a difference of spelling. One or two examples will
make our meaning clear.
k (Cod. Bobiensis).
Et cum hi* natus esset in bethlem iudze in die- bus herodis regis ecce magii ab oriente uener- unt hierosolima dicentes ubi est qui natus est rex iudzor uidimus enim stellam ... Set autem rex herodes turbatus est et tota hierosolima cum eo. Et conuocatis omni- bus sacerdotibus et scri- bit plebis querit ab eis ubi > nascitur.
text or graduall margin, and we i
MATTHEW 2!-4,
a (Cod. Vercellensis).
Cum ergo natus esset Jesus in bethlem ciuit- ate iudee in diebus herodis regis ecce magi ab oriente uenerunt hierosolyma dicentes ubi est qui natus est rex iudzorum uidimus enim stellam eius in orientem et uenimus adorare eum. Audiens autem herodes rex turbatus est et omnis hierosolyma cum ipso. Et [congreg]auit omnes principes sacerdotum et scribas popub et interro- gabit ab eis ubi Christus nascitur.
Exopus 32!7-0,
Cod. Wirceburgensis.
Et audiuit ihS uocem populi clamantium dixit ad Moysen uox pugnee in castris auditur. Et dixit Moyses non est uox de penopan cum uirtute sed nec uox de principum fugee sed uocem prin- cipatus uini ludentium ego audio. Cumque adpropinquasset castrae uidet uitulum et choros popu Et iratus animo
Toyses proiecit de manib suis duas tabulas et com- minuit eas sub montem. Etsumens uitulum quem fecerant combussit igni et comminuit eum minu- tatim et seminauit eum in ae et potauit filios istrahel.
Cod. Lugdunensis.
Et cum audisset Iesus clamorem populi claman- tium, dixit ad Moysen : non uox pugnie in castris auditur. Et dixit Moy- ses : non est de principi- bus cum uirtute, sed nec uox de principium fugze sed uocem ones uini ego audio. um- que adpropinquassent eastre uident uitulum et choros populi: etiratus animo Moyses proiecit de manibus suis duas tabulas et comminuit eas sub montem. Et sumens uitulum quem fecerant, combussit eum igni et conteruit eum minutatim et seminauit eum in aqua, et potanit illud filios Istrahel.
6 (Cod, Veronensis).
Cum ergo natus esset Jesus in bethlehem ciuit- atem iudez in diebus herodis regis. . . oriente uenerunt in hierosoly- ma dicentes ubi est qui natus est rex iudzorum uidimus enim stellam illius in orientem et uenimus adorare eum. Audiens autem rex He- rodis turbatus est et omnes hierosolyma cum illo. Et congrega.. . sacerdotum et scribas populi et interrogauit ab eis ubi Christus nas- ceretur.
gliding into the text from the ave causes which seem, at least,
J (Cod. Brixianus).
Cum ergo natus esset Jesus in bethleem index in diebus herodis regis ecce magi ab oriente ue- nerunt, hierosolyma di- centes, ubi est qui natus est rex iudeorum uidi- mus enim stellam eius in orientem et uenimus adorare eum. Audiens autem herodes rex tur- batus est et omnis hiero- solyma cum illo. Et con- gregauit omnes principes sacerdotum et scribas populi et requisiuit ab eis ubi Christus nas- ceretur.
The above instances are taken entirely at random to give a general idea of the agreements and differences of the parallel texts. It must be said that in many passages the differences would be found to be far more considerable than in either of those above. Yet, as the total result of numerous comparisons of the various texts with each other, one 15 bound to admit, at least, the increasing pro- bability of the conclusion that at the basis of all the types of text there is one original version which has determined, in great measure, the character of wil the subsequent revisions.* For ἘΠΣΘΙ͂Υ the differences can be reasonably accounted for. In OT we know that at this time the MSS of the LXX were in a state of hopeless confusion—a confusion which had been intensified by the misuse of Origen’s critical signs. A proof of the mixture of Gr. texts
| * There are some books in which two types of text seem far | more marked, e.g. the Synoptic Gospels and Apoc. ; while in |
others, such as the Pauline Epp., there is a much closer | resemblance between all types of text. This suggests one of the most important methods to be followed in investigating the OL Bible—that, namely, of treating each group of books separately.
VOL, III.—4
sufficient to explain the numerous variations.* As an instance of what was possible, the Psalter which Jerome had corrected according to the LXX was so corrupted by scribes in his own life-time that he was compelled to emend it a second time.t But after all, as Burkitt puts it : Ὁ ‘whether there were one or two independent versions is a compara- tively minor question in face of the undoubted fact that the independent versions were few in number.’
3. The problem which is of paramount importance in this subject is, Can we trace the history of the version (or versions)? For the sake of the subse- quent discussion we will here subjoin a list of the extant authorities for the OL Bible.§
OLD TESTAMENT.—HEXATEUCH.—4. Cod. Lug- dunensis [6th cent.]. At Lyons (MS 54). Gn 16%6 172-18 195-2 2638-8 27-3315. 371-98 4038: οὐ Ex 1-- 719 219-85 95259618 976-end, Ty 1-188 2516-end, Nu, Dt, Jos, Jg 1-11%!(?). Published as far as Dt 11‘, by U. Robert, Pent. Versio Lat. Antiquissima, etc. Paris, 1881. Remaining part discovered by Delisle in autumn of 1895. See ‘ Academy,’ Nov. 30th, 1895. For the romantic history of the MS, see the ‘ Avant- Propos’ of Robert’s work. 2. Fragments in Cod. Ottobonianus, No. 66 (Sth cent.]. In Vatican. Fragg. of Gn from chs. 37, 38, 41, 46, 48-50 ; of Ex from chs. 10, 11, 16, 17, 23-27. Pub. by C. Vercellone in Varia lectiones Vulg. ete. Tom. i. pp. 183 ff. 307 ff., Rome, 1860. 3, Cod. Wircebur- gensis [6th cent. . Univ. Libr. of Wiirzburg (MS 64a). Gm 362% M-24 4012-20 4)4-5) Kx 227-28 95%_-2618 3215-83 3318-27 3.518. 361 3035. 4089 Ly 47-59 510-61 75:11. 18-17. 22-27 QI-3. 6-13 ] ]7-9. 12-16, 22-25. 27-47 714. 1991 1. 931_99 2012. 20_9]2 9919-29 935-9, Dt 2942-85 31.1.5 Pub. by Εἰ. Ranke, Par Palimpsest. Wirceburgensium, Vienna. 1871. 4. Cod. Monacensis [5th or 6th cent.]. Hof- Bibliothek at Munich (Lat. 6225). Ex 918-105 12-14% 1619-205 315-337 363-40", Lv 374% 1129-128 1417-15) 1818-208, Nu 3*-48 45) : 30 3114. 355 360 118, Dt 81910! 227-2: t Pub. by L. Ziegler, Bruchstiicke einer vorhieron. Ubersetz. d. Pent. Munich, 1883. 5. Fragg. of Genesis (257°-28°), from a Lat. VS of the Quast. of