Imagens da página
PDF
ePub

text et veniet defiderium. He thinks, that if this difficulty could be furmounted, it is eafy and natural language to fay, that He, towards whom the defire of all nations ought to be turned, fhould come.

With refpect, however, to the propriety of connecting

a fingular noun, with a plural verb, this mode of expreffion receives perhaps fome countenance from the Chaldee paraphrafe, which, as Bishop Newcome obferves, "follows the Hebrew in its ungrammatical form." But we fubmit it to our Readers, whether the following examples may not tend in fome degree to justify fuch a conftruction of the paffage

before us.

Exod. i. 10.

[merged small][ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Pfal. cxix. 103.

Quam DULCIA SUNT palato meo ELOQUIUM TUUM. Prov. xxviii. 2.

[ocr errors]

FUGERUNT, et non perfequens, IMPIUS.

Examples of a fimilar enallage are not wanting in other languages. We will produce one only from the Ajax Flagellifer of Sophocles

Κἴ τις ἴσθ ̓ “ΣΚ

Τὸν τὸ μανέντος καπιβελευτο τρατο

Ξυναιμον ΑΠΟΚΑΛΟΥΝΤΕΣ,

But perhaps it will be more to our purpofe to obferve, that when two fubftantives are joined together in a fentence, in flatu regiminis, as the Grammarians term it (which is precifely the cafe in the paffage before us), then the verb fometimes agrees in number with the latter fubftantive, though it ought naturally to agree with the former. Thus 2 Sam. x. 9.

[ocr errors]

Et vidit Joab quod ESSET contra fe FACIES (plur.) belli. Here the verb agrees in gender and number with the latter fubftantive, inftead of being put plurally, and agreeing with 39.

9" We will produce another paffage, which, it fhould feem, is exactly parallel in this refpect with the paffage in Haggai.

Job, xv. 20:

[ocr errors]

Et NUMERUS annorum ABSCONDITI SUNT.

[ocr errors]

If it were neceffary to enlarge on this fubject, we might ob ferve, that the construction, which we have been endeavouring

ΤΟ

[merged small][ocr errors]

to establish, is ftill further fupported by analogy. In the inftance
produced above, from Samuel, we remarked, that the verb
agreed in gender, as well as in number, with the latter fubftan-
tive, inftead of the former.

A fimilar inftance, with respect to gender, occurs Levit. xiii. 9.

[ocr errors]

Plaga leprae cum fuerit in homine.

The verb is feminine, and agrees with my, the lat
ter fubftantive, inftead of ya, which is mafculine, and re-

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

Here the verb is again feminine, and agrees with the latter in-
ftead of the former fubftantive, which is mafculine.

These, and other examples of the fame kind, which might
eafily be produced, fhew that the Hebrew abounds with anoma-
lies, which have a near resemblance to that we have attempted
to illuftrate. They afford therefore a species of analogical proef,
which may be fairly, and perhaps fuccefsfully admitted.

The Bishop's objections to Houbigant's interpretation, are the
great folemnity of the introduction, ver. 6, and the beginning of
ver. 7, and the impropriety of the language, the defirable things
of all nations fhall come, when it fhould rather be faid, the de-
firable things of all nations shall be brought.'-These are un-
doubtedly very strong objections, and to thefe we would add
the parallel prophecy of Malachi, ch. iii. 1, which incontro-
vertibly relates to the Meffiah, and which is thus translated by
Bishop Newcome:

• Behold I will fend my Meffenger,
And he fhall prepare the way before me:
And the Lord whom

ye

feek

Shall fuddenly come to his temple, &c.'

As to the propriety of applying the paffages refpecting the Temple to that rebuilt by Herod, the Bishop is very juftly of opinion, that fuppofing the Meffiah to be prophefied of ver. 79, greater precifion would not have been used; for this would have led the Jews to expect a demolition of the Temple then building, and the erection of another in its ftead. As Herod's rebuilding the Temple was a gradual work of 46 years, he thinks that no nominal diftinction between Zerubbabel's and Herod's Temple was ever made by the Jews; and quotes the authority of feveral of the Rabbins to fupport and illuftrate this pofition.

This laft argument of the Bifhop has great weight with us in obviating the objections drawn from Jofephus; but as the paffages

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

paffages of that hiftorian, which relate to the prefent queftion, have been profeffedly examined in two diftinct publications, we decline faying any thing further on the subject, till it comes more particularly before us.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

The notes are copious and pertinent, untainted by an oftentatious difplay of erudition, and abounding with fuch illuftrations of eastern manners and cuftoms, as are beft collected from modern travellers. As a Commentator, the learned Prelate has fhewn an intimate acquaintance with the beft critics, ancient and modern. His own obfervations are learned and ingenious. It is moreover not the leaft merit of his criticifms, that they are continually enlivened by the introduction of claffical quotations; an expedient, by which the tedium of grammatical difquifition is happily relieved, the taste of the Commentator difplayed, and the text, in fome inftances, more fuccefsfully explained, than by diffuse and laborious modes of illuftration. Parsons, 18 ART. XI. The Elements of Euclid, with Differtations intended to affift and encourage a critical Examination of thefe Elements, as the most effectual Means of eftablishing a juster Taste upon mathematical Subjects than that which at prefent prevails. By James Williamfon, M. A. Fellow of Hertford College. 4to. Vol. I. 16s. Boards. Oxford printed. Sold by Elmfley, London. 1781. HEN this work firft made its appearance, we deferred our account of it, in the view of procuring the fecond volume; which being not yet published, we have at length refolved to notice this first volume by itself.

W

The dulnefs of commentators is a fubject of much generalcomplaint,' fays Mr. W. in the beginning of his introductory differtation. Were all commentators to write in the manner of Mr. W. the grievance would be much increased, and the Public might juftly complain of the infignificancy as well as dulnefs of annotators. The truth is, that our Editor has done too much; he has endeavoured to explain things that needed no explanation, he has darkened a fubject fufficiently clear in itfelf, and rendered the moft perfect and inoft fimple book that the world ever has feen, or perhaps ever will fee, confufed and difficult. My intention,' fays he, in this edition, is not to correct my author, but to supply a defect which it could not have been very confiftent with his plan to remedy. For he has written his book exprefsly upon the fuppofition that his reader was endued with the faculty of attention; and as this is a difpofition of mind with which the book is but rarely taken up, a few feafon able warnings, therefore, to roufe the attention of the indolent, may be given with great propriety.' What a compliment to readers! Did ever an Author fuppofe all his readers to be void of the faculty of attention? If he did, why write at all? The

[ocr errors]

greatest

greatest compliment an Author can pay to his readers is, that with all due perfpicuity, he conveys his ideas in language well fuited to the fubject he treats, without intermixing in his difcourfe heterogeneous matter, and a fuperfluity of particulars, which, inftead of commanding the attention, and keeping it al ways awake, and in action, tend to weary it, and give the reader a difguft to the fubject.

Mr. W. affirms that an Author, who writes upon fubjects of science, may often find it by no means convenient to deliver himself in fuch a manner as to be always intelligible even to thofe whom he would wish to have for readers.' What can Mr. Williamson mean by this declaration? And what can the Public think of that Author who waftes his time for no other purpose than to render himself unintelligible, and give his readers unneceffary trouble?

In the tranflation of his Author, Mr. W. has ftrictly adhered to the original; which, as a tranflation, is undoubtedly a great perfection: yet we cannot acknowledge the prefent performance to be preferable to thofe of Cunn, Simpfon, or Barrow. For a learner, this work is certainly a bad one, because the beautiful fimplicity and conciseness of the subject is by no means attended to. The original is in many places redundant; and Dr. Barrow has, judiciously in his edition, left out fuch fuperfluities as tend, without explaining the subject, to confufe the English reader. The original Greek abounds with a number of conjunctions and adverbs, which, when properly ufed, add great beauty to that language; but fince the idiom of the English tongue will not admit of their ufe, it is certainly wrong to retain them.

ART. XII. Tales of the twelfth and thirteenth Centuries. From the French of M. Le Grand. 12mo. 2 Vols. 6s. fewed. Kearsley. 1786.

THE

m.

HE object of M. Le Grand, in this curious and amufing collection, is fuppofed, by the tranflator, to have been the investigation of the truth, and an ardent zeal for the reputation of his country. He hath detected the encroachments of other nations, and particularly the Italians, on his own, and replaced the ftolen laurel on the brows of his countrymen, At the fame time he hath contefted the claim of priority made by one part of^ the nation over the other, by the fouthern over the northern provinces of France.

The Provençal Troubadours have long obtained a credit for excellence to which they had no fair claim, while the old French Romancers have been generally treated with neglect or disdain. It is the business of this publication to refcue them from the obfcurity into which they have unjustly fallen; and to prove from their own works, that they are entitled to a higher diftinction

than the caprice of fortune, or the prejudices of fashion and cuftom, have hitherto allowed them.

M. Le Grand's obfervations on the different fpecies of romance, in his introductory difcourfe, are in general very judicious. His diftin&tions are accurate and clear; and his reflections are the fruit of much hiftorical knowledge, and no small fhare of philofophical speculation; though his partiality to his own country hath in one place betrayed him into an oftentatious boaft, that may indeed be excused, but will undoubtedly be laughed at.

A very interesting remark here prefents itself, which I believe has never been yet fuggefted by any writer: it is, that those provinces of France, which in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries produced the authors of romance and fable, are precifely the fame, that, in the feventeenth and eighteenth, have given to the world Moliere, Boileau, Racine, Rameau, Crebillon, La Fontaine, Boffuet, Voltaire, Rouffeau, Corneille, Buffon, Condé, Turenne, Le Brun, Le Pouffin, Des Cartes, Vauban, &c. &c. &c. ; that is, the genius, the eloquence, the invention, the imagination, the fublimity of talent, in short, all the celebrated poets and the illuftrious heroes, who have adorned their country, or extended the limits of their several arts, fciences, or profeffions. Shall we not then conclude that nature, in the unequal diftribution of her gifts between the feveral diftricts of the kingdom, has been pleafed to allot the mental endowments more efpecially to the provinces fituated to the northward of the Loire? I fhall not pretend to account for this phenomenon; but fatisfied with ftating the fact, fhall leave the caufe to be inveftigated by others. But I cannot help obferving, that she had already begun in thofe early ages to endow our northern provinces with that creative power, that vigour and fecundity of conception, which once more, for the fecond time, but with much more reafon, has rendered our writers models for imitation, and objects of admiration, to all Europe.'

Our readers will be better pleafed with the following extract, which will give them fome idea of these Tales:

Those who read with attention muft obferve that every age and nation has not only its peculiar ftyle, but that in the works of pure imagination, as the romances, and even in thofe that are compofed of the most extravagant fictions, one difcerns the manners and the character of a nation described with as much truth, and often with more fpirit than in their very hiftories themselves. This obfervation will appear to be founded on reason, when we reflect, that the writer in all the whimfical inventions of his brain, in all the operations that he conceives, is obliged to employ men, and fuch men precifely as he fees about him. By this interefting picture which the tales prefent of the manners and cuftoms of their earlier ages, they will probably engage the attention ftill more than they will please by their intrinfic beauties. And it is not merely the general manners, or thofe of the more elevated ranks in life, that they reprefent. Calcu lated, like comedy, to defcrite the ordinary tranfattions of private

« AnteriorContinuar »