Scripture, from its first word; or it may have been familiarly called so from some particular passage, as the very plaint of David seems to have been called "The Bow, from a beautiful phrase in it. These are some of the many conjectures hazarded by commentators, who believe this book to have been a collection of various pieces. There is little enough of certainty; merely two facts, that there was an ancient book called "Jashar," and that Jashar means either" an upright man," or "uprightness."

Slight as is this foundation, it suffices to bear Dr. Donaldson's whole theory-that as this epithet is often applied to the Israelites, as a title, though always in the plural, and indeed, according to him, forms the basis of the very name of Israel, (quasi Isr-el,) "it is sufficiently evident what sort of a book was this of Jashar. It was undoubtedly a collection of old poems, and other monuments connected with the piety and history of the people who worshipped Jehova. Whether with the Septuagint you render it the book of uprightness,' or with the Chaldaic, the book of the law,' you must conclude, that this book was a compilation or collection, containing all those fragments which delivered the rule of religion, the pith of the law, which either exhibited the nature of probity, or celebrated the victories of the true and sincere Israelites, proclaimed their felicity, or promised their future happiness. Whatever, of this character, found mixed up with the sacred writings of the Jews may be reckoned an old fragment, will claim a place among the remains of the book of Jashar, and return to it, by right of restora tion." (p. 25.)

Here is indeed a bold and quick arrival at a conclusion. But we must observe, at the outset, that our author is not deterred by trifles. When he does gain a consequence, whether by the circuitous route of emendations, transpositions, conjectures and metamorphoses, or by the one spring over five-barred difficulties, which have baulked the most daring in the chase before him, he always reaches his

epithet whereas in Latin rectus and probus are the very words we want, especially the first, for Jashar We shall therefore always use the words upright, and uprightness, when we wish to convey the corresponding terms for Dr. Donaldson's explanation of that Hebrew word.

point with a confidence, a positiveness, not to say an assurance, which almost makes his reader afraid he must be right. There having been a book entitled of "the upright," nay even" of the law," you must conclude not only that it contained a certain class of poems, but that every poem in Scripture that can be brought into that class was necessarily in it. We will test this assertion later, more particularly. For the present let us see the extent of this swelling conclusion. Because twice in Scripture a few lines are quoted from a book, our author undertakes to apportion to it a series of long extracts, in prose and verse, ranging from Genesis to the Psalms, divided into seven distinct parts, each part again subdivided into fragments, not following one another consecutively in the scriptural volume, but picked out from different places, and brought into connection on a merely arbitrary plan of distribution. In fine, the imaginary book of Jashar was composed of the following parts.

PART THE FIRST. The history of creation, to show that man, created upright, fell through carnal wisdom. First fragment, made up from parts of Genesis i., vi., viii., vi. Second fragment, parts of Genesis ii. and iii.

PART THE SECOND. The family of Abraham adopted as "the upright," to be sons of God. First fragment, rejection of the families of Cham and Chanaan, in general, (Gen. ix.). Second fragment, rejection of the Kinnæans, (Gen. iv.) Third fragment, rejection of the Agarenes (Gen. xvi., xvii. xxi.) Fourth fragment, rejection of the Idumeans. (Gen. xxiv. xxvii.)

PART THE THIRD. "The upright Israelites, escaped from Egypt, after forty years passed in the desert, and many other fluctuations of fortune, dedicate a temple to Jehova, in a tranquil land, under the peaceful king Solomon," (Gen. viii. 6-2.) Let the reader mark the refer

ence.

PART THE FOURTH. "The Laws of God to be observed by the upright people." First fragment, the ten commandments, (Deut. v.) Second fragment, the pith of the divine law, (Deut. vi., x., xi.) Third fragment, the inculcation of obedience, (Deut. viii. vi.)

PART THE FIFTH. "Blessings and exhortations to the upright," Canticles of Jacob, (Gen. xlix.), of Balaam, (Numb. xxiii., xxiv.), and of Moses, (Deut. xxxii., xxxiii.)

PART THE SIXTH.

of the people."

"Wonderful victories and liberations Ovation of Moses and Mary, (Exod. xv.), of Josue (Jos. x.), and of Debora (Jud. v.)

PART THE SEVENTH. "Various songs on the rule and happiness of the upright during the reigns of David and Solomon.'

We shall have to lead our readers through these different parts, to enable them to see clearly the religious opinions proposed by our author. But we are met at the threshold by one or two important enquiries. For example, when was this book of Jashar compiled, or when were the songs of which it is to be reconstructed, originally put together?

66

Dr. Donaldson unhesitatingly answers, during the reign of Solomon, the Augustan age, no doubt, of Hebrew literature, The king himself wrote a good deal, and we possess many remnants left by him, relating to philosophy and poetry. He may have been a tyrant, but he was a theocrat, and religious, and one who professed to have received divine inspiration," (p. 26). Such is the character given of Solomon and of his writings, which Christians, as well as Jews, have reverenced as belonging to something higher than is here allowed them. Material happiness and prosperity having now reached their summit, no time seems more suitable for extolling the privileges of the upright people, and for putting together whatever described this happy lot reserved to it.

Such are the general grounds for attributing this Authology, as our author sometimes calls it, to the time of Solomon. Then he proceeds to more particular proofs, which are certainly good evidences of system-building power. We will run through them. The second, for instance, is this, "As in the blessing of Jacob's children, which is certainly to be referred to the Jasharan collection, all the tribes are mentioned as still living together, our Authology must have been anterior to Jeroboam's shism," (p. 27.) The third is, that in the same blessing (Gen. xlix. 5) occurs the Greek word naxapa for a sword, and that this could not have been introduced into Hebrew, till after David had surrounded himself with Cretan guards the Cerethi of the vulgate. This is altogether a tissue of uncertainties.*

* To build a theory, which would overthrow admitted doctrines

But the reader will at once see, that these arguments, if sound, prove, not merely that the book of Jashar was put

respecting Scripture, upon disputed translations of words and sentences is surely not merely dangerous, but unfair. In this instance, there is no proof that the Cerethi were Cretans, nor that a Greek word occurs in the passage, nor that the word means necessarily a sword. We throw this discussion into a note, as not likely to interest general readers. First as to the Cretan satellites, or prætorian guards supposed to have been introduced by David; it is principally a similarity of names that gives colour to a conjecture made by Calmet, and led the Septuagint to give a similar version, in passages which will not bear it. It is certain that before David came to the throne, there was a tribe bearing this name. For during Saul's lifetime, a young Egyptian captive says to David, "We made an incursion against the Cerethi, and the territory of Juda..... and burnt Siceleg with fire" (1 Reg. or Sam. xxx. 14.) It is also plain from Ezechiel (xxv. 16) that there was a Philistine tribe of the name, dwelling on the sea-coast. Indeed there is a play of words on the name useful in other respects. "I will stretch out my hand against the Philistines," (to whose guilt alone the passage refers,)" and I will curt-ail the Kerethim, and I will destroy the remnant on the sea-coast." In Sophonias it is the same. "Wo to you, inhabitants of the coast-nation of Kerethim; the word of the Lord is against thee, Canaan, land of the Philistines," (ii. 5.) These are not the Cretans surely, but a Canaanite tribe. If thus we find such a clan existing before David, and continuing to the time of Ezechiel, settled in the land of Palestine, why conclude, or rather conjecture, that the Kerethi whom he enlisted in his service, and who are united (2 Reg. xv. 18.) with the Pelethi, whom Dr. Donaldson himself calls Philistines, (p. 128) were not members of this tribe, but people of the same name brought from Crete ? If we read in our history that the Queen was escorted by the Boston militia, what should we think of a foreign historian, who should conjecture that they were a body guard brought from America? We should say that Boston existed in England first, and continues till our time, and probably gave rise, by colonization, to its more distinguished namesake across the Atlantic. And so we may say here. If the similarity of names between Cretans and Kerethi be such that one must be derived from the other, surely, as the gulf-stream of emigration and colonization set in from the east towards the west, and since the Phoenicians as we call them generically, that is the mixed tribe, from the coast of Palestine, have left traces of themselves, waifs and strays on each side of their course, on the north in Cyprus, Malta, Sicily, France, Spain, and still further, on the south along the African coast to Carthage and beyond, it would have been strange if Crete had not been visited, and even become a

together in the reign of Solomon, but that the pieces composing it, at least the prophecy or blessing attributed to

settlement. And after all, the traditions of Cadmus, “the eastern" in Greece prove the influence of Asia on Greece. Or why not make David's guards to have been Curetes from Sabina, or koupηTes from Phrygia? Each is more like the Hebrew. Which conjecture then is more probable, that as most of the islands and countries from Tyre to the Columns of Hercules obtained, and yet retain names of Palestinic origin, so Crete should have suffered the same fate; or that David should have sent for Cretan guards, while we have a tribe close to him bearing the name attributed to them?

The play upon the words in Sophonias suggest the possibility after all, of the opinion which makes David's body guards to have been composed of two classes, not two nations, the Kerethim slayers or executioners, from Karath, to cut off or destroy, and the Pelethim runners, from a root existing in Arabic, with an analogous one in Hebrew, to be fleet. The version Philistine, which Dr. Donaldson takes from Ewald, has not been generally adopted.

The next question is, does a Greek word occur in Jacob's prophecy? The word in question is "their mekaroth," and this is the supposed plural of mekera; (see also p. 196) we say supposed, because the word occurs no where else in Scripture either in singular or plural. We do not suppose that Dr. Donalson would derive μάχαιρα from μαχομαι, as some etymologists do : for the p seems manifestly radical. Whether, however, he does or not, the Hebrew word has its analogous derivatives from a common root, through which the idea of piercing or digging, as in transfodere, prevails. There is no evidence that the Greeks may not have learnt the word from the Phoenicians, from, or through whom, they learnt probably many uses of war. The word παράδεισος, though in form so Greek, came from Persia, nearly as it stands. The Hebrew

kopher and the Greek Kúpos are the same in letters and meaning; shall we conclude that the Canticle of Canticles in which it occurs, (i. 14) drew it from Greece? Or does no mor come from μvppa or, Lebona incense from λißavos, or carcum from кpoкov, or crocum (more commonly written as a masculine), though etymologists find a plausible root in Greek and we have none in Hebrew? These two words would also form an argument for the Canticle in which they occur, having been subject to Hellenic influences on the language of Judea. Or does o masak to mix, come from μioyew? We might multiply examples to any extent. But is it impossible that even such a similarity of words may have been accidental? St. Jerome translated nughe in Sophon. iii. 18, by nuga, on purpose to show a coincidence between Hebrew and Latin.

If therefore páxaupa is to be found in Jacob's prophecy, we are