INTRODUCTION
SO
INTRODUCTION
trina Christiana", is chiefly a hermeneutical treatise,
and deals with only a few questions of introduction in
book II, chapters viii-xv. One of the writers most fre-
quently mentioned in connexion with the first period in
the history of Biblical introduction is a certain Greek,
Adrian (d. about A. D. 450), who is probably the same
as the Adrian addressed by St. Nilus as a monk and a
priest. He certainly belonged to the Antiochene
school of exegesis, and was apparently a pupil of St.
John C'hrysostom. He is the author of a work en-
titled Ei<ra7w77; €15 ras Qelas Vpaipdi, "Introduction to
the Divine Scriptures", which has indeed supplied the
specific name of mtroduction for the theological science
treating of topics preliminary to the study of Holy
Writ, but which, in fact, is simply a hermeneutical
treatise dealing with the style of the sacred writers
and the figurative expressions of the Bible (P. G.,
XC'VIII). The other principal writers of that period
are: St. Eucherius of Lyons (d. about 450), whose two
books, " Instructiones ad Salonium filium", are rather
a hermeneutical than an introductory work; the
Benedictine Cassiodorus (d. about 562), whose treatise
" De institutione Divinarum Scripturarum" .sums up
the views of earlier writers and gives an important list
of Biblical interpreters, chiefly Latin; the African
bishop Junilius (d. about 552), who belongs to the
school of Nisibis, and whose "Instituta regularia
divinje legis" resembles most a Biblical introduction in
the modern sense of the expression; lastly, St. Isidore
of Seville (d.636), whose "Etymologise" and "Proce-
mia in libros V. et N. Testamenti" supply useful
material for the study of Biblical introduction.
(2) Middle Ages. — During this period, as during the one just described, the preoccupations of the ecclesi- astical writers were chiefly doctrinal and exegetical, and their methods of study had usually little to do with the historico-critical method of investigation by means of which, as we have seen, questions introduc- tory to the interpretation of the Bible should be treated. Most of them were satisfied with a mere repetition of what had been said by St. Jerome, St. Augustine, and Cassiodorus. This they did in the prefaces which they prefixed to their commentaries on the Sacred Books, and the purpose of which is directly hermeneutical. The only remarkable work on introduction produced in the Middle Ages is the one which the Jewish convert Nicholas of Lyra (d. 1340) placed at the beginning of his "Postilla Per- petua", and in which he treats of the canonical and uncanonical books, the versions of the Bible, the various senses of Holy Writ, and the rules of inter- pretation.
(3) Recent Period. — This is by far the most impor- tant and most fruitful period in the history of Biblical introduction. Since the sixteenth century this branch of theological learning has been more and more cultivated as a distinct science, and has grad- ually assumed its present form. The first work of this period was published at Venice, in 1566, by the Dommican Sixtus of Siena (d. 1599). It is entitled "Bibliotheca sancta ex prajcipuis Catholicae Eccle- sia; auctoribus coUecta ", and treats in eight books of the sacred writers and their works, of the best manner of translating and explaining Holy Writ, and gives a copious list of Biblical interpreters. Among the Catholic authors on introduction who soon followed Sixtus the following deserve a special mention: Arias Montanus (d. 1.598), whose "Prolegomena" in his Polyglot (Antwerp, 1.572) forms a valuable introduc- tion: Salmeron (d. 1585), whose "Prolegomena Bib- lica " appears in the first volume of his works (Ma- drid, 1.598); Serarius (d. 1642), whose "Prieloquia" (Antwerp, 1625) was selected iiy Migne as the most suitable general introduction with which to begin hi.s "Sacra; Scriptur;e Cursus ('ompletus"; the Ora- torian Lami (d. 1715), the learned writer of the Apparntus ad Bibjia sacra " (Paris, 1G87); the Bene-
dictine Martianay (d. 1717); and the able theologian
EUies Dupin (d. 1719). Meantime the Protestants,
somewhat belated by doctrinal bias, brought forth
a certain numl:)er of general introductions, among
which may be mentioned those of Rivet (Dordrecht,
1616); Walther (Leipzig, 1636); Calov (Wittenberg,
1643); Brian Walton (London, 1637); and Heidegger
(Zurich, 1681). The first scholar to depart from the
unsatisfactory method of treating topics preliminary
to the study of Holy Writ which had hitherto pre-
vailed, and which had made some of the writings of
his immediate predecessors dogmatic treatises rather
than works on Biblical introduction, was the French
Oratorian Richard Simon (1638-1712). According
to him the Sacred Books, no less than the various
Biblical translations and commentaries, are literary
products which must bear the impress of the ideas
and the methods of composition prevalent at the time
when they were written, so that, to view and appre-
ciate these works aright, one should study them care-
fully in themselves antl in the light of the historical
events under which they came into existence. A
study at once historical and critical appeared also to
him the best means for disposing of unsovmd theories,
and for vindicating the inspired character of the
Bible, which had been recently impugned by Hobbes
and Spinoza. Hence the name of "Histoire Cri-
tique", which he gave to his epoch-making intro-
ductions to the Old Testament (Paris, 1678), to the
text (Rotterdam, 1689), versions (Rotterdam, 1690),
and commentaries (Rotterdam, 1693) of the New
Testament. Simon's methods and conclusions were
at first strenuously opposed, and afterwards set aside
by Catholics and by Protestants alike. The most
noteworthy works of the eighteenth century on intro-
duction, on the basis of the ancient method, are,
among Catholics, those of Calmet (Paris, 1707-20);
Goldhagen (Mainz, 1765-68); Fabricy (Rome, 1772);
Marchini (Turin, 1777); and Mayer (Vienna, 1789);
and, among Protestants, those of Hody (Oxford,
1705); Carpzov (Leipzig, 1721-28); J. D. Michaelis
(Gottingen, 1750; Hamburg, 1787).
The true method of Biblical introduction set forth and applied by Simon was not destined, however, to be discarded forever. The rationalists were the first to use it, or rather to abuse it, for their anti-dogmatic purposes. Ever since the latter part of the eighteenth century, they, and those more or less affected by rationalistic tendencies, have very often«openly, and at times with rare ability, treated Biblical introduc- tion as a mere literary history of the Sacred Writings. As belonging to the critical school, the following writers on introductory topics may be mentioned: Semler (d. 1791); Eichhorn (d. 1827); de Wette (d. 1849); Bleek (d. 1859); Vatke (d. 1882); Riehm (d. 1888); Kuenen rd. 1891); Reuss (d. 1891); Scholten; Hilgenfeld; Wellhausen; W. R. Smith (d. 1894); S. Davidson (d. 1898); Strack; Wildebocr; E. Kautzsch; F. E. Koenig; Jidicher; Cornill; Baudissin; H. Holtz- mann; liacon; Budde; Cheyne; Kent; Moffatt; Von Soden; Pfleiderer; to whom may be added, as occu- pying in the main similar positions, B. Weiss; Salmon; Driver; A. B. Davidson (d. 1902); Curtiss (d. 1904); Ottlcy; Kirkpatrick; Ryle; Briggs; Bennett; Adeney; C. H. H. Wright; McFayden; and Geden. The fol- lowing are the principal Protestant writers who mean- time have striven to stay the progress of the critical school by treating the questions of Biblical intro- duction on conservative lines: Hcngstcnberg (d. 1869); Hofmann (d. 1877); Hilvernick (d. 1845); Keil (d. 18,s,S); 15isscll; C.loag; Godet (d. 1900); Westcott (d.PHl'i); Ilaniian: Saycr; Sunday; Green (d. 1900); Dods; Kcir; Burkitt; Zahii; Mackay; Urquhart; and Orr.
During the same period Catholics have produced numerous works on Biblical introduction, and used in them, in various degrees, the historico-critical method
