'
PRESENTED TO THE LIBRARY OF
PRINCETON THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
BY
jyirs. Alexander Ppoudfit.
3SW
A
DISSERTATION
CONCERNING THE
A N T I Q^U I T Y
OF THE
HE BR E W- L A N GU A G E,
LETTERS, VOWEL-POINTS,
AND
ACCENTS.
By JOHN ^GILL, D. D.
Imo vero cenfeo, nullius mortalis, licet in Hebrseis Uteris do&e verfati, tantum efle acumen, peritiam, perfpicaciam, ut prophette noftro (Jefaiae) longe pluribus locis reddere po- tuerit genuinum fuum fenium ; nifi le£llo antiqua fynagogica per traditionem in fcholis Hebraeorum fuiflet confervata, ut earn nunc Maforetharum punflulis expreflam habemus : quo- rum proinde ftudium et laborem nemo pro merito depraedicet. Quod enim in hoc viridario deliciari poflimus, ipfis debemus, viris perinde do<3tis et acri judicio praeditis.
Vkringa, Praefat. ad Comment, in Jefaiam, Vol.1, p. 5.
LONDON, Printed: And Sold by G. Keith, in Gracechurcb. Street ; J. Fletcher, at Oxford; T. and J. Merrill, at Cambridge; A. Donald- son and W.Gray, at Edinburgh ; J. Bryce, at Glajgow j A. Angus, at Aberdeen ; and P. Wilson, at Dublin. M.DCC.LXVII,
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2011 with funding from
Princeton Theological Seminary Library
http://www.archive.org/details/dissertationconcOOgil
[iii]
THE
PREFACE.
THE following Differtation has long lain by me ; nor w s it written at firft with any de- fign to publifh it to the world; but was written at leifure hours for my own amufement, and by way of effay to try how fir back the antiquity of the things treated of in it could be carried. And what has prevailed uoon me now to let it go into the world, and take its fate in it, are the confi- dence which fome late writers on the oppofite fide have exprefled, their con- tempt of others that differ from them, and the air of triumph they have af- fumed, as if victory was proclaimed on their fide, and the comrcverfy at
a an
[iv]
an end, which is far from being the cafe; and what feeming advantages are obtained, are chiefly owing to the indolence and floth of men, who read only on one fide of the queftion, and fuch who write one after another, and take things upon truft, without ex- amining into them themfelves, either through want of ability, or through unwillingnefs to be at any pains about it.
I confess, it has given me offence to obferve the Jews called by fuch op- probrious names, as villains, wilful corrupters of the Hebrew text, & c. It muft be owned indeed, that they are very ignorant of divine things, and therefore the more to be pitied ; and many of them are, no doubt, very im- moral perfons ; but have we not fuch of both forts among ourfelves ? yet, as bad as the Jews are, the worft among them, I believe, would fooner die, than wilfully corrupt any part of the Hebrew Bible. We fhould not bear
falfe
witnefs againft our neighbours, let them be as bad as they may in other things. J have never, as yet, feen nor read any thing, that has convinced me that they have wilfully corrupted any one partage in the facred text8, no not that celebrated one in Pf. xxii. 16. Their copiers indeed may have made miftakes in transcribing, which are common to all writings ; and the Jews meeting with a various reading, they may have preferred one to another, which made moil: for their own fenti- ments ; nor is this to be wondered at3 nor are they to be blamed for it. It lies upon us to rectify the miftake, and confirm the true reading.
It does not appear, that there ever was any period of time, in which the Jews would or could have corrupted the Hebrew text ; not before the coming of Chrift, for then they could have no dif- pofition nor temptation to it; and to a 2 at-
a See a good Defence of the Jews by F. Simon againft Leo Caftrius, Morinus and Voiiius in his Difquifit. Cri- tic, c, ix. and x.
[ vi]
attempt it would have been to have rifqued the credit of the prophecies in it; nor could they be fure of any ad- vantage by it : and after the coming of Chrift, it was not in their power to do it without detection. There were the twelve apoftles of Chrift, who were with him from the beginning of his miniftry, and the feventy difciples preachers of his gofpel, befides many thoufands of 'Jews in Jerufalem, who in a fhort time believed in him ; and can it be fuppoled that all thefe were without an Hebrew Bible ? and parti- cularly that learned man, the apoftle Paul> brought up at the feet of a learned Rabbi , Gamaliel \ and w ho out of thofe writings convinced fo many that Jefus was the Chrift, and who fpeaks of the Jews as having the privilege of the oracles of God committed to them Rom. iii. i, 2. nor does he charge them, nor does he give the leaft inti- mation of their being chargeable, with the corruption of them ; nor does
Chrift,
[ vii ] ,
Chrift, nor do any of the apoftles ever charge them with any thing of this kind. And befides, there were mul- titudes of the Jews in all parts of the world at this time, where the apoftles met with them and converted many of them to Chrift, who, they and their fathers, had lived in aftateor difperfion many years ; and can it be thought, they fhould be without copies of the Hebrew Bible, whatever ufe they may be fuppcfed to have made of the Greek verfion ? fo that it does not feem cre- dible, that the Jews fhould have it in their power, had they an inclination to it, to corrupt the text without de- tection. And here I cannot forbear tranfcribing a paffage from Jerom k, who obferves, in aniwer to thole who (ay the Hebrew books were corrupted by the Jews, what Origin faid, " that cc Chrift and his apoftles, who re- " proved the Jews for other crimes, " are quite filent about this, the a 3 " great-
* Comment, in Efaiam, c. 6. fol. 14. G.
U
[ VUi ]
greateft of all." Jerom adds " if a they fhould fay, that they were cor- " rupted after the coming of the Lord, " the Saviour, and the preaching of " the apoftles ; 1 cannot forbear laugh- iC ing, that the Saviour, the evange- cc lifts and apoftles fhould fo produce u teftimonies that the Jews afterwards " fhould corrupt." To all which may be added, that the Jews are a people always tenacious of their own wri- tings, and of preferving them pure and incorrupt : an inftance of this we have in their Targums or paraphrafes, which they had in their own hands hundreds of years, before it appears they were known by Chriftians ; in which interval, it lay in their power to make what alterations in them they pleafed ; and had they been addicted to fuch practices, it is marvellous they did not ; fince they could not but ob- ferve, there were many things in them, that Chriftians were capable of impro- ving againft them, fhould they come
. into
[ix ]
into their hands, as in fael: they have done; and yet they never dared to make any alterations in them : and had they done any thing of this kind, it is moft reafonable to believe, they would have altered the paffages rela- ting to the Meffiah; and yet thofe, and which are many, ftand full againft them. Indeed, according to Origency as fome think, the Tar gums were known very early, and improved a- gainfl the yews in favour of Jefus be- ing the true Meffiah, agreeable to the fenfe of the prophets ; fince he makes mention of a difpute between Jafon, an Hebrew- ChYi&ian, fuppofed to be the fame as in Acis xvii. 5. and Pa- pifcusy a Jew ; in which, he fays, the Chriftian (hewed from Jewifo wri- tings, that the prophecies concerning Chrift agreed with Jefus ; and what elfe, fays Dr. Allix a, could he mean by JewiJIo writings, but the Tar gums? a 4. though
c Contra Celfum, 1. 4. p. 199. d Judgment of
the ancient Jewilh Church, &c. p. 376.
[ *]
though it is poffible the writings of the Old Teftameant may be meant, by which the apoftle Paul alio proved that Jlujs was the Chrift. However, if the Targums are meant, they do not afterwards appear to have been known by chriftian writers for fome hundreds of years.
It may be faid, perhaps, that the yews are fclf-condemned, and that it may be proved out of their own mouths and writings, that they have in fome places wilfully corrupted the Hebrew text ; as the thirteen places they own they changed, on the ac- count of Ptolemy king of Egypt ; and alfo what they call Tikkwi Sopberim, the ordination of the fcribes, and Ittur Sopben'm, the ablation of the fcribes : as to the firft of thefe, it is true, that they fay e, when Ptolemy king of Egypt defired to have their law, and feventy men fent to translate it, that
they
e T. Hierof. Megillab, fol. 71. 4. T.Bab. Megillah, fol. 9. 1. Maflechet Sopherim, c. 1. f. 8. fol. 8. 1.
they made alterations in the copy they fent ; but then it fhould be obferved, that they do not fay they made any alteration in their own copies, only in that they fent to him ; and which ap- pears alfo to be a mere fable of the Talmudifts, and that in facl no fuch al- terations were made : but the ftory was invented, partly to bring into dis- grace the Greek verfion of the Seventy y as if it was made after a corrupt copy; and partly to make the minds of their own people eafy, who difapproved of that work, and kept a faft on occafion of it f. My reafon for this is, becaufe the Greek verfion does not correfpond with the pretended alterations. There are but two places out of the thirteen, which agree with them ; the one is in Gen. ii. 2. which the Seventy tranflate, and on the Jtxth day God ended his work ; the other is in Numb. xvi. 15. which they render / have not taken the dejire of any one of them, inftead of one
afs
f Schulchan Aruch, par. i. c. 580. f. 3.
[xii]
afs from them ; neither of which feem to arife from a bad copy before them, but from fome other caufe. The firft of them is not peculiar to the Septua- gint, it is the fame in the Samaritan Pentateuch ; and the latter plainly arifes from the fimilarity of the letters Daleth and Rejh* There is a third, Exod. xii. 40. in which there is fome agreement, but not exact. Befides, neither Philo the yew, nor JofepbuSy though they wrote very particularly of this affair of Ptolemy, yet make not the leaft mention of thefe alterations, in the copy fent to him, nor in the tranilation of it, They obferve, there never was any change made in the fa- cred writings, from the time of the writing of them to the age in which they lived. Philo faysg, the Jews, " for the fpace of more than two " thoufand years, never changed one i% word of what was written by Mofes, u but would rather die a thoufand
<c times,
? Apud Eufeb. Prspar. Evangel. 1.8, c. 6. p. 357.
[ xiii ]
** times, than receive any thing con- " trary to his laws and cuftoms." Jofephus h obferves, u it is plain, in u fact, what credit we give to our iC writings, for that fo long a fpace of
" time has run out, vet no one ever
j •
" dared, neither to add, nor to take iC aw v. nor to change any thing." And Walton1 himfelfj i obferve, reck- ons this ftory a^out the alterations for the fake of King Ptolemy, to be a Rabbinical fable ; and, as fuch, Je- rom k had got a hint of it from one of his Rabbins,
The Tikktm Sopherimy or ordination of the fcribes, is fuppofed to be the order of Ezra, as it is faid in the Ma- forah on Exod. xxxiv. 1 1 . and on Numb. xii. 12. and of his colleagues ; though fome think * it is no other than the order or inftruction of the infpired writers themfelves. It refpects eigh- teen paffages in the Bible, fo expref-
fed,
h Contra Apion, 1. 1. c. 8. ! Prolegom. Polyglott. 9. f. 16. k Praefat. ad Quseft. He\ Tom. 3. f'ol. 65. c.
? Buxtorf. Epift. Glaflw jn Philolog. Sacr. p. 40.
[ xiv ]
fed, as that fome fmatterers in know- ledge might gather from the con- text, that fomething elfe is intended than what is written; and fo fufpedt a corruption in the text, and take upon them to alter it. Now this or- dination of the fcribes, as it is called, is fo far from implying a corruption itfelf, and from encouraging an at- tempt to make an alteration in the text, that it is juft the reverfe ; it is an ordinaion that the text fhould be read no otherwife than it is; and would have it remarked, that the words fo read, and which are the words of the infpired writer, contain an Euphemy in them, what is deceat and becoming the majefty of God ; when, if they were read, as the context might be thought to require they fhould be read, they wouid exprefs what is de- rogatory to the glory of the Divine Being. Thus, in the firft of the places, this ordination refpec'ts, GW.xviii. 22. Abraham flood yet before the Lord\ it
might 4
might feem to fome from the context, that the Lord defcended to ftand be- fore Abraham ; but as this might be thought derogatory to the glory of God, the infpired writer chofe to ex- prefs it as he has done, ; and the de- fign of what is called the ordination of the fcribes, is to eftablifh it, and to admonifh that none mould dare to al- ter it m ; and fo it was to prevent an alteration, and not to make one; they made no change at all, far be it from them, as Elias Levita fays n. As for the Ittur Sopherimy or ablation of the fcribes, that is only the removal of a fuperfluous Vau in five places0; not that it was in the text, and removed from it by them, but what the com- mon people pronounced in reading, as if it was there ; which reading the fcribes forbid, to fecure and preferve the integrity of the text ; and which
pro-
m Halichot Olam, p. 47, 48. Prsefat. Ben Chayim ad Bibl. Heb. Buxtorf. fol. 2. Buxtorf. Talmud. Lexic. Col. 2631. n InTifbi, p. 270. ° B.. il Aruch, in voce TlOy Praefat. Ben Chayim ut fupra. Buxtorf. ut fupra. Col. 1597, 1598.
[ xvi ]
on of u to the common peo- ple, is called a taking it away; though in reality it never was in the text, only pronounced by the vulgar.
There is a paiTage in the Talmud \ produced by fome q, as a proof that the Jews ftudioufly corrupted the fcriptures, and allowed of it, when an end was to be anfwered by it ; which is this, " it is better that one letter be " rooted out of the law, than that the " name of God fhould be prophaned " openly ;" but their fenfe is not that any letter fhould be taken, or that it was lawful to take any letter out of any word in the law, to alter the fenfe of it, in order to ferve that, or any other purpofe ; but that a leffer com- mand fhould give way to a greater : as for inftance, that the law concern- ing not putting children to death for the fins of their parents, and of not fufTering bodies hanged on a tree to
remain
p T. Bab. Yevamot, fol. 79. 1. q Vid. Morin.
de Sincer. Beb. 1, 1. Exercitat. 1. c. 2.
[ xvii ]
remain fo in the night, fhould give way to a greater command concern- ing fanclifying the name of God pub- lickly ; as in the cafe of Saul\ fons be- ing given to the Gibeonites to be put to death, and whofe bodies continued hanging a conliderable time, which is the cafe under confideration in the Talmudic paflage referred to ; and the fenfe is, that it was better that the law in Deut. xxiv. 1 6. fhould be violated, rather than the name of God fhould be prophaned ; which would have been the cafe, if the fons of Saul had not been given up to the Gibeonites to be put to death for their father's fins, be- caufe of the oath of "Jojhua and the princes of Ifrael to them. The fab- rications charged upon the Jews by yuftin and Origen refpecl: not the Hebrew text, but the Septuagint ver- fion ; and even, with refpecl: to that, Trypho> the jfewy rejecls the charge brought by Juftin as incredible ; whe*
ther,
[ xviii ]
ther, fays he r, they have detracted from the fcripture, God knows; it feems incredible.
It his been very confidently af- firmed, that there is no mention made of the Hebrew vowel-points and ac- cents, neither in the Mijnah nor in the 'Talmud : and this is faid by fome learned men, who, one would think, were capable of looking into thofe writings themfelves, and not take things upon truft, and write after other authors, without feeing with their own eyes, and examining for themfelves, whether thefe things be fo or no ; in this they are very culpable, and their miftakes are quite inexcufa- ble. But to hear fome men prate about the Ta/mudy a book, perhaps, which they never faw; and about the Majo- rat) and Major etic notes, one of which, as fhort as they be, they could never read, is quite intolerable. Thefe men are like fuch the apoftle fpeaks of, on
another
r Juftin. Dialog, cum Tryphone, p. 297, 299.
[ xix ]
another account, who under/land^ nei- ther what they fay^ itor whereof they affirm. What is this Maforah* ? who are thefe Maforetesf and what have they done, that fuch an outrageous cla- mour is raifed againft them ? to me, they feem to be an innocent fort of men; who, if they have done no good, have done no hurt. Did they invent the vowel-points, and add them to the text, againft which there is fo much wrath and fury vented ? to af- fert this is the height of folly ' ; for if they were the authors of the points, the inventors of the art of pointing, and reduced it to certain rules agree- able to the nature of the language, and were expert in that art, as, no doubt, they were, why did not they point the Bible regularly, and according to the art of pointing at once ? wThy did they
b leave
s Plane divina res eft Hebraeorum Critica, quam ipfi Maflbram v'ocant. If. Cafaubon. Epift. ep. 390. Por- thaefio, p. 467. c Pun£tationem Hebraicam non
efleMaflbra, neque dici, norunt qui nondum aere lavantuiv Owen. Theologoumen. par. 4. DigreflT. 1. p. 293.
[XX]
leave fo many anomalies or irregular punctuations? and if, upon a furvey of their work, they obferved the irre- gularities they had committed, why did not they mend their work, by cafting out the irregular points and putting regular ones in the text itfelf, and not point to them in the mar- gin ? or there direct to the true read- ing? is it ufual for authors to ani- madvert on their own work in fuch a manner? if they make miftakes in their work at firft, is it ufual in an after edition, and following editions, to continue fuch miftakes in the body of the work, and put the corrections of them in the margin? The Mafo- retes, had they been the inventors of the vowel-points, would never have put them to a word in the text, to which they were not proper, but what better agree with a word placed by them in the margin ; had they in- vented them, they would have put proper ones to the word in the text ;
or
[ xx{ ]
or have removed that, and put the word in the margin in its room, with which they agree, fee Gen. viii. 17, and xiv. 3. and it may be obferved, that their critical art and notes are not only frequently exercifed and made upon the points, but even upon the points without confonants, and upon confonants without points ; which would not have become them, had they been the inventors of them ; fee an inftance of each in Jer. xxxi. 38, and li. 3. The truth of the matter, with reipecl: to the Maforetes, is, that the pointing of the Bible was not their work j they confidered it as of a di- vine original, and therefore dared not to make any alteration in it ; but only obferved, where there was an unufual pun&uation, that it might be taken notice of; and that fo they found it, and fo they left it ; and that thofe who came after them might not dare to attempt an alteration. Punctuation was made before their time, as their b 2 work
[ xxii ]
work itfelf {hews ; and Walton °, an oppofer of the antiquity of the points, has this obfervation ; il The Major e- tic notes about words irregularly pointed, and the numbers of them, neceflarily fuppofe that pointing was " made long before." Have thefe Maforetes employed their time and ftudy, in counting the verfes and let- ters of the Bible, and how many verfes and letters there are in fuch a book ; and where exactly is the middle of it; where a word is deficient or lacks a letter; or where it is full and has them all ; or where one is redundant and has too many ; where one letter is larger and another lefTer than ufual, and an- other fufpended ; fuppofe now this is all trifling, and of no manner of im- portance, yet who or what are injured by it ? the mifpending of their time in fuch trifles, is a lofs not to others, but to themfelves ; and, as a learned man "
remarks,
n Prolegom. 8. f. 12. w Cbappelozv's Com-
mentary on Job ix. 34, See alfo on ch. xi. 14.
[ xxiii
remarks, cc how trifling foever this fcrupulous exactnefs of the Mafo- retes (with refpect to the letters in the Hebrew text] may appear, yet it fuggefts to us one obfervation, that the yews were religioufly careful to preferve the true literal text of fcripture ; and confequently, not- withstanding their enmity and ob- ftinate averfion to chriftianity, they are not to be charged with this ad- ditional crime of having corrupted the Bible :" and after all, have not the Chriftians had their Maforetes al- fo x, who, with like diligence and faithful nefs, have numbered all the verfes, both of the Greek verfion of the Old Teftament and of the books of the New ? and have they been blamed for it? yerom1 numbered the verfes of the book of Proverbs, and favs they were 915, exactly as the Major ah. Some words, through length
b 3 of
x Vid. Croii Obferv. in Nov. Teft. c. I. & c. 10. y Quaeft. feu Trad, Heb. lib. Reg. 3. fol, .80. 1. Tom. 3.
[ xxiv ]
of time, became obfcene and offenflve to chafte ears, at leaft were thought fo z; hence the Major etes placed other words in the margin, which, perhaps, is the boldeft thing they ever did, and of which the Karaite yews complain ; but then they never attempted to re- move the other words from the text, and put in theirs in their room ; they only placed them where they did, that, when the paffages were read in pub- lic, or in families, the reader might be fupplied with words that fignified the fame, only more pure and chafte, and lefs offenfive ; at leaft which were thought fo ; and which were left to their own option to read them or not. The paffages are Deut. xxviii. 27, 30. 1 Sam. v. 6. 9. If. xiii. 16. Zech. xiv. 2. 2 Kings vi. 25. x. 27. and xviii. 27. ]/. xxxvi. 12. and it would not be improper, if, in the margin of our Bibles over-againft the laft, and others that have the fame word, an- other
* Maimon. Moreh Nevochim, par. 3. c, 8.
[ xxv ]
other Engli/h word or words were put to be read lefs offenflve. And, by the way, from the change of words pro- posed in thofe paffages, may be drawn an argument in favour of the anti- quity of the Maforetes. For this part of their work muft be done, whilft the Hebrew language was a living language, when only the difference of words offenfive or not offeniive to the ear could be difcerned, and a change of them neceffary : and certain it is, thefe notes were made before the Tal- mud, for mention is made of them in ita: yea, thefe variations are followed by the ancient Targums, by Onkelos, and the jerufalemon Deut. xxviii. 27. 30. and not only by Pjeudo -Jonathan on 1 Sam. v. 6. 9. 2 Kings vi. 25. x. 27. and xviii. 27. but by the true Jonathan on If. xiii. 16. and xxxvi. 12. and Zech. xiv. 2. who and On* kelos are fuppofed to live in the firft century. As for the word Sebirim^ b 4 fome*-
a T. Bab. Megillah, fol. 25. 2.
[ xxvi ]
fometimes ufed by the Maforetes in their notes ; this only refpects the con- jectures of fome perfons, who thought a word fhould be otherwife read or pointed ; but it is what the Maforetes object to, and fay of fuch perfons, that they are miftaken : and this they ob- ferve, that no one may prefume to make any alteration upon fuch conjec- tures : and are they to be blamed for this ? and, befides thefe things, what have they done, except tranfmitting, from age to age, the marginal or va- rious reading's, which had been ob- ferved by collating copies, or which arofe from their own cbfervations, by comparing different copies that lay be- fore them ; and from delivering them down to pofterity, they obtained the name of Maforetes ; and can this be thought to be culpable in them ? they left the text as they found it ; nor did they offer of themfelves to infer t a va- rious reading, different from the com- monly received copy, but placed fuch
readings
xxvii
readings in the margin, that others might make what ufe of them they pleafed ; or rather they took this me- thod, to prevent the infertion of them into the text, fuggefting, that fo they found them, and there it was proper to continue them : and is a Bible with fuch readings the worfe for them ? is a Greek Teftament to be dif-efteemed, for having the various readings in it collected from different copies ? or are our Englijb Bibles with the marginal readings in them, placed by the tran- slators themfelves, with references to other fcriptures, the lefs valuable on that account ? nay, are they not the more valued for them ? and it may be obferved, that thefe Keries or marginal readings of the Hebrew text, are fol- lowed in many places, by fome of the beft tranflators of the Bible, both an- cient and modern. Aquila and Symma- chus, the beft of the antient Greek in- terpreters, almoft always follow themb.
yerom
b Montfaucon. Hexapla Origen. vol. 2. p. 549.
cc ((
it
[ xxviii
jferom had knowledge of them, and teftihes to Aquilas following them, in a particular inftance. His words are c, AJferemoth in Jer. (xxxi. 40.) for which, in a Hebrew copy it is writ- ten Sedemoth, which Aquila inter- prets fuburbana." And which rea- ding is preferred by jerom d, as is the marginal reading of v. 38. And if he was the author of the Vulgate Latin verfion, that agrees with the marginal readings of the Maforetes in feveral places; fee Jojh. iii. 16. and xv. 47. 2 Sam, viii. 3. 2 Kings xix. 31. all which fhew the antiquity of thefe readings. So modern interpreters, Ju- nius and TremelliuS) our own tran- slators, and the Dutch e, often follow them, as do various interpreters, both Papifts and Protejlants. Nay, fome of thefe readings and notes are confirmed by the infpired writers of the New Teftament. Thus, for inftance, in
pf-
c De loc. Heb. fol. 89. B. d Comment, in
Hieremiam, c. 31. 40. fol. 161. F. e Leufden.
Philolog. Heb. Mixt. Differt. 10. f. 9. p. 84.
C xxix ]
Pf. xvi. 10. the word rendered holy 07te^ is written with ajW, as if it was plural ; but the Maforetic note on it is, that the yod is redundant, and fo the word is to be confidered as of the lingular number.; and this is con- firmed by two infpired writers, the apoftles Peter and Paul, Ac~ls ii. 27. and xiii. 35. Again, in Prov. iii 34. the Cetib or textual writing is, XZPyh the poor 1 but the Keri or marginal reading cw^ the humble or lowly, which is followed by our tranflators of the text, and is confirmed by two apoftles, "James and Peter% yam. iv. 6. 1 Pet. v. 5. And what have the Maforeles done in this refpect, but what the learned Dr. Kennicott is now doing, or getting done in the federal libraries in Europe \ that is, collating the feveral copies, and collecting from them the various readings ; and which, if I underftand his defign aright, is not to form, upon his own judgment, a new copy of the Hebrew text ; but to
do
[ xxx ]
do with the prefent copy in common life, what others have done with the New Teftament ; let it ftand as it is, with the various readings thrown into the margin as they may be collected, and leave them to every one's judge- ment, with fome critical rules to form it, to make ufe of them as they pleafe: and when this learned gentleman has fini fried his large Major etic work, he will be the greateft Maforete that ever any age produced ; fince not only eight hundred and forty-eight various readings, as Elias f has reckoned thofe of the Maforetes to be, but as many thoufands, and more will now appear. I fay not this, to depreciate his labo- rious undertaking, far be it from me ; he has my good wifhes for the finifh- ing of it, and what little affiftance otherwife I can give him in it. For I am not fo great an enthufiaft, for the integrity of the prefent printed He- brew copy, as to imagine, that it is en- tirely
f Praefat. 3. ad Maforet.
xxxi ]
tirely clear of the miftakes of tran- fcribers in all places : to imagine this, is to fuppofe a miraculous intcrpoli- tion of Divine Providence attending the copiers of it, and that conftant and univerfal ; and if but one copier was under fuch an influence, it would be very extraordinary indeed, if his copy fhould be lighted on at the firft print- ing of the Hebrew Bible ; and befides the firft Hebrew Bible that was print- ed, was not printed from one copy, but from various copies collated ; nor is there more reafon to believe, that the Hebrew text of the Old Teftament, which is more antient, fhould be pre- ferved from the efcapes of librarians, than the Greek of the New Teftament, which it is too notorious are many : nor is fuffering fuch efcapes any con- tradiction to the Promife and Provi- dence of God, refpecting the prefer va- tion of the Sacred Writings, fince all of ?jiy moment is preferved in the fe~ veral copies ; fo that what is omitted,
or
[ xxxii ]
or ftands wrong in one copy, may be fupplied and fet right by another, which is a fufficient vindication of Di- vine Providence ; and this may ferve to excite the diligence and induftry of learned men, in collating the feveral copies for fuch a purpofe ; and be- tides, the Providence of God remark- ably appears, in that the efcapes fuf- fered to be made do not affect any doctrine of faith , or any moral prac- tice^ as has been obferved and owned by many B : and after all, if from the prefent collation of manufcripts, there fhould be publifhed, what may be thought a more correct and perfect copy of the Hebrew text, we fhall be beholden to the Jews for it, againft whom the clamour rifes fo high : for by whom were the manufcripts written, now collating, but by Jews f for the
truth
s Amamse Antibarb. Bibl. 1. i. p. 20. 22. Bochart. Phaleg, 1. 2. c. 13. col. 91, 92. Walton. Prolegom. 6. f. I. 3. and 7. f. 12. 15 and Confiderator confidered, p. 127. 162. Capellus de Critica. Epift ad UfTer. p. 116. Dr. Kennicott, Differt. 1, p. 11. 301.
xxxiii
truth of this, I appeal to the learned collator himfelf ; and who, if I mis- take not, in his printed DhTertations always reprefents the feveral Hebrew copies, whether more or lefs perfect, as the work of Jewifo tranfcribers ; and indeed the thing fpeaks for itfelf ; for from the times of Jerom to the age of printing, there were fcarce any, if any at all among Chriftians, capa- ble of tranfcribing an Hebrew copy ; that interval was a time of barbarous ignorance, as with refpect to arts and fciences, fo with refpect to languages, efpecially the Hebrew, To know a little Greeks in thofe barbarous times, was enough to make a man fufpe&ed of herefy ; and to ftudy Hebrew^ was almoft fufficient to proclaim him an heretic at once : the ftudy of which lay much neglected, until it was re- vived by Reuchlin and others, a little before, and about the time of the Re- formation. There might, in the above fpace of time, rife up now and then
one,
xxxiv
one, who had fome knowledge of the Hebrew tongue, as Raymund in the thirteenth century, the author of Pu- gio Fideiy and friar Bacon^ who wrote an Hebrew grammar in the latter end of the fame century, and which per- haps was the firft, at leaft one of the firft Hebrew grammars written by a Chriftian ; though fince, we have had a multitude of them : for almoft every fmatterer in the Hebrew language thinks himfelf qualified to write a grammar of it. However, there is no reafon to believe, as I can underftand, that any of our Hebrew manufcripts were written by Chriftians, but all by Jews, I mean fuch as were written before the age of printing ; for what have been written fince, can be of no account.
I observe there is much talk about the Maforetic Bible, and about Mafo- retic authority. As to the Maforetic Bible, I could never learn there ever was fuch an one, either in manufcript,
or
[ XXXV
or in print, that could with any pro- priety be fo called. Is a Bible with points to be called Maforetic f it mud be with great impropriety, fince the Maforetes, as has been obferved, were not the authors of pointing : are any called fo, becaufe they have various readings, and other notes in the mar- gin ? as well may a Greek Teftament, with various readings and notes in the margin have fuch a name. Let it be fhewn, if it can, that there ever was in manufcript, or in print, a copy of the Hebrew text, in all things con- formable to the Maforetic notes and readings in the margin, or in which thefe are inferted in the body of the text, call them corrections, emenda- tions, various readings, or what you pleafe ; but if thefe cannot be fhewn, then whatfoever Bible, that does not conform in the text to the Maforah in the margin, with much greater pro- priety may be called Ami- majorette than Maforetic. As to authority, the
c Ma-
[ xxxvi ]
Maforetes never claimed any ; their Keri is no command to read io or fo, nor even a direction how to read, and much lefs a correction of the text, as if it was faulty ; it is only a fuggeflion, that fo it is read in fome copies ; for the word for which p {lands in the margin of fome Bibles, is not the im- perative pi? Kere read, but is *?P ; and is either the fame with ,;nP fomething read, or with ~pP a reading, i. e. a various reading. And if the Maforetes ever pretended to any authority, as they have not, it is not regarded • for notwithstanding their antiquity, their readings, and what is agreeable to their notes and obfervations, are not admit- ted into the text, but are obliged to keep their place in the margin ; and where then is their authority ? thus, for inftance, in defiance of Major etic authority, as it is called, and notwith- jfianding the Majorette note in the margin, the fecond yod is continued Jn 3'T?il Pf xvh IP- and in defiance 3 °f
£ xxx vii
of the punctuation of the word, which is different from all other places, where the word is manifeftly plural, as in Pf. Hi. 9. lxxix. 2. cxxxii. 9. and cxlv. 16. 2 Chro?i. vi. 41. in all which places Segol is put under Da- leth ; but here Sheva> as it is in other words, in which the yod is redundant alfo, and the word to be read fin^u- lar, as Debareca, 1 Kings viii. 26. and xviii. 36. Dameca, 2 SdtfiA. 16. Yadeca, 1 Kings xxii. 34. Prov. iii* 27. Abdeca, 1 Kings i. 27. Rdgkcay Eccl. v. 1. with others : and in de- fiance of the Talmud alfo. There are but two places h I have met with in the Talmud, where the text is quoted \ and in both o[ them the word is with- out the yod; fo that if thefe, efpecially the firft, had any authority, the yod would not continue in that word.
The different fchemes men have formed, for reading Hebrew without the antient points, (hew the neceflity c 2 of
* T. Bab. Eruvin, fol. 19. 1. et Yoma, fof. 87* i>
[ xxxviii ]
of them, and the puzzle they are at without them ; but what need men rack their brains to find out a fcheme of reading that language, when there is one fo fuitable, readv at hand for them,con(i fling of vowel-points,which for their figure and pofition cannot be equalled by any ; which are fo con- trived, that they take up fcarce any, or very little more room, than the words do without them ; which nei- ther increafe the number of letters in a word, nor make it longer, nor give it any unfightly appearance ? whereas, for inftance, Majclef's fcheme, befides the augmentation of letters, makes the word look very aukward : and if it was thought the prefent vowel- points were too numerous, and too great an incumbrance to words, one would think, men might content themfelves with reducing their number, and not throw them all away : but the great offence taken at them is, that they tie down to a certain determinate fenfe cf 2 tie
[ xxxix ]
the word, and that they cannot bear, but chufe to be at liberty to fix what fenfe upon it they pleafe.
Great complaint is made of the ignorance of the Maforetes in point- ing ; and an inftance is given of it, in their pointing the word Cyrus, as to be read Corejh or Chorejh, though in- deed they had no hand in it ; but ad- mitting they had, and whoever had, there does not appear to be any juft blame for it. It is true, it may be thought foy if the Greek pronuncia- tion of the word mull be the rule of punctuation : but the original name is not Greek, but Per fie ; and winch, in that language, lignifies the fun. So Ctejias ■ and Plutarch k fay : whether Cyrus had his name from the fun be- ing feen at his feet, while fieeping, which he three times endeavoured to catch with his hands, but it ilipt from him; and which, according to the Ma-
1 In Perficis ad Calcem Herodot. Ed. Gronov. p. 687, k InArtaxerxe, p. 1012.
[XI J
giy portended a reign of thirty years ', is not certain : now the word for the fun, in the Perjic language, is Chor or Cor, the fame with Or, Job xxxi. 26. and it is now called Cor/had™ : hence, the god of the Perjians is called Oro- maxes, and fometimes Oromafdes n, Hormufd, and Ormufd ; this (hews the propriety of the frrfl: point put to the word, a Cholem and not a Sburek ; and it may be obferved, there is a iimilar word ufed for the fun in other eaftern languages, and is pronounced ChereSy Job ix. 6. to which may be added, that the oriental verfions, both Syriac and Arabic, read the word for Cyrus in all places in the Bible, with 0, e, and Shin, according to the Bible- pronunciation. It was ufual with the Perjtans j to give men names taken from the fun, as Garjhenax Efth. i. 14. and Or Jims in Curtius°: as for
the
' Cicero de divinatione, I. i. Vid. Hiller. Onoma- ftic facr. p. 615. 617. m Vid. Hothart. Phaleg. Li.
c. 15. co). 61. n Plutarch, ut fupra, p. 1026* et ii>
Vita Alexandri, p. 682. ° Hilt. 1. 10; c. 1.
[xli]
the Greek pronunciation of the word, it is not unufual with the Greeks to pronounce a Cholem by an Ypfilon, as Tzor, Loci, Beerot, by Tyrus, Lydda, Berytus, In like manner may the punctuation of Darius be vindicated, which is Darjavefch, Da?i. v. 31. in much agreement with which, this name is Axpeiouos Dareiaios with Cte- Jias p, and is a word confiding of four parts, and fignifies a great, vaft, ve- hement fireq; and EJch> fire, is well Jcnown to be the deity of the Perjia?is, which was taken into the names of their kings and great perfonages, as was ufual in the eaftern nations. So V aft hi, the wife of Ahafuerus, or Va-ejloti, a great fire, Eftb. i. 9. Ze- re/hy or Zehar-efo, the wife of Hamany ch. v. 10. the brightnefs of fire ; and jt appears in A fly ages, a king of the Medes. Strabo fays r, fome people called Darius, Darieces, Cafaubon *
thinks,
p In Perficis, ut fupra, p. 641. 643. * Hil'er. ut
i'upra, p. 635. r Geograph. 1. 16. p. 540. ■ Com- ment, in ib. p, 217.
[ xlii ]
thinks, that Strabo wrote Aapiav^ Dariaoues, which is near the Hebrew punctuation.
I have fentthe following DiflTerta- tion into the world, not to revive the controverfy about the things treated on in it, nor with any expectation of putting an end to it ; no doubt, but fome will be nibbling at it : and tho' I may be very unfit to engage further in this controverfy, through weight of years upon me, and through the du- ties of my office, and other work upon my hands, fome third perfon may perhaps arife, to defei i what may be thought defenfible in it. Should any truly learned gentleman do me the honour, to animadvert upon what I have written, I am fure of being treat- ed with candour and decency; but fhould I be attacked by fciolifts, I ex- pect nothing but petulance, fuperci- lious airs, filly fneers and opprobrious language; and who will be righteoufly treated with neglect and contempt.
To
[ xliii ] To conclude; if what I have written fhould merit the attention of men of learning, and caufe them to think again, though ever fo little ; and be a means of directing fuch, who are en- quiring after thefe things ; and of en- gaging fuch who may hereafter write on thefe fubjedts, to think more clofely, to write with more care, caution and candour, and with lefs virulence, haughtinefs and arrogance, than have appeared in fome writings of late upon them, my end will be in a great meafure anfwered.
A
ERRATA.
Page 23. 1. 23. for Eber, r. Elam his firft-born. P. 62. 1. 11. r. through the near likenefs. P. 65. 1. 3. r. Gen. Xiv. 14. P. 92. 1. 11. r.faid. P. 113. 1. 14. r. NDTn- P. 1 28. 1. ult. put a comma inftead of a full ftop. P. j ^5. \. II. r.Bameh. 1. 15. r. If. liv. 13. P. 244. 1. 22. r. H")\9. 1, 24. r. HTPO- P. 266. 1. 16. r. n:D7. P. 267. 1. 22, for when, r. where.
Lately Publijhed, By the fame AUTHOR,
I. An Exposition of the Old Teftament, 6 Vols. Folio.
II. An Exposition of the New Teftament, 3 Vols. Folio.
III. An Exposition of the Canticles, in CXXII. Sermons, Quarto.
IV. The Prophecies of the Old Teftament, re- fpefking the Meffiah, confidered j and proved to be li- terally fulfilled in Jefus, 8vo.
V. The Cause of God and Truth, 4 Vols. 8vo: '
VI. Sermons and Tracts on Various Subjects of Divinity, Polemical and Practical, 4 Vols. 8vo.
A
D I SSERTATION
CONCERNING THE
H E B R E W L AN G UAG E,
Letters, Vowel-Points, and Accents.
CHAP. I.
Of the Antiquity of the Hebrew Language \
A CORDING to the Targum of Onkelos, on Gen. ii. 7. when God breathed into man the breath of life, that became in man vHlttD mi a fpeakingfpirit, or foul ', or, as yonathan paraphrafes it, the foul in the body of man became a /peaking fpirit; that is, man was endued with a natural faculty of fpeech ; fo that he may be defined as welt a b oratione, a fpeaking animal, as a rationet B a rea-
C * J
a reafonable one ; for fpeech is proper and peculiar to men : when it is faid, man is endued, as all men are, with a natural faculty of fpeaking, it is not to be under- ftood, as if he was endued with a faculty of fpeaking fome particular language j but with a power and capacity of fpeak- ing any language he hears, or is taught ; I fay hears, becaufe unlefs a man has the fenfe of hearing, he cannot exprefs any articulate founds, or words : hence fuch perfons as are totally deaf from their birth, are always dumb, and can never fpeak any language. Adam firft heard the Lord God fpeaking, before he uttered a word himfelf, as it feems from the facred hiftory. The language Adam fpake, and which, perhaps, he received not the whole inftan- taneoufly, but gradually ; in which he im- proved, as circumftances, and the necef- iity of things required, and which was continued in his pofterity : this very pro- bably is that which remained to the con- fufion of the tongues at Babel, and the difperfion of the people from thence. But of this more hereafter.
Some
[ 3 ]
Some have fancied, that if children, as foon as born, were brought up in a foli- tary place, where they could not hear any language fpoken, that at the ufual time children begin to fpeak, they would fpeak the firft and primitive language that was fpoken in the world. Pfammitichus, king of Egypt, made trial of this by putting two children, newly born, under the care of a fhepherd ; charging him, that not a word mould be uttered in their prefence ; and that they mould be brought up in a cottage by themfelves ; and that goats mould be had to them at proper times to fuckle them ; and commanded him to ob- ferve the firft word fpoken by them, when they left off their inarticulate founds. Ac- cordingly, at two years end, the fhepherd opening the door of the cottage, both the children with their hands ftretched out cried bee, bee. This he took no notice of at firft, but it being frequently repeated, he told his lord of it, who ordered the children to be brought to him ; and when Pfammitichus heard them pronounce the word, he enquired what people ufed it, and upon enquiry found that the Phrygians B 2 called
[ 4 ]
called bread by that name , upon this it was allowed that the Phrygians were a more ancient people than the ILgyptians, between whom there had been a long con- tend about antiquity. This is the account given by Herodotus a ; but the Scboliaft of Ariftofhanes% fays, that it was at three year's end the king ordered a man to go in filently to them, when he heard them pro- nounce the above word. And fo Suidas c relates, that at the fame term of time, the king ordered one of his friends to go in fi- lently, who heard and reported the fame ; and all of them obferve, that the ftory is differently related by others ; as that the children were delivered to a nurfe or nurfes, who had their tongues cut out, that they might not fpeak before them ; and fo fays Tertullian d : yet they all agree in the word ipoken by the children. But, as Suidas obferves, if the former account is true, as it feems moft probable, that they were nourished by goats, and not women ; it is ixo wonder, that often hearing the bleat- ing of the goats, be-ec9 be~ec, they mould
imitate
* Euterpe five, \.z: t'. i, %: b In Nubes, p.
i jo, c Voce Bsx*ure*w ,: Ad Nationes,
i. ». c. 8.
f 5 3 imitate the found, and fay after them bee, which in the Phrygian language lignifled bread y and fo food is exprelfed in Hebrew by a word of a fimilar found jq beg, Ezek. xxv. 7. Dan.i* 8. andxi. 26. and might as well be urged in favour of the antiquity of that language ; but this proves nothing.
It may feem needlefs to enquire what was the firft language that was fpoken, and indeed it mutt be fo, if what fome fay is true, that it is not now in being, but was blended with other languages, and loft in the confufion at Babel; and alfo if the Oriental languages, the Hebrew, Samari- tan, Chaldee, Syriac, Arabic, and Ethio- pic, are but one language ; which is more probable, as Ravins c thinks, and fo may go under the general name of the Eajiern language; and it muft be acknowledged there is a very great fimilarity between them, as not only appears from Ravius, but from the Pentaglot Lexicon of Scbin- dler, and efpecially from the Harmonic- Grammars and Lexicons of Hottinger and Caftell ; and yet I caniaot but be of opi- nion, that the Hebrew language (lands di- B 3 flinguimed
' ADifcourfe of the Oriental Tongues, p. 38, 35.
[ 6 ]
ftinguimed by its fimplicity and dignity. The celebrated Albert Schultens f reckons the Hebrew, Chaldee, Syriac, and Arabic languages, as fifter-dialetts of the pri- maeval language ; which I am content they mould be. accounted, allowing the He- brew to be the pure dialed;, which the others are a deviation from, and not fo pure : though I fjiould rather chufe to call them daughters, than fitters of the Hebrew tongue ; fince, as yerom fays *, the Hebrew tongue is the mother of all languages, at leaft of the oriental ones. And thefe daughters are very helpful and afiiiting to her their mother in her decli- ning ftate, and now reduced as to purity to the narrow limits of the facred fcriptures -, for I cannot prevail upon myfelf to agree that (he mould be ftripped of her maternal title, dignity, and honour ; fince fhe has the bed claim to be the primitive language, as will be feen hereafter. Dr. Hunth, though he is of the fame mind with Schul- tens, that the above languages are lifters,
having
f Pnefat. ad Comment, in Job. & in Prov. & Orat. de Ling. Arab. Franeker. 1729 & altera Lugd. Batav. 1732. * Comment, in Soph. c. 3. fol. 100. A. h Orat. de
Antiqu. &c. Ling. Arabic, p. 3. 49. 53. Oxon. 1738. 8e. Orat. de ufu Dialett. Orient, p. 2. Oxon. 1748.
[ 7 ]
having the fame parent, the Eaftern lan- guage, yet feems to allow the Hebrew to be the elder fitter. And Scbultens 'l him- felf afferts, that the primaeval language, which was from the beginning of the world fpoken by our firft parents, and the ante- diluvian patriarchs, and after the flood to the difperfion, is the fame which was af- terwards called Hebrew, from Heber; from whom it panned through Peleg and Abraham to the nation of the Hebrews, and fo the mother-language ; but how it could be both mother and fifter, is not eafy to fay.
That there was but one language fpo- ken by men, from Adam to the flood in the times of Noah, and from thence to the confuiion and difperfion at Babel, feems ma- nifeft from Gen. xi. i . and the whole earth was of one language, and of one fpeech ; and which is confirmed by the teftimonies of feveral heathen writers, as by Sibylla in Jo- fephus k , by Abydenus l , and others ; and which continued in that interval without any, or little variation : the longevity of the
patriarchs
JVid. Oratlones fupradi&as, p. 6, 41. k Antiqu.
1. 1. c. 4. $.3. l Apud Eufcb. Evangel, Pr«par
I.9. c. 14. p. 416.
[ 8 ]
patriarchs much contributed to this, for Adam himfelf lived to the ioth century, and the flood was in the 17th. Methufelah, who died a little before the flood, lived up- wards of two hundred years in the days of Adam, and 600 years cotemporary with 'Noah, and who doubtlefs fpoke the fame language that Adam did ; yea Lamech, the father of Noah, was born 50 years or more before the death of Adam -, fo that the lan- guage of Adam to the days of Noah is eafi- ly accounted for as the fame : if any varia- tion, it mufl be in the offspring of thofe of the patriarchs who removed from them, and* fettled in different parts of the world, but of this there is no proof; the feparation of Cain and his poflerity on account of re- ligion, does not appear to have produced any alteration in language ; but the fame language was fpoken by one as another, as is evident by the names of perfons in the line of Cain, and of places inhabited by them to the time of the flood ; when, no doubt, the fame language was fpoken by Noah, from whom his fons received it, and was continued unto the difperfion, which before that was but one ; and it is 1 the
[ 9 ]
the opinion of the Perfian prieils or Magi, that the time will come when the earth will be of one language again § ; and if fo, it is probable it will be the primitive one, but what that was, is the thing to be enquired into. The Targums of Jonathan and On* kelos on the place, add, by way of expla- nation, "and they fpoke in the holy tongue, f* in which the world was created at the " beginning," meaning the Hebrew lan- guage, ufually called the holy tongue -, and this is the fenfe of Jarcbi, Aben Ezra, and the Jewifh writers in general, and of many Chriftians. But moll nations have put in a claim for the fuperior antiquity of their nation and language, the Europeans not excepted. Goropius Bee anus pleaded for the Teutonic language, or that which is fpoken in lower Germany and Brabant ;, to be the original one, and attempted to de- rive the Hebrew from it ; but it has been thought he was not ferious in it, only did it to mew his acumen, and the luxuriancy of his fancy and imagination ; the eaflern nations have a much better pretext to an- tiquity, and moft, if not all of them, have
put
$ Plutarch, de Ifide & Ofir. p. 370.
[ 1° ]
put in their claim for it. There was a long conteft between the Egyptians and Phrygians about this matter, as before obferved. The Armenians have urged in their favour, that the ark refted on one of the mountains in their country, where Noah and his pofterity continued fome time, and left their language there. The Arabs pretend, that their language was fpoken by Adam before his fall, and then changed into Syriac, and Was reftored upon his repentance, but again degenerated, and was in danger of being loft, but was preferved by the elder Jor- bam, who efcaped with Noah in the ark, and propagated it among his pofterity. The Chinefe make great pretentions to the primitive language, and many things are urged in their favour, as the antiquity of their nation, their early acquaintance with arts and fciences, the Angularity, fim- plicity, and modefty of their tongue k. A countryman of ours, in the laft century, publifhed a treatife, called (i An historical eftay, endeavouring a probability that the language of China is the primitive lan- guage, by y. Webby Efq; London, 1669,
8vo."
* Sec the Univerfal Hiftory, Vol. 1. p. 346, 347,
[ i* J
8vo." But as when many candidates put up for a place, they are generally reduced to a few, and, if poflible to two * the fame method mud be taken here; for the contert lies between the Syriac or Chaldee, and the Hebrew.
The Chaldee or Syriac language has its patrons for the antiquity of it -, not only <Theodoreti who was by birth a Syrian, and Amyra the Maronite, who are not to be wondered at, and others who have made it their favourite ftudy ; but even the Arabic writers, the more judicious of them, give it not only the preference to their own lan- guage in point of antiquity, but even make it as early as Adam. Elmacinus fays !, there are hiftorians (Arabic ones) who affirm, that Adam and his pofterity fpoke the Syriac language until the confufion of tongues j and fo Abulpharagius fays ", "of our dodlors, Bafilius and Ephraim aflert, that unto Eber the language of men was one, and that that was Syriac, and in which God fpoke to Adam j" and it mud be al- lowed, that there are many things plaulibly
faid
1 Apud Hottinger. Smegma 1. I. c. %. p. 228. ■ Hilt Dynail. Dyn. i.p. 16.
[ >? )
£aid in favour of this language being primi- tive: it mult, be owned that the Chaldean nation was a very antient one, Jen. v. I $. and that the Syriac language was fpoken very early, as by Laban -, but not earlier than the Hebrew, which was fpoken at the fame time by Jacob -, the one called the heap of ftones which was a witnefs between them Jegar-fahadutha in the Syro- Chaldean language, and the other Galeed in Hebrew, which both fignify the fame thing : what is commonly urged is as follows :
I. That the names of a man and wo- man are as much alike, if not more fo, in the Chaldee or Syriac language, as in the Hebrew, a man is called Gabra and a woman Gabretha, which is equally as near as Ijh and Ijhah produced to prove the antiquity of the Hebrew, Gen. ii. 23. But neither in the Chaldee of Onkelos, nor in the Syriac verfion of that place, is it Ga- bretha, but Ittetha in the one, and Ante- tha in the other. Theodoret * inflances in the names Adam, Cain, Abel, Noah, as proper to the Syriac language ; but the de- rivation
* In Gen. quaeft. 59.
[ 13 ]
rivation of them from the Hebrew tongue is more clear and manifeft.
2. That it is rather agreeable to truth, that the primaeval and common language before the confufion mould remain in the country where the tower was built and the confufion made, which was in Cha/dea, and therefore the Chaldee language, mufl be that language0; but rather the contrary feems more natural, that the language, confounded and corrupted, mould continue in the place where the confufion was made, and that thofe pofleffed of the pure and primitive language mould depart from thence, as in fact they afterwards did.
3. It is obferved ?, that both Eber and Abraham were originally Chaldeans, and were brought up in Cha/dea, and fb mufl: fpeak the language of that country, which therefore mufl be prior to the Hebrew z but it mould be confidered, that not on!y Eber but Abraham lived before the confu- fion and difperfion -, for if the confufion was in the latter end of Pe/eg's days % A->
braham,
0 Myricsei Prxfat. ad Gram. Syro-Chald. p Ibid.
1 So R. Jofe in Seder Olam Rabba c. 1. p. 1. Abarbine! in Pentateuch, fol. 51, 3. Juchafm, fol, 8. 1. Shalihalec Ha- kabala; fol. 1, 2,
[ H 3
braknm, according to the Jewijh chrono- logy, mull be 48 years of age -f, and con- fequently poffeffed of the pure and primi- tive language, be it what it may; and iince it does not appear that either he or any of his pofterity, as Ifaac and Jacobs ufed the Chaldee language, but the Hebrew only, it feems to follow, that not the Chal- dee* but the Hebrew, mull be the language fpoken by him, and fo the primitive one.
4. It is faid ', the Hebrews fprung from the Chaldeans, Judith v. 5. and fo their language muft be later than theirs -, this is founded on Abraham's being of Ur of the Chaldees, from whence he came ; but it does not follow, that becaufe he was born and lived in that country before the con- fufion of Babel, that therefore he fpoke the language ufed in that country after- wards, fince he was foon called out of it ; and it appears that he fpoke not the Chal- dee or Syriac language, but the Hebrew, as before obferved.
5. It is urged', as highly probable, that the language the fecond Adam ipake, the
nrft
f Seder Olam, ib. \ Myricaeus, ut fupra. s Ibid.
[ '5 3
firft Adam did ; now Chrift and his Apo- ftlcs, and the people of the Jews in their times, fpoke in the Syriac language, as ap- pears from Matt, xxvii. 46. Mark v. 41 . and vii. 34. but according to fome learned men, asMaJzus*, and Fabricius Boderianusr, this was not the ancient language of the Syrians and Chaldeans, but a new language, which had its firft rife in the Babylonijh captivity, and was a mixture of Cbaldee and Hebrew, tho' rather the mixture began in the times of the Seleucida, the Syrian kings, who entered into and diftrefted Judea ; and therefore no argument can be taken from it in favour of the Syriac being the primi- tive language. I proceed now to propofe the arguments that are, or may be ufed in favour of the Hebrew language being the primitive one ; and the
Firji, may be taken from the alphabet of the tongue itfelf, which appears to be the firft alphabet of all the eaftern languages. The Chaldee or Syriac, Phoenician or Sama* ritan, have their alphabets manifeftly from it; the names, the number, and order of their letters, and even the form and duels of
them J Prsefat. ad Gram , Syr. r Prsfat. ad Diftion. Syro-Chaldr
[ >6 ]
them feem to be taken from thence, and to be corrupt deviations from it -, and the Arabic language, tho' the order of its alphabet- is fomewhat difturbed, yet the names of moft of the letters are plain- ly from the Hebrew -, and fo indeed is the greater part of the names of letters in the Greek alphabet, from whence the Ro- mans have taken theirs, and other Euro- pean nations. Hermannus Hugo* obferves, that it is agreed among all, that from the names of the Hebrew characters, the let- ters of all nations have their names ; now that language, whofe alphabet appears to be the firft, and to give rife to the alpha- bets of other tongues, bids fairefl to be the firft and primitive language : let it be ob- ferved that the Hebrew alphabet, as it now is, is exa&ly the fame as it was in the days of David and Solomon, fo early it can be traced ; for it is to be feen in the 119th Pfalm, and in others, and in the laft chapter of the book of Proverbs, as well as in the book of Lamentations, written before or at the beginning of the Babylonijh captivity.
Secondly,
0 De prima fcribendi orig. c. 7. p. 65.
[ *7 1
Secondly, Another argument for the an- tiquity of the Hebrew language, may be formed from the perfection and purity of it. Abraham de Balmis w fays of it, that %< it is perfect in its letters and in its points. *' Our language, fays he, is the moft per- V feci language, and in its writing the mod * perfect of ail writings of all languages ; ** there is nothing wanting, and there is " ^nothing redundant in it, according to the *c laws and rules of things perfect: and com- <( pleat." It confifts of words which moil fully and effectually exprefs the nature of the things iignified by 'em ; its roots, which are of a certain number, are, for the moft part, of three letters only, and it has no exotic or ftrange words uied in it. Who- ever compares it with the Syriac or Cbal- dee, will eafily perceive the difference as to the purity of 'em, and that the Chaldee is derived from the Hebrew, and is later than that ; for as Sca/iger long ago obfer- vedK "pD Melech muit be before 8Db? Mal- ca, the latter being derived from the for- mer ; and the fame may be obferved in a multitude of other inftances : now that C which
w Mikneh Abraham, p. 39. lin. 13, 14, 15. * Epifi:.
ad Thompfon. £p. 24Z.
t 18 ]
which is perfect, pure, and underived, mufl be before that which is imperfect, corrupt, and derived; or, as the philofopher7 ex- prefTes it, that which is vicious and cor- rupt muft be later than that which is in- corrupt.
Thirdly, The Paronomafia which Adam ufed when he called his wife woman, may ba thought to be a good proof of the antiqui- ty of the Hebrew language ; fince it will agree with that language only, jhe Jhall be called IJhah, woman, becaufe Jhe was taken, meijh, out of man, Gen. ii. 23. which pa- ronomafia does not appear neither in the Syriac verlion, nor in the Chaldee para- phrafes of Onkelos and "Jonathan, in which tho' Gabra is ufed of a man, yet never Ga- bretha of a woman, not even in places where men and women are fpoken of to- gether; fee the Syriac vernon and Chaldee paraphrafe of Exod. xxxv. 22. Deut. ii. 34. and many other places j and the reafon for it is plain, the word is expreffive of power and might, and fo not fo proper to be ufed of the weaker fex. ^Fhe Syriac or Chaldee language will not admit of fuch an allufion.
as
y Ariftot. de Republica, 1. 3 . c. 1 .
[ 19 ]
as is in the text ; for on the one hand, as Gabra is ufed for a man, and not Gabretba for a woman, fo on the other hand, Itta, Ittetha, and Intetha or Antetha, are ufed for a woman, but never Itt for a man. Now as we prove that the additions to the book of Daniel were written in Greek, from the p aronomajia in ch. xiii. 55. 59. fo this feems to prove that the language A- dam fpoke in to his wife muft be the He- brew language, and confequently is the pri- mitive one.e
Fourthly, The names of perfons and pla- ces before the confufion at Babel, are in the Hebrew language, and are plainly deri- ved from words in it; as Adam from HD"!tf Adamah, earth, out of which he was for- med, as is generally thought. Eve, from «Tn Chayah, to live, becaule the mother of all living ; Cain from H3p to get, ob- tain, poffefs, being gotten from the Lord ; Abel, from bnn Hebe/, vanity, as his life was; and Setb, from TW Sbetb, put, ap- pointed, becaufe put, fet, or appointed another feed in the room of Abel* : and fo all the names of the Antediluvian patri- C 2 archs
z Vid. Berertiit Rabba f. 18. fol. 15. a. » Vid. Se-
pherCofri, par. 1. 0 68.
t 2° 1
archs down to Noah and his fons, and their names alfo, with all thofe before the con- fufionand difperfion at Babel-, and likewife the names of places, as of the garden of Eden, from *?# delight, pleafure, it being a very pleafant place -, and the land of Nod from *TI3 to wander about; Cam being an exile and wanderer in it : now thefe being the names of perfons and places before the confuflon of tongues, ckarly fhew what language was fpoken before that time, namely., the Hebrew, which therefore ieems to be the primitive one.
Fifthly 'y It is notorious that the law and the prophets, or the books of the old te- ftament, were written in the Hebrew tongue. The law was written in it on two tables of ftone by the finger of God himfelf, and the facred books were written in the fame lan- guage, under divine infpiration. Now it is reafonable to conclude, that the fame language God wrote and infpired the pro- phets to write in, he himfelf fpoke in to Adam, and infpired him with it, or how- ever gave him a faculty of fpeaking it, and which he did fpeak, and therefore may be concluded to be the firft and primitive
tongue.
It
[ 21 ]
It now remains only to be enquired into, why this language is called Hebrew. It is fuppofed by fome to have its name from Ebert the father of Pe/eg, in whofe days the earth was divided, and from whom the Hebrews fprung and have their name b; and which opinion has been mod: generally received. Others think it has its name from *yytAbar, to pafs over, from Abr abams paf- fing over the river Euphrates into the land of Canaan ; this notion Aben Ezra makes mention of on Exod. xxi. 2. and has been eipouled by Tbeodoret c among the ancients, and indeed according to Origen\ the word Hebrew fignifies pajfer over, and fo Jerom; and by Scaliger* and Arias Mont anus* among the moderns, in which they have been followed by many. The matter is not of very great confequence, but I muft confefs I am mod inclined to the former j fovasAuftin* obferves, before the confulion language was one, and common to all, and needed no name to diftinguifh it; it was enough to call it the fpeech of man, or the human language; but when there
was
b Suidas in voce E£f«ioi. c Theodoret, in Gen.
Qu. 60. \ Comment, in Matth. p. 23^. Ed. Huet. et
in Num. Homil. fol. 19. 1 9. E. Reuchlin. de verbo mirific. I, 3. c. 13. d Ej^ift. ad Thompfon. et ad Ubertum.
■ Canaan c. 9.10. i De Civ. Dei, 1. 16. c. 11.
r « i
was a confufion of tongues, and fo more than one, it became neceiTary to diftinguifh them by names; and what name morepr o- per for the firll language than that of He- brew, from Eber, the laft man in whofe days it was alone and common to all ? for in his fon's days the earth was divided into different nations, fpeaking different lan- guages. Moreover, Shem is faid to be the Father of all the children of Eber, Gen. iv. 21. or as Jonathan paraphrafes it, of all the children of the Hebrews, or of He- brew children : refpect is had, as the learn- ed Rivet* obferves, to the bleffing of Shem, in oppofition to the curfe of Ham, Gen. ix. 25. 26. Now as Canaan fprung from Ham, and was the father of the Canaanites, fo Eb.r fprung from Shem and was the fa- ther of the Hebrews-, and as afterwards they were called the children of IJrael, and Ifraelites from IJrael, and the children of J ud ah and Jews from Judah ; fo the children of Eber or Hebrews from him, and with equal propriety the language they fpoke may be called Hebrew from him . and their country likewife, as in Gen. xl. 15. for it does not feem probable that the
land
f In Gen. Exercitat. 66. p. 319.
[ 23 ]
land of Canaan mould be called the land of the Hebrews, as it is there, fo early' as in the youth of Jojepb, from a fin gle family being paffengers, travellers, and ftrangers in it, which are characters not very re- fpectful and honourable, nor diftinguiihing; but rather from Eber, who, and his im- mediate offspring, might inhabit it, • it being that part affigned and divided to 'em at the divifion of the earth, Dent, xxxii. 8. out of which they might be dri- ven by the Canaanitesy fee Gen. xiii, 7. and xiv. 1, 4. therefore it was an act of ju- stice to difpoffefs them and replace the chil- dren of Eber in it : and this may alfo ferve to account for the names of places in pure Hebrew in old Canaan^ by which they were called, when Jofiua made a conqueft of it, as well as in the time of Abraham r, lince it was the land of Eber before it was the land of Canaan -, if Melchizedeck was Sbem, as the yews in general believe, he was king of a city in it, and Eber his firft born had a right unto it, claim'd by Chedarlao- mer, a defcendant of his, who attempted the refcue of it from the Canaanites, who had ufurped a power over it, at leaft over
fome
' See Dr. Llghtfoot, vol. ii. p. 327.
[ 2+ ]
fbme part of it ; and it is eafy to obferve* that in the prophecy of Balaam, Numb. xxiv. 24. as the AJj'yrians are called AJJmr, from their original progenitor, fo the He- brews have the name of Eber from him J and fo the word Eber there is rendered Hebrews by the Septuagint and other tran- ilators; and as they, fo their language, may- be called from him. As to what is objec- ted h, that Eber and Abraham were Chal- deans, and fpokethe Chaldee language, this has been reply'd to already ; and whereas it is obferved, that from the time of Eber to Abraham, no one is ever called an He- brew from him ; it is not to be wondered at, fince Eber lived to the time of Abraham, and even to the time of Jacob, according to both the Jewim and Scripture-chrono- logy.
The foundation of the other opinion, that the Hebrews and their language have their name from Abraham's puffing over the Euphrates to the land of Canaan, is the Septuagint verfion of Gen. xiv. 13. which inftead of Abraham the Hebrew, reads to tt^cctih the tranfitor or paffer over;
tW
b F-rpen. Orat. de Ling Heb. ' Seder Olam Rabba>
«• i.'p. 4.
[ 25 ]
tho' perhaps no more is meant by that ver- fion, than that he was, as Juvena/k ex- prelfes it, natus ad Euphratem, born near the river Perat, for that is its name in He- brew ; but whatever may be faid for Abra- hams being called an Hebrew from fuch a circumftance, it can fcarcely be thought that a whole nation mould be denominated from fuch an action of a remote anceftor, when they themfelves palled not over the fame river -, befides there were multitudes who palled over the Euphrates belides A- braham, who yet never were fo called ; as Canaa?i and his polterity mull pafs over it, when they removed from Shinar to the land afterwards called by their name ; and indeed Erpenius1 is of opinion that the Ca- naanites were firft called Hebrews, or paf- fers over, by the Chaldeans, becaufe they palled over the river Jordan into the country which lay between that and the Mediterra- nean fea, afterwards called from them the land of Canaan ; and that Abraham had not his name from his palfage into it, but from his dwelling there, and learning their lan- guage ; hence his polterity were called He- brews, and the Hebrew language the lan- guage
k Satyr, i. v. 104. l Ut fupra.
[ 26 ]
guage of Canaan, If. xix. 18. and the fame writer thinks, that if the Hebrews were only thofe of the family of Jacob, they would not have been fo well known to the Egyptians in the time of Jofeph as they were : but to all this it may be reply'd, that the Canaanites were ever called He* brews, does not appear from any writers, facred or prophane ; nor is it probable that the pure and primitive language, that is the Hebrew, as has been (hewn, mould be left with and continued in the race of Canaan ; and ftill more improbable, that Abraham mould learn it of them, who was porTefTed of the firffc and primitive lan- guage before the confulion of tongues, as has been obferved, and before he came in- to the land of Canaan-, befides he feems to be called Abraham the Hebrew, Gen, xiv. 13. to diftinguim him from Mamre, Eficol, and Aner, who were Canaanitesy confederates with him ; nor is the Hebrew language called the language of Canaan, btcaufe firft fpoken by the Canaanites, but becaufe the people of IJrael fpoke it, who for a long time had inhabited the land m
which
* Vid. G!ofs in T. Bab. Menachot, fol. 109 2 & Abar- binei. in U. xix. 18.
t m 3
which bore that name ; nor need it feem ftrange, that the name of Hebrew mould be Co well known in Potiphars family, and to the Egyptians in Jo/eph's time, when he himfelf told them, no doubt, that he was an Hebrew, as he told the chief butler, Gen. xxxix. 17. and xli. 12. and efpecially if what has been before obferved concern- ing the land of the Hebrews, can be efta- blifhed, Gen. xl. 15. as being inhabited by Eber and his fons, before the Canaa- nites poiTeiTed it.
There are other etymologies of the jiame of the Hebrews and their language, which fcarce deferve any notice -, as that they have their name from Abraham ; fo Artapanusn, an heathen writer, fays the Jews are called Hebrews from Abraham, but there are but few that have embraced this no- tion ; others fay, they are fo called from Eber- hanaar, which fignines beyond or the other fide of the river, that is, of the Euphrates, where Abraham and his father Terah dwelt, and from whence Abraham is faid to be taken ; but there were many befides them, even whole nations who dwelt beyond that river, who were never called Hebrews,
nor
■ Apud Eufeb. Evangel. Praspar. 1. 9. c. 1 %.
[ ** )
nor can any good reafon be given, why thefe and their pofterity and their lan- guage mould be called Hebrew from thence, tho; many, both Jews and Chrijiians, have imbibed this notion*: Ei/febius-f, tho' he thinks the Hebrews had their name from Eber, yet as the word figriifies a paiTer over, not from one country to the other, but from the vanity of the things of this pre- fent world, to the ftudy of divine things, and in which they retted not, but palled on in fearch of more recondite knowledge : pe5 haps, after all, the true original of the name may be taken from the place of A- brabams birth, who is firft called Hpyft the Hebrew , or rather the Ibrite> Gen. xiv. 13. the place of his birth was Ur of the C/jal- dees, as Abe/2 Ezra7 rightly judges, fince it is exprefsly faid to be the land of his brother Haran's nativitv, and therefore moft probably his alfo ; now Ur of the Chaldees is called NTD frmy lbra Zeira* and fo Abraham might have this epithet from the place of his nativity, the Ibrite, to diftinguiih him, as before obfened, fiom
the
• Vid. Buxtorf de Ling Heb. Confervat f 32, 33. f Evangel. I'raepar. 1. 9. c 6. p. 5.-0. p Comment.
in Gen. xi 28. * T. J^ab. Bava Bathra, fol. ,91. 1. &
Gloff. in lb.
[ 29 J
the Amorites, among whom he then dwelt, and whence his pofterity frequently after- wards have the name of -D^QV or Ibrites, Gen. xxxix. 14. 17. and xl. 15. and xliii.
One thing more I would juft obferve, that whether the Hebrews and their lan- guage are fo called either from Eber, the father of Pe/eg, or from Abar, to pafs over, or from Eber, beyond, or the other tide of the river, or from Ibra the native place of Abrchiim ; tho! cuftom has prevailed to write the word with an afpiration, Hebrew and Hebrews, it ihould be written without one, Ebrew and Ebrews, as words begin- ning with 37 ufually are, as Amminadib, lm~ manuel, &c.
CHAP,
[ 3* ]
CHAP. II.
Concerning the Antiquity of the Hebrew Letters.
IT has been a controveriy among learned men, for a century or two pail, whe- ther the modern letters ufed by the Jews, and in which their facred books are now extant, are the fame in which the law and the prophets were originally written. This is denied by fome, and it has been affirm- ed, that the original letters of the Hebrews, and in which the books of the Old Tefta- ment before the times of Ezra were writ- ten, were what are called Samaritan ; and that Ezra, after the return of the Jews from the captivity in Baby/on, changed thefe letters for the Merubbah, or fquare ones fince in ufe ; and in them wrote all the fa- cred books then in being, and gave thean- tient letters to the Samaritans ; and this no- tion has been embraced upon the teftimo- nies of Enfebius and Jerom -, the foundation of which appears to be a tradition of the Jews, and that far from being generally re- ceived by them. The former of thefe in his
chro-
t 31 ]
chronicle at A. M. 4740, writes, that " it " is affirmed, that Ezra, by the ftrength «* of his memory, compiled or put together ** the divine fcriptures, and that they (the 4( Jews) might not be mixed with the Sa- u maritans, changed the Jewifh letters:" now this pafTage of Eujebius, as Marckius* obferves, is not to be found in Sca/iger's editions of his chronicle, neither in the original Greek, nor in the Latin verlion ; and the illuftrious Spanheim ' has fully pro- ved, that it is fpurious, and added to the text by fome modern hand ; and admitting it to be genuine, it fmells rank of a Jewijh tale, particularly that Ezra compiled the fcriptures memoriter ; and it is no difficult thing to account for it, from whence Eu- febius had it, if he had it at all -, for fince he was bifhop of Ccefarea, where both Jews and Samaritans lived, he might receive this notion from the one or from the other; from the Samaritans, as Buxtorfft conjec- tures, who were continually boafting of their language and letters, in which, they fay, the law was given, a copy of which they pretend to have, written by Phine/oas
the
r Exerci:at. in Matt. v. 18. f. 6. p. 6j. s Apud
Carpzov. Critic, par. i. p. 240. • De LiterisHeb.
f, 61.
[ 32 ]
the Ton of Eleazar ; or rather he might have this account from the Jews that refi- ded there. Jerom, who lived a little after Eufebius, and who might take what he writes from him, or rather from fome of the Jewijh Rabbins he had for his precep-' tors and inftruclors, for he had four of them at different times, is more confident, and faysu, " certumque eji, &c. it is certain •' that Ezra thefcribe, and teacher of the " law, after Jerujalem was taken and the " temple rebuilt under Zerubbabel, found " other letters, which we now ufe, when to " that time the characters of the Samari- " tans and Hebrews were the fame ;" but how could Jerom be certain of this, who lived near a thoufand years after the fup- pofed facl ? do Ezra or Nehemiah give the leaft hint of fuch a change of letters, tho' they relate things of much lefs confequence than this ? or do any of the other prophets fuggeft any thing of this kind ? not the leaft fyllable. Do Jofephus or Philo the yew fay any thing about it ? not one word, but the reverfe, as will be feen hereafter : from whence and from whom then could Jerom be allured of it ? from
no
» Praefat. in lib. Reg. Tom. 3-fol. 5. L.
t 33 J
no other than his Jews and their traditions; from whom it is certain he received many things, as his treatife called §>ucejliones feu Troditiones Hebraicce> on various parts of fcripture mew ; which are all or moil: of them to be found in the Tabnud, and other writings of the Jews, and particularly this. The Jerufalem Talmud was printed about the year 230, long enough before Jerom, for him to have knowledge of it at lead from his inft-ructors. The Babylonian Tal- mud was compiling in his time, tho' not finimed before the year 500 ; but the tradi- tions it confifts of were well known be- fore, being handed down from one to ano- ther, and with which Jeroms Jews could furnifli him, and did. But what puts this matter out of all quefcion, is a fragment of On'gen's, publimed by Montfaucm w, who alfo fpeaks of letters ufed by Ezra after the captivity, different from the more an- tient ones, and plainly declares from whom he had it, and opens to us the true fource of this notion : " in fome accurate copies, " he fays, it (the word Jehovah) is writ- <l ten in antient Hebrew letters, but not *' in thofe now in ufe, <pu<rt yap, for they fay, D " (that
w Prasliminar. in Hexapla Origen. p. S6,
[ 34 ]
" (that is, the Jews) that Ezra ufed others " after the captivity." fo that it clearly ap- pears to be a Jewijh tradition ; and it is not improbable, that Jerom had what he calls certain, from this paflage of Origen, as well as from Eufebius, fuppofing the pafTage in him to be genuine ; and in which he might be confirmed by his Rabbins ; fo that all that has been faid about this mat- ter comes from the fame fountain, a Jewijh tradition. And the tradition refpe&ing it in the Jerufa/emTa/mud x is as follows: " it '* is a tradition; R. Jofe fays, Ezra was <c fit to have the law given by his hand, " but that the age of Mofes prevented it ; " yet tho' it was not given by his hand,. " the writing and the language were;. " the writing was written in the Syriac " tongue and interpreted in the Syriac " tongue, Ezra iv. 7. and they could not " read the writing, Dan. v. 8. from hence " it is learnt, that it was given on the fame " day. R. Nathan fays, the law was " given in breaking, (in rude, rough, and " broken letters, fuppofed to be meant of " the Samaritan) and agrees with R. Jofe;. "but Rabbi (i. e. Judah HakkodepJ fays 3 « the
* T. Hierof. Megillah, fol. 71. t, 3.
[ 35 3
" the law Was given in the Afjyrian cha- *f racter (the fquarc letter) and when they *' finned, it was turned into breaking, u (into a rough, and broken character) and " when they were worthy, in the days of " Ezra, it was turned to them again in " the Afjyrian character, according to Zach. " ix. 12. It is a Tradition ; R. Simeon ben " Ekazer fays, on the account of R. Ele* " azer Ben Parta, who alfo fays, on the a account of Ellezer Hatmnodai, the law u was written in the Afjyrian character." As it Hands in the Babylonian Talmud J, it is thus exprerTed : «< Mar Zutra, or as " others Mar Vkba, fays, at firft the law t( was given to IJrael'm the writing beyond 44 the river, (or the Samaritan) and the «c holy tongue ; and again it was given to •' them, in the days of Ezra, in the A[[y~ 44 rian writing, and Syriac tongue ; tney " chofe for the Ifraelites the Afjyrian wri- " ting and the holy tongue, and left to the '* Ideots the writing beyond the river, and *' the Syriac tongue. Who are the Ideots ? R* 44 Cbajda fays, the Cut bites (i.e. the Sama^ " ritans) : what is the writing beyond the D 2 ** river ?
y T. Bab. Sanhediin, fol. 21.2. and 22. j. and Zeba- chim, foi, bi. 1. and Glofs. inib.
[ 36 ]
" river ? R.Cbafda fays, the Libonaanvrvi- " ting ;" which the Glofs explains of great letters, fuch as are written in amulets and on door-ports. Now tho' this account is far from being clear and plain, as to what is the fenfe of thefe Rabbins j yet admit it to be the fenfe of R. Jofe, and of Mar Zutra or Ukba, that the law was written in Samaritan characters ; to which if you add R. Nathan, as agreeing with them, there are but three on that fide of the que- ftion ; whereas there are four who affirm it to be written in the Ajfyrian, or iquare character, namely, R. Judah the faint, R. Simeon, and the two Eleazers ; and as for R. Judab, he was of fo much account with the Jews, as to weigh dov/n all others ; the decifion of any matter in de- bate was, for the moll; part, according to him ; and it is to the latter fcntiment that the Jews nowuniverfally agree. There is but one, R. Jofepb Albo, on the other fide of the queftion, unlefs Nachmanides can be thought to be, which yet is doubtful", now this feems to be the whole and fole foundation of the above notion, which has prevailed fo long among chriftian wri- ters.
-' Vld. Buxtorf. de Uteris Heb. f. 20. 52, 53, 54.
f V ]
ters. I cannot but remark the foible of fome learned men, that if any thing againft a received opinion is produced from the Talmud, and other Jewifa writings, it is at once condemned as a Jewijh dotage, dream and fable ; but if it accords with a favou- rite hypothecs, how greedily is it eatched at ? how tenacioufly is it held ? It is ama- zing that fo many learned men mould give into the change of the Jewifh letters by Ezra. It is not likely that the law mould be given to the Jjraelites, and the facred books be written in Samaritan let- ters, that is, in the old Phoenician charac- ters, which belonged to the race of Canaaii-, and if they were, that the people of the yews could be prevailed upon to part with them, in which their hoiy books were written ; and if they were written in them, as then, befides the Pentateuch, the books of Jojhua, fudges, Samuel, the Pfalms of David, and books of Solomon, and the Prophets before the captivity, mult be written in the fame character ; and if fo, it is ftrange that not one copy of either of thefe mould be heard of, feen, or known ; nor is it probable that the books of the Old Teftament fhould be written in two D 3 dif-
[ 38 ]
different characters ; thofe before the cap- tivity in Samaritan letters, and thofe after it in the fqaare letters, as they muft be according to this hypothecs. It is not to be believed, that Ezra would attempt fuch a change of himfeli without an order from God, which no where appears, when fuch a charge againil innovations Hands in Deut. iv. 2. nor does it feem poffible that he fhould be able effectually to do it ; it could never be in his power to cell in all the co- pies of the facred books, which the Ifra- elii.cs had carried into the feveral parts of the world, thro' their captivities ; nor is it probable that the Samaritans* if pofll-fled of the fquare character, which is grand and majeitic, mould ever be prevailed upon to part with it, for a character fo ugly, fo iii ihaped and deformed as the Samaritan is ; nor was it in the power of Ezra to oblige them to it : to which may be added, that furely it can't be thought that thofe ugly and ill -ihaped letters were formed by the finger of God, and the law written by him in them, the contrary to which is now uni- verfally affirmed by the Jews ; and yet with what confidence has this been afferted, and thofe of a different fentiment treated with
mofj
[ 39 ]
moil abufive language, unbecoming men of learning, by fuch as Sca/iger, Dnijius, and Vojfiusi as if they were men but half learned, half divines, mere fools, fceptics, &c. but of late I obferve this confidence abates, and learned men begin to think that it is far from being a determined point, what were the original characters of the Hebrews. The learned authors of the Univerfal Hijlory a have taken the fide of thofe who are againrl the Samaritan cha- racters, and are for the fquare letters be- ing the original Hebrew, and have given their reafons for it ; and I hope to make it appear, at leafl probable, that the Jews al- ways had and retained their letters and cha- racters, and alfo the Samaritans theirs ; and that there has been no commutation of let- ters between them: and to begin
With the Jews; though we cannot come to any certainty of their ancient letters and characters, yet there is a probability that they were the fame in which their facred writings are now extant ; and this is all I (hall attempt to mew.
It has been obferved that the Hebrew
alphabet is the nrft of the oriental lan-
D 4 guages,
a Vol. xvii. p. 302, 304.
[ 4° ]
guages, from whence the reft have re- ceived theirs; but in name only, not in fignification ; for the fignification of the names of the letters in the alphabet only correfpond with the figures of the fquare letter j indeed though the Hebrew alpha- bet is obierved in order no lefs than twenty times in the Old Teftament, Pfal. xxv, xxxvii, cxi, cxii, cxix. eight times, cxiv. Prov. xxxi. Lamentations fix times, yet not the name or one letter is given ; but in the Septuagint verfion of the Lamenta- tions, made three hundred years before Chrift, the names of all of them are given juft as they now are. The Greeks h ii the names of their letters very early, not only before the writing of the New Teftament, in which mention is made of fome of them, as of lota, Alpha, and Omega ; and in Jojepbus * of Theta, and Taw, but Herodotus*, who wrote his hif- tory between four and five hundred years before the birth of Chriit, obferves, that the Perjian names end in a letter which in the Doric dialed is called San, and in the Ionic dialed Sigma. Plato -)-, as early, makes
3 men-
* Antiqu. 1. i. c. 6. b Clio, five 1. i. c, 139.
f in Cratylo, p. 271, 284, 28 j, 289, 2^i, zgj, E<!4 Ficin.
[4i ]
mention of the names of feveral of the letters of the Greek alphabet; and Homert fome hundreds of years before them, has the names of the whole Greek alphabet; for his works, both his Iliad and his Odyf- Jey, the feveral books of them, have their titles from thence, and are called by their names; unlefs it mould be thought, as it is by fome, that the titles are added by fome ancient Grammarians ; which names are chiefly taken from an Eajlern alphabet: and as the Greeks are generally fuppofed to have their letters, at leaft mod of them, from the Phoenicians, they doubtlefs had the names of them along with them ; and Diodorus Siculus j exprefsly fays, that as Cadmus brought the letters from Phoenicia into Greece, fo he gave to every one their names, as well as formed their characters; and as the Phoenician, or old Samaritan alphabet confifted of letters of the fame name, though of a different character from the Hebrew, it may reafonably be fuppofed that the names are derived from thence, as the language is but a dialect of the He- brew, with a little variation and deflexion from it; fo that the Hebrews had thefe
names
\ fiibliothec. lib. 3. p. 200.
[ 42 3
names originally; and it cannot be thought otherwife but that when their letters were firft invented, and marks made for them, but names were given unto them; and Ca- pellus a himfelf is quite clear and exprefs in this matter : " before the age of Cad- *' mus the Phoenician, he fays i. e. 1450 <" years before the birth of Chriit, the He- 4t brew letters had their own names, and i* indeed the fame with thofe by which *' they are now called, as is plain by com- " paring the Greek alphabet with the He- w brew," and alittle after he fays, the fame names of Hebrew letters are as they were three thoufand years ago : now the names of the letters of the Hebrew alphabet, though adopted by others, only correfpond in their fignification with the figure of the fquare letters now in ufe : thus according to various writers w , M Aleph the firfr. letter, lignifies an ox, and its figure refem- bles the head and horns of one, and as that, gives the lead to the reft; 2 Beth, an houfe, and it reprefents one, its foundation,
wall,
* Arcaaum punftat. Revelat. I. 1. c. 12. b Vid.
Schiridler. Lexicon Pentaglott. Herman. Hugonem de prima Scribend. Orig. c. 7. p. 69. &c. Wafmuth Vindicice Heb. par. i.e. 1. p. 58, <^6. Marckii Exercitat. ad Matt. v. 18. Bedford's Chronology, p. 497, and Dr. Gregory Sharpe's Origin of Languages, p. 60, &C
f 43 1
wall, and roof, which with the Hebrews was fiat; JJ Gimel a camel, and it has the figure of its long neck and bunch on its back ; 1 Daletb a door, and it de- fcribes the lintel and port, of one ; n what it fignifies and reprefents is not eafy to fay : 1 Vau, an hook, and it refembles one; t Zajin, fignifies armour, and has the figure of a dart, fpear, or club ; n Cheth a bead, and its polition is like that of a qua- druped ; o Teth, folding or involving, as is the form of it ; * Jod, an hand, the fmall part of it the finger, it reprefents ; 3 Caph, the hollow of the hand, or a curvature, as its figure is ; 1 Lamed, a goad, and it is like one ; D Mem, a fpot as is imprefTed on the hollow of the hand; 3 Nun, a fon, child, or infant, and it is thought to refemble one fitting ; D Samech, a fupport, the pede- ftal of a column, to which it is not un- like ; V Ain, an eye, and it is the figure of one open ; 5 Pe, a mouth, an open one ; ¥ Tzadde, 2. fork, and fuch is its fi- gure; p Kopb, a revolution, a femicircle, with a defcending line, or a monkey, hav- ing the tail of one 1 Rejh, the heaci, the hinder part of one it refembles ; W Schin, a tooth, and is the figure of three teeth ;
D T/jau
[ 44 ] H T/batx, a mark, fign, or border, being the boundary of the alphabet. Now the figures of the letters of the alphabet, nei- ther in the Samaritan characters, nor in any other but the fquare, will anfwer to the fignification of thefe names.
As the Hebrew language was the firfl and primitive language, and was fpoken by Adam, as has been ihewn, it is probable the letters were firft invented by him, as ibme have thought *; fince as man is not only a fpeaking, but a focial animal, it can hardly be imagined that Adam fhould live fo many years, and not conlider the advantage of letters to his poiterity, and atempt to form fuch for their ufe ; nor could arts and fciences, which no doubt were found out in his time, be well culti- vated without the ufe of etters. It is certain iome of the arts and fciences were in ufe before the flood, Gen. iv. 21. and very probably afironomy, as it muft be, if
there
c Si idas in voce A&s/n. Hermannus Hugo, utfupra c. 3. p. . Bibliander & alii in ib. The Jews afcibe feveral writings to .'dam, Wolni Biblioth. Heb. p. 1 io, HI. In the 1 ud they {peak of the book of the firft Adam, T Bab. Bava Metzia, fol. 85, 2 and of a book the angel Raziel gave him, which bears the name oi that angel, Zohar in G . fol. 4!, 3 Some writers make mention of a book compofed by Abel the fon of Adam. See Bangi Cceluni Qiient. p. 103, 123.
[ 45 ]
there is any truth in the hiftory of the pillars erected by the posterity of Setb, which muft make writing neceffary, as Huygens d obferves : befides, it is not rea- fonable to fuppofe that Adam himfelf fhould be without the knowledge of the fciences, fince the very firft light of the heavenly luminaries would lead him into a contemplation of them, and to make fu- ture obfer/ations upon them ; and by ob- ferving their motions, appearance, and dif- appearance, their revolutions, and the diftinctions they made of days, months, and years, and of the feafons, of fummer and winter ; he muft obtain by degrees a confiderable knowledge of this fcience. Some have thought e that the knowledge of all things natural, both terreftrial, as plants, &c. and celeltial, was of God in- fufed into him, and implanted in his na- ture , and in whatibever way he had it, it may be reafonably concluded that he would communicate it to his pofterity, which feems to require the ufe of letters ; and Scaliger f made no doubt of it that the art of printing was known by him;
though
d Cofjmotheorof. fol. 10. p. 56. e Vid. Lydiat de-
tent tra&. de ann. form. c. 8. p. ?6. f Apud Lydiat. ib, p. 125.
[ 46 ]
though that is not very probable, yet he might have the knowledge of letters, and of the ufe of them ; indeed the Indian Brachmans g, and the ancient Druids h and Pythagoras 1 taught their doctrines without the ufe of letters -, but it was not through want of them, nor through mere neglect of them, but becaufe they had fome pe- culiar ends to anfwer thereby : now if let- ters were invented by Adam, it feems mod reafonable that as his language, fo his let- ters were continued to the times of Noah, and were communicated in the times of Sbem through the families of Eber and A" braham to the people of Ifrael; and though the precife character cannot be determined, it is moft probable, it was the iquare cha- racter, as being the molt expreffive, per- fect, and elegant, The Jewifh writers are quite clear in this matter, that not only the letters but even the points and accents as they now are, were known to Adam, being taught him of God -, as the author of the book of Cofrik, and his commen- tator R. Judah Mufcatus K
If the pillars {ct up by the fons of Setb
could
R Alex. ab. Alex. Genial, dier. 1. 2. c. 30. h Caefar. Comment. 1. 6. c. 13. ' Alex ab. Alex, ut fupra. k Colli par. 4. f. 25. i Comment, in ib. fol. 229. 1.
[ 47 3
could be depended on as genuine, there would be proof not only of the arts and fciences, particularly auronomy, being known and taught, but of letters, and their ufe in their days; and to Setb himielf the invention of letters has been afcribed™! yofephus n fays, the pillars erected by his pofterity continued to his time : but it is not likely that thefe pillars, the one of brick, the other of ftone, mould furvive the flood ; and the account he has given of the place where they flood, is very dark and intricate ; he calls it the land of Syriad, but whether he means Syria, or a place in the land of Egypt, or Seirath near G/7- gal, Judg. iii. 26. each of which is guefled at °, cannot be determined ; nor does he give us the leaft hint what kind of charac- ters were upon them; and indeed had the pillars been really in being, it can fcarcely be thought that the characters could be legible, or that even conjectures could be made of what they were. In Syria and Mefopotamia are faid to be fome ancient books of the Zabia?is, which they pretend to be the patriarch Setb's p ; and the, Arabic
writers
m Vid. Suidam in voce Z«9. n Antiqu. 1. i. c. 2.
* Vid. Marfham Canon, fecul. 1. p. 3. f Prideaux. Prsfat. ad Marmor. Arundel. & Voffium de a-tate mundi, c. 10. p. 37. p Praefat. Hyde ad Hilt. Relig. Perf.
[ 4§ ]
writers fay ', that Seth was the inventer of writing letters, and {hewed them in the Hebrew tongue. If the account that is given of Cainan, the grandfon of Seth, could be credited, it would not only prove the ufe of letters in thofe early times, but that the Hebrew letters were then ufed ; the account is what is faid to be fent by Alexander the Great, when in India, to his matter Arijlotle, and is as follows : *' When I came to fuch a place in India, «' fays he, the natives told me that they " had with them the fepulchre of an an- " cient king that ruled over all the world, " whofe name was Cainan, the fon of " Enos, who forefeeing that God would ' *' bring a flood upon the earth, wrote his " prophecy of it on tables of ftone, and *< they are here ; the writing is Hebrew u writing."
Enoch, the feventh from Adam, deli- vered out the prophecy referred to by the apoftle Jude, ver. 14, 15. but whether it was written is not certain ; it is not im- probable it might be : the Jews make men- tion of a writing of his in their ancient
book
1 Elmacinus apud Hottinger. Smegma, p, 228. r Ju.. chafin, fol. 3.2. fa Ben Gorion, 1. 2. c. iS. p. 131.
[ 49 J
book of Zohar f, and in the ¥ar?iim of 'Jonathan on Gen. v. 24, he is called the great fcribe ; and feveral of the chriflian fathers fpeak of a book of his as authen- tic, as Tertuiiian ' and others; and the Ara- bic writers u tell us of pyramids and pil- lars erected by him, on which he engraved the arts and the imtruments of them; and fome writers w afcribe the invention of letters and writing of books to him ; but what characters he wrote and engraved in are not faid : others * have pretended to give the alphabets of Adam, Setb, Enoch, and Noah-, but the characters they give neither agree with the Hebrew nor with the Samaritan, and are mere figments, and are no more to be depended on than in what the prophecy of Ham the fon of Noah was written, out of which Phere- cydes the Syrian, is faid to take his allego- ries y. If Abraham the anceftor of the Jewifh nation was the inventor of letters, as fome fay, the Hebrew characters might E bid
8 In Gen. fol. 53. 2. and 74. 1. * De Cultu faemirt. 1. i.e. 3. vid.Bangi Ccelum Orient. Exercitat. i. 24. Qu. 5. u Abulpharag. Hill, dynaft. dyn. 1 p. 9. w Vid. Hugo, de orig. fcribendi, c. 3. p. 41. Shalfhalet Hakabala fol. 94, 2. xVid. Bangi ut fupra, Exercitat. 2. Qu. 1. p 100, 101. 104. 105. y Vid. Clem. Ale. Stromat. 1, 6. p. 642.
[ 5° ]
bid fair to be the farfl -, nay, Suidas fays r they were the facred letters he invented ; and to him is fometimes afcribed the caba- lijlic book of the Jews called Jetzirah a.
Some of the Jewifh Rabbins fay, that the grains of manna which fell from hea- ven about the tents of the lfraelites in the wildernefs were figured with the character of the Hebrew letter i Van very perfectly exprerled ; and that that is the principal reafon why the wondering lfraelites faid one to another KIP! ]D Man hu, which ac- cording to them is to fay, what means this van f the reafon of which figure they fup- pofe to be, becaufe the manna was only to be gathered on thtjix days of the week, which that letter numerically fignifies : this is to be, treated as a mere fable, nor have I met with it in any writer but Gaf- farellns b ; all the advantage I mak< of it is this, that thofe Rabbins who relate this, believed that the fquare letters were in ufe before the giving of the law, for fo early was the original defcent of the manna; and indeed if the Israelites did not under- 3 ftand
2 Tn voce AgfKxp, vid. Herman Hugo, ut fupra, p. 41. a Cofri par 4. c. 27. Juchafin fol. 52. 2. b Unheard of Curiofuies, par. 4. c. 12. p. 352.
[ 51 ]
ftand letters before the giving of the law, of what ufe could the writing of it be unto them ? and to what purpofe was it written and brought unto them.
It is not only the opinion of fome Chrirtian writers ■ that the Hebrews re- ceived their letters firft. from Mofes thro' the giving of the law unto them, but even Enpolemns, an heathen writer, as quoted both by Clement of Alexandria d, and Eu- febius e, affirms that Mofes firft. delivered letters to the Jews, which is received by manyf ; however this be, it is certain, the law was written in letters engraved by God himfelf, and given to Mofes for the Ifraelites ; and it is mofl probable, as has been already obferved, that thofe letters were not the ill-fhaped letters of the Sa- maritans, the fame with thofe of the old Phoenicians or Canaanites, but the noble, majeftic fquare letters, in which the books of the law and prophets are now extant. E 2 Phih
c Vid. Aug. de Civ. Dei, 1. 18. c. 39. Ifidor. Origin. 1. 1. c. 3. and chronic, p. 263. d Stromat. 1. 1. p. 343.
e Praspar. Evangel. 1. 9. c 26. f So Clemens Roman. Cornelius Agrippa,Crinitus,Textor, Gyraldus apud Herman. Hugo, ut fupra, MS. in Vatican. Biblioth. apud Wafer, de Numis Heb. 1.2 c. 3. vid. Owen. Theologoumena 1. 4. Di- greff. 1. p. 301.
[ 5* ]
Pbilo the Jew 8, fays, the law was anci- ently written in the Chaldee language, that is, in the Hebrew language, properly fo called ; for, as Jerom h obferves, Pbilo thought the Hebrew and Chaldee were the fame language ; and nothing is more com- mon with the Jews \ than to fay the writ- ing in which the law was given, is the AJfy- rian language and writing, by which they mean the modern Hebrew letters, in dif- tindlion from the Samaritan, as appears by what has been quoted out of the cTahmidi and which they exprefly fay k is what they now write in. This they call the Affyrian tongue and writing, from the word Afiery which fignifles happy aad bleifed, being happy and blefled above all languages ; or becaufe they had it from their anceftor A- braham, who came out of Ajfyria, and as they carried it into Affyria, when led cap- tive thither, fo it came out of Ajfyria with them, when they came from thence1; and that the tables of the law were written in it, is generally agreed on, by
them,
t De vita Mofis. 1. i. p. 657, 658. h Comment, in
Dan. i. 4. l Balmefii mikneh Abraham, p. 2. lin. 26.
k GI01T. inT.Bab. Megillah, fol. 8 2 Shalfhalet Hakabala,
fol. 74 2 ' T. Bab. Sanhedn . fol. 21. i.and Bal-
pief. utfupra, lin. 24, 25. and p. 6. lin. 13. 14.
t S3 1
them. R. Jacob fays m, the whole world acknowledge that the tables and book of the law, which were in the ark, were written in the Ajfyrian character, by which they mean the fquare character ; that is, the whole Jewijh nation, a few, only excepted, not more than two or three ft. If the mediums of proof made life of by the Jews could be admitted as valid, as they cannot, it would put the matter out of all doubt, that the fquare letters were as early as the law : they ob- ferve, that the hooks of the pillars in Exod. xxvii. 10. are called Vans, and as the pillars were not changed, fo the Vaus were not changed; from whence they conclude the Vans were made like hooks, and that in the days of Mofes the Vans were like thofe now in ufe °; and v/hat is true of one let- ter is true of the reft $ and that their let- ters were never changed, and which they alfo conclude from Efth. viii. 9. They have likewife a notion that the letters of the law were perforated, fo that the figures of the letters could be fcen on both fides, E 3 where-
m In En Ifrael Megillah, c. I. fol. 415. x. n Vid. Buxtcrf, de lit. Heb. f, 20. 23. ° T. Hierof. Megillah, fol. 71.3, T. Bab. Sanhedrin, fol. 22. I. and Glofs. in ib.
[ 54 ]
wherefore they obferve D Mem c/aufumand D Samecb which were in the tables, flood miraculoufly * -, for they being near or like to a circle or an O, they had no- thing to adhere to, or fubfift by, but muft fall, unlefs fupported by a miracle. Now though thefe notions cannot be allowed of, they ferve to mew the fenfe of the Jews, that the fquare letters were then in being, fince thefe obfervations will not agree with the faid letters in the Samaritan alphabet ; nay, they fay that the forms of letters, vowels and accents were written by God on the tables, as we now have them «.
It was ufual in ancient time to infcribe things on rocks and mountains, in order to perpetuate them to pofterity, to which Job may allude, ch. xix. 24. thus Semira- mis engraved her image and an hundred fhield-bearers by her at the bottom of a rock, and wrote upon the rock in Syriac letters, as Diodorus Siculus relates r j fo the Arabians, Phoenicians, and Egyptians ', and others, before the ufe of paper, engraved their fentiments on rocks and ftones •.
The-
p T. Bab. Sabbar, fol 104. * Tipheret Ifrael in
Bioughton's works, p. 506.670. 684.703. r Biblioth. 1. 2. p 100 101. * Plin. 1. 6. c. 28 . vid. Huet. Demon- ftrat Evangel, c. 2. f. 15.
[ 55 ]
Hhemijtocles cut letters upon ftones which the lonians, coming the day after to Arte-* mifium, read, as Herodotus reports ' ; and it was uiual with the Danes to write the acts and deeds of their ancestors in verfe, and engrave them in their own language on rocks and ftones \ In a journal made about forty years ago, from grand Cairo to mount Sinai, a tranflation of which is pub- limed by Dr. Clayton, late biihop of Clog- her, it is related w, that thofe who made it came to fome hills near mount Sinai, cal- led the written mountains; on which with others they palled for an hour together, were engraved ancient unknown cha- racters, cut into the hard marble rock, twelve or fourteen feet diftant from the ground -, and though they had feveral in. company acquainted with the Arabic, Greek, Hebrew^ Syriac, &c. none of them had any knowledge of thofe characters. The biftiop thought it probable that thefe were the ancient Hebrew characters, which the Ifraelites having learned to write after the giving of the law on mount Sinaj, di- E 4 verted
1 Urania, five, 1 S.c. 22. vide Melpomene, five I. 4. c. 87. u Salmuth. in Pancirol. par. 2. p. 256. w Journal Sec. p. 45, 46. Ed. 2.
[ 5« ]
verted themfelves with practifing it during their forty years abode in the wildernefs ; and he was of opinion that the ancient He- brew characters might be recovered by them ; wherefore he propofed to the Soci- ety of Antiquarians in London, to fend a proper perfon thither for that end, and offered to bear a proportion in the expence of it ; and could thofe characters be reco- vered, and an alphabet formed out of them, it would doubtlefs determine what was the ancient figure of the Hebrew let- ters. About an hundred years before the above journal was begun, Petrus a Valle and Thomas a Novaria tranfcribed feveral of them, which the former had in his pof- fefiion, and mewed them to fome Jews, to whom fome of the letters feemed to be like to thofe of the Hebrew now in ufe, others like the Samaritan, and others agreed with neither ; but the fenfe of them none could understand p. Now thefe let- ters were no doubt of one and the fame alphabet, form and figure originally, and if many of them are of the fquare form, or like thofe Hebrew letters now in ufe, and thofe the greater part of them, as it
mould
f Antiq. Eccl. oriental, p. 147.
[ 57 1
mould feem by their being mentioned firft -, I mould think they were all when firft written of the fame form ; and that fuch of them as are now broken and disjointed, are thofe faid to be like to the Samaritan letters, which are rough and deformed ; hence the Jews call them \*yn, a fracture, broken, and uneven ; and fuch that agreed with neither, thofe that are greatly effaced by time -, and I am the more ftrengthened in this fuppofition by the relation of Cof- mas JEgyptius, who travelled into thofe parts in the fixth century, more than twelve hundred years ago , who teftifies, that he himfelf faw many flones in the wilder nefs engraved by the Hebrews in Hebrew letters, in memory of their jour- ney in it * -, his account, as Montfaucon r relates it is, that in the wildernefs of Sinai 9 and in all the manfions of the He- brews, you may fee ftones fallen from the mountains, all engraved with Hebrew let- ters, as, fays he, I teftify, who travelled that way. Now I imagine that this man in that age could have no other notion of Hebrew letters than of thofe then in ufe
with
i Vid. Fabritii Bibliothec. Grajc. Tom. 2. p. 6i 5# f in Dr. Kennicott's Diflert. 2. p. 147. 148.
[ 58 ]
with the Jews ; and he adds, fome Jews who read thefe infcriptions told us, they fignified fo and fo — fuch a journey — out of fuch a tribe — in fuch a year — in fuch a month — i. e. fuch and fuch things were done. Now the letters which thefe Jews were converfant with, and capable of rea- ding and interpreting, feem more likely to be the Hebrew letters, which they then ufed, than the Samaritan, which it is not reafonable to fuppofe they would give them- felves the trouble of learning, having no- thing to do with the Samaritans, but at en- mity with them.
The plate of gold on the forehead of the high-prieit, on which was engraven holinejs to the Lord, the Jewsi difpute about it, whether this was in more lines than one, and what letters were in a line, but it was never a queftion with them in what character it was written. Jerom fays1 indeed, that the word Jehovah was in his time found written in antient letters, in fome Greek volumes ; but it mould be ob- ferved, that Jerom fpeaks not of Jewifi or Hebrew copies, but of Greek volumes,
meaning
s T. Bab. Sabbat, fol. 63. 2. & Succah, fol. 5. 1. l Pra> fat. in lib. Reg. fol. 5. L.
[ 59 ]
meaning the Greek verfions ofjfqm'/a and! Tbeodotion in Origen's Hexapla, and of an- tient Hebrew letters in the faid Greek ver- fions, where the word Jebovab was written jm Hebrew characters thus, nini, which the Greeks not understanding, and being deceived with the fimilarity of the charac- ters to fome of theirs, read it from the left to the right, as they were wont to do, Pipi; whereas the word was to be read no other than Jebovab, and was written nei- ther in Greek nor in Samaritan characters, but in Hebrew letters, as fometimes figur'd* or however as formed by fome Greek wri- ters not expert in the Hebrew letters, as may be fecn in a fpecimen of fuch letters, given by Montfaucon*, which feem to have been written by fome Grecian who had but little knowledge of the Hebrew tongue and its characters, in which the Hebrew letter He, tho' Scbindler would have it to be the Samaritan He, refembles the Greek letter Pit and the letters Van and Jod are very fimilar in Hebrew, and both have fome likenefs to the Greek letter Iota. Drujius out of Procopius on If. lix. 13. obferves, that in his margin were written A. Th.
u Praeliminar. ad Hexapla Origen. c. 2. p. 22.
[ 6o ]
£v ITini, that is Aquila, and Theodotion fo read -, and he further obferves, that fo for- . merly they wrote the letters of the name tetragrammaton or 'Jehovah, which they read Pipi, becaufe of the fimilitude of the letterswj and Jeromx himfelf is as exprefs for it as can be, he fays the name of four letters is written with thefe, Jod >, He n» Van 1, He H, which fome not understand- ing, becaufe of the likenefs of the charac- ters, when they found it in Greek copies, ufed to read it Pipi; and elfe where y he fays, the name of God, on the plate of gold, was written in Hebrew letters, thofe above- mentioned ; hence, becaufe as R. Afariah* underftands him, he affirmed that thefe were engraved in the Ajfyrian character, he conjectures that Jerom had feen the plate of gold at Rome, which R. Eliezer ben Jofe, faw there, and that Jerom was of the mind that the prefent Hebrew letters, were then ufed by the Jews ; and indeed it is not probable that this plate mould be en- graved in the Samaritan, that is in the let-
ters
w Vid. etiam Drufium de voce Elohim & Tetragram. c. 20. &. Grotium in Matt. xxii. 44. Montfaucon.prseliminar. adHexapla Origen. vol. 2. p. 90. 184. Lexicon col. 430. * Epift ad Marcellam Tom. 3. fol. 31. B. * Ad Fabio- lam fol. 20. B. z Meor Enayim, c. 58. fol. 178. 2.
[ 6i ]
ters of the old Phoenicians or Canaanitesi the race of Canaan, whom the Jews, when this order about the plate was given to Mofes, were going to drive out of their land. It mull be owned that Origen has the fol- lowing words in a fragment3 of his; " with " the Jews the name of the four letters te f Jehovah J is ineffable, which was en- " graved on the golden plate of the high- *' priert, and with the Greeks is pro- *' nounced Lord (xvpiog) ; but in correct He- " brew copies it is written (that is, with " its four letters Jehovah, which may be " believed; but when he adds, it was writ- *' ten) in antient letters, but not in thofe " now in ufe." If he means the Samari- tan letters, as it is fuppofed he does ; this depends on a Jewifo tale he next relates, which has been already confidered.
That the Pentateuch written by Mofes was written in the fquare characters or let- ters now in ufe with the Jews, feems clear by comparing Gen. x. 3, 4. with 1 Chron. i. 6. where the perfons called Riphath and Do- danim by Mofes, are by the author of the book of Chronicles m fome copies caed Diphatb and Ro da mini ; and w ho is called Hemdan in
Gen. * Apud Montfaucon. ut fupra, p, 86.
[ 62 ]
r<&7z.xxxvi.26.is Hemram in i. Cbrou. i. 41. and Hadar in Gen. xxxvi. 39. is Hadad in 1 Chron. i. 50. The author of the book of Chronicles i thro' the fimilarity of the let- ters *1 and 1 Refo and Daletb, puts one for another, and ftill fignify the fame perfons ; £0 Riblah in Numb, xxxiv. 1 1 . and as it is read in the 2d book of Kings, and prophe- cy of "Jeremiah, is in Ezek. vi. 14. called Diblath-, on which Jerom remarks, that the near liken efs of the Hebrew letters 1 and *1 Daletb and Rejh, which are diitinguifhed by a fmall apex, it may be called Debla- iha, or Reblatba , and fo Tbeodotion reads it Deblatba in Jer. xxxix. 5. and this will account for the fame man being called Deuel and Reuel, Numb. i. 14. and ii. 14. Now this can't be owing to the miftakes of late tranfcribers, fince the fame difference is obferved in the Septnagint verfion of thefe places, at lead in moft of them, and were fo from the beginning, from the writers themfelves ; and thofe letters being much more nmilar in the Hebrew than in the Sa- maritan alphabet, the Samaritan Daletb having a hook at the back of it thus ? which ftrikes the eye at once, and eafily diftinguiflies it from °* Rejh, (hews that Mo-
Jesy
f h ]
Jes, in all probability, wrote in the for- mer and not in the latter; fo likewife dif- ferences of names in the fame books plainly arife from the fimilarity of the letters ! and 1 °Jod and Vau in the Hebrew fquare cha- racters, when there is no fuch fimilarity in the Samaritan character nt and t, as to occafion fuch differences, thus Ahan in Gen. xxxvi. 23. is Allan 1 Chron. i. 40. Vaakan Gen. xxxvi. 27. is 'Jaakan 1. Chron* i. 42. Zepho Gen. xxxvi. 11. is Zephl 1 Chron. i. 36. Shepbo in Gen. xxxvi. 23. is Shephl 1 Chron. i. qo.Alvab Gen. xxxvi. 40. is Allah 1 Chron. i. $i. P#« G^/z. xxxvi. 39. is Pal 1 Chron. i. 50. Heman Gen. 22. is Homam 1 Chron. i. 39. Klmchl on I Chron. i. 6, 7. takes notice of the differ- ence of thefe feveral words, as read in Ge- ne/Is and Chronicles, and attributes it to the fimilarity of letters ; and obferves, that let them be read as they may, they are the fame names, and fo Ben Melech after him.
Aben Ezra has helped us to another proof of the Pentateuch being written in the fquare character ; he obferves, " that the word STn in Exod. i. 10. is irregular accor- ding to the grammar, and mould be HJVn for He radical is changed into Tau, accor- ding
[ 64 ]
ding to ufual conftruction, as in Gen. i. 30. but fo it is, becaufe thefe letters are near alike in writing, there being only the duel: of a point between them, which is in the letter He, but in pronunciation and name they differ ; for at firfl it is called He, and when the point is protracted it is called Tau; and this is a fign or proof that the writing we now ufe is Hebrew :"*and as the Pen- tateuch was originally written in this cha- racter, fo it continued until the Samaritan Pentateuch was written, wThich plainly ap- pears to be copied from it, by its having the interpolations of Ezra's copy in it, which it would not have had, had it been more antient than that; and if it was firft brought to the Samaritans, as is probable, by ManaJ/eh, when he fled to them, it was in the fquare character firft introduced among them, as Dr. Prideaux ownsb, who otherwife is an advocate for the Samaritan letter being the antient Hebrew character. That this was the cafe, appears from the difference between the Hebrew and Sama- ritan Pentateuch, occafioned by the fimi- larity of the letters in the fquare character, the fame with that now in ufe with the
Jews,
b Connection, part i, p. -ft 6, 417.
[ 6; ]
yews, as has been obferved by many Teamed menc, particularly in Rejh and Daleth, fee Gen. x. 4. and xlix. 10. which fhews that the Pentateuch was originally in the mo- dern Hebrew characters, and which is fu- perior in point of antiquity to the Samari- tan, which is copied from it; and to the fame caufe, in many instances, is owing the difference between the Hebrew text and the Septuagint verfion, namely the fimi- larity of the Hebrew letters, as yerom fre- quently obferves ; for that was made out of the Chaldee tongue, as Philo the yewd affirms, that is the Hebrew according to him; and yufiin Martyr* afferts, that Mo- fes, under a divine infpiration, wrote his hiftory in Hebrew letters, (he does not fay in Samaritan, tho' he himfelf was a Sa- maritan) and that out of their antient books written in Hebrew letters, the Septuagint or 70 elders made fheir tranflation, which books in Hebrew letters were then prefer- ved by the yews in their fynagogues. Pto- lemy, king of Egypt, had only at firfl the Hebrew bible in Hebrew letters, tranfcri- bed and fent him y but not being able to
F read
c Hottinger. Amii»orin. p. 50. Carpzov. Critic facr. p. 229. 604.610. Univerfal Hiilory, vol 17. p. 305. i De vita Jofephi, 1. 1. p. 658. * Ad Grsecos, p. ij.
[ 66 ]
read and underftand it, he fent for men out of Judea to tranllate it into Greek* -, and Tertullian% affirms, that i*z the Sera- peum, or library of Ptolemy, the tranfla- tion was to be feen in his time, with the Hebrew letters themfelves, from which the tranflation was made; and certain it is, as the authors of the Univerfal Hi/lory h have obferved, that the Septuagint verfion is of higher antiquity than any of thofe fhekels which arefaid to have the Samaritan characters on them, the eldeft of which did not precede the fettlement of the high- priefthood in the Ajmonean family, that is not much above 150 years before Chrift -, and yet this is the main argument advanced in defence of the Samaritan letters being the antient Hebrew characters ; of the va- lidity of which, and the genuinefs of the Samaritan fhekels, more heareafter.
The argument in favour of the Penta- teuch being written in the fquare character, taken from the fimilarity of Daleth and jR^7j, occasioning different readings of words, nay be ufed with refpect to the fecond book of Samuel, as written in the fame cha- racter,
f Epiphan. de ponder. £ Apologet. c. 1 8-. h Us
fupra, p. 301, 304, 305.
[ 67 ]
racier, the penmen of which feem to be Gad and Nathan* fee I Chron. xxix. 19. in which the king of Zobah is called Hadade- zer, 2 Sam. viii. 3. but the writer of the book of Chronicles, generally fuppofed to be Ezra, putting Rejh for Daleth, thro' the likenefs of the letters, calls him Hada- rezer, 1 Chron. xviii. 3. and fo one of Da- vid's worthies is called Shammah the Haro- dite, 2 Sam. xxiii. 25. but in i Chron. xi. 27. Shammoth the Harorite ; where may be obferved another difference, arifing from the fame caufe, the likenefs of the letters H and n the fame man being called Sham- mah in one place, and Shammoth in the other; and that it cannot be owing to the miftakes of late tranferibers, fince the fame difference is to be obferved in the Septua- gint verfion of both places ; betides there is another difference in the name. Harodite in Sam. is written with a n Cheth, and the Harorite in Chronicles with an ft He, which two letters are alfo very fimilar in the fquare character ; whereas, neither the 3 He and A- Tau3 nor the VL Cheth and x He are at all alike in the Samaritan character. So that the fame that is called Hiddai 2 Sam. xxiii. 30. is Rural or Churai, 1 Chron. F 2 xi. 32.
f 68 ]
xi. 32. and another is called the Gadite 2 Sam. 23. 36. and Haggerz, or the Hagge- ritey 1 Chron. xi. 38. fo thro' the likenefs of Jod and ^?# in the fquare character, which have none in the Samaritan, as be- fore obferved, the king of Tyre is called Htraniy 1 Kings, v. 1, 2. and Huram 2 Chron. ii. 3. n.
^&7z Chabib or #. ilfc/fj- «S<r/^tfz T^, a Jew, who lived about the year 1480, was fhewn in the kingdom of Vakntia in Spain, a fepulchral monument of a general of A- maziah king of Judab, on the top of a mountain ; which, tho' much effaced, he was juft able to read a verfe or two in rhyme and metre, at the end of which was iTtfDN1?1; from whence he concluded that fuch kind of verfe was in ufe with his anceftors, when in their own land : and he might have concluded alfo the antiquity of the Hebrew letters, as Buxtorffk obferves, could this infcription be thought genuine ; but it is hard to conceive how a general of Amaziab, king of Judah, mould be bu- ried in Spain : and of like credit muft be accounted the grave of Adoniram, the tax- gatherer
1 R. Azariah,ImreBinah, c.6o fol. 182 k De liter.
Heb. f. 27. U de profod. metric, ad calc. Heb. Gram.
t 69 ]
gatherer for Solomon and Rehoboam, in the fame country, and found at the fame time1; and could the account be credited which Benjamin of Tndela gives of the cave of Machpe/ah, wherehe fays there are fix graves, of Abraham, IJ'aac, 'Jacob, Sarah, Rebecca and Leahy oppofite to one another, on which are written *f this is the grave of Abraham," and fo on the grave of IJ'aac, and on the reft, it would prove the very early antiquity of fuch letters; but thefe are not to be depended on. The Hebrews have five letters, which they call double letters, or final ones, be- caufe the figure of them is different at the end of a word, from what it is at the be- ginning of one, or in the middle of one ; and thefe are Mem, Nun, Tzade, Pe, and Capb, commonly called "|£)¥3D Manatzpach-, thefe muft be of very antient ufe, they are mentioned in Berefoitb Rabban, and in both the Ta/muds ; in the one ° they are faid to be ufed by the feers or prophets, and in the other p to be an Halacah or tradition of Mofes from Sinai; yea, by an antient wri- ter*1 they are faid to be known hy A bra- F 3 ham,
1 Vid. Hottinger. praefat. ad Cipp. Heb. p. 4. m fu- neral-, p ;8, 49. n Parafh. 1. fol. 1, 4. ° T. Bab. Sabbat, fol. 104.. 1. p T. Hierof. Megillah, fol. 71 4 1 PirkeEliezerc 48.
f 7° ]
ham ; and indeed they feem to be as early as the other letters in the alphabet. Hence Abpqbam de Balmis* makes the Hebrew al- pha^: :iiil' of tv/enty-ieven letters ; and Jerom { . e"ak§ of theie five final letters as of ls early, d equal ufe with the twenty- tvo letters, and !h Et -'phanius l ; and Ire- ncziis-\f before them, is thought, by Dr. Grab- l i refer to a final Hebrew letter, when he fays, uthatGod,infi^r<?w,.is called j&z- rucb (blefled) which confifts of two letters and a half;" Dr. Grabe's note upon it is, that -j is taken for half of the letter n ; but in that he is miftaken, for the word has not that letter, nor has that letter a final, but D, and the final of that does not fhor- ten, but lengthen the letter. Now if thefe final letters were of Mofes and the pro- phets, then the law and the prophets mull: be written in the Hebrew characters now in ufe, and not in the Samaritan characters, for the Samaritans have no final letters; and particularly the book of the prophet IJaiah, which was written 200 years or more before the fuppofed change of letters by Ezra, muft be written not in the Sama- ritan
r Mikneh Abraham, pag. 2. tin. 12, 13. ' Fnefat. ad
lib. Reg fol. ij.M. ' De menfur. & ponder. f Adv. Hsref. I. 2 c. 41.
[ 7' ]
ritan character, according to that notion, but in the modern Hebrew, iince the Mem final, contrary to common ufage, appears in the middle of the word POTD1? If. ix. 6. which has occafioned much fpeculation and enquiry, both among the Jews and christians, which could not appear if writ- ten in the Samaritan character •■, in which, as before obferved, are no final letters j and that it was fo read in the antient Hebrew copies, is clear from both Talmud's u, where it is written and reafoned upon, and the Jeru/a/em Talmud was finifhed A. D. 230. Jerom^ owns the reading of it, and of- fers a reafon for it, and obferves that the Mem claufimi, in the middle of the word rD"luD7 is fo written for the fake of a myf- tery, to (hew the exclufion of the jews from the kingdom of Chriif ; even that fame jferom makes this remark, who fays, it is certain that Ezra changed the Jewifh letters ; but if Ifaiah wrote in the Sama- ritan character, as that change fuppofes, it would fpoil the remark he has made; in this he contradicts himfelf. This is an obfer- vation oiWajmuttis ; but I fufpect that Waft- F 4 tnuth
H T. Hierof. Sanhedrin, fol. 27. 4. T. Bab. ib. fol. 94 1. w Apud Wafmuth Vindic. Keb. par. 1 . p. 44.
[ 7* ]
muth has miftaken Hieronymus de fancla fide, a later writer, who wrote a book againfl the Jews, for Hieronymus the antient father ; fince I can find no fuch treatife as is re- ferred to by him in Jeroms works, either genuine or afcribed to him.
The book of Daniely if written by him- felf, as it feems plainly to be, mud be written before the pretended change of let- ters by Ezra i the Jews in the Talmud* in- deed fay it was written by the men of the great fynagogue, that is the fynagogue of Ezra i but the reafon given for it is frivo- lous, as in the Glofs upon the place, that prophecy was not fuffered to be written without the land (of IfraelJ ; for did not Mofes write the Pentateuch without the land ? and was not Ezekiel ordered by God to write among the captives at the river Chebary Ezek. i. 3. and xxiv. 2. ? Jofe- phusi is exprefs for it, that Daniel wrote his own prophecies, and left them to be read, and this is clear from the book itfelf, ch. xii. 4. and from the words of Chrift in Matt. xxiv. 15. now fince this book was written partly in Hebrew, and partly in
Chaldee%
* T. Eab. BavaBathia, fol. 15. 1. * Antiqu.l 10
6, if. f. 7.
[ 73 1 Chaldee, I afk, in what letter it is mod proba- ble it was written, whether in two different characters ? which feems not at all pro- bable, and whether in one character ; what moft probably that was, whether the Sama- ritan or the iquare letter? it liiould feem more probable to be the latter, according to the h/potheiis of thofe who are for the change of letters by Ezra, who fuppofe that was the character ufed in Chaldea and Babylon, where Daniel lived; and I mould think it more probable for another reafon, becaule it was better known to the yews, for whofe ufe chiefly that book was writ- ten : and particularly it deferves confi- deration, in what letter or character the hand-writing Belfiazzar faw on the wall was written, which the Chaldeans could not read, only Daniel the Jew. It is certain the words in Daniel v. 25. are Chaldee, and had they been written in their own characters, which were the fame lince called Samaritan, as will be (hewn in the following chapter; the Chaldeans, no doubt, could have read them, though they might not have understood the meaning of them : now tho' we can't be certain of the charac- ter, yet it is probable it was the fquare
character
[ 74 ] character then and now in ufe with the yews, to which Dame/ was accuftomed before he came to Babylon, and therefore could eafily read the hand-writing, tho' without doubt it was by divine infpiration that he gave the interpretation of it. Jo- fephus ben Gorton * is quite clear in this ; the letters, he fays, were the holy tongue, that is, Hebrew, but the writing or words were the Syriac tongue, or the Chaldee -, and indeed if thefe words had been in a different character from that which Daniel wrote, it is much he had not given them in it.
Bianconi*, the laft that wrote on the an- tiquity of the Hebrew letters, is of opinion that the Chaldeans ufed the fame characters with the Hebrews. He fuppofes their lan- guage to be the fame, which he argues from the relation of Abraham and Nabor being brethren, and from the Hebrews defend- ing from the one, and from the other the Chaldeans 'y hence Jofepbus* calls the Chaldeans their kindred ; tho' perhaps the latter rather fprung from Arphacfad-,
he
3 Hift. Heb. 1. t. c. 5. p. 25. a De Antiq. li-
ter. Heb. p. 6. Bononice 1748. b Contr. Apion.
1. 1. f. 13.
[ 75 1
he urges the converfation which railed be- tween Abrahams fcrvant and Nabor's fa- mily, when he was fent thither to take a wife for Jja .,, and what palled between the men of Haran, Nahor's city, and Jacob, and between him and Rachel and Lab an, in which there appear'd to be no difficulty of under/landing one another. All which is true, and yet the language might not be exactly the fame ; the Chaldee being a dia- lect of the Hebrew, might be underflood by the Hebrews, elpecially in thofe earlier and purer times, when the deviation from the Hebrew might not be fo great as after- wards ; and yet it is certain that "Jacob and Laban -ifed a different language, at the time of their covenanting together, and gave different names to the heap which was the witncfs between them, tho' to the fame fenfe. This learned writer indeed thinks that the Chaldean name of it was given by anticipation, and that it was called fo by Laban's fons afterwards, which being known to Mofes, he inferted it : but be it fo, that will prove the difference of that language in the times of Mofes at leaft, and which, in the times of Hezekiah, appears to be (till more different from the Hebrew, 4 fince
[ 76 ]
fince the common people among the Jews underftood it not, 2 Kings xviii. 26. and in the times of the captivity, fome of the He- brews, carried captive, were taught the Chaldean tongue, Dan. i. 4. and the diffe- rence between that and the Hebrew may be feen in the books of Daniel and Ezra, yea, it is called a language not known nor underftood by the 'Jews, Jer. v. 15. now from the famenefs of language, as this wri- ter fuppofes, he proceeds to argue the fame- nefs of character, which however probable it may be thought to be, it is not conclu- five. The Syriac and Chaldee are nearer to each other, than either to the Hebrew, and yet their characters are very different, at leaft as we now have them. But what this learned writer feems chiefly to depend up- on, and what he thinks to be greatly to his purpofe is, the inftance of Cyrus being able to read the prophecies in Ifaiah, concern- ing himfelf, according to Jofephus*-, which he imagines he could not have done, if the Chaldee and Hebrew characters were not the fame. He fuppofes he underftood the Chal- dee language, and could read that, having been fome time in the court of Darius ;
but
e Anticj. 1. 11. c. 1. f. 2.
f 77 ] but that is not quite certain, fince at his taking of Babylon it does not appear that the Chaldee tongue was much known in his army ; for he then gave orders, accord- ing to Xenophon d, to thofe who under- ftood the Syrian or Chaldee language to proclaim that fuch of the inhabitants that were found in the ftreets, mould be flain, but thofe that kept within doors mould be fafe; and it was immediately after this, even in the firft year of his reign with Da- rius* that he gave liberty to the Jews to re- turn to their own land, when he had know- ledge of the prophecy of Ifaiah concerning himfelf; and befides, why may he not be thought to know the Hebrew character alfo as well as the Chaldee* fuppofing them different ? he was a very enterpriiing prince and had conquered many nations, and might be mafter of many languages, as Mithridates king of Pontus was, and efpe- cially of the Hebrew , if what is faid by an Arabic writer e is true, that he married the lifter of Zernbbabely and his mother alfo is faid -j- to be a Jewefs; and after all, the whole depends upon the teftimony of Jo-
fephus,
d Cyropoedia, 1. 7. c. 23. e Abulpharag. Hift.
Dynaft. dyn. 5. p. 82. f Hottinger. apud Pfeiffer.
Theolog. Jud. Exercitat. 7. c. 1. th. 1.
[ 78 ] fephus, that he did read the prophecy of Ifaiah, who produces no authority for it ; and if he did read it, it might be through an interpreter, or as tranflated for him, fuppofing him ignorant of the Hebrew language and its character : and it can hardly be thought that when the fame Jo- fephus fays f that Alexander was (hewn the prophecy in Daniel concerning himfelf, that he understood Hebrew, or the lan- guage in which it was written, but that it was read and interpreted to him. There is a paffage I confefs in 'Jofephus % which makes the Hebrew and Syriac character very fimilar ; for according to him, Deme- trius the librarian of Ptolemy Philadelphia told the king when he acquainted him with the Jewifh writings, that their character was very much like to the Syriac letters, and were pronounced like to them ; but ac- cording to Arifiaus b, and whofe words are alfo prefer ved in Eufebius c, Demetrius faid very much the contrary -, that the Jews, as the Egyptians, had a peculiar character, and a peculiar pronunciation ; fome think they ufed the Syriac, but it is
not
f Antiqu. 1. II. C. 8. f. 5. a Antiqu. I. 12. c. 2. f . 1 .
b Hiit. 72. Interpr. p. 4. 5. c Prsepar. Evangel. b. 8. c. 2. p. 350.
t 79 ]
not fo, fays he, it is in another form and manner.
Thus have I traced the Hebrew letters and characters from the beginning of them to the times of Ezra, when the fuppofed change took place ; what I undertook to mew was no more than that it is probable that the ancient letters of the Jews, and which they have always retained, are the fquare letters, as they are commonly called, or thofe in which the facred fcrip- tures are now extant ; and I think I have made it appear to be probable. I lay no ftrefs on the pillars of Seth, nor the tables of Caiman, and the writing of Enoch, nor the letters of the law, and the fancies of the Jews about them and the manna, nor upon any infcription on fepulchral monuments ; but I think it is probable, that as the nrii language men fpoke and was after the confulion of tongues called the Hebrew language, to diilinguim it from others, if there were letters before that confulion, as it feems reafonable to fuppofe there were, they were fuch as were proper and peculiar to it, and it is probable that they afterwards continued in it ; and where- as the alphabet of the Hebrew language ap- pears
r 8° ]
pears to be the firftof the oriental languages, from whence the reft have the names, or- der, and number of their letters, it is pro- bable, yea it feems more than probable, that the letters of the Hebrew alphabet were thofe of the fquare kind, fince to them only the names of the letters in their fig- nification correfpond : it is probable that the law of the ten commands, was written and given in thofe characters, and not in the Samaritan -, it is more probable the letters on the written mountains, fuppofed to be written by the Ifraelites in the wil- dernefs, when encamped, and on their travels there, were of the fame kind, ra- ther than of the Samaritan, or any other ; it is probable, that the letters on the plate of gold the high prieft wore on his fore- head were the fame as now in ufe, and that Mofes wrote his Pentateuch, in the fame character 3 that Ifaiah alfo wrote his prophe- cies in the fame ; and that the book of Da- niel, and particularly the hand-writing that terrified Beljhazzar, were written in the fame j nor is there any juft reafon to believe that the Jews ever had any other fort of letters, nor that Ezra changed their an- cient ones for thofe; for, as has been already 4 obferved,
[ «i ] ooferveef, he never Would have done it without a divine command, which it does not appear he had ; and if he would have done it, and had had ever fuch an inclina- tion to it, he never could have done it; nor is it credible that the Jews in Babylon fo forgot their language, and their letters, as to make fuch a change neceiTary, which is fuggefted*. Can it be thought that the men who remembered the firit. temple in its glory ,v and wept at laying the foundation of the fecond, Ezra iii. 12. fhould forget their language and the alphabet of it, when the greater part were only fifty-two years there ? for the feventy years are to be reck- oned from the fourth of cJehoiakimi eighteen years before the deftrudion of the city and temple by Nebuchadnezzar 3 and their being carried captive by him into Babylon ; where they lived together in bo- dies, did not mix with the Cbaldceans, nor intermarry with them, and converfed toge- ther in their own language, had their fa- cred books in it to read, held a conefpon- dence with 'Jeremiah bv letters, at the firft of the captivity, and had the miniitry and fermons of Ezekiel to attend upon in it Ezek. i. 1, and iii. 15, and xxx. 30, 33. G Jer*
* Elise Pracfat. Methurgeman.
[ 82 ]
Jer. xxix. i, 25, 31. nor is it true that their language was corrupted in Babylon ; the captives that returned fpoke the lan- guage of the Jews purely, only the chil- dren of fome few, whofe fathers had mar- ried wives, not in Babylon, but women of AJhdod, Amnion, and Moab, after the re- turn from the captivity, who fpoke half in the language of thofe peGple, for which JNehemiah reproved them j and this fhews it was not a general thing : and certain it is that the prophets Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi wrote in pure Hebrew, as it was in the days of Mofes -, the fame roots, prefixes, fuffixes, idioms, conftructions, and terminations, are to be obferved in them as in the Pentateuch of Mofes, Up- on the whole, the Jews certainly fpoke the Hebrew language after their return from the captivity, and fome when they came back to Perfia again, in Nehemi- ah's time ; nor had he forgot it, nor dif- ufed it, for walking before Sufa, the chief city of Perfia, as Jofephus * relates, he overheard fome ftrangers lately come from yerujalem difcourfing together in the He- brew tongue, and understanding them, he
aiked
* Antiqu. 1. xi. c. 5. f. 6.
[ h ]
afked the queftions as in Neh. i. 2. he hirri- felf wrote in Hebrew, as did Ezra, not only his own book, but the books of Chro- nicles, as is fuppofed ; yea, fome of the Pfalms were written after the return from the captivity, as Pf. cxxvi. cxxxvii. and even as late as the times of Antiochus Epipbanesj and all in pure Hebrew. Daniel in the captivity wrote in Hebrew, excepting what concerned the Chaldaam ; and fo did Eze- kiel. The book of EJlber, fuppofed to be written by Mordecai, was written in pure Hebrew -, and if Ahafuerus was Xerxes, it mufl be written many years after the cap- tivity ; and in his time, Pf. lxxxviii. is by fome thought to be written. It is the na- ture and glory of the Hebrew language to have been always conftant and invariable, and fo it is probable its letters were 3 the Jews glory in their facred writings, that no innovation was ever made in them. y<j- fephus 6 fays, " it is manifeft in fact in what " veneration and credit we have our let- <f ters or books ; for though fo many ages " are pad:, (as almoft 3000 years, as he " fays) yet no man has dared to add any " thing to them, nor to take any thing G 2 " from
s Cont. Apion. 1. i. f 8.
[ «4 ]
" from them, nor to change them :" it is plain from hence, that this hiftorian knew nothing of the change of the letters of the facred writings made by Ezra, which muft be an innovation in them. Philo the yew h, fays " our law only is firm, <c immoveable, unfhaken, fealed as it were " with the feals of nature; it remains " firmly from the time it was written, " until now ; and it is to be hoped it will " remain immortal throughout all ages, " as long as do the fun and moon, the " whole heaven, and the world." The eighth article of the Jewi/b creed runs thus : * " I believe with a perfect faith, i. e. «c fincerely, that the whole law which is " now in our hands, is that which was " given to Mofes our mafter, on whom be 11 peace, without any change and altera- " tion;" but we have a greater teftimony than thefe, of the unalterablenefs of the law, and even of the letters in which it was written, the words of Chrijl in Matt, v. 18. for verily I fay unto y on > 'till heaven and earth pajs away, 07ie jot or one tittle pall in no wife pafs from the law, till all be
fulfilled ';
11 De vita Mofis 1. z 656. * Seder Tephillah, fol. 86. 2. Abarbinel. Paerfat. in Jer.
[ 85 ]
fulfilled', which though it is not to be un- derstood of the bare letter Tod, which as it is fometimes redundant, fo in fome places wanting, as in i Sam. xxi. 2. 2 Sam. xvi. 23. and xxi. 8. Nebemiab xii. 46. and though it is a proverbial expref- fion, fignifying the unchangeablenefs and unalterablenefs of the law, with refpecl: to the leaft precept in it ; yet it is founded upon, and is an allulion to the writing of the law, and the letters of it; not to any copy of it in any language whatever ; but to the original writing of it, and its letters, in which it had continued unto his time, and in which the Iota or Tod is the leait of the letters ; and therefore could have no refpecl; to the Samaritan copy of the law, in which language it is not the lead letter, but a very large one ; which has befides the ftroke above, three large prongs, de- fending from it, each of' which is as large again as the Hebrew Tod; which is fo fmall, that Irenceus ' calls it half a letter ; and to which our Lord manifestly refers : and this makes it at leaft highly probable, that the law was originally written not in the Samaritan, but in the fquare Hebrew G 3 letters,
'Adv. Hjeref. 1. 2. c, 41.
[ 86 ]
letters, which had unalterably remained unto the times of Chrift ; all which make it greatly probable, that the Jews only had one fort of letters, which always remained with them, and are what are extant to this day.
Bianconi^t the learned writer before- mentioned, is quite clear in it, that the Hebrew letters were never changed by Ezra, nor by any public authority ; and which he judges improbable, fince neither he nor yofephus make mention of any fuch change 5 and from the great numbers of Jews left in the land at the captivity, and the return of multitudes from it; and from Ezras coming to them with a large num- ber alfo, and that fixty or eighty years af- ter the return of the firft ; and from the prophecies of Haggai and Zechariah> and from the fhekels in the times of the Macca- bees, which fuppofing fuch a change would have been not in the Samaritan, but in the fquare character ; and from the unlike- lihood of a conquered people-taking the characters of an enemy's language, and quitting their own, and that after they had f)een many years delivered from them.
He
k De Antiqu. Liter. Heb. p. \ 8.-22, 25, 26,
I 87 ]
He fuppofes, that the Hebrews, Chaldce- ans, Phoenicians, and Samaritans, had all the fame characters originally, and that there was a change made among the Jews long after the times of Ezra, from the ancient character to the fquare one ; and that it began in the fhekels, in the time of the Maccabees, in which he obferved a mix- ture of the ancient and modern characters, and fuppofes, that by little and little the change was made, from frequent tranf- cribing'the Bible, and daily writing -, and that the modern letters were gradually formed from ufe, and the fwift manner of writing, and for the convenience of it : but it does not feem probable that a cha- racter mould be mended through fwiftnefs of writing, and that fuch a grand, majeftic, regular, and well-formed character, as the fquare letter is, mould be produced in that way ; but rather that the ill-fhaped, ragged, rough, and deformed Samaritan character, mould fpring from thence ; and which feems to be the fact, but not fo late as the times of the Maccabees ; but as early as the divifion and difperiion of the nations, in the times of Peleg ; fo Gaffarellus * ob- G 4 ferves,
* Unheard-of Guriofities, c. 13. f. 6. p. 40 5 .
[ 88 ]
fervcs, that the Samaritan characters are corrupted from the Hebrew ; and he adds, this is {o certain a truth, as that it is a point of infinite perverfenefs to offer to doubt of it. According to Dr. Bernard's table of alphabets, called Orbis eruditi Literatura a charatlere Samaritico deducla, it has been thought, that the letters of all nations muft have fprung from the Sama- ritan character; but this feems to depend much on fancy and imagination; and I am inclined to think, that all are deducible from the Hebrew fquare character, the Ajj'yrian firft, then the Phoenician, from that the Greek, and fo on; according to Hermatinns Hugo l, the Hebrew letters (the prefent ones) were the firft ; next fprung from them the Chaldcean letters, which he fays are fcarce extant ; then the Affyrian, or Babylonian, and the Syriac, or Ara- maean, and from the Syriac, the Samaritan.
The principal argument by which die hypothecs oppofed, is iupported, is taken from fome coins or fhekels, laid to be dug up in Judea, with thefe words on them, Jerujalem the holy, and the foekel of Ijrael, the letters of which, it is af-
ferted?
* De prima Scribencji orig. p. 54.
[ h ]
ferted, agree, in form, with the Samari~ tan. Now as the Samaritans, becaufe of their averfion to the Jews, and the ten tribes after their feparation from the other two, had nothing to do with Jeriifalem, nor any efteem for it, neither of them can be thought to ftrike thefe pieces ; and it is inferred from hence, that they mud have belonged to the Jews before the captivity, and to the Ifradites before the feparation of the ten tribes -, and confequently the Samaritan letters, fuppofed to be the fame with thofe on the coins, were the ancient Hebrew characters, and in which the books of the Old Teflament were written -, and this argument is thought to be unanfwer- able : but it mould be obferved, that the letters on the moil unexceptionable of thefe coins differ considerably from thofe in the Samaritan Pentateuch, and feem to refemble, in fome inftances, the Hebrew almoft as much as the Samaritan ; and be- fides the oldeft of them do not precede the fettlement of the high-priefthood in the Afmoncean family, and were not much above one hundred and fifty years before the aera of Chrift, and fome of them are
later; 4
[ 9° J
later m ; to which may be added, there are coins, both filver and brafs, with in- fcriptions in the fquare character, which according to them are much more ancient than the other, and fo prove the fuperior antiquity of the fquare character to that of the Samaritan. Rab. Azariah fays n, that he faw among fome ancient coins at Mantua, a filver coin which had on one fide of it the form of a man's head, and round about it, King Solomon, in the holy tongue, and fquare writing, and on the other fide the form of the temple, and round about it written the temple of Solo- mon ; and Hottinger ° affirms, he faw one of the fame fort in the collection of the Elector Palatine. The Jews in their Tal- mud p, ipeak of a yerufalem coin, which had David and Solomon on one fide, and the words, yerufalem, the holy city, on the other fide ; and of a coin of Abrahams, having on one fide, the Hebrew words for an old man and an old woman, and on the other fide, thofe, for a young man and a young woman-, and the learned Chrifiopher
Wagenfeil
m See the Univerfal Hiftory, vol. xvii, p. 302, 303, 304. n Meor Enayim, c. 58. fol. 174, 2. See fol. 54.
0 Praefat. r.d Cippi Heb. p. 41. p T.Bab. Bava Kama, fol. 97, z. vid. Wafer, de Num. antiqu. 1. 2. c. 5.
[ 9' ]
Wagenfeil * afTures us, he had both thefe coins in his own poffeffion, of which he gives the figures with the words on them, in the fquare letters ; befides Abraham, the Jews * fpeak of three more, that coined money, Jojhua, JDavid, and Mor- decai-, the coin of Jojhua had on one fide a bullock, and on the other, an unicorn. See Deut. xxxiii. 17. that of David's had a ftaff and fcrip on one fide, and a tower on the other j that of Mordecai's had fackcloth and allies on one fide, and a crown of glory on the other 5 elfewhere -j- it is faid, it had Mordecai on one fide, and E/iher on the other : there was alfo a coin of Mofes -y I myfelf have feen a coin of his r, having on one fide, his face, with his ears horned, like rams horns, and un- derneath is the word nt^D> in fquare cha- racters, and on the other fide, the firft commandment, in the fame character, *p fVfV $h and thou Jh alt have no other God before me -, and which exactly agrees with one Mr. Selden ' had in his poffefilon, found among fome rubbifh at Skene in
Surry.
« Sotah, p. 574, 575. * Berefhit Rabba, Parafh. 39. fol. 34, 4. f Midrafli Efther, fol. 95, 4. r Penes Mr. Richard Hall in Southwark. s De Jure Naturae, 1. 2. c. 6, p. 187.
t 92 ]
Surry, It will be faid, thefe coins are fpu- rious -, the fame may be, and is faid of thofe that have the Samaritan characters on them; nor is there any reafon to believe that thofe (hekels or coins which have on them, Jerufalem the holy, and the fo eke I of Jfrael, are any of them indifputably ge- nuine. Ottius and Re/and, who have ap- plied themfelves clofely to the ftudy of thofe coins, have as good as confeifed it ; and Spanheim, by what he has fai , ap- pears to be in a very great doubt about it1. The celebrated Charles Patin, fo famous for his fkill in coins and medals, and who had free accefs to the cabinets of all the princes in Europe, declared many years ago to the learned Chrijlopher Wagenfeil* with great affurance, that he never found in thofe collections, an Hebrew coin, but what was manifestly fpurious : where- fore thefe coins are not to be depended on, nor can any fufficient argument be drawn from them in favour of any hypothecs. Moreover, it has been faid; that the anci- ent Hebrew or Samaritan characters, were given to the Cuthites or Samaritans, and
left
* Univerfal Hiftory, ut fupra, p. 303. u Ut fupra, P. 576-
f 93 1
left with them out of hatred to them, and that the fquare letters in the times of Ez- ra were chofen, taken, and retained by the yews . for their ufe ; but then how comes it to pafs that the Samaritan charac- ters were re-arTumed and infcribed on the coins three hundred years after, namely, on thofe of Simon the high prieft, of jfa- nathan his brother, and of John Hyrcanusy his fon, as the coins published by Mr. Swinton (hew w ? and by Jobn Hyrcanus, the 'aft of thefe, Samaria was deftroyed, the temple in Gerizzim demolished, after it had ftood two hundred years, and the Samaritans made tributary to the yews; and it is obfervable, that upon the coin of HyrcamiSy on one fide are Samaritan let- ters, and on the other Greek letters, and which was ufual with the Carthaginians, Syrians, and Sidonians ; and there is an in- ftance of it in a coin of Demetrius : x and by the way, this furnifhes us with an anfwer to a queftion of Bianconi y, who afks, why the Maccabees did not put Greek letters on their money, a well known cuftom in
that
w Diflert. de Num. Samar. p. 46,49,61. x Montfaucon. Diar. Italic, p. 355. / De Antiqu. Liter. Heb. p 23, 24.
[ 94 ]
that age, and common to all the eaft, for it feems he never faw any -, and adds, that Jewi/h coins with two forts of letters Were never feen. But to proceed ; from the different letters on the coin of Hyrcanus, from the one, it can no more be inferred, that Samaritan letters were in ufe among the jfewsy than that from the other, Greek letters were; and though I profefs no fkill in coins, I mould think that the reafon of thofe different characters were defigned by Hyrcanus as an infult on both people, and as a triumph over them, and to perpetuate the fame of his conquefls both over the Samaritans and the Greeks, or Syro Mace- donians : however, it appears, that from thefe coins no argument can be taken to fupport the hypothens, that the ancient Hebrew characters were the Samaritan ; and indeed it is entirely inconnftent with it ; for how does it appear that thofe let- ters were left to the Samaritans, and others taken by the Jews ? and it is alfo clear that there is no neceffity to give into the notion of a twofold character in ufe with the Jews, the one facred, in which their holy books were written, namely, 4 the
t 95 J
the fquare character ; and the other com- mon, ufed in coins and civil affairs, as the Samaritan-, to which fome Jews z and chris- tians a feem to have been led by the above coins ; for though the Egyptians b had their facred characters and their common ones, and fo had the Greeks e yet not the Jews, whofe priefts had no juggling tricks to play, as the priefts of Egypt and Greece had -, and though fome later Jews have given into the notion of a double charac- ter, as in ufe formerly, yet it is not men- tioned in their ancient writings, as if they had one for the fancluary and facred ufes, and another for common ufe ; the only place I have met with, that feems to favour it, is the Targum of "Jonathan, on Gen. xxxii. 2. " and he called the name of the " place in the language of the holy houfe, " Mahanaim" which is not to be rendered the language of the houfe of the fancluary, or the temple, as by fome, fince that is ufually called, t£Hp£ rV:i or tttJHplE, as ire Gen. xxviii. iy3 22. and not KS^llp no as
here ;
*Maimon. & BartenorainMifn. Yadaim,c. 4. f. 5. a Vid. Buxtorf. de Lit. Heb. f. 45 . b Herodot. Euterpe, five, 1 2. c. 36. Diodor. Sicul. 1. i. p. 72. & 1. 3. p. 144. Clement. Alex. Stromat. 1. 5. p. 555. c Theodoret. in Gen. Quseft. 60.
[ 96 ]
here ; but the language of the holy houfe* or family, the people of God, that is, the Hebrew tongue ; to which may be added, an ancient writer among the chriftians, Ire- nceus*, who fays, that" the ancient and nrfl letters of the Hebrews, and called facer dotal, are ten in number y but that he means to dif- tinguifh them from any other letters or cha- racters, ufed by the Hebrews, does not appear; befides, he fpeaks only of ten, and what he means is not eafy to fay -, however, by them he cannot mean the Samaritan letters, becaufe among thefe letters he reckons the Tod, which he calls half a letter, which cannot agree with the Samaritan Tod, but does with that of the fquare character.
* Adv. Haeref. 1. 2. c 41.
CHAP.
[ 97 ]
CHAP. III.
Concerning the Original of the Samaritans* their Language and Letters.
HAVING, in the preceding Chapter* fhewn that it is probable that the Hebrews always had the fame letters, with- out any material change or alteration, and which have been retained by them, and are in ufe to this day; I {hall endeavour, in this chapter, to make it appear as probable* that the Samaritans always had diftinct letters from the Jews, and retained them ; fo that there never was any commutation of letters between them : and in order to fet this in as clear a light as I can3 it may be proper to enquire into the original of letters, and particularly of the Samari- tans.
It is highly probable that there were let- ters before the flood, as already hinted, and fo before the confufion of tongues, which, as the firft language they belonged to, were pure and uncorrupt,and the original of others; which firft letters were the Hebrew, that H being
[ 98 ]
being the firft tongue, as Hermannus Hugo d obferves ; nor, as he adds, did the figures of letters begin to differ before the diverfity of languages at Babel. But my enquiry is, concerning the firft letters after the divifion of tongues ; and thefe are claimed by vari- ous nations : fome fay they were the inven- tion of the Egyptians, others of the Phoeni- cians, and others of the Chaldceans c. Many afcribe the invention of letters to the Egyp- tians, to the Thoth, Taautus, the Mercury of the Egyptians, as Sanchoniatho f, Gellius g, and others, as fome in Plato * ; but Pliny fays h the P Phoenicians bear away the glory of it ', and if fame is to be credited, as Lucan l exprefTes it, they were the firft. that dared to mark words by figures. Suidas -j- afcribes the invention of letters to them, and i% does Melak; but Vojfias, in hisobfervations on him, is of opinion, that by letters he means numbers, and that Arithmetic and Ajironomy were the invention of the Phoe- nicians,
d De prima Scribendi Orig. c. 3. p. 42, 43. e Theo- philus ad Autolyc. 1. 3. prope iinem. f Apud Eufeb. Evangel. Praepar. 1. 1. p. 31. s Apud Plin. Nat. Hift. 1. 7. c. 56. * In Philebo, p. 374. & in Phaedro, p. 1240. h Piin. 1. q. c. 12. l Phssnices primi, &c.Phar. fal. 1. 3. v. 220. So Critias, apud Athenaeum, 1. i.e. 22. p. 28. f In voce ypa.ppa.'w, and in Kao/xo?. k De Situ Orbis, I. i.e. 12.
[ 99 ] nicians, which need the affiftance of num- bers ; and perhaps the true realbn why let- ters have been thought to be found out by them is, becaufe they firft brought them, into Greece -, but as Dr. Cumberland 1 re- marks, the Chaldeans and Ajfyridns will not grant them this honour, but contend for an earlier invention of them, and that the inventors lived among them, and not in Phoenicia, nor in Egypt ; and Pliny m is of opinion, that the Ajjyrian letters were al- ways, or that the Ajjyrians always had let- ters ; which he confirms by the teftimonies of Epigenes, Berofus and Critodemus, who fay, they had obiervations of the ftars in- fcribed on bricks, for a long courfe of years paft ; as they might have from the begin- ning of their nation, or nearly, and which was very early : it was in their country the confufion of tongues was made ; and their language comes near to the Hebrew, the firft and pure language, from which theirs is a deviation ; and fo their letters might be taken from theirs, though greatly cor- rupted. Ellas * obferves that the Syrian language is nearer!: to the holy, or Hebrew language, of all languages ; and quotes H 2 Aben
1 Sanchoniatho, p. igi. ™ Ut fupra, 1, 7, c. 56. * Pra?- /"at. ad Methurgeman.
[ ioo ]
Aben Ezra as of opinion that the Syrian language is no other than the holy tongue corrupted ; which corruption Elias thinks took place after Abraham departed from Chaldea, though perhaps it might be fooner; fo Ephrem Syrus, who well underftood that language, fays *, that the Syrian language has an affinity with the Hebrew, and in fome refpects nearer reaches the fenfe of the fcriptures ; and R. David Ganz -f* ob- ferves, that thofe who were nearer! to the place where the confufion was made, were purer and nearer to the holy tongue, as th Syrians and Arabians ; the Ajfyrian, Chaldee, and Syrian language and letters were the fame ; and they are of great affinity, if not the fame, with the old Phoenician, now called the Samaritan, as will be feen here- after -, and the duels of their letters may well be thought to be had from the He- brew ; but as the Ajjyrians are the firfr. the heathen writers had knowledge of, to them they impute the original of letters, as many do n. Diodorus Siculus ° relates, that fome fay the Syrians (that is, the Af-
fyrians)
* Apud Bafil. in Hexaemeron, Homil. 2. f Tzemach David, par. 2. fol. 4. 1. n Vide Alex. ab. Alex. Ge- nial. Pier. 1, 2. c. 30. ° Bibliothec. 1. 5. p. 340. ,
[ 1°' ]
Jyrians) were the inventors of letters ; and Eufebius alfo obferves p the fame, that fome fay, the Syrians flrft devifed letters; and he feems willing to allow it, provided that by Syrians are meant Hebrews ; but no doubt thofe writers intended the Syrians or AJfy- rians, commonly fo called : fome, in Clemens of Alexandria % join the AJfyrians and Phce- nicians together, as the inventors of letters ; but the real fact feems to be as follows :
The Phoenicians received their letters from the AJfyrians or Syrians, and not from the Hebrews, as fome have thought -, not from Abraham the anceftor of them, who, according to Suidas*, invented the holy letters and language, the knowledge of which he fays, the Hebrews had, as be- ing his difciples and pofterity : that he in- vented the letters and language, may be doubted ; but that he fpoke it is not be queftioned, fince he was forty-eight years of age, when the confufion of tongues was made, as before obferved, and therefore fpoke the pure language ; yea, E/ias Le- ruita • fays, it was clear to him that language was confounded immediately after he went H 3 from
P Praspar. Evangel, ut fupra. "J Stromat. 1. l. p. 307. 1 In voce A%xa/A. » Prsfat, ad Methurgeman.
[ I02 ]
from Chaldea, and that he and his ancef- tors fpoke the holy tongue as received from Adam, to Noab9 which may be admitted; but it cannot by any means be admitted, that when he came among the Canaanites, that he either learned the primitive or He- brew language from them, as fome have fancied, which they neither had, nor he needed, fince he fpoke it before -, or that he taught it them. Eupo/emus and Artapa- iius, who fay ', that Abraham taught the 'Phoenicians AJironomy, yet don't pretend that he taught them letters ; nor is there any foundation for the one or the other, lince he chofe not to have fuch a free con- verfation and fociety with them as thefe required, who would not fo much as bury his dead with them, nor fufFer his fon to intermarry with them ; and the like pre- caution ljaac his fon took with refpect to Jacob, who for fome years was out of the land, and when he returned, was but a fojourner in it, as his fathers had been ; and after a while went down with his pofte- rity into Egypt, where they abode at lean: two hundred years j and when they came
from
* A pud Eufeb. Prasnar. Evangel. I. 9. c 17, 18.
[ i°3 ]
from thence, and after forty years travel in the wildernefs, and entered the land of Ca- naan, the inhabitants were either deftroyed by them, or they fled before them, and even at the report of their coming*; and fo had no time to learn a language of them, or receive letters from them. Cadmus, the 'Phoenician, whom Ifocrates -j- calls the Si- donian, is generally fuppofedtogo from Phoe- nicia to Greece, in the times of Jojhua, whither he carried letters, and therefore muft be pofTerTed of them before Jq/bua entered Ca?iaan ; he is faid to come to Rhodes in Greece, and at Lindus to offer to Lindia Minerva a brafs pot with Phoenici- an letters on it ; and the huge ferpents, who, upon his coming thither, are faid J to wafte that country, feem to be no other than the Hivites, the fame with the Cadmo- nitesj Gen. xv. 19. which the word Bivites fignifies, whom Cadmus brought with him thither. Others of the Phoenicians or Ca- naanites fled into Africa ', particularly the Girgajites, as is alferted in the 'Jerufalem H 4 Tat-
* Targum. in Cant. 3. 5. f Helens Laudat. in fine. X Diodor. Sic. 1. 5 p. 329, ' T. Bab. Sanhedrii^
fol . 9 1 . 1 . 2
[ I04 ] Talmud u, and is confirmed by Procopius w, who fays they came into Numidia, where they had a garrifon in the place where in his time was the city of Tingis (now called Tangier), where they erected two pillars of white ftone, then in being, A. D. 540, which he himfelf faw and read, on which inP/6^;z/<:/^ letters were written, "we " are they that fled from the face of Jefus, *' (ov jofouaj the robber, the Ion of Nave u (or Nun J." Suidas * fays, it was written, we are the Canaanites -, which is a full proof they had letters before the times of Jo/hua, and did not learn them of the Ifraelites when they came into Canaan ; befides, it is clear from the lcriptures alfo, that they had letters before that time, as appears from the names of fome cities among them, particularly Debir, which in the Perjian language, as Kimcbi* from the Rabbins fays, fignifies a book; and which place was alfo called Kirjath-fannab, and Kirjath-fepber, which fignify, that it was a city where either there was an academy for the in-
ftruction
n T. Hierof. Sheviith, fol. 37. 3. w Vandalic.l. 2. p. 13^. apud Prideaux. Not. ad Marmor. Arundel. Tingit. p. 139, 140. Evagrii Ecclef Hift. I. 4. c. 18. * In voce yjawaiv, Co Athanafius, contr. Gentes, p. 16. x Commen\ in Jud, 1. 1. T, Bab. Avodah Zarah, fol. 24. 2.
[ "5 ]
ilr uction of perfons, or a library of books, or where the archives of the country were kept, a city of Archives, as the Targum, which fuppofes letters ; and the Septuagint render it a city of letters, yofb. xv. 49. from all which it feems plain, that the Phcenici- ans or Canaanites did not receive letters from the Hebrews, but rather from the Af- fyrians or Syria?2s.
The Afyrians or Syrians, though they may be difiinguimed, the one having their name from AJhur, a fon of Shem, and the other from Aram, 2. younger fon of his, Gen. x. 22. hence they are called in Strabo y Aramaeans or Arimei -, and in the times of Ahaz king of Judab there were both a king of Ajfyria, and a king of Syria, yet thefe two names are often confounded, and indifferently ufed by the ancients, as if the fame people, Syria being commonly thought to be a contraction of Ajfyria z > fo Lucian of Samofata in Syria, calls him- felf an AJfyrian % and on the other hand, Tatian the AJfyrian, is called by Clemens of Alexandria b, a Syrian ; thefe countries be- ing contiguous, yea, the one a part of the
other,
yGeograph. I. 16. p. 540. 2 Univerfal Hiftory, vol. 2; p. 255. * De Dea Syrise, p, 1 . b Stromac, 1. 3. p. 460,
[ "6 ]
other, they may very well be called the one and the rfher -, the Syrians, according to Suidas %;, have their name from the Af- Jyrians -, hence IJidore c fays, whom the anci- ents called Affyrians we call Syrians -, fo Juftin d remarks, that the Affyrians, who were afterwards called Syrians, held the empire three hundred years ; and the fame people who, according to Herodotus*, were by the Greeks called Syrians, are by the Barbarians called Affyrians, among whom were the Chaldeans ; and Strabo obferves f, that Semiramis and Ninus were called Syrians, by the one Babylon the royal city was built, and by the other Nineveh, the metropolis of Affyria ; and that the fame language was ufed both without and within the Eu- phrates, that is, by the Syrians ftrictly fo called, and by the Babylonians or Chaldcz- ans : and it need not feem ftrange that the Phoenicians mould receive their letters from thefe people, fince they were their neighbours, and lived fo near them. He- rodotus g fpeaks of them as fpringing out of Syria, and dwelling in Syria, and of
Phce-
* In voce Aa-crv^oi. e Orig. 1. 9. c. 2. d A Trogo I. 1. c. 2. e Polymnia, five, 1. 7. c. 63. f Geograph. 1. 2. p. 58. 8 Clio, five, 1. i.e. 105. & Euterpe, five, 1, 2. c. 116.
[ *°7 ]
Phoenicians and Syrians as together in Pa- lefiine h. Phoenicia is often defcribed as in- cluded in Syria, and as a part of it ; fo Diodorus Siculus l, fpeaking of Caele- Sy- ria, adds, in which Phoenicia is compre- hended , and Strabo k fays, fome divide all Syria into Coele- Syrians and Phoenicians ; and Clemens of Alexandria x calls Phoenicia, Phoenicia of the Syrians ; and IJidore m ob- ferves, that £yr/tf has in it, the provinces Comagene, Phoenicia, and Pale/line; fo P//- #y n : P/&/7<? * the JVw afferts, that Phoeni- cia, Coele- Syria, and Pale/line, went by the common name of Canaan in the times of Mofes ; and the Phoenicians and AJJyrians are reckoned as one by Macrobius ° -, with all which agree fome paffages of fcripture ; the woman of Canaan, in Mat. xv. 22. is called a Syro-Phcenician in .Mzr^ vii. 26. fo the difciples are faid to fail into Syria, and land at Tyre the chief city in Phoe- nicia, ABs xxi. 3. and as their country was much the fame, fo their manners ; hence the proverb p, " the Syrians againft
the
h Euterpe, five, I. 2. c 104. & L 4. c. 89. f Bibliothec. 1. (8. p. 591. k Geograph. 1. 16. p. 515. ' Admon. ad Grasc. p. 25. m Orig. 1. 14. c. 3. n Nat. Hilt. 1. 5. c. 12. * De vita Mofis 1. 1. p. 627. ° Saturnal. I, i„ c. 21. p Vid. Suidam in voce <rv^o>, & Reinef. de Ling. Funic, p. 1 j.
[ »°8 J
the Phoenicians" fignifying, their being a- Jike as to temper and behaviour ; their re- ligion and deities were the fame; the rites of Adonis were common to them both ; Adad, the god of the Ajjyrians \ is the fame with the Adodus of the Phoenicians * ; fo that, all things confidered, it may well be thought they had the fame language and letters, or nearly the fame. Annius of Vi- terbo affirms % that the ancient AJfyrian and Phoenician letters were the fame, who certainly was a man of learning, for the times he lived in, and very inquifitive, how- ever culpable he might beinpublifhing fome fragments as genuine, thought to be fpuji- ous ; on which account perhaps he has been a little too feverely treated by critics, as Dr. Clayton late bi£hop of Clogher has obfervedb ; and who is of opinion, that his fragment of Berofus, fo much complained of, ought not to be entirely rejected as fpurious ; and the fame writer fays c, that the firft. Phoe- nix, from whom the Phoenicians had their name, and the firft Cadmus from whom
the
i Macrob. Saturnal. 1. i.e. 24. * Sanchoniatho apud
Eufeb. Prspar. Evangel. I. 2. p. 38. a Comment, in Xeno- phon. de .^quivocis, p. 1 18. b Introduce. Chronolog. Heb. Bible, p. 19 — 22. c Annii Comment, in Manethon. Sup. plement. p. 97.
[ io9 1
the Greeks had their letters, fprung from Syria; which Phoenix, who is faid by him to reign in Sidon, according to Sanchoni- atho d, was no other than Canaa?i the fon of Ham ; for he fays, that <{ one of thefe (the Phoenicians) IJiris was the inventor of three letters, the brother of 'Chna (or Ca- naan) who was firft called Phoenix.1'
The old Canaanitijh or Phoenician lan- guage, and alfo the Punic, were the fame ; hence Aujlin e fays, that the coun- try-people living near him, who were a colony of the Phoenicians, when afked who they were, ufed to anfwer, in the Punic language, Chanani, CanaaniUs. Now, though this language was near the Hebrew language, fo that the Hebrews and Cana- anites could converfe together as to un- derftand one another, which appears from Abrahams converfation with them, Gen? xiv. 1 8. — 24. and xxiii. 3. — 16. and from the converfation of the Hebrew fpies with Rahab the Canaanite, Jojh. ii. 9 — 21. and from the names the Canaanites impofed on their cities before they came into the hands
of
* Apud Eufeb. Prsepar. Evangel. 1. 2. c. 10. p. 39. * Ex-^ pof, Rom. Tom. 7. p. 363.
[ »° 3
of the Hebrews, as is evident from the books of Jojhua and Judges, unlefs thofe names were given them by Eber and his fons, who dwelt here before the Canaan- ites, as Dr. Lightfoot * fuggefts ; yet the language was not altogether the fame, it differed much, and efpecially in after-times, and particularly in their colonies, where it had the name of the Punic. Aujiin x hav- ing remarked, that the Hebrews call Chrlft MeJJiah, obferves, that " the word agrees «c with the Punk language, as very many ie Hebrew words, and almojl all do ;" which may be true of proper names in particular, but not of words in general. St. Jerom, who underflood the Hebrew language bet- ter than Aujiin, affirms, that the Canaan- itijh or Punic language was bordering near unto the Hebrew *, and in a great part near unto it" 3 he does not fay, as Fuller w ob- ferves, in the greater!: part, nor almoft in every part, and ftill lefs in every part, but in a great part ; and fo Origen x affcrts, that
the
s Works, vol. 2. p. 327. x Contr. Petil. 1. 2. p. 123. Tom. 7. vid. Reinef. de Ling. Punic, c. 4. f. 4. p. 20. * Trad. Heb. in Gen. fol. 71, M. u Comment, in Ifaiam, c. 19. fol. 42. C. & in Hierem. c. 25. fol. 51. F. Tom. 5. w Mifcellan. Sacr. 1. 4. c. 4. * Contr. Cel- fum, ]. 3. p. 115.
t I" ]
the Hebrew language differs both from the Syrian and the Phoenician, Jerom in one place y fays, that the Canaanitijh or Punic language is a middle language between the "Egyptian and the Hebrew. Salmajius ■ fug- gefts as if fome thought that the Punic and Egyptian languages were the fame ; which can by no means be admitted.
It feems mod probable what Jerom elfe- where a obferves, that the Canaanitijh or Phoenician language is the Syrian, or nearly that -, and Aufiin b affirms, that the Hebrew, Punic, and Syrian languages are very near a-kin -, and mofl of the words which he makes mention of as Punic, are plainly Chaldee or Syriac ; fo mammon, he fays % is the word for gain, in the Pu- nic language, and is the Syriac word ufed for riches in the time of Chrift, Luke xvi. 9. hence with the Phoenicians is the name of a man Abdamamon d, which fignifies a fervant of mammon, riches wealth, or gain, fee Mat. vi. 24. fo he fays e blood, in the Punic language is called Edom ; now in
the
v In Ifalam, ut fupra. * Not. in pallium Tertull.
p. 205. a In Ifaiam, ut fupra. " In Ioannem, Tr.
15. p. 58. Tom. 9. c De Sermon. Dom. 1. 2. p. 352. Tom. 4. d Vid. Swinton. Infcript. Cit. p. 21. c £- naxrat. in Pf, 136. p. 646. B.
[ H2 ]
the Hebrew tongue it is Dam ; but in the Chaldee or Syriac tongue, it is, CHtf, or CTtf, which are frequently ufed in the Chaldee paraphrafes : he alfo obferves f Baal in the Funic tongue, fignifies Lord, and Samen heaven, and both together, Lord of heaven, which with Sanchoniatho * a Phoenician writer, is a deity of the Phoeni- cians ; and fo Balfamen in the Pcenulus of Plant us h, is manifeflly of a Chaldee or Sy- riac termination : the above Phoenician writer ' fpeaks of a fort of intelligible ani- mals, whom he calls Zophajemin, and which Philo Byblius, who tranllated his work out of the Phoenician language into Greek, interprets feers, or contemplators of the heavens, which word alfo, is plainly in the Chaldee or Syriac dialect; and Kir c her k affirms, that he had in his pof- feffion a fragment of Sanchoniatho, written in the Aramaean or Syrian language. The Maltefe, or the inhabitants of the ifland called Melita, Acls xxviii. I . a colony of the Phoenicians as Di odor us Si cuius l af- firms,
f Qusft. fuper Jud. 1. 7. p. 130. B. Tom. 4. & A-
pud Eufeb. Przepar. 1. 2. p. 34. h Aft. 5. fc. 2. v. 67.
1 Apud Eufeb. 1. 2. p. 33. k Obelifc Pamphil.
p. in. apud Fabritii Biblioth. Gr. Tom 1. p. 164. ' Bib-
liothec. 1. 5. p. 294. 2
[ »*3 ]
firms, have in their language a great deal of the old Phoenician or Punic unto this day ; and it is obfervable, that their nu- merals from two to eleven, end in a, and from twenty to an hundred, in in m ; which are exactly the terminations of the fame numbers in the Chaldee or Syriac dialect. The Carthaginians were another colony of the Phoenicians, and the old name of the city of Carthage was Car- theda ; which, as Solinus n fays, in the Phoe- nician language, Signifies the new city, be- ing compofed of tfmp Kartha a city, and KJ~nn new, which are both Chaldee words. There was a city in Canaan, or old Phoe- nicia, called Hadattah, or Hazor-Hadattah, New Hazor, Jo/h. xv. 25. and another city there is called Kerioth : another name of Carthage we meet with in Plautus °, ap- pears to be of Phoe?jician original, Gbadre- anac, the chambers, lodging, or feat of A- nak, that is, the Aiiakim, fuch as were in old Canaan ; though, according to Dr. Hyde p, the word fignifies, as he conjec- tures, the new city alfo : and Bochart q has I obferved
m See Univerfal Hiftory, vol. 17. p. 299. n Polyhiih c. 40. So Ifidor. Orio;. 1. 14. c. 14. ' ° r'cenulus, Ad. 5. fc. 2. v. 35. p Not. in Peritzol. Itinerar. Mundi, p. 44.
*» Canaan. 1, 2. c. 6.
[ H4 J
obferved many words in the Punic of Plait** tus, which are in the Syrian dialedt ; and there are feveral words in different authors faid to be Punic or Phoenician, which are manifeftly Chaldee or Syriac. Plutarch fays % the Phoenicians call an ox Tbor, which is the word ufed in Chaldee for it. 'Jonah's gourd, according to Jerom *, was called Elkeroa in the Syriac and Punic lan- guage,* as if they were the fame. Sanc- tius l obferves, that in Spain a garden is called by a Punic name Carmen, which fignifies a vineyard, though fet with other trees ; which Punic word, he makes no doubt (as he need not) comes from the Hebrew word Cerem, a vineyard, and which in the Chaldee language in the plu-^ ral number is Cermin *, and Char mis * is the name of a city given by the Phoenicians, becaufe of the multitude of vines about it. lfidore a, fays the Phoenicians call a new village Magar-, the word is ufed by Plautus in his Panulus w, where it fignifies a place in Carthage, fome public building
there,
r Opera, vol. i. Vit. Sylloe, p. 463. s Comment, in Jonam, c. 4. fol. 59. B. ' Comment, in Cantic. 1.6. p. 58. * Stephan. de urb. ° Orig. 1. i$. c. 12. Co Servius in Virgil. yEneid. lib. r. v. 369. w Prolog, v. 86. rid. Philip. Pareum in lb. & Lexic Plautin.
[ i*5 ] there, and it is the fame with the Syriac word Magar, which fignifies an habitation 3 fo Anna in Virgil x, the fitter of Dido, or £///#, who were both Phoenicians, and daughters of Pygmalion king of Tyre, is the Syriac name for Hannah. See Z,«£* ii. 36. Gtf^J or Cadiz, corruptly called Cales, which belongs to Spain, the Phoe- nicians called Gadir or Gadira, which in the Punic language fignifies an hedge, as is obferved by many y, and fo it does in Chaldee ; the reafon of which name is, be- caufe that place was hedged about on all fides by the fea : the Syriac word Korean, ufed by the Jews in Chritt's time for an oath, Mark vii. 1 1 . is faid by Theophraf- tus * to fignify the fame in the Punic lan- guage ; and Lachman is ufed by Athenceus ft for bread, which the Syrians fo call, and which in Syria is the belt bread; and by the Syrians and Syria, he means Phoenicians and Phoenicia, where it feems it was fo called, and is manifeftly a Chaldee word; as is the word Nabla, the name of a mufical in- I 2 ftrument,
x JEne\d. 1. 4. v. q. & paffim. 7 Feftus Avienus in Ora Maritim.l. i. Solinus, c. 36. Plin. Nat. Hift. 1. 4. c. 22. Ifi- dor. Orig. 1. 14. c. 6. 2 Apud Jofeph. contr. Apion, 1, 1. f. zz. * Deipnofophift. 1. 3. c. 29 p. 113.
[ n6 J
Jftrument, faid by him * to be an invention; of the Phoenicians ; as Sambuca is of the Syrians, called the Phoenician lyre, the' fame with the Chaldee Sabbeca, Dan. iii. 5. there rendered fackbut. Paufanias -f ufes this as a proof that Cadmus was not an Egyp- tian, but a Phoenician ; becaufe Minerva is not called by the Egyptian word Sais, but by the Phoenician word Siga, which comes from the Chaldee or Syriac word tfJD to increafe or be increafed ; from all which it appears, that the Chaldee or Syrian language and the Phoenician are nearly the fame, and fo the letters may be fuppofed to be.
Let it be further obferved, that the Greeks had their letters from the Phoenici- ans, at leaft fixteen or feventeen of them, b' which Cadmus, fome fay Linus J, brought out of Phoenicia into Greece ; which, with- out mentioning their number, is afferted by Herodotus c, who fays, they were called Cadmeian and Phcenicianlctters, and that he faw fome of them at Thebes in Boeotia, en- graved on fome Tripods there, and that they
were
* lb. 1. 4. c 23. p. 175. f Exotica, five, 1. 9. p. 560. b Plin. 1. 7. c- 7. c. 56. Ireiisus adv. Haref. 1. i.e. 12. Ifidor. Orig. 1. i. c. 3. I Suidas in voce Aoo,-. 'Terpfi*- chore, five, i. 5. c. 58. 59.
[ *i7 1
were greatly like the Ionic letters -, the iame fays Diodorus Sicu/us of the original and names of thofe letters, and relates d, that the brafs pot Cadmus offered to Mi- nerva Lindia, had an infcription of Phoe- nician letters on it : the Greeks therefore, themfelves, acknowledge, that they had their letters from the Phoenicians, as the above writers affirm, and fo Euphorus % Zenodotus f, and others -, hence Jofephus g obferves, that they glory in it, that they received them from them ; fo that this is a matter out of queftion : and Bianconih is of opinion, that the ancient Greeks ufed the very letters of the Phoenicians ; and indeed this feems to be the meaning of Herodotus, in the place before referred to ; and Dic~iys Cretenjis is faid l to have written his hif- tory of the Trojan wars, in the Greek lan- guage, but in Phoenician letters ; and fo Linus and Orpheus wrote in the letters of the Pelafgi, the fame with the Phoenician, as fays * Diodorus ; and the Greeks for- merly wrote as the Phoenicians did, from 1 3 the
d Bibliothec. 1. 3. p. 328, 329, 340. cApud Clem. Alex. Stromat. 1. 1. p. 306. * In Laert. vit. Philofoph. 1. 7. p. 455. b Contr. Afion. 1. 1. f. 2. h De An-
tiqu. Liter. Heb. p. 59. i Vid. Fabritii Bibliothec. Gr. 1. i.e. 5. f, 10. p. 33 * Bibliothec. 1. 3. p, 200, 201.
[ "8 ]
the right to the left, for in this form was the name of Agamemnon written, on his ftatue at Olympiad ; and thus wrote the Etrufci, who had their letters from the Greeks -f, whofe ancient language was the Aramaean or Syrian \ -, which way of wri- ting by the Greeks, was gradually by little and little difuied, and irTued in a form like that of the ploughing of oxen, called £vgoo(p'$ov, in which manner the laws of Solon were written, as appears from Suidas c and Harpocratiah d; that is alternately, from the right to the left. Now as the Greeks re- ceived their letters from the Phoenicians, and there is a fimilarity of the letters of the one to thofe of the other, as it is rea- fonable to fuppofe there mould, and as He- rodotus, upon his own fight, affirms there was, as before obferved, nay, were the fame ; fo there is a great likenefs between the Greek and the prefent Samaritan let- ters ; as the Samaritans wrote from the right hand towards the left, if the poiition of the Samaritan letters be inverted for that
pur-
* Paufan. Eliac. i. five 1. 5. p. 338. f Vid. Dicktn- fon. Delphi Phaenic c. 10 & Reinefium <Je lingua, Pu- nica, c. 12. f. 30. % Reinef. lb. c. 2. f. 16. c In voce voftos. ** In OxecuSc*.
[ "9 ]
purpofe, as Mr. Bedford remarks k, the letters will appear to be the fame , or, how- ever, very much alike : the ufe to be made of this will foon and eafily be perceived ; for, as Bochart x reafons, this being the cafe, it follows that the Samaritan characters are the very fame which were\ifed in Phoenicia in the times of Cadmus ; and it is acknow- ledged by many learned men, that the letters or characters of the ancient Canaanites, that is, the Phoenicians, were either the fame with, or very like to the Samaritan characters m, or that the old Phoenician let- ters, and the Samaritan are very fimilar, and nearly the fame, fo that they may be reckoned the fame *; and whereas theP/fo?- nicians received their letters from the AJfy- rians, or Chaldeans, it follows that the Sa- maritan letters being fo like the Phoenician, muft be the fame, or near the fame, with the old AJfyrian and Chaldean characters ; and that the people who are properly called Samarita?is, had both theirlanguage and their letters from the Chaldeans or Syrians, will
I 4 highly
k Chronology, p. 479. l Ep. Voflio col. 859.
m Univerfal Hiitory, vol. 2. p. 347. n Bochart. La- naan 1. i.e. 20. col 451. Dr. Kennicott. Diflert. 2. p. ici, 1.56.
[ *20 ]
appear probable from the original of them, next to be confidered.
It is amazing to me, that fome learned men mould make the ten tribes of Ifrael that revolted under Jeroboam, the original of the Samaritans. Samaria indeed was built in the times of Omri, a fuccefTor of his, and not before, and by him, between whom and Jeroboam, reigned Nadab, Ba- afloa, Elab and Zimri, and this city alfo became the metropolis of the ten tribes, and was inhabited only by Ifraelites, tho' never from hence were called Samaritans, but Ifrael or Epbraim ; nor had they any more connexion with the people after called Samaritans than with the Scy- thians and Tartars ; for it was not till after the Ifraelites were carried captive into Af- Jyria, that thofe, after called Samaritans, were fent as a colony from thence to re- people Samaria, which was entirely Grip- ped of its inhabitants by the king of Affy- ria ; nor does it appear that thofe who were left in the land of Ifrael had any fociety with this new colony, or mixed with 'em, either in civil or religious things, but re- turned, at leaft, many of them, to the pure worfhip of God, and joined with the
tribe
f ?21 1
tribe of Judab, and put themfelves under the government of the kings of it, and went with that tribe captive into Babylon. Nor is it clear that either thofe of the ten tribes, or thofe of the two tribes, had any thing to do with thefe Samaritans, for three hundred years after their firft fettle- ment in Samaria, nor they with them; even until they were joined by fome rene- gado Jews in the times of Manajfeb the prieft, for whom a temple was built in. Gerrizzim by Sanbal/at; the only inftance is of the prieft fent from Ajfyria to teach them the wormip of the God of the land, which they very coolly and hypocri- tically received, ftill continuing in the ido- latry they brought with them, and in which they continued to the times of Ez- ra, 2 Kings, xvii. 27, 28, 29, 33, 44. on which account the IJraelites that were left in the land were obliged to keep at a diftance from them, even when they firft came among them, for had they joined them, it may reafonably be thought, there would have been a prieft, who, though of Jero- boams religion, could have inftructed them as well as the prieft fent from among the captives in Ajfyria, who alfo muft have
been
[ 122 ]
been of the fame fort : now, either there were no priefts left in the land, or, if there were, they had not joined the Samaritans, and though they had officiated in Jerobo- ams idolatry, did not chufe to join them in theirs ; and certain it is, that in the times of Ezra and Nehemiab, the Je&s would have nothing to do with the Sama- ritans, efpecially in religious things, Ezra iv. i, 2, 3. Nehemiab ii. 20. and though under the influence of Sanballat their governor, they received the renegado Jews with his fon -in-law Manajfeh at the head of them, it does not appear that they cor- dially embraced them, fince in any time of trouble the Jews were in, [they did not care to own they had any connexion with them ; fo in the times of Antiochus Epif banes, by whom the Jews were greatly diftrefTed, they wrote unto him, and de- fired they might not be confidered as of the fame religion with the Jews, and be in- volved with them in the fame diftrefs ; fince, though their anceftors had been forced into a compliance with fome parts of their worfhip, yet they affured him they were different from them, both in their manners or cuftoms, and in their
original ;
[ !23 ]
original ; and, whereas they had built art altar on mount Gerizzim, not dedicated to any deity, they defired it might, for the future be called the temple of the Gn?- cian Jupiter"; though, at other times, when the circumftances of the Jews were more favourable, then they claimed kin- dred with them, and derived their defcent from Jofeph, and his fons Manajfeh, and Ephraim °, as they did from Jacob in the times of Chriji ; and yet then the Jews had no dealings with them, John iv. 9, 12, and they are manifeftly diftinguifhed by our Lord himfelf from the Jews, and from the loft fheep of the houfe of Ifraef, Matt. x. 5, 6. John iv. 22. What is faid in favour of the Samaritans by Jewifli writers, as by Maimonides *, and by Oba- diah Bartenora -f-, mult be underftood as expreffing the opinion their anceftors had of them, after they embraced the Jewi/b religion ; in which they thought they were hearty and fincere, and fo gave credit to them, until the wife men of Ifraef, as they fay, made a ftricl enquiry about 'em,
and
" Jofeph. Antiqu. 1 iz. c. 5. f. 5. ° Ibid. 1. 11. c. 8. f. 6. * Comment, in Mifn. Beracot, c. 8. 8. f Com- ment, in. Ib.c. 7. 1.
I 124 ]
and found that they worfhipped the image of a dove -, after which they reckoned them as other idolatrous heathens, and would have nothing to do with them, as is af- ferted by them in thofe very paifages where the character is given of them, as ftricl: ob- iervers of the written law *.
A late writer p fuggefts, that Jerobo~ am not only coined a new religion by the help of his priefts, but a new language and letters, to keep the people clofe unto him, which language he fuppofes to be the Samaritan ; but this is faid without' any proof, or ihadow of probability; and with equal probability is what Genebrard q, from a Jewijh writer, afferts, and which perhaps may better fuit the hypothecs of a change of letters, than where it is com- monly placed j that " the Jews in Rehobo- " ams time, that they might not join with *' the fchifmatic Ifraelites, in anyufe of fa- te cred things, contrived the form of letters ** which are now ufed, i. e. the fquare ■** letters, changing their former figures,
*< and
* Vide Guifium in lb. p Kalf. Diflert. Philolog. de Ling. Heb. Natal, p. 72. «. Chronolog. ad A. M.
3203. e Mofe Gerundenfe.
t *«* i
u and left thofe which have been fincc " called the Samaritan letters ;" but, the Samaritans had their original language and letters elfewere ; and from whence they had them, may be concluded from the account given of them in 2 Kings xvii. 24, 30, 31. where the places from whence they came are expreily named, and the ido- latry they brought with them fully de- fcribed, and in which they continued } and by confidering which, it will appear, that they were originally Chaldeans or Phoeni- cians, and had the fame religion, language, and letters they had ; fome of them were brought from Babylon, the metropolis of the Chaldean empire, and perhaps the greater part, fince they are firft mentioned ; and whoy no doubt, brought with them their language and letters, the Chaldean, as they did their idolatry; for they made Juccoth benoth, or the tabernacles of the daughters, or booths of Venus, as Selden rthinks it may be rendered ; and which may have refpect to the apartments in the temple of Mylitta, or Venus in Babylon, the like to which
thofc
7 De Dif. Syr. Syntagm. 2. c. 7 p* 71 1-
[ »26 ]
thofe people made in Samaria, in whicli women, once in their lives, profKtuted themfelves to whomfoever afked them, in honour of Venus ; of which filthy prac- tice, Herodotus s makes mention ; and from the Babylonians the "Phoenicians had the fame cuftom, their women proftituted themfelves before their idols, and dedicated their gain to them, being ftrongly per- fuaded they would be propitious to them, and they mould enjoy profperity, as Atha- najius f affirms ; and Valerius Maximus " re- lates, that they had a temple called the tem- ple of Sicca Venus, which is near in found to fuccoth Benoth, where their matrons be- fore marriage proftituted their bodies for gain; and there was ^Phocnici an colony, three days journey from Carthage, called Sicca Veneria w; to which may be added, that it was a cuftom with the Cyprians, another colony of the Phoenicians, for virgins be- fore marriage to proftitute themfelves, and give their gain to Venus x ; by all which, it is plain from whom thefe Samaritans received their impiety and impurity : others of thefe
people
3 Clio, five 1. i. c. 199. l Contr. Gcntes, p. 21. n Di£l. & Fad. Memorab. 1. 2. c. 6. f. 15. w Ptolem. Geograph. I. 4. c. 3. vid. Reinef. de Ling. Punic c. 8. f. 28. & Riviit. deMajumis, c. 7. f. 26. x JuiUn. e ! rogo 1. 18. c. 5.
[ I27 I
people were brought from Cuthah, or Cutba9 a city in Erec, a province of Baby- lon y, where it is faid Abraham lived ; the Samaritans are commonly called Cittbim, or Cuthites in Jewifh writings * ; and fo thefe were of the fame country with the former, and had the fame language and letters in. all probability ; the idol they made for themfelves was Nergal, which is part of the name of two of the princes of Baby- Ion, it being ufual with great perfonages im the eaft, to take their idols into their names, See jfer. xxxix. 3. this name according to Hillerus, fignifies the fountain of light, and denotes the fun the Babylonians wor- shipped : the next that were brought to Samaria by the king of Ajfyria were brought from Ava the fame with Iva, If xxxvii. 17. and perhaps the fame with the Avim, Deut. ii. 23. a people that formerly dwelt in Bbcenicia, or on the borders of it, from whence might be a colony of them in the country ©f Ajfyria or Babylon ; in the Septua- gent verfion of v. 31. they are c ailed Hivites, which were one of the feven nations of
Canaan*
y Hyde Hift. Relig. Vet. Perf. c. 2. p. zq, 40. * T. Bab. Bava Bathra, fol. 91. 1. Vid. Pirke EUezer, c. 26. fol. a6. 2. and c. 38,fol. 44. z.
[ 128 ]
Canaan, or of old Phoenicia, the remain's of which had fettled in thofe parts -, thefe had for their idols, Nibhaz and Tartak, which according to Hillerus b, fignify the one the remote one feet h, that is, the fun which beholds all things, and the other a chain, denoting either the fixed liars chained to their places, or the Satellites, of the planets fixed to their orbs, worfhipped by the Chaldeans and AJfyrians : the next came from Hamath, a city in Syria, on the northern borders of the land of Ca- naan, Numb, xxx iv. 8. their idol is called Afiima, which, as Hillerus c fays, was with the Arabs, the name of a lion, the fymbol of the fun j which might be worshipped by thefe men, under this name, as the fun was the chief object of the worfhip of the AJfyrians and Phoenicians, as Macrobius d obferves : the laft of this colony of the Sa- maritans, were men that came from Se- fharvaim, which was either the Sipharab of Ptolemy*, in Mefopot ami a, or that which was near Babylon. Abydenus f makes men- tion
b Onomaftlc. facr. p. 6o5. c lb. p. 609. A Satur-
nal. 1. 4. c. 21, 42. e Geograph. 1 5. c. 18. f Apud
Eufeb. Prsepar. Evangel. 1. 9. c. 41. p. 457.
[ '29 J
tlon of, or rather, as Vitringa thinks*, a city in Syro-Phcenicia9 or a province in which Abydenus h places Heliopolis, namely Ccele- Syria ; and it is certain the idolatry thefe men were guilty of, is the fame with that of the old Canaanites or Phoe- nicians, who burnt their children in the fire to Molech, Lev. xviii. 21. as thefe did to Anammelech and Adrammelech, the fame with Molech, as the word Melech with which they end, (hews, which fignifies king, as Molech does : that the Phoenicia tins facrificed their children to Saturn or Molech, is obferved by Pliny *, Eiifebius k, and Athanajius \ hence thofe words of En- nius, " poeni funt foliti, fuos facrificare <c puellos," as did the Carthaginians, a co- lony of the Phoenicians, which is affirmed by Porphyry m, 'Jufiin n, Curtius °, Pefce- nius Fe/lus p, Diodorus Siculus % and others ; from all which it clearly appears, that the Samaritans fprung from the Afjyrians or Chaldeans, and the Phoenicians ; and fome- times they would call themfelves Sido-
K nians,
s Comment, in Ifaiam, c. 36, 19. h Apud Eufcb. ut fjpra c. 12. ' Nat. Hift. I 36. c. 5. k DeLaud. Conftantin. p. 646. ' Contr. Gent. p. 21. m De Ab- ftinentia, 1. 2. c. 27. n E Trogo, 1. 18. c. 6, and 1. 10. c 1. ° Hift. 1. 4. c. 3. p ApudLa&ant. Inftitut. 1. 1. c, 21. * Bibliochec. 1. 20. p. 756. 789.
[ *3° 1
nians ', from Sidon, a chief city in Phtem- cia ; fo that they may well be thought to bring with them to Samaria, the language and letters of the A Syrians and Phcenicians : and certain it is, that the Samaritans ufed the Syrian tongue and letters, Ezra iv. 7. the fame with the Chaldee, Dan. i. 4, and 2. 4. more than two hundred years after they came to Samaria ; for their epiftle to the king of Perjia was written, in that language and letters ; and according to yc/ep/jus*, the Syrians, Pheenicians, Am- monites, and Moabites, joined the Samari- tans in it ; and with great propriety did they ufe them in writing to a king of P<erjia, fince the Perjians and Syrians, for the mod part, ufed the fame letters and characters, as Epiphanius* arTerts. jferom* is clear in it, that the old Canaanitifi or old Phoenician language is the fame with the Syrian ; and that the Samaritan lan- guage approaches nearer to the Chaldee or Syriac, than to the Hebrew, is affirmed by Bochart u -, and whoever has but dipped
into
r Jofeph. Antiqu. I. It. c. 8. f. 6, & 1. 12.C. 5. f. 5. * Antiqu. 1 n. c. 2. f. 1. s Contr. Hseref. \.z.
hreref. 66. f Comment, in If. xix. fol. 29. I. u Epift- Voflio, col. 860.
[ »3* i
into the Samaritan verfion of the Penta- teuch, will eafily perceive it is in the Chal- dee dialed:, here and there an Hebrew word ; and it is not to be wondered at, that they mould get into their language, when fome of the Jews had mixed them- felves with them 5 and Walton w owns the fame, that the dialect of the Samaritan verfion is of the fame kindred with the Chaldee language, though it has fome few words proper and peculiar to itfelf j and fo F. Simon * fays, that the Samaritan verfion is Written in the Syro-Chaldean language, not impure, which mews the antiquity of it. There are three dialects of the Syriac lan- guage, as Abidpharagius y, an Arabic writer relates -, the Aramcean, the moft elegant of all, which the inhabitants of Roha, Harran, and outer Syria ufed ; that of Paleftine^ which was fpoken by the inhabitantsof Da- mafcusy mount Libanus, and interior Syria % and the Chaldee Nabatbean dialect, the mofl unpolifhed of all, ufed by thofe who dwelt on the mountains of the Affyrians, and in the villages of Erac or Babylonia ; which latter very probably, was fpoken by the Samari- K 2 tans*
w Prsefat. ad Introduft. Ling. Oriental, f. 25. *Difqu, Critic, c. 11. p. 88. r Hift. Dynait. p. 16, 17.
[ *32 1 tans. What were the antient Syrian or Af~ fyrian letters can only be concluded from the old Phoenician, which appears to be the fame with the modern Samaritan -, for fince the Phoenicians received their letters from the Syrians, or Affyrians, they mull be nearly the fame. The ufual Syr lac cha^- rafters, in which are written the verfions of the Old and New Teftament, are com- paratively of a late date and ufe, being in- troduced by the chriftians of Antioch ; who, in imitation of Daniel and Ezra, had ufed the Hebrew character, but changed it for thofe now in ufe, becaufe they would have nothing in common with the Nazarenes or Ebionites ?: the more un- ufual, and more ancient character is the Efirangelo, ufed only now for capitals, and frontifpieces and titles of books, which is rough and unpolifhed, and bears a refem- blance to the old Phoenician or Samaritan ; and Mr. Caflell z is exprefs for it, that the EJlrangelo is the Chaldee character; for that the Affyrians and Chaldeans ever ufed the fquare character of the Hebrews cannot be
proved,
'■> Boderian. Prasfat. ad Lex Syro-Chald. Wahon Praefat. ut iupr^, i 35. T Lexic. Heptoglott. col. 178. vid. Pfefferi
Critica facta, f. 2. problem. Queft. ».
[ *33 ] proved, fince we have no writings of theirs extant ; for what Chaldee books we havev were written by Jews, either in, or after the Babyhnijh captivity ', as by Daniel, and Ezra, who wrote Chaldee in the fquare character, becaufe it was what their facred books were written in, they had been ufed to, and the people alfo, for whofe ufe they wrote •, and in after times, the Chaldee paraphrafes were written by Jews-, and fo both Talmuds, though lefs pure ; and it feems this character was ufed by the Syri- an chriflians, in imitation of the Jews, be- fore their change of characters already mentioned ; but after the Chaldee monarchy ceafed, no books were written by any of that people in their own language. Bero- fus the Chaldean, and others, wrote in Greek. Theophilus of Antioch a indeed fays, that Berafus fhewed the Greeks Chaldee let- ters ; but whether by them he means their learning, laws, and hiftory, or the characters of their letters, is not cer- tain ; if the letters, it does not appear what they were : hence Hottinger h con- K 3 eluded
a Ad Autolyc.l. 3. p. i?9- b Smegma oriental, par. i. p. 35. Gram. Chald. Syr. p. 4.
[ '34 ]
eluded that the ancient character of the Ajfyrians and Chaldeans is unfeen, and un- known, and that nothing certain is had concerning it ; fome, he fays, think it is the Samaritan) which is right, others, the Ethiopic ; but he himfelf was in fu£- pence, and hoped, that in fome time would be publifhed by Golius, fome Chaldee wri- tings, in the ancient tongue and character j but whether any ever were publifhed, I never heard. The Jews fayc, that after the hand-writing of the angel upon the wall, and the publication of the Hebrew characters by Ezra, the Chaldeans left their own characters, and ufed them ; but this feems to be faid without any good founda- tion, • =
Now, fince both the Samaritan language and letters differ from the Hebrew, being the old Vhcenician and Aflyrian-y it was ne- ceffary that, when the Pentateuch of Mo- fes was brought among them, it fhould be copied, and put into Samaritan letters, that they might read it? ask was, and that from a copy in the fquare character, as
the
e Buxtorf, de Lit. Heb. Addit.
5
[ *f$ ]
the variations mew, before obferved ; and it was necefTary alfo, that there mould be a verfion of it in their own language, that they might the better underftand it, and which alfo has been done; and upon the whole, I think it plainly appears, that they always retained their own language and letters, which were the Affyrian and old Thcenician, to the times of Manajfeh their high prieft, and ages after, as the Hebrews retained their language and letters alfo, the fquare ones ; fo that there feems to be no foundation for any fuch change of let- ters being made by Ezra, as has been con- tended for.
CHAP.
t 136 ]
CHAP. IV.
Of the Antiquity of the Vowel-Points, and Accents,
IPut the vowel-points and accents toge- ther, becaufe, according to the doc- trine of them, they have a dependence on each other ; the points are often changed according to the pofition of the accents, and therefore the One muft be as early as the other ; and as Elias Levita b himfelf obferves, " there is no fyllable without a " point, and there is no word without an u accent." About the antiquity of thefe there has been a controverfy for a century or two part, and which is not yet decided; nor do I expecl: it will be by this eiTay of mine ; all that I propofe is, to try how far back, or how high, in point of antiquity, thefe things can be traced and carried.
There have been divers opinions con- cerning them. Some think they are of a di- vine original ; and others, that they are of human invention. Some fuppofe that they
were
* Sepher TobTaam, five, de accent, c, 4.
[ 137 1
were firft invented by Ben A/her and Ben Napbtali, about the year 1037'; others, that they were devifed by the Jews of Ti- berias, 500 years after Chrift at lead:, or however were invented after the Talmud was finimed f ; others afcribe them to Ez~ ra and the men of the great fynagogueg; who they fuppofe, at lean: revived and re- ftored them, and fixed them to the confo- nants, which before were only delivered and ufed in a traditionary way ; and others are of opinion, they /were given to Mofes on mount Sinai, as to the power of them in pronouncing and reading, though not as to the make and figures of them in wri- ting, but were propagated by tradition to the times of Ezra ; whilft others believe they were ab origine h, and were invented by Adam together with the letters, or how- ever that they were coeval with the letters, and in ufe as foon as they were : which ac- count is mod probable, may appear by tracing them ftep by ftep, from one period
of
e SoMorinus de Sinceritate Heb. & Gr. Text. 1.2. Ex- ercitat. 14. c. 1. Genebrard. chronolog. p 181. Calmet. &c. f Elias Levita, prsfat. 3. g Ben Chayim
praefat. Bibl. in principio & multi fcript. Jud " Cofri
par. 4. f. 25. Mufcatus in ib. fol. 229. 1. Meor Enayim. c. 59.
[ 138 1
of time to another -, and to begin with the loweft of them,
A. D. 1037. In this year, according to R. Gedaliah* and David Ganz f, flourifhed two famous Jews, Ben AJher., and Ben Naphtali, to whom fome have afcribed the invention of the vowel-points; and fo early, however, it is owned that they exifted, even 700 years ago and more : but that thefe were the inventors of them is not probable, fince in the following century lived many emi- nent Jewifh doctors, jfarcfo', Kimchi, and Aben Ezra, who often make mention of the points, but never as a novel invention ; which, had thefe been the authors of, it can hardly be thought, but that they would have made mention of them as fuch, and commended them for it. Kimcbi* obferves againft thofe that read Adonai lord, and im- mecha with thee, in Pf. ex. I, 3. inftead of Adoni my lord, and ammeca thy people, " that from the rifing of the fun to the fet- " ting of it, (i. e. throughout the world)
" you
• Shalfhalat Hakabala fol. 28. 2. f Tzemach Da-
vid par. » . fol. 37, 1 . s Apud Pocok. Porta Mofis
miicell. not. p. 58.
[ 139 ]
0 you will find, in all copies, Nun with ft cbirek, and Aw with patbacb :" fo that in his time pointed bibles were in common and general ufe, Befides, he charges Jerom with an error on account of the points, and therefore muft believe they were in his time. The author of the book of Cofri, h even if R. Judab Hallevi was the author of it, lived about 1 140, or as others, 1089 ; and he fpeaks of punctuation as a divine thing, as the effect of divine wifdom, and does not appear to have the leaft notion of its being of human invention, and much lefs the invention of the prefent age or preceding century 3 nay R. Judab Cbtjug, laid* to be the firft grammarian and the chief of them, he found the Bible pointed and accented, as Elias Levita k fays ; and he was coeval with Ben AJher, and wrote a book of the double letters, and another of pointing, l as if it was of long time and generally received, and was become an art ; he makes not the leaft mention of Ben Ajher being concerned in it ; and lb R. Jonab, another grammarian, a little af- ter him, is filent concerning this matter1";
and
h Par. 3. c. 32. ' Balmefii Mikneh Abraham
p. 24. lin. 10. Elias prasfat. Methurgeman, fol. 2. I. k lb. ' Wolfii Bibliothec. Heb. p. 338. 424. m Vid. Buxtorf.
de Punft. Antiq. par. 2. p. 329.
[ HO ]
and Aben Ezra fpeaks 8 of Ben Labraf, who was before 'em both, as having found flinn with pat bach in Pf. ix. 6. in an an- tient pointed copy; fo that there was an antient pointed Bible before thefe men were in being: and what puts it out of all doubt that thefe men could not be the inventors of the points is, as Elias Levita obferves, ° that their distentions and difputes were a- bout the points and accents, and about words before pointed, and not then pointed ; wherefore it is not reafonable to fuppofe that they would difagree and difpute about what they themfelves had invented ; fo that it moft evidently appears, that the points muft be in ufe before their time.
A. D. 927.
About this time lived Saadiah Gaon, who wrote a book concerning pointing, which Jarcbi, on Pf. xlv. 9.mak,es mention of, and fays he faw it -y the points there- fore muft be before his time; for it cannot be thought that he mould write a book concerning an art, and the rules of it, which did not exift : the accents alfo muft then be in ufe, iince, as Gaon was for dividing
* Comment, in Pf. 9. 6. ° Praefat. 3.
[ Hi 1
Jehovah from righteoufnefs in Jer. xxiii. 6. making the latter to be the name of the Meffiah, and the former the name of God, who called him fo. Aben Ezra* replies to him, that he miflook or perverted the author of the accents, and made him guilty of an error, who put Tarcha (or TtphcaJ on IfcOp*; and again, whereas the word Jehovah is repeated in Exod. xxxiv. 6. Gaon obferves that the firft. name is to be con- nected with fcHp1!, proclaimed-, but Aben Ezra* replies, if it mould be fo, why did not the author of the accents connect it ? but fays he, it is right to repeat the name, as Abraham Abraham, Jacob Jacob, Mo- Jes Mofes. Now it would have been abfurd in Aben Ezra to have charged Gaon with a miilake or perverfion of the accents, if they were not in beingin the times of Gaon: he lived many years before Ben AJJoer and Ben Naphtali ; this proves that they were not the inventors of them ; and Aben Ez- ra himfelf lived in the next century to them, and he fpeaks of the accents not as a novel invention, but of as early ufe as the men of Ezra's great fynagogue ; and
ex-
* Comment, in Exod. 18. 3. 1 lb. in Exod 54. 6.
[ '42 3
exprelfes fuch an high opinion of them, that he advifes not to acquiefce in any ex- pofition that is not according to them, nor hearken to it.
A. D. 900.
In the church of St. Dominic in Bononia, a copy of the Hebrew fcriptures is kept with great care, which is pretended to be the original copy written by Ezra himfelf, and is valued at a high rate ; fo that fome- times the Bononians have borrowed large fums of money upon it, and repaid them for the redemption of it. It is written in a very fair character, on calf-fkin drefs'd, the letters retaining their blacknefs, and it is made up in a roll, according to the antient man- ner. This copy was prefented by the Jews to Aymericus, the then mafler of the or- der of St. Dominic, who exercifed that of- fice about the year 1308, as Montfaucon r relates, who faw it ; and who further ob- ferves, that befides a Latin infcription fewed to it in the middle of the volume, which he gives, there is alfo one in He- brew, " this is the book of the law of Mo-
* Diar. Italic, p. 399. 400. vid. ejufdem Prjeliminar. in Hexapla Origen. p. zz.
[ 143 1 " fes, which 'Ezra the fcribe wrote, and " read before the congregation, both men " and women ; and he ftood in a wooden " pulpit." Montfaucon fays not whether it is pointed or no, but dean Prideaux f fays, it has the vowel-points ; and Francifcus <TiJfardus Ambaceus ailerts * the fame, who fays he often faw it -, as did alfo Arias Mon- tanus, u and who affirms that it has the Ma- jorat), the fame as in the Venetian and Bombergian editions. Now though there is no reafon to believe it to be the autograph of Ezra, nor near fo early, yet, according to the account of it, it muft be antient -, for it is near 460 years ago fince it was pre- sented by the Jews to the monaftery, and as they prefented it as a very antient copy, even as the autograph of Ezra, it muft have had then marks of antiquity on it, and muft have been written fome ages be- fore; and as Dr. Kennicott™ obferves, it is a moderate fuppofition to imagine it was written as long before it was prefented, as it has been fince, and fo muft be of as early a date as where I have placed it.
A. D.
r Connection, par. i . p. 362. * Gram. Heb. apud
Hottinger. Thefaur. Philolog. p. 512, 513. u Pras-
fat. de ver. Left, in Heb. Lib. * DiiTertation, voL
1. p. 310.
[ H4 ]
A. D. 740.
If the book of Cofrii before-mentioned, was .not only compiled from loofe fheets and put together by R. Jtidah Hallevi, as fome think; but that the dialogue itfelf was had between a Jew, whofe name, fome fay, was Ifaac Sangari, and a Per pan king, whofe name was C ho/roes, and which R. Ju- dab fays, was 400 years before his time, fo he fuggefls in the beginning of the book ; and whereas he flourifhed about the year 1140, this book mufl be compofed, or this dialogue held, about the year 740. Now in this work the points and accents are much ipoken of, in which the author commends the excellence and elegance of the Hebrew tongue on account of them; gives many of the names of both, and declares the ufefulnefs of them; afTerts that they were received by tradition from Mojes ; that they are the production of ad- mirable wifdom, and would never have been received had they not come from a prophet, or one divinely affifted x ; and he does not give the leaft, hint of their being of an human, and much lefs of a modern
in-
x Cofri, par. 2. f. 8c. & par. 3. f. 31, 32.
[ HS ]
invention ; yea, exprefly afcribes the fevzn kings or vowel-points, as Aben Ezra alio calls them, to Ezra and the men of his fy- nagogue, and which he fuppofes they re- ceived by tradition from Mofes.
A. D. 600. Those whoafcribe the invention of the points to the Jews of Tiberias, fuppofe that this was after the year 500, when the Ba- bylonian Talmud was finifhed. Their rea- fon for it is, becaufe, as they affirm, no mention is made of them in that work, and therefore the invention of them muff, bo later than that; but of this more hereafter. However, according to this hypothecs, one would think they muft have been invented and in ufe by the time above given ; though indeed thofe who efpoufe this hypothecs, are at a very great uncertainty about the ex- act time of this invention. The firft per- fon that broached this notion was Elias Levita, a Germa?i Jew, who lived in the 16th century, contrary to the fentiments and belief of his whole nation ; who either fuppofe the points were from Ezra, and the men of the great fynagogue, or from Mo- Jes at mount Sinai, or from Adam who had
L them
f 146 ]
them from God himfelf. This man affer- ted,y that after the finilhing of the Tal- mud, which he places in the year 436, af- ter the defolation of the fecond temple, arofe the men of 'Tiberias ; wife and great men, expert in the fcripture, and in pu- rity and in eloquence of language excelled all the Jews in thofe times ; and after them did not arife any like them, and that thefe were the authors of the points : this is faid without offering the lead proof of it, and by one that lived near a thoufand years af- ter j it is ftrange that he only mould be in this fecret ; that no hiftory, Jewifh nor Chriftian, mould make mention of it for fuch a courfe of years : it is not probable that there were fuch a fett of men at Tibe» rias about the time fuggefted, lince a great destruction of the Jews was made at it, in the year 352, by G alius 9 at the com- mand of Conjlantius ; and fince promotion to doclormip ceafed in the land of IJrael with Hillell the prince, who flourifhed a- bout the year 340, as the Jeivi/h chrono- Jogers * obferve : and fince the flourifhing university of the Jews was at Babylon at
the
* PraTat 3. ad Maloret! * Shallhalct Hakab-la
fjol. 25. z. Gau z. Tzraacli David, fbl. 33. I.
[ 147 1
the time of this pretended invention, very unlikely it is, that it fhould be done with- out their knowledge, advice, and afliftance, and without either approbation of it, or oppofition to it by any of them, for ought appears ; and that it mould be univerfally received by the Jews at once every where, and not one Momus to find fault, this is very extraordinary ; yea, that it fhould be received by the Karaite Jews themfelves, enemies to tradition and innovation, as will be feen hereafter. It is ftrange that, according to this fcheme, as many perfons mull be employed in this work, that there fhould be but one fort of pointing; that they fhould all take the fame method, throughout the whole Bible, without any variation, except fome anomalies, and which are to be obferved in letters as well as in points; and that this mould be al- ways continued with the 'Jews, and never any other fcheme propofed and attempted; and that it fhould not be known who be- gan it and when. And indeed we are left at a very great uncertainty about the place where this wondeful affair was transacted; Eliasy the relator of it, mould he be preffed J< 2 hard,
[ 148 ]
hard, feems to have found a fubterfbge to- retreat unto, and therefore he tells us that Tiberias is Moe/ia* ; but where that is he fays not, but leaves us to feek for it where we can, and take a wild goat's chace into Afia Minor, to Pontics, or Bithynia, or Pa- phlagonia, where Moejia or Myfia is faid to be , but never famous for Jewifi doctors, nor have any been heard of in it : the Ti- berias of the fcripture, and of Jofepfais, and of the Jewi/h writers in general, was a city in Pa/e/line, fituate on the lake of Gene far ety famous in their writings for the laft fitting of the Sanbedri?n in it, for a very confiderable univerfity there, for the refidence of R. Judah, the faint, in it, where it is probable he compiled the Mif- nah, and of many others of their cele- brated doctors, in the 2d and 3d centu- ries; and where it is certain the 'Jernfalem Talmud was finished, in the 3d century ; after which the univerfity in it began to decreafe. and we hear but now and then of a doctor in that place, the univerlities in Babylon bearing away all the glory j
there-
* Prafat. 3. ad Maforet. he feems to have taken this name 0$ Tiberias from Ben Chayiin 2:1 Mafor. Mag. Lit. f] t'ol. 31. 2. or from David Kimchi, in Miclol. fol. 108. 2.
[ H9 ]
therefore it is not probable, that this bufinefs of pointing the Bible was done by the men of Tiberias in later times : and if it was, it is ftrange that none of them mould de- clare themfelves the authors of the points, or that they had an hand in the invention of them, or were affiiting in that work, fince it would have gained them immortal honour, it being allowed to be an inge- nious and ufefulwork; andefpecially fince the Jews are proud boafters and lovers of fame and reputation : it-range, very ftrange it is, that not one of the men concerned in this work can be named ; nor any time fixed when it was done by them, whether ioo years after the finiihing of the 'Tal- mud, or 200, or 300 or 400 -, neither of which it feems the efpoufers of this no- tion chufe to fix upon, neither on particu- lar men, nor on a particular time, left they mould be entangled. The only man I have met with, that has ventured to rix the date of the invention of the points, is PoJJevinus the jcfuit, a who in his great wifdom has pitched on the year 478, when the points began to be in ufe; and fo fome
L 3 ye^rs
a Apud Herman. Htigonrm de prima fcribendi orig. c, 27. p. 168.
[ 'So J
years before the finifhing of the Talmud, ac- cording to the moft early account of it ; whereby he has deftroyed the hypothecs on which this notion is built. It is incredible that men under a judicial blindnefs, and the curfe of God, ignorant of divine things, mould form a fcheme which fo well afcertains the fenfe of the fcriptures ; that they mould hit on fuch an invention, and publifh it, fo fubveriive of their own religion, and i'o ferviceable to chriftianity and its doctrines, and which in no one in- ftance oppofes it ; and that after they had feen, as they muft in the age they are fup- pofed to invent them, what ufe the chri- ftians had made of various paiTages of fcripture againft fudaifm, and in favour of chriflianity ; and yet mould point and accentuate thofe very paifages againft them- felves, and for the chriftians : take one in- ftance in the room of many as to accents, in Gen. xlix. jo. how gladly now would they have the Athnacb removed from i^A"i to iy and then read the words, as they have attempted todob, the fcepter Jhall not depart jrom Judah, nor a law-giver from
bet-ween
b Vid. Menaffeh. ben Ifrael. Conciliat. in Gen. Qua?ft. 6? t 3. >
[ IJ" ]
between bis feet for ever ; for Shiloh fiall come : but the accents are againft them, and forbid this reading ; of what ufe they are in Jer. xxiii. 6. has been already obferved : nor is it credible, that the accents (hould be invented by the Jews about the time fuppofed ; fince one ufe of them was to lead and direct in mufic, and that the ufe of accents mould in profe and verfe be dif- ferent, as they be in metrical and profe- writings of the Bible, when at the time fuppofed, metre was difufed, and the metre of the Hebrews loft and unknown. He that can believe fuch a romantic ftory as all this is, need not be fqueamilh to believe the moil: arrant lye and notorious fable, to be met with in the wh-olzTahmid; a greater I know not 3 a louder lve I believe was ne- ver told by a few, nor by any other, that ever met with the leaft degree of credit in the world ; it is amazing it mould be be- lieved by any : fome Proteftants at firft re- ceived it, through their too great credulity, and through their high efteem for the a- bove-mentioned Elias, by whom they were taught the Hebrew language, of the ufe- fulnefs of which they were fenfible. Ma- ny of the Papifts greedily catched at it, L 4 and
E «5P ]
and commended the Protejlants for receiv- ing it ; who might hope, in the iflue, to •avail themfelves of it, fince it would appear from hence, that the fenfe of fcripture the Protejlants had given into, depended on the invention of men, even of fome yews, long fince the time of Chriflianity ; and they might hope that on this account, they would reject the points, and then, as words would be fubject to various fenfes without them, and fome contrary to each other, they would at lad: be convinced of the ne- ceffity of one infallible interpreter of fcrip- ture. Morimis, a papift, and a very princi- pal oppofer of the points, in a bookc, high- ly commended by fome Protefiant writers, fpeaks out plainly ; he fays, " the reafon " why God would have the fcriptures writ- «' ten in the ambiguous manner they are, *c (i. e. without points) is, becaufe it was " his will that every man mould be fub- " jecl: to the judgment of the church, and *' not interpret the fcriptures in his own " way; for feeing the reading of the fcrip- " tures is fo difficult, and fo liable to va- *' rious ambiguities, (i. e. a mere nofe of
" wax,
e DeHeb. & Grsc. Text. Sinceritate, 1. i. Exercitat, 6. c. zA 8. p. 198, 199.
[ 153 ]
*< wax, to be turned any way) ; from the « very nature of the thing, he obferves, it " is plain, that it was not the will of God, " that every one mould rafhly and irreve- iC rently take upon him to explain it, nor " to fuffer the common people to expound <c it at their pleafure, but, that in thofe, " as in other things refpedting religion, " his will is, that the people fhould de- " pend upon the priefts."
A. D. 500.
About this time the Babylonian Tal- mud was nnifhed ; according to Scali- ger*, in 5085 in which it is faid no men- tion is made of the points and accents : but, upon enquiry, it will be found to be otherwife ; for though the Talmudijis do not mention the names, nor exprefs the figures of the vowel-points, they mani- feftly fuppofe them; which (hew they were in being in their times ; as when they fay, read not Jo, but fo, it is plain they have no reference to the confonants, which are the fame one way as another; they muffc have refpect to the difference of the vowel- points,
* De Emend. Temp. I. 7. p. 323.
[ 154 ]
points, the doctrine of which is the foun- dation of their remarks, and therefore mutt be known bv them : fo the Karaites charge the Rabbins with perverting the commands of God by their Al-tikrds, read not fiy but fo, not changing the confonants but the vowels and accents; for having faid that the copies of theirs and the Rabbins, with refpectto punctuation were the fame; they obferve, that otherwife in the places where they change the vowels and accents, and fay, do not readfo, but Jo, they would not have faid, do not read, but abfolutely would have pointed according to their pleafure ; but that it is fuggefted they dared not do ; which, the Karaites add, is a proof, that be- fore the finifhing of the Talmud, from the days of old, the law was pointed and ac- cented b ; thus when they fay c, with refpect to Pf. 1. 23. do not read nrt^l but Dt^l, they mean do not read Shin with a point on the right hand, but with a point on the left; fo quoting Prov. xix. 23. they direct d, do not read y^W but y^jp that is, do not read the word with the point on the left
hand
b Dcd Mordecai, c. u. p. 137. c. 12. p. 152. 153. c T. Bab. Sotah, fol 5. 2. Mocd KatOD, fol 5. 1. d T. Bab,
Berucot, fol. 14. I.
t '55 ]
hand of Shin, when it would fignify fatif- Jied, as the common punctuation reads; but with the point on the right hand of it, and then it fignifies /even; and fo proves what it is quoted for, as they think, that that man that lies feven nights without a dream, is an evil man, and fo read what follows ; he Jhall not be vifitcd, be is an evil man: andfo inlf.'u. 22.U/tffayse, don't read n&S but HD2, that is, to ferve his own purpofe, don't read as if it was Bamah, (i. e. pointed with a Patach and Ssgolj which would fignify wherein, but Bamah, (i. e. with two Kametzes) and fo fignifies an high place ; like wife ml/lliv. 3. i.it is faidf, dont read "pn (i. e. with a KametzJ thy children, but -pl3, (i. e. with a van, and cholern) thy builders ; fo quoting Ezekiel, xlviii. 25. it is obferved*, don't read nEttS Shammah there (i.e. with two Kametzes) but H/DtP, Shemahy his name, (as if with Shevah, and KametzJ and this form does not fuppofe any corruption of the text, nor even a vari- ous reading; but is a kind of allegorical fport of thefe Rabbins among themfelves as F. Si- mon * calls it; when to fhew their acumen,
obferve, e T. Bab. Sotah fol. 4. 2. * T. Eab. Beracot,
fol. 64. 1. sT. Bab. Bathra, fol. 75. 2. * Difquif. Crit. c. 3. p. 17.
I 156 ]
obferve, what different fenfes may be put upon a word by its being differently pointed, which they propofe to coniide- ration, as if it was thus, or thus pointed ; but then this fuppofes the points to have been in being or they could not divert themfelves after this manner : and it mould be obferved, that this phrafe is ufed chiefly in giving allegorical expofitions, and is not by way of authority and command, as en- joining fuch a reading ; but by way of conceffion ; or fuppofing it was read fo, it would yield a commodious fenfe, efpecially if allegorical c : nor can I fee how this phrafe could be ufed in writing by giving inftances as above, without expreffing the very marks and figures of the points as put to the words in debate ; or otherwife they muff, act like delirious men indeed: nor can I fee how the ridiculous ftory, concerning jfoab's flaying of his m after for teaching him to read wrong could be related in the Talmud6' without the vowel-points being put to the word in it, which is told thus ; zhzv^Joab had cut off every male in Edom,
I Kings
' Vid. Maimon. Moreh Nevochim. par. 3. c. 43. Hot- tinger. Theiaur. phiiolog. 1. 1. c. 2. p. 214. Buxtorf.de Punftuat. par. 1. p 97, 98. Surenhof. Biblos Kattalagcs. p. 4 59. to, e T Bab. BavaBathra, fol. 21. 1. 2,
[ 157 ] i Kings xi. 15, 16. when he came before David he faid to him, what is the reafon that thou haft Co done ? (i. e. that thou haft not deftroyed the females, as the glofs is) he replied, becaufe it is written (Deut. xxv. 19.) thou (halt blot out "Of of AmOr lecky David faid unto him, but behold we read"DT; Joab anfwered, I was taught to read it "Of : he went and afked his mailer, faying, how didft thou teach me to read, he told him "d?j he drew his fword to kill him. Now where is the difference ? they all fay the fame thing, David, Joab, and his mafter, as the bare letters of the word without the vowel-points are given. What fenfe can be made of this ftory, thus told ? No doubt but in the Talmud, as ori- ginally written, the feveral vowel-points were put to this word ; as faid to be read by Joab, it was zacar, male, with two Ka- metzes -, as by David and Joa6's mafter, it was zecer, remembrance, with two Se- gols; and fo in other cafes, of a fimilar kind, the points were put, though in procefs of time left out, through the carelerlhefs or floth of tranfcribers ; and two inftances of this I have met with where the very
figures
[ i5§ I
figures of the vowel-points are ufed; thus having quoted Numb. xiii. 31. it is directed h dont read ^jdd than us (with a ShureckJ but faott than him (with a Cho/emJ; and in another place *, with refpect to the paffage in Deut. xxiii. 18, they fay, do not read nnr (with a KametzJ but ?3V (with a £0 £<?//; the firfl word, pointed as directed, iignifies a whore, being feminine, the other, differently pointed, is mafculine, and Iig- nifies a fornicator k. My Talmud is of the .'Amfterdam and Frankford edition, and I have no opportunity of confulting another : ihould it be faid, thefe points are annexed to the words by the editors of this work; i alk why they are not added to the words in the other inftances ? no doubt the rea- fon is, becaufe they were originally fo in the Talmud, and fo I found them; and I make no queftion of their being put in all other inftances, though omitted by copiers. To thefe obfervations I would add, the prick or point on the Vau in the word for arofe, in Gen. xix. 33. is taken notice of in the Ta/mud]; and fo are the 15 pricks
on
h T. Bab. Sotah, fol. 35. 1. ! T. Fab. Temurafa,
fol. 29. 2. • k Vid. Schindler. Lexic. Pentaglott.
col. 495. l T. Bab.-Horayot, fol. 10. 2, & Nazir,
fol 21. 1.
[ 159 ]
on feveral words in the bible, among which this is onera and on the word for unlefs, in Pf. xxvii. 13. n and on Dent. xxix. 29. ° Now if thefe pricks and points were fo ear- ly, which are of fo little ufe, much more the vowel-points ; and as for the accents, they are exprelly mentioned : thus thofe words in Nebem. viii. 8. are interpreted, fo they read in the law of God, this is the Scrip- ture -, diftinSlly, this is the 'Tar gum ; and gave the fenfe-, thefe are the verfes pointed, as R. Niffim on that place in the Talmud interprets it, and can fed them to underflaiid the reading, thefe are QWD 'pD>5 the di~ ftinciions of the accents p ; and fo in other places mention is made of the diftin&ions of the accents'1, and of the accents of the law r, which might be mewn and pointed at by the hand, and therefore mufl be vi- able marks or figures ; and which are to be underftood both of vowel-points, and of accents ; and fo the glofs on that place interprets it, both of pointing and the elevation of the voice in fmging according
to
m Aboth. R. Nathan, c. 34. fol. 18. Sopherim. c. 1. f. 3. n T. Bab. Beracot, fol. 4. 1. ° T.
Bab- Sanhcdrin, fol. 43. 2. p T. Bab Megi laja,
fol. 3.1. & Nedarim, fol. 37. 2. 1 T. Bab. Cha-
gigah, fol. 6. 2. r T Gab. Beracot, iol. 6z- I. *
Glois in lb. Pefachwn, fol. 119. u
[ '6o ]
to the accents. And the marks and figures of them, they fay in the Talmud, Solomon* inflructed the people in ; for fo thofe words are paraphrafed in it, he taught the people knowledge, for he inftru&ed them Dȣj/D ^D'DH in the Jignsy marks, figures, or cha- racters of the accents : and on the phrafe, his locks are bufiy, it is obferved ; from hence we learn that he f Solomon J fought out and explained every tittle, prick, or point fin the law) heaps of heaps of the conftitu- tions or decifions of itf: and in one of the above places8 referred to, they dif- pute about giving a reward to fuch who taught the accents ; which furely could ne- ver be thought of, if the accents were not yet invented ; to which may be added, that in the Talmud* mention is made of fome words in the Bible, " written but <c not read," and of others, " read but *' not written j" thofe that are written but not read are alone without the vow- el* points, as in jfer. li. 5. &c. Thofe that are read but not written, are thofe
whofe
« T. B. Eruvim, fol. 21.2. f Ibid. s Neda-
rim, fol. 37. 1. * T. Bab. Nedarim, fol. 37. 2.
Mafiechet. Sopherim. c. 6. f. 7.. 8.
f 161 j
whofe vowel-points ftand alone in the text, and the confonants in the margin, of which there are ten, Jud. xx. 13. Ruth iii. 5. 17. 2 Sam. viii. 3. and xvi. 23. and xviii. 20. 2 Kings xix. 31. 37. y^r. xxxi. 38. and 1. 29. This mews that the flare of the Hebrew text, with refpect to thefe Keries and Cetibs, was the fame at the^ compofition of the Talmud as now ; and that the Talmudifis mud have been acquain- ted with pointed Bibles, and confequently points mufl have been in ufe before the finifhing of the Talmud-, and fo before the pretended men of Tiberias: the ablation of the fcribes is fpoken of in the fame traffi, which forbids the reading the fuperfluous Vau in five places ; and alfo the reading of the fcribes, which (hews how they read and pronounced fome words, as Arets^ Shamaim, Mitzraim\ as Aretz, fometimes Aratz, and fometimes Erets, according to the diverfity of the accents, as Buxtorff obferves*; and Shamaim fometimes witlj Kametz and Patacb, and fometimes with a double Kametz, becaufe of the paufe ; and fo Mitzraim. The note of R. JSliJJim on M the
* Tiberias, c. 8. p. 11.
[ '62 ]
the place is, becaufe of the Athnach, A~ rets is read with a Kametz, and Sbamai?n arid Mitzraim, though they have no Aleph in them, are read as if they bad.
A. D. 400.
The Maforah, or Maforeth, as it i9 ibmetimes called, which fignifies tradition, is a work confirming of remarks on feveral things in the Bible, handed down topofte- rity from one to another ; it does not appear to be the work of one man, nor of a fett of men, and living in one age or place, who were jointly concerned in it, but of vari- ous perfons, in feveral ages : it might be begun by the men of the great fynagogue of Ezra, to whom the Jewif/j writers ge- nerally afcribe it ; and be carried on by fcribes and copiers in after ages, and at laft finifhed by the men of Tiberias ; not the Uto- pian men of Tiberias, after the year 500, who lived in the* 6th and 7th centuries, as pre- tended, but by thofe who lived in the 2d and 3d centuries, and in the beginning of the 4th ; men of fame and note among the Jews, and whofe names are given, and an account of them in the 'Jerufalem Tal- mud, of whom more hereafter ; though in 4 later
t 163 J
later times, fome things have Crept into this work, and additions made to it, in which the names of Jarchi and Ben Gerfom are mentioned, and even fome are the notes of Ben Chayim himfelf, the fir ft edi- tor of it in printed Bibles ; who with much pains brought it into fome form and order, and difpofed of it in the manner it is in fome printed copies : however, it is cer- tain the work was in being before the Ba- bylonian Talmud '; for the juit now mention- ed editor of the Ma/oral?, in his preface which ftands before Bomberg's Bible, and which Buxtorffzlio has placed before his, aflerts, that in many places the Talmud con* tradicls the Major ah -, and befides it is expre- fly mentioned in it. Such phrafes are fome- time6* to be met with in it as JOpftV Dtf, and rniDb1? Dtt; the meaning of which is, that fuch an expofition of a word or paflage, has its foundation in the Scripture, or is according to that, and is the literal fenfe of it, as it is commonly read; and that fuch an expofition or interpretation of a word or pafiage, has its foundation in the M 2 Ma-
• T. Bab. Pefachim, fol. 86. 2. Succah, fol. *. 2. Kid- dufhin,- fol. 18. I.. Sanhedrin, fol. 4. 1.
[ .64 ]
Maforah, or is according to that §; and is the traditionary fenfe of it, as it may be read and pronounced by other vowels : yea, thofe men who are faid to have numbered all the letters in the law, and the verfes in it, and to have pointed out the letter which is exactly the middle of the penta- teuch, and in other books, are called DOjptO the antients-, who had lived long ago, and with whom the compilers of the Talmud were not to be named * ; and are thought by the learned bifhop UJher-f to be the men of the great fynagogue of Ezra ', falfe therefore it is what F. Simon fays J, from Elias Levita, that the Maforah is later than the Talmud: yea, Chrift himfelf, in his time, fpeaks of a traditionary fett of men, who, he fays, were of old time, and are called by him, oc^x^^h the antients; who delivered down peculiar fenfes of the law from age to age, and may be truly faid to be a fort of Maforetes, Matt. v. 28. the fame who elfewhere are called elders, and to whom traditions are afcribed, Matt. xv. 2. Mark vii. 3, 5. though perhaps the mif-
nic
% Vid. Halicot Olam, par. 4. c. 3. p. 187. * T. Bab.
Kiddufhin, fol. 30. 1. & Sabbat, fol. \iz. 2. f Epift.
ad Capell. in cake dcfept. interpr. p. zit. J Difquif. Cri- tic, c. 4. p. 23.
[ '65 ]
nie do&ors are rather more peculiarly in- tended : and certain it is, that the feveral parts of the work of the Maforetes afcri- bed to them, are made mention of in the Talmud; as not only the numbering of the letters and verfes in the law before afTerted ; but the diitinclion of verfes themfelves is ipoken of in it, and is afcribed to Mq/es, though by Ellas Levita * made to be the work of the Maforetes ; in the Talmud -f it is faid, " whatever verfe Mofes did not " diftinguim, we do not diftinguim :" yea, we read of the diftinclion of verfes in the Mifnab J, which was compiled fome hun- dreds of years before the Talmud, The various readings which the Maforetes are faid to be the authors of, even divers forts of them are mentioned in the Tal- mud§; and their concern with the points and accents will be prefently obferved: but not only thefe parts of the work afligned them, but the forms of letters, greater, lefTer, or fufpended, marked by the Mafo- retes in the Bible, are obferved in the Tal- M 3 mud\
* Sepher Tob Taam, c. 2. f T. Bab.
Megillah, fol. 22, 1. I Mifn. Mcgillah.
c. 4.. f. 4. £ T. Bab. Nedarim, fol. 37. 2.
t 166 ]
mud || -, yea, the Maforah itfelf is mention- ed in it. In the interpretation of Neh. viii. 8. taken notice of- in the preceding fection, that part of it, and caufed them to underfiand the reading, as iome interpret it of the diftinction of accents ; others fay,' thefe are the Maforah *, or Majorette notes, or astR, Niffim, on the place, explains it, what is delivered in the Maforah: yea, not only in the ferufalem Talmud* mention is made of it, but in the Mifnah1 itfelf, finim- ed in the year 1 50, as a faying of R. Aki- ba, who died in the beginning of the fe- cond century; " the Maforah is an hedge f€ to the law ;" the note of Bartenora on it is, the Maforeth, which the wifemen have delivered to us, concerning words de- fective and redundant in the law. I mufl be fafe therefore in placing this work 100 years before the Babylonian Talmud, it cer- tainly muft be in being fo early at lead:, and much earlier; and Walton, an oppofer of the points, acknowledges u that fome part of
the
|J MaiTech. Sopherim, c. 9. f. 5. 7. T. Bab. Bava Ba- thra, fo). 1 09. 2. & Glofs in lb. T. Bab. Kidciuftiin, fol. 30. 1. T. Bab. SanhedYin, fol. 103. 2. 3 T. Bab.
Nedarim, fol. 37.2. Megillah, fol. 3. 1. * Megil-
Jah, fol. 74.4. l Pirke Abot, c. 3.f. 13. u Pro-
kgoat). 8. f. 12.
[ '6/ ]
theMa/bretic notes were collected before the Talmud was finifhed ; and thinks it* proba- ble, that though not immediately after Ez- ra, yet about the time of the Maccabees, when the fe€k of the Pharifees rofe, fome might begin to make thofe obfervations ; and Dr. Prideaux\ fuppofes that they be- gan a little after the time of Ezra : now the obfervations of the Maforetes were not only about entire words, nor about letters or confonants, but alio about the points and accents : take a few inftances, inftead of many which might be produced, on Gen. i. 5. the note of the Maforah is, Titf1? is written feveral times with a Kametz ; on Gen. xiv. c. Chedarlaomer, one word with two Sbevabs ; and on Exod. xxxii. 6. it is obferved the word pr\'$b is no more found with Segol and Siliuk ; on Job xix. 7. rWtt is no more written with Segol and Kametz ; and on Pf. lxxxiv. 11. it is remarked, that Thx is twice with a Patach and Athnach. See alfo on Gen. xvi. 13. and xix. 2. Exod, xxvi. 5. Lev. x. 4. 19. Numb. ix. 2. Dent* xviii. 17. Jofi. vi. 14. 1 Sam. x. 21. Pf, xxvii. 4. Jer. xvii. 17. arid iii. 32. Dan.
M 4 i. 3*
t Conneft. par. i.B. 5 p. 353.
,
I 168 ]
i. 3. and iii. 21. Ezr^ viii. 16. and other places ; wherefore the points and accents muft be before the Majoretes, and not invented by them.
A. D. 385. Jerom died in 420, being upwards of 90 years of age, and therefore muft flourifh about this time. He was the beft verfed in Jewijh literature of any of the antient writers, having had no fewer than four jfews, at different times for his inftructors ; and that he had knowledge of the points and accents, which therefore muft be in his time, I think is moft clear from his writings. I do not infift upon the marks and figures of the vowel-points, which go along with the Hebrew words ufed by him, which I fuppofe are added by the editors of his works ; though I confefs, I cannot perfuade myfelf that fo fenfible and learn- ed a man as jferom was, would ever fay what he does, unlefs not only he faw the Hebrew words he mentions, with the vow- el-points to them, but put them to them himfelf, when be wrote them ; though in length of time they might be difufed in the copies tranfcribed from him ; for how 4 other-
[ i69 1
othervvife could he fay, of fuch and fucha word, it is not written fo, but fo, in the Hebrew text, and yet gives the word either way with the fame con fon ants exactly ; fo he gives the word n)D3» in If. ii. 2 1 . and others, as will be prefently obferved : what is there th^en to diftinguilh them ? or how could he expect to be believed, or to convince any by fuch a method ? this was to make him appear very ridiculous -, but fuppofing the vowels put to the words by him, thefe would diftins:uim one word from another, and make him act like himfelf, and like a true critic ; and this being the cafe, it is eafy to account for it, why the vowel- points and accents are not mentioned by him, there being no need of it; fince they were prefented to the eye of the reader, and fuppofed to be -underftood by him. However, the fame Hebrew words exprelled in Roman characters, I take for granted were done by himfelf, and this I think is owned by Walton *. I have indeed no o- ther edition of his works, than that of £- rafmus, nor an opportunity of confulting any other ; now the words, as thus read, greatly agree with, and very rarely differ
from
* Bibl. Polyglott, prolegom, 3. f. 47.
t J7° ] from the modern punctuation, and where they do, it may be owing to inadvertency, or to too great confidence in his memory, or to copiers ; but be this as it may, it is certain he often fpeaks of the Hebrew points and accents, and of the variety of them, and that the fame words are pro- nounced by different founds and accents, and that Hebrew names are varioufly inter- preted, according to the diverfity of accents, and change of the vowel-letters * ; now, befides the notice he takes x of the prick or point on the word Kumab, in Gen. xix. 34. which he calls pointing ; he makes many obfervations on divers words, which mani- feftly mew his knowledge of the Hebrew points, without which he could never have made them : thus he obferves y, that in PJl xc. 8. in the Hebrew it is written lJJD^y, alumenUj which he tranflates our negle5is9 and wonders at the Septuagint interpreters, that they mould tranflate it our age, as if it was olamenu ; and now how could he fay it was written in the Hebrew^ alumenu and
not
wEpift. adEvagr. fol. 13. F.Tom. 3. Comment, in Ezek. c. 28. fol. 220. C. Tom. 5. & in Hagg. 1. fol. 101. & fol. 102. B. 1. 6. & in Ephef. fol. 95. F. Tom. 9. * Qusft. Heb. in Gen. fol. 68. 1. y Epift. ad Cyprian, fol.
35. B. Tom. 3.
[ *7l 1
not olamenu, fince the word without points may be read either way, if he had not feen it himfelf, nor had been told that it was fo pointed? nor could he fay * that in Exod. xiii. i 8. he found it written in the Hebrew volume, carefully examining its characters, Hamujim, and not Hami/im ; if the He- brew volume he examined had no points ; for this he had not from tradition, nor from ufe and cuftom of reading, but found it fo written ; he alfo obferves3, that the word DHytp, written with the fame let- ters, has a different iignification, as it may be differently read ; if Searim (i. e. with a Kametz) then it lignifies efimations, but if Seorim, (i. e. with a Cholem) then it figni- fies barley ; again b he remarks, that nyi, written with the fame letters, if read Re, (i. e, with a ShevahJ then it is a friend, if Ro, (i. e. with a Cholem) then it is a Shepherd; alike remark6 he makes on the word r\Q2> m If h\ 22. that if it is ren- dered wherein, then it mufl be n232> bameh, but if an high place or high, then it mufl be read r\Q2 bamah; fo the three letters •"ON when we fay they fignify memorial,
or
z Ep. Damafo. 2 qu. fol. 12. A. B. a Quasft. Heb.
in Gen. fol. 70. 4. b lb. fol. 72. C. « Com-
ment, in 1{. c. 2. fol. 7. D, T. 5.
L !7-2 ] or remembrance, then he faysd the word is read zecer, (i. e. with two Segols) but if a male, then it is read zacar, (i. e. with two Kametzes) ; again6, theie three letters *\21 iignify according to the quality of the places, if read dabar (i. e. with two Kametzes) it fignifies a word, but if deber, (i. e. with two Segols) then it fignifies the plague ; fo the word IpKf, he obferves f, that if the accent is varied, that is the point, it fignifies either a nut or watching -, that is, if it is pointed for a verb, then it fignifies to watch, but if as a noun, then it fignifies a nut, an al- mond-nut. And whereas in the Septua- gint verfion of .Jonah iii. 4. it is three days inftead of forty ; Jerom wonders g how they mould fo tranflate, when there is no likenefs in the Hebrew words, for three and for forty, neither in the letters nor in the fyllable, nor in the accents, that is vowels 5 and again he obferves1", the ambiguity of the Hebrew word •>}&, which is written with three letters, » and 3 and jy -, if, fays he, it is read Skene (i. e. with a Shevah and a Tzere)
it
d lb. inc. 26. fol 50. H. • lb. inc. 9. fol. 19.
H. & in Habac. c. 3. fol. 87. H. Tom. 6. f Com-
ment, in Ecclef. fol. 43. G. Tom. 7. & in Jerem. fol. 133. C. s Comment, in Jon. c. 3. fol. 57. M. h Com-
ment, in Ezek. 15. fol. 194. C.
[ i73 3
it fignifies two, but if Sba?ie, (i. e. with a Kametz and a TzereJ then it fignifies years, and fo in many other places. Jerom mud have knowledge of the point placed fome- times on the right hand of the letter tp, and then called Tamin, and fometimes on the left hand of it, and then called Smol, which gives it a different pronunciation, and the words a different fenfe : he obferves ', that from Ifi, a woman is rightly called I/ha, but Tbeodotion, he fays, fuggefts another etymology, faying, me mall be called af- fumption, becaufe taken from man -, and, adds he, I/fa may be interpreted affumption, according to the variety of the accents, that is, the points ; his meaning is, that if the word is derived from tttp}, with the point on the left hand, then it may fignify affumption, iince the word, fo pointed, fig- nifies to affume : again, Berfabee, he faysk, as differently accentuated, that is pointed, may be tranflated the well of the oath, or the well of fattety, or of the feventh ; the reafon of which is, becaufe y2W with a point on the right of £i% fignifies feveny and to /wear ; but with the fame point on the left
of
1 Qusft. Heb. ad Gen. fol. 65. I. fc Comment,
in Amos, c. 8. fol. 99. B.
[ '74 j
of the letter, it fignifies fulnefs wtiAfatiety , the fame is obferved by him in another place1, that it has different fenfes according to the variety of the accents. Now could Jerom pofiibly make fuch obfervatioris as thefe without the knowledge of the points ? for though from fome of thefe paffages it maybe gathered, that unpointed books had been ufed, and fo fome were deceived thro' the ambiguity of words without points; yet how came it to pafs that he himfelf was not deceived ? and how could he be fure of the true Hebrew reading, if he had not feen pointed Bibles, or had not been taught that they were fo pointed in fuch and fuch places ? to fuppofe other- wife is quite incredible. And it appears alfo, that the punctuation in his time was the fame wTith the modern punctuation, which he follows and fcarce ever departs- from 'y take, for inftance, his reading the, title of the 45th Pfalm, " Lamanazeah al " Sofannim, libne Corah, Mafchil fir je- «' didothm"; there is but one point miffing, and that is the Sbevab in the firft word, and which is fometimes not pronounced,
and
1 Comment, in If. c. 65. fol. 115. C. m Ad P'rin-
cipiam, fol. 34. F. Tom. 3.
[ *75 3
and had no certain pronunciation with the antients -3 fometimes by a, fometimes by /, fometimes by an e, as now ufually ; accor- ding to the Hebrew grammarians, it has the nature of all the reft of the vowels, and is equal to them, and pronounced like them, at certain times under certain conditions §. Three whole verfes in Ge?i. xvi. 18, 19, 20. are exactly pronounced according to the modern punctuation"; his verfion of the P/alms agrees with the Hebrew text, as it now is, and as it is with the points : befides what can he mean by faying °, that he then in his old age could not read the Hebrew text by candle-light, fince the let- ters were fo fmall, that they were enough to blind a man's eyes at noon-day ? for the Hebrew letters, let them be wrote as fmall as they well can be, can not be leiTer than the common Roman character 3 he muft be underltood fiirely of the fmall pricks or points which belonged to the Hebrew let- ters. How came he to put Adonai inftead of Jehovah, in Exod, vi. 3. if he is the au- thor
§ Vid. Balmef. Heb. Gram, five Mikneh Abraham, p. ?8. Sepher Cofri, par. 2. f. 80. & Mufcatum, in lb. fol. 128. 1. & R. Judah Chijug, & Aben Ezra, in Mufcat. n Ad Evagrium, fol. 13. 6. lb. ° Proem, in Sept.
Comment, in Ezeki! c. 20. fol. 208. G.
[ 176 ]
thor of the vulgate Latin verfion, unlefs he knew that the Jews put the points of Ado-* ?iai to Jehovah ? There is a paffage in Je- rom* which is produced by fome to dif- prove the knowledge and ufe of vowel- points in his time ; when fpeaking of Enon near Salim, " it matters not, he fays, whe- " ther it be called Salem or Salim, fince the " Hebrews very Jeldom make ufe of vowel- " letters in the middle ; and according to " the pleafure of readers and the variety " of countries, the fame words are pro- " nounced with different founds and ac- «' cents." Now Jerom is here to be under- stood either of the Matres LeSlionis >ltf ; and it, is very true that thefe are feldom ufed in the facred books of the Hebrews, and which makes the ufe of vowel-points the more neceffary; and if the Matres Leffio- nis were expunged upon the introduction of the points, as is fuggefted by fome, then the points muft have been before Jerom % time, and confequently not the invention of the men of Tiberias ; fince it feems the above letters were rarely ufed in his time as placed between confonants, as Dabar, and
other
* Epift. Evagrlo, torn. 3. fol. 13. F.
[ l77 ] other words obferved by him (hew : or elfe he is to be underftood of vowel-points go- ing along with letters; and thefc he might truly fay, were 'very rarely ufed, becaufe pointed Bibles in his time were very rare : but then he fuppofes fuch were ufed, tho' but feldom, and this Dr. Owen ° took to be his fen fe; " either, fays he, I cannot un- " derftand him, or he does poiitively af- " firm, that the Hebrew, had the ufe of " vowels, in his epiftle to Evagn'us ;" upon which he obferves, " if they did it per- " raro, they did it, and then they had them ; though, in thefe days to keep up their credit in teaching, they did not much ufe them -, nor can this be fpoken of the found of vowels, for furely, they ** did not feldom ufe the founds cf vowels, " if they fpoke often." And to this fenfe, the words of yero??i are quoted hy R. Aza- riab*-, and from whence he concludes, that the points were really in being before his time, and fo they are underftood by others J ; to fay no more, as not only the vowel-points and accents are faid to be the
N in-
° Cf the Divine Original of the Scriptures, p, 285. * imre Binah, c. 59 fol. 181. 1. X Simeon de
Mus, jofeph. de Voyfin. apud Owen. Theologoumcn, p,
4}2.
a
<(
[ 178 ]
invention of the men of Tiberias, after the finishing of the Talmud, but the diftinclion of verfes alfo ; it is certain, that Jerom, who lived a century or two before thefe preten- ded Tiber ians are faid to live, frequently § fpeaks of verfes in the Hebrew books, and diftinguifhed by him into colons and com- mas which the accents make; and of which mention is made before him in the Jeru- falem Talmud, and even in the Mijnab, as will be feen hereafter; yea, in the New Teftament, Luke iv. 17. Aft* viii. 32.
A. D. 370. About this time lived Epipbanitis, bi- fhop of Cyprus; he flourifhed in the times of Valens, Gratian, and Theodojius, and wrote a book againft various herefies ; and among them takes notice of thofe of the Nicolaitans, and their followers the Gno- fticks, &c. who had a fort of deities they paid honour to, and v/hich they called by bar- barous names ; and one of them was called Caulaucauch, a word taken from If. xxviii. 13. as he obferves ; upon which he gives' the text in Hebrew, thus, " Saulajau Sau-
" lafau,
$ Prsefat. in Jofuam, Paralipomen. Efaiam & Ezekiel. p Eiiphan. contr. Hieref. 1. r. ha;ref. 25.
[ >79 ]
u, lafau, Caulaiicauch, Caulaucauch, Zier- €i jam, Zierfam" exactly agreeing with the prefent pun&uation, only the Sbeva in the lad word is pronounced as an i; which may be owing to the copier, and is fometimes not pronounced at all, as before obferved, and when it is. it is differently : and very nearly to the fame manner of poin- ting, is his quotation of Pf. ex. 3, accor- ding to the Hebrew text, " Merem meffaar u La&til ' jeledecbeth^ '; and fo of If. xxvi. 2, 3. the likenefs is very great and much the famer. ] {u^obzILpiphanius took thefe He- brew pafTages from Origens Hexapla, a work in being in his time ; and if fo, this carries the punctuation ftill higher \ of which more hereafter. Moreover, the fir/ft word ob- ferved, was fo pronounced by fome here- ticks, if not in the firft, yet in the fecond century.
A. D. 360.
About this time lived R. Afe, the head
of a fchool or academy at Sura in Babylon1-,
he is laid to write a large book concerning
N 2 point-
1 Tb. 1. 2. hser. 65. r lb. 1. 3. hasr. 76. vid. Mont-
faucon. Hexapla Origen. vol. 2. p. 130 ' Vid.
Ganz, Tzemacn David, par. i.fol.33. 1. 2.
[ iSo )
pointing, and the cabalijlic fecr^fs in it, which book R. Nachman*, who lived about the year 1200, fays, was then in th^ir acade- my. IN ovv if this Kabli fo early wrote a book about the points, they mud then, and be- fore that time be in ufe, and mint have been fome time before in ufe, to be reduced to an art, and brought under certain rules, and treated on at large.
A. D. 340.
About this time lived R. Hillell, the prince, the lafl of thofe who was promo- ted to doctorfhip in the land of IJrael, as before obferved. Now R. Zacuth* ipeaks of a copy of the book of 24, called the Bible, written by R. Hillell, by which all books were corrected in the year 956 or 984, (according to the cJewijh account) and that he faw a part of it fold in Africa, and that it had been written in his time 900 years, and obferves that Kimcbi fays in his gram- mar, that the Pe?jtateuch was at Toletolo, or Toledo. Some, as Schickard* and Cuntfus%, are of opinion, that this Hillell, was the
famous
* Apud BuxtorfF. de Pun ft. Antiq. par. i. p. 55. u Ju- chafin, fol. 132. I. w Bechinat haperuihim, p. 51-
& Jus Reg, Heb. c. 2. theor. 5. f. 4. x De Repub-
lic. Heb. i. i.e. 1*.
[ '8. ]
famous Hillell that lived before the times of Chrijiy and flourished ioo years before the deftruction of the fecond temple ; and if fo, fince his copy was pointed, as will prefently befeen, it would prove the points to be as early; but he is more generally thought to be Hillell the prince, before- mentioned ; for that he mould be a Spanifl) jfew, who lived about 600 years ago, as Morinus y fuggefts, is not credible ; fince it can't he thought he was an obfcure perfon, but of fome note, from whom, for the fake of honour, the copy had its name, and efpecially as by it all copies were cor- rected ; beiides, the above *Jewifo chrono- loger, who gives the account of it, fays, the copy he faw had been written 900 years before his time, and he lived about the year 1 500. Now this copy had the points, as is certain from what Kimcbi fays, who lived in the 12th century; he obferves', that the word W\l, in Pf cix. 10. is writ- ten with a broad Kamets, and in the copy of Hillell, at Toletolo, or Toledo, it is writ- ten concerning it in the Majorat, that it is no where elfe with Chateph, i. e. with N 3 Ka-
y Exercitat. Eibl.l. i.e. 2. p. 29. z Comment,
in Pfai. icg. 10.
[ 182 }
Kamets -Chatefh ; and in another work" of his, he fays of the word nDl^n, in 2 Sam. xiii. Mem is with Segol, which is not ufual, and is in the room of Pat bach-, and in the book of Hlllell, which is at Toletolo or Toledo, it is with Pathach; and the learned Mercer h obferves, that the word HJHj m Prov. xxiv. 14. is, in a M S. written with a Tzere, but in the margin it is remarked, that in Hill 11 it is written with a Sfg"^/. Wherefore the points mud: be annexed to the Bible as early as the times of Hillell, and before.
In the library at Berlin is a Hebrew MS. written by £//^j> the pointer, con- taining the Pentateuch, the 5 Megillot, with the book of ^o^, and fome chapters out of the Prophets, with Maforetlcal obfervations in the margin ; which, if what is faid of it could be eftablifhed, it would be full as antient as Hillell\ copy : at the end of it the writer has put his name, and declares that he wrote it, and pointed it, and finiihed it in the year fromthe creation of the world 4094; and Andrew Mullerus, fometime provoft at Berlin, wrote at the beginning of
it,
a Seoher Shorafli. rad. £2*C'« k Ccmm^nt. in
Prov- xxiv. 14.
[ i83 ]
it, that this copy was written by Elias in the ifland of Rhodes, A. C. 334; but La Croze* the late librarian, fays, that at the end of the book there are manifeft traces of letters blotted out, and others put in, and that the colour of the ink, and form of the parchment clearly mewed, that it could not then be written fcarce 400 years.
There are feveral antient copies of the Bible pointed, but the precife age of them cannot be afcertained. The yews in Chi- na, have a very antient Hebrew Bible in Pekin, 12.16. to be not at all differing from ours c; by which it lhould feem that it is pointed, or otherwife it would differ. A copy called Sinai, a correct copy of the Pentateuch, has the accents, as Elias Le- vita acknowledges d, who obferves that the nrft word in Exod. xviii. j . is with Gera- Jhim, but in Sinai with a Rebiah -, and he alfo gives another inflance of a different ac- centuation, but adds, that he knew not who was the compoier oi it. R. Nacb- mant, who lived about the year 1200, fays, he fearched mod diligently in all the Baby- N 4 lo iian
* A} ud Wolf. Biblioth. Heb. p. 166. 16;. c Se-
medo's ii;itoryot China, par«iiC. d SepherShi-
bre Luchot. • Apud Buxtorff. ut fupra.
t «84 ]
Ionian' and Jerufalem copies, and in Hil- fell's, and could not find any where a Da* gejh in thofe three guttural letters, n n> V, but found it in x,in three places, Lev. xxiii. 17. Cn?#. xliii. 26. and E;srtf viii. 18. by which it appears, that not only HillelPs copy, but the Babylonian and Jerufalem co- pies were pointed. Ben Melech, on Ezek. xxiv. 10. obferves, that R. Jonah writes, that he found the word Harkach with a Kamets under He in they erufalem copy, but in the Babylonian copy, he found it with a Fat hack. There was a Jerufalem copy made mention of by feveral, that was a pointed one; Muftatus* fays, that the word ^Htt, in Deut. vi. 4. is pointed with >SVg-<?/ arid Kamets, as it is found in the correct Jerufalem copy ; and fo Kimchi affirms *, that in the correct Jerufalem copy, the word Vin* in Job xxix. 18. was with a Sburek for thofe of Nahardea, and with zCbolem for the wefterrt JeWs ; and feems to be the copy R. Jonah the grammarian, and Maimoni- de\ v.ho both lived in the 12th century, truited to and depended on; and which the fatter h calls the famous Egyptian copy, which
was
f Comment, in Cofri, par. 4. fol. 2^0. 4. £ Sepher
Shorath. rad. 7ffY« " Iiiichot Torah, c. 8 f". 4.
[ I*! 1
was many years at Jerufa/em, and which Ben After fpent much time in correcting, who lived there a long time, as Elias fays5, and by which other copies were corrected ; and this Azariabk confulted, and fays, it was in 'Jerujalem from the times of the mifnic doctors, and had in it the Tikkun Sopberim, the ordination of the fcribes, and the Bible-feclions open and fhut.
A. D. 300.
The Rabbot are commentaries on the five books of Mofes, written by Rabbi Bar Nachmoni, who flourifhed, according to Buxtorff1, about this year. There are fif- teen words which have unufual pricks or points upon them, obferved by the Ma- forab and in the Talmud ; ten of them in the law, four of them in the prophets, and one in the Hagiograpba ; thofe in the law, moft, if not all of them, are taken notice of in thefe commentaries m; in one*
of
1 Shibre Luchot & Prsefat. 3. ad Maforet. k Meor
Enayim. c 9. fol. 52. 2. ' Biblioth. Heb. p. 326.
m BereOiit Rabba, f. 48. fol. 43. 1/ & f. 51. fol. 46. 1. &{. 78. fol. 68. 3. &f.84- fol. 73.3.BemidbarRabba, f. 3. fol. 182.2. * Bemid bar Rabba f. 3 fol. 182. 2.
Abot R. Nathan, c. 34. vid. Aruch in voce ~?pj & tvjaaric Philip. Aquin. fol. 343. 2. who from hence concludes that Ezra put the points and accents.
3
[ i86 ]
of which are thefe words concerning them, faid Ezra, if Elijah (another copy has MoJesJ fhould come and fay, why haft thou written them ? 1 will fay to him, now have I pointed them ; if he fhould ' fay, thou haft written well, I will im- 1 immediately remove the points from ' them." In another of them, " expref6 1 mention is made of the accents, Neb. 1 viii. 8. is thus paraphrafed, they read in
* the book of the law of God, this is the fcrip- ' ture ; diftinBly this is the Targum ; and ' gave thefenfe, thefe are the accents ; and
* caufed them to widerftafid the reading, 1 thefe are the heads of verfes."
A. D. 230.
In this year the J 'en uj ale m Talmud was finifhed, as is generally owned, though Sea- tiger* places it in 370, and Whifton\ in 369, in which the accents are made men- tion of". The paffage in Neh. is explained much in the fame manner, as in the Ba- bylonian Talmud, and in the Rabbot juft now quoted ; the diftinclion of the verfes is ob- ferved in it||, which is made by the accent
Silluk.
* De Emend. Temp. 1. 7. P. 323. § Chronolo-
|r"eal Tables, cent. 19. n T.
Hierof. Megiiiah, foJ. 74. 2, 4. || lb. fol. 75. 1. 2.
[ i»7 ]
Silluk. In this Talmud% the double reading of a word in Hag. i. 8. is obferved, which in the text is written "TIOK'I, but in the margin it is read rHiDtfl ; the one is accor- ding to the letters without the Jl parago- gic, the other according to the points with it, which, as Schindler faysn, is the true read- ing; for becaufe the point Kametz is under the laft letter, the quiefcent letter n is to be afTumed, and fo the word is to be read with n paragogic ; but if the word had no points at the time this Talmud was compiled, nor written with H in any copies, why mould it be read, or directed to be fo read ? I have placed this Talmud here becaufe it is generally received, though fome think it was not written fo early, iince mention is made in it of Dioclefian the king ; and if the Roman emperor ot that name is meant, it muft be written in or after his time; though it appears from the Talmud0 itfelf, that the Doclet or Dioclefian fpoken of was, ac- cording to that, fome petty king, that lived in the times of R. Judab Hakkodejh, the compiler of the Mifnab, by whofe
chil-
% T. Hierof. Maccot, fol. 32. I. & Taaniot, fol. 65. 1. Lexic. Pentaglott. col. 830 ° T. Hierof. Trumot, 46. 2, 3.
3
[ 1 88 ]
children he had been beaten, as pretended, and when he became a king, complained of it ; which can not fo well agree with the emperor Dioclejian : however, what is quoted from it, is a proof of the accents be- ing mentioned in it, which fome have de- nied, and for the fake of which it is ob- ferved.
About this time flourifhed that indefa- tigable writer Origen, who had know- ledge of the Hebrew tongue, and is almoft the only one of the antients that had, ex- cepting Jerom. This writer, in one of his commentaries*, quotes the Hebrew reading of Pf. cxviii. 25, 26. and agreeable to the prefent punctuation ; in which he appears to be inftructed by a Jew, fince he puts A- Aonai inftead of Jehovaht and by which it is evident that the Jews pointed as they do now. The fame writer compofed a work called Hexapla ; which, had it been preferved, would have been of great ufe in this controverfy about the antiquity of the Hebrew points; for in this work he placed in the firft two columns, iirft the Hebrew text with its proper letters, and then the fame in Greek characters : Fabricius* has
given
* Comment, in Matth. p. 438, 4.39. Ed. Huet. r Bibliothec. Grace, torn. 2. p. 346.
[ i»9 3
wiven a fpecimen of it in the whole firft chapter of Genefis, collected out of the fragments of the antient Gretk interpre- ters; and fo has Montfcucon* after him; which I have compared with our pointed Bibles, and find it exactly agrees with our modern punctuation, with fcarce any va- riation at all ; take as a proof the firfl two or three verfes.
V"> n fiR* niriyrr ha cznnn vis Sy'^rrV
* t • " :
3-
ni** yrm *viR rr OTtfw* "fcjh-
The reft of the fpecimen, throughout the whole chapter, is agreeable to this; both Fabricius and Montfaucon have given another fpecimen of the Hexapla, on Hof. xi. i. the fame which Walton* has tran- scribed from a copy of cardinal Barberini, from whom they feem to have taken it, which does not fo exactly agree With the modern pointing as the other does ; but Montfaucon* has given two more fpecimens,
one
i Hexapla Origen. Tom. i. p. 2. &c. T Biblia Poly-
glott. Tom. 6. 72. Interpr. Ed. Roman, p. 133. s Prze-
liminar. ad Hexapla. c. i. p. 16.
BpsM^ TSxpix. EAw»/a E3- cur ay. cup x& cazptq uaapsq oluSx S'wa aCcotf nfyuvix. «A (pvi SfWjU. apax^ EAwtjW. |U.p«%j(p£.9- oA
2iu)y,ep E'Awjk m «p «[ji wp
[ igo ]
one out of the OBapla of P/l ii. 6. and an- other out of the Fnneapla of Hab. ii. 4. which perfectly agree with the prefent punctuation; and it is furprifing they mould, when it is confidered, that particularly the fpecimen of the whole firll chapter of Ge- nefis is collected from fragments preferved in various writers, and thofe but little ikilled in the Hebrew language, and who fbme- times wrote differently one from another ; and that thefe have patted through the hands of various copiers, entirely unac- quainted with that language ; and yet Fa- bricius complains not of any difficulty in collecting it; Montfaucon indeed does1, and it is pretty much he mould, fince he wrote after Fabricius ; this mews that he did not confult him, and that he had not his ipeci- menfrc: n aim; and therefore it is the more furprifing that they mould fo nearly a- gree, the difference between them being chiefly not in the vowel-points, but in the powers of fome few of the confonant let- ters. With what precifion and exactnefs, agreeable to the modern punctuation, may it reafonably be fuppofed were the Hexa- pla of Origen, as firft publifhed by him,
and
1 HexaplaGen. p. 14.
[ >9* ]
and as it would have appeared had it been pfeferved; and who muft have had a poin- ted Bib'h. before him when he compoled it ; and the moft exqnifite care, circum- fpeclion and diligence muft have been uicd by him, to obfe~ve every letter and every point, fo as to write each word in Greek characters, and give them a proper regular pronunciation. Though I muft confefs, that fince Origen was but indifferently fkilled in the Hebrew language, as Huetius* has obferved, and fb father Simon*; I greatly fufpect he had, by fome means or other obtained a copy of the Hebrew Bi- ble, written in Greek characters, perhaps from a Jew with whom he was acquain- ted, well verfed in the Hebrew language, both letters and points ; for it was allowed by the Jews * to write the Hebrew text in the characters of any language, though not to read it fo written in their iynagogues ; and efpecially they allowed of writing it in Greek characters, it may be for the ufe of the Hellenijtic Jews ; nay they allowed the facred books to be written in Greek cha- racters
■ Origenian. 1. 2. c. 1. f. 2. p. 26. * Difquifir.
Critic, 0 9. p. 61. * T. Bab. Sabbat, fol. 115. 1, &
Megillah, fol, 9. I, & Debarim Rabba, f. x. fol. 233. 1.
[ 102 ]
rafters only, for fo it is faid in the Mifnah*, •* there is no difference between the (fa- ** cred) books, the Phylacteries, and Me- «.* zuzah (the parchments on the door- f* ports ) only that the books may be writ- 44 ten in every tongue, but the Phylacteries " and Mezitzab may not be written but in *' the A/fyrian (i. e. in Hebrew characters). " Rabbi Simeon Ben Gamaliel fays, they
* don't allow the books to be written but in *£ Greek;" and the deciiion was, according to Simeon, zs Maimonides*obferves ; and who agreeable to this fays, •« they may not ** write the Phylacteries and Mezuzah but *l in AJfyrian characters, but they allow *c the (facred) books to be written alfo in " Greek, and in that only." I fufpect therefore, I fay, that Origen lighted on one of thofe copies, and what ferves to ftrength- en the fufpicion is, that in his Hexapla, A- donai is put for Jehovah, as the Rabbins read it§. Now what he did in compiling his Hexapla, was placing the feveral copies, as he fou ad them, in order, in diftinct co- lumns as follows; firft, the Hebrew text in Hebrew letters, as then in ufe with the
Jews,
* Megillah, c. i. f. 8. T. Hierof. Sabbat, fol. 15.3.
* Tephiilin, c. 1. s. 19. % Vid. Epiphan. contr. Hreref. 3. hisr. 76.
[ i93 1
Jews, as Eufebius afTuresx, who doubtlefs law the work itfelf; and next a copy of the fame in Greek characters, he had fomc- where met with ; then followed the Greek verfions oiAquila, Symmachus, the Septua^ gint, and Theodotion : but be it in which way it may, whether the compofition of the Hebrew copy in Greek characters, was Orige?isy or another's, it feems a clear cafe that a pointed Bible muft. then be in being, and was made ufe of; -and that there was a regular punctuation, and that by the fpecimen the prefent punctuation agrees with it; which obfervation fufficiently con- futes and deftroys thofe notions and vulgar mirtakes fo generally received, of the in- vention of the points by the men of Tibe- rias* and of their being invented after the writing of the Talmud, and of their being unknown in the times of Jerom; all which muft now be retracted.
A. D. 2co.
In this century, and the preceding, lived the Rabbins of Tiberias, fo frequently men- tioned in the 'Jerufalem Talmud, fmifhed in the year 230, as before obferved; at this O time
* Ecclefiaft. Hift. 1. 6. c. 16.
[ J94 ] time as there were many fynagogues of the Jews at Tiberias, fo there was a famous academy; and now lived the true men of Tiberias, fpoken of in Jewi/Jj writings, and at this time only, as to any number of them; for in the following century, uni- verfities and promotions ceafed in the land of Ifrael. Thefe men, fo famous in Jew- ijh writings for their knowledge of the He- brew language, and the purity and ele- gance of it, and the right manner of read- ing and pronouncing it, lived before the times of Jerom, and fo not after the nnifh- ing of the Talmud, as E/ias fays ; for Je- rom manifeftly refers to them, and to the fentiments the J-ews had of them, for their knowledge of the law, and the beauty and elegance of their language*. But though thefe men ftudied the Hebrew language, and were very expert in it, and in the af- fair of pointing, yet they were not the in- ventors of the points •> which may be con- cluded from what Aben Ezra fays* of them ; " I have {ten, fays he, the books t( which the wife men of Tiberias examin- " ed, and fifteen of their elders gave it
9t upon
* Qu£eft. feu Trad. Heb. in Gen. T. 3. fol. 73. I. K. y Comment, in Exbd. 25. 31,
[ W 1
" upon oath, that three times, they dili- *f gently confidered every word and every u point, every full and deficient word, and f* behold, Tod was written in the word " ntPVn"* i- e. in£;cW. xxv. 31. by which it appears that the Bible was not pointed by them, but pointed Bibles, which they had, were examined by them ; fo that pointed Bibles were in being before their time -y they were pointed to their hands ; they only fearched into them, and ftudied them, and became very expert and accu- rate in their knowledge of the points : hence the fame writer, in another work * of his fays, that from them, the men of Tibe- rias were the Maforetes; from them we have the whole pointing ; not that they were the authors and inventors of the points ; but that by them they were handed down to them with great accuracy and exadtnefs ; for he exprefly fays in an- other work of his *, that " the men of the great fynagogue taught the people the fenfe of the fcriptures by the accents, and by the kings and minijiers ; fo he calls the O 2 vowel-
z Tzachut fol. 138, 2. npud Buxtorf. de Punft. Antiqj. P- 11. * Mozne Leflion Hakodelh apud .Buxtorf. lb.
p. 13, 14.
[ 196 ]
vowel-points, Cholem, Shurek, &c. and were inftead of eyes to the blind; there- fore in their foot-fteps we go forth, them we follow, and on them we lean in all cxpofitions of the fcripture." But what- foever fkill the men of Tiberias might at- tain to in the ftudy of the points, they ap- pear to be very unfit for, and unequal to fuch a work as the invention of them. Hear what Dr. Lightfoot a has obferved of them, who was thoroughly acquainted with their characters, as to be learned from the above Talmud. " There are fome who " believe the holy Bible to be pointed by " the men of Tiberias ; I do not wonder " at the impudence of the Jews who in- " vented this ftory ; but I wonder at the " credulity of Chriftians who applaud it. " Recollect, I befeech you, the names of " the Rabbins of Tiberias, from the firft fi- '< tuation of the univerfity to the time " that it expired ; and what at length do f( you find, but a kind of men mad with *« Tharijaifm, bewitching with traditions <c and bewitched, blind, guileful, doting, " they mull pardon me, if I fay magical " and monftrous ? men how unfit, how
unable, * Works vol. ii. Chorograph. Cent. c. 81. p. 73. 74-
t '97 ]
** unable, how foolim, for the undertake £: ing fo divine a work ?" Then he gives the names of many of them, and obfervw trHr childifhnefs, fophiftry, froth, and poifon, and adds, " if you can believe the <f Bible was pointed in fuch a fchool, bfe- " lieve alio all that the Talmudifis write. t: The pointing of the Bible favours of " the work of the Holy Spirit, not the " work of loft, blinded, and befotted " men ;" and elfewhere he fays, " it is " above the {kill of a mere man to point " the Bible ; nay, fcarcely a verfe as it is. ■" The ten commandments may puzzle all " the world for that fkill."
As about this time, the univerfities both of "Tiberias and Babylon were the moil flou- rifning, it may be reafonably fuppofed, that as they had each of them copies of the Bible, which they carefully examined, and preferved for the ufe of the Jews in Palejiine and Babylon, that now were made the various readings called weft em and eaft- ern, published at the end of fome printed Bibles ; the one for the Jews in their own land, called wejlern, and the other for the yews in Babylon, called eajlern. The dif- O 3 ference
* Erubhim, or Mifcellanies, c. 31. vol, i. p. 10 14.
r 198 ]
fercnce in number are 216, and none of them in the law ; and they are moflly very trivial, and chiefly about letters and words, but not altogether, for in two places, Jer. vi. 6. Amos iii. 6. they make mention of the point Mappick, in which the one copy differs from the other; fo that Eliasb is wrong, in faying that the differences are about words and letters only, but not about points and accents, and therefore he fup- pofes they were made before the invention of the vowel-points and accents ; but he is miftaken, thefe were then in being. In Lam, v. 21. the wejiern Jews have the Tetra- grammaton, Jebovab, but the eajiern have Adonai > the forme/ word, as it mould feem, having in their copy the points of the latter, as it fometimes has, they put Adonai inflead of it ; which mews that the points then were.
A. D. 190.
Clemens of Alexandria lived and wrote about this time, and is thought to make mention of the Hebrew points and accents, where he faysc, there are fome, who in
reading,
* Frsefat. 3. ad Maforet. e Stromat. 1. 3. p. 442.
[ 199 ] reading, by the tone 'of the voice pervert the Scriptures to their own pleafure, and by a tranipofition nvccv TrpovooSiuv kocl giy- puv (which Sylburgius his interpreter ren- ders) of certain accents and points, what are wifely and profitably commanded, force to their own liking j" in which he has re- fpecT: to a text in Mai. hi. 1$. and which he vindicates againft fome heretics of his time ; but not to the Greek verfion of it, and the accents of that ; for thofe in the oppofition fay, there were no accents in the .Greek tongue for ages after d j but to the Hebrew text, and the points and ac- cents in that ; and the rather this may be fuppofed, feeing it appears in feveral parts of his writings, that he had fome know- ledge of the Hebrew tongue.
A little before Clemens, Irenceus wrote, who,
tho' he had but afmall degree of knowledge
of the Hebrew language,yet fomething of it he
O 4 endea-
d Some fay they began in the 7th century, vid. Velafti Difiert. deLit. Grasc. Pronunciat. par 4. c. 2 P- 9^- Roma?, 1 75 1. It it laid the ancienter the MSS. are, the fewer are the accents, and that thofe which exceed a thoufand years have none at all, Mirtifb. Sarpedon (alias Frideric ReifTen- berg). Diifert. de Vera Attic, Pronunciat par. 3.C. 1. p. 48. Romx, 1750; but Gregorius Placentinius makes thein much more ancient. See his Epitome Graic. Paleograph. c. u, p. 88 Roma:, 1735. The controverfy about the Greek ac- cents has been oi late years revived at Rome.
[ 200 ]
endeavoured to get, triat he might anfwer the heretics of his time, who were fond of introducing foreign words and their fig- nifications into their fchemes. The firft and ancient Hebrew letters, he fayse, were but ten ; which Feuardentius his annotator explains of the ten from Aleph to Tod in- clulive, becaufe thefe were the firft and chief from whence all the reft were formed ; and indeed the cabalijlic Jews ■ fay the Tod is the beginning of all letters ; and Hermannus Hugo * obferves, that all the Hebrew characters are compofed from the fingle letter Tod varioufly joined toge- ther 5 but Irenaus adds, M that every one «5 of the letters are written by fifteen, the «< laft letter coupled to the firft." f* Now what he means by fifteen Dr. Grabe fays he could not devife. I fufpect he means the fifteen vowel-points, as fome grammarians h reckon them, and call them five long, five fhort, and five moft fhort, which Irenaus might have fome knowledge of from thofe who taught him the little Hebrew he had ; for that he ccnfulted the Rabbins of his
time
* Adv. haeref. 1. t. c. 41. f R. Abraham Dior, in Jet- zirah p. 5S. Ed. Rittangel. ? De prima Scribendi Orig. c. p. 64. h Vid. Balmefii Mikaeh Abraham p. 25. lin. 3. Se 2O'. lin. 6.
[ 20! ]
time is clear from what he before fays of the Hebrews and their language, " Sicut <f periti eorum dicunt :" and it is obferv- able that in his time Hebrew words were read and pronounced according to the mo- dern pointing ; as for inftance, lp1? *)p is read not Cidacu nor Coloco, as mpft natu- ral, without points; but Cau/acau l, as it is in our pointed Bibles in If. xxviii. 13. and was read fo before his time by the he- retics he oppofes. There are other words in Ireneeus k which agree with our modern punctuation, as Sabaoth, Eloa, Adonai : and here I cannot forbear obferving, that Pbilo By b litis \ who lived half a century at leaft before Irencensy in translating San~ choniatbos hiftory out of the Phoenician language, reads E^n^tt, his author's word no doubt, in Greek EXueip, as Jerom m, Ba- flR, and Epipbanius °, in the fourth cen- tury read it Eloim-, and Or i gen before them, as the fpecimen of his Hexapla given above {hews. This very antient way of reading and pronouncing Elohim, as it agrees with
the
1 Adv. haeref. 1. i.e. 73. k Jb. 1. z. c. 66. l Apud Eufeb. Praepar. Evangel. 1. I. p. 37. 'm Epili. Marcellae fol. 31. A. Tom. 3. Quarfc. Heb. in Gen. fol. 66. E. c Adv. Eunom. 1. 1 . » Contr. K;cref. 1. i . Haeref. 40.
[ 202 ]
the modern punctuation, fo it may be ob- ferved againft the Hut chinf onions, who fometimes write and pronounce it Elabim and fometimes Aleim, as Mafclef alfo does.
A. D. 150.
In this year, or about this time, the Mifnah or book of Traditions was fi- nifhed, which R. Judab Hakkodejh col- lected together, that they might not be loft ; and it mull be written fo early, fince by the unanimous confent of JewiJJj wri- ters, it was compiled by this Rabbi, who nourished in the times of Antoninus Pius, with whom he was very familiar. Some Chriftian writers indeed place it at the be- ginning of the fixth century, or at the end of the fifth, and others at the end of the fourth ; but no good reafon can be given why the Jews fhould antedate this book, for whofe ufe only it was written. There is not one Rabbi mentioned in it but lived before R. Judab, the fuppofed compiler of it -, nor is there any chronological charac- ter in it that brings it lower than the times of Adrian the predecefTor of Anto- 1 ninus,
[ 203 1 rJnus, whofe name is once mentioned ia it p ; therefore Maimonides * thinks the Mifnah was compofed about his time. Now the Jews had been very much har- raffed in the times of Trajan and Adrian^ but obtained £>me favour and eafe in the times of Antoninus j and having more eafe and leifure, it was the fitteft opportunity of letting about this work of collecting their traditions from feveral parts ; which were put together by the above Rabbi, that they might not be loft : according to the author of Cq/h'*, this year 150 is the year 150 from the defTruclion of the fe- cond temple, which brings it to the year of Chriji 220 -, but R. Abraham Ben Da- vid, b and R. Menachem c place the Mifnah m 120 from the deftruction, which is A. D. 190 ; but Morimts d himfelf owns that Rab- benu Hakados compiled the Mifnaiot or traditions almoft two hundred years before the council of Nice, and that council was but little more than three hundred years
after
P Avodah Zarab* c 3. f. 3. * Comment, in lb,
a Par 3. c. 67. fo R. Serira in Juchafm fol. 115. and R. Azariah Meor Enayim c. 24. fol. 95, 1. b Sepher Ca- bala. c Apud Ganz Tzemach David, par 1. fol. 30, 2. d De finceritate Hfb Text. i. 1. Exercit. 1. c, 2. p.
?7-
[ 204 ]
after the birth of Chrifi. The general regard paid to the Mlfnah by the Jews in all parts, in Palejiine and in Babylon, the puzzle the Gemarijls are at in many places to underftand it, many of the traditions in it being the fame that are obferved or re- ferred to in the New Teftament, are proofs of the antiquity of it ; and though it is de- nied, yet it is moft clear that Jerom had knowledge of it as a written book > his words are, thatq " the traditions of the " P hart fees are what to this day are called «* SeuTsputreig (fecondary laws or the Mif- " nah, and are fuch old wives fables, that ** I cannot bear evolvere to turn them over; " for neither will the bignefs of the book " admit of it, and moft of the things in " it are fo filthy that I am afhamed to fpeak " of them ;" in which he not only gives the work its proper name, a fecondary law or Mi/nab, but fpeaks of it as a book, and of a confiderable bulk, it being bigger than our New Teftament, and there are things in it which agree with the character he gives of it, and fuch as well deferved his cenfure, as Dr. Wotton * thinks ;
though
*» Epirt. Algafias Qu. 10. fol. 55. I, Tom. 3. • Mif- eellaneous Difcourfes, &c. p. 94.
[ 205 ]
though I muft confefs in this I am of a different mind ; but chufe rather to fub- fcribe to what the learned Wagenfeil fays *, that in the Mifnah as abftra&ed from the Gemara, " there is no fable nor apologue in it, nor any thing very foolifh, nor very re- mote from reafon j it contains mere laws and traditions." Jerom therefore fays this upon hearfay, and it is plain by his own words he had not read it ; or, it may be, rather he refers to the Jerufalem Talmud, which confifls both of the Mi/nah and Ge- mara -, and not only the matter but the bulk of the book 'Jerom fpeaks of better agrees with that, which is a large folio ; and being finifhed in the year 230, as be- fore obferved, there was time enough for Jerom to have knowledge of it ; however, I think it is beyond all doubt, that there was a collection of the Jewijh traditions call- ed in his time Mifnab or Mifnaiot, and that this was a written book, in fome form or an- other, either by itfelf or with the Gemara, of which Jerom had knowledge; and that Jerom faw the Mifnah itfelf is the Opinio?, of the learned Dr. Bernard in his letter to the bimop of Fern, prefixed to
the
• Praefat ad Tela Ignea, p. 57, 58.
[ 206 ]
the Mi/nab of Sitrenbujiits -f ; and Jeroffi in the fame epiftle makes mention of the Mifnic doctors by name, as Rab, Akiba, Simeon, and Hillell, who delivered to the Jews the tradition of walking 2000 feet on a fabbath day ; and a little after he fays, l< on certain days when they (the Jewifo c< doctors) explain their traditions they " ufually fay to their difciples, 0; <ro<pc; " 2zvTS(>u<riv, that is, the wife men teach " the traditions," than which no words can more fully and fitly exprefs or give a better tranflation of the phrafes 132") "Un Our Rabbins teach, that is, in the Mifnah, and *3"! ♦jri fuch a Rabbi teaches, that is, in the Mifnic way 5 phrafes to be met with in innumerable places in Talmndic writ- ings r ; which mews the knowledge Jerom had of them, and that they were in be- ing before his time -, and hence it is, that the wife men are called Tanaim, Mifnic doctors, and the Mifnah itfelf Mathnitha, tradition, inflruction, doctrine. The Mi- fnic doctors are frequently called wife men
in
f Videret equidem aliquando opus illud Mifnicum Rec- tor Bethleemiticus, &c. Vid. Triglandium de fedta Karse- orum c. 9. p. 123, who is of the fame opinion. r See the meaning of theie phrafes in Halicot Olam, p. 35, 39. Ed. L' Emaereur.
[ 207 ]
in it. The moft famous of them for their doctrines, debates, and decilions in the Mijhah were well known to yerom, and their names and the order of time in which they lived, are given by him : " The Nazarit.es , fays he, * interpret the " two houfes {If. viii.) of the two fami- tf lies of Sammai and Hillell, from whom te fprung the Scribes and Pharifees, in <£ whofe fchool Akiba fucceeded, thought <c to be the matter of Aquila the profe- " lyte, and after him Meir, fucceeded by <£ *Johanan the fon of Zaccaiy after him tc Eliezer and then Delpbon (Tarpbon I " fuppofe is meant) and again JofepbthG " Galilean, and yojhua unto the captivity ct of yerufalem. Sammai and Hillell 11 therefore did not arife in yudea much be- Cf fore the Lord was born ; the firft of u which iignifles a di(Jipator7 and the other <c propha?ie-, becaufe that by their traditions <£ and fecondary laws (or Mifnic doclrines) {c they diffipated and defpifed the precepts <c of the law ; and thefe are the two houfes <c which did not receive the Saviour." It is obfervable in this paffage, that yerom
calls
s Comment, in Efaiam, c. S. fol. 17. I, Tom. 5.
[ 208 ]
calls the fchools of Hillell and Shammajj which make To confiderable a figure in the Mifnah, houfes and families, which is the very name they go by in the Mifnah hun- dreds of times, as XVI Hillell and n»H Shammai. So yerom elfewhere e calls the Jeivifh fables and traditions, Sevrepuo-etg fe- condary laws, as is alfo before obferved, and anfwers to Mijhnaiot, the very name by which their book of traditions is called: and Eicfebius u, who lived before yerom, makes mention of the Deuterotcz or Mifnic doctors among the yews, by which name yerom * often calls the Pharifees, who were traditionary men, retailers of tradi- tions, and the authors of the Mifnah ; and by the fame name he calls one of the Rab- bins, that inftructed him in the Hebrew tongue -f-, and from whom, with others, he became acquainted with many things now to be met with in the Mi/nab and Talmud ; and this accounts for yerom's knowledge of the Mifnah, which might not be known by thofe who were his cotemporaries; and
which i
1 Comment, in Efaiam c. 59. fol. 103. in Ezek. c. 36. fol. 235. H. & in Matt. 22. fol. 30. M. Epift. ad Damafum, T. 3. fol. 40. A. " Pra-par. Evangel. 1. II. c. 5. * In Efaiam, c. 3. fol. 9. C. & c. 10. fol. 20. D. & c, 29. fcl. 57. C. Tom. 5. f In Habacuc. c. 2. fol. 85. D. Tom. 6,
[ 2°9 1
which need not be wondered at, fince the book was written purely for the ufe of the Jews, and was not defigned to be made public to others ; and it was only thro' Jerom's acquaintance with fome Jewijh Rabbins his preceptors, that he came to have any notion of it ; wherefore Auftin not knowing it was committed to writ- ing *, is no objection to it, fince it might be written, and he be ignorant of it, he having no correfpondence with the "Jews, as yerom had : and it may be further ob- ferved, that of the Mifnic doctors fome lived before the birth of Cbrijl, and fome after, yet before the deflruction of Jern- falem, and others after that, but all be- fore R. Judah Hakkodefo, the lafl of them, and who compiled the Mlfnah about the date given ; and it may alio be obferved, that whereas fome of thefe men lived be- fore this date fome confiderable time, in courfe, their debates and deciiions about any matter mud: be reckoned as early ; fo that the difcourfe between two Rabbins I {hall prefently produce, founded upon punctuation, who lived about, or a little
P af-
* Opera T. 6.. contr. Adverfar. L?g. 8c Proph. 1. 2. c. 1. p. 256.
[ 210 ]
after, the destruction of jferufakm, carries the affair of punctuation higher than the date fixed w, even into the firft cen- tury.
The Mi/nab, according to the yews, was pointed. Ephodeus x fays, you will find all the ancient copies of the Mifnah writ- ten with points and accents ; and R. Aza- riah y affirms, that he faw two copies of the Mifnah more than 500 years old, with points and diftinguifhing accents -, and in. the Mifnah not only mention is made of verfes in the Bible, and how many to be read at a time z, by which it appears that the facred books were diftinguifhed into verfes fo early, but the points are mani- feftly referred unto. Two doctors are in- troduced a as difputing about the reading of the text in Cant. i. 2. Says R. Jo- Jbua, brother IJhmael how doft thou read the words, yiM or yiM ? that is, whether he read the word with a mafculine or fe- minine affix •, and fo, whether it was the congregation or church that fpoke to God,
or
f Vid. Halicot Olam, c. 2. p. 19, 26, 228. & Pocock. Port. Mofis, p. 120. xApud Buxtorf. c'e Puntt. Antiqu. p. yS. y Meor Enayim, c. 59. fol. 180, 2. z M> gillah, c. 4. f. 4. • Avcdah zarah, c. 2. f. 5.
or whether it was God that fpoke to the church? now this could not be determined by the letters or confonants which are the fame ; but by the vowel-points, which dif- tinguifh the affixes : according to R. Jfi- mael it was to be read feminine "W"7 as if fpoken by God to the church -, but this R. jfo/kua denied ; Not fo, fays he, but tjhti mafculine, and fo fpoken by the church to God. Now though thefe two Rabbins might have an unpointed bible before them, yet the foundation of their reafon- ing lay in the points ; for their difpute was not barely how the word was pro- nounced, but how it was read', and it is obfervable, that it is the modern punctua- tion of this word that is by this inftance eftablifhedj to which may be added, that the Maforeth is exprefly made mention of in the Mijhah b as the hedge of the law, one branch of which is concerned with the points and accents, and to the authors of it thofe that oppofe the points afcribe
them. Now R. Akiba, whofe faying this
is, flourifhed about eighty years after
Chriit, and died in the year 120, in the
P 2 war
b Plrke Abot, c. 3. f. 13. vid. Leufden in ib.
[ 212 1
war of Adrian againfr. the Jews ; in whom the glory of the law is laid to ceafe, be- caufe he gave his mind to fearch out the meaning of every apex, tittle, and point in it, as it was foretold of him that he mould * : the extraordinary point in the letter n in Hpim, Numb. ix. 10. is ob- ferved in the Mifnah -f.
A. D. 1 20. About this time, according to the Jewifi chronology0, lived Simeon Ben yochai a. difciple of R. Akiba author of the book of Zohar ; the authority and antiquity of which book is not called in queftion by any of the yews, no not by E/ias Levita himfeif, who fir ft afferted the points to be the invention of the men of Ttberias j yet declared 4, if any one could convince him that his opinion was contrary to the book of Zohar, he mould be content to have it rejected. What may be urged in favour of the antiquity of that book, is not only, that the perfons introduced fpeaking in it, and
whofe
* Mifn. Sotah, c. 9. f 15. Bartenora In ib T. Bab. Me, nachot t'ol. 29, 2. f Pefadiim, c. 9. f. 2. c Garni
Tzemacfr David, par. x. t'ol 30, n* d Prjefat. 3. ad
Maforet.
[ 2'3 1
whofe fayings are recorded, were as early or earlier than the time to which it is placed ; but the. neatnefs of the language in which it is written, which far exceeds any thing written after this time ; as alfo there being no mention made of the Tal- mud in it, though there e is of the Targums of Onkelos and 'Jonathan. Some things objected to its antiquity may be only inter- polations. R. Azariah fays *, it was written before the Mifnah was compiled. According to Majius -f it was written a little after the deftruction of Jerufalem. Now in this book it is faid, " the letters " are the body, and the points are the fpi- " rit or foul;" and the text in Dan. xii. 3. is thus paraphrafed, they that be wife Jh all Jhine, the letters and points ; as the bright - nejsy the modulation of the accents ; they that turn many to right eoufnefs, thefe are the paufes of the accents f ; fo Nehemiah viii. 8. is interpreted in it, of the paufes of the accents, and of the Maforeth 8 ; and in another place h " Jehovah is called 11 E/ohim, becaufe he is the river of mer- P 3 cies;
e Zohar in Gen. fol. 6 1, i . * Imre Binah, c. 59.
fol. 179, 2. t Comment, in Jolh. 1, 3, * Zohar
in Gen. fol. l* 3. g In Exod. fol. 82, 4. h lb, ia Lev. fol. 4, 3. Ed. Sultzbach.
[ 214 ]
cies ; and it is written mercy, and pointed " by Ekbim -," yea, the very names of the points and accents are mentioned in it in yarious places >, as Cho/em, Schurek, Chi- reky Pathacb, Segol, Sbeva, Kajnetz, Tzere, Zarka, S ego It a, Shalfhelet, &c. and elfewhere mention is made of the feven vowels, which are by gramma- rians called Kametz, Tzere, Cbirek, Cbolem, Shurek, Pathach, Segal; fb fome of the extraordinary points or pricks, on certain words are obferved in it, as that on. the word for he kijfed him, Gen. xxxiii. 4. and on the word for afar off, in Numbers ix. 10. * ; the double letters in the Hebrew tongue, the pronunciation of which de- pends upon the points, are made mention of in this book ra.
A. D. 100.
In the time before this date, or in the firft century, the Targums of Jonathan and Onkelos were written ; the one is upon
the
' lb. in Ges». fol. I, 2. & 26, 3. & 38. 1. 2. & 71, 2. Tikkure zohar praefat. fol. 6, 2. & 7, 1. i lb. in Gen. fol. 98, 4. m In Gen. fol. 38, 1.
[ 215 3
the prophets, and the other upon the Pen- tateuch, and are by Buxtorf* faid to be the moft ancient books of all the Hebrews, Jonathan flourifhing a little before Chrift, and Onkelos a little after; though fome write that they knew one another ; how- ever, they were in this century : it is certain alfo there was a Targum on Job, as ancient -j- as R. Gamaliel, the mafter of the ApoftJe Paul; and Onkelos muft be cotemporary with him, if what is faid J is true, that he burnt at Gamaliel's funeral as much as was worth feventy Tyrian pounds. The Targums are now in our printed bibles pointed ; but whether they were fo when firft written cannot be faid. Ellas Levita n is very pofitive and fays, without doubt the Targumifls wrote their paraphrafes without points ; and affirms alfo, that they were not pointed by the Maforetes, but by men of note long after their time ; but this is all faid to {tive. an hypothefis of his own, that there was no pointing before the men of "Tiberias; P 4 that
* Biblioth. Rabbin, p. 293. f T. Hierof. Sabbat, fol. 15, 3- X T. Bab Avodah zarah fol. 11, 1.
" Pra;fat. ad Methurgeman, fol. 2, 1 .
[ 2.6 ]
that the points of them were then in a corrupt ftatc, and very irregular ; and fo indeed Bux- torj * found them, and took great pains to re- flore them ; and which not only fuppofes their being, but it may be that fuch a ftate was owing to their great antiquity and the long neglect of them. With fome Jewijh com- mentators "Jonathan is obferved in fome places to tranflate and paraphrafe accord- ing to the points. Kimcbi on 2 Sam. xix. 14. obferves, that inftead of he bowed, Jonathan renders it pafiively, was bowed, by which it feems, he fays, that he read DO with a Tzere under Tod, but the Maforah teftifies of it that it is with a Patach under the Tod; ^nd. on Hof. v. 15. he remarks, that in the word lOtPtf* the Aleph and Shin are with a Sheva, agreeable to which is the 'Tar gum of Jonathan; and Jarchi on Ezek. xxvii. 16. obferves, that as to the point Dagejh, Jonathan explains the word that has it fometimes literally, and fome- times allegorically ; for in that way he fometimes paraphrafed otherwife than in the copy before him ; fo the Jerufalem Targumijl on Gen. xiv. 5. what Onkelos and FJeudo-Jonathan take for the proper
name
» Praefat, ad Bibl, Iieb.
[ 2i; ]
name of a place, he inftead of Ziizim in Ham, has it, the iilujirious ones among them-, and fo it is quoted in Berefoit Rabba % on which the commentator b obferves, that Zuzim is allegorically explained, as if it had the fignification of fplendor and luftre, and Be bam, which is with a Kamelz, as if it was written with a Segol ; but if the points were not then known, there could be no foundation for fuch an allegorical in- terpretation. Capellus c himfelf owns, that 'Jonathan and Onkelos made ufe of an He- brew copy different from what the Septua- gint did, and almoft the fame we now have from the Maforetes ; and indeed On- kelos fcarce ever departs from the modern punctuation, and it will be difficult to produce a fingle inftance proving that he ufed an unpointed Bible.
A. D. 70.
yofephus, the famous Jewijh hiftorian, flourished about this time. Scarce any thing can be expected from him concern- ing the Hebrew Points, who wrote in Greek, and conformed Hebrew words to
the
a Parafh. 42 fol. ij, 2. k In Mattanot Cehunnah in ib. c Critica, p. 324..
L *« ]
the genius of that language, and who read and pronounced confonants, as well as vowels, different from the Hebrew words. There is a paffage of his which is thought to militate againft the antiquity and necef- iity of the vowel-points, when he fays d, that the facred letters engraven on the mitre of the high prieft, meaning the word 'Jehovah, zrefoi/r vowels ; which are fuppofed to be a fufficient number of vowels for the Hebrew language, at leaft, if another or two are added to them : but, to take off the force of this objection, if there is any in • it, let it be obferved, ift. Jojephus's want of fkill in the Hebrew tongue, with which he is charged by fome learned men ; the Syro-Chaldean language being commonly fpoken by the Jews in his time, and which, perhaps, may ferve alfo to account for his different pronuncia- tion of Hebrew words in fome places. 2dly, What he calls vowels, and which fome think may be ufed inftead of vowels, are allowed by the fame to have alfo the power of confonants ; and it is certain, that the Van, was ufed as a confonant be- fore, and in the times of Jofepbus ; fo Da- vid
«• DeBcllo jud, 1. 5.C. 5-f. 2.
[ 2i9 3
vid is read Aa&J, in Matt. i. i. 6. & faffim, and in the very name "Jehovah he fpeaks pf; for the Samaritans* pronounced it Jabe; and 1 and lare fometimes changed for one another in the Hebrew language, as in Bathjhua for Bathjheba, i Chron. iii. 5. and Jofephus mull: have knov/n that the Tod is ufed in the Bible as a confonant, in a multitude of proper names of men and places, and in other words, and even in his own name. 3dly, If the facred name "Jehovah confifted of vowels only, it could not be pronounced ; for as confonants can- not be pronounced without vowels, fo nei- ther can vowels without confonants -, and though the word is by the Jews faid to be ineffable, yet not becaufe it could not be pronounced, for it was pronounced by the blafphemer in the times of Mofes, by Hi- ram> by the former wife men to their chil- dren once a week *, and by the high prien: in the fanctuary, as they allow f ; but be- caufe as they thought it was not lawful to pronounce it, at leaft in common, as fay
both
* Theodoret. in Gen. Qu. 15. vid. Epiphan. contra Hx- rcf. 1. 1. har. 40. * T. Bab. Kiddufhin, fbl. 71, 1. f Mifn. Sotah, c. 7. f. 6. T. Bab. Yoma, fol. 39, 2.
[ 220 ]
both Philo g and Jofephus h -, and fo in the Mifnah \ he is faid to have no part in the world to come who pronounces the name 'Jehovah with its own letters. When the ancient Greek writers fay it is unutterable, as the author of Delphi Pbamicizantes ob- ferves k, it is only as written by the Greeks, who fcarce admit of u as a confonant, and cannot exprefs afpirates in the middle and end of a word, as this word requires ; but then he adds, not becaufe it cannot be pronounced, for it may be pronounced ac- cording to the Hebrew letters, with which it is written. 4thly, The three letters in the name Jehovah, for there are no more in it of a different kind, can at mod be only confidered as mat res leBionis, as they are called, and fo ufed in the room of vowels -, but then thefe are often wanting in the Hebrew text, and in places where they might be expected, and where their prefence would be neceffary, if this were their ufe, and there were no other vowels or vowel-points, and therefore are inefficient to fupply the place of them.
5thly
8 De vitaMofis, 1. 3. p 670. b Antiqu. 1. 2. c. 12. f. a. l Sanhedrin, c. n. f. r. k Dickinfon, c. 6.
P-S7-
[ 221 ] cthly, After all, ypappciTce. and (puvyevTtz are the fame in Jofepbus as in the Greek epigram in Eujebius \ and they the fame with q>mtj the human and articulate voice, which, as Capellus m obferves, confifts not of vowels only, but of confonants alfo ; and both in the one as in the other, the tetragram- maton, or the name of four letters, Jehovah is thought to be meant ; or of feven letters, four confonants and three vowel-points ; hence S 'caliger n fays, " there is no neceffity e( by (puvyevra to underftand vowels, in " the above Greek epigram, fince "Jofepbus ** exprefly calls the four letters of the te- " tragrammaton <puvr,svra9 whence it appears *' that any letters may be fo called;" and Jqfepbus's view in the obfervation he makes was not to tell us what fort of letters they were that were upon the mitre of the high prieft, whether vowels or confonants; but that it was the tetragrammaton or name of four letters, that was written upon it, ufing the language of his own nation, and which continues in ufe to this day ; wherefore both Selden ° and Braunius * ren- der the pafTage in Jofepbus thus, <e about
" it
1 Praepar. Evangel. 1. xi. c. 6. * Orat. de Nom. Te- tragram. p. 172. n In Fragm. ad Calcem lib. deEmeo-
dat. Temp. p. 34. ° De Sucoef. in Fonrif Ebr. I. 2. c. 7 ? De Veftixu Sacerd. Heb. 1.2. c. 22. f. 18. p. 8x1.
[ 222 ]
«' it (the mitre) was another golden crowfi " bearing facred letters, that is, the name " tetragrammaton." Pbilo calls them the four engravings of the name, and the engravings of the four letters, and this, fays he, divines call tetragrammaton -f. Moreover, though Jofephus does not make exprefs mention of the Maforah in his writings, yet Arias Montanus q thinks, he never could have fo confidently faid what he faid without the help of it ; as when he fays T, in fuch a fpace of time that was pair, meaning from Mofes, " no man dared ** to add, nor to take away, nor to " change any thing in the fcriptures, chuflng " rather to die •" and the fame fays Philo the Jew ', who lived in the fame age, and a little before him, that the Jews in the fpace of more than 2000 years, " never " moved out of its place one word of what " was written by Mofes, rather willing to " die a thoufand times than go contrary to " the laws and cuftoms ;" and that there was a Maforah before their times is ac- knowledged by fome who have been op-
pofers
f De vita Mofis, 1. 3. p. 670, 673. < Dc Varia Heb. Lib. Script. & Left. ' Contr. Apion 1. i. c. 8. * A- pud. Euftb. Evangel, praspar. 1. 8. c. 6. p. 357.
5
[ 223 ]
pofers of the points, as before obfervecL The filence of Philo and jo/epbus about the points, is only a proof that they were not a matter of controverfy, but no proof of their not being in ufe.
A. D. 31.
That the points were in ufe in the times of Chrifl may be concluded from. Mat. v. 18. till heaven and earth pafs away one jot (or one Yud, as the Syriac veriion) or one tittle (or one Chirek, as Elias Hutter in his Hebrew veriion) fiall in no wife paj& from the law till all be fulfilled ; and fo as the leaft letter in the Hebrew alphabet Tod is referred to, the le?ft of the points in ufe, Chirek, is alfo ; between which and the Greek word xepoua, ufed by the EvangelinV is great nearnefs of found, and feems to be no other than that point made Greek, So Dr. Lightfoot ° obferves that our Saviour in his words of one Iota, and one Keraia, not perifhing from the law, feems to al- lude to the leaft of the letters, Jod, and to the leaft vowel and accent. The argument from hence cannot well be put more
ftrongly
6 Works, vol. 1. p. 10 14.
[ 224 ]
frrongly than it is by Dr. John Prideaux ', who yet was an oppofer of the points ; '« if the points, fays he, were not at this " time, why does the Saviour make men- M tion of them ? if they were the fame " with the confonants or only cornicular ft eminencies of them, why are they rec- " koned here as diftincT: things ?" and to which he makes a very feeble anfwer, and indeed the argument feems unanfwerable : nor can the pricks on certain letters called tD'Jn, be deligned, though very ancient, being mentioned in the Talmud*, and the fame letters on which they are put, and on them only and not on all ; and as Broughton0 obferves, " thefe, and likewife accents, are " no part of the word, therefore vowel- " pricks (or points) muft be meant ;" and it may be concluded with Pifcator on the place, that Chriir. " fo calls, i. e. tittles, what now u g° ^y ^e name °f points, which in He- M brew writing are varioufly put to letters, " both to lignify the proper found of fome " of them, and the vowel-founds, and alfo " the accents and parts of a fentence; hence " it appears that the holy Bible in the
time
p Yiginti dux Leftiones, Left. 12. p. 182. a T.Bab.
Menachdt, fol. 29, 2. \ Works, p. 204.
L 225 ]
fi time of Chrift was pointed, and that ic that punctuation was approved of by «' him ;" fo Pafor in his Lexicon fays, tc by tittle here is meant a point ; wherefore the vowel-points were in the time of Cbri/l, and not, as fome pretend, a new invention." The words of Chrift expreffed on the crofs, Eli, Eli, &c. and the names of perfons in the genealogies of the.Evan- gelifts, and in Heb. xi. and in other places of the New Teftament, feem to confirm the modern punctuation. The Dagefh forte appears, and is preferved in many words in thofe times, as in Immanuel, Mat. i. 23. Matthew, Lebbceus, Thaddczus, Matt. x. 3. Hofanna, Matt. xxi. 9. Epb- phatha, Mark vii. 34. Anna, Luke ii. 36. Matt bat, Matt hat bias 9 Luke iii. 24, 25. Matthias, Aclsi. 23. Abaddon, Rev. ix. 11. Armageddon, Rev.xvi. 16. Sabbat on, Matt, xii. $.Lamma, Mark xv. 34. with others, and the Dagefh leiie in Capernaum, Sarepta, and others ; and even the ufe of the Pat bach Genubah appears in the pronunciation of Meffias and Siloam as well as the other points, John i. 41. and ix. 7, 11.
Q_ A,
[ 226 ]
A. 30. Ante Chriftum. About this time lived two famous dodors among the Jews, Hillell and Sbam- mai, heads of two fchools and of two feds, fo different, that it is faid c the law was as two laws, and a faft was appointed on ac- count of the divifion between them d ; the former was followed by the Rabbanite Jews, and the latter by the Karaite Jews: and it may be obferved, that Jofephus' calls Pollio, the fame with Hillell, a Pha- rifee, but not Sammeas or Shammai, he mentions with him; through whom the Karaites derive the genealogy and fuccef- fion of their doctors, and from whom they fay they received the do&rine and copy of the law f ; which Shammai had from She- maiah, and he from Judah ben Tabbai, in whofe days the feparation was made, 120 years before Chrifi, as will be feen here- after. Now the Karaites with one confent declare, that the copy of the law B they had, had the points and accents, and that fuch
copies
c T. Bab. Sanhedrm, fol. 83, z. d Schulchan A-
mch, par. 1. c. 580. e Antiqu. 1. 15. c. 1. f. «■
ftod Mordecai, five Comment, de Karris, c. 9. p. o" Edit, a Wol£o. - Ibid, c. 12. p. 150.
[ 227 ]
copies they always had and ufed ; as the Hillellian copy is alfo a pointed one. I have obferved under A. D. 340. that fome learned men take that copy to be this Hil- k//'s, and I am pretty much inclined to the fame opinion ; for, as Sbammai had a copy for him and his party, fo Hillell had, no doubt, one for him and his ; and as the Karaites boaft of their copy, and of the antiquity of it, fo the Rabbanites boaft of Hillell' s copy ; which muft be the copy of fome eminent perfon of that name, by which all copies were corrected ; and who fo eminent as this Hillell? It is indeed moft generally afcribed to a Hillell, who lived in the fourth century, not fo famous as this ; and as for the copy which R. Zacuth faw, and which had been written 900 years before he faw it, which, from 1500, in which he lived, carries it up to the year 600, it falls fhort of that Hillell, and ftill more of this. I fuppofe, there- fore, that that was a copy taken from the original copy of the elder Hillell, and be- ing the only one remaining, was valued, and made ufe of for correcting all other copies; fo that if this was the cafe, there were two pointed Bibles as early as the 0^2 date
[ 223 ]
date given. Hillell began his government as the head of an academy, ioo years be- fore the deftruftion of the temple, about the beginning of the reign of Herod \ with which Jofephus ! agrees, who calls him Pollw, as before obferved.
A. 40. Ante Chriftum. About this time lived R. Necbuniab Ben Kanah, as the Jewijh chronologers * gene- rally place him. I fufpeft him to be the fame whom Grotius r calls R. Nebumias, who, according to him, was fifty years before Chrift, and who then openly de- clared, that the time of the Meffiab figm- fied by Daniel, would not be prolonged beyond thofe fifty years. To this Rabbi the book of Babir is generally afcribed by the Jews : Could the authenticity and an- tiquity of it be eflablifhed, it would fur- nifh out a very early proof of the points ; for R. Becbai\ a celebrated writer with the Jews, has a quotation out of it to this
pur-
I T. Bab. Sabbat, fol. ittlJ J«W% fol. .g, *. fan* Tzcxnach David, par. 1. fol. .fet. * Anuqu. 1. £
c. 1. f. 1. & c. 10. f. 4. & JofiPF- Hle°;1' k c l)\ fn1 J" rWn fol 20, 1. GanzTzemaADavid, par.i.foi.24.
t % De Ve'r. Rclig. Chrift. 1. \ • f. 1 4- I APud BuX'
;orf. Tiberiad. c. 9.
[ 229 ]
purpofe, €i Letters are like to the body, " and points to the foul, for the points <c move the letters as the foul moves u the body, as our R. R. expound in <( the book of Bahir -" but feeing fuch antiquity of this book is doubtful as af- cribed to it, I lay no Itrefs upon it ; though Buxtorf1 fays, it is the mod ancient of all the Rabbinical books, and if fo, it mufl be as ancient as it is faid to be -, ilnce Jo- nathan Ben Uzziel, who wrote on the prophets, was cotemporary with the fup- pofed author of it.
A. 120. Ante Chriftum.
In the times of John Hyrcanns^ and Ale- xander Janncens his fon, fprung up the feci: ,of the Karaites u in oppofition to the Pha- rifees, who had introduced traditions, and fet up the oral law, which thefe men re- jected. In the times of the faid princes lived Simeon Ben Shetach, and Judah Ben Tabbai, who flouriiried A. M. 3621. thefe two feparated, the latter from the former, becaufe he could not embrace his inven- Q^3 tions
r Bibliothec. Rab. p. 3 19. fo Groddeck de Script. Rabbin. f. 74. p. 26. u Cofri, par. 3. f. 65. Maimon. in Pirke Abor, c. i. f. 3. Juchafin, fol. 51. 1.
[ 230 ] tions which he formed out of his own brain; and from rum the Karaites fprung, who were firft called the fociety or congre- gation of Judab Ben ctaMwzk, which was afterwards changed into the name of Ka- raites : for that they had their rife from Anan and Saul, who lived in the eighth century after Chrift, and fo after the Tal- mud was finifhed, as fay Morinus l and o- thers, is very falfe ; for mention is made of them in the Mijnah m compiled in the 2d century ; they were only the reftorers not the authors of Karaifm, which muft be near as early as Pharifaifm ; and that, ac- cording to yofephus n, was as early as the times of 'Jonathan the Maccabee, Now thefe men, the Karaites, adhered to the fcriptures only, whence they had their name, which fignifies Scripturarians, the fame, as fome think, with tie Scribes? ypa{xpaTetg, letter- men, and thefe the fame with the lawyers in the New Teftament, who kept to the letter of the fcriptures, Matt, xxiii. 13. compared with Luke ii,
52.
k Dod Mordecai, c. 2. p. 12, 13, 14. ' De Sincer.
Heb. Text. 1. 2. Exercit. 7. c. 1 f. 6. m Megillah c. *.
f pi. 24, 2. Amftelod. Ed. vid, Houting. in Miih. Roflihafha-
nah, c. 2. f. 1. & Trigland. de Se&. Karsorum, p. 20,
: al Antic] . ]. 13* c. 5. 1". 9.
[ 23I ]
52. and Matf. xxii. 35. with Mark xii. 28. but the Scribes and Pharifees are not only put together, but as agreeing with each o- ther, and fo they might in fome things a- gree againit. the Sadducees, who denied the refurrection, See Acts, xxiii. 9. and might differ in other things ; but what makes moit. againft the Scribes being: the fame with the Karaites, is their joining with the Pharifees in the point of traditions, Mat. xv. 1. 2. Mark vii. 1 — 5. and on the other hand what feems moll; to favour the notion that the Scribes and Lawyers dif- fered from the other feels, is the text in Luke xi. 45. and certain it is, that Chriil: does fpeak more favourably of the Scribes than of others, Matt. xiii. 52. and xvii. 10, 11, Mark xii. 28, 34. and he is fome- times compared with them, though with fome difference, Matt. vii. 29 ; and Orobio, a Jew, of the laft century, faid ° our Je- Jus was a Karaite ; and a Rabbinical Jew, out of ill-will to the Karaites, feigned a letter pfrom them to the other Jews, avert- ing that Jefus of "Nazareth agreed with them, and exhorted his followers to re- Q^_4, ceive
* Apud Trigland. ut fupra, c. 6. p. 66. ' Apud Hul« dric. Not. ad i oldos Jefchu, p. 82, 83.
t 232 ]
ceive their rites, and not thofe of the Rab~ banites ; and that their anceftors had no hand in his death, and that they were the Rabbanites that flew him, and were only anfwerable for it ; but it is evident that the Scribes wTere concerned in the death of Chrift, Matt, xvi. 21. and xx. 18. xxvi. 3. xxvii. 42. though after all, it may be rea- fonably thought that the Karaites, fome of them, were among the Scribes, of which fcribes there were fome in every feci, and included in them q; for as there were Scribes on the fide of the Pharifees, ABs xxiii. 9. fo mention is made in 'Jewijh writings, of the Scribes of the Sadducees r, and of the Samaritans. Now the fentiments of thefe men, the Karaites, were from the beginning of them, conflant and uniform -y they made the fcripture their only rule, would not admit of any innovation in it, nor addition to it, nor that the inventions and traditions of men mould be made equal to it, and much lefs fet up above it. The teftimony therefore of fuch men for the points, muft be very confiderable.
Bux-
* Vid. Drufium de Sett. Jud. 1. 2. c. 13. Alting. Shilo, 1. 4. t. 8. Trigland. ut fupra, c. 6. r G. Uriin. Antique Ileb. Academ. c. 9. p. 227.
[ 233 ]
Buxtorf", the younger, indeed, does fay of the Karaites, that they rejected punctua- tion as a fpecies of the oral law, and of tradition ; greatly miftaking the author of the book of Cojri, who from the Karaites admitting the points, urges their admifTion of tradition ; fince he, and other Jews, thought punctuation, from the times of Mofes to Ezra, was delivered by tradition, and therefore, fays he *, * if fo it is, both we and the Karaites, are bound to admit tradition ;' to which king Cbofroesis made to anfwer, ' fo the Karaites indeed will fay (i. e. with refpect to the necellity of the tradition of the points and accents to read the book of the law) ; but when they have found or got a perfect law a copy with points and accents) they will deny that they have any further ufe of tradition, i. e. for the ex- planation of it.5 Now though this writer may go too far in afcribing traditions to the Karaites, thouglvthey did allow it in lome fenfej yet it is plain he took it for granted, that they were for uling, and did make ufe of pointed copies of the law ; and fo Morinus * himfelf underltood it, and owns
it;
w De Pun£t. Antiqu. par. 1. p. 300. x Cofri, par. 3. *"• 33» 34^ * Epift. Buxtorf. ep. 70. i^ Antiqu. Ec- clef. Orient, p. 362.
f 234 ] It; but this is ftiil more clear and manifeft from their own writings : in a book I of theirs, in great repute with them, it is ob- served, that the patrons of tradition ex- plain boughs of thick trees, ufed in the feaft of tabernacles, Lev. xxiii. 40. of a tree whofe leaves are treble, according to Exod. xxviii. 14. but, fays the Karaite writer, this is contrary to the nature of the lan- guage, for this y (in my) is with a Ka- tnetz, but that is with a Sheva ; fo in an- other work « they fay, the Rabbanites af- firm, that what is written in the law needs explanation by tradition, but we don't believe fo , but that what is written, its explanation goes along with it, meaning in the vowel-points ; and a little after fome pointed words are ufed. The Karaites own, that their copies of the Bible a^ree with thofe of the Rabbins, becaufe the difpofition and order of the books of fcrip- ture were made by Ezra, who lived be- fore the fchifm; and as to the various readings of Ben After and Ben Naphtali, many of which are about the points and
ac-
2 Addareth Eliahu apud Trigland. de Sett. Kar. p. 32. * R. Caleb, Afarah Maamarot, MS. apud Trigland. Jb. p. 117. '
[ 235 ]
accents, they rather agree with the latter ; but it greatly difpleafes them that in fome places the points are changed and others put in their room for modefty-fake a, as in I Sam. v. 6. 9. 12. and vi. 4. 2 Kings vi. 25. by which it appears they are very te- nacious of the points, and are not for al- tering them on any account ; which they would never be {ticklers for, could they be thought by them to be the invention of the Rakbins, and additions tothefcripturesmade by them. Mordecai, the famous Kai~aite in 1699, and his arTociates, are unanimous for the antiquity and coevity of the points with the letters ; his words in anfwer to fome crueftions fenthim by Trig/andius are thefe*, f all our wife men with one mouth affirm ft and profefs, that the whole law was U pointed and accented, as it came out of " the hands of Mofes the man of God :" how falfe then is it what Mormus -f fays, that " all the Jews, the Karaites alfo, tho* <c enemies of the traditions, and the Kabala, ft believe, as a moft certain tradition, that f« the book of the law which Mojes deli-
" vered
8 Chillouk MS. apud Trigland. lb. p. 189, 190. * Dod Mordecai, c. 12. p 150-157. -J- Epift. Bux- torfio in Anticju. Ecclef. Orient. Ep. 70. p. 394.
t 236 ]
<»* vered to the Ifraelites, was without pointt (t and acents f but F. Simon * is againft him, and affirms, that the Karaites readily receive the Bible with the vowel-points, ac- cents, and Maforah. The above Karaite goes on and fays, " far be it that the in- «* vention of points and accents was made " after the finishing of the Talmud, for " this is largely to be confuted ; for the (( divilion of the Rabbans and Karaites <e was long before the finifhing of the €< Talmud, as has been proved ; and if " there were no points nor accents in '* the time of the divilion, but were found «c out only after the finifhing of the Tal- " mud, then there would be different co- " pies of the law and of the prophets in " our hands 5 that is, copies in the hands *' of the Karaites, pointed different from " the pointing of the copies in the hand " of the Rabbans -, for in the places wht re «f the Rabbans have contradicted the vowels " and the accents, and fay, don't read fo, <e and fo, they would not have faid, don't " read, but abfolutely they would have " pointed according to their will and *f and fenfe •," of which he gives inftances
in
* Difquifit. Critic, c. 4. p. 25. & c. 1a. p. 93, 95.
[ 237 J
in which they might have fo done -, and obfervesJ that many of the Rabbans af- fert, that the points and accents were equally as ancient as the letters ; as R. A- xariah in Meor Enayim, and R. Samuel Ar- kevolti in Arugat Habbofiem : and he goes on and fays, that " the copy of the fcrip- " tures which we have is the fame that (e the Rabbans have; in this there is no di- *e viiion, no difference between us -, for '? the difpofition or order of the fcriptures " was from the men of the great fyna- " g°gue> thofe good figs, on whom be ce peace, at which time there was no dif- €< fenlion between them ; wherefore with ?' us there is nothing full and deficient, " neither firft and laft, no Ken' and Cbe- " tib, but what are in the order of the " fcriptures which is now in the hands of " the Rabbans; and the moft correct books ci are the moft in efteem with us, and we " follow, or depend upon the reading of " Ben Naphtali:" and it is certain their Bibles had the fame Majorette notes and obfervations in common with the Rab- batiites; fo it is obferved by them *, that
the
* Menachcm in Dod MordecaS, c. 10 p. 130. that Me- nachem was a Karaite, vid. Trigland, de feft. Karsorum, c. ix. p. 187, 5
[ 238 ]
the letter n in twenty places is written at' the end of a word, but not read, which agrees with the prefent Maforah. R. Aa- ro?i, a Karaite, published a Hebrew gram- mar in 158 1, in which he never deferts, as can be obferved, the modern punctuation of the Bible, and confults the Maforah in words written defectively, or in any other irregular way, and is full of Maforetic ob- fervations, fuch as the Rabbanites pro- duce * ; and a Karaite -f-, of the fame name, Ttfho wrote a commentary on the law in 1294, frequently refers to the points, and makes mention of the names of them, as, 'Tzere, Pathach, Sheva, Hatafh-camets, Cholem, Sburek, Dagefh. This feet, the Karaites, would never have admitted the prefent punctuation, if they had not be- lieved it obtained in the Bible of old, and came from God himfelf ; and as others re- latec, they ftrongly affirm, that the vowel- points of the Hebrew Bible are from Mo- fes and the prophets. The fenfe of the Ka- raites about the points is with me an invinci- ble
* Vid. Wolfii AccefT. sd Notitiam Karseorum, p. 37. & Bibli th. Heb. p. 119. f Vid. Simon. Difqu. Critic, c.
12. p. 95, 96. vid. MafTechetSopherim, c. 6. f. 4. c Le- geri Epift. Hottinger. in Thefaur. Philolog. p. 54.
[ 239 ]
ble proof of the great antiquity, and againfl the novelty of them; for from the time that this fed: rofe up, it was not poffible for the Pbarljees, Rabbanltes, Maforetic, or tra- ditionary Jews call them by what names you will, to have introduced fuch an in- vention as the vowel-points, in any pe- riod of time whatever, but thefe men would have objected to them as fuch, and would never have received them ; it is to me a demonstration that the vowel -points were in being before the fchifm was, which was about the time before given, and were univerfally regarded by the Jews, fo early, as of a divine original.
A. 164. Ante Chriftum.
The Keries and Cetlbs, of which 'Ellas fays d there are 848, are various readings, or differences of the marginal reading from the written text. That thefe are of great antiquity is certain ; fince they are not only mentioned in the Babylonian Talmud c, but in the Jerufalem Talmud '*, particularly the various reading of Hagg. i. 8. and in
the
d Praefat. 3. ad Maforet. e T. Bab. Nedarim, fol. 37, 2. Sopherim, c. 6. f. 5. 8. &. c. 7. f. 1, 2, 3, 4. & c. 9. f. 8. * Maccot, fol. 32, 1.
.5
t 240 ]
the book of Zohar f ; though when thefc marginal readings were firft made or be- gan to be made, is not certain : the Jews fayg, they are a tradition of Mofes from mount Sinai 5 but that cannot be, fince his books were not then written, and much lefs the books of the prophets ; fome Chriftians indeed are of opinion, as Broughton, Ainfworh^ and Wafmuth, that both the text and marginal reading are of divine infpiration ; and it mull be owned; that in many places they may be both taken into the fenfe of the pafTage, and much enrich it, and both are taken in by " our tranflators in Prov. xix. 7. and in the margin of 2 Sam. xxiii. 13. and in other verfions 5 but they are by others fuppofed to be put by Ezra and the men of the fyna- gogue, on the return from the captivity, who, upon revifing the books of fcripture, and feveral copies of it, obferved various readings j fo Kimchi, on 1 Kings xvii. 14. fays, the copies were perplexed or diflurbed in the captivity h ; they found one copy fo* and another fo -, and fome they did not up.j
derffcand,
f In Deut. fol. it 9, 3. & 226, 3. « T. Bab. Nedar. ut fupra, Schulchan Aruch. par. c. 141. f. S. ^ Vid. B?r»
Chayim Prsefat. ad Eibl. Hebe col. 1.
[ 241 ] ftand, and fome of which they did not chufe to put into the text, nor to can: away, and therefore put one within in the text, and the other without in the margin, to be ufed at difcretion ; and in his preface to the former prophets he obferves much the fame : " In the firft captivity the copies " were loft or removed out of their place, " (were out of order) and the wife men u that knew the law were dead j and the " men of the great fynagogue, who re- *' ftored the law to its former ftate, found " variations in the copies, and they went " after the greater number (of copies) ac- <c cording to their judgment ; and a place <c which they could not clearly underftand, " they wrote the word and did not point *' it ; or they wrote it without (in the tc margin) and did not write it within (in " the text) and fo they wrote in one way <l within, and in another way without." It is faid in the 'Jerujalem Talmud a " they " found three copies in the court, (not with " Ezra, as Morinus b renders it,) in one «* they found it written vjjrjo, Deut. xxxiii. " 27. in two HW£ ; they confirmed the " two (as the true reading) and rejected
R " the
* Taanioth, fol. 68, 1. b Exercit. L 2, exerc. 12. c, 3,
[ 242 ]
" the one j in one they found it written, u 'Dioyi, Exod. xxiv. 5. in two ny3, they «« confirmed the two, and reje&ed the << other ; in one they found it written y&n, « Gen. xxxii. 22. in two mjyy nntf, they « confirmed the two and rejected the one." Some think b thefe three copies were what belonged to the three bodies of the Jews in Judea, Babylon, and Egypt; and conjecture, that from the collation of thefe copies arofe the Keri and Cetib; though this refers to times after Ezra and the great fyna- gogue. Tranflators fometimes follow the Cetib, and fometimes the Keri, as do the Chaldee paraph rafes, which fometimes take in both, as in Pf. xxii. 16. which is a proof of the antiquity of them : there is a various reading in If. xlv. 5. Jonathan ben Uzziel, and fo Aquila, an ancient Greek interpreter, tranflate according to the mar- gin ; and Symmacbus and Theodotion, two other ancient ones, tranflate according to the textual writing, which is obferved by Jerom H fo that thefe various readings were known by him, though it has been de- nied,
> Light'foot, Hor. Heb in Matt. 5. 18. p. 140. O-
49. 5. in Hierem. c. 3'. 4°- fo1' l6o« Vlde Loc' Heb> fol. 85. B.
[ 243 1 nied, and were in being before the pre- tended Maforetes of Tiberias. Nay, the forms and figures of letters unufual, or of an unufual pofition, marked by the Mafo~ retes are obferved in the Talmud * ; fo that thefe Maforetic remarks were before thofe men were, faid to be after the finifh- ingof that. Thefe readings feem to be de- figned not as corrections and emendations of the text, but only fome as various read- ings, and others as euphemifms, to be re- garded by readers as may feem good to them, and others as obferving anomalous punctuations ; but in none was it intended that alterations mould be made in the text, but that that mould ftand as it is, and was found : but it fecms better with Carpzoviuj k tofuppofc that thefe marginal readings were made after the times of An- tiocbus, when the temple was purified and worfhip in it restored -, and the autograph of Ezra, perhaps, and many copies of it being destroyed, though not all, (fee Maccab. i. 59, 66. and iii. 49, and xii. 9.) it was thought proper to revile the R 2 bocks
«
T. Bab. Kiddulhin, fol. 30,' 1. &66. 2. Bava Bathra, fol. 109, 2. Sanhedrin, fol. io}, 2. MafTech. Sop.ierim c. 9. f. 7. k Critic. Sacr. p. 342.
[ 244 ] books of the fcripture ; and obferving dif- ferent readings in the copies they found, they placed them in the margin for the faid uies ; and therefore I have put the date of the original of them as above : now though thefe greatly refpect words and letters, yet in fome inftances the change of confonants appears to be in the mar- gin for the fake of vowels found in the text not fo fuitable to the confonants in it ; and therefore the vowels muft be in the text when the Keri was put in the mar- gin, as the learned Pocock l has obferved in the Keri and Cetib of Pf. xxx. 4. " for, fays he, unlefs the Maforetes, or whoever put the Keri in the margin had found »Y"IV/D» fo as it is now pointed, with vowels agreeing to the word ^TTD, vhat need had they to fubftitute it ? iince the fenfe aswell, if not better, flows by read- ing it H*1VD i but if in other copies they had found it HTfi» and without vowel-points, why did they not dafh out the Fau, and read it fo ? and if they had found mVD, with its own vowels, in which they read it, they would never have dared to have caft them away without neceffity, and put thofe in
their
1 Miicellan. Not. in Port. Mofis, p. 64, 65.
[ 245 ] their room, proper to an infinitive 5 as it is faid, the fame commonly is the reafon of others, in which Vau is poftponed to Ka» metz, 1. Sam. xxvii. it. Jojh. xv. 63* Pf. ci. 5. and to Pat bach, Pf. v. 9." fo that it appears to be the doctrine of the points, and the anomalous ones obferved, that is fometimes the caufe of the marginal Keri, See If. xxxvi. 12. where the points under the word in the text better agree with that in the margin, and feems to be the reafon of the marginal reading. Some of thofe Keries may not be fo ancient as the date above ; but additions may be made by fome in later times ; yet they feem chiefly to be of great antiquity, as appears by what has been obferved of the Targums and ancient Greek copies ; and Buxtorf™ has given fome rules to difcern the one from the other.
A. 277. Ante Chriftum.
In this year, according to bifhop Vfher n,
Ptolemy Philadelpbus king of Egypt, being
defirous of erecting a library in Alexandria,
R 3 employed
m Anticritica, par. z. c. 4. p. 501. * Annal. Vet. Teft. p. 480.
t 246 ]
employed Demetrius his librarian to collect books for that purpofe, who in a letter to the king preferved by Eufebius °, tells him that he had diligently executed his orders ; but that with fome few other books, there remained the books of the law of the Jews to be got, which lie fays were con- tained in Hebrew letters and vowels ; for what elfe can be meant by (pavy, as diflin- guifhed from letters ? not the pronun- ciation and found, which thofe volumes could not be faid to lie in, but the vowel- points, by which the letters were read and pronounced, and are annexed to them for that purpofe ; fo that it feems at this time the books of the Jews were written not only in Hebrew letters, but with Hebrew points, and in their own characters, as Demetrius fays p, which were different both from the Egyptian and Syrian, as he affirms ; and which deferves to be remarked, as what may be of fome fervice to mew what were the Hebrew characters then in ufe : and though it is commonly fuppofed that the feventy interpreters ufed an unpointed copy from which they translated, whence
came
0 Praepar. Evangel. 1. 8. c. 3. p. 351. t Apud Eufeb. p. 350. Vid. Ariltex Hift. 70. p. 4, 5. Ed. Oxon. 1692.
r 247 i
came fo many miftakes to be made in their verfion ; yet Hottinger^ has obf rved near fifty places in which for Kametz they read Tzereor Segol; (oLeufden * obferves, that they read words with wrong vowels, as Tzere for Kametz, Pf, xl. 5. Patach for Tzere, Pf vii. i2. Chirek for Patach, Pf vii. 7. Patach for &•£#/, iy xci. 3. and which might be owing either to a vitiated pointed copy before them, which led them wrong; or to an unpointed copy, and trufting to their memory, put one point for another ; though Dr. Lightfoot T fuggefts they pur- pofely u ufed an unpricked Bible, in which M the words written without vowels might " be bended divers ways, and into di- *c vers fenfes, and different from the mean- *c ing of the original ; and yet if the tranf- " lation was queftioned they might prick " or vowel the word fo as to agree to " their tranflation : how they have dealt " in this kind there is none that ever laid " the Hebrew Bible and the SepJuagint to- " gether, but hath obiervedj" though he adds, " their differences from the ori- R 4 " ginal,
s Thefaur. Philolog. 1. i. c. 3. p. 354, &c. * Philo- log. Heb. Mixt. Dhiert. 4. p. 31. " ' Works, vol. 1. p. 490. •
[ 248 ]
r* ginal, which were innumerable, were ** partly of ignorance, they themfelves not " being able to read the text always true, " in a copy unvowelled ; but this ignorance " was alio voluntary in them ; they not *' caring to miftake, lb that they might do '* it with their own fecurity jf" and fo Mr. Broughton * fays, " that the feventy had ** not the vowelled Bible, both for the rare- "■ nefs, and becaufe they never meant to " give the truth ;" but be it that they ufed an unpointed Bible purpofely, or a pointed one vitiated, it (hews that points were in ufe in their time, and very necef- fary : and it may be obferved, that the Pentateuch, which fome, as Jofepbus and others, think was the only part of fcrip- ture tranflated by them, is almoft every where tranflated in agreement with the modern punctuation ; and Jerom * long ago obferved this, that the five books of Mofes tranflated by them more agreed with the Hebrew than any other. It is an ob- fervation of Capdlus -f himfelf, that the feventy interpreters, who lived about 300
years
s Works, p. 6-0, (S<. * Qucerh feu Trad. Heb. in
Gen. fol 6c. D. Tom. 3. f Orat. tie Nom. Tetragram. p. 1 S3, 191"', 192.
[ 249 ] years before Chrift, inftead of the tetra- grammaton or the word 'Jehovah, always read Adonai, and always render it by xvpto$, a word not expreffive of effence, as Jeho- vah is, but of lordthip, as Adonai is ; and that they are followed in this by the Apof- tles of Chrill, and the reft of the writers of the New Teftament, and the ancient fathers of the church ; and that from them the Greek interpreters of the Old Tefta- ment never depart, as Aqnila, Symmachus, and Theodotion. Now what could lead them to read Adonai, and fometimes Elo- him inftead of Jehovah, and translate the word accordingly ? not the confonant let- ters of Jehovah, but the points of Adonai and Elohim put unto it as they now are; and Capellus * plainly conferTes that this word had the points of Adonai, and fome- times of Elohim in their time ; for he fays, the feventy when niiT has the points of C»nbtt oftner render it kv^ib xvpls, as Pf. lxviii. 21. £? pajjim, and fometimes ttuptog, and 9eog, as in Amos iii. 7. &c. from whence it is conjectured that for Adonai Jehovah they read Adonai Elohim.
A. * lb. p. 146.
[ 25° ]
A, 454. Ante Chriftum.
In this year, according to bifhop UJfter', Ezra was returned from Babylon, and was at Jerufalem, and read, and expounded the law to the people of the Jews there. It is the generally received notion of the Jews, that the vowel-points were annexed to the letters of the facred Books by Ezra ; not but that they fuppofe they were origi- nally from Mofes and the prophets, and that they are equally of divine authority as the letters ; only they imagine they were delivered down from them by oral tradi- tion to the times of Ezra, and by him af- fixed to the letters ; and Ellas, who in- vented the ftory of the men of Tiberias, is of the fame mind, only with this dif- ference, that the oral tradition of the points was carried down to thofe men, and they put them to the letters : as much like a fiction as this oral tradition looks, as it undoubtedly does, yet it is little lefs, if any, what Capellas and Walton al- low, efpecially the latter; that the point- ing of the Maforetes is not arbitrary, and at their pleafure, but according to the
found,
J Annal. Vet. Teft. p. 197.
[ *5i ]
found, pronunciation, true and accuftomed reading, always in ufe, handed down fuc- ceffively to their times, and which contains the true fenfe and meaning of the Holy Ghoft. Dr. 'John Prideaux u, an oppofer of the antiquity of the points, yet thinks it probable that fome of the points and accents for the diftin&ion of the text, and, for the direction of the reading, were de- vifed by Ezra, and by the fucceeding Ma- jor etes before the Talmudifts, and were pre- ferved in feparate parchments and meets, and that they were ufed and increafed to the times of the Siberian Maforetes, who were after the Talmudijls ; which is giv- ing up the invention of them by the men of Tiberias, and afcribing the ori- ginal of them to Ezra. Many who are clear for the divine authority of the points and accents are content they mould be afcribed to Ezra, fince he was divinely infpired, as Buxtorf and others ; and it may be fafely concluded that the points and accents were in being in his time, fince the Mafora/j which was begun by him, or about his time w, at leaft by the men of
hi«
u Viginti & duas Lettiones, Left. 12. p. 196, 197. w Cafaubon. Epift. ep. 390. Porthsfio, p. 468.
[ *52 1
his fynagogue, is concerned about the points and accents, as well as other things, as has been obfervedj and befides, the Scribes, which were afliftant to Ezra in reading the law, cannot well be thought to lead, at lead: (o well, to read it dijlinclly, and caufe the people to underftand the reading of it, even men, women, and children, without the points. Not to take any fur- ther notice of the fenfe the Talmudi/ls, both 'Jervfalem and Babylonian, give of the text^in Neb. viii. 8. I now refer to, which has been quoted already. Dr. Humphrey Prideaux, though he took that fide of the queftion, which denies that the vowel- points were affixed by Ezra, and of the fame divine authority with the reft of the text, yet allows, that they came into ufe a little after the time of Ezra, being then neceffary for the reading and teaching of the Hebrew text * ; which is not only an acknowledgement of the great ufefulnefs of the points, but carries the antiquity of them very high; and I fee not if they were needful for the reading and teaching of the Hebrew text a little after the time of Ezra, why they were not as neceffary in the
time
* Conne&ion, par. i. b. 5. p. 352, 353.
[ 253 1
time of Ezra; for was the neceflity of them. owing to the Hebrew language, then ceafijg to be vulgarly fpoken, fo, according to him, it did ceafe to be in the times of Ezra ; though I apprehend that is a miftake, for it was fome hundreds of years after, ere it ceafed to be vulgarly fpoken.
There is nothing to be obferved be- tween the times of Ezra and Mofes rela- tive to the points ; for I lay no ftrefs on the different pronunciation of Shibboleth t in Jud. xii. 6. though Schindler x is of opi- nion that from hence it appears, that the point on the right and left hand of tP, was then in ufe; and fo by confequence the other points alfo.
Elias Levita* roundly afferts, that the copy of the law which was given by Mo- fes to the children of IJrael was without points and accents ; but this is faid with- out proof, and is what no man is able to prove. He quotes Aben Ezra y, who fays, the points were delivered at Sinai, but the tables of the law were not pointed, which feems to be a flat contradiction, at leaft it is what is very improbable. Much better
does
* Lex. Pentaglott. col. 1792. vid. Balmefii. Gram. Heb. p. 14. lin. 9. 14. 16. * Prsefat. 3. ad Maforet. ? Zach She- phataim in lb.
[ 254 ]
does another writer x argue, whom he mentions, who in anfwer to the queftion, How do we know that the points and ac- cents are of God ? fays, " it may be re- ** plied, what is written in Deut. xxvii. «* 8. and thou fh alt write upon the Jlones all " the words of this law very plainly; but *« without the points and accents, which " explain the words, no man, he fays, can " understand them clearly and plainly" and whatever may be faid for the king's writing out a copy of the law, and reading in it all the days of his life Deut. xvii. 1 8, 19. and for the priefts reading it once a year in the hearing of ali Ifrael, which yet is not very eafy to account for, with- out the points, fo as to be underftood, Deut. xxxi. 11. yet how the common people fhould be able to read it to their children, and teach them the knowledge of it with- out the points, is ftill more difficult of belief.
The common opinion of the yews is, either that the points and accents were delivered to Mofes on mount Sinai, yet only as to the power of pronouncing and reading, but not as to their marks and fi- gures
• R. Levi bar Jofeph Semadar, in ib.
[ *55 1
gures in writing ; but that the true man- ner of reading the fcriptures was propa- gated and preferved by oral tradition to the times of Ezra -, or that they were given to Mofes at Sinai, but were omitted in wri- ting for the mod part afterward, and Co were forgotten, 'till Ezra came and reftored thtm. But it rather feems that they were as early as the Hebrew letters ; and fince it is not improbable that thefe were before the flood, and before the confufion of tongues, the points were alfo ; and could the fenfe of Gen. xi. i. given by a late writer % be eftabliihed, it would be out of all doubt; which is this, and the whole earth was of one language, i. e. the Hebrew language, as afterwards called, and of one fpeech, or words, that is, according to this writer, words diftinguifhed by acute or {harp points ; deriving the word ufed from *nn to parpen, whereby he thinks, the tautology in the text is avoided ; and to which may be added, that the latter claufe of the text is plural : yet I fear the word will not bear this fenfe, fince the lingular and plural words ufed, the one in one claufe, and the other in the other, mull
have
* Kalf. de Ling. Htb. Natal, p. 33, 37, 38, 35.
[ 256 ]
have a different derivation, which is not ufual of a word in the fame text.
If the book of Jetzirab was compiled by Abraham, to whom the Jews b com- monly afcribe it, though fometimes to Adam, the points might be traced to his time; for in that book frequent mention is made of the double letters Begad Cephat, or Begad Cepbrat, as there Co called c, be- caufe they have a double pronunciation, which pronunciation depends upon the points, their having or not having in them the Dagejh lene. But though there is no reafon to believe that the book was written either by Abraham or Adam, yet it is an ancient one, and by this inftance it carries the antiquity of the points higher than is now commonly allowed unto them ; for the book is fpoken of in the Talmud*-, and if it was written by R. Akiba, who is the only one mentioned by the Jews as the au- thor of it, befides Adam and Abraham, he died in the beginning of the fecond cen- tury ; though if Jonathan Ben Uzziel wrote a fupplement to it, which was as a
com-
b Cofri, par 4. c. 27. Juchafin, fol. 52, 2. e C. I.
f. 2, 9, 10, & c. 2. f. 1. & c. 4. f. 1, 2, 3. d T.
Bab. Sar.hedrin, fol. 65, 2.
t *57 1
commentary on it> as is faid % it murr. be before his time, fince Jonathan was cotem- porary with Chriil, or a little after him % and it may be obferved, that the double pronunciation of the above letters was in ufe in the times of Chriff, as appears from the words, Armageddon, Capernaum, Eu- phrates, Joppa, Pafcha, Sarepta, and o* thers.
It is not only the opinion of fome Jewi/b *
writers, that the vowel-points, as well as <<
letters, were given by God himfelf to Adam, as the author of Cofri*, and his commen- tator Mufcatus *, and of R. Azariah h, and of others -, but fome Chriftian writers l / •
alfo, afcribe them to Adam ; and indeed, if the Hebrew letters were of his invention, as many have thought, and Walton khim- ■"'■ -
felf thinks, there can be no reafonable doubt but the vowels were alfo ; but be this as it may, I am inclined to believe that the vowels were coeval with the let- ters, and that the penmen of the facred fcriptures, feverally annexed, the vowel- S points
e Vid. Wolfii Bibliothec. Heb. p. 28. f Par. 4. c, 25. * In lb. fol. 229, c. h Meor Enayim, c. -9. , ! Al- lied. Chronolog. p. 267. vid. Buxtorf. de Punft. Antiqu. paj\' 2 p. 309, 310. k Prolegom. 2. f. 7.
[ *58 ]
points to letters in their writings. My reafons are thefe :
I. The perfection of language requires vowels. No language can be perfect with- out them ; they are the life and foul of lan- guage ; letters without them are indeed dead letters -, the confonants are ftubborn and immoveable things, they can't be moved or pronounced without vowels, which are, as Plato fays l, the bond of let- ters, by which they are joined, and with- out which they can't be coupled together : can it be thought, therefore, that the He- brew language, the firft, and mod perfect of all languages, mould be without them, which, if this was the cafe, would be the molt imperfect of all the orieiital languages ? for notwithftanding what has been faid to the contrary, the Samaritan had its points, though differing from the Hebrew, as Je- rom obferves m, and fo a later writer n has obferved it has. The Syrians, Chaldceans, Arabs, and Perjians, had vowel-points like wife, as Hottinger affirms °, and fo dean Pridcaux p. The invention of the
Syriac
i Sophifta p. 177. m Prasfat ad Reg. T. 3. fol. 5. L, n Petrus a Valle in Antiqu. Eccl. Orient, p. 184. ° The- faur. Philolcg. p. 403. p Connexion, par. 1. B. 5. p.
Sv *
[ 259 ]
Syriac vowel-points is indeed by fome 8 af- cribed to Epbrem Syrus, who lived in the 4th century ; and as for the Etbiopic lan- guage, the vowels are incorporated into the confonants, and are a part of them, and lb muft be ab origine, and coeval with them ; and even thofe who are for carting away the vowel-points feem to be fenlible of a neceffity of fubftituting fomething in their room, the matres leftionis, as they call them, »lft to which fome add n i but thefe are not fufficient, being wanting in a great number of words ; witnefs alfo the various methods of reading Hebrew, contrived by men ; but why mould they be at pains to find out a method of reading and pro- nouncing the Hebrew language, when there is fuch a plain one at hand, ready prepared for them, and of which Walton himfelf fays r, that it is a moil profitable and ufe- ful invention no man can deny ?
2. The nature and genius of the He- brew language require points ; without thefe the difference can't be difcerned between nouns and verbs, in fome inflances, as -m, with many others -, between verbs active, S 2 and
i Vid. Fabritii Bibliothec. Gr. Tom. 5. p. 320. r fro* legom. 8, f. 1Q-.
[ 26o ]
and verbs paffive, between fome conjuga- tions, moods, tenfes, and perfons, Ka/, Pie/, Pual ; imperatives and infinitives, are proofs hereof -, nor can the Vau converfive of tenfes be obferved r, which yet is ufed fre- quently throughout the Bible, and with- out which, the formation of fome of the tenfes by letters would be ufelefs. Mori- nus • himfelf fays, " that without the " points a grammar cannot be written, as *' Elias rightly obferves ; for example, de- " fcribe the conjugation Ka/ without M points, and immediately you'll be at a I1 fiand, and much more in Pie/;" and Walton l alfo owns the ufe of them in the inveftigation of the roots. The pronun- ciation of fome letters depends upon the points as has been obferved.
3. The vowel-points are neceiTary and ufeful to the more ealy learning, reading, and pronouncing the Hebrew language. What menvwell fkilled in the language may be able to do is one thing, and what learners of it, and beginners in it can do is another thing; men well verfed in it
may
r Vid. Cofri, par. 2. c. 80. * Epift. Buxtorfio in An- tiqu. Eccl. Orients], p. 392. * Introduct. Orient. Ling.
p. 5.
[ »6i J
may chufe to read without them ; and To a man that is mafter of Brachygraphy may chufe to read what he has written in fhort hand, and to which he is ufed, rather than in long hand ; but this is no proof of the perfection and propriety of his Brachygra- phy* " A tongue, as Dr. Lightfoot fays°, " cannot firft be learnt without vowels, *•• though at laft fkill and practice may *e make it to be read without ; grammar ** and not nature makes men to do this :" and a late learned writer has obferved w, that <l to talk of reading Hebrew without points, " is a collujive way of ipeaking ; we may " do it when we have learnt the language, M but not before ; as it is a dead language " we want in ft ructions either by word of " mouth or by grammar. Points in He- " brew are like fcaffolds in building, when " the work is finifhed we may take them " down and throw them aiide, but not " fooner with fafety." Dr. John Pri- deaux x an oppofer of the antiquity of the points, owns that " the tongue being toffed " about by various calamities, the points S3 " were
u Works, vol. 1. p.ioi4. w Chappelow's Preface to his Comment on Job, p. 18, 19. x Viginti & dux Lec^iones, Left. 12. p. 189.
[ 262 ]
" were added, that it might be the more " accurately preferved, and that by the " yews, to whom it ceafed to be verna- " cular; as alfo that by others it might the ° more eafily be underftood, and be more •* exactly pronounced :" and elfewhere he fays y, let them be whofe additions to the text they may, they are fo far from cor- rupting it, that they rather protect it from corruption, and lead to a more eafy reading and underftanding of it ; and fo Walton % another oppofer of the points, fays, " the " Chriftian church received their (the Ma- " foretes) punctuation, not upon their au- *■ thority, but becaufe it exprefled the true " fenfe received in the church of God; and cc withal becaufe they faw it conduced " much to the more eafy reading of the «' text, and even to the true reading of it, lf as he owns * :" and their great mafter and chief leader Capellus a, having treated of the points and accents devifed and added to the facred Hebrew text by the Maforetesy as he fuppofed, frankly owns, " that up- " on that account we now certainly owe
tl much
y Fafciculus Controverf. de Script, qu. 3. p. 21. * The C'onfiderator confideieci, p. 209. * Proiegom. 8. f. 17.
Arcan. Punft. 1. I. c. 17. i". 11.
[ *63 ]
e< much unto them; or rather, mould give " thanks to God, who flirred up thefe men " to it, and put them upon the ftudy of " it ; for in that work they have certainly " laboured moft fuccefsfully, fo that now " by the help of thofe little marks we can " far more eqfily, and even more happily H be converfant in reading and underftand- " ing the facred Hebrew text, than other- M wife could have been done by us with- " out this help." Why then mould it not be attended to ? and indeed I cannot fee how common people, men, women, and children, could be able to read it with- out points, when it was their mother tongue ; it was their duty and intereft to read their Bible in it, for whofe fake it was written, and who had as great an intereft and concern in it as men the mod: learned have, it being the grand charter of their falvation ; the Bible was not written for learned men only, but for thefe alfo, and therefore it was written, as it was proper it mould be, in the moll; plain and eafy manner.
4. The vowel-points and accents are ufeful and neceifary, to remove ambiguity and confufion in words and fentences, and
S 4 that
t 26+ ]
that the true fenfe of them may be come at with eafe, by perfons of the loweft ca- pacity and meaneft ability, for whofe fake, as obferveci, the Bible vvas written -, and that they are of this ufe has been owned by the oppofers of them : fo Capdlus b, fpeaking of the accents fays, " certainly t( thefe little marks when fitly and oppor- " tunely put, are indeed of this ufe, that *' fometimes we lefs hefitate about, and u more expeditiouily take in the mind and u fenfe of the writer j* and fo Walton c fays of the Maforetes, that M they pointed " the text, not at their own will and plea- " fure, but according to the true fenfe and u received reading from the facred writers " to their times ; hence the reading is " made more ec'y, and the text lefs ob- u noxious to ambiguity and corruption." Should it be faid, as it often is, that by at- tending to the connexion of words, and to the context, the fenfe of a word in queftion may be foon and eaflfy understood. Let it be obferved, that all have not the fame natural parts and abilities, and the like acumen of wit, clearnefs of understanding, and critical judgment, as particularly the
above v Arcan, Puntl. 1. 2. c. 25. f. 7. e Prolegom 8. f. 10.
[ *65 ]
above perfons mentioned ; and befides, the words in connexion and in the context be- ing unpointed, fome of them may be equally difficult to be underftood, and the fenfe of them muft be examined and fixed, ere the fenfe of the word in queftion can be determined; all which will require time, and perhaps after all, entire fatisfaction is not obtained : and if men who may be thought to be well verfed in the language, and men of parts and abilities, have been led into miftakes, through a neglect or want of the points, much more may per- fcns of mean and ordinary capacities. The authors of the feveral Greek verfions of the Bible, the Septuagint interpreters, yiquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus, were all jfews, excepting the laft, and he was a Samaritan, and may be allowed to have a confiderable fhare of knowledge of the Hebrew language ; yet thefe, efpecially the feventy interpreters, neglecting the points, and tran dating without them, what grofs fenfes have they put upon the text ? fome- times directly contrary to what is intended, fometimes what is very abfurd, and even wicked and blafphemous, or nearly fo ; take an inflance of each, God is angry
every
[ 266 ]
every day, Pf. vii. 1 1 . the Greek verfion Is, does not bring on anger, or is not angry every day, the word 7K differently pointed, is ufed for God, and for the negative not. The paffage in If. xxiv. 23. then the moon Jhall be confounded, and the J tin ajhamed, when the lord of ho/Is Jhall reign, &c. which with others Dr. Lowthd reprefents as fo grand and magnificent, and fo coloured, that no tranflation can exprefs, nor any altogether obfcure ; and yet this is mod mi- ferably obfcured in the Greek verfion of it, and a fenfe given extremely low, mean, and abfurd ; the brick Jhall wafle, and the wall Jhall fall, when the Lord reigns, Sec. 11-32^ differently pointed fignifies the moon, and a brick, and HDn, the fun and a wall, the authors of this verfion have abfurdly taken the latter fenfe. Lam. iii. 33. it is, he, i.e. God, doth not willingly affHB-, the Greek verfion is he doth not anfwer from his heart, cordially and fincerely, thereby charging God with infmcerity and difiimulation j yet the three letters rw unpointed fignify to anfwer as well as to afflict; in Kal it figni- fies the former, in Piel the latter; which is the true fenfe here, and to be difiinguiihed
by ' De Sacr. Poef. Heb, Piselett.6. p. 6()> 70.
[ *7 ]
by the points ; and how have the fame in- terpreters, by changing points and letters, fpoiled the famous prophecy of the Mejjiab in If ix. 6. where, inftead of everlajiing Father, the Prince of -peace, they tranflate I will bring upon the princes peace ? though the pafTage is otherwife produced by Clemens of Alexandria % more agreeable to the Hebrew text ; which fhe ws that the Septuagint ver- fion is not in the fame ftate now it formerly was. The learned Vitringa * has obferved, that " the Greek interpreter of Alexaii- H dria, who came forth under the name u and number of the Seventy, not being " expert in the Jerufalem reading, has " often in his unhappy and unlearned ver- *• fion, fo deformed the prophet (Ifaiah? s) " difcourfe, in the more obfcure places, " that Ifaiah cannot be known again in " Ifaiah :" and through negligence or dif- ufe of, or want of the points, the Greek in- terpreters have made miftakes, when one would think it was almoft impomble they mould ; thus '32 differently pointed, or without any points, may fignify fons or
builders.
e Paedagog. 1. 1. c. 5. See alfo Eufeb. Demonftrat.
Evangel. I.7. c.i. p. 336, 337, * Pr*fat. ad Com-
ment, in Ifaiam, Vol. 1. p. 5.
I 268 ]
builders. They have taken the word in the firft fenfe in 1 King v. 18. and contrary to the context and plain fenfe of the words, read, Solomon s Jons and Hiram's Jons hewed them, the ftones. The fame word, con- fiding of the fame letters, as di^erently pointed, has two or three fenfes, and fome- times half a dozen, and even eight or ten, as the word "Q"?. How difficult therefore muft it be to attain unto, and fettle the true fenfe, as in fuch and fuch a place, at leaft to common perfons ; and for thefe the bible was originally written, as well as for learned men.
5. It will be difficult to affert and main- tain the perfpicuity of the fcripture, lay- ing afide the vowel-points and accents; and make it to comport with the wifdom of God to deliver out his laws, the rule of man's conduct both towards himfelf and one another, and doctrines defigned to make men wife unto falvation, and to in- ftrucl: them in matters of the greateft mo- ment for time and eternity: to deliver thefe, I fay, in ambiguous words, that admit of various fenfes, and at beft give a fenfe dif- ficult to attain unto by men of the deepeft learning and of the greateft capacity. It is * the
[ 269 ]
the part of a wife law-giver to exprefs his laws, and of a king to publifh his edicts, and of a teacher to give forth his doctrines and inftructions in the cleared manner, in the plainer!: terms, in words the mod eafy to be underftood; and not in ambiguous language capable of admitting divers fenfes, and fuch as is contrary to what is intended ; and can it be thought that God, our law- giver and king, and who by his word pro- pofes to teach men to profit, and to lead them by the way they mould go, would act otherwife ?
6. Nor mall we be able, I fear, to fup- port the infallibility of the fcripture, that part of it the Old Teftament, as a fure rule of faith and practice, when by taking away or laying alide the points, it becomes flexi- ble, and may be turned as a nofe of wax to any thing to ferve a purpofe, to counte- nance any doctrine or practice agreeable to the different taftes and inclinations of men ; lince hereby it will admit of different fenfes, and fo in confequence muff be uncertain, and not to be depended on : and, I fear it is this wantonnefs of fpirit that has led many to throw away the points and ac- cents, that they might be under no re-
ftraints
[ 27° I ftraint, but at full liberty to interpret fcrip- tures as their fancy inclines, and their intereft leads ; but if the points give the true fenfe and mind of the Holy Spirit in the facred writings, which has been owned by fuch who have oppofed the divine origi- nal of them, why mould they be laid afide, to make way for any fenfe the fancy of men may impofe upon them ? Walton in fo many words affirms f, that " they (the Maforetes) " exprefs in their punctuation the true fenfe " of the Holv Ghoft, which was dictated " to the holy penmen, and by them com- " mitted to writing, and preferved both by 4< Jews and Christians" ; and that " they " pointed the text according to the true " and received reading, which exprefled the " true fenfe of the Holy Ghoft, and not as " they pleafed; nor is it lawful for any " one to reject their reading at pleafure, " but all are tied to it, unlefs fome error " or better reading can be clearly proved ;g" and Capellus himfelf faysh, <c none are to " be obliged to admit the punctuation of «c the Maforetes, becaufe, and as it is from " them; but all may be bound by this
" punctu-
f Prolegom. Polyglott. 3. f. 51-1 ^ The Confiderator eonfidered, p. 200. h Arcan. Punct. 1. 2. c. 26. f. 2.
[ 27I ]
" punctuation, as and becaufe it can be " demonftrated, that it almoft every where " both agrees with the confonants to which * it is added, with the feries and flructure u of the words in the paffage, and that it " produces a fenfe commodious, true, co- " herent, &c. nor can any other punctua- *' tion be produced more apt and more " commodious'."
7. The infpiration of fcripture is affected thereby. If all fcripture or the whole wri- ting of the Bible is by infpiration of God, then not the matter only, but the words in which it is written, are of divine infpira- tion ; and indeed what elfe are meant by the words the Holy Ghojl teacheth, 1 Cor. ii. 13? and if the words of fcripture are of di- vine infpiration, and given by God himfelf, then, furely, not half words, as confonants without vowels are j and if whole words, which is mod agreeable to the wifdom and honour of the Divine Being, then both confonants and vowels were given by infpi- ration ; and if the latter were not, but of human invention, then, fo far as they have been and are in ufe, and the fenfe of fcrip- ture
1 Qui punfta vel negligunt, vel prorfum rejlciunt, certe cu-ent omni judicio & ratione. Calvin, in Zech. xi. 7.
[ 272 ]
ture has been and Mill is taken from them, and made to depend on them, fuch fenfe ftands not upon divine authority, but upon human authority ; and on that of a fett of men, blinded, befotted, and deftitute of the Spirit of God, bitter enemies to chriftianity, and perhaps a fett of men as bad as ever was on earth ; and if the points are of their invention and addition, they ought never to fland in our Bibles, and be ufed by us, but fhould be rejected with great indignation : a pointed Bible, if poflible, fhould not be in the world, having in it fuch an addition to the word of God, which ought not to be made, and which is fo directly contrary to his order, Deut.iv. 2. and xii. 32. Prov, xxxi. 6. And to which may be further obferved,
8. If the vowel-points were not annexed to the letters by the penmen of the facred writings, when penned by them, but have had a later and a new beginning, that would have been known ; fome would have di- vulged it ; it would have been on record fomewhere or another, and we fhould have been informed by fome means or another, by whom they were placed, and where and at what time -, but nothing of this has ever
tran-
[ 273 ] tranfpired. The ftory of Elias about the men of Tiberias merits no regard ; and even that the points were annexed by Ezra, or by the men of his congregation, is mere conjecture, without any foundation -, and therefore upon the whole it may be con- cluded, that they were originally put by the facred penmen, Mofes and the prophets.
It is often faid, in favour of reading the Bible without points, that Rabbinical books are written without them, and are eafily read. But then it fhould be obferved, that they are read by fuch who have £rft read the Hebrew Bible with points, and who are well verfed in Bible-Hebrew ; and by fuch the commentaries of Kimcbi, Abarb'mel, and others, may be read with fome eafe, whofe ftyle is plain and clear -, and by de- grees other writings more rough, crabbed and difficult may be read alfo ; but as Bux- tor/1 and others obferve, there is a great difference between the Bible and Rabbini- cal books, in writing, in ftyle, in manner and means of learning and readino- them. In Rabbinical books, the matres lecJionis, as nN are called, are ufed to fupply the want of vowels ; whereas in the Bible they T are
1 Be Pun&. Amiq. par. 3 p. 370.
t 274 1 are moft frequently omitted, and even in places where they might be expected, and leaft of all fhould be omitted : the ftyle of Rabbinical books is for the moft part plain, and where it is not, as in the Talmud and other writings, it is hard and difficult to read them ; but the ftyle of the Bible is ge- nerally fhort, concife, full of ellipfes and other figures, efpecially in the prophetic writings; add to which, what is contained in Rabbinical writings are things ufually be- fore known, or eafily underftood, and to be read without much ftop or hindrance ; but the facred fcriptures contain myfteries, things fublime, and more remote from the capacities of men, and require more atten- tion, help and afliftance in reading them ; and befides, if a miftake is made in Rab- binical v/ritings, it is not of that import- ance, as in reading the Bible ; and there- fore we may venture to read with lefs pain and with more fafety, the one without points than the other. Buxtorf, the fon, upon his own obfervation afterts k, that it is more eafy to read Rabbinical books un- pointed, than any of the books of the Bible pointed ; and that he could venture to fay,
that
k DePunft. Antiq. par. 2. p. J76.
[ 275 3 that he could more readily and certainly read any "Rabbinical books never feen by him before, than any book of the Bible even pointed, and though well known by him, and often read over and over again. Yet, notwithflanding all the advantages on the fide of Rabbinical writings, how many mi/lakes have been made by learned men, as by Sca/iger, Schickard, Kir c her, Vorfihis, and others ? what blunders in tranflation has Buxtorf expofed in Morinus and Capel- lus ? and even thofe great matters in Rab- binical literature, as the Buxtorf s themfelves, Selden, Ligbtfoot, &c. are not without their errors; nor need it be wondered at, fince, in the Talmuds efpecially, there are many places which feem quite unintelligible, and befides are written in the Chaldee dialect, and that very impure, and abounding with exotic words.
It is frequently objected againfi the Bi- ble being written and read with points, that the copy of the law every where kept in the Jewifti fynagogues is without points, as anfwering to the Mofaic Archetype. That it is an unpointed copy of the law which is ufually kept in the Jewifi fynagogues now, T 2 will
t *7« ]
will be allowed !, but that the Archetype or Autograph of Mofes was without points may be afTerted, but not eafily proved ; nor can it be faid, with any precilion, how long it has been the cuftom of the "Jews to have an unpointed copy of the law in their fyna- gogues ; nor can what they have, bethought to be an ectype of, or to anfwer to the copy of Mofes, nor be kept with that view. For had the Autograph of Mofes the Kerz\ or marginal readings ? it will not be faid by the oppofers of the points that it had -, but the prefent copies of the law in the iyna- goguesof thej^mrhave, if I miftake not, and even the pricks and points which they call crowns m ; are the prefent copies in the fy- nagogues written in Samaritan characters ? they are not: and yet, according to the hy- pothecs of Morinns, Capelhis, and thofe that follow them, they ought to be fo writ- ten, to be an ectype of, or to anfwer to that of Mofes •, fince that, according to them, was in that character : but to have a copy in that character now would be contrary to their own rules, one of which runs thus",
«« they
1 Lyra in Hof ix. 12. JVIenafTeh ben Ifrael. Conciliator, in Exod. qu. 50. p. 170. • -m Schulchan Aruch, par. 1. c. 141. f. 8. and par. 2. c. 275. (.6. Vid. Hackfpan. Cabala, p. 309. n Maflechet Sopherim3 c. 1. f. 6. .
t 277 ]
" they dont write (the facred books) nei- ,e ither in the language beyond the river (t (or the Samaritan), nor in the Syriac, e* nor in the Median, nor in Greek -, and in " whatfoever language or writing they are " written, they may not be read (/. e. pub- " lickly) until they are written in the Af- «* fyrian" or fquare character. There are other reafons to be given, why unpointed copies are kept and ufed in the fynagogues of the Jews, and which may ferve to lead to the original of this cuflom, and the rea- fon of its continuance.
I, One reafon was, that the Cabali/ls, and thofe who had got into the allegorizing way of interpreting the fcriptures, might have the opportunity of framing and efta- blifhing their own and even various fenfes of them, which an unpointed Bible will admit of, when a pointed one will not. Hence that laying of R. Menachem °, " a " book of the law in which there are many *' faces (or on which many fenfes may be " put) is one not pointed -" for, as he fays, " when letters are not pointed, they have tf many faces (or may be differently read) ; '•* but when they are pointed, they have only
" one
J Apud Munfter. Praefat. ad Vet. Teft.
[ 27S ]
t* one fenfe, according to the punctuation:" and this R.Bec/jai* plainly fuggefts, is the original caufe and reafon of ufing unpointed copies ; " letters not pointed, he fays, admit tc of various fenfes, and are divided into " divers fparks ; and becaufe of this we are 4< commanded not to point the book of the *,' law; for the literal fenfe of every word " is according to the punctuation, and " there is but one literal fenfe in a pointed " word ; but an unpointed word a man " may understand many ways, and find out *' many wonderful and excellent things :" and it is for much the fame realbn, that men may not be tied down to one fenfe of a word, that points are now fo much oppofed. Some have drawn an argument for the novelty and againft the antiquity or the points, from the Cabalifts making no ufe nor mention, of them in their writings, but drew their various fenfes, it is faid, from the letters only, and the combination of them, and not from the vowels and accents; but this has been abundantly confuted by Buxtorf^. The commentator on the book of Cofri* makes mention of R. Aaron, a
great
p Apud Buxtorf. ut fupra, p. 45,46. q Ut fupra,
par. 1. c. 5. p. 54, &c. r R. Judah Mufcatus in Cofri,
iol. 230. 4. Vid. Wolf, Bibliothec. Heb. p. 128.
[ z79 ]
great Mekubbal or Cabbalifi, the head of the univerfity at Babylon, as the author of a book of pointing, and which is quoted by Kittangeliiis s ; and in the Cabalijiic Lexicon*, under the word DH1?3, mention is made of nine points, and their names are given, Kametz, Pathacb, Zere, &c. and the ufe that is made of them is obferved ; and MenaJJeb ben Ifrael* defcribes the Ca- balijls, as employing themfelves in fearching out the deep myfteries of the law, which are contained in the letters, points and mu- fical accents ; and a little after, he obferves, that " the law was given without points, !f like the books the Jews now have in " their fynagogues j fo that when any word " occurs, whofe letters now are not tied to ■f certain vowels, men may put what points " they pleafe to them, and fo the words " may be read one way and another."
2. Another reafon of the Jews having an unpointed copy of the law in their fyna- gogues is, that it might be a memorial of the oral tradition of points and accents, from the times of Mojes to Ezra, They
fup-
8 Pe Verit. Relig. Chrift. p. 27. 40. l Kabela.
Denudata. par. 1. p. 592. ■ u Conciliat. in Exod.
qu. 50. p. 169. 172. 174. Vid. Leifden. Philolog. Heb. Mixt. Diflert. 13. p. 106. & Philolog. Heb". DifTert. 26,
[ 23o ]
fuppofe the points were of Mofes, but not annexed by him to the Pentateuch ; but that they were delivered and handed down by oral tradition from one to another until Ezra, who added them to it; and there- fore to keep in memory this wonderful af- fair, they always have an unpointed copy in their fynagogues.
3. Another reafon why only unpointed copies of the law are kept in the fyna- gogues, may be their fuperflitious accuracy and exactnefs in writing the law; fo as to letters, if any are wanting or not rightly placed, or fimilar ones put for each others the copy is prophane or rejected ; and as it is flill more difficult to have the points and accents exactly put, they choofe to have none at all : hence they fay w a pointed copy is prophane or to be rejected, even though the punctuation is razed out; partly be- caufe it will not admit of various fenfes, as before obferved, and partly becaufe of the difficulty and almoft impombility of a per- fect pointed copy; and the rather they are indifferent to one, and like as well to have an unpointed one in their fynagogues, fmce there ^ none but their learned men, as priefls, &c. read in them. 3. Bur
w Schulchan Aruch, parr2. C. 274. f. 7.
*
[ a»i ]
4. But the chief reafon of unpointed copies in the fynagogues feems to be, that none but learned men, or fuch who are well verfed in the Hebrew language, (hould be admitted readers there -, for if the copy- was pointed, as then, any common man might read it, fo any fuch man might be chofen to the office of a reader, though otherwife very illiterate; and to prevent any fuch being introduced into it, is the principal reafon now, why it is unpointed. And though thofe who are expert in the lan- guage, and are able to read without points* and are chofen into the office of reader in the fynagogue, and have exercifed that office many years ; yet it is their cuflom, as one of thofe readers told Cocceius x long ago, to prepare themfelves at home by reading out of a pointed copy, for their better, eafier and more accurate reading in the fyna- gogue. And it is their ufual method to this day, for the prsecentor of the fyna- gogue, though ever fo well verfed in read- ing the fcripture, and" ever fo exact in 'the knowledge of the Heffrew tongue, the day before the fabbath, to read the parfages ap- pointed to be read that day cut of a pointed U copy,
* Goccei Defenf. Cod. Heb, f. 19. p. 22. Tom. 7.
[ 282 ]
copy, and thereby make himfelf mafter of the exact reading of them, that fo the day following he may read them without hefi- tation or flop, and pronounce, as he does, exactly in conformity to the prefent punc- tuation y : and after all it follows not, be- caufe the Jews now have, and have had for ages part, unpointed Bibles in their fyna- gogues, which men of learning could read, that they have not, nor had any pointed ones for the common people. It is certain that they had formerly, and have fuch now ; wherefore this is no fufficient objec- tion againft the antiquity and ufe of the points, but an argument in favour of them ; fince the true reafon of having unpointed copies in the fynagogue is, that none might be admitted readers in them, but fuch who are fo perfect in the Hebrew language as to be able to read exactly in an unpointed copy, agreeable to the points and accents in a pointed one.
y Carpz v. Cricic. facr. par. I; p. 267.
FINIS.
BOOKS
Printed for, and Sold by G. KEITH, in Gracechurch-Street.
AInfworth's Diftionary, Latin and Englifh, 2 Vols, Folio. Buxtorfi Biblia Heb. 3 Vols. Fol. Calafio Concordantia Bjbliorum Heb. a Romaine, 4
Vols. Fol. Dionyfius Halicarnaflenfis ab Hudfono, 2 Vols. Fol. Wilfon's Didionary of the Bible, Fol. Homed Opera cum Comment. Euftathii, 3 Vols. Fol. Nov. Teft. cura Millii, Fol. Poli Synopfis Criticorum, 5 Vols. Fol. Surenhufii Mifchna, Not. Var. 6 Vols. Fol. Trommii Concordantia, Gr. 2 Vols. Fol. Bedford's Scripture Chronology, Fol. Biographia Britannica, 7 Vols. Fol. Chambers's Dictionary and Supplement, 4 Vols. Fol. Dr. Goodwin's Works, 5 Vols. Fol. Dr. Manton's Works, 5 Vols. Fol. Bp. Pocock's Works, 2 Vols. Fol. Puffendorf's Law of Nature and Nations, Fol. Univerfal Hiftory, 9 Vols. Fol.
Cruden's Compleat Concordance to the Bible, Quarto. Milton's Political and Poetical Works, 5 Vols. 410. Neal's Hiftory of the Puritans, 2 Vols. 4to. Ogilvie's Day of Judgment and other Poems, 4to and 8vo. Dr. Watts's Works, 6 Vols. 4to. Brine's Works, 6 Vols. 8vo. Bp. Beveridge's Works, 12 Vols. 8vo. Dr. Crifp's Works, 2 Vols. 8vo. Hervey's Meditations, Dialogues, and Letters, 9 Vol?,
8vo. Dr. Ward's Syftem of Oratory, 2 Vols. 8vo.
/idf.V- »v.i*i-Wff