Egyptian Rabbinical Jew.* It has never been admitted as the genuine work of Ezra, nor is it extant in any Hebrew or Greek manuscripts. We have already referred to the supposition that the Prophet Malachi was the same person as Ezra, but that the general opinion of the learned is against this opinion.

The time and place of Ezra's death is not known with certainty. Josephus says that he died and was buried at Jerusalem, but the more current opinion of the Jews is, that he died at Zamzuma, a town on the Tigris, while on his way to Persia,† to have an interview with Artaxerxes on the affairs of the Jews. A tomb there bears his name, and is a place of pilgrimage to both Jews and Mahomedans.

Before quitting the subject of the Canon of the Holy Scriptures, it may be interesting to our readers to follow it through some other comparatively unimportant revisions which it underwent, as to external form. We abridge the account chiefly from Prideaux.

The question of how the verses in the ancient scriptures used in the Synagogues were marked, or if they were marked at all, except by each line being considered a verse, is a matter of doubt with the learned. We have seen that in reading the Law, after every verse the inter

* See Bishop Gray's Key to the Old Testament: in loco.

See Notes to the Pictorial Bible at the end of Ezra, where a full description of the tomb of the Prophet is given by Dr. Kitto, who visited it in 1832.

preter translated it into Chaldee, and the same after every three verses of the Prophets, therefore some way of distinguishing the proper quantity to be read each time must have been used in any case however these are not the same divisions as those now called verses. The first great change was the dividing the books of Scripture into chapters, which was done about the year 1240, by Cardinal Hugo, who having laboured assiduously in the study of the Bible, drew up the first concordance, in which work he employed a number of monks, who collected the words under each letter of the alphabet, and enabled him to execute speedily so arduous a task. For the purpose of reference, he divided each book into sections, which are the chapters now in our Bibles. All students being eager to avail themselves of the help of Cardinal Hugo's Concordance, divided their Bibles in the same manner, and the Jews also adopted it. The Concordance of Cardinal Hugo was afterwards improved by Arlottus Thuscus, and Conradus Halberstadius, the one a Franciscan and the other a Dominican friar, who lived at the close of the same century.

Thus the division of chapters was introduced, but not of verses as now, which was the work of a Jewish Rabbi, nearly two centuries later, in 1430. Cardinal Hugo had used the seven first letters of the alphabet, A. B. C. D. E. F. G., placed in the margin at equal distances, using more or fewer of the letters, as the chapters were

longer or shorter. But when Rabbi Nathan' adopted the use of a Concordance, which he did in consequence of finding its utility in the controversies he held with Christians, and when he made one in Hebrew for the use of the Jews, he did not adopt the letters of Cardinal Hugo, but placed Hebrew numerals at every fifth verse, and this long continued to be the manner used in all Hebrew Bibles; but Athias, a Jew of Amsterdam, published two very correct editions of the Hebrew Bible, one in 1661, and the other in 1667, in which he introduced the usual Arabic figures, and placed them at every verse, where the numerical Hebrew letters are not. Thus the Jews borrowed the division of chapters from the Christians, and the Christians the division of verses from the Jews."

The present division of the New Testament into verses, was made in 1551, by Robert Stephens, a learned printer, who published an edition of the Bible at Paris, divided in this

manner.

CHAPTER XXXVI.

THE REST OF NEHEMIAH'S ADMINISTRATION.

EXPELLED THE TEMPLE.

TOBIAH

MANASSES FLEES TO SAMA

RIA A TEMPLE BUILT ON MOUNT GERIZIM.

AFTER Nehemiah had spent twelve years at Jerusalem, using his authority to reform abuses, and bring into subjection the factious and ill-disposed, he once more returned to the Persian court: here he probably resumed his former office of cup-bearer, and enjoyed the favor of the monarch he had so ably served. At the end of "certain days-" supposed by Prideaux to be about five years, Nehemiah again returned to Jerusalem, with the authority of governor, as before. Abuses had gained ground in his absence, arising in great measure from the law against intermarrying with idolaters, not being observed. Tobiah the Ammonite, already mentioned as the confederate of Sanballat in his designs against Nehemiah, had married the daughter of a leading man among the Jews, and his son had done the same; by these connexions with the chief princes of Jerusalem they obtained a dangerous ascendancy in the city, which was openly exercised as soon as the opposing authority of Nehemiah was withdrawn. During his absence in Persia, the compliance of the High

Priest went so far, as to allow Tobiah to occupy apartments in the Temple itself, for which purpose the stores laid up for the meat offerings, and for the support of the Levites, were removed: several chambers were united into one, which was given up for the luxurious abode of this idolater. When Nehemiah discovered on his return, this flagrant violation of the sanctuary, he was deeply grieved, and instantly exerted his superior authority to expel the unlawful intruder. He cast forth all the household stuff of Tobiah out of the chambers, and had them cleansed and purified, and then restored to their original use, and again the vessels of the Temple, and the frankincense and other stores were laid therein.

Another violation of the Law, called for the vigorous intervention of Nehemiah. The Sabbath was profaned; the Jews themselves openly trod the wine press, and brought in their burdens of corn, and figs, and grapes, as on a common day; besides this, foreign merchants and sellers of all kinds of ware, brought up their goods to

"Eliashib the Priest." Nehemiah xiii., 4. Some have thought this to be a different person from Eliashib the High Priest; but we follow Prideaux, who satisfactorily proves them to be the same. See Prid. Con. vol. i. page 446. It is evident such an appropriation of the chambers in the Temple could only be carried out with the consent of the High Priest, whose character in other respects is not against the supposition: he is never spoken of as assisting Ezra and Nehemiah in their reforms, though from his office he ought to have taken a conspicuous part, as the prophets Haggai and Zechariah did: he is only mentioned as assisting in rebuilding the walls.