pound the riddle in three days, and it came to pass on the seventh day, &c.," if new or 'a, three, be changed into new or '1, six, every thing will be clear. If, however, the probability of a reading being erroneous is rather small or if the alteration of the reading is considerable, or varies much from the analogy by which errors originate, the conjectural emendation is to be rejected, although it may suggest itself. Thus John David Michaelis conjectures without sufficient reason, that in I Sam. viii. 16, for in your asses, the reading ought to be in your precious things; but if a better

reading were wanted in this place, it is offered by the Alexandrine translator, who gives the meaning of p3, your oxen.

That sort of conjecture which aims at making the text conformable to grammatical rules is to be attributed solely to an unwarrantable eagerness for correcting.

§ 146. Doctrinal conjecture.

· .:

An alteration of a reading without a witness on doctrinal grounds merely, is called doctrinal conjecture. This is nothing but a corruption of the text, and not to be tolerated in any book. It is sufficient to remark that such conjecture is founded not only on strictly doctrinal arguments, or such as refer to articles of faith or moral precepts, but also on all others derived from opinions previously fixed. If, therefore, doctrinal conjecture induced the Jews to alter p Gerizim into y Ebal in Deut. xxvii. 4, in order to deprive the Samaritans of an argument for that as a place of worship; it was the same principle which led the Samaritans to add in Exod. xii. 10. to the words "the sojourning of the Israelites in Egypt," the clause “and in Canaan;” because, through a preconceived opinion they conjectured that 430 years would not agree with four generations.--The critic must also be on his guard, not to be induced by doctrinal arguments to ascribe the more weight to witnesses or to internal arguments, because the reading for which they give evidence is favourable to certain opinions.

§ 147. Higher Criticism.

Higher criticism, (which indeed often rises to an extreme) does not differ from conjectural, except that it is not occupied with single words or phrases, but with sentences and parts of sentences of some length, and also with whole books which are proved from internal arguments either to belong or not to belong to a certain age or writer. In the books of the Old Testament respecting the history of which we have so little external evidence, this kind of criticism is absolutely necessary, and by the aid of it much is discovered which borders on historical certainty. But, like critical conjecture, it ought to be exercised with sobriety and modesty. No reliance is to be placed upon what might possibly be or happen, for to reason from what is possible to what is real is illogical; nor are bold decisions to be made on light grounds affording nothing more than some weak probability, which, upon a more attentive examination of the subject, comes to nothing. The errors which have been committed in identifying authors of our own age who have written anonymously in their vernacular tongue with others, whose style, principles, mode of reasoning, and course of thought, were all well known from other sources,* ought to be a remarkable warning to the bolder critics of the present day, to employ this uncertain criticism with more caution, and to imitate more closely the example of the Scaligers and Casaubons. Suspicions and trifling reasons prove nothing. It must be shown that a book or a part of a book contains things manifestly more modern than its date, or such as could not have been written by the author to whom it is ascribed, on account of the age in which he lived, or the sects to which he belonged, or the language which he used, which must be clearly and perfectly known to us.[a]--Lastly, caution must be used, never to call in the aid of doctrinal arguments drawn from any preconceived opinions.

[a] Jahn quotes in his German work, the following passage from MORUS, Opusc. P. II. p. 46. s., whence the preceding ideas are taken, and which richly merits insertion here in full. "Ne monumenta historiæ

[The author alludes to some anonymous publications in Germany, which were erroneously ascribed to Zimmerman and Kant, and the caution which he founds upon this fact was never more applicable than it is to his countrymen at the present day. Tr.]

festinantius suspecta judicemus, quasi hæc altior indago critica sit, si ubique suboleat aliquid suspecti. Suspectum nihil in hoc genere dici potest, nisi vel per indubitata et diserta testimonia doceri potest, non esse illo tempore scriptum, sed per fraudem confictum; vel non potuit illo tempore scribi; quia insunt res illo tempore recentiores: vel ab eo viro scribi non potuit propter tempus, quo vixit, propter disciplinam quam secutus est, et propter orationem, qua usus est, plane perfecte nobis cognitam; vel monumenta vetusta invicem dissonant, et injiciunt suo dissensu serupulum. Ad hos leges nisi redeatur, et Scaligerorum et Casaubonorum exemplum severius in imitationem trahatur, verendum est, ne, quod apud Aristophanem Euripides conqueri cogitur, ανθρωπε, όλην την τραγωδίαν με αφαιρεις, idem mutatis verbis majore jure magna veterum historiæ scriptorum pars indignari debeat; όλην την ίςορίαν ήμων αφαιρειτε.”

PART II.

PARTICULAR INTRODUCTION TO EACH BOOK OF THE OLD TESTAMENT

§ 1. Order of treatment.

HAVING discussed those subjects which relate equally to all the books of the Old Testament, we proceed to the examination of the particular books. These we shall not take up in the order in which they are arranged in manuscripts or editions, but in noticing them shall follow, as much as possible, the order of the times in which they were respectively written, or of which they contain the history. We will commence with the historical books, proceeding in succession to the prophetical, to the Hagiographa, and, in the last place, to the deuterocanonical. In this manner the examination of the whole will occupy four sections.

SECTION 1.

OF THE HISTORICAL BOOKS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.

CHAPTER I.

OF THE PENTATEUCH.

§ 2. Contents of the Pentateuch.

THE Pentateuch contains an account of the arrangements of the Divine Being for the purpose of founding, establishing, maintaining, and promoting, religion and good morals, from the creation of man down to the death of Moses. By far the greater part relates to those things which God established by the agency of Moses. What precedes this is introductory, but necessary for the correct and perfect understanding of the remainder. The work consists at present of five books,* but the contents naturally divide themselves into three parts.

I. The FIRST, containing the book of Genesis, comprises the divine arrangements for the support of religion and virtue antecedently to the Mosaic dispensation, from the creation of man down to the death of Joseph, A. M. 2318. This may be subdivided into two portions: the first, Gen. i. 1—xi. 26, contains in a few documents, the principal events from the creation to the birth of Abraham, A. M. 1948, and recounts the ancestors of that patriarch who had cultivated and preserved a due regard for religion and good morals: the second, Gen. xi. 27-l. 26, furnishes a more detailed history of

* [See § 22, note b.]