Turning to MSS of the NT, there Is fonnd even so early as the Codex Vaticanus (4th cent.) a marginal indication of sections divided according to the sense, and apparently constructed for purposes of reference. It bears traces of having been copied from a yet more ancient document. A division of the Gospels into larger chapters («(p«A«ja majora) is ascribed to Tatian. the disciple of Justin Martyr. These are also known as t.tAo. from the summary of the contents of the section commonly appended to the numeral indicating it. In Latin the »ifaX«<a were termed breves and the summaries breviaria. The relations of the different narratives of the same event contained in the Gospels must early have attracted attention, and to exhibit these was the design of the «i^aA«<« miTwra, attributed to Ammonias of Alexandria, who lived in the 8rd cent. Upon these Eusebius of Ciesarea a century later founded his ten canons, by means of which it is possible to ascertain whether a passage occurs in one Gospel alone cr in any combination of two or more. In the 5th cent. Euthalius, a deacon of Alexandria, published first St. Paul's Epistles and then the Acta and Catholic Kpistles, divided into Kic<^Xa.ia similar to the t/tXai of the Gospels ; and Andreas, Archbishop of the Cappadocian Ceesarea, completed the work so far by dividing the Apocalypse into twenty-four paragraphs (kcyt,), of which each was subdivided into three xt$a.ketiet. (But see Robinson, Eutfialiana, 189rj).
The modern division of the whole Bible into ckapt^'rit has usually been attributed to Hugues de St. Cher (Hugo de Sancto Caro), Provincial of the Dominicans in France, after- ward! Cardina.1 in Spftin (died a.d. 1263), but reoeDt investi'
BIBLE
gatlons ascribe it with ^eater nrobabiiity to Stephen Langtion, Archbishop ot Canterbury, died 1227 (see Gregory, Prolegoment to Tijchendorf'a NT^ ed. viii. p. 164 ; Konig, Jiinleit. in dot AlU Teal. p. 4ftl). Engaged about 1248 in preparing a con- oordance, or index of declinable words, Hugo, adopting Lang- tOD'l division into chapters, subdivided them by placing the letters A-G in the margin at equal distances from each other. The chapter* were soon introduced into the Latin Vulgate, and thence into Greek USS and printed editions circulating in the West. Scrivener (Introd. to the CTil.o/A'n tribes several instancei of inappropriat* division due to this arrangement, the sense being materially interrupted. The indication of minor division! by marginal letters was soon found inadequate and inconvenien^ and Robert Stephens in his Greek Testament of 10.S1 introduced the system of verse divisions which is still in use. Already about 1437 Rabbi Nathan had employed a similar system, along with Hugo's division into chapters, for the OT, in connexion with a concordance of the Hebrew Bible. This Stephens used as his model, but the work was executed hurriedly, in(*r equitatidum ('while resting at the inns on the road,' interprets Scrivener), on a Journey between Paris and Lyons, according to the informa- tion supplied by his son, Henry Stephens, in 1576. Stephens' verse-divisions were adopted in the Geneva English Biole of 1560, and subsequently In the AV of 1611. As they are found in practice to break up the sense of the text, the RV has printed the text in paragraphs, indicating chapter and verse in the margin only. The first printed edition of the Heb. Bible with chapters is that of Bomberg, 1526 ; the first with the verses numbered is that of Athias, 1661.
IV. Canon. — The word 'Canon' means 'pattern, rule ' ; probably in the first instance it denoted a measuring line. It does not appear to have had any religious application in pre-Christian times. Its tise by the Christian Church for the ' rule of faith and life ' was possibly suggested by such passages in the NT as Gal 6", Ph 3". Since the time of Origen it has been applied to the Holy Scriptures of OT and NT as being the recognised authority and court of appeal in regard to Christian faith and practice. It was the content, however, not the range of the Scriptures, which was thus designated. The application of tlie term involves Church recognition, that the Scriptures are separated from all other literature in virtue of the authority thus ascribed to them. Thus Rufinus translates the KavonKdt of Origen by reiju- laris or publicus, opposing the books of which the adjective is used to the Apocr. and Libri Ecclesi- astici. Athanasius was among the first to apjily it to the writings which contained the regulative content. Some have thought that the word Canon was used for the list of books appointed to be read in churches ; but this appears inconsistent with the fact that the LibH Ecclesictstici were also used for this purpose. Nor does the suggestion that it was the practice of the Alexandrian grammarians to apply the term ' canonical,' in the sense of ' classical,' to certain Greek authors, appear to have an ascertained bearing upon the Christian usage.
i. OT Canon. — The formation of the Canon of OT is a subject involved in much obscurity. That the process was a long and gradual one lies in the nature of the case, but the trustworthy indications are few, and the way is thus opened for those efforts of criticism, working upon the contents of the sacred books, which have in recent years assumed such remarkable proportions. There can be no doubt that the large collection was formed by the aggregation of smaller ones, to which some have traced allusions in such OT passages as Dt 17"* 31»'- *, 1 S 10'^, Pr 25', and tierhnps Zee 7", though the last may refer to tiie oral rather than the written law. There are also references to the earlier prophets in the pages of the later. The grouping of the books in the Heb. Bible, which has been already adverted to, may further be taken as at least a rough indication of the growth of the Canon. In both the Heb. and LXX arrangement of the books the first place is occupied by the Pent., and this notwithstanding the great variations in the order of the later books. Here, therefore, we may fairly conclude that we have the starting-point of the process. This was