Page images
PDF
EPUB

time they fulfil all the laws of hospitality with a proud honour, and inviolable fidelity. Within the last half century they are become for the most part Mahomedans, being previously little other than absolute heathens. Their language is affirmed to be totally different from every other.' There is no writing in it. Their political state is completely feudal. There is a class called princes. Each of these is the proprietor of a number of families by courtesy called nobles; and these nobles inherit the mencattle beneath them. There are no regular taxes; whatever is required by the upper people, is furnished by the lower. These requisitions are not seldom as oppressive as they are arbitrary. The highest value is set on the true ancient quality blood, insomuch that no man is deemed to be of noble blood whose family 'is ever known to have been ignoble, even though it may have given birth to several kings.' A prince commits his son, when only a few days old, to the care of one or other of his nobles, and never sees him till the time of the young man's marriage. Hence,' says our Author, results the utmost indifference be'tween the nearest relations.'' A prince reddens with indignation when he is asked concerning the health of his wife and children, makes no reply, and commonly turns his back on the inquirer in contempt.' Mr. K. coincides with the prevailing report as to the fine forms and countenances of this nation. They are also very cleanly in their habits.

It would be in vain for us to attempt to enumerate the multitude of tribes and sub-divisions of tribes that are scattered among the villages, mountains, lakes, and steppes of the wild region of the Caucasus, or to trace the line of the Russian boundary, or to state the precise kind of relation between the frontier authorities of that empire and such tribes as may not yet be quite swallowed up. By our Author's account it should seem that this great monopolist is very cordially hated by these innumerable hordes of wild people; at the same time that their hostility to one another enables the Russian government to maintain its power among them by means of a military force quite contemptible in point of number and fortresses.

There are some interesting descriptions of antiquities and ruins, especially of the extensive remains of Madshar, a large Tartar city, supposed to have been destroyed about the year

1400.

Our traveller sometimes found himself in very romantic and sublime situations, and seems to have felt some very slight promptings of enthusiasm, in gazing on the vast range of snowy mountains, the two loftiest of which, Elbrus and Mqinwari, he pronounces to be rivals to Mont Blanc. Elbrus he deems to be probably as high as that monarch of the Alps. The inhabitants have many superstitious feelings respecting these two sublime

objects, feelings which would very seriously incommode an adventurous traveller that should attempt the ascent.

The Elbrus has never yet been ascended, and the Caucasians have a notion that no person can reach its summit without the special permission of the Deity. They likewise relate that here Noah first grounded with the ark, but was driven further to Ararat. The ascent from the south side would perhaps be the most practicable, did not the mountaineers throw innumerable obstructions in the way of such an enterprise. Its foot is totally uninhabited, and surrounded by marshes produced in summer by the melting of the snows. All the mountaineers have abundance of tales to relate concerning the evil spirits and dæmons who dwell upon it, whose prince they call Dshin Pudischah, and of whose annual meetings they have invented as many fables as the North Germans respecting the assemblies of the witches on the Brocken.' p. 168.

[ocr errors]

The Mqinwari is without doubt the next in height to the Elbrus of the whole snowy range of the Caucasian mountains, It is probably equal in size to Mont Blanc, if however it does not exceed the latter*. Its figure is that of a sugar-loaf, and it is covered nearly to its base with everlasting snow and ice. So high as it can be ascended, that is to say, to the commencement of the snowy region, the stone consists of red basaltic porphyry and clay-porphyry, intermixed more or less with vitreous feldspar.'

'Above the foot of the Mqinwari are excavations called in Georgian Bethleemi, the access to which is extremely difficult. Tradition reports that they were formerly inhabited by pious recluses. Here is said to be suspended an iron chain by which you can ascend to the cradle of Christ, and the tent of Abraham constructed without either poles or cords.

According to other fabulous accounts, buildings of marble and crystal, standing upon the snow itself, are here to be seen; these are probably masses of ice, which form all sorts of figures of palaces and towers. Greek monks, who pretended to have reached the very summit of the mountain, might with impunity palm upon the cre dulous all sorts of fictions respecting the wonderful objects to be met with there, and among the rest the tale of a golden dove which hovers self-supported in the midst of one of the buildings.' p. 382.

In dismissing the book, we have to acknowledge that there is mingled with its dry statistical and historical details much cu

[ocr errors]

*We suspect that an accurate collation of the different parts of the book would detect a considerable number of inconsistencies, not to say contradictions. We think we have observed several, and here is a palpable one: In speaking of the Elbrus he pronounces it to be by far the highest' mountain of the Caucasus, and adds, it is little inferior in elevation to Mont Blanc.' In describing (as above) the Mqinwari, which, by his former statement must be by far lower than the Elbrus, he yet suggests that it may be higher than Mont Blanc.

rious matter to which we have not found room to make even the smallest allusion. More than half of it will be read with interest. We hope another volume will not be condemned to appear without a large and well authorized map, the want of which renders much of this totally useless.

[ocr errors]

Art. III. 'H xain diaben. Novum Testamentum, cum Notis Theologicis et Philologicis. 8vo. 3 vols. Vol. i. pp. 631; vol. ii. pp. 550; vol. iii. pp. 678. Londini, in ædibus typographicis A. I. Valpy. Price 21. 12s. 6d. 1816.

FORTES creantur fortibus et bonis. The poet's adage, unhappily as it has failed in many instances, has a gratifying application to the family of that respectable clergyman and excellent scholar, Dr. Valpy, of Reading. The editorship of this Greek Testament is from one of his sons, the Rev. Edward Valpy, of Norwich; and the typographical execution, at once elegant and correct, is one of the numerous labours which shew that another son of the Doctor, Mr. Abraham Valpy, is treading in the steps of the learned printers of the sixteenth century. We cordially wish him the rewards of success and honour; and that he may emulate the Stephenses and Turnebi and Cratanders.

The plan of this work is to give the Greek Text, with a series of brief Scholia after the manner of Hardy's, (Lond. 1768.) principally selected from Grotius, Elsner, Raphelius, Bos, Palairet, Kypké, and Rosenmuller. A Testament of

this kind, judiciously furnished with critical and philological notes, is certainly a desirable manual for constant use in the study of a divine, or of any scholar. But we regret that we cannot greatly commend the execution of this attempt. Those of the Notes which are intended, we suppose, to be Theological, (in a great measure, we believe, taken from Hardy,) are in general miserably jejune; and are frequently no other than bare truisms and identical propositions. Had all the Notes of this Theological' denomination been omitted, the book would have acquired in goodness all that it would have lost in size. Thus also more space would have been gained for Critical and Philological Annotations. Those of these two descriptions which exist, are indeed numerous, and often valuable, being transcribed and abridged from the authors above mentioned; but we find, in relation to them, two subjects of regret. First, that these Notes are often too short for the satisfaction, or at least for the reasonable gratification, of the reader. If all the paltry and childish Comments had been excluded, more ample extracts could have been given from the best Critics, and apposite passages from the Classics, from Philo and Josephus, and from the Fathers. Secondly, we

are not pleased with the suppression of the names of the writers whose remarks are introduced, either transcript or compendium. The mention of those names in a few instances is no apology for the general system of reticence: it rather aggravates the fault, by its tending to draw the reader into a belief that the general body of the Notes, as they contain no such acknowledgement, are original.

The Notes are connected with their respective portions of the Text, by the numeral of the verse and the recital of a word or clause. This is a well-chosen method, as it preserves the text free from disfigurement: but it does not appear to us judicious, to make the introducing recitals in Latin instead of in Greek: a mode which can be of service to few or none; which gives the book an unscholar like aspect; and which must sometimes occasion ambiguity: as in 1 Tim. i. 9. where it is impossible to determine whether Nefariis, in the Note, is is intended for 'ανοσίοις or for βεβήλοις.

To each book is prefixed an account of its author, occasion, and object, drawn up in a style of Latinity much superior to that of the usual writers of Biblical Prolegomena. We wish that the Editor had extended his cares, in this respect, to the composition of an Analysis of the matter in each of the Epistles, in order to shew the connexion of the parts, and the course of the argument and applications. It would also have been a very useful addition to the subsidia of this work, had the Time and Place of events, in the Gospels and Acts, been put at the top of each page, as in Dr. White's Diatessaron.

The Text is, generally, that of Griesbach; but there is little criticism on the readings, so that the possessor of this edition cannot dispense with Griesbach's. Mr. Valpy, however, follows the Received Text in those passages which have a relation to important controversy: but he does this in a manner which excites our concern. After the ample induction of evidence in Wetstein, Griesbach, &c. it might surely be expected that a new editor, or critic, would not have retained the common readings without assigning his grounds for so doing.

We have a proper example in Dr. Lawrence and Mr. Nolan. But in this edition we find Acts xx. 28. ECU, Col. ii. 2. Kai Πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ Χριστοῦ, 1 Tim. iii. 16. Θεός, without the smallest intimation that a diversity of reading exists in those instances. In 1 John v. 7, 8. the common reading is preserved; but a note merely states the fact of the controversy, and concludes with this, and only this, reason for the preference given:'Istis verbis e textu sublatis, nescio quid curti atque inexpleti

.

semper miki apparuit.'* We do not object to the learned Editor, that he has preferred the common readings; but we contend that he owed to his critical character, to the interests of truth, and to the satisfaction of his readers, a perspicuous statement, though it might have been concise, of the reasons for his opinion. As the case stands, we fear that this course will by some be imputed to a mere deference to Church Authority: Si quid-doctrinæ Ecclesiæ Anglicanæ, quæ ab 'Apostolica puritate, simplicitate, et dignitate, proximas facile 'tenet, minus consentaneum in his videatur, quod non factum 'spero et nolim, id penitus pro non dicto et retractato esse volo.'t Tom. i. præf. p. 7.

Those persons will not be greatly satisfied with this avowal, who are solicitous that their " faith should stand, not in the wisdom "of men, but in the power of God:" and inferences, though without justice, will be drawn by the enemies of orthodox doctrines, that the advocates of those doctrines shrink from fair and even-handed criticism.

While we thus state, as our duty obliges, our disappointments and objections in relation to this edition, we have much more pleasure in repeating our approbation of its accuracy, its convenient form, and its useful intention; an intention which, notwithstanding the defects that we regret, it will still answer in a considerable degree.

Art. IV.

ברית חדשה על מי משיח: נעתק מלשון

יון ללשון עברי לטוב בני ישראל.

(The New Covenant; translated into the Hebrew Language from the Original Greek; by the Direction and at the Expence of the London Society for Promoting Christianity among the Jews.) 1813.

THE

HE Gospel of Matthew is the only portion of the New Testament contained in the present publication. Of this, a smaller edition than the demand may require, has been printed for circulation, that the Editors may have an opportunity of profiting by public criticism in the revision of the work for a larger impression. They solicit the attention, and bespeak the candour of the learned, in a manner which is creditable to themselves, and which cannot fail of obtaining the notice of those persons who are capable of revising, for correction and improvement, a version of the Christian Scriptures, as important in its design as it is difficult in its execution.

* On the omission of these words from the text, there has always appeared to me something indescribably abrupt and incomplete.

If, contrary to my hopes and wishes, any thing should appear in these sheets at all inconsistent with the doctrine of the Church of England, which, in purity, simplicity, and dignity, certainly holds the next rank to the Apostolic Church, I desire to renounce any such sentiment.

« PreviousContinue »