lie heaped on the battle-field. Away from its immediate strifes, its scenes of pageantry and glory, its curse is most keenly felt around a thousand firesides, in the hearts of mothers and children, whose domestic affections have been broken and whose prospects in life have been marred or destroyed for ever. All these are to be added to the amount, when we estimate the cost of American Independence, and reckon up the debt of gratitude which we owe to the generation that achieved it.

ARTICLE VII.

REVIEW OF THE EDINBURGH BIBLICAL CABINET.

The Biblical Cabinet; or Hermeneutical, Exegetical and Philological Library. Edinburgh: Thomas Clark. 1832-1841.

THE object of this work is worthy of all commendation. It seeks to supply a deficiency in British, but more particularly in Scottish literature, which has been universally acknowledged and lamented. This neglect of Biblical studies in Scotland may appear, at first view, unaccountable. The great reformer, he, who stamped his likeness on the character, and embalmed his memory in the hearts of his countrymen, through all succeeding ages, strove to bring them back to the pure word of God, and to dispossess them of those habits and notions which had led them to undervalue this sacred book. He was the coeval, too, of men, who were mighty in the original Scriptures, and who handled with skill and manly courage the weapons which were forged in this armory. Why did not the sturdy Scotchman catch some of the enthusiasm of his brothers at Wittenberg and Geneva?

The people of North Britain have, moreover, always been renowned for their attachment to the Scriptures, and their opposition to popery. They have stood fast in the liberty wherewith Christ has made them free. They have never bowed down to the dicta of the Fathers.

They have never sworn allegiance to the tradition of the elders. On one celebrated occasion, they were rather over-zealous in denouncing the apocryphal writings. Their love to the Bible has undergone some pretty formidable tests. They have borne an unflinching testimony when the hosts of the Papal hierarchy were hunting them like partridges on the mountains, or mingling their blood with the wine of the communion which they were celebrating by stealth, at the bottom of some dark ravine. Such a people, it should seem, would be among the foremost in digging into the mines of sacred truth. The descendants of such might be expected to welcome every attempt to unfold the meaning of the original Scriptures.

Scotland, likewise, has been famous for her universities. For several centuries, she has professed to teach universal literature and science; or else, she has assumed a name which does not belong to these schools. Do not Biblical studies come within the range of litera humaniores? Must the Mosaic code be postponed to that of Justinian, or to the technics of the Scotch courts? Must the oriental languages be excluded from the academic hall on account of the discoveries of Dr. Black in chemistry, or of Dr. Brown in mental analysis?

Such, however, is the fact. Oriental study has never had any chosen abode north of the Tweed. She has rather been an exile, even in the retreats provided for her. Foundations for the study of Hebrew and other eastern languages have long existed in all the universities. Yet the use, which has been made of them, is very meagre. A few facts, which were given in evidence before the Parliamentary Commission, in 1830, will fully bear out our assertion. The professor of oriental languages at Edinburgh states, that in teaching Hebrew he does not use the points, as he is satisfied, that in the time allotted to him, he could do nothing with the points; and for the same reason, he does not explain the system of punctuation. It was stated, that no regular system of Biblical criticism has been taught at Glasgow. The students use Parkhurst's Hebrew Lexicon. They do not study the Chaldee portions of the Old Testament, not being furnished with a dictionary for that tongue! The professor at King's College, Aberdeen, reports, that he "accustoms his pupils. to look for the words in a dictionary; but owing to the

mode in which Hebrew dictionaries are generally prepared, they have not commonly become expert at this when the class is finished." If such are the fountains, what must be the streams!

A prominent cause of this inattention to the oriental tongues in Scotland is, ignorance of languages generally, or rather, an inaptitude in the Scottish mind for philological pursuits. Scarcely any names of distinction in Greek and Latin literature can be mentioned. George Buchanan, the eminent Latinist, is almost the only exception. Occasionally, a Dalzel, or a Dunbar may have been respectable teachers of youth, or compilers of excerpts from the classics. The late Professor Sandford, of Glasgow, the translator of Thiersch's Greek Grammar (who, however, was educated at an English university), might have obtained some laurels, if he had not plunged into the treacherous sea of politics. In researches in modern languages, eastern or western, the land is equally barren. Dugald Stewart, speaking of the extraordinary attainments in philological pursuits, displayed in the labors of Adelung and some of his successors, remarks, "I call it an almost miraculous gift, because in looking over such tables, as that exhibited in the supplement to the Encyclopædia Britannica (see article, Languages) I can only wonder and admire at faculties to which I am unconscious of possessing in myself any thing at all analogous." * This honest confession may account for the professor's neglect to study the German language, which was so obviously important in his philosophical studies, and his total ignorance of which he repeatedly deplores.

Again, systematic divinity has been a favorite study with the Scottish divines. Dick's Theology is, perhaps, a fair representative of the results of that study. The logical element has had full play. Powers of discrimination and of accurate analysis, within certain limits, have, unquestionably, been abundantly nurtured. But the pursuit has been exclusive. The oracles of God have been made to square with the catechism. The text has been compelled to bend to the dogma. The Bible has been, ostensibly, the only rule of faith and practice. But it has been studied too often with the determination

* Works, Camb. ed., III, p. 60.

to make it harmonize with "the analogy of" Scottish "faith." Its free doctrines, its unfettered precepts, its life-giving morality, have been approached only in a certain prescribed way. The wealth, the overflowing wealth, of the inspired word has not thus been appreciated or seen. No system of divinity can be lawfully made out of the Scriptures till the text is well understood. The superstructure has been erected before the foundation was laid. This exclusive attention to the formulæ of the faith goes far to account for the neglect of Biblical interpretation. The presbyteries have not inquired whether the applicant for ordination could read the documents which he was to be commissioned to explain, but whether he could respond, ex animo, to an excellent creed of human invention.

Certain general characteristics of the people of Scotland have interposed another formidable obstacle to Biblical studies. They are noted, the world over, for an unyielding tenacity. They are stiff disciples of the past, rigid upholders of what is time-worn and venerable. The Presbyterian clergy have been sternly opposed to innovation in every shape. Hence there would be a very natural antipathy to Biblical philology. The creators and the leading professors of this branch of study are Germans. The Teutonic race have been eyed with the keenest jealousy. Literary wares from Germany have undergone a long quarantine at the Scottish ports, if they * have not been thrown overboard as hopelessly infected. An indiscriminate hostility has been waged against German theologians, however high, in their own land, is their character for sound views and pious feelings. Of course, Biblical studies have shared the fate of their friends and abettors. They have been proscribed or neglected.

We may mention, once more, a circumstance which may be regarded, partly as a cause, and partly as a result,

* We have a case in point, in the following from the "Orthodox Presbyterian.' It refers to an answer by Mr. Menzies to some strictures of Mr. Robert Haldane on Tholuck's Exposition of the Romans, translated by Mr. Menzies. "We have no hesitation in saying, that it is a satisfactory and complete answer, and shows, in a very convincing and triumphant manner, that Mr. Haldane has often misrepresented Tholuck's meaning, and that he has given garbled quotations, and upon these founded a charge of impiety and blasphemy."

of the prevalent distaste for oriental studies, namely, the distinguished and almost ecumenical reputation of not a few of the men who have filled various professorships at the Scotch universities. We have only to recall the names of Adam Smith, Thomas Reid, Dugald Stewart, and Thomas Brown in mental science; of Drs. Black and Thomson, and of Sir David Brewster in natural science; of the Gregories and Hunters in medicine; and of Dr. Chalmers in divinity. Among the most popular professors in Scotland, at the present time, are Mr. Jamieson, Professor of Natural History, at Edinburgh, and Sir William J. Hooker, Professor of Botany, at Glasgow. The average attendance of students, on the former, some years since, was two hundred; on the Hebrew professor in the same university, sixty-eight! In the metaphysical, mathematical, and natural sciences, Scotland has an elevated rank. But the popularity of these branches, and the desire to maintain the old reputation, have pre-occupied the public mind, and, co-operating with other causes, have quenched all desire to engage in philological pursuits. We might have anticipated, indeed, that eminence in one department of knowledge should have induced the scholars of Scotland "to intermeddle with all wisdom." There is a mutual relation between every species of literature. The speculations of Dr. Campbell and of Dr. Ferguson lead directly to the investigation of language. Such, however, seems not to have been the case. The natural expectation has not been answered. The literary men of Scotland have been content to bear the reproach which has been heaped upon them by the Grecians and the Latinists south of the Tweed.

The considerations, which we have adduced, will show some of the difficulties with which Mr. Clark has had to contend in bringing out his series of translations. He has had warm recommendations from the most eminent philologians and divines of the whole island. Such publications as the Christian Observer and the Eclectic Review, have spoken kindly and frequently in his behalf. He has had almost every encouragement, except that of intelligent readers, or patrons who could appreciate the value of the undertaking.