« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »
in various works, and to prepare an edition of Griesbach's adopted readings have been inserted; the Greek Testament, which should contain a in some of them there are additional corrections. text freed from considerable errors, accompanied The following are deserving of special notice. by such helps as might facilitate interpretation; to exhibit the more important various readings, in London, in 1 vol. 8vo.
(1) Dr. Knapp's edition, which has been reprinted and the authorities on which they are supported,
(2) Professor Schott's edition, also in 1 vol. 8vo. together with the judgment of the editor re- (Lipsiæ, 3rd edit., 1825), in which the Greek text is specting them.
accompanied by a Latin version. This, as far as we “ That Griesbach has fulfilled the duties which have examined it, is strongly tinctured by the prevahe owed to the public,” says Bishop Marsh, “ that lent and heterodox theology of Germany. his diligence was unremitted, that his caution was (3) Professor White's edition (2 vols. 8vo., Oxford, extreme, that his erudition was profound, and that 1808) consists of the Textus Receptus, or common his judgment was directed by a sole regard to the text, but exhibits very distinctly those readings which evidence before him, will, in general, be allowed by he considers of equal or superior value to the received
Griesbach would remove from the text; those which those who have studied his edition, and are able text; and those insertions into the text which he to appreciate its merits. That his decisions are
conceives the authority of MSS. to justify: always correct; that, in all cases, the evidence is so
(4) Aitton's edition of Griesbach's text was issued nicely weighed, as to produce unerring results; from the Glasgow University press, in 1821, in 1 vol. that weariness of mind, under painful investigation, 32mo.; and the publisher of this work has subsehas, in no instance, occasioned an important over- quently sent forth an equally correct and beautiful sight; that prejudice or partiality has no nchere reprint of it in the same form. influenced his general regard for critical justice;
(5) The Greek Testament published by Mr. Bagswould be affirmations which can hardly apply to ter, and forming part of his beautiful, accurate, and
cheap Polyglott Bible, in a single folio volume, is any editor, however good or great. But, if at any printed from the text of Mill, but exhibits in twentytime he has erred, he has, at the same time, two pages, at the beginning, the various readings of enabled those who are competent judges to decide Griesbach which are referred to in the text by approfor themselves, by stating the contending evidence priate marks. The low price and portable form of with clearness and precision. Emendations, this edition, give it strong claims to preference. But founded on conjecture, however ingenious, he has the enterprising publisher has also issued the followintroduced not in a single instance: They are all ing: founded on quoted authority. Our attention is (6) The Greek Testament (in fcp. 16mo., about even solicited and directed to that authority, the the length of one's finger), in which the received adopted readings being always printed in smaller text is adopted, but having in a centre column of
the whole of the various readings of Griescharacters than the rest of the text, and with re- bach, as contained in his edition 1805, in which, ference to the rejected readings, which are printed besides his amended text, he has given the more imin the inner ‘margin in the same letters with the portant of those readings that differ equally from his text, while both of them refer to the respective own and the received text. In addition to these, are evidence which is produced below. If readings inserted the themes of difficult words, after the plan are added, where none existed before, or are with of Hoole, but differing from his Testament in this drawn without substitution, the changes are marked material respect, that whereas his work was excluwith equal clearness, and are equally supported by sively adapted to the Lexicon of Pasor, in which the critical authority. When the evidence is not suf
Greek words are all arranged under their primitives
or roots, the present edition is adapted to the generficiently decisive to warrant an alteration in the ality of Lexicons, in which the words are arranged text, the readings worthy of notice are placed in alphabetically. The more important elliptical words the inner margin, with different marks expressive from Bos, Schættgen, Leisner, and others, are added: of their different claims.” Such is the character and to render the work still more useful, a great of this important work, which, with the prolego- variety of texts are inserted, to illustrate Greek words gomena belonging to it, forms a treasure of biblical and phrases. There are also two very beautifully learning, of incalculable value.*
executed maps; one of Judea, the other illustrative 12. There have been several editions of the of the travels of the apostles. This is a critical Greek Testament, in which the most important of
edition of the Greek Testament of an unique description, and lays the student under deep obligations
to its projector. It has been followed by the two * In purchasing Griesbach's work, care should be taken to following works, in the same forn and size, which procure the second edition, that is, the one printed at Halle, in 1796 and 1806; or else the London edition of 1818. It is in
we cannot pass by, though they do not properly be2 8vo. vols. A new edition of Griesbach's text is now in long to the topic treated of in this section. Their course of publication, in Germany, with many important addi- utility to the student will plead our apology. tions, by Dr. Schulz. The first volume was published in 1827.
A Concordance to the Greek Testament, containing
all the principal words in the Greek Testament, in an interposition, on the mere ground of an unithe manner and on the basis of the celebrated work formity of reading in the various MSS. extant. of Schmidt, which affords the same facilities of re- Such an uniformity might have been the result of ference to the Greek text, as Cruden's renowned other and objectionable causes, and therefore could Fork does to the English.
have furnished no proof of a divine superintendA Lexicon to the Greek Testament, Greek and
But, in fact, we need no such supervision ; Eozish, comprehending erery word in the New TesLancas, as well as those in the various readings of the materials we possess are adequate to procure a Giesbach ; the various diffuse definitions of larger sufficiently authentic text, while we are relieved Forks being abridged with care, and rendered clear, from the necessity of repelling the charge of a consimple, and precise.
certed agreement among its several depositaries, We need only add, that the entire cost of these for the
purpose of giving a perfect unity of three works does not exceed seventeen shillings ; reading. True it is, that the great multiplication that their size will permit a person to carry them in of these writings has induced a proportionate his pocket, although the type is not small; and that variety of readings, or variations in existing copies; the philological attainments and well known indus- but this, instead of being the cause of permanent try of the lamented editor have rendered them more inaccuracy, affords, above all things, the means of correct, perhaps, than any similar works extant. correcting errors where they have really crept in.
1. The first step in the inquiry, then, and that SECTION V.
upon which the propriety of every attempt to corVARIOUS READINGS.
rect the text of an ancient work must depend, is to Accidents to which Literary Works are liable: the Scriptures' ascertain the probable causes of those various readDot secured against these -- Various Readings: their sources, number, and value – Prescribed Rules for correct ings which the existing copies present. This lies ing the Text where faulty: the Process adopted by Gries at the foundation of every thing ; because it is obbach-Recepsions of the Greek Text-Concluding Remarks vious, that if two MSS. present a various reading of en Various Readings.
the same passage, the true one can only be ascerI. Having taken a review of the principal criti- tained and fixed with certainty, by a previous accal editions of the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures, quaintance with the sources whence errors in the and of the progress that has been made towards copies of literary works may spring. This knowthe attainment of a pure or genuine text, it only ledge is one of the main ingredients in the science temains to give some account of the sources of of critical conjecture, which is of so great importthese various readings about which so much has ance in the matter of which we are treating. been said, and to suggest some considerations for 2. The following may be considered as the chief determining their real value.
sources of error in works of this description. II. In order to form an adequate conception of 1. Imperfections in the original MSS. the nature of various readings, it will be necessary 2. The accidental mistakes of transcribers. to take a glance at the accidents to which literary 3. The assumption of marginal glosses into the works are liable in the progress of transcription, text. and in their passage down the stream of time. 4. Designed alterations of a literary kind. In this respect the sacred writings stand in pre- 5. Wilful corruptions made for party purposes. cily the same circumstances as other ancient Upon each of these sources of crror a word or works. An original document was committed to two may be offered. the keeping of the church, by an inspired prophet 1. It is evident that an original MS. might conof apostle, who designed it, in conformity with the tain such imperfections as would induce a diversity divine purpose, for general and constant use. In of reading in two or more copies taken from it, order to carry this purpose into effect, copies of the which imperfections might have been caused either document had to be multiplied by transcription, in by the ordinary ravages of time, or by the particular precisely the same manner as the literati of Greece accidents to which it had been exposed. Thus, if and Rome multiplied copies of their classic authors. a word or letter had been rendered illegible, and Now, it must be obvious that in such a process, there were no other MS. at hand which made up the sacred text would be liable to be affected by the deficiency, a transcriber would probably supply the usual inconveniences of copying, unless a con- the deficiency by conjecture: and, since it is protuued miracle were wrought to ensure its integrity. bable that more than one letter or word would suit It would be a mere waste of time to argue that no the connexion of the passage, two transcribers m advantage could have been derived from such might vary in their insertions. This would, of an interposition of the divine power; because, as course, give birth to a variety of reading, in all must be obvious to all persons, it would lie beyond the copies subsequently made from these. the ability of man to demonstrate the fact of such 2. The accidental departures of transcribers
from their exemplars, independent of the imper- b) Or, the writer might mistake a contraction, of fections just noticed, would occasion a large num- which there are many in ancient Greek MSS. ber of various readings.
The following selections will exhibit the nature The mistakes originating these variations might of some of these contractions, and show the great be of several kinds.
chances there were of mistakes in copying the (1) If the copier wrote after a person who read MSS. in which they are found, and which are the original to him,
also written without any divisions between the a) He might mistake one word for another words : similar in sound; or the reader might mispro
1ЛЄ nounce a word, and mislead him.
Керос Інсотс Христос Інротсалси Thus, tb la is put for 15 lu fifteen times, and 15 lu for xy la twice, according to the Masora ; perhaps oftener. In 1 Cor. xii. 3, for ravonowhai,
It is thought that we have an instance of this kauthesomai, the Alex. reads rauynowuas, kauche- kind of mistake in Rom. xii. 11, where, for sw somai ; and in 1 John iv. 2, instead of gewozete
, augiw, the Lord, three MSS. which have been ginoskete, “ye know," several MSS. and some
collated, read iw zaigw, the time, the transcribers Versions read you woreTQ1, ginosketai, “ is known.” probably mistaking the usual contraction of rugiw b) He might transpose two or more words ;
(KN), for a contraction of xaigw, which would have
been the same. c) He might omit one or more words; d) He might unite two words together, making
c) The transcriber might also make a wrong divi
sion of words or letters; or he might improperly them one; or separate one word into two.
unite them. In either of these cases, there would be a departure from the original, and a consequent disagree written without any divisions between the letters.t
As we have already said, the text was originally ment with other copies, which had been correctly. The following specimen will be interesting to those taken. (2) If the transcriber had the work before him, Mss., and also illustrate the subject on which
unacquainted with the form of ancient Greek a) He might mistake similar letters.
we are speaking. It is taken from the fac-simile of Thus, in the Greck MSS. which are written
a Codex Rescriptus, sometime since discovered in in uncial letters, a person might easily interchange the library of Trinity College, Dublin, published such letters as o oce; TT UHN; under the superintendence of Dr. Barrett, who
AX* In the Hebrew MSS. the greater brought this precious fragment to light. The similarity between some of the characters would
passage is Matt. xxii. 43, 44: proportionately augment the chances of error. This
be seen in the case of such letters as the fol- AcreuartOIC OICTTWCONNA : ; 779; ; ; .
ENTINIKJAEIKNLT TONAET As a specimen of such mistakes, we may notice
EITT ENKC TWK Wuor 2 Kings xx. 12, where 3 (6) has been written for OTEKA ZIWNuor (m) in the name of the king of Babylon, as will
UCANOWTOTCEXOPOYC be seen by comparing it with Isai. xxxix. 1. In OrrITOKAT WTWNTTO the former place it is Berodach ; in the latter,
WNC OT Merodach. In Numb. ii. 14, 7 (r) has been The chances of mistake are here multiplied, written for 1 (d) Reuel for Deuel, as may as already suggested, by the numerous contractions by collating the passage with ch. i. 14; vii. 42; employed. Thus, for O IHzors, we have only x. 20. Similar permutations of letters are found ons, as in the first line, where the is placed in
many MSS. of the New Testament. And it will above the letters; and in the second and third here occur to the reader, that the chances of mis- lines, where similar marks are seen, we have take would be multiplied, in proportion to the KN, K, and K, for KTPION, KIPIOS, and damage which a MS. had sustained.
KYPIN. But putting the contractions out of sight,
* The following passage in Galen, an ancient author, is much to many letters it has happened, that the characters denoting to our purpose : “ It frequently happens,” he remarks, “not them have suffered variations, some by apposition, some by only to those who are not disposed to commit an error in writ- composition, some by parts taken away.”—De Comp. Med. per. ing, but also to some who do it by design, that they make Gen. lib. vii. c. 9. omicron (0) into theta (8), by a line drawn across the middle + Hag has some extended remarks upon this topic ; Introd. of the circular letter. The iota (1), too, may be turned into vol. I. $ xlv., &c. other letters approaching it in shape ; so, if from gamma (T) We have here employed the modern Greek character, but one line be taken away, or if from rho (P) a member be re- this will answer the purpost. moved, the form of iota (1) remains. In like manner with regard
ומשפטי כאור Icept the Vulgate, read
it is evident that a number of letters thus united, of. The most remarkable instance of it occurs together would sometimes be susceptible of more in Matt. xxvii. 35, where all the words which than one division and upon that which was made in the received text stand between ringov near would depend the reading and sense of the copy. the beginning of the verse, and the same word
Of various readings arising from this source at the end of the verse, are omitted in ninety-eight there are several examples, one or two of which known MSS., the principal Versions, and some may be here noticed. In Hos. vi. 5, a letter of the Fathers; upon the authority of which they belonging to the beginning of one word has been are rejected as spurious by Wetstein and Griesbach. added to the end of the preceding one-705WD Michaëlis, however, defends their integrity upon ** " and thy judgments the light goeth forth;" the principle of an homoioteleuton, judiciously this gives no sense ; but all the ancient Versions, arguing that the interpolation of the omitted words
“and my so as exactly to suit the context is very difficult to judgment shall go forth as the light."* Ps. lxxiii. be conceived, whereas their omission, on the prin4 presents a very singular reading : “No bands ciple just mentioned, would be a very natural acci(distresses) into their death"-Snina; this has dent. It cannot, he remarks, be an interpolation resulted from uniting two words in one, Sn 1995 from John xix. 24, where the quotation is differLappen to them; perfect and firm is their strength." ently introduced ; and, moreover, the author of the In James v. 12, the common text reads, with most quoted Psalm is in the disputed passage styled o MAS, "Lest ye fall (siç i ozgioiv) into hypocrisy;" 79007795, the prophet, the application of which title bat the Alex. and a few others, with some ancient to the Psalmist is peculiar to Matthew. Versions, read ito ngroiv, “ under judgment.”+ In the Hebrew Scriptures there is an instance of d) Again, a variation from the original or copy such an omission, in Judg. xvi. 13, in the latter
used as an exemplar, might be occasioned by the part of the verse. A reference to the passage will exchange of synonymous words.
show that its sense is not complete : " And he It is known that in copying a work, it is usual [Samson] said unto her [Delilah], If thou weavest with a transcriber to fix a short passage in his the seven locks of my head with the web.” This memory, and then to commit it to writing ; he does ends the address of Samson ; and the following not usually take up a single word at a time. Now, verse begins—“ And she fastened it with the pin," in the process of writing, it is by no means unlikely &c. Now, it seems very strange, that Samson that a synonymous word would be substituted for should direct Delilah to weave the locks of his head, one in the text. Those who have been in the and nothing more; and that she should omit to do habit of copying will immediately perceive the this, and adopt an expedient which he had not liability to errors of this description. Michaëlis suggested; namely, fasten his hair with a pin. has pointed out an instance of such an interchange But such is the representation of the passage. It of words, in Rev. xvii. 17, where, for thecon might be thought highly probable, therefore, that Tuara, seven MSS., quoted by Wetstein, have there is an omission in our present text; but we TEREGOI GOUTAI on noyou; and seven others, which he are not left to conjecture, for the Septuagint, no has likewise quoted, τελεσθωσιν οι λογοι.
doubt following the old Hebrew text, has the folc) Other accidental variations would be ocasioned lowing addition to the words of Samson, as they by what is called the homoioteleuton, or the re- stand in our copies, and are cited above :-“and currence of a word after a short interval; a source of various readings which merits parti
shall fasten them with a pin in the wall, I shall cular attention. become weak like other men : and so it was,
that Let it be supposed that the same word stands when he slept, Delilah took the seven locks of his in different places in a passage, and that the head, and wove them with the web.” Then follows writer, after having transcribed down to the former the fourteenth verse, as in our version. This hiatus of the two words, should, in carrying his eye back was no doubt occasioned by a circumstance similar to his exemplar, alight upon the latter of them, to the one just noticed in Matthew. The part and conceiving it to be the one down to which he omitted closes with the same words (
non- , had already written, proceed onward in his work. with the web) as those now closing the thirteenth la such case, it is evident, that so much of the verse; and the copyist, having written onward to passage as was between the two words in question, the first member of the sentence where they stand, would be omitted in the derived copy.
in again looking at his original, alighted on them That such omissions have frequently occurred, at the end of the sentence, and, mistaking them we have all the evidence that the subject admits for the words he had just written, naturally passed
on to the verse following. The consequence was, * Kennicott, Diss. Gen. 1. p. 517.,
that all the words lying between, were left out in * Gerard's Institutes, p. 296.
But it will be evident, on a moment's reflection, | above printed in hollow letters, and destroy, as that this same thing, that is, the recurrence of a we have seen, the sense of the passage. If the word after a short space, might give rise to another conjecture here ventured be well founded, the description of error ; namely, a repetition of the words below inclosed in brackets are spurious : words lying between. Thus, if a copyist had “And one of his servants answered and said, Let written down to the place where the word some take, I pray thee, five of the horses at occurred a second time, and in returning to his remain, which are left in the city, behold, they exemplar should take up the place where it oc- are all as the multitude of Israel that [are left in curred the first time, and, conceiving himself to it; behold, I say, they are even as all the multibe right, proceed in transcribing, such an error tude of the Israelites that] are consumed.” as the one supposed would be the consequence; It may be well to add, that the disputed words that is, the words lying between would be re- are wanting in the oldest of Kennicott's MSS., peated.
and in forty others collated by him and De Rossi; In 2 Kings vii. 13, this appears to have been neither are they contained in the Greek or Syriac the case, for we have there a repetition of seven
Versions. words, which seem entirely useless, though our j) Another source of error that requires notice venerable translators, with most others, have not under this head, is nearly allied to the one just thought themselves at liberty to reject them. dismissed ; namely, the immediate repetition of The English Bible, which indicates strongly that
letters, the latter of which, being mistaken for the translator has been sadly puzzled to make any
the former, are left out. thing intelligible of his text, reads thus: “ And To perceive clearly the probability of errors one of his servants answered, and said, Let some arising from this cause, the manner in which the take, I pray thee, five of the horses that remain, ancient MSS. were written must be recalled to which are left in the city (behold, they are as all mind. This, as we have seen, was in a continuous the multitude of Israel that are left in it; behold, text, without any space being left between the I say, they are even as all the multitude of the words,* in which case the chances of mistake were Israelites that are consumed), and let us send much greater and more numerous than they and see.”
If any one can understand this, it would be according to the present system of is to be wished that the public may have the writing. To illustrate this, we may refer to Luke benefit of his discovery. It is to be remarked, vii. 21, where, for smagioaTO 50 Betly, several however, that the latter part of the sentence here, MSS. have eyagioato Bensiv, omitting the article inclosed in a parenthesis, is, in the Hebrew, a (-o). Now this omission, as the MSS. were repetition of the preceding part, and if fairly originally written, would casily occur ; for the translated, the whole would read thus :
words would read thus : they are as all the multitude of Israel which
EXAPISATOTOBAEIIEIN remain in it; behold, they are as all the multitude if the article were inserted ; and as follows, if it of Israel which are consumed.” An inspection were omitted : of the original will show how easily this repetition
. might originate, in the manner we have supposed; In some cases of this kind, there is no internal but to make it as plain as possible, to such per- evidence to be had for settling a disputed reading; sons as know nothing of the language, we have since it is impossible to decide whether the letters here given it, with the repetition in hollow in question have been omitted or repeated, where letters :
either way of writing the passage makes out a good sense. In such circumstances critics are governed by the number and character of the
testimonies on either side. Again, The second word (72x) recurs, it will be seen, g) A person, having written one or more words from after six other words, and to this succeeds the a wrong place, and not choosing to erase it, might duplicate part of the passage. It is therefore return to the right one, and thus produce the reasonable to infer, that the transcriber, having
improper insertion of a word or a clause. completed the first seven words, that is, the sen
This has probably been the case in Matt. tence down to the recurring word, in again turning xxvi. 60, among other passages, where the first to the
copy before him, alighted upon the former xas oux sugov, “ but found none,” is superfluous part of the sentence, and catching the same word and improper, and is wanting in one MS. In 2 with his eye, continued to write, supposing it to Cor. xii. 7, the second iva in imepangwas, “lest I be the one at which he had previously stopped. This would produce the repetition of all the words |
* See the Specimen, p. 30, ante.
הנשארים אשר נשארו-נה הנס ככל-ההמון ישראל אשר נשארו בה הנם ככל-המין ישראל אשר --תמי