whose Egyptian branch is depicted in Philo's De vita contemplativa,1 supply just the type of antecedent training which even he feels inclined to assume. 66 So, too, with the Pastoral Epistles, which our author regards as genuine, and that not merely in parts; the theory of large early interpretations does not work out at all well in detail. . . The real difficulties lie in the field of language, and of ideas as embodied in language." As to the false teaching implied in them, he starts from a modified acceptance of certain distinctions laid down in Weiss' recent commentary, and then observes that "several obvious marks of Judaism are present," yet not of Pharisaic Judaism Paul's old enemy. Ψευδώνυμος yvoσis must be taken relative to the context in which it appears, and this as determined by μύθοι καὶ γενεαλογίαι απέραντοι (=Haggada of type seen in Book of Jubilees) and voμodidaokaλo (where vóuos-Halacha), would seem to be Judaistic. Read, then, in this connection, yevdwvvuos yvwσis may easily refer to "the distinctive lore of a class of canonists and casuists (so the avτiléσes attributed to it), "a special knowledge limited to experts or initiated persons" like the "Wise Men" of the Talmud (cf. John vii. 49). As for the traces of a nascent tendency to ethical dualism in 1 Tim. iv. 1 ff., this has at any rate no philosophical basis, but may well have its roots in some sentiment among the imperfectly known Dispersion, akin to Essenism. It is surely a merit of the view here taken of the Pastorals, that it finds in early Christianity traces of that Rabbinic factor in Judaism which might a priori be expected to come to the surface. Finally, as regards the New Testament, a chapter is devoted to the Epistle of James, 1 Peter, Hebrews, and the Apocalypse, all of which, and in the order named, are assigned to c. 60-70 A.D. They are all shown to be free from Judaistic limitations. Indeed, we are not sure whether Dr Hort makes quite enough of the men of Jewish birth or training among the "Diaspora" churches addressed by James and, as it would seem, by Peter also. We suspect that the traces of "heathen converts" in 1 Peter have been unduly magnified, if we take into account the parallels with the Judeo-Christian Epistle of James. But the point cannot here be argued. Lecture ix. opens the account of extra-canonical witness to Judaizing Christianity. It deals summarily with "The Church of Jerusalem from Titus to Hadrian," and brings together most happily 1 Mr F. C. Conybeare's forthcoming work will probably serve to justify this statement. The Therapeuta were more philosophic in temper than the Essenes, whose system is yet called by Philo ή δίχα περιεργίας Ἑλληνικῶν ὀνομάτων piλooopía (Omn. prob. lib. 13), and more deserve to be styled Gnostic Jews (ef. Lightfoot, Coloss. p. 91). matter generally found only πολυμερῶς καὶ πολυτρόπως ; such as the Christianity of Hegesippus, the Episcopal Succession at Jerusalem, the religious position of the Christians at Pella, and that of the Church of the Circumcision at the time of and after the war under Hadrian. Then come two lectures dealing with "The Judaizers of the Ignatian Epistles " and "Cerinthus, Barnabas,' Justin Martyr." And finally, the Palestinian history is resumed under the form of Ebionism. Here the true nature of the misused distinction between "Ebionites" and "Nazaræans" is laid down with a firm hand (much as in M'Giffert's note on Eus. H. E. iii. 27); and the peculiar Essene Ebionism of the Book of Helxai is traced to the circles whence proceeded, early in the third century, the Clementine Romance (Περίοδοι Πέτρου), variously redacted in the Clementine Homilies and Recognitions. For the detailed justification of these latter positions we shall eagerly await the special series of lectures on the subject. Meantime, it is enough to have drawn attention to Dr Hort's study of Ebionism, a topic to which the new Sinai Gospels lend a fresh interest. VERNON BARTLET. Lehrbuch der Hebräischen Archäologie. Von Dr Wilhelm Nowack. Erster Band: Privat und Staatsalterthümer. Zweiter Band: Sacralalterthümer. Freiburg i. B. und Leipzig, 1894: Akademische Verlagsbuchhandlung von J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck). Edinburgh and London: Williams & Norgate. 8vo, pp. xv. 396, viii. 323. Price M.16. LAST April I gave an account in the pages of this Review of a new work on Hebrew Antiquities by Dr Benzinger based on the latest and best ascertained results of Semitic Archæology condensed into a compact and handy treatise without sacrifice to freshness or clearness. It now falls to my lot to review in these pages another work on the same theme from the pen of Professor Nowack, published, moreover, by the same firm, though on a larger scale. The first impression produced upon the reader is the great similarity of plan that characterises both works. Both are not only well illustrated, but in many cases contain identical illustrations. Both are also founded upon the same presuppositions of the Higher Criticism, for the critical standpoint in both is that of Wellhausen. Lastly, a glance at the table of contents exhibits a striking correspondence as to order of treatment and classification of subject-matters. The writer of the later and larger work, Professor Nowack, fully acknowledges this similarity, and confesses also his indebtedness to the earlier work of Dr Benzinger: "I was, in the summer of last year, just bringing my work to a conclusion when I was informed that Benzinger's treatise was in the press. Through his kindness I have had the opportunity of glancing at the sheets of his book before publication, and have thus availed myself, in my last revision, of Benzinger's admirable pages, and in certain places have made reference to them. Although we have started from the same historico-critical conceptions, and have in this way arrived at the same results, it is to be hoped that my work will not be superfluous in addition to his—indeed, the plan of his outline rendered the employment of a more extensive range of scientific materials impossible." These words correctly indicate one contrast as we compare these two excellent works. Moreover, Dr Benzinger's considerable experience as a Palestinian explorer gives a special value to all his topographical references, as well as to those which concern climate, fauna and flora, and existing Oriental usages. On the other hand, Dr Nowack's reputation as an Old Testament scholar and critic had long ago (1880) been established in the days when he was Privatdocent in Berlin and produced his learned and interesting commentary on Hosea. Indeed, it is not difficult to see that the studies of that early date have been utilised in the present volume. The useful note on the i and in his comment on Hosea v. 8. (p. 96 in the commentary) may be compared with the remarks on the same subject in the present work (Vol. i. p. 277). Compare also the notes on Hosea vii. 4 (p. 122) concerning the Hebrew Tannûr or oven "with the instructive and well-illustrated treatment of this topic in the present Lehrbuch (Vol. i. p. 144). 66 It must not be supposed that because Professor Nowack's work is on a much larger scale of execution than that of Dr Benzinger, it is therefore more discursive in treatment. Such an inference would be wholly contrary to fact. An immense mass of information has been accumulated by the most painstaking industry and careful sifting of materials, and finally compressed into these two encyclopædic volumes of Nowack's treatise. In fact, condensation is perhaps a more noticeable feature of the larger than of the smaller treatise. Moreover, the Hebrew student will be thankful for Dr Nowack's scholarly footnotes-e.g. for calling attention to some Massoretic textual changes occasioned by religious scruples 1 (Vol. i. p. 12), to a useful summary of the discussion on Ophir and references to literature (Vol. i. p. 248), an apposite reference to Exodus iv. 25 on p. 168, an instructive note on the significance of the Hebrew 1 See also Benzinger's work, p. 374, on the "terebinths" (plural) of the Massoretic text (Gen. xiii. 18; xviii. 1). inn 'bridegroom' on p. 162 foll. In Vol. ii., on Religious institutions, the footnotes become much more frequent and voluminous. See especially those upon pp. 46, 63, 79, 92, 94, 105, 114 (footnote 1), 175, 185 foll. (Azazel), 211 foll. as examples out of a large number, where some of the best results of exegetical scholarship or the most ingenious hypotheses are either described or referred to. Such a work as this will save the Hebrew lecturer many an hour of midnight toil in the mechanical search over indexes and tables of contents, for these footnotes are crowded with exact references to the best literature on each subject that is dealt with. It is in this Second Volume we notice the most striking contrast in Nowack's treatment as compared with that of Benzinger. For the 130 odd pages devoted by the latter in his much smaller octavo to the subject of Sacralalterthümer or Antiquities of Religion, we possess in Nowack's work an entire volume dealing exclusively with this subject, consisting of 315 much larger octavo pages. The introduction to Vol. i. is excellent. Especially satisfactory are the clearly-marked and well-arranged sections on the sources of information from which Hebrew Archæology is derived. The paragraphs devoted to monuments, graves, inscriptions, coins, etc., are set forth with good judgment and with due proportion. The author, however, appears to lay too little stress in these introductory pages upon the influence of Babylonia on the early life and civilisation of Palestine, and therefore mediately on that of Israel. The lessons taught us by the discoveries at Tell el Amarna and Tell el Hesy would surely dispose an archæologist to reverse the order of the paragraphs a and b (p. 11). We contend that the influence of Babylonia upon the early civilisation of Palestine, 1500-1400 B.C. and previously, was even deeper than that of Egypt, though Egyptian influence over Phoenicia at this and at a later period was unquestionably strong (see Pietschmann, Geschichte der Phönizier, pp. 270-277). We certainly do not attempt to set aside the indications which point to Egypt as probably the source from which Canaanite and Israelite alike borrowed circumcision and the alphabet. Viewed in this light, the relation of Canaan to Ham (Gen. x. 6) is not without significance. And yet, when we give full weight to considerations such as these, and to the traditions of very early contact between the Hebrew race and Egypt (Gen. xii. 10; xvi. 16; xxxix. foll.), our surprise is all the greater to find the traces of Egyptian influence over Hebrew institutions and ideas to be so meagre. Even the derivation of the Hebrew ark of the Covenant from Egyptian sources is by no means clear, though Egyptian parallels (ark of Khons, Amon, etc.), may be immediately suggested. On the other hand, the earlier and far deeper influence of Babylonia, to which the author does justice on a subsequent page (p. 98), is strongly suggested in the pre-exilian Hebrew document J, whose narrative begins Gen. ii. 4b-iv. 26, and is continued at intervals in chapters vi.-xi. As we read these records of early human culture our eyes are continually directed to the Euphrates and Tigris, scarcely ever to the Nile. The historical elements underlying the ancient narrative, Gen. xiv., as well as the references in Joshua vii. 21, Judges iii. 8, only confirm the impression which the recent discoveries in 1887 and 1892 have served to deepen. Respecting Phoenicia, see Pietschmann's work referred to above, pp. 143-147, 260-264. Where there is so much to commend and admire, criticism seems out of place, and in truth I find little scope for criticism in these pages. Yet it may legitimately be asked whether a somewhat broader basis of comparison might not have been sought in the vast fund of illustrative materials disclosed by Assyriology, and made acceptable to the non-Assyriologist by means of such transcribed texts as Schrader in his Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek and Delitzsch in his Beiträge zur Assyriologie have published. It is somewhat strange that Dr Nowack hardly ever quotes from the large and valuable store of epigraphic material accumulated in the Corpus Inscr. Semit. Note by way of contrast the constant citation from this work in the pages of Bathgen's Beiträge zur Semitischen Religionsgeschichte, Robertson Smith's "Religion of the Semites," and in Driver's unequalled "Notes on the Text of Samuel." It is quite true that Schröder's work on the Phoenician language, with its serviceable store of facsimiles and reproduced texts (published just a quarter of a century ago), is occasionally quoted, and we are thankful for the reference to the term in the Marseilles tablet (Vol. ii. p. 215, footnote 2). And it should also be mentioned, in justice to Dr Nowack's treatise, that the works of leading Assyriologists are cited in all the more important cases. Thus, on the subject of the Sabbath and seven-day week, we have an excellent discussion (Vol. ii. pp. 141 foll.), and the reader is glad to have the views of Jensen unearthed from the Sunday-School Times. The same remark applies to the discussion as to the origin of the Purim festival both in name and rite (pp. 197-200). Similarly, the sections devoted to Measures, Weights, and Alphabet (in Vol. i.) leave little to be desired. This we say in due qualification of the general impression left upon our mind by a perusal of this elaborate and painstaking work of a scholar whose speciality lies in Old Testament Exegesis, and whose relation to the original documents of Semitic Archæology appears to be rather too indirect, though the references to literature are plentiful. Thus, when we turn to the subject of baking (Vol. i. pp. 111, 118, and 240), and still more when we read the reference to the cakes in |