EXEGESIS. 354 EXEGESIS. marked originality and great ability is Bernhard Duhm, whose commentaries on Isaiah in 1892 and on the Psalms in 1S99 have proved very help- ful. Sympathetic insight and critical independ- ence also mark the commentary on Genesis by Hermann Gunkel (1901). What is best in Bun- k<h's Bibehoerk comes from Adolf Kamphausen's hand. The contributions by Franz Delitzsch (died 1S90) to the Keil-Delitzseh commentaries are particularly valuable for the author's pro- found knowledge of rabbinic lore. August Klos- termann's commentary on Samuel and Kings (1887) exhibits a textual criticism as startlingly bold as the exegesis is conservative. Rudolf Smend's commentary on Ezekiel (1880) is par- ticularly important. The series of commentaries edited by Michael Wilhelm Xowack contains many good expositions, and that edited by Karl Marti contains, among others, good commentaries by the editor himself on Isaiah (1900) and Dan- iel (1896). Karl Heinrich Cornill, in his study of the text of Ezekiel (1886), showed himself an excellent textual critic. No contributions to textual criticism during the century were more significant than those of Paul de Lagarde (died 1S91), whose marvelous native resources, phil- ological and philosophical, were mainly devoted to the Greek version. In Holland Abraham Kuenen (died 1891), H. Oort, Y. II. Kosters (died 1897), J. C. Matthes, and G. YVildeboer have rendered especially valu- able services to biblical interpretation. Kuenen, a most conscientious and painstaking scholar, was the first to recognize that the priestly docu- ment, narrative as well as legislation, was post- exilic. Kosters first searchingly inquired into the historical character of the story of the return from Babylon. In France Eduard Reuss (died 1891 ) as early as 1833 expressed his conviction that Leviticus was post-exilic, and by his ex- cellent translation of the entire Bible with com- mentary spread the results of a more fruitful Bible study among his countrymen. Ernest Renan (died 1892) commented with particular success on Ecclesiastes. The important epigraph- ical labors of eminent French scholars, partic- ularly Clermont-Ganneau. have also been of con- siderable value to interpretation. In Great Brit- ain Samuel Davidson, in editing the tenth edition of Home's introduction (1856), introduced a more scientific view of the Hebrew Bible. More important, however, was the acute criticism of the Pentateuch and Joshua by J. W. Colenso (1862-79). Rowland Williams contributed to the understanding of the prophets (1866). By his thorough knowledge of Arabian antiquity W. llobcrtsun Smith (died 1894) was able to throw much lighl upon the biblical writings. ,. B. Davidson (died 19i>:2) was a thoughtful and in- dependent expositor. Samuel R. Driver, by his introduction, his commentaries, and his contribu- tions to the Hastings Dictionary of the Bible, of which he is one of the editors, has won well- deserved fidence as an interpreter of the Bible. An eminent biblical exegete, an acute textual eritic, ami a. resourceful ami sympathetic ex- tdei "t the thought i- Thomas Kelly Cheyne. His works upon Isaiah ami the Psalter and in the Biblica bave distinctly advanced i ! i ience. Gei man met bods of' interpreta- tion i< ae known in America through an essay prophet v i.-. i ieoi ge l: t . in ■i G. Palfrey's lectures on Jewish his- tory (1840), and Theodore Parker's translation of de YVette's introduction (1840). During the last two decades valuable contributions to bib- lical interpretation have been made by C. F. Toy, C. A. Briggs, George F. Moore, Henry P. Smith, Paul Haupt, and many others. The Pulpit Com- military, the Expositor's Bible, the Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges, the International Critical Commentary, the Messages of the Bible, and the Temple Bible are all written more or less from a modern critical standpoint. A work of great importance is the Polychrome Bible, edited by Paul Haupt, presenting, in different colors to indicate the different literary strata, a critically restored Hebrew text and the translation into modern English of this text. OF TUB NEW TESTAMENT. To the Jewish Scriptures were gradually added by the post-Apostolic Church the distinctive writ- ings of the Apostolic Age, as of the same author- itative inspiration as the older writings, ami, consequently, open equally with them to the study and the practice of the Church. The first of • these Christian writings to be studied were those which contained the life and teachings of Jesus, the earliest known example of such study perhaps being the reputed work of Papias (c.100), en- titled An Exegesis of the Sayings of Our Lord, and based upon at least the Gospels of Matthew and Mark. Other efforts at Gospel exposition appear in the Exegetica of the Gnostic Basilides (died c.135) ; the Hypomnemata of the Valentinian Heracleon (c.150), and in the commentary on the Gospels held by some critics to have been written by Marcion (c.175). These works are preserved only in fragments, and from the little known of them they seem to have been written not only in a dogmatic spirit, which was doubtless due to the heretical position that most of the writers main- tained toward the Church, but also after the alle- gorical method, which was the controlling prin- ciple of all interpretation in that age. Evidence of this tendency to study the Gospels is further furnished by such works as Tatian'a Diatessaron (c.170), an attempt to weave out of the four Gospels a single story of the life and teaching of Christ, in which composite Gospel Ephraem Syrus wrote a commentary: and by Marcion's reconstruction of the Gospel of Luke as the sole basis for the Gospel narrative. In fact, the numerous apocryphal Gospels are them- selves witness to the primary interest which the second century took in the Gospel traditions. No genuine exegesis of the New Testament writings, however, was produced until the rise of the Alexandrian school in the latter pari of the second century, the most illustrative represen- tative of which was Origen (c 185-254). His exegetical writings may be separated into three groups, which differ among themselves largely in the object they have in view. The first group (Scholia, Notes) consisted of brief exegetical re- marks intended mainly for the elucidation of dif- ficult 1 passages; the second group (llomiliai. Homilies) consisted of expository discourses deliv- ered ii nnection with public worship, and hav ing as their purpose the instruction and edifica- tion "!' die general congregation: the third group [Tamai, Volumes) consisted of elaborate treat- ments of entire books of Scripture, with it view to making them intelligible to the more educated cla-s. (if these e,inu|is ,, M lv the last dealt in any
