BY THE SAME H R AUT O .

T E ST A ME NT T H E N EW ,

TRANSLA TE D FR OM TH E LA TE S T GRE E K TE X T HE D RF TISC N O .

A New and thoroughly R evised E dition.

rt l Pa C ot/l, Price 1 0: 6d.

"— Of high and distinctive value . Sa turday R eview. Will prove a very useful book to almost any student of the New — tfie m . Testament. A m “ noble m num nt f wi rea in an r ti A o e o de d g d sobe cri cism. d Dr Davidson has done the translation with fidelity, vigour, an ’ — elegance. H Wa tckma n

“ We heartily welcome the volume as a help to the more accurate ”— stu f the New estament Freem n. dy o T . a “ We shoul be lad if this A welcome addition to the library. d g - book should attain a wide circulation. Nonconfom irt.

LO NDO N

P TERNOSTER S U RE . N P L Co . 1 A A . KE G GA AU , Q THE

CANO N O F THE B IB LE

1 75 FOR MA TION H I T R y , S O ,

A ND FL U T A TIONS C U .

D SAMUEL AVIDSON D . Q ,

0? HA LLS , AND LL-D.

THIRD EDIT ION, REVISED AND ENLARGED.

L O ND O N

N A L 1 P ARE K G U . T RN T . C . E CO E OS ER U A P , A SQ

1 8 8 0 .

PR E FA C E .

THE substance of the present work was written towards the close of the year 1 875 for the

of e new edition the Encyclop dia Britannica.

e Having been abridg d and mutilated, contrary ’ f to the author s wishes, be ore its publication

there, he resolved to print it entire . With that view it has undergone repeated revision with eu ff largement in di erent parts, and been made as complete as the limits of an essay appeared

of to allow. As nothing importance has been knowingly omitted, the writer hopes it will be found a comprehensive summary of all that concerns the formation and history of the

Bible canon . The place occupied by it was a vi PRE FA CE .

vacant. No English book reflecting the pro

s of it cesses or result recent cr icism, gives an account of the canon in both Testaments .

Articles and essays upon the subject there are ; but their standpoint is usually apologetic not

scientific, traditional rather than impartial, l unreasonably conservative without being critica .

The topic is weighty, involving the considera

of as tion great questions, such the inspiration, f h o t e r . authenticity, authority, and age Sc iptures

h has f The aut or tried to handle it airly, founding his statements on such evidence as seemed convincing, and condensing them into a moder If ate compass . the reader wishes to know the

’ evidence, he may find it in the writer s Intro ductions to the Old and New Testaments, where the separate books of Scripture are discussed ; and in the late treatises of other

h s critics. W ile his exposition are capable of

no expansion, it is believed that they will t be

s easily shaken . He commend the work to the PRE FA CE . vii

attention of all who have an interest in the

of founda progress theology, and are seeking a tion for their faith less precarious than books however venerable. It has not been the writer’s purpose to

of f chronicle phases opinion, or to re ute what he believes to be error in the newest hypotheses

of about the age, authority, and composition the f books . His aim has been rather to set orth the most correct view of the questions involved in a

of history the canon, whether it be more or less

recent. Some may think that the latest or most current account of such questions is the best ; f but that is not his opinion . Hence the ashion

f of able belie that much the Pentateuch, the

of s of Book Leviticus wholly, with large part

and Exodus Numbers, in a word, that all the laws relating to divine worship with most of the chronological tables or statistics, belong to f Ezra, who is metamorphosed in act into the first

s Elohist, is unnoticed . Hence also the earlie t F viii PRE A CE .

’ gospel is not declared to be Mark s . Neither has the author ventured to place the fourth

of gospel at the end the first century, as

Weitz sacker f Ewald and do, a ter the man

ner of the Old critics ; or with Keim so early as

1 1 0- 1 1 A D 5 . . Many evince a restless anxiety to find some thing novel ; and to depart from well - established

conclusions for the sake of originality . This

shews a morbid state o f mind . Amid the feverish outlook for discoveries and the slight

for f regard what is sa e, conservatism is a com

mendable thing. Some again desire to return,

far be as as they can, to orthodoxy, finding tween that extreme and rationalism a middle

- f way which offers a resting place to aith . The numerous changes which criticism presents are

of far not a symptom soundness . The writer is indeed from thinking that every question con nected with the books of Scripture is finally

t settled ; but the majori y undoubtedly are, FA PRE CE . ix

though several already fixed by great scholars f continue to be opened up a resh . He does not profess to adopt the phase of criticism which is fashionable at the moment ; it is enough to state f what approves itsel to his judgment, and to hold it fast amid the contrarieties of conjecture

ex cres or the cravings of curiosity. Present cences or aberrations of belief will have their

day and disappear. Large portions of the Pentateuch will cease to be consigned to a post exile time, and the gospels of Matthew and

Luke will again be counted the chief sources of

’ Mark s . It will also be acknowledged that the

of first as it now exists, is much later origin

than the fall of Jerusalem . Nor will there be so great anxiety to show that justin Martyr was f acquainted with the ourth gospel, and owed his

- ff of Logos doctrine chiefly to it. The di erence ten or twenty years in the date of a gospel will not be considered of essential importance in

estimating its character. x PRE FA CE .

' The present edition has been revised through

- out and several parts re written . The author hopes that it will be found still more worthy of

the with which the first was received .

Ma 8 y 1 87 . N C O NT E T S.

PAG E PTER I CHA .

N RODU T I T C ORY,

PTER II CHA .

THE OLD TESTAMENT CANON EROM ITs BEGINNING To

ITS CLOSE,

R I I CHAPTE I .

HE S M R N AND ALEXANDRIAN C NONS T A A ITA A ,

PTER IV CHA .

NUMBER AND ORDER or THE SEP R E BOOKS A AT ,

T CHAP ER V.

USE or TE E OLD TESTAMENT BY THE FIRST CHRISTIAN WR ERS AND THE R HERS LL THE ME r IT , AT TI TI o GEN ORI ,

P CHA TER VI.

THE NEW TESTAMENT CANON IN THE FIRST THREE CEN URIES T , xii C NT S O E NT .

PAG E P V CHA TER II.

THE BIBLE CANON FROM THE FOURTH CENTURY TO THE REF R T ON O MA I ,

P VI CHA TER II.

ORDER OF H w ES MEN BOOKS T E NE T TA T ,

CHAPTER IX .

SUMMAR OF THE SUB EC Y J T,

P R X CHA TE .

THE CANON IN THE CONFESSIONS OF DIFFERENT CHU RCHES,

CHAPTER XI.

TH N THE PRESEN ME E CA ON FROM SEMLER To T TI , W H EFLECT NS N ITS RE D US MEN IT R IO O A J T T, I THE CANON O F THE B B LE .

C HAPTER I .

D R Y INT R O U C T O .

r f AS introducto y to the ollowing dissertation, I shall explain and define certain terms that

canon a ocr frequently occur in it, especially , p y

i ] ec e ica a re ta cl siast l . p , , and the like A right pp hension of these will make the Observations advanced respecting the canon and its formation

plainer. The words have not been taken in the f same sense by all, a act that obscures their

sense. They have been employed more or less ff vaguely by di erent writers . Varying ideas

e have be n attached to them .

1 The Greek original of cemon means primarily a straight rod or pole ; and metaphorically, what T IE AN N F THE BIB LE I C O O .

rule. serves to keep a thing upright or straight, a

New I6 In the Testament it occurs in Gal . vi .

1 6 f f 2 . I I and Cor x. 3 , 5, , signi ying in the ormer,

dis a measure ; in the latter, what is measured, a tric its t. But we have now to do with ecclesiasti

cal use. There are three opinions as to the origin of its application to the writings used by the

C . n hurch According to Tola d , Whiston, Semler, had Baur, and others, the word originally the sense of list or catalogue of books publicly read

s . in Christian a semblies Others, as Steiner, sup pose that Since the Alexandrian grammarians applied it to collections of Old Greek authors

models Of classics as excellence or , it meant

wr t n s classical (canonical) i i g . According to a f third opinion, the term included rom the first

the idea of a regulating principle. This is the

more probable, because the same idea lies in the

Of New Testament use the noun, and pervades its applications in the language of the early

of Fathers down to the time Constantine, as T INTR ODUC OR Y. 3

“ redner 1 of C has shown . The canon the church

“ in the Clementine homilies ; 2 the ecclesiastical

” 3 the of canon, and canon the truth, in

“ ” Clement and Irenaeus ; 4 the canon Of the

5 re nla dei of faith in Polycrates, the g fi Ter

6 librire ulares of 7 tullian, and the g Origen, imply

at ve nc le a norm i pri ip . But we cannot assent to

’ Credner s view of the Greek word for canon

“ of being an abbreviation Scriptures of canon,

’ equivalent to Scripture legis in Diocletian s

9 — a w Act vie too artificial, and unsanctioned by usage.

It is true that the word canon was employed by Greek writers in the sense of a mere list

1 c -68 a Ges lziclzte des Kanons . . , pp 3

H m a oteler. v l. i. l ment. o . . C o 608 C e p , p. . 3 tr ata i. P tter S om v . 80 ed. o . , I 5, p 3 ,

v Hav i Ad . es” . 95. 5 b H . E A . Euse v 2 p . . , . 4.

5 ‘ De rasm ot. Ha razcom h 1 2 I p j m, c s. , 3 . 7 t Mat iii . 1 ommen in . . 6 ed. D C . p 9 ; elarue .

3 u 7pa¢al xa bvos. 9 Monumenta vetera ad Donatistarum Itistoriam ertinentia p ,

Du in . 1 68. p , p THE CAN N OF THE B IB 4 O LE . but when it was transferred to the Scripture

of books, it included the idea a regulative and — normal power a list of books forming a rule or

-f law, because the newly ormed Catholic Church required a standard of appeal in opposition to the Gnostics with their arbitrary use of sacred

of writings. There is a lack evidence on behalf of its use before the books of the New Testa ment had been paralleled with those of the Old i in author ty and inspiration .

The earliest example O f its application to a

catalogue of the Old or New Testament books

’ occurs in the Latin translation of Origen s homily

on Joshua, where the original seems to have

”1 f been canon. The word itsel is certainly in

’ “ Am hilochius p fi as well as in Jerome, and

4 fin s of Ru u . As the Latin translation Origen

1 w xami .

3 c h b oks of the At the end Of the Iambi ad Seleu nm, on t e o

d aorar xavdw a» at? r aw New Testament he adds, 061 0s wev é os ) ,

' y Oew vefiorwv ” ma . 3 i II Re . Prologns galeatus n . g

Mi ne. x s in S mo. A ast . ed. E po . y p , 37, p 374, g

6 THE CANON OF THE BIBLE .

sacred and inspired; till the time of Theophilus

1 80 AD ae of Antioch (about . ) Hence Iren us applies the epithets divine and perf ect to the

Scriptures ; and Clement of Alexandria calls

ins ire them p d. When distinctions were made among the

1 Biblical writings other words were employed, m “ ” 2 synony ous with canonised . The canon was thus a catalogue of writings forming a rule of

for truth, sacred, divine, revealed by God the

s for instruction of men . The rule wa perfect its

purpose.

3 The word apocryphal is used in various senses,

which it is difficult to trace chronologically.

r Apoc yphal books are,

Ist secret m sterious , Such as contain or y things,

books of the higher wisdom . It is thus applied

4 to the Apocalypse by Gregory of Nyssa. Akin

to this is the second meaning.

1 ’ ' u h xavom o eva or xexm é va. S c as m ama, é pwpéva. i p v 3 ' dr x o Orat. de rdin. vol. ii. . . o pv¢ r. O p 44 m m p r ’ o oc om . 7

z ud ke t secret , Such as were p or withdrawn

cor from public use. In this sense the word

1 responds to the Hebrew ganuz . So Origen

O speaking of the story of Susanna. The ppo

of read in ublic 2 site this is p , a word em d 3 ploye by Eusebius .

rd 3 , It was used of the secret books of the

4 5 heretics by Clement and Origen, with the

' 6 c r of s urious seude ra /tical ac esso y idea p , p pig p , in opposition to the canonical writings of the

C of atholic Church . The book Enoch and

’ similar productions were so characterized .

th s 4 , Jerome applied it to the book in the

1 m The ews a lied the word rnuz im to boo s with g; J pp g k

r m ubli us whose contents were thou ht to be out of drawn f o p c e, g harmonywith the doctrinal or m oral views of Judaism when the

‘ ’ ta ts canon was closed. See FiIrst s Der Kanon des alten Tes men ,

’ ' 1 2 no te and Gei er s Ursc/ m t . 201 . p. 7, g f , p 9 Oednp oatevpéra .

3 - H . E . II. 2 III 1 6. 3 , . 3 4 M Stromata lib iii 1 1 ed. i ne. , . . p. 34, g

Prolo . ad Cant. o vol iii 6 g pp . . p. 3 . 6 ” 00 al der i a o 6 9, lw yp ¢ a

’ 7 i r lz sau 11 See Su ce s T e rus, s. . 8 THE F E CANON O THE B IB L .

Septuagint which are absent from the Hebrew

e he i. d t . rea canon, , to the books which were in

1 ChurCh ecclesiastical i , the ones occupy ng a rank

SO next to the canonical. In doing he had

respect to the corresponding Hebrew epithet .

a ocr /z l This was a misuse of the word p yp a , which had a prejudicial effect on the character

2 - w of the books in after times . The ord, which

not was he did employ in an injurious sense, adopted from him by Protestants after the f Re ormation, who gave it perhaps a sharper

distinction than he intended, so as to imply a contrast somewhat disparaging to writings

which were publicly read in many Churches and put beside the canonical ones by distinguished

fathers . The Lutherans have adhered to

’ Jerome s meaning longer than the Reformed ; but the decree of the Council of Trent had

1 ' B a am m ma a libri ecclesiastici. tflM y w , 9 In his epistle to Laeta he uses the epithet in its customary

f books unauthentic not roceedin from the au h r sense, o , p g t o s

h bear O . vol. i d Mi names t e . . . 8 e . n whose y pp , p 77, g e. INTR D T O UC OR Y.

ff some e ect on both . The contrast between the canonical and apocryphal writings was carried to its utmost length by the Westminster

in divines, who asserted that the former are

spired, the latter not. CHAPTER II .

THE OLD TESTAMENT CANON FROM ITS

NIN T IT BEGIN G O S CLOSE.

THE first important part of the Old Testament

put together as a whole was the Pentateuch ,

of or rather, the five books Moses and Joshua .

s This was preceded by smaller document ,

which one or more redactors embodied in it. The earliest things committed to writing were probably tire ten words proceeding from Moses f himself, a terwards enlarged into the ten com mandments which exist at present in two

recensions (Exod . xx. , Deut. v . ) It is true that we have the Oldest form of the decalogue from the Jehovist not the Elohist ; but that is no valid objection against the antiquity of the nucleus out of which it arose. It is also ME N u THE OLD TE STA T. probable that several legal and ceremonial a if f en ctments belong, not to Moses himsel , at least to his time ; as also the Elohistic list

Of stations in Numbers xxxiii . To the same time belongs the song of Miriam in Exodus

. of xv , probably consisting a few lines at first, and subsequently enlarged ; with a triumphal

O de 2 over the fall Of Heshbon (Numbers xxi . 7 The little poetical piece in Numbers

. 1 1 8 xxi 7, , afterwards misunderstood and so

- taken literally, is post Mosaic . During the unsettled times of Joshua and the Judges there could have been comparatively

little writing. The song of Deborah appeared,

f of full of poetic orce and fire. The period the early kings was Characterized not only by a remarkable development of the Hebrew people and their consolidation into a national

but state, by fresh literary activity. Laws were written out for the guidance Of priests and people ; and the political organization of the THE CAN N F THE B IB LE O O .

rapidly growing nation was promoted by poetical productions in which spiritual life

of expressed its aspirations . Schools prophets ff were instituted by Samuel, whose literary e orts

tended to purify the worship. David was an

accomplished poet, whose psalms are composed

in lofty strains ; and Solomon may have

written a few odes. The building of the

temple, and the arrangements connected with

its worship, contributed materially to a written

legislation .

During this early and flourishing period ap

1 eared Of ehovah p the book of the Wars J , a

heroic anthology, celebrating warlike deeds ; and

2 the book of Jashar, also poetical . Jehoshaphat is mentioned as court- annalist to David and

8 . a Solomon Above all, the Elohists now p

eared of l p , the first whom, in the reign of Sau , was author of annals beginning at the earliest

1 Num . xxi . I . oshua x 1 2 I 2 i 4 J . , 3 ; Sam. . 1 8. 3 2 Sam . viii 1 6 1 Kin s iv . . ; g . 3

1 4 THE CANON OF THE BIBLE .

interspersed with few reflections . His parallels

v to the later writer commonly called the Jeho ist,

are numerous . The third author, who lived in

m t the time of Uzziah, though ore my hological

s r . t than the Elohist , was less fo mal His s and

in point is prophetic . The third document corporated with the Elohistic ones formed an

of important part the whole, exhibiting a vivid ness which the first lacked ; with descriptions

- of persons and things from another stand point .

The Jehovist belonged to the northern kingdom ;

O f the Elohists were Judah .

' The state of the nation after RehoboaIn was unfavourable to literature. When the people

were threatened and attacked by other nations, divided among themselves in worship and all

n higher interests, re t by conflicting parties, the theocratic principle which was the true bond of ff union could not assert itself with e ect. The w e people ere corrupt th ir religious life debased .

The example of the kings was usually prejudicial AME 1 THE OLD TE ST NT. 5

to political healthiness . Contact with foreigners

as as well with the older inhabitants of the land,

es the hindered progress . In these circumstanc f prophets were the true re ormers, the advocates

of political liberty, expositors of the principles t hat give life and stability to a nation . In

Judah, Joel wrote prophetic discourses ; in

. r Israel, Amos and Hosea Now, too, a edactor put together the Elohistic and Jehovistic docu

ments, making various changes in them, adding throughout sentences and words that seemed desirable, and suppressing what was unsuited to

- his taste. Several psalm writers enriched the national literature after David . Learned men at the court of Hezekiah recast and enlarged — (Proverbs xxv . xxix .) the national proverbs, which bore Solomon ’s name because the nucleus

of an older collection belonged to that monarch.

s These literary courtiers were not prophet , but

. r rather scribes The book of Job was w itten, with the exception of Elihu ’s later discourses 16 THE AN JV F TH B IB C O O E LE . which were not inserted in it till after the f return rom Babylon ; and Deuteronomy, with

was e Joshua, added to the preceding colle f f tion in the reign o Manasseh . The gi ted

Of author Deuteronomy, who was evidently

imbued with the prophetic spirit, completed the

ie f . . O Pentateuch, , the five books Moses and

- Joshua, revising the Elohist Jehovistic work, and making various additions or alterations . He did the same thing to the historical books

of Judges, Samuel, and Kings ; which received

from him their present form . Immediately before and during the exile there were numer

ous authors and compilers . New psalms

appeared, more or less national in spirit .

Ezekiel, Jeremiah and others prophesied ; especially an unknown seer who described the

of present condition the people, predicting their coming glories and renovated worship in strains

- 1 of far reaching import. This great prophet

1 - iah xl lxvi. Isa . 1 THE OLD TE STAIIIE NT. 7 expected the regeneration of the nation from

Of the ro hets the pious portion it, p p in particular, not from a kingly Messiah as Isaiah did ; for the hopes resting on rulers out of David ’s house

had been disappointed . His aspirations turned

S en to piritual means. He was not merely an

thusiastic seer with comprehensive glance, but also a practical philosopher who set forth the

’ doctrine of the innocent sufiering for the guilty ;

’ ’ difiering therein from Ezekiel s theory of indi vidual reward and punishment in the present — world a theory out of harmony with the cir

umstances of c actual life . The very misfortunes

S n of the nation, and the igns of their retur ,

excited within the nobler spirits hopes of a

brighter future, in which the flourishing reign of David should be surpassed by the universal

Of t worship of Jehovah . In consequence heir

the outward condition, prophets of the exile

were usually writers, like Ezekiel, not public

speakers ; and their announcement of glad B 1 8 THE CANON OF THE BIBLE . tidings could only be transmitted privately from

person to person . This explains in part the

oblivion into which their names fell ; so that

he d l. . t the author or re actor of Jeremiah , li ;

- - t Of C . 2 . 1 1 0 au hors hapters xiii . xiv 3 , xxi ,

- xxiv. xxvii ., xxxiv. , xxxv., inserted in Isaiah ;

the and, above all, Babylonian Isaiah, whom Hitzig improbably identifies with the high

priest Joshua, are unknown . After the return from Babylon the literary spirit manifested itself in the prophets of the restoration — Haggai, Zechariah; and Malachi who wrote to recall their countrymen to a sense of religious

duties ; though their ideas were borrowed in

part from Older prophets of more original

k of genius . The boo Esther appeared, to make

h r was t e obse vance of the purim feast, which of

Persian origin, more general in Palestine. The large historical work comprising the books of

Ezra, Nehemiah, and Chronicles, was compiled

partly out of materials written by Ezra and 1 THE OLD TE S TAME NT. 9

Nehemiah, partly out of older historical records which formed a portion of the national litera

- ture . Several temple psalms were also com posed a part of the present book of Proverbs

Ecclesiastes, whose tone and language betray

its late origin ; and Jonah, whose diction puts its date after the Babylonian captivity. The

' Maccabean age called forth the book of Daniel

and various psalms. In addition to new pro ductions there was an inclination to collect

’ former documents. To Zechariah s authentic prophecies were added the earlier ones con — tained in chapters ix . xiv . ; and the Psalms

were gradually brought together, being made up into divisions at different times ; the first and

second divisions proceeding from one redactor, f f the third rom another, the ourth and fifth from

n a still later. Various writi gs besides their own were grouped around the names of earlier pro

hets p , as was the case with Isaiah and Jeremiah . The literature is more indebted for its best 20 THE CAN N OF THE BIBL O E .

constituents to the prophetic than to the

r beCause p iestly order, the prophets were preachers of repentance and righteousness whose great aim was to make Israel a Jehovah worshipping nation to the exclusion of other

gods . Their utterances were essentially ethical and religious ; their pictures Of the future

subjective and ideal . There was silently elaborated in their schools a spiritual mono

t theism, over against the crude poly heism of — the people generally a theocratic ideal inade quately apprehended by gross and sensuous Israel— Jehovism simple and sublime amid a sacerdotal worship which left the heart impure while Cleansing the hands . Instead of taking

its their stand upon the law, with rules of

s worship, its ceremonial precept and penalties

t against transgressors, the prophets set hem

selves above it, speaking slightingly of the forms and customs which the people took for f the whole of religion. To the view o such as

22 THE CAN N OF HE BIBLE O T .

Of t idea, the hope a better time in which heir high d ideal of the theocracy should be realise . With

l t s such be ief in the future, wi h pious a pirations

n r r enliveni g their pat iotism, did they comfo t

and encourage their countrymen . The hope,

rw general or indefinite at first, was afte ards

attached to the house of David, out of which a

r n restorer of the theoc acy was expected, a ki g

- n pre eminent in righteous ess, and marvellously f gi ted . It was not merely a political but a

urifica religious hope, implying the thorough p

Of tion of the nation, the extinction idolatry,

the general spread and triumph of true religion . d The pious wishes of the prophets, often repeate ,

became a sort of doctrine, and contributed to f sustain the ailing spirit of the people. The indefinite idea of a golden age was commoner than that of a personal prince who should reign

in equity and peace . Neither was part of the

national faith, like the law, or the doctrine of

sacrifice ; and but a few of the prophets por T HE OLD TE STAME NT. 23 trayed a king in their description of the period

of ideal prosperity . The man who first gave public sanction

a to a portion of the national literature was Ezr ,

Of was who laid the foundation a canon. He the leader in restoring the theocracy after the

“ the law exile, a ready scribe in of Moses, who had prepared his heart to seek the law of the Lord and to teach in Israel statutes and judg ” AS ments . we are told that he brought the

book of the law of Moses before the congrega

the tion and read it publicly, idea naturally arises

that he was the final redactor of the Pentateuch, separating it from the historical work consisting

t w of Joshua and the subsequen ritings, of which w it formed the commencement. Such as the first canon given to the Jewish Church afterits reconstruction— ready for temple service as well

as synagogue use. Henceforward the Mosaic

book became an authoritative guide in spiritual,

t we f f ecclesiastical, and civil mat ers, as in er rom 24 TH E CANON OF THE BIBLE . various passages in Ezra and Nehemiah and

’ from the chronicler s own statements in the

book bearing his name. The doings of Ezra with regard to the Scriptures are deduced not only from what we read of him in the Biblical

book that bears his name, but also from the

1 h s legend in the fourt book of Esdra , where it is related that he dictated by inspiration to five ready writers ninety- four books ; the first twenty four of which he was ordered to publish openly

r that the wo thy and unworthy might read , but

reserved the last seventy for the wise . Though the twenty- four books of the Old Testament

cannot be attributed to him, the fact that he copied and wrote portions need not be ques

tioned. t/ze law He edited , making the first

or canon collection of books, and giving it an

ac authority which it had not before. Talmudic counts associate with him the men Of the great

1 ’ f Cha . xiv. 2 0 &c. See Hil f l Messias uda orum p 3 5 , gen e d s j ,

Io . p. 7 THE OLD TE STAME NT 25

synagogue. It is true that they are legen

t f of dary, but here is a oundation fact beneath

’ the fanciful superstructure . As to Ezra s treat

O f ment of the Pentateuch, or his specific mode f redaction, we are le t for the most part to f ffi conjecture. Yet it is sa e to a rm that he added — making new precepts and practices

O f either in place or beside older ones . Some things he removed as unsuited to the altered

Circumstances Of the people others he modi

fied . He threw back later enactments into ffi earlier times . It is di cult to discover all

the parts that betray his hand . Some elabor ate priestly details show his authorship most If clearly. his hand be not visible in Leviticus

— ' . far chap xvii xxvi . ; a writer not removed from his time is observable ; Ezekiel or some

. of r x x v other It is clear that some the po tion ( .

— 22 — 1 9 ; xxvi . 3 45) is much later than the

the - Elohists, and belongs to exile or post exile period . But great difficulty attaches to the 26 E A N OF I TH C NO THE B B LE . separation of the sources here used ; even after ’ f Kayser s acute handling O them . It is also

6 the . 2 2 t perceptible from Ezekiel xx 5, , hat

. 1 but n clause in Exodus xiii 5, all the firstbor

of my children I redeem, was added after the

S t e a exile, ince h prophet shews his unacqu int

ance with it . The statute that all which

openeth the womb should be burnt in sacrifice

to Jehovah, appeared inhuman not only to

r te Ezekiel, but to Ez a or his associates in

editing the law ; and therefore the clause about the redemption of every firstborn male was sub

joined . Ezra, a second Moses in the eyes of

r the later Jews, did not sc uple to refer to Moses

and e what was of recent origin, to deal fr ely

n with the natio al literature. Such was the first — f canon that o Ezra the priest and scribe.

The origin of the great synagogue is noticed

1 6 in Ezra x . , and described more particularly

- x . in Nehemiah viii . , the members being appar

1 - 2 ently enumerated in x . 7; at least the THE OLD TE S TAME NT 2 7

Me ila g Jer. (i . 5) and Midrash Ruth 3)

Of s - five speak an a sembly of eighty elders, who are probably found in the last passage.

One name, however, is wanting, for only eighty four are given ; and as Ezra is not mentioned

the among them, conjecture of Krochmal that

f d. it has dropped out o x . 9 may be allowe Another tradition gives the number as one

ot hundred and twenty, which may be g by

“ adding the chief of the fathers enumerated

1 - 1 in Ezra viii . 4 to the hundred and two heads of f - Wh II 2 8 . amilies in Ezra . 5 ether the num ber was the same at the commencement as f w r . a ter ards is unce tain Late Jewish writers,

Abarbanel however, such as , Abraham ben

c if & . David, Ben Maimun, , speak as it con sisted of the larger number at the beginning ; and have no scruple in pronouncing Ezra pre h l sident, rat er than Nehemiah .

1 f’ T l See Buxtor s i erias cha . x . 88 &c and H rz , p . , p , . e

’ ' f ld s Gesclucltte des Volkes Israel vol i 80 &c ZwOlft r e , . . p. 3 , . e

Excursus. 28 THE CAN N F THE I L O O B B E .

The O ldest extra- biblical mention of the synagogue is in the Mishnic treatise Pirke

“ Abot/z ec ed , where it is said , Moses r eiv the d law from Mount Sinai, and delivere it to

the Joshua, Joshua to the elders, the elders to prophets, and the prophets delivered it to the

men of the great synagogue. These last

“ spake these words : Be slow in judgment ; appoint many disciples make a hedge for ” 1 Baba B at/1m the law In the Talmudic ,

“ their biblical doings are described : Moses

the wrote his book, section about Balaam and

es Job. Joshua wrote his book and eight vers

e of the law. Samuel wrote his book and Judg s and Ruth . David wrote the book of Psalms

by ten elders, by Adam the first man, by

e Melchizedek, by Abraham, by Moses, by H

1 ha t r i C p e .

2 e Does this mean or instead o B n m f , f; as loch u der

ands iti Waehner Inserts to fill u the sen som st , p se, e of

hich however were com osed b but this is far-fetched w , , p y .

i u tat s re ar 1 t i E b am . . See An q e , p 3

30 THE CANON OF THE B IBLE .

s c 1 of co in pa sage, Blo h understands it py g or writin out g , a sense that suits the procedure of the men of the great synagogue in regard to

tw & c. Ezekiel, the elve prophets, , but is inap

plicable to , Moses, Joshua, Samuel, David ,

he & c. t t Jeremiah, It is probable enough hat synagogue scribes put into their present form and made the first authorised copies of the

Boraitha works specified . The , however, is

not clear, and may only express the opinion

u f of a private individ al in a con used way . Simon the Just is said to have belonged to

AS the remnants of the synagogue. Ezra is

“ u called a ready scribe, and his labo rs in con nection with the law were important, he may have organised a body of literary men who

S hould work in harmony, attending, among other things, to the collection and preservation of the national literature ; or they may have

1 ' ‘ Studien z ur Gesc/Iic/lte aer Samrnlung der alt/Iebrdisch n

iteratur 1 2 c L , p. 7, & . 1 THE OLD TE S TAME NT. 3

been an association of patriotic men who voluntarily rallied round the heads Of the new

t f state, to support them in heir undamental f re orms . The company of scribes mentioned

I 1 in Maccabees does not probably relate to it.

Of A succession priests and scribes, excited at first by the reforming zeal of one whom later

c Jews looked upon as a se ond Moses, laboured in one department of literary work till the cor poration ceased to exist soon after if not in

ie. B . C. the time of Simon, . , from about 44 5 till about 200 ; for we identify the Simon cele

1 - brated 1 26 . in Sirach . with Simon II , son

f - - 2 o . B . C. 22 1 20 the high priest Onias II , ; not

t I. wi h Simon , son and successor of the high

’ - I. B . C. 1 0 2 1 . priest Onias , 3 9 Josephus s

O pinion, indeed, is contrary ; but leading

Zunz f Jewish scholars, such as , Herz eld,

Derenbour ff Krochmal, g, Jost, and Bloch di er from him .

1 I 2 ovra' w ' a saréwr i wa w' VI . 1 , y yb7p m , not ) a y yfi. 2 3 THE CANON OF THE B IB LE .

To the great synagogue must be referred the

t a compila ion of the second canon, cont ining

t Joshua, Judges wi h Ruth, Samuel, Kings,

t a Isaiah, Jeremiah wi h Lament tions, Ezekiel

the tw s was and elve minor prophet . It not D 00 . C. the completed prior to 3 , because book of

Jonah was not written before. This work may be called a historical parable composed for a

r didactic purpose, giving a milder, la ger view

’ of Jehovah s favour than the orthodox one that

. t a an excluded the Gentiles Ru h, cont ining idyllic story with an unfinished genealogy

v attached meant to glorify the house of Da id, and presenting a kindred spirit towards a

r was people unifo mly hated, appended to

Judges ; but was subsequently transferred to

ed the third canon . It was written imm iately after the return from the Babylonian captivity ; for the Chaldaising language points to this

w s date, not ithstanding the supposed archaism

i e. th discovered n it by som In like manner, e THE OLD TE STAME NT. 33

Lamentations, originally added to Jeremiah, were afterwards put into the later or third canon . f Joshua, which had been separated rom the ' five books of Moses with which it was closely f joined at first, ormed, with the other historical l portion (Judges, Samue , Kings), the proper

’ of continuation Ezra s canon . The prophets included the three greater and twelve minor.

’ With Isaiah s authentic oracles were incorpor

- ated the last twenty seven chapters, belonging for the most part to an anonymous prophet of

the exile, besides several late pieces inserted

- in the first thirty nine Chapters . Men of pro phetic gifts wrote in the name of distinguished

s prophet , and put their productions with those w of the latter, or adapted and rote them over f f fif a ter their own fashion . The fi tieth and ty

first - chapters ofJeremiah shew such over writing ,

’ TO Zechariah s authentic oracles were attached

- . of chapters ix . xiv , themselves made up two

- x 11 - parts (ix . xi . xiv . ) belonging to different AN B IB E 34 THE C ON OF THE L . t imes and authors prior to the destruction of

the Jewish state by the Babylonians .

’ The character of the synagogue s proceedings in regard to the books of Scripture can only be

deduced from the conduct of Ezra himself, as

well as the prevailing views and wants of the

r times. The scribes who began with Ez a, see f ing how he acted, would naturally ollow his

in example, not hesitating to revise the text f 1 substance as well as orm . They did not re w frain from changing what had been ritten, or

of from inserting fresh matter. Some their

novelties can be discerned even in the Penta f teuch . Their chie work, however, related to

the f orm of the text . They put into a proper

1 That the Scribes always adhered to the prohibition to write

n li rdinances cannot be held even in th o re gious laws and o , e

face of the Talmudic sa in ' writers y g, mm Wmp: 3 m; (

of Hala o h are lik a burner f th law This ma a l to c t e o e ) . y pp y

h r b k li r Th reater t e late scribes o oo men, not to the ear e . e g ’ r ltr i e id As part of Geiger s U sc ifl is based on the oppos t ea.

r f rm r h l s i h Talmudic sa the evereIice for o e sc o ar ncreased, t e y

in mi h ac e ted. See Temara 1 b. g g t be c p , 4 THE OLD TE STAME NT! 3 5 form and state the text of the writings they

studied, perceiving less need for revising the matter . What they did was in good faith,

with honest intention .

The prophetic canon ended with Malachi s

oracles . And it was made sometime after he

prophesied, because the general consciousness that the function ceased with him required a

considerable period for its growth . The fact that it included Jonah and Ruth brings the

f B 00 . C. . completion a ter 3 , as already stated There are no definite allusions to it till the

B second century . C. Daniel speaks of a passage in Jeremiah being in “ the books or

” 1 writings and the prologue of Jesus Sirach f presupposes its ormation . Such was the s econd canon, which had been made up

- 2 0 B C gradually (444 9 . . )

Another view of the collection in question

r has been taken by various schola s. Accord

1 Cha ter ix 2 p . . 6 THE CAN N OF THE B IB E 3 O L . ing to a passage in the second book of

a Maccabees, the second c non originated with

N who e f ehemiah, gath red together the acts o the kings and the prophets and (psalms) of D avid, and the epistles of the kings con f ” 1 cerning the holy gi ts . These words are

obscure. They occur in a letter purporting to be sent by the Sanhedrim at Jerusalem to the Jews in Egypt, which contains apo cryphal things ; a letter which assigns to

Nehemiah the merit Of various arrangements

rather belonging to Ezra. It is difficult to

“ understand the meaning of the epistles of ff ” If the kings concerning the o erings. they

were the documents of heathen or Persian

kings favourable to the rebuilding of Jeru

salem and its temple, would they not have been rejected from a collection of sacred

books belonging to the Chosen people ? They

might perhaps have been adopted had they

1 ha t r II 1 . C p e . 3

8 THE CAN N OF THE 3 O BIBLE . account of his supposed canon hardly com mends itself by inherent truthfulness or pro babilit t y, hough it is accepted by Ewald and

c Ble k.

Wh t en the great synagogue ceased, here was an interval during which it is not clear whether

the sacred books were neglected, except by private individuals ; or whether they were

studied, copied, and collected by a body of scribes . Perhaps the scribes and elders of the

Hasmone an time were active at intervals in this

Of department. The institution a senate by Judas Maccabaeus is supposed to be favoured — 2 1 0 . by Maccabees (chapter i. ii but the f passage furnishes poor evidence O the thing.

Judas is there made to write to Egypt in the

1 88 year of the Seleucidae , though he died

f 1 2 t i.e. . thir y six years be ore, , 5 Other places

2 have been added as corroborative, viz. ,

M I Maccab . VII. . accab. . . 2 iv 44, xi 7; 3 3

Some go so far as to state that Jose ben Joeser THE OLD TE S TAME N T. 39

was appointed its first president at that time . The Midrash in Bereshith Rabba 6 5)

makes him one of the sixty Hassidim who

were treacherously murdered by Alcimus ; but

this is neither in the first book Of the Maccabees

C l ( hapter vii . ) nor in Josephus, and must be

pronounced conjectural . It is impossible to

fix the exact date of Jose ben Joeser in the

F Aboth a Hasmonean period . irke le ves it

’ indefinite . Jonathan, Judas Maccabaeus s suc

cessor, when writing to the Lacedaemonians,

speaks of the gerusia or senate as well as tlze

people of the Jews ; whence we learn that the

of 2 body existed as early as the time Judas .

Again, Demetrius writes to Simon, as also to

3 s nat t/ze elder and ion of the Jews . After Jona

s than and Simon, it may have been uspended

for a while, in consequence of the persecution

1 Anti . x11 . 1 0 1 . q , , 1 ’ 8 xu . Mac ab . ose hus s Anti . xiii 1 c . J p q , . 5, ; , 3 5 3 Maccab xiii. 6. I . , 3 0 THE CAN N OF THE B IBL 4 O E.

and anarchy prevailing in Judea ; till the great

n Sa hedrim at Jerusalem succeeded it, under

H rcanus of y I . Though the traces a senate

the in the Maccabaean epoch are slight, Talmud

1 its countenances existence . We believe that

it was earlier than Judas Maccabaeus . Of its

constitution nothing is known ; but it was pro

bably aristocratic. The Hasmonean prince would naturally exert a commanding influence

over it. The great synagogue had been a kind

of of democratic council, consisting scribes,

2 r . doctors or teache s, and priests Like their

the predecessors of great synagogue, the Has

ac mon an elders revised the text freely, putting

r into it explanato y or corrective additions,

which were not always improvements . The

Of way in which they used the book Esther, employing it as a medium of Halachite pre

scription, shews a treatment involving little

1 1 ’ ' N Sota 2 a. ehemiah viii , 4 DJ BD, . 3 . THE OLD TE STAME NT: 41

idea of sacredness attaching to the Hagio

ra h g p a.

We are aware that the existence of this body

is liable to doubt, and that the expressions

belonging to it in Jewish books, whether elders

erusia or g , have been applied to the great

synagogue or to the Sanhedrim at Jerusalem,

or even to the elders of any little town or

hamlet ; but it is difficult to explain all on f that hypothesis, without attributing con usion

to the places where they occur. If the body

rv of in question be not allowed, an inte al about

Sixty years elapsed between the great syna

the gogue and the Sanhedrim, during which hagiographical writings were comparatively

neglected , though literary activity did not N . O cease authoritative association, at least,

dealt with them . This is improbable. It is true that we read of no distinguished teachers

rv in the inte al, except Antigonus of Socho, disciple of Simon the Just ; but the silence can 2 TH A 4 E C NON OF THE B IB LE .

hardly weigh against a reasonable presumption .

C . One thing is lear, viz , that Antigonus did not reach down to the time of the first pair that

presided over the Sanhedrim . i of . e. The contents the third canon, , Psalms,

t Proverbs, Job, Can icles, Ecclesiastes, Esther,

s Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, Chronicle , the for

mation of which we assign to the Hasmone an

erusia m f ff f g , were ulti arious, di ering widely rom

C e— one another in age, haracter, and valu poeti

cal , prophetic, didactic, historical . Such as

seemed worthy of preservation, though they

the had not been included in second canon, were gathered together during the space of an

hundred and fifty years . The oldest part con

sisted of psalms supposed to belong to David .

s f The first psalm, which contains within it el

in traces of late authorship, was prefixed as an

troduction to the whole collection now put into

the third canon . Next to the Psalms were

Proverbs, Job, Canticles, which, though non THE LD E S AME O T T NT. 43 prophetic and probably excluded on that

account from the second canon, must have

existed before the exile. Enriched with the

latest additions, they survived the national

C disasters, and laimed a place next to the

Psalms . They were but a portion of the literature current in and after the sth century f f B C. as . , may be in erred rom the epilogue to

Ecclesiastes, and the Wisdom of Sirach . The historical work compiled by the chronicle writer was separated, Ezra being put first as the most important part and referring also to the church of the 6th and sth centuries

s who e history had not been written. The

t Chronicles hemselves were placed last, being

considered of less value than the first part, as they contained the summary of a period

already described, though with numerous

- adaptations to post exile times . The youngest

Of portion consisted the book of Daniel, not written till the Maccabean period (between 1 70 T I 44 HE CANON OF TIIE B BLE .

1 f C. o and 1 60 B. ) ; and probably several

60 6 80 8 8 n o Psalms (44, , 74. 75. 7 . 79. . 3 . 9. ,

1 1 8) which were inserted in different places

of the collection to make the whole number

I 50. These late odes savour of the Maccabean

time ; and are fitly illustrated by the history f given in the first book o Maccabees . The list

continued Open ; dominated by no stringent

principle of selection, and with a character

’ was c tubim somewhat indefinite . It called ,

1 Talmudic tradition, which attributes the redaction of the book to the men of the great synagogue who are said to have

act r e influen e of the divine s irit t h ed unde th c p , separa es t e three apocryphal pieces from the rest ; but this arose from the desire of discountenancing the idea that the work consists of

ro l en Such later tradition too i mance and eg d. k cur ous ways of j ustifying the canonicity of Daniel and the redaction of it by

the reat s na o ue ex m the assum tion that the s cond g y g g , g , p e part arose out of a series of unconnected Megilotfi which were not reduced to chronological order Still the Midrash main tains that Daniel or the erson writin in his nam , p g e, was no

ro het li e Ha ai Zechariah and Malachi bu p p , k gg , , , t a man of

visions an a ocal tist. It was a eneral f , p yp g belie , that visions had come into the lace of ro bec when the boo a ared p p p y k ppe .

“ The Greek translation could not have been long after the ori inal because it is used in the First Boo of Ma b g , k cca ees.

46 THE CANON OF THE B IBLE .

as holy, but merely productions embodying

t f e human wisdom, and were here ore exclud d ,

is improbable . We do not think that an alter ation of opinion about them in the course of a

r centu y or more, by which they became divine

of f r and holy instead human, is a satis acto y f explanation . The Psalms o David and the book of Job must have been as highly esteemed

’ in the period of the great synagogue s existence

as they were at a later time . Other considera tions besides the divinity and holiness of books contributed to their introduction into a canon .

Ecclesiastes was taken into the third collection

because it was attributed to Solomon . The

of was e Song Songs understood all gorically,

a f act which, in addition to its supposed Solo

monic authorship, determined its adoption . f And even a ter their canonical reception,

whether by the great synagogue or another

of body, the character books was canvassed.

was of It so with Ecclesiastes, in spite the THE OLD TE S TAME NT: 47

supposed sanction it got from the great syna

d as gogue contained in the epilogue, adde ,

some think, by that body to attest the sacred f 1 ness o the book .

While the third canon was being made, the

f O f so erim, as the successors the prophets, were active as before ; and though interpretation was f their chie duty, they must have revised and

corrected the sacred books to some extent . We need not hesitate to allow that they some

times arranged parts, and even added matter

’ f of o their own . In the time the canon s

entire preparation, they and the priests, with writers and scholars generally, redacted the

national literature, excluding or sanctioning

of such portions it as they thought fit.

1 ' It has been thought that the phrase IIIDDR 6313 in the

h v ud s to the reat council or s na o u Th nint erse all e g y g g e. is

ibl n v ri us r unds The r conj ecture is plaus e o a o g o . easons for attributing the epilogue to a later tim e than the writer of the book appear to be stronger than those assigning it to the

ri inal author The 1 th and 1 th verses in articular o g . 3 4 p , are

unlike Coheleth. ANON OF TH IB 48 THE C E B LE .

At this time appeared the present five-fold

the d as partition of Psalms, precede it had been

by other divisions, the last of which was very

similar to the one that became final . Several

inscriptions and historical notices were prefixed .

r dif The inscriptions, however, belong to ve y ferent r times, their histo ical parts being usually older than the musical ; and date from the first collection to the period of the Hasmonean

the college, when final redaction of the entire

Psalter took place . Those in the first three books existed at the time when the latter were made up ; those in the last two were prefixed partly at the time when the collections them selves were made, and partly in the Maccabean

‘ f age . How o ten they are out of harmony with

the poems themselves, needs no remark . They

c ur l are both traditional and conj e t a . The earliest attestation of the third canon is that of the prologue to Jesus Sirach ( 1 3 0 where not only t/ze law and tire proplzets are THE OLD TE STAME NT. 49

S “ pecified, but the other books of the fathers, “ ' ”1 N or the rest of the books . O information is

given as to its extent, or the particular books

included . They may have been for the most

part the same as the present ones . The passage

does not Show that the third list was Closed . The

better writings of the fathers, such as tended to

learning and wisdom, are not excluded by the

r definite a ticle. In like manner, neither Philo nor the New Testament gives exact information

as to the contents of the division in question .

Ecclesi Indeed, several books, Canticles, Esther,

astes, are unnoticed in the latter. The argu

t the ment drawn from Matthew xxiii . 3 5, hat

the Chronicles were then last book of the canon, is inconclusive ; as the Zechariah there named was probably different from the Zechariah in

1 rd & ha r dr ca t hla rd hea dr éir e r p fifi 3 48 . The younge

Sirach does not use a aI which would have b a ro er 7p ¢ , een p p ’ translation of c tubim D not this 417W; im l h n-a . oes p yt e no ppli ’ cation of the specific title c tubim to the hagiographa at that time and therefor h that the hird O , e t e idea t canon was still pen ? D 50 THE CANON OF THE B IBLE .

2 Chronicles xxiv. None of these witnesses

was proves that the third canon finally closed . A more definite testimony respecting the canon is given by Josephus towards the end of D r A . For the first centu y . we have not an

innumerable multitude of books among us,

but tw -two only enty books, which contain the records of all the past times ;

And which are justly believed to be divine. of them five belong to Moses . But as to the time from the death of Moses till the

of of reign Artaxerxes king Persia, the pro phets 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

f r li e. It is true our histo y has been written

r since Artaxerxes ve y particularly, but has not

been esteemed of the like authority with the

f r f f o mer by our ore athers, because there has not

been an exact succession of prophets since that THE OLD TE STAME NT: 5:

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 anything to them, to take any

f C thing rom them, or to make any hange in them ; but it has become natural to all Jews

f r immediately and rom their ve y birth, to

esteem these books to contain divine doctrines, if and to persist in them, and occasion be,

”1 for willingly to die them . This list agrees

with our present canon, showing that the Palestinian Jews were tolerably unanimous as

to the extent of the collection . The thirteen

prophets include Job ; the four lyric and moral

books are Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and

Canticles .

It is not likely that the Hasmonaean senate

had a long existence. It was replaced by the

Sanhedrim, a more definite and state institution,

1 ontra A ion i. 8 C p , . 2 THE CAN N OF THE IB 5 O B LE .

intended as a counter- balance to the influence

the e the of Hasmon an princes . The notices of

H rcanus I. latter reach no further back than y ,

1 i.e. 1 B C , about 3 5 . . Josephus speaks of it under

Hyrcanus It cannot be referred to an

3 r rcanu F n in earlier pe iod than Hy s I . ra kel deed finds a notice of it in 2 Chronicles xix.

8 1 1 , ; but the account there is indistinct, and

refers to the great synagogue . The compiler having no certain information about what was l the of the r ong past, transfers origin cou t he

of f speaks to Jehoshaphat, in order to glori y the house of David . It is impossible to date w F the Sanhedrim, ith rankel, in the Grecian

era, in which case it must have been dissolved

t during the Maccabean insurrec ion, and after

1 ota 2 . 1 the duumvirate or u oth In Maaser Sheni, S 4 , s gg ,

h r ident Nasi and vice- resident Ab-beth consisting of t e p es , , p , ’ referred to H rcanus s creation. Zunz affirms that it din, are y

ted in the time of Simon son of Mattathias 1 2 B. c. origina , , 4

1 iv. nti . x . A q , , 9

3 ericbtlicbe eweis . 68 . Der g B , p

E A N O THE B IB 54 TH C NO F LE . least intervened between the extinction of the

’ great synagogue and Daniel s book . This holds

good, whether we assume, with Krochmal, the

’ redaction the — synagogue s of work, more cor

rectly the putting together of the independent

parts of which it is said to be composed ; or

equally so, if the taking of it into the canon as a book already completed be attributed to the

same body. But we are unable to see that

’ Krochm als reasoning about the synagogue put

’ ting Daniel s work together and one of the

members writing the book Of Esther is pro

bable.

ad In like manner, Maccabean psalms are verse to the hypothesis that the great syna

conse gogue completed the third canon . In

ence of qu these late productions, it is impossible to assert that the men of the synagogue were

the redactors of the Psalter as it is. It is

true that the collection was made before the

Chronicles and many other books of the hagio THE OLD TE ST AMEN T. 55 graphical canon ; but the complete Psalter did

not appear till the Maccabean period . The

n fin ca on, however, was not considered to be ally Closed in the first century before and the next after Christ; There were doubts about

some portions. The book of Ezekiel gave

ff of s o ence, because some its statement seemed

s to contradict the law. Doubt about others were of a more serious nature ; about Ecclesi

the astes, Canticles, Esther, and the Proverbs .

The first was impugned because it had contra dictory passages and a heretical tendency ; the

second, because of its worldly and sensual tone ;

Esther for its want of religiousness ; and Pro

verbs on account of inconsistencies . This

scepticism went far to procure the exclusion

of f the suspected works rom the canon, and

e nuaim 1 their relegation to the class of the g . f . o But it did not prevail Hananiah, son

1 ’ w u us i ll concealed withdra n rom blic e. DHJal tera y , f p 56 THE CANON OF THE B IB LE .

f 2 B o . C. H ezekiah, son Garon, about 3 , is said to have reconciled the contradictions and quieted

1 of the doubts. But these traces resistance to

the fix ity of the canon were not the last. They 6 f AD . reappeared about 5, as we learn rom the

2 r Talmud, when the controversy tu ned mainly

of upon the canonicity Ecclesiastes, which the

of m school Sha mai, who had the majority,

opposed ; so that the book was probably ex

3 cluded . The question emerged again at a

later synod at Jabneh or Jamnia, when R .

Eleasar ben Asaria was chosen patriarch, and

Gamaliel the second deposed . Here it was

decided , not unanimously however, but by a

of Hillelites majority , that Ecclesiastes and the f o i. e Song Songs pollute the hands, ., belong ‘ h properly to the Hagiographa. T is was about

1 ’ ’ See Furst s Der It anon des alten Testaments u s w . . 1 , . pp. 47, 1 1 8 . Tract Sa at 4 . bb . ch. i. 1 Because of its profane spirit and Epicurean ideas ; see

d ot v. . Yada im A o v. y 3 y 3 . N IHE OLD TES TAME T. 57

D 1 of 0 A. 9 . Thus the question the canonicity

of certain books was discussed at two

synods. Passages in the Talmud have been adduced

to shew that the Shamm aite Objections to the

canonicity of Ecclesiastes were overruled by

f 2 the positive declaration rom the 7 elders,

being a testimony anterior to tlze Cbristian era

that Coheleth is canonical ; but they do not 2 f support the Opinion . The sages re erred to in the treatise Sabbat and elsewhere is a

vague expression, resting apparently on no — historic tradition a mere opinion of compara f tively late date. If it re er to the Jerusalem

1 ’ raetz s Kobelet . 1 62 1 6 See G , pp , 3 . 1 The sa es wished to ronounce Coheleth a ocr hal b g p p yp , e

use its statem nts ar c ntradictor And wh hav h n ca e e o y. y e t ey ot declared it apocryphal Because it begins with words of the law and ends with words of the law for it O ens with the words , , p What advantage has man in all his labour wherewith he — b nd r the s n abbat. 0 b la ours u e u ? &c. Sec S 3 . So also in the Midrash : The sages wished to pronounce — b l h a r hal &C. . Va ikra rabba 1 61 . Cohe et poc yp , &C yy 58 THE CANON OF THE BIBLE .

A. D 6 Hilleli s synod . 5, the te were simply

outnumbered there by the Shamm aites. The

for matter was debated hastily, and determined

t he the time by a majority. But synod at

Jamnia consisted of 72 persons and a passage

r i 1 in the t eatise Yadayim refers to t. The

testimony of the 72 elders to whom R . Simeon

far ben Asai here alludes, so from belonging to

-C an ante hristian era, belongs to a date about

0 D f 9 A . And the act that the synod at Jamnia took up again a question already debated at

AD 6 Jerusalem . 5, proves that no final settle

ment of the canon had taken place before .

u The canon was virt ally settled at Jamnia,

of where was confirmed what R. Akiba said the

Canticles in his usual extravagant way : N0

day in the whole history of the world is of so

1 i v i fr m the R. Simeon ben Asai sa d, I have recei ed t o

h h d i ha R Eleasar ben Asaria m out of t e 72 el ers n the dayt t .

ointed elder that the Son of Son s and Coheleth was app , g g — h d Yada im v. . pollute t e han s. y 3 THE OLD TE S TAME NT. 59 much worth as the one in which the Song of

Songs was given to Israel ; for all the Scriptures

”1 are holy ; but the Song of Songs is most holy.

the As Hagiographa were not read in public,

Of O Of the with the exception Esther, pinions Jewish rabbins might still differ about Canticles

f of and Ecclesiastes, even a ter the synod Jamnia.

In opposition to these remarks, it is stren uously argued by Bloch that neither the pas

in n sage the Mish ic treatise Yadayim, nor any

f canonical clzaracter of other, re ers to the the books to which Jewish elders raised several

s objections . But his argument are more vehe ment than valid . Anxious to assign the final

settlement of the entire canon to an authorita ffi tive body like the great synagogue, he a rms that all parties were united in opinion about

1 This language was based on a figurative interpretation of the

One who said Whoever reads such writin s as ira Song. , g S ch ” h later books loses all art in everlastin life can h and t e p g , ave

i h He outheroded the Palestinian tradition res ectin no we g t. p g ’ i rodu tions of later ori in which merel affirms ha the Jew shp c g , y t t

“ ” d n t ollute the hands. Toss. Yada im c. they o o p y , 60 THE CAN N OF THE IB O B LE .

— u Perushim the time of Christ, Ass m, , and

Zeddukim hamm aites Hi l li ; S and l e tes. But it requires more than his ingenuity to explain

of Ado ot away the meaning Yadayim 3 , 5, y v.

1 . v t 3 , Sabbat To what did such di ersi y of

opinion relate, if not to the canonical character of the books ? A specific answer to the ques

r 1 tion is not given by the learned w iter, who is too eager in his endeavour to attribute the settlement of the third canon to the great

synagogue, and to smooth away all diversities

of opinion about several books, after that time, as if none could afterwards question the autho

ritative settlement by that body. He will not even allow a wider canon to the Alexandrian

Jews than that of their Palestinian brethren, though he cannot but admit that the former read and highly esteemed various apocryphal

of tlzeocratic books because their character.

Surely the practical use of writings is an evi

1 w 1 Studi z ur esclticltte u. s. . . 0 &c en G , , p 5 , .

THE N N F TH BIB E 62 CA O O E L .

pen (viii . it may be inferred that the same process took place afterwards ; that offensive

things were removed, and alterations made

of continuously down to the close the canon,

r and even after. The co rections consisted of

of additions and changes letters, being indicated in part by the most ancient versions and the traditions of the Jews themselves who Often

knew what stood in the text at first, and why

it was altered . They are also indicated by the

nature Of the passage itself viewed in the light

f of o the state religion at the time . Here sober judgm ent must guard against unnecessary

u . conject res Some changes are apparent, as k oa s . 1 8 1 the plural in Genesis xiii , xiv. 3 ,

1 f r v . . 0 o S x iii , Deuteronomy xi 3 , the ingular oak ods and the plural g in Exodus xxxii . 4

u d o . 2 2 for the sing lar g So Sam . vii . 3 , (comp .

1 1 . . 2 1 . Deu e n Chron xvii , and LXX ) ; and t ro o

1 ’ Gei er s Urscbr t 288 g if , p. . TIIE OLD TE S TAME N T. 63

ii my xxx . have been altered . Popper and Geiger have probably assumed too much cor

rection on the part of the Scribes and others ; though they have drawn attention to the f subject in the spirit o original criticism . Jewish literature began to degenerate after

the captivity, and it continued to do so . It

leant upon the past more and more, having an

external and formal Character with little of the

living soul . The independence of their reli

gious literature disappeared with the national

independence Of the Jews ; and the genius of the people was too exclusive to receive much expansion from the spirit of nations with whom

C they came in contact. In such ircumstances, amid the general consciousness of present

misfortune which the hope Of a brighter future

s of could not dispel, and regretful retrospect i ' the past t nged with ideal splendour, the exact

1 lo isc/t fl dscbm aa r an I See De Goeje in the W g y f y g g I.

1 868 . &c ( ) p 1 79, . E A 64 TH C NON OF THE B IB LE .

time of drawing a line between books that

might be included in the third division of the

canon must have been arbitrary. In the absence of a normal principle to determine

selection, the productions were arbitrarily separ

ated . Not that they were badly adjusted .

On the contrary, the canon as a whole was

of settled wisely. Yet the critical spirit learned

Jews in the future could not be extinguished

by anticipation. The canon was not really settled for all time by a synodical gathering at

H a io Jamnia ; for Sirach was , added to the g grapha by some rabbins about the beginning

1 of the 4th century ; while Baruch circulated

long in Hebrew, and was publicly read on the

f - day o atonement in the third century, accord

2 ing to the Apostolic constitutions . These two books were in high repute for a considerable

time, possessing a kind of canonical credit

1 ’ ie ottesdienstliclzen Vortra e 1 0 1 1 02 . Zunz s D g g , pp 1 20 . 1 2 ed. Ueltz en. V. , p 4, TIIE D TE S TAME N OL T. 65

even among the learned Jews of Palestine.

ochanan B as Rab, J , l ar, Rabba bar Mare,

occasionally refer to Sirach in the way in

’ which the c tubim were quoted : the writer of

Daniel used Baruch ; and the translator of

Jeremiah put it into Greek .

If it be asked on what principle books were

the n es admitted into canon, a single a swer do ffi not su ce. One and the same criterion did not determine the process at all times . The lead ing principle with which the first canon- makers set out was to collect all the documents of d Hebrew antiquity. This seems to have guide

if r ft . Ezra, not the g eat synagogue a er him

the The nation, early imbued with theocratic

r f C spi it and believing itsel the hosen of God, was favourably inclined towards documents in

a which that standpoint was assumed . The leg l l and ethical were special y valued . The pro phetic Claimed a divine origin ; the lyric or poetic touched and elevated the ideal faculty E E 66 THE CANON OF THE B IB L .

on which religion acts . But the leading prin ciple which actuated Ezra and the great syna

l the gogue was gradual y modified, amid growing compass Of the national literature - and the con sciousness that prophecy ceased with Malachi . When the latest part of the canon had to be selected from a literature almost contem

oraneous p , regard was had to such produc l tions as resembled the O d in spirit. Ortho doxy Of contents was the dominant criterion .

was ffi h But this a di cult t ing, for various works

really anonymous, though wearing the garb of old e so names and histories, were in xistence, that the boundary of the third part became

uncertain and fluctuating.

The principle that actuated Ez ra in making the first canon was a religious and patriotic one. From his treatment of the oldest law books we infer that he did not look upon them as inviol

. h w able Venerable t ey ere, and so far sacred ;

for but neither perfect nor complete all time. THE OLD TE STAME NT. 67

In his view they were not unconditionally

authoritative. Doubtless they had a high value

as the productions of inspired lawgivers and

men of a prophetic spirit ; but the redaction

to which be submitted them shows no super

stitious canonical reverence. With him and

lzo ly were not identical . Nor does the idea of

immediate divine an , authority appear to have

dominated the mind Of the great synagogue

of . in the selection books Like Ezra, these

scholars reverenced the productions of the

s prophets, poet , and historians to whom their

countrymen were indebted in the past fo r te

ligious or political progress ; but they did not

look upon them as the offspring of unerring

wisdom . How could they, while witnessing repetitions and minor contradictions in the

books collected ?

The n same remarks apply to the third ca on .

Direct divinity of origin was not the criterion which determined the reception of a book into 68 THE C N N F A O O TIIE B IB LE .

it ; but the character and authorship of the

book . Did it breathe the old spirit, or proceed from one venerated for his wisdom ?

Was it like the old orthodox productions ; or did it bear the name of one renowned for his piety and knowledge of divine things ? The stamp of antiquity was necessary in a certain sense ; but the theocratic spirit was the leading

consideration . Ecclesiastes was admitted be cause it bore the name of Solomon ; and

’ Daniel s apocalyptic writings, because veiled

under the name of an old prophet. New psalms were taken in because of their asso ciation with much Older ones in the temple

the s service. Yet first book of Maccabee

t was excluded, hough written in Hebrew. It is still more remarkable that Sirach was put among the external productions ; but this was

for owing not so much to its recent origin, it is

e of older than th book Daniel, as to its being an

the a apparent echo of Proverbs, nd therefore

0 THE CAN N OF THE B IB LE 7 O .

the assumption of its supernatural origin . At a

ed much later period, the Masoretes r uced to one

of in type all existing copies their Scriptures, troducing an uniformity imperatively demanded

in their opinion by multiplied discrepancies .

Whatever divine Character the reflecting at

tributed to the canonical books, it must have amounted to the same thing as that assigned to human attributes and physical phenomena a divinity resulting from the over- leaping of

c se ond causes, in the absence of inductive philosophy. Here the imperfection conditioned

the the be by nature of created cannot hid . Yet the books may be truly said to have con tained the word of God .

t/ze Law Of the three divisions, or Pentateuch

was most highly venerated by the Jews . It was the first translated into Greek ; and in

’ Philo s view was inspired in a way peculiar to

Tlee Pro /zets occ itself. p , or second division, u

a pied somewhat lower place in their estimation, THE LD TE STAME NT O . 71 but were read in the public services as the law

’ f c tubim had been be ore. The , or third division, was not looked upon as equal to the

Prophets in importance : only the five Megiloth

li licl were p b y read . The three parts of the collection present the three gradations of sanctity which the books assumed successively in Israelite estimation . A certain reverence was attached to all as soon as they were made

Canonical ; but the reverence was not of equal

height, and the supposed authority was pro

1 portionally varied . The consciousness of pro phetism being extinct soon after the return

n was f . rom Babylo , a genuine instinct With the extinction of the Jewish state the religious

Spirit almost evaporated . The idealism which the old prophets proclaimed in contrast with the symbolic religion of the state gave place to

tt forms and an attachment to the wri en law.

1 nn in the a/zrbiiclzer r de utsc/ze Tbeolo ie dritter Dillma , 7 fi g ,

aud . 22 . B , p 4 I 72 THE CANON OF THE B B LE .

Religion came to be a thing Of the understand

of ing, the subject learned treatment ; and its

s essence was reduced to dogmas or precept . Thus it ceased to be a spiritual element in which the heart had free scope for its highest f aspirations . In addition to all, a oreign meta

s of physical theology, the Per ian doctrine spirits,

the was introduced, which seemed to enlarge

sphere of speculation, but really retarded the

free exercise of the mind . As the external side of religion had been previously directed to the of n performance good works, this exter ality was now determined by a written law. Even

the prophetism that appeared after the restora

of tion was little more than an echo the past,

falling in with an outward and written legalism . The literature of the people deteriorated in

a oca se quality, and prophecy became p lyp . In

such circumstances the advent of a new man

was needed to restore the free life Of religion in

higher power. Christ appeared in the fulness THE OLD TESTAME NT. 73 of time to do this effectually by proclaiming the

F f in divine atherhood, and ounding a worship s irit and in tr ut/z l p . Rising above the symbo ic

wrappings of the Mosaic religion, and relying

of f upon the native power the spirit itsel , he shewed how man may mount up to the throne of the God, adoring the Supreme without inter

vention of . temple, sacrifice, or ceremony

When the three divisions were united, the ecclesiastical respect which had gathered round the law and the prophets from ancient times

’ c ubim began to be transferred to the t . A belief in their sanctity increased apace in the

r the era wt centu y before Christian , so that sacredness and canonicity were almost identical .

of The doubts individuals, it is true, were still expressed respecting certain books of the

’ c tubim i ff , but they had no percept ble e ect

upon the current opinion . The sanctity attach ing to the last division as well as the others did f not permit the total displacement o any part. THE CAN N F THE I LE 74 O O B B .

' The passage in Jo sephus already quoted

D 1 f A. 00 shows the state O the canon about . .

According to it, he considered it to have been

C of Lon im anus losed at the time Artaxerxes g , whom he identifies with the Ahasuerus of

6 - 2 t B . C. Es her, 4 4 4 4 The books were divine,

so that none dared to add to, substract from,

was or alter them . To him the canon some

thing belonging to the venerable past, and w inviolable. In other words, all the books ere

peculiarly sacred. Although we can scarcely

think this to be his private opinion merely,

it is probably expressed in exaggerated terms, and hardly tallies with his use of the third

l Esdras in preference to the canonical texts. l ’ His authority, however, is smal . Bloch s

t im ro estimate of it is too high . It is ut erly p

’ bable that Josephus s Opinion was universally

’ Of held by the Jews in his day. His division

: the books is peculiar five Mosaic, thirteen

1 - x and xi. 1 . In his Antiq. , . 4, 5, 5 THE LD TE S TAME N O T. 75

f historical, our containing religious songs and

u f f o . t as r les li e It appears, indeed, hat he had

- two the same twenty books we now have, Ruth

to at was still attached Judges, and Lament ions to Jeremiah but his credit is not on a par with that of a Jew who adhered to his countrymen

f for the in the time o their calamity. He wrote

Romans. One who believed that Esther was

the youngest book in the canon, who looked

’ as upon Ecclesiastes as Solomon s, and Daniel

an exile production, cannot be a competent

judge. In his time the historical sense of the book of Daniel was misapprehended ; for after the Grecian dynasty had fallen without the fulfilment of the Messianic prophecy connected

its with it, the Roman empire was put into

place . Hence various allusions in The History

1 of the Jewish Wars. The passage in the

1 Antiquities, about Alexander the Great and

1 i 6 sec. and i 2 s 1 v. , 3 , v . , ec. . 11 xi 8 sec. . . , 5 6 THE CAN N OF THE B IBLE 7 O , the priests in the Temple at Jerusalem is apoc r h f al. yp In any case, Josephus does not urnish a genuine list of the canonical books any more t han Philo. The Pharisaic view of his time is

was undoubtedly given, that the canon then

complete and sacred . The decision proceeded from that part of the nation who ruled both

over school and people, and regained supremacy f f of i. e. a ter the destruction the temple ; , rom

- the Pharisee sect to which Josephus belonged .

It was a conclusion of orthodox Judaism .

With true critical instinct, Spinoza says that

the canon was the work of the Pharisees. The third collection was undoubtedly made under

their influence .

The origin of the tlzreefold division of the

1 canon is not, as Oehler supposes, a reflection of the different stages of religious development

1 ’ i E nc klo a die vol. v u. Art cle Kanon in Herz og s y p , p . ’ d r r e ena z ur T[zeolo ie des alt 253 ; an the same autho s P olgom g .

Test 1 2 . . , pp. 9 , 9

' 8 T E AN N F THE BI E 7 H C O O B L .

Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel ; succeeded by

for the twelve minor prophets, arranged the

most part according to their times, though

the length Of individual prophecies and simi

larit of y contents also influenced their position .

The arrangement of books in the third division

depended on their age, character, and authors .

The Psalms were put first, because David was

of supposed to be the author many, and on

account of their intrinsic value in promoting

f O f f the religious li e the people. A ter the

Psalms came the three poetical works attri

Of buted to Solomon, with the book Job among

- them, Proverbs, Job, Canticles, Ecclesiastes .

of f was in The book Esther ollowed, since it

tended to further the observance of the Purim f east ; with the late book of Daniel . The

’ position Of Daniel among the c tubim arises solely from the fact of its posterior origin to i the prophet c writings, not excepting the book

O f Jonah itself ; and the attempt to account for THE OLD TE STAME NT. 79 its place in the third division on the ground of its predominant subjectivity is based on the unfounded assumption that the objective state of religion is represented in the second division

and the subjective in the third . Had the boo k f 00 B . C. t s existed be ore 4 , it would doub le s have stood in the second division . But the contents themselves demonstrate its date contemporary d f history being wrappe in a prophetic orm .

Having some affinity to Esther as regards

f the heathenism and Greek li e, book was put

next to the latter. To Ezra and Nehemiah, which were adopted before the other part of

- f it the Chronicle book and separated rom ,

s - were added the o called Chronicles. Such was the original succession of the third division

’ c tubim or ; but it did not remain unaltered .

For the use of the synagogue the five Megiloth

were put together ; so that Ruth, which was

originally appended to Judges, and the Lamentations affixed at first to Jeremiah ’s 80 THE CAN N OF THE B IB E O L .

prophecies, were taken out of the second

and put into the third canon . This caused

of a separation Canticles and Ecclesiastes .

The new arrangement was made for liturgical

purposes . C H A P T E R I I I .

THE SAMARITAN AND ALE XANDRIAN

CAN N O S.

THE Samaritan canon consists of the

Pentateuch alone. This restricted collection

is owing to the fact, that when the Samaritans separated from the Jews and began their

worship on Gerizim, no more than the Mosaic writings had been invested by Ezra with

f be canonical dignity. The hostile eeling tween the rivals hindered the reception of

of books subsequently canonized . The idea their having the oldest and most sacred part in its entirety satisfied their spiritual wants .

Some have thought that the Sadducees, who already existed as a party before the Maccabean

period, agreed with the Samaritans in rejecting F 82 THE CANON OF THE B IB LE

all but the Pentateuch ; yet this is doubtful . It

1 is true that the Samaritans themselves say so ; f and that some of the church athers, Origen,

Jerome, and others agree ; but little reliance

can be put on the statement . The latter, f perhaps, con ounded the Samaritans and Sad ducees . It is also noteworthy that Christ in refuting the Sadducees appeals to the Penta

the t teuch alone ; yet conclusion, hat he did so because of their admitting no more than that

portion does not follow. The Alexandrian canon differed from the

Palestinian . The Greek translation commonly called the Septuagint contains some later pro ductions which the Palestinian Jews did not

s adopt, not only from their aver ion to Greek

f c literature generally, but also rom the re ent

of origin of the books, perhaps also their want

of prophetic sanction. The closing line the third part in the Alexandrian canon was more or less

’ See Ab lfatach s Am ] S mara . 1 02 & c. u m . a , p , 9, ° DRI N CAN N SAMARITAN é ALE X AN A O S. 83

— fl uctuating capable of admitting recent writ ings appearing under the garb of old names and

histories, or embracing religious subjects while the Palestinian collection was pretty well

determined, and all but finally settled . The judgment of the Alexandrians was freer than that of their brethren in the mother country. They had even separated in a measure from

Leonto olis the latter, by erecting a temple at p and their enlargement of the canon was

of another step divergence. Nor had they the criterion of language for the separation of canonical and uncanonical ; both classes were

before them in the same tongue. The enlarged canon was not formally sanctioned ; it had not the approval of the Sanhedrim ; yet it was to the Alexandrians what the Palestinian one was If to the Palestinians . Jews who were not well acquainted with Hebrew used the apocryphal

of and canonical books alike, it was a matter feeling and custom ; and if those who knew the 8 THE N N F 4 CA O O THE BIBLE . old language better adhered to the canonical

of more closely, it was a matter tradition f and language. The ormer set little value on the prevalent consciousness of the race that the spirit of prophecy was extinct ; their view of

’ the Spirit s operation was larger. The latter clung to the past with all the more tenacity

of . that the old life the nation had degenerated . The Alexandrian Jews opened their minds to

Greek culture and philosophy, appropriating d new i eas, and explaining their Scriptures in

‘ accordance with wider conceptions of the divine presence though such adaptation turned aside

the original sense. Consciously or unconsciously they were preparing Judaism in some degree to f be the religion o humanity. But the Rabbins shut out those enlarging influences, confining their religion within the narrow traditions of

one people. The process by which they con

f its served the old belie helped to quench spirit,

so that it became an antique skeleton, powerless

86 THE N N OF HE CA O T B IB LE .

reason working upon revelation, and moulding

ue/z tradition it into a new system . S serves but to show the inability of genuine Judaism to

' ’ ’ R atz nalzszn assimilate philosophic thought . o g should not be styled the operation of tradition .

The truth of these remarks is evident from a

of f comparison two books, exempli ying Alexan drian and Palestinian Judaism respectively.

The Wisdom of Solomon shows the enlarging ff e ect of Greek philosophy. Overpassing Jew f ish particularism, it o ten approaches Christi anit 1 y in doctrine and spirit, so that some have

f r even assumed a Christian origin o it. The

Wisdom o f Jesus son of Sirach has not the doc

of trine immortality. Death is there an eternal f sleep, and retribution takes place in this li e . The

Jewish theocracy is the centre of history Israel the elect people and all wisdom is embodied in

the law. The writer is shut up within the old

national ideas, and leans upon the writings in

N k and oac . Kirschbaum , Weisse, SA AL ’D 8 MARITAN é E X AA RIAN CANONS. 7

B which they are expressed . Thus the agio

of graphical canon Judea, conservative as it is,

and purer in a sense, presents a narrower type

of r than the best specimens the Alexand ian one .

The genial breath of Aryan culture had not ex

anded e p its S mitism .

The identity of the Palestinian and Alexan

d notwithstand drian canons must be abandone , ing the contrary arguments of Eichhorn and

Movers . It is said, indeed, that Philo neither mentions nor quotes the Greek additions ; but

neither does he quote several canonical books . f According to Eichhorn, no ewer than eight f 1 o . the latter are unnoticed by him Besides,

of he had peculiar views inspiration, and quoted loosely from memory. Believing as he did in the inspiration of the Greek version as a ffi whole, it is di cult to think that he made a distinction between the different parts of f it. In one passage he re ers to the sacred

' 1 ' un in dar alte Testam t vol. i. . 1 . E inla t g en , p 33 E THE CANON OF TH B IB LE .

of f of books the Therapeutae, a anatical sect

laws o ro lzets Jews in Egypt, as , oracles f p p ,

lzymns and at/zor books by which knowledge and f ”1 piety are increased and per ected, but this

presents little information as to the canon of

the Egyptian Jews generally ; for it is precari ous argumentation to say with Herbst that they f if prove a two old canon . Even the Alex

andrian and Palestinian canons be identical , we

cannot be sure that t/ze atner books which the

t/ze Therapeutae read as holy besides the law,

ro izets and h mns ff f ha io p p y , di ered rom the g

ra ha g p , and so constituted another canon than

the general Egyptian one . It is quite possible

that tno hymns mean the Psalms ; and tfze

ot/zer books of , the rest the hagiographa.

The argument for the identity of the two f . & c . canons deduced rom 4 Esdras xiv 44 , ,

as if the twenty- four open books were dis tinguished from the other writings dictated to

1 ’ mt contem la te/a O . Tom. M De a . ed. an e p , pp p 475, g y.

90 THE CANON OF THE BIBLE .

ormall n n t own as f y recog ise a ca on of heir , De

Wette says of them, they had and used one

larger than the Palestinian, without troubling themselves about a f ormal sanction for it by a body of Rabbis at Jerusalem or elsewhere .

Their canon was not identical with that of the

and all the f Palestinians, argumentation ounded

’ upon Philo s non - quotation of the apocryphal

th books fails to prove e contrary. The very way inwhich apocryphal are inserted among canonical

books in the Alexandrian canon, shows the equal

s and rank a signed to both. Esdras first second succeed the Chronicles ; Tobit and Judith are

between Nehemiah and Esther ; the Wisdom of

Solomon and Sirach follow Canticles ; Baruch succeeds Jeremiah Daniel is followed by Sus anna and other productions of the same class

and the whole closes with the three books of Mac

s . cabee . Such is the order in the Vatican MS

c in The threefold division of the anon,

i in s has d cat g three stage in its formation, SAMARITAN » A XA I a LE NDR AN CANONS. 9 :

I

d. continue Josephus, indeed, gives another,

of based on the nature the separate books,

n not on MSS . We learn nothi g from him of its r hi histo y, w ch is somewhat remark

two able, considering that he did not live centuries after the last work had been added .

’ The account of the canon s final arrangement

was evidently unknown to him . CHAPTER IV.

NUMBER AND ORDER OF THE SEPARATE

BOO KS.

THE number of the books was variously os

- d. timate Josephus gives twenty two, which was the usual number among Christian writers in the f n second, third, and ourth centuries, havi g been derived perhapsfrom the letters of the Hebrew

alphabet. Origen, Jerome, and others have it.

It continued longest among the teachers of the

’ Nice horus s Greek Church, and is even in p

1 stichometry. The enumeration in question

has Ruth with Judges, and Lamentations with ” Jeremiah . In Epiphanius the number twenty

‘ the al habet seven is found, made by taking p

’ See Credner s a Cost/lit h e dos Ka nons . 1 2 . , p 4

D s ct ers 22 2 vol 11 1 e man . ond cha t . 80 d. p , p , 3, . p. , e

Petav.

HE A O F THE B IB LE 94 T C N N O .

n of first or authentic prophecies, the late ess these oracles brought Isaiah into the third place

among the greater prophets . The Talmudic

of order the Hagiographa is Ruth, Psalms, Job,

Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Lamentations,

Daniel, Esther, Ezra, Chronicles . Here Ruth

precedes the Psalter, coming as near the former prophets as possible ; for it properly belongs to

them, the contents associating it with the

’ Judges time. The Talmudic order is that usually adopted in German MSS . What is the true estimate o f it ? Is it a proper Talmudic

w . regulation Perhaps not, else the Hebre MSS of the French and Spanish Jews would not so f readily have departed rom it. Bloch supposes

Bathra that Baba , which gives the arrangement

f of r Boraithas o the books, is one the apoc yphal that proceeded from an individual teacher and

1 had no binding authority.

1 ' ’ Studim z ur Gesokzcfito der al testa c t r t mm th fie Litera u , n. s. w 1 8 t e c. . , p. , ORDE R OF THE SE PARA TE B OOKS. 95

The Masoretic arrangement differs from the Talmudic in putting Isaiah before Jeremiah and

Ezekiel . The Hagiographa are, Psalms, Pro

r ve bs, Job, Canticles, Ruth, Lamentations,

Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra (with Nehe

1 miah), Chronicles . This is usually adopted in f ff Spanish MSS . But MSS . o ten di er arbi traril y, because transcribers did not consider

an 2 themselves bound to y one arrangement .

the According to some, a very old testimony to commencing and concluding books of the third division is given by the New Testa

ment (Luke xxiv . 44 ; Matthew xxiii . agreeably to which the Psalms were first and the Chronicles last ; but this is incon

elusive .

The Alexandrian translators, as we have ff f seen already, placed the books di erently rom

1 ' ' D l or tex tzous m ’ bns H e B ib i m n inah . 6 ody, g , p 44. Hodygives lists of the order in which the books stand in i i i f M w S. 6 om e earl rin ed ed ons and n a e S . . s yp t t , p 45 H BIBLE 96 THE CANON OF T E .

the Palestinian Jews . In their version Daniel

f z the comes a ter E ekiel, so that it is put beside

greater prophets . Was this done by Jews or ? Christians Perhaps by the latter, who put it

tw the be een greater and lesser prophets, or in o of r ther words, out the thi d into the second

of division, because dogmatic grounds, and so f effaced a trace o the correct chronology.

can Little importance, however, be attached to the order of the books in the Septuagint ; because the work was done at different times B by different persons . ut whatever may have been the arrangement of the parts when

the whole was complete, we know that it was disturbed by Protestants separating the apocryphal writings and putting them all

together.

98 THE CANON OF THE BIB LE .

- f i . 2 1 Wisdom xii xv Romans ix . , rom Wisdom

- - . . 1 1 f 1 8 20 xv 7; Eph . vi 3 7, rom Wisdom v. ;

1 f . . 1 0 & c. . 1 Cor ii , , rom Judith viii 4. Others

l are less probable . When Bishop Cosin says, that “ in all the New Testament we find not any one passage of the apocryphal books to have been alleged either by Christ or His ” i of apostles for the confirmat on their doctrine,

the argument, though based on fact, is scarcely

conclusive ; else Esther, Canticles, Ecclesiastes,

and other works might be equally discredited . Yet it is probable that the New Testament

writers, though quoting the Septuagint much

more than the original, were disinclined to the

additional parts of the Alexandrian canon .

They were Palestinian themselves, or had in

view Judaisers of a narrow creed . Prudential

motives, no less than a predisposition in favour

of the old national canon, may have hindered

1 ' ' r 8 . 26 &c. Stadten and Kritzken fo 1 53 , p 7,

'

ol stzc l istor t/to Canon . 22 . A Stfi a a H yaf , p CHRIS TIAN SE T E T U OF H OLD E S TAME NT. 99

them from expressly citing any apocryphal

production . The apostle Paul and probably

of New the other writers the Testament,

believed in the literal inspiration of the

Biblical books, for he uses an argument in the Galatian epistle which turns upon the

of 1 singular or plural a noun . And as the

inspiration of the Septuagint translation was

commonly held by the Christians of the early

n ce turies, it may be that the apostles and evangelists made no distinction between its

rt . r pa s Jude quotes Enoch, an apoc yphal work

not in the Alexandrian canon ; so that he at

1 D ’ ’ ' ' e h Z ur o matzé Staaten n. Kritzken for 1 860 S e Rot e, g , ,

’ 6 The a ostle s ar um ent rests on the occurrence o p. 7, &c . p g f

h sin lar seed or é a in Genesis xvii. 8 not h t e gu ( , pp ) t e

lural seeds o r é ara thou h the lural of the corres ondin p ( , pp ) g p p g l h b Hebrew word cou d not ave been used, ecause it has a dif

i n Grammatical inaccurac is made ferent significat o . y the basis

i l in r r ta io Those who i h of a certain theolog ca te p e t n. w s to see a Specimen of laboured ingenuity unsuccessfully applied to the

’ ifi tion of St Pauls ar um ent in this assa e ma j ust ca g p g , y consult ’ Das lte Testa t in neuem Testament Tholuck s a men . 6 e , p 3 , tc. fl E i h i i i t u a e. st. to t Gal ns i Vier e A g ( p e at a . 100 THE CANON OF THE B IB LE . least had no rigid notions about the difference f o canonical and uncanonical writings . Still we know that the compass o f the Old Testa ment canon was somewhat unsettled to the

of as Christians the first century, it was to the

Hellenist Jews themselves . It is true that the

Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms were universally recognized as authoritative ; but

of the extent the third division was indefinite, so that the non - citation of the three books respecting which there was a difference of opinion among the Jews may not have been

c . a cidental Inasmuch, however, as the Greek speaking Jews received more books than their

Palestinian brethren, the apostles and their

immediate successors were not wholly disin

clined of to the use the apocryphal productions.

The undefined boundary of the canon facilitated

also the recognition of all primitive records of

the new Revelation .

The early fathers, who wrote in Greek, used the

02 HE CAN N F THE B I L 1 T O O B E .

1 has by Scripture briefly signified this,

saying. Assuming that Wisdom was written by

Solomon, he uses it as canonical and inspired,

? designating it divine Judith he cites with other

’ books of the Old Testament ; and the Song of the three children in the furnace is used as

4 ls Scripture. Ecclesiasticus also is so treated . " Dionysius of Alexandria cites Ecclesiasticus

u “ (xvi . introd cing the passage with hear

”7 divine oracles . The same book is elsewhere

8

2 0 . 8 cited, chapters xliii . 9, 3 and i . So is

1° - 2 . 1 2 1 Wisdom, vii . 1 5 and Baruch (iii 5) is also quoted!? The fathers who wrote in Latin used some of the old Latin versions of which

of Augustine speaks ; one them , and that the

1 3 Stromata 11. 2 r at v 15 11 St om a i . 121 , 3 . , 1 6. , . 7. 4 E x Scri t ro /wt el 1 . e o ae c. . p p p . g , 5 ' “ Stromatezs ii. 1 2 A D , 5. 1 64 . . 7 ’ ' ' De Natura R tlz z v l i ou s Rel nzae Saerae o . v. . 6. q , p 35 8 ' ' Fra ment Nzc t i l . e . n Re z Sacrae vol 11 . . 0 g g. , . p 4 4. 9 1° Hid . 0 . 1s 06 , p 4 7 . , p. 4 . u ’ ' E t a ad z n s a D . Ro R lz . ii . is ol . o m n in e Saer. vol. i . 1 p y , o , p 95. 1” ' Reh . Siam vol. ii. . 08 . q , p 4 CH T E RIS IAN USE OF TH OLD TE STAME NT. 103

ft of oldest, probably dating soon a er the middle

the second century, being known to us as the

Itala f . As this was made rom the Septuagint,

’ it had the usual apocryphal books . Jerome s critical revision or new version did not sup plant the old Latin till some time after his

1 death . Tertullian quotes the Wisdom of

’ 2 Solomon expressly as Solomon s ; and intro

“ ”3 duces Sirach by as it is written . He cites

4 Baruch as Jeremiah . He also believes in the

u of of f a thenticity the book Enoch, and de ends

5 cr f it as S ipture at some length . Cyprian o ten cites the Greek additions to the Palestinian

canon . He introduces Tobit with the words

”6 as it is written, or divine Scripture teaches,

“ saying and Wisdom with, the Holy Spirit

”8 shows by Solomon . Ecclesiasticus is intro

' ‘ D Advers. Valentzmonos h l 220 A. . , c . 2 . 3 e x tat ne t h 2 . D E lzor io Casti atis, c .

5 t t De itn liebri ch. . Con ra Gnos ieos, ch. 8 Hao Mu , 3

6 7 D . t F ll De rat. omin. 1 E is . 1 1 0 ed. e . . p 55, p. , O , p 53

8 82 D t t t i ch. 1 2 . 1 . e E x/zor . Mar ri a y , , p 10 T IB L 4 THE CANON OF HE B E .

“ ”1 duced r with, it is written ; and Ba uch with,

”2 t 1 and the Holy Spiri teaches by Jeremiah .

3 2 Maccabees are used as Scripture ; as are the

1‘ additions to Daniel . The African fathers fol

lo w the Alexandrian canon without scruple .

A D Hippolytus of Rome (about . . who

as 5 wrote in Greek, quotes Baruch Scripture ;

and interprets the additions to Daniel, such as

a . Susann , as Scripture likewise Melito of Sardis 7 made it his special business to inquire among the Palestinian

Jews about the number and names of their canonical books ; and the result was the

— of a following list the five books Moses, Joshu ,

f of Judges, Ruth, our books Kings, two of

s of Chronicle , the Psalms David, the Proverbs of of Solomon , Ecclesiastes , the Song Songs,

Job, Isaiah, Jeremiah, the twelve in one book,

1 11 D Mortal 1 r t e . 6 1 D a D . e . omin . 1 1 , p O . , p 4 . 3 im iii ‘1 t . De Tes . 62. La sis 1 . . & . 4, p p , p 33 , c

’ 5 N et 6 dv. o . Mi i A v. See ue s ed tion . 68 &c g , p 9 , . 7 f After 1 71 .

106 T HE CANON OF THE BIBLE .

the epistle is attributed to Jeremiah. But catalogue had no influence upon his practice . He followed the prevailing view of the extended

“ canon . Sirach is introduced by for this also is written the book of Wisdom is cited as a

2 3 divine word; the writer is called a prophet ;

Christ is represented as speaking in it through

Solomon 4 1 ; and Wisdom vii . 7 is adduced as the words o hrist Himse 5 f C lf . Tobit is cited as

6 cr ture of S ip . His view the additions to the

of books Daniel and Esther, as well as his ffi opinion about Tobit, are su ciently expressed f in the epistle to A ricanus, so that scattered quotations from these parts of Scripture can

f of be properly estimated . O the history Susanna he ventures to say that the Jews

1 H m t in oann tom . xxxn. ch. 1 ed. uet. Co men . y " 4,

9 D laru i d. e e. t a l iii. 2 vol. . . e Con r Ce s. 7 p 494, 3 H rn. v 2 . H m vi. 1 Levit. o . In E x odus, o

H m x11 In Levit. , o . . 4. 5 h H rn 2 1 . In Lu am , o . ‘1 ratione ii. . 2 1 . De O , p 5 CHRISTIAN USE OF THE OLD TES TAAIENT. 107

1 withdrew it on purpose from the people . He seems to argue in favour o f books used and

in read the churches , though they may be put

of v out the canon by the Jews . As di ine

r Providence had prese ved the sacred Scriptures, no alteration should be made in the ecclesi astical tradition respecting books sanctioned by the churches though they be external to the

Hebrew canon .

Most of the writings of Methodius Bishop of

’ of Tyre are lost, so that we know little his f Opinions respecting the books o Scripture.

But it is certain that he employed the Apo crypha like the other writings of the Old Testa

0 . 2 ment . Thus Sirach (xviii . 3 and xix ) is

’1 quoted in the same way as the Proverbs .

4 1 - Wisdom (iv . 3) is cited , and Baruch (iii .

1 D i 2 . laru v l . . 1 O . ed. e e o . pp , p

‘ ' I3 1 1 . 3 ’ ec nt r inu in Comb fi Conviviam d e vi g m, e s s Auctarium bib

raec rum atrum . 6 . liothecae G o p , p 9 5 bid . 6 . Ibid. . 1 0 . I . , p 9 , p 9 C HAPTER VI .

THE NEW TESTAMENT CANON IN THE FIRST

THREE ENT C URIES.

THE first Christians relied on the Old Testa f ment as their chie religious book . To them it was of divine origin and authority. The New

n Testament writi gs came into gradual use, by

the side of the older Jewish documents, accord ing to the times in which they appeared and the

names of their reputed authors. The Epistles of

Paul were the earliest written ; after which came

the Apocalypse, the Epistle to the Hebrews,

and other documents, all in the first century. After the first gospel had undergone a process of r re- f t anslation, writing, and interpolation, rom

the discourses 1 of the Aramaic basis, , which

1 - e M tu A E s a . u eb H E iii y . p . . . . 39.

1 10 HE CAN N OF THE B IB LE T O .

u~ ing they may have been, the reporters were n

equal to their work. It is also remarkable that

so many of them should be unknown ; produc

tions being attached to names of repute to give

them greater currency. When Marcion came from Pontus to Rome

( 1 44 he brought with him a Scripture

n of collection consisti g ten Pauline epistles . With true critical instinct he did not include d those a dressed to Timothy and Titus, as also

the epistle to the Hebrews . The gospel of ’ F Marcion was Luke s in an altered state. rom this and other facts we conclude that external

parties were the first who carried out the idea of of collecting Christian writings, and putting them either beside or over against the sacred

s of of book the Old Testament, in support

Basilides 1 2 AD their systems . As to ( 5 ) , his supposed quotations from the New Testament

1 in Hippolytus are too precarious to be trusted .

1 ’ David s ntroduction to the Stud i the IV Testar vol. son I y f . n. 88 x. p. 3 . E NE W TE S TAAIE NT CANOIV 1 TH . 1 1

“ Testimonies to the acknowledged books of the New Testament as Scripture have been transferred from his followers to himself ; so that his early witness to the canon breaks f f down . It is in erred rom statements in Origen and Jerome that he had a gospel of his

’ own somewhat like St Luke s, but extra

canonical . His son Isidore and succeeding

’ disciples used Matthew s gospel . Jerome says

that Marcion and Basilides denied the Pauline

authorship of the epistle to the Hebrews

1 and the pastoral ones. It is also doubtful

’ 1 0- 1 66 A whether Valentinus s ( 4 D . ) alleged citations from the New Testament can be relied

of upon . The passages this kind ascribed to him by the fathers belong in a great measure

f of to his disciples . The ragment a letter pre

served by Clement o f Alexandria in the second

of book the Stromata, has been thought to

contain references to the gospels of Matthew

1 E x lanatio in E ist. ad Titm n vol. iv. . 0 ed. Be i p p , p 4 7, ned ct. TH AN N OF THE E E C O BIB L .

f f has and Luke ; but the act is doubt ul . Nor Henrici proved that Valentinus used John ’s

1 . f u gospel But his ollowers, incl ding Ptolemy

1 8 A - 0 . D. Heracleon 1 8 200 A D ( ) and ( 5 ) , quote

the Gospels and other portions o f the New 2 F ’ Testament. rom Hippolytus s account of

ae the Ophites, Perat , and Sethians, we infer that the Christian writings were much employed

.

by them . They rarely cite an apocryphal

work. More than one hundred and sixty citations from the New Testament have been e s m gath red out of their writings . We may ad it

that these Ophites and Perata were of early

f w of origin, the ormer being the oldest kno n the Gnostic parties ; but there is no proof that the acquaintance with the New Testament

1 t n che Gnosis and die heilz e Schr . . Die Valen inia is jg ifl , p 75 2 A good deal of manipulation has been needlessly employed for the purpose of placing these heretics as early as possible ; ’ but nothing definite can be extracted from Irenaeus s notices of ’ h Hi l tus s use of the resent tense in s eakin of them t em . ppo y p , p g ,

r renders it probable that they were nearly his contempo aries. 3 ’ See the Indexes to Duncker and Schneidewin s edition.

1 1 4 THE CANON OF IHE BIB LE .

r of centu y, and continued till the end it ; con temporaneously with the development of a Catholic Church and its necessary adjunct a

Catholic canon .

No New Testament canon, except a partial

and unauthoritative one, existed till the latter

f of ec hal the s ond century, that is, till the idea f o a Catholic church began to be entertained.

The living power of Christianity in its early stages had no need of books for its nurture .

But in the development of a church organiza tion the internal rule of consciousness was f changed into an external one o faith . The Ebionites or Jewish Christians had their

favourite Gospels and Acts . The gospel of

t was Mat hew highly prized by them, existing

of as it did in various recensions, which the gospel according to the Hebrews was one. f Other documents, such as the Revelation o

and of John ; the preaching Peter, a Jewish

Christian history subsequently re-written and E TE STAA/IE NT CAN V 1 TIIE N W OZ . 1 5 employed in the Clementine Recognitions and

Homilies, were also in esteem . Even so late

- 1 1 A D. He es 80 . i us as 75 , g pp , a Jewish Christian, does not seem to have had a canon consisting

’ of the f our gospels and Paul s Epistles, but

“ appeals to the law and the prophets and the

Lord , so that his leading principle was,

’ the identity of Jesus s words with the Old

Testament ; agreeably to the tenets of the

party he belonged to . The source whence he drew the words of Jesus was probably

the Gospel according to the Hebrews, a w document which we kno he used, on the

of u f authority E sebius . He does not re er to Paul except by implication in a passage

1 f en given in Photius rom Steph Gobar, where he says that such as used the words “ Eye

& c . hath not seen, nor ear heard, , falsi

’ fied the Divine Scriptures and the Lord s

for words, Blessed are your eyes they see,

1 B ibliotheea od. 2 2 ; c 3 . 1 1 6 THE CAN N OF THE B IB LE O .

& c. n As Paul quoted the condemned la guage,

1 ’ . he is blamed Though he knew Paul s epistles,

m autho ta he does not look upon the as ri tive.

He betrays no acquaintance with the fourth

“ gospel ; for the question, What is the door to Jesus ?” does not presuppose the knowledge

2 N s of . . o en f John x , 7, 9 g has ailed to prove

’ ’ Hegesippus s Jewish descent ; and Holtz mann s mediating view of him is incorrect!1

1 It is an unfounded assumption that Paul cited the passage ” b m ere accident on the contrar he ives it as canonical y y, g , “ ” i is written 1 Corinth ii. It ma be tha h with as t ( . y t t e Gnostics are referred to as using the obj ectionable passage ; but

ecial leadin to limit it to them when Paul has ex it is sp p g ,

th am e derivin it either from Isaiah lxiv ssl used e s . pre y , g 4, or som e unknown document j ust as it is special pleading to iden

xucos standin beside vé os xal r o rat with the N tify 6 p g p p pfi , ew ’ t The word excludesPauls E istle from th Testamen . p s e canon

r h r an evidence to the contrar as has been alle d no is t e e y y, ge ,

ria e istles attributed to Clem nt in the two Sy c p e , which Wet

’ ’ bins s H . E iv 2 in ublished. Com . E use . . 2 Ph ti ste p p , o us s

bli theca 2 2 . A olo ists have laboured to rove He e i B i o , 3 p g p g s p

us an orthodox Catholic Christian like Irenaeus but in vain p , .

was a ewish Christian of m oderate t e ho din He J yp , l g inter course with Pauline Christians at the time when the Catholic

f rm d Church was being o e . ’ 1 Hil en eld s itsclzr t for 1 8 - 1 8 8 See g f Ze tf 75 7 .

1 1 8 THE CAN N OF THE BIB LE O .

epistles, which show their dependence on the

t of au hentic Pauline ones, with those Peter,

presuppose a similar collection ; which, along f with the Synoptists, existed before the ourth gospel . The Apocalypse and the epistle to the Hebrews were obnoxious to the Pauline

’ churches, as Paul s letters were to the Jewish f Christian ones . Hence the ormer were outside

the Pauline collections . The apostolic fathers quote from the Old

Testament, which was sacred and inspired to

them . They have scarcely any express cita All tions from the New Testament. usions

occur, especially to the epistles .

The first Epistle of Clement to the Corin thians (about 1 20 implies acquaintance

of s with several the epi tles, with those to the Cor i hi ns nt a . , Romans, Hebrews, and perhaps others Two passages have also been adduced as de

of rived from the gospels Matthew and Luke,

2 8 and . in chapters xiii. xlvi ; but pro THE NE T TAME NT CA 1 W E S NOtV. 1 9

bably some other source supplied them, such as

oral tradition . It has also been argued f that the quotation in the fi teenth chapter,

“ The Scripture says somewhere, This people

honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is f f f 6 ar . rom me, comes rom Mark vii in which

f . I it varies rom the Hebrew of Isaiah xxix 3 ,

as well as the Septuagint version . Clement f there ore, so it is said, quotes the Old Testa

ment through the medium of the gospels

8 . (Matthew xv. , Mark vii But the argu ment is inconclusive because the words agree closely enough with the Septuagint to render

the supposition very probable that they are a

f . memoriter citation rom it As they stand, they coincide exactly neither with Mark nor 1 f the Septuagint. Thus we dissent rom the

opinion of Gebhardt and Harnack . Wher

ever Scripture is cited , or the expres

1 - ’ ’ There is ar ean u instead of the Septuagint s and Mark s

&r é et h nd . (Tisc e . ) x 2 E 1 0 THE CANON OF THE BIBL .

sion it is written occurs, the Old Testa

ment is meant.

1 D. Hermas (about 40 A. ) seems to have used the epistle to the Ephesians and perhaps that

as of to the Hebrews, well as the epistle James ;

t but here is great uncertainty about the matter,

for there is no express or certain quotation from

of any part the New Testament. The writer

f of f o ten alludes to words Jesus, ound in

’ Matthew s gospel, so that he may have been

1 acquainted with it. Keim and others have dis

covered references to the fourth gospel ; but they

are invalid . There is no allusion to the Acts in

. 2 . Scri ture e vis . iv , 4 The only p cited is th

2 B ldat and Iodat A . apocryphal book , now lost The writer seems to have known several Jewish

3 Apocalypses .

1 N Geschichte esu von az ara vol. 1 . 1 y , , p 44 .

' 1 V ion 11 with th r l See is . 3 , 4, e p o egomena of De Gebhardt

k lxxiii and Harnac , p. . 1 ’ ee Holtz m ann in Hil enfeld s Zeitschn for 1 0 S g fi 875, p. 4 ,

1 22 THE CAN N OF THE B IB LE O .

t f even Justin, thir y years a ter, never quotes the

n Scri ture New Testame t writings as p . The thing would be anomalous and opposed to the

r of f of histo y the first hal the second century.

t - u When hese post apostolic prod ctions appeared , the New Testament writings did not stand on

the same level with the Old , and were not yet esteemed sacred and inspired like the Jewish

Scriptures . The Holy Spirit was thought to

dwell in all Christians, without being confined to a few writers ; and his influence was the

common heritage of believers . There are evi

’ dences of Barnabas s acquaintance with the

Epistles to the Romans and Corinthians ; nor is it improbable that he knew the canonical

of a ears gospel Matthew, though one passage pp

1 & c n . 0 . to co tradict Matthew xxviii , , without

necessarily implying ignorance of what lies in '

the of it, viz ., that ascension Jesus took place on

1 of . the day his resurrection Strangely enough,

’ 1 See Cha ter xv end with Hil enfeld s note B arnahae e is p . , g , p

tula d altera 1 1 8 1 1 . e . , pp. , 9 THE NE W TE STAME NT CAN 1 2 ON. 3

Keim thinks that the writer had John ’s gospel before him ; but this opinion is refuted by the

’ of Barnabas s fth 1 end fi chapter. Holtzmann has ably disposed of the considerations ad

? duced by Keim Barnabas quotes the book of Enoch as Scripture ; 3 and an apocryphal

w - prophecy is introduced ith, another pro 0

4 phet says .

’ As far as we canjudge from Eusebius s account

5 of 1 0 AD Papias (about 5 ) , that writer knew noth ing of a New Testament canon . He speaks

1 s 1 ed Hil enfeld. Epi . p. 3 . g

‘ 2 ir wissenscha tliche Theolo ie 1 8 1 6 Zeitschnft fi f g , 7 , p 33 ,

etc.

r xv and iv. In the form er the reference is to Chapte s i.

xix 6 66 6 but the latter is not in the resent Enoch lxx . 5 , , 7, p

Eno h thou h Hil enfeld thin s he has discovered it book of c , g g k ’ - Dillmann s Das B uch Henoch 1 6 and xc. 1 . . in lxxxix. 6 4 7 ( , pp

1 Was another a ocr hal ewish book current in the 6 , p yp J

nd r the nam e of Enoch or did he con time of Barnab as, u e ;

misl d b the Greek trans found one document with another, e y

into discredit ? lation of an apocalyptic work which had fallen

’ d B arnabae E istula ed. 2 . 8 . See Hilgenfel s p , pp 77, 7

1‘ Chapter xi. 5 es iii. . Hist. E ccl . 39 T E AN N F THE IB LE 1 24 H C O O B .

of Matthew and Mark ; but it is most pro bable that he had documents which either

formed the basis of our present Matthew and

' Mark, or were taken into them and written

1 of ae over . According to Andreas C sarea he

was acquainted with the Apocalypse of John ;

while Eusebius testifies . to his knowledge of

1 1 Peter and John . But he had no conception

of canonical authority attaching to any part of

the New Testament . His language implies

1 A small body of literature originating in the fragment of

i H E l i i 1 - has P r b Euseb us i . s i apias p eserved y ( st cc e . . , 39, 4) l l n appeared ; though it is difficu t to obtain satisfactory conc usio s.

' Not only have Weifl enbach and Leimbach written treatises on

the sub ect but other scholars have entered into it m ore or less j , full — Zahn Steitz Ri enbach Hil enfeld Li sius Keim y, , , gg , g , p , ,

Mar ns Loman H l an Li h f te o tz m ann H s h Tietz d t oot. , , , au ra t , , g The fragment is not of great weight in settling the authenticity

of the four o l Indir l in hr w m e li ht on g spe s. ect y deed it t o s so g the connection of two evangelists with written m emoirs of the life of Jesus but it rather suggests than solves various m atters

of im ortance . It is tolerabl clear that he os l if such the p y t g pe s, y ma be called of which he s ea s as written b Matthew and y , p k y

Mar were not identical with the works now existin under the k, g names of these evangelists and that no safe conclusion can be ’ ’ ’ drawn from Papias s silence about John s and Luke s as not

1 26 THE CANON OF THE B IBLE .

he Gos el the A ostles A D. t . ) There p and p are

1 recognized as the constituents of the book . The writer also used the Gospel according to

the Hebrews, for there is a quotation from it in

? the epistle to the Smyrnians The second part of the collection seems to have wanted the epistle to the Ephesians ? The two leading

parties, long antagonistic, had now become united ; the apostles Peter and Paul being

4 mentioned together. In the Testaments of

’ the twelve patriarchs (about 1 70 Paul s

”

i.e. life is said to be described in holy books, ,

5 he his own epistles and t Acts .

1 D. Justin Martyr ( 50 A. ) knew the first and f third of the synoptic gospels . His use o

’ Mark s does not appear. His knowledge of

1 ’ E ist. ad Philadel h ch. . See H fel n h p p , 5 e e s ote on t e pas

- sa e. The other well known assa e in cha r i is t g p g pte vii . oo uncertain in readin and m eanin to be d g g a duced here . 1 11 Cha ter iii. To the E hesians cha xii p p , pter .

‘1 E ist ad Romanos iv. p . , 5 Testam B n . 1 1 . 20 1 d Sink . e j , p , e . er. TH E NE W TE S TAME NT CANON 1 27

the fourth is denied by many, and zealously f defended by others . Thoma finds proo s f that Justin knew it well, and used it reely as - of a text book gnosis, without recognizing it as the historical work of an apostle ; an ffi 1 hypothesis encumbered with di culties . What ever be said about Justin ’s acquaintance with

1 D this gospel ; its existence before 40 A. . is incapable either of decisive or probable proof ;

’ and this father s Logos- doctrine is less de velo ed en p than the Johannine, because it is cumbered with the notion of miraculous birth

by a virgin . The Johannine authorship has receded before the tide of modern criticism ;

and though this tide is arbitrary at times, it is

here irresistible. Apologists should abstain f from strong assertions on a point so di ficult, as that each “ gospel is distinctly recognized by him ; for the noted passage in the dialogue

1 ‘ Zeitschri t ir zmlsscnscha liche Theolo ie 1 8 0 / fl fl g , 75, p. 49 , 1 8 T N N T E B B 2 HE CA O OF H I LE .

with Trypho does not support them ? It is pretty certain that he employed an extra

so- of canonical gospel, the called gospel the

t Hebrews. This Petrine document may be e ferred to in a passage which is unfortunately

? capable of a double interpretation He had

’ of also the older Acts Pilate. Paul s epistles

are never mentioned, though he doubtless knew

them . Having little sympathy with Paulinism he attached his belief much more to the primi

. I tive apostles The Apocalypse, Peter, and

I John he esteemed highly ; the epistle to the Hebrews and the Acts he treated in the same

’ ’ 1 EV 761 dr o oveu a fu 0 r wr irr G 3 m p u ac, d dram n) 11 3 dr oo bh a o

‘ Ital é w éxelvoc r a axokovfl w er cr at . 0 . r s p no d wv o v dxfl . Sec 1 3

“ h l re i h Here t e apost es a not necessar ly Matthew and Jo n. Apocryphal gospels then current bore the nam e of apostles or

— P r m Ni u hi c their at ndants of ete a es odem s Mat & . te , , J , c , t as,

’ Kai T b dire?» p erwro/saxévat airrbv IIérpor Ital ryeypd¢0a¢

’ év Tots dr a soveu ao c atrroi? e e évov Ital 70070 erd 706 m / u y y mp , n Di u ’ m l al. c m Tr h. 1 06. Here the ronoun airro , yp , p i)

r babl refer to Pe r And th x r i n h m m i p o y s te . e e p ess o is e o rs ’ can hardl m ean Mark s os el since erome is the first th y g p , J at calls it such.

1 0 T E N L 3 H CA ON OF THE B IB E .

was made among the current documents . He regarded them all as having been written down f rom memory, and judged them by criteria of evidence conformable to the Old Testament f Scriptures . Though lessons out o Gospels

(some of our present ones and others), as also

of out the prophets, were read in assemblies on

1 the first day of the week, the act of converting

the Christian writings into Scripture was pos

terior ; for the mere reading of a gospel in churches on Sunday does not prove that it was

considered divinely authoritative ; and the use

of f the epistles, which ormed the second and

less valued part of the collection, must still

have been limited .

’ 1 60- 1 80 Justin s disciple, Tatian ( wrote

Diatessaron of a or harmony the gospels, which m began, according to Ephre Syrus, with John

I of i . but our knowledge it is uncertain . The author omitted the genealogies of Jesus and

1 A lo i ed. Thirlb . po g. . 97, y TH N A 1 1 E E W TE S TAME NT C NON. 3

x hin yt g belonging to His Davidic descent .

He seems also to have put into it particu lars derived from extra- canonical sources such

as the Gospel according to the Hebrews . Doubtless he was acquainted with Paul ’s

writings, as statements made in them are quoted ; but he dealt freely with them ac

cording to Eusebius, and even rejected

several epistles, probably first and second

l Timothy.

’ In Polycarp s epistle (about 1 60 which is liable to strong suspicions of having been

f th 2 written a ter the dea of the bishop, there are reminiscences of the synoptic gospels ; and

’ most of Paul s epistles as well as 1 Peter were used by the writer. But the idea of canonical

authority, or a peculiar inspiration belonging to

these writings, is absent .

11 m h xn. where a al is a lied to the a ostoli Co p. c ap. , 7p ¢ pp p c epistles ; a title they did !not receive so early as the age of

l car Zahn i lf admits this. Po y p. h mse 1 2 THE CAN N OF THE BI 3 O BLE .

The author of the second Clementine epistle

(about 1 50- 1 60) had not a New Testament canon

s made up of the four go pels and epistles. His

Scri ture p was the Old Testament, to which is

“ applied the epithet the Books or the Bible ;

“ ” and the words of Christ. The Apostles imme

“ ” diatel s y ubjoined to the Books, does not mean

the New Testament, or a special collection of the

has ? apostolic epistles, as been supposed The

preacher employed a gospel or gospels as Scrip

ture w ; perhaps those of Matthe and Luke, not

n the whole docume ts, but the parts containing

the words of Christ ? He also used the Gospel of t u the Egyptians as an authorita ive doc ment,

and quoted his sources freely. With the Johannine writings he seems to have been

11 unacquainted .

Athenagoras of Athens wrote an apology

1 6 A D addressed to Marcus Aurelius ( 7 . . ) In it

1 a t xiv 2 . Cha t r 11 . Ch p er . p e 4. 1 See Clementis Romani ad Corinthios guae dicuntur epis

lac ed (16 Gebhardt et Harnach 2 . sec 10 Prole omen tu , . , g a,

1 34 THE CANON OF THE BIB LE .

the meaning, the collection is put on a par with

the Old Testament, and regarded as inspired.

f A D I 0 In the second epistle o Peter (about . . 7 )

’ c ture Paul s epistles are regarded as S rip (iii .

This seems to be the earliest example of the f canonising o any New Testament portion .

Here a brotherly recognition of the Gentile

apostle and his productions takes the place of f ormer opposition . A false interpretation of his epistles is even supposed to have induced

a departure from primitive apostolic Christianity . The letter of the churches at Vienne and

1 A D f Lyons ( 77 . .) has quotations rom the epistles

n 1 1 to the Romans, Philippia s, Timothy, Peter,

the of Acts, gospels Luke and John, the

Apocalypse . The last is expressly called

1 cr ture S ip . This shows a fusion of the two

original tendencies, the Petrine and Pauline ; and the formation of a Catholic church with a

. n common canon of authority Accordi gly, the

1 A E H E v 1 u b . . 1 . se . . . ed. Bri h p , , p 44, g t. THE NE W TE STAME NT CAN ON. 1 3 5

two apostles, Peter and Paul, are mentioned

together.

1 A D Theophilus of Antioch ( 80 . . ) was familiar

’ with the gospels and most of Paul s epistles,

as also the Apocalypse. Passages are cited

”1 from Paul as the divine word . He ascribes

f n the ourth gospel to Joh , calling him an inspired

? man, like the Old Testament prophets We also learn from Jerome that he commented on the gospels put together by way of

3 harmony.

The author of the epistle to Diognetus (about

A D 200 . . ) shows his acquaintance with the

’ gospels and Paul s epistles ; but he never cites f the New Testament by way o proof. Words

are introduced into his discourse, in passing and

4 from memory.

1 0680 ar. Ad Autol cum iii 1 ; 1 1 1 d Mi n : . e M y , 4, p 4 , g e.

3 2 3 is 1 1 d l Ihid. 11. 2 . E t. a A asi m , p 5 , g a . ’ 4 erb k s Studien z ur eschichte der alten Kir See Ov ec G che,

handlun I. in which th date of the letter is brou ht d Ab g , e g own

i e i fter C ns antine. Surel this s too lat t ll a o t y . LE THE CANON OF THE B IB .

The conception of a Catholic canon was realized about the same time as that of a

church Catholic . One hundred and seventy

years from the coming of Christ elapsed before the collection assumed a form that carried with

1 the hol nd ns re it idea of y a i pi d. The way in

which it was done was by raising the apostolic ’ writings higher and higher till they were of

equal authority with the Old Testament, so that the church might have a rule of appeal . But by lifting the Christian productions up to

r the level of the old Jewish ones, inju y was done to that living consciousness which feels the opposition between spirit and letter ; the latter writings tacitly assuming or keeping the character of a perfect rule even as to form . The Old Testament was not brought down to

New s the ; the New was rai ed to the Old . It is clear that the earliest church fathers did not

1 ’ Davidson s Introduction to the Study of the New Testa ii t l. . . 0 men , vo p 5 8, &c.

8 E A E I LE 1 3 TH C NON OF TH B B .

Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian agree

c in re ognizing its existence .

Irenae us had a canon which he adopted as apostolic . In his view it was of binding force and authoritative . This contained the four

gospels, the Acts, thirteen epistles of Paul, the f o . first epistle John, and the Revelation He

- had also a sort of appendix or deutero canon, which he highly esteemed without putting it

on a par with the received collection, consisting

’ of the John s second epistle, first of Peter, and m the Shepherd of Her as . The last he calls

1 ture h Scri . t e p The epistle to Hebrews, that

’ of Jude, James s, second Peter, and third John

he ignored . Clement’s collection was more extended than

’ ae - Iren us . His appendix or deutero canon

2 included the epistle to the Hebrews, John,

Jude, the Apocalypse of Peter, the Shepherd

of of Hermas , the Epistles Clement and Barna

1 a r . 20 2 Adoors. H es , w , . THE E STAME AN N W TE NT C OIV. 1 39

bas . He recognised no obligatory canon, dis

tinct and of paramount authority. But he separated the New Testament writings by their traditionally apostolic character and the degree f o importance attached to them . He did not attach the modern idea of canonical in opposi

non-canonical tion to , either to the four gospels or any other part of the New Testament .

1 Barnabas is cited as an apostle . So is the

? Roman Clement The Shepherd of Hermas is

3 divi e of spoken of as n . Thus the line the Homo logoumena is not marked off even to the same

extent as in Irenae us .

’ Tertullian s of canon consisted the gospels,

of Acts, thirteen epistles Paul, the Apocalypse,

1 and John . As an appendix he had the e epistl to the Hebrews, that of Jude, the

of 2 1 Shepherd Hermas, John probably, and

- Peter. This deutero canon was not regarded

1 M Stromateis 11. 6 . 6 ed i ne. , , p 9 5, . g 1 3 ? 8 1 2 lia i. 2 Mid iv. 1 . 1 . I . 2 . , 7, p 3 ” 9, p 9 140 THE CANON OF THE BIBLE .

s as authoritative. No trace occurs in his work

’

2 . of James epistle, Peter, and 3 John He

1 Scr ture t used the Shepherd, calling it ip , withou

implying, however, that he put it on a par with the usually acknowledged canonical writ

f re ings ; but a ter he became a Montanist, he

pudiated it as the apocryphal Shepherd of

r adulterers, put among the apoc yphal and

”2 false by every council of the churches . It

was not v n , howe er, reckoned amo g the spurious

s and fal e writings, either at Rome or Carthage,

of in the time Tertullian . It was merely placed outside the universally received works by the

of western churches that day. These three fathers did not fix the canon

absolutely. Its limits were still unsettled .

But they sanctioned most of the books now

- accepted as divine, putting some extra canonical productions almost on the same level with the

r rest, if not in theo y at least in practice .

1 1 D - e Oratione ca . 1 2 . De Pu icitia 10 20 , p d , cap. .

142 THE CANON OF THE B IB LE .

ferred to in the middle ages ? That to the Alexandrians is probably the epistle to the

Hebrews ; though this has been denied with

out suflicient r eason . According to the usual

t punctuation, bo h are said to have been forged

’ in Paul s name, an opinion which may have been entertained among Roman Christians

1 D. about 70 A. The Epistle to the Hebrews

was rejected in the west, and may have been thought a supposititious work in the in

terests of Paulinism, with some reason because

of its internal character? which is at least semi

Pauline, though its Judaistic basis is apparent .

The story about the origin of the fourth gospel

with its apostolic and episcopal attestation,

evinces a desire to establish the authenticity of

1 ’ See An er s eber den Laodicener B rie 1 8 g U f; 43 . 3 Fertur etiam ad Laudecences alia ad Alex andrinos Pauli nomine incte ad hes m j e Marcionis et alia plura qua in Catholi cam ecclesiam rece i non otest Perha p p . ps a comma should be

ut after nomine and ncte oined to what follo p , fi j ws, to the alia

lura said to be for ed in the interest f M p g o arcion. THE NE W TE STA ME NT CANOIV. 43 a work which had not obtained universal ac ceptance at the time ? It is diflicult to make out the meaning in various places ; and there is con siderable diversity of opinion among expositors of the document ? In accord with these facts we

of find Serapion bishop the church at Rhossus,

3 of in Cilicia, allowing the public use the gospel

4 ' of Peter which s ; hews that, there was no ex clusive gospel - canon at the end of the second

r centu y, at least in Syria . The present canon

had not then pervaded the churches in general .

What is the result of an examination o f the Christian literature belonging to the

1 Q ua rti evangeliorum yohannis ex discipulis cohortantibus

’ condisczpulis et episcopis suis dix it conjq unate mihi Odie triduo et quid cuique fiterit revelatum alterutrum nohis ennarremus eadem nocte revelatum Andrea ex apostolis ut recogniscentihus c nc hannis suo n mine cuncta discrih r t u tis fi o e e . 3 It is printed and largely commented on by Credner in his

Geschichte des neutestamentlichen Kanon edited b Volkmar v , p.

1 1 &c. and b Westcott On the Canon A endix 4 , , y , pp C, p. 466.

2 n Man others have ex lained it s iall il d editio . y p e pec y H gen

feld.

3 1 Ab ut A. D. 1 0 . E nsch. H o 9 . E . vi. 1 2. 1 T 44 HE CANON OF THE B IBLE .

second century ? Is it that a canon was then fi xed, separating some books from others by a

t e line so clear, hat those on one side of it wer

c i of alone re koned inspired , authoritat ve, apos tolic origin or sanction ; while those on the other

s were con idered uninspired, unauthoritative,

1 without claim to apostolicity, unauthentic

Was the separation between them made on any clear principle of demarcation ? It cannot be

so. d said The century witnesse no such fact, ff but merely the incipient e orts to bring it about.

n The discriminati g process was begun, not

was completed . It partly forced upon the prominent advocates of a policy which sought to consolidate the Jewish and Gentile- Christian

parties, after the decline of their mutual anta i m on s . g , into a united church They were glad to transfer the current belief in the infallible

inspiration of the Old Testament, to selected

n w ff of Christia ritings, as an e ective means defence against those whom they considered

1 AN N O 46 THE C O F THE BIBLE .

th a given . It is possible that e carelessness of transcriber may have caused some of the singularities observable in this list such as the

omission of the epistles to the Philippians and Thessalonians but the end shows a freer idea of

books fit for reading than what was usual even

1 at that early time in the African Church .

In Syria a version of the New Testament for the use of the church was made early in the 3d

r . w P centu y This ork, commonly called the e

2 2 the shito, wants Peter, and 3 John, Jude, and

Apocalypse. It has, however, all the other books,

including the epistle of James and that to the

Hebrews . The last two were received as apostolic.

Towards the middle of the 3 rd century

’ 2 Origen s testimony respecting the Canon is of

great value. He seems to have distinguished — three classes of books authentic ones, whose

n was ad apostolic origi generally mitted, those

1 i T schendorf edited the Pauline e istles from this M p S. i si e 2 1 L a 1 8 . 2 A D p , 5 t 54 . . TIIE NE W TE STAME NT CANON: 1 47

- not authentic, and a middle class not generally recognised or in regard to which his own

O pinion wavered . The first contained those already adopted at the beginning of the century

both in the East and West, with the Apocalypse, and the epistle to the Hebrews so f ar as it

1 contains Pauline ideas ; to the second belongs

of the Shepherd Hermas, though he sometimes

it 2 of hesitated a little about , the epistle Bar

of nabas, the Acts Paul, the gospel according to

the Hebrews, the gospel of the Egyptians, and

3 of the preaching Peter ; to the third, the epistle

4 of 2 2 . James, that of Jude, Peter, and 3 John

The separation of the various writings is not

formally made, nor does Origen give a list of

n r f them. His classificatio is gathe ed rom his works ; and though its application admitted of

’ considerable latitude, he is cautious enough,

1 Tc). v 7 Otafli x t hta Gracdo xa O oho o ue é 5 j yfifi , n , u y uj va. 3 In one lace however he calls it ver use ul and d i p , , y f iv nely 3 ins ired. Comment. in e . ad Roman. xvi. 1 . r 0 p p , 4 6 a.

4 v A . Euseb . Hist. E ccles. vi. 2 iii. 2 dr nxe é era p , 5 5, yu . 1 8 THE AN F 4 C ON O THE BIB LE .

the appealing to the tradition of church, and throwing in qualifying expressions? The Canon of Eusebius 3 is given at length in

? his E cclesiastical History He divides the

books into three classes, containing those

‘ ’ 3 eneral received cantrovertea writings g ly , those ,

here ic l 3 f and the t a . The first has the our

of gospels, the Acts, thirteen epistles Paul ,

1 1 ? John, Peter, the Apocalypse The second

class is subdivided into two, the first corre

’ 8 sponding to Origen s mixed or intermediate

1 t i h iii 6 . m en n Matt . . E . vi. 2 . Co m . See Euseb , II. , 5 p 4 3

Ibid. . 8 1 Comment. in e . ad Roma n. iv. . 68 in , p 4 ; p , p 3 ;

l i Num6. 11. . 2 ontra tth iii . 6 Homi . vii . in C Ma . . , p 44 ; , p 94 ;

De Princi iis ros i. . . . ed s i. 6 8 Z O Cel . , 3 , p. 3 7 ; p p / , p 49 pp , .

Delarue.

1 0 D 34 A. . 3 t ccles. iii. 2 also 1 vi. 1 1 . His . E , 5 3 , 39 ; 3 , 4

u ev évbcdfl xa dra lhex‘ ra dvav'rl ra buohoyo u a, n , w , ppn . 3 '’ - ihe é ev vcb t a 8?781 iroMoc év t heta rat xxh lac dw y p a, y p p 3 s, s é w r

e a ow Oeamioc t vuév , n.

- - 3 m Ital Ou 'oe r awsha v 0 drown in n o flfi; h 6 a (iii.

7 with he ualifica i n d e ur l This last t q t o y p e y. In another

he states that it was re ected b some and ther f r i i place j y , e o e t s

' 8 - alon with the dvrtke é eva or v60a . unrat also g y p p ,

1 0 THE CAN N OF THE BIB 5 O LE . ous ? In like manner he speaks of the Apo calypse of Peter and the epistle of Barnabas as controver e mix r t d. The ed or spurious of O igen are vaguely separated by Eusebius both come under the general head of the controverted for ft a er specifying them separately he sums up,

all these will belong to the class of the contro verte the very class already described as con taining books well known and recognized by

s most, implying al o that they were read in the churches ? It is somewhat remarkable that Eusebius does not mention the Epistle of Clement to the

of Corinthians in this list. But he speaks it in another place as a production whose authen

1 1115 1 Hist E ccles. n. 2 . Christo horson Schm id 1 00 01 111. . , 3 p , , and Hug think that Eusebius gave the Opinion of others in this

likel that h av hi word but it is more y e g e s own, as Valesius ’ h n in Schmid s Historia anti thinks. See t e ote que: et vindicate!;

is c. . 8. Canon , & , p 35 1 1 M , vi. 4.

s . 1 2 &c. Kanon , p 4 , THE NE W TE STAME NT CANON 1 51

ticit e 1 of its y was generally acknowledg d, and public use in most churches both formerly and

- of in his own time. This wide spread reading it did not necessarily imply canonicity ; but the mode in which Eusebius characterises it, and its f extensive use in public, avour the idea that in many churches it was almost put on equality with the productions commonly regarded as

authoritative. The canonical list was not fixed

immovably in the time of Eusebius . Opinions f about books varied, as they had done be ore.

The testimony of Eusebius regarding the

has b e canon, important as it is, less weight

’ t cause of the historian s creduli y. One who

’ believed in the authenticity of Abgar s letters

of f to Christ, and in the canon the our gospels

of at the time Trajan, cannot take rank as a f f f judicious collector or si ter o acts.

2 D About 3 3 A. . the Emperor Constantine entrusted Eusebius with the commission to

1 t E ccles. iii. 1 6 Opohwovpévn. His . . BLE 1 52 THE CANON OF THE BI . make out a complete collection of the sacred Christian writings for the use of the Catholic

How c Church . this order was exe uted we are

redner c not told . But C is probably corre t in saying that the code consisted of all that is now in the New Testament except the Revelation . The fifty copies which were made must have supplied Constantinople and the Greek Church for a considerable time with an authoritative

canon .

’ Eusebius s catalogue agrees in substance with

f f e that o Origen . The historian ollowed ccles l iastica tradition . He inquired diligently into the prevailing opinions of the Christian churches w s and riters, with the view held by others before and f contemporaneously with himsel , but could i d not atta n to a decide result. His hesitation s wa of tood in the y a clear, firm, view of the question . The tradition respecting certain

was books still wavering, and he was unable

t f to fix i . Authority ettered his independent

1 A E 54 THE C NON OF THE BIBL .

s ffect n w ed tep, e i g a bond of union hose ne must have been felt while each church was isolated under its own bishop and the collective body c ould not take measures in common . Writings of more recent origin would be received with greater facility than such as had been in circula

for f d tion many years, especially if they pro esse

m f of to co e rom a prominent apostle. A code

v f apostolic writings, di ine and per ect like the

Old Testament, had to be presented as soon as possible against Gnostic and Manichae an here tics whose doctrines were injurious to objective

Christianity ; while the multiplication of apocry phal works threatened to overwhelm genuine tradition with a heap of superstition . The

Petrine and Pauline Christians, now amalgam

‘ ated to a great extent, agreed in hastening

- the canon process .

The infancy of the canon was cradled in

r t i an uncritical age, and ocked with radit onal

c e ease. Conscientious care was not dire t d from 1 55

the first to the well - authenticated testimony of

- f eye witnesses . Of the three athers who con

its ae tributed most to early growth, Iren us was credulous and blundering ; Tertullian passionate

- C of and one sided ; and lement Alexandria,

of imbued with the treasures Greek wisdom, was mainly occupied with ecclesiastical ethics .

Irenae us argues that the gospels should be four

u in number, neither more nor less, beca se there are four universal winds and four quarters of the f world . The Word or Architect o all things

gave the gospel in a fourfold shape. Accord f ing to this ather, the apostles were fully

f rm h in o ed concerning all t ings, and had a

’

f f . per ect knowledge, a ter their Lord s ascension Matthew wrote his gospel while Peter and Paul were preaching in Rome and founding the church ? Such assertions shew both ignorance

and exaggeration .

Tertullian aflirms that the tradition of the

1 1 1 8 . Adversus Ha res, iii. , 1 HE B LE 56 THE CANON OF T IB .

a ostolic churches 1 p guarantees the four gospels, and refers his readers to the churches of f & c. or Corinth, Philippi, Ephesus, , the

? authentic epistles of Paul What is this but the rhetoric of an enthusiast ? In like manner he states that bishops were appointed by the f apostles, and that they existed rom that

time downward, the succession originating so early ? Clement contradicts himself in making Peter authorise Mark ’s gospel to be read in the churches ; while in another place he says that

” f it 4 the apostle neither orbad nor encouraged .

t f The hree athers of whom we are speaking, had neither the ability nor the inclination to examine the genesis of documents surrounded

of with an apostolic halo. No analysis their authenticity and genuineness was seriously

1 1 ’ Adv Ma c. iv . De t . r . re scri ha ret. 5 p p . c. 36. 3 De raescri t haer 2 . et. c p p . 3 . 1 h H t c s. ii 1 d i A E use . is . E cle . an v 1 p. 5 . 4.

THE CANON OF THE BIBLE .

a f sta s perception . Wh t are the mani e tion of s r t s s piritual feeling, compa ed wi h the re ult of logical reasoning ? Are they more trustworthy t a ? i h n the latter Certa nly not, at least in rela

ce r tion to questions of eviden . It is t ue that their testimony has a value ; but it is one pro portionate to the degree of credibility attach in g to witnesses circumstanced as they were, whose separation of canonical from uncanonical

gospels, or rather their canonising of certain

f and n writings apart rom others, their claimi g

for of f of inspiration the authors the ormer, must be judged by the reasonableness of the

s f of thing it el , in connexion with men their type. The second century abounded in pseud

r onymous literature ; and the early fathe s,

he e as well as t churches, wer occupied with other things than the sifting of evidence con nected with writings considerably prior to their

s a own time. The increa e of such apocryph l

s productions, gospels, act , and apocalypses E TAME N CAN 1 THE NE W T S T ON. 59 among the heretical parties stimulated the orthodox bishops and churches to make an authentic collection ; but it increased the difli c l i u t es of the task. Textual criticism has been employed to dis credit the true dates of the present gospels ; and the most exaggerated descriptions have been given of the frequent transcription of the text

r and its great corruption in the second centu y.

The process of corruption in the course of frequent transcription has been transferred even

to the first century. It is true that the gospels at the end of that century exhibited a text w of r hich bears marks t anscription, interpola

tion, and addition but they were not the com

lete as t p works we have them now, being hen but

f s in progress, except the ourth . The a sumption that advanced corruption existed in the pre sent text of the synoptists as early as the first century is gratuitous ; unless the process by

which they were gradually built up is so called . 1 60 THE CAN N OF THE BIB E O L .

No attempt to get a long history behind the canonical gospels at the close of the first cen tury out of advanced corruption can be

successful . It is attested by no Christian writer of the century ; and those in the first

f of hal the second, both heretical and orthodox, did themselves treat the text in a manner f r f f a short o its implied in allibility. The

t various readings wi h which they had to do, do not carry up the canonical gospels far into

r the first centu y. The transcription, enlarge

of ment, and interpolation the materials which

of make up the body them, must not be identified with the corruption of their completed tex ts , in order that the latter may be relegated to an early period ; for the synoptists did not

f - f of come orth full blown, each rom the hand a

single person . The old Latin version or versions used by Tertullian and the interpreter

Irenmus of , have been pressed into the same

service. but in vain .

F HE IBL THE CANON O T B E .

necessarily attaching to infallible documents . Their being freely handled excludes the idea i of rigid canon sation . The men who first canonised them had no certain knowledge of k their authors . To them, that nowledge had been obscured or lost ; though a sagacious criticism might have arrived at the true state of the question even in their day

In the sub- apostolic age Ebionitism passed

into Catholicism, Jewish into Pauline Chris tianit y, the mythical and marvellous into the

the dogmatic, the traditional into historic, the

r legendary into the litera y . The conflict

of parties within the sphere of Christianity gave rise to productions of various tendencies

which reflected the circumstances out of which

they arose. These were accepted or rejected by the churches according to the prevailing

opinions of the persons composing the churches . Common usage led to the authorisation of

of some ; others were neglected . The state the THE NE W TE STAME NT CANON 1 63

f second century in its belie s, credulity, idio s ncracies of y prominent teachers, antagonistic

s opinions and mystic speculations, throw a light upon the New Testament writings and

f of especially on the ormation the canon, which

explains their genesis . Two things stand out

e l most cl arly, the comparative y late idea of a canonical New Testament literature ; and the absence of critical principles in determining it. The former was not entertained till the latter

of part of the second century. The conception canonicity and inspiration attaching to New Testament books did not exist till the time

of Irenae us.

the When it is asked, to whom do we owe

? s canon the u ual answer is, to the Church .

This is true only in a sense . The unity attributed to Christians before Irenmus and

Tertullian, consisted in their religious con i sc ousn ss. e It was subjective. The idea of — the church was that of inward fellowship the 1 6 THE CAN N OF THE B 4 O IBLE . fellowship of the spirit rather than an outward organism . The preservation of the early Chris

to tian writings was owing, in the first instance,

and the congregations to whom they were sent, the neighbouring ones with whom such con

re ations g g had friendly connection . The care of them devolved on the most influential

s —ou teacher , those who occupied leading

i f w posit ons in the chie cities , or ere most interested in apostolic writings as a source

of instruction . The Christian books were

mostly in the hands of the bishops . In process of time the canon was the care of

assemblies or councils . But it had been made before the first general council by a few leading fathers towards the end of the second century f in different countries . The ormation of a

Catholic Church and of a canon was simul

taneous. The circumstances in which the collection originated were unfavourable to

r the authenticity of its materials, for t adition

166 THE CAN N F THE B IBL O O E .

sion has a different and narrow sense in the

seven Ignatian epistles which we believe to be

the supposititious and later than Justin . Neither

t e s hr e epistle published in Syriac by Cureton, nor the seven Greek ones enumerated by

Eusebius are authentic ; though Zahn has tried

A D 1 . to prove the latter such, dating them . . 44

u f m convinc His arg ments, however, are far ro

’ ing ; and the whole story of 1 Ignatius s martyr dom at Rome rather than Antioch is still

doubtful for the circumstances under which he

is said to have been dragged to Rome, and his

the writing letters to churches by the way, are

of Malalas highly improbable. The testimony that Ignatius suffered at Antioch in December

1 1 the of 5 in presence Traj an, may be quite as good as that of Chrysostom and the Syriac monthly calendar on which Zahn relies so con

1 I natius von Antiochien 1 8 and Prole omena to the g , 73 ; g

Patrum A ostolicorum o era b de Gebhardt Harna k and p p , y , c ,

Z i ulus u ahn, Fasc c , . THE NE W TESTAME NT CANON 1 67

fidentl of th y. The fact the priority of e last

Malalas two to is of little weight as evidence.

The main point is the locality in which Ignatius

ff Malalas l of su ered ; which , himse f a native

Antioch and a historian, ought to have known

better than Chrysostom, because he copied

preceding historians.

It is necessary to be precise on this sub ject because some speak of the church as though it were contemporary with the apostles

e themselves, or at least with their imm diate

disciples ; and proceed to argue that dissensions arose soon after “ within the church rendering

c an appeal to the written word ne essary. When

the authority of traditional teaching gave way to

of a writ en rule n that t , a cha ge came over the

church w condition of the . Such a vie tends to

mislead . There were dissensions among the

earliest Christians . The apostles themselves

were by no means unanimous. Important

differences of belief divided the Jewish and THE CANON OF THE B IBLE .

The Gentile Christians from the beginning.

types of Christian truth existing from the first

gradually coalesced about the middle of the

s c e ond century ; when heretics, especially the

f t Gnostics, appeared so ormidable that a ca holic

as . church w developed Along with this process,

as the and an important element in it, writings

of apostles and apostolic men were uncritically taken from tradition and elevated to the rank

f of o divine documents . It was not the rise new dissensions within the church which led to the first formation of a Christian canon rather did the new idea of a catholic church require a standard of appeal in apostolic writ

e autho ings, which wer now invested with an rity that did not belong to them from the beginning.

Origen was the first who took a somewhat scientific view of the relative value belonging

the ff to di erent parts of the biblical collection .

His examination of the canon was critical .

TH C E E ANON OF THE BIB L .

The result was a remarkable one, and calls

its f . for our gratitude, notwithstanding de ects

Though the development was pervaded by no

n critical or definite principle, it ended in a cano

for which has maintained its validity centuries. It is sometimes said that the history of the canon should be sought from definite cata

lo ues ~ g , not from isolated quotations . The

latter are supposed to be of slight value, the f of ormer to be the result deliberate judgment.

This remark is more specious than solid . In

u relation to the Old Testament, the catalog es f given by the athers, as by Melito and Origen, rest solely on the tradition of the Jews ; apart f rom which they have no independent authority. As none except Jerome and Origen knew

of Hebrew, their lists the Old Testament books are simply a refl ex ion of what they learned from others . If they deviate in practice from their masters by quoting as Scripture other

than the canonical books, they show their E ME NT CAN 1 1 THE NE W T STA OIV. 7

- judgment over riding an external theory. The very men who give a' list of the Jewish books evince an inclination to the Christian and

E istle enlarged canon . So Origen says, in his p

to A ricanus . f , that the churches use Tobit

In explaining the prophet Isaiah, Jerome

. 6 in f employs Sirach vi . , proo of his view, remarking that the apocryphal work is in the

E i ha Christian catalogue. In like manner p p

A etius f nius, in a passage against , a ter referring

to the books of Scripture, adds , as well as the

i. e. of books of Wisdom, , the Wisdom Solomon

of and of Jesus son Sirach finally, all the other

’ books of Scripture. In another place he gives

the canon of the Jews historically, and ex cludes the apocryphal Greek books ; here he

of includes some the latter. We also learn from Jerome that Judith was in the number of

the the books reckoned up by Nicene Council .

Thus the fathers who give catalogues of the

Old Testament shew the existence of a Jewish 1 AN N 72 THE C O OF THE B IB LE . and a Christian canon in relation to the Old

Testament ; the latter wider than the former ; their private opinion being more favourable to the ri one, though the other was histo cally trans

m itted. In relation to the New Testament, the synods which drew up lists of the sacred books show the view of some leading father like

u Aug stine, along with what custom had sanc tioned. In this department no member of the synod exercised his critical faculty ; a number

together would decide such questions summarily .

Bishops proc eed in the track of tradition or

ri autho ty.

AN OF T E B IB LE 1 74 THE C ON H .

canonical ones of the New and Old Testament.

The 6oth canon proceeds to give a list of such .

All the books of the Old Testament are

enumerated, but in a peculiar order, somewhat

like the Septuagint one. With Jeremiah is

B aruch specified , then the Lamentations and

E istle p . The prophets are last ; first the minor,

next the major and Daniel . In the New Testament list are the usual seven Catholic

of epistles, and fourteen Paul including that to

the Hebrews . The Apocalypse alone is wanting.

Credner has proved that this 6oth canon is

? not original, and of much later date The Apostolic Constitutions give a kind of f canon like that in the 59th of Laodicea. A ter

speaking of the books of Moses, Joshua, Judges

Kings, Chronicles, those belonging to the

r of retu n from the captivity, those Job, Solomon,

the sixteen prophets, and the Psalms of David f our Acts, the epistles of Paul, and the our

1 ' Geschichte des neutest. Iranon 2 1 , p. 7, &c. T Y 1 FR OM THE FOUR TH CE N UR . 75

gospels are mentioned . It is remarkable that

the Catholic epistles are not given . That they are indicated under Acts is altogether

of improbable . The Antiochian Church that time doubted or denied the apostolicity of

these letters, as is seen from Theodore, Cosmas,

and others . Hence their absence from these

Constitutions, which are a collection belonging to different times the oldest portion not earlier

? perhaps than the third century

r r Cy il of Je usalem, who took part in the

2 “ n of Cou cil Laodicea, gives a list of the divine . ” Scriptures . The books of the Old Testament

- are twenty two, and the arrangement is nearly

that which is in the English Bible . With

“ Jeremiah is associated Baruch and the Epistle . All the New Testament books are given except

r the Apocalypse. The list agrees ve y nearly

’ of with that Eusebius, by taking the latter s

controverted writings into the class of the

1 3 ’ See Constit. A ostol. . 6 e Ue tz en. 86 A. D. p , p 7, d. l 1 3 1 6 THE CAN N OF THE BIB LE 7 O .

”1 generally received . The writer insists on the

necessity of unity in the Church upon the sub

ce f the w j t, and orbids reading of ritings not

en l c era re eived. n g ly No e but these are allowed .

6- 8 as the ro Yet he refers to Baruch (iii . 3 3 ) p

1 phet ; and in adducing the testimonies of the

the prophets for existence of the Holy Spirit,

a . 1 . the last he gives is D niel xiii 4 , 45 Sirach

1 . 2 1 22 iii , is cited ; Wisdom is quoted as Solo

’ mon s (xiii . the song of the three children

2 2 3 is used (verse 5 with verses 7, 9 ; and

22 7 Daniel (xiii . , 45) is quoted . A ’ anasi A D. In th us s festal epistle (365 . ) the

“ archbishop undertakes to set forth in order the books that are canonical and handed

down and believed to be divine. His list

of the Old Testament nearly agrees with

’ Cyril s, except that Esther is omitted and Ruth

1 M 22 66 6 ed. ill . Catech. iv. . es , , pp , 7, 1 3 bid vi. 80. Oid xi . 1 2 . I . . I . , . p 4 , p 3 bid ix 1 1 Ibid. ix . . 1 1 1 22 . I . . . . , pp 5, , p 5 3 7 bid 11 1 Ibid xvi. . 2 I . , . p. 3 . . , p 39 .

BIB LtE 1 78 THE CANON OF THE .

” duced with what is said by the Holy Spirit.

20 22 2 re Baruch (iv . , ) and Daniel (xiii . 4 ) are ferred to in the same way as Isaiah ? Tobit

“ it 1 (ii . 7) has it is written prefixed to . Can onical and apocryphal are mentioned together

and similar language applied to them .

Eusebius of Caesarea cites Wisdom as a divine ” oracle e f , and after adducing s veral passages rom

n f Proverbs, subjoi ing to them others rom the same book with the introductory formula these

are also said to be the same writers, he con

“ ”3 cludes a with such is the scripture . Sir ch is

’ cited as Solomon s along with various passages 3 f . s from Proverbs A ter quoting Baruch, he say ,

there is no need to appeal to the divine voices , ”7 Th which clearly confirm our proposition . e ad ditions to Daniel are also treated as Scripture ?

1 d e isco E i 1 E ist. a . 2 2 . t &c. . . p p p gyp , , , p 7 1 i ian. . 1 2 i ontra Ar . 1 6. C , , p. 4 1 A olo . contra A rianas ii. vol i . 1 p g , . . p 33 . 1 5 3 Prae ar. E van. i. . Ibid. xi. 1 . Ibid i p , 9 , 4 . , xi . 1 8 . 7 3 5721 vi. 1 1 on. E van . vi 1 1 " , Dem g , . 9 , R H CE R 1 FRO/ll TIIE FOU T NTU Y. 79

1 Basil o f Caesarea had a canon agreeing with

the that of Athanasius . Along with usual

n books reckoned as belonging to the ca on, he used the apocryphal productions of the Old

e of T stament . Thus the book Wisdom (i . is

2 3 quoted by him . So are Sirach (xx . ) ; Baruch,

’ 5 (iii . called Jeremiah s ; Judith (ix . 4) ; and Daniel (xiii . " Gregory of Naz ianz us puts his list into a f poetical orm . In the Old Testament it agrees

’ w Athanasius s ith exactly, except that he men

tions none but the canonical books . Like

Athanasius, he omits Esther. In the New Tes f tament he deviates rom Athanasius, by leaving

out the Apocalypse, which he puts among the

? spurious He does not ignore the apocryphal

1 D 1 379 A. . 1 Hamil. in rincz . roverb. O . ed. Garnier altera v p p p pp , ol. 11. 3 ’ i Monast 1 0. Constitut oner . c. iii. 2 . Ibid 4 , . , p. 779 . 1 i Adv E unom vol. . . 1 . . , p 4 7 3 De S iritu Sancto c viii. vol. iii 2 p , . . p. 3 .

3 7 ' In Princi . Proverb vol. 11. . 1 2. 1 8 A D p , p 5 3 9 . . I 3 Mi v i O ed. ne o ii . . pp. g , l. pp 473, 474. 1 80 T E N OF E B I H CANO TH BLE .

t e books of the Old Tes ament, but quotes Dani l xiii .

1 Amphilochius of Iconium gives a metri

of h cal catalogue the Biblical books . T e

canon of the old Testament is the usual one,

“ of except that he says Esther at the end, some judge that Esther should be added to the fore

n goi g. He notices none of the apocryphal

books . His New Testament canon agrees with

s the present, only he exclude the Apocalypse as spurious which is given as the judgment of

s the majority . He alludes to the doubt that existed as to the epistle to the

to Hebrews, but regards it as Pauline ; and the number of the catholic epistles (seven or 3 w three) . The concluding ords show that no list was universally received at that time .

1 i us s Ep phani follows Athana ius in his canon .

1 Mi ne ol. iii. . . r n az ianz eni O . ed. v Grego N , pp g . pp 473 , 474 1 D. 395 A. 3 Naz . O . n. . 1 . Iambi ad Seleucum ; in Greg. pp p 94 1 D 403 A. .

1 8 2 THE CAN N OF THE B IB E O L .

Didymus of Alexandria1 speaks against 2

? Peter that it is not in the canons

3 Chrysostom does not speak of the canon ; but in the New Testament he never quotes

the last four catholic epistles or the Apocalypse .

All the other parts he uses throughout his

1 w i . numerous orks, ncluding the Apocrypha 8 Thus he introduces Wisdom (xvi . 2 ) with " 6 Scripture says . He quotes Baruch (iii . 3 ,

and Sirach (iv.

° Didymus of Alexandria cites Baruch (iii .

10 ’ s s 3 5) as Jeremiah, and treats it like the P alm .

1 392 A. D. 1 . ri und ed Mi ne. Enarra in e . Pet sec am . 1 . t. p 8 , p 774 g 1 0 . D 4 7A . 1 ’ di f hr sostom s Wor s vol. See Montfaucon in his e tion o C y k ,

vi. 6 6 ed. Paris 1 8 . pp. 3 4, 3 5, , 3 5 1 Ex s inPsalm ix See also xi. 1 in Genes where po . c . 7. ,

W m x v isdo i . 3 is cited.

1 Ex os in Psalm x x p . li . 3 . 7 1 r A. De Laz a o, ii. 4. 392 D.

1 t Mi ne ii 2 ed. . De Trinita e, i. 2. p. 79 g 1° F a me in E ist 2 ad Corinthios when Baruch iii. r g nts. p . , , 3,

uot d li e Psalm 1 0 1 . 1 6 . is q e k , p 97 BR M THE F RTH CENT 1 8 O OU UR Y. 3

1 Daniel (xiii . 45) is also quoted He says of

’ Peter s Second Epistle that it is not in the canon .

3 Theodore of Mopsuestia was much freer than his contemporaries in dealing with the f books o Scripture. It seems that he rejected

- inscri Job, Canticles, Chronicles, and the Psalm p tions ; in the New Testament the epistle of

James , and others of the catholic ones . But

’ Leontius s account of his opinions cannot be adopted without suspicion ? The canon of Cyril of Alexandria 1 does not

’ ff Athanasius s di er from . Like other writers of the Greek Church in his day he uses along with the canonical the apocryphal books of the Old

m . 1 . 6 Testa ent He quotes (iii ) Edras (iv. 3 )

“ ”3 with inspired Scripture says . Wisdom (vii.

6 “ n ) is introduced with, accordi g to that which

1 1 sanct. i. . 10 . 2 8 A . D. De Spirit. p 33 4 3 L n iu B z antinus contra Nestoriano et Eu hi See eo t s y s tyc anos, ii Oll ndi B ibliotheca x . . 0 Com . Fri lib . iii in C a 6 . tz sche De . , p 9 p

Theodori Mo suesteni vita et scri tis Halse 1 8 6. p p , , 3 1 3 A. D Contra ulian. i. . 1 d Mi . e ne 444 J p 54 , . g . 1 84 THE CANON OF THE B IB LE .

” 1 is x written . In another place it has the prefi

” 3 for as it is written (i . 7) ; and is treated

1 11 1 . Scripture ( . Sirach (i . ) is cited

- e Baruch also (iii . 3 5 3 7) is introduc d with ,

”1 another of the holy prophets said . The catalogues of the Old Testament con

tained in the manuscripts B, C, and u need not

of be given, as they are merely codices the

Septuagint, and have or had the books canonical

and apocryphal belonging to that version . The list of the New Testament books in B is like that f of . Athanasius Imper ect at the end, the MS .

must have had at first the Epistles to Timothy,

the Titus, Philemon, and Apocalypse. C (cod .

Ephraemi rescriptus) has fragments of the New

Testament, which show that it had originally all the present books in the same order as

’ n si s s Atha a u . at or the Sinaitic manuscript has

1 1 Ibid 8 1 . . Ibid. 2 1 , p, 5 , p. 9 . 3 I I aim d Mi 1 P n s e . ne . . 8 vol i , g , p 93 . 59, . . 3 d Mi ne . 10 vol i. e . P. 9 , . , g

186 THE CANON OF THE B IBLE .

intermediate class consisted of those read in the c rc s e e sef not de hu he , which w r u ul, but

ois e in m rs b ot a n in iv atte of elief. An her dva ce

the matter of the canon at this period was the

a ti a gener l adop on of the Hebrew canon, with

relegation of the Greek additions in the Septu

agint to the class publicly read? Yet doubts

about the reception of Esther into the number

of the c c t anoni al books were still enter ained ,

though it was one of the Jewish canon ; doubt

less on account of its want of harmony with

at c Christian consciousness. And the c holi

e s s f e pi tle which had been doubted be ore, Jud ,

m s e te Ja e , S cond Peter, were now generally

iv n ce ed. But there was a division of opinio

about the Apocalypse .

We come to the period of the Latin corre

sponding to that of the Greek Church which

’ . t has just been noticed Augustine , gave grea

attention to the subject, labouring to establish a

1 ' 1 xb m . tm e 0 A D . flcfiMa dra y u +43 . R M THE F R 1 8 F O OU TH CENTUR Y. 7

m was co plete canon, the necessity of which generally felt . According to him the Scriptures which were received and acknowledged by all

the churches of the day should be canonical,

as Of those not universally adopted, such are received by the majority and the weightier of the f churches, should be pre erred to those received by the fewer and less important churches. In his enumeration of the forty f our books of the Old Testament, he gives ,

f s are a ter Chronicles, other historie which neither connected with the order specified in

an the preceding context, nor with one other,

o i.e . Esther udith the , Job, Tobit, , J , two books of the c s Ma cabees, and Esdras . Wi dom and

s Ecclesia ticus, he thinks, should be numbered

as among the prophets, deserving of authority and having a certain likeness to Solomon ’s

writings , He says of the Maccabees that this

1 fort -four boo s are of Moses oshua ud es Ruth The y k , 5 , J , J g , ,

in s 2 hronicles ob Tobit Esther udith 2 Maccabees 4 K g , C , J , , , J , , 1 88 THE CANON OF TIIE B IB LE .

Scripture has been received by the Church

”1 not es . usel sly, if it be read or heard soberly

The famou s passage in the treatise on Christian

ri o doct ne, where he enumerates the wh le

he canon, is qualified by no other ; for though knew the distinction between the canonical books of the Palestinian Jews and the so - called

r as of m e apoc yphal ones, as well the fact so

New Testament writings not being received

r church- rec tion unive sally, he thought ep a

ffi su cient warrant for canonical authority.

Hence he considered the books of the Macca

bees canonical, because so received by the

Church ; while he says of Wisdom and Sirach that they merited authoritative reception and

? numbering among the prophetic Scriptures Of the former in particular he speaks strongly h in one place, asserting t at it is worthy to be

ra Nehemiah Psalms m Ez , , , 3 of Solo on, Wisdom, Ecclesiasti

Pro h t cus 1 2 e s reater do . De Doctrina Christiana 11 , p , 4 g . 8 .

1 ntra Gaudent i o Pa i 8 v l. C . . 8 ix O . r s 1 o . . 1 006 3 ; pp , 3 7, p . 3 De Doctr Christ 11 0 . . . 8 . Civitat. Dei. xviii. 2 , 1

1 0 IIE C N N OF THE B B E 9 T A O I L .

The an n ms Maccabees. New Testament c o see

? to have agreed exactly with our present one

The Council of Carthage (397) repeated the

s u e e tat t of its pr decessor, enumerating the same

? books of the Bible as canonical Augustine

was the a n s so anim ting spirit of both cou cil , that they may be taken as expressing his views

on the subj ect.

3 J erome gives a list of the twenty-two

a o T m c nonical b oks of the Old esta ent, the

e as s a sam that of the Pale tini n Jews, remarking that some put Ruth and Lamentations among

tw - f s the Hagiographa, so making enty our book .

All besides should be put among the Apoc

r ha. yp Wisdom, Sirach, Judith, Tobit, the

Shepherd are not in the canon . The two books

a 1 of Macc bees he regarded in the same light.

’ But though Jerome s words imply the apocry

1 1 m iii 2 Ibid. 1 Ma o . . . . nsi t . , p 9 4 , p 89 .

3 0 142 A . D. 1 rolo us aleatus in Libros Re um E ist d linis P g g g . p . a Pau m . FR HE F R TH CE N R 1 1 OM T OU TU Y. 9

- phal position of these extra canonical books, he allows of their being read in public for the edification of the people, not to confirm the

f e o i. . authority doctrines ; , they belong to

the ecclesiastical books of Athanasius . His idea of apocryphal is wider and milder than

? s in a that of ome others the L tin Church . It

1 has been conjectured by Welte, that the con clusions of the African councils in 393 and 397

’ influenced Jerome s views of the canon, so that his later writings allude to the apocryphal works in a more favourable manner than that of the Prologus galeatus or the preface to

’ Solomon s books . One thing is clear, that he quotes different passages from the Apocrypha f along with others rom the Hebrew canon .

Eustochius In his letter to , Sirach iii. 3 3 (Latin) comes between citations from Matthew and

which is written Luke ; and is introduced by , in

Pamm achius 6 a letter to ; and xxii . has divine

1 ’ In Herbst s E inleit. erster Theil , , p. 3 7. 1 2 THE CAN N OF THE B IBLE 9 O .

? Scri ture ed p appli to it Ruth, Esther, and

are s o l ume The Judith p ken of as ho y vol s. practice of Jerome differed from his theory ; or r be t and ather he came less posi ive, altered his views somewhat with the progress of tim e

and knowledge. As to the New Testament, he

a gives catalogue of all that now belongs to it, remarking of the epistle to the Hebrews and of the Apocalypse that he adopts both on the

t i o f au hor ty of ancient writers, not present

was no t custom. His opinion about them

? decided In another work he gives the Epistle of Barnabas at the end of the canonical list .

He also states the doubts of many respecting

2 the Epistle to Philemon, and about Peter,

2 . Jude, and 3 John According to him the first

Epistle of Clement of Rome was publicly read in some churches ?

1 ed. Benedict. Vol. IV. . 6 8 0. Opp. , , pp 79, 5 4, 75 1 . . Mi ne. n. l i. 1 10 d. ad Darda O vo . e Ep. pp p 3 , g 3 P stic . in ad hil See Onoma a Sacra ; Comment Ep. em ; De

Viris illustr.

IB E 1 94 THE CANON OF THE B L .

in He uses the apocrypha without scruple,

“ trod cin 0 w u g Sirach (iii. 3 ) with it is ritten ;

“ and 1 t in Wisdom (i . 3) with it is writ en

”3 Solomon .

Lucifer of Cagliari 3 uses the apocrypha

1 equally with the canonical books. Thus Mac cabees (i. 43) is quoted as holy Scripture So d 3 M . 2 accab . . 2 is (vi Judith (ix ) is cite , as 6 3 x vn. 1 . are also Wisdom ( , Tobit (iv ) ;

and Daniel (xiii .

1° Ambrose of Milan had the same canon as i most of the Westerns n his time. With some

others, he considered the Epistle to the

Hebrews to have been written by St Paul . I n the Old Testament he used the apocryphal

f . vn 22 books pretty reely Wisdom ( . ) is cited

1 De Schismate Donatist. iii. 3 .

1 bid ii 2 ab I . , . 5 out A. D.

1 De non arcendo &c. ed. Coleti . 1 0. p , , , p 9 1 Ibid 2 6. Ibid. 1 . , p. 3 , p. 87. 7 9 ro Athanasia lib . i. . 8. Ibid. . 10 P , p 9 , p 5. 1 8 id. lib. 11. . 1 2 1 2 . Ib , pp 7, Y 1 FR OM THE FOUR TH CE NTUR . 95

1 0 as authoritative Scripture. Sirach (xi . 3 ) is

s 1 also cited as Scripture . Baruch (iv. 9) is l quoted Danie (xiii . 44, 45) is treated as

4 Scripture and prOphetic ; and Tobit is ex f 5 pounded like any other book o Scripture .

Rufinus6 enumerates the books of the Old and New Testaments which “ are believed to

be inspired by the Holy Spirit itself, according

of to the tradition our ancestors, and have been

of handed down by the Churches Christ . All

the books of the Hebrew canon and of the New f Testament are specified. A ter the list he says, these are they which the fathers included in

the canon, by which they wished to establish

the assertion of our faith . He adds that there

canonical ecclesiasti are other books not , but cal

of the Wisdom Solomon, Sirach, Tobit,

Judith, and the books of the Maccabees .

1 De S iritu Sancta iii. 1 8 . Dc 60m p mom! viii. 3 In Psalm cxviii., Sermo. 1 1 8, 2 .

D S r a iii vi c it S nct. . pi . . 39 5 ’ 3 zb r d ia . . L e c Tob . +4 10 A D 1 96 THE CANON OF THE BIBLE

Besides the usual New Testament works, he

of speaks of the Shepherd Hermas, and the

“ Judgment of Peter as read in the churches, f 1 but not as authoritative in matters of aith .

2 Philastrius o f Brescia gives some account of

the Scriptures and their contents in his time.

The canonical Scriptures, which alone should C C be read in the atholic hurch, are said to be

the law and the prophets, the gospels, Acts, f o i. e thirteen epistles Paul, and seven others, . ,

two of Peter, three of John, one of Jude, and f one o James . Of the Old Testament apocrypha he asserts that they ought to be read for the

of f sake morals by the per ect, but not by all .

’ He speaks of lzcrctics who reject John s gospel

and the Apocalypse . Respecting the Epistle

to the Hebrews which is omitted in his canon,

v ed he speaks at large, but not ery decid ly, affirming that some attributed its authorship to

1 o t Mi E x os. in S mb l. A os ol . ed. ne p y p , pp 3 73 , 3 74, g .

bo t 8 A. TA u 3 7 D.

1 98 THE CANON OF THE B IBLE pseudepigraphical writings which ought not only

1 to be rejected but condemned . A canonical list appears in three different forms bearing the names of Dam asus (366

2 1 Gelasius I . (49 and Hormisdas (5 4

the ld According to the first, books of the O

In Testament are arranged in three orders .

e the first are the Pentateuch, Joshua, Judg s,

Ruth, four Kings, two Chronicles, Psalms, P d roverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Wis om , and

Ecclesiasticus ; in the second, all the prophets,

r including Ba uch ; in the third, Job, Tobit,

The Judith, Esther, Esdras, two Maccabees . f New Testament books are the our gospels, f the ourteen epistles of Paul, Apocalypse, and

Acts, with seven Catholic epistles . That which is called the Decree of Gelasius

is almost identical with the preceding. It wants Baruch and Lamentations. It has also two Esdrases instead of one. In the New

1 Mans i 0 1 A ud i ii 1 0 1 0 . p , . pp. 4 , 4 FR M THE F0UR TH CE NT R 1 O U Y. 99

Testament the epistle to the Hebrews is ab

sent.

The Hormisdas- form has the Lamentations of Jeremiah : and in the New Testament the

Epistle to the Hebrews.

The MSS . of these lists present some diver sity ; and Credner supposes the Damasus- list a

i authen fiction . But Th el has vindicated its

ici t ty. It is possible that some interpolations

may exist in the last two ; the first, which is

the shortest, may well belong to the time of

l D m s s a a u .

1 A D In 4 9 . . another council at Carthage, at h w ich Augustine was present, repeated the f ormer list of books with a single alteration, f . o of viz , fourteen epistles Paul (instead

11 (thirteen) .

The preceding notices and catalogues show a

general desire in the Western Church to settle

1 ’ Credner s Zur Gcsc/iic/ite dc: Kanom . 1 1 and , p 5 , &c. , ’ Thi ls E ivtola Roman m Ponti cum m uinac tom i e p om fi g , . .

M n i iv . 0 a s . p 43 . 200 THE CANON OF THE BIBLE

the canon . The two most influential men o f

the period were Augustine and Jerome, who did

unfitted for not entirely agree. Both were a f critical examination o the topic . The former f was a gi ted spiritual man, lacking learning and

his independence. Tradition dominated all ideas about the difficult or disputed books . He l did not enter upon the question scientifica ly, on the basis of certain principles ; but was — content to take refuge in authority the prevailing authority of leading churches . His

judgment was weak, his sagacity moderate, and his want of many- sidedness hindered a

critical result. Jerome, again, was learned but f timid, lacking the courage to ace the question fairly or fundamentally ; and the independence

necessary to its right investigation . Belonging

as he did to both churches, he recommended the

of practice the one to the other. He, too, was chiefly influenced by tradition ; by Jewish teachers in respect to the Old Testament, and

202 THE CANON OF THE B IBLE

e W stern Church is still visible, though it could

not extinguish the prevailing desire to include

the disputed books . The Greek view was to

receive nothing which had not apparently a

good attestation of divine origin and apostolic

authority ; the Latin was to exclude nothing

hallowed by descent and proved by custom . The former Church looked more to the sources

ion of doctrine ; the latter to those of edificat .

s as The one desired to contract those source , so

not to be too rich ; the other to enlarge the

edification . springs of , not to be too p oor

for k Neither had the proper resources the wor , nor a right perception of the way in which it

should be set about ; and therefore they were

ff as not fortunate in their conclusions, di ering

they did in regard to points which affect the

foundation of a satisfactory solution .

Notwithstanding the numerous endeavours

both in the East and West to settle the canon

t th th u s not during he 4 and s cent rie , it was FR M THE F R TH CE zVTUR 20 O OU Y. 3

finally closed . The doubts of individuals were still expressed ; and succeeding ages testified to the want of universal agreement respecting

was several books . The question, however,

racticall 0 p y determined. N material change occurred again in the absolute rejection or

S admission of books. With ome fluctuations, the canon remained very much as it was in h h the 4t and st centuries . Tradition shaped

and established its character. General usage

gave it a permanency which it was not easy to

disturb. No definite principles guided the

its course of its formation, or fixed present

state. It was dominated first and last by cir

cumstances and ideas which philosophy did

not actuate. Its history is mainly objective.

was Uncritical at its commencement, it equally

so in - the two centuries which have just been

considered . The history of the canon in the Syrian

church cannot be traced with much exactness . THE CANON OF THE B IBLE

The Peshito version had only the Hebrew

canonical books at first ; most of the apocryphal were rendered from the Greek and added in the

estorian N recension. In the New Testament it wanted four of the catholic epistles and the m . D 8 Apocalypse Ephre (A. . 37 ) uses all the

o l as books in our canon, the ap cryphal as we l hi the canonical . The former are cited by m

1 is in the same way as the latter. Sirach ii .

1 quoted with as the Scripture says; and Wisdom

2 it s wr te . i it n iv 7with . Daniel xiii . 9, belong

th ing to the Greek additions, is also cited wi

8 as i wri e t t is tt n. It should be observed tha

’ the quotations given are all from Ephrem s

s Greek, not Syriac, works ; and that suspicion have been raised about the former being

tampered with. The Syrian version of the

New Testament made by Polycarp at the re

of Philox enus of Mabu f quest g, had the our

1 . Gra m tom . 11 . . 2 d R 1 6 O e . om pp , p 3 7, . 74 1 3 d m . i. . 1 0 1 Ibi . to Tom 111. . 60 , p . p .

206 THE CANON OF THE B IB LE

1 2 a and Chronicles, Job, Ezra and Nehemi h,

1 2 s and Judith, Esther, and Maccabee ;

2 e in the New Testament, James, Pet r,

2 s Jude, and 3 John. He also say that the Apocalypse of John is much doubted h i. e. t e . by Orientals In the third list, , books of no authority added by some (quidam) to

1 C . the canonical, are put Wisdom and anticles

r at The catalogue is confused, and e roneous

t f least in one respect, hat Jerome is re erred

to, as sanctioning the division given of the Old

Testament books ; for neither he nor the Jews

agree with it. The canon of the Abyssinian church seems to

have had at first all the books in the Septu a int r g , canonical and apoc yphal together, little h distinction being made between t em . Along with the contents of the Greek Bible there were

Enoch, 4 Esdras, the Ascension of Isaiah, the

A sen h f s et & c . o Jubilees, , That the New Testa

1 Galland x11. . & c. , p 79, R T E T R 20 FR OM THE FOU H C N U Y. 7

ment agrees with the present Greek one. At a later period in the Arabic age a list was made and constituted the legal one for the use of the f church, having been derived rom the Jacobite

’ of s canons the apo tles . This gives, in the Old

Testament , the Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges, C Ruth, Judith, Kings, hronicles, Ezra and

of Nehemiah, Esther, Tobit, two books

of Maccabees, Job, Psalms, five books

Solomon, minor and greater prophets . The

Wisdom of Sirach (for teaching children) and

Gorion i e. of the book of Joseph ben , . , that the

Maccabees, are external . The new Testament f has our gospels, Acts, seven apostolic epistles,

of of fourteen Paul, and the Revelation John .

u Later catalog es vary much, and are often

of enlarged with the book Enoch, 4 Esdras,

& c . the Apocalypse of Isaiah, The canon of

was fl uc u in 1 the Ethiopic church t at g.

The canon of the Armenians had at first

1 ’ Di nn in Ewald s b/Erbium See llma v. . 1 ji , p 44, &c. 208 T[IE CANON OF THE B IBLE

the Palestinian books of the Old Testament,

- New twenty two in number, and the usual

Testament ones, except the Apocalypse. It was made from the Syriac in the fifth century

Mesrob — by Sahak and . The deutero canonical

w the books and additions ere appended, after disciples of those two men who had been sent ff k by them into di erent places, brought bac authentic copies of the Greek Bible from the

Max imian n patriarch , by which the versio already made was interpolated and corrected as it was subsequently corrected by others

and despatched to Alexandria Athens, who,

however, did not return till their teachers

were dead . The MSS . of this version were afterwards interpolated from the Vulgate ; Oskan himself translating for his edition (which was

A D the first printed one, . . Sirach 4 Esdras and the Epistle of Jeremiah from the

of Latin . The book Revelation does not seem to have been translated till the eighth

2 10 T AN N F THE B IBLE HE C O O .

n and 3d) were not in the Georgia MS . use d

Arcil for of 1 b u t by Prince the edition 743 , Th were rendered out of the Russian . e

Moscow Bible printed under the direction and

of o Wakuse t at the cost Ar il, Bacchar and ,

is the authorised edition of the Georgian i Christ ans.

The Bible canon of the Eastern church in the

middle ages shows no real advance. Endea

vours were made to remove the uncertainty

arising from the existence of numerous lists ;

but form er decisions and decrees o f councils

of were repeated instead a new, independent

canon . Here belongs the catalogue in the f f MS. o is Alexandrian , the fi th century, which f peculiar. A ter the prophets come Esther,

Mac Tobit, Judith, Ezra and Nehemiah, 4

cabees , Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes,

- Canticles, the all virtuous Wisdom, the Wisdom

of of . Jesus Sirach In the New Testament, the

Apocalypse is followed by two epistles of F THE F R TH CE N R 1 1 ROM OU TU Y. 2

Clement. The list was probably made in

1 f i i a . o S na t Egypt That Anastasius , patriarch

’ of A Nice ho rus s Sticho ntioch, is similar to p

r f met y, which we shall mention a terwards .

Baruch is among the canonical books ; Esther

among the antilegomena . The Apocalypse is

nn 8 th of u oticed . The 5 the Apostolic canons gives a list of the Old and New Testament

of books, in which the usual canonical ones the former are supplemented by Judith and 3 Mac cabees those of the latter by the two epistles of Clement, with the Apostolic constitutions . This catalogue cannot be put earlier than the f fi th or sixth century, and is subject to the sus

icion f p o having been interpolated . We have

’ also Nicephorus s S tic/tornetry (806- 8 1 5 of which we may remark that Baruch is among f o . T the canonical books the O . ; while the

of Revelation is put with the Apocalypse Peter,

1 ~ A D. 1 599 . 1 ’ Se C n r s ur. Gr ub. dc: Kanons . e red e Z , p 97, &c. 1 2 THE CAN N OF THE IB LE 2 O B . the epistle of Barnabas and the Gospel accord

s ing to the Hebrew , among the antilegomena

of the N . T. It is also surprising that the

Apocalypse of Peter and the Gospel according

the r to Hebrews are not among the Apoc ypha ,

’ where Clement s epistles with the productions of r Ignatius, Polycarp, and Hermas appea . The list is probably older than that of the Antioch

inai a patriarch Anastasius S t . Cosmas Indico

pleustes (53 5) never mentions the seven Catholic

epistles of the New Testament or the Apo

l D 2 c A. . 6 a ypse. The Trullan council ( 9 )

- five re adopts the eighty Apostolic canons,

ectin the n j g, however, Apostolic Constitutio s . 1 f Photius, patriarch of Constantinople, ollows

the eighty- fifth Apostolical canon of the

1 3 Trullan Council . But in his Bibliotheca he

speaks differently regarding the epistles o f

1 89 1 .

1 N m canon Titalas II o o I. ca . 2 vol. iv. 1 0 , , p , , pp. 50, Mi 1 1 0 1 ed. ne. See Codd 1 1 1 5 g . 3 , 26.

1 L 2 4 THE CANON OF THE BIB E . ment books gives a fourth not in the Hebrew

Ecclesi canon. Here he specifies Wisdom, asticus 1 2 , Tobit, Judith, and Maccabees, saying that the church of Christ puts them a mong the divine books, honours and highly

1 r esteems them . There are also the fou th

2 council of Toledo Gregory the Great ;

3 Notker Labeo ; Ivo (about Bede ° Alcuin Rabanus Maurus ; Hugo de St Victor

8 Peter of Clugny ; John of Salisbury Thom as

1° 11 12 Aquinas ; Hugo de St Cher ; Wycliffe ; Nic o 18 f & c. &c. o laus of Lyra, , Several these, as Hugo

n of St de St Victor, Joh Salisbury, Hugo de f Cher, and Nicolaus of Lyra, ollowed Jerome in separating the canonical and apocryphal book s

14 of the Old Testament .

The Reformers generally returned to the

1 3 60 A D. 1 2 D 1 4 . + 9 A. . 6

9 + 1 1 82 4 . D .

1 1 6 D 1’ ‘ ' 1 2 A. . l 1 8 A . D 1 3 3 4 . “ 1 See H d 3 c. o y, p. 64 , & 2 1 FR OM THE FOUR TH CENTUR Y. 5

off Hebrew canon, dividing the additional books of the Septuagint or those attached to the a ocr lzal Vulgate . These they called p yp ,

’ f of a ter Jerome s example . Though considered

of no authority in matters doctrine, they were f pronounced use ul and edifying. The principal f reason that weighed with the Re ormers was , that Christ and the apostles testified to none of

the Septuagint additions.

Besides the canonical books of the Old

Testament, Luther translated Judith, Wisdom ,

1 2 Tobit, Sirach, Baruch, and Maccabees, the

Greek additions to Esther and Daniel , with the

of Prayer Manasseh . His judgment respecting

several of these is expressed in the prefaces to

1 them . With regard to Maccabees he thinks

it almost equal to the other books of Holy

Scripture, and not unworthy to be reckoned f w . O as among them Wisdom, he says, he long in doubt whether it should be numbered

among the canonical books and of Sirach that 2 1 6 THE CANON OF THE B IBLE

it is a right good book proceeding from a wise

f of man. But he speaks un avourably several

of other apocryphal productions, as Baruch and

2 Maccabees . It is evident, however, that he

considered all he translated of some use to the

Christian Church. He thought that the book f o Esther should not belong to the canon .

’ Luther s judgment respecting some of the New Testament books was freer than most

Protestants now are disposed to approve. He

thought the epistle to the Hebrews was neither ’ ’ d Paul s nor an apostle s, but procee ed from an excellent and learned man who may have been the disciple of apostles . He did not put it on an equality with the epistles written by apostles

The themselves . Apocalypse he considered n either apostolic nor prophetic, but put it almost on the same level with the 4th book of

of Esdras, which he spoke elsewhere tossing into the Elbe. This judgment was afterwards

’ modified, not retracted . James s epistle he

2 18 THE CANON OF THE B IBLE

w i s the New rit ng even in Testament collection.

Nor did the Reformers consider it a dangerous t f hing to bring the act before the people . To

make it palpable, Luther attached continuous numbers to the first twenty- three books of his

f f r version, bringing the our antilegomena a te these, without numbers ; and this mode of marking the difference continued till the middle

1 1 of the 7th century. Luther was right in

assigning a greater or less value to the

w of separate ritings the New Testament, and

in leaving every one to do the same . He relied

on their internal value more than tradition ;

taking the word of Gocl in a deeper and

wider sense than its coincidence with the Bible .

Bodenstein of Carlstad examined the question

of canonicity more thoroughly than any of his f contemporaries, and ollowed out the principle

of private judgment in regard to it. He divides

1 ’ ' ee Tholuck s Kommentar z um B ne an die IIeé raer S fi , z weite An a e 86 fl g , pp. 55, . 219

— 1 the biblical books into three classes . Books o f the highest dignity, viz . , the Pentateuch and

2 o f the Gospels ; . Books the second dignity, ie . . , the works termed prophetic by the Jews,

f r a and the fi teen epistles unive s lly received ; 3 .

ie Books of the third and lowest authority, . . , the Jewish Hagiographa and the seven Anti

legomena epistles of the New Testament . Among the Apocrypha he makes two classes such as are out of the canon to the Hebrews

yet hagiographical (Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus,

Judith, Tobit, the two Maccabees), and those that are clearly apocryphal and to be rejected f (third and ourth Esdras, Baruch, Prayer of

of Manasseh, a good part the third chapter of

1 Daniel, and the last two chapters of Daniel . Zwingli asserts that the Apocalypse is not a

2 biblical book .

1 ’ ’ Carlstadt s treatise is reprinted in Credner s a Ga ckiclite K des anons.

1 W 1 erke di b h nd hulth ss v l 11. . 6 , e ted y Sc uler a Sc e , o . p 9 . 220 THE CANON OF THE IBL B E .

Oecolampadius says We do not despise

s s h s Judith, Tobit, Eccle ia ticus, Baruc , the la t two Es s ee a two dra , the three Maccab s, the l st

s of an chapter D iel, but we do not attribute to

t ”1 them divine authori y with those others . As to the books of the New Testament he would

ar not comp e the Apocalypse, James, Jude, 2

2

e 2 e . P ter, and 3 John with th rest

Calvin did not think that Paul was the author of the e to the 2 e pistle Hebrews, or that Pet r was written by the apostle himself ; but both in his opinion are canonical.

1 E ad Valdem ar 1 0 a ud Sculteti annal. mun . re p. . 53 , p g

now t decas secunda . 1 1 . , pp 3 3 , 3 4 1 Ibid.

222 IIIE CAN N OF THE B IB LE O . l se. r e yp This appea s in Melito, Irena us,

of Clement Alexandria, Origen, Augustine,

of rt e Jerome, the Vulgate, the Councils Ca hag

D. 1 held in A. 397and 4 9 ; and is now the usual

n arrangeme t.

Within the limits of the two general arrange m s n r ent just mentio ed, there were many va ia

lze os els in t . tions. Thus we find relation to g p

in h . a t e III ( ) Matthew, John, Luke, Mark ;

’ f b a e . o a a MSS the old It lic marked , , , , j,17:

’ ar enteus Ulfila s and in the cod . g of Gothic

version .

6 n ( ) Matthew, Joh , Mark, Luke ; in the

f D 1 o A. council Ephesus . 43 , Cyril of Alexan

Theodoret r dria, , the stichomet y of the Cler

mont MS . Such was the usual order in the

f f r Greek Church o the fi th centu y.

c f ( ) Mark is put first, ollowed by Matthew ;

f B bbi n of in the fragment o a o a MS . the Itala

' t rin k a Tu marked .

’ a w n ( ) Matthe , Mark, Joh , Luke ; in the F HE NE W TE STA E N B S 22 ORDE R O T M T OOK . 3

uret nian C o Syriac gospels. They are men

’ tioned in the same order in Origen s I . Homily

on Luke .

The reason of the order in (a) and (b) lies in

of d apostleship. The works apostles prece e

of . those evangelists The established sequence, which is already sanctioned by Irenaeus and

of Origen, has respect to the supposed dates

the gospels. Clement of Alexandria says that ancient tradition supposed those gospels having the genealogies to have been written before the

others .

A s A ts lze s les . tlze c o t A o t n IV to f p , not o ly

f s is this work put immediately a ter the go pels,

the which is order in the Muratorian canon,

but we find it in other positions .

a in ( ) Gospels, Pauline Epistles, Acts ; the

1 2 MS. Sinaitic , the Peshito, Jerome, and Epi

ni s pha u .

1 ’ Hug says that his copy of Widmanstad s edition had the

Acts immediatel followin the Gos y g pels. 1 E ist ad Paulin m p . u . 22 THE CAN N OF THE BIB LE 4 O .

6 s s ( ) Gospel , Pauline Epistle , Catholic Epis t s s u le , Act ; in Aug stine, the third council o f

I. . and Toledo, Isidore, Innocent , Eugenius IV , the Spanish Church generally.

c s ( ) Gospels, Pauline, Catholic Epistle ,

oca s r of the Ap lypse, Act ; in the stichomet y

e Cl rmont MS .

As tire E istles o Paul the V. to p f , besides

n w o t place they o ccupy in our Bibles, hey sometimes follow the gospels immediately.

a c ( ) Gospels, Pauline Epistles ; the Sinaiti

M E i hanius h S. , Jerome, p p , Augustine, the t ird

f I. council o Toledo, Isidore, Innocent , Euge

r the r . nius IV. , the stichomet y of Cle mont MS

u l the (6) The us a order of Greek Church is,

t & c . Gospels, Acts, Ca holic Epistles, Pauline, ,

e sa an as in Cyril of J ru lem, the Laodice Council

Leontius n the Athanasius, of Byza tium,

The t MSS . A . B but not 3 . cri ical Greek

Testaments of Lachmann and Tischendorf adopt this order.

226 THE CAN TIIE BIBL OIV OF E .

(a) Marcion had but ten Pauline epistle s in

w : 1 2 C n the follo ing order Galatians, and ori thians s 1 2 , Roman , and Thessalonians, the

n Laodiceans (Ephesians), Colossians, Philemo ,

Philippians.

b 1 2 ( ) and Corinthians, Ephesians, Philip

n I 2 s pia s, Colossians, Galatians, and The sa

1 2 lonians, Romans, Philemon, Titus, and

s Timothy, to the Laodiceans, the Alexandrian

(the Epistle to the Hebrews) ; in the Muratorian canon .

c E he ( ) Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, p

sians, Philippians, Thessalonians, Colossians, w Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebre s ; d an . Augustine, several MSS of the Vulgate

1 in England .

' a n n ( ) Roma s, Corinthia s, Galatians, Thessa

n lonians, Ephesia s, Philippians , Colossians,

Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews ; in the so-called decree of Gelasius in the name of

1 bid. 66 I , p. 4. RDE R OF THE NE W TE STAME NT B KS 22 O OO . 7

’ ff Hormisdas, in Labbe s text. But here di erent

MSS . vary in regard to the position of the

Thessalonian epistles .

VII . The Laodicean letter was inserted f either be ore the pastoral epistles, as in several f MSS . o the Vulgate in England ; or before the Thessalonian epistles preceding them ; or

of at the end the Epistle to the Hebrews, as in

of a MS . the Latin Bible at Lambeth . Its insertion in copies of the Vulgate was owing to

of the authority Gregory the Great, who looked upon it as authentic .

n of VIII . The positio the Epistle to the Hebrews usually was either before the pastoral f ie. epistles, . , immediately a ter those to the

Thessalonians ; or after the pastoral ones and

Philemon . The former method was generally adopted in the Greek Church from the fourth

r centu y. The latter prevailed in the Latin

Church from Augustine onward .

(a) Pauline epistles to churches (the last T E 228 H CANON OF THE B IB LE .

ec n being the s ond to the Thessalonia s),

in Hebrews, Timothy, Titus, Philemon ; the

1 E i . H. s MSS. 1 . . , A B C , Athana ius, p p

l h li s Theodor m s Eut a u et. ha iu , , Jerome men tions it after the epistles of Paul to the seven churches as an eighth excluded by the

f s majority, and proceeds to speci y the pa toral

Am hilochius Ebed esu th ones . But p and j e f Syrian have the western order, viz. , the ollow ing b f im ( ) Pauline Epistles, Hebrews ( ollowing

mediately that to Philemon) ; in Augustine and

the Vulgate version generally. It is so in the

canons of the councils at Hippo and Carthage

A D . . ( . 393 and and in the MSS D and

G. , in Isidore of Spain, and the council of Trent.

at/tol IX . With respect to the order of the C ic

istles w not all Ep , hich were adopted into the

canon till the end of the fourth century Euse

’ 1 ni s Collectanea monumentorum vetera n: Frae at See Zacag f ,

111111. &c . p.

THE CAN N OF THE BIBLE O .

and a Gallican Sacramentarium . The Vulgate council of Trent follow this arrangement. 4 ( ) John, Peter, Jude, James ; in the list I given by Innocent . , and the third council

of Toledo .

The Eastern church naturally set the Epistle

of James, who was Bishop of Jerusalem, at the head of the others ; while the Western put

Peter, the Bishop of Rome, in the same place.

X . The Revelation varied little in position .

a ( ) In the decree of Gelasius, according to its t w hree recensions, the Revelation follo s

’ s Paul s epistle , preceding those of John and

the other Catholic ones . 6 ( ) In D or the Clermont MS . it follows the

Catnolic epistles, and precedes the Acts which

the if last is thrown to end of all the books, as it were an appendix to the writings of the

1 apostles .

’ ’ 1 See Volkmar s Annan to Credner s Gescfiicfite des I g V. T.

Kanon . 1 B i , p 34 , &c and Hody De iol om m tex tibus ori inalibus g , p. 644 , & c. C H A P T E R I X .

MM Y F T E S B T SU AR O H U JEC .

a n ( ) In relatio to the Old Testament, the prevailing tendency in the Greek Church was ff to follow the Palestinian canon . Di erent lists appeared from time to time in which the en

i e. deavour . there to exclude apocryphal, , spurious

the works, was apparent . In addition to canonical of ecclesiastical , a class books was

for - judged fit reading in the Church, a class intermediate between the canonical and

the apocryphal . The distinction between canonical and ecclesiastical writings appears in

E i hanius & c Cyril of Jerusalem, Athanasius, p p , . The Latin Church showed a disposition to

elevate the ecclesiastical books of the Greek

of Church to the rank the canonical, making 2 2 THE CAN N OF THE BIB E 3 O L .

the line between the two indistinct ; as we se e

from the acts of the councils at Hippo and

f n Carthage, in the end of the ourth and begi ning

’ he ft r e of t fi h centu y, where Augustine s influenc

s was predominant. But notwithstanding thi

r deviation from the st icter method of the Greeks,

learned men like Jerome adhered to the Pales

in n ev t the es s t ia canon, and en s yled eccl ia

o a ocr lzal r tical b oks p yp , t ansferring the epithet

from one class to another. Hilary and Rufinus

also followed the Greek usage.

wi s During the sixth and follo ng centurie , it

cannot be said that the canon of the Greek

r was n d t Chu ch defi itely close , notwi hstanding

the decrees of councils and references to older

authorities. Opinions still varied about certain

books, such as Esther ; though the Palestinian f list was commonly ollowed . During the same

period, the enlarged canon of the Alexandrian i Jews, which went far to abolish the dist nction between the canonical and deutero- canonical

2 77112 CAN N OF THE I LE 34 O B B .

e of n d or clos the New Testament cano , it e

in term ed it largely. Eusebius made a Greek

Bible containing the usual books, except the

Revelation . Though the historian of the church

for was not well fitted the task, being deficient

t in critical abili y and trammelled by tradition,

he doubtless used his best judgment . Hence,

n C about the year 3 37, the Consta tinian hurch

w n received a Bible hich had an influential origi . No binding authority indeed attached to the list of the Christian books it presented ; but it had weight in the Greek Church . It did not

ff v prevent di erent opinions, nor deter indi iduals

from dissent. Thus Athanasius, who disliked

of Eusebius and his party, issued a list the w sacred writings hich included the Revelation .

n A D The canon of the Laodicea Council ( . . 363) agreed with the Constantine one.

That variations still existed in the Eastern Church is shewn by the lists which vied with one another in precedence . The apostolic canons S MMAR Y OF THE SUB E C 2 U J T. 3 5

the adopted seven general epistles, while the

apostolic constitutions excluded them . The

r Alexandrian MS . added to the ordina y books

’ of the New Testament Clement s two epistles ; and Cosmas Indicopleustes omitted the general

epistles as well as the Apocalypse. At length

of n the Council Constanti ople, usually called l Trn lan A . D the ( . laid down positions that

fixed the canon for the Greek Church . The endeavour in it was to attain to a conclusion

which should unite East and West . This

council did not enumerate the separate books, f but re erred to older authorities, to the

- five of eighty canons the apostles, the de

of n of crees the sy ods Laodicea, Ephesus,

r Carthage, and others ; to Athanasius, Grego y

Naz ianz us Am hliochius of of , p Iconium, Cyril

ennadius - c G & . of Alexandria, , After the fourth century there was a general desire to

fall back on apostolic times, to appeal to

C O of the hurch, to ascertain the pinion 2 6 THE CAN N OF THE B IB LE 3 O .

n or as e r o n sy ods s mblies ; in a word, to ely

authority.

Less discrepancy and activity were m anifested

about the canon in the Western Church. Here

the chief doubts were directed to the epistle to Th the Hebrews and the seven general ones . e

f m c b e or er was early excluded, and ontinued to

so even in the time of Jerome . The latter were

n adopted much sooner. The impulse give by

Constantine to determine the books of Scripture

re- c acted on the West, where the Church on

’ sidered it its own privilege. Augustine s in

fl uence contributed much to the settlement of

d of . D A. the question The syno s Hippo ( . 3 93) D and of Carthage (A. . 397) received the epistle

s s to the Hebrews and the seven general one , thu

now fixing the New Testament canon as it is .

1 In 4 9 the African bishops, in the presence of a f Papal delegate, repeated their ormer decision . After the West Goths joined the Catholic

n r Church in the sixth ce tu y, the Romish and

2 8 TH ANON OF TH 3 E C E B IB LE .

e decrees. This body, however, could only settl

c for an s t the subje t Rom ist , since, while the righ

n of private judgment is exercised, no corporatio can and not declare some books inspired others ,

of f s some authoritative in matters aith, other

t not, without presumption . Though the presen Bible canon rests upon the judgment of good

' d e r of difl erent n an l a ned men times, it can ever

a be fin lly or infallibly settled, because the critical

r r ff ce powe s of reade s di er, and all do not ac pt

church authority with unhesitating assent . It is the way of men to defer unduly to the

opinions expressed by synods and councils, especially if they be propounded dogmatically ; to acquiesce in their decisions with facility rather

than institute independent inquiry. This is ex

m lified the e p in the history of the canon, where fallibility of such bodies in determining canon

r icity is conspicuous . It is so in the general e

e tion of b00k c p the of Esther, while the old

was a n poem, the Song of Songs, c lled in questio 2 SUMMAR Y OF THE SUBJ E CT. 39 at the synod of Jamnia in the omission of the Revelation from the canonical list by many be

longing to the Greek Church, while the epistles

’ to Timothy and Titus were received as St Paul s

from the beginning almost universally . C H A P T E R X .

THE CANON IN THE CONFESSIONS O F

DIFFERENT CHURCHES.

D f A. 1 THE second Helvetic Con ession ( . 566) speaks of the apocryphal books of the O ld

Testament as those which the ancients wished

the autho rita to be read in churches, but not as

1 tive in matters of faith . f e A D. 1 m Th Gallic Con ession ( . 559) ake s a

t b distinc ion between canonical and other oo ks,

m a the former being the rule and nor of f ith,

but m u not only by the consent of the Church, c h

more by the testimony and intrinsic persuas ion

t u of the Spirit, by whose suggestions we are a ght

to distinguish them from other ecclesi asti c al

o b oks which, though useful, are not of the k ind

1 Niem r ollec n 6 e e C tio o essrbn m . y , C nf , p 4 8 .

242 THE CANON OF THE BIBLE

It the the new opposes, however, old law to ,

a making them antagonistic. The historic l document containing the articles of The

the A. D. 1 1 es Union of Valleys, 57 , separat

d th indee e canonical and apocryphal books, purporting to be founded on a Confession of

F A D 1 1 e is . 20 th aith as old as . ; but latter

t of my hical, as appears from a comparison it with the epistle which the legates of the Wal

ensians ( co la ad s t s d gave to E mp iu . The ar icle

’ of that Union are copied from Morels account of his transactions with ( E colampadius

r 1 and Buce in 530. The literature of this people was altered by Hussite influences and the Reformation ; so that though differing little from the Romanists at first except in ecclesiastical discipline, they diverged widely afterwards by adopting the Protestant canon

1 nf and doctrines. Hence the Co ession issued

1 ’ See Herz o s Die Romania /ten Waldem ar g , p. 55, &c. and

’ his ro ramm De an 'ine et ristino statu Wald nsiu p g g p e m , & c.

1 1 PP 71 4 ° S 2 IN THE CONFE SSION . 43 in 1 655 enumerates as Holy Scripture nothing

and but the Jewish Palestinian canon, the

1 usual books of the New Testament . The canon of the Anglican Church

s given in the sixth article of religion, define holy Scripture to be those canonical books of

of t the Old and New Testament, whose authori y f was never any doubt in the Church. A ter giving the names and number of the canonical

r books, the article prefaces the apoc yphal ones

Hierome with, And the other books (as saith) the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners ; but yet doth it not

r apply them to establish any doctrine. Such a e ”

& c. & c . these following, , At the end it is stated

“ that all the books of the New Testament, as

are they commonly received, we do receive and a ccount them canonical . The article is ambi If guous. the canonical books enumerated are those meant in the phrase of whose authority

1 ’ Le er s Histoire des E lises Vandoises vol i 1 1 2 g g , . . , p. , &c. 244 THE CANON OF THE BIBLE

was d never any oubt in the Church, the state

ec ment is incorr t. If a distinction is implied between the canonical books and such canonical o nes as have never been doubted in the Church, the meaning is obscure . In either case the

n u la g age is not explicit. The Scottish or Westminster Confession of

Faith gives a list of all the books of the Old and New Testaments as the Word of God written ; adding that those called the apoc r ha no yp are not of divine inspiration, and

— of part of the canon, no authority in the

of Church, nor to be approved or made use otherwise than human writings. The Roman Catholic canon was finally determined at the Council of Trent which adopted all the books in the Vulgate

as sacred and canonical, without distinction .

and Third and fourth Esdras, third Maccabees, the prayer of Manasseh were not included ; though the first and last appearedin the original

“ 2 N OF T E B E 46 THE CA ON H B I L .

attempts to uphold the old distinction between the canonical and ecclesiastical books by Metro

phanes Critopulus patriarch of Alexand ria in

1 62 Lucaris r ns a 5, and Cyril pat iarch of Co t n

tinople ( 1 63 8 came to the same decisio n

t a o wi h the Romish, and canonized all the p c

h o ryp a. This was done at a Jerusalem syn d under Dositheus in 1 672 .

’ 1 Kimmels Monum ta e c s en a i 6 en d i ec le ori t rt . . fi . , p p 4 7. C HAPTER XI .

THE CANON FROM SEMLER To THE PRESENT

TIME WITH REFLECTIONS ON IT , S READ

NT JUSTME .

SEMLER 1 was the most conspicuous scholar

after the Reformation who undertook to correct

n e the prevaili g ideas resp cting the canon .

Acquainted with the works of Toland and

of h Morgan, he adopted some t eir views, and

prosecuted his inquiries on their lines chiefly in

relation to the New Testament. He had no

e definite principles to guide him, but judg d

books chiefly by their christian value and use to h t e Church . Though his views are sometimes

- - he one sided and his essays ill digested, placed

new n ed e the subject in lights, and re der a servic

1 1 1 A D 1 79 . 248 THE CANON OF THE B IBLE

1 to truth which bore abundant fruit in after years.

He and f e dealt tradition severe blows, re d

was theology from the yoke of the letter. He

d sc . e f . ollowe by his di iple Corrodi, by G L O der,

and r J . D . Michaelis, Herder, Lessing, Eichho n, — most of whom recommended their views by a freshness of style which Semler did not

r Gesenius command . The more ecent works of ,

Zunz De Wette, , Ewald, Hitzig, Geiger and

Herzfeld have contributed to form a juster opinion of the true position which the books of the Bible occupy. ° f F s o . C . In the New Te tament, the writings

Baur have Opened up a new method of investi

gating the canon, which promises important

o and lasting results . Proceeding in the track f

Semler, he prosecuted his researches into primi tive Christianity with great acuteness and

of singular power combination . Though his

1 AMandlun tron reier Untersuclmn des Canon art g f g , 4 p s,

1 -1 Halle, 1 77 775.

250 THE CANON OF THE BIBLE

the etr ne C r u P i and Pauline hristians too rigo o sly, and invaded the authenticity of the sac red writings to excess ; for it is haz ardous to make a theory extremely stringent to the comparative

of neglect modifying circumstances, which, ffi though increasing the di culty of criticism, contribute to the security of its processes . Yet he has properly emphasized internal evidence ; and many of his conclusions about the bo oks

will stand . He has thrown much light on the original relations of parties immediately after the of n and origin Christia ity, disturbed an organic unity Of the New Testament which had Th been merely assumed by traditionalists . e best Introductions to the New Testament must

accept them to some extent. The chief char

acteristic of the school is the application o f

historic criticism to the genesis of the New

Testament writings, irrespective of tradition

a striving to discover the circumstances or

ks r tendencies out of which the boo o iginated . SIN E SE MLER 1 C . 2 5

’ Baur s tendene principle judiciously applied

cannot but produce good results . We have seen that sound critical considera tions did not regulate the formation of the three collections which make up the entire

of canon the Old Testament. Had it been so, the Pentateuch would not have been

n attributed to Moses . Neither would a umber

c of latter prophe ies have been , accepted as Isaiah ’s and incorporated with the prophet ’s

authentic productions . All the Proverbs, the

of book Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs would not have been assigned to Solomon ;

Jonah would have been separated from the

prophets, and Daniel must have had a later

position in the Hagiographa. We cannot, d therefore, credit the collectors or e itors of the books with great critical sagacity. But

they did their best in the circumstances, pre

serving invaluable records of the Hebrew

. n d people In like man er, it has appeare , that 252 THE CANON OF THE BIBLE the ecclesiastics to whom we owe the New

Testament collection were not sharp- sighted w in the literature ith which they had to do .

It is true that well - founded doubts were entertained by the early Christians about

e several portions, such as the s cond Epistle of

& c . Peter, the Epistle to the Hebrews, , but

the Revelation was needlessly discredited . They accepted without hesitation the pastoral

of epistles as Pauline, but doubted some the

whch o f Catholic Epistles, bear the impress

authenticity more strongly, such as James .

2 It is therefore incorrect to say that Peter,

2 t the and 3 John, James, Jude, Epis le to

Hebrews, and the Apocalypse have been received into the canon on evidence less complete than that belonging to the

r others . The ve y general admission of the

’ fourth gospel as the apostle John s, is a curious

o f s example f acile traditionali m . Biblical c riti m cis , however, scarcely existed in the first three

254 THE CANON OF THE BIBLE

- ed I h a and literary take a one sid view. t as

so n d a li a theological character al . It ee s the pp c

n nOt h s c sm the tio , only of i toric ritici , but immediate consciousness belonging to every

r t shou be Ch istian. The two Testamen s ld s ed and c os s eparat , their respe tive p ition — assigned to each the Old having be en

preparatory to the New. Should it be said

as is th o f the bluntly, it in the 7 Article

r t a Anglican Chu ch, that the Old is not con r ry to the New Testament ? Luther at least ex pressed his opinion of the difference between

1 them pretty clearly ; though the theologians of Germany after him evinced a desire to minimise ff 2 the di erence. Should the general opinion o f

1 F am le Moses is dead his rul w nt out wh or ex p , e e en — Christ came he is of no further service here . W e are willin to re ard him as a teacher but we will not g g , regard him as our law iver un ss lie a ree w t/t Me N g , le g i ew Testament

” ' and Me law o na ture. Sammtlicfie Sckm eu W f fi , ed. alch.

dritt r Thei1. . e , pp 7, 8 .

Such as Calovius Chemnitz ohn Gerhard W . L s r , , J , y e , uenstedt Brochmand Hollaz M Q , , , & c. elancthon also makes TME N 2 I TS RE AD/ US T. 55

the Protestant Church that the authority of the Old Testament is not subordinate to that of the

New be rigidly upheld ? According to oneaspect

of the former it may be so, viz . , its prophetic h and theological aspect, that in w ich it is

brought into close union with the latter ; the

essence of the one being foreshadowed or

implied in the other, as Justin Martyr supposed .

n And this view has ever lost supporters, who

of s by the help double sense , types, and

e of the symbols, with assum d prediction definite f and distant uture, transform the old dispensa

tion into an outline picture of the new ; taking into it a body of divinity which is alien from its

nature . According to another aspect, viz ., the

moral and historical, the equality can scarcely

be allowed . Schleiermacher is right in saying that the Old Testament seems to be nothing

but a superfluous authority for doctrine ; an

no important distinction between the two Testaments in his Loci

' ’ l zci alvin l wa d riv m tluo og . C s theo ogy s e ed fro the Old Testa

m ent more than the New. 2 6 THE CAN N OF THE B IB LE 5 O .

Opinion coinciding with that of the ea rly

c an has c no t So ini s, who held that it a histori al,

of o a dogmatic, value. Only such our pi us emotions as are of a general nature are accu rately reflected in the Old Testament ; and a ll that is most decidedly Jewish is of least value

the to Christians . The alleged coincidence of

Old Testament with the New must be modified

of n by the doctrine development . It has bee fostered by types and prophecies supposed to refer to christian times ; by the assumed dicta tion of all Scripture by the Holy Spirit ; by fancied references of the one dispensation to the other ; by the confounding of a Jewish Messiah

r sketched in various prophets, with Jesus Ch ist, if as the latter had not changed, exalted and purified the Messianic idea to suit his sublime

of purposes human regeneration . The times and circumstances in which the Old Testament

Scriptures appeared, the manners, usages, civil

“ isation h , intellectual and moral stage of t e

2 8 THE AN N F TH E 5 C O O E B IBL .

s d the the authors posses e Spirit of God. These varieties affect the matter as well as the manner

is f o of the writings. It there ore unphilos phical to treat the Bible as a whole which was dictated I by the Spirit and directed to one end . ts uniformity is chequered with variety ; its har mony with disagreement. It is a bundle o f

oo ec l e b ks a sel tion from a wider iteratur , reflecting many diversities of religious appre hension f the e n . A ter two Testaments have b e

rightly estimated according to their respective

merits, the contents of each should be duly — apportioned internal evidence being the test of

i a riori their relative importance, rrespective of p

s as umptions. Their traditional origin and

authority must be subordinated to the inherent

value they bear, or the conformity of the ideas f to the will of God . The gradual ormation of

both canons suggests an analysis of the classes into which they came to be put for the Sam e canonical dignity was not attributed by the ITS READj USTME NT.

Jews to the books contained in the three divisions ; and the controverted writings of the New Testament found gradual recog ni i t on very slowly. Luther made important distinctions between the canonical booksl ; and

Carlstadt put the Antilegomena of the New

Testament on a par with the Hagiographa of the Old.

In the Old Testament the three classes or

canons have been generally estimated bytheJews according to their respective antiquity ; though the sacrificial worship enjoined in the Penta teuch never formed an essential part of the

Jewish religion ; the best prophets having set

small value upon it . The pure monotheistic

o s r d ctrine of the e last w iters, chiefly contained in the s the econd canon, lifts that class up to highest rank ; yet the Decalogue in the Penta

1 ’ His full sayings are collected in Bretschneider s Lutfier an u nsere Zeit - ’ , . 1 86 22 and in Krause s uscula tlseolo ca pp 4 ; Op gi , pp. THE CAN N OF TH O E B IB LE . teuch is sufficient to stamp the first canon with

w be o s rea o th. s s e g t r It mu t c nfe d, however, that the Mosa law was the ai o f ic meagre, in dom n

pure ethics ; and that it promoted among the people a slavish spirit of positivism by laying

re s ess on a s a s st mo tr ct th n dispositions, and in i in on s e . For t as the g mall r gulations his re on,

s a d t The prophet comb te its narrow externali y . three canons were regarded with a degree of veneration corresponding to the order in which they stand . To apportion their respective values to the individual parts of them is a difficult task .

n As to the New Testament writings, we thi k that some of them might conveniently occupy

duetero- canonical the position of , equivalent to

those of the Old Testament having that title .

2 2 We allude to and 3 John, Jude, James,

. few Peter, the Revelation It is true that a of these were prior in time to some of the univer sally- received gospels or epistles ; but time is

262 THE CAN N OF H O T E B IB LE .

many points are independent of dogm atics ; and that the right decision in things historical m ay be reached apart from any ecclesiastical sta ndpoint.

t ti Again, should the dis inc on between the apocryphal and canonical books of the O ld

Testament be emphasized as it is by many ?

be be two Should a sharp line put tween the ,

as t the t hough one class, wi h the period it

r the r belonged to, were cha acterized by e rors

and anachronisms of its history ; the other by

o simplicity and accuracy ; the one, by b oks

written under fictitious names ; the other, by

the power to distinguish truth from falsehood

or by honesty of pu rpose ? Should the one

be a Sign of the want of truthfulness and

of ? discernment ; the other, religious simplicity

Can this aggregation of the Apocrypha over

h o against the Hagiograp a, serve the purp se

of a just estimate ? Hardly so ; for some of

e the latter, such as Esther and Ecclesiast s, ITS RE AD USTMEN 26 / T. 3

Ist cannot be put above Wisdom, Maccabees,

Judith, Baruch, or Ecclesiasticus . The doctrine

of immortality, clearly expressed in the Book of

sd is s Wi om, not in Ecclesia tes ; neither is God once named in the Book of Esther as author of the marvellous deliverances which the chosen

his people are said to have experienced . The

tory narrated in Ist Maccabees is more credible

s than that in Esther. It is therefore mi leading

to mark off all the apocryphal works as Human

e and all the canonical ones as divin . The divine and the human elements in man are too inti

of n mately blended to admit such separatio .

of The best which he produces partakes both .

The human element still permeates them as

long as God speaks through man ; and He

neither dictates nor speaks otherwise. In the

attributes claimed for the canonical books no

rigid line can be drawn . It may be that the inspiration of their authors differed in

of as for degree ; that the writer Ecclesi tes, F T B IB E 264 THE CANON O HE L .

was example, more philosophical than Jesus

son of Sirach ; but different degrees of in

spiration belong to the canonical writers them

selves. Undue exaltation of the Hebrew

canon does injustice to the wider Alexandrian

“ one. Yet some still speak of the pure Hebrew ” c n t the ano , identifying it with hat of Church

a be of England . We dmit that history had

e a come leg nd ry, that it was written in an ora

torical n style by the Alexa drian Jews, and was

used for didactic purposes as in Tobit and

Judith . Gnomic poetry had survived in the

book of Sirach ; prophecy, in Baruch and the

Epistle of Jeremiah, though here the language

is already prosaic . Imitation is too observable

of r in the matter and manner the Apoc ypha .

Ha i They have parallels, however, among the g o

ra ha g p , which originated in an age when the genuine breath of prophetic inspiration had ceased ; when history and prophecy had degene rated ; so that the transition from Esther and

266 N N T I THE CA O OF HE B B LE .

an f r f h ch Christi s o the fi st our centuries, w i excluded all the apocryphal books and in

ed s clud all the canonical one , cannot be s hown. And in regard to the critical judg ment of Jews and Christians in that period it is arbitrary to suppose that such as adopted the present canonical books alone were mo re

e disc rning than others . They were more traditional and conservative ; their discrim inat ing faculty not corresponding to the degree of t heir reliance on the past. The aim of the inquirer should be to find — from competent witnesses from contempo r . aneous or succeeding writers of trustworthy character— the authors and ages of the biblical

books . When evidence of this kind is not

available as Often happens, the only resource

is the internal . The external evidence in

a e favour of the canon is all but exh ust d, and

e now nothing of importance can be add d to it .

Its strength has been brought out ; its weakness IT S RE AD STM N / U E T. 267

has not been equally exhibited . The problem resolves itself into an examination of internal characteristics, which may be strong enough to f modi y or counterbalance the external . The latter have had an artificial preponderance in the past ; henceforward they must be regulated bythe i nternal . The main conclusion should be drawn from the contents of the books themselves.

And of w the example Je s and Christians, to

s t whom we owe the Bible canon, show hat

s ca ion d clas ifi t is necessary. This is a mitted both by Roman Catholic writers and orthodox Pro testan s - w t . A gloss writer on hat is usually ”

of i.e. the called the decree Gratian, , Bolog

1 2 r nese canonist of the th centu y, remarks

' “ about the canonical books, all may be received but may not be held in the same estimation .

f second order John Gerhard speaks o a , containing the books of the New Testament, about whose

1 authors there were some doubts in the Church ;

1 8 ed. Cotta 1 62 . Loci m i. . 1 86 1 L 2222123125, To . pp , 7, , 7 268 THE CAN N OF THE B IBLE O .

and Q uenstedt similarly specifies proto-canonical

deutero-canonical s and New Testament book , or

1 of the r those fi st and second order. What are degrees or kinds of inspiration assumed by

of f many, but a tacit acknowledgment the act that books yary in intrinsic value as they are more or less impregnated with divine truth or differ in the proportion of the eter nal and temporal elements which commingle in every revealed religion ? Doubtless the authors from whom the separate books pro ceeded if , discoverable, should be regarded ; the inspiration of an Isaiah is higher than that

e authorita of a Malachi , and an apostl is more tive than an evangelist ; but the authors are f f . o o ten unknown Besides, the process redaction through which many of the writings passed

of hinders an exact knowledge authorship . In these circumstances the books themselves must determine the position they should occupy

1 - l olemica . 0. eologia Didacticop , p 34

0 T E CAN N F THE BIBL 27 H O O E . of his children the Scriptures presenting ideas

’ of Him consistent with pure reason and man s

es n c s es es u as f r our high t i stin t , b id s ch set o th s n e en the o e s of dep dence on infinite ; the bo ks, in s ort a co a n a reve ati f God with h , th t nt i l on rom least admixture of the human conditions under — which it is transmitted these belong to the

t r highest class. If hey lead the eader away f m n to c f a l f ro opi ion pra tice, rom dogm to i e, from non-doing to obedience to the law of mo ral

f the r l duty, rom notion that eve ything in sa va tion has been done for him to the keeping of

f r l conc e the commandments, rom pa ticu arist p tions about the divine mercy to the widest — belief of its overshadowing presence such books of Scripture are in that same propo rtion

s to be ranked among the be t. In regard to the ’ h Old Testament, conformity to Christ s teac ing

m u will determine rank ; or, which is tanta o nt,

’ conformity to that pure reason which is Go d s natural revelation in man ; a criterion which E STME N 1 I TS R AD/ U T. 2 7 assigns various ranks to such Scriptures as ap peared among a Semite race at a certain stage

of . its development In the New Testament, the words and precepts of Jesus have a character of f their own, though it is very di ficult to select

them from the gospels . The supposition that the apostles ’ productions possess a higher f a o . authority th n those their disciples, is natural

But the immediate followers of Christ did not ff f all stand on one platform . Di ering rom one

a nother even in important principles, it is if possible, not certain, that some of their dis

’ of ciples composition may be higher value .

The spirit of God may have wrought within the apostles generally with greater power and clear ness than in other teachers but its operation is conditioned not merely by outward factors but

by individual idiosyncracy ; so that one who had not seen the Lord and was therefore not an

apostle proper, may have apprehended his mind

an better than immediate disciple. Paul stood 2 2 TH N N F E 7 E CA O O TH B IBLE .

above the primitive apostles in the extent to

which he fathomed the pregnant sayings of

s and s Je us developed their latent germs . Thu the normative element— that which determines

the varying degrees of authority belonging to — the New Testament does not lie in apostolic

authorship but internal worth ; in the clearness

and power with which the divine Spirit enabled

t men to grasp the truth . By distinguishing he

tem oral eter nal the p and the in christianity,

writings necessarily rise or sink in proportion to

eternal and these elements. The is the essence

r gem of revealed truth . Pe fectibility belongs

only to the temporal; it cannot be predicated of

eterna the l. The multitudinous collection of books con

tained in the Bible is not pervaded by unity of

classifica purpose or plan, so as to make a good

s of tion easy. Lea t all is it dominated by such substantial unity as has been connected with one man ; for the conception of a Messiah was

2 THE CAN N OF THE B B E 74 O I L . divided in their beliefs ? Did the Jewish and the Pauline ones unite in accepting the sa w ? for m me ritings Not a considerable ti e, until the means of ascertaining the real authors of the books and the ability to do so were

lacking.

the As to the Old Testament, Palestinian Jews determined the canonical books by gradually contracting the list and stopping it at a time when their calamities throwing

fo r of them back on the past springs hope, had

stiffened them within a narrow traditionalism ;

but their brethren in Egypt, touched by

and Alexandrian culture Greek philosophy,

n received later productio s into their canon ,

some of which at least are of equal value with

of Palestinian ones . In any case, the degree authority attaching to the Biblical books grew f " d rom less to greater, till it culminate in a

a d s in divine ch racter, a sacre nes rising even to

f t dis allibili y. Doubtless the Jews of Palestine ITS RE AD USTME N 2 / T. 75 tinguished the canonical from the apocryphal or deutero- canonical books on grounds satis factory to themselves ; but their judgment was not f of in allible . A senate Rabbis under the

old dispensation might err, as easily as a synod

of priests under the new. Though they may

eneral have been g ly correct, it must not be

l a s assumed that they were a w y so. Their dis cernm ent m ay be commended without being

of magnified . The general feeling leaning upon

for of the past was a sound one, the best times

Judaism had departed, and with them the most original effusions ; yet the wave of Platonism that passed over Alexandria could not but quicken even the conservative mind of the Jew .

of Greek thought blended with echoes the past,

f e though in dulled orm. Still a lin had to be drawn in the national literature ; and it was

The f well drawn on the whole . eeling existed that the collection must be closed with works of a certain period and a certain character ; and it 2 76 THE CANON OF THE B IB LE

was s d a nt clo e ccordingly, without preve ing individuals from putting their private Opinions

s . over against authority, and dis enting

At the present day a new arrangement is necessary ; but where is the ecclesiastical body bold enough to undertake it ? And if it were attempted or carried out by non - ecclesiastical

parties, would the churches approve or adopt the d ? h if procee ing We venture to say, t at some books be separated from the collection — and others put in their place if the classifica

tion of some be altered, and their authority — raised or lowered good will be done ; the

Bible will have a fairer degree of normal power in doctrine and morals, and continue to promote f spiritual li e. Faith in Christ precedes faith in books . Unless criticism be needlessly nega tive it cannot remove this time- honoured legacy f rom the position it is entitled to, else the

of spiritual consciousness humanity will rebel .

While the subject is treated reverently, and the

2 8 THE CAN N OF E B BLE 7 O TH I .

of l they contain a declaration the divine wi l .

Hence there is truth in the statement of o ld

theologians that the authority of Scripture is f d rom God alone . It was the early church indee

that made the canon, selecting the books which

appeared to have been written by apostles or

apostolic men, and carrying over to them

authority fro m alleged authenticity more than

r inte nal value. But the latter is the real index

of authority ; and God is the fountain from w 1 hom spiritual endowments proceed . The canonicity of the books is a distinct question

1 i u o nullum librum facit anonic Eccles a sua a t ritate c um ,

ui e canonica scri turae autoritas est a solo Deo &c q pp p , . ’

rhard Loci Theolo ici om . i. . ed. Cotta. Autorit Ge s g , t p 4, as

ri tur uoad nos nihil aliud est uam m anifesta i sc p ae q , q t o et co nitio uni ae illins divinzx umm autoritatis ua: s ri g c et s ae , q c pturae

int insi l i i non con r ri est erna et ta. Ecc esia g tur fe t sc pturae novam ali uam autoritatem uoad nos sed testifica i n s q q , t o e ua ad a nitionem illins veritatis nos d ducit oncedimus ecc i g e . C , les am esse scri tura sacrae testem custodem uindicem raec uem p , , , p o , et inter retem sed ne amus ex eo cifici uod autoritas scri p g , , q pturae sive simpliciter sive quoad nos ab ecclesia pendeat et quidem u ic nd t —I id m n e e ea . b . to us secundus . d. Cotta. , p , , p 39, e ITS RE AD/ USTME NT: 279

from that of their authenticity. The latter is a thing of historic criticism ; the former of

doctrinal belief. Their ecclesiastical authority rests on outward attestation ; their normal, on

faith and feeling.

-i Turnhull é Printers.

' S uare nd n. 1, Patm ta q , Lo o

A LIST OF A ’ KEGAN P UL AND CO . S C. P BLICAT N U IO S .

AM E U R . ADAMS ( F. AT

a an. F m A ew ri The History ofj p ro F Ly cs. Smallcro wn .

Earli eriod to the resent 8vo . Cloth rice as . the est P P , p

M f. h n With Ma s and lans. O S Pro S eldo . volumes. p P A ( )

i e are. each. Den y 8110. Cloth. pr c Science o f Law. Fourth Edi n tion. Crow 8vo. Cloth, prioe se. ana u s (w. l olume 11. of The Internationa f Love fro ha e V Lyrics o , m S k l and speare to Tennyson. Se ected 111 F01 9 . anna aso rskca . R . R ) . 3 . “ a ‘ n‘ a ” 3 V ictories and Defeats. An E M” , “ ma p dition. ma p. “ 0.

M l anual. Dem 8v0. C oth, rice 1 s. D y p 4 B . ADAMSO N H . .

T ruth as it is in esus ND E RSO N R . C . E . The J . A (

wn 8v0 . Cloth rice 8r. 6d. Cro , p T ables for Facilitating the C alculation of every Detail in 8 . A . K. H . c onnection with E arthen and r m a uiet Place N w Mason Dam s . Ro al8vo. Cloth Fro Q . A e y y , 2 price as. Volume of Sermons. Crown 8v0 .

Antio e . T a p A ed . Large l fi r wn 8vo oth i s. c o . C fx ce ALB E RT ( Mary) . H olland and her H eroes to H E h m ARC R (T o as) . the ar r s An da tation f m ’ S i A p m A b o u t m ’ “ y Fa t he r s Ma cys itne of the Dutch Re ” B usiness . 11 l public. Small erown 8 0 . C oth, the ad and he S , t Sorrowing. rice 1 . 6d. p , 4 v 8 o. Cloth, price 2s. 6d.

M A . E R ev . ALL N ( . Arm of the North G erm an i y Abraham ; his L fe, T im es, Confederation.

and ravels a o. Se T , g B i f . i W M A r e Description of its Organi n Edit on. i a s co d p. Po t z ation of the ifferent Branches th r , D 8vo. Clo , p ice 6s. of the Service and their f dle in W ar, of its Mode f Fi h o g tin , & c. &c. L E G rant B A . g AL N ( ) , . Translated from the Corrected Edi h siolo ical E P y g sthetics.

Large post 8vo. 9s.

8vo . Clo ri th, p ce 5s. E T ALL I S ( . A R NO L D Per Cruc em ad Luc em . The

. So cial Politics De 1 . m l Lif , 2 81 0 u Ora e vols. Res t Dem! 3m , y . l h i 1 . ot r s. Cloth, price 2 5s C , p ce 4 ’ A L ife s Decisio n. C rown Free Land. Cr w o n 8vo.

vo . Cloth rice 41. 6d. Cloth ri 8 , p 7 , p ce 6s, U B E R . B E R Sir Sheraton B art A TIN (J AK ( , ). ' ’ Cam oens Lusiads. Portu H alleck s International ext with Translatio Law or Rules Re ulatin h T , ; g g t e 3 ntercourse of Stat Map and Portraits. I es in Peace and War Ne w E i em 8vo. rice 03 . . d tion Revised with D y 3 A , , P N otes and Cases. vols D . em ’ 3 y Mar s B ran Pie . 8 v Aunt c . Cloth ri y , p ce 3 83 . ’ ” O lave s. B the author of St. The Laws relating to Q ua IIustrated. Cloth rice 3 . 6d. , p 3 rantine . r wn C o v . h 8 o Clot , price

1 23 . 6d. AVIA . B L DW N Ca t. . F Z . S . T he O dyssey of H o m er A I ( p J .

h Fca . T h Done into Englis Verse. p e Large and Sm allG am e

loth rice 1 3 . 4to. C , p 5 of B e ngal and the No rth-W est r Pr e n ovinc es of ndia . W I 4to . ith B G E H O (W alter) . numerous llustrations A T I . SecondEdi

tion. lo h ri litics r C t , p ce 2 1 3 . Physics and Po ; o , hou hts on the pplication B N M KS rs . T g A A ( G . Prin x les of atural Selection c p N ’ “ G od s Providence and nheritance to Political So H ouse . I N w Edition. Crown 8v if E ion. r wn 8vc . o. Cloth ciety. F th dit C o e ,

h ri e . Clot , p c 43 e i nal me . of The nt rnat o Volu II I Ri les and B reakers pp . Scientific Series. P . oems S uare 8vo . l th q C o , price 53 . Som e Articles on the De B A RLE E E ( llen) . i ion of Silver and o ics prec at , T p Locked Out : a Tal f h n h Dem 8vo. rice e o t e con ectedwit it. y P Strike. Witha Frontis iece R l 53 0 p . oya

t 6mc . loth C , price 1 3 . 6d. ti t on The E nglish C ons tu i .

New Edition Revised and B RNE S W illiam . A , A ( ) Corrected with an ntroductory , I An Outline o f E nglish Dissertation on Recent Changes and S eechcraf r wn t. C o 8 vo. Cloth p , E vents. Crown 8vo. Cloth rice , p ri p ce 43 . 73 . 6d. Po em s of Rural Life in , the L o m b a rd S t re e t . A Do rset Dialect . New Edition M ne Mark , escri tion of the o et. D y m le co te in 1 vol. r wn 8 C o vo. Cloth p , Seven Edition. Crown 8vo. Cloth, price 83 . 6d. 6d. price 73 . O utlines of R ede cra ft O lan . B AG T ( A ) L W o ic . ith En lish Wor i g ) g d ng.

idents in Mines : their rown 8vo . Cloth ri e 3 Acc , p c 3 .

Causes and revention. Crown 8vo . P B R L E G eor e A T Y ( g c . i 63 . Cloth, pr ce Do m estic E cono m y : Thrift B N lexander LL . D. AI (A ) , in E ver Da Lif y y e . Taught in Mindand B o dy: the Theories Dialogues suitable for Children of

all a es. Small crown 8vo . Cloth of their relation. Seventh Edition. g ,

lim 23 . h rice . p, Crown 8vo. Clot , p 43

olume V. of The nternational B S N H . Charlton M D V I I A TIA ( ) , . . Scientific Series. T he B rain as an O rgan o f

n as a Sc ienc e . E ducatio Mind. Withnumerous Ill i ustrat ons.

wn 8 hird Edition. Cloth Se cond Edition. Cro wn C o vo. 8vo. Cloth r T , ,

rice 3 . price 53 . p 5 l m of The nternational o u e . of th Volume XXV. I V XXIX e Interna tion l S ie ifi Seientific Series. a c nt c Series. AU R Ferdinand Dr. Pb B ( . T H AM E DW ARDS ( Mi A Philologlcal ntroduction § ) to G r e k and L tin f r tud i e a o S nts . K tt e y. With a Frontispiece T ra nslated a nd ada ted from the r p C own 8vo. Cloth rice ‘ , p 6‘ ( u Kno nnan of. B C . w a ve y P , M o he v B E N A. O rt n d t D GT N . an Re . E . . O L " VI ( . ’

S A. l te f ell w u m s M. a o of Kin s , g Ke y Notes. Small cro C o lle e Cam brid e and ssistant g , g . A 8vo. l C oth rice 3 . Mas , p 5 ter at Eton. Second and re

vised edition Crown 8vo. Cloth . , B LA N SE R A Prof. Pietr ( o) . p rice 63 . The T heo r of Sound i B E R v y n it Y S ( e . C anon R . H . ) A N Relation t M o usic . With num At the C o m m unio n Tim e . rous llustr I ations. Second Edition Manual fo r 1101 Communion. r wn 8 A C o vo. Cloth rice , p 53 . W ith a re face b t e i p y R ght Rev. ’ the Lo rd l is hop of De rry and Ra h lo th ri e p oe . C , c 1 3 . 6d. " fl , Can also e had bound in B lue R o se s ; or Helen Mali Fre o r , nch m occo , price 23 . 6d . : Per ’ nofska s Marri age. e Autho sian moroc co rice . , p 3 3 Calf, or ” of era. 2 vols. T urke m o r co rice V y oc , p 33 . M. Cloth ilt t s , g op , 1 23 . H o m e So ngs fo r Q uiet Also a Chea er Edition in H F u a nd p ours . o rth cheaper Edi v l W o . ith Frontis i p ece . Crown 8v n F . 8v l th tio . ca o. C o rice p , p 23 . 64 . Cloth ri , p ce 63 . Th is may a lso be had l mndwm ely bound in m orocco w:£1: ilt ed B g ge r. L U ME ( Major

B E LL NG H M H enr B arris The O erations of th I A ( y) , p - - G e rm te r at L aw . an rm ies in Franc e fr A , Sedan to the end f So c ial A spects of Catholi o the war o f 1 8 1 W . i M th a . F c iam and Prote sta ntism in the ir 7 p rom the J on of the Head- uart ers S C iv l B e arin o n taff. i g up Nations . q T lated b the late E . M d y . ones Ma Translated an adapted from the , j soth Foot Pr f o . of M il. M Bar , ist. Sand Fre nch of . le on de Haulle ,

burst. Dem 8vo. Cl th W P fa y o , rice ville. ith a re ce by His E mi p n r inalM nin r wn cn Ca d an . o 8v oc C o. g B G U SLAW O SKI Ca t . ( p . va n . Cloth rice 63 . A ) , p Tactical De ductio ns fro m B E NNE Dr. W TT ( the W r - a of 1 870 71 . Translat Narrative Po em s B allads. by Colonel Sir Luml

Fca . 8vo . Sewed in ColouredWra Bar p p t. la te 1 8th ( Royal

er rice 1 3 . p , p ment. hird Edition T ,

Corrected. em 8v f ilors . c. Cloth rice So ngs or Sa Dedicated D y , p 73 . b i Re uest to H . R H th y Spec al . . e D n r h W uke of Edi u g . ith Steel s o uwrc x P i an llustration o tra t d s. Cr wn r I o E ri e 64 y tian B elief and Mo 8 o l th c 3 . v . C o , p 3 . g p d ern hou ht . Lar e ost 8 An Edition in llustrated aper T g g p vo. I P Cloth r , p ice 1 03 . 64 . ri e 1 3 . Covers, p c P ram id Facts and f a o n y Fan Songs o S g W riter. cies. Crown 8vo . Cloth rice , p 53 . Crown 8vo. Cloth, price 63 . T he T asm anian Lil B E R NS E N y. With T I F ontis iece. Cro r p wn 8yo. Cloth T he Five Senses of Man . , ri p ce 53 . llustration ec n With 9 : I s. S o d wn Mike H owe the B E di ion. Cro 8 v h u hr t o. Clot s an , , ge r ’ rice of V an Diem en p s s Land. W ith

m XX I. fTh F olu e o e nternational ontiS iece . Cro V I r p wn 8vc. Cloth , rice p 53 .

6 A Lut of

B R ANT W . CAVA E C LR FF C R . Y ( . ) Y O I - T a tics Poem s. Red line Edition. Notes on Cavalry c , W rait f i Wi Dia ith a llustrations and ort o O r an sation & c . th I P g ,

& l heatra r m v th rice ras. th Au or. Crown8vo. C ot a s. Dem S o. lo e . g y C , p

3 .

H N H Mrs . E . C APMA ( on. A C onstant H e art tor . A S y

. 6d. 3 ls. h t 1 23 . 3 2 vo Clot , gil tops, price

B U RC KHA RDT (j acob) . C H E E ev . re ( R ) . The Civiliz atio n of the Pe YN T he Prophe cies o f Isaiah. riod of the Renaissa nce in Ital ranslated with Critical Notes anl T , uthorised translation, by S. G . A D b vol dem isserta tions y. Two s , ] Middlemore . 2 vols. Dem 8vc . y 611 8vo. Cloth. Vol. I. rice 1 23 . l , p C oth, price 2 43 . ’ B U R O N Mrs . Richard) . T ( Children s T oys , and some The Inner Life of Syria,

d. Palestine , and the H ol Lan With Ma Photograp and

Coloured lates. 2 vols. Second C H RIST O PH E R SO N (The lat Edition. Dem 8vo. Cloth rice y , p M Rev . H enr . A . Also a Cheaper Edition in y) , th Serm ons. With an Intro one volume . Large post 8vo . Clo ,

F. . A D. S duction by ohn Rae, LL. ,

d i r wn 8vo. Cloth R O h d Secon Ser es. C o U T N ( Capt . Ric ar The G o ld Mine s o f Midian and the Ruined Midianite E N P C LAY D . ' ’ ( C ities . Fortn ht s ur in A To l nd under Lord B ea W W E ng a orth estern Ara is . ith nu N l The oli i Histor c c onsfie d. P t cal y merous llustrations. Second Edi I the end the Last Six Years, from tion. em 8 vo. Cloth rice 1 83 . D y , p Se 1 873 to the beginnin of 1 880 . The Land o f Midian R e W ndex cond Edition. it an I , i W h r lustr vis ted. it nume ous il a Continua tion to March, 1 880. Dem tions on wood and b Chromo l h ri e 1 8vo . C ot , p c 63 . ra h 2 m v lithog p y. vols. e y 8 o. oth rice 23 CL E R M or. Cl , . Y aj LD R O 1c W 2 CA Minor T ac t s. ith ’ Calderon s Dram as : The Ma s and lans. Fourth — p P - Ed1tion. em 8vo . Cloth rice 1 Wonder Working Magician Life is D y . p — a Dream The Pur a C LO DD ( Edward) , Patrick. Translat T he Childho o d of th Florence Maccarthy. ri e 1 W o rld a Sim le ccount of M Cloth, p c 03 . p A in Earl imes Six th C ANDLE R y T .

Crown avo. Cloth rice 3 . T he G ro undwo rk of B elief. , p 3 A Special Edition for v l 3 . 8 . h ce Crown o C ot , pri 7 ric M D P e 1 3 . E R W . . CA R PE NT ( . T he Principle s of Mental The Childhood of R oll

Physimogy. With their p lica i is A p g ons. Including a Sim ti ns t e Traintn and i i o to h D sc pline of the Birth and of M h Mmd and of t e , e Study of its and Le en hird Thousan g ds. T Mor id Conditions. ll b ustrated. I Crown 8vo. Cloth rice 3 . , p 5

Fifth Edition. 8vo . loth rice 1 C . 23 . p A Special Edition for Schoo N Dr PE E R . P li C R ( hi p Pri A T ce 1 3 . 6d. His Life and W ork di . E ted

his bro ther Russell Lan e sus of Naz areth. With by , t Car J W er. i h rtr pent t po ait and vignette . brief Sketch o f ewish History n Edi n r wn v e i Seco d tio . C o 8 o. Cloth th me of is Birth. Sm , T ic e r 3 . 6d. cro wn 8 vo . Clo th ric e 63 . egan a O S M W HM S.

E a C O RF E L M D CO L E R IDG ( Sar ) . I D . .

ett e son in V erse H ealth. r n 8 l Pr y L s s C ow vo . C oth,

for G ood Childre n, with some price 63 . in Lati in Eas Lessons m b e. C O RY ( W illiam ) . ew Edi n. llustrated. ca A N tio I p . A G uide to Mo dern E ng 8 . 6d. vo . Cloth, p ice 33 r lish Histo Part M . C C I D C XV . Phantasm ion . A Fair Tale. y —MD De v CCC . my 8 o. Cloth, With an ntroductor reface b the X I y P y ri e c 3 . l p 9 Right Hon. Lord Co erid e, of New i i t M r . d t on. O ter St. a C O U R E w y y A TN Y ( .

llustrated. Crown 8vo. Cloth I , T he Metaphysics of J ohn rice 3 . 6d. p 7 Stuart Mill . Crown 8vc. Cloth, Mem o1t and L etters of Sara ri p ce 53 . 6d. C oleridge. Editedbyher Daughter. CO W R v ill h With ne ( e . W iam . C ea Edition t. ) p . o Portrai AN l th ri 6d Po em s : Chiefl r C o , p ce 73 . . y Sac ed, in L L m r cludin ranslations from some CO I NS ( Morti e ) . g T

ncient Latin H mns F . 8 . T h L n i y . cap vo e Secret o f o g L fe . A Cloth rice 3 . l h , p 5 Smallcrown 8vo. C ot . price 33 . 6d. Inn of Stran e Me etin s x g g , c o ( Rev. Sir G . B art .

and other oem s . Crow 8v P o. A H isto ry o f G reece from Cloth rice 3 . , p 5 the Earliest Period to the end of the

O LO MB C l n l Persian War. New Edition. 2 v C ( o o e ) . ols.

em v . th ri T he Cardinal A rchb isho D y 8 o Clo , p ce 3 63 . p . S ani h Le end in tw n - nine A p s e ty The Mytholo gy o f the C ncions. Sma l crown 8vo Cloth a . , r n atio ns N w i a e Ed tion. 2 A y N . rice 53 . vols. em 8vo. Cloth rice 2 83 . N h D y , p C W AY ( H ug ) . ’ Life s A G eneralH istor o f re ece A s Idyll . Sm allcrown y G 8 from e Earli P h v h ri . th est r o . Clot , p ce 3 3 6d. e iodto t e Death of lexanderthe Great witha M M. , C O O KE . A . LL . D . A ( , of the subse en Hist r t Fun i i q t o y o the g ; the r Nature, Infl u re ent u i p s th e. ew Edit on. ences ses & c. Edited b , U , y the Rev. 8vo . l th C o , price 73 . 6d. M. A. M. . Berkele J y, , F. L. S.

Wi ns. th llustratio SecondEdition. T ales of ci I An ent G reece . r l th rice C own 8vo. C o , 53 . N w E e dition. Small crown 8vo

olume . of e nternational I I Cloth rice 63 . V X V , p

Scientific Series. School Histor of G reece E y . CO O K (Prof j . Wi h Ma . t s New Editi n. F h h m 1 t p o cap T e New é e s ry. With 8vo. Cloth rice 3 . 6d. Fif h , p 3 1 ns. Illustratio t Edition. v l th rice rown 8 o. C o , 53 . The G reat Persian W ar

olume . of e nternational t V IX T I from he Histories of Herodotus. Scientific Series. New Edition F . cap . 8vc . Cloth,

Scientific C ulture . Crown price 33 . Gd.

8vo. Cloth rice 1 3 . , p A Manual o f Mythology C O O PE R H ( . . in the form of uestion and nsw ” Q A er. T he Art 0 l Furnishin on N ew E on. g diti Fcap. 8vo. Cloth, i P Rat onal and E sthetic rin price 33 .

c i les . N w and h a Edit n p e C e per io . O K Rev. Sir G B ( . art . , Fca . 8vo Cloth rice 1 3 6d. p . , p . M d . A an E U S CE 11 . , TA m C O FFEE (Francois) T O N O NE s ’ L E xil D é c . one into English Popu ar R om ances of the erse withthe sanction of the uthor Mi A Secon V A ddle ges. d Edition in

. wn 8 ll b O . L. Cro vo . e um one volume. Crown 8vo. Cloth y I V , , price 63 . m u l . V SO COx ( Rev. Sa e ) DA ID N LL D —ontinued l a M ndi . . c . Sa v tor u ; or, Is Canon of the B ible : Its Christ the Saviourof allMen? Sixth F rm o ation Histor , and Fluctua Edition. Cro wn avo. Cloth, price 53 . , y i t ons. Third Edition, revised and

T vi an en ar ed. Smallcro wn 8vo. G oth he G enesis o f E l, d l g , ri e oth S rm o ns mainl E x sito p c y . er e , y po

ec n wn 8vo . S o d Editio n. Cro Clot D V IE 0 Christo her . A S ( . p ) price 63 . Rambles and Adventures of O ur h l Fi ld Clu With C R AU FU R D ( Sc oo e b . A : F our l ustrations. r wn 8vo. eekin i h I l C o S g fo r L g t Sermons. Cloth, price 53 . r wn 8v l th . C o o. C o , price 53

oavxs s ( Rev. J . m a . C R AW FO R D ( O sw a ld) . T heology and Morality. o al l P rtug , O d and New. With llustrations and M Dem I aps. y lo h i 63 8vo . C t r ce 1 . , p 1 3 . 6d. D V E S r . c ns sswnu . Mrs . A I ( ' t l n Ca u lus . Translated into The King s an er. Drama

En lish wn . h s Fiv lu g erse Cro 8vo Clot , i ur ct . n Fo A e I l strations. V 4to. G oth, price 1 03 . 64 . N r M A W SO G eo e . DA ( g ) , Z

CRO M O N H enr . Pra ers with a Disc ourse PT ( y) y ,

Industrial Co nciliation. o n Pra er. Edited by his Wife.

FifthE itiou. Crown 8vo . rice 63 . Fca . avo. G oth rice 23 . 6d. P p , p rm o n Di e M Se ons sput d CRO Z E R ohn B e attie . B . I (J ) , Points a nd S eeial Occ asions . h R i F t e T e eli o n o f the u ur . g . Edited by his ife Third Edition. Crown syo . Cloth rice 63 . , p Crown 8vo . Cloth, price 63 . Serm ons on Dail L ife and ' N y E RS . D ANV ( D Wif t . e ond u y Edited by his e. S c Parted. A Tale of Clouds Edi . t i . tion Crown 8vot G o h, pr ce 63

W ll tra ns. and Sunshine. ith us tio I ’ DE L H O ST E Col. E . . ( F . l ri e Ex ra a sve ot c . 6d t c p . C p 33 T he De sert Pastor, ean ’ J Little Minnie s T ro ubles. ar usse u ranslated from the o a . T - W th F E ll . n Wi h a An Every day Chronicle i our rench of uge e Pe etan . t

F ntis iec e. N diti W. H . ro w E Illustrations by e on. .

ri . 6d. avo. Cloth rice . 64 . Fcap. G oth, p ce 3 3 , p 3 3 ’ DE NNIS Pixie s Adventures ; or, the ( J With 2 1 llustra E n lish So nnets. Collected Tale of a Terrier. I g

ti ns. 1 6mo . G oth rice 3 . 6d. and rran ed. Ele antl bound. o , p 4 A g g y

ri 3 . Fcap. 8vo . G oth, p ce 3 6d. ’ n A re s r Nan y s dventu o , DE RE DCL FFE V isc o u nt W 1 I ( the ale of a Goat. ith 2 llus T I f r P r d K. St at o ) , . C . , G B . n 1 6m ri e 6d. tratio s. o . G oth, p c 43 . W hy am I a Christia n

Fith Ecfition. Crown 8vo. C loth f , DSO Rev. Sam uel D. D DAVI N ( ) , pri ce 33 . LL . D. DE SPRE Z ( Philip The NewT e stam ent, trans Daniel and o hn lated fro m the L atest G re ek J ; or, the f i h nd rf cal se of the ld an Te xt o T sc e o . A New and Apo yp O d tha t o f

thoron hl Revised Editi the New estament. Dem 8 17 y T y 0 .

8 Cloth rice 1 03 . 6d. Cloth rice 1 23 . vo. , p , p

rb r E V M k s nu o uns ( He e t) . AN S ( ar m m ' W ell Spent Lives : a Series T he King s Story B o o

der i ra rown 8vo . n three F a 8vo. Cl0 of Mo n B og phies. C I c p rice rs m ri . P ce 53 . Part I. , with four illustration: E ducational Code of the

Prussian Nation, in its Present - rd w th the E x C V L . Fo rm . In acco ance i I I IAN Decisions of the Common rovincial P Life in the Mofussil ; or, f t Law, and with those o Recen

64. rum ur-m aso n IL an R B il o ( ). s nwa s ( ev. as ) .

I. E ls e Din m n i s ore . Cro wn Minor Chords ; or, So gs

8vo. Cloth rice 3 . 61 . for the Sul ering : a Volume oi , p 3 o ’ F . 8 th ri e Verse. cap vo. Clo , p c II. E lsie s G irlho o d. Crown

sv . th c Clo , price 33 . 64 . ’ h rl tte III. E lsie s H olida s a t E LLIOT (L ady C a o ) . y

R oselands. Crown 8vo . Medusa and other Poem s. th Crown svc . Clo , price 63 .

F E LD H r B ( o ace) , . A . L ond. E LL O E b e nez er The Corn I I TT ( ) , T he U ltim ate T rium h o Law Rhym e r. p

Christi nit . a y Small crown 8vo. Poem s. Edited b his Son y , Clot r ce ’ h, p i 3 3 . 6d. ev li of St. ohn s the R . Edwin El ott, J , 8v th ntigua. a vols. Crown o. Clo , F NN the late am es A I ( J ) ,

rice r8r. p Stirrin T im g es ; or, Records from Jerusalem Consular Chronicles E LSDAL E ( Henry) .

of 1 8 t r8 6. ’ 53 o Edited and Com Studies in T enn son s iled hi i W y by s dow. ith a Preface

lls r wn 8vo. l th rice 3 . p d . C o C o the iscountess ST A NGFO D I y , p 5 y V R R .

2 vols. em D y 8vc . Price 3 03 . E pic of Hades (T he) . B the author of Son of Two Folke stone R itual C ase ” orlds. enth and fina l revised T he . The Ar ument Proceedin T y ) g , ud m an 8vc . l h rice 3 . 6d. ent d Re Edition. Fcap . C ot , p 7 g port, revised y lso an llustrated Edition with e se raiCounsel en a e Dem A I g g d. y

i n 8vc . l h r seventee n full age des g s in photo C ot , p ice ass.

a s R HAPMA . mez z o tint by m c . C N FO R MB R ev H enr Y ( . y) . l th extra ilt leaves rice a s. 4to. C o , g , p s Anc ient R om e and its C on

E NS Mark . VA ( ) ne ction with the Christian Re T he el o f H om e ligio n : an Outline of the Histor of G o sp Life. y the Cit from its First Foundati n v loth ri e y on Crow 8 o. C , p c 4s. 6d. down to the E rection of the Chair ' - F h of St. eter A The Stor of our at er s . O . 2 W y P , 4 4 ith nume rous llustrations 0 n ient ve l r . F c Lo , told to Chi d en ourth I A Monuments Scul ture andCoina e and Cheaper Edition. With Four , p , g , and of the Anti uities of the Chris v . q llustrations. Fca . 8 o Cloth I p , tian Cata m co bs. Ro al to . Cloth price i s. y 4 extra rice Rox b r , p u gh, m or o ice occ r 23 6d. A B o ok of C o m m on Prayer , p 5 . and W orshi for H ousehold p FO W L R E ev. E dm und s l v r ( ) . U e , compiled ex c usi ely f om the Ne L atin Prim r R HolyScri tures. w and Cheaper e ule s m ade

E i p . l h r . d tion. ca 8vo. C ot rice r E s p , p a . Crown 8vc . Cloth y , price 3c. t wns Rev 1 : IL A . G L B E R o ( . I T The R econciliation of R e Auto bio graphy and other M ri em o als . Edited b osiah ligion and Sc ience . Being Essays

i . r G lbert hi d Edition. i Por on mmortalit ns iration Mira T I y, I p , W trait and several ood En ravin s. h in f hrist. g g cles, and t e Be g o C Demy Crown 8v l h o. C ot , price 73 . 64 . 8vo. Cloth, price roe. 6d. LL Rev W B G ( . . . A . T he Divine Legation o f I Myths and Songs from the Christ . Crown 8vo . Cloth, price 73 . S th P ifi W ou ac c. ith F Max M er . M. ull A. FR SE Donald , , A R ( ) . Com arative Philol p ogy at Oxford. E x n T ab es o f ter cha ge l S Post 8v o. Cloth, price or. ling and Indian Rupee Cur r dextende G inevra and T he Duke of ency, u on a new an d sys

tem em racin alues from O ne G uise . Two ra edies row , g V T g . C n

Farthin to One Hundred housand 8vc . Clo th rice 63 g T , p . Pounds and at Rates ro res si , p g G L E R M O A . Sixt nths f a nn ( r m V e o Pe y, e E x em la L tin e p a a . A First as. d a 8v 3 r p upee. o; o. Construing Book with Short otes Cloth ug:roe. 6d. N , , p Lexicon and an ntroduction t th , I o e Anal sis of Sentences F FRIS E LL H ain y . ca . 8vo. W ( J . ) . p Cloth rice as . f , p T he B etter Sel . Essays for G O DW N W illi m wn l th ( a ) . H me Life. r 8v I o C o o. C o , W illia price m G o dwin : H is Frie nds and C on e m t poraries. O ne o f T wo or A Left ; , With Portraits and Fac similes of the

H ande d B ride . With a Frontis handwritin f d g o Go win and his Wife .

iece. Crown 8vo. Cloth rice s. 6d. B Ke p , p 3 C. an Paul. 2 v ls y g o . Demy

8vo. Cloth rice 283 . D E R M D , p G R N . A . The G enius o f Christianit Longevity : T he Means o f y U nve iled. Bein E ssa 3 never Prolonging Life after Middle g before ublished. Edite with a e rth Editi n Revised and p Ag . Fou o , refac e b Ke an C. Paul. Cr m l r 8 P , g own E lar ed. S al c own vo . Cloth n g , 8vo. lot C price 6d. price 43 . G O E Z E C ( apt. . von) . G R RE ( E ) T A A TT O erations o f the G erm an i r p B y St ll W ate s. A Story E ngine e rs during the W ar of H Wi h ev for Q uiet ours. t S en llus - I 1 8 0 1 8 1 . Published b uthorit 7 7 y A y, trations. Crown 8vo . Cloth rice 63 . , p andin ac cordance withOfiicialDoc u men ts. Translated from the German G E B LE R ( Ka rl V o n) . b Colonel G . Graham V. . B y , C , C. . , G alile o G alilei and the R . E . With 6 lar e Ma g ps. De my

Rom an C uria from Authe ntic 8 vo . Cloth ri , , p ce arr. wi h he Sources. ranslated t t sanc T O LDSMID Sir Franc is H en ( ry). tion of the uthor b Mrs. G G A , y EOR E M em o ir o f. Wi th Portrait. E D m . l th rice res. ST URG . e y8vc C o , p Crown 8vc . Cloth ri , p ce 53 .

G E DDE S am es . (j ) O O DE NO U G H C m m o odore . Hi to r o f the Adm inistra R N J s . . C . B M . ( . y , , . G . tion of ohn de Witt Grand Pen Mem oiro f J , , withE xtractsfrom

l . 1 62 H lland. Vo . sionary of o 3 his Letters and ournals E it I . d ed by with Portrait. Dem 8vc . i 6s4 . y , his Wid i ow. th Stee l Engraved Cloth, rice i s. P rtr p s o ait. S uare 8vc . l C oth 3 . " q , 5 lso a Li r fl , A b ary Edition with G . H . . T Ma s W p , oodcnts, and Steel Eu V er s m ostl written in se raved Portrait. , y Square post 8vo .

r wn 8vo. loth rice gloth ric i ndi C o C e . I a. , p , p a H E C E L P E — G O SSE ( E dmund A K ( ro f. w an a s Studies in the Literature o f ‘ tha - is Fre edom in Science and N orthern E urope . Wi l ront ma iec e designed and etched by Al Teaching. From the German of ‘ paderna . Lar e ost 8vo . Cloth Ernst Haechel with a Prefato g p , ,

N H. H ote b . ux le F. i w . R. g ce y T y,

Crown svc . Cloth rice 3 New Poem s . Crown 8vc . , p 5

Cloth rice 64 . , p m A RE . E on ( A g t) . M. A . v 8 . B arin Re . G O U L D ( g) , a i l P ris O rig na s, with an Pre se nt andPast. G erm y. e n e Ri tchi gs, by L on cheton.

8vc . Cloth rice arr. 2 Vols. Dem , p v y poet 8 ce Cloth, price 1 4' The Vic ar of Mo rwensto w : ’ H alle c s Int e rn a t io n a l wker. a Memoir of the Rev. R. S. Ha k L aw r R les R r it. hird Edition te o u e ula tin the With Po tra T , ; , g g

uare oat 8vo. Cloth ntercourse of Sta tes in eac e and vised. Sq p , I P W ar. New Edition, revised with h rd . , G RE E O U G H ( Mrs . Ric a ) A N Notes and Cases. By Sir Sherston Mar Ma dalene A Poem . y g Bak er . . , Bart 2 vols Dem y 8vo. rchme nt anti ue Lar e o st 8vo . a q , g p P Cloth rice 83 . , p 3 e 63 pric .

H R hom as . hn f ilston. DY G RE Y (J o ) . o D A ( T ) A Pair o f B lue E es N w ohn G rey ( o f Dilsto n) y . e E W Fro t dition. ith n is iece . wn B hine E . Butler. Cro Lem oita. yJ p 8vo . Cloth rice 63 . New and Revised dition. Crown , p

8 vc . Cloth rice 3 . 64 . , p 3 T he R eturn o f the Native .

M. A . R MLE Rev. H . W h G New Edition. it Frontis I Y ( piece.

n i fl Crown 8vo . Cloth rice 63 . T rem adoc Serm o s, ch e y , p v the Unse e n on the SPI ITU A Bo n , H R i - R O L e C o . R L A I S N ( ut . l ’ WO D and the tv ms HUMANiTv. RL , D The o mc er s Mem o ran wn vo th e n iti n. Cro 8 . Clo S co d Ed o , dum B ook for Peace and W ar.

rice 6s. p nd E di i bl Seco t on. O ong am o . ' 3 M roan el tic and an n R . as d e cil rice G R iiNE ( , p , p

6d. ru ns 3 . Studie s o f B last Furnac e ; , 5

ranslated b L. D. Pheno m ena. y R G O N Th Ri h T H A TIN T ( e g t H on. . Dem . F. G . S F R . . E B . Gordon . S y , , M . P the Mar uis of . q ) , 6d. 8vo. Cloth rice 3 . , p 7 E lectio n S e ec hes in 1 8 p 79 . rcher . G U RNE Y R ev. ) ( A and 1 880 . With Address to the ords of Faith and Cheer. Electors of North-East Lan ashire W c . w y nstruction and Su es Cro n 8 o . Cloth rice s . 6d. A Mission of I gg , p 3

l h rice 65 . . rown 8vo. C ot tion C , p A R e H W E I v. M . H S ( . . A wen A Dram a in Mo no A rro ws in the Air G : . Crown B he uthor of the E ic lo ue . t p 8vo . Second Edition. Cloth rice 6s. y A , p i n F . of ades. Second Ed tio . cap Current o in Mate C . rialism t ric e r. 8 vc . Clo h, p s The Devil—Crime—Drunkennes s

f E rnst . — — Pro . HA E C KE L ( ) Pauperism Emotion Recre ation f Creation. a r o The S bbath. hird E diti r wn T he H isto y T on. C o

b Professor E . 8vc . Cloth rice 63 . Translation revised y , p With Ra Lanltester M. A. F. R . S. , ee h in eason . y ' Sp c S Fourth Co loured Plates and Genealo cal Edition. Crown 8vo. Cloth rice r. f th , p g Trees of the various groups o nd Thou hts fo r the T im e s . s. Seco ants and animals. 2 vol g ri le n h wn Post 8vc . Cloth ce E ve t Edition. Cro 8vo. Cloth g ti n. di o , p ,

price 6d. T he H isto ry o f the E volu I U n s e c t a ria n Fa m il tion of Man . With num erous l y Pr Ne and hea l Lar e st 8vo . a ers . w C er E di vo s. o lustrations. 2 g p y p

Fca . 8v . l ri h rice 23 . o C oth ce r:. 6d . Clot , p 3 p , p

- N Ma n d H U O rthur M A . HOO E R contiu e . P ( a h TT ( A ) , h n f r nv id P r T e A glic an Ministry. Its C ookery o I al s, e Nature and alue in r ns f elicate i estion a d elation to the so o D D g , n V tholi Pri th W ith a Pre il ri Ca c es ood. Ch dren. Crown 8vce Cloth, p ce face by his Em inence Cardina l New

Dem v . man. o loth ri e 1 y 8 C , p c 4s . E ve Da Meals ry y . Being H O L E ro f. ) Economical andWholes ome Rec ipes X Y ( P

T he C ra fish . An Intro for Breakfast, Luncheon and Sup y duction to the Stud of Zoolo per. Second Edition. Crown 8vo. y gy. With E i ht -two Illus i tra t ons. Cloth, price 53 . g v Crown 8 o . oth, price 5s. H O O E R Mrs . olume of the nterna P ( V XXVIII . I

tional Scientific Scientific Series. The H ouse of Raby. With

Crown 8vo. Cloth , H B L INC O D ( 1.

Annus Am o ris. Sonnets.

O K S E llice . F a 8v . H . o l h rice 11 c C ot s. 6 . P IN ( ) p , p a Life and Letters of am es J NG E LO W e an I ( J ) . H inton, withan ntroduction by Sir I O ff the Skelli s A N v W g . o el. W . . Gull Bart. and ortrait en , P With Fr n i o tis ece . Second Edition. v n l b . p ed o Stee y C H . J eens.

r wn . C o 8vo Cloth rice 6s. nd Edition. Crown 8vo . Cloth , p

- rice 8s . 6d. T he Little W o nder h rn p o . Second Series of Stories old to H O K NS A ” T P I a hi With C ld. Fifteen llustrati I ons. T he Port o f R efu e or Small 8vc l . g ; , . C oth, price es 6d. Counsel and Aid to Shipmasters in

Difi cult D b Indian B isho rics. B an ou t or istress. r y, , D C own p y

8vo. Second and Revised Editi n. ndian h r hman. Dem 8v o C u c o. 64 I y . Cloth, price 6s. Int e rn a t io n a l S c ie nt ifi c H O R E R The Misses N ( ) . e Th S ries ( e) . W alk n Florence s i . A New F rm s of W r : F I . o ate A am i and thorou hl Revised Edi ion. a g y t liar E x positio n of the O rigin and l Wi vols. wn oth l Cro 8vo . C imp. th Phenom ena of G lacier B s. y J dall, F. R. S. With a

ustrations. Seven Edi I th tion. Crowr l h 8vo. C ot , price y . Muse Galleries and ums. 3 5 . Ph sics and Politics II . y ; hou hts on the lication of th! H LL E dm und T g App U ( c . ' Principles of Natural Selection T he E o “ ” ur pean in India. and Inheritance to Political So i r Witha MED CAi. GUIDE i o nAN G LO B IND R . R . M iANS. y . S air. M. D. ThirdEdi i R t on, evised . Foods. B Edward Smith and Corrected. ost 8v loth III , o. C P , ’ W r MD . . . & c nume ous llus , I

trations. Six thE i r wn dit on. C o 8vo. - H U CH SO Lieut . Col. F T I N ( 1 . MAG and Ca t . G . H . G R E G6 3 p V Mi d and : . I . n Body The Theo f their R B l Military Sketching and R e ries o elation. y A exandei D Ba LL. . Wi co nnai s nce With Fifte in, th Four llustra s a . en la P tes. I tions. Seventh Edition. r w Small 8 l C o n 8vo. vc . C oth, price 6s . l ce C oth, pri as. The firstVolum e of MilitaryHand

booksforRe imentalOfficers. Edited V . The Stud of Socio o g y l gy .

Lieut. B . Bu c Nsuxv B Herbert S encer. E hthEditi , y p ig on.

A. A.A. G . Crown 8 l , vo. C oth, price 53 . ’ Ke ‘ C. z mPa l u Co. 3 Publ t g ica ions.

Int e rna tio n a l S c ie ntifi c Int e rna tio n a l S c ie ntifi c Series (The) Series (Thc)

O n the C onservati n f . . The VI . o o XVIII Nature of Light

ner . B B W E alfour Stewart, ith a General ccount of h sical gy , A P y , LL. D. . ai x ti & c th llustra i ns. cs. B t o Dr. E u ene Lomm l. , 4 I ap y g e Fifth Edition. Crown 8vo. Cloth ith x88 llustrati n nd e , I o s a a tabl of ' - price 53 . S Chto l’ h ’ h 0 33. sif éfil V II nim al L ocom otion or , . A ; , W i 1 ° alk ng, Swimming, and F n

D . nim l P M. . c. it a ar B . B . etti rew & asites and y P g , , XIX A J M m 1 0 llustrations. Second Edition. ess ates. B M. Van B 3 I y eneden. Wit Crown 8vo. Cloth rice 3 . h 8 llustrations. Second Edi , p 5 I

tion. rown 8vo. Clo ri e Res nsi ilit “ Mental th, p c III . p h y i . Ferm entati f Xi e g ll s e on. B ro . s ase . ldaud l y y, XX P

Schiitz enber er. Wi 8 Ill tra u . m th 2 us D. g

lot tions. Second E dition. r wn 8 . C h, price C o vo

Cloth rice .r. The New Chem istr B , p s IX . y. y F r fessor . Cooke. With 1 llus . The ive Senses f Man P o P 3 I XXI o . a B f. Bern W !if hEdi sy ro stein. ith t tion. r wn . : ll s trations. C o o y P 9 I u

ri trations. Second Editi n wn Cloth, p ce 53 . o . Cro

8vo. Cloth rice Th e e f L w , p 53 . . e Sci nc o a B X . y F ur h . The heor of Sound in Prof. held nAm os. o t E S o dition. XXII T y its Relation to Musi B P f wn loth rice c. ro . Cro 8yo. C , p 53 . y i tr B M e o laserna. With numerous . nim al ech ism XI A an . A P llustrations. SecondEdition. Crown Treatise on Terrestrial and Aerial I 8v l th ri o. C o , p ce sr. Locomotion. B rof. E . . Mare . y P J y Wi r ti . Studies in S ectrum th i t Illust a ons. Second XXIII l E diti n. rown 8vo. Cloth ri na sis. B . orman k er. o , p ce 53 . A y] N y

F. R . With Six hoto hic I The Doctrine of escent p p l XII . D lustrat ons f S ectr a n n i m B f o p a, n umerous a d Darwin s . y Pro . Osca i en ravm on wood. Crown 8y Wi h 26 g o. ch idt. t llustrati ns S m I o . e n dition. l . S co d C oth, price 6s 64 . hird Edition. Crown 8yo. Cloth T , H istor r h XXIV . A y of the G owt m E ° of the Ste a n ne . B Prof. The Histor of the Con y XIII . y H . hurston. i h R . t num erous fl ict betwe en R eli ion and Sci T

llustrations. Second Edi i r wn W I t on. C o M D. ta er . e nce . By . . , , J p v l e 8 o. C oth, pric 6s. 6d. Fourteenth Edition. Crown LL. D. X V E d i h ri e X . uc at on as a Scie nce . 8vo. Clot , p c 53 . l r B By exande ain, LL. D. hird X IV Fun i their ature In A T . g ; N » Editi n. r wn o C o 8yo. Cloth, price c . B M fl uen Uses, & y . C.

. The H um an S ec ies . Cooke L. D. Edited h the Rev. XXVI p ,

B P . e y rof. d Q uatrefa es. Second M el . ithn e g . . Berk e F. L S. um A y, J i n r wn Ed tio . C o 8vo. Cloth rice r. rous llustrations. S cond Edition. , p s I e M Crown 8vo. Cloth rice 3 . . odern Chrom atic s , p 5 XXVII . With A lications to Art and ndus X h Che m ic al E fl ects f p I V . T e o N W t tr b den Rood. i h 1 0 Li h ra h , y g 3 ght and P otog p y. By Dr. y ori inal llustrations. Crown 8vo el With z g . Hermann Vog . oo Illustra I Cloth rice tions. hird and Revised Edition. T e e C ra fi sh : x . an ntro h r I T y I Crown 8vo. Clot , p ice 53 . n e tud f Z ol B ductio to th S y o o og . y if nd r wth of y X V I. The L e a G o f. H ux ie With i h H . e Pro T. g ty Pr Wi L n e B f. a . y o lliam wn two llustrations. 8vo . Cloth ' I , Dwi t tue . Second Editi g y on. r ce 7 p i 5 . ri Crown 8vo. Cloth, p ce 53 . T he B rain as an O r XXIX . gan M H l M h of ind. B . Char ton B I. H one and the e c a astian XVI y y , M D Wi num e nism f E x h n e W . . th rous llus ti o c a . B . tan tra o g y S I ns.

le . R. Second Editi n r wn 8 . l ev ns F S. Fourt n o . C o y C o h yJ o , h Editio . o t ,

r l h rice r. C own8vo. C ot , price 53 . p s 1 6 A List of

E N I S E an RA M D In t e rn atio na l S c ie nt ifi c J K N ( . ) d Y O N ' E s s — ( L) , q . Series (Thd amfi nued. A L egal H andb o o k fo r i heo r . . T he to m c y B XXX A T y rc hite c ts B uilde rs and B uild ’ A , , - s i ‘ n lated b E . l t nl . Tra I r f A . y i ng O wners . Second Edition Re a n m C lo th 1 l iii iii lmw. C r u , vised. C rown 8vo. Cloth, price 6s. r prit c ; . E NK NS R R e . M. A J I ( v. . olum Forthcoming V es. T he Privile ge o f Peter and

M. W c oou u sso no A. the Claim s of the h Prof. . C , Rom an Churc Firs t Princi les of the E xac t confronted with the ri tures the The p Sc p , iences e x lained to the Non-ma Councils and the estim on of the Sc p , T y P es them l al. o se ves F a . th the matic p . c p . 8vo Clo ,

rice 5 . 6d. F. R. p 3 B . S. Sir o r m LU BBOC K, art , B s O n nts and ee . NN E u h n . J I NG S ( Mrs . V a g a ) DVX R B . A. W . T u isE oy f. . ur Pro T , , R ahel : H er Life and L et l Form and Habit in Flowerin l . Sc. g

ters . With a Portrait from the Plants. Paintin S uare ost Pr q p D. o /m F e R M. Mic a i. o Prof. , 8vo . ri C p ce 7s. 6d. toplasm and the Cell Theory. ’ F. R. S. . D. Pro f. . C. RAMSAV LL v a A , , J ero e m s W ife and other alle E arth Scul ture : Hills, ys, p Poe m s . F . V ca 8vo. Cloth rice p , p M untains ains Rivers Lakes o , Pl , , ; 33 . 6d . w h we du ed d h w ho t ey re Pro c , an o they have be en Destroyed. J E VO NS (w sm le” m a F R B T Profess r of Ph siolo . . S . P. ER ( o y Paris Forms of Life and ot er ) Money and the Mechanism Cosm ical Conditions. f E x c h e o ang . Fourth Edition. N M . Th r IIE R MA N VO N Y e O Cro wn 8vo . Cloth rice E ER , p sr. s an o f S ee ch. VolumeX VI f The n g p I. o I ternational

E MO RSE uici e an Scientific Series. r f. I S P o . d : . LL E ssa in Com arative Moral Sta y p j o E L tistics. ’ - A C onsul s Manual a nd The Rev. SECClu D . late A , . J , ' ' rof Shi owner s and Shi master s Prac Directo the Observatoryat Rome . p p The tars tical G uide in their ransa ctions S . T Abroad With D Na . efiniti ns f u i R - o o t mfi . OSE N iIAL f he i r P ] T , o t Un ve cal Mercantile and Le al erm s r lan ene Ph i l , , g T ; sityo Er gen. G ral ys o ogy a Glossar of Mercantile e rm s in Mus les Nerves y T of c and . E lish ng , French, German, talian W Th I , F . . e f . UDD, . R S Laws o and S anish bl M ne J p . a es of the o f T y, iolcanic cti n. A o Wei hts and Measures of the Prin g , ci al omm r i Prof. F. N. B ALFO UR . The Eni p C e c al Nations and their br ni Pha Animal if E uivalents in British Standards yo e ses of L e . q and Form s of Consular and No tarial . Luvs, Physician to the Hos ice J Acts D . em 8 o l h r i v . C ot ice as. de l Sal triere The Brain a y , p a pé . n its Fun ti ns W h l i c o . it lustrat ons. H NS N O O E C . M A I J T ( . .

Dr . A A im C RL SEMPER . n als and . . . H isto rical Ab stracts B in . e g their Conditions of Ex istence . Outlines of the History of some of G G . RO MA N S F. L. S. Ani EOR E E , the less-known States of Eur J ope . m al ntelli en e . g c r w I C o n 8vo . l C oth rice . 6d , p 73 .

F ED W . BEN NETT . Hand AL R A NE S L b O ( uc ) . ook of Cryptogamic Botany. J y Puddin s nd e ts g a Sw e . Bein E N N g K S ( R ev. Canon) . J I Three Hundred and Sixty-Five T he G ir l nd d e L e e ofPrato . Recei ts a r ved b E g p pp o y xperience.

Small crown 8vo. Cloth rice as r , p . C own 8yo. , price at.

i 8 A Lirt of

O H H I L Dr. E . LI ANDE R ( Richard) . ( T e Nature of hl b t : i Fantastic Stories. Trans h g W th ' ' eral cc n Ph a tic lated from the German by Psulim a Gen A ou t d wc lOp a Wih Ei ht full- a e econd Edition. With 1 88 Illustra B. Granville. t p g S - i and a able of S ectra in M E . rascr tler. t ons Illustrations b . Ty T p Chrome-litho ra h . Third Edi Crown 8vo . oth, price 91 . g p y i tion. Crown 8vo . Cloth, pr ce 9 .

E E Rev. F. D. C . L . of The n r L ( Volume XVIII . I te ns

i ifi es. The Other W orld ; or, tionalSc ent c Seri

s vols. Glimpses of the So tursl. LO N SDALE ( Margaret) . A New Edition 8vo . Cloth, Sister Dora . A Biograph m 3 58 . with Portrait engraved on steel

H . ecas and one illustration. C. LE E ( Helm s) . J ,

welfth edition. Crown svc. Cloth Her Title of Honour. A T , - W price 6s. Book for Giils. NewEdition. ith

LO R ME R eter D. D. a Frontispiece. I ( P ) , N 00 !» John Knox and the Church of E n land : HisWerk inher ul it g P p , LE W S E dward illon . I ( D ) and his nfluence u on her Litur I p gy, A Draft Code of Crim inal rticles, and Parties. Demy 8vo. A . w d P edure . em 8vc . L an roc 1 3 3 . a D y Cloth. price

Cloth rice si r. , p ohn W iclif and his n lish recursors b Ge rhard LEW I S ‘Mary A . g P , y ‘ z ictor Le chler. ranslated from A Rat with l hree T ales. V T

the German with additional otes. With Four Illustrations b , N v ri s vols. Demy 8 o. Cloth, p ce arr. rice 3 . F. Frere. Crown 8vo. Clot p 5 ’ t an th Lauder Love s G amu d o er L INDSAY (W . ) ,

oem s. Small crown 8vo. Clo th Mindin the Lo wer Anim als P , price 33 . 6d. in H ealth and Disease . a vols. - m 8vc . Cloth rice 23 . LO W DE S H enr . De y , p 3 N ( y) i n l io Poem s and ra s at ns. LLO YD ( Francis) and Charles Crown 8vo . Cloth rice 63 . T ebbitt. , p E xtensio n o fE mpireW eak MAC c nm roc x Defic its Ruin With a - ness Sir Spangle an t e Dingy ticalScheme fo r the Reconstruc Prac ll ar r H . ustrated u e c o wn en I . Sq tionof siatic urkey. Smallcro wn A T . rice as. 6d. 8vo , p ri . d. 8vo . Cloth ce 3 6 , p 3 MAC DO NA LD LO C E R Malcolm Portrait of K . ith

London L rics. A Newand F y the AuthorengravedonSteel. ourth

Revised Edition with dditions and Edi i n. r wn avo. rice fir. , A t o C o P h uth r wn 8vo . a Portrait of t e A or. C o The Mar uis of Lo ssie . n r q Cloth, elega t, p ice 63 . Second Edition. Crown 8vo. Cloth a hea er Edi Fca , Also C p tion. p rice 6s. a p 8vo . Cloth, price s. 6d. Micha St. G e orge and St. el. LO C E R . orm an F. R . S. KY (J N ) , wn8v . l th . SecondEdition. Cro o C o 6s Studies in Spectrum Ana ,

M C E N . lysis ; with six photographic illus A K N A L) tions of S ec t a and numerous l ck Fe ws. A Bo ok tra p r , P u y o

in n w . Sec nd Edi en rav s o ood o With Six llustrations . g g for Boys. I

wn . l t ri e os. 6d tion. Cro 8vo C o h c . wn 8vo . , p Fourth Edition. Cro Clo t-b,

Vol. . of The nternational XXIII I price 3 s. 6d.

Scientific Series. At School with an O ld

LO K . ix us r i I Dragoon. With S Ill t at ons. T he New W erther Sm all . Second Edition. Crown 8vo . Cloth, t Cloth ri e own8vo . , p c as. 64. price 53 . '

C. Ke an Paul 6? Coir P bl g u zkatzom .

L CH L MAC A AN Marie Antoinette : a Dram a.

No tes and E xtracts on Small crown 8vo. Cloth ri , p ce sr. is e n E ve rlasting Pu n hm t and R H C M K M ( a pt. lb ert H a st E ternal Life acc ordin to A A A , g in R N gs) , . . Literal nte rpretatio n. Small I T he G re at Fro z en S a e . A l th ri 3 . crown 8vo. C o , p ce 3 6d. Personal Narrative of the Voyage of “ the lert durin the Ar tic E x M C U G H ( R ev . ohn . g c A NA T j ) . A edition of 1 - W h p 875 6. it six full C o ma Do m ini: An Essa y a e llustrations two Ma s and ’ p g I , p , n he Lord s Su er its rimi o t pp , went - v W P t se en oodcuts. F0 e tive nstitution, A stolic Us s, I and c ca er edition. Crown v p 8 c . and Subsequent istory Demy Cloth. price th ri e 1 8vo. Clo , p c 43 . Master B bb ‘ o y : a Tale. B M G NU SSO E irilrr M y0 ) , . the uthor of hristi N A N A A C na 0“ h. and L ME R ( . H . M. . Wi th llustrations b E . . B PA A I y H ELL . ’ E xtra fca . 8vo. Cloth rice 3 . 6d. ohan Ludvig R uneb erg s p , p 3

yrical Songs, ldylls and E pi M S E R M . A T AN ram s Fca . 8vo . Cloth rice g . p , p f-a - o n H al d z e Daughters.

. With F a rontis iece. r wn 8v D p C o o. M. . m u n R . ( , h Clot , price 33 . 6d. The Medical G uide fo r L E M U DS ( Dr. n l - di B s m en A Y A g o lh ans. eing Co p R esponsib ility in Mental diam of Advice to E uropeans rn isease . hird Edition. rown ndia relatin to the Preservation D T C , g I l 8vo . C oth, price 53 . and Regulation of Health. With a l m of Th nternational Su lement on the Management of Vo u e VIII . e I h i s ndi S nd Edition. Sc entific Serie . C dren in I a . eco

Crown 8vo . Lim cloth rice 3 . 6d. p , p 3 ME R D H G r E IT ( eo ge) .

T he E oist . A Comed inNar L DE H E and E E . MA N ( . . . ) g y tiv v r wn 8vo th ra e . ols. C o . Clo . Princes and Princesses 3 . fl “ lso a Chea er Edition with us , A p ll trated. Smallcrown 8vo . Cloth, I Fro tis iece r wn 8vo loth n p . C o . C , price as. 6d. ric p e 66 . N MA NIN G ( His E m inence C ar T he O rdeal of Richard Fe dinal) . v r l Histo of Fat er and Son. e e . A h

E sa In ol rontis iece. wn s ys on R eligion and one v . with p Cro

8vo. loth rice 6s. Literature . B various Writers. C , p

Third eries. gem S 8vo. Cloth y , E R H enr M RITT ( y) . price ror. 6d. Art Criticism and R o T he Inde endence o f the p m ance . With Recollections, and H ol See With an endix con w n - thre llust tions in cau y , App T e e I ra ai h Pa i t nin t e al llocut on and a orte nna Lea Merritt. Two g p A f , y A

translation. Cr. 8vo . Cloth rice 3 . l , p 5 vols. Large post 8vo. C oth, ass.

T he T rue Sto r o f the DDL E The Lad y MI TO N ( y) .

atican C ouncil. Crown 8vo . B allads. uare 1 6m o Cloth V Sq . , Cloth, price sr. price 6d. M LL R E d rd E E wa . MA RE Y ( . I ( ) T he Histor and Do ctrines Anim al Mechanics. A y ' of rvin srn or the so-called Os reatise on errestrial and erial I ; , T T A i thol c an Apostohc Church. 2 vols. Wi h xx strati ns. Locomotion. t 7 Illu o s Large po t 8vo. Cloth, price ass. Second Edition. Crown 8vo . Cloth, rice T h p sr. e Church in R elation to the e olume . The nterna nal Stat . Crown avo . Cloth ric V XI of I tio , p e s Screntific Series. 7 . 6d. MILK! ( J ames) . Monm o uth:A D rama, o f which Tables of E xchange for the the Outline is Histori cal. Dedicated Conve rsion of Sterlin Mone into b ermission to Mr g y y p . Henr r in y I v g. di and e lon Currenc at Small cro w n an C n 8 vc . Clo th I y , price 53 .

t i t . . to as r Ra es fro m 8d . pe MO RE LL ( J . Se o d Editio Rupee . c n n. De my E uclid Sim plified in Me 8vc . Clo th. price £ 2 as. thod and Lan ua e M g g . Being a H N . anualof Geometr MIN C I ( J y. Com iled froni l i th W ar the most im orta nt Frenc W orks B u garia s nce e . p , a roved b the Universit of P ri No tes o f a To ur in the Autumn of pp y y a s and the Minister of P b f u lic Instruc l 8 . Sm a ll cro wn 8 s rt. Cloth 7) , tion. Fca . svc . Cloth ri rice 0 d p , p ce as . p 3s. . MO R E C Rev . F. M I ( . A . MIVART ( St . G eorge) , P. R . 8 . The Olym inn and Pythian Co nt rar E v l ti n empo y o u o O des of Pin ar . A New Transla An Essa on some tion in E i y n lsh erse . Crown v g V 8 o . C es. ost 8vo . Cloth rice Cloth rice P , p . p 1 3 . 64 . yr. MO RSE E ( . RE D. MO C KLE R First B o ok of Z o l o o gy. A G ram m ar of the B alc o With numerous llustrati n I o s. Cro wn

8vo. Cloth ri L u , p ce r. chee ang age , as it is spoken in s Maltran ncient Gedrosia in the MO RSH E A D ( , E . D. A ) ( A . ) - ersia rabic and Romancharacters. Th P A e Agam em no n of ma Fcap . 8vo . Cloth. price sr.

T H O FFA ( Robert Scott) . T he E co no m yo f C o nsum p MO RT E RRA F ( e lix . tio n; anOmittedChapter in olitical ) P T he L e nom end of Allandale Eco y, with s cial refere nce to g , ‘ and other P s i oems. m l wn the ue t o ns of om merc ial Crises S a l cro 8vo . Cloth ri ce dr. and t e Policy ofTrades Unions ; and , p withReviews of the heoriesof dam T A H KE ( . h Mi AA J mi R ard . l S t , ic o, . S l , Fawcett, J Slavo nic Fa r ales . i y, T c. em l h & D y 8vo. C ot , price 1 83 . R ssian Sem a Polish and From u , n, , With Fou lllus T he Principle s o f a T im e Bohemian Sources . n

l th rice . r i s. Crown 8vo . C o , r Policy : bein an E xposition of a t at on p s

Method of Sett in Dis utes be tween D. D. g p NE W MAN J . Em layers andE mplo yed in regard Charac teristics from the to irne andWa es b a sim le Pro , y p f Bein Selections g W ritings o . g ess f Mercantile Barter without c o , rran e from his various Works. A g d - recourse to Strikes or Locks out. ’ with the uthor 5 ers nal v l. “ A p o a Re rinted from The Econom of p y W th ortrait . i n. " Third Edit o i Consum tion with a Preface and , h rice 6s . p Crown 8 vc . Clot , p endix containin Observations on pp g Dr. . H . A A Portrait of the Rev. som e Reviews of that book anda R e J , m unted for framin can ewman, o g, criticism of the heories of Ricardo T 2s 6do rice . be bad. p . Mill on R en and and . S t alue J , V , Ph D N LAS hom as . . o of P o ction c ( T ) , , C st r du . Demy 8vc . 0 é gg 3 6d. Cloth, price 3 . The Pedigree o fthe E nglish - MO L E ( Field Marshal Von) . l n r ument Historic l TK Peo e z a A g , a e t t e r fro m R u s s t a he Formation and L s . and cientific, on t Nati n tracin Race~ slat b Robina ier. Growthof the o Tran ed y Nap , g h mix ture in Britainfrom the earliest Crown 8vo . Clot , price 6s . ad ith es ecia l reference to the times, w p Note s o f T ravel. Bein E x incor oration of the Celtic bort p , A tracts from the ournals w Fifth Edition. em v of. J ro n es. D y 8 c .

8vo. Cloth rice 6s. Sloth rice 1 65. , p , p

N f - ra asLo n ose h . E ro . . F. s¢ ( J p ) PAY ( P J ) m tris rd. ur Railwa s S etches A Visit to G erm an h O y k , Sc ools E le m Historical and Descriptive . With entary Sc hools in Ger

tical nformation as to Fares m an . otes of a rof ional Prac I , y N P ess Tour ' to ins ect som Rates & c . , and a Cha ter p e of the K r wa Reform . Crown vo . imar Schools Pmo y P y ,

ri e 6s. Schools and Schools for e p c , T chnical M M SO ra. ark PATTI N ( ). The R enaissance o f Art in F e W Nine ranc . ith wen Steel

En r s v ls. em 8vo. g avings. o D y Cloth, price

a . 64.

P UL C . e an . A ( K g ) PE L LE TAN

Ma r W o lls t o n e c ra ft . y The D s e ert Pastor, ean Le tters to m la With refator J I y. P y an. Translated from the Me b an w Po s in moir y, d T o rtrait B Colonel E De y . P. a rte Lea Merritt ' c n o b nna . f , y A L Hoste. t ha Fron N ro v l ri . ; C wn 8 o. C oth, p ce 6r Edition. F cap. svc. price ’ G o eth s Faust N w e . A e NN r on in rown 8vo. E E LL H . Cholm ondele . T anslati Rime. C P ( y) Pe asus R esaddled B g . X the uthor of Puck on e asus W illiam G o dwin : His A P g , W & c . & c . ith Ten Full Ill i s Friends and Contem porar e . ° trations Da er. With Portraits and Facsimdes of the

Second ition. ca . to. Cloth Handwritin f Godwin and his p 4 g o l e e ant rice m s. 64 W g , p . 3 v ls. ar 8vo. ife. o Squ e post Cloth, rice 3 83 . N p E R CE Ma . P I ( j L) . D nar an The G enius O f Christianity A ictio y d G lo ssary f th - Wi h v ll d Essa b William o e Ko ran. t c ions Gr m 0 n e e . Being ys y a ed matical References andipx lanatlons Godwin never before publish . p

of the ex t. to . Cloth rice arr. Edited with a reface b C. 4 , p , P , T Ke an aul r wn 8v Cloth . C o o. g P , E SC -IE L Dr O sc P I ( . ar) . ri 6d. p ce 78 . The R ac es o f Man and e i G e ra hicalDi n th r og p strib ution. PA U L ( Margaret Ag es) . Lar e crown 8vo . Cloth r g , p ice 93 . le r G entle and Sim p :A Sto y. l h il o s E G RE W ( J . B ell u . n a vols. Crown 8vo. C ot , g t t p , P TTI ) ,

F. R . S . price 1 23 . " nim al Lo co m o lso a Chea er Edition in one A tion ; or, fl , A p Walkin Swimmin d PI Fronti . 8vo. , an vol. with spiece Crown g g,

With 1 o llustrations. Second Cloth rice 6s. I , p

tion. rown 8vo . Clo T hn olume . of he PAYN E ( J o ) . V VII Scientific Series. and D ath Songs of Life e .

FE FFE R E m il . Crown 8vo. Cloth rice r. P I ( y) , p s ’ uarterm an s G race and Q , P f E ( ro . . AYN P othe r Poem s . Crown 8 h J vo. Clot ,

L ectures on E ducation. price 53 . ri 6d P ce . G lan Alarch : His Silence

and S n oem. . Frobel and the Kinder arten o Second g A P . II . .

ti n. Edition. rown 8vo. rice 6c. system. Second Edi o p — ’ PFE FFE R E m il contzrm ed. I ( y) Proteus and Am adeus. A ’ G erard s Monum ent and . E i b bre , Corres pondence d ted y Au y P h r D wn8v . loth ri e ot e oem s . Second Edition. e ere. Cro o C c 3 . V , p 5 r wn v l th C o 8 o. C o rice 63 . , p L C L B P U B I SC H O O O Y . m h M it Poe s . Second Edition. T he V olunte er, t e il ia

rown 8v . m n he Re ular Soldier C o Cloth, price 63 . an, a d t g .

r wn 8v Cloth rice 3 . C o o. Sonnet an , p 5 s d Songs . New h Editi n xfim h rin PU L PIT CO MME NTA RY (T e). o . o andsome l ed , y p t m. an he v . . E xa and bound in cloth ilt ed es n ce Edited by t R e . S d , g g , p J

D M. p n e . the Rev. Canon H . . S e c E z ra Ne he m ia h a n d N H M , , C E S ho m as A . PI (T ) , . E he r. R anon . Rawlin st By ev. C G Sam uel W ilb erforce : Faith with Hom ilies b Rev son M. A. — — , ; y Service Rec om pe nse . hree Pr f. Thomson M. A. Rev T R . o , W P rtrai of Bisho Sermons. ith a o t p M A. . LL. B . Prof. A Redford, , . , Wilberforce ( after a Photogra h by W . . Rev . wis M A. . Rev. S. Le W , , J A Charles atkins) . Crown 8vo . loth, M nal Rev. A Mackennal acdo d, . , price 6d. Rev B . W . l k n B . A . . A , Rev. C ar so , . , W Dinwiddie H i s Rev. . F. ast ng , , PLAYFAI R ( Lieut Her ' B A B Pr f. Rowlands . . LL. . Rev. o Britannic Majesty s Consul-General , , , Prof. P v B R v. Re . G . Wood, . A. , e in lgiers. A B M A an Rev C . Barker, LL. . , . . , d

x el . e nd Edition. One T ravels in the Fo otsteps o f S. E l S co ri 6d B ru in l ri d u is oi. ce ms. . ce A e a a n T n . , p ’ Il u trated b acsimile of Eruc s ls y 1 Sam uel. B the Ver Rev. . s y y original Draw mgs rhotograpte5 W mil . i h ies R . P mi h D D t H . S t , . o M s ap , & c. Royal 4to. Cloth: v Donald F D. D. by the Re . raser, , bevelled boards ilt leaves rice , g , p v f h Rev. B . R e . ro a man and P . C p , £ : 3 3 D Pri e r s. ale . c s

L LO C K w . PO ( Punjaub (The) and North L ec ture s o n French Po ets. r B an Western Frontie of India. D livere t he R l e d a t o a nstitution. P n wn 8v . oth y I old u jaubee. Cro o C ,

Small crown 8vo. Cloth rice r. , p s price 53 .

U RE F G E S Prof. p o usnx m (A . Q AT A (

T he H u m a n S e c i e s . R u s s i a n R o m a n c e . p E rown 8vo loth ranslated from the ales of Belkin Second dition. C . C , T T , rice 3 . B Mrs . Buchan elfer ale 5 & c . y . T ( p ' J Vol. . of The nternational Mouraviefi Crown 8vo. Cloth, XXVI I

Scientific Series. price 3 3 . R E I-IAW ohn H enr B E R (J y) , PRE S YT . c n U nfoldings o f Christian G aur : Its R uins and In h wi H ope . An E ssay s o ng that the sc ri tions. Edited with consider Doctrine contained in the Damna p able additions and alterations b his to Clauses of the Creed commonl y W w With f rt -f r hoto ido . o y ou p ed thanasian is unscriptur A hic illustrations and twent -five 6d grap Smallcrown 8vo. Cloth, price 43 . . - l u er fac simi es of Inscriptions. p

r o . th . 6d. R E Pr f B onam . o al t Clo , 1. 1 3 IC ( o . y) y 4 3 3

E D Carveth . Currency and B anking. R A ( )

8 . oth rice n the T heo o f Lo ic Crown vo Cl , p O ry g

An Essay. Crown 8vc . Cloth, Chapters on PracticalPoli price 63 . i l E m B in the Sub t ca cono y. e g lities of the Future Life . stance of Lectures delivered before R ea

o Lar e Sm all crown 8 vo. Cloth rice the University of Oxf rd. g , p

8 . 1 2 . 1 8 . 6d. post vo Cloth, price 3 3 4

' rs . R B E R O T RE ANE I ( M . G O TS N ( he Late Rev.

F M e a . A d Bri ht“ B lessing and B lessed ; a ' g

ketch of Girl Life . With a frontis S No te s on G e nesis . New

iece . Crown 8 vo . Cloth, price 55. p a d chea er Edition. r n 8yo. n p C ow ,

price 3 3 . 64 . W akin and W orking ; or,

from G ir ood to W om anhood. erm on . Four S s Series. Small r With a Frontispiece. C own 8vo. wn r 8 oth s. c o vo. Cl , price a 64 . each. Cloth, pnce 53 . E nglish G irls : the ir Place E xpo sitory L ectures on ’ St. Paul s E istles to the Co and Po wer. With a Preface by p rinthians New Edi i mall . t on. S M . f Birmin ham . W ale . o R. . D , A A

h crown 8170. Cloth rice 3 . i . 8vo. Clot Second Edit on Fcap . , , p 5

price 23 . 64. Lectures and Addresses, and other ust An one , with other literar Ne y y remains. A Jtori s . hree llustrations. Ro al e Edition. r wn 8v l th rice T I y C o o. C o , p 5:

rice rs. i 6mo . Cloth, p An Analysis o f Mr. T enny Sunshine enn and other ’ " J y s n s In Mem riam o o . ( Dedi Stories. Three lllustrations. Ro al y cated b Permission to the Poet 6d y r6mo. Cloth, price rs. . La e. . 8v ureat ) Fcap o. Cloth, price a: Sunb eam W illie and other , The E ducatio n o f th ri hree llustrations. Ro al Sto es. T I y Hum an R ace . ranslated fro h ri T r6mo . Clot , p ce 1 3 . 64. the German of Gotthold Ep in i Less F a . l . h g c p 8vo. C ot , pr L D ev. RE YN O S ( R J . The Supe rnatural in Na Life and Letters . b erifica tion b Free Use o f Edited ture . A V y

the Rev St ford Br k A. . o oo e M. Scie nce . Second E dition revised p , , , _

De m vo Cloth Cha lain tn Ordinar to the ueen. and enlarged. y 8 . , p y Q

rice s . p u . 2 vols. uniform with the Set I , Wi mons. th Steel Portrait. Crown M ster of Miracles The . y y , v l 8 o. C oth, price 7s. 6d. By the uthor of The Supernatural A ” . Librar E iti D d on in em 8vo. in Nature. Crown 8vo . Cloth, II y , y , wi h Tw P t o Steel ortraits. Cloth price 63 . , ri e m p c s.

R B O Prof. ( A P ular Edi i n I T . o t o in one vol. III p , h lo E n lish Ps c o . Se wn v l h o 8 . C t g y gy Cr o o , price 63 .

. cond Edition. Revised and Cor A The adorn Works can a lso be rec ted Translation from the latest i French Edit on. Large post 8vo.

l h rice 5. C ot . p 9 Portrait of the late Rev F A . . Robertson mounted H eredity : A Psycholo ical , be had, pnce as. 6d. n i Phenom ena its gws Stud o ts , ,

its uses and its Conse uences. , q O B N R SO ( A . Mar F. ) oth n I N y Large crown 8vo. Cl , p ce or. A H andful 0g Honey

DrH suckle . Fca . 8vo. Cloth ric Chev lier . enr RIN K ( a y) . p , p s. 6d G re enland Its People and 3 .

its Products . By the Chevalier R LL G N Y RI NK resident of the ( . Dr. H E R , P f Wi g%n Greenland Board o Trade. th ixteen llustrations dr wn b the E tna : a Histo r of th s I , a y y M un i a Ma . Edited b o ta n and its E r ti n E skim o, and p r. up o s ' r wn 8v With Ma l o o. g s and l ustra st t WN C cc tions. S uart Re r BRO . p I q a 8vo. Cloth rice r. t or. , p o

3 6 41 e e

s NtO R N. SHE LLE L ad s ( Y ( y) .

Alexis De T ocqueville . Shelley Mem orials from v ti i and Con ersa ons A uthent c So urc es . With (no to 5 ' O W t 3 Edited 0 O

8 ricm. a v3; L r e ost vc . Cloth a g p , p

Serm ons to Naval C adets. SH E LLE Y ( Perc y B ysshe) .

M . Preached on board H . . S Poem s sele te dfro m Dedi c .

Britannia. Small crown svc . Lad h l th Pre cated to y S eley. Wi Cloth rice 3 . 64 . , p 3 e b Ri ha e t Printed fac y c rd Garn t . - e W iature onhand mad paper. ith min

frontis iec e. Elz evir 8vo. lim atch Seven Autum n Leaves from p . , p p P ment anti ue. rice 6.r. vellum h Nine , Fairyland. Illustrated wit q Etching; Square crown Svo. n. SH E R MAN (G e w . m y . “ Mem oirs Of G eneral W Sherm n mm ander of o s . a , Co SH ADW E LL ( Maj . . . T

Mo untain W arfare . Illus v W War. By Himself. 9 ols. trated b the Cam ai n of r in em l th y p g ygg Map. D 8vo C o , price tion Switz erland. Bein a ransla E g T Copyright xglirk dition. of the Swiss Narrative compiledfrom W the Archduke Charles the orks of Rev . e h , SH ILLITO ( J os p ) . omini and others. lso of otes , A N W om anhood its Duties Cam , l General H. afour ou the y D ‘ T m s Privile es . Boo 1 With e On , and g paign of the Valtelline in 63 5. A for oun Women. Second Edition. endix Ma s and ntroductor g App p , I y Crown 8vo. rice 3 . 64 . Dem 8v Cloth rice r6r. 3 Remarks. y , p P

M A . SH LE Rev O rb . IP Y ( , y) , SH AKSPE ARE ( Charles) . Princi les O f the Faith i Saint Paul at Athens p Relation to Sin. To ice f Spiritual Christianity in Relation to Thought in Times of trea some s ects of Modern Tho ht. A p With an In Eleven Addresses. ine Sermons reached at St. te N p a ' duction on the ne lect of Dogm ti Westbo rne ark . hen s Church, u P Theolo in the urch of En land Rev Canon g pith Preface by the . and a ostscript on his leaving th FA A . Crown 8vo . Cloth rice 3 . RR R , p 5 8 Church of England. Demy v0

e t . Cloth, pric ar S H AW ( Major W ilk inson) . Church T racts or Studie T he E lem ents O f Mo dern , in Modern Problem s . By vario ti Practicall a lied to Tac cs . y p wn 8vo. Cloth Writers. 3 vols. Cro Wit went English Formations. T y mall crown five Plates and Maps. S

loth rice 1 23 . 8vo . C p L . B . , su rt n ( E dward) , m o L

" “ F. R . S . The Second olume of Mili fl , V tar Handbooks for Officers and H ealth and Disease, as In y ” Non-commissionedOfficers. Edited - k b l. . B Brac en ur Co C . by Lieut. y,

A. A. G. R. A. ,

SH W ( Flora s Ill tra A Food . Profiisely us

tor of i r wn 8vo. C astle B lair : a S y Sixth Edit on. C o '

2 vols. Crown 8vo. ce 3 . YouthfulLives. 5 a lume . of The nternation. l i a s rice m . lso an o c v lt t p , A , III I . g M E r L S N S H dwa d M D L . B E E SO N Rob ert L ouis IT ( ) , . T V ( ) F — . R . S . continued. Pra c t ic a l Die t a ry f o r T ravels with a Do nkey in

Fam ilies , Schools , and the L a the Ceve nnes . With Fron iece

b urin . New Edition. b W ane. r v o Classes alter Cr C own 8 o. oth g A y ,

ost 8vo. Cloth rice s. 64 . ri e 3 . 64 . P , p 3 p c 7

T E V E NSO N Rev. W . T ub ercular C onsum ptio n H m ns for t e Church and in its E arly and Rem ediable y

H om e. Selected and Editedb the Stages . Second Edition. Crown y

Rev. W . Fleming Stevenson. 8vo. Cloth, price 6s. The most complete Hymn Book

ublished. Songs o f Two W o rlds. By p ” f es The H Book consists of hree the Author of The Epic o Had . T e in one arts For ublic Worshr Fifth Edition. Compl te P P F F il hi . or am yand rivate Wors p. olume with ortrait. Fca . 8vo . II P V , P p — I . For Children. Cloth rice 3 . 64 . II , p 7

SOngs for Music . uare crown By Four Friends. Sq

8vo. C oth rice 3 . l , p inin son s Re inald . Conta g g y g A M Ga Greville S E W R Prof. B alfour . A Stephen H , T A T ) , . . F k g LL . D. . . 8 . Wing. , On the Conservation of

PE DDING s . S (Jam e ) h E nergy. Fifth Edition. Wit R eviews and Discussio ns , E n i s own 8vo . Fourteen grav ng . Cr i Literar , Political, and H s l y C oth, price s. torical not relatin to B acon. i l , g Volume Vi of The Internat ona

Dem 8vo. Cloth rice res. 64 . y , p Scientific Series. i and U R E R O R R (Franc s), SPE NC E R ( H erb ert) . T T N H awes) . The Study o f So ciolo gy. im es r C anterb ury Ch ; o , i r wn 8yo. Cloth Ei hth Edit on. C o g , Chaucer ales retold to Children. price T With llustrations from the Elles of The nternational I Volume . I V . l th m ere MS. Extra Fcap . 8vo C o , Scientific Series. price 3 3 . 64 . T RE TT O N H esb a S E DM ( E dm und Clarenc e) . ( T AN ’ Wi David Llo d s ast W ill. Lyrics and Idylls. th y

Wi F llustrations. Ro al rown 8vo. Cloth th our y other Poems. C , I r6mo . rice as. 64 . 3 64 . , price 7 . p T he W onderful Life . hib ald ohn STE PH E N S (Arc J ) , h usan Fca . 8vc . Thirteent Tho d. p LL . D. Cloth, price as. 64 . T he Fol estone Ritual ’ k Through a Needle s Eye ubstance of the u C ase . The S rg A . 2 ols Crown 8vo. Cloth 9. Story. v , ment delivered before the J11c l t rice 1 23 . gi t op, p Committee ofthe rivyCouncil. On P lso a Cheaper Edition tn em A b ehalf of the Respondents. D y i hFrontis iece . Crown one volume,w t p 8vo. Cloth, price 63 . h rice 63 . 8vo. Clot , p

ieut .-Colonel F. W . S T E V E NS ( W illiam ) . T U B B S (L ) f o nd o h r im ent of B en al T he T ruce O G d, a t e T he R eg g l h Histor of its oems. Small crown 8vo . C ot , Artiller . The y P y W 64 . Or amm tion E ui ment, and ar p rice 33 . g , Com 3 from ublished Services. P S T E E SO Rob ert Louis) . rds and vario V N N Works, Ofi cial eco , us Wi h With num r . e ous A n Inland Oyage t Private Sources.

ll r ions. 3 v Maps and I ust at ols. Demy 8vo. Cloth, price S U MM Lieut. Hu o German TAYLO R C ol. Meadows T ( g ( ) , ' ar ta he to the van Ex —c on i Milit y At c t nued.

diticn. pe R al h Darnell p . New and ' hea r E Russia s advance E ast C pe dition. With Frontis

iece . Crown 8 . l th . R r s p vo C o , rice 63 ward. Basedon the Ofi cial epo t p

H . ranslated b Ca t. C. E . of. T p The C o nfessions Of a Thu . v g Vt sNr . With hiap. Crown 8 o. New E i r d tion. C own 8vo. Cloth,

IL A . SU LLY ( am es) . T ara M al J a ahratta T e. Sensation and Intuition. New E it d ion. Cro wn 8m Cloth.

v loth rice 1 03 . 64 . Demy 8 o. C , p price 63 .

P ssim ism : a Histor and e y TE B B IT T ( Charles) and Franci

a ticisrn. em 8vo . uce r . Ll Cri D y P y oyd. E x tensio n O fE m pire W eak Sunn land Stories . y ess ? D fi W ’ n e c its Ruin ? ith B the uthor of unt Mar s Bran y A A y Practical Sche me for the Recon “ l h Pie. llustrated. Smsll8vo. C ot , struction of Asi ti r e I a c Tu k y. Smal rice s. 64. p a cro wn 8vo. l th ri C o , p ce 3 s. 6d. Sweet Silver Sa in s of y y g E NN SO N lfre d T Y ( A ) . Shakespeare . Crown 8vo. Cloth T he Im perial Lib rary E di l e s. 64 . gi t, pnc 7

tio n. m Co plete in 7vols. Demy 8w D vid ME a . Cloth rice 64 . in R0: SY ( ) , p £ 3

bur h bmdi . O utlines o f an Industrial g ng, £ 4 64

’ Second Edition. Crown Science . A th r E it u o s d io n. Com let ri e p 8vc . Cloth, p c in 6 olum es. ost 8y Cloth ilt V P o. g r - o half morocco , Roxburgh style T ales fro m Ario sto . Retoldfor

W three VO L I. E arl Po em s an b a Lad . ith . Children, y y y ,

wn 8vo . Cloth l tions. Cro E n ish d lls rice R O: illustra , g I y . P h 64 . bur . 6d price g , 73 .

L. I Lo ck l all VO I . s ey H TAYLO R (Algernon) . Luc retius , and other Poem s G uienne . Notes of anAutumn

rice 6s. Roxbur h s. 6d. P g , 7 Crown 8vo . Cloth rice s. 64 . Tour. , p 4 V L II. The Id ll O . I y s O LO R Sir ' ( he Kin Com le e TAY t t . c s 6d. n e . ’ ( p ) P 7 W orks Com lete . Author s x r fi p Ro bu g 93 .

vols. Crown 8vo . Edition, in 5 . c n VOL. IV The Prin ess, a ri e 6s. each. Cloth, p c Maud. rice Roxbur h P g , to . containin the Vols. I . III g VOL. V . E noch Arden ls. and . oetical Works, o V. V P V I M ri m I m . Pri and n e o a ce os. the Prose Works. Roxburgh, 73 . l Meadows Dra a C . m s P s LO R o V L. VI. rice . TAY ( ) , O . 7

Roxburgh, M. A Nob le Q ueen a Rom ance C ab inet E ditio n. 1 2 vols His o Crown 8vo . of Indian t ry. E ach with Frontis iece. rice p Cloth. P l th ric a 6d. each. C o , p e s. ' 8vo . a sm a r E t v l rr wn O N a o s. C t vols. Cro C DITI . o See a . 3 lete in handsom e Ornamental Gas Cloth. p Tippo o Sultaun : a Tale of di n New Edition with Po c et V olum e E tio the Mysore War. k

v n cas . Dit rown 8vo. Cloth r ols. I neat e 63 tc Frontispiece. C , 3 , 3

ditto . E xtra cloth ilt price 63 . g ,

30

Turnbnll . VAUG H A H . Halford aern T HO MSO N . ) N tim e Re iua rofessor o Mod Social Pro lem s ; or, an In g History in O x ford U niversit: nir into the Law of Infl uences.

. 1 in:lDiagrams. Demy 8vo Cloth, New Readings and R ‘ ' ' 64 . price nos. deringa of Shakespeare s l

ediea . V . em sve . Cl g ol. I D y G odfre B . A . T H RI NG ( Rev . price 1 53 . r r cs Hym ns and Sac e Ly i .

8vo. Cloth rice 3 . 6d. LL R Prot . l eap. . p 3 VI A I ( ) Nic colo Machiavelli an THU RSTO N( Pro f . R . H i Tim e s ranslated b Lin A History o f the G ro wth s . T y illari. 2 v ls. la r 8 in Wi V o ge post of the Steam E n e . th g l C oth, price 243 . numerous Illustrations. Second v l h Edition. Crown 8 o. C ot . price a a VIN CE NT (C pt . c . E le m e n t a ry Mi lit a r R Dr. TO DH U NTE . ) i i J G eogr hy, Reconno tr ng, an f S elle wn A Stud o y. Cro Sk cgfn m f r y et g. Co piled o Nor 3 8vo. Cloth, price 7 . Commissioned Officers and Sol

of all rms. Square crown ave Alcestis A Dramatic Poem . A ri Cloth, p ce as. 6d. Ex tra ( cap. 8vo. Cloth, price 53 .

lla andother Poem s. Laure VO G E L ( Dr. H erm ann) . ' h r 64 Crown 8vo . Clot , p ice os. . T he Chemical E fiects 0 Li ht a nd Photo ra h in th T O L ING SB Y ( Frere ) . g g p y, a lica tion to Art Science a h . , E lnora. An Indian Myt o In ustr The translati n th r y. o o ougl lo ical oem. Fca . 8vo. Cloth g P p , v W 1 00 llu re ised. ith strations I , price 6s. cluding some beautiful specimens

hoto ra h . hirdEdition. Cro T ranslations fro m Dante , P g p y T

8y . l th ri . - o C o , p ce 53 Petrarc h , Michael An elO , and

l nn . 8v . olum . The nternati Vittoria C o o a cap . o V e XV of I o

U R E R Rev. C . ennyson) . L d M r T N ( T VYN E R ( a y a y) . So nnets L rics andT rans , y , E very day a Po rtio n

lations . Crown 8vo. Cloth rice , p dapted from the Bible and th A ' ra er Book for the Private De P y , r tions of those living in Widow wm m o (L ouisa) . Collected and edited b Lad M R ecollect ions of W ork y y v l yner. S uare crown 8 e. C house isitin and Ma na e V . V g g ri q extra, p ce 53 . m ent durin e -fiv g tw nty e years . Small r vo c own 8 . Cloth rice s. 6d. W L S E N Charles p r: , p 3 A D T I ( ) , TY ND LL o hn LL The B alance O f E m o tii B F. R . A ) , . S and ntellec t : An E ssa In Form s O f ater. A Fam i I ductor to the Stud of Phiyoso l liar E xpo sition ofthe O rigin and y y p ' Crown 8vo. Cloth rice 6s. Phenom ena O i G lac iers . With , p wen -fi ty ve llustrations. Seventh T I L E n W L R ( R ev. c . . ) Edition. Crown v l A 8 o . C oth ri , p ce 53 . l The A o cal se Review me . f Vo u I o The International p yp , n er e i Scientific Series. u d th L ght of the Doctrine the Unfoldin s d th : V B E NE DE N g Age an e Re AN n f l tutio o al hings. Dem y 8 Anim al Parasite s and T Cloth rice m s. M , p essm ates . With8 llustrati I ons.

Second Edition. Clo rice 3 p 5 . W L E RS So hia L dia A T p y ) . olum e . of The nternational T V XIX I he B rO O A Poem . S ro c wn 8vo . Clo th - fid.