if not altogether officious and intemperate, in many respects inconfiftent with the dignity and the defign of academical inftitutions. Our Author was not lefs zealous than his companions; but we have more pleasure in confidering him as a scholar, than as a partizan. His atchievements in the latter character may be left to the filent contemplation of thofe who remember the diffenfions which raged in the Univerfity: while the friends of the Mufes may lament, in general, that learning is not always found united with the meekness of genuine wisdom. About this time Dr. K. became one of the King's preachers at Whitehall, and in the year 1759, we find him Vicar of Culham in Oxfordshire. In January 1760 he published his fecond differtation on the ftate of the Hebrew Text; in which, after vindicating the authority and antiquity of the Samaritan Pentateuch, he difarmed the advocates for the Hebrew verity of one of their most fpecious arguments. They had obferved that the Chaldee Paraphrafe having been made from Hebrew MSS. near the time of Chrift, its general coincidence with the prefent Hebrew Text muft evince the agreement of this laft with the MSS. from which the Paraphrafe was taken. Dr. K. demonftrated the fallacy of this reafoning, by fhewing that the Chaldee Paraphrase had been frequently corrupted, in order to reconcile it with the printed Text; and thus the weapons of his antagonists were fuccessfully turned upon themselves. He appealed alfo to the writings of the Jews themselves on the fubject of the Hebrew Text, and gave a compendious hiftory of it from the close of the Hebrew canon down to the invention of printing, together with a description of 103 Hebrew MSS. which he had dif covered in England, and an account of many others preferved in various parts of Europe. A collation of the Hebrew MSS. was now loudly called for by the moft learned and enlightened of the friends of biblical criticifm; and in this fame year (1760) Dr. Kennicott emitted his proposals for collating all the Hebrew MSS. prior to the invention of printing, that could be found in Great Britain and Ireland, and for procuring at the fame time as many collations of foreign MSS. of note, as the time and money he should receive would permit. His firft fubfcribers were the learned and pious Archbishop Secker, and the delegates of the Oxford prefs, who, with that liberality which has generally marked their character, gave him an annual fubfcription of 40 pounds. In the first year the money received was about 500 guineas, in the next it arose to goo, at which fum it continued stationary till the tenth year, when it amounted to 1000. During the progrefs of the work the induftry of our Author was rewarded by a canonry of Chrift Church. He was also prefented, though we know not exactly when, to the valuable living of Mynhenyote, in Cornwall, on the nomination of the Chapter of Exeter. In 1776 the first volume was published, and in 1780 the whole was completed. If now we confider that above 600 MSS. were collated, and that the whole work occupied 20 years of Dr. Kennicott's life, it must be owned that facred criticism is more indebted to him than to any scholar of any age. His exertions, however, did not end here. For, to the labours of a mind naturally active in the pursuit of truth, and invigorated by conftant habits of industry, death only, or, which is worse than death, the alienation of reason, can put a final period. Before the year 1783, when he died at Oxford, in the 65th year of his age, he had printed 194 pages of the volume which we are now about to examine; the remainder has been added, fince his death, in compliance with his will. In the introduction he profeffes himfelf a zealous advocate for an authoritative revifal of the English verfion of the Old Teftament; and, indeed, the great object of his work feems to be, to demonftrate the neceffity, and to facilitate the execution, of this project, by expofing the numerous imperfections, and correcting many of the errors with which that verfion abounds. With refpect to the propriety and neceffity of fuch an interpofition of authority as is here contended for, we have fufficiently explained our fentiments on a former occafion : and though we are fo unfortunate as to have the whole weight of Dr. K.'s opinion against us, yet we must freely confefs that we have seen nothing in his work which has induced us to alter our own. Dr. Kennicott's remarks begin with the book of Genefis, and are continued to the Pfalms, where death put an end to his wellmeant and useful labours. The Editors have added tranflations of feveral Pfalms, of the Song of Mofes, and obfervations on two paffages of the Prophet Hofea, which were found among Dr. K.'s papers, fairly tranfcribed for the prefs. To the tranflations of the Pfalms are fubjoined fome fhort and imperfect Notes, against which a malevolent or a faftidious critic might eafily raise many objections. But the Editors, we conceive, confidered themselves bound by the ftrong expreffions in Dr. K.'s Will to publish these rude fketches, which, even in their prefent form, contain many hints, that may be of important ufe to future commentators. To examine, therefore, with fcrupulous feverity a part of the work, which is profeffedly given to the world, under fuch circumftances as thefe, would be equally inconfiftent with that respect which is juftly due to the memory of Dr. K. and with every principle of manly and liberal criticism. The volume is concluded by eight fermons, in fome of which the Author appears as a Hebrew critic, and in others under the humbler, but perhaps more ufeful, character of a plain and practical inftructor. REV. June, 1788. LI In In the speech of Lamech, Genefis, iv. 23. which, in our verfion is obfcurely rendered-I have flain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt-Dr. K. very properly adopts the interpretation of Bishop Lowth (Prælect. p. 52. 3d edit.) I have flain a man for having wounded me, and a young man for having bruifed me. By this verfion, perfpicuity and confiftency are reftored to the whole paffage, and the propriety of Lamech's diftinction between his own case and that of Cain is obvious, viz. that whereas Cain had been guilty of wilful murder, Lamech had only flain a man in his own defence. Of Genefis, xlix. 5-8. Dr. K. has given a verfion very different from the common one; but of the propriety of this, as well as of many other most important alterations, we are unable to form a decided opinion, because we are totally unacquainted with the reasons and authorities on which it is founded. For these authorities we are referred to a series of notes, which do not exist, but which it appears to have been the intention of Dr. K. to have added at the end of the volume, had he lived to complete the work. The Author's verfion of this paffage is divided into fhort lines correfponding with the metre of the original; and he confiders it, both here and in his Preface to the Hebrew Bible, as a matter of fingular importance that all the poetical parts of the Old Teftament fhould be thus printed. The fame opinion has been held by other eminent tranflators, and particularly by Bishop Newcome, who thought it of fufficient confequence to deferve a place among his fifteen rules for the conduct of a new tranflation. On this fubject, however, we have always entertained fome doubts; and those doubts have lately received confiderable confirmation from the remarks of Dr. Geddes, in the Appendix to his Profpectus of a New Translation of the Bible. It is univerfally acknowledged, that the measure and mechanifm of Hebrew verfe are but very imperfectly, if at all, understood by modern fcholars. The divifions of the ableft Hebrew critics must therefore be, at best, but uncertain and capricious; and can convey to us nothing more than the arbitrary notions of the divider. Indeed, in general, we think, they contribute little either to the force and beauty of the Text, or to the profit and inftruction of the reader on the contrary, they often ferve only to disjoint and disfigure the one, and to perplex and puzzle the other. Were it neceffary to our prefent purpose, we could confirm thefe affertions by feveral inftances, in which an undue attention to this circumftance has led fome of our ableft tranflators into ambiguity, inelegance, and even abfurdity. To the English verfion of Exod. ix. 15.-For now I will Aretch out my hand, that I may fmite thee and thy people with pestilence-Dr. Kennicott thinks there is a ftrong objection; be3 caufe cause a peftilence is not recorded among the ten plagues inflicted upon Egypt. This objection he removes by tranflating inn I might have ftretched out; and fhews by feveral inftances, that the circumstances of a verb, ufually præter or future, may be thus qualified by might, would, should, &c. Exod. xvi. 15. in the common verfion is abfurdly rendered, And they faid one to another, it is Manna, for they wist not what it was. Dr. K.'s verfion, though not new, is ftrictly proper-And they said one to another,, what is this? for they wift not what it was. From these words the Manna afterwards de rived its name. Numb. xxii. 22. Dr. K. thinks it cannot be supposed that God would have been angry with Balaam, merely for going with the fervants of Balak, when he had before exprefsly given him permiffion to go, in verfe 20. He proposes, therefore, to adopt the reading which is preferved in the Arabic verfion-And God's anger was kindled because he went avare, with a covetous b inclination. This is perfectly confiftent with the character of Balaam, who is faid by St. Peter to have loved the wages of unrighteousness. Numb. xxiii. 21. Dr. K. changes the third perfon præter Hiphil into the firft perfon future, and refers it to Balaam-I do not bebold iniquity in Jacob; neither do I fee perverfeness in Ifrael. This correction appears to us totally unneceffary. For it may be observed, that the particle often fig nifies contra, adverfus ;, that the word 118 may be tranflated injuria, contumelia, and moleftia, vexatio, inquietatio, perturbatio: and that the verbs and are used to express not merely the fimple act of beholding, but the beholding with fome degree of pleasure and fatisfaction. Thus Habak. i. 13. טחור עינים מראות רע והביט אל עמל לא תוכל THOU ART of purer eyes than to behold evil, and canft not look on iniquity Now God does, indeed, behold evil, but not with fatiffaction; he does look on iniquity, but not with approbation. From the words, therefore, thus explained, without having recourfe to correction, may be deduced a verfion intelligible in itself, and perfectly confiftent with the context. Joshua, iv. 9. Dr. K. boldly afferts, that this verse, as it now ftands in the Hebrew Text, flatly contradicts the reft of the chapter, and that the difficulty can only be folved by reading but we deny that the prefent reading - בתוך infitead of מתוך involves in it either difficulty or contradiction. The facred writer is not here fpeaking of the ftones mentioned in the preceding verfe, which were fet up in Gilgal; but of twelve other ones, which Joshua fet up in the midft of Jordan. In this interpretation we are juftified by the authority of the Chaldee L12 Para Paraphrafe, and the Septuagint verfion-Esnoe de Inous xai aλλs δώδεκα λίθες εν αυτῳ τῳ Ιορδάνῃ. Of the celebrated triumphal Song of Deborah and Barak, Judges, v. Dr. K. has given a new verfion, in which he has endeavoured, with fome degree of probability at leaft, to affign to the different fpeakers their respective parts. But on the propriety of this diftribution, and on the merits of the verfion itself, we think it improper to decide, becaufe, from the want of the Author's Notes, we know not on what authority they reft. 1 Sam. xxiii. 22. Go, I pray you, prepare yet, and know and fee his place, where his haunt is. Dr. K. propofes, on the authority of two MSS. and the firft printed edition, to read underfland further, learn more particularly, inftead of 1 1 prepare yet. 2 Sam. xviii. 3. But the people answered David, thou shalt not go forth; for if we flee away, they will not care for us, neither if half of us die will they care for us, but NOW thou art worth ten thousand of us. Dr. K. reads the pronoun X THOU art worth ten thousand of us, instead of the adverby now. The Tranflators themselves were fenfible of the neceffity of this alteration, and accordingly inferted the words thou art in Italics. There is a remarkable inftance of each of these words being exchanged for the other, in 1 Kings, chap. i. ver. 18 and 20. And now behold Adonijah reigneth, and Now, my Lord the King, knoweft it not. And in verfe 20. and THOU, my Lord, O King, the eyes of all Ifrael are upon thee. Dr. K.'s obfervations on the book of Job are highly deferving the attention of every reader, who wishes to obtain an accurate knowledge of that fublime but difficult poem. The integrity of Job's character being not only infifted on by himself, but also expressly admitted by God, and the whole poem turning on the multiplied miferies of a man eminently good, one grand difficulty has been, how to reconcile thefe pofitions with the feveral paffages in chapters vii. ix. and xlii. where Job now appears to confefs himself a very grievous finner. Dr. K. thinks that this difficulty will be removed, by fuppofing-that in chap. vii. ver. 20. where Job, in the English verfion, is represented as confeffing his fins to God, he is really fpeaking in reply to Eliphaz and the general fenfe of the paffage is as follows; You fay, I must have been a finner; what then? I have not finned against thee! O thou spy upon mankind! Why haft thou fet up me, as a butt, or mark, to shoot at? Why am I become a burden unto thee*? Why not rather overlook my tranfgreffion, and pass by mine iniquity? I am now finking to the duft! To-morrow, perhaps, * So the Greek verfion and thus both Grey and Houbigant; with Ladvocat, in Thefis Sorbon. 1765, p. 21.' |