cast, by persons familiar with the Hebrew Language. Van der Hooght's historical summaries of the contents of each chapter are omitted, in order that the expense of the book may not be unnecessarily increased. The various readings and Masoretic notes are very neatly and clearly exhibited at the foot of each page. Upon the whole, this edition may safely be pronounced the most beautiful, as well as the cheapest, edition of the Hebrew Scriptures ever published. To its great accuracy a learned Polish Rabbi has borne testimony. (See Jewish Expositor, September, 1825, p. 346.)

14. Biblia Hebraica Manualia, ad Exemplar Athianum accurata [à Judâ D'ALLEMAND]. Londini, 1828, large 12mo.

This edition of the Hebrew Scriptures was printed by the London Society for promoting Christianity among the Jews. "In compliance with the prejudices of those, for whose benefit it was intended, it is strictly a Jewish Bible, without a single Roman letter or figure. The Jews do not like Van der Hooght's edition, because a mark (†), which they deem a cross, is used in the text as a mark of reference to the notes." The editions most prized by the Jews are those of Athias (see page 7. No. 3 of this Appendix); and from his second edition, printed in 1667, the text of the present Hebrew Bible is taken, with one or two variations. "From its size, price, and the correctness of the text, this book will be a desirable acquisition to the Christian reader of the Old Testament in its original language, who wishes to possess the Jews' text. But for critical purposes, he must have recourse to Bibles free from the Masorah, such as those of Munster, and the quarto of Stephens." (Jewish Expositor, July, 1828. vol. xiii. pp. 256. 258.)

15. Biblia Hebraica secundum editiones Jos. Athiæ, Joannis Leusden, Jo. Simonis aliorumque, imprimis Everhardi Van der Hooght, recensuit, sectionum propheticarum recensum et explicationem clavemque Masorethicam et Rabbinicam addidit Augustus HAHN. Lipsia, 1831. 8vo,

The text of Van der Hooght is scrupulously followed by Dr. Hahn, who has carefully corrected the typographical errors in Van der Hooght's edition. The volume is stereotyped from a new and very clear type, with singular neatness, and it is printed on good paper. As all the late editors (Jahn alone excepted) have preferred to follow the judgment of Van der Hooght, his text may now be regarded as the textus receptus of the Hebrew Scriptures.

Of the minor editions, containing the Hebrew text only, without any critical apparatus, the following have been recommended to biblical students; viz.

1. The most useful Hebrew Bible, for any person who is moderately acquainted with Latin, is that of Benedictus Arias Montanus, with an interlineary Latin translation, printed by Christopher Plantin at Antwerp, 1572, 1584, folio.

2. Biblia Hebraica, accurante M. Christiano REINECCIO. Lipsia, 1725, 1729, 1756.

These are neat and accurate editions, Masch mentions another edition dated 1729, in quarto, in which the books are arranged according to the order adopted in the editions of the German translation of the Bible.

3. Biblia Hebraica manualia ad optimas quasque editiones recensita, atque cum brevi lectionum Masorethicarum Kettriban et Krijan resolutione ac explicatione. Edita a Johanne SIMONIS. Hala, 1752; 1767. Editio nova, 1828. 8vo.

The second edition of 1767 is the best. The text is that of Van der Hooght,. There is a short yet full Hebrew and Latin Lexicon at the end of both editions, which have the additional merit of being portable, cheap, and useful.

4. Biblia Hebraica sine punctis. Amstelodami, 1701, small 8vo.

This is usually though incorrectly called Leusden's Hebrew Bible. The real editor was Maresius; Leusden wrote a preface to the Hebrew Bible printed at Amsterdam, 1694, 8vo. which abounds with errors. With the edition of 1701 is frequently bound up a neat and accurate edition of the Greek Testament, printed by Wetstein at Amsterdam, 1740, in small 8vo.

5. Biblia Hebraica, ad optimarum editionum fidem, summa diligentia recusa. Societatum Biblicarum sumptibus. Basilea,

1827. 8vo.

SECTION II.

EDITIONS OF THE HEBRÆO-SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH.

1. CHRISTOPHORI CELLARII Hora Samaritanæ hoc est, Excerpta Pentateuchi Samaritanæ Versionis, cum Latinâ Interpretatione novâ et Annotationibus perpetuis. Etiam Grammatica Samaritana copiosis exemplis illustrata, et Glossarium, seu Index Verborum. Cizæ, 1682. 4to.

2. Pentateuchus, Hebræo-Samaritanus, charactere HebraicoChaldaico editus, curâ et studio Benj. BLAYNEY, S. T. P Oxonii, 1790. 8vo.

The text of the Hebræo-Samaritan Pentateuch, which was

printed in Bishop Walton's Polyglott, described in p. 20. infra, has been adopted as the basis of this edition, to which have been added various readings from Dr. Kennicott's edition of the Hebrew Bible already noticed.

SECTION III,

PRINCIPAL EDITIONS OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT, AND OF DETACHED BOOKS THEREOF.

BESIDES the works of Le Long and Masch, the history of the various editions of the Greek Testament is treated at considerable length by Pritius, by Dr. Mill and Wetstein in the Prolegomena to their critical editions of it, by Michaelis and his learned annotator Bishop Marsh,2 Dr. Griesbach,3 Professors Beck1 and Harles," by Mr. Butler, and by Dr. Clarke. To their labours, which have been consulted for this section, the reader is once for all referred, who is desirous of studying this important branch of the literary history of the sacred writings.

The following table exhibits the four principal StandardText-Editions of the Greek Testament, together with the principal editions which are founded upon them :8—

1. ERASMUS. 1516-19-22-27-35.

Aldus. Fol. Gr. 1518.-Gerbelii. Qto. Gr. 1521.-Cephalaus. Oct. Gr. 1524.-Bebelius. Oct. 1524. Gr. 1531-35.-Colinæus. Oct. Gr. 1534.-Platteri. Oct. Gr. 1538-40-43.- Van Ess. Oct. Gr. Lat. 1827.

2. COMPLUTENSIAN. 1514.

Plantin. Oct. Gr. 1564-73-74-90-91-1601-12. Fol. Gr. et Lat. 1572. Oct. 1574-83. Fol. 1584.-Geneva, Gr. 1609. 24mo. 1619, 1620. Qto.-Goldhagen. 1753. Oct. Gr.-Gratz. Gr. Lat. 1821. Oct.

3. ROBT. STEPHENS. 1546-49-50.

Oporinus. Duod. Gr. 1552.-Wechel. Fol. Gr. 1597. Duod. 1600. Fol. 1601. Duod. 1629.-Imp. Nicolai Dulcis. Fol. Gr. 1687.Edit. Regia. Fol. Gr. 1642.-Crispin. Duod. Gr. 1553-63-1604. Duod. Gr. et Lat. 1612-22.-Froschoveri. Oct. Gr. 1559-66.-Brylinger. Oct. Gr. 1563.- Voegeli. Oct. Gr. 1564.-Vignonii. Duod. Gr. 1584-87-1613-15.-Beza. Fol. Gr. et Lat. 1565-82-89-981642.-Waltoni. Fol. Gr. Lat. 1657.-Millii. Fol. Gr. 1707.Kusteri. Fol. Gr. 1710-23.-Birchii. Gr. 1788. Fol. et Qto.Hardy. Oct. Gr. 1768. 1776. 1819.-Valpy. Gr. 1816; 1826. Oct. -Lloyd. Gr. 18mo. 1828. 1830.-Greenfield, Gr. 48mo. 1829.Bloomfield, Gr. 1832. 8vo.

4. ELZEVIR. 1624-33, &c.

Boecleri. Oct. Gr. 1645.-Curcellæi. Oct. Gr. 1658-75-85-99.-Felli. Oct. Gr. 1675.-Konigii. Oct. Gr. 1697-1702.-Gregorii. Fol. Gr. 1703.-G. D. T. M. D. Oct. Gr. 1711-35.-Wetstenii. Fol. Gr. 1715.-Birrii. 1749. Oct.-Basil. 1825. Oct.-Lond. 1827. 48mo. The editions of Bengel, Bowyer, Griesbach, Alter, Harwood, Knappe, Tittmann, Boissonade, Lachmann, Scholz, Naebe, and Goeschen, are not formed on the text of either of the above editions. Of the various editions of the Greek Testament, which have issued from the press, the following more particularly claim the

notice of the biblical student :

1. Novum Instrumentü omne diligenter ab ERASMO Roterodamo recognitum et emendatum. Basilea, 1516, folio. Gr. Lat. edit. princeps.

Introd. ad Lect. Nov. Test. pp. 403-423.

consensus Textûs Sacri cum Paraphrasi Chaldaica ac Septuaginta Virorum Interpretatione Græca monstratur. Londini, 1650, 1664, 1679, 4to.; Tiguri, 1664, 1670, 8vo.; Glasguæ (in ædibus academicis) et Londini, 1823. 8vo.

Bythner's Lyra Prophetica has long been known as perhaps the most valuable help to the critical and grammatical study of the book of Psalms. The late reprint, at the university press of Glasgow is very beautiful.

PP. 1--46.

3 Nov. Test. vol. i. prolegom. pp. iii.-xxxix.
Monogrammata Hermeneutices Novi Testamenti, pp. 110-115.

5 Brevior Notitia Literaturæ Græcæ, pp. 656-664.; and also vol. iv. of his improved edition of Fabricius's Bibliotheca Græca, pp. 839-856. Horæ Biblicæ, vol. i. pp. 150-169.

Bibliographical Dictionary, vol. vi. pp. 168-203.

Bibliotheca Sacra, and from Dr. Dibdin's Introduction to the Knowledge of This table is taken from Masch and Boerner's edition of Le Long's the Classics, vol. i. pp. 55. 3d edit. with the requisite corrections and addi

tions.

Erasmus had the distinguished honour of giving to the world the first edition of the entire New Testament. It was reprinted in 1519, 1522, 1527, and 1535. The first edition is of extreme rarity, and was executed with great haste, in the short space of five months. Some of the manuscripts which he consulted are preserved in the public library at Basle, but none of them are of very great antiquity. For the first edition he had only one mutilated manuscript of the Apocalypse (since totally lost); he therefore filled up the chasms with his own Greek translations from the Latin Vulgate. The publication of this edition, in which he omitted the controverted clause in 1 John v. 7. because it was not in any of his manuscripts, involved him in a literary contest with the divines of Louvain, and with Stunica, the most learned of the Complutensian editors.2 The editions of 1516, 1519, and 1522, were published before he saw the Complutensian Polyglott, from which he corrected the edition of 1527, particularly in the Apocalypse. Erasmus's editions were repeatedly printed after his death, particularly at Basle, Frankfort, and Leipsic. All his editions are much esteemed, notwithstanding their faults, and in some respects they are considered as equal to manuscripts. In the first edition Dr. Mill discovered about five hundred vitiated passages, and about one hundred genuine ones; a copy, on vellum, is in the Cathedral Library at York. Mr. Nolan has satisfactorily vindicated the character of Erasmus, as a sound critic and editor of the New Testament, from the charges of Dr. Griesbach. (Inquiry into the Integrity of the Greek Vulgate, pp. 410-419.)

2. Novum Testamentum, Græce et Latine. Compluti, 1511. This forms the fifth volume of the Complutensian Polyglott noticed in p. 19. infra. Though it bears the date of 1514, yet as it was not allowed to be sold generally until 1522, before which time Erasmus had printed three editions of the New Testament, it is in fact entitled only to the second place in our list. The Greek text of this edition is printed without spirits, but the vowels are frequently accented. The characters seem to have been cut in imitation of those found in manuscripts of the twelfth century; and were probably taken from some manuscripts of that age, which were consulted by the Complutensian editors. The Complutensian edition contains the celebrated text relative to the heavenly witnesses in 1 John v. 7, 8., of which we have given an engraved facsimile in another part of this work. Wetstein, Semler, and other Protestant critics charged the editors with having altered the text, in order to make it conformable to the Latin Vulgate; but this charge has been refuted by Goeze and Griesbach. Their vindication is pronounced satisfactory by Michaelis (who considers the Apocalypse to be the best edited part of the Complutensian Greek Testament); and also by his annotator, Bishop Marsh, who states that this charge, in general, is not true. For though he is of opinion, that in some few single passages,-as in Matt. x. 25. and 1 John v. 7-they follow the Vulgate in opposition to all the Greek manuscripts, he has ascertained, from actual collation, that there are more than two hundred passages in the Catholic Epistles, in which the Complutensian Greek text differs from the text of the Vulgate, as printed in the Complutensian edition. The manuscripts used for this edition are characterized as being very ancient and very correct, but this assertion is contradicted by internal evidence (see p. 20. infra.); and it is a most remarkable fact, that "wherever modern Greek manuscripts, manuscripts written in the thirteenth, fourteenth, or fifteenth centuries, differ from the most ancient Greek manuscripts, and from the quotations of the early Greek fathers, in characteristic readings, the Complutensian Greek Testament almost invariably agrees with the modern, in opposition to the ancient manuscripts. There cannot be a doubt, therefore, that the Complutensian text was formed from modern manuscripts alone." (Bishop Marsh's Divinity Lectures, part i. p. 95.) The researches of the Danish professor Birch have shown that the Complutensian editors have made no use whatever of the Codex Vaticanus, though they boasted of valuable manuscripts being sent to them from the Vatican library.

3. Simonis COLINI.-'H Kan senden. Ev EUTETI TOY παρησίων, παρά τω Σίμωνι Κολινάκο, δεκεμβριου μηνος δεύτερου φθίνοντος, ETH ATTO TAS Degovias a...d. (Paris, 1534. 8vo.)

An edition of singular rarity, beauty, and correctness. Colinus was a very careful printer. He has been unjustly charged with partiality in following some unknown manuscripts; but from this accusation he has been fully exonerated by Dr. Mill and Wetstein. 4. Novum Testamentum, Græce. Lutetiæ, ex officina Roberti STEPHANI Typographi, Typis Regiis. 1546, 12mo. 1549, 12mo. 1550, folio.

The FIRST of these editions is usually called the O mirificam Edition, from the introductory sentence of the preface, O mirificam regis nostri optimi et præstantissimi principis liberalitatem. It has always been admired for the neatness of its typography, as well as for its correctness, only twelve errata (it is said) having been disco

The first portion ever printed was executed by Aldus Manutius at Venice, in 1504. A copy is in the Royal Library of Wirtemburg at Stutgard. The whole of St. John's Gospel was published at Tubingen, in 1514. 2 In his disputes with Stunica, Erasmus professed his readiness to insert this verse if it were found in a single manuscript. Though Stunica could not produce one, yet as it was afterwards discovered in the Codex Britannicus (or Montfortianus), a manuscript of no great antiquity, Erasmus felt himself bound to insert it, and accordingly admitted it into his third edition

of 1522.

vered in it. Robert Stephens compiled this edition from the Complutensian, and the edition printed at Basil, in 1531, and again in 1535, by Johu Bebelius (which last followed the editions of Erasmus, and that of Aldus, printed in 1518,) together with the fifth edition of Erasmus according to Griesbach, and from fifteen ancient manuscripts in the Royal Library at Paris. Griesbach (tom. i. proleg. pp. xiv.-xxxi.) has given a long and critical examination of this edition, and of the manuscripts consulted by Stephens for his three editions. Stephens's first edition differs from the Complutensian text in five hundred and eighty-one instances, exclusive of the Apocalypse, in which he closely follows Erasmus. The SECOND edition closely resembles the first in its exterior appearance, but differs from it in sixty-seven places; of which four are doubtful readings, thirty-seven not genuine, and twenty-six genuine; so that this latter edition has eleven readings of less authority than the former, to which, however, it is preferred on account of its greater rarity and correctness. It is this second edition which has the remarkable erratum pulres for plures, in the last line but one of the first page of the preface, occasioned by the transposition of a single letter. The THIRD edition of 1550, in folio, is a chef-d'œuvre of splendid typography. It was once supposed to have been formed entirely on the authority of Greek manuscripts, which Stephens professes, in his preface, to have collated for that purpose, a second and even a third time. So far, however, was this from being the case, that the researches of critics have shown that, except in the Apocalypse, it is scarcely any thing more than a reprint of Erasmus's fifth edition. Though its value as a critical edition is thus considerably reduced, the singular beauty of its typography (which has rarely been exceeded in modern times) has caused it to be considered as a distinguished ornament to any library. Robert Stephens reprinted the Greek New Testament at Geneva in 1551, in 8vo. with the Vulgate and Erasmus's Latin versions, and parallel passages in the margin. This is the scarcest of all his editions, and is remarkable for being the first edition of the New Testament divided into verses. (Marsh's Michaelis, vol. ii. part i. pp. 446. 448. part ii. pp. 848, 849. Griesbach, Nov. Test. p. xv.) The character of Robert Stephens, as an editor of the Greek Testament, has been elaborately vindicated against the criticisms of Professor Porson, by the Rev. C. P. Greswell in the first volume of his "View of the early Parisian Greek Press" (Oxford, 1823, 8vo.); and also by the Rev. Francis Huyshe, who has inserted a series of papers in the third, fourth, and fifth volumes of the British Magazine, for 183334, in which the statements of Porson, Griesbach, and some other modern critics are minutely investigated.

5. Novum Testamentum, cum versione Latina veteri, et nova Theodori BEZE. Geneva, folio, 1565, 1576, 1582, 1589, 1598. Cantabrigiæ, 1642, folio.

The New Testament of 1565 is the first of the editions conducted by Theodore Beza, who was a native of France, and a Protestant, and fled to Switzerland on account of his religion. "The critical materials which he employed were for the most part the same as those which had been used by Robert Stephens. But he had likewise the advantage of that very ancient manuscript of the Gospels and the Acts, which he afterwards sent to the university of Cambridge, and which is known by the name of the Codex Beza. He had also a very ancient manuscript of St. Paul's Epistles, which he procured from Clermont in France, and which is known by the name of the Codex Claromontanus. Lastly, he had the advantage of the Syriac version, which had been lately published by Tremellius, with a close Latin translation. But the use which he made of his materials was not such as might have been expected from a man of Beza's learning. Instead of applying his various readings to the emendation of the text, he used them chiefly for polemical purposes in his notes. In short, he amended Stephens's text in not more than fifty places; and even these emendations were not always founded on proper authority." (Bishop Marsh's Lectures, part i. p. 109.) Beza's third edition of 1582 is considered as the most complete of those printed under his own eye; but all his editions have the Vulgate Latin version, and a new one of his own, together 1598, being esteemed the most accurate of any that had before been with philological, doctrinal, and practical notes. The edition of published, was adopted as the basis of the English version of the New Testament, published by authority in 1611. This testimony of the Anglican church is highly honourable to its merit. The reprint of Beza's Testament, at Cambridge, in 1642, with the addition of Joachim Camerarius's notes, is considered as the editio optima.

6. Novum Testamentum Græcè. Lugdum Batavorum. Ex Officina ELZEVIRIANA, 12mo. 1624.

This is the first of the celebrated Elzevir editions, and deserves (says Bishop Marsh) to be particularly noticed, because the text of the Greek Testament, which had fluctuated in the preceding editions, acquired in this a consistency, and seemed, during upwards of a century, to be exposed to no future alterations. The text of this edition has been the basis of almost every subsequent impression. Wetstein adapted his various readings to it; and it has acquired the appellation of "Textus Receptus." "The person who conducted this edition (for Elzevir was only the printer) is at present unknown; but, whoever he was, his critical exertions were confined within a narrow compass. The text of this edition was copied from Beza's text, except in about fifty places; and in these places the readings were borrowed partly from the various readings in Stephens's margin, partly from other editions, but certainly not