given to a particular šabbāthôn—pacification day in general as a means of distinguishing the developed institution from the one to which it may be traced back.116 We may sum up this investigation in a series of propositions, as follows: 1. The idea of propitiation of the deity enters largely into the thought and religious rites of both Hebrews and Babylonians. 2. The Hebrews, like the Babylonians, distinguished certain days as occasions on which measures had to be taken to ensure the good-will of the gods, to prevent their anger from being aroused, or to assuage that anger if aroused. These days were chosen from various motives. One factor in the choice was the association of ideas involved between changes in the appearance of the moon or changes of season, and changes in the disposition of the gods towards their subjects. 116 It is interesting to note the general similarity of the Egyptian precautions for unfavorable days to the Babylonian and Hebrew customs. Like the Babylonians, the Egyptians had their calendars in which the favorable and unfavorable days are entered; and, what is more to the point, a single day could have both a favorable and unfavorable character. Dividing the day into three sections, the calendars furnish the indications for each of these sections. Thus (MASPERO, Romans et Poésies au Papyrus Harris, No. 500, pp. 38-9) the 6th Paophi is noted as "good, good, good," that is, each part of the day is good; the 5th Paophi is "bad, bad, bad," that is, the whole day is bad; but the 4th Paophi is noted as "bad, good, good," that is, it begins as an unfavorable day and ends as a favorable one, precisely as the Babylonian û m nab libbi. Again we have the 23d Paophi (ibid., p. 41. See also, for further illustrations, CHABAS, Le Calendrier des jours Fastes et Nefastes de l'année Égyptienne, and WIEDEMANN, Religion of the Egyptians, pp. 263-4) described as "good, good, bad," two-thirds good, but ending as an unfavorable day. For these unfavorable days and days of double aspect we find, as among the Babylonians, precautions prescribed. On the 4th of Paophi one is not to leave one's house- an ordinance that is paralleled by the order found in Exodus for the Sabbath. Similarly, on the 5th Paophi one is not to leave the house, nor to approach one's wife. On the 7th Paophi one is to abstain from all work, clearly for the reason that labor on that day will not meet with the favor of the gods. But the Egyptian theologians furnish a reason of their own for this precautionary rite that forms a perfect parallel to the doctrine of post-exilic Judaism, and it is almost startling to read the entry for the 27th Paophi: "Unfavorable, unfavorable, unfavorable! Do not leave the house on this day. Do no manual labor. Ra (the god) rests." (MASPERO, ibid., p. 41. The verb used embodies the idea of contentment. It approaches, therefore, the idea of pacification that is prominent in the Babylonian and Hebrew stem šabat.) The precaution against touching fire is also met with. On the 11th of Tybi (ibid., p. 34) "one is not to approach fire," and the reason assigned is that Ra has predestined the fire on that day for the destruction of his enemies. In other words, the sacred element must only be handled when one can be sure of the favorable disposition of the gods. 3. Among both Hebrews and Babylonians these days had either a decidedly inauspicious character, i. e., were unfavorable days, or had an uncertain character, i. e., were days that might become unfavorable, but that could by observing the proper rites be converted into favorable days. 4. Among the terms used to describe such days, the Babylonians had a word šabattu m, for which in Hebrew we have an equivalent, Šabbāthôn, both the Babylonian and Hebrew word conveying the idea of "propitiation," "cessation" of the divine anger, pacification, and cognate ideas. 5. The Sabbath of the Hebrews was originally such a Šabbāthôn — a day of propitiation and pacification, marked by rites of an atonement character. 6. At this stage in the development of the institution, it was celebrated at intervals of seven days, corresponding with changes in the moon's phases, and was identical in character with the four days in each month (7th, 14th, 21st, and 28th) that the Babylonians regarded as days which had to be converted into days of pacification. 7. The similarity of the precautionary measures prescribed for these days (and others) by the Babylonians to the biblical rites for the Hebrew Sabbath is to be accounted for by an agreement in the interpretation put upon such days by the two peoples—an agreement due to early contact. 8. Besides the 7th, 14th, 21st, and 28th days of each month, the ancient Hebrews had other days which they regarded as and called šabbāthôn, just as the Babylonians had various other days—so, e. g., regularly the nineteenth day of each month in the year—which were either unfavorable or had a twofold aspect as unfavorable days that could be converted into favorable ones. Among the days regarded as šabbathôn by the Hebrews were the New Year's Day, the Day of Atonement, the first and eighth days of the annual pilrimage to the chief sanctuary, falling in a month held sacred by other Semitics (e. g., Arabs) as well as by the Hebrews, and reverting to a period that lies beyond the reach of historical investigation. 9. The emphasis laid at a later period upon cessation from labor, which was originally merely one feature of many in a šabbāthôn, permitted and suggested an interpretation of the precautionary rites prescribed for those occasions that obscured their original import. 10. The introduction, in consequence of profound changes in religious conceptions among the Hebrews, of the custom of celebrating the Sabbath every seventh day, irrespective of the relationship of the day to the moon's phases, led to a complete separation from the ancient view of the Sabbath, while the introduction, at a still later period, of the doctrine that the divine work of creation was completed in six days removed the Hebrew Sabbath still further from the point at which the development of the corresponding Babylonian institution ceased. II. The original character of the Sabbath as a day of propitiation accounts for its being brought into connection with the exodus from Egypt, while the association with the traditions regarding creation is due to the later and advanced conceptions that grew up around the institution. The connection with the exodus reflects the continued influence of the ancient popular views of the Sabbath; the association with the creation of the world is the product of Jewish theology, in its natural endeavor to give to the day an origin in keeping with more advanced religious thought. 12. Jewish theology, in making the central feature of the distinctively Jewish Sabbath the imitation of an example set by Yahwe at the beginning of time, found a support for this doctrine in the survival of an ancient phrase in the popular phrase of the narrative, now embodied in the opening chapters of Genesis. That phrase originally referred to the cessation of Yahwe's anger after subduing forces hostile to his rule, but the phrase, embodying the same verb šābat that underlies šabbāthôn, admitted of an interpretation which made Yahwe "rest" after his exertions. In this sense, the ancient, timehonored phrase-deeply impressed upon the popular mind-was retained and served as the point of departure for the development of one of the most important doctrines set up by the compilers of the Priestly Code-a doctrine that gave to the Sabbath its hold upon the people and made the institution the great bulwark of Judaism down to the present day. 13. Lastly, to put the contrast concisely between the Sabbath in its original form and the fully developed post-exilic institution, we might say that the old Sabbath was merely a sabbathôn, one šabbāthôn among many others, identical in character and spirit with a Babylonian âm nûh libbi or šabattum; the developed institution was unique in its character, with rest from all kinds of work as its central idea, a day sacred to Yahweh who had created the world in six days and who had himself set the example for all times by resting on the seventh day. These two features-(a) a day of absolute rest and (b) the doctrine upon which this ordinance is based-represent the distinctively Jewish contribution to the Babylonian-Hebraic šabattum. Between the old sabbāthôn and the new Šabbath, however, there lies the growth of the Hebrew people from a semi-primitive condition of religious thought to the advanced belief which controls and dominates the entire pentateuchal legislation in its final-its present-shape. DOCUMENTS. INDEXED. A HITHERTO UNPUBLISHED PROLOGUE TO THE ACTS THE oldest manuscripts of the Bible contain, as is well known, only the text of the Holy Scriptures. Even the brief titles and subscriptions in the Codex Sinaiticus and the Vaticanus are in part added by a later hand. Soon, however, it began to be customary to add all sorts of explanatory material. The canons and sections of Eusebius, the brief prologues of Jerome, are familiar examples. The largest collection of such material passes under the name of Euthalius. But despite all the labor that has recently been devoted to this collection, despite even the acute investigations of Professor Robinson, of Cambridge,' the Euthalius question must still be regarded as an extremely confused and confusing problem. This arises chiefly from the fact that the first editor, Laurentius Alexander Zacagni, prefect of the Vatican library under Pope Innocent XII, proceeded upon the principle that the greatest possible completeness was the chief thing to be sought, and accordingly based his work upon a manuscript which contained a very rich collection of introduction material, the greater part of which, however, made no claim whatever to the name of Euthalius. Gallandi3 and Migne simply reprinted his edition without critical revision. Only lately has the attempt been made to separate, by criticism, the genuine Euthalian elements of the collection from the others. In all probability we shall have to assume several authors 'J. ARMITAGE ROBINSON, "Euthaliana," in Texts and Studies, Vol. III, No. 3, Cambridge, 1895. 'L. A. ZACAGNI, Collectanea Monumentorum veterum ecclesiæ graca ac latina. Tomus I (et unicus), Rom., 1698, contains: "Acta Archelai, S. Ephremi Syri sermones duo, S. Gregorii Nysseni scripta varia, Euthalius." I own the copy of Tregelles. 3 A. GALLANDI, Bibliotheca veterum patrum antiquorumque scriptorum, Tom. X (Ven., 1774), pp. 197–320, xi-xiv. MIGNE, Patrologiæ cursus completus, series græca, Tom. 85 (Paris, 1860), pp. 619-790. for the various parts of the work. On the one side this is in entire agreement with the fact, observable in the history of literature in general, that the lesser names disappear, their work being attributed to a more famous writer. Conspicuous examples are furnished by the names of Cyprian and Augustine in Latin literature, under which even writings of Novatian, Pelagius, and others are hidden. On the other side this appears in the notorious fondness of the scribes of biblical manuscripts in later centuries for bringing together the greatest possible variety of material in order to give higher value to their manuscripts. The admirable descriptions of the New Testament manuscripts which we owe to Professor Caspar René Gregory, of Leipzig, are especially exhaustive with reference to this matter, and give an authentic picture of the way in which, in the course of time, materials have been heaped together in the manuscripts of the Bible. We do not now refer to the fact that biblical manuscripts have also been used for copying other and profane literature. We are concerned only with the introductory matter which stands in relation to the New Testament itself. One who would become acquainted with this material—and it is quite worth while to study the history of biblical interpretation which is embodied in it—can obtain a good impression of it from the older editions of the New Testament, especially from those of Mill and Matthaei, not to mention also the commentaries of Theophylact and Oecumenius, and the well-known catena. would no doubt be a task worth undertaking, though not practicable for an individual or at private expense, to gather together and to sift critically all such introductory material as exists in the manuscripts and printed books, and thus to produce a corpus introductorium Novi Testamenti. Undoubtedly many treasures still await discovery. The following pages will furnish an example of this hidden material. The public library at Naples possesses a manuscript which contains the latter half of the New Testament, to whose significance for the Euthalian question Dr. Albert Ehrhard, professor of church history in the Roman Catholic faculty at the University of Würzburg (Herbipolis), 5 Novum Testamentum Græce ad antiquissimos codices denuo recensuit. . . . C. TISCHENDORF: editio octava critica maior. Vol. III: Prolegomena scripsit CASPAR RENATUS GREGORY; additis curis † EZRA ABBOT. Lipsia (Hinrichs), 1884-1894; especially fasc. II (1890): "de codicibus minusculis et de lectionariis." |