Page:The New Testament in the original Greek - Introduction and Appendix (1882).pdf/203

Rh filled its task. In truth not only the harder but the larger part remains. We have to begin with simply endeavouring to range under the three principal types or lines of text all readings evidently worthy of attention as possibly right, at the same time making full use of the instruction to be gained by observing the attestations of all Pre-Syrian readings whatever, whether they have any appearance of being possibly right or not. Of the variations in which the endeavour is baffled we shall speak presently. Multitudes of variations present no difficulty at all, and as many need only a little consideration to interpret them.

228. Such Western readings as have acquired no accessory attestation by adoption into the Syrian or other mixed texts catch the eye at once in books or parts of books in which we have one or more Greek MSS with a tolerably unmixed Western text and in which Old Latin evidence is not wanting. In the Gospels such readings are attested by D, the chief Old Latin MSS and Fathers, the Old Syriac, and the Greek Ante-Nicene Fathers, those of Alexandria partially excepted. They are not materially less conspicuous if in the Gospels they are likewise supported by a stray uncial as or X or, or by a few cursives, as 81 (especially), or 1 and its kindred, 13 and its kindred, 22, 28, 157, &c., or by the Latin or Syriac Vulgate (indeed any Syrian text), or the Thebaic, Æthiopic, Armenian, or Gothic. In Acts D and the Old Latin fragments and Fathers, with the Greek patristic evidence as above, are the primary attestation:, E2, 31, 44, 61, 137, 180, &c., or any of the above versions except the Gothic, especially the Harklean Syriac or Thebaic, may be the secondary; the numerous quotations by Irenæus taking a prominent place. In the