Kabbi Nathan having in his Concordance (in 1450) commenced the practice of referring to a versicular di- vision of each of the Latin chajitcrs by the number of each Masoretic verse in the chapter, Arabic figures were, after tlie example of Le Fevre's edition of the Psalms, affixed to each verse by Pagninus in his Latin Bible in 1528. Pagninus introduced a somewhat sim- ilar division into the New Test, and Apocryphal books. His system was adopted by Robert Stephens in the New Test, in 1551, and in the whole Bible in 1555, with scarcely any alteration except in the deutero-ca- nonical books and the New Test., wherein lie introduced a difterent division. This division was partly founded on the practice of ancient manuscripts, and was partly his own. But, as his object was to adapt his division to his Concordance witliout any reference to the sense, he unfortunately introduced a much worse division than he found in any of his models. It is to be lamented that his •' wild and indigested" system of breaking njj the text into what appear to the eyes of the learned and to the minds of the unlearned as so many detached sentences (llichaelis, Introd.) has had a deleterious ef- fect on the sense of Scripture, and perhaps given rise to some heresies (see Pref, to Bishop IJoi/d's Greek Test.'). Michaelis supposes that the phrase "inter equi- tandum" does not mean that Stephens accomplished ids task while actually riding on horseback, but that dur- ing the intervals of Ids journey he amused himself by doing it at his inn. If his division was a mere modi- fication of that of Pagninus (see " Bible" in Taylor's ed. of Calmet's Did.), it might easily have been done "in- ter e(|uitandum;" a phrase wliich, however we under- stand it, not inaptly represents the post-liaste expedi- tion witli winch his work was executed. Whether Pag- ninus himself adopted his division in the New Test, from manuscripts, or what his design was in introduc- ing it, must be the result of an investigation which we cannot now enter upon. Stephens, it is true, never once refers to Pagninus's system ; but we could hardly sup- pose that he was unacipiainted with it, even had we no evidence to this effect. The evidence, however, does exist, for we find that Stephens in 1556 had in his pos- session two copies of Pagninus's Bible. The preface to his edition of 1557 contains the following words: "In exteriori autem parte interpretationem Sanctis Pagni- ni (quam potissimum, ut maxiine tidam, omnes uno ore laudant), crassioribus litteris excusam damns; sed banc tjuidem certe multis partibus ea quam in aliis editioni- hiis habes, meliorem, Kacti enini sumiig duo ex prima U'iiis editions e.reinp/aria, in qinbus non solum typo- graphica errata non piiuca. nee levia, maim propria ipse author correxerat, sed multos etiam locos diligentins et aceijratius quam antea examinatos, reeognoverat."
Croius {Obserrat.} states that he had seen very an- cient Latin MSS, containing Stephens's division, with
the first letter of each verse rubricated, but he does not designate tiis MSS. We believe this was a biassed as- sertion. There are Latin ]MSS. with [leriods so marked, but they are not the same with Stepliens's verses. There is in the British Museum also a ^IS. of part of the Sept. (llarl. .5021), dated in 1()47, which is vensicu- lated throughout, and marked with figures, but the verses are much hmger than those of Stephens's. Latin MSS. are found divided in the same manner as the (ireek, one of which is the Cod, Bez(e,\\\nt:h was col- lated by Stephens for his edition of 1550. Dr. Lau- rence's book of F^noch is divided into verses, with num- bers attached, as well as into chapters called ke/'el. Dr. Laurence says that these divisions into verses are arbi- trary, and vary in the different Ethiopic INISS. of Enoch. The numbers, we presume, were added by the translator. By a letter from Dr. Bandinel, keeper of the Bodleian Library, we learn that that library possesses an Ethio- jiic MS. of the New Test, divided into sections and paragraphs entirely different from ours, not numbered, but separated by a peculiar mark. The verses in the (Jospel of the Templars [see Gospels, Spukiol's], in- stead of spaces or figures, are separated by a horizontal line [ — ] (Philo, Cod. Apac).
The MS. of the Syriac New Test, in the British Mu- seum (No, 7157), written at Bethkiiko, A.D. 7(58 (see Wright, Seiler, p. 651, note), contains a numerical di- vision in the Gospels, with the numbers in rubric insert- ed by a coeval hand into the body of the text. At- tached to each number is another in green, referring to a canon of parallel passages on the plan of that of Euse- bius, but placed at the foot of each page. The sections, which are called versiculi in the Cutalogve, and have been mistaken for verses, are more numerous than the Ammonian, Matthew containing 426, Mark 290, Luke 402, and .John 271. There is a complete capitulation also throughout all the books, the chapters being sepa- rated in the text b\'a peculiar ornament, with the num- ber in the margin: of these chapters jMatthew has 22, Mark 13, Luke 22, .John 20, Acts 25; of the Catholic epistles, James 1 and [i] John 6, and the Pauline have 54. After the first Gospel there is a double ntnriber, by which the former are recapitulated, and a treble num- ber from the Acts to the end.