Sandie, George. Horeb and Jerusalem. Pp. 417. Edinburgh, 1864. Thomson, W. M. The Land and the Book; or, Biblical Illustrations drawn from the Manners and Customs, the Scenes and Scenery, of the Holy Land. 2 vols., 8vo, pp. 560, 614. New York, 1859. New ed., vol. i, pp. xx, 592. Tillotson, John. History of Palestine and the Holy Land. Illustrated with 350 Engravings and Maps. With a History of the Crusades, compiled by W. and R. Chambers. 8vo. New York, 1875. Tristram, H. B. Bible Places; or, the Topography of the Holy Land. 8vo, pp. xvi, 367. London, 1871. 8th ed. New York, 1878. Wright, Thomas. Early Travels in Palestine, Comprising the Narratives of Arculf, Willibald, Bernard, Saewulf, Sigurd, Benjamin of Tudela, Sir John Mandeville, De la Brocquiere, and Maundrell. 12mo, pp. 548. London, 1848. Palmyra. Myers, H. M. Remains of Lost Empires. Sketches of the Ruins of Palmyra, Nineveh, Babylon, and Persepolis, etc. 8vo, pp. 531. New York, 1875. Persia. Loftus, William K. Travels and Researches in Chaldea and Susiana. 8vo, pp. 436. New York, 1857. Wagner, M. Travels in Persia and Georgia. 3 vols., 8vo. London, 1856. Phoenicia and Israel. A Historical Essay. London, 1871. Phoenicia. Samaria. Mills, John. Nablus and the Modern Samaritans. 12mo, pp. xii, 335. London, 1864. Shelaby, Jacob Esh. Notices of the Modern Samaritans. 8vo, pp. 55. London, 1855. Seven Churches. Cathcart, M. The Seven Churches of Asia. 4to. London, 1869. Sinai. 8vo. London, 1871. Bartlett, S. C. From Egypt to Palestine through Sinai, the Wilderness, and the South Country. 8vo, pp. 555. New York. Gaussen, L. From Egypt to Sinai. The Exodus of the Children of Israel. 12mo. London, 1869. Ritter, C. Comparative Geography of Palestine and the Sinaitic Peninsula ; translated and adapted to the use of students by W. L. Gage. 4 vols., 8vo. New York. Stanley, Arthur P. Sinai and Palestine in Connection with their History. 8vo, pp. lv, 535. New York, 1857. 4. Hebrew Poetry and Music. Carhart, J. Wesley. The Poets and Poetry of the Hebrews. New York, 1865. Herder, J. G. The Spirit of Hebrew Poetry. From the German. 2 vols., 12mo, pp. 293, 320. Burlington, Vt., 1833. Hutchinson, Enoch. The Music of the Bible; or, Explanatory Notes upon all the Passages of the Sacred Scriptures relating to Music. 8vo, pp. 513. Boston, 1864. Lowth, R. The Sacred Poetry of the Hebrews. London and Andover. Many ed. Taylor Isaac. The Spirit of Hebrew Poetry. 8vo, pp. xvi, 347. London, 1861. SECTION XII. BIBLICAL ISAGOGICS. (Introduction. Canonics). Comp. Dav. Schulz, Review of Eichhorn's and de Wette's Einleitungen in Stud. u. Krit, 1829, No. 3, pp. 570-72; Hupfeld, Begriff u. Methode der sog. Bibl. Einl., Marb., 1844; Rudelbach, Begriff der N. T. Theologie u. Isagogik, in his Zeitschrift, 1848, 1; Baur, Die Einl. in das N. T. als theol. Wissensch. in Theol. Jahrbb., 1850-51; Delitzsch, Begriff u. Methode der sog. Biblischen u. insbeson. A. T. Einleitung, in Thomasius and Hofmann's Zeitschr. für Prot. u. Kirche, xxviii, No. 3; Erl., 1854, p. 133, 8qq.; Hahn, in Herzog's Encykl., iii, p. 726, 8qq. (s. v. Einl. ins A. T.); Articles Biblical Introduction in M'Clintock & Strong's Cyclopædia, vol. iv, p. 630, and Kitto's Cyclopædia, vol. ii, p. 27; Brooke Foss Westcott, Introduction to the Study of the Gospels; Henry Alford, How to Study the New Testament. The objects of canon. The Bible is a body of writings which originated in different periods and under various circumstances and conditions, which were from different authors, and were gradually collected into a whole; and it is consequently necessary for a a history of the proper appreciation of its character that the origin and fortunes of the entire collection and also of its several parts be understood. To afford this knowledge is the office of the history of the canon or the science of Biblical Introduction (Isagogics in the limited sense), which is divided either into Introduction to the New or to the Old Testament, or into general and special. General introduction discusses the origin and progress the establishing of the canon, the history of manuscripts, editions, versions, Introduction is revisions of the holy Scriptures, etc. Special introduc- either general tion, on the other hand, inquires, in partial connexion or special. with criticism, into the authenticity and integrity of the several writings, and deals, in addition, with the history of their authors as such, the design, plan, form, and style of their works, and finally with the date, place, and circumstances in which the writings were composed. not The idea of Introduction itself is vague, and opinion is still divided with regard to its importance and extent as a The scope and Biblical science. De Wette denies that Introduction limits of Introduction is a science in the proper sense, and views it as a mere precisely deaggregation of preliminary knowledge, which lacks termined. both "a true scientific principle and a necessary connexion of its parts; but in more recent times scholars (e. g., Schulz, Credner, 1 1 De Wette, Einl. § 1. Schleiermacher (Herm. u. Krit., p. 379) observes in a similar spirit that the so-called N. T. Introduction is “a science that has no limits whatever, and into which anything that is desired may be thrown. A going back to principles is wholly out of the question in such a case. . . . But it is pertinent to ask, 'Are there no such principles?'" Comp. p. 36; "N. T. introduction is not properly a constituent part of the organism of theological science, but it is practically useful for both the beginner and the master, because it facilitates the bringing together upon a single point of all the inquiries that are involved." Scholz, a Roman Catholic writer on in Reuss, Hupfeld) have directed attention to the necessity for a sifting of the material to be treated by Introduction, and also for the application of principles to such treatment. The indefinite character of the word "introduction " will be apparent to every mind. posed as a sub At the bottom, all that our treatment of encyclopædia has touched upon or shall hereafter discuss, relating either to the Bible itself or to the aids necessary for its interpretation, may be included under Introduction to the Bible; and, in point of fact, the Hebrew and New Testament languages, archæology, hermeneutics, etc., have been thus disposed of in some instances. Some writers have accordThe name "Ca- ingly preferred to lay aside this indefinite term, and the nonics pro- name canonics has been proposed as a substitute. Othstitute for In- ers (like Reuss) have exchanged it for the name "Histroduction." tory of the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments." The vague idea of introduction is certainly confined within wholesome limits in one direction by this method; but in another direction the present science of introduction is extended to cover a field that lies beyond the bounds of introductory matter, since the later fortunes of the Bible-the dissemination of the sacred writings, the history of their employment and their exposition-are included. troduction, likewise speaks of it as being simply an aggregation of multifarious matters, in connexion with which the important feature is that they be "conveniently distributed." He divides introduction into criticism, hermeneutics, and archæology (see pp. 1 and 2). Comp. Delitzsch, 1. c., "Every science is an organism; but the term organic applies only to what is not simply a means for promoting an object external to itself, but is itself a whole, an object to itself, in which the individual with its peculiarities is lost in the idea of the whole, and only that is an instrument (organ) which aids the development of the whole in its identity with itself. The so-called introduction lacks this organic character. It is not without idea and aim, but it lacks the immanent, self-developing idea, the principle of teleological self-reference, which is necessary to a science." 1 The name is first employed by Adrian, a writer probably of the fifth century, in the small hermeneutical work εἰσαγωγὴ εἰς τὰς θείας γραφάς; afterward by Cassiodorus (in the sixth century), and later in the Middle Ages. In Germany Michaelis first used it in connexion with the N. T., and Eichhorn with the O. T. Comp. Hahn in Herzog's Encykl., iii, p. 727, sqq. 2 Zyro, in Stud. u. Krit., 1837, No. 3, considers canonics to be merely a branch of isagogics. In his view, the latter comprehends everything that is necessary for the interpretation of the Scriptures, i. e., 1. the nature and importance of the Bible, together with its history (canonics); 2. its compass, or the genuineness of its matter (criticism); 3. its language and contents (hermeneutics). He then divides canonics into two parts, in abstracto, in which character canonics unfolds the nature of the Scriptures under the forms of authenticity, credibility, and genuineness, and canonics in concreto, or what is usually termed introduction in the more limited sense, which is again divided into general and special or into Old and New Testament canonics. Comp. Pelt, Encykl., p. 121. It will not be denied that great interest attaches to such an all-sided historical knowledge respecting the Bible; but methodological considerations require nevertheless that what is introductory to the study of Scripture (the history of its origin and the collection of its parts into a canon), and what relates to the further history of the already completed collection of the Scriptures, should be kept apart. Only the former, though likewise historical in its nature, is an exegetical auxiliary science, because it affords a correct position to the exegete from which to operate; while the latter must be assigned to the department of Church history and the history of literature, and may be reserved for a later stage of theological study. It does not appear to us a matter which the science need be ashamed of, that the "reader of the Introduction Bible" (i. e., the student) must before all "be well- properly limitgrounded in historical knowledge in order to correctly the canon and understand and properly appreciate the Bible as a whole 1 ed to history of criticism. and in its parts;" but such preliminary knowledge needs a careful discrimination of its elements among themselves, and a proper distribution of its parts in the organism of the sciences. If, in harmony with this principle, the grammatical and archæological elements be excluded, and a distinct place be assigned to hermeneutics, there will be left only what is generally denoted by the still current name of introductory science, namely, the history of the canon (within the limits hitherto assigned to it) and criticism. These may not be wholly separated from each other, for the history of the canon is not to be a mere review, but history involving the discussion of principles-critical history; in which connexion it may be remembered that what is now called introduction was formerly known as critica sacra or histoire critique du V. et N. T. (Richard Simon). This does not forbid, however, that criticism as such, i. e., the whole of the science of critical principles, should constitute a distinct branch of study, as does hermeneutics, which embraces the theory of interpretation. The science of introduction is thus confined to critical and historical inquiry concerning the books of Scripture and their collection into a canon, instituted for purposes of exegesis. cial introduc The division into Old and New Testament introduction results from the nature of the case; but the relation of general Relation of to special introduction is more difficult to determine. general to speThe usual method is to begin with the general (the col- tion. lection of the canon, history of the text, versions, etc.), and to supplement this with introductions to the several books; but the oppo The words of Hupfeld, p. 8. site course may be adopted with Reuss, and the origin of the different books discussed, so that the formation of the canon from its first beginnings to its final completion is presented in a genetic view. In the latter case, however, the special introduction would need to be very brief and to steadily approach its object, as is the case with Reuss, the more extended discussion being reserved for the exegesis of the books. Here, again, the intervention of the different sciences comes into view. Introduction provides the point of view from which the exegete is to regard the Bible; but the progress of exegesis reacts upon introduction and alters the position of isagogics. Period of the Encyclopædia is concerned with the material of introduction only in so far as it is necessary to give preliminary information with regard to its general character. The question concerning the period in which the formation of the canon was first underfirst formation taken, is connected with the inquiry respecting the time of the canon. when the art of writing was invented. It is certain that the canon as a whole appears for the first time after the captivity. The traditional view that Ezra (B.C. 478) and Nehemiah (2 Macc. ii, 13) took measures for collecting the different books, has been doubted by the criticism of recent times.' The first to receive a completed form was probably the Pentateuch, and to this the other books were added in various collections and at different times. The earliest constituents of the New Testament canon were the Pauline epistles, which were written as occasion required (those to the Thessalonians being the oldest); and to these were gradually added the (catholic) epistles of other apostles, together with the written memorabilia of the life of Jesus (Gospels), the latter being probably first in point of time. The ancient Church knew of but two collections, the εὐαγγέλιον and the ἀπόστολος (acThe New Test- cording to the assumption which has become current ament canon in since the time of Semler, though it is not fully established). The former included the four Gospels, which had already been distinguished from the spurious gospels and recog the early Chris tian Church. 1 Comp. Leyrer's art. in Herzog's Encykl., xv, p. 296, sqq. A reference to an already completed canon cannot, of course, be looked for in the canonical books themselves. The apocryphal Book of Wisdom, however (not later than B.C. 130), affords proof that a collection of sacred writings existed (chap. xlv-xlix), though it cannot be shown that the entire canon, as we possess it, is intended; for this purpose a formal catalogue would be required. The first to furnish a list (of twenty-two books) was Josephus (contr. Ap. i, 8), from whom the tradition referred to in the text is also derived. 2 * Pelt, p. 144, under reference to Orelli: Selecta patrum capita ad ɛionyntikǹv sacra pertin. p. 1, 11, sq., note. Comp. Landerer in Herzog's Encykl., vii, p. 270, sqq. |