THE LABORS OF BIBLICAL CRITICS, AND THE RESULTS OBTAINED.

We are now prepared for a brief sketch of the history of Biblical Criticism, showing particularly the successive stages of its progress, and the results which have thus far been attained.

As we have stated before, the art of printing is the parent of this science, seeing that it was by means of printed copies that the attention of scholars was first awakened to the importance of the subject and led to the study of it. The early printed editions, being copied from different manuscripts and printed in different countries, at first produced confusion by their differences, and afterward led to the adoption without very good reasons of a" Received Text," which became a standard for all others. The steps by which this result was reached were briefly as follows: The Greek Testament of Erasmus, published in 1516, at Basle, Switzerland, and the Complutentian Polyglott, printed at Complutum (Alcala) in Spain, in 1514, but not published till 1522, were, as we have said before, the first printed editions of the New Testament. These editions had circulated about a quarter of a century without rivals, when Robert Stephen, a celebrated printer at Paris, brought out an edition in 1546, followed rapidly by three others, the last in 1551. In this last the Greek Testament was first divided into verses numbered on the margin, the division into chapters having been introduced in the Latin Bible in 1248. The purpose of both divisions was to facilitate ref (41)erences to particular passages.1 His third edition (15o0) became the standard or received text in England, and from it chiefly the English version was made in 1611. In 1633 a very small Greek Testament was published at Leyden in Holland, by two brothers named Elzevir, in which the verses were marked by breaks in the text, and not merely by numbers in the margin as before. In a somewhat boastful spirit, the Elzevirs remarked in their preface, "Now you have a text received by all, in which we give nothing changed or corrupted." The words helped forward their own fulfillment, and this edition became the Received Text on the Continent of Europe. The differences between its readings and those of the edition of Stephen are not very numerous nor very important. Neither of these standard editions was prepared with such care and skill as to entitle it to special preeminence, yet each in the course of time gained such a hold upon the public mind that to change it was considered almost sacrilegious.

It was not until the year 1707 that an edition of the Greek Testament was published containing a really serious attempt to apply the materials of Biblical Criticism to the restoration of the original text. This was the critical edition of John Mill, of Oxford University. He spent thirty years in preparing it, and he died just two weeks after its publication. In preparing it he collated a large number of Greek MSS., versions, and ancient quotations, and printed in his notes their various readings, amounting to about 30,000. He also discussed the value of the evidence adduced, and pointed out the corrections which it indicated, but he printed in the body of his work the text of Stephen without correction. This work excited alarm and opposition among the friends of the Bible, and some infidel writers took advantage of the facts to inveigh against the reliability of the Scriptures;2 but the final result of the discussion was to render Christian scholars more favorable to the prosecution of critical studies. It was perceived that discovering various readings was not creating them, but that it was a necessary preparation for correcting them. Scrivener expresses the common judgment of critics when he says, "Dr. Mill's services to Biblical Criticism surpass in extent and value those rendered by any other, except perhaps one or two men of our own time." 3

The attack upon Mill's work, of which we have just spoken, having been made after his death, its defense was taken up by Dr. Richard Bentley, one of the most accomplished scholars and brilliant writers of that age. His defense of Mill increased his own interest in the work of Biblical Criticism, and directed the attention of others to his qualifications as a critic, so that he was at length induced to attempt the preparation of a critical edition of the New Testament. A large amount of preparatory work was done, and many valuable contributions were made to the development of the science, but other engagements diverted his attention to such a degree that, to the regret of subsequent critics, he left his work incomplete.4

Thus far the work of criticism on the New Testament had been prosecuted almost exclusively in Great Britain; it was now transferred to Germany, and but little more was done in England for about a century. The next critical edition after Mill's was the work of John Albert Bengel, which appeared in 1734, twenty-seven years later. When Mill's work appeared Bengel was a student at the University of Tübingen, and in common with thousands of other pious men he was excited and alarmed by the multitude of various readings which had been brought to light. He commenced the collection of critical materials merely to satisfy his own mind, but was encouraged by others to complete the work and give it to the public.5 The characteristics of his edition were the following:

He made some changes in the Received Text, but only such as he found in some previous printed edition; he printed the text in paragraphs, instead of the detached verses used by the Elzevirs; he printed in the margin the various readings which he thought worthy of notice, with signs to indicate their relative value; he gave the evidence in favor of a received reading as well as that against it; and he was the first critic to point out the fact that MSS. are distributable into families. He was a man of undoubted piety and great faith in the inspiration of the Scriptures. Besides his critical work he wrote a valuable commentary called The Gnomon of the New Testament, a revised edition of which in English has been recently published.

John James Wetstein was the author of the next critical edition, published at Amsterdam in two folio volumes, 1751-2. He was a native of Basle in Switzerland, where he was ordained to the ministry at twenty years of age. He had already become so enamored with critical studies that his ordination sermon was on the subject of Various Readings of the New Testament, and "his zeal for this fascinating pursuit," says Scrivener, "became at length with him a passion, the master passion which consoled and dignified a roving, troubled, unprosperous life." He visited both England and France in his search for MSS., and in the midst of his labors he was deposed from his "pastorate" on account of Unitarian sentiments. He finally obtained a Professorship at Amsterdam, where his work was completed and where, two years later, he ended his life. He was the first to employ the method now in use of designating uncial MSS. by capital letters, and the cursives by Arabic numerals. He collated 102 MSS.,6 and his collations were more accurate than those of his predecessors. Scrivener expresses the opinion that in the critical portion of his work he must be placed "in the very first rank, inferior (if to any) to but one or two of the highest names."7

The next eminent critic after Wetstein was John James Griesbach, whose name stood for many years at the head of the list of Biblical critics. His principal edition appeared in two volumes, the first in 1796 and the second in 1806. While he was engaged in its preparation many MSS. hitherto unnoticed were collated by other scholars. The libraries of Russia, Austria, Italy and Spain were ransacked in search of them, and the results published in various volumes were appropriated by Griesbach. He also himself collated quite a number of MSS., versions and ancient authors. The materials before him were therefore more abundant than those possessed by any previous critic, and he used them with a skill hitherto unprecedented. The distinctive purpose of his edition was to place before his readers such evidence from the materials of criticism as would enable the student of his work to decide for himself on the genuineness of any given reading. He also carefully laid down the principles which should guide us in reaching a decision. Following the suggestion of Bengel, he attempted to make a distribution of MSS. into three great families, which he called the Alexandrian, the Western and the Byzantine, according as he thought that their parentage could be traced to Alexandria, to Europe, or to Constantinople. This was the most distinctive feature of his critical theory, and it is the one which has received the greatest amount of adverse criticism from more recent critics. He devoted forty years to constant labor in his chosen field, and died in the year 1812.8

The edition of Scholz, a Roman Catholic Professor the University of Bonn, is the next in order of time. It was the result of twelve years' labor and was published in two volumes, one in 1830, the other in 1836. Scholz is noted among critics for two things of contrasted merit--for the vast number of new MSS. which he brought to the notice of scholars (six hundred and sixteen) and in part collated, and for the extreme inaccuracy with which all his work was executed.9 In search of MSS. he visited the old libraries of France, Italy, Switzerland, Palestine and the Archipelago, doing much service in the way of gathering materials for future critics, but exhibiting little skill in using them.  

The next year after the appearance of Scholz's first volume (1831) Charles Lachmann published at Berlin a small Greek Testament, which was followed by a larger edition in two volumes, the first in 1842 and the second in 1850. In the first of these editions he startled the world by the boldest and most original adventure yet made in Biblical Criticism. He cast aside the Received Text entirely as being entitled to no authority other than that of the MSS. from which it was printed, and formed a text from ancient documents alone. This appeared sacrilegious to those who had learned to regard the Received Text almost with the reverence due to the apostolic autographs, and it aroused against its author a storm of denunciation. But true critics at once accepted the principle involved as correct, and from that time all prescriptive claims set up for the Received Text have been disregarded.10 Another distinctive feature of Lachmann's work was not so well received by critics. His aim was to reproduce, not necessarily the true text, but the text as it existed in the fourth century. He used only such documents as he thought necessary to this result, and where they united in an unquestionable error, he printed this error, because it was a part of the text which he was aiming to reproduce. Subsequent critics agree in the opinion that the documents which he used were insufficient even for the purpose which he had in view,11 and many have condemned the purpose itself, because they have understood him as aiming at a restoration of the true text.12 After all that can be said against it "still the fact will remain," says Tregelles, "that the first Greek Testament since the invention of printing, edited wholly on ancient authority irrespective of modern tradition, is due to Charles Lachmann." Like so many of his fellowlaborers he ended his critical labors with his life. He died in 1851, the year following the completion of his second edition.

The name of Constantine Tischendorf stands next in the list of great Biblical critics, and it was the first to tower above that of Griesbach. He published eight editions of the Greek Testament, of which the first appeared in 1841, and the eighth was completed in 1872. On this last edition, which was published in part-, from 1865 to 1872, his fame as a critic chiefly rests, and of it Scrivener remarks: "This is beyond question the most full and comprehensive edition of the Greek Testament existing; it contains the results of the latest collations and discoveries, and as copious a body of various readings as is compatible with the design of adapting it for general use."13 But while thus extolling the edition as a whole, the same author speaks unfavorably of Tischendorf's stability of judgment, and shows that he paid too much deference to the authority of the Sinaitic MS., of which he was the discoverer.14

Tischendorf's fame rests not merely on the number and value of the editions of the Greek Testament which he edited, but also and perhaps chiefly on the large number of valuable manuscripts which he caused to be carefully printed, thus relieving scholars who wished to examine them of the necessity of visiting the libraries in which they were kept.15

The career of this great critic, from the time that he commenced his critical labors until he attained world-wide celebrity, has been candidly related by himself.16 It possesses all the interest of a romance, and it is full of encouragement to young men, who, under the crushing weight of extreme poverty, aspire to a life of eminent usefulness. He resolved, in 1839, to devote his life to the textual study of the New Testament, and to attempt, by using all the acquisitions of his predecessors, to reconstruct the exact text which came from the hands of the sacred writers. After publishing his first edition (1841) he was convinced that to accomplish his purpose it would be necessary for him to examine the original documents for himself, and to give them a closer scrutiny than they had yet received. But this required a protracted and expensive tour to foreign lands, and money he had none. He applied to his Government (that of Saxony) and obtained a grant of one hundred dollars a year for two years. With this meager sum, insufficient to allow the purchase of an extra suit of clothing, he started on a literary tour which was destined to occupy four years. He spent two years in Paris, and thence went successively to Holland, England, Italy, Egypt, the Libyan Desert, Mt. Sinai, Palestine, Smyrna, the isle of Patmos, Constantinople and Athens, everywhere searching through collections of ancient manuscripts and collating many of them. The journey and his purchases cost him about five thousand dollars, which came to him through the use of his pen, and through the gifts of persons who became interested in his work, thus verifying the conviction with which he set out, that "God helps those who help themselves, and that which is right must prosper." His labors on this tour were full of important results, one of the most important of which was the restoration, by chemical applications, of the faded manuscript C, at Paris, and the printing of its text. While visiting the convent of St. Catharine, in 1844, he saw a basket of old parchment leaves, which the monks had set aside to be burned as worthless, and to his great delight he detected among them some sheets of a very ancient copy of the Old Testament in Greek. He obtained about forty-five of the leaves without difficulty, but the ignorant monks inferred from his lively satisfaction that they must be of great value, and they refused to let him have more. These were published when he returned home, and their great antiquity was so clearly demonstrated that he resolved to leave no effort untried to obtain the whole volume to which they belonged. In 1853, nine years later, he was at the convent again, but he could find no trace of the coveted treasure. In 1859 he went again, backed this time by commendations from the Czar of Russia, and supported by his money. After searching in vain for a few days, and almost despairing of success, he found the whole of the precious document in the hands of the steward of the convent. It proved to be the Sinaitic manuscript of the whole Bible in Greek which we have described in Chapter IV. It was with the1 utmost difficulty, after bringing to bear the influence of high officials in the Greek church, and making several journeys back and forth, that he succeeded in obtaining permission to carry it to Cairo and copy it. He copied its "one hundred and ten thousand lines, many of which were so faded as to be almost illegible, in the months of March, April and May, when the thermometer was never below 77° in the shade. He finally succeeded in obtaining the manuscript itself for the imperial library at St. Petersburg, and on the 19th of November, 1859, he proudly laid it at the feet of Alexander II., in his winter palace. By the munificence of his imperial patron he was also furnished with the funds necessary to make a large number of fac simile copies in four volumes each, which were distributed gratuitously among the more noted libraries of Europe and America. This task was completed in 1802, but Tischendorf afterward published the New Testament part of the manuscript in ordinary type, with critical notes which exhibit its variations from the Elzevir text and from Codex B.

The surprising and gratifying results of his life-long industry secured to Tischendorf from time to time the most flattering encomiums from learned men, University Faculties, and crowned heads in every part of Europe, but he concludes his narrative by saying: "That which I think more highly of than all these flattering distinctions is, the conviction that providence has given to our age, in which attacks on Christianity are so common, the Sinaitic Bible, to be to us a full and clear light as to what is the word written of God, and to assist us in defending the truth by establishing its authentic form." After thirty-four years of unremitting and exhausting labor in his chosen field, his strong frame was prostrated by a stroke of paralysis in 1873; his work was thus brought suddenly to an end, and his useful life closed on the 7th of December, 1874, when he had nearly completed his sixtieth year.

Though Biblical Criticism, which had its birth in Great Britain, as we have seen, soon afterward left her shores, after an absence of more than a hundred years it returned, and English critics, with the clearness of thought and even balance of judgment which characterize their race, seem destined to the high honor of bringing it to perfection.

While Tischendorf was prosecuting his Herculean labors on the continent, S. P. Tregelles, his only rival as a critic, his friend and correspondent, was quietly toiling at the same task in England. Born in Falmouth of Quaker parentage in 1813, just two years before the birth of Tischendorf, at an early age he joined the body called Plymouth Brethren, with whom he was connected the greater part of his life. In 1838, when he was only twenty-five years of age, he published a specimen page of a proposed Critical Greek Testament, the plan of which had been formed as a result of several years of study undertaken at first for his own satisfaction. The distinctive feature of the plan, much like that of Lachmann's, of whose edition he then knew nothing, was the formation of a text based exclusively on ancient manuscripts, but allowing ancient versions a determining voice in regard to clauses and longer passages.17 He afterward modified his plan so as to admit the testimony of ancient versions without limitation, and to include also the evidence of quotations made during the first three and a half centuries.18 In 1844 he published the first fruits of his labors in the form of a corrected text of the Apocalypse, accompanied by an English translation. In further prosecution of his studies, he found it necessary in order to settle points of difference among his predecessors, and to guard against repetition of any of their mistakes, to recollate all the MSS. and versions on whose authority he proposed to rely. For this purpose he visited the principal libraries of Europe, conversed much with Lachmann, and compared notes with Tischendorf. After more than twenty years of such toil, he published Part First of his work, containing Matthew and Mark, in 1857, and Part Second containing Luke and John, in 1861. In neither of these parts had he the opportunity of using the Sinaitic MS., which, though found in 1859, had not yet been published. The remainder of the New Testament was brought out in three other parts from 1865 to 1870. Part Fifth was published for him by other editors, who sadly state in their Introduction, that in the early part of that year while Dr. Tregelles was in the act of revising the concluding chapters of Revelation, he was visited by a second and very severe stroke of paralysis, which, though it left his intellect unclouded, disabled him from a further prosecution of his work.19 Thus did another great Biblical critic pay the oft-inflicted penalty of an overtaxed brain, and cease from labor when the noon of life had little more than passed. His assistant editors bear witness to his faith and piety in these words: "For many long years he has reverenced the Scriptures as being veritably the word of God. His prayer has been that he might be the means of protecting it from the consequences of human carelessness, and presenting it as nearly as possible in that form in which it was first given us by God."20 His personal friend, Dr. Scrivener, who always refers to him in terms of tender regard, says that he met with much disquietude and some mild persecution among the Plymouth Brethren, and adds: "His last years were more happily spent as a humble lay member of the Church of England, a fact he very earnestly begged me to keep in mind."21 He lingered in helplessness for several years, and died at Plymouth April 24, 1875.

The principles by which Tregelles was guided in forming his text are regarded by other critics as defective, on the ground that they exclude the use of nearly all the cursive MSS. He allowed only such of these to be heard as can be proved to have been copied from ancient uncials, while it is held by the objectors that all the witnesses should be heard, and the testimony of each taken at its proper valuation.22 But it is conceded on all hands that he performed the tedious work of collation with more accuracy than did any of his predecessors, and that the text which he produced was the nearest approach yet made to the identical words of the sacred writers.23

In the spring of 1853, when Lachmann's text and Tischendorf's second edition had but recently appeared, two Professors at Cambridge, B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort, undertook the preparation of a manual text for their own use, "hoping at the same time that it might be of use to others." For twenty-eight years their labors were continued with some delays and interruptions occasioned by other occupations, and their edition was not published till May, 1881. It bears the title, "The New Testament in the Original Greek;" and in harmony with the title the first sentence of the Introduction reads as follows: "This edition is an attempt to present exactly the original words of the New Testament, so far as they can now be determined from surviving documents." The two editors worked independently, but compared their results from time to time, and discussed their differences. Such differences as they could not adjust they have indicated on the margin. As a reason for this procedure they say: "This combination of completely independent operations permits us to place far more confidence in the results than either of us could have presumed to cherish had they rested on his own sole responsibility."24 And it may be added that it permits the student also to receive them with a proportionate degree of confidence. The text was published in one volume, and the Introduction and Appendix shortly afterward in another. Both were promptly republished in America by Harper & Brothers.

These editors made no attempt at a general collation of manuscripts, though they have done some valuable work in this department. Their work is distinguished by a more careful research into the genealogy of documents than has been attempted hitherto, and by a consequent more discriminating judgment as to the weight of evidence which should be attached to each. They are accused of ascribing too much authority to Codex B, and their views in some other particulars are called in question, but Dr. Scrivener, who urges these objections, bears hearty testimony to the general value of their work, and says of the Introduction that it is "a very model of earnest reasoning, calling for and richly rewarding the close and repeated study of all who would learn the utmost that can be done for settling the text of the New Testament on dogmatic principles."25 In their text they depart more widely from the received text than any previous editors have thought allowable, and some of the most important changes which they have made are contested. The qualifications of the two editors for their task are of the highest order. They are pronounced by Scrivener "two of our best living scholars."26 Dr. Westcott is best known in America by his Introduction to the Four Gospels, his admirable work on the New Testament Canon, and his Commentary on the Gospel of John, part of The Bible Commentary.

We are now prepared to sum up briefly the results thus far attained by the labors of Biblical critics. We have mentioned only those critics who have prepared editions of the Greek Testament, omitting many who have made invaluable contributions in the way of collating particular manuscripts, editing portions of the text, and taking part in the discussion of the facts and principles involved; but we have mentioned enough to show in a general way how the results have been attained which we mentioned in Chapter Second. Besides demonstrating that the text of the New Testament has been so well preserved that only in one place in a thousand, and that a place on which we can put our finger, is there any doubt as to the original reading, we are able to name the following results which have been placed within the reach of all:

1. The "Revised Version" of the English New Testament puts into the hands of all who read the English language, the maturest results of Biblical Criticism in an English dress. Its text, where there are no references made to different readings, represents the settled Greek text that is known to have been composed by the sacred writers, while the marginal readings point out all the words in reference to which there is any difference worthy of notice among ancient documents. Not only so, but the relative degree of probability in favor of the reading adopted in the text is approximately indicated, so that the least educated English reader can see for himself the broad ground of certainty and the narrow ground of doubt.

2. The Revisers, who were selected from among the most eminent scholars in Great Britain and America, had before them all the critical editions which have been mentioned above, including advanced sheets of Westcott & Hort's text, and where these differ they made an intelligent choice of readings. The Greek which they followed in translating has been published by Dr. E. Palmer, of Oxford, and also by Dr. Scrivener, thus placing in the reach of every one who can read the Greek Testament a far purer text than has been seen by any previous generation since the .sacred autographs disappeared.

3. The materials for criticism which have been collected by the diligence of the noble men whom we have mentioned are now so ample, and the number of thoroughly accomplished critics yet engaged in the work so great, that we have every reason to expect a speedy consummation of their hopes in a restoration of the original text which shall approach very nearly to perfection. Then the science of Biblical Criticism, having finished her task, may lay aside the implements of her toil and rest under the benediction, well done!

1 For a detailed account of the origin and progress of these divisions, see Scrivener, Int. 60-68.

2 The leader of this attack was Anthony Collins, the most noted infidel writer of that age. See Farrar's History of Free Thought, 132-185.

3 For an account of the discussion and its results, see Tregelles, History of the Printed Text, 46-57.

4 Both Tregelles (Printed Text 57-651 and Scrivener (453-456) give interesting accounts of the career and critical labors of Bentley.

5 Tregelles, History of Printed Text, 69.

6 Scrivener, Int. 460. Tregelles (Printed Text 77) states the number at twenty. The discrepancy is due to different methods of counting. MSS. of the Gospels, of Acts, of Paul's Epistles, of the Catholic Epistles, and of the Apocalypse, are sometimes counted separately even when they are parts of one copy of the New Testament. In this way a MS. containing all would be counted as five if cited for every part, and yet it may be counted as one.

7 Scrivener, ib. 460. To this testimonial may be added the statement of Davidson (Biblical Criticism ii. 125): "Notwithstanding the defects and inaccuracies observable in the work, it is still indispensable to all who are occupied with sacred criticism; and will ever remain a marvelous monument of indomitable energy and diligence, united to an extent of philosophical learning rarely surpassed by any single man;" and the following passage from Tregelles: "Bishop Marsh says of Wetstein, what that critic said of Mill, that he accomplished more than all of his predecessors put together. If this character be too high, it is but little more than the truth" (History of Printed Text, 77).

8 For a fuller account of his career and of the estimate in which his labors are held by later scholars, see the works of Tregelles, Davidson and Scrivener, already referred to so frequently, and Dr. Hort's Introduction.

9 "It is our duty," says Scrivener, "to express our sorrow that twelve years and more of hard and persevering toil should, through mere heedlessness, have been nearly thrown away" (Introduetion,475). "His collations have been hasty and superficial. They are often incorrect" (Davidson, Bib. Crit. ii. 137). "If Scholz' text is compared with that of Griesbach, it will be seen that it is a retrograde step in the application of criticism; and thus though he maintained a truer system of families than Griesbach did, yet his results are even less satisfactory, because he applied a theory to the classification of authorities by which their respective value was precisely reversed" Tregelles, History of Printed Text, 97).

10 The following remarks of Tregelles on this subject are worthy of notice even at the present day by persons who are but partially in formed on the subject of Biblical criticism, and who are prejudiced against what they style changes in the text: "It is in vain to call such a labor 'wholesale innovation,' or to say that it manifests 'want of reverence for Holy Scripture;' for it is not innovation to revert to the first sources; it is not irreverence for God's word to give it forth on the best and most attested basis. It is not cancelling words and sentences, when they are not inserted because the oldest and best authorities know nothing of them. Honest criticism has to do with facts as they are, with evidence as it has been transmitted, and not with some subjective notion in our own minds of what is true and right--a notion that has no better basis than recent, ill-grounded tradition."  

11 Tregelles, his greatest admirer and zealous defender, says on this point: "A wider scope of ancient evidence should have been taken" (lb. 100).  

12 Davidson, after stating Lachmann's real purpose, says: "Had this, his true purpose, been perceived, it would have saved a great deal of misapprehension on the part of his censors, who have written against him through ignorance" (Bib. Crit., ii. 141).

13 Introduction. 481.

14 "The evidence of Codex א, supported or even unsupported by one or two authorities of any description, proved with him sufficient to outweigh all other witnesses, whether manuscripts, versions, or ecclesiastical writers" (Int. 529). "The result of this excessive and irrational deference to one of our chief codices, that which he was so fortunate as to bring to light twenty-five years ago, appears plainly in Tischendorf's eighth edition of the New Testament. That great critic had never been conspicuous for stability of judgment" (ib. 528).

15 "It may be truly asserted that the reputation of Tischendorf as a Biblical scholar rests less on his critical editions of the New Testament than on the texts of the chief uncial authorities which in rapid succession he has given to the world" (ib. 483).

16 The narrative was published in Germany in 1S64, and a translation of it into English was published by the London Tract Society in 1806, followed by a reprint of the American Tract Society, in the same year. The little volume bears the rather cumbrous title: "When were our Gospels Written: An Argument by Constantine Tischendorf, with a Narrative of the Discovery of the Siniatic Manuscript."

17 There had arisen before my mind a plan for a Greek New Testament, in which it was proposed,-  

1st, To form a text on the authority of ancient copies, without allowing the "received text" any prescriptive right;  

2nd, To give to the ancient versions a determining voice as to the insertion or non-insertion of clauses, etc.; letting the order of words, etc., rest wholly on MSS.;  

3d, To give the Authorities for the text, and for the various readings, clearly and accurately, so that the reader might at once see what rests on ancient evidence (Account of Printed Text, 152, 153).  

18 lb. 173.

19 Advertisement to Part Fifth, 1.

20 Ib., 2.

21 Introduction, 487.

22 "Tregelles' 'ancient authorities' are thus reduced to those manuscripts which, not being Lectionaries, happen to be written in uncial characters, with the remarkable exception of Codd., 1, 33, 69 of the Gospels, and 61 of the Acts, which he admits because they preserve an ' ancient text.' We shall hereafter inquire (Ch. vii.) whether the text of the New Testament can safely be grounded on a basis so narrow as that of Tregelles" (Scrivener, Int., 485). In Chap, vii., as promised, the question is discussed elaborately.

23 "Having followed Tregelles through the whole of God. 69, I am able to speak positively of his scrupulous exactness; and in regard to other manuscripts now in England it will be found that where Tischendorf and Tregelles differ, the latter is seldom in the wrong" (Scrivener, Int. 486).

"We believe that his accuracy in making collations and faithfully recording them is superior to that evinced by any of the great editors, Mill, Wetstein, Griesbach, Lachmann or Tischendorf "(Davidson, Bib. Crit. ii. 146).

"Of the services of Tischendorf in collecting and publishing materials it is impossible to speak too highly, but his actual text is the least important and least satisfactory part of his work. Dr. Tregelles, to whom we owe the best recension of the Gospels, has not yet reached the Epistles of St. Paul" (J. B. Lightfoot, Preface to Commentary on Galatians, iii). This testimonial from one of the ripest of living scholars was written in February, 1865, when Parts First and Second of Tregelles' Edition were all that had been published.

24 New Testament in Original Greek, Introduction, §§ 1, 20, 21.

25 Introduction, 530, § 15, and see the entire chapter on Recent Views of Comparative Criticism.

26 Ib. 488.