Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

In an address to the reader, in the Latin language, prefixed to the volume, the Editors remark, that though the Gospel of Matthew has been frequently translated into the Hebrew language, the whole of the New Testament has been rendered into that tongue twice only: Bis tantum Hebraice redditum fuisse ' constat :'—namely, by Elias Hutter, (whose version was first published in 1599,) and by a Jew of Travancore, whose manuscript version was brought from the East by the late Dr. Claudius Buchanan; and was presented by him to the London Society for promoting Christianity among the Jews. To this information we may add, that a Hebrew version of the whole New Testament was prepared by John Baptist Jona, of which the four Gospels were published at Rome, in. 1668. The death of the translator, in the same year, appears to have prevented the publication of the remaining books, (of Jona's translation,) which we should suppose were deposited in the college de propaganda fide.

In deference to the Eastern Jews, only pure Hebrew words of Biblical authority are admitted in this New Translation; those cases alone being excepted, which require the use of other terms. For the convenience of the Western Jews, rabbinical modes of expression are occasionally introduced into the margin. Words not contained in the Greek text, are denoted by hollow letters; but no such distinction in the type has been observed in cases where the sense of the original is expressed by periphrasis. A few terms of the original have not been translated, but appear in the corresponding forms of Hebrew orthography; as Barti(w, 100. BATTIOTAS, D'UDUDI. Care has been taken to give the force of the Greek article: and the Translators have endeavoured to present their version in as pure a Hebrew style as possible; having submitted this portion of their work to the inspection of more than fifty Hebrew scholars, previously to its final preparation for the press.

We applaud the honesty of the Translators in rendering the quotations from the Old Testament in the New, directly from the Greek, instead of inserting the passages from the Hebrew Text, as some of their friends injudiciously advised. The most scrupulous fidelity was essential to the proper execution of the duty imposed on the Translators; and we are glad that in the article of quotations, they have not committed themselves.

No information is communicated by the Editors, relative to the Greek text from which the present version has been translated. The precision and details which are now very properly required in all Biblical undertakings, can in general be so easily supplied, that, as a point of duty, we notice the omis sion, and suggest to the Editors the insertion of an additional line in their preface, for the satisfaction of the public. It is

however very evident, that the received or Elzevir text, is assumed as the standard to which this. Hebrew version is made conformable. A few instances, it is true, occur, in which the latter varies from the former; but from a careful inspection of the whole first Gospel, and the particular consideration of the very few deviations which presented themselves to our notice in the course of our progress, we cannot be mistaken in remarking that the Editors have not availed themselves of the labours of those eminent scholars, by whose erudition and critical acumen the Greek text of the New Testament has been purified and restored. Is the Elzevir text of 1624 to supersede every other, and to continue the basis of every translation?

The translation now submitted to our inspection, is literal; and so well executed, as to reflect no small credit on the parties by whom it has been conducted. It is printed throughout with points, but without accents. The typographical execution of the book, is extremely neat. Feeling warmly interested in every means of aiding the diffusion of Christian truth in its native purity, we congratulate the Translators of this Hebrew version, on this specimen of their labours; and earnestly hope they will be enabled to complete their im portant undertaking.

We shall select a few passages from the translation before us, not for the purpose of censuring them, but to suggest something towards their correction and improvement.

.לעת גלות בבל

Ch. i. 11. Ἐπὶ τῆς μετοικεσίας Βαβυλῶνος. Here, there is no word in the Greek original corresponding to in the version, which is not necessary to convey the proper sense. In 1 Kings xviii, 35, we have any about the ftime of) evening sacrifice. a is preferable to the phrase employed in the version, and is the idiom adopted by the Syriac translator.

אלם הריכל

Ch. ii. 11. is inserted in the text, and appears as a various reading in the margin. In this example, the Translators, in common with the English public version, depart from the reading of the received Greek text, which has upov; an almost solitary instance of departure from it. Ch. iv. 5. Τὸ πτερύγιον τῷ ἱερᾶ. We should object to as the proper word to be the representative of TO TEPUYO, and would suggest as the more appropriate term; since the latter preserves the etymology of the original expression, and further resembles it in peculiarity of application.

Ch. x. 2. Αποστόλων.

מלאכים

Notwithstanding the authority which may be alleged in support of thsi word, we would recommend its being changed for was often as the Greek VOL. V. N.S.

E e

[ocr errors]

in its special appropriation to the Apostles, occurs in the New Testament.

Ch. xi. 30. Τὸ φορτίον μου. NO. As the Translators have rendered in the 28th vs. by boon they should optioμivo have inserted instead of N in the 30th.

המסבלים

Ch. xii. 11. is inserted without occasion: so also is in the 20th verse of this chapter.

-

18. Και κρίσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν ἀπαγγελλει ;0 1. We submit whether another verb should not have been selected as the rendering of dayy. This part of the quotation is copied verbally from the passage in Isaiah xlii. 1; differing from it, however, in the arrangement of the words; the Translators following the order of the English common version.

The same Greek words are not infrequently translated by different Hebrew terms, where the sense is unvaried. Thus, in the case of the adverbs, which is rendered by 10 ch. iii, 16; but in ch. xiii. 20, 21. the only other passages in which it is found, by xD. Ακολούθει μοι is translated by

Na ch. viii. 22; but in eh. ix. 9, by s . Eis ámávinow is in one place (ch. xxv. 1.) rendered by sb: and in another (vs. 6.) by rap. To these and similar instances we refer, not as censurable blemishes, but merely for the purpose of expressing our opinion, that uniformity in the manner of translating the same words and phrases, where no deviation is demanded by the different idioms of the two languages, is highly desirable, and should be observed.

In ch, xxiii. 8, we find another instance of deviation from the received text, in the adoption of doxanos, teacher, instead of xanynn's, leader; the word being inserted instead of which the common reading would require. Though Sidaxaños appears only in Griesbach's margin, we confess that in our judgement the internal probability is so strong, as to justify this alteration.

We shall only further hint to the Conductors of this work, that as they have, though rarely, deserted both the received Greek text, and the English common version, which has had some influence on their own, they ought, in order to be consistent, to admit nothing into their translation, that wants the support of a critically correct Greek text as its basis. Art. V. Paul's Letters to his Kinsfolk. 8vo. pp. 468. Price 12s. Edinburgh, Constable and Co. 1816.

THE Newspaper wits have reported Mr. Walter Scott to have fallen in the field of Waterloo. It should seem either that he only lost his laurels there, or this volume must be received as evidence of his resurrection. We congratulate Mr.

Scott on being able to redeem to so great a degree by his prose, his failure as a poet.

In attributing this volume to the above-named gentleman, we rely on the authenticity of the publisher's advertisement. It is a highly spirited and interesting volume. The assumption of a feigned character under the name of Paul, seems designed merely to give propriety to the easy familiarity and varied subjects of the letters. The first four epistles are occupied with general observations on the state of France, previous to the landing of Bonaparte at Cannes. Paul assures his Cousin Peter, that though this had been prevented, yet that "There were within France itself, elements sufficiently jarring to produce, sooner or later, a dreadful explosion.' The first cause of discontent he alleges to have arisen from the pretensions of the emigrant noblesse and clergy; and he adverts to the restoration of Charles II., to which he says, we almost involuntarily resort as a parallel case,' for the purpose of remarking, that the tempting' course of re-action and revenge, was magnanimously declined by all the leading cavaliers. If Cousin Paul means to convey the idea, that the restoration of Charles II. was, in any important respect, a parallel case, he is only imposing on the ignorance of Cousin Peter. The less that is said of the magnanimity of the restored monarch and his dissolute court, the better. But we can excuse Mr. Scott.

'

Paul further affirms, in accordance with the representation in our last number, that The system of the Gallic Church had 'been thoroughly undermined before its fall.'

Its constitution had been long irretrievably shattered; the whole head was sore, and the whole heart was sick. Doctrines of infidelity, every where general among the higher ranks, were professed by none with more publicity than by the superior orders of the clergy; and respecting moral profligacy, it might be said of the church of France, as of Ilion,

'Intra mania peccatur, et extra.'

After enumerating other causes of apprehension, which conspired to produce disaffection to the royal family at their first restoration, Paul says,

'The protestants in the South of France remembered the former severities exercised against them by the sovereigns of the House of Bourbon, and trembled for their repetition under a dynasty of monarchs, who professed the catholic faith with sincerity and zeal. Add to these, the profligate who hate the restraints of religion, and the unthinking who ridicule its abstracted doctrines, and you will have some idea how deeply this cause operated in rendering the Bourbons unpopular.'

At page 57, we meet with the important remark, that even at that period, the language of the government of France during

ts short-lived reign, for which it was wholly indebted to the magnanimity of the conquerors of France, became gradually and insensibly tinged by the hostile passions of her population,

The impatient and irritated state of the army dictated to her representative, even at the Congress, a language different from what the Europe n republic had a right to expect from the counsellors of the monarch, whom their arms had restored. It is probable that the government felt that their army resembled an evoked fiend pressing for employment, and ready to tear to pieces even the wizard whom he serves, unless instantly supplied with other means of venting his malevolence.'

To allay all these hostile feelings, and to save Louis the painful conflict between gratitude and interest, our ministers have now adopted the precaution of drawing a military circle round the wizard, to guard him from the malice of his own fiend!

Cousin Paul fully confirms the previous statements of the well-concerted schemes which secured Napoleon's seemingly wonderful success, and of the gross negligence or treasonable connivance of the police. A Frenchman, finding his friend 'ignorant of some well-known piece of news, observed, in reply, Vous etes apparemment de la police? as if to belong to that body inferred a necessary ignorance of every thing of import'ance that was going forward in the kingdom.'

The most interesting part of the present volume, however, is that which contains the minutely circumstantial and very lively description of the GREAT BATTLE; it corresponds indeed entirely with the accounts of former narrators, but receives from the present writer some additional touches of moral painting, which add to the interest of this tale of tears and of glory.

The Author defends the policy of Bonaparte in his bold and sudden advance into Belgium; and shews that in all respects he had most effectively prepared for the encounter. By incredible exertions he had amply supplied his deficiency of artillery; his cavalry were upwards of 20,000 in number; Of whom the 'lancers were distinguished for their ferocity, and the cuirassiers by the excellence of their appointment and the superior power of their horses.' Of the infantry,' adds our Author, it was 'impossible to speak too highly in point of bravery and disci'pline in the field.'

6

The affair at Quatre Bras was extremely bloody. The Duke of Brunswick was among the many valuable officers on the list of the slain. The French were repulsed in their attempt of advancing on Brussels, but no immediate advantage resulted from this engagement.

While Ney was engaged with the English army, Bonaparte moved with his centre and right wing against Blucher. It was at this desperate contest, so fatal to the Prussians, that the

« ForrigeFortsett »