with too supercilious a contempt, to borrow much from any; and they had too profound a veneration for the language, in which they received the Oracles of God, to render foreign assistance, in any great degree, necessary. The Scriptures have always been the object of their devout regard, the fountain of their dearest hopes, and their sweetest consolation in distress and persecution: how, then, can it be believed that they ever would neglect the cultivation of the Hebrew language, to the study of which they have been obligated by every tie that most interests the heart?

Whatever allowances, therefore, are to be made for inveterate prejudice or involuntary error, great deference is due to the traditionary interpretation of the Jews. In discovering this interpretation the commentator of the present age has but little trouble. All that Rabbinical literature can supply for the elucidation of the Hebrew volume has been collected by preceding critics; and it is, perhaps, impossible for the most unwearied industry to add any thing of importance to their labours.

While their merits in the preservation of the language are acknowledged with due praise, much

cannot be said in recommendation of their commentaries, which are often extremely puerile and absurd.* To understand a language is one thing, to expound a work written in it is another: it is very possible for those who are thoroughly acquainted with the former, to be altogether unsuccessful in the latter: and this I take to be principally the case with the Rabbins. They are deeply conversant with the language of the Bible; but their exposition of it is often inept, allegorical, and trifling. Having carefully consulted the Rabbinical Bible of Buxtorf, I am clearly of opinion, that little assistance can thence be derived to the interpreter of the book of Proverbs.

Another valuable collateral aid is supplied by the Polyglott and Hexaplarian versions. When all, or most of them coincide in the same translation, it would surely be very uncritical not to pay great respect to such an authority. The venerable

* Rosenmulleri Historia Interpretationis, par. 5, p. 210, et seq. Lips. 1795-1814. Simon, Hist. Crit. du V. T. lib. iii. cap. 5 and 6. + I know not why Bishop Marsh, in his admirable Lectures, (Lect. 14,) when enumerating the sources from which our knowledge of Hebrew is derived, has not mentioned the Hexaplarian versions, nor the traditionary interpretation of the Jews.

Septuagint merits the greatest regard, as well on account of its high antiquity, as its general excellence; and a close attention to it will contribute largely to our knowledge of Hebrew. In the Proverbs it is particularly elegant, having, in many places, preserved the terseness and energetic brevity of the original; though in others it departs widely from the Hebrew text. But, of all the ancient versions, the Syriac is the most uniformly faithful and accurate; and, as the language so nearly resembles the Hebrew, its value can scarcely be estimated too high.

It is not easy to determine the degree of credit which is due to the Targum on the Proverbs. Its resemblance to the Syriac version is, in many respects, so great, that it has been the subject of doubt among the learned, whether the one has not been taken from the other:* and Professor Dathe contends that the Targum on Proverbs was taken from the Syriac version, and not immediately from the Hebrew. To this hypothesis it may be objected,

* "De ea dubium est eruditis, utrum ipsa ex versione, quæ in ea extat, Syriaca, an hæc vicissim ex illa sit descripta: adeo altera alteri respondet."-Wolfii Bibliotheca Hebræa, vol. ii. p. 1176.

+ Opuscula, Diss. 3, p. 106, Lips. 1796.

that it is impossible to conceive the motive for translating the Syriac into Chaldee, which, whoever could read, might with little trouble read the Syriac itself, from the great similarity of the two languages. With a view, however, of determining this question, which is of much interest to the annotator on the Proverbs, I regularly compared them while engaged in the prosecution of this work: I regret my neglect of noting down their variances, and their agreements in peculiar renderings; but my examination led to the conclusion, that, though they sometimes agree even when the Syriac departs from the Hebrew, yet their differences are too numerous to be accounted for on the supposition of the one being taken immediately from the other. Nevertheless, their agreement is so frequent and striking, as to afford just grounds for believing, either that the Chaldee Paraphrast had the Syriac before him, and used its assistance, or that one of them has been subsequently corrected by the other.*

The sources, therefore, from which the knowledge of Hebrew has been derived, and by an attention to which it may be improved, are Biblical Usage, Jewish

* Dathii Opuscula, Diss. 3, § 7.

Tradition, the ancient Versions, and the Oriental Dialects. When these are unanimous, their evidence is decisive; the nature of the subject neither admits nor requires other testimony; and every sound judgment must acquiesce in an interpretation so strongly supported. But it frequently happens, that these witnesses disagree: hence arises a difficulty, and a difficulty of the most arduous kind, to determine their respective degrees of credit, and to distinguish on which side the evidence preponderates. The testimony of the ancient versions and that of the kindred dialects often differ, and both are sometimes at issue among themselves. Now, amidst this discordancy, what course should a judicious critic pursue? By what rules shall he estimate their comparative authority? And by what principles shall he be guided in forming a decision?

Now, according to the principles which I have been endeavouring to establish, the first appeal is to the sacred text, and when the meaning of a word can be established by this means, the evidence is perfectly satisfactory. Though other testimony may corroborate, it is not of necessity required. In the failure of deriving satisfaction from that quarter, the next appeal is to the authority of Jewish tradition,