These general facts might seem sufficient, in the view even of those, who are not personally acquainted with the work, to claim for it a place in the biblical literature of this country, and the few among us, who are acquainted with it, have long wished for a translation, which should render it accessible especially to all who are professionally engaged in biblical studies. The same influence, it is believed moreover, is needed here, and indeed among English scholars generally, which, as above remarked, it exerted, in concert with other works, in the country which produced it. The work of Bp. Lowth is the only one of much distinction, whose influence is felt either in England or in this country, in cultivating in the minds of students a genial love for the spirit of Hebrew antiquity. What that is, as compared with the work of Herder, is readily seen by any one, who is acquainted with both, and capable of appreciating the difference between them. Valuable, and indeed indispensable as it is, to the student of the Bible, from the richness of its thoughts and the nice discrimination exhibited in its learned criticism, it differs essentially from that of Herder in the point of view, from which it contemplates the subject of which it treats. It seeks to illustrate and make intelligible the beauties and sublimities of Hebrew poetry, by comparing it in all its varieties, with the productions of Grecian and Roman art, and has done perhaps all that can be desired in following out that mode of critical comparison. It exhibits the views, which must naturally be taken, and are therefore justly taken, by a mind thoroughly disciplined and cultivated by a study of what in English literature is exclusively understood by classical learning both ancient and modern.

But in one sense it may be justly said, that the more thoroughly one's understanding is moulded by the forms, and occupied with the conceptions exhibited in the literature of one age and country, the less is it qualified to imbibe the genuine spirit, and feel the simple power of every other national literature. This must necessarily be the ease, if it be so pre-occupied and biassed as to judge of all others, and test their merits, exclusively by the result of comparison with that, from which its own character was derived. Unless it have the higher power of divesting itself of all that is peculiar in its acquired forms of thought, and in those conceptions by which it takes cognizance of the objects of its knowledge, of clothing itself anew in the forms of thought peculiar to another people, and of so adopting their conceptions for its own, as to contemplate the world around them under the same. relations with them, the man can never participate in their emotions, nor breathe the spirit of their poetry. He must not only be acquainted with the facts of their history, the modes of life, and the circumstances of every kind, by which their habits of thought and feeling were moulded, as a mass of antiquarian lore, but must learn to place himself entirely in their point of view, and to see all these particulars in the relation to each other, and to the observer, which they would then assume. When he has done this, he will be prepared to understand why they thought, and felt, and wrote as they did; and if he have the feeling and inspiration of the poet, he will sympathize with their emotions, and the living spirit of their poetry will be kindled up in his own imagination. How difficult it is for us to do this, however, in relation to the poetry

of a people so widely diverse from us in all the circumstances of their earthly existence, can be understood only by those who have looked at the subject with enlarged and philosophical views. Thus to enter into the spirit of Grecian poetry, to understand the child-like simplicity of Homer, and appreciate the truth of feeling in his representations, is a high attainment for the classical student, yet the Greeks were our neighbours and kindred, when compared with the more ancient and Oriental Hebrews. When we place ourselves in the tents of the Hebrew patriarchs, on the plains of Arabia, or the mountains of Palestine, every thing is to be learned anew. The language, the habits of life, the modes of thought and of intercourse, the heavens above, and the earth beneath, all are changed, and present to us a strange and foreign aspect. When in addition to this we consider, that the poetry, which we are here called to study, belongs to the earliest periods of recorded time, and embodies many of the first simple and child-like conceptions of the human mind, and when we reflect, too, how difficult it is for us to return upon our own childhood, and revive the faded conceptions and forgotten feelings, with which we then looked abroad upon the works of nature, observed the conduct of our fellowmen, or contemplated our own being and destiny, we may apprehend something of the difficulties, which an author has to overcome, who would fully enter into the spirit of Hebrew poetry, and make it intelligible to a mere English reader. We may understand too how impossible it would be by the method, which Lowth has pursued, and by that alone, to do full justice to a body of poetry so peculiar, and so diverse

in its whole spirit, from that with which he brings it into comparison. Hence the necessity of the work of Herder; and the end, which he sought to accomplish, was to supply that, which was wanting in the celebrated lectures of Bp. Lowth. He has aimed by tracing the simple and child-like conceptions, which had been transmitted from the infancy of the race, and which had a predominant influence, in connexion with the outward circumstances of their existence, in giving its character and spirit to their poetry, in a word, by looking at these in their causes, to place us in the proper point of view, and enable us to feel and appreciate them for ourselves. But what farther is necessary to be said on this point the author has himself said in the plan of his work, in his preface, and in various parts of the work itself.

How far the author has succeeded in regard to the attainment of his end, the reader, with proper qualifications for forming an opinion, must judge for himself. That he has always apprehended in their true sense the early conceptions of the Hebrews is not to be supposed, nor would any one probably undertake to defend all his views, even of important matters, connected with the early traditions of the race, The biblical representations of Paradise, of the garden of Eden, of the temptation and fall of Adam, of the Cherubim, of the deluge, and of what Herder denominates mythological representations generally, have ever furnished an ample field of speculation, in which every critick feels at liberty to form his own opinions, and for the most part to interpret by his own rules. So far as philosophical and theological considerations influenced the author, he seems to have aimed chiefly at

meeting the popular objections to the representations of Scripture, which were then very generally prevalent, and are so more or less in every age, by showing, that, although we cannot understand these, as they would at first seem to mean, when seen from our point of view, they yet exhibit when seen from the right position, and in their true relations to the age and people, for which they were originally made, a sense both natural and rational. To judge fairly of the author, as a man of piety and of sober and correct views, from the representations, which he has given of these matters, we must consider moreover the atmosphere, in which he wrote, and the free spirit of Biblical criticism, as exhibited at the same time by Eichhorn and other contemporary German writers. But after making due allowances of this sort, it will still be felt, that the work contains some things irreconcilable with just views, nor would I be understood as subscribing to all the sentiments, which I am herewith exhibiting to the publick.

If it be asked, why then do I exhibit opinions, which I deem erroneous, I can only say, that others, as well as myself, and those in whose judgment I place the highest confidence, have thought it extremely desirable, all things considered, that the work should be given to the publick, and my views of duty to my author, as a faithful translator, did not permit me to misrepresent his opinions in any thing of importance.* I was at

*I fear that in one or two instances, the translation, through inadvertence, is such as may seem to convey a sense farther removed from what are considered correct views, than the original. An instance of this occurs on page 189, where "Hell" properly means the place of the dead. It is explained by reference to page

176.