belonging to the same country assembled and formed respectable congregations, such as the Alexandrians, the Syrians, and the Asiatics, &c. Act. Apost. vi. 9; ix. 29. "The Christian school of this city also consisted partly of members who spoke Greek, or Hellenists, who were numerous enough to support themselves in a dispute with the Jews. Act. Apost. vi. 1.”— pp. 33-50. We shall only introduce another extract, containing Dr. Hug's sentiments in reference to the famous Hellenistic controversy. Adverting to certain opinions which some learned men have entertained on this subject, he adds: "In order to get rid of them, we have been referred to an explanation which had already been for a long time abandoned, and which is to the following purport: Hellenists are nothing but proselytes, who were always holden in less esteem by the Jews who belonged to the twelve tribes, or by the Hebrews in the more confined sense of the word, and who, in reference to their heathenish extraction, were called Hellenists.' "At all events, however, they spoke Greek, and it is probable they did so from the circumstance of having been of heathen extraction, or, but lately, heathens themselves. And who could expect any thing else from the natives of Cilicia, and particularly of Cyrene, Alexandria, and lonia? Act. Apost. vi. 9. If we would prove, from the example of Philo, that the Alexandrians did also understand something of Hebrew, this could have been but very little; and besides this, there were very few as learned as he was. "Let us analyze these notions a little. What is a Jew? What is a Hebrew ? What is a Helen? and what is a Hellenist? -The name of Jew (we speak of the times of our Lord and the apostles) is the common expression for all who, According to their extraction, came from the ancient kingdom of Judah, on what ever part of the earth they might be living, (φυσει Ἰουδαιοι, Gal. ii. 15. παντες κατα την οικουμενην, Act. Apost. xxiv. 5.) and the religion of this race of men, γένος, is called Judaism, Ἰουδαϊσμος, Galat. i. 14. Therefore the Jews stand in contradistinction to the heathens, Ovn, Rom. iii. 29. ix. 24. &c. or, in contradistinction to the chief pcople of the heathens, viz. the Greeks, λnvov, Acts xviii. 4. Rom. ii. 9. x 12. 1 Cor. i. 24. and to be addicted to Judaism, is, lovduïLeiv; but a pagan mode of life is eviкws ny, Gal. ii. 14. and never éλnvičev.— He who had departed from heathenism, and who had not yet been so long in it (Judaism) as to be considered by the nation as a fellow-citizen, was a proselyte, or a son of a proselyte, Acts vi. 5. xiii. 43. And in Acts ii. 10. 'Iovdator and πρоonλurоt, occur, for the whole of the professors of Judaism. "In the same manner as the Jews and the Greeks are opposed to each other, so also are the Hebrews and the Hellenists, Acts vi. 1. Wherein can that consist, by and by which he distinguishes a subwhich the Hebrew distinguishes himself, division of the general name of Jew? Certainly not in religion-IN THAT he is a Jew; not in extraction, uσEL, IN THAT ALSO he is a Jew. In what else can it consist but in the language? When we speak of customs, opinions, and religious worship, 'Iovdaukos only is used: but when we treat of the national language, writings, and literatue, then païkos is used; we say, eßpaïkn diaλEKTOS, Acts xxii. 2. xxvi. 14. ἑβραϊκα γραμ para, Luke xxiii. 38. and we speak and write ßpaior, John xix. 17. 20. we But never say Ἰουδαϊκη διαλεκτος, 'Iovdaika γραμματα, &c. It would therefore appear pretty evident, in what the Hebrew distinguishes himself from his whole nation. "If then the peculiarity, by which the Hebrew distinguishes himself, consists in the language, we may likewise guess, wherein the peculiarity of the Hellenist, who is opposed to him, consists; THAT in like manner must be referred to the lan guage. Hence, βραΐζειν and ἑλληνίζειν were opposed to each other. The word eßpaïeir means, in Josephus, to state any thing in the Hebrew language, ra του Καίσαρος διηγγειλε ἑβραΐζων. Bell. Jud L. vi. c. 3. n. I. What then could XXŋvišeiv be?—That which it has ever been,-to speak Greek; as, for instance, Thucydides says, ii. 48. EXληνισθησαν την νυν γλωσσαν, “ they adopted the Greek language, which they now speak;' and Xenophon, Anab. vii. c. 3. n. 12. ἑλληνίζειν γαρ ἠπιστατο: or as Lucian, Philopseud. c. 16. says of the dæmon, whom the native of Palestine drives out, ἀποκρίνεται ἑλληνίζων ή Bapßapilor, he answers in both languages of Palestine, in the language of the country βαρβαρίζων, and in the Greek enviwv. Accordingly, a Hellenist was well explained by the scholiast Greek;' and even if John Chrysostom, as to mean a Jew by extraction who speaks it seems to me, inferred this signification from the formation of the word only, still he was too good a Grecian, for us on this account to dispute his assertion. If we consult one of the older Greek grammarians, we shall obtain from him the information, that from 'EXAny comes éλληνίζω, thence ελληνιστι, as from Δωρίζω, Δωρίστι, Αιολίζω, Αἰολιστι. The question respecting language and dialect is here decided. Thus Hellenists are distinguished by the language, in consequence of which they are opposed to Jews speaking Hebrew or Aramaic :-they are men who speak Greek. Still, (and here I principally complain of Berthold) a great importance is always placed, as it should be, upon the circumstance of Jesus being introduced as speak ing Hebrew, Mark v. 41. Tadıda kovμi, vii. 34. ¿ppadu, and Matthew xxvii. 46. Mark xv. 34. It might be replied, that the Hebrew words in these passages are quoted by the evangelists as remarkable occurrences, which would not have been the case, if Jesus had generally spoken Hebrew; and what could well be urged against this answer? Yet we will not dismiss the matter so abruptly. Our Lord might have spoken to the Jewish multitude in Hebrew, because they were predisposed to listen to it. But how did he speak to a mixed assembly, collected from different parts and different cities? How did he speak to proselytes and heathens: how at Gadaris? Matt. viii. 28. Mark v. 1. Luke viii. 26. How in the districts of Tyre and Sidon, Mark vii. 24. where the Syrophoenician Greek woman, yuvn Ἑλληνις Συροφοινικισσα, entered into conversation with him? How at Decapolis, which, as far as we know, consisted of Greek cities, such as Philadelphia, Hippos, Pella? 46 Finally, even if Jesus more frequently spoke Hebrew, in what manner does that affect Matthew, who had not to speak to detached parties, which went to and fro,-sometimes to Hebrews and sometimes to Hellenists,-and who could not accordingly change his language; who must have conceived to himself a fixed class of men, and chosen his language according to them, in which the present and a future generation, to which perhaps the Hebrew might become less familiar, were included."-pp. 50--54. With respect to the English translation of this valuable work, we are dissatisfied with it on three grounds. In the first place, it has neither an index, nor a table of contents; an omission which is altogether unpardonable in a work of this nature, which necessarily embraces such a vast multiplicity N. S. No. 36. of subjects. We scarcely ever take up Marsh's Michaelis without feeling indignant at a similar omission; and are confident that most of our readers will concur in a sentiment once expressed by a friend: " By all means print an index; a copious index is well worth the addition of any sum in proportion to the size and value of the book." Secondly, we have long been persuaded that a great book is a great evil; and are, therefore, sorry to find Hug's work, which, if confined within a reasonable compass, might have been very generally read, swelled out into two bulky octavos, two hundred pages of the first volume of which, printed in a large type, contain an outline of Berthold's Introduction. This part should have been altogether omitted, and reserved for the Museum Theologicum, which Dr. Wait promises us at the end of the present year. Considering, however, the size of the book, and the quantity of Greek and Oriental type requisite in the composition, we do not think the price at all extravagant. We are grieved, in the third place, to be under the necessity of stating, that the translation is very badly got up. The German, we are aware, is a language of considerable difficulty; it differs widely in its forms of construction from our own, and is not unfrequently manufactured into periods of the most complicated and unwieldly character; and, with this conviction, we are fully disposed to allow considerable latitude to those who undertake a translation from the one language into the other. The predominating character, howe ever, of the work before us, is that of negligent servility; in conse quence of which, it is not only loaded with Germanicisms, but abounds with passages which are either destitute of meaning, or which express something very different from what was intended 4 Q "The labour of life, which is for the most part allotted to our species, will never cease to demand that time, which such views and convictions require; what then guided us in the interim, until every one was furnished with his wisdom? or what was left to him, who probably did not overtake his wiser brother? what to younger generations of mankind, which as yet had not attained maturity of moral conduct? It is replied, the authority of fathers and fellow-citizens. What! this authority! if so, it must constantly happen, that an authority more certain, more general, more in unison with itself, and more sacred gives birth to it, which directs its principal aim to the morals and precepts of fathers and fellow-citizens.". pp. 1, 2. Another paragraph begins with this sentence: "Wherefore, to assist the weak, every duty is divided into commandments, that no one might be impeded from seeking its basis in the whole creation, and from uniting it with the several parts of the system."-pp. 4, 5. In reference to the historical writers of the New Testament, we are told that "The narrative itself is so constituted, that it represents them, notwithstanding its brevity, as having the mien and demeanour of persons engaged in traffic." p. 9. We should have supposed that in bringing the work through the press, the translator could not have failed to perceive the perfect novelty of the sentiment here broached. It is well-known that Matthew was a tax-gatherer. The anonymous author of the Acts of Mark asserts that he was of the race of the priests. As to Luke some have thought that he was a painter; some a slave; and others, the beloved physician." John, we know, was a fisherman. But that they were "persous engaged in traffic," was never before asserted. Yet we read again in the course of a couple of pages : "The more we enter into particulars on this point, and observe the effect of opinions, customs, and manners peculiar to this time, in the language and undertakings of trafficking individuals, by so much the more intrinsically evident must it be, that the composers of these books have passed their days under these circumstances of life."-p. 11. avowed that the Evangelists were Here, as above, it is distinctly "trafficking individuals." How are we to account for these assertions? 66 By adverting to the fact that the German verb "handeln," signifies both to "trade" or traffic," and simply to "act, do," &c. If we apply the latter signification to both passages, they will read as they ought to do; "the mien and demeanour of persons engaged in the transactions;" "the language and undertakings of the acting individuals." "At page 15, Dr. Hug is made to say :-"We would not, however, bring them (forgers of books) further into notice, had not great and enlightened writers used them as authorities, and sometimes permitted themselves to be ensnared he actually says is, "we will not, by the same errors." But what however, bring them further into notice, but produce in proof some great and enlightened writers, who have sometimes permitted themselves to be ensnared by similar mistakes." Another curious passage occurs, p. 26. "The Alexandrian merchant vessels preferred Puteoli (Pozzuoli), to all the harbours in Italy, and here they deposited their rich freights. They conducted the crew, adorned with wreaths and festive garments, in the form of a fleet, one after another, into the pur harbour, where they were received with the greatest demonstrations of friendship. Such was the case with the sale of Alexandrian commodities throughout Italy. According to the course then sued by this vessel, Paul went direct into this harbour and no further, either backwards or forwards, on land." Here, among other incoherencies, we are presented with the Alexandrian sailors, arranged in the form of a fleet, and conducted into the harbour of Puteoli. Can any thing be more perfectly ridiculous? What the author affirms is, that the "merchant vessels, sometimes by fleets, and sometimes singly, entered the harbour, where the crews, adorned with wreaths and festive garments, were received with demonstrations of friendship." Equally unhappy is the concluding sentence in the quotation. Certainly no person would gather from it, that the author meant to say, that Paul landed precisely at this harbour, and not at any other point, either higher or lower, in Italy. Yet this is actually what is expressed by the original. Speaking of Frumentius, the Apostle of Abyssinia, it is said, "he must have thought of a version of the Sacred Scriptures in the language of the country, if not for the use of the nation, yet for the use of those who attended his ministry," p. 424. The German is, die sich zum Lehramte bildeten—" who were preparing for the ministry." We read, p. 480, in reference to the Vulgate; "Since it happened, that the book met in this state the eyes of the public, which was disposed to form a strong judgment upon it, upon this let it rest." According to the original the passage reads thus: "How it happened that the book met, in this state, the eyes of a public which was disposed to form a severe judgment upon it, we shall not determine." Treating of the Codex Argenteus, p. 484, Dr. Hug is represented in the translation as making the following statement respecting the way in which Isaac Vossius became possessed of this invaluable relic of antiquity:-" It was then deposited in the Royal Library at Stockholm, and said to have been given as a present to the celebrated Isaac Voss, by Queen Christina, whose particular favour he enjoyed. Others, however, reverse it, saying, that he himself presented it to her." Here the translator discovers his ignorance both of the German language and the history of the Version in question. Dr. Hug's words are: er habe es sich selbst geschenkt, literally, according to the German idiom-he presented it to himself, i. e. in plain English, " he stole it,”—a charge actually brought against Vossius, from the imputation of which his character has never been cleared. Similar instances might be multiplied in abundance; and, indeed, without having the original at hand, the reader never can be certain that he is put in possession of the real meaning of the author. We are the more disappointed by the present specimen of translation, as we had been led to entertain considerable expectations. from the Museum Theologicum, which is projected to "comprize the greater part of the biblical researches of the continental scholars ;" and do most seriously advise the translator, if he wishes that work to be continued beyond the first number, to commence, without delay, a thorough revision of his manuscript. We are equally desirous with himself to see our countrymen put in possession of many of the treatises with which he stands pledged to furnish them; but we had rather see them kept a little longer in expectation, than obliged to spend their time in attempting to decipher an obscure and unintelli gible, because a hasty and negli gent translation. It is also devoutly to be wished that Dr. Wait would expunge from these works, as they pass through his hands, those profane and wanton passages or phrases with which many of them abound, but which ought never to find a place in any work professedly devoted to the elucidation or examination of the HOLY SCRIPTURES. We have no desire to shut out any light our German neighbours may pour upon us; but we deprecate the spirit in which many of their investigations are carried on, and the language which they too often employ in treating subjects of such grave and transcendent importance. History of the Commonwealth of England, from its Commencement, to the Restoration of Charles the Second. By W. Godwin. Vol. 3. 8vo. Price 14s. Colburn. OF the two former volumes of Mr. Godwin's work, we have already recorded our favourable opinion, (Feb. 1825, and Sept. 1826,) and a few lines, in testimony of our continued approval, on the appearance of a third volume, might, perhaps, have been deemed sufficient. But the period of our national history which is here illustrated, is one of such powerful interest; and the events which then took place, have been, on all hands, so grossly misrepresented, and so distorted by party spirit, that we cannot deny ourselves the gratification of a more extended notice. Not that it is our intention to enter into any detail of the events here narrated; but to show our readers, by a few extracts from the volume, that it is one which well deserves their attentive perusal, both as Englishmen and as Nonconformists. The account of the death of Charles closed the former volume. Till the period at which this volume commences," says Mr.Gin his advertisement, the great leaders among the Commonwealthsmen may be considered as merely engaged in clearing away obstacles, and obtaining an adequate area for reducing their speculations to practice. In the commencement of the year 1649, they abolished kingship and the house of lords: they had no old institutions standing in the way to impede their efforts. Now it was that they were to erect their republic. "But, if there remained no old insti tutions to thwart their endeavours, the memory of these institutions still subsisted, and presented a formidable difficulty with which for them to contend. We shall see in what manner they tried to surmount that difficulty. Their ulti mate success was not equal to their courage and their talents. But, if they did not build up a Commonwealth as durable as the foundations of the world, they at least subdued every declared enemy, both from within and without, and caused themselves to be respected and feared by all surrounding nations. The five years treated of in this volume, may challenge any equal period of English history, in the glory of its rule, and perbaps in the virtue and disinterestedness of many of its most distinguished leaders."— pp. v. vi. The account of the state of parties at this crisis, would be esteemed too long to copy, did we not feel assured, that it will weigh more with our readers, than any comment from our own pen, to convince them that we have not erred in our estimate of Mr. G.'s quali fications for the task he has undertaken, and of the impartiality he has evinced in its execution. We have, therefore, extracted nearly the whole of it. "It was a great and perilous experiment that was made upon the inhabitants of this country, by the men who, in the middle of the seventeenth century, resolved to communicate to the English nation, the blessing, such they deemed it, of a republican government. We are told of a dancer, who had been accustomed to perform his figure with a chest standing against one side of the room, and who felt, when the chest was removed, unable to repeat the lesson in which he had been instructed. Things immaterial and unessential are felt by us to be of the utmost importance, where we have never been accustomed to do without them: and, |