« AnteriorContinuar »
text 1790 1831 et veniet defiderium. He thinks, that if this difficulty could be surmounted, it is easy and natural language to fay, that He, towards whom the desire of all nations ought to be turned, should come. With respect, however, to the propriety of connecting
a fingular noun, with 787 a plural verb, this mode of expreffion receives perhaps some countenance from the Chaldee paraphrase, wbich, as Bifhop Newcome observes, “ follows the Hebrew in its ungrammatical form.” But we submit it to our Readers, whether the following examples may not tend in some degree to justify such a construction of the passage before us.
Exod. i. 10.
כִּי תִּקְרֶאנָה מִלְחָמָה
Cum EVENERINT bellum. Pral. cxix. 103.
? Quam DULCIA SUNT palato meo ELOQUIUM TUUM. Prov. xxviii. 2.
מַה־נִמְלְצוּ לְחַיִכי אִמְרָתֶךָ
פָּסוּ וְאֵין־רֹדֵף רָשָׁע
FUGERUNT, et non perfequens, IMPIUS. Examples of a similar enallage are not wanting in other languages. We will produce one only from the Ajax Flagellifer of Sophocles
Κ τις έσθ' οΣ και
Ξυναιμον 'ΑΠΟΚΑΛΟΥΝΤΕΣ. . But perhaps it will be more to our purpose to observe, that when two substantives are joined together in a sentence, in flatu Tegiminis, as the Grammarians term ii (which is precisely the case in the passage 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.
? ° Et vidit Joab quod esset contra-se FacIES (plur.) belli. Here the verb agrees in gender and number with the latter fub. ftantive 7915, instead of being put plurally 747, and agree.
. g"We will produce another palage, which, it Thould seem, iş exactly parallel in this respect with the passage in Haggai. Job, xv. 20.
% Et NUMERUS annorum ABSCONDITI SUNT. If it were necessary to enlarge on this subject, we might ob serve, that the construction, which we have been endeavouring
וַיַּרְא יוֹאָב כִּי־הָיְתָה אֵלָיו פְנֵי הַמִּלְחָמָה
•פְנֵי ing with
וּמסְפָר שָׁנִים נִצְפְנוּ
to eftablish, is Aill further supported by analogy. In the instance produced above, from Samuel, we remarked, that the verb agreed in gender, as well as in number, with the latter fubftantive, instead of the former. A similar instance, with respect to gender, occurs Levit. xiii,
נֶגַע צָרַעַת כִּי תִּהְיֶה בְאָדָס
Plaga lepre cum fuerit in homine. The verb mom is feminine, and agrees with myrş, the lat. ter subftantive, instead of ya), which is masculine, and re
, Again, Jerem. X. 22.
קוֹל שְׁמוּעָה הִנֵּה בָאָה
Vox rumoris ecce venit! Here the verb is again feminine, and agrees with the latter inftead of the former substantive, which is masculine.
These, and other examples of the same kind, which might easily be produced, shew that the Hebrew abounds with anomalies, which have a near resemblance to that we have attempted to illuftrate. They afford therefore a species of analogical proof, which may be fairly, and perhaps successfully admitted.
The Bishop's objections to Houbigant's interpretation, are the great solemnity of the introduction, ver. 6, and the beginning of ver. 7, and the impropriety of the language, the desirable things of all nations Thall come, when it Ihould rather be said, the defirable things of all nations shall be brought.'--These are undoubtedly very strong objections, and to these we would add the parallel prophecy of Malachi, ch. iii. I, which incontrovertibly relates to the Messiah, and which is thus translated by Bishop Newcome:
• Behold I will send my Messenger,
Shall suddenly come to his temple, &c.' As to the propriety of applying the passages respecting the Temple to that rebuilt by Herod, the Bishop is very juftly of opinion, that fuppofing the Messiah to be prophesied of ver. 79, greater preci. fion would not have been used; for this would have led the Jews to expe&t a demolition of the Temple then building, and the erection of another in its stead. As Herod's rebuilding the Temple was a gradual work of 46 years, be thinks that no nominal distinction between Zerubbabel's and Herod's Temple was ever made by the Jews; and quotes the authority of several of the Rabbins to support and illustrate this position.
This last argument of the Bishop has great weight with us in obviating the objections drawn from Josephus; but as the
passages passages of that historian, which relate to the present question, have been profesedly examined in two distinct publications, we decline saying any thing further on the subject, till it comes more particularly before us.
The notes are copious and pertinent, untainted by an oftentatious display of erudition, and abounding with such illuftrations of eastern manners and customs, as are best collected from modern travellers. As a Commentator, the learned Prelate has Thewn an intimate acquaintance with the best critics, ancient and modern." His own observations are learned and ingenious. Ic is moreover not the least merit of his criticisms, that they are continually enlivened by the introduction of classical quotations; an expedient, by which the tedium of grammatical disquisition is happily relieved, the taste of the Commentator displayed, and the text, in some instances, more successfully explained, than By diffuse and laborious modes of illuftration. Persona, 1: ART. XI. The Elements of Euclid, with Differtations intended to
aflift and encourage a critical Examination of these Elements, as the most effectual Means of establishing a juster Taste upon machematical Subjects than that which at present prevails. By James Williamson, M. A. Fellow of Hertford College. 4to. Vol. I. 16s. Boards. Oxford printed. Sold by Elmfley, London. 1781.
HEN this work first made its appearance, we deferred
our account of it, in the view of procuring the second volume; which being not yet published, we have at length resolved to notice this first volume by itself.
• The dulness of commentators is a subject of much generalcomplaint,' says Mr. W. in the beginning of his introductory dissertation. Were all commentators to write in the manner of Mr. W. the grievance wouid be much increased, and the Public might justly complain of the insignificancy as well as dulness of annotators. The truth is, that our Editor has done too much ; he has endeavoured to explain things that needed no explanarion, be .has. darkened a subject sufficiently clear in itself, and rendered the most perfect and inoft fimple book that the world ever has seen, or perhaps ever will see, confused and difficult. • My intention,' says he, in this edition, is not to correct my author, but to supply a defect which it could not have been very twonsistent with his plan to remedy. For he has written his book expressly upon the supposition that his reader was endued with the faculty of attention ; and as this is a disposition of mind with which the book is but rarely taken up, a few season: able warnings, therefore, to róuse the attention of the indolent, may be given with great propriety,' What a compliment to readers! Did ever an Author fuppose all his readers to be void of the faculty of attention? If he did, why wsite at all.? The
greatest compliment an Author can pay to his readers is, that with all due perspicuity, he conveys his ideas in language well fuited to be subject he trears, without intermixing in his difcourse heterogeneous matter, and a superfluity of particulars, which, instead of commanding the attention, and keeping it ala ways awake, and in action, tend to weary it, and give the reader a disguft to the subject,
Mr. W. affirms that an Author, who writes upon subjects of science, may often find it by no means convenient to deliver himself in such a manner as to be always intelligible even to those whom he would wish to have for reade: s.' What can Mr. Williamson mean by this declaration ? And what can the Pube Jic think of that Author who wastes his time for no other purpose than to render himself unintelligible, and give his readers unnecessary trouble?
In the translation of his Author, Mr. W. has ftri&tly adhered to the original; which, as a translation, is undoubtedly a great perfection: yet we cannot acknowledge the present performance to be preferable to those of Cunn, Simpson, 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 such superfluities as tend, without explaining the subject, to confuse the English reader. The original Greek abounds with a number of conjunctions and adverbs, which, when properly used, add great beauty to that Janguage; but since the idiom of the English congue will not admit of their use, it is certainly wrong to retain them. In ART. XII. Tales of the twelfth and thirteenth Centuries. From the French of M. Le Grand.
2 Vols. 6s. sewed. Kearsley. 1786.
HE object of M. Le Grand, in this curious and amusing
çollection, is supposed, by the translator, 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 stolen laurel on the brows of his countrymen, At the same time he hath contested the claim of priority made by one part of the nation over the other, by the fou hern over the northern provinces of France.
The Provençal Troubadours have long obtained a credit for excellence to which they had no fair claiin, while the old French Romancers have been generally treated with neglect or disdain. It is the business of this publication to rescue them from the ob. scurity into which they have unjustly fallen; and to prove froin their own works, that they are entitled to a higher diftinétion 6
than the caprice of fortune, or the prejudices of falbion and cuftom, have hitherto allowed them.
M. Le Grand's observations on the different species of romance, in his introductory discourse, are in general very judi. cious. His distindions are accurate and clear ; and his reflections are the fruit of much historical knowledge, and no small Ihare of philosophical 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 presents itself, which I believe has never been yet suggested by any writer : it is, that those provinces of France, which in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries pro. duced the authors of romance and fable, are precisely the same, that, in the seventeenth and eighteenth, have given to the world Moliere, Boileau, Racine, Rameau, Crebillon, La Fontaine, Bossuet, Vol. taire, Rousseau, 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 sublimity of talent, in short, all the celebrated poets and the illustrious heroes, who have adorned their country, or extended the limits of their several arts, sciences, or profesfions. Shall we not then conclude that nature, in the unequal distribution of her gifts between the several districts of the kingdom, has been pleased to allot the mental endowments more especially to the provinces situated to the northward of the Loire ? I fall not pretend to account for this phenomenon ; but fatisfied with stating the fact, shall leave the cause to be investigated by others. But I cannot help observing, that she had already begun in those early ages to endow our northern provinces with that creative power, that vigour and fecundity of conception, which once more, for the second time, but with much more reason, has rendered our writers models for imitation, and objects of admiration, to all Europe.
Our readers will be better pleased with the following extract, which will give them some idea of these Tales :
• Those who read with attention must observe that every age and nation has not only its peculiar style, but that in the works of pure imagination, as the romances, and even in those that are composed of the most extravagant f&tions, one discerns the manners and the character of a nation described with as 'much truth, and often with more spirit than in their very histories themselves. This observation will appear to be founded on reason, when we reflect, that the writer in all the whimsical inventions of his brain, in all the operations that he conceives, is obliged to employ men, and such men precisely as he sees about him. By this interesting picture which the tales present of the manners and customs of their earlier ages, they will probably engage the attention till more than they will please by their intrintic beauties. And it is not merely the general manners, or those of the more elevated ranks in life, that they represent. Calculated, like comedy, to describe the ordinary transzcions or private