« ForrigeFortsett »
of the Apocalyse." By the Rev. G. Croly, LL.D.,
being the Substance of a Speech delivered at Exeter
Hall. By J. E. Gordon, Esq.
the Fact and Period of the Mosaic Deluge, and of its
having been the only Event of the kind that has ever
occurred upon the Earth. By George Fairholme.
2. A General View of the Geology of Scripture. By the
CHURCH OF ENGLAND
Art. I.-A Connexion of Sacred and Profane History, from the
Death of Joshua to the Decline of the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah; intended to complete the Works of Shuckford and Prideaux. By the Rev. Michael Russell, LL.D., Episcopal Minister. Leith. Vol. III. London: J. G. and F. Rivington. 1837.
THIS volume concludes the undertaking on which Dr. Russell has been for many years engaged; it is clearly the result of indefatigable labour. It contains much conjectural matter, which we do not deem necessary to our investigation, but removes in other parts a very considerable portion of scriptural difficulties.
It is not our intention to follow its rapid survey of the Biblical narrative, but to fix our criticisms upon prominent particulars. We fully assent to the author's idea, that the prohibition from eating blood was occasioned by a propensity to partake of the warm blood of animals, such as Bruce has described to be prevalent in Abyssinia ; which, with its attendant cruelties, the humane spirit of the Mosaic economy consistently denounced. But the author has overlooked the cause of the hostilities between Amalek and Israel ; he has not shown why the former, more particularly than any other nation, should have opposed the latter, immediately after the Exodus, which seems to have been necessary to his review of the reign of Saul. Two races appear to have borne the former name in the Old Testament: the first descended from Ham, who were probably of the Phænician stock ; the second, the descendants of Esau, who lived in Idumæa. This distinction is verified by Gen. xiv. 7, (where the Amalekites occur as a nation soon after Abraham's establishment in Canaan), compared with Numb. xxiv, 20, where they are mentioned as a very early or primitive nation (On D'UN); and by Gen. xxxiv. 12, where others of the same name occur among the posterity of Esau. Since, then, one class belonged to the family of Ham, we may easily give credit to the eastern historians, who assign as the
NO, III.-- VOL. II.
cause of their attack upon the Israelites a desire to avenge the deaths of their kindred, the Egyptians, in the Red Sea. Nor will it appear strange, that two distinct people should have had the same name, when we call to mind, that several titles * designated habits. This Gentile term does not indeed seem to be easily deducible from the Semitic family of languages; but may we not, for reasons which will be given in the sequel, conjecture, that some trace of it survives in the Sanscrit 3TTTTO Cāmālăkă, which is applied to land near a mountain?—for as this is clearly adapted to the Amalekites, who resided in Arabia Petræa, so it may without difficulty have been given to another race of similar habits. Besides, when we consider the intermarriages of Esau. and his sons with the Canaanites, it is far from improbable, that Amalek, the grandson of Esau,—the family of Timna his mother not being recorded,-may have been related by descent to the earlier race of the name; or that, as Israel was a cognomen of Jacob, and Edom of Esau, Amalek may have been one of the same description, and have been intended to designate the peculiar residences of himself and his descendants. This observation, which is only hypothetically proposed, will explain its application to two separate people; in which we are in some degree warranted by the wide use of Horim in Scripture.
Dr. Russell has correctly understood the transaction between Saul and the witch at En-dor. It is nowhere stated, that Samuel actually appeared: 877 090 5180 YT") suggests not the idea, that Saul saw Samuel, but that he was persuaded, i.e. by the woman's description--that it was Samuel. As Dr. Russell says, the shade of Samuel only seemed to be recalled from the shades. That the woman knew Saul at the first glance, is clear from her speech in 1 Sam. xxviii. 9; and the aspect of affairs, combined with the knowledge, that the kingdom was decreed to pass from the line of Saul to David, would naturally dictate to her the part which she should play, and the answer which she should return. Saul's mind was predisposed to receive any impression; the time too was night, and favourable to her purpose. By the aid of those ordinary illusions, which eastern pretenders to necromancy practised, and by ventriloquism, in which they were generally skilled, the particulars in the narrative might easily have been effected. For, as no reasoning will convince us that the Almighty would have thus favoured arts, which he had severely and repeatedly denounced, and as it was not possible for evil agency to have evoked the spirit of Samuel from 5180, we are confident that the account requires a very different interpretation. Saul had previously inquired of Jehovah; but Jehovah
* That names were given from habits and circumstances, is evident from the Μακρόβιοι, Ιχθυοφάγοι, &e. &c.