« ÎnapoiContinuă »
languages have since been marked.1 As, however, these modern divisions and sub-divisions are not always made with the strictest regard to the connection of parts, it is greatly to be wished that all future editions of the Scriptures might be printed after the judicious manner adopted by Mr. Reeves in his equally beautiful and correct editions of the entire Bible; in which the numbers of the verses and chapters are thrown into the margin, and the metrical parts of Scripture are distinguished from the rest by being printed in verses in the usual manner.
ON THE DIVISION AND MARKS OF DISTINCTION OCCURRING IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.
I. Antient Divisions of Trλos and Kepaλaia. Ammonian, Eusebian, Τίτλοι Κεφάλαια. and Euthalian Sections.-Modern Division of Chapters. Account of the Antient and Modern Punctuation of the New Tesment. Antient Exo and Modern Verses. III. Of the titles to each Book. IV. Subscriptions to the different Books." IT is evident on inspecting the most antient manuscripts of the New Testament, that the several books were originally written in one continued series without any blank spaces between the words; but in progress of time, when Christianity was established, and frequent appeals were made to the sacred writers, in consequence of the heresies that disturbed the peace of the church, it became necessary to contrive some mode by which to facilitate references to their productions.
I. The Jews, we have already seen,3 divided their law into paraschioth and siderim, or larger and smaller sections, and the prophets into haphtoroth or sections; and it has been conjectured that this division suggested to the early Christians the idea of dividing the Books of the New Testament into similar sections; but by whom such division was first made, is a question that is by no means easy to determine. Some vestiges of it are supposed to be found in Justin Martyr's second apology for the Christians, and in the writings of Ter
1 Buxtorf, Præf. ad Concordant. Bibliorum Hebræorum. Prideaux's Connection, vol. i. pp. 332-342. Carpzov. Introd. ad Libros Biblicos Vet. Test. pp. 27, 28. Leusden, Philol. Hebr. Diss. iii. pp. 23-31.
2 This is evident from the strange manner in which the early fathers of the christian church have sometimes separated the passages which they have quoted. Thus instead of dogacare dn apa Te Tov Ocov, therefore glorify God (1 Cor. vi. 20.), Chrysostom read dofaσare on åpãre Tov Osov, glorify and carry God; and in this erroneous reading he has been followed by the Latin translator, who has glorificate et portate Deum. In like manner, in Phil. ii. 4., instead of ikacroι okozoVVTEs, looking every man, the Codex Boernerianus reads exaσTOS KOTOUνTES toiling for every one. Cellerier, Essai d'une Introduction critique au Nouveau Testament, p. 112. Genève, 1823. 8vo.
3 See p. 143. supra.
40 87. Ernestí seents to countenance this hypothesis. Inst. Interp. Nov. Test.
tullian.' But Dr. Lardner is of opinion, that these passages scarcely amount to a full proof that any sections or chapters were marked in the copies of the New Testament so early as the second century. It is however certain that the antients divided the New Testament into two kinds of chapters, some longer and others shorter, the former were called in Greek and in Latin breves; and the table of contents of each brevis, which was prefixed to the copies of the New Testament was called breviarium. The shorter chapters were called xepaλama, capitula, and the list of them capitulatio.
This method of dividing is of very great antiquity, certainly prior to the fourth century: for Jerome, who flourished towards the close of that century, expunged a passage from Saint Matthew's gospel which forms an entire chapter, as being an interpolation. These divisions were formerly very numerous; but, not being established by any ecclesiastical authority, none of them were ever received by the whole church. Saint Matthew's gospel, for instance, according to the old breviaria, contained twenty-eight breves; but, according to Jerome, sixty-eight. The same author divides his gospel into 355 capitula; others, into 74; others, into 88; others, into 117; the Syriac version, into 76; and Erpenius's edition of the Arabic, into 101. The most antient, and it appears the most approved of these divisions, was that of Tatian (A. D. 172.) in his Harmony of the four Gospels, for the Tλ or breves: and that of Ammonius, a learned Christian of Alexandria in the third century, in his Harmony of the Gospels, for the xɛpaλaia or capitula. From him they were termed the Ammonian Sections. As these divisions were subsequently adopted, and the use of them was recommended, by Eusebius the celebrated ecclesiastical historian, they are frequently called by his name. According to this division, Saint Matthew contains 68 breves, and 355 capitula; Saint Mark, 48 breves, and 234 capitula; Saint Luke, 83 breves, and 342 capitula; and St. John, 18 breves, and 231 capitula. All the evangelists together form 216 breves, and 1126 capitula. In antient Greek manuscripts the λ or larger portions are written on the upper or lower margin, and the xɛpaλaia or smaller portions are numbered on the side of the margin. They are clearly represented in Erasmus's editions of the Greek Testament, and in Robert Stephens's edition of 1550.
The division of the Acts of the Apostles, and of the Catholic Epistles, into chapters, was made by Euthalius Bishop of Sulca in Egypt, in the fifth century; who published an edition of Saint Paul's Epistles, that had been divided into chapters, in one continued series, by some unknown person in the fourth century, who had considered thein as one book. This arrangement of the Pauline Epistles is to be found
1 Ad Ux. lib. ii. c. 2. p. 187. D. De Pudicitiâ, cap. 16. sub finem. De Monogam. c. 11. p. 683. The passages are given at length by Dr. Lardner, Works, 8vo. vol. ii. p. 283; 4to. vol. i. p. 433.
2 The paragraph in question is to be found in the Codex Bezæ, immediately after the twenty-eighth verse of the twenty-eighth chapter of St. Matthew's Gospel. Michaelis has printed it, together with two Latin translations of it, in his Introduction to the New Test. vol. i. pp. 293-295.
in the Vatican manuscript, and in some others; but it by no means prevails uniformly, for there are many manuscripts extant, in which a fresh enumeration commences with each epistle.1
Besides the divisions into chapters and sections above mentioned, the Codex Beza and other manuscripts were further divided into lessons, called Αναγνώσματα οι Αναγνώσεις. Euthalius is said to have divided Saint Paul's Epistles in this manner, as Andrew Bishop of Casarea in Cappadocia divided the Apocalypse, at the beginning of the sixth century, into twenty-four lessons, which he termed λoyo (according to the number of elders before the throne of God, Rev. iv. 4.), and seventy-two titles, according to the number of parts, viz. body, soul, and spirit, of which the elders were composed!
The division of λ and xspaλaia continued to be general both in the eastern and western churches, until cardinal Hugo de Sancto Caro in the thirteenth century introduced the chapters now in use, throughout the western church, for the New Testament as well as the Old: of which an account has already been given. The Greek or eastern church, however, continued to follow the antient divisions; nor are any Greek manuscripts known to be extant, in which chapters are found, prior to the fifteenth century, when the Greek fugitives, after the taking of Constantinople, fled into the West of Europe, became transcribers for members of the Latin church, and of course adopted the Latin divisions.
II. Whether any points for marking the sense were used by the apostles, is a question that has been greatly agitated; Pritius, Plaff, Leusden, and many other eminent critics, maintaining that they were in use before the time of the apostles, while Dr. Grabe, Fabricius, Montfaucon, Hoffman, John Henry Michaelis, Rogall, John David Michaelis, Moldenhawer, Ernesti, and a host of other critics, maintain that the use of points is posterior to the time of the apostles. The numerous mistakes of the fathers, or their uncertainty how particular passages were to be read and understood, clearly prove that there was no regular or accustomed system of punctuation in use, in the fourth century. The majority of the points or stops now in use are unques
1 Millii Prolegomena, §§ 354-360, 662-664. 739, et seq. 2 See p. 148. supra, of this volume.
3 Rumpeus has given twelve closely printed quarto pages to the enumeration of these opinions. Com. Crit. in Nov. Test. pp. 165–176.
4 Some of these mistakes and uncertainties of interpretation are sufficiently curious. Thus Jerome on Eph. i. 5. says: "Dupliciter legendum, ut caritas vel cum superioribus vel superioribus copuletur." And on Philemon iv. 5. he says: "Ambiguè verò dictum, utrùm grates agat Deo suo semper, an memoriam ejus faciat in orationibus suis semper. Et utrumque intelligi potest." (Jerome, Homil. IV. in Joh. p. 42, 43. edit. Francofurti.) Epiphanius mentions a mark of punctuation used in the Old Testament, which he calls vrodiaσroλn; but he takes notice of nothing of the kind in the New Testament, though he was warmly discussing the manner in which the sense ought to be divided in John i. 3. The disputes, which arose concerning this passage prove to demonstration that there was no fixed punctuation at the period referred to. Chrysostom, for instance, branded as heretics those who placed a pause after the words oude ev and before yeyover, yet this mode of pointing was adopted by Irenæus, Clement of Alexandria, Órigen, and even by Athanasius. Cellerier, Introduction, p. 114. where other additional examples are
tionably of modern date: for, although some full points are to be found in the Codex Alexandrinus, the Codex Vaticanus, and the Codex Beza, (as they also are in inscriptions four hundred years before the Christian æra) yet it cannot be shown that our present system of punctuation was generally adopted earlier than the ninth century. In fact, it seems to have been a gradual improvement, commenced by Jerome, and continued by succeeding biblical critics. The punctuation of the manuscripts of the Septuagint, Ernesti observes from Cyril of Jerusalem, was unknown in the early part of the fourth century, and consequently (he infers) the punctuation of the New Testament was also unknown. About fifty years afterwards, Jerome began to add the comma and colon; and they were then inserted in many more antient manuscripts. About the middle of the fifth century, Euthalius (then a deacon of the church at Alexandria) published an edition of the four Gospels, and afterwards (when he was bishop of Sulca in Egypt) an edition of the Acts of the Apostles and of all the Apostolical Epistles, in which he divided the New Testament into Xa (stichoi), or lines regulated by the sense, so that each terminated where some pause was to be made in reading. Of this method of division (which Euthalius devised in order to assist the clergy when reading the Word in public worship, and obviate the inconveniences and mistakes just noticed) the following extract from Tit. ii. 2, 3. according to the Codex H. Coislinianus 202, will give an idea to the reader.
In English, thus:
1 Cyrilli Catechesis xiii. p. 301. Ernesti, Inst. Interp. Nov. Test.
This mode of dividing the sacred text was called Erixousrgia; and this method of writing, drydov ygala. At the end of each manuscript it was usual to specify the number of stichoi which it contained. When a copyist was disposed to contract his space, and therefore crowded the lines into each other, he placed a point where Euthalius had terminated the line. In the eighth century the stroke which we call a comma was invented. In the Latin manuscripts, Jerome's points were introduced by Paul Warnefrid, and Alcuin, at the command of the emperor Charlemagne; and in the ninth century the Greek note of interrogation (;) was first used. At the invention of printing, the editors placed the points arbitrarily, probably (Michaelis thinks) without bestowing the necessary attention; and Stephens in particular, it is well known, varied his points in every edition. The fac-similes given in the third chapter of this volume will give the reader an idea of the marks of distinction found in the more antient manuscripts.
The stichoi, however, not only assisted the public reader of the New Testament to determine its sense; they also served to measure the size of books; thus, Josephus's twenty books of Jewish Antiquities contained 60,000 stichoi, though in Ittigius's edition there are only 40,000 broken lines. And, according to an antient written list preserved by Simon, and transcribed by Michaelis, the New Testament contained 18,612 stichoi.1
The verses into which the New Testament is now divided, are much more modern, and are an imitation of those invented for the Old Testament by Rabbi Nathan in the fifteenth century.2 Robert Stephens was their first inventor,3 and introduced them in his edition of the New Testament, published in the year 1551. This invention of the learned printer was soon introduced into all the editions of the New Testament; and the very great advantage it affords, for facilitating references to particular passages, has caused it to be retained in the majority of editions and versions of the New Testament, though much to the injury of its interpretation, as many passages are now severed that ought to be united, and vice versa. From this arrangement, however, Wetstein, Bengel, Bowyer, Griesbach, and other editors of the Greek Testament, have wisely departed, and have printed the text in continued paragraphs, throwing the numbers of Stephen's verses into the margin. Mr. Reeves also has pursued the same method in his beautiful and correct editions of the authorised English version, and of the Greek Testament in 12mo., 1803.5
1 Introd. to the New Test. vol. ii. pp. 526, 527. Michaelis, after Simon, uses the word remata; but this is evidently a mistake.
2 See p. 148. supra, of this volume."
3 He made this division when on a journey from Lyons to Paris, and, as his son Henry tells us (in his preface to the Concordance of the New Testament), he made it inter equitandum, literally, while riding on horseback; but Michaelis rather thinks that the phrase means only, that when he was weary of riding, he amused himself with this work at his inn. Michaelis, vol. ii. p. 527.
4 Thus Col. iv. 1. ought to have been united to the third chapter.
5 The title of the last mentioned work is—"H KAINH AIАOнкн. The New Testament in Greek, according to the Text of Mill and Stephens, and the Arrange