I writers, llie edition of the Greek Testament un- r consideradon is indispensable to every critic, and U always be reckoned a marvellous monument of lomitable energy and unwearied diligence. The vkgomena contain a treasure of sacred learning that
II always be prized by the scholar. They were re- blished, with valuable notes, by Semler (1774, 8vo). (8.) The seholar who is pre-eminently distinguished the history of New-Testament criticism is Dr. John mes Griesbach. He enriched the materials collect- by Wetstein with new and important additions, by Dating MSS., versions, and early ecclesiastical writ- I, particularly Origen, with great labor. The idea ncfngionSj recommended by Bengel and Semler, he opted, and carried out with much acuteness and sa- dly. His first edition appeared at Halle (2 vols. 8vo, 74-5). The first three gospels were synoptically ar- nged, but in 1777 he published them in their natural der. The text is founded on a comparison of the pious materials which he possessed. Nothing was iopted from conjecture, and nothing received which id not the sanction of codices as well as versions. A lect number of readings is placed beneath the text. I his SymbokB CrituxB he gave an account of his crit- il labors, and of the collations of new authorities he id made. Such was the commencement of Griesbach's teranr labors.
(9.) Between the years 1782-88, C. F. Matthaei pub- shed a new edition of the Greek Testament at Riga, 12 vols. 8vo. His text was founded on a collation more than 100 Moscow MSS., which he first exam- ed. It is accompanied with the Vulgate, scholia, and rumu. He avowed himself an enemy to the idea ' reoeiuumt, despised the ancient MSS. (especially cod. ez«) and the quotations of the fothers, while he un- ily exalted his Moscow MSS. His chief merit lies 1 the careful collation he made of a number of MSS. itherto unknown.
(10.) Before the completion of Matthaei*s edition speared that of Alter (Vindob. 1786-7, 2 vols. 8vo). he text is that of the Vienna MS., with which he col- ited 22 others in the Imperial library. To these he Ued readings from the Coptic, Slavonian, and Latin ersions.
(11.) In 1788, Professor Birch, of Copenhagen, en- >rged the province of sacred criticism by his splendid iition of the four Gospels in folio and quarto. The )xt is a reprint of Stephens's third, but the materials ppended to it are highly valuable. They consist of ^tracts taken by himself and Moldenhauer, in their ^vels, from many MSS. not examined by Wetstein, od of Altor's selections from the Jerusalem-Syriac cfsion discovered in the Vatican. Birch was the first ho carefully collated the Codex Vaticamu. The pub- cation of the second volume was prevented by a fire Ittt destroyed many of the materials. In 1798 he
published his various readings on the remainder of the New Testament, except the Apocalypse. In 1800 he published those relating to this book'also.
(12.) In 1796 appeared the first volume of a new and graatiy-improved edition of Griesbach's New Testa- ment. For it he made extracts from the Armenian, Slavonic, Latin, Salxidlc, Coptic, and other versions, besides incorporating into his collection the results of the labors of Matthaei, Alter, and Bbch. The second volume appeared in 1806, both published at Halle, in 8vo. At the end of the second volume is a dissertation on 1 John v, 7. The work was reprinted at Leipzig, 1808-7, in four splendid 4to vols. ; also at London in 1809, and again in 1818, 2 vols. 8vo. The prolegomena are exceedingly valuable. This edition cannot be too highly rated. It is indispensable to every critic and intelligent theologian.
In 1827, many new materials having been procured since the date of Griesbach's last edition, it was thought necessary to publish a third. It appeared accordingly, under the superintendence of Dr. Schulz, at Berlin, in 8vo. The first volume contains the prolegomena and the Gospels. It exhibits various readings fhmi about 20 new sources, many corrections of Griesbach's ref- erences and citations, besides considerable improve- ments in other respects. The second volume has not been published.
The editions of Knapp, Schott, Tittmann, Vater, N&. be, and Gdschen are chiefly founded upon that of Griesbach. Of these the most esteemed is that of Knapp, which has passed through five editions, and is characterized by sound judgment, especially in the punctuation and accents.
(14.) In 1880 appeared the first volume of a large critical edition, superintended by Dr. J. Martin Augus- tus Scholz, professor at Bonn, containing the Gospels. The second volume, in 1886, completed the work. Both are in quarto. The editor spent twelve years of inces- sant labor in collecting materials for the work, and travelled into many countries for the purpose of colla- ting MSS. The prolegomena prefixed to the first vol- ume occupy 172 pages, and contain ample information respecting all the codices, versions, fathers, acts of councils, etc., etc., which are used as authorities, to- gether with a history of the text, and an exposition of his classification system. In the inner margin are giv- en the general readings characteristic of the three great families. The total number of MSS. which he has added to those previously collated is 606. LitUe reli- ance, however, can be placed on the accuracy of the extracts which he has given for the first time. His researches have tended to raise the textm receptus high- er than Griesbach placed it. In consequence of his preferring the ConstantinopoUtan family, his text comes nearer the Elzevir edition than that of Griesbach. The merits of this laborious editor are considerable. He has greatiy enlarged our critical apparatus. Yet in acuteness, sagacity, and scholarship he is far inferior to Griesbach. His collations appear to have been su- perficial. They are not to be depended on. Hence the text can not command the confidence of Protestant critics. We can not believe, with the editor, that the Byzantine family is equal in value or authority to the Alexandrine, which is confessedly more ancient, nor can we put his junior codices on a level with the very valuable documents of the Oriental recension. His text is, on ^ tcholt, inferior to that of Griesbach. In a few important passages only it is superior.