which is superscribed uuvos divos, and is called the grand doxology; for this hymn has not the clause αγιος ο θεος, άγιος ισχυρος, αγιος αθανα Tos, &λendov nuas, which was used between the years 434 and 446; and therefore the manuscript must have been written before this time. Wetstein thinks that it must have been written before the time of Jerome, because the Greek text of this manuscript was altered from the old Italic. He adds, that the transcriber was ignorant that the Arabs were called Hagarenes, because he has written (1 Chron. v. 20.) ayogalos for Αγαραίοι. Others allege that αγοραίοι is a mere erratum ; because Ayagawv occurs in the preceding verse, Ayagirns in 1 Chron. xxvii. 31. and Ayagnvos in Psal. lxxxii. 7. These arguments, says Michaelis, afford no certainty, because the Codex Alexandrinus must have been copied from a still more antient manuscript; and if this were faithfully copied, the arguments apply rather to this than to the Alexandrian manuscript itself. It is the hand-writing alone, or the formation of the letters, with the want of accents, which can lead to any probable decision. The arguments alleged to prove that it is not so antient as the fourth century, are the following. Dr. Semler thinks, that the epistle of Athanasius, on the value and excellency of the Psalms, would hardly have been prefixed to them during his life. But it ought to be recollected, that Athanasius had many warm and strenuous advocates. From this epistle Oudin has attempted to deduce an argument, that the manuscript was written in the tenth century. This epistle, he says, is spurious, and could not have been forged during the life of Athanasius, and the tenth century was fertile in spurious productions. Again, the Virgin Mary, in the superscription of the Song of the Blessed Virgin, is styled soroxos, a name which Wetstein says betrays the fifth century. Further, from the probable conjecture, that this manuscript was written by one of the order of the Acœmetæ, Oudin concludes against its antiquity; but Wetstein contents himself with asserting, that it could not have been written before the fifth century, because Alexander, who founded this order, lived about the year 420. From this statement, pursued more at large, Michaelis deduces a reason for paying less regard to the Codex Alexandrinus than many eminent critics have done, and for the preference that is due, in many respects, to antient versions, before any single manuscript, because the antiquity of the former, which is in general greater than that of the latter, can be determined with more preci sion. The value of this manuscript has been differently appreciated by different writers. Wetstein, though he denotes it by A. the first letter of the alphabet, is no great admirer of it, nor does Michaelis estimate it highly, either on account of its internal excellence or the value of its readings. The principal charge which has been produced against the Alexandrian manuscript, and which has been strongly urged by Wetstein, is its having been altered from the Latin version. It is incredible, says Michaelis, who once agreed in opinion with Wetstein, but found occasion to alter his sentiments, that a transcriber who lived in Egypt, should have altered the Greek text from a Latin version, because Egypt belonged to the Greek diocese, and Latin was not understood there. On this subject Woide has eminently displayed his critical abilities, and ably defended the Greek manuscripts in general, and the Codex Alexandrinus in particular, from the charge of having been corrupted from the Latin. Griesbach concurs with Woide,1 and both have contributed to confirm Michaelis in his new opinion. If this manuscript has been corrupted from a version, it is more reasonable to suspect the Coptic, the version of the country in which it was written. Between this manuscript and both the Coptic and Syriac versions, there is a remarkable coincidence. Griesbach has observed, that this manuscript follows three different editions: the Byzantine in the Gospels, the Western edition in the Acts of the Apostles, and the Catholic epistles, which form the middle division of this 'manuscript, and the Alexandrine in the epistles of Saint Paul. The transcriber, if this assertion be true, must have copied the three parts of the Greek Testament from three different manuscripts of three different editions. It is observable, that the readings of the Codex Alexandrinus coincide very frequently not only with the Coptic and the old Syriac, but with the New Syriac and the Ethiopic; and this circumstance favours the hypothesis, that this manuscript was written in Egypt, because the new Syriac version having been collated with Egyptian manuscripts of the Greek Testament, and the Ethiopic version being taken immediately from them; have necessarily the readings of the Alexandrine edition. The Alexandrian manuscript is written in uncial or capital letters, without any accents or marks of aspiration, but with a few abbreviations nearly similar to those already noticed, and also with some others which are described by Dr. Woide, who has likewise explained the various points and spaces occurring in this manuscript. A fac-simile of the Codex Alexandrinus was published in folio by the late Dr. Woide, principal librarian of the British Museum, with types cast for the purpose, line for line, without intervals between the words, precisely as in the original. The following specimen will convey to the reader an idea of this most precious manuscript. 1 In his "Symbole Critice," vol. i. pp. 110-117. 2 See p. 50. supra. In the Preface to his fac-simile of the Alexandrian manuscript of the New Testament, § 27–34. 4 The following is the title of Dr. Woide's splendid work. Novum Testamentum Græcum, e Codice MS. Alexandrino, qui Londini in Bibliotheca Musei Britannici asservatur, descriptum, a Carolo Godofredo Woide. Londini ex prelo Joannis Nichols, Typis Jacksonianis, MDCCLXXXVI. Twelve copies were printed on vellum. The fac-simile itself fills two hundred and sixty pages; and the preface, comprising twenty-two pages, contains an accurate description of the manuscript, illustrated by an engraving representing the style of writing in various manuscripts. To this is subjoined an exact list of all its various readings, in eighty-nine pages; each reading is accompanied with a remark, giving an account of what his predecessors, Junius (i. e. Patrick Young), Bishop Walton, Drs. Mill and Grabe, and Wetstein, had performed or neglected. To complete this work, there should be added the following: Appendix ad editionem Novi Testamenti Græci, e Codice Alexandrino descripti a C. G. Woide, in qua continentur Fragmenta Novi Testamenti juxta in For this stereotype specimen we are indebted to the Rev. H. H. Baber, one of the librarians of the British museum, who kindly favoured us with the use of the Alexandrian types, with which he is now printing the Codex Alexandrinus. For the gratification of the terpretationem dialecti superioris Egypti que Thebaica vel Sahidica appellatur, e Codd. Oxoniens, maxima ex parte desumpta cum dissertatione de Versione Bibliorum Egyptiaca, quibus subjicitur Codicis Vaticani collatio. Oxonii: E Typographeo Clarendoniano, 1799, folio. This work was edited by the Rev. Dr. Ford. 1 In 1812 Mr. Baber published, by subscription, a fac-simile of the book of Psalms, from the manuscript now under consideration, of which twelve copies are on vellum, to match with the same number of copies of the New Testament. To complete the Old Testament in a similar manner, was an undertaking too vast and extensive for an unbeneficed clergyman. In consequence, therefore, of a memorial by Mr. B., seconded by the recommendation of several dignitaries of the church, as well as professors and heads of colleges in the two universities, the British Parliament engaged to defray the expenses of completing this noble undertaking; (See the Memorial and other Proceedings in the Literary Panorama, vol. i. N. S. pp. 465-478.); and Mr. Baber is now rapidly proceeding in his laborious task. The Pentateuch and Historical Books, with the notes belonging to them, are published. And the remaining text of the Old Testament, comprising the Psalms and Prophetical Books, is completed, and will be published as fast as the notes, which are to accompany each portion of the text, can be printed off. The whole is executed in a splendid folio size, and in such a manner as to represent most faithfully every iota of the original manuscript. The better to preserve the identity of the original, instead of spreading out the contracted various readings, in the margin, by letters in full, (as Dr. Woide had done in his fac-simile of the Alexandrian manuscript of the New Testament) fac-similes of such various readings, cut in wood, are inserted precisely in the places where they occur, filling up only the same space with the original. The tail pieces, or rude arabesque ornaments at the end of each book, are also represented by means of fac-similes in wood. The work will consist of four volumes in folio; three comprising the text of the Old Testa English reader, the following extract is subjoined, comprising the first seven verses of Saint John's Gospel, rendered rather more literally than the idiom of our language will admit, in order to convey an exact idea of the original Greek (above given) of the Alexandrian manuscript. John i. 1-7. INTHEBEGINNINGWASTHEWORDANDTHEWORDWAS WITHGD ANDGDWASTHEWORD. HEWASINTHEBEGINNINGWITHĠD OUTHIMWASMADENOTONE THING ETHANDTHEDARKNESSDIDNOTITCOMPRE HEND THERE WASAMNSE NTFROMGODWHOSENAME WAS JOHN THISPERSONCAME ASAWITNESSTHATHEMIGHTTESTI II. The CODEX VATICANUS, No. 1209, which Wetstein and Griesbach have both noted with the letter B., contests the palm of antiquity with the Alexandrian manuscript. No fac-simile of it has ever been published. The Roman edition of the Septuagint, printed in 1590, professes to exhibit the text of this manuscript; and in the preface to that edition it is stated to have been written before the year 387, i. e. towards the close of the fourth century: Montfaucon and Blanchini refer it to the fifth or sixth century, and Dupin to the seventh century. Professor Hug has endeavoured to show that it was written in the early part of the fourth century; but, from the omission of the Eusebian xɛpaλ and ro, Bishop Marsh concludes with great probability that it was written before the close of the fifth century. The Vatican manuscript is written on parchment or vellum, in uncial or capital letters, in three columns on each page, ment, and a fourth containing prolegomena and notes. The edition is limited to two hundred and fifty copies, and twelve are on vellum. They are such as reflect the highest credit on the printers, Messrs. R. and A. Taylor. The reader who may be desirous of further information concerning the Alexandrian manuscript is referred to Dr. Grabe's prolegomena to his edition of the Greek Septuagint, and also to the prolegomena of Dr. Woide already cited, and to those of Dr. Mill and Wetstein, prefixed to their editions of the New Testament. See also Michaelis's Introduction to the New Testament, vol. ii. part i. pp. 186-209, and Bishop Marsh's notes in part ii. pp. 648–660. Dr. Lardner has given the table of contents of this manuscript in his Credibility of the Gospel History, part ii. chap. 147. (Works, 8vo. vol. v. pp. 253-256; 4tc. vol. iv. pp. 44-46.) 10 VOL. II. all of which are of the same size, except at the beginning of a book, and without any divisions of chapters, verses, or words, but with accents and spirits. The shape of the letters, and colour of the ink, prove that it was written throughout by one and the same careful copyist. The abbreviations are few, being confined chiefly to those words which are in general abbreviated, such as ez, KC, IC, XC, for os, Kugios, Indous, Xgisos, God, Lord, Jesus, Christ. Originally this manuscript contained the entire Greek Bible, including both the Old and New Testaments; in which respect it resembles none so much as the Codex Alexandrinus, though no two manuscripts vary more in their readings. The Old Testament wants the first fortysix chapters of Genesis, and thirty-two psalms, viz. from Psal. cv. to cxxxvii. inclusive; and the New Testament wants the latter part of the epistle to the Hebrews, viz. all after chap. ix. verse 14, and also Saint Paul's other epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, and the whole book of Revelation. It appears, however, that this last book, as well as the latter part of the epistle to the Hebrews, has been supplied by a modern hand in the fifteenth century, and, it is said, from some manuscript that had formerly belonged to Cardinal Bessarion. In many places the faded letters have also been retouched by a modern but careful hand and when the person who made these amendments (whom Michaelis pronounces to have been a man of learning) found various readings in other manuscripts he has introduced them into the Codex Vaticanus, but has still preserved the original text; and in some few instances he has ventured to erase with a penknife. Various defects, both in orthography and language, indicate that this manuscript was executed by an Egyptian copyist. Instead of un, συλληψη, &c. he has written συλληψη, λήμψεσθε, ληφθήσεται, which occurs only in Coptic or Græco-Coptic MSS. He has also written wav for sirov, as may be seen in the celebrated Rosetta inscription; sidav, ἔπεσαν, εισήλθαν, ἀνείλατο, and διεμαρτύρατο, as in the inscription of the Theban Memnon; and wgaxav and yeyovav, as the Alexandrians wrote according to the testimony of Sextus Empiricus. These peculiarities show that the Codex Vaticanus exhibits the Egyptian text, subsequent to the third century, according to the Alexandrine Recension of Griesbach, and the Hesychian Recension of Hug. It has been supposed that this manuscript was collated by the editors of the Complutensian Polyglott, and even that this edition was almost entirely taken from it: but Bishop Marsh has shown by actual comparison that this was not the case. The Vatican manuscript has been repeatedly collated by various eminent critics, from whose extracts Wetstein collected numerous various readings: but the latest and best collation is that by Professor Birch, of Copenhagen, in 1781; the results of which are noticed in another part of this work. Although the antiquity of the Vatican Manuscript is indisputable, it is by no means easy to determine between its comparative value and that of the Alexandrian Manuscript; nor is there any absolute and universal standard by which their several excellencies may be estimated. With regard to the Old |