« ÎnapoiContinuă »
worthless fellow! (Matt. v. 22.) – Tanıda xoulls (Talitha cumi), maid arisc! (Mark v. 41.)" 4. Latinisms. —-The sceptre having departed from Judah,
“ " (Gen. xlix. 10.) by the reduction of Judæa into a Roman province, the extension of the Roman laws and government would naturally follow the success of the Roman arms : and if to these we add the imposition of tribute by the conquerors, together with the commercial intercourse necessarily consequent on the political relations of the Jews with Rome, we shall be enabled readily to account for the Latinisms, or Latin words and phrases, that occur in the New Testament. The following is a list of the principal Latinisms :- Accagiov (as
( sarion, from the Latin word assarius), equivalent to about three quarters of a farthing of our money, (Matt. x. 29. Luke xii. 6.) Knuoos (census), assessment or rate, (Matt. xvii. 25.) — Kevrougiw (centurio), a centurion, (Mark xv. 39. 44, 45.) - Kawia (colonia), a colony, (Acts xvi. 12.) – Kovosudia (custodia), a guard of soldiers, (Matt. xxvii . 65, 66. xxviii. 11.) - Arvagios (denarius), a Roman pen
( ny, equivalent to about seven-pence halfpenny of our money, (Luke vii. 41.) — øgaryerasov (flagellum), a scourge, (John ii. 15.); from this word is derived bgayɛow, to scourge with whips, (Matt. xxvij. 26. Mark xv. 15.) As this was a Roman punishment, it is no wonder that we find it expressed by a term nearly Roman. - IoudTos (Justus), (Acts i. 23.) — Asyew (legio), a legion, (Matt. xxvi. 53.) - Koogavons (quadrans), a Roman coin equivalent to about three-fourths of an English halfpenny, (Matt. v. 26.) - A13eptivos (libertinus), a freed man, (Acts vi. 9.) – Altpa (libra), a pound, (John xii. 3.) — ASVTEON (linteum), a towel, (John xiii. 4.) - Maxsadov (macellum), shambles, (1 Cor. x. 25.) - Meu Bgava (membrana), parchment, (2 'f'im. iv. 13.)
Minor (mille), a mile; the Roman mile consisting of a thousand paces. (Matt. v. 41.) — E&Crns (sertarius), a kind of pot, (Mark vii. 4. 8.) – II gautogov (prætorium), a judgment-hall, or place where the prætor or other chief magistrate heard and determined causes, (Matt. xxvii. 27.) – Enusxiv lov or Equxv.210V (semicinctium), an apron, (Acts xix. 12.) – Esxagios (sicarius), an assassin, (Acts xxi. 38.) — Loudagiov (sudarium), a napkin or handkerchief, (Luke xix. 20.) - texovhatwg (speculator), a soldier employed as an erecutioner, (Mark vi. 27.) Tafegua (taberna), a tavern, (Acts xxviii. 15.) -Tisãos (titulus), a title, (John xix. 19, 20.)2
5. From the unavoidable intercourse of the Jews with the neighbouring nations, the Arabs, Persians, (to whose sovereigns they were formerly subject,) and the inhabitants of Asia Minor, numerous
1 Additional examples of Chaldaisms and Syriasms may be seen in Olearius de Stylo Novi Testamenti, membr. iii. anaphorism. vi. (Thesaurus Theologico-Philologicus, tom. ii. pp. 22, 23.
2 Pritii Introductio ad Lectionem Novi Testamenti, pp. 320_322. Olearius, sect. 2. memb. iii. aph, ix. pp. 24, 25. Michaelis, vol. i. pp. 162—173. Morus, vol. i. pp. 235, 226. Olearius and Michaelis have collected numerous instances of Latinising phrases occuring in the New Testament, which want of room compels us to omit. Full elucidations of the various idioms above cited, are given by Schleusner and Parkhurst in their Lexicons to the New Testament. The Græco-Barbara Novi Testamenti (16mo. Amsterdam, 1649.) of Cheitomæus, may also be consulted when it can be met with.
words, and occasional expressions may be traced in the New Testament, which have been thus necessarily introduced among the Jews. These words, however, are not sufficiently numerous to constitute so many entire dialects : for instance, there are not more than four or five Persian words in the whole of the New Testament. These cannot, therefore, be in strictness termed Persisms : and, though the profoundly learned Michaelis is of opinion that the Zend-avesta, or antient book of the Zoroastrian religion, translated by M. Anquetil du Perron, throws considerable light on the phraseology of St. John's writings; yet, as the authenticity of that work has been disproved by eminent orientalists, it cannot (we apprehend) be with propriety applied to the elucidation of the New Testament. From the number of words used by St. Paul in peculiar senses, as well as words not ordinarily occurring in Greek writers, Michaelis is of opinion (after Jerome) that they were provincial idioms used in Cilicia in the age in which he lived ; and hence he denominates them Cilicisms.
The preceding considerations and examples may suffice to convey some idea of the genius of the Greek language of the New Testament. For an account of the most useful Lexicons that can be consulted, see the Appendix to this volume, No. II.
ON THE COGNATE OR KINDRED LANGUAGES. 1. The Chaldee. - II. The Syriac. - III. The Arabic. — IV. The .
Ethiopic. - V. The Rabbinical Hebrew. - VI. Use and impor
tance of the Cognate Languages to sacred criticism. THE cognate or kindred languages are those, which, together with the Hebrew, are dialects immediately derived from the primitive language, if indeed, (as many learned men have thought,) they are not derived from the Hebrew itself, confessedly the most antient language in the world, and with which they preserve nearly the same structure and analogy. The modern Italian language, as well as the antient Greek and Latin, will furnish us with numerous examples of this affinity. The two last indeed are not dialects, but entirely different languages; the Latin having acquired very many words from the Greek, in consequence of the numerous colonies of "Greeks that settled in Italy, from whom the Aborigines imperceptibly borrowed many words. In like manner the antient Greeks and modern Russ are allied, as also all the Old German and modern Danish, together
Michaelis, vol. i. pp. 149–162. 2 Scaliger in his treatise De causis Linguæ Latinæ, and Vossius, in his Etymo. logicon Linguæ Latine, have illustrated this subject at considerable length.
with the British and German of Lower Saxony, &c. Although these languages have in progress of time become distinct, yet, in many respects, they may all be considered as similar, from the connexion which may be traced between them.
The principal cognate dialects or languages are the Chaldee, Syriac, and Arabic.
1. The Chaldee, we have already seen, was a dialect of the Aramæan language : it was acquired by the Jews during the Babylonian captivity, and was currently spoken at the time our Saviour appeared in Judæa. Besides the parts already stated as being written in this tongue, numerous Chaldaic words occur in the book of Job, the Proverbs, and other parts of the Sacred Writings, for the correct understanding of which the knowledge of Chaldee is necessary. It is further of great use for enabling us to read the Chaldee paraphrases which show the sense put by the Jews theinselves on the words of Scripture.
II. The Syriac, though written in a different character, is also a dialect of the Aramean language : it was vernacular in Galilee. Hence, though several of the sacred writers of the New Testament expressed themselves in Greek, their ideas were Syriac; and they consequently used many Syriac idioms, and a few Syriac words 3 The chief difference between the Syriac and Clialdee consists in the vowel-points or mode of pronunciation ; and, notwithstanding the forms of their respective letters are very dissimilar, yet the correspondence between the two dialects is so close, that if the Chaldee be written in Syriac characters without points it becomes Syriac, with the exception of a single inflexion in the formation of the verbs. The great assistance, which a knowledge of this dialect affords to the critical understanding of the Hebrew Scriptures, is illustrated at considerable length by the elder Michaelis, in a philological dissertation, originally published in 1756, and reprinted in the first volune of M. M. Pou's and Ruperti's Sylloge Commenationum Theologicarum.5
III. Though more remotely allied to the Hebrew than either of the preceding dialects, the Arabic language possesses sufficient analogy to explain and illustrate the former, and is not perhaps inferior in importance to the Chaldee or the Syriac; particularly as it is a living language, in which almost every subject has been discussed, and has received the minutest investigation from native writers and lexicographers. The learned Jews who flourished in Spain from the tenth to the twelfth century under the dominion of the Moors, were the first who applied Arabic to the illustration of the Hebrew language : and subsequent Christian writers, as Bochart, the elder Schultens, Olaus
1 Morus, vol. i. p. 174.
5 D. Christiani Benedicti Michaelis Dissertatio Philologica, quâ Lumina Syriaca pro illustrando Ebraismo Sacro exhibentur (Halæ, 1756), in Pott's & Ruperti's Sylloge, tom. i. pp. 170—244. The editors have inserted in the notes some additional observations from Michelis's own copy.
Celsius, and others, have diligently and successfully applied the Arabian historians, geographers, and authors on natural history, to the explanation of the Bible.
ÍV. The Ethiopic language, which is immediately derived from the Arabic, has been applied with great advantage to the illustration of the Scriptures by Bochart, De Dieu, Hottinger, and Ludolph (to whom we are indebted for an Ethiopic grammar and Lexicon): and Pfeiffer has explained a few passages in the books of Ezra and Da, niel, by the aid of the Persian language.
V. The Rabbinical Hebrew is a mixture of several languages, which cannot be of great use for illustrating the Holy Scriptures; though it ought not perhaps to be wholly despised. Dr. Gill has applied the Rabbinical Hebrew to the elucidation of the Bible more than any other modern commentator. The Latin is nearly allied to the Greek, which, however, requires but little illustration from it.
VI. The cognate or kindred languages are of considerable use in sacred criticism. They may lead us to discover the occasions of such false readings as transcribers unskilled in the Hebrew, but accustomed to some of the other dialects, have made by writing words in the form of that dialect instead of the Hebrew form. Further, the knowledge of these languages will frequently serve to prevent illgrounded conjectures that a passage is corrupted, by shewing that the common reading is susceptible of the very sense which such passage requires: and when different readings are found in copies of the Bible, these languages may sometimes assist us in determining which of them ought to be preferred.
1 Bauer, Herm. Sacr. pp. 82, 83. 106, 107. Walton, Prol. c. xiv. 52–7. 14. (pp. 635_641. 649.) Bishop Marsh's Divinity Lectures, part iii. p. 28.
2 Bauer, Herm. Sacr. p. 107. Walton, Prol. c. xvi. 96-8. (pp. 674678.) 3 Dubia Vexata, cent. iv. no. 66. (Op.
tom. i. pp. 420-422.) and Herm. Sacra. c. vi. 9. (Ibid. tom. ii. p. 648.) Walton, Prol. c. xvi. 9 5. (pp. 691, 692.) Gerard's Institutes of Biblical Criticism, p. 63. — For Bibliographical Notices
p of the principal Grammars and Lexicons of the Cognate Languages, see the Appendix to this Volume, No. III. VOL. II.
ON THE MANUSCRIPTS OF THE BIBLE.
ON THE HEBREW MANUSCRIPTS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
I. Different classes of Hebrew Manuscripts. - II. The rolled Manu
scripts of the synagogues. - III. The square Manuscripts used by the Jews in private life. - IV. Antient recensions or editions of Hebrew Manuscripts. – V. Age of Hebrew Manuscripts. - VÍ. Of the order in which the Sacred Books are arranged in Manuscripts. — Number of Books contained in different Manuscripts. - VII. Modern Families or Recensions of Hebrew Manuscripts. - VIII. Notice of the most antient Manuscripts. - IX. Brief
notice of the Manuscripts of the Indian Jews. 1. ALTHOUGH, as we have already seen, the Hebrew text of the Old Testament has descended to our times uncorrupted, yet, with all the care which the antient copyists could bestow, it was impossible to preserve it free from mistakes, arising from the interchanging of the similar letters of the Hebrew alphabet, and other circumstances incident to the transcription of antient manuscripts. The Rabbins boldly asserted, and through a credulity rarely to be paralleled, it was implicitly believed, that the Hebrew text was absolutely free from error, and that in all the manuscripts of the Old Testament not a single various reading of importance could be produced. Father Morin was the rst person who ventured to impugn this notion in his Erercitationes in utrumque Samaritanorum Pentateuchum, published at Paris in 1631 ; and he grounded his opinion of the incorrectness of the Hebrew manuscripts on the differences between the Hebrew and the Samaritan texts in the Pentateuch, and on the differences between the Hebrew and the Septuagint in other parts of the Bible. Morinus was soon after followed by Louis Cappel, (whose Critica Sacra was published in 1650,) who pointed out a great number of errors in the printed Hebrew, and shewed how they might be corrected by the antient versions and the common rules of criticism. He did not, however, advert to the most obvious and effectual means of
endation, namely, a collation of Hebrew manuscripts; and, valuable as his labours unquestionably are, it is certain that he neither used them himself, nor invited others to have recourse to them, in order to correct the sacred text. Cappel was assailed by various opponents, but chiefly by the younger Buxtorf in his Anticritica, published at Basil in 1653, who attempted, but in vain, to refute the principles he had established. In 1657 Bishop Walton, in his Prolegomena to the London Polyglott Bible, declared in favour of the principles asserted by Cappel, acknowledged the necessity of forming a critical apparatus for the purpose of obtaining a more correct text of the Hebrew Bible, and materially contributed to the formation of one by his own