ii. Greek.— Many ancient MSS contain the LXX version of OT along with the text of NT. It seems, therefore, more convenient to divide MSS into Hebrew and Greek than into OT and NT. Two facts in the early history of NT Scriptures are worthy of note. The one is the wholesale destruction of the sai^red books during the perse-
cution of Diocletian (A.D. 302), and the other that in A.D. 330 fifty large and carefully prepared copies of the Scriptures were made by order of the Emperor Constantine for the use of the churches of Constantinople. The former event is doubtless accountable for the fact that no MS exists wliich is older than the 4th cent. For a thousand years subsequently the sacred text may be traced in a continuous and increasing stream of MSS. Aboat 100 of these are Uncials, written, that is, in capital letters — a mark of early date ; the remainder, numbering nearly 2000, being Cursives, that is, iu the smaller running hand which was used from the 9th cent, onwards. An interesting class of MSS are the Palimpsests, in which the sacred text has been more or less obliterated and some later work \vritten over it. Short articles on the five leading uncials will be found under their respective symbols : viz. ( 1 ) the Codex Sinaiticus, known by the symbol N, (2) the Codex Vaticanus (B), (3) the Codex Alexandrinus (A), (4) the Codex Ephraemi (C), and (5) the Codex Bezm (D).
VI. Versions. — Renderings of the Scriptures from the original into other tongues are not only interesting in themselves as giving us the form in which the B. brought its message to the various peoples of the earth, but (esp. those of ancient times) are of very great value for determining what the original text itself was. They tap, as it were, the stream of MS evidence at various points from which we have parallel and independent streams avaOable for comparison with the parent strtam and with each other. It is evident that, to derive the full benefit from this circumstance, a critical text of the VSS must be prepared with the same care as of the original. Given this, and it is obvious how important the VSS become in deciding between rival MS readings, as also for purposes of interpretation. The wealcness of this branch of textual criticism is the defective state of the text of even the most important versions. Along with the VSS proper are justly reckoned those refer- ences in the writings of the early Fathers, which are in effect fragmentary MSS or VSS, according as they are quotations or translations.
Of OT the most important version is the Alex- andrian, known as the Septuagint (LXX), from the tradition that the portion of it embracing the Law was made by 72 scribes or scholars sent by the high priest from Jerus. to Alexandria at the req^uest ot Ptolemy Philadelphus (B.C. 285-247). This tradition, after\vard8 extended to the whole version, has not only been overlaid by many mythical elements, but originally rested upon a letter by one Aristeas, which is now admitted to be a forgery. It is, moreover, contradicted by the differences in merit and value which distinguish the several books, as well as by the divergence in the methods of para- phrasing and interpretation employed. There can be no doubt that a succession of translators of varying capacity and skill were engaged upon this version. The work was carried on probably during the 3rd and 2nd cents. B.C., the greater part being completed at the latest by B.C. 132, the date alluded to in the preface to the Greek rendering of the Book of Ecclesiasticus. There were other Greek VSS, such as those of Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmaclius ; but none of these was so widely influential or so extensively used as the LXX. It is of importance not only as an aid to the study of the Heb. OT, but as introductory to the Greelt NT, the language of which is largely based uiion it. From it sprang other VSS, such as the Itala or Old Latin Version, certain Syriac VSS, the -Ethiopic, Coptic, Sahidic, Armenian, Georgian, Gothic, and Sclavonic VSS, together with the Arabic VSS, which were not taken directly from the original The Targums or in-
BIBLE
BIBLE
293
terpretations were rather paraphrases than trans- lations. The necessity for them arose from tlie substitution of Aramaic for Heb. as the ordinary language of the Jews after their return from tlie Exue. The most important is the Targ. of Onkelos on the Pent., wliicli keeps more closely to the original than the others, and is remarkable for careful as well as skilful work.
Of VSS which embrace both OT and NT, one of the earliest and most valuable is the Syriac Peshitta, the name meaning ' siiiiiile ' or ' faithful.' Its relation to one or two VSS of equal or j;reater antiquity is still sub judice. It dates from tlie 2nd cent. A.D. Its place in the history of the Canon has already been mentioned. Tlie Phil- oxenian or Monophysite Version is not an inde- pendent renderinji, but a peculiar modification of the Peshitta. The Old Lat. Version (the Itala) prob. arose in N. Africa, was made (as already men- tioned) from the Greek of tlie LXX, and is only known from citations in patristic writers. It was in the course of revising the Old Latin that Jerome conceived the desij^n of making a new translation of OT direct from the Hebrew. This work, begun in A.D. 39U, occupied liiiii fourteen years, and was for long most unfavourably received. It was accused of being heretical, and even Augustine underrated it. It received ecclesiastical sanction lirst in Gaul ; later it was recognised by Gregory the Great, but 2U0 years more elapsed before it became in the West the generally received and authoritative version, thenceforward known as the Vulgate or ' popular ' version. The text of the Vulgate is in a very un- satisfactory condition, having been almost from the first corrupted owing to the existence and use along with it of the Old Latin, and the not unnatural transference of readings from the one into the other.