rector' proper (אa) made use of an excellent exemplar, and the readings which he occasionally introduces take high rank as authorities. Those of another hand (אb) of somewhat similar appearance but ill determined date (? Cent. vi) are likewise for the most part distinctly ancient, but include many of later origin. The much more numerous readings introduced by אc (? Cent. vii) are for the most part Syrian; but scattered among them are readings handed down from a high antiquity: the exemplar employed by this writer had apparently some such mixed character as we find in X of the Gospels. These examples will suffice to illustrate the phenomena of correction generally. The manner in which it produces mixture of texts in transcripts from corrected MSS has been already explained by the example of D2 and E3 (§§ 335—339). In some instances, as often in A and C, an erasure preceding correction has completely obliterated the original writing: but, as the amount of space which it occupied can almost always be ascertained, a comparison of the lengths of the existing variants is usually sufficient to determine the reading with tolerable certainty.
CHAPTER IV. SUBSTANTIAL INTEGRITY OF THE PUREST TRANSMITTED TEXT
356—374
356. Having now described the nature of the evidence available for settling the text of the New Testament, and explained the modes of applying it which leave least room for error, it is right that we should give some answer to the reasonable enquiry whether there is good ground for confidence that the purest text transmitted by existing documents is strictly or at least substantially identical with the text of the autographs. This enquiry will however be best approached through another, which is closely connected with the subject of the preceding chapter; namely, whether there is or is not reason to
