Surely his unwashed clothes and his untrimmed beard-not ostentatiously paraded by himself, as Mr. Blunt would imply, but mentioned by the sacred historian as positive indications of his poignant sorrow, ought to have preserved his memory from such an imputation. His is a hard fate indeed to be exposed to new slanders, thousands of years after his death. And all, for what? To account for the omission of his name in David's last instructions to his son Solomon, as though there were no other possible account to be given of this silence: as if, e. g., after the extinction of Saul's family to expiate the slaughter of the Gibeonites, the paternal inheritance of Mephibosheth may not have rendered him independent of royal bounty; or David may have provided for him sufficiently during his own life-time; or he may have been removed by death, beyond reach of fresh favours.

We own to a strong suspicion of new discoveries of this kind in Holy Scripture, especially when they would lead us to regard in an unfavourable point of view characters which we have learnt to esteem. We are satisfied with the common estimate of Mephibosheth; and it is no recommendation of Mr. Blunt's view that it is new. It is not necessary to defend David against the charges of injustice and oblivion of his oath, by accusing Mephibosheth of deception and rebellion, aggravated by perjury and gross ingratitude. The records of David's reign contain quite a sufficient element of vice on the surface: no need to blacken those few characters of whom we are permitted to think more favourably.

An

But we have said more than enough to show the character of Professor Blunt's volume, of its merits and faults. The remaining parts exhibit the same admixture, and in almost the same proportions, as the two former parts which have here been noticed; and the errors in the later parts are ascribable to the same weakness to which the earlier ones have been traced. over anxiety to multiply illustrations of his argument leads him to discover cases of coincidence where none really exist; and history, geography and chronology are unconsciously distorted in order to contribute additional instances. The bare enumeration of examples under the three classes into which they would naturally fall-good, bad, and indifferent-would swell this review beyond its due limits, which it has, perhaps, already exceeded; and we can, after all, most conscientiously recommend the work to the perusal of the Biblical student: the very test that he must apply to every section, will prove to him a useful exercise in the field of Scripture criticism.

But the main value of the Professor's volume, if we mistake not, consists in this, that it gives a reality to the sacred narra

6

tive; invests historical facts and personages with new interest; and almost animates them with new life. The events of sacred history are commonly, from some cause or other, less clearly realized than those of civil history;-not because the imagery is less vividly drawn, or the facts less faithfully detailed, or the circumstances of inferior interest; but probably because the peculiarities of Oriental customs, diction, style, (with which we mostly become familiar through the medium of the Arabian Nights, or other equally veracious Entertainments,') throw over all a halo of romance, which produces a kind of vague impression such as the parables leave on the mind of a child. In fact, the outlines require to be strengthened, in order that we may think and judge of men and things as they really were. Familiarity with the manners and customs of the East, so much less liable to change than our own,-such a familiarity as could alone be acquired by travel, or rather by a residence in Syria, would of course be the best and surest method of supplying the desideratum. But, non cuivis homini contingit: The few who have the opportunity are much to be envied; and they are laid under a strong obligation to observe carefully and report faithfully, without disparagement on the one hand or exaggeration on the other, whatever may serve to the elucidation of Scripture truth; for the great majority of Christians must of necessity look to books for information on the subject, and the more familiar we become with the geography and scenery of Palestine, and with the habits of native life, the juster conceptions we shall form of the public or private events recorded in the Inspired Books. We shall thus learn to regard the Patriarchs, Prophets and Apostles as men subject to like passions as we are;' they will no longer be the dim ideal beings that they are to most of us; unsubstantial, phantom-like forms flitting over the page of sacred history like painted figures on the illuminated disc of a magic lantern. Now it is because Professor Blunt thus deals with the sacred history, reasoning about men and things as of substantial realities-yet for the most part without any irreverent familiarity—that his book is calculated to be eminently useful; just as Paley's Hora Paulinæ, from which the idea is borrowed, has a use quite independent of that which its author contemplated-independent, that is, of the argument-namely, that it directs our attention to those features which mark the Apostolic writings as real epistolary communications with the various Churches; and by helping us to interweave the letters with the history, reflects light on both; so that the history enables us to understand allusions in the letters, which were obscure or inexplicable of themselves, while on the other hand, the letters fill up gaps in the history,

6

and furnish a commentary of the utmost value on various passages in the Apostle's life; insomuch that the Christian student looks back upon his first acquaintance with that masterly work as an era that opened to his enjoyment, not merely fresh stores of sound criticism, but-what is of infinitely higher valueuntold treasures of Divine wisdom, in the example and experience of the great Apostle, which were before hidden from his eyes. Here, we regret to say, the comparison between Professor Blunt and Archdeacon Paley must cease. Their works when regarded as Evidences can only be spoken of in contrast. We cannot imagine it possible for any one to rise from the perusal of the Hora Paulina without a full conviction of the authenticity of S. Paul's Epistles. Their genuineness and inspiration are distinct questions, which the author did not contemplate. He proved his point. On the contrary, we cannot imagine the possibility of Professor Blunt's Coincidences working conviction on the mind of any one who was disposed to deny the authenticity of the books of the Old Testament. We fear it would tend rather to weaken the position of the orthodox than to strengthen it at all. The critical acumen of the German philosophers would shiver his chain to pieces, link by link. We are sincerely grieved to be obliged to say this: for the Church owes to Professor Blunt a debt of gratitude for valuable services, which we should be the first to acknowledge as they deserve. But in times like these it were worse than idle to dissemble the truth for the sake of mere compliment. Mr. Blunt is too honest to do it himself, or to wish us to do it. To return to the point from which we set out. Will the trustees of Mr. Hulse's bequests receive in good part a suggestion which is offered in no unfriendly spirit? They have heard enough of German Rationalism; but they are not perhaps aware of the strong under-current of infidelity which is sapping the foundations of the faith of thousands in our own land; nor of the systematic endeavours that are being made, by means of lectures and the press, to disseminate among the lower orders in our metropolis and provincial cities, principles utterly subversive, not only of all religion and morality, but of all social order. We all know how utterly inadequate the ordinary resources of the Church are to meet this monster evil. The overworked and underpaid Parochial Clergy of our densely peopled manufacturing districts, fully occupied with their own flocks, which they tend in the midst of wolves, are utterly powerless to stem the tide of atheistic and antinomian error which the unrestrained license of the press is pouring forth upon the neglected myriads. Is it too much to hope that, under these appalling circumstances, the munificent bequests of which they are the adminis

trators may be made available for the maintenance of Truth beyond the limits of the University, where, through the singular mercy of God, it is now least endangered? It is not for us to suggest how this may best be done. All that we desire is to inform them of the real condition of the country, of which they may perchance be ignorant,-for the surface is fair enough, while the disease is preying on the heart's core,-and to pray them, as wise physicians, to consider how they can best apply the remedy which has been placed in their hands for the public good. It is impossible to deny that the duties as at present exercised are an useless, an inconvenient, perhaps a mischievous mockery and the offices a snug piece of patronage for private friends, or at best a mere reward of literary or academic merit. It were well worth an experiment, whether they might not be made substantial blessings, by being brought to bear upon the leaven of Infidelity, so as to counteract, or at least to check, its accursed influence.

433

ART. VI.-The Agamemnon of Eschylus; the Greek Text, with a Translation into English Verse, and Notes Critical and Explanatory. By JOHN CONINGTON, B.A., Fellow of University College, Oxford. London: John W. Parker. 1848.

6

In the present work,' says Mr. Conington in his preface, I have undertaken to perform two duties, which in English ' literature have been usually kept distinct, that of a translator and that of a philological commentator. Though there does 'not seem any reason in the nature of the case why a scrupulous attention to the text and an appreciation of the poetry of an author should exclude each other, it would appear to be a • fact that in this country the two are rarely found together. In Germany the case is different: there is by no means so broad a line of demarcation drawn between them; and publi'cations professing to exhibit both are very frequently to be 6 seen. The explanation of this fact obviously is, that there ‹ both philosophy and poetry, in its widest sense, are subjects of very general interest; each is felt to have some national value, and a wish naturally arises among writers and readers to include both in one comprehensive view; while with us • neither can be said to excite any great measure of thoughtful ' attention, so as to enter in any real extent into public education, and thus both are alike left to small classes of students, who, jealous of their own art, are slow to perceive its bearing on any other.' We hope that this reproach, though still not undeserved, is, so far at least as relates to the appreciation of the poetry of the Ancients, infinitely less deserved than it would have been a quarter of a century ago. With a true and genuine poetry of our own, and a just sense of the superiority in every department of Christian over Heathen art, we have regained a truer heart and eye for the poetry of the Ancient World. Nor have we been absolutely without an effort to combine the functions of philological with those of poetical illustration. Mr. Mitchell's Aristophanes,' in spite of obvious faults of inaccuracy and prolixity, will, we think, be always entitled to honourable mention as a successful effort to treat as a living mind, and surround with a living interest, an author who, to his own and the student's misfortune, had never before been served up with more appetizing sauce than Potter's • Antiquities,' and those heaps of philological and antiquarian sawdust which are accumulated in the volumes of Bekker. But, however this may be, we will take upon ourselves

6

6

6