however, is the case; and, as we do not affect to be uninterested in an undertaking in which we feel our own credit not a little engaged, we shall endeavour to preserve our reputation for critical impartiality by that sort of survey of Mr. Nolan's labours, which shall rather facilitate the decision of others than express any opinion of our own. We proceed therefore to present our learned readers with an analytical view of the important subject of the "Inquiry," which the author has divided into six Sections.

Section I. opens with a brief account of the different editions of the New Testament, and of the manner in which the various readings have accumulated by the diligence of modern collators. The various expedients are then specified, which have been suggested for determining the genuine from the spurious readings. Having thus mentioned Dr. Bentley's scheme, Mr. Nolan proceeds to describe the scheme of Dr. Griesbach.

"His project for classing the Greek manuscripts, in order to form a more correct text, is not only formed on more comprehensive views, but rested on a higher basis. Instead of the authority of St. Jerome, who flourished in the fifth century, he builds upon that of Origen who flourished in the third. Instead of the existence of two species of text, one of which corresponds with the Vulgate, and the other with the generality of Greek manuscripts, he contemplates the existence of three, which he terms the Alexandrine, the Western, and the Byzantine, from the different regions in which he supposes them to have prevailed. According to this division, he has formed his classification of manuscripts, which he consequently distributes into three kinds. A choice among their respective texts he determines by the authority of Origen; whose testimony seems entitled to this respect, from the attention, which he, above all the antients, bestowed upon biblical criticism. Finding a striking coincidence to exist between his scripture quotations and the celebrated manuscript brought from Alexandria, which was the scene of Origen's literary labours, he thence determines the manuscripts, which belong to that class which he distinguishes as the Alexandrine. The manuscripts, which differ from this class, and coincide, in their characteristick peculiarities, with those which have been directly imported to us from Constantinople, he distinguishes as the Byzantine. His third class, which contains the Western text, consists of a set of manuscripts, which have been principally found in Europe, and which possess many coincidences with the Latin translation, where they differ from the peculiar readings of both the preceding classes."P. 4.

It has been an opinion as early as the times of Bishop Walton, that the purest text of the scripture canon had been preserved at Alexandria; the libraries of that city having been cele

brated

brated from an early period, for their correct and splendid copies. From the identity of any MS. in its peculiar readings, with the scripture quotations of Origen, who presided in the catechetical school of Alexandria, a strong presumption arises that it contains the Alexandrine edition; the supposition being natural, that Origen drew his quotations from the copies generally prevalent in his native country. This notion, the truth of which is necessary to the validity of Dr. Griesbach's conclusions, is combated on several grounds by Mr. Nolan. He shews from the inconstancy of Origen's quotations, that no certain conclusion can be deduced from his testimony; he infers from the history of Origen, who priucipally wrote and published in Palestine, that the text, quoted by that antient father, was rather the Palestine than the Alexandrine: and he proves, from the express testimony of St. Jerome, that the text of Origen was really adopted in Palestine, while that of Hesychius was adopted at Alexandria.

Having thus opened the question, and set it upon the broader ground assumed by those critics, who confirm the readings of the Alexandrine text, by the coincidence of the antient Versions, of the Oriental and Western Churches; Mr. N. combats this method, proposed for investigating the genuine text, in two modes. He first shews that a coincidence between the Western and Oriental Churches, does not necessarily prove the antiquity of the text which they mutually support; as the Versions of the former Church were corrected, after the texts of the latter, by Jerome and Cassiodorus, who may have thus created the coincidence, which is taken as a proof of the genuine reading. In the next place, he infers, from the prevalence of a text published by Eusebius of Cæsarea, and from the comparatively late period at which the Oriental Versions were formed, that their general coincidence may be traced to the influence of Eusebius's edition. This position he establishes, by a proof deduced from the general prevalence of Eusebius's sections and canons in the Greek MSS. and Antient Versions, and by a presumption derived from the agreements of those texts and versions with each other in omitting several passages contained in the Vulgar Greek, which were at variance with Eusebus's peculiar opinions. In the course of this discussion, the author assigns adequate reasons for the omission of the following remarkable passages, Mark xvi. 9-20. John viii. 1—11. and for the peculiar readings of the following celebrated texts, Acts xx. 28. 1 Tim. iii. 16. 1 John v. 7. And having thus established the general influence of Eusebius's text, he generally concludes against the stability of the critical principles on which the German critics have undertaken the correction of the Greek Vulgate.

The

The material obstacles being thus removed to the establishment of his plan, Mr. N. proceeds in Sect. II. to investigate the different Classes of Text which exist in the Greek Manuscripts. Having briefly considered the scripture quotations of the Fathers, and shewn that they afford no adequate criterion for reducing the text into classes; he proceeds to the consideration of the antient trauslations, and after an examination of the Oriental Versions, more particularly of the Sahidic, he comes to the conclusion, that no Version but the Latin can be taken as a safe guide in ascertaining the genuine text of Scripture. This point being premised, the author lays the foundation of his scheme of classification, in the following observations.

"In proceeding to estimate the testimony which the Latin translation bears to the state of the Greek text, it is necessary to premise, that this translation exhibits three varieties :--As corrected by St. Jerome at the desire of Pope Damasus, and preserved in the Vulgate; as corrected by Eusebius of Verceli, at the desire of Pope Julius, and preserved in the Codex Vercellensis; and as existing previously to the corrections of both, and preserved as I conceive, in the Codex Brixianus. The first of these three editions of the Italick translation is too well known to need any description; both the last are contained in beautiful manuscripts, preserved at Verceli, and at Brescia, in Italy. The curious and expensive manner in which at least the latter of these manuscripts is executed, as written on purple vellum in silver characters, would of itself contain no inconclusive proof of its great antiquity; such having been the form in which the most esteemed works were executed in the times of Eusebius, Chrysostome, and Jerome. The former is ascribed, by immemorial tradition, to Eusebius Vercellensis, the friend of Pope Julius and St. Athanasius, and, as supposed to have been written with his own hand, is deposited among the relicks, which are preserved with a degree of superstitious reverence, in the author's church at Verceli in Piedmont. By these three editions of the translation, we might naturally expect to acquire some insight into the varieties of the original. And this expectation is fully justified on experiment. The latter, not less than the former, is capable of being distributed into three kinds; each of which possesses an extraordinary coincidence with one of a correspondent kind, in the translation. In a word, the Greek manuscripts are capable of being divided into three principal classes, one of which agrees with the Italick translation contained in the Brescia manuscript; another with that contained in the Verceli manuscript; and a third with that contained in the Vulgate." P. 58.

Specimens of the coincidence of the three classes, in the Greek and Latin, are annexed in separate columns. And the testimony of the Eastern and Western Churches to the existence of those classes being thus produced, the author proceeds to as

certain

certain the antiquity of the classes; which he effects by the Latin translation.

"As the existence of a translation necessarily implies the priority of the original from which it was formed; this testimony may be directly referred to the close of the fourth century. The Vulgate must be clearly referred to that period, as it was then formed by St. Jerome; in its bare existence of course the correspondent antiquity of the Greek text with which it agrees, is directly established. This version is, however, obviously less antient than that of the Verceli or Brescia manuscript; as they are of the old Italick translation, while it properly constitutes the new. In the existence of the antient version, the antiquity of the original texts with which it corresponds is consequently established. The three classes of text, which correspond with the Vulgate and Old Italick Version, must be consequently referred to a period not less remote than the close of the fourth century." P. 70.

Having thus carried up his system of Classification as high as the fourth century, our author then justifies it by the testimony of St. Jerome; for this learned father, who lived at that period, asserts the existence of three classes of text in the same age, which respectively prevailed in Egypt, Palestine, and Constantinople. The identity of these classes with the different classes. of text which still exist in the Greek original and Latin translation, our author then proceeds to establish. And this he effects by means of the manuscripts which have been written, the versions which have been published, and the collations which have been made, in the different countries to which St. Jerome refers his classes: founding every part of his proofs on the testimony of Adler, Birch, Woide, Münter, and other critics who have analysed the text and versions of the New Testament. Having thus ascertained the fact, that the Egyptian, Palestine, and Byzantine texts still exist in three Manuscripts, which he takes as exemplars of his different classes; Mr. N. after removing some objections, proceeds to prove, that this method of Classification is adequate, and but nominally different from that suggested by Dr. Griesbach. The Alexandrine text, he asserts, is properly the Palestine, and the Western text the Egyptian; the former having been transported from Palestine to Alexandria by Euthalius, and the latter from Egypt to Italy by Eusebius Vercellensis.

We here take occasion to observe, that a further proof arises of the certainty of the conclusions formed in the first section; relative to the instability of Dr. Griesbach's system, which is built on an assumption, that the Alexandrine and Western texts are antient and separate editions. For admitting the importation of the Egyptian text into the West by Eusebius Vercel

8

lensis,

lensis, the evidence of these witnesses cannot be received as se parate testimony, nor antedated to the fourth century, when the Bishop of Verceli returned from exile in the Thebais. In fact, as nothing is more improbable, than that Greek MSS. should have continued in the West, from the apostolical age to this period, while it is certain the Western Church was unacquainted with the language in which they were written; nothing is more probable than that they should have been thus imported into the West, and have been preserved in the monasteries in which they have been discovered from that time to the present: the monastic mode of life having been introduced into Italy at this period. by Eusebius Vercellensis. In this consideration, if well founded, the whole of Dr. Griesbach's system appears to us to lapse to the foundation; the great object of his criticism having been to form an alliance between the few MSS. of the Alexandrine and Western texts, in order to outweigh the testimony of the numerous MSS. of the Byzantine edition; as he conceived the joint testimony of the former texts, in being antient and separate witnesses, paramount to that of the last named text, as a comparatively modern edition.

Having distributed the Greek MSS. into classes, Mr. N. proceeds in Section III. to choose a particular text from these different classes. Commencing with some general remarks in favour of the Byzantine text, deducible from the place in which it is found, as the region in which the sacred writings were deposited; he argues in favour of the same edition, from the testimony of the Greek Church; as having adopted it as its authorised text; and from the testimony of the Latin Church, as having followed it in its primitive Version.

"The Brescia manuscript, which contains this testimony, possesses a text, which, as composed of the old Italick version, must be antedated to the year 393, when the new version was made by St. Jerome. It thus constitutes a standing proof, that the Byzantine text, with which it agrees, has preserved its integrity for upwards of 1400 years; during which period it was exposed to the greatest hazard of being corrupted. This proof, it may be presumed, affords no trifling earnest, that it has not been corrupted during the comparatively inconsiderable period of two hundred and ninety years, which intervene between this time and the publication of the inspired writings. For while 290 years bear no propor tion to 1400, the chances of such a corruption must diminish in proportion as we ascend to the time of the apostles. The first copyists must necessarily have observed a degree of carefulness in making their transcripts proportionable to their reverence for the originals, which they took as their models: from the autographs of the apostles, or their immediate transcripts, there

could