lose, perhaps, a confiderable part of their merit; for of what ufe is a great book on the fhelf, if we have not the ready means of confulting it in the moment when a particular paffage is wanted? The time of a man who knows how to employ it, is too short to be fruitlessly spent in beating the fields in which the game is not to be found. ART. XIV. Elements of Hebrew Grammar; to which is prefixed a Differtation on the two Modes of Reading, with or without Points, By Charles Wilfon, Profeffor of Hebrew at the University of St. Andrews. 8vo. 5 s. bound. Cadell. 1782. THE HE Author firft examines the alphabet, and fhews the power of the several letters which compofe it. The prefent characters are generally believed to be the Chaldaic, introduced by Ezra after the captivity. The more ancient characters were those of the Phoenicians, now called the Samaritan, from whence the Ionic or firft alphabet of the Greek's, both in the order and figure of the letters, is fuppofed to have been derived. Grammarians have been perplexed in ascertaining the found of [called Ain, or Gnain] fome fuppofing it to be a confonant, and others a vowel. Those who confider it as the former, give it the power of gn; and those who think it to be the latter, proThere are alfo those who maintain that it is a ftrong and deep guttural, equal to three b's. The primitive found of it was loft before the Septuagint translation; for in those Hebrew words, expreffed by Greek characters, in which this ambiguous letter occurs, we fometimes find it represented by a, fometimes by y, and at other times by w. There are alío fome inftances in which it is entirely omitted. From the form and position of it, our Author adopts the opinion of those who think it fhould be founded like the vowel o. nounce it as o. " Those who efpouse the doctrine of the Maforetic points, ftrenuously maintain, That all the Letters of the Hebrew alphabet are confonants. This pofition is improbable à priori. It is contrary to analogy: and our Author thinks it is contrary to fact. There are three letters (viz. 1 a, u, i.) which bear the marks of vowels clearly ftamped upon them. Some have added to this lift three vowels more (viz. čo), but others, with greater appearance of reafon, add only two (viz. the He and the Ain, i and o), and thus make the whole number to be five. But ftill there is a difficulty without the Maforetic points; fince there is a vaft number of words totally deftitute of thefe vowels. How are fuch words to be formed into articulate He was the long on the former arrangement; and the • The Hheth founds! Tounds? The expedient adopted is the fhort à or ĕ; either of thefe, in any combination of confonants, will produce articulate founds. The Hebrew writers thought it fufficient, in words deftitute of long vowels, to note down the confonants only, being fully convinced that, in this abbreviated form, the meaning of fuch words could not be mistaken by the reader. They employed their vowel characters for the purpose of expreffing the long vowels, when the fe conftituted a radical part of the word. For the fhort vowels they had no characters, deeming them'un neceffary, becaufe the very pronunciation of the confonants forced them, as it were, from the mouth of the fpeaker, while at the same time thefe fleeting and variable founds made no part of the word in its radical and primitive capacity. - To fix words to certain définite founds was the great object of the Maforites, a fet of Jewish critics, who flourished about the commencement of the Chriftian æra. Their labours were of a very confined nature: they did not extend to the elucidation of obfcure paffages; but were often wafted on difficult trifles, and puerile conceits. Their attempts to affix points or marks to the Hebrew letters, with an intention to supply the defects of vowel-letters in the original text, appear in the fifth century, and attained their perfection about the tenth. Some philologifts, however, give the invention and application of them to the facred text a much earlier origin. Mr. Wilfon declines entering into the niceties of this controverfy. A few centuries (fays he) more or lefs, is a matter of fmall confequence. It is clear from the most authentic documents, that the complex fyftem of adding points to the Hebrew letters, not merely to facilitate the enunciation of confonants, but to difguife and tranfform thofe very letters which every one muft difcern at first view to be vowels, was unknown at the time of the LXX's tranflation, about two hundred and eighty years before the birth of Chrift. Thefe tranflators of the Old Teftament into the Greek language, either ufed MSS. which had no points at all, which is the most probable fuppofition; or, if they had any, they were in number and quality entirely different from thofe which appear in the Bibles printed on the Maforetic plan..... Origen, who lived in the 3d, and St. Jerom, who lived in the 4th cenfury, and were both well fkilled in Hebrew, make no mention, of vowel-points . . . . The filence of the latter on this fubject is' a circumftance truly remarkable. He, of all the ancient Fathers, was most devoted to the study of Hebrew literature. He spent more than twenty years in Judæa, merely for the purpofe of attending the fchools of the most celebrated Jewish teachers, and of converfing with the moft intelligent native Jews on the fubject of their language, and the meaning of their facred writings.' Our Author very properly obferves, that whether we REV. May, 1783. Ff read read with or without points, the sense and meaning of the language muft entirely depend upon the written characters, deftitute of points and accents, as they ftill remain in the most ancient and authentic MSS. The Jews have never suffered the MSS. which are preferved in their fynagogues for the purposes of religious worship to be disfigured with points.' The method here propofed of reading without the points is illuftrated by a fpecimen [viz. the ift Pfalm], in which, by fupplying a short or between the confonants, their enunciation becomes caly and natural. There is a fimplicity in this method that recommends it in preference to the Maforetic, which is complex and difficult beyond measure, and exceedingly difcouraging to a beginner. The following remark is very judicious, and contains an objection to the Maforetic fcheme, which is founded on the philofophy, or primary and effential principles of language, and is at the fame time established by analogy, as well as by the particular Atructure of the Hebrew tongue. The letters & upon the plan of the Maforites are termed quiefcent, because, according to them, they have on fome occafions no found. At other times these fame letters indicate a variety of founds, as the fancy of these critics hath been pleased to distinguish them by points. This fingle circumftance exhibits the whole doctrine of points as the bafelefs fabric of a vifion. To fupprefs altogether, or to render infignificant a radical letter of any word, in order to fupply its place by an arbitrary dot, or a fictitious mark, is an invention fraught with the groffeft abfurdity." Though Mr. Wilfon thinks the points arbitrary and fuperAuous, and an incumbrance on the language, yet as many Hebrew bibles are printed on the Maforetic plan, he briefly explains and exemplifies their nature and ufe: and hath given a cataJogue of the Authors who have written for and against their adoption. To fhew in what manner the Greek writers in the 3d century read the Hebrew language, he hath given a curious 1pecimen of that part of Origen's Hexaplus, which contains the Hebrew text converted into Greek characters. The firft verse of Genefis is thus witten: Βρησιθ βαρα Ελωειμ εθ ασαμαιμ ουεθ καρες. It is very remarkable, that Origen expreffes the four letters & which the Maforites call Quiefcent, by vowels; though with fome variety, for is fometimes denoted by a, e, yea, and also by w. Ain and Hheth are always treated by him as vowels: the former as a or ; the latter as w, a, n and The Hebrew confonants are reprefented by the fame Greek ones that we ufe when converting the former into the latter, with only one exception, viz. the Tfade [ts]is expreffed by s. He is not fcrupulous about the vowel to be fupplied between two confo nants nants for their enunciation, but promifcuously employs, a, ε, n, and even a (as pwxep) to accomplish this purpose. Mr. Wilfon quotes a paffage from Jerom, in which that learned Father, fpeaking of a Hebrew word which confifts of three confonants, exprefsly fays, that it is pronounced indifferently Salem, or Salim, according to the fancy of the speaker, or the custom of particular places. On the nature and genius of Hebrew grammar, the Author obferves, that the roots are generally verbs, and confift commonly of three, fometimes of two, rarely of four letters. There are eleven letters that are pure radicals, and never can be ferviles or derivatives. The other eleven may be either the one or the other. Few words have more than ten letters. A great number confift of three or four. But of whatever letters any word confifts, it must at least contain One of a radical character. In chapter the 7th, entitled, Of Nouns, in Government or Conftruction,' the Author takes notice of a peculiarity in the Hebrew, which is equally elegant and expreffive, and which he calls the Genitive of pofition. A bloody man, is denominated in Hebrew a man of blood; a talkative man, a man of tongue; an intimate friend, the man of my fecret, &c. &c. To express the fuperlative degree, the name of God is very often annexed. The loftieft cedars are called the cedars of God; the highest mountains, the mountains of God; and, river of God full of waters, is an elegant expreffion to denote rain. We cannot purfue this Author through every part of the work before us. We have perused it with attention; and, on the whole, we think it entitled to our recommendation. The characteristics of the different verbs are pointed out with great precision; and their irregularities very happily accounted for and explained. As a grammar, however, the prefent publication appears to be defective in one circumftance, and that too of no fmall importance to beginners, efpecially to those who are obliged to proceed without the affiftance of a mafter-what we mean is, the want of a practical analyfis of the Hebrew paffages printed in this work, and accompanied with tranflations. This would have been of fingular fervice; and we earnestly recommend it to the ingenious and learned Author to prepare one for the next edition. In the mean time, we must acknowledge, that this defect may be, in a good degree, fupplied by the very copious and uteful account which is here given, with great perfpicuity and accuracy, of derivatives, and from the rules laid down, with equal judgment and clearness, to facilitate the investigation of the root. ART. XV. An Efay to show that Chriflianity is beft conveyed in the Hiftoric Form. By John Simpfon. Printed in Leeds. 8vo. 2s. Boards. Johnson. 1782. A S truth will always bear the light, it has juftly been esteemed a circumftance highly favourable to Christianity, that its advocates have had fuch frequent occafion to bring the grounds of their faith into full view, in order to refute the objections of its adverfaries. Nay, it has, in many inftances happened, that thofe very circumstances which have been urged as difficulties attending the belief of Christianity, have, upon a fuller examination, appeared to furnish prefumptive evidence in its favour. It is with the defign of obviating an objection against Chrift ianity, of this kind, that the piece now before us is written. The hiftorical form in which the records of the Chriftian religion are preferved, has led many to object, that the doctrines of Chrift are delivered to the world in an indiftinct and irregular manner; and that it is mixed with many trifling circumstances, which derogate from the dignity of divine inftructions, and divert the attention from the main fubject. Instead of conveying the Chriftian religion in a diffufe narrative, in which its doctrines and precepts are thinly fcattered, they think it would have been better to have given a compact and methodical view of them, claffed and arranged in proper order. A fyftem of this kind, they imagine, would have imparted clearer notions of the objects of our belief and practice; would have been more eafily retained in the memory, than a number of unconnected accounts; and would have been more immediately applicable to ufe, as a rule of faith, as well as of manners. This ingenious and candid writer, examines at large the force of this objection, and fhows, in detail, the peculiar advantages attending the method in which Chriftianity has been conveyed to the world. With this view, he confiders diftinaly the ftrength of evidence which both the internal and external proofs of the divine authority of Chriftianity receive from the hiftorical form; the clearness with which the knowledge of the doctrine of Chrift is, in this manner communicated; the deep impreffion which inftru&tions, given in the way of narrative, make upon the memory; and the fuperior influence which they are, on this account, likely to have upon the heart and life. Under this last head, he fhews, particularly, that the hiftorical method tends to fix the attention, intereft the affections, and excite men to action; that it fuggefts the proper means of forming a worthy character; that it manifefts the operation of good principles in the general tenor of life, and in various cafes to which precepts annot be adapted; that it exhibits a perfect ftandard of religion and |