East was undertaken. and contains both Old and New Testaments-the latter perfect, without the loss of a single leaf. In addition, it contains the entire Epistle of Barnabas, and a portion of the "Shepherd" of Hermas, two books which down to the beginning of the fourth century were looked upon by many as Scripture. All the considerations which tend to fix the date of manuscripts lead to the conclusion that the Sinaitic Codex belongs to the middle of the fourth century. Indeed, the evidence is clearer in this case than in that of the Vatican Codex; and it is not improbable (which cannot be the case with the Vatican MS.) that it is one of the fifty copies of the Scriptures which the Emperor Constantine in the year 331 directed to be made for Byzantium, under the care of Eusebius of Cæsarea. In this case it is a natural inference that it was sent from Byzantium to the monks of St. Catherine by the Emperor Justinian, the founder of the convent. The entire Codex was published by its discoverer, under the orders of the Emperor of Russia, in 1862, with the most scrupulous exactness, and in a truly magnificent shape, and the New Testament portion was issued in a portable form in 1863 and 1865.

It is written in four columns to a page,

These considerations seem to show that the first place among the three great Manuscripts, both for age and extent, is held by the Sinaitic Codex, the second by the Vatican, and the third by the Alexandrine. And this order is completely confirmed by the text they exhibit, which is not merely that which was accepted in the East at the time they were copied; but, having been written by Alexandrine copyists who knew but little of Greek, and therefore had no temptation to make alterations, they remain in a high degree faithful to the text which was accepted through a large part of Christendom in the third and second centuries. The proof of this is their agreement with the most ancient translations—namely, the so-called Italic, made in the second century in proconsular Africa; the Syriac Gospels of the same date, now transferred from the convents of the Nitrian desert to the British Museum; and the Coptic version of the third century. It is confirmed also by their

agreement with the oldest of the Fathers, such as Irenæus, Tertullian, Clement, and Origen.

These remarks apply to the Sinaitic Codex-which is remarkably close in its agreement to the "Italic" version-more than they do to the Vatican MS., and still more so than to the Alexandrine, which, however, is of far more value in the Acts, Epistles, and Apocalypse than it is in the Gospels.

A few readings, as remarkable for the correspondence which they disclose in the date of the manuscripts, as for the testimony which they bear to their authority, I propose now to bring before my readers.

1. The ordinary conclusion to the Gospel of St. Mark, namely, XVI. 9-20, is found in more than five hundred Greek manuscripts, in the whole of the Syriac and Coptic, and most of the Latin manuscripts, and even in the Gothic version. But by Eusebius and Jerome (the former of whom died in the year 340) it is stated expressly that in nearly all the trustworthy copies of their time the Gospel ended with the 8th verse; and with this, of all existing known Greek manuscripts, only the Vatican and the Sinaitic now agree.

2. The opening of the Epistle to the Ephesians in our Bibles contains the words, "to the saints which are at Ephesus." The words "at Ephesus" were not in the copies used either by Marcion (A.D. 130—140) or Origen (185—254); Basil the Great (who died in 379) also states that they were wanting in the old manuscripts of his time; and the omission agrees well with the encyclical character of the Epistle. At the present day the words are found in many ancient Greek manuscripts, and in all the ancient versions; and even to Jerome no copy was known which did not contain them. Now, however, the Sinaitic and Vatican manuscripts alone agree with Basil, Origen and Marcion.

3. Origen states-and the statement is confirmed by various quotations before his time--that in John I. 4 some copies contained

"in Him is life," instead of "in Him was life.”

Whereas that reading is now found only in the Sinaitic manuscript, and in the famous Cambridge copy of the Gospels known as the "Codex Beza"; although it is shown in most copies of the Italic version, in the old Syriac, and the oldest Coptic versions.

4. Jerome mentions, in reference to Matt. XIII. 35, that Porphyry, the opponent of Christianity in the third century, accused the Evangelist of having said "which was spoken by the prophet Isaiah," a reading which is exhibited also by an authority of the second century. To which Jerome adds that well-informed people had long before removed the name of Isaiah from the passage. Now, of all our manuscripts of a thousand years old, not one exhibits the name of Isaiah except the Sinaitic, with which a few of later date agree.

5. The passage John XIII. Io is cited six times by Origen; but the Sinaitic MS. alone (with a few copies of the old Italic version) gives it as Origen does, namely, "He that is washed needeth not to wash, but is clean every whit."

6. In John VI. 51-where the passage is very difficult to settle the Sinaitic Codex alone among all Greek manuscripts has the undoubtedly right reading, namely, "If any man eat of My bread he shall live for ever. The bread which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh," which is confirmed by Tertullian, at the end of the second century.

Many other examples of the kind might be given.

In the facsimile steel engraving which forms the frontispiece to the volume, my readers may examine for themselves the style in which each of the three great manuscripts so often mentioned is written. Initial letters are found in the Alexandrine Codex only, and in not having them the other two agree with the Herculanean rolls of the first century.

I have only further to speak of the method pursued in the printing of this edition.

The text is that of the English "Authorised Version," exactly reproduced; and in the notes are given the variations from that text in the three manuscripts above named:—

S*, V*, and A* denote that the words so accompanied are the original reading of the respective MSS., though altered by a later hand; while the later readings themselves are denoted by S2, V2, or A2 respectively. But my readers will bear in mind that, as a rule, I give only the original readings, and very rarely the ancient corrections.

The sign "om." denotes that the words to which it is prefixed are omitted; "adds" or "add" that they are added. For instance: "SV om. ever" signifies that in the Sinaitic and Vatican MSS. the word "ever," given in the English text, is omitted: while "A adds saying" signifies that the Alexandrine MS. adds that word to the passage referred to in the English text.

Notes belonging to the same words in the text are divided by a comma; those belonging to a fresh passage by a semicolon. When words from the text are quoted in the notes they are followed by a colon, and then by the correction of the manuscript. Thus, "suffered he their manners: A bore he as a nurse"-which denotes that the last five words are given in the Alex. MS. instead of the first four which stand in the English.

Many obvious blunders which are found in the manuscripts are passed over in silence. But others, evidently wrong, are so denoted by the words "an error" or "a mere error." I have no doubt that very shortly after the books of the New Testament were written, and before they were protected by the authority of the Church, many arbitrary alterations and additions were made in them. On the other hand, many variations are obviously only matters of pronunciation, and of little importance; others again arise only from the Greek idiom, and therefore need not be noticed.

Inaccurate or insufficient renderings I have denoted by the words "translate" or "all MSS." Thus "translate by the well" denotes that that is a more accurate rendering than the "on the well" of the English Bible. Scholars like Trench, Scrivener, and Alford, whom I have usually followed in such cases, will know how to add to these latter corrections, but the plan of my work did not allow me to give more than I have actually given.

Lastly, I have to acknowledge the kind assistance that I have received in this work from my learned friend Mr. B. Harris Cowper. No single work of ancient Greek classical literature can command three such original witnesses as the Sinaitic, Vatican, and Alexandrine Manuscripts, to the integrity and accuracy of its text. That they

are available in the case of a book which is at once the most sacred and the most important in the world is surely matter for the deepest thankfulness to God.

Leipzig, Christmas, 1868.

Constantine Tischendorf.