as it stood when the Massoretes had concluded their labours, and their destruction of all MSS. that did not agree with their text explains why we have none of an earlier date.

Manuscripts were condemned for slight causes, e. g.

(a) A new sheet was condemned if it contained three errors. (b) A Synagogue Roll in actual use was condemned when injured by wear and tear, or if the letters were blurred or effaced by kissing the opening and closing words of the lections read.

All condemned copies were laid aside in a Ghenisa or lumber loft, and when the loft became inconveniently full the old condemned or defective MSS. were reverently buried.

From the Ghenisas and from the graves of the MSS. several old MSS. have been recovered. The Jews did not value an old manuscript on account of its age. When once a new manuscript had been passed, authorized and verified, they preferred the newer as being more perfect and free from damage. All this made ancient Hebrew manuscripts very scarce, and all that we have owe their preservation to the Ghenisas or MSS. cemeteries, or to the fact that they fell into the hands of Gentiles. It is not remarkable then, that

(a) All old Hebrew manuscripts of the Old Testament are all alike.

(b) We have one of these manuscripts of the year A. D. 916, and others which may prove to be of earlier date. But see where this leads us:

The Massoretes did not conclude their labours until about the tenth century and we have Hebrew manuscripts of about that date. So even in these manuscripts which we may think so modern, through the Massoretes, the Talmud, the Scribes, the School of Babylon and the School of Tiberias, we find an ancient Hebrew text of the Old Testament which is the lineal descendant of

(a) The Palestine Text in use in the time of our Lord; and of

(b) Ezra's revision of about 450 B. C.

In this way we carry back the text of the Old Testament to about A. D. 100.

The Massoretic Text is substantially the same as that used in the period of the Talmud, and their treatment of that text shows that it was ancient even then. We are able to conclude that our Hebrew MSS. have preserved a text which was current in or soon after the time of our Lord. One eminent writer concludes that all our Hebrew MSS. of the Old Testament have originated from a single copy made in the reign of the Emperor Hadrian (A. D. 117-138), and all scholars substantially agree that the Massoretic Text takes us back to about that period.

Originally the Hebrew Scriptures were written without vowels; so we might write "grn" and read the three letters as "green," "grain," "groin," "groan," &c.

The Massoretes fixed the vowels to be inserted by means of vowel points in accordance with the tradition of use (oral or written). Their work called the Massorah (i. e. the Tradition) is a critical grammar commentary on the text of the Old Testament which indicates the correct reading of the text in respect of words, vowels, accents, punctuation, vocalization, etc. Where the text was doubtful, or even plainly wrong, they stated in the margin the traditional ancient reading, so that it might be always read instead of the words in the text. These marginal readings were called "KRI" (that which was to be read), while the readings of the text were called "KTHIB” (that which was written). The text was not altered, from the veneration paid to it, but the use of the margin gives us a revised text. This Revised Marginal Massoretic Text is the "Textus Receptus" of the Old Testament, and the Massorah

is at present the one source from which material for a further revision of the Old Testament can be obtained.

Aaron b. Moses b. Asher, one of the last of the authorities, lived and worked in the first thirty years of the tenth century. His Bible Codex of the year 989 is generally regarded as the authoritative model. The oldest manuscript is of the ninth century and is in the British Museum. The oldest dated manuscript is of the year 916 and is now in St. Petersburg. There are other manuscripts which claim to be of earlier date than these two. Then we are able to check, test and compare these MSS. with

(a) The Samaritan Copy of the Five Books of Moses, which professes to date from about B. C. 408, having (since that date, so long ago) no connection with the labours of the Jewish Scribes, Schools, Talmudists or Massoretes.

(b) The Septuagint. (See Chapter V.)

(c) No less than three translations of the Hebrew Text of the Old Testament into Greek made not later than A. D. 200. (d) A parallel arrangement of six versions or MSS. of the Old Testament as they then stood made by Origen (A. D. 184-253.) (See Chapter VIII.)

(e) Quotations from early Hebrew MSS. now lost.

(f) MSS. of early date recently discovered.

It would be interesting to show the special difficulties which attend the reading of the Old Hebrew MSS., but these must be passed over without more than this general reference.

I

X.

ENGLAND'S EARLY EFFORTS.

T is startling to think that although Christianity had been established in Britain for many hundreds of years, there

was no English version of the Bible until near the end of the fourteenth century.

How did they get on without a Bible?

They relied on the Church and clergy; on the services and teaching. Minstrels went about the country, welcome in palace and hall, and Gospel and Bible songs in due time had a large share along with heroic and warlike odes; the people could not read; many of the clergy were ignorant, and for their use. small portions of the service and of the Scriptures were put into the vulgar tongue. Latin became the language of worship and religion. It was felt that as there was one religion and one Church, so there was one sacred language-Latinand there was neither desire for, nor idea of, an English Bible for the English people.

Dore (No. 139, pp. 13, 14, 15) cites strong evidence to show that there was no anxiety whatever for an English Version of the Bible even at a later date, and states that Hugh Latimer almost entirely ignored the English Bible and always took his text from the Latin Vulgate.

The wandering missionary clergy, the welcome minstrels, wayside or churchyard crosses, with carved pictures of portions of the Gospel Story, painted windows and pictures in the churches, were used in addition to the stated services of the Church.

The people gathered around the crosses, the pictures and the church windows and gazed, and were taught and instructed, much as in later days the people who could not read gathered

around the chained Bible, to hear one read clearly and give the

sense.

I now give a running Chronological Summary so as to pave the way for the History of the English Bible from MS. to print, and from the first prints to the Authorized Version of 1611, the Revised Version of 1881-1885, and the American Standard Edition of the Revised Version of 1901.

A. D. 563. Columba founded the Monastery of Iona. His missionaries travelled over the north of England.

A. D. 597. Augustine landed in Kent as a missionary sent by the Bishop of Rome, bringing with him the Latin Bible or Vulgate.

A. D. 664.

The important conference at Whitby when Northumbria broke away from the special ways of Ionian and Celtic Christianity and decided to follow the rule and ways of Canterbury and Rome.

A. D. 675 (about). Caedmon, the farm servant of Whitby Abbey, sang paraphrases of the Bible Story in the language of the people, and was then taught and instructed and sent out to his work with authority. At this date his poetry was the Anglo-Saxon Bible, though it was no version of Scripture, but poems founded on Scripture.

A. D. 640-708. While Caedmon was singing, Aldhelm, Abbot of Malmesbury, and later Bishop of Sherborne, found that the people cared little for his sermons, so he took up his position as a minstrel on a bridge, first singing the secular songs they knew and then drawing them on to songs of religion and the Bible. It is said that he translated the Psalter into Anglo-Saxon, but this is extremely doubtful.

A. D. 673-735. Bede the great historian, a Monk of Jarrow on the Tyne, followed. He was probably the most learned man