boce,and Harnack, Sitzungsberichte d. kinigl. Preuss. Akad. d. Wissen- schaften zu Berlin, xi., 1899), whilst he lays stress upon xi. 28, and maintains the genuine Lucan character of the words used, ¢.g., ὀγαλλίασις, συστρέφειν.
Still more recently Hilgenfeld, Acta Apostolorum, 1899, has again, and more fully, expressed his conviction of the priority of the & text (although he differs from Blass and Zahn in not referring a and B to the same original author+), and he has reconstructed it much on the same lines as Blass, and somewhat more boldly. Re- ferences to the text adopted by Hilgenfeld will be frequently found in the apparatus criticus (as also to his annotations which deal Jargely with the criticisms of B. Weiss in his Codex 1)). In his Proleg. Hilgenfeld divides the authorities for the Western text as against SABC into various groups: (1) Grzco-Latin MSS.: Codex D and E; (2) Latin versions: Plor., Gig., Par., Wernig., Prov., as Blass calls them, see above on p. 42; (3) Oriental versions: especially the marginal readings of Thomas Harkel in the Philox- enian Syriac; also the Sahidic version ; (4) the Fathers: especially Irenzus, Cyprian, Tertullian (with reference to Corssen’s pamphlet, see above) ; (5) some readings even in the four great MSS. SABC. Hilgenfeld evidently attaches some weight (as Blass) to 137 (M), and to Codex Athous Laure, p. ix. (see Blass, Philology of the Gospels, p. 250; and further, Studien und Kritiken, 1., 1900).
For Literature bearing on Acts see the valuable lists in Headlam, “Acts,” Hastings’ B.D., pp. 34, 35, and Wendt, Apostelgeschichte, pp. 1-4, 1899. The present writer would venture to add to the for- mer: (1) Commentaries : Felten, Apostelgeschichte, 1892; Knabenbauer, Acius Apostolorum (Paris, 1899), two learned and reverent works by Romanists, the latter dealing with the most recent phase of modern problems of text, chronology and sources; Wendt, Afostelgeschichte (Meyer-Wendt), 1899, with a full Introduction, pp. 1-60, discussing all recent problems, with constant reference in the text to Professor Ramsay’s writings, and altogether indispensable for the study of Acts; Matthias, Auslegung der Apostelgeschichte, 1897, a compen- dium useful in some respects, based chiefiy upon Wendt’s earlier edition; Zéckler, Apostelgeschichte, 2nd edit., 1894; to these con- stant reference is made. (2) Introductions: Zahn, Einleitung, ii.,
+“ Blassio debemus alterum Actorum app. textum non ortum ex jam fere recepto, sed hinc ab ipso Actorum app. auctore postea breviante et emendante in -chartam puram scriptum esse minime demonstravit, lima ita potitus est, ut etiam genuina et necessaria non pauca sublata sint,”’ p. xiv.