Of patristic commentaries those of Chrysostom (Homilies), Theodore of Mopsuestia and Theodoret may be mentioned. Of later commentaries earlier than the modern period Calvin and Bengel are perhaps the most important. The chief modern com- mentaries by foreign writers are those of De Wette, Meyer, Ewald, Hofmann, Klopper, Franke (in Meyer), Oltramare, Von Soden (Hand- Commentar), Wohlenberg (Strack-Zoeckler) and Haupt (latest edition of Meyer). Among English commentaries those of Eadie, Alford, Ellicott, Lightfoot, Findlay (in the Pulpit Commentary), Beet, Moule and Abbott (International Critical Commentary) may be mentioned. Klépper is important for the discussion of theological questions, especially the angelology, but the style is very diffuse. Oltramare is very full and thorough, but at times eccentric. He is also quite ignorant of English work. Von Soden is valuable, and has fre- quently influenced Abbott. Much the best commentary on the Epistle is that of Haupt, which, though in Meyer, is an entirely new work. Por close grappling with the thought of the Epistle it has no rival. It sometimes presses the argument from the connexion too far, and is perhaps sometimes too subtle; but these are very slight defects. We still need in English a commentary of this kind, to unravel the thought of this most difficult Epistle. Our most important works, those of Ellicott, Lightfoot and Abbott, are of special value from the philological standpoint. Lightfoot is very full on points of history, and contributes a valuable excursus on the Essenes. His discussions of special words are also full and luminous, He is less strong in exegesis and Biblical theology. Abbott is “mainly philological,” and as such most thankworthy, especially for the frequent testing of Lightfoot’s results. Findlay is also excellent and deserves to be much better known. Moule rests for the most part on Lightfoot, but is very scholarly and at times independent. Maclaren in the Expositor’s Bible exhibits the in- sight and felicity of exposition which characterise all his work. Moule’s Colossian Studies should also be mentioned.
Por critical discussions the New Testament Introductions may be consulted, and especially Sanday’s very valuable article in Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible (2nd ed.). The most thorough critical discus- sion is Holtzmann’s Kritik der Epheser- und Kolosserbriefe (1872), on which Von Soden wrote a series of elaborate articles in the Yahrb. 7. protestant. Theol. for 1885. For the theology of the Epistle the