THE BIBLE. 



393 



copies have been thoroughly examined, and most 

 of them have small value, though some compara- 

 tively recent MSS. are important from the fact 

 that they represent an ancient text. Lection- 

 aries, even when uncial, are little esteemed by 

 most critics. Graeco-Latin codices which have 

 the Greek and Latin in parallel columns were for- 

 merly suspected of correcting the Greek text by 

 the Latin, but their value is now generally rec- 

 ognized. 



The oldest copies of the Greek Testament are 

 the Codex Sinaitieus («) and the Codex Vatica- 

 nus (B), both of the fourth century. Next in 

 age come the Alexandrian manuscript (A), and 

 the Codex Ephraemi (C), both of which are re- 

 ferred to the fifth century. All of these copies 

 were originally complete Bibles, with the Old as 

 well as the New Testament. N is still complete 

 as regards the New Testament ; A and B have 

 lacunae ; C is very imperfect, and barely legible, 

 the ancient writing having been almost removed 

 by a mediaeval scribe to make way for the writ- 

 ings of Ephraem Syrus. N, A, B, C, are the four 

 great first-rate uncials, and will be found more 

 fully described in separate articles. Besides 

 these there are one or two fragments as old as 

 the fifth century (I, I", T). 



A quite peculiar place is held by the Graeco- 

 Latin Codex Bezae at Cambridge (D), which dates 

 from the sixth century, but presents a text full 

 of the most singular interpolations. The other 

 uncials of the gospels are less important, either 

 from their fragmentary state or from the char- 

 acter of their text. The later uncials are hardly 

 more valuable than good cursives. 



The most important MS. of the Acts, in ad- 

 dition to those already mentioned, is E, the Codex 

 L-.iudianus, Graeco-Latin of the sixth century, in 

 the Bodleian at Oxford. For the Pauline epis- 

 tles we may mention D, or Codex Claromontanus, 

 at Paris, also Gra?co-Latin of the sixth century ; 

 and H, or Codex Coislinianus, of the same cen- 

 tury, of which there are twelve leaves at Paris 

 and two at St. Petersburg. Uncial authority is 

 most scanty for the Apocalypse, for which the 

 Vaticanus is defective. B of the Apocalypse is 

 an uncial of the eighth century. 



The Christian Versions. — We have seen that 

 the early Church adopted the LXX.,not so much 

 in the character of a version, as in that of an 

 authoritative original. Although several at- 

 tempts were made in the second century of our 

 era to produce a better Greek rendering of the 

 Old Testament, not one of these seems to have 

 had its origin in the Catholic Church. Aquila 



was a Jew, whose closely verbal rendering was 

 designed to serve the subtilties of Rabbinic Ex- 

 egesis. Symmachus and Theodotion were prob- 

 ably Ebionites. The former was an excellent 

 master of Greek, who happily corrected many 

 clumsy renderings of the LXX., but inclined too 

 much to paraphrase, and to the obliteration of 

 characteristic figures and bold expressions. Theo- 

 dotion made less extensive changes, and aimed 

 only at necessary corrections. His rendering of 

 Daniel was so manifest an improvement that it 

 entirely displaced the old version, and is still 

 regularly printed as part of the LXX. 



In the Christian Church the importance of 

 these new versions and the unsatisfactory con- 

 dition of the LXX. — which, apart from its origi- 

 nal defects, had been much corrupted in suc- 

 cessive transcriptions — were first clearly set forth 

 by Origen in his Hexaplar edition of the Old 

 Testament. This great work takes its name from 

 the six columns in which it was arranged, con- 

 taining respectively the Hebrew in the proper 

 character, the same in Greek letters, the versions 

 of Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion, and a 

 text of the LXX., partly corrected by comparison 

 of MSS., partly emended by recourse to the He- 

 brew. The variations of several less important 

 versions were also noted. The complete Hexa- 

 pla was too huge a work to be transcribed and 

 circulated as a whole. It lay in the library at 

 Caasarea, and was only occasionally consulted by 

 scholars ; but the column containing Origen's 

 emended text of the LXX. was published in sepa- 

 rate transcripts by Eusebius and Pamphilus, and 

 attained so great a circulation that in the Pales- 

 tinian churches, as we learn from Jerome, it quite 

 displaced the older text. In composing his Hex- 

 aplar text, Origen was careful to distinguish his 

 own improvements from the original LXX. by the 

 use of asterisks and other marks. In later copies 

 these marks were unfortunately often omitted. 

 The Hexaplar text became mixed up with the 

 true LXX., and the modern critic is sometimes 

 tempted to forget how much the Eastern Church 

 owed to this first attempt to go back to the He- 

 brew Old Testament, in his impatience at the ob- 

 literation, by the adoption of Hexaplar correc- 

 tions, of important divergences of the LXX. from 

 the Masoretic text. Our knowledge of the other 

 columns of Origen's great edition is fragmentary, 

 and is derived partly from citations in ancient 

 authors, partly from notes in MSS. of the Hexa- 

 plar LXX., or of the Syriac translation of it com- 

 posed by Paul of Tela (616 a. d.). The best 

 collection of these fragments is that edited by 



