50. Ut inquiratur sanguis omnium Prophetarum, qui effusus est a constitutione mundi a generatione ista,

quiratur. 28*

sanguinis 28* R; sangis 43

>omnium sanguis 54*

prophetarum: prophaetarum 19; profetarum 43, 44 DOR ept mol d e q r constitucione 7, 42 c; constitutionem 37 T* e

effusus 5, 16, 43 D R mol q

51. a sanguine Abel, usque ad sanguinem Zachariae, qui periit inter altare et aedem. Ita dico uobis, requiretur ab hac generatione.

sanguine +enim 16

om abel usque ad sanguinem 48

28, 35, 37, 39, 49, 54* Q mol r2 aur ce ir Gr K M II etc. syr-hcl* ad sanguine 10 M d; ad sanguinae 32.

abel + iusti 2, 17, ad sanguinem: Zachariae: Zacchariae 1, 3, 6, 8, 11, 17, quae 16 perit 5 mol i inter templum et altare 20 (cp. r2 e). eadem 28 R: edem 39, 40, 43, 44, 46, 47, 48, 50, 52, 54, 56, 57 W

18, 36 CJ Obf; Zacharie 39, 40, 47, 52, 57 W inter: intra 50; in 53, 58

2

aedem:

ac Io.

52. Uae uobis Legisperitis, quia tulistis clauem scientiae, ipsi non introistis, et eos, qui introibant, prohibuistis.

uobis +non 32*

ue 24, 32, 39, 40, 47, 48, 49, 50, 52, 53, 54, 56, 57, 58 W legisperitis: legis legis peritis 1*; legisperitiis. 16*; legis peritos 17*

53 D;

quia:

qui 1, 7*, 10, 15o, 25, 26, 27, 38, 39, 41*, 46°, 49, 50, 55, D Q R V W mt aur i r å clauem: clauim 26, 27o, 35, 41, 44, 50, 52, 32, 39, 40; sapientiae uel scientiae 43 32, 44, 46, 47, 49, 55 DR Wr2 a b c d il q erased after ipsi 5. over an erasure 55 introibunt 3; introiebant 4, 5, 48 A M Xc, intrabant 16, 21, 32, 44 Dept-mg dur mole r2 aur l; introibant uel intrabant 43; introierunt 50. istis 15, 19, 40*, 54 C.

clau 28* scientiae: scientie +et 1, 7, 10, 11, 15, 20, 21, 24, 25, 27, ipsi: psi 26; ipsis 18*; one letter introistis: introitis 1, bce; istis 21*, 32 introibant:

proibu

53. Cum autem haec ad illos diceret, coeperunt Pharisaei et Legisperiti grauiter insistere, et os eius opprimere de multis,

58.

cap xii 6, 8, 9, 12, 17, 36, 38, 39, 42, 43, 53; xxxviii 11, 20, 37; xli 47; l. 41, 53, written in large letters 15; the first line written in gold 19. quum 18, autem (ac dei 8): om all.

CO; et cum 49 J

illos: eos 16 r2c de ad illos 56 (ce)

hec 22, 28, 39, 47 W diceret: discederet 12; dicerent 40* > diceret coeperunt: caeperunt 35 D; ceperunt 27, 30, 32, 36, 39, 40, 43, 47, 48, 49, 50, 52, 53, 54, 56, 57 W pharisaei: pharisei 22, 26, 27, 36, 38, 39, 40, 46, 47, 48, 50, 52, 53, 56, 57, 58 W ept i; pharysei 54; pharissei 32 R; farisei 43, 44 9 legis peritii 56*; legispaeriti 24 resistere 40 opprimere: obprimere 3, 10, 16, 25, 29, G R TW; oppremere 5*; opprime 28*; deprimere 27; subprimere 23; imprimere 53 corp oxf; inprimere 58.

54. insidiantes ei, et quaerentes aliquid capere de ore eius ut accusarent eum.

insidantes 2; insidiantis 5.

aur dur Gr X 130 cop.

ei: eius 32; om 3, 4, 10, 16, 18, A D G OMVX querentes 18, 22, 24, 27, 28, 32, 35, 36, 37, 39, 40, 47, aliquit 35 aliquid capere 16, 23, 53, 58 D mt Gr K II: capere aliquid capere 36, 45*; >capere aliquid the rest. accussarent 5, 21, 32, 44 R mol r; acusarent 17*.

48, 49, 52, 54, 56, 57 R mol

rest

de 47: ex the eum: illum 21, 32, 49.

The analysis of the above collation seems to show the following results:

to 5.

2. good Vulgate.

3. very good Vulgate; decided resemblance to O; resembles

4, 18. 4. very good Vulgate; decided resemblance to A; very close resemblance

5. good Vulgate; decided resemblance to A; very close resemblance to 4. 6. good Vulgate.

7. good Vulgate; decided resemblance to V; resembles 10, 11, 25, 27; Alcuinian.

8. good Vulgate; close resemblance to 36.

9. good Vulgate.

10. good Vulgate; decided resemblance to V; Alcuinian text blended with Irish readings.

11. good Vulgate; resembles 7, 10, 20, 25, 27; Alcuinian.

12. good Vulgate.

14. good Vulgate.

15. contains African Old Latin readings; earlier MSS preserve mainly European Old Latin readings.

16. resembles DR, also mol T; resembles 21, 32, 44; most akin to r in Old Latin readings.

17. good Vulgate.

18. good Vulgate; contains readings like 3.

20. good Vulgate; like 25; Alcuinian with Irish readings.

21. good Vulgate; very close resemblance to 32; resembles 16, 44.

23. poor Vulgate.

25. like 20; Alcuinian with Irish readings.

26. poor Vulgate.

27. Alcuinian.

28. poor Vulgate; close resemblance to 35.

30. good Vulgate.

31. good Vulgate.

32. good Vulgate; very close resemblance to 21; resembles 16, 44.

35. poor Vulgate; close resemblance to 28.

36. good Vulgate; resembles the older MSS.

41. resembles aur; also 53, 58.

42. poor Vulgate.

43. resembles 44.

44. good Vulgate; resembles 16, 43, 21, 32.

45. good Vulgate.

47. good Vulgate.

48. resembles 52.

51. poor Vulgate.

52. poor Vulgate; resembles 48.

53. very like 58.

58. very like 53.

59. poor Vulgate.

SALISBURY, ENGLAND

G. MALLOWS YOUNGMAN

RECENT THEOLOGICAL LITERATURE

THE INTERNATIONAL CRITICAL COMMENTARY ON CHRONICLES

This is the latest volume1 of the "International Critical Commentary," the most important work on the Bible produced by the American and English scholars of the present day. Of the series in general it may be affirmed that the volumes covering the Old Testament are on the whole more satisfactory than those on the New Testament. That fact is due largely, it may be presumed, to the vastly freer work which for a generation has been done in the former field. While there are many unsolved problems still in the Hebrew biblical literature, there are numerous important points which are settled so far as present knowledge permits.

Professor Curtis' contribution seems to be on a level with the best of the commentaries in this series, and some of his predecessors had already made the standard high. It is especially satisfactory to have a worthy treatment of Chronicles; for there has been nothing in English to which the student could turn, and unfortunately most American theological students are limited to their native tongue.

Chronicles originally covered the two books still known by that name and the books of Ezra-Nehemiah as well. Therefore it is in its early form a history of the Jews from Adam to the Greek period. But since for the early period there is practically nothing but lists of names (I, 1−9), Chronicles as we use the term covers the history from the time of David to the Exile. Now, that period is already included in our books of Samuel and Kings. What then was the purpose of a writer who proposed to rewrite that great period of Hebrew history? To begin with a negative, it is certain that he had no narrow view of the inspiration and infallibility of the earlier histories; for he uses them at times with great freedom; and it is plain that he wrote his book because he was not satisfied with his predecessors' interpretation of the events they recorded.

A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Books of Chronicles. By Edward Lewis Curtis, Ph.D., D.D., Professor of the Hebrew Language and Literature in the Divinity School of Yale University, and Albert Alonzo Madsen, Ph.D. New York: Scribner, 1910. xxii+534 pages. $3.

To get the author's point of view there are three matters in which he shows a compelling interest, genealogical records, the Davidic dynasty, and the Temple with all other institutions connected with its worship. He was therefore an antiquarian, a somewhat narrow Jewish patriot, and an enthusiastic devotee of the priestly law. His personal traits are not only discoverable in his work, but they also exerted a strong influence upon his composition, to so great a degree indeed that his work is far removed from the plane of scientific history, and degenerates frequently to apologetics, a noble enough science in its place, but out of its element when it colors historical narrative.

Whence did the Chronicler derive the material for his history? We may disregard revelation without prejudice, for in that we follow the author, for he claims only written sources for his work. In the first place he makes liberal use of the narrative portions of Genesis-Kings, as we may see from the table given by Curtis (pp. 17-19), the most complete list of the parallels known to me. Then the Chronicler cites a number of other authorities, partly annals of Kings, partly prophetic writings or biographies. For the full list see Curtis, Introduction, pp. 21 ff. Right here we come to the most mooted problem in this field. As a matter of fact, did the Chronicler have any written sources, or did he merely cite authorities, somewhat after the fashion proposed to the perplexed de Cervantes by his friend, merely to embellish his narrative and to give an appearance of authenticity, as alleged by some scholars of the present day?

The Chronicler wrote certainly as late as 300 B.C., and very possibly a century later. The late date is one of the grounds for distrusting his sources. Too much has been built upon the question of date. The best American histories are usually those of most recent date. So far as date goes, a far better history might have been written in the third century than in the fifth. The author of Kings wrote after the destruction of Jerusalem, yet he certainly had written sources, from which he took what served his purpose; but he surely did not use all the material he had before him. If old sources were available for him in the exilic period, there is no reason why original writings may not have survived to the time of the Chronicler.

But it is urged that all of the matter peculiar to the Chronicler shows the same literary style, being full of words, phrases, and constructions used only or chiefly by him. There is much force in this argument, and yet it is not so convincing as often alleged. For the Book of See author's preface to Don Quixote.

2