The dogmatical zeal of the Protestants was greatly excited by the work of Louis Capelle, a reformed divine and learned professor at Saunuir, which appeared under the title of Ludovici Cappelli Criiica Sacra ; sire de ra- riis quoi in reteris Ttstuminti libris occurrunt lectionihus libri sex (Parisiis, 1650), A learned Eoman Catholic and priest of the Oratoiy, Eichard Simon, rightly per- ceived, from the dogmatical bile stirred up by Capelle, that Biblical criticism was the most effective weapon to be employed against the Protestantism which had grown cold and stiff in dogm.aties. He therefore devoted his critical knowledge of the Bible to the service of the Eo- man Catholic Church, and endeavored to inflict a death- blow upon Protestantism. The result, however, was the production of Simon's excellent work on Biblical criti- cism, which bccf.me the basis on which the science of Biblical introduction was raised. Simon was the first who correctlj^ separated the criticism of the Old Testa- ment from that of the Xcw. His works on Biblical in- troduction a] iic.rid r.iukr the follcaviiig titles: J!ist(,ire Critique du I nii.r j'( s/auu itt (I'aiis, ](i7N). 'I'liis -work was inaccurate ly reiuiiilKl at Anisttrdaui by l-Hzcvir in 1679, and subsequently in many other bad jiiratical edi- tions. Among these the most complete was that print- ed, together with several polemical treatises occasioned by this work, at L'ottcn'iaiii.iu ICs.'i.lto :— ///.s^o^Ve Ci-{- iigue du Texte dii .\ni,r,/iii 'J',.-^/,inu i,i ( Kotterdam, 1689) : — Ilistoire Critique d(s \'( r.<i(,Hs <!u Xauveau Testament (Eotterdcm, 1690): — JJisloire Critique cUs jirincipaux Coinmentateurs du Nouveau Testament (Eotterd. 1693). By these excellent critical works Simon established a claim upon the gratitude of all real friends of truth ; but he was thanked by none of the prevailing parties in the Christian Church, The Protestants saw in Simon only an enemy of their Church, not the thorough investiga- tor and friend of truth. To the Eoman Catholics, on the othep hand, Simon's works appeared to be destruc- tive, because they demonstrated their ecclesiastical de- crees to be arbitrary and unhistorical. The Ilistoire Critique du Vieux Testament was suppressed by the Eo- man Catholics in Paris immediately after its publica- tion, and in Protestant countries, also, it was forbidden to be reprinted. Nevertheless, the linguistic and truly sci- entific researches of Pocock ; the Oriental school in the Netherlands ; the unsurpassed work of Humphry Hody, De Bibliorum Textibus Oriyinalibus Versionibus, etc, (Oxonise, 1705, folio) ; the excellent criticism of Mill, in his Xorwn Testanientum Gracum cum Lectionibus Vari- (inli/u.^ (()\<mi:i'. 17(i7. liilid), wliich was soon followed by A\'<'tstiiii"s .\nruin 'fi sliiuu utum GrcECUm, editionis re- ccptc-, (iiui J.i,i/',i„il,u.^ ]'(iiiiiuti/,us (Amstelodami, 1751- 52, folio), and by which even Bengel was convinced, in spite of his ecclesiastical orthodoxy (comp, Bengclii Ap- paratus Criticus Xori Testamenti.Y). 634 sq.) ; the Bib- lical works by H. Michaelis, especially his Biblia IJebra-
INTRODUCTION
632
INTRODUCTION
tea ex Manuscriptis et impressh Codinbus (Hate, 1720), and Keniiicott's Vetus. Tcs/mticiiliim I/ebraicum cum va- riis Lectkmibus (Oxoii. ITTGj, and the revival of classi- cal philology— aU this pradiially led to results which co- incided with Simon's criticism, and showed the enor- mous difference between liistorical truth and the arbi- trary ecclesiastical o])inioiis which were still prevalent in the >vorks on Biblical introduction by Pritius, Black- wall, C'arpzov, Van Til, iMoldenhaiier, and others. J. D. Michaelis mildly endeavored to reconcile the Church with historical "truth, but has been rewarded by the anathemas of the ecclesiastical party, who have pro- noiuiced him a heretic. By their ecclesiastical perse- cutors, Richard Simon was falsely described to be a dis- ciple of the pantheistical Spinoza, and Michaelis as a fol- lower of both Simon and Spinoza. However, the medi- atini; ciuleavors of :MifhaeIis gradually prevailed. His Kiitlcilini;/ in die Goitlichen Schriften des Neiien Bundes (Gottingcn, 1750,8vo) was greatly improved in later edi- tions, and the fourth (1788, 2 vols. 4to) was translated and essentially augmented by Herbert Marsh, after- wards bishop of Peterborough, under the title Infro- duction to the Neio Testament, etc. (Cambridge, 1791- 1801, 4 vols. 8vo). Michaelis commenced also an intro- duction to the Old Testament, under the title Einleitun(j in die Gitttlichen Schriften des A Iten Bundes (Hamburg, 1787). Ed. Harwood's New Introduction to the Studij and Kiiowledye of the Neiv Testament (London, 17G7-71 ; translated into German by Schulz, Halle, 1770-73, 3 vols.) contains so many heterogeneous materials that it scarcely belongs to the science of introduction.
The study of New-Testament introduction was in Germany especially promoted also by J. S. Semler, who died at Halle in 1791. It was by Semler's influence that the critical works of Richard Simon were translated into German, and the works of Wetstein re-edited and circulated. The original works of Semler on Biblical introihictiou are his Apparatus ad liberalem Novi Tes- tamenli Iiili'rprefatinnem (HaliE, 1767), and his Ahhnnd- lung vonfn !■ r f'lit, /•.•^iichung des Canons (Halle, 1771-5, 4 vob.). SriiilirV- xliocil produced J. J. Griesbach, who died at Jena in 1812. Griesbach's labors in correcting the te.xt of the New Testament are of great value. K. A. Hanlein published a work called Ilandbuch der Ein- leilunij in die Schriften des Neuen Testamentes (Erlangen, 1794-1802, 2 vols.), in which he followed the university lectures of Griesbach. A second edition of this work appeared in 1801-9,3 vols. This introduction contains excellent materials, but is wanting in decisive historical criticism.