whom David enlisted when he resided among the Philistines, were archers and slingers. We do not exactly see the authority on which he has pronounced them to be such, although we have offered corroborative etymologies in the note. As in 2 Sam. xv. 18 they are associated with the Gittim, or men of Gath, it is possible that their names may have been derived from some places in Palestine. The Arabic roots and, both indicative of swiftness, also offer an explanation of the words. He certainly is wrong in identifying the latter with the velites, or light troops of the Roman legion, as it regards the etymology of the terms; because with the proofs of a connexion between the Greek, Latin, and Sanskrit, which we now have, there cannot be a doubt, that वेलू, rel, or वल्, val, to move, whence वल vălă, an army, unfolds to us the origin of the appellation.

There is great judgment in Dr. Russell's observations on the Psalms; and he has shown that little dependence can be placed on the different theories concerning their metres. Much nonsense has been written on their titles, in which some have even discerned most recondite mysteries; and men of learning, such as Bertholdt, have speculated in a most extraordinary manner on the subject. But, as Forskel and Dr. Russell remark, these titles were undoubtedly names of more ancient tunes, to which the Psalms were intended to be sung and played. In this opinion Hahn generally concurs, although his fancy has contrived to dis

הגיון and an aria in נגינה cover a cantabile in


The Songs of Degrees, у,LXX.wdaì rwv avaẞalμāv, Dr. Russell ingeniously proposes to render the "Songs of the Steps," from the probability that these Psalms were recited or sung at the vestibule of the temple, on the stair which led to the door of the holy place. Lightfoot supposed them to have been sung on the fifteen steps which rose in the courts of the temple.

Notwithstanding the ingenuity of the hypothesis, we think that this title had a different interpretation. We are convinced that they were so called, as having been the Psalms sung by the pilgrims going to Jerusalem at the great festivals; for in this sense by is continually used in the Old Testament (cf. 1 Kings xii. 27, 28; Ezra vii. 6, 7; Zach. xiv. 16, 17), and we are assured that the meaning of the Greek word was the same, be

may refer the word to the root, kri, to hurt, to injure, to kill, whence

कृतिन् kritin, nom. kriti, skilful, &c. क्रथ् krath, is also a root

of the same meaning. On similar grounds, the Pelethites may be re

ferred to fum pil, to throw. पिल्

cause avaßaivuv has this force in the New Testament (cf. Matt. xx. 18; Acts xviii. 22). The Syrians had also a sort of odes, which were called; sc? | Sam.

We next notice the writer's remarks upon the cherubim. That they had an emblematical signification we readily allow, but what that signification was, it is impossible to determine. They have been compared to the Sphinx, to Garuda, and many other pagan compounds, but the Scriptures afford not even a glimpse sufficient to guide us in bringing the inquiry to a satisfactory result. It is a point, which we must leave as great a mystery as we have found it. It is even doubtful if the word be of Hebrew origin, because they are mentioned before the time of Abraham, in whose days we imagine the Hebrew to have arisen; and it is very certain, that the real root does not exist in Hebrew, and that the senses supplied by those in the cognate tongues are exceedingly inapposite. And, though we have shown in a note, that the Sanskrit may perchance have preserved the sense of the original root, we cannot critically avail ourselves of it, as the comparison is but hypothetical.

Josephus describes them as flying creatures; which description agrees with that of Ezekiel, Daniel, and St. John. Even if we grant, that the bovine form preponderated, we cannot, with Dr. Russell and others, allow the signification of the word to have proceeded from a root indicative of ploughing,* because it by no means answers to the character in which they are mentioned in Scripture; nor, with others, from one indicative of carving or engraving, because it would be indefinite. Nor is there validity in Eichhorn's suggestion of a former of images or idols; because it is far more probable, that the cherubim themselves gave this derivative sense to the Syriac.

We do not agree to the evident bearing of Dr. Russell's argument, that soon after the apostasy in worshipping the golden calf, the cherubim were ordered to be made and placed in the tabernacle, on account of the hardness of the people's hearts, and their propensity to Egyptian idolatry; because if such had been the motive, it would have been a virtual sanction to their transgression. The cause is among those things which we cannot discover; and the meaning of those, which were over the mercy-seat, may have been connected with that of the

The sense of the original root seems, from the prophetic descriptions, to be preserved in the Sanskrit ch'harb, or garb, to move forwards, to go; for although the grammatical forms of the Hebrew and Sanskrit are totally different, they have many words in common, which, if Vans Kennedy's theory be correct, will admit of an easy solution. Compare with this etymology. Ps. xviii. 11.

cherubim, which are mentioned on Adam's expulsion from Eden. It was scarcely in imitation of these, that Jeroboam set up the calves in Israel; for they appear to have wanted the other parts of the compound, and if they had been counterparts to those in the temple, they would assuredly have been called such. Jeroboam's long residence in Egypt renders it more likely, that they were imitations of the Mnevis and the Apis.

Dr. Russell's research into the origin of alphabetic letters is recommended by acuteness and learning; but he has been too much swayed by the theories of Mr. Landseer and Dr. Lamb. In these two works fancy has been plentifully put into requisition, and on little more than an aërial foundation an imposing castle has been erected.

That picture-writing preceded alphabetic, but few will deny; but the gradation, in which pictorial and hieroglyphical symbols passed to alphabetical characters, is not easy to be developed. The Chinese characters, to a certain extent, exemplify Dr. Russell's ideas, and in many instances he has cogently appealed to them, as existing illustrations of his positions; but their principles of combination remove them in a great measure from the question. Egyptian antiquities indeed afford us a considerable light, but not one sufficient to guide us through every dark part of the inquiry and great as the discoveries of Young and Champollion have been, it is to be feared that they have not fully realized the original hopes, and that very much is wanting to their perfection. Much has certainly been assumed. There are Coptic characters, to which the symbolical counterparts have not been satisfactorily determined; and there is an immense quantity of words lost to the Coptic, since the time of the Ptolemies, very many of which must have been expressed in the hieroglyphics. If we grant, that from phonetic hieroglyphics came alphabetic signs, WHEN they came, and THROUGH WHAT GRADUAL PROCESS they came, remains a question, on which the veil of obscurity is cast. We do not like to trust to mere theory on such points. Thus, we may not affirm that the Hebrews, the Arabs, and the Phoenicians, had a pictorial alphabet, because we cannot affix a date to the simple characters, and are not prepared to show that they did not receive them from some other nation. Aleph, Beth, Gimel, and the rest, may be words denoting sensible objects, and as such be pictorial subjects; so may Alpha, Beta, Gamma, &c. if we seek an interpretation from the Sanskrit; but even if they denoted originally sensible objects, we perceive that the names were retained after the abandonment of pictorial writing; and therefore can draw no just conclusion from their retention in earlier times. And as, with a slight variation, the Hebrew alphabetic names were common to other nations, we cannot exclusively fix their pictorial representatives on the house of Abraham. Be it remembered, that Abraham was a


Chaldee; and that the language now called Chaldee, which is cognate to the Hebrew, should more properly be styled the Babylonian for the real Chaldee (as we might incontrovertibly show from the names of the Chaldean conquerors of Babylon,) was quite distinct from that dialect which now passes under the name, and which is nothing more nor less than Syriac. With respect to Abraham, we may indeed suppose, from the locality of Ur, that Syriac words and forms may have been interblended with his Chaldee; here, however, let us observe, that the argument which some have urged respecting Yegar Sahadutha (Gen. xxxi. 47.) is totally faulty, because the Syrian was the proper language of Mesopotamia, where Laban resided. Many derive the term Hebrew from Abraham's passage of the Euphrates;we think, incorrectly; and imagine it to be a patronymic, alluding to his descent from Eber. But although in Canaan and its vicinity, there were many dialects cognate to the Hebrew, we find the word first emphatically applied to Abraham: it would therefore seem, that, as we read in the sacred text, that his household consisted of various slaves, his original language may have been so blended by his tribe with that of the country, as to have been called y, the dialect of the descendants of Eber.

Now, if in phonetic hieroglyphics the whole animal or symbol was given for the mere sake of its initial alphabetic sound, the advance towards a simplification of the system may have been far more rapid than authors have admitted it to be. Thus, although we may doubt the assertion of Eupolemus, that Moses introduced alphabetic characters, we see no reason to doubt the fact of their existence before his time. We cannot imagine the tables of the Law to have been pictorial or hieroglyphical: the characters must have been alphabetic. The Ogham of the Druids, (which word has been retraced to the Sanskrit

ăgămă,) to which Dr. Russell has appealed, were rather mysterious or sacerdotal characters; the cuneiform characters of Babylonia and Persia, the Sassanian inscriptions, the alphabets edited by Hammer, and those more ancient ones to be discovered in India show, that at a very early age secret ciphers were adopted. Let us add the Devá-nágari to the list, also the Cufic, the Zend and Pá-zend; and who shall fathom the antiquity of alphabetic characters? But more on this subject will appear in the course of the review.

In Dr. Russell's remarks on the religion, arts, sciences, and learning of the Hebrews, his own opinions are skilfully combined with the labours of his predecessors. In his account of the studies of the Levitical colleges, among which were poetry, ethics, oratory, pharmacy, music, and even a certain degree of physical science, he seems closely to have followed Jennings,

and to have consulted the work of Witsius. These colleges were succeeded by the prophetic schools, in which young men, maintained at the public expense, were prepared for certain offices analogous to those which are discharged by the different orders of the christian clergy: in these, it seems, the whole learning of the nation was vested. But among many ancient people we find prophet and poet synonymous terms, and we are not without instances in which the Hebrew & exhibits this twofold sense. As in the prophetic schools music was extensively cultivated, and as the ancient prophets commonly delivered their oracles in verse, hence perhaps the synonym arose. But, as Dr. Russell says, any intellectual exertion directed towards the service of God or the advancement of religious knowledge, came within the primitive acceptation of the term: thus Miriam was called a prophetess, and the sons of the prophets at Ramah were said to prophesy, when they performed divine anthems on their psalteries, tabrets, and harps. Deborah was also denominated a prophetess, because she judged Israel. To be a prophet in the secondary sense, it was not therefore necessary to have the power of foretelling future events.

Nevertheless, it was one part of the duty of the prophet, properly so called, to enforce and elucidate Divine truth, and to apply himself to the study of the sacred books: he was taught to examine the import of the sacrifices and the ceremonial laws, and to investigate every thing which prefigured the Messiah. "Thus, Daniel understood by books the number of years, whereof the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah the prophet." With respect to the scenical representations of the prophetic oracles,


* In the New Testament pоpηTEÚεLV is very widely used, and in a manner corresponding to the Hebrew word. The native Arabic Lexica identify the root with he showed, he told, he indicated, which appears to be the primitive sense of the Hebrew; and in the Hebrew the root in Niphal and Hithpahel seems to be often synonymous with (uaiverai,) he was seized with a furor or impetus, &c. mining the various passages, in which Nabi No occurs, we find reason to interpret it at one time a prophet kar' oxir, at others, a poet, (and perhaps a musical performer,) and an interpreter of the Divine oracles. In this latter sense the verb is frequently used in the New Testament. It is worthy of remark, that the Latin vates has the double sense of prophet and poet, and appears to have proceeded from some root corresponding to the Sanskrit, vad (which exactly answers in


sense to the Arabic or ) whence

vādin, nom. vādī,

a sage, or from favid, to know, whence afa vēdin, nom.

vēdī, a pandit, a teacher.

« ForrigeFortsett »