« AnteriorContinua »
any difficulty to commentators. The daughter represents the weak state of the ten tribes, from conspiracy, faction, and invasion, after the extirpation of Jehu's family; and the son is the figure of their total destuction as a kingdom and a people. This is the general scope of the following chapters, in which various incidents are enumerated, to heighten the picture, and show the depraved state of the ten tribes in the most striking colours; but they are not left a prey to despair ; for sufficient encouragement is still afforded to the devout part of the nation to believe that their deliverance should be wrought in a most wonderful manner, and that they should again become the people of God.
This view of the subject is amply dilated in a very prolix preface, in which, however, we do not see any thing particularly striking, or that has not occurred to prior commentators. We agree entirely with the author in that part of his recommendation of his own version in which he observes that it ought not to supersede the use of the public translation in the service of the church. The fact is, it may be well applied to, in conjunction with bishop Newcome's, to afford a completer idea of the original : in some cases it is superior to the vulgar version ; but, as a whole, it is assuredly not so fit for public use. Accompanying the translation are a body of notes, explaining the sense of the version as it occurs; and at the end of the work are introduced a variety of critical remarks on the original and its translators. We shall give an instance or two of this mode of commenting upon the sacred prophet. Upon the birth of Lo-ruhamah it is observed, that, though compassion shall no longer be extended to the ten tribes, Judah shall be cherished with tenderness and preserved by a supernatural deliverance : on which our author makes the following remark ;
. These expressions are too magnificent to be understood of any thing but the final rescue of the Jews from the power of Antichrist in the latter ages, by the incarnate God destroying the enemy with the brightness of his coming; of which the destruction of Sennacherib's army in the days of Hezekiah might be a type, but it was nothing more. It may seem, perhaps, that the prophecy points at some deliverance peculiar to the house of Judah, in which the ten tribes will have no share; such as the overthrow of Sennacherib actually was; whereas the destruction of Antichrist will be an universal blessing. But, in the different treatment of the house of Judah and the house of Israël, we see the prophecy hitherto remarkably verified. After the excision of the kingdom of the ten tribes, Judah, though occasionally visited with severe judgements, continued however to be cherished with God's love, till they rejected our Lord. Then Judah became Loammi; but still continues to be visibly an object of God's love, preserved as a distinct race for gracious purposes of mercy. Perhaps in the last ages the converts of the house of Judah will be the principal objects of Antichrist's malice. Their deliverance may be first wrought ; and through them
the blessing may be extended to their brethren of the ten tribes, and ultimately to the whole world. This order of things the subsequent prophecy seems to point out.' P. 3.
Now we shall observe upon this comment, that the salvation alluded to refers only to the house of Judah, that it takes place when the ten tribes are in the desolate state represented by the term Lo-ruhamah; and, consequently, there is no time to which it can be so properly referred as to the signal deliverance of Judah from the invasion of the all-powerful arms of Sennacherib. The idea of a farther deliverance of Judah, independently of that of the ten tribes, is altogether conjectural; and the introduction of Antichrist, and the converts of the ten tribes of Judah, and the incarnate God to destroy their enemies, seems to have no foundation whatsoever in the text; for whenever the day of the restoration of the Jews may arrive, it is said that both the children of Judah shall be collected, and the children of Israel shall be united, and they shall appoint themselves one head, and come up from the earth. Let us not be wise above what is written, nor admit specious conjectures in our comments, beyond what we would allow in the received text.
In the eleventh chapter, twelfth verse, a proof is discovered of the Trinity not entirely unknown to some commentators, but long rejected by our public translation as well as by the great body of interpreters. The term in our common version rendered “the saints' is by our author transmuted into the holy ones;' on which we meet with the following note:
- The word may signify either the constancy of Judah's fidelity to the “Holy Ones;'' or the firmness of the support, which he shall receive from them. “ The Holy Ones,” the Holy Trinity. By the use of this plural word the prophecy clearly points to the conversion of the Jewish people to the Christian faith.' P. 40.
We shall simply observe, that the term “the holy ones' is improper, for the original wants the article the. The LXX read the same words nearly as we have them, but in one place conjoin what with us occurs separately. The difficulty seems to be in the punctuation; and the question is, whether we should use by, ngom, a people, or by, ngim, with. The text has only Dy, ngm, and we are not bound to the Masoretic punctuation. Referring our readers to the Septuagint and to Michaëlis's translation, we beg leave to suggest the following, in which we have derived assistance from both: * Ephraim hath compassed me about with treachery, and the house of Israël and Judah with deceit. Still the people of God shall have dominion, and a hely nation be established. If it should be asserted that the stop must be placed at Israël, then the following must be predicted of Judah, who will have dominion, and be established a holy nation. It seems however worthy of inquiry, whether the prophet' did not here foresee the glory of Messiah's kingdom; and though both branches of the chosen people should be rejected, still in the divine counsels remained a remedy for their revolt, by the ingraft of the wild olive and the call of the Gentiles ?
In the notes at the end the writer dilates with much self-satisfaction, and sometimes produces matter worthy of notice independently of criticism ; yet there seems to be no reason for the introduction of several of these notes on a translation of Hosea any more than on many of the antecedent prophets; and a reader who engages in a perusal of one of Hosea ought to be previously instructed on such subjects. We mention this particularly in the present times, when paper is so expensive a commodity; and a translator should endeavour to compress his ideas into as small a compass as possible, instead of swelling them out, as in the instance before us, to a length far beyond what the case requires. Surely a long note upon the meaning of the word prophet was unnecessary; yet to several the explanation of the term graven images may be useful, and, as not generally understood, properly inserted.
- The graven image was not a thing wrought in metal by the tool of the workman we should now call an engraver; nor was the molten image, an image made of metal, or any other substance melted, and shaped in a mould. In fact, the graven image and the molten image are the same thing, under different names. The images of the ancient idolaters were first cut out of wood, by the carpenter, as is very evident from the prophet Isaiah. This figure of wood was overlaid with plates either of gold or silver, or, sometimes perhaps, of an inferior metal ; and in this finished state it was called a graven image (i.e. a carved image), in reference to the inner solid figure of wood, and a molten (i. c. an overlaid, or covered) image, in reference to the outer metalline case or covering. And sometimes both epithets are applied to it at once. “ I will cut off the graven and molten image.” Again, “ What profiteth the graven and molten image?" The English word. “ molten” conveys a notion of melting or fusion. But this is not the case with the Hebrew word for which it is given. The Hebrew 70) fignifies, generally, to overspread, or cover all over, in whatever manner, according to the different subject, the overspreading or covering be effected; whether by pouring forth a'substance in fusion, or by spreading a cloth over or before, or by hammering on metalline plates. It is on account of this metalline case that we find a founder employed to make a graven image ; and that we read in Isaiah of a workman that 66 melteth a graven image:” and in another place we find the question, “ Who hath molten a graven image?" In these two passages the words should be “ overlayeth,” and “overlaid.” P. 134.
In the version itself we may point out some places where it is superior to that established by authority.-Chap. I. 6. In
stead of taking away, the Hebrew is rendered properly, Insomuch as to be perpetually forgiving them. This lection is indeed not new, but adopted with judgement. -- Chap. II. 2.
Argue that she is no wife of mine.' We cannot say so much for rendering sometimes the objective case of Jehova by the words
the Jehova,' as in chap. V. 4. 'the Jehovah they have not known;' and in verse 6. to seek the Jehovah;' for the English reader perceiving in the next verse 'to Jehovah they have been false,' may fairly inquire what is the difference between the use of the term Jehova and the Jehova.—Chap. V. 13. Jareb is properly denied to be in this place a proper name, and the selle tence is rendered 'Send to the (quere a) king, who takes up all quarrels. The phrase is rather too diffuse, and the margin of our Bible points out better to a king who shall plead.' Chap. VIII. 7. Instead of · They have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind,' in our common version, whose meaning is not very obvious, the Hebrew is rendered with stricter attention, 'Awind shall scatter him; a whirlwind shall cut him down.'-Chap. VIII. 12. I will write upon him Sin's. The masters of my law are accounted as it were an alien race.' There is considerable authority for the word masters, and the Jection deserves consideration.--Chap. XIII. 2.°"Let the sacrificers of men kiss the calves.' The original admits of this version; and if it be just, it will be a proof that the ten tribes had fallen into the most horrid superstitions of the heathen, and sacrificed human victims to their detestable images.
We could select with pleasure other instances; but the above will suffice to call the attention of the critic to this work. We lament indeed that the mode of printing it must put it out of the power of the greater part of Hebrew students to avail themselves of the publication. A considerable purse indeed would be required to purchase the comments and versions of the Scriptures, if detached parts could not be published without the insertion of so much matter, not indeed altogether extraneous to the purpose, but assuredly known before a student advances to the perusal of the minor prophets. We have already noticed this superfluous labour in a former publication by the same author, and we wish it to be more attended to by writers in general. Two hundred and seventy-four quarto pages are now before us, a fourth part of which would have amply sufsced for the purpose of exhibiting the version now presented, and the grounds of the interpretation where it differed from that of other readings. Upon such a scale, we leave to our au.. thor, who is a mathematician, to calculate what would be the quantity requisite, and expense demanded, if he were to give us a version of the whole Bible with a similar commentary,
would bes of the greaterode of
ART. II.- Allwood's Literary Antiquities of Greece. (Continued
from Vol. XXXI. p. 137.) THE continuation of our account of this ingenious and elaborate work has been delayed from a cause with which our readers are already acquainted. In Vol. XXXI. p. 121. New Arr. we gave a full and comprehensive analysis of the author's plan, accompanied with a few scattered observations as we proceeded: we now return to the work with a view of selecting some particular sections, it is impossible to notice the whole) as specimens of Mr. Allwood's manner and merit.
• In treating of subjects of such high antiquity I have endeavoured to establish every point by probability. And by bringing a great number of probabilities to bear upon the same points, I hope it will appear that I have generally approached very near the truth. Indeed the very great consistency of the explications I have given in every part of the work, with themselves, and with the histories upon which they have been employed, is a further proof in favour of my success.' P. xvi.
There is no small degree of truth in this paragraph; but the author's attachment to system has induced him to suppose he has succeeded better, than a cool and impartial survey of his labours will often allow us to admit. We will select an example from sect. ii.-Prior to the possession of Greece by the Helladians, there can be no doubt that it was occupied by a barbarous and unpolished people. Our first inhabitants,' observes Plato, in Cratyl. ' were barbarians. Ellos de mwy aç olotacou Bapbafor.' Euphorus, Pausanias, and indeed all the Greek historians and philosophers of established reputation, assert the same fact; but who those barbarians were, we are not expressly informed by any writer whatever. The Greeks, in the more polished ages of their country, denominated every people barbarians who were not natives of Hellas, or admitted to the honour of naturalisation. Hence the term was indiscriminately bestowed, as Mr. Allwood justly observes, upon the Egyptians, the Indians, and Babylonians, at a time when their respective countries were the grand repositories of arts and science, and when the philosophers of Greece, that they might complete the measure of their acquisitions, were desirous of traveling among these nations. Thus far we perfectly accord. Our author then proceeds:
• The barbarians, however, in question, were entirely distinct from any of these enlightened nations. They were the descendants of Japhet, who peopled “ the isles of the Gentiles," or the regions of Greece and Europe. These were the territories allotted at the time of the division; and the sacred writer informs us, that “they divided them in their lands, every one after his tongue, after his family, in their nations."