To these authorities, I will add that of Herodotus himself. When the Lacedæmonians wished to restore the Pisistratidæ in Athens, Sosicles of Corinth said to them: "If it seems best to you that cities should be governed by tyrants, why do you not give an example by establishing one over yourselves?" It appears then, that he made a decided diference between the τύραννος and the βασιλεὺς ; for we know that the Lacedæmonians were governed by kings.' p. 566.

It is not necessary for us to provide such information for our readers as that which is comprised in the first sentence of the following extract; the remarks, however, which it introduces, are too important to be omitted:

Ajax, the son of Telamon, distinguished himself at the siege of Troy; but, after the death of Achilles, having contested with Ulysses for the arms of the deceased hero, and Ulysses having obtained them, he killed himself in despair. Homer, in his Odyssey, places him in the Elysian fields; and at this I am not surprised, for there were many points of morality which at that time of day were not well understood, insomuch that they did not consider suicide as infringing upon its principles, but even authorized the act. But I have always been astonished that Fénélon, the pious and learned Archbishop of Cambray, should, in his Telemachus, have placed Ajax in the regions of the blessed. It is true, he assigns to this prince a degree of happiness inferior to that of the kings who occupied themselves exclusively in rendering their subjects happy; but, still, he has placed him in the abode of happiness, and this is a bad example.' Vol. II. p. 486.

This note is very creditable to the moral perception of the learned Translator. We could wish, however, that he had furnished us with the means of determining, whether it was equally correct in relation to other violations of great principles, as well as in respect to suicide. We cannot extricate from his censure the good Archbishop, who has unquestionably greatly offended against the laws of morality, by assigning a place in the regions of felicity, to such a person as Ajax; but it strikes us, that the suicide is the only circumstance to which M. Larcher objects as requiring his exclusion. The example is bad; but it is not the only one deserving of reprobation in the Archbishop's survey of the fields of Elysium. The wrathful Achilles, fit only to destroy cities, to subvert kingdoms, and to fill the world with confusion and trouble, is also among the beatified. We are indeed told, by the Author of Telemachus, that the reward of courage and 'prowess, is much less than that of wisdom, integrity, and bene'volence.' Fenelon was the disciple of a Teacher who has not recognized courage and prowess as moral virtues; and if he had delivered only the lessons of his Master, we should not have read, in any of the descriptions which his pen might have drawn of the scenes of unfading bliss, that they who were only great in 'battle, but neither amiable nor virtuous', were admitted to its

enjoyment. The endowments of the brute would not have been confounded with the qualities of the saint, if the excellent Archbishop had not sometimes lost sight of the principles which constitute the true greatness of human character, and take men out of the circle of vulgar admiration. We expect from Christian writers, in works of fiction as well as in those which are of a more serious description, such representations as shall not be inconsistent with the maxims which they have received, to guide them in their award of praise and approbation; nor give sanction to the corrupt practices in which so many of the evils that afflict the world originate. "The wisdom that is from above, is first pure, then peaceable, gentle-full of mercy and good fruits", and should never be separated from the glory which is given to man as his ultimate possession. We should have been glad to find ourselves anticipated in this course of remark by M. Larcher; but his silence in the one case, compared with the explicit reprobation of the bad example' in the other, induces the fear, that his estimate of moral principles was a very defective one, and that military glory' was one of the idols to which he had no objection to offer sacrifice.

Art. IV. A Hebrew and English Lexicon to the Old Testament; including the Biblical Chaldee. Edited, with Improvements, from the German Works of GESENIUS. By Josiah W. Gibbs, A.M., of the Theological Seminary, Andover, North America. 8vo. pp. 656. Price 25s. London, 1828.

THE

HE basis of the present work is the smaller lexicon of Professor Gesenius, published at Leipsic in 1815, to which additions have been made from the Thesaurus or larger lexicon, and which has received corrections from the Professor's Commentary on Isaiah, and his other philological works illustrative of Biblical Hebrew. The American Editor has conferred a substantial benefit on the students of the language in the United States, by translating this Lexicon for their use; and the English publishers deserve the thanks of those who are prosecuting the study of the sacred tongue in this country, by the republication of it in the present form.

Gesenius has obtained great celebrity as a Hebrew lexicographer. A translation of his larger work, by Christopher Leo, has recently been issued from the Cambridge University press, in two handsome quarto volumes; and his Grammar, as well as his Lexicon, has been adopted as the basis of the instruction given by the professors of the most popular of the American theological seminaries, in the branch of learning to which they relate. The present Editor eulogises the soundness

of his judgement, as evinced by his making a sober and tem'perate use of the various means for determining the signification of a Hebrew word.' This is a primary qualification, since the means of understanding the import of a passage in the Hebrew Scriptures, can never be supplied to us by any philologist who satisfies himself with imposing some fanciful notion upon a word, instead of cautiously deducing from a comparison of the instances in which it occurs, the several senses which it bears. Gesenius rejects all mystical derivations; and he has avoided the error into which some modern lexicographers have run, of almost constantly adducing Arabic derivations, though he is careful to avail himself of the assistance to be received from the oriental dialects. In one point of great moment, but of great difficulty, especially in Hebrew words, the merit of Gesenius appears to us to be somewhat over-rated by his present Editor, who states, that Gesenius has been very successful in seizing hold of the primary physical acceptation of a word, and in the orderly arrangement of its several significations. We agree, however, in the commendation which he passes on the method adopted by the Author of the Lexicon, of supporting the sense and construction of terms by pertinent citations, which, in cases of difficulty, are written out and accompanied with a literal translation. Such a view of the different meanings of a word, is the best commentary on the passages cited. This plan, indeed, is not peculiar to the present work, but it greatly enhances its utility; and we advert to it principally for the purpose of earnestly recommending to the Hebrew student the use of the Concordance. Let him who would make solid proficiency in Hebrew, add to his Grammar and Lexicon a Hebrew Concordance; and by accustoming himself to examine the examples of the use of words in their connection, he will find it promote his advancement in Hebrew philology in the most advantageous manner.

The Lexicon of Gesenius is constructed on the principle of alphabetical arrangement, which affords, in some respects, facilities that are wanting in the etymological collocation of words; but the other mode in general use, is not without its claims to preference. The Editor objects against it, the arbitrary associations which those who follow it introduce into their classification of words,-as the derivation of 8, a father, from

, to acquiesce; and in such instances, we may concede the propriety of a separate and distinct arrangement. But it is, on the other hand, no small inconvenience, to find words, of whose relation there can be no doubt, placed apart in different portions of the Lexicon; as in the case of the verb y, to know, for which we have to consult it in pp. 142. 232. 312. The difficulties of the etymological method appear to us to be exaggerated in the

VOL. II.-N.S.

E

representation, that it supposes the student to be already a proficient in the language. With the instructions derived from his grammar, he will soon acquire a readiness in finding the roots; and the practice of tracing the derivatives to them, will essentially assist him in his progressive advancement.

As a specimen of the Lexicon, we extract the following examples of the manner in which the Author arranges and defines the meanings of words.

T, fut. T and T. 1. to be lost, to fail; with person, 1 Sam. ix. 3. 20. with 1, 1 Di refuge has failed them.

of the

Deut. xxii. 3.

Job xi. 20

Jer. xxv. 35.

Ps. cxlii. 5. Job

the law shall תּאבַד תּוֹרָה מִכֹּהֵן וְעָצָה מִזְקֵנִים .26 .xxx. 2. Ezek. vii

fail the priest, and wisdom the aged, Comp. Jer. xviii. 18. xlix. 7. Hence Deut. xxxii. 28 nigy ki a people void of counsel or wisdom,

(TN is participle in const. state.) heart, i. e. the understanding, of the sternation. Job. viii. 13 728

יאבדלב הַמֶּלֶךְ .Jer.

Jer. iv. 9 7 the king shall fail through fear, conŋ and the hope of the pro

fligate man fails, i. e. is frustrated. Ps. ix. 19. cxii. 10. Prov. x. 28.

the designs of the ungodly shall come to דֶּרֶךְ רְשָׁעִים תאבד 6 .Ps. i

nought. Ezek. xii. 22 every prophecy faileth.

2. to wander, go astray, spoken of cattle. Ps. cxix. 176

a stray sheep. Comp. Jer. 1. 6. Ezek. xxxiv. 4, 16. Hence also of persons, Isa. xxvii. 137

Assyria. (Parall. .) Deut. xxvi. 5 7

the exiles in the land of

a wandering Syrian.

3. to perish; spoken of a harvest, Joel i. 11. of a country, Exod. x. 7. Jer. ix. 11. of houses, Am. iii. 15. of men and animals, Job. iv. 11. Judges v. 31. Num. xvii. 27 (12) 727 we perish, we all perish. Hence it signifies to be destroyed, rooted out, Deut. vii. 20. viii. 19. often with the addition Y Deut. iv. 26. xi. 17. Josh. xxiii. 13, 16.

4. Also simply to be unfortunate, unhappy, spoken of men; as Part. 28 the unfortunate, forsaken, Job. xxix. 13. xxxi. 19. Prov. 31.6.

Note 1. The future with Tseri T is used at the end of a clause, the future with pattah TN in the beginning or middle; comp. Job. viii. 13, with Ps. ix. 19.

Pi. 728. fut. 7. 1. Caus. of Kal no. 1. to lose, to cause to fail. Ecc. iii. 6. vii. 7. many abny Ten a bribe perverts the understanding, comp. Jer. iv. 9. construed with 1, Jer. li. 55.

2. Caus. of Kal no. 2. to lead flocks astray, Jer. xxiii. 1.

3. Caus. of Kal no. 3. to ruin, destroy, kill. Est. iii. 9. 13. 2 K. xi. 1. xiii. 7. xix. 18. Num. xxxiii. 52. Deut. xii. 2. T to destroy, or waste one's substance; Prov. xxix. 3.

Note 2. 7738 Syr. for 77; Ez. xxviii. 16.

Hiph. Ti. 9. Pi. but especially 1. caus. of Kal no. 1. Job xiv. 19. Jer. xxv. 10.

2. Caus. of Kal no. 3. to destroy men, nations. Deut. vii. 10. viii. 20. ix. 3. Often followed by from amidst the people, Lev. xxiii. 30. or by a nap from under heaven, Deut. vii. 24.

Note 3. TN Chald. for TN 1 per. sing. fut. Jer. xlvi. 8. 728, fut. T28. Chald. to perish, as in Heb. Jer. x. 11. they shall perish.

‹ Aph. in, fut. Tin, to destroy, Dan. ii. 12. 24. perhaps also to perish, ii. 18.

Hoph. in to be destroyed. Dan. vii. 11.

T7 m. verbal from T2, ruin, destruction. Num. xxiv. 20. 24. Note. The form of this noun is that of the common participle, but the signification is abstract, Comp. ¬ni, nia.

.dec. X ,אָבַד f. verbal from אֲבֵדָה

1. Something lost. Ex. xxii. 8. Lev. v. 22. 23.

2. i. q. 1972 the region of the dead.

אָבַד m. verbal from אֲבַדּוֹן *

1. Destruction. Job xxxi. 12.

Prov. xxvii. 20. Keth.

is

ans the subterranean

Prov. xv. 11.

2. Place of destruction, hence i. q. world, the region of the dead. Job xxvi. 6. 172 m. verbal from T2, destruction. 77 m. verbal from 72, dec. 11. b. id.

xxviii. 22.

Est. ix. 5.

Est. viii. 6.'

We have taken this verb as the first which occurs in the Lexicon; and though, from its occupying this precedence, it could scarcely be expected to present marks of hasty composition, we cannot praise this example as a finished specimen of Hebrew philology. The definition includes senses which do not belong to the word; as in 2. to wander, go astray, exiles. 4. To be unfortunate, unhappy.-To lead astray. Whatever relation these expressions may have to the state included in the predications of the verb 8, they can have no place in the correct definition of it, or of any of its ramifications. The word never means to go astray, or wander, though it is sometimes very properly employed to represent the state into which the