NON CIRCULATING YYYY Trrrrrrrrrrrt YYYY IT Trrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr YYYYY 3 3 : 3. : Presented by HON. D. BETHUNE DUFFIELD. i : 2 Tappāl PróSb][6Flåll ASS06jafjöll | IB F A FY. ** 11–11111111111111111111111111111111111. A 1–1111111111. A 14-111 a 11 - º - º --- ºf ºx CRITICAL DISQUISITIONS on THE Eighteenth Chapter || || || || - ºn 11 * * ** / 3ſſaial). IN A LETTER TO EDWARD KING, ESQ.. F, R. S. A. S. BY - - * SAMUEL LORD BISHOP OF RochestER, F. R. S. A. S. *:::A; 3a ºn u e, successive - º - : ºº y º ºſº -- º º ——sº--— PHILADELPHIA: RE-PRINTED BY JAMES HUMPHREYS, From the London Copy of 1799, -- 18oo, f º !: */ 4/42?-??32. A. ADVERTISEMENT. HE old Engliſh Bibles, occa- --, ſionally cited in the following pages, are Coverdale's, the great Eng- liſh Bible, the Biſhop's Bible, and the Engliſh Geneva Bible. Cov E R D ALE’s tranſlation was prin- ted in folio, in the year 1535, and made its public appearance in the ſummer of the following year. It was the work of the pious and learn- ed Divine, whoſe name it bears, Myles Coverdale, afterwards Lord Biſhop of Exeter. Of all our authoriſed tranſlations it has the leaſt pretenſi- ons to accuracy. By the author's own account of it, he relied more upon earlier tranſlations, than upon any examination of his own, of the original texts. For he profeſſes, that he “tranſlated purely and faithfully ** Out: º 2. - -º- - - - --- - - - -- - - - --- -------- - - (iv ) º “ out of foregoing interpreters,” who had tranſlated the Scriptures, “ not “ only into Latin, but alſo into “ HDutch.” -- The GREAT ENG LI's 11 BIBLE is the tranſlation, made under the di- rečtion of Archbiſhop Cranmer, and printed in large folio in I 539. A noble work, well correſponding with its title: “ The Byble in Englyſhe, “ that is to ſay, the content of all “ the holy ſcripture both of the olde “, and newe teſtament, truly tranſla– “ ted after the veryte of the Hebrue “ and Greke textes, by the dylygent “ ſtudye of dyverſe excellent learned “ men, expert in the forſayde tonges.” The BISHOP's BIBLE is the revi- ſed and amended edition of Cran- er's, made by the moſt eminent di- vines and ſcholars of the times, un- der the direction of Archbiſhop Par- ker, and ſplendidly publiſhed in folio in 1568, - The º ( v ) \, The ENGLISH GENEvA BIBLE is the tranſlation made by the Engliſh Proteſtants, in exile at Geneva, in the reign of Philip and Mary. It was firſt printed at Geneva in 1560; and between that time and the year 1616, it underwent above thirty editions at London, in different ſizes. It was the common family Bible in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, and is of ten cited by the title of Queen Eli- zabeth's Bible. The editions that have been uſed upon the preſent occaſion have been, of Coverdale's and the Great Bible, the original editions in the Archiepiſ- copal Library at Lambeth. - Of the Biſhop's º the origi- nal edition in the Libra?y of the Col- legiate Church of Weſtminſter. Of the Engliſh Geneva, the 4to's of 1589, and 1599, both in the poſ- feſſion of the author. A 2 TO -- - -- -- To EDWARD KING, ESQUIRE. DEAR SIR, º º ONSIDERABLE portions of my time, for ſome years paſt, have been employed in the ſtudy, of all ſtu- dies the moſt intereſting, of the Prophe- tic parts of the Holy Scriptures; and among the reſt, the Prophecies of Iſaiah, have deeply engaged my attention. But it was a converſation with you, in the early part of laſt ſpring, that put me, at that time, upon a more minute exami- nation, than I had ever made before, of the XVIIIth Chapter of that Prophet. The concluſions to which I found my- ſelf inevitably brought, differ in ſome very important points, though concern- ing the general ſcope of the Prophecy they agree, with the interpretation which you communicated to me. I felt how- ever no inclination to agitate the queſ- tion (even with yourſelf I mean, for there was nothing at that time to bring into diſcuſſion before the Public) and after much deliberation with myſelf, I * . thought - º - ( ; ) thought it better avoided; knowing, that your opinions are not raſhly taken up; conceiving, that you might re-conſider the ſubječt; and perſuaded, that a man of your learning and upright intention, is more likely to ſet himſelf right by his own meditation of an abſtruſe queſtion, than to be ſet right by another. But now that you have given that ſame interpre- tation of this Prophecy to the Public, in your Supplement to your Remarks on the Signs of the Times, I ſhould think myſelf wanting to the duties of the ſta- tion, to which God has been pleaſed to 2, çall me, if I were any longer to ſuppreſs the reſult of a diligent meditation of ſo important a portion of the Prophetic Word. I cannot however enter upon the ſubjećt without profeſſing, not to yourſelf, but to the world, how highly I value and eſteem your writings, for , the variety and depth of Erudition, the Sagacity and Piety which appear in eve- ry part of them ; but appear not more in them, than in your converſation and the habits of your Life, to thoſe who have the happineſs, as I have had the happineſs, to enjoy your intimacy and friendſhip, I muſt publicly declare, that - I think you are rendering the beſt ſervice - - {Q - - to the Church of God, by turning the attention of believers to the true ſenſe of the Prophecies. For you are perfeótly right in the opinion you maintain, that a far greater proportion of the Prophe- cies, even of the Old Teſtament, than is generally imagined, relate to the Se- cond Advent of our Lord. Few com- paratively relate to the Firſt Advent by itſelf, without reference to the Second. And of thoſe, that have been ſuppoſed to be accompliſhed in the Firſt, many had in that only an inchoate accompliſh- ment, and have yet to receive their fūll completion. While we agree in theſe great and leading principles, I hope that a difference of opinion upon ſubordinate points, upon the particulars of interpre- tation (ſo far as either of us may venture upon particular interpretation, which is to be ventured upon with the greateſt caution, with fear, indeed, and trem- bling) will be received, on both ſides, with that candour and charity, which is due from one to another, among all thoſe who, in theſe eventful times, are anx- iouſly waiting for the redemption of Iſrael, and marking the aweful Signs of its gradual approach. --- This XVIIIth Chapter of Iſaiah is, as you -- - -- º --- - ( to ) you have with great truth remarked, one of the moſt obſcure paſſages of the an- cient Prophets. It has been conſidered as ſuch by the whole ſucceſſion of In- terpreters, from St. Jerome to Biſhop Lowth. “The objećt of it,” ſays the Biſhop, “the end and deſign of it, the “ people to whom it is addreſſed, the “ hiſtory to which it belongs, the per- “ ſon who ſends the meſſengers, and the “ nation to whom the meſſengers are “ ſent, are all obſcure and doubtful.” Much of this obſcurity lies in the dic- tion (propter inuſitata verba, ſays Mun- ſter, propter figuratas ſententias) in the highly figured caſt of the language, and in the ambiguity of ſome of the princi- pal words, ariſing from the great variety of ſenſes often comprehended under the primary meaning of a ſingle root. Few, I fear, will have the patience to follow me; but you, I flatter myſelf, will be one of the Few that will, in the ſlow and la- borious method of inveſtigation, by which I endeavour to diſpel this obſcurity; which however is the only method, by which ob- ſcurity of this ſort is ever to be diſpelled. Diſcarding all previous aſſumptions, con- cerning the deſign of the Prophecy, the people to whom it is addreſſed, the hiſto- ry º /* ( 1 1 ) ry or the times to which it belongs; I enter into a critical examination of every word of which the meaning is at all doubt- ful; and I conſider the meaning of every word as, in ſome degree, doubtful, which has been taken in different ſenſes by differ- ent interpreters of note. I conſider the etymology of the word; I enquire in what ſenſes it is ačtually uſed, by the Sacred Writers in other paſſages; and I com- pare with the original, and with one another, the tranſlations of Interpreters, in different languages, and of different ages. And here I muſt take occaſion to re- mark, that, among the ancient tranſla- tions, attention is principally due to the Syriac, to the fragments that are come down to us from Aquila, and to the Septuagint. To the Syriac, becauſe it was the work of Chriſtians in the very earlieſt age of Chriſtianity ; it gives us therefore the ſenſe, which was receiv- ed by thc immediate ſucceſſors of our Lord's Apoſtles. To what remains of Aquila's verſion, for the contrary reaſon; it was the work of an enemy; and gave that ſenſe of the Original (where the ſenſe was at all uncertain) which was the leaſt favourable to Chriſtianity. To - the a tranſlation made before the Hebrew ceaſed altogether to be a living language, but, being made by Jews long before the birth of Chriſt, the authors could be biaſed by no prejudice againſt the parti- cular claims of our Lord Jeſus to the charaćter of the Meſſiah of the Iſraelites. And whenever it gives a ſenſe particu- larly favourable to his pretenſions, and ſuch a ſenſe it gives in many paſſages, every ſuch interpretation may be taken as an admiſſion of the adverſary. It is much to be lamented, that this tranſla- tion is not come down to us in a more perfect ſtate. Great indeed would its authority be, had we reaſon to receive it as the genuine unadulterated work of Ptolemy's tranſlators. And yet, even in that perfeót ſtate, the authority, I ſhould have allowed to it, would have been far ſhort, I confeſs, of what you ſeem to aſcribe to it; I ſhould not have made it my Text. I ſhould have claimed for myſelf, and other men of learning of the preſent day, a full competence to judge of the ſenſe of the Original, in oppoſi- tion to the ſenſe of the Seventy-Two. The fact however is, that this tranſlation having been the moſt uſed, both in the º ſynagogue - - the Septuagint; not only becauſe it was ( 13 ) ~ ſynagogue and in the church, in the firſt ages of Chriſtianity, has for that very reaſon been the moſt tampered with both by Jews and Chriſtians. It has been corrupted, by the very means, that were uſed to preſerve and improve it. For I cannot but agree with St. Jerome, though I know how much his judgment in this point has been decried, that Ori- gen's additions and detraćtions, however guarded by his aſteriſks, his lemniſks, and his obeliſks, were, in the nature of the thing, a ſource of inevitable cor- ruption (for I give the name of Cor- ruption to any alteration, though for the better, of an author's own words.) And in the preſent ſtate of this Greek Verſion, it is impoſſible to diſtinguiſh, with cer- tainty, what is pure Septuagint, what is Septuagint correčted by Origen, and ſtill more corrupted by careleſs tranſcribers or preſumptuous emendators of Origen's correóted Text. Great attention ſtill is due to it; but not more than is due to an imperfeót vitiated copy of a venera- ble original. Which original was but itſelf a ſhadow of the Hebrew Verity, the only prototype. It ought always to be conſulted in difficulties, and much light is occaſionally to be derived from it. But * B I - - - ( – 14 ) -- I ſay without heſitation, that upon the whole, it repreſents the whole of the Hebrew Text with leſs exačtneſs, than either the Vulgate or the common Eng- liſh tranſlation. In theſe ſentiments, I fear, you will not concur. But this is a point upon which I think it my duty to ſpeak out. For it would be very miſ- chievous in the preſent times, very con- trary to the intereſts of ſacred truth, if a party were to be formed in favour of any particular tranſlation. But to return to the immediate ſubjećt. When by this proceſs, by ſcrutinizing etymologies, exploring uſage, and con- ſulting tranſlations, I think I have aſcer- tained the plain literal meaning of a word, and have ſelečted, from a variety of ſenſes, that which ſeems the beſt ſuit- ed to the context; my next ſtep is to conſider, what the thing denoted by the word, in the literary meaning, may figuratively repreſent, according to the principles of the prophetic imagery; for theſe two things, the literal meaning, as the foundation of the figurative, and the figurative meaning, according to the principles and uſage of the prophe- tic ſtyle, are the only ſure baſis of inter- pretation ; which will ever be precarious - * - and - ( 15 ) and deluſive, if it be founded only on ſome general reſemblance, haſtily caught up by the imagination, between particu- lar detached events, and the expreſſions of the Prophet looſely and fancifully ex- pounded. And ſuch, I believe, all in- terpretations will be found to be, which refer texts of Prophecy to events merely ſecular; not connected, or but very re- motely conneéted, with the ſtate of Re- ligion and the fortunes of the Church. Theſe fanciful interpretations, in one way or other, always are miſchievous. Either they take; and then they ſpread a general error; or, if they find few ad- mirers, they raiſe a prejudice againſt the interpreter, who in other reſpects may de- ſerve attention, or, what is worſe, againſt the word of Prophecy itſelf. And for this reaſon, I confeſs, I have often wiſh- ed, that the formation of the Goodwin Sands, the invention of the Teleſcope, the diſcoveries with regard to Fixed Air, and the invention of the Air-Balloon, had not been brought forward, as things at all conneéted with the effuſion of the tremendous Vials of Wrath, on the Sea, the Sun, and the Air. Great as theſe things ſeem to the narrow mind of Man, } cannot think, that even greater things than V. ( 16 ) , than theſe, not even the diſcoveries of Copernicus and Newton, were worthy of the notice of that Spirit, which was in the Holy Prophets. The method of inveſtigation I have deſcribed, if men had the patience to purſue it, in moſt caſes, I am perſuaded, would diſcover the general ſubjećt of a prophecy, and even develope the parti- culars of the accompliſhment, when the general ſubjećt lies in any part of the hiſtory of paſt times, if the detail of that part of hiſtory is accurately known. But when the accompliſhment of a prophecy is ſtill future; when once the general ſubjećt is aſcertained, at that point inter- pretation ought to ſtop for the preſent, reverently expećting the farther com: ments of Time, the authoriſed and in- falliable expoſitor. You have well re- marked, that, with reſpect to the detail of things future, “Sacred Truth ſhould “ be very much left to ſpeak for itſelf, “ by ſlow degrees.” And for itſelf it will ſpeak, in God's good time; and it is only to a certain extent, that Man ſhould attempt to ſpeak for it: juſt ſo far, as to lay hold of the general ſubjećt, that we know whereabouts, if we may ſo ſpeak, in what particular quarter of the world t ( 17 ) world Politico-Eccleſiaſtic, we may watch for the completion. If we go beyond this, and attempt to deſcend into parti- culars, it is difficult, I am perſuaded, even for a man of the moſt ſober mind to keep his Imagination in order. And, though among the fanciful gueſſes of a man of learning and judgment, one per- haps in twenty, which I think is a large allowance, may turn out true; it is far better to leave this truth to be brought to light by Time, than to hazard the credit, both of the expoſition and the text, by the other nineteen, which Time will confute. No miſchief is done in the one caſe ; much, in the other. This Eighteenth Chapter of Iſaiah is one inſtance among many, in which Ex- poſitors have perplexed themſelves by gratuitous aſſumptions, concerning the general ſcope of the Prophecy, before they attempt to ſettle the ſignification of the terms in which it is delivered ; and then they have ſought for ſuch interpreta- tions of the language, as might ſuit the applications they had aſſumed. But it is a prepoſterous way of dealing with an writer, to-interpret his words by his ſup. Poſed meaning, inſtead of deducing his ineaning from his words. It has been 2 aſſumed ( 18 ) aſſumed by moſt interpreters, firſt, that the principal matter of this prophecy is a Woe, or judgement. 2. That the objećt of this woe is the land of Egypt itſelf, or ſome of the contiguous coun- tries. 3. That the time of the execu- tion of the judgement was at hand, when the prophecy was delivered. -- I ſet out with conſidering every one of theſe aſſumptions as doubtful; and the concluſion to which my inveſtigations bring me, is, that every one of them is falſe. Firſt, the prophecy indeed pre- dićts ſome woeful judgment. But the principal matter of the prophecy is not judgment, but mercy; a gracious pro- miſe of the final reſtoration of the Iſra- elites. Secondly, the prophecy has no reſpect to Egypt, or any of the conti- guous countries. What has been ap- plied to Egypt is a deſcription of ſome people, or another, deſtined to be prin- cipal inſtruments in the hand. of Provi- dence, in the great work of the re-ſet- tlement of the Jews in the Holy Land; a deſcription of that people, by charac- ters by which they will be evidently known, when the time arrives. Thirdly, the time for the completion of the prophe- cy was very remote, when it was dº -- - aſı - ( 1.9 ) and is yet future; being indeed the ſea- ſon of the Second Advent of our Lord. You may ſay perhaps, that in ſtating theſe concluſions here, before I have diſ- cuſſed the difficulties and ambiguities of the language of the Sacred Text, I am myſelf doing the very thing I blame in others; that I aſſume a certain gene- ral application, which I mean to confirm by critical reaſoning on the holy pro- phet's words. But you will find, that my own concluſions are not aſſumed in any part of my enquiry, any more than the aſſumptions of others, which I diſ- card. I conſider the words in themſelves; and I come to the concluſions by a gram- matical examination of the words, inde- pendent of all aſſumed applications. My only reaſon for ſtating my concluſions here is, that I think the diſquiſition, upon which I am entering, will be more per- ſpicuous, and the length and minuteneſs of it leſs tedious, if the general reſult in which it is to terminate, be previouſly, known. Juſt as, in any mathematical inveſtigation, the analytical proceſs is more luminous and ſatisfactory in every ſtep, if the theorem, to which it con- dućts, is diſtinétly enounced in the be- ginning. - º A5 > nº … ( 20 ) As far as the concluſions which I have ſtated, go, I have the ſatisfaction to think you agree with me. The difference be- tween us lies chiefly in this ; You main- tain in your Remarks on the Signs of the Times, that it is expreſsly declared in certain paſſages of Iſaiah’s prophecy, by what people, and from what place, and at what time, the Jews ſhall be reſtored. In your Supplement, you alledge the 18th Chapter of Iſaiah, as giving the fulleſt information with reſpečt to the matter: And you think the French are deſcribed, in that chapter, as the reſtorers of the Jews. It is my opinion, on the contrary, that the time for the reſtoration of the Jews is no otherwiſe defined than as the ſeaſon of our Lord’s Second Advent. I contend, that although this XVIIIth Chapter of Iſaiah deſcribes a people deſtined to be inſtruments of Providence in the reſtoration of the Jews, it deſcribes that people only by certain charaćters, which have ačtually belonged to different people in different periods of the hiſtory of Man, and leaves it unde- termined to what people, among the various nations of the earth, theſe cha- raēters may belong, when the time ſhall come for the accompliſhment of the pro- - phecy; ( 21 ) phecy; and I contend, that it is a mat- ter equally undetermined, from what place the reſtoration of the Jews will begin. But although I pretend not poſitively to ſay, what nation God has choſen to be the condućtors of the Iſraelites to their ancient ſeats, and main- tain that Prophecy gives no clear light upon that queſtion: I ſay, negatively, that there is no reaſon to believe, that the Atheiſtical Democracy of France is deſtined to ſo high an office. The grounds, upon which I find myſelf com- pelled to differ upon theſe points will ap- pear in the ſequel. I ſhall now give you my analyſis of the Sacred Text, in the ſhape of notes upon the public tranſla- tion. To theſe I ſhall ſubjoin a tranſla- tion of the whole chapter, accompanied with ſhort explanatory notes, for the in- formation of the common Engliſh reader. For this I take to be the only way, in which the reſult of theſe critical enquiries can be communicated to the unlearned. And to them it is to be communicated. For I never will admit, nor would you, I think, be inclined to admit, that our Religion has belonging to it, any ſecret doćtrine, from the hearing of which the illiterate laity are to be excluded. The º I, Otlon ( 2.2 ) notion of the incompetence of the com- mon people to underſtand the whole of the revealed doćtrine, and of the danger of expounding the prophecies to them, is falſe and abominable. It is the very principle, upon which the Sacred Text was, for ſo many ages, kept under the lock and key of the dead languages. “Would to God, ſay I, all the Lord's “ people were prophets.” And in this, I think, you will agree with me. ISAIAH, CHAP, XVIII. Verſe I. “Wo to the Land” **s ºn In the 5th and 6th verſes there is al- luſion to ſome ſevere judgement; and from a notion, which may perhaps be found to be erroneous, that the country, addreſſed in this verſe, is to be the ob- jećt of that threatened judgement, many interpreters, among theſe the LXX. Vulg, and Chald, render ºn by “ Wo “ to—.” But the particle ºn is not ne- ceſſarily comminatory. Sometimes it is an exclamation of ſurprize; and very often it is ſimply compellative of per- - * fonS º ( 23 ) - ſons at a diſtance. And ſo it is taken here by Calvin, Caſtalio, in the Great Bible, the Biſhop's Bible, the Engliſh Geneva Bible, and by Vitringa. —ſhadowing with wings”—eºs bºx The word bºx, which our tranſla- tors, very judiciouſly in my opinion, have taken in the ſenſe of “ ſhadowing,” muſt be confeſſed however to be of doubtful meaning. - . The root ºx, or bºx, has two principal ſenſes. “ To quiver,” like the lips in fear (Hab. III. 16.) and “ to ſhade,” or “ſhelter.” It is often applied par- ticularly to the ears, and predicates of the ears, that they ſing or tingle. This particular ſenſe ariſes naturally out of the general ſenſe of quivering; the ſinging, or tingling of the ear, being a ſound pro- duced within the ear itſelf, when the nerves, and other parts of the organ, are, by any external cauſe, thrown into a ve- hement vibratory motion. Hence ſome nouns, derived from this root, are uſed for the names of ſuch muſical inſtruments as, from the readineſs with which their parts are thrown into quick vibrations, give a ſound particularly ſhrill and ſharp. - - Of ( 24 ) Of theſe nouns ºxbº is one. It occurs in four paſſages only beſides this. Name- ly, 2 Sam. VI. 5. Pſ. CL. 5. Job, XL. 26. Deut. XXVIII, 42. In the text in Job, indeed, it denotes ſome implement of a fiſherman. In Deuteronomy, “the “ locuſt;” whether from the ſound of its wings, or from the other ſenſe of the root ºs is doubtful. But in both the other paſſages, it is evident from the context, that it renders ſome muſical inſtrument; and it is, by moſt interpreters, underſtood of cymbals. And ſo it is taken by St. Jerome here. “ Vae) terrae cymbalo “ alarum,” is his rendering. That is, “ Wo to the land the cymbal of wings.” By the ſtrućture of this Latin ſentence, the country intended, whatever it may be, is deſcribed under the image, or em- blem, of a “ cymbal of wings.” For terrae is a dative in appoſition with “ cymbalo.” But it is evident from St. Jerome's commentary, that he neither knew, what ſort of a thing a “cymbal “ of wings” might be, or what country was ſo deſcribed. Symmachus ſeems to have underſtood the expreſſion of ſome adjunét of the par- ticular country intended, deſcribed under the image, not of a cymbal, or of any - particular - ( 25 ) - particular muſical inſtrument, but of founding wings. - St. Jerome's notion of the Cymbal has been caught up by three commentators of conſummate taſte and erudition, the great Bochart, Huetius, and Biſhop Lowth. But, underſtanding the Es:- bºbs, with Symmachus, as an adjunct of the land, not as an emblem of the land itſelf; they have added, what was wanting of perſpicuity to St. Jerome's tranſlation ; or, rather, they have found a meaning for St. Jerome, which he could not find for himſelf. Their ren- dering is, “land of the winged cymbal.” Then aſſuming, (for they cannot prove it, and Biſhop Lowth, with his uſual candour, allows that the thing is doubtful) that Egypt is the country intended, they take “ the winged “ cymbal” to be a poetical periphra- ſis for the Egyptian Siſtrum ; which dif- fered, as they think, from the common cymbal in certain appendages of its ftrućture, which reſembled “wings;” or at leaſt might be called Esso ac- cording to the large acceptation of that word in the Hebrew language. For Huetius, I think, was the only one of C the ( 26 ) the three, whoſe imagination found in the figure of the Egyptian Siſtrum, with its lateral appendages, an exačt reſem- blance of a bird with expanded wings. Be that as it may, they agreed that the “ winged cymbal” was the Egyptian Siſtrum ; and they conſidered this as a charaćteriſtic of the land of Egypt, taken from the frequent uſe of the Siſtrum, in the rites of her idolatrous worſhip. This interpretation no where makes a better figure, than in the elegant paraphraſe of Carpentius : - Vae tibi quae reducem, ſiſtris crepitanti bus, Apim - -- Concelebras, crotalos et inania tympana pulſans, Amne ſuperba ſacro tellus And if it were certain, that Egypt is the country upon which the prophet calls, and that theſe words are inapplicable to Egypt, in any other ſenſe, which they may admit; then indeed it would follow, that this muſt be the true ſenſe of them in this place. But ſo long as it is at leaſt doubtful, whether Egypt be the country intended ; and ſo long as it is certain, that theſe words admit of other ſenſes, in which they would be applicable to Egypt, if Egypt were the country in- | - - tended ; -- ( 27 ) tended, it will be reaſonable to ſuſpend our judgement, and to ſeek an expoſi- tion of Jeſs refinement. - The ſecond principal ſenſe of the root ** is, “to ſhade, to overſhade, to ſhel- “ ter;” and as a noun, “ſhade,’’ ‘‘ a “ſhadow,” “ a ſhelter;” and this is the ſenſe, in which it is moſt frequently uſed. It is true, the word in the re- duplicate form never occurs in this ſenſe, except it be ſo uſed in this place. But in this place it is ſo taken by the Syriac interpreter, and by Aquila. lax as il S.A. 1s; }) , o, And this rendering is followed by moſt modern interpreters; by Calvin, Diodati, the Spaniſh, and our Engliſh tranſlators, Caſtalio, ju- nius, Oſtervald, and the very learned Vitringa ; except that inſtead of a noun ſubſtantive for the word bºx, which Aquila and the Syriac uſe, theſe mo– derns put either a participle, of ſome- thing equivalent to a participle. Inum- brans alis. Calvin. Shadowing with wings. Eng. Alis umb: oſa tellus. Caſ talio. Terræ umbroſe oris. Jun. and Trem. Pais qui fait ombre avec des ailes. Ofterwald, Terra obumbrata alis. Vitringa. It is certainly an obječtion of no great - weight ( 28 ) weight againſt thoſe renderings, that the word *xºs, in the reduplicate form, is not to be found in any other text, in the ſenſe of ſhade, ſhadowing or over- ſhadowing. According to the princi- ples of the Hebrew language, the re- duplication of the letters of a root only gives intenſity to the ſenſe, whatever it may be. So that in whatever ſenſe a word in the ſimple form is uſed, in the fame it may be uſed in the reduplicate form, if the occaſion requires an inten- tion of the ſignification. Eºss bºx,- late obumbrans alis. But taking this as the literal rendering, ſtill the image is of doubtful meaning. - The mention of the rivers of Ethiopia, which immediately follows, has led almoſt all expoſitors to look to Egypt, as the country addreſſed. If Egypt be intended, the alluſion may be to the geo- graphical features of that country. The wings of Egypt may be underſtood, as Vitringa, Grotius, and Junius underſtand them, of the ridges of mountains run- ning from South to North, on either ſide of the Nile; by their divergency, as they advance northward, ſomewhat reſembling a pair of pinions, and overſhadowing the intermediate vale of Egypt. But it is by ( 29 ) by no means certain that Egypt is the country intended; and, whether Egypt be intended or not, the image may allude to nothing in the figure of the country, but to ſomething in the national charaćter or habits of the people. So they muſt have underſtood it (and among them are the LXX. Jonathan and Coverdale) who take the wings for the ſails of numerous veſſels, overſhadowing the ſurface of the ocean. But the ſhadow of wings is a ve- ry uſual image in the prophetic language, for protećtion afforded by the ſtronger to the weak. God’s protećtion of his ſer- vants is deſcribed by their being ſafe un- der the ſhadow of his wings. And in this paſſage, the broad ſhadowing wings may be intended to charaćterize ſome great people, who ſhould be famous for the protećtion they ſhould give to thoſe whom they received into their alliance; and I cannot but think this the moſt fimple and natural expoſition of the ex- preſſion. - - I ſhall therefore diſmiſs, without cere- mony, thoſe fanciful expoſitions, which would explain theſe wings of thoſe of the ſwallow over the ſtatue of Iſis, or of the wings of the idol Kneph. But there is another expoſition which demands more C 2 - attention, ( 30 ) attention, as it has dropped from your pen. “ Lands,” you premiſe, “ have K. « & C. K. G. ( ; K.C.