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