Page:The New Testament in the original Greek - 1881.djvu/655

557 had not come to differ from each other through independent corruption in the one or the other. Accordingly, with certain limited classes of exceptions, the readings of אB combined may safely be accepted as genuine in the absence of specially strong internal evidence to the contrary, and can never be safely rejected altogether.

Next come the numerous variations in which א and B stand on different sides. Here an important lesson is learned by examining in the same consecutive manner as before the readings of every combination of each of these MSS with one other primary MS. Every such binary combination containing B (as in the Gospels BL, BC, BT, &c.) is found to have a large proportion of readings which on the closest scrutiny have the ring of genuineness, and hardly any that look suspicious after full consideration: in fact, the character of such groups is scarcely to be distinguished from that of KB. On the other hand every combination of א with another primary MS presents for the most part readings which cannot be finally approved, along with, it may be, a few which deserve more consideration. All other MSS stand the trial with even less success than א.

Analogous though not identical results are obtained by testing the groups formed by א or B with only secondary support, that is, associated only with inferior Greek MSS, or with Versions, or with Fathers, or with two or three of these classes of documents. The same high standard of excellence as before is reached where groups of this kind containing B shew variety in the accessory evidence: where B is supported by a single version only, the character varies with the version associated. Even when B stands quite alone, its readings must never be lightly rejected, though here full account has to be taken of the chances of clerical error, and of such proclivities as can be detected in the scribe of B, chiefly a tendency to slight acd inartificial assimilation between neighbouring passages: the fondness for omissions which has sometimes been attributed to him is imaginary, except perhaps as regards single petty words. On the other hand the readings in which א stands alone bear almost always the marks of either carelessness or boldness; and except in a few readings, some of them important, the general character of all the various groups containing א with such accessory attestation as is described above is more or less suspicious. Many of the readings