for the purpose of ascertaining the importance -which progressive Ethnology must assign to
one document; and this document happens to.be the Xth Chapter of a Book called “ Genesis,”
(which some vehemently protest is Mosaic, while others as flatly contradict them,) it behooves
us to test certain points of these disputed allegations by archaeological criteria; and,
authority against authority, the citation of a few may help us in making ready for the
voyage.
“ And vet no one, I believe, has the pretension to understand perfectly the sense of ff«-
no one denies that the text of this book contains many parables, or Oriental alle-
sories of which the most skilful and the wisest of the Fathers of the Church have sought
hi vain for the meaning. — But, thanks to the massoretic points and to the susceptibilities
S orttodoxv things have come at the present day to such a pass, that if Moses himself
arose frmn fte tomb to cause all uncertainty to ceasej if he interpreted his own book literally
; if he expounded it as he had conceived it and reflected upon i t ; Jerasalem Rome
Constantinople and Geneva, [Great Britain, Germany, France, and the United States,]
wo“ d“ onvTke their Doctors of Divinity from all corners of the world to prove to h im -
that heknows nothing about the genius of the Hebrew to n g u e -th a t his translation is
contrary to the grammar and dictionary of Mr. This or Mr. T h a t - hati he does not possess
even common s e n s e - th a t he is an impious (fellow whose book they had done per-
fecfly right [ Z m * orders, XHI-XVIth centuries] to burn; and that it is wonderful how
he had not been served so himself in the other world. (205)
Having now fulfilled my published pledges to the reader, so far as relates to the ■
bition of a few atoms of the vicissitudes through which the Xth Chapter of Gcnem has travelled
to reach our day, I am obliged to bring this “ Archaeological Introduction to an
abrupt close at this point. The reasons are these: I
When my colleague Dr. Nott, at Mobile (in April, 1852), agreed with me to erect a
literary cenotaph “ To the memoby of MORTON,” it was mutually arranged that m oar
division of labor, he would undertake the anatomical and physical department, embracing
those subjects that belong to the Natural Sciences; while the execution of the archeological
and biblical portions was to devolve upon myself. -feW jg
No two men have ever worked together in the same harness with more perfect harmony
of object In the midst of professional engagements, whose onerous character none bn
the most laborious of th<j medical faculty can adequately appreciate, Dr. Nott, at the sacrifice
of every instant of repose, succeeded in accomplishing, not merely all that appertains
to his part of our enterprise as set forth in Part I., but also the revision of my studies as
exhibited in Part I I .: each of us, notwithstanding, being wholly responsible for whatew
naturally falls within the specialities severally assumed,.but neither of us being ai y
amenable for mistakes in other than our own departments as above classified. _
On the other h a n d -independently of three months, December 1852 to March 185 .
spent by myself in travelling; and aside from all supervisions of the press since the 2 »
o f August— I devoted nearly twelve months of day and night to the performance of my
“ special^ ” of our joint undertaking; some of the fruits of which have been already submitted
to the reader’s criticism. .
Resolved, in my own mind, to pursue inquiries into biblical questions, once for all, «?««
adnecem, my manuscripts have, I think, completely answered the Aristotelian propositi
above stated as concerns the Pentateuch. Nevertheless, I postpone their publication: -
1st. Because they do not directly concern Ethnology, and the main subjects of this wo»
2d. Because the printers assure me that my “ copy” could not be condensed, satafa
torily, within 300 more of these pages: thereby rendering it impossible to keep yp
of Mankind” within one volume. _
Ample, however, and far more gratifying than a dry archaeological disquisition ean b
the general reader, are the compensations which displace my own performances: and H
with unfeigned pleasure that, in order to make room for the papers of our .collaborators,
( 2 0 5 ) L a c o t o : J S l o im ; i . p . 1 8 0 .
mutilate my own essays in substituting theirs. Perhaps it is for the best ; because the
nature of this work may elicit some hostile comments; and he is the prudent soldier
who “ keeps his powder dry.” In consequence, I suppress about 300 of these pages, after
submitting an outline of the Periods of misfortune which the canonical Hebrew Text has,
to a great measure, survived, down to C a h e n ’s Bible, a . d . 1831-1849.
Walton, Kennicott, and De Wette (to say nothing of other sources), the reader perceives
a r e tolerably familiar to us. To extract from their works is merely mechanical ; but the
fear of tedium warns us to be eclectic. In these matters it is our private opinion that,
if Titans were again to pile Ossa upon Pelion, after rolling upon “ Ossa the leafy Olympus,”,
(206) they would fail to startle, far less convince, those who lie below the metaphysical
stratum of intellectual development ; for, “ as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses,
so do these men withstand the truth.” (207) It will be more interesting to the enlightened
reader to view a brief historical schedule of the changes which eighteen centuries have
entailed upon the Hebrew Text — condensed principally from Kennicott’s results in his
Dissertatio Generalis : — -
1st p e r io d , b . c . — “ In most ancient times, the Hebrew Text was corrupt;” and the
codex (say, “ fragmentary books ”) used by the Greek interpreters of the Old Testament,
at Alexandria, was undoubtedly Hebrew, but a copy not sufficiently emended.
Even Buxtorf is obliged to admit— “ JudEeos a tempore Esdrse negligentiores fuisse
circa textum Hebrseum, et non curiosos circa lectionem veram.”
The numerals were expressed by letters : the five final letters (kafi mim, nun,; p a y ,
and tsàde) had not then been invented : the words were still undivided.
2d p e r io d , a . d . down to 500. — The texts were more corrupt in the time of Philo and
Josephus. Neither in their day, nor in that of Origen, third century, were the Commandments
(Exod. xx. 3-17) divided into ten, in the manner they are now. In Philo
the division is quinary, after the fashion of Pythagoreans. About the latter epoch
commences the Talmudic Mishna; and, in the fifth century, the Gemara; each of
which books proves the increase of textual errors. So do the writings of the Fathers
during all this age — notably St. Jerome; while the apostolic books demonstrate that
the Greek differed, more or less, from the Hebrew original.
3d p e r io d , a . d . 500 to 1000.—Aside from the later and less reliable Fathers, two Hebra-
ical works establish, that no expurgations of error had been made in the Text: viz.,
the Robboth, after a . d . 700, and the Pirke Etiezar, after 800.' About the sixth century,
the Rabbis of Tiberias commenced the “ Masora” : a labor that would not have been
undertaken but for the reasons above given, and the wretched condition of the Text
in their time ; as proved by the multitudes of Keri velo Kethib (the read, but not the
written) or Kethib vélo Keri (the written, but not the read). (208)
4th p e r io d , a , d . 1000 to 1450.—The Jewish schools of Babylonia seek refuge in Spain
about 1040; between which era and. 1240 flourished the four great Rabbis. Their
works prove not merely different readings, but absolute mistakes in copies of the Text :
things then existing in manuscripts of the Old Testament now exist no longer, and
viceversa ; while the “ Masora,” itself, already in confusion inextricable, only rendered
matters worse. It is of this age alone that we possess those Hebrew manuscripts by
us called ancient—not one 900 years old !
5th p e r io d , a . d . 1450 to 1750.—Printing invented ; the art was first applied to Psalms
in the year 1477 ; and to the whole Hebrew Text in 1488; that entire edition, save
one-third of a copy, being immediately burnt by Neapolitan Jews. But here, upon
editions now following each other with rapid succession, the Rabbis begin their restorations
and their lamentations. Continental scholars now set to work upon Hebrew in
earnest, without professorships : whilst, in England, king James’s version is a splendid
(206) Y d ìg il : Georg.; i . 281.
(207) 2 Tim. iii. 8 — apud Sharpe.
( 2 0 8 ) D e W e t t e : i . p p . 3 4 5 , 3 5 3 - 3 5 8 .