any hard-and-fast lines. There are points at whic
they shade off into each other. Perhaps it may be allowable to regard αἱ} (in Matthew, at least) as a connecting link between the ‘ African’ and ‘European’ families. A credible tradition associ- ates it with Eusebius, Bp. of Vercelli, situated between Milan and Turin, a part of Italy to which Gr. influence had not, in any powerful degree, extended, and where a Lat. Bible would be early required. Here, in Italy, it would be quite natural that many of the roughnesses of the original tr® should be toned down, and that is, indeed, the character of ‘European’ in so far as it may be distinguished from ‘ African’ Latin.{— The vividness of the latter gives place to a certain insipidity ; there is a less bold use of compound expressions ; some words have a large extension given to their meaning; there is a more normal use of the commoner parts of speech, such as prepositions and pronouns. Accordingly, the so- called ‘ African’ elements in a may be merely the more marked traces left of the original tr® or of one type of it. From a careful collation of the readings of the Lat. tr™ of Irenzeus** with the leading MS authorities,++ while Jren. Lat. stands constantly alone, there seems to be a more than accidental connexion between his text and that of
* cores for Hort’s classification, Westcott and Hort’s ΝΎ, ii. PP. .
+See Caspari, Quellen z. Gesch. ἃ. Taufsymbols, iii. p. 456 ff.
t Perhaps this affinity is better explained by later revision.
§ It ought here to be noticed that P. Thielmann assigns to this class, and with good reason, the Lat. tro of Wis and Sir. See Archiv, viii. 2, ᾿; 285 ff. ; 4, p. 501 ff.
! Including a,. It is interesting to find that the quotations of Novatian have a close resemblance toa. He was schismatic Bishop at Rome, and a contemporary of Oyprian. See Burkitt, Old Lat. ete. p. 16.
4 See Thielmann, Archiv, ix. 2, p. 247 ff.
** Surely there is a great deal of evidence for the earlier date Shy — en of hoe Be Les » Ohetatins aes vol. i. p. 267, ii. p. 667. Lipsius, Dict. of Christian Biog. ii. p. 256. Massuet’s Dissertatio, ii. § 58, as reprinted by iene Tren. . Tom. ii. pp. 230-233.
+t This was made possible by means of the full conspectus of variants printed in Novum Testamentum S. Irena, ed. by Banday, and in course of publication by the Clarendon Press. Through Mr. Ο. H. Turner’s great kindness, and the courtesy of the Clarendon Press, the writer has seen the proofs for the four Gospp.
a.” Perhaps d+ (Lat. of Cod. Bezw) is not far removed from this stage in the history of the text, and it is not improbable that Cod. Beze was written in Lyons where Irenzeus was bishop. It should also be borne in mind that Irenzus, a native of Asia Minor, was in closest connexion with the East. And, as bearing upon this, the sug- gestion of Prof. Armitage Robinson must be noted, that already, in A.D. 177, a Lat. VS of the Bible was known to the narrator of the story of the martyrdoms at Vienne and Lyons.t These facts seem to hint at a connexion between the earliest branch of the ‘European’ family and the South of Gaul.§ A remarkable clue to the whole history of the version, as well as this special point, would be furnished if Blass’ || theory of a double recen- sion of Luke’s writings were made good. The rough draft first made by Luke is seen, he holds, in the Cod. Beze especially and its allied docu- ments. The second and more polished copy is the received text. But Luke has always been closely associated with Antioch. This would therefore be another line of evidence pointing to the birth- place of the version.
The most representative text of the ‘ European’ group is the Verona MS ὁ, which seems to have a close affinity with all the other members of this family.{/ And yet here again we are reminded of the danger of sharply distinguished groups. For in some parts of 6 there are, possibly, signs of the ‘Italian’ revision already to be found,** while some markedly ‘ African’ phenomena also reveal them- selves.t+ An important subdivision of this group is that embraced by r+} and p.§§ They seem to contain a specially Irish or British form of text which appears repeatedly in various Vulg. MSS.|\|| They often agree with the quotations of Fastidius and Gildas. And this goes far to suggest a British recension of the OL.{1 It is quite natural that this British type of text should have intimate relations with the ‘ European’ family, seeing that there was an established line of communication between Ireland especially and monasteries such as Bobbio and St. Gall in the North of Italy and Switzer- land. Perhaps there is a hint to be gained in this direction bearing upon the whole history of the version. It is possible that every region of importance, ecclesiastically, may have had its own recension.*** There are certainly traces of this in Spain also. And an important contribution to its history is made by the biblical quotations of Priscillian, whose works have been lately dis- covered by Dr. G. Schepss, and edited by him in