sentiment that reposes upon suppositions, has no voice in scientific discussions ; and, every
time that it would meddle with them, it ought to he called to order through the simple dictum
: Taceat mulier in ecclesia.” (66)
II. — Th e e x e g e t ic a l Evidence.
« Eh ! datevi pace, o teologoni di vecchia scuola, che la verità vuol risplendere anche a
traverso di quel denso velo che la ignoranza di alcuni di voi si presume di opporle. Intanto
per apprendimento vostro fatevi or meco a leggere qualche altro versetto in c u i . . . sara
pure una di quell’ esse novità che a’ preoccupati leggitori fanno strabuzzare occhi e naso
aggrinzare.” (67)
The foregoing section has prepared the reader for the “ experimentum crucis” to which
we now propose submitting various passages of king James’s version, by way of testing
the vaunted accuracy of its forty-seven translators. Three of these instances have been
already indicated ; (68) one of which, wherein Job longed that his speech should he
« printed in a book” waS noticed above.
For convenience sake, having now a few more of these literary curiosities to present, 'we
will tabulate them under alphabetical signs, and prefix to this initial gem the letter
A . — Job xix. 23.
One almost blushes to make this imbecility more palpable to general intelligence by recalling
to mind that òZock-printing was unknown to Europe prior to a. d . 1423, and printing in
types before 1457— although the former invention existed, according to Stanislas Julien,(69)
in China a t a . d . 593, and the latter about 1041. Yet, by this “.translation,” the patriarch
must have foreshadowed the art six to ten centuries previously to the .advent of Christ !
Like every writer comprised in the Old Testament Canon, Job knew as much of China as
they all did of America; that is, to be frank, just nothing at all. Howforty-seven able-
bodied men could have overlooked this blunder while “ correcting proof,” surpasses comprehension;
unless we ourselves perpetrate another anachronism, as well as a pitiful conundrum,
and suppose that “ Job-printing ” may have suggested some inappreciable affinity
between the Anglo-corrupted name of that venerable Arab and the glorious art. "What more
simple than to have printed what the “ original sacred tongues” read, “ inscribed in a
register ? ”
j 0l xxxi. 35. [N.B. The first citations always present the textualities of king
James’s version.]
«Oh that one would hear mel behold, my desire is, that the Almighty would answer me, and that mine
adversary had written a book.”
Can human intelligence understand-what possible connection Job’s supplication, that God
should reply to him, can have with his individual craving that his own unnamed enemy
should have indited a look? If this text be “ divinely inspired ” in king James’s version,
then “ the Lord have mercy upon his creature ” archaeology ! Because, were these words
authentic, logic could prove : —
1. That, at least 2500 years ago, polemical works in the form of “ books” were not
unknown even in Arabia.
2. That, inasmuch as Job could have no benevolent motive in such wish, vexed as he felt
at thè aggravations heaped upon his distressing afflictions by his proverbial comforter«,
and knowing, as he must necessarily have done, the power which a Reviewer has over
an author, he longed, with vindictive refinement, as the most terrible retribution to be
inflicted upon an adversary, that his particular enemy should actually write a look, in
order that Job might review him ; probably,as Horace Smith conjectured,“ in the Jerusalem
Quarterly."
(66) Path: 1 Corinthians xiv. 34; — S tb a u s s : Vie de Jesus; Littré’s transl., Paris, 1840; il. p. 878.
(67) L a n c i : Op. cit.; i . p. 160.
(68) Nora; Op. cit.; pp. 136, 137.
(69) Communication to UAcadémie; June 7 — London Athenwum; 19 June, 1847.
Cahen renders —
«Alas! that I have not one who hears! Behold my writing—let the Almighty answer me — and the
book edited by my adverse party.” (70)
This version (for reasons to be elaborated elsewhere) is unsatisfactory, like all we have
seen, but Land’s ; because among other oversights it does not afford due weight to the
word TctU; vaguely rendered “ sign” or “ mark” in Ezeki&l ix. 4. TaU is the name of the
last letter in the post-christian square-letter alphabet of the Jews; which 142 years b . c . ,
on the earlier Maccabee coinage was cruciform; sometimes like the Latin, at others like
the Greek cross. (71) At the time when Ezekiel wrote in Chaldea, during the sixth century
b. c., this cruciform letter was the one he must have used, no less than the shape of that
“ mark” which should be stamped upon the foreheads of the righteous. Its etymological
and figurative meaning was “ benediction” or “ absolution;” just what its descendant, the
“ baptismal sign ”, (drawn with water on the foreheads of infants) signifies at this day.
Ezekiel’s TaJJ had no direct relation, beyond a distant resemblance in shape and perhaps
an occult one in hierophantic mysteries, to the “ Crux Ansata,” or the sign for “ Ankh,”
eternal life, of the more ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics; but its original is now-a-days
producible from the cuneiform monuments of Assyria; though 'our demonstration of the
fact must be reserved to other opportunities.
It is one thing to prove that the forty-seven were wrong in their ^appreciation of the “ word
of G o d q u i t e another to emulate the presumptuous part of theologians and dictate dogmatically
the English sense of anpient texts in themselves obscure. Our task limits itself
to the former office in this essay; but, not to shrink from the utterance of what little we
know, the following yree rendering indicates a probable solution of this tortured passage,
and combines Land’s with other views:— says J o b , “ Who will give me one that will listen
to me? [i. e., as my judge]. Behold! (here is) my TaU [i. e., he holds up masonically the
cruciform emblem, as his “ absolution”]. The Omnipotent will answer for me [i. e., guarantee
me, be my surety, become responsible for me —“ that I seek not to evade,” understood].
And now let my opponent write down his charge [i. e., let my accuser, my calumniator, put
his accusations into writing—“ that everybody may see them,” understood"].
And, while on the subject of TaTJ, we may continue our expurgations with other
examples.
O. — Psalms lxxviii. 41.
«Yea, they turned back and tempted God, and limited the Holy One of Israel.”
Bad as the Jews were, in this case they did precisely the contrary! “ The Psalmist,”
says Lanci, (72) “ celebrates in this canticle the marvels which the Lord had done in behalf
of rebellious Israel; nevertheless, as the latter finished by conversion, God pardons him
and spreads over the culprit the most ample bounties. Conversion, therefore, is the import
of this verse, and then it is said—“ they (became) converted, they supplicated the Puissant,
and implored TaU [i. e., “ absolution,” or “ benediction”] of the Holy of Israel.”
D . — 1 Samuel xxi. 10—15.
« And David arose; and fled that day for fear of Saul, and went to Achish the King of Gath. — And the
servants of Achish said unto him, Is. not this David the king of the land ? did they not sing one to
another of him in dances, saying, Saul hath slain his thousands, and David his ten thousands ? —
And David laid up these words in his heart, and was sore afraid of Achish the King,of Gath. —
And he changed his behavior before them, and feigned himself mad in their hands, and scrabbled
on the doors of the gate, and let his spittle fall down upon his beard. — Then said Achish unto his
servants» Do, ye see the man is mad: whereforo then have ye brought him to me? — Have I need
of madmen, that ye have brought this fellow to play the madman in my presence? shall, this
fellow come into my house? ”
{ Reminding the reader that D a v i d , besides being the warrior-king, was Israel’s bard, we
let Lanci speak for himself:—“ The LXX (Greek) made a periphrasis at the first verse, and
(70) Op. di. ; voi. xv. p: 143.
(71) L e tr o n n e : Examen Archéologique ; 1846; piate i., and pp. 11-18.
(72) Sagra Scnttura Illustrata; Roma, 1827 : eh. ix. C a h e n , xiii. p. 175, note.