the clergyman and the layman; the former would hardly care to lag behind the latter, and might be stirred up to a more earnest and zealous discharge of the most important duty to which he is called, the ministration of the Word of God in a manner calculated to enlist the sympathy and arouse the attention of the hearers. Monopoly in preaching is as injurious as monopoly in most other articles: the quality becomes deteriorated. We do not know that the matter upon which we have been dwelling will ever get beyond a suggestion, but there is, we are convinced, food for reflection in it well deserving the most earnest consideration of all who are well-wishers to our Zion. It deserves more ventilation than we have given to it in this article. Perhaps, now that the suggestion has been made, others may feel disposed to discuss it more fully, and with more experience, than we pretend to. For our own part, our feeling is, "Would God that all the Lord's people were prophets, and that the Lord would put His Spirit upon them!" We would not fear for the future of the Church of England.

ON THE TRANSMISSION OF THE TEXT OF THE NEW
TESTAMENT.

The Words of the New Testament as altered by Transmission, and ascertained by Modern Criticism. For Popular Use. By Rev. William Milligan, D.D., Professor of Divinity and Biblical Criticism, Aberdeen; and Rev. Alex. Roberts, D.D., Professor of Humanity, St. Andrews. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark. 1873.

THE want of a volume such as that which Professors Milligan and Roberts have produced, is one which has been long felt, and never more so than at a time when the attention of thoughtful minds amongst all classes of the community is being directed, in a manner and degree wholly unprecedented, to the critical examination of the Bible.

Books treating upon the outlines of such sciences as Astronomy, Geology, or Botany, abound on every side, whilst those which deal with the far more important, and, we may add, the far more interesting subject of Biblical Criticism, are for the most part, either meagre or inaccurate, or too technical in their style, and too elaborate in their general character, to supply the requirements of the ordinary English reader of average ability and education.

The result has been, as it is expressed in the Preface to the

volume before us, that "multitudes of highly intelligent men who are well versed in the leading principles and results of other sciences, know very little of the objects, methods, or achievements of Sacred Criticism."

It is to meet this want, at a time when men of education and reflection, who are at all conversant with the subject of Biblical literature, are anticipating with interest and anxiety the results of the labours of the two Revision Companies, now sitting at Westminster, that Professors Milligan and Roberts have given to the world a volume of very moderate bulk and cost, which will enable such persons to form for themselves some idea of the existing need of a revision of the Authorised Version, of the principles on which, in the judgment of the writers, that revision should be conducted, and of the general character of the results which may be expected from such an undertaking.

The first chapter of this work is devoted to the consideration of the causes of the Various Readings which are found in different Manuscripts of the Greek New Testament.

The first of these to which we shall direct the attention of our readers, is the substitution of an easier construction for one of greater difficulty. The transcriber, meeting with a construction of rare occurrence, and one presenting some amount of difficulty, may naturally have "glided into the style of expression with which he was familiar," or may have arrived at the conclusion that the passage had unintentionally been transcribed incorrectly by his predecessor, and that it was his duty to correct the error.

In illustration of the manner in which various readings might originate, Professor Roberts refers to the numerous expressions which abound in the modern editions of the works of Shakespeare, which it is perfectly certain that Shakespeare never wrote, and which are being gradually, though slowly, eliminated, as the result of much labour, and a thorough study of the contemporary literature. It is quite possible to conceive how, in the course of this process, some favourite readings may have to be abandoned as untenable, notwithstanding the reluctance with which they would be extruded. Our author refers, by way of illustration, to the well-known passage in Scene 3, Act II. of King Henry V., a passage which has been not inaptly designated "the glory and the opprobrium of Commentators." In the old folio editions of Shakespeare, the quotation is as follows: "I knew there was but one way; for his nose was sharpe as a pen, and a table of green fields." Pope's conjecture upon these inexplicable words was that they contained an order to bring in a table, and that " fields' green was the name of the owner. This criticism may not have been

son.

designed to be seriously understood, but it imposed upon JohnTheobald's celebrated emendation of the passage, as is familiar to all readers of Shakespeare, is, "and a' babbled (he babbled) of green fields." Now, as Professor Roberts justly observes, "if it became the settled judgment of critics that the phrase referred to is simply a happy guess, and was never written by Shakespeare, every reasonable man would give it up, however prosaic or unintelligible might be the words substituted in its place."

Our author proceeds to apply the illustration to the beautiful precept in 1 Peter iii. 8, "Be courteous," and to observe that if authority should so determine that we ought to read "Be humble," however we might regret the substitution, we must not hesitate to accept it.

As an illustration of the manner in which various readings have arisen out of a desire on the part of the copyists to remove or lessen difficulties, Professor Roberts refers to St. Luke xiv. 5, where the true reading, according to the best MSS., is, "Which of you shall have a son or an ox fallen into a well, &c.," but, inasmuch as the supposed argument is from the less to the greater, the word "ass" which occurs in chap. xiii. 15, has been substituted for " son," and the passage is made to read thus; "Which of you shall have an ass or an ox fallen into a pit, and will not straightway pull him out on the Sabbath day?"

Another and frequent cause of error is found in the case of passages in close proximity terminating with the same word. Thus we find that St. Matthew xii. 47, is omitted in some excellent MSS., as, e. g., the Vatican, and the Codex Regius Parisiensis 62, by an error the origin of which is obvious. The preceding verse ends with the word λaλñoa; and verse 47 ends with the same word. The transcriber doubtless caught sight, as he looked up from his work to his copy, of the word which he had just traced, and not perceiving that he had not transcribed the words intervening between its occurrence at the end of verse 46 and at the end of verse 47, omitted the latter of those verses altogether.*

Another source of error is found in the close resemblance of words of different signification. Thus, in Greek, the word meaning edification (oikodoμía) differs only by one letter from the word which signifies dispensation (oikovouía). Hence, in the Received Text followed in the English Authorised Version, the former of these words was, as it is believed, erroneously substituted for the latter, and we find "godly edifying which is in faith," instead of "God's dispensation which is in faith." In answer to the objection which is sometimes urged against * Professor Roberts has incorrectly stated that verse 46 is omitted, unless, as is possible, this is an error of the press.

the authority of the New Testament, grounded upon the great variety of readings which exist in the text-an objection which has not only been adopted by professed opponents of Revelation, but which has derived strength from the prejudices, and, we must add, the ignorance of some of its defenders,-it is argued by Professor Roberts, as it had already been argued by Bentley and others, that this variety of readings constitutes the strength, rather than affords indication of the weakness, of the cause which we advocate. Unless it had pleased God to interpose by miracle, in order to the preservation of the original text from the admission of any change or error,-a mode of procedure which is not in harmony with the ordinary course of His dispensations,-the best, if not the only, security which we can imagine for the preservation of the text in its essential integrity, consists in the number and variety of the sources from whence it can be ascertained. Professor Roberts appeals, by way of illustration, to the very different case presented in the writings of the Roman historian Velleius Paterculus. Only one manuscript, he tells us, has ever been discovered of his work, and all emendations of that manuscript are due to conjecture. The result is, that the text of the narrative is in a state of hopeless confusion. The same remark applies, to a certain extent, to a portion of the writings of Tacitus; and in that, as in the former instance, the result is visible in the corrupt and mutilated condition of the text. In the case of the New Testament, on the contrary, whilst ample scope is afforded, here as elsewhere, for the exercise of man's industry and learning, the multitude of manuscripts which, by God's over-ruling providence, have been preserved, and of which the most valuable have been discovered since the publication of our English Authorised Version, whilst they necessarily furnish an increased number of various readings, furnish also not only an invaluable mass of materials for the discovery of the true text, but also overwhelming evidence that, amidst all their varieties in minute circumstantials, not one article of the faith, or one of the moral precepts of the Gospel, is jeopardized by their existence.

The third chapter of this volume deals with the age and character of the existing manuscripts of the New Testament, and gives a short history of the oldest and most celebrated amongst them. These manuscripts are of two descriptionsthose denominated Uncial, because written throughout in capital letters, and those denominated Cursive, which have capitals only at the beginning of sentences or paragraphs, and are otherwise written in small characters. The Uncials are more ancient, and, of course, less numerous, than the Cursive Vol. 73.-No. 440.

4 L

manuscripts, the line between the two being drawn about the tenth century.

The most valuable of the Uncial manuscripts are the following:

I. A. The Alexandrian. This Manuscript was sent over into England in the year 1628, as a present from Cyril, then Patriarch of Constantinople, to Charles I. It was brought by Cyril from Alexandria, and is supposed to have been written in Egypt about the middle of the fifth century, or somewhat earlier. It is preserved in the British Museum in four quarto volumes, of which the first three contain the Septuagint version of the Old Testament almost entire, whilst the fourth volume, containing the New Testament, is imperfect in several places. The greater portion of St. Matthew's Gospel is wanting, as is also a small portion of the Gospel of St. John, and a considerable part of the Second Epistle to the Corinthians.

II. B. The Vatican, so called because it belongs to the Vatican Library at Rome. This MS. is written on fine parchment in capital letters, strongly resembling those of some of the MSS. discovered at Herculaneum. Its date is commonly supposed to be the middle of the fourth century, i.e., above a century earlier than that of the Alexandrian MS. Very great difficulty has been experienced by scholars in their efforts to obtain even a sight of this ancient and valuable MS. At length, in 1857, it was announced that an edition was about to be published, prepared by Cardinal Mai and others. But it was discovered, on its appearance, that it was very far indeed from being an exact transcript of the Vatican MS., and that numerous passages had been inserted without any authority from it. In 1866, Tischendorf obtained access to the MS. for the space of about forty hours, during which short time he collated nearly the whole of the first three Gospels, and copied in facsimile some twenty pages.

At length, in 1868, a facsimile edition of this celebrated MS. came out from the Papal press at Rome in five large volumes, of which four contain the Septuagint version of the Old Testament-which is defective in the greater part of Genesis and part of the Psalms-and the fifth, the New Testament, which, however, is defective in the Vatican MS. in several of the Epistles and in the Apocalyse, whilst some of these chasms have been supplied by a later hand.

III. C. The Codex of Ephraem, so called because portions of the Old and New Testament were found underlying one of the writings of Ephraem, the Syrian hymnologist and theologian. By the aid of a chemical preparation much of the original writing has become legible. This MS. is in the Imperial