THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
panied by a translation in Latin and a learned commentary. Parallels follow each other. Regard for the text involves often a doubling of the text and comment. There is evident all the way along a wide separation in idea from that of the Tatian Diatessaron. It is no longer a history of Jesus that is sought, in the words of the Gospel, but a learned investigation of the different reports of the Evangelists in order to secure a well-grounded history of Jesus. John Lightfoot undertook a harmony arranged in four columns (part 1, London, 1644). The design was carried out, however, by J. Clericus, in his Harmon ia evangeliea, Amsterdam, 1699, in which the text was in four columns, and at the foot an account interwoven from the four of the life of Christ. (T. Zahn.)
The principle of the Diatessaron or interwoven Gospel has been employed somewhat extensively. How constantly and variously this has been the case is illustrated by the following list of works, which is merely representative, not at all exhaustive: Johan Hind, The Storie of Stories; or, the Life of Christ according to the foure holy Evangelists, with a Harmonie of them, London, 1652; [John Locke,] Hist, of our Saviour Jesus Christ, Related in the Words of Scripture, ib. 1705; R. Willan, The Hist, of the Ministry of Jesus Christ, Combined from the Narrations of the Four Evangelists, ib. 1782, and often; J. White, Diatessaron; sive integra historia . . . Jesu Christi Grojce, ex iv. evangeliis . confecta. Subjungitur evangeliorum harmonia brevis, Oxford, 1799, and often; C. G. Kuchler, Vita Jesu Christi Grace, Leipsic, 1835; S. T. Bloomfield, Epitome evangeliea; being a Selection from the Greek Testament, forming a connected Narrative of . the Life and Ministry of Christ, London, 1846; P. Lacheze, Concorde des evangiles, Paris, 1854. In particular, the demand that the life of Christ be studied from the sources apart from the deliverances of the councils and from church dogma has resulted in the last quarter of a century in a large number of lives of Christ told in the form of the combined narratives of the Gospels. Representative works of this character in English are: W. S. White, The Hist, of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Being the four Gospels combined in one continuous Form, Lincoln, 1884; J. Mostyn, The Four Gospels in One, London, 1889; A. T. Pierson, The One Gospel; , . . the four Evangelists in one complete Record, New York, 1889; J. G. Butler, The Fourfold Gospel, ib. 1890; C. C. James, The Gospel Hist, of Jesus Christ in a Connected Narrative, London, 1890; Earthly Footprints of our Risen Lord, Introduction by J. Hall, New York,
1891; R. W. Rawson, Gospel Narrative, or Life of Jesus Christ . . and Epitome and Harmony of the Gospels, London, 1892; J. Strong, Our Lord's Life; a continuous Narrative in the Words of the Four Gospels, New York, 1892; W. Pittenger, Interwoven Gospels and Gospel Harmony, ib. 1893; A. E. Hillard, A Continuous Narrative of the Life of Christ in the Words of the Four Gospels, London, 1894; W. H. Withrow, A Harmony of the Gospels; being the Life of Jesus in the Wortfs of the Four Evangelists, New York, 1894; The Life and Teachings of Jesus Christ, a Continuous Narrative Collated from the Gospels, ib. 1898; Anna M. Perry, The Life of our Lord in the Words of the Four Evangelists, ib. 1901; W E. Barton, T. G. Soares, and S. Strong, His Life; a complete Story in the Words of the four Gospels, 1906. Consult also E. A. Abbott, Indices to Diatessarica, New York, 1908.
II. Harmonies in Parallel Arrangement: The
oldest precursor of modern harmonies in the form of
three- or fourfold arrangement is the
i . Ammo- work of Ammonius of Alexandria (q . v . ) ,
nius and who published an edition of the Gospel
Augustine, of Matthew, on the margin of which he
noted the relation of the other Gospels
to Matthew. According to his own statement, this
work induced Eusebius to write a similar one, but
on a different method. He divided the four Gospels
into sections (perikopai or kephalaia), assigning to
Matthew 355 sections, to Mark 233, to Luke 342 and to John 232. Beside each number Eusebius added in red ink a second number that referred to the canons or tables in front of the work, of which he had made ten for the purpose of finding the parallel or related passages. The first canon contained the numbers of those sections for which Eusebius found parallels in all four Gospelsthe second the parallels in Matthew, Mark, Lukethe third those in Matthew, Luke, John; the fourth those in Matthew, Mark, John; the fifth those in Matthew, Luke; the sixth those in Matthew, Markthe seventh those in Matthew, John; the eighth those in Luke, Mark; the ninth those in Luke, John; the tenth the pericopes in each Gospel without parallels in the others. If one looked in this canon for the respective number of the section, he found parallel to it the number of the related section from the other Gospels. Augustine's De consensu evangelistarum libri quattuor had chiefly an apologetical and harmonistic purpose, but it was used as a text of the Gospels, revised by Jerome, and was provided with the sections and canons of Eusebius. From Augustine until J. Clericus' (Le Clerc) Harmonia evangeliea (Amsterdam, 1699), the material of the Gospels was treated preponderatingly from the view-point of the interwoven narrative.
Clericus was the first in whom the interest in
the fourfold or comparative arrangement became
distinctly prominent. Another work
2. Clericus representing the transition from the
and the interwoven Gospels to the fourfold Griesbach arrangement was by Nicolas Toinard,
School. Evangeliorum Harmonia Graco-Latina (Paris, 1707), which, although compiled for chronological and historiographical purposes, gives so much attention to the comparative presentation of the texts that one is reminded of Rushbrooke (see below). The first real parallel arrangement is that of J. J. Griesbach — Synopsis evangeliorum (Halle, 1776, and often), which grew out of the need for a proper basis for exegetical lectures on the Gospels. Griesbach felt that if Matthew, Mark, and Luke were interpreted in their order, many repetitions would be necessary; while, on the other hand, many peculiarities of Mark and Luke would be unconsidered if, after the interpretation of Matthew, there were treated only that material from the second and third Gospels which is not contained in Matthew; and, further, that it was not sufficient to interpret only one of the three Gospels. Therefore he printed the text of the first three Evangelists in such a way that the common subjects stood side by side and the parallels could be at once considered. He did not include the fourth Gospel in this arrangement. The work of Griesbach became the norm for the following time. Anger in his Synopsis evangeliorum Matthcei, Marci, Lucce (Leipsic, 1852) made a valuable addition by including parallels from the Apocryphal Gospels. Other synoptical works are: G. M. L. de Wette and F Lucke, Synopsis evangeliorum (Berlin, 1818, 2d ed., 1842; on the basis of Griesbach); J. Gehringer, Synoptische Zusammenstellung des griechischen Textes der vier Evangelien (Tubingen, 1842); J. H. Friedlieb, Quatuor evangelia sacra in harmonium redacta