S

Sanday, 1880. Cheyne, Driver, Clarke, Goodwin, Sanday, The Holy Bible, containing the Old and New Testaments, translated out of the original tongues, and with the former translations diligently compared and revised, by his majesty's special command, with various renderings and readings from the best authorities, with which is incorporated the aids to the student of the Holy Bible. London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1880; 2nd ed. 1888.

Also printed with marginal cross-references as The Variorum Teacher's Edition (1882) or The Variorum Reference Bible. For many years it was the most convenient source in English for information concerning the various readings. Some of the citations of the Westcott & Hort text are inaccurate because the editors used a pre-publication copy of that text which did not quite match the copy later sent to the press. The Variorum Bible also gives a very large number of alternative renderings. The New Testament was reprinted separately: Robert Lowes Clarke, Alfred Goodwin, William Sanday, The Variorum edition of the New Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ ... with various renderings and readings from the best authorities (London, 1881). The Apocrypha appeared separately: Charles James Ball, The Ecclesiastical or Deutero-canonical books of the Old Testament, commonly called the Apocrypha, Variorum Reference Edition (London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1892). See also the"Variorum" annotations without text in Charles James Ball, The Queen's printer's aids to the Student of the Holy Bible, Variorum illus. ed (London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1898). An American edition, based upon the American Standard Version, also appeared (see Monser 1910).

Sanday, 1889. William Sanday, Novum Testamentum cum parallelis S. Scripturae locis vetere capitulorum notatione canonibus Eusebii. Accedunt tres appendices. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1889.

A corrected reprint of Lloyd's edition of Mill's text (see Lloyd 1828). Sanday is the editor of the three appendices, which include (1) a collation of Westcott and Hort 1881 against Estienne 1550; (2) Notes on important various readings of Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Weiss, Westcott & Hort, and Palmer; and (3) notes on selected readings of the Memphitic version. The second appendix presents a good digest of the most important various readings.

Scanlin, 1988. Harold P. Scanlin, "Bible Translation as a Means of Communicating New Testament Textual Criticism to the Public." The Bible Translator, Vol 39, No. 1 (Jan 1988), pp. 101-113.

An interesting discussion on the use of footnotes in modern English versions.

Schaff, 1879. Philip Schaff, ed., A Popular Commentary on the New Testament. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1879.

This four-volume commentary gives the King James Version with a large number of various renderings and readings in the margin, and full expository notes. The presentation of various readings is inadequate, because no editors or manuscripts are cited. The various renderings are often pedantic and tiresome, but always exact. Schaff was later to become the chief editor and advocate of the American Standard Version.

Schaff, 1891. Philip Schaff, ed., A Companion to the Greek Testament and the English Version. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1883; 2nd ed., 1885; 3rd ed., 1887; 4th ed., 1891.

A concise but meaty introduction to textual criticism, with annotated select bibliographies of very high quality. Much of the book is devoted to a defence of the recently published English Revised Version. Appendix I presents an exhaustive chronological list of editions of the Greek New Testament from 1514 to 1870, derived from Reuss 1872 and supplemented by Prof. Isaac H. Hall. This is not, strictly speaking, a bibliography, because the titles are not given; editions are referred to by editor, edition number, city, publisher, and date. Appendix II presents facsimile plates of the title pages and other pages of special interest from all the important editions of the Greek Testament.

Schaff et al., 1901. Philip Schaff, et al., The Holy Bible, Containing the Old and New Testaments, Translated out of the Original Tongues, Being the Version Set Forth A.D. 1611, Compared with the Most Ancient Authorities and Revised A.D. 1881-1885, Newly Edited by the American Revision Committee A.D. 1901, Standard Edition. New York: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1901.

The American Standard Version, an American revision of the English Revised Version of 1881.

Scholz, 1830. Johann Martin Augustin Scholz, Novum Testamentum Graece. Textum ad fidem Testium Criticorum recensuit, Lectionum Familias subjecit, &c. Leipsic: 1830, 1836. 2 vols.

Scholz was a pupil of J.L. Hug (see Hug 1808), and learned from him to think of the manuscripts as members of families having their origin in ancient recensions. But he rejected Hug's elaborate theory of the recensions, and adopted instead Bengel's simple division of "African" and "Asian" witnesses (see Bengel 1725), which he styled "Alexandrian" and "Constantinopolitan." In the first group he placed the oldest Greek copies, the Old Latin version, the Vulgate, both Coptic versions, the Ethiopic version, and the citations of Clement and Origen. In the second group he placed the later Greek copies, with the Syriac, Gothic, Georgian, and Sclavonic versions. Against Bengel, however, Scholz preferred the latter group of witnesses, and his text purported to be a reconstruction of the primitive text on the basis of the majority readings of his "Constantinopolitan" witnesses.

Scholz spent many years travelling around Europe and the Near East collating manuscripts. As a result, readings from 616 cursive manuscripts previously unexamined by scholars were recorded in his apparatus, along with the information given by Wettstein and others. He was the first to publish readings from a collation of the Codex Vaticanus that was made in 1669 (against Aldus 1518) by Bartolocci, then Librarian of the Vatican. Scholz had discovered a transcript of this collation, which was previously unknown, in the Imperial Library of Paris in 1819. It is much inferior to the collations already published in Birch 1788 and Ford 1799.

Between the text and apparatus he set forth the readings which he believed to be typical of the Alexandrian group. He also indicated there the readings typical of the Constantinopolitan where he has not adopted them in the text, against his general method.

Scholz's edition was especially well received in England, where scholarship was taking a more conservative direction than in Germany; Scholz was understood to be a defender of the traditional text, and his apparatus seemed to surpass all previous editions in its completeness. Before long, however, his apparatus was found to be so unreliable as to be practically useless. His text continued to receive respect, and was chosen for Bagster's Hexapla (see Bagster 1841); but it had little influence after 1845, when he publicly announced that he had changed his mind, and would now recommend the Alexandrian readings instead (see Scrivener and Miller 1894, vol. 2, p. 230). The readings of Scholz's text and the readings he called Alexandrian and Constantinopolitan are collated against Estienne 1550 in the appendix of Tregelles 1854.

Scrivener, 1845. F.H.A. Scrivener, A Supplement to the Authorized English Version of the New Testament: Being a Critical Illustration of its More Difficult Passages from the Syriac, Latin, and Earlier English Versions, with an Introduction. London: William Pickering, 1845.

Scrivener, 1861. F.H.A. Scrivener, A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament. London: Bell & Daldy, 1861. 3rd ed. 1882. 4th ed. revised by Edward Miller, 1894. 2 vols.

Scrivener's work was for many years the most widely used introduction for students. He represents the conservative school of critics who did not accept the theories of Westcott & Hort. The first edition includes a collation of Estienne 1550 with the Complutensian Polyglot (Stunica 1522), Beza 1565, and Elzevir 1624 and 1633. This collation is missing from later editions, but was corrected, supplemented and republished by Herman Hoskier in his Full Account (see Hoskier 1890). See also Ezra Abbot, Notes on Scrivener's "Plain Introduction," &c., edited by Jos. H. Thayer (Boston, 1885). The work was enlarged and thoroughly revised by Edward Miller for the 4th edition. See Scrivener and Miller 1894.

Scrivener, 1864. F.H.A. Scrivener, A Full Collation of the Sinaitic MS. with the Received Text of the New Testament. Cambridge, 1864; 2nd ed. 1867.

A full and exact collation of Codex Sinaiticus.

Scrivener, 1864 b. F.H.A. Scrivener, Bezae Codex Cantabrigiensis: being an exact Copy, in ordinary Type, of the celebrated Uncial Graeco-Latin Manuscript of the Four Gospels and Acts of the Apostles, written early in the Sixth Century, and presented to the University of Cambridge by Theodore Beza A.D. 1581. Edited, with a critical Introduction, Annotations, and Facsimiles. Cambridge, 1864. Reprinted by Pickwick Press, Pittsburgh (Pittsburgh Reprint Series 5), 1978.

Scrivener's edition of the Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis.

Scrivener, 1875. F.H.A. Scrivener, Six Lectures on the Text of the New Testament and the ancient MSS. which contain it, chiefly addressed to those who do not read Greek. Cambridge and London, 1875.

Scrivener, 1881. F.H.A. Scrivener, The New Testament in the Original Greek according to the Text followed in the Authorized Version, together with the Variations adopted in the Revised Version. Edited for the Syndics of the Cambridge University Press, by F.H.A. Scrivener, M.A., D.C.L., L.L.D., Prebendary of Exeter and Vicar of Hendon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1881.

"The special design of this volume is to place clearly before the reader the variations from the Greek text represented by the Authorised Version of the New Testament which have been embodied in the Revised Version ... The Cambridge press has judged it best to set the readings actually adopted by the Revisers at the side of the page, and to keep the continuous text ... uniformly representative of the Authorised Version" (Scrivener). Elsewhere it is reported that, by Dr. Scrivener's count, the number of differences indicated in the notes amount to 5,337 (Scrivener and Miller 1894, vol. 2, p. 243). Reprinted in The Parallel New Testament: Greek and English. Being the Authorized Version set forth in 1611 Arranged in Parallel Columns with the Revised Version of 1881 and with the Original Greek as Edited by the Late F.H.A. Scrivener, M.A., D.C.L., LL.D., Prebendary of Exeter and Vicar of Hendon, According to the Text Followed in the Authorized Version with the Variations Adopted in the Revised Version (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1892). The text is currently available, minus the notes, introduction, and appendix, in H KAINH DIAQHKH. The New Testament. The Greek Text Underlying the English Authorised Version of 1611 (London: Trinitarian Bible Society, 1976). An interlinear translation is given in Green 1979. Compare with Palmer 1881 and the English Revised Version.

Scrivener and Miller, 1894. F.H.A. Scrivener and Edward Miller, A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament, for the Use of Biblical Students, by the Late Frederick Henry Ambrose Scrivener; fourth edition, edited by the Rev. Edward Miller. 2 vols. London: George Bell & Sons, 1894.

For this revised edition of Scrivener's Plain Introduction Edward Miller (who shared Scrivener's conservative views) called upon several eminent scholars to contribute new chapters on the ancient versions, and also received much help in elaborating and improving other departments of the work. Under this revision the edition took on the character of an encyclopedia, and for seventy years afterwards was the most widely used source of information for textual criticism in Great Britain and America. After so many years it became outdated, especially in view of the many papyrus manuscripts discovered during that time, and was replaced by the much shorter Introductions of Metzger and Aland; it remains very useful, however, for all sorts of information not included in the more recent works, and is nearly indispensable for historical research. An annotated catalog of all known Greek manuscripts (the English equivalent of the standard catalog of materials published in Gregory 1900) is included in the first volume.

Scrivener and Nestle, 1906. F.H.A. Scrivener and Eberhard Nestle, Novum Testamentum: textus Stephanici, A.D. 1550, cum variis lectionibus editionum Bezae, Elzeviri, Lachmanni, Tischendorfii, Tregellesii, Wescott-Hortii, Versionis Anglicanae Emendatorum. Accedunt parallela s. Scripturae loca. Editio Quarta, ab Eb. Nestle Correcta. London: George Bell and Sons, 1906.

Here is an edition of Estienne 1550 with an apparatus of the various readings adopted by Beza, Elzevir, Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Westcott & Hort, and the translators of the English Revised Version of 1881. Corrected by Eberhard Nestle for the fourth edition.

Semler, 1764. Johann Salomo Semler, Wetstenii libelli ad crisin atque interpretationem Novi Testamenti. Halle, 1764.

An annotated reprint of the Prolegomena to Wettstein 1751, in which Semler applies to Wettstein's data Bengel's theory of families (see Bengel 1725 and 1734); and carries Bengel's theory further, by suggesting that the African family of manuscripts arose in connection with a hypothetical recension made in the middle of the third century by Origen of Alexandria, and that the Asiatic family arose later, in the early fourth century, in connection with another recension done by Lucian of Antioch (see Metzger 1964, p. 115).

Semler, 1767. Johann Salomo Semler, Apparatus ad Liberalem Novi Testamenti Interpretationem. Illustrationis exempla multa ex epistola ad Romanos petita sunt. Halle, 1767.

In this book Semler modified the theory of recensions proposed in Semler 1764, by separating from the early African family those manuscripts which he called Western, a group which escaped the influence of Origen and prevailed in Italy.

Sharpe, 1840. Samuel Sharpe, The New Testament, translated from the Text of J.J. Griesbach. London: John Green, 1840; 2nd ed. 1844; 3rd ed. 1856.

A translation of Griesbach 1805, by a Unitarian.

Simon, 1689. Richard Simon, Histoire critique du texte du Nouveau Testament, Ou l'on etablit la Verite des Actes sur lesquels la Religion Chretienne est fondee. Rotterdam, 1689. English translation: Critical History of the Text of the New Testament. London, 1689. Followed by Histoire critique des versions du Nouveau Testament, ou l'on fait connoitre quel a ete l'usage de la lecture des Livres Sacres dans les principales Eglises du monde. Rotterdam, 1690. English translation: Critical History of the Versions of the New Testament. London, 1692. Supplemented by Nouvelles observations sur le texte et les versions du Nouveau Testament. Paris, 1695. A German edition prepared by H.M.A. Cramer, with preface and notes by J.S. Semler, was published in Halle, 1776 ff., in three parts.

With these controversial works Richard Simon, a French Priest, became the first scholar to publish a full treatise on the materials of New Testament textual criticism. Simon's works were quickly overshadowed by the Prolegomena of Mill's Novum Testamentum (see Mill 1707), which incorporated most of what was helpful in them. For a description of Simon's study see Werner Georg Kümmel, The New Testament: The History of the Investigations of Its Problems (New York: Abingdon, 1972), pages 40-46.

Smith et al., 1611. Miles Smith, et al., The Holy Bible, Conteyning the Old Testament and the New. Newly Translated out of the Originall Tongues, & with the Former Translations diligently Compared and Revised by his Majesties Special Comandement, Appointed to be read in Churches, Imprinted at London by Robert Barker, Printer to the Kings most excellent majestie, Anno Dom. 1611.

See the King James version.

von Soden, 1913. Hermann Freiherr von Soden, Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments in ihrer ältesten erreichbaren Textgestalt hergestellt auf Grund ihrer Textgeschichte [The Writings of the New Testament restored to their earliest attainable Text-form on the Basis of their textual History]. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, volume I Untersuchungen [i.e. Prolegomena, issued in three parts] 1902, 1907, 1910. 2,203 pages. volume II Text mit Apparat 1913. Manual edition: Griechisches Neues Testament, Text mit Apparat (Göttingen, 1913).

Von Soden's text is based upon a theory of the manuscript tradition which divides witnesses into three basic groups: the Koine text (from Asia Minor), the Hesychian text (from Egypt), and the Jerusalem text. These three are reconstructed by von Soden and put on the same level as witnesses to the original text. Wherever two agree upon a reading he adopts that reading in his text. Consequently, von Soden's text approaches much more closely to the Received Text than any other modern critical edition. His text had a strong influence upon Merk 1933 and upon other texts published by Roman Catholic scholars in the 20th century. It was also used by James Moffatt as the basis for his popular English version, The New Testament: A New Translation (New York: Doran, 1913). It is collated in the appendix of Aland et al. 1979.

Souter, 1910. Alexander Souter, Novum Testamentum Graece: Textui a Retractatoribus Anglis Adhibito Brevem Adnotationem Criticam Subiecit. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1910. 2nd edition, 1947.

Souter's Greek text is taken from Palmer 1881 (representing the readings followed by the committee of the English Revised Version of 1881), to which he adds a select apparatus of various readings chiefly from the so-called "Western" class of early witnesses and of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (see Grenfell and Hunt 1898). The second edition (1947) has a revised apparatus which includes the readings of the Chester Beatty Papyri (see Kenyon 1933). Little notice is given to the later "Byzantine" manuscripts in either edition. Next to the Nestle editions, Souter's edition was the second most widely used manual edition until the appearance of Aland Black Metzger Wikren 1966.

Souter, 1935. Alexander Souter, The Text and Canon of the New Testament. London: Duckworth, 1935. Revised by C.S.C. Williams, 1954.

Stephens, Robert. See Estienne.

Stephens, 1878. Henry Stephens, The Bibles in the Caxton Exhibition MDCCCLXXVII., or a Bibliographical Description of nearly One Thousand Representative Bibles in Various Languages Chronologically Arranged, from the First Bible Printed by Gutenberg in 1450-1456 to the Last Bible Printed at the Oxford University Press the 30th June, 1877. London: Henry Stephens, 1878.

Stuart, 1861. Clarence Esme Stuart, Textual Criticism of the New Testament for English Bible Students; being a comparison of the authorised version with the critical texts of Griesbach, Scholz, Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, and Alford, and the Uncial MSS.; including the celebrated Codex Sinaiticus. London: Samuel Bagster & Sons, 1861; 2nd edition 1899.

The phrase "uncial MSS." in Stuart's title refers to all of the important old manuscripts of the Greek text made prior to the tenth century, which are written in large capital letters, called "uncial" script. The Codex Sinaiticus, especially mentioned in the title as a recent discovery, is one of these. Stuart's work was much expanded and improved in its second edition (1899), and was reproduced in the margin of Newberry 1886 and Newberry 1893.

Stuart, 1893. Clarence Esme Stuart, The Student's Critical New Testament, containing the Greek text of Scholz with various readings, and the English Authorized version, together with a textual criticism of the New Testament &c. London: Samuel Bagster & Sons, 1893.

Stunica, 1522. James Lopez de Stunica [Diego Lopez de Zuñiga], et al., eds., Novum Testamentum Grece et Latine in Academia Complutensi Noviter Impressum [The Greek and Latin New Testament, Now Printed in the Complutensian College], being volume 5 of Biblia Sacra Polyglotta, complectentia Vetus Testamentum Hebraico, Græco, et Latino Idiomate; Novum Testamentum Græcum et Latinum; et Vocabularum Hebraicum et Chaldaicum Veteris Testamenti, cum Grammatica Hebraica, nec non Dictionario Græco; Studio, Opera, et Impensis Cardinalis Francisce Ximenes de Cisneros [The Holy Bible in Several Languages, being a combination of the Old Testament in the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin tongues, the Greek and Latin New Testament, and a vocabulary of the Hebrew and Chaldee of the Old Testament, with a Hebrew Grammar, and also a Greek Dictionary; Published through the devotion, work, and expense of Cardinal Francisco Jimenes of Cisneros]. Industria Arnaldi Gulielmi de Brocaric artis impressorie magistri. Compluti [Alcala], 1514, 1515, 1517. 6 vols.

This work of six large volumes, commonly called the Complutensian Polyglot, was sponsored by the generous Francisco Ximenes [Jimenes] of Cisneros, a wealthy Roman Catholic Cardinal in Spain, who employed an editorial staff under the direction of the noted scholar, James Lopez of Stunica. (for a biography of Ximenes see James P.R. Lyell, Cardinal Ximenes. London, 1917).

Preparations for the Complutensian edition began in 1502, twelve years before the printing of the New Testament volume, and twenty years before its distribution. For the New Testament Ximenes provided Stunica with a staff of at least three scholars, and procured for him manuscripts from the Vatican library. The Greek text published in the Complutensian edition was therefore a much more accurate representation of the Greek manuscripts than Erasmus could hope to produce in the space of a year at Basle. It came off the press in 1514, before Erasmus had even begun to edit his text, but its publication (i.e. distribution) was delayed until 1522, after the permission of Pope Leo X had finally been obtained for it. Only 600 sets were printed; ninety-seven are known to remain.

In the preface to the New Testament the claim is made, "ordinary copies were not the archetypes for this impression, but very ancient and correct ones; and of such antiquity, that it would be utterly wrong not to own their authority; which the supreme Pontiff Leo X, our most holy Father in Christ and Lord, desiring to favour this undertaking, sent from the apostolic library." This claim seems to have been accepted by all at the time, and no inquiries were made concerning the manuscripts for more than 200 years, by which time they were no longer available. But an examination of the text reveals that, despite the claims of the preface, and despite the fact that really ancient copies were undoubtedly available to Stunica in the Vatican library, the Complutensian text was based upon manuscripts quite as ordinary and modern as those used by Erasmus. Its readings may be examined in the complete collation against Estienne 1550 presented in Scrivener 1861. In a few places the Greek text is conformed to the Vulgate by conjecture, most notably in 1 John 5:7, which reads the same in the Greek text as in the Vulgate. But unlike Erasmus, who also did this in places, they neglect to inform the reader of what they have done. Their note at 1 John 5:8 shows a strange contempt for the Greek text; it carefully explains why the editors have omitted from the Vulgate the usual words et hi tres unum sunt (KJV and these three agree in one) at the end of the verse, citing St. Thomas Aquinas as an authority; but it makes no mention of the fact that the preceding clause has been added to the Greek text by means of translation from the Latin, because it was not to be found in any Greek copy. This may have been an oversight, and it may also be wondered if a Vatican censor had a hand in it. When asked by Erasmus on what authority they have done it, Stunica made the dogmatic reply, "You must know that the copies of the Greeks are corrupted; but ours [i.e. our Latin copies] contain the very truth." In general, however, Stunica refrained from making such arbitrary alterations in the Greek text, perhaps because he cared so little what was in it.

The Complutensian edition had little independent influence; although it was limited to 600 expensive copies, its Greek text might well have appeared in cheap reprints across Europe if it had been published before that of Erasmus. As it happened, Erasmus was first, and the Complutensian edition had influence only as a source used by Erasmus in his revised fourth edition, and as a text whose readings appeared in the margin of Estienne 1550. Its general superiority ought to have been recognized by scholars, but by the time it appeared Luther had made his translation, the Protestant Reformation had begun, and the scholars were occupied with the great theological issues of the day.

Sturz, 1984. Harry A. Sturz, The Byzantine Text-Type and New Testament Textual Criticism. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1984.

Sturz, like Pickering (see Pickering 1977), is an advocate of the traditional text as found in the later manuscripts, but is more cautious than Pickering. He argues that the "Byzantine text-type" of these manuscripts is an independent witness to the original text, and ought to be given as much weight as the so-called Alexandrian text represented in Codex Vaticanus. He bases his argument not on the statistical "majority text" premises of Pickering and Hodges, but on the basis of an elaborate comparison of the majority text with the texts of third century papyrus manuscripts. An extensive and fully indexed bibliography is included in the book.

Swanson, 1994. Reuben J. Swanson, New Testament Greek Manuscripts: Variant Readings arranged in Horizontal Lines against Codex Vaticanus. Part I: Matthew. Preliminary Printing. Pasadena, California: William Carey International University, 1994.

Swanson's apparatus (for Matthew only) displays the full texts of several important manuscripts in the same convenient format employed in his earlier Horizontal Line Synopsis of the Gospels (1975).

In his Introduction Swanson makes several erroneous statements which show that he is not familiar with the history or methods of textual criticism. He incorrectly states that the Greek text of the Complutensian Polyglot (see Stunica 1522) was edited by Cardinal Ximenes. He maintains that the texts of "current critical editions," including the UBS text (see Aland et al. 1979), have arisen "by a process of editing the early Textus Receptus through the substitution of selected readings," and that because this was done "upon an inadequate representation of the evidence" they actually perpetuate "remnants of the twelfth century minuscules used by Erasmus" (pp. iii, iv.) These statements reflect mere ignorance of the method followed by modern critical editors, who since the middle of the nineteenth century have compiled their texts without any reference to the Received Text. He also unjustly asserts that the apparatus of Aland et al. 1979 contains "many inaccuracies" (p. v.).

At the end of the volume is added a section called "Examples of Variant Readings with Translations and Comments: Workbook," in which Swanson's comments are sometimes rather odd, reflecting habits of literary analysis more germane to Gospel source criticism than to textual criticism.