m. 
 
 tir 
 
 

 
 <&.< <>, &* 40St /ffl^
 
 Y T
 
 Ill
 
 The State of the Printed Hebrew Text 
 of the Old Teftament conjidered. 
 
 A 
 
 S S E RTATION 
 
 IN TWO PARTS. 
 
 Part the Fir/I compares i C H R o N, XI 
 with 2 S A M. V and XXIII ; 
 
 AND 
 
 Part the Second contains Obiervations on 
 SEVENTY HEBREW MSS, 
 
 With an Extract of 
 MISTAKES and VARIOUS READINGS. 
 
 By BENJAMIN KENNICOTT, M. A. 
 Fellow of Exeter College. 
 
 Thus faith the LORD: Stand ye in the ways, and fee, and ask 
 for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein ; 
 and ye jhall find reft for your fouls. J erem .6.16. 
 
 OXFORD 
 
 Printed at the THEATRE: and Sold by Mr. Clements and 
 Mr, Fletcher, in OXFORD; Mr. Birt, Meff. Rivirtgton and 
 Mr. Dodfley, in LONDON; Mr. Thurlbourn and Mr. Mern'f, 
 in CAMBRIDGE; Mr. Leaks, in BATH; and Mr. Score, 
 in EXETER. M DCC LIII.
 
 
 - W.-&* 
 
 Imprimatur, 
 
 J. BROWNE, 
 
 Vice-Can, Oxon. 
 
 Mail 17.
 
 TO 
 
 THE REVEREND AND WORTHY 
 
 THE VICE-CHANCELLOR 
 
 THE HEADS OF HOUSES 
 
 AND 
 
 THE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE 
 VENERABLE HOUSE OF CONVOCATION 
 
 IN THE 
 UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD 
 
 THIS DISSERTATION 
 IN GRATEFUL ACKNOWLEDGMENT 
 
 OF THE 
 HONOUR OF A DEGREE 
 
 . WHICH 
 THEY WERE PLEASED TO CONFER 
 
 ON ACCOUNT OF 
 TWO FORMER DISSERTATIONS 
 
 IS 
 MOST RESPECTFULLY 
 
 DEDICATED 
 BY 

 
 FR. LUCAS BRUGENSIS 
 
 In PRJEFATIONE ad 
 
 Cardin. SIRLETUM. 1580. 
 
 Erunt, fat fcio, qui hzc noftra ut frivola afpernabuntur j ii 
 nempe, quibus non curse funt, quae occurrunt fubinde, Codicum, 
 Varietatulae. At eorum ego nihil movebor fententiis : qui Scrip- 
 turam Sacram eo profequor honore, ut longe faciam pluris unum 
 hie, etiam minimum, fuse Integritati locum reftituifTe, quam Ci- 
 ceronis, Virgilii, aut cujufcunque alterius hujus ordinis, quinqua- 
 ginta. Et fi qui kudi fibi ducunt, horum Editiones a Mendis 
 vindicaiTe ; longe ego majori dignum laude cenfeo, qui hie id 
 operas ccllocarit. Non quafi Scriptura Sacra Erroribus obnoxia 
 fit, qua?, a prima Veritate profefta, Veritatis regula eft ; fed 
 quod in Codices five Apographa, per frequentem Exemplarium 
 in Exemplaria transfulioncm, nunc Librariorum nunc Leftorum 
 ofcitantia incuria infcitia temeritate, Labeculas Errata Depravatio- 
 nefque fubinde irrepferint ; qux aliorum Codicum five Apogra- 
 phorum collatione mutari corrigi auferri debeant.
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 I 
 
 HAT All Scripture was given by the 
 
 Infpiration of God and that the 
 
 Books of the Old and NewTeftament, 
 as they proceeded from the God of 
 Truth, were true in all their Articles of Faith, 
 juft in all their Precepts of Duty, and harmo- 
 nious in their vaft variety of Hiftorical Fa&s 
 are Pofitions moft readily aiTented to, and moft 
 gratefully acknowledg'd by all Chriftians. 
 
 But, tho' thefe Sacred Books were at firft com- 
 pos'd by men (of different Capacities indeed, and 
 expreffing themfelves each in his own Stile, yet 
 by men) who were all directed to Truth and 
 fecur'd from Error by the immediate Agency of 
 God Himfelf ; tho' this point, I fay, is readily 
 granted, and it becometh well the Pofleflbrs of 
 this invaluable Treafure to be moft truly thank- 
 ful for it yet, what was thus infpir'd by God, 
 was committed to the Care of Menj and we 
 muft acknowledge, that we have had this Trea- 
 in Earthen Veffeh. We muft acknowledge, 
 
 A 2 that
 
 8 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 that thefe Sacred Books have not defcended to 
 us, for fo many Ages, without fome Mi/lakes and 
 Errors of the Transcribers. This the Various 
 Readings, remark'd in the different Copies both 
 of the Old and New Teftament, evidently de- 
 monftrate ; and yet, what has been admitted uni- 
 verfally as to the latter, not a few have ftrenuouf- 
 ly denied as to the former. 
 
 If this were not a known cafe, it would feem 
 ftrange that Men, pretending to an Acquain- 
 tance with Languages, mould allow Miftakes to 
 have been introduced in tranfcribing the New 
 Teftament, and not allow the fame as to the 
 Old ; when the Whole of the latter was writ fo 
 long, and fome Parts of it near 1500 Years, be- 
 fore the former. To fuppofe fuch an abfolute 
 Freedom from Error in the Tranfcribers of thefe 
 Books, the moft ancient in the whole World 
 what is it elfe, but to fuppofe a conftant Miracle 
 wrought in favour of every fuch Tranfcrlber^ and 
 the Divine Affiftance communicated in the For- 
 mation of every Letter ? And this Infallibility 
 continued down to thefe times ; as there feems 
 no particular jEra affignable for its Termination : 
 at leaft, it feems to have been as neceffary 'till 
 the Invention of Printing, as, it could have been 
 before, 
 
 But
 
 INTRODUCTION. 9 
 
 But this Neceffity, it is probable, no fenfible 
 Man will maintain. And yet there is room to 
 think, that Men can bring themfelves almofl to 
 maintain any thing ; fince we find there are fome, 
 who would perfuade us they have perus'd the 
 Original Books of the Old Teftament, and yet 
 do ( and perhaps ever will ) maintain the abfolute 
 Integrity of the prefent Hebrew Text. 
 
 It may not be improper to produce one Proof 
 of what may otherwife perhaps be thought im- 
 pomble. And let it be in the Words of the Au- 
 thor of a late Pamphlet call'd Marginal Animad- 
 verfiotis on Mr. Coftard's two late Diflertations : a 
 Pamphlet, which pretends to correct the Perfor- 
 mance of a Man of great Merit and extenfive 
 Learning ; but pretends to correct it with fuch 
 a profufion of Calumny, as is uncommon even 
 in this Age of Abufe and Licentioufnefs. This 
 Gentleman, who defires to be confider'd as a Pro- 
 ficient in the Hebrew Language, remarks thus on 
 Mr. Coftard, p. 15 and 16. He would have the 
 LXX to be corrupted in Gen. 31,7 &c. But This 
 is not quite fatisfying, he would fuppofe an Error 
 in the Hebrew itfelf, in the Management of which 
 he flews a degree of Effrontery and Profanenefsjit 
 to undertake any thing. The only Remark pro- 
 per to be made upon this PafTage may be that 
 the Author of it difcovers fuch a Strength of Pafr 
 
 fiou
 
 10 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 (ion and fuch a Weaknefs of Judgment, that, in- 
 ftead of proving Others can undertake any thing, 
 he only proves He himfelf ought to undertake No- 
 
 t/ring. 
 
 The Appeal, here made, is made only to fuch 
 ferious Men, as would know and be eftablim'd 
 in the Truth ; who, with the utmoft Veneration 
 receiving the Books of Scripture as the Word of 
 God, are defirous of learning, by every rational 
 method, what was originally recorded in them. 
 That great Advantages have been deriv'd to the 
 prefent Text of the New Teftament, from care- 
 fully collating the moft ancient Copies and their 
 beft Verfions, is undeniable. And, as there have 
 been, perhaps, more Variations from the Original 
 Reading in the Old than in the New Teftament j 
 an Application of the fame Method to difcover 
 thefe Variations is at leaft pardonable ; and, if 
 iuccefsful, muft be praife- worthy. 
 
 That all other Books of Antiquity have come 
 down to us with fo we Errors, is very readily ad- 
 mitted it is charg'd upon human Fallibility or 
 want of Care in the feveral Tranfcribers and 
 the only Method for difcovering thefe feveral Er- 
 rors is univerfally apply'd by the Learned. To 
 which it may be added that, in general, Books 
 have been handed down to thefe times with a 
 
 greater
 
 INTRODUCTION. u 
 
 greater Number of Errors, in proportion as thefe 
 Books have been of greater Lengthy as the Cha- 
 r after in which they have been writ has had Let- 
 ters more fimilar to each other ^ and as fuch Books 
 have been farther remold in point of Antiquity 
 from the Age in which we live. This then be- 
 ing the Cafe, it is no wonder, on all thefe Ac- 
 counts, that we find many Variations and Errors 
 in the prefent Text of the Books of the Old c Te- 
 ftament ; which (fo far from being an Argument 
 to their Prejudice) feems to be an Argument, 
 and a very forcible one, to prove the high Anti- 
 quity to which they pretend, and to which Claim 
 they are certainly entitled. 
 
 TH u s much it feem'd neceflary to premife, 
 to prevent any unfavourable Impreflions, 
 which might arife from the following Obferva- 
 tions j in confequence of Prejudices, which at 
 prefent obtain in the Minds of many Good Men, 
 who pretend not to Knowledge enough in the 
 Hebrew Language to determine for themfelves. 
 For whofe Satisfaction, and in Juftice to the pre- 
 fent Text, it muft be (and is here with pleafure) 
 obferv'd that the many Variations and Errors, 
 which do in fact occur, are chiefly found in pla- 
 ces not immediately relative to the Faith or Pra- 
 ftice of Mankind. And yet, even in the lefs 
 
 weighty
 
 12 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 weighty Matters of the Law, or the ftill lefs 
 important Articles of National Jewifli Hiftory ; 
 Who, that deiires a more fuccefsful Reception of 
 this Divine Book in the World, does not wifh 
 to fee every Error rationally remov'd ; that fo the 
 Whole Revelation of the Ways and Will of God 
 to Man may mine forth in PerfeSl Beauty ! 
 
 The learned and judicious Bifhop Walton ob- 
 ferves, that the Corruptions, which are found in 
 the Hiftorical Books of the Old Teftament, ap- 
 pear chiefly (and indeed it is natural to expect 
 they mould appear chiefly) in the feveral Num- 
 bers and Proper Names. Prolegom. p. 4'! . And 
 if we mould examine all the Hiftorical Books of 
 the Old Teftament, perhaps we mould find this 
 Obfervation no where more ftrongly confirm'd, 
 t// than in the Chapters, which are the Subject of 
 
 the following Remarks Which Chapters 
 
 are now particularly felected for Examination, 
 not merely to eftablim the Certainty of fome Cor- 
 ruptions in the prefent Text, but in hopes of 
 pointing out the Original Reading mfome of the 
 many Places fo corrupted. 
 
 The rational and fafe Method of proceeding 
 iii a Cafe of this important Nature is to com- 
 pare Scripture with itfelf to explain a difficult 
 Phrafe or Paflage by a clear one, that bears fome 
 
 Relation
 
 INTRODUCTION. 13 
 
 Relation to it to confider the natural Force of 
 the Original Words, the Tendency of the Con- 
 text, and the Defign of the Writer to com- 
 pare the moft ancient Editions of the Original 
 with one another, and with the beft Copies of 
 the moft celebrated Verfions. 
 
 The whole of this Method is at all times ne- 
 ceffary, in order to a fuccefsful Enquiry into the 
 true Reading of the Books of Holy Scripture. 
 And as to the particular Chapters here examin'd, 
 they fo nearly referable each other (treating of 
 the fame Subject) that the principal Means of 
 difcovering their feveral Corruptions will be 
 the Light, which they mutually reflect upon each 
 other. 
 
 Thefe Chapters (at leaft fo far as they unite in 
 the fame Hiftory) give us the Hiftory of David's 
 Mighty Men i. e. the Chief of thofe Men of Va- 
 lour, by whofe firm Affiftance and furprizing 
 Bravery, he rofe from a low Condition to the 
 Throne of Judah, and, after feven Years and fix 
 Months, to that of Ifrael. And among other Va- 
 riations, which will be found in the two princi- 
 pal Chapters containing the Hiftory of thofe He- 
 roes, the firft is that in Chronicles we have 
 Ten Verfes, which open the Hiftory, and give 
 us the jlrft Hero ; which Verfes make no part of 
 the 23d Chapter in Samuel. The Reafon of 
 
 B which
 
 i 4 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 which Difference feems clearly to be this that 
 this Catalogue of David's Worthies is plac'd at 
 the Conclufion of the Hiftory of his Reign in Sa- 
 muel, and at the Beginning of it in Chronicles. In 
 the former, we have firft the wonderful Eleva- 
 tion of David to the Throne ; with the Battles 
 and Occurrences, which led on to that great E- 
 vent, and fecur'd him in die PofTeilion of his 
 Kingdom : and then, at the Clofe, we have a 
 Catalogue to perpetuate the Memory of thofe 
 Warriors, who had been particularly inftrumen- 
 tal in promoting the Succefs, and eftablilhing the 
 Glory of their Royal Matter. Whereas, in the 
 latter, the Hiftory of David begins with him as 
 King, and immediately mentions the Heroes of 
 his Armies j and then proceeds to an Abridg- 
 ment of the Hiftory of his Reign. 
 
 This is the different Method of the Hiftory in 
 thofe two Places. And the natural Confequence 
 of this Difference is that, as thefe Mighty 
 Men are recorded in the beginning of David's 
 Reign in Chronicles, there we find them intro- 
 duc'd with Joab at their Head, with the Reafon 
 of his being fo particularly diftinguim'd : but, in 
 the concluding Chapter of Samuel, when the 
 Hiftory of David's Reign had been already given, 
 there Joab might well be omitted ; lince no one 
 could forget, that Joab was David's chief Might-
 
 INTRODUCTION. 15 
 
 ty Man, when he had been mention'd in almoft 
 every Page, as Captain-General of the Armies of 
 Ifrael. 
 
 This Account of fo material a Difference in 
 the Beginning of thefe two Catalogues, if it wants 
 any additional Confirmation, may be ftrengthen'd 
 by obferving that nearly the fame Solution is 
 given by Hugo de Vienna, in his Commentary on 
 the Bible ; a MS Copy of which, in 17 Vol. 
 Folio, writ 1460, and finely illuminated on Vel- 
 lum, is preferv'd in Exeter College Library. In 
 this Commentary we read 2 Sam. 23 ; Inter 
 Fortes non nominatur Joab ; quia Princeps Militia 
 erat, & fie notafuit ejus Fortitude. 
 
 The not attending to this Circumftance feems 
 to have been the caufe of a Miftake of Dr. De- 
 lany's, in his Hiftorical Account of the Life of 
 David j a Book, which well deferves a careful 
 Perufal. This worthy Author has obferv'd (Vol. 
 3, Book 1 6) that Joab is excluded from this Ca- 
 talogue of David's Mighty Men; but why fo 
 great a Captain and fo brave a Man mould be 
 left out of this Lift, be owns, he cannot com- 
 prehend : otherwife, than by fuppofing him ex- 
 cluded for fome notorious Act of Guilt ; as fe- 
 veral other Names, which are found in the Lift 
 of Samuel are, he thinks, omitted in the fubfe- 
 
 B 2 quent
 
 i6 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 quent Lift of Chronicles for the fame reafon. 
 But, with deference to fo great an Authority, 
 I beg leave to obferve that Joab is not omitted 
 in the Catalogue of David's Worthies ; being ex- 
 prejly mention'd and celebrated at large, as the Firft 
 of that honourable Number in the Catalogue of 
 Chronicles. And tho' not exprefly mention'd at 
 the head of the Catalogue in Samuel (becaufe he 
 had been before celebrated thro' that whole Book 
 as Captain-General) yet he muft be there alfo in- 
 cluded; in order to compleat the exadl: Number 
 37, mention'd in the end of this Catalogue of Sa- 
 muel, which would be incompleat without him ; 
 and he muft there alfo be confider'd as the Firft 
 of the 37, fince the regular Subordination of the 
 {everal Worthies would be otherwife inexplica- 
 ble. Indeed it was totally unneceiTary to men- 
 tion Joab again upon this Occafion ; and the Au- 
 thor of the firft Catalogue, naturally fuppofmg 
 the well-known Name of Joab could not be for- 
 gotj proceeds to the Names of the remaining 36, 
 who compleat the Number. And therefore this 
 Author begins the Catalogue here with Tloefe 
 be the Names of the Mighty Men &c. i. e. the re- 
 maining Names of the other Mighty Men, who 
 with Joab were 37 in all; but the Author of 
 Chronicles, giving us Joab together with the o- 
 ther 36, tells us This is the Number of the 
 
 Mighty
 
 INTRODUCTION. -17 
 
 Mighty Men &c. i. e. the whole Number men- 
 tion'd all together. 
 
 As to the other Names, which have been 
 thought by Dr. Delany and others to occur in 
 the Catalogue of Samuel, and not in the Cata- 
 logue of Chronicles, it will (I prefume) appear 
 hereafter that every Name, which was origi- 
 nally in the firft, was originally alfo in the fecond 
 Catalogue: We muft except only One, the loth 
 of the 37 Heroes ; who, tho' recorded in the for- 
 mer Catalogue univerfally, is univerfally omitted 
 in the latter, and his Place fupplied by another. 
 The caufe of which Omiffion may have been ei- 
 ther fome notorious Act of Guilt, as imagin'd by 
 Dr. Delany ; or, that dying foon, his Succeflbr 
 was recorded inftead of him in the fecond Cata- 
 logue, according to Junius and Tremellius. This 
 fingle Variation will be found the only Exception; 
 every other Worthy was uniformly recorded at 
 firft in both Catalogues : whilft Joab was and is 
 particularly mention'd in this Chapter of Chroni- 
 cles, tho' he had been omitted in this Chapter of 
 Samuel, only becaufe he had in that Book been 
 fufficiently characteriz'd as David's chief Mighty 
 Man, in the Chapters preceding. 
 
 The Ten Verfes in Chronicles then, as they 
 give us the Hiflory of Joab's Bravery and the 
 
 Caufe
 
 i8 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Caufe of his fuperior Honour, muft be firft con- 
 fider'd ; before we proceed to the Hiftory of the 
 other Heroes, given us by the two principal Chap- 
 ters in common. 
 
 But tho' this 23d Chapter of the 2d Book of 
 Samuel does not coincide with the Chapter of 
 Chronicles, till we come to the nth Verfe of 
 the latter j yet the 5th Chapter of that Book of 
 Samuel coincides with it ; and with very near fo 
 much of it, as brings us to the Union of the 
 other two Chapters. And this happens very for- 
 tunately ; as fuch a Comparifon thro' the 9 firfl 
 Verfes of the Chapter in Chronicles will lead to 
 the Explanation of fome very difficult PafTages. 
 
 I mall therefore, thro' the following Compa- 
 rifon of thefe Chapters, give the Original Text, 
 with the Tranflation of it by the LXX (accord- 
 ing to the Alexandrian Copy in Breitingers Edi- 
 tion) and, after thofe Obfervations which may 
 occafionally be found neceffary, mall add fuch a 
 Veriion of the Original Text, as the Obferva- 
 tions refpe&ively offer'd on each Verfe mall ap- 
 pear to recommend.
 
 i CHRONICLES XI, i. 
 
 Compar'd with 
 2SAMUEL V, I. 
 
 TH hti 
 
 ronan "in SK 
 
 ron 
 
 -p^ai 
 
 Chro. 
 
 wan Sam. 
 ----- Chro. 
 Sam. 
 
 cy 
 
 tv 
 
 XeC^v, xo/ 
 
 <rx 
 era 
 
 Sam. Ky 
 
 Chro. 
 Sam. 
 
 Chro. xo/ 
 Sam. xo/ 
 
 The firft word here, that makes any material 
 Variation in the Original Senfe, is run Ecce; 
 which in Samuel is i^n Ecce Afo, and probably 
 was n^n originally as in Chronicles, before the 
 H was corrupted into 1J. That this has been the 
 cafe appears from the word's being render'd by 
 the LXX here, as in Chronicles, by iJk, without 
 
 the
 
 20 DISSERTATION 
 
 the Pronoun after it j and becaufe the Pronoun 
 is fufficiently exprefs'd in the Text by "WOK. 
 The words -p^ll "ptfy, tho' render'd plurally 
 by the Alex, and Vat. Copies of the LXX, are 
 fingular in both Chronicles and Samuel in the 
 Original, and alfo in the Complutenlian Edition 
 of the LXX. 
 
 Perhaps it may be worth remarking that 
 the word TfT here in Chronicles is in Samuel *rn j 
 and that this Difference feems not to have hap- 
 pen'd by chance, but to have been originally ob- 
 ferv'd thro' the feveral Books in which this Name 
 occurs. It occurs for the firft time as the laft 
 word in Ruth, and is there writ without a Tod y 
 as it continues to be thro' the Books of Samuel, 
 Kings, Pfalms, Proverbs, Ifaiah, Jeremiah and 
 Ezekiel ; but it appears with a Tod in the Books 
 of Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zechariah. 
 This Difference feems to have obtain'd original- 
 ly j becaufe it has been almofl univerfally obferv'd 
 in every Edition to this day. 
 
 It is not here fuppos'd, that any thing myfte- 
 rious is couch'd under the different Expreffions 
 of this Name of David in thefe different Books. 
 But yet, if there be reafon for fuppoling it cufto- 
 mary to write this Name without a Tod till the 
 Captivity, (ante Chrift. 588) and with a Tod af- 
 ter the Captivity ; may not this be one Argu- 
 ment
 
 On iCHRON. XI &c. 21 
 
 mentor or againft the Antiquity of any particu- 
 lar Book, in which this Name is found ? It mod 
 certainly would, if we could depend upon the 
 Tranfcribers not having omitted or inferred the 
 Yod improperly. There is, however, an Har- 
 mony among them in this matter, which is fo 
 nearly univerfal, that it deferves fome Confidera- 
 tion. Indeed in fome Editions, this Name is writ 
 with a Tod^ once in Hofea and twice in Amos ; 
 and if in thefe places the Yod was original, the 
 Variation muft have been introduc'd before the 
 Captivity, (lince thefe Prophets liv'd about 200 
 years before it) which would be contradictory to 
 the Reading in Jeremiah and Ezekiel, who liv'd 
 at the time of the Captivity. But in the Bomberg 
 Bible, printed fo early as 1517, the Name in 
 Hofea is Tft : and tho', in this celebrated Edi- 
 
 o 
 
 tion, in Amos 9, n, it is TYT ; yet it has the 
 little Circle () over it to intimate an Error, and 
 accordingly in the Margin it is TH- And fo 
 Amos 6, 5, tho' it is again writ TT^ yet it has 
 again the little Circle over it, to mark it for a 
 faulty word, as in the in fiance preceding. 
 
 If then it mould appear reafonable to believe, 
 that the Name of David (a Name of the higheft 
 Honour among the Jews, which therefore was 
 doubtlefs exprefs'd with proportionable care) if 
 this Name was writ without a Tod till after the 
 
 C Capti-
 
 22 DISSERTATION 
 
 Captivity, or at leaft till the days of Hofea and 
 Amos; this will be a ftrong Argument againft 
 the Antiquity of the Canticles that it was a 
 much later Compofition than is generally fup- 
 pos'd ; and not the Song of Solomon, or a Song 
 made by Solomon. Becaufe the Name of David 
 is there writ (invariably, I believe, in all copies) 
 with a Tod, as after the Captivity, or at leaft till 
 the time of Hofea: whereas in and near the time 
 of Solomon (about 1000 years before Chrift) it 
 was invariably writ without a Tod-, as appears 
 from his own Book of Proverbs, the Pfalms, Sa- 
 muel, Kings &c. 
 
 At the conclufion of the Remarks occafional- 
 ly fubjoin'd to each verfe, it was propos'd to add 
 fuch a Verfion of it in Englim as is agreeable 
 to the Obfervations refpectively preceding ; and 
 therefore the Englim Verfion of this firft Verfe 
 is Then all Ifrael were gathered together to Da- 
 vid unto Hebron^ faying ; Behold! We are thy Bone 
 and thy F/eft. 
 
 i Chron. xi, 2 j 2 Sam. v, 2. 
 
 nvm DJ Dttfap tan SIDD DJ Chro. 
 
 nVHl - - DI^W DJ SlDHK DJ Sam. 
 
 Chro. 
 Sam. 
 
 Chro.
 
 On i C H R O N, XL &c. 23 
 
 jrhti mrr ian S*nir HN chro. 
 
 ----- rnrr noan SNW ruv Sam. 
 nnn nnNi S*n^ ntf ay DK rrnn Chro. 
 nnn nriNi Sjotr* DK ay rw nnn Sam. 
 
 Chro. 
 
 Sam, 
 
 Chro. 
 
 Sam. 
 
 Chro. ------ <ro jo9v* o e^rt.y^i' xo/ etv&yuv TOV 
 
 Sam. 6<^' Jjjitay, j-u yc&a, o eKTAyuv Key a,yuv TOV 
 
 Chro. I<rp<*>jA* xo/ ?rf Kvptof o tof cry osr 2u 
 
 Sam. I^CMjA. KO/ 7XJ KvplOf ----- wfflf ' (TO 
 
 Chro. vroii&aveis TOV Actov /tc-a ray I^otjjA, xo/ cw ^ 
 
 Sam. voif&w TOV fa*>ov IAX TOV l<r^t>jA, xo/ (7& ew; 
 
 Chro. ? yyXfjfyjov tTn -- 
 
 Sam. $ yUfyov tm TOV 
 
 In the Text here the third tDi feems unnecef- 
 fary$ and, as it is not found in Samuel nor in 
 the Greek Verfion of either Samuel or Chroni- 
 cles, it mould probably be omitted in Chroni- 
 cles. It may alfo be remark'd, that the fecond 
 word in this verfe 71DD heri is in Samuel 71EJ1N : 
 and, that fuch variations of the fame word are 
 not peculiar to Hebrew (as fome would infinuate 
 to the difcredit of this facred Language) is clear 
 from this very inflance among the Greeks ; fmce 
 
 C 2 not
 
 24 DISSERTATION 
 
 not only y$is but alfo 6%&? (with a Letter added 
 at the beginning, exactly as in the Hebrew) is 
 the Greek Adverb for Tefterday. This Phrafe 
 tDI&'Su? DJ SlDH D3 (or, as the laft word is 
 more commonly writ tDfc^?^) is the general Ex- 
 preffion for in time paft j and anfwers to the 
 common Greek Phrafe of xJ^t? xcn ^ouluu. The 
 word ij^y in Samuel is not in Chronicles ; nor 
 is it neceffary, being naturally underftoodj on 
 the contrary we have the two words *]n7N and 
 fiy in this verfe of Chronicles, which are not 
 found in that of Samuel : Proofs thefe, that the 
 two facred Hiftorians, tho' they could not at firft 
 really contradict each other, did not however 
 always exprefs the fame Senfe in the very fame 
 Words and Phrafes. The Text in Samuel has 
 two evident Corruptions in the words nn"n 
 OOJTI *WlD; the n, being unneceflary at the end 
 of the verb, is evidently taken from the begin- 
 ning of the next word, which is defective for 
 want of it j and the radical K is dropt at the end 
 of the fecond Participle. The word TJJ had 
 perhaps the Prepofition h originally prefix'd in 
 Chronicles as well as in Samuel, fmce the LXX 
 (Alex, and Vat. Copies) give us $ yyxffyw in both 
 places. It has been very properly remark'd by the 
 learned Bifliop Patrick and others, that the frft 
 Ruler or Governor of a Nation, who is chara- 
 
 fteriz'd
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 25 
 
 cteriz'd under the beautiful Metaphor of a Shep- 
 herd, is David; who was taken from his Flock 
 to feed the People of Ifrael, in confequence of 
 the Divine Appointment, which is in this Verfe 
 acknowledg'd by all Ifrael. 
 
 The Englim Verfion is Moreover in time 
 paft, while Saul was King, 'Thou leddejl out and 
 broughtefl in Ifrael*, and the Lord thy God faid 
 unto thee, ^hou fialt feed my people Ifrael^ ami tbou 
 Jkalt be Ruler over my people Ifrael. 
 
 iChron. xi, 3 ; 2 Sam. v, 3. 
 
 rwon -jSnn Stf'Ww Jpr SD wan Chro. 
 rnron "jSan W SKW 'Jpr hi INII Sam. 
 iiinnn nni nm ---- onS nnDn Chro. 
 pnnnn nnn in *]San onS niDi Sam. 
 hy *i?S inn n^ intr/^n mn Chro. 
 n?c in^nn mn Sam. 
 no mn ^TD Chro. 
 
 ____ ---- Sam. 
 
 Chro. 
 Sam. Ko/ 
 
 Chro. TOV @><MriXia, tv Xtfy&v. Ko/ ^gS'eTO ot;ro/$- o 
 Sam. TOJ/ ^ctT<Aeoe- ? XtGpuv, x.cq <ht9"tTo CUITCIS o 
 Chro. /3ctcnAd6f Aoty^ thcttyxviv tv XiGp&v tv&vn 
 Sam. /BcKnAdCf Ao^t^ v XtGpuv Wtomov Kvpte 
 
 Chro.
 
 26 DISSERTATION 
 
 Chro. xcq tj.gKnw TOV 
 
 Sam. Key /ftM* 1 TOV Aowo ? flKnAa* ITTI 
 
 Chro. l<rf>ct,vi\ x&l& rev Aoj/cv Kvpia JW 
 
 Sam. 
 
 The Text in Samuel having *)S^n before "in, 
 and the LXX (in the Vat. Copy alfo) reading 
 (nA<50$- in both Chapters j 'tis probable, that 
 n was originally in the Text in Chronicles : 
 tho' the Omiffion of it makes no manner of Al- 
 teration in the Senfe. The laft Phrafe in this 
 verfe, which is omitted in Samuel, has been 
 thought harm in the Original ; and is very ab- 
 furdly paraphras'd in the Vulgat by juxta Ser- 
 monem Domini ', quern locutus eft in manu SamueL 
 But the Phrafe feems peculiarly proper, when 
 we confider that the word of the Lord was en- 
 tirely falfill'd by Samuel's anointing David King j 
 and therefore it was not onfy ftrictly true, but 
 very pertinently obferv'd, that the word of the 
 Lord was fulfilled by the hand of Samuel, The rea- 
 fon why thefe laft words were omitted in Sa- 
 muel, feems to be becaufe this Circumftance 
 had been particularly mention'd in that book be- 
 fore ( i Sam. 1 6 ; 1 13) and therefore was there 
 unneceffary : tho' it is very properly mention'd 
 in Chronicles, where it had not been at all ob- 
 ferv'd. And indeed the mentioning this Circum- 
 
 ftance
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 27 
 
 fiance was abfolutely neceffary in Chronicles; 
 that Book (for St. Jerom tells us, the two Books 
 of Chronicles were formerly but One) being an 
 Extract from the Public Regifters of the Kings 
 of Ifrael and Judah. In which Regifters fo 
 remarkable a Circumftance as transferring the 
 Crown from one Family to another (from Saul 
 to David) made a Vindication of it unavoidable ; 
 which Vindication is exprefs'd in thefe words 
 according to the word or commandment of the Lord 
 fulfill'd by the hand of Samuel m anointing David 
 King. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is So all the Elders of 
 Ifrael came to the King unto Hebron y and King 
 David made a Covenant with them in Hebron be- 
 fore the Lord; and they anointed David King over 
 Ifrael, according to the word of the Lord (ful- 
 filled) by the hand of Samuel. 
 
 i Chron. xi, 4. 2 Sam. v, 6. 
 
 Sam. 
 
 Chro. 
 Dnn W Sam. 
 
 Chro. Kctf TO(9^jj o @>ct<ri\dj$, x.af -- av/tyts la-pay*. 
 Sam. K/ rt-T^A^e A<w<^ xo/ o; ayfyt? CUJTX 
 
 Chro.
 
 2 8 DISSERTATION 
 
 Chro. ITTI l<f>x<rct,typ, awry l&Uf, x.cq SAC o; 
 Sam. 
 
 Chro. 
 
 Sam. (Tcuov TW x,a,TGtx,%v7ix, 
 
 There are two or three Variations between the 
 Text of Chronicles here and that of Samuel; but 
 neither of them material, becaufe each PaiTage 
 makes a regular and confident Senkr. Inftead of 
 David and all Ifrael in Chronicles, in Samuel it 
 is the King and bis Men ; and D11'n which in 
 the former text is taken plurally y in the latter is 
 confider'd as fmgular : and the ) in 'DI^'H in 
 Chronicles is dropt in Samuel, and the fame Let- 
 ter in 3tPV m Samuel is dropt in Chronicles. 
 
 The Englifh Verlion is And David and all 
 Ifrael went to Jcrufalem, which was Jcbus ; for 
 there the Jebujites were the Inhabitants of the Land. 
 
 i Chron. xi ; 5, 6 : 2 Sam. v ; 6, 7, 8. 
 
 DU i n^ mSKn Chro. 
 ----- "ISN'T Sam. 
 rt^n Chro. 
 
 enwn in^on D^ o n:n Sam. 
 
 flN TH T^Sn ------ - - Chro. 
 
 n n^n *nn Nin K 1 ? noxS Sam. 
 
 J TTT 1V XH p> fc niVD Chro. 
 
 : i-n ny ^n ]v^ m>o Sam. 
 
 Chro.
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 29 
 
 'Din* rOD hi ...... Chro. 
 
 DU> TOD hi Ninn DVl Sam. 
 ---------- Chro. 
 
 Dniyn n*n D'hosn nan Tim Sam. 
 
 - ...... ----- Chro. 
 
 nofii -ny N p Hy in Mi Sam. 
 -------- Chro. 
 
 n^n S^ ^in Sam, 
 
 Chro. 
 
 Sam. 
 
 . ElTTtW 01 K&TOlXXVTtS leC^f TU AcWl, CVX 
 
 Sam. K/ e^sS'jj ----.. r<a &cwt- ovx, 
 
 Chro. o"gA<i6nj <w<^g. ---------___- 
 
 Sam. ff-eAd6<r)j aJfe, ou OLVTH&VCUI 01 wipAo; xo/ o* 
 
 Chro. ---------- -j .- ........ 
 
 Sam. %#Ao;, Ae^vlef, o2{ ^ a-AusrTO/ A</<^ 
 
 Chro. Kay -z^xcmAfltCeTa - - - T/W r Z3&o% > Za> 
 
 Sam. Ko/ 
 
 Chro. 
 
 Sam. 
 
 Sam. jj^epct g^wj' ^ray TI/^OJI/ IzGxarcuov, - - - - 
 Chro. -------- --- ........ - 
 
 Sam. t7r]eo9'a> ev <GrfaefJrifyJt x,cq TX$ x,utef, Kctf rove 
 
 Chro. -- ...... ------------ 
 
 Sam. -n/(pA#$- xo/ wj (utrwiMs "^v%]w Aoti;^. 2i^ 
 
 D Chro.
 
 30 DISSERTATION 
 
 Chro. 
 
 Sam. r'dTQ tp&rr tvtyXoi x.ey %Aoi ovx, 
 
 Chro. - 
 
 Sam. 
 
 Chro. TJJJ/CV. tt#/ eu/g&j S7r ' ^T^W ev 
 
 Sam. - 
 
 Chro. 
 
 Sam. 
 
 The prefent Englifh Verfion. 
 
 Chro. And the Inhabitants of Jebus faid to 
 
 Sam. Which fpake unto 
 
 Chro. David, 
 
 Sam. David, faying, Except thou take away the 
 
 Chro. ---- - - - fflwufialt not come -- 
 
 Sam. blind and the lame, thou floalt not come in 
 
 Chro. hither. -- 
 
 Sam. hither : thinking David cannot come in hi- 
 
 Chro. Neverthelefs, David took the Cajlle 
 
 Sam. ther. Neverthelefs, David took the Jlrong 
 
 Chro. -- of Zion, which is the City of David. 
 
 Sam. hold of Zion: the fame is the City of David. 
 
 Chro. And David faid, Wlofoever 
 
 Sam. And David faid on that day, Whofoever 
 
 Chro. fmiteth the 
 
 Sam. gettetb up to the Gutter, and fmiteth the 
 
 Chro.
 
 On i CHRON. XI SV. 31 
 
 Chro. Jebufites firft, 
 
 Sam. yefafiteSj and the lame ', and the blind > 
 
 Chro. ^ 
 
 Sam. that are hated of David's Soul where- 
 Chro. ^ 
 
 Sam. fore they faid y The blind and the lame Jhall 
 
 Chro. - Jhall be chief and 
 
 Sam. not come into the Houfe. - - - - 
 
 Chro. captain. So 'Joab the fon of Zeruiah went 
 Sam. -------- ________ _ 
 
 Chro. firji up y and was chief. 
 Sam. 
 
 The reafon of placing this whole Sentence to- 
 gether being obvious, let us proceed to confider 
 the feveral parts of it, in the two Chapters. The 
 words Oil* *38P% which are not in the Original 
 of Samuel, are not in the Vat. Copy of the LXX 
 in Chronicles j but the Alex, tranflates regularly 
 according to the prefent Hebrew Text. In Sa- 
 muel there is a Claufe or two in the Speech of 
 the Jebufites, which is omitted in Chronicles for 
 Brevity j as the Hiftory in Chronicles is regular, 
 and the Senfe compleat without it. But tho' the 
 Hiftory be regular and very intelligible in Chro- 
 nicles, yet the additional Claufes in Samuel make 
 the Hiftory there remarkably perplex'd j and (as 
 Dr. Delany obferves) incumber it with more Dif- 
 
 D 2 faculties
 
 32 DISSERTATION 
 
 faculties than are ordinarily to be met with. In 
 full proportion to the Difficulties has been the 
 Number of different Interpretations; and yet there 
 feems to be very fufficient Room for offering an- 
 other Interpretation, in fome material Points dif- 
 fering from them all. The words in Samuel, fo 
 far as the Text in Chronicles coincides, are clear 
 and determinate in their meaning And the In- 
 habitants of Jehus faid to David, Thou Jkalt not 
 come hither. But the fucceeding words in Samuel 
 are very difficult ; or, at leaft, have been variouf- 
 ly interpreted. The prefent Englim Tranllation 
 is Except thou take away the blind and the lame, 
 thinking David cannot come in hither. 
 
 The chief Difficulty here lies in determining 
 who are thefe Blind and Lame ; whether Jebufites, 
 or the Jebufite Deities call'd Blind and Lame by 
 way of Derifion. The latter Opinion has been 
 maintain'd by fome confiderable Writers; but 
 yet feems indefenfible. For however David and 
 the Ifraelites might be difpos'd to treat fuch Idols 
 with Scorn and Contempt, 'tis not at all likely 
 the Jebufites fhould revile their own Deities; and 
 we muft remember, that thefe Deities are fup- 
 pos'd to be here call'd Blind and Lame by the 
 Jebufites themfelves. But, admitting them to be 
 Idol-Deities, what meaning can there be in the 
 Jebufites telling David he jhould not come into 
 
 the
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 33 
 
 the Citadel, unlefs he took away the Deities upon the 
 walls ? If he could fcale the Walls, fo as to reach 
 thefe Guardian Deities, he need not afk Leave 
 of the Jebuiites to enter the Citadel. But (which 
 is much more difficult to be anfwer'd) what can 
 
 poffibly be the Meaning of the laft Line 
 
 Wlierefore they faid ^ the Blind and the Lame foall 
 not come into the Houfe ? For, Who faid ? Did 
 the Jebufites fay, Their own Deities (before ex- 
 prefs'd by the Blind and Lame) mould not come 
 into the Houfe mould not (according to fome) 
 come where they were or, mould not (according 
 to others) come into the Houfe of the Lord? Or, 
 could thefe Deities fay, David and his Men mould 
 not come into the Houfe ? The Abfurdity of at- 
 tributing fuch a Speech, or any Speech to thefe 
 Idols, is too clear to need Illuflration ; and 'tis a 
 known part of their real Character, that they have 
 Mouths, but f peak not. 
 
 But, tho' thefe Deities could not denounce 
 thefe words, yet the Jebuiites might ; and 'tis 
 poffible (it has been faid) that the Blind and the 
 Lame in this latter part of the Sentence may fig- 
 nify the Jebujites-, not any particular Jebufites, 
 fo maim'd; but the Jebufites in general, call'd 
 blind and lame, for putting their Trufl in blind 
 and lame Idols. This feems too refin'd an In- 
 terpretation j and we may fafely conclude that 
 
 the
 
 34 DISSERTATION 
 
 the fame Expreffion of the Blind and Lame 
 means the fame Beings in the two different parts 
 of the fame Sentence. It has been farther ob- 
 ferv'd, that thefe Blind and Lame are here fpo- 
 ken of as different from the Jebufites Whofi- 
 ever fmiteth the Jebufites, and the Lame and the 
 Blind-, and if they were different, it requires no 
 great Skill at Deduction to determine they were 
 not the fame. 
 
 Perhaps then thefe Blind and Lame were, in 
 fact, a few particular Wretches, who labour'd 
 under thefe Infirmities of Blindnefs and Lame- 
 nefs ; and therefore were different from the ge- 
 neral Body of the Jebufites. But here it will be 
 demanded at once how we can then account 
 rationally for that Bitternefs, with which David 
 expreffes himfelf here againft thefe Blind and 
 Lame - 3 and how it was pomble, for a Man of 
 David's Humanity to deteil Men for mere un- 
 blameable, and indeed pitiable, Infirmities ? And 
 laflly, the Authors of the Unherfal Hi/lory, in 
 their Note on this Tranfa6lion, mention the fol- 
 lowing as the firft plaufible Argument againft 
 the literal acceptation How could David dif- 
 tinguifh the halt, or the lame, or the blind, from 
 able Men, when ported upon lofty Walls j lince 
 thofe Infirmities are not difcernible but near at 
 hand? This, it muft be allow'd, would be a 
 
 Dim-
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 35 
 
 Difficulty indeed, if David's Information here had 
 been only from his Eye-light. But this Obje- 
 ction immediately vanimes, when we reflect, that 
 the Jebufites are faid in the Text to have told 
 
 David the Bind and the Lame Jlwuld keep 
 
 him off: for certainly David could eafily con- 
 ceive the Men, who were plac'd upon the Walls 
 to infult him, were Blind and Lame j when he 
 was told fo by the Jebulites themfelves ; and told 
 fo, to render this Infult of theirs the greater. 
 
 Having thus mention'd fome of the prefent In- 
 terpretations , it may be now proper to fubmit 
 another to the Judgment of the Learned Reader. 
 And here, for the fake of clearnefs, I mall firfl 
 give what feems to be the true Interpretation of 
 this Paflage j and then fubjoin the feveral Argu- 
 ments in Defence of it. 
 
 And the Inhabitants of Jebus faid to David, 
 < Thou ft alt not come hither - y for the Blind and the 
 Lame Jhall keep thee off, by faying , David fiall 
 not come hither. But David took thejirong hold of 
 Sion, which is the City of David. And David 
 faid on that day, Wloofoever (firft) fmiteth the Je- 
 hu/it es, and thro the fubt erroneous PaJJage reacheth 
 the Lame and the Blind, that are hated of 'David 's 
 Soul, becaufe the Blind and the Lame continued to 
 
 fay, be JJ;all not come into this Iwtfe 
 
 fhall be chief Captain. 
 
 The
 
 36 DISSERTATION 
 
 That the connected Particles tDN 3 fignify 
 For in this place is evident, becaufe the words 
 following are rather caufal than objeftive; and 
 we have feveral inftances of this Senfe of the two 
 Particles given us by Noldius : thus Prov. 23,18, 
 they are render'd For in the Englim Tranflation ; 
 and fo in the Englim, Greek, Syriac and Arabic 
 Verfions of Lam. 5, 22. That the verb "pDPI is 
 not here the Infinitive, but the Preter of Hiphil, 
 is apparent from the Senfe ; that it has been fo 
 confider'd, is certain from the Maforet Pointing, 
 as De Dieu and other Critics have obferv'd j and 
 we fee it is tranflated as fuch by the LXX, in 
 the plural Number, wnwowi. From this veriion 
 then, and from the plurality of the two Nouns, 
 which are neceflarily the Nominatives to this 
 verb, we may infer, that it was originally *|WDPT> 
 the Vau having been dropt here as in many other 
 places. Thus Gen. 1,28 we have nKODl (& 
 fubjicite earn) inftead of <"Tlt#3Dl twice in the 
 verb irOS^n (regularly inmtPPT reputavimus 
 eum) in the 3d and 4th Verfes of the 53d of 
 Ifaiah in this very /th Verfe, in the word 
 'DH'n, which mould be Dl^*n> as it is in the 
 9th and other adjoining Verfes and this Vau 
 is alfo omitted in the 9th Verfe in itfJtP, which 
 we are told in the Margin mould be Wtftp, where 
 the Yod has alfo been corrupted into a Vau. E- 
 
 nough
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 37 
 
 nough having been faid of the Number , let us 
 now confider the Tenfe of this Verb ; which be- 
 ing preter, fome have tranflated it by a word ex- 
 prefllve of time pafl. But the Senfe neceflarily 
 requires it to be tranflated as future in other Lan- 
 guages, tho' it be more exprefiive in the Origi- 
 nal in the preter tenfe : it being agreeable to the 
 Genius of the Hebrew Language frequently to 
 fpeak of Events yet future, as having actually 
 happen 'd, when the Speaker would flrongly ex- 
 prefs the Certainty of fuch Event. This Obfer- 
 vation is peculiarly applicable to the Cafe here. 
 For this Caflle of Mount Sion had never yet 
 been taken by the Ifraelites, tho' they had dwelt 
 in Canaan about 400 years ; as we learn from the 
 facred Hiftory, Jom. 15,63; Judg. i, 2 1 j 1 9, 10 ; 
 and from Jofephus, Lib. 7 ; Cap. 3. 
 
 The Jebufites then, abfolutely depending on 
 the advantage of their high Situation and the 
 ftrength of their Fortification (which had fe- 
 cur'd them againft the Ifraelites fo many hun- 
 dred Years) look'd upon this of David's as a vain 
 Attempt, which therefore they might fafely treat 
 with Infolence and Raillery. Full of this fond 
 Notion, they plac'd upon the Walls of the Ci- 
 tadc-1 the few Blind and Lame, that could be 
 found amongfl them ; and told David He 
 Jhould not come thither-, fcr the Blind and the Lame 
 
 E were
 
 38 DISSERTATION 
 
 were fufficient to keep him off'-, which they (thefe 
 weak Defenders) mould effectually do, only by 
 their Shouting n:n TH Nil* vh David fiall not 
 come hither No David foall come hither &c. 
 
 That the Blind and the Lame were contemp- 
 tuoufly plac'd upon the Walls by the Jebufites, 
 as before defcrib'd, we are afliir'd not only by 
 the Words of the Sacred Hiftory before us, but 
 alfo by the concurrent Teftimony of Jofephus, 
 in the following words TX$ Tn^ufj^j^ ret* o\f/s 
 x/ 72^ |3ctG-s- xo/ <&ct,v TO tehuSyffyo 
 "Xfavq TV ficcaiteus tvt TV Ttrxps, XMJ teyw\uv 
 ewrov etvtX&etv T%S av&TnipXs, TCWTU, i UTfA'fj 
 
 fyovxvTis rn TOOV T&rxjw oxvporrjk Lib. 7 j Cap. 3 . 
 
 Now that thefe Blind and Lame, who appear 
 to have been plac'd upon the Walls, were to 
 infult, and did infult David in the manner before- 
 mention'd, feems very evident from the words 
 Tke Blind and the Lame Jhall keep thee off, BY 
 SAYING &c. and alfo from the Impombility of 
 otherwife accounting for David's Indignation a- 
 gainft thefe (naturally pitiable) Wretches. And 
 the not attending to this remarkable Circum- 
 ftance feems one principal Reafon of the Perple- 
 xity fo vifible among the various Interpreters of 
 this Paffage. 
 
 It is very remarkable, that the Senfe be- 
 fore given to *]TDH DK D, For the Blind and 
 
 the
 
 On i C H R O N. XI . 39 
 
 the Lame fiall keep thce off', is confirm'd by Jo- 
 fephus ; who, in the words juft cited from him, 
 has x&AeuttV aurw <rASvii/ rzg ct,va,7n)px$. And it is 
 farther remarkable, that the fame Senle is given 
 to thefe words in the Englifli Bible of Coverdale, 
 printed in 1535; in which they are render'd 
 
 jtjjoit fl;alt not come Jjitjjcr, but tjje fcipnfce 
 anb lame ffjal fcrpbe tje atuaie. This is one 
 
 great inftance to prove the Credit due to fome 
 parts of this very old Englim Version ; as the 
 Senfe of this Paflage feems to have been greatly 
 miftaken both before and fince. That it has 
 been chang'd for the w otic face that Edition, 
 is very evident ; and that it was improperly ren- 
 der'd before appears from Wickliffes MS Ver- 
 fion of 1383, where we read ITtjOU (Jalt not 
 entre JiUur : no ftut Qow &o atuep Iil^nJj men 
 anb lame &c. 
 
 After this additional Claufe of Samuel in the 
 Speech of the Jebufites, the two Hiftories agree 
 in faying, David took the Jlrong holdofSion, which 
 'was afterwards call'd the City of David. By this 
 flrong hold of Sion, or City of David, we are 
 
 led by the words of the Text to underftand, 
 
 not the Fortrefs or Citadel (which was not yet 
 taken, as appears from the Order of the Hiftory 
 in both Chapters) but the Town of the Jebufites, 
 or City of David, which was fpread over the 
 
 E 2 wide
 
 40 DISSERTATION 
 
 wide Hill of Sion : and is what Jofephus means, 
 when he tells us David firft took the lower 
 Town, iluj xarto -zro\iv, the Town which lay be- 
 neath the Citadel > after which he tells us, that 
 the Citadel yet remain'd to be taken CT* Jg TJJ* 
 Axpcif Xfttnp^uf?* Lib. 7; Cap. 3. 
 
 The Two Chapters having agreed in this laft 
 Circumftance of David's making himfelf Mailer 
 of the Town or City, they now vary as before ; 
 and here alfo the Hiftory in Chronicles is regu- 
 lar, tho' it takes no Notice of fome farther Cir- 
 cumftances relating to the Blind and Lame : and 
 indeed thefe latter Circumftances were to be o- 
 mitted of courfe, as the Hiftorian chofe for Bre- 
 vity to omit the former. But as to Samuel, there 
 is in that Book a Deficiency of feveral words, 
 which are necefTary to compleat the Senfe; which 
 words are preferv'd in the Text of Chronicles. 
 And as the Difficulty here alfo lies entirely in 
 the Text of Samuel, let us fee whether it may 
 not be clear'd up to Satisfaction. 
 
 David, having now poffefs'd himfelf of the 
 ftrong Town of the Jebufites fituate upon the 
 Hill of Sion, proceeds, Ninn DV1 the fame day, 
 to attack the Citadel or Fortrefsj which was 
 confider'd by the Jebufites as impregnable. And 
 probably the Ifraelites would have thought it ib 
 too, and David had retir'd from before it, like 
 
 his
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 41 
 
 his Forefathers ; if he had not poflefs'd himfelf 
 of it by Stratagem, when he found he could not 
 ftorm or take it by open force. For this feems 
 in fact to have been the Cafe ; and the Hiftory 
 of this Succefs may be properly introduc'd by a 
 fimilar Cafe or two. 
 
 And firft, Dr. Prideaux (in his Connection, 
 Part I, Book 2) tells us of the City of Babylon, 
 that, when it was befieg'd by Cyrus, the 
 Inhabitants thinking themfelves fecure in their 
 Walls and their Stores, look'd on the taking of 
 the City by a Siege as an impracticable thing ; 
 and therefore from the top of their Walls feoff ed at 
 Cyrus, and derided him for every thing he did to- 
 wards it. (A Circumftance moft exactly parallel 
 to that of the Hiftory before us.) But yet, that 
 Cyrus broke down the great Bank or Dam of 
 the River, both where it ran into the City, and 
 where it came out ; and as foon as the Channel 
 of the River was drain'd, in the middle of the 
 Night, while Belfhazzar was caroufmg at the 
 conclulion of an Annual Feftival, the Troops of 
 Cyrus enter d thro' thefe Paffages in two Parties, 
 and took the City by Surprize. 
 
 And there is a fecond remarkable Cafe rela- 
 ted by Polybius, which will farther illuflrate 
 the prefent Hiftory ; and was communicated to 
 me by a learned Friend. Rabatamana, fays Po- 
 lybius,
 
 42 DISSERTATION 
 
 lybius, a City of Arabia, could not be taken, 'till 
 one of the Pri finer s jkewd the Bejiegers (TQV 
 voftov, i ov KartCcuvw ITTI ilsjj vtyetav 01 tuQt.iG 
 juJjvo*) a fubt err cine nus Paffage ^ thro' which the Be- 
 Jieged came down for Water. Ed. Cafaubon. 8vo. 
 Vol. i. p. 578. 
 
 Now this Fortrefs of the Jebufites feems to 
 have been circumftanc'd like Rabatamana; in 
 having alfo a fubterraneous Paffage, which is 
 call'd in the Original TUjT a word, which oc- 
 curs but once more in the Bible, and does not 
 feem commonly underftood in this Place. The 
 Englifh Verfion calls it the Gutter the Vulgat 
 Fiftulas Vatablus Canales Jun. and Trem. 
 EmiJJarium Poole Tubm Aqua and Bochart 
 Aheus &c. But, not to multiply Quotations, 
 moft Interpreters agree in making the word iig- 
 nify fomething hollow, and in applying it to 
 Water : juft the cafe of the vTrovop* of Rabata- 
 mana ; a fubterraneous Paffage, or great Hollow, 
 thro' which Men could pafs and repafs for Wa- 
 ter. That this ^3tf in the Text was fuch an 
 Underground Paffage might be ftrongly prefum'd 
 from the Text itfelf j but it is prov'd to have 
 been fo by Jofephus. For, fpeaking of this very 
 Tranfaction, he fays gr; Jg nj? Ax^ct? ATTC^- 
 Wi?, fiamXtv? TV AIA T1N THOKEIMENnN 4>A- 
 
 KCU ttanlw
 
 On i C H R O N. XI c. 43 
 
 CLTTCLVTOS Tou haw aay&tv 6W7?yyAetTO &C. 
 Lib. 7; Cap. 3. Here then we have vTroxetffyai 
 <pa,pa,jftf (the fubterraneous Cavities) moft re- 
 markably anfwering to the wravcfMs and TU; 
 and putting this Interpretation upon a veiy folid 
 footing. I mall only add upon this point that 
 die true Senfe of the obfcure word T^ in this 
 place remarkably occurs in the Commentary of 
 Hugo de Vienna before-mention'd ; where it is 
 explain'd by Cunicuks fubterraneos, per quos e- 
 rat Afcenfus ufque ad Tetfa. 
 
 That the Prepofition a prefix'd to ^1^ fome- 
 times iignifies per, is evident from Noldius ; and 
 that it iignifies fo in this place is certain from 
 the nature of the Context, and the Teftimony of 
 Jofephus, who (as we have feen) exprefTes it by 
 cJW. The verb yiDN' in this fentence is very pro- 
 perly future ; as Hebrew Verbs in that tenle are 
 known to be frequentative^ or to exprefs the con- 
 tinuance of doing any thing ; and therefore that 
 Tenfe is with great propriety us'd here to exprefs 
 the frequent repetition of the infolent Speech us'd 
 by the Blind and the Lame upon the Walls of 
 the Fortrefs. 
 
 It only remains here to make an Obfervation 
 or two on the Reward propos'd by David, and 
 the Perfon who obtain'd it. The Text of Chro- 
 nicles tells us David faid, Whojoever fmiteth the
 
 44 DISSERTATION 
 
 Jebiifitesjirjl, Jhall be Chief and Captain, or Head 
 and Prince. We are to recoiled:, that Joab the 
 fon of Zeruiah (David's Sifter) had been Gene- 
 ral of his Army j during the Civil War, between 
 the Men of Judah under David, and the Ifrael- 
 ites commanded by dbner in favour of Imboflieth 
 the fon of Saul : but that the Ifraelites having 
 now fubmitted to David, he was King over the 
 whole twelve Tribes. David, we know, fre- 
 quently endeavour 'd to remove Joab from his 
 Command of the Army, on account of his 
 Haughtinefs and for feveral Murders ; but com- 
 plain'd, that this Son of Zeruiah was too hard for 
 him. One of thefe Attempts of David's feems 
 to have been made at the time Ifrael came in to 
 David, by the Perfualion of Abner ; when 'tis 
 probable the Condition on Abner's fide was to 
 have been made David's Captain-General : and 
 perhaps Joab fufpeded fo much, and therefore 
 murder'd him. The next Attempt feems to have 
 been made at the taking this ftrong Citadel of 
 the Jebufites. For David propofes the Reward 
 abfolutely to every Officer of his Army Who- 
 foeverfmiteth the Jebufites firji i. e. whofoever will 
 afcend firft, put himfelf at the head of a De- 
 tachment, and march up thro' the fubterraneous 
 Paflage into the Citadel, Jhall be Head and Cap- 
 tain. 
 
 This
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 45 
 
 This Propofal, we may obferve, was general 
 and yet, how much foever David might wifh 
 Joab fafely remov'd, 'tis reafonable to think that 
 he made Joab the firfl Offer. And, we find, 
 that however dangerous and dreadful this Enter- 
 prize appear'd, yet Joab had Prudence enough 
 to undertake it, and Courage enough to exe- 
 cute it : nnJWQ Syn and Joab went up firft y 
 or at the head of a Party, and was accordingly 
 declar'd Head, or Chief-Captain, or (in the mo- 
 dern flile) Captain- General of the united Armies 
 of Ifrael and Judah. 
 
 'Tis not unlikely that the Men of Ifrael ex- 
 pelted, that tho' Abner their General had been 
 bafely murder'd by Joab, yet David's Chief-Cap- 
 tain fhould be chofen from amongfl Them- y or 
 at leaft that they mould have a chance for that 
 firfl Pofl of Honour, as well as the Men of Ju- 
 dah. And if they had declar'd any Expectation 
 of this kind, David feems to have taken the wifefl 
 Step for determining fo important a Point by 
 declaring, that neither Relation, nor Fortune, nor 
 Friendmip mould recommend upon the occa- 
 fion j but, that as the bravefl Man and the befl 
 Soldier ought to be Commander in chief, fo this 
 Honour mould be the Reward of the greatefl 
 Merit; that there was now a fair Opportunity 
 of fignalizing themfelves in the taking this im- 
 
 F portant
 
 46 DISSERTATION 
 
 portant Fortrefs; and therefore his Refolution 
 was that Wbofbever would head a Detachment 
 up this fubterraneous Paffage, and fhould firft 
 make himfelf Mailer of the Citadel, by that Paf- 
 fage, or by fcaling the Walls, or by any other 
 method, mould be Head and Captain i. e. Cap- 
 tain-General. 
 
 'Tis remarkable, that the Text in Samuel is 
 very incompleat in this place : David's Propofal 
 to the Army is juft begun, and a Circumftance 
 or two mention'd j but the Reward propos'd, and 
 the Perfon rewarded, are totally omitted. We 
 may prefume the Text could not have been thus 
 imperfect originally, lince no Ellipfis can fupply 
 what is here wanting ; and therefore the words 
 in the coinciding Chapter of Chronicles which 
 regularly fill up this Omifiion, were doubtlefs at 
 firft alfo in Samuel, and are therefore to be re- 
 ftor'd. The Neceflity of thus reftoring the words 
 not found in the prefent Copies of Samuel is ap- 
 parent : and we may add, that St. Jerom, (in his 
 Quceftime s feu Traditiones Hebraicte in lib. Regum) 
 tells us Subauditur quod liber P aralipomenon de- 
 clarat y hoc modo dicens Erit Princeps & Dux : 
 afcendit igitur primus Joab, Jilius Samite, & fa- 
 ttus eft Princeps. 
 
 The Englim Verfion then of thefe Texts in 
 Chronicles is And the Inhabitants of Jebusfaid 
 
 to
 
 O.i i C H R O N. XI 8V. 47 
 
 to David, 'fhQiiftalt not come hither. But David 
 took the Jlrong Hold of Sion, which is the City of 
 David. And David f aid, Whofoever firjl fmiteth 
 the Jebufifes, jhall be Head and Captain. So Joab 
 the fon of Zend ah 'went up Jirji, and was Chief 
 Captain. And the Englifh Verfion of thefe Texts 
 in Samuel is And they fpake unto David, fay- 
 ing, ThouJJoalt not come hither ; for the Blind and 
 the Lame Jhall keep thee off, by faying, David Jhall 
 not come hither. But David took the Jlrong Hold 
 of Sion, which is the City of David. And David 
 faid on that day, Whojoever (firjl) fmiteth the Je- 
 biifites, and thrd the fubterraneous Paffage reacheth 
 the Blind and the Lame, which are hated of Da- 
 vid's Soul, becaufe the Blind and the Lame conti- 
 nued to fay, he jhall not come into this Houfe Jhall 
 be Head and Captain. So Joab the fon of Zeruiah 
 went up Jirji, and was Head or Captain-Ge- 
 neral. 
 
 iChron. xi,7; 2 Sam. v, 9. 
 
 : Tin TV iS itnp p Sv n^an im st&n c. 
 *vy rh jnpn - - - m^on in aen s. 
 
 iV Ttf 
 
 Sam. Kf txaSurt &cu>io iv TVJ 
 
 ChrO. XOtAg(TV OUJTUJJ, 
 
 Sam. gxAjjS'q cwrtj v\ 
 
 F 2 The
 
 48 DISSERTATION 
 
 The Engliih Verfion is 
 And David dwelt in theftrong Hold-, therefore 
 they -called it the City cf David. 
 
 i Chron. xi, 8 ; 2 Sam. v, 9. 
 
 2*:iDn TVI *<frpn p I^DD ^*yn p'i Chro. 
 :nnm f<iSn p noo TTI pn Sam. 
 
 "TH ln Chro. 
 - - - Sam. 
 
 Chro. 
 
 Sam. Ko/ toxsaofMitTiV ewrqv -sroAi!/ xvx,Xb) GLTTO r/if a,- 
 
 Sam. xct?, xo/ rov c/xgv CWTQV. 
 
 We have here feveral Variations between the 
 two Original Texts ; and the Verfions are re- 
 markably different and defective. It has been al- 
 ready obferv'd, that fome Circumftances, men- 
 tion'd by the Author of one Hiftory, are omit- 
 ted by the other ; and the Author of Chronicles 
 has here inferted a Circumftance with regard to 
 Joab, which is not recorded by the Author of 
 Samuel. But let us firft confider the former part 
 of the Verfe in Chronicles, with which the words 
 in Samuel coincide ; not exactly indeed, but with 
 fome variation. The Hebrew words in Chroni- 
 cles iignify literally Et (zdificavit cruitatem a 
 
 circuitii
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 49 
 
 circuitu a Millone & ufque ad circuitum ; and the 
 LXX very concifely exprefs the whole of a cir- 
 cuitu a Millcne & ufque ad circuitum by the fin- 
 gle word xo*A&>. 
 
 Not to enumerate, at prefent, a variety of 
 wrong Opinions on this part of the Sentence, the 
 true Meaning feems to be this: David having 
 poffefs'd himfelf of the Cattle of Sion, join'd the 
 the Caflle to the Town beneath it, by building 
 Houfes from one to the other, and made there- 
 by one round regular City. Millo (tfiSa from 
 tf *70 plenusfuit^ complevit, perfecit a compleat 
 Enclofure or Fortification) is a Word which has 
 greatly perplex'd the Commentators ; but it feems 
 to have been the Name of the Caftle of Sion, or 
 the Fortrefs of the City of David. The LXX 
 generally render it (as in the Text) by A^A, a 
 Citadel: and in 2 Chron. 32, 5, we read ptm 
 TIT TV ttPDh ntf and he fortified Millo in the 
 City of David ; or rather, he fortify' 'd the Caftle 
 (or Citadel) of the City of David. Thus Dr. 
 Lightfoot tells us, Millo was a part of Sion ; 
 Vol. 2. p. 25. And Jofephus ufes Axpa, for Mil- 
 lo, when he fpeaks of this very Circumftance 
 rt Kara zroXiv Trip^a&uv, x.cq TUIJ A- 
 
 CWTY\, tTTOlYlflV IV CUpO,' Key 'ZTtplT6i'X l l- 
 
 uv T&XUV xartwirtv lua>tv. Lib. 7; 
 Cap. 3. 
 
 Millo
 
 50 DISSERTATION 
 
 Millo then being the Name for the Citadel, 
 or ftrong Fortrefs of Sion, 'tis evident that Da- 
 vid begun his Works from thence, from Millo 
 (a circuitu) round the lower town, and brought 
 them about (ad circuitum) to the place where 
 the circuit commenc'd, making a compleat Com- 
 munication and regular Enclofure : which an- 
 fwers exactly in Senfe to the following Englifh 
 Tranflation of thefe words in a MS Bible writ 
 in 1408 anfc fie bilfcioe tlje titere in cumpais 
 from pello til to tfje Cltmpag. The Original 
 Text in Samuel has not the word *vyn, an d on- 
 ly fays David built a Circuit (MD not MOD) 
 from Millo. But the LXX have cunbjj TTO\IV after 
 ftaAppttt, both in the Alex, and Vatican Copies, 
 omitting the Name David ; and therefore we 
 have reafon to think the beginning of this Verfe 
 was originally the fame in Samuel as in Chro- 
 nicles. 
 
 The laft word in Samuel nnOl has been 
 greatly miftaken ; and the more fo, as it bears 
 no refemblance to any word in the correfpond- 
 ing Verfe. The LXX render it rev otxsv OJUTX, re- 
 ferring it probably to David j but the fuffix'd 
 Pronoun mould then have been Mafculine. And 
 had the word been thus exprefs'd, tho' it would 
 have fo far vindicated that Tranflation, it would 
 not then have made a proper Senfe. The truth 
 
 is
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 51 
 
 is that the n at the end of noi being the lo- 
 cal particle, the word Jfignifies here G? ad domum 
 or & ad locum ; and fo regularly anfwers to -jyi 
 Jl^DH in the other Text. For as that is ? 
 
 tedificavit civitatem a circuitu a Millone & ufoue 
 j j j. 
 
 ad circuitum (ad Millonem) fo will this be & 
 
 tedificavit David circuitum a Millone & ufque ad 
 j j i 
 
 Domum (ad Millonem) i. e. even to the Houfe of 
 the Citadel, or to Millo, from which the works 
 were firft begun : which is the very fenfe of the 
 correfponding Text. But what puts this Inter- 
 pretation out of all doubt is the ufe of this word 
 at the end of the preceding verfe j and as it there 
 moft certainly means the Houfe of Millo, or the 
 Citadel (from the walls of which the Blind and 
 Lame fhouted David mail not come into this 
 Houfe) fo it muft mean the fame Houfe of Millo 
 here : and that the Houfe of Millo is the Scrip- 
 ture Name for this ftrong Fortrefs, fee 2 Kin. 
 12, 20. 
 
 The laft part of the Verfe of Chronicles is loft 
 in the Tranflation of the LXX (at leaft in the 
 Alex, and Vat. Copies) if indeed it were origi- 
 nally in Chronicles ; which may be queftion'd, 
 as it is not in Samuel (with the words imme- 
 diately preceding and following) nor in the LXX. 
 But in order to fill up a Vacancy in the Tranfla- 
 tion, we have Key tTrotepYia-t xcy tXa&i TUU -zroXtv, 
 
 which
 
 52 DISSERTATION 
 
 which words bear no relation to the prefent He- 
 brew words ; nor could they be proper, if they 
 did. The Original words here have receiv'd two 
 different Confirmations 'Joab repaired the reft 
 of the City ; and Joab faved alive all that re- 
 mained in the City. The former is confirm'd by 
 no ancient Verfion, except the Vulgat ; and in- 
 deed, to bid or make Houfes to live inftead of to 
 repair Houfes is a very bold and a very uncom- 
 mon Figure, if ever us'd at all ; which probably 
 it is not. The latter Conftru&ion is confirm'd 
 by the Paraphrafe both of the Syriac and Ara- 
 bic Verfions j which therefore may pombly have 
 been the Senfe of the LXX, before the words 
 there were loft. To which it may be added, 
 that this Verb is us'd conftantly (perhaps in eve- 
 ry place of the Old Teftament) forjautng alive 
 in war ; and this very word ,T!T occurs i Sam. 
 27, in the pth and nthVerles And David n!T 
 faved alive neither Man nor Womaii. What there- 
 fore David did not, Joab (upon the prefent Sup- 
 pofition) did ; for, after the City of the Jebufites 
 had been ftorm'd and taken, Joab n*IT faved a- 
 live all that remained in the City, or all the 
 Remnant of the City vivas confervavit Urbis 
 reliquias, as it is render'd in Poole's Synopfis. 
 And this would be true, whether (in the Senfe 
 of the Syriac) the right hand of Friendship was 
 
 given
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 53 
 
 given them, and they were permitted to live ftill 
 in the City; as we find Araunah the Jebufite 
 was or whether, when they had been fav'd 
 from the fword, they were thruft out of the Ci- 
 ty, according to Jofephus arp&irc? xv 
 
 er Itpoavhvpuv tx&ahtov, &< 
 
 -arcA/i/. Lib. 7 ; Cap. 3 . 
 Thefe two then probably are the only Inter- 
 pretations, which are at prefent given of this Paf- 
 fage -, which however does not feem fatisfactori- 
 ly explain'd by either : not by the firft, becaufe 
 the verb mr is never ( I believe ) us'd in that 
 Senfe ; and more probably not by thefecond, be- 
 caufe it both interrupts the feries of the Narra- 
 tion, and feems to contradict the truth of the 
 Hiftory. For how can Joab be here celebrated, 
 as faving alive the Remainder of the City, when 
 all or the chief part of the Deftruction here men- 
 tion'd, or rather fuppos'd, is fuppos'd to have been 
 made by yoab? Since, when David promis'd, 
 that Whofoever fhould firft fmite the Jebufites, 
 and particularly the Blind and the Lame, mould 
 be Chief Captain ; Joab was the Man, who re- 
 ceiv'd the Reward, and therefore was doubtlefs 
 the Man, who did the Execution. 
 
 It feems neceffary then to endeavour at a diffe- 
 rent Explanation of this Paffage j and perhaps the 
 following may be the true one that the words 
 
 G
 
 54 DISSERTATION 
 
 may, by Miftake, have been corrupted from 
 
 jTyn n# r-K rrrv avi 
 
 This feems to be a very rational Conjecture ; and 
 tho' I receive no farther Honour from it than in 
 having had it communicated to me, yet I mall 
 offer fome Obfervations in defence of it. 
 
 The letter n has been chang'd into n in at 
 leaft four other places, which are mention'd by 
 Walton ; and indeed fcarce any two Letters are 
 more fimilar, and therefore more likely to be ex- 
 chang'd. The verb rVIT, tho' future, will have 
 the preter fignification equally with JTITj and 
 both in confequence of the Converfive Vau, tho' 
 prefix'd not to the Verb but to the Nominative 
 cafe preceding it : an Obfervation this ( of the 
 Vau's operating at fome diftance from the Verb) 
 Avhich is of great Service, and was (I believe) 
 firft communicated to the World by the learned 
 Mr. Peters, in his late Critical Diflertation on the 
 Book of Job; page 202. The particle ntf fre- 
 quently precedes the Nominative cafe ; and that, 
 when the Nominative is plac'd either before the 
 Verb, or after it, as here. Walton tells us, that 
 K has been frequently inferted, to exprefs the 
 found of the vowel A, in words where fuch K 
 was not original ; and fo we find it inferted in 
 many inftances Hofea 10, 14 DNp) (inftead 
 
 of
 
 On i C H R O N. XL &c. 55 
 
 of Dpi) &furget 2 Sam. 12; i and 4, in &'&n 
 pauper, which in the third verfe is rightly ex- 
 prefs'd en : the fame word has the K again in- 
 ferted in Prov. 10, 4 Neh. 13, 16 in NT\pif- 
 cis, which fhould be yr. To thefe many other 
 Examples are added by that learned Author j all 
 which, he tells us, funt a quiefcentibw Am Vau - y 
 which all Grammarians know is exactly the Cafe 
 of the word here, *w Princeps being the Noun 
 of Tity principatum geffit. And therefore, as this 
 is a word of the very fame nature with thofe 
 which have the tf frequently inferted, fo remark- 
 able a Circumftance will the more eafily per- 
 fuade us to admit the Suppoiltion here. 
 
 As to the Senfe of the Paffage, this fmall Va- 
 riation of the Text greatly improves it ; not to 
 repeat the reafons, why the other Interpretations 
 cannot be admitted. For when David had taken 
 this important Fortrefs, and built up the City, 
 and furrounde4 it with a Wall ; it was natural 
 to expert, that he mould make fome one the 
 Governor of the Place ; and Who fo proper to 
 be the Governor of his Capital, as JOAB his Cap- 
 tain-General, the Man, who had the greateft 
 /hare in the Conqueft of it ? And indeed the 
 words of Jofephus quoted page the 49th feem to 
 confirm this account ; for he fays that David 
 having finiih'd the works round the City, ap- 
 
 G 2 pointed
 
 56 
 
 pointed Joab Superintendant of the Works : and 
 certainly Superintendant of Works> which were 
 made for the Security of the City and which were 
 now fmifh'd, muft be nearly the fame with *$} 
 Tyn Governor of the City. And as to the Con- 
 text, that and the prefent PafTage are render'd ve- 
 ry harmonious by this Interpretation David 
 took the ftrong Hold of Sion, which is the City 
 of David And David dwelt in the ftrong Hpld 
 < And he built the City in a Circuit from Mil- 
 lo round to the beginning of that Circuit and 
 Joab was made Governor of the City and Da- 
 vid waxed greater and greater &c. 
 
 If then *$} is here corrupted into itfitf, may 
 not the fame word have been corrupted into *V)tP? 
 For Sar or Sor might eafily be miftaken by a 
 Tranfcriber, when dictated to by a Reader ; as 
 has been evidently the Cafe in many other words, 
 which are different in Letters, but fimilar in 
 Sound ---- fuch as j*S and iS, Stf and hy &c. 
 And it will, perhaps, be no difficult matter to 
 convince a reafonable Enquirer, that this word 
 originally was, and therefore mould be ftill 
 in the end of the celebrated Text of Gen. 
 49, 6 : which, in the Englifh Bible, is For in 
 their anger theyjlew a Ma?2, and in their f elf -will 
 they digged down a WALL : or, if the word "w 
 
 Sur
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 57 
 
 Stir be pronounc'd Sor, it then iignifies an Ox ; 
 and therefore fome Interpreters have render'd the 
 laft part of the preceding Sentence and in their 
 felf-will they houghed the OXEN. But to leflen any 
 riling Prejudice againft the fuppos'd infertion of 
 the Vau in this place> let it be previoufly ob- 
 ferv'd that, if this inffcance mould be allow'd, 
 it will not be the only one, wherein thefe two 
 words *vuy and *)? have been miftaken for each 
 other: fmce in Hofea 12,11, the Hebrew word 
 at prefent is D^W Boves; but the LXX, 'tis 
 plain, read DH8P, by rendering it Adorns; as 
 we have it in all the Editions. 
 
 Let us now proceed to the Text in Genefis-' 
 
 w ripy Drn:n w$ inn DSK:I o 
 nn^p o Dn-in^i rv o D5^ TON 
 
 That 118^ does not here fignify a Wall, may be 
 inferr'd from the Hiftory of the Deftru&ion of 
 the Sichemites by Simeon and Levi ; ch. 34525 
 &c. lince no fuch circumflance is at all men- 
 tion'd as their digging down the Walls of the City : 
 which indeed could have anfwer'd no End, as 
 they had murder'd all the Men and plunder'd 
 the City. But, even admitting they had done 
 this, it is more unlikely ftill, that old Jacob 
 mould in this folemn Manner curfe their Paflion 
 moft for doing, what (if they had done it) would 
 have been the leaft part of their Crime. 
 
 Others,
 
 58 DISSERTATION 
 
 Others, feeing the Abfurdity of rendring this 
 word here a Wall, have render'd it an Ox or 
 Oxen. But that thefe Brothers did not hough the 
 Oxen, is certainly prefumeable from this remark- 
 able Circumflance in the Hiflory j that they took 
 their Sheep, and their OXEN, and their AJJes, and 
 that 'which 'was in the City, and that which ivas in 
 the Field, and all their Wealth, and all their little 
 ones, and their Wives took they Captive &c. See 
 Verfes 28 and 29. The wifer among the Com- 
 mentators, feeing the Impropriety of both thefe 
 rendrings, have endeavour'd to raife the Idea of 
 each word, by faying that the Wall here is a 
 Metaphor for the Prince of the City ; or that 
 the Ox, being an Emblem of Greatnefs, fignifies 
 the Governor. 
 
 But the Miftake feems only to be this that 
 the word here expreffes plainly, what thefe In- 
 terpreters were conftrain'd to think was at leaft 
 expreft in Metaphor; for the words of the Hifto- 
 ry remarkably coincide with, and greatly illu- 
 flrate thefe words of Jacob. In Chap. 34 ; 25, 
 26 5 we read They flew all the Males, Hamor 
 alfo andSichem (the Prince and his Son) tbeyjlem 
 with the Sword: fo here, in exadly the fame 
 Order 
 
 In
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 59 
 
 In their Anger, they flew the Men ; 
 
 and, in their Fury, they deflroyed the Princes : 
 
 Curfed be their Anger, for it was farce -, 
 
 and their Fury, for it was inflexible. 
 'Tis remarkable, that the fecond part of this Sen- 
 tence encreafes in Emphafis upon the firft; in 
 their Anger they flew the Inhabitants ; but, in the 
 Exceff or Overflowing of their Anger they dejlroyed 
 the Princes. The verb ipy fignifies in the He- 
 brew penitus eradicavit, radicitus perdidit (very 
 properly therefore apply'd to the Deftruction of 
 the whole Family of the Princes of Sichem) and 
 in Arabic it fignifies per emit, interfecit. 
 
 It is confefs'd, that here is another Alteration 
 introduc'd in the word render'd their Fury j and 
 'tis prefum'd, that it will be admitted by the 
 Learned, upon their confidering the Reafons in 
 defence of it. It muft be obferv'd, that Jacob, 
 having faid in the beginning of the firft Line 
 In THEIR ANGER they flew the Men, begins the 
 next Line with Curfed be THEIR ANGER; a Con- 
 nexion fo ftrikmg, from the Repetition of the 
 word DDK, that from that confideration only we 
 might almoft conclude there was the fame fink- 
 ing Connection between the fecond part of the 
 two fentences, arifing from the fame Repetition : 
 and in THEIR FURY, they dejlroyed the Princes-, 
 Curfed be THEIR FURY Gfr. But at prefent we 
 
 have
 
 60 DISSERTATION 
 
 have in thefe two places two different words; 
 the laft being the very word, which we might 
 expect j and the firfl one of the words, which 
 was leafl likely to be chofen for the place it now 
 fills. 
 
 For py"i (which our Tranflators have ren- 
 der'd Self-Will ) fignifies properly Benevokttti*, 
 Gratia, Favor &c. and is never once (I believe) 
 render 'd by a word of unfavourable Idea, but in 
 this place. The LXX render it by EIM&W*, xapif, 
 EAwf, lAe^o])??, iXctpcv, A)f/*<fc, tAjjffj?, AwcW, Tl(wr- 
 JbtTflf, and Aptfos the Ideas of which words are 
 certainly as oppofite to the Temper of Simeon 
 and Levi, (efpecially here, where they are pro- 
 perly declar'd Inftruments of Cruelty) as can well 
 be conceiv'd : whereas the two principal ren- 
 drings of the other word rn^y are o^ and &v- 
 with fometimes Op^ua and M>JW? words, 
 
 whofe Ideas are the moft confonant imaginable. 
 The inference deducible from hence feems to be, 
 that probably DOTH was originally Dm:un> 
 as in the correfponding place ; the words confift 
 of the fame number of Letters, and four out of 
 the fix Letters are the very fame. This fecond 
 Word the Syriac Interpreter has render'd by 
 Jjjcsa**, which is a word of great Emphafis, and 
 fignifies Indignatio fortis (Schaaf's Syriac Lexi- 
 con) and in this Verfion the Noun J^OA> is re- 
 
 gularly
 
 On i CH RON. XI &c. 61 
 
 gularly repeated ; which is one Argument in con- 
 firmation of the fecond Word's being repeated in 
 the Hebrew Copy, from whence this Tranfla- 
 tion was made. And indeed, there is fuch an 
 Acceflion of Spiritednefs and Beauty given to the 
 Sentence by the double Repetition, that the rea- 
 fons here ofFer'd feem fufficient to recommend it. 
 But, to return from this Digreflion. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion of the Text in Chroni- 
 cles is And he built the City in a Circuit from 
 Millo, and round to (the beginning of) that Cir- 
 cuit : and *Joab ivas made Governor of the City. 
 And the Verfion of the Text of Samuel is 
 And David built a Circuit from Millo> and round 
 to the Houfe of Millo. 
 
 i Chron. xi, 9 ; 2 Sam. v, 10. 
 
 - - mm HiTJn ^hr\ TIT -jSn Chro. 
 nW mm S-n;n -pSn TIT jSn Sam. 
 
 J W mttZV Chro. 
 J *\W nwiV Sam. 
 
 Chro. Ko/ tTnp&fTQ Aewi srop&ofjfyuoz xoq 
 
 Sam. Kf gTro^dOeTO Aouiia tropdjofyjof xcq 
 
 Chro. jU^o?, x,cq Kvpios 7ixv\o%fH*lup 
 
 Sam. (J/jJts, xcq Ko^o? o 00f o 7mv\oxpa\tep 
 
 The only Variation here is, that in Samuel 
 we have the word >nW between mjQtf and 
 
 H mm
 
 62 DISSERTATION 
 
 Chronicles. The Name Lord of Hojls t 
 or Lord God of Hofts, is frequently attributed to 
 the Deity in the Holy Scriptures; and appears 
 firft in i Sam. i, i r. But as the former Phrafe 
 occurs above 200 times, and the latter not per- 
 haps above 20 ; if the Phrafe in thefe two Ver- 
 fes of Chronicles and Samuel was originally the 
 fame, it feems right to prefer the Phrafe in Chro- 
 nicles j efpecially as the Word nStf is (I believe) 
 no where found in this Sacred Name thro' the 
 Books of Samuel, but in this place. It may be 
 obferv'd, that the Noun QWK being us'd in 
 conftrudl:, like any other Noun, is regularly 
 *nStt, when preceding mN^tf, as in this place ; 
 and therefore the final Mem feems to have been 
 improperly added by a Tranfcriber, in Pf. 59, 6 
 80 ; 5, 8, 15, 20 84, 9 : in all which pla- 
 ces the Word probably mould be writ M7tf> as 
 in Pf. 89, 9 ; and as in this, and other places. 
 
 The Englim Verfion is ---- So David waxed 
 greater and greater, and the Lord of Hofts was 
 with him. 
 
 rChron. xi, 10. 
 
 amaan n^n 
 
 Key XTQI 01 ctp%ovTt$ Ttav SVVATUV, ci rfoxv TU 
 
 01
 
 On i C H R O N. XI Gfc. 63 
 
 Cl X.cl%VGV7ff (MT &VTX IV TT, #OTA& CtVTX 
 
 T0? is-flcwjA, TOV /3c6cr;A<$6tra/ CUJTOV xctTa, rev Aoyoi> Ku- 
 
 Having particularly mention'd Joa&, his Bra- 
 very at the taking the ftrong Fortrefs of the Je- 
 bufites, and his Reward in being plac'd at the 
 head of the United Army ; * the Hiftorian pro- 
 ceeds here to an honourable Enumeration of thofe 
 other Mighty Men, who had remarkably diftin- 
 euifh'd themfelves in David's Service. And he 
 
 o 
 
 not only reckons up the remaining 36 Heroes, 
 to compleat the Catalogue of the 37, as they are 
 exprefsly number 'd 2 Sam. 23 ; 8 to 39 ; 
 but at the Clofe of this Lift adds 1 5 more ; who, 
 tho' inferior to the 37, had yet behav'd in fuch a 
 manner, as to be worthy of being recorded with 
 honour. 
 
 There is a peculiar Connection between the 
 Conclufion of the preceding Verfe, and the In- 
 troduction of this and the following. For the 
 Hiftorian, being about to record fome marveBous 
 Exploits of David's Heroes, who had rais'd him 
 to, and fecur'd him in, the PoflefTion of his King- 
 dom, (left we mould look no higher than to thefe 
 Inftrumental orjtcond Caufes) takes care to give 
 God the Glory due unto Him y as the Supream Au- 
 thor of David's Greatnefs j while he was doing 
 
 H 2 Honour
 
 64 DISSERTATION 
 
 Honour to the brave Men, whom God had in- 
 fpir'd with Fortitude, and made bis Inftruments on 
 this Occafion. For this feems the true reafon of 
 the Obfervation at the clofe of the laft verfe 
 that the Lord of Hofts (or of Armies) was with 
 him. No wonder then, that David waxed great- 
 er and greater, fince the Lord of Hofts was with 
 him, to give Succefs to his Caufe; and he had 
 fo many Mighty Men,, to be the Captains of his 
 Armies. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is ---- Thefe alfo are the 
 chief of the Mighty Men, who were with David, 
 valiantly exerting themfehes with him in his King- 
 dom, with all Ifrael, to make him King, according 
 to the word of the Lord concerning IfraeL 
 
 i Chron. xi, 1 1 ; 2 Sam. xxni, 8. 
 TTlS "U^N D'TDJin 13DO M^Nl Chro. 
 
 -JEW onun rnoty nW Sam. 
 
 p Dyn&' Chro. 
 
 Chro. 
 *<in Sam. 
 SSn Chro. 
 
 Sam. 
 
 Chro. Ko/ oyrof c ttp&f&Of ruv mawrcw rov 
 ICUUT& TO, cvr.^un,rct ruv mwtruv ray 
 
 Chro,
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 65 
 
 Chro. ItGaap tfc? Axapavi Trz&lolowf, -ruv 
 
 Sam. idoocfotf o Xavavcucs, <x,p%uv rx 1$% (otJ]c$-) 
 
 Chro. euros tcorcur&To T^JJ popfyouav currov ct,7ro 
 
 Sam. ---- A^HVUV o Ao-uycuo?, ------ 
 
 Chro. Tpicutonxf Tp&vpct/ri&s tv xcupu svt. 
 Sam. 
 
 The prefent Englifh Verlion. 
 Chro. And this is the Number of the mighty men 
 Sam. Thefe be the Names of the mighty men 
 
 Chro. 'whom David had; Jajhobeam an 
 
 Sam. whom David had; The Tachmonite that 
 
 Chro. Hachmonite, the chief of the Captains: 
 Sam. fat in the feaf, chief among the Captains, 
 
 Chro. be lift up his fpear againft 
 
 Sam. (the fame was Adino the Eznite) againft 
 
 Chro. ^Qojlain (by him) at one ttme. 
 
 Sam. 800, whom bejlew at one time. 
 
 The Catalogue of David's Mighty Men in Sa- 
 muel coincides with the Catalogue in Chronicles,, 
 at this nth Verfe 3 and in this one Verfe (fo con- 
 tradictory in the two Chapters, and fo remark- 
 ably defective in that of Samuel) there are more 
 Difficulties, than in almoft all the other Verfes 
 united. Here then it will be neceflary to make 
 feveral Obfervations, and thofe of fome confider- 
 able length ; efpecially, a the right underftand-
 
 66 DISSERTATION 
 
 ing this one place will lead us eafily to the true 
 Senfe of many others, which would be elfe ex- 
 treamly difficult. 
 
 1. That the words of this Verfe, and of the 
 Verfes following in thefe two Chapters, original- 
 ly contain d the fame Senfe no one can doubt 
 who has at all confider'd them, or will at any 
 time carefully compare them. And hence it will 
 follow, that, however different a Word, or Words, 
 or the manner of Exprejfion may be in fome Ver- 
 fes of thefe two Chapters (as it evidently is in 
 many) yet the Senfe muft have been, and mould 
 be ftill the fame in both places ; and where the 
 Senfe is not now uniform, but mamfejlly contra- 
 dilory y one of the two places muft have been 
 corrupted. 
 
 2. The next Obfervation, which is of great 
 importance to the Truth of the Hiftory before 
 us (and feems neceffary to be eftablifh'd antece- 
 dently to any farther Enquiries) concerns the ex- 
 aft Number , and the fuperior or inferior Rank of 
 thefe celebrated Warriors. 
 
 As to the Number , we are exprefsly afTur'd in 
 Samuel, Ver. 39 that they were thirty andfe- 
 <ven in all. But then, how to make out this 
 Number by a particular Detail of the feveral 
 
 Worthies
 
 On i C H R O N. XI Gfc. 67 
 
 Worthies in their Order, has been the Subject of 
 much Difquifition, but does not appear to have 
 been yet properly determin'd. In both Samuel 
 and Chronicles we frequently have Thirty of thefe 
 Thirty feven mention 'd 'together , as a fixt and well- 
 known Body of them, which were celebrated on- 
 ly by the general name of Mighty Men. See Sam. 
 13, 23 and 24: Chron. 15 and 25. And in both 
 Chapters we have alfo frequent mention of the 
 Number 'Three 5 and fufficient reafon for con- 
 cluding that the remaining Seven were divid- 
 ed into a double Ternary, or two Ranks different 
 in Dignity, and each Rank containing Three He- 
 roes : * confequently there was yet One Hero re- 
 maining to be accounted for. See Sam. 9, 17, 1 8, 
 19, 22, 23 : and Chron. 12, 15, 20, 21, 24, 25. 
 Now the moil rational and certain method of 
 inveftigating the truth of thefe Petitions, and 
 difcovering the difference of Rank among thefe 
 Thirty feven Heroes, is to fee firft who are 
 properly the Thirty, fo frequently mention'd in 
 a Body, and celebrated only by the Name of 
 Omun the Mighty Men. 
 
 Here then we mall find, that there are exact- 
 ly thirty enumerated after Afahel, the Brother of 
 Joab ; Sam. 24. And from the Thirty upward 
 we meet with Six Names, which are Jajfjobeam, 
 Eleazar, Shammah, Abijhai, Benaiah and Afabel; 
 
 to
 
 68 DISSERTATION 
 
 to which in Chronicles is prefix'd (as before ob- 
 ferv'd) Joab the Captain-General, who certainly 
 is confider'd as the firfl and chief of David's 
 Mighty Men. 
 
 Let us now fee, how the Notion of a Divi- 
 fion of the next Six into a double Series of Three 
 is fupported by the Hiftory. And here (without 
 rectifying at prefent fome corrupted Numbers on 
 this fubjecl:) let us only obferve, that in Chron. 
 20, it is faidof^f^Zwi He was Head of Three, 
 i. e. (as in the next verfe, very remarkably) 
 Of the Three he ivas more honourable than Two, 
 therefore he was their Captain - y but yet he attained 
 not unto the Three, i. e. not unto the Three, which 
 bad been mentioned juft before him-, and were fu- 
 perior in Honour, as they had been in Merit. 
 
 Again; it is faid of Benaiah, who was next 
 under Abimai, (and therefore the Second of the 
 Second Ternary) Sam. 22, Chron. 24 5 thefe 
 things did Benaiah, and had a Name among Three ; 
 and then, in the next words he ivas more ho- 
 nourabk than the Thirty, but he attained not unto 
 the Three-, i. e. the Three Generals mention'd be- 
 fore Abimai, and fuperior to Abimai and him- 
 felf. Now as Abijhai, Joab's Brother, was at 
 the head of Three, and Benaiah next under him 
 was one of Three j there muil follow a third Man 
 to compleat this Ternary : and the next Man be- 
 ing
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 69 
 
 ing Afahel y another Brother of the Captain-Ge- 
 neral, we muft conclude (as there is no other 
 mention'd ) that be was the third General of the 
 fecond Series efpecially, as be was evidently 
 not one of the Body of Thirty, there being Thirty 
 exprefly nam'd after him. 
 
 If then Abijhai, Benaiah and y^z^/conftituted 
 a fecond Ternary of Heroes, who were more ho- 
 nourable than the Thirty , and yet attained not un- 
 to the Three mention'd before them; certainly 
 there was afirft Order of Three, fuperior in Ho- 
 nour to this fecond Three : which firfl Order of 
 Three mufl be Jaftxbtam, Eleazar and Shammah. 
 The Jirft is mention'd corruptly, but the fecond 
 and tbird clearly and exprefly in Samuel-, where- 
 as, in Chronicles the two Jirft are mention'd clear- 
 ly and exprefly, and the tbird is omitted. 
 
 Thus then we have the Whole Thirty feven 
 Mighty Men enumerated, and rank'd in their 
 Order Joab the Captain-General a double 
 Series of Three Generals (the three moft honour- 
 able next to Joab making the firft Series ; and 
 the more honourable than the Thirty, but lefs 
 honourable than the firft Three, making the fe- 
 cond Series) and then the Body of Thirty. But 
 this Arrangement of thefe feveral Heroes will re- 
 ceive additional Confirmation from a farther exa- 
 mination of thefe two Chapters. 
 
 I We
 
 TO DISSERTATION 
 
 We may juft remark here, that Dr. Delany 
 (Vol.2, p. 102) enumerates the feveral Orders of 
 thefe Mighty Men in fuch a manner as to make 
 them only Thirty fix 'There were, fays he, in 
 David's Army (as I obferifd before] Three Heroes 
 of the firft Rank, Three of the fecond, and Thirty 
 of the third. But it muft be acknowledg'd, that 
 in page the 44th he obferves David had Three 
 Commanders in chief, of the firft Order, Three of 
 the fecond, and Thirty one of the third. Thefe in- 
 deed make Thirty feven ; and the only Inaccu- 
 racy here is, in making the laft Number Thirty 
 one inftead of Thirty j and in not attributing the 
 {ingle odd Number to the Captain-General, and 
 putting it firft, which will be found certainly to 
 be the place of it. What Dr. Delany obferves, at 
 this fecond place, of a Fourth Order of Thirty 
 (hall be confider'd hereafter. 
 
 3 . The next Obfervation muft be with regard 
 to the Name of thejirft General of thefirfl Series, 
 mention'd in the verfe now before us 5 the Let- 
 ters of which in Chronicles and Samuel are at 
 prefent very different. 
 
 If we confult the Form constantly obferv'd 
 through the remainder of the Chapters, we fhall 
 find the firfl thing that occurs of either of the 
 mighty Men is his Name } as we might naturally 
 
 expeft
 
 On i C H P. O N. XI 8V. 71 
 
 expect it fhould bej and, in general, firft his 
 Proper Name, and then his Family or Local 
 Name. This being the cafe, we might reafon- 
 ably expect to find the Proper Name of this He- 
 ro recorded in the beginning of his Character in 
 both places j efpecially as his Family or Local 
 Name is actually exprefs'd in both. In Chroni- 
 cles we have his Proper Name fo exprefs'd, and 
 find it to be Jqfljobcam DJQD'* ; and that this 
 was in fact his Proper Name is certain from 
 
 i Chron. 27, 2 where we learn , that this 
 
 mighty Man was the firfl Officer or Captain of 
 the Body of 24000 Men, who, during the firft 
 Month of the Year, were in waiting upon the 
 King Over the firft Courfe, for the firjl month., 
 was DVHty* Ja/hobeam. After jfaflwhegnh who 
 was over the firfl month, are mention'd Eleazar 
 the fon of Dodi for the fecond month, Benaiah 
 for the third, Afabel for the fourth &c. Men, 
 whofe Names follow that of "Jajhobeaan in the 
 Hiilory now before us ; and therefore prove 
 that Jajhobeam, who isjirjt before them there > is 
 the fame Man with Jafhobeam, who is frft before 
 them here. 
 
 But, inflead of DVH^* in Chronicles, we have 
 in Samuel rQ^2 2.W two words, which have 
 greatly perplex'd the Commentators, and yet feem 
 not properly accounted for. As to thofe, who 
 
 I 2 have
 
 72 DISSERTATION 
 
 have been led away by the flrange Verfion of 
 the Vulgat in this place, and have applied thefe 
 words to David) ingenioufly making David the 
 firft of his own Mighty Men ; I fuppofe, no- 
 thing need be faid to weaken their Opinion : 
 and indeed it is too abfurd to be anfwer'd fe- 
 rioufly. 
 
 There are others, who fuppofe the Proper 
 Name of this General to be exprefs'd either in 
 the two words JHlfcO Dt^ or in the word 
 1 J03nn or in IJHy. But that Adino is not 
 the Proper Name will ealily be concluded from 
 its Situation in the middle of his Character (con- 
 trary to the fettled Rule) and more efpecially 
 from its being a corruption of a regular Verb, 
 as will be feen hereafter. To which it may be 
 added that no fuch Man as Adino the Eznite 
 is mention'd any where elfe in Scripture - y which 
 he moft probably would have been, had that 
 been the true Name of the perfon here meant : 
 becaufe we find the Names of the inferior Gene- 
 rals frequently mention'd in other places. That 
 *3SDnn Tachmoni is not the Proper Name is plain, 
 becaufe it is the Family or Local Name ; as is 
 evident from its Termination and Situation, and 
 from a comparifon with the more correct Text 
 in Chronicles. And that Jajhob-bajhebet is not 
 the Proper Name, may be inferr'd, becaufe it is 
 
 not
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 73 
 
 not exprefs'd as fuch in any ancient Verfion be- 
 caufe it may be inferred from the confufion in all 
 the Versions, that the Corruption (which is fo 
 great in the remainder of this verfe) begins in 
 
 thefe words and becaufe it is certain (from 
 
 iChron. u, n, compar'd with 27, 2) that the 
 true Name was Jajhobcam ; and therefore thefe 
 two words muft have been corrupted. 
 
 But, do not the fame Men appear frequently 
 in Scripture to have 'Two Names ? If fo, this Ge- 
 neral might be calPd both jajbbbeam and Jajhob- 
 b&fbebet. In anfwer to this it may be obferv'd 
 firfl that Men have not two Names in Scrip- 
 ture fo frequently as is fuppos'd j a Variation of 
 their Name being certainly owing fornetimes to 
 a Miftake of the Tranfcriber. Befides ; where a 
 fecond Name has been given, it has been gene- 
 rally more diftinguim'd from the former than 
 thefe two are from one another : as Jetbro and 
 Reuel, Solomon and Jedidiab, Simon and Peter &c. 
 And therefore, when we have two Names, va- 
 rying but little from each other, evidently be- 
 longing to the fame perfon, we may reafonably 
 fuppofe the one to have been accidentally varied 
 from the other; and that they were not both 
 original, unlefs we have an exprefs Authority 
 given in the Text for fuch fmall Variation. 
 
 But
 
 74 DISSERTATION 
 
 But that nothing of this kind appears here is 
 certain ; and that the following Heroes have on- 
 ly one Proper Name is certain alfo. And there- 
 fore, as the Proper Name of this Hero is given 
 twice exactly the fame, Jaft>obeam ; and that in 
 places, where the Text in the concomitant words 
 is well preferv'd; we muft conclude, that 'Ja- 
 Jhob-bajhebet, which differs from Ja/hobeam only 
 in the end of the Name, has been corrupted from 
 y^JJoobeam efpecially as the corrupted Name 
 only appears here, in a Text which is greatly 
 corrupted in other inflances. 
 
 But laftly it may be objected there is no 
 neceffity for fuppoiing Jajhob-bajhebet to be the 
 Proper Name of this mighty Man ; as it might 
 be intended, in conjunction with the following 
 words, to exprefs the Quality or Dignity of the 
 Perfon fpoken of. For thus Queen Elizabeth's 
 Veriion 1599 He that fat in the Seat of Wij- 
 dom, being chief of the Princes, 'was Adino of 
 Ezni. 
 
 To this it may be anfwer'd firft that there 
 is not mention'd thro' the whole Bible any fuch 
 Man, as Adino of Ezni ; and that there will ap- 
 pear a Neceffity for admitting Adino Hezni to 
 have been a corruption of tivo common 'words. So 
 that Calmet might have fpar'd the following im- 
 proper Obfervation on Jafhobeam, in his Dictio- 
 nary
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 7$ 
 
 nary of the Bible " We cannot fee, from whence 
 they took Adi no the Eznite, which is entirely 
 fuperfluous in this place." 'Tis true, as contain- 
 ing a Proper Name, the words are fuperfluous ; 
 but it feems no difficult matter to difcover from 
 whence they came, as they are abfolutely necef- 
 fary to compleat the Sentence in the quality of 
 common words. 
 
 In confequence then of this Neceffity, we are 
 oblig'd to look out for fome other Proper Name - y 
 and fortunately we have the concurrent Tefti- 
 mony of two other 'Texts (and one of them almoft 
 an exact Copy of the prefent) to prove, that the 
 Mighty Man here meant was jajhobeam. But 
 there is an Inaccuracy thro' the whole of this 
 Verfion, in the words juft cited Chief of the 
 Princes is a wrong Verfion of ^W'n WW\ 
 and he that fat in the Seat of Wifdom is rather 
 more improper than the former ; fincc fOKf 
 (when deriv'd from %w and us'd fubftantively) 
 fignifies the Aft of fating^ and perhaps a Seat or 
 Chair is never its proper Signification. But, ad- 
 mitting that, the word UDDnn never iignifies Wif- 
 dom ; that being exprefs'd by the regular Noun 
 n/DDPT. But, -even admitting that both thefe 
 words might fo fignify e/fewhere, they could not 
 here^ as we mould then have no Proper Name 
 at all ; and confequently one of David's Generals 
 
 would
 
 7 6 
 
 would be recorded in a Catalogue that was to do 
 Honour to his Name, without any Name to be fo 
 honour'd : which is fufficiently abfurd. 
 
 But tho' this Verfion of Queen Elizabeth's is 
 fo defective, in this place ; yet, in the older En- 
 gli{h Verfion of Coverdale before-mention'd, the 
 Words are here very remarkably tranflated 
 
 3afafceam tje fonne of iacl)mom, tje cjefeff 
 
 amonge tjjie. 
 
 If we confult the feveral Editions of the LXX, 
 
 they evidently help us in affigning this Name of 
 
 yafhobeam to this Hero. The Alexand. has uo- 
 
 &zq and the Vat. ieoo9-e, in which words are pre- 
 
 ferv'd the three firft Letters 2& , only the two 
 
 laft tranfpos'd j but the Complut. has the three 
 
 Letters right lec-CcntS 1 . And in Chronicles the 
 
 LXX is almofl as clear as the Original ; Alexan. 
 
 tt&t*j* D V 5 * (Chro. 27, 2, iooet,p D y 3 B? ) 
 
 Vat. I6<re<*^. Aid. le<rCd.c.A Comp. igj-Cce-ct^. 
 
 To which may be added the Teftimony of Jo- 
 
 fephus HpuTo$ ^v xv iitxrcupos ( D y jy ) ^cg- 
 
 Awpavi ( 3 D D H ) pag. 401 ; Edit. Haverc. 
 
 Upon the whole then, there feems to be an 
 abfolute Neceffity for admitting that this Pro- 
 per Name has been corrupted intq Jafhob-bafhebet 
 in Samuel from Jajhobeam ; as it now ftands, and 
 evidently has ever flood in Chronicles. And this 
 (considering how many Mutilations equally great ^ 
 
 and
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 77 
 
 and indeed greater ; muft be allow'd) will pro- 
 bably be admitted by all, but fuch as are de- 
 termin'd to maintain the abfolute Integrity of the 
 prefent Hebrew Text, in oppofition to the clear- 
 eft Proofs of the contrary. And fuch a Corrup- 
 tion would probably be admitted, upon thefe fe- 
 veral Evidences ; even tho' the Variation of the 
 latter part of the word could no otherwife be ac- 
 counted for, than by the fallibility of the Copyijl, 
 and the plain Conviction that fo the thing is 
 which is frequently all the Satisfaction that can 
 be obtain'd. 
 
 But here there feems a way of accounting for 
 this Miftake of the Tranfcriber, by remarking 
 that the word rQKtt occurs in the Line im- 
 mediately preceding this Proper Name. And 
 therefore it feems not irrational to fuppofe, that 
 the Tranfcriber, being to write Dy^tPS regular- 
 ly writ the three firft Letters 2&* ; and then, in- 
 flead of continuing the word, carelefly caft his 
 Eye upon the word JH2BQ in the Line imme- 
 diately above (which following a word that be- 
 gins like 3& might the more eafily miflead the 
 Eye) and tranfcrib'd it in here, inftead of the 
 remaining Syllable of the Proper Word. 
 
 That the word DUEO is not a Corruption of 
 a Patronymic in this place, is plain from i Chron. 
 27, 2 ; where we are told, that Jafiobeam's Fa- 
 
 K tber
 
 78 DISSERTATION 
 
 ther was S^Hit Zabdid, a word not at all fimi- 
 lar. And therefore, as fOtSQ is fo confin'd be- 
 tween y&) the three firft Letters of the true 
 Proper Name, and 3DDnn the Family or Local 
 Name; there is no great room for indulging 
 Conjecture with regard to it, as there would be 
 if it flood in a general Sentence of common 
 words : and the only probable account of it 
 feems to be (as before obferv'd) that it was care- 
 lefsly tranfcrib'd in here from the Line above. 
 
 That the Supposition of fuch an Accident as 
 this may appear the more rational, betides the 
 feveral preceding Reafons, I mall now produce 
 (from this fame Book, and but two chapters be- 
 fore) one clear Inftance of fuch a Miftake or Dijlo- 
 cation-y which does not appear to have been con- 
 fider'd as fuch, but has been given up by fome 
 under the more general Name of a Corruption. 
 
 In 2 Sam. 21,19, we read *iy p pnW "j'1 
 
 inw pn 'run rvS:i ntt DnSn na &r\x 
 
 : D^") ^lliDD Which Sentence in Englim is 
 nearly this And Elhanan, the Jon ofjaare Ore- 
 gim, a Eethkmite y Jlew Goliath the Gittite -, the 
 Staff of whofe Spear was like a Weaver s Beam. 
 
 Now every one knows, that Goliath the Git- 
 tite was flain by David, and therefore there muft 
 have been a Miftake of fome Tranfcriber here ; 
 fince Goliath could not be flain alfo by Elhanan 
 
 the
 
 0;z i C H R O N. XI &c. 79 
 
 the fon of Jaare Oregim. Under this perplexity 
 we are feafonably reliev'd by a repetition of this 
 very place in Chronicles 3 which, tho' perhaps the 
 moft corrupted Book, as well as die lateft in the 
 Old Teftament, is extreamly ufeful (among o- 
 ther reafons) becaufe it will frequently fettle the 
 true Reading in Books, which are more ancient 
 and more important. 
 
 We read then, i Chron. 20, 5 
 
 Tdn nSa >HN onS n w p pnW 71 
 
 And Elhanan, the fon of Jaor, Jlew Lahmi the 
 Brother of Goliath ofGath &c. Here all is plain 
 and confident; and thefe words have evidently 
 been corrupted into the words now found in Sa- 
 muel. But, for conviction, let us place both to- 
 gether ; firft the regular Line of Chronicles, and 
 under it the corrupted Line of Samuel 
 
 HK w p pnW 71 
 
 no DOIN ny p pnW 71 
 
 The Corruption is now evident to every Eye 
 that *Yiy (or as the marginal reading has it in 
 Chronicles TV') is corrupted into ny> DK in- 
 to n'3 ; after which is was natural for fome Co- 
 pyift to infert the n at the beginning of OH^, to 
 make it a regular Local Name - y for >sn^n r"V3 
 is a Bethkhemite and then ^nK has plainly been 
 corrupted into Dtf But then j bow comes in the 
 
 K 2 long
 
 So DISSERTATION 
 
 long word D'Jntf after HJM, when there is no- 
 thing in the uncorrupted Text to introduce it ? 
 How is it, that after 'ny (which fhould be W 
 or *vy And Elhanan the Son of Jaor) comes 
 in a Participle plural Mafculine^ fignifying T*AI- 
 N o N T E 2, WEAVERS j and which confeffedly fo 
 fignifies, at the end of this very verfe ? 
 
 I think there is but one way of anfwering 
 thefc Queries, to any reafonable Man's Satisfa- 
 ction, and that is ---- by faying, that the word 
 was taken into the middle of the Verfe from the 
 end of it, in the following manner. 
 
 A Tranfcriber is to copy thefe Words 
 
 Ton r\*n TIN wnh nN w p pnW 71 
 - : D'ntf TODD inon v^i 
 
 He writes on regularly, 'till he has tranfcrib'd 
 Yiy Jaor-y and then, upon the next reference to 
 his Book, careleily cafting his Eye upon the Line 
 under ~ny> Jaor, and feeing ^"UQD Kimnor a 
 word ending with the fame Letters he had juft 
 fet down, he writes on the next word from 
 
 thence D'JHN Or^/w---Djntf W P pnW 11 
 after which, referring again to his Book, and 
 finding his Miilake, he returns to the Line a- 
 bove, and there (without flrikmg out the word 
 D'jntf Oregim, which he had inferted impro- 
 perly) writes on from Tiy* Jaor, as he mould 
 have done at firil
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 81 
 
 rrS:i rw vrh HK CDU-IK TOM p pnW 71 
 
 -- which words, by the farther carelefnefs of fome 
 Tranfcriber or Tranfcribers fince, have been cor- 
 rupted (we fee) into the words following 
 
 nSn rvn D'nK ny p pnW 71 
 
 This then feems to be rational Account of the 
 infertion of this long word where it had not the 
 leaft bufinefs. And the Conclufton from hence is 
 that, if tD;p|tf may have been, and moft proba- 
 bly was inferted from the Line immediately un- 
 der, J~OKO moft probably was inferted from 
 the Line immediately over what was then tran- 
 fcribing, thus 
 
 It may be here objected, that, in order to re- 
 commend the two preceding Suppofitions, the 
 Lines have been made to confift of fuch a parti- 
 cular length, as it is impoffible for us to know 
 they actually did confift of, at the time the Mif- 
 takes here fuppos'd were made. But it will cer- 
 tainly be allow'd, that each Line might be of the 
 length here affign'd it 5 and the infertion of each 
 word, here fuppos'd, is a ftrong argument that 
 the Lines were fo. And perhaps the Reader will 
 be fully convinc'd of this, when it is obferv'd 
 
 that,
 
 82 DISSERTATION 
 
 that, fince affigning the Number of Words here 
 given to each Line, I have found a very extra- 
 ordinary Confirmation of this Suppofition in Le- 
 wis's Hebrew Antiquities, Book 7, Chapter 13; 
 which Author, treating of the Manner in which 
 the ancient Jews tranfcrib'd the Holy Books, fays, 
 Thirdly the Length of the Line was to be of 
 THIRTY Letters. Now this is moft exactly the 
 Number of Letters affign'd to the firft Line of 
 the lafl inftance j and Thirty one is the Number 
 of Letters affign'd to the firft Line of the for- 
 mer. 
 
 Taking it for granted that enough has been 
 faid to prove, that the Name of this Mighty 
 Man mufl have been originally in Samuel Jajho- 
 beam, as we find it twice in Chronicles, and ha- 
 ving alfo endeavour'd to account for the Corrup- 
 tion ; it may be time to proceed from his Pro- 
 per Name to the Name of his Family or Country. 
 And this may be eafily afcertain'd, fince it is 
 nea/ly the fame in both places ; the one having 
 1 l^DHn and the other JlMn p. The Name 
 here in Samuel was at firft JDDnn, the article n 
 at the beginning having been corrupted into a fi; 
 for the word p in Chronicles is regularly fup- 
 ply'd in Samuel by that Article. A parallel in- 
 ftance of this remarkably occurs in the very next 
 verfe; where TnHNn in Chronicles is *nntf p 
 in Samuel. This
 
 0?i i C H R O N. XI &c. 83 
 
 This laft inftance will be one proof, among a 
 thoufand, of the infertion or omiffion of the Vau 
 in the middle of a word, at the pleafure of the 
 Tranfcriber; as above, in ^SDHD and JlDn. 
 It may alfo be remark'd, that tho' Jafhobeam is 
 here faid to be the Son of Hacbmoni, yet his 
 Father's Name was Zabdiel*, and therefore the 
 Hachmonite, or the Son of Hachmoni, muft have 
 been the Name of his Family, 'Tribe or Country 
 (for it is impofiible fometimes to diftinguifh one 
 of thefe from another) juft as the Ahohite, or the 
 Son of Ahohi, is the Family or Local Name of the 
 next Hero E/eazar the Son of Dodi. 
 
 4. In the Second Obfervation the Order of the 
 Thirty feven Mighty Men was found to be 
 Joab y the Captain General a double Series of 
 Three and a Body of Thirty j the firffc Series 
 of Three confining of < Ja/bobfam y Eleazar and 
 Shammab, and the fecond of Abijhai, Benaiah 
 and AfaheL This then prepares the way to an 
 eafy Solution of the next Difficulty; which a- 
 rifes, not only from the reading tPWH tertius 
 in Samuel and Q'jyiStPn triginta in Chronicles, 
 but from that variety of meanings put upon both 
 words by different Commentators. The truth is 
 
 Both words are corrupted; and, inftead of 
 
 fignifying either tertius or triginta^ mould be both 
 
 fnfasm
 
 84 DISSERTATION 
 
 , r&h&n tres\ fince we fee Jafoobeam was the 
 Head or Captain of hree> being the firfl of the 
 firft Series of Three. 
 
 That the Termination of the fimilar words 
 rUGfStt? ires, fc?7JP tertius y and DtP7tP triginta, 
 is frequently exchang'd by miftake, might be 
 prov'd by many inftances ; two of which ( at 
 leaft ) appear in other parts of this very Chapter 
 in Samuel. For D'tP?^ triginta and W^w ter- 
 tius in the 1 3th and 1 8th verfes will be prov'd to 
 have been originally n&^W tres in Samuel, as 
 they are now truly read in their correfponding 
 verfes in Chronicles. It may not be improper to 
 conlider here the Neceflity of thus correcting 
 *tP7tPn in the 1 8th Verfe, as it will lead us the 
 more ealily to fee the fame Neceflity in this 8th 
 Verfe. 
 
 Abijhai then, who in the 1 8th verfe is faid to 
 be tP7#n tPJH the third Head or Captain, was 
 not fo in fact; for, being the firft Captain of 
 the fecond Series, he muft have been \hzjifth 
 Captain, Joab and the three Captains of the firft 
 Series being before him. The Reading then muft 
 have been at firft in the Text, as it is ilill in the 
 Margin PIB^tPn tre^ fince that and that only is 
 true ; for we fee that Abijhai was properly Head 
 of THREE, being the firft Captain of the fecond 
 Ternary. Thus in the Eomberg Edition of the 
 
 Hebrew
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 85 
 
 Hebrew Bible (1517) we have 'mfottft in the 
 Margin ; and in the Complutenfian Edition of 
 1515 (the oldeft printed Copy exftant) rw!H#n 
 is read in the 'Text itfelf., without any various 
 Reading in the Margin. Thefe Arguments, add- 
 ed to that drawn from the fame PafTage in Chro- 
 nicles, where this very word n^D'H is read in 
 the Text univerfally, muft be allowed fully fuffi- 
 cient to prove it fhould have been alfo ,*~TtJ^C7T 
 in Samuel. And as fuch it is remarkably ren- 
 der'd in Coverdale's Englim Veriion before-men- 
 tion'd; btfai tlje irotjer of Soafc tje 
 forme of 25wi 3 frag one alfo cjjefe amonge 
 
 If then this word 'ty^n is certainly a Cor- 
 ruption from n^t^n in the 1 8th verfe, it will 
 be obvious to infer that the fame may have 
 been the cafe in this 8th Verfe. And indeed it 
 muft have been the cafe : lince Jafhobeam was 
 not more the Third Captain than Abifhai ; but as 
 Abijhai was the Fifth ^ "Jafbobeam was the Second; 
 he being the firft Captain of the. firft Series, and 
 inferior only to Joab the Captain-General. But 
 tho' Jafhobeam was not the Third Captain^ he 
 was Head of Three ; and therefore the true read- 
 ing here alfo muft have been r*wflffft tres a- 
 greeably to which the Vulgat renders this word 
 Ires, and the Complutenlian Copy of the LXX 
 
 L very
 
 86 DISSERTATION 
 
 very juftly reads here vrgarof TUV rotav ; and 
 alfo Theodotion vrfuTOf TUV r XTCS. 
 
 This Alteration being admitted, it will of 
 courfe follow, that one Miflake has alfo been 
 made in this verfe in Chronicles, which has been 
 faithfully preferv'd in every other word j and 
 that is in O'&rS^n- That this word has been 
 miftaken for ntP^Itfn is demonstrable from the 
 1 3th verfe in Samuel; and that the fame muft 
 have been the cafe here in Chronicles, is alfo 
 certain from what has been already eftablifh'd as 
 to this verfe in Samuel. But this point is farther 
 
 confirm'd by reflecting that Jafhobeam was 
 
 not truly Head or Captain of the 'Thirty, becaufe 
 the Thirty were not more under him, than un- 
 der any other General of the two Series j but 
 were kfi under him, than under yoab, who was 
 the Head or Prince over the whole Thirty feven. 
 The Clearnefs therefore of the Hiftory in this 
 point will oblige us to allow a miftake of D^7^H 
 thirty in Chronicles for nt^7t^n three; which 
 Miftake will be prov'd to have obtain'd elfewhere 
 in this very chapter, and muft be allow'd to 
 have obtain'd here alfo for the fake of Truth, 
 and to make a proper harmony with the pafTage 
 in Samuel. 
 
 It may juft be remark'd, that the Miftake of 
 an n for a D is not uncommon $ the Son and 
 
 SucceiTor
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 87 
 
 SuccefTor of Rehoboam is call'd, in i Kings 14, 
 31, DON Abiam; but in 2Chron.i2,i6, rv^tf 
 Abiah a Corruption, which is frequently re- 
 peated in the Hiftory of that King. And the 
 caufe of fo eafily miftaking thefe two Letters n 
 and CD (as well as of others, which differ chief- 
 ly in their being open or clos'd at bottom) pro- 
 bably was, that the blacknefs of the Line, which 
 was rul'd to direct the Pen, fometimes appear'd 
 like the tranfverfe bottom-ftroke of a Letter : 
 for the beft Jewifh Manufcripts were rul'd be- 
 fore writing, as appears from Lewis 's Hebrew An- 
 tiquities, Book 7, Chap. 23. 
 
 5. The next Difficulty in the corrupted Text 
 in Samuel lies in fixing the true reading of 
 
 Among the many different Verlions of thefe 
 words, the Englim is The fame was Adino the 
 Ezmfe. But that Jajhobeam the Hachmonite mould 
 be the fame with Adino the Eznite, is not only 
 highly improbable, but evidently impoffible. Be- 
 fides ; if thefe words mould be thus render'd, or 
 in any manner like it, there would be in the 
 Senfe fuch an Hiatus, as no Ellipfis can excufe 
 y&ft>obeam the Hachmonite, the fame was Adi- 
 no the Ezmfe again/I 800, whom he 
 
 flew at one time. 
 
 L 2 As
 
 88 DISSERTATION 
 
 As thefe words then cannot be Proper Names, 
 or a Proper and Local Name, they muft be a 
 corruption of common words ; and of fuch words, 
 as compleat the Senfe of this, and anfwer to the 
 Senfe of the other paffage. I only fay anfwer 
 to the Senfe , becaufe it is impomble to bring one 
 of the words to refemble its correfponding word 
 in Letters,, on account of their abfolute Diffimi- 
 litude. Nor is there any neceffity for endeavour- 
 ing it ; fince a Verbal Samenefs is not obferv'd in 
 every other part of thefe two Chapters, inftances 
 to the contrary being very numerous. 
 
 The firft of thefe three words is NJin, which 
 is the fame in both paffages. The fecond, being 
 fomewhat alike in both as to Form, tho' diffe- 
 rent mfome Letters-, and being only writ proper- 
 ly in the firft paffage, the word there muft be the 
 Standard and correct the loft. That it is tru- 
 ly writ in Chronicles is plain, becaufe it makes a 
 regular Senfe in the Original, and is uniformly 
 tranflated; and indeed is the very ivord, which 
 would have been expecled in that place, as it oc- 
 curs in feveral other places in company with the 
 fame words as here. 
 
 How unlike foever the words -my and uny 
 may appear at firft fight, it mufl be confider'd, 
 that they confift of Letters which have been fre- 
 quently miftaken for each other elfewhere, and 
 
 there-
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 89 
 
 therefore they may have been fo here. (And we 
 fhould conftantly remember that the iimilar 
 Letters were much lefs diftinguifhable formerly 
 when exprefs'd in Manufcripts, than they are at 
 prefent when printed from Types prepar'd with 
 great Exactnefs and a juft Diftindlion.) The Vau 
 
 is a thoufand times miftaken for a Tod the 
 
 Reft frequently for a Daleth and a Rejh fome- 
 times for a Nun. Inftances of the firft are need- 
 lefs. And as to the fecond, inftances of that Ex- 
 change are very frequent : hence Hadarezer 
 i Chron. 18, 3 ; and Hadadezer 2 Sam. 8, 3 
 hence in Gen. 22, 13, ^Htf for ^ntf, Aries wms, 
 as in the ancient Verfions -, not poft, iince eleva- 
 oit oculos & ecce poft &c. is not very intelligible 
 and Gen. 47, 21, inftead of Bnj*S in^ 
 the Samaritan and LXX feem to have read 
 DH13/' 1 ? in^. Thefe and other Inftances have 
 been obferv'd by the learned Houbigant in his 
 late Prolegomena &c. 
 
 To the preceding may be added the following- 
 remarkable inftance obferv'd by Cappellus. Sa- 
 muel, enumerating the Deliverers of his Bre- 
 thren, tells them, ( i Sam. 12,11) And the Lord 
 fent Jeritbbaal, and p^ SEDAN, andjeptithab, and 
 Samuel. But as Bedan had not been before-men- 
 tion'd, from this Silence of the Hiftory, in con- 
 currence with other reafons for fuppofmg a Mif- 
 
 take
 
 90 DISSERTATION 
 
 take here, it may be prefum'd that no fuch man 
 had been their Deliverer ; and that the Name of 
 fome real Deliverer has been corrupted into this 
 Name of Bedan. The LXX here authorize this 
 Conclufion, having in all the copies B^CWC ( p^t 
 from p-D; not "pi as in Cappellus, tho' it might 
 be fo in the ancient copies) and Barak was an 
 eminent Deliverer. If any Evidence could be 
 wanting, St. Paul puts this Corruption out of all 
 doubt ; for, alluding plainly to this paflage, he 
 fays (Heb. n, 32) the time would fail me to 
 tell of Gideon (i.e. Jerubbaal ) O/^BARAK, of Sam- 
 pfon, ofjephthah and of Samuel. 
 
 And that a Re/b has not only been thus mif- 
 taken for a Daletb, but alfo for a Nun, is evi- 
 dent (I think) from the cafe of Achan ( Jofh. 7, 
 1 8 &c. pv) whofe Name in the Vatican Edition 
 of the LXX is conftantly A%<*/> : and probably it 
 was at firft *oy in this chapter of Jofhua, not 
 only becaufe of the Vatican Reading, but alfo 
 becaufe it is *oy in the Text itfelf in i Chron. 
 2, 7. To which it may be added that the 
 Valley, where this Man was fton'd, is faid (Jofh. 
 7, 26) to be call'd the Valley of TOP Achor un- 
 to this day. 
 
 Thefe feveral Letters then being frequently 
 chang'd, let us fuppofe thefe Alterations here, 
 and the word liHV will be "nvW ; which is ve- 
 ry
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 91 
 
 ry near TV)V> and doubtlefs was carelefly writ 
 inftead of it, as it muft have been Tnj? original- 
 ly here, as well as in Chronicles. For that this 
 word muft have been a Verb of the fame fenfe 
 with "HIV is plain from the Subftantive that fol- 
 lows it ; which at prefent is lefs underftood (if 
 poffible) than "OHy with all its Corruption. I 
 mall only add here that this will not be con- 
 fider'd as taking improper Liberty, or afluming 
 a Licence for Suppofition, by any who have care- 
 fully attended to the much greater Corruptions that 
 frequently occur, and confequently to the greater 
 Liberties that muft be taken elfewhere : and in 
 this very chapter we have Miftakes much lefs pro- 
 bable than that juft mention'd fuch as 
 (Sam. 2 1 ) inftead of iT'tf &c. - &c. 
 
 Le Clerc obferves Quidfibi velint :VVn 
 nemo dixerit ; and adds Hie deformantur <uerba 
 in Paralipomen. feu male defcriptafuerint, feufu- 
 gientibus literis fatis commode legi non potuerinf. 
 But tho' he pronounces both thefe words inex- 
 plicable, and will have them to have been both 
 greatly miftaken ; yet we need defire this to be 
 admitted only as to thejirft word : for thefecond 
 will probably be found to require no Change at 
 all, the true reading "Utfyn being retain'd in all 
 the beft Copies. 
 
 The
 
 9 2 DISSERTATION 
 
 The word "UVyn having the Pronoun fuffix'd 
 at the end and the Article prefix d at the begin- 
 ning ( as it fometimes is prefix'd fee among 
 other inftances *p"Wn Lev. 27, 23) anfwers ex- 
 aclly in form and force to WJH Dtf in the cor- 
 rect pafTage. It will therefore be allow'd, that \$y 
 was, and confequently is a true Hebrew Noun - f 
 when it appears, that it is a Noun in the Arabic 
 Language juft in the fame Senfe with nun. 
 That this is the cafe may be prov'd from the 
 concurrent Authorities of Cajlell, Schindler^ Golius 
 and Giggeius. Cajlell gives the word jyy, as not 
 occurring in the Hebrew Bible; but after the 
 word }Vy fets down the Arabic Verb x-^j^-c 
 attraxit Ramum, the regular Noun from which 
 /**& (\W) he renders Thyrfus. Schindler alfo 
 gives us ]'>% and fays Arab, cum y punttato 
 \iy ramai)it y & inde \\y Ramus. In Golius we 
 have L~os percuffit Baculo r cel Gladio, e vicit pug- 
 nans &c. under which Verb is the Noun L.xac 
 (founded jyy) Eaculus. And with Golius, Schin- 
 dler and Caflell agrees Giggeius ; who, in his 
 Thefaurus, gives us L-xasJJ Baculus, Ha/tile; and 
 xy.>aAJ^ Ramus, Tbyrfus. To thefe feveral Au- 
 thorities may be added that of St. Jerom, who 
 in the Vulgat has render'd the word by Lignum ; 
 which, being nearly the fame in fenfe with the 
 Thyrfus, Ramus, Eaculus and Haftile of the Ara- 
 bians,
 
 On i C H R O N. XL &c. 93 
 
 bians, is a ilrong Argument that jyy was an He- 
 brew Noun fo fignifying, tho' (like many other 
 words) it may occur but once in the Bible. 
 
 If then l^yyn fignifies ( Tbyrfum fuum, Hajlile 
 fuum^ or Haflam fuam> as iJVJn does ; it will 
 follow that Wiy has certainly been corrupted 
 from "my as before obferv'd. For the verb in 
 Samuel, governing alfo the Noun Haftile or Ha- 
 Jlam, muft iignify tleuavit as well as the verb in 
 Chronicles; but there is no other verb of that 
 fignification that has any refemblance of Letters. 
 Wherefore, as the word ?<in preceding is the 
 fame in both PalTages, and the firft Letter of the 
 next word in both is the remarkable letter J7; 
 we muft infer that the remainder of the word in 
 Samuel has been corrupted from the remainder 
 of the word in Chronicles. 
 
 It may alfo be obferv'd that the word \y 
 is frequently us'd in conjunction with ryjn, as 
 in this very chapter of Samuel ver. 8 DOH \*^ 
 SuAcv 3bQet,TG$y LXX: fo 2 Sam. 2 1, 19; and iSam. 
 1 7, 7 j in which laft place it is corrupted into 
 ^n If then \y be frequently us'd for the Staff 
 of a Spear > and is join'd here and in many other 
 places with JT^n ; we may reafonably fuppofe, 
 that there was alfo fuch an Hebrew word as \^y 
 fignifying a Spear ; efpecially as we find it fo in 
 the Arabic Language. 
 
 M Or
 
 94 DISSERTATION 
 
 Or laftly (which is a Solution that may be 
 more agreeable to fome) it may eafily be con- 
 ceiv'd, that in a corrupt place (as this confefledly 
 is) the j might be inferted by Miftake (as it is 
 evidently in Prov. 1 5, 14) fo that the word would 
 be then 1VVH ; and had we found itfo, we mould 
 naturally have acquiefc'd in the reading, and faid 
 the word ^y, which was frequently us'd for 
 the Staff' of a Spear > was us'd here for the Spear 
 
 itfelf. 
 
 We have here then a Word, which may fuf- 
 ficiently perplex fuch of our modern Hebreans, 
 as call it Effrontery and Profanenefs to fuppofe 
 an Error in the prefent Hebrew Copies; and 
 who at the fame time hold the Arabic Language 
 in fovereign Contempt , or rather treat it as an Abo- 
 mination. If the word "Otfyn has been impro- 
 perly writ for "i^yrij then there is one Error In 
 the Hebrew Itfelf. If the word is now writ pro- 
 perly, where are we to refer for the Senfe of it ? 
 The Noun \yy occurs no where, as a Noun, in 
 the Hebrew Lexicons. It has been fhewn, that 
 it cannot be here a Proper Name, becaufe there 
 is another Proper Name ; and it is plain from 
 the correfponding Verfes, that it is a Noun an- 
 fwering in fenfe to D^PT a Spear. Let any inge- 
 nuous Reader then determine, whether the Ara- 
 bic Senfes of Bacillus, Ramus, Thyrfus and Haftile 
 
 do
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 95 
 
 do not excellently illuftrate this Word in this 
 place : but, if the Arabic Language be fo evi- 
 dently ferviceable in one inftance, why not in o- 
 thers ? The Unprejudiced will allow the Proba- 
 bility of it. And the Prejudiced may do well to 
 confider that, by infifting upon the Integrity 
 of the prefent Hebrew Text y they introduce the 
 Neceflity of referring to the Arabic Language; 
 and that, by excluding the Ufe of the Arabic 
 Language, they (in this inftance at leaft) feem 
 oblig'd to admit an Error in the prefent Copies of 
 the Hebrew 'Text. 
 
 I mall only add, with regard to the word "my, 
 that in the 1 8th Verfe of this fame chapter we 
 read of Abifhai vvjn JHK Vny Niim which 
 words are exacT^y the fame in iChron. n, 20. 
 Thefe two inftances then, fo extreamly pertinent, 
 added to that third correct inftance in the corre- 
 fponding place of verfe the i ith, are certainly 
 fufficient to mew the NecefTity of reading -niy 
 in 2 Sam. 23,85 inftead of a word at prefent un- 
 intelligible, begun with the fame remarkable Let- 
 ter as the regular werd, and carried on in Let- 
 ters that are very eafily miftaken for each other, 
 and are confefledly fo miftaken in other places. 
 
 6. The Difficulty next occurring is in the 
 Number flWD rttSW 800, fince the correct paf- 
 
 M 2 fage
 
 96 DISSERTATION 
 
 fage reads niND VhW 300. This we may ac- 
 count for by fuppofmg that as the Jews, in 
 tranfcribing the Bible as well as in their own 
 writings, frequently exprefs'd the Numbers \yyfm- 
 gle Letters; fo, the letter ty which is 300, being 
 the frft letter both of { iJBty and PTtfj might 
 (upon reducing that Numeral Letter back into 
 its word at length) for want of attention be writ 
 nJDtP in Samuel inftead of vnw as in Chroni- 
 cles. 
 
 That the Tranfcribers of the Bible, in the fe- 
 veral Tranflations, have fometimes exprefs'd the 
 Numbers by fingle Letters, is evident from Co- 
 verdale's Tranflation of the nth verfe of this 
 
 chapter of Chronicles fmote tjre C at one 
 
 tattle ; and from Theodotion's Verfion of the 
 8th verfe of this chapter of Samuel, where we 
 read ST^UTO? TM r XTO?. And that the Jewifh 
 Tranfcribers did frequently exprefs the Bible 
 Numbers, in the Original^ by fingle Letters is 
 well known to the Learned. 
 
 Thus in Waltoris Prolegom. de Textuum Orig. 
 
 Integr. p. 42, we read Ipfe etiam Scaligerjic 
 
 fcribit " Literis Numerallbus^ non Ferbis y anti- 
 quitus Numeri concipiebantur . And in the He- 
 brew Grammar printed with the Complutenfian 
 Bible, fo long fince as 1515, we are told He- 
 brcei per Liter as Alpbabeti per ordinem Numeros 
 
 fcribunt,
 
 On i C H R O N. XI fr. 97 
 
 fcribunt. Sunt, giti 500 G? deinceps per 5 lit eras 
 Jinales defignarent j fed h<zc ratio numeros dejignan- 
 di non ab omnibus recipitur, Jed per lit eras Alpha- 
 beti compojltas id faciunt, &/ 500 per pn i. e. 400 
 & 100. 
 
 This then being the Cafe, there feems no 
 doubt, but many of the Numbers, which now 
 appear almoft incredible in fome places and con- 
 tradictory in others (as in the place now before 
 us) are owing to Miftakes in fome of the Jimilar 
 Letters. One or two material Miftakes of this 
 kind, rationally accounted for, will fufficiently 
 confirm this point and it is a point of no 
 fmall Importance. 
 
 The firft inftance mall be the remarkable Con- 
 tradiction between 2 Kings 8, 26, and 2 Chron. 
 22, 2 j which has fo much perplex'd the Com- 
 mentators, \hatWalton (Prolegom. p. 36) puts 
 it among the quadam ATTOOA : and De Dieu fays 
 
 Malim rotunde fateri^ inexplicabilem hanc no- 
 bis effe Difficult at em. We read in 2 Kings 8, 26 
 
 Two AND TWENTY years old was Ahaziah, 
 when he began to reign ; but in 2 Chron. 22, 2 
 FORTY AND Two years old was Ahaziah, when 
 he began to reign: which two AlTertions being 
 of the fame King of Judah, and it being impoffi- 
 ble that both mould be true ; the queftion is 
 Which is falfe, and how came it to be fo ? 
 
 Now
 
 98 DISSERTATION 
 
 Now 'tis certain, that Jehoram (Ahaziah's Fa- 
 ther) was but Forty years old when he died; 
 and therefore Ahaziah, who immediately fuc- 
 ceeded him, could not at that time be Forty two, 
 iince he muft then have been born before his Fa- 
 ther. 
 
 Ahaziah then, when made King, was but 22, 
 as we find it in Kings ; and the Error in Chro- 
 nicles is evidently owing to a Miftake of one of 
 the Hebrew Numeral Letters. For 3D being 
 22, 2 which is 2 is retain'd and render'd pro- 
 perly in both places ; but 3 20 was miffoken for 
 40 or as the Mem was formerly fhaped o 
 (fee the Prolegom. to Origen's Hexapla:) and 
 this fets the matter right at once; without re- 
 curring to any of thofe ingenious Hypothefes, 
 which have been fram'd to prove that Aha- 
 ziah might be 42 and 22 years old at the fame 
 time. 
 
 It muft be obferv'd, that the true Number 22 
 is read univerfally, in all the Tranflations as well 
 as in the Original of Kings ; but the falfe Num- 
 ber 42 in Chronicles is only found in the prefent 
 Hebrew Text and the Vulgat. The Number in 
 the Syriac in Chronicles is 22 the Arabic Ver- 
 fion alfo has S._A_V*, / .>.-^!^z.j /y^Sl which is 
 the 22d Tear. And the LXX in none of the 
 Copies agree with the prefent Hebrew Number, 
 
 but
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 99 
 
 but generally read truv euon ; which being fo far 
 right, there can be but little doubt, that the 
 words Key 3vo, which at firft follow'd, have been 
 carelefly dropt by fome Tranfcriber. No6ilits, in 
 his Note on the Greek Veriion of this place, fays 
 Alii Libri addunt xty Juo, quemadmodum etiam 
 in noftrOj 4, Reg. 8. And we find, in Origen's 
 Hexapla, that one of the Greek Copies (proba- 
 bly that ancient one found in Caracalla's time) 
 read here HD by rendring the Number etwn x.cq 
 3vo : all which proofs make the Miftake In- 
 dubitable, and ftrongly recommend this Method 
 of correcting it. 
 
 Another very remarkable Example of this kind 
 occurs in the 3d chapter of the Book of Num- 
 bers. We read in ver. nth And thefe were 
 
 */ 
 
 the Sons ofLevt; Gerfton, Kohath and Merari. 
 22. The Gerjhonites were 7500 28. The Koha- 
 thites 8600. 34. The Merari tes 6200 39. All 
 the Lcvites 'were 22000. But the Sum total of 
 the preceding numbers, inftead of being really 
 22000, will be found to be 22300. 
 
 The Difference of the Sum Total in the Text 
 from the real Sum might be thought to arife 
 from exprefTmg the former by a round Number , 
 if there were not fufficient reafon to infer the 
 contrary from what follows. In Verfe 43d all 
 the firft born Males of the Ifraelites are reckon'd 
 
 22273,
 
 ioo DISSERTATION 
 
 22273, which in verfe 46th are exprefly faid to 
 be 273 more than the Levites j (and there was 
 great reafon for being exact in the calculation) 
 and confequently the true Number of the Le- 
 vites muft have been 22000, as exprefs'd in the 
 Sum "Total of the Text. For if they had been 
 22300, inflead of the Ifraelites exceeding the 
 Levites by 273, the Levites would have exceed- 
 ed the Ifraelites by 27. The Levites then being, 
 in the whole, exactly 22000, there mufh have 
 been a Miftake of 300 too much in one of the 3 
 particular Numbers that conftitute the Sum to- 
 tal of 22300 : and now let us fee, whether this 
 Miftake may not be owing to the Change of fame 
 Jimilar Numeral letter. 
 
 This addition of the 300 cannot be in the 
 MeroriteSj becaufe the hundreds there are only 
 two -, and the Fau with a Stroke over it fignify- 
 ing 6000, and the Rejfj 200, the Number will 
 be Ti' 6200. Neither can we fuppofe it to be in 
 the Kohathites, becaufe the Numeral CD for 600 
 and \y for 300 could not eafily be miftaken. The 
 Error therefore muft be in the Sum of the Ger- 
 JJjonites^ where the ^200 might very eafily be 
 miftaken for *] 500, and the ") formerly was 
 fcarce different from a ^ by having the perpen- 
 dicular Stroke much fhorter than at prefent. 
 There is then fcarce a poffibility of doubting 
 
 whether
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 101 
 
 whether thefe two Letters have been fo miftaken, 
 as the Suppofition is fo well authoriz'd zndjohes 
 the whole Difficulty j or rather reconciles the Con- 
 tradition - t by bringing the Sum Total of the 3 
 Numbers exactly to, what it is faid to be in the 
 Text, 22000. 
 
 The Hebrew Numbers having therefore been 
 certainly exprefs'd formerly by Letters, this is a 
 fufficient vindication of the preceding Solution of 
 the Difficulty as to the 800 and 300 Men. And 
 how eafy a Miftake of 500 might be in our way 
 of expreffing Numbers, will immediately appear 
 upon fetting down the very fame Numbers 800 
 and 300. But that the Number in Sarmtfiwas 
 originally 300, as well as in Chronicles, will be 
 farther evident from an Argument that falls more 
 properly under the next article. 
 
 7. The word ^n is read the fame in both 
 PafTages, and properly. For tho' it carries with 
 it a Difficulty at firft fight, as being fingular; yet 
 there are many inftances, where a Numeral, or 
 a Conjunction of Numerals, expreflive of very 
 many, take after them and agree with a Noun 
 that is fingular. One Example of this we find 
 in Gen. 5, 4 And the days of Adam, after he 
 begat Setb, 'were 800 year (not years J DND rOOtP 
 juft as we fay 800 Tear, and 800 
 
 N Pound,
 
 102 DISSERTATION 
 
 Pound-, not Tears, and Pounds. And another 
 Example may be i Sam. 9, 22 % &$ D'tpScO 
 rftfztf 30 Man. The regularity of this fingular 
 Noun being admitted, the next confideration 
 muft be the true meaning of it. 
 
 Here the Verfions are widely different ; and 
 the general Run of them make ftrange Work, 
 by rendring V?n occifus or vulneratus. For, ac- 
 cording to this rendring, Jamobeam obtain'd his 
 Preeminence by bravely lifting up his Spear a- 
 gainft 300 Men, after they were dead, or at 
 leaft, after they were wounded. Thus we have 
 the word render'd here in a MS. Englim Verlion 
 of 1408 tj)te reifeoe Ijis g)jiafte (>pere) 
 on ttire Jimimfc fooimfcio men in one tpmr. 
 
 Indeed our prefent Englim Verfion in Samuel 
 renders 7^n whom be Jlew, but fuch a Veriion 
 feems not to be defenfible ; and fo the Authors 
 of it thought by putting the word Jlain in the 
 Margin, and by tranflating it in Chronicles again/I 
 300 men Jlain. 
 
 The reafons againft rendring ^Sn whom hejlew 
 are, firft that, there being then no Noun af- 
 ter the Numeral, the Sentence would be incom- 
 pleat he lift up his Spear againft 300 
 whom he Jlew at one time. And fecondly, be- 
 caufe of the almoft incredible Nature of the A- 
 ction a Mans killing 300 Men with his own 
 
 fmgk
 
 On i C H R O N. XI & c . 103 
 
 Jingle Spear which Incredibility is remov'd by 
 confidering V?n as a Noun of the Signification 
 affign'd it in the following Obfervations. Were 
 not thefe reafons ftrongly againft it, SSn might 
 be admitted as a Verb, with its fignification of 
 occidit ; and we might fuppofe the Pronoun -|'tf 
 underftood before the Verb here, as in other pla- 
 ces. Thus Exod. 4, 135 nStrn -PS r*o rhv 
 
 mitte^ quafo, per manum (quam, vel illius quern) 
 mittes: and Exod. 15, 135 it tDV "pom ivm 
 nStO -duxijii in mifericordia tua Populum fame 
 (quern) redemijli. 
 
 But the true fenfe of die word ^n in this 
 place feems^to have been preferv'd only in the 
 Vatican Edition of the LXX in Samuel, where it 
 is render'd STPATinTAS. For however fome 
 Lexicographers may refufe the afti've fenfe of oc- 
 cidere or ixilnerare to the verb ^Sn in AW, yet 
 they all allow it in Pihel-, but thefe two Conju- 
 gations are the fame in the Preter Tenfes with- 
 
 D 
 
 out Points ; and indeed this atfive Senfe is al- 
 low'd the word here according to the common 
 Interpretation whom he SLEW. Caftell informs 
 us, that this verb in Arabic J^. fignifies defcen- 
 dit) caftrametatusfuit, graflatusfuit, protexit, &c. 
 This Idea of the Verb is farther deducible from 
 the Nouns deriv'd from it j and thus the follow- 
 ing Nouns of this verb are render'd by Giggeius, 
 
 N 2 in
 
 io 4 DISSERTATION 
 
 in his Thefaurus J^s 4 -'! and *l=s* J l Statio, Ca- 
 Jlra 5_i-=r j l Telum> Miffile and J-^^-^t 
 Vir validus Gf audax ; which latter remarkable 
 Signification is confirm'd by Caftell, and greatly 
 recommends the Vat. Verfion of SSn by ST PA- 
 TILTHS. This Verb then having the Ideas of 
 fighting, warring and wounding fo evidently an- 
 nex'd to it j and the Arabic Noun from its Verb 
 fignifying Vir validus & audax ^ the Hebrew 
 Noun from its Verb will regularly anfwer to 
 ST^wiwnyffj or Miles. This then being fometimes 
 the Senfe of this Noun, we may conclude it to 
 be the proper Tranflation of it in this place ; fo 
 that Jajhobeam lifted up his Spear againji ''Three 
 hundred fighting men (or Three hundred Soldiers) 
 at one time. 
 
 But it may be faid if Soldiers had been here 
 meant, why was not the Hebrew Noun for Sol- 
 diers here made ufe of? The Anfwer is that 
 if D'SSn be not that Hebrew Noun, there feems 
 to be no other for it in the Bible. In 2 Chron. 
 25, 13, the two words which we tranflate by 
 the term Soldiers are TTTJin ^ the fens of a Troop -, 
 and what we term fighting Men., i Kings 12, 21, 
 are Hfirte Ht^V literally thofe that do the War. 
 The Noun S^n then, coming from a Verb, 
 whofe fenfe in Hebrew is vubifravtt, occidtf, and 
 which in Arabic has the military Ideas which 
 
 are
 
 On i C H R O N. XI {&. 105 
 
 are always affix'd to sifaEwfe or a Soldier > muft 
 be properly exprefs'd by that word; efpecially, 
 as there is no other word for it in the Hebrew 
 Language. 
 
 But this is too material a Point to be pafs'd 
 over, without fome farther Obfervations ; fince 
 many of the places, where this Noun occurs, feem 
 to have been mifunderftood by every Interpreter, 
 for want of confidering it in the Senfe here con- 
 tended for. Such an Aflertion as this will re- 
 quire fome Proofs to fupport it j and probably 
 the federal Texts here fubjoin'd will be fully fatif- 
 factory. 
 
 We may previoufly remember, that the Senfe 
 given at prefent to the Noun SSn is the pa/Jive 
 Senfe of interfeftus or vulneratus -, which it is ftill 
 allow'd to have, where the Context requires it : 
 but that the following Texts are produc'd as re- 
 quiring the affive Senfe of tftterficiens or vufat- 
 rans, or rather Miles and that the including 
 this latter Senfe, where neceffary, does no more 
 exclude the former, when neceflary in other pla- 
 ces, than the Participle ^HD confodiens in Ezek. 
 29, 9 prevents V?nD from being confoflits in E- 
 zek. 32, 26. 
 
 The fir ft Inftance may be Judges 20, 31; 
 where &hhn occurs in the following manner
 
 io6 DISSERTATION 
 
 'SSn oyno rconS 
 
 which words are ren- 
 der 'd by the LXX Ko/ qplyurro TVT^&IV VA rx X&* 
 TRX^ KOU\ CLTH*^ tv roug o&t$ uyi 
 &) icractjjA. Now it feems evi- 
 dent, that neither the Senfe of cccijus nor that of 
 'vulneratM can take place here, if we confider the 
 Context The Ifraelites were afTembled to at- 
 tack the Benjamites at Gibeah the third time, 
 and the Sons of Benjamin went forth to meet the 
 People, and were drawn off from the City 
 then follow the words here cited ; and what pro- 
 priety can there be in rendring them and they 
 began to fmite of the people the wounded or Jlain ? 
 Can we fuppofe any of the Ifraelites (who now 
 advanc'd to attack the Benjamites) to be Jlain or 
 wounded, before the battle begun ? And yet we 
 feem oblig'd to fuppofe thus much, if the word 
 CD* 7?n be taken here in the Senfe ufually con- 
 tended for. Thus the Chaldee Verfion is here 
 render'd Et cceperunt ad occidendum ex populo 
 occifos 5 and thus the LXX, by rendring the ori- 
 ginal words M^strm nroittr s>c rx }\CL# TpaufteuMfr 
 The Vulgat endeavours to make" Senfe here, by 
 the infertion of three Verbs, neither of which are 
 in the Original. And our Englim Tranflators, 
 who were fenfible how improper the word Jlain 
 or wounded would be in this place, have inferted 
 pne verb, by rendring D'SSn and kill, But
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 107 
 
 But this is endeavouring to make good Senfe 
 in Englifh at the Expence of the Original Lan- 
 guage, which (every one muft fee) will not ad- 
 mit fuch a Tranflation ; and it mufl be obferv'd, 
 that the Englifh Tranflators, being fenlible alfo 
 of the Impropriety of this verfion, have render'd 
 the words in the Margin To fmite of the Peo- 
 ple wounded. But this, and every other, Impro- 
 priety will perhaps be remov'd by translating the 
 word DV?n Milites; for the Sentence will be 
 then Et MILITES c&perunt per cut ere (or 
 6? cceperunt per cut ere MILITES) ex populo, ficut 
 primo die & fecundo, injlratis quafi triginta vi- 
 res in Ifraele. And that this is the proper Verilon 
 of the word in this place feems to be farther evi- 
 dent from the 39th verfe ; where we read p'jai 
 
 w$ Dt?Sva TOW t^*o DbSn ironS Snn 
 
 Et Benjamin per cut ere ccepit MILITES, inter 
 vires IfraeliSy quafi triginta <viros. 
 
 The next Inftance may be taken from Pfalm 
 
 89, ii -jty VY-ITI am SSnD n^Di nn 
 
 71'K nntD The better to illuftrate thefe words, 
 it muft be obferv'd that in the Book of Pfalms 
 and Proverbs each Verfe confifts generally of two 
 parts cail'd Hemiflicks ; one of which is exege- 
 tical of the other, either by expreffirig the fame 
 Senfe in different words, or explaining one Af- 
 
 fertion
 
 io8 DISSERTATION 
 
 fertion by its Oppofite or Contrary. Let us now 
 fee how this Rule has been obferv'd as to this 
 Verfe j which is evidently of that kind, which 
 e^xpreffes in its two parts the fame fenfe in diffe- 
 rent words. 
 
 The LXX read Zu vra,7retvct><r<x,s> us Tpajupa,- 
 
 TIOUV, V7TtpV\$&VOV' IV TU @f)O,J>lOVl TV\$ 0UJUC(,[A,tU$ VX lt- 
 
 <nwf>7ri<rct$ TX? vxfipxs trx. And I believe all the o- 
 ther Verfions render the word SSnD here either 
 tanquam vulneratus or tanquam occifus* But pro- 
 bably neither of thefe Senfes will be thought ve- 
 ry applicable, when we reflect that 2m Ra- 
 hab here is a Name for Egypt or the Egyptians ; 
 and that the Pfalmift in this verfe alludes to the 
 Deftruftion of the Egyptians in the Red Sea. 
 For, is there Propriety .in faying that God 
 defbroy'd the Egyptians like dead men^ or like 
 wounded men ? Were not the Egyptians deftroyd ? 
 Did they not perijh ? Did not Pharaoh and all 
 his Hoft die in the Red Sea ? And can their De- 
 ftru&ion by Death be compar'd to itfelf ? Can it 
 be faid with any dignity, that Menjlain were de- 
 jftroy'd like Men Jlain ? Or laftly, as thefe Egy- 
 ptians were thus totally deftroyd, can it be faid, 
 that they were deftroy'd like wounded men ? 
 which certainly is to compare great things with 
 fmall, with a peculiar Impropriety. Our com- 
 mon Englifh Verfion is Thou haft jubdued E-
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 109 
 
 gypt, AND DESTROYED IT ; Thou haft jcattered 
 thine Enemies abroad with thy mighty Ann. But 
 the laft Tranflators, feeing the abfolute Unlaw- 
 fulnefs of tranflating V?nD and deftroyd it ; have 
 render'd the Verfe 'Thou haft broken Rahab in 
 pieces, AS ONE THAT is SLAIN ; 'Thou haft fcat- 
 tered thine Enemies with thy ftrong Arm. 
 
 Without any more previous Obfervations then, 
 let us now fee how this Verfe will be exprefs'd, 
 with the fignification of y?n at prefent contend- 
 ed for Tu, tanquam Miles, confregifti flLgy- 
 ptum ; in brachio roboris tui difperftfti Inimicos tuos. 
 'Tis impomble not to obferve, how exactly the 
 Hemifticks now anfwer to each other ; fmce eve- 
 ry Expreffion in one has its correfponding Ex^ 
 
 preffion in the other Tu tanquam Miles, in 
 
 brachio roboris tin confregifti, dijperjifti JE- 
 gyptum y Inimicos tuos. 
 
 Tu, tanquam Miles, confregifti flLgyptum ; 
 
 In brachio roboris tui, difperfifti Inimicos tuos. 
 For the more fuccefsful Recommendation of this 
 Tranflation, let us fubjoin the former \ptum - y 
 
 Tu confregifli, qua/i occifum (vulneratum) &gy- 
 
 In brachio roboris tui, difperjifti Inimicos tuos. 
 But the Tranflation here propos'd will receive 
 additional Confirmation from obferving not 
 only, that the Lord mighty in E-attle, the Lord 
 ftrong and mighty &c. are frequent Appellations 
 
 O in
 
 no DISSERTATION 
 
 in the books of Scripture ; but that, as this Part 
 of the Pfalm evidently alludes to the Deftrudion 
 of the Egyptians in the Red Sea, fo the Images 
 and Ideas in this verfe are evidently taken from 
 the fublime Ode, which was fung after that won- 
 derful Event. For we read in Exod. 15, 3 
 The Lord is a Man of War (Tu tanquam Miles) 
 6. Thy right hand, O Lord, is become glorious in 
 power ; thy right hand, O Lord, hath dajhed in 
 pieces the 'Enemy Tu, tanquam Miles, confre- 
 gifti ,/Egyptum ; in brachio roboris tui, difperfi- 
 fti Inimicos tuos. 
 
 Thus again we read, of the ftrange Woman, 
 or Harlot, in Prov. 7, 26 D'SSn tD'IH 3 
 PTJnn S3 DVWl nS'fln which words the 
 LXX have tranflated noXitf? y^ rpuir&ra, *<*)<*- 
 gA>j;ce, Ko/ Ava^/d-^roi etmv ovf wttyovdiiM. The 
 learned Reader will readily obferve, that Tpao-eura 
 can no more be the true veriion of D >V 7 7H here, 
 than DDW can be interpreted by MMfiSpupw, 
 which it never is but in this place ; and here 
 Symm. and Theod. render it i%vf>si y as the Sen- 
 tence requires it fhould be. Since the Noun, 
 which is expreffive of Multitude in the fecond 
 Hemifrick, and anfwers to D2l multos in the 
 firft, is certainly SD omnes> or plurimos^ which 
 in this Verfion of the LXX is entirely omitted. 
 
 The
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. j 1 1 
 
 The Arabic Verfion, following the LXX, 
 reads Quoniam fauciavit multos f depradata eft 
 eos ; neque recenfetur numerus illorum, quos eneca- 
 
 "jlt. The Syriac has Quia copiam occiforum 
 
 proftravitt G? fortifjimi funt omnes quos necavit. 
 The Chaldee Paraphrafe Quoniam multos in- 
 terfeElos dejecit^ & fortes funt 'omnes interfefti ejus. 
 And the Vulgat Multos enim vu/nerafos dejecit, 
 &forti[Jimi quique interfefti funt ab ea. This lafl 
 Senfe has been follow'd by our Englifli Tranila- 
 tors thus Forjhe hath cajl down many wound- 
 ed \ yea y many Jlrong men ha've been flam by her. 
 But is the Correfpondency of the two Hemi- 
 flicks, which very perfectly obtains in the Origi- 
 nal of this verfe, at all illuftrated by any of thefe 
 Verfions ? I leave the Determination to the learn- 
 ed Reader ; and fhall obferve, that the Tranila- 
 tion of this verfe by the very learned Albert 
 Schultens is Nam multos ad lanienam projeSlos 
 (profanatos) cadere fecit \ & numeroji omnes truci- 
 dati ejus. We learn from hence, that as this ce- 
 lebrated Profeffor of the Oriental Languages was 
 not pleas'd with the common Tranflations of 
 
 J 
 
 Dv 1 ?!! vulneratos or occifos, by rendring it ad la- 
 nienam projeftos ; fo neither was he pleas'd with 
 that verfion of his own (as we may eafily fup- 
 pofe he could not) and therefore we fee he has 
 render'd it by profanatos in a Parenthefis. 
 
 O 2 From
 
 ii2 DISSERTATION 
 
 From all this uncommon Fluctuation then in 
 the beft Expofitors we may be led to fufpect 
 fome general Miflake; and perhaps it will ap- 
 pear to have been in the Senfe of the word 
 D'77n. For if we here again render this word 
 Milites, we mail find every part of the Hemi- 
 fticks perfectly to correfpond ; thus multos a- 
 grees with omnes or plurimos Milites with for- 
 tes orfortiflimi dejecit with interfecit or inter- 
 fefti funt ab ea : 
 
 Multos enlm Milites cadere fecit - y 
 Etfortijpmi quique ab ea interfetti funt . 
 
 In Jeremiah, chapter the 5ift we feem to 
 have feveral inftances, where this word mould 
 be render'd as before. In verfe the 4th we read 
 D'S?n IT^I which words have been ufually 
 render'd & cadent interfetti. But, as the verb 
 753 fignifies to fall mortally^ or to be Jlain in bat- 
 tkj (Jofh. 8j 24,25: Judg. 8, io; 12,6; 20,44 
 and 46) the queftion is whether cadent (inter- 
 Jicientur) interfetti is not an improper Expref- 
 fion. Or rather, as the words immediately pre- 
 ceding are ntf 3 73 IJDHHn penitus delete omnem 
 ejits Exeratum, the Queftion may be whether 
 Nam cadent Milites be not a much more fignifi- 
 cant and proper Veriion than & cadent interfefti \ 
 when the Subftantive laft preceding was the fin- 
 gular Noun Exercitus or Militia. But
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 113 
 
 But let us take the Context with it The 
 Prophet here foretells the Fall of Babylon ; and 
 in the conclulion of the 3d verfe we read 
 
 rwntf ^D lonnn mm HK iSonn San 
 
 Ef nefarcatisjuperjteucmbm ejus,penitus delete om- 
 nem ejus Exercitum. Then follows the 4th Verfe 
 
 rvrwim onpwi DHBO pa &hhn iSfltt 
 
 Nam cadent Milites in Chaldaorum terra, & tranf- 
 fgentes gladio (cadent) in plateis ejus. That the 
 word tD'SSn fhould be here render'd Mik'tes, 
 feems farther deducible from the 3oth verfe of 
 the preceding Chapter ; which verfe, treating of 
 the very fame Deftrudtion with the verfe before 
 us, has thefe words PTmrm Pimm 
 
 ?<inn ova IDT nnn^D n SDT 
 
 JUVENES ejus in plateis ejus, & omnes VIRI BEL- 
 LI EJUS fuccidentur in illo die. Here we fee, 
 that in two Texts prophetically declaring the 
 fame circumstances of the fame Deftruction, we 
 have Juvenes in one exprefs'd by the fame word 
 for Juvenes in the other; and then the word 
 D'^Sn, which is here render'd Milites in one, 
 exprefs'd by Viri belli in the other. 
 
 But, let us proceed to the other Inftances in 
 this fame chapter. In verfe the 47th we read 
 rOini 173* rvV?n ^31 which words have been 
 generally render'd & omnes interfetti ejus cadent 
 in mtdio ejus. But what can be the meaning of 
 
 inter*
 
 ii4 DISSERTATION 
 
 inter fefti ejus or interfetti Babylonis j or is there 
 Propriety in faying mterfe&i ejus interficien- 
 tur ? The whole Verfe is Propterea ecce dies 
 venumf, C5? vifitabo Juper Sculptilia Babylonis , & 
 
 omnis 'Terra ejus confundetur ; and the next 
 
 words in this folemn Denunciation of Vengeance 
 feem only properly tranflated by & omnes Mi- 
 lites ejus cadent in medio ejus. There are fome 
 Commentators indeed, who feeing the Impro- 
 priety of interfetti, have render'd the word here 
 Saltatores-, but this Comment feems to deferve 
 no farther Notice, than to mew that the Au- 
 thors of it were not fatisfy'd with the common 
 Interpretation. 
 
 If we proceed from this 47th only to the 4pth 
 verfe, we mall find farther reafon for allowing 
 this Tranflation of D'SSn by Milites. The in- 
 termediate Verfe is Ef laudabunt fuper Babylo- 
 nem Cceli & Terra quia ab Aquilone <venient ei 
 VaftatoreS) ait Dominus. Then follows verfe 49th 
 
 Sin 1 ? pj Stf-Ky* SSn Ss:S ^an D^ 
 
 D SSn Thefe words have been variouf- 
 ly interpreted, and yet have been generally (per- 
 haps it might be faid, univerfally) mifunderftood 
 by Commentators. Our Englifh Tranflation is 
 As Babylon bath caufed the Slain of Ifrael to 
 fall; fo at Babylon Jhall fall the Slain of all the 
 Earth. 
 
 The
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 115 
 
 The Impropriety of caufmg thofe who had 
 been flain to fall, or to be Jlain^ induced our 
 Tranflators to place in the Margin Both 'Ba- 
 bylon is to f all y Qyejlain of Ifrael -, and with Ba- 
 bylon 6cc. But this Addrefs to the Slain is cer- 
 tainly the greater Impropriety j and the former 
 Englifh Verfion is confirm'd by the LXX, who 
 read ---- K/ yi Ka&vXuv trtreiv tTroiytrt TXg r pew pa,- 
 Ita? Icr^cwjA, xcq tv Ka&vXuvi TzrttrXvTzq Tpcwpadic^ ##- 
 <njf -njf j^f. The Englim and Greek Verfions feem 
 right here in the form and Difpofition of the Paf- 
 fage, but are probably wrong again in the Tranf- 
 lation of D*77f1 by Slain inftead of Soldiers , fmce 
 the true Tranflation feems to be As Babylon 
 bath caufed THE SOLDIERS of Ifrael to fall ; Jo at 
 Babylon Jhall fall THE SOLDIERS (not, of all the 
 Earth 3 but) of all that Country. 
 
 In Ezekiel 1 1 ; 6, 7, we read 
 
 ro pS ^Sn nnvi 
 
 ^Sn mn 
 
 Thefe words are deli- 
 ver'd to men, .who gave wicked Counfel in the Ci- 
 ty (of Jerufalem) probably by recommending an 
 Encreafe of their Military Force j and who, vain- 
 ly confiding in the Arm of Flefh, thought to 
 defend themfelves againft the Deitruclion de- 
 nounc'd by the Prophet : omnem lapidem movif~
 
 n6 DISSERTATION 
 
 fey u tf e f e adverfus Chaldczos confirmarent &c. Jun. 
 and Tremellius. For thus faith the Lord ver.2. 
 Thefe are the Men ptf D^nn, ot Ao^o/u^o/ \^- 
 Tcua, who contrive Vanity (fince all their Defence 
 fhall be in vain) and counfel evil Counfel in this, 
 City &c. therefore prophecy again/I them, and fay 
 ver. 5 / know the Imaginations of Tour Hearts. 
 6. Te have multiplied your SOLDIERS in this City, 
 and with SOLDIERS ye have filled the Streets there- 
 of. 7. Therefore, thus faith the Lord, THE SOL- 
 DIERS, whom ye have placed in the midft of you, 
 Jhall be Flejh, and this City the Caldron. 8. Te 
 have feared the Sword, and I will bring the Sword 
 upon Tou - This Interpretation of the word 
 O'S^n in thefe three places feems to make this 
 PafTage fpeak good Senfe itfelf, and perfectly to 
 agree with the Context -, neither of which can 
 eafily be allow'd it, while it is render'd Te 
 have multiplied SLAIN MEN in this City, and fill- 
 ed the Streets with SLAIN MEN ; therefore Tour 
 SLAIN MEN, whom Te have placed in the midjl 
 of Tou &c. 
 
 It may be worth while to confider the Verfion 
 of the LXX ETrtyB-vvciTt vmpXf vpuv tv TT\ 
 Taw]);, xcq gvgTrAjjircm TO,$ cJkf CW\YIS T^cw^nuv 
 TXTO TzaJk Aej^ A^vctj Kvptor TXs vtxpXf vpuv, 
 ^r ev pta-a CWTYIS &c. We fee here, that 
 is tranflated firft by vvyvs then by TpctvfMTMv, and 
 
 then
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 117 
 
 then again by vtitps a plain proof, that the 
 Tranflators did not well know how to reconcile 
 the word to the fenfe of the Context ; and in- 
 deed it feems impoflible, that either the word 
 NEKPOTS or TPATMATIAS fhould be applied 
 to ETA HATE with any propriety in this place: 
 whereas the propriety of STPATIIITAZ vpuv, 
 %s ETA SATE w pica vpvv is fo obvious, as to 
 need no Illuflration. 
 
 'Tis true the Vatican Edition of the LXX, in- 
 dead of erasure, has t7ra,Tcdra,Tt : but then it muft 
 
 -3 * "3 * 
 
 be obferv'd that this very common Verb CDli? 
 is never render'd by TSTATCLOSU in any other place, 
 but it is forty times render'd by w&a, as we 
 now have it in the Alexandrian Copy of this 
 place. Nor is it elfewhere render'd by any verb 
 of a fimilar fignification with 'sra.Taara ; but ge- 
 nerally by verbs lignifying like ra^a, and verbs 
 which are very applicable to the true Senfe of 
 this Paffage as rfypi and iwpt with their Com- 
 
 pounds, Ift&tJkM, l7n%<iU &C. 
 
 There is another Inftance in this Prophet, 
 which is too remarkable to be here omitted. In 
 Chap. 21,14, we read-- :nn Kill D'SSn ann 
 SllJin S?n which words are literally, upon the 
 common Acceptation, as in the interlineary Ver- 
 lion Gladius interfe&orum, tic gladius occ'ifimag- 
 
 P ~
 
 ii8 DISSERTATION 
 
 ni But that this Sword of Vengeance, which 
 was thus fharpening for the yet future Deftru- 
 ftion of Jerufalem, could not be Gladius interfe- 
 tforitm, or (which feems more unintelligible) Gla- 
 dius occift magni, is fo evident, that it has com- 
 pell'd two Interpreters to come almoft to Truth 
 here, in rendring the latter Expreffion Gladius 
 Occi/ionis magnet^ as in the Vulgat -, and Gladius 
 Interfetfionis maguce, as in the Chaldee Para- 
 phrafe. And it feems ftrange, that thefe two 
 Interpreters mould not have feen the much great- 
 er propriety (from the mafculine Termination of 
 the words, and for every other reafon) of tranf- 
 lating the words Gladius Occiforis y Interfetforis, 
 or Militis magni. The true Verfion then of thefe 
 words probably is Gladius Militum (Babylo- 
 niorum) hie gladius Militis magni (bellicofi Re- 
 gis Babylonis) for thus it is exprefly call'd in the 
 ipth Verfe S^^ *jSo H^n the Sword of the King 
 cf Babylon. 
 
 I fliall refer only to one Chapter more, the 
 firft Chapter of the fecond Book of Samuel ; and 
 to that part of it, which contains David's La- 
 mentation for the Deaths of Saul and Jonathan. 
 
 This Lamentation has ever been admir'd, as 
 a Picture of Diftrefs the moft tender and the 
 moft finking j unequally divided by Grief into 
 
 longer
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 119 
 
 longer and ihorter Breaks, as Nature could pour 
 them forth from a Mind much interrupted, and 
 fill'd with the moft lively Images of Love and 
 Greatnefs. His Reverence for Saul and his Love 
 for Jonathan have the ftrongeft Colourings ; but 
 their Greatnefs and their Bravery come full upon 
 him, and are exprefs'd with peculiar Energy. 
 Being himfelf a Warrior, it is in that Character 
 he fees their greateft Excellence; and tho' his 
 Imagination hurries from one point of recolle- 
 ction to another, yet they were fetch brave 
 Warriors! that he wonders at their Deaths-; and 
 we hear him, at firft, at laft, every where la- 
 menting How are THE MIGHTY fallen ! 
 
 Let us now fee, whether the Word, we have 
 been thus confidering, has not been improperly 
 tranflated in Three places here, as it feems to 
 have been in fo many elfewhere ; in One of thefe 
 three places I think it is indifputable ; and every 
 fmgle Improvement in fo celebrated a PafTage 
 muft be particularly valuable. 
 
 The place, where this Noun feems moft evi- 
 dently miftaken, is Verfe the 2 ad D'7?n DTD 
 
 -nntf WJ r^S jnyin* ntrp Dn:u nSna 
 
 Which words (as is allow'd by Noldius fre- 
 quently to fignify fine] may be thus render'd 
 Sine Sanguine MILITUM, fine Adipe FORTIUM, 
 Arcm Jonathan!* non retrocefferat. If this Ver- 
 
 P 2 fion
 
 i 2 o DISSERTATION 
 
 fion could want a Recommendation, let it be 
 oppos'd to the prefent Interpretations, which are 
 generally to the following purpofe A Sangui- 
 ne interfettorum^ ab Adipe Fortium, Arcus yona- 
 thanis &c. Upon the preceding Conftrudtion 
 then we fee Militum and Fortium are very ftrong- 
 ly connected ; or rather Adipe Fortium is a beau- 
 tiful Gradation upon Sanguine Militum : juft as 
 in the Paffage of Proverbs before quoted Mul- 
 tos enim MILITES dejecit, G? FORTISSIMI quique 
 ab ea interfefti funt. 
 
 But if this Noun, here plural, neceflarily fig- 
 nines Milites, it will be a very fair prefumption, 
 that it fignifies the fame in the two other places 
 of this fame Lamentation ; efpecially as the word 
 C3H3J./8fitoj which is connected with it here, 
 is alfo remarkably connected with it in both the 
 other places. Thus, in the very firft Exclama- 
 tion of David, his beloved ^fonatban is prais'd in 
 the firft Break, and lamented in the iecond ; but 
 evidently with the fame idea 
 
 Q Decus Ifraelis ! fupcr exce/Ja tua MILES ! 
 
 ^uomodo ceciderunt FORTES ! 
 Can any thing be more worthily conceiv'd, or 
 more happily exprefs'd, than this Applaufe given 
 to his dear Friend Jonathan the ORNAMENT 
 
 and
 
 On i CH RON. XI &c. 121 
 
 and the DEFENCE of his Country -, O ? PRE- 
 SIDIUM (Miles) & duke DECUS Ifraelis! But 
 how are THE MIGHTY fallen ! iince this Jo- 
 nathan and Saul alfo are flain in Battle. Who- 
 ever recollects the preceding Hiftory of David 
 will fee the trueft Nature in his thus breaking 
 forth in the Praife of Jonathan only, (and that 
 without naming him here, at firft ) and then in 
 his decently lamenting the King and the Prince 
 together. And, that the firfl Break was thus ex- 
 preflive of 'Jonathans Praife only, is evident from 
 verfe the 25th; where the fame words are re- 
 peated, and Jonathan's Name is expreily men- 
 tion'd. 
 
 But how languid and unmeaning are the feve- 
 ral Tranflations of this firfl Exclamation at pre- 
 fent ! The Englim Tranflation is The Beau- 
 ty of Ifrael is Jlain upon thy high Places : but 
 whofe high places ? And then, the Lamentation 
 couch'd in the next words (bow are the Mighty 
 fallen^ or Jlain) is entirely anticipated by the Term 
 Jlain, which is now read in the words before 
 them. It feems therefore but reafonable to infer 
 
 that this Noun V?n, which fignifies Miles 
 
 in ihejecond inftance, mould have the fame idea 
 annex'd to it in this firjl inftance ; efpecially as 
 in the firft inftance alfo it has the word Dnm 
 fortes clofely connected with it. And laftly, if 
 
 this
 
 122 DISSERTATION 
 
 this Signification be allow'd it in Phefe two inftan- 
 ces, we muft allow it in the third - y as that is 
 only a repetition of the firft, and has the very 
 fame Connection with ty>*\^$ fortes. 
 
 It may be proper to obferve, that the verb 
 31tW has been miilranfcrib'd for J1DJ : and that 
 **?H was probably at firft '73 (according to the 
 excellent Remark of Dr. Delany) as the Particle 
 1 ^H feems not to fignify quafi non any where in 
 the Bible ; and efpecially, as the Negative Par- 
 ticle is omitted in the Syriac and Arabic Ver- 
 fionSj and in the Chaldee Paraphrafe ; which it 
 could not well be, if the word was 173 in their 
 feveral Copies. And now, that the Propriety of 
 thus tranilating the Noun 77H in thefe three 
 places, and efpecially in the fecond, may the 
 more fully appear, I mall here fubjoin a clofe 
 Verfion of this inimitable Lamentation j endea- 
 vouring to preferve, as much as poffible, the 
 Spirit and Tendernefs and Sublimity of the Great 
 Original. 
 
 O DECUS Ifraelis, fuper excelfa tua MILES ! 
 Qupmodo ceciderunt FORTES ! 
 
 Nolite indicarc in Gatho, 
 
 Nolite indicare in plateis Afcalonis : 
 
 Ne lastentur Filiae Philifthaeorum, 
 
 Ne exultent Filiae Incircumciforum. 
 
 Montes
 
 On i CHR/ON. XI &c. 123 
 
 Montes Gilboani, fuper Vos 
 
 Nee Ros, nee Pluvia, neque Agri Primitiarum ; 
 
 Ibi enim abjecl:us fuit Clypeus Fortium, 
 
 Clypeus Saulis, Arma inuncti Oleo ! 
 
 Sine Sanguine MILITUM, 
 
 Sine Adipe FORTIUM, 
 
 Arcus Jonathanis non retrocefTerat ; 
 
 Gladiufque Saulis non redierat incaflum. 
 
 Saul & Jonathan 
 
 Amabiles erant & jucundi in Vitis fuis, 
 
 Et in Morte fua non feparati. 
 
 Prse Aquilis veloces ! 
 
 Prae Leonibus fortes ! 
 
 Filiae Ifraelis, deflete Saulem ; 
 
 Qui Coccino cum Deliciis vos veflivit, 
 
 Qui Veftibus veftris Ornamenta impofuit Aurea ! 
 
 Quomodo ceciderunt FORTES, in medio Belli ! 
 
 O Jonathan, fuper excelfa tua MILES ! 
 
 Verfor in anguftiis, Tui caufa, 
 
 Frater mi, Jonathan ! 
 
 Mihi fuifti admodum jucundus ! 
 
 Mini tuus Amor admodum mirabilis, 
 
 Mulierum exuperans Amorem ! 
 
 Quomodo ceciderunt Fortes, 
 
 Et perierunt Arma Belli ! 
 
 But it may be time to return to the Expla- 
 nation of our Two Chapters, after this long Di- 
 
 greflion
 
 124 DISSERTATION 
 
 greflion if a careful Enquiry into the true 
 Senfe of a word, which feems to have been 
 greatly miflaken in thefe and other Chapters, can 
 be call'd a Digreffion. 
 
 If then the Noun T7H fo frequently iignifies 
 a Soldier, it will readily be admitted that Ja- 
 jhobeam lift up his Spear againft 300 Soldiers at 
 one time. This was a very extraordinary Difplay 
 of Courage, and worthy of one of David's Chief 
 Captains. We can hardly believe, that fo brave 
 a Man would lift up his Spear againfl 300 Men, 
 that were either dead or wounded ; or, that he 
 could kill fo prodigious a Number by himfelf, 
 with his own iingle Spear : but we may reafon- 
 ably believe, that, when furrounded or render'd 
 defperate, he might fight his way thro' a Body 
 of 300 Soldiers, or defend a narrow Pafs againft 
 a Body of that number. 
 
 What the Divifions in Armies then were, is 
 not much known at prefent; but we read ( i Sam. 
 29, 2) the Lords of the Philiftines pajftd on (to Bat- 
 tle) by Hundreds and by Thoufands. And as the 
 Philiftine Army was thus divided, probably a 
 Company of theirs conlifted of an hundred Men j 
 and if Three Companies form'd a Regiment, that 
 Regiment would confequently confift of Three 
 hundred Men, which is exactly the Number en- 
 
 countred
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 125 
 
 countred by Jafliobeam. It feems extreamly pro- 
 bable, that Three hundred might be one conftant 
 Divilion in the Army of the Israelites, in honour- 
 able remembrance of Gideon's Troop of Three 
 hundred , which beat the Midianites - y which 
 Troop God himfelf thought proper to fix at 
 Three hundred, which were a fmall Body felect- 
 ed out of Thirty two Thoufand, the number of 
 Men in Gideon's whole Army. And if this were 
 a Divifion amongft the Israelites, the Philiftines 
 might copy their Example in this inflance. But 
 whether this Divifion obtain'd amongft the If- 
 raelites, or not j that it obtain'd amongft the Phi- 
 liftines feems highly probable from this Hiftory 
 of Jamobeam. And a farther Confirmation of 
 this Opinion may be drawn from the i8th verfe 
 of this chapter in Samuel and the 2oth in Chro- 
 nicles i where we read that Abijhai alfo, at 
 another time, lifted up his Spear againft the fame 
 Number Three hundred : and he was rewarded 
 for this AcT: of Heroifm by being plac'd at the 
 Head of the Second Series of Generals, as Jamo- 
 beam had been made Head of the Firft. 
 
 Wherefore, as both the Places relating to Abi- 
 jhai make the Enemy Three hundred, and as that 
 in Chronicles relating to Jafhobeam has alfo Three 
 hundred; we need not fcruple to reduce the Eight 
 hundred in the corrupted PalTage to the fame 
 
 Number ;
 
 126 DISSERTATION 
 
 Number ; which will leave room enough for ap- 
 plauding the Hero y and will render the PaJJages 
 confiftent, as they muft originally have been. 
 Not to add, that it will greatly abate the Mar- 
 vellous, which is carried very high upon the com- 
 mon acceptation of ya/bobearrfs flaying Three hun- 
 dred men by his own Jingle Spear. But then ; what 
 mail we fay to that Encreafe of the Marvellous, 
 which arifes from Abifia? s flaying alfo Three hun- 
 dred men by his Jingle Spear that thefe two Men 
 mould each flay fo prodigious a Number y and each 
 the very fame Number to a Man as the other \ 
 But this appears entirely rational, upon the pre- 
 ceding Interpretation. 
 
 Befides ; if Both could be fuppos'd to have at- 
 chiev'd fuch an Exploit, certainly Both would 
 have deferv'd an equal Reward and the fame 
 Rank in Military Honour. But we are told 
 that Abijhai attai?ied not unto the firjl Three : yet 
 how could he be lefs honourable than Jamobeam, 
 when he had done the fame marvellous Exploit 
 or rather, how could he be lefs honourable than 
 the two Captains that were inferior to < Jajlwbeam y 
 fince no action of Theirs can be conceiv'd to have 
 been greater. Whereas, if Jamobeam and Abi- 
 fhai fought their way through, or encountred, a 
 whole Regiment of the Philiftines ; that was e- 
 minently to the Honour of Both ; and deferred- 
 
 iy
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 127 
 
 ly rais'd Abifhai to the Head of the Second Series, 
 tho' he had not attained to the Honour of Jajho- 
 beam, who had alfo diilinguifh'd himfelf glo- 
 rioufly on other Occafions. 
 
 8. The laft Obfervation on thefe two very dif- 
 ficult Verfes is that ^rttf in Samuel mould be 
 rintf as in Chronicles. The former is miftaken 
 for the latter in Canticles 4, 9 ; and in Ifaiah 66, 
 17: and that it has been fo miftaken here is 
 plain, fince we have nntf in the Margin in Sa- 
 muel in every Edition, and in the Text itfelf of 
 the Complutenfian. We may therefore conclude 
 that to have been the Original word in Samuel, 
 as it now is in Chronicles ; efpecially as the Noun 
 Qyfl is of the Feminine Gender. 
 
 It may be remark'd here, that we have in this 
 Verfe of Chronicles one Example of that Jumble 
 of Verfans, which makes up fome part of the 
 prefent Edition of the LXX. The Phrafe Dyn 
 nntf had in this Verfe been render'd m? by one 
 Tranflator, and w KCU^U tvi by another (for we 
 cannot fuppofe tbe fame Perfon would tranflate 
 the Phrafe two different ways, and place one 
 verfion of it in the middle and the other at the 
 end of the Verfe ;) and the Conclufion of this 
 Verfe in the Original Verfion of the LXX ha- 
 ving been loft, it is repair'd by part of two dif- 
 
 ferent
 
 128 DISSERTATION 
 
 ferent Verfions: one of which read atmr. and 
 
 * -o y 
 
 the other ev xoipa tvi : and fo both rendrings con- 
 tinue in the fame verfe, even to this day 
 y Doptycuav twrw A HAS ITTI 
 EN KAIP& ENI. See another fuch 
 Jumble of Verfions in the LXX, 2 Sam. i, 23. 
 
 The Engliih Verfion of Chronicles is And 
 this is the Number (in Samuel Tbefe are the 
 Names) of the Mighty Men, whom David had : 
 yajhobeam the Hachmonite, Chief of Three j he lift- 
 ed up his Spear againft Three Hundred Soldiers at 
 one time. 
 
 i Chron. xi -, 12, 13, 14: 
 
 and 
 2 Sam. xxiu -, 9, 10, 1 1, 12. 
 
 Kin mtiNn frn p nrvW inh&o i2.Chro. 
 - - >nntf p m p nrvW -nnwi 9. Sam. 
 
 nn Kin 13. icnajn nenfwa chro. 
 
 Dnaj n^Strn Sam. 
 
 ISDN! eaiK^fim D0"t DSl Tn Chro. 
 
 -in Sam. 
 chro. 
 10. jSK^ ^K iSyi non^D^ Sam. 
 
 ^ Chro. 
 
 *n nw o ^ D^n^Ssn in Dp Sam. 
 
 Chro. 
 
 mn wn ^irrr W n Sam. 
 
 Chro.
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 129 
 
 ---------- - _ . ---- Chro. 
 
 IN inn** < DP oyro mnn ova Sam. 
 
 ...... -------- Chro. 
 
 nin >OK p nap nntfi n. Sam. 
 npSn - - wn ' ----- - - Chro. 
 
 msrn npSn DL^ nm n'nS D^n^SiD Sam. 
 DJ ovm omv^ n^D Chro. 
 
 Di DVm Dtyiy riN^D Sam. 
 
 rrpSnn Tin^ in^nn 14. Chro. 
 rhw\ npSnn ^nn ^vnn 12. Sam. 
 nvi^n mn wi tsr^i) n^ Chro. 
 mn trvn D^ntrSD DK Sam. 
 
 Chro. 1 2. Ko/ jM.gr' CUJTOV Etectfao tjOf 
 Sam. 9. Kotf jM-sr' ofTov EAfA^M, vpg 
 Chro. o A%,&jf xrcf 
 
 Sam. CUITX, yof 2^<r TH tv TOI$ rpicri 
 
 ChrO. $tw tents. I^' OVTQS V\V p,VTU, AcWlO IV 
 
 Sam. ffvvcvrotf pvra, kcwiS', tv ru 
 
 Chro. JAW Key 01 ct/^.o(pyAo; <nujv\'x$rt\auv 
 
 Sam. (mf currav tv TOI$ <t^o(puAo<?, muvf)^H w&t ets 
 
 Chro. 
 
 Sam. 
 
 Chro. ------------- ...... 
 
 Sam. aviw, KCL\ tTmraJriv tv TQI? afaotyvhoif, tug oo 
 Chro. - ____ _ _ _ ___ ___ __ . 
 
 Sam. txwmo-tv v\ %etp aurv, Key vFmvuXbi&ii n %/ 
 
 Chro.
 
 i 3 o DISSERTATION 
 
 Chro. 
 
 Sam. CWTOV 'Brpcg ibv i*,&%cup&v. Ko/ g7ro;>jjr 
 
 Chro. _ - - - - - 
 
 Sam. r$Muw fjayzXyv tv TY\ q^a, xv>j- xo/ o 
 
 Chro. ------- - - - ------- 
 
 Sam. gxA&jro OTTiff-a cwrx ^Kv\v tx,<hv<nteiv. 1 1 . 
 Chro. 
 
 Sam. [AST CWTOV Zetupcuxf, IJG$ AftCl, 
 
 Chro. ------------- 
 
 Sam. cw/ixS-ricrav ci 
 
 Chro. [tzpif T% ctyte 
 
 Sam. ptpis TX &yep r sfry\yv[<; $><&%%. Ko/ o Acto^ 
 
 Chro. am TrptxruTrx a'fo.cityvhuv. 14. Ko/ ^ tv 
 
 Sam. EX Trpor&Trx ct,7&o$vXtoV. 12. Ko/ 
 
 Chro. ^c<T6> r^f fAtpi&f, xcq t<ra<riv ajuiljj, 
 
 Sam. 2a- T>j? ittSbf, x<q &&iXa\Q cwryv, 
 
 Chro. 
 Sam. 
 
 Sam. 
 
 The prefent Englim Verfion. 
 
 Chro. 1 2. ^)/^ <?/&r ^/;;z was Eleazar the fon of 
 Sam. 9. ^2^ ^r him was Eleazar the fon of 
 Chro. ZW0, theAhohite, who was one of the three 
 Sam. Do/0, ^ jibohite, one o/' ^ /Ar^ 
 
 Chro.
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 131 
 
 Chro. Mighties. 13. He was with David at 
 Sam. mighty Men with David, when 
 
 Chro. Pafdammim, and there the Philiftines 
 Sam. they defied the Philiftines that 
 
 TV fc/ 
 
 Chro. were gathered together to battle, - - 
 Sam. were there gathered together to battle ', and 
 
 Chro. 
 
 Sam. the Men of Ifrael were gone away. 10. He 
 
 Chro. 
 
 Sam. arofe, and f mote the Philiftines until his hand 
 
 Chro. 
 
 Sam. was weary, and his hand clave unto the 
 
 Chro. 
 
 Sam. fword : and the Lord wrought a great Vi- 
 Chro. - 
 
 Sam. Elory that day -, and the People returned af- 
 
 Chro. - 
 
 Sam. ter him only to fpoih 1 1 . And after him 
 
 Chro. ______ 
 
 Sam. was Shammah the fon of Agee the Hararite: 
 
 Chro. 
 
 Sam. and the Philijimcs were gathered together 
 Chro. - - - - where was a parcel of ground 
 Sam. into a 'Troop, where was a piece of ground 
 Chro. full of Barley, and the People fled from be- 
 Sam. full of Lenities; and the People fed from 
 
 Chro.
 
 132 DISSERTATION 
 
 Chro. fore the Philiftines. 14. And they fet them* 
 Sam. the Philiftines. 12. But he flood 
 
 Chro. fefaes in the midft of that parcel, and de- 
 Sam. in the midft of the ground, and de- 
 
 Chro. livered it, andjlew the Philiftines j and the 
 Sam. fended it, andjlew the Philiftines : and the 
 Chro. Lordfavfd them by a great Deliverance. 
 Sam. Lord wrought a great Victory. 
 
 It feem'd neceflary to compare together thus 
 much of the Two Chapters in this place, that 
 fo the Reader might fee the more clearly what 
 a great Mutilation or Defetf there is in this part 
 of tlie Text in Chronicles. The principal Evi- 
 dence for the Proof of this mufl arife from the 
 Infpection and Comparifon of the Text in both 
 places; and from thence it will appear, almofl 
 beyond a poffibility of Doubt, that the Hiftory 
 in Chronicles breaks off abruptly in the middle 
 of the Qth verfe in Samuel ; and recommences, 
 in a manner equally abrupt, in the middle of the 
 nth Verfe. But if any one mould be difpos'd 
 to deny this Defect in Chronicles, and to main- 
 tain the Perfection of the Text as it now ftands 
 there ; he need only be defir'd to make out from 
 that alone the Hiftory of the Thirty feven Migh- 
 ty Men which feems abfolutely impoflible. 
 
 For as Sbammah, the Third General of the firft 
 
 Series
 
 O?i i C H R O N, XL &c. 133 
 
 Series is there omitted; the Hiftory will be fo 
 far from being found regular, that it is thrown 
 into total confufion. 
 
 That there is a Deficiency then of one whole 
 Verfe and a part of two others here in Chroni- 
 cles will, in general, be allow'd. And the O- 
 miffion feems manifeftly owing to the refem- 
 blance of fome words at the place where the 
 Transcriber broke off and where he went on. 
 
 * 
 
 For having writ narbs 4 ? Dt? ISDN J , he cafl 
 his Eye down on rvrh D'fl&'Ss 13Dtn (two of 
 which words are very fimilar) and copied on 
 from the laft place ; and fo caus'd the Omiffion, 
 which has been continued ever flnce. 
 
 Let us now confider each of thcfe Verfes par- 
 ticularly j comparing one Text with another, 
 where the two parts accompany each other j and 
 endeavouring to eftablim the true Reading in the 
 Places that are corrupted. 
 
 In Samuel the 9th verfe begins thus And 
 after him was Rleazar the Son of Dodi (not Dodo) 
 the Ahohite i. e. next after Jamobeam, and there- 
 fore the Second General of the fir ft Series. The 
 word "nntf in Samuel is writ more properly in 
 Chronicles in the plural form, with a Yod be- 
 fore the Pronoun ; and is fo exprefs'd here in 
 Samuel in the Complutenlian Bible. The Patro- 
 nymic of Eleazar in Samuel is Dodt, with Dodo 
 
 R in
 
 I 3 4 DISSERTATION 
 
 in the Margin. The LXX (in the Alexand. Co- 
 py) have a Verfion for both Dodo and Dodi, ^ 
 gvrga&upW OJUTX, tjo$ z#cr Zw being a various 
 reading for Att&v, as appears from the Vatican 
 Copy. In Chronicles it is Dodo; but in the LXX 
 (Vat. and Alexand. Copies) AaJa/, as from A^J;. 
 But this point is determin'd at once by i Chron. 
 27, 4 where we read that (as Jajhobeam, the 
 firft General of the firft Ternary, was the firft 
 Officer for the firft month in waiting upon the 
 King) fo, for the fecond month, was Dodi the 
 Ahohite doubtlefs Eleazar the fon of Dodi the 
 Ahohite (the fecond General of the firft Ternary) 
 as before obferv'd. Eleazar the fon 0/^is dropt in 
 this laft place, and the next word is not fin 
 but nVT (Dodi) in the Text, and A^Jta in the 
 LXX ; which is an Authority fufficient for de- 
 termining between the difagreeing Copies of the 
 Verfes now before us. 
 
 Befidesj'the reading here Eleazar the fon of 
 DODI the Ahohite will the more effectually dif- 
 tinguim this Hero from Elhanan the fon of DODO 
 the Bethlemite, who ftands recorded the Jirft of 
 the Body of Thirty Mighty Men, in Sam. 24, 
 and Chron. 26. And it feems to have been ow- 
 ing to the Refemblance of thefe two Names, that 
 Dodo at firft crept into the Text, after Eleazar j 
 fince Eleazar is alfo confounded in the Vatican 
 
 Edition
 
 On i CH RON. XI &c. 135 
 
 Edition of the LXX with Elbanan. To all which 
 may be added the Teftimony of Jofephus, who 
 calls this Eleazar t/cj- A<wJ*. Lib. 7. Cap. 12. As 
 to the Family or Local Name, it has been alrea- 
 dy obferv'd that the Son of Ahohi^ and the A- 
 hohite, lignify juft the fame thing. 
 
 The word CDH2J in Samuel mould have the 
 H prefix'd, as in Chronicles j it is plac'd fo in the 
 Margin of* the feveral Editions, and in the Text 
 of the Complutenlian. Before this, and its pre- 
 ceding word, we have in Chronicles the Pro- 
 noun tfin J which does not appear in any Ver- 
 fion, and therefore probably was not Original. 
 
 The next words are very obfcure, and on that 
 account it may be proper to compare them 
 
 DJDT Dfia *vn oy rvn Kin Chro. 
 DV Sam. 
 
 The Text here is corrupted in Samuel; the 
 Differences there evidently destroying the regular 
 Senfe in Chronicles and making it unintelligible. 
 It would be endlefs to enumerate all the Con- 
 ftructions of the word Diru : but whether it 
 has been thought a verb a&ive or pajf^e^ whe- 
 ther the Senfe that fome have labour'd to extract 
 from it be that tbe Philijlines revil'd the If- 
 raelites, or the Israelites defed the Philijlines ; or 
 that tbe Ifraelites expofd their lives to the Pbili- 
 
 R 2 fiines t
 
 136 DISSERTATION 
 
 Jlines, according to others certain it is, that 
 neither -of thefe contradictory Opinions can be 
 the true one. For (not to infill upon D'nttf^D 
 having a 3 prefix'd after fpn , which that verb 
 never admits after it) this word contain'd origi- 
 nally fome p?~oper Name of a Place. 
 
 This appears, not only from there being fuch 
 a Name here in the Copy of Chronicles, and 
 that Name of Letters veryjimilar to the word fo 
 corrupted j but alfo, becaufe in Samuel itfelf the 
 third word from this is Qjp ibi, which is direct- 
 ly relative to fome Place antecedently mention'd : 
 otherwife, there can be no fenfe in When they 
 defied the Philiftines, that were THERE gather d 
 together to battle. And farther according to 
 the prefent reading in Samuel there is no Nomi- 
 native cafe, nor Introduction to the verb IfiDJO j 
 as there regularly is in Chronicles. Some Com- 
 mentators therefore, feeing the abfolute Neceffi- 
 ty of making this word the Name of a Place, 
 have render'd it at Horpam : but there is no fuch 
 Place in the Bible as Horpam ; and if there were, 
 it would neither make this PafTage Senfe, nor 
 the two PaiTages confident. 
 
 This then, and the beginning of the next 
 word, have been corrupted j and the true read- 
 ing is preferv'd in the correfponding Copy of 
 Chronicles, which has alfo two additional words 
 
 Kin
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 137 
 
 rVH Kin before TIT CDS' two words, which 
 we may conclude to have been originally alfo in 
 Samuel ; as the Aid. and Complut. Editions of 
 the LXX read there *ro? w psra, Aou;^: and Jo- 
 fephus, fpeaking of this very place, has c?'^v pi- 
 ~& r* $<unXtu$ tv A^ao-apa (which laft word was 
 perhaps originally A$**&f*0) the Verfion of Dfitf 
 DOT) Lib. 7; Cap. 12. 
 
 As to the true Name of this Place, we have 
 it in Chronicles Pafdammim ; or, as it is fome- 
 times writ, Ephefdammim ( i Sam. 1 7, i ) and moil 
 of the Letters in the true and the corrupted word 
 are very fimilar, and therefore the more cafily 
 miffoken. 
 
 Chro. 
 
 mnn n in DJ^ Sam. 
 
 I have only omitted the Tod here in the pro- 
 per Name ; which, being frequently omitted in 
 Nouns of the Plural Number, might be fo here : 
 and have fliorten'd the oblique Stroke of the 
 Mem t as it appears from Origen's Hexapla to 
 have been formerly written, which brings it ve- 
 ry nearly to a Pe the Dalctb and Rejh are fre- 
 quently miflaken the Samech is only diftin- 
 guifh'd from a Heth by its union of the perpen- 
 dicular ftrokes at the bottom and thefirft and 
 lajl Letters are the very fame. 
 
 The
 
 138 DISSERTATION 
 
 The next word, without doubt, was the No- 
 minative Cafe to the verb IDDSO, which imme- 
 diately follows it in Samuel as well as in Chro- 
 nicles ; and therefore muft have been in both, as 
 we rtow find it in Chronicles, tDTltrSsm. The 
 Senfe then is He was with David at Pafdam- 
 mim. And when the Philiflines were there gather d 
 together to Battle , and the Men of Ifrael were gone 
 away (fled) he arofe &c. 
 
 Here is another Argument againft the prefent 
 reading in Samuel, arifmg from the words 
 when they defyd the Philiftines -, ilnce we can hard- 
 ly fuppofe, that the Ifraelites were fo hardy, as 
 firft to defy their dreadful Enemies j and, upon 
 the appearance of a Party of them, fhamefully 
 to get up into the Mountains, and^y from them 
 without a battle. Wherefore, that they did not 
 defy the Enemy they dreaded, is probable 3 but that 
 they fled from them upon their appearance, is cer- 
 tain. And yet we find in the next verfe, there 
 was then among them One Hero, who maintain'd 
 his Ground againft this Party of the Philiftines ; 
 and not only maintain'd his Ground, but oblig'd 
 the Party to retire with great Lofs. 
 
 But we muft remember that the Sacred 
 
 Hiftorian, who was fully fenfible how furpri- 
 zing this Event would appear in after times, 
 takes care to inform us in the following words, 
 
 that
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 139 
 
 that the hand of the Lord was with 'Eleazar, and 
 that the chief Author of the great Deliverance 
 wrought that day was the Lord : the Lord, 
 who had arTur'd the Ifraelites by Mofes, that One 
 of them Jbould chafe a thoufand, and two put ten 
 that/and of their Enemies to flight. 
 
 There is no word that requires particular Ob- 
 fervation in the i oth Verfe, but "Ot^ ; which in 
 the Alexand. and Vat. Copies of the LXX, is 
 render'd EX*^TC, and in the Aid. and Complut. 
 vn-ispe^Av, in which laft fenfe are the Vulgat and 
 the Englifo Veriion. If it be confider'd as the 
 Prefer Tenfe, it muft be the former ; if the Fu- 
 ture, it may be the latter. Jofephus evidently 
 takes it in the latter fenfe ; and his words are fo 
 juft a Paraphrafe upon the Paflage before us, that 
 it may not be improper to tranfcribe t&em ---- 
 MET' ctuTGV (lioycu^o^ v\v Eteu,(a>po$ vpg AaJ#tf, of Iw 
 iv Apa.eutci). XTG$ TTOTZ, TUV 
 
 TUV TO 
 
 ewruv 
 T/W po^cuav cwra TY\ &ict,, xcq rtff 
 
 X,&Tcl,ct,VTa,$ A7TO TUV OQtUV, 
 
 ov TOTS vtxku ct(>a,(dzq, TX piv EAftt^ct^ KT&VGV- 
 vrrof^ux at TX 'nrtyS'Xf x.cq CTX,V\<&GVTC$ ry$ avcu- 
 
 Mf. Lib. 7 ; Cap. 12. 
 
 The
 
 140 DISSERTATION 
 
 The firft word in the nth Verfe has the Yod 
 omitted again, as appears by the end of the pre- 
 ceding verfe, and many other places ; the Com- 
 plut. Edition reads here "nrwi. No other word 
 in the firft part of this verfe has any difficulty, 
 except rvn 1 ?, and that has been greatly the Sub- 
 ject of Difputation. The moft rational account 
 
 of it feems to be that it fignifies ad Lechi, 
 
 the place where Samfon made fo remarkable a 
 Deftruction of the Philiftines j fee Judges 1 5 ; 
 14, 17. Thus the LXX (Edit. Complut.) read 
 tTTt ZIAFONA the fame word, which is us'd 
 here by Jofephus. And Bochart, in his Hiero- 
 zoicon (Par. i ; Lib. 2 ; Cap. 15) endeavours to 
 eftablifh this as the true fenfe of the word, in 
 this place. 
 
 After this Proper Name the PafTage in Chro- 
 nicles takes place again, and goes on with its cor- 
 refponding Paflage in Samuel. The word QEf in 
 Samuel is omitted in Chronicles pombly be- 
 caufe it had been writ but the third word before, 
 as the Text now ftands in the latter. The next 
 Variation is that CWry in Samuel is Dm W 
 in Chronicles ; which two words refemble each 
 other fo much in the number and nature of their 
 conftituent Letters, tho' a little tranfpos'd, that it 
 may be prefum'd from thence they were origi- 
 nally the very fame word ; and doubtlefs were fo> 
 
 as
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 141 
 
 as the two Texts evidently treat of the fame Attion 
 in the fame Place. 
 
 In Samuel the word is D'BHy, Qctxx, lente ; 
 in Chronicles DHW, */3-^, hordeo. The laft 
 word is writ almoft univerfally without a Fan, 
 and therefore probably was fo writ here original- 
 ly ; and then there can be no doubt, but that 
 the two words D'ttHV and Dnyp, confuting of 
 the very fame number of letters, and of the very 
 fame letters, except a *| for a 1, and occurring in 
 the fame part of the Hijlory in two different Co- 
 pies, were originally the fame Word. (That 
 fuch a Tranfpoiition or Diflocation of Letters 
 has been made elfewhere, fee Ezra 2, 46, >7a&P; 
 which is igfyp in Neh. 7, 48 In Gen. 11,31, 
 we have itf VH exierunt initead of tftfVI eduxit, as 
 in the Samaritan verfion and LXX In i Sam. 
 2, 3, tfSl was read Stfl by the LXX, who have 
 render 'd it x,cy 0c? j and fo in Job 13, 15 : to 
 which may be added, from 2 Sam. 23, i, CDJO 
 or jo, for which the LXX feem to have read 
 ptf or }2tf, by rendring the word twice in this 
 verfe TRW, as ufual.) And as the piece of Ground 
 mention'd in thefe two Chapters is faid to be full 
 of Lentiles or Barley, 'tis more probable it was 
 the latter 9 on account of the greater ufe and plen- 
 ty of Barley. The Copy in Chronicles differs al- 
 fo in reading -\D} - but either of the two Num- 
 
 S bers
 
 i 4 2 DISSERTATION 
 
 bers of that verb is right ; becaufe tDP, being a 
 Noun of Multitude, may be connected with a 
 verb plural; as the Noun w$ was in Samuel 
 verfe the pth. 
 
 In the two next correfponding Verfes the LXX 
 being uniformly fmgular in the federal Verbs, , that 
 is a plain Proof, that the plural Verbs in the 
 prefent Text of Chronicles mould \&fmgular^ as 
 in Samuel. The alteration of them to Plurals 
 feems to have been owing to the preceding O- 
 miflion of one of the Mighty Men ; whofe Exi- 
 gence fome Tranfcriber was defirous to fupport, 
 by making two perfons concern'd in this Action 
 inftead of one. 
 
 But the Original Hiftory could fpeak but of 
 One in this place, and that evidently was Sham- 
 mab, the third General of the firft Ternary : of 
 whom a wonderful inftance of Heroifm is here 
 recorded that he flood alone agamfl a Party of 
 the Phili/lines, in a Field of Barley, andfav'd the 
 Barley and deflroyd many of the Philijlines. This 
 being another Relation of a furprifing Nature, 
 and fomewhat fimilar to the preceding, the Hi- 
 ftorian here alfo obferves that the hand of the 
 Lord was with Shammah, the brave Inftrument 
 of this Defeat of the Philiftines ; and that the 
 great Deliverance that day was wrought by the 
 Lord. For, it may be remarked that the Lord 
 
 not
 
 0/2 i C H R O N. XI &c. 143 
 
 not only continued to protect Ifrael, for the pre- 
 fervation of his true Religion in the world, by 
 means of that People j but to deftroy their Ene- 
 mies, as they had been for many Ages the Ene- 
 mies of the Lord, and provok'd him to Anger by 
 their abominable Idolatries. 
 
 The only remaining Difference is that ytPYI 
 in Chronicles is corrupted from t^yi in Samuel. 
 This appears, not only from its being tPJH in 
 the correct Verfe of Samuel 5 but becaufe this 
 and the three following words are exactly the 
 fame in the loth as in this i2th verfe of Sa- 
 muel : and, that the word here in Chronicles 
 was originally alfo the fame (as the three that 
 follow it are) is plain from the LXX, all the 
 Copies of which Verfion uniformly fo render it 
 - Kaf tTToiritrt Kvpw cur^ictv piyajJiv. To thefe 
 feveral reafons it may be added, that WV1 can- 
 not be the Hiphil future from w, becaufe that 
 would be JWV1, as in Pfal. 1 16, 6 ; and laftly, 
 if it had been thus exprefs'd, it could not have 
 been the original word, as it makes no fenfe 
 with the words following : for the Verfion would 
 be then And the Lord failed a great Delive- 
 rance. 
 
 The proper Englifh Verfion then of thefe fe- 
 veral Verfes is And after him was Eleazar y the 
 fon ofDodij the Ahohite, one of three Mighty Men ; 
 
 82 be
 
 I 4 4 DISSERTATION 
 
 he was with David at Pafdammim. And when 
 the Pllilftlnes were tJjere gathered together to bat- 
 tle , and the Men of Ifrael were fled - y he arofe, and 
 fmote the Philifiines, until his Hand was weary, 
 and his Hand clave unto the Sword : and the Lord 
 wrought a great Deliverance that day; and the 
 People returned after him only tofpoil. And after 
 him was Shammah, the f on of Agee, the Hararite : 
 and the Phllljllnes were gathered together at Lechl, 
 where was a piece of Ground full of Barley, and 
 the people fled from before the Phllijllnes. But he 
 placed himfelf in the mldfl of the Field (of Barley) 
 and faved it, and fmote the Phllljllnes ; and the 
 Lord wrought a great Deliverance. 
 
 iChron.xi, 15 ; 2 Sam. xxm, 13. 
 
 &*tn cwfcibn fcwp mn Sam. 
 TIT SK n^n H>v Chro. 
 
 Stf l^ "-7^ Sam. 
 
 ntrS) nm Sam. 
 
 Chro. Ka/ xctT?j3"<tv o/ rpets tx. ruv TPICLKOVTO, 
 
 Sam. K<2/ x.ct,ry(ra,v Taet$ ATTG TMV Tota,x.ovTa, 
 
 Chro. %ovrav fif T^JUJ Tnlpav irpog Potato, et$ TO 
 
 Sam. x<[>v\ouv ets K.<z<riu&a 7rpo$ Louio &$ TO 
 
 Chro.
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 145 
 
 Chro. hcucv Oobfaaft, x.eq 77 'zr&pt.fji.&QXq TUV 
 Sam. Xcuw QooXcLfj,' xoy ray pa, ruv 
 Chro. Xav an*pe|M<eA7;<{ tv TY\ xothath ruv 
 Sam. A&v tratvtGaXov tv r 
 
 That the word D'^t? Thirty in Samuel fhould 
 have been T\whw Three, as it is in the Margin 
 here and in the Text in Chronicles, will readily 
 be allow 'd ; not merely becaufe it is fo in the 
 Margin and Text, but becaufe it is impoflible 
 the Hiftorian fhould fay And Thirty out of the 
 Thirty 'went dc<wn. The Complutenfian Bible has 
 nttf^tP Three here in the Text of Samuel, and all 
 the Verfions agree in faying Three of the Thir- 
 ty : and, if any thing could be yet wanting to 
 compleat this Evidence, there is the Evidence of 
 the Text in Samuel againft itfelf. For tho' here, 
 at the beginning of the Hiftory of this Exploit, 
 perform'd by thefe men, they are call'd Thirty ; 
 yet at the end of it, in ver. ijth, they are call'd 
 n^Sl^ Three > thefe things did THREE of the 
 Mighty Men. 
 
 The next point then muft be Who thofe 
 Mighty Men were, and of 'what Rank among 
 the Thirty feven Heroes. The Words pie^Bf 
 tTfrn DHPTODft don't appear to have been right- 
 ly tranflated in any ancient Verfion. They begin 
 the Exploit of the Tbres Heroes^ who broke thro 
 
 the
 
 146 DISSERTATION 
 
 the Army of the Philiftines, and brought David 
 Water from the Well of Bethlehem. The Hebrew 
 words are literally Tres ex (or prae) triglnta Ca- 
 put -j which laft word may be render'd plurally. 
 Our Englifti Veriion renders the Words And 
 Three of the Thirty Chief-, but this cannot be the 
 fenfe, becaufe there were not Thirty Heads or 
 Chiefs there being Thirty Jeven, if we reckon 
 all the Mighty Men ; and there being but Seven, 
 if we reckon only thofe who were more honour- 
 able than the Thirty, and to whom alone the 
 name of tyjn Head is attributed - y thefe being 
 properly the HEADS of the other Thirty. 
 
 The Englifh Tranflators feem to have been 
 fenlible of an Incorrectnefs ; and therefore, in 
 the Margin, render the words And the Three 
 Captains over the Thirty. This is much nearer 
 to truth than the former, but not exaft ; becaufe 
 there were not Three, but Seven Captains over 
 the Thirty. The LXX ( Alexand. and Vat.) ren- 
 der the words Ko/ fUtn&pfc* TJM$ ATTO ruv rpta,- 
 xovra, but very improperly. For if thefe He- 
 roes were Three of the Mighty Men in general, 
 they muft have been Three of the Thirty feven, 
 and not Three of the Thirty. But this Verfion 
 is MVP] faulty in not tranflating the principal word 
 BWl, at leaft not in the Alexand. and Vat, tho' 
 it is in the Aid. and Complut. Copies j and very 
 
 falfe,
 
 On i C H R O N. XI c. 147 
 
 falfe, becaufe the Three, that went down, were 
 not of the laft Thirty, but of the firft Seven ; 
 Three of the more honourable - y and indeed the 
 very Three, that make the firft Series of Gene- 
 rals. 
 
 Jofephus, after he had recorded the Three firft 
 Generals iios-cu^, Etecta,pc$ and ssCctf, fpeak- 
 ing of this Exploit, fays 01 rpetf avfyts OTTOI. 
 Lib. 73 Cap. 12. Juft fo the Sacred Hiftorian 
 mentions yaftobeam, Eleazar and Shammah, as 
 the Generals of the firft Series, recording in what 
 manner each had particularly diftinguifh'd him- 
 felf j and then adds this heroic Action perform'd 
 by them all together : after which, he proceeds to 
 the Names of the Second Three j and none of the 
 Thirty are mention'd 'till many verfes afterwards. 
 The Vulgat renders the words Nee non & 
 ante defcenderant tres, qui erant Principes inter 
 triginta. Here n&'^H is made properly to a- 
 gree with *N"| (tria Capita, or tres Duces) and 
 this is true, becaufe the title of V?$T\ was given 
 only to the firft Seven, as before obferv'd. But 
 inter triginta mould have been prte triginta ; and 
 then the Senfe is clear ---- that the Three, 'who 
 went down, were (not Three of the Thirty Cap- 
 tains, but) Three, who were Heads, or Captains, 
 over or abwe the Thirty. That this is the true 
 
 meaning of Q'tt-'tiTlO is farther evident from the 
 
 fams
 
 148 DISSERTATION 
 
 fame Expreflion apply'd to Benaiah t the Second 
 Captain in the fecond Series ; in verfes the 22d 
 and 23d Thefe things did Eenalah and had 
 a Name among 'Three mighty men ; he 'was honour- 
 able above the Thirty n^DJ DCfWH JE, but he 
 attained not unto the firjl Three > the Three Cap- 
 tains of the firft Series. 
 
 The word itf^l in Samuel being in all the 
 ancient Verfions, and feeming to improve the 
 Propriety of the Sentence, was probably read at 
 firft alfo in Chronicles ; but the infertion or o- 
 miffion makes no material Difference in the Senfe. 
 The two next words are very different in Senfe, 
 and yet veryjimi/ar in Sound and in the Letters ; 
 and therefore we may fairly prefume that one of 
 them has been corrupted from the other ; which 
 has been fo corrupted, is then the queftion. Now 
 the phrafe *vjfp Stf feems to be corrupted, as 
 thofe words never fignify in the time of Harveft 
 throughout the Bible ; the phrafes for that being 
 TVp D2 as in Gen. 30, 145 or Ttfp nva as in 
 Jer. 50, 16; or TVp:: as in Prov.6, 8. That the 
 JLXX could not read it in this Senfe is plain from 
 their tranflating it as a proper Name j Keuruap in 
 the Alexandrian, K^o-uctv in the Vatican, and Kct- 
 <raa, in the Aldine Copy - 3 but after the time of 
 the LXX the Corruption fettled into what now 
 obtains 5 as is evident from the later Verfions. 
 
 On
 
 On i C H R O N. XI Gfc. 149 
 
 On the contrary, the Phrafe Tjfn W in Chro- 
 nicles is fupported uniformly by all the ancient 
 Verlions , rendring the Noun here the Rock 5 
 which bears a proper Relation to the word Cave' 
 jiift following it in the Text. Thefe two words 
 are frequently mention'd together, the former as 
 the mountainous or upper part, and the latter as 
 the hollow part contain'd within the former : 
 which two were frequently found in the moun- 
 tainous parts of Paleftine; and, on account of 
 the Difficulty and Danger of Accefs, were call'd 
 the Hold*) or Places of Safe Retreat from an E- 
 nemy. Thus i Sam. 24, I, David went up, and 
 dwelt rrntflD^ in the Jlrong HOLDS' of Engedi. 
 3. And Saul went tofeek David HIV J) hv up- 
 on the ROCKS ; where we have the fame Prepo- 
 fition preceding the fame Noun,, as here in Chro- 
 nicles. 4. And he came where was a CAVE rDVO > 
 which Cave was fo large, that David with fome 
 of his little Party lay conceal'd in the inward 
 Receffes of it. Jofephus calls it 
 xiy KQihWy &$ vrohv xcq pjxo? etvtuycg xcq 
 Lib. 6 ; Cap.*i 3 . 
 
 The cafe of Engedi then feems to have been 
 juft the cafe of Adullam ; where there was alfo 
 mD a Jlrong 'bold, i Sam. 22, 4; and a Cave 
 n*)VD, i Sam. 22, i ; both which words are al- 
 fo mention'd here in Sam. 14, and Chron. 16 : 
 
 T we
 
 i 5 o DISSERTATION 
 
 we may therefore fafely conclude, that *v*n (or 
 rather Tl^n) was nere a ^ the Name for the 
 Rock of AduUam, and that it originally was fo 
 in Samuel as it is ftill in Chronicles. So that 
 Tlan was firft corrupted into *nyp (or, as Hou- 
 bigant tells us the p was formerly writ |5, T)jfp) 
 which was the Form of it, when the LXX ren- 
 der'd it Kcuraap ; and thence it was corrupted in- 
 to TVpj as it now ftands. 
 
 The only ' remaining word to be confider'd 
 here is rvm> which in Chronicles is nJltDI j and 
 we may infer, that the Corruption is here alfo 
 in Samuel. For it does not appear that rw 
 ought for 'certain to be render 'd a Troop any 
 where in the Bible j and it is never once ren- 
 der'd raypt by the LXX, but in this place : 
 which therefore, we may fuppofe to have been 
 corrupted from r"Un., the regular word for a 
 Troop or Hofty and frequently occurring in Scrip- 
 ture : and indeed being the very word us'd in 
 thefe fame chapters but three verfes afterwards. 
 Jt may be added, that the Vulgat feems to have 
 read nJHD in this very place of Samuel, by ren- 
 dring the word there Cajlra y which n'H never 
 fignifies. As to Rephaim, that was the Name of 
 the Valley lying between Jerufalem and Bethle- 
 hem; the diftance of which two places, as Maun- 
 drell tells us, is PVM hours Travel, p. 87, Edit. 4. 
 
 The
 
 On i CH RON. XI &c. 151 
 
 The Engjifh Verfion is ---- And there 'went 
 
 o 
 
 down 'Three Captains, who were over the Thirty, 
 and came to* the Rock to David, into the Cave of 
 Adullam ; and the Hojl of the *PhiliJlines was en- 
 camped in the Valley of Rephaim. 
 
 iChron. xi, 16; 2 Sam.xxm, 14. 
 
 ? TITI Chro. 
 TK mm Sam. . 
 
 nni Chro. 
 
 no Sam. 
 
 Chro. Ko/ Actf;^ rm ev T>J nri(H6Xfl, Kcy TO 
 Sam. Ka/ Aof;<^ TOTE gv r>j -sre^o^, xo/ ro 
 Chro. Tjyv t^\o(puA&>j' TOTS v r>j 
 
 The NounOVD in Samuel is chang'd in Chro- 
 nicles into n^. The Word ni'J is Prtefeflus 
 or Pra/es, and is render'd PrtefecJus by Calafw 
 in this place. But the Context fpeaks not of a 
 Prefect, but an advanc'd Guard or Military Sta- 
 tion ; the regular word for which is y$& as in 
 Samuel j and which in other places generally 
 precedes D'ntP^fi, as it does in this place, i Sam. 
 13,23: 145 1,4, 6 &c. 
 
 In Samuel the Prepofition 21 is dropt at the 
 beginning of the laft word ; but is exprefs'd in 
 
 T 2 all
 
 i 5 2 DISSERTATION 
 
 all the Verfions there, as in Chronicles. This 
 Prepofition is wanting at the "beginning of words 
 in many other places; thus in 2 "Sam. 21, 9, 
 D^nn ihould be D^nrO in principio ; and thus 
 in 2 Kings 14, 14, we have this Letter wanting 
 at the beginning of the very fame word as in 
 this Verfe fV3 in domo^ inftead of JT1H, as it 
 is regularly prefixed, when this pafTage is repeat- 
 ed in 2 Chron. 25, 24. 
 
 The Englifh Verlion is ---- And David was 
 then in an Hold, and the advanced Guard of the 
 Philiftines 'was then at Bethlehem. 
 
 
 
 iChron.xi, ij -, 2 Sam. xxin, 15. 
 
 YDO D'B jpt? >D *1DK"1 TH 1NJV1 Chro. 
 
 wnn Sam. 
 
 DnS ni Chro. 
 
 DrlS n*a Sam. 
 
 Chro. Ko/ 67r.e3'o / tt)jir &GUJIO KOJ enrv rig txvn&t ^ 
 Sam. Kay iTn&vpqfft, kewio xcq etTri' rig <sroTii pi 
 
 ChrO. VO&p tX, TU XoLK'AX B>?6Ag|U. T gy TV\ TTVty J 
 
 Sam. f ap IK rx \ct,x.}< TX tv BjjOAgg^. ra v T^ TTI/AJJ 5 
 
 Chro. ------------------- 
 
 Sam. ro A <rv<ry[Ace, ruv A^.O(!)V^V TOTS, tv 
 
 In this Verfe (which feems to contain, not 
 David's bare Longing for the Water of Bethle- 
 
 hem,
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. ' 153 
 
 hem, but his paffionate Wifh to fee his Native 
 Bethlehem freed from the Troops of the Phili- 
 ftines ) there is no Difficulty, -nor any Variation 
 in the words except, that the n is omitted at 
 the end of the firft word in Chronicles j and the 
 word for Well is writ fometimes with a Van\ and 
 fometimes with an Aleph having an Ho/em im- 
 derftood; as in the two next verfes, and again 
 in verfe the 2oth of Samuel -and 22d of Chro- 
 nicles. The LXX in Samuel have here a Claufe, 
 which is not in the Original, 'but is very impro- 
 perly repeated, from the preceding Verfe. 
 
 The Englim Verfion is And David longed 
 and j 'aid \ Who will give me to drink of the Water 
 of the Well of Bethlehem, which is by the Gate? 
 
 iChron. xi, 18; 2 Sam. xxiu, 16. 
 
 
 
 runm n^S^n wpm chro. 
 
 ronon onn^n r\wh& wp:n Sam. 
 onS rv2 "nno D^D in^^n Chro.- 
 onS no n^nD DO inK^n Sam. 
 
 in SN* iNn*i INOT Sam. 
 DHN iwn omru^S Chror 
 on^ ion omn^ Sam. 
 
 <hipfia,v et rpetf 
 Sam. Ko/ JltppHpv ot Tp? 
 
 Chro.
 
 154 DISSERTATION 
 
 
 
 Chro. ruv afaofyvhuv x,cq vfytvffuvlo v&p gx 
 Sam. rtav afaotyvhcav, Key v0$ivouv\o v&ao gx T# Actx- 
 Chro. jus r% tv Rf^A6jtt, o$ yv tv TYI izrvty, xo/ 
 Sam. y,x r* vt Bjj&Agg^. rx tv rj -zryAjj. Ko/ 
 
 Sam. 
 
 Chro. OUMO T% Tnetv CWTO, Key tatretnv 
 Sam. 
 
 Inftead of DH^JH nty^ 75&r^ o/*/& Mighty 
 Men, it is in Chronicles n^iyn *K? Ti&r^,- juft 
 the fame in Senfe; the latter feerning more re- 
 lative to a prior mention of them. But as the 
 Phrafe here in Samuel occurs again, with regard 
 to the fame Men, in Sam. 17 and Chron. 19; 
 from its being, in both thefe latter places, uni- 
 formly the fame .with' this, we may infer that 
 it was alfo the fame at firft in the correfponding 
 verfe of Chronicles. The word *]D>1 in Samuel 
 js in Chronicles ^DiT; (the LXX in both the 
 fame earrc-mv) but tho' the latter Hebrew word 
 is never us'd elfewhere, and the former is the 
 common worc^; we may fafely admit the latter 
 as the trueft word, fince it contains the three *o- 
 riginal and .radical Letters of the Verb : and it 
 were greatly to be wim'd, that the Verbs in eve- 
 ry other place had alfo thofe radical Letters re- 
 ftor'd, which have been omitted by the Mafo- 
 rets, and fupply'd by their Punctuations, The
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 155 
 
 The Action of pouring cut Water before the 
 Lord was us'd with great Solemnity, as we read 
 in i Sam. 7, 5. And here David feems (in con- 
 fequence of that facred Cuftom) to have pour'd 
 out the Water, which was thus unexpectedly 
 brought him j either by way of Prayer that 
 God would forgive his having thus (undefigned- 
 ly) hazarded the Lives of Three of his braveft 
 Warriors j or elfe (according to Jofephus, Lib. 
 7 j Cap. 12 j) as an Aft of T^hankJ giving for their 
 fafe Return from fo very dangerous an Enterprize. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is And the three Migh- 
 'ty Men brake through the 'Hoji of the Pbiliftines, 
 and drew Water out of the Well of Bethlehem that 
 was by the Gate, and took and brought it to Da-* 
 vid y but David would not drink it, and he poured 
 it out unto the Lord. 
 
 iChron. xi, 19; 2 Sam. xxiu, 17. 
 
 r>Nt 'nw6 nSxD h nWn noxn Chro. 
 n^r n^vo rnrr h rhhr\ nD^n Sam. 
 
 n Chro. 
 
 H Sam. 
 
 ornn^S rin^ ><Si DIK^H orw:a Chro. 
 
 Sam. 
 
 n nvhw wv rhx Chro. 
 Sam. 
 
 Chro.
 
 156 DISSERTATION 
 
 Chro. Ko/ emir \te&)$ pen o Qio$ r% Troiipit] TO y 
 
 Sam. Ko/ 7rer IAeo>$- poi, 
 
 Chro. TXTO' cupa, avfytov TXTUV 
 
 Sam. TUTU, cupa, TUV tufym T&V vt 
 
 Chro. tzupam tv ysv% > cu$ curruv > on ev '^v^cnf ay- 
 
 Sam. TCU$ y/vx > at$ CUJTMV Trtopeq. ---.___. 
 
 Chro. TUV yvtyxciv OUJTO' Ko/ xx, gCouA^ro trttv ewro. 
 Sam. -------- Ko/ ^x jj&eAjjirg -sr^v 
 
 Chro. To^rct V7roiv\ra,v 01 r^ets 3vva,T9t. 
 Sam. TauTct, t7TQiv\<ra,v 01 TC&$ av 
 
 Thefe two Verfes vary confiderably ; yet in 
 fuch a manner, that we can eaiily fee they were 
 originally the fame. The prefent reading in 
 Chronicles, in the middle of the yerfe where the 
 Difference is greater!, is exactly regular ; . and 
 compleatly expreflive of the Wonder and Sur- 
 prize of David on fuch an occafion : but the 
 prefent reading in Samuel is evidently broken, 
 and wants all that fpirited Emphafis, which gives 
 fo much Beauty to the other. That it is fo bro- 
 ken and defeftive is clear from the lofs of the 
 verb nntfiy (bibam) which is found in the an- 
 cient Verlions, and therefore exifled formerly in 
 the Original. And as the Text of Samuel is 
 plainly deficient in that verb, fo is it in many more 
 ivords y which are regular in the correfponding 
 
 Paffage. 
 
 The
 
 On i CHRON. XI GV. 157 
 
 The participle DOTTm feems foifted in by 
 fome Tranfcriber, to make the Paffage Senfe, as 
 it now ftands j but, even with that word, it is 
 apparently incompleat, wanting ftill the neceffa- 
 ry word nn^tf. Or, at leaft, if we could fup- 
 
 pofe the Senfe to have been Is not this the 
 
 Blood &c. then there mufl have been originally 
 the Pronoun Kin, or fomething elfe, to perfedl 
 the Sentence. As to the Variation between the 
 words f|EWD miT in Samuel and mtryo ifbtiQ 
 in Chronicles 5 the laft word of each may be 
 right : for the Pronoun is found added to an In- 
 finitive in the prefent manner, i Kings 21,3; 
 tho' fuch Infinitive generally is without it, the 
 Pronoun immediately preceding the Infinitive be- 
 ing fufficiently expreffive of the Perfon. Thus 
 in Gen. 44, 17 ; we have the very fame words 
 
 as here nNt n WE b rh'hn. 
 
 It does not appear, that D'rfttf is ever us'd in 
 this folemn form of Appeal to the Deity, the 
 word being conftantly mrV ; as in i Sam. 24, 6 5 
 26, 1 1 : and i Kings 21,3. But then the word 
 nirV fhould have the Mem prefix'd, as it is be- 
 fore TPK i and as we find it in the feveral in- 
 ftances juft referr'd to. This Prepofition is im- 
 properly omitted alfo in fome other places; as 
 Jofhua 10, 13; and in this very chapter of Sa- 
 muel, ver. 24 and 32. 
 
 U How
 
 158 DISSERTATION 
 
 How the facred Name of rniT Jehovah came 
 to be exchang'd into D'rf7K God in this place, 
 may probably be owing to the Super ftitious Ve- 
 neration the later Jews paid, and do ftill pay, to 
 the Name Jehovah (the Nomen ineffabile) which 
 therefore they pronoun'd Adonai or Elohim. A 
 Jew then, who was dictating to a Tranfcriber, 
 reading Elohim in this place inftead of Jehovah, 
 and not giving notice of fuch Variation, the for- 
 mer Word was fet down inftead of the latter : 
 and probably the fame Miftake has been made 
 in many other Places. 
 
 The original Caufe of this Superftition (the 
 not pronouncing the Name Jehovah) probably 
 was that Jehovah was the Name of the God 
 of the Jews., in contradiftinction to all the Dei- 
 ties, or falfe Gods of other Nations ; as being the 
 Name of the neceffarily-exijlent Being. And the 
 Jews, perhaps, had learnt at Babylon, amongft 
 other Heathenim Superftitions , to conceal the 
 true Name of the God of their Country, to pre- 
 vent its Deftruction. For the Heathens had ve- 
 ry early a fuperftitious Notion, that a Country 
 or City could not be taken, till the tutelar God 
 or prefiding Genius was invited out of it, by in- 
 voking him in his Real Name. The Jews, find- 
 ing this a facred Cuftom obferv'd by other Na- 
 tions, abfurdly adopted the fame precaution ; and 
 
 refolv'd,
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 159 
 
 refolv'd, that the true Name of their God fhould 
 alfo be a Secret, by declaring it unlawful to pro- 
 nounce it. 
 
 That fuch a Cuftom did obtain in the World 
 very early, is evident from thofe celebrated Lines 
 in Virgil ; ^Eneid. 2, 351 6cc. 
 
 Exceffere omnes^ Adytis Arifque reHtfis y 
 'JD/V, quibus Imperium hoc fteterat 
 On which words Servius refnarks Romam ce- 
 latum effe vohterunt, in cujus Dei tuteld tirbs Ro- 
 ma fit j Gf jure Pontificum cautum eft, ne fuis No- 
 minibus Dii Romam appellarentur, ne ex augur art 
 poffent : G? in Capitolio fuit Clypeus confecratus 
 Genio Urbis Romte, five Mas Jit Jive Fcemina. Ma- 
 crobius gives a whole Chapter upon the words 
 of the Poet juft cited, and fays De vetujlijji- 
 mo Romanorum more^ & de occukij/imis facris vox 
 ijla prolata eft : conftat enim omnes urbes in alicu- 
 jus Dei effe tuteld, moremque Rotnajiorumfuiffe^ ut 
 cum obfiderent urbem boftium, certo carmine evoca- 
 rent tut el ares Deos : pr opt ere a ipft Romani & DEUM 
 in cujus tuteld urbs Roma eft, ut (&) ipjius URBIS 
 Latinutn Nomen ignotum effe voluerunt ; caventi- 
 bus Romani s, ne quod f ape adverfus urbes hojlium 
 feciffe fe noverant, idem ip/i quoque hoftili Evoca- 
 tione pater entur. Lib. 3 ; Cap. 9. This then be- 
 ing the Cuftom of the Romans at other Sieges, 
 and no fuch Evocation having been pradtis'd at 
 
 U 2 the
 
 160 DISSERTATION 
 
 the Siege of Jerufalem j 'tis probable, diat their 
 Omiffion of that Cuftom at a Siege fo remark- 
 able was occafion'd by their Ignorance of the 
 true Name of the God of Jerufalem. 
 
 This Verfe concludes with Thefe things did 
 thefe three Mighty Men ; i. e. thus much for the 
 wonderful Exploits of the three Generals of the 
 firft Series : and truly wonderful their Exploits 
 are, whether we confider the Actions of each, 
 as they are celebrated at firft distinctly j or this 
 laft daring Exploit, which (without the com- 
 mand of David, through their own unparallel'd 
 Boldnefs, under favour of the Night, or by 
 fome Stratagem) was perform'd by them all to- 
 gether. 
 
 And here, at the Conclulion of the Honours 
 of thefe Three Heroes, it may be proper to men- 
 tion a Miftake of the Learned Dr. Lightfoot up- 
 on this Subject ; who has made the Number of 
 the Mighty Men to be but 'Thirty Six, when the 
 Text exprefly tells us they were Thirty SEVEN 
 in all. He has alfo plac'd the Heroes of the two 
 Ternaries in the following remarkably-falfe Or- 
 der i ft Joab ad Adino of Ezni, call'd Ja- 
 mobeam by Oirice 3d Eleazar : and in the 
 Second Rank ift Abifiai ad Shammah 
 
 3d Benaiah. 
 
 In
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 161 
 
 In direct Contradiction then to the regularity 
 and truth of the Hiftory, the Dr. places Sham- 
 mah as the Second General of the Second Series, 
 who was (as we have juft feen) the Third Ge- 
 neral of the Firft Series : and Jajhobeam (whom 
 , he calls by the ftrange Name of Adino the Ez- 
 nite) he makes the Second General inftead of the 
 Firft, in the Firft Series of Three. For, as he 
 allows Abijhai to rank as Firft General of the Se- 
 cond Series, from his being call'd Head or Chief 
 of three ; fo muft Jaflnbcam rank as Firft Gene- 
 ral of the Firft Series, for the very fame reafon. 
 
 The truth is having unfortunately plac'd 
 
 yoab as Head of the fir ft Three (when he was 
 not one of either Series of Three, but Superior 
 to Both as being Captain General) he found him- 
 felf oblig'd to degrade Jajhobeam to the Rank of 
 the Second General of the Firft Series ; and then, 
 as Eleazar compleated the Firft Three, to de- 
 grade Shammah much more, by ranking him Se- 
 cond of the Second Series, inftead of Third in 
 the Firft; and by placing him after Abijhai, 
 whom he undeniably precedes in the Text and 
 in all the Verlions. For we have already feen 
 the honours of Sbammab, and proceed now to 
 thofe of Abijhai, according to the regular Order 
 of the Hiftory. 
 
 The
 
 162 DISSERTATION 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is ---- And he faid, the 
 Lord forbid^ that I jhould do this thing ! Shall 1 
 drink the Blood of thefe Men, with their Lives ? 
 (fhall I drink this Water, which may be conii- 
 der'd as the Blood of thefe Men, who have 
 brought it at the hazard of their Lives r) for, at 
 the hazard of their Lives, they have brought it ! 
 And he would not drink it. T^hefe things did 
 thefe three Mighty Men. 
 
 iChron. xi, 20; 2 Sam. xxin, 18. 
 
 natv TIN tyni Chro. 
 
 p :iKV TIN ^3K1 Sam. 
 
 Kirn n^iS^rr v*r\ Chro. 
 n "niv Kim ns^fcfn ^'^ Sam. 
 SSn HWD t^ Chro. 
 SSn niKD ^Vp Sam. 
 
 Chro. Kay A&araf o c6 
 
 Sam. Ko/ ACiO-o/, 
 
 Chro. rfiff >;y apxuv rav 
 
 Sam. re? */>%4Ji/ w T 
 
 Chro. TV pc[t(pcu.&y cwr'd ITTJ ^txofttfs TfHtup&'Mf iv 
 
 Sam. TO oftv cwrx iTn T/x9<rtx$ Tp 
 
 Chro. xeupu ew, rof yv evofjufjGS u rcif 
 
 Sam. Kf fio/rw cvo^ct gv TO/? 
 
 The
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 163 
 
 The firft Variation here is in the Proper Name 
 of the Hero, it having a Tod lefs in Chronicles 
 (and every where in Chronicles, as well as here) 
 than in Samuel, where it is uniformly writ with 
 two Tods. That ntnStrn in Chronicles has been 
 corrupted into K^B?n in Samuel, has been al- 
 ready prov'd in the ad and 4th Obfervations on 
 the 8th Verfe of Samuel. Both the Hebrew Co- 
 pies, and all the Verfions, agree here in fixing 
 the Numeral to 300 excepting, that the Alex. 
 reads here I^UMTJC*, which is of no Authority 
 againft the Agreement of the Hebrew with itfelf 
 and with all the other Verfions. 
 
 And K^i in Chronicles is evidently a Corrup- 
 tion of I 1 ?! in Samuel ; a word exactly of the 
 fame Sound, and therefore eafily miftaken by the 
 Ear, tho' not eafy to be miftaken by the Eye of 
 a Tranfcriber. 
 
 Thus the words V? and N 1 ? have been mifta- 
 ken in the famous Anfwer of Elifha to Hazael, 
 concerning the Recovery of Benhadad, King of 
 Syria ; 2 Kings 8, 10 Go, fay unto Mm, Thou 
 mayeji certainly recover-, howbeit the Lord hath 
 Jhewed me, that he flail furely die. Now, tho' 
 this Anfwer may be defenfible, as Benhadad's 
 Sicknefs was not mortal, and his Death was 
 from Violence; yet the prefent Reading in the 
 Text of the Hebrew Bibles (tfS non) teems pre- 
 ferable
 
 1 64 DISSERTATION 
 
 ferable to the Marginal Reading in this place; 
 and the Anfwer will be then ---- Go fay, Thou 
 Jhalt not recover ; for the Lord hath fteived me> 
 that he flail furely die. The Miftake of thefe 
 two words then (tf7 and y?) makes a very ma- 
 terial Difference in the Senfe of a PafTage ; turn- 
 ing it, indeed, to a Senfe quite oppofite to what 
 it mould be : and as this Miflake has been fome- 
 times made, thefe two words mould be every 
 where very carefully attended to and examin'd. 
 
 The particular Nature of the Exploit here ce- 
 lebrated has been explain'd in the 7th Obferva- 
 tion on the 8th verfe in Samuel ; to which there- 
 fore it may be proper to refer, to avoid unnecef- 
 fary Repetition. 
 
 The Englifh Veriion is ---- And Abifiai, the 
 Brother of Joab, the fon of Zeruiah y he was chief 
 among Three ; for he lift up his Spear againjl 300 
 Soldiers, and had (therefore) a Name among Three. 
 
 iChron.xi, 21 ; 2 Sam.xxin, 19. 
 
 DnS *m "rnDJ DWI nt^n p Chro. 
 m nnDi on rn^S^n p Sam. 
 
 N*S H^S^n "TV1 Chro. 
 
 xh iwhvn nyi Sam. 
 
 Chro. ATTO TUV Tg/av VTTip T%$ Jyo tvfrofys, x.cq 
 Sam. Ex, TUV Tg/wv txetvav tv&fyf) xcq 
 
 Chro.
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 165 
 
 Chro. cwTOf ei$ ctexpvTct,, xcq tag ruv rpiav XX. 
 Sam. cw\ois tis ctwcvTa,, x.cq tea? ruv rpixv XX, 
 
 
 The only various Reading here is that on 
 in Samuel is in Chronicles O'JBO j which Varia- 
 tion does not affect the Senfe, and therefore both 
 words may have been original. For, as Abijhai 
 has been prov'd to be the firft General of the fe- 
 cond Ternary, the Senfe is the fame, whether 
 we fay Of the three was he not mojl honourable^ 
 or Of the three he was more honourable than two. 
 But, as the ancient Verfions do not acknowledge 
 an Interrogation in the firft inftance, and as the 
 firft inftance is evidently corrupt in the LXX by 
 reading txetvuv (which is extreamly improper, as 
 bis Inferiors had not been yet mentioned) it feems 
 much more eligible to prefer the laft reading, as 
 in Chronicles j which is adapted with great pro- 
 priety to the Circumftances of the Hiftory. To 
 which it muft be added, that one of the Greek 
 Verfions in Origen's Hexapla feems to have read 
 D'SKO in Samuel; by rendring the words there 
 
 --- VTTtp TXf JtlO gpj^Cf. 
 
 That the Verfion of this word 0^3 is truly 
 vTTtp mf Jys, as we have it uniformly in all the E- 
 ditiom of the LXX, may be farther inferr'd from 
 the Authority of Noidius-, who appeals to this 
 word, among federal others, for this ufe of the 
 
 X Prepo-
 
 166 DISSERTATION 
 
 Prepofitioh prefix'd to it: another inftance of 
 which will occur foon in the mention made of 
 Afahel, Sam. 24 j where, as in this prefent in- 
 ftance, Junius and Tremellius render this Prepo- 
 fition byfupra. And what entirely confirms this 
 uniform Authority of all the Editions of the LXX, 
 together with the Authorities of Noldius, and of 
 Jun. and Trem. is the Impoffibility there feems 
 to be of explaining the word properly in any o- 
 ther manner. 
 
 In this Verfe then we have a full Proof of the 
 Arrangement here given to the Seven Heroes, 
 who were more honourable than the Thirty. 
 Abijhai is here declar'd to be inferior to Three, 
 who muft be the Generals of the firft Series 
 Jajhobeam, Eleazar and Shammah who have 
 been already mention'd before him, in their or- 
 der ; and he is here alfo faid to belong to Three, 
 over two of whom he himfelf was Superior. And 
 accordingly he is firft mention'd, as being the 
 Head of the fecond Series, and after him the Hi- 
 ftory proceeds to the two Generals his Inferiors 
 who were Benaiah and Afahel', the former of 
 whom is firft mention'd in the very next verfe. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is Of the Three he was 
 more honourable than two, therefore he was their 
 Captain ; and yet he attained not unto the Jirft 
 Three. 
 
 i Chron.
 
 On i C H R O N. XI & c . 167 
 
 i Chron. xi, 22 5 2 Sam. xxiu, 20. 
 
 :n S<n WX p jnnrr p nn Chro. 
 :n n trK p jnniT p in^m Sam. 
 nN ron s>on StfsnpD Chro. 
 ntf ron Nsin SNV^P \s Sam. 
 nxn n rr^m "n Nini ^NIB Chro. 
 nnxn n^ ram *n Kim I^ID Sam. 
 : jW f n DV^ man Chro. 
 : &&r\ ova n^nn Sam. 
 
 Chro. Ko/ BcfcViZ<ctf t^!^ luaae, 
 
 Sam. K/ H>a,vcua,g tj@* laiaoat, 
 
 Chro. -aroAAct tpyat, eturx vTrtp K 
 Sam. -zroAAoTOf tyo^ CCTTO K<jtCg<r>;A, 
 Chro. 
 
 Chro. x.(5675^)j, ^oy tTMiafyi TOV Atovla, tv T&) Actx- 
 
 Sam. xreoj x/ iTTMTitfy TOV Aiov\ct> tv [twa T& Acwc- 
 
 Chro. xw ev 
 
 Sam. x ev 
 
 This fecond General of the fecond Series was 
 Benaihu, whofe Name is writ properly here in 
 Samuel with a Vau at the end; which Van is 
 wanting at the end (as is alfo another at the be- 
 ginning) of the fame Word in Chronicles. That 
 this is the true Expreffion of this Name is plain 
 
 X 2 from
 
 168 DISSERTATION 
 
 from the next repetition of it in thefe two chap- 
 ters, Sam. 22d and Chron. 24th; and alfo from 
 i Chron. 27, 5 and 6. And it is properly fo ex- 
 prefs'd, to diftinguim this Hero (whofe Chara- 
 cter is truly illuftrious, fee i Kings 1,32 &c.) 
 from one of the Thirty mighty men, who is 
 mention'd in the prefent chapter of Chron. ver. 
 32d; and in i Chron. 27, 14, is recorded as the 
 eleventh Captain in waiting on the King : where- 
 as this 1(T32 Benaihu was the third Captain in 
 waiting on the King, as appears from i Chron. 
 27 ; 5, 6, juft before appeal'd to. 
 
 The word *n is evidently defective, for want 
 of the laft Letter ^, which is preferv'd in Chro- 
 nicles ; and which is alfo preferv'd in the Mar- 
 gin of moft Editions in Samuel, and in the Text 
 there of the Complutenfian. The word ^N^tf 
 in Samuel mould be ^NHtf as in Chronicles; 
 and, being compounded of ntf Leo and Stf Deus, 
 is us'd here as the ftrongeft Compound word for 
 a Man or Men of Valour : and this Senfe of the 
 word is confirm'd by Vitringa, in his excellent 
 Commentary on Ifaiah; Vol. 2, p. 138. The 
 Courage of a Lion is fo fingular, that a Man of 
 extraordinary Heroifm is frequently call'd a Lion, 
 by way of Emphafis ; and the word God is fre- 
 quently apply'd in Scripture to things particular- 
 ly Great, the more emphatically to exprefs fuch 
 
 parties
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 169 
 
 particular Greatnefs. Wherefore the conjunction 
 of both thefe Metaphors ftrongly points out in 
 thefe two Moabites the moft furprizing Courage, 
 and Bravery almoft unparallel'd for we mufl 
 except the braver Ifraelite y 'who Jlew them ; and 
 of whofe Heroifm nothing greater need be faid, 
 than that he flew two fuch Heroes. 
 
 We may obferve, that the LXX in Samuel 
 
 have a different Verfion of the words jjp 
 
 HK1D SN*ltf ras &io tftf A^ijA rx MuaG. But this 
 is no exact Verfion ,of the words j and perhaps 
 they were not thus tranflated at firft, even here 
 in Samuel ; becaufe thefe words are join'd to 
 others, which, in Breitinger's Edition, are dif- 
 tinguifh'd by a fmaller Character, as loft, or 
 omitted in the ancient Translation, and fhp- 
 ply'd from fome other quarter. And the LXX 
 in Chronicles have no fuch word as */*?, but 
 feem to have taken the Original words in the 
 very Senfe here aflign'd them ; reading - TX$ 
 2vo A^wjA. Muct,. And a farther Confirmation of 
 this Senfe of the words may be .deriv'd from 
 the Obfervation of Bocbarf, in his Hierozoicon 
 (P. i. L. 3. C. i.) that the two words o*>\ 
 zUM Leo Dei fignify to this day, among the A- 
 rabians, a Man of extraordinary Valour : and as 
 fuch we find them given to Alt, the Son-in-Law 
 cf Mohammed. 
 
 Ifhali
 
 170 DISSERTATION 
 
 I fhall only add, that we have here in the 
 Greek of Samuel an inftance of what has been 
 before obferv'd as to the Hebrew that Miflakes 
 have frequently been made by Tranfcribers on 
 account of the fame or like words occurring in dif- 
 ferent places : fince we fee, that the reafon, why 
 the nine original words in the true Copy of the LXX 
 in Chronicles were omitted in Samuel, is the 
 repetition of the verb iT^T^n. For the Tranfcri- 
 ber, having writ the firjl i7nx.i, and, upon the 
 next application to his Book, cafling his Eye up- 
 on the fecond eimmfyy writ on from thence, as if 
 he had before regularly ended with that latter 
 word. 
 
 See other inftances of the fame Accident in 
 the Original of this Chapter of Samuel ver. 17 ; 
 and in the LXX at ver. 2 1 . There is a very re- 
 markable Obfervation, of this fame kind, made 
 by Dr. Milles, on the controverted Text of St. 
 John There are Three -, that bare- Record &c. 
 After enumerating the ftrongeft Arguments for 
 and againjl the Authenticity of this Text, he 
 gives his own opinion thus i . Pericopen bane, 
 utcunque pojlea difparuerit, in ipfo certe Johanms 
 Autographo extitijje, aliifque aliquot ad illud defcri- 
 ptis Exemplaribus. 3 . Unde igitur faftum dica- 
 mus, ut Codicibus exciderit hie Verjiculus ? Mini- 
 me quidem dolo malo, quod arbitror ; fed omnino 
 
 cafu,
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 171 
 
 cafu, ac pur a puta negligent ia Librarii -, qui cum 
 forte inter fcribendum tolleret oculos ad illud o; pap- 
 TvfMvrie ver. 6, mox in idem incidens, ver. 7, in- 
 termedia tv rca xpavu o H.a,rv\p o Aoyoe x,cq TO Aytov 
 
 5la prteterierit. Procli'vi admodum errore -, quod 
 norunt, qui bus cum veteribus membranis res eft. 
 2 Edit. 1723. p. 584. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is And Benaihu, the 
 
 fon of yehoiada, the fon of a valiant Man of Kab- 
 
 zeel, mighty in Exploits ; be Jlew two Men of 
 
 Moab, who were Jlouter than Lions : he a/Jo went 
 
 down, and Jlew a Lion, in a pit, in a fnowy day . 
 
 iChron. xi, 23 ; 2 Sam. xxui, 21. 
 
 m/tD t^K nxon &^Nn n^ HDH Nini Chro. 
 "itrN n^o t^\v HK n^n tfim Sam. 
 njn nvon nm noNa tron Chro. 
 non nvon im Sam. 
 
 nunn DN r:n to^trn v^ mn Sam. 
 
 imnnn n^on TO Chro. 
 nxon TO Sam. 
 
 Chro. Kflt/ lafTOf e^K7z?g TOJ/ ctvfya, TOV iyvntGV, av- 
 Sam. Atrrof g^KTzs^g rev ctvfyct, rev Aiyvnliov, ay- 
 
 Chro. tya, cpctTcv TrtmtTryxw, KO.] w rv\ "xppt T% Aiyu- 
 Sam, fyct g^Tr gv at TV\ %etf)i Td Aiyu- 
 
 Chro.
 
 i 7 2 DISSERTATION 
 
 . TTTtX OOQV Ct)$ CiVTtOV vtycUVOVTUV, XCtj 
 . TTTl'ei 000V us %u\oi 2^o9-g^s' xetf 
 
 Chro. fwrov Vavcuctf tv paGoa, xo/ ctfyetAaro ex rrj$ 
 
 etVTt M gXo&y, xetf YlfTTXFt TO fiogV 
 
 %^05" T'tS Aiy/ftllX TO OOfiV, X.cq CLTTZXTeiVlV CWTOV 
 
 Sam. ex TV\S %po5" T* Atyvrfliit, xo/ t7Txrvv CUJTQV 
 
 ChrO. V TU fycLTt CWTX. 
 
 Sam. ev ru Jbasn CWTX. 
 
 The words H0 t^'N in Samuel mould be, as 
 in Chronicles, HtfOH ty'Kn 5 for the fecond word 
 is twice repeated in this very Verfe with the ar*- 
 ticle prefix'd in Samuel j all the three places have 
 it in Chronicles and it is prefix'd in Samuel be- 
 fore both words by the LXX. The next varia- 
 tion is between nN*l "It^N in Samuel and w$ 
 ^Dn PHD in Chronicles. The firft word 
 in Samuel muft have been writ by a very 
 carelefs Tranfcriber inftead of tptf > which latter 
 word is plac'd in the Margin of Samuel. 
 
 The next word ntfHD is very fimilar in its 
 Letters to rTO, and therefore one may have been 
 corrupted from the other. But, if we confider 
 the Senfe of each word, and obferve that n"TD is 
 follow'd by two other words, which do not fol- 
 low nNHDj we may more rationally fuppofe, 
 that both words are original, each being proper 
 in its prefent text ; and that the three words in 
 
 Chroni-
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 173 
 
 Chronicles were at firft intended as a Paraphrafe 
 upon the word in Samuel. For rwlD t?*tf # 
 .Mz// of great Afpeff may very properly be ex- 
 plain'd by HD^a POPI JT1D t^'N tf Mro, u-/6c/<? 
 Stature was Jive Cubits high. Jofephus calls this 
 Egyptian Seup+rof TO (ttyt&of. Lib. 7 -, Cap. 
 
 12. 
 
 The two words tD'JHtf TOOD are evidently 
 wanting in Samuel, as the Senfe is otherwife de- 
 fective an Egyptian., a Man whofe Stature was 
 jive Cubits high -, and in the hand of the Egyptian 
 was a Spear certainly like a Weaver '5 Beam : 
 lince this is the ufual Comparifon for the vaffc 
 Spear us'd by one of thefe Giants. And we find, 
 the LXX read here us fyfav %l&.ct,&(>a,$ y which 
 puts the omirTion in the Text of Samuel beyond 
 Difpute. We have here another inftance in the 
 LXX of the Eye of the Tranfcriber having been 
 mifled by the fame word occurring in different 
 places j and of his copying on from the laft 
 word, when he had writ only the firfl : for the 
 feveral words inferted in Samuel in the fmall 
 Character were omitted between Jbpv and ^u. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is And hejlew an E- 
 gyptian, a Man (in Sam. of great Afpett) <whofe 
 Stature was Jive Cubits high ; and in the hand of 
 the Egyptian was a Spear > like a Weaver s Beam : 
 but he went dvwn to him with a Staff } and pluck- 
 
 Y td
 
 1 7 4 DISSERTATION 
 
 td the Spear out of the Egyptian's hand., and Jlew 
 hi?n 'with his own Spear. 
 
 iChron. xi, 245 2 Sam. xxm, 22. 
 
 Bt? iSi jnnrv p irm nw nW Chro. 
 DP VTI jnnrv p imn nw nW Sam. 
 
 : Dn:un nanSaa Chro. 
 
 : cnnjin n^Sap Sam. 
 
 Chro. Ttyr<* 7ro<;<re Btju/^^t^ r^fig- ladtu, Key 
 
 Sam. Tofrat tiroiqon 'Bavcuc&s yog i&tfet^M, x,cq 
 
 Chro. ovopa, tv rots rpieri TCI? 
 
 Sam. cvoput, tv roif Tf>i<riv TCI$ 
 
 T^hefe things did Benaihu, the fon of Jehoiada ; 
 and he had a Name among three mighty Men. 
 
 iChron. xi, 25 ; 2 Sam. xxm, 23. 
 
 Wi Nin *ODi ^n bnftfcj^i p Chro. 
 SKT "TnD: fi^S^n p Sam. 
 
 Sy im ina^n K^ ^S Chro. 
 
 SN* nn ino'^n K^ S Sam. 
 
 Chro. TTrcp T? 7^<ctK9i'72 ^^ tvaoros XTK, XCLJ ^05 
 
 Sam. E# T^V Tf<fitJP J/JO?OJ-, XO/ ^fflff 
 
 Chro. T^f #x ^jO^ero' ^o/ X<*TI^O-J/ ofTsv kcwto 
 Sam. rp5- ^x jjA^g, ^o/ era^gf at^roj^ Actut 
 
 ChrO. lltJJ TTK^lCLV CUUTX. 
 
 Sam. rex awts <WTX. 
 
 In
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 175 
 
 In Samuel the Alexand. and Vatic. Copies of 
 the LXX have rpuv, as if D^St^H had been 
 ntPWfli but in the Complutenfian the words 
 are wm^ rx$ Tpiawv, which is the true Tranlla- 
 tion of the Hebrew words and the true Senfe of 
 the Place. This will appear from recollecting 
 
 what has been already prov'd that Benaihu 
 
 was one of the Sruen Generals, who were more 
 honourable than the thirty Mighty Men, being 
 the Second General of the Second Series. The 
 Text then muft have been, as we now have it 
 both in Samuel and Chronicles He was ho- 
 nourable (or honoured) aknx the Thirty ; or (as 
 in Chronicles) Above the Thirty (behold him!) 
 he was honourable : but yet he attained not unto the 
 firft Three. And that the Original words cannot 
 properly fignify pra tribus honor abilis, is evident j 
 becaufe Benaihu, in confequence of this Title, 
 mufl have been the firjl General of a Ternary : 
 whereas it is certain from the Hiftory, that he 
 was Qi\\y fecond in the Second Ternary. 
 
 It is plain, that the extraordinary want of Pro- 
 priety, fo vifible in the ancient Verfions of this 
 piece of Hiftory, and particularly of this Verfe, 
 has been principally owing to their feveral Au- 
 thors not attending to the Nature and Subordi- 
 nation of thefe Mighty Men, as here explain'd. 
 Thus in Samuel the Chaldee Paraphraft reads 
 
 Y 2 PA*
 
 176 DISSERTATION 
 
 Pra robujlis honorabilis^ fed ad tres Fortitudines 
 
 non pervenit. The Syriac Verfion gives us 
 
 P radar a facinora gerebat ut triginta. The Ara- 
 bic has Agitabatur in bello, & triginta viro- 
 rum operam exercebat. The Vulgat Qui erant 
 inter triginta nobiliores, veruntamen ufque ad tres 
 non pervenerat. And the Vulgat in Chronicles is 
 equally remarkable for want of Senfe $ui erat 
 inter tres robujlos nominatijjimus^ inter triginta pri- 
 mus &c. 
 
 It only remains to be obferv'd that Stf in 
 Samuel mould be by as in Chronicles ; and that 
 the laft word has been very differently interpre- 
 ted, which Interpretations have been owing to 
 different Readings of the word in queftion. The 
 LXX in Chronicles, by rendring it -sTar^*, feem 
 to have read innflttfiD- Others, as Grotius ob- 
 ferves, feem to have read irnBtPD, by rendring 
 it Cuflodiam Jua m. There is no great Improprie- 
 ty in the prefent reading both in Samuel and 
 Chronicles inyDt^ ^y fuper Aufcultationem vet 
 Obedientiam fuam i. e. Benaihu was fet over thofe, 
 whofe particular Duty it was to hear and obey 
 the King's Orders, by being nearer his Royal 
 Perfon. 
 
 And we find this to have been exactly the 
 Cafe. For we read i Chron. 18, 17; and 2 Sam. 
 20, 23 that this Benaihu was over the Cbere- 
 
 thites
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 177 
 
 tbttes and the Pelethites : and, from 2 Sam. 1 5, 
 18; 20, 6 and 7; i Kin. i; 33,38, it appears, 
 that the Cherethites and the Pelethites compos'd 
 David's Body-Guard. Benaihu then, in being pla- 
 ced over thefe, was properly Captain of David's 
 Life-Guard; and therefore the words before- 
 mention'd muft be render'd over his Guard. 
 Thus Jofephus ^,ctvouo(, & ru lua&v T^JJ TD.NT 
 2nMATO4>TAAKHN APXHN 'Grfapjdumv. Lib. 
 7; Cap. 12. But thefe Authorities feem more 
 ftrongly to recommend the word imatyo. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is Behold! he was more 
 honourable than 'the Thirty > but he attained not 
 unto the firjl Three ; and David fet him over his 
 Guard. 
 
 i Chron. xi, 26 ; 2 Sam. xxm, 24. 
 
 Chro. 
 Sam. 
 
 Chro. KCLJ ai duvaloi ruv ovv&fAtuv,b.auYiX,a, 
 Sam. Aow>jA ctogAe? IUA& xro$ w rot? 
 
 Here is a confiderable Difference between the 
 two Texts ; and the Occafion of it feems to be 
 this that the Author of the Catalogue in Chro- 
 nicles, not confining himfelf to the confideration 
 of \hcExat Number of thefe Mighty Men (which 
 had been before exprefly mention'd in Samuel) 
 
 does
 
 178 DISSERTATION 
 
 does not at all diftinguifh Afahel^ as to his Rank 
 amongft the Thirty Seven. But, tho'^lftibe/ was 
 more honourable than the Thirty, yet nothing 
 particular being recorded of Him, more than of 
 the following Thirty (who are celebrated by their 
 Names only, and not by their Exploits) the Au- 
 thor of Chronicles barely fets him at the head of 
 the following Thirty. 
 
 The Author of the Catalogue in Samuel ob- 
 ferves a different method. He, having been ex- 
 act with regard to the Rank and Number of thefe 
 famous Heroes, tells us that Afabel was over 
 the Thirty, whofc Number, as a Body of the 
 fame Order, had been fo often mention'd j and 
 therefore, that He (Afahel) was the laft of the 
 fecond Three, of which his brother Abijkai was 
 thtjirft. For it is impomble, that Afahel mould 
 be one of or among the Thirty, becaufe there fol- 
 low Thirty exclufivcly of him j and becaufe A- 
 fahel muft be the laft of the fecond Ternary, 
 which otherwife is incompleat : confequently the 
 Prepofition n, prefix'd in this verfe to tt&hv 
 Thirty ', muft be here render'd over or above ; as 
 it has been already prov'd to fignify, in the Ob- 
 fervations on the 21 ft verfe of this chapter of 
 Chronicles. See pages 165 and 166. 
 
 And there is this farther Proof of its fignify- 
 ing Preeminence (and not Equality) in this 
 
 place,
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 179 
 
 place, that the Arabic Verfion renders the word 
 Oty*?tP3 by o^*-^ u***; prmceps triginta (for- 
 tium) triginta prteftutj or rather (according to 
 the primary Idea of this verb) triginta Capttt 
 fait : fo that no word could more ftrongly ex- 
 prefs Afahel's Superiority over the Thirty, whoje 
 Names (as the Arabic Verfion adds) are thefe. 
 Shamma &c. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion in Chronicles is Alfo 
 the valiant men of the Armies were Afahel, the 
 brother of Joab : &c. and in Samuel Afahel, 
 the brother ofjoab, was over the thirty. 
 
 i Chron. xi, 26 5 2 Sam. xxm, 24. 
 
 : onS rvna inn p pnW Chro. 
 : onS no mi p pnW Sam. 
 
 Chl'O. EXtCLVCLV 
 
 Sam. 
 
 This Firft Hero, in the Body of Thirty, is 
 exprefs'd exactly the fame in both the Original 
 Texts ; excepting, that the Mem is dropt at the 
 beginning of his Local Name in Samuel : juft 
 as the Beth was before the fame Name in the 
 1 4th verfe of this chapter of Samuel. How this 
 Worthy's Name is properly diftinguifh'd from 
 Eleazar, the fon of Dodi, the Ahohite, has been 
 already obferv'd in page 134. 
 
 We
 
 i8o DISSERTATION 
 
 We have here another Inftance of the Con- 
 fufion and Jumble of Verfions, which is now 
 found in the LXXj for in Samuel the word 
 nn> which had been render'd by one Tranfla- 
 tor A&JW, and zD-ctT^tJeA(p CUITX by another, is 
 here tranflated by Both. Or rather, thofe ' two 
 Tranflations are by fome Tranfcriber or Editor 
 injudicioufly thrown together : and of this there 
 are, in the feveral Editions of the LXX, many 
 Inftances. 
 
 The Englifh Veriion is Elhanan, the fon of 
 Dodo, of Bethlehem. 
 
 iChron. xi, 27; 2 Sam. xxm, 25. 
 
 nrinn mat? Chro. 
 n-inn nap Sam. 
 
 Chro. 
 
 Sam. SC^M-O/ o Apxo 
 
 That this Mighty Man, the Second in the 
 Body of Thirty, cannot be the fame with Sham- 
 mah the Hararite, the Third General of the firft 
 Series of Three, we may conclude at once. But 
 that he is the fame with Shamhoth (mnoty) men- 
 tion'd in i Chron. 27, 8, as being the Fifth Cap- 
 tain in- waiting on the King, feems very evi- 
 dent ; becaufe Four of the Twelve Captains in 
 waiting, who are mention'd prefently after Sham- 
 
 hoth
 
 On i CH RON. XI &c. 181 
 
 both there, are mention'd prefently after Sham- 
 moth here. To which it muft be added, that 
 the feveral Copies of the LXX agree in rendring 
 the Name in Chronicles ItyMtd' ; but do not a- 
 gree to read s^ao/ in Samuel, fmce the Aid. 
 Copy reads se^S- there. 
 
 One of thefe Names then being now impro- 
 perly exprefs'd in the Original Text, we may 
 conclude, that the Name nW Shammah in Sa- 
 muel is corrupted from either m,W Shammoth 
 or mnEt^ Shamhoth ; if from the former, by a 
 change of the two fimilar Letters n and r> 
 nDB7 from nct^ ; if from the latter, by an O- 
 miffion of the laft, or two laft Letters n/3^ 
 
 from nrw or rnrw. 
 
 As this Worthy is thus diftinguim'd from 
 Shammah (one of the firft Seven) by the diffe- 
 rent Termination of his Proper Name, Sham- 
 hoth 3 fo of the different Local or Family Names 
 now foijnd in Chronicles and Samuel, it may 
 be proper to prefer that, which farther diftin- 
 guifhes this Man from the former. The former 
 then being Shammah the Hararite, this will be 
 Shamhoth the Harodite ; the laft Name being ta- 
 ken exactly as it is in Samuel. A farther Rea- 
 fon for preferring the Name of Harodite is, that 
 the Worthy, mention'd immediately after Sham- 
 moth, is alfo an Harodite - y and two Heroes of 
 
 Z the
 
 i82 DISSERTATION 
 
 the fame Place or Family are frequently men- 
 tion'd together in the following parts of this Ca- 
 talogue. 
 
 And that Shamhoth was an Harodite, as in 
 Samuel j and not an Hararite^ or (more ftridtly) 
 Jlrorite, as in Chronicles ; appears yet more e- 
 vidently from the Alexand. Copy of the LXX 
 which makes the Termination of the Word in 
 Chronicles the very fame as in Samuel <A, *- 
 ji 5 the Aid. Copy ^, A^ ; and the ancient 
 Cambridge Greek MS retains alfo <A, A&. To 
 all which we may add laftly, that not only the 
 Bomberg and Complut. Editions agree in reading 
 this Name H*inn in Samuel ; but that the En- 
 glim Polyglott has the very fame Termination 
 (H) alfo in Chronicles. This different Termi- 
 nation then, together with the difference of a n 
 in this Name of Harodite, inftead of an n in Ha- 
 rarite, or Arorite^ fufficiently diflinguifh the one 
 from the other. 
 
 The Englim Verfion is Shamhoth, the Ha- 
 rodite. 
 
 2 Sam. xxin, 25. 
 
 This Mighty Man is uniformly mention'd in 
 this place, in all the Original Copies of Samuel 
 Elika, the Harodite j and therefore EVAX* in 
 
 the
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 183 
 
 the Alexand. Copy of the LXX fhould be EA<- 
 xa,, as it is in the Complutenlian. 
 
 It is remarkable, that this Hero, thus uni- 
 formly inferted in Samuel, is as uniformly o- 
 mitted in all the Copies of this Catalogue in 
 Chronicles i and, that after Uriah (the laft of 
 the Thirty Seven) Zabad is univerfally added, 
 and compleats the Number. A very probable 
 Reafon for this is affign'd by Junius and Tre- 
 mellius, which is that Elika dying foon, and 
 being fucceeded by Zabad in his Military Ho- 
 nours, as one of the Thirty Seven Worthies; 
 Elika, tho' nam'd in the middle of the firft Ca- 
 talogue is omitted in fatfecond; and Zabad, his 
 SuccefTor, is added at the end of the remaining 
 Thirty Six, as being of later Appointment. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is Elika, the Harodite. 
 
 iChron. xi, 27; 2 Sam. xxm, 26. 
 
 Chro. 
 
 Sam. 
 
 Chro. XeM>jf o 
 Sam. E^jf o 
 
 That the Local or Family Name of Heletz 
 was Pelonite, as in Chronicles, and not Paltite, 
 as in Samuel, is eafily inferr'd from the LXX ; 
 
 Z 2 but
 
 184 DISSERTATION 
 
 but is certain from I Chron. 27, 10 ; where this 
 fame Worthy is recorded as the Seventh Captain 
 in waiting on the King ; and there both his 
 Names are exprefs'd literally the fame, as here 
 .in Chronicles. The Teth therefore, like many 
 other complicated Letters, is here in Samuel cor- 
 ruptly made up of the original Vau and Nun 
 of n. 
 
 That a Letter, thus compounded of two or 
 more ftrokes, may be miftaken for two Letters 
 whofe ftrokes coincide with the flrokes of the 
 Letter fo compounded, is eafy to imagine. And, 
 that fuch a complicated Letter has been elfe- 
 where fo miftaken for two more limple Letters, 
 fee page the I9th of this Diflertation, in the 
 words run and ujn. See alfo i Sam. 17, 32; 
 where D"Ttf is by the LXX render'd Kug/o? ^*, 
 and was therefore read by them ^Ttf 3 which, 
 perhaps, was the true Reading. And there is a 
 remarkable inftance of this Change, in two words 
 fucceeding each other ; or rather, in the fame 
 Proper Name repeated (or intended to be re- 
 peated) in Ruth, 4; 20, 21 And Amminadab 
 begat Nahjhon, and Nah/hon begat nu7W Salmah, 
 and pftW Salmon begat Boaz &c. 
 
 The Englifh Vcrfion is Hekfz, the Pelo- 
 nite, 
 
 i Chron.
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 185 
 
 i Chron. xi, 28 5 2 Sam. xxin, 26. 
 
 Tipnn ppy p trvy Chro. 
 : 'ypnn trpy p any Sam. 
 
 Chro. npa/ tjcf EKX,V\$ o 
 Sam. ip<tf tcf Exx&f o 
 
 The Original Texts agreeing as to .the Names 
 of this Mighty Man (excepting the common O- 
 miffion of a Vau in Samuel) nothing farther need 
 be obferv'd of him, than that he was the Sixth 
 Captain in waiting on the King ; as appears from 
 i Chron. 27, 9. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is Ira, the fon of Ik- 
 kejh, the Tekoite. 
 
 i Chron. xi, 28 ; 2 Sam. xxiu, 27. 
 
 Chro. 
 Sam. 
 
 Chro. A&ttp o 
 Sam. A&eg o 
 
 This Worthy's two Names are exprefs'd uni- 
 formly, as the laft; excepting the fame Omif- 
 (ion of a Vau here again, in the Local Name in 
 Samuel. He appears (from the Lift in i Chron. 
 27, 12) to have been the Ninth Captain in wait- 
 
 ting,
 
 i86 DISSERTATION 
 
 ting, for the Ninth Month. His Local Name, 
 in conformity to the LXX, and all the other an- 
 cient Verfions, may be more properly render'd 
 Anathothite than Antothite j efpecially, as the 
 Place, which gave this Name, was Anathoth, as 
 appears from Jerem. i, I. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is Abiezer, the 
 thothite. 
 
 i Chron. xi, 29 ; 2 Sam. xxiu, 27. 
 
 :DD chro. 
 Sam. 
 
 Chro. KOJ\ 2oo%o/ o 
 Sam. ex TUV yuv ra 
 
 Here is a very confiderable Difference between 
 the two Expreffions of this Proper Name, in the 
 Englifh Verfion, and a ftill greater in fome of 
 the ancient Verfions. In the Englifh this Hero 
 is call'd Mebunnai in Samuel, and in Chronicles 
 Sibbecai. The Englifh Tranflators here exprefs 
 the two Words, exactly according to the Mafo- 
 retical Pointing ; but the Name is evidently cor- 
 rupted in Samuel by a Miflake of two very fi- 
 milar Letters m for 3D- For, there being no 
 fuch Biblical Name elfewhere as Mebunnai, the 
 LXX, in the Alexand. and Vat. Copies, do not 
 acknowledge it for a Proper Name here; but 
 
 render
 
 On i CH RON. XI &c. 187 
 
 render it E* TUV yew, which makes no Senfe, and 
 therefore cannot be admitted -, and befides it oc- 
 calions a Deficiency of a Proper Name. 
 
 The Aid. Edition of the LXX reads s*#;^ 
 alfo in Samuel j which alone is a ftrong Prefum- 
 ption, that Sibbecai was the true Name. But 
 this is put out of all doubt, as foon as we ob- 
 ferve that this fame Hero, call'd Sibbecai the 
 Hufhathite here in Chronicles, is call'd alfo Sib- 
 becai the Hufoathite in Chapter the ajth of this 
 fame Book 3 where he is celebrated as the Eighth 
 Captain in waiting upon the King. And laftly, 
 his two Names are exprefs'd exactly in the fame 
 manner in 2 Sam. 21,185 and in I Chron. 20, 4. 
 
 The Englim Veriion is Sibbecai, the Hujba- 
 thite. 
 
 i Chron. xi, 29; 2 Sam. xxiu, 28. 
 
 Chro. 
 
 Sam. 
 
 Chro. HA; o 
 Sam. ztiuv o 
 
 The Local or Family Name of this Mighty 
 Man being here the fame both in Samuel and 
 Chronicles, we may fafely infer, that his Proper 
 Name alfo, in thefe two correfponding Places, 
 in the very fame part of the Catalogue, was ori- 
 
 ginally
 
 i88 DISSERTATION 
 
 ginally the fame in both (like every other Hero's 
 here mention'd) tho' at prefent the Proper Name 
 in Samuel differs greatly from that in Chroni- 
 cles. Neither of thefe words (I believe) occurs 
 elfewhere in the Bible, as the Name of a Man ; 
 and there feems therefore to be no other way of 
 determining what was the real Proper Name 
 here, but by referring to the LXX; to learn 
 from thence, whether the Corruption of this 
 Name be'pD7 Zalmon from <ky Hai, or the 
 contrary. 
 
 The Name Hat is regularly and uniformly 
 render'd HA* in all the Copies of the LXX, and 
 in all the ancient Verfions, in Chronicles. But 
 in Samuel the Copies are confus'd. The Vatican 
 reads Efoav, the beginning of which word inti- 
 mates it to have been originally the fame with 
 HA*. In the Alexandrian copy, the Original 
 Name being loft, it is fupply'd by ss^.^ in the 
 Margin, and SEA^V (in a fmall Character) in the 
 Text, taken from fome later Tranflation. This 
 therefore we may fairly fuppofe to have been the 
 Verlion of the Proper Name in Samuel, as it 
 flood at the time of that later Tranflation ; after 
 the true Name, which we find uniformly in the 
 Original and the Verfions of Chronicles, had 
 been corrupted. And the Corruption will more 
 readily be fuppos'd in this Name in Samuel, on 
 
 account
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 189 
 
 account of the evident Corruption there of the 
 Name immediately preceding, and the Preferva- 
 tion of the true Name in Chronicles. 
 
 That the two principal Letters in thefe two 
 Words, V and V> may have been miflaken for 
 each other, is eafy to infer from their Forms ; 
 the difference between them being only the Turn 
 of the bottom Stroke, either return'd horizontal- 
 ly, as in the latter, or drawn below the line a 
 little obliquely, as in the former. And that thefe 
 two Letters have been elfewhere miflaken for 
 each other, appears from 2 Kings 20, 4 ; where 
 *VVn Urbs is corrupted from 1VI1 Atrium. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is I/ai, the Ahohite. 
 
 i Chron. xi, 30 ; 2 Sam. xxm, 28. 
 
 nna Chro. 
 nno Sam. 
 
 Chro. 
 
 Sam. Ma,tpct,<{ o 
 
 This Mighty Man (the Tenth Captain in wait- 
 ing on the King, i Chron. 27, 13) is fo uniform- 
 ly exprefs'd in the Original Text and the Ver- 
 fions, that we need only remark the Omiffion of 
 a Vau in the Local Name ; and that the Proper 
 Name in the Vat. Copy of the LXX in Chroni- 
 cles is M*f. A a The
 
 1 90 DISSERTATION 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is Mabarat, the Nc 
 tophatbite. 
 
 iChron. xi, 30 ; 2 Sam. xxin, 29. 
 
 :nsio:n rova p nSn Chro. 
 'natun wn p nSn Sam. 
 
 Chro. 
 Sam. 
 
 That the Name of this Mighty Man was ori- 
 ginally Heled y as it is now exprefs'd in Chroni- 
 cles, and not Heleb, as in Samuel, is plain from 
 j Chron. 27, 15; where he is recorded as the 
 Twelfth Captain in waiting, on the King. It is 
 there indeed writ, with a Tod added at the End j 
 which fmall Letter is frequently found to have 
 been added improperly in other places, and in 
 words lefe likely to be miftaken : fee the word 
 muftferens, in the 37th verfe of this Chapter of 
 Samuel. 
 
 The Original and the Veriions not only agree 
 to read Heled here in Chronicles, but in Samuel 
 alfo the Complutenfian Text has V?n Heled, and 
 it is there alfo Heled in the Vulgat. In Samuel, 
 in the Vatican Copy of the LXX, this Name 
 with the three words following it is entirely o- 
 mitted (from the Caufe frequently before ob- 
 
 ferv'd
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 191 
 
 ferv'd the repetition of the word NirutyaBi or 
 'KiTatpa-BiTK ) and in the prefent Alexandrian Co- 
 , py, the words foifted in are far from agreeing 
 with the Original Words, which are regular and 
 uniform in the correfponding places ; excepting 
 the common Omiilion of a Vau again in Samuel, 
 and the Miftake of a n for a n ---- a Miftake, 
 which has alfo been made in Jofh. 15,47; where 
 we have ^ilJj terminus^ inftead of *?nj! magnus ; 
 and in Ezek. 40, 2, HJ12 a meridie was read by 
 the LXX 1312 ex adverfo. 
 
 , The Englifli Verfion is Heled, the fon of 
 Baanah y the Netophathite. 
 
 jChron. xi, 31 ; 2 Sam. xxin, 29. 
 
 p TPK chro. 
 p n^ Sam. 
 
 Chro. 
 
 Sam. 
 
 The Proper Name here may reafonably be 
 prefum'd to have been TVK Ithai y as in Chroni- 
 cles; which diftinguifhes this Mighty Man of 
 Gibeab from n^ It fat the Gittite, who came to 
 David long after his PofTemon of the Throne 
 (2 Sam. 15, 19) and therefore could not be one 
 of thofe Mighty Men, who adher'd to David in 
 
 A a 2 his
 
 192 DISSERTATION 
 
 his humbler Fortune, and whofe Valour contri- 
 buted to make him King 'O>7Dn^ ; as is obferv'd 
 of them by the Author of Chronicles in this 
 chapter, at the i oth verfe. 
 
 It is probable then, that this Name mould 
 have been exprefs'd in Samuel, as we find it in 
 Chronicles. And that it was originally writ in 
 Chronicles with a double Tod, as at prefent, feems 
 evident from the Vatican Copy of the LXX, 
 which renders it A<^ inftead of Ai-Si ; and in the 
 Complut. Copy it is ija/ . But the Copies of the 
 LXX in Samuel are evidently confus'd. In the 
 Vatican the words are very improperly tranflated 
 
 Ec&aq vjOf P<&* ex, TaJoasB" t]o$ Rtviaptv TX EtypaS'cux ; 
 and in the Alcxand. the words have been loft ; 
 but both thefe Copies agree at prefent in making 
 the Place here unintelligible, by rendring the 
 word *fo tjog : whereas tne leaft Reflection muft 
 have told them, that yo$ there was applicable to 
 no Name preceding, and that Gibeah was a Tow*, 
 belonging to the Sons of Benjamin. Judg. 19; 
 14, 1 6. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is Itbai> thefon ofRi- 
 bai^ of Gibeah of the fom of Benjamin. 
 
 j Chron. xi, 3 1 j 2 Sam. xxm, 30, 
 
 Chro. 
 
 Sam. 
 
 Chro,
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 193 
 
 Chro. >a,vcu&<; o Q&pctS'cavi, 
 Sam. B#v-<#; o 4fafg*9&n>mif' 
 
 This Mighty Man was the Eleventh Captain 
 in waiting upon the King; and is call'd, in 
 iChron. 27, 14, Wljnfln rm ; an Authority 
 fufficient to decide between the two difagreeing 
 Copies here, in favour of Chronicles. It has 
 been already obferv'd indeed (page 168) that this 
 Name mould be Benaiah, and not Benaihu 5 that 
 being the Proper Name of the illuftrious Hero, 
 who was the fecond General of the fecond Ter- 
 nary. The *} therefore, which is redundant at 
 the end of the Proper Name here in Samuel, is 
 certainly part of the n, which is loft at the be- 
 ginning of the Local Name, which Name is de- 
 fective for Want of that emphatic Article. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is Benaiah, the Pira- 
 thonite. 
 
 iChron. xi, 32 ; 2 Sam. xxin, 30. 
 
 mn Chro. 
 nn Sam. 
 
 Chro. Ovpi ix. 
 
 Sam. A$c tx, 
 
 Several of the preceding Names having been 
 miftaken in Samuel, and their true Readings 
 
 preferv'd
 
 I 9 4 DISSERTATION 
 
 preferv'd in Chronicles, we may be inclin'd from 
 thence to think, that the Defect continues to be 
 in the fame Catalogue; confequently that HH 
 Hiddai has been corrupted (as it eafily might) 
 from Hin, or (the Vau omitted) nn Hurai. 
 The Syriac and Arabic Verfions would incline 
 one to prefer Hiddai ; but the Greek Verfions 
 uniformly declaring for Hurai in Chronicles ; 
 and, tho' they are confus'd and broken in Sa- 
 muel, yet the Aid. Copy there alfo reading Oy^;, 
 that Name feems to deferve the preference. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is Hurai, of the Brooks 
 ofGaafh. ' 
 
 iChron. xi, 32; 2 Sam. xxm, 31. 
 
 :n:nyn WON* Chro. 
 >n:nyn pnSyotf Sam. 
 
 Chro. A?A o 
 
 Sam. AH*.*uy Q 
 
 The true Reading here feems to be that in 
 Samuel, Abialbon ; lince we can more eafily con- 
 ceive three original Letters to have been carelef- 
 ly dropt by a Tranfcriber, than three Letters to 
 have been arbitrarily and rafhly inferted, where 
 there feems to have been no affignable reafon. 
 The Particles h$ and h? appear to have been 
 
 frequently
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 195 
 
 frequently miftaken in otfyer places, on account 
 of their nearly fimilar Pronunciation j fee pages 
 144 and 176. The laft Syllable of the Proper 
 Name in Chronicles feems to have been former- 
 ly detatch'd, as pnSv in fome of our printed 
 Copies is from ^N ; and therefore might eafily 
 be taken for \^ films. And \^ films might be o- 
 mitted by fome injudicious Tranfcriber, as un- 
 neceiTary before a Local Name ; fmce the article 
 n, prefix'd to fuch a Name is found to be equi- 
 valent to, and fupply the place of the word ^ 
 in other places : fee two inftances in thefe very 
 chapters, page 82 ; and another, page 209. 
 
 That this really was the Cafe feems greatly 
 confirm'd by the Syriac and Arabic Verlions, 
 which have both render 'd the word in Chroni- 
 cles by Abiel films. This they certainly would 
 not have done, if the word had been only Stf^tf 
 Abiel, as it is at prefent ; but 'tis extreamly pro- 
 bable, their Copies read the word p, (which, 
 with the Van omitted, will be bon) and that this 
 Syllable was writ at fome diftance, as a diftincl: 
 word : and laftly, that, being a diflind: word, 
 it was afterwards injudicioufly omitted for the 
 reafon before aflign'd. The Local Name is ex- 
 actly the fame in both Copies. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is Ablation, the Ar- 
 bathite. 
 
 i Chron.
 
 196 DISSERTATION 
 
 iChron. xi, 33 $ 2 Sam. xxiu, 31. 
 
 m&ry Chro. 
 
 DlEty Sam. 
 
 Chro. A^caS* o J$a,o<ra,p.i, 
 Sam. A<r(t&)& o 
 
 The Proper Name of this Mighty Man being 
 exactly the fame in both Places, we need only 
 remark here, that his Local Name is in Chroni- 
 cles the Babarumite, and in Samuel the Barbu- 
 mite j which Difference is owing to a Tranfpo- 
 lition of the two Letters n and *| : and, as the 
 Name of the Place from whence this Hero is 
 denominated was probably DHPQ Bahurim 
 (2 Sam. 3, 1 6) that in Chronicles feems to be 
 the true Local Name. And indeed the Syriac 
 and Arabic Verfions feem to have read thefe two 
 Letters right ; the former rendring the Local 
 Name here by ex Hurim, and the latter byj#w 
 Hurim. 
 
 This Tranfpofition of two Letters will be ad- 
 mitted without the leaft Difficulty by fuch, as 
 have obferv'd the much greater Tranfpolitions of 
 Letters, that have been made elfewhere by the 
 carelelTnefs of the Jewifh Tranfcribers ; and we 
 cannot ealily fuppofe a greater Tranfpofition, or 
 Inverfion of the Letters of a word, than what 
 
 we
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 197 
 
 we find 2 Sam. 1 1, 3, and i Chron. 3, 5. In the 
 former place we read of Batbjheba ( y^& J"Q ) 
 Uriah's Wife, that fhe was the Daughter of 
 tDV'Stf Eli am ; and in the latter place thefe 
 four (Solomon Gff.) were born to David by Batb- 
 fieba (y\& nil Batbfhtta) the Daughter of 7tf*tD0f 
 Ammiel. 
 
 The Englim Verfion is Azmaveth, the Ba- 
 harumite. 
 
 i Chron. xi, 33 ; 2 Sam. xxiu, 32. 
 
 Chro. 
 
 tf Sam. 
 
 Chro. E\ia,a, o 
 Sam. EhiaJo o 
 
 As there is nothing obfervable here on the 
 Names of this Mighty Man in the Original Text, 
 we may juft remark (on account of the different 
 Termination of his Local Name in the two Greek 
 Chapters) that the Learned feem to have drawn 
 an unanfwerable Argument againfl the Greek 
 Verfion'* being the Work of One Man, or the 
 Work of Many concurring in the fame Method 
 of translating - from that great Difference, 
 which is found thro' the feveral Books of the Old 
 Teflament, in the Greek Expreflion of the very 
 
 B b fame
 
 198 DISSERTATION 
 
 fame Proper Names. For in this, and the ad- 
 joining Verfes, we fee that the Tranflator of 
 Chronicles renders the Local Names by a Lite- 
 ral Expreffion of the Hebrew Words ; but the 
 Tranflator of Samuel gives them a Greek Ter- 
 mination. Hence in the former we have ver. 
 28, QtK&t ; in the latter, ver. 26, wc^r^ and 
 afterwards 
 
 &C. 
 
 The Englilh Verlion is Elihaba, the Shaal- 
 bonite. 
 
 iChron. xi, 34; 2 Sam. xxiii; 32, 33. 
 
 j nnnn *<w p \rw ^irjn D^n n Chro. 
 nnnn notr nrmrv ^ on Sam. 
 
 Chro. T<o/ AOTtjtf o r^yuv;, lava&a,v tjo$ It&yy o 
 Sam. viot Arav luva&av. *z#i4a. o 
 
 The Hebrew Copies of this Place are at pre- 
 fent corrupted in Chronicles, and very imperfect 
 in Samuel ; and there is no ancient Verfion, 
 which has rightly preferv'd the Original Read- 
 ing. We muft therefore attend carefully to the 
 Words themfelves ; and the more care will be 
 here necefTary, as the Jews have render'd this 
 corrupted Place more perplex'd by making the 
 
 Verfe
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 199 
 
 Verfe end in Samuel at the word Jonathan. That 
 the Verfe could not end with this word original- 
 ly, will be foon evident; and perhaps the beft 
 method of refettling and illuftrating this very 
 difficult PafTage may be to difcover firft what 
 Connexion the Name Jonathan has with the 
 words preceding or following. 
 
 We read 2 Sam. 21, 21, that yatP p pJirT 
 (which the Marginal Keri tells us mould be 
 MZV ) TH TIN Jonathan, the fon of Sbamha* 
 the brother of David, flew the Great Giant, that 
 had fix fingers on each hand &c. and in i Chron. 
 20, 7, we find the fame Exploit of the fame 
 Warrior TH TIN xySW p jrolJT Jonathan 
 the fon of Shamha, the brother of David. Jona- 
 than being then fo defervedly celebrated in both 
 thefe Places ; and being celebrated in Chronicles 
 in company with Sibbecai, who flew the Giant 
 Saph (or Sippai) and in Samuel not only with 
 Sibbecai but Abijhai alfo, both of whom are found 
 in the honourable Catalogue of David's Mighty 
 Men j we might reafonably expect to find Jona- 
 than alfo in the fame Catalogue, efpecially as he 
 was David's Brother's Son. And there feems to 
 be now no room for doubting of his being fo re- 
 corded in the words of the two Chapters at pre- 
 fent under confideration. 
 
 B b 2 For
 
 200 DISSERTATION 
 
 For the Proper Name Jonathan is preferv'd in 
 Samuel exactly the fame as in the two other Paf- 
 fages juft referr'd to; and in Chronicles, with 
 the omiffion only of a fingle Letter. The Name 
 of Jonathan's Father is exprefs'd a little diffe- 
 rently ; but yet fo, that we can ealily fee it was 
 the fame Patronymic as in the two preceding 
 PafTages. In Chronicles here it is JOL^, and in 
 Samuel nDttf ; and in the two other Paffages it 
 is tf yot^. Not that this Name of David's Bro- 
 ther is always exprefs'd $yft& j but he is twice 
 elfewhere called n/tD^- And from hence 'tis evi- 
 dent, that the Catalogue in Samuel expreffes the 
 Name exactly according to this latter form ; and 
 the Catalogue in Chronicles according to the for- 
 mer, m& corruptly written for tfyotP, as it oc- 
 curs in a third place, i Chron. 2, 13. 
 
 The Authorities therefore of the printed Co- 
 pies being nearly equal (from the Number of 
 Places) where this Name occurs ; we cannot de- 
 termine abfolutely, which was the true Original 
 Name riE^ or NVDIP : and perhaps it may be 
 proper to prefer the latter, as it will the more 
 effectually diftinguim this Mighty Man from 
 H2tr Shammab, the fon of tf Jtf Agee* the Hara- 
 rite., recorded in this Catalogue as the Third Ge- 
 neral of the firft Series of Three. The Name 
 'Jonathan then being certainly connected with the 
 
 words,
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 201 
 
 words, which follow it, we fee how abfurdly 
 the Termination of this Verfe has been fix'dj 
 and we mall foon fee (what is much more ma- 
 terial to our purpofe) how to underftand the 
 words preceding 'Jonathan^ as they are to make 
 compleat Senfe by themfelves. 
 
 The three words to be now confider'd are, in 
 Chronicles '31UH Di^n J3 ; which in Sa- 
 muel are ftrangely reduc'd to two jtp ^3. 
 
 It fcarce needs Obfervation, that the words Filii 
 ytfen cannot contain the Name of any Man ; 
 and that the words Filii Hafhem Gizonita do not 
 much mend the matter. The firft word then 
 mu ft have been originally p jilius, as it is at 
 prefent render 'd t/o? in the Vatican Copy of the 
 LXX in Chronicles ; or the Prepofition Mem 
 muft be underftood at the beginning, or have 
 been originally prefix'd (but dropt in tranfcri- 
 bing, as the fame Letter Mem is before n*2 in 
 the 24th verfe of this chapter of Samuel ; fee 
 page 197) and then the word will iignify ex fi- 
 liis. 
 
 The Word immediately following muft be 
 the Name of the Father Of the fins of Ja- 
 Jhen, in Samuel ; but Haflxm in Chronicles. And 
 of thefe two words, we may prefer the laft, as 
 more likely to be genuine becaufc No Greek 
 Verfion acknowledges the Tod at the beginning, 
 
 be-
 
 202 DISSERTATION 
 
 becaufe it is likely, that the Tod in Samuel is 
 part of the He in Chronicles, as it is in other 
 places ; (Ifaiah 53, 10, ^nr\ morbo affcrit inftead 
 of H^nn ; Hofea 6, 9, OH exjpettare inftead of 
 HDn &c.) and becaufe there is fo great a Mil- 
 take in Samuel as the Omiffion of the next long 
 word in Chronicles, 'tis more probable that the 
 Miftake in the preceding Letter has been made 
 alfo in Samuel ; efpecially as the Nun is more 
 likely to be a Corruption of the Mem, than the 
 contrary. 
 
 The two firft words being tD^n 31 Of the 
 fons of Hafoem, the only remaining Difficulty is 
 to afcertain the Signification of the third word 
 OTJin. If this word be fuppos'd to fignify (what 
 it ufually is fuppos'd to fignify) the Gizonite, it 
 muft then be applied to the Patronymic Hafoem ; 
 the confequence of which will be, that we mall 
 have no Proper Name of this Mighty Man at 
 all. This word, therefore, which occurs no where 
 elfe as a Gizonite, muft have been a Proper 
 Name j and accordingly the LXX in the Alex, 
 and Aid. Copies give us o Tawi, and the Complut. 
 Edition o rowi : and, tho' this Name is entirely 
 omitted in the prefent Hebrew Text of Samuel, 
 yet the Aid. Copy of the LXX there alfo reads 
 as in Chronicles. 
 
 There
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 203 
 
 There can be then but little room for doubt- 
 ing, whether this be the Proper Name of Our 
 Hero j efpecially, as this is a Literal Verfion of 
 the word oil 3 j excepting the the change of a i 
 into a t two Letters fo fimilar, that it is fre- 
 quently very difficult to diftinguim them. And 
 that this is a Biblical Name appears from iChron. 
 5, 1 5, where we have the Proper Name j l tf ; 
 which may be the fame Name, with one Vau 
 omitted as an Holem (fo very frequently the cafe 
 elfewhere) and indeed we find this word exactly 
 fo render'd by the LXX, Vat. Edit. r*w, Alexand. 
 TGWI. That the Article n is fometimes prefix'd 
 to a Proper Name, is evident from Jofh. i, 12 j 
 where we read nttODH Manajjeb, 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is ' Gouni, of the Jons 
 of Ha/hem -, 'Jonathan^ the fon of Shamha, the Ha- 
 rarite. 
 
 iChron. xi, 35 j 2 Sam. xxiu, 33. 
 
 nnnn ~\yv p DNn Chro. 
 
 : 'TINH *\~\W p D^'H^ Sam. 
 
 Chro. A%;ct j w. tjc$ *Z<t%ct,p o ' Apapi 
 Sam. AM.v<*v icf ?.*<*, o 
 
 As there is a Miftake in the Name of this 
 Hero's Father, occafion'd by the Likenefs of a 3 
 
 and
 
 204 DISSERTATION 
 
 and a % 'tis probable, that *OJ? in Chronicles 
 is right -, as we find a Perfon of that Name in 
 i Chron. 26, 4 : whereas the Name *nj? never, 
 perhaps, occurs elfewhere. That the Corruption 
 has been in Samuel, we may farther prefume 
 from the Bomberg Edition having there in the 
 Margin -j&'Cf. The Local Title has alfo the 
 wrong Letter in Samuel ; as we may infer from 
 the Hero immediately preceding being alfo an 
 Hararite ; and becaufe the Name there, both in 
 Samuel and Chronicles, is exprefs'd with an n, 
 as here in Chronicles. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is <dhiam y the fon of 
 Sbacar, the Hararite. 
 
 i Chron. xi j 35, 36: 2 Sam. xxm, 34. 
 
 nan : TIN p SsW Chro. 
 p 2Dn p vhsh* Sam. 
 
 Chro. EAp<tct,A 
 
 Sam. 
 
 We have here a very remarkable Difference 
 in the two Catalogues, and the Difference is e- 
 vidently owing to a Corruption of the Original 
 Names in Chronicles. For according to Samuel 
 there is given us only one Mighty Man, but in 
 Chronicles we have two -, but two cannot pofli- 
 
 bly
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 205 
 
 bly be included in thefe words, becaufe the Ca- 
 talogue will be then made to contain more Wor- 
 thies than thirty Seven, which is the Number 
 exprefly faid to be contain'd in it. And it muft 
 be obferv'd, that the long words in Samuel are 
 exactly prefer v'd, and exprefs'd here juft as they 
 occur in other places Elipbelet, which fre- 
 quently occurs ; but Eliphal, I believe, never : 
 and fo the Local Name Maacathite, which 
 we find exprefs'd the fame in 2 Kings 25, 23. 
 
 The Variation of the feveral Copies of the 
 LXX here in Chronicles is very obfervable 
 Alexand. A;<p**Aj Vat. Ehtyar; Aid. Z<(pct#A; 
 Complut. EAip*A Alexand. n^aty-c 5 Vat. 0v- 
 cctyap ; Aid. &, Atyiq j Complut. ii^, A<p* 
 Alexand. M%#^& ; Vat. Ktgjc3^t We may 
 take notice, that the Syriac and Arabic Verfions 
 feem to have read the laft Name without the 
 Article prefix 'd TOVD p, by rendring it qui 
 de Maacathj and ex Maacatb; and it has been 
 already obferv'd in pages 82 and 192, that the 
 Noun p prefix'd to a Name does not always 
 imply, that the Name following expreffes the 
 Father of the perfon preceding j but that it fome- 
 times expreffes the Place or Divifion of the Coun- 
 try, in which the perfon before rnention'd was 
 born or dwelt. Wherefore it feems more likely, 
 that this laft Name was here intended to exprefs 
 
 C c Elipbe-
 
 206 DISSERTATION 
 
 Eliphekfs or his Father's Local Name, than the 
 Name of his Grandfather; the mention of whom 
 does not feem to be particularly neceflary in this 
 place. 
 
 As to the prefent Corruption of the Letters 
 here in Chronicles from their correfpondent Let- 
 ters in Samuel j if we compare them, we may 
 eafily trace the Manner of the feveral Alterations 
 
 the D at the end of the firft word in Chroni- 
 cles, is in Samuel omitted the i and *j in 
 
 are parts of the two Letters n and D in 
 
 the word *)5n is corrupted from p3 and 
 in the laft word the *i is miftaken for y and 
 tranfpos'd. That the Corruption here has been 
 properly attributed to Chronicles, will be farther 
 evident ; when we conlider the next words, and 
 find the Corruption continue to be in the fame 
 Copy. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is Eliphelet, the fon of 
 Ahajbai, the Maacathite. 
 
 iChron. xi, 36 j 2 Sam. xxm, 34. 
 
 rrntf Chro. 
 
 D^W Sam. 
 
 Chro. 
 Sam. 
 
 The
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 207 
 
 The three long Words here in Samuel occur- 
 ring regularly, and being exprefs'd in other pla- 
 ces with the very fame Letters j we may pre- 
 fume them to be properly preferv'd in this place. 
 Chronicles alfo, having here lefs in its Copy, is 
 probably, on that account alfo, corrupted ; fmce 
 it is a confefs'd Maxim with all good Critics 
 that a Sentence, or a Word, or a Letter, may 
 much more eafily be omitted than added - y and 
 efpecially, where there can be no particular Rea- 
 fon to influence the Tranfcriber. It need only 
 be added, that the Proper Name here, which 
 has been chang'd in the Alexand. Edition to E- 
 A<*, is in the Complut. Edition E\ta,p ; as it is 
 in the Hebrew Text, and in all the other ancient 
 Verlions. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is Eliam, the fon of 
 Abithophel, the Gilonite, 
 
 i Chron. xi, 375 2 Sam. xx.ni, 35. 
 
 chro. 
 
 Sam. 
 
 Chro. Affupcq o 
 Sam. AaKpcq o 
 
 The Proper Name is 'nyn Hetzro in both the 
 Hebrew Copies at prefent ; but probably was o- 
 
 C c 2 riginally
 
 208 DISSERTATION 
 
 riginally n^n Hetzrai. For it is at prefent 
 in the Text of the Complut. Edition ; it is 
 in the Margin of the Bomberg, and the other 
 Editions of the Hebrew Bible; it is not only 
 nVH in the Targum on Samuel, but alfo HPI 
 in the Chaldee Paraphrafe on Chronicles, pub- 
 lifh'd by Dr. Wilkins ; it is render'd Hetzri or 
 Hetzrai> in all the ancient Verfions, except the 
 Vulgat, which reads Hezro j and we find it Afro. 
 among the Various Readings of the Latin Tranf- 
 lation by St. Jerom, lately publifh'd by Blanchi- 
 ni, in his Vindicia Canon. Scripturarum Vulg. &c. 
 Romae, 1740. 
 
 We may obferve here, that the Alexand. and 
 Vat. Editions of the LXX agree in reading the 
 Local Name here with a A in Samuel (which is 
 right) and with a ^ in Chronicles ; and it may 
 be proper to remark the Caufe of this Miftake, 
 as it will frequently lead us to difcover the Caufe 
 of Miftakes in the prefent Copies of the LXX in 
 other places. Montfaucon, in his Preface to O- 
 rigen's Hexapla, tells us, page 44 that, in 
 Origen's time and for fome Ages after, the Greek 
 Bibles were writ in Capital Letters without Ac- 
 cents - y and in that large Character there being 
 many Letters very fimilar, they were frequently 
 miftaken for each other -, and hence arofe a great 
 Number of Various Readings. The Letters, 
 
 which
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 209 
 
 which he mentions as moft fimilar, and confe- 
 quently moft frequently miftaken, are A A A 
 e c and M N. Thus, as to the three 
 firft, in Judg. i, 31, nSilN A*A* was writ in 
 fome Copies ActA*(p; Pf. 31, 16, *nnV 
 px was by fome Tranfcribers writ 01 incupoi 
 and hence K*ppjAi has been chang'd into 
 in our prefent Text of Chronicles. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is Hetzrai, the Car- 
 melite. 
 
 iChron. xi, 37; 2 Sam. xxm, 35. 
 
 p nyj chro. 
 Sam. 
 
 Chro. 
 Sam. 
 
 The Proper Name of this Mighty Man is pro- 
 bably corrupted alfo in Samuel 3 principally be- 
 caufe the Syriac and Arabic Verfions of Samuel 
 call him Gari } which is a ftrong Prefumption 
 that the Copies, which they were tranflated from, 
 read nyj -, and the j and the j are fo much a- 
 like, that it is difficult to diftinguifh them, un- 
 lefs they are very accurately exprefs'd. Befides ; 
 the Corruption will be the more eafily admitted 
 in the firft word in Samuel, becaufe the fecond 
 
 word
 
 210 DISSERTATION 
 
 word feems to be corrupted there alfo. For if 
 the Family or Local Name of this Worthy was 
 really Arblte -, it would then have been writ, not 
 i"ltf H, but >y:mn> as we find the Place Arba 
 writ y:ntf Joih. 21, n. 
 
 The Copies of the LXX are very confus'd in 
 Samuel. The Alexand. tranflates >:ntfn A^- 
 %? ; and the Vat. renders the two Names 
 by a very ftrange Conjunction of Letters in one 
 word T# Ovocucf,^ j from both which Verfions 
 we may learn, that the Authors of them read 
 another Letter different from what it is at pre- 
 fent, and that is a 3 for a n OltfH. But 
 that the prefent Reading with a Beth is right, 
 we may infer from its being a Beth in the word 
 in Chronicles - } and from its being render'd Atr; 
 in the Aid. Copy of the LXX we may infer al- 
 fo, that the Re/b in Samuel was originally a Zaln ; 
 which makes the two words the very fame 
 excepting, that here again we have the word p 
 Jilius in one Copy anfwering to the Article n pre- 
 fix'd in the other ; as has been frequently before 
 obferv'd. 
 
 The preceding extraordinary Verlion of the 
 Words MINn >"iyS by one barbarous Term Ou- 
 ^5$# makes one apply to many of the Proper 
 Names here and elfewhere that fevere Cenfure, 
 which St. Jerom (in his Epiftle to Domnio and 
 
 Rogation)
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 211 
 
 Rogation) has pafs'd upon the Tranfcribers of 
 the Book of Chronicles Libert enim vobis /o- 
 quor : it a in Gratis & Latinis Codicibus hie No- 
 minion Liber vitiofus eft, ut non tarn Hebrcza quam 
 Barbara qutedam & Sarmatica Nomina conjetta 
 arbitrandum fit. HQC Scriptorum culpte adfcri- 
 bendum, dum de emendatis inemendata fcriptitant ; 
 & fape hie tria Notftina, fubtrattis e medio fylla- 
 bis, in unum vocabulum cogunt ; vel e regione unum 
 Nomen, propter latitudinem jiiarn^ in duo <uel tria 
 "cocabula dividunt. And if this fhould not be the 
 genuine Epiftle of St. Jerom, as there are fome 
 who queftion it j yet, in that undoubted Epiftle 
 of his to Chromatius^ by way of Preface to the 
 fame Book of Chronicles, he begins with aflert- 
 ing the great Corruption of the feveral Copies of 
 the LXX Si Septuaginta Interpretum pura, & 
 ut ab eis in Grcecwn verfa ejl^ Editio permanent ; 
 fuperftue me, Chromati^ impelleres^ ut Hebrtea Vo- 
 lumina Latino Sermone tramferrem. But let us 
 return from this Hint, or rather from this un- 
 anfwerable Authority, as to the Corruptions in 
 the Greek Tranilation of the LXX ; which it 
 may have been the more proper to obferve, on 
 account of the Confidence with which fome 
 would fecurely depend upon it, as truly exprefs- 
 ing at prefent the Senfe of the Divine Original. 
 
 The Englim Verlion is Naarai, the fin of 
 Azbai. i Chron.
 
 212 DISSERTATION 
 
 iChron. xi, 38} 2 Sam. xxm, 36. 
 
 : nan p iroo pa TIN SKV Chro. 
 :n mtfo jru p Saw Sam. 
 
 Chro. I&jA cWgA^o? Naftsw, Mat&ap 
 Sam. 
 
 In thefe words are evidently included the 
 Names of Two Mighty Men, concerning whom 
 it is difficult to know what to determine ; fince 
 not only the two Original Copies, but the Ver- 
 fions alfo vary confiderably. The fafeft Rule, 
 when two Copies difagree in a Cafe of fo ob- 
 fcure a Nature (as the bare mention of a War- 
 rior's Name in the days of David muft be to us 
 at this diftance of time) feems to be to deter- 
 mine in favour of that Copy, which has the A- 
 greement of a greater Number of the Ancient 
 Veriions. This feems to be the fafeft Rule in 
 all Cafes, where the Names are not elfewhere 
 repeated in the Hebrew Text; and where we 
 are not contradicted by the Nature of the Origi- 
 nal Language, or by fome accidental Circum- 
 ftances in the Hiftory. 
 
 The Proper Name of the firft Mighty Man 
 in Chronicles StfV Joel is in Samuel StfJl' Igd; 
 two words, which differ only in one Letter ; the 
 Vau being miftaken for the fimilar Letter Gimel, 
 
 or
 
 On i CHRON. XI Off. 213 
 
 or the contrary. Joel is a common Scriptural 
 Name; one, the Prince of the half Tribe of 
 ManafTeh, Joel, thefon of Pedaiah, i Chron. 27, 
 20 j and another, Joel, thefonofjehieli^ one of 
 David's Lords of the Treafury, i Chron. 26, 22. 
 Joel then being the Name of fome confiderable 
 Men in David's time -, and Igal occurring (per- 
 haps) but once, as the Name of a Contempora- 
 ry with Jofhua, Numb. 13,7; 'tis probable from 
 hence, that the former was the true Name of 
 the Hero here celebrated. And another Circum- 
 ftance in favour of Joel is, that all the ancient 
 Verfions agree in reading Joel in Chronicles ; 
 but they vary very much as to Igal in Samuel 
 
 the Alexand. and Vat. Copies of the LXX 
 r**A, both omitting what is now the firft Let- 
 ter the Aid. i;k*#ut, and the Complut.. I^^A 
 
 the Vulg. Igaal, and the Chald. Igal but 
 the Syriac and Arabic Verfions read it widely 
 different NeaeL 
 
 The next point is, whether Joel was the Bro- 
 ther of Nathan, or his Son ; and it is probable, 
 that the former was true. Firft, becaufe it was 
 very eafy for a carelefs Tranfcriber to write Son 
 inflead of Brother Joel thefon of Nathan ; the 
 fon of being the common Connection of two Pro- 
 per Names ; but the brother of\ being a Relation 
 very feldom exprefs'd, can hardly be imagin'd to 
 
 D d have
 
 2i 4 DISSERTATION 
 
 have been fet down by a Tranfcriber, unlefs it 
 had been fo exprefs'd in the Copy from whence 
 he was tranfcribing. Betides ; Joel being no 
 where recorded as the Son of Nathan, but in 
 the place under confideration ; and one of the 
 Name in David's time being exprefly mention'd, 
 as the Son of Pedaiah, and another of Jebieti : 
 'tis probable on this account, that Nathan was 
 not Joel's Father, but his Brother : and fo the 
 fecond Error in Samuel accompanies the firft. 
 
 As to the next word, the Senfe of that will 
 depend upon the two words that follow it. For 
 if the two laft words compleatly exprefs the Pro- 
 per and Local (or Family) Name of another 
 Mighty Man, as in Samuel, then the word 
 PQSD in Samuel muft belong to two words pre- 
 ceding : confequently, if the two laft words were 
 originally incompleat, as at prefent in Chroni- 
 cles the fon of Haggeri ; the word *irQQ in 
 Chronicles muft be then the Proper Name, and 
 precede the two words following. 
 
 Let us begin with the laft wordj which in 
 Samuel is HJH the Gaddite, but in Chronicles 
 Hjn Haggerij which perhaps occurs no where 
 elfe in the Bible as a Proper Name. The An- 
 cient Verfions unanimoufly (except the Aid. Co- 
 py of the LXX) declare for the prefent Reading 
 in Samuel. But in Chronicles the Verfions are 
 
 very
 
 On i C HRON. XI &c. 215 
 
 very diiagreeing ; and (which feems fufficient to 
 determine in favour of Samuel) the Syriac and 
 the Arabic Verfions of Chronicles evidently read 
 the lafl word as in Samuel : for the Syriac Ver- 
 fion of thefe three words is >^ ,._, KA^SO 
 T!"OO ; and the Arabic <^<iJ\ o-ss-Coj 
 m ]D nW TODl. Thefe two Ver- 
 fions of Chronicles agreeing with the feveral Ver- 
 fions of Samuel, in the prefent reading of the 
 lafl word in Samuel H3H the G-adlte-, we may 
 conclude that to have been the originally true 
 word. 
 
 But if this lafl word be the Gadite, the two 
 preceding words cannot be fuppos'd to have been 
 p "1PQO Mibhar the fon of; for what Propriety 
 is there in faying Mibhar the fon of the Gadite? 
 And it may be remark'd, as a farther Proof that 
 the word "irOO Mibhar has been corrupted j 
 that the Syriac and Arabic Verfions read it 
 Michad- t the Complut. Edition of the LXX 
 Gaq, and the Vat. MeCctctA. 'Tis probable then, 
 that the true Reading was Bani the Gadite -, as 
 we have it at prefent in Samuel : as a confe- 
 quence of which Conceilion, we mufi allow 
 *1POO in Chron. (which v/e fee has been cor- 
 rupted, and read different ways) to have been 
 originally PQD ex Tzobd, asat prefent in Chro- 
 nicles. 
 
 D d 2 The
 
 216 DISSERTATION 
 
 The famous Lud. Cappellus, in his Critica Sa- 
 cra> pag. 20, obferves on this Paflage i Chron. 
 11,38; 2 Sam. 23, 36 : qui duo loci par alleli me- 
 died manu egere videntur He then mentions 
 the Difagreements of the Verfes, without at- 
 tempting to correct the words that are corrupt- 
 ed ; 'till he comes to njn ^ imo in Samuel, 
 which words mould be (he fays) HJH p rOVD 
 as at prefent in Chronicles. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is Joel, the brother of 
 Nathan, ofTzobah; Bani, the Gadite. 
 
 I Chron. xi, 39; 2 Sam. xxm, 37. 
 W Chro. 
 
 W Sam. 
 
 Chro. 
 Sam. 
 
 Nothing farther need be obferv'd here, than 
 that the two Names of this Mighty Man are re- 
 gularly the fame in the two Hebrew Copies; 
 tho' the true Greek Veriion of the Proper Name 
 zsAtapc in Samuel has been corrupted into the 
 ftrange Name of z^Atp^ in Alexand. Copy of the 
 LXX in Chronicles. 
 
 The Englifh Veriion is ---- Tzekk, the Am- 
 monite. 
 
 I Chron.
 
 On i CHRON, XL &c. 217 
 
 iChron. xi, 39 j 2 Sam. xxm, 37. 
 
 p nv *SD N^:J *rmn nm Chro. 
 : rrn* p SK v 'So 'NKN Tntfnn nm Sam. 
 
 Chro. N&apcq o B^ 
 
 Sam. Ti^ooot o ZqpuS'eu', oupuv ret, trx,<jvi lua> 
 
 Chro. 
 
 Sam. 
 
 The Proper Name of this Worthy is regular- 
 ly the fame in both Samuel and Chronicles ; 
 and is diftinguim'd from another Worthy alrea- 
 dy mentioned (page 209) by a difference in the 
 fecond Letter of his Name. The Local Name 
 being properly exprefs'd in Samuel, an tf is o- 
 mitted in it in Chronicles. The Participle tftpj 
 .has a Tod very improperly added at the end of it 
 in Samuel ; and as this is the leaft of all the He- 
 brew Letters, fo there are many Inftances of its 
 being improperly inferted elfewhere the Tran- 
 fcribers of the ancient Manufcripts having pro- 
 bably taken for a Tod what was only part of 
 fome adjoining Letter. 
 
 I mail mention two very remarkable Places, 
 where this Tod has been inferted improperly ; 
 tho' in thefe the Infertion of it may pofTibly have 
 been made, not from Chance, but by Defign. 
 The Jewifh Tranfcribers have added the Tod im- 
 
 properly,
 
 218 DISSERTATION 
 
 properly, at the end of the Noun mm in that 
 
 famous Prophecy of the Pfalmift, Pf. no, 4; 
 Thou art a Prieft for ever., mm *?y after the 
 Order of Melchifedek : which Place has been ex- 
 cellently illustrated by Mr. Langford in his late 
 Objections to a Pamphlet intituled Critical Notes 
 on Scripture. But according to the prefent Read- 
 ing, the Senfe and Force of this Text (on which 
 the Author of the Epiftle to the Hebrews expa- 
 tiates fo much) finks into juil Nothing ; for the 
 literal Verfion of the words now is Tu es Sa- 
 cerdos in (Zternum^ fecundum Ordinem MEUM Mel- 
 chifedek. 
 
 There is alfo another Text of equal Confe- 
 quence, where the flrong Reafoning of the Apo- 
 ftles St. Peter and St. Paul is invalidated by the 
 improper Infertion of this fame Letter, in Pfal, 
 1 6, 10 ; Thoujhalt not leave my Soul in He/I, nei- 
 ther foa/t thou fiiffer (Thy Holy One, according to 
 all the Verfions ; but, if we adhere literally to 
 the printed Hebrew Copies, which have this Tod 
 inferted, it will be) Thy Saints to fee Corruption : 
 as the fame word "pTDn is render'd in Pfalm 
 52,9579,2^132,9; 145,10. But, not to mul- 
 tiply inftances of the improper Infertion of this 
 Letter ; thefe may be Sufficient to mew the Rea- 
 fonablenefs and Neceffity of expunging it in fome 
 other Places, as it ought to be in the Verfe now 
 
 under
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 219 
 
 under confideration. And thefe Instances may 
 perhaps put all Serious Chriftians upon delibe- 
 rating whether they fhould any longer main- 
 tain the Abfolute Integrity of the Prefent He- 
 brew Text. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is Naharai, the Bee- 
 rothite, the Armour-Bearer of Joab thefon of Ze- 
 ruiah. 
 
 i Chron. xi, 40 ; 2 Sam. xxiu, 38. 
 
 ,* nrrn :ru nnn *ny Chro. 
 :nnn 11:1 nrrn NT? Sam. 
 
 Chro. Ityg o It&te/, ra,prj o 
 Sam. Eicts o 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is ---- Ira, the Ithrite -, 
 Gareb, the Ithrite. 
 
 i Chron. xi, 41 ; 2 Sam. xxiu, 39. 
 
 p nnr nnn nnw Chro. 
 *^ hi ^nnn nm Sam. 
 
 Chro. Qupetf XtT&i, "ZaGaT ijcf OA;, 
 
 Sam. Ovpi&f o Xtfleuor 7mv\tf Tputxsvla tcaf vnla,. 
 
 We have here in Samuel the Loft of the Thir- 
 ty Seven Mighty Men, the brave Hero and faith- 
 ful Subjeft, Uriah the Hittite 3 whofe two Names 
 
 are
 
 220 DISSERTATION 
 
 are properly exprefs'd in both Copies. And then 
 the Chapter in Samuel concludes the Catalogue 
 with thefe Words (which are invariably the fame 
 in all the Copies of the Original and in all the 
 Verlions) Thirty and Seven in all. But the Au- 
 thor of Chronicles, after mentioning Uriah the 
 Hittite, adds another Mighty Man, Zabad the 
 fon of Ahlai ; for this Hero, fucceeding one of 
 the Original Thirty Seven, (who is omitted in 
 this Catalogue of Chronicles) is added here at 
 the End to recompleat the eftablifh'd Number. 
 See pages 17 and 183. 
 
 The Englim Veriion in Chronicles is Uriah t 
 tbeHittite-, Zabad, the fin of Ahlai : and in Sa- 
 muel Uriah> the Hittite. Thirty and Seven in 
 all. 
 
 THUS ends the CATALOGUE of DAvib's 
 THIRTY SEVEN WARRIORS ; a Body of 
 Men ( if we may infer the Merit of them All 
 from the well-known Characters of Some) equal, 
 perhaps, in Heroic Bravery and true Military 
 Glory, to any Body of Men, of the fame Num- 
 ber, that ever liv'd at one time. Men! Who, 
 adhering to David, after his Divine Defignation 
 
 to
 
 On i CH RON. XI &c. 221 
 
 to the Throne, were the INSTRUMENTS of fix- 
 ing him in his Kingly Government over the 
 Twelve Tribes of Ifrael : enabling him, not on- 
 ly to raife one of the moft illuftrious Monarchies 
 in the World j but to ftop the wide-fpreading 
 Idolatry of his Age to eftablifh the Worfhip 
 of THE ONE TRUE GOD and, by the uni- 
 ted Affiftance of Poetry the moft Sublime, and 
 of Mufic proportionally perfect, to proclaim the 
 Name of JEHOVAH to the World, and make His 
 Praife to be Glorious. 
 
 Such are the MIGHTY MEN, who were 
 thought Worthy of being recorded in Holy 
 Scripture; and Who have been recorded there 
 by Two Hiftorians, as Men, whofe Names were 
 to endure for ever, and whofe Fame was to be 
 tranfmitted down among all Pojle rities for ever- 
 more. But Low are the MIGHTY fallen! All 
 their Virtue, all their Heroifm has hardly fe- 
 cur'd them from the Sentence pafs'd upon Men 
 of oppofite Characters The Name of the Wicked 
 flail rot. 
 
 For, from the preceding Obfervations it has 
 appear 'd, that fuch Corruptions have been intro- 
 duc'd by Tranfcribers into the true Names of 
 thefe Worthies, that they were in danger of be- 
 ing (fome of them) utterly blotted out from under 
 Heaven. Has not Jafoobeam the Hachmonite, that 
 
 E e Mighty
 
 222 DISSERTATION 
 
 Mighty Man of Valour, who encountred a whole 
 Regiment of Philiftines, dwindled in the flrft Ca- 
 talogue into Adino the Eznite ? And has not the 
 brave Sbammab, who defeated a Party of the Phi- 
 liftines by his own lingle Arm, in the fecond 
 Catalogue been totally omitted ? But, not to re- 
 capitulate the other Warriors, whofe Names have 
 been omitted or corrupted through the CarelefT- 
 nefs of Tranfcribers, this we may rationally main- 
 tain that as thefe Heroes were at firft thought 
 Worthy of being celebrated once, and twice alfo, 
 in the Sacred Hiftory j it cannot be improper to 
 preferve their True Names, in order to continue 
 to them the perpetual Honours which were de- 
 iign'd them. 
 
 But be the Merit and the Fame of thefe Migh- 
 ty Men more or lefs illuftrious, their Hiflories 
 are interwoven in THE BOOK OF SCRIPTURE ; 
 which, being given by the Infpiration of God, is 
 infinitely valuable : confequently every the leaft 
 Miftake, introduc'd into the prefent Copies of 
 the Divine Original, inflead of being fuperfli- 
 tioufly confecrated by Age, mould be religiouf- 
 ly pointed out and rationally corrected that 
 fo THE BIBLE, the gracious Gift of God to 
 Man, may be univerfally receiv'd, unexception- 
 ably admir'd, and beyond all Contradiction ap- 
 pear to be, what it really is, Worthy of God, and 
 
 Worthy
 
 On i C II R O N. XI &c. 223 
 
 Worthy of all Acceptation. And if every incau- 
 tious Error of the Tranfcribers fhould be care- 
 fully attended to j moil certainly the clofeft At- 
 tention Ihould be paid to all fuch Mistakes, as 
 introduce Confujion and Contradiction. Neither of 
 thefe could have obtain'd Originally ; and both 
 of them have frequently been objected by the 
 Advocates for Infidelity and might not fome 
 Objections be urg'd very ftrenuouily, if we 
 were to maintain the abfolute Integrity of the 
 prefent Hebrew Copies, or not to corred: the 
 Errors of Tranflators ? 
 
 The Two Catalogues of David's Chief Migh- 
 ty Men, who were 'Thirty and Seven in all^ have 
 been now compar'd ; in order to difcover their 
 feveral Miftakes and Corruptions. But, tho' the 
 Author of the Book of Samuel concludes with 
 Uriah, the laft of the Thirty Seven j yet the 
 Author of the Book of Chronicles adds Fifteen 
 Warriors more, on whom it may be now pro- 
 per to make a few Obfervations. 
 
 Thefe Fifteen are undoubtedly recorded, be- 
 caufe they were Brave Men ; and we may fairly 
 prefume, that they are recorded after the Thirty 
 Seven, becaufe their Bravery was not equally e- 
 minent and ferviceable. As the Thirty therefore 
 were inferior to the Seven to the Captain Ge- 
 
 E e 2 ncral,
 
 224 DISSERTATION 
 
 neral, and to the Three Generals of the Two 
 Ternaries ; fo were thefe Fifteen inferior to the 
 Thirty. And indeed this is exprefly obferv'd of 
 Adina ; and very properly obferv'd of Him, as 
 being the Firft of the following Number. For 
 in Verfe the 42d of this Chapter of Chronicles 
 we read Adina ^ the Reubenite, the Captain of 
 the Reubenites j Q'tS^tP vWl but the thirty were 
 fuperior to him, or bis Superiors: which is juft 
 the Reverfe of what is faid of Eenaihu ( Chap. 
 27, 6 ) D'&'S&y hy he was Superior to the Thirty ; 
 as he certainly was, by being the fecond Gene- 
 ral of the fecond Series. 
 
 Through this whole Chapter, or Catalogue of 
 David's Worthies, each is mention'd by himfelf, 
 as a Brave Man ; independently of the particu- 
 lar Number of Men, over whom each prefided, 
 as an Officer. Adina therefore being indubitably 
 recorded in the fame manner with all the reft, 
 the words D'C^7tP vSyi do not fignify & cum 
 eo Triginta ; but, as Junius and Tremellius have 
 render'd them (and as the Nature of the Hiftory 
 and their remarkable Situation in the Chapter re- 
 quire they mould be render'd) at t amen fupe- 
 riores eo Triginta. 
 
 Dr. Delany, in his Life of David (Vol. 2, pag. 
 44) obfcrves that David had Three Com- 
 manders in chief of the firft order, three of the 
 
 fecond,
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 225 
 
 fecond, thirty one of the third, and thirty of the 
 fourth. And for a Proof of this laft Order of 
 Thirty he refers to this 42d Verfe, taking the 
 words in the common Tranllation and Thirty 
 with him. But I muft beg Leave to differ from 
 that worthy Author in this point. 
 
 It will readily be granted, that the Thirty 
 here mention'd muft be mention'd either as Adi- 
 na's Inferiors, Equals or Superiors. That they 
 were not his Inferiors, or that he was not their 
 prefiding Officer, is evident from the Reafon be- 
 fore affign'd ; namely that every Worthy is 
 here recorded only for his own Perfonal Valour, 
 without mentioning the particular Allotment or 
 Number of Men which he commanded, as an 
 Officer. That they were not his Equals, or (ac- 
 cording to Dr. Delany) of the fame Order, is evi- 
 dent from hence j that they would then have 
 been exprefly mention'd by Name, equally with 
 Adina j as the Warriors of the other feveral Or- 
 ders had particularly been : and indeed whoever 
 is not nam'd, is certainly not celebrated at all. 
 Belides ; if Adina be here mention'd as one of a 
 Fourth Order of Thirty (which, by the way, he 
 cannot be ; fince he with Thirty would be Thirty 
 One) the Worthies mention'd in this Chapter af- 
 ter him, who are but Fourteen, could never be 
 intended to compleat an Order of Thirty -, and 
 
 there-
 
 226 DISSERTATION 
 
 therefore they muft be introduced without any 
 Order or Regularity at all, without the leaft 
 Reafon affign'd for their making part of the 
 Company thus honourably recorded. 
 
 But upon the Supposition, that the Thirty 
 here mention'd were Adina's Superiors, the Hi- 
 ftory of this Chapter and the feveral Heroes 
 therein celebrated will be ftriftly regular. It be- 
 gins with Joab, David's Captain General > and 
 gives the Reafon of his obtaining that fupreme 
 Poll of Military Honour. Then it mentions the 
 Three Generals of the two Ternaries, who were 
 under Joab. And after thefe Seven, who were 
 the Moft Honourable^ it gives us the Names of 
 Thirty more, called the Mighty Men, who were 
 inferior to the Seven ; and whofe Names only 
 are mention'd, without their Exploits. After the 
 Enumeration of this Body of Thirty, the Hifto- 
 rian mentions Adina, the Chief of the Reube- 
 nites; but obferves, that he does not mention 
 him, as equally honourable with the preceding 
 Thirty ; for that the Thirty 'were his Superiors. 
 
 This is the Regular Order of the Chapter; 
 and certainly the moft obvious and natural Ren- 
 dring of the Words DP*W vSjn is attamen 
 Juperiores eo Triginta. To this Authority of Jun. 
 and Trem. may be added that of Ar. Montanus, 
 who alfo renders them & fuper eo Triginta. 
 
 And
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 227 
 
 And to thefe muft be added the greater Autho- 
 rity of the LXX -, who, in both the Alexand. 
 and Vat. Editions render the words xo/ tm ew- 
 TM Tyia,wrm j the Latin Verfion of which in the 
 London Polyglott. is & fuper eum Triginta. 
 The Syriac Verfion has here miflaken the true 
 Senfe, by rendring the words G? ifte prtepofi- 
 tus erat triginta viris > which it is impoffible the 
 "Hebrew words can fignify. And the Arabic 
 Verfion is either corrupted in this place itfelf, or 
 was made from a Copy here corrupted, or per- 
 haps both ; for it renders the word here Ef 
 Adinu Sarajilius e Tribu Rubelis. Hi erant pr<z- 
 pojiti tricenis. 
 
 It may be now proper to give the Original 
 Words of this 42d Verfe, and of the few re- 
 maining Verfes of this Chapter in Chronicles, 
 together with the Greek Verfion, in the Order 
 before obferv'd. 
 
 iChron. xi, 42. 
 
 p 
 
 Key tin cwru 
 
 XWTA, 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is Adina, tbe fen of 
 Sbiza, the Reubenite y a Captain of the Renbenites; 
 but the 'Thirty 'were his Superiors. 
 
 i Chron,
 
 228 DISSERTATION 
 
 i Chron. xi, 43. 
 
 p pn 
 
 , o 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is Hanan> the fon of 
 Maacah - t and Jojhaphat, the Mithnite. 
 
 i Chron. xi, 44. 
 
 omn n Wuh yiy 
 
 j, 'S.ctppa, Koq I>jA tjoi XaJufA TX Apap 
 
 Several of the Brave Men here enumerated 
 feem to have dwelt beyond, or on the Eaft Side 
 of Jordan j for the Places, from whence they are 
 denominated, certainly lay in that part of the 
 Country. In the laft Verfe we had Hanan, the 
 fon of Maacah y or the Maacathite \ one from a- 
 mong that People, who were the old Inhabi- 
 tants beyond Jordan: as appears from Jofh. 13, 
 13. And in this Verfe we have firft Uzzia, the 
 AJhtarothite ; one of AJktaroth, a Town beyond 
 Jordan: Jofh. 13, 12. The two Warriors next 
 recorded were Aroerites 3 and Aroer was alfo be- 
 yond Jordan: Jom. 13, 9. 
 
 The Proper Name SxiV* 1 ! mould probably be 
 W'yl ; that being the Marginal Reading noted 
 by the Maforets, and being exactly exprefs'd in 
 
 all
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 229 
 
 all the Copies of the LXX. Tis obfervable, that 
 in i Chron. 5 j 7, 8, we read ^NW* Jehiel 
 and Azaz the fon of yotP Shema, who dwelt 
 HjnV3 at Aroer ; three Names, which, occur- 
 ring in this laft place with the fame Letters as 
 in the Verfe before us, give us reafon to think 
 that the words in both places are uncorrupted. 
 And as the Maforets have given the Sound of 
 Sbema to this Proper Name in the Fifth Chap- 
 ter, it may be proper to give it the fame Sound 
 here in the Eleventh Chapter j as it will the bet- 
 ter diftinguifh this Warrior from Shammah and 
 Shamhothj the Mighty Men recorded in the pre- 
 ceding Catalogue: pages 142 and 180. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is Uzzia, the AJhta- 
 rothite-j She ma and Jehiel, tbefons of Hotharn, the 
 Aroerite. 
 
 i Chron. xi, 45. 
 
 xcq LMct^M, o ctkhtyos cw\x o Quoiq, 
 
 Jedibe/, or (as it is fometimes exprefs'd) Je- 
 diael is here literally faid to be the fon of Shimri *, 
 but in the Margin of the Englifh Bible the two 
 words not? p are render'd Shimrite which 
 (hews, that the Tranflator or Tranflators of that 
 Book took nw p and nDPH to have the fame 
 
 F f Signifi-
 
 230 DISSERTATION 
 
 Signification j which is agreeable to fome prece- 
 ding Obfervations, concerning the word p and 
 the emphatic Article.- But as the next Warrior 
 Joha is here faid to be a Titzite, and to be Je- 
 dihel's Brother j we may infer, that Jedibel was 
 not a Shimrite, but the fon of Shimri, who will 
 therefore be Father both to him and to Joha. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is Jedihel, the fon of 
 Sbimri ; and Joha, his brother, the Titzite. 
 
 iChron. xr, 46. 
 
 ann Dnnon 
 
 nom 
 
 lutna, o 
 
 j XMJ Ii&tpct, o 
 
 The firft Proper Name here is 7H7K E//V7, 
 but the Alexand. Copy of the LXX renders it 
 isAwjA Jeliel; and the Verfions are here confus'd: 
 but they are uniform in having read ^N^tf Eliel 
 as the firft Proper Name in the Verfe following. 
 And it may be therefore right to prefer the A- 
 lexand. Reading here Stf^K 1 Jetiel, as it will 
 diftinguim thefe two Warriors from one an- 
 other. 
 
 The Local or Family Name otjetiel here, be- 
 ing Dinon, is render 'd in the Englim Verfion 
 
 the
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 231 
 
 the Mahavite. But had that been the true Senfe 
 of the Word, we may prefume, from the con- 
 ftant Form of Local Names in this Catalogue 
 and elfewhere, that it would have been writ 
 >inon. And perhaps it was fo writ here Origi- 
 nally, and the final Mem has been added impro- 
 perly by a Tranfcriber ; becaufe the Mem is not 
 exprefid in any Copy of the LXX, except the 
 Complutenfian : but indeed all the Verfions here 
 are remarkably confus'd. 
 
 Perhaps there is no Bible Word that comes 
 any way near this Local or Family Name, but 
 D*in, Hivttes -, and if this word originally ex- 
 prefs'd Jeliel's being an Hivite or one of the Hi- 
 vifer, it muft have been writ D'lPinft ; fmce the 
 Prepofition precedes the emphatic Article : fee 
 the word D'^StPHD in page the 144^1 of this 
 DiiTertation, and the word DynD Jugd. 20, 31. 
 That an Hivite may be here recorded, is evident 
 from the mention of an Ammonite in verfe the 
 39th an Hiftite in verfe the 41 ft and a 
 Moabite in verfe the 46th. 
 
 Whether thefe Brave Men were afTociated A- 
 liens, (born from Families that were Hivztes, 
 Hittites &c.) who revolting to David were lift- 
 ed among his own Troops, and rewarded with 
 their deferv'd Honours; or whether they were 
 fo call'd from their being born or having liv'd in 
 
 Ff 2 the
 
 232 DISSERTATION 
 
 the refpective Countries of the IHvites, Hittites 
 &c. is perhaps not eafy to determine. But, 
 whatever they were by Birth, whether Enemies 
 or Friends to David j we need not doubt of their 
 having diftinguim'd themfelves in his Service a- 
 gainfl the Enemies of Ifrael. But the Suppofi- 
 tion of Jeliel's being an Hivite is not fo proba- 
 ble, as the former Suppolition of his being a 
 Mabavite; fmce this laft feems to receive the 
 moil Countenance from the feveral Verfions. 
 
 The Englifh Verfion is Jeliel, the Maha- 
 vite j and Jeribai, and s jofha e viah> the fom of El- 
 naam ; and Ithmah the Moabite. 
 
 i Chron. xi, 47. 
 
 x^t/ luQ>v\o xcq Eoorj>jA o 
 
 In this laft verfe the Local or Family Name, 
 which concludes the verfe, is a word equally 
 perplexing with the word D'lnnD in the verfe 
 preceding : and the Difficulty is nearly of the 
 fame nature. If this word fignify the Metzo- 
 baite^ as render'd in our Englifh Bible 5 then 
 the n is improperly added at the end of this 
 word, as the D was at the end of Mabavitt. 
 If this be not the true Rendring of it, there 
 
 feems
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 233 
 
 fecms to be another Method of explaining it : 
 which is to render it ex Tzobd, as if it was ori- 
 ginally writ rmtfHD with the two firft Let- 
 ters tranfpos'd again as in the former inftance, 
 and the inferted inftead of the i omitted. For 
 the Vau is here underftood univerfallyj and in 
 the Bomberg Edition it is exprefs'd pr^yon. 
 The word p"Ol Tzobah is the Name of the 
 Capital City of Hadadezer King of Syria j and 
 a Man of Tzobah might as well be here enume- 
 rated, as an Hittite or an Ammonite. The An- 
 cient Verfions favour the former Explanation, 
 which therefore feems to be the Senfe we mould 
 prefer; that being certainly a concluiive Argu- 
 ment for the Senfe of an obfcure Name, where 
 there is no Argument to the contrary. 
 
 But if the Word feems lefs likely to have fig- 
 nified ofTzoba, than Metzobaite ; it is more like- 
 ly that it mould have fignified Metzobaites : and 
 the only Corruption then will be that of a CD 
 into the fimilar Letter pj, which has been fre- 
 quently the Cafe elfe where ; fee pages 86 and 
 87. That the Local Name is fometimes Plural 
 ( and properly fo, to exprefs its Agreement and 
 Relation to more Proper Names than one) is 
 evident from the 6th verfe of the next Chapter ; 
 which verfe is Elkanah, and Jejiah, and A- 
 zaree/, and Joezar, and Ja/kobeam, tD'mpn the 
 
 Korhitcs.
 
 234 DISSERTATION 
 
 Korhites. And indeed there feems a Necemty 
 of giving the word under confideration a Plural 
 Signification; becaufe there are two Warriors, 
 who will otherwife have no Local or Family 
 Appellation at all. 
 
 The Englim Verfion then will be //>/, 
 
 and Obed, and Jafiel^ the Metzobaites. 
 
 I HAVE now laid before the Learned Reader 
 my Obfervations on thefe Chapters ; which 
 have been thus particularly examin'd, not mere- 
 ly to eftablifh the Certainty of Corruptions in the 
 printed Hebrew Text, but in hopes of pointing 
 out the Original 'Reading in feme of the many Pla- 
 ces here corrupted. As thefe Chapters contain 
 the very fame Hiftory, I have carefully corn- 
 par 'd them, in order to difcover their feveral Va- 
 riations; and have endeavour'd likewife to fix 
 the different nature of thefe Variations which 
 of them may fairly be fuppos'd to have been ori- 
 ginally intended by the later Author, and which 
 of them remain to be charg'd upon the Igno- 
 rance and Carelefnefs of the 'Tranfcribers. 
 
 A large Share of them has indeed been afcrib'd 
 to this latter Caufe ; and yet I am at the fame 
 time fenfible, what Prejudices obtain in favour 
 of thofe very Tranfcribers. I do not mean here 
 
 the
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 235 
 
 the Prejudices of Jews in favour of Jews ; fince 
 there are fufficient Proofs, that the Exiftence 
 of Miftakes has been, by the wifer part of them, 
 in fad acknowledg'd in the Hebrew Text. For 
 (not to infift upon the Various Readings now 
 found in their own favourite Books of the Mif- 
 na, Talmud, Gemara &c.) what elfe, but the Va- 
 rious Readings offome different Copies, are the 200 
 Differences in Letters and Words, collected from 
 the Hebrew Copies us'd by the Oriental and Oc- 
 cidental Jews, i. e. the Jews who .liv'd at Baby- 
 lon and in Palejline ? And what elfe are the 800 
 or 1000 Notes call'd Ken and Cetib, and mark'd 
 in the Margin of their Bibles by the Jews them- 
 felves ? directing, that fuch and fuch Words, 
 tho' writ in the Text, are not to be read; and 
 that fuch and fuch Words are to be read, that 
 are not writ that one Word is fometimes im- 
 properly made two, and that fometimes two 
 Words are improperly united. And it muft be 
 added, that the Jews unanimoufly acknowledge, 
 that there are at prefent TWENTY FIVE VERSES, 
 which have in them an Hiatus or Gap, in which 
 fomething is wanting to compleat the Senfe. 
 
 But, by the Prejudices before-mention'd, are 
 meant fuch Prejudices in favour of the Jewijh 
 Zran/crtbers as are entertain'd by Chriftians ; but 
 in different Degrees. Some there are of thefe, 
 
 who
 
 236 DISSERTATION 
 
 who refolutely maintain, that the Care of the 
 Jews in transcribing the Holy Books was fuch, 
 or that the Providence of God fo fuperintended 
 the Jewifh Tranfcribers, that they never miftook 
 at all. Thefe men may perhaps imagine, that 
 what the Jews have told us of their Paraphraft 
 Jonathan , was true of all their 'Tranfcribers - t 
 namely, that if a Fly pitch 'd upon the Book or the 
 Body of a Tranfcriber (during his tranfcribing) fo 
 as to be likely to divert his Attention^ it was imme- 
 diately conj'wrid by Fire from Heaven. 
 
 That there are Perfons, who maintain the ab- 
 folute Integrity of the prefint Hebrew Copies, has 
 been obferv'd once already ; and let the point (as 
 it may feem incredible to Men, who know Mif- 
 takes have been made by the Tranfcribers of the 
 Greek Teftament, and of all other Books in the 
 world) be farther prov'd by the Opinion of the 
 the learned Wolfiw (Biblioth. Heb. Tom. 2. pag. 
 
 10) Liter is & Vocalibus nullam Labem aut 
 
 Corruptelam illatam effe exiftimamus. And that 
 this can poflibly be the Opinion alfo (at leaft 
 the Exoteric Dodtrine) of 'whole Societies of Men, 
 will appear from the words of this fame cele- 
 brated Author, among many others ; for, in page 
 27, he tells us Hehetii Theologi, & fpeciatim 
 Genevenfes, anno 1678, peculiari Canone caverint y 
 ne quis in ditione fud Minifler Ecclefice reperiatur, 
 
 nifi
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 237 
 
 nifi fateatur publice, Textum Hebrteum, ut hodie 
 eft) in exemplaribus Maforeticis, quoad Conjonantes 
 ? VocaleSy Divinum & Authenticum ejje. Or, as 
 this folemn but wonderful Profeffion is, a little 
 differently, exprefs'd by Dr. Hody (De Eibl. Text. 
 Original, pag. 567) Ab Ecclejiis Heheticis de- 
 cretum eft, ut qui ad Minifterium Sacrum, five ad 
 Munus ProfeJJbrum proveherentur , fubjcriberent 
 omnes (Sic SENTIO) Antiquitati Focalium He- 
 braicarum, non quidem notularum Jive apicukrum 
 ipforum hodiernorum, fed Leftionis hodiernce ; ita 
 ut nihil in Textu Heb. hodierno punttato agnofcatur 
 Rrrorum. 
 
 Others there are among Chriflians, and thefe 
 a confiderable Number, who agree that the 
 few Miftakes, which the Jewifh Tranfcribers 
 have made, are very flight and inconfiderable ; 
 fuch as by no means materially affed: the Con- 
 text, or pervert the true Meaning of the infpir'd 
 Writers. Whilfcfcarce any allow, or appear to 
 allow, the exiftence of fuch confiderable Mif- 
 takes, as have been pointed out in the Compa- 
 rifon of thefe Chapters. Indeed Mifhakes, of the 
 fame kind with the preceding, are as obvious in 
 other places ; fo that 'tis a Wonder they have 
 not been long fince univerfally acknowledg'd. 
 And yet, ftrange as this may appear at firft 
 
 G g fight,
 
 DISSERTATION 
 
 fight, there are certain Reafons, which have led 
 many ferious men to confider fuch places, not as 
 really corrupted, but only as containing Difficulties 
 beyond their power of Explanation. Thefe Rea- 
 fons are the Attacks of Infidels on one hand, 
 and of Catholics on the other ; from which they 
 endeavour to defend themfelves, as Chrijlians and 
 as Protejlants, by maintaining the Integrity of 
 the prefcnt Sacred Text ; which they take to 
 be an impregnable Defence againfh Both the ad- 
 verfe Parties. 
 
 For the Infidel, fay they, will infifl if there 
 are Miftakes in the Original Text of the Bible, 
 that our Divine Rule is then precarious and un- 
 certain, and confequently can be no Rule at all. 
 But if the Infidel will be unreafonabk, muft Be- 
 lievers indulge their Fears, where in reality no 
 Fear is ? Will not every fenfible Chriftian allow, 
 that the True Text of the New Teftament is not 
 render 'd precarious by the Multitude of Various 
 Readings there collated ? And will not every fen- 
 fible Infidel allow, that the True Text of all the 
 Heathen Philofophers, Hiftorians and Poets, is 
 in fact ejlabliftid by the careful Comparifon of 
 many Copies and Verfions ; fince from the Va- 
 rious Readings collected from them all, he will 
 be the better qualified to correct the Miftakes 
 unavoidably made by Tranfcribers in every fm- 
 
 *
 
 On i C H R O N. XI Gfc. 239 
 
 gle Tranfcript ? And yet the fame Infidel may 
 be expected (among other Articles of Unreafon- 
 ablcnefs) to object to the Notion of Miflakes 
 made by Tranfcribers in the Text of the Tivo 
 Teftaments \ fince , if thefe Miflakes were all 
 clearly pointed out and fairly corrected, he 
 would lofe moft of his Common-Place Wit and 
 Invective. 
 
 But yet, fay thefe Proteftants, mould we al- 
 low Miflakes in the prefent Text of the Hebrew 
 Bible, the Catholic will tell us that We can 
 have no fafe Reliance on a corrupted Text ; and 
 mufl therefore refer, for the true and certain 
 Senfe of Scripture, to an infallible Church and 
 an authenticated Vulgat. But Infinuations or Af- 
 fertions of this kind are equally unreafonable 
 with the former. For do not Proteflants abfo- 
 lutely deny the Exiftence of Infallibility in any 
 particular Man or Society, and confequently in 
 the Church of Rome ? And may they not fafely 
 deny it (if there were no other Argument) up- 
 on the ftrength of this plain Maxim That a 
 Bifhop, or Council, which has errd, may err -, and 
 therefore is not infallible ? And as to their Vulgat 
 Verfion, though authenticated at the Council of 
 Trent, the wifer Catholicks themfelves now al- 
 low, that there are many Various Readings in the 
 different Copies of it, and that it is capable of 
 
 G g 2 mud).
 
 2 4 o DISSERTATION 
 
 much Improvement. And this ; notwithftanding 
 the Editors of the Complutenfian Bible ( in which 
 the Vulgat is plac'd in the middle Column be- 
 tween the Hebrew Ferity and the Verlion of the 
 LXX) have, in the Prologue, impioujly refem- 
 bled the Vulgat fo plac'd to Jefus Cbrift crucified 
 between two 'Thieves. 
 
 If then the Scriptures of the Old Teftament 
 could be in f aft render d precarious by the acknow- 
 ledgment of fome Miftakes in the prefent Co- 
 pies of it, no concluiive Argument, we fee, 
 would arife from it in favour of the Church of 
 Rome, or of its Vulgat Verjion j fince the one is 
 not an infallible Interpreter, nor the other a per- 
 fetf Interpretation. But that the Old Teftament 
 is not render d precarious by the acknowledgment 
 of fome Miftakes in the prefent Copies of it, 
 any more than the New Teftament, is and muft 
 be undeniable : and that it is really the cafe in 
 neither is evident, becaufe no Miftakes could have 
 obtain'd in the Originals j and confequently the 
 Difcovery and Correction of the Miftakes found 
 in the prefent Copies muft reftore thefe Sacred 
 Books nearer and nearer to that pure State, in 
 which they came from the hands of their in- 
 fpir'd Authors. 
 
 As I have juft before-mention'd the Council of 
 Trent, that famous Council, in which the Me- 
 rits
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 241 
 
 rits of the Original Text of both Teftaments and 
 of their Verflons were debated, and the Vulgat 
 Latin was, by the Sacred Committee, on the 
 memorable i7th of March, declar'd Authentic ; 
 it may be obferv'd, that Madruccius, a German 
 Bifhop, who was among the loudeft Advocates 
 for eftabliming the Latin Verfion^ in oppofition 
 to the Hebrew and Greek Originals^ exprefs'd his 
 Zeal without Knowledge, in the following pathe- 
 tic Periods Utinam mmquam hue adveniflent 
 
 Liter arum Graecarum Hebraicarumque ProfeJJ'ores ! 
 Nimirum, his nunc czrumnis non divexaretur EC- 
 clefia. It may have been the lefs improper to 
 have produc'd the words of Madruccius, on this 
 occafion j as the fame fort of ferious Complaint 
 will be heard, perhaps, in thefe days of ours 
 of UneafmeJJes raisd, and of Difturbances given 
 by any Propofal, which, however rational and 
 beneficial, has the Marks of Innovation -, and ef- 
 pecially, if the Author of it ventures, tho' with 
 the utmoft Veneration, to approach the Sacred 
 Text, in order to correct fome of the many Mif- 
 takes unhappily introduc'd by Tranfcribers. 
 
 One thing is certain, that if the Miftakes and 
 Corruptions, pointed out in the preceding Ob- 
 fervations, have been reprefented as more or great- 
 er than they really are j they have not been fo 
 
 repre-
 
 242 DISSERTATION 
 
 reprefented from any Satisfaction, which the 
 Writer would receive from the Dtft&v&y or Pub- 
 lication of Miftakes. Such a Satisfaction, in ge- 
 neral, would be ungenerous -, but, in the prefent 
 cafe, it would be impious: and all good men 
 would rejoice, if e-very Attempt of this kind was 
 abfolutely unneceffary. 
 
 But Magna eft Veritas^ Gf frertxdebit. Or, 
 
 to ufe another Maxim, which perhaps has not 
 the lefs Beauty, becaufe it is Rabbinical 
 
 nftx Kin Tra trnpn hv isnin 
 
 Sigillum Dei Optimi Maximi Veritas. 
 
 Whether Attempts of this kind are, in fact, 
 needlefs j or, how far this Attempt may have 
 been properly or improperly executed; is fub- 
 mitted, with all due Deference, to the Judgment 
 and to the Candour of the Learned. The Au- 
 thor thinks of the Books of Holy Scripture, with 
 the higheft Veneration ; and his point in View 
 
 is the ascertaining their Original Words and 
 
 their True Senfe. On which account, it will yield 
 him real Pleafure to fee his Arguments, if falfe, 
 rationally confuted ; and to find thefe invaluable 
 Books more clearly illuflrated, and their True 
 Senfe more confidently eftablim'd, upon any o- 
 ther Scheme than his own. 
 
 It
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 
 
 It only remains to fubjoin the preceding Chap- 
 ters, regularly connected ; in the manner, in 
 which it is now prefum'd they ought to be tranf- 
 lated : the material Variations from the receiv'd 
 Englifh Tranflation being here diftinguifh'd by 
 Italic Characters. 
 
 It would confiderably improve us in our ac- 
 quaintance with the Old Teftament, if every He- 
 brew Letter had a dijlincl characlerijlical Sound \ 
 and was to be'conftantly exprefs'd by fuch a Let- 
 ter in Englifh, as would immediately convey to 
 the mind its correfpondent Letter in the Origi- 
 nal. But as this is a point of fome Confequence, 
 about which the Learned greatly differ in their 
 opinions ; nothing is here determin'd, or indeed 
 attempted : but the Powers of the Hebrew Let- 
 ters are exprefs'd nearly in the ufual way. 
 
 As to the Dwifan of the Verfes^ the Reader 
 will find that fomewhat different in the follow- 
 ing Chapters from what now obtains in the pre- 
 fent printed Editions. For however flrongly Eux- 
 torf y Leufden^ Pfeiffer^ and their many Admirers, 
 may infift upon it That the Divifion of the 
 Verfes of the Old Teftament was not a work 
 merely human (as that in the New Teftament was 
 made by R. Stephans) but had the peculiar Privi- 
 lege of being fix'd by the infpir'd Author of each 
 
 Book,
 
 244 DISSERTATION 
 
 Book, or at the lateft by Ezra : however flrong- 
 ly, I fay, this may be infilled upon, yet if by it 
 is meant, that the modern Divifion is of infpir'd 
 Authority, I muft prefume as flrongly to de- 
 ny it. 
 
 I fuppofe it will readily be granted, that no 
 infpir'd Author could feparate words, which the 
 Senfe determines to be infeparable. And in this 
 very 23d Chapter of Samuel, the 32d Verfe now 
 ends with fuch a word, as undoubtedly muft be 
 connected, in the fame Verfe y with the words fol- 
 lowing, which now begin the 33d Verfe 
 
 'Jonathan^ the fon of Shamha, the Hararite. 
 No great Penetration is neceflary to determine, 
 that thefe words mould be join'd together in the 
 fame Verfe ; jufl as the Proper Names of all the 
 other Heroes are every where connected with their 
 Family or Local Names -, and as this very Hero is 
 actually exprefs'd in the corresponding Verfe of 
 Chronicles. 
 
 'Tis probable, that the Divifion of the Verfes 
 of the Old Teftament has been different at diffe- 
 rent times - y and it feems certain, that Verfes were 
 not the fame in Sf. Jerom's time as at prefent. 
 For that learned Father, in his Preface to the 
 Book of Job, obferves That there were 700 or 
 800 Verfes (fome think the true reading to be 
 70, or 80) wanting in the ancient Latin Tranjla- 
 
 tion
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 245 
 
 tion of that Book : which cannot eafily be fup- 
 pos'd of fuch Verfes as the prefent, there being 
 but 1070 of our Verfes in the whole Book. 
 
 F. Simon obferves (in his Critical Hiflory of the 
 Old ft/lament , Book i. Ch. 2$.) that the Ancients 
 meant by a Verje what the Greeks call'd T<%C^, 
 and what we call a Line ; and indeed the Word 
 Verfus y from vertere to turn^ clearly points out 
 its own original Signification. Agreeably to this, 
 it appears from that part of St. Augujliris Specu- 
 lum^ which abridges the Book of Proverbs, that 
 in his time every Line (whether it concluded 
 with a Paufe in the Senfe, or not) was confi- 
 der'd as a Verfe - y and that each Line of his con- 
 fifted of about fix Words : tho' the more natural 
 Divifion thro' the Books of Job, PJa/ms, Pro- 
 verbsy &c. would certainly have been, to have 
 fet every Hemiftick in a diftinct Line. 
 
 The Nature of Verfes then having varied, and 
 the prefent Verfes (as Terminations of, or Paufes 
 in the Senfe) having been probably fix'd in the 
 Hebrew Text, as in the Greek Verfion, fome 
 Ages after the publication of the Books of the 
 Old Teftament, as they confefledly were as to 
 the New ; we mail the lefs wonder, that fome of 
 the wifer Jews made no fcruple to alter the re- 
 ceiv'd Divifion, where they found it to be erro- 
 neous. For F. Simon tells us that Eli as Levi- 
 tt h ta,
 
 246 DISSERTATION 
 
 ta, the beft Jewifh Critic, affirms, the prefent 
 Diftinction of Verfes was made by the Maforet 
 Jews, after the Talmud: and that Aben Ezra 
 mentions, amongft others, R. Mofes Cohen, a 
 learned Grammarian, who took the liberty of 
 joining fome Verfes of the Bible other-wife than 
 they were join'd by tliofe who had mark'd 
 them ; affirming, that they were miftaken in 
 thofe places. 
 
 Wherefore; as fome of the Jews have thus 
 fairly acknowledg'd the late Invention of the pre- 
 fent Divifion of the Verfes ; and others of them 
 have as ingenuoufly acknowledg'd the Exiftence 
 of Miftakes in their Copies of the Sacred Books, 
 and have honour'd the Correctors. of them : we 
 may fairly conclude, That fome Chriftiam, and 
 thefe too Proteftants, have carried their Superfti- 
 tious Notions of the Divinity^ not only of the 
 Rabbinical Copies of the Hebrew Text, but of 
 every thing relating thereto^ much higher than 
 fome even of the Jews themfefaes. 
 
 I mall only add ; that, though the preceding 
 Chapters contain a part of Hiftory, which may 
 be thought of little confequence ; and certainly 
 is fo, confider'd merely as a Hiftory: yet, as it 
 makes a part of the Hiftory of the Bible, in 
 which every thing is great and important ', either 
 
 in
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 247 
 
 in itfelf or in its Connexions ; a proper Explana- 
 tion muft be a thing truly defireable. And per- 
 haps the Remarks, which have been now fub- 
 mitted to the Public upon thefe Chapters, may 
 be of real Confequence ; as they feem to furnim 
 a Demonftration of a Point greatly debated, and 
 at prefent not generally believ'd -, and this too a 
 Point, which is certainly important enough to 
 deferve the ferious Attention of the Learned ; 
 namely 
 
 THAT there have beefi made, in the Copies 
 of the Sacred Books of the Old Teftament, very 
 many and very material MISTAKES - } which have 
 greatly injur'd the true Senfe of the infpir'd Au- 
 thors : and that thefe Miftakes which were 
 at firft introduced by the late 2cn& faulty Manu- 
 fcripts furnifh'd by the Jews and which have 
 been hitherto retain V, from a falfe notion of the 
 Jeivijh Exatfnefs in tranfcribing^ in concurrence 
 with the unaccountable Authority of an imper- 
 fect, contradictory and corrupted Mafora are 
 now (unlefs the Friends of Revelation mould 
 take the Alarm, and endeavour foon to prevent 
 it) likely to be perpetuated in the printed Hebrew 
 Bibles. ' 
 
 H h 2 2 Samuel,
 
 DISSERTATION 
 
 2 Samuel, V. 
 
 THEN came all the tribes of Ifrael to Da- 
 vid unto Hebron ; and they fpake, faying j 
 " Behold, we are thy bone and thy flefh. 
 
 2 " Moreover, in time paft, while Saul was 
 " king over us, thou leddeft out and broughteft 
 " in Ifrael : and the Lord faid unto thee, Thou 
 " malt feed my people Ifrael, and thou malt be 
 * c ruler over my people Ifrael." 
 
 3 So all the elders of Ifrael came to the king 
 unto Hebron ; and king David made a covenant 
 with them in Hebron, before the Lord; and 
 they anointed David king over Ifrael. 
 
 **## # * 
 
 6 Then the king and his men went to Jeru- 
 falem, unto the Jebufites, the inhabitants of the 
 land. And they fpake unto David, faying; 
 <c ffjoujhalt not come hither : for the blind and the 
 " lame flail keep thee off, by fay ing , David Jball 
 " not come hither. 
 
 7 But David took the ftrong hold of Zion ; 
 the fame is the city of David. 
 
 8 And David faid, on that day ; " Whofoever 
 "jirjl fmiteth the Jebufites, and through thefubter- 
 " raneous pajjage reacheth the lame and the blind, 
 " that are hated of David" s foul (becaufe the blind 
 
 " and
 
 On i C H R O N. XI Gfr. 249 
 
 i Chron. XL 
 
 THEN all Ifrael were gathered together to 
 David unto Hebron, faying ; " Behold, we 
 " are thy bone and thy flefh. 
 
 2 " Moreover, in time paft, while Saul was 
 "king, thou leddefl out and broughteft in If- 
 " rael : and the Lord thy God faid unto thee, 
 "Thou fhalt feed my people Ifrael, and thou 
 " fhalt be ruler over my people Ifrael." 
 
 3 So all the elders of Ifrael came to the king 
 unto Hebron, and king David made a covenant 
 with them in Hebron, before the Lord ; and they 
 anointed David king over Ifrael, according to the 
 word of the Lord (fulfilled) by the hand of Samuel. 
 
 4 Then David and all Ifrael went to Jerufa- 
 lem, which was Jebus ; for there the Jebufites 
 were the inhabitants of the land. 
 
 5 And the inhabitants of Jebus faid to David j 
 " Thou fhalt not come hither." But David took 
 the ftrong hold of Zion ; the fame is the city of 
 David. 
 
 6 And David faid ; " Whofoever firfl fmiteth 
 " the Jebufites, mall be head and captain." 
 
 So
 
 250 DISSERTATION 
 
 2 Samuel, V. 
 
 " and the lame continued to fay, He Jhall not come 
 " into this houfe) Jhall be head and captain'' So 
 Joab, the fon of Zeruiah, went up firjl^ and was 
 appointed head. 
 
 9 And David dwelt in the ftrong hold, and 
 called it The city of David ; and David built in 
 a circuit from Mil/o, and round to the houfe (of 
 Milk.) 
 
 i o And David waxed greater and greater : 
 for the Lord God of hofts was with him. 
 
 2 Samuel, XXIII. 
 
 8 Thefe are the names of the mighty men, 
 whom David had. Jaftobeam, the Hacmonite; 
 headyf (an order of) three : he lifted up hisfpear 
 againjl three hundred foldiers at one time. 
 
 9 And next to him was Eleazar, the fon of 
 Dodi, the Ahohite; he was one of the three 
 mighties : be was with David at Pafdammim. 
 
 10 And the Pbiliftmes were there gathered 
 together to battle, and the men of Ifrael fled : 
 but he arofe, and fmote the Philiftines, until his 
 hand was weary, and his hand clave unto the 
 
 fword 5
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 251 
 
 i Chron. XI. 
 
 So Joab, the fon of Zeruiah, went up firft, and 
 was appointed head. 
 
 7 And David dwelt in the ftrong hold ; there- 
 fore they called it The city of David. 
 
 8 And he built the city in a circuit from ~M.il- 
 loj and round to (the beginning of) that circuit : 
 and Joab was made go'vernour of the city. 
 
 9 And David waxed greater and greater : 
 for the Lord of hofts was with him. 
 
 10 Thefe alfo are the chief of the mighty men, 
 who were with David, valiantly exerting them- 
 felves with him in his kingdom, with all Ifrael, 
 to make him king; according to the word of 
 the Lord concerning Ifrael. 
 
 1 1 And this is the number of the mighty men, 
 whom David had. Jaihobeam, the Hacmonite ; 
 head of (an order of) three : he lifted up his fpear 
 againfl three hundred foldiers at one time. 
 
 1 2 And next to him was Eleazar, the fon of 
 Dodij the Ahohite ; he was one of the three 
 mighties : he was with David at Pafdammim. 
 
 13 And the Philiftines were there gathered 
 together to battle, and the men of Ifrael fled : 
 but he arofe, and fmote the Philiftines , until his 
 hand was weary , and his hand clave unto the
 
 252 DISSERTATION 
 
 2 Samuel, XXIII. 
 
 fword; (and the Lord wrought a great deliverance 
 on that day) and the people returned after him, 
 only to fpoil. 
 
 1 1 And after him was Shammah, the fon of 
 Aga, the Hararite. 
 
 1 2 And the Philiftines were gathered together 
 at Lett, where was a piece of ground full of 
 barley ; and the people fled from before the Phi- 
 liftines : but he placed himfelf in the midft of the 
 field, and faved it, and fmote the Philiftines : and 
 the Lord wrought a great deliverance. 
 
 1 3 Now thefe three, who were head men^ fu- 
 perior to the (body of) thirty, went down and came 
 ever the rock> to David, into the cave of Adul- 
 lam : and the hojl of the Philiftines was encamp- 
 ed in the valley of Rephaim. 
 
 14 And David was then in the hold, and the 
 advanced guard of the Philiftines was then at 
 Bethlehem. 
 
 1 5 And David longed, and faid ; " Oh, that 
 " I could drink of the water of the well of Beth- 
 " lehem, which is by the gate !" 
 
 1 6 Then the three mighty men brake through 
 the hoft of the Philiftines, and drew water out 
 of the well of Bethlehem, which is by the gate j 
 and took and brought it to David : but he 
 
 would
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 253 
 
 i Chron, XL 
 
 fword ; (and the Lord wrought a great deliverance 
 on that day) and the people returned after him, 
 only to fpoil. 
 
 14 And after him 'was Shammah, the fon of 
 Aga> the Hararite. 
 
 15 And the Philiftines were gathered together 
 at Lebi, where was a piece of ground full of 
 barley j and the people fled from before the Phi- 
 liftines : but he placed himfelf in the midft of the 
 field, and faved it, and fmote the Philiftines : and 
 the Lord wrought a great deliverance. 
 
 1 6 Now thefe three, who were head men, fu- 
 perior to the (body of) thirty, went down over 
 the rock, to David, into the cave of Adullam : 
 and the hoft of the Philiftines was encamped 
 in the valley of Rephaim. 
 
 17 And David was then in the hold, and the 
 advanced guard of the Philiftines was then at 
 Bethlehem. 
 
 1 8 And David longed, andfaidj "Oh, that 
 " I could drink of the water of the well of Beth- 
 " lehem, which is by the gate !" 
 
 1 9 Then the three mighty men brake through 
 the hoft of the Philiftines, and drew water out 
 of the well of Bethlehem, which is by the gate j 
 and took and brought it to David : but David 
 
 I i would
 
 254 DISSERTATION 
 
 2 Samuel, XXIII. 
 
 would not drink it, and he poured it out unto 
 the Lord. 
 
 17 And he faidj "The Lord forbid, that I 
 " fhould do this thing ! Shall I drink the blood 
 " of thefe men, who have thus hazarded their 
 
 *J / 
 
 "lives? For, at the hazard of their lives, have 
 " they brought it!' And he would not drink it. 
 Thefe things did thefe three mighty men. 
 
 1 8 And Abifhai, the brother of Joab, the fon 
 of Zeruiah, he was head of (an order of) three ; 
 for he lifted up his fpear againft three hundred 
 foldiers ; fo he had a name among three. 
 
 1 9 Was he not moft honourable of the three ? 
 Therefore he was their captain : but he attained 
 not unto the (firft) three. 
 
 20 And Benaihu, the fon of Jehoiada, the 
 fon of a man of valour, mighty in exploits, ofKab- 
 zeel-, he flew two men of Moab, who were 
 ftouter than lions : he alfo went down, and flew 
 a lion in a pit, in a fnowy day. 
 
 21. And he flew an Egyptian, a man won- 
 derful to behold; and in the hand of the E- 
 gyptian was a fpear, like a weaver s beam : 
 but he went down to him with a ftafF, and 
 plucked the fpear out of the Egyptian's hand, 
 flew him with his own fper. 
 
 22 Thefe
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &t. 255 
 
 i Chron. XL 
 
 would not drink it, and he poured it out unto 
 the Lord. 
 
 20 And he faid ; " The Lord forbid, that I 
 " mould do this thing ! Shall I drink the blood 
 " of thefe men, who have thus hazarded their 
 " lives ? For, at the hazard of their lives, have 
 <c they brought it." And he would not drink it. 
 Thefe things did thefe three mighty men. 
 
 21 And Abijhai, the brother of Joab, he 
 was head of (an order of) three ; for he lift- 
 ed up his fpear againft three hundred foldiers ; 
 fo he had a name among three. 
 
 22 Of the three he was more honourable than 
 two, therefore he was their captain: but he attain- 
 ed not unto the (firft) three. 
 
 23 And Benaihu, the fon of Jehoiada, the 
 fon of a man of valour, mighty in exploits, ofKab- 
 zeel; he flew two men of Moab, who were 
 ftouter than lions : he alfo went down, and flew 
 a lion in a pit, in a fnowy day. 
 
 24 And he flew an Egyptian, a man whofe 
 flature was five cubits high ; and in the hand of 
 the Egyptian was a fpear, like a weaver's beam : 
 but he went down to him with a ftaff, ancj 
 plucked the fpear out of the Egyptian's hand, 
 and flew him with his own fpear. 
 
 I i 2 25 Thefe
 
 256 DISSERTATION 
 
 2 Samuel, XXIII. 
 
 22 Thefe things did Benaihu, the fon of Je- 
 hoiada j and he had a name among three migh- 
 ty men. 
 
 23 He was more honourable than the thir- 
 ty ; ,but he attained not unto the (firft) three : 
 and David fet him over his guard. 
 
 24 Afahel, the brother of Joab, was (alfo) a- 
 bove the (following) thirty. 
 
 25 Elhanan, the fon of Dodo, of Bethlehem : 
 Sbamhotb, the Harodite : 
 
 26 Elika, the Harodite : Heletz, the Pelonite : 
 
 27 Ira, the fon of Ikkem, the Tekoite : A- 
 biezer, the Anathothite. 
 
 28 Sibbecai, the Hufhathite : Ilai> the Ahohite: 
 
 29 Maharai, the Netophathite : Heled, the 
 fon of Baanah, the Netophathite : 
 
 30 Ithai, the fon of Ribai, of Gibeah of the 
 fons of Benjamin : Benaiah, the Pirathonite : 
 
 3 1 Hurai y of the brooks of Gaafh : Abial- 
 bon, the Arbathite : 
 
 32 Azmaveth, the Bahurimite : Elihaba, the 
 Shaalbonite : 
 
 33 Gouni y of the fons of Hajhem : Jonathan, 
 the fon of Shammah, the Hararite : 
 
 34 Ahiam, the fon of Shacar, the Hararite : 
 Eliphelet, the fon of Ahafbai, the Maacathite : 
 
 35 Eliam,
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 257 
 
 i Chron. XI. 
 
 25 Thefe things did Benaihu, the fon of Je- 
 hoiada -, and he had a name among three migh- 
 ty men. 
 
 26 Behold, he was more honourable than the 
 thirty ; but he attained not unto the (firft) three : 
 and David fet him over his guard. 
 
 27 Alfo the mighty men of the armies were 
 Afahel, the brother of Joab. (Then) Elhanan, 
 the fon of Dodo, of Bethlehem : 
 
 28 Shamhoth, the Harodite : Heletz, the Pe- 
 lonite : 
 
 29 Ira, the fon of Ikkefh, the Tekoite : A- 
 biezer, the Anathothite : 
 
 30 Sibbecai,theHumathite: Ilai, the Ahohite : 
 
 3 1 Maharai, the Netophathite : Heled, the 
 fon of Baanah, the Netophathite : 
 
 3 2 Ithai, the fon of Ribai, of Gibeah of the 
 fons of Benjamin : Benaiah, the Pirathonite : 
 
 33 Hurai, of the brooks of Gaafh : Abial- 
 bon> the Arbathite : 
 
 34 Azmaveth, the Bahurimite : Elihaba, the 
 Shaalbonite : 
 
 35 Gouni, of the fons of Hamem : Jonathan, 
 the fon of Sbammab, the Hararite : 
 
 36 Ahiam, the fon of Shacar, the Hararite : 
 Elipbelet, the fon of Aha/bat, the Maacathite : 
 
 37 Eliam,
 
 258 DISSERTATION 
 
 2 Samuel, XXIII. 
 
 3 5 Eliam, the fon of Ahithophel, the Gilo- 
 nite : Hetzrai, the Carmelite : 
 
 36 Naarai, the fon of Azbai : Joal, the bro- 
 ther of Nathan, of Tzobah : 
 
 37 Bani, the Gadite : Tzelek, the Ammonite : 
 
 38 Naharai, the Barothite, armour-bearer to 
 Joab, the fon of Zeruiah : 
 
 3 9 Ira, the Ithrite : Gareb, the Ithrite : 
 40 Uriah, the Hittite. Thirty and feven 
 in all.
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 259 
 
 i Chron. XI. 
 
 37 Eli am, the fan of Ahithophel, the Gilo- 
 nite : Hetzrai, the Carmelite : 
 
 38 Naarai, the fon of Azbai : Joal, the bro- 
 ther of Nathan, of Tzobah : 
 
 3 9 Bam, the Gadite : Tzelek, the Ammonite : 
 
 40 Naharai, the Barothite, armour-bearer to 
 Joab 3 the fon of Zeruiah : 
 
 4 1 Ira, the Ithrite : Gareb, the Ithrite : 
 
 42 Uriah, the Hittite : Zabad, the fon of 
 Ahlai. 
 
 43 Adina, the fon of Shiza, the Reubenite, 
 and head of the Reubenites ; but the thirty were 
 hisfuperiors. 
 
 44 Hanan, the fon of Maacah j and Jofha- 
 phat, the Mithnite : 
 
 45 Uzzia, the Amtarothite : Shema and y<?- 
 hiel^ the fons of Hotham, the Aroerite : 
 
 46 Jedihel, the fon of Shimri 5 and Joha, his 
 brother, the Titzite : 
 
 47 Jdidt tne Mahavite ; and Jeribai, and 
 Jofhaviah, the fons of Elnaam j and Ithmah, 
 the Moabite : 
 
 48 Eliel, and Obed, and Jafliiel, the Metzo- 
 baites.
 
 PART II. 
 
 AFTER that the preceding Obfervations 
 had been writ, and the greater part of 
 them printed off; I found that the 
 BODLEIAN LIBRARY, thatjuftly- 
 celebrated Magazine of Learning, contain'd, a- 
 mong its other Treafures, feveral Manufcript Co- 
 pies of the Books of the Hebrew Bible. Thefe 
 therefore I confulted j in order to fee, how far 
 they might favour or difcountenance the notion 
 of Corruptions in the printed Texf, in general ; 
 and whether any Affiftance was to be obtain'd 
 from them, for the Explanation of thefe Chap- 
 ters in particular. 
 
 I enter'd upon the Examination of thefe MSS, 
 without expecting any great matters from them ; 
 having frequently been allur'd by confiderable 
 Writers that the Jews ( the later Jews, at 
 leaft) had tranfcrib'd their facred Books fo care?- 
 fully, and with a fuperftitious Exaclnefs num- 
 ber'd every Sentence and Word and Letter, that 
 no material Differences could be found in any of 
 the MS Copies now exftant. 
 
 Kk But
 
 262 DISSERTATION 
 
 But I foon found this Information to be falfe. 
 A very different Scene of things prefented itfelf. 
 The MSS indeed, in general, were writ with 
 great Care ; but yet, the very beft and moft ac- 
 curate of them wore the Marks of human Im- 
 perfection. It appear'd, that the Various Read- 
 ings., if all carefully collected, would be ma- 
 ny in number ; and not a few of them feem'd 
 to be very coniiderable : fome, that illuftrate 
 Paffages darken'd by Miftakes in the printed Co- 
 pies, in other places and fome, that throw 
 Light upon the preceding Chapters j and indeed 
 are the very Readings, which I had recommend- 
 ed as true, upon Conjecture. I muft confefs, 
 that I was greatly and agreeably furpriz'd at this 
 Difcovery. But here as I tread upon dange- 
 rous Ground, there is a neceffity for Caution j 
 and I mall therefore declare my Meaning fully, 
 in order to be underffood properly. 
 
 It could be no Pleafure to any man, who firm- 
 ly believes the Infpiration of the Books of Holy 
 Scripture, and heartily wimes them to be uni- 
 verfally receiv'd, and as univerfally underftood, 
 admir'd and practis'd j to fuch a one it certainly 
 could be no Pleafure to be convinc'd of the Im- 
 perfeffion of thofe printed Copies of the Scriptures, 
 which are fpread through the World for the In- 
 ftruction of Mankind. 
 
 But,
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &t. 263 
 
 But, on the contrary ; if a man, duly warm'd 
 with thefe religious Sentiments, mould, upon 
 peruiing thefe printed Copies, find in fome pla- 
 ces Expreflions, which feem to be abfurd, and 
 quite contrary to the Genius and Idiom of the 
 Language itfelf, as exprefs'd in all other places 
 
 if he mould find the Letters of a Word, 
 
 which is well known (becaufe uniformly writ in 
 many other places) tranfpofd* and not only Let- 
 ters tranfpos'd in a word, but Words alfo remov'd 
 from their ufual fituation in a fentence, to the 
 Jeeming detriment of their own Senfe and that of 
 the Context j and further, even a Sentence re- 
 mov'd from the place, which it mould feem moft 
 
 likely to have fill'd originally if there mould 
 
 any where appear to him to be a Deficiency of 
 Senfe from the OmiJJion of a Letter, Word or 
 Sentence j or an Interruption of the Senfe by 
 (what in other Writings would be concluded to 
 
 be) an Addition or Interpolation if he mould 
 
 find the fame Hiftorical Matters, when related 
 by different Hiftorians, not only exprefs'd in dif- 
 ferent Phrafes and with different Circumftances 
 ^for that undoubtedly may be done in the ftricl:- 
 eft confiftency with Truth ) but the 'very fa?ne 
 Circumftances fo exprefs'd by thefe different Hi- 
 ftorians, that there feems to arife Inconfiftency or 
 
 Contradiction and if he mould not only 
 
 K k 2 meet
 
 264 DISSERTATION 
 
 meet with fome feenung Inconfiftencies in diffe- 
 rent Books, or in different parts of the fame 
 Book, in the Old Teftament; but mould alfo 
 find, that fome Paffages in the New Teftament, 
 which are cited from the Old, feem to owe their 
 prefent Difference and Difagreement to a fmall 
 Tranfpofition or Miftake of Letters in the pre- 
 fent Hebrew Text if fuch a man, in fuch 
 
 Circumftances, mould be told, That thefe Dif- 
 ferences, Difficulties, Inconfiftencies &c. muft 
 exift only in his own Imagination, and be fet 
 down to the difagreeable article of his own Dul- 
 nefs j fince the Jews, the original Proprietors 
 and (perhaps) conflant Tranfcribers of the He- 
 brew Books, had copied them with fo much 
 Care as to prevent the leaft Miftake ; or, if a 
 Miftake could have been made, they had their 
 Divine MASORA (or traditional Enumeration of 
 every Sentence and Word and Letter) by which 
 grand Touchftone every fuch Miftake would im- 
 mediately have been difcover'd and corrected 
 
 With the moft ferious Expoftulation I would afk, 
 What is fuch a man to do ? 
 
 Buxforf, that ftrenuous Defender of the Inte- 
 grity of the prefent Hebrew Copies, has given 
 his Advice in the following very round and dog- 
 matical Periods Adfer Judicium folidum ? 
 
 mafcu*
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 26$ 
 
 tnafculum, fide Texfui Hebrceo^ diligenter eum ex- 
 pende, Linguce Hebrtetf accuratajn cognltionem ti- 
 bi compara, Inter pretes confide ; & SEMPER in Tex- 
 tu Hebraico HODIERNO veram, commodam, & cum 
 antecedentibus G? confequentibus convenientem lecJio- 
 nem tttvemes. Loca multa tvctvnoQavni ejje conce- 
 , negamus ! Anticrit. p. 145 & 918. 
 
 But what, if the ferious Enquirer fhould com- 
 ply with the whole of this Advice j if he fhould, 
 in particular, bring with him to the Enquiry not 
 only his own Hock of Judgment, but (to fupply 
 the Deficiencies of that) the Judgment of others, 
 whofe Learning and Sagacity are undeniable ; 
 and if, befides the diligent exercife of his own 
 knowledge of the Original Language, he fliould 
 (according to the laft article of the preceding 
 Advice) confult the Interpreters and fuppofing, 
 that in fome of the places, which feem to him 
 unintelligible or inconliftent in the prefent He- 
 brew Text, thofe Interpreters (particularly the 
 Authors of the moft ancient Verfons) fliould give a 
 clear, regular and confiftent Senfe j which would 
 likewife be the natural Senfe of the prefent He- 
 brew words, admitting only the Miftake fome- 
 times of a Word^ and fometimes only of a fmgle 
 Letter ----- Would not fuch a man be ftrongly 
 tempted to believe, that the Authors of thofe 
 
 Verfions
 
 266 DISSERTATION 
 
 Verfions read differently from our printed He- 
 brew; and that their ancient \vritten Copies con- 
 tain'd the True Readings in thole places, where 
 our later written or printed Copies have been 
 corrupted'? Would he not ivijh to find this the 
 real ftate of the Cafe ; and that too, in defiance 
 of the pretended Divinity and unaccountable Au- 
 thority of an imperfeSl) contradictory and corrupt- 
 ed Mafora ? 
 
 But laftly : if, happily difcovering any ancient 
 MSS of the Books of the Hebrew Bible, he 
 mould find, that the Jewim Tranfcribers of the 
 Old Teflament had made the fame fort of Mif- 
 takes, with the Chriftian Tranfcribers of the New 
 Teftament, and with the Tranfcribers of all o- 
 ther Books in the world (as they muft have done, 
 without a Miracle constantly wrought in favour 
 of every fuch Tranfcriber) : and if, befides this 
 general ftate of things, he mould find in parti- 
 cular, that thefe MSS, late as the Oldeft of them 
 muft be with refpect to the MSS us'd by the 
 Authors of the moft ancient Verfions, contain'd 
 Readings, which are not only different from the 
 printed Hebrew, but are the very Readings ex- 
 prefs'd in fuch ancient Verfions he has then 
 not only Reafon for believing that the Authors 
 of thofe Verfions might have read differently; 
 but he has all the Demonftration, which the 
 
 thing
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 267 
 
 thing can poffibly admit, that they did fo : un- 
 lefs it can be fuppos'd, that the Various Read- 
 ings found in thefe MSS, which only agree with 
 and are perfectly exprefs'd in the words of the 
 ancient Tranflations, were inferted by the Jews 
 in Complaifance to thefe very Tranflations; which, 
 perhaps, is a Suppoiition too abfurd to be main- 
 tain'd. 
 
 For, not to infill upon the general want of 
 Greek, Syriac and other Learning, which would 
 render the Jewifh Tranfcribers incapable of con- 
 forming their Hebrew Text to fuch Tranflations; 
 and not to urge the Veneration of the Jews for 
 their own Hebrew Text, and the Deteftation in 
 which the Greek Veriion of the LXX has been 
 held by them ever lince the fecond Century (two 
 things, which would effectually have prevented 
 them from receding from their Text, in favour 
 of that Veriion, had they been properly qualifi- 
 ed for the Talk) not, I fay, to infift upon thefe 
 Points, which feem fufficient to prevent Surmi- 
 fes of this kind ; there are other Arguments, a- 
 rifmg from the Nature and Number of the Pla- 
 ces now found to vary, which are decifive. 
 
 Every reafonable man will fuppofe, that, if 
 any Tranfcriber of the Hebrew Bible could have 
 intended to alter, and had alter'd the Hebrew 
 Text, in conformity to, and to raife the Credit 
 
 of
 
 268 DISSERTATION 
 
 of the Greek or any other ancient Verfion ; the 
 Alterations would have been made uniformly in 
 favour of fuch Verfion -, and in many places, and 
 thefe places of fome confequence. But as the pla- 
 ces, in which thefe MSS are found to vary from 
 the printed Hebrew, are not made uniformly 
 conformable to any particular Verfion ; but fome- 
 times preferve a Reading of the Greek y and fome- 
 times of the Syriac or Arabic Verfion, fometimes 
 of the Chaldee Paraphrafe, and fometimes of the 
 Samaritan Text itfelf ; the pomble Sufpicion of 
 an Intention to juftify any one Verfion is totally 
 remov'd. 
 
 Again : as the places, in which the printed 
 Hebrew Text now differs from the mofl ancient 
 Verfions, are wry many y and yet the inftances of 
 the concurrence of the MSS with any of thefe 
 Verfions in oppofition to the printed Text are 
 very few-, hence alfo arifes a convincing Argu- 
 ment againft any Sufpicion of Defign. 
 
 Farther : as the ancient Verfions vary in their 
 Senfe from the printed Text in many conji- 
 derabk articles; and yet the places, in which 
 thefe MSS are found to agree with the Verfions 
 in oppofition to the printed Text, are places of 
 fmall confequence in comparifon, and of little mo- 
 ment in themfelves ; we feem to have all reafon- 
 able Satisfaction, that fuch Inflances have not 
 
 been
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 269 
 
 been defignedly made to vary, but are the true 
 genuine Remains of older Copies. 
 
 Laftly : had thefe Inftances been either many 
 in Number j or material in their Nature, and 
 thefe uniformly concurring with any one particular 
 Verfion ; there had indeed been then fome fort 
 of Foundation for fufpecting the Honefty of the 
 Tranfcribers. But the Cafe is happily the Re- 
 verfe. They are neither frequent enough, nor 
 material enough, to raife Sufpicions of foul play j 
 and yet they are fufficiently frequent to prevent 
 the Notion of Accident, and are fufficiently pow- 
 erful to eftablifh one another as being truly 
 tranfcrib'd from true Copies, and flriftly and 
 properly fuch Various Readings from our mo- 
 dern printed Copies, as once obtain'd in the old 
 written Copies us'd by the Authors of the moft 
 ancient Verfions. 
 
 And now, if there certainly are Errors in the 
 printed Text of the Old Teftament, may we not 
 be permitted to difcover them, and humbly to 
 propofe Corrections of them ? And if the Copies 
 us'd by the Authors of the ancient Verfions un- 
 doubtedly were different in fome instances from 
 Ours, may we not prefume thefe Differences to 
 lie chiefly in fuch places, as, being perplex'd or 
 contradictory in the modern Hebrew Text, are 
 
 L 1 clear
 
 270 DISSERTATION 
 
 clear and confiftent in thefe Veriions? And, 
 however warm the Difpute has been hitherto, 
 Whether the Differences from the printed He- 
 brew Text, which are now found in the Greek 
 and other ancient Veriions, are jbmetimes owing 
 to Variations in our printed Copy from the MSS 
 usd by the Authors of thefe Verfions $ will not this 
 important Point be now determin'd, in favour of 
 thofe Tranflators, when it appears, that many of 
 their very Readings are preferv'd in the MSS now 
 exftant ? And laftly : in cafes where the Affift- 
 ance of the ancient Veriions is made neceifary by 
 the Miftakes* of the later Jewiih Tranfcribers, 
 may we not more fafely recur to thefe Veriions, 
 and more religioufly adopt their Various Read- 
 ings, now when this ftrong Sanction is given 
 to the Authority of thefe Veriions, by the Con- 
 currence even of the prefent MSS with them, in 
 Oppojltion to the printed Reading ? 
 
 Surely, it mufl be a proper Foundation for 
 Satisfaction and Joy to every Friend of Revela- 
 tion (and what is a Foundation for Joy to a Be- 
 liefer can be no Caufe of Triumph to an Infidel) 
 I fay then, it muft be a proper Foundation for 
 Satisfaction and Joy to every Friend of Revela- 
 tion, to find that the Difficulties and Ob- 
 ftructions, which he now meets with in the 
 printed Copies of the Old Teftament, are not fo 
 
 neceiTa-
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 271 
 
 necefTarily owing to Mofts and the Prophets, as 
 to demand his abfolute AfTent and refolute Vin- 
 dication. 
 
 But he will be full of Gratitude to the Su- 
 pream Being, who, as the Author of every good 
 and perfett Gift, gave thefe Books originally per- 
 fect, free from Error and univerfally confiftent. 
 And if they have fuffer'd fome Alterations, in 
 the lefs important articles, by being tranfcrib'd 
 in fo many hundred and perhaps thoufand Co- 
 pies, during the long period of near 2200 years 
 iince the latefl Writer in them j he has the ut- 
 moft reafon to be thankful for the Prefervation 
 of thofe feveral Ancient Verfwns (however imper- 
 fectly deliver 'd down themfelves in fome inftan- 
 ces) by the help of which he may be enabled to 
 remove many Difficulties found in the printed 
 Text of the Original not forgetting a proper 
 Thankfulnefs for the Prefervation alfo of fuch 
 Hebrew MSS, as will either, of themfelves, re- 
 ftore the true Reading in any instances however 
 few, or will confirm the Authority of the An- 
 cient Verfions, which afford much more plenti- 
 ful Affiftance. 
 
 It may not be improper, in this place, as I 
 have already us'd the phrafe Various Readings and 
 the word Corruptions^ and mail frequently have 
 
 L 1 2 occa-
 
 272 DISSERTATION 
 
 occafion to exprefs myfelf in the fame manner 
 hereafter, to explain my meaning fully as to the 
 Senfe here affix'd to this word and phrafe. And 
 however needlefs fuch an Explanation may be 
 thought by feme, yet the more converfant in thefe 
 matters will allow the Neceffity of it, on ac- 
 count of the Miftakes committed by confiderable 
 Writers on thefe very points. 
 
 As to a Various Reading then, my Opinion is 
 Varia eft LeSiio^ ubicunque vane kgitur 
 Wherever in two Copies of the fame Writing 
 the one differs from the other in Word or Let- 
 ter, or in the Pofition of the fame Words or 
 Letters, every jucb Difference is properly a Va- 
 rious Reading. And iince every Variation from 
 the Original of an infpir'd Author is a Variation 
 for the ivorfe^ every fuch Variation is properly a 
 Corruption. Confequently, though every Various 
 Reading proves a Corruption to have happen'd, 
 every Various Reading is not itfelfz Corruption ; 
 becaufe one of the Various Readings may be the 
 true Reading, which obtain'd at firft in the Ori- 
 ginal. 
 
 Now, as every Author exprefles himfelf in 
 one certain and determinate manner, all Va- 
 rious Readings, found in any two Copies of the 
 fame Work, muft be made either by Omif- 
 fiori) Addition^ Tranf-pofition, or Change. And 
 
 thefe
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 273 
 
 thefe four different Species of Variation, or ei- 
 ther of them, can be owing only to one of thefe 
 two general Caufes Chance or Deflgn. 
 
 Chance includes the articles of Ignorance and 
 Carekfnefsj thro' which a Tranfcriber, for want 
 of either Knowledge or Care, writes differently 
 from his Copy, or miftakes the perfon who dic- 
 tates to him j and this, both without intending 
 it at firft, and without perceiving it afterwards. 
 
 Defign includes the permitting a Miftake to 
 continue, without correcting it, tho' made invo- 
 luntarily j and this, to prevent a Blot, and con- 
 fequently to prefer ve the apparent Value of the 
 Copy : but chiefly it comprehends all fuch Va- 
 riations of Letters, Words or Sentences, as are 
 made knowingly - y whether for the intended Cor- 
 rection and Illuftration, or for the Corruption 
 and Embarrafment of the Copy fo tranfcrib'd. 
 
 If this then be the real Nature of Various 
 Readings, and all Various Readings muft be ow- 
 ing either to Chance or Defign ; we may certain- 
 ly conclude, that where neither of thefe Caufes 
 are admitted, there can be no fuch thing as a 
 Various Reading at all. And therefore, the 
 learned Dr. Whitby, tho' he has given us a Trea- 
 tife call'd Examen Variantium Leffiionum D. Mil- 
 ///', yet, in the overflowings of his Zeal againft 
 the multiplication of Various Readings, feems 
 
 to
 
 DISSERTATION 
 
 to have denied the very Exiftence of any fuch 
 thing. 
 
 For, as to the article of Chance, he fays ( pag. 
 ii.) Non ilia Van antes Lettiones merito di- 
 cendce funt, qua ex ofcitantia, incuria, infcitia, aut 
 ignorantia Suriptoris aut Librarii evenenmf. And 
 as to the other article, that of Dejign includ- 
 ing fuch Variations, as are made wilfully, either 
 with a good or bad Intention, and confequently 
 either by Friends or Enemies he fays, as to 
 Enemies Mult'o minus pro Variis Leftionibus 
 habendte funt, qua adult erinis Evangeliis aut H<%- 
 reticorum pravitati ortum fuum debent. And laft- 
 ly as to Friends, he fays Eft valde incongruum 
 Patrum glojjemata aut interpretamenta pro Variis 
 Lettionibus exhibere. The Doctor therefore, hav- 
 ing thus excepted the wilful Alterations of both 
 Friends and Enemies, and the undejign'd Altera- 
 tions made both by ignorant and carelefs Tran- 
 fcribers, may well fay he has lejjerid the Heap 
 and lighten 'a 1 the Burden of Various Readings ; 
 fince he feems totally to have annihilated them ; 
 and to have prov'd, not only that Dr. Mills fpent 
 30 Years, but that he himfelf had fpent much 
 time and much pains about a Non-Entity. 
 
 This, as it feems to be an Error of Confe- 
 quence, deferv'd fome Notice j and efpecially in 
 this place, where Various Readings are confi- 
 
 der'd ;
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 275 
 
 der'd j and confequently, where it is necefTary 
 to have clear Ideas, not only of the Exiftence of 
 Various Readings, but of their -particular Na- 
 ture. 
 / 
 
 The Jews have fometimes been charg'd with 
 'wilfully corrupting the Old Teftament, in points 
 of material Confequence ; but this fevere Charge 
 feems never to have been clearly prov'd upon 
 them. And yet there can be no doubt, but that 
 the later Jews, where they have found Copies 
 reading differently in any Paflages relating to the 
 Meffiah, may have fometimes preferr'd that Read- 
 ing, which was the leaft favourable to the Chri- 
 ftian Caufe. 
 
 Had the Jews ever intended to omit or alter 
 any of the Prophecies predictive of the Meffiah, 
 and which fo circumftantially defcribe the Mef- 
 fiah of the Chriftians ; they would moft proba- 
 bly have omitted or alter'd fome of thofe, which 
 are now univerfally exftant, and are the flrong- 
 eft becauie the plained Proofs of the pajl Advent 
 of the Meffiah. And the reafons, why they did 
 noty may be either that high degree of Ve- 
 neration, with which they treated the Oracles of 
 God, which might rellgioujly reftrain them or 
 that Senfe, which they muft have, of the //#- 
 pojfibility of making any material Alteration, with- 
 out
 
 276 DISSERTATION 
 
 out being detected; becaufe the Greek Veriion, 
 which univerfally obtain'd, had ( thro' the good 
 Providence of God ) been made long before the 
 Birth of Chrift, and confequently long before 
 the Jews could be under any Temptation to fal- 
 fify on this head j and this Confideration might 
 politically reftrain them from making any mate- 
 rial Alterations. 
 
 But as to the other Caufe of Various Read- 
 ings, that of Chance ', whether particularly owing 
 to the want of Care or the want of Knowledge in 
 the Jewifh Tranfcribers, that appears to have 
 been the fruitful Parent o Corruptions. And 
 yet, fo much Juftice muft be done thefe Tran- 
 fcribers, as to fay That if any other Book in 
 the world, of equal Bulk., could have been of e- 
 qual Antiquity, and had been fo often tranfcrib'd, 
 as the Old Teftament - y from the many Thou- 
 fands of Miftakes now found in other Books, 
 tho' tranfcrib'd but in few Copies in proportion, 
 and in Languages lefs liable to Miftakes, we may 
 fairly infer, that the modern Copies of fuch a 
 Book would have had Miftakes multiplied to a 
 much greater number, than can be found in the 
 prefent Hebrew Copies : and indeed in propor- 
 tion, as the religious Care of the Jews (at leaft of 
 the later Jews) was undoubtedly greater than that 
 of the other Tranfcribers of Books in general. 
 
 Whofo-
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 277 
 
 Whofoever therefore is rationally convinc'd, 
 that there are fuch Miftakes, Errors, or Cor- 
 ruptions, in the modern printed Editions of the 
 Old Teftament, muft ( if he believes the Lifpi- 
 ration of the Original of this Book, and its in- 
 finite Confequence to Mankind ) mufl think him- 
 felf bound to defire of others, and to endeavour 
 himfelf at the Correction of every fuch Miflake -, 
 and at the Difcovery of every Truth, which, 
 proceeding out of the Mouth of God, was recorded 
 by his holy Prophets Jince the World began. And 
 when he has certainly made fuch Difcovery, whe- 
 ther of a Word, or if but of a fmgle Letter (for 
 as the learned Bengelius obferves on this fubjedt 
 THE LEAST PARTICLE OF GOLD is GOLD) 
 that warm Principle of Benevolence, which a- 
 nimates the human Breaft, mould induce him 
 as a Man ; but, if feconded and enforc'd by the 
 Sacrednefs of his Character, mould command 
 him as a Chrijlian Teacher, to impart the Difco- 
 very to others. For, in the beautiful Parable of 
 our bleffed Saviour What Woman, having ten 
 pieces of Si her, if Jhe lofe one piece, doth not light 
 a candle, and fweep the houfe, and feek diligently 
 till fie find it ? And when fie hath found it, Jhe 
 calleth her friends and her neighbours together, fay- 
 ing, Rejoice with me, for I ha r oe found the piece ', 
 which I had loft. 
 
 M m Various
 
 278 DISSERTATION 
 
 Various Readings have, at many different 
 times, been collected and offer'd to the Public, 
 on the New Teftament -, to the great Honour of 
 Mills, Bengelius &c. and more continue to be 
 offer'd, to the great Honour of Blanchini, Wet- 
 jlenim &c. And Various Readings, thus collated, 
 notwithftanding the Clamours of fome and the 
 Fears of others, have maintain'd their own Im- 
 portance ; have lilenc'd thofe Clamours ; have 
 quieted thofe Fears; and, inftead of rendring 
 precarious the Sacred Text, have been its ftrong- 
 eft Eftablimment. Not, that they have efta- 
 blifh'd thejirft, fecond, or any printed Edition of 
 the New Teftament ; but I mean, that, as eve- 
 ry printed Edition has had Variations ( more or 
 lefs) from the Original Writings of the Evange- 
 lifts and Apoftles, fo the Collation of many Va- 
 rious Readings, found in the ancient Greek Co- 
 pies, Veriions and Citations, has been an effec- 
 tual, and the only effectual method of difcover- 
 ing many of the True Readings, which had been 
 loft. A Remark this the more neceffary, be- 
 caufe many of the lefs learned feem to confine 
 the word Text^ or the True Text, to their own 
 printed Copy-, not reflecting, that an Original 
 Gofpel of St. Matthew, or any Evangelift, may 
 poffibly have been fomewhat different from thofe 
 
 Copies
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 279 
 
 Copies of it, which fell into the hands of the ce- 
 lebrated Rob. Stepham, or any other Printer. 
 
 If this may be, if this has been abundantly 
 prov'd to be, the Cafe ; why may we not fup- 
 pofe, that fome Differences may have happen'd 
 alfo in the Old Teftament; and that the MS 
 Copies of R. Ben Chaim, in the year of Chrift 
 1500, may vary in fome inftances from the Au- 
 tographa of Mofes and the Prophets, writ t*wo or 
 three thoufand Tears before ? And if this can be 
 prov'd alfo to be the Cafe, may it not furely 
 it may and ought to be declar'd publickly j that 
 fo the fame rational Means may be apply'd for 
 the Correction of fuch Miftakes : fince it will 
 be allow'd, that a Phylician, who mould find a 
 Friend out of Order, and yet allure him of his 
 being perfectly in Health, would be guilty of 
 great Unkindnefs to his Friend, and do no Ho- 
 nour to his own Character. 
 
 The Man, who firft undertook to bring the 
 Printed Text of the Old Teftament to the Teft 
 of found Criticifm, was the learned and now 
 juftly-celebrated LUDOVICUS CAPPELLUS, in his 
 Critica Sacra, the Work of Six and Thirty 
 Years j a Work ! which, notwithftanding the 
 Violence with which the Publication of it was 
 ( for the fpace of Ten Years ) oppos'd by fome, 
 notwithstanding the Virulence with which is was 
 
 Mm 2 con-
 
 2 8o DISSERTATION 
 
 condemn'd after Publication by many others (and 
 is condemn'd to this very day by a few) and 
 notwithstanding fome undoubted Miftakes in 
 particular places, will be a lafting Monument of 
 Fame to its Author. But this celebrated Prote- 
 jlant, who bore fo noble a Teftimony to the 
 Truth (i. e. the Miftakes made by Jewifh Tran- 
 fcribers) feems to have been defective in one ca- 
 pital Proof of it of the attual Exiftence of Mif- 
 takes in any particular Hebrew MS, and efpecial- 
 ly of great Miftakes ; of the actual Exiftence of 
 Various Readings, and efpecially of fetch, as vary- 
 ing from the modern Hebrew Copies agree with 
 the moft ancient Versions. And this Defect of 
 Proofs from MSS it is the Intention of the fol- 
 lowing Obfervations to fupply. 
 
 But, as this is a Cafe of great Importance, 
 that the Reader may the better judge of the true 
 State of it, I mail mention firft the general 
 Scheme of Cappellus ; then that of Euxtorf ( the 
 Younger ) who labour'd to confute him : and 
 then proceed to give fome Extracts from the He- 
 brew MSS before-mention'd, which will tend to 
 eftablifh and compleat the Arguments of Cappel- 
 lus, and to lilence the principal Objection ofBux- 
 torfznd his other Adverfaries. 
 
 Cappellus undertakes to prove That Various 
 Readings may, and ought to be, collected on the 
 
 Books
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 281 
 
 Books of the Hebrew Teftament, on account of 
 the many Mi/takes in the modern Copies, which 
 Miftakes have been occafion'd by the Ignorance 
 and Carelefnefs of Tranfcribers that one prin- 
 cipal Means of difcovering thefe Various Read- 
 ings is a careful Examination of the Ancient Ver- 
 fions, and a judicious Comparifon of them with 
 the prefent Hebrew Text and that, from the 
 many places, in which the printed Hebrew Text 
 differs widely from the Senfe of thefe Ancient 
 Verfions, and places where the Tranflators could 
 have no reafon for varying defignedly, we may 
 properly infer that their written Copies were in 
 thefe places fomewhat different from cur printed 
 Copies 5 confequently, that we may fafely refer 
 to thofe Verfions, wherever the prefent Hebrew 
 Text is unintelligible, abfurd or contradictory. 
 
 Buxtorf, the Author of the Anticritica, main- 
 tains That we are never to recede from the 
 prefent Reading of the Hebrew Bible, as to Let- 
 ters or Points ; fmce the Text at prefent will al- 
 ways give a true, proper and confident Senfe 
 that we cannot collect a Various Reading from 
 any or all the Ancient Verfions put together, 
 fince the Text in the ancient Hebrew Copies was 
 the fame as in the modern and that, where thefe 
 Verfions differ from the prefent Hebrew, the 
 Caufe mufl be either that they tranflated para- 
 
 phrajlically
 
 282 DISSERTATION 
 
 phrafiically or improperly at firft, or that their 
 Verfions have been iince corrupted: fince there 
 are no Traces in any MS, not the leaft Mention, 
 Memory or Remainder of fuch Variations in the 
 Hebrew Copies, as are exprefs'd in thofe ancient 
 Verfions. 
 
 This laft Point feems to have been the thing, 
 which chiefly perplex'd the learned Critic j and 
 we fee, that he does not well know what An- 
 fwer to make to it. It am vero, fays he, etiamfi 
 ad ifta qucejita rcfpondere non poJJ'em, proptereane 
 verum non effet Codicem Hebr<zum, quo ufi funt 
 LXX ab hodierno yudaico diverfum abire? An 
 quia perierunt Vetera ilia Exemplaria, non poteft 
 jam ojlendi fie vel Jic in Us fuiffe fcriptum, ex 
 Trajiflationibus eorum quce ex illis faftte funt ? 
 Quodnam vulf Cenfor nofter clarius & certius vete- 
 ris illius lettionis wftigium niji ipfam TUV LXX 
 Grcecam Tranjlationem ? Annon enim ex ipfms cum 
 bodierno yudaico contention?) Sole ipfo clarius h- 
 quet y LXX Interpreter longe aliter in codice fuo le- 
 gifle ? An> quia non habemus Vetuftas Membranas, 
 & Exemplaria Hebraica, qute nobis reprafentent 
 lettionem Codicis Hebrai ruv LXX, negandum eft 
 propterea nos, ex eorum Tranjlationis cum hodierno 
 textu Hebrao collationc, pojfe deprehendere quomodo 
 ipfi in Codice fuo legerint ? Abfurdum & ridiculum. 
 Pag. 570 & 572. 
 
 This
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 283 
 
 This way of Reafoning feems extreamly fair 
 and true ; and indeed is allow 'd in all other Ca- 
 fes of the fame Nature. And as a great deal de- 
 pends upon the Propriety of this Reafoning, it 
 may be necelTary to obferve, that Cappellus, in 
 his Anfwer to ABp. Ufier, ftates his Argument 
 in the following manner Excerpt aliquas pojje 
 Variantes LeEliones ex Vulgata Grasca Verfwne, id 
 pari modo & ratione de hac Tranjlatione, qua de 
 reliquis omnibus oftenditur : nimirum, quum Tranf- 
 lationis Verba apte quadrant & refpondent Vocibus 
 & Phrafibus Hebraicis, qua ab Hodierni s facili 
 Scribe indocJi lapfu & err ore deformari potuerunt-, 
 nee pot eft alia jujla aut 'verifimilis reddi ratio ^ cur 
 fie diverfe a Textu Hodierno Hebraico Interpret 
 difcejjerit^ quam quia Jic in Codice fuo Hebraico, 
 quo ufus eft) legit ; oftendendo utriufque lettionis af- 
 Jinitatem y qua fattum ut ex und in alter am facile 
 tranfitus faftus fit . Nee aliter deprehenditur^ ex 
 Tranjlatione libri cujiifcimque five Latimjive Grx- 
 ci, Jive Hebraiciy7w Arabici &c. Varia Letfio> 
 quam hoc modo. Atque Jic a doftifjimo Salmafio 
 deprehenfiz funt Autorum Grfscorum^ ex Arabtca 
 Tranjlatione, plufquam millenee Varies LecJiones. 
 
 And this fame Argument Cappellus very pro- 
 perly urges, in his Defence againft Buxtorf (^2.g. 
 570) Interroget Cenfor nofter bodiemos Criticos, 
 eofque confulat j vide bit eosfepe deprehendere y quo- 
 
 modo
 
 284 DISSERTATION 
 
 modo Cicero in codicefuo Greece Phaenomen^n A- 
 rati (qua ipfe L,atine reddidit) diverfe ab hodierno 
 Grteco legerit. Idem docebunt eum cruditi Philofo- 
 phi, qui interdum obfervant ex Averrhois & Avi- 
 cennae Latind Verfione, interpretem Arabem, quern 
 illi homines fecuti funt, aliter IcgiJJe in Gr<zco Tex- 
 tu Ariftotelis, Hippocratis, Galeni, quam hodie le- 
 gatur, etfi Veteres illi Codices Graci perierint. 
 
 But ftill, notwithstanding the Juftnefs of this 
 Reafoning in general, Cappellus finds himfelf hard 
 prefs'd by his Adverfary's chief Argument no 
 Footfteps no Traces not the leaft Remainder 
 of fuch Readings in any Hebrew MSS. At, in- 
 quit Cenfor, Quomodo ex infinitis locis, in quibus 
 LXX ab Hebrteo diffident, non UNUM SALTEM 
 AUT ALTERUM Exemplum remanjiffet? 
 
 Cappellus's Obfervation immediately following 
 is this that the later Jews did not compare 
 their Hebrew Books with the Greek Verfion, in 
 order to note the Differences j either becaufe they 
 could not, as they were generally quite ignorant 
 of the Greek Language j or becaufe they would 
 not, as they held the Greek Verfion both abo- 
 minable and defpicable. Happy, I fuppofe, would 
 have been this Great Author; if, (inftead of 
 making an Obfervation, which however true is 
 certainly no Anfwer to his Adverfary ) he could 
 have anfwer'd the Queflion by denying what is 
 
 taken
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 285 
 
 taken for granted in it ; or by affirming That 
 in fome of the moft ancient MSS now exftant 
 there is not one only, not two only, but federal 
 Various Readings j which, tho' entirely different 
 from the modern Hebrew Copies, entirely agree 
 with the moft ancient Verfions. 
 
 That this is certainly the Cafe will foon ap- 
 pear from the Extract of Miftakes and Various 
 Readings, which I have made from the fore- 
 mention'd MSS ; and which, after a few Obfer- 
 vations previoufly neceiTary, I mail lay before the 
 Learned. By this Extract is not meant a Cata- 
 logue of every Miftake, and of all the Various 
 Readings to be found in the whole Sum of For- 
 ty MSS, that are now prejervd, or rather, that 
 lie mouldring and decaying, thro' Age, in the Bod- 
 leian Library : for, to collate all thefe MSS with 
 due Care and Exactnefs, would be a Work not 
 of Months but of Years : and efpecially, if it 
 mould be the Work but of one perfon only. 
 But by it is meant a fiort Lift of feme Miftakes 
 and Corruptions found, by dipping here and there, 
 in fome of the moft ancient of thefe MSS ; in 
 order to draw from them an unanfwerable Ar- 
 gument againft the pretended fingular. Exaffnefs, 
 (or Infallibility, {hall I fay ?) of the Jewim Tran- 
 fcribers ; and in proof, that they have commit- 
 ted Miftakes of Letters, Words and Sentences. 
 
 Nn And
 
 2 86 DISSERTATION 
 
 And by it is alfo meant a Jkort Lift of Various 
 Readings-, many, that are undoubtedly true, where 
 our printed Copies are falfe ; and Jbme, that are 
 not only different from the printed Copies, but 
 are the very Readings tranilated in the Ancient 
 Verfions. 
 
 And as thefe Ancient Verfions will from hence 
 receive a flrong Sanction, in proof that their Au- 
 thors did fometimes read differently in their an- 
 cient Hebrew Copies j and fmce we may there- 
 fore the more fafely recur to them for Affiftance, 
 in articles of real Difficulty and Diflrefs ; I mall, 
 for the greater Confirmation of the prefent Gene- 
 ral Scheme, add fome Obfervations on PafTages, 
 whofe Illuflration is owing to thefe Ancient Ver- 
 fions only : and both thefe , for the more eafy Com- 
 parifon of them with the Places, to which they 
 refpeftively belong, I mall intermix according 
 to their Order in the prefent Difpofition of the 
 Books in the Englifh Bible. 
 
 But before any particular Reference is made 
 to thefe MSS, it may be neceffary to offer fome 
 Obfervations on their Age and Authority ; in or- 
 der to determine, with the greater Certainty, how 
 far any of their Variations may have a Right to 
 be admitted, in preference to the printed Read- 
 ings. 
 
 The
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 287 
 
 The Foundation of this Enquiry may be laid 
 thus. There are, in the printed Editions of the 
 Hebrew Bible, a few Injiances, in which thefe 
 printed Editions differ from one another ; there- 
 fore there have been made a few Mi/takes. And 
 there are found, in the MS Copies of the He- 
 brew Bible, many Inftances, in which thefe MSS 
 differ from the printed Editions and from one 
 another ; therefore many Miftakes have been made 
 in tranfcribing the Sacred Books of the Old Tef- 
 tament. 
 
 Now the Rule, which mould determine the 
 greater or lefs Propriety of a Reading in one 
 printed Edition, which differs from any other 
 printed Edition; and indeed the Rule, which 
 ufually is allow'd to determine in favour of ei- 
 ther Reading, as the moft likely to be genuine 
 and authentic, is this to prefer that Reading, 
 which is (Firft) more frequently repeated in o- 
 ther places ; or which (Secondly) bears a greater 
 Analogy to, and makes a better Harmony with 
 other places : which (Thirdly) is more ftrongly 
 recommended by the moft ancient Verfions ; and 
 (Fourthly) which is corifirm'd by the oldeft print- 
 ed Editions and a greater Number of them. 
 
 Of thefe Four Kinds of Authority, the three 
 frft feem to be fuperior ; and, as their Authori- 
 ty is generally acknowledg'd, fo the Nature of 
 
 N n 2 that
 
 288 DISSERTATION 
 
 that Authority in each is, in general, properly 
 underftood. But as to the Fourth kind of Au- 
 thority, there are ftrong Reafons, for conclud- 
 ing, that it is, in general, greatly miftaken. 
 This then being a Point of real Confequence, 
 and the Conlideration of it being abfolutely ne- 
 ceffary in this place ; let it be confider'd with a 
 due mare of Attention. 
 
 Were there but Two printed Editions of the 
 Books of the Hebrew Bible, and did thefe Two 
 fometimes read differently (fuppofing, for exam- 
 ple, that the one Edition read tf ^ non^ in 2 Kings 
 8, 10, and the other read ^ ei) as both Read- 
 ings could not be true, thefe two printed Edi- 
 tions, being in this inftance abfolutely contradic- 
 tory, would deftroy the weight of each other's 
 Teflimony ; and the Reading would remain to 
 be determin'd by the three fuperior kinds of Au- 
 thority. But yet, as two oppofite Forces do not 
 totally deftroy each other, unlefs they are at the 
 fame time equal Forces - 3 fo neither will this be 
 the confequence of two contradiftory Readings, 
 unlefs the two printed Editions, in which they 
 are found, mould be of equal Authority : con- 
 cerning which it may be proper to fpecify the 
 following Cafes. 
 
 i. If
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 289 
 
 I. If thefe two Editions were printed from one 
 another, the Authority of the latter will be then 
 annihilated, or be refolv'd wholly into that of 
 the former. And this would alfo be true, even 
 tho' an hundred Editions fhould have been de- 
 riv'd, either mediately or immediately, from this 
 firft Edition as their great Archetype or Exem- 
 plar. Since an hundred Perfons in a Court, who 
 ' had not been Eye-witnefTes of a particular Fad: ; 
 and who could only depofe, that they had heard 
 of fuch Fact from one and the fame Perfon ; 
 would be fo far from being confider'd as many 
 diftincl Witnefles of the Fact, that the only va- 
 luable Evidence would be the fingle Teftimony 
 of him, who was the Eye-witnefs. 
 
 2. If thefe two Editions were not printed 
 from one another, but both exaffly from the fame 
 
 Jingle MS -, the Authority of both would be e- 
 qual, but would refolve into the Authority of 
 that One MS, from which they were both ta- 
 ken. 
 
 3. If thefe two Editions were printed from 
 two different MSS-, yet, if one of thefe MSS 
 mould have been exactly tranfcrib'd from the o- 
 ther j the Authority of the four Copies would 
 refolve into the Authority of the firft MS, as 
 before. 
 
 4 . if
 
 290 DISSERTATION 
 
 4. If thefe two Editions were printed, each 
 from federal MSS, and thefe not directly copied 
 
 from each other j the Authority of thefe Editions 
 would then weigh more or lefs, in proportion to 
 the greater or lefs Authority of their refpective 
 MSS, and the greater or lefs Judgment and Care 
 with which they had been printed. 
 
 5. If the MSS, made ufe of for each printed 
 Edition, mould be valuable for their Antiquity 
 and intrinfic Goodnefs, and their fever al Variations 
 mould have been exactly noted, and the beft Read- 
 ings mould have been judicioufly felected by the 
 
 Editor of each : the Authority of Both Editions 
 
 j 
 
 would be then very great : but the greater Ex- 
 cellence of either would remain to be determin'd 
 upon a clofe Examination of the greater Anti- 
 quity and Correc"tnefs of the particular MSS, to- 
 gether with the greater Skill and Fidelity of the 
 particular Editors. 
 
 6. But if thefe Editors, inftead of being Men 
 of true Critical Judgment and free from impro- 
 per Prejudices, mould be the very Reverfe of 
 Both if they mould be fo ftrongly prejudic'd 
 in favour of the Rabbinical MASORA, as to fet 
 up THAT as the Great Standard, by which eve- 
 ry difputable Reading was to be determin'd if 
 this Mafora was not very early begun, and be- 
 came reverenc'd but lately, and that moft impro- 
 perly
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 291 
 
 perly and unjuftly, to the Exclufion of many 
 true Readings in Letters, Words and Sentences 
 if fome of the later Jews alter'd fuch MSS as 
 they could meet with, fo as to make them more 
 conformable to this Mafora, by erafing Letters, 
 Words and Sentences j which, however injudici- 
 ouily done, was well intended and weakly call'd 
 Correcting if by this means the lateft MSS 
 became the mofl uniform j and thofe only were 
 coniider'd as compkatly correct, which were thus 
 made compkatly conformable to fuch a Major a 
 Men, thus unhappily prejudic'd, when about to 
 print an Edition of the Hebrew Bible, as they 
 would choofe what they judg'd the beft MSS, fo 
 they would undoubtedly choofe the latejl, and 
 confequently the ivor/l : and if they had MSS 
 more ancient, their Variations, however mate- 
 rial, being Anti-Maforetical y would be rejected 
 at once, as of no Authority, and as entirely un- 
 worthy of being noted even in the Margin of 
 their Editions. And in fact we find, that the 
 Jews have only deliver'd down to us in the Mar- 
 gin a few Various Readings, known by the Names 
 of Keri and Cetib, inferted by one or more of 
 their ivifer Forefathers (tho' not always with the 
 greateft Judgment) and thefe collected from a 
 very few MSS ; for had many ancient MSS been 
 collated, and had all their Variations been noted, 
 
 they
 
 292 DISSERTATION 
 
 they muft have been more in Number and of 
 much greater Confequence. 
 
 Thefe Six Cafes being premis'd, let us now 
 confider What is moft likely to be the true 
 Caufe of the general Uniformity fo obfervable in 
 all the printed Editions of the Hebrew Bible. 
 
 The Advocates for the Integrity of thefe print- 
 ed Bibles affert, That the Jews having never 
 made any material Miftakes in tranfcribing the 
 Holy Books, this general Uniformity is account- 
 ed for at once ; fince every Edition, from what- 
 ever MS or MSS it mould be printed, would 
 necefTarily furnifh nearly the fame Readings. But 
 this Notion of the Integrity of the printed He- 
 brew Bibles, and of the peculiar Exactnefs of the 
 Jewifh Tranfcribers, has been already confuted ; 
 and will be yet more fully confuted by the fol- 
 lowing Catalogue of Obfervations drawn from 
 the Bodleian MSS &c. And therefore thofe, who 
 maintain the Imperfection or Corruption of the 
 printed Hebrew Bibles, muft affign another 
 Caufe. 
 
 Father HOUBIGANT, Prefbyter of the Orato- 
 ry at Pans, who, by his late excellent Prole- 
 gomena, has greatly rais'd the Curiofity of the 
 Learned, and made them wim the fpeedy Pub- 
 lication of his Hebrew Bible 'with Various Read-
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 293 
 
 ings (a kind of Work, than which none is more 
 wanted) this learned Father (pag. 189 &c.) ac- 
 counts for the Uniformity of the printed Hebrew 
 Bibles upon the firft Cafe, which I before fpeci- 
 fy'd that they are all Streams from one com- 
 mon Fountain, having been all deriv'd from the 
 firft Edition, which was printed, at Venice, by 
 R. Jacob Ben-Chaim ; confequently the Authori- 
 ty of them All refolves into the fmgle Authority 
 of that One and he obferves, that this Edition 
 of Ben-Chaim was printed from late and faulty 
 MSS ; which appears not only from the Nature 
 of the printed Work itfelf, but from the very 
 account which this Rabbi has given of the MSS 
 he made ufe of. 
 
 This is a Confideration of very great Impor- 
 tance; and therefore I mail produce this Au- 
 thor's own words Quoniam in ImpreJJis menda 
 non pauca exflant^ qucz eadem abfunt a quibufdam 
 bones notce Codicibus> id jam non dubium relinqui- 
 tur^ Bibliis imprimendis adhibitos fuijje Codices no- 
 te? inferioris, minimequc omnium laudatidos. Cujus 
 mali) Sacras in Liter as invetfz, caufa princepsfuit 
 in eo R. Jacob. Ben-Chaim, qui Biblia Hebraica 
 primus omnium typis manda'vit. Quamvis enim 
 inferioris not a Codices adhibuijjet^ tamen ejus Edi- 
 tionem Venetam cceteri omnes Editores, qui pojl 
 fiterunt, Jwuti Junt t Gf tanquam drchetyfum ha- 
 
 O o buerunt.
 
 294 DISSERTATION 
 
 buerunt. fe/Ks eft ipfe Ben-Chaim, non faille (e 
 
 j j j.j +/ jj j 
 
 optimorum Codicum Editorem. Nam cum is mid- 
 turn conqueratur, quod in fids Codicibus MASORA 
 MAGNA, variis Animalhim figuris non tarn orna- 
 ta quam deformata, inexplicabiles Errores confine- 
 ret ; co ipfo declarat Codices fuos fuijje omnium re- 
 centijfimos (moft certainly admodum recentes) quo- 
 mam talia Ornamenta vetuftiores Codices non ba- 
 bent. Et fepe obferuat Rich. Simonius, Codices 
 tales ejje minime omnium tejiimandos & jeligendos. 
 
 As a Proof of this, F. Houbigant obferves 
 That when Leufden had publifh'd an Edition of 
 Athiafs Hebrew Bible j and, in the Title, de- 
 clar'd it to have been collated cum antiquijjimis & 
 accuratijfimis Exemplar ibus, becaufe his MSS had 
 the Great Mafora in the Margin under the Forms 
 of Bears, Dogs and other Animals j he was fo 
 much ridicul'd by F. Simon for his want of Judg- 
 ment, that, in his next Edition, the fplendid 
 mention of his mojl ancient and moft accurate 
 MSS was prudently and honeftly omitted. 
 
 F. Houbigant, having fettled the Character of 
 this firft Edition, as printed from late and bad 
 Copies by Ben-Chaim, and having mention'd the 
 celebrated Editions fince printed from it, con- 
 cludes thus Eundem lapidem volvebant ornnes 
 Editor es, ut prior es Editiones, Typographicis mendis 
 exceptis, putarent fuije quam accuratiffimas, Et t 
 
 cum
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 295 
 
 cum pkrique Codicibus carercnt^ ad Editiones illi 
 omnium primas fe confer eba?it y quas haberent lit 
 Normamfuam. Quid vero ille Opitius, cujus ex- 
 flat Editio Kiloni in Germania, 1709, quam E- 
 ditionem dixit Jacob, le Long ejje ACCURATISSI- 
 MAM ? Habuit Codicem quemdam Opitius, quern 
 adiret' y vide, LecJor, qualem Gf quam antiquum, 
 Filius meus, inquit, primo nadlus eft Codicem 
 magnum quatuor tomorum in folio Regali, Tar- 
 gum Major a magna & parva inftruclium, a Ju- 
 daeo quodam Sondalio filio Hillelis Gerfon, anno 
 1455 fcriptum vel punctatum; quern omnium 
 effe optimum, & cum accuratioribus Impreffis 
 plerumque confpirare fui expertus. Utrum igi- 
 tur ex eo Codice Opitius novum quidquam protulit ? 
 Certe Editionem Opitianam cater is omnino Jimilem 
 habemus, mendifque tantum typographies ipji pro- 
 priis deformatam. Atque idem dixeris de cateris 
 multis nominis inferioris Editionibus, quarum alias 
 ad Balilienfem, alias ad Athianam Editores ex- 
 preffere. Sic ut omnes eas, quas adhuc vidimus^ 
 tanquam imam eandemque habere pojjis. 
 
 Our Author concludes this Point with the foU 
 lowing corrobative Teftimony from Morinus 
 Hie fane infolentiffima confidentia cum ignoratione 
 maxima conjungitur. Hebraica Biblia funt fmce- 
 riffima. Quamobrem vero ? Non alia rat tone du- 
 cuntur^ quam quod excufa Jibi inxicem confentire 
 
 O o 2 animad-
 
 296 DISSERTATION 
 
 animad'vertant. Idem de MSS omnium atatum, 
 quorum ne Specimina quidem unquam viderunt, af- 
 
 frmandum effe temere pronunciant. Nee cogitant 
 omnes fere libros editos ex uno & eodem fonte di- 
 manafje ; ideo Confenfum ilium non magis admiran- 
 dum effe, quam Editionum Vulgata Verfwms auto- 
 ritate dementis VIII recenfitarum unitijjimam 
 Concordiam. Quanquam illud ipfum, quod de librh 
 Judaicis in lucem edifis predicant L , inique diftum 
 
 Jit. Reclamant enirn Judsei ; Mendafque innume- 
 raSy ingentefque a MSS Diffen/iones^ non dicam In 
 Chriftianorum Editiojiibus^fed in us quas ipfi Ju- 
 daei emenditaffe elaborarunt^ Rabbini adnotant. 
 
 Thus has this learned Author, who allows 
 many Miftakes to have been made by the Jewiih 
 Tranfcribers, accounted for the Uniformity of the 
 feveral printed Editions of the Hebrew Tefta- 
 ment. And his Method of accounting for it, I 
 humbly prefume, is in a great meajure right ; 
 perhaps it may be ftrictly juft and fully conclu- 
 iive. I think it moft certainly would be fo ; if to 
 the Caufe which he affigns, and which falls un- 
 der thejirjl Cafe^ we mould add another Reafon, 
 which is explain'd in tbejixth and loft Cafe before 
 laid down. 
 
 For, if it be allow'd, that All the prefent E- 
 ditions were printed from One, either mediately 
 
 or
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 297 
 
 or immediately j the Authority of All will be 
 then but the Authority of One, and the Unifor- 
 mity of All is at once accounted for. But if this 
 mould be denied j and if either of the later Edi- 
 tions could be prov'd to have proceeded, not 
 from any previoufly-printed Edition, but direct- 
 ly and abfolutely from MSS j yet ftill if thefe 
 MSS were very late ones if the Jews correct- 
 ed their late MSS to the Maforetic Standard 
 and if, by accounting no MS to be compkatly ac- 
 curate, but what was compleatly conformable to 
 that Rule, they brought all the lateft MSS to be 
 nearly uniform and almoft literally the fame in 
 fuch a cafe, I fay, the Uniformity now obferva- 
 ble in all the printed Editions is fairly and fully 
 accounted for, even tho' they were not univer- 
 fally printed from one another. 
 
 This material Point may be fufficiently Evi- 
 dent to any reafonable Perfon, who will examine 
 the Hebrew MSS now exftant. Since he will 
 find that the Older MSS have a greater num- 
 ber of Variations from the printed Copies that 
 many true Readings are eras'd and alter'd in the 
 MSS, to make them more conformable to the 
 Mafora j many parts of which muft therefore (a 
 Truth, worthy our Confideration ) have been 
 form'd from Obfervations made on bad Copies 
 and that in the later Centuries, the Rabbles, 
 
 having
 
 298 DISSERTATION 
 
 having thus corrected fome of the MSS which 
 were kfs conformable, and tranfcrib'd others fo 
 as to make them more conformable to this Ma- 
 fora, have by thefe means made the later MSS 
 generally uniform. 
 
 The moft ancient and beft MSS then not be- 
 ing thus uniform, and this Uniformity being on- 
 ly the Character of fuch later MSS as are ftrict- 
 ly Major eti cal ; the Confequence is clear that 
 all our printed Editions muft have been either 
 printed from one another ; or, from fuch MSS, 
 as being reduc'd to one Standard, may be confi- 
 der'd but as One MS. But if they had been ta- 
 ken from MSS, which were in fact older and 
 therefore had many Variations ; yet, as none of 
 thefe Variations have been noted and preferv'd, 
 but the Readings extracted from them have been 
 only fuch, as were agreeable to the later Edi- 
 tions and to the Mafora thefe MSS, tho' ever 
 fo ancient and truly valuable, are in effect brought 
 down to the low level of the lateft and <worft 
 MSS ; and an Edition printed from them can be 
 only of equal Value with an Edition from the 
 lateft MSS, becaufe it would bejuft the fame. 
 
 Inftances, wherein the MSS now exftant have 
 been thus injudicioufly corrected, will be pro- 
 duc'd hereafter. That many Variations have been 
 made to bend and bow down to this bfofora, as 
 
 their
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 299 
 
 their Judge infallible, is clear from Fad ; and it 
 might be confirm'd by a Variety of Testimonies, 
 of which I mail only produce Two. Wolfius (in 
 his Biblioth. Hebr. Tom. 2, /^-33o) tells us from 
 F. Simon Judai, qui Opus Maforeticum vel- 
 uti quid Divinum refpiciunt, Codices Bibliorum 
 MSS ad Illud reformare veriti nonfuerint -, era/is 
 Literis, Ditfionibus, imo & Sententiis integrity in 
 MSS exemplaribus -, ut ita Maforeticis conforma- 
 rentur. Affertionem hanc probat Simonius, ex- 
 emplo Cod. MSS. Biblioth. Reg. & Orator. Parif. 
 in Epift.felett. AmjleL 1700. But, what is more 
 furprizing, is, that the warmeft Declarations 
 mould have been made in Honour of this Rab- 
 binical Mafora by CHRISTIANS; who, animated 
 with the fame blind Zeal, have been ready to 
 applaud and efpoufe the wonderful Opinion of 
 Henr. Opitius; who tells us Si OMNES CO- 
 DICES cotruenirent in ajjerendd Leflione quadam, 
 contrarium vero pronunciaret MASORA, confiden- 
 ter EJUS fecuti fumus Autoritatem. 
 
 This fame Opitius, who (as has been obferv'd, 
 pag. 295) was, in 1709, the Author of an Edi- 
 tion of the Hebrew Bible, and an Edition which 
 Le Long has honour'd with the Character of 
 moft accurate ', tells us that^ for the Benejit of 
 his Edition, he had Recourfe to an Hebrew MS 
 Bible, contain d in four large Folio Volumes, writ 
 
 or
 
 300 DISSERTATION 
 
 or pointed in the year 1455; which he had found 
 by Experience to be (optimum) the beft, or a ve- 
 ry good MS, becaufe it almojl always agreed with 
 the more accurate printed Editions. Upon which 
 words it may be proper to remark by the way 
 that, as all the late MSS were writ and point- 
 ed at the fame time, and as none but very late 
 MSS are fo nearly agreeable to the printed Edi- 
 tions ; therefore this MS of Opitius y which did 
 fo nearly agree, was both written and pointed in 
 the year 1455. 
 
 Thefe words- then of Opitius contain a clear 
 Proof that the printed Editions agree moil 
 with the lateft MSS ; fmce the moft accurate (i. e. 
 the moft 'M.aforetical) printed Editions agreed moft 
 with this MS j which it mould feem was fo an- 
 cient, as to be writ juft at the time when MSS 
 ceasd to be writ at all juft at the /Era of 
 the Invention of Printing. And confequently 
 the MS or MSS y from which the'firft printed E- 
 dition was taken about jifty years afterwards, and 
 which fo exactly agreed with this MS of Opt- 
 tins, might have ( for any thing that appears to 
 the contrary) and moft probably had (as the U- 
 niformity loudly declares) the high Honour of be- 
 ing FIFTY YEARS OF AGE ! an Age fo pro- 
 foundly venerable, that who can wonder, to fee 
 all future Editors doing it fovereign Homage; 
 
 and
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 301 
 
 and agreeing to print from That^ as their Great 
 Archetype ; or from other Copies, which, by be- 
 ing compleatly like it, would be equally worthy 
 of Veneration I 
 
 But I forbear to urge the Method, in which 
 THE HEBREW TESTAMENT ! that only true 
 Narrative of the greateft Events paft, and that 
 compkat Chain of Prophecy of the greateft Events 
 then future ! that firm Foundation of the New 
 Teftament ! that Gift of GOD ! has been 
 tranfmitted to thefe times, in the printed He- 
 brew Bibles. I moft readily acknowledge the 
 Accuracy and Truth^ which happily obtain in 
 the Printed Editions, in Matters relative to our 
 Faith and Praclice ; and, from the Harmony of 
 the prefent Hebrew MSS with all the Ancient 
 Verfions in thefe mofl important Articles, I think 
 'That Point clearly demonftrable. But yet, as ma- 
 ny Miftakes of Tranfcribers have been admitted 
 into different Books, and perhaps fome into every 
 Book of the Old Teftament, in all the Printed 
 Editions j and as many true Readings have been 
 confequently excluded, to the undoubted Injury 
 of the Senfe of the Infpir'd Writers i 'tis Our 
 Duty to examine (before it be too late) what Af- 
 fiftances may be obtain'd for the Correction of 
 fuch Miftakes, and for the Recovery of fuch True 
 Readings. 
 
 P p Here
 
 3 o2 DISSERTATION 
 
 Here then THE HEBREW MSS, whether Older 
 or Later, will be found to be invaluable. 
 
 The LATER MSS, having fewer Variations 
 from the printed Editions (and the very late MSS 
 have a very few) thefe few Variations may con- 
 tain fome better and truer Readings' ; and there- 
 fore fuch MSS will have their proportionable 
 Merit. But the chief Advantages to be deriv'd 
 from the later MSS are firft, the Proof of the 
 Uniformity, which obtains between them and our 
 feveral printed Editions fecondly the Proof to 
 be deriv'd from them, and indeed from all He- 
 brew MSS, (and this the Proof of a Point, which 
 is therefore the more neceflary to be prov'd, be- 
 caufe obftinately denied) that the Jewifh Tran- 
 fcribers were very fallible ; and have, notwith- 
 ftanding all their Care, made many Miftakes in 
 Letters, Words and Sentences and thirdly, we 
 fhall be enabled by thefe and by all Hebrew MSS 
 the more judicioufly to correct the Miftakes 
 found in the printed Hebrew Bibles, than we 
 could pombly have been, without feeing He- 
 brew MSS ; becaufe when we know the Man- 
 ner of the Jewifh Writing, the lengthning and 
 Chortning of their Letters, and the Nature of the 
 feveral Miftakes made in thefe later MSS, we can 
 the better judge how to CQVK&. Jimilar Miftakes 
 made in the older MSS now loft* The
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 303 
 
 The OLDER MSS, not having been render 'd 
 fo conformable to the lately-eftablifh'd Majorette 
 Standard, (tho' they were therefore confider'd by 
 the Rabbles as faulty and inaccurate) will be 
 defervedly reputed much more valuable, becaufe 
 they will be found to contain a much greater 
 number of Variations ; and confequently may 
 furnifh us with many true Readings. Thefe Ol- 
 der MSS are alfo very valuable, as they contain 
 many of the Letters ( n H K ) call'd the Matres 
 Leflionis j which, as the Rabbinical Punctuation 
 began more and more to obtain, and at lajl to 
 be writ at the fame time with the Letters of the 
 Text, began more and more to be omitted for 
 Expedition in writing, and to be fupply'd by 
 their refpective Points. A Matter, which de- 
 ferves ferious Confideration : fince, if thefe Let- 
 ters are frequently omitted, and if the Omiffion 
 of either of them will fometimes give a Word a 
 very different Meaning ; it mould feem truly ad- 
 vifeable for Men of Hebrew Learning to acquaint 
 themfelves with the Rabbinical Points, as thefe 
 Points frequently difcover the Places where fuch 
 Letters have been omitted. And the Difcovery 
 of every fuch Letter is the more important, be- 
 caufe without the regular Reftoration of thefe e- 
 je&ed Letters (which, I prefurne, are/0wof the 
 five Original Voweh of the Alphabet) perhaps we 
 
 P p 2 mall
 
 3 o 4 DISSERTATION 
 
 mall never be able to recover the true Nature,, 
 Rythmus, or Quantity of the Hebrew Poetry. If 
 this Remark mould appear to be of Confequence, 
 the Reader is indebted for it to the Learned John 
 Robertfon, M. D ; a Man, of whom I have the 
 Pleafure to know, that his Worth in other In- 
 flances is equal to his Learning : and this Gen- 
 tleman, in his late Pamphlet on the "True and An- 
 cient Method of Reading Hebrew, has offer'd fome 
 New and Curious Obfervations on the Hebrew 
 Verification. 
 
 But tho' the Older Hebrew MSS are valuable 
 on both the preceding Accounts, yet there is an- 
 other and fuperior Confideration in their favour. 
 All the Hebrew MSS now extant are late with 
 refpect to their Diftance from the loft infpir'd 
 Writer in the Old Teftament ; and as we can- 
 not therefore expect to find very many true Read- 
 ings preferv'd in the oldeft of them, which are 
 not alfo preferv'd in the printed Editions j the 
 greateft Value of thefe older MSS feems to be 
 the Sanction, which they give to the Authority 
 of the Greek and the other ancient Veriions j 
 and thefe ancient Verfions, thus authoriz'd, will, 
 when judicioufly examin'd, and carefully com- 
 par'd with the Hebrew Text and with one ano- 
 ther, furnifh us with True Readings in a much 
 greater Number and of greater Importance. 
 
 And
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 305 
 
 And indeed this we might naturally have ex- 
 pected; fince the Hebrew Copies us'd by the 
 Authors of the ancient Verfions were older than 
 the oldefl MSS now extant by many hundred 
 Years. And therefore, when we reflect how 
 Errors multiply with Age, fince the more Co- 
 pies the more Errors ; and efpecially, if whilft 
 new ojies are for want of Care introduc'd, the old 
 ones are for want of Judgment retain'd; if we 
 were to give a Poetical Perfonality to thefe MSS, 
 we might fuppofe them to lament in the follow- 
 ing Stanza 
 
 Damncfa quid non imminuit Dies f 
 
 JE,tas Parentum^ pejor A r oh, tulit 
 
 Nos nequiores, mox daturos 
 
 Progeniem vitiojtorem. 
 
 Having fubmitted to the Learned Reader the 
 preceding Obfervations on the Authority of the 
 printed Editions of the Hebrew Bible, and on 
 the Nature of the Hebrew MSS in general ; I 
 mall proceed to fpeak of thefe MSS fomewhat 
 more particularly. 
 
 I prefume, it may be taken for granted 
 that very few Copies of the Hebrew Bible, and 
 probably none at #//, have been taken off in Wri- 
 ting^ fince the Invention of Printing ; if we ex- 
 cept the Copies of the Lau\ and fome other par- 
 ticular
 
 306 DISSERTATION 
 
 ticular Sections of the Old Teftament, tran- 
 fcrib'd for and preferv'd in the Jewifh Syna- 
 gogues. And as Printing was introduc'd about 
 300 years lince, and the firft Hebrew Bible was 
 printed about 50 years after; the latejl Hebrew 
 MS will be about 300 years of Age, and 50 
 years older than the firft printed Edition. The 
 MSS, which are of this latejl Age, or but a lit- 
 tle older, will be found remarkably uniform in 
 their Text with the printed Editions, and fo are 
 of lefs Service; as before obferv'd. And they 
 are thefe late MSS, of between 300 and 400 
 years of Age (which were therefore writ between 
 the years 1350 and 1450) which make the great- 
 er Number of the Hebrew MSS now extant. 
 
 But there are Others, much more Ancient 
 than thefe, to grace the Catalogue. There are 
 in Europe already made known (and who can 
 fay, what more ancient and more valuable Trea- 
 fures may be happily difcover'd, when their Im- 
 portance Jhall be publlckly confefsd ? ) there are 
 MSS, I fay, already celebrated by the Ages of 
 about 700 years ; and fome, we may prefume, 
 are Older. The celebrated Blanchini, who, in 
 his Evangelium Quadruple*, has lately printed a 
 MS of the Gofpels in the Old LATIN Ferfion, 
 writ by Eufebius, who died in the year 371 
 (which may therefore be above 1380 years old) 
 
 and
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 307 
 
 and who fuppofes the famous Alexandrian and 
 Vatican GREEK MSS of the Bible to have been 
 writ before the year 395 (which, according to 
 this Critic, will be above 1350 years old; about 
 100 years more, than is generally allow'd) this 
 Author fays, as to the HEBREW MSS Anti- 
 quitas maxima, qu<% Us tribui tutb poffit (licet Mo- 
 rino judlce ad annos 600 non extendatur, Codi- 
 cum tamen Vetujliorum documentis) adftoo vet 900 
 circiter annos per finger e putanda eft. Vind. Can. 
 Script. Vulg. Prae pag, 33. 
 
 Perhaps there are no Hebrew MSS extant, 
 that extend their Antiquity to a i ooo Years ; 
 but beiides the Authority of Blanchini and o- 
 thers, I have Reafons founded upon the MSS 
 already difcover'd, for fuppofing that there are 
 fome, which may boaft 800 Years of Age, at 
 leaft. And perhaps between the Extreams of 
 800 or 900 and 300 years (from the year 950 
 or 850 to 1450) will fall the feveral Hebrew 
 MSS now extant -, and thefe, fooner or later, as 
 they mall be able to fix their refpective Claims 
 and Pretenfions. 
 
 Not that the real Merit of thefe ( proportion- 
 ably late) MSS will be always and univerfally as 
 their Antiquity ; nor will it follow, that any 
 MS muft be better than another, merely becaufe 
 it may be more ancient. For, tho' that will be 
 
 true
 
 3 o8 DISSERTATION 
 
 true in general; yet it may fo happen, that a 
 MS of 600 ye*ars of Age may be tranfcrib'd from 
 a MS of 700 ; whilft a MS of but 500 years of 
 Age may be tranfcrib'd from a MS of 800 3 or 
 from a Copy, which had more and better Various 
 Readings from the printed Editions. 
 
 The Reader will be pleas'd to obferve that, 
 as the Study of the Hebrew Language has been 
 only reviving during the laft 100 Years, Books 
 in this Way have not as yet, perhaps, been fuf- 
 ficiently examin'd and as THE MSS OF THE 
 HEBREW BIBLE have been but very lately con- 
 fider'd as of any Importance (tho' an high Value 
 has been allow'd to be due to the MS Copies of 
 the New Teftammt and of all other Books in the 
 World) for thefe Reafons the exact Ages of the 
 feveral Hebrew MSS, excepting a few that are 
 dated, will not be eafily determin'd. And per- 
 haps it will be impoffible to fix 'fome to any 
 particular Century ; till the different Characters in 
 which they are writ, the different Countries from 
 whence they came, and the different Marks of 
 Age arifing from the Infertion or Omiffion of 
 the Mafora and the Points, have been as through- 
 ly examin'd, as the Characters of the Greek MSS 
 have been, and as their feveral Ages have confe- 
 quently been determin'd, by the celebrated Mont" 
 faucon. 
 
 I pre-
 
 On i C H R O N. XI fifc. 309 
 
 I pretend not therefore to any exaft Determi- 
 nations, as to the MSS before-mention'd ; but 
 fhall think myfelf, together with the Public, 
 greatly indebted to Perfons of fuperior Skill and 
 Judgment, who fhall hereafter fix the ieveral 
 Ages of thefe invaluable MSS, and who {hall 
 more particularly fecure to each its deferved Ho- 
 nours. 
 
 The Hebrew MS, which is ufually reputed 
 the moft Ancient : , that is as yet difcover'd in Eu- 
 rope, is the celebrated Pentateuch at Bononia in 
 Italy r , reported to be the Handwriting of EZRA; 
 and the following Account given of it by Mont- 
 faucon is worth tranfcribing. Codicem, quern a 
 multis amis acceperam ejje Librum Efdrae auTc^ct,- 
 (pov, me ajjequi ciirarunt Patres Dominicani 
 Duplici clave obferatum tenetur ingens hoc Volu- 
 men, feu convolutus Liber. Eftque pellis 'vituli 
 fubacJa G? traftabilis^ in qua Pentateuchus babe- 
 tur^ more Bibliorum qucz etiamnum apud Ebrceos 
 in Synagogis ajjervantur ; pauculas recentiore ma- 
 nu marginales Nofas obfervavi. Liters vix quid- 
 quam nigredmis amiferunt ; quod pelli trlbuitur a- 
 tramenti tenaciffimce . Codex a 'Judczh bide Mo- 
 nafierio dono oblatus fuit y quo tempore Aymericus 
 Magifter Or dims erat, initiofc. i^.faculi^ ab an- 
 nh 400 ; infer iptio in medio Voluminc ajjuta rem 
 
 denun-
 
 DI SSERTATION 
 
 denunciat his vertis Hie Rotulus Legis eft, 
 quern fcripfit Efdras fcriba manu fua &c. Hcec y 
 ut ex CharaEtere liquet, tempore Aymerici confcrip- 
 tafunt, A.D. 1308. Hincpalam ejl y a vero aber ra- 
 re eos, qui eeftimant Hebraica Biblia nulla occurre- 
 re, ab annis plus 400 exarata. Nam anni ^oofunt 
 (poft) quam hie Codex dono oblatus Aymzncofuit 
 qui turn perantiquus habebatur. Ac licet fabulam 
 fapiat^ quod aiunt Efdras ipfms matiu exaratum -, 
 negari fane pofle non videtur, aliqualis faltem Ve- 
 tuftatis turn fuifle, cum traditm Aymerico fuit. 
 See Montfaucon's Diarium Italicum* 410. 1702, 
 
 P a g- 399- 
 
 Now if this famous MS was thus prefented 
 
 about 450 years lince, and was then prefented 
 and receiv'd as writ by Ezra more than 2000 
 years fince; 'tis fcarce pomble to fuppofe, that 
 fo furprizing an Age could have been impudent- 
 ly pretended or creduloufly believ'd, unlefs the 
 MS had been in fat very ancient : and therefore 
 it may perhaps be a moderate Suppofition, to 
 imagine it writ as long before the time it was fo 
 prefented, as it has been fince which will fet 
 the Antiquity of it at about 900 Years. 
 
 I obferv'd before, that this is ufually reputed 
 
 the mqft ancient Hebrew MS ; but the fame Mont- 
 
 faucon^ who examin'd this Pentateuch, examin'd 
 
 a MS Hebrew Copy of the Book of Eftber pre- 
 
 ferv'd
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 311 
 
 ferv'd alfo in Sonoma, which he thinks to be 
 Older Megillat Efther, Volnmcn ex pelle 'uituli 
 fubata y vetuftiflimum & ufu tritum, quale fupra 
 depinximus Volumen Pentateuchi ab ipfo Efdra ut 
 eejlitnant exaratum, & <videtur fane ipfo Pentateu- 
 chi Volumine antiquius. Pag. 406. 
 
 As the Report, which afcribes the preceding 
 Pentateuch to Ezra, is defervedly difcounte- 
 nanc'd by Montfaucon ; fo undoubtedly ought ail 
 Reports of the fame nature, with refpect to o- 
 ther Hebrew MSS. Such as the Pentateuch at 
 Helmftad, which Saubertus feems to allow, in 
 concurrence with the common Report, to have 
 been writ before the Birth of Chrift ; a Claim, 
 which tho' not quite fo prefumptuous as fome 
 others, becaufe the MS is of fome confiderable 
 Antiquity, has been judicioufly rejected by *Ten- 
 zelius. Such as the MS, which in the laft Cen- 
 tury was offer'd to Sale at Amjlerdam, with an 
 Infcription and Date declaring it to have been 
 writ about 300 years before Chrijl -, notwithftand- 
 ing it was full of the Maforetic Minutiae ^ in Fi- 
 gures and Images in the Margin. And, to 
 name no more, fuch as the MS Copy of the Sa- 
 maritan Pentateuch faid to be preferv'd at Sicbem, 
 and pretended to have been wrote by Phineas^ 
 the fon of Eleazar, the fon of Aaron ! Totally 
 difcarding then all fuch fanciful and ridiculous 
 
 Preten-
 
 3 i2 DISSERTATION 
 
 Pretenfions to extream Antiquity, we may fairly 
 prefume, from the two preceding MSS men- 
 tion'd by Montfaucon that there are Hebrew 
 MSS now extant, of about 900 Years of Age. 
 
 The next Hebrew MS, which I mall men- 
 tion, is Number 53, in the Oratory at Pans., cele- 
 brated by F. Houbiganty in his Prolegomena, pag. 
 195^ which famous MS it may be very ufeful 
 to take fome Notice of. For as the Age of T^hat 
 is known, by its being dated ; we mall be great- 
 ly affifted by it in afcertaining the Age of Two 
 of the Bodleian MSS, which are not dated : Two 
 MSS, which have the fame general Marks of 
 Excellence with the MS of the Oratory ; and 
 feem to be of greater Antiquity, as they have 
 fome Marks of Age not belonging to the O- 
 ther. 
 
 This learned Critic then tells us Oratorien- 
 fium Hebr. Codicum antiquiffimus anno 827, ut 
 Judtei numerant, hoc ejl poft Chriftum natum 1069, 
 fuit exaratus. Now, that the Reader may the 
 better understand the Nature of this Date, and 
 that of other Hebrew MSS, it may be proper to 
 remark (what F. Houbigant has fubjoin'd in a 
 Note) that the Deftruction of the Temple at 
 Jerufalem happen'd, according to the Jewifh Ac- 
 count, in the Year of the World 3828 j but, ac- 
 cording
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 313 
 
 cording to the Chrijlian, in 4070 j fo that as we 
 Chriftians reckon 242 Years (or thereabout, for 
 other Authors reckon 240) more forward than 
 the Jews, that Sum muft be added to their Date, 
 to make it coincide with our Computation. 
 
 This MS then, which by this Date is deter- 
 min'd to be near 700 years old, is faid to con- 
 tain ea omnia, quce in meliorh not a CoJicibus 
 Hebr. inejje liri dofti di&itant. i. Utjint Hif- 
 panicij quoniam in Codicibus defer ibenJis diligen- 
 ticres fuenmt Hifpani, quam aut Galli, aut Itali, 
 aut Germani. 2. Utjine Punftis Vocalibus fue- 
 rint primum defer ipti. 3. Ut Liter is nudis atque 
 elegantibus. 4. Ut $ libros Mo/is non majori in- 
 tervallo feparatos habeant> quam quo Legis Seffio- 
 nes feparari folent. 50. Ut in Us adfmt Mafors 
 not a paucijfimce. As to the laft Article, this fame 
 Critic makes it one Proof of the Antiquity of his 
 Sixth Hebrew MS, N. 59 (which he fuppofes 
 to be as old as his Firft, i. e. ahnofl 700 years of 
 Age) that it has the Great Mafora much more 
 thinly ft atter d in the Mar gin % than his four inter- 
 mediate MSS. 
 
 The Antiquity of a MS being one principal 
 article of Enquiry, the Reader will receive Sa- 
 tisfaction from feeing the preceding Rules, as to 
 Hebrew MSS, farther confirm'd by the Tefli- 
 mony of Jabhnjki, given us by Wolfius in his 
 
 Eiblioth.
 
 3H DISSERTATION 
 
 Biblioth. Hebr. Tom. 2. fag. 326. Ubi Infcrip- 
 tio ? Nota cetath prorfus abejl^ ad alia recurren- 
 dum erit Jigna ; qua f cite tommemoravit eruditiffi- 
 mus Jablonfkius, in Prtef. ad Bibl. Hebr. Berolin. 
 Antiquum Codicem ceftimari iiult I ex Scriptu- 
 ra ; Ji fit elegant^ Jim artifido y & prifcd fimplici- 
 tate venerabilis : ubi etiam putat^ a Codice vere 
 antique Ken & Cetib abefle debere. (Confer R. 
 Simonem, in Hift. Crit. V. T. lib. i. cap. 23. pag. 
 117.) 2 ex Mafora; Jl vel nulla adfit^ vel 
 parca ; quippe quam o/im in librosjingularesfeorfim 
 relatam ejje conjlat. Si igitur Codex., ccetera anti- 
 quiis, nullam prorfm habuerit, perantiquus erit ; 
 fi vetuftus folam Maforam parvam praferet, mediae 
 erit tetatis ; ft utramque^ 'Textum habere pofjunt 
 antiquum^ Mafora autem novitatis Jufpetta erit. 
 3 ex continua Scriptione j ubi ^etujliffimi Co- 
 dicis indiciumforet^ fi 5 libri Mofis non magis quam 
 reliqikz Seffiiones Legis ab invictm diflinguantur : 
 quia tota Lex, Cabbalijlarum tefiimonio^ olim unus 
 veluti Verfusy^/> and he might have added 
 here, what he obferves, page 42 quorundam 
 tejlimonio> tota Lex olimfuit injlar unius Vocis. 
 
 Let us now apply thefe general Marks of An- 
 tiquity to the Two Bodleian MSS before-men- 
 tion'd. 
 
 HEB.
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 
 HEB. MS. BODLEIAN. NO. i. 
 
 The Firfl of thefe MSS was originally a beau- 
 tiful Copy of the whole Pentateuch^ writ in a 
 ftrong Character, on Vellum^ in Folio ; it is now 
 imperfect, having unfortunately loft from the Be- 
 ginning to Gen. 27, 3 1 . The Proofs of its Ex- 
 cellence and Antiquity are i. It is a Spanijh 
 MS ; as appears from the Squarenefs of its Let- 
 ters, fuch as we fee in the Antwerp Polyglott and 
 in the Bible of Rob. Stephens 2. The Letters, 
 which are moderately large, are plain, iimple, 
 and elegant, but univerfally unadorn'd 3 . It 
 was originally writ 'without Points ; as is evident 
 from the different Colour of the Ink in the Let- 
 ters and in the Points. Thefe three Marks are 
 exactly coincident with thofe of the Oratorian 
 MS. ' 
 
 But 4. Whereas in the Oratorian MS the 
 5 Books of Mofes are feparated by the fpace of 3 
 Lines, in the Bodleian they are feparated by the 
 fpace of 4 Lines ; and are in the latter, as well 
 as in the former, begun with Letters of the fame 
 Size with the Letters following, without Picture 
 or Decoration. Between Gen. and Exod. indeed 
 fome later hand has inferted the firft word of 
 Exodus (nStfl) in large Gold Letters : but this 
 
 is
 
 3 i6 DISSERTATION 
 
 is clearly a later Infertion, becaufe the fame word 
 n^Nl begins the Book uniformly with the words 
 following, and at the beginning of the firft line ; 
 whereas the initial word was always omitted in 
 the firfr, line, when there was an intention to de- 
 corate it at large over the firfr. line. Between 
 Numb, and Deuteron. the Space is greater j there 
 being left vacant, out of the two Columns in a 
 Page, about one Column and a half. 5. Where- 
 as the Oratorian MS has had a few Obfervations 
 from the little Mafora inferted by a later hand in 
 the Margin, arid of the great Mafora at the top 
 and bottom of the Pages, and the Various Read- 
 ings of Ben-Aftier and Ben-Napbtbali at the be- 
 ginning ; the Bodleian has NONE, and is entirely 
 free from all thefe RMimJms, as well as from 
 the Notes of Keri and Cetib. And as it has been 
 determin'd by the general Marks of Antiquity 
 before fpecified, that a MS is, in general, fo 
 much the Older, by how much the lefs it has 
 of thefe Marginal Obfervations ; fo an abfolute 
 Freedom from them is on all hands allow'd ( if 
 the MS has other Marks of Age) to be a ftrong 
 and indifputable Proof of very great Antiquity 
 Si Codex, ccetera antiquity nullam prorfus habuerit 
 Maforam, erit perantiquus. 
 
 Laftfy. To the preceding Marks of Antiquity, 
 may be added another, and that a very confider- 
 
 able
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 317 
 
 able one, belonging to the Bodleian MS, which 
 we are faithfully told does not belong to the MS 
 of the Oratory namely ; that the Letters, tho' 
 boldly exprefs'd at firft, have been obliterated in 
 many places, and would have 'been now not 
 at all legible in thofe places, if they had not 
 been writ over a fecond time j and tho' fuch pla- 
 ces were rewrit in the fame ftrong Character, 
 yet many of the Words are becoming a fecond 
 time invifible. This MS then, having thefe ma- 
 ny Marks of Great Antiquity, and fome of much 
 Greater Antiquity than the MS of the Oratory ; 
 as the Age of That is near 700 Years, I prefume 
 (with due Submiffion to better Judgments) we 
 mall not do This MS Juftice, if we do not allow 
 it to be 800 Years of Age. The Number and 
 Place of this MS in the Bodleian Library is 
 Laud. A. 172. 
 
 HEB. MS. BODLEIAN. NO. 2. 
 
 The MS, which demands our next Confide- 
 ration, was prefented to the Bodleian Library by 
 the fame Great Friend to Learning and the Uni- 
 verfity of Oxford A-Bp. LAUD j and is cata- 
 logued Laud. A. 162. This MS is writ alfo on 
 Vellum , in Folio \ and as the" former originally 
 contain'd the Pentateuch, this contains the Re- 
 
 R r jnainder
 
 3 i8 DISSERTATION 
 
 mamder of the Hebrew Bible : it is not quite fo 
 much impair'd by Ufe as the preceding, but it 
 has the very fame generdl Proofs of its Great An- 
 tiquity, and feems to have been originally a Se- 
 c ond Volume to It. I fay originally ; becaufe it cer- 
 tainly has not always been fo confider'd. For 
 thefe MSS, as they are bound in a different 
 Manner, feem to have been in different hands ; 
 and from ( perhaps ) diftant parts of the World 
 have been at laft happily reunited, tho' they have 
 not been catalogued together, as if they were 
 NOBILE PAR FRATRUM. 
 
 I had been for fome time ftrongly inclin'd, 
 notwithstanding the Difference of their Drefs, to 
 confider Them as real Brother -j, becaufe of their 
 very fimilar Features; and at laft, by an acci- 
 dental Comparifon of them, difcover'd fuch a 
 Proof of their being writ by the fame Hand, as 
 feems to be, together with the other Circum- 
 ftances, fully conclulive. I found, not only that 
 they both contain'd two Columns in each Page, 
 but that every Column in both was moft exactly 
 of the fame Height and Breadth, with the fame 
 intermediate Space between the Columns j and 
 therefore were undoubtedly meafur'd out by the 
 very fame Rule ; that every Line in each Column 
 contain'd about the fame number of Letters, and 
 every Column in each contain'd the fame number of 
 
 Lines
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 319 
 
 Lines excepting the Ten firft Leaves in the 
 Second Volume, which (I fuppofe thro' Mif- 
 take ) have one Line lefs than every Column in 
 the Firft Volume, and than every Column in the 
 fame Volume afterwards. 
 
 The Two MSS then, thus equally Ancient as 
 proceeding from the fame Hand, thus uniform- 
 ly limple in their true Spanijh Character, thus 
 uniformly writ without Points, thus equally free 
 from Maforetical Obfervations in the Margin as 
 well as at the Beginning and End, both in ma- 
 ny places obliterated with Age, and both long 
 fince rewrit in many places to fecure the difap- 
 pearing Letters as they feem to claim the An- 
 tiquity of 800 Years, and contain many confi- 
 derable Various Readings, have been the MSS, 
 to which I have principally confin'd my Exami- 
 nation. I mall only add that as there is, in 
 the Second Volume, an Exception to the Ge- 
 neral Rule of 23 Lines in a Column ; fo there is 
 alfo in it an Inftance or two, wherein the Initial 
 Word of a Book is writ larger than the Words 
 following. 
 
 HEB. MS. BODLEIAN. NO. 3. 
 
 The next MS which I mall mention, is a Co- 
 py only of the Pfalms, writ on Vellum^ in Duo- 
 
 R r z fleet mo - t
 
 320 DISSERTATION 
 
 decimo ; and is catalogued Bodley, E. i , 24. Tho' 
 a fmall Volume this, it feems to be very valua- 
 ble, as it has all the general Marks of Antiquity 
 excepting, that the Letters are not much ob- 
 literated, unlefs at the Beginning and in a few 
 other places. It has no Mafora, either Great or 
 Small. It was writ without Points; as is ex- 
 treamly evident, not only from the different Co- 
 lour of the Ink where it is now pointed, but be- 
 caufe feveral Pialms remain unpointed flill. The 
 initial Words and Letters of all the Pfalms are 
 univerfally unadorn'd ; and of the fame Size with 
 the other Letters, that follow them. The Cha- 
 racter, tho' lefs than that of the two preceding 
 MSS, greatly refembles it in moil of the Let- 
 ters ; and the whole appears in an elegant Sim- 
 plicity, free from every fanciful Embellimment. 
 To the preceding Marks of its great Antiquity 
 muft be added one more, ariiing from the many 
 Variations in it from the printed Copies ; and in 
 places, where almoft all the MSS now extant 
 have been made to agree in particular, that 
 it has preferv'd the incommunicable Name of 
 God JEHOVAH in feveral places ; where the Su- 
 perftition, which long ago prevented all the Jews 
 from pronouncing that awful Name, encreaiing 
 more and more, has in the later Centuries pre- 
 vented fome of the Jews even from writing it ; 
 
 who
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 321 
 
 who therefore exprefs'd it imperfectly fome 
 thus " others thus * others thus V o- 
 thers thus v and others have totally dropt the 
 Original Name, and inftead of it have writ the 
 word J1K Lord. This MS therefore, on all the 
 preceding Accounts, is not only valuable for its 
 Variations^ but venerable for its Age> which may 
 be full 700 Years. 
 
 HEB. MS. BODLEIAN. NO. 4. 
 
 The next MS is writ on Vellum^ in Two Vo- 
 lumes , in Folio ; and originally contain'd the 
 Whole Bible : it is catalogued Huntingdon^ 1 1 and 
 12. Both Volumes are now imperfect j the Firft 
 having loft from the beginning of Gene/', to Chap. 
 34, and 21 ft Verfej and the Second having loft 
 from 2 Cbrat, 9, 4, to the end of that Book 
 which is ufually writ, in other MSS as well as 
 in this, the loft Book of the Old Teftament. In 
 this MS, immediately after the Book of Kings., 
 comes the Prophet Jeremiah, then Ezekiel, and 
 then Jfaiab; which proves, that 'Jeremiah was 
 fometimes plac'd at the head of the Prophets : a 
 Circumftance, from which fome Learned Men 
 have inferr'd, that the whole Volume of the Pro- 
 phets (properly fo call'd) might formerly go un- 
 der the Title of Jeremiah , and upon this prin- 
 ciple
 
 322 DISSERTATION 
 
 ciple they have endeavour'd to folve the Difficul- 
 ty in St. Matth. 27, 9. 
 
 The Character of this MS is fomewhat frnal- 
 ler than that of the Firft and Second MS, and 
 begins to be obliterated in many places. It is 
 now furrounded with fome of the Maforetical 
 Criticiims ; but, perhaps, was writ without Points 
 at firft, as there are fome Lines even now un- 
 pointed. The Pages are, almofl univerfally divi- 
 ded into 3 Columns ; and the initial Words of the 
 feveral Books are generally writ fomewhat larger 
 than the words which follow them. This MS 
 has fome remarkable Various Readings ; and per- 
 haps its Age may be about 600 Years. 
 
 HEB. MS. BODLEIAN. NO. 5. 
 
 The only remaining Hebrew MS, which I 
 have particularly infpefted, was originally a corn- 
 pleat Copy of the Hebrew Bible ; and has now loft 
 but One Leaf, which contain'd from Genef. 24, 
 1 6, to 25, 22. It is writ in a jmall Letter, on 
 Vellum^ in Quarto ; and is catalogued Selden, Arch. 
 A. 65. The initial Words and Letters are not 
 larger than thofe which follow j the Five Books 
 of Mofes are feparated by the Space of 4 Lines ; 
 and about one Quarter of the MS was not point- 
 ed, when die Text was writ favourable Cir- 
 
 cumftances
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 323 
 
 cumftances thefe, and fuch as would have in- 
 duc'd a perfon, perhaps, to confider it as 500 
 Years of Age at leaft ; if its Age had not been 
 limited to 448 (or 446) Years by an Account of 
 it in Italian, added about an 100 Years lince at 
 the Conclufion but upon what Authority the 
 Date in that Account is founded, does not ap- 
 pear. The Account of it is, in Englifh, as fol- 
 lows 'This MS Bible hath been carefully exa- 
 mirid by me, and found faithfully tranfcrib'd; writ- 
 ten with all Care, as well in the Points as in the 
 Accents ) in the 5064 year from the Creation of the 
 World-, together with the fmall Mafora, and the 
 Expojition of Rabbi Sa/amon upon the Pentateuch : 
 and, in every Doubt of the Printed Books, Re- 
 courfe may be had to This, which, on account of its 
 Antiquity and Accuracy, is mofl true and good. 
 John Leon Modena, Hebrew Rabbi in Venice ; 
 the %th of October, 1628 after Chrift ; which is, 
 according to the Computation of the Hebrews, 5388 
 from the Creation of the World. 
 
 The high Encomium, pafs'd upon this MS by 
 the Rabbi before-mention'd, is exalted beyond 
 the Truth. But yet, there are even now feme 
 True Readings preferv'd in it, that are not found 
 in the printed Copies ; and more True Readings 
 might have been found in it, if John Leon Mo- 
 dena, or fome other Rabbi, full fraught with 
 
 Zeal
 
 3 2 4 DISSERTATION 
 
 Zeal for the Mafora, had not eras'd the original 
 Writing in many places to make it more con- 
 formable to That invariable Teft of Verity 
 But, muft not That Rule have been founded on 
 very Excellent MSS, if many true Readings muft 
 be eras'd, to make any MS conformable to it \ 
 And muft it not have been founded on very 
 Ancient MSS, if very late MSS muft be cor- 
 rected, to cure their Variations from it ! 
 
 But to conclude the Account of this MS. 
 It has one confiderable Excellence that the 
 Verfes in the Poetical Books are divided into He- 
 mijlicks^ as they certainly ought to be ; and as 
 our Firft MS is divided, in the Song of Mofes. 
 1 mall only obferve farther, that this teems to 
 have been the very MS mention'd by Bp. Wai- 
 ton^ in his Prolegomena, pag. 32 ; where he 
 fays Habeo Exemplar MS, quod olim erat Joh. 
 Seldeni, fcriptum annis abhinc 350, cum Variis 
 Leftionibus Ben- Afher G? Ben-Naphtali -, ex qui- 
 bus qutfdam fuppkvimus in noftris Bibliis, qua? me 
 in VenettS) nee in Bafilienjibus habentur. Erat 
 quondam Leonis Modena?; fcriptum anno cer<z 
 Judaic^ 5064, Chriftiance 1304, ut in fine Li- 
 bri notatur. This learned Editor mentions his 
 having fupplied fome things in his Bible from 
 this MS -, and therefore it may be proper to re- 
 mark, that fuch Supplements were made only 
 
 from
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 325 
 
 from the Various Readings of Ben-AJher and 
 Ben-Napbtalf, which are Variations that refpecl: 
 not the Letters but the Points. Whereas he 
 might, from this MS, have alfo fupplied fome 
 whole Words. For, 'tis the great Honour of THIS 
 
 MS to preferve Two entire Verfes in one 
 
 Place, which I mall mention in its Order; Two 
 VerfeSy which are found but in very Jew of the 
 moft ancient and beft MSS ; which are how- 
 ever moft certainly a part of the Original Text ; 
 and which, tho' totally omitted in many printed 
 Editions, are not compleatly mferted (perhaps) in 
 any one printed Edition, not even in the Englijh 
 Polyglott. 
 
 Thefe FIVE HEBREW MSS feem to be the 
 moft valuable, and have therefore been fome- 
 what particularly defcrib'd. And as the many 
 other Hebrew MSS, which have been generouf- 
 ly prefented to the Bodleian Library, are alfo 
 worthy the Attention of the Learned ; and as 
 fome of them will be referr'd to in the follow- 
 ing Papers ; it may be proper to give a fhort Ca- 
 talogue of their Names their Places in the Li- 
 brary the Books which they contain .&c. 
 
 Sf The
 
 526 DISSERTATION 
 
 The Catalogue of the Bodl. Heb. MSS. 
 briefly continued. 
 
 6. POCOCK Compleat Bible beautiful MS 
 Initials of the fame Size with the Letters fol- 
 lowing fome places unpointed the Poetic. 
 Books writ in Hemifticks Vellum 40. 
 
 2 Vol NO. 347, 348. 
 
 7. BODLE Y Compleat Bible > except Jojh. yud. 
 Sam. Kin. Jer. and Ezek. (which probably 
 made another Vol. now loft) Germ. Character 
 
 Initials larger and decorated ~ generally 4 
 Columns in a Page Veil 3 large Vol. Fol 
 Archiv. A. 95, 96, 97. 
 
 8. HUNTINGTON ~ Pentateuch Three large 
 Rolls no Mafora no Points no Diftinc- 
 tion of Verfes Space of 4 lines after every 
 Book Initials not larger ~ NO. i, 2, 3. 
 
 9. HUNTINGTON Pentateuch ~ beautiful Cha- 
 racter Initial Words wanting Veil Fol. 
 
 N. 69. 
 
 10. LAUD Pentateuch Heb. and Chald ~ Ini- 
 tials large and decorated generally 3 Co- 
 lums Veil large Fol G. 97. 
 
 11. MARSHALL Pentateuch (Heb. and Chald.) 
 -- Megillotb and Job Initials larger 3 Co- 
 lumns Veil Fol NO. i. 
 
 12. Po-
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 327 
 
 12. POCOCK Pentateuch Heb. Chal. and A- 
 rab Initials not larger i Column Eaflern 
 Paper writ 1450 2 Vol large 40 
 NO. 395, 396. 
 
 13. POCOCK Pentateuch^ Pfalms and Megilloth 
 
 Initial Word or Letter gilt, with a red 
 Decoration Veil 80 NO. 30. 
 
 14. MARSH Pentateuch, imperf ~ Gen. 4, 20 
 36, 7 j then Exod. 5, 8 40, 19 ; then Dent. 
 ~ no Mafora no Points Rabbin. Charaft. 
 
 Paper -- 120 NO. 10. 
 
 15. BODLEY Genejis no Mafora Initial Word 
 not larger ~ large Letter Paper Fol C. 
 
 7,8. 
 
 1 6. POCOCK Exodus beautiful Charaft Ini- 
 tial Word not larger Veil ~ 1 2 NO. 7. 
 
 17. HUNTINGTON Lev. Num. Deut. and Me- 
 gilloth no Mafora no Points originally 
 Initial Word not larger Space of 4 Lines 
 between two Books of the Pentat ~ 2 Line 
 Space between the Megilloth Veil ~ 40 
 N. 235. 
 
 1 8. MARSHALL Numb, from 4, 44 ; and Deu- 
 teron Heb. and Chald. with a Comment 
 Veil -80 -No. 51. 
 
 19. HUNTINGTON Deuteron. from 3,123 with 
 fome Parafhoth of Samuel intermix'd by the 
 Writer ~ greater part unpointed Paper 
 
 NO. 475. 20. HUN-
 
 328 DISSERTATION 
 
 20. HUNTINGTON Jofhua and Judges Ini- 
 tials not larger ~ Veil 40 N. 396. 
 
 21. MARSH Judges and Kings ~ no Mafora 
 Kings not pointed Initials not larger da- 
 ted 5000 i. e. 1242 i. e. 510 years of Age 
 Eaft. Paper 40 N. 607. 
 
 22. MARSH Ruth, Dan. Ezra, Nehem Ini- 
 tials larger, not decorated Paper 4 
 N. 21. 
 
 23. BODLEY Ruth, Ezra, Nehem. Job. Lam. 
 EJiher Initials wanting Veil 40 Arch. 
 
 F. 7 . 
 
 24. LAUD Ruth, and the other Megilloth no 
 Mafora Initials larger Veil Fol A. 
 171. 
 
 25. MARSH Samuel, begins i Sam. 2, 3 Eaft. 
 Paper 4 N. 9 1 . 
 
 26. MARSHALL Samuel (from i Sam. 6, 10) 
 Kings and the Prophets Initials larger 
 V<:ll-Fol-No.3. 
 
 27. HUNTINGTON Chro. Pf. Job, Prov. Me- 
 gill. Dan. Ezr. and Nehem Initials not 
 larger, nor decorated Poet. Books in He- 
 miflicks fmall Letter much obliterated 
 and injur'd Veil 1 2 N. 59 1 . 
 
 28. HUNTINGTON Ezra and Daniel Ini- 
 tials not larger Eaft. Paper 4 NO. 
 
 3 6 7- 
 
 29. SEL-
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 329 
 
 29. SELDEN ~ Eft her a little Roll, moft beau- 
 tifully writ ~ no Mafora, nor Points, nor 
 Diftindtion of Verfes Initial Word not 
 larger Arch. A. 
 
 30. HUNTINGTON --Job, with 2 Arab. Verfions 
 
 Initial Word not larger Eaft. Paper 
 40 __ NO. 511. 
 
 3 1 . LAUD Pfalms no Mafora no Points o- 
 riginally Paper 1 2 A. 43. 
 
 32. LAUD Pfalms Initials larger, with De- 
 corations ~ Veil 40 E. 22. 
 
 33. LAUD Pfalms Initials larger and decora- 
 ted - Veil - 40 - L. 1 6. 
 
 34. BODLEY Pfalms Initials larger and deco- 
 rated - Veil - 80 - A. 3, 6. 
 
 35. PRIDE AUX Pfalms firft Letter larger -- 
 Sophpafuk red -- Veil 12 Bodley, Arch. 
 
 B. 20. 
 
 36. SELDEN Pfalms firft Word in Gold Let- 
 ters, red Decoration no Mafora dated 
 rm*S nVl'n' (5235 a creatione) i.e. 1477 
 
 oblong form Veil -- 8 NO. 105 fupe- 
 rius. 
 
 37. POCOCK Pfalms Heb. and Arab in He- 
 mifticks Veil ~ 40 _ N. 281. 
 
 38. BERNHARD Pfalms a Comment round it 
 
 firft Letter larger ~ not old -- Veil 8 
 
 ie. c. 1,10. 
 
 39. Po-
 
 330 DISSERTATION 
 
 39. POCOCK Proverbs Heb. and Arab -- Ini- 
 tial Word not larger Eaft. Paper -- 4 -* 
 No. 285. 
 
 40. POCOCK ~ Proverbs Heb. and Arab, with 
 a Comment Initial Word not larger Eaft. 
 Paper little Fol - N. 70. 
 
 41. POCOCK Ecclef. with a Comment Initial 
 Word not larger Eaft. Paper -- 80 N. 
 274. 
 
 42. HUNTINGTON Ecclef. with a Comment 
 defective at begin, and end Eaft. Paper 
 40.. NO. 6 1 6. 
 
 43. BERNHARD Ifaiah Initial Word not lar- 
 ger - Eaft. Paper - 80 - ISE. C. i, 22. 
 
 44. HUNTINGTON Ifai. Jerem. Ezek Initials 
 not larger Veil -- 4 N. 261. 
 
 45. BODLEY ~ Ezekiel Heb. and Lat. Veriion 
 in the Margin feems coeval with the Letters, 
 and an interlineary Lat. Veriion feems later 
 and coeval with the Points begins at the 
 left hand Veil 40 A. hypero. 159. 
 
 46. HUNTINGTON Ezek. Hofea &c. to Mala- 
 chi no Mafora Initial Word larger Veil 
 ~ 24^ N. 604. 
 
 To the preceding Bodleian Heb. MSS 
 
 may be added the following Copies of the 
 
 SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH j 
 
 which
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 331 
 
 which Bp Walton calls xp?A<cv admodum 
 pretiofum, ac Auro contra non carum : and thefe 
 Copies contain, not a Verfion, but the Hebrew 
 Pentateuch in the Samaritan Character. 
 
 47. BODLEY Folio large Character, and a lit- 
 tle obliterated in many places Imperfect 
 begins Gen. i, 21 -- Exod. 8, and Exod. 17, 
 fupply'd ( in each place ) by 2 leaves writ in 
 a fmaller Character Lev. 4, 2, One leaf of 
 Eaft. Paper, late hand then 2 leaves of the 
 Orig. Vellum 8 leaves of Paper, late hand 
 2 of Orig. Vellum 31 of Paper, late 
 10 of Orig. Vellum 28 of Paper, late 3 
 of Vellum, lefs in Size and Character than 
 the Orig. Book 4 of Paper, late 6 of 
 Orig. Vellum i of Vellum, lefs Size and 
 Character 4 of Orig. Vellum -- 2 of lefs 
 Vellum the remainder from Dent, u, 25 
 to Deut. 34, 4, of Vellum, and large Cha- 
 racter beginning to be obliterated the lafl 
 8 Verfes wanting. It is catalogued, Bodley, 
 Arch. C. i. 
 
 48. BODLEY large Quarto Parts of the Sa- 
 mar. Pentateuch, with an Arab. Vcrfion (in 
 Samar. Letters) plac'd in the oppofite Co- 
 lumn begins Gen. i, n and proceeds, 
 with feveral intermediate Deficiences, to the 
 End of Gen the fame the Cafe of Exod. to 
 
 Chap,
 
 DISSERTATION 
 
 Chap. 18,4 defective from thence (except 
 from Num. 18, 20, to 19, 9) to Deut. 8, 13, 
 and then continued to the end ; but the Con- 
 cluding Chapters of Deut. feem the work of 
 a later hand Vellum and Paper Arch. 
 
 C.2. 
 
 49. BODLEY ~ Quarto begins Gen. 25, 29 and 
 ends Deut. 22,21 diff. Characters writ by 
 diff. hands generally Vellum , but fome 
 leaves of Baft. Paper Arch. C. 3 . 
 
 50. LAUD -- large Quarto On a vacant Leaf at 
 the beginning is this Infcription Pentateu- 
 chum hoc Samaritanum eft (in principal & fine 
 mutilatum) antiquijjimis Phcenicum literis de- 
 
 fcriptum. Ab Eccleftafticis fcriptoribus, Eufe- 
 bio, Diodoro Tarfenfi, Hieronymo, Cyrillo 
 &c. fapius eft citatum. A Cuthasis vero ho- 
 diernis, una cum aliis aliquot eorum monumen- 
 ttSy redemit Jacobus UfTerius, 
 
 Armach. Hibern. Primas. 
 
 ( Then follow thefe words, in another hand -, 
 fign'd by A-Bp Laud ) 
 
 Qui librum hunc mihi dono dedit. W. Cant. 
 
 Firft Leaf Paper, very late hand 2d 
 Leaf Paper, not fo late, another hand 2 
 leaves of Vellum, Character older -- then be- 
 gins the Orig. Book, Eaft. Paper ; Letter mo- 
 derate
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 333 
 
 derate Size, and feems not very ancient 
 this Paper and Character continues to Deuf. 
 1 7, 2 -- then 8 leaves of Vellum, the Cha- 
 racter perhaps older -- 5 of Paper, dif?. from 
 the body of the Book ~ 6 concluding leaves 
 of Paper, by a very late hand, which were 
 tranfcrib'd ( as the Infcription fubjoin'd tells 
 us ) at the Command of A-Bp Laud e x 
 vetufloy eoque integrc? BibUothecce Cottotiana 
 Exemplari) quod A. D. 1^62 fuit exaratum. 
 Catalogued, Land. B. 143. 
 
 51. MARSH ~ 12 Veiium Totally oblitera- 
 ted in many places, efpecially at the begin- 
 ning and end the 4 laft leaves by a very 
 late hand -- Catalogued NO. 1 5. 
 
 52. POCOCK 243 fine Vellum Character 
 very fmali obliterated in many places 3 
 firft pages not legible, the 4th begins at Gen. 
 6,21 ends at Deuf. 22 Catalogued N. 5. 
 
 To this Catalogue of the Bodleian Hebrew 
 MSS it may not be improper to add the Names 
 of fuch Hebrew MSS, as are in the Libraries of 
 our feveral Colleges ; that fo the Learned may fee, 
 collected together, the Whole Treafure of He- 
 brew MSS now preferv'd in THE UNIVERSITY 
 OF OXFORD. 
 
 T t ORIEL
 
 334 DISSERTATION 
 
 ORIEL College 
 
 53. Catalogued 72 Gen. i, 24 to end of Deut. 
 then Haphtaroth from 7/feW,& &c. then 
 Pfalms, beginning at Pf. 32, 8 ; Job ; Ecclef. 
 beginning at 3 , 5 ; Cantic. Lament. Daniel-, 
 Efther; Ezra-, Nehem. Cbron. to the laft Chap. 
 20 Verfe Initials not larger ~ Veil Fol. 
 
 LINCOLN College 
 
 54. Pentateuch a Roll, very fmall, moft beau- 
 tifully writ, on the fineft Vellum no Ma- 
 fora, nor Points, nor Diftinction of Verfes 
 the firft Letter larger than the Letters fol- 
 lowing it, but in the other Books of the fame 
 Size -- the Space of 4 Lines between every 
 two Books This MS, extreamly elegant, 
 but not old, was prefented to the College- 
 Library by its prefent very worthy Reftor. 
 
 55. EJlher a Roll, large and fair Character 
 Initial Letter and Word not larger than the 
 following ~ no Mafora, nor Points, nor Dif- 
 tin&ion of Verfes. 
 
 CORP. CHRIST. College 
 
 56. Catalogued W. B. 4, 7 Pentateuch Veil 
 Fol Initial Words omitted 4 Columns ; 
 the 2 middle containing the Vulgat Verfion, 
 the 2 external contain the Hebrew Text. 
 
 57. Catalogued W. C. 4, 9 Jojh. Jud. Sam. Ec- 
 clef. EJlher a Commentary in the Rabbin. 
 
 Charac-
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 335 
 
 Character no Points Initial Words not 
 larger than the reft Veil ~ Fol. 
 
 58. Catalogued W. D. i, 5 i Samuel, to Chap. 
 20, 1 5 j and the 2 Books of Chronicles Veil, 
 in 80 The Part of Sam. proceeds from left 
 to right, but Chron. regularly from right to 
 left -- Sam. has a Lat. Verlion in the Mar- 
 gin, and alfo between the greater part of the 
 Lines j Cbron. has the interlineary Verfion on- 
 ly Perhaps originally without Points ; and 
 the Pointer feems to have added the interli- 
 neary Verfion. 
 
 59. Catalogued W. B. 4, 6 Pfalms 3 Lat. Ver- 
 lions Veil Fol ~ begins at the Left. 
 
 60. Catalogued W. D. 2, i Pfalms (with a Lat. 
 Verfion in the Margin) and Proverbs Ini- 
 tial Words larger than the reft Veil Fol. 
 
 61. Catalogued W. B. 4, 8 - Prophets (all the la- 
 ter) except Daniel and Obadiah Heb. and 
 Lat. 4 Columns, difpos'd as NO. 56 -- Ini- 
 tial Words omitted at firft, in order to be 
 decorated j and not fmce inferted ~ Veil 
 Fol. 
 
 ST. JOHN BAPT. College 
 
 62. Catalogued N. 143 in Abaco 3 Jofh. Judg. 
 Cant. Ecclef the whole writ from the left 
 to right Initial Words wanting ~ Lat. Ver- 
 fion in the Margin feems to have been writ 
 
 Tt 2 by
 
 336 DISSERTATION 
 
 by the Writer of the Heb. Text ; and an in- 
 terlineary Lat. Verfion feems to have been 
 added afterwards by the Pointer Veil, in 
 40 __ Prefented to the Library by the learned 
 Dr. Bernard, 1667. 
 
 JESUS College 
 
 63. Pentateuch, with Chald. Paraphrafe in the 
 Margin Initial Words larger Veil 2 Vol. 
 Fol. bought by Mr. Lewis Roberts, Fac- 
 tor at Conftantinople, in 1624; and, together 
 with the Book following, prefented to this 
 Library Catalogued 46 and 47. 
 
 64. Cant. Ruth, Lam. Ecclef. Efther, and fome 
 Haphtaroth out of Ifaiab &c. the 3 Books of 
 Pfal. Prov. and Job writ without Points in 
 the Margin Initials larger Veil Fol - 
 Catalogued 48. 
 
 65. Pfalms dated 1602 Paper 120. 
 
 To all which MSS may be added 
 
 6. Pentateuch a Compleat Copy ~ fmall Cha- 
 racter Initials not larger, nor decorated . 
 Space of 4 Lines after each Book Veil 
 120 in the Library of the Rev. and Learned 
 Dr. Barf on, Canon of Chrift-Church. 
 
 It may be neceiTary, for the fake of the lefs 
 converfant in thefe matters, to explain fomewhat 
 
 more
 
 On i C H R O N. XI Gfr. 337 
 
 more particularly, why the written Samaritan 
 Pentateuchs have been plac'd in the preceding 
 Catalogue with the Hebrew MSS. And the Rea- 
 fon is Becaufe the Samaritan Pentateuch is 
 not a Verfan of the Hebrew Pentateuch, but is 
 The Hebrew Pentateuch in another Character; 
 the Samaritan and Hebrew Text having been o- 
 riginally the fame. And, tho' thefe Two Copies 
 of the fame Text are not, at prefent, exattly the 
 fame ; yet, where they vary, perhaps the Sama- 
 ritan more frequently gives the truer Reading. 
 Since the Law of Mofes, in the Samaritan,, or 
 ( more properly ) in the Old Hebrew Character, 
 will be found to have been in general more care- 
 fully preferv'd, or (by not having been fo often 
 tranfcrib'd ) to have contracted fewer Blemimes, 
 than the Same Law, which has been alfo deli- 
 ver'd down in the Hebrew ', or ( more properly ) 
 in the Chaldee Character, adopted by the Jews 
 after their Return from the Babylonifh Capti- 
 vity. 
 
 I am aware, that the preceding Sentences con- 
 tain Pofitions contradictory to the Sentiments 
 and Decifions offome Learned Men. But I know 
 alfo, that thefe Pofitions have been maintain'd 
 and infifted on by other Learned Men; Wbom y 
 as they feem to have TRUTH with them, I ven- 
 ture to follow. 
 
 The
 
 The Hiftory of the Samaritans, the Antiqui- 
 ty of Their Pentateuch, and the Authority of 
 Our Copies of it, have been well confider'd by 
 Morinus, Walton^ Houbigant &c. but perhaps by 
 no one more fully and fatisfactorily than Du Pin, 
 in his Canon of the Old Teftamentj Book i. 
 Chap. 5. Se&.i.&c. And this Author, with his 
 ufual Moderation, like a truly-judicious Man, 
 concludes that we are not to declare abfolute- 
 ly for One of thefe Pentateuchs againft the Other, 
 but to prefer the true Readings in Both. His Con- 
 clufion of this important Point flands thus 
 
 " Tho' the Hebrew Samaritan Text be not 
 " wholly conformable to the Hebrew Common 
 " Text, and different only in Characters j there 
 " is not however any Difference fo confiderable, 
 " as to make it to be accounted Another Text* 
 "All. that can be faid of it is, that they are Two 
 " Copies of the Same Hebrew Text, Two Copies of 
 " the Same Original Text ; betwixt which fome 
 " Difference hath happen'd, either by the direct 
 " Intention of the Copiers, who defigned to make 
 " fome Additions or Changes, or by their Neg- 
 " tigence, which hinders not but both may be 
 " the True Original Text. 'Tis not abfolutely 
 " neceffary, that we mould always follow the 
 " Samaritan Pentateuch j nor are we always ob- 
 " lig'd to follow the Hebrew Text. We muft 
 
 "judge
 
 On i C H R O N. XI r. 339 
 
 "judge of it, according to the Rules which we 
 " have prefcrib'd and applied to the principal 
 " Differences of thofe Two Texts. This is the 
 " Medium we muft take between the oppofite 
 " Sentiments concerning the Samaritan Penta- 
 " teuch, which fome extol too high, and others 
 " defpife too much." 
 
 I mail juft remark What a ftrong Proof 
 is given by the Samar. to the Truth of the He- 
 brew Pentateuch, at the fame time that the for- 
 mer proves many Corruptions in the latter. 
 Since, after more than a Thoufand Years from 
 the firft exiftence of the Samar. Pentateuch, fe- 
 veral of the Chriftian Fathers made Extracts 
 from one or more Copies, or from a Verfion of 
 it And, after having been unheard of, or at 
 leaft unfeen by the European Chriftians, for an- 
 other Thoufand Years, this ineftimable Treafure 
 was recover'd in the Seventeenth Century j when 
 a few Copies, and Parts of Copies, were pur- 
 chas'd in the Eaft of the Defendants of the Sa- 
 maritans And fmce thefe Copies riot only an- 
 fwer exactly to the Quotations made by the Fa- 
 thers, but by their general Agreement with the 
 Hebrew Copies prove Their Truth, and the Truth 
 of each other, beyond all Contradiction. 
 
 It muft be obferv'd, that there has been but 
 One Copy of the Samar. Pentateuch, as yet, print- 
 
 ed ;
 
 340 DISSERTATION 
 
 ed 5 and no wonder, that any One Copy, however 
 excellent, mould contain Tome Faults : as that 
 undoubtedly does in the French Polyglott, and 
 alfo in the Englijh Polyglott, which (in that in- 
 ftance) is copied from the French. F. Houbigant 
 makes mention of Six Copies of the Samar. Pen- 
 tateuch ; and fays, Prolegom. pag. 188 Nullum 
 vidimus, quanquam effetfatis mendofus, a quo mul- 
 ta Menda non abfunt, qua Hebrteos Codices detur- 
 pant. Montfaucon, in his Diarium Italicutn, pag. 
 1 1, tells us In Bibliothecd Ambrofiand Medio- 
 lanenfi fervantur Biblia Samaritana antiquij/ima, 
 quam minima forma, in 12. and adds Hac 
 fane, fi ad vacaret, vellem collata cum editis. To 
 thefe Seven then may be added thofe, which have 
 been before-mention'd, as preferv'd in the Bod- 
 leian Library. 
 
 Having thus ofFer'd fuch Obfervations , as 
 feem'd previoufly neceflary, on the Printed Edi- 
 tions of the Hebrew Bible, on the Hebrew MSS 
 in general, and on the Oxford Hebrew MSS in 
 particular ; I proceed now to give the Extract of 
 Miftakes and Various Readings, which I have 
 made from Some of Thefe MSS. And as the 
 Nature and Intention of this Extract have been al- 
 ready explain'd, in pages 285,286; I beg to refer 
 the Reader to thofe pages, before he proceeds to 
 perufe the following Particulars. The
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 341 
 
 The Extract, thus explain'd, {hall be begun, 
 as foon as I have mention'd 4 other Hebr. MSS, 
 which are preferv'd in the Univerfity of CAM- 
 BRIDGE ; the perufal of which MSS was lately 
 granted me, in the moft obliging manner, by 
 the Worthy Perfons to whofe Care they are en- 
 trufted. 
 
 The Fir/1, and moft ancient, is a valuable MS 
 preferv'd in CAIUS College, catalogued NO. 404; 
 writ on Vellum, in 8. and contains the whole 
 Heb. Bible, except the Pentateuch. It was given 
 to the College by Dr. Cairn himfelf ; as appears 
 from thefe Words at the end ~ Joannes Cams col- 
 legia Goneuilli & Caii fuo dedit a. 1557. One 
 column fills each page ; and the initial words of 
 the books are larger, but not decorated. It feems 
 to have been writ without Points, at firft j be- 
 caufe feme words are unpointed Jlill ; and thefe 
 were probably fo left by the Pointer, on account 
 of his finding them different from the words in 
 other later and pointed Copies. That the Age of 
 it is between 500 and 600 years, may be pre- 
 fum'd from the Number and Nature of its Va- 
 rious Readings ; and becaufe the Keri is ufually 
 found in the Text. I fay ufually ; for this is not 
 the cafe un'merfally , though we find it aflerted in 
 Bp Walton's Prolegom. to the Polyglott (pag-32) 
 where he calls this MS exemplar antiquiffimum ; 
 
 U u and
 
 342 DISSERTATION- 
 
 and fays nulluni Ken in margine notatur. In- 
 deed this MS was not examin'd by Walton him- 
 felf, but by a Friend of his, who fent him fome 
 of the Various Readings, which however he made 
 no ufe of. This MS has the following remark- 
 able Peculiarity, that the Order of the Books is the 
 fame as in the Englifo Bible. 
 
 The Second MS, which contains the whole 
 Heb. Bible, is in the Public Library. It is Writ 
 on Vellum, in 4. there are 2 columns in a page ; 
 the beginning of each book is decorated j and it 
 has fome confiderable Variations. The writing 
 by Hemifticks takes place at the conclufion of . 
 Pf. 1 3 j Prov. 4, 9 ; and Job 3 , 20. This MS was 
 writ by Jacob Levi, and is dated mwh nS'in'n'. 
 
 The Third MS is alfo a compleat Heb. Bible, 
 in 3 Vol. Fol. on Vellum j given by Bp Bedell to 
 EMANUEL College j and is catalogued Clajf. i. 
 Num. 27. This MS is later than the preceding j 
 it contains 2 columns in a page; and has the 
 initial word larger and decorated, with an Illu- 
 mination round the firft page of each volume. 
 The Order of the Books is alfo uncommon in 
 this MS ; the 3d volume begins with Chron. then 
 the Pfalms, Job, &c. and ends with Nehemiah. 
 
 The Fourth MS contains only the Pfalms. It 
 is writ on Veil, in Fol. with 3 Lat. Verfions ; 
 and is mark'd R 8, 6, in the juftly-admir'd Li- 
 brary of TR i N i T Y College. THE
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 343 
 
 THE EXTRACT 
 
 OF MISTAKES AND VARIOUS READINGS. 
 
 GEN. 3, 12 runJ Kin And the Man f aid ^ 
 The Woman^ whom thou gave/I to be with me, SHE 
 gave me &c. Thus our Englifh Verfion renders 
 the words ; but they are in truth 'The Woman 
 HE gave me &c. And, at verfe 20 tsjin 
 HJVn Adam called his Wife's name Eve, becaufc 
 SHE was the mother 8cc. But here alfo the print- 
 ed Hebrew is becaufe HE was the mother &c. 
 
 The great Propriety, and indeed abfolute Ne- 
 cefTity, that the Pronoun of the 3d perfon fhould 
 have its different Genders, or be differently ex- 
 prefs'd, is elegantly demonftrated in a late ex- 
 cellent Treatife, call'd a Phikfophical Enquiry on -X' 
 Univerfal Grammar , pag. 70. And every one 
 knows, that the Pronouns He and She are diftin- 
 guifh'd in the Hebrew ; as they are, and ought 
 to be, in all Languages. , 
 
 'Tis not a little furprizing then, that Kin He 
 /hould be frequently found inftead of tf'H She, 
 in the Hebrew Bibles ; which Miftake frequent- 
 ly repeated, as none but a 'Jewifo Tranfcriber 
 could make in writing, fo none but a Jcwifo 
 Critic could publifh by printing it. The Sama- 
 ritan Text knows no fuch Abfurdity ; reading 
 
 u u 2 
 
 //
 
 344 DISSERTATION 
 
 tf*H She in both places here, as (perhaps) in eve- 
 ry other, where this Pronoun has been corrupt- 
 ed in the Hebrew. Some of the Hebrew MSS 
 alfo read tf'n She in thefe two places : in ver.i2. 
 N. 7, 53, 56 j and in ver. 20 N. 7. 15, 
 53, 56. And the Second Cambridge MS reads 
 N>n properly, in both verfes. 
 
 To the Teftimony of thefe MSS may be add- 
 ed that of MSS preferv'd elfewhere. And here 
 it may be remark'd, that (perhaps) the only He- 
 brew Bible, which has been yet publifh'd, with 
 Various Readings collected from any MSS, was 
 publim'd by *Jobn Henry Michaelis, at Hall in 
 Saxony, 1720, in 2 Vol. Quarto; a Copy of which 
 fcarce Edition is in the curious Collection of 
 Books prefented to Chrift-Church College by A-Bp. 
 Wake. The Author of this Edition tells us, he 
 collated quinque (Codices) MScriptos membrana- 
 ceos, quos pojfidet Bibliotheca venerabilis Miniflerii 
 Erfurtenfis Evangelici. He diftinguimes thefe 5 
 MSS by the Numbers I, 2 &c. and fays, in his 
 Note on the preceding 2oth Verfe, that MS 2 
 reads here tf'n ilia j as it frequently does in other 
 places, where the printed Editions improperly 
 read N^n # 
 
 F. Houbigant obferves, pag. 98, that the Pro- 
 noun here is tf'n ilia, in the Oratorian MSS \ in 
 N c . 53 writ in the I2th Century, and in N c . 42 
 
 writ
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 345 
 
 writ in the 1 3th : and he adds in priori mult a 
 Wr\ qu<z nunc Kin ', in pojleriori fere femper . Sed 
 tamen Jud<zaftro cuidam id cum non placeret^ ilk 
 tranjverfo calamo litter am > fape deleft -, quoniam 
 WafctiLJic jiibebat ; ne ilk Codex, cum Mafora non 
 concordaret. 
 
 To the preceding Authorities may be added 
 that of the Printed Copies againft themfefoes. For 
 moft of the Copies have the Points and the 
 Points evidently direct to the true reading of tf n 
 She, by having an Hirek under the firft letter, 
 in thefe two inftances and perhaps in every other 
 now found corrupted. As for the Points in ge- 
 neral, I do not incline to the notion of their ne- 
 cejjary EJJentiality or extream Antiquity; much 
 lefs to ( what the Author of a late DifTertation 
 on the Hebrew Vowel-Points calls) a Superior 
 Sanctity in 'Them above the Letters themfelves. 
 But yet, the Points feem to have their Ufes, and 
 thefe not inconfiderable ; and to have this Ufe, 
 among others that, as many Hebrew Letters 
 have been corrupted iince the Invention of the 
 Points, and as the Points fubjoin'd originally to 
 the true Letters have been in many of thefe pla- 
 ces regularly prefer^ d\ thefe Points will fre- 
 quently concur (as they do here) in proving the 
 Truth of fuch Corruptions, and will point out 
 the Method of correcting them. 
 
 There
 
 346 DISSERTATION 
 
 There are Three Observations., which, as they 
 muft be frequently recollected in the following 
 inftances, may be mention'd here once for all. 
 As Firji that many Miftakes, eaiily feen in 
 the printed Hebrew Bible, are not vifible in the 
 Englifh Translation ; the Tranilators having of- 
 ten given the Englifh, not of what really w, but 
 of what they imagin'd (and fometimes very jufl- 
 ly irnagin'd) ought to have been printed in the He- 
 brew Text. Secondly that where any MS is 
 not quoted, in this Extract, as confirming a par- 
 ticular Reading j it is not to be concluded, that 
 fuch a MS contradicts it, or reads differently. 
 For feveral of the MSS may be defective in that 
 place, as fome of the Oldeft are in the inilances 
 preceding ; but the more general Caufe of Si- 
 lence will be, that the MSS have not been all 
 examin'd. And the Third Obfervation is that 
 the Advocates for the Integrity of the printed 
 Hebrew Copies have Two Words, which folve 
 almoft every Difficulty. If Confufion or Abfur- 
 dity is introduc'd by the Exchange of one Pro- 
 noun,, Number or Tenfe for another ; it is, we are 
 told, the beautiful Figure ENALLAGE : if a to- 
 tal Deficiency of Senfe is objected, thro' the O- 
 mijjion of a Word or Sentence ; it is vindicated un- 
 der the Name of an ELLIPSIS Two Figures, 
 xvhich had not been -now held fo ufeful in ex- 
 plaining
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 347 
 
 plaining the Hebrew Language; if the Samaritan 
 Pentateuch had been fooner known and better 
 attended to. For, as F. Houbigant obferves, pag. 
 92 Error ijle eripiendm eji^ Tejlamenti Veteris 
 Scriptores fuijfle rerum Grarnmaticarum aut rudes 
 aut negligentes. Nee vero talla portenta fomnian- 
 tium Grammaticorum mine haberemus, nifi nimium 
 jero advent [jet ilk Codex Samariticus, quern milk 
 annos tenebris confepultum^ Europa noftra fczculo 
 ultimo tandem recuperavit. Quippe mirum, quam 
 egregie eorum indoftam doftrinam confufef is Co- 
 dex ; a quo exulant miracida ilia Ellipie^n & E- 
 nallag^n, aut fi quod aliud genus eft Soloecifmo-' 
 rum. (Pag. 86.) Negat Morinus, Hebrceam Lin- 
 guam fine Lege ufurpafj'e Genera, Numeros Gf 
 Perfonas ; quod cum eo negare Quis dubitabit ? 
 
 GEN. 4, 8 
 And Cain talked with Abel his brother : and it 
 came to pafs^ when they were in thejield &c. The 
 true Verfion of thefe words is And Cain faid 
 unto Abel^is brother-, and it came to pafs 5cc. 
 The Phrafe of talking with is properly exprefs'd 
 by DV *m, as Exod. 33, 9. But the prefent 
 Phrafe Stf *iJD^ is us'd, when one perfon fpeaks 
 to another in words that are exprefs'd after this 
 introductory Phrafe : as, And the Lord faid unto 
 esj Speak unto the children of Ifrael &c. And 
 
 Mo/es
 
 348 DISSERTATION 
 
 Mofesfaid unto Pharaoh^ 'Thus faith the Lord &c. 
 This Phrafe then being us'd here, And Cain f aid 
 unto Abel; we naturally expecl: to read the Words > 
 which Cain fpake unto Abel : but our prefent 
 Hebrew Text does not inform us. So far in- 
 deed has the Honefty of the Jews prevail'd, as 
 to acquaint us \k& fomething is here wanting^ 
 to compleat the Senfe ; having generally left a Va- 
 cant Space in their MSS, which Space is left al- 
 fo in many of the printed Editions : and in the 
 Englifh Polyglott the Omiffion is fignified by a 
 little Circle, as before exprefs'd. 
 
 Van der Hooght has left a fmall Space here, 
 and no Circle ; but tells us, in his Preface 
 Addimus medio 28 Verfuum Circulum , & eorun- 
 dem margini plDD VVDK2 tfpDD ad Jignijicandum 
 ibidem effe Hiatum in medio Verfu, & fenfum il- 
 lic defetfivum effe fuppkndum. Leufden tells us, in 
 his Claims Heb. Vet. Teftamenti, /;/ hoc Verfu 
 relinquitur in multis Bibliis Spatium vacuum, quafi 
 ibi deejjet vel fubititelligeretur aliquid dantur in 
 V. T. circiter 28 Verfus, in quorum medio commu- 
 niter eft Spatium vacuum, quqft Senfus ibi effet 
 biulcus -, fed primus Verfus talem hiatum admittem 
 eft Genef. 35, 22. 
 
 We may remark here, that there can be no 
 ftronger Confeflions of the Fallibility of the Jew- 
 iih Tranfcribers, and of their having made Great 
 
 Mi/lakes
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 349 
 
 Mi/lakes, than the honeft Acknowledgments 
 made by the Jews themfelves of fo many and 
 fuch material Omiffions. We may alfo obferve, 
 that as the Great Mafora on this Verfe fays, there 
 are 28 Verfts thus defective, but it is contradict- 
 ed by the Little Mafora ; and as the fame Great 
 Mafora, at Genef. 35,22, contradicts itfelf, by 
 aflerting there are but 2 5 defective Verfes : we 
 may hence infer the Fairnefs of thofe Rabbies, 
 who have told us fo much Truth, as to the 
 Contradictions of their Great Rule - 3 and we 
 muft infer a great Defeft of Judgment in thofe 
 CbriftianS) who yet infift fo much upon the In- 
 fallibility of this Rule, as to admit in or fhut 
 out of the Bible any Reading at the Command 
 of this Mafora, in defiance of the Context and 
 Common Senfe. It may be farther obferv'd, that 
 as the exact Places of fuch Omiffions are not u- 
 niformly acknowledg'd ; 'tis poffible, that the lit- 
 tle Circle, the fign of Omiffion, may be now 
 plac'd, where it mould not, and may be omit- 
 ted, where it mould have been inferted : as will 
 be made more probable hereafter. And from 
 this, and other confefs'd Contradictions of the 
 Mafora to itfelf, we may laftly infer that we 
 feem to have no great Occafion for the Book of 
 the learned Danzius y which (Wolfim tells us) 
 he writ, but has not been yet publifh'd, call'd 
 
 Xx The
 
 350 DISSERTATION 
 
 The Mafora tumbled from its Throne 
 nlty. 
 
 If then, as Van der Hooght obferves, the De- 
 fe6l of Senfe at every fuch Hiatus is to be fup- 
 ply'd, we are fortunate in having the fulleft E- 
 vidence for fupplying it in this place ; in the fol- 
 lowing manner And Cain faid unto Abel his 
 brother. Let us go into the field. And it came to 
 pafs, 'when they were in the fold, that Cain rofe up 
 again/I Abel his brother, andjle*w him. This fhort 
 Speech of the inlidious Cain is prefer v'd uniform- 
 ly in the Samar. Text, in the Greek, Syr. and 
 Lat. Verlions ; and alfo in the Targums of jferu- 
 falem and Jonathan, tho' not in the Chald. Para- 
 phrafe which is the Targum of Onkelos. This 
 Omiffion then, tho' perhaps older than moft 
 Hebrew MSS now extant, was made later than 
 fome other Omiflions, which are not fupply'd 
 by the ancient Verfions, or at leaft the prefent 
 Copies of them. And this Speech was omitted 
 in the Hebrew Copy us'd by the Author of the 
 Arabic Verfwn ; which reads here, not as the o- 
 ther ancient Verfions, but as the printed He- 
 brew a direcl: Proof this, that the Arabic Ver- 
 fion, or fome Part of it, was not made from ei- 
 ther of the other ancient Verfions, but direttly 
 from an Hebrew Copy. And therefore we may 
 expeft, that this Arabic Verfion will give usfome
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c.. 351 
 
 fftance in the prefent Enquiry j and we fhall 
 not be deceiv'd in this Expectation. 
 
 Before this Note be concluded, it may be pro- 
 per to obferve that fome Advocates for the 
 
 Integrity of the printed Heb. Text, feeing how 
 dangerous a Conceflion was made by every Ma- 
 foretic Pi/ka, provided fuch Pijka was allow'd 
 to denote a Defect in the Text, have receded fo 
 very far from this Conceffion, as to infift, that 
 this Pijka denoted rather Perfection than Defi- 
 ciency. For thus Carpzovius, who ( in his Crit. 
 Sacr. Vet. ejl. pag. 33) calls the prefent Heb. 
 Bible Codicem ab univerfali labe omnino immunem, 
 tells us, in pag. 815 Tofo ccelo aberrant ', qui 
 Pijka defeSlum notare autumant, quin indicium po- 
 tiits completi fenfus in medio ver/ii prtzbet. 
 
 But this Aflertion, however decifively deli- 
 ver'd, mufl fubjedl itfelf to Examination. The 
 noun tf pDD is deriv'd from pDD rumpere^ abrum- 
 pere, cejfare y definere, dejicere-, and hence pD) 
 MUTILUS membris. Buxtorf. Here then we may 
 remark firft, that wherever this marginal note ip 
 found, a vacant Space is, or mould be, left in 
 the middle of the oppolite verfe -, whence arifes 
 the ftrongeft prefumption, that fome words were 
 fitpposd) or known, to be there omitted. And fe- 
 condly, from the preceding Derivation it ap- 
 pears, that the fenfe of breaking off 'and failing 
 
 X x 2 perfed-
 
 352 DISSERTATION 
 
 perfectly coincides with this fuppos'd iignifica- 
 tion of the blank Space. Let us now examine 
 fome verfe, to which the word Pi/ka has been 
 affix'd ; in order to fee, whether the Senfe be 
 remarkably complete and finijtid in the middle of 
 fuch verfe, or remarkably imperfect and defective. 
 And let us take this very verfe : for Buxtorf tells 
 us, in his Clavis Maforte primus verjus, in quo 
 datur fpatium vacuum, extat Genef. 4, 8. The 
 Hiatus here is thus fituated. And Cain f aid unto 
 Abel his brother and it came to pafs y 
 
 <wben they were in the jield &c. 
 
 Now, is the Senfe at this Chafm, remarkably 
 complete, or is it remarkably defective ? If mofl 
 certainly the latter, then the Maforetic Pijka, 
 fix'd at and caufing this Chafm, does clearly de- 
 note fuch Deficiency agreeably to the nature 
 of a vacant Space agreeably to the true mean- 
 ing of the Noun agreeably to the preceding 
 Explanation of Van der Hooght agreeably to 
 that of Leufden (PhiloL Heb. Differt. 22) re- 
 linquitur fpatium vacuum; quia Maforethce judi- 
 caruntfenfum ibi ejje hiulcum & ellypticum y ac vo- 
 ces quafdam jubintelligi^ qua ad perfefflum fenfum 
 exprimendum videntur requiri and agreeably to 
 that of Buxtorf (Anticrit. pag. 534) Mafora no- 
 tat , 25 effe verfus lacunam in medio verfu haben- 
 tes, ubi fc. aliquid adj'enfus integritatem dejicit. 
 
 As
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 343 
 
 As thefe Reafons and Authorities feem fully 
 fufficient to determine againft the AfTertion of 
 Carpzovius, I mall only add, that the fame Bux- 
 torf is feverely cenfurable, for what he fays far- 
 ther on this point j namely Dum notat Mafe- 
 ra lacunam^ non ea mente facit^ quaji docere veHt, 
 S crib arum lapfu, incur ia^ cafu y aut err ore id ac- 
 cidije, fed recte ita efle, & fie efTe debere. Sit 
 lacuna & hiatus (ubi aliquid ad fenfus integrita- 
 tem deficit) quod Ji aut em ille hiatus certo conjilio 
 Jit faclus ab ipfo Scriptore Sacro, imo a Spiritu 
 Sand:o, noftrum non ejl eum in textufuppkre. 
 
 GEN. 19, 30. The following 9 Words are o- 
 mittedinMS5 -NT O WV Vnn nt^1 nm 
 it^n "IVIVI nntyS an Omiffion evidently oc- 
 cafion'd by the fame Word 2J^i occurring in 
 two different parts of this Verfe. For the Tran- 
 fcriber, having writ ihtjirji a5rn, upon refer- 
 ring again to his Copy, cafr. his eye on thefecond 
 3ipn ; and fo, to the utter Forfeiture of his In- 
 fallibility, writ on from the fecond inftead of 
 the firft an Accident, which will foon have 
 others produc'd to keep it in Countenance, and 
 to eflablim the Certainty of confiderable Miftakes 
 made by Jcwifh Transcribers. 
 
 GEN.
 
 354 DISSERTATION 
 
 GEN. 20, 4. Inftead of the word HN Adonai 
 (Lord) here, MS 66 and Erfurt MS 2 read mn 
 yehovah : which is very remarkable. The Jews, 
 after having all of them for many Ages (perhaps 
 from the Babylonim Captivity) avoided pronoun- 
 cing the incommunicable Name JEHOVAH, be- 
 came at \aft,fome of them, fo fuperftitious as not to 
 write it ; but exprefs'd it, as they pronounc'd it, 
 fometimes D'nW Elobim (God) and fometimes 
 J"ltf Adonai (Lord) : and that moft awful and 
 majeftic Name feems to have been, by this Su- 
 perftition, excluded the Bible, in feveral places 
 in the later MSS and printed Editions. That 
 this Superftition grew upon them more and more, 
 is evident ; becaufe the Older MSS now extant 
 have this Word JEHOVAH more frequently; and 
 becaufe in our Oldeft MS, N. i, when the Let- 
 ters were retouch'd in many places, the Word 
 JEHOVAH was frequently left in its former ftate, 
 fcarce vifible, totally untouch'd by the perfon 
 who rewrit the words immediately before and 
 after it, and who rewrit even the Prepofition fre- 
 quently prefix'd to it. 
 
 This Superftition then, as it might be the 
 Caufe of a Jewifh Tranfcriber's exchanging the 
 Word JEHOVAH, where he found it exprefs'd in 
 his Copy 5 fo it cannot well be fuppos'd to have 
 
 permit-
 
 On iCHRON. XI &c. 355; 
 
 permitted him to write it, where he did not find 
 it in his Copy. And therefore, tho' we may pre- 
 fume it to have been fometimes improperly omit- 
 ted y we can hardly prefume it to have been ever 
 improperly inferted. As the Prefumption then is 
 in favour of the Word JEHOVAH being the true 
 Reading, wherever it is now found ; fo it is the 
 Honour of thefe two MSS to preferve it here : 
 more Inftances of this fort will be produc'd here- 
 after. 
 
 I mail only add, at prefent, a Reflection of 
 Bp. Walton^ Prolegom. pag. 48 In varz'is Lec- 
 tionibus Orientalium & Occidentalium, obferva- 
 runt nonnulli pro nomine piirv, quod extat apud 
 Occidentals, ponere Orientates ^Ttf appellativum j 
 wW. Thren. 5, 21 j quod plane probat, Maforetha- 
 rum cakulum incertum ejje de numero fingularum 
 Literarum, cum incertum fit utram Leftionem fe- 
 quaris. 
 
 GEN. 20, 5 
 
 H^ nnOK Kin DJ m In thefe 12 Words 
 we find the Pronoun of the 3d perfon 5 times -, 
 twice properly He, and three times originally 
 She ; but in the printed Editions 2 of the 3 fe- 
 minine Pronouns have been moft abfurdly chang'd 
 into mafculine. So that the preceding Words, if 
 ehfely, or rather if truly tranflated, contain the 
 
 follow-
 
 356 DISSERTATION 
 
 following Expoftulation of Abimelech on ac- 
 count of Sarah Said HE not unto me, HE is 
 my Sifter ? And SHE, even HE faid, HE is my 
 Brother ! And is This the boafted Integrity of 
 Jewim Tranfcribers ? I mould humbly prefume, 
 that this fmgle Specimen, read ferioufly but twice 
 over, is fufficient to convince Men the moft ob- 
 flinately prejudiced, that every Hebrew Letter is 
 not printed, as it was writ originally. 
 
 Several other Inftances might be produc'd of 
 the fame Miflake in other places of the printed 
 Hebrew Text} in which however the Samar. 
 Text is exactly regular : and places, in which 
 fome of the prefent Hebrew MSS read tf *n pro- 
 perly. Particularly N. 53 had it fo at Jirji in 
 Genef. 12 ; 14, 1 8, 19 20 ; 2, 3, 5 twice 
 26 -, 7 twice, 9 twice &c. in all which places 
 fome injudicious Corrector has evidently alter'd 
 the original into a 1 , out of a profound Vene- 
 ration for his Idol, THE MASORA. The Second 
 Cambridge MS has j*n thrice in this verfe. 
 
 GEN. 23, 2. And Sarah died (being 127 years 
 old) and Abraham came to mourn for Sarah, and 
 to weep for her. The laft word of this Sentence 
 is, in the Hebrew, nniQVl ; in which the fourth 
 of the fix letters is lefs than the reft. It may be 
 obferv'd here, that all our printed Hebrew Bi- 
 
 bles
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 357 
 
 bles have feveral Letters exprefs'd uncommonly ; 
 fome greater, fome lefs than the adjoining, iome 
 
 Jufpended y fome inverted &c. Irregularities 
 
 thefe, fo offenfive to the Eye, that one mould 
 think on that account only ( unlefs they were cer- 
 tainly original) they muft have been omitted by 
 judicious Editors. But, it mould ftem, thefe Ir- 
 regularities contain mighty Myfleries ; and were 
 the curious Contrivances of Mofes and the Pro- 
 phets to convey high and important Meanings. 
 So fay the Cabaliftic Rabbies, and fo believe the 
 Chriftians for otherwife, they had certainly 
 been long fince annihilated, or reduc'd to their 
 primitive State of uniform Regularity. Indeed 
 the Myflerious Senfes affign'd, in order to con- 
 fecrate thefe Inaccuracies of Tranfcribers, are 
 many of them fo exquifitely abfurd, that a Wri- 
 ter runs but a fmall hazard in paffing fevere Re- 
 flections on them j barely to name them is effec- 
 tually to expofe them. 
 
 In this Inftance, we have two Verbs expref- 
 five of Abrahams Sorrow for the Death of Sa- 
 rah and his Tears at her Funeral. And in the 
 fecond Verb, which expreffes his weeping for 
 her, the fourth Letter is lefs than the three pre- 
 ceding and the two following in the fame ivord-y 
 which little Letter, we are told, was fo writ by 
 Mofes, to intimate to us that ive are not to in- 
 
 Y y dulge
 
 358 DISSERTATION 
 
 dulge Grief for our departed Friends, fmce Abra- 
 ham wept but little for Sarah, as appears from this 
 little Caph ; and that Abraham indeed wept but 
 little, becaufe, tho he had loft his Wife, yet it was 
 in her Old Age. 
 
 But, let the Judgment of the Great Author of 
 the Pentateuch, and of every infpir'd Writer, be 
 vindicated from fuch injurious Imputations. And 
 let thefe Irregularities ( the like to which have, 
 perhaps, been admitted into no other Book in 
 World ) be truly call'd Inaccuracies of the Tran- 
 fcribers, and let them be remov'd for ever. The 
 Samar. Pentateuch acknowledges none of them. 
 And they are evidently the Mistakes of late Tran- 
 fcribers ; fince the older MSS now extant are free 
 from moft, if not all of them. And indeed fome 
 of the later MSS were either copied from MSS, 
 which had them not ; or elfe their Tranfcribers 
 had too much Judgment to perpetuate them. 
 This fame Caph is regular, in MSS 7, 9, 1 1, 12, 
 13, 14, 15, 53, 63, 66 (in 66 the 3 has been al- 
 ter'd) and in R. Stephen's printed Edit, of 1543. 
 
 GEN. 25, 8. 'Then Abraham died in a good old, 
 age, an old man and full of years j and was ga- 
 thered to his people. The Engliih Tranflators have 
 faithfully diftinguifh'd by Italic Characters all 
 fuch words, as they have inferted to compleat 
 
 the
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 359 
 
 the Senfe, but were not in their Copies of the 
 Hebrew Text. They acknowledge therefore, 
 and veryjuftly, that the true Englifh of the pre- 
 fent Hebrew Words is Abraham died in a good 
 old age, an old man and full -, and was gathered 
 to his people. The Senfe now being abfolutely 
 imperfect, there feems a Neceffity for allowing, 
 that the word DD days is here omitted ; fince 
 that Word is now found regularly in the Samar. 
 Pentateuch, and in the Greek, Syr. Arab, and 
 Vulg. Verfions. And indeed OD> ViBH Jpf 
 an old man and full of days is the cuilomary Phrafe 
 on fuch occafions. Thus Gen. 35, 29, Ifaac died 
 D'JD* yH'1 pt an old man and full of days : fee 
 alfo i Chron. 23, I ; 29, 28 : yob 42, 17 &c. 
 
 GEN. 26, 1 8. And Ifaac digged again the wells 
 of water, which they had digged in the days of A- 
 braham his father. The Relative they having no 
 Antecedent but Ifaac, with which no Enallage 
 Numeri can make it agree, we may fuppofe fome 
 Miftake ; and we are fully authorized to correct 
 it by the Samar. Text reading here HUV /ervi 9 
 inftead of >DO in diebus two Hebrew Words 
 not very fimilar in their Letters. This Correc- 
 tion is not only made neceflary by the prefent 
 Hebrew Context, but the Samar. Reading is con- 
 firm'd by the Greek , Syr. and Vulg. Verfions. 
 
 Y y 2 The
 
 360 DISSERTATION 
 
 The Sentence will be now And Ifaac digged 
 again the wells of water, which the fervants of A- 
 brabam his father had digged-, for the Philiftines 
 had flopped them after Abraham's Death. 
 
 GEN. 29, i. Then "Jacob went on his journey p , 
 and came into the land of the people of the Raft. 
 
 2 And he looked, and behold a well in the jield ; 
 and to, there were three Jlocks of Jheep lying by it ; 
 
 for out of that well they watered the Jlocks : and a 
 great Jlone was upon the well's mouth. 
 
 3 A/id thither were all the Jlocks gathered; and 
 they rolled the Jlone from the well's mouth \ and wa- 
 tered the Jheep, and put the Jlone again upon the 
 welfs mouth in his place. 
 
 4 And 'Jacob faid unto them, My brethren, 
 whence be ye? And they faid, Of Haran are 
 we. &c. 
 
 7 And he faid, Lo, it is yet high day, neither 
 is it time that the cattle Jkould be gathered together ; 
 water ye the Jheep, and go and feed them. 
 
 8 And they faid, We cannot, until all the flocks 
 be gathered together, and till they roll the Jlone from 
 the well's mouth ; then we water the Jheep. 
 
 It feem'd neceflary to give thefe 6 Verfes en- 
 tirely, that the Reader may the more eafily fee 
 the Neceffity of a few Alterations. We have here 
 a Dialogue, and yet no Man is mention'd but 
 
 Jacob ;
 
 On iCHRON. XI &c. 361 
 
 Jacob ; the only living Creatures prefent befides 
 him being Three Flocks of Sheep. If therefore 
 there were no other way of accounting for this 
 Dialogue, the Reader would be apt to infer 
 that Shepherds muft be underftood, tho' not ex- 
 prejs'd. But the Truth feems to be, that the 
 word for Shepherds was originally exprefsd in thefe 
 Verfes ; and that the ftrange Narration, now 
 given us in them, will be reftor'd to its firffc 
 beautiful Simplicity, by allowing that fome Tran- 
 fcriber has, in 3 places, 
 
 inftead of Dynn Paftores 
 
 writ DHiyn Greges 
 
 a Miftake, which early obtaining in fome Copy 
 of high Repute, has been tranfcrib'd into all the 
 later MSS. That the above Miftake has actual- 
 ly been made, is certain from the Samar. Text y 
 and the Arabic Verfwn in the Englifh Polyglott ; 
 whofe Honour it is to have preferv'd the True 
 Reading in Verfes 3 and 8 j and from the Greek 
 Verfion^ which alfo has preferv'd it in the latter. 
 
 But tho' the Samar. Text, and the Greek and 
 Arabic Verfions, read Shepherds inftead of Flocks 
 in the 8th Verfe j and tho' the Samar. and Arab. 
 Copies read alfo Shepherds in Verfe the 3d , yet 
 this Paffage is not yet clear of all its Difficulties : 
 fmce the 3d greatly interferes at prefent with the 
 8th Verfe. The 3d 3 as tranflated with the Cor- 
 
 redlion
 
 362 DISSERTATION 
 
 re&ion before-mention'd, tells us, that (when 
 Jacob firfl came into the field and faw the well ) 
 all the Jkepherds 'were there gathered together ; and 
 watered their focep, and replaced the fane upon the 
 well's mouth* But the 8th Verfe tells us, that the 
 Jhepherds were not yet ajjembled all together ; and 
 therefore thofe, who were prefent could not un- 
 cover the well, and water their own flocks fe- 
 parately. 
 
 The true Method of reconciling thefe two 
 Verfes is, to fay that the 3d fpeaks only of 
 the Cujlom of the Shepherds aflembling at that 
 Well, and watering their Flocks all together: a 
 Senfe this, which the words moft naturally ad- 
 mit. For all the Verbs in the 3d Verfe, tho' 
 prefer ; have a future Signification, on account of 
 the jxmverfive Particle prefix'd to every one of 
 them j and therefore, as futures, cannot exprefs 
 *.pajl Aflembly or Action. But, being frequen- 
 tative, and implying the Continuance and Cujlom of 
 doing a thing (the known Signification of Hebrew 
 future Tenfes) remarkably exprefs this Senfe 
 And there ( at this well ) all the Jhepherds ufually 
 met together, and rolled the Jlone from the well's 
 mouth, and watered the Jheep, and put the Jlone a- 
 gain upon the well's mouth. Confequently when 
 Jacob would have the Shepherds then prefent to 
 water their Sheep - 3 they might well anfwer
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 363 
 
 We cannot^ until all the fiepherds be gathered toge- 
 ther, and roll the Jlone from the well's mouth j then 
 we water the foe ep. 
 
 But then if thefe Shepherds, who were be- 
 fore fuppos'd to be afTembled at the 3d Verfe, 
 were not alTembled; and if that Verfe be ex- 
 preffive only of the Cujlom of their afTembling j 
 fliall we not be thought to deftroy the whole 
 Advantage of the Samar. Reading ? For, it will 
 be faid, if the 3d Verfe does not exprefs Shep- 
 herds fo aflembled, no preceding Verfe exprefles 
 the Prefence of any Shepherds > and fo Jacob 
 will be again left with only the 3 Flocks of 
 Sheep, and of them he is once more to make his 
 Enquiries. This Difficulty, however formidable 
 at firft fight, may be fatisfactorily remov'd. We 
 have feen, that the word DHTVil Flocks has 
 been writ inftead of Dynn Shepherds, in the 
 3d and 8th Verfes j and certainly the fame Mif- 
 take may have been made alfo in the 2d Verfe : 
 the Admiffion of which third Miftake, or rather 
 of the fame Miftake in a third Place, will com- 
 pleat the Beauty and Propriety of this PafTage 
 a PaiTage, not properly tranflated ( perhaps ) in 
 any one Verfion^ nor properly explain'd by any 
 one Commentator. 
 
 i Then Jacob 'went on his journey -, and came in- 
 to the land of the people of the Eaft. 
 
 2 And
 
 364 DISSERTATION 
 
 2 And he looked \ and behold a well in a field; 
 and hj three fhepherds were lying by it, for out 
 of that well they watered their flocks : and a great 
 
 Jlone was upon the well's mouth. 
 
 3 (And there all the fhepherds ufually met toge- 
 ther^ and rolled the Jlone from the well's mouth, and 
 watered the Jheep j and put the Jlone again upon the 
 well's mouth, in its place.) 
 
 4 And Jacob faid unto them, My brethren, whence 
 are ye? And they Jaid, We are of Har an. &c. 
 
 7 And he f aid, Lo, it is yet high day j neither 
 is it time, that the cattle foould be gathered toge- 
 ther : water ye the Jheep, and go, feed them. 
 
 8 And they f aid, We cannot, until all the fhep- 
 herds Jhall be gathered together, and roll the Jlone 
 
 from the well's mouth ; then we water thejheep. 
 
 Before we leave this PafTage, it may be pro- 
 per to add a few Remarks. As firft, that the 
 word Shepherds is exprefs'd in Hebrew either by 
 tD*yn or ]$y yn; as in Gen. 46, 32; Exod. 
 2, 17 &c. And that the Participle Qin cu- 
 bantes, recubantes or recumbentes, may be proper- 
 ly apply'd to the Shepherds ( lying by the Well 
 in expectation of their Brethren) is fufficiently 
 evident from Ifaiah 13, 20 j where we read 
 
 DIP i:n> $h Djm LXX *k not^f * ^ 
 
 ttvctTTBu/ffWTiq tv ewrt]. Another Remark may be, 
 that by correcting n*TV Greges into yn Pajlores. 
 
 in
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 365 
 
 in the ad Verfe, we have a regular Nominative 
 Cafe to the Verb lpj? bibere fecerunt^ adaqua- 
 runt. And laftly, the Signification here given to 
 the 3d Verfe, as expreffing a Cuftom, receives 
 Confirmation from the Vulgat Verfion j which 
 renders the Verfe Morifque erat, ut cunftis 0- 
 vibw ( it mould have been Pajloribus) congrega- 
 ttSj devofaerent lapidem &c. 
 
 GEN. 29, 10. MS i omits the 3 words 
 
 'D defuper ore putei ; words, which are 
 undoubtedly omitted through a Miftake of the 
 Tranfcriber, as they are found in the Samar. 
 Text and all the ancient Verfions. The fame 
 Tranfcriber has alfo omitted Htf f rater meus in 
 the 1 5th Verfe, and \zjilius in the 34th. 
 
 GEN. 31, 1 8. This Verfe is exprefs'd in MS 
 i , with a remarkable Variation. The MS omits 
 4 words together ; which are alfo omitted in the 
 Greek, Syr. Arab, and Vulg. Verfions, and al- 
 fo in the Chald. Paraphrase : the words are 
 tr:r> -l&'tf \np> njpO. The Verfe, as it ftands 
 in the prefent Heb. and Samar. Text, is proper- 
 ly exprefs'd in our Englifh Tranflation thus 
 And he (Jacob) carried away all Iris cattle , and 
 all his goods^ 'which he had gotten^ the cattle of his 
 getting, 'which he had gotten in Padan-aram &c. 
 
 Z z The
 
 366 DISSERTATION 
 
 The Englim of this MS, agreeably to the Senfe 
 of thefe ancient Verlions, will be And he car- 
 ried away all his cattle, and all his goods 'which he 
 had gotten in Padan-aram &c. 
 
 Now we muft either fuppofe, that the fecond 
 mention of the Cattle muft have been inferted 
 by fome Tranfcriber in fome late Copy of the 
 Heb. Text, and that the Samar. Text with its 
 Verfion has been made to conform to it ; or that 
 tkasfecond mention of the Cattle muft have been 
 omitted by fome Tranfcriber of an ancient Copy, 
 which gave the Verfe thus imperfed: to the Co- 
 pies, from which has been deriv'd the prefent 
 Reading in the ancient Verfions and in this old 
 MS. Whether the lafl of thefe Cafes is not the 
 more probable, I leave to the Determination of 
 the Learned. And I mall only obferve, that we 
 have here a very remarkable Inftance, not only 
 of a Various Reading, but offucb a Reading, as 
 is entirely different from the printed Heb. Text, and 
 yet entirely agrees with the ancient Verfions. 
 
 GEN. 31,33. And Laban went* into Jacob's 
 Tent &c. The Greek Verfion has alfo ?/d6pj<rev 
 fcrutatus eft And Laban went, and fearched in 
 Jacob's Tent &c. The printed Samar. Text alfo 
 has here the verb *"f^1Jfif^ Gf ligavit, projlra- 
 i)it &c. which probably has been corrupted from
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 367 
 
 & perfcrutatus eft &c. exactly the Senfe 
 of vip-Mvua-w, and perfectly confonant to the Samar. 
 Verfion, which reads mjf^fr & diligenter fcrv- 
 tatus eft 5cc. It may be added, that the verb 
 C'Dnn is found in the Heb. Text but two Verfes 
 after ; where alfo it is corrupted in the printed 
 Samaritan into JUf^UftTfc > kut t ^ ie wor d is again 
 right in the Samar. Verfion. Le C/erc has a re- 
 markable Note on this Word. 'The Samar. Text, 
 fays he, has here the verb J2OIT1, which Jigni- 
 Jies in other places ligavit, ftravit, but mujl Jigni- 
 fy here quaefivitj fcrutatus eft : Strange, fays he, 
 that fo diligent a man as Caftell Jhould omit the 
 verb KOn with this Signification. But, muft the 
 word tT2H of neceflity have this Signification ? 
 May not the word be miftaken for t^fln ? Why 
 truly, he allows that it is tyfln in the Hebrew 
 Text juft afterwards ; and adds, that the Letters 
 of the fame Organ, as every one knows, are eafily 
 miftaken for one another. The Wonder then is, 
 not that Caftell mould forget to give a Verb a 
 Senfe, which it never had ; but that this Critic 
 would cenfure fo great a Man for a Miftake, 
 and yet feem to own, that the Miftake is not 
 his but the Tranfcribers. 
 
 Some time after writing the preceding Note, 
 in which 1 had fuppos'd the printed Samar. Read- 
 ing corrupted in the two words before quoted, I 
 
 Z z 2 conlult-
 
 368 DISSERTATION 
 
 confulted the 6 Samar. MSS in the Bodleian Li- 
 brary ; and, upon examining them, I found 
 that N. 48 was agreeable to the printed Copy 
 that N. 49 was defective in thofe two pla- 
 ces but that the other 4 MSS, 47, 50, 51 and 
 52, contained in both places the very Reading, 
 which I had recommended upon Conjecture. 
 
 GEN. 31, 39. The Participle T\'mfurto ab- 
 latum occurs twice in this Verfe, being doubly 
 irregular ; having an unneceflary ', and not hav- 
 ing the neceffary 1. There can be no great 
 Doubt then, but the is the l chang'd and tran- 
 fpos'dj efpecially as the Samar. Text regularly 
 reads fttlJJ * n both places. 
 
 GEN. 3 1, 52. The following 10 Words are o- 
 mitted in MS i, between ntn ^n and ntn 
 
 nrn Sjn n T^N "OVN xb w D^ nnxan 
 
 GEN. 3 1, 53. Having already mention'd feve- 
 ral Miftakes by Omiffion, I mail now mention 
 one Miftake, and a very remarkable one by Ad- 
 dition or Interpolation : and this an Addition fo 
 ancient, as to have been introduc'd into the He- 
 brew Copies, from whence all the ancient Ver- 
 Jions were made, except the Greek j for that reads 
 this Verfe properly, 
 
 Laban,
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 369 
 
 Laban, having reminded Jacob of the Heap 
 and Pillar then ere<5ted, as Witnefles of their 
 League of Friendmip, concludes his Speech in 
 this folemn manner The God of Abraham and 
 the God of Nahor judge betwixt us, the God of their 
 father. This is the exprefs Verfion and Order of 
 the prefent Hebrew Words ; and what then can 
 be the meaning of the God of their father ? Thefe 
 Words, from their Situation in the Sentence, do 
 not feem capable of contributing to the Senfe of 
 it ; neither would they, perhaps, be more capa- 
 ble of it, if plac'd in any other part of the Sen- 
 tence. As Laban fpeaks to Jacob, the Pronoun 
 their can refer only to Abraham and Nahor j and 
 their father was Terah. But no fuch Expreffion 
 any where occurs as the God of Terah ; and Te- 
 rah was an Idolater. On this account then there 
 feems to be fome Miftake, as well as on account 
 of the Order of the Words the God of Abra- 
 ham and the God of Nahor judge betwixt us, the 
 God of their father. 
 
 The LXX happily explain this Difficulty, by 
 (hewing us, that the words C3JT2K >nStf were 
 not in the Heb. Copy, from whence they tranf- 
 lated -, reading o &&$ h&pcut,}*, xcq o QMS Not%^ 
 jgivet enapttnv YI^UV. If the 2 Heb. Words then 
 are interpolated, as they feem to be ; there can 
 be no doubt, but the Interpolation was made by 
 
 the
 
 370 DISSERTATION 
 
 the Tranfcriber's beginning to write the fame 
 Line twice ; in the following manner. 
 His Copy contains the two following Lines- 
 
 row : pw vatf Tnsi spy 
 
 having writ the firft Line, he begins again with 
 
 but then finding his Miftake, he refers to the 
 fecond Line; and tranfcribes y3E^ &c. with- 
 out either blotting out or erafing the two words 
 he had inferted, that he might not hurt the 
 Sale of his Copy by the Difcovery of his own 
 Carelefnefs. Several Proofs of Accidents firni- 
 lar to this will be given from the Heb. MSS, 
 in the courfe of this Extract ; and as the Jewim 
 Tranfcribers are therefore prov'd capable of act- 
 ing thus, perhaps there will be but one Objec- 
 tion againft admitting it to be the Cafe in the in- 
 ftance now before us. And the Objection is 
 that the two Words, here fuppos'd to be repeat- 
 ed, are not exactly the fame in both places ; fince 
 the firft reads DmHtf >nW> and the fecond nStf 
 OnOtf . But that the i in the firft place was al- 
 fo a *i formerly (and has been fince chang'd into 
 a ) in the fecond place, is clear from the Samar. 
 Text and its Verfion ; which have the *i now 
 alfo in the latter. The Samar. Text therefore 
 proves this Repetition or Interpolation moft re- 
 
 markably ;
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 371 
 
 markably ; fince that reads the Text thus ---- 
 
 wa DSP mm 
 &c. 
 
 /& God of Abraham and the God of Nahor 
 judge betwixt us 
 
 the God of Abraham. And Jacob fwore &c. 
 This Inftance of two Words interpolated at one 
 place ftrongly confirms what has been before of- 
 fer'd (fee pag. 81 and 82) to prove the Interpo- 
 lation of a Word in two other places ; efpecially, 
 as the Number of Letters in this Line remark- 
 able agrees with the Number of Letters in the 
 Lines before referr'd to. 
 
 GEN. 33, 18. MS i omits D")tf 
 an Omiflion, not occafion'd by the fame or limi- 
 lar Words. But in ver. 24 of the next chapter, 
 this fame MS omits thefe 7 Words ---- YJW 
 Hy nvty *W SD "Of SD ', an Omiflion, occa- 
 fion'd by (the general Caufe) the exiflence of the 
 fame words in different parts of the fame verfe. 
 
 GEN. 35, 22. This is one of the 25 or 28 
 Places, where the Jewifh Tranfcribers have left 
 a vacant Space in their MSS ( as there is in MS 
 I &c.) in the middle of the Verfe ; and where a 
 Space has been alfo left in the printed Editions 
 with thefe words in the Margin y^QKn NpDD 
 
 pIDD
 
 372 DISSERTATION 
 
 plDfi Hiatus in medio Verfiis. This Verfe, as it 
 is at prefent, reads thus And it came to pajs 
 when Ifrael dwelt in that land> that Reuben went 
 and lay with Bilhah his father's concubine; and If- 
 rael heard it Now the fons of 'Jacob 
 were twehe &c. As the Jews then acknowledge 
 fomething wanting here to compleat the Senfe, 
 the Greek Verlion has preferv'd the Words omit- 
 ted in the Heb. Text. And the Supplement in 
 the Greek acquaints us, that this Ad: of Reu- 
 ben's was confider'd by his father as vile and fla- 
 gitious Xrtf Tvoyripov ifyavr, tvctvriov cwrx a Cen- 
 fure, which is naturally expected in the Hifto- 
 ry ; and that Ifrael greatly refented this Action of 
 Reuben's, fee chap. 49, 4. Let us fee then how 
 the verfe reads with the Hiatus thus fupply'd 
 And it came to pafs y when Ifrael dwelt in that 
 land y that Reuben went and lay with Bilhah his 
 father s concubine j and Ifrael heard it, and it ap- 
 peared evil in his fight. Now the fons of Jacob 
 were twehe &c. 
 
 GEN. 36, 2. This verfe, in the prefent Heb. 
 Text, tells us, that one of Efau's Wives was A- 
 bolibamah, the daughter of Anah, the daughter of 
 Zibeon the Hivite. But Anah appears to have 
 been Zibeon's Son ; as is evident from verfe the 
 24th of this Chapter And thefe are the fons of 
 
 Zibeon,
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 373 
 
 Zibeon, Alab and Anah -, ( Kin hie) HE was that 
 Anab, who found (Ni'O mafc.) the Mules (DEn 
 a word differently exprefs'd and more differently 
 interpreted ) in the wilderntfs, as HE fed the ajj'es 
 of Zibeon His father. Here then is a miftake of 
 r\^filia writ inftead of p filius \ and indeed we 
 have it Son now in the Samar. Text and Verlion, 
 and alfo in the Greek and Syriac Verfions. The 
 fame miftake has been alfo made in the i4th 
 verfe And thefe were the fens of Aholibamah, 
 the daughter of Anah^ the daughter of Zibeon j 
 where the Greek Verfion has again AVA, rx up se- 
 G&yur and alfo the Samar. Text reads here ^j^ 
 JiKuSy tho' falily exprefs'd in its Lat. Verfion by 
 Jilt a. Thefe are Authorities fully fufficient to 
 prove this Change j and we mail without hefi- 
 tation admit the poffibility of fuch fmall altera- 
 tions, when we mail fee by repeated proofs, that 
 the Jewifli Tranfcribers have in fad: made much 
 greater j an inftance of which will be given in 
 the next Article. 
 
 As the Heb. Text, both in the 2d and i4th 
 verfes, reads rQ flia y and the Samar. Text in 
 both verfes ^^ filius (which ever of the readings 
 be the truer) it does not feem probable, that thefe 
 two Changes of the fame true word into the fame 
 falfe word mould have happened by Chance^ ei- 
 ther in the Heb. or Samar. Text. But 'tis moil 
 
 A a a proba-
 
 374 DISSERTATION 
 
 probable, that when the miflake had been made 
 undeiignedly in one verfe, the Alteration was de- 
 fignedly made in the other, that fo the 2 verfes 
 might agree a remark this, that well deferves 
 Confideration. For it will perhaps be found, 
 that this Doclrine of Affimilation ( or the volun- 
 tarily altering one or more Words, to render it, 
 or them, conformable to fome other Word, and 
 that other Word itfelf miftaken ) has been the 
 Caufe of feveral Corruptions introduced by the 
 Jewifh Tranfcribers. 
 
 Every the leaft miftake in the Text of the 
 Bible mould be carefully corrected; as fuch a 
 wrong Reading, however inconfiderable in itfelf, 
 may be brought to confirm a Point that is mate- 
 rial. An Inftance of this is now before us. For 
 Whitby, in his 2d Note on St. Matthew's Gof- 
 pel, quotes this very Miftake Alibamah (which 
 fliould have been Aholibamah) the daughter of A- 
 nah^ and the daughter of Zibeon. But we have 
 already feen that Anah was the Son of Zibeon : 
 and if the word had properly been Daughter., 
 the Paflage had been even then nothing to the 
 Dr's Purpofe j fince Aholibamah would not have 
 been mention'd as the Daughter both of Anah and 
 cf Zibeon, but as the Daughter of Anah, 'who 
 ( and not Aholibamah ) was the Daughter of Zi- 
 beon. 
 
 GEN,
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 375 
 
 GEN. 36, 6. As MS n has a remarkable 
 Change of 3 words near together, I fliall give 
 the prefent Text, and fubjoin the different Read- 
 ings of this MS. 
 
 : vns 
 
 The Hiftorian fpeaks here of Efau's removal 
 from Canaan to mount Seir ; and therefore the 
 printed Text is the truer Reading. But even 
 the printed Text feems to have one confiderable 
 Fault j and the different Reading of the Samar. 
 Text and Greek Verfion feems more agreeable 
 to the Context. The literal Verfion of the pre- 
 fent Heb. Text is & accepit Efau omnem 
 fubjlantlam^ quam acquifierat in terra Canaan , & 
 ivit ad terram, a facie *Jacobi fratris fui. But 
 according to the Samar. and Greek Copies 
 quam acquifierat in terra Canaan^ G? wit ex terra 
 Canaan, a facie Jacobi fratris fui . This latter 
 Senfe feems very preferable, as Jacob continued 
 in Canaan. 
 
 GEN. 36, 8. And Efau dwelt in mount 
 Efau, he is Edom. But MS i, not having the 
 word Efau the 2d time, reads And Efau dwelt 
 in mount Seir, that is Edom. The Name Efau is 
 omitted ( in the latter part of this fentence ) in 
 
 Aaa 2 the
 
 376 DISSERTATION 
 
 the Vulgat^ which alfo reads Habitavitque E- 
 fau in monte Seir: ipfe eft Edom. 'Tis obfervable, 
 that the Samar. Text has the word, tho' it's La- 
 tin Veriion has it not j that Latin Verfion being 
 evidently here taken from the Vulgat. And this 
 fhews the Neceffity of referring to the Text it- 
 fe/f, and not confiding entirely in Verfioes. 
 
 GEN. 36, 1 6. The two firft Words in this 
 Verfe (duke Korah) are interpolated. The 1 5th 
 and 1 6th Verfes of the prefent Heb. Text read 
 thus Thefe ivere dukes of the fons of Efau. The 
 fons of EUphaz, the frjl-born fon of 'Efau ; duke 
 Teman, duke Omar, duke Zepho, duke Kenaz, duke 
 Korah, duke Gat am > duke Amalek. Now is it cer- 
 tain from ver. 4, that Elipha-z was Efau's fon by 
 Adah-, and, from ver. n, 12, that Eliphaz had 
 but 6 fons feman, Omar, Zepho, Gatam, Ke- 
 naz^ and (by his concubine Timnah he had) A- 
 ma-ek. It is alfo certain from ver. 5 and 14, that 
 Korah was the fon of Efau (not of Eliphaz) by 
 Aholibamah-, and, as fuch, he is properly enu- 
 merated in ver. 18 And thefe are the fons of A- 
 holibamah^ Efaus wife -, duke JeuJJj, duke Jaalam, 
 duke Karah. 
 
 Hence then it is fufficiently clear, that fome 
 Tranfcriber has improperly inferted duke Korab, 
 in the 1 6th verfe. And tho' this miftake is of 
 
 long
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 377 
 
 long ftanding, as being found in the Greek Ver- 
 fion, at leaft in the prefent copy of it ; and alfo 
 in the Chald. Vulg. Aral, and Syr. Verfions ( in 
 the latter indeed the two words are inferted at a 
 different place ) yet, to the great Honour of the 
 Samar. Text and Veffan^ in them the 2 words are 
 properly omitted; or rather, they are regular, 
 without them. 
 
 GEN. 46, i o. And thefons of Simeon ; Jemuel, 
 and Jamm, and Ohad, and "Jachin^ and Zchar, 
 and Shaul. But, as thefe Proper Names are ex- 
 prefs'd differently in other places, it may be worth 
 while to compare them. 
 
 ,105 
 
 Num. 26,1 2 ; iN&y nnr ]D 
 iCr0.4,24. SIK^ nit nn 
 
 Out of the 6 true names in the ift and ad lines, 
 we have in the others 2 names properly pre- 
 ferv'd, 3 corrupted, and i omitted ; as feems 
 clear from the Syr. and Arab. Verfions. For it 
 is 7N1D* in the Syr. Verfion of Num. and in the 
 Syr. and Arab. Verfions of Chron. And here in 
 Cbron. the name, that has been dropt in the He- 
 brew, is preferv'd, tho' not perfectly, in both; 
 the Syr. has ^ntf, and the Arab. *INH tranfpos'd 
 from ^ntf 5 in each the } is miflaken for T 
 
 the
 
 378 DISSERTATION 
 
 the next two words mt 3W, corrupted from 
 *trt ?y (or ;o>) are twice exprefs'd, both in 
 the Syr. and Arabic ; fir ft according to the true 
 Reading in Gen. and Exod. and then according 
 to the corrupted Reading in Chronicles. This 
 remarkable Circumftance proves, that the Read- 
 ings of 2 different Copies have been fometimes 
 thrown together j or, that fome Various Read- 
 ings have been taken into the Body of thefe an- 
 cient Verfions from the Margin. 
 
 The fifth of the preceding Names has been 
 greatly alter'd, not only by a Tranfpofition of 
 the two laft letters, but by a Change of the firft. 
 And that the f and the V, two letters of the fame 
 crgan^ have been exchang'd by miftake elfe- 
 where, is evident from the i6th verfe of this 
 very chapter, compar'd with Numb. 26, 16. For 
 in the former, one of the fons of Gad is call'd 
 pVK Atzbon ; but in the latter 3tK Ami the 
 tf the fame, chang'd into f, 1 into 3, and \ 
 into *. There are feveral other inftances of Va- 
 riation in the Proper Names of this chapter ; but 
 I mall only add one: and that is in ver. 23 
 And the fons cf Dan, Huftim D{?n ]1 ^31- 
 But this fon of Dan in Numb. 26, 43, 'is call'd 
 Sbubam DPW j by both Tranfpofition -and 
 Change. As there is but this one fon of Dan, 
 ii feems to have been writ haftily, ac- 
 cording
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 379 
 
 cording to the general run (as in 2 Kin. 23, 10) 
 by miftake for pi &Jffius; as the ARABIC Ver- 
 fion only, to its peculiar Honour, has perferv'd it, 
 reading here (^/\& o?^ & flius Dan &c. 
 
 It may not be improper to conclude this Note 
 with obferving that, befides the Keri and Ce- 
 tib 3 which muft be allow'd to be the Various 
 Readings of fome different Copies, or intended 
 Corrections of fome Miftakes in the Text, the 
 Jews have noted in the Mafora 1 8 words, which 
 they call tDHDID ppn Ordinatio five CorreClio 
 Scribarum j and 5 words, which they call Tjoy 
 DH51D Ablatio Scribarum. And (which is more 
 immediately to our prefent purpofe) they have 
 thought it lawful to endeavour at the difcovery 
 and correction of Miftakes in the Text, even up- 
 on Conjecture j having inferted into the Margin of 
 their Bibles ( and that upon the authority of the 
 Mafora) various Notes call'd JH'SD Conjeflurcz, 
 from *OD conjicerf, arbitrari^ cenfere y opinari &c. 
 Of thefe Maforclic Conjectures Cappellus enume- 
 rates above an hundred ; and fays (pag. 419^ vo- 
 tantur ]n*^D, quia Judtzis 'videtur ita ejje legen- 
 dum, quomodo in libri Margine ab ipjis notatur per 
 1OD legendum effe. The Mafora then conjectures^ 
 that jn & flit is writ four times inftead of pi 
 & fliw, of which four inftances 0^1 in this 
 Note is one. 
 
 EXOD.
 
 380 DISSERTATION 
 
 EXOD. 3,18. And thoujhalt go with the elders 
 cf Ifrael to the king of Egypt, and ye ftall fay un- 
 
 to him why mpj D"-nyn n>K mn 
 
 'Jehovah Dens Hebrceorum occurrit fuper nos. 
 Inftead of mpJ occurrit the Samar. Text more 
 properly reads ^V^p^J vocatus eft. The Greek 
 Verfion has frforaexA^a/ *pct,f, and the Vulgat vo- 
 cavit nos. The verb ends with an tf in MSS i 
 and 4, tho' in the latter fome Corrector has add- 
 ed the Strokes of an n > and the 2d Camb. MS 
 reads alfo JOpJ. See alfo ch. 5, 3. MS 4, in this 
 verfe, inftead of nn^t^T & Jacrificemu, has iron 
 & facrificabunt. 
 
 EXOD. 7. 7. And Mofes was 80 years old, and 
 Aaron 83. But MS i reads JBWTV trS^ 33, 
 by miilake indubitably. It is however fuch a 
 miftake, as greatly vindicates the fuppolition of 
 a miftake of the fame fort, in pag. 96 -, for, if 
 DOIDty and D'^^, 80 and 30, have been mif- 
 taken for one another, certainly an Exchange 
 may have been made of their two lingulars 
 
 DtP and lh0* 8 and 3. 
 
 EXOD. 7; 1 8, 19. Among the many inflan- 
 ces, in which the Samar. Text differs at prefent 
 from the Hebrew, one- of the molt remarkable 
 
 is
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 381 
 
 is that, as to the Commiffions given by God 
 to Mofes, and executed by Mofes before Pha- 
 raoh, the Samar. Text exprefles every Speech 
 twice j but the prefent Heb. Text once only 
 generally as given in charge by God, without 
 mentioning the punctual execution of the Com- 
 miffion by Mofes j and twice we have the Speech 
 of Mofes to Pharaoh, (and that denouncing two 
 of the fevereft Judgments) without having read 
 of any fuch Commiffion previoufly given him. 
 
 Now, as no man, acquainted with ancient 
 Learning, can doubt, but that the Samar. Copy, 
 which gives thefe Speeches twice, derives the 
 ftronger prefumption in its favour from ancient 
 Cuftom ; fo, if Repetitions were ever neceffary 
 or proper, to mew the Fidelity with which fuch 
 Commiffions were executed, one mould expect 
 them on the prefent Occafion when Jehovah 
 fends Mofes to Pharaoh on an Embaffy the moft 
 important, with Denunciations of Vengeance the 
 moft aftoniming. And we have this farther pre- 
 fumption in favour of fuch Repetitions, that Mo- 
 fes, who executed thefe awful Commiffions, was 
 himfelf the Writer of the Hiftory that records 
 them. 
 
 Another Argument, that fuch Repetitions ob- 
 tain'd originally, may be drawn from the feem- 
 ing Impropriety confequent upon the Omiffion 
 
 Bbb of
 
 382 DISSERTATION 
 
 of fuch Repetitions. As, for inftance, in this ve- 
 ry Chapter. At ver. 14, 15 &c. we read And 
 JEHOVAH^?/*/ unto Mofes, Get thee unto Pharaoh, 
 and thou fhalt fay unto him; JEHOVAH, the God 
 of the Hebrews, hath fent me unto thee, faying, Let 
 my people go, that they may ferve Me in the wil- 
 dernefs; and behold! hitherto thou wouldeji not hear 
 Behold! I will f mite with the rod, that is in 
 mine hand, upon the waters which are in the river ; 
 and they Jhall be turned to blood &c. After this 
 we expect to read, that Mofes went and fpake 
 unto Pharaoh, as the Lord commanded. But 
 the prefent Heb. Text, having concluded the 
 Speech of God to Mofes, immediately exprefles 
 God's Command for turning the waters into 
 blood, and then mentions the Judgment j with- 
 out having at all mention'd the Execution of the 
 Commiffion, which, if attended to, was to have 
 prevented the Judgment. 
 
 More inftances of this kind may be obferv'd 
 in Chap. 8; 4, 5, 23, 24. In this 24th verfe, the 
 initial words (And the Lord did fo) more natu- 
 rally follow the Repetition of God's Speech by 
 Mofes before Pharaoh, as in the Samar. Text, 
 than the Speech of God to Mofes, as in the pre- 
 fent Hebrew. So again, in ch. 9; 5, 6, 19, 20. 
 In the laft inftance, the Commiffion was for 
 Mofes to denounce before Pharaoh the Judg- 
 ment
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 383 
 
 ment of the Hail; with orders to declare, that 
 every Man and Beaft, found in the field, mould 
 be deilroy'd. The Delivery of this MefTage is 
 not recorded in the Heb. Text j but, immediate- 
 ly after God's Speech to Mofes, we read He 
 that feared the <word of the Lord amongfi Pha- 
 raoh" s fervants, made his fervants and cattle flee 
 into the houfes : which conduct of Pharaoh's Ser- 
 vants muft have been in confequence of the De- 
 livery of the preceding Meflage ; tho' the Deli- 
 very is not recorded in the Heb. as it is in the 
 Samar. Text. 
 
 The Inference from thefe paiTages is that, if 
 thefe Speeches were originally exprefs'd twice, as 
 Teems probable from the Irregularity of the pre- 
 fent Heb. Text, which fometimes records the 
 Speech only as from God, and fometimes only 
 as from Mofes ; if this is probable ( and it will 
 be made more probable hereafter) we muft con- 
 clude, that die Repetitions, now regularly ob- 
 taining in the Samar. Text, were defignedly omit- 
 ted in the Heb. Text for brevity, and that they 
 were omitted very early, as in the Greek and the 
 other Ferfions they are exprefs'd once only. 
 
 EXOD. 8; 10, 1 1. MS 5 omits the two ver- 
 
 fes o jnn \yth TIITO loan innS natn 
 Dmfiifn -noi : irnW mno VK 
 B b b 2
 
 384 DISSERTATION 
 
 : ra-iNtyn IK n pi IDVBI 7-nyDi At ver. 24, 
 
 inftead of p mrV CWl ? ita fecit Jehovah, MS 
 j reads improperly DnW tWp 6? fecit Deus. 
 In ch. 9, 12, inftead of njnfl 2*7 fitf mn pTH1 
 the words in MS i are njHfi zb p?m as we 
 find the expreffion, in the printed Heb. Text, 
 in ch. 7, 13. And in ch. 10, 12, this fame MS 
 omits thefe 4 words DHD ptf by Sw At 
 ver. 17, the Samar. Text (inftead of the words 
 
 (mrvS i^nvm TINDII Ni 
 
 reads 
 
 mn 
 
 and MS i reads mrv W as in the Samaritan. 
 
 EXOD. 1 1 . Some Obfervations have been al- 
 ready offer'd, in favour of the Samar. Text, on 
 account of its exprefling the Speeches both as 
 deliver'd by God to Mofes, and as repeated by 
 Mofes to Pharaoh. It was prefum'd, that thefe 
 Speeches were originally exprefs'd twice in the 
 Heb. Text alfo j and this chapter feems to fur- 
 nifh a ftrong Confirmation of it. For if we have 
 here, in the printed Heb. Text, not only the 
 Speech as deliver d by Mofes to Pharaoh, but fome 
 Sentences which muft have been Parts of the 
 fame Speech as deliver d by God to Mofes ; then 
 I think, we may fairly prefume, that the whole 
 Speech of God to Mofes was exprefs'd originally. 
 
 As
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 385 
 
 As this is a Point of Importance, and as feveral 
 places in this chapter feem to require fome alte- 
 ration ; the Reader will do well to perufe the 
 chapter, before he proceeds farther in thefe Ob- 
 fervations on it. 
 
 The 2 verfes, which conclude the preceding 
 chapter, are 28. Aid Pharaoh f aid unto Mofes y 
 Get thee from me, take heed to thyfelf, fee my face 
 no more : for in the day thoufeeji my face thoujhalt 
 die. And Mofes faid, Thou haftfpoken well-, I will 
 fee thy face again no more. Such then being the 
 conclufion of the preceding chapter, the Quef- 
 tion is Whom does Mofes addrefs, in the 4th 
 and following verfes of this chapter ? Or rather 
 the Queftion will be, as it is certain from ver. 8, 
 that he fpeaks to Pharaoh How can Mofes 
 be mention'd, as fpeaking again to Pharaoh in 
 this chapter ; when, in the chapter before, Pha- 
 raoh had order'd him finally from his prefence, 
 and Mofes had told him, he would obey ? In- 
 deed there is but one way to folve this Difficul- 
 ty ; and that is, by faying, that this laft Speech 
 of Mofes to Pharaoh was deliver'd then, at that 
 very Interview, before he went out from Pha- 
 raoh's prefence. 
 
 But, if we attend to the Heb. Text, we mail 
 fee this Solution clogg'd with a material Difficul- 
 ty. For, the former chapter having concluded 
 
 with
 
 386 DISSERTATION 
 
 with Pharaoh's Command to Mofes to withdraw, 
 and Mofes's Promife to obey; this chapter be- 
 gins with the Orders given by God to Mofes in 
 the i ft and ad verfes. And then, the 3d verfe 
 containing no part of any Speech ', and being pure- 
 ly the Narration of the Hiftorian ; we totally lofe 
 fight of Pharaoh the Interview is entirely at 
 an end and we wonder to read in the verfe 
 following And Mofes faid, Thus faith the Lord 
 &c. when it is not obvious, to whom he can be 
 addreffing himfelf. Such is the Difficulty at- 
 tending this Paffage, according to the prefent He- 
 brew Text. But if we confult the Samar. Text, 
 we mall be led to a clear view of this important 
 Tranfadtion ; and mall fee the Unity of a very 
 awful Interview happily preferv'd, almojl in its 
 original Perfection. 
 
 Pharaoh, foften'd but not fubdued by a feries 
 of aftoniming Miracles and fevere Judgments, 
 offers Mofes and his Brethren Leave to go and 
 ferve Jehovah j provided, their Flocks and Herds 
 remain'd in Egypt Mofes tells him, Our cat- 
 tle alfo floall go with us, there jhall not an hoof be 
 left behind &c. Upon this Pharaoh kindles, 
 and commands him to withdraw; adding, In 
 the day thou feeft my face again thou jhalt die 
 Mofes replies, that Pharaoh had fpoken well, for 
 this was the laft Vifit he mould make him 
 
 This
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 387 
 
 This then being by Agreement to be the final 
 Interview, God immediately tells Mofes " He 
 "had one Judgment yet in ftore, which he 
 " would now execute on this prefumptuous Of- 
 " fender j and a Judgment, which mould effec- 
 " tually fecure their Difmiflion : that the time 
 " was therefore come, for him to order his Bre- 
 " thren (as foon as he mould be gone forth from 
 tc Pharaoh) to afk, every man of the Egyptians 
 " that were his neighbours, for Silver and Gold ; 
 <c and that he would give them fuch Favour in 
 "the eyes of their fevere Mailers, that they 
 " would readily give them whatfoever they 
 " mould defire for he commanded him now 
 " to declare to Pharaoh, he would on that very 
 " Night fmite all the Firft-born in the Land of 
 < Egypt j but amidft this dreadful Calamity of 
 te the Egyptians, not even a Dog mould move 
 " his tongue againft an Ifraelite : and that, as to 
 * { Mofes himfelf, tho' he had been juft before 
 " threaten'd with Death by Pharaoh, he mould 
 " be greatly honour'd in the fight of Pharaoh's 
 <f Servants, and alfo of all the People." Thefe 
 feveral notices being injlantly convey'd to the 
 mind of Mofes, he at once addrelTes himfelf to 
 Pharaoh ; denounces the Death of the Firft- 
 born ; humbles the haughty Monarch by fore- 
 telling, that his Servants mould foon bow down 
 
 to
 
 DISSERTATION 
 
 to him, and entreat him to leave Egypt with all 
 his Brethren : and thus, having faithfully exe- 
 cuted the final Part of the moft folemn Com- 
 miflion, that Man was ever delegated to dif- 
 charge, he goes out from Pharaoh with great 
 Indignation. I mall now give an Englifh Ver- 
 iion of this Chapter, as I prefume it flood ori- 
 ginally j and fhall fubjoin fuch Remarks, as of- 
 fer themfelves in vindication of the feveral Al- 
 terations. 
 
 1. Aid JEHOVAH faid unto Mofes ; " Tet will 
 " 1 bring one plague more upon Pharaoh and upon 
 " Egypt 5 and afterwards he will fend you out 
 " hence : when he Jhall fend you away, he will 
 " drive you out hence altogether. 
 
 2. " Speak now in the ears of the people; and 
 " let every man afk of his neighbour, and every 
 " woman of her neighbour, veflels ofjilver and vef- 
 " fels of gold and raiment. 
 
 3. " And I will give this people favour in the 
 "fight of the Egyptians, fo that they fhall give 
 " them what they afk. 
 
 4. " For, about midnight I will go forth into 
 " the midft of the land of Egypt. 
 
 5. " And every firft-born in the land of E- 
 "gypt fhall diej from the firft-born of Pha- 
 " raoh, who fitteth upon his throne, unto the 
 " firfl-born of the maid-fervant, that is behind 
 
 "the
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 389 
 
 " the mill : and even unto the firft-born of eve- 
 " ry beaft. 
 
 6. " And there mall be a great cry throughout 
 "all the land of Egypt ; fuch, that there hath 
 " been none like it, nor mall be like it any more. 
 
 7. " But againft any of the children of Ifrael 
 " mall not a dog move his tongue ; againft man, 
 " nor even againft beaft : that thou mayeft know, 
 " that JEHOVAH doth put a difference between 
 " the Egyptians and Ifrael. 
 
 8. " And Thou alfo malt be greatly honoured 
 " In the land of Egypt j in the fight of Pharaoh's 
 "Jervants, and in the fight of the people" 
 
 9. Then faid Mofes unto Pharaoh 5 " Thus 
 " faith JEHOVAH 5 Ifrael is my fon, my firft-born; 
 " and I faid unto thee, Let my fon go, that he 
 " may ferve me. 
 
 10. "But thou haft refufed to let him go; 
 " behold ! therefore JEHOVAH flayeth thy fon, 
 " thy firft-born." 
 
 11. And Mofes faid ', Thus faith JEHOVAH: 
 " About midnight I 'will go forth into the midft of 
 "the land of Egypt. 
 
 12. " And every fir jl -born in the land of Egypt 
 "Jhall die ; from the firfi-born of Pharaoh, who 
 "fitteth upon his thronc y unto the fir jl -born of the 
 " maid-fervant, that is behind the mill; and even 
 " unto the firfi-born of every beaft. 
 
 Ccc 13. "And
 
 DISSERTATION 
 
 13. " And there jkall be a great cry throughout 
 " all the land of Egypt ; fuch, that there hath been 
 " none like it? nor ft all be- like it any more. 
 
 14. " But again/I any of the children of Ifrael 
 "Jhall not a dog move his tongue -, againjl man, nor 
 f< even againjl beaft : that thou mayeft knew, that 
 " JEHOVAH doth put a difference between the E- 
 " gyptians and Ifrael. 
 
 1 5. tc And all thefe thy feruants Jhall come down 
 et to me, and bow down tbemfehes to me, faying j 
 " Go forth, thou, and all the people that follow 
 " thee ; and then I will go forth? 
 
 1 6. And be went out from before Pharaoh in 
 great Indignation. 
 
 17. And JEHOVAH faid unto Mofes-, " Pha- 
 tf raoh doth not hearken unto you, that my wonders 
 " may be midtiplied in the land of Egypt" 
 
 1 8. And Mofes and Aaron performed all thefe 
 wonders before Pharaoh ; but JEHOVAH hardened 
 Pharaoh's heart , Jo that he would not let the chil- 
 dren of Ifrael go out of his land. 
 
 Having thus attempted a true Englifh Ver- 
 fion of this Chapter, I proceed to offer fome ob- 
 fervations in defence of the more material Alte- 
 rations, which are diftinguifh'd by a different 
 Character. 
 
 The firft thing remarkable is the rendring 
 in ver. 2, not by borrow, but ajk > an al- 
 teration,
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 391 
 
 teration, which wants no other vindication than 
 to obferve, that to ajk > beg and pray for are the 
 proper fignifications of this verb Stf^. See Pf. 
 21,4; 122, 6 : Prov. 20, 4 &c. The rendring 
 '^D Vejjeh feems more proper than Jewels, fmce 
 a Silver Jewel or a Golden Jewel is not fo intel- 
 ligible as a Si her or Golden VeJJel or Thing in ge- 
 neral ; befides, the moft common tranflation of 
 >SD is z/&. And 'tis probable, that the Charger s\ 
 Bowls and Spoons of Silver and Gold, which the 
 Princes offer'd about a year after, at the Dedica- 
 tion of the Tabernacle (as recorded Numb, ch. 7) 
 were the very Vejjeh given them by the Egyp- 
 tians. The words and Raiment are added in ver. 
 2, not only on the authorities of the Samar. 
 Text and Verfion, and of the Greek Verfion at 
 this very place; but alfo becaufe the Ifraelites 
 were commanded to beg Garments (ch. 3, 22) 
 and becaufe 'tis obferv'd ( ch, 1 2, 3 5 ) mat they 
 dd fo. 
 
 As to verfe the 3d, the giving that, not by 
 way of hiftorical Narration, as in the prefent 
 Heb. Text, but as the continuation of God's 
 Speech to Mofes, as in the Samaritan ; 'tis this, 
 which gives the Confiftency to the Chapter, by 
 preferving the Unity of the Interview. Whereas, 
 not only the Confiftency of this with the pre- 
 ceding chapter is broken, and the Regularity of 
 
 C c c 2 it's
 
 392 DISSERTATION 
 
 it's own feveral Parts is deftroy'd, by the prefent 
 Heb. Text ; but alfo a great Impropriety or A- 
 nachronifm is introduc'd into this particular verfe. 
 For the time, when God aSfaa&y gave the People 
 this favour ( fo that the Egyptians gave them e- 
 very thing which they requefted ) was, not be- 
 fore Mofes had declard to Pharaoh the Deflruc- 
 tion of the Firft-born, but after that this Judg- 
 ment had been executed: and therefore we find 
 the Hiftory of this matter regularly given in ch. 
 12, 36, The Addition, made at the end of this 
 verfe in the preceding Tranflation, has the au- 
 thorities of the Samar. Text and Verlion, and 
 alfo of the Greek Verfion, at this place ; and is 
 confirmed by the defcription of the Event, in 
 ch. 12, 36. 
 
 The Jews, who omitted the Speech of God 
 to Mofes in general, retain'd the PafTage And 
 I will give this people favour in the fight of the E- 
 gyptians, as it conduc'd not a little to the Ho- 
 nour of their Nation j but then they threw the 
 Words into the form of an historical Obferva- 
 tion And the Lord gave the people favour &c. So 
 again, they retain'd the paiTage in ver. 8 And 
 Thou /halt be greatly honoured &c. as it aggrandi- 
 zed Mofes their Leader and their Lawgiver ; but 
 then they diverted tbefe words alfo of their original 
 drefs, and gave them the turn and appearance of 
 
 Narra-
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 393 
 
 Narration, And the Man Mofes was greatly ho- 
 noured &c. This feems to be the only rational 
 Explication of two very difficult PafTages ; fince 
 it is more than probable, that they could not be 
 Obferuatwm or Articles of Narration made by 
 the infpir'd Hiftorian. And, as to the latter, 'tis 
 not likely that God, in addreffing himfelf to Mo- 
 fes, mould fpeak c/^ Mofes in the ^/WPerfon, 
 And the Man Mofes &c. 
 
 The 9th and loth verfes have been totally ba- 
 nifh'd the Heb. Text, and are only preferv'd in 
 the Samaritan, to it's peculiar Honour. If we 
 look back to ch. 4^21, 22, 23; we mall find, 
 that, as Mofes was on the Way to Egypt, to de- 
 mand the Difmiffion of his Brethren, God com- 
 manded him that, when he had done all the 
 feveral Wonders, which he had enabled him to 
 perform, before Pharaoh, and to no purpofe ; 
 then he mould fay unto Pharaoh, <c 'Thus faith 
 " JEHOVAH - 3 Ijrael is my fo?2, my Jirjl-born -, and 
 " / faid unto fkee, Let my fon go, that he may 
 "Jerve me : But thou haft refufed to let him go ; 
 " behold (therefore) I flay thy fon, thy jirft-born" 
 This then being exprefly in the original Com- 
 miffion of Mofes, w r e find it not in the Speech 
 of God to Mofes in this chapter. But as Mofes 
 was told, that he was now to denounce the Death 
 of the Firft-born, he immediately recollects that 
 
 Article
 
 394 
 
 Article in his original Commiffion ; and according- 
 ly begins his Speech to Pharaoh with what had 
 been firft commanded him. And having deli- 
 ver'd this moft folemn Preface or Introduction, 
 he proceeds more particularly to denounce the 
 Deftruftion of the Firft-born, as God had im- 
 mediately before enjoin d him. And as thefe were 
 two diflindl Injunctions, he carefully preferves 
 them fo, beginning the latter as well as the for- 
 mer with, Thus faith JEHOVAH. 
 
 It may be added, in favour of the Authenti- 
 city of thefe two Verfes that, as God had ex- 
 frcjly commanded Mofes to fpeak to Pharaoh the 
 words of thefe two Verfes, we cannot doubt but 
 he did fpeak them as no other time could be 
 proper for him to fpeak them, but the time of 
 his denouncing the Deftruction of the Firft- 
 born, we cannot doubt but hefpoke them then 
 and; if he fpoke them, and at that time ; we 
 can hardly doubt, but that, as they are material 
 Words, be actually recorded them afterwards ( in 
 proof of his faithful Difcharge of the Divine 
 Commiffion) and that he recorded them in this 
 very Place. 
 
 EXOD. 1 2 j 1 5 &c. We have here a very long, 
 and therefore a very remarkable Omiflion> in MS 
 1 1 i a MS, in which die Heb. Text of the Pen- 
 tateuch
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 395 
 
 tateueh and its Chald. Paraphrafe are exprefs'd 
 alternately. This Omimon is evidently owing 
 to the fame 3 words occurring at the end, and 
 immediately before the beginning of it j but this 
 is a caufe, which by no means excufes the very 
 criminal Carelemefs of the Tranfcriber. I mall 
 give the Omiffion at full Length ; and, it con- 
 lifts of the following 153 words. 
 
 Dvm : nxvotr NDV iy ntfaip KDVD 
 snpa mtrn Dvm trip Kipa 
 -j cm rw et^ naawe 
 DD^ ntrv> nnS Kin 
 D nxvair jc^vni trnp 
 
 no Din ]inn invn K 1 ? NT^V S ^S n 
 ^n ^nmnSn Kin tr 
 nrn ovn Dsyn o mvon 
 Drn HK DniDtri onp pNO DD^niKaif n 
 n IT-ID joW npn DDnmS nrn 
 
 07 pDm inn NOV n rn&m 
 DV ntr 
 nnxn DV 
 
 Ninn trs^n nnn^i HVDHD SDK SD o 
 vv K^n^ : ptfn mr^m in S 
 Sinn HD HK D^nnn row
 
 396 DISSERTATION 
 
 That this may jiot be thought the only conil- 
 derable Omiflion, I mall jufl mention a few o- 
 ther inftances. In MS 2 there is an Omiflion of 
 6 1 words, in Ezek./, 4 6cc. in the ift Camb. 
 MS 23 words are omitted at 2 Kin. 17, 25 &c. 
 at Jer. 29, 17 &c. 70 words : at Ezek. 7, 5 &c. 
 
 above 60 words in the 2d Camb. MS 47 
 
 words are omitted at 2 Kin. i. 1 1. As the Rea- 
 der therefore will never more doubt, Whether a 
 Jewijh T'ranfcriber could be guilty of great Mif- 
 takes in tranfcribing ; I mall not give many more 
 inftances of Omiffion, tho' I have obferv'd many 
 more in my mort acquaintance with Heb. MSS. 
 The Omiflions here mention'd are very material, 
 as to Quantity and the Number of words, and as 
 to the proof thence arifing againjl the peculiar 
 Exaftnefs of the Jewijb Tranfcribers ; and farther 
 than this they are not material, fmce other MSS 
 have the words here omitted. I fhall next men- 
 tion an Omirlion ; which, tho' confirming but of 
 few words, is very material as to its Quality - y and 
 it obtains, perhaps, in all the prefent Heb.Copies. 
 
 EXOD. 12; 40. Now the fojourning of the chil- 
 dren of Ifrael, who dwelt in Egypt, was 430 years. 
 
 This Place has been confider'd by fome as in- 
 explicable, upon the notion of the Integrity of 
 the prefent Heb. Text ; and indeed, as to the 
 
 Advo-
 
 On i CH RON. XI &c. 397 
 
 Advocates for that notion (if they merit the 
 name of Critics} it feems to be a Crux Critico- 
 rum. For that the Children, or Defcendants, of 
 Ifrael did not fojourn, or dwell, 430 years in 
 Egypt, may be eafily, and has been frequently, 
 demonflrated. Some therefore would fancy, that 
 by Egypt are to be underftood here (by a ftrange 
 kind of a figure) both Egypt and Canaan. But 
 neither will this greater latitude of Place do the 
 bufinefs ; fince the children of Ifrael, including 
 alfo Ifrael their father, did not fojourn 430 years 
 in both Countries, before their Departure out of 
 Egypt. And therefore others, fenfible of a De- 
 ficiency ftill remaining, would not only have E- 
 gypt to fignify Egypt and Canaan^ but ( by a fi- 
 gure yet more comprehenfive ) would have the 
 children of Ifrael to fignify Ifrael 's children and If- 
 rael their father and Ifaac the father of Ifrael and 
 part of the life of Abraham the father of Ifaac. 
 
 Thus indeed we arrive at the exact fum ; and 
 by this method we might arrive at any thing 
 except Truth; which, we may prefume, was 
 never thus convey'd by an infpir'd Writer. The 
 ftone of fumbling^ in this and many other inftan- 
 ces, is evidently the notion of the Integrity of 
 the prefent Heb. Text, which will lead its Vo- 
 taries for ever into inextricable Difficulties 
 Pttzzkd with Mazes > and perplex d with Errors ; 
 
 D d d whjle
 
 398 DISSERTATION 
 
 while the Infpiration and Authority of the Holy 
 
 Scriptures lofe more credit than they gain by 
 
 fuch indefenfible and unprecedented illuftrations. 
 
 Strange ! that good men mould permit Abfurdi- 
 
 ty or Contradiction to be charg'd upon an in- 
 
 fpird Writer, rather than allow Fallibility or 
 
 Miftake to be imputed to a Rabbinical Tran- 
 
 fcriber ! 
 
 But, leaving others in the endeavour to ex- 
 tract the true fenfe of Mofes out of words not 
 his own, or rather, out of a fentence not now 
 found in the Heb. Text, as he exprefs'd it j let 
 us fee what the Samar. Text, that valuable Co- 
 py of the Pentateuch, gives us in this place (and 
 the following is the uniform reading of all the 
 Samar. MSS in the preceding Catalogue) --- 
 
 All here is truly confident, and 
 worthy the pen of Mofes Now the fojourning 
 of the children of Ifrael and of their fathers, 'which 
 they fojourned in the land of Canaan and in the land 
 of Egypt, was 430 years. This fame fum is 
 given by St. Paul (Gal. 3, \j) who reckons from 
 the Promife made to Abraham (when God com- 
 manded him to go into Canaan) to the giving of 
 
 the
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 399 
 
 the Law, which foon follow'd the Exodus of 
 the Ifraelites: and this Apoftolical Chronology 
 is exactly concordant with the Samar. Penta- 
 teuch. For, from Abraham's entring Canaan to 
 the birth of Ifaac was 25 years (Gen, 12, 4: and 
 17; 1,21) Ifaac was 60 years old, at the birth 
 of Jacob (Gen. 25, 26 ) Jacob was 130, at his 
 going down into Egypt (Gen. 47, 9) which 3 
 numbers make 215 years and then Jacob and 
 his children having continued in Egypt 215 years 
 more, the whole fum of 430 is regularly com- 
 pleated. 
 
 Thus Jofephus fays exprefly (lib. 2. cap. \$) 
 that the Departure out of Egypt was 
 
 xaj TtT(>ct,Ko<ri<x, v\ AafBftet ? 
 
 TY\$ Jfc I&XO&3U ItATWOtSCUKCidg ? llifj 
 
 , %l&M<rioif 'zrqos -mis ^xot^gj/re tvicwrotf ug-g- 
 ^ov. Thus alfo the Greek Verfion (Alex, and 
 Aid. Edit.) reads ---- H &. ^r^oiwia-i? ruv i^uv i<r- 
 tv 
 
 ftUTOt X,CLf 01 fVctTifXf CWTUV, 6T>J TlTOcMQlTtCt, 
 
 And thus St. Auguftin, in his 47th Queftion 
 on Exodus In Exodo fcriptum eft, Incolatusjl- 
 liorum Ifraelis, quern incoluerunt in terra JEgypti, 
 & in terra Canaan, ipfi & fatres eorum, anni 430. 
 
 EXOD. 13, 2. MS i, after pfDrmi 
 has nD3^1 D1N1. And in ver. 1 8, it reads 
 
 D d d 2 Pba~
 
 400 DISSERTATION 
 
 Pharaoh inftead of DrV?tf Deus words wide- 
 ly different ( in every poflible article ) in figure^ 
 found, andjenfe j and therefore this miftake proves 
 ftrongly againft the pretended Exactnefs of the 
 Jewifh Tranfcribers. This fame MS, in ch. 16, 
 8, has the two words pnn* hy interpolated, and 
 left uneras'd j words, which feem to have been 
 taken in improperly from the 2d line under it : 
 the 3 lines are 
 
 DDK "I^K mn hy DDruSn ru* 
 why xh n& umi vhy 
 hy a 
 
 EXOD. 15, 2. The prefent Heb. Text is fy 
 rt nnotl. But n^Dtl, being irregular, mould 
 probably be rnt1 & laus mea ; agreeably to the 
 Chald. Arab, and Vulg. Verfions. MS i reads 
 here, very remarkably rrmDtt W n s and 
 in the printed Samar. Copy, the reading is alfo 
 rvmDft. That the n, in this Samar. Copy, has 
 been added to the * of the preceding word, to 
 make the word n* Jab (Jehovah) feems proba- 
 ble, becaufe the is neceffary to mat! j but it 
 is made more probable by the Teflimony of our 
 Samar. MSS, which I have lately confulted 
 after having long fince noted down the preced- 
 ing correction. Four of thefe Six valuable MSS 
 (No. 47, 50, 51, 52) agree in reading mDfi ny 
 
 but
 
 On i CHRON, XI &c. 401 
 
 but NO. 48 is here defective ; and N. 49 has 
 
 y with a tranfverfe flroke over the n, 
 to intimate fome peculiarity. 
 
 EXOD. 1 8 ; 5, 6, 7. Here we read And 'Je- 
 thro, Mofes father in law, came, with hisfons and 
 his wife, unto Mofes into the wildernefs. And he 
 faid unto Mofes, I thy father in law Jefbro am 
 come unto thee, and thy wife, and her twofons with 
 her. And Mofes went out to meet his father in 
 law &cc. Strange, that Mofes mould go out to 
 meet Jethro, as in ver. 7 j after that Jethro had 
 been with him, and talk'd to him, as in ver. 6 ! 
 The Heb. Copies us'd by die Authors of the 
 Greek and Syr. Verfions feem to have had the 
 truer Reading, run ecce, inftead of jtf ego ; ac- 
 cording to which the place will be And Je- 
 thro >, Mofes s father in law, came with hisfons and 
 his wife unto Mofes into the wildernefs. 6. And it 
 was told Mofes, Behold, thy father in law Jethro 
 is come unto thee, and thy wife, and her two fans 
 with her. 7. And Mofes went out to meet bis fa- 
 ther in law &c. That lENn, as the future in 
 Niphal, may be render'd & diflumfuit, fee Gen. 
 10, 93 perhaps it is us'd here actively, in the 
 fame manner as the verbs *|ji xi*1 are in 2 Kin. 
 5,4 And one went and declard it to his lord> 
 faying &c. 
 
 As
 
 402 DISSERTATION 
 
 As a firmer Conviction will obtain with re- 
 gard to the Neceffity of any Emendation of the 
 printed Text, whenever a Conjecture, ^r/? found- 
 ed on the Nature of the printed Texf y mail be af- 
 terwards confirm d by one or more MSS j it may 
 be neceflary here again to obferve that, fmce 
 the preceding Remark had been made, as it now 
 ftands, (in which the printed Samar. Copy as 
 well as the Heb. is fuppos'd corrupted) I have 
 found this Point remarkably eftablifh'd by the 
 Samar. MSS. For, tho' NO. 48 is here defective, 
 and tho' NO. 49 reads *jtf ego ; the other 4 Co- 
 pies (N. 47, 50, 51, and 52) agree in reading 
 
 run ecce. 
 
 EXOD. 19, 3. MS i has *inn Dt?n p e 
 catis monte ; undoubtedly two Various Readings 
 put together, or one from the Margin added to 
 the other in the Text : lince the Original Read- 
 ing was certainly either nnn p e monte, or p 
 DWn e ccelis. The word D'OtPn is expung'd 
 in the MS ; or elfe it has not been writ a ad 
 time, as the words have been both before and 
 after it. 
 
 EXOD. 25, 3 1 . We have here the word 
 which F. Houbigant properly calls nullius forma 
 nulliufque interpretations . This word is evident-
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 403 
 
 ly compounded ( as is remark'd in Poole's Synop- 
 fu) of 2 Readings n^V /# and ,-"K?yn /#<:/ j 
 both the formative Letters being inferted by an 
 injudicious Tranfcriber who, finding thefe two 
 Readings in different Copies, or in the Text and 
 Margin of the fame Copy, refolv'd to have the 
 true Reading, and fo inferted both ; as appears to 
 be the cafe in other places. 
 
 There being a Neceffity from the Context, 
 and particularly from the fame verfe, for read- 
 ing nt^J^n thou Jhalt make-, the Rabbins have 
 been fhrewdly fagacious in difcovering reafons 
 for the infertion of the j taking it for granted, 
 that fuch an unparallel'd Irregularity mufl be big 
 with Myftery. Two of their Solutions will per- 
 haps be fully fufficient for the Reader's Satisfac- 
 tion. The older Account is that, as Mofes 
 was here commanded to make a Candlejlick for the 
 Tabernacle, the , being the Numeral for Ten, was 
 here inferted to mew, that Solomon ivas after- 
 wards to make 'Ten Candle/licks for the Temple ; 
 fee i Kin. 7, 49. As this Type is far fetch'd and 
 greatly labour J d (almoft to a degree of modern 
 Typification) it would have conduc'd more to the 
 honour of the % if this Mofaick Cajidlejiick had 
 contain'd Ten Branches-, but, unfortunately in 
 this refpecl:, the very next verfe tells us, that it 
 contain'd Six Branches only. Such then was the 
 
 Rabbi-
 
 404 DISSERTATION 
 
 Rabbinical Solution, in the days of old: and the 
 later account is that Mofes has endeavour'd 
 in this wonderfully-compounded word to con- 
 vey the Hiftory of the Making this Candleftick 
 
 that, when God had commanded him, fay- 
 ing, nfc^yn thoujhalt make a golden Candleftick, 
 after fuch and fuch a fafhion, Mofes being vehe- 
 mently agitated in mind, and fearing he was un- 
 equal to the furprizing Fabricature, God order'd 
 him to throw the Mafs of Gold then in his hand 
 towards Heaven, and faid, rwy it Jhall be made 
 
 and the Candleftick fell down before him ex- 
 quiiitely fmim'd ! 
 
 'Tis worth obferving, that Aben Efra confef- 
 fes, in his Remarks on this word, that there 
 were Variations in the Jewifli MSS Vidi li- 
 brosj fays he, quos rimati funt Sapientes Tiberia- 
 dis, ac jurarunt quindecim ex Senioribus eorum, 
 quod ter diligentijfime confidcrarhit unamquamque 
 vocem & unumquodque punftum, quamque dittio- 
 nem pknam & defe&ivam, 6? e cce fcriptum in 
 uoce nSWn * neque tamen invent fie in libris Hif- 
 panorum G? Gallorum, neque in libris eorum qui 
 funt ultra mare. We are told here, that the Spa- 
 nijh Copies ( the befl MSS ) had not this ; but 
 that it was found univerfally in fucli Copies as 
 were made ufe of by the Critics of Tiberias : 
 whence may alfo be drawn an Inference not ve- 
 ry
 
 Qn i C H R O N. XI '&c. 405 
 
 ry favourable to thofe Critics and their Copies 
 and to the Obfervations form'd upon thofe Copies 
 by thofe Critics we owe (it is faid) the inva- 
 luable Mafora. This then, tho' the founda- 
 tion of fuch entertaining Stories (as it has no 
 exiftence in the Sam. Text as it was not found 
 by Aben Efra either in the Spanijh or French MSS 
 as it is not found in our MSS i, 12, 13, 14, 
 66 ; not in the 2d and 3d Camb. MSS ; nor in 
 Erfurt 3, 4 and as it is not acknowledg'd by 
 the ancient Verlions) fhould certainly, for the fake 
 of Truth and Serioufnefs, be utterly rejected. 
 
 Upon this propofal, to banifh the letter from 
 this word of the Law, perhaps there will be the 
 fame Outcry as is mention'd in Wolfius (Biblioth. 
 Heb. Tom. 2. pag. 488 ) where he gives us, from 
 Shemoth Rabba, the following Prayer of a Tod 
 juft in the fame perilous circumftances Af- 
 cendit lit era Yod, & f apple x projlrata cor am Deo 
 dixit ; O Dominator mundi I Nonne conftituifti, ut 
 ne ulla Liter a periret de Lege in ceternum ? En 
 Salomon occupatus eft in eo, ut me deleat : fortajjis 
 hodie abrogabit unam, & in craftinum alter am^ do- 
 nee tota Lex pereat. But, however artfully the 
 Petitioner here makes his own Caufe the Caufe 
 of the Public, and reprefents the whole Common- 
 wealth of Letters in danger, if he mould be re- 
 mov'd j yet if R, Salomon was juflly convinc'd 
 
 E e e that
 
 4 o6 DISSERTATION 
 
 that no Right (in this inftance) but one abfo- 
 lately hereditary was indefeasible^ and that the Pe- 
 titioner had no better claim than prejent Pojfef- 
 
 fion, unjuftly ufurp'd and injurioufly maintain'd 
 
 doubtlefs this Rabbi, in his efforts for the 
 Extirpation of this Yod, manifefted a Zeal truly 
 laudable and worthy our imitation. I mail only 
 add, that the preceding Prayer is of fome real 
 ufej as it proves, that even the Jews did not 
 univerfally believe their later MSS abfolutely per- 
 fect -, fince R. Salomon attempted to banifh this 
 Letter, and confequently to alter the then cufto- 
 mary Reading. 
 
 EXOD. 27, 12. We have already feen proofs 
 of the improper Repetition and Interpolation of 
 Words -, MS i reads this whole Verfe twice : thus 
 HDN D'tTDn iD'ySp tD DNsS T^HH 
 
 > nn ami : rrwy DrrnKi rr\vy 
 
 In ch. 29, 1 1, we read 
 
 ili< nnD mn* ^ maftabis juvencum co- 
 ram Domino oftium tabernaculi conventus but 
 MS i has the Prepofition Stf ad before nnD of- 
 tium, which every one fees is neceflary (as in 
 Deut. 22,21) and is found in the Greek, Syr. 
 Chald. Arab, and Vulg. Verfions ; an Example 
 
 this
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 407 
 
 this of a Reading entirely different from the print- 
 ed Hebrew, and yet entirely agreeing with all the 
 ancient Verlions. The printed Sam. Text feems 
 to have been here taken from, or made conform- 
 able to, fome late and faulty Heb. Copy j fince 
 that alfo reads nn> mrv OtH without the ne- 
 cefTary Prepofition : and it reads alfo niJT Ofi 1 ? 
 ^Htf nn5 in ver. i o, where the printed Hebrew 
 reads only ^ntf ^S 1 ?. 
 
 In ch. 36, n, MS i, inftead of npJ3> reads 
 P"J3*pPI as i n tne following part of this fame 
 verfe ; the Sam. Text reads here Plp3, as it is 
 now in the Heb. Text of the verfe following. 
 And this MS, at ver. 32, inftead of the fecond 
 piyan without y*7 preceding, reads y^ with- 
 out pron following ; the Sam. Text reads both 
 words. And this fame MS (ch. 59, 9) reads 
 arca> inftead of }tynn peftorale. 
 
 LEVIT. i, i. N'npn The laft letter of this firft 
 word in Leviticus is printed in a lefs fize, than 
 the 4 letters before it. Firft, it feems, this lit- 
 tle K is to mew, that little children 'were to begin 
 to read the Pentateuch at this 'word. But fecond- 
 ly, we are told by others, that Mofes intended 
 at firft to write, and had writ the word *ip 1 1 G? 
 obviamfaffus eft ; but that, God having fudden- 
 ly caltd him with a loud voice, he ( in order to 
 
 E e e 2 exprefs
 
 408 DISSERTATION 
 
 exprefs both ) added a little Aleph, and made it 
 N*lpn & vocavit Solutions thefe fo equally fur- - 
 prizing, that one is at a lofs which to admire 
 moft. This word then contains one of thofe Ir- 
 regularities, which Buxforftdls us (Tiberias, cap. 
 1 4) have been preferv'd, c eu prifcte fapientice ce- 
 terna monument a &-tejlimonia. 
 
 That this Irregularity muft be plac'd, not to 
 the intention of Mofes, but to the fault of a 
 Tranfcriber, feems fufficiently evident, without 
 obferving that this tf is regular, not only in 
 the Sam. Text, but alfo in the Heb. MSS i, 4, 
 7, 10, u, 12, 66 : in the 2d Camb. MS it is re- 
 gular ', and it was fo, originally in the 3d. I 
 {hall only add, that the Enumeration of the Li- 
 ters minufcula, given by the Great Mafora on 
 this word, is very different from the Enumera- 
 tion, given by the fame Mafora at the End; and 
 certainly fuch difagreements and inconfiftencies 
 in any Rule are no argument in its favour. 
 
 LEVIT. 4, 29. Inftead of rhvn D1p02 in lo- 
 lo holocaujli, MS 4 reads nWfl DTO 1EW DIpDl 
 in loco quo maclat holocaujium. The Senfe of the 
 MS feems very preferable ; fmce he Jball Jlay the 
 Jin-offering in the place 'where he flays the burnt- 
 offering, is more clear than he fkall Jlay the fin- 
 offering in the place of the burnt-offering. This 
 
 very
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 409 
 
 very remarkable Various Reading is confirm'd 
 by the Greek and Syr. Verfionsj and by the 
 Heb. Text itfelf (before and after) at the 24th 
 and33dverfes nVvn DK BW ntPK Dlpoa 
 And laltly, it is fully confirm'd by the Samar. 
 Text ; which, together with the preceding Au- 
 thorities, is fufficient to reeftablifh thefe two 
 words, which have been happily preferv'd in this 
 MS. In the Sam. Text indeed the verb is 1DW 
 maftant, in verfes 24, 29, and 33 ; and this feems 
 to be the truer reading. 
 
 LEV IT. 5, i. The word tfi non is very re- 
 markable. It occurs 3 5 times in this form ; but 
 is in other places more regularly exprefs'd tfS 
 'Tis fomewhat ftrange, that fo common a parti- 
 cle mould fo frequently be exprefs'd improper- 
 ly j becaufe, if a Tranfcriber knew any one word 
 in the language, he muft be fuppos'd to know 
 this. The true reafon of our finding this fhort 
 word, which occurs fo many hundred times, ex- 
 prefs'd fo often with a Vau, feems to me to be 
 this. The words tfS non and ^ , being the 
 fame in found, have been writ frequently in- 
 flead of one another ; & inftead of 17 15 times, 
 even according to the Mafora ( according to fome 
 Critics more frequently , but according to others 
 lefs) and i^ inflead of tfh twice. Thefe words 
 
 then
 
 4io DISSERTATION 
 
 then having been thus miftaken, feme Tranfcri- 
 bers, finding the Copies differ, writ the one Read- 
 ing in the Text and the other in the Margin j 
 whilft other Tranfcribers, of lefs judgment, re- 
 folving to have the true Reading in the Text, 
 exprefs'd both in the compound word ?<iS ; 
 which has therefore been continued, as one way 
 of expreffing the Hebrew negative Adverb. The 
 MSS read the word regularly K*7 in feveral of 
 thefe places j as MSS i , 7, 1 7, in this place. The 
 Sam. Text reads the word regularly, without a 
 ), perhaps in every other place as well as here. 
 
 LEVIT. 5, 9. MS i has the word ^npH be- 
 tween DKDn and Kin This word feems inatten- 
 tively inferted j fince the Law fpeaks here of the 
 Sin-offering of a private perfon, and not of the 
 congregation, as in ch. 4, 21. And as this MS 
 has fome words inferted, it has alfo fome omit- 
 ted * y for the word tfS non (than which there is 
 no one "word of greater confequence ) is omitted 
 in ch. n, 4; (and in Numb. 31, 23.) In ch. 
 19, 3, the 3 words nwn Tirol? riNI are 
 writ twice. In ch. 23, 29, inftead of nrTDJl 
 rVOVO is has 3 whole words added, and reads 
 
 rray :npo Ninn tr^n nrroji 'tis obfer- 
 
 vable, that the next verfe is univerfally conclud- 
 ed, in almoft the fame words with this verfe in 
 
 the
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 
 
 the MS. In the I5th ver. of the following chap- 
 ter this fame MS has iny inftead of iNDn : and 
 in Numb. 26, 50, inftead of DIKE VIDtf 400, 
 it reads (taken from the end of the verfe follow- 
 ing) DWCP1 niNip yZW 730. I fhall only add 
 here, that in Numb. 7, MS 4 has verfes 66, 67, 
 68, 69, 70 71 (containing 66 words) twice. 
 
 NUMB. 3, 39. There are in the printed Heb. 
 Bible 15 words, which have a Dot over every 
 letter j the reafon of which feems clearly to be 
 that the word, fo dotted, was fufpe&ed of 
 being interpolated, not being found in fome o- 
 ther Copies. In this verfe we have the follow- 
 ing word thus dotted priNT & Aaron - y a word, 
 which is not found in the Sam. Text; nor in the 
 Syr. Verfion ; and (which is very remarkable) it 
 is not found in our oldeft Heb. MS. 
 
 NUMB, n, 15. We have here the Pronoun 
 fern. Dtf inftead of the mafc. Pronoun nDtf } and 
 this, even in the fpeech of Mofes to GOD him- 
 felf an Abfurdity fo great, that the Reader 
 fcarce need be inform'd, that it is peculiar to the 
 Heb. Text. As fo extravagant a Miftake has 
 been made and continued, it muft be extrava- 
 gantly accounted for and we are told ( what 
 we can hardly read with patience) that Mofes 
 
 writ
 
 412 DISSERTATION 
 
 writ this Pronoun without the n, to indicate, 
 that he was fo exafperated, during this his ad- 
 drefs to the Divine Being, as to be incapable of 
 pronouncing the whole word, and could only 
 fpeak thefirjl of the 2 fy liable* ! The fame Mif- 
 take has been made in i Sam. 24, 1 9 where 
 the .Punctuation mews it to have been formerly 
 nnN j as it is now in MS 2, and was at firft in 
 MS. 5. 
 
 NUMB. 13, 22. The 2 verbs in the verfe pre- 
 ceding, the i ft of the 2 verbs in this verfe, and 
 alfo the verbs in the following verfes are univer- 
 fally plural - y and yet the 2d verb in this verle 
 ( contrary to all the rules of writing ) is, in the 
 printed Heb. Text, fingular >O>1 6? venit. 
 Should we not all agree that fome Tranfcriber or 
 Printer had miftook ; if we were to read, in Cce- 
 fars Commentaries, the following Verbs, each re- 
 ferring itfelf to the fame nom. cafe plural &? 
 afcenderunt & exploraverunt G? VENIT 
 & venerunt & exciderunt & reverfi funt ? 
 This Verb, fo abfurdly^zg-. in the printed Heb. 
 Text, is properly plur. in the Sam. Text, and in 
 all the ancient Verfions. This was alfo the Read- 
 ing in our oldeft MS 3 before fome Corrector had 
 injudicioufly eras' d the laft Letter. The Mafo- 
 retic Sebirin have been mention'd, pag. 379; 
 
 and
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 413 
 
 and the Mafora conjectures, that, as the^g-. 
 number is 1 5 times writ where the word mould 
 be read plural, fo the word tf 1* mould be read 
 in this and 7 other places. 
 
 NUMB. 27, 7. The Hiftory here tells us of a 
 Petition preferr'd by the Daughters of Zelophehad-, 
 and, in ver. 5, we read, that Mofes laid before 
 the Lord JDDttfD caufam earum. The pronoun 
 fuffix'd to this noun is regularly feminine,, and 
 diftinguim'd in fome written and moft printed 
 Copies by its being much larger than common -, to 
 denote, fay the Rabbies, that thefe Daughters 
 did great Honour to their Sex, and had more than 
 common Merit. But, how then are the 2 Pro- 
 nouns in ver. 7, (which equally refpect thefe 
 Daughters) found mafculine? Why, fay they, 
 for the greater Honour of thefe young Women, 
 becaufe they had behavd themfehes like Men. 
 Wonderfully-conliftent Illuftrations ! The Peti- 
 tioners are firft honour'd with a fern. Pronoun of 
 an uncommon Size, to mew they were honoura- 
 ble as Women j and then twice with a mafc. Pro- 
 noun, to mew that, tho' they were Women, yet 
 in their behaviour they were as honourable as 
 Men ! And does our Text want fuch explana- 
 tions, as thefe are ? 
 
 Fff Non
 
 4H DISSERTATION 
 
 Non tali Auxilio, nee Defenforibus ijlh 
 
 Tempus eget 
 
 However, inflead of cenfuring, let us compaffio- 
 nate thefe poor Critics j who have given the beil 
 accounts they could get of what they were told 
 was, every letter of it, the Writing of Mofes : 
 and let us proceed to obferve, that thefe Pro- 
 nouns have been corrupted. For that onS and 
 DHOtf were originally \rb and fnOtf, is not on- 
 ly evident from the Sam. Text, but muft be 
 confefs'd by all, who will allow the great Au- 
 thor of the Pentateuch to write with common 
 
 fenfe and confiftency becaufe the very two 
 
 words }rp and frVHtf are found even in the print- 
 ed Heb. Texf, and in the very fame verfe, juft 
 after DnV and DPlON- To which it may be add- 
 ed, that where it is D!T2K pater eorum in the 
 printed Text, it is ^ft^R pater earum in MSS i, 
 4, 7, 10 (here chang'd) and 175 in Erfurt MS 4, 
 and alfo in 3 originally; but Michaelis tells us, 
 that in MS 3, the \ having been eras'd in obe- 
 dience to the Mafora, a D is fuperfcrib'd. 
 
 DEUTER. 6, 12. MS i has here preferv'd the 
 word *]nStf Deus mem ( MSS 4 and i o have it 
 in the margin ) a word undoubtedly original, as 
 it is found in the Sam. Text, in the Greek, Syr. 
 and Arab. Verfions ; and as jWlf fTliT is the 
 
 phrafe
 
 On i CHROK XI Gfr. 415 
 
 phrafe jufl before at ver. 10, and juft after at ver. 
 13. But in ch. 13, 2, this MS has a Variation 
 for the worfe j reading , inflead of **intf poji, 
 rtt^y 31 ? Jirvtamm : the printed Reading here 
 is certainly preferable, becaufe the word D""OV31 
 ? Jerviamus eis occurs afterwards, as the laft 
 word in this fame verfe. In ch. 15, 1 8, this MS 
 alfo has itf vel inftead of mtt Mum-, and the 
 Senfe muft be confiderably varied, or rather be 
 made Nonfenfe, by fuch an Omiffion, tho' it be 
 the Omiffion but of one fingle letter. In ch. 1 6, 
 12, inftead of DHtfai it reads DHV3 p&O 
 which reading is confirm'd by the Sam. Text 
 and the Greek Verfion ; when this MS was 
 pointed, a little ^ was prefix'd to the 2d word, 
 and the ift was left unpointed. In ch. 17, 16, 
 inftead of DD 1 ? vo&is, it improperly reads 7K ad 
 me. And, in ch. 20, 19, it has the word nWn 
 twice j which mould be obferv'd, as every diffe- 
 rence may furnifh the Learned with fome hint 
 for the correction of this obfcure and probably 
 corrupted place foS m^H ^V D"T^H O 
 *T1^D1 T3QD qu?a homo lignum agri ad veniendwn 
 ajaciebus tuis in 
 
 DEUTER. 22, 19. The word rnVJ occurs 22 
 times in the Pentateuch, and is not once printed 
 properly but in this place I mean, not in the 
 
 F f f 2 Heb.
 
 4 i6 DISSERTATION 
 
 Heb. Text ; for the Sam. Text reads it regular 
 alfo in other places. That it was univerfally re- 
 gular in the Heb. Text, is fufficiently clear from 
 the Heb. Punctuation ; for, a Kametz being e- 
 ven now exprefs'd in the printed Copies under 
 the *i ( which is at prefent the laft letter ) an n 
 rnufl have follow'd, when the Point was firft 
 fubjoin'd to that letter. This word is properly 
 exprefs'd rr\y}puella in 2 Kings , 55 3, 4; &c. 
 and, when thus exprefs'd, it has its true and 
 neceffary diftinction from "\y^ puer. Without 
 which dirtinction fuch Miftakes might eafily be 
 made, as would caufe Confufion; as in ver. 23, 
 where the word being improperly *\y), the verb 
 has been made mafculine to agree with it : and 
 the Sam. Text has the verb there either taken 
 from, or made conformable to, the Heb. verb 
 fo corrupted even tho' the noun be in the 
 Sam. f-nyj. Indeed the Mafora has corrected 
 the 2 1 irregular forms of this Noun j having or- 
 der'd the word at every place to be read my}. 
 We have before us then a word, which oc- 
 curs 22 times in the Pentateuch, and yet is but 
 once writ regularly. Hence may arife this quef- 
 tion -r Is it probable, that this word mould be 
 undcfignedly writ -jy j, inftead of TT\V^ ne and 
 twenty times ? I prefume the contrary. It feems 
 evident from this and many other instances, that 
 
 fome
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 417 
 
 fome of the Tranfcribers, not being deeply ac- 
 quainted with the language they were tranfcri-- 
 bing, finding a word once or twice miftaken, 
 have defignedly made the fame word in other pla- 
 ces, or other words in connexion 'with it, to con- 
 form to fuch miftaken word confequently, that 
 fome Tranfcriber, rinding the word n"iyj care- 
 leily writ -jyj in one or more places, omitted 
 the n in other places, and perhaps in every place 
 in the Pentateuch; and probably the rij now 
 found in this fingle inftance, crept in again by 
 fome later Tranfcriber's inadvertently deviating 
 into Truth. For that this fingle inftance was 
 formerly conformable to the reft, we feem to 
 have proof from fome of the MSS, which read 
 nyj and not myj here: fee MSS i, 7, 17, 
 66. The Reader will take it for granted, that 
 the frequent Omiffion of this necerTary Letter 
 has tortur'd many a Rabbinical Invention to ac- 
 count fof it, and produc'd fome pleafant Solu- 
 tions. It has fo. And the word myy/tf^j it 
 mould feem, is writ *\y) puer, when applied to 
 REBEKAH LAUDIS caufa, quod cauta & pro- 
 <vida fiterity inftar Pueri ! but, when applied to 
 DINAH VITUPERII caufa, quod deambula- 
 tio ejus caufam dederit Jlufro ! Buxt. Tiber, cap, 
 13- 
 
 DEUTER a
 
 4i8 DISSERTATION 
 
 DEUTER. 22, 19. Inftead of htwi MS 
 i reads tfh iW 1trtf Dnn HtrxS the 3 in- 
 terpolated words were taken in here by the Tran- 
 fcriber's carelefly cafting his eye ten oerjes farther 
 forth-, for at ver. 29 we read thefe 3 words, pre- 
 ceded and follow'd by the very fame words as 
 occur in this 1 9th verfe. The fame Tranfcriber, 
 at ch. 28, 27, carelefly transferring his eye to 
 ver. 3 5, (eight verfes farther forth) has inferted, 
 in ver. 27, 4 words that belong only to the 3 5th 
 verfe "pplp "W "J^n *pO led again in- 
 to Miftake by the famenefs of the preceding 
 words. To which it may be added, that in ch. 
 25, 19, this fame MS has a furprizing Variation 
 of iSn inftead of iSyJ ; fo that the verlion of 
 this MS (inftead of & fohet cake amentum ejus de 
 pede ejus) is & fohet pedem ejus de pede ejus. 
 
 DEUTER. 28, 57. Mofes, in this folemn Chap- 
 ter, foretells the ailoniming Miferies, that mould 
 be inflicted on the Ifraelites, in cafe of their fu- 
 ture Difobedience - } and in this and the adjoining 
 verfes moft afFectingly paints one of the deepeft 
 Scenes fo predicted. F. Houbigant has very ju- 
 dicioufly remark'd (Prplegom. pag. 69 &c.) that 
 the Senfe here is greatly difturb'd by two cor- 
 rupted words nn^MI and n03^V L t us then 
 
 atten-
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 419 
 
 attentively confider the PafTagej after referring 
 the Reader to verfes 49, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57 of this 
 chapter. 
 
 Now by the eye of the Man or Woman being 
 evil againft each other, even againft the Wife or 
 Hufband of the bofom, is moft ftrongly defcrib'd 
 their extreme Want j fo that (as Bp Patrick ex- 
 preiTes it) they jhould grudge every bit, which they 
 jaw one another , or their near eft relations^ eat -, be- 
 ing ready tofnatch it from their mouths thro' rave- 
 nous hunger. The Man, fays Mofes, when thro* 
 Famine he fhall kill and eat one of his own 
 Children, mail not give part of this Child to his 
 other Children, nor even to his Wife : and the 
 Woman (for even her fofter Soul mall grow in- 
 fenfible to the Miferies of others, thro' her own 
 dreadful Neceffity) She alfo mall grudge the leaft 
 refrefhment to her Hufband, Son and Daughter. 
 So far all being clear, let us proceed to the next 
 verfe j which, at prefent, is clofely connected 
 with the preceding, thus Her evil Eye mall 
 grudge the leaft refreshment to her Hujband, and 
 to her Son, and to her Daughter (57) and to her 
 sifter-birth or Secundine^ as the word ( if there 
 be fuch a word) is allow'd to fignify. But is 
 there propriety in faying She mail grudge e- 
 very morfel eaten by her Children and by her Se- 
 cundine ? To thefe and the preceding let us add 
 
 the
 
 4 2o DISSERTATION 
 
 the words following She mall grudge every 
 morfel to her Son and to her Daughter, and to 
 her Secundine, and to her Children. The laft Ar- 
 ticle, her Children, having been before particu- 
 larly fpecified in her Son and her Daughter, feems 
 to be totally redundant and unnecefTary. 
 F. Houbigant obferves, as to the word 
 
 fecundina ejus hujus fignificatm nullum aliud 
 
 Heb. in Codicibm exemplum reperitur, nullum Ve- 
 tcribus in Linguis veftigium, ivx ullum apud Ve- 
 teres Interpreter fignum cerium & exploratum. Let 
 us now fee how this learned Critic endeavours 
 to correct this paflage. He fuppofes one 2 im- 
 properly inferted in the word JTJ321 & inflios 
 fuos, fo that the word mould be non & jilios 
 fuos -, and that fome Tranfcriber, finding this 
 word in ver. 57 with a Prepolition, like the 
 Nouns in ver. 56, concluded that the ^ in the 
 firjl word of ver. 57 muft be alfo a Prepolition ; 
 and fo alter'd the word to make it regularly con- 
 nected with \htfuppotd Prepolition prefix'd to 
 it. The firft word then (in ver. 57) having been 
 alter'd, to make it conformable to n^Dll, which 
 is fuppos'd to have one 2 not original, but im- 
 properly inferted -, it is no fmall Satisfaction to 
 me to inform the Reader that Our Oldejl MS, 
 N.I, happily confirms this Conjecture, read- 
 ing here rV3)n &jHiosjuos, without the Prepofi- 
 
 tion
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 421 
 
 tion a Various Reading, which, if not found 
 in other MSS ( and K Houbigant has not men- 
 tion'd any fuch) does particular Honour to This 
 Bodleian MS. 
 
 Having thus corrected iTnm to JTJll, and 
 confequently reflor'd fiJVTCWfl to its primitive 
 form nS&OI &? coquet, let us now obferve the 
 Propriety of this PaiTage. 56. The tender and 
 delicate woman among you> 'who would not adven- 
 ture to fet the fole of her foot upon the ground for 
 delicatenefs and tendernefs, her eye Jhall be evil to- 
 wards the husband of her bofom, and towards her 
 fon, and towards her daughter. 57. And me mail 
 boil that which cometh out from between herfeet^ 
 even her children which jhe flail bear ; for fie 
 Jhall eat them, for want of all things, fecretly. 
 Thefe words, being prophetical, are fulfill'd in 
 2 Kings 6, 29. For we read there, that 2 Wo- 
 men of Samaria having agreed to eat their owa 
 
 o o 
 
 Children, One was actually boild^ where the 
 very fame verb *?&% coxit is made ufe of. 
 
 It may be proper to remark, that the word in 
 the MS is undoubtedly rt^l; but fome igno- 
 rant Corrector has put a little crooked Beth over 
 the word ( evidently the addition of a hand dif- 
 ferent from, and later than, the Tranfcriber's ) 
 as if the word had been before defective. 
 
 Ggg DEUTER.
 
 422 .DISSERTATION 
 
 DEUTER. 3351. And this is the bk fling 
 with Mofes the man of God blejjed the children of 
 Ifrael before his death. 
 
 2. And he faid, The Lord came from Sinai, 
 and rofe up from Seir unto them , he foined forth 
 
 from mount Par an, and he came with ten thoufands 
 of faints: from his right hand went a Jiery law 
 for them. 
 
 3. Tea, he loved the people ; all his faints WQ in 
 thy hand: and they fat down at thy feet $ every 
 onejhall receive of thy words. 
 
 4. Mofes commanded us a law : even the inhe- 
 ritance of the congregation of Jacob. 
 
 5. And he was king in Jejhurun, when the 
 heads of the people, and the tribes of Ifrael were 
 gathered together. 
 
 The printed Heb. Text. 
 
 DnWn wx wo Q -I^N nmnn nn i. 
 mrr -)*n 2. 
 -ino win 
 3. nnS ni t^ WJDD 
 
 ion cm i"io virnp Sj troy 
 mm 4- 
 5- 
 
 Thefe Verfes being remarkably unintelligible, 
 the following Correction and Tranflation are of- 
 fer'd, with deference, to the Learned. 
 
 nem i*
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 423 
 
 nra T>3. "i'N PiDnin nxn 
 irno vsh S^"i^ ji n 
 JDS mn 2. 
 ytya mn 
 
 3- 
 
 vr on Dm 5. 
 ; vnri:nD i^^n 
 uS m> nmn 6. 
 nSn naniD 
 
 7. 
 
 I. And this is the Bleffing, wherewith Mofes, the man of God, 
 tleffed the children of Ifrael, before his death. And he faid -- 
 
 2. JEHOVAH came from Sinai, 
 And he arofe upon them from Seir ; 
 
 3. |Ie fhone forth from mount Paran, 
 And he came from Meribah-Kadefh: 
 
 From his right hand a fire fhone forth upon them. 
 
 4. Truly, he loved the people, 
 And he blcfled all his faints : 
 
 5. For they fell down at his feet, 
 And they received of his words. 
 
 6. He commanded us a Law, 
 
 The inheritance of the congregation of Jacob. 
 
 7. And he became king in Jefhurun j 
 
 When the heads of the people were aflembled, 
 Together with the tribes of Ifrael. 
 
 G g g 2 Tic
 
 424 DISSERTATION 
 
 The general Nature of this folemn Introduc- 
 tion is to (hew the Foundation^ which Mofes had 
 for bleffing his Brethren ; namely, becaufe God 
 had frequently manifefted his Glory in their favour. 
 And the feveral Parts of this Introduction are 
 difpos'd in the following order The Manifef- 
 tation of the Divine Glory on Sinai, as it -was 
 prior in time and more magnificent in fplendor, 
 is properly mention'd firft That God mani- 
 fefted his Glory at Seir, is evident from Judg. 
 5, 4; Lord, when thou wenteji out of Seir, when 
 thou marchedft out of the fields ofEdom ; the earth 
 trembled, and the heavens dropped &c. The 
 next place is Paran$ where the Glory of the Lord 
 appeared before all the children of Ifrael (Num. 1 4, 
 loj And we read (Num. 20, i ) that, towards 
 -the end of the 40 years, they came to Kadejh, 
 which we learn from ver. 1 3 was call'd Meribah, 
 on account qf their contentious oppofition to the 
 Determinations of God in their favour; and 
 there the Gbry of the Lord again appeared, as we 
 are inform'd in ver. 6 Thefe then, fays Mo- 
 fes, were the Places, from whence God mani- 
 feiled his Glory, in a fiery appearance ; the more 
 illuftrioufly to proclaim his Ipecial Providence o- 
 ver, and Care of, Ifrael, < For this is the In- 
 ference he makes from all thofe glorious Ap- 
 pearances, Truly he loved the People, and he blej/ed 
 
 all
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 425 
 
 all his Saints i. e. all thofe, whom he had chofe 
 unto himfelf to be, not only a peculiar People, 
 but alfo an holy Nation. That, in order to 
 make themfuch, God had difplay'd his Glory on 
 mount Sinai ; where they had fallen proftrate at 
 his feet with the humbleil Adoration, and vow'd 
 the moil fincere Obedience. For, that God 
 had there commanded them The Law, which 
 was to be the PolTeffion and Inheritance of all 
 the children of Jacob. And, to crown the 
 whole, God had not only blefs'd them as their 
 Lawgiver, but had alfo vouchfaf'd to be their 
 King j Honours, which had both been conferr'd 
 at that moft folemn AfTembly, when the Chiefs 
 and all their feveral Tribes were aflembled toge- 
 ther. Let us proceed now to the Obfervations, 
 which offer themfelves in favour of the preced- 
 ing Alterations. 
 
 i . The words tHp niD^D cannot regularly 
 fignify with ten thoufands of Saints ; becaufe the 
 general fenfes of o are ab and abjqite (as in the 3 
 inftances juft before it in the fame verfe) and 
 becaufe &np is not Saints but Holinels. But 
 
 / 
 
 Mofes feems in this, as in each of the preceding 
 lines, to have given the name of a Place ; and 
 #1p is the conftant name for Kadejb, otherwife 
 call'd Meribab-KadeJki and indeed the word is 
 in this very place render'd by the LXX &A$ 
 
 In
 
 426 DISSERTATION 
 
 In the 8th verfe of this chapter 'tis call'd 
 Meribah' y but, in the 51 ft verfe of the former, 
 \ve have tHp rQHD Mtribab-Kadefh : and fo 
 in 2^.47,19, tjnp ITOHD, but in ch.48, 28, 
 ttnp J""OHO exactly the fame as in the in- 
 ftance juft quoted from the chapter preceding, 
 and as in the inftance before us, excepting the 
 change of one letter. The 3 preceding lines then 
 containing each the name of a Place, and thefe 
 two words being { with the change of a fingle 
 letter) the name of a fourth Place, from whence 
 alfo the Divine Glory was manifefted in the 
 Wildernefs " it feems preferable to confider thefe 
 words as implying this Place, rather than to 
 tranflate LHp Saints, which it does not properly 
 Signify; the regular word being CWip, and it 
 occurs in the 3d line following. 
 
 Farther : if ty*fj5 could properly be tranflated 
 Saints j then, according to the rules of language, 
 the relative Pronoun, next following, could have 
 no other Antecedent : and hence it will follow, 
 that the fiery law (generally fuppos'd to be ex- 
 prefs'd in the next words) was given to thefe 
 Saints be came 'with ten thoufands of Saints 
 {i. e. Angels) from his right band 'went a fiery /aw 
 for them. Befides ; the word Saints very fel- 
 dom, if ever, fignifies Angels ; for the Prophecy 
 0f Enoch, taken literally, is behold* the Lord 
 
 cometb
 
 On i C H R O N. XI Gfc. 427 
 
 confeth with his holy Myriads: and in 
 5, the Lord my God flail come, and all 
 J&K'H/J (not "py w// /&?, but probably iy con- 
 formably to all the ancient Verfions ) with him $ 
 where the word Saints- has frequently been ap- 
 plied to the fpirits of jufl Men made perfett. If 
 the Prepolition o be thought abfolutely necefla- 
 ry before rOHE, we may conclude it has been 
 omitted, as it frequently is elfewhere ; and where 
 it was not ib likely to be omitted as here, the 
 Noun beginning with the very fame letter : thus 
 we have ry,3 frequently for DM3 : fee alfo page 
 1 57 of this Diflertation. 
 
 2. JD7 m VX I^^D from his right hand a 
 fire of law for them. The word rn is Chaldee; 
 and is not found in any book writ before the 
 Captivity, but in this place : and here it is us'd 
 very obfcurely, becaufe it follows &$ ; for cer- 
 tainly afire of law (if we examine the ideas clofe- 
 ly) is a phrafe not very intelligible. But farther: 
 the bleffing of the Law is gratefully acknow- 
 ledg'd in ver. 4, where the Law is exprefs'd by 
 its proper word r"mn ; a ^d therefore we may 
 prefume it was not intended here in ver. 2, and 
 exprefs'd by the Chald. word m a word, 
 which is not here acknowledg'd by the Greek 
 and Syr. Verfions. And that rn was not origi- 
 nally the word here, may be farther prefum'd, 
 
 becaufe
 
 428 DISSERTATION 
 
 becaufe one of the Sam. MSS, NO. 51, reads 
 JTH > and in another, NO. 50, the Vau is plac'd 
 over the word, as if omitted. 
 
 Thefe feveral Reafons concurring againft the 
 prefent Reading, let us fee what profpect there 
 may be of a rational Emendation ; and perhaps 
 the true Senfe of this difficult place may be beft 
 illuftrated by its parallel place, in the fublime 
 and juftly-celebrated Ode of Habakkuk 
 
 mn aw HDD 
 n*nn 
 
 : nry jvnn 
 
 3^ GOD came from Teman, 
 
 And the Holy One from mount Par an ; 
 Ef ^/or^ covered the heavens, 
 And the earth was full ofhispraife. 
 4. And his brightnefs was as the fun ; 
 
 The fplendors (ifTuing forth) from his hand, 
 For there was the manifeftation of his power. 
 Before this paflage be applied, it may be proper 
 to offer a few Obfervations upon it. As mtf , in 
 Job 31, 26, fignifies the Sun (which, being the 
 principal fource of Light thro' this Syftem, may 
 properly be call'd Light, or the Light, UX,T itpwti) 
 
 that
 
 On i C H R O N. XI & c . 429 
 
 that rendring feems to improve the fenfe here. 
 As D'yip is deriv'd from ]"ip fplendere, radios 
 fplendoris emittere, it is much better render'd here 
 Splendors than Horns. And, as the Hand, and 
 Right Hand, and ^rw, are expreffions frequently 
 applied to God, upon any fignal Difplay of the 
 Divine Power ; perhaps the Hand of God can- 
 not fo properly be faid to hidt and conceal, as to 
 fxert and manifeft his Power and Majefty : and 
 that the verb, from whence the noun pon is 
 deriv'd, had this idea of jkewing forth, is evi- 
 dent from feveral places in the Sam. Verfion ; as 
 Gen. 41, 25, what God is about to do *nnn he hath 
 dif cover d (or made known) to Pharaoh. 
 
 In this illuftrious Paffage then, which is pa- 
 rallel^ or at leaft remarkably Jimilar, to that of 
 Mofes, we fee the brightnefi or Jplendor is poeti- 
 cally reprefented as Jtreaming from the hand of 
 God; that awful Hand, which is mighty in ope- 
 ration, and has fo often manifefted the Divine 
 Power to a wondring World. 'Three therefore 
 of the four words here feem to be determin'd ; 
 for, as in Habakkuk the brightnefs Jlr earns from 
 the hand of God, fo here the jire proceeds from, or 
 kindles at, the right hand of Jehovah. 
 
 From his right hand a jire ---- to than. 
 It only remains then to confider here, what 
 
 H h h was
 
 430 DISSERTATION 
 
 was moft probably the word, which originally 
 compleated this Proportion. And, amidft the 
 uncommon confufion of Interpreters and Com- 
 mentators, the Sam. Veriion alone feems to have 
 preferv'd it. For that Verfion, which in general 
 exattly exprejfes the words of the Text, reads the 
 
 line here fc2 * **-# ' tfi * ^rn^m!B 
 
 fo that the ift word 1JD being the very 
 fame, and the 2d being the Chald. word for t^tf, 
 we have the 3d word miN or *V)tf to agree with 
 t^tf (which is fometimes of the mafc. and fome- 
 times of the fern, gender) and this word fills up 
 the line, inftead of the prefent irregular word 
 n"T, or as it has been fometimes writ riff. And 
 indeed this Various Reading in the Sam. MSS 
 ftrongly confirms this Correction ; for, whence 
 can the 1 in nfT be deriv'd, but from the mid- 
 dle of the original word Titf, which has been 
 corrupted in its other two letters ? One of the 
 other letters (*)) is very fimilar to, and therefore 
 may eafily have been miftaken for n : and (which 
 is extreamly obfervable) the Senfe with this verb 
 *fitf perfectly coincides with the words of Ha- 
 bakkuk before cited ; there it is the fplendors 
 (ifluing forth) from his hand-, and here the, 
 fire Jhone forth upon them from his right hand. 
 It having been juft prefum'd, that the 1 in nn 
 is, the middle letter of *V)K, we may remark, that 
 
 this
 
 On i C II RON. XI &c. 431 
 
 this verb has the 1 in the preter tenfe; as ap- 
 pears from Buxt. Tbefaur. pag. 208, where we 
 read Tltf Cholem per totum prtzteritum retinet. 
 3. The next line, that requires Illuftration, is 
 *]TH VEHp SD omnes fanfli ejus in manu tud ; 
 and certainly if ever a line wanted Illuftration, 
 we have fuch a one now before us. Mofes, 
 fpeaking of Jehovah, is here fuppos'd to fay 
 Truly he loved the people, all his faints are in thy 
 
 hand ! But 'whole Saints ? And in whole Hand ? 
 
 i 
 According to the Vulgat the line mould be 73 
 
 W2 VKHp all his faints are in his hand-, and the 
 Chald. Paraphrafe gives the fame Senfe. This 
 indeed fomewhat mends the matter j but yet the 
 Syr. Verfion feems to have preferv'd the truer 
 reading, which is 
 
 pi vtsnp 
 
 / omnibus fanftis fuis benedixit. 
 This reading of "jll inftead "^Ti is a very fmall 
 variation, as to the Letters j but it makes a great 
 improvement in the Senfe of the line, which is 
 now made perfectly to agree with the Context 
 'Truly he loved the people, and he bleffed all his 
 faints. This reading is confirm'd by the Sam. 
 Verfion, which has "piO j which cannot iigni- 
 fy in manu tua, but feems to be ^^D with the 
 addition of K to exprefs the Kametz, and a 1 for 
 
 H h h 2 an.
 
 432 DISSERTATION 
 
 a "]. The addition of 1 before the firil word ^3 
 has the authority, not only of the Syr. Verlion, 
 but alfo of the Sam. Text. 
 
 4. The words ^jnS and "pminiD mould 
 probably be vSjnS and 1riVQ"1!3 ; becaufe it 
 feems necelfary to the Senfe, that the Pronoun 
 here fuffix'd ihould be of the 3d perfon. There 
 can be no doubt, but the Authors of the Greek 
 Verlion read the latter word vm""Q ta TD> as they 
 have render'd it ano TUV \cyaiv OJUTZ : and the 
 Vulgat has the Pronoun in the 3d perfon, in 
 both inftances ; reading pedibus ejus, and doc- 
 trina illiiis. The Variation feems to have been 
 introduc'd by fome ignorant Tranfcriber, who 
 alter'd thefe 2 words, to make them agree with 
 *p3, which had been before corrupted from 
 "pQ. (fee pag. 417.) The Context is uniformly 
 in the 3d perfon JEHOVAH came he arofe, 
 hejkone he loved be blejjed : confequently 
 the Senfe here mould be they fat down (not at 
 thy, but ) at his feet, and received of his words. 
 The firil of thefe nouns, \hojing. in the printed 
 Hebrew, is plur. not only in the Sam. Text, but 
 in Heb. MSS I, 5, u, 12, 14, 63 ; in Camb. 25 
 and in Erfurt i, 2, 3, 4. 
 
 5. That the verb tfw mould be itfjyn, w ^l 
 be foon evident ; becaufe it follows a verb plu- 
 ral, refers likewife to time paft, and has the 
 
 fame
 
 O;z i CHRON. XI &c. 433 
 
 fame plur. nom. cafe. Accordingly we find, that 
 in the Sam. Pentateuch the word is ltf&"i, which 
 undoubtedly was at firfl itf J^l ; not only becaufe 
 the , which is preferv'd in the Hebrew, is ne- 
 ceflary, but becaufe the word in die Sam. Ver- 
 fion is ftap^ G? acceperunt. The Syr. Ar. and 
 Chald. Verfions have this verb in \heplur. num- 
 ber, with the conjunction preceding it. The o- 
 miffion of 1 both at the beginning and end of 
 this word is juft fuch another Corruption, as has 
 been remark'd pag. 167; wheje n^l is writ iii- 
 ftead of urm 
 
 6. That Mofes mould (in this his final Blefs- 
 ing) fpeak of himfelf by name, in the 3d perfon, 
 is very improbable : and, as the Pronoun ^ no- 
 fas occurs in the fame line, it feems impojjibk. 
 For could Mofes fay Mofes commanded Us i. e. 
 Mofes commanded Me and Ton i. e. Mofes com- 
 manded Mofes and Tou ? And if fuch language 
 would be abfolutely abfurd, no friend to the 
 character of Mofes will, I fuppofe, infift upon 
 its having dropt from him on this folemn Oc- 
 cafion. But farther : if Mofes could have been 
 the perfon here fpoken of, ( as well as the per- 
 fon here fpeaking) he muft be alfo the perfon 
 intended in the next verfe, as King of Jefiurun 
 or IfraeL But this is a Title, which he never , 
 afTum'd, or rather difclaim'd; fee Dent. 17, 145 
 
 and
 
 434 DISSERTATION 
 
 and indeed GOD himfelf was the only King of 
 Ifrael before Sauh fee i Sam. 8, 7 &c. 
 
 'Tis very probable then, that this word has 
 been inferted by miftake, on account of its re- 
 markable likenefs to the very next word nti^D 
 or ntJflD and nUHO or HttHID ; for other inftan- 
 ces may be produc'd, where a letter having been 
 negligently omitted or added, Tranfcribers have 
 afterwards inferted both the proper and improper 
 word, that they might be fure of having the true 
 reading in one of them. Wherefore, as the Tran- 
 fcriber of MS 4, (2 Kin. 15, 17) finding fome 
 Copies had irVW Ozihu and others IHHTV Ozri- 
 hu, has inferted both ; and as Camb. MS i has 
 mtf Maotb and m/2tf Amoth, in Ezek. 45, 2 -, 
 and laftly, as in \heprinted Text of Ifaiah 12, 2, 
 are inferted n* Jab and mJT *$tbwdb\ fo here 
 may have been inferted both nt^lO Mo/he and 
 
 I ihall now fubjoin one general Obfervation, 
 which contains a folution of the following Dif- 
 ficulty. It will perhaps be urg'd, as a prefump- 
 tion in favour of the prefent Reading, not only 
 in this paflage but alfo in fome others, that the 
 printed Heb. Text is fometimes the fame with 
 the Sam. in words here fuppos'd corrupted. In 
 anfwer to which Objection it muft be obferv'd, 
 that wherever there is Reafon and fufficient Evi- 
 
 dence
 
 On i C H R O N. XI ?r. 435 
 
 dence for proving a word corrupted -, there, if 
 the prefent Sam. and Heb. Copies agree, their 
 agreement may be accounted for by fuppoiing 
 that fome Samar. Copy has, in thefe inftances, 
 been either taken from, or made conformable to 
 fome Heb. Copy, which in fuch inftances had 
 been corrupted. The Defcendants of the Sama- 
 ritans being a people very few in number, their 
 Copies of the Law were probably few in pro- 
 portion. And as we know but little of their hif- 
 tory, their few Copies may have been render'd 
 defective and imperfect thro' time and accidents ; 
 and fuch Defects may have been fupplied by 
 their having recourfe to an Heb. Copy, and 
 tranfcribing in the Sam. character fo much as 
 would compleat their own Copy or Copies. That 
 this may have been the cafe, will be thought 
 probable by every reafonable Enquirer; when 
 he confiders the manner in which moft Copies 
 
 of the Sam. Pentateuch have been fent us 
 
 fcarce any, perhaps not one very ancient Copy, 
 that is entirely tranfcrib'd by the fame hand, and 
 is perfectly free from that mixture of Vellum 
 and Paper, and of earlier and later writing, 
 which are fo obfervable in the Bodleian Copies. 
 See the ft ate of the 3 Perefcian MSS, in the Pre- 
 face to the Paris Polyglott ; and of the 2d Ora- 
 torian MS, in F. Houbigant, pag. 183. 
 
 If
 
 436 DISSERTATION 
 
 If this fliould not be univerfally the cafe ; if 
 there mould be now extant in Europe any an- 
 cient Sam. Pentateuch, compleatly tranfcrib'd by 
 the fame hand, and perfectly prelerv'd ; yet that 
 Harlaan Copy, which was pubiifh'd by Mori- 
 nus and republim'd by Walton (the only Copy 
 publim'd hitherto) does not feem to be preferv'd 
 thus compleatly. For F. Houbigant obferves, as 
 to this very MS plura folia infima parte lace- 
 ra y & fqualida longo ufu atque tritu. Prolegom. 
 pag. 184. And (pag. ijo) he tells us, that this 
 fame MS has been correSled; which, if it has 
 been corrected with no more Judgment than the 
 Heb. MSS, will be no argument in its favour : 
 his words are Emendationes in eo Codice quadam 
 funty nan quidem ad Margmem, ut bodiernis Heb. 
 fere Jit in Codicibus^ fed ipfo in Context* collocate : 
 nimirum Sam. Defer iptor opusfuum relegeru, litu- 
 ra delet eas litteras, qncefcribi non debuiffent^ quas 
 autem fcriptum oportuerat, eas atramento eodemfu- 
 pra "oerbum^ minori forma, fuggerit. From this 
 condition of the Sam. Pentateuchs one may pre- 
 fume, that fome Words, and perhaps Sentences, 
 may have been tranfcrib'd from Heb. Copies, ei- 
 ther in fome of the Sam. Copies now extant, or 
 in fome Copy more ancient (but now loft) from 
 whence one or more of the prefent Copies may 
 have been deriv'd. 
 
 But
 
 On i C H R O N. XI c. 437 
 
 But this will, perhaps, be thought certain; 
 when we obferve, that in the 3d verfe of the pre- 
 ceding paiTage we have 2 words rn ttftf which 
 make one of the 1 5 inftances mention'd in the 
 Mafora, as words writ together, but to be read 
 feparately : and we find them writ as one, in 
 MSS 4, 6 3 n, 13, &c. and in Athias's printed 
 Bible. Now this Conjunction obtains alfq in the 
 Sam. MS, NO. 47 ; and how are we to account 
 for this ftrange Uniformity in Error ? Whence 
 this improper Conjunction of the fame 2 words ? 
 That it was introduc'd into the Sam. from an 
 Heb. Copy, which had that Conjunction, is 
 highly probable at leaft j and efpecially, as this 
 feems to be the cafe in a few other places. To 
 inftance only in one. It has been remark'd, on 
 
 Gen. 31, 53 that the words Om^tf TlStf 
 
 have been interpolated, both in the later Heb. 
 and Sam. Copies j but can any man think, that 
 thefe words were interpolated in both by the ve* 
 ry fame accidental blunder ? Certainly 'tis more 
 prefumeable, that fome old Sam. Copy was fup- 
 plied in this verfe, from fome old Heb. Copy, 
 that had been here interpolated : a Solution , 
 which may be given of every other Difficulty of 
 the fame nature. But, perhaps, fome Miftakes, 
 common to both Copies, may be fo ancient ', as 
 not to want this Solution. 
 
 I i i JOSH.
 
 438 DISSERTATION 
 
 JOSH. 6, 7. MSS 2, 5, and Camb. i, 2, read 
 here *>2tf '1 G? *//#// ; undoubtedly right, becaufe 
 the Speaker is Jo/hua: and this fame Reading 
 obtains alfo in the Text of Erfurt MS i , which 
 has in the Margin nEN'l G? dixerunt 5 on which 
 Michaelis, ftrongly prejudiced in favour of the 
 Mafora, injudiciouily remarks per per am & con- 
 tra Maforam. The Eomberg and Complut. Edi- 
 tions read ^Djn- 
 
 The celebrated y^ Leufden lias here a cu^ 
 rious Note (a fpecimen of many others) in which 
 he tells us // would not be abfurd ( that is, in 
 his opinion ) to fay, that there is intended in thi$ 
 word A DOUBLE LITERAL SENSE, a plur.fenft 
 denoted by the Letters, and a fmg. fenfe by the 
 Points : i. e. here are two Literal fenfes, one ex- 
 prefs'd by the Letters, and the other not exprefs'd 
 by the Letters ! How profoundly judicious is this 
 rigid Advocate for the printed Heb. Text, and 
 what a keen Inveftigator of double fenfes ! Ha4 
 he liv'd in tbefe days, he had been a celebrated 
 Maker out of many Meanings -, for, if he had fail'd 
 in Spiritual fenfes, he would in full proportion 
 have exceeded in Literal. 
 
 JOSH. 10, 24. All the printed Editions and 
 fome MSS, without any marginal variation, read 
 
 here
 
 On i CHRON. XI Gfr. 439 
 
 here KID^nn with an tf at the end, exactly like 
 a verb in Arabic -, a form this, which occurs in 
 the Heb. Bible only in this and i word more. 
 The exigence of this tf feems entirely owing to 
 the miflake of fome Arabian Tranfcriber, who 
 inattentively exprefs'd thefe 2 verbs in the way 
 of his own language : and many inflances of this 
 kind are obfervable in other places. F. Houbi- 
 gant^ pag. 55 Si qua etiam verba Librarius 
 fecerat fcribendo vel Chaldaica vet Arabica, ne ejus 
 quidem generis Emendator caftigabat; quia linguam, 
 in qua natus erat> Chaldaicam aut Arabicam no- 
 rat, Hebraicam parum intelligebat : atque inde ac- 
 ridity ut Heb. in Codicibus et Chaldaifmi complures 
 G? Arabifmi quidam Jtnt, quos Hebraica lingua 
 numquam ufurpavit. MSS 2, 4, 5, 20, and Camb. 
 MS 2, read "obnn ; and MS 2 reads totf vokte- 
 runf, which, in Ifaiah 28, 12, is printed Kl^JC. 
 In this fame ch. of Jofhua, MS 20 has verfes 
 29 and 30 writ and pointed twice. 
 
 JOSH. 1 5, 47. The true reading Tnjn is found 
 in the Text of MSS 2, 5 ; and in the Erfurt 
 MSS i, 2, 3. This 'was the reading in Camb. 
 MS 2, and is in MS i. This laft MS, in ch. 
 1,3, has iTIT (pointed) inflead of TDDi; fee 
 ch. 14, 9 : in ch. 9, 13, inflead of rDn% it has 
 and, in ch. 22, 4, 1VD1 inflead of Jjfll. 
 I i i 2 In
 
 440 DISSERTATION 
 
 In ch. 15, 60, MS ^2 omits the word rHp the 
 2d time; and has {?# 6, inftead of DTltP 2. 
 
 JOSH. 1 8; 12, 14, 19. The verb jrn is print- 
 ed ftng. in thefe 3 verfes, tho' it agrees ( or ra- 
 ther, mould agree) with the fame plur. noun, 
 MS 2 reads Vffi in the 2 laft verfes ; and, if it 
 mould be plur. in all 3, (as the Senfe and even 
 the Pointing determine ) then probably there has 
 been fome affimilating art {hewn here, agreeably 
 to what has been obferv'd, pag.4i7. Camb. MS 
 i has the word plural, and MS 2 had, in all 3 
 verfes. The plur. noun mould be writ yrntflfln 
 (inftead of VDNtfn) in verfes 12 and 14, and it 
 has the 2 Vaus properly in ver. 19; but in this 
 laft verfe the pronoun has (in Van Hoogbt's Edit. 
 but not in Walton's Polyglott, nor in the Bomb, or 
 Complut. Editions) been improperly added to it 
 by Affimilation, becaufe the fame noun had the 
 pronoun fuffix'd to it in the 2 former inftances. 
 MS 2 has ver. 1 6 of the following chapter twice ; 
 the words of the Repetition being dotted, agree- 
 bly to the obfervation on Numb. 3, 39. 
 
 JOSH. 21 ; 36, 37. We have here the moft 
 convincing Proof of the Fallibility of a Jewifli 
 Tranfcriber, and of the Imperfection of the Ma- 
 fora. That the Tranfcriber and his Rule have 
 
 fail'd
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 441 
 
 fail'd frequently in the cafe of Letters and Words^ 
 has been obferv'd already ; and we have here an 
 inftance of the failure of Both in Two Whole Ver- 
 Jes Two Verfes, which, tho' certainly genuine., 
 have been omitted in many MSS and in many 
 printed Editions. 
 
 In this chapter the Hiftorian gives an account 
 of the 48 cities, which were given by lot to the 
 Levites; to the Kohathites 23, to the Gerfhonites 
 13, and to the Mer antes 12. In ver. 7 we are 
 told, that the Tribes, out of which were allot- 
 ted cities to the Merarites, were Reuben, Gad and 
 Zebulun. All the cities allotted to the Kohathites 
 are enumerated firft, then all thofe allotted to 
 the Gerfhonites ; and then, from ver. 3 5, are enu- 
 merated the cities allotted to the Merarites, after 
 which lafl enumeration we are told in ver. 40 
 So all the cities for the Merarites were TWELVE. 
 But tho' it be certain, from the particular nature 
 of this whole enumeration, that all the 1 2 cities 
 of the Merarites were at firft mention'd; and 
 though it be certain, that they are all exprefly 
 nam'd in the Greek, Syr. Arab. ./Ethiop. and 
 Vulg. Verfions, and alfo in fome copies of the 
 Chald. Paraphrafe ; yet it is equally certain, that 
 Four of thefe cities have been omitted in many 
 MSS : and, becaufe they were omitted in the 
 particular MS or MSS, on which the Mafora 
 
 was
 
 442 DISSERTATION 
 
 Was form'd (and confequently are not allow'd 
 genuine by the Mafora ) they have been omitted 
 in the printed Bibles of Buxforf, Leufden> Van der 
 Hooght y Micbaelis, and many others. 
 
 The Verfes, thus furprizingly omitted, are the 
 36th and 37th in the London Polyglott, and in 
 the Englifh Bible are exprefs'd thus And, out 
 of the tribe of Reuben, Bezer with her fuburbs, 
 and yahazah with herfuburbs j Kedemoth with her 
 fuburbs, and Mephaath with herfuburbs : four ci- 
 ties. Thefe then are the Verfes, which ( as re- 
 mark'd pag. 325) are found in the Bodleian MS 
 NO. 5 ; and they are alfo in NO. 62. This laft 
 MS has thefe' verfes in the fame manner, as they 
 are in fome of the printed Editions j but it makes 
 for the additional honour of the Bodleian MS, to 
 have preferv'd them more compleat and entire, 
 there being Four Words in that which do not ap- 
 pear in any other Heb. Copy. According to this 
 MS then thefe verfes are ntf plan ntDODl 
 
 enjiD n^ nvn ntf rrcnn tht TV 
 JIKI mo-Tp HK : rrtsn^D n^i 
 ony nt^ua n^i nyfl3 nxi 
 
 out of the tribe of * Reuben , Bezer with herfuburbs, 
 to be a city of refuge for the flayer, and Jaha- 
 zah with her fubtfrbs &c. 
 
 That the words to be a city of refuge for the 
 JIayer are genuine, is ilrongly prefumeable from 
 
 the
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 443 
 
 the Greek Verfion, which has here TW trctXiv r * 
 <f)vy&miytw rx <povdj<myT(&. But it is made cer- 
 tain by the ,/th and 8th verfes of the preceding 
 chapter, which tell us there were 6 cities of 
 Refuge, 3 on each fide Jordan, of which Bezer 
 was one ; and yet, though the other 5 cities are 
 mention'd in this chapter as cities of refuge, Be- 
 zer is not mention'd as fuch, excepting in this 
 MS I fpeak here only of the MSS before- 
 mention'd. Camb. MSS i and 2 have thefe ver- 
 fes in the Margin. 
 
 R. Kimchi, who liv'd about 500 years lince, 
 tells us, that he never found thefe verfes in any an- 
 cient corrected MS i. e. he never found them in 
 any ancient MS, that had been corrected by the 
 Maforetic Standard. It would have been furpri- 
 zing if he had, fince the Mafora does not ac- 
 knowledge them ; and therefore a flanch Mafo- 
 retic Corrector muft have eras'd them, where- 
 ver he found them. The truth feems to be, 
 that thefe Verfes had been (on account of the 
 Samenefs of fome Words ) accidentally omitted 
 in fome Copy, or Copies, tranfcrib'd or correct- 
 ed by R. Hillel ; and that the part of the Mafo- 
 ra, which reckons all the Verfes in Jofhua as 
 656 (in (lead of 658) was form'd upon this Co- 
 py of Hillel, or a MS tranfcrib'd from it ; and 
 fo thefe Verfes have been fmce eras'd in fome 
 
 Copies
 
 444 DISSERTATION 
 
 Copies and excluded from others by Maforetic 
 Authority. I mall only add to the preceding 
 Proofs of the Authenticity of thefe Verfes, that 
 they are univerfally read in i Cbron. 6 ; 78, 79 ; 
 which, upon comparing the places, teems a clear 
 proof, that they were originally read alfo in Jof- 
 bua : tho' their exiflence in Cbron. has been ab- 
 furdly urg'd as a reafon, why they mould not be 
 in Jof/ma. 
 
 JOSH. 22, 34. MSS 2, 4, and Camb. MSS i, 
 2, 3, between the 2 lail words of this verfe, read 
 Kin ; which not only gives an Emphafis (the 
 Lord HE is the God) but is exprefly confirm'd 
 by the Chald. Paraphrafe. And indeed this feems 
 to have been a common Form of confeffing tho 
 belief of the One True God ; thus in i Kin. 1 8, 
 
 39, DnStfn Kin mrr &rbxr\ Nin nin. The 
 
 printed Text of this verfe feems farther deficient 
 - And the Reubenites and the Gadites called the 
 altar ( Syr. The altar ofwitnefs) for it foall be a 
 witnefs betwixt us, that the Lord he is the God. 
 The Englifli Tranflators have inferted the word 
 *7J? Ed (Witnefs) which is put in the margin of 
 Plantin's Heb. Bible, and is confirm'd by the 
 Syr. Arab, and Vulg, Verfions. Kimchi quotes 
 the Chald. Paraphrafe, as having the word TnD 
 (teftis) twice j, which, if read in two places for- 
 merly,
 
 On i CHRON. XI ' Gfr. ,445 
 
 merly, has been lately omitted in one as ma- 
 ny other alterations have perhaps been made in 
 it, in conformity to the later copies of the He- 
 brew Text. 
 
 JOSH. 24, 30. Should we read in an Eng. Hif- 
 tory, that the renowned Marlborough was buried 
 at Blenheim near Woodjlock, and, a few pages af- 
 ter ( upon a 2d occafion of mentioning his Bu- 
 rial ) that he was buried at Bknmeih near Wood- 
 jlock 5 we mould conclude, that 2 letters had ex- 
 chang'd their places. And may we not allow 
 the fame, in this part of the Sacred Hiftory, as 
 it is univerfally printed ? Since it tells us here, 
 that Jo/hua was buried at Timnath-ferah in mount 
 Ephraim -, and yet tells us, in Judg. 2, 9, that he 
 was buried at T^imnath-heras in mount Ephraim ? 
 That D^H is tranfpos'd from mD, fee the Syr, 
 Ar. and Vulg. Verfions of "Judges. 
 
 JUDG. i, 22. Inftead of nM Camb. MS i has 
 'J3> which feems to be the better reading ; be- 
 caufe the Context is Dil D3 *]DV V7JH Et 
 afcenderunt (filii) Jofephi, etiam ipfi. It feems 
 alfo to have been >jn at firft in NO. 62. The 
 LXX have 01 yci, and fo the Arab. Verfion. In 
 ch. 15, 6, we read the Philijlmes burnt her and 
 her father with her. But MS 4, Camb. i, and 
 
 K k k Erfurt
 
 446 DISSERTATION 
 
 Erfurt i, 3, read .Tltf noi and her father's 
 houfe : the word fVi is confirm'd by the Gr. 
 Syr. and Ar. Verfions. MS 4 has alfo pfcfiDtP af- 
 ter DnS "lm in ver. 1 1 ; and fo have the LXX. 
 In ch. 1 6, 1 8, we read And Jhe called for the 
 Philiftines, faying^ Come up this once, for he hath 
 foeived me all his heart but according to the 
 Text of perhaps every printed Edition (except 
 the Complut. ) it is he hath Jhewed r~h her 
 where *k has been affimilated to rh juft before 
 it. 'Tis S mihi in MSS 2, 20, 21, and in Er- 
 furt i. In ch. 20, 13, we have the Points of a 
 word, without any Confonants j thefe being re- 
 mov'd to the Margin. But, as fome of our MSS 
 were antecedent to the Invention of this Myfte- 
 ry, or elfe their Writers did not enter into the 
 Spirit of it; MSS 2, 4, 20, and Camb. i, read 
 lii in the Text ; LXX c; vpi. 
 
 RUTH i; 8, 9, 1 1, 13, 19. In thefe verfes the 
 Pronouns are furprizingly corrupted. In ver. 8, 
 we read DDOV and tDD W inftead of pDV and 
 \rvwy in 9 and u, DD 1 ? for pS in J3> 
 |nbh twice for DH^H, and CDDD for pa in 
 19, DlWtP for ;nnt^, as it is \rhv juft after: 
 and indeed it is \wr\W in MSS 17, 23, and in 
 Erfurt 2, 3, 4. Here again Common Senfe is 
 infulted with a vindication of all thefe Miftakes. 
 
 For
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 447 
 
 For we are told, that fome of the Pronouns here 
 are maftuluKi tho' applied to Naomi's Daughters 
 in law; becaufe it was the undoubted intention 
 of the Sacred Writer to mark the rough and maf- 
 culine Difpofition of thefe Daughters. But then, 
 asjbme of the Pronouns here applied to them are 
 feminine ', are we not to fuppofe (lince contrario- 
 rum contraria eft ratio) that thefe fern. Pronouns 
 denote their female Soffnefs and Modejly ? And 
 how then mall we determine their real charac- 
 ters ? If there could be fuppos'd a perfon capa- 
 ble of anfwering fuch Queries, we might afk 
 farther Why is the Pronoun twice feminine y 
 (ver. 13) when applied to Naomi's Sons? Does 
 this Enallage of the Pronoun denote their gentle 
 Nature? But it happens unluckily, that thefe 
 Sons were never born, being here only talk'd of 
 or imagin'd ; and therefore, not being real Be- 
 ings, have no Nature at all. 
 
 RUTH 3, 3. Naomi fpeaks here to Ruth ; and 
 the Verfion of the printed Heb. Text is Thou 
 fialt wajh and anoint tbee, and I will put thy rai- 
 ment upon thee, and get me down to the floor ; but 
 make not thyfelf known &c. The confufion arifes 
 from hence, that, of 4 verbs in the preter tenfe, 
 2 are exprefs'd with a at the end in the zd per. 
 feminine j an irregularity occafion'd by the mif- 
 
 K k k 2 take
 
 448 DISSERTATION 
 
 take of fome Tranfcriber, who inadvertently ex- 
 prefs'd thefe 2 verbs in the Syr. form agree- 
 ably to the Obfervation on Jofh. 10, 24. MSS 
 5, 17, have both thefe verbs without the * ; MSS 
 2, 22, 23, 24, and Camb. i, 2, have thefirjl with- 
 out it : the Complut. Edit, has only the loft with 
 , but the Bomberg has it in neither of the 4 
 verbs, in text or margin. 
 
 Cappellus (pag. 143) fuppofes this proper, 
 to diftinguifh the 2d per. fern, from the 2d per. 
 rnafculine ; which are not elfe diftinguim'd in 
 Hebrew, except by the Points. But perhaps this 
 great Critic did not confider, that, by adding this 
 % the 2d p. fern, would be confounded with the 
 i ft p. both mafc. and feminine : and certainly 
 the fame form in the ijl p. both mafc. and fern, 
 and in the zd p. fern, would introduce much 
 greater perplexity, than the fame form in the fwo 
 zd perfons only. As this Miftake has been fre- 
 quently made in the later MSS, and has been 
 introduc'd from them into the printed Editions ; 
 it may be right to mew the confufion thence 
 
 J O 
 
 ariiing, and to vindicate the Heb. Language, 
 which totally difclaims it. The Heb. form is 
 founded upon jufl reafoning and ftrict proprie- 
 ty ; having i form for the i ft p. both mafc. and 
 feminine, for the 2d p. both mafc. and feminine, 
 and 2 forms different from the preceding and 
 
 from
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 449 
 
 from one another for the 3d p. mafc. and femi- 
 nine. Thus in Greek, Lat. and Eng. tyu, ego, /, 
 mafc. and fern. w, tu y thou, mafc. and fern. 
 but CWTOS CWTYI, ilk ilia, hejhe, to exprefs the 3d 
 perfons. The propriety of this Diftinction is e- 
 vident. But, would there be propriety, if (for 
 inflance) the Pronoun /was to fignify/ (Man) 
 and / (Woman) and Thou (Woman) ? Certain- 
 ly not. And as the Heb. language knows no 
 fuch abfurdity, let no fuch be faften'd upon it, 
 merely becaufe a blundering Tranfcriber has ex- 
 prefs'd feveral verbs improperly not that the 
 fame confufion attends the Syr. language as does 
 the Heb. in this inftance; becaufe verbs in the 
 i ft p. have no Yod either in the Syr. or Chald. 
 languages. 
 
 RUTH 4; 4, 5. Ruth having claim'd Boaz for 
 her 2d hufband ; and Boaz having refolv'd to be 
 fo, if her nearer kinfman mould decline it ; he 
 here addrefles this kinfman concerning Ruth and 
 her Inheritance, which were to go together 5 but 
 begins with propofing the latter. The words, as 
 they are printed, are ftriftly thus 3. And he 
 faid, Naomi fellcth a parcel of land, which was our 
 brother Elimelech's. 4. Therefore IJatd, I would 
 /peak unto thee, faying ; Buy it, before the elders of 
 my people. If then thou wilt redeem it, redeem it ; 
 
 but
 
 450 DISSERTATION 
 
 but if he will not redeem it, tell me that I may 
 know : for there is none but thee to redeem it, ex- 
 cept me who am after thee. And he faid, I will 
 redeem it. 5. Then faid Boaz, On the day thou 
 buyejl the land of the hand of Naomi, I will alfo 
 buy it of Ruth the Moabitefs &c. 
 
 The Miftakes are Stf^ (ver. 4) inflead o 
 as it is read in MS 23, and Erfurt 3 ; and as it 
 was read by the Authors of all the ancient Ver- 
 fions ntfOl (ver. 5) fhould be n*O> the a be- 
 ing inferted here by way of Affimilation to TD 
 juft before j the Prepofition, which is abfolutely 
 deftructive of the fenfe, is not acknowledg'd by 
 the Syr. and Vulg. Verlions and in this fame 
 verfe JT3p fhould be n^p, as the Punctuation 
 fhews it was formerly in the Text ; and as it is 
 now in MS 22. Thefe Errors being corrected, 
 the fenfe will be regularly thus If then thou 
 wilt redeem it, redeem it-, but //'thou wilt not re- 
 deem it, tell me, that I may know : for there is 
 none but thee to redeem it, except me 'who am after 
 thee. And he faid, I will redeem it. Then faid 
 Boaz, On the day thou takejl the land of the band 
 of Naomi, thou muft alfo take Ruth the Moabitefs 
 &c. See ver. ioj and Cappellus p. 144 and 362. 
 
 i SAM. 2, 3. The Eng. Verfion fuppofes 2 
 miftakes in this verfe that the negative par- 
 ticle
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 451 
 
 tide Stf is omitted before tf, becaufe we find 
 it in the Gr. Syr. Chald. and Ar. Verfions and 
 that K^l fhould be 171, as in the Keri -, and in- 
 deed it is iVl in MSS 2, 4, and Camb. i, 2. In 
 ver. 1 6 we have the contrary miftake of "p for 
 xS ; as in the Gr. Syr. Ar. and Vulg. Verfions : 
 Camb. MS 2 and Erfurt i, 3, read here yh. 
 
 It has been obferv'd on Lev. 5, i, that both 
 thefe readings are fometimes thrown together in 
 one word tfiS which happens to be render'd non. 
 But in ch. 10, 19, where we have 17 for tf^> 
 MS 2 and Erfurt i have both 17 and {**?. In 
 this latter inftance Samuel refers to ch. 8, 19, 
 where it is ^JD Dtf O tih T\W\ ; but here it 
 O iS n^Kns and, inch.i2, 12, ntDKm 
 K? *S where, as >S is not acknow- 
 ledg'd by the Gr. Syr. and Ar. Verfions, we may 
 prefume it to be an alteration of ^ infer ted as 
 above-mention'd 5 efpecially, fince ~> is not point- 
 ed, as an authentic word, in MS 2. When fome 
 Defenders of the Integrity of the printed Heb. 
 Text have been prefs'd with the argument of 
 Var. Readings call'd Keri; they have replied, 
 that fuch marginal Notes were not fo properly 
 Var. Readings, as Explanations of obfcure words 
 in the Text. But, is there obfcurity in the words 
 iS and K^ non ? Or can thefe words, in any 
 poffible fenfe, be explanations of each other ? Yet 
 
 Leufden
 
 452 DISSERTATION 
 
 Leufden tells us (on i Sam. 2, 16) *fa dpoteft ex- 
 plicari per tf^ nequaquam / 
 
 i SAM. 12; 5, 10; and 13, 19. The fame verb 
 is here printed fing. inftead of plural. In the ift 
 inftance the Mafora conjeftures y that the word is 
 wrong ; as in 1 1 other places. In the 2d in- 
 ilance, the Punctuation and Keri {hew the word 
 to be corrupted ; MSS 2, 4, 5, 25, read now 
 YIDN'1 ; excepting, that the i has been eras'd in 
 N. 5 : Camb. MSS i, 2, are alfo plural. And 
 in the 3d inftance, befides the Punctuation and 
 Keri, MSS 2 and 5 read riSK ; tho' the T has 
 been eras'd in the latter: here alfo the fame 
 Camb. MSS are plural. 
 
 i SAM. 14, 14. And the fojl Jlaughter, which 
 Jonathan and his armour-bearer made^ was about 
 20 men, within as it were an half acre of land, 
 which a yoke of oxen might plow. By the ma- 
 ny words in a different character, inferted to 
 piece out the fentence, we fee our Tranflators 
 did not well know what to make of the con- 
 cluding words : and no wonder, fince they are, 
 when literally tranflated about 20 men y as in the 
 half of a furrow of a yoke of ajield. 
 
 The learned Mr. Hallet^ in his Notes on pecu- 
 liar Texts of Scripture, 3 Vol. 8. (which I had 
 
 not
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 453 
 
 not feen, till the firft part of this DifTertation 
 was finifh'd) has prepar'd the way to the Cor- 
 reftion of this PafTage, and has happily explain'd 
 many others. The LXX y fays he, (vol.2, p. 21) 
 read the Hebrew in a different manner , and have 
 render d the verfe thus, That firft flaughter was 
 of about 20 men with darts, and ftones, and 
 'flints of the field. I fuppofe, fays he, they read 
 D*3kPO j what 'word they read inftead of 
 
 y, which they render flints, / cannot conjee- 
 ture. 
 
 As there feems to be great Probability fo far, 
 it remains to correft the word "ratf, render'd by 
 the LXX xo%Aa. And the Arabic language has 
 preferv'd a word fo compleatly expreffing the 
 fenfe of the word in this place, and fo nearly re- 
 fembling it in its letters, that it feems likely to 
 have been the very word in queftion it is 
 ^.-*-A. ("103) Si lex minor is generis; and Golius 
 gives /Ua. Si/ices -, both from the verb j*s* de- 
 dit pruinam ignis , and project f lapilhs feu filiculos y 
 qui ^\.4.s>. Zjimar dicuntur : Gol. and Caftell. As 
 this fo exactly hits the fenfe (Jonathan and his 
 Servant deft roy ing 20 Philiftines by throwing 
 Stones and Flints) probably it was the very word. 
 The true reading then will be 
 
 : me? 
 
 IV oA/, O 6V 7KT()oohQlf, KOJ( IV X0%fat TTlx. 
 
 Lll ISAM,
 
 454 DISSERTATION 
 
 i SAM. 1 6, 23. The word for &fuit (which 
 is the fenfe here ) muft be rvi or rrrVl ; and, 
 for the honour of MS 2, it was originally writ 
 *m here - y tho' fome late Corrector has eras'd it 
 and put nm in the margin. In ch. 17, 7, ^n 
 fagitta is properly ^y lignum, in MS 2. In ver. 
 33, this MS reads *rn David inftead of Sltfty 
 Saul. In ch. 20, i, this fame MS properly reads 
 J-rWD, inftead of f-pUD. And in ver. 2, the 
 words rc&y vh non faciet have been corrupted 
 into T\W ib ei fecit : All the ancient Verfions 
 read properly. MS 2 is ftill regular -, but MS 5, 
 tho' that alfo was right at firft in both words, 
 has been abfurdly corrected in both : MS 4, and 
 Camb. 2, have the 2d word right, reading iS 
 rw -, and Cd/. i has the ift word right, read- 
 ing ntPy ife Inverts, the word ^nn mould 
 be DWn, not being in conftrudt j and fo it is 
 now read in MSS 2, 5, and Camb. 2 : and it 
 fhould be fo read in ver. 36 and 37 : fee ver. 20 
 and 21. In ch. 23, 10, MS 4 has 2 letters in- 
 ferted from the line under; which are left un- 
 eras'd mn DB TH 
 
 It was obferv'd, pag. 122, that j-jetf, 2 Sam. 
 i, 22, fliould be jiiDi ; and it is JIDJ in MS 2, 
 in Camb. i, 2, and in Erfurt i, 3. This laft MS 
 and Camb. i read peftVon in ver. 24. 
 
 2 SAM.
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 455 
 
 2 SAM. 5, 2. The participle K$IB, which (it 
 was fuppos'cl, pag. 24) mould be N'2"lSn> is fo 
 writ in MSS 2, 4 and 5 ; MS 5 reads die verb 
 alfo properly JTn : and Camb. MS 2 has rrn 
 tf'iSm tf'ysn. MS 4 has 4 letters from the 
 line above 5 which, tho' the Tranfcriber found 
 he had improperly inferted (by leaving the word 
 unfinim'd, as in the preceding inftance) are left 
 uneras'd N'SISn nnn 
 
 mrr 
 
 2 SAM, 6, 6. Our celebrated ProfefTor of the 
 Oriental Languages ( whofe Name is juftly ho- 
 nour'd by the Learned for giving new Life to 
 Oriental Literature amongft us) has communi- 
 cated to me his Conjecture, that there is here an 
 Omiffion ; fince, inftead of \TM htf Hi V 
 the Original Reading more probably was 
 
 \r\$ W 11* n nrv- The words n 
 
 numfuam are fo neceffary to the Senfe, that they 
 are inferted in the Eng. Bible; and, that they 
 were formerly in the Heb. Text, is evident, not 
 only from the Chafrn made by the Omiflion of 
 them, but alfo from their being found in all the 
 ancient Verfions. 
 
 As there has been a Miftake then in the words 
 expreffing Uzzah's Crime ; fo has there been in 
 
 L 1 1 2 the
 
 456 DISSERTATION 
 
 the next verfe, which exprefles his Punimment. 
 His Crime was, that be put forth his hand to the 
 Ark ; and we naturally expect to read that x 
 the Lord fmote him, becaufe he put forth his hand 
 to the Ark. This Reafon indeed is not exprefs'd 
 in the Heb. Text ; but it is in the Syr. and Ar. 
 Verfions. The Heb. Text reads Sfc?n Sv ; and 
 the noun *?' occurs no where elfe. But, had 
 fuch a noun been ever found, fignifying Error 
 or c lemeritas ; it certainly would have had the 
 pronoun here fuffix'd to it. The Vat. and Aid. 
 Editions of the Greek Verfion omit thefe words ; 
 but the Alex. Edit, has ( inferted ) n zrpoTriTtict, : 
 words, which feem to have been adopted into 
 this Copy from Theodoret. For Nobilim fays 
 Theodoretus proponent quczjlionem^ cur Oza Jit a 
 Deo percujjus^ ac narrans quofdam putaffe eum de- 
 dijje p&nas r^ arpcfl-gr&$-, videtur indicare hanc 
 dictionem non fe habuiffe in Scriptura. Proba- 
 bly then the Syr. and Ar. Veriions have pre- 
 ferv'd the true reading ; according to which the 
 Text will be and the Lord fmote him *\w$ ty 
 IT HK n^ty becaufe he put forth his hand. So 
 that we have here 2 letters tranfpos'd, and i 
 chang'di S&'H for nS^. The parallel place, 
 i Chron. 13 ; 9, 10, ftrongly confirms both thefe 
 Corrections; for there we read DN NtV rhw\ 
 JT and afterwards w H^ n^'K 7^ 
 
 2 SAM.
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 457 
 
 2 SAM. 7; 23, 24. Among all the methods of 
 difcovering the errors in the prefent Heb. Text, 
 the beft is to compare parallel places \ the great 
 ufe of which lias been already demonftrated, and 
 will the more fully appear, the more carefully 
 fuch places are compared. The verfes, parallel 
 to thofe here referr'd to, are iChro. 17; 21, 22; 
 and the following Comparifon of them will dif- 
 cover fome Corruptions not Variations only, 
 but Corruptions properly fo call'd. For this 
 Thankfgiving, or Prayer, of David was fpoke 
 in only one certain manner ; confequently where 
 two Copies of it exprefs the fame Parts in a dif- 
 ferent manner, it may be prefum'd that one of 
 the Copies is there corrupted. 
 
 BI C. 
 
 i DitrSi ovS iS ^^ 5 ^ DnW s. 
 CDV iS rwfl 1 ?. D'nS^n C. 
 *?njn DD^ mtrvSi s. 
 c. 
 
 on^oo iS nns ntrK ny s. 
 DHXDD nnfl nir^ "jov C. 
 S-ity> HDV nN *]S pom s. 
 &c. tDy *] SN-I^ IDV n^ inrn C. 
 
 There being miftakes here in both Copies, I 
 fliall fubjoin vrh&'Jeeau to have been die true 
 
 Text;
 
 458 
 
 Text ; for certainly both Places, as they contain 
 the fame parts of one and the fame Appeal to 
 God, muft have been one and the fame originally. 
 
 DP DIDI oy i 
 -py ':SD en:b mtf-iw rrbnjn 
 1 pom : EartTiWl DU DH>DO *]S nns 
 &c. nni D^iy ny ovS "jS Wn^ IDV n^ 
 
 And "what one nation on earth is like thy people, 
 
 like Ifraell 'whom God went to redeem for a people 
 
 to himfelf, and to make himfelf a name, and to do 
 
 for them things great and terrible., to drive out 
 
 from before thy people (whom thou redeemed^ to 
 
 thee out of Egypt) the nations and their gods ! And 
 
 thou haft confirmed to thyfelf thy people Ifrael, to be 
 
 a people unto thee for ever -, for tbou, JEHOVAH, 
 
 baft been their God. 
 
 I mall now compare the Variations, with 
 which the Name of God is exprefs'd in thefe 2 
 Copies of David's Prayer. 
 
 1. S. 1 8. P?W *J1tf Adonai Jehwab 
 C. 1 6. CDTtW miT Jehovah Elohi?n 
 
 2. S. 19. m!T U"Jtf Adonai Jehovah 
 C. 17. D'nStf Elohim 
 
 3. S. 19. PT1ST ^1^ Adonai Jehovah 
 C. 17. D^n^^ mn* Jehovah Elohim 
 
 4. S. 20. mn* *J1^ Adonai Jehovah 
 C. 19. niiT Jehovah 
 
 5. S.
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. , 459 
 
 5. S. 22. Dn^ mn Jehovah Elohim 
 C. 20. mil* Jehovah 
 
 6. S. 25. D'H^tf miT Jehovah Elohim 
 C. 23. ^ mrv ^ Jehovah 
 
 7. s. 26. Wn^Sy onW rwny -n 
 c. 24. SNT^ o;nW Stntf* >nStf nitfntf -n 
 
 8. s. 27. ^KW nW m^r mn 
 c. 25. nW 
 
 9. S. 28. nifT 'i"I^ Adonai Jehovah 
 
 C, 26. mn* Jehovah 
 
 10.8.29. riin* ^*T^ Adonai Jehovah 
 
 C. 27. miT Jehwab 
 
 The firft Remark on thefe ftrange Variations 
 may be, that >Htf Adonai, being a word of very 
 inferior dignity ( us'd by a fervant to his mafler ) 
 is a mean word to be fubflituted inftead of 
 THAT NAME, which is above every Name, the 
 awful and incommunicable Name JEHOVAH. 
 That the Jews have fuperftitioufly omitted the 
 latter, and fupplied it by the former, has been 
 obferv'd pag. 1 58 and 321. And from fome pla- 
 ces it appears, that where they have retain'd the 
 word JEHOVAH, they have put in Adonai before 
 it, to ftrike the Reader's eye firfl, and fo to pre- 
 vent his pronouncing the word JEHOVAH after 
 it. We have here feveral inftances, in which 
 the words DnStf miT have been chang'd into 
 a $ appears from Chronicles, where 
 
 the
 
 460 DISSERTATION 
 
 the word UTK is not found once j but even in Sa- 
 muel the words CD'rfttf mns are preferv'd in 
 the 5th and 6th inftances. That the words in 
 the i ft inftance were formerly in Samuel, as 
 they are now in Chron. appears from the Syr. 
 Verfion, the Vulgat and the Chald. Paraphrafe ; 
 which fame Authorities are uniform in the 2d, 
 3d and 4th inftances. That Chron. had former- 
 ly mn* in the 2d inftance, may be prefum'd 
 from the Ch. Paraphrafe j and that it had Q'nW 
 in the 4th, is confirm'd by K.VP& o eio? in the 
 Gr. Verfion. As to the 7th inftance, the words 
 ^NIEP *nW have perhaps been inferted by mif- 
 take -j for they are not in Sam. and feem redun- 
 dant. The 8th inftance feems greatly defective 
 in Chronicles. And the pth and loth inftances 
 feem to have been QnW mn* in both Copies ; 
 Camb. MS i has it fo in ver. 28, in Samuel. In 
 the fix places in Samuel now mn* *yitf, the 
 Points belong to D'nW mn*; fo that tbefe 
 were certainly the words, when the Points were 
 firft invented : and thefe are now the words in 
 the Chald. Paraphrafe. I fhall only add, that 
 there appears to be a neceffity for allowing 
 that, in thefe 2 Copies of the fame Prayer, fpoke 
 once only, the preceding Invocations were at firjl 
 the fame. 
 
 2 SAM.
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 461 
 
 2 SAM. 8; i &c. The Advantages of thus 
 comparing parallel places being obvious, I mall 
 give a farther fpecimen; that we may at once 
 fee, what Miftakes obtain in the printed Heb. 
 Text, and how this Method molt happily difco- 
 vers them. The parallel place is iChro. 18, i &c. 
 
 iD nNn JDD HK nn npn s.i. 
 T rrnm ru DK npn-C.i. 
 am p itrnn n n-n 71 s. 3 . 
 nrrnn HK nn in 0.3. 
 -inn IT n^nS inaSa 8.3. 
 
 nnn in yvrh inD^n nnan 0.3. 
 y:uri ^W IJOD -m -TD^I 8.4. 
 v^n aDn )SK HOD "im taSn 0.4. 
 6. Sn tr'K ^ onwi oKn3 8.4. 
 6. S;n ts^N n^ on^yi DBHS C.4. 
 7. - PPDI on^i Davi m s. 6. 
 
 J. plTDni DnKl "7TT C.6. 
 
 npS nrvnin ny >ninDinDaai 8.8. 
 npS irnin nv pDoinnntsoi c.8. 
 
 17- JIND nann nt^m in s.8. 
 
 16. JIKD nnn npm TH c.8. 
 18 :IDID nn^i DOHD "ina p 8.17. 
 
 mum 17 JIDID N&WI DUHD nn^K p C.i6. 
 in m nSflni mom yTin p s. 18. 
 
 nnn p 0.17. 
 
 VH D3HD S.i 8. 
 
 M m m With-
 
 462 DISSERTATION 
 
 Without remarking all the differences in thefe 
 paflages, it may be obferv'd in general that I 
 by no means fuppofe every Variation here to be 
 a Corruption, and yet that I cannot fuppofe thefe 
 paflages uncorrupted. Are we to believe, that 
 the fame man is properly call'd Hadadezar and 
 Hadarezer or Ahimekcb and Abimelech &c. 
 Are we to fay, with Bp Patrick that Metheg- 
 ammab in Sam. is expounded to be Gatb and its 
 territories in Chron. or, that 700 in Sam. and 
 7000 in Chron. agree in fenfe, only the number 
 in Sam. is exprefs'd by an Ellipjis ? Other In- 
 terrogatories might be put, and the impoflibility 
 of fuppofing the Text entire in thefe paflages 
 might be largely infifted on. But as judicious 
 Remarks have been made on fome of thefe Mif- 
 takes by Mr Hallet, I mall only mention one. 
 The Text in Chron. tells us, that David took 
 1000 chariots, and 7000 horfemen, and 20000 
 footmen: but in Sam. that David took 1000 
 ( what ? ) and 700 horfemen, and 20000 footmen. 
 The Omiffion of the word 32T\ chariots feems 
 indubitable : LXX ^iA<<* apfictTa. But, how are 
 we to account for the furprizing Variation in the 
 Numbers -, fmce niKD V2W 700 and rWZV 
 D'fiStf 7000 differ widely in letters and flgnifi- 
 cation. We have here then another Confirma- 
 tion, of what was fuppos'd, fag. 96 &c. that the 
 
 Jews
 
 C?2 i C H R O N. XI &c. 463 
 
 Jews formerly exprefs'd the Bible Numbers by 
 fmgle Letters, and then the miftake is eafy 
 t being 7000 and \ 700. The fame miftake oc- 
 curs in 2 Sam. 10, 18 700 J, which in iChro. 
 19, 1 8, is 7000 t. Will any other Hypothecs 
 fo naturally folve this repeated Difficulty ? 
 
 2 SAM. 11,3. The proper names in the pre- 
 ceding inftances feem to have been originally the 
 fame 3 tho' fome of the letters are now different, 
 and others are tranfpos'd. But if fuch Tranfpo- 
 fitions have not been yet prov'dfalfy, le^ us try 
 another fpecirnen taken from this verfe. 
 Batbjkeba, the daughter of ELI AM. 
 
 pyStf ra yap ni 
 Stf'ay ra jw m 
 
 Bathjhua, the daughter of AMI EL. 
 This laft line is from i Chron. 3, 5, where the 
 fame woman, and (I fuppofe) her fame father are 
 intended j fince the letters of the father's name 
 are exaftly the fame in both places j with the al- 
 moft unparallel'd Tranfpofition of the 2 firft let- 
 ters put laft, and the 2 laft letters put firft. 
 
 In ch. 14, 26, what is printed 200 Jhekels af- 
 ter the king's weight, or more litterally (pX3) 
 the king's ftone, is in MS 2 Spfc'l after the kings 
 Jhekel, or according to the royal Jhekel ; fo the Gr. 
 Verlion tv ru putha TU @eun\au*. In ch. 1 6, Camb. 
 
 M m m 2 MS
 
 464 DISSERTATION 
 
 MS i reads the i4th and 15th verfes thus (fee 
 the Syr. and Arab. Verfions ) 
 
 in 
 
 2 SAM. 22; 13, 14. This fublime Song is in- 
 ferted alfo in the Book of Pfalms ; and we have 
 reafon to rejoice, that it is fo. For a careful 
 Comparifon will difcover, in each Copy, fome 
 Miftakes, which now obfcure its original Glory. 
 The verfes, above referr'd to, are thus exprefs'd. 
 1 3 . Through the brightnefi before him 'were flames 
 of fire kindled. 14. The Lord alfo thundred from 
 heaven, and the mofl High uttered his voice. But 
 in Pfalm the i8th thus. 13. At the brightnefi 
 of his prefence his clouds removed : hail-Jlones, and 
 coals of fire. 14. The Lord alfo thundered out of 
 heaven, and the Higheft gave his thunder : hail- 
 fanes, and coals of fire. However different thefe 
 verfes may be at prefent ; yet I prefume that 
 both Copies of this Thankfgiving were, here at 
 leajl, the fame originally. For let us compare 
 the prefent Heb. Text 
 
 "nja "nju mjD s. 
 
 TO n^y vnv nja HJID P. 
 
 Two great Miftakes, one in each Copy, now dif- 
 cover themfelves. That the words V\2V V^y 
 are wanting in Sam. feems evident ; becaufe the 
 
 2 He-
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 465 
 
 2 Hemifticks are not otherwife compleatcd, and 
 becaufe y^y is acknowledg'd in Sam. by the Syr. 
 and Ar. Verfions. But, as the ift Hemiftick is 
 defective in Samuel, the ad is corrupted in the 
 Pfalm. For, what propriety is there in At 
 the brightness of his prefence his clouds removed -, 
 hail-Jlones and coals ofjire ? Were hail-ftones and 
 coals of fire removed a/fo ? And whence, and whi- 
 ther were they removd? And how, and at whofe 
 command did they exift ? In Sam. this laft He- 
 miftick is perfectly clear and regular At the 
 brightnefs of his prefence his clouds removed-, and 
 coals of fire were kindled: or they kindled into 
 coals ofjire. 
 
 The next verfe is very irregular in the Pfalm, 
 having 3 Hemifticks j the laft of which is not 
 at all exprefs'd in its correfponding verfe in Sa- 
 muel : wherefore we may prefume, fuch a 3d 
 Hemiftick is not original. And that it has been 
 interpolated, feems to be certain j becaufe, even 
 in the Pfalm, it is not found in the Vat. Aid. 
 Complut. or Alex. Copies of the LXX ; tho' in- 
 ferted in Breitinger's Edition of the latter, but in 
 a lefs character, and with an ^ Afterifk : and 
 not in the Old Italic Verfion, publifh'd by Blan- 
 chini. This Hemiftick then feems to have been 
 inferted into this verfe from the preceding, as 
 Cappeilus fuppofes : and the manner of this in- 
 
 fertion
 
 466 DISSERTATION 
 
 fertion is difcover'd to us by MS 5, which has 
 the Pfalms in HemLfticks, with a vacant Space 
 between them. In this MS the lines ftand thus 
 : ten Vrr:n TO my vay i-m nwo 
 
 : K Vmi *ra i^p jn pfyn mrv ooiia ojrvi 
 
 ; eaom m DTTQI ODM vxrr nVa"i 
 
 Whence it appears, that the 2d Hemiftick of 
 ver. 14 having been improperly writ clofe to the 
 I ft, a Vacancy was left in the place where it 
 fhould have been writ, which vacant Space was 
 afterwards fill'd up by repeating the words im- 
 mediately over it, to prevent a Difcovery of the 
 Writer's carelefnefs. 
 
 Let me now entreat the Reader to confider 
 this Ode attentively ; and perhaps he will view 
 the Greateft Image that was ever exprefs'd in 
 words. DAVID, overflowing with gratitude 
 to the Divine Providence, for delivering him 
 from his numerous and mighty Enemies, pours 
 forth his Soul in the ftrongeft exprefiions of his 
 own Mifery and of God's Majejly Diftrefs, Dan- 
 ger, Death, had every way furrounded him 
 he fupplicated God; and that fo repeatedly, fo 
 earneftly, that his voice afcended to Heaven, and 
 his cry enter'd the ears of the Almighty Then 
 the Earth mook, the foundations of the Hills 
 trembled; for God was wroth He bowed the 
 Heavens, he came down; Darknefs was under 
 
 his
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 467 
 
 his feet He rode, he flew upon the Cheru- 
 bim j he flew fwiftly upon the wings of the 
 Wind Darknefs was as yet his Pavilion 5 Wa- 
 ters furrounded, and Clouds concealed his Glo- 
 ry ! But the brightnefs of his Prefence foon 
 fcattered the Clouds 5 they removed, they kin- 
 dled into coals of Fire ! the blaze of Glory burffc 
 forth, and the whole Univerfe was in Flames ! 
 At the brightnefs of his pre fence his clouds removed - r 
 They kindled into coals ofjire. 
 Then JEHOVAH thundered in the heavens ; 
 And the moft High uttered his voice : 
 And he fent forth his arrows, and fcattered them ; 
 And he multiplied lightnings, and dejlroyed them : 
 And the channels of the fea 'were feen ; 
 And the foundations of the world were dif covered: 
 At thy rebuke, O JEHOVAH! 
 At the blaft of the breath of thy nojlrihl 
 
 2 SAM. 22, 23. This whole verfe is writ twice 
 in MS 25. In ver. 28 we read in Samuel 
 
 mrr n^ nnK o 
 
 Quia tu lucerna mea, o Jehovah. 
 But the Image here feems fo entirely unworthy 
 , of the Great Father of Lights, that we readily 
 prefer the reading in the parallel verfe 
 
 n: *vtfn nn*t o 
 
 tyia tu lucernam meam illuwinabis. 
 
 That
 
 468 DISSERTATION 
 
 That the verb Ttfn illuminabis was formerly al- 
 fo in Samuel feems evident from the Syr. and 
 Ar. Verfions ; and it is now in Sam. in MS 2, 
 and Camb. i . This laft MS, in ver. 7, has wsh 
 K^n between the 2 laft words; agreeably to the 
 Reading in the Pfaim, and to the Syr. and Ar. 
 Verfions here in Samuel. 
 
 2 SAM. 23, 4. This Song of David's feems to 
 contain a Prophecy of the Meffiah ; and will, I 
 prefume, be certainly determin'd to that impor- 
 tant Senfe, if a Various Reading in our Oldeft 
 MS NO. 2 mould appear to be genuine. It con- 
 cerns that remarkable part, which exprefTes the 
 light of the Morning and the rifmg of the Sun 
 
 tyw mt npa niNin 
 
 Etjicut Lux matutma orietur Sol. 
 If we take thefe words literally, are they Senfe ? 
 Is not the Sun the Light of the Morning ; 
 or, is not the Morning-light the only and certain 
 Effect of the Sun-rifmg ? And can a thing be 
 compar'd to itfelf , or the Caufe to its Effect ? 
 The Various Reading, which ( if true ) not only 
 frees us from this difficulty, but proves this paf- 
 fage to be prophetical, ftands thus 
 
 ew mrv mt npn mtoi 
 
 Etjicut Lux matutma orietur JEHOVAH SoL 
 This word niJT JEHOVAH is regularly writ in 
 
 the
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 469 
 
 die MS, as here exprefs'd j and, if the original 
 Reading, feems to have been omitted in other 
 Copies, on account of the Similitude of the ad- 
 joining words JT)t and miT. This Reading re- 
 ceives a ftrong Confirmation from the Greek 
 Verfion ; which it may be neceffary to compare 
 with the printed Heb. Text 
 
 HJJD may xh -ipa tra^ rrm ipn 
 
 LXX, Vat. Copy --- Kct/ tv (pun 0EOT 
 Ajo? TO <7r%u>i KTPIOZ stt^ijAjb' 
 and the Alex. K<z/ EV E n (par; 
 
 ^A/o? ro <7r?^ ^ TrxpyhQiV tx. Qiyfes. From 
 which Verfions, however unintelligible at pre- 
 fent in themfelves, an Argument arifes in favour 
 of the Reading in this MS. For in the Vat. E- 
 dition we have esof and Kvpog, and in the Alex. 
 Gee? ; words, which have nothing in the printed 
 Heb. Text to authorize or introduce them, and 
 feem only to be accounted for by this MS Read- 
 ing. According to which perhaps the Greek 
 Verlion flood originally thus KO/ gy ty&U (read- 
 ing TiNU ) srpa/ct? <*jweA o Kyp;(^ ( in another 
 Copy 0of ) c *jA;cf, TO "Tz-ptvi ov 9fttpj)iJfrty ( reading 
 11V, which is generally render'd by mppgfppfc 
 inftead of nnv or rTOV w<piAa/) >c <pgy&?. The 
 true Greek Verfion therefore feems to be 
 
 o Kvoiof o 
 
 <pcAist/ (ec ofTTj) e>c (p^&f, Tranlpofitions of words 
 
 N n n are
 
 470 DISSERTATION 
 
 are frequent in the prefent Gr. Verfion j which 
 in fome places is a Jumble of 2 or 3 different 
 rendrings of the fame word or words thrown to- 
 gether : which feems to have been the cafe here. 
 For the words gof and Kvpof feem to be diffe- 
 rent rendrings of the fame word niT or perhaps 
 of that and Q'n^tf writ in fome Copies inftead 
 of k ; and then both words have been tranfpos'd, 
 both remov'd from their place after mt, where 
 this MS and the Context require the word KVOIC? 
 ihould be flation'd : and indeed there the Senfe 
 is excellently illuftrated by its fituation 
 
 Efjicut Lux matutina orietur Jebovab Sol. 
 
 It is impoflible to read thefe words, without 
 recollecting the Allufion to them in Malachi 
 jhall the Sun of Righteoufnefs arife &c. which 
 words, in the original, farther confirm the Read- 
 ing in the MS. For in Malachi we have the 
 fame verb and the fame noun, as in Samuel ; 
 but with a remarkable difference in their Con- 
 nexion. In Samuel the Verb is mafculine y but 
 in Malachi feminine -, and as the phrafe feems 
 copied by the latter from the former, one might 
 have expected to find the fame Verb, when 
 join'd to the fame Noun, in the fame exalted 
 Image, carefully exprefs'd in the fame Form. 
 Hence alfo it is probable, that the word pnrv 
 was originally in Samuel -, as the Verb there is 
 
 mafcu-
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 471 
 
 mafculine, becaufe more immediately connected 
 with mtT than with jPDty. 
 
 Sam. Jhall Jehovah, the Sim, arlfe 
 Mai. Jhall the Sun of Righteoujnejs anfe 
 Jer. Jehovah, our Righteoufnefs. 
 Ifaiah 60, I. Arife, Jhine, for thy light is come-, 
 and the glory of Jehovah is rifen upon thee. 2. For 
 behold, the darknefs ftall cover the earth, and grofs 
 darknefs the people : but (pun* Hit*) JEHOVAH 
 SHALL ARISE upon thee, and his glory Jhall be feen 
 upon thee. 3. And the Gentiles Jhall come to thy 
 light, and kings to the brightnefs of thy rifmg. 
 I leave the Inference to the Reader, 
 
 2 SAM. 23, 8. It was fuppos'd, pag. 81, that 
 the word r"Q2to was inferted from the line a- 
 bove it ; which line was there fuppos'd to con- 
 lift of the following twenty nine letters 
 
 onrnn rnotp nS : raaa \*r\w *ptr trim 
 
 I find this Conjecture remarkably confirm'd by 
 MS 4; in which this line begins and ends in the 
 very fame manner ; and as this and the line fol- 
 lowing begin with the fame letters, as fuppos'd, 
 the words r"O^ 3tP fall directly under itnty* 
 filttO. The laft word in this verfe is, in this 
 fame MS, nntf ; as it was corrected in pag. 1 27. 
 ver. 9. TinKI was corrected to y*injO in pag. 
 133 j and it is fo writ in MSS 4, 5, 25, and 
 
 N n n 2 Comb.
 
 472 DISSERTATION 
 
 Camb. i. MS 5 and Camb. i read DH^n, as 
 fuppos'd pag. 135. ver. 1 1. The firft word is 
 here again yintfl (as fuppos'd pag. 140) in MSS 
 2,4,5,6,25,26, and Camb. 1,2. ver. 13. 'Tis 
 TWhW in MSS 2 and 4, as fuppos'd pag. 145 ; 
 Camb. i has p niT^n. ver. 17. 'Tis mnD 
 in MSS 2, 5, 26, and Erfurt MS i ; as fuppos'd 
 pag. 157. ver. 18. 'Tis n^St^n in MSS 2, 4, 
 and Camb. i ; as fuppos'd pag. 163. ver. 20. 
 The word Sflfl is compleat in MS 2, and Cora. 
 i ; and 'tis ^KHN in MS 5, and Camb. i ; as both 
 were fuppos'd pag. 168. ver. 21. 'Tis w>$ in 
 MSS 2, 4, 5 (in MS 6 tytf) and in Camb. i ; as 
 fuppos'd pag. 172. ver. 29. 'Tis *rSn in MS 
 2, as fuppos'd pag. 190. ver. 35. The Name 
 YYi'n feems to have been at firft HVn in MS 4, 
 and is fo in Camb. i -, as fuppos'd pag. 208. 
 
 2 SAM. 24, 13. We have here, deliver'd by 
 the prophet Gad, a moil folemn MefTage ; Da- 
 vid is commanded to choofe i of the 3 follow- 
 ing Judgments 7 years Famine 3 months 
 Flight before the Enemy or 3 days Peftilence. 
 But in i Chro. 21, 12, the Propofal runs more re- 
 gularly, ( not 7 but ) 3 years, 3 months, or 3 
 days. Can there be any doubt of a Miftake 
 here ? Did the prophet Gad deliver this MefTage 
 twice ? If only owe, did he propofe both 7 and 
 
 3 years
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 473 
 
 3 years of famine ? If 3 years, the number 7 is 
 wrong ; and if 7 years, the number 3 is wrong : 
 Common Senfe feems fully fufficient to deter- 
 mine fuch a point as this is. And yet we find 
 fome men, and even A-Bp Ufher in his Annals, 
 pleading for the Truth of thefe different Read- 
 ings ! And this, notwithstanding that Great Man 
 has exprefs'd himfelf fo ftrongly as to the Falli- 
 bility of Jewifh Tranfcribers Ad me quod atti- 
 net '; fententia me a htec perpetua fuit ^ Hebrceum Vet. 
 Teftamenti Codicem Scribarum erroribus non minus 
 effe obnoxium, quam Novt Codicem & llbros omnes 
 allos. De LXX Verfione Syntag. pag. 219* If 
 then one of the numbers be corrupted, the Uni- 
 formity of the number Tbree^ fKll obferv'd in 2 
 inftances in Samuel and in all 3 in Chronicles, 
 will induce us to prefume the 3 corrupted into 
 7 ; efpecially as the Greek Verfion has T/- ETJ? 
 alfo in Samuel. 
 
 The Advocates for the Integrity of the Heb. 
 Text may perhaps fay with their Champion 
 Buxtorf, as to the Differences of Bible Num- 
 bers Satius eft ignorantiam nojlram agnofcere^ 
 
 & UTRUMQUE RECTUM ESSE PIE CREDERE. 
 
 Hiftorice enim illce non funt it a accurate fecundum 
 
 omnes circumjlantias confcriptcs^ fed breves tantum 
 
 Epitome?. (Aitticrit. pag. 40 \) But, when the 
 
 fame Circumftances are mention'd in 2 places, 
 
 could
 
 474 DISSERTATION 
 
 could there be originally a Contradiction ? Or, 
 can we, with any appearance of fenfe, aflert that 
 3 is an hiftorical Epitome of 7 ? But yet we 
 fhall be told perhaps, that we had better adopt 
 Buxtorf's W[zx\m--Utrumque bonum, quia utrum- 
 que fcriptum -, (pag. 420) efpecially, as there is 
 great Weight in one of his Canons of Criticijm, 
 (pag. 414) Rei Veritas non in Verbis confijlit^ 
 fed in Sententid A Canon ! the moft wifely 
 eftablim'dj becaufe of its univerfal Influence ! A 
 Canon, that will excufe every blundering Afler- 
 tion, not only of its Author but of all the Fra- 
 ternity of Writers provided it be but true ; 
 which, I confefs, if a Sentence be composed of 
 Words^ I fhrewdly fufpecl: it is not. I fhall only 
 add, that the Contradiction here again feems to 
 have been occafion'd by the miftake of a Nume- 
 ral Letter J 3 for t 7. 
 
 i KIN. 9, 1 8. The name of the celebrated 
 ^D^H Tadmor (call'd by the Greeks Palmyra) is 
 exprefs'd ^DH Tamor in the Text of the printed 
 Editions; but the 1 is preferv'd in the Margin. 
 That this letter exifted formerly in the Text is 
 evident from the Gr. Syr. Ar. and Chald. Ver- 
 fions -, and particularly from 2 Chro. 8, 4, where 
 it is now *lD*rn Tadmor: MS 4, and Camb. i, 2, 
 read nsnn now in Kings. The poffibility of o- 
 
 mitting
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 475 
 
 mitting one letter will eafily be admitted ; efpe- 
 cially, when we obferve, that 13 words are omit- 
 ted in the i6th ver. of the preceding chapter; as 
 is evident from 2 Chro. 6, 4 &c. and that 18 
 words are omitted in Judg. 16; 13, 14; and 12 
 words in 2 Kin. 23, 16 j as is evident from the 
 Greek Verlion. 
 
 i KIN. 10, 1 1. Mention is here made o 
 Almug trees ; but in 2 Chro. 9, 10, thefe fame 
 trees are call'd Algum trees D'DIJ^tf by a tranf- 
 pofition of the letters j and Q ; for I fuppofe it 
 will hardly be faid, that thefe Trees were both 
 Almug and Algum. At ver. 22, MS 4 gives us 
 another inftance of a word taken in improperly 
 from the line preceding, in the following man- 
 ner DO 
 
 In ver. 34 of the next chapter we have yet a 
 more extraordinary inftance of improper Infer- 
 tion; there being the 3 following words fy*m 
 1 D^n yiV inferted in MS 21 -, and inferted from 
 ver. 38, at the diftance of 4 verfes. 
 
 i KIN. 1 1, 29. Inftead of nofctt Camb. MS i 
 has n^D^*l in ve/te. Should we find in any Lat. 
 Author the word Pe/timentum frequently repeat- 
 ed, and ftiould we fometiroes find the fame word 
 
 (or
 
 47 6 DISSERTATION 
 
 (or letters expreflive of the fame thing) writ 
 VeftineaUim> we mould correct the latter with- 
 out the lead fcruple. In the Heb. Bible we have 
 
 , 
 
 rcsbv (Shilmah) 16 times, and rtet^ ( Sbim- 
 lah) 27 times ; both fignifying veftis. I humbly 
 prefume it mould be rtoty (Sbimlah) univerfal- 
 ly, as it is here in this MS ; the Arab, verb J^,i 
 (Sbamal) is Vfftivit, totumfe operuit &c. Let us 
 only confider Exod. 22 ; 26, 27. Can we think, 
 that Mofes, in ver. 26, writ noW'; and, in the 
 very next verfe, rb%W as the words are now 
 printed r Since making the preceding Correc- 
 tion, upon referring to the Samar. Pentateuch, 
 I find the word there properly rtet^ (Shimlah) 
 in every place. 
 
 i KIN. 12, 7. The verb "DTI & dixit is pro- 
 perly fQTI Gf dixerunt in MSS 2, 4, and Camb. 
 j, as it is in all the ancient Verlions and in its 
 parallel place; and as the Senfe requires. But 
 what Guide is the Senfe to a Tranfcriber, who 
 perhaps did not underftand the Language he was 
 tranfcribing ? If he had, could he have.fono- 
 torioufly miftook Plurals for Singulars and Sin- 
 gulars for Plurals ? Another inftance occurs in 
 this very chapter in ver. 21 ; where we have 
 Wl1 & "cenerunt inftead of Km (or Kim) G? 
 ventf, as it is in MSS 2, 4, 5, Camb. i, and ori- 
 
 ginally
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 477 
 
 ginally in Camb. 2. (In ver. 10, Camb. MS i has 
 "D-in inftead of nEKD j but in ch. 13, 22, 
 inftead of "Ql : in ver. 16 this MS has "jntf 
 
 inftead of Hotf tfSl liltf : in ch. 21, 21, 
 JV* printed ^D 'JJfl : and in 2 Kin. 3,11, 
 i inftead of *f?D rex.) In ver. 33 there is 
 another extraordinary Miftake ^Tl^D pr<zter y 
 Inftead of 1^7/D we f or//? y^o, as it is in the Text 
 of MS 4, and Camb. i . This word is alfo right 
 in the Marginal Keri ; which, Leufden tells us, 
 we are by no means to fay is the truer Reading, 
 becaufe then the Text muft be allow'd to be 
 corrupted : but the Keri "O^D ex corde fuo only 
 explains what is meant by 11?^ prceter. Strange 
 indeed ! If it be true, that prater is explain'd by 
 ex corde fuoy it is in truth a marvellous Explana- 
 tion j and perhaps it is only to be paralleled by 
 ei explain'd by non ! 
 
 i KIN. 13, 20. We have here a Maforetic 
 Pi/ka or Hiafus, the little Circle of OmifTion be- 
 ing plac'd between the 2 words nl }n^'!"N 
 The Senfe is And it came to pafs> as they fat 
 at table that the word of the Lord came &c. 
 
 The Arab. Veriion only has the word here omit- 
 ted, which reads As they fat: at table and did 
 eat, that the word of the Lord came 6cc. In 2 Kin. 
 5, 9, MS 4 has a word taken in from the line a- 
 bove O o o
 
 478 DISSERTATION 
 
 rrsn nn 
 
 2 K i N. 14, 2 1. We have here the firfl men- 
 tion of the king of Judah, who fucceeded his 
 father Amaziah : I do not yet exprefs his Name ; 
 becaufe the Tranfcribers have made many diffe- 
 rent miftakes about it, which are now to be con- 
 fider'd. He is here call'd in the printed Heb. 
 Text HHty Azariah, or Ozriab ; but in the Syr. 
 and Ar. Verfions Uzia, which we mail foon find 
 to have been nearly his true Name. St Matthew 
 calls him oziAZ; and in the place parallel to 
 this of Kings ( 2 Chro. 26, i ) he is call'd irvty 
 Uziah, or ( more literally ) OZIHU. 
 
 This King is next mention'd in the firft verfe 
 of the next chapter, where the word is again 
 printed PlHtV Ozriab -, but MS 2 originally read 
 here properly iJTty Ozihu : the T has been lince 
 turn'd into part of a ^ in the word p added af- 
 ter it, and a little "> is put over the word by 
 fome late Corrector The Syr. and Ar. Ver- 
 lions here again read as before, and as they con- 
 tinue to do afterwards. In ver. 6 he is call'd 
 1iT"tfy Ozrjbu, a little nearer the truth, by hav- 
 ing the i at the end j but in ver. 7 it is again 
 HH?y Ozriab : in both thefe places MS 2 reads 
 it properly irW Ozibu. In ver. 8 it is again 
 
 printed
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 479 
 
 printed imW Ozrihu. But, tho' this MS was 
 right in ver. 6 and 7, where the printed Text 
 was doubly falfe ; yet in ver. 1 3 that fame MS 
 reads it wrong with a *i, where the printed Text 
 for the rft time is without the *i : MS 21, and 
 Camb. i, have no *\ here. In ver. 17 we relapfe 
 into the double Corruption of liTty into nHty j 
 where the Tranfcriber of MS 4, refolving to 
 have the true reading, has inferted both HHW 
 and rvtP 5 but unluckily neither of his readings 
 are true, for want of the ). In ver. 23 and 27 
 it is again nHiVj but in 23 Camb. i has the ). 
 In ver. 30 rvWs but MSS 2, 21, and Camb. i, 
 read here truly irvty j MS 4 has here a new Va- 
 riation limy. At laft, in ver. 32, even the print- 
 ed Text reads this Name properly iPVty Ozzbu, 
 as do MSS 2, 4, 5 and 21 : and in ver 34, the 
 printed Text again reads it properly in'tV- In 
 Chronicles the Name is truly liTtV 0.s/'/6# (all 
 the Verfions agreeing in the fame reading) in 
 2 Chro. 26; i, 3, 8, 9, 1 1, 14 and in ver. 17 
 appears the caufe of thefe many Blunderings, 
 which is, that the Tranfcribers have confound- 
 ed the Name of the King irvty Ozibu with the 
 Name of his Prieft inHtV Ozribu, who is men- 
 tion'd in the i7th and following verfes after 
 that, the King's Name is writ regularly in verfes 
 1 8, 19, 21, 22, 23 j and in ch. 28, 2. 
 
 O o o 2 But,
 
 480 DISSERTATION 
 
 But, can Freedom from Miftake be afcrib'd to 
 this printed Text of the Heb. Bible to the 
 Text, which thus perplexedly varies the name 
 of the fame Man, the name of the fame King, 
 of the fame remarkable King of Judah fo in- 
 confiftently miflakes it, as to call it firft Aza- 
 riab, or Ozriah ; then Ozriah ; Ozrihu\ Oz- 
 riah ; Ozrihu ; Oziah -, Ozriah ; Ozriah ; Oz- 
 riah -j Ozia ; OZIHU; OZIHU; and O z i H u 
 univerfally in Chronicles ; excepting in i Chro. 
 
 3^ I2! 
 
 The learned Carpzovius tells us, (Crit. Sac. 
 
 Vet. Teji. p. 789^) that Azarias and Vfias are 
 2 Names (he mould have faid, that n^tV and 
 IHHty and irVty are 3 Names) plainly different, 
 of one and the fame Perfon. But I refer it to 
 the moft avowd Admirer of Carpzovius, whether 
 he can poffibly fuppofe Ozihu and Ozrihu and 
 Ozriah to be 3 different Names, i. e. 3 Names 
 all regularly writ, and properly expreffive of the 
 fame Perfon Or, if he mould find afcrib'd to 
 the fame Critic in the fame book the words 
 Carpzovius, Carpzorvius and CarpzG c oiu> whether 
 he would not think them, whether he would not 
 declare he thought them to be one and the fame 
 ivord) erroneoufly exprefs'd by fome very falli- 
 ble Scribe or Printer. 
 
 2 KIN.
 
 On iCHRON. XI &c. 481 
 
 2 KIN. 19, 23. Inftead of 
 
 MSS a, 21, and &UH. i, read niiT finn 
 ITD ISNm : and in this fame verfe MSS 2, 5 
 and 2 1 read r^p, and Camb. i has i^p, which is 
 wrongly printed np. The fame 3 MSS have 
 the word niNltf which is furprizingly omitted 
 in the printed Text, ver. 31. In ch. 23, 33 in- 
 ftead of "]*?D1 MS 2 reads properly ^SoDr In 
 ch. 24, jo, this fame MS, and Camb. i, 2, in- 
 ftead of Hiy Ppy afcendit fervi read properly 
 '"DV 1 7^ afcenderunt fervi ; and at ver. 8, MS 2 
 reads n^S'tf 3, inftead of niDiy 8. (fee pag^So) 
 I fliall only add here, that ch. 25 of this book 
 is parallel to ch. 52 of Jeremiah ; and that, who^ 
 foe ver will compare them, will find many Va- 
 riations , and fome Corruptions; one of which 
 feems to be the Infertion of 3 words in the 
 laft verfe, in the Copy of Jeremiah. 
 J 1n B hi 1DV1 DV im Kin. 
 
 t vn a SD inio DV ny IDVI .DV nil Jer. 
 
 Kin. a daily rate for every day y 
 Jer. a daily rate for every day, until the day of 
 Kin. all the days of his life. 
 
 Jer. his death, all the days of his life. 
 It muft be remark'd, that the words in Jere- 
 miahy until the day of his death, as they feem to 
 be a moft unneceflary Tautology, and are not 
 
 in
 
 482 DISSERTATION 
 
 in Kings ; fo they are not in Jeredttab, in our 
 Oldeft MS. 
 
 i CHRON. i, 36. Tho' there are many Corrup- 
 tions in this chapter (and fome of them are cor- 
 reded by the MSS) yet I mall only mention 
 one. This verfe is printed ---- The fons of Eli- 
 phaz - 3 Tcman, and Omar, Zephi, and Gata?n, Ke- 
 naz> and Timnah, and Amalek. But Timnah was 
 the concubine (not the fon) of Eliphaz, and the 
 mother ( not the brother ) of Amalek j and Eli- 
 phaz had only 6 fons ; (fee Gen. 36; 1 1, 12, and 
 pag. 376:) fo that there muft be a miftake here. 
 And yet, as the printed Heb. Text is, fo is the 
 prefent Greek Verfion, Vat. Edition ; fo the Syr. 
 Verfion; fo the Latin; but not fo the Arabic. 
 For the Arabic Verfion has here the true read- 
 ing and Timnah,, 'which was the concubine of 
 Eliphaz the fon of Efau, bear him Amalek : and 
 thus the Alexand. Copy of the Greek Verfion 
 
 rov 
 
 i CHRON. 2, 18. Here we read pn^n p 
 
 nti n^ f ^ nmrv n^ n^Sin Et Caleb, fi- 
 
 lius Hezron, genuit Azubam mulierem & Jerioth 
 render'd by the Eng. Tranflators And Ca- 
 leb, the fon of Hezron, begat children of Azubah 
 his wife and of Jerioth. But, omitting the words 
 
 infert-
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 483 
 
 inferted in a different character, it will be And 
 Caleb begat Azubah 'wife and Jerioth ! That A- 
 zubah was Caleb's wife, appears from ver. 19; 
 and the true reading here feems to be preferv'd 
 in the Syr. and Ar. Verfions ---- And Caleb begat 
 'Jerioth by Azubah his wife. And therefore, (as 
 Noldius tells us, that ntf fometimes fignifies de or 
 ex) there needs but the following Correction 
 
 j nw nNi TOK nmry DK T^IPI 
 : nw n maw miry rut Vnn 
 
 i CHRON. 4, 3. And THESE are the FATHER 
 of Etam, yezreel and Ijhma and Idbafo. This is 
 the true Verfion of the printed Hebrew ; and if 
 words ever wanted fenfe, they do fo here. Doubt- 
 lefs, inftead of 13$ pater, the Original MS had 
 '32 flit ', agreeably to all the ancient Verfions. 
 In 2 Chro. n, 18, we read that Rehoboam took 
 him to wife Mahalath^ p THE SON ofjeri?noth! 
 And muft this Nonfenfe too be afcrib'd to EZRA ! 
 Every reader will fuppofe it to be, not SON, but 
 DAUGHTER in the ancient Verfions j and it is 
 rfofilia in MSS 2 and 5. Leufden has here this 
 very odd Note Forte per p (with a Pathah) 
 hlc intelligitur uterque fexus ! 
 
 i CHRON. 6, 57. And to thefom of Aaron they 
 gave the cities ofjudah, namely, Hebron a city 
 
 of
 
 484 DISSERTATION 
 
 of refuge. But fuch a Licence to infert words at 
 pleafure cannot be allowable. The printed Heb. 
 Text literally fignifies And to the fens of Aaron 
 they gave cities of Judah refuge Hebron and Lib- 
 nah &c. The true Reading here will be eafily 
 recover'd by comparing this verfe with its paral- 
 lel, J0/&.2I, 13 
 
 vy ntf una jron pn nSi Jom. 
 
 mirr ny n urn prut nSi chro. 
 
 rwu& niKi fran HK rcnn oSp Jofli. 
 
 pnnn nj< oSpDn chro. 
 
 We fee now, that, as the Senfe abfolutely dif- 
 allows the word rnilT Judah ^ fo it is alfo re- 
 jected by its parallel place j and it was never writ 
 here in Chronicles in MSS 2, 5, nor in Camb. i, 
 2, 3 : nor indeed is it in the Bomberg or Com- 
 plut. Editions, We fee alfo, upon this compa- 
 rifon, that *vy has been improperly made ny 
 by Tranfpofition ; fmce but one City of refuge 
 is here exprefs'd or meant. And laftly, from 
 the parallel place, and from the Syr. and Arab. 
 Verfions here, we learn that JTtiHJlQ flNI and 
 her fuburbs mould alfo follow the word 
 Hebron. 
 
 . 8, 29. As the Genealogies of the 
 other Sons of Ifrael have been given, in the pre- 
 ceding chapters, this gives the Genealogy of Ben- 
 
 jamin ;
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 485 
 
 jamin ; and therefore here the Genealogies might 
 be naturally fuppos'd to end. But, at the 3 5th 
 verfe of the next chapter, we have ten verfis of 
 Benjamin's Genealogy ; which were originally 
 the fame with the ten verfes of this chapter, be- 
 ginning at this verfe. 'Tis difficult to account 
 for the Repetition of thefe verfes, provided they 
 were repeated originally ; but if they have only 
 been repeated thro' the blunder of a Tranfcriber, 
 it is eafy to affign the caufe of it. And this caufe 
 is the exiftence of the fame words in the verfe pre- 
 ceding thefe verfes here, and alfo in the verfe 
 preceding them in the next chapter. But, how- 
 ever thefe verfes were introduc'd into the next 
 chapter, the Repetition of them affords an un- 
 anfwerable argument againft the Prefervation of 
 every Heb. Letter j iince feveral Miflakes may be 
 corrected by the Repetition. 
 
 In ch. 8, 29, we read, that the Name of the 
 Wife of feme one ( whofe Name is omitted ) was 
 Maachah-, but in ch. 9, 35, that the Name of 
 the Sifter of Jehiel was Maachah : yet it is not 
 Sifter y but Wife> even in this 9th chapter, in all 
 the Ancient Yerfiom y and in MSS 2, 4, 5, and 
 Camb. i, 2. In ch. 8, 30, "0 Ner is omitted 
 In 8, 31, mSpD Michloth is omitted ; as is 
 the end of the word preceding it In 9, 40, we 
 read Jonathans fen was ^yn ano and Sy^ HO 
 
 Ppp What!
 
 DISSERTATION 
 
 What ! Mcri-baal and Merib-baal ! Are thefe a- 
 gain different Names of the fame man, and both 
 expreis'd properly ? Credat Carpzovius. But ch. 
 
 8, 34, forbids this notion, by reading in both 
 places Syi ana Merib-baal In 8, 35, we 
 read jntfn Tarea, which fame man is, in 9, 41, 
 jnnn ^Tachrea ; after which laft word, 
 Achaz is omitted In 8, 36, he have r 
 Jehoadah twice j who, in 9, 42, is twice call'd 
 my Jarab. Strange Miftakes thefe ! and their 
 number might be augmented but I mail only 
 add, that ^D in 8, 38, mould have been alfo in 
 
 9, 445 as appears from MS 2, 
 
 i CHRON. 1 1. On this Chapter I fhall be a lit- 
 tle particular. In ver. I, inftead of *vn Stf 
 MS 4 had at firft TI^S. In ver. 2, MSS 2 and 
 6 have Sy before the laft word. MS 53, after 
 H>tf"W DK> has nmn nil S^ interpolated 
 from ver. i. In ver. 3, MS 5 has the word "jSftrT 
 before TH, as was fuppos'd pag,26. MS 53 has 
 no l before p"On> and inferts the word TJ} be- 
 tween l ?mCP and n^"TD. In ver. 5, MS 7 omits 
 *J2iTV. Gz^. i has ptfH after OtT. MS 53 
 reads Stf , inftead of j<7. In ver. 6, MS 7 omits 
 
 Svn IB^I t^^nS rrrv. MS 53 has 
 
 inftead of rtilKWD. In ver. 8, MS 53 
 
 ?rnn for rvn. MS 58 has ovn for nyn. 
 
 In
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 487 
 
 In ver. 1 1, MS 7 has Dnn^n, but MS 53 
 MS 2 omits SSn. In ver. 12, MS 53 has 
 for nt8P7CO * n ver - J 3> MS 53 has ttfrtOTfi for 
 DTltrSsm. MSS 2, 7, 53 and 58 have DHVtT 
 without the 1, as was fuppos'd pag. 141. In ver. 
 14, MS 53 has p^nn for npSnn. In ver. 15, 
 MSS 7, 53 and 58 read "nvn- Camb. 2 has p 
 before and after nc^n. In ver. 16, MS 58 has 
 -C'tf for ttf. In ver. 18, MSS 7 and 58 omit 
 the ii firft words. MS 5 has "OKBH for itfirn- 
 MS 7 omits IN^I. MS 58 has mrp 'ish for 
 mri'S. In ver. 19, MS 7 omits Dmtyfln O. 
 MS 53 reads nv^vS DWP for rwya nSa. 
 In ver. 20, MSS 2, 5, 7, 53 and 58 read proper- 
 ly B>:JNI. MS 53 has w for 3NV. MS 2 has 
 ntf between n^H and trN"). MS 58 and Camb. 
 2 have 1^1 for ^TJ as corrected pag. 163. In 
 ver. 21, MS 53 has Ty for *TW In ver. 22, MS 
 7 has n for S'n, which word is omitted in MS 
 53. In ver. 23, MS 7 omits t^n PHO tyN 
 
 nvon im n*:Kn. MS 58 has r\yh for SK. 
 
 In ver. 24, C(/w^. i, after the 2 firft words, has 
 WJrO- MS 7 has N^l for iSl. In ver. 25, MS 
 53 has *K&0VI 131 for |C^h p, and Niim 
 for r<m. MS 58 has Sm for hw. In ver. 26, 
 MS 58 has D'Snn for D^HH- MS 53 lias tftry 
 for SKHW. In ver. 27, MS 53 has IQE? for 
 MS 2 has nnnn ; as was fuppos'd pag. 
 Ppp 2 181,
 
 DISSERTATION 
 
 1 8 1. In ver. 28, MS 53 has ppy for wpy. In 
 ver. 29, MSS 7 and 53 have Sy for Sy. In 
 ver. 30, MS 7 omits TISltMH PHya p "iSn. 
 In ver. 31, MSS 7 and 58 have TIN for Tl'tf. 
 MS 58 has mynJD for nynjJE, and :iy-|Dn for 
 OlfttnDn. In ver.32, MS 2 has ^ms for 
 In ver-33, inftead of 'DriPOn MS 2 has 
 and MS 5 'smnn. MS 2 has the laft word 
 'jSny^n. In ver. 34, MSS 5, 7, 27, 53, and 58 
 have mi? for N;J^. In ver. 35, MS 53 has NTIN 
 for DNTltf. MS 5 has Tin for ^K. In ver. 39, 
 
 MS 2 has jioyyn. MS 7 has mn^n for 'man. 
 
 MS 53 has ^D vmnn ^tri nm. In ver. 40, 
 MS 2 omits nrvn j*l^. In ver. 42, the word 
 tfW is writ Ktt^ in MS 7, in MS 53 Njrttf, 
 and in MS 58 nr&'. In ver. 43, MSS 2 and 5 
 have DDtrinn for tDflPVV In ver. 44, MS 7 has 
 KW for JW. MS 2 has 'mnfcWDiT MS 53 
 has aty for ys^. MSS 2, 5, 58 have W'Vn for 
 S WV MS 7, inftead of Hjnyn, has ly-iyn i 
 but MS 53 nvnyn. In ver. 45, MS 7 has 
 ^>jn* by tranfpofition for ^{cyn ; and fo MS 
 5 nNVI for KnV% In ver. 46, Camb. 2 has m*1 
 twice. MS 53 has 2?hx for hwhto ; and, in- 
 ftead of n^^VI, has ^irn ; MS 7 reads it iTH^VV 
 Laftly, in ver. 47, for priori faffim, MS 7 
 reads nmXDn b*MW1* Thefe then are fome, 
 but not all, die Various Readings in this One 
 
 Chap-
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 489 
 
 Chapter; and the Inference from hence, as to 
 the peculiar exachiefs of the Jewifh Tranfcri- 
 bers, I leave to every Reader. 
 
 N. 21, 17. We have already had one 
 Name varioufly corrupted, the Name of king O- 
 zihu-, and we have here another Specimen, e- 
 qually, if not more furprizing. We read Je- 
 horam had no fon left him, Jave tntfin* Jeboabaz, 
 or Ihuahaz. Should we read in any ancient Hif- 
 torian, that Philip, king of Macedon, had no 
 Son but Ander-alex-y and mould we foon after 
 read, that he was fucceeded by this fame Son 
 Alex-ander, and that this Alex-ander acted fo 
 and fo, and that this Ander-alex died in fuch a 
 year 6cc. mould we not conclude, that fome 
 Printer or Tranfcriber had plac'd the 2 laft fyl- 
 lables firft, and the 2 firft laft? But, can this 
 poffibly be the cafe with a Jew?/?} Tranfcriber ? 
 Perhaps, it may. I have already pointed out 
 fome extraordinary Tranfpofitions ; but the moft 
 extraordinary now prefents itfelf 
 
 1H t n K abax-ihu 
 t n tf in* / h u - a h a z 
 
 That the true Name of this king was iJTtrttf A- 
 bazibU) is certain from his hiftory in Kings; 
 which it may be proper to refer to in the firft 
 place. In 2 Kin, 8, 24, he is firft call'd innntf 
 
 Aha-
 
 490 DISSERTATION 
 
 AJjazibu ; the Greek Veriion reading owQag, and 
 the other ancient Verfions regularly the fame. 
 ver. 25, 26, 29, the fame ch. 9, 16, JTtntf A- 
 laziah, without the i - ver. 21, Abazihu-, fo 
 again Ahazihu in ver. 23 j and yet the very 2d 
 word from this is Abaziah : ftrange Inconfiften- 
 cy ! ver. 27 and 29, Abaziah ch. 10, 13 - y 
 and ii j i, 2; four times Ahazihu but juft 
 after the laft Aloazihu is Ahaziab : which 2d 
 Name however is Abazibu in the Carnb. MSS 
 I, 2. Let us now trace this Name in Chronicles. 
 2 Chro. 21, 17. Here his Name is tflNliV JZwtf- 
 haz -, yet the Veriions declare here for Ahazihu 
 ch. 22; i, 2, three times Abazibu ver. 6, 
 IHHty Ozribu, a new variation from Ahazihu -, 
 but here alfo the ancient Verfions are all for A- 
 bazihu. (The Name Ozrihu has been already 
 difcover'd to be given to the King, when it be- 
 long'd to his Prieft -, and here 'tis given to the 
 King> when it belong'd to one of his Captains-, 
 fee ch. 23, i.) In the very next verfe it is a- 
 gain properly Aloazihu In ver. 8, 9, 10, u, 
 'tis 7 times Ahazihu Yet in ch. 25 ; 23, 25, 
 he is twice call'd tnxirV Ihuahaz. But in the 
 verfes parallel to thefe (2 Kin. 14; 13, 17) the 
 firft reads, not Ihuahaz, but Ahazihu. To which 
 ( as it is perhaps the only place elfe, where the 
 Name occurs in thefe books) mull be added 
 
 i Chro.
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 491 
 
 i Chro. 3,11; and there, in the lift of the Kings? 
 of Judah, he is properly call'd Ahazihu. 
 
 2 CHRON. 36 j 22, 23. This Book of Chroni- 
 cles is extreamly valuable ; not only, as it con- 
 tains fome articles of Hiftory not mention'd elfe- 
 where, but as it gives us many true Readings^ 
 which are loft in the Older Books of the Bible. 
 The 8 firft Chapters contain the feveral Genea- 
 logies ; firft, of the Line, in which the Promife 
 of the Meffiah was convey 'd down to Jacob> and 
 then of his 12 Sons to David: and the reft of 
 the Book gives us the Jewifh Hiftory, from Da- 
 vid to the Babyloniih Captivity. At this great 
 Period of the Jewifh Monarchy and Grandeur, 
 we might have expected to find this Extract from 
 the Public Regifters to have been concluded. But 
 there are now Two Verfes at the end of it, which 
 are fo far from being chronologically connected 
 with the preceding, that they mention, and but 
 juft mention, the Decree of Cyrus. 
 
 I fay but jujl mention it j becaufe they begin 
 that memorable Decree, but leave it unfinijh'd', 
 breaking off in the very mid/I of a Sentence, in a 
 manner perhaps unparallel'd. Had the Decree 
 been given complete here; one might have read 
 it, both here, and immediately after, at the be- 
 ginning of Ezra, with Propriety and Pleafure. 
 
 But
 
 492 DISSERTATION 
 
 But as only Part of it is thus imperfectly fub- 
 join'd to Chronicles, perhaps it may be pardon- 
 able to confefs a Sufpicion that thefe 2 loft ver- 
 Jes of Chronicles have been added improperly that 
 fome Transcriber having finifh'd the Book of 
 Chron. at ver. 21, he, without leaving the dif- 
 tance ufual between different Books, writ on the 
 beginning of Ezra j but that, finding his mif- 
 take, he broke off abruptly ; and fo begun Ezra 
 at the cuftomary diftance, without publifhing 
 his Error by erafing or blotting out thofe Lines, 
 which he had carelefly fubjoin'd to Chronicles. 
 That the Reader may the better fee how ftrange- 
 ly this book now ends j let us compare this Con- 
 clufion with the Beginning of the next book: 
 which will at the fame time difcover a few mif- 
 takes. 
 
 C. Now in thefrft year of Cyrus , king of Perjia y 
 E. Now in the Jirji year of Cyrus y king of Perfia> 
 C. (that the word of JEHOVAH Q by the mouth 
 E. (that the word of JEHOVAH D by the mouth 
 C. of^TVGTV 'Jeremiah might be accomplished) JE- 
 E. of rVD"V Jeremiah might be accomplished ) JE- 
 C. HOV AH flirred up the fpirit of Cyrus> king of 
 E. HOV AK Jtirred up the fpirit of Cyrus, king of 
 C. Perfia-jfo that he made a proclamation through- 
 E. Perfia;fo that he made, a proclamation through- 
 
 C. out
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 493 
 
 C. out all his kingdom, and he put it alfo in wri~ 
 E. out all his kingdom , and he put it alfo in wri~ 
 C. ting, faying "Thus faith Cyrus, king of Perjia. 
 E. ting, faying "Thus faith Cyrus, king of Perjia. 
 C. " JEHOVAH, the God of heaven, hath given me 
 E. " JEHOVAH, the God of heaven, hath given me 
 C. " all the kingdoms of the earth ; and he hath 
 E. " all the kingdoms of the earth ; and he hath 
 C. " charged me to build him an houfe in Jerufa- 
 E. " charged me to build him an houfe in Jerufa- 
 C. " lem, which is in Judah. Who is there among 
 E. " lem, which is in Jvdab. Who is there among 
 C. " you of all his people? nin* JEHOVAH, his God, 
 E. " you of all his people? n Let his God 
 
 C. "be with him; and let him go up 
 E. " be with him; and let him go up to Jerufalem, 
 C. 
 E. " which is in Judah ; and build the houfe &c. 
 
 We now fee the Break, with which the book 
 of Chronicles has been long made to conclude 
 
 let him go up to Jerufalem 5cc. 
 
 But, if this be a furprizing Conclulion of any 
 fmgle Part, how much more furprizingly mufl 
 it conclude the whole Bible ! For Chronicles has, 
 for many Centuries, been plac'd the laji Book, in 
 the Hebrew MSS. But, as the place of the o- 
 ther Books is known to have been varied ; fo 
 this Piece of Cyrus's Decree, thus inattentively 
 
 q fub-
 
 494 DISSERTATION 
 
 jfubjoin'd to the end of Chronicles from the begin- 
 ning of Ezra, is fufficient to perfuade us, that 
 the Book of Ezra once follow'd that of Chroni- 
 cles. In Camb. MS 3, Chron. is follow'd by the 
 Pfalms, as it is alfo in the Vatican MS mention'd 
 Tom. 4, pag. 628 of Blanchini's Evangel, quadru- 
 ple* : and, in Camb. MS i, Chron. is actually fol- 
 low'd by Ezra. 
 
 JOB 42, 2. The Speech of God to Job being 
 finifh'd (in which the Divine Power is defcrib'd, 
 with the utmoft Magnificence of Language) Job 
 now makes his own Confeflion / know, that 
 thou can/I do every thing &c. I mould prefume, 
 upon the Authority of the ancient Verfions and 
 the Nature of the Context, that the verb, now 
 printed DVT novi/ti, was originally TUH* now, 
 as it is order'd to be read by the Keri. But this 
 Reading is alfo confirm'd by MSS 2, 5, 23, and 
 by Camb. MS 2. Tis therefore ftrange, that 
 Mr. Profeflbr Chappelow, in his learned and ve- 
 ry ufeful Commentary on Job, mould feem to 
 prefer the printed Textual Reading ; but his Rea- 
 fon for it, tho' deriv'd from Schultens, is really 
 furprizing THOU KNOWEST, fays he, makes 
 the expreffion more fublime. 
 
 One mould not have expected to find Subli- 
 mity., if Senfe, afcrib'd to this reading by any 
 
 man,
 
 On i C H R O N. XI & c . 495 
 
 -man, who allows Miftakes in the printed Text. 
 Schultens did not. But that this Author does, 
 is fully manifeft from his offering Corrections, 
 even tho' unfupported by any one MS or ancient 
 Verfion: fee particularly ch. 19, 25. How this 
 can be confiftent with adopting the following 
 Sentiment of Cunacus, is difficult to apprehend 
 quod, cum fumma barbaries orbl incubuiffet, 
 
 NULLUS APEX DE PR-ffiSTANTI S S I MO ILLO 
 
 SCRIPTO PERIERIT, Maforitarum beneficium eft. 
 Preface, pag. 1 7. This itrong Attachment to the 
 Maforetic Doctors has led the Profeffor to en- 
 deavour to perpetuate their critical Niceties, as 
 he calls the injudicious Whims of the Lit era 
 majufcultz & minufcultf -, which, if he does not 
 believe to be original, he had more prudently 
 abolifh'd. But, in ch. 9, 34, he has printed 
 IDlty virgamfuam I^Jlty the large Teth, fay 
 the Maforets, confider'd as a Numeral, denoting 
 "Job's Nine Great Calamities. I mail only remark, 
 that this c leth is regular in the Camb. MSS i, 2 
 and 3. 
 
 It may not be improper to add here one far- 
 ther Specimen of the critical Nicety of the Ma- 
 forets. In Efther ch. 9 ; 7, 8, 9, we have the 
 Names of Hainan's i o fons, which are plac'd in 
 the MSS one exattly over another, becaufe 'tis 
 believ'd, that thefe fons were hang'd, nvtfdeways 
 
 Qj] q 2 oiv
 
 496 DISSERTATION 
 
 on the fame Gibbet, but on 10 Gibbets plac'd 
 perpendicularly one above another. The ift of 
 thefe Names is printed with i little letter; the 
 7th, with 2 > and the i oth, with i little and i 
 big letter. The Myftery, as to the 2 former in- 
 ftances, is fcarce known j but, as to the lafl it 
 has been preferv'd by Tradition, and is too cu- 
 rious to be pafs'd over The Name of the loth 
 fon is exprefs'd with a big Van and a little Zain, 
 thus NW*| Vaizatha ad indie andurn (fay 
 Buxtorf, Leufden &c.) quodfuerit hicjilius estate 
 quidem minimus, fed malitia erga Judaos maxi- 
 mus ! The Reader will hardly fuppofe, that 
 fuch Irregularities obtain'd originally ; feveral 
 MSS are regular in fome of thefe Letters and 
 I have lately purchas'd a MS of this Book of 
 Efther, a Roll, writ without Points or Diftinc- 
 tion of Verfes j in which all the preceding Let- 
 ters are regular, 
 
 PSAL. 1 6, 10. Thou /halt not leave my foul in 
 hell ( or Hades) neither ft alt thou fuffer thy Holy 
 One to fee corruption. Thefe words, the Apoftles 
 obferve to the Jews, are a Prophecy of the won- 
 derful Refurre&ion of fome particular Perfon, 
 whofe Soul was not long to continue in the place 
 of departed Spirits, and whofe Body was not to 
 be corrupted, both being foon to be reunited. 
 
 Now
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 497 
 
 Now David, fay they, did not fpeak this of him- 
 fe/f-j his Body hath feen Corruption: but, be- 
 ing a Prophet, he fpake of the Refurreftion of 
 CHRIST. We fee, that the whole force of this 
 Appeal to the Jews depends upon this that 
 the paflage referr'd to, as predictive of Chrift's 
 Refurrection, is predictive of the Refurrection of 
 fome one particular Perfon. But, is this the cafe 
 in the printed Heb. Bibles ? Is not the leading 
 word, almoft univerfally, *]H*Dn ? And do we 
 not find this word every where elfe render'd 
 Sanfti tui j and is it not certain, that the Heb. 
 Language will not admit a fingular Rendring? 
 But, if this word be necelTarily plural^ it muft 
 be obferv'd firft that the words God 'will not 
 fuffer his SAINTS to fee corruption are not true; 
 and, if they were, they would not predict the 
 Refurrection of any particular Perfon, and con- 
 fequently not that of Jefus Chrift. What (hall 
 we fay then ? Have the Apoflles impos'd a Pro- 
 phecy upon the Jewifli People and upon the 
 World ? Certainly they, who infift upon the 
 reading *jnDPl, do in effect accufe the Apoftles 
 that they are found falfe Witnejjes in the caufe 
 of God ; becaufe they have teftified of David, that 
 he prophecied of the Refurretfion of Chrift in parti- 
 cular j which however he prophe/ied not of, if Jo be 
 that he fpoke of Saints in general. But Who
 
 498 DISSERTATION 
 
 jhall lay any fuch thing to their charge ? Let the 
 Apoftles be true, and other men liars other 
 men may be deficient in their Knowledge and in 
 their Honejiy -, but infpird Apoftles could neither 
 be deceived nor deceive. 
 
 Perhaps it may be faid, that, tho' the Noun 
 is plur. in the Text, it \sjing. in the Margin ; and 
 that where the Marginal Reading is better, it 
 may be adopted, as it evidently mould here. 
 But I would afk Was this Noun plural, in 
 the days of the Apoftles ; or was it not ? If it 
 was, the Apoftles have mifquoted it : if it was 
 not, then it has been made plural fince, and con- 
 fequently corrupted. Again Was this Margi- 
 nal Reading extant in the Margin, in the days 
 of the Apoftles ; or was it not ? If not, then the 
 Argument founded upon it fails : if it was, how 
 came the Margin to contain the true reading, and 
 the Text the wrong, without a Corruption of the 
 Text? 
 
 Let us now fee, what farther Reafons there 
 are for fuppofing this word *pTDn corrupted 
 from *|TDn. To Apojlolical Authority may be 
 firft added the Authority of All the Ancient Ver- 
 Jions fecondly, the Authority of the Maforets 
 themfehes, who (tho' they have order'd the word 
 to be printed plural in the Text) have order'd it 
 to be readfmgular and thirdly, the conclufive 
 
 Autho-
 
 On i C H R O N. XI fifa 499 
 
 Authority of Heb. MSS. Of thefe I have exa- 
 min'd 24, which contain this Pfalm; and, of 
 thefe 24, SIXTEEN have now the true Reading 
 *\*VUR fan&um tuum., writ regularly in the Text j 
 and One more had this word alfo "]TDH at firft, 
 but part of the horizontal flroke of the 1 has 
 been eras'd, and a * inferted by fome late Cor- 
 rector. The MSS, which happily difcover this 
 important Reading, are N. 2, 3, 4, 5, 13, 31, 
 
 3 2 > 33> 34> 35> 3 6 > 37> 6 i and &^- Ms $ i, 
 2, 3, 4. In R. Stephen's Bible it is properly 
 
 PSAL. 22, 17. We have here another word 
 of importance j and a word, which has equally 
 perplex'd the Learned. We may fay of David, 
 as to other inftances, what the Apoflles have 
 faid of him as to the preceding that, being a 
 Prophet ', he foretold, not only the Refurrection 
 of Chrift, but alfo fome particular Circumftan- 
 ces of his Death. Of this kind are the words 
 they pierced my hands and my feet ; which words, 
 not being true of David ( fo far as appears from 
 his hiftory ) have been univerfally underftood as 
 only applicable to, and confequently predictive 
 of, the Crucifixion of the Meffiab. 
 
 But the printed Heb. Text is fjjHI *v HJO 
 like a lion my hands and my feet ! It has been in- 
 
 filled
 
 500 DISSERTATION 
 
 lifted on by many learned men, that the word 
 njO is here corrupted ; which perhaps is allow'd 
 by all, who allow any Miftakes in the printed 
 Heb. Bibles. The learned Dr. Pocock is on the 
 fide of thofe who defend the prefent reading in 
 this place -, but then he alfo defends the prefent 
 reading every where elfe : according to this great 
 Man -jtfD is perfodit as well as mD, and n&O is 
 the participle Benoni, plural, with the Q omit- 
 ted, fignifying perfodientes. But, as the Omif- 
 fion of the D is very irregular, and never proper 
 but before a fuffix'd Pronoun or in conftruct; 
 and as the ancient Versions exprefs it, not as a 
 Participle, but as a Verb ; there feems to be but 
 little doubt, that this word was originally yo or 
 VIJO with an tf inferted to exprefs the Kametz. 
 
 R. Cham tells us, he found this word V)X3 
 in the Text of fome correct MSS, with HJO in 
 the margin. Ifaac Levifa fays the fame of a MS 
 belonging to his Grandfather. The fame has 
 been faid of a MS at Jena in Saxony. And the 
 fame may be affirm'd of an old and valuable MS 
 of the Pfalms in our Bodleian Library j which is 
 N. 3 in the preceding Catalogue, and is de- 
 fcrib'd pag. 319 &c. In this MS the word is 
 nJO with ntO in the Margin. And, tho' there 
 is fomething, barely perceptible, refembling the 
 tail of a about the middle of the 1 ; yet, upon 
 
 a clofe
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 501 
 
 a clofe Examination of this Letter by myfelf and 
 Others, the bottom of the T feems to have been 
 writ with the fame Ink as the top of it; and, 
 when view'd in the Sun, the top and bottom 
 fparkle in the very fame manner. 
 
 PSAL. 25, 17. In this Alphabetical Pfalm the 
 Verfe beginning with the letter p is now omit- 
 ted. That it really is omitted may be ftrongly 
 prefum'd from the Nature of the Pfalm ; and 
 this Prefumption is confirm'd by MS 2, in which 
 the verfe beginning with tf is writ twice ; which 
 Repetition was perhaps made to fill up the Space 
 left vacant by the Omiffion of the verfe begin- 
 ning with the next letter p. The Omiffion of 
 the 1 4th verfe, (beginning with j) in the 145th. 
 Pfalm, is too well known to require particular 
 notice ; that being acknowledg'd by all the an- 
 cient Verfions. 
 
 PSAL. 59, 6. As we have the CD fometimes 
 improperly omitted, fo we have it fometimes 
 improperly inferted ; as has been obferv'd pag. 
 62. In this verfe we find the word D'H^K twice 
 in a conjlrutt State-, and, when fo lituated, it 
 mould be always ( as it generally is ) nStf > and 
 as it is once in this verfe firft we have D'H^tf 
 irregularly, and then 78*^1 'FlStf regu- 
 R r r larly.
 
 5 o2 DISSERTATION 
 
 larly. But MS 2 reads tDWtf irregularly in 
 both ; and yet MS 3 reads both regularly rptf ! 
 In ver. u, MS 2 reads properly HDH : in Pf. 
 60, 7, it reads jjyi : and has the regular , in- 
 ftead of i, in 3 inflances in Pf. ; i, 20. 
 
 PSAL. 68, 9. This verfe iignifies literally thus 
 terra tremidt etiam exit diftillaverunt a facie 
 Dei hie Sinai a facie Dei Dei Ifraelis. The 
 words hie Sinai fland here fo unconnected, that 
 there feems to be fome Miflakej and perhaps 
 the Learned will be the better qualified to cor- 
 rect it properly, if they compare it with its ii- 
 milar (if not parallel) pafTage in Judg. 55 4, 5. 
 
 mirn "pysa "vy^n "inxyi nin 
 
 joy JD^ ' 
 
 'DIP DJ 
 
 mn ODD 3D nr mn ODO ^n onn 
 
 J. Jehovah! when thou went eft forth out of Seir- t 
 P. O God! when thou wenteft forth before the people -, 
 J. when thou marchedft out of the field of Edom: 
 P. when thou marchedft through the wildernefs : 
 J. The earthjhook y and the heavens dropped-, 
 P. ^The earth Jhook, and the heavens dropped; 
 J. the clouds alfo dropped water : 
 
 J. The mountains melted at theprefence of Jehovah - r 
 P. at the prefence of God-, 
 
 even
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 503 
 
 J. even that Sinai, before Jehovah, the Godof Ifrael! 
 P. even that Sinai, before God, the God of Ifrael ! 
 I believe, moft Readers will infer from this 
 Comparifon, that the Text in Judges is as com- 
 pleat, as it is fublime in its Image and that 
 the laft part in the Pfalm is incompleat for want 
 of The mountains melted, to introduce Sinai ; and 
 then Sinai is indeed introduc'd with a moft fi- 
 nim'd propriety. Shall we then fuppofe the 
 Pfalm originally flood thus 
 Jehovah! when thou went ejl forth before the people-, 
 *when thou marchedft through the wildernefs : 
 The earth trembled, and the heavens dropped; 
 the clouds alfo dropped water : 
 The mountains melted at the prefence of Jehovah -, 
 even that Sinai, before Jehovah, the God of Ifrael ! 
 That the name Jehovah is properly reftor'd here, 
 appears from Judges ; and our old MS of the 
 Pfalms, NO. 3, has the word Jehovah at leaft^xr 
 times in this one Pfalm, where it is not once in 
 the printed Editions. Camb. MS i has mn* in 
 Ifai. 7, 13, where it is printed *n/tf ; and in the 
 next verfe, now jitf ; (the LXX have &v/cc in 
 both:) in Ezek. 16, 305 18, 23; 36, 4; and in 
 Zeph. i, 7, it has DTtW m!T printed mfT OTtf. 
 Hence the frequent OmifTion of nilT in the later 
 Copies is evident j for, as obferv'd pag. 355, we 
 can more eafily account for the improper Omif- 
 fan, than Infertion of it. R r r 2 Ps,
 
 504 DISSERTATION 
 
 PSAL. 79, 7. The printed Heb. Text here is 
 
 / comedit jfacolntm, & habitaculum ejus de/blave- 
 As the nom. cafe is plural, and the verbs agree- 
 ing with it are twice plur. in the verfe preced- 
 ing ; and as the 2d verb in this verfe is properly 
 for the fame reafon plural ; we muft infer, that 
 the i ft verb here, as it can refer to no other 
 nom. cafe, mould be alfo plural: efpecially as 
 both verbs here are regularly plur. in all the an- 
 cient Verfons. If any farther Evidence mould 
 be necefTary to prove the Non-Integrity of this 
 word ^Dtf, our excellent MS N. 3 reads here 
 V?2tf. And if any doubt can poffibly yet re- 
 main, let us receive the Teftimony of Jeremiah, 
 in ch. 10, 25 a place, which as it will prove 
 2 Corruptions in this Pfalm, will alfo receive 
 Correction from this Pfalm, and be equally im- 
 prov'd by a cornparifon. 
 
 & ~\&$ tmjin W "jnsn -jfitr Pfa. 
 xh i^tf Dun hy inan -pp Jer. 
 
 tih ItDtm 1PK IVbVoO Svi Pfa. 
 
 Jer. 
 
 irn vxn apv n^ io^ o Jer. 
 
 inu nxi Pfa. 
 Jer. 
 
 The
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 505 
 
 The i ft Variation is evidently in favour of Jere- 
 miah. The 2d feems to be in favour of the 
 Pfalm, as mnfltPO is not countenanc'd by the 
 Syr. AT. Chald. and Vulg. Verfions. The 3d 
 Variation fmifhes the Proof of a Corruption in 
 the Pfalm. And as to the 4th and greateft Va- 
 riation, the addition of 2 verbs in Jeremiah; 
 (neither of which are in the Pfalm, or necefTary 
 to the Senfe;) perhaps they are both added by 
 Tranfcribers. But, moft probably, inS^T is a 
 true and original word, as the Greek Verfion has 
 Key ttaLwihtoauv ew\ov efpecially, as in^DNI makes 
 the fentence abfurd nam comederunt yacobum t 
 & comedent eum, G? confumpferunt eum. We 
 may therefore conclude, that inS^KI is a Var. 
 Reading of infepi (occafion'd by Sstf juil before 
 it) and inferted by a Tranfcriber, who, refolving 
 to have the true reading, inferted both. This 
 Zeal, without Judgment, has operated very ex- 
 tenfively; for we fee it, not only in the Heb. 
 Text, but frequently in the Greek, and fome- 
 times in the common Englifh Tranflation. Thus, 
 in Pf. 29, i, Bring unto the Lord, O ye mighty 
 and Bring young ra?m unto the Lord are 
 different Rendrings of the fame Heb. words : 
 and fo are for he fpake the wordy and they were 
 made and he commanded, and they were 
 created in Pf, 148, 5. 
 
 PROV.
 
 506 DISSERTATION 
 
 PROV. 10,10. This verfe in the printed Bibles is 
 
 i msy *n ^y pp 
 
 winkftb with the eye, caufeth forrow ; 
 
 but a prating fool fiall fall. 
 The Proverbs of Solomon are known to confift 
 of 2 Hemifticks, the fecond of which ftrength- 
 ens and illuftrates the firft, either by difplaying 
 the contrary effect of a contrary caufe, or by an- 
 other Maxim of the fame kind and fimilar na- 
 ture. But what Contrariety or Connexion is there 
 between the two preceding Hemifticks ? If we 
 refer to the Greek, Syr. and Ar. Verfions, we 
 fhall find the ift Hemiftick beautifully illuftra- 
 ted by an Antithefis in the 2d : thus 
 
 He, that ivinketh with the eye, caujeth forrow ; 
 
 but be, that freely reproved, workethfafety. 
 Maxims, worthy of Solomon ! " When a man 
 "connives at his friend's failings, either filently 
 " beholding or deceitfully applauding his un- 
 " worthy adionsj the offender is encourag'd to 
 " iin on, and heap up matter for very forrowful 
 " reflections afterward : but the man, who with 
 <c an honeft freedom prudently reproves him, 
 " moft effectually contrives his honour and fafe- 
 " ty." Solomon feems to have exprefs'd the con- 
 fequences of a virtuous and a vicious Friendflnp 
 fomewhat differently in the next verfe, where the 
 Sentiment however is the fame
 
 On i C M R O N. XI &c. 507 
 
 The mouth of the righteous is a well of life; 
 
 but the mouth of the wicked conccaleth dejlruc-lion. 
 The Excellence of thefe Sentiments perhaps will 
 readily be admitted ; but it will be afk'd how 
 are we to account for the Exchange of the Hemi- 
 Jlick in the verfe now under confideration ? The 
 Anfwer will open the Caufe, not only of this 
 Miftake, but perhaps of many others in the 
 Books that are divided into Hemifticks ; and it 
 is this That thefe Verfes were formerly divi- 
 ded into 2 parts, which were writ at fome dif- 
 tance from each other j fo that the ift and 2d 
 Ranges of Hemifticks made 2 diftincl: Columns 
 in a page : this is now the nature of the Books 
 of Proverbs and of the Poetical Books in the Old 
 Teft. in MSS 5, 6, 27, and Camb. 2. And the 
 confequence of this Arrangement has been, that 
 fometimes a whole Verfe has been omitted, by the 
 Tranfcriber's miffing his proper Line; as the 32d 
 verfe of this chapter is omitted in MS 4, and Job 
 2 1, 9, in Camb. 2 : that an Hemiftick having been 
 omitted, a Verfe is made to confiil fometimes of 
 
 i Hemiftick only and fometimes of 3 : and it 
 has happen'd, that a Tranfcriber, having writ the 
 
 i ft Hemiftick of a Verfe, upon referring to his 
 copy, hath caft his eye upon a 'wrong 2.d Hemi- 
 Jiick) and fo hath connected together Maxims 
 
 abfolutely inconnectible in their nature. This 
 
 laft
 
 5 o8 DISSERTATION 
 
 laft is the cafe here ; as the Reader will perhaps 
 be fully convinc'd, when he finds that this fame 
 zd Hemijlick, which now makes the latter half 
 of the i oth verfe (where it has not the leaft bu- 
 finefs, and is difclaim'd by the ancient Verfions) 
 makes alfo the latter half of the 8th verfe, and 
 has been taken in here from thence; a fimilar 
 word preceding in the 2 places. Let us place 
 the 3 verfes together. 
 
 Snan niv np nS DDH 
 rm -jS DITQ iSin 
 navy ]n rv p? 
 
 PROV.ii,i6. A gracious woman retalneth honour? 
 
 andjlrong men retain riches. 
 But the Gr. Syr. and Ar. Verfions have 2 Hemi- 
 fticks, which are here omitted ; namely, the 2d 
 of ver. 1 6, and the ift of ver. 17 : thefe Verfions 
 read thus 
 
 A gracious woman fupporteth her hujband's honour -, 
 butjhejhat hateth righteoufnefsjsathroneofdifgrace. 
 The Jlothful, tho* rich, Jhall come to poverty ; 
 but the laborious foall retain their riches. 
 The pofiibility of fuch an Omirlion may appear 
 from ch. 12, 6 ; where MS 7 omits from D'Wl 
 the 2d word in ver. 6, to the fame word imme- 
 diately under it in ver. 7. In ch. 16, MS 60 
 omits ver. 22 and 23 ; on account of the fame 
 
 words
 
 On i C H R O N. XI &c. 509 
 
 words concluding ver. 21, and 23. In ch. 18, 7, 
 MS 2 has ytSH improbus, inftead of itrDi #/>// 
 */* : and ver. 23 is omitted in MS 7. MS 2, in 
 ch. 21,17, inftead of ppi T ^fr* met?, reads 
 (by omiflion and tranfpolition) \**\ jaty nriD^: 
 and, in ch. 25,5, it has ion mlfericordia inftead 
 of j3"i jujlitia. 
 
 PROV. 19, i. Better is a poor man, that walk- 
 eth in bis integrity, than he that is peruerfe in his 
 lips and is a fool. An Antithefis is here evident- 
 ly intended j but is there ( in reality ) the leaft 
 Antithelis between a poor man and a fool? The 
 Gr. and Ar. Verfions are here defective ; but we 
 do not want their affiftance, as the Syr. Verfion 
 has fo compleatly preferv'd this whole Verfe ; 
 reading, inftead of a fool a rich man, and inftead 
 of in his lips in his ways. Our excellent MS N. 
 2, inftead of vnflt? his lips, reads VD*n his ways, 
 ftrongly confirming the Syr. Verfion j and is far- 
 ther confirm'd by the Targum. (MS 60, for 
 trp^D reads pBWO by tranfpofition. ) Then as 
 TDD Jlultus deftroys the fenfe, and as there is a 
 ncceffity for a word anfwering to dives, agree- 
 ably to the Syr, and Vulg. Verfions 5 perhaps the 
 true word here was 'v&y dives 
 Better is a poor man, that walketh in his integrity, 
 than he, 'who isperverfe in his ways, though he be rich. 
 
 Sff ISAI.
 
 5io DISSERTATION 
 
 ISAI. 37, 1 8. The true Englifh of this verfe, 
 as printed is Truly, O JEHOVAH, the kings of 
 AJJyria have laid ivqfte ALL THE LANDS AND 
 THEIR LAND. Can we doubt of a Miftake here ? 
 The other Copy of Hezekiah's Prayer, given us 
 
 in 2 Kin. 19, 17, reads have laid ivafte the 
 
 nations and their land D^tf fiXI D'lJin per- 
 haps DSltf ihould be DD>^K the nations and 
 their lands. 
 
 ISAI. 6 1, i. It has been before fuppos'd, that 
 *ntf was fometimes inferted before mn*> to pre- 
 vent the pronunciation of the latter; and we 
 have here a confirmation of fuch an infertion. 
 For, will any one fay, that the words Jehovah 
 and Adonai were both originally in this verfe 
 Thefpirit of the Lord the Lord or, of the Lord 
 Jehovah is upon me? St. Luke tells us (ch. 4, 18) 
 that, when Jefus open'd the book of Efaias in 
 the Synagogue, he found the place where it was 
 written Thefpirit of the Lord is upon me &cc. 
 with which reading agree the Gr. Ar. and Lat. 
 Verfions of Ifaiah. 
 
 As this feems a Demonstration from the New 
 Teftament of the Infertion of ^"jtf Adonai ; fq 
 there is a place in the Old Teftament, which 
 furniihes a Demonstration of the Change of mn* 
 
 Jeho-
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 511 
 
 Jehovah into D'rY7K Elobim. In Gen. 22, 14, we 
 
 read nan* mn "im ovn *IJDN n#tf HNT mn 
 
 And Abraham called the name of that place JE- 
 HOVAH IIREH ; bccauje he had faid that day, on 
 the mow-it^ Jehovah Jireh i. e. Jehovah will pro- 
 vide. But, in ver. 8, we are told at prefent, that 
 Abraham had faid Elobim Jireh i. e. God will 
 provide. That *iw'N fignihesfor and becaufe y fee 
 Gen. 3 1, 49 he called the heap Mlfpeh, for kc 
 faid &c. and perhaps this particle is applied here 
 to the future tenfe comttr/ruefy, as i et always is, 
 and as *N tune is fometimes, but fometimes not. 
 It feem'd the more proper, to mention this place, 
 becaufe no part of the Bible ( perhaps ) is fo ab- 
 furdly tranflated, as this is at prefent And A- 
 braham called the name of that place yehvuah-jireb : 
 as it is faid to this day\ In the mount of the Lord 
 it ft all befeen. I mail juft remark, that as Abra- 
 ham call'd this mount Jehovah will provide, be- 
 caufe he had faid to Ifaac, Jehovah will provide ; 
 fo Jehovah did then provide a Sacrifice for Abra- 
 ham, typical of That Great Sacrifice, which Je- 
 hovah afterwards provided for the Whole World, 
 and (which is remarkable) on the very fame 
 Place. See Critical Notes on Scripture, pag. 4. 
 
 JEREM. 7, 22. Inftead of N^IH eduxit MSS 
 2, 4, 5 and Camb. i, read W>"in eduxi a Va- 
 
 Sffa riatlou
 
 512 DISSERTATION 
 
 riation materially different in fenfe; and every 
 Variation mould be collected on this and the 
 preceding verfe, which feem greatly corrupted : 
 perhaps the Syr. Verfion will be the beft Guide 
 to their true meaning. In ch. i o, 7, we read 
 among all the wife (men) of the nations and in all 
 their kingdoms. The phrafe kingdoms of the wife 
 is, perhaps, improper : MS 2 has in the Mar- 
 gin 0*723 among all the kings of the nations and 
 in all their kingdoms. In ch. 15, 14, inftead of 
 ttShpfufMr IMS* it has D 1 ?'!}'* IV ufque adfeculum ; 
 and, in ver. 18, it reads fTPl nVPI, inftead of 
 that odd divifion fpnn Til. In ch. 18, 22, it 
 reads nrw, as it is printed in ver. 20. And in 
 ch. 20, 1 1, it has the true word ntf mecum, in- 
 ftead of >mtf me in the printed editions, which 
 makes no poffible fenfe in this place. In Ifai.65, 
 25, Camb. MS i has -HIT inftead of iniO, LXX 
 apa,: and, in Jer. 10, 18, DDK inftead of Di"lS. 
 In Jer. 1 2, 4, there feems to be a Tranfpolition 
 of 2 letters, which makes a remarkable diffe- 
 rence in the fenfe --- ijriHnK our lajl end for 
 our ways : LXX cJ 
 
 JER. 21, 12. MS 2 reads here 
 (not Slti) ptriV 1D deliver the opprejjed from the 
 hand of the oppre/or. The word DJT7W3 .A^ 
 f orz/;/z was originally in this MS DD'^yD fadia 
 
 . vejlra,
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 513 
 
 veftra, as it is ROW in MS 4, &;/T?^. i, and origi- 
 nally in Camb. 2 j fo the ancient Verfions, and 
 fo the printed Text in ver. 14. As ch. 26 begins 
 with mentioning Jeboiakim y the fon ofjojiah, king 
 ofjudah, fome Tranfcriber (thinking the begin- 
 ning of ch. 27 muft fpeak of the fame perfon, 
 becaufe it alfo fpeaks of a fon ofjofiah) feems to 
 have writ "Jehoiakim inftead of Zcdekiah, as it is 
 now iii the Syr. Verfion : not confidering, that 
 Zcdekiah was alfo Jofmtisfon. 
 
 ^11.31,38. The word DWU venienfes, which 
 has been ignorantly excluded the Text, and ba- 
 nifh'd to the Margin of the later Heb. MSS and 
 printed Bibles (to the no fmall furprize of every 
 fenfible Reader, and in contradiction to all the 
 ancient Verlions ) is found regularly in the Text 
 of MS 2, and in Camb. i, 2. MSS 2 and 5 read 
 properly imirOT & in legc tua ; but in the 
 printed Text the word is become ^JTHrQl : 
 Leufden wifely remarks, that // is not likely Je- 
 remiah would have exprej'sd this ivordfo irregular- 
 ly^ without afufficient reafon. MS 2 reads n\S1 
 & ubi (printed Vtfl) in ch. 37, 19. This Cor- 
 ruption reminds one of a Corruption of the fame 
 word, that is much more material. Every man 
 has felt the Force of that Exclamation of St. 
 Paul O Death) where is thy Vittory ? Grave, 
 
 where
 
 514 DISSERTATION 
 
 where is thy Sti?ig ? But if we refer to Hofea 13, 
 14, from whence the Apoftle cited thefe affect- 
 ing words, we find them greatly varied by the 
 Corruption of this word ;TK ubi y which by tranf- 
 poiition is twice become ntt ero. That the true 
 reading is rTft ubi, is evident, not only from the 
 Greek, Syr. and Ar. Verlions, but from the Con- 
 text. The very fame Corruption obtains in ver. 
 io; fee all the ancient Verfions: and that JTtf 
 tttDtt is ubinam nunc, fee Job 17, 15. 
 
 In ch. 42, 6, MSS 2, 4, and Camb. i, have 
 UPON nosy infread of the new-coin'd Pronoun 
 IJtf ; the Points of which word determine it to 
 have been formerly iJHJtf. In ch.49, 30, DH^y 
 fuper eos mould moft undoubtedly be uniform 
 with the preceding DD'^V fuper vos -, and fo it is 
 in MS 2, Camb. i, and originally in Camb. 2* 
 And in ch. 51, 3, where we read in print ^tf 
 ^l^l^n *p*T T^T ne tendat tendat tcndens (words, 
 the Impropriety of which is too ftriking to want 
 a Comment) MSS 2, 5, and Camb. i, 2, read re- 
 gularly 'pnn "JIT Stf. This furprizing Conti- 
 nuation of TENDAT TENDAT reminds one of 
 i Chro. 24, 6 ; where, inftead of one houftwld ta- 
 ken for Eleazar, and one for Ithamar^ the pre- 
 fent Heb. Text ( having fPltf caff us, inftead of 
 *jntf wnis) iignifies one taken for Eleaza r, and 
 TAKEN TAKEN for Ithamar ! 
 
 JER.
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 515 
 
 JER. 50, ii. In this verfe we have 4 miflakes 
 of the fame kind (fome of them probably by Af- 
 fimilation) 4 verbs ending with inftead of i : in 
 Camb. MS 2, one verb ends with i now, as all 4 
 did originally. But if has fupplanted [four times 
 here, in ch. 51, 34, we mall find the latter to 
 have made ample Reprifals, having fupplanted 
 the former Jive times ! 
 
 EZEK. 1 6, 13. Here W and nD^ have a 
 
 improperly, as have many other words in this 
 
 chapter: ver. 20, 'JVlS's 22, THSt* 31 
 
 and nnj 36, WO; 43, rrDf and 
 
 47, 7VB% and fo again in 51. But MS 2 has 
 
 no at the end of either of thefe words, (nor has 
 
 Camb. i, in 6 of them :) fee note on Ruth 3, 3. 
 
 And as this MS has not * in the preceding in- 
 
 fiances, it has it in the two following inftances, 
 
 which require it; in {pifV^ty ver. 53, and fy&'yi 
 
 & fades is properly rwjn & : foaam ) ver. 59, 
 
 In ch. 22, 12, instead of "jtyj Dl *}Q^ J^OT 
 
 MS 2 reads pi DT "pE^ : the word innocent 
 
 is in the Targum, and feems to improve the 
 
 fenfe. This fame MS has 4 variations in 3 words, 
 
 ch. 23, 43 inftead of p-w r\V D^DKj it has 
 
 W nn^ D5W3. r<7w^. MS i has vm proper- 
 
 ly, inftead of vn^> in ch. 37, 9. 
 
 EZEK.
 
 516 DISSERTATION 
 
 EZEK. 40, 6. In this verfe occurs the firft of 
 the THIRTY FOUR Words, wherein the is al- 
 low'd by the Keri to be omitted in this one Chap- 
 ter; and it is omitted in one manner, always 
 when it is the iign of the plur. number before a 
 fuffix'd 1 certainly therefore not omitted by 
 chance, but by voluntary Affimilation. But Camb. 
 MS i, to its great Honour, has the > regularly 
 in 32, out of thefe 34 words. In ch. 42, 16, 
 fTOK EOT fhould be mtfD tPDH (500) as it is 
 printed 3 times juft after ; and as it is writ here 
 in MS 4, and in Camb. 1,2. MS 2 reads DIVHV 
 (printed Djn?) in ch. 44, 23 ; and in the next 
 verfe reads QDPobt In ch. 45, i, this MS reads 
 STUD (printed nSmn) fo the VxAg&fortito. In 
 ch. 48, 3, MS 2 omits from Snj in the 2d ver. 
 to the fame word in the 3d from Ji> in the 
 4th to the fame word in the 5th and again 
 from plD* in the 6th to the fame word in the 7th 
 verfe. In ver. 16, the words mND tTDH tPBH 
 Jive Jive hundred! are properly JH1NB tt?Dn 500 
 in MSS 2, 4, Camb. i, 2, and Erfurt i, 2, 3, 45 
 as in all the ancient Verfions. I mail juft men- 
 tion, that Camb. MS i has 16 words writ twice 
 in Mai. i. 10 ; and that this MS has the follow- 
 ing very remarkable Variation in Zephan. i, 8. 
 For it reads there
 
 On i CHRON. XI &c. 517 
 
 erit in die illo, inquit Jehovah, quod vifitabo) 
 
 mpfli mn DNJ Kinn avn rvm 
 
 where the printed reading is 
 
 mpfli run* mr ovn nm 
 
 V f die facrificii Jehovce, quod vijitabo . 
 
 HOSEA 6 ; 4, 5. O Ephraim, what flail I do 
 unto thee ? O Judah y what jhall I do unto thee ? 
 For your goodnefs is as a morning cloud; and> as the 
 early dew, it goeth away. Therefore have I hewed 
 them by the prophets, I have flam them by the 
 words of my mouth ; and thy judgments are as 
 the light (that) goeth forth. 
 *>&'' ""11 tf *]'&&&} & judicia tua lux egredietur. 
 
 That thefe words are greatly irregular, fuf- 
 ficiently appears from their having been very per- 
 plexing to Dr. Pocock, in his Comment on this 
 Prophet ; and I believe, few Readers receive fa- 
 tisfa&ion from his long and labour'd Explana- 
 tion. But as Chance fometimes difcovers what 
 great Capacity and Diligence cannot unravel ; fo 
 an accidental attention to the Sound of thefe 
 words led me to (what I prefume is) the true 
 account of them namely, that fome Tran- 
 fcriber, upon hearing umijhpatecaor from the 
 perfon dictating to him, writ umifopateca or, 
 inftead of umijhpate caor j which blundering Di- 
 vifion has been furprizingly continued, and is 
 
 T 1 1 become
 
 DIS SERTATION &c. 
 
 become the Reading in (perhaps) all the prefent 
 MSS, as well as printed Editions ! 
 
 Since making the above Obfervation, exadtly 
 as it now ftands, I have found the fame made 
 by Meibo?muSy in pag. 35 of his Work call'd 
 Davidis Pfalmi 12 &c. Fol. 1698. This learned 
 Author has, in his Preface, mention'd another 
 Diffociation of Letters; for in Jer. 23, 33, we 
 have tftfjD HD Dtf> which he reads tftfOn DHK. 
 See the Context and the ancient Ver lions. 
 
 That the preceding Variation in Hofea, which 
 is fo materially different in fenfe, and y^t only 
 divides the fame letters in another manner, is 
 the true and original Reading^ is clear from the 
 Context; and, it is confirm'd by every ancient 
 Verfion, except the Vulgat, which has &ju~* 
 dicta tua qtiaji lux egredientur. I {hall therefore 
 conclude the prefent ExtracT: with this Correction. 
 
 XOf TO KQlfJUt, pd US tyu$ 
 
 Jjc^o* \ 
 
 The true Englifh Verfion therefore is 
 And my judgment Jhall go forth as the light. 
 
 CONCLU-
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 THUS have I attempted to explain the 
 Names, and to illuftrate the Hiftory of 
 David's Mighty Men : not merely with a view 
 to reeftablim their Names, nor entirely for the 
 fecurity of their deferved Honours ; but princi- 
 pally, becaufe the prcftnt State of their Hijlory 
 affetfs other parts of the Old Te /lament. And, as 
 the Firfl Part of this DiiTertation offers fome 
 corrections of the printed Heb. Copies j in the 
 Second (which ftrongly fupports the general prin- 
 ciple on which the Firft is founded, and there- 
 fore is added as a Second Part to it) I have giv- 
 en Proofs from Heb. MSS of many and great Mif- 
 takes made by Jewifli Tranfcribers ; and have 
 (I prefume) (hewn, that fome Miftakes have been 
 admitted into all the printed Heb. Bibles. I mail 
 now, by way of Conclufion, add fome Remarks 5 
 which have occurr'd too late to be inferted in 
 their proper places, and yet materially affed: fome 
 of the preceding Obfervations : correcting alfo a 
 few Errata, which I find upon a Review of the 
 Diflertation. 
 
 The firft thing, which I mail mention, con- 
 cerns feveral Obfervations before made j and it is 
 a very curious printed Copy of a Third Part of 
 
 T 1 1 2 the
 
 5 2o CONCLUSION. 
 
 the Heb. Bible. It was given to the valuable Li- 
 brary of Eton College by Dr. Pellet, who was a 
 great Matter of Heb. Learning ; and he has in- 
 ferted the following account of it, in the begin- 
 ning of the Firft Volume. Hie Liber, in 2 vo- 
 lumina divifus, imprejjus eft Neapoli, anno 1487 
 /. e. anno uno ante imprej/ionem, quam fari cura- 
 verunt Judcei Soncinates. Complettitur tertiam par- 
 tern Bibliorum, quam Cethubim vacant Ebrcei, cum 
 Commentaries Rabbinicis -, inter quos extat unus & 
 alter, quos frujlra quaras in Bibliis Rabbinicis 
 Bombergianis & Buxtorfianis. Hoc Exemplar U- 
 nicum, & jlammis ereptum, uti par eft credere, 6? 
 folo Raritatis nomine aftimandum Bibliothecce Colk- 
 gii Regalis JEtonenfis donavit Tho. Pellet 1735. 
 
 According to this account then, there is pre- 
 ferv'd in this truly valuable Book The Only Copy 
 of the Firft-printed Edition of the Heb. Bible, or 
 at leaft of a Third Part of it : and I prefume, 
 that this account is true. That it is an Only Co- 
 py is prefumeable, becaufe no one Publisher of 
 the Editions of the Heb. Bible has ( fo far as I 
 can difcover) taken any notice of it ; thefe Pub- 
 lifhers agreeing, that the Firft Edition was print- 
 ed in 1488 by the Jews of Soncinum: an Edi- 
 tion, which 'perhaps was never feen by any one 
 of them. That this Naples Edition of 1487 has 
 been burnt by the Jews (tho' this Eton Copy had 
 
 the
 
 CONCLUSION. 521 
 
 the iingular good fortune to efcape) is highly 
 probable from the nature of it. For firft, this 
 Edition is not JlriSfly Major etical ; there being 
 feveral Readings in the Text, which the Mafora 
 had order'd to retire into the Margin : and in- 
 deed it has no Ken at all. Secondly, there are 
 fome connderable Miftakes in it. In Pf. 3 5, ver. 
 15 is omitted (from Pf. 38, 7, to 61, 5, is writ) 
 as is ver. 12 in Prov. 14: fo are in ch. 15 verfes 
 26 and 27 ; (fee pag. 507 of this Differtation : ) 
 ver. 28 begins pH *D printed p-ft & in other 
 copies. In Ruth 2 ; 5, 6, twelve words are omit- 
 ted, and ten in Ecclef. 5 ; 17, 1 8 ; in this laft 
 verfe it has ^"QDl (pointed) between D'DD31 and 
 ID^i^m. In Daniel one whole page is unpoint- 
 ed. Laftly, this Edition might give Offence, 
 becaufe it has fome Commentaries, which were 
 never admitted into any other Edition j feveral 
 parts of thefe Commentaries are eras' d in diffe- 
 rent places, for 10 lines together, and words are 
 artfully writ in to fupply the vacancies. 
 
 That this Edition is of the Antiquity pretend- 
 ed, I prefume for the following reafons. Firft, 
 it is printed on Vellum^ as the firft printed books 
 were. Secondly, it has Variations in the Text, 
 which are not found in any later Edition. Jeho- 
 vah miT is always printed mT or T)T j as are 
 fometimes DnW and ;fjN for D'nW and 'JTtf. 
 
 (The
 
 522 CONCLUSION. 
 
 (The 2 former fuperflitious Variations obtain al- 
 fo in a very old Copy of Part of the Heb. Bible, 
 printed on Vellum, in 1 ac, belonging to the Rev. 
 and Learned Mr. Swinton ; which Copy contains 
 the Pentateuch, McglUoth and Haphtaroth.) This 
 Eton Copy reads jfchovabj in fotne places where 
 other printed Copies read Adonal j as in Pf. 2, 4, 
 and 68, 27. In Ruth 3, 3, the 4 verbs are re- 
 gularly without ; fee p. 448. In i Chro. 6, 57, 
 no rnirv -, fee p. 484 : and in ch. 9535, 40, the 
 words are *TO*tf and ^yz 3H2D; fee p. 48 5: and 
 the Chronicles make but one book, fee p. 27. In 
 Efth. 9; 7, 9, the letters in the proper Names 
 are regular; fee p. 496. In Job i, 10; 9, 34; 
 42,2 ; the words are regularly nntf, 101^, WT; 
 fee p. 494. And laftly, in Pf. 16, 10, it is *]TDn 
 tfby Holy One; fee p. 498. This Edition is 2 fmall 
 Folio Volumes ; and is catalogued Aa 5; 19, 20. 
 
 Page 13, line 20. It is not the intention of 
 this Paffage to exclude Divine Providence, that 
 Firft and Principal Caufe of all human Succefs : 
 fee p. 63, 221. It may be remark'd here as 
 feveral Paffages in the preceding Work are ex- 
 plain'd and confirm'd by Paffages in other pages 
 of it ; it is hop'd, that the Whole will be fairly 
 compar'd, antecedently to the definitive Difap- 
 probation of any Part. 
 
 - P. 19.
 
 CONCLUSION. 523 
 
 P. 19, 1. 7. The word -mJK fhould be UW. 
 P. 20, 1. 21. The different expreffion of the 
 word David is more regularly obferv'd in the 
 printed Editions, than in the MSS ; tho' thefe al- 
 fo generally have it *rn in the books writ before 
 the Captivity, and TTI in thofe writ after it. 
 But as the MSS rather weaken the Obfervation, 
 not only by their Variations in this inflance, but 
 their Inaccuracy in many others > lefs flrefs will 
 be laid upon this Difference. The word David 
 occurs Jirft in Ruth 4, 17. 
 
 P. 3 5, 1. 26. In the Margin of the Eng. Tranf- 
 
 lation we read becauje they had faid> even tkt 
 
 blind and the lame. He Jhall not come into the houfe* 
 
 P. 43, 1. 1 6. F/av. JofephitSy etji in allquibus 
 
 Vtrfiortem Grcecam fequi "oideatur, ex textu tamen 
 
 potij/imum Hebraso Antiquitatum Juarum opus con- 
 
 texuit. Hody de Text. Orig. p. 222. And A-Bp. 
 
 Uflier obferves (De LXX Verfwne Syntagma, p. 
 
 214^) De ipfo Jofepho non eft illud prcztereundum y 
 
 quod ex facris Hebracorum literis Origines fuas 
 
 tranjlaturum fe eft polticitus. Aniiq. L.i.C.i. &c. 
 
 P. 55, 1. 14. To thefe inftances of tf inferted 
 
 to exprefs the Kametz (which are taken from 
 
 Walton, who took them from Cappellus) others 
 
 might be added in die prefent Heb. Text. I mall 
 
 only mention i Sam. 17, 12 ; where the infer- 
 
 tion of it feems to have occafion'd an odd Mif- 
 
 take;
 
 524 CONCLUSION. 
 
 take; DW3 in amis, being formerly writ 
 > has been fince writ by tranfpofition 
 in viris : but an old man and Jin c ken in 
 yean feems the truer reading, agreeably to the 
 Syr. and Ar. Verfions. The tf is fuperfluous in 
 48 words, according to the Mafora. Inflances 
 are alfo frequent in the Chaldee : fee the Chald. 
 Paraphrafe on Chronicles publifh'd by Beckius, 
 who (on 2 Chro. 29, 31; and ch. 31; i, 14) 
 fays, Kamez per Alepb Jignificatum fuif. The 
 learned Campeg. Vitringa obferves (Obferuat. 
 Sacr. p. 186,) Vetuftiores Hebrteos vulgares fal- 
 temfuos Codices eo prorfus modo fcripjiffe, quo hodie 
 fuos confignare confueverunt Rabbini ; hoc eft y quod 
 literh 'Itf uji fuerint loco vocalium: cum autem 
 poftea puncla wcalia fubftituerentur, faftum effe y 
 ut. ^itf paffim ex vocabulis fublatte funt j id tamen 
 non tarn fattum ejje diligenter & accurate, ut non 
 qucedam remanferint veftigia. 
 
 P. 55, 1. 23. As to Joab's being made Gover- 
 nor of, the City, the Chald. Paraphrafe of Beckius 
 iignifies G? "Joab gubernator erat (or admimjlra- 
 bat) reliquum urbis : the word DJ1SD gubernans 
 is alfo in the Targum on Chron. publim'd by 
 Dr. Wilkins. 
 
 P. 56, 1. 17. As to Miftakes fuppos'd to be 
 introduc'd by a Reader dictating to a Tranfcri- 
 her ; the argument wili iland jufl the fame, if 
 
 we
 
 CONCLUSION. 525 
 
 we confider a Tranfcriber as dictating to bimfelf 
 i. e. as founding to himfelf a feries of words, 
 which his eye had juft read in the copy : and 
 this is a cuftom, which prevails with moft, if 
 not all, Tranfcribers. 
 
 P. 60, 1. 21. This Suppofition is farther con- 
 firm^ by Camb. MS 3, in which the word is 
 tDJjnil ' that the 4th letter is y appears from 
 the fame form in the next word. 
 
 P. 6 1, 1. i. Syr us Inter pres^ Hebraico ex con- 
 textu, i)erbum de verbo, ut plurimum interpreta- 
 tur : ut facillimum fit quid legerit (in Codice fuo 
 Hebraico) dijudicare. Houbigant, Proleg. p. 2 93. 
 
 P. 62, 1. 8. As to the phrafes niNn* 'fiStf miV 
 and miO mrv> I formerly thought the latter 
 to be the jufter phrafe, becaufe it occurs ten times 
 oftner. But I now fufpecl:, that nStf always 
 preceded rviJO* originally, when applied to God. 
 For mKUi (Hofts or Armies) can by no means, 
 I think, be allow'd to be a Name of 'God ; and it 
 is never applied to God, but in conjunction ; as 
 Holy! Holy! Holy! Lord God of (not Sabbath 
 as generally pronounc'd and mifunderftood, but) 
 Tzebaoth i. e. Ho/is. The word mrv yebovab, be- 
 ing the proper and peculiar Name of God, never 
 has the n before it, or a Pronoun after it ; and 
 is therefore with equal impropriety plac'd in con- 
 ilruct Jebovab of hojh : whereas yehmab God 
 
 U u u of
 
 526 CONCLUSION. 
 
 ofhofts is intelligible and compleatly proper. The 
 Eng. Verfion therefore in pages 62, 250, 251, 
 fhould be for JEHOVAH, the God ofhojis y was 
 with him. 
 
 P. 62, 1. 19. The reafon, why the final Mem 
 has been in fome words improperly inferted, and 
 in others as improperly omitted, is well affign'd 
 by Vitringa, Obfervat.facr. p. 187: namely, that 
 the Jews, in their ancient copies of the Scrip- 
 tures, as at prefent in their common writing, o- 
 mitted the D, and fignified it by a Dam, as 
 'HJQ ; which oblique ftroke, upon the filling 
 up words that had been abbreviated, was fome- 
 times not obferv'd, and confequently the CD was 
 omitted ; or elfe the ftroke was fancied to exift, 
 and fo the CD was inferted. See pag. 50 1 . 
 
 P. 85, 1. 3. This was obferv'd in confequence 
 of Walton's Account, fee Prolegom. p. 3 2 ; be- 
 fore the Difcovery of the curious Eto?i Edition : 
 but yet this lafl contains only a third part of the 
 Old Teftament. 
 
 P. 87, 1. 13. This appears to be the cafe in 
 the preceding MSS, moft of which were rul'd 
 to guide the pen. And that the Line thus rul'd 
 has occafion'd Miftakes, we have a remarkable 
 proof in Montfaucon (Diar. ItaL p. 55 ) who 
 thus accounts for MafTon's great Miftake, as to 
 St. Mark's Gofpel at Venice. Maflbn thought, 
 
 he
 
 CONCLUSION. 527 
 
 he had difcover'd it to be a Greek MS by the 4 
 letters KATA ; which prove to be BATA, being 
 part of the 2 Latin words IBATAUTEM : and he 
 thought, he had in fome places difcover'd A, 
 which happens to be A, the tranfverfe ftroke 
 being now invifible, and the 2 legs being join'd 
 at bottom by the line rufd to guide the Tranfcri- 
 ber. I fhall juft remark, that thefe 20 Leaves 
 at Venice , with the laft 8 Leaves at Prague^ 
 make the whole Gofpel of St. Mark ; which 
 Gofpel belongs to the other 3 Gofpels in the 
 Forojulian MS: a MS, which was writ in the- 
 6th Century, and contains the oldefl Copy of Sf. 
 Jerom's Verfwn of the Gofpels. See Laur. a Turre's 
 excellent Letter to Blanchini, in his Evangel. 
 quadrup. 'Tom. 4, pag, 543 . 
 
 P. 89, 1. 2. This Obfervation is juftified by 
 the preceding MSS j in many of which one can 
 fcarce diftinguim the limiliar Letters ; and fome- 
 times it is impoffible. In line 25 the word mould 
 be pa. 
 
 P. 90, 1. 4. The Syr. and Ar. Verfions have 
 alfo Barak. And they both read Samfon, as the 
 laft Deliverer mention'd, where the prefent Heb. 
 Text has Samuel, the name of the perlbn then 
 fpeaking. Samfon was more likely to be cele- 
 brated by Samuel, and he is mention'd alfo by 
 St. Paul Gideon, Barak, Samfon, Jepbtha &c. 
 
 U u u 2 In
 
 528 CONCLUSION. 
 
 In line 18 the Syr. Verfion alfo reads Achar. 
 
 P. 92, 1. 4. See alfo 'SnNH and VVHH in Jofh. 
 7, 215 8,33 &c. 
 
 P. 95, 1.4. Dr. Eyre, in a Letter to A-Bp 
 Ufher, exprefs'd himfelf thus Nonfum aoai- 
 xofAcLvvi? (lit Glenardus olim) Jed Arabicari parum- 
 per, & primoribus tantum labrls Arabicifmum de- 
 gujlare vo/iti, ut in aim quibufdam reftius judicare 
 pcffem. The Ufefulnefs of the Arabic Language 
 is fairly ffoted in the following Maxim of the 
 
 Rabbins mantra vpi 
 
 7r iftos lingua, Sy- 
 
 ^ Arabica y & Hebraica^ conjunguntur ex fi- 
 tniKtudine, in Nominibus, Confuetudinibus^ & Mi- 
 nijleriis fuis. Plantavitii Paufani Epifc. Lodoven. 
 Fieri leg. Rabbin. 1805. 
 
 P. 98, 1. 13. This is alfo the exad: form of 
 the Mem in the Vatican MS of the Pentateuch 
 and Prophets, faid to be almoft 800 years old : 
 fee Blahchini's Evang. quad. 'Tom. 4, p. 604. In 
 line the 26th of this page the word mould be 
 
 S . >_-> V-fc^_'. 
 
 P. 99, 1. 6. We find this reading xocr< xo/ 3vo 
 in the valuable Edition of Aldus, printed 1518; 
 concerning which A-Bp Ufher fays ex multis 
 vetuftijjimis Exemplar i bus excufa prodiit . De LXX 
 Verfione, p. 83. 
 
 P. 100,
 
 CONCLUSION. 529 
 
 P. 100, 1. 26. This is the cafe in fome of the 
 preceding MSS. And as to the Miftake of *i 200 
 for "| 500; there is another Corruption intro- 
 duc'd by a Miftake of one of the fame two let- 
 ters, in i Kin. 9, 23, parallel to 2 Chro. 8, 10 ; 
 in the former we have 550 yj, and in the latter 
 250 rv The 3 50 has alfo been miftaken for 
 its fimilar letter D 20, only 5 verfes after the 
 preceding inftance. See other inftances of Num- 
 bers evidently miftaken through the refemblance 
 ( not of words, but of) numeral Letters, in pag. 
 463, 474: to which I mail only add Gen. 2, 2, 
 T DV1 in die feptimo in the prefent Hebrew, pro- 
 bably corrupted from T DVH in die fexfo, as in 
 the Samar. Text, and Gr. and Syr. Verlions. 
 
 This Evidence, which arifes from the Num- 
 bers miftaken where the Letters fignifying thofe 
 Numbers are particularly fimilar, is the ftrong- 
 eft kind of Proof, that the Numbers in the Heb. 
 Bible were exprefs'd formerly by numeral Let- 
 ters ; as they were in the ancient Gr. and Lat. 
 MSS. As to the Latin MSS j the Eufebian MS 
 of the Gofpels, almoft 4400 years old, has nu- 
 meral Letters: thus in Matth. i, 17, GENERA- 
 TIONES xiin. As to the Greek MSS; Beza's 
 MS in Cambridge, perhaps the moft ancient now 
 extant, has numeral Letters : thus in Joh. 21,11, 
 for 153 we have PNT. On this principle Eufe- 
 
 bius,
 
 530 CONCLUSION. 
 
 bius, and other primitive Writers, accounted for 
 the difference between the Evangelifts concern- 
 ing the hour of Chrift's Crucifixion. Irenaeus, 
 treating of the number 666, fays, In omnibus an- 
 tiquis & probatlj/imis fcripturh Numero hoc pofito, 
 fecundum Grace/rum computationem y perLiteras &c. 
 That the Greek Numbers were thus exprefs'd in 
 Origen's Hexapla, is prefumeable from the very 
 ancient Colbertine Fragment of Judges, copied 
 from it; which, in ch. 10, 3, is exprefs'd thus 
 EKPINENTONIZPAHABKAIKETHKAlErEN 
 
 ONTOAT'mBKAiATioi &c. fee Montfaucon's 
 Pantograph. Gr. p. 1 87. On the celebrated Si- 
 gean Infcription, cut about 550 years before 
 Chrift, there is the word HE0MON ; upon which 
 Chimull obferves, p. 6 lonica vetus afpirata 
 H, vocalis longa vicem non adhuc gerens, fed o5la- 
 vum in alphabeto locum, lit n Hebrtforum y occu- 
 pans; ejufque adhuc retlnem tejlimomum^ quod ab 
 eo ufque tempore inter numeralia cclo denotaverit. 
 
 If then the Heb. n was us'd fo early for the 
 number 8, no doubt the other letters were us'd 
 to exprefs the other numbers, and as the Alpha- 
 bet contain'd 22 letters, thefe would exprefs num- 
 bers to 400 i when the addition of the 4 laft to 
 one another would exprefs every remaining hun- 
 dred. But fuch an addition being found incon- 
 venient, (as pnn 900) the Jews invented a dif- 
 ferent
 
 CONCLUSION. 531 
 
 ferent form of 5 letters, (probably) that they 
 might exprefs every hundred by one mark only, 
 for we find the 5 finals us'd by the Jews to ex- 
 prefs the 5 remaining hundreds *] 500, Q 600, 
 | 700, f\ 800, ^ 900. The invention therefore 
 of thefe different forms feems to prove the Cuf- 
 tom of ufing numeral Letters j and confequently 
 this Cuftom will be allow'd to have been as old 
 at leaft, if not older than fuch finals : which fi- 
 nals muft be allow'd to be of confiderable Anti- 
 quity. The final Mem in the middle of a word 
 (Ifai. 9, 6) is remark'd in the Talmud : and the 
 Authors of both the Babylon and Jerufalem Tal- 
 muds fpeak of the 5 finals letters, as being of 
 great Antiquity even in their time. Leufden's 
 PhiloL Heb. p. 1 28. See the preceding pages 403, 
 495. As to the in n&'VT), Aben-Ezra, who 
 liv'd above 600 years fmce, confider'd it as the 
 numeral Letter for ten : and however abfurd it 
 was, to confider the as a numeral Letter in that 
 particular place ; he could not have fo confider'd 
 it, but upon the fuppofition or knowledge that Num- 
 bers had been formerly exprefs'd by fingle Letters. 
 The learned Vignoles (in his Chronologie de JJ 
 Hiftoire Sainte, Liv. i 29) has offer'd a Con- 
 jecture, which well deferves to be confider'd : 
 and it is that the Heb. Bible Numbers have 
 been, at fome time heretofore, exprefs'd by Marks 
 
 analo-
 
 532 CONCLUSION. 
 
 analogous to our common Figures I, 2, 3 &c. 
 and that thefe Marks for Numbers, having per- 
 haps been communicated by the Arabians toge- 
 ther with their Vowel-Points, were us'd by fome 
 ( if not all the ) Jewifh Tranfcribers, before the 
 Doctors of Tiberias publim'd their particular Co- 
 py of the Heb. Bible, in which all Contractions 
 were difcontinued and the Numbers were confe- 
 quently exprefs'd by words at full length. This 
 Conjecture, however new, is countenanc'd by 
 fome Numbers, the miftakes in which are moft 
 eafily accounted for, by admitting the Addition, 
 Omiffion, or Tranfpofition of a Cipher. In i Sam. 
 6, 19, we read, that the Lord fmote 50070 Phi- 
 liftines, for looking into the Ark ; but in the Syr. 
 and Ar. Verlions the fum is only 5070. In i Kin. 
 4, 26, we read, that Solomon had 40000 flails 
 for horfes; but in aChro. 9, 25, only 4000. 
 And in 2Chro. 13; 3, 17, we read, that Abijah 
 took the field with an Army of 400,000 chofen 
 men of Judah, and was oppos'd by Jeroboam at 
 the head of 800,000 chofen men of Ifraelj and 
 that there were flain of the men of Ifrael 500,000. 
 This wonderful Battle not being recorded in 
 Kings, we have no Parallel Place to confirm or 
 corrett thefe Numbers by; for many learned 
 men fuppofe them corrupted. The preceding 
 Author's Conjecture feems here very probable, 
 
 that
 
 CONCLUSION. 533 
 
 that a Cipher has been improperly inferted in 
 each of thefe 3 fums j the fubtradiion of which 
 will reduce them to 40,000, 80,000, & 50,000. 
 Vignoles remarks ( and he remarks truly ) . that 
 the Old Lat. Tranflation of Jofephus has thefe 
 lajl Numbers; and, that they were formerly in 
 the Greek Text of that Author he prefumes far- 
 ther, becaufe Abarbanel ( as the Reader may fee 
 in Meyer's Chronicon, p. 797) accufes Jofephus of 
 having made Jeroboams lofs no more than 50,000 
 contrary to the Heb. *Text 3 a Charge, which could 
 not have been brought againfl Jofephus, if the 
 Copy feen by Abarbanel had read 500,000 a- 
 greeably to the Heb. Text. The preceding lejjer 
 Numbers are alfo in fome MSS of Epiphanius ; 
 as we are told by Hudfon, the learned Editor of 
 Jofephus. That the Numbers of Jofephus in 
 this place have been alter'd, feems farther pro- 
 bable from the nature of the oldeft printed Lat. 
 Verfions. In the Venice Edition of 1486, the 
 numbers are 40,000, 80,000 and 50,000. But 
 in an Edition evidently older, tho' without the 
 Date when or the Place where printed, the read- 
 ing is XL mili a virorum Jeroboam vero manus 
 duplex erat Q? Quingenta milia. So that we 
 are told here, that 500,000 were flain out of 
 80,000 ; which is plainly impoffible. This old 
 Edition is in the valuable Library of the Rev. 
 
 Xxx and
 
 534 CONCLUSION. 
 
 and very Learned Mr. Sanford, Fellow of Bal- 
 liol College. In which College Library, there is 
 yet an Older (and perhaps the firjl-pri nted) E- 
 dition of Jofephus, on Vellum, given by Dr. Gray 
 Bp of Ely, who died in 1478 ; and in this cu- 
 rious Edition the numbers are quadraginta milia 
 duplex 6? Quinquaginta milia. If then, 
 as feems extreamly probable, the larger Num- 
 bers now found in the Greek Text of Jofephus 
 are not original, but inferted to confirm the 
 Numbers before corrupted in Chronicles ; per- 
 haps the claufe now in Jofephus, which magni- 
 fies the greatnefs of the flaughter, is alfo foifted 
 in to fupport and countenance the larger Num- 
 bers. 
 
 If then the Numbers in the preceding Texts 
 of Scripture (one of which is certainly miftaken) 
 feem to owe their Corruption to the improper 
 Addition of a Cipher -, they furnifh a ftrong pre- 
 fumption in favour of the Conjecture before- 
 mention'd. (An Arabic Cipher might very eaiily 
 be added or omitted, becaufe it is nothing more 
 than our Period (.) as appears, not only from 
 Erpenius, but from one Arab. Almanack brought 
 from Egypt by the late Rev. and Learned Dr. 
 Shaw, and from another in the pofTeffion of my 
 worthy Friend Mr. Coftard, who has alfo tran- 
 fcrib'd the former.) But then, as Miftakes in o- 
 
 ther
 
 CONCLUSION. 535 
 
 ther Numbers are more naturally accounted for 
 on the principle of numeral Letters j may it not 
 be admitted, that Both Cujloms have formerly ob- 
 tain'd among the Jews at different Times, and in 
 different Countries ? That this was the cafe a- 
 mong the Arabians, we are alfur'd by Erpenius ; 
 who fays, that the older Arabians exprefs'd Num- 
 bers by the alphabetical Letters, but that the la- 
 ter Arabians had borrow'd from the Indians the 
 Figures i, 2, 3 &c. which however were fome- 
 what different from our common Figures. 
 
 I mail only add on this important Subject, 
 that in confidering the Bible Numbers as ex- 
 prefs'd formerly by numeral Letters, we mall do 
 well to compare the Samar. Letters, particularly 
 in their ancient Medaltic Character; feveral Forms, 
 very different from thofe in the prefent Samar. 
 MSS, having been happily recover'd by the learn- 
 ed Mr. Swinton, in his late Diflertations on the 
 Citiean Infcriptions and fome Samar. and Phoe- 
 nician Coins. And an acquaintance with the old 
 Samar. Character will be of tne greater ufe, the 
 longer the Old Teftament continued to be writ 
 in that Character. Perhaps then die great like- 
 nefs of the Samar. Capb and Mem ( *j *^ ) may 
 have occafion'd the miftake of 40 for 20, re- 
 mark'd pag. 98. The Capb and Nun are alfo 
 very limilar, in the later Samar. Character (% ^j) 
 
 X x x 2 and
 
 536 CONCLUSION. 
 
 and alfo in the Medallic Character, fee Mr. Swin- 
 ton'sjir/l Table : which likenefs may have caus'd 
 the miilake remark'd in the beginning of this 
 Note. It may be added to the preceding Obfer- 
 vations, that on the Sixth Coin exhibited by Mr. 
 Swinton (ftruck, about 150 years before Chrift, 
 by Jonathan the Jewim High-Prieft) the lafl let- 
 ter feems evidently to be the Samar. Befb y figni- 
 fying the number two : fee the Diflertation, p. 69. 
 
 P. 103, 1. 1 6. All the Lexicographers do not 
 
 agree in the pa/Jive fenfe of y?n : in the Com- 
 
 plut. Lexicon it is y?n (chalal) vulnerare, inter- 
 
 jlcere^ occidere ; and in Udal's Heb. Eng. Lexicon 
 
 we read SSn he wounded \ he killed. 
 
 P. no, 1. 12. Tho' the preceding Correction 
 in the Pfalm feems fully juftified by the Context 
 and the parallel words in Exodus; yet, as the 
 Phrafe is very bold, I mall give one or two 
 more inftances. Ifai. 42, 13; The Lord Jhall go 
 forth as a mighty man ; be flail Jlir up jealoufy, 
 like a man of war. Jer. 20, 1 1 ; The Lord is 
 with me TOJO **&K paxfat- See alfo Pf.yS, 65. 
 
 P. 1 10, 1. 27. All, in the Heb. Language, fig- 
 nifies fometimes no more than many - y and many 
 fometimes fignifies all. Thus in Daniel's Pro- 
 phecy of a general Refurreflion (ch. 12, 2) many 
 Jkall awake ; which our Saviour explains by all 
 &c. Joh. 5. 28 : and that all fignifies no more 
 
 than
 
 CONCLUSION. 537 
 
 than a great many, fee Exod. 953,6, compar'd 
 with ch. 9, 195 12, 29. So that this verfe in the 
 Proverbs fhou'd be render'd Multos enim mili- 
 tes dejecit, 6? fortijfimi plurimi ab ea interfetfi 
 fimt (the word quique mould be alfo phirimi in 
 pag. 120, lin. 10) that is, in the Paraphrafe of 
 Dr. Hammond The moft valiant Heroes, the 
 mofl puiffant Soldiers, that have never yielded, but 
 flood undaunted againji all other ajjaidts, have ge- 
 nerally been vanquijtid, and frequently deflroyd, by 
 the allurements of Women. 
 
 P. 1 1 8, 1. 2. Inftead of yet, read then. 
 
 P. 119, 1. 27. Schmidius alfo, in hi-s excellent 
 Lat. Bible, renders the prepofition here byjine. 
 
 P. 122, 1. 22. O Beauty of Ifrael! a warrior 
 on thine high places! To confirm the propriety of 
 thus applying *]TH2 excelfa tua, it may be re- 
 mark'd, that David in this fame book (ch. 22, 
 34) thus exprefTes his gratitude to God, for gi- 
 ving him Courage and Conqueft 
 
 He maketh my feet like hinds feet, fwift to purfue 
 the flying enemy j but, as to me, be maketh me 
 tojlandfirm on my high places: fuper excelfa mea 
 flare faciet me : Hare . The Reader will pleafe 
 to obferve, that, in pag. 120, I exprefs'd myfelf 
 more doubtfully, as to SSn Signifying attivdy in 
 the i ft. and 3d. inflances, than in the 2d ; which 
 
 indeed
 
 538 CONCLUSION. 
 
 indeed appears frill, as it did formerly, indubi- 
 table. Perhaps, as to the ift. and 3d. we may 
 apply the obfervation in p. 105, 1. 21. 
 
 P. 128, 1.6. The reafon of the Greek Ver- 
 fion's having now 2 or 3 different rendrings of 
 the fame words is this. Origen's Hexapla (which 
 has been fuppos'd to have made 50 Folio Vo- 
 lumes) being too large to be entirely tranfcrib'd, 
 the Learned, inferted many of its Various Ren- 
 drings in the Margin of their old Greek Verfion, 
 adding fometimes their own Remarks; which 
 Variations and Remarks were afterwards taken 
 by Tranfcribers into the Text at firft perhaps 
 within Parenthefes, which have been iince omit- 
 ted. Montfaucon fays, that the Coiflinian Gr. 
 MS. of the Octateuch (writ about noo years 
 iince) in marginibus effert lefliones Aquilcz Gfc. 
 multo frequentiores Us quce in aliis Bibliis, libris 
 Mtis, feruntur. Jtticz marginales note? funt inter- 
 pretationes, plenimque allegoricce, anagogica, ethi- 
 C(Z> raro literates. See Biblioth. Coijlin. & Blan- 
 chini's Evang. quad. Tom. 4, p. 589. 
 
 P. 132, 1. 12. This is a very considerable O- 
 miffion ; yet not fo confiderable, as fome men- 
 tion'd p. 396. Omiffions equally great have been 
 made by the Tranfcribers of other ancient Books ; 
 and, perhaps, the 22 lines in Virgil's 2d. Book, 
 from ver. 566 to 589, were formerly omitted by 
 
 acci-
 
 CONCLUSION. 539 
 
 accident. Servius fays, hi funt Ferfus, quos Tucca 
 
 6 Varus obliti funt. Thefe Verfes are not found 
 in the famous Florence MS, writ almoft 1300 
 years fince, and lately printed by Fogginus ; and 
 yet they were undoubtedly in the Book at firft, 
 becaufe Verfe 60 1 refers to Verfe 569 &c. 
 
 P. 134, 1. 14. Thus, in 2 Chro. 15, 8, we 
 have Odea 1 , inftead of Azariah the fon of Oded$ 
 fee the LXX (Alex. Edit.) the Syr. and Vulg. 
 Veriions. The fame feems to be the cafe, in ver. 
 
 7 of the 1 6th chapter ; where we now read Ha- 
 nani, inftead of Jehu the fon of Hanani ; fee 
 i Kin. 1 6, i &c. 
 
 P. 135, 1. 12. Inftead of in any Verfion &c 
 read in the Text or any Verfion of Samuel, and there- 
 fore perhaps 'was not original. 
 
 P. 137, 1. n. Among the Var. Readings of 
 St. Jerom's Tranflation collected in Blanchini's 
 Vindicia &c. we have here Apbes-domim. 
 
 P. 141, 1. 17. Verfion mould be Text. 
 
 P. 156, 1. 22. nntfty mould be nn^'tf. 
 
 P. 157, 1. i. I am now inclin'd to think the 
 participle DO^Tin ambulantes to be genuine. 
 
 P. 1 60, 1. 4. This reafon is given by Walton, 
 Proleg. p. 49. Videntur pofteriores Judtfi jinnies 
 fuijje Romanis ; quod nomen Dei, fub cujus tutela 
 erant^ftudiofe occultarunt, ne hoftes ipfum evocarent, 
 ( But in pag, 1 6 he fays, the Jews did not pro- 
 nounce
 
 540 CONCLUSION. 
 
 nounce it ob majorem reverentiam.) Jofephus, de 
 hoc nomine loqucns, fubjicit tri^i us ov Sipx pot - 
 -TT&V. Cerium eft, apud Judceos longe ante Chrifti 
 tempora (ante tempora 70 Interpretum) nominis 
 hujus pronunciation m fub magna paena inter di^am 
 fuijje omnibus i nift foils Sacerdotibus, cum in tern- 
 plo populum folenniter benedicerent ; unde poji tem- 
 pli everfionem nemini omnino licitum fuit illud ef- 
 fari ; G? fie brevi vera pronunciatio penitus periit. 
 Perhaps, as this cuftom of not pronouncing Je- 
 bovah continued after the deftruftion of Jerufalem y 
 it was rather owing to a fuperflitious Reverence, 
 than political Precaution. The judicious Critic 
 laft mention'd thinks the prefent Points under 
 niiT to belong to ^*ttf ; and that niiT is rather 
 to be pronounc'd Jabvo than Jehovah. ( Diodo- 
 rus Siculus, Porphyry, and other Heathens, had, 
 fome how or other, learnt the Name of the God 
 of the Jews to be iAa or IET&, and the word 
 I Ail is frequent on the Bafilidian Gems.) If the 
 true pronunciation of this awful Name were cer- 
 tainly loft ; I mould prefume, that, whenever a 
 New Tranflation of the Bible mail happily be 
 undertaken, the prefent pronunciation, which is 
 grown venerable by ufe, might properly be re- 
 tain'd. But, that this word was pronounc'd J E- 
 H o v A H, fo early at leaft as the 2d. Chriftian Cen- 
 tury, feems evident from a DifTertation on the 
 
 cele-
 
 CONCLUSION. 541 
 
 celebrated words of Demetrius Phalereus, con- 
 cerning praiiing God by thefeven Vowels IEHHOTA 
 ( H being an afpirate for n> and or expreffing ) ) 
 in p. 245 of Commentarii Societatis Regice Scien- 
 tiarum Gottingenjis> 1752. 
 
 P. 164, 1.3. See this reading excellently de- 
 fended by the learned Witfius, in the preface to 
 his Mifcell. Sacra. But, if the reading in the 
 Text be preferable, in this inftance ; it certainly 
 is not, in Ifai. 9, 3 Thou haft multiplied the na- 
 tion , and not encreafed the joy j they joy before tbee, 
 according to the joy in barofft t and as men rejoice 
 'when they divide the fpoil. When the Reader re- 
 flects, that Ifaiah is the writer ; he will at once 
 determine, that the preceding Sentence could not 
 fland thus originally. The word K7 non mould 
 be certainly Y? ei (as it is in the Margin of the 
 Heb. Text, and to him is in the Margin of the 
 Eng. Bible) Thou haft multiplied the nation ; 
 thou haft encreafed the joy thereof. They joy before 
 thee^ according to the joy in harueft &c. MS 2 had 
 17 ei here originally ; as I infer from the word's 
 being erafs'd by a Maforetic Corrector : for it 
 would not have been eras'd, had it been fr*7 non 
 agreeably to the abfurd determination of the Ma- 
 fora and the later MSS. The judicious Mr. Mede 
 has a truly excellent Explanation of the begin- 
 ning of this chapter 5 in Book i, Difc. 25. This 
 
 Yyy Pro-,
 
 542 CONCLUSION. 
 
 Prophecy, fays he, is quoted by St. Matthew, cb. 4, 
 14 Blind Jews, that- could not fee it! Nav, 
 I mujl fay yet more : even we Chrijlians cannot al- 
 together be excused; 'who, by following the Jews too 
 clofe, have fo troubled and darken 'd this Prophecy, 
 by mijlranflating and mifdiftinguifoing it, that we 
 can hardly tell how to defend St. Matthew's appli- 
 cation thereof-, much lefs fee the Evidence of fo no- 
 ble and clear a Prophecy. I think the Devil did 
 owe it a fpight from the beginning. &c. Carpzo- 
 vius tells us, p.3i8 ; Uterque fenfus commodus eft 
 & affirmations ("p ei) refpettu ad Mejjiam habit o ; 
 & negations (VO non) relatione ad gentem yudai~ 
 camfafta. But could this Author think, that the 
 infpir'd Writer writ both i^ and ^ ? If not, 
 why rcmft.jlat Contradictions be faid to be both of 
 them commodious, when one of them mujl befalfe? 
 
 P. 165, 1.22. 'D^ett fhould be D'JBa. 
 
 P. 168, 1. 13. If any one would fee, into what 
 Abfurdity men may be led by defending every 
 reading in the printed Heb. Text, he may refer 
 to Schoettgenii Hor<z Hebraic*?, p. 80 ; which 
 will give him a curious fpecimen upon this Word 
 H vivens, miftaken for *^n virtus. In the 8th. 
 line of this page, 3 ad. mould be 3 ift. And on 
 line 26, we may add the remark of Anfaldus, in 
 his late Treatife de forenji Judcecrum buccina, p. 
 1 6. Quawrcis ego. verms verba ilia ( in tuba Dei ) 
 
 Hebraif-
 
 CONCLUSION. 545 
 
 Hebraifmum redolere Jentiam, ac /ignificare in tu- 
 ba maxima , in tuba maxime fonora ; Hebrceorum 
 dicendi forma^ fuperlati<ua nominafrequentiffime ad- 
 junSiione alicujus ex nominibus Dei efferentium 6cc. 
 
 P. 170, 1. 19. Infteadof Milks read AT///; the 
 fame in p. 274, 1. 23 ; and in p. 27-8, 1. 4. 
 
 P. 184. 1. 20. I now greatly fufpect the truth 
 of this Remark ; having lately perus'd Mr. Jack- 
 fon's Chronolog. Antiquities. But, without iniift- 
 ing on the Probability of his Chronology from 
 the Creation to the Flood, from the Flood to the 
 Call of Abraham, and from the Exodus to So- 
 lomon's Temple, I mall only remark that, if 
 in the account of the Generations in this laft 
 interval Jbme Names have been omitted^ as he fup- 
 pofes here in Ruth ; (and as Circumfbnces led 
 him to fuppofe them omitted between Salmon and 
 Boaz :) I think, we may draw a ftrong proof of 
 the Omiffion, from the prefent Heb. Text itfelf, 
 and in this place. Let us obferve the Genealogy : 
 Pharez begat Hezron ; Hezron begat Ram ; Ram 
 begat Amminadab ; Amminadab begat Nabjhon ; 
 Nakjhon begat (not Salmon but) Salntab; and 
 (then it follows) Salmon begat Boaz. So that, 
 tho' the name of the Son of the perfon preceding 
 be repeated, in every other inftance, as the name 
 of the Father of the following ; and tho' it be 
 repeated in exactly the fame manner, as the I- 
 
 dentity
 
 544 CONCLUSION. 
 
 dentity of the Perfon requir'dj yet here, tho 1 
 Nahfhon begat nD*7E? Salmah, it was \tih& Sal- 
 mon begat Boaz : fo that we may fairly fuppofe 
 the Omiffion to be in this very place ; and it was, 
 perhaps, occalion'd by the likenefs of thefe two 
 Names. 
 
 The perufal of this. Chronological Work has 
 alfo corrected another Opinion mention'd p. 275, 
 1. 8 5 as it feems to furnifh a Proof of a volunta- 
 ry Corruption of the Heb. Text, in the article of 
 Chronology. As to the Age of Jared, in Gen. 5, 
 1 8 ; the Samar. MS N. 50 feems to have had 
 the word riKEl G? centum; becaufe there is a Ra- 
 zure in the place proper for this word, and the 
 Space is juft equal to it. See Jackfon's Chrono- 
 logy ; Vol. i, p. 54 59 and 71 175. I fhall 
 only add, that, if the Arguments offer'd by this 
 Author in favour of the Greek Chronology of 
 the firH: Ages mould be thought infufficient ; 
 perhaps they are render 'd fully compleat by the 
 additional Arguments offer'd in Mr. Cockburn's 
 late Enquiry on the Deluge; p. 59 &c. 
 
 P. 200, 1. 24. Perhaps Jonathan was the fon 
 of this very Shammah ; lince Father and Son 
 might both be honour'd in the Army at the fame 
 time. And then it will be preferable to exprefs 
 the name of Shammah here, as it is exprefs'd u^ 
 niverfally in ver. 1 1 , 
 
 P. 203.
 
 CONCLUSION. 545 
 
 P. 202, 1. 12. As theLXX have vios, perhaps 
 is the preferable reading j confequently 
 the Eng. Verfion in p. 203 will be Gouni y the fon 
 of Hafiem. One inftance is given p. 203 of yij, 
 LXX (Alex.) Towi, being a Bible Name ; and 
 we read alfo in Gen. 46, 24, ^u, LXX (Alex.) 
 Taw i. Another inftance of n prefix'd to a Pro- 
 per Name occurs in 2 Sam. 24, 1 6, | OTltf H A- 
 raunah: fee p. 203, 1. 15. 
 
 P. 211, 1. 20. On this occafion of cenfuring 
 the Greek Verfion, it may be proper to give the 
 following judicious Determination of Dr. Hody, 
 De Text. Orig. p. 364. Ut breviter proferam quod 
 & fentio, & (Ji quod aliud) fcio : caufa vera, 
 quare novam ex Heb. interpretatimem aggrejfus eji 
 Hieroriymus , hcec fuit Non placuit ei LXX 
 Verfio ; qiiippe Textui Heb. non fat is conjbna> in 
 multis deficient, in multis redundans, in multis er- 
 ram. Hoc firmum fixumque maneat. Neque eo ta- 
 men tendit hie nojler labor, ut Verfionis Grceca auc- 
 toritas ufque adeo diminuatur & Iabefa5letur> ut 
 prorfus nulla ei fuperfit. Id longe a noftris ftudiis 
 abejl. Quin G? earn quantivis prctii thefaurum lu- 
 bens fateor ego, atque etiam profit eor - 3 G? pro ea. 
 equidem Deo 0. M. ex animo gratias ago. 
 
 P. 220, 1. 7. That Zabad belongs to the pre- 
 ceding Catalogue, and cannot be connected with 
 the Names following, is evident j becaufe the ve- 
 ry
 
 546 CONCLUSION. 
 
 ry next Name in Chronicles begins a New Or- 
 der; an Order of Men, that were inferior to the 
 37 : fee p. 223 227. 
 
 P. 224, 1. 25. Schmidius renders thefe words 
 properly fed fupra ilium triginta (ifti.) 
 
 P. 235, 1. 4. See F. Simon's Difquifitiones Cri- 
 tics de variis Biblior. Edit. p. 16, 52. 
 
 P. 247, 1.2i. That this is a true Charge up- 
 on the Mafora (tho' it has been worfhipp'd by 
 fome Jews and fome Chriftians, as was Nebu- 
 chadnezzar's golden Image by the Babylonians) 
 we fhall perhaps be fully convinc'd, when we 
 conlider the following Declarations of fome of 
 its fworn Votaries ; of the man, who firft di- 
 gefted and printed it ; of the man, who firfh ex- 
 plain'd it in Chaldee j of the man, who firft 
 turn'd it into Latin ; and of a man, whofe Zeal 
 for it was inferior to neither of the former. R. 
 Jac. Ben Chaim tells us, Poftquam infpexi libros 
 Major <Z) vidi illos omnino confufos, & ufque eo per- 
 turbatos, ut nulla in Us domus e [jet fine mortuo. R. 
 El. Levita affirms, Defeftw Mafora non pojje nu- 
 merarl. (See Walton's Prolegom. p. 48, and Hou- 
 bigant p. 40.) Buxtorf complains, Infinites er- 
 rores in Maforam introdiici^ cohterentia divellendo, 
 divcrfa uniendo, nativa hujus loci m alienum fo- 
 lum tranfplantando, detrahendo^ addendo, commu- 
 tando j pudenda r oero hie eft Judcsonim negligentia, 
 
 imma-
 
 CONCLUSION'. 547 
 
 immanis incuria & ofcitantia, ad manifeftifflma e- 
 tiam "dtia c&evteuije. (See his Comment ar. Ma- 
 foret. p. 196 and Preface.) And laftly, as to the 
 Mafora's being imperfeEl, contradictory and cor- 
 rupted; we find each article thus fupported by 
 Carpzovius. For, p. 3 1 8, he fays, Ut taceam, 
 ne dimidiam Maforte part em ad nos pervemj/e 
 p. 3 1 9, Sibimet ipfi paffim contradicere Maforam, 
 hoc, ut exemplis comprobatum datur, nee negarl 
 pot eft p. 320, Multis modis corrupt am y mutilam 
 & interpolatam ultra fatemur Ma for am. 
 
 If fuch then be the State of this Mafora 
 (which, it feems, is call'd The Hedge of the Law) 
 how can ib miferable an Enclofure confine any 
 thing, as it fhould do ; or, if it was ever fo firm 
 and compact at prefent, how would it fecure the 
 true Readings, that were gone aftray before it 
 was built ? So far indeed it would fecure them ; 
 it would fecure them from ever reentring, or be- 
 ing brought back to their original places. And 
 truly this great Dijfervice has been done by it ; 
 fince, however broken in fome parts, it has hedg'd 
 many a true Reading out of the Heb. Bible. 
 
 P. 271, 1.24. Auttor itaque fuerim, ut hca 
 ilia facri contextus, quce manca ejfe vet corrupt a 
 antecedentium & confequentium ratio demonftrat, 
 *ueterum Interpretum auxilio reftituantur ; cum, in 
 paucioribus ^ Codices MSS venire poj/int in fub- 
 
 fidium,
 
 548 C O N C L U S I O N, 
 
 Jidium. F. Simon's Difquifit. Critics, p. 51, 
 P. 290. 1. 27. F. Simon obferves (Difquifit. 
 Critic, p. 23 ) Conftanter affirmat Elias. Levita 
 Maforam Talmude pofleriorem ej/e, illiufque refert 
 initium ad annum Chrijli 506. Immo natam illam 
 ejje crediderim poft annum 600, & ab Arabibm 
 
 fumptam, quibus yudcei id omne quod habent rei 
 Grammatics & Critics acceptum referunt. Ha- 
 bent illi Alcorani fui Major am^ Judaicce baud ab- 
 
 Jimilem &c. 
 
 P. 297, 1. 17. If therefore the Complut. Edi- 
 tion, for inftance, mould not have been printed 
 from an Edition before printed according to the 
 Mafora, but entirely from MSS; yet it would 
 contain the fame Heb. Text, if the Heb. MSS, 
 from which its Text was printed, had been Ma- 
 foretically corrected. And that this was in fact 
 the cafe, we are told in Carpzovius, p. 389 : Sep- 
 tem Hebrteos Codices, qui 4 fee ulorum at at em ha- 
 builje & ad Maforam accomodati fuifie ab A. 
 
 +U 
 
 Montano perhibentur, ad ham Editionem compara- 
 *uit Ximenius. 
 
 P. 332, 1. 14. Fojfius f Morinus affirmant. 
 Codices puntfatos non inveniri vetuftiores 5 faculis - t 
 antiquioribus Punffa ab alia manu adjecJa ejje. 
 Wolf. Bib. Heb. Tom. 2. p. 325. 
 
 P. 333, 1. 27. Apparet noftram atatem ilia ma- 
 jorum noftrorum felifiorem effe, qua & fepius, f 
 
 fluri-
 
 CONCLUSION. 549 
 
 pluribus in locis, Codices Biblici Heb. manu exarati 
 efferuntur^ quam olim, ubi in maxima felicitatis 
 parte poncbatur, Codicem ullum^ ^el fait em par tern 
 ejus, oculis confpexiffe. Wolf. Biblioth. Heb. Tom. 
 2, p. 324. 
 
 P. 348, 1. 10. In the printed Pentateuch of 
 Mr. Swinton, mention'd p. 522, we have the 
 Marginal Note, and the /pace of nearly a whole 
 line left vacant. There is almoft as great a Va- 
 cancy left in this Pentateuch at Gen. 35, 22: fee 
 p. 371. As to line 25 of this page, Leufden ex- 
 prefTes himfelf yet more fully in his note on Jer. 
 38, 28 hiatus denotat fenfum ibi non ejje perfec- 
 tum fed VOCES QJJASDAM SUBINTELLIGI. 
 P.36i, 1. 1 8. A nongentis & amplius annis R. 
 Saadias fcripturam univerfam Arabico fermone do- 
 navit : unicum duntaxat Mojis Pentateuchum An- 
 gli, editum in ekgantibus illis Polyglottis^ nobis, 
 communicarunt . F. Simon's Difquijit. Crit. p. 105. 
 P. 369, 1. 26. The word %^ra mould be X.WK. 
 P. 371, 1. 13. This is one remarkable inftance 
 of the Truth of the Greek Verfion, where both 
 the prefent Heb. and Samar. Copies are corrupt- 
 ed; and I mall add another inftance, remarked 
 by Dr. Wall in his excellent Notes on the Old Tef- 
 tament. In Num. 35, 4, we read, in both the 
 Heb. and Samar. Copies, 1000 cubits round a- 
 bout ; which number however is, in the Greek 
 
 Z z z Ver-
 
 550 CONCLUSION. 
 
 Verfion, 2000 -, as it is certain from the next 
 verfe , that it muft have been originally : fee 
 
 P-437- 
 
 P. 399, 1.25. The preceding Obfervation is 
 
 not offer'd, as New; it is fo important and fo 
 ebvious, as to have been frequently enlarg'd up- 
 on : but it was too material to be pafs'd over in 
 this Extract of Miftakes in the prefent Heb. Bi- 
 bles. As there are a few Obfervations mention'd 
 in the courie of this DifTertation, which have 
 been made by Others ; it may be proper to ac- 
 quaint the Reader, that, where they are not af- 
 crib'd to Others, they are not fo afcrib'd, becaufe 
 the Author had not been indebted to Others for 
 the Difcovery. 
 
 P. 402, 1. 14. F. Simon properly obferves, we 
 ought to have federal good MSS of the Heb. Sa- 
 mar. Text^ in order to make a proper Criticifm-, 
 and then we Jhould not leave fo many Faults of the 
 < Tra?^fcriber s , as there are in the printed Copy. 
 Crit. Hift. of the Old Teft. B. i. ch. 1 1. 
 
 P. 410, 1. 8. Perhaps this cafe is miftated. For 
 as this negative particle always has the found of 
 the i, 'tis probable, that it was at firft writ tfy? j 
 and that the ) has been generally omitted, fince 
 the invention and addition of the Vowel-Points. 
 
 P. 410, 1. 22. I mall add one inftance, where 
 .the negative particle feems omitted in the printed 
 
 Text
 
 CONCLUSION. 551 
 
 itfelf. In Prov. 5, from ver. 3 to ver. 15, 
 Solomon difTuades his fon from following the 
 ftrange woman; and, from ver. 15 to ver. 20, 
 advifes him to confine himfelf to his own Wife, 
 in thefe figurative expreffions 13. Elbe aquam 
 de djlerna tua-, & fluent a de puteo tuo. 16. (Ne) 
 dij-pergantur fontes tuiforas ; (nee) in plateis rk'i 
 aquarum. 17. Sint tibi foli -, & alieni non parti- 
 cipent tecum. 18. Sit font tuns benedlSlm; & Ice- 
 tare cum uxore adolefcentice tucz. I prefume, that 
 the judicious Reader will fee the neceiTity of the 
 negation in the i6th verfe; and allow that it was 
 originally in the Text: efpecially as we now read 
 in the Greek Verfion (Vat. Edit.) MJJ wt^xxet- 
 e9-fc> 6cc. Origen and Clement of Alexandria have 
 alfo the negative particle ; and Aquila's Verfion 
 is Mj &a,<niQp'7riti<&u<rctv 6cc. De Dieu, feeing the 
 neceflity of this verfe being negative, recommend- 
 ed the reading it interrogatively. But that would 
 make it very harfli and unconnected ; and an In- 
 ter rogat he and a Negative amount to juft the 
 fame. This Remark on the Deficiency of N^ 
 non, or ^tf ne, is made by Cappellus ; who fup- 
 pofes another fuch Omiflion in the printed Text, 
 in ch. 14, 33 ; fee the Gr. Syr. and Ar. Verfions. 
 The negative particle is omitted, in ch. 6, 17, in 
 MS 60. 
 
 P. 416, 1. 21. F. Simon obferves, that the num- 
 
 Z z z 2 bcr
 
 552 CONCLUSION. 
 
 her cftbe Far. Readings, which are manifeftly Er- 
 rors of Tranfcribers, is not fo great in the good 
 MSS of the Bible, as in thofe which have been 
 printed with too much Jewifh Super/ft tion. 'This I 
 have obferv'd in reading fome MSS, which have 
 mw in the Text, without any remark in the Mar- 
 gin ; as it is in the Samar. Copy. Book i . ch. 1 1 . 
 
 P. 417, 1. 27. So in Jonah 2 ; 1,2; the word 
 for pifcis is firft jn and afterwards rUT On 
 which difference Leufden fays, Hinc concludunt 
 Judcei, quod Jonas prius fuerit in pifce mafculo, 
 qui erat auguftus, in quo potuit exfpatiari ; fed poft- 
 ea evomuijjet eum ille pifcis, & abforptus fuijfet a 
 pifce f<zm. qua erat plena ftetibus, in qua *valde 
 coarcJabatur :. & pr opt ere a orajfet ex vifeeribus 
 njnn pifcis illius famina ! 
 
 P. 443, 1.9. In uno Codice Hifpanico MS fit 
 mentio Civitatis refugii, quam exemplaria hattenus 
 edita non agnofcunt. F. Simon's Difquifit. Crit. 
 p. 49. It may be remark'd on line 24, from this 
 fame learned Critic Ubi Doctor aliquis apud 
 Judceos extitit, qui eruditionis qualifcunque nomen 
 fbi comparaverit ; flatim illi, prapojlera agendi 
 rations, Codices fuos ad illius exemplar reformave- 
 runt. Tales inter Judteos fuere DoEtores Scbolte 
 Tibsrienfis, Magijiri Ben Afher, Ben Nephtali, 
 Hillel, & alii quamplurimi. Hac arte tandem fac- 
 turn eft, ut, fublatis omnino vetujiis Bibliorum ex- 
 
 emplaribus,
 
 CONCLUSION. 553 
 
 emplaribus, fublatte quoque fuerint qua in rebus 
 majoris momenti erant Scripturarum Varietates. 
 Hcec omnia illujlrari poffent ex aliis ^udaorum }i- 
 bru &c. p. 50. Concerning HiUel, fee p. 14 of 
 the fame Author. 
 
 P. 443, 1. 26. The Mafora reckons 688 Verfes 
 in Ezra and Nehemiah, whereas there are now 
 found but 686. Leufden's Claris Hcb. p. 518. 
 See p. 246, 1. 21, of this Diflertation. 
 
 P. 449, 1. 1 6. The Mafora obferves, that there 
 are 43 words, in which is writ at the end, but 
 is not to be read. F. Simon, Book 2, ch. 13. 
 
 P. 460, 1. 2 1. Leufden fays, in his note on Pf. 
 68, 21 ; Non aufim dicere, pofteriores Major etbas, 
 ad confirmandam lefiionem Adonai, hujus infolenth 
 punttationiseffe auttores; ne cogerer fimul concedere 
 Textum in tot innumeris locis ejje corruption. 
 
 P. 476, 1. 15. This Tranfpoiition, repeated 16 
 times, would (if properly noted) have greatly 
 encreas'd the number 62 ; which is the number 
 given by the Maforets to thofe Miftakes, which 
 they call -iniNSI QlplD anterioratum & pojlerio- 
 ratum \. e. words, whofe letters are tranfpos'd. 
 Carpzovius, p. 301. 
 
 , P. 484, 1. 1 6. This word then, I prefume, is 
 clearly prov'd an Interpolation ; and yet the Ma- 
 fora confirms it. For Buxtorf fmartly replies to 
 Cappellus Hoc te, Critice, docuiJJ'et Mafora ; 
 
 / qua
 
 554 CONCLUSION. 
 
 qua vocem pmn* tanquam authentic am agnofcit* 
 No great Credit this, either to the Mafora, or to 
 its Advocate - 3 and yet he feems to think, that 
 he had anfwer'd moil unanfwerably. Anticriti- 
 ca, p. 519. 
 
 P. 498, 1. 20. As there is no Opinion fo ex- 
 travagant, but it may be entertain'd ; Matt. Hil- 
 ler (whom Capzovius, p. 335, calls <uir jlupendi 
 ingenii ? e ruditionis fummte) thought, and per- 
 fuaded others to think with him that the Keri 
 and Cetib were both infpir'd ! Utramque lettio- 
 y tarn textualem, tarn marginalem, cenfet $&- 
 Rapuit hoc eupfMi, in ajjenfum principes in 
 Orient ali liter atura vires, qui cty^vcictv Autoris 
 laudibus certatim extulerunt. p. 336. Upon this 
 principle then *]TDn and "JTOPT (fantti tui & 
 fanttm tuns) mull be both true and infpir'd 
 Readings, in this place. And on this principle 
 the fame Sentence with ^ non, and without it-, 
 muft be true and infpir'd. &c. And thus this 
 great Author, with his very laudable tv^a, has 
 made Truth and Infpiration to contradict Truth 
 and Infpiration ! What Abfurdities will not men 
 have recourfe to, in the determin'd Support of 
 an inveterate Prejudice ! 
 
 P. 505, 1. 28. We may add another inftance, 
 in the fame common Tranflation of Pfalm 22, i 
 My God, my God, look upon me, whv haji tkou 
 
 for.
 
 CONCLUSION. 55$ 
 
 forfaken me &c. The words look upon me are not 
 
 */ */ J. 
 
 in the Heb. Text > and every one knows, that 
 
 -i 
 
 they are not in our Saviour's citation of this paf- 
 
 fage on the Crofs, *//' Eli lama fabaftbani : 
 therefore they are the Englifh double Verfion of 
 the 2d. ^tf, as in the Gr. and Lat. Verfions. 
 
 P. 513, 1.28. The words Viftory and Sting 
 are by miftake printed in the place of each other. 
 
 P. 5 1 8, 1. 2. How an Error in one Copy could 
 afterwards obtain univerfally, which with fome 
 (it fliould feem) is a mighty Paradox, is well ac- 
 counted for by Vitringa, in his Obferuat. Sacr. 
 p. 724 Ad Id quoque velim anlmum ad<uerti y 
 quam facile evenire potuerit, ut mendcz unius codi- 
 cis ad alios codices quamplurimos tranjierint \ cum 
 Judtei multorum locorum & (Ztatum fape foliti fue- 
 rlnt fuos iibros Biblicos emendare ad exemplar 
 fcriptionis unius codicis Biblici. Huic vero incu- 
 ria Librariorum ut bene multce Variantes Leffio- 
 nes pojleriorum temporum originem fuam debent ; 
 Jic pariter non abfurdum videbatur^ illi ut caufie 
 adfcribere earn variationem leclionum *h& tf^. Ea 
 etenim (p. 720) fait iiicuri a Librariorum, qui co~ 
 dicibus facris defcribendis adhibiti funt ; ut certe^ 
 fi p<?na olim jlatuta fuijfet hifce Librariis, multi 
 merito in earn incurrijjjent . 
 
 FROM
 
 556 CONCLUSION. 
 
 FROM the many preceding Obfervations I 
 prefume we may now draw this Inference 
 
 tfhat the printed Editions are not abfolutely per- 
 fect Copies of the Original Books of the Old Tiejla- 
 
 ment. And the Confequence of this Truth is 
 That it is not only expedient, but necefTary, to 
 point out the Miftakes introduc'd by Tranfcri- 
 bers, and to reeftablim the original Readings : to 
 feparate the pure Gold from the Drofs and De- 
 filement, which it has contracted by Time and 
 Accidents. For we may well fay, with the Au- 
 thor of the Lamentations, ch. 4, i j How is the 
 Gold become dm ! How is the mojl fine Gold 
 changed ! 
 
 But whilfl we recede from the Notion of the 
 abfolute Integrity of our prefent Copies j we muft 
 be cautious how we fly off into the oppoiite Ex- 
 treme, where we mail be equally diftant from 
 Truth. I mean the Notion, which has been ad- 
 vanc'd by a late Noble Author ; who, in the 3d. 
 of his Letters on Hiftory lately printed, aflerts 
 
 That the Scriptures of the Old T^ejlament are 
 come down to us broken and confus'd, full of addi- 
 tions, interpolations and tranfpojitions y made we nei- 
 ther know when ?ior by whom-, and fuch in jhort, 
 a< never appeared on the face of any other book, on 
 whofe authority men have agreed to rely. Now, if 
 
 this
 
 CONCLUSION. 557 
 
 this were in fact the cafe ; the furprize would be 
 the lefs with all men of Judgment, when they 
 coniider the Antiquity of the Heb. Books , the Short- 
 nefs of their Words, the Likenefs of their Letters, 
 and the "oaft Number of Copies taken : cauies thefe, 
 which conftitute fuch an Apology, as no other 
 Book in the world is entitled to. But the prece- 
 ding Reflection of his Lordfhip's, not being ac- 
 companied with Proof, contains only his Opi- 
 nion ; and we muft remember, that it is the O- 
 pinion of One, who, it is prefum'd, knew no- 
 thing of the Books he was cenfuring, but from 
 Tranjlatiom all of which have many Faults of 
 their own to anfwer for. That there are fome 
 Miftakes in the prefent Copies of the Heb. Scrip- 
 tures, is certain. But we deny, that they are Jo 
 broken and confusd as reprefented ; or that they 
 are FULL of additions, interpolations and tranfpo- 
 Jitions : fince if all the corrupted Places could be 
 collected, though they would appear numerous by 
 themfefoes y they would probably be Jo few in 
 comparifon of the Places uncorrupted, as to bear 
 but a ijery fmall proportion. 
 
 But however that may be; the Old Tefta- 
 ment muft be condemn'd, at all Events : and 
 therefore we are told, that fome have talk' d of the 
 beauty and gigantic Jize of Adam, others of Cain 
 and Abel's quarreling about a girl 6cc. But, why 
 
 A a a a would
 
 558 CONCLUSION. 
 
 would his Lordfhip mention Stories, which en- 
 tirely owe their exiftence to the wild whim of 
 Jewim Rabbies, or the licentious imagination of 
 Mahometan Doctors ; and yet aflert, that they 
 are only EXTENSIONS of the Mofaic Hi/lory ? 
 Surely, if Bonzes and T^alapoim 'would almojl bhijh 
 to relate fuch Stories, to mention the Mofaic Hif- 
 tory as furniming the matter for them is fo un- 
 juft a charge, as a Bonze or a Talapoin 'would have 
 been totally afoamd of. In fhort ; there is fome- 
 thing fo extraordinary in his Lordmip's Remarks 
 on Sacred Hiftory, that it naturally reminds one 
 of what Dean Swift obferv'd in his Letter to 
 Mr. Pope, Dec. 10, 1725 IF LORD B. 
 
 EVER TRIFLES; IT MUST BE, WHEN HE 
 TURNS A DlVINE. 
 
 As his Lordmip has been pleas'd to felect one 
 pafTage of holy Scripture, and to treat it with a 
 fevere but unjuft Cenfure ; it may be proper to 
 offer a few Remarks upon it. The pafTage is 
 (Gen. 9. 25) Curfed be Canaan, a fervant of fer- 
 vanfs jkall he be unto his brethren : which words 
 were deliver'd on the following occafion. Noah 
 planted a Vineyard; and, being unacquainted 
 with the flrength of Wine, drank and was drimk,- 
 en ; and lay uncover'd within his Tent. Ham, 
 Noah's youngeft fon, faw his father's nakednefs, 
 and tgld his brothers publicklyj upon which 
 
 Shem
 
 CONCLUSION. 559 
 
 Shem and Japhet cover'd their father with a 
 garment. Noah awoke, and having difcover'd 
 the different Behaviour of his three Sons, faid 
 Curfed be Canaan &c. Thefe words are not only 
 a Curfe but a Prophecy, or (more properly) the 
 folemn Prophecy of a Curfe, which was to befal the 
 Pofterity of Canaan for their own Impieties. That 
 the Patriarchs were favour'd with the Know- 
 ledge of future Events, both as to Bleffings and 
 Curfes ; and that they were allow'd to declare 
 them upon certain occafions; is evident from 
 the Hiftories of Ifaac, Jacob, Mofes &c. And 
 that the Canaamtes were to be punim'd for their 
 own Impieties (and confequently would have 
 been fo punim'd, if Noah had never deliver'd 
 the preceding Prediflion) is evident from Gen. 
 15,16; Lev. 1 8, 24 &c. Deut. 9.460:. Where- 
 fore God, forefeeing the great Wickednefs of that 
 People, had determin'd their Subjection and Sla- 
 very to the Pofterity of Shem and Japhet ; and 
 thefe Events having been reveal'd to Noah, he 
 now declares them (partly as a prefent Reward on 
 Shem and 'Japhet, but principally) as a prefent 
 Punijhment on Ham-, who, tho' he had other 
 fons, is properly (on this occafion) charadteriz'd 
 as the father of Canaan, in ver. 18 and 22. Hence 
 then it appears, that where his Lordfhip fays 
 no writer but a Jew could impute to the oeconom 
 
 Aaaaa of
 
 560 CONCLUSION. 
 
 of the divine providence the accomplijhment of fuch 
 a prediction, nor make the Supreme Being the ex- 
 ecutor of fuch a curfe ; he has quite miftaken, or 
 miftated, the cafe. For, God did not execute 
 the Curfe, becaufe Noah had pronounc'd it) but 
 Noah therefore pronounc'd it, becaufe God had 
 determin'd to execute it. But fays his Lordfhip 
 Who does not fee, that the curfe and the punijh- 
 ment, in this cafe, fell on Canaan and his pojleri- 
 ty, exclusively of the reft of the pofterity of Ham ? 
 True : and who does not fee the propriety of 
 Noah's particularly mentioning Canaan ? Ham 
 had 4 fons ; but Canaan only is here mention'd, 
 becaufe his Pofterity, as they would be remark- 
 able Sinners, were to be remarkable Sufferers. 
 This Prediction of their Puniihment was ful- 
 fill'd, when the Pofterity of Shem (the Ifraelites) 
 conquer'd their Land, the Land of Canaan ; and 
 the Subjection of the Canaanites to Japhet (the 
 European Powers) was fulfill'd afterwards. But 
 fays his Lordfhip Who does not fee, that the 
 curfe and the punijhment, in this cafe, were the 
 punijhment of the fon, and not of the father, pro- 
 perly ? Certainly every one may fee, that, tho' 
 this Curfe was pronounc'd againft the Pojlerity of 
 Canaan for their wickcdnefs, yet Ham was alfo 
 punim'd for his wickednefs. For if men, in thefe 
 days, are fo feniibly affected with die profpect of 
 
 Happi-
 
 CONCLUSION. 561 
 
 Happinefs or Mifery, Honour or Difgrace, await- 
 ing their Pofterity (and furely his Lordfhip would 
 not have denied the force of fuch a Reflection) 
 how does this circumftance improve upon us, 
 when we confider J A P H E T and S H E M and 
 H A M as the Three Men, from whom all the 
 Nations of the Earth were to arife ! What In- 
 dignation, what Diftrefs, muft fill the foul of 
 either of thefe Brothers, at being affur'd, that the 
 Pofterity of one of his Sons ftoidd be Slaves to the 
 Pofterity of the other two ! And if fuch an affu- 
 rance muft have given Ham the moft afflicting 
 Concern ; I appeal to the beft Critic in the world, 
 Common Senfe, whether a Punijhment on Ham was 
 not infixed properly, when Noah pronounc'd the 
 following folemn Prophecy 
 
 Curfed be Canaan ! [brethren ! 
 
 A fervant of fervants mall he be unto his 
 
 BleiTed be J E H o v A H, the God of Shem ! 
 
 And Canaan mall be his fervant ! 
 
 God mall enlarge Japhet ! 
 
 And he fhall dwell in the tents of Shem ! 
 
 And Canaan mall be his fervant ! 
 If it fhould be thought preferable to refer the 
 word Bleffed directly to Sbem, as the word Curfed 
 is to Canaan ; the 3d. line may be (and perhaps 
 more pertinently) render 'd Bleffed of J E H o- 
 VA H, my God, be Shem ! See Gen. 24, 3 i . As to 
 
 the
 
 562 CONCLUSION. 
 
 the nature of Ham's Punifhment, the Readef 
 may refer himfelf to the defcription of the Joy of 
 JEneas, when Anchifes reveal'd to him the Ho- 
 nours of bis Race ; fee Virgil's 6th. book, ver. 
 679 &c. and to the defcription of the Diftrefs of 
 Adam, on Michael's revealing to him the Mife- 
 ries of Mankind-, fee Milton's nth. book, ver. 
 754 &c. And indeed this laft admir'd Author 
 has done fo much Juftice to the preceding paf- 
 fage of Scripture, that it would be unpardonable 
 not to tranfcribe it, from book 12, ver. 97 &c. 
 Yet fometimes Nations (hall decline fo low 
 From Virtue, which is Reafon ; that no Wrong 
 But Juftice, and fome fatal Curfe annext, 
 Deprives them of their outward Liberty, 
 Their inward loft. Witnefs th' irreverent Son 
 Of him who built the Ark; who, for the mame 
 Done to his Father, heard his heavy Curfe, 
 Servant of Servants, on his vitious Race. 
 
 I have referv'd one Maxim of his Lordfhip's 
 for this place, that it might be accompanied with 
 a fatisfadory Confutation. His Lordfhip has gi- 
 ven it as his Opinion, that the Scriptures would 
 have been prefers 'd entirely in their original purity ', 
 if they had been entirely dilated by the Holy Ghoft. 
 But that they are now more broken, confused and 
 corrupted, than any other book on ivhofe authority 
 men have agreed to rely. But Dr. BENTLEY, 
 
 who
 
 CONCLUSION, 563 
 
 who fpent his life in the critical Examination 
 of the Books of holy Scripture and other ancient 
 Writings, tells us, in his excellent 32d. Remark 
 on Free-Thinking It is Faff undeniable, that 
 the Sacred Books have fufferd no more Alterations 
 than Common and Clajjic Authors j and have no 
 more Variations, that 'what muji necejj'arily have 
 happened from the Nature of Things. And it has 
 been the common Senfe of Men of Letters, that num- 
 bers of Manufcripts do not make a Text precarious j 
 but are ufeful, nay necejjary, to its EJiabliJhme?2i 
 and Certainty. The Refult then of the whole mat- 
 ter is, That either all Ancient Books, as well as 
 the Sacred, muji now be laid afide, as uncertain 
 and precarious ; or to fay, That all the Tranfcripts 
 of Sacred Books foculd have been privileged againft 
 the common Fate, and exempted from all Slips and 
 Errors whatever. There is in each of the [e Maxims 
 
 ^ / 
 
 fuch a guft of the Paradox and Perverfe, that they 
 equally fuit with a modern Free-Thinkers palate. I 
 have too much Value for the Ancient Clajjics, even 
 to fuppofe, that they are to be abandon d-, becaufe 
 their Remains are fufficiently pure and genuine, to 
 make us fare of the Writer 's Defign. If a corrupt 
 Line, or dubious Reading, chances to intervene -, it 
 does not darken the whole Context, nor make an Au- 
 thor's Purpofe precarious. Terence, for inftance, 
 has as many Variations as any Book whatever, in 
 
 proper-
 
 564 CONCLUSION. 
 
 proportion to its Bulk ; and yet, with all its Inter- 
 polations, OmiJJions, Additions or GloJJes (chufe the 
 worjl of them on purpofe) you cannot deface the 
 Contrivance and Plot of one Play j no, not of one 
 Jingle Scene ; but its Senfe, Defign, and Subfervien- 
 cy to the lajl IJJue and Conclujion, Jhall be vifible and 
 plain thorow all the Mijl of Various Leftions. 
 And fo it is with the Sacred Text. And why 
 then mujl the Sacred Books have been exempted from 
 the injuries of Time, and fecurd from the leaft 
 Change ? What need of that perpetual Miracle -, 
 if, with all the prefent Changes, the whole Scrip- 
 ture is perfect and fufficient to all the great Ends 
 and Purpofes of its firfl Writing ? What a Scheme 
 would fome men make? WJoat worthy Rules would 
 they prefcribe to Providence ? That in Millions of 
 Copies; tranfcrib'd in fo many Ages and Nations, 
 all the Votaries and Writers, who made it their 
 Trade and Livelyhood, foould be infallible and im- 
 peccable ? That their Pensfoouldfpontaneoujly write 
 true, or be fuper naturally guided-, thd the Scribes 
 were nodding or dreaming ? Would not this exceed 
 all the Miracles of both Old and New Tejlament ? 
 
 To conclude. We of this Nation are blefs'd 
 with the Revelation, which God has been pleas'd 
 to make of Himfelf and of Our Duty, in the Vo- 
 lumes of The Old and New Teftament ; in which 
 therefore are certainly hid the Treafures of Wif- 
 
 dom
 
 CONCLUSION. 565 
 
 dom and Knowledge - y Knowledge ! that will hum- 
 ble the Pride of Man j and Wifdom ! that will 
 make him wife unto Salvation. Thefe Volumes 
 then, containing the Rules by which we mould 
 live here, and the Laws by which we fliall be 
 judg'd hereafter, rnuft be of infinite and univer- 
 fal Concernment. Wherefore, as thefe Sacred 
 Treafures are hid in Languages unknown, at 
 prefent, to the Common People ; to open thefe 
 Treafures, and to difperfe them for the Public 
 Happinefs, muft be the Duty of all Men of 
 Learning and Ability : but particularly of Thofe, 
 who are called to the high Honour, who are ad- 
 mitted to the important Truft, of being Mini- 
 Jiers of Cbrift, and Stewards of the Myfteries of 
 God. 
 
 'Tis now 140 Years, fmce the lafl Tranflation. 
 of the Bible into Englifh j which, tho' a good 
 Tranflation in general, is allow'd by the Learn- 
 ed to be greatly improveable in many places. A 
 NEW TRANSLATION therefore, prudently 
 undertaken and religioufly executed, is a Blefs- 
 ing, which we make no doubt but the Legifla- 
 ture will in a few years grant us. And what 
 Improvements may not be expected in the Tranf- 
 lation from the Improvements made of late in 
 the Original Languages, and particularly in He- 
 brew ? But, antecedent to a New Tranflation of 
 
 B b b b the
 
 566 CONCLUSION. 
 
 the Old Teftament, there is this one thing to be 
 carefully determin'd What it is, that is to be 
 tr (inflated: whether, or no, the Tranilation is to 
 be made again, and for ever, from the Heb. 
 Text, as it has been hitherto printed upon the 
 Authority of the Mafora. I prefume to hope 
 Not. For, if this Mafora appears to have been 
 founded on late and faulty MSS - y if it has ex- 
 cluded Words improperly omitted by Tranfcri- 
 bers, continued Words improperly inferted, and 
 authoriz'd many Readings undoubtedly wrong ; 
 certainly the Authority of it will be no longer 
 acknowledg'd. And, if many Errors in the print- 
 ed Heb. Text may be pointed out, and the true 
 Readings in thofe places can be happily reco- 
 ver'd 3 may we not hope, that fucb Corrections 
 
 will.be admitted? all fuch Corrections, as 
 
 bring with them Proofs fo fatisfactory, as the 
 Importance of determining The rue Word of 
 God requires and demands Codicibus emcndan- 
 dis primitus debet invigilare folertia eorum, qui 
 Scripturas Divinas nojje dejiderant. St. Auguftin. 
 It may be neceffary to add fome Obfervations 
 explanatory of the preceding Sentence, and of 
 the Sentence which concludes the Firil Part of 
 the DiiTertation ; becaufe they relate to a Point 
 of great Importance. Some who allow Miftakes 
 in the printed Heb. Copies, are of Opinion, that 
 
 bow
 
 CONCLUSION. 567 
 
 tioiv fully feever any Various Readings can prove 
 themfefoes Original, yet nonejkould be admitted in- 
 to the Text cf the printed Editions. This being 
 the Sentiment of fome Men, who are eminent 
 for their Learning and Judgment, I pay it great 
 Deference, and wifh I could fee it in its full 
 force. But I mufl beg leave to confefs myfelf, 
 at prefent, differently perfuaded on this Point; 
 and, as it is a Point, which regards the Honour 
 of Him ivhofe Word is Truth., I hope I mall be 
 pardon'd for fubmitting my own opinion to the 
 Learned Reader. 
 
 The Various Readings, which alone have a 
 Right to be introduc'd, even into the Margin of 
 the Heb. Bible, I would divide into Three Claf- 
 fes; the Firft containing fuch as are certainly 
 true ; the Second fuch as are probably true ; and 
 the Third fuch as are pojjibly true. A few fpeci- 
 mens will give the Reader a clear Idea of my 
 Meaning ; and will prepare the way to the In- 
 ference, that naturally refulfs from this Diilinc- 
 tion. Firft then, as to the Various Readings, 
 which are certainly true. Such, I prefume, are 
 all thofe Variations, which are uniformly con- 
 firm'd by the Context and Parallel Places in the 
 printed Heb. Text itjelf^ by Heb. MSS, and by 
 the Ancient Verfions. Inftances of this kind are 
 *]TDPl SanElus tuus (p. 497) confirmed by the 
 
 B b b b 2 Con-
 
 c68 CONCLUSION. 
 
 
 
 Context, by 17 out of 24 MSS, by all the An- 
 cient Verfions, and by Apoftolical Authority 
 Verfes 36 and 37 (pag. 440) confirm'd by the 
 Context, the Parallel Place, by MSS, and all 
 the Ancient Verfions "totf ( p. 504 ) con- 
 firm'd by the Context, the Parallel Place, by I 
 MS, and all the Ancient Verfions. I prefume 
 we may alfb reckon, as certainly true^ fuch Va- 
 rious Readings, as are furnim'd by Parallel Pla- 
 ces in the printed Text itfelf ; where one Place 
 clearly proves the other corrupted, and confe- 
 quently proves its Right to correct it. Inftances 
 here are many: I mall only refer to p. 29, 64, 
 79, 97, 128, 145, 162, 456, 464, 473, 510. If 
 the Authority of the Samar. Text be admitted, 
 as I prefume from its own internal Evidence that 
 it mutt be ; then Tte, in concurrence with the 
 Context and the Ancient Verfions, will be al- 
 low'd to correct fome undoubted Errors : as in 
 P- 343> 355> 377>39 8 > 42,4i2. And laftly, I 
 fubmit it to the Learned, Whether (as it has 
 been prov'd, that the Authors of the Ancient 
 Verfions, in their old Heb. Copies, did read dif- 
 ferently from our late Heb. Copies) Whether we 
 may not alfo correct the printed Heb. Text by 
 the Ancient Verfions> in thofe few places, where 
 the Context clearly mews Abfurdity and Con- 
 tradiction in the printed 'Heb. Text, and at the 
 
 fame
 
 CONCLUSION. 569 
 
 fame time mews as clearly the Propriety and 
 Confiftency of the Various Readings preferv'd in 
 fuch Ancient Verfions : fee p. 90, 369, 483, 506, 
 518,549. 
 
 Now, as to the Various Readings, which me- 
 rit a place in the Firft Clafs, as Readings certain- 
 ly true ; I prefume, that their certain Truth gives 
 them a certain Right to be reftor'd to their ori- 
 ginal Stations : and confequently, that They, to 
 whofe Care are committed the Oracles of God t 
 have full Powers to reeftablim all fuch Readings 
 in the Text itfelf. Nothing feems capable of with- 
 flanding the Arguments which they offer in their 
 own favour, but their being unfortunately exclu- 
 ded the prefent printed Copies. But if thefe Co- 
 pies and their Standard are proifd imperfeffi , why 
 may not an Heb. Bible be now printed with 
 greater accuracy and exad'nefs ? Such Readings 
 in the prefent printed Heb. Text, as are clearly 
 prov'd wrong, may be continued in the Margin : 
 and that they will be foon remov'd thither, we 
 may promife ourfelves from the eminent Learn- 
 ing and Piety of the Governors of our Church, 
 The Pillar and Ground of Truth. I mall only ob- 
 ferve, as to the 2d. and 3d. ClafTes of Various 
 Readings, that they can only expect to be ad- 
 mitted into the Margin of the printed Bibles ; 
 and there they have a Right to be admitted. 
 
 The
 
 570 CONCLUSION. 
 
 The Reader will now give me leave to ani- 
 mate him to the Study of the Hebrew Language, 
 in the words of Our illuftrious Countryman RO- 
 GER BACON, who flourifh'd about 500 years ago; 
 the Ornament of his own Age, and the Admi- 
 ration of the Ages fucceeding : and however un- 
 claffical his Style, there is Juftnefs in his Senti- 
 ments and Cogency in his Reafons. Si nefcia- 
 mus aliquam rationcm Linguarum, quibus ufi funt 
 SancJi, Philofophi, Poette, & omnes Sapientes y in 
 fcripturis fuis ; pro ccrto erimus vacui fapientia 
 SancJorum, Philofophorum, Poetarum & Sapien- 
 tum omnium : quia nee legere nee intelllgere poteri- 
 MUS ea quce tr affiant. Hoc probo per exempla Sanc- 
 torum manifejla ; ? magni Errores apud <vulgus 
 Theologorum propter ignorantiam Lmgiiarum. Nam 
 nee Textum poffiint intelligere nee concipere; nee 
 Expofitiones Auftorum fcire> qu<z mixtce funt om- 
 nes Gr&co, Hebrao & Arabico ; propter hoc^ quod 
 Autfores & omnes Sapient es antlqui Jluduerunt ra- 
 tionem Linguarum. Et prceterea Tranjlationes ha- 
 bent magnas & mult as Falfttates. Probavi diligen- 
 ter de Facilitate Textus. Exempla mult a dedi, fe- 
 cundum qua corrumpitur Textus ; cf? addidi qu<z- 
 
 dam exempla de Numerorum faljitate. N o s 
 
 SUMUS SUCCESSORES SANCTORUM, ET 
 PHILOSOPHORUM, ET SAPIENTUM AN- 
 T i QJJ o R u M. Ergo debemus fcire de Linguis, 
 
 quod
 
 CONCLUSION. 571 
 
 quod necejfe ejljicut ipfi: aut Illifuerunt Jlulti, ? 
 Nos fapientes ; quod non eft fatendum. 
 
 It may not be improper, at the Clofe of thefe 
 Obfervations, to afTu re the Reader that, ifa- 
 mong the many References before made, and ef- 
 pecially to the MSS in the Second Part of the 
 DifTertation, there mould be any wrong Refe- 
 rence or Mifreprefentation ; no fuch thing has 
 been any where done def.gnedly. As to involun- 
 tary Miflakes therefore ; thofe which are not ma- 
 terial^ the Reader will candidly pardon ; and 
 thofe, which are material, the Author will think 
 himfelf greatly oblig'd to any friendly hand for 
 correcting : as his Intention has been to maintain 
 Truth) and to fecure the Honour of the Original 
 Word of God. And may the Original Languages 
 of the Sacred Scriptures be diligently cultivated 
 by the Learned ; and for the Conviction of 
 every Infidel Objector for the Satisfaction of 
 every lincere Believer for the Happinefs of 
 Man and for the Glory of God may they 
 be rationally reprefented to the Public : that fo 
 THE BIBLE may more and more appear to be, 
 what it is, Worthy of God, and worthy of all ac- 
 ceptation ! For thus faith the Lord : Stand ye in 
 the ways, and fee, and ajkfor the old paths, inhere 
 is the good way, and walk therein ; and ye jhall 
 fad reft for your fouls. 
 
 The
 
 572 CONCLUSION. 
 
 The Origin, the Dignity, and the Duration 
 of this Divine Book, together with its gradual 
 Progrefs thro' die World, are beautifully repre- 
 fented in the words of the Son of Sirach (Ecclus. 
 ch. 24) with which therefore I {hall conclude. 
 
 This BOOK OF Wi s D o M Jhall praife berfelf-, 
 
 And Jhall glory in the mid/I of her people : 
 
 In the congregation of the mojl High JJwllJhe open 
 
 And triumph before bis power. [her mouth ; 
 
 " / came out of the mouth of the moji High j 
 
 " And covered the earth, as a cloud : 
 
 " / alfo came out, as a brook from a river ; 
 
 " And as a conduit into a garden. 
 
 " I faidy I will water my bejl garden ; 
 
 <c And will water abundantly my garden bed: 
 
 " And h ! my brook became a river \ 
 
 " And my river became a fea ! 
 
 " / will yet make doftrine tofiine, as the morning; 
 
 " And will fend forth her light afar off: 
 
 / will yet pour out doctrine ', as prophecy \ 
 
 " And leave it to all ages, for ever /" 
 
 FINIS.
 
 INDEX OF TEXTS. 
 
 Gen. 2, t 
 
 P a g-5*9 J om - 18; i*, I4 I? 
 
 440 
 
 t 3 j i*, * 
 
 343 t 2ij 3 6 , 37 440, 
 
 55* 
 
 t 4,8 
 
 347 22,34 
 
 444 
 
 5, 18 
 
 544 t *4, 3 
 
 445 
 
 9, *5 
 
 558 Judg. i, 22 
 
 445 
 
 20,4 
 
 354 15,6 
 
 
 
 t- 5 
 
 355 ii 
 
 446 
 
 22,13 
 
 89 i*> 3>i4 
 
 475 
 
 t - H 
 
 511 18 
 
 446 
 
 i *3>* 
 
 356 t *o, 13 
 
 
 
 15,8 
 
 358 31, 39 
 
 105 
 
 26, 18 
 
 359 tRuth ii 8,9, &c. 
 
 446 
 
 J 295 i, 2, 3,4, 5,6 
 
 ,7,8 360 i 3,3 447, 
 
 5** 
 
 31,18 
 
 3*5 t 4i 4, 5 
 
 449 
 
 33>39 
 
 366,368 t 20,21 
 
 543 
 
 t-53 
 
 368 i Sam. 2, 3 
 
 450 
 
 35,** 
 
 371 6, 19 
 
 531 
 
 t 3*j * 
 
 37* i*i 5,1 
 
 452 
 
 6,8 
 
 375 t ii 89, 
 
 5*7 
 
 * 16 
 
 37* i* 
 
 451 
 
 46,10 
 
 377 13, 19 
 
 452 
 
 t 49, * 
 
 5^,5*5 t 14, 14 
 
 - . 
 
 Exod. 3, 18 
 
 380 16, 23 
 
 454 
 
 7i 18, 19 
 
 17, I* 
 
 5*3 
 
 10, 17 
 
 384 *o; 1,2,38 
 
 454 
 
 t ii, the whole Chapter 2 Sam. ij 21,22,24 
 
 119, 
 
 i i*, 40 
 
 396 & 454, 
 
 537 
 
 15,2 
 
 400 t 5i i, * 3) *, 7, 8, 9, io- 
 
 
 i 18, 6 
 
 401 p. 19 to 62, 
 
 455" 
 
 22,26 
 
 476 t 6, 6 
 
 455 
 
 t *5j 3 r 
 
 402 t 7i *3j*4 
 
 457 
 
 29, ii 
 
 406 8 ; i to 8, 17, 18 
 
 461 
 
 i Lev. i, i 
 
 47 t Hi 35 14, *6 
 
 463 
 
 4>*9 
 
 408 16 ; 14, 15 
 
 464 
 
 i Num. 3, 22 
 
 99 t 21, 19 
 
 7* 
 
 39 
 
 411 t 22 j 13, 14 
 
 464 
 
 11, 15 
 
 23 
 
 467 
 
 i 13, * a 
 
 412 t 23,4 
 
 468 
 
 26, 12 
 
 377 i 8 to the End - 64 &c. 
 
 471 
 
 t *7, 7 
 
 413 t 4, 13 
 
 47* 
 
 i 35, 4 
 
 549 i Kin. 4, 26 
 
 53 r 
 
 Deut. 6, 12 
 
 414 8, 16 
 
 475 
 
 22, 19 
 
 415,55* 9> 8 
 
 474 
 
 t 18,57 
 
 418 13, 28 
 
 5*9 
 
 t 33 > i>*,3>435 
 
 422 { 10, ii j t 11,29 
 
 475 
 
 Join. 6, 7 j 10, 24 
 
 438 t i*; 7,*i>33 
 
 476 
 
 15,47 
 
 439 I3j l 
 
 477 
 
 
 Cccc 2 
 
 Kin.
 
 INDEX OF TEXTS. 
 
 2 Kin. 8, 10 
 
 163,541 fProv. 5, 16 
 
 551 
 
 9; 16, 21, 27, : 
 
 9 49 7, *6 no 
 
 536 
 
 t 14, i 
 
 478 i 10, 10 
 
 506" 
 
 15 J ',6,7,8 
 
 fir, 16 
 
 508 
 
 17, 23, 27, 3 
 
 o 479 14,33 
 
 55' 
 
 195 23,31 
 
 481 15,18 
 
 5*1 
 
 20,4 
 
 189 f 19, 15 *t, 17 
 
 509 
 
 
 Ecclef. 5, 18 
 
 5*1 
 
 24, 105 25, 30 
 
 Ifai. 75 13, 14 
 
 503 
 
 t i Quo. 1,365 
 
 2, 18 481 f 9>3 
 
 541 
 
 3> f 
 
 463 12,25 16,4 
 
 434 
 
 t 4,3 
 
 48j f 37, I8i 61, I 
 
 510 
 
 -- 24 
 
 377 65, 25 
 
 5 '2, 
 
 \ 6,17 
 
 4833 5 ** Jer. 7, 2 
 
 5ii 
 
 t 8 j 29 to 36 
 
 485 10, 7 
 
 511 
 
 95 35 to 42 
 
 485,522 2f 
 
 504 
 
 J; 1 1 j the whole 
 
 19 &c. 486 t 12, 4 
 
 512 
 
 175 21,22 
 
 457 15 5 MJ 18 
 
 
 
 185 i to 8, 16, 
 
 17 461 18,22; 20,115 *r, I* 
 
 
 
 24, 6 
 
 514 23, 33 
 
 518 
 
 aChro. 85 lo, 18 
 
 5*9 t *7, i 
 
 5'3 
 
 9,10 
 
 475 f 3 r >385 37, 19 
 
 
 11, 18 
 
 483 42, 6- y 49, 30 
 
 514 
 
 135 3> '7 
 
 53* 5o,ii 
 
 515 
 
 15,85 1 6, 7 
 
 539 t 5,3 
 
 514 
 
 i *i> 17 
 
 489 4, 47, 49 
 
 I 12 
 
 1 ", * 
 
 97,5*8 34 
 
 5'5 
 
 6 
 
 490 52,34 
 
 481 
 
 25 j 23, 25 
 
 Ezek. 115 6, 7 
 
 f 
 
 \ 365 22, 23 
 
 491 16, 30 
 
 J03 
 
 Efth. 9 ; 7, 8, 9 
 
 495,522 i3,2o&c. 53,59 
 
 515 
 
 Job i, 105 9,34 
 
 . T 8 
 
 10, - 3 
 
 5? 
 
 i 42, 2 
 
 494, 21, 14 
 
 117 
 
 Pfal. 2, 4 
 
 22,125 23,43 
 
 515 
 
 i 1 6, 10 118, 496, 36,4 
 
 503 
 
 \ 18; 13, 14 
 
 464 3 7a 9 
 
 5 if 
 
 22, I 
 
 554 t 40,6 
 
 516 
 
 t- '7 
 
 499 41, 16: 445 *3, *4 
 
 
 
 *5> 17 
 
 501 45, i 5 48, 16 
 
 
 
 595 6,11 
 
 fHof. 6,5 
 
 5'7 
 
 60,7 
 
 502 f 13 ; 10, 14 
 
 f '4 
 
 t 68,9 
 
 Hab. 3 } 3,4 
 
 428 
 
 
 522 Zeph. i, 7 
 
 f3 
 
 71, 20 
 
 502 8 
 
 56 
 
 t 79> 7 
 
 504 Zech. 14, $ 
 
 4*7 
 
 89, II 
 
 *7j 5 ; This Mark (f) points out 
 
 the 
 
 110,4 
 
 more material Corrcflions. 
 
 
 J A - I A. 
 
 for 
 
 
 INDEX.
 
 INDEX. 
 
 A 
 
 Abarbanel. p. 533: 
 
 Aben Ezra. p. 146, 404, 531. 
 
 Abifhai, id Capt. of the zd Ternary, p. 84, i6i } 166. 
 
 Achan for Achar. p. 90. 
 
 Aldus'* Edit, of the LXX. p. 5 28. 
 
 Aleph inferted. p. 54, 714. 
 
 Anfaldus. p. 54- 
 
 Arabic Language, its Ufe. p. 92, 103, 453, 528. 
 
 Verhon. p. 179, 350, 361, 379, 477> 4Sa. 
 
 Afahel, 3d Capt. of the ad Ternary, p. 69, 177. 
 Afiimilation. p. 374,41754*, 44, 44^ 45", 5 if, JI^- 
 Auguftin. p. 245, 399. 
 
 B 
 
 Bacon, Roger, p. 570. 
 Beckius. p. 524 
 Bedan for Barak, p. 89. 
 
 Benaihti., zd Capt. of the zd Ternary, p. 167, 17? . 
 Ben Chaim. p. 193, 546. 
 Bengelius. p. 277, 278. 
 Bentley. p. 562. 
 Beza, his Gr. MSS. p. $29. 
 Blanchini. p. 208, 278, 306, 494, 527. 
 Bochart. p. 140, 169. 
 Bolingbroke. p. 556. 
 
 Books of the O. Teft. tranfpos'd. p. 321, 341, 494. 
 Buxtorf. p. i64>*8i, 352,353, 408, 417, 473,496, 546, 55?- 
 
 C 
 
 Calmet. p. 74. 
 
 Cappellus. P . 89, 216, 279., 448, 4^f> 55 ' 
 
 Carpzovius. p. 351,480,486, 542, 547, 554. 
 
 \ Chalal (ignifies a Soldier, p. 103 &c. 
 
 Chald. Paraphrafe. p. ^44, 509, 5 15. 
 
 Chappelow. p. 494. 
 
 Chifliul. p. 530. 
 
 Clement of Alexand. p. 551. 
 
 Cockburn. p. 544. 
 
 Cciflinian Gr. MS. p. 538. 
 
 Colbertine Gr. MS. p. 530. 
 
 Conjectures on the Heb. Text made by the Maforcts. p. 379, 
 
 4'3>4>.- 
 
 Contradiftions, none originally in the S. Scriptures, p. 66 t 223, 
 
 169, 47*3 499- 
 Coftard. p. 9) 41,54, 534. 
 Coverdalc, his old Eng. Verfion. p. 39, 76, 85. 
 Cunacus. p. 495. 
 
 Cccc a Dan-
 
 IN D E X. 
 
 D 
 
 Danzius. p. 349. 
 
 David, his Name differently exprefs'd. p. 20, 523. 
 
 - his Lamentation, p. 118. 
 
 - his Laft Words, p. 468. 
 
 - his General Thankfgiving. p. 466. 
 t - takes the Caftle of Jerufalem. p. 30. 
 De Dieu. p. 36, 97,551. 
 
 Delany. p 15, 17, 31, 70, 122, 224. 
 
 Defign of the Diflertation. p. 10, 12, 223, 234, 141, 146, 571 i 
 
 Difference in the 2 Catalogues, p. 13. 
 
 Du Pin. p. 338. 
 
 E 
 
 Eleazar, id Capt. of the ift Ternary, p. 133. 
 Elias Levita. p. 245, 546. 
 Erpenius. p-?35- 
 Eton Heb. Bible, p. 520. 
 Eufebins, his Lat. MS of the Gofpels. p. 306. 
 Eyre. p. 518. 
 
 F 
 Final Heb. Letters, p. 531. 
 
 G 
 
 Gottingen Commentaries, p. 541: 
 
 Greek Verfion. p. 90, 99, 103, 117, 117, 197, aof, zir, 368, 
 3993 443> 4J3> 4*J, 4*9> 4 8z > *> 6 > 53 8 > 545, 549> 55 r. 
 
 H 
 
 Hallet. p. 451, 462. 
 
 Harris, his Philofophical Enquiry, p. 343. 
 
 Heb. Bible, its Importance, p. 211, 301, 572. 
 
 - printed from late MSS. p. 290, 297, 300. 
 Hemifticks in the Poet. Books, p. 324, 466, 506. 
 Killer, p. J54. 
 
 Hody. p. 237, 523,545. 
 
 Houbigant. p. 89, i jo, 292, 3 12, 338, 347, 402, 418, 420, 43$, 
 
 Hudfon. p. 533. 
 
 Hugo de Vienna, p. ij, 43. 
 
 Hunt. p. 455. 
 
 I 
 
 Jablonski. p-313- 
 jfackfon, his Chronology. 0.543. 
 | Jathobeam, ift Capt. of the ift Ternary, p. 70, 8f. 
 JEHOVAH, not pronounc'd by the Jews. p. 158, 320, 354, 
 
 J40. 
 ' writ Elohim or Adonai. p. 157, 321, 354,459, 
 
 481,503, 510,51^522. 
 Jerom. p. 7 , 46, io, 244, 545. 
 
 Jewifl/
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Jewifh Tranfcribers not nbfolutcly exaft. p. 77, 155, nr, :62, 
 *85. 353j374,4oo,4io, 418, 507. 
 
 Infidels can derive no advantage from the Miftakes of Tranfcri- 
 bers of the Bible, p. 238, j/o, 563. 
 
 Integrity (abfolute) of the prefent Hebrew Text believ'd. p. 9, 
 119,136,165, 351, 397>477>49*- 
 
 Interpolations, p. 77,80,368, 376,400, 406, 410,41 1, 4^,43 4, 
 454, 4J5> 4<56, 47f> 47*> 48l, 44> 48f, 49*j 5J> 50^,514, 
 516. 
 
 Joab, David's Capt. General, p. 44. 
 
 Jod frequently infertcd. p. 117, 447, 515. 
 
 omitted 34 times in i chapter, p. 5 16. 
 
 its Prayer, p. 405. 
 
 Jofephus. p-38,40,41,49, 53,76, 139, '47, iJ5> I73> 399, J33- 
 Irenjcus. p. 530. 
 
 K 
 Kimchi. p. 443. 
 
 Ju 
 
 Langford. p. 118- 
 Le Clerc. p. 91, 367. 
 Letters, Heb. large and little, p. 357, 407, 413, 495,496. 
 
 Sain.ir. the older, p. 337. 
 
 ' of one word join'd to another, p. z<j, 464, 483, 5 iz, 
 
 *I7- 
 Leufden. p. 194, 348, 352,438, 4S*j477 3 483^ 49^> J'3j 55 Z > 
 
 553- 
 
 Lewis, p. 81,87. 
 Lightfoot. p. 49, 160. 
 
 Line rul'd, the caufe of Miftakes. p 87, 516. 
 Lucas Brugenfis. p. 5 . 
 
 M 
 
 Macrobius. p. 159. 
 Madrnccius. p. 14 r. 
 Mark, his Gofpel at Venice, p. 517. 
 Mafora. p. 164, 290, 197, 199, 314, 349, 356, 408, 416, 437, 
 
 440, 443i?46,548, 573- 
 Maflbn, his Miftake. p. 516. 
 Maundrell. p. 150. 
 Mede. p. 541. 
 Meibomius. p. 518. 
 
 Mem final omitted and inferted. p. 61, 501, 526. 
 Michaelis. p. 344, 438. 
 t Mighty Men (David's) their Order, Number and Dignity. 
 
 p. 66, 83, 166, no, zi6. 
 Mill. p. 170, 178. 
 Millo. p. 49. 
 Milton, p. 561, 
 
 Miftakes,
 
 I tf D E X. 
 
 Miftakes, many in the later Heb. Copies, p. 287, 290, 353, 400, 
 4i8, 454, 471, 477>48o, 483, 485, 4*>9> 49 
 
 accounted for. p. 1 i, 176, 557. 
 
 fome ackncwledg'd by the Jews. p. 235, 549, 406. 
 
 - our Duty to correct them. p. 2 19, 247, 277, 279, 301, 
 
 374,499)566, 569. 
 
 - - how beft corrected, p. 12, 568. 
 Montfaucon. p. 108, 308, 309, 340, 526, 538. 
 Morinus. p. 295 , 338. 
 
 MSSHeb. their Value, p. 166, 271, 280, 286, 297, 302,42054(2, 
 466,499,500,509. 
 
 - - their Age. p. 305, 308, 3 10, 3 12, 548- 
 >' Bodleian, p. 261, 315, 316. 
 
 " -Colleges in Oxford, p. 334. 
 
 - - Cambridge, p. 341,495,5 16. 
 
 - - Paris, p. ? 12, 344. 
 
 - Erfurt, p. 344. 
 
 -- Bononia. p. 309. 
 
 - Helmfbd. p. 3 i r. 
 
 Samar. their Value, p. 368,400,401,750. 
 
 Bodleian, p. 331. 
 Paris, p. 340, 435,436. 
 Milan, p. 340. 
 
 N 
 
 Names, different of the fame perfon. p. 73, 463, 478, 489. 
 New Tranflation of the Bible, p. 563. 
 Noah, his prophetic Curfe. p. 558. 
 Numbers exprefs'd by Numeral Letters, p. 96, 463, 474, 529. 
 
 - -- _ - our com. Figures, p. 532. 
 
 O 
 
 OmilTions. p. 46, 132, 134, 170, 173, 198,107, 348,353,3*9, 
 36,-, 368, 37 1, 383, 393, 395,396, 441, 455, 464,468,4753481, 
 
 485, 501, 5 oa 3 5 6 > ?o8, 59> J 163 511? 5*6, 539> 543> 5P- 
 Opitius. p. 295, 299. 
 Origen. p. 99, 165,538,551. 
 
 P 
 
 Papifts can derive no advantage from the Miftakes of Tranfcribers 
 
 of the Bible, p. 139. 
 Parallel Places, their great Ufe. p. 13, 79, 198, 444, 457? 4^', 
 
 481,484, 502, 510. 
 Patrick, p. 24, 419, 462. 
 Pellet, p. 520. 
 Peters. 54. 
 
 fignifies an Omifiion. p. 351, 371, 477, 549. 
 
 Pocock.
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Pocock. p. 500, 517. 
 
 Points Heb. ufefuJ. p. 503, 345, 446, 460. 
 
 Polybius. p. 41. 
 
 Prideaux (from Xenoph. Cyrop.) p. 41. 
 
 Printed Heb. Bibles, why uniform, p. 190, 291, 196, 548. 
 
 Pronouns miftaken. p 343, 355, 411, 413, 415, 432, 44*, 454> 
 
 R 
 Robertfon. p. 304. 
 
 S 
 
 Sam. Pentateuch, its Value, p. 331,337,347,370,361,373, 
 377, 38o 3 384, 393> 398, 4i r, 476. 
 
 - Verfion. p. 377, 430, 433. 
 Sanford. p-534- 
 
 Scaliger. p. 96. 
 Schoettgenius. p. 541. 
 Schmidius. p- 5 37, 546- 
 Schultens. p. nr, 494, 49?. 
 Shammah, 3d Capt. of the i ft Ternary. p. 69, 141. 
 Shaw. p. 5 3 4- 
 Sigean Infcription. p. 530. 
 Simon, F. p. 245, 299, 548, 551. 
 Swinton. p. 522, 5 3?. 
 
 Syriac Verfion. p. 60, 98, 215, 377, 411, 431, 4^7,4$?, 484, 
 509,511,513,524,525,532. 
 
 T 
 
 Tranfpofitions. p. 141, 143, 196, 3$r, 378, 445, 463, 477, 476, 
 477, 4343 439>509> 5 i 2 ; 5i3,5i6,553- 
 
 U 
 
 Van der Hooght. p. 34?. 
 Var. Readings, what. p. 271. 
 -- neceffary to fix the Text. p. 238, 5^3. 
 
 - fonie to be collefted from the ancient Verfions, 1 
 
 p. 281, 286. 
 
 -- their great Value, p. 278, 287. 
 -- their Three Clafles. p, 566. 
 'Verfes, their prefent Divifion not always proper, p. 198, 204, 
 
 243,504. 
 
 Verfions, Ancient, their great Value, p. 265, 27f, 506, 5 18. 
 -- juftified by Heb. MSS. p. 266, 285, 304, 3<J<?, 
 
 409, 442, 468, 469, 485, 499, 509. 
 Vignoles. p. 53 r. 
 Virgil, p. 159,538, 5^2. 
 Vitringa. p. 168, 524, 526, 555. 
 Uniformity of the printed Heb. Bibles : fee Printed. 
 tfrnyerfal Hiftory. p. 34. 
 
 Ufher,
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Urher. p. 473, ? 13, 5*8. 
 Vulgar, p. 7 2, 147, a 39; 5 '8. 
 
 W 
 
 Wall. p. 549 
 
 Walton, p ii, 96, 97, 524,331, 338, 341, 355, 515,539. 
 
 Wetlten. p. ^78. 
 
 V/hithy. p. 175,374. 
 
 V/ickhfie. p 39. 
 
 Wilkini. p. ioi, 514. 
 
 Witliu>. p. 54?. 
 
 V.'^i'Jj iniliakc;i by iound. p. 56, 163,517. 
 
 ( ^& ^fMj*rft^ 
 
 ^l^^^fe 
 
 ^ f fSycSiv'

 
 University of California 
 
 SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 405 Hilgard Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90024-1388 
 
 Return this material to the library 
 
 from which it was borrowed.
 
 
 i in in i in H 1 1 ii 
 
 A 000 091 896 1