Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Textbook Advancements On Sustainable Civil Infrastructures Don Chen Ebook All Chapter PDF
Textbook Advancements On Sustainable Civil Infrastructures Don Chen Ebook All Chapter PDF
Don Chen
Sonny Kim
Anand Tapase Editors
Advancements on
Sustainable Civil
Infrastructures
Proceedings of the 5th GeoChina International
Conference 2018 – Civil Infrastructures
Confronting Severe Weathers and Climate
Changes: From Failure to Sustainability, held
on July 23 to 25, 2018 in HangZhou, China
Sustainable Civil Infrastructures
Editor-in-chief
Hany Farouk Shehata, Cairo, Egypt
Advisory Board
Khalid M. ElZahaby, Giza, Egypt
Dar Hao Chen, Austin, USA
Editors
Advancements
on Sustainable Civil
Infrastructures
Proceedings of the 5th GeoChina International
Conference 2018 – Civil Infrastructures
Confronting Severe Weathers and Climate
Changes: From Failure to Sustainability, held
on July 23 to 25, 2018 in HangZhou, China
123
Editors
Don Chen Anand Tapase
University of North Carolina at Charlotte Karmaveer Bhaurao Patil College of
Charlotte, NC, USA Engineering
Satara, India
Sonny Kim
University of Georgia
Athens, GA, USA
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Contents
v
vi Contents
For many years, civil infrastructures have mostly been designed and constructed
based on direct costs, without proper consideration of the maintenance and
depreciation over its service life. However, in recent years much emphasis has been
placed on meeting the environmental and socioeconomic targets of sustainable
development. This volume constitutes an important contribution that addresses
urgent needs to develop sustainable infrastructures, mainly associated with the
engineering properties of pavement materials, erosion control, soil mechanics, and
pavement performance evaluation. This volume is part of the proceedings of the 5th
GeoChina International Conference on Civil Infrastructures Confronting Severe
Weathers and Climate Changes: From Failure to Sustainability, HangZhou, China,
2018.
vii
The Use of Automated Flocculation Titrimetry
and SARA Analysis to Predict the Performance
of Bituminous Binders in Asphaltic Hot Mix
and Bitumen Emulsions
1 Introduction
In oxidative aging, SARA fractions are converted by insertion of oxygen into the
organic molecules at reactive sites. Aromatics partially converted to resins, resins to
asphaltenes, and asphaltenes further increased in polarity (Holleran et al. 2017; Planche
2014; Harnsberger et al. 2008). Hence RAP binders may be thermodynamically
unstable depending on the degree of oxidation and its effect on associated species and
their level of dispersion. Thus, Heithaus parameters with SARA may be used to assess
The Use of Automated Flocculation Titrimetry and SARA … 3
the condition of the binder, its emulsability, and recyclability of RAP. Rejuvenation
effect may also be assessed also by use of Heithaus parameters.
2 Research Objective
The research objective was to verify the use of Heithaus parameters as measured using
AFT and the SARA analysis with the physical performance of the binder in RAP mixes
and emulsions.
3 Materials Used
The bitumens were both paving grade and emulsion grade bitumen derived from New
Zealand Refinery (NZRC) and imported sources (USA). The RAP came from pave-
ment milled after approximately ten years’ service life. Extraction was by Dichlor-
omethane and recovery with a centrifuge and final solvent removal using rolling thin
film oven at 90 °C under dry nitrogen. The PG grade virgin binder was a PG64-22H
made to New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) M/1A Specification. The emulsion
grades were 80–100 penetration made to NZTA M/1 specification. The rejuvenator was
a lignin modified oil as provided by an outside supplier. Mixes were made and tested
using NZTA M/10 (2014) methodology and specifications. A standard nominal max-
imum aggregate size of 14 mm (AC14 as per specification) and a greywacke aggregate
source. The grading and binder contents were optimised using NZTA M/10 2014. The
difference between mixes was only in the type of binder.
4 G. Holleran et al.
Bitumen chemistry is complex and dependent on both crude and refining. The differ-
ences in the composition have been demonstrated by Holleran and Holleran (2010).
The composition of bitumen is plotted on a triangular diagram that shows the SARA
fractions. It is possible to define a range of compositions that have satisfactory rhe-
ology. Appropriate blends with RAP, as shown in Fig. 3, can be determined as well as
rejuvenation materials and levels.
Pauli (1996) has described the development of the Automated Heithaus test and its
usefulness in characterising bitumen. The test was originally developed to describe
asphaltene chemistry in crude oils, but for nearly four decades it has been used to
determine thermodynamic stability in blended bitumens. It is very useful in describing
the microstructural changes bitumen goes through with oxidation and refinery pro-
cesses. The incompatibility referred to, came from the colloidal model which is divided
into sol and gel bitumens where the gels are the dispersed medium and sols the
dispersing medium. Hence, the Heithaus test is designed to measure this solubility
function in polar terms. The gels are micelle structures analogous with emulsion
technology. Micelles, cannot be observed in bitumen. There are no phase boundaries in
bitumen the microstructural model being based on polar species dispersed in less polar
and non-polar species. So, compatibility concerns mutual miscibility, and this deter-
mines stability. Oxidation changes this balance as do different heteroatom compounds
in both the polar and non-polar phases. Oxidation of bitumen is described by Holleran
et al. (2017), and the effect is to destabilise the bitumen microstructure. The
The Use of Automated Flocculation Titrimetry and SARA … 5
methodology has been described by Pauli (1996). It calculates three basic parameters.
Namely pa—peptisability of the associated species, po—the peptizing power of the
dispersing species, and P—the overall stability of the system. The classical method-
ology requires manual titration as follows:
• Four 1.0 g samples of a test bitumen are placed into four 125 mL Erlenmeyer
flasks.
• To the four flasks are added amounts of 1.0, 2.0, 4.0, and 6.0 mL toluene,
respectively.
• After the dissolution of the bitumen is completed, the flasks are immersed in a water
bath maintained at 25 °C (77 °F) for 30 min.
• The flasks are titrated with 1.0 mL aliquots of n-heptane. After each addition of
n-heptane, the contents of the flask are stirred for several minutes and then inspected
to observe if flocculation has taken place. Flocculation is detected by transferring a
drop of the p the solution to a filter paper with a glass rod.
• The development of two rings on the filter paper signifies the onset of flocculation.
Heithaus parameters pa, po, and P are calculated as described by Pauli (1996).
In ASTM D 6703 (2014) an automated instrument is used shown in Fig. 4.
• Three solutions with different concentrations are made as follows. Three bitumen
samples of weights 0.4, 0.6, and 0.8 g are transferred to separate reaction vials and
diluted with 3.000 mL toluene to make the three different bitumen solutions.
• Each solution is titrated with isooctane (2,2,4-trimethylpentane) to allow the onset
of flocculation as illustrated in Fig. 4.
6 G. Holleran et al.
• During titration, the solution passes through the spectrophotometer, and the output
signal is recorded. The computer records and plots the change of percent trans-
mittance (%T) of detected radiation a (740 nm wavelength) that passes through the
quartz cell. This parameter is plotted against the time (t) of titration.
• The calculated Flocculation Ratio (FR) versus Concentration (C) graph gives FRmax
and Cmin (y and x-intercepts, respectively). These two parameters are used to cal-
culate the Heithaus parameters as shown below:
pa ¼ 1 FRmax
po ¼ FRmaxð1=Cmin þ 1Þ
P po=ð1 paÞ
– Typically ranges from a highly stable value near 4 to an unstable value near 2.
When combined with the base binder the PG grades are improved at the high-
temperature end, but low temperature grading would suggest poor low temperature
performance. 50% RAP being worse than 30%. When rejuvenator is added to the aged
binder, the low temperature properties significantly improve, and the high-temperature
properties move closer to that of the virgin binder.
8 G. Holleran et al.
6.3.2 Fatigue
The fatigue properties were tested using 4 pt bending as specified in NZTA (2014)
results are shown in Fig. 8. This data shows that the fatigue life of the RAP mixes was
lower than that of virgin mixes but that this was improved by use of rejuvenation and is
consistent with SARA and rheological testing of binders.
improving the stability does not bring it to virgin levels. Rejuvenation improved the
stability significantly. The Heithaus parameter would appear to be consistent with the
mix results and the SARA analysis.
range of different compositions, the Heithaus parameters, and to a lesser extent, the GI
shows that the emulsion performance with a single emulsification system could be
predicted. The field and laboratory testing of cure are in agreement with this prediction.
In general, the Heithaus factor P needs to be around 3 or higher. This figure represents a
more stringent requirement that appears to be the case in the asphaltic hot mix. More
data is needed to set the exact limits.
12 G. Holleran et al.
7 Conclusions
• The AFT methodology appears to predict the performance of bitumen by deter-
mining the agglomeration tendency of the polar fraction of the binder.
• There is broad agreement on AFT parameters with the SARA compositions. The
Gaestel Index is in broad agreement with both other sets of data.
• The AFT is correlated with the rheological properties as measured in the PG third
generation specification approach.
• RAP binders have a general tendency to higher polarity and hence agglomeration
this may be mitigated by blending with more balanced bitumen or by rejuvenation.
SARA analysis may be used as a blending tool, but AFT and performance testing
must be used to create an accurate prediction of properties.
The Use of Automated Flocculation Titrimetry and SARA … 13
• Low AFT P factors result in the poorer performance of mixes in crack resistance
and low temperature properties and are reflected in low temperature rheological
properties in the binder.
• In emulsions, the detailed chemistry is important, but the AFT appears consistent
with emulsion properties and the SARA data.
• The AFT is a valuable tool to determine RAP and rejuvenation use in hot mix and
performance in emulsions.
References
AASHTO; AASHTO M332 (2014): Standard Specification for Performance-Graded Asphalt
Binder Using Multiple Stress Creep Recovery (MSCR) Test. American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C. (2013)
ASTM International: ASTMD 6703: Standard Test Method for Automated Heithaus Titrimetry.
ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA USA (2014)
ASTM International and ASTM D7000-11: Standard Test Method for Sweep Test of Bituminous
Emulsion Surface Treatment Samples. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA USA
(2017)
Boduszynski, M.M.: Asphaltene in petroleum asphalts: composition and formation. In: Advances
in Chemistry Series: Chemistry of Asphalts. American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C.
(1981)
Harnsberger, M., Peterson, C., Pauli, T.: Asphalt Component Compatibility—RAP. Expert Task
Group Meeting, FHWA, Western Research Institute Wyoming (2008)
Heithaus, J.J.: Measurement and significance of asphaltene peptization. J. Inst. Pet. 48 (1962)
Holleran, G., Holleran, I., Bearsley, S., Dubois, C.J., Wilson, D.: Epoxy asphalt for durability of
open graded mixes. In: Proceedings of Australian Asphalt Pavement Association, 17th
International Conference, Melbourne (2017)
Holleran, G., Holleran, I.: Bitumen chemistry using cheaper sources—an improved method of
measurement by TLC-FID and the characterization of bitumen by rheological and
compositional means. In: Proceedings Australian Road Research Board, 24th International
Conference, Melbourne (2010)
Holleran, G., Holleran, I.: Coalescence control in sealing emulsions. In: Proceedings Australian
Road Research Board, 1st Spray Sealing Conference, Adelaide (2008)
Jones, D.R.: An asphalt primer: understanding how the origin and composition of paving-grade
asphalt cements affect their performance. SHRP Technical Memorandum #4, National
Research Council, Washington, D.C. (1992)
NZ Transport Agency and TNZ M/1A: Performance specification for asphalt binders. NZ
Transport Agency, Wellington, New Zealand (2016)
NZ Transport Agency: TNZ M/1 Specification for roading bitumens. NZ Transport Agency,
Wellington, New Zealand (2005)
NZ Transport Agency: TNZ M/10 Specification for dense-graded and stone mastic asphalts. NZ
Transport Agency, Wellington, New Zealand (2014)
Pauli, A.: Asphalt compatibility by using the automated heithaus titration test. Preprints of
papers, Am. Chem. Soc. Div. Fuel Chem. 41 (1996)
Planche, J.P.: Insights into binder chemistry microstructure properties relationship. In: Proceed-
ings of International Society of Asphalt Pavements (ISAP), Raleigh North Carolina (2014)
14 G. Holleran et al.
Robertson, R.E.: Chemical properties of asphalts and their relationship to pavement performance.
Report # SHRP-A-UWP-91-510, National Research Council, Washington, D.C. (1991)
Texas Department of Transport: Overlay Test Tex-248-F, Austin, Texas, USA (2017)
Laboratory Characterization
of Low-Temperature Performance
of High Modulus Asphalt Concrete
by Beam Bending Test
1 Introduction
Rutting is one of the most important distresses for asphalt pavements [1]. It is caused by
material consolidation and lateral movement due to repeated heavy wheel loadings on
the various pavement layers. The rutting distress is viewed as not only a structure failure
but also a serious safety hazard to vehicles because hydroplaning can occur in the
presence of rutting in rainy weather, resulting in serious traffic accidents. Moreover,
vehicles tend to be pulled towards the rutted path, making it uncomfortable to drive
[2, 3]. Researchers have put forward many solutions to the rutting problem [4]. The
concept of high modulus asphalt concrete (HMAC) [5] always suffers the attention. By
improving the modulus of asphalt concrete, it can decrease the plastic deformation
of asphalt concrete under traffic loadings and increase the rutting resistance of asphalt
concrete. Therefore, HMAC is an effective way to extend the service life of
asphalt pavement. So far, there are two main methods [6] to increase the modulus of
asphalt concrete. One is to select low penetration asphalt, which has a higher viscosity.
The other is to blend modifiers together with the asphalt concrete. In this study, the
second method was adopted.
2 Objective
Based on the above considerations, the objective of this paper is to characterize the
low-temperature performance of HMAC through low-temperature beam bending test.
In addition, an index from the low-temperature beam bending test which can reflect
low-temperature performance of HMAC accurately will be proposed.
Asphalt mixtures can be seen as elastic materials at low temperature, the destroy
process of which is accompanied with energy dissipation. The work external force does
to materials can be transformed into two parts: elastic strain energy to be stored and
surface energy to produce new interface after initiation and propagation of cracks. The
low-temperature cracking of asphalt pavement is [12] due to that internal fatigue stress
and strain induced by the thermal stress of asphalt mixture exceeds the ultimate stress
and the ultimate strain. Therefore, single stress or strain indices are unreasonable to
evaluate the low-temperature anti-cracking performance of asphalt mixture. Generally,
asphalt mixture has better low-temperature anti-cracking performance with more elastic
strain energy stored. The damage of material can be expressed with strain energy
density function dW/dV supposed that the destroy form of material is corresponding to
energy condition per unit volume. dW/dV is shown as Eq. 1.
eZ0
dW=dV ¼ rij deij ð1Þ
0
In which, dW/dV is strain energy density function; rij and eij are stress and strain
component respectively; e0 is strain corresponding to peak stress (also called critical
strain). The critical value of strain energy density is the area under stress-strain curves
when specimen fractures, which can be measured by test like beam bending test,
uniaxial compression test and so on.
Laboratory Characterization of Low-Temperature … 17
Fig. 1. Photo of ZQ
100.0
Lower limit
90.0
Upper limit
80.0
Resultant gradation
70.0
Passing percentage (%)
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
0.075 0.15 0.3 0.6 1.18 2.36 4.75 9.5 13.2 16 19
Sieve size (mm)
The mix design procedures for AC-16 in this paper were determined as per the
Chinese specification “Standard Test Methods of Bitumen and Bituminous Mixtures
for Highway Engineering” (JTG E20-2011). The optimal asphalt content of HMAC is
4.9% (here the asphalt content includes both asphalt and additives), while the basic
asphalt mixture is 4.8% based on the Marshall Design method. All the asphalt binders
Laboratory Characterization of Low-Temperature … 19
used were SHELL-70. On the first stage, high modulus additives were dispersed and
melting into the aggregates. Then, hot asphalt binders were poured into the mix,
resulting in the partly dissolution of additives. The obtained mixes are coated by
compound binders, in which additives offer strong mechanistic properties and asphalt
acts as plasticizer, filler and binder. Three different percentages of ZQ were chosen to
produce high modulus asphalt mixtures (5, 7.5 and 10.5% by weight of the base
binder). There are four types of asphalt mixtures tested in this study totally.
The mixing and compaction temperatures are 170 and 155 °C, respectively, which
were determined using the viscosity-temperature relationship curves. The HMA mix-
tures were then aged for 2 h at 160 °C in a short-term oven before compaction. The test
samples were cut from the square slab specimen of 300 mm 300 mm 50 mm
compacted using a wheel roller. The sample geometry is 250 mm 30 mm 35 mm.
The specimen fabrication is according to Chinese specification “Standard Test Methods
of Bitumen and Bituminous Mixtures for Highway Engineering” (JTG E20-2011).
5 Experimental Investigation
Currently, there are many testing methods to investigate the low-temperature perfor-
mance of asphalt concrete, such as the Indirect Tensile Test (IDT), the Thermal Stress
Restraint Specimen Test (TSRST), J-integral test, direct tensile relaxation test and so
on. Comparing with the above test methods, three-point beam bending test at low
temperature is simple and feasible, and the discreteness of test data is lower. Therefore,
the low-temperature beam bending test was chosen to evaluate the HMAC
low-temperature anti-cracking performance. The schematic of beam bending test is
shown in Fig. 3.
Beam bending test (three-point bending test) was carried out as per Chinese
specification with Universal Testing System (UTM-25). Through this test bending
strength and bending strain can be obtained, its calculation equations are shown as
follows.
20 X. Wen and H. Zhu
eB ¼ 6hd=L2 ð3Þ
SB ¼ RB =eB ð4Þ
12 ZQ-5%
ZQ-7.5%
10 ZQ-10.5%
base binder
8
Stress/MPa
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Strain/με
From Fig. 4 it can be found that the stress-strain curve of HMAC with 5% ZQ is
similar to the one with 10.5%. Comparatively, the stress-strain curve of HMAC with
7.5% ZQ is higher, while the stress-strain curve of basic asphalt concrete is lower. It is
inferred that different stress-strain curve means different low-temperature performance.
Laboratory Characterization of Low-Temperature … 21
1.5
Bending strength
1.4
Bending strain
Normalized value
1.3
Strain energy
density
1.2
1.1
0.9
0.8
Base binder ZQ-5% ZQ-7.5% ZQ-10.5%
Mixture type
his apostleship.
There is a dim relic of a story, of quite ancient date, that after the
dispersion of the apostles, he went to Arabia, and preached there till
his death. This is highly probable, because it is well known that many
of the Jews, more particularly after the destruction of Jerusalem,
settled along the eastern coasts of the Red sea, where they were
continued for centuries. Nothing can be more reasonable then, than
to suppose that after the wasting fury of invasion had desolated the
city and the land of their fathers, many of the Christian Jews too,
went forth to seek a new home in the peaceful regions of Arabia
Felix; and that with them also went forth this true Israelite without
guile, to devote the rest of his life to apostolic labors, in that distant
country, where those of his wandering brethren, who had believed in
Christ, would so much need the support and counsel of one of the
divinely commissioned ministers of the gospel. Those Israelites too,
who still continued unbelievers, would present objects of importance,
in the view of the apostle. All the visible glories of the ancient
covenant had departed; and in that distant land, with so little of the
chilling influence of the dogmatical teachers of the law around them,
they would be the more readily led to the just appreciation of a
spiritual faith, and a simple creed.
All the testimony which antiquity affords on this point, is simply this:――Eusebius
(Church History, V. 10,) says, in giving the life of Pantaenus of Alexandria, (who lived about
A. D. 180,) that this enterprising Christian philosopher penetrated, in his researches and
travels, as far as to the inhabitants of India. It has been shown by Tillemont, Asseman and
Michaelis, that this term, in this connection, means Arabia Felix, one part of whose
inhabitants were called Indians, by the Hebrews, the Syrians and the early ecclesiastical
historians. Eusebius relates that Pantaenus there found the gospel of Matthew, in Hebrew,
and that the tradition among these people was, that Bartholomew, one of the twelve
apostles, had formerly preached there, and left this gospel among them. This tradition being
only a hundred years old when Pantaenus heard it, ranks among those of rather
respectable character.
On the question of Matthew’s identity with Levi, Michaelis is full. (Introduction, III. iv. 1.)
Fabricius (Bibliotheca Graeca, IV. vii. 2,) discusses the question quite at length, and his
annotators give abundance of references to authors, in detail, in addition, to those
mentioned by himself, in the text.
his call.
his gospel.
In mentioning the Hebrew as the original language of the gospel of Matthew, it should be
noticed, that the dialect spoken by the Jews of the time of Christ and his apostles, was by
no means the language in which the Old Testament was written, and which is commonly
meant by this name at present. The true ancient Hebrew had long before become a dead
language, as truly so as it is now, and as much unknown to the mass of the people, as the
Latin is in Italy, or the Anglo-Saxon in England. Yet the language was still called “the
Hebrew,” as appears from several passages in the New Testament, where the Hebrew is
spoken of as the vernacular language of the Jews of Palestine. It seems proper therefore, to
designate the later Hebrew by the same name which is applied to it by those who spoke it,
and this is still among modern writers the term used for it; but of late, some, especially Hug
and his commentator, Wait, have introduced the name “Aramaic,” as a distinctive title of this
dialect, deriving this term from Aram, the original name of Syria, and the regions around, in
all which was spoken in the time of Christ, this or a similar dialect. This term however, is
quite unnecessary; and I therefore prefer to use here the common name, as above limited,
because it is the one used in the New Testament, and is the one in familiar use, not only
with common readers, but, as far as I know, with the majority of Biblical critics.
Though the evidence that Matthew wrote his gospel in Hebrew, is apparently of the most
uniform, weighty and decisive character, there have been many among the learned, within
the three last centuries, who have denied it, and have brought the best of their learning and
ability to prove that the Greek gospel of Matthew, which is now in the New Testament, is the
original production of his pen; and so skilfully has this modern view been maintained, that
this has already been made one of the most doubtful questions in the history of the canon.
In Germany more particularly, (but not entirely,) this notion has, during the last century, been
strongly supported by many who do not like the idea, that we are in possession only of a
translation of this most important record of sacred history, and that the original is now lost
forever. Those who have more particularly distinguished themselves on this side of the
controversy, are Maius, Schroeder, Masch and Hug, but the great majority of critics still
support the old view.
The earliest evidence for the Hebrew original of Matthew’s gospel, is Papias of
Hierapolis, (as early as A. D. 140,) not long after the times of the apostles, and acquainted
with many who knew them personally. Eusebius (Church History, III. 39,) quotes the words
of Papias, (of which the original is now lost,) which are exactly translated
here:――“Matthew therefore wrote the divine words in the Hebrew language; and every one
translated them as he could.” By which it appears that in the time of Papias there was no
universally acknowledged translation of Matthew’s gospel; but that every one was still left to
his own private discretion, in giving the meaning in Greek from the original Hebrew. The
value of Papias’s testimony on any point connected with the history of the apostles, may be
best learned from his own simple and honest account of his opportunities and efforts to
inquire into their history; (as recorded by Eusebius in a former part of the same chapter.) “If
any person who had ever been acquainted with the elders, came into my company, I
inquired of them the words of the elders;――what Andrew and Peter said?――what
Thomas, and James, and John, and Matthew, and the other disciples of the Lord used to
say?”――All this shows an inquiring, zealous mind, faithful in particulars, and ready in
improving opportunities for acquiring historical knowledge. Yet because in another part of
the works of Eusebius, he is characterized as rather enthusiastic, and very weak in
judgment, more particularly in respect to doctrines, some moderns have attempted to set
aside his testimony, as worth nothing on this simple historical point, the decision of which,
from the direct personal witness of those who had seen Matthew and read his original
gospel, needed no more judgment than for a man to remember his own name. The
argument offered to discredit Papias, is this:――“He believed in a bodily reign of the
Messiah on the earth, during the whole period of the millennium, and for this and some
similar errors, is pronounced by Eusebius, ‘a man of very weak judgment,’――(πανυ σμικρος
τον νουν.) Therefore, he could not have known in what language Matthew wrote.” The
objection certainly is worth something against a man who made such errors as Papias, in
questions where any nice discrimination is necessary, but in a simple effort of a ready
memory, he is as good a witness as though he had the discrimination of a modern skeptical
critic. (In Michaelis’s Introduction to the New Testament, vol. III. c. iv. § 4, is a full discussion
of Papias’s character and testimony, and the objections to them.)
The second witness is Irenaeus, (A. D. 160,) who, however, coupling his testimony with
a demonstrated falsehood, destroys the value which might be otherwise put upon a
statement so ancient as his. His words are quoted by Eusebius, (Church History, V. 8.)
“Matthew published among the Hebrews his gospel, written in their own language, (τῃ ιδιᾳ
αυτων διαλεκτῳ,) while Peter and Paul were preaching Christ at Rome, and laying the
foundations of the church.” This latter circumstance is no great help to the story, after what
has been proved on this point in the notes on Peter’s life; but the critics do not pretend to
attack it on this ground. They urge against it, that as Irenaeus had a great regard for Papias,
and took some facts on his word, he probably took this also from him, with no other
authority,――a guess, which only wants proof, to make it a very tolerable argument. Let
Irenaeus go for what he is worth; there are enough without him.
The third witness is Pantaenus of Alexandria, already quoted in the note on Nathanael’s
life, (p. 363,) as having found this Hebrew gospel still in use, in that language, among the
Jews of Arabia-Felix, towards the end of the second century.
The fourth witness is Origen, (A. D. 230,) whose words on this point are preserved only
in a quotation made by Eusebius, (Church History, VI. 25,) who thus gives them from
Origen’s commentary on Matthew. “As I have learned by tradition concerning the four
gospels, which alone are received without dispute by the church of God under heaven: the
first was written by Matthew, once a tax-gatherer, afterwards an apostle of Jesus Christ,
who published it for the benefit of the Jewish converts, having composed it in the Hebrew
language, &c.” The term, “tradition,” (παραδοσις,) here evidently means something more than
floating, unauthorized information, coming merely by vague hearsay; for to this source only
he refers all his knowledge of the fact, that “the gospel was written by Matthew;” so that, in
fact, we have as good authority in this place, for believing that Matthew wrote in Hebrew, as
we have that he wrote at all. The other circumstances specified, also show clearly, that he
did not derive all his information on this point from Papias, as some have urged; because
this account gives facts which that earlier Father did not mention,――as that it was written
first, and that it was intended for the benefit of the Jewish converts.
The testimony of Jerome [A. D. 395,] is however, so full and explicit, and so valuable
from his character as a Hebrew scholar, that it may well be esteemed of higher importance
to the question, than that of some earlier writers. His words are,――“Matthew composed his
gospel in Hebrew letters and words, but it is not very well known who afterwards translated
it. Moreover, the very Hebrew original itself is preserved even to this day, in the library at
Caesarea, which the martyr Pamphilus, most industriously collected. I also had the
opportunity of copying [describendi] this book by means of the Nazareans in Beroea, a city
of Syria, who use this book.” [Jerome De scriptoribus ecclesiasticis. Vita Matthew.] Another
passage from the same author is valuable testimony to the same purpose,――“Matthew
wrote his gospel in the Hebrew language, principally for the sake of those Jews who
believed in Jesus.”
Now these testimonies, though coming from an authority so late, are of the highest value
when his means of learning the truth are considered. By his own statement it appears that
he had actually seen and examined the original Hebrew gospel of Matthew, or what was
considered to be such, as preserved in the valuable collections of ♦Pamphilus, at a place
within the region for which it was first written. It has been urged that Jerome confounded the
“gospel according to the Hebrews,” an apocryphal book, with the true original of Matthew.
But this is disproved, from the circumstance that Jerome himself translated this apocryphal
gospel from the Hebrew into Latin, while he says that the translator of Matthew was
unknown.
In addition to these authorities from the Fathers, may be quoted the statements
appended to the ancient Syriac and Arabic versions, which distinctly declare that Matthew
wrote in Hebrew. This was also the opinion of all the learned Syrians.
The great argument with which all this evidence is met, (besides discrediting the
witnesses,) is that Matthew ought to have written in Greek, and therefore did. (Matthaeus
Graece scribere debuit. Schubert. Diss. § 24.) This sounds very strangely; that, without any
direct ancient testimony to support the assertion, but a great number of distinct assertions
against it from the very earliest Fathers, moderns should now pronounce themselves better
judges of what Matthew ought to do, than those who were so near to his time, and were so
well acquainted with his design, and all the circumstances under which it was executed. Yet,
strangely as it sounds, an argument of even this presumptuous aspect, demands the most
respectful consideration, more especially from those who have had frequent occasion, on
other points, to notice the very contemptible character of the “testimony of the Fathers.” It
should be noticed however, that, in this case, the argument does not rest on a mere floating
tradition, like many other mooted points in early Christian history, but in most of the
witnesses, is referred to direct personal knowledge of the facts, and, in some cases, to
actual inspection of the original.
It is proper to notice the reasons for thinking that Matthew ought to have written in
Greek, which have influenced such minds as those of Erasmus, Beza, Ittig, Leusden,
Spanheim, LeClerc, Semler, Hug and others, and which have had a decisive weight with
such wonderfully deep Hebrew scholars, as Wagenseil, Lightfoot, John Henry Michaelis,
and Reland. The amount of the argument is, mainly, that the Greek was then so widely and
commonly spoken even in Palestine, as to be the most desirable language for the
evangelist to use in preserving for the benefit of his own countrymen, the record of the life of
Christ. The particulars of the highly elaborate and learned arguments, on which this
assertion has been rested, have filled volumes, nor can even an abstract be allowed here;
but a simple reference to common facts will do something to show to common readers, the
prominent objections to the notion of a Greek original. It is perfectly agreed that the Hebrew
was the ordinary language spoken by Christ, in his teachings, and in all his usual
intercourse with the people around him. That this language was that in which the Jews also
commonly wrote and read at that time, as far as they were able to do either, in any
language, is equally plain. In spite of all that Grecian and Roman conquests could do, the
Jews were still a distinct and peculiar people; nor is there any reason whatever to suppose
that they were any less so in language, than they were in dress, manners, and general
character. He, therefore, who desired to write anything for the benefit of the Jews, as a
nation, would insure it altogether the best attention from them, if it came in a form most
accordant with their national feelings. They would naturally be the first persons whose
salvation would be an object to the apostolic writers, as to the apostolic preachers, and the
feelings of the writer himself, being in some degree influenced by love of his own
countrymen, he would aim first at the direct spiritual benefit of those who were his kindred
according to the flesh. Among all the historical writings of the New Testament, that there
should be not one originally composed in the language of the people among whom the
Savior arose, with whom he lived, talked and labored, and for whom he died, would be very
strange. The fact that a gospel in the Hebrew language was considered absolutely
indispensable for the benefit of the Jewish inhabitants of Palestine, is rendered perfectly
incontestable by the circumstance that those apocryphal gospels which were in common
use among the heretical denominations of that region, were all in Hebrew; and the common
argument, that the Hebrew gospel spoken of by the Fathers was translated into Hebrew
from Matthew’s Greek, is itself an evidence that it was absolutely indispensable that the
Jews should be addressed in writing, in that language alone. The objection, that the Hebrew
original of Matthew was lost so soon, is easily answered by the fact, that the Jews were, in
the course of the few first centuries, driven out of the land of their Fathers so completely, as
to destroy the occasion for any such gospel in their language; for wherever they went, they
soon made the dialect of the country in which they lived, their only medium of
communication, written or spoken.
Fabricius may be advantageously consulted by the scholar for a condensed view of the
question of the original language of Matthew’s gospel, and his references to authorities,
ancient and modern, are numerous and valuable, besides those appended by his
editors.――The most complete argument ever made out in defense of a Greek original, is
that by Hug, in his Introduction, whose history of the progress of Grecian influence and
language in Syria and Palestine, is both interesting and valuable on its own account, though
made the inefficient instrument of supporting an error. He is very ably met by his English
translator, Wait, in the introduction to the first volume. A very strong defense of a Greek
original of Matthew, is also found in a little quarto pamphlet, containing a thesis of a
Goettingen student, on taking his degree in theology, in 1810. (Diss. Crit. Exeg. in serm.
Matt. &c. Auct. Frid. Gul. Schubert.)
This point has been made the subject of more discussion and speculation, within the last
fifty years, among the critical and exegetical theologians of Europe, than any other subject
connected with the New Testament. Those who wish to see the interesting details of the
modes of explaining the coincidences between the three first evangelists, may find much on
this subject in Michaelis’s Introduction to the New Testament, and especially in the
translation by Bishop Marsh, who, in his notes on Vol. III. of Michaelis, has, after a very full
discussion of all previous views of the origin of the gospels, gone on to build one of the
most ingenious speculations on this point that was ever conceived on any subject, but
which, in its very complicated structure, will present a most insuperable objection to its
adoption by the vast majority of even his critical readers; and accordingly, though he has
received universal praise for the great learning and ingenuity displayed in its formation, he
has found few supporters,――perhaps none. His views are fully examined and fairly
discussed, by the anonymous English translator of Dr. F. Schleiermacher’s Commentary on
Luke, in an introductory history of all the German speculations on this subject with which he
has prefaced that work. The historical sketch there given of the progress of opinion on the
sources and materials of the three first gospels, is probably the most complete account of
the whole matter that is accessible in English, and displays a very minute acquaintance with
the German theologians. Hug is also very full on this subject, and also discusses the views
of Marsh and Michaelis. Hug’s translator, Dr. Wait, has given, in an introduction to the first
volume, a very interesting account of these critical controversies, and has large references
to many German writers not referred to by his author. Bertholdt and Bolten, in particular, are
amply quoted and disputed by Wait. Bloomfield also, in the prefaces to the first and second
volumes of his critical Annotations on the New Testament, gives much on the subject that
can hardly be found any where else by a mere English reader. Large references might be
made to the works of the original German writers; but it would require a very protracted
statement, and would be useless to nearly all readers, because those to whom these rare
and deep treasures of sacred knowledge are accessible, are doubtless better able to give
an account of them than I am. It may be worth while to mention, however, that of all those
statements of the facts on this subject with which I am acquainted, none gives a more
satisfactory view, than a little Latin monograph, in a quarto of eighty pages, written by H. W.
Halfeld, (a Goettingen theological student, and a pupil of Eichhorn, for whose views he has
a great partiality,) for the Royal premium. Its title is, “Commentatio de origine quatuor
evangeliorum, et de eorum canonica auctoritate.” (Goettingen, 1796.) The Bibliotheca
Graeca of Fabricius, (Harles’s edition with notes,) contains, in the chapters on the gospels,
very rich references to the learned authors on these points. Lardner, in his History of the
Apostles and Evangelists, takes a learned view of the question, “whether either of the three
evangelists had seen the others’ writings.” This he gives after the lives of all four of the
evangelists, and it may be referred to for a very full abstract of all the old opinions upon the
question. Few of these points have any claim for a discussion in this book, but some things
may very properly be alluded to, in the lives of the other evangelists, where a reference to
their resemblances and common sources, will be essential to the completeness of the
narrative.
The passage containing the prophecy of ♦the death of Zachariah, is in Matthew xxiii. 35;
and that of “the abomination of desolation,” is in xxiv. 15.
This interesting event is recorded by Josephus; (History of Jewish War, IV. v. 4;) and is
one of the numerous instances which show the vast benefit which the Christian student of
the New Testament may derive from the interesting and exact accounts of this Jewish
historian.
This view of these passages and the circumstances to which they refer, with all the
arguments which support the inferences drawn from them, may be found in Hug’s
Introduction, (Vol. II. §4.) He dates Matthew’s gospel much later than most writers do; it
being commonly supposed to have been written in the year 41, or in the year 61. Michaelis
makes an attempt to reconcile these conjectures, by supposing that it was written in Hebrew
by Matthew, in A. D. 41, and translated in 61. But this is a mere guess, for which he does
not pretend to assign a reason, and only says that he “can see no impropriety in supposing
so.” (Introduction, III. iv. 1, 2.)
Eichhorn suggests, that a reason for concluding that Matthew wrote his gospel a long
time after the events which he relates, is implied in the expression used in chap. xxvii. 8,
and xxviii. 15. “It is so called, to this day,”――“It is commonly reported, to this day,”――are
expressions which, to any reader, convey the idea of many years intervening between the
incidents and the time of their narration. In xxvii. 15, also, the explanation which he gives of
the custom of releasing a prisoner to the Jews on the feast-day, implies that the custom had
been so long out of date, as to be probably forgotten by most of his readers, unless their
memories were refreshed by this distinct explanation.