Editors' Preface. THE object of the notes in the present edition of the Bible is to put the reader in possession of the main facts relative to the text of the Authorised Version. They are designed not merely to correct some of the more important mistranslations, but to supply the means of estimating the authority by which the proposed corrections are supported. They appeal at once to the ordinary Bible reader, whose chief difficulties they endeavour to meet, and to the special or professional student, who will find, it is hoped, particularly in the Old Testament, a more careful selection of critical data and authorities than is elsewhere accessible. It is this two-fold character which constitutes the special feature of the present work, and distinguishes it from the larger revision now in progress at Westminster. The editors of the Old Testament particularly desire that the two undertakings may be understood to be quite independent. Although they have for some time past taken part in the larger revision, they have been careful to keep the two works distinct; indeed, they had practically finished much, if not most, of their preparation for this volume before becoming members of the Company of Revisers. The notes range themselves under two heads, Variations of Rendering, and Variations of Reading The former are those cases where the Authorised Version has been thought not to represent the original fairly-these are indicated by figures consecutive through the chapter as reference-marks; the latter, where the text which the Authorised Version translates has been supposed to be either incorrect or doubtful-these are specified by the earlier letters of the Greek alphabet in each verse. The reference-marks are placed before and (as a rule) after the words of the text that are referred to; the names of authorities immediately after the words in whose support they are quoted. No new rendering is introduced on the private authority of the editors. We must, however, except a few of the notes on passages where the Authorised Version is not strictly accurate in representing grammatical forms, or not literal in rendering the language of the original. But as a rule, if a Various Rendering has no name appended to it, it is to be understood that it has the general verdict of scholars in its favour. With regard to the English of the notes, it has been the endeavour of the editors to keep it as far as possible in harmony with that of our present Bible. An exception must, of course, be made in the case of matter introduced as paraphrase or explanation, where the language of the Authorised Version has become antiquated, or where (especially in the New Testament) it has seemed liable to be misunderstood. Completeness in the explanation of archaisms has, however, not been aimed at. It should likewise be mentioned that, where several authorities substantially agree, the editors have ventured to combine them by selecting some one English word which seemed fairly to express their meaning. (1) With regard to the Various Renderings, it was obviously necessary to limit them to those (or some of those) which appeared sensibly to affect the meaning. A very slight change in the English has sometimes been found sufficient. Where, for instance, the thought, or the colouring of the thought, was perceptibly modified by the presence or absence of the definite article, or where the distinctions of tenses seemed of great importance to the sense or consecutiveness of a passage, such points have been noticed. But alterations in these respects have not been made in the interest of mere grammatical accuracy. A great source of obscurity in the Authorised Version is the use of different English words for one word of the original, even in the same context. In such cases, one uniform rendering has frequently been adopted, with the result, not merely of clearing up the context, but of suggesting an unexpected parallelism between different parts of the Bible. (2) With regard to the Various Readings, it is necessary to remind the reader that the text from which the Authorised Version of the New Testament is translated is substantially identical with that of the first edition of the Greek text published by Erasmus in 1516, an edition based upon not more than five MSS., and those chosen almost at random without any regard to their intrinsic value. The discovery of some of the most ancient and valuable MSS. of the New Testament, and the systematic use of others, both ancient and valuable, which, though known in Western Europe in the 16th century, were scarcely used, and, in general, a more comprehensive study of MSS. and ancient Versions, has shewn that this "Received Text," as it is called, labours under manifold corruptions. Most students will probably allow the superior authority of Lachmann, and (especially) of his successors Tischendorf, Tregelles, and Westcott and Hort, and accept the judgment of these editors, where they agree, as decisive. The Hebrew text of the Old Testament stands upon a somewhat different footing. The form in which it appears in the printed Bibles is that in which it has been fixed by the Jews themselves for centuries. But a close examination reveals the fact that, jealously guarded as it thus has been, there must have been an earlier period in its transmission, during which errors and alterations crept in. The existence of such errors may be easily shewn, without passing beyond the limits of the Hebrew text itself, by a comparison of the corresponding chapters in the Books of Samuel and Kings on the one hand, and in the Chronicles on the other. Of the MSS. which have as yet been examined, but few date back as far as the 10th century A.D., and these few contain only portions of the Bible. But the ancient Versions at once carry us back to a period from 500 to 1000 years anterior to this: they thus reflect, with more or less exactness, a text far older than that represented by the earliest Hebrew MSS. Certainly to classify and account for all the divergences which they exhibit is a problem of extreme complexity, and perhaps insoluble: but, if used with tact and sobriety, the ancient Versions afford invaluable aid in restoring order and sequence where the Hebrew, as we possess it, appears involved in much confusion. Cases, however, occur in which a suspicion of corruption attaches to the text, which even a comparison of the Versions does not avail to remove. Here, then, nothing remains but to make a temperate use of critical emendation. However reluctant we may be to admit the principle of conjecture, an exceptional application of it is justified in the case of the Old Testament (1) by the long interval which elapsed between the composition of most of the books and the earliest date to which we can trace them, and (2) by the nature of the Hebrew characters, which, in every phase through which the alphabet has passed, are very liable to be confounded. Purely arbitrary emendations are, of course, inadmissible; but there are many passages which become at once intelligible on a slight alteration in the form of one or two of the letters. Changes of the vowel-points are also occasionally of service, but these do not in the same sense fall under the head of conjecture, for the vowel-points merely represent a valuable, but still post-Christian, exegetical tradition. The editors of the New Testament have been permitted (and they desire to record their grateful sense of the kindness) to collate throughout the edition of the Greek Testament, as yet unpublished, by Canon Westcott and the Rev. Dr. Hort. It is the result of more than twenty years' labour, during which the whole mass of evidence has been carefully sifted and weighed upon principles determined by an independent study of the authorities, their relation to one another, and the history of the transmission of the text. The opportunity of the present re-issue of the work as a reference Bible has been taken to make some additions and corrections: especially in the New Testament portion, in which the editors have been helped by several criticisms, public and private; their acknowledgments are especially due to Mr. S. Bloxsidge, formerly of Exeter College, Oxford. The Various Readings of the Greek text have been still more carefully examined, and it is hoped that few variations of importance will have escaped notice. Some additional MSS. have been quoted-notably Z, which is of so much importance for the first part of St. Luke, and, to a greater extent than before, Z in St. Matthew. The readings of the principal Versions have been sparingly introduced, and also in some cases those of the most eminent Fathers. Among modern authorities, collations have been made of the text of McClellan for the four Gospels, and of Weiss for the first three; also of the text of Westcott and Hort for Acts to Revelation. Account has also been taken of the readings of Lightfoot and Ellicott on the Epistles upon which they have commented. As Dr. McClellan, and in a qualified sense Bishop Ellicott, represent different principles of criticism from those now generally in the ascendant, additional confidence may be felt where they are in agreement with the other editors. It should be remembered also that the text of Tregelles for the Gospels, and that of Lachmann for the whole of the New Testament, was formed before the discovery of the Codex Sinaiticus, so that the balance of evidence since their time has been somewhat altered. For the Various Renderings, the following have also been collated: McClellan on the Gospels, Vaughan, Rückert, and Van Hengel on Romans, Lightfoot on Galatians, Van Hengel on Philippians, Moulton on Hebrews, and Jelf on 1 St. John. The editors were also fortunate enough to be able to introduce at the last moment a collation of Dr. Westcott on the Gospel of St. John. Canon Farrar's St. Luke, which they would gladly have included, appeared too late. By the method of notation adopted, the number of passages in each chapter for which new readings or new translations are proposed, as well as their places, can be readily ascertained without reading through the text. It only remains to invite the reader's careful attention to the pages in which the abbreviations and other points of detail are explained. June 1880. T. K. CHEYNE, S. R. DRIVER, R. L. CLARKE, Editors of the Editors of the New Testament. Co.-Conybeare, Rev. W. J. (died 1875,) and Howson, Da.-Davidson, Rev. Dr. Samuel. Del.-Delitzsch, Dr. Franz. De W.-De Wette, Dr. W. M. L. (died 1849.) Eb.-Ebrard, Dr. J. H. A. El. or Ell.-Ellicott, Right Rev. Dr. C. J. Fri.-Fritzsche, Dr. C. F. A. Grimm, Dr. C. L. W. Ha.-Harless, Dr. J. C. A. von. Heinrich, Dr. J. H. Hitzig, Dr. F. (died 1875.) Ho.-Holtzmann, Dr. J. H. Hu.-Huther, Dr. J. E. Je.-Jelf, Rev. W. E. (died 1875.) Jo.-Jowett, Rev. B. Ke.-Kern, Dr. F. H. Lan.-Lange, Dr. J. P. Li.-Lightfoot, Right Rev. Dr. J. B. Lü.-Lünemann, Dr. G. Luther, Martin (died 1546.) Mack, Dr. Martin. Mcl.-McClellan, Rev. J. B. Me.-Meyer, Dr. H. A. W. (died 1873.) Mou.-Moulton, Rev. Dr. W. F. Ol. or Ols.-Olshausen, Dr. Hermann (died 1839.) Reuss, Dr. E. Rü.-Rückert, Dr. L. J. (died 1871.) Trench, Most Rev. Dr. R. C. Va.-Vaughan, Very Rev. Dr. C. J. VH.-Van Hengel, Dr. W. A. (died 1870.) W.-Westcott, Rev. Dr. B. F. Wetstein, Dr. J. J. (died 1754.) Wi.-Winer, Dr. G. B. (died 1858.) Wie.-Wiesinger, Dr. A. Wo.-Wordsworth, Right Rev. Dr. Chr. 2. NAMES OF ANCIENT COMMENTATORS OCCASIONALLY QUOTED. Aug.-Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, 395-430. Clem. Alex.-Clement of Alexandria, flourished 194. Iren.-Irenæus, Bishop of Lyons, 178. Origint-The same as represented by an ancient Tert.-Tertullian, flourished 200-220. Theod. Mops.-Theodore, Bishop of Mopsuestia,399-428. 3. VERSIONS. Latin. OL.-The Old Latin Translation, made in the 2nd century A.D., and existing in various forms; the oldest MSS. belong to the 4th and 5th centuries. Vulg.-The Old Latin as revised by Jerome with the help of Greek MSS., A.D. 383-5; the oldest MSS. are of the 6th century. Syriac. Cur.-The Curetonian Syriac. Probably an old form of the Syriac Version made in the 2nd century; considerable fragments exist in a MS. of the 5th century. Syriac.-(continued). Pesh.-The Peshito Syriac. Apparently a revised form of the above; its oldest MS. is of the 6th century. Egyptian. Memph.-The Memphitic Version. In the dialect of Lower Egypt; made not later than the 3rd century. Theb.-The Thebaic Version. In the dialect of Upper Egypt; about the same date as the Memphitic; some MSS. as early as the 4th century. 45 NOTE. In the citation of the MSS., and the several handwritings in them, Tischendorf's notation has been followed. The citations of MSS. have been taken from the editions of Tischendorf, Tregelles, and Alford; usually the first: the accounts of the MSS., from Tischendorf and Scrivener. (i.e. Aleph, first letter of Hebrew alphabet). Codex Sinaiticus, now at St. Petersburg; discovered by Tischendorf in 1859 in the Convent of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. Contains a large part of the Septuagint and the whole New Testament. Written, in Tischendorf's judgment, about the middle of the 4th century A.D., probably at Alexandria. Corrected in some places by later hands, Na, of the 4th century, , about the 6th century, Ne or ca, early in the 7th century, cb of the 7th century. The first hand is denoted by or *. (See note below). E E E F G H H H K K A Codex Alexandrinus, in the British Museum ; presented to Charles I. in 1628 by Cyril Lucar, Patriarch first of Alexandria, then of Constantinople. Contains the Septuagint almost complete, the whole New Testament, except St. Matthew i.-xxv. 6, and St. John vi. 50-viii. 52. Date (first hand denoted by A or A*) middle of the 5th century or earlier, corrected in a few places by later hands (A2 and A3); corrections which may probably have been made by the original scribe himself, are denoted by A**. May have been written at Alexandria, but "it exhibits, especially in the Gospels, a text more nearly approaching that found in later copies than is found in most of its high antiquity."-Scrivener. B Codex Vaticanus, in the Vatican Library at Rome. Contains nearly all the Septuagint and all the New Testament except Hebrews ix. 14 to end, 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Revelation; these are found in it indeed, but supplied by a late hand, probably of the 15th century. First hand (B or B*) of the 4th century, probably Alexandrine; Tischendorf thinks that the copyist who wrote out this MS. was one of the two scribes who produced the original Sinaitic MS. of the New Testament. Corrected in some places by later hands B2 of the 4th or 5th century, B3 of the 10th or 11th century. B (Revelation). Also in the Revelation. About 800 A.D. C Codex Ephraemi Syri Rescriptus. So called because certain tracts by St. Ephraem the Syrian had been copied upon it above the old writing. Now in the National Library at Paris. Mutilated, containing about half the New Testament, no single book being entire. First hand (C or C*) of the 5th century, Alexandrine, or at least Egyptian, Tischendorf thinks; later hands, C2 of the 6th century, apparently Syrian or Egyptian, C3 of 9th century, Constantinopolitan. D (Gospels and Acts). Codex Bezæ. In the University Library at Cambridge; presented to the T University in 1581 by Theodore Beza. Contains the Gospels and Acts in Greek and Latin, except a few chapters. The first hand (D or D*) of the 6th century. Some of the missing portions are supplied, "perhaps from the original leaves," by a hand of about the 10th century (Dsupp). Has many words and some passages not found in other MSS. Vatican. Contains D (Epistles). Codex Claromontanus. In the National Library at Paris. Contains the Epistles of St. Paul in Greek and Latin. Written (D or D*) in the 6th century in North Africa by a L L Z A Greek of Alexandria, Tischendorf thinks; meant for the use of a Latin Church. Corrected by later hands, both Greek, D' of the 7th century, De early in the 9th. (Gospels). Codex Basileensis, in the Public Library at Basle, apparently brought thither from Constantinople. Contains the Gospels, except a few verses of St. Luke. 8th century. (Acts). Codex Laudianus, now at Oxford;_presented to the University by Archbishop Laud in 1636. Contains the Acts in Greek and Latin, except about two chapters. Date, about 600 A.D. Apparently written in Sardinia, for use in a Latin church. (Epistles). Codex Sangermanensis, now at St. Petersburg. An inexact copy of D Claromontanus. 9th century. (Epistles). Codex Augiensis; in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge. Contains the Pauline Epistles, in Greek and Latin, except a few passages; the Greek text of the Epistle to the Hebrews is also missing. 9th century. (Epistles). Codex Boernerianus; in the Royal Library at Dresden. Contains the Pauline Epistles, except the Hebrews, with some omissions. It has much resemblance to Codex Augiensis, F., and Scrivener believes that both were copied from one MS. some centuries older than either. Date, late in the 9th century. (Gospels). Codex Andr. Seidelii, now at Hamburg. Contains the Gospels, with many omissions. 9th or 10th century, (Acts). Codex Mutinensis; at Modena. Contains part of the Acts. 9th century. (Epistles). Codex Coislinianus Parisiensis. Part now at Paris, part at St. Petersburg. Contains fragments of five of the Pauline Epistles. 6th century. (Gospels). Codex Cyprius Parisiensis. In the National Library at Paris. Contains the Gospels. 9th century. (Epistles). Codex Mosquensis. At Moscow. Contains the Epistles, except about 12 chapters. 9th century. (Gospels). Codex Parisiensis Regius. In the National Library at Paris. Contains the Gospels, except a few passages. 8th century. Has "a strong resemblance to Codex B; abounds in what are termed Alexandrian forms beyond any other copy of its date."-Scrivener. (Acts and Epistles). Codex Angelicus Romanus, belonging to the Augustinian monks at Rome. Contains Acts from viii. 10, and Epistles, except a few verses. Of 9th century. Codex Palimpsestus Dublinensis. In Library of Trinity College, Dublin. Passages of Chrysostom and Epiphanius written over the old writing, in a hand of the 10th century or later. Contains part of St. Matthew. 6th century. (i.e. Gamma). Part at Oxford, part at St. Petersburg. Contains the Gospels nearly entire. 9th century. (i.e. Delta) Codex Sangallensis. In the Monastery of St. Gall in N.E. Switzerland. Contains the Gospels, except part of St. John. "Written by Latin (most probably by Irish) monks in the west of Europe during the 9th century."-Scrivener. (i.e. Xi). Codex Zacynthius. In the Library of the British and Foreign Bible Society, London. Contains considerable portions of St. Luke. Like Z, a palimpsest, the original hand being probably of the 8th century. References of the forms *, B*, C*, &c., are used to denote the original reading of the MSS. N, B, C, &c., in cases where a later hand has introduced an alteration. In passages which have not been touched by the later hands, the first hand is denoted by N, B, C, &c., simply. Beorr, Ceorr, and the like, are sometimes used to denote one or more of the correctors, or later hands, of the MS. in question, where it has not been thought worth while to distinguish these hands from one another. Cvi (i.e. C, ut videtur) and the like, denote that the editor from whom the citation is taken is not quite sure that he has rightly read the passage in question in the particular MS. |