new names by which they were at that time called; instances of which occur in Genesis xiv. 4, where Dan is substituted for Laish, and in several places in Genesis, and also in Numbers, where Hebron is put for Kirjath Arba, &c. He likewise wrote out the whole in the Chaldee character, charging for it the old Hebrew character, which has since that time been retained only by the Samaritans, and among whom it is preserved to this day. Dupin contends that Nehemiah was principally concerned in compiling and collecting this canon; for proof of which he refers to the letter of the Jews of Jerusalem, written to the Jews of Egypt, mentioned in the beginning of the second book of Maccabees, in which it is said, that Nehemiah had collected the books of the Kings, of the Prophets, and of David. It is said that this canon was then approved by the grand Sanhedrim, the great synagogue or council of seventy, and published by its authority. It is, however, says Dupin, more apparent that about that time the number of the sacred books was fixed among the Jews by a canon, which the whole Jewish nation received and followed; so that they looked no longer upon such books as sacred and divinely inspired, which were not contained in it. stroyed and lost, that, besides tnis copy of it, there was then no other to be obtained, and refers to the surprise manifested by Hilkiah, on the discovery of it, and the grief expressed by Josiah when he heard it read, as plainly showing that neither of them had seen it before, 2 Kings, xxii. 8—13. 2 Chron. xxxiv. On the other hand, Dr. Kennicott contends, that long before this time there were several copies of the Law in Israel, during the separation of the ten tribes, and that there were some copies of it also in the possession, at least of the prophets and priests belonging to the two more faithful tribes of Judah and Benjamin. He thinks that the surprise expressed by Josiah and the people, at his reading the copy found by Hilkiah, may be accounted for by adverting to the history of the preceding reigns, and particularly recollecting what a very idolatrous king his grandfather Manasseh had been; wanting neither the will nor the power to destroy the copies of the Law, if they had not been carefully secreted. This solemn reading of it by Josiah would doubtless awaken his own and the peoples' earnest attention; more especially as the copy produced was possibly the autograph of Moses. From this time copies of the Law were extensively multiplied among the people; and though, within a few years, the original copy might be burnt with the city and temple, it is certain that Daniel had a copy of the Scriptures with him at Babylon; for he quotes the Law, and mentions the prophecies of Jeremiah. Dan. ix. 11. 13, ix. 2. It appears also, from the sixth chapter of Ezra, and from the ninth chapter of Nehemiah, that copies of the Law were dispersed among the people. It is unnecessary, therefore, to suppose, with some of the fathers, that Ezra restored the Scriptures by a divine revelation, after they had been lost and destroyed in the captivity; an opinion resting only on the authority of a fabulous relation, which occurs in the fourteenth chapter of the second apocryphal book of Esdras. What Ezra did may be comprised in the following particulars. He collected and collated as many copies of the sacred writings as he could find, and out of them all formed one complete copy, adjusted the va- From the New Testament, as well as from the rious readings, corrected the errors of trans- testimony of Josephus, it appears that this stancribers, and, as some say, annexed the 'Keri dard canon of Old Testament Scripture was dichetibs,' which are found in the margins of the vided into the three parts, of the Law, the Proancient MSS. He likewise made additions in phets, and the Hagiographa, or Psalms (Luke xxiv. several parts of the different books which ap- 44). Josephus, Contra Apion. i. 8. tom. ii. p. 441., peared to be necessary for their illustration, says the canonical books were distributed into correction, and completion. To this class of three classes; the first containing the five books additions, we may refer the last chapter of Deu- of Moses; the second, thirteen historical and teronomy, which, as it gives an account of the prophetical books, written from the time of the death and burial of Moses, and of the succession death of Moses to Artaxerxes; and the third, of Joshua after him, could not have been written four books of hymns and of morality; the whole by Moses himself. Under the same head have number amounting to twenty-two. The first also been included many other interpolations in class therefore comprehended Genesis, Exodus, the Bible, which create difficulties that cannot Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy; the be solved without allowing them; as in Gen. second Joshua, Judges, with Ruth, Samuel, xii. 6, xxii. 14, xxxvi. 3. Exod. xvi. 35. Deut. Kings, Chronicles, Ezra with Nehemiah, Esther, ii. 12, iii. 11. 14. Prov. xxv. 1. The interpo- Isaiah, Jeremiah with Lamentations, Ezekiel, lations in these passages are ascribed by Prideaux Daniel, and the twelve minor prophets; and the to Ezra; and others which were afterwards added, third Job, the Psalms, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, he attributes to Simon the Just. Ezra also and the Song of Solomon. The whole passage changed the old names of several places that were is as follows: become obsolete, putting instead of them the The canon of the whole Hebrew Bible seems, says Kennicott, to have been closed by Malachi, the latest of the Jewish prophets, about fifty years after Ezra had collected together all the sacred books which had been composed before and during his time. Prideaux supposes the canon was closed by Simon the Just, about 150 years after Malachi. Be this as it may, it seems well established, that Judas Maccabæus repaired the temple, and replaced in it every thing necessary for the performance of divine worship (1 Macc. iv. 36-59), which included a correct copy of the Hebrew Scriptures, if not that of Ezra himself. And that this copy remained in the temple until the destruction of Jerusalem and the subversion of the Jewish polity under Titus, when it was carried in triumph to Rome, among the other spoils which he had taken. "We have not an innumerable multitude of books among us, disagreeing from and contradicting one another, but only twenty-two books, containing the records of all past 'imes, which are justly believed to be divine. Five of them belong to Moses, which contain his laws, and the traditions concerning the origin of mankind, till his death. But as to the time from the death of Moses, till the reign of Artaxerxes king of Persia, who reigned after Xerxes, the prophets who were after Moses wrote down what was done in their times in thirteen books. The remaining four books contain hymns to God, and precepts for the conduct of human life. Our history, indeed, has been written, since Artaxerxes, very particularly; but it has not been esteemed of equal authority with the former by our forefathers, because there had not been an exact succession of prophets since that time. And how firmly we have given credit to these books of our own nation, is evident by what we do: for, during so many ages as have already passed, no one has been so bold as either to add any thing to them, to take any thing from them, or to make any change in them; but it is become natural to all Jews, immediately, and from their very birth, to esteem these books to contain divine doctrines, and to persist in them; and, if it be necessary, willingly to die for them.' Josephus contra Apion, lib. 1. sect. 8. There is some variety of opinion, among the fathers, as to the classification of the books of Ruth, Job, the Song of Solomon, &c. at this time: but that all our present canon was contained in this ancient one is confirmed by the modern division of the sacred books among the Jews, who now enumerate twenty-four. The Law is still the first division, containing the five books of Moses: the Prophets are divided into the former and latter, with regard to the time when they flourished respectively. The former prophets containing the Books of Joshua, Judges, and 1 and 2 Samuel, and 1 and 2 Kings; and the two last being each considered as one book. The latter prophets comprise the writings of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the twelve minor prophets, whose books are reckoned as one. The Cetubim, or Hagiographa, consist of the Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Song of Solomon, Ruth, Lamentations of Jeremiah, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra and Nehemiah (reckoned as one), and 1 and 2 Chronicles, which also are reckoned as one. In the modern copies of the Hebrew Scriptures, the Song of Solomon, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, and Esther, are placed immediately after the Pentateuch, under the name of the five Megilloth, or volumes. This order, however, is not always observed. We pass over minor divisions in this place, as well as the modern one, into chapters and verses, referring the reader for the latter to the word CHAPTER. The council of Trent having extracted from Luther's writings the position 'that no books should be reckoned a part of the Old Testament beside those received by the Jews,' (see Sarpi's History), have included, for no other reason that we can find, the Apocryphal books of Tobit, Judith, The Book of Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, 1 Maccabees, and 2 Maccabees, in the sacred canon. See our article APOCRYPHA. A canon of the ancient Scriptures thus delivered to us by those to whom were 'committed the oracles of God,' has been perpetuated by numerous MSS. preserved both by Jews and Christians with scrupulous care, and is happily distributed, in modern times, by the invention of printing, into every region of the globe. Hebrew MSS. of the Old Testament are extant in the form of rolls and square: the former being generally the shape of those found in the Jewish synagogues. To ensure their correctness, approved scribes have been from before our Saviour's time employed upon the task of transcribing them; and although superstition may have dictated a great portion of such rules as the following, the observance of them it is clear must have had an unquestionable_tendency to preserve pure the sacred text. Carpzov and other critics tell us that the copies of the law must be transcribed according to the Jews (and these rules are said to be observed to the present day), from ancient MSS. of approved character only, with pure ink, on parchment prepared from the hide of a clean animal, for this express purpose, by a Jew, and fastened together by the strings of clean animals. Every skin must contain a certain number of columns of prescribed length and breadth, each column comprising a given number of lines and words. No word must be written by heart or with points, or without being first orally pronounced by the copyist: the name of God is not to be written but with the utmost devotion and attention; and previously to writing it, the pen must be washed. The want, or the redundance of a single letter, the writing of prose as verse, or verse as prose, respectively, vitiates a MS. and when a copy has been completed, it must be examined and corrected within thirty days after the writing has been finished, in order to determine whether it is to be approved or rejected. The Hebrew text of these MSS., it should here be remarked, was originally transcribed without any breaks or divisions into chapters and verses, or even into words; so that a whole book, as anciently written, was in fact but one continued sentence, or rather word. When various readings therefore had arisen in the lapse of ages, the Jews had recourse to a canon or rule which they called masora or tradition, consisting of the most minute critical notices, which they placed in the margin of their copies of the text, and which tells us the different reading of the words which are redundant or defective; how often the same word is found at the beginning, middle, or end of a verse, the different significations of the same word; the agreement or conjunction of one word with another; what letters are pronounced, and what are inverted, together with such as hang perpendicular: they even took the number of each letter, for the Jews cherish their sacred books with such reverence, that they make scruple of changing the situation of a letter, which is evidently misplaced: supposing that some mystery has occasioned the alteration. They have likewise reckoned which is the middle letter of the Pentateuch, which is the middle clause of each Book; and how many times each letter of the alphabet occurs in all the Hebrew Scriptures. See Walton's Prolegomena, c. viii. Five examplars have been more particularly celebrated among the Jews for their correctness, the Codex of Hillel, of Ben Asher, also called the Jerusalem, or Palestine Codex; of Ben Napthali, or the Babylonian Codex; the Pentateuch of Jericho, and the Codex Sinai. But, in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, collections of Hebrew MSS. were made by Christian critics, which have placed a most minute acquaintance with every part of the sacred text within the power of almost every modern student. Rabbi Joseph Athias, in his celebrated edition of the Hebrew Bible, printed at Amsterdam 1661 and 1667, may be said indeed to have led the way to this good work. He was succeeded by Jablonski, in his Bible printed at Berlin 1699, by Vander Hooght in 1705, Opitz in 1709, J. H. Michaelis in 1720, and Houbigant in 1753. In this last year Dr. Kennicott first announced to the public his important and extensive plan, for collating Hebrew MSS., in his First Dissertation on the state of the printed Hebrew text. Of his progress, and the circumstances that at ended it, we have a detailed account in the Dissertatio Generalis, published with the second volume of his Bible. Having proposed ten years as the time which, he thought, would be necessary for collating the Hebrew and Samaritan MSS., he was enabled by his singular assiduity to fulfil his own expectations and those of the public. Patronised by his Majesty and a great number of liberal friends to the undertaking, both at home and in foreign countries, in the list of whom are no fewer than seven crowned heads, several princes, cardinals, archbishops and bishops, besides universities, public libraries, and many of the most eminent literati in various parts of Europe; and amongst whom a subscription of £10,000 was raised; Dr. Kennicott instituted various and extensive enquiries after MSS. at Constantinople, Warsaw, Venice, Bologna, Mantua, Pavia, Genoa, Lisbon, Geneva, Utrecht, Erfurt, Berlin, Stockholm, and Hamburgh. The numerous Hebrew MSS. of the latter place were collated by the celebrated Reimarus, who not only concurred in but applauded the undertaking. In the prosecution of this work, it was discovered, that the printed editions of the Hebrew Bible, which had been supposed to agree, and on the agreement of which the notion of the integrity of that text had been founded, very much differed from one another and particularly, that the oldest editions agreed most with the oldest and best MSS., and the modern editions, with the latest and worst. As one proof of this, it is alleged, that the variations in the first edition (in 1488) from Van der Hooght (in 1705) amount to 12,000. In the year 1767 Dr. Kennicott derived great advantage from his own examination of the Paris MSS., both Hebrew and Samaritan, and from the labors of Dr. Gill, a celebrated Baptist minister, who collated for him all the passages quoted in the Talmud. An Hebrew MS., which once belonged to a synagogue at Jerusalem, was at this time purchased by his Britannic Majesty; and our author himself, hoping to obtain other treasures from the East, sent to Canton, and had nearly succeeded in procuring a MS. from the Jews at Cai-fong-fu, in the province of Honan. But though he failed in China, he succeeded in America, and procured a complete Hebrew MS. from a Jew at New York. During the tenth and last year of this collation, eight Danish MSS. were sent to Oxford for the author's own examination, as were also six others from Toledo, by Dr. Bayer. Collations of other MSS. were furnished, at the same time, from Silesia, Cologne, Strasburg, Konigsburg, Upsal, Leyden, and Ireland. The indefatigable author, having thus collected materials for his noble undertaking, no less honorable to his country than to himself, proceeded to digest the variations, with which he was furnished, under their severa. books, chapters, and verses. During this operation, he formed a plan for a more complete scrutiny of the best MSS. through Europe, by sending some well qualified person to re-examine the MSS. already collated, and to examine the rest in passages of greater moment, and where success seemed at all probable. Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Bruns, a learned German, was selected for this embassy: and he was honored with letters from the secretaries of state here, to all our foreign ambassadors, as well as from the rulers of the two synagogues in London. The places in which he thus examined MSS. during a tour of three years, were Paris, Louvain, Cologne, Mentz, Worms, Manheim, Nuremburgh, Augsburgh, Stutgard, Carlsruhe, Strasburgh, Basle, Zuric, Berne, Geneva, Turin, Casale, Veruli, Milan, Genoa, Leghorn, Sienna, Rome, Florence, Bologna, Cesena, Modena, Reggio, Parma, Mantua, Padua, Venice, Udina, Goritia, Gradisca, Trieste, Vienna, Dresden, Leipsic, Erfurt, Jena, Dessau, Berlin, Hamburgh, Helmstadt, Cassel, Amsterdam, Utrecht, Leyden, and the Hague. The variations contained in nearly 700 bundles of papers, being at last digested, including the collections made by Dr. Bruns; and the whole, when put together, being corrected by the original collations, and then fairly transcribed into thirty folio volumes, the work was put to press in 1773; and both volumes, with the general dissertation, were finished in July 1780. The writer of this paper cannot here forget the admirable peroration of one of Bishop Marsh's lectures at Cambridge, on the subject of the immense mass of readings, many of them very insignificant, thus obtained. 'You will be ready,' he observed, perhaps, with me to say, How many learned lives and what a vast sum of money has thus been expended in comparatively fruitless labor; for no controversy of importance either between Jews and Christians, or any of the sects into which they are respectively diviaed, has been affected by them. No: it was worth all their lives and labors to know there was nothing to do!" Of the different printed editions of the Hebrew Bible it is not necessary for us here to speak particularly. Best amongst the best, of course where it can be obtained and duly appreciated, is Dr. Kennicott's work; to which may be added De Rossi's important supplement, published at Parma between the years 1784 and 1799, in five 18mo. volumes. The Psalter, issued about the year 1477, was the first book printed in Hebrew. It had the complete commentary of Rabbi Kimchi annexed. The Pentateuch was printed at H Bologna in 1482; and the Greater and Lesser Prophets followed in 1484 and 1486: the Hagiographa was first printed at Naples in 1487, and a copy of this edition is in the library of Eton College. At length the whole Hebrew Bible appeared complete from the Socini press in 1488. In 1494 was published that edition of the Hebrew Scriptures, at Brescia, from which Luther made his German translation: thus early uniting the invention of printing with the reformation of religion. This was also the basis of Bomberg's celebrated edition of the Hebrew Bible, and of the Complutensian, Antwerp, and Paris Polyglott versions. Bomberg's second edition, printed at Venice in 1525-6, is the basis of all our modern Hebrew Bibles. For BIBLES, POLYGLOTT, see the close of this article. SECT. II. OF THE FORMATION OF THE CHRIS TIAN OR NEW TESTAMENT CANON. Jesus Christ and his apostles adverted constantly to the Scriptures of the Old Testament as testifying of him; it is also remarkable that they quote sometimes the Septuagint, if not other versions of the ancient Scriptures. Thus they, in fact, adopt the Jewish canon, and set the seal of a direct divine approval upon it at the close of a far greater period of time from its commencement than has elapsed since that important and unequivocal sanction was given. But Christianity in primitive times was not a national religion, and was long before it even received public toleration; this will, in part, perhaps, account for the comparatively late date at which we find any public body or council who furnish us with the accredited canon of early Christians. Le Clerc observes upon this (H. E. ann. 100. num. iii. iv. et ann. 29. num. xcii.), 'We nowhere read of a council of the apostles, or of any assembly of the governors of Christian churches, convened to determine by their authority, that such a number of gospels, neither more nor fewer, should be received. Nor was there any need of it, since it is well known to all, from the concurring testimony of contemporaries, that these four gospels are the genuine writings of those whose names they bear, and since it is also manifest that there is in them nothing unworthy of those to whom they are ascribed, nor any thing at all contrary to the revelation of the Old Testament, nor to right reason. There was no need of a synod of grammarians to declare magisterially what are the works of Cicero or Virgil. In like manner, the authority of the gospels has been established by general and perpetual consent, without any decree of the governors of the church. We may say the same of the apostolical epistles, which owe all their authority, not to the decisions of any ecclesiastical assembly, but to the concurring testimony of all Christians, and the things themselves which are contained therein.' From the decree of the council of Laodicea, held A. D. 363, it appears that there were writings at that time already known by the title of canonical. In its last canon that council declares that private psalms ought not to be read in the church, nor any books not canonical, but only the canonical books of the Old and New Testament' after which follows a catalogue or enumeration of such books, in which are omitted all the apocryphal books of the Old Testament, and the Revelation in the New. The fortyseventh canon of the council of Carthage, assembled A. D. 397, ordains, that nothing besides the canonical Scriptures be read in the church.' The council's canon of the New Testament is the same as that now received. From the manner in which the epistle to the Hebrews is mentioned, there is reason to suspect, that it was not so generally received as the other thirteen epistles of St. Paul was. The Revolution' seems rather omitted from the Laodicean, than as an inspired book. If we now advert, therefore, to the authentic writings of ancient authors, we shall find, that they had the same canon of the New Testament with that which is generally received to this day. Accordingly, the catalogue of canonical books furnished by Origen about A. D. 230; Eusebius, A. D. 315; Athanasius, A. D. 326; Cyril, A. D. 348 (the book of Revelation excepted); Epiphanius, A. D. 368; Basil and Gregory Nazianzen, and Amphilochius, A. D. 370; Gregory Nyssen, A. D. 371; Jerome, A. D. 392; Augustine, A. D. 395; Rufinus, A. D. 397; Innocent I bishop of Rome, A. D. 402; Isidore of Pelusium, and Cyril of Alexandria, A. D. 412; Cassian, A. D. 424; Prosper of Aquitain, and Eusebius bishop of Lyons, and Sedulius, A. D. 434; Leo, bishop of Rome, and Salvian presbyter of Marseilles, A. D. 440; Dionysius, falsely called the Areopagite, A. D. 490; Gelasius, bishop of Rome A. D. 494; Andrew, bishop of Cæsarea, A. D. 500; Facundus, an African bishop, and Arethas, A. D. 540; Cassiodorius, A. D. 556; Photius, patriarch of Constantinople, A. D. 858; Oecumenius, A. D. 950; Theophylact, A. D. 1070 (the Revelation excepted); and Nicephorus Callisti, A. D. 1325; agrees with that which is now received among both Catholics and Protestants, as well as in the Greek church. It is worthy of notice here, that as Protestants we have thus the sanction of the entire Jewish church for our received canon of the Old Testament, and the rejection of the Apocrypha-and that of the Catholic as well as Greek church for all we hold to be the Christian Scriptures. A late futile attempt to bring forward an Apocryphal New Testament, is no further worth notice here than as giving us an occasion to refer to Mr. Horne's excellent examination of that performance, in his Introduction to the Critical Study of the Holy Scriptures, vol. ii. p. 687. Very anciently, the New Testament consisted of two codes or collections, called gospels and epistles, or Evangelion and Apostolion. Tertullian distinguishes the gospels by the names of the writers, and calls them, our Digesta or digests, in allusion, as it seems, to some collection of the Roman laws digested into order. As to the order of the several gospels, it appears that, in Tertulliau's time, they were disposed in the African churches according to the quality of the writers; those two occurring first which were written by apostles, and then the other two written by apostolical men. In some of the most ancient MSS. now extant, the order of the several evangelists is Matthew, John, Luke, Mark. The order of the four gospels has been generally Matthew, Mark, Luke, John; then follow the Acts, St. Paul's Epistles, the Catholic epistles, and the Revelation. All the books of the New Testament were written in Greek, except the gospel of St. Matthew, who, according to St. Jerome, first wrote in Judea in the Hebrew anguage. The MSS. of the New Testament still extant exceed in number those of any single classic whatever more than 380 were collected by Griesbach alone. They have been dispersed over all parts of the globe; and several of them are upwards of 1200 years old. It is true that many of them are not entire; the most, in number, containing the Gospels; some the Gospel and Acts of the Apostles only; others the Gospel, Acts, and Epistles; and but a few the Revelation of St. John. Thirty thousand various readings were found in those collected by Dr. Mill, and 150,000 are said to be contained in the researches of Griesbach. Yet the most correct and accurate of the ancient classics are more depraved, mutilated and inaccurate. Not a hundredth part of these various readings makes any perceptible variation in the meaning of the sacred writers; evident verbal errors constitute by far the major part of them; substitutions of one word for another; or an immaterial transposition of words in a sentence. The most inferior of these manuscripts in the judgment of critics, does not pervert or resign a single article of the faith of Christians, or omit or alter one moral precept. The variations may indeed prove that God has not been pleased, by a standing miracle, to prevent those accidents affecting the sacred books which are never supposed to affect the credit or utility of other writings; but the general sense of the inspired penmen has been made more evident and unequivocal by these researches, and the flaws and imperfections thus discovered on the surface of the foundation stones, serve only to demonstrate the antiquity of our faith. important single MS. copies of the New TestaThe most ment are, 1. The Codex Alexandrinus, see ALEXANDRINUS, where a specimen is furnished. 2. The Codex Vaticanus (these two contain also the Septuagint version of the Old Testament). 3. The Codex Cottonianus. Beza. 5. The Codex Ephremi. 6. The Codex 4. The Codex Claramontanus. 7. The Codex Argenteus. 8. The Codex Rescriptus of St. Matthew's Gospel, in Trinity College, Dublin. Laudianus. 9. The Codex 10. The Codex Boerneianus, &c. Michaelis has given a catalogue of 292, and bishop Marsh, his annotator, has added 197, to which they respectively refer; and to these celebrated works, Wetstein's Proleg. N. T., bishop Marsh's Michaelis, and Mr. Horne's Introduction, already adverted to, we must refer the reader for further information on this topic. The principal standard-text editions of the Greek New Testament are those of Erasmus, who gave the world the first printed edition of the entire New Testament in 1516; the Complutensian, forming the fifth volume of the Complutensian Polyglott, published in 1522; that of Robert Stephens, first published in 1546; and the Elzevir Greek Testament, published in 1624. The text in common use has been copied, with a 99 few exceptions, from that of Beza, who closely followed R. Stephens. Griesbach is the Kennicott of New Testament criticism; and the student who can possess himself of his and department of sacred literature; the best editions Wetstein's labors, is well furnished in this are Wetstein, 2 vols. folio, 1751; Griesbach, former He alone contributed more to advance 2 vols. 8vo., 1796. Bishop Marsh says of the the criticism of the Greek Testament than all who had gone before him: and this task he performed not only without support, either public or private, but during a series of severe trials, under which a mind of less energy would infallibly have sunk. In short, he gave a new turn to the criticism of the Greek Testament, and laid the foundation on which later editions have built.' SECT. III.-OP THE PRINCIPAL VERSIONS OF THE BIBLE, ANCIENT AND Modern. Our observations, and the facts we have relanguages of the Bible. corded thus far, principally relate to the original destruction of the Jewish polity, a most important version of the Old Testament in Greek, was Long prior to the executed among that ancient people of God. This is called the Septuagint, either because it was executed, as has been stated, by six approved scribes from each of the twelve tribes, at the request, as we are told, of Ptolemy Philadelphus; or because it was sanctioned by the Sanhedrim or Great Council of the Jews, who were seventy in number. Dr. Hody, ' De Bibliorum Textibus Originalibus,' &c., who seems accurately to have studied its origin, states that this version was made by the Jews living at Alexandria, for the brethren, who were then settled in Egypt, and use of themselves and many thousands of their who, living among the Greeks, generally used the Greek language: that the whole was not translated at once; but the Pentateuch, about 285 years before Christ; and that when Antiochus Epithe Jews translated into Greek Isaiah, the followphanes forbad them to recite any part of the law, ing prophets, &c., for the use of the temple at Heliopolis and the Alexandrian synagogues. It is clear, from the number of Coptic words in this version, and several peculiar modes taken either in Egypt, or by Jews much conof expression, that this was a work undernected with that country; and the most probable opinion is, that the Pentateuch was executed in the joint reigns of Ptolemy Lagus, and his son Philadelphus; Joshua, not less than twenty years after the death of the latter; and the other books at subsequent unknown periods. We have alluded to those quotations of this version in the New Testament which fully prove it to have been well accredited among the Jews in our Saviour's time. Of the Septuagint version, ancient transcripts; and there are four principal the Alexandrian and Vatican codices are the most printed editions, from one or more of which all subsequent editions have been copied, viz. the Complutensian, the Aldine, the Vatican, and the Oxford, or Dr. Grabe's edition. Various other ancient versions are of considerable importance to the criticism and interpretation of Scripture. The Greek version of the Old Testament by Aquila, a Jew of the second century; another by H 2 |