136667076 19 Scrivener a Plain Introduction to Criticism of the New Testament 4th Ed Vol I 1894

7/30/2019 136667076 19 Scrivener a Plain Introduction to Criticism of the New Testament 4th Ed Vol I 1894

1/485

mM'-i^:'-''-"


2/485

CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARYENGLISH COLLECTION

THE GIFT OFJAMES MORGAN HARTPROFESSOR OF ENGUSH


3/485

CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 1924 092 355 1


4/485

The original of this book is inthe Cornell University Library.

There are no known copyright restrictions inthe United States on the use of the text.

http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924092355100


5/485

A PLAIN INTRODUCTION

CRITICISM OF THE NEW TESTAMENT


6/485

OjcforSHORACE HART, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY


7/485


8/485


9/485


10/485


11/485

APLAIN INTRODUCTION

TO THE

;riticism of the new testamentFOR THE USE OF BIBLICAL STUDENTS

BY THE LATEFREDERICK HENRY AMBROSE SCRIVENER

M.A., D.C.L., LL.D.PREBENDARY OF EXETER, VICAR OF HENDON

FOURTH EDITION, EDITED BYTHE REV. EDWARD MILLER, M.A.

FORMERLY FELLOW AND TUTOR OF NEW COLLEGE, OXFORD

VOL. I

GEORGE BELL & SONS, York Street, Covent GardenAND NEW YORK : 66 Fifth Avenue

CAMBRIDGE: Deighton Bell & Co.l8o4


12/485

ft.a^^qinIn templo Dei ofiert unusquisque quod potest : alii aunim, argentum, et lapides pretiosos : alii

byssum et purpuram et coccum offerunt et hyacinthum. Nobiscum bene agitur, si obtulerimuspelles et caprarum pilos. Et tamen Apostolus contemtibiliora nostra magis necessaria judicat.

HiERONYMi Prologus Galeatus.


13/485

DEDICATION[in the third edition]

to his graceEDWARD, LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY.

My Loed Archbishop^Nearly forty years ago, under encouragement from

your venerated predecessor Archbishop Howley, and with thefriendly help of his Librarian Dr. Maitland, I entered upon thework of collating manuscripts of the Greek New Testament byexamining the copies brought from the East by ProfessorCarlyle, and purchased for the Lambeth Library in 1805.I was soon called away from this employment (k^v Mkovti yeOUfjLato less congenial duties in that remote county, whereinlong after it was your Grace's happy privilege to refresh thespirits of Churchmen and Churchwomen, by giving them piouswork to do, and an example in the doing of it. What I havesince been able to accompHsh in the pursuits of sacred criticism,although very much less than I once anticipated, has proved,I would fain hope, not without its use to those who love HolyScripture, and the studies which help to the understanding ofthe same.Among the scholars whose sympathy cheered and aided my

Biblical labours from time to time, I have had the honour ofincluding your Grace; yet it would be at once unseemly andfallacious to assume from that circumstance, that the principlesof textual criticism which I have consistently advocated have


14/485

VI DEDICATION.approved themselves to your judgement. All that I can lookfor or desire in this respect is that I may seem to you 'tohave stated my case fairly and temperately, in earnest contro-versy with opponents far my superiors in learning and dialecticpower, and for whom, in spite of literary differences, I enter-tain deep respect and true regard.My Lord, you have been called by Divine Providence to the

first place in our Communion, and have entered upon yourgreat office attended by the applauses, the hopeful wishes, andthe hearty prayers of the whole Church. May it please God toendow you richly with the Christian gifts as well of vdsdom asof courage : for indeed the highest minister of the Church ofEngland, no less than the humblest, will need courage in thecoming time, now that faith is waxing cold and adversaries aremany.

I am, my Lord Archbishop,Your obliged and faithful servant,

F. H. A. SCEIVENER.Hendon Vicapage,

Whitsmtide, 1883.


15/485

PREFACE TO FOURTH EDITION.

At the time of the lamented death of Dr. Scrivener a newedition of his standard work was called for, and it was supposedthat the great Master of Textual Criticism had himself madesufficient corrections and additions for the purpose in the marginof his copy. When the publishers committed to me the taskof preparation, I was fully aware of the absolute necessity ofgoing far beyond the materials placed at my disposal, if the bookwere to be really useful as being abreast of the very great pro-gress accomplished in the last ten years. But it was not tillI had laboured with absolute loyalty for some months thatI discovered from my own observation, and from the adviceof some of the first textual critics, how much alteration mustat once be made.Dr. Scrivener evidently prepared the Third Edition undergreat disadvantage. He had a parish of more than 5,500 inhabi-tants upon his hands, with the necessity of making provision forincrease in the population. The result was that after adding125 pages to his book he had an attack of paralysis, and soit is not surprising that his work was not wholly conductedupon the high level of his previous publications. The book hasalso laboured under another and greater disadvantage of toorapid, though unavoidable, growth. The 506 pages of theFirst Edition have been successively expanded into 626 pagesin the Second, 751 in the Third, and 874 in the Fourth; whilethe framework originally adopted, consisting only of ninechapters, was manifestly inadequate to the mass of materialultimately gathered. It has therefore been found necessary, as

t


16/485

VUl PREFACE.the work proceeded, to do violence, amidst much delicateembarrassment, to feelings of loyalty to the author forbiddingalteration. The chief changes that have been made are asfollows :The first intention of keeping the materials within thecompass of one volume has been abandoned, and it has beendivided into two volumes, with an increase of chapters in each.

Instead of 2,094 manuscripts, as reckoned in the thirdedition under the six classes, no less than 3,791 have beenrecorded in this edition, being an increase of 236 beyond the3,555 of Dr. Gregory, without counting the numerous vacantplaces which have been filled up.

Most of the accounts of ancient versions have been rewrittenby distinguished scholars, who are leaders in their severaldepartments.The early part of Volume I has been enriched from the

admirable book on ' Greek and Latin Palaeography,' by Mr. E.Maunde Thompson, who with great kindness placed the proof-sheets at my disposal before publication.

Changes have been made in the headlines, the indexes, andin the printing, and sometimes in the arrangement, which will,I trust, enable the reader to find his way more easily aboutthe treatise.And many corrections suggested by eminent scholars have

been introduced in different places all through the work.A most pleasing duty now is to tender my best thanks to theEight Reverend the Lord Bishop of Salisbury and the Rev. H. J."White, M.A., for the rewriting of the chapter on Latin Versionsby the latter under Dr. John Wordsworth's supervision, withhelp from M. Samuel Berger ; to the Rev. G. H. Gwilliam, B.D.,Fellow of Hertford College, now editing the Peshitto for theUniversity of Oxford, for the improvement of the passages uponthe Peshitto and the Curetonian ; the Rev. H. Deane, B.D., foradditions to the treatment of the Harkleian ; and the Rev. Dr.Waller, Principal of St. John's Hall, Highbury, for the resultsof a collation of the Peshitto and Curetonian ; to the Rev. A. C.Headlam, M.A., Fellow of All Souls College, for a revision of the


17/485

PREFACE. IXlong chapter upon Egyptian Versions ; to F. C. Conybeare, Esq.,M.A., late Fellow of University College, for rewriting the sec-tions on the Armenian and Georgian Versions ; to ProfessorMargoliouth, M.A., Fellow of New College, for rewriting thesections on the Arabic and Ethiopic Versions ; to the Eev. LI.J. M. Bebb, M.A., Fellow of Brasenose College, for rewriting thesection upon the Slavonic Version; to Dr. James W. Bright,Assistant-Professor in the Johns Hopkins University, for rewrit-ing the section on the Anglo-Saxon Version, through Mr. White'skind offices ; to E. Maunde Thompson, Esq., D.C.L., LL.D., F.S.A.,&c., for kindness already mentioned, and other help, and to G. F.Warner, Esq., M.A., of the Manuscript Department of the BritishMuseum, for correction of some of the notices of cursive MSS.belonging to the Museum, and for other assistance ; to J. RendelHarris, Esq., M.A., Fellow of Clare College and Reader in

I

Palaeo'fe^ in the University of Cambridge, for much help of avaried nature ; to Professor Isaac H. Hall, Ph.D., of New YorkCity, for sending and placing at my disposal manj' of his publi-cations ; to the lamented Professor Bensly, for writing me a letterupon the Syriac Versions ; to the Eev. Nicholas Pocock, M.A.,of Clifton, for some results of a collation of F and G of St. Paulto Professor Bernard, D.D., Trinity College, Dublin, for a paperof suggestions ; to the Rev. Walter Slater, M.A., for preparingIndex II in Vol. I ; and to several other kind friends, for assis-tance of various kinds freely given. The generosity of scholarsin communicating out of their stores of learning is a mostpleasing feature in the study of the present day. Whatevermay be my own shortcomingsand I fear that they have beenenhanced by limitations of time and space, and through theeffects of ill-health and sorrowthe contributions enumeratedcannot but render the present edition of Dr. Scrivener's greatwork eminently useful to students. EDWARD MILLER.

9, Bkabmoke Eoad, Oxford,January 17, 1894.


18/485


19/485

CONTENTS.CHAPTER I.

PAGSPEBLIMINART CONSIDERATIONS 1Various readings antecedently probable, 1-3 ; actually existent, 4 ;

sources of information, 5 ; textual criticism, 6-9 ; classes and extent ofvarious readings, 10-12 ; divisions of the work, 12.

CHAPTEE II.GENERAL CHARACTER OF THE GREEK MSS. OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 21

Authorities, 1 ; materials for writing, 2-7 ; form and style, 8-9 ;character of early Uncial writing, 10 ; of Cursive, 11 ; ascript or sub-script, 12 ; breathings and accents, 13 ; punctuation, 14 ; abbreviations,15 ; capitals, 16 ; stichometry, 17 ; correction or revision of MSS., 18.

CHAPTER III.DIVISIONS or THE TEXT, AND OTHER PARTICULARS . . .56

JEarliest Sections, 1-2; 'Ammonian' Sections and 'Eusebian'Canons, 3 ; Euthalian Sections and Lessons, 4, 5 ; Subscriptions, 6 ;foreign matter, 7, 8 ; tabular view, 9 ; chapters and verses, 10 ; contentsand order, 11, 12 ; Lectionaries, 13, 14.

APPENDIX TO CHAPTER IH .80Synaxarion and Eclogadion of the Gospels and Apostolic writings

daily throughout the year ; Menology.

CHAPTER IV.THE LARGER UNCIALS OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT . . .90

Codex Sinaiticus ; Cod. Alexandrinus ; Cod, Vaticanus ; Cod.Ephraemi ; Cod. Bezae.

CHAPTER V.UNCIAL MANUSCRIPTS OP THE GOSPELS 131

From E (Codex Basiliensis) to 2 of St. Andrew of Athos.


20/485

XU CONTENTS.CHAPTER VI.

UNCIAL MANTJSCBIPTS OF THE ACTS AND CATHOLIC EPISTLES, OFST. Paul's epistles, and of the apocalypse(1) Acts, ts*-3 ; (2) Paul, X-3 ; (3) Apocalypse, X-P.

CHAPTER VII.CUESIVB MANUSCRIPTS OF THE GOSPELS. PAET I. 1-449

CHAPTER Vni.CUESIVE MANUSCRIPTS OF THE GOSPELS. PAET II. 450-774

CHAPTER IX.CURSIVE MANUSCRIPTS OF THE GOSPELS. PART III. 775-1321 .

CHAPTEE X.CURSrVE MANUSCRIPTS OF THE ACTS AND CATHOLIC EPISTLES, 1-420 .

CHAPTER XI.CURSIVE MANUSCRIPTS OF ST. PAUl's EPISTLES, 1-491CHAPTER XII.

CURSIVE MANUSCRIPTS OF THE APOCALYPSE, 1-184....CHAPTER XIII.

EVANGELISTARIES, OR MANUSCRIPT SEEVICE-BOOKS OF THE GOSPELS,1-963

CHAPTER XIV.LECTIONARIES CONTAINING THE APOSTOLOS OR PRAXAPOSTOLOS, 1-288ADDITIONAL UNCIALS ....APPENDIX A. CHIEF AUTHORITIES

,, B. ON FACSIMILES C. ON DATING BY INDICTION,, D. ON THE 'FfifiaTa,, E. TABLE OF DIFFERENCES .

INDEX I. OF GREEK MANUSCRIPTSINDEX II. OF SCRIBES, PAST OWNERS, AND COLLATORS

169

189

241

272

284

307

320

327

377

378379380381384

391

411


21/485

DESCRIPTION OF THE CONTENTS OF THELITHOGRAPHED PLATES i.

PLATE I opposite page 291. (i) Alphabet from the Eosetta Stone [b. c. 196], a specimen of capitals.2. (a) Alphabet from Cod. Sinaiticus ) . f i3. (3) Alphabet from Cod. Alexandrinus )

PLATE II 321. (4) Alphabet from the Cotton Fragment (Evan. N) and Titus C. xv [vi],2. (5) And from Cod. Nitriensis (Evan. R, Brit. Mus. Add. 17,211).PLATE III 841. (6) Alphabet from Cod. Dublinensis (Evan. Z).2. (7) From Brit. Mus. Harl. 5598 (Evst. 150), [a.d. 995].3. (8) From Brit. Mus. Burney 19 (Evan. 569).

Note that above psi in 2 stands the cross-like form of that letter asfound in Apoc. B [viii].

PLATE IV ; . 901. (9) Extract from Hyperides' Oration for Lycophron, col. 15, 1. 23, &c.

{"trrepidov Ao'701, ed. Babington, 1853). Dating between B.C. 100to A.D. 100, on Egyptian papyrus, in a cursive or running hand.\vvTaff Ttva T


22/485

98

xiv DESCRIPTION OF THE LITHOGRAPHED PLATES.3.(11") Cod. Priderioo-August. [iv], a Sam. vii. 10, 11, Septuagint

aiavTOV aaBaia ap\xn


23/485

DESCRIPTION OF THE LITHOGRAPHED PLATES. XVPLATE VIII 105

(20) Cod. Vaticanus, B of the Gospels, Acts and Epistles [iv], taken fromBurgon's photograph of the whole page. Mark xvi. 3-8 : /uvrbv KiOov l TTJs | $vpaff rov t^vrjîitov \ Kcii dvaPKeipaaai 6eoj\pov(7iVon avaiciKi\\iffrai o \i6o_tT ^vycip

\ fieyaff ff(p6^pa kcLl k\\6dvaai. ha toHvriiX(i\ov kiSov veaviffKov \ KaSijUivov iv Toia \ Scfioiir nept0(P\i]iii\vovaroXiiv \fvicr)v | acU eêSaiiPiiBrjaav | 6 Si \iyti duTaiir ^^ | iicSan-0i(T$ iv ^r]Ti\Te T^v vaâprjvbv to | kffTavpcoîvov 7iyfp\Brj bvKc'oTiV t&Sc (Se

Ih Tfynoa oirov 6i]Kd [ avTov 6,\Ka vndyT | etirare

Toiff fm0Tjrdtff I dvTov Kcii tw irfTpu | oTt trpodyei Ofids tiff \ rfivya\i\diav 4et di'[T^' 6jpff0 HaOojff irjirti' vpuv icdi fê\6ov\ffaL tcpvyovdiro Tov 1 fjiVTjpUtov ktx^^ y^P | dvTciff Tpd/xoff Kcii cffjffTatrto' Kdt dvScvliv\Siv iivov e


24/485

Xvi DESCRIPTION OF THE LITHOGRAPHED PLATES-2. (25) Cod. Laud. 85, E of the Acts [vi], Latin ar^ Greek, in a sort of

stichometry. Acts xx. 28 : regere | ecclesiam ] domini 1 1 ^.A'^""" IT,,!/ im\r,aiav \ tou ot. Below are specimens of six letters takenfrom other parts of the manuscript. See p. 169.

3. (26) Matt. i. 1-3, Greek and Latin, from the Complutensian Polyglott,A.D. 1514. See II. 176.

131PLATE XI1. (37) Cod. Basil., Evan. E [vii], from a photograph given by Dean

Burgon, Mark i. 5-6 : npoa airiv. maa i) iovSaia | x-hai fo)^c|. Seep. 160.

PLATE XII 13*1. (31) Cod. Wolfii B, Evan. H [ix], John i. 38-40 : toikt aKoKovBovvTaa\i-jei avToia + rt fi;|TTC + 61 8e . iiTTOV &vtw + pa00fi- b A7E|Tai

ipiXT]Viv6ixivov SiS6.(TKa\e Tiov iik\viiff + \eyci dvTOt


25/485

DESCRIPTION OF THE LITHOGRAPHED PLATES. XVllPLATE XIII 343

1. (36) Parham. 18, Evst. 284 [a.d. 980], Liike ix. 84: -^ovToa tyiverove\


26/485


27/485

ADDENDA ET COREIGENDA.Pages 1-224, passim, for reasons given in Vol. II. 96 note, for Memphitic read J

Bohairic ; for Thebaic reoA SaMdie.P. 7, 1. 25, /or Chapter XI reacL Chapter XII.P. 14, 1. 20, /or Chapter X nod Chapter XI.P. 87, 1. 19, for Synaxaria reai Menologies.P. 119, II. 11 and. 12 from hottom, foir 93 read 94 ; for Memoranda in ourAddenda reoA ingenious argument in n. 1.P. 149, T' Horner, aM now in the Bodleian at Oxford.P. 214, 1. 3 from bottom, for 464 read iv. 64.P. 224, Evan. 250, 1. 3, fm p. 144 read p. 150.P. 226, Evan. 274, 1. 2 from end, far Chapter IX read Chapter XII.P. 255, 1. 6 from bottom,/or Bibl. Gr. L. read Bibl. Gr. d.P. 835, 1. 1, for 41 read 4.P. 343, 1. 12,/or Ev. 1 (2) read Ev. 1 (1).


28/485


29/485

INTRODUCTIONTO

THE CRITICISM OF THE TEXT OFTHE NEW TESTAMENT.

CHAPTEK I.PEELIMINAEY CONSIDERATIONS.

1. T\7HEN God was pleased to make known to man His' ' purpose of redeeming us through the death of His

Son, He employed for this end the general laws, and workedaccording to the ordinary course of His Providential government,so far as they were available for the furtherance of His mercifuldesign. A revelation from heaven, in its very notion, impliessupernatural interposition ; yet neither in the first promulgationnor in the subsequent propagation of Christ's religion, can wemark any waste of miracles. So far as they were needed for theassurance of honest seekers after truth, they were freely resortedto : whensoever the principles which move mankind in the affairsof common life were adequate to the exigences of the case, moreunusual and (as we might have thought) more powerful meansof producing conviction were withheld, as at once superfluousand ineffectual. Those who heard not Moses and the prophetswould scarcely be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

2. As it was with respect to the evidences of our faith, soalso with regard to the volume of Scripture. God willed thatHis Church should enjoy the benefit of His written word, atonce as a rule of doctrine and as a guide unto holy living. For

VOL. I. B


30/485

3 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS.this cause He so enlightened the minds of the Apostles andEvangelists by His Spirit, that they recorded what He hadimprinted on their hearts or brought to their remembrance, with-out the risk of error in anything essential to the verity of theGospel. But this main point once secured, the rest was left,in a great measure, to themselves. The style, the tone, thelanguage, perhaps the special occasion of writing, seem to havedepended much on the taste and judgement of the several pen-men. Thus in St. Paul's Epistles we note the profound thinker,the great scholar, the consummate orator : St. John pours forththe simple utterings of his gentle, untutored, affectionate soul:in St. Peter's speeches and letters may be traced the impetuousearnestness of his noble yet not faultless character. Their indi-vidual tempers and faculties and intellectual habits are clearlydiscernible, even while they are speaking to us in the power andby the inspiration of the Holy Ghost.

3. Now this self-same parsimony in the employment ofmiracles which we observe with reference to Christian evidencesand to the inspiration of Scripture, we might look for beforehand,from the analogy of divine things, when we proceed to considerthe methods by which Scripture has been preserved and handeddown to us. God might, ifHe would, have stamped His revealedwill visibly on the heavens, that all should read it there : Hemight have so completely filled the minds of His servants theProphets and Evangelists, that they should have become merepassive instruments in the promulgation of His counsel, and thewritings they have delivered to us have borne no traces whateverof their individual characters : but for certain causes which wecan perceive, and doubtless for others beyond the reach of ourcapacities. He has chosen to do neither the one nor the other.And so again with the subject we propose to discuss in thepresent work, namely, the relation our existing text of the NewTestament bears to that which originally came from the hands ofthe sacred penmen. Their autographs might have been preservedin the Church as the perfect standards by which all accidentalvariations of the numberless copies scattered throughout theworld should be corrected to the end of time : but we know thatthese autographs perished utterly in the very infancy of Chris-tian history. Or if it be too much to expect that the autographsof the inspired writers should escape the fate which has over-


31/485

VARIOUS READINGS. 3taken that of every other known relique of ancient literature,God might have so guided the hand or fixed the devout attentionboth of copyists during the long space of fourteen hundred yearsbefore the invention of printing, and of compositors and printersof the Bible for the last four centuries, that no jot or tittleshould have been changed of all that was written therein. Sucha course of Providential arrangement we must confess to bequite possible, but it could have been brought about and main-tained by nothing short of a continuous, unceasing miracle ;bymaking fallible men (nay, many such in every generation) forone purpose absolutely infallible. If the complete identity of allcopies of Holy Scripture prove to be a fact, we must of coursereceive it as such, and refer it to its sole Author : yet we mayconfidently pronounce beforehand, that such a fact could nothave been reasonably anticipated, and is not at all agreeable tothe general tenour of God's dealings with us.

4. No one who has taken the trouble to examine any twoeditions of the Greek New Testament needs be told that thissupposed complete resemblance in various copies of the holybooks is not founded on fact. Even several impressions derivedfrom the same standard edition, and professing to exhibit a textpositively the same, difier from their archetype and from eachother, in errors of the press which no amount of care or diligencehas yet been able to get rid of. If we extend our researches tothe manuscript copies of Scripture or of its versions whichabound in every great library in Christendom, we see in thevery best of them variations which we must at once impute tothe fault of the scribe, together with many others of a graverand more perplexing nature, regarding which we can form noprobable judgement, without calling to our aid the resources ofcritical learning. The more numerous and venerable the docu-ments within our reach, the more extensive is the view weobtain of the variations (or various headings as they arecalled) that prevail in manuscripts. If the number of thesevariations was rightly computed at thirty thousand in Mill'stime, a century and a' half ago, they must at present amountto at least fourfold that quantity.

5. As the New Testament far surpasses all other remains ofantiquity in value and interest, so are the copies of it yet exist-ing in manuscript and dating from the fourth century of our


32/485

4 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS.era downwards, far more numerous than those of the most cele-brated writers of Greece or Rome. Such as have been alreadydiscovered and set down in catalogues are hardly fewer than threethousand six hundred, and more must still linger unknown in themonastic libraries of the East. On the other hand, manuscriptsof the most illustrious classic poets and philosophers are farrarer and comparatively modern. We have no complete copy ofHomer himself prior to the thirteenth century, though some con-siderable fragments have been recently brought to light whichmay plausibly be assigned to the fifth century ; while more thanone work of high and deserved repute has been preserved to ourtimes only in a single copy. Now the experience we gain froma critical examination of the few classical manuscripts thatsurvive should make us thankful for the quality and abundanceof those of the New Testament. These last present us with a vastand almost inexhaustible supply of materials for tracing thehistory, and upholding (at least within certain limits) the purityof the sacred text : every copy, if used diligently and with judge-ment, will contribute somewhat to these ends. So far is thecopiousness of our stores from causing doubt or perplexity to thegenuine student of Holy Scripture, that it leads him to recognizethe more fully its general integrity in the midst of partial varia-tion. What would the thoughtful reader of Aeschylus give forthe like guidance through the obscurities which vex his patience,and mar his enjoyment of that sublime poet?6. In regard to modern works, it is fortunate that the artof printing has wellnigh superseded the use of verbal or (asit has been termed) Textual criticism. When a book onceissues from the press, its author's words are for the most partfixed, beyond all danger of change ; graven as with an ironpen upon the rock for ever. Yet even in modern times, as inthe case of Barrow's posthumous works and Pepys's Diary andLord Clarendon's History of the Eebellion, it has been occasion-ally found necessary to correct or enlarge the early editions, fromthe original autographs, where they have been preserved. Thetext of some of our older English writers (Beaumont andFletcher's plays are a notable instance) would doubtless havebeen much improved by the same process, had it been possiblebut the criticism of Shakespeare's dramas is perhaps the mostdelicate and difScult problem in the whole history of literature


33/485

TEXTUAL CRITICISM. 5Bince that great genius was so strangely contemptuous of thepraise of posterity, that even of the few plays that werepublished in his lifetime the text seems but a gathering fromthe scraps of their respective parts which had been negligentlycopied out for the use of the actors.

7. The design of the science of Textual criticism, as appliedto the Greek New Testament, will now be readily understood.By collecting and comparing and weighing the variations of thetext to which we have access, it aims at bringing back thattext, so far as may be, to the condition in which it stood in thesacred autographs ; at removing all spurious additions, if suchbe found in our present printed copies ; at restoring whatsoevermay have been lost or corrupted or accidentally changed in thelapse of eighteen hundred years. We need spend no time inproving the value of such a science, if it affords us a fairprospect of appreciable results, resting on grounds of satisfactoryevidence. Those who believe the study of the Scriptures to bealike their duty and privilege, will surely grudge no pains whencalled upon to separate the pure gold of God's word from thedross which has mingled with it through the accretions of somany centuries. Though the criticism of the sacred volume isinferior to its right interpretation in point of dignity andpractical results, yet it must take precedence in order of time :for how can we reasonably proceed to investigate the sense ofholy writ, till we have done our utmost to ascertain its preciselanguage ?

8. The importance of the study of Textual criticism issometimes freely admitted by those who deem its successfulcultivation difficult, or its conclusions precarious ; the rather asBiblical scholars of deserved repute are constantly putting forththeir several recensions of the text, differing not a little fromeach other. Now on this point it is right to speak clearly anddecidedly. There is certainly nothing in the nature of criticalscience which ought to be thought hard or abstruse, or evenremarkably dry and repulsive. It is conversant with varied,curious, and interesting researches, which have given a certainserious pleasure to many intelligent minds ; it patiently gathersand arranges those facts of external evidence on which alone itventures to construct a revised text, and applies them accordingto rules or canons of internal evidence, whether suggested by


34/485

6 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS.experience, or reeting for their proof on the plain dictates ofcommon sense. The more industry is brought to these studies,the greater the store of materials accumulated, so much themore fruitful and trustworthy the results have usually provedalthough beyond question the true application even of thesimplest principles calls for discretion, keenness of intellect,innate tact ripened by constant use, a sound and impartialjudgement. No man ever attained eminence in this, or in anyother worthy accomplishment, without much labour and somenatural aptitude for the pursuit ; but the criticism of the GreekTestament is a field in whose culture the humblest student maycontribute a little that shall be really serviceable ; few branchesof theology are able to promise, even to those who seek buta moderate acquaintance with it, so early and abundant rewardfor their pains.

9. Nor can Textual criticism be reasonably disparaged astending to precarious conclusions, or helping to unsettle thetext of Scripture. Even putting the matter on the lowestground, critics have not created the variations they have dis-covered in manuscripts or versions. They have only taughtus how to look ascertained phaenomena in the face, and try toaccount for them ; they would fain lead us to estimate therelative value of various readings, to decide upon their respec-tive worth, and thus at length to eliminate them. While weconfess that much remains to be done in this department ofBiblical learning, we are yet bound to say that, chiefly by theexertions of scholars of the last and present generations, thedebateable ground is gradually becoming narrower, not a fewstrong controversies have been decided beyond the possibility ofreversal, and while new facts are daily coming to light, critics ofvery opposite sympathies are learning to agree better as to theright mode of classifying and applying them. But even werethe progress of the science less hopeful than we believe it to beone great truth is admitted on all hands ;the almost completefreedom of Holy Scripture from the bare suspicion of wilfulcorruption; the absolute identity of the testimony of everyknown copy in respect to doctrine, and spirit, and the maindrift of every argument and every narrative through the entirevolume of Inspiration. On a point of such vital moment I amglad to cite the well-known and powerful statement of the o-re^t


35/485

KINDS OF READINGS. 7Bentley, at once the profoundest and the most daring of Englishcritics : ' The real text of the sacred writers does not now (sincethe originals have been so long lost) lie in any MS. or edition,hut is dispersed in them all. 'Tis competently exact indeed inthe worst MS. now extant ; nor is one article of faith or moralprecept either perverted or lost in them ; choose as awkwardlyas you will, choose the worst by design, out of the whole lumpof readings.' And again: 'Make your 30,000 [variations] asmany more, if numbers of copies can ever reach that sum : allthe better to a knowing and a serious reader, who is therebymore richly furnished to select what he sees genuine. But evenput them into the hands of a knave or a fool, and yet with themost sinistrous and absurd choice, he shall not extinguish thelight of any one chapter, nor so disguise Christianity, but thatevery feature of it will still be the same ^.' Thus hath God'sProvidence kept from harm the treasure of His written word,so far as is needful for the quiet assurance of His church andpeople.

10. It is now time for us to afford to the uninitiated readersome general notion of the nature and extent of the variousreadings met with in manuscripts and versions of the GreekTestament. We shall try to reduce them under a few distinctheads, reserving all formal discussion of their respective char-acters and of the authenticity of the texts we cite for the nextvolume (Chapter St). ^Cfi

(1) To begin with variations of the gravest kind. In two,though happily in only two instances, the genuineness of wholepassages of considerable extent, which are read in our printedcopies of the New Testament, has been brought into question.These are the weighty and characteristic paragraphs Mark xvi.9-20 and John vii. 53viii. 11. We shall hereafter defendthese passages, the first without the slightest misgiving, thesecond with certain reservations, as entitled to be regardedauthentic portions of the Gospels in which they stand.

(3) Akin to these omissions are several considerable inter-polations, which, though they have never obtained a place inthe printed text, nor been approved by any critical editoi", are

' 'Kemarks upon a late Discourse of Free Thinking by PhileleutlierusLipsiensis,' Part i, Section S2.


36/485

8 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS.supported by authority too respectable to be set aside withoutsome inquiry. One of the longest and best attested of theseparagraphs has been appended to Matt. xx. 28, and has beenlargely borrowed from other passages in the Gospels (see below,class 9). It appears in several forms, slightly varying from eachother, and is represented as follows in a document as old as thefifth century:

'But you, seek ye that from little things ye may becomegreat, and not from great things may become little. Wheneverye are invited to the house of a supper, be not sitting down inthe honoured place, lest should come he that is more honouredthan thou, and to thee the Lord of the supper should say. Comenear 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 thanthee should come, and to thee the Lord of the supper shall say.Come near, and come up and sit down, thou also shalt havemore glory in the eyes of the guests ^.'We subjoin another paragraph, inserted after Luke vi. 4 inonly a single copy, the celebrated Codex Bezae, now at Cam-

bridge : ' On the same day he beheld a certain man working onthe sabbath, and said unto him, Man, blessed art thou if thouknowest what thou doest ; but if thou knowest not, thou artcursed and a transgressor of the law.'

(3) A shorter passage or mere clause, whether inserted or not inour printed books, may have appeared originally in the form ofa marginal note, and from the margin have crept into the text,through the wrong judgement or mere oversight of the scribe.Such we have reason to think is the history of i John v. 7, theverse relating to the Three Heavenly Witnesses, once so earnestlymaintained, but now generally given up as spurious. Thus tooActs viii. 37 may have been derived from some Church Ordinalthe last clause of Rom. viii. 1 (jn?j /card aapKa -R^pmaTova-w, aXKaKara nve.vp.a) is perhaps like a gloss on rots iv Xpiora! 'Itjo-oS : eiK^in Matt. v. 22 ^ and ava^im in i Cor. xi. 29 might have beeninserted to modify statements that seemed too strong: t?j a\rj0eta

' I cite from the late Canon Cureton's over-literal translation in his ' Remainsof a very antient recension of the four Gospels in Syriac,' in the Preface towhich (pp. xxxv-xxxviii) is an elaborate discussion of the evidence for thispassage.

* But see Dean Burgon's 'The Revision Revised,' pp. 858-861.


37/485

KINDS OF READINGS. 9nil neWeadai. Gal. iii. 1 is precisely such an addition as wouldhelp to round an abrupt sentence (compare Gal. v. 7). Somecritics would account in this way for the adoption of thedoxology Matt. vi. 13 ; of the section relating to the bloodysweat Luke xxii. 43, 44 ; and of that remarkable verse,John V. 4 : but we may well hesitate before we assent to theirviews.

(4) Or a genuine clause is lost by means of what is technicallycalled Homoeotoleuton (6jixotoreAeDToi), when the clause ends inthe same word as closed the preceding sentence, and the tran-scriber's eye has wandered from the one to the other, to theentire omission of the whole passage lying between them. Thissource of error (though too freely appealed to by Meyer andsome other commentators hardly less eminent than he) isfamiliar to all who are engaged in copying writing, and is farmore serious than might be supposed prior to experience. InI John ii. 23 6 djxoXoy&v tw vibv (cai tov irarepa e'x^ei is omittedin many manuscripts, because tov naripa e'xet had ended thepreceding clause : it is not found in our commonly receivedGreek text, and even in the Authorized English version isprinted in italics. The whole verse Luke xvii. 36, were it lessslenderly supported, might possibly have been early lost throughthe same cause, since vv. 34, 35, 36 aU end in acjieOrjcreTai.. A saferexample is Luke xviii. 39, which a few copies omit for thisreason only. Thus perhaps we might defend in Matt. x. 23the addition after cfuvyere els r-qv akXrjv of kclv iv rrj (ripa buaKcoaivifxas, (pevyeTe ds ttjv (i.KX.r]v (hepav being substituted for the first6.\\rjv), the eye having passed from the first (pivyire ds ttjv to thesecond. The same effect is produced, though less frequently,when two or more sentences begin with the same words, as inMatt, xxiii. 14, 15, 16 (each of which commences with ovalvp.lv), one of the verses being left, out in some manuscripts.

(5j Numerous variations occur in the order of words, the sensebeing slightly or not at all afi'ected ; on which account thisspecies of various readings was at fii'st much neglected bycollators. Examples abound everywhere : e. g. rt p.ipos or p.iposTL Luke xi. 36 ; dvopan 'Avaviav or 'Avaviav 6vo'p,aTi Acts ix. 12 ;yjfvxpos ovre (ecrros or feoroj ovre \jfvxpos Apoc. iii. 16. The orderof the sacred names 'IjjcroCy Xpiaros is perpetually changed,especially in St. Paul's Epistles.


38/485

lO PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS.(6) Sometimes the scribe has mistaken one word for another,

which differs from it only in one or two letters. This happenschiefly in cases when the uncial or capital letters in which theoldest manuscripts are written resemble each other, except insome fine stroke which may have decayed through age. Hencein Mark v. 14 we find ANHrreiAAN or AHHrreiAAN ; inLuke xvi. 20 HAKQMeNOC or eiAKX2MeN0C ; so we read Aavib

- or Aa^t'S indiSerently, as, in the later or cursive character, j3 andV have nearly the same shage. Akin to these errprs of the eyeare such transpositions as SAABON for EBAAON or EBAAAON,Mark xiv. 65 : omissions or insertions of the same or similarletters, as eMACCfiNTO or eMACilNTO Apoc. xvi. 10 : AFAA-AIACHNA[ or ArAAAIAOHNAI John v. 85 : and the droppingor repetition of the same or a similar syllable, as EKBAAAONTA-AAIMONIA or eKBAAAONTATAAAIMONIA Luke ix. 49 ;OTAeAeAOSACTAI or OTAeAOHACTAI 2 Cor. iii. 10 ; ADA-HeHCAexeTO or AneHeAexeTO i Pet. iii. 20. It is easy tosee how the ancient practice of writing uncial letters withoutleaving a space between the words must have increased the riskof such variations as the foregoing.

(7) Another source of error is described by some critics asproceeding ex ore dictantis, in consequence of the scribe writingfrom dictation, without having a copy before him. One is not,however, very willing to believe that manuscripts of the betterclass were executed on so slovenly and careless a plan. It seemsmore simple to account for the itacisms '- or confusion of certainvowels and diphthongs having nearly the same sound, whichexist more or less in manuscripts of every age, by assuming thata vicious pronunciation gradually led to a loose mode of ortho-graphy adapted to it. Certain it is that itacisms are much moreplentiful in the original subscriptions and marginal notes of thewriters of mediaeval books, than in the text which they copiedfrom older documents. Itacisms prevailed the most extensivelyfrom the eighth to the twelfth century, but not by any meansduring that period exclusively :indeed, they are found frequentlyin the oldest existing manuscripts. In the most ancient manu-scripts the principal changes are between t and et, at and e,

' The word f,Tama^6s or hama^s is said to have been first used bv Cassiodnn,,(A. D. 468-56U ?). See Migne, Pair. Lat. t. 70, col. 1128. loaorus


39/485

ITACISM AND INTERPOLATION. IIthough others occur : in later times 77 t and ei, -q 01 and v, even oand CO, r) and e, are used almost promiscuously. Hence it arisesthat a very large portion of the various readings brought togetherby collators are of this description, and although in the vastmajority of instances they serve but to illustrate the characterof the manuscripts which exhibit them, or the fashion of the agein which they were written, they sometimes affect the gram-matical form (e. g. lyape or eyeipai Mark iii. 3 ; Acts iii. 6 ;passim : tSere or etbere Phil. i. 30), or the construction (e. g.ia.(Tu>iJ.ai or la(rojj.ai Matt. xiii. 15 : ov jj,^ Tifxriffri or o^ /a^ TLfj,ria-eLMatt. XV. 5 : tva Kavdr)yjx6vMark x. 30 : Kavyaodai 8^ ov (jviJi,(j)ipei or Kavxaadai 8ei" ov a-vp-ipepeL2 Cor. xii. 1 : ort xprjoros 6 Kvpios or otl xP"'''"o^ KvpiosI Pet. ii. 3). To this cause we may refer the perpetual inter-change of Tjixeh and vixei?, with their oblique cases, throughoutthe whole Greek Testament : e. g. in the single epistle ofI Peter, ch. i. 3 ; 12 ; ii. 21 bis ; iii. 18 ; 21 ; v. 10. Hence wemust pay the less regard to the reading rnj-irepov Luke xvi. 12,though found in two or three of our chief authorities : in Actsxvii. 28 t5>v Kad' fjnas, the reading of the great Codex Vati-canus and a few late copies, is plainly absurd. On the otherhand, a few cases occur wherein that which at first sightseems a mere itacism, when once understood, affords an excellentsense, e. g. Kadapi(cov Mark iii. 19, and may be really the trueform.

(8) Introductory clauses or Proper Names are frequentlyinterpolated at the commencement of Church-lessons {mpiKonai),whether from the margin of ordinary manuscripts of the GreekTestament (where they are usually placed for the convenienceof the reader), or from the Lectionaries or proper Service Books,especially those of the Gospels (Evangelistaria). Thus in ourEnglish Book of Common Prayer the name of Jesus is intro-duced into the Gospels for the 14th, 16tb, 17th, and 18th Sundaysafter Trinity ; and whole clauses into those for the 3rd and4th Sundays after Easter, and the 6th and 24th after Trinity ^.To this cause may be due the prefix elite he 6 Kvpws Luke

? To this list of examples from the Book of Common Prayer, Dean Burgon(' The last twelve verses of St. Mark's Gospel Vindicated ' p. 215) adds the Gospels


40/485

12 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS.vii. 31 ; Kol orpac^ets irpos rox/s jxadriTas etire Luke x. 22 ; andsuch appellations as d8eX


41/485

ERRORS IN COPYING. I3jLiot . . . TM (TToixaTi avT&v Kal Matt. XV. 8 : li.araa-6ai tovs o-vvre-Tpifxixevovi Tr]v Kapbiav Luke iv. 18 : avrov dKov(Te


42/485

14 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS.as in Acts xvi. 3 jjSetfrai; yap iravres oTi''E\\.r]v 6 Trarrjp avTov virrjp-^êvfor ^heiaav yap airavres tov irarepa avrov on "EWrjv vnripyevsimilarly, rvyx&vovTa is omitted by many in Luke x. 30 ; com-pare also Acts xviii. 26 fin. ; xix. 8, 34 init. The classical iiivhas often been inserted against the best evidence : e. g. ActsV. 23 : xix. 4, 15 ; i Cor. xii. 20 ; a Cor. iv. 12 ; Heb. vi. 16. Onthe other hand a Hebraism may be softened by transcribers, asin Matt. xxi. 23, where for ikdovTi avT& many copies prefer theeasier eXôVros avrov before TrpoafjXOev avria bibdcTKovTi, and inMatt. XV. 5 ; Mark vii. 12 (to which perhaps we may add LukeV. 35), where xat is dropped in some copies to facilitate the sense.Hence nal ol av6pooTToi may be upheld before ot Ttoiixives in Lukeii. 15. This perpetual correction of harsh, ungrammatical, orOriental constructions characterizes the printed text of theApocalypse and the i-ecent manuscripts on which it is founded(e. g. Tr)v yvvaiKa 'leCa^riX TrjV Xeyovaav ii. 20, for fj Xeyovaa).

(13) Hence too arises the habit of changing ancient dialecticforms into those in vogue in the transcriber's age. The wholesubject will be more fitly discussed at length hereafter (vol. ii.c. k.) ; we will here merely note a few peculiarities of this kindadopted by some recent critics from the oldest manuscripts,but which. have gradually though not entirely disappeared incopies of lower date. Thus in recent critical editions Kaipap-vaovjx, MaQdalos, riaaepes, evaros are substituted for KaTTepvaovfi,Mardaws, Tiacrapes, evvaros of the common text ; ovrcos (not ovtco)is used even before a consonant ; ^kOajxiv, ijKdaTe, ^\9av, yevajxevosare preferred to f]\6ojj.iv, ^XOere, ^\6ov, yevoixevos : fKadepia-drj, avv-C^reiv, Xrnrôfxai to (KadapCa-dt], a-v^rfTflv, ATji/foyiiai : and v eêX-Kva-TiKov (as it is called) is appended to the usual third persons ofverbs, even though a consonant follow. On the other hand themore Attic irfpnTcrraTriKei ought not to be converted into -nepie-77e7raT7jKt in Acts xiv. 8.(14) Trilling variations in spelling, though very proper to benoted by a faithful collator, are obviously of little consequence.Such is the choice between Kal kydt and Kayto, Uv and av, evdioi?and evOvs, Mcovafjs and Mcoa-rjs, or even between irpdrrovn andTTpAa-a-ova-i, between evb6KT](Ja, evKaCpow and r^vboK-rjcra, rjvKaipovv.To this head may be referred the. question whether &\Xd^, ye, be,

' The oldest manuscripts seem to elide the final syllable of aWA before nouns,but not before verbs : e. g. John vi. 32, 39. The common text, therefore, seems


43/485

IMPERFECT COPYING. I5T, ixerd, irapd. &c. should have their final vowel elided or notwhen the next word begins with a vowel.

(15) A large portion of our various readings arises from theomission or insertion of such words as cause little appreciabledifference in the sense. To this class belong the pronounsavTov, avT


44/485

l6 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS.I^ being employed to indicate KAI in very early times ^. Ora large initial letter, which the scribe usually reserved for asubsequent review, may have been altogether neglected : whencewe have ti for On, before a-rev-q Matt. vii. 14. Or , placedover a letter (especially at the end of a line and word) todenote v, may have been lost sight of; e.g. XiOov fxeya Matt,xxvii. 60 in several copies, for MErA. The use of the symbolm, which in the Herculanean rolls and now and then in CodexSinaiticus stands for irpo and Trpoa- indifferently, may have pro-duced that remarkable confusion of the two prepositions whencompounded with verbs which we notice in Matt. xxvi. 39Mark xiv. 35 ; Acts xii. 6 ; xvii. 5, 26 ; xx. 5, 13 ; xxii. 25. Itwill be seen hereafter that as the earliest manuscripts havefew marks of punctuation, breathing or accent, these points(often far from indifferent) must be left in a great measure toan editor's taste and judgement.

(18) Slips of the pen, whereby words are manifestly lost orrepeated, mis-spelt or half-finished, though of no interest tothe critic, must yet be noted by a faithful collator, as they willoccasionally throw light on the history of some particular copyin connexion with others, and always indicate the degree of careor skill employed by the scribe, and consequently the weightdue to his general testimony.The great mass of various readings we have hitherto at-

tempted to classify (to our first and second heads we will recurpresently) are manifestly due to mere inadvertence or humanfrailty, and certainly cannot be imputed to any deliberate in-tention of transcribers to tamper with the text of Scripture.We must give a different account of a few passages (we areglad they are only a few) which yet remain to be noticed.

(19) The copyist may be tempted to forsake his properin loe. , says, 'KTPIM omnino soribi solet Kco,' and this no doubt is the usual form,even in manuscripts which have xp5 I^, as well as x^i 7v, for x/"


45/485

REVISION BY THE COPYIST. 1function for that of a reviser, or critical corrector. He maysimply omit what he does not understand (e. g. bevTepoT;pa>T


46/485

l8 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS.been said to afford the student a general notion of the natureand extent of the subject ^. It may be reasonably thoughtthat a portion of these variations, and those among the mostconsiderable, had their origin in a cause which must haveoperated at least as much in ancient as in modern times, thechanges gradually introduced after publication by the authorsthemselves into the various copies yet within their reach. Suchrevised copies would circulate independently of those issuedpreviously, and now beyond the writer's control ; and thus be-coming the parents of a new family of copies, would originateand keep up diversities from the first edition, without any faulton the part of transcribers ^. It is thus perhaps we may bestaccount for the omission or insertion of whole paragraphs orverses in manuscripts of a certain class [see above (1), (2), (3)] ;or, in cases where the work was in much request, for thoseminute touches and trifling improvements in words, in con-struction, in tone, or in the mere colouring of the style [(5), (11),(12)], which few authors can help attempting, when engaged onrevising their favourite compositions. Even in the Old Testa-

My departed friend, Dr. Tregelleg, to whose persevering labours in sacredcriticism I am anxious, once for all, to express my deepest obligations, rangedvarious readings under three general heads : substitutions ; additions ; omissions.Mr. C. E. Hammond, in his scholarlJke little work, ' Outlines of Textual Criticismapplied to the N. T., 1876, 2nd edition,' divides their possible sources intoUnconscious or unintentional errors, (1) of sight; (2) of hearing; (3) of memoiy:and those that are Conscious or intentional, viz. (4") incorporation of marginalglosses ; (5) corrections of harsh or unusual forms of words, or expressions ;(6) alterations in the text to produce supposed harmony with another passage,to complete a quotation, or to clear up a presumed difficulty ; (7) Liturgicalinsertions. While he enumerates (8) alterations for dogmatic reasons, he addsthat 'there appears to be no strong ground for the suggestion ' that any suchexist (Hammond, p. 17). Professor Roberts ('Words of the New Testament"by Drs. Milligan and Roberts, 1873) comprehends several of the foregoingdivisions under one head : Again and again has a word or phrase been slippedin by the transcriber which had no existence in his copy, but which was due tothe working of his own mind on the subject before him.' His examples arelpXTm inserted in Matt. xxv. 6 ; iSovaa in Luke i. 29 ; vwip fj^Siv in Rom. viii. 26(Part I. Chap. i. pp. 5, 6).

' This source of variations, though not easily discriminated from others, musthave suggested itself to many minds, and is well touched upon by the lateIsaac Taylor in his ' History of the Transmission of Antient Books to moderntimes,' 1827, p. 24. So Dr. Hort, when perplexed by some of the textualproblems which he fails to solve, throws out as an hypothesis not in itselfwithout plausibility, the notion of ' a first and a second edition of the Gospelsboth conceivably apostolic ' (Gr. Test. Introduction, p. 177). '


47/485

PLAN OF THIS WORK. IQment, the song of David in a Sam. xxii is evidently an earlydraft of the more finished composition, Ps. xviii. Traces of thewriter's curae secundae may possibly be found in John v. 3, 4vii. 53viii. 11 ; xiii. 26; Acts xx. 4, 15 ; xxiv. 6-8. To thislist some critics feel disposed to add portions of Luke xxixxiv.

12. The fullest critical edition of the Greek Testament hithertopublished contains but a comparatively small portion of thewhole mass of variations already known ; as a rule, the editorsneglect, and rightly neglect, mere errors of transcription. Suchthings must be recorded for several reasons, but neither they,nor real various readings that are slenderly supported, canproduce any effect in the task of amending or restoring thesacred text. Those who wish to see for themselves how far thecommon printed editions of what is called the ' textus receptusdiffer from the judgement of the most recent critics, may referif they please to the small Greek Testament published in theseries of ' Cambridge Greek and Latin Texts ^,' which exhibitsin a thicker type all words and clauses wherein Eobert Stephen'sedition of 1550 (which is taken as a convenient standard) differsfrom the other chief modifications of the textus receptus (viz.Eeza's 1565 and Elzevir's 1624), as also from the revised textsof Lachmann 1842-50, of Tischendorf 1865-72, of Tregelles1857-72, of the Revisers of the English New Testament (1881),and of Westcott and Hort (1881), The student will thus beenabled to estimate for himself the limits within which the textof the Greek Testament may be regarded as still open todiscussion, and to take a general survey of the questions onwhich the theologian is bound to form an intelligent opinion.

13. The work that lies before us naturally divides itself intothree distinct parts.

I. A description of the sources from which various readingsare derived (or of their external evidence), comprising

(a) Manuscripts of the Greek New Testament or of por-tions thereof.

(b) Ancient versions of the New Testament in variouslanguages.

' ' Novum Testamentum Textus Stephanici A. D. 1550 . . . curante F. H. A.Scrivener.' Cantabr. 1877 (.Editio Major, 1887).

C a


48/485

20 PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS.(c) Citations from the Greek Testament or its versions

made by early ecclesiastical writers, especially bythe Fathers of the Christian Church.

(d) Early printed or later critical editions of the GreekTestament.

II. A discussion of the principles on which external evi-dence should be applied to the recension of the sacred volume,embracing

(a) The laws of inteenal evidence, and the limits oftheir legitimate use.

(b) The history of the text and of the principal schemeswhich have been proposed for restoring it to itsprimitive state, including recent views of Com-parative Criticism.

(c) Considerations derived from the peculiar characterand grammatical form of the dialect of the GreekTestament.

III. The application of the foregoing materials and principlesto the investigation of the true reading in the chief passagesof the New Testament, on which authorities are at variance.In this edition, as has already been explained in the preface,

it has been found necessary to divide the treatise into twovolumes, which will contain respectively

I. First Volume :Ancient Manuscripts.II. Second Volume:Versions, Citations, Editions, Prin-

ciples, and Selected Passages.It will be found desirable to read the following pages in

the order wherein they stand, although the chief part ofChapters VII-XIV of the first volume and some portions else-where (indicated by being printed like them in smaller type)are obviously intended chiefly for reference, or for less searchingexamination.


49/485

CHAPTER II.GENERAL CHARACTER OF THE GREEK MANUSCRIPTS OP

THE NEW TESTAMENT.AS the extant Greek manuscripts of the New Testamentsupply both the most copious and the purest sources ofTextual Criticism, we propose to present to the reader someaccount of their peculiarities in regard to material, form, style ofwriting, date and contents, before we enter into details respectingindividual copies, under the several subdivisions to which it isusual to refer them.

1. The subject of the present section has been systematicallydiscussed in the ' Palaeographia Graeca' (Paris, 1708, folio) ofBernard do Montfaucon [1655-1741 ^], the most illustriousmember of the learned Society of the Benedictines of St. Maur.This truly great work, although its materials are rather tooexclusively drawn from manuscripts deposited in French libraries,and its many illustrative facsimiles are somewhat rudely en-graved, still maintains a high authority on all points relating toGreek manuscripts, even after more recent discoveries, especiallyamong the papyri of Egypt and Herculaneum, have necessarilymodified not a few of its statements. The four splendid volumesof M. J. B. Silvestre's ' Pal^ographie Universelle ' (Paris, 1839-41, &c. folio) afford us no less than 300 plates of the Greekwriting of various ages, sumptuously executed; though theaccompanying letter-press descriptions, by F. and A. ChampoUionFils, seem in this branch of the subject a little disappointingnor are the valuable notes appended to his translation of theirwork by Sir Frederick Madden (London, 2 vols. 1850, 8vo)sufficiently numerous or elaborate to supply the ChampoUions'defects. Much, however, may also be learnt from the ' Hercu-

' In this manner we propose to indicate the dates of the birth and death ofthe person whose name immediately precedes.


50/485

22 GREEK MANUSCRIPTS.lanensium voluminum quae supersunt' (Naples, 10 torn. 1793-1850, fol.); from Mr. Babington's three volumes of papyrusfragments of Hyperides, respectively published in 1850, 1853and 1858 ; and especially from the Prolegomena to Tischendorf'seditions of the Codices Ephraemi (1843), Friderico-Augustanus(1846), Claromontanus (1852), Sinaiticus (1862), Vaticanus(1867), and those other like publications (e.g. Monumenta sacrainedita 1846-1870, and Anecdota sacra et profana 1855) whichhave rendered his name perhaps the very highest among scholarsin this department of sacred literature. What I have been ableto add from my own observation, has been gathered from thestudy of Biblical manuscripts now in England. To thesesources of infoimation may now be added Professor Watten-bach's ' Anleitung zur griechischen Palaeographie ' secondedition, Leipsic, 1877, Gardthausen's ' Griechische Palaeographie,'Leipsic, 1879 ; Dr. C. E. Gregory's ' Prolegomena ' to the eighthedition of Tischendorf, and especially the publication of ' ThePalaeographical Society Greek Testament, Parts I and II,Leipsic, 1884, 1891, 'Facsimiles of Manuscripts and Inscriptions

'

edited by E. A. Bond and E. M. Thompson, Parts I-XII,London, 1873-82, and a Manual on ' Greek and Latin Palaeo-graphy' from the hands of Mr. E. Maunde Thompson, ofwhich the proof-sheets have been most kindly placed by theaccomplished author at the disposal of the editor of this work,and have furnished to this chapter many elements of enrich-ment. It may be added, that since manusci'ipts have beenphotographed, all other facsimiles have been put in the shade

;

and in this edition references as a rule will be given only tophotographed copies.

2. The materials on which writing has been impressed aidifferent periods and stages of civilization are the following :Leaves, bark, especially of the lime (liber), linen, clay andpottery, wall-spaces, metals, lead, bronze, wood, waxen andother tablets, papyrus, skins, parchment and vellum, and fronan early date amongst the Chinese, and in the West after th(capture of Samarcand by the Arabs in A. d. 704, papeimanufactured from fibrous substances ^. The most anciemmanuscripts of the New Testament now existing are composecof vellum or parchment (membrana), the term vellum beinj

^ 'Greek and Latin Palaeography,' Chaps. II, III.


51/485

MATERIALS FOR WRITING ON. 23strictly applied to the delicate skins of very young calves, andparchment to the integuments of sheep and goats, though theterms are as a rule employed convertibly. The word parch-ment seems to be a corruption of charta pergamena, a namefirst given to skins prepared by some improved process forEumenes, king of Pergamum, about B. c. 150. In judging of thedate of a manuscript on skins, attention must be paid to thequality of the material, the oldest being almost invariablywritten on the thinnest and whitest vellum that could beprocured ; while manuscripts of later ages, being usuallycomposed of parchment, are thick, discoloured, and coarselygrained. Thus the Oodex Sinaiticus of the fourth century ismade of the finest skins of antelopes, the leaves being so large,that a single animal would furnish only two (Tischendorf, Cod.Frid.-August. Prolegomena, 1). Its contemporary, the far-famed Codex Vaticanus, challenges universal admiration for thebeauty of its vellum : every visitor at the British Museum canobserve the excellence of that of the Codex Alexandrinus of thefifth century: that of the Codex Claromontanus of the sixthcentury is even more remarkable : the material of those purple-dyed fragments of the Gospels which Tischendorf denominatesN, also of the sixth century, is so subtle and delicate, that somepersons have mistaken the leaves preserved in England (Brit.Mus. Cotton, Titus C xv) for Egyptian papyrus. Paper made ofcotton ^ {charta hombycina, called also charta Damascena fromits place of manufacture) may have been fabricated in theninth 2 or tenth century, and linen paper (charta proper) asearly as 1242 A. D. ; but they were seldom used for Biblicalmanuscripts sooner than the thirteenth, and had not entirelydisplaced parchment at the era of the invention of printing,about A. D. 1450. Lost portions of parchment or vellummanuscripts are often supplied in paper by some later hand

' 'Eecent investigations have thrown doubts on the accuracy of this view ; anda careful analysis of many samples has proved that, although cotton wasoccasionally used, no paper that has been examined is entirely made of thatsubstance, hemp or flax being the more usual material.' Maunde Thompson,p. 44.

' Tischendorf (Notitia Codieis Sinaitici, p. 54) carried to St. Petersburga fragment of a Lectionary which cannot well be assigned to a later date thanthe ninth century, among whose parchment leaves are inserted two of cottonpaper, manifestly written on by the original scribe.


52/485

24 GREEK MANUSCRIPTS.but the Codex Leicestrensis of the fourteenth century iscomposed of a mixture of inferior vellum and worse paper,regularly arranged in the proportion of two parchment to threepaper leaves, recurring alternately throughout the whole volume.Like it, in the mixture of parchment and paper, are codd. 233and Brit. Mus. Harl. 3,161the latter however not being aNew Testament MS.

3. Although parchment was in occasional, if not familiar, useat the period when the New Testament was written {to. ^i^kia,fx6.Xi.aTa TCLs fj.fx^pavas 2 Tim. iv. 13), yet the more perishablepapyrus of Egypt was chiefly employed for ordinary purposes.This vegetable production had been iised for literary purposesfrom the earliest times. ' Papyrus rolls are represented on thesculptured walls of Egyptian temples.'' The oldest roll nowextant is the papyrus Prisse at Paris, which dates from 2500 B.C.,or even earlier, unless those which have been lately discoveredby Mr. Flinders Petrie reach as far, or even farther, back ^. Theordinary name applied in Greek to this material was xP^')s(a John 12), though Herodotus terms it ^v^Xos (ii. 100, v. 58),and in Latin charta (a Esdr. xv. 2 ; Tobit vii. 14Old LatinVersion). Papyrus was in those days esteemed more highly thanskins : for Herodotus expressly states that the lonians had beencompelled to have recourse to goats and sheep for lack of byblusor papyrus ; and Eumenes was driven to prepare parchmentbecause the Alexandrians were too jealous to. supply him withthe material which he coveted ^- Lideed, papyrus was used farbeyond the borders of Egypt, and was plentiful in Rome underthe Empire, being in fact the common material among theEomans during that period: and as many of the manuscriptsof the New Testament must have been written upon so perishablea substance in the earliest centuries since the Christian era, thisprobably is one of the reasons why we possess no considerablecopies from before the second quarter of the fourth century.Only a few fragments of the New Testament on papyrus remain.We find a minute, if not a very clear description of the mode ofpreparing the papyrus for the scribe in the works of the elderPliny (Hist. Nat. xiii. 11, 12). The plant grew in Egypt, also

1 I2 i

Ten Years Digging in Egypt,' pp. 120, &c.Greek and Latin Palaeography/ p. 35 ; Pliny, Nat. Hist. xiii. 11.


53/485

PAPYRUS AND VELLUM. 25in Syria, and on the Niger and the Euphrates. Mainly underChristian influence it was supplanted by parchment and vellum,which had superior claims to durability, and its manufacturefrnspfi nUiftrvthw fin the conquest of Egypt by the Mohammedans(A..D. 638). XtW/twL^iufcr

4. Parchment is said to have been introduced at Eome notlong after its employment by Attains. Nevertheless, if it hadbeen in constant and ordinary use under the first Emperors,we can hardly suppose that specimens of secular writing wouldhave failed to come down to us. Its increased growth andprevalence about synchronize with the rise of Constantinopolitaninfluence. It may readily be imagined that vellum (especiallythat fine sort by praiseworthy custom required for copies ofHoly Scripture) could never have been otherwise than scarceand dear. Hence arose, at a very early period of the Christian.era, the practice and almost the necessity of erasing ancientwriting from skins, in order to make room for works in whichthe living generation felt more interest, especially when cleanvellum failed the scribe towards the end of his task. Thisprocess of destruction, however, was seldom so fully carriedout, but that the strokes of the elder hand might still be traced,more or less completely, under the more modern writing. Suchmanuscripts are called codices rescripti or palimpsests (7raA.1V-^qcTTa ''), and several of the most precious monuments of sacredlearning are of this description. The Codex Ephraemi at Pariscontains large fragments both of the Old and New Testamentunder the later Greek works of St. Ephraem the Syrian : andthe Codex Nitriensis, more recently disinterred from a monasteryin the Egyptian desert and brought to the British Museum,comprises a portion of St. Luke's Gospel, nearly obliterated,and covered over by a Syriac treatise of Severus of Antiochagainst Grammaticus, comparatively of no value whatever.It will be easily believed that the collating or transcribing ofpalimpsests has cost much toil and patience to those whoseloving zeal has led them to the attempt: and after all thetrue readings wiU be sometimes (not often) rather uncertain,

' 'Nam, quod in palimpsesto, laudo equidem parcimoniam.' Cicero, AdDiversos, Tii. 18, though of a waxen tablet. Maunde Thompson, p. 75.


54/485

26 GREEK MANUSCRIPTS.even though chemical mixtures (of which ' the most harmless isprobably hydrosulphuret ofammonia ') have recently been appliedwith much success to restore the faded lines and letters of thesevenerable records.

5. We need say but little of a practice which St. Jerome^and others speak of as prevalent towards the end of the fourthcentury, that of dyeing the vellum purple, and of stampingrather than writing the letters in silver and gold. The Cottonfragment of the Gospels, mentioned above (p. 23), is one of thefew remaining copies of this kind, as are the newly discoveredCodex Rossanensis and the Codex Beratinus, and it is not unlikelythat the great Dublin palimpsest of St. Matthew owes its presentwretched discoloration to some such dye. But, as Davidsonsensibly observes, ' the value of a manuscript does not dependon such things ' (Biblical Criticism, vol. ii. p. 264). We care forthem only as they serve to indicate the reverence paid to theScriptures by men of old. The style, however, of the pictures,illustrations, arabesques and initial ornaments that prevail inlater copies from the eighth century downwards, whose coloursand gilding are sometimes as fresh and bright as if laid on butyesterday^, will not only interest the student by tending tothrow light on mediaeval art and habits and modes of thought,but will often fix the date of the books which contain themwith a precision otherwise quite beyond our reach.

6. The ink found upon ancient manuscripts is of variouscolours ^. Black ink, the ordinary writing fluid of centuries(jne'Aai', atramentum, &c.) differs in tint at various periods andin different countries. In early MSS. it is either pure blackor slightly brown ; in the Middle Ages it varies a good dealaccording to age and locality. In Italy and Southern Europeit is generally blacker than in the North, in France and Flanders

' 'Habeant qui volunt veteres libros, vel in membranis purpureis auroargentoque desoriptos.' Praef. in Job. ' Inficluntur membrauae colore purpureo,aurum liquescit in litteras.' Epist. ad Eustochium.^ Miniatures are found even as early as in the Cod. Eossanensis (2) at thebeginning of the sixth century.i This paragraphwhich has been rewritten, has been abridged from Mr. Maunde

Thompson's 'Greek and Latin Palaeography,' pp. 50-52, to which readers arereferred for verification and amplification.


55/485

INK AND PENS. 27it is generally darker than in England; a Spanish MS. ofthe fourteenth or fifteenth century may usually be recognizedby the peculiar blackness of the ink. Deterioration is observablein the course of time. The ink of the fifteenth century par-ticularly is often of a faded grey colour. Inks of green, yellow,and other colours, are also found, but generally only forornamental purposes. Ked, either in the form of a pigmentor fluid ink, is of very ancient and common use, being seen evenin early Egyptian papyri. Gold was also used as a writingfluid at a very early period. Purple-stained vellum MSS. wereusually written upon in gold or silver letters, and ordinarywhite vellum MSS. were also written in gold, particularly inthe ninth and tenth centuries, in the reigns of the Carlovingiankings. Gold writing as a practice died out in the thirteenthcentury : and writing in silver appears to have ceased con-temporaneously with the disuse of stained vellum. The ancientsused the liquid of cuttle-fish. Pliny mentions soot and gumas the ingredients of writing-ink. Other later authors addgall-apples : metallic infusions at an early period, and vitriolin the Middle Ages were also employed.

7. While papyrus remained in common use, the chief instru-ment employed was a reed {KdXaixos 3 John ver. 13, canna), such asare common in the East at present : a few existing manuscripts(e.g. the Codd. Leicestrensis and Lambeth 1350) appear to havebeen thus written. Yet the fii-mness and regularity of thestrokes, which often remain impressed on the vellum or paperafter the ink has utterly gone, seem to prove that in thegreat majority of cases the stilus made of iron, bronze, or othermetal, or ivory or bone, sharp at one end to scratch the letters,and furnished with a knob or flat head at the other for purposesof erasure, had not gone whoUy out of use. We must add toour list of writing materials a bodkin or needle (acus), by meansof which and a ruler the blank leaf was carefully divided,generally on the outer side of the skin, into columns and lines,whose regularity much enhances the beauty of our best copies.The vestiges of such points and marks may yet be seen deeplyindented on the surface of nearly all manuscripts, those on oneside of each leaf being usually sufficiently visible to guide thescribe when he came to write on the reverse. The quill pen


56/485

28 GREEK MANUSCRIPTS.probably came into use with vellum, for which it is obviously-suited. The first notices of it occur in a story respectingTheodoric the Ostrogoth, and in a passage of Isidore's 'Origines'(vi. 13).

8. Little need be said respecting the form of manuscripts,which in this particular [codices) much resemble printed books.A few are in large folio ; the greater part in small folio orquarto, the prevailing shape being a quarto (quaternio or quire)whose height but little exceeds its breadth ; some are in octavo,a not inconsiderable number smaller still : and quires of thi'eesheets or six leaves, and five sheets or ten leaves (Cod. Vati-canus), are to be met with. In some copies the sheets have marksin the lower margin of their first or last pages, like the signaturesof a modern volume, the folio at intervals of two, the quarto atintervals of four leaves, as in the Codex Bezae of the Gospelsand Acts (D), and the Codex Augiensis of St. Paul's Epistles (F).Not to speak at present of those manuscripts which have aLatin translation in a column parallel to the Greek, as theCodex Bezae, the Codex Laudianus of the Acts, and the CodicesClaromontanus and Augiensis of St. Paul, many copies of everyage have two Greek columns on each page ; of these the CodexAlexandrinuB is the oldest : the Codex Vaticanus has threecolumns on a page, the Codex Sinaiticus four. The uniquearrangement ^ of these last two has been urged as an argument

' ' Greek and Latin Palaeography,' p. 49.' Besides the Cod. Sinaiticus, the beautiful Psalter purchased by the National

Library from the Didot sale at Paris has four columns (Mr. J. Rondel Harris),and besides the Cod. Vaticanus, the Vatican Dio Cassius, the Milan fragment ofGenesis, two copies of the Samaritan Pentateuch at Nablous described byTischendorf (Cod. Frid.-Aug. Prolog. 11), the last part of Cod. Monacensis 208(Evan, 429), and two Hebrew MSS. Cod. Mon. Heb. 422, and Cod. Reg. Heb. 17,are arranged in three columns. Tischendorfhas more recently discovered a similararrangement in two palimpsest leaves of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus from whichhe gives extracts (Not. Cod. Sinait. p. 49) ; in a Latin fragment of the Pentateuch,the same as the Ashburnham manuscript below, seen by him at Lyons in 1843 ina Greek Evangelistarium of the eighth century, and a Patristic manuscript atPatmos of the ninth (ibid. p. 10) ; so that the argument drawn from the triplecolumns must not be pressed too far. He adds also a Turin copy of the MinorProphets in Greek (Pasinus, Catalogue, 1749), and a Nitrian Syriac codex in theBritish Museum 'quern circa finem quart! saeculi scriptum esse subscriptiotestatur" (Monum. sacra inedita, vol. i, Prolog, p. xxxi). To this not slenderlist Mr. E. Mauude Thompson enables us to annex B. M. Addit. 24142 a FlemishLatin Bible of the eleventh century. The late Lord Ashburnham in 1868


57/485


58/485

hMA.CO111zI-K:>

I-bao-^

Xy.CD

1


68/485


69/485

FORMS OF UNCIAL LETTERS. 35Such are Codd. ANRZ, Rossanensis (sometimes), and the CottonGenesis. In the Herculanean rolls the letter comes near the commoncursive /3 ; in some others (as Cod. Rossanensis at times) its shape isquite like the modern B. When oblong letters became common, thetop (e.g. in Cod. Bezae) and bottom extremities of the curve ran intostraight lines, by way of return into the primitive shape (see No. 36,dated a.d. 980). In the very early papyrus fragment of Hyperidesit looks like the English R standing on a base (No. 9, 1. 4). Butthis specimen rather belongs to the semi-cursive hand of common life,than to that of books.Gamma in its simplest form consists of two lines of equal thick-

ness, the shorter so placed upon the longer, which is vertical, as tomake one right angle with it on the right side. Thus we find it inthe Rosetta stone, the papyrus of Hyperides, the Herculanean rolls,and very often in Cod. A. The next step was to make the horizontalline very thin, and to strengthen its extremity by a point, or knob,as in Codd. Ephraemi (No. 24), RZ : or the point was thus strengthenedwithout thinning the line, e.g. Codd. Vatican., Rossanensis, N andmost later copies, such as Harl. 5598 (No. 7) or its contemporaryParham 18 (No, 36). In Cod. Bezae (No. 42) gamma much resemblesthe Latin r,Bdta should be closely scrutinized. Its most ancient shape is an

equilateral triangle, the sides being all of the same thickness (/^).Cod. Claromontanus, though of the sixth century, is in this instanceas simple as any : the Herculanean rolls, Codd. Vatican., Sinait., andthe very old copy of the Pentateuch at Paris (Colbert) or ' Cod. Sar-ravianus' and Leyden, much resemble it, only that sometimes theHerculanean sides are slightly curved, and the right descending strokeof Cod. Vatican, is thickened. In Cod. A begins a tendency to prolongthe base on one or both sides, and to strengthen one or both endsby points. "We see a little more of this in Cod. Rossanensis and inthe palimpsest Homer of the fifth century, published by Cureton. Thehabit increases and gradually becomes confirmed in Codd. Ephraemi(No. 24), the Vatican Dio Cassius of the fifth or sixth century, iaCod. R, and particularly in N and E of the Acts (Nos. 4, 14, 25).In the oblong later uncials it becomes quite elaborate, e.g. Cod. Bof the Apocalypse, or Nos. 7, 21, 36. On the Rosetta stone and inthe Cod. Bezae the right side is produced beyond the triangle, andis produced and slightly curved in Hyperides, curved and stronglypointed in Cod. Z.

Spsilon has its angular form on the Rosetta marble and other inscrip-tions in stone; in the oldest manuscripts it consists as an uncial of asemicircle, from whose centre to the right of it a horizontal radiusis drawn to the concave circumference. Thus it appears in the Hercu-lanean rolls (only that here the radius is usually broken off before itmeets the circle), in Codd. Frid.-August., Vatican., the two ParisPentateuchs (Colbert-Leyden fifth century, Coislin. sixth) and theCotton Genesis. In Cod. Alex, a slight trace is found of the morerecent practice of strengthening each of the three extremities with

D a


70/485

36 GREEK MANUSCRIPTS.knobs, but only the radius at times in Cod. Kossanensis. The customincreases in Codd. Ephraemi, Bezae, and still more in Codd. NE,Z,wherein the curve becomes greater than a semicircle. In Hyperidea(and in a slighter degree in Cod. Claromon. No. 41) the shape almostresembles the Latin e. The form of this and the other round letterswas afterwards much affected in the narrow oblong uncials : see Nos.7, 16, 36.

Zeta on the Eosetta stone maintains its old form (IC), which isindeed but the next letter reversed. In manuscripts it receives itsusual modern shape (Z), the ends being pointed decidedly, slightly,or not at all, much after the manner described for epsilon. In oldcopies the lower horizontal line is a trifle curved (Cod. E, No. 5), oreven both the extreme lines (Cod. Z, No. 6, and Cod. Augiensisof St. Paul). In such late books as Parham 18 (a.d. 980, facsim.No. 36) Zeta is so large as to run far below the line, ending in a kindof tail.

JEta does not depart from its normal shape (h) except that inCod. Ephraemi (No. 24) and some narrow and late uncials (e. g. Nos.7, 36) the cross line is often more than half way up the letter. Ina few later uncials the cross line passes outside the two perpendiculars,as in the Cod. Augiensis, twenty-six times on the photographed page ofScrivener's edition.

Theta deserves close attention. In some early inscriptions it isfound as a square, bisected horizontally O). On the Eosetta stoneand most others (but only in such monuments) it is a circle, with astrong central point. On the Herculanean rolls the central point isspread into a short horizontal line, yet not reaching the circumference(No. 10, 1. 8). Thence in our uncials from the fourth to the sixthcentury the line becomes a horizontal diameter to a true circle (Codd.Vatican., Sinait., Codd. ANEZ, Ephraemi, Claromont., Eossanensis,and Cureton's Homer). In the seventh century the diameter beganto pass out of the circle on both sides : thence the circle came to hecompressed into an ellipse (sometimes very narrow), and the ends ofthe minor axis to be ornamented with knobs, as in Cod. B of theApocalypse (eighth century), Cod. Augiensis (ninth century), LX ofthe Gospels, after the manner of the tenth century (Nos. 7, 16, 21,36, 38).

Iota would need no remark but for the custom of placing over itand upsilon, when they commence a syllable, either a very shortstraight line, or one or two dots. After the papyrus rolls no copyis quite without them, from the Codex Alexandrinus, the CottonGenesis and Paris-Leyden Pentateuch, Cod. Z and the Isaiah includedin it, to the more recent cursives ; although in some manuscripts theyare much rarer than in others. By far the most usual practice is toput two points, but Cod. Ephraemi, in its New Testament portion,stands nearly alone with the Cotton Genesis (ch. xviii. 9) in exhibitingthe straight line; Cod. Alexandrinus in the Old Testament, but notm the New, frequently resembles Codd. Ephraemi and the Cottoq


71/485

UNCIAL LETTERS. 37Genesis in placing a straight line over iota, and more rarely overU2)silon, instead of the single or double dots ; Cod. Sinaiticus employstwo points or a straight line (as in Z's Isaiah) promiscuously over bothvowels, and in Wake 12, a cursive of the eleventh century, the formerfrequently pass into the latter in writing. Codd. Borgianus (T) andClaromont. have but one point ; Codd. N and Eossanensis have two foriota, one for wpsilon.

J!ap2)a deserves notice chiefly because the vertex of the angleformed by the two inclined lines very frequently does not meet theperpendicular line, but falls short of it a little to the right : we observethis in Codd. ANR, Ephraemi, Eossanensis, and later books. Thecopies that have strong points at the end of epsilon &c. (e. g. Codd.NE and AZ partly) have the same at the extremity of the thin orupper limb of Kappa. In Cod. D a fine horizontal stroke runs a littleto the left from the bottom of the vertical line. Compare also the initialletter in Cod. M, No. 32.Lamhda much resembles alpha, but is less complicated. All our

models (except Harl. 5598, No. 7), from the Eosetta stone downwards,have the right limb longer than the left, which thus leans against itsside, but the length of the projection varies even in the same passage(e. g. No. 10). In most copies later than the Herculanean rolls andCod. Sinaiticus the shorter line is much the thinner, and the longerslightly curved. In Cod. Z (Nos. 6, 18) the projection is curvedelegantly at the end, as we saw in delta.Mu varies as much as most letters. Its normal shape, resembling the

English M, is retained in the Eosetta stone and most inscriptions, but atan early period there was a tendency to make the letter broader, and notto bring the re-entering or middle angle so low as in English (e.g. Codd.Yaticanus and Sinaiticus). In Cod. Ephraemi this central angle issometimes a little rounded: in Codd. Alex, and Parham 18. the linesforming the angle do not always spring from the top of the verticallines: in Arund. 547 (No. 16) they spring almost from their foot,forming a thick inelegant loop below the line, the letter being rathernarrow : Harl. 5598 (No. 7) somewhat resembles this last, only that theloop is higher up. In the Herculanean rolls (and to a less extent in theCotton Genesis) the two outer lines cease to be perpendicular, and leanoutwards until the letter looks much like an inverted W (No. 10). Inthe papyrus Hyperides (No. 9) these out

Documents

136667076 19 Scrivener a Plain Introduction to Criticism of the New Testament 4th Ed Vol I 1894