1. E.g. from Oxford, Contentio Veritatis: Essays in Constructive Theology by Six Oxford Tutors (London: John Murray, 1902)Google Scholar; and from Cambridge, Swete, H.B. (ed.), Essays on Some Theological Questions of the Day by Members of the University of Cambridge (London: Macmillan, 1905)Google Scholar, esp. essays 10 and 11, and Swete, H.B. (ed.), Essays on Some Biblical Questions of the Day by Members of the University of Cambridge (London: Macmillan, 1909), esp. essays 7, 9–16.Google Scholar

2. E.g. Wace, Henry, The Bible and Modern Investigation (London: SPCK, 1903)Google Scholar; Streatfeild, G.S., ‘A Parish Clergyman's Thoughts about the Higher Criticism’, Expositor VI 6th series (1902), pp. 401–24Google Scholar. Clarke, W.N., Sixty Years with the Bible: A Record of Experience (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1910)Google Scholar is an American Baptist evangelical liberal's personal account of gradual acceptance of the higher criticism over the course of his lifetime.

3. For example, both Leslie Stephen and T.H. Huxley later in the century pointed to Tract 85, ‘Lectures on the Scripture Proof of the Doctrines of the Church’, in which John Henry Newman emphasized the unsystematic character of the Bible, as providing arguments against Christianity as powerfully effective as those written by any unbeliever. See Turner, Frank M., John Henry Newman: The Challenge to Evangelical Religion (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002), pp. 275–83Google Scholar (esp. 279–81) and 678 n. 37. Also Lightman, Bernard, The Origins of Agnosticism: Victorian Unbelief and the Limits of Knowledge (Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1987), pp. 114–15.Google Scholar

4. The classic account is Chadwick, W.O., The Victorian Church (2 vols.; London: A. & C. Black, 1971–1972)Google Scholar. See also Harris, Jose, Private Lives Public Spirit: A Social History of Britain 1870–1914 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993)Google Scholar and McLeod, Hugh, Religion and Society in England 1850–1914 (New York: St Martin's Press, 1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5. Cornish, F. Warre, The English Church in the Nineteenth Century (2 vols.; London: Macmillan, 1910), II, p. 209Google Scholar. Cf. ‘Westcott, Brooke Foss’, D.N.B. Supplement 1901–1911, pp. 635–41 (esp. 641)Google Scholar; ‘Hort, Fenton John Anthony’, D.N.B., XXII Supplement, pp. 868–72 (esp. 870)Google Scholar; ‘Westcott, Brooke Foss’, Encyclopaedia Britannica (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 11th edn, 1911), XXVIII, pp. 537–38Google Scholar. Also the views of the Principal of Lightfoot Hall, Birmingham, John Battersby Harford, quoted in Stephenson, Alan M.G., The Rise and Decline of English Modernism (Hulsean Lectures for 1979–1980; London: SPCK, 1984), pp. 81–82Google Scholar. A further aspect was zeal to apply the truths thus ascertained to the pressing problems of industrial and social life, a feature clearest in the career of Westcott.

6. ‘Lightfoot, Joseph Barber’, Encyclopaedia Britannica, XVI, pp. 626–27Google Scholar. Slater, W.F., ‘Hort's Lectures on “Judaistic Christianity”’, Expositor II, 5th series (1895), pp. 128–40Google Scholar. Headlam, A.C., ‘Methods of Early Church History’, English Historical Review XIV.liii (01 1899), pp. 1–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar, esp. 21–22. Headlam gives Lightfoot much of the credit for the adoption of scientific methods in theological subjects and for definite advance in early church history.

7. E.g. the Methodist Rigg, J.H., ‘Dr Hort and the Cambridge School’, London Quarterly Review LXXXVII.xxvii (10 1896), pp. 53–76Google Scholar. More critically, the Congregationalist Fairbairn, A.M., ‘Some Recent English Theologians: Lightfoot, Westcott, Hort, Jowett, Hatch’, Contemporary Review 71 (03 1897), pp. 341–65Google Scholar; and the Primitive Methodist Peake, A.S., ‘Bishop J.B. Lightfoot’, Recollections and Appreciations (London: Epworth Press, 1938), pp. 115–19.Google Scholar

8. Selwyn, E.G., ‘The University Sermon’, Cambridge Review (11 11 1938), pp. 89–90Google Scholar; Heard, R.G., ‘Cambridge Biblical Scholarship: Westcott, Lightfoot, and Hort’, Cambridge Review (15 02 1947), pp. 321–22Google Scholar. E.g. the evangelicals Handley Moule and Henry Wace; the Anglo-Catholic W. Sparrow Simpson; and the liberal-modernist William Sanday.

9. Neill, Stephen, The Interpretation of the New Testament 1861–1961 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1964), esp. chs. 2 and 3Google Scholar. Church, C.L., ‘Westcott, Brooke Foss, and Fenton John Anthony Hort’Google Scholar, and Dunn, J.D.G., ‘Lightfoot, Joseph Barber’, in McKim, D.K. (ed.), Historical Handbook of Major Biblical Interpreters (Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 1998), pp. 389–94 and 336–40.Google Scholar

10. Use of ‘legend’ in this context has given some offence. However, in history of reputations research it means no more than ‘fame’ without any necessary implication of being unwarranted. The bases and processes involved in the reputation are the subject of the investigation. An example of this kind of research, from a theological (as opposed to a historical and sociological) standpoint, is Williams, Rowan's reflection on Westcott's liberalism in Anglican Identities (London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 2004), ch. 5.Google Scholar

11. The only account known to me is by Elliott-Binns, L.E., Religion in the Victorian Era (London: Lutterworth Press, 2nd edn, 1946), pp. 292–310Google Scholar. Cf. his English Thought 1860–1900: The Theological Aspect (London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1956), pp. 118–25, 160–61 and 167–68Google Scholar. Howard, W.F. presents three pen portraits in ‘The Cambridge Triumvirate’, The Romance of New Testament Scholarship (London: Epworth Press, 1949), ch. 3Google Scholar. They are also discussed extensively in Neill, , The Interpretation of the New Testament 1861–1961Google Scholar. See now Baird, William, History of New Testament Research. II. From Jonathan Edwards to Rudolf Bultmann (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003), ch. 2Google Scholar, where they are taken individually, not as a group. Neither is the connection considered in Patrick, Graham A., The Miner's Bishop: Brooke Foss Westcott (Werrington, Peterborough: Epworth Press, 2nd edn, 2004)Google Scholar, while C.K. Barrett publishes studies of Lightfoot, Westcott and Hort seriatim in Jesus and the Word and Other Essays (Allison Park, PA: Pickwick Publications, 1995), pp. 1–53Google Scholar, without analysing the group as such. The same observation applies to their articles on Hort, Westcott (Patrick) and Lightfoot (Barrett) in the recent Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), XXVIII, pp. 206–209Google Scholar, LVIII, pp. 257–61 and XXXIII, pp. 757–62. While they are taken together by Pawley, B.G. as ‘Westcott, Lightfoot and Hort’ in Coggins, R.J. and Houlden, J.L. (eds.), A Dictionary of Biblical Interpretation (London: SCM Press, 1990), pp. 725–26Google Scholar, their collective identity goes unremarked.

12. Parsons, Gerald, ‘Biblical Criticism in Victorian Britain: From Controversy to Acceptance?’, in Parsons, G. (ed.), Religion in Victorian Britain. II. Controversies (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1988), pp. 239–57Google Scholar, drawing on Riesen, R.A., Criticism and Faith in Late Victorian Scotland: A.B. Davidson, William Robertson Smith and George Adam Smith (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1985).Google Scholar

13. Turner, Frank M., ‘The Religious and the Secular in Victorian Britain’, ch. 1 in his Contesting Cultural Authority: Essays in Victorian Intellectual Life (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), pp. 3–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

14. Collins, Randall, The Sociology of Philosophies: A Global Theory of Intellectual Change (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1998).Google Scholar

15. The classic account is Newsome, David, Godliness and Good Learning: Four Studies on a Victorian Ideal (London: John Murray, 1961).Google Scholar

16. See Zemka, Sue, ‘Spiritual Authority and the Life of Thomas Arnold’, Victorian Studies 38.3 (Spring 1995), pp. 429–62.Google Scholar

17. See Stray, Christopher, Classics Transformed: Schools, Universities, and Society in England, 1830–1960 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998), esp. Part IGoogle Scholar. Westcott was Senior Classic in 1848; Lightfoot in 1851. Hort was third in Classics in 1850.

18. The number and variety of their projects indicates how charged up they were by their heritage. See Treloar, Geoffrey R., Lightfoot the Historian (WUNT, 2; Reihe 103; Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1998), pp. 43–44Google Scholar; Hort, A.F., Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort (2 vols.; London: Macmillan, 1896), I, ch. 4Google Scholar; Westcott, A., Life and Letters of Brooke Foss Westcott… Sometime Bishop of Durham (2 vols.; London: Macmillan, 1903), I, chs. 3–4.Google Scholar

19. ‘The Journal of Classical and Sacred Philology’ (Cambridge University Papers MR1, Cambridge University Library). The journal ran from 1854 to 1860 when the absence of a professional academic community caused its failure, as it had caused the failure of similar ventures previously. Stray, , Classics Transformed, p. 62.Google Scholar

20. Jowett, Benjamin, The Epistles of St Paul to the Thessalonians, Galatians, Romans: With Critical Notes and Dissertations (2 vols.; London: John Murray, 1855)Google Scholar. Stanley, A.P., The Epistles of Paul to the Corinthians (2 vols.; London: John Murray, 1855).Google Scholar

21. Treloar, , Lightfoot the Historian, pp. 57–58.Google Scholar

22. Davidson, R.T. and Benham, W., Life of Archibald Campbell Tait (2 vols.; London: Macmillan, 1891), I, pp. 207–208.Google Scholar

23. Essays and Reviews was a joint venture of seven writers who argued that Christianity should be reshaped by its contact with modern thought. Shea, Victor and Whitlam, William (eds.), Essays and Reviews: The 1860 Text and its Reading (Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 2000)Google Scholar. See also Ellis, I., Seven Against Christ: A Study of ‘Essays and Reviews’ (Leiden: Brill, 1980)Google Scholar; and Altholz, J.L., Anatomy of a Controversy: The Debate Over ‘Essays and Reviews’ (Aldershot: Scholar Press, 1994).Google Scholar

24. Hort, , Life and Letters of Hort, I, pp. 434–39Google Scholar. Westcott, , Life and Letters of Westcott, I, pp. 213–15.Google Scholar

25. Treloar, Geoffrey R., ‘J.B. Lightfoot and St Paul, 1854–65: A Study of Intentions and Method’, Lucas: An Evangelical History Review 7 (12 1989), pp. 5–34Google Scholar and Lightfoot the Historian, ch. 11.

26. Westcott, B.F., The Bible in the Church: A Popular Account of the Collection and Reception of the Holy Scriptures in the Christian Churches (London: Macmillan, 1864)Google Scholar; The Gospel of the Resurrection: Thoughts on its Relation to Reason and History (London: Macmillan, 1866)Google Scholar; A General View of the History of the English Bible (London: Macmillan, 1868)Google Scholar; Essays in the History of Religious Thought in the West (London: Macmillan, 1891)Google Scholar, essays I–IV; ‘Comte on the Philosophy of the History of Christianity’, Contemporary Review 6 (12 1867), pp. 399–421Google Scholar; ‘Aspects of Positivism in Relation to Christianity’, Contemporary Review 8 (07 1868), pp. 371–86.Google Scholar

27. The assertion of the solidarity and continuity of Christianity with life was directed against both Utilitarians and Positivists. For Westcott on Plato, see Turner, Frank, The Greek Heritage in Victorian Britain (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981), pp. 377–78Google Scholar; and in relation to Comte, Cashdollar, Charles D., The Transformation of Theology, 1830–1890: Positivism and Protestant Thought in Britain and America (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1989), pp. 430–35.Google Scholar

28. For which see Treloar, , Lightfoot the Historian, ch. 7.Google Scholar

29. Hort, to Westcott, , 30 01 1868Google Scholar, in Hort, , Life and Letters of Hort, II, p. 91.Google Scholar Cf. Hort, to a Friend, 6 01 1869Google Scholar, in Life and Letter of Hort, I, p. 103.Google Scholar

30. Hort, to Macmillan, , 21 01 1858 and 28 04 1858Google Scholar, in Hort, , Life and Letters of Hort, I, pp. 393–94 and 397–98.Google Scholar The emphases in these and the following quotations are my own.

31. Hort, to Ellerton, , 15 02 1861Google Scholar, in Hort, , Life and Letters of Hort, I, p. 442.Google ScholarLightfoot, to Westcott, , 24 11 1862.Google Scholar When I saw it, this correspondence was held at Auckland Castle. It has since been moved to the Durham University Library, Palace Green, and catalogued among the Auckland Castle Episcopal Records (cited hereafter as ACER).

32. Hort, to Westcott, , 2 and 4 05 1860Google Scholar, and Hort, to Lightfoot, , 4 05 1860Google Scholar, in Hort, , Life and Letters of Hort, I, pp. 421–44.Google Scholar

33. In explaining his reluctance to write, Hort stated: ‘It was quite otherwise while the joint scheme lasted.’ Hort, , Life and Letters of Hort, I, pp. 444–45.Google Scholar

34. Westcott, to Lightfoot, , 11 and 30 06 1863Google Scholar, Lightfoot Papers, Dean and Chapter Library, Durham Cathedral (cited hereafter as LDC). Cf. Westcott, to Lightfoot, , 15 06 and 2 07 1863Google Scholar, in Westcott, , Life and Letters of Westcott, I, pp. 282–83.Google Scholar

35. Lightfoot, to Westcott, , 6 11 1863Google Scholar, ACER. In the event Lightfoot failed to complete his part on I Peter, while Westcott published his volume on the Fourth Gospel in 1882. The manuscript of Lightfoot's work on I Peter is among the Lightfoot Papers in the LDC.

36. Lightfoot, to Westcott, , 19 10 n.y. [1863[, ACER.Google Scholar

37. Hort, to Westcott, , 27 01 1864Google Scholar, in Hort, , Life and Letters of Hort, II, p. 5.Google Scholar

38. Lightfoot, to Westcott, , 18 09 n.y. [1870], ACER.Google Scholar

39. Westcott, to Smith, R. Payne, 2 12 1870Google Scholar, MS.Eng.lett.d.171, f. 211, Bodleian Library, Oxford.

40. Hort, to Lightfoot, , 21 01 1879, LDC.Google Scholar

41. Westcott, to Lightfoot, , 22 01 1879, LDC.Google Scholar

42. See Brooke, Christopher, A History of the University of Cambridge. IV. 1870–1990 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), esp. ch. 5.Google Scholar

43. Clayton, Joseph, Bishop Westcott (London: A.R. Mowbray, 1906), p. 62.Google Scholar The ideal was readily emulated by their successors. E.g. Henry Barclay Swete: A Remembrance (London: Macmillan, 1918)Google Scholar, esp. Part II.

44. Others included raising standards for higher degrees in Divinity, introducing the inter-collegiate lecture scheme, and increasing the number of Divinity professors. On their reform of Divinity at Cambridge, see Treloar, , Lightfoot the HistorianGoogle Scholar, ch. 7.

45. Westcott, B.F., ‘On Preparation for the Theological Examinations’, The Student's Guide to the University of Cambridge (1874), pp. 298–338Google Scholar, esp. 311–12: ‘the study of the Bible will be the beginning and end of his studies, the most fruitful of all and the most inspiring [p. 311] … authorship, date, sources, place of composition, integrity, history, use and the like … in vital connection with the external and spiritual circumstances of the age to which it belongs’ (p. 312).Google Scholar

46. While Oxford had introduced the Honour School of Theology the year before, it remained in the hands of High Church conservatives until the death of Pusey in 1882. On theology at Oxford, see Hinchliff, Peter, God and History: Aspects of British Theology 1875–1914 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992), pp. 99–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and ‘Religious Issues, 1870–1914’, in Brock, M.G. and Curthoys, M.C. (eds.), The History of the University of Oxford. VII. Nineteenth Century Oxford, Part 2 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2000), pp. 97–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

47. By 1884 all but two of the bishops accepted the examination for ordination to the diaconate.

48. As did his successor, Handley Moule, another member of the Cambridge connection. Eden, G.R. and MacDonald, F.C. (eds.), Lightfoot of Durham (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1932), pp. 21–54, 166–73.Google Scholar Also Savage, H.E., ‘“Bishop Lightfoot's Influence: His Trust in Young Men”, A Paper by the Very Rev. H.E. Savage (Dean of Lichfield, 1909–39)’Google Scholar, edited with an introductory note by Benedikz, B.S., Durham University Journal LXXVII.1 [n.s. XLVI.1] (12 1984), pp. 1–6.Google Scholar

49. Most notably William Sanday (from Hatfield Hall, Durham) and H.W. Watkins (from St Augustine's, Canterbury), both of whom later wrote admiringly about Lightfoot, and became, with his assistance prior to his death, Bampton Lecturers in the 1890s. Much the same intergenerational effect was achieved by the creation of the Cambridge Clergy School, later to be known as Westcott House. See Cunningham, B.K., The History of Westcott House (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1932).Google Scholar

50. Although they were inclined to feel overwhelmed, their students still felt there was a work for them to do. Robinson, J. Armitage, ‘The Theological Influence of Bishop Lightfoot’Google Scholar, in Eden, and MacDonald, (eds.), Lightfoot of Durham, pp. 123–35 (135).Google Scholar It was one of them who said of Lightfoot, ‘If he has not done all he intended, he has at least shown how it should be done’.

51. Murray, went on to become Master of Selwyn College (1909–1928).Google ScholarVenn, J.A., Alumni Cantabrigienses: Part II. From 1752 to 1900 (6 vols.; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1940–1954), IV, p. 503.Google Scholar

52. Robinson, J.A.T., The Roots of a Radical (London: SCM Press, 1980), pp. 155–61.Google Scholar Also Robinson, J.A.T., Joseph Barber Lightfoot (Durham Cathedral Lecture 1981Google Scholar; Dean and Chapter of Durham, 1981). Others included V.H. Stanton, Richard Appleton, H.E. Ryle, G.R. Eden, F.C. MacDonald and C.H. Boutflower.

53. For ‘truth in theology’, Westcott, to Lightfoot, , 26 01 1864Google Scholar, in Westcott, , Life and Letters of Westcott, I, pp. 246–47.Google ScholarTreloar, , Lightfoot the Historian, pp. 76–77.Google Scholar Hort developed the theme on the eve of his return to Cambridge in the Hulsean Lectures published posthumously as The Way The Truth The Life. See Burnaby, J., ‘Revised Reviews: VII—F.J.A. Hort's “The Way, The Truth, The Life”’, Theology LXIV.493 (07 1961), pp. 281–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Neville, Graham, ‘Science and Tradition: F.J.A. Hort and his Critics’, Journal of Theological Studies 50.2 (10 1999), pp. 560–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

54. Esp. Westcott, B.F., On the Religious Office of the Universities (London: Macmillan, 1873).Google Scholar

55. This interest is traced theologically by Ramsey, A.M. in From Gore to Temple: The Development of Anglican Theology Between ‘Lux Mundi’ and the Second World War (London: Longmans, 1960).Google Scholar

56. For the reaction, see Hinchliff, Peter, Benjamin Jowett and the Christian Religion (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987), ch. 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar The principal cause of offence was Jowett's subjective and exemplarist view of the Atonement which was judged to be contrary to the teaching of the Thirty-Nine Articles. See now Atherstone, Andrew, ‘Benjamin Jowett's Pauline Commentary: An Atonement Controversy’, Journal of Theological Studies 54.1 (04 2003), pp. 139–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

57. The schemes were Dr Smith's, Rivington's, Pusey's and the Speaker's.

58. The contribution of Lightfoot and Westcott is acknowledged in the Editors' Preface. The only other British New Testament scholar mentioned is Ellicott whose commentaries are of a different sort. See Sanday, William and Headlam, A.C., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (The International Critical Commentary on the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1895), pp. i–iiGoogle Scholar. The editors of the series were S.R. Driver, Alfred Plummer and C.A. Briggs.

59. Farrar, F.W., The Life of Christ (London: Cassell, Potter, Galpin & Co., popular edition, 1881 [1874]).Google ScholarFarrar, to Lightfoot, , 12 02 1874Google Scholar, LDC. See Farrar, Reginald, The Life of Frederic William Farrar Sometime Dean of Canterbury (London: James Nisbet & Co., new and rev. edn, 1905), ch. 6.Google Scholar

60. Farrar, F.W., The Life and Work of St. Paul (2 vols.; London: Cassel, Peter Calpin, 1879).Google Scholar

61. They include Alfred Edersheim, William Sanday, William Ramsay and J.E.B. Mayor.

62. Farrar, 's History of Interpretation (Bampton Lectures for 1885; London: E.P. Dutton, 1886)Google Scholar is the defence and justification of this standpoint. His comment on p. 424 (‘Our own day has given us comments on St. Paul's Epistles, and on the Gospel and Epistles of St. John, superior in some respects to any which have yet been produced in any age or any branch of the Church of Christ.’) is clearly an allusion to the writings of Lightfoot and Westcott.

63. It was in fact a demonstration of Hume's point that in the reporting of miracles there must be something amiss with the reporting.

64. Separately published as Essays on the Work Entitled Supernatural Religion (London: Macmillan, 1889).Google Scholar

65. Separately published as God and the Bible. See Super, R.H. (ed.), The Complete Prose Works of Mathew Arnold VII (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1970).Google Scholar

66. Particularly Hort, who is said to have attended 88 per cent of the meetings.

67. Lightfoot, J.B., On a Fresh Revision of the English New Testament (London: Macmillan, 1871).Google Scholar

68. The extent of their influence is reflected in the claim that Hort spoke for three of the ten years during which the Company met. That influence is noted in Hemphill, Samuel, A History of the Revised Version of the New Testament (London: Elliot Stock, 1906).Google Scholar See also Chadwick, , Victorian Church, II, pp. 40–57.Google Scholar

69. E.g. the estimate of Elliott-Binns, , English Thought, pp. 169–71.Google Scholar

70. For the temper of the period, Turner, , Contesting Cultural Authority, pp. 197–98.Google Scholar See Hatch, Edwin to Carpenter, William Boyd, 8 05 1887Google Scholar in Major, H.A.D., The Life and Letters of William Boyd Carpenter (London: John Murray, 1925), p. 156Google Scholar for an indication that lay people denied clergymen the right to hold liberal opinions.

71. Davidson, Samuel, An Introduction to the Old Testament, critical, historical, and theological, containing a discussion of the most important questions belonging to the several books (London and Edinburgh, 3 vols., 1862)Google Scholar; An Introduction to the Study of the New Testament, critical, exegetical, and theological (London, 2 vols., 1868).Google ScholarLea, John, ‘The Davidson Controversy, 1856–1857’, Durham University Journal LXVIII.1 (12 1975), pp. 15–32.Google Scholar

72. Within Anglicanism, there is also the case of Colenso whose commentary on Romans (1863) brings him into the New Testament field.

73. Ellis, , Seven Against Christ, pp. 230–33 and 236–60.Google ScholarTurner, , Greek Heritage, pp. 414–32Google Scholar, esp. 416–17.

74. See Treloar, G.R., ‘Smith, William Saumarez’, in Dickey, B. (ed.), Australian Dictionary of Evangelical Biography (Sydney: Evangelical History Association of Australia, 1994), pp. 345–47.Google Scholar

75. E.g. ‘Present State of Historical Enquiry into New Testament Writings. Acts of the Apostles. By the Bishop of Adelaide’, in Report of the Church Congress Held at Melbourne 19th to 24th November, 1906(Melbourne, n.d.), pp. 140–47.Google Scholar

76. With others such as A.F. Winnington-Ingram and Charles Gore. Matthews, C.H.S., A Parson in the Australian Bush (Adelaide: Rigby, 1973 [1908]).Google ScholarFrappell, R.M., ‘The Australian Bush Brotherhoods and their English Origins’, Journal of Ecclesiastical History 47.1 (01 1996), pp. 82–97, esp. 86–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

77. This development is represented and summed up by Salmon, George, Introduction to the New Testament (London: John Murray, 4th edn, 1889).Google Scholar

78. On developments of Scotland, see Wright, D.F., ‘Education, Theological’, in Cameron, N.M. de S. (ed.), Dictionary of Scottish Church History and Theology (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1993), pp. 278–85Google Scholar, and Cheyne, A.C., Studies in Scottish Church History (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1999), esp. ch. 6.Google Scholar In ‘Religious Issues, 1870–1914’, p. 110, Peter Hinchliff notes that at Oxford, ‘By the end of the Edwardian era the [theological] faculty seems to have accepted completely the liberal critical approach’, but offers no account of how this change occurred.

79. Hatch, Edwin, The Organization of the Early Christian Churches (Bampton Lectures for 1880; London: Rivingtons, 1881)Google Scholar; The Influence of Greek Ideas and Usages Upon the Christian Church (Hibbert Lectures for 1888; London: Williams & Norgate, 1890).Google ScholarEllis, , Seven Against Christ, pp. 263–70.Google Scholar

80. E.g. Thompson, J.M., Miracles in the New Testament (London, 1911).Google Scholar

81. The very conservative Brown, Robert could write: ‘I cannot associate myself with any general campaign against criticism. My quarrel with the Higher Criticism is not because it is criticism, but because, instead of being what it claims to be, it is criticism of a spurious type.’ The Bible and Modern Criticism (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 3rd edn, 1903), p. 186.Google Scholar See Wright, David F., ‘Soundings in the Doctrine of Scripture in British Evangelicalism in the First Half of the Twentieth Century’, Tyndale Bulletin 31 (1980), pp. 87–106Google Scholar, esp. 88–91.

82. The Bible as a basis of Christian faith was being re-evaluated at all levels. See Langford, T.A., In Search of Foundations: English Theology 1900–1920 (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1969)Google Scholar, esp. ch. 4, and Wellings, Martin, Evangelicals Embattled: Responses of Evangelicals in the Church of England to Ritualism, Darwinism and Theological Liberalism 1890–1930 (Carlisle: Paternoster Press, 2003).Google Scholar