CORRESPONDENCE.

To the Editor of the Journal of Sacred Literature.

DEAR SIR,-It is with unfeigned pleasure that I hail the publication of your Journal, so well calculated to promote the cultivation of Sacred Literature in this country; and having from my childhood delighted in the study of the Hebrew, I shall feel happy if you will allow me to contribute my mite towards the diffusion of a more accurate knowledge of Scripture. Although a Jew, and consequently on many biblical points at issue with the majority of your readers, yet I feel that the neutral portion of sacred ground which Jew and Gentile may tread in friendship and for mutual benefit, is wide enough to admit of our meeting in amity. I am fond of miscellaneous reading, and occasionally find remarks which appear to me likely to throw light upon scriptural passages. Allow me to record a few of these observations

in the order in which they occur to me.

The conjectures as to the nation deriving its origin from Ashkenaz (Gen. x. 3) are well known. Of all the opinions given, none is treated with greater indifference than that of the Rabbis, who understand by it 'Germany.' Now it is remarkable that one of the oldest dynasties of Germany goes by the title of Counts of Ascania. We read in the Penny Cyclopædia, in the article ANHALT, Its rulers' (of the principality of Anhalt) derived their origin from Ascanius, grandson of Japhet, the son of Noah, whose descendants are said to have migrated from the marshes of Ascania in Bithynia, and at last to have settled among the forests of Germany. Hence the princes of Anhalt to this day designate themselves Counts of Ascania.' It is not my object to reopen the question as to whom Ashkenaz refers. But when it is borne in mind that it is not likely that the dukes of Anhalt should have based their title upon a rabbinical statement; that Jer. li. 27 points to some nation near Ararat; that ethnographical evidence points to the Asiatic origin of the Germans, especially to their relation with ancient Persia; that the erudite Hammer, guided by the affinity of languages, calls them a Bactriano-Median nation; that the primitive inhabitants of Bithynia (which includes the province of Ascania) were conquered, and perhaps expelled, by Thracian immigrants (Herod. i. 28; vii. 75), and consequently may have settled in Europe-I think that the rabbinical tradition deserves some further consideration, the more so since this statement is made for the first time, if I am not mistaken, in the Talmud Yerushalmi, Treatise Meghilla, ch. i., which work, according to Zunz (Gottesdienstliche Vortraege der Juden, c. iii. p. 53), could not have been compiled later than three centuries after the destruction of the second temple.

The signification of the word zaananim occurring twice in Scripture (Josh.

6

(Josh. xix. 33; Judg. iv. 11) has not hitherto been satisfactorily explained. It is easily perceived from the context that the term is a geographical name. But this does not offer any clue towards the solution of the difficulty, since it is admitted (Winer's Biblisches Realworterbuch, sub voce) that the geographical position of the place or district cannot be ascertained. Nor are lexicographers more fortunate in their conjectures, as the etymologies proposed by Gesenius, Lee, and Fürst do not throw any light upon the nature of the locality alluded to. The difficulty was so strongly felt by the translators of King James's Bible, that, against all grammar, they rendered Days from Allon to Zaananim' (Josh. xxx. 33). Now it appears to me that the exact position of this place, or rather district, was centuries back pointed out by rabbinical writers. Both the Talmud Yerushalmi, in the first chapter of the Treatise of Meghilla, and the Targum Jonathan, in loco (Judg. iv. 11) translate the marshy plain near Kedesh.' Now we know that this marshy plain, formed by the Jordan, was situate near the western shore of the waters of Meerom, now called by the Arabs Bahrat Chule, ‘Lake of Chule,' or rather, as it ought to be called, Morass of Chule,' since, according to the testimony of Rabbi Joseph Schwarz (Sepher Tebuoth Haarets, p. 99, a), now residing in the Holy Land, this lake in summer presents only a number of marshes. This explanation, so simple and so consistent with the geographical position assigned by Scripture to these places, and which is moreover alluded to in the commentaries of Rashi and Kimchi, in loco, would doubtless not have escaped the researches of the biblical scholars, had the word offered to the lexicographers an etymology favourable to the rabbinical statement. But as they all considered the as servile and as the root, the etymology did not bear out the rabbinical explanation. But I think the lexicographers have been mistaken. It appears to me that yy, and not , is the root, and this word in the Talmudical dialect means 'morass,' as may be seen on referring to the Aruch. I need hardly remind the Hebrew scholars that many genuine Hebrew words not to be found in the Bible have been preserved in the Talmud. According to this view, 'Allon Bezaanim' would be in stat. const., like Ellon Moreh (Gen. xii. 6), and would mean the plain of the marshes.'

I shall conclude with an observation on the people called Horites mentioned several times in the Pentateuch (Gen. xiv. 6; Deut. ii. 12, &c.). This word is by all lexicographers known to me derived from

, a hole,' and the people are compared with the Troglodytes of the Greeks. Now I am not so sure that this etymology is correct. The word might as well be derived from (which, according to Fürst, is a derivative of ), and would then mean a freeman,' which appellation would apply to the Horites, at least as well as that generally given. It is not my desire now to discuss this point, as I do not at this moment enjoy the necessary leisure; but the conjecture appears to me worth the consideration of the biblical geographer. What suggested to me this hypothesis was the explanation of the

Midrash,

,Now this last word ואת החורי זו אליתרפוליס Midrash, which has

as expressed in Hebrew characters, appears to me to be the Greek EXEVOEроTOXIC, Freetown,' or 'the city, the residence of the free. '

London, October 30, 1848.

Dr. A. BENISCH.

INCREASE OF THE ISRAELITES IN EGYPT.

In Jahn's History of the Hebrew Commonwealth occurs the following passage with reference to this subject:- An anonymous writer in the Literarischen Anzeiger, 1796, Oct. 4, p. 311, has demonstrated that the Hebrews, in four hundred and thirty years, might have increased from 70 persons to 977,280 males above twenty years old. He supposes that of those seventy persons who went to Egypt, only forty remained alive after a space of twenty years; each one of whom had two sons. In like manner, at the close of every succeeding period of twenty years, he supposes one-fourth part of those who were alive at the commencement of the period to have died. Hence arises the following geometrical progression.'

After twenty years, of the seventy there are forty living, each having

With reference to this, Mr. John Frank, master of Sidest School, near Wells, favours us with the subjoined remarks. He considers that the object of this calculation is 'to make it appear that the wonderful increase of the Israelites in Egypt was, in reality, no wonder at all, and that they might, indeed, without any marvel, have increased half as much again, as Moses states them to have done.' He then proceedsOn looking over the computation by which this remarkable conclusion is sought to be established, it appears to me to contain several very gross errors. In the first place, the writer reckons the period of increase (the space from the Esodus to the Exodus) as 430 instead of 215 years. In the second place, he does not deduct from the time the 20 years which had elapsed prior to his first term, viz., 80 males above 20, being reached; and in the third, he has computed the sum of all

the

the terms of his progression, instead of the last term, thus giving us the sum of all who were living at each of the vicesimal years, in lieu of those only who were alive at the time of the Exodus. Correcting these errors, it may be well to see to what result his assumption as to births and deaths will lead.

and by the usual rule, the last term = a ba1 = 80 × 1

= n

By logarithms, log. = 1760193, which multiplied
by 51.540799

to which add log. 80 1.90309

we have . 3-443889 for the log. of the required last term, the number answering to which is nearly 2780, widely different from 977,280!

Omitting further notice of this inaccurate computation, I will now proceed to show what number the 75 persons (using the Septuagint account) would have amounted to in 215 years, supposing that their numbers were doubled every 25 years, this being the rate (as established by Malthus, and generally admitted) at which population tends to increase if unchecked.

4.1628893 for the log. of the last term,

to which the number 14551 nearly answers.

There remains, therefore, the difference between this number and nearly 2 millions to be accounted for, and how this is to be done by those who will not allow a miraculous fecundity I cannot imagine.

It may be interesting to know at what rate the 75 persons must have increased, for their number to have amounted to 2,400,000 in 215 years. A very simple logarithmic calculation will show, that to attain this result, their numbers must have doubled about every 16 years.'

NOTICES

NOTICES OF BOOKS.

Principles of Textual Criticism, with their Application to the Old and New Testaments. Illustrated with Plates and Fac-similes of Biblical Documents. By J. SCOTT PORTER. 8vo., pp. 515. London, 1848.

THIS volume is divided into three Books. The first contains general principles of textual criticism; the second, textual criticism of the Old Testament; and the third, textual criticism of the New Testament. It bears evidence, on every page, of labour and research. The author has taken great pains to make himself acquainted with the subjects he discusses. He had to go over a wide field of reading; and he has diligently traversed it. There are proofs of untiring patience and praiseworthy abilities. Yet it cannot be said with truth, that he has been successful in adding to our previous knowledge of the science; or that he has consulted the best and most recent sources of information. The work indeed is avowedly a compilation, for the use of beginners in the science of criticism; but the writer affirms that in all instances he has availed himself of the latest and best investigations which have appeared.' This was certainly his duty; whether he has discharged it, is exceedingly doubtful. Books written in the English and Latin languages have been freely used; while such as are in the German tongue, and untranslated, seem to have been little, if at all, consulted. Perhaps the writer does not know German; if he does, he has been very negligent in availing himself of the critical books composed in it. Thus we find no trace of his personal acquaintance with the Introductions of Eichhorn, whose name we have only observed once in a note (written Eickhorn), of Bertholdt, Jahn, Hävernick, Herbst, De Wette (last edition), Guerike, and of Hug (last edition). Equally unknown appear to be Zunz's Die gottesdienstlichen Vorträge der Juden ; Frankel's Vorstudien zu der Septuaginta; Van Ess's Pragmatische Geschichte der Vulgata; Hupfeld's Kritische Beleuchtung, in the Studien und Kritiken; Reuss's Die Geschichte der Heiligen Schriften Neuen Testaments; Hengstenberg's Beiträge; De Wette's Exegetisches Handbuch, and not a few other works composed in the same language. He has not even availed himself of several excellent Latin works, such as Rinck's Lucubratio Critica in Acta Apostolorum, Epistolas Catholicas et Paulinas; Thiersch, De Pentateuchi Versione Alexandrina; Valckenaer, Diatribe de Aristobulo Judaeo; Bernstein's Commentatio de Charklensi Novi Testamenti translatione Syriaca; Hirzel, De Pentateuchi versionis Syriacae quam vocant Peschito, indole; Credner, De Prophetarum minorum versionis Syri

a In page 285 (note) we meet with Kritiken und Studien, herausgeben von Ullmann und Umbreit. In these few words there are two mistakes.

acae