators, and
indeed from their own practice in the Old Testament
and the Apocrypha, attempted to imitate the Greek
original by drawing a refined distinction between
"Greeks" or Hellenes and "Grecians" or Hellenistce.
The two cognate words doubtless meant very different
things. A Greek was either a Hellen by race, or a
heathen by religion, so that S. Mark says of the poor
woman whose daughter was healed that she was "a
Greek, a Syrophoenician by nation" (ch. vii. 26): her
worship was paganism, while by birth she was a
Canaanite. The Hellenists, or Grecians, on the contrary,
were born Jews, living in foreign lands, speaking the
Greek as vernacular in the countries where they
sojourned, using the Greek Septuagint version of the
Hebrew Bible in the service of the synagogue : very
probably they neither understood nor sought to under
stand any other. Now which of these very different
orders of men is spoken of in the passage before us ?
The Received text has "Hellenistas," our Authorized
version renders "Grecians" accordingly. But it seems
plain that the reading is erroneous, and that "Greeks,"
"Hellenes," should take its place. The context indeed
hardly allows us a choice. Immediately after the call of
the Gentiles to the privileges of the Gospel was acknow
ledged and acquiesced in by the brethren at Jerusalem
(ver. 18), we read that some who had been scattered
abroad years before, now went about preaching the word
to Jews only. In this there was nothing new. There
bad been " Hellenists," that is, Greek-speaking Jews,

166 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN
among them long since (ch. vi. 1), and to say that
these were again preached to was not at all strange :
the marvel is contained in ver. 20, with which we
are now concerned. Translated closely this verse
should run "But there were some of them, men of
Cyprus and Cyrene, which, when they were come to
Antioch, spake unto the Greeks also " : ("also " con
veying additional information), and preached too with
such success in converting these heathen Greeks, that
Gentile Christians first obtained at Antioch the name,
no longer of Nazarenes (ch. xxiv. 5), but of Christians
(ch. xi. 26). The meaning being thus clear, and the
Received text mistaken, we enquire what autho
rities maintain the true reading ? They are good in
themselves, although few in number, being only Codd.
AD (by the first hand), a single cursive, though that one
of first-rate excellence, the Peshito Syriac, the Arme
nian, perhaps the ^Ethiopia Some versions, as might
have been expected, overlook entirely the difference
between Hellenes and Hellenists, and are useless to
us here : the Peshito, in the other two places where
the term Hellenist occurs, has " Greek disciples " in
ch. vi. 1, "those Jews who knew Greek" (a fair
definition) in ch. ix. 29, but simply " Greeks " here.
Eusebius also has " Greeks," and though Chrysostom's
text reads " Hellenists," yet his commentary shews
that he had "Hellenes" in the copy before him, alL
the more surely because he is perplexed how to ex
pound it: his words are echoed by GEcumenius and
Theophylact. Here then is a case wherein a few wit
nesses preserve the only reading that can be true
against a large majority which vouch for the false.

THE LATTER PART OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 167
"Hellenists" is found in BE, in D according to a
rather late corrector, in the three more recent uncials,
in all cursives save one (including even 13 1. 61, see p. 83).
Cod. C is defective here, and the wonderful blunder
of Cod. K ("Evangelists," p. 47) suggests the notion
that its archetype agreed with B.
(2) Acts xiii. 32, 33. "The promise which was
made unto the fathers, God hath fulfilled the same
unto us their children." This reads smoothly enough
as spoken by S. Paul to the Jews assembled in their
synagogue at Antioch in Pisidia : when we come to
look into the state of documentary evidence, it will
appear too smooth to be true. For "us their children "
we find "our children" in the five great uncials KABCD,
but apparently in no cursive whatever, in the Vulgate
version (one copy reading "your" for "our" by a
familiar itacism, see p. 41), in the iEthiopic, in Hilary,
Ambrose, and the Venerable Bede after their own
Latin version. The Thebaic omits "us," the Mem
phitic "us their," the latter of which pronouns would
in Greek be fully implied. The Received text is that
of the third hand of C (which is no great authority),
of Cod. E, for once in opposition to Bede (p. 72), of
the three other uncials extant in this book, of all
cursives, of the two Syriac (Peshito and Philoxenian,
the other two having now failed us) and Armenian
1 It unfortunately happens that cursive manuscripts which contain
more than one portion of the New Testament have seldom the same
numeral assigned to them throughout. Thus the great Cod. 33 of
the Gospels (p. 80) in the Acts and Catholic Epistles is known as 13,
in S. Paul as 17 : the Leicester copy, 69 of the Gospels (p. 81) is
called 31 in the Acts and Catholic Epistles, 37 in S. Paul, 14 in the
Apocalypse.

168 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN
versions, of the catenas of the Fathers with Chrysostom
and Theophylact. Of course Bengel's canon (p. 114)
might here be brought into play, but the result is
so harsh as to tempt us to suspect that the primitive
reading of the passage was "unto us" simply, "their
children" being annexed as a pertinent gloss. Thus
would all variations be well accounted for (Canon v,
p. 116), only that such a conclusion cannot be accepted
as anything better than plausible conjecture in the face
of the fact that "us" alone is read only in one cursive,
and that one of no particular value.
(3) Acts xiii. 33. "As it is also written in the
second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I
begotten thee." The variation which commended
itself to the acute and judicious Griesbach, and to
several editors after him, is "the first psalm," and so,
in fact, Erasmus deliberately chose to have it in his
first published Greek Testament. No better example
than this can well be given of the danger of taking
up a reading because it is difficult (Canon 1, p. 114)
when documentary evidence tells strongly against it.
It is well known that the first and second Psalms,
although they have little in common as regards style
and tone, and were probably composed at different
periods, were sometimes reckoned by the ancients as
one, for which arrangement Bede assigns the fanciful
reason that, beginning as it does with a beatitude
"Blessed is the man," &c, the first Psalm would thus
end with one: "Blessed are all they that put their
trust in him." Now arises the question whether the
Apostle, in using what is in our present Bibles Ps. ii,
7, has cited it as from the second Psalm or from the

THE LA TTER PART OF THE NE W TESTAMENT. 1 6 9
first. For the word "second" of the common text,
which with Westcott and Hort we are content to
abide by, may be alleged (with some slight change in
the order of the Greek) Codd. KABOE. 13. 61 (see p. 83),
all other uncials and cursives, D only excepted, which
Jhas "first," in company with Tertullian, Cyprian,
Hilary (who enters into a long explanation of the
matter), and certain Latin manuscripts known to Bede-
Nor is the variation exclusively western, for Origen,
Eusebius, and certain Greek catenas maintain it
also, Eusebius pronouncing, with reference to the
beatitudes, that "whereas the sentiment was the same
in both, it was no wonder that the Hebrews joined the
two Psalms together." The fact is, that the practice
of reckoning the two Psalms, now in conjunction, now
separate, existed as early as Justin Martyr's time, whose
Old Testament quotations are almost as loose as those
in the New. There is no cause, therefore, here to
follow Cod. D against all the rest of the manuscripts
and versions.
(4) Acts xv. 34. "Notwithstanding it pleased
Silas to abide there still." We have in this verse an
addition to the text of the Acts which is condemned
at once by the lack of sufficient external authority,
and by the numerous variations of the form in which
it appears in the copies that contain it. Indeed one
can almost trace its growth, and in its existing shape
(as Mill saw long since) it can be regarded as nothing
else than a gloss brought in from the margin, designed
to explain how Silas, notwithstanding his being sent
away with Judas from Antioch to the Apostles at
Jerusalem (ver. 33), was soon afterwards at hand,

170 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN
ready to be chosen by S. Paul as a companion in
travel (ver. 40). The verse is wholly wanting in Codd.
KABE and three later uncials, in Codd. 31 (p. 167,
note), 61 and full fifty-six other cursives : indeed it
would scarcely have been admitted into the Received
text at all, but that Erasmus found it, as he found ch. viii.
37 (p. 73), in the margin of quite a modern Basle cur
sive which he used. Of the versions it is absent from the
Peshito Syriac (onlythat certain editors have thrust their
own translation of the Greek into the text), from the
Memphitic, Polyglott Arabic, the best copies of the Latin
Vulgate (am. fuld., see p. 103), and Slavonic : it is
not found in Chrysostom's commentary, or in one
form of Theophylact's. When it does appear, as we
just said, it is instructive to note the several shapes
that the verse gradually assumes. In Cod. C and
many cursives (13 being among them) it runs " Not
withstanding it seemed good to Silas to await them":
the Complutensian Polyglott and a few cursives vir
tually resemble Erasmus and the Received text, "to
abide there still": thus it stands in the Thebaic (where
we might not have looked for it), in the later Syriac with
an asterisk (p. 93), in Erpenius' Arabic, GUcumenius'
commentary, and one form of Theophylact's. Cod. D
adds a new clause to the verse as given by Cod. C
"but Judas went alone," and is followed by one or
two Latin codices, some forms of the Armenian and
Slavonic editions. Cassiodorus (of the sixth century)
and Pope Clement's Vulgate add to all this one word
more "But it pleased Silas to abide there; but Judas
alone departed to Jerusalem." The iEthiopic has
something different from them all, "And Paul per.

THE LATTER PART OF THE NE W TESTAMENT. 1 7 1
sisted in remaining," with or without a final "there."
You know by this time what conclusion to draw from
these glaring discrepancies in our authorities (see
pp. 158, 162).
(5) Acts xvi. 7. "But the Spirit suffered them
not." For "the Spirit," say rather, "the Spirit of
Jesus"; the evidence in favour of this addition being
so overwhelming that it is not easy to conjecture'how
it ever fell out of the text: "the Spirit of Christ"
in Rom viii. 9 is a close and satisfactory parallel. The
blessed name is read in Codd. KABDE, in the valuable
second hand of C (p. 63), in Codd. 13. 31. 61 and
six or more other cursives, in both Syriac, the Mem
phitic, the Vulgate (except a single copy), the iEthio-
pic, three codices of the Armenian. But this last
version is quite unsettled on the point : two of its
manuscripts read "Christ," as in the passage above
cited from S. Paul; six "the Holy Spirit" withEpipha-
nius; three have nothing added to "Spirit." Cod. C
and the dissenting copy of the Vulgate read "of the
Lord"; but the catenas, with Didymus and Cyril of
Alexandria, are with the five great uncials. With the
Received text side the three junior uncials here extant,
the mass of the cursives, the Thebaic (again found with
the moderns), Chrysostom and Theophylact. The
whole clause is omitted in two ordinary cursives.
(6) Acts xx. 28. "To feed the Church of God,
which he hath purchased with his own blood." Nothing
but familiarity with these solemn words could prevent
our feeling them to be very startling, yet the result
of recent criticism has been to uphold them as they
stand. Of the several various readings presented to us

172 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN
by existing documents, only two can come into com
petition, namely, "the Church of God," and "the Church
of the Lord," as seen in the extracts above given,
pp. 58, 72 : they differ in the abridged form of Greek
writing only by a single letter ©T (GD) and KT (LD),
The Received text is maintained by Codd. ^B, at least
14 cursives (but Cod. 61 is here defective), by every copy
of the Latin Vulgate save that in the Complutensian
Polyglott, which was probably altered from the parallel
Greek, by three manuscripts of the Peshito Syriac and
the Philoxenian text. The alternative "Lord" is
stronger in numbers if not in real power : Codd. ACDE
(and the Latin versions of the last two in spite of the
Vulgate), sixteen cursives (including 13, the best
surviving), some of the catenas, the Memphitic, Thebaic,
and Philoxenian margin, the Armenian, perhaps one
form of the iEthiopic. Its other form, with most manu
scripts and editions of the Peshito, Erpenius' Arabic
(p. 176, note), Origen once, four copies of Athanasius,
and Theodoret twice, read "Christ"; the Old Latin m.
(p. 101) "the Lord Christ." Not to mention other
variations still more slightly countenanced, we come
to "the Lord God," given by the great majority of
Greek codices, namely, the third hand of C, the three
later uncials, and considerably more than a hundred
cursives. This is found in the Complutensian Polyglott,
but in no version except the Slavonic, and no ecclesias
tical writer before Theophylact in the eleventh century.
It is manifestly a composite reading, devised for
reconciling the two earlier "God" and "Lord," which
alone deserve serious discussion, as between them the
chief uncials are divided, KB on the one hand, ACDE

THE LATTER PART OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 173
on the other. Here, therefore, is a case in which
Patristic authority should have more than usual weight,
and when we find that so bold a term as "the blood
of God" occurs not only in Tertullian but in the purest
text of Ignatius [A.D. 107], though afterwards softened
into "Christ," we cannot help feeling that nothing
short of the express language of Scripture could have
brought it so early into vogue : even as it is, the precise
expression was censured by Origen and others after
him. Manuscripts of Athanasius fluctuate between
"God," "the Lord" and "Christ," as do those of
Chrysostom and Theophylact in part. Basil the Great
and Epiphanius of the fourth century also prefer "God,"
with Ambrose and the Latins after their own version
of Scripture. For "the Lord" the chief evidence would
be that of Irenaeus, only that he is here extant only
in an old Latin translation (p. 108), and it has been
alleged that the current of his argument proves that
he had "God" in his Greek text. "Lord" is found too
in the Apostolical Constitutions (p. 162), in Eusebius
and Didymus, in Lucifer of Cagliari, Jerome and
Augustine (the Latin Bible notwithstanding), all of
the fourth century; possibly in Theodoret a little later.
Ammonius (a.d. 220) is quoted in the catenas to the
same purport.
Where the choice is so difficult, internal considera
tions will be sure to determine the judgment of critics.
It seems fair to say that all which uphold the com
bination "the Lord God" virtually make for the
harder form, which alone could have given offence.
There is force also in Dean Alford's remark that " the
Church of the Lord" would have fully satisfied the

174 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN
orthodox, and have laid them under no temptation
to change it, whereas the alternative "the Church
of God" would be sure to be tampered with by
those whose opinions were absolutely incompatible
with it.
(7) Acts xxvii. 37. "And we were in all in the
ship, two hundred threescore and sixteen souls." Here
Westcott and Hort have received for 276 the variation
76, placing the higher number in the margin. Their
only support is Cod. B and the Thebaic version, which
are not unfrequently together without other company.
The change was plainly resorted to by those who were
slow to believe that a heavy laden corn-ship (ver. 6,
18) would contain so many souls. But vessels of this
kind were very large. One that found its way to the
Pirasus in Lucian's time (about A.D. 150), being
driven out of its course from Alexandria to Italy,
cannot be brought below 1300 tons burden ; and no
modern can easily conceive the wretched overcrowding of
an ancient ship. Josephus, a year or two later (A. D. 63),
was wrecked in the Adriatic with 600 on board. Add
to this that S. Luke wishes to impress on us the fact
that out of so large a party all were saved, whereas 76
would have been very few.
Of the rest of our authorities, Codd. KC (DE have
now failed us), three later uncials and all cursives
gave one have 276; A reads 275; Cod. 31 (the Leicester
copy) 270; one form of the iEthiopic "about 206," the
Memphitic in one codex 176, in another the incredible
number 876. Epiphanius comes nearest to Cod. B
" about 70 " : for the more specific 76 " about " would
be less suited.

THE LATTER PART OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 175
The source of all these variations is, beyond ques
tion, the habit of expressing numbers in ancient
documents by letters used as figures. Of this practice,
once very prevalent, many traces remain in surviving
copies, such as KD and others. Irenasus recognises it
when treating of the number of the beast, whether 666
or 616 (Rev. xiii. 18), in a passage we have already
referred to (p. 110). It is no doubt the source of many
discrepancies observed in parallel portions of the Old
Testament. Here the omission or insertion of a single
letter (w : omega) would make all the difference between
"276" (cor) and "about 76" (wcor).
(8) Rom. v. 1. " Therefore being justified by faith'
we have peace with God." The closer the context of
this passage is examined, the plainer it will appear that
inference from preceding statements, not vague or
general exhortation, is the Apostle's purpose. Yet
the majority of our best authorities, in the place of
" we have " read " let us have," the difference between
the two being the substitution of the long vowel omega
for the short omicron (see p. 135). The hortatory form is
adopted by Codd. KB (the former corrected by an early
hand, the latter by one later) ACDE (but E of S. Paul
is of no weight, p. 70), two other uncials, full thirty
cursives (17. 37 being among them: see p. 167, note),
the Peshito possibly, the Memphitic (the Thebaic is
not extant), all forms of the Latin, the iEthiopic,
the Arabic, and Chrysostom. The supporters of the
indicative are Codd. FG (the rather as they oppose
their own Latin versions), another uncial, and the
great majority of the cursives, with Epiphanius, Cyril
of Alexandria, and the Slavonic version. The printed

176 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN
Philoxenian strangely combines both "let us have,
we have." Here, of course, save for special reasons,
no one would doubt to adopt the hortatory form, even
though the resulting sense is so comparatively poor.
We cannot help remembering, however, that although
the itacism (p. 39) which substitutes the long o for the
short, and the converse, is not so common in the most
ancient copies as in later, yet no manuscripts are quite
free from it, and we feel persuaded that the various
reading in this verse has its origin in that fruitful
source of error. In Heb. xii. 28, " we have grace," which
is there quite inadmissible, has no mean support in
stead of "let us have" of the Received text. The
case of 1 Cor. xv. 49 we will consider in its proper
order. (9) Rom. xiii. 9. " Thou shalt not bear false wit
ness." The ninth commandment is omitted by Codd.
ABD(E)FG, one later uncial, thirty-four cursives at
least, including 17 (seep. 167, note) and 47 (an excellent
Bodleian cursive, recently collated anew by Tregelles), by
the Peshito Syriac and Erpenius' Arabic1 (which sets the
sixth commandment before the seventh), the Thebaic
(which omits the seventh also), by the best copies of the
Vulgate version (am.fuld., &c, p. 103), the Gothic, by
Clement of Alexandria (twice), by Origen twice (but he
has it once, and once omits " thou shalt not covet " also).,
by Cyriland Theodoret,by Augustine, Ambrose, and some
other Latins; nor does it appear in the Complutensian
1 This Arabic version, whatever independent value it may possess
in the Gospels (pp. 106, 159), is in the Acts and Epistles a close
rendering from the Peshito, and is of no use but to ascertain the true
reading of the latter.

THE LA TTER PART OF THE NE W TESTAMENT. 177
edition. Erasmus, however, brought it into the Received
text, Avhere it rests on the support of Cod. K, of the
single remaining later uncial, of the majority, as it
would seem, of the cursives, including 37 (see p. 1 67, note) :
one cursive places it before the eighth commandment.
Its retention is supported by the Philoxenian Syriac
(wherein "thou shalt not covet" precedes), the Mem
phitic, the Clementine Vulgate and most of its manu
scripts, some being good, the Armenian and ^Ethiopia
Chrysostom has the ninth, but omits the tenth com
mandment, and such constant variation would serve to
shew that something is wrong (see p. 158).
The clause might very well have been lost by the
hommoteleuton see p. (133), but on the other hand there
is a natural tendency to enlarge a list like this (Canon II.
p. 115) by the addition of a member which might seem
to have been accidently overlooked. We must here, as
often, prefer the Complutensian text to that edited by
Erasmus. (10) Rom. xvi. 5. " Epasnetus, who is the first-fruits
of Achaia unto Christ." But then the household of
Stephanas was the first-fruits of Achaia (1 Cor. xvi. 15),
and S. Paul is now writing from Corinth, the capital of
that province (ver. 1, &c). The latter circumstance
seems to have suggested "Achaia" as an alternative
reading:, for "Asia" is no doubt that of the true text,
being supported by Codd. KABCD (by the first hand)
EFG, two good cursives, the Vulgate, Memphitic (the
Thebaic being lost), Armenian, ^Ethiopic, Origen in the
Latin, but very expressly, all Latin Fathers after their own
version, and John Damascene. The evidence for "Achaia"
is much weaker, namely the second hand of Cod. D, again
S. L. 12

178 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN
corrected by the third hand which E follows (p. 71),
the two later uncials, nearly all the cursives (even 17.
37. 47), both Syriac versions, and one excellent manu
script of the Vulgate, with Chrysostom, Theodoret,
(Ecumehius and Theophylact. Where the five great
codices are unanimous, as here, there can be no doubt
that we are bound to follow them, even though their
reading were not, as it is, intrinsically preferable; but
the Peshito vouches for the antiquitj' of the variation
"Achaia," and Codd. 17. 37 are not often found in
opposition to the oldest uncials.
(11) Rom. xvi. 25—27. To what part of the Epistle
to the Romans ought this noble doxology to be an
nexed ? In the Received text, although it is set at
the end, there are three other verses which, with more
or less reason, have been regarded as suitable con
clusions to this divine Epistle (ch. xv. 33 ; xvi. 20, 24)1 ;
so that M. Re"nan has propounded a theory which
Canon Lightfoot has sufficiently disposed of, that we
have here combined in one the endings of four several
letters, addressed to four different Churches, each of
them containing the first fourteen chapters nearly
unchanged, with appropriate endings and personal
allusions peculiar to each. It is enough to reply to
this ingenious hypothesis that ch. xv. 33, whether with
or without the final "Amen" (which is omitted in Codd.
AFG, Greek and Latin, and three cursives), " Now the
God of peace be with you all," occurs in the body of
one (Phil. iv. 9), not at the end of another (2 Cor. xiii.
11) of S. Paul's letters, and so affords M. Re"nan no
1 "Thus loth to depart is the tune of all loving friends," is dear
old Fuller's comment on the Apostle's reiterated farewells.

THE LATTER PART OF THE NE W TESTAMENT. 179
help ; while with respect to the two similar verses in
ch. xvi., no really ancient authorities recognise both.
The chief of them (Codd. KABC), Origen, the Mem
phitic, iEthiopic, and best copies of the Vulgate (am.
fuld., &c, p. 103) put " The grace of our Lord Jesus
Christ be with you" at the end of ver. 20 and not at
the end of ver. 24, whereas Codd. DEFG, not receiving
it in ver. 20, retain it in the latter place. Thus we
have forms of speech adapted for the close of this great
Epistle in two places (ch. xvi. 20 ; 25 — 27), not in four.
But another complication now comes into view.
The doxology comprised in ver. 25 — 27 is so completely
in S. Paul's style and manner, that no one can doubt
its authenticity, yet manuscripts and versions vary
as to the position which it ought to occupy. In Codd.
KBCDE, the Latin of F, with the Vulgate to which it
belongs (p. 76), in the Peshito, Memphitic and iEthiopic
versions, it is placed at the end, as in the Received
text: in Cod. G (but not in its associate F, p. 75")
there is a space about sufficient to contain it left at the
end of ch. xiv., and there the three verses are found
in one late uncial and in quite a large majority of the
cursives (including Codd. 37. 47, see p. 176), as also in
the Philoxenian Syriac and one form of the Arabic, in
Chrysostom, Cyril of Alexandria, Theodoret and John
Damascene ; and this too although the connection be
tween ch. xiv. and ch. xv. is manifestly of the closest
nature. More remarkable still it is to find that Cod. A
and another uncial, Cod. 17 the best of the cursives and
one other, Armenian manuscripts and printed books,
read the doxology in both positions. Origen especially
records the fact that some copies had it at the close of
12—2

180 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN
ch. xiv., others at the end of the Epistle, to which latter
arrangement he seems to lean. In F it is wholly absent
in both Greek and Latin after ch. xiv, in Greek after
ch. xvi. 24. There is no space in Cod. G between
" Amen " ch. xvi. 24 and the subscription to the Epistle.
All this variation points to something we cannot
well understand, and the resuming in ch. xv. 1 of the
subject treated of in ch. xiv. will serve to shew that the
original documents which put the doxology in that
situation must there have ended the letter. Hence it
has been plausibly conjectured that S. Paul set forth
this great treatise in two separate forms; the first
addressed to the Roman Church, precisely in the shape
we now have it ; the other designed, like that to the
Ephesians, for more general circulation, the two con
cluding chapters being now withheld, as being of local
and passing interest. This supposition is countenanced
by the fact that Cod. G omits the words "in Rome" in
ch. i. 7, 15 (confirmed in ch. i. 7 by a marginal note of
Cod. 47 : see p. 176), just as in Eph. i. 1, "in Ephesus"
is omitted in Codd. KB and the important second hand
of one cursive (67). At any rate we may adopt this
theory from Canon Lightfoot as a provisional expedient ;
although it may not be necessary, nor indeed most agree
able to the facts of the case, to deny that the doxology
was included in S. Paul's earliest recension of the Epi
stle to the Romans.
(12) 1 Cor. xi. 24. "And when he had given
thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat : this is my
body which is broken for you." Here the participle
"broken" is rejected by most modern critics on the
weighty evidence of Codd. KABC. 17, and the second

THE LATTER PART OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 181
hand of 67, with no other support than one form
of the Armenian, Cyril of Alexandria and Fulgentius in
the fifth century, and Theodoret's report of Athanasius.
Cod. D, like its more celebrated namesake (p. 185), is
rather fond of synonyms, and for "broken" reads
"bruised" by the first hand. Every other authority
besides the six afore-named manuscripts supplies some
thing or other, for indeed the expression " which is for
you," almost intolerably bald and harsh in Greek, would
be impossible in any other language. Hence later
hands in Codd. KCD (and consequently E, p. 71) have
" broken," which is also read by Codd. FG and the three
other uncials containing this chapter, by all cursives
except the two afore-said, by both Syriac, the Gothic
and the other Armenian, which was altered from the
Latin. Of those Latin the parallel versions of Codd.
DE have " which is broken," the interlinear renderings
of Codd. FG " which shall be broken," but this is a dif
ference of interpretation merely. More serious is the
variation of the Latin Vulgate and Cyprian " which shall
be delivered," and of the Memphitic "which is delivered."
The Thebaic and iEthiopic again, with a manuscript of
Euthalius (p. 70), support "which is given," manifestly
derived from Luke xxii. 19. Theodoret knew both forms.
While the holy bread is often spoken of in the New
Testament as "broken," the same expression is nowhere
else applied to the Lord's body, and might seem to-
involve a superficial contradiction to John xix. 36 :
hence it may have been omitted from the very oldest
manuscripts, and other words supplied, as early as
Cyprian's age. Had not "broken" been for some
reason avoided, it would naturally have been taken up

182 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN
again from the former part of the verse : on the other
hand, of course, it might be said, that it was conveyed
into this clause from the preceding context. If any
word must be brought in between "which is" and
"for you" — and some word really seems indispensable
— it cannot be any other than that in the Received
text, which has the powerful support of the Peshito,
the oldest document cited, of the Greek Fathers, as
Basil, Athanasius (in spite of Theodoret's representation),
and Chrysostom in the fourth century, of Euthalius in
one manuscript, of John Damascene, 02cumenius and
Theophylact. Add to this the fact that, in all forms
of the Primitive Greek Liturgies known to us, "broken"
occurs in the most sacred words of Institution. These
Liturgies have probably come down unaltered from
the fourth century, whatever changes they may have
undergone in earlier times.
(13) 1 Cor. xv. 49. " As we have borne the image
of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the
heavenly." Thus the words stand in the Received text,
admirably corresponding with the context, especially
with the future tenses in ver. 51, 52. The itacism,
however, which we noticed in Rom. v. 1 (p. 175) has
exercised its influence here, in versions no less than in
manuscripts of the Greek. The hortatory "let us bear"
for "we shall bear" appears in Codd. KACD(E)FG, 17.
37. 47, three lesser uncials, the great majority of cur
sives which have been well collated, in the Complu
tensian Polyglott, the Memphitic, Vulgate, and Gothic
versions, also in the ^Ethiopic according to Tregelles.
Tertullian twice insists that we have here a precept,
not a promise, and Chrysostom is express to the same

THE LATTER PART OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 183
purport. Irenasus and Origen (each several times over,
both in Greek and Latin), and in the fourth century
Methodius and Epiphanius, Cassarius and Gregory of
Nyssa, with the Latin Fathers Hilary and Ambrose
after Cyprian and the Latin version, Euthalius and Cyril
(twice) in the fifth century, John Damascene in the
eighth, all adopt the form "let us bear," to the sore
injury of the sense. It may seem a bold measure, but
I am persuaded it is the only safe one, to prefer the
future tense to this accumulation of testimony against
it from sources so various ; but for once Cod. B and a
comparatively small band of cursives maintain the
correct reading, as does the Armenian version, and
probably (not for certain) the two Syriac. Tischendorf
adds the ^Ethiopic version, but I cannot tell whether
he or Tregelles is right. Theodoret is decisive for the
future, which Cyril of Alexandria has twice, as well as
the other form twice. Photius in a catena states both
sides of the question, (Ecumenius and Theophylact are
with Cod. B, whose influence we will strain for once
(but see p. 49) that we may preserve the spirit of the
Apostle's words.
(14) 1 Cor. xv. 51. The text of S. Paul's Epistles,
taken generally, is much more free from various read
ings than any other part of the New Testament, and
those that do occur seldom give much trouble to the
critic. Here, however, we have a passage which has
perplexed Biblical students from Jerome's time down-.
wards : it has exercised, as some of you may remember,
the keen judgment of Bp. Pearson, in his Exposition of
the seventh Article of the Apostles' Creed. From the
Received text the following divergencies are more or less

184 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN
well supported : (a) " We shall not all sleep, but we
shall all be changed." (b) " Not all of us shall sleep,
but we shall all be changed." (c) " We shall all sleep,
but we shall not all be changed." (d) "We shall all
rise, but we shall not all be changed." (e) " We shall
all sleep, and the whole of us shall be changed." "Does
not the first of these readings," asks Tregelles, " possess
the best claim on our attention ? For the connection
is such that the Apostle immediately speaks of the
'we' who will not sleep, but will be changed when
the trumpet sounds at the coming of the Lord1."
Neglecting a slight Greek particle which has not been
rendered in our Authorized version, what is virtually the
Received text (a) is supported by Cod. B, the third hand
of D and E which is derived from it (p. 71), the three later
uncials containing the passage, by Codd. 37. 47, and nearly
all cursives, by Origen, Theodore of Heraclea and Apol-
linarius, as cited by Jerome, by the two Syriac versions,
the Memphitic (the Thebaic not being extant), the
Gothic, and one form of the .ZEthiopic : the Old Latin m.
(p. 101) also quotes the second clause without a nega
tive. For (a), moreover, may be cited Ephraem (p. 60)
and Csesarius, Gregory of Nyssa and Chrysostom (often)
in the fourth century, Euthalius and Theodoret in the
fifth, Andreas of Cassarea in the sixth, John Damascene
in the eighth. The form (b) is supported only by
Origen in the Greek and by some copies known to
Jerome : it is probably no various reading, but a more
explicit way of bringing out the true meaning of (a).
The form (d) also will hardly enter into competition,
since among, manuscripts it is upheld only by the first
1 Account of the Printed Text of the Greek New Testament, p. 191.

THE LATTER PART OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 185
hand of D, whose proneness to synonyms reminds us of
its namesake in the Gospels (p. 181), and by the Vulgate
in every shape, even the parallel Latin versions in EF
against their own Greek, by Tertullian and Hilary.
Jerome and Augustine note it as read in the Latin
manuscripts, but not in the Greek. Cod. A by the first
hand stands alone for (e), which is apparently due to
an error of the scribe in a siDgle letter. The only
formidable rival to (a) is (c), which is maintained by
Codd. KCF (with an itacism) G. 17, by A also, if we
make allowance for the transcriptural mistake. This
reading is in substance the same as that in the margin
of the Complutensian, and is discussed by Jerome, who
alleges Didymus and Acacius in its favour : it appears
too in Origen, as well as (a) and (b), so little consistency
can be looked for in Patristic citations, unless they
be very express. Cyril of Alexandria and the Greek
copies known to Pelagius and Maximus vary in like
manner between (a) and (c). For (c) are quoted the
Armenian and one form of the iEthiopic version, but
no Latin except the interlinear translation of G and
that rendering set above the text of F which is derived
from G (see p. 76).
Besides the manifest inferiority of (c) in regard to
the sense, it is but weakly supported by versions and
ecclesiastical writers. We prefer without hesitation
the reading (a) of Cod. B and the great majority of
critical authorities, bearing in mind the statement of
Bp. Wordsworth of Lincoln : "The objection which was
made by some in ancient times to the Received reading:
was, that the wicked would not be changed, namely,
glorified; but S. Paul is here speaking only of the

186 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN
resurrection of the Just." Thus men sought to evade a
difficulty of their own making by such expedients as
(c) and (d).
(15) Phil. iii. 3. " For we are the circumcision,
which worship God in the spirit." The alternative
reading, " which worship by (or "in") the Spirit of God,"
seems to yield a veryinferior sense. The true circumcision
to which we belong is one of the spirit, not of the letter
(2 Cor. iii. 6), a meaning which the Received text brings
out precisely, and from which its rival differs by only a
single Greek character, through the change whereof it is
made to glide from a perfectly intelligible though rare
construction into the common-place formula " the Spirit
of God." Yet such is the decision of our main critical
authorities, Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, and the
state of the evidence certainly goes far to justify their
decision, although Griesbach clave to the common read
ing, doubtless as being the harder one (p. 114), and Mill
boldly denounces the alteration as being made in igno
rance of S. Paul's design. Here, therefore, we have
internal considerations drawing us powerfully one way,
and documentary testimony the other. " Worship God
in the spirit " is found only in the first hand of D, the
third hand of K, one late uncial, a very few cursives of
small account, the Peshito Syriac and the Philoxenian
text, the Old Latin m., the Vulgate, the Latin translations
of DEF, the Gothic, Armenian, and iEthiopic versions.
Chrysostom very clearly vouches for the same form,
which is found in the Latin of Origen and some others.
On the other hand, " by the Spirit of God " is read in
Codd. KABC, the third hand of D (and consequently
E, p. 71) FG, two other uncials, full a hundred cur-

THE LATTER PART OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 187
sives, including all the best, in the margin of the Phi
loxenian Syriac, the Memphitic (the Thebaic being
defective), a single codex of the Vulgate, and the Latin
of G, which is much conformed to its own Greek (p. 76),
in Eusebius, Athanasius, a codex of Euthalius, Theodo-
ret (sometimes), and John Damascene. Both Augustine
and Ambrose, while they recognize the alternative as
read by some or most of the Latin copies, declare that
nearly all the Greek have the genitive form " the Spirit
of God," as we actually find to be the case. Augustine
suggests also "God the Spirit." It calls for some
courage to resist the proposed change in this place,
however unlikely we may feel it to be correct.
(16) Col. ii. 2. "To the acknowledgment of the
mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ": — ¦
rather render, " of God the Father and of Christ," even
as the Received text stands. We put forward this
interesting passage, rendered difficult only by the great
variation in the text, as a good example of the canon
(V, p. 116) which declares that reading to be the best,
which most readily accounts for all the phenomena, and
bears the appearance of being the original, from which
all the rest were derived. This is here that supplied by
the great Cod. B, which reads " the mystery of God who
is Christ," or " of the God Christ," a form of speech some
what countenanced by ch. i. 27, " this mystery. . .which is
Christ;" yet more so by the text we have next to examine
(1 Tim. iii. 16), if we could venture to lay any stress
upon it. Cod. B is supported only by Hilary and Cyril
(the latter having "God and" [or "even"] "Christ").
Its reading is approved by Lachmann, Tregelles, Tisch
endorf in his last edition, and other good judges.

188 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN
Another of our canons, which prescribes the choice
of the shorter reading (II., p. 115), has been preferred for
this place by Griesbach (whose critical tact is indeed
very admirable, see p. 112), by Dean Alford, and afore
time by Tischendorf. This plan would make the verse
end at " the mystery of God," and regard every thing
after these words as mere surplusage and accretion.
The additions to "God" are indeed manifold. Some
(Cod. D, the Latin of Codd. DE, and Augustine) have
" which is Christ " from ch. i. 27 ; others " God the
Father of Christ," which is found in Codd. KAC, one
cursive, one Arabic codex, and (on Griesbach's informa
tion, yet unconfirmed) in the Thebaic : thus also Codd.
am. fuld. of the Vulgate (p. 103), and the Latin of F (the
Greek of FG being lost), only that "Jesus" is annexed.
No one variation is so well supported as this, but if
it were true, how can we account for the divergencies
from so simple and ordinary a form ? The Received
text " of God the Father and of Christ " cannot stand,
as it has for it only the third hand of D (with E against
its parallel Latin, see p. 71), two later uncials, the great
mass of cursives, the Philoxenian Syriac, Theodoret,
John Damascene, and some others. Lesser varieties may
be named, but must not be allowed to perplex our ulti
mate decision : "of God in Christ" from Clement of Alex
andria and a Latin writer of the third century : " of God
who is in Christ" from the single cursive Cod. 17, to which
one Armenian edition adds "Jesus," the other Arme
nian giving " God the Father in Christ Jesus." Lesser
codices of the Vulgate vary strangely. In the Clemen
tine edition we find "of God the Father, and of Christ
Jesus," while two cursives, the Peshito Syriac, Arabic,

THE LATTER PART OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 189
and Chrysostom, prefer "of God the Father, and of
Christ," which confirms the Received text without
being identical with it.
All these various modifications offer a common oppo
sition to Griesbach's, or the shortest form, " the mystery
of God," which is too slenderly supported to hold the
ground against them. The passage is thus read in one
late uncial, and about six cursives, of which 37 is good,
the second hand of 67 (66 of the Acts) of decided value
(p. 180). It were almost like guess-work to act upon
testimony such as this, and we prefer to fall back on
Cod. B in the last resort, noting this text to our readers
as one that would be involved in hopeless confusion, if
we possessed not the clue of internal evidence — that is,
of common sense matured by experience, to guide us,
however uncertainly, through the tangled maze.
(17) 1 TlM. iii. 16. "God was manifest (or rather
"manifested") in the flesh." We have now come to a
text which has proved the very torture of critics, and
whose variations, significant though they be, appear to
have arisen from no desire on any side to accommodate
it to doctrinal predilections, but simply through a
habit of ancient scribes, which we have had occasion to
notice before (p. 58) ; that of abridging the sacred
names after a fashion we should think unbecoming, and
which in this instance has proved far from convenient.
Between the Greek masculine relative " who " (OC) and
the abbreviated form of " God " (@C) the difference is
merely one of the presence or absence of two very thin
horizontal lines, one within the 0, the other over the
two letters, and in manuscripts of remote date slight
strokes like these are perpetually found obliterated

190 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN
from mere age, where beyond doubt they once existed.
Hence the original evidence of Codd. AC is quite doubtful
between " God was manifested" and "who was mani
fested," though in their later condition it is indisputably
the former, the question always being whether the more
recent hand has changed the primitive reading, or
merely renewed the decaying strokes. Respecting
Cod. C I have said before (p. 62) all I know, and in
respect to it the candid statement of its editor Tischen
dorf has rather increased the difficulty than tended to
remove it. Cod. A has several times in the present
generation been submitted to the closest examination
with a view to ascertain its actual testimony. The leaf
containing it has been handled carefully, no doubt, but
so frequently, as to be in no good condition (see p. 52),
and, seeing as we all must with our own eyes, I
am sorry to have to say that my conclusion on the
matter, namely that the two faint horizontal strokes of
the first scribe yet underlie the coarser black lines of
a far more recent one, is opposed to the decision of
scholars I cannot name without deep respect, of Dr
Ellicott the Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol, and, as I
believe but am not sure, of Dean Alford also. I can
only plead that those who saw Cod. A when it first
came into England, and was necessarily in a better
state of preservation than now, formed the same opinion
as I do. Such were its early collators, Young and
Huish (p. 54); the illustrious editor of the New Testa
ment (1707) John Mill, and that too contrary to his
first prepossessions; Dr John Berriman, who, with four
others, scrutinized the document when preparing his
Lady Moyer Lectures in 1737; and C. G. Woide, who

THE LATTER PART OF THE NEW TESTA2IENTA91
himself edited this manuscript in 1786 (p. 55). As the
case stands, neither of these first-rate uncials can be
appealed to with confidence, which is the more unfor
tunate, inasmuch as we have now lost the help of
Cod. B, which broke off, as you will remember, at
Heb. ix. 14, that Epistle in ancient times often taking
precedence of 1 Timothy (p. 27).
Cod. K, however, speaks with no uncertain sound :
for, although here also the corrector has been busy, yet
his work is palpable and without disguise : above "who"
(OC) of the first scribe, the two Greek letters (6e)
necessary to be prefixed to OC in order to turn the
relative into " God " are inserted above the line, with
the proper accent (s), by a hand of about the twelfth
century (Plate I., No. 12). The masculine relative also
appears in Codd. FG beyond any reasonable doubt : the
neuter relative (0), which is grammatically more correct,
as agreeing with " mystery" preceding,. is found in Cod. D
by the first hand ; but this is manifestly a corrupt varia
tion from the masculine form, whose solecism in regard
to construction pleads in its favour (Canon I., p. 114).
The cursives which support the relative are but three, of
which, however, 17 is one, and another is of high value
(73, at Upsal). For " God," since Codd. AC are out of
court, we have no better evidence than the three later
uncials which contain this verse, and full 200 cursives,
only that the Leicester codex 37, by placing 0 (here
intended for the Greek article) before " God " abridged
(Plate III., No. 11, line 1 : see p. 81), makes an effort to
combine the reading of Cod. D with that of later copies.
Nor do versions uphold the case of the Received
text. The Peshito Syriac and Philoxenian text, with

192 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN
the Armenian, one form both of the ./Ethiopic, and the
Arabic of Erpenius (p. 176, note), have a relative which
may be either masculine or neuter. The Philoxenian
margin probably, the Memphitic, Thebaic, Gothic, and
the other .ZEthiopic certainly, favour the masculine
relative : all Latin codices, even those of Codd. FG
Avhose Greek is masculine, side with Cod. D, with Hilary
and Augustine, for the neuter. "God" is found only
in the Slavonic and Polyglott Arabic, which count for
almost nothing.
In respect to the Fathers, the Received text makes
a better stand. Ignatius, in his purest copies, speaks
of "God being manifested as man," Hippolytus twice
declares that " God was manifested in the body." In
the fourth century Didymus and Gregory of Nyssa in
all probability acknowledged it, as unquestionably did
Theodoret, John Damascene, CEcumenius, Theophylact,
at a later period. Chrysostom's manuscripts fluctuate
in his commentary, though he elsewhere seems to refer
to the common reading : the catenas are hostile. Photius
cites Gregory Thaumaturgus, of the third century, for
" God." The masculine relative is upheld by Cyril of
Alexandria (in spite of his printed editions), by Epi
phanius (twice), and many others : nor is a text so im
portant as this alleged in many places where it would
fairly be looked for, though a negative argument should
not be pressed too far.
On the whole, if Codd. AC be kept out of sight
(and we know not how more light can be thrown on
their testimony), this is one of the controversies which
the discovery of Cod. K ought to have closed, since it
adds a first-rate uncial witness to a case already

THE LATTER PART OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 193
very strong through the support of versions. 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 ten^-
able against the accumulated force of external evidence
which has been brought against it.
(18) Heb. ii. 7. Whensoever a passage is cited from
the Old Testament in the New, the tendency on the
part of scribes is to enlarge the quotation rather than
to compress it (Canon II. p. 115). Thus in Heb. xii. 20,
" or thrust through with a dart," taken from Ex. xix. 13,
rests on no adequate authority whatever. The last
clause of the present verse, " and didst set him over the
works of thy hands," though imbedded in the quotation
from Ps. viii. 4 — 6, is rejected by Tischendorf, set
within brackets by Lachmann and Tregelles. The middle
place which it holds in the citation diminishes the pre
sumption against its genuineness in the Epistle, and it
seems pertinent enough to the argument : on the other
hand, how came the words to be lost, if they were ever
there ? Internal evidence is thus equally divided : the ex
ternal is perhaps less ambiguous. The clause is absent
from Cod. B, from D by the third hand, E by the second,
two later uncials, from 47 and full fifty or sixty cursives,
from some manuscripts and editions of the Peshito, but
not from Widmanstadt's (p. 90),from the Philoxenian text,
the commentaries of Chrysostom, John Damascene, GScu-
menius and Theophylact. It appears in Codd. KACDE
(the first hand, which one would not suspect, see p. 71),
M (see p. 77), and a later uncial (FG do not contain this
Epistle), fewer cursives, but the best, as 17. 37. 137 and
s. L. 13

194 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN
its close ally, the Philoxenian margin (pp. 73, 93), the
Vulgate, even that appended to Cod. F, the 11 emphitic,
Armenian, and ZEthiopic versions, with Eusebius, a
manuscript of Euthalius, and Theodoret. One is con
tent to retain a clause thus strongly attested.
(19) Heb. ii. 9. "That He by the grace of God
should taste death for every man." We have here an
important various reading, dwelt upon by Origen in the
third century (he discusses it in no less than six places
in his works), by Jerome in the fourth, by Theodoret in
the fifth, at which last period Theodore of Mopsuestia,
who lay under an ill repute among the orthodox, boldly
charges them with corrupting the passage; by sub
stituting what he deemed an unmeaning addition " by
the grace of. God" for the true text, "without" or
" apart from God." Now " apart from God " is at pre
sent found in no manuscripts except Cod. M (p. 77)
and that second hand of the cursive 67 to which we
are indebted for so many excellent readings, resembling
those of the best uncials. Among versions it is found
only in some copies of the Peshito (including at least
one of tbe best), and is cited by the Latins Ambrose
(twice) in the fourth century, Fulgentius and Vigilius
of Thapsus in the fifth, as well as by the Greek- Anas-
tasius the Abbot in the eighth, Here, then, we have
a variation as old as Origen, yet one which cannot
stand for a moment against Codd. KABCD and the
rest. I have called your attention to this almost forgotten
reading for two reasons ; the first being an ingenious
and by no means unlikely conjecture as to its origin.
It has been supposed that "apart from God" has been

THE LATTER PART OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 195
transferred into the text of ver. 9 from the margin of
ver. 8, where it was inserted as a seasonable gloss upon
¦the words " he left nothing that is not put under him "
.(compare 1 Cor. xv. 27). This may be, and it is always
interesting to be able to account for the existence of a
.strange corruption like the present. My second point
is to shew by a plain proof that the variation was not,
as GScumenius and Theophylact suppose, the work of the
followers of Nestorius. That they must be acquitted of
¦so serious a charge is evident from the fact that the
reading was known to Origen two centuries before the
subtle heresy of Nestorius took its rise. Yet, upon the
face of it, there was much to countenance the mistake :
the arrogant language of Theodore of Mopsuestia ; the
existence of the false words in Nestorian copies of the
Peshito, such as one of the eighth century in the
British Museum (Rich, 7157), certain Syrian Churches
being infected with that error down to the present
hour; above all, the substance of the change itself: for
no statement could better suit the Nestorian fiction
that the Redeemer came with two separate Persons as
well as two separate Natures, than the assertion that
He suffered apart from his Divinity.
(20) Heb. iv. 2. " The word preached did not profit
-them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard
it." By a simple change in the case of the participle,
the latter clause is made to run " not being mingled by
faith with " (or, with the margin of our Bibles, because
they were not united by faith to) " those that heard it ";
mixed or mingled no longer agreeing with " the word,"
but with " them " immediately before it. It would be
impossible to part with the common reading, the nomi-
13—2

196 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN
native, without regret, for it is much the clearer, though,
it must be confessed, it is not on that account the more
probable (Canon I. p. 114). The accusative form ("them
not being mingled ") is adopted by Codd. ABCD(E)M,
the three later uncials, 17. 37. 47, and the great mass
of cursives, the Complutensian edition, the Memphitic,
the best copies of the Vulgate (am. fuld., &c, p. 103),
the Latin of Cod. F, whose Greek is lost (p. 74), the
Philoxenian Syriac, Armenian, and ^Ethiopia To the
same effect are cited the Latin of Irenaeus in two manu
scripts (but the Received reading stands in others), and
Theodore of Mopsuestia expressly. So too Chrysostom,
Theophylact, CEcumenius, and one or two more. Cyril
of Alexandria and Theodoret may be alleged on both
sides. For the nominative, whereby " mixed" is in
concord with " the word," the roll is but scanty : Cod. K
and quite a handful of cursives, the Latin versions of
Codd. DE against the parallel Greek, the Clementine
Vulgate and many good Vulgate manuscripts, only not
the best, with Lucifer of Cagliari of the fourth century,
whose Latin text is usually very pure ; add to these the
considerable help of the Peshito Syriac (very clearly),
and of the Arabic of Erpenius (p. 176, note). Tischendorf
here abides by the Received text, induced partly no
doubt by deference to the Codex Sinaiticus, whose dis
covery will immortalize his name (p. 33), not that such
prepossessions ought to have biassed his judgment in
the least : partly by an opinion that to make satisfactory
sense of the passage as corrected we must change " them
that heard it" into " the things heard," for which fur
ther alteration the evidence is very feeble indeed.
(21) Heb. ix. 1. " Then verily the first covenant had

THE LATTER PART OF THE NE W TESTAMENT. 197
also ordinances of divine service." Our Authorized Bible
of 1611 here has very rightly the word "covenant" in
italic type, to shew that it is not found in the original
at all, but is simply repeated from the last verses of the
preceding chapter. The Complutensian Polyglott, how
ever, and after its example the Greek text of Stephens
(1550), and the English translations of Tyndale (1526)
and Coverdale (1535), insert the word "tabernacle"
instead, which was no doubt suggested by "the first
tabernacle " in ver. 2. Our own Bible was saved from
this error by following the edition of Beza (1589), which
has no noun after "the first" in ver. 1, and in the Latin
supplies the blank by the true word "covenant" in the
proper type. Since "tabernacle" is read in no uncial
manuscript whatsoever, and not in the best cursives
(such as 17. 37), although, probably, in a majority of the
whole mass (with 47), it ought undoubtedly to be re
moved from the Greek text. Only a copy of Euthalius
and Theodoret can be alleged in its behalf, for the soli
tary version which supports "tabernacle," the Mem
phitic, must have meant it as an interpretation, not as
representing a word read in the original.
(22) Heb. xi. 13. We noticed above a clause in this
Epistle (ch. xii. 20) which rests on no adequate authority
(p. 193), but which, being taken with its context from the
Old Testament, can easily be accounted for. The same
cannot be said for the words now before us, " and were
persuaded of them," which first appeared in the Greek
Testament of Erasmus (1516), were brought into the
English Bible by Tyndale (1526), and have remained
there ever since, not a single authority of any kind
being known to support them, and the sense being

198 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN
rather impeded than aided by their presence. Whence
they came would be hard to say, except from an ordinary
cursive at Basle (Cod. 7 of S. Paul), which internal
evidence convinces me was much used by Erasmus, and
which, in his elaborate edition of the Greek Testament
(1751 — 2), its collator Wetstein does not quote as
omitting the clause.
(23) James ii. 18. " Yea, a man may say, Thou hast
faith, and I have works : shew me thy faith without thy
works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works."
One of the few marginal notes in our Authorized Bible
which are concerned with various readings (see p. 86),
is here inserted so as to make the sense quite opposite to
that in the text, if not completely to destroy it : " some
copies read [as an alternative to without thy works'] by
thy works." There is no real doubt that the marginal
rendering is wrong, and that of the translators true, but
the English student may like to know the precise
merits of the case, and how, in a matter so evident, the
marginal note was set there at all.
"Without," or rather "apart from thy works" is
found in five out of the seven uncials which contain this
Epistle, including Codd. KABC, in about fourteen cur
sives, including 13, 31 (see p. 167,note), and (what in such
a matter ought to weigh considerably) in every known
version, both Syriac, both Egyptian, ff1. of the Old
Latin, which contains St James, the Vulgate, Armenian,
and ^Ethiopia For " by'' (which evidently sprang from
the "by" immediately following) we know of no vouch
ers except two late uncials, nearly all the cursives, the
marginal commentaries or catenae, and Theophylact.
If ever there was a case where a recent and improbable

THE LATTER PART OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 199
reading must be rejected for the intrinsically good one of
all the ancients, such a case is the present.
What then the need of a marginal note ? The fact
is that our translators were doing what they seldom
liked to venture on : — they were changing the Received
Greek text which they usually accepted without ques
tion, to follow Beza's Greek Testaments of 1582, 1589,
1598 and the Vulgate. They knew that "by," however
ill it suited the context, had appeared in every preceding
English version, as well as in the editions of the Com-
plutensians, of Erasmus, of Stephens (1550), and of Beza
himself in 1565, and so they drew attention in the
margin to their weighty and much-needed correction.
(24) 1 Pet. iii. 15. As a result of our examination of
1 Tim. iii. 16 we felt compelled by the force of truth to
withdraw, at least from controversial use, a great text
on which modern theologians, though not perhaps
ancient, have been wont to lay much stress. A critical
enquiry into the present passage will produce the
opposite effect of rendering available in the support
of the orthodox faith what seemed previously to have
no dogmatic value. " Sanctify the Lord God in your
hearts" is the Received text, as in Isai. viii. 13, upon
which S. Peter, after his well-known fashion, is mould
ing his own language. "Sanctify the Lord Christ in
your hearts" is the alternative reading, which we shall
see good reason to adopt. " As the Apostle here applies
to Christ language which in the Old Testament is made
use of with reference to Jehovah, he clearly suggests
the supreme godhead of our Redeemer," is the fair com
ment of Professor Alexander Roberts. Now "the Lord
Christ" is found in Codd. KABC (only seven uncials

200 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN
contain this Epistle); eight cursives, including Cod. 13,
the best (see p. 167, note) ; both Syriac and both Egyptian
versions, the Vulgate, Erpenius' Arabic, the Armenian
nearly ("the same Lord and Christ"), Clement of Alex
andria in the second, Fulgentius in the fifth century,
Bede in the eighth. Against this phalanx we have
nothing to set except the three later uncials, all the
cursives (including 31, see p. 167, note) except nine, the
Polyglott Arabic and Slavonic versions, Theophylact
and G5cumenius — in fact nothing earlier than the ninth
century. One Lectionary at Leyden, with its accompany
ing Arabic version, has " The Lord Jesus our Christ."
(25) 1 John ii. 23. The English reader's attention
will have been directed to this verse by reason of its
second member being printed in italics "but he that
acknowledged the Son hath the Father also," this being
the only instance in the New Testament wherein variety
of reading is thus indicated in the Authorized Bible of
1611, though later impressions exhibit the same device
in John viii. 6 and elsewhere. The example had been
set to our translators in what is called the " Great
Bible" of 1539, and indeed the Greek words they
render are even now no portion of the Received text,
although Beza inserted them in his edition of 1582,',
pointing out at the same time this Apostle's habit ofi
using antithetic clauses in his composition. Beyond;
doubt Beza is here right and those who omitted the
clause mistaken, although the Complutensian Polyglott
and Erasmus alike rejected it. The cause of its absence
from some copies is easily perceived : it arose from that
negligence of the scribes to which we have before given
the technical name of homoeoteleuton (p. 133) or " like

THE LATTER PART OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.201
ending" : each member of the verse terminating in Greek
with the same three words. The italicised clause is
strongly upheld also by external evidence, being found
in five of the seven extant uncials (Codd. K ABC being
four of them), in at least 34 cursives (including Cod. 13
and other excellent copies), in both Syriac, in the
Memphitic (perhaps too in the Thebaic), in the best
codices of the Latin Vulgate (am. fuld., p. 103 &c.) and
its printed editions, in the Armenian, iEthiopic, and
Erpenius' (not the Polyglott) Arabic versions. It is
recognised by Origen (thrice), Eusebius, both Cyrils,
Theophylact (but not (Ecumenius). The Old Latin ni.
(p. 101), with Cyprian and Hilary, adopts " he that ac
knowledged the Son hath both the Son and the Father."
We note this as an instance of the evil consequences
ensuing on the exclusive adherence to modern Greek
manuscripts upon the part of our earliest editors.
(26) 1 John v. 7, 8. We are here treading over
the ashes of many a fiery debate, but the flame which
once raged so fiercely is well-nigh extinct. It may be
doubted whether a single person now living, who is
capable of forming an intelligent judgment on critical
subjects, believes or professes to believe in the genuine
ness of that interpolated gloss, familiarly known as the
"Text of the Three Heavenly Witnesses." Yet Mr
Charles Forster's "New Plea" for its authenticity,
published only seven years since, the ingenious and,
as it proved, the last effort of a veteran scholar, is as
full of life and vigour as any of its predecessors in that
long controversy which gave rise to the trenchant "Let
ters to Mr Archdeacon Travis" (1790), the best known,
perhaps the ablest, work of one who was at onoe the

202 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN
pride and the shame of the University of Cambridge,
the profoundly learned, the acute, the scornful and
overbearing Richard Porson, We shall here attempt
nothing more than a brief summary of the facts of the
case, but it will be such as shall leave no person at a
loss as to the inference to be drawn from them. There
can be no doubt that on the main issue Porson was
right, Travis and Forster wrong.
" For there are three that bear witness, the Spirit,
and the water, and the blood : and the three agree in
one." Such is the whole passage as it proceeded from
the Apostle's pen. In our common Bibles we further
read, after "bear witness" in ver. 7, what may have
been originally a pious and innocent gloss on the genu
ine passage, first set in the margin, and afterwards
intruded into the text, but which has no rightful place.
there on any principle that is capable of reasonable vin
dication. The two verses now run as follows, the
supposititious words being placed within brackets for
convenient guidance to the eye and mind :
" For there are three that bear witness [in heaven,
the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost : and these
three are one. And there are three that bear witness
in earth,] the Spirit, and the water, and the blood : and
the three agree in one."
Here, no doubt, we may mark the antithesis, the
opposition of the several members of parallel clauses,
which we mentioned just now (1 John ii. 23) as charac
teristic of the sacred writer, and which perhaps helped
to procure acceptance for the interpolation. It is right
to say this much in its behalf, for there is almost
nothing more that can be said.

THE LA TTER PART OF THE NE W TESTA MENT. 203
Cod. C being defective from 1 John iv. 2 to 3 John 2,
we have but six uncials (Codd. KAB and the three
later) to take as our chief guides : not one of them
shews a vestige of the words within brackets. The
cursive copies which contain this chapter are at least
194, besides about 60 Lectionaries, or Church-lesson
books : the bracketed passage appears in only three,
and those of quite modern date. One of them, indeed
(Cod. Ravianus at Berlin), is good for nothing, being a
mere transcript from printed Greek Testaments, espe
cially from the Complutensian. The same may appa
rently be said of a marginal note inserted by a very
recent hand in a manuscript of the eleventh century
now at Naples. The real authorities are thus reduced
to two, one (Codex Ottobonianus, 162) in the Vatican,
upon which, so far as it goes, no grave suspicion has been
cast ; the second at Trinity College, Dublin, which has
not passed unchallenged. That at Rome is as late in
age as the fifteenth century, and, like Cod. E of the
Acts (see p. 71), has the Latin version on the same
page with the Greek, and in the post of honour on
the left. This passage has therefore been set in the
Greek column of the Codex Ottobonianus, for the
same reason as it was a little later in the Complutensian
Polyglott, because it was already extant in the parallel
Latin Vulgate ; and they both bear the semblance, the
Complutensian very decidedly, of having been actually
translated from the Latin by their side. The Dublin
manuscript, Codex Montfortianus (61 Gospels, 34 Acts,
&c), as it is called from a former owner, stands upon a
different footing. When Erasmus published his first
editions of the New Testament (1516, 1519), he was

204 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN
censured for leaving out a passage which, as being found
in their Latin Bibles, most of his readers were familiar
with. His reply was that he could do no other than
omit it, because he had never yet met with a Greek
codex which contained it : whensoever he did meet with
one, he would insert it from that copy. A transcript of
the verses as read in " A British manuscript " found in
England was sent to him before the publication of his
third edition in 1522, and what he had sent him, he then
gave his readers in its proper place. Now no " British
manuscript" containing the bracketed words has ever
been heard of unless it is that at present in Dublin, the
earliest possessor of which that we can trace is Froy, a
Franciscan friar, about the period of the Reformation.
It is true that, besides another slight variation, Mont-
fort's manuscript does not answer to Erasmus' descrip
tion of the British one, in that, like the Complutensian
and Vatican copies, it omits the last clause of ver. 8,
" and the three agree in one," which, by his account, the
British one contained. A great deal has been made of
the discrepancy by those who deny the identity between
the two : yet the supposition is obvious that the person,
whosoever he was, that sent the paper to Erasmus,
might have broken off after transcribing the disputed
words, and neglected to note down the further variation
immediately after them. We are willing to assume,
then, that the British and Montfort codices are one and
the same, and see no reason for suspecting that it was
forged between 1519 and 1522 to answer a purpose :
yet a manuscript like this, which could hardly be more
than a century old when it thus came to light, which
bears in parts a close resemblance to the Latin Vulgate*

THE LATTER PART OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 205
and has been thought to have been transcribed, at least
in the Apocalypse, from the Leicester codex (p. 81), can
hardly be deemed of sufficient value or antiquity to
bear adequate testimony to the existence of the passage
in really important Greek documents.
When from manuscripts we come to versions and
Fathers, the result may be stated in a word. The in
sertion belonged to the Latin branch of the Church, and
to none other. Of the Greek Fathers not one has cited
it, or made any reference to it that can be depended
on, even when it might seem most required by his
argument, and although he quotes consecutively the
verses immediately before and after it. It has been
unhappily thrust by editors into the printed Peshito
version, but is not found in a single manuscript: it is
not in the Philoxenian Syriac, the Memphitic, Thebaic,
^Ethiopic or Arabic, in any shape. Scarcely any Arme
nian codex has it, and only a few recent Slavonic copies.
To the western Church it appertains exclusively, and here
too it appears with that wide variation in the reading
which has several times before been alleged as unfavour
able to the genuineness of a passage which exhibits it
(see p. 158). Mai's celebrated "Speculum" (m.), of the
sixth or seventh century, representing the Old Latin,
and about 49 out of every 50 extant codices of the Vul
gate, contain it in some shape or other : yet even here it
is missing in full fifty of the best Latin copies, in
cluding those principal ones am. fuld. (p. 103). Even
the great Latin writers Hilary, Lucifer, Ambrose,
Jerome, Augustine, all of the fourth century, know
nothing of it. The Fathers who do allege it are chiefly
Africans, as Tertullian in the second century not im-

206 DISCUSSION OF IMPORTANT PASSAGES IN
possibly, Cyprian with greater likelihood in the third,
Vigilius of Thapsus and Fulgentius of Ruspas in the
fifth or sixth. Nor have we much reason to doubt
that Eugenius, Bishop of Carthage, late in the fifth
century, pressed it into a confession of faith presented
to the Arian Hunneric, king of the Vandals.
We have said before that it is perfectly gratuitous
to allege fraud against those who introduced the Three
Heavenly Witnesses by way of spiritual comment, first
into the margin of this Epistle, then into the text. That
it has no right to hold a place in the body of Scrip
ture we regard as certain. It belongs not to the whole
Christian Church, but to a single branch of it, and
in early times only to one fruitful offshoot of that
branch. (27) Rev. xvi. 7. The Received text of the Book
of the Revelation is far more widely removed from that
of the best critical authorities than is the case in any
other portion of the New Testament. This partly
arises from real variations between the few primary au
thorities to which we have access in this portion of our
critical labours, partly to the circumstance that Erasmus
had access to only one Greek copy, and that a poor
one (p. 80), while succeeding editors of this Book chose
rather to follow Erasmus than the Complutensian
Polyglott, which would have led them less astray. The
general tendency of the readings of more recent codices
has here been to suppress the broad Hebraisms of
which the Apocalypse is full, to smooth the gram
matical constructions of the Greek, to soften what is
hard, and correct what is difficult ; as if to prove before
hand Bengel's sweeping rule (p. 114), that the harsher

THE LATTER PART OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 207
the reading the more likely it is to be true. A single
example will shew our meaning as well as a multitude.
?f I heard the altar speak," writes the Apostle, "Even
so, Lord God Almighty, true and righteous are thy
judgments." The altar, which the prophet from
Judah apostrophised in the days of Jeroboam (1 Kings
xiii. 2), is here represented by a yet bolder figure of
impassioned poetry, as rejoicing in unison with the
angel of the waters (ver. 5), in that God had avenged
the blood of his saints and prophets which had been shed
as it were thereupon (ch. vi. 9). This of course was
above the comprehension of the later scribes, who, by
interpolating two. words, bring us down to the prosaic
statement of the common text, "I heard another out
of the altar." The corrupt "another out of," as is so
repeatedly the case in the Apocalypse, rests in this pre
cise shape on almost no authority at all. It is merely
the consequence of Erasmus' following ordinary copies
of the Latin Vulgate against his own solitary Cod.
Reuchlini, which, omitting " another," retains still the
feeble "out of" with the Complutensian and Cod. B
of this book, a Vatican manuscript of the eighth or
ninth century, beyond measure inferior to its great
namesake. The commentator Andreas of the seventh
century in some copies favours the latter form, while
one other cursive makes for the paraphrase of the
Memphitic and ^Ethiopic, "a voice from the altar." The
best (am., p. 103) and two or three other codices of the
Vulgate have "another," or "another angel," but there
is probably no Greek evidence whatever for " another."
The true reading, "the altar saying" or "speaking,"
is maintained by the three great uncials which still

208 GENERAL CONCLUSION.
contain this book (Codd. KAC), by the only remain
ing one of later date except B, by every known cursive
except Cod. 1, by fuld. (p. 103) and other good manu
scripts of the Vulgate, by the Syriac (which, however,
is no longer the Peshitc, but a much later version), by
the Armenian, by other copies of Andreas, and by
Arethas of Caesarea, who wrote a commentary on the
Apocalypse in the tenth century, and points out therein
the peculiar turn of expression, to which he gives
the technical name of synecdoche.

You will easily understand that the passages which
have been selected for examination in the course of the
present and the last preceding Lectures form numerically
but a very small portion of those whose readings have
been brought into question by Biblical critics. They have
been specially chosen from the mass, some for their novel
or interesting character, most of them either for their
unusual length or their intrinsic value. I can call to
mind none that through pressure of time have been
over-passed, which in gravity at all approach some of
those you have been invited to consider. Now, if the
case be thus, surely we are entitled to claim for the
existing text of the Greek New Testament such
moderate exemption from avoidable imperfections, such
almost entire freedom from wilful corruption, as will en
able us to use it with confidence both in our theological
studies and in our devotional reading. You will not,
I trust, be disposed to think slightingly of the science
of Textual criticism, or deem it unworthy of attention

GENERAL CONCLUSION. 209
in an age when every one is trying to learn a little
about everything ; if, while instructing us in the pro
cesses whereby a yet purer and more correct Bible may
be attained to, it assures us at the same time of the
general integrity and perfect honesty of that Authorized
version of the Holy Scriptures, which is the happy
inheritance of English-speaking nations.

SL. «

INDEX I.
OF THE MANUSCRIPTS AND ANCIENT VERSIONS OF THE
NEW TESTAMENT DESCRIBED IN THESE LECTURES.

Gheek MiKCSoniris. PAGES
Uncials. Codex Alexandrines (A)  49—56, 58- -9, 63, 160, 190
 Augiensis (F, S. Paul)  73—6,116
 Beza; (D, Gospels, Acts) ... 43, 63—8, 116, 143, 147, 153,
181, 185
 Boernerianus (G, S. Paul)  73—6,116
 Borgianus (T, Gospels)  150 note
 Claromontanus (D, S. Paul)  68—70, 75, 100, 116,
181, 184
 Coislin (H, S. Paul)  70
 Dublinensis (Z, Gospels)  76
 . Ephraem (C) ...49, 60—63, 116, 147, 149, 151, 160, 190
 Guelpherbytani (P, Q, Gospels)  76
 Laudianus (E, Acts)  71—3, 167, 203
 Monacensis (X, Gospels)  160
 Nitriensis (R, Gospels)  76
 Regius 62 (L, Gospels)  42, 43, 49, 77, 93, 121, 122,
137—8
 Ruber (M, S. Paul)  77
 Sangallensis (A, Gospels)  43,74
 Sangermanensis (E, S. Paul) ... 70—1, 72, 75, 116, 175
 Sinaiticus (K) ... 26, 32—41, 46—9, 57, 59, 79, 125, 147,
151, 152, 167, 191, 196
 Vaticanus (B)  25-32, 48, 49, 56-7, 59, 77, 116
 Zacynthius (S, Gospels)  144 and note
 B (Apocalypse)  207
 I (Gospels)  157
 N (Gospels)  78, 100
 Tb (Gospels)  155

212 INDEX I.
PAGES
Codex Wd (Gospels)  77
 T and A (Gospels)  78
Cursives.  1 (Gospels, Acts, Epistles)  79
 1 (Reuchlini, Apocalypse)  80, 206, 207
 7 (S.Paul)  198
 13 (Gospels)  82 note
 22 (Gospels)  129, 130
 33 (Gospels, 13 Acts, 17 S. Paul)  80, 167 note
 47 (S. Paul)  176, 180
 61 (Gospels, 34 Acts)  203—5
 61 (Acts)  83
 66 (Acts) )  180,189,194
 67 (S. Paul) )
 69 (Gospels, 31 Acts, 37 S. Paul, 14 Apoc.)  81, 131,
167 note, 191
 73 (S.Paul)  191
 95, 96 (Apocalypse)  83
 124 (Gospels)  82 note
 137 (Acts)  73
 157 (Gospels)  82
 162 (Acts, &c.)  203
 209 (Gospels)  122, 145
 274 (Gospels)  138
 346 (Gospels)  82 note
 y (Lectionary of Gospels)  83
Codd. KB compared  41—5, 46, 116, 137 note
 FG (S. Paul) compared  75, 179, 185
Professor Ferrar's group  82 and note, 116, 127, 129, 132, 135, 148,
151, 161.
Latin Manusckipts.
Old Version.
Codex a. (Vercellensis)  99
6. (Yeronensis)  100
c. (Paris)  49, 101
e. i. (Vienna)  101
/. (Brixianus)  100, 147
Jp-.ffK (Corbey)  101, 198
y\ g\ (S. Germain)  101

INDEX I. 213
. PAGES
n. (vaticanus)  ¦  101
j. (Sarzannensis)  100
7c. (Bobbiensis)  100, 138
m. (Speculum)  101, 205
New Version or Vulgate.
am. (Amiatinus)  103 105
fuld. (Fuldensis)  103
Ancient Veesions.
Syriac. Peshito  89
Curetonian  90
Philoxenian or Harclcan  92
Jerusalem  93
Egyptian  94—6
Memphitic  96
Thebaic  97
Latin, Old and New ox Vulgate  98 — 105
Editions of Popes Sixtus and Clement  104—5, 123, 132
Gothic  105
iEthiopie  ib.
Armenian  ib., 139 note
Georgian  106
Frankish  ib.
Anglo-Saxon  ib.
Persic  ib.
Arabic  ib.
 of Erpenius  ib., 159, 176 note

INDEX II.
OF TESTS OF HOLT SCRIPTURE ILLUSTRATED OR
REFERRED TO IN THESE LECTURES.

PAGES
Gen. xxxi. 47  89
Ex. xix. 13  193
— xxi. 33  149
— xxiii. 4  ib.
Lev. xxiii. 10, 11  145
Deut. i. 31  88
2 Sam. xxii  128
1 Kin. xiii. 2  207
2 Kin. xviii. 26  89
1 Chr. xxix. 11  122
2 Chr. xx. 6  ib.
— xxiv. 20— 22  48
Ps. ii. 7  168
— viii. 4— 6  193
— xviii  128
— xxii. 18  132, 136
Isai. viii. 13  199
— xxxvi. 11  89
— liii. 12  136
Dan.ii.4  89

PAGES
lEsdrasiv. 59  122
Prayer of Manasses  122
Matt. i. IS  108—9
— v. 11  121
— v. 22  119, 129, 146
— vi. 9—13  148
— vi. 13  122
— vii. 25  147 note
— ix. 13  115, 116
— xi. 19  124
— xii. 38—40  126
— xvi. 2, 3  ib.
— xvii. 17  129
 20  128
 21  128, 135
— xix. 16, 17  129
— xx. 28  91, 93
— xxiii. 35  47 — 8
— xxvi. 39  151
— xxvii. 28  42
 35  132, 136
— xxviii. 1  139
Markii. 17  115,116
— iii. 12  134
 30  135
— V. 10,23, 38  134

INDEX II.

215

PAGES
Mark vi. 20  133
 22  43—4
— vii. 19  134
 26  165
 31 ..'.  44—5
— ix.26  134
 29  128, 135
— x. 18  129
— xiv. 30, 68, 72  48—9
— xv. 28  136
— xvi. 6—8  56—7
 9—20  91,137—42
Lukei. 26  47
— ii. 14  142
— v. 32  115
— vi. 1, 6  145
 4  68
 22  121
 48  147 note
— vii. 18—35  124
— x. 41, 42  147, 153
— xi. 2, 4  148
 51  48
— xii. 54—56  127
— xiii. 15  149
— xiv. 5  ib.
 8—10  91
— xv. 18, 19,21  109
— xvi. 12  42
— xviii. 19  129
_ xxi. 24  42
 37,38  82,161
— xxii. 19  I81

37.

 136
 43,44....'  150,152
34  152
 153

— xxiii.
— xxiv.

John i. 18  153- 156

PAGES
Johnii. 3  47
 13  156
— iii. 13  155
 16, 18  154
— v. 1  156
 3,4  157
— vi. 4  156
— vii. 8  158
 36  161
 39  114
 53— viii. 11  82, 160—3
— viii. 6  200
— xii. 1  156
— xix. 24  132, 136
 36  181
— xxi. 21, 22  65
Acts vi. 1  166
 5  47
— viii. 24  68
 37  73,170
— ix. 5, 6  115
 29  166
— x. 15  135
 30  136
— xi. 18  165
 19—27  90
 20  47,164
 26  166
 30; xii. 25  43
— xiii. 1  90
 2,3  136
 18  87
 32, 33  167
 33  168
— xiv. 9  47
 23  136
— xv. 33, 34,40  169
— xvi. 7  171

21G

INDEX II.

PAGES
Acts xx. 28...  58, 72, 171
¦ — xxiv. 5  166
— xxvi. 14  115
— xxvii. 6, 18, 37  174
Rom. i. 7, 15  180
— v. 1  175, 182
— viii. 9  171
— xiii. 9  176
— xiv. 23  179
— xv. 23  98
 33  178
— xvi. 1, 5  177
¦  20, 24  178—80
¦  ¦ 22  8
 25—27  178—80
ICor. vii.5  136
— ix. 5  47
— xi. 24  180
— xiii. 5, 6  69
— xv. 27  195
 49, 51, 52  176,182
 51  183
— xvi. 15  177
2 Cor. iii. 6  186
— xiii. 11  178
Eph. i. 1  180
PhiL iii. 3  186
— iv. 9  178

PAGES,
Col. i. 27  187, 188
— ii. 21  187—9
1 Tim. iii. 15, 16. ..62, 81, 187, 189
—93, 199
2 Tim. iv. 13  8
Heb. ii. 4  47
 7  193
 8, 9  194
— iv. 2  195
— ix. 1  196
— xi. 13  197
— xii. 20  193, 197
 28  176
James ii. 18  198
— iii. 12  117
1 Peter iii. 15  199
— v. 13  46
1 Johnii. 23  200, 202
— iv.9  154
— v. 6—9  57
 7, 8  58, 101, 201—6
2 John 12  8
Rev. vi. 9  207
— xiii. 18  110, 175
— xvi. 5  207
 7  206—8

CAMBBIDGE : PEINTED BY C. J. CLAY, M.A. AT THE UNI VEESITY PEESS.

BY THE SAME AUTHOR.
A PLAIN INTRODUCTION TO THE CRITICISM
OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. For the Use of Biblical Stu
dents. Second Edition, thoroughly Revised, enlarged, and brought
down to the present date ; with an account of the Egyptian Ver
sions, contributed by Canon LIGHTFOOT. With numerous Illus
trative Extracts from MSS., lithographed in facsimile. Demy 8vo.
i6j.
CODEX BEZ^E CANTABRIGIENSIS. Edited, with
Prolegomena, Notes, and Facsimiles. 4to. 26s.
A FULL COLLATION OF THE CODEX SINAITI
CUS, with the Received Text of the New Testament ; to which is
prefixed a Critical Introduction. Second Edition, revised. Fcap.
8vo. 5s.
"Mr Scrivener has now placed the results of Tischendorf's discovery
within reach of all in a charming little volume, which ought to
form a companion to the Greek Testament in the library of every
Biblical student." — Reader.
AN EXACT TRANSCRIPT OF THE CODEX AU-
GIENSIS, a Graico-Latin Manuscript in Uncial Letters of S.
Paul's Epistles, preserved in the Library of Trinity College,
Cambridge. To which is added a Collation of Fifty Manuscripts
containing various portions of the Greek New Testament deposited
in English Libraries : with a full Critical Introduction. Royal 8vo.
26s. The Critical Introduction is issued separately, price 5s.
NOVUM TESTAMENTUM GR^ECUM, Textus Ste-
phanici, 1J50. Accedunt variae lectiones editionum Bezae, Elzeviri,
Lachmanni, Tischendorfii, et Tregellesii. i6mo. 4s. 6d.
This Edition embodies all the readings of Tregelles and of Tischen
dorf's Eighth or Latest Edition.
An Edition with wide Margin for Notes. 7s. 6d.
A FULL AND EXACT COLLATION OF ABOUT
TWENTY GREEK MANUSCRIPTS OF THE HOLY GOS
PELS (hitherto unexamined) deposited in the British Museum,
the Archiepiscopal Library at Lambeth, &c., with a Critical Intro
duction. Demy 8vo. 6s.
DEIGHTON, BELL, AND CO. CAMBRIDGE.
GEORGE BELL AND SONS, LONDON.

December 1877.

A CLASSIFIED LIST
OF
EDUCATIONAL WORKS

PUBLISHED BY

GEORGE BELL & SONS.

Full Catalogues will be sent post free on application.

BIBLIOTHECA CLASSICA.
A Series of Greek and Latin Authors, with English Ni>tes , edited by
eminent Scholars. 8ve.
¦ffiscbyhis. By F. A. Paley, M.A. 18s.
Cicero's Orations. By G. Long, M.A. 4 vols. 16s., lis., 16»., 18s.
Demosthenes. By R. Whiston, M.A. 2 vols. 16s. each.
Euripides. By F. A. Paley, M.A. 3 vols. 16s. each.
Homer. By F. A. Paley, M.A. Vol. I. 12s.; Vol. II. 14s.
Herodotus. By Rev. J. W. Blakesley, B.D. 2 vols. 32s.
Hesiod. By F. A. Paley, M.A. 10s. 6d.
Horace. By Rev. A. J. Macleane, M.A. 18s.
Juvenal and Persius. By Rev. A. J. Macleane, M.A. 12s.
Plato. By W. H. Thompson, D.D. 2 vols. 7s. 6d. each.
Sophocles. By Rev. F. H. Bla.vdes, M.A. Vol.1. 18s.
Tacitus: The Annals. By the Rev. P. Frost. 15s.
Terence. By E. St. J. Parry, M.A. 18s.
Virgil. By J. Conington, M.A. 3 vols. 12s., 14s., lis.
An Atlas of Classical Geography; Twenty-four Maps. By W.
Hughes and George Long, M.A. New edition, with coloured outlines.
Imperial Svo. 12s. 6<J. Uniform with above
A Complete Latin Grammar. By J. W. Donaldson, D.D. 3rd
Edition. 14s.
A Complete Greek Grammar. Bj J. W- Donaldson, D.D. 3rd
Edition. 16s.

George Bell and Sons'

GRAMMAR-SCHOOL CLASSICS.
A Series of Greek and Latin Authors, with English Notes. Fcap. 8i-o.
Cffisir de Bello Gallico. By George Long, M.A. fts. 6d.
 Books I.-I1L For Junior Classes. By G.Long, M.A. 2s.6d.
Catullus, Tibullus, and Propertius. Selected Poems. With Life. By
Rev. A. H. Wratislaw. 3s. 6d.
Cicero: De Senectute, De Amicitia, and Select Epistles. By
George Long, M.A. 4s. 6d.
Cornelius Nepos. By Rev. J. F. Macmichael. 2s. 6d.
Homer: Iliad. Books I.-XII. By F. A. Paley, M.A. 6s. 6d.
Horace. With Life. By A. J. Macleane, M.A. 6s. C>d.
Juvenal: Sixteen Satires. By H. Prior, M.A. Is. 6i/.
Martial: Select Epigrams. With Life. By F. A. Paley, M.A. 6s.6d.
Ovid : the Fasti. By F. A. Paley, M.A. 5s.
Sallust: CatiJina and Jugurtha. With Life. By G. Long, M.A. 5s.
Tacitus: Germania and Agricola. By Rev. P. Frost. 3s. 6d.
Virgil ; Bucolics, Georgics, and jEneid, Books I. -IV. Abridged
from Professor Conington's editir-n. 5s. 6<i.
(The Bucolics and Georgics in one volume. 3s.)
 ^Eneid.Bks.V.-XlI. Abgd. from Prof. Conington's Ed. 5s.6rf.
Xenophon: The Anabasis. With Life. By Rev. J. F. Macmichael. 5s.
 The Cyropsedia. By G. M. Gorham, M.A. 6s.
 Memorabilia. By Percival Frost, M.A. 4s. 6d.
A Grammar- School Atlas of Classical Geography. Containing Ten
selected Maps. Imperial Svo. 5s.
Uniform with the Series.
The New Testament, in Greek. With English Notes, &c. By
Rev. J. F. Macmichael. Is. 6rf.

CAMBRIDGE GREEK AND LATIN TEXTS.
.Eschylus. By F. A. Paley, M.A. 3s.
Cssar de Bello Gallico. By G. Long, M.A. S».
Cicero de Senectute et de Amicitia, et Epistola3 Selects. By
G. Long, M.A. Is. (>d.
Ciceronis Orationes. Vo'. I. (in Verrem). By G. Long, M.A. 3s.6d.
Euripides. By F. A. Paley, M A. 3 vols. 3s. 6d. each.
Herodotus. By J. G. Blakesley, B.D. 3 vols. 7s.
Homtrillias. I.-XII. By F. A. Paley, M.A. 2s. 6d.
Hoiatius. By A. J. Macleane, M.A. 2s. fid.

Educational Works.

Juvenal et Persius. By A. J. Macleane, M..V. Is. fid.
Lucretius. By H. A. J. Munr.i, M.A. 3s. 6d.
Sallusti Crispi Catilina et Jugurtha. By G. Long, M.A. Is. dd.
Terenti Comoedize. By W. Wagner, Ph.D. 3s.
Thucydides. By I. G. Donaldson, D.D. 2 vols. 7s.
Virgilius. By J. Couington, M.A. 3s. dd.
Xenophontis Expeditio Cyri. By J. F. Macmichael, B.A. 2s. dd.
Novum Testamentum Grsecum. By F. IT. Scrivener, M.A. Is. dd.
An edition with wide margin for notes, 12s.
CAMBRIDGE TEXTS WITH NOTES.
A Selection of the most usually read nf the Greek and Latin Authors
Annotated for Schools. Fcap Bvo. Is. dd. each.
Euripides. Alcestis. By F. A. Paley, M.A.
 Medea. By F. A. Paley, M.A.
 Hippolytus. By F. A. Paley, M.A.
 Hecuba. By F. A. Paley, M.A.
 Bacchaj. By V. A. Paley, M.A.
.ffischylus. Prometheus Vinctus. By F. A. Paley, M.A.
Ovid. Selections. By A. J. Macleane, M.A.
PUBLIC SCHOOL SERIES.
A Series of Classical Texts, annotated by well known Scholars.
Crown 8vo.
Aristophanes. The Peace. By F. A. Paley, M.A. is. dd.
 The Acharnians. By F. A. Taley, M.A. is. dd.
 The Frogs. By F. A. Paley, M.A. is. dd.
Cicero. The Letters to Atticu=. Bk. I. By A. Pretor, M.A. -is. dd.
Demosthenes de Falsa Legatione. By R. Shilleto, M. A. 6s.
 The Law of Leptines. By B. W. Beatson, M.A.
Plato. The Apologv of Socrates and Crito. By W. Wagner, Ph.D.
4th Edition. 4s. 6d.
 The Phcedo. By W. Wagner, Ph.D. 5s. dd.
 The Protagoras. By W. Wayte, M.A. is. dd.
Plautus. TheAulularia. By W. Wagner, Ph.D. 2nd Edition. is.6d.
 Trlnummus. By W. Wagner, Ph.D. 2nd Edition. 4«. dd.
 . The Menaechmei. By W. Wagner, Pb. D. [Immediately.
Sophoclis Trachinias. By A. Pretor, M.A. is. fid.
Terence. By W. Wagner, Ph.D. 10s. dd.
Theocritus. By F. A. Paley, M.A. is. dd.
Others in prrparauon.

George Bell and Sons'

CRITICAL AND ANNOTATED EDITIONS.
ffitna. By H. A. J. Munro, M.A. 3s. dd.
Aristophanis Comcedise. By H. A. Holden, LL.D. 8vo. 2 vols.
23s. &d. Plays sold separately.
,  Pax. By F. A. Paley, M.A. Fcap. 8vo. is. dd.
Horace. Quinii Horatii Flacci Opera. By H. A. J. Munro, M.A.
Large 8vo. 11. Is.
Livy. The first five Books. By J. Prendeville. 12mo. roan, 5s.
Or Books I.-III. 3s. 6d. IV. and V. 3s. 6d.
Lucretius. Titi Lucretii Cari de Rerum Natura Libri Sex. With
a Translation and Notes. By H. A. J. Munro, M.A. 2 vols. 8vo. Vol.1.
Text, His. Vol. II. Translation, 6s. (Sold separately.)
Ovid. P. Ovidii Nasonis Heroides XIV. By A. Palmer, M.A. 8vo. 6s.
Propertius. Sex. Aurelii Propertii Carmina. By F. A. Taley, M.A.
bvo. Cloth, 8s
Sophocles. The Ajax, By C. E. Palmer, M.A. 4s. dd.
Thucydides. The History of the Peloponnesian War. By Richard
Shilluto, M.A. Book I. 8vo. 6s. W. (Book II. in the press.)
Greek Testament. Bv Henry All'ord, D.D. 4 vols. 8vo. (Sold
separately.) Vol.1. 12. 8s. Vol. II. Ii. 4s. Vol. III. 18s. Vol. IV. Part 1. 18s.;
Part II. 14s.; or in one Vol. 32s.

LATIN AND GREEK CLASS-BOOKS.
Auxilia Latina. A Series of Progressive Latin Exercises. By
Rev. J. B. Baddeley, M.A. Fcap. 8vo. 2s.
Latin Prose Lessons. By A. J. Church, M.A. 2nd Edit. Fcap. 8vo.
2s. 6ri.
Latin Exercises and Grammar Papers. By T. Collins, M.A. Fcap.
8vo. 2s. 6d.
Analytical Latin Exercises. By C.P.Mason, B.A. 2nd Edit. 3s. dd.
ScalaGraBca: a Series of E'ementary Greek Exercises. By Rev. J. W.
Davis, M.A., and R W. Baddeley, M.A. 3rd Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 2s ed.
Greek Verse Composition. By G. Preston, M.A. Crown 8vo. is. lid.
By the Rev. P. Fbost, M.A., St. John's College, Cambridge.
Eclogse Latins;; or, First Latin Reading Book, with English Notes
and a Dictionary. New Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d.
Materials for Latin . Prose Composition. New Edition. Fcap. Svo.
2s. ed. Key, 4s.
A Latin Verse Book. An Introductory Work on Hexameters and
Pentameters. New Edition. Fcap. Svo. 3s. Key, 5s.
Arjalecta Graca Minora, with Introductory Sentences, English Notes,
and a Dictionary. New Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. Qd.
Materials for Greek Prose Composition. New Edit. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. dd.
Ke.v, 5s.
Florileginm Poeticum. Elegiac Extracts from Ovid and Tibullus
New Edition. With Notes. Fcap. 8vo. 3s.

Educational Works.

By the Rev. F. E. Gretton.
A First Cheque-Book for Latin Verse-makers. Is. dd.
A Latin Version for Masters, 'is. dd.
Reddenda; or, Pa^saa-es with Parallel Hints for Translation into
Latin Prose and Verso. Crown Svo. 4s. ed.
Reddenda Reddita (see next page).
By H. A. Hoi.dek, LL.D.
Foliorura Silvula. Part 1. Passages for Translation into Latin
Elegiac and Heroic Verse. 8th Edition. Post 8vo. 7s. 6d.
 Part II. Select Passages for Translation into Latin Lyric
and Comic Iambic Verse. 3rd Edition. Post 8vo. 5s.
Part III. Select Passages for Translation into Greek Verse.

3rd Edition. Past 8vo.
Folia Silvula?, sive Eclogse Poetarum AngUcorum in Latinum et
Graeeum conversae. 8vo. Vol. I. 10s. 6d. Vol. II. 12s.
Foliorura Centnrise. Select Passages for Translation into Latin and
Greek Prose. 6th Edition. Post 8vo. 8s.

TRANSLATIONS, SELECTIONS, &c.
%* Many of the following books are well adapted for school prizes.
JEschylus. Translated into English Prose by F. A. Paley, M.A.
2nd Edition. Svo. 7s. ed.
, Translated by Anna Swanwick. Crown 8vo. 2 vols. 12s.
 Folio Edition, with Thirty-three Illustrations from Flax-
man's designs. 11. 2s.
Antbologia Grffiea. A Selection of Choice Greek Poetry, with Notes.
By Rev. F. St. John Thackeray, ith and Cheaper Edition. 16mo. 4s ed.
Antbologia Latina. A Selection of Choice Latin Poetry, from Ntevius
to Buechius, with Notes. By Rev. F. St. John Thackeray. Fcap. 8vo.
6s. ed.
Aristophanes: The Peace. Text and metrical translation. By
B. B. Rogers, M.A. Fcap. 4to. 7s. fid.
 The Wasps. Text and metrical translation. By B. B.
Rogers, M.A. Fcap. 4to. 7s. 6rf.
Corpus Poetarum Latinorum. Edited by Walker. 1 vol. 8vo. 18s.
Horace. The Odes and Carmen Sreculare. In English verse by
J. Conington, M.A. 7th edition. Fcap. 8vo. 5-s. ed.
.  The Satires and Epistles. In English verse by J. Coning
ton, M.A. 4th edition. 6s fid.
 Illustrated from Antique Gems by C. W. King, M.A. The
text revised with Introduction by H. A. J. Munro, M.A. Large 8vo. 11. Is.

George Bell and Sons'

Mvsas Etonenses, sive Carminvm Ktonte Co. d torvm Delectvs. By
Ric' ard Okea. 2 vols Svo. 15s
Propertius. A'erse translations from B -ok V., with revised Latin
Text. By F. A. Ia'?y, M.A Fcap. 8\o. 3s.
Plato. Gorgias. Tianslated by E. M Cope, M.A. 8vo. 7s.
 Philebus. Translated by F. A. Paley, M.A. • Small Svo. is.
 Thesetetus. Translated by F. A. Taley, M.A. Small bvo. 4s.
 Analysis and Index of the Dia'ogues. By Dr. Day. Post
8vo. 5s.
Reddenda Eeddita: Passages from English Poetry, with a Latin
Veisc T.anblatiou. By F. E. Grettou. Crown Svo. 6s.
Sabrinte Corolla in hortnlis Reeiae Scholie Sa'opiensis contexuerunt
tres viri floribus legendis. Editio tei-tia. 8vo. 8s. 6d.
Sertum Carthusianum Floribus trium Seculorum Contextum. By
W. H. Brown. 8vo 14s.
Theocritus. In English Verse, by C. S. Calverley, M.A. Crown 8vo.
7s. 6d.
Translations into English and Latin. By C. S. Calverley, M.A.
Post 8vo. 7s. ed.
 into Greek and Latin Verse. By R. C. Jebb. 4to. cloth
gi t. 10s. 6d.
Virgil in English Rhythm. By Rev. R. C. Singleton. Large crown
8vo. 7s. 6d.
REFERENCE VOLUMES.
A Latin Grammar. ByT.H Key, M.A. 6th Thousand. PostSvo. 8s.
A Short Latin Grammar for Schools. By T. H. Kev, M.A., F.R.S.
llth Edition. Post 8vo. 3s. 6rf.
A Guide to the Choice of Classical Books. By J. B. Miyor, M.A.
Crown 8vo. 2.*.
The Theatre of the Greeks. By J. W. Donaldson, D.D. 8th Edition,
Post Svo. 5s.
A Dictionary of latin and Greek Quotations. By H. T. Riley. Tost
8vo. 5s. With Index Verborum, 6s.
A History of Roman Literature. By W. S. Teuffel. Professor at the
University of Tubingen. By W. Wagner, Ph.D. 2 vols Demy 8vo. 21s.
Students Guide to the University of Cambridge. Revised and cor.
rected. 3rd Edition. Fcap. Svo. 6s 6d.

CLASSICAL TABLES.
Greek Verbs. A Catalogue of Verbs, Irregular and Defect' ve; their
leading formations, tenses, and inflexions, with Paradigms for conjugation
Rules for formation of tenses, &c. &c. By J. S. Baird, T CD. 2s. 6d.
Greek Accents (Notes on). By A. Barry, D.D. New Edition. Is.
Homeric Dialect. Its Leading Forms and Peculiarities. By J S
Baird, T.C.D. Is.
Greek Accidence. By the Rev. P. Frost, M.A. New Edition. Is.
Latin Accidence. By the Rev. P. Frost. M.A. Is.

Educational Works.

Latin Versification. Is.
Xotabilia Quajdam; or the Principal Tenses of most 0f the Irregular
Greek Verbs and Elementary Greek, Latin, and French Constructions.
New edition. Is.
Richmond Rules for the Ovidian Distich, &c. By J. Tate, M.A. Is.
'Ihe Principles of Latin Syntax. Is.

CAMBRIDGE SCHOOL AND COLLEGE
TEXT-BOOKS.
A Series of Elementary Treatises for the vsc of SI admits in the Univer
sities, St hools, and Candidates for the Public
Examinations. Fcap. 8vo.
Arithmetic. By Rev. C. Else •, M.A. Fcap. Svo. Tib Edit. 3«. dd.
Algebra. By the Rev. C. Elsee, M.A. 4th Edit. is.
Arithmetic. By A. Wiigley, M.A. 3s. dd.
 A Progressive ('nurse of Examples. With Answers. By
J. Watson, M A. 3rd Edition. 2s. 6d.
Algebra Progressive Course of Examples. With An=-wtrs. By
Rev. W. F. M'Michacl, M.A.. and R. Prowde Smith, M A [Immtdiate'y.
An Introduction to Plane Astronomy. By P. T. Main, M.A. 3rd
Edition. [In the Press.
Conic Sections treated Geometrically. By W. H. Besant, M.A.
2nd Edition. 4s. 6d.
Elementary Statics. By Rev. H. Goodwin, D.D. 2nd Edit. 3s.
Elementary Dynamics. By Rev. H. Goodwin, D.D. Hn-l Edit. 3s.
Elementary Hydrostatics. By W. H. Besant, M.A. 7th Edit 4».
An Elementary Treatise on Mensuration. By B. T. Moore, M.A. 5s.
The First Three Sections of Newton's Principia, with an Appendix;
and tbc Ninth and Eleventh Sections By J. H. Evans, M A. 5th Edition,
by P. T. Main, M A. 4i
Elementary Trigonometry. By T. P. Hudson, M.A. 3s. dd.
Geometrical Optics. With Answers. By W. S. Aldis, M.A. 3s. dd.
Analytical Geometry for Schools. By T.G. Vjvyan. 3rd Edit, is dd.
Companion to the Greek Testament. By A. C. Barrett, A.M. 3rd
Edit on. Fcap 8vo. 5s.
An Historical and Explanatory Treatise on the Book of Common
Prayer. By W. G. Humphry, B.D. 5th Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 4s. 6d.
Music. By H. C. Banister. 6th Edition revised. 5s.
 History of. By H. G. Bonatii Hunt, Mm. B. Oxon.
 [Shortly.
ARITHMETIC AND ALGEBRA.
Principles and Practice of Arithmetic. By J. Hiod, M.A. 9th Edit.
4«. 6rf.
Elements of Algehra. By J. Hind, M.A. 6th Edit. 8vo. 10s. dd.
See al'0 foregoing Series.

George Bell and Sons'

GEOMETRY AND EUCLID.
Text Book of Geometry. By T. S. Aldis, M.A. Small 8vo. 4s. dd.
Parti. 2s. ed. Part II. 2s.
The Elements of Euclid. By H. J. Hose. Fcap. Svo. 4s. dd.
Exercises separately, Is.
¦  The First Six Books, with Commentary by Dr. Lardner.
10th Edition. 8vo. 6s.
The First Two Books explained to Beginners. By C. P.

Mason. B.A. 2nd Edition. Fcap. Svo. 2s. Gd.
The Enunciations and Figures to Euclid's Elements. By Rev. J.
Brasse, D.D. 3-rd Edition. Fcap. Svo. Is. On Cards, in case, 5s. 6d.
Without the Figures, Gd.
Exercises on Euclid and in Modern Geometry. By J. McDowell, B.A.
Crown Svo. 8s. ed.
Geometrical Conic Sections. By W.H. Besant, M.A. 2ndEdit. is.dd.
The Geometry of Conies. By C. Taylor, M.A. 2nd Edit. Svo. 4s. dd.
Solutions of Geometrical Problems, proposed at St. John's College
from 1830 to 1846. By T. Gaskin, M.A. 8vo. 12s.

TRIGONOMETRY.
The Shrewsbury Trigonometry. By J. C. P. Aldous. Crown 8vo. 2s.
Elementary Trigonometry. By T. P. Hudson, M.A. 3s. dd.
Elements of Plane and Spherical Trigonometry. By J. Hind, M.A.
5th Edition. 12mo. 6s.
An Elementary Treatise on Mensuration. By B. T. Moore, M.A. 5s.

ANALYTICAL GEOMETRY
AND DIFFERENTIAL CALCULUS.
An- Introduction to Analytical Plane Geometry. By W. P. Turnbull,
M.A. Svo. 12s.
Treatise on Plane Co-ordinate Geometry. By M. O'Brien, M.A.
8vo. 9s.
Problems on the Principles of Plane Co-ordinate Geometry. By W.
Walton, M.A. 8vo. 16s.
Trilinear Co-ordinates, and Modern Analytical Geometry of Two Di
mensions. By W. A. Whitworth, M.A. 8vo. 16s.
Choice and Chance. By W. A. Whitworth. 2nd Edit. Cr. 8vo. 6s.
An Elementary Treatise on Solid Geometry. By W. S. Aldis, M.A.
2nd Edition, revised. 8vo. 8s.
Geometrical Illustrations of the Differential Calculus. By M. B. Pell.
8vo. 2s. 6d.
Elementary Treatise on the Differential Calculus. By M. O'Brien,
M.A. 8vo. IDs. ed.
Notes on Roulettes and Glissettes. By W. H. Besant, M.A. 8vo.
3s ed.
Elliptic Functions, Elementary Treatise on. By A. Cayley, M.A.
Demy. 15s.

Educational Works.

MECHANICS & NATURAL PHILOSOPHY.
Elementary Statics. By H. Goodwin, D.D. Fcap. 8vo. 2nd Edit. 3s.
Treatise on Statics. By S.Earnshaw, M.A. 4th Edit. Svo. 10s. dd.
A Treatise on Elementary Dynamics. By W. Garnett,B.A. Cr.8vo. 6s.
Elementary Dynamics. By H. Goodwin, D.D. Fcap.8vo. 2nd Edit.
3s.
Problems in Statics and Dynamics. By W. Walton, M.A. 8vo. 10s. dd.
Problems in Theoretical Mechanics. By W. Walton. 2nd Edit.
revised and enlarged. Demy Svo. 16s.
An Elementary Treatise on Mechanics. By Prof. Potter. 4th Edit.
revised. 8s. ed.
Elementary Hydrostatics. By Prof. Potter. 7s. dd.
 By W. H. Bezant, M.A. Fcap. Svo. 8th Edition. 4s.
A Treatise on Hydromechanics. By W. H. Besant, M.A. 8vo.
New Edition revised. 10s. 6d.
A Treatise on the Dynamics of a Particle. By W. H. Besant, M.A.
[Preparing.
Solutions of Examples on the Dynamics of a Rigid Body. By W. N.
Griffin, M.A. Svo. 6s. 6f.
Of Motion. An Elementary Treatise. By J. R. Lunn, M.A. 7s. dd.
Geometrical Optics. By W. S. Aldis, M.A. Fcap. 8v0. 3s. dd.
A Chapter on Fresnel's Theory of Double Refraction. By W. S.
Aldis, M.A. 8vo. 2s.
An Elementary Treatise on Optics. By Prof. Potter. Part I. 3rd Edit.
9s. 6d. Part II. 12s. 6d.
Physical Optics; or the Nature and Properties of Light. By Prof.
Potter, A.M. 6s. ed. Part II. 7s. ed.
Heat, An Elementary Treatise on. By W. Garnett, B.A. Crown
8vo. 2s. 6d.
Figures Illustrative of Geometrical Optics. From Scbelbach. By
W. B. Hopkins. Folio. Plates. 10s. 6d.
The First Three Sections of Newton's Principia, with an Appendix;
and the Ninih and Eleventh Sections. By J. H. Evans, M.A. 5th Edit.
Edited by P. T. Main, M.A. 4s
An Introduction to Plane Astronomy. By P. T. Main, M.A. Fcap.
8vo. cloth. 4s.
Practical and Spherical Astronomy. By B. Main, M.A. 8vo. 14s.
Elementary Chapters on Astronomy, from the " Astronomie Phy
sique " of Biot. By H. Goodwin, D.D. 8vo. 3s. ed.
A Compendium of Facts and Formula? in Pure Mathematics and Natural
Philosophy. By G. R. Smalley. Fcap. 8vo. 3s ed.
Elementary Course of Mathematics. By H. Goodwin, D.D. fitb Edit.
Svo. 16s
Problems and Examples, adapted to the "Elementary Course of
Mathematics." 3rd Edition. 8vo. 5s.
Solutions of Goodwin's Collection of Problems and Examples, By
W. W. Hutt, M. A. 3rd Edition, revised and enlarged. 8vo. 9s.

10 George Bell and Sons'
Elementary Examples in Pure Mathematics. By J. Taylor. 8vo.
7s. 6d.
Mechanical Euclid. By the late W. Whewell, D.D. 5th Edition, 5*.
Mechanics of Construction. With numerous Examples. By S. Fen-
wick, F.R A.S. 8vo 12s.
Table of Anti-Logarithms. By H. E. Filipowski. 3rd Edit. Svo. 15s.
Mathematical and other Writings of R. L. Ellis, M.A. Svo. 16s.
Notes on the Principles of Pure and Applied Calculation. By Rev.
J. Chailis, M.A Demy 8vo. 15s.
The Mathematical Principle of Physics. By Rev. J. Chailis, M.A.
Demy 8vo. 5s.
HISTORY, TOPOGRAPHY, &c.
Rome and the Campagna. By R. Burn, M.A. With 85 Engravings
and 2(1 Maps and Plans. With Appendix. 4to. SI. 3s.
Modern Europe. By Dr. T. H. Dyer. 2nd Edition revised and
continued. 5 vols, demy 8vo. 21. 12s. 6d.
The History of the Kings of Rome. By Dr. T. H Dyer. 8vo. 16s.
A Plea for Livy. By Dr T. H. Dyer. Svo. Is.
Roma Regalis. By Dr. T. H. Dyer. Svo. 2s. dd.
The History of Pompeii: its Buildings and Antiquities. By T. H.
Dyer. 3rd Edition, brought down to 1874. Post Svo. 7s. 6d.
Ancient Athens : its History, Topography, and Remains. By T. H.
D>er. Super-royal 8vo. Cloth. M. 5s.
The Decline of the Roman Republic. By G. Long. 5 vols. 8vo.
14s each.
A History of England during the Early and Middle Ages. By C. H.
Pear&on, M.A. 2nd Edit., revised and enlarged. 8vo. Vol. I. 16s.
Vol II. 14s.
Historical Maps of England. By C. H. Pearson. Folio. 2nd E lit.
revised. 31s. 6d.
A Practical Synopsis of English History. By A. Bowes. 4th Edit.
Svo. 2s.
Student's Text-Book of English and General History. By D. Beale.
Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d
Lives of the Queens of England. By A. Strickland. Library Edition,
8 vols 7s. 6d. each. Cheaper Edition, 6 vols. 5s each. Abridged Edition
1 vol. 6s. 6d
Eginhard's Life of Karl the Great. Translated with Notes by
W. Glaister, M.A., B.C.L. Crown Svo. 4s. 6d.
Outlines of Indian History. By A. W. Hughes. Small post 8vo. 3s. dd.
The Elements of General History. By Prof. Tjtler. New Edition,
brought down to 1874. Small post Svo 3s. 6d.
Ati,a«es.
An Atlas of Classical Geography. 24 Maps. By W. Hughes and
G.Long, M.A. New Edition. Imperial 8vo. 12s. id.
A Grammar-School Atlas of Classical Geography. Ten Maps selected
from the above. New Edition. Imperial 8vo. 5s.
First Classical Maps. By the Rev. J. Tate, M.A. 3rd Edition.
Imperial 8vo. 7s. 6d.
Standard Library Atlas of Classical Geography. Imp. 8vo. 7s. dd.

Educational Works. 11

PHILOLOGY.
WEBSTER'S DICTIONARY OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE.
Re-edited by N. Porter and C. A. Goodrich. Writh Dr. Mahn's Ety
mology. 1 vol. 21s. With Appendices and 70 additional pages of
Illustrations, 31s ed.
" The best practical English Dictionary extant " — Quarterly Review.
Prospectuses, with specimen pages, post free on application.
New Dictionary of the English Language. Combining Explanation
with Etymology, and copiously illustrated by Quotations from the best
Authorities. By Dr. Richardson. New Edition, with a Supplement. 2
vols 4to. it. lis. ed. ; half russia, 51. 15s. ed ; russia, 6(. 12s. Supple
ment separately. 4to. 12s.
An 8vo. Edition, without the Quotations, 15s. ; half russia, 20s. ; russia,
24s.
The Elements of the English Language. By E. Adams, Ph. D.
15th Edition Post8vo. 4s. 6d.
Philological Essays. By T. H. Key, M.A., F.R.S. Svo. 10s. dd.
Language, its Origin and Development. By T. H. Key, M.A., F.R.S.
8vo. 14s.
Synonyms and Antonyms of the English Language. By Archdeacon
Smith. 2nd Edition. Post 8vo. 5s.
Synonyms Discriminated. By Archdeacon Smith. Demy 8vo. 16s.
A Syriac Grammar. By G. Phillips, D.D. 3rd Edit., enlarged.
8vo 7s. ed.
A Grammar of the Arabic Language. By Rev. W. J. Beaumont, M.A.
Umo. 7s

DIVINITY, MORAL PHILOSOPHY, &c.
Novum Testamentum Grsecum, Textus Stephanici, 1550. By F. H.
Scrivener, A M., LL D. New Edition. 16mo. 4s. 6ci. Also on Writing
Paper, with Wide Margin. Half-bound. 12s.
By the same Author.
Codex Bezse Cantabrigiensis. 4to. 26s.
A Full Collation of the Codex Sinaiticus with the Received Text of
the New Testament, with Critical Introduction. 2nd Edition, revised.
Fcap. Svo. 5s.
A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament. With
Forty Facsimiles from Ancient Manuscripts. New Edition. 8vo. 16s.
Six Lectures on the Text of the New Testament. For English Readers.
Crown 8vo. es. 
The New Testament for English Readers. By the lafe H. Alford,
DD Vol.1 Part I. 3rd Edit. 12s. Vol I. Part It 2nd Edit. 10s. ed.
Vol II. Part 1. 2nd Edit.. 16s. Vol. II. Part II. 2nd Edit. 16s.
The Greek Testament. By the late H. Alford, D.D. Vol. I. 0th
Edit. 1(. 8s. Vol. II. 6th Edit. 1(. ii. Vol. III. 5th Edit. 18s. Vol. IV.
Part I. 4th Edit. 18s. Vol. IV. Part II. 4tn Edit. 14s. Vol. IV., XL 12s.

12 George Belt and Sons'
Companion to the Greek Testament. By A. C. Barrett, M.A. 3rd
Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 5s.
Hints for Improvement in the Authorised Version of the New
Testament. By the late J. Scholefield, M.A. 4th Edit. Fcap. 8vo. 4s.
Liber Apologeticus. The Apology of Tertullian, with English
Notes, by H. A. Woodham, LL.D. 2nd Edition. Svo. 8s. 6cS.
The Book of Psalms. A New Translation, with Introductions, &c.
By Rev. J. J. Stewart Perowne, D.D. Svo. Vol. I. 4th Edition, 18s.
Vol. II. 3rd Edit. 16s.
 Abridged for Schools. 2nd Edition. Crown Svo. 10s. dd.
The Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England. By the Ven.
Archdeacon Welcbmau. New Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. Interleaved, 3s.
History of the Articles of Religion. By C. H. Hardwick. 3rd Edition.
Post 8vo. 5s.
Pearson on the Creed. Carefully printed from an early edition.
With Analysis and Index by E. Walford, M.A. Post 8vo. 5s.
Doctrinal System of St. John as Evidence of the Date of his Gospel.
By Rev. J. J. Lias, M.A. Crown Svo. 6s.
An Historical and Explanatory Treatise on the Book of Common
Prayer. By Rev. W. G. Humphry, B.D. 6th Edition, enlarged. Small
post 8vo. 4s. ed.
The New Table of Lessons Explained. By Rev. W. G. Humphry,
B.D. Fcap. Is. ed.
A Commentary on the Gospels for the Sundays and other Holy Days
of the Christian Year. By Rev. W. Denton, A.M. New Edition. 3 vols.
8vo. 54s. Sold separately.
Commentary on the Epistles for the Sundays and other Holy Days
of the Christian Year. 2 vols. 36s. Sold separately.
Commentary on the Acts. Vol.1. 8vo. 18s. Vol.11. 14s.
Jewel's Apology for the Church of England, with a Memoir. 32mo. 2s.
Notes .on the Catechism. By Rev. A. Barry, D.D. 5th Edit.
Fcap. 2s.
Catechetical Hints and Helps. By Rev. E. J. Boyce, M.A. 3rd
Edition, revised. Fcap. 2s. 6d.
Examination Papers on Religious Instruction. By Rev. E. J. Boyce.
Sewed. Is. ed.
Church Teaching for the Church's Children. An Exposition of the
Catechism. By the Rev. F. W. Harper. Sq. fcap. 2s.
The Winton Church Catechist. Questions and Answers on the
Teaching of the Church Catechism. By the late Rev. J. S. B Monsell,
LL.D. 3rd Edition. Cloth, 3s. ; or in Four Parts, sewed.
The Church Teacher's Manual of Christian Instruction. By Rev.
M. F. Sadler. 16th Thousand. 2s. ed.
Brief Words on School Life. By Rev. J. Kempthorne. Fcap. 3s. dd.
Short Explanation of the Epistles and Gospels of the Christian Year,
with Questions. Royal 32mo. 2s. ed. ; calf, 4s. ed.
Butler's Analogy of Religion ; with Introduction and Index by Rev.
Dr. Steere. New Edition. Fcap. 3s. 6<2.

Educational Works. 13
Butler's Three Sermons on Human Nature, and Dissertation on
Virtue. By W. Whewell, D.D. 4th Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d.
Lectures on the History of Moral Philosophy in England. By W.
Whewell, D.D. Crown 8vo. 8s.
Elements of Morality, including Polity. By W. Whewell, D.D. New
Edition, in 8vo. 15s.
Astronomy and General Physics (Bridgewater Treatise). New Edi
tion. 5s.
Kent's Commentary on International Law. By J. T. Abdy, LL.D.
New and Cheap Edition. Crown Svo. [Immediately.
A Manual of the Roman Civil Law. By G. Leapingwell, LL.D. 8vo.
12s.

FOREIGN CLASSICS.
A series for use in Schools, with English Notes, grammatical and
explanatory, and renderings of difficult idiomatic expressions.
Fcap. Qvo.
Schiller's Wallenstein. By Dr. A. Buchbeim. 2nd Edit. 6s. dd.
Or the Lager and Piccolomini, 3s. ed. Wallenstein's Tod, 3s. ed.
 Maid of Orleans. By Dr. W. Wagner. 3s. dd.
 Maria Stuart. By V. Kastner. 3s.

Goethe's Hermann and Dorothea. By E. Bell, M.A., and E. Wolfel.
2s. 6d.
German Ballads, from Uhland, Goethe, and Schiller. By C. L.
Bielefeld. 3s. 6d.
Charles XII., par Voltaire. By L. Direy. 3rd Edit. 3s. dd.
Aventures de Telemaque, par Fenelon. By C. J. Delille. 2nd Edit.
4s. ed.
Select Fables of La Fontaine. By F. E. A. Gasc. New Edition. 3s.
Picciola, by X. B. Saintine. By Dr. Dubuc. 4th Edit. 3s. dd.

FRENCH CLASS-BOOKS.
Twenty Lessons in French. With Vocabulary, giving the Pronun
ciation. By W. Brebner. Post 8vo. 4s.
French Grammar for Public Schools. By Rev. A. C. Clapin, M.A.
Fcap. Svo. 2nd Edit. 2s. 6d. Separately, Part I. 2s. ; Part II. Is. 6i.
French Primer. By Rev. A. C. Clapin, M.A. Fcap. 8vo. Is.
Le NouveauTresor; or, French Student's Companion. By M. E. S.
16th EJitiou. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d.

14 George Bell and Sons'
F. E. A. Gasc's French Course.
First French Book. Fcap. 8vo. New Edition. Is. dd.
Second French Book. New Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. dd.
Key to First and Second French Books. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. dd.
French Fables for Beginners, in Prose, with Index. New Edition.
12mo. 2s.
Select Fables of La Fontaine. New Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 3s.
Histoires Amusantes et Instructives. With Notes. New Edition.
Fcap. 8vo. 28. 6d.
Pract cal Guide to Modern French Conversation. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. dd.
French Poetry for the Young. With Notes. Fcap. 8vo. 2s.
Materials for French Prose Composition ; or, Selections from the best
English Prose Writers. New Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 4s. 6d. Key, 6s.
Prosateurs Contemporains. With Notes. 8vo. New Edition, revised.
5s.
Le Pe'it Compagnon ; a French Talk-Book for Little Children.
16mo. 2s.6rf.
An Improved Modern Pocket Dictionary of the French and English
Languages. 25th Thousand, with additions. 16mo. cloth. 4s.
Modern French-English and English-French Dictionary. 2nd Edition,
revised. In 1 vol. 12s. ed. (formerly 2 vols. 25s )

GOMBEET'S FREKCH DRAMA.
Being a Selection of the best Tragedies and Comedies of Moliere,
Racine, Corneille, and Voltaire. With Arguments and Notes by A.
Gombert. New Edition, revised by F. B. A. Gasc, Fcap. 8vo. Is. each;
sewed, ed. Contents.
Moliere : — Le Misanthrope. L'Avare. Le Bourgeois Gentilhorome. Le
Tartuffe. Le Malade Imaginaire. Les Fennnes Savantes. Les Fourberies
de Scapin. Les Precieuses Ridicules. L'Ecole des Fommes. L'Ecole des
Maris. Le Medecin malgre Lui.
Racine : — Phedre. Esther. Athalie. Iphigenie. Les Plaideurs. 1. La
Theba'ide ; ou, Les Freres Ennemis. 2. Andromaque. 8. Britannicus.
P. Corneille :— Le Cid. Horace. Cinna. Polyeucte.
Voltaire : — Zaire.

GERMAN CLASS-BOOKS.
Materials for German Prose Composition. By Dr. Buchheim. 4th
Edition revised. Fcap. 4s. 6rf.
A German Grammar for Public Schools. By the Rev. A. C. Clapin
and F. tiollMullcr. Fcap. 2s. ed.
Kotzebue's Der Gefangene. With Notes by Dr. W. Stromberg. Is.

Educational Works. 15

ENGLISH CLASS-BOOKS.
The Elements of the English Language. By E.Adams, Ph.D. 15th
Edition. Fost 8vo. 4s. 6rf.
The Rudiments of English Grammar and Analysis. By E. Adams,
Ph D. New Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 2s.
By C. P. Mason, B. A. London University.
First Notions of Grammar for Young Learners. Fcap. Svo. Cloth. 8d.
First Step s in English Grammar for Junior Classes. Demy 18mo.
New Edition. Is.
Outlines of English Grammar for the use of Junior Classes. Cloth.
is. ed.
English Grammar, including the Principles of Grammatical Ana
lysis. 22nd Edition. Post Svo. 3s. 6rf. .
The Analysis of Sentences applied to Latin. Post Svo. Is. dd.
Analytical Latin Exercises : Accidence and Simple Sentences, &c.
Post 8vo. 3s. ed.
Editedfor Middle-Class Examinations.
With Notes on the Analysis and Parsing, and Explanatory Remarks.
Milton's Paradise Lost, Book I. With Life. 3rd Edit. Post 8vo. 2s.
.  Book II. With Life. 2nd Edit. Post 8vo. 2s.
 -Book III. With Life. Post 8vo. 2s.
Goldsmith's Deserted Village. With Life. Poi-t 8vo. Is. dd.
Cowper's Task, Book II. With Life. Post 8vo. 2s.
Thomson's Spring. With Life. Post 8vo. 2s.
 Winter. With Life. Tost Svo. 2s.

Practical Hints on Teaching. By Rev. J. Menet, M.A. 4th Edit.
Crown Svo. Cloth, 2s. ed. ; paper, 2s.
Test Lessons in Dictation. Papt r cover, Is. dd.
Questions for Examinations in English Literature. By Rev. W. W.
bkeat. 2s. ed.
Drawing Copies. By P. H. Delamotte. Oblong 8vo. 12s. Sold also
in parts at Is. each.
Poetry for the Si hool-room. New Edition. Fcap. 8vo. Is. dd.
Select Parables from Nature, for Use in Schools. By Mrs. A. Gatty.
Fcap. 8vo. Cloth. Is.
School Eecord for YouDg Ladies' Schools, dd.
Geographical Text-Book; a Practical Geography. By M. E. S.
12mo. 2s.
The Blank Maps done up separately. 4to. fs. coloured.
A Fiist Book of Geo-raphy. By Rev. C. A. Johns, B.A. , F.L.S.
Ac. Illustrated 12mo. 2s. ed.
Loudon's (Mrs.) Entertaining Naturalist. New Edition. Revised by
W. 3. Dallas. F L.S. 5s.
 Handbook of Botany. New Edition, greatly enlarged l.y
D. Wooster. fcap. 2s. ed.

16 Educational Works.

The Botanist's Pocket-Book. With a copious Index. By W. R.
Hayward. Crown 8vo. Cloth limp, 4s. ed.
Experimental Chemistry, founded on the Work of Dr. Stbckhardt.
By C. W. Heaton. Post 8vo. 5s.
Double Entry Elucidated. By B.W.Foster. 7th Edit. 4to. 8s. dd.
A New Manual of Book-keeping. By P. Crellin, Accountant. Crown
8vo. 3s. 6rf.
Picture SchoolBooks. In simple Language, with numerous Illus
trations. Royal 16mo.
School Primer, ed — School Reader. By J. Tilleard. Is. — Poetry Book
for Schools. Is. — The Life of Joseph. Is. — The Scripture Parables. By the
Rev. J. E. Clarke. Is. — The Scripture Miracles. By the Rev. J. E. Clarke.
ls.-The NewTtstament History. By the Rev. J. G. Wood, M.A. Is.— The
Old Testament History. By the Rev. J. Q. Wood, M.A. Is.— The Story of
Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress. Is.— The Life of Christopher Columbus. By
Sarah Crompton. Is. — The Life of Martin Luther. By Sarah Crompton. Is.

BOOKS FOR YOUNG READERS.
In 8 Parts. Limp cloth, 6d. each.
Part I. The Cat and the Hen ; A Cat iii a Bag1 ; Sam and his Dog, Red-leg ;
Bob and Tom Lee. Part XI. The New-born Lamb ; The Good Boy, Bad Boy,
and Nice Wise Girl ; Bad Ben and Old Sam Sly; Poor Fan. Pare III. The
Blind Boy ; The Mute Girl ; A New Tale of Babes in a Wood. Part IV. The
New Bank-note ; The Royal Visit; A King's Walk on a Winter's Day Part V.
Story of a Cat, told by Herself Part VI. The Three Monkeys. Part VII.
Queen Bee and Busy Bee. Part VIII. Gull's Crag, A Story of the Sea.

BELL'S READING-BOOKS.
FOR SCHOOLS AND PAROCHIAL LIBRARIES.
The popularity which the " Books for Young Readers," have attained is
a sufficient proof that teachers and pupils alike approve of the use of inter
esting stories, with a simple plot m place of the dry combination of letters and
syllables, making no impression on the mind, of which elementary reading-
books generally consist
The Publishei s have therefore thought it advisable to extend the application
of this principle to books adapted for more advanced readers.
Now Ready. Post Svo. Strongly bound.
Masterman Ready. By Captain Marryat. Is. dd.
Parables from Nature. (Selected.) By Mrs. Gatty. Is.
Friends in Fur and Feathers. By Gwynfryn. Is.
Robinson Crusoe. Is. dd.
Andersen s Danish Tales. (Selected.) By E. Bell, M.A." Is.
Southey s Life of Nelson. (Abridged.) Is.
Grimm's German Tales. (Selected.) Is.
Life of the Duke of Wellington. \In the press.

London : Printed by Johh Strakgeways; Castle St. Leicester Sq.

VAbfrcffllVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 08844 8700