B. Carrying the Heb. text, as it presently exists in the so-called square script, back to the ancient Heb. form of writing. It is natural to assume that, in connexion with the change of ^vritten characters, errors must have slipped in, whose dis- covery may be facilitated by restoring the old script. The art. Alphabet (vol. i. p. 7011.) can now be supplemented and improved with the help of the admirable work of M. Lidzbarski, Hand- buck des nordsemitischen Epigraphik, Weimar, 1898 (pp. 173-203, 'Die Schrift der nordsem. Inschrif ten ').
C. We have seen that the text of the OT books has undergone not a few changes since their com- position. We must be careful, however, not to exaggerate the importance of these changes. The circumstance that we are still in a position to analyze, in the main with perfect confidence, most sections of the Pentateuch, i.e. to separate from one another the sources from which these sections have been composed, is a convincing proof that even the sum of all the changes in question has been far smaller than one might be disposed to think, and far smaller than critics like Aug. Klostermann have held it to be.
vil, LiTERATURB.— F. Buhl, Eannn und Text dea AT, Leipzig,
'he Heb. Uxt of the OT, London, 1899 (both the last two works fcre of a popular character] ; A. Loisy, Hist, critique du texts et des versioiut de la liibU, 2 vols., Paris. 1892. 95 ; A. Dillmann and F. Buhl, • Bibeltext des AT' in PRESu. 713-728; the OT Introductions of Eicbbom, Ed. Konig, H. I^ Straclc.
Hermann L. Strack.
TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.-
L Introduction : Uncertainty about the Text of the Greek
Testament. iL Materials for restoration of the te.\t.
1. Manuscripts.
2. Versions.
8. Quotations.
4. Number of Variations increased by the new materials
6. Rules of Textual Criticism.
Literature and Addenda. [In this article ' Introd.' or * Introduction' stands for Nestle's Introd. to the (jr. NT., 1901).
i. Introduction : Uncertainty about thb Text of the Greek Testament.— For the general reader, as a rule, no question exists about the text of the book which he is reading. The copy in his hand is for him the work of the author. It is only under special circumstances that the question arises how far we may rely upon the text in our hands. Especially since the invention of the printing-press such circumstances have become much more rare, but they are far from having disappeared altogether. It may suffice to recall the obseuritv in which the works of Shakespeare and the ear^y editions of them are enveloped, or questions like that as to the origin of some Rubrics in the Prayer- Book." But in the case of works composed at a time when their multiplication was possible only by means of copying, it requires little thought and experience to bring home this point with full force. It presses upon the mind with increased weight in the case of the NT, which was or is no ' book ' at all, properly speaking, but a collection of writings, a great many of which were at the outset not destined for publication and multiiilica- tion. When St. Paul wrote his first letter to the Thessalonians he did not write it with the inten- tion that it should or raiglit be published after- wards, and consequently did not give it the form appropriate to such an object. Neither had he — or slie, perhaps a poor slave or an old woman — who first copied it the intention of copyin<^ it for publication. Hence parts may have already been omitted which did not appear of importance, e.g. the address, or the date and subscription ; sen- tences may have been abbreviated or expressions changed. It is similar with the Grospels. When the first collection of sayings of Jesus or the first narrative of His deeds was set down in ^^Titing, the next who copied it might feel inclined to enlarge it or to change any detail according to the form in which he had heard it, without any bad intention.
In spite of this situation of things, not only readers but even editors of the Greek Testament rested for a long time satisfied in the naive belief that the next best, i.e. worst, text in their hands was the text of the NT. When Erasmus finished, on the 1st March 1516, the first edition of the Greek Testament sold in print, he put at the end : Finis Testnmenti totius ad GR.ECAM VERI- TATEM vetustissimorumriue Codicum Latinorum fidem ad prohatissimorum authorum citationem et
* A most significant example in German literature has been in- vestigated lately by Prof. Tschackert of Gdttinj;en. What is the original text of tlie Con/esifio Au^ustanat It was handed to the emperor Ch.irles v. on the afternoon of the 25th June 1530, in two copies, German and l.atin. Both copies have disappeared. The Confession appeared in print as early as Sept. 1530, and two months later there was a semi-official publication of it by its author, Melanchthon ; but neither of these gave the originaL Therefore Prof. Tschackert examined 35 manuscript copies, all dating from the year 1.S3U, and nine of which once belonged to men who had subscribed the Confesjiion. In an official docu- ment like this we expect now that all duplicates shall agree to the very letter. Yet, besides orthographical differences, Prof. Tsch.ackert had to collect hundreds of variants, and the writer of the present article is convinced that the true text has not been restored by him in every case. In one case it concerns • quotation from the NT (Gal 18), where Prof. Tschackert, follow- ing his MS N, prints *der sei verflucht,' 'let Aim be accursed,' while the present writer believes that the other USS AKZ givs the true reading, * das eei verflucht,' Cs. ' let it be cursed.'