ones, namely, the Syro-Egyptian, founded in 1844, the Chronological Institute, founded in 1850, the Anglo-Biblical Institute, founded in 1852, and the Palestine Archaeological Association, founded in 1853; and furthermore, that it does not conflict with the object and purpose of the Royal Geographical Society, or the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, or with the Palestine Fund Association. The Society of Biblical Archaeology holds meetings every month from November to June, when papers are read and discussed, and the interest manifested is so great that the papers are seldom all read or the discussions completed. It has been my good fortune to attend two of the meetings of this Society held in a commodious hall in Conduit Street, London, and the large number of gentlemen and ladies present, and the interest manifested in learned papers and discussions upon Egyptian hieroglyphics, Assyrian Cuneiform Slabs, Cypriote Palaeography, Hamathite Inscriptions, Himyaritic or Sabaean Grammar, Hebrew and Accadian, and inscriptions and legends that go back to the Tower of Babel, the Deluge, and even to the Creation, would surprise beyond measure the people of America, who, as an eloquent orator has said of us, "have our heads buried in newspapers and ledgers." But it is very important to the world and especially to biblical science that such a society exists, and more battles are fought by its members from year to year, and victories won for the authenticity and historical fidelity of the Scriptures than the Christian public, either here or abroad, is aware of. The "Transactions" already referred to form a storehouse of valuable facts pertaining not only to all departments of Hebrew life, but to the Semitic peoples and languages which surrounded the people of God as a common centre. In connection with the work of this Society it is appropriate to mention the name of one of its most active and efficient members, whose papers enrich its volumes, and who laid down his life in efforts to advance the objects which it was designed to promote. I refer, of course, to George Smith, who died at Aleppo in 1876, aged 36 years." Those who have had no experience of Syrian deserts cannot realize the hardships and exposures which those must encounter who, in those inhospitable regions, seek to gather facts and evidence to corroborate and illustrate biblical history. Whether or not a monument be erected over his far-off resting-place, he has certainly erected for himself a lasting monument in his work, only a part of which, however, is revealed in the volumes and articles that have appeared under his name. Mrs. Smith, his widow, told me that he left a vast quantity of notes and materials, the accumulations of years of patient study, which the Trustees of the British Museum were designing to purchase. Besides paying a brief tribute to the memory of a personal friend, I wish to call attention to two or three qualities for which this eminent scholar was distinguished. I would make special mention of the devout and reverential spirit with which he approached the study of the biblical records. He said that we could afford to be patient with their apparent difficulties; and he cherished the hope that, since so much light had been shed upon them by the researches of the past few years, we should be able in time to solve, with partial or entire satisfaction, all the questions that have been raised with regard to them from the period of Genesis to that of the Babylonian captivity. In the second place I would notice the kindly spirit with which he always spoke of other laborers in the same field, scholars whose means of judging had been far less favorable than his own, and who therefore, or for other reasons, differed from him with regard to certain disputed points. Certain Englishmen have told me that Mr. Smith was spoiled by his success. On the contrary, from my personal acquaintance with him, I should say that he cherished a very humble opinion of himself and his labors, that he was always ready and willing to help others, and that he was never forward to insist upon his own opinions and views. He coincided with the opinion of Renan, who on one occasion said that scholars are frequently "too severe in the judgments which they pronounce of each other. Whoever occupies himself with honesty and perseverance in disinterested research, is worthy of our esteem. It shows great presumption to employ contemptuous and illnatured expressions. Let him who has never made a mistake, throw the first stone." The transition from his room, or "cell," as he called it, in the British Museum, which was a very small apartment surrounded by thick stone walls, and where a ray of sunshine seldom or never entered, to the heat and malaria of the deserts and valleys of the East, was too sudden and great, and his system gave way at last. His death was not only a terrible blow to the Society of Biblical Archaeology, but it makes a great gap in the ranks of Assyriologists, especially since he stood head and shoulders above all his co-laborers, whether English or German or French. Among the papers presented to the Society at its meeting in June, was one by Mr. W. St. Chad Boscawen, Mr. Smith's successor in the British Museum, giving some of the results of Mr. Smith's last expedition to the East. About two thousand five hundred new tablets were obtained, and, as it happened, without much digging, for the heavy rains during the wet season of 1875-76, had washed down the side of one of the mounds, and left exposed a number of large jars in which the valuable documents had been stored. They relate to all conceivable details of business — sales, contracts, descriptions and deeds of land, etc. Many of them belong to a certain firm called "Egibi,” which preserved this name for several generations. The accounts or records of this firm extend from the first year of Nebuchadnezzar II., B.C. 604, to the end of the reign of Darius Hystaspis, B.C. 185. The data which these tablets furnish pertain to an important period of history, but we have not space at present to give even a summary of the results gained. But while Mr. Smith appeared to have a natural gift for reading the tablets, which enabled him to proceed rapidly where others could only spell their way slowly, syllable by syllable, his superiority was after all mainly due to his long-continued and untiring application. Mrs. Smith spoke to me of his habit of close study day after day and month after month, until it seemed to her that his strength must be exhausted. What he said on one occasion to a gentleman who knew him well, gives us a hint of his habits of study, and shows at the same time how necessary he felt it to be for students, if they would be accurate and really proficient, to copy from the original documents: "When I am gone there will be a regular rush to study Assyrian, but the students will never get on unless they do as I have done for fifteen years, copy, copy, copy, every day from the tablets themselves; it is no use attempting to become an Assyriologist from the study of the printed text. One must get acquainted with the way in which the Assyrians wrote, and the wretched style of their script. The words look so different on the tablets from what they do in the books that one can hardly make them out to be the same. Half of those who write about Assyriology can't read a single line of the clay; even a stamping won't do, as you want to catch the light on the wedges in a peculiar way." 8. M. ARTICLE X. NOTICES OF RECENT PUBLICATIONS. THE BOOKS OF THE NEW COVENANT TRANSLATED FROM THE GREEK INTO HEBREW. By Prof. Franz Delitzsch.1 We have been favored with a copy of this work by the translator, and take pleasure in bringing it to the notice of the Christian student. It is not the first Hebrew translation of the New Testament, but the latest, and we may hope the last, which will be the standard for times to come. The first translation was published in 1599, by Elias Hutter, in his Polyglot Bible, and since that time only single parts have been published by different translators. The work for a new translation was not resumed until the beginning of our century, when, in 1817, the London Society for Propagating the Gospel among the Jews published a new translation. In 1821 the same society issued a second edition, and so on, from time to time, till 1866, when a thoroughly revised edition, with vowels and accents, was published. But this edition, in spite of the great amount of labor bestowed upon, and the money spent for it, proved itself not to be the ne plus ultra, especially through the criticism concerning the text as well as the accents which Professor Delitzsch published in his Hebrew edition of Paul's Epistle to the Romans. Considerations like these - especially the desire of realizing a hope cherished for about forty years-induced Professor Delitzsch to undertake this great task; and we believe that he has executed his task in such a way that it will stand the severest criticism of all living divines. Professor Delitzsch is, according to our judgment, the only man competent for a work of this nature, and his life-long studies in Jewish literature have best qualified him for it. Only a thorough acquaintance with the idiom current in the time of Christ and the apostles can bring about this result; and the Horae Hebraicae et Talmudicae, which Delitzsch published in the Zeitschrift für die lutherische Theologie und Kirche, Leipzig, October, 1876, etc., show not only his thorough acquaintance with the whole range of Jewish literature, but may also serve as a critical commentary to his Hebrew translation of the New Testament, because they are the best proof of the superiority of his translation above its predecessors. There is another point which is worthy of consideration. All former translations were made from the Textus Receptus; the present, ספרי הברית החדשה נעתקים מלשון יון ללשון עברית בחשת דלית 1 .1877 .Leipzig ובהשגחת החכם פראפעסאר פראנץ רעליטש from the Codex Sinaiticus; and the student who peruses this Hebrew translation will find all such passages as are wanting in N or the Codex Sinaiticus put in brackets. We have before us, besides Delitzsch's Hebrew New Testament, four other editions; the earliest dated 1821; the latest, 1872. A comparison of these with Professor Delitzsch's would be of great interest to the student; but the space allotted does not permit it. We will, however, select some passages at random; thus in Matt. ii. 23 dru Natopatos memoral, the or is not expressed in the older editions, while Delitzsch translates, iv. 5, ert To Trepulov Tot tepot is translated in one edition ;כי נצרי יקרא , על-פנת ההיכל in another ,על כנס ההיכל in two, על אלם ההיכל by -Now, the latter transla .על גג בית המקדש while Delitzsch translates tion correctly expresses the iepóv of the text; for b is not the iepóv, but vaós, and thus we find it rendered by the Sept. 1 Kings vi. 5, 17; Ps. v. 8; xi. 4, etc. We could greatly multiply examples like these, especially from the Epistles; but we will give the reader the Lord's Prayer as rendered by Delitzsch, and add in notes the readings of the other translations. It may be asked cui bono? We answer, not only as a mere literary production, but especially as a work prepared with a higher object in view, it should be welcomed by every Christian who prays for the coming of the kingdom of Christ. In Europe, Asia, and Africa, and, in fact, everywhere, the Jew must have the gospel in the same language |