vvlOS-ANCElfj>
 
 HOR^E B I B L I C JB, 
 
 ACCIPE, SED FACILIS ! 
 
 Buchanan ad Mar. Scot. Ref. 
 
 PRINTED IN THE YEAR 1797-
 
 . 
 QUARE quis tandem me repreliendat, fi quantum c*teri$ 
 
 ad feftos dies .ludorura celebrandos, quantum ad alias vo- 
 luptates, et ad ipfam requiem animi et corporis conceditur 
 temporis : quantum alii tempeftivis conviviis, quantum ale*, 
 quantum pils, tantum mihi egomet ad hsec ftudia recollcnda, 
 fumpfero. 
 
 Cic. pro Archid.
 
 TO 
 
 SIR JOHN COURTENAY THROCKMORTON, 
 BART. 
 
 THE FOLLOWING 
 
 b 
 
 ESSAY 
 
 kl 
 
 IS INSCRIBED, 
 
 SY HIS MOST OBLIGED 
 
 AND MOST OBEDIENT SERVANT, 
 
 CHARLES BUTLER, 
 
 Lincoln's Inn, 
 
 
 . .
 
 
 
 i, -" 
 
 Y 
 
 ''5 *U 
 
 ' 
 
 .
 
 HOR.E BIBLIC^E. 
 
 WITH a view to imprefs on the memory, 
 the refult of fome mifcellaneous reading 
 on different fubje&s of BIBLICAL LITERATURE, 
 the following notes were committed to paper. 1$ 
 may be found, that, they give, 
 
 I. Some hiftory of the rife and decline of the 
 Hebrew language, including an account of the 
 Mifhna, the Two Gemaras, and the Targums : 
 II. Some account of the Helleniftic language, 
 principally with a view to the Septuagint verfion 
 of the Bible : III. Some obfervations on the effect 
 produced on the ftyle of the New Teftament, 
 I ft. by the Helleniftic idiom of the writers ; 
 2dly, by the Rabbinical doctrines, current in 
 Judaea, at the time of Chrift's appearance, and by 
 the controverfies among the fedls, into which the 
 learned were then divided j 3dly, by the literary 
 purfuits of the Jews, being confined to their reli- 
 B gious
 
 2 H O R JE fe I B L I C M. 
 
 gious tenets and obfervances ; 4thly, by the poli- 
 tical fubferviency of the Jews to the Romans ; 
 5thly, by their connc&ions and intercourfe with 
 the neighbouring nations; and 6thly, by the dif- 
 ference of the dialects, which prevailed among the 
 Jews thernfelves : IV. Some account, ift, of the 
 biblical literature of the middle ages; 2dly, of 
 the mduftry of the Monks ; and 3dly, of the in- 
 duftry of the Jews, in copying Hebrew manu- 
 fcripts : V. Some notion of the Maforah, arid the 
 Ken and Ketibh : VI. Some notion of the con- 
 rroverfy refpe&ing the nature, aBtiq-4ity f ,and uti- 
 lity of the vowel- points : .VII. Some general re- 
 marks, I ft, on the hiftory of the Jews after .their 
 return from the Babylonilh captivity to the birth 
 of Cbrifr, ; 2dly, on the perfections fuffered by 
 the Jews ; 3^1}', on their prefent {late ; 4thly, on 
 their religious tenets ; 5thly, on the appellations 
 of their doctors and teachers ; 6thly, on the Ca- 
 bala; 7thly, on their writers againft the Chriltian 
 religion; and 8thly, on their principles rcfpedting 
 religious toleration : VIII. Some obfervations 
 on the nature of the Hebrew manufcripts, and the 
 principal printed editions of trie Hebrew. Bible: 
 IX. Some account of -the principal Greek ma- 
 nufcripts of the- New -Teftament : X. Of the 
 biblical labours,, of Qrigen : XL Of the poly- 
 gloltic .editions; of th^ New Tedament : XII. Of 
 llis principal .Greek editions of the New Tefta- 
 ment : XIII. Of tlie oriental verfions of the 
 
 New
 
 HORJEBIBLIC.ffi. 3 
 
 New Teftament : XIV. Of the Latin Vulgate : 
 
 XV. Of the Englifli tranflations of the Bible : 
 
 XVI. Of the divifion of the Bible into chapters 
 and verfes : XVII. Some general obfervations on 
 the nature of the various readings of the facred 
 text, fo far as they may be fuppofed to influence 
 the queftions refpe&ing its purity, authenticity, or 
 divine infpiration. 
 
 I. 
 
 ift. The claim of- THE HEBREW LANGUAGE to 
 the higheft autmslityj&nnot be denied : its pretenfions 
 to be the original language of mankind, and to have 
 been the only language in exiftence before the con- 
 fufion at Babel, are not inconfiderable. In a ge- 
 neral fenfe it denotes the language ufed by the de- 
 fcendants of Abraham, in all the variations of their 
 fortune, before and after they became poflefled of 
 the promifed land, during their captivity in Babylon, 
 to the time of their final difperfion; and from their 
 final difperfion, fo far as they retained a peculiar 
 language of their own, to the prefent time. But 
 it may be more accurately confidered, under the 
 three diftincSt idioms of South Chanaanitic, Ara- 
 maean, and Talmudical. 
 
 Li. It evidently received the appellation of 
 South Chanaanitic^ from its being the idiom of the 
 inhabitants of the land of Chanaan : and, as no 
 material alteration took place in it, during the long 
 period which elapfed, from Abraham's arrival in 
 Chanaan, till the captivity, it is known, through 1 
 B 2 the
 
 4, H O R JR B I B L I C ' JS. 
 
 the whole of this period, by that appellation. It 
 may be fuppofed to have arrived at its perfe&ion in 
 the reign of Solomon. Nice obfervers profefs to 
 remark in it, fome degree of falling off from that 
 time, and have therefore pronounced his reign to be 
 the golden, and the prophefyings of Ifaiah to be 
 the filver age of the Hebrew Language. During 
 the captivity of the Jews in Babylon, their language 
 was far from being wholly forgotten by them. On 
 their return, it was greatly their wifh to reftore it : 
 but their commixture with the natives of the coun- 
 try, where they had been captives, the refidence of 
 many of them in the neighbouring nations, their in- 
 tercourfe and habits with the fubje&s of other king- 
 doms, and their frequent political connections with 
 the Seleucidan monarchs, introduced into it a mul- 
 titude of foreign words and foreign idioms. la 
 the progrefs of time they debafed it altogether, 
 and, in a manner, converted it into another lan- 
 guage. 
 
 I. 2. In this ftate, it is known by the ap- 
 pellation of Aramaan. That appellation is given 
 it from the immenfe territory of land, which ex- 
 tends from Paleftine, and the adjacent country 
 bordering on the Mediterranean, to the Euphrates, 
 and beyond the Tigris. It was known to the 
 Jews, by the general name of Aram. The lan- 
 guage in ufe throughout this extenfive territory, 
 was divided, principally into two diale&s, the 
 Syriac and the Chaldee; the firft was called the 
 Weil Aramaean, and was fpoken by the inhabitants 
 
 of
 
 IIOR^BIBLIC/E. 5 
 
 of Jerufalem and Judaea ; the latter was called the 
 Eaft Aramaean, and was fpoken by the inhabitants of 
 the Galilaea Gentium. Both are commonly in- 
 cluded under the general name of Chaldee. The 
 learned, however, ftill cultivated the ftudy of 
 the old Hebrew or South Chanaanitic, and it was 
 ufed in the fervice of the fynagogue. Thus it 
 continued the language of literature and religion, 
 but the language of common difcourfe was the 
 Aramaean. Such was the ftate of the Jewifli 
 language, at the time of the arrival of Chrift ; 
 fuch it was fpoken by him, in his familiar inftruc- 
 tions and converfations ; and fuch, with Come va- 
 riation, it continued till the final difperfion of the 
 Jews, after the deftru&ion of Jerufalem. 
 
 I. 3. Notsvithftanding the deftru6tion of the 
 city of Jerufalem, a large portion of the Jews re- 
 mained, or eftablifhed themfelves, in Judaea. By 
 degrees they formed themfelves into a regular fyftem 
 of government, or rather fubordination, connected 
 with the various bodies of Jews, difperfed through- 
 out the world. They were divided into the Wef- 
 tern and Eaftern Jews. The Weftern, were thofe 
 who inhabited Egypt, Judaea, Italy, and other parts 
 of the Roman empire ; the Eaftern were thole who 
 were fettled in Babylon, Chaldaea, and Perfia. The 
 head of the Weftern Jews^was known by the name 
 of Patriarch ; the head of the Eaftern Jews was 
 called, Prince of the Captivity. The office of 
 patriarch was abolifhed by the imperial laws, 
 B 3 about
 
 6 HOR/EBIBLIC-ffi. 
 
 about the year 429 : from which time, the Wef- 
 tern Jews were folely under the rule of the chiefs 
 of their fynagogues, whom, they called primates. 
 The princes of the captivity had a longer, and a 
 more fplendid fway. They refided at Babylon or 
 Bagdad, and exercifed their authority over all the 
 Jews who were eftablilhed there, or in the adja- 
 cent country, or in AfTyria, Chaldaea, or Parthia. 
 7'hey fubfifted as late as the i2th century. In the 
 midft of their depreflion and calamities, the Jews 
 were attentive, in fome meafure, to their religion 
 and language. With the permiflion of the Ro- 
 mans, they eftablifhed academies. The mod fa- 
 mous were thofe of Jabnes and Tiberias. About 
 the reign of Antoninus Pius, Rabbi Jehuda Hakka- 
 dofch, publimed a colle&ion of Jewifh traditions, 
 called the Mijhna, the ftyle of which feems to 
 dew, that, their attempts to reftore their language 
 had not been unfuccefsful. A Latin tranflation of 
 it was published by Surenhufius, at Amfterdam, 
 1698 1713, in fix parts or volumes, folio. As a 
 fupplement to this, the firft Gemara was written, 
 for the ufe of the Jews of Judaea, whence it is 
 called the Gernara of Jerufalem. The ftyle of it 
 is fo abrupt and barbarous, that, the moft profound 
 Hebraifts almoft confefs their inability to under- 
 ftand it. After the death of Antoninus Pius, a 
 frefh perfecution broke out againft them, and they 
 were expelled from their academies within the 
 Roman empire. The chief part of them fled to 
 
 Babylon,
 
 H O R JE ' B I B L I C I. 7 
 
 Babylon, and the neighbouring countries; and 
 there, about the 5th century, publifhed what is 
 called ,the Second or Babylonrfh Gemara, exceed- 
 ing the former in barbarifm and obfcurity. A 
 tranflation of it was begun in Germany by Rabc. 
 The Miflina and the two Gemaras form what is 
 called the Talmud^ and the idiom of this collec- 
 tion is called the TalmudicaL It was ufed by 
 many of their writers. About the year 1038 the 
 Jews were expelled from Babylon. Some of the 
 moft learned of them paffed into Africn, and thence 
 into Spain. Great bodies of them fettled in that 
 kingdom. They afliired the Saracens in their 
 conqueft of it. Upon that event, an intimate con- 
 nelion took place between the difciples ofJVIofes 
 and the difciples of 'Mahomet. It was cemented 
 by their common hatred of the chriftians, and 
 fubfiired till their colrfaon expulllon. This is 
 one of the moft brilliant epochas of Jewifh litera- 
 ture, from the time of the deftruclion of Jerufalem. 
 Even in the darkeft ages of their hiftory, they cul- 
 tivated their language with affiduity, and were 
 never without fkilful grammarians, or fubtle inter- 
 preters of Holy Writ. But, with refpe to the 
 period we are fpeaking of, it was only during their 
 union with the Saracen?, and under the Kalifat, 
 that they ventured into general literature, or ufed, 
 in their writings, a foreign, and confcquently in 
 their conceptions, a profane language. 
 
 In the literature of the Jews, the Targums fill a 
 
 coiifiderable fpace. They are paraphrafe?, which, at 
 
 -B 4 .different
 
 8 HOR.ffiBIBLIC.ffi; 
 
 different times, and by different hands, have been 
 made, in the Chaldee language, of all the Hebrew 
 parts of the Old Teftament. They have various 
 degrees of merit. What is called the Targum of 
 Onkelos is a paraphrafe of the Pentateuch, and is 
 executed far better than any other. 
 
 II. 
 
 The only inftance, in which, before the birth of 
 Chrift, the Jews appear to have ufed a profane 
 language, was in the tranflation of the Bible made 
 by the SEPTUAGINT. 
 
 II. i. With refpedl: to the Style : It has been 
 obferved, that the policy of the Romans to 
 extend, with the progrefs of their arms, the 
 ufe of the Latin language, was attended with 
 greater fuccefs in their Vtyiftern, than in their 
 ^Mtlern conquefts ; fo that, while the language of 
 Rome was readiiy adopted in Africa, Spain, Gaul, 
 and Pannonia, the Greeks preferved their lan- 
 guage ; and it continued to be fpoken in their 
 various colonies, from the Hadriatic to the Eu- 
 phrates and the Nile, and in the numerous cities 
 in Afia, founded by the Macedonian kings. All 
 of them abounded with Jews. They were known 
 by the name of Grecian or Helleniftic Jews, from 
 the application which the Jews made of the term 
 Helleniftic, to defcribe them as refiding in-Xirecian 
 cities, and fpeaking the Grecian language. Alex- 
 andria, upon many accounts, was, in their regard, 
 4. the
 
 HOR-ffiBIBLIC^E. , 
 
 the capital of the countries they inhabited. By- 
 living among the Greeks, they naturally acquired 
 their language ; but they incorporated into it num- 
 berlefs words and phrafes of their own. This muft 
 always be the cafe where foreigners acquire a lan- 
 guage. It was fo in a particular manner with the 
 Jews, as they acquired the Grecian language ra- 
 ther by practice than grammar, and as they did 
 not live promifcuoufly among the natives, but fc- 
 parately, in large communities, among themfelves. 
 Befides, they had a more than common reverence 
 for the facred book. It comprized all their religion, 
 all their morality, all their hiftory, all their politics, 
 and whatever was moft excellent of their poetry. 
 It may, therefore, be faid to have contained all their 
 language and its phrafes. Unavoidably they would 
 be led to adopt its idiom, even in their ordinary 
 tiifcourfe, and to introduce it into their writings. 
 The confequence was, that, always bearing in their * 
 minds the idiom of their mother tongue, they 
 moulded the Greek words into Hebraic phrafes, 
 and fometimes even ufed the words themfelves in 
 an Hebraic fenfe. The effect of this was the more 
 ftriking, as no languages are more diflimilar than 
 the Hebrew and the Greek ; the copioufnefs and 
 variety of the latter, in every poflible fenfe, in 
 which thofe words are applicable to language, form- 
 ing a ftrong contraft to the fimplicity and penury 
 of tntiMtcFi, Hence, when the Jews came to 
 tranflate the facred writings into Greek, their ver- 
 
 fcon
 
 II O R 211 B I B L I C JB. 
 
 carried, in every part of it, the ftrongeft tinc- 
 ture of their native idiom : fo that, though the 
 words were Greek, the phrafsology was every 
 where Hebrew. This was greatly increafed by the 
 fcrupulous, not to fay fuperftitious attachment of 
 the Jews to the Holy Writings, which led them to 
 tranflate them in the moft fervile manner. To this 
 muft be added, that the whole tenor of the Holy 
 Writings relates to facts and circumftances pe- 
 culiar, in many refpecls, to the chofen people. 
 Bendes, the duties, which they inculcate, and 
 the fentiments they exprefs or produce, were un- 
 known to the writers of Greece. In exprefling 
 them, therefore, the tranflators were often at a 
 lofs ; and then, for want of a correfponding or 
 equivalent word to convey their author's mean- 
 ing fully, they were conftrained to do the beft they 
 could by approximation. The letter written by the 
 German Jews, refiding in England, to their foreign 
 -brethren, recommending Doctor Kennicot to their 
 protection and affiftance in his biblical purfuits, 
 (publifhed by him in his Diflertatio Generalis), is 
 a curious fpecimen of the language of a Jew, when 
 he attempts to exprefs modern, and, in his refpccl, 
 foreign ideas, in the Hebrew language. 
 
 II. 2. With refpect to the Hijhry of the Scp- 
 tuaglnt^ there fcarcely is a fubjedt of literature 
 upon which more has been written, or of which 
 lefs, with any degree of certainty, is known. The 
 popular account of its being made in the reign of 
 
 Ptolemy
 
 H O R M B I B L I C JK. * 
 
 Ptolemy Philadelphia, at the fuggeftion of Ariftaeas, 
 and under the direction of Demetrius Phaleraeus, 
 by feyenty or feventy-two Jews, (hut up in cells, 
 appears to be generally exploded. The prevailing 
 opinion is, that it was made at Alexandria, at dif- 
 ferent times, and by different interpreters ; but that 
 all of them were Jews. The Pentateuch, the book 
 of Job, and the Proverbs, are the parts of the ver- 
 fion moft admired. The principal editions are, the 
 Vatican, publifhed in 1587, and Mr. Grabe's, 
 printed at Oxford in 1707, from the famous Alex- 
 andrine Manufcript. A fplendid edition of it is 
 now preparing at Oxford, under the care of Doclor 
 Holmes. The verlion of the Septuagint is the 
 verfipn generally cited by the apoftles and the fa- 
 thers, and has always been of the higheft authority 
 in the church of Rome. It is the authentic verfion 
 of the Greek church: the ancient Vulgate was a 
 translation from it. 
 
 II f. 
 III. I. This leads to the mention of the STYLE 
 
 OF THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 Moft probably all of them were originally written 
 in Greek, except the Gofpel of Saint Matthew 
 and the Epiftle of St. Paul to the Hebrews. The 
 Style of the writers is nearly the fame as that of the 
 Septuagint ; but it is more free from Hebraifms, 
 and approaches, fomewhat nearer, to the Grecian 
 idiom ; in each, however, the Hebrew phrafeology
 
 is HOR^EBIBLICTE. 
 
 is equally difcernible. To mention Come particu- 
 lars, in each, the fame ufe is made of the double 
 fubftantive to fupply the Jewifh want of adje&ives, 
 as " kingdom and glory " to cxprefs a " glorious 
 " kingdom j" " mouth and wifdom " to exprefs a 
 " wife difcourfc." In each, the words, " of God,'* 
 are ufed to denote the fuperlative degree, in cornpa- 
 rifon ; as " the mountains of God " and " the ce- 
 ct dars of God " for " very high mountains " and 
 <c very high cedars." In each, the difficulty, and, 
 on many occafions, the impracticability of accom- 
 modating the conjugations of the Hebrew language 
 to the Grecian modes and voices, and the Hebrew 
 connectives to the Greek particles and prepofitions, 
 every where appear. But, befides a peculiarity 
 of ftyle, from the perpetual recurrence of Jewifh 
 phrafeology, the New Teftament has, in common 
 with the Old, the leading features of the oriental 
 ftyle of inftruction, fhort aphoriftic fentences, 
 and frequent ufe of allegory and parable. In each, 
 extreme fimplicity of phrafe is joined, throughout, 
 to extreme boldnefs and pomp of imagery; and 
 both are rendered the more ftriking by their proxi- 
 mity. This is frequently feen in the moil familiar 
 difcourfes recorded of Chrift by the Evangclifts. 
 Even in the Sermon on the Mount the fubjecl: and 
 the fimile are often united in a manner which the 
 rations of the Weft have never employed out of 
 poetry. In thefe, and in many other inflances, a. 
 confiderable degree of firailitude is difcoverable be- 
 tween
 
 HORJE BIBLICJE. i j 
 
 tween the Greek of the Septuagint, and the Greek 
 of the New Teftament : in fome refpects, how- 
 ever, the Greek of the New Teftament has ftrong 
 peculiarities. 
 
 III. 2. One of the moft ftriking of thefe was a 
 Confequence of the Rabbinical doflrines and difputes, 
 which, at the time of Chrift's miffion, prevailed in 
 Judaea. Notwithftanding the unfocial temper and 
 habits of the Jews, and their decided averfion from 
 intercommunity with ftrangers, it was impoifible 
 that fuch numbers of them fhould inhabit the cities 
 of Greece, without imbibing fomething of the li- 
 terary and inqtiifitive fpirit of that people. The 
 confequence was, that they gave into a variety of 
 difputes, and, as is ufual in thefe cafes, were divided 
 into fets. The principal of them, were the Phari- 
 fies and the Saducees. The former had fubfifted 
 one hundred and fifty years before the arrival of 
 Chrift : they gave too much to tradition, and de- 
 luged the plain fimplicity of the Mofaic law in a 
 multitude of Icriptural glofifes and comments. They 
 affecled great auflerity of morals, and pra&ifed! 
 numberlefs fuperftitions. They held the chief offices 
 both in church and ftate, and had the greateft in- 
 fluence over the common people. The Saducees 
 were a more ancient feet : they were diftinguifhed 
 by their adherence to the word of the facred 
 writings, interpreting it always in its moft literal 
 fenfe, and rejecting, with contempt, all traditionary 
 reafonings and obfcrvaiices. But, at the lame time 
 
 that
 
 14 H O R JE B I B L I C &. 
 
 that they profeffed a ftricT:, not to fay a bigotted 
 adherence to the law of Mofes, they held, by a 
 ftrange contradiction, the loofeft opinions. They 
 denied a future ftate, and, as far as is confiftent 
 with any belief in the holy writings, were Epicu- 
 reans both in practice and theory. In oppofition to 
 the Pharifees, who were fatalifts, they maintained 
 the freedom of the human will. They avoided in- 
 terfering in public concerns, and were few in num- 
 ber, but of the higheft quality. The Scribes had 
 originally their name from tranfcribing, or making 
 copies of the law. By degrees they became the 
 expounders of it. They may be confidered as the 
 public teachers of the Jewifli theology. Like all 
 others, who held offices, or interfered in public 
 concerns, they were under the guidance, and obliged 
 to profefs the principles, and imitate the manners of 
 the Pharifees. The Herodians were rather a po- 
 litical than a religious feet. Herod, whether an 
 Idumaean by birth, or defcended, as many fuppofe, 
 from .one of the Jewifh families, who returned 
 from the Bahylonifh captivity, unqueftionably be- 
 longed to a family which had long profefTed the 
 Jewifh religion, and was ranked among the tribe 
 of Judah. But he feems to have had neither ex- 
 ternal reverence, nor internal reflect, for the re- 
 ligious institutions of his country. He built tem- 
 ples in the Grecian tafre; creeled ftatues for ido- 
 latrous worihip ; adopted, in his ordinary habits of 
 life, Roman manners and Roman ufages; and, in 
 
 his
 
 HOR^BIBLIC/E. 15 
 
 his public capacity y was abfolutely devoted and 
 fubfervient to Roman politics. This brought upon 
 him the hatred of the Pharifees, who were zea- 
 loufly attached to the independence of their 
 country, and bore the Roman yoke with the ut- 
 moft indignation. But many of the Jews, parti- 
 cularly of the Saducees, embraced his politics, 
 and, on that account, received from their country- 
 men the name of Herodians, an appellation, in the 
 general notion of the Jews, of the higheit contumely. 
 Such was the ftate of the reiigious.fects among the 
 Jews at the time of the birth of our Saviour. The 
 Rabbins, or the teachers of each feel, defended 
 their tenets with the greateft zeal and pertinacity. 
 
 III. 3. All of them however agreed in thinking 
 their religious tenets and obfervances were the 
 only objecls worthy of their attention. It follow- 
 ed, that their literary controverfies, inftead of em- 
 bracing, like thole of the philofophical feels of the 
 Pagans, the wide circle of general literature, were 
 dirzfled and confined to their religion and religious 
 ififtjtutionsy and were exhaufted in queftions and 
 difcuffions immediately, or remotely, referrible 
 to thofe objects. They were fometimes ftriking by 
 their refinement and abfirufenefs, but were often 
 idle and viiionary. Thefe religious contentions 
 neceflarily produced a confiderable efFecl ori the 
 language of the Jews j raid, whether they ex- 
 prciL-d thi. aielves in Greek or in Hebrew, led 
 them to adopt new terms and expreilions. Thefe, 
 
 which
 
 6 H O R M B T B L I C JR. 
 
 which may be called Rabbinifms, frequently occur 
 in the New Teftament. 
 
 IIL 4. Another peculiarity of the language of 
 the New Teftament, is its occafional Latinifm. 
 This was originally owing to their political fub- 
 ferviency to the Romans. The celebrated pro- 
 phecy of Jacob, (Gen. ch. 49. v. 10.), had fore- 
 told " that the fceptre fhould not depart from 
 u Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, 
 " until the Shiloh fhould come." Both antient 
 and modern Jews agree, that the Meffiah was de- 
 ftgned by the Shiloh. When the Ailyrian monarch 
 led the ten tribes of Ifrael into captivity, the 
 fceptre departed from them, and the lawgiver from 
 their feet. But the fceptre and the lawgiver wece 
 preferved to Judah, and remained to him, till 
 Judaea was reduced into a province by the Romans. 
 The firft interference of the Romans, as conque- 
 ror?, in the affairs of Judza, was in confequence of 
 their conqueft of Syria. From that time, they 
 appointed the High Priefts. Still, though they 
 changed the order of fucceffion, at their pleafure, 
 they uniformly confined their choice to one of the 
 f.icerdctal family. In other refpecls, they left the 
 tews in the full pofieffion, both of their civil and ec- 
 cleftaftical government, till the death of Archelaus, 
 the immediate fucceflbr of Herod. The year 
 after his death, they reduced Judoea into a Roman 
 province. Then it was, that the power of life 
 and death was taken from the Jews, and juftice 
 
 was
 
 HORABIBLIC.^. 17 
 
 was thenceforth adminiftered in the name and by 
 the laws of Rome. Then, therefore, but not till 
 then, the fceptre departed from Judak y and the 
 lawgiver from bis feet. It may eafily be conceived 
 what effect the overpowering influence and domi- 
 nion of Rome would have, both on the written and 
 the fpoken language of Judaea. 
 
 III. 5. The New Teftament abounds alfo with 
 expreffions introduced into it, in confequence of 
 the unavoidable intercourfe of the Jews with their 
 jf/iaticy Syrian, and Arabian neighbours. It is ob- 
 fervable, that here, as in moft inftances where 
 Afia is fpoken of, with a reference to the New 
 Teftament, the word denotes a very fmall part of 
 the territory, generally included under that deno- 
 mination. It denotes, in its largeft fenfe, the con- 
 tinent of the world, on the eaftern front of Eu- 
 rope ; in a lefs large fenfe it denotes the great 
 peninfula between the fea of Pontus and the Me- 
 diterranean ; in a more confined fenfe, it denotes 
 the part of Afia on the weftern fide of the Tau- 
 rus ; in a fenfe ftill more confined, it denotes the 
 proconfular Afia, or the Afia propria of Ptolemy, 
 comprifing Lydia, Ionia, Caria, Myfia, Phrygia, 
 and the proconfular Hellefpont. But, in the New 
 Teftament, it generally denotes a ftill narrower 
 tra& of country; that part only of proconfular 
 Afia, which comprizes the country of Ephefus and 
 Lydia. With the inhabitants of this country, the 
 Jews bad fonie intercourfe, and the induftry of 
 C commentators*
 
 i? HO R^E BIB LIC JE. 
 
 commentators has traced, in many inftances, its 
 idiom in the new fcriptures. In other inftances 
 they have traced in them the language of Perfia, 
 Arabia, and particularly of Syria. 
 
 III. 6. It fhould alfo be obferved, that, among 
 the Jews ihcmfelves y there was a confiderable dif- 
 ference of dialett. The firft divifion of the coun- 
 try was that, 'by Jofhua, of the whole land of 
 Canaan among the twelve tribes. To this a total 
 end was put, by the definition of the ten tribes, 
 by Salmahafler, and of the two remaining tribes, 
 by Nebuchadnezzar. After the return of the 
 Jews from their captivity, in Babylon, and at leaft 
 as early as their government under the Affemo- 
 nsean princes, the nation was diftinguifhed by * 
 fourfold distinction. The nrft, was Judaa, in- 
 cluding- Idumsea; the fecond, was Samaria; the 
 third, was Galilaea, diftinguifhed into the Ga- 
 lilaea Superior, or the parts bordering on Phoenicia 
 and' Syria, and the Galilaea Inferior, comprifing 
 Tiberias, Nazareth, Caphernaum, the Itabyrian 
 Mountain, and the Decapolis ; the fourth, was 
 Pcraea, which cornprifed> with fome increafe, the 
 portion ofc the Promifed Land, occupied by the 
 tribes of Ruben and Gad. All thefe .were under 
 fhe'-goveFUBient of Herod the Great. Upon his 
 death-, Auguftus .^allotted Judasa, Idumsea, and 
 Samaria, to his fan 1 Archelaus, under the title o 
 Ethnarch; Galilsa and Persea, to Herod Anti- 
 j>s s rahother - f his-fonF, under the; title of Te- 
 
 trarchj
 
 H O R M B I B L I C JE. 19 
 
 trarch ; and Ituraea, and Trachonitis, and the 
 greateft part of the country beyond the Jordan, 
 to Philip, his other fon, under the fame title. 
 Some time after, Archelaus and Herod Antipas 
 were banilhed, and the territories in their govern- 
 ments were reduced into a Roman province. On 
 the death of Philip, the territory in his govern- 
 ment was added to the tetrarchate of Syria. Each 
 of thefe divifions had its own provincial dialect. 
 The fpeech of Peter, when Chrift appeared 
 before the tribunal of Caiaphas, betrayed him to be 
 a GaJilaean. But a difference of dialect was the 
 flighteft of the many points of difference between 
 the Samaritans and the general body of the Jews. 
 They were of a different origin ; the Samaritans 
 being a mixed body of people, chiefly Cuthites, 
 but all of heathenHh extraction^ fent by the king 
 of Aflyria to repeople the kingdom of the ten tribes, 
 whom he had carried into baniftiment. Some time 
 after their arrival into the land of Ifrael, they em- 
 braced the worfhip of the true God, and built a 
 temple to his honout on mount Gerizim, aflerting 
 againft the Jews, that it was the place confecrated 
 by God himfelf to his worfhip. They admitted the 
 divine authority of the Pentateuch, but rejected the 
 other books sf-Mofca. It is fuppofed they woi> 
 (hipped feveral heathen deities in conjunction with 
 the true God. Religious hatred feems never to 
 have been carried further than it was between the 
 Jews and the Samajitans. - Such was the general 
 C 2 ftat
 
 aa HOR^E B I B L I C JE. 
 
 ftate of the Jews, as far as it may be fuppofed to 
 have influenced their language at the time of the 
 arrival of Chrift. Whatever influence it had on 
 their language when they expreffed themfelves in 
 Hebrew, the fame, and not in a lefs degree, it had 
 on it, when they exprefled themfelves in Greek. 
 
 IV. 
 
 The biblical labours of Origen and St. Jerom 
 are well known, and will be mentioned in a further 
 part of thefe obfervations. FROM THE DEATH 
 OF ST. JEROM, TO THE REVIVAL OF LETTERS 
 UNDER THE PONTIFICATE OF LEO THE Xth, 
 a period of about one thoufand years, now comes 
 under consideration. 
 
 IV. i. The comparatively low Jl ate of lit era- 
 turfy and of the arts and fciencts^ during this middle 
 age, muft be acknowledged} but juftice claims our 
 gratitude to the venerable body of men, who ftrove 
 againft the barbarifm of the times, and to whofe 
 exertions we entirely owe all the precious remains 
 of facred or profane antiquity, that furvived that 
 calamitous aera. For whatever. has been preferved 
 to us of the writers of Greece or Rome ; for all 
 we know of the language of thofe invaluable 
 writers ; for all the monuments of our holy religion ; 
 for the facred writings which contain the word of 
 God; and for the traditions of the wife and the 
 good refpe&ing it, we are folely, under providence, 
 indebted to the zeal and exertions of the priefts 
 
 and
 
 HOR-fflBIBLIC-ffi. *i 
 
 and monks of the church of Rome, during this 
 middle age. If, during this period, there were a 
 decay of tafte and learning, it is wholly to be 
 afcribed to the general ruin and devaftation, brought 
 on the chriftian world, by the inroads and con- 
 quefts of the barbarians, and the other events, 
 which were the caufcs, or the confequsnces of the 
 decline and fall of the Roman empire. Befides, 
 while we admit and lament, we fhould not exagge- 
 rate, the literary degradation, of the times, we 
 fpeak cf. Biblical literature, the immediate fubject 
 of the prefent inquiry, was by no means entirely 
 neglected. Doctor Hody, in his moft learned 
 Hijhria Scholaftica Hebraici Textus ^erjionum- 
 que Grtscts et Latines Vulgates^ places this cir- 
 cumftance beyond the reach of controverfy. He 
 proves, that, there never was a time, even in the 
 darkeft ages, when the ftudy of the original lan- 
 guage of the Holy Writings was wholly neglected. 
 In England alone, the works of the venerable Bede, 
 of Holy Robert of Lincoln, and of Roger Bacon, 
 {hew how greatly it was prized and purfued there, 
 
 IV. 2. Copies of works were not then multi- 
 plied, at the parry's will, by the inftantaneous ope- 
 ration of the prefs. They were tranfcribed by the 
 labour of individuals, a tafk of infinite pains and 
 perfeverance, and to which, (for gain was out of 
 the queftion), nothing but the confcientious and 
 unwearied induflry of a religious copyift, was equal. 
 To this Gerhardus Tychfen, the proteftant pro- 
 C 3 feflbr
 
 ai H O R'< BT-BLIC^E. 
 
 feffbr of philofophy and oriental literature, at Bu- 
 zot, in his Tentamen de variis Codicum Hebr&arum 
 Veteris Teftamentl^ MSS. Roflockii 1772, bears an 
 ample testimony. He obferves, that, all manu- 
 fcripts, of the, Maforah, with figures of dragons, 
 fphinxes, bears,, hogs, or any other of the unclean 
 animals j all manufcripts- of f the- Teffcament, with 
 the Vulgate tranflation, or corrected to it, or cor- 
 rected to the iSeptuagint verfion ; all manufcripts, 
 not written with black ink, or in which there are 
 words written in golden letters, or where the words 
 or the margin are illuminated, and all manufcripts, 
 where the worelAdonai is written inftead of the 
 word Jehovah, wer& written by chriftians, and not 
 by Jews. " I am fenftble," fays he, that, it is the 
 " general opinion, that, the ftudy of the fine arts' 
 "was buried during the middle ages. It is not, 
 *' however, lefs certain, that, while, during many 
 " ages, literature was cruftied every where elfc, 
 " (he found a refuge in monafteries. From unex- 
 " ceptionablc evidence, it may be fhewn, that, while 
 " fome of the monks applied themfelvcs to the 
 " ftudy of divinity, medicine, or dialectic, others 
 " made themlelves thoroughly acquainted with the 
 " Hebrew lanp-uage, in order to <:orifouiid the Jews, 
 " in their difputes with them, by producing the 
 " orig-inal text ; others, (of whom fome were pro- 
 " felytes from the Jewifh religion), attained the 
 w higheft fkill in calligraphy, and copied Hebrew 
 marmferipts," " I cannot deny," he fays in 
 6 anotliej-
 
 HORy BIBLIC 
 
 .another part of his work, "'that in 
 " the paradife and nurfery of monks, calligraphy 
 "arrived at its fummit of excelki'.ce, jjarticularly 
 "in monafteries. The Jews, with whom Spain 
 <s at that time abounded, appear to have learnt it 
 " from them. In proof of this jafiertion^ I may 
 " appeal to fome Hebrew manufcripts,. ^ rny/cif 
 " have feen, where the letters, throughout, ^ arc fo 
 * c equal, that the whole has the appearance pf p.r.int. 
 " Frequendy, after reflecting on this fingular* .cir- 
 *' cumftance, I have been inclined to thipk, ,that, 
 < the monks, who cultivated the ftudy of calligraphy 
 "with great eagernels, had the forms, of ail the 
 <l letters of the alphabet, impreflcd into, or ejigraved 
 tc out of thin plates ; that, whole pages or columns 
 " of thefe plates were placed under the parchment 
 ."or vellum, on which.it was intended to ^write, 
 <c and then, by drawing a pencil over them, they 
 " were able to produce this furprifing equality of 
 ." letters ; or, it may have been that the {hapes or 
 "forms of the letters were fir ft imprinted upon 
 " the parchment or vellum, and afterwards filled 
 " up." Such is the acknowledged merit of the 
 monks as tranfcribers of the Holy Writings. 
 
 IV. 3. The Jews be/lowed, on the copies made by 
 thenj) even an excefs of care. It has been a con- 
 frant rule with them, that, whatever is confidered as 
 corrupt, fhall never be ufed, but fhall be burnt, or 
 .otherwife deftroyed. A book of the law wanting 
 :but one letter, with one letter too much, or with 
 
 C A- an
 
 4 H O R .ffi BIBLIC-ffl. 
 
 an error in one fingle letter, written with anything, 
 but ink, or written on parchment made of the hide 
 of an unclean animal, or on parchment, not pur- 
 pofely prepared for that ufe, or prepared by any but 
 an Ifraelite, or on (kins of parchment tied together 
 by unclean firings, fhall be holden to be corrupt : 
 that, no word fhall be written, without a line firft 
 'drawn on the parchment j no word written by 
 heart, or without having been firft pronounced 
 orally by the writer: that, before he writes the 
 name of God, he fliall warn his pen ; that, no 
 letter fliall be joined to another ; and that, if the 
 blank parchment cannot be feen all around each 
 letter, the roll (hall be corrupt. There are fettled 
 rules for the length and breadth of each fheet, and 
 for the fpace to be left between each letter, each 
 word, and each feftion. Thefe, Maimonides men- 
 tions as fome of the principal rules to be ob- 
 ferved in copying the facred rolls. Even to this 
 day, it is an obligation on the perfons who copy the 
 Sacred Writings, for the ufe of the fynagogue, to 
 obferve them. Thofe who have not feen the rolls, 
 ufed in the fynagogues, can have no conception of 
 the exquifite beauty, corre&nefs and equality of 
 the writing. 
 
 V. 
 
 But the attention of the Jews was by no means 
 confined to the writing of the copies of the holy 
 word 5 they made almoft incredible exertions to 
 
 preferve
 
 HOR-ffi BIBLlC-ffi. *$ 
 
 preferve the GENUINENESS AND INTEGRITY OF 
 
 THE TEXT. 
 
 V. i. This produced, what has been termed the 
 Maforab^ the moft ftupendous monument, in the 
 whole hiftory of literature, of minute and perfevering 
 labour. The perfons who were employed in it, 
 and who afterwards received from it, the name of 
 Maforites, were fome Jewifti literati, who flou- 
 rifhed after the commencement of the chriftian 
 aera. With a reverential, not to fay a fuperftitious 
 attention, of which hiftory does not furnifli an in- 
 ftance, to be urged in comparifon with it, they 
 counted all the verfes, words, and letters of all the 
 twenty-four books of the Old Teftament, and of 
 each of thofe twenty-four books, and of every 
 feftion of each book, and of all its fubdivifions. 
 " Then," (fays Doctor Benjoin in his valuable 
 preliminary difcourfe to his Tranflation of the Pro- 
 phet Jonah), " they counted the number of all the 
 " fimilar words of each fe&ion, and of every fub- 
 " divifion of that book. For inftance, fo many 
 " times the word Elohim occurs in the firft fubdi- 
 " vifion of the firft fecStion, and fo many times oc- 
 " curs the fame word in the whole fecYion, and fo 
 " many times, in the whole book. Not fatisfied 
 " with this, they counted every word that mult be 
 ** written with a certain letter, which is called full 
 " with fuch a letter, and which word would have 
 " the fame found, if it were written without that 
 " letter. Then they counted every word that muft 
 
 "be
 
 %6 H O R JE B I li L I C JE. 
 
 u be written without fuch a letter, and which word 
 *' would have the fame pronunciation, if it were 
 "written with tharletter. Then they pointed out 
 " every verfe, in which fuch or any other word 
 " occurs, by mentioning the fir ft three or four 
 " words, the firfl part ,of each fentence in which 
 u that word is written, in fuch and fuch a manner, 
 " that is, with or without fuch a letter." Such is 
 the celebrated Maforah of the- Jews. Originally it 
 did not accompany the text. Afterwards the greateft 
 part of it was written in the margin. To bring it 
 into the margin, it was neceflary to abridge the 
 work itfelf. This abridgment was called the Ma- 
 jornh Parva. Being found too fb.ort, a more COT 
 pious abridgment of it was inferted. This, in con- 
 tradiftin&ion from the other Maforah, was called 
 the Maforah Magna. The omitted parts were added 
 at the end of the text, arid this was called the Ma-> 
 Jorab F'malis. 
 
 . V. 2. In the Jewifii manufcripts and printed 
 editions, a word is often found inclofed in a circle, 
 or with an afterifk over it, and a word written in 
 the margin of the fame line. The former is called 
 the Ketbibh, the latter the Ken. In thefe, much 
 myilery has been difcovered by the Maforites. 
 Some have fuppofed them coeval with the text; 
 and that they were communicated, verbally, by 
 Mofes himfelf : fo that he inftru&ed the people 
 generally, and the Levites, his own people, in par- 
 Jicular, that the word he had written in fuch a 
 
 manner,
 
 H O RJG B I B L I CJE. *y 
 
 manner, fhould be underftood in fuch another man- 
 ner, and communicated his reafons for it. This, 
 they fay came by oral tradition, to the Maforites, 
 who committed it to writing. The more prevailing 
 opinion is, that, they are partly various readings 
 collected from the time of Efdras, and partly critical 
 obfervations, or as they have been called infinua-. 
 tions, of the Maforites, to fubftitute proper or re- 
 gular for improper and irregulaj, and ibmetimes 
 decent, for indecent exprefiions, in the text. It is 
 obfcrvable, that, none of them occur in, the Pro- 
 phecy of Malachi. 
 
 VI. 
 
 The next care of the Jews, was to afcertain and 
 fix the pronunciation. . With this view they in- 
 vented the Vowel Points. To underftarid this, it 
 may be proper to obferve, that, every language ne- 
 ceflarily confifts of thofe founds, which are produced 
 by the mere al of opening the mouth, and which 
 are, therefore, called vowels ; and of thofe, which 
 are produced, both by opening the mouth, and by a 
 particular application of its three principal organs, 
 the lips, the teeth, and the tongue j and' which, 
 from the joint operation necefiary to produce ttem, 
 are called confonants. In moft languages, the 
 marks or figns, made ufe of in writing, to denote 
 the vowel founds, do not exceed five. But each 
 of thefe is fufceptible of the different inflections of 
 he grave, the fknder, and the clofe. Even thofe 
 
 require
 
 HOR^BIBLIC^E. 
 
 require a ftill further fubdivifion. Now the natural, 
 or, as they may be termed, the original, founds of the 
 vowels, may be taught by precept ; but their fur- 
 ther modes, or at leaft the application of thofe 
 modes, can only be acquired by practice. The 
 confequence has been, that, in every language, the 
 marks or figns ufed to denote the vowel founds, by 
 no means reach all their inflections, or fhew their 
 particular application. The object of the vowel 
 points, was to fix a written fymbol of every found, 
 which the Hebrew vowels aflumed in pronuncia- 
 tion, and to afcertain the particular found, each 
 vowel mould have, in the fyllable or place where 
 it was ufed ; fo that, a reader might find the exadl 
 found by his eye, without any refort to ufage, or 
 any neceffity for further inftrudion, than what a 
 complete knowledge of the vowel points furnifhed. 
 In the Hebrew alphabet, the vowel characters were 
 but three, the Aleph, the Vau, and the Jod, cor- 
 refponding to the A, the U, and the I, of the Ro- 
 mans. Thefe, from the affiftance they gave to the 
 enunciation of a vaft variety of words, were called 
 the metres leRionis^ or the parents of reading. 
 But they fufficed to denote a very fmall number 
 only, of the many vowel founds. Befides, there 
 are many words, in Hebrew, which confift entirely 
 of confonants ; and of which, therefore without the 
 affiftance of vowels, there could be no enunciation, 
 To remedy this inconvenience, the Maforites in- 
 vented the vowel points. They firft fettled the, 
 
 founds
 
 HOR-flS B I B L I C 4. .9 
 
 founds of each of the matres leflioms, and laid down 
 general rules to fix the pofitions, where they mould 
 be founded ; and where they fhould be filent. They 
 then appropriated to their purpofe two fymbol?, 
 the point and the ftrait line. Thefe they multiplied 
 and combined, both feparately and together, into a 
 variety of forms. To each of thofe forms, they 
 affixed a particular vowel found. Thus, leaving 
 nothing to be acquired by ufe, or even by oral in- 
 ftrudtion, (except as for as it extended to the doc- 
 trines of the vowel points), they eftabliflied a cor- 
 refponding and appropriate fign for all the vowel 
 founds in the Hebrew language, and all their in- 
 flections and modifications. At firft view, it muft 
 be thought, that, the effect of the Maforah in pre- 
 ferving the integrity of the text of the Hebrew, 
 and the effect of the vowel points in afcertaining 
 and fixing its pronunciation, muft have been very 
 great. But feveral writers of great biblical name, 
 have abfolutely and explicitly denied their utility. 
 They affert both to be a modern invention ; that, 
 the Maforah has only ferved to perpetuate the cor- 
 ruptions and imperfections of the text, and, that, 
 the application of the vowel points to the pronun- 
 ciation of the language, is a work of ufelefs la- 
 bour, and involves the learner in a maze of per- 
 plexing and disheartening difficulty. The Jews, 
 themfelves have never admitted the vowel points 
 into the rolls, or manufcripts ufed for religious 
 worfjhip, in their Synagogues ; and fame of their 
 
 ableft
 
 *o HOR^E E 1 E L I C M. 
 
 ableft and moft intelligent writers, have joined in 
 the opinion, that, they are a modern invention, and 
 that, fo far from' facilitating, they perplex and in- 
 creafe the difficulty of the pronunciation of the 
 Hebrew. Few literary controverfies have been 
 agitated with more learning, or greater warmth. 
 Capellus was firft in time, and certainly among the 
 firft in learning and ability, who contefted the an- 
 tiquity and utility of the Maforah and the vowel 
 points : they had ftrenuous defenders in the two 
 Buxtorfs. In the opinion of many writers of the 
 firft eminence, (among whom are reckoned Hou- 
 bigeant, Kennicot, L'Advocat, the late Bifhop 
 Lovvth, Doctor Kennicott, and Doctor Geddes), 
 the victory is decided in favour of Capellus. Still 
 however, fome writers- of refpectability,,as Doctor 
 Rutherford, Doctor Benjoin, and feveral German 
 writers of -high renown, are ftrenuous advocates in 
 their favour. The rejection of the vowel points 
 made it neceflary to fubititute fomething of equal 
 power, in their room. Here Capellus was at a lofs. 
 But, fome time after the beginning of the prefent 
 century, .Monfieur Mafclef, a canon of Amiens, 
 found a complete fubftitute for them. He con- 
 fidered the Aleph, Heth, Vau, and Jod, to be the 
 four original Hebrew vowels. Thefe he directed 
 to be pronounced, wherever they occurred: and 
 where two or. more confonants followed, without 
 any of thefe fuppofed vowel letters, he directed,- 
 that, after each of the confonants, that ; vowel 
 fhould be founded, which is its auxiliary found in 
 
 the
 
 H O RzB B I B L I C^. 3 * 
 
 the alphabet j as an E, after a Beth ; an I after a 
 Ghimmel ; an U after a Nun ; and an A after a 
 Thau. Modern writers have improved on this 
 fy'ftem, by fuppofmg the Ain of the Hebrew alpha- 
 bet, to correfpond to the Roman O. This makes 
 the number of Hebrew vowels complete. To 
 explain the two fyftems more clearly, the following 
 Englifh chara&ers, fupplied with Hebrew points, 
 as below, 
 
 Gv s, ths d r dl brd, 
 
 render, as nearly as the founds of the two lan- 
 guages admit, the petition in our Lord's Prayer, 
 " Give us this day our daily bread." The fame 
 letters, read in the Mafclefian fyftem, would be 
 pronounced, Give fa thas da re dala bered. It 
 muft be admitted, that, if the pronunciation of the 
 Hebrew according to the vowel points, be the 
 right pronunciation, the pronunciation of them 
 according to the Mafclefian fyftem is miferably 
 defective. But it is abfolutely denied by the ad- 
 vocates for the Mafclefian fyftem, that, the pro- 
 nunciation according to the vowel points is the 
 true pronunciation. A concife 'ftatement of the 
 arguments for and againft the vowel points, may 
 be -found in Houbigeant's Preface to his Radnes 
 Hebfaiquesy Paris 1732. Thofe, who wifti to in- 
 veftigate the fubje& further, muft have recourfe to 
 the writings of Capellus, and the two Buxtorfs, 
 who, though firft in the cpntjoyerfy, completely 
 exnatifted the fubjeft. " 
 
 VII. A
 
 S i HORJE BIBLICJE. 
 
 VII. 
 
 VII. An attention to the ftudy of the lan- 
 guage, naturally produces a defire to be acquainted 
 \vith the HISTORY OF THE JEWS. The Sacred 
 Writings which compofe the Old Teftament, lead 
 the reader to the return of the Jews from the Ba- 
 bylonilh captivity, and their wars under the Afl 
 monaean princes : thus far alfo the works of Fla- 
 vius Jofephus accompany him ; thence they lead 
 him on to the time of their final difperfion. 
 
 Few parts of ancient hiflory are lefs attended 
 to than that which comprehends the period of time 
 which intervened between the return of the Jews 
 from the captivity and the birth of Chrift. Yet 
 on many accounts itdeferves particular attention. 
 
 Year 
 
 By the decree of Cyrus, Zerubbabel, the World, 
 prince or chief of the Jews, was fent to re- 
 build the temple in 34^9 
 
 Jofedek, lineally defcended from Aaron, 
 was at that time high prieft ; and the prieft- 
 hood remained in his family till it was af- 
 fumed by Judas Macchabaeus, and by that 
 means paffed into the family of the Afmo- 
 naeans. This was a period of 369 years - 3838 
 
 It continued in the Afmonaean family till 
 they were deftroyed by Herod a period of 
 129 years. In the laft year of his reign 
 Chrift was born - - - 3967 
 
 The three following genealogical tables will 
 ferve to explain this period. 
 
 The
 
 H O R & B I B L r-C M. 33 
 
 The firft is a genealogical account of the high 
 
 priefts, who after the captivity, officiated in the 
 
 temple built by Zerubbabel, or, as it is generally 
 
 calledj the Second Temple ; from him it is entitled 
 
 . S lemmata Zerubbabellano- Pontificia. 
 
 The fecond is a genealogical table of the Mac- 
 chabaean, or, as they are more, properly called, the 
 Afmomean Princes j' from them it is entitled 
 Sternmata Ajmontsana. 
 
 The third is' a genealogical table of Herod's 
 family ; from his Idumaean extraction it is entitled 
 Ste?timata Idumcsana. 
 
 It ihould be obferved, that, mention is made ia 
 them, of thofe peribns only, who are fpoken of par- 
 ticularly in the Jewim hiftory, and of thofe through 
 whom the defcent to them is deduced. So that, 
 except in this point of view, the Stemmata produced 
 here are very incomplete. Thofe who wiih to fee 
 them at full length will find them in Anderfon's 
 Royal Genealogies. The Idumaean pedigree is ex- 
 cellently ftated in Relandus's Pale/Una, in the third 
 "volume of Brotier's Tacitus^ and more at length in 
 Noldius's Hiftoria Idumaa, publilhed in Haver- 
 camp's edition of Jofephus. 
 
 Jofedeck,
 
 S 4 H O "R . M B it B L I C JE. 
 
 Jofedeok, the firft of the high priefts mention- 
 ed in the- Stemmata Zenibbabellano-Ponfificidy was 
 high pricft,- when the captivity began. His fon 
 aflifted Zerubbafoel in rebuilding the temple. Elia- 
 fhib was contemporary with Artaxerxes Longi- 
 manus, called in fcripture, Ahazuerus, who married 
 Efther the daughter of IVTordecai. Johahrian flew 
 his brother Jefus. 
 
 ManaiTcth their brother, retired to Samaria, and 
 built the temple on mount Gerizim. 
 
 In the time of the priefthood of Jadduah, Alex- 
 ander part into Afia, and put an end -to the Perfian 
 empire by the victories he obtained over Darius. 
 The Jews thereupon became" fubjects of the kings 
 of Madedon. This was in 3670. They continued 
 fiich, till, in 3700, 'Ptolemy So&r declared himfelf 
 king of Egypt ; and then- they became a part of his 
 fubje&s. In 3806, Antiochus Magnus, ting of 
 Syria, defeated the Egyptian army in the battle of 
 Paneas, and feized all Coelo- Syria and Paleftine. 
 The Jews then became fubjech of the" kings of 
 Syria.
 
 B I B L I C JE. 
 
 35 
 
 STEMMATA ZERUBB ABEL AN O - PONTIFICIA. 
 
 JoHANNAM. 
 
 JAPDWAH. 
 
 JESUS. 
 
 MAKASSETK, 
 
 ONIAS I. 
 
 SIMON I. 
 ^ furnamed thp Juft. 
 
 MANHASSETU 
 ruled, becaufe his nephe\^, 
 
 the Juft, was under ae. 
 
 ON i AS II. 
 
 ELEAZIR. 
 
 SIMON II. 
 
 1 
 
 ONIAS III. JASON. MENELAUS LYSJMMACEUJ 
 
 depofed by Antio- fucceeded Jafon. fucceeded Menelaui. 
 
 chus Epiphanes, 
 who gave the of- 
 fice to his brother. 
 
 W ONIAS IV. 
 
 -5s I On Judas Maccha- 
 baeus's afluming 
 the priefthood, he 
 went to Egypt, and 
 
 L built a Jewifli tem- 
 ple at Heliopolis. 
 
 D 2
 
 55 HOR^: BIBLIC^B. 
 
 The family of Joarib was the firft clafs of priefts 
 of the fons of Eleazer, the fon of Aaron the high 
 prieft. Some time after the captivity, one of the 
 family was called Afmonaeus. From him the family 
 received the name of Afmonaans. Antiochus Epi- 
 phanes began the fevere perfecution of the Jews, 
 which occafioned Mattathias, a leader in the family, 
 to rife in arms againfl him. This was in 3836. 
 The vi&ories of his fons made the Jews independent 
 of the Syrian monarch. 
 
 The recent victories of Pompey the Great, .over 
 Tigranes, gave the Romans a pretence, and a 
 quarrel which happened in 3940, between Hyrca- 
 nus and Ariftobulus, the fons of Alexander Jan- 
 naeus, gave them an opportunity of interfering in 
 the affairs of the Jews. From this time the Jews 
 became fubje&s to the Romans.
 
 HO R-ffi B-I B L^- 
 
 EMM ATA'' AS MONTANA. 
 
 MATTAtHlAS 
 dwelt at Modcn, and took, up arms 
 againlt Anticchus Epipha, 
 
 '. 
 
 'O 
 
 c 
 <u < 
 
 0, 
 
 I I 
 
 JUDAS.. JONATHAN SIMON ELEAZAR 
 
 3d fon. fucceeded Judas, fucceeded Jonathan. - died in battle. 
 
 JOHN, furnamed HYRCANUJ, 
 fucceeded Simon hrs father. 
 ' 
 
 , . .,..!. 
 
 I I 
 
 ARISTOBOLUS I. ALEXANDI-R JANN.TU.S 
 
 fucceeded his father. fucceeded ARISTOBULVS. 
 
 HYRCANUS. 
 
 ARISTOBULUS II. 
 
 ALEXANDER. 
 
 ANTICONVI. 
 
 ARISTOBULUS III. 
 
 MARIAMNX, = 
 
 called the noble Afmo- 
 
 naean, as ihe lived to be 
 
 the fole reprefentativc 
 
 of that noble family* 
 
 HXR09. 
 
 D 3
 
 3* HO KJ& * IE LI CM. 
 
 When the Jews were carried captives to Babyjon, 
 the EdomiteS} or Idumeeans^ poflefled themfelves of 
 the fouth part of the lands occupied by the tribe of 
 Judah. John Hyrcanus, the Afmonaean prince of 
 that name, conquered them in 3875, and made, 
 them embrace the Jewifh religion. Antipas, the 
 grandfather of Herod, was an Idumsean Jew. Herod 
 began his reign in 3967. He married Mariamne, 
 the fole reprefentative of the noble family of the, 
 Afmonaeans, and thence called by her contempora- 
 ries the noble Afmonaean. He enlarged, adorned, 
 and in a manner rebuilt the temple of Zerubbabel. 
 As it was built on the fame foundation, and with 
 the lame materials, as fer as they- could go, it wa& 
 not confidered as a new temple, diftincl: from that 
 of Zerubbabel. In the thirty-third year of his 
 reign Chriil was born. The following year Herod 
 died.
 
 11 O R JB, B I B L I C &. 39 
 
 S T E M M A T A I D U M JE A N A. 
 
 ANTIPAS. 
 
 I 
 
 ANTIPATER. 
 
 HEROD. = MARIAMXE. r= M\\RJAMNE. == MATTHOA. = CLEOPATRA. 
 
 zd daughter of.Simon. 
 
 r 
 
 HEROD EAPHIL1PPU Si 
 
 riJeCtJoned by St. Mark, 
 ch. vi. v. J7. 
 
 ARISTOBCLVS. 
 Put to death by his father's 
 orders a few days before his 
 deceale ; which gave rife tj 
 the faying of Auguftus, that 
 he would rather be Herod's 
 iwine than his child. 
 
 PHILJPPUJ. 
 Terrarch of Trachonitis. 
 Luke, ch. iii. v. i. 
 
 ACRIPPA I. 
 
 St. Peter imprifoned 
 in hisi'rfe-time. He put 
 to death James, the bio. 
 ther of John. He was 
 flruck with death at the 
 public thews. 
 
 I I 
 
 ARCHELAUS, HEROPES Asf IPA$ HERODIAS. 
 
 , Succeeded his rathe* ' te'whcni -CKrl ft 
 in Judza,, SacparJa, , was fent by Pilate, 
 and Jdurriaea, under ' 
 the title of ethnarct, 
 mentioned by Mat- 
 
 thew, th.ii; v. 22. AD-.UGHTER, 
 
 whofe dancing pleafed 
 
 r-> Jlcrodes Antipas, and 
 
 ! prevailed oa him to 
 
 HEK.oDiAS.-fr put St. John the Bap. 
 
 Firft the wifcpf Phi- t:it to death. 
 
 lip #it tilrtA&tt. thafi of 
 Herocits A.. 
 
 AGRIPPA II. DRU^US. 
 before whom St. Paul 
 f leaded. Afts, ch. xxir. 
 
 BERENICE, 
 
 before whom 
 
 St. Paul pleaded. 
 
 DRVSILI.A = FISTUS, 
 
 the proconful, bf- 
 fore whom St. Paul 
 pleaded. Acts, ch. 
 xxiv. 
 
 D 4
 
 40 HO R M B I B L I C M. 
 
 The following is a catalogue of the High Priefts, 
 from the beginning of Herod's reign, till the final 
 deftru<5lion of the temple. They had no hereditary 
 right, but were fet up and removed at the pleafure 
 of Herod and his fucceflbrs. 
 
 Ananclus, 
 
 Annas, and Cai- 
 
 ^Elionseus. 
 
 Jefus. 
 
 phas his fon-in- 
 
 Jofeph. 
 
 Simon. 
 
 law, joint col- 
 
 Annanias, called 
 
 Jofephus. 
 
 leagues at the 
 
 by Saint Paul 
 
 Joazar. 
 
 time of Chrift's 
 
 a white wall. 
 
 Eleazar, 
 
 paflion. 
 
 Ifhmael. 
 
 Jefus. 
 
 Annas alone : 
 
 Jofephus, 
 
 Joazar. 
 
 A6rs iv. & v. 
 
 Anna. 
 
 Anna or Annas, 
 
 Jonathas. 
 
 Jefus. 
 
 Ifhmael. 
 
 Theophilus. 
 
 Jefus. 
 
 Eleazar. 
 
 Simon. 
 
 Matthias. 
 
 Simon. 
 
 Matthias. 
 
 Fhannias. 
 
 Phannias was high prieft when Jerufalem and 
 the temple were deftroyed "by Titus Vefpaflan, 
 This was in the yoth year of the Chriftian asra. 
 Since that time the Jews have neither had temple 3 
 nor high prieft, nor holy city. 
 
 VII. 2.
 
 HOR^ SIBLICJE. 4 
 
 VII. 2. With refpeft to the prefent f.ate cf 
 the Jews-* their hiftory, from the death of Chrift 
 to the prefent century, has been 'ably written by 
 Morrfieur Bafnage. ' It prefents a fcene of furFering 
 and perfecution unparalleled in the annals of the 
 world. Wherever the Jews have been eftablifhed, 
 they necefTarily have borne their fhare of the evils 
 of the age, in which they lived, and the country, in 
 which they refided. But, befides their common (hare 
 in the fufferings of fociety, they have undergone a 
 feries of horrid and unutterable calamities, which 
 no other defcription of men, have experienced in 
 any other age or any other country. Brotier com- 
 putes the number of thofe, who perifhed by the 
 fword between the year 66 and the year 70, at two 
 millions. When we reflect on them we may au- 
 drefs die Jews, as the Rabbi Jochanan is faid to 
 have addrefled the temple, at the time of the fiege 
 of Jerufalem, when he felt it fhaking, and obferved 
 'the gates opening of their own accord, " O tem- 
 " pie, temple, why doeshhou fhake ! and ar"t thus 
 " moved!' We know thou art to be deftroyed." 
 But while we reverence, -in their fufferings and ca- 
 lamities, the prophecies which foretold them, fo 
 long before they happened ; while, in humble ii- 
 Jence and fubmiffion, we adore the infcrutable and 
 un(earchab'le decrees of God, who thus terribly 
 vifits the fins of fathers on their children, we iall 
 find, that, in judging between them and their per- 
 fecutors, it is a juftice due to them from its, to 
 
 acknowledge,
 
 43 HORJE B1BLICJE. 
 
 acknowledge, that, if on feme occafions, .they may 
 be thought to, have deferved their misfortunes by 
 their .pri.yate.vices or public crimes, it has oftner, 
 happened, that they have been the innocent victims 
 cf avarice, rage or mistaken zeal. Res eft facra, 
 vifir. Their fuffcrings alone intitled them to fome 
 compaflion ; and our companion for them rifes to 
 an higher, feeling,, when, to ufe the language of 
 St. Paul, (ix. Rom. 4, 5, and 6,) we confider " that, 
 " their's wag the adoption, the glory, the covenants, 
 " the, law, the worfhip, the promifs, and the fathers, 
 an4 that from them defcended the Chrift accord- 
 " ing to the flefb, who is God over all, blefled 
 for everj" and ( xi. Rom. 26, 28), " That the 
 " hour approaches, when all Jfael fhall be faved, 
 " when the deliverer ihall come out of-Zion, and 
 <c fhall turn away ungodlinefs from Jacob j" and 
 that, even in their prefent flate of rejection, " they 
 " are beloved of God, for their father's fake." To 
 the honour of the See of Rome, it mufl be faid, 
 that, the Roman pontiffs, .with fome few exceptions, 
 have treated them with lenity, defended them againft 
 their pcrfecutors, and often checked the miftaken 
 zeal of thofe, who fought to convert them by force. 
 Thus, St. Gregory the Great always exported his 
 clergy, and the other parts of his flock, to behave 
 to them with candour and tenderncfs. HP repeat- 
 edly declared, that, they fliould be brought iuto the 
 unity of faith, by gentle means, by fair perfuafions, 
 by charitable advic,e, not b,y far.ce ; and 3 tJiai, as
 
 H O : R.J3 B I B L I C,JE. 43 
 
 the law of the Hate- did not allow their building 
 new fynagogues, they ought to bo allowed the free 
 ufe of their own places of worfhip. His fucce$brs, 
 in. general, pursued the. fame Jine of conduct. The 
 perfecutions excited by the Emperor Heraclius 
 againft the Jews,, were blamed at the fourth council 
 of Toledo, which declared " that, it was unlawful 
 <( and unchriftianlike to force people to believe, 
 w feeing it is God alone who hardens and fhcws 
 " mercy to whom he will." St. Ifidore of Seville 
 vyas an. advocate for the mild treatment of them. 
 There is extant a letter from St. Bernard, to the 
 Archbifhpp of Mgntz, in which he ilrongly con- 
 demns the violence fhewn them by the erufaders. 
 At a latter period, Pope ' Gregory .the IXth, a. 
 zealous promoter of the crufade itfclf, obferving^ 
 that, the erufaders, in many places began their ex- 
 pedition, with maflacres of the Je,ws, not only 
 loudly reprehended it, but took all proper methods 
 of preventing fuch barbarity. Pope Nicholas the 
 lid protected them, in his own dominions, even 
 againft the inquiiition ; and fent letters into Spain, 
 to prevent force being ufed to compel them to 
 abjure their religion. Pope Alexander the Vlth 
 receive^, with kindnefs, and recommended to the 
 protection of the other Italian ftates, the Jews who 
 came to Rome or other parts of Italy, on their ba- 
 nifhment from Spain and Portugal. Paul the Hid 
 ihewed them fo. much kindnefs, that Cardinal Sa- 
 dolet thought him blameable for carrying it to an 
 
 excefs.
 
 44 HOR.ffiBIBLIC.ffi. 
 
 excefs. By the bulls of Pius V. and Clement the 
 Vlllth, they are banifhed from the papal dominions, 
 except Rome, Ancona, and Avignon. Pope In- 
 nocent the Xlth, gave them feveral marks of his 
 favour. The general kindnefs of the Roman Pon- 
 tiffs to them is admitted by the Jews themfelves. 
 The Jewifh writers divide the weft into two 
 fovereignties, or rather into the two principal 
 religions that reign in it, namely the Roman 
 Catholic and the Proteftant ; extolling the kind 
 protection arid favour they receive from the 
 former, and complaining of the unkind treat- 
 ment they meet with from the latter. <c Popifh 
 " Rome," fays Barrios, " hath always protected 
 them, ever ftnce its general Titus deftroyed 
 Jerufalem." 
 
 Of the ftate of the Jews during the Middle 
 Ages we hfave" curious and interefting accounts 
 by Benjamin of Tudela in Navarre, and Rabbi 
 Pitachah ; two learned Jews, who, in the twelfth 
 century, vifited the ' principal cities of the eafr, 
 where thfc Jews had fynagogues, and returned 
 through Hungary, Germany, Italy, and France. 
 A wlfli t6 magnify the importance of their brethren, 
 is difcernible in the writings of both; and, for their 
 extreme credulity, both are juftly centered. But, 
 r.fter every reafonabld 'deduction is made on thefe 
 accounts, from the credibility of their narratives, 
 much will remain to intereft even an intelligent 
 and cautious reader. At different times, the Jews 
 
 have
 
 H O R /E B I B L I C-M. 45 
 
 have been lanifhed from France, from Germany, 
 from Spain, from Bohemia, and from Hungary. We 
 have particular accounts of the miferies of thofe, who 
 were banifned from the laft of thefe kingdoms. They 
 were baniftied from England in the reign of Edward 
 the Ift, but were permitted to , return by Oliver 
 Cromwell. Numbers of them are fettled in Perfia, 
 in the Turkish empire, in Fez, Morocco, Barbary, 
 in many parts of the Eaft Indies, in fome part of 
 Germany, in fome of the Italian States, in Poland, 
 in Pruffia, and the Hanfe towns. Their condition 
 is moft flourifhing in England and Holland; but 
 Poland is the principal, feat of their 1 literature. 
 They have no accurate deduction of their defcent 
 or genealogy. They fuppofe, tha.t,,in general they 
 are of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah,- with 
 fome among them, of, the tribe of Levi ; but the 
 Spanifh and Portuguefe Jev/s claim - this defcent, 
 exclufively for themfelves, and, in confcquence of it, 
 will not by marriage, or otherwife, incorporate 
 with the Jews of other nations. They have fe- 
 parate fynagogues; and if a Portuguefe Jewfhould, 
 even in England or Holland, marry a German 
 Jewefs, he would immediately be expelled the fy- 
 nagogue, deprived of every civil and ecclefiaftical 
 right, and ejected from the body of the nation. 
 They found their pretenfions on. a fuppofition, 
 which prevails among them, that, many of the 
 principal families removed, or were fent into 
 Spain, at the time of the captivity of Babylon. See 
 
 the
 
 4* n a R ^ B i B L r c M. 
 
 the Reflexions Critiques^ added to the fecond let- 
 ter, in the incomparable collection, intitled, Lettres 
 de quelques Juifs Portugal 's JiUeinands et Polonais, 
 a M. de Voltaire. It is certain, that, a large body 
 of Jews is eftablifhed in China ; the beft account 
 of them is in Brotier's Tacitus, 3 vol. 567. 
 
 All Jews feel the dignity of their origin, recollect 
 their former pre-eminence, with confctcus elevation 
 of character, and bear, with indignation, their prefent 
 ftate of degradation and political fubferviency.- Btj 
 they comfort themfelves with the hope,- that then- 
 hour of triumph is at hand, when the long expecT- 
 ed Mefiiah will come, will gather them from the 
 corners of the earth, will fettle them in the land of 
 their fathers, and fubjedl all the nations of the earth 
 to his throne. 
 
 VII. 4. With refpeft to the religious tenets of the 
 yews : In 1650, a grand council of them was held 
 on the plain of Ageda, about 30 leagues from Buda. 
 A great multitude of Jews, among whom were 300 
 Rabbins, afiembled there in tents. Rabbi Zacha- 
 riah, .of the tribe of Levi, prefided. They came 
 to four refolutions, that, the Mefliah was not 
 come ; that, he would appear as a great con- 
 queror, and fubjecl all nations to him ; that, he 
 would alter nothing in the Mofaic religion ; that 
 he was to be born of a virgin, and that his 'mira- 
 culous birth would be a chara&eriftic, by which 
 he fhould be known. It is obfervable, from the 
 accounts we have of the proceedings of this coun-
 
 H O R J B I B L T C 'JR. 47 
 
 "cil, that, the different fe6ls of the PharifeeS and Sa- 
 ducees were evidently difcernible in it; and that, 
 the feel: of the Pharifees predominated. But it is 
 ftill ntore remarkable, that, among other points, it 
 was debated, whether Jefus Chrift were not the 
 Meffiah. Surely the prophecies of the Old Tefta- 
 ment refpecling the Meffiah, muft, in the opinion 
 of the Jews themfelves, be ftrongly applicable to 
 Jefus Chrift, when the queftion of his being the 
 Mefliah became a fubjeft of debate on this memo- 
 rable occafion *. VII A. 
 
 * The particulars of this meeting being curious, and very 
 little known, an account of it is in'eited here from a publi- 
 cation intitled The Phoenix, printed in 1707. It is in the 
 fourth article of the fecond volume of thdl \vor4f. That article 
 is called " A narrative of the proceedings of a great council 
 of Jews, aflembled in the plain of Ageda in Hungary, 
 " about thirty leagues from Budn, to examine" the fcriptureV 
 " concerning Chrift, on the iith of O&ofrer t65o. Rv Samuel 
 " Brett, there prefent. Alfo a relation of fomfe other obferva- 
 te tions in his travels beyond the fens." After mentioning 
 fome occurrences he met with, he fays, " I orrn't to recite 
 ' many other occurrences, which by conference I (hall wil- 
 " lingly communicate to my friends, they being too mnny 
 " to commit to writing : only now the fourth remaTkaisfe 
 " thing remaineth to prefent you with ; and that is, 
 
 " The proceedings of the great coxmcil of Jews, afiembledi 
 " in the plain of Ageda in Hungary, about thirty leagues 
 ' diftant from Buda, to examine the fcrfpttires concerning 
 Chrift, on the lath of Oftober 1650. 
 
 It hath been much defired by marly honefr Chriftians, 
 <c that this narrative of the Jews council mould be publifhed, 
 which I did intend onry to communicate fo private friends. 
 
 "The
 
 4* Jf O R /E B I B L I C M> 
 
 VII. 4. The religious tends of the Jews are 
 thirteen in number : they are as follows 
 
 ift, " I believe with a true and perfect fajth that 
 
 "God 
 
 " The chief argument by which they have perfuaded me to 
 '* do it, is becauTe tliey do conceive it to be a preparative and 
 * e hopeful fign of the Jews converiion, and that it will be glad 
 'tidings -to the church of Cirri ft ; and therefore I have 
 ' yielded to fatisfy their defires. And thus it was : 
 
 " At the 'place above named, there sflembled about .three 
 * hundred Rabbies, called together from ieveral parts of the 
 *' world, to examine the fcripttires concerning Chrift'j' and 
 " it feems this place was thought moft convenient for this 
 council, in regard that part of the country was notmuch 
 " inhabited, becaufe of the continual wars between the Turk 
 and the king of Hungary, where (us I was informed) they 
 * had fought two bloody battles ; yet both princes, notwitlv- 
 " {landing their own differences, did give leave to th$ Jews 
 " to hold their council there j and for their accommodation 
 " there, the Jews did make divers tents for their rej>ofe,.and 
 44 had plenty of provifion brought them from other parts of 
 ' the country, during the time of their fitting there. There 
 ' was alfo one large tent, built only for the council to fit in, 
 " made almoft four fquare j the north and fouth part of it 
 " being not altogether fo large as the eafl and weft part 
 * thereof. It had but one door, and that opened to the 
 "eaftj and iu the middle thereof ftood a little table. and a 
 " llool for the propounder to fit on, with his face towawls.the 
 " door of the tent. The faid propounder was of. the. tribe 
 ' of Levi, and was named Zacharias ; and within this tent 
 " round about were placed divers forms for the confulters ty 
 fit on. It was alfo inclofed with a rail, that ftood at a 
 ' diftance from it, to prevent entrance to all ftrangers, and 
 ' to all fuch Jews as could not prove themfeives to be Jews 
 
 ""by
 
 HOR-ffi BIBLIC^S. 49 
 
 Ct God is the Creator, (whofe name be blefled), 
 " governor and maker of all creatures, and that, 
 
 he 
 
 " by record, or could not difputc in the Hebrew tongue, 
 " which many had forgotten, who lived in fuch countries, 
 " where they are not allowed their fynagogues, as in France, 
 " Spain, and thofe parts of Italy that do belong to the 
 " king of Spain, viz. the kingdom of Naples, with the pro- 
 " vince of Calabria jand Apuleia } the kingdom of Sicilia 
 " and Sardinia j in which place if a Jew be found, and he 
 " deny the Popifh religion, he is in danger to be condemned 
 " and executed for it; and yet profit and benefit allured them 
 " to dwell in tliofe countries, nctwithilanding their fears and 
 "dangers: and themfelves are willing to forget, and fo 
 " neglect to teach their children ;heir native language, rather 
 *' than they will loofe their opportunity of profit : and fome 
 tc have burnt the ancient records of their tribe and family, 
 " that they might not be discovered by fearching, or other- 
 " wife. And for this defect they could not prove their tribe 
 " or family, they were not permitted to coane within the 
 " rail, but were commanded to remain without, with the 
 " ftrangers that remained there, which were above 3,000 
 " perfons, and they were for the moft part Germans, 
 " Almains, Dalmatians, and Hungarians, with fome Greeks, 
 ' but few Italians, and not one Englifhman, that I could 
 " hear of befides myfelf. 
 
 " 1 was informed that the king of Hungary, not favour- 
 " ing the reformed religion, did give no encouragement to 
 " any proteftant churches to lend any divines thither ; but 
 " he did allow that fome afiiftants mould be lent from 
 " Rome : and their coming thither, did prove a great unhap- 
 " pinefs to this hopeful council. 
 
 " When the afiembly did firlt meet, they fpent fome time 
 ' in their mutual litlutation's j and as their manner is, they 
 
 E
 
 ;o H O R M B I B L I C JB. 
 
 " he hath wrought all things, worketh and (hall 
 " work for ever. 
 
 2d. I 
 
 <{ killed one the other's cheek, expreffing much joy for their 
 " happy meeting. And all things being provided for their 
 " accommodation, they confidered of the Jews that were to 
 " be admitted members of this council ? and they were only 
 " allowed to be members, which could by record prove them- 
 " felves to be native Jews ; and for defeft herein, I obferved 
 ** above five hundred refufed : though doubtlefs they were 
 ' true-born Jews, yet they could not by record prove them- 
 " felves fo to be ; and for this they were not admitted to be 
 members of the council, but they did abide without tht 
 ** rail with the ftrangers that were there : and the number of 
 them that were accepted to be members was about three 
 " hundred Jews. And this was all that was done the firft 
 ' day. 
 
 " On the fecond day, the aflembly being full, the pro- 
 <* pounder ftood up and made his fpeech concerning the end 
 ' of their meeting : and this, faid he, is to examine the 
 " fcriptures concerning Chrift, whether he be already come,, 
 * or whether we are yet to expeft his coming. In exam in 
 ' ing this queftion, they fearched tlie Old Teftament \vilh 
 * great care and labour, to be refolved of the truth thereof,. 
 having many Bibles with them there for this end. And 
 ' about this point there were great difputes amongit them. 
 M The major part were of opinion, that he was not come : 
 tl and fome inclined to think that he was come ; being 
 " moved thereto by their great judgment, that hath conti;- 
 " nued now this fixteen hundred years upon them. 
 
 ' I remember very well one of the council in his con- 
 ference with me, feemed to be very apprehenfive of the 
 great and long defolation of their nation, ever fince their 
 ** deftruflion by the Roman emperors j and he imputed this 
 * theu
 
 YL O KM BIBLIC^. 5 t 
 
 Id. I believe, with perfect foith, that, the 
 *' Creator, -(whofe name be blefled), is one, and 
 
 " that, 
 
 " their affli&ion to their impenitency. And comparing their 
 " prefent judgment, with thdr other judgments they had 
 *' futFered before, he ingenuously contended, that he did con- 
 " ceive it was for feme great wickednefs ; and that their 
 " nation was guilty of the blood of the prophets fent from. 
 "' God to their nation, and the many maiTacres that had 
 " been committed by the fevers! lefts and fact ions of them. 
 " For, faid he, we are no idolaters, neither do I think we 
 *< were guilty of idolatry f:nce cur captivity in Babylon ; 
 *' and therefore, f.-iid he, I do impute this ou*' calamity and 
 *' prefent judgment? to the forennmed caufes. And this was 
 " the fum of that which was dilputed amongft them the fc- 
 *' cond d:iy of their meeting ; and fo they adjourned till the 
 *' next morning, which was the third day of their meeting. 
 
 '' When being aflembled together again, the point that 
 " was chiefly agitated was concerning the manner of 
 " Chritt's coming. And this Ibme faid mall be like a 
 i: mighty prince, in the full power and authority of a king, 
 " yea in greater power than ever any king had; and that he 
 <f will deliver their nation out of the power of their enemies, 
 ' and their temple fhall be rebuilt again j and, tlv.it the 
 * nations fhall be of their religion, and worfhip God after 
 " their manner. For they hold, that the Mefliah wjll not 
 fl alter their religion, whenfoever he cometh. And further, 
 " concerning his parentage, they did agree in this, that he 
 <' mould be born of a virgin, according to the prediction ot 
 tlie prophets ; and they agreed alfo that he might be born 
 " of fuch a virgin which might be of mean note amongft 
 " their nation, as was the Virgin Mary. And here fome of 
 " them feemed to me, to incline to think that Chrift wae 
 ' come. T/ierefore when they came together again the next 
 E z " day,
 
 " that, fuch an unity as in him, can be found irt 
 " none other ; and that he alone hath been our 
 " Godj is and for ever fhall be. 
 
 3 d. I 
 
 " day, the propounder demanded of them, if Chrift were 
 " already come, and who they thought he was ? and to this 
 " demand they gave this anfwer, that they thought Elijah 
 " was he, if he were come, becaufe he came with great 
 " power, which he declared by flaying the priefts of Baal j 
 " and, for the fulfilling of the fcripture, he was opprefled by 
 " Ahab and Jezabel : yet they efteemed him to be more than 
 " a mortal man, becaufe he fo ftrangcly afcended up into 
 " heaven. And becauie this opinion was contradicted by 
 " others, the day following they took into examination the 
 " fame queftion, to anfwer them that faid Elijah was not the 
 " Mefliah. They of the contrary opinion did urge the care 
 " and love of Elijah for the good of their nation, in that he 
 " left them Elifha his difciple to teach and inftrucl the peo- 
 " pie, which they expefled to be the care of their Mcfliali. 
 " Theie were the chief arguments they had to defend their 
 ' opinion : and the fame day, towards night, it came into 
 " queftion amongft them, what he then was that faid he was 
 " the fon of God, and was crucified by their anceftors ? and 
 " becauie this was the great queftion amongft them, they 
 '* deferred the further confideration thereof until the next 
 " day. 
 
 " When meeting again, the Pharifees (for foine of this 
 " feft were amongft them, that were always the enemies of 
 ' Chrift) they firft began to anfwer this laft night's queftion ; 
 " and thefe by no means 'would yield that he was the 
 *' Chrift ; and thefe reafons they gave for their opinion. 
 
 " Firft, becaufe (laid they) he came into'the world like an 
 * ordinary and inferior man, not with his fcepter, nor royal 
 (e power} wherewith they affirmed the coming of Chrift 
 
 ftiould
 
 HOR^EBIBLIC^. 53 
 
 3d. " I believe with a perfe& faith, that, the 
 w Creator, (whofe name be blefled), is not corporeal, 
 
 "not 
 
 " mould be glorious. Secondly, they pleaded againft him 
 " the meannels of his birth, in that his father was a carpen- 
 " ter ; and this they faid, was a difhonour that Chrift mould 
 " not be capable of. Thirdly, they accufed him to be an 
 " enemy to Mofes's law, in fuffering his difciples, and in 
 " doing works himfelf that were prohibited on the fcbbath 
 * { day; for they believe that the Median will punctually and 
 " exactly keep the law of Mofes : and where the gofpel doth 
 " teltify of Chrift, that he did fulfil the law, they reject the 
 " teftimony thereof, becaufe they do not own the gofpel. 
 " But I obferved thele reafons of the Pharifees did not fatisfy 
 " all that heard them, but there ftill remained fome doubt in 
 " fome of tliem concerning Chrift j for there flood up one 
 " rabbie called Abraham, and objected againft the Pharifees 
 " the miracles that Chrift wrought whilft he was upon earth, 
 " as his riling of the dead to life, again his making the lame 
 " walk, the blind to fee, and the dumb to fpeak. And the 
 " faid Abraham demanded of the Pharifees, by what power 
 " he did thefe miracles ? The anfwer the Pharifees returned to 
 " him was to this purpofe: they faid he was an impoftor and 
 " a magician j and blafphemoufly traduced him of doing all 
 " his miracles by magic. Thus (laid they) he firft caufed 
 them to be blind, to be dumb, and to be lame ; and then 
 " by taking away his magic charm, they were reftored to 
 c their former condition. Neverthelefs this anfwer gave lit- 
 " tie fatisfa&ion to the faid Abraham : but thus he replied, 
 " that he could not charm thofe that were born in that con- 
 ' dition as blind, &c. and born alfo before Chrift himfelf 
 " was born ; as it appeareth fome of them were. Thi 
 feemed to him an abfurd paradox ; and truly the preffing 
 < of this argument did almoft put them to a nonplus, till at 
 E 3 "Jaft
 
 54 -H O R & B I B L I C /E. 
 
 " not to be comprehended with any bodily pro-. 
 " perties : and that there is no bodily eflence 
 " can be likened unto him. 
 
 4- "I 
 
 " ]aft they had (his evafion (though we?k and vik). They were 
 <c (faid they) by other magicians convinced to be fo in their 
 * mother's wombs ; and that although himfclf were not then 
 " born when they were bom with thefe evils, yet he being a 
 great difiembler. and more cunning than any magician be- 
 " fore him, power was given him by th devil, to remove 
 " thofe charms which others had placed. And there was one 
 " Pharifee named Zebedee, who of the Pharifees there did 
 <{ moft opprobrioi:(ly revile him, and vehemently t-.rge thefe 
 " things againft him : but I conceive he did it not to the well 
 " liking of many there that heard him, even members of the 
 " council. And as t*e Pharifees that day'played their parts 
 " agnvnft him ; fo did -tbeSadducees alib endeavour (for forne 
 " of that ft 61 were alfe of the council) to render Chriit vile 
 <( and odious to the l-eft of the jews th?t were arTembltn 
 *' there. I obferved it was with them, as it was once with 
 ' Herod and Pilate ; tho 1 they two 1 could not agree betwixt 
 " themfelves at other times, yet they could agree together to 
 " crucify Chrift : for the Pharifees and Sadducees, tho' they 
 " be much divided in opinion among themfelves, yet did they 
 ** at this time too much agree to difgrace and diflionour 
 4< Chrift with their lies, calumnies, and bhl'phemies : for the 
 ' Sadducees as well as the Pharifees, did in other things accuft 
 " him for a grand impoftor, and for a brcacher of corrupt 
 < doclrine ; in that in h's gofpel he teacheth the refurrtclicn 
 ' from the dead, which they there denied to be true doc- 
 trine : but it is no new thing to lee factions diffenting, te 
 *' agree in fome evil defign againft others, as I found it by 
 *' exptTience. Being at Rome in tlie year 1650, which was 
 <* tht year of their jubilee, there was a great Itrife between 
 
 ' the
 
 M O R & B I B L I C JE. 5i 
 
 4. " I believe, with a perfect faith, the Creator, 
 <* (whofe name be bleiled), to be the firft, and the 
 
 laft, 
 
 " the jefuits and the friars of the order of St. Dominick, 
 " both /of which were agaiuft the protellants : and although 
 " their differences have been by the care and vigilance of the 
 " pope fo (mothered that the world hath not taken much 
 " notice thereof ; yet this fire broke out into a flame greater 
 " than it ever was before (as they certified me there) both 
 *' by public difputir.es and by bitter writings one againtl 
 " another, opening the victs and errors of one another's 
 " faclion ; thus feeking to difgiace one the other ; which 
 " caufed the pope to threaten to excommunicate the authors 
 " of all fuch black .and libellous books, that did tend to the 
 " dishonour of his clergy and religion, to rr.tike them infa* 
 " mous to the world. But this by the way. 
 
 " We are come now to the feventh and laft day of their 
 " council ; and on this day, this was the main query 
 " amongft them : If Chrift be come, then what rules and or- 
 " ders hath he left his church to walk by ? This was a great 
 " queftion amongtl diem : and becaule they did not believe 
 " the New Teftament, nor would be guided by it, they de- 
 " manded fome other initruclion to direcl and guide them 
 "in this point. Whereupon fix of the Roman clergy (who 
 *' of purpofe were fent from Rome by the pope to afiift in 
 " this council) were called in, viz. two jefuits, two friars of 
 " the order of St. Auguftine, and uvo of the order of St. 
 " Francis. And thefe being admitted into the council, be- 
 " gan to open unto tliepi the rules and doftrine of the holy 
 " church of Rome (as they call it) which church they mag- 
 '' nificd to them far the holy catholic church of Chrift, and 
 " then- doftrine to be the infallible doctrine of Cbrift, and 
 * their rules to be the rules which the apoftles left to the 
 ' church for ever to be obferved, and that the pope is the 
 E * " holy
 
 56 HOR^EBIBLIC^E. 
 
 " laft, and that noihing was before him, that he 
 " fhall abide the laft for ever. 
 
 5 . I 
 
 " holy vicar of Chrift, and the fucce/Tor of St. Peter. And 
 " for inftarice in fome particulars they affirm the real pre- 
 * fence of Chrift in the facrarnent, the religious obfervations 
 " of their holy days, the invocation of the faints praying to 
 " the Virgin Mary, and her commanding power in heaven 
 over her fon, the holy ufe of the crofs and images, with the 
 " reft of tlieir idolatrous and fuperftitious worfhip ; all 
 " which they commended to the aflembly of the Jews, for 
 ' the doclrine and rules of the apoftles. But fo foon as the 
 " aflcmbly had heard thefe things from them, they were ge- 
 " nerally and exceedingly troubled thereat, and fell into high 
 ' clamours againll them and their religion, crying ox:t, No 
 * { Chrift, no woman God, no interceifion of faints, no wor- 
 " fhipping of images, no praying to the Virgin Mary, &c. 
 '* Truly their troubles hereat was fo great that it troubled me 
 '* to fee their impatience : they rent their clothes, and caft 
 *' dft upon their heads, and cried out aloud, Blafphetny, 
 " blafphemy ; and upon this the council broke up. Yet 
 " they affembled again the eighth day ; and all that was done 
 *' tlien, was to agree upon another meeting of their nation 
 " three years after 3 which was concluded upon before their 
 ' final diflblution. 
 
 ' I do believe there were many Jews there that would have 
 *' been perfuaded to own the Lord Jefus 5 and this I afl'ure 
 ".you for a truth, and it is for the honour of our religion, 
 ' and the encouragement of our divines : one eminent 
 << rabbi there did deliver me his opinion in conference with 
 c me, that he at firft feared that thofe who were fent from 
 '* Rome, would caufe an unhappy period to their council ; 
 *' and profefled to me, that, he much defired the prefence of 
 K fome' proteftant divines, and dpccially of our Englifh di- 
 
 " vinesj
 
 H O R M B I B L I C J. $7 
 
 5. " I believe with a perfeft faith, that, the 
 " Creator, (whofe name be blefledj, is to be wor-' 
 " fhipped, and none elfe. 
 
 ' vines, cf whom he had a better opinion than of any other 
 " divines in the world : fer he did believe that we had a 
 " great love to their nation ; and this reaibn he gave me for 
 " their good opinion of our divines, becaufe he underftood 
 " they did ordinarily pray for the converfion of their na- 
 " tion ; which he did acknowledge to be a great token of our 
 " love towards them : and efpccially he commended the 
 44 minifters of London for excellent preachers, and for their 
 " charity towards their nation ; of whom he had heard a 
 " great fame. As for the church of Rome, they accounted 
 " it an idolatrous church, and therefore will not own theitf 
 " religion :.and by con veiling with the Jews, I found that 
 " they generally think that there is no other chriftian religion 
 " in the world, but that of the church of Rome j and for 
 " Rome's idolatry, they take offenct at all chriftian re- 
 " ligion. By which it appeareth that Rome is the greateft 
 " enemy to the Jews converfion. 
 
 " For the place of the Jews next meeting, it is probable it 
 " will be in Syria, in which country I alfo was, and did 
 " there converfe with the feel: of the Rechabites, living in 
 " Syria. They ftill obferve their old cuftoms and rules j 
 " they neither fow nor plant, nor build houfes ; but live in 
 tents, and often remove from one place to another, with 
 ft their whole family, bag and baggage. And feeing I fin^, 
 " that by the Italian tongue I can converfe with the Jews, 
 * or any other nation, in all parts of the world where I have 
 " been ; if God give me an opportunity I mall willingly at- 
 " tend their next council. The good Lord prosper it. 
 " Amen." 
 
 6. I
 
 5 S HOR^S BIBLIC^E. 
 
 6. " I believe with a perfect faith, that, all the 
 " words of the prophets are true. 
 
 7. " I believe with a perfect faith, that the pro- 
 " phecies of Mofes, (our maftcr, may he reft in 
 "peace), were true. That he was the father and 
 chief of all wife men, that lived before him or 
 " ever fhall live after him. 
 
 8. " I believe with a perfect faith, that, all the 
 * c law which at this day is found in our hands, was 
 delivered "by God himfelf, to our mafter, Mofes, 
 * l (God's peace be with him). 
 
 . 9. ** I believe with a perfect faith, that, the fame 
 tt law is never to be changed, nor any other to be 
 " given us of God, (whofe name be bleffed). 
 
 10. " I believe with a perfecl: faith, that, God, 
 * c {whofe name be blefled), underftandeth all the 
 ** works and thoughts of men : as it is written in 
 " the prophets ; He fa&ioneth their hearts alike; 
 ** He underftandeth all their works, 
 
 11. ** I believe with a perfecl faith, that, God 
 ** will recompence good to them who keep his 
 commandments, and will puniih thofe who tranf- 
 ft grefs them. 
 
 12. " I believe with a perfecl faith, that, the 
 f 4 Meffiah is yet to come j and almough he n I 
 
 * c his coming, yet I will wait tor him till he come. 
 
 13. " 1 believe with aperfe-ft faith, that the dead 
 fc Jhall be rcftored to life when itfhall feem fit unto 
 ** God the Creator ; (whofe name be blefled, and 
 < l memory celebrated world without end, Amen.)" 
 
 VIJ. 5-
 
 HOR^E BIBLIC^. 59 
 
 VII. 5. The doftcrs and teachers cf the Je'^s 
 Lave been diftinguifned by different appellations. 
 Thofe employed -in the Talmud were, from the high 
 authority of their works, among the Jews, called 
 jiemonrmm, or dictators. They were fucceecled by 
 the Seburoint) or opinionifts, a name given them, 
 from the refpect, which the Jews had for their 
 opinions; and becaufe they did not diclate doc- 
 trines, but inferred opinions by difputation and pro-* 
 bable arguments. Thefe were fucceeded by the 
 Ghecm?n t or the excellent; who received their name, 
 from the very high efteem, and even veneration, in 
 which they are held by the Jews, They fubhfted 
 till the deftruction or" the academies of the Jews 
 in Babylon, by the Saracens, about the year 1038, 
 From that term the learned among the Jews have 
 been called Rabbins, it is ieldom, that a Jew ap- 
 plies himfelf to profane literature. Even the law- 
 ful nefs of it has been generally queftioned. Some 
 have greater refpecfc than others, for the talmudi- 
 d.cal doctrines. In confequence of ufmg in his 
 writings fome free cxpreflions concerning them, 
 a violent (rorm was raifed againft Maimonides. 
 Kimchi, and generally fpeaking, all the Spanifh and 
 Narbonnefe doctors took part with him. The others, 
 led on by R. Solomon, the chief of the fynagogue 
 of Montpellier, oppofed him. Both parties were 
 equally violent, and the fynagogues excommuni- 
 cated each other. This difpute commenced about 
 the middle of the twelfth, and lafted till nearly the 
 
 thirteenth
 
 o HOR7E BIBLIC^, 
 
 * 
 
 thirteenth century. But the great dtfttncUon of 
 the Jewifli rabbins, is that of the Tanaits or Rab- 
 banifts and Caraites. The firft are warm advocates 
 for the traditionary opinions, generally received 
 amona; the Jews ; particularly thofe of the Targum, 
 and 'for the obfervations of feveral religious cere- 
 monies and duties, not enjoined by the law of 
 Mofcs : the others abfolutely reject all traditionary 
 opinions, and hold all rites and duties, not enjoined 
 by the law of Mofes, to be human inftitutions, 
 with which, there is no obligation that a Jew 
 Should comply. 
 
 VII. 6. The Cabala is diftinguifhed into three 
 forts : By the firft, they extract from the words 
 of fcripture recondite meanings, which are fome 
 times ingenious, but always fanciful. The fecond, 
 is a fort of magic, in employing the words and 
 letters of the fcripture, in certain combinations, 
 which, they fuppofe, have power, to make the good 
 and evil fpirits of the invifible world, familiar to 
 them. The third, which is properly the Cabala, 
 is an art, by which they profefs to raife myfterious 
 expofitions of the fcripture, upon the letters of the 
 fentences, to which they apply them. The whole 
 is fancy and imagination. This, fome even among 
 the Jews, acknowledge. 
 
 VII. 7. When Roufleau fays in his Emile, 
 ct Je ne croirai jamais avoir bien entendu les rai- 
 " fons des Juifs, qu'ils n' aient une etat libre, des 
 K ecoles, des univerfites, ou ils puiflent parlcr et 
 
 " dcmeurer
 
 HOR.E BIBLIC^E, <Ji 
 
 * { demeurer fans rifque; alors feulement, nous pour- 
 u rons fcavoir ce qu'iis ont a dire," he evidently 
 writes on a fubject, on which he was perfectly ig- 
 norant. At all times, the Jews have had fchools, 
 and numberlefs are the ivorks they have pnblijbed^ 
 in defence of Judaifm^ and againft the cbriftlan 
 religion. The moft celebrated of thefe are the 
 Tddx JtfchU) a work replete with the boldeft 
 blafphemy, and the Cbizzouk Emounah, or buckler 
 of faith, a work of great ability. Thefe and other 
 writings of the Jews, againft chriftianity, are col- 
 lefled, and an ample refutation of them, pub- 
 lii n ned, in the Tela Ignea Satana^ of Wagenfeil, 
 Altdorbm Noricornmj 1681. The Pugio Fidel of 
 Raymundus Martinus^ is confidered to be a learned 
 and powerful defence of the chrifiian religion, 
 againil the arguments of the Jews; and though ic 
 be not free from the literary defects of the times, 
 in which it was written, it ftill preferves its repu- 
 tation. The Arnica Collatio de veritate Religlonls 
 Chrijtiana cum erudito 'Judtso, of Limborch, and the 
 papers publiflied with it, form one of the moft in- 
 terefting and entertaining works of controverfy, 
 that have appeared upon any fubjecl:. 
 
 VII. 8. It it a mijlake to foppofe the Jews an. 
 intolerant people. They hold all men obliged to 
 obierve, what are called the feven precepts of the 
 fons of Noah. Thefe are ift, not to commit adul- 
 tery ; 2dly, not to blafpheme ; 3dly, to appoint 
 juft and upright judges j 4-thly, not to commit 
 
 inceft ;
 
 <s H O R M B I B L I C 2E. 
 
 inccft; 5th ly, not to commit murder; 6thly, 
 to rob or fteal ; and ythly, not to eat a member of 
 any living creature. But they hold the Jews alone 
 obliged to conform to the Sinaitic covenant, or 
 law of Mofes. They fay, it was a covenant be- 
 tween God and the Jews ; that the Jews therefore 
 are bound to the performance of it ; but that 
 it is not bln<.iing on the reft of mankind. Thofe 
 who forfoke idolatry, and profefs to follow the pre- 
 cepts of Noah, are called by them, profelytes of the 
 gate ; and, while the Jewiih government exifted, 
 were permitted to live among them. Thofe, who 
 take on them the obfervance of the whole law, 
 are called profclytcs of jiiftlce or rigbteoitfnefs ; they 
 are initiated to it, by ablution, facrifice, and cir- 
 cumcifion ; and are thenceforth confidered to be 
 Jews, for all purpofes, except intermarriage, from 
 which, fome nations are excluded for ever, others 
 till after the third generation. 
 
 VIII. 
 With refpeft to the HEBREW MANUSCRIPTS 
 
 AND PRINTED EDITIONS OF THE HEBREW TEXT, 
 
 VIII. I. It is obfervable, that, no extenfive col- 
 lation of the Hebrew manufcripts of the facred 
 text, was made till the prefent century. This was 
 owing, in a great meafure, to the notion which had 
 'been formed, of the integrity of the facred text, 
 in confequence of its fuppofed prefervatton from 
 
 error,
 
 error, by the wonder-working Maforah. In the 
 annals of litcj-ature, there is not, perhaps, a more 
 (hiking initance of the little fafety there i?, in 
 trufling, without examination, to received opinion?, 
 than the general scquiefcence of the learned in the 
 opinion we fpeak of. The rabbins boldly afTerted, 
 and the chrifthhs implicitly believed, that the He- 
 brew text was free from error, and that, in ail the 
 manufcripts of it, not an inftance of a various 
 reading of importance could be produced. " Qua 
 " Icitifiime patent oriens et occidens, uno ore, uno 
 " modo, verbum Dei legitur ; et omnium librorum, 
 w qui in A fid, Africa vel Europa funt, fine ulla 
 " difcrepantia confonans harmonia eernitur." Such 
 is the aftor.ifhing language of Buxtcrf, in his Ti- 
 berias. The firft, who combated this notion in 
 the form of regular attack, was Ludovicus Capellas. 
 From the difference he obferved between the He- 
 brew text, and the verfion of the Septuagint, and 
 between the Hebrew and the Samaritan Pentateuch j, 
 from the manifeft and palpable corruptions, he 
 thought he faw in the text itfelf, and, from the 
 many reafons which made him fuppofe the vowel 
 points arid the Maforah, were both a modern and 
 an ufclefs invention, he was led to queftion the 
 general integrity of the text ; and even his enemies 
 aUowcd, that, in his attack upon it, he difcovered 
 extreme learning and ingenuity. Still, hor/ever, 
 he admitted the uniformity of the manufcripts. 
 Vv'hen this \vas urged againft him by Buxtorf, he 
 
 ha*
 
 $4 HORJE BIBLICJS. 
 
 had little to reply. At length, (what mould havS 
 been done before any thing had* been faid or written 
 on the fubjet), the manufcripts themfelves were 
 examined, and innumerable various readings in 
 them, difcovered. From this time the biblical cri- 
 ticifm of the facred text took a new turn. Manu- 
 fcripts were collated every where; were examined 
 with the fame attention, the various readings of 
 them were difcufied with the fame freedom, and 
 their refpective merits afcertained by the fame rules 
 of criticifm, as had been before ufed, in refpeiSt of 
 manufcripts of profane authors. The celebrated 
 colle&ion of Doflor Kertnlcctt was begun in the 
 year 1760. He undertook to collate all the manu- 
 fcripts of the facred text in England and in Ireland ; 
 and, while he fliould be employed in this, (which 
 he fuppofed might be about ten years), to collate, 
 .as far as the expence would admit, all the Hebrew 
 manufcripts of importance, in foreign countries. 
 The firft volume was printed in 1776, the fecond, 
 .and only other, in 1780. Doctor Kennicott him- 
 felf collated two hundred and fifty manufcripts. 
 Under his direc-lion, and at his expence, Mr. Bruns 
 collated three hundred and fifty : fo that, the whole 
 number of manufcripts collated, on this occafion, 
 was fix hundred. He mentions in his preface 
 feveral other manufcripts, which it was not in his 
 power to collate. It appears, that, in his opinion 
 fifty-one of the manufcripts collated for his edition 
 were from fix hundred to eight hundred, and that 
 
 one
 
 HOR^BIBLIC^E. 6 * 
 
 one hundred and feventy-four were from four hun- 
 dred and eigHty to five hundred and eighty years 
 old. Four quarto volumes of various readings have 
 fmce been publimei! by M. De Rojji of Parma, 
 from more than four hundred manufcripts; fomt 
 of which .tre did to be of the feventh or eighth 
 
 o 
 
 century, a well as fro vn a coniklerable number of 
 rare and unnoticed edition?, under the title of Varies 
 Lettiones faicrls T eft am? /'/, ex imaienfd manufcrip- 
 torum edit:rumque coMcum corgerie, bauftce et exa- 
 m:nai(s,-~Parm(s^ 1786. The matter, however, is 
 far from being exhaurted, particularly, if the pof- 
 fih;j of the Eait are t t .k^n iiito calculation. 
 
 The con/equenca of thefe extenfive collations has 
 been, to : \:r;\ opinion among the learned 1 , 
 
 iftly, that, all the manufcript copies of the Hebrew 
 fcriptures now extant, may, in fo;:>e fort, be called 
 Maforitic copies, becaufe none of them have en- 
 tirely efcapcd the rude hands of. the Maforites : 
 2dly, t!iat, the moft valuable manufcripts, generally 
 fpeaking, are tl:ofe. which are c-ldeft, written, atfirfr, 
 without points or accc-nts, containing the greateft 
 number of real vov.'cls, or mat res leftivnis^ exhi- 
 biting m :rks of an accurate tranfcriber, and con- 
 forming moft to ths amient verfions, and, with 
 regard to the Pentateuch, conforming moft to the 
 Samaritan exemplar : 3dly, that the Maforitic co- 
 pies often difagree, and- that the further back they 
 go, the greater is their difagreement from the pre- 
 fent printed copy : fourthly, that the fynagogical 
 
 F rolls
 
 Ji O R JSL B I B L I C IE. 
 
 rolls difagree the lead, from the printed copies, 
 fo that, they arc of little value in afcertaining the 
 text ; an excellent judge has faid, that, he would 
 not change the fmalleft fragment of an old manu- 
 icript, of the tenth age, for the fineft fynagogical 
 roll in Europe : 4thly, from all this, they conclude, 
 that, the fureft fources of emendation, are a col- 
 lation of manufcripts and parallel places ; a com- 
 parifon of the text with the antient verfions, and 
 ihefc with one another ; grammatical analogy; and, 
 where all thefe fail, even conjectural criticifm. 
 The merit of Doctor Kennicott's labours is ge- 
 nerally acknowledged ; his opinions on the ftate of 
 the Hebrew text are generally received, and the 
 high pretenfions ef die Maforah are generally re- 
 jected. Still, however, the ancient opinions have 
 fome advocates. They do not go fo far as to affert, 
 that, a collation of Hebrew manufcripts, is perfectly 
 ufelefs, but they think it may be prized higher 
 than it deferves : that, when manufcripts of an 
 earlier date than the Maforah are fought for, it 
 fhould not be forgot, that, the Maforites had thofe 
 manufcripts, when they fettled the text ; and what 
 hopes, can there be, they afk, that, at the clofe of 
 the eighteenth century, after the Hebrew has long 
 ceafed to be a fpoken language, a chriftian, fo much 
 of whofe time is employed in other purfuits and 
 dlftrafted by other cares, can make a better ufe of 
 thofe manufcripts than was actually made of them 
 by the Maforitic literati, whofe whole time, whofe 
 
 every
 
 HOR-ffi BIBLIC^E. < 7 
 
 every thought, from their earlieft years to their 
 lateft age, was devoted to that one obje&; who 
 lived among the people, and almoft in the country, 
 where the events recorded by them, happened,' 
 who (iiw with their ov/n eyes the manners they 
 defcribe, and daily and hourly fpoke and heard a 
 language kindred to that in which they are written ? 
 But, if there muft be a collation of manufcripts, 
 then, fay they, no manufcript written by any other 
 than a Jew, or wanting any one of the before- 
 mentioned marks of authenticity, fhould be taken 
 into account : and, trying the queflion of the in- 
 tegrity of the text, by thefe, which they call, the 
 only authentic manufcripts, no queftion, fay they, 
 will remain of the perfect integrity and perfect free- 
 dom from 'corruption, of the prefent text. Where 
 it can be fhewn, that the text of the Maforah is 
 corrupt, the genuinenefs of the Bible reading may 
 be doubted, but, where there is no reafon to im- 
 peach the Maforah, the text, as theyaffert, is beyond 
 controverfy. Wolfius, Bibl. Hebra?a, torn. ii. 331, 
 boldly fays " Confsrantur in cumulum^ fi quis fub- 
 " nafci unquam potcft^ omnes vanctates^ et omni ego 
 w pignore contendere aujim^ eas magis adftabiliendafa 
 t{ quam duble reddcndam leRronem bcdie reccptam In- 
 " fervituras ejjc." Opitius in the laft page but one 
 of his preface, fays ftill more confidently " ghitn fi 
 *' vel onincs irtfirbffi> Vtl manufcripti codices conve-. 
 " n'rrent in affirer.da lettione quadav:, c:::irariufa 
 prsmirxitiret Mafora \ confidentcr cjr.s f 
 
 1 2 "fiimttt
 
 Sg H O R Jf. B I B L I C Jg. 
 
 " fum,us autioritatem, fi modo noils conjiaret illam 
 " e jf e genuindm'\ The fame opinion is adopted by 
 Tyfchen, in his work already cited, and to enforce 
 it, appears to have been his chief object in writing 
 tliat work. It is alfo adopted in its fulleft extent, 
 , by Mr. Benjoin, in his Jonah. The Titres Primi- 
 tifs of Fabricy-i Rvne J7J2) contain much curious 
 learning urged with a confiderable degree of inge- 
 nuity,, iu favour of the Maforitic fyilsm. Tantas 
 r.on nvjltwn eft componere lltes. 
 
 VIII. 2. With refpecT: to the printed editions 
 of the Hebrew Ewle r thofe v/hich have appeared 
 to deferve particular attention, are, the edition at 
 Soncjno, in 1488, from its being the firft printed, 
 edition of the whole Bible j the edition at Brefcia, 
 in 1 494, from its being the edition, ufed by Luther 
 in his tranflation ; a third, was printed in 1557, 
 without the name of any place. Thefe three edi- 
 tions" are called the Soncinate^ being printed by 
 Jews, of a family which came originally from Ger- 
 many and eftablifhed themfelves at Soncino, a 
 town in kombardy, between Cremona and Brefcia. 
 They were the firft Hebrew printers. Some of 
 them afterwards eftablifhed themfelves in Bononi?, 
 Brefcia and Rimini. AMafs edition was published 
 . at Amfterdam, firft in 1661, and afterwards in 1667. 
 The edition of Nunncs Terra, with the notes of 
 Kaichi, was begun in 1700, and printed in 1705, 
 and was the favourite edition of the Jews. Bom- 
 ktrg's edition was printed frye times, and is diflin- 
 * guilhed
 
 H O R JE B I B L I G M. 6 
 
 -guiflied by the beauty of the type 5 but, not 
 being divided into chapters and verfes, is unfit 
 for general ufe. Rovert Siepbetrs'to 22mo. edition 
 is nioft elegantly printed. The Plantlnlan edi- 
 tions have confiderable merit for their neatnefs 
 and accuracy. Eat all were furpufled by the 
 edition of Everardbtts vander Hoogbt in 1/05. 
 It has the general reputation of great accu- 
 racy. Some have called its accuracy in queftidn j 
 but the elegance of the type, the beauty of the 
 paper, and the fine glofly blacknefs of the ink, 
 cannot be denied. His text was adopted by Dr. 
 Kennicott, in his edition. The editions of which 
 we have been fpeaking hitherto, are of 4 the Hebrew 
 alone, without any tranflatian. The moil cele- 
 brated edition of the Hebrew, with a Latin tranfla- 
 tion, was, till of late, that of Sebajlian Munjler^ 
 publiflied in 1534, 1535) and 1539. It was the 
 firft Latin tranflation by any of the feparatifts from 
 the fee of Rome. Sanies Pagninus was the firft of 
 the communicants with that fee, who made an 
 entirely new Latin verfion. It was publifhed at 
 Lyons, in 1528. It has often been republifhed. 
 That, it is an accurate and faithful tranflation, all 
 acknowledge, that, the latinity is barbarous, can- 
 not be denied ; but, as it was the author's plan, to 
 frame a verbal tranflation, in the ftri&eft and moft 
 literal fenfe of that word, its fuppofed barbarifm was 
 unavoidable, and cannot, therefore, be imputed to 
 jty as a fault. With fome improvement, and ac- 
 F 3 companiedj
 
 70 HOR^EBIBLIC^B. 
 
 companied by the New Teftament in Greek, and the 
 vulgate tranflation of it in Latin, it was publifhed 
 by Arias Montanus^ firft in 1 542, with notes by the 
 celebrated Servetus, by way of appendix to the 
 Antwerp Polyglot, in 1572. Afterwards, feveral 
 editions of it were publifhed. Of thefe the edition 
 of Geneva in 1619, is the beft. The celebrated 
 edition of the reverend Charles Francis Houbigant, 
 an oratorian, was publifhed in four volumes folio, 
 with a Latin verfion and prolegomena, at Paris, in 
 1 753. The prolegomena and the Latin verfion have 
 been printed feparately. The merit of this edition 
 is celebrated by all, who are not advocates for the 
 Maforah. By them it is fpoken of in the very 
 harfheft terms. Several manufcripts were occa- 
 fionally confulted by the author : but, it is evident, 
 he did not collate any one manufcript throughout. 
 Mention has been already made of Doftor Kenni- 
 cott's edition, and the fubfequent labours of De 
 Roffi. Prior to Houbigant's edition, was that of 
 Reineccius at Leipfic, in 1725, reprinted there, in 
 1730 and 1739. A new edition of it was printed 
 in 1793, under the infpelion of Doctor Doederlein 
 and Profeflbr Meifmer. It contains the moft im- 
 portant of the various readings collected by Dr. 
 Kcnnicott, and M. de Roffi, printed under the text. 
 For the purpofe of common ufe, it is an excellent 
 edition, and fupplies the want. of the fplendid, but 
 expenfive editions and collations, of Houbigant, 
 Kennicott, and De Roffi. Thofe who extend their 
 
 biblical
 
 H O RyE B I B L I CIS; 7 t 
 
 biblical refearches into Rabbinifm, are recommended 
 by the learned in that branch of biblical literature, 
 to the Biblla Rabbinica of Rabbi Mofes, publifhed at 
 Amfterdam, in four volumes folio, in 1724, 1727, 
 which have entirely fuperfeded the Biblia Rabbinica 
 of Bombers: and Buxtorf. 
 
 .IX. 
 
 IX. i. THE GREEK MANUSCRIPTS, according 
 to Wetftein's account, are written either on parch- 
 ment or vellum, or upon paper. The parchment 
 or vellum is either purple-coloured, or of its natural 
 colour ; and either thin, or thick. The paper is 
 either filken, or of the common fort ; and either 
 glazed, or of the ordinary roughnefs. The letters 
 are either capital (generally called uncial), or fmall. 
 The capital letters are either unadorned and fimple, 
 and the ftrokes of them very thin and ftraight; 
 or they are of a thicker kind, uneven and angulous. 
 Some of them are fupported on fomething like a 
 bafe, others are ornamented, or rather burthened, 
 with a top. Letters of the firft defcription, are of 
 the kind generally found on the antient monuments 
 of Greece ; thofe of the laft, referable the paintings 
 of half barbarous times. Manufcripts, therefore, 
 written in the firft kind of letter, are generally fup- 
 pofed to be of the fixth century at the lateft j thofe 
 written in the fecond kind of letter, are, generally 
 fuppofed to be of the tenth century. The manu- 
 F 4 fcripts
 
 p H O R M B I B L I C JE; 
 
 fcripts written in the fmall letters are of a ftili later 
 age, But the Greek manuicripts, copied by the 
 Latins, after the reign of Charlemagne, are in 
 another kind of alphabet ; the , the c, and the y, 
 in them, are infledled, in the form of the letters of 
 the Latin alphabet. Even'in the earlieft manu- 
 fcripts fome words are abbreviated. At the begin- 
 ning of a new book, the four or five firft lines, arc 
 often written in vermilion. There are very few 
 manufcripts of the entire New Teftament. The 
 greater part contain the gofpels only; very few 
 have the apocalypfe. In almoft all, (and this is 
 particularly the cafe of the older manufcripts), 
 feveral leaves are wanting ; fometimes they are re- 
 placed in a writing of a much later date. All the 
 manufcripts have obliterations and corrections. But 
 here a material difiinclion is to be attended to : 
 fome of the alterations are made by the writer 
 himfelf, others are made by another perfon, and at 
 a fubfequent time. The firft are faid to be a prirnd 
 manii, the fecond a fecunda manu. 
 
 IX. 2. The curious and extenfive collations, 
 which have been made of manufcripts within this 
 century, have (hewn, thjt, certain manufcripts have 
 an affinity to each other \ and that, their text is diitin- 
 guiflied from others by chara&eriftic marks. This 
 has enabled the writers on the fubject, to arrange 
 them, under certain general claftes. They have 
 obferved, that, as different countries had different 
 yer-fions, according to their refpe&ive languages^ 
 
 their
 
 H O R M B I B L I C JR. 7J 
 
 their manufcripts naturally refembled their refpee- 
 tive verfions, as the verfions, generally fpeaking, 
 were made from the manufcripts in common ufe. 
 Purfuing this idea, they have fuppofed four prin- 
 cipal editions, ift. the Weftern edition, or that ufed 
 in the countries, where the Latin language was 
 fpoken; with this, the Latin verfions coincide: 
 2d. the Alexandrine edition ; with this, the quo- 
 tations of Origen coincide : 3d. the Edeflene edi- 
 tion, from which the Syriac verfion was made : 
 and 4th. the Byzantine or Conflantinopolitan edi- 
 tion : the greateft number of manufcripts written 
 by the monks on mount Athos, the Mofcow manu- 
 fcripts, the Slavonian or Ruffian verfions, and the 
 quotations of St. Chryfoftom, and Theophylaft, 
 bifliop of Bulgaria, arc referrible to this edition. 
 The readings of this edition are remarkably dif- 
 ferent from thofe of the other editions; between 
 thofe, a ftriking coincidence appears. A reading 
 fupported by all three of them, is fuppofed to be of 
 the very higheft authority ; yet, the true reading is 
 fometimes found only in the fourth. 
 
 IX. 3. From the coincidence obferued between 
 many Greek manufcripts and the vulgate^ or fome 
 other Latin tranflation, a fufpicion arofc in the 
 minds of feveral writers of" eminence, that the 
 Greek text had been altered, throughout, to the 
 Latin. This feems to have b:en firft fuggefted by 
 Erafmus ; but it does not appear that he fuppofed 
 the alterations were made, before the fifteenth cen- 
 tury:
 
 W H O R ^ B I B L I C M. 
 
 tury : fo that the charge of latinizing the manu- 
 fcripts did not, in his notion of ir, extend to the 
 -original writers of the manufcript, or, as they are 
 called, the writers -a prima manu, as itaffefled only 
 the fubfequent interpolators, or, as they are called, 
 the writers a fecunda manu. Father Simon, Mill, 
 and Bengel adopted and extended the accufationj 
 and it was urged by Wetftein with his ufual vehe- 
 mence and ability; fo that it came to be generally 
 received, Semler was the firft critic, who ventured 
 to call it in queftion. He v/as followed by Grief- 
 back and Woide ; and finally, brought over Mi- 
 chaelis ; who, in the firft edition of his introduction 
 to the New Teftament, had taken part with the ac- 
 cufers ; but, in the fourth edition of the fame work, 
 with a candour, of which there are too few exam- 
 ples, declared himfelf perfuaded, that, the charge was 
 unfounded, and totally abandoned his firft opinion. 
 Carrying the proof to its utmoft length, it only 
 fhevvs, that, the Latin tranflations arid the Greek 
 copies, were made from the fame exemplars. This 
 rather proves the antiquity of the Latin tranflations, 
 than the corruption of the Greek copies. It is alfo 
 obfervable, that, St. Jerom corrected the Latin from 
 the Greek: a circumftance, known in every part 
 of the weftern church. Now, (as Michaelis juftly 
 pbferves), when it was known, that, the learned 
 father had made the Greek text, the bafis for his 
 alterations in the Latin tranflation, it is fcarcely to 
 be imagined, that, the learned men or the tran- 
 
 fcribers
 
 HORjEBIBLIC/E. y$ 
 
 fcrlbers of the weftern church, would alter the 
 Greek by the Latin. It is ftill lefs probable, 
 that, thofe of the eaftern church would a<t in this 
 manner. 
 
 IX. 4. Befides the manufcripts which contain 
 whole books of the New Teftament, other manu- 
 fcripts have been confulted, with a view to find out 
 the true readings of the text ; among thcfe are the 
 Leflionana^ or collections of detached parts of the 
 New Teftament, appointed to be read in the public 
 fervice of the church. Thefe are diftinguifhed into 
 the Evangelijlarium or leffons from the gofpel ; and 
 the yfy0//W</j-, or the leflbns from the a&s and epiilles. 
 The quotations from the New Teftament in the 
 works of the antients, have alfo been confulted. 
 
 IX. 5. The principal manufcripts are the Co- 
 dex Alexandrinus, the Codex Cantabrigienfis or the 
 Codex Bczs, and the Codex Vaticanus. The re- 
 fpective ages, of thefe venerable manufcripts, has 
 been a fubjet of great controverfy, and has em- 
 ployed the ingenuity and learning of feveral biblical 
 writers of great renown. After a profound invefti- 
 gation of the fubjecl, Dotor Woide fixes the ag,e 
 of the Codex Alexandrinus between the middle and 
 the end of the fourth century ; after a fimilar in- 
 veftigation, Doctor Kippiing fixes the age, of the 
 Godex Cantabrigittijis or the Cotiex Bezse at the 
 fecond century. Montfaucon and Blanchini refer 
 the Codex Faticanus to the fifth century. But we 
 are infinitely better acquainted, with the two nrft, 
 
 thau
 
 76 H O R IF, ' B I R L I C ft.. 
 
 than with the third, of thefe manufcripts. In 1786, 
 a fac fimile edition of the Codex Alexandrinus was 
 publHhed at Oxford, at the expence of the univer- 
 fity, by Doctor Woide ; in 1793, a fac fimile edi- 
 tion of the Codex Cantabrigienfis,- or the Codex 
 Bezse, was publiflied at Cambridge, at the expence 
 of the univerfity, by Doctor Kippling. Thefe, edi- 
 tions exhibit their refpeclive prototypes, page for 
 page, line for line, \vord for word, contraction for 
 contraction, rafure for rafure, to a degree of fimi- 
 larity hardly credible. The types were caft for the 
 purpofe, in alphabets of various forms, that, they 
 might be varied with the manufcript and reprefent 
 it more exactly. Of a work of this kind, till thofe 
 we are fpeaking of were published, the world had 
 not feen an inflance. That, which approached 
 neareft to them, was, the Medicaean Virgil, pub- 
 liihed at Florence in 1741. The Codex Vaticanus 
 has been often collated but never published. Bent- 
 ley procured important extracts to be made from it. 
 Thefe were publiihed by ProfefFor Birch, with his 
 own, in the fplendid edition of the four gofpels 
 \vhich v/e fhall afterwards have occafion to mention. 
 
 From the manufcripts of the New Teftament ; 
 the pafiage is to the printed editions, commencing 
 with the Polyglots, by reafon of their fuperior im- 
 portance. -J3ut thefe, (though it make it neceffary 
 
 to
 
 HOR^BIBLICTE. 77 
 
 to return, in. fome meafure to the Old Teframent), 
 {b.ould be preceded .by, an account of the BIBLI- 
 CAL LABOURS OF ORIGIN. They are known 
 under the appellation of his Tetraples, Hexaples, 
 Qctapjes, and Enneaples. The tetrapks contained 
 in four columns, the Greek verfions of Aquila, 
 Symmachus, the Septuagint and Theodotion. Hav- 
 ing discovered two other verfions, he added thefe, 
 to the Tetraples. They'conftitutcd, together, the 
 Hexaples; "By prefixing to them, the Hebrew text, 
 and tranlcribing it, in a Separate column, in Greek 
 letters, he increafed them to Octaples. He 
 wards added to thanva fcparate veriion of the Pf 
 With, that, they are called. bis Enneaples. So 
 the firft column contained the Hebrew text in, He*- 
 brew letters ; the Lcond, the Hebrew,, in Greek 
 letters; the third, the verfion of Aquila; the fourth* 
 the verfion of Symmr.chus.j the fiftli, the Greek 
 text of the Septuagint ; the fixth, die veriion of 
 Theodotion ; the ieventh, his fifth Greek edition ; 
 the eighth, his fixth Greek edition; the ninth, his 
 Jail veriion of die Pialms. It is oWbrvable, that, 
 in the column, which contains the Hebrew text, in 
 Greek letters, he-expreffes it, in fuch letters, as 
 evidently fhew he was tidier unacquainted with, or 
 paid no attention to the JVIaforitical pronunciation. 
 He uniformly exprefles, what the Maforites call ihz 
 quiefcent letters, the Aleph, He, Vau, and Jod, by 
 vowels ; hut fo \arioufiy, t'.ut it is nr*oft clear 
 he confidered it to be a matter of indifference, by 
 
 wbat
 
 7 8 II O R M B I B L I C US. 
 
 what vowel he fhould denote- them. He alwayi 
 treats the Ain and Heth as vowels ; and, when two 
 confonants occur, he feems to have confidered It 
 optional, what vowel he fhould admit between 
 them. All this is diametrically oppofite to the fyf- 
 tem of the Maforites* 
 
 XL 
 
 The firft and the moft fplerdid of the POLY- 
 GLOTTIC EDITIONS, is that of Co'mplutum or Al- 
 tola. It is comprifed in fix volumes folio. The 
 imprefnon was printed off, in 1517, but was not 
 publiflied till fix years after. The expence of the 
 work, which amounted, (it is faid), to fifry thoufand 
 ducats, was wholly paid by Cardinal Xim^nes, one 
 of the nobleft and faircft chararitrs, that ever ap- 
 peared on the theatre of the world. " The variety, 
 " the grandeur, and the fuccefs of his fchemesj leave 
 <c it doubtful," fays Doctor Robertfon, " whether 
 *' his fagacity in council, his prudence in conduct, 
 " or his boldnefs in execution, deferve the higheft 
 <e praife. His reputation is ftil! high in Spain, not 
 u only for wifdom but fancliity, and he is the only 
 <c prime minifter mentioned in hiftory, . whom his 
 " contemporaries reverenced as a faint, and to 
 " whom the people under his government, afcribed 
 *' the power of working miracles." An interefting 
 and pleaung account of his earneftnefs in promoting 
 the fuccefs of the work is given, by the writers of 
 
 his
 
 HOR^E BIBLlC^Cf. 79 
 
 his life. It is certain, that, he fpared no expence in 
 collecting manuscripts ; but, whether he had any 
 that were truly valuable, has been much doubted. 
 The doubt gave rife to a literary controverfy in 
 Germany, which was chiefly managed by Goeze and 
 Semler ; the former denying, the latter aflerting, 
 the value of the cardinal's manufcripts. In 1784, 
 when Profeflbr Birch was engaged in his edition of 
 the Bible, Profeflbr Moldenhawer, went to Alcala 
 for the purpofe of difcovering the manufcripts, ufed 
 in the Ximenian polyglot. After much enquiry he 
 difcovered, that about thirty-five years before, they 
 had been fold to a rocket-maker of the name of 
 Toryo ; and the receipt given to him for his pur- 
 chafe was produced. Another objection made to 
 the edition, is, that, the editors, in confequence of 
 too high an opinion of the vulgate, and a miftaken 
 zeal for the chriftian religion, introduced, fome- 
 times, into the Greek text, readings of the vulgate, 
 which they did not find in the Greek manufcripts. 
 This point alfo was difcufied, at length, in the <*on- 
 troverfy we have mentioned. Six hundred copies 
 only were printed off. The common price is from 
 forty pounds to fixty. A fmall number, ( it is 
 thought not more than four), were printed on vel- 
 lum. One of thofe, at the fale of the Pinelli library, 
 was fold to Count Macartney for four hundred and 
 eighty-three pounds. For a typographical defcrip- 
 tion of the work, fee De Bure's Bibliographic in- 
 irruclive, theologie, art, I. The Complutenfian 
 
 polyglot
 
 8* H O R JE B I B L I C IE. 
 
 polyglot was followed and excelled by the Polyglot 
 of dnttuerp) printed, in that city in 15691572, in 
 eight volumes folio. The Polyglot of Paris, printed 
 in 16281645, in ten volumes folio, is one of the, 
 moft fplendid works, that, ever iilued from the prefs. 
 It was printed at the expence of Monfieur Le Jay. 
 Cardinal Richelieu offered to defray the whole coft 
 of the impreffion, and to give Le Jay the whole 
 profit of the falc, on condition, he would let it pafs 
 under his name. On the other hand the bookfeilers 
 of London, offered him very advantageous terms, 
 on condition it fhould be called the London polyglot : 
 he refufed both offers. Unfoituaatdy the work 
 had not a fale, fo, that, the cd.tor was completely 
 ruined by it. Lefs beautiful,, but more accu.vte, 
 and comprehending more than any of the three pre- 
 ceding polyglots, is the Polyglot of London^ printed 
 in 1657, in fix volumes, to which the Lexicon 
 Heptaglotton of Gaftell, in two volumes folio, is 
 ufually added. Bryan "Wakon-j afterwards biihop 
 of Chefler, was the editor of it. Twelve copies of 
 it were printed on large paper : one, of great beauty, 
 is in the library of St. Paul's cathedral ; another was 
 in that of the- Count de Lauraguais. The Lcipjic 
 Polyglot published in two volumes folio, in 1750, 
 contains the text, according to the iViaforitic re- 
 vifion, with the points ; the Sep.tuagint from Grabe's 
 edition of the Alexandrine manufcript, corrected as 
 far as could be, by Origen's afterifks and obelufes ; 
 with a Latin translation of it by Schmidius, and 
 
 with
 
 HORaEBIBLICjE. Si 
 
 with Luther's tranflation, and notes of the various 
 readings of the 'Vatican and other principal manu- 
 fcripts, and with philological and explanatory notes. 
 The cheapnefs of this edition makes it an ufeful 
 fubftitute for the former polyglots. 
 
 XII. 
 
 The firft of the GREEK PRINTED EDITIONS of 
 the New Teftament, in point of time, was that of 
 ErafjniiSj with a new Latin tranflation. He pub- 
 liflied five editions of it, in the years 1516, 1519, 
 1522, 1527 and 1525. The edition of 1519 is 
 moll ^(teemed. The two laft were altered in many 
 places, efpecially in the Revelation of St. John, 
 from the Complutenfian edition. A brief to Eraf- 
 mus from pope Leo the Xth, is prefixed to it. Al- 
 bcrtus, cardinal and archbimop of Mentz, writ him 
 a moft obliging letter, upon his edition, highly com- 
 mending it, and deiiring to fee him. He fent him, 
 with the letter, a golden cup, " amplum et grave," 
 fays Erafmus, " et opere fpectandum. Quin et no- 
 " men indidit. Ait vocaii poculum amoris- ex quo, 
 " qui biberint, protinus benevolentia mutua con- 
 " glutinari. Si vera funt h.TC, utinam theologi 
 " Lovanienfes ex ea mecum potaftent ante annos 
 " duos." It is oblervable, that, the Greek text of 
 Erafmus, latinizes, or, in other words, is made to 
 conform to the vulgate tranflation, even more than 
 that of Complutum, againft which he ftrougly 
 G urged
 
 urged the charge of latinizing. This edition in- 
 volved Erafmus in a quarrel with the divines of 
 Louvain, and with the Spanifh divines, employed 
 on the Complutenfian polyglot. The principal of 
 thefe was Stunica, a man of real learning. The 
 controverfy between him and Erafmus is inftru&ive 
 and interefting. In many inftances Stunica had the 
 advantage over Erafmus. But Erafmus had greatly 
 the advantage over Lee, his Englifh antagonift. 
 
 The next edition of the New Teftament in 
 Greek, is that inferted in the Cunplutenfum Polyglot. 
 The learned agree in wifhing the editors had de- 
 fcribed, or, at leaft fpecified the manufcripts they 
 made ufe of. The editors fpeak highly of them ; 
 but this was, when the number of known manu- 
 fcripts was fmail, and manufcript criticifm was in its 
 infancy, fo that, without impeaching either their 
 candour or their judgment, their aflertions, in this 
 refpecl:, muft be underftood with much limitation. 
 It has been charged on them, that they fometimes 
 altered the Greek text without the authority of a 
 fingle manufcript, to make it conform to the Latin. 
 Againft this charge they have been defended by 
 Goeze, and, to a certain extent, by Griefbach. 
 The ftrongeft proof in fupport of the charge is, 
 fhat, after Stunica had, in the bittereft terms, re- 
 proached Erafmus with his omiffion of the cele- 
 brated verfe of the hc-avenly witneffe^, and Erafmus 
 had, with equal vehemence challenged Stunica to 
 produce a fingle Greek manufcript in its fupport, 
 
 he
 
 ttORjB B I B t I C JE. 83 
 
 he did not c'te one Greek manufcript for it) but 
 perfifted in arguing from the authority of the Latin* 
 This, the lats Dr. Travis, the zealous defender of 
 the verfe, owns himfelf unable to account for, fatis- 
 fa&orily. The fate of their manufcripts has been 
 already mentioned. 
 
 The editions of Robert Stephens are next to be 
 confrdered. It is obfervable, that, while almoft 
 every other art, has, from the time of its firft in- 
 vention, been in a ffate of gradual improvement to 
 the prefent time^ the art of printing, very foon after 
 its firft appearance, attained a degree of perfection, 
 in many refpefts fuperior to its prefent {tare. Of 
 this, the Greek editions of the NewTeftament, 
 by Robert Stephens, are a frr iking example. For 
 exquifrte beauty and delicacy of type, elegance and 
 proper difpofition of contractions, fmoothnefs and 
 foftnefs of paper, liquid clearnefs of ink, and evenefs of 
 lines and letters, they have never been furpafled, and, 
 in the opinion of many, never equalled. There are 
 Four editions of them publifhed by himfelf in 1546, 
 1549, 1550, and 1551. His fon publifhed a fifth 
 edition in 1569. The third of thefe is in folio, and 
 has the readings of fixteen manufcripts, in the 
 margin. The two firft are in octavo, and of thofe, 
 the frrft, (that in 1546), is the moft correct. 
 There is prefixed to it, an addrefs by Robert Ste- 
 phens to his readers beginning, u O mirificam 
 *' regis noftri optimi et praeftantillimi principis 
 
 G 2 "liberali-
 
 U H O R M -B I B L I C M. 
 
 " liberalitatem." From this it has been generally 
 termed the Mirificam edition. The correclnefs of 
 this edition is equal to its beauty. It has been faid 
 to have but one error of the prefs, and that this is 
 in the prefixed addrefs, where " pulres " is written 
 for " plures." But probably this is not the error 
 objected ; for at the top of page 289, of the fecond 
 volume, IHANNOT. B. is evidently written for 
 inANNOT. A. Till lately, an opinion generally 
 prevailed, that, thefe types were abfolutely loft ; 
 but, in the EJ/ay Hijlorique fur Foriglne des cbarac- 
 te es orientaux de I'imprimerle toy ale et fur les cha- 
 r after es Grecs de Francois i er . appeles communement 
 Grecs du Roi, publifhed by Mr. de Guignes, in 
 the firft volume of the Notices et Extraits des Ma- 
 nufcripts de la Billiotbeque du Rol^ it appears, that, 
 the puncheons and matrices, ufed by Robert Ste- 
 phens, in thefe celebrated editions, are flill preferved 
 in the Imprimerie Royale at Paris. From the fame 
 work we learn, that, in 1700, the Univerfity of 
 Cambridge applied to the King of France to have 
 a caft of the types j that, a propofal was made them 
 on the part of the king, that, in the title-pages of 
 the works printed by them, after the words " typis 
 " academkif " there fhould be added carafteribus 
 Gratis e tyfographfio reglo Pariftenji : that, the 
 uaiveriity, refuted to accede to the propofal ; and 
 that, in confequence of the refufal, the negotiation 
 went off. 
 
 The
 
 HORJEBIELICM. 85 
 
 .The edition of Beza was printed in 1565, 
 from the third edition of Robert Stephens. It has 
 often been reprinted. The laft edition printed by 
 Beza himfelf, was in 1598. In his choice of read- 
 ings he is accufed of being influenced by his Cal- 
 viniftic prejudices. 
 
 The celebrated edition of the Elzevirs was firft 
 printed at Leyden in 1624. It was printed from 
 the third edition of Robert Stephens j where it 
 varies from that edition, it follows, generally, the 
 edition of Beza. By this edition, the text, which 
 had fluctuated in the preceding editions, acquired 
 a confiftency. It was generally followed in all the 
 fubfequent editions. It has defervedly, therefore, 
 obtained the appellation of Editlo recepta. The 
 editors of it are unknown. 
 
 The celebrated edition of the reverend John Mill 
 was publilhed at Oxford in 1707, after an affiduous 
 labour of thirty years. He furvived the publication 
 of it, only fourteen days. Heinferted in his edition, 
 all the collections of various readings, which had 
 been made before his time ; he collated feveral 
 original editions ; procured extracts from Greek 
 manufcripts, which had never been collated, and in 
 many inftances, added readings from the ancient 
 verfions, and from the quotations of them in 
 the works of the ancient fathers. The whole 
 of the various readings collected by him, are faid, 
 without any improbability, to amount to thirty 
 thou&nd. He has enriched his work with moft 
 03 '_ learned
 
 t6 HOR.ZE B I B L I. C j& 
 
 learned prolegomena, and a clear and accurate de- 
 fcription. of his manufcripts. He took the third 
 edition of Stephens for his text. He fliews the 
 higher! reverence for the Vulgate, but thinks ilightly 
 of the Alexandrine manufcript. His work formed 
 a new sera in biblical criticifm. It was reprinted 
 by Ludolph Kufter, at ^Rotterdam, in 1710, with 
 the readings of twelve additional manuferipts; 
 While facred criucifm lafts, his learning, indefa- 
 tigable induftry, andmodeft candour, will be fpokeu, 
 of, with the higheft praife. 
 
 The edition of John Albert Bengel y abbot of Abv 
 fpirfpack in the dutchy of Wurtemberg, was pub- 
 lifhed in 1734. He prefixed to it his " Introdufiio in 
 CnfinNovl TeJJamanti ;" and fubjoined to it, his 
 *< Apparatus Critic us and Epilogus" He altered the 
 text, where he thought it might be improved j butj 
 except in. the Apocalypfe^ heitudioufly avoidttl in- 
 ferting in the text, any reading, which was not in 
 fome printed edition. Under the text, he placed 
 fome felel readings, referving the whole collection. 
 of various readings, and his own fentiments upoii 
 them, for his Apparatus Criticus. He exprefTed his 
 opinion of thefe margin,a! readings by the Greek 
 letters, , j3, y, J, and H. a, denotes, that, he held the 
 reading to be genuine; ,3, that he thought; its ge^ 
 nuinenefs was not abfolutely certain, .but that the 
 reading appeared to him preferable to that in the 
 text ; 7, that the reading in the margin was of equal 
 value with the reading in the text > c y that the 
 9 marginal
 
 H O R .* BIBLIC^. *r 
 
 marginal reading feemed of lefs value ; and % that 
 he thought it abfolutely fpurious, though fome cri- 
 tics defended it. Several fmall editions of Bengel's 
 New Teftament have been publifhed in Germany. 
 His " Gnomon" which is a collection of explana- 
 tory notes upon the New Teftament, does not give 
 a very high notion of his own intelligence of the 
 facred book. 
 
 All former editions of the Greek Teftament 
 were furpafled by that of John "James Wciftein \ 
 of which it is fufficient to mention, that, Michaelis, 
 his profefled enemy, and who lofes no opportu- 
 nity of fpeaking harfhly of him, fays, that, it is, 
 of all editions of the Greek Teftament, the moft 
 important, and the moft necefiary to thofe, who are 
 engaged in facred criticifm : and that, Do&or Her- 
 bert Marfh, the celebrated tranflator of Michaelis, 
 and perhaps the beft judge, now living, of the merit 
 of Inch a work, calls it, by the emphatic appellation, 
 of the Invaluable Book. It was publifhed in two 
 volumes folio, in 17515 at Amfterdam, Wetfteiu 
 thinks flightly, not to fay contemptuoufly, (unfor- 
 tunately contemptuous expreflions were too familiar 
 to him), both of the vulgate and the Alexandrine 
 manufcript. He adopted for his text, the editio 
 recepta, of the Elzevirs. His collection of various 
 readings far furpafles that of Mill or Bengel, His 
 notes are particularly valuable, for the copious ex- 
 tracts he has made from the rabbinical writers. 
 Thefe greatly ferve to explain the iJiom and turn 
 G4 of
 
 88 H O KM B I B L I C JR. 
 
 of eyprefiion ufed by the apofloHc writers and 
 evangelifts. The editions of his Prolegomena and 
 of hi? Libelli ad Cr'ifin otque Inierpretationem Novi 
 Teftamenti) by Do6ior Semler, arc a mine of re- 
 condite and curious biblical learning. After every 
 dedu&ion is made from the merit of his edition, 
 on account of the fuppofed fociniaim and intem- 
 perate fpirit of the author, much, very much will 
 remain that deferves the higheft praile. 
 
 The acknowledged merit of Wetftein's edition 
 excited a general fpirit of emulation among the wri- 
 ters of Germany. The firft, in time, as in eminence, 
 was Dofloryohn James Griefbacb-, whofe edition of the 
 NewTeftament was firft publifhed in 17751777, 
 in two volumes o&avo, at Halle. In this laft year, 
 (1796), the firft volume has been reprinted, under 
 the patronage, and at the expence, of his grace, the 
 duke of Grafton. It has extracts from two hundred 
 manufcripts, in addition to thofe quoted in the former 
 edition, He has collated all the Latin verfions, 
 publiflitd by Sabatier, and Blarichini. His object, 
 is to give a feledt and chpice colle&ipn of the va- 
 rious readings, produced by Mill, Bengel and Wet- 
 ftein, and of his own extracts, omitting all fuch as 
 are trifling in themfelves, fupported by little autho- 
 rity, or evidently only errata. Griefbach's edition 
 is the text book ufed by the ftudents in the German 
 univerfities. Moft probably, like Heyne's Virgil, 
 it will become the general book of fcholars, mafc 
 ters, and literati. Previoufly to his publication of 
 
 his
 
 HOR^E BIBLIC^E, * s 
 
 his edition of the Greek Teftatnent, Griefbach pub- 
 lifhed his Synopfis Evangel'iorum Mattbai^ Mard^ et 
 Lucee, Hal*?) \lrno, 1771. 
 
 In 1786, Profijjor Alter publiihed at Vienna, in 
 two volumes, folio, Codex Lambecii, r, in the Im- 
 perial library, and thence {1 vied by him the Codex 
 Findobonenfis. He has corrected it occafionally froni 
 the edition publifhed by Robert Stephens in 1546, 
 Subjoining, at the end of each volume, a lift of thefe 
 corrections, under the title of Vitia Codicis findolv- 
 nenfis ; he has added the various readings from the 
 Coptic and Slavonian verfions, and from two Latin 
 Verfions in the Imperial library. 
 
 It remains only to take notice of the ^uatuor 
 fvangelia Grcsca, cum vartantibus lefiionibus a textu 
 Codd. MSS. Elbllotheccs Vaticana*, Barberina^ Lau- 
 rentiants ^indobonenfis^EfcurialenJis^HanuierJis regla, 
 quibus accedunt leftiones verjtonum Syranim^ vttgrii, 
 Pbiloxeniana:, et Hiercfolymitants, jujju et fumptibus 
 regiiS) euldit Andreas Birch. Haunles 1788, fol, et ^t:. 
 This is a noble fruit of royal munificence. Profeflbrs 
 Birchj Alter, and Moldenhawer, were employed, 
 and their expences defrayed, by the prefent king of 
 Denmark, to travel into Germany, Italy, France, 
 and Spain, to collate the manuicripts of the facred 
 text. The work now under confideration, is the 
 refult of their united labours. The text is that of 
 Mill. The edition is particularly valuable, for the 
 large extracts from the Codex Vaticanus.
 
 ,5 H O R.35 B I B'L I C JB. 
 
 There are many other refpe&able editions of the 
 Greek Teftament ; but thofe we have .mentioned 
 are, confefledly, the principal. The edition by 
 Erafmus, and the edition in the Complutenfian ' 
 polyglot, are the principal editions, from which 
 almoft all the fubfequent editions have been taken. 
 This, Dodlor Griefbacb, in his excellent prolego- 
 mena, has placed beyond controverfy. " All the 
 " modern editions," he fays, u follow that of the 
 " Elzevirs ; that was taken from the edition of 
 " Beza, and the third of Robert Stephens j Bcxa 
 c< copied the third of Robert Stephens, except in 
 * c fome places, where he varied from it arbitrarily, 
 " and without fufiicient authority. The third of 
 " Stephens immediately follows the fifth of Erafr 
 *' mus's editions, except in a very fc:w places in the 
 " apocalypfe, where he preferred to it the Complu- 
 tc tenfian edition. Erafmus, formed the text, as 
 " well as he could, from a (mall number of manu- 
 *' fcripts, and thofe of a recent date, and without 
 " further aid than an interpolated edition of the 
 " vulgate and bad editions of a few of the fathers." 
 The principal editions, in which Erafmus and the 
 Complutenfians have not been ibllovved, are thole 
 of Mr. Bowyer, Profeilbr Aker, and Griefbach. 
 It were greatly to be wiihed that fome perfon 
 would collect and publifli together, with fuch 
 obfervations and illuitrations as the ful>je6t occa- 
 fionally requires, the various prolegomena of Wal- 
 ton, Mill, Wetftein, arid Griefbach ; the contro- 
 verfy between Erafmus and the Spaniih divines and 
 
 Lee,
 
 HORJBBIBLICJ& 91 
 
 JL,ee, and the prefaces of Kennicott, Kippling, and 
 Woide ; with a fuccinct but complete account of 
 the chief manufcripts and printed editions of the 
 iacred text. In fuch a collection a place fhoulJ be 
 allowed to fome of Doctor Campbell's preliminary 
 dllTertations, and to fome of Doctor Macknight's 
 preliminary effays. 
 
 XIII. 
 
 Amqng the ORIENTAL VERSIONS the Syrlac 
 claims the firil place, from the immenfe territory 
 where it is fpoKen, having always been the language 
 pf learning and of the higher orders of life from the 
 mountains of AfTyria to the Red fea. The moft 
 ancient of the Syriac verfions is called the Ptjbito, 
 or die literal ; it is in general ufe among the Syriac 
 chnitians. It was firft made known in Europe, by 
 Mofes of Marden, who was fent by Ignatius, pa- 
 triarch of the Maronite chriftians, in the year 1552, 
 to pope Julius the Hid, to acknowledge the fupre- 
 macy of the Roman pontiff. It was firir. printed at 
 Vienna, in 1555. It has been fince reprinted ; . the 
 belt edition is that of Leyden, in 1709, reprinted 
 in 1717. Its readings coincide molt remarkably 
 with thofe of the vulgate ; which ieems to afford a 
 conclufive argument in favour of the antiquity of 
 both the vwfions. It certainly was made before the 
 fourth, and there are arguments to (hew it was 
 made at the end of the firft, or the beginning of. the 
 
 fecond
 
 fecond century. There are more modern Syriac 
 verfions ; the principal of which is the Philoxenian 
 verfion, publifhed by Dodor Ridley, and fmce re- 
 pubiifhed by Profeffor White, whofe Bampton Lec- 
 tures have obtained the applaufe of every man of 
 tafte, and extorted the praife even of Mr. Gibbon. 
 The Coptic is the language of the rude peafants 
 of the Nile. The verfion in that language was 
 printed with a Latin translation at Oxford, in 1716, 
 by David Wilkins, a native of Memel in Pruilia. 
 The editor of Erneflis Inft'ituto, fixes its age at the 
 fifth century. The indefatigable induftry of the 
 moderns has difcovered a verfion yet in manufcript, 
 called the Sahidic verfion, from its being, in the 
 language of the nation which inhabits the Upper 
 Egypt, or the part which lies between Cahera and 
 Aflevan, called in Arabic, Said. It is fuppofed by 
 Do&or Woide, to have been made in the fecond 
 century. Some parts of it have been publifhed. 
 An Mthiopic veriion was publifhed at Rome, in 
 1548 and 1549, from a defective copy; that, from 
 which the ^Ethiopic verfion in the London polyglot 
 was printed, was ftiil more defective. An Arme- 
 nian verfipn was printed, at Arnfterdam, in \ 666, 
 in quarto j an edition in oiitavo was printed there 
 in 1668. The former includes both the Old and 
 the New Teftament ; the latter contains the New 
 Teftament only. An edition, in that language, of 
 the New Teftament, was puhlifhed, in duodecimo, 
 in 1698. Thz Georgian veriion was firil printed 
 
 at
 
 HORjE BIBLIC^E. ?s 
 
 at Mofcow, in 1743, folio. An Arabic verfion of 
 the four gofpels was published at Rome in 1590 
 1591. It was printed, with a veriion of the. remain- 
 ing books of the New Teftament, in the Paris and 
 London polyglots. Erpenius publifhed the Arabic 
 New TeJiamenr, at Leyclen, in 1616, from a ma- 
 nufcript written in the Upper Egypt, in the year 
 1342. The Roman congregation de propaganda 
 fide, publifhed, in 1671, an Arabic and Latin Bible, 
 under the infpeilioa of Sergius Riiius, bifhop of 
 Damafcus. The Englifh faddy for promoting: 
 chriilian knowledge publiihed, 111.1727, an Arabic 
 N ew Teftament, for the ufe cf the chriftians, in Afia. 
 Ten thoufand copies were printed of tlas edition. 
 A Perfic verfion of the four gofpels is printed in 
 the London polyglot. A new tranflation of it was 
 printed by Profeiibr Bode, at Helinftadt, in 1750. 
 1751, with a preface, containing hiilorical and cri- 
 tical remarks, on the Perfic veruons. Another 
 Perfic verfion was printed in London 1652 1657, 
 Ernefti in his Inftitutio, fays, that Uphilas, bilhop 
 of the Goths, tranflared the New Teftament into 
 the Gotl'ic. language in the fourth century : and 
 that, this verfion is fuppofed to be the verfion of 
 the GofptI, which was published at Dordrecl, in 
 1665, by Junius and Marshall, at Amfterdam, in 
 1684, at Stiemhielin in 1672, and at Oxford, in 
 1750 by Edward Lye, The Codtx Argenteus is 
 written on vellum j the letters are lilverj except the 
 initials, which are gold. It has been much doubted, 
 
 whether
 
 94. H'OR^ B I B L I C? A. 
 
 whether the verficn fliould be called Gothic of 
 Francic, and whether it were taken from the Greek 
 or the Latin. The Rujjjlan or Slavonian verfton 
 was made from the Greek. The moft ancient cop/ 
 of the Whole Bible, in the Ruffian language, was 
 written in the year 1409, in the time of the grand 
 duke Wafjljewitch. But, of the New Testament, 
 there are copies of the eleventh, twelfth, thirteenth 
 and fourteenth centuries. A ftill more ancient ma- 
 nufcript was given by the Czar Iwan Wafeljewitch 
 to Garabunda, fecretary to the dutchy of Lithuania) 
 it was written, in the time of the grand dukd 
 Wlademir, who reigned from 972 to 1015. The 
 oldeft printed edition is that of Prague, in 1519. 
 It has been finee printed, at Oftrog in 1581, at 
 Mofcow, in 1663, 1751, 1/565 17575 1766 in folio, 
 in 1759 in large oftavo, at Kiow, and in 1758, in 
 folio. Copies and accurate extracts have been 
 given from this verfion by Profeflbr Alter. The 
 'geography and hiftory of thefe, and other countries 
 of the eaft, and the revolutions of their religious 
 tenets, fo far as thefe fubjedls are connected with 
 the verfjons of the Old or NcwTeftament antiently, 
 or at prefent in ufe among them, might be wrought 
 into an interefting and curious difcufiion. 
 
 XIV. 
 
 To obtain an accurate notion of what is called 
 LATIN VULGATE TRANSLATION, of the 
 
 icriptures,
 
 H O R & B I B L I C M. $J 
 
 fcriptures, it is necefiary to enquire into the nature 
 of the Latin verfions, made before the time of St. 
 Jerom, particularly the verfion called, the Vetus 
 ltdica ; and to confider the different verfions pub- 
 limed by St. Jerom, as they came immediately from 
 his hands, as they were corrupted in the middle ages, 
 and as they have been corrected and promulgated 
 by papal authority. 
 
 XIV. i. Two paffages, in different parts of the 
 works of St. Augufline, clearly (hew, the nature of 
 the fctus Italica, and the other Latin verfions, 
 prior to the time of Si. Jercm. In his treatife de 
 Doclrina Chriftiana, lib. 2. chap. 1 1. St. Auguf- 
 tine fays, u that, the number of thofe, who had 
 " tranflated the fcriptures from the Hebrew into 
 "the Greek, might be computed J but that, the 
 " number of thofe, who had tranflated the Greek 
 " into the Latin could not. For, immediately upon 
 "the fir ft introduction of chriftianity, if a perfon 
 " got poflefSon of a Greek manufcript, and thought 
 " he had any knowledge of the two languages, he 
 " feC about tranflating the fcriptures." In an- 
 other part of his works, 1. 2. ch. 15. he fays, " in 
 " ipfes interpretationibus Itala cteteris precferatur^ 
 cc nam eft verborum tcnaclor cum perfpicultate fen- 
 K tcntla. " It fhould fcem difficult to miftake 
 the import of thefe expreflions, yet they have given 
 rife to much controverfy. One fide, with a view 
 to rob the vulgate of all pretenfion, even to a re- 
 mote affinity to the translation pointed at by St. 
 
 Auguftine,
 
 9 l H O R JE B 1 B L I C M. 
 
 Auguftine, in this place, has in item defiance of all 
 manufcripts, and all printed editions, propofed to 
 read " ilia " for " Itala ;" and, (to make fenfe and 
 grammar of the paflage, of which, the alteration in 
 queflion, if it were to (land alone, would totally 
 bereave it), to fubftitute " quae " for " nam," - 
 an emendation, certainly not of the gentleft touch. 
 The other fide to exalt the vulgate, has fuppofcd it 
 may be fairly inferred from the pafTage in St. Au-> 
 guftine, that, there was a vcrfion, which having 
 been firlr. fanelioned by the Roman pontiff, was re- 
 ceived by the whole Latin church, and was gene- 
 rally ufed in the for vice of the church. But this is 
 carrying his words much beyond their natural im- 
 port, and is as unjuftifiable an attempt to raife, as 
 the other is, to deprefs, the real dignity and merit 
 of the vulgate. The high terms of commenda- 
 tion, in which St. Augultine exprefTes himfelf of 
 the Vetus Italica have raifed a general wifh, that it 
 
 touM be difcovered and publiflied. In 1695,0001 
 [artianay, the learned editor of the works of St. 
 Jerom, publiilied at Paris, in o&avo, what he fup- 
 pofed was the. Vetus Italica, of the gofpel of St. 
 Matthew,, and of St. James's epiftle. In 1743, 
 Peter Sabatier publifhed at Rheims, in three large 
 volumes folio, his u Bibliorumfacrorum Latince ver->- 
 " fiones antlqua feu vetus lialica et cater <z queecum- 
 tc que in codicibus maKufcriptis et antlquorum lilris 
 " repenri poluerunt qua cum vulgata Latino et cum 
 44 textit Graco comparantur." Where there were 
 
 chafmS
 
 HOR-ffi BIBLIC^:. 57 
 
 chafms in his manufcripts, he fupplied them from 
 the vulgate. The laft publication of the kind is by 
 Father Jofeph Blanchini, an oratorian ; the tide of 
 his work is " Evangelijlarium quadruplex Latlnes 
 " verftonis antique feu veteris Italics ex codicibus 
 tc manufcriptis aureis argenteh purpureis aliifqite 
 <c plttfquam millenaries antiqititaiis, Roma 1749." 
 It contains five, or rather four manufcripts, of a 
 Latin verfion. In many places they differ j and 
 Blanchini's arguments, that, the differences are 
 merely errors of the tranfcribers, are, by no means, 
 conclufive. It fesms generally believed, that they 
 are four diftindt verfions. A Latin tranflation, per- 
 haps anterior to that of St. Jerom, is publifhed by 
 Doctor Kippling with the Codex Bezs. That 
 this and the other tranflations may be anterior to St. 
 Jerom, all allow. But that any one 6f them is the 
 Vetus Italica, no fatisfaclory evidt-nce, no convinc- 
 ing argument has yet been produced. ^ 
 XIV. 2. The great multiplicity of verfions, and 
 the confufion which prevailed among them, were 
 the motives, which firft urged St. JEROM to bis 
 biblical labours. He b.egan by correcting the Pfalms j 
 but the people at large, being accuftomed to their 
 old verfion, could not be induced to lay it afide, in 
 favour of St. Jerom's. He, therefore, publifhed 
 another edition; In this he made few alterations in 
 the text itfelf, but fliewed by obelufes and afterifks, 
 where it differed from the Septuagint, or the He- 
 brew. From this laft edition, and the old Italic, 
 
 H 5^
 
 9 2 H O R E B I B L I C ^E. 
 
 is formed the vulgate edition of the Pfalms, which 
 is now ufed in the Roman Catholic church. St. 
 Jerom's original corre&ion of the Pfalms never 
 came into public ufe. On the fame plan, in which 
 lie made that correction, he corrected alfo, the 
 Proverbs of Solomon, the Ecclefiaftes, the Canti- 
 cum Canticorum, the book of Job, and the Para- 
 lipomena. He afterwards undertook and executed, 
 with the greateft applaufe, a complete verfion, into 
 Latin, of all the Old Teftament. He tranflated alfo 
 the New Teftament from the Greek into the Latin. 
 This tranflation, made by St. Jerom, of the Old 
 Teftament from the Hebrew, and of the New Tef- 
 tament from the Greek, is the origin or ftock of 
 our prefent vulgate, except with refpect to the 
 Pfalms ; which, as was obfcrved before, refts on 
 St. Jerom's fecond edition of the old tranflation. 
 The genuine verfion of St. Jerom, from a beau- 
 tiful manufcript at Paris, was publifhed, there, 
 'in 1692, by Dom Martianay and Dom Pouget, 
 under the title of Sanfli Eifebii Hieronymi di~ 
 vlna bibliotheca haftenus incdita. St. Jerom's ver- 
 fion had the fate of many confiderable works 
 of genius. It had warm advocates, particularly 
 among the truly learned, and violent enemies, par- 
 ticularly among the ignorant. By degrees its merit 
 was univerfally acknowledged, and it almoft uni- 
 verfally fupcrfeded every other verfion. Such was the 
 vulgate tranflation as it came originally from. the 
 hands of St. Jerom. 
 
 XIV. 3.
 
 HOR-ffl BIBLICJE. 99 
 
 XIV. 3. It did not efcape the general fate of 
 manufcripts during the middle age. Partly by the 
 miftakes or errors of tranfcribers, partly by cor- 
 rections made by unfldlful perfons, partly by alte- 
 rations from the citations in the works of the fa- 
 thers, and partly by infertions made in it by way of 
 explanation, the text was exceedingly disfigured 
 and corrupted, in many places. But one circum- 
 ftance in particular, introduced variations Into every 
 part of it. It is, that, the old uncorre&ed verfion 
 was intermixed with it, throughout. Caffiodorus, 
 and, after him Alcuim, ufed their utmoll endeavours 
 to reftore the verfion to its priftinc purity. But it 
 was a mifchief, which. all their abilities and zeal 
 were infumcient to remedy. At the revival of let- 
 ters, feveral perfons of learning exerted themfelves 
 to procure a good edition of it. The chief editions, 
 publiihed on this plan, are thofe of Robert Stephens, 
 in 1540, 1545, and 1546; that of Hentenius in 
 1547, and that of the Louvain divines, in 1557, 
 and i 573, chiefly conducted by Lucas Brugenlis. 
 
 XIV. 4. It was afterwards revifed and promul- 
 gated by papal authority. The council of Trent 
 took the ftate of the verfions into confideration. 
 It declared the antient and common edition mould 
 be confidered the authentic edition j and that the 
 Bible mould be printed as correctly and as expe- 
 ditioufly as poffible, principally according to the 
 antient and vulgate edition. In confequence of this 
 it was publifaed by Stxtus Quintus in 1590. But 
 H 2 his
 
 TOO H O R M B I B L I C JE. 
 
 his edition 'fcarcely made its appearance, befoi'e it 
 was difcovered to abound with errors. The copies, 
 therefore, were called in, and a new edition was 
 printed .by Clement the yillih, his immediate fuc- 
 ceflbr, in 1592; and afterwards with fome varia- 
 tions, in 1593. The difference between the two 
 papal editions is confiderable. Dr. James, in his 
 celebrated Bellum Papale, reckons two thoufand 
 inftances in which they difFer ; Father Henry ds 
 Bukentop, a Recollet, made a, fimilar collection ; and 
 Lucas Brugenfvs has reckoned four thoufand places, 
 in which, in his opinion, the Bible of Clement the 
 Vlllth, may be thought to want correction. Car- 
 dinal Bellarmin, who had a principal part in the 
 publication of the edition, praifcd. his induftry, and 
 writ to him, that, thofe concerned in the work, had 
 not corrected it with the utmoft accuracy, and that, 
 intentionally, they had pafled over many miflakes. 
 u Scias vtlim" fays his eminence, " Eiblla vulgata 
 tc non effe a nobis accuratijjlme caftigata : muha 
 tc enlm de indiiftrla^ juftis de caujis pertranfi'vimus". 
 When it is examined critically it evidently appears 
 the work of feveral hands. A frrupulous adhe- 
 rence to the text is obfervable in moft parts of it} 
 but in fome it is carried further than in. others. 
 It frequently happens, that, this leads to barbarous 
 expre-ffions : fometimes even the vulgate is re- 
 proachable with abfolute folecifms ; as fi fucrit 
 hsmini centum ove*, dormnantur cor urn rep/eta 
 /:;/ nuptia dljcumbentium^ widens quoniam (for quod) 
 i. Hhifus
 
 HOR^E B I B L I C -ffi. 
 
 ubi erugo et tinea 
 fdunt) for edidcruntfruciusfuo*) iiluminare kis, 
 qui in teacbris, nihil ncs nocebit,-~ vapulalis multus. 
 Many othef inftances of folecifms or barbariuns of 
 a fimilar nature, might be produced. But thefe do 
 not detract from its general merit. Not only Ro- 
 man Catholics, but feparatifts from the church of 
 Rome, agree in its praifc. It is univerfally allowed, 
 that, it does not fufFer in a comparifon with any 
 other verfion. Dr. M,tll, whofe whole life was 
 fpent in the ftudy of the manufcripts and printed 
 editions of the original and the translations from 
 it, profciits the greateft efteem for it, and in 
 his choice of readings, defers confuierably to it. 
 .Grotius fpeaks of it highly ; Walton and Ben- 
 gel praife it much. In his HijJoire Critique du 
 <Texte et dcs rerf.ws du Nou^eau Teftamenty Father 
 Simon has pointed out its real merit. The church 
 of Rome juitly treats it with die greateft veneration. 
 Some divines have fuppofcd it to be abfolutely free 
 from error, and that no one is at liberty to vary 
 from it, in translation or expofition. But this is 
 going to an extreme. The council of Trent, in 
 pronouncing it to be authentic, did not pronounce 
 it to be infpired or infallible. Sec Nertalis Alexan- 
 der^ de vulgata jcr'ipturte v^rfione^ quajiis 5, 
 tt quo fenfu vnlgata editio fa autbentica ; et 
 tio 6, de pfalmatis et mendis qu&-> in vulgatd verfane 
 Latino, Bibliorum jujf'u Cletnenih Vlllvi mendata y 
 etiamnum fnperfun^ qtax eccltfue auElorhate carrigi 
 H 3 f'ofunt.
 
 H O R M B I B L I C JB. 
 
 - > 
 
 Roman catholic writers of eminence 
 have contended, that, confidering the prefent ftate 
 of the Greek text, the vulgate exprefles more of 
 the true reading of the original?, or autographs of 
 the facred penmen, than any Greek edition that 
 has yet appeared, or can now be framed. There 
 is no reafon to fuopofe that any of the autographs 
 exiited in the third century. See Griejbach, Hijloria 
 Textus Epijlolarum Pauli.. 
 
 XV. 
 
 We now come to THE ENGLISH TRANSLA- 
 TIONS OF THE BIBLE. 
 
 XV. i. There are many Anglo-Saxon verfions of 
 the New Teftament. The four gofpels were pub- 
 lifhed by Matthew Parker, William Lifle and 
 Thomas Marfhall, in the years 1571, 1658, and 
 1665. This laft edition was printed at Dordrecht, 
 with the Maefo- Gothic verfion and reprinted at 
 Amfterdam, in 1684. As the Anglo-Saxon ver- 
 fion was evidently made from the verfion in ufe 
 before St. Jerom's, it is much valued by thofe, who 
 are curious after the readings of the old Italic. 
 
 XV. 2. The moft antient Englijh translation is 
 that of Wlckliff. It was finimed about the year 
 1367. It was revifed by fome of his followers. 
 Both the original and the revifed tranflation are dill 
 extant in manufcript. The copies of the latter arc 
 more rare than the copies of the former. 
 
 XV. 3.
 
 H O R M B I B L I C JE. to* 
 
 XV. 3. The principal printed editions are 
 I ft. thofe of Tyndale and Coverdale; 2d. the Ge~ 
 Kevan Bible, or the tranflations made by the Englifh 
 who fieri to Geneva to avoid the perfections of 
 Qu^en Mary ; 3d. the Epifcopal tranflation niade 
 In the reign of Queen Elizabeth, under the direction 
 of Matthew Farcer, the celebrated archbiiliop of 
 Canterbury ; 4th. King Jamss's Bible : it was 
 printed in 1611, and is that, which is at prefent 
 ufed in all the Britifh dominions; 5'th. the Englifh 
 translations made by the Roman Catholics, The 
 chief of thefe are, the Rbemifo Teflamfnt^ printed at 
 Rhemes in 1582. In the year 1589, Doctor Fulke, 
 matter of Pembroke- hall, Cambridge, reprinted this 
 tranflation, together with the Bifliop's Bible in two 
 columns. It is a curious performance, and very 
 much ucferves the attention of thofe, who ftudy the 
 fubje&s in controverfy between Roman catholics 
 and proteftants, particularly fuch as turn on fcrip- 
 tural interpretation. The Doway Bible is print- 
 ed in. two volumes quarto, in 1609, 1610. It is 
 faid to be made from " the authentical Latin." A 
 new edition of it was publifhed in five volumes 
 oclavo, in 1750, by the late Doctor Challoner. 
 Befides thefe, a tranflation in two volumes, large 
 ofovo, was publifhed at Dovvay, in the year 1730, 
 by Doilor \Vithnm. It is enriched with ufeful and 
 foncife notes. 
 
 H 4 XVI. It
 
 104- HORJE BIBLIC^E. 
 
 XVI. 
 
 It remains to obferve a foiking peculiarity of the 
 Old and New Teftament: its divifion into CHAP- 
 TERS AND VERSES. 
 
 XVI. i. The divifion of the Hebrew text intq 
 chapters^ was made by the Jews, in imitation of the 
 divifion of the New Teftament, into chapters. 
 Their divifion of the Old Teftament into verfes, 
 was much more antient, being, probably, of the 
 fame date as their invention of the vowel points. 
 Much of the labour of the Maforites was confumed 
 in calculating the verfes, and their literal peculiari- 
 ties. Thus, they difcovered, that, the verfes in the 
 bookcf Genefis amounted to 1534; that its middle 
 verfe was the fortieth of the twenty-feventh chapter ; 
 that, the whole Bible contained twenty-three thou- 
 fand two hundred and fix verfes ; that there were 
 two verfes in the Pentateuch, all the words of which 
 ended with a Mem j that there were three verfes 
 which confifted of eighty letters ; that there are 
 fourteen verfes which confift of three words j twen^- 
 ty-fix, which contain all the letters of the alphabet; 
 one which contains ail the final letters, &c. &c. 
 
 XVI. 2. The antients divided the New Tefta- 
 ment into two kinds of chapters. The TJT^OJ, or 
 larger portions, are written either in the upper or 
 lower margin, and generally in red ink ; the *e<pa.toua t 
 or fmall portions, are numbered on the fide of the 
 margin. They are clearly reprefented in Erafmus's 
 
 edition,
 
 H O R & B I B L I C J. joj 
 
 edition, and in R. Stephens's edition of 1 550. Thefe 
 chapters differ in different copies. The moft cele- 
 brated, and one of the moft antient divifions, was 
 that of Ammonius. From him it had the appella- 
 tion of the Ammon'ian feclkm. It was afterwards, 
 in a great meafurc, fuperfeded, by that of Eufebius. 
 But by the example and influence of Cardinal Hugo 
 de S. Caro, the old divifion was entirely laid afide, 
 and that in prefent ule was adopted. Robert Ste- 
 phens was the inventor 'of the verfes into- which 
 the New Teftament is now divided. The divifion 
 into chapters is fometimcs liable to objection. The 
 divifions intoverfes is ftill more obje&ionable. But 
 rt is now too late to reject it. In moft of the later 
 editions of note, the text is continued, without any 
 diftin&ion of verfes ; but the verfes are numbered! 
 in the margin. 
 
 XVI. 3. The punciuatlim of the Bible is a 
 modern invention. In the antient maaulcripts no 
 marks are found, except a point and a blank fpace. 
 The comma was invented in the eighth century; 
 the femicolon in the ninth ; the other ftops were 
 difcovered afterwards. The fpirits and the accents 
 are not earlier, in the opinion of moft writers, than 
 the feventh century. 
 
 XVII. 
 
 With refpeft to the influence of the various 
 readings on the queftions refpccting the purity^ 
 
 authenticity.
 
 io$ HOR. BIBLIC^S. 
 
 authenticity, or divine infpiration of the facred text : 
 it may be obferved, that, when a perfon unac- 
 quainted with the nature of what are called va- 
 rious readings, hears of the multitude of thofe, 
 which are difcovered in the manufcripts and printed 
 editions of the Old and Ne\y Teftament, he is 
 apt to confider it in a very improper point of vk>w, 
 and to draw very improper conclufions from it. For 
 he either confiders this multitude of various readings 
 to be injurious to the authority or authenticity of 
 the fcriptures ; or, falling into the oppoiite extreme, 
 he fuppofes them to be of fuch little moment, 
 as to make the labour beftowed in collecting them, 
 and weighing their comparative merit, an ufekfs 
 and vain employment. Such a perfon it is not eafy 
 to convince of his error. But whoever is acquainted, 
 with the various readings in claflical authors, may 
 fbon be made fenfible, that, on one hand, the various 
 readings of the facred text, do not in any refpe<5fc 
 impeach its divine authority or authenticity ; and 
 that, on the other, thofe deferve highly of the 
 Chriftian world, who, with due advantages of na- 
 tural and acquired endowments, and with due at- 
 tention and modefty, exert themfelves in collecting 
 various readings, or in any other biblical purfuit, 
 that tends to advance the literal purity of the text. 
 The Bible may be conddered in three points of 
 view, equally important. It announces the articles 
 which a chriftian niuft believe, and tbe duties he 
 irwft perform, and it gives the hiftory of the divine 
 
 teacher,
 
 H O R M B I B L I C JE. 107 
 
 teacher, while he was incarnate upon earth. All this 
 is to be found in the molt fahy Greek edition, that 
 has yet been printed of the. holy book. From this, 
 however, we are not to conclude, that the difference 
 between a faulty and perfect edition of a work is in- 
 confiderable. To exemplify this, let us take a fen- 
 tence in the New Teflament of the moft frequent 
 ufe -,- that which is commonly tranflated from the 
 Greek, in the following words ; " Gloria in excel/is 
 ." Deo et in terra pax hominibus Icnee voluntatis" 
 There are three different modes of reading this 
 fentence in the Greek. The firft when tranflated, 
 is rendered, 
 
 Gloria in excelfis Deo; 
 
 Et in terra pax hominibus bonae voliintatis : 
 
 the fecond, 
 
 Gloria in excelfis Deo, et in terra ; 
 Pax hominibus bonae voluntatis ; 
 
 the third, 
 
 Gloria in excelfis Deo, 
 Et in terra pax, 
 
 Hominibus bona voluntas. 
 
 Now in all of them, the fentence is moft beautiful 
 
 in all, it is fuch as angels might fing, and heaven 
 and earth rejoice to hear. But the fenfe in each is 
 different ; and every perfon, therefore, mult wifli to 
 have the true reading, or the manner in which the 
 fentence was written by the evangelift himfelf, af- 
 certained : flill, however, the difference of the 
 feading does not in any wife affect the general au- 
 thenticity
 
 lo* H O R & B I B L I &. 
 
 thentlcity of the facred book, as an hiftory, or as a 
 rule of faith or duty. -Yet it evidently is of im- 
 portance to fettle the true reading. This is at- 
 tempted by a companion of antient manufcripts, by 
 aination cF parallel 'pafiages, and by verifying 
 them with the fame poiuge, as it is cited in the 
 writings of the fathers. How great is the fpace 
 between the edition of Tacitus by Lipfius, (to go 
 no far the i' back), and that of .the fame author by 
 Brotier ! Yet in each, the- hiftory is the fame. 
 Each informs die reader of the^uark policy of Ti- 
 berius,- -of the arts of Sejaruis, of the imbecility of 
 Claudius, the cruelty of Nero, the grandeur of 
 Otho in his laft moments! from each the reader 
 learns, that, by the election of Vitcllius in Germany, 
 the fatal fecret of the empire was difclofed, that, an 
 emperor might fcechofen out of Rome. Yet furely 
 the fcholar reads' all this with infinitely lefs pleafure 
 in Lipfius, than in Brotier. Such being the com- 
 parative merit of a perfect and an inrperfecl: edition, 
 and the connection between the facred writings and 
 facred literature being fo great, every perfon, to 
 Vftbm the facrcd writing's are dear, rntrft wifh them 
 edited in th- mofl peYFe'el manner': arschnuft be 
 ienfibfe that it would re Reft difgrace on. the 1 learned 
 of the chriftian worldy tfiatr, any one pagan author 
 filouM be pubKfhed'in a niore perfedl: manner, than 
 
 "the w6i-d of God. 
 
 
 
 To give the text in its ufmoft purity, has been 
 the object -of the editions and publications we have 
 
 mentioned,
 
 HOR^ BIBLIC^E. 109 
 
 mentioned, and many others. An Englifhman muft 
 view with pleafure the ufeful and magnificent ex- 
 ertions cf his countrymen in this refpecl:. Bifhop 
 Walton's Polyglot ranks firft in that noble and coftly 
 clafs of publications ; foreign countries can fhew 
 nothing equal to Dr. Kennicott's edition of the 
 Bible, or fimihr to Dr. Woide's edition of the 
 Codex Alexandrinus, or Dr. Kippling's edition of 
 the Codex Bezae j and in the whole republic of let- 
 ters, nothing is 'noW f0 impatiently expected, as 
 Dr. Holmes's edition of the Septuagint. 
 
 THE END.
 
 ERRATA. 
 
 Page 3, line 1 1, for authority read antiquity. 
 
 tg, 26, dele the words, / A/o/". 
 
 41, - zi, for <7 read dt-Jl. 
 
 60, - I, for dejlrudion read dijlinflictn.
 
 p 
 
 J)| |^| |OSi |\j 
 
 
 
 University of California 
 
 g| ^, SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 405 Hilgard Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90024-1388 
 Return this material to the library 
 from which it was borrowed. 
 
 3foU 
 
 fit A^S I9M 
 
 r 
 
 ^UIBR A p R I 2 
 
 K= 
 
 % 
 
 ^ <T 
 
 |l3 
 
 ^ojn 
 
 
 p 
 
 ^OF-CAI 
 
 ^ . 
 
 k 
 
 i^ 
 
 
 ^ f* 
 
 ! = 
 
 > Y7 
 
 
 Ul 
 
 ! ( 
 
 
 "IS 
 
 C. x-J 
 
 
 .4 
 
 ^0Aavi 
 
 \\\ N 
 
 A\\E-UNI 
 9\ 
 
 " S 
 
 *- \ <^ 
 
 
 rri 
 
 X 1 ^^ 
 
 
 ^7 
 
 < ^MM 
 **~^ 
 
 ^sim 
 
 il 
 
 A\\E-UNi 
 G- 
 
 \ 
 
 XJ k 
 
 z\ 0- 
 
 < ^M. 
 
 )1 
 
 1m 
 
 j *^ * *% 
 
 - 5 
 
 %13DN 
 
 $ 
 
 s^HIBi 
 
 u? 1 I 
 
 53 
 
 ^ JUJ 
 
 nfl rflifri I3fl t7ri 
 
 r^ 
 
 Jfc ^ ^ l^_/A_ ^ """ /\^ ) = S ^^K > 
 
 Sic 
 
 */ 5S o V 4^/\j 5 ? t V ^V o u_ ^J^ 1 ^ 1 -5 
 
 S.V. 
 
 ^ . A^ J? ^- ^^.^ Q. ...^
 
 ^ ^OF-CAUFO/?^ 
 
 S ^S 
 w te 
 
 
 f VkJ 
 
 f ^. 
 
 OQ 
 
 ^fiiDRHn i c^r ^.NViL-univino/^ ^ 
 
 XJITI l!=^l I