sentences, the general opinion is, that several persons made | poetical: the order of the subject is, in general, excellently prea collection of them, perhaps as they were uttered by him. served, and the parts are very aptly connected. It is embellished Hezekiah, among others, as mentioned in the twenty-fifth with many beautiful descriptions and personifications: the dicchapter: Agur, Isaiah, and Ezra might have done the same. tion is polished, and abounds with all the ornaments of poetry, The Jewish writers affirm that Solomon wrote the Canticles, so that it scarcely yields in elegance and splendour to any of or song bearing his name, in his youth, the Proverbs in his the Sacred Writings. riper years, and Ecclesiastes in his old age.

closely." "In the exquisite description of a virtuous woman, in xxxi. 10-31., the initial letters of the verses follow the order of the Hebrew alphabet.

against themselves to be inserted in the sacred canon; and with regard to the foreign expressions alleged by Grotius (supposing all of them to be really foreign expressions, IV. The Proverbs of Solomon hold a conspicuous rank which, however, is not the case), their appearance may be among the metrical books of the Old Testament. Not only accounted for by the circumstance of Solomon's having inare they admirably adapted to convey instruction by the dulged in sinful intercourse "with strange women" (1 Kings treasures of practical wisdom which they open to us, but xi. 1, 2.), whose language he probably acquired. they also afford us a noble specimen of the didactic poetry phenomena in the natural world, and their causes, of the The beautiful descriptions which this book contains of the of the Hebrews, the nature of which they enable us to understand by means of the antithetic parallels with which they circulation of the blood (as the late Bishop Horsley thought), abound.2 Much, indeed, of the elegance, acuteness, and and of the economy of the human frame, all show it to be force, which are discernible in Solomon's wise sayings, is the work of a philosopher. It is generally supposed to have derived from the antithetic form, the opposition of diction been written by Solomon in his old age, after he had repented and sentiment. Hence a careful attention to the parallelism of his sinful practices, and when, having seen and observed of members (which topic has already been largely discussed much, as well as having enjoyed every thing that he could in the first volume of this work) will contribute to remove wish, he was fully convinced of the vanity of every thing that obscurity in which some of the proverbs appear to be except piety towards God. The Rabbinical writers inform us, involved. Sometimes, also, one member or part of a pro-and their account is corroborated by Jerome, that the Jews, verb must be supplied from the other; or, as Glassius has who, after the captivity, collected the Inspired Writings into expressed it in other words, sometimes one thing is expressed the canon, at first refused to admit this book into the sacred in one member, and another in the other, and yet both are to which, from inattention to the author's scope and design, code, in consequence of some heresies and contradictions, be understood in both members. Thus, in Prov. x. 14. we read, they imagined to exist in it. But, after considering the expressions it contains towards the close, relative to the fear of God and the observation of his laws, they concluded to receive it; and its canonical authority has been recognised ever since. There can, indeed, be no doubt of its title to admission: Solomon was eminently distinguished by the illumination of the divine Spirit, and had even twice wit

Wise men lay up knowledge:

But the mouth of the foolish is near destruction.

The meaning of which is, that wise men communicate, for the benefit of others, the wisdom they have acquired and preserved; while fools, being destitute of that knowledge, soon exhaust their scanty stock, and utter not merely uselessnessed the divine presence. (1 Kings iii. 5. ix. 2. xi. 9.) but even injurious things. Again,

A wise son maketh a glad father:

But a foolish son is the heaviness of his mother.

Prov. x. 1.

The tendency of the book is excellent when rightly under stood; and Solomon speaks in it with great clearness of the revealed truths of a future life and of a future judgment.7

assent.

Bishop Lowth has classed this book among the didactic Both the father and mother are to be understood in the two poetry of the Hebrews: but Mr. Des Voeux considers it as members of this passage, although in the first the father only a philosophical discourse written in a rhetorical style, and is noticed, and in the second the mother only is mentioned. interspersed with verses, which are introduced as occasion Lastly, many things which are spoken generally, are to be served; whence it obtained a place among the poetical books. restrained to particular individuals and circumstances: as, To this opinion Bishop Lowth subsequently declared his however, this rule has already been illustrated at length, it will not be necessary to multiply additional examples. The author, with much pleasure, refers his readers to the Rev. Mr. Holden's "Attempt towards an Improved Translation of the Proverbs of Solomon," with Notes, as the best critical help to an exact understanding of this fine compendium of ethics that is extant in the English language.

SECTION IV.

ON THE BOOK OF ECCLESIASTES.

I. Title, author, and canonical authority.-II. Scope and synopsis.-III. Observations.

I. THE title of this book in our Bibles is derived from the Septuagint version, EKKAHZIAΣTHE signifying a preacher, or one who harangues a public congregation. In Hebrew it is termed, from the initial word ♫♫ (KоHELеTH), "the Preacher;" by whom may be intended, either the person assembling the people, or he who addresses them when convened. Although this book does not bear the name of Solomon, it is evident from several passages that he was the author of it. Compare ch. i. 12. 16. ii. 4-9. and xii. 9, 10. The celebrated Rabbi Kimchi, however, ascribes it to the prophet Isaiah; and the Talmudical writers to Hezekiah. Grotius, from some foreign expressions which he thinks are discoverable in it, conceives that it was composed by order of Zerubbabel for his son Abihud; Jahn, after some later German critics, for the same reason, thinks it was written after the Babylonish captivity; and Zirkel imagines that it was composed about the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, from some traces of the notions of the Pharisees and Sadducees which he conceives he has discovered in this book, and against which he supposes it to be directed. But it is not likely that those Jewish sects would permit a work levelled

Dr. Good's Dissertation on the Book of Proverbs, in Dr. Gregory's
Memoirs of his Life, p. 305.
On the Nature of the Scripture Proverbs, see Vol. I. Part II Book II.
Chap. I. Sect. VI.

See Vol. I. Part II. Book II. Chap. VI. Sect. I.

The opinion of these and of other writers are satisfactorily refuted by the Rev. Mr. Holden, in his "Attempt to Illustrate the Book of Ecclesiastea." (8vo. London, 1822.) Preliminary Discourse, pp. v.-xxviii.

II. The SCOPE of this book is explicitly announced in ch. i. 2. and xiii. 13., viz. to demonstrate the vanity of all earthly objects, and to draw off men from the pursuit of them, as an apparent good, to the fear of God, and communion with him, as to the highest and only permanent good in this life, and to show that men must seek for happiness beyond the grave. We may therefore consider it as an inquiry into that most important and disputed question,-What is the Sovereign Good of man, that which is ultimately good, and which in all its bearings and relations is conducive to the best interests of man? What is that good for the sons of men, which they should do under the heaven all the days of their life? (ii. 3.) "This is the object of the preacher's inquiry; and, after discussing various erroneous opinions, he finally determines that it consists in TRUE WISDOM. The scope of the whole argument, therefore, is the praise and recommendation of WISDOM, as the supreme good to creatures responsible for their actions. In this wisdom is not included a single particle of that which is worldly and carnal, so frequently possessed by men addicted to vice, the minions of avarice, and the slaves of their passions; but that which is from above, that which is holy, spiritual, and undefiled, and which, in the writings of Solomon, is but another word for Religion. Guided by this clue, we can easily traverse the intricate

Of the four words which Grotius asserts to be foreign, viz. VD (SIR) a

THORN, Eccl. vii. 6. 72 (ABJONAH) desire, xii. 5., WD (PasHaR) to interpret, viii. 1., and D1 (Gumatz) a pit, x. 8.,-two only can at all be considered as belonging to his argument; for the first occurs in Exod. xvi. 3. and 2 Kings iv. 39. (Heb.), and the second may be derived from the Hebrew root N (ABAH) to trish; and although the last two are at present only to be found in the Chaldee, it does not therefore necessarily follow that they are not Hebrew, for how many other words are there in the Hebrew language, the roots of which are now only to be found in the kindred Arabic or Chaldee dialect? And if they shall be deemed genuine Hebrew words, there surely is no reason why the last two words above cited should not equally be true and proper Hebrew. It is indeed wonderful, as Witsius has long ago remarked, to observe of what trifling pretexts learned nen sometimes avail themselves, in order to support paradoxes. (Witsii, Miscellanea Sacra, lib. i. p. 227. Alber, Interpretatio Scripturæ, tom. vii. p. 189.) But the philological speculations of Grotius are surpassed by those of the late Professor Eichhorn, which are satisfactorily refuted by Mr. Holden in his translation of Ecclesiastes, Prel. Diss. p. xiii.

Bp. Horsley's Sermons, vol. iii. pp. 189, 190. Mr. Holden has refuted this hypothesis, Ecclesiastes, pp. 173, 174. Carpzov, Introd. ad Libros Vet. Test. part ii. p. 222. Bp. Gray's Key, p. 292. In his "Philosophical and Critical Essay on the Book of Ecclesiastes,' 4to. London, 1760.

windings and mazes in which so many commentators upon of order and arrangement. In the same way has the royal the Ecclesiastes have been lost and bewildered. By keep- preacher treated the subject; not with exact, philosophical ing steadily in view the preacher's object, to eulogize method, but in a free and popular manner, giving an uncon Heavenly Wisdom, the whole admits of an easy and natural trolled range to his capacious intellect, and suffering himself interpretation; light is diffused around its obscurities; con- to be borne along by the exuberance of his thoughts and nection is discovered in that which was before disjointed; the vehemence of his feelings. But, though the methodical the argument receives additional force, the sentiments new disposition of his ideas is occasionally interrupted, his plan beauty; and every part of the discourse, when considered in is still discernible; and perhaps he never wanders more from reference to this object, tends to develope the nature of True his principal object than most of the other writers in the Wisdom, to display its excellence, or to recommend its ac- Sacred Volume." quirement.

learned and elaborate attempt to illustrate it. The following
Synopsis (which is also borrowed from Mr. Holden) will
give the reader a clear view of its design :-
PART I. THE VANITY OF ALL EARTHLY CONDITIONS OCCUPA-

TIONS, AND PLEASURES.

SECT. I. The vanity of all earthly things. (i. 2.)
SECT. II. The unprofitableness of human labour, and the
transitoriness of human life. (i. 3—11.)

SECT. III. The vanity of laborious inquiries into the ways
and works of man. (i. 12-18.)

SECT. IV. Luxury and pleasure are only vanity and vexation of spirit. (ii. 1—11.)

SECT. V. Though the wise excel fools, yet, as death happens to them both, human learning is but vanity. (ii. 12—17.) SECT. VI. The vanity of human labour, in leaving it they know not to whom. (ii. 18-23.)

SECT. VII. The emptiness of sensual enjoyments. (ii. 24 -26.)

For the preceding view of the scope of this admirably "Hence he commences with the declaration that all is va-instructive book, the author is indebted to Mr. Holden's nity, which is not to be understood as implying any censure upon the works of creation, for God does nothing in vain, every thing being properly adapted to its end, and excellently fitted to display the power, wisdom, and goodness of the Almighty. Yet when the things of this world are applied to improper purposes; when they are considered as the end, while they are only intended to be the means; and are rested in as the source of happiness which they were not designed to afford, vanity is discovered to be their character; that which is most excellent becomes useless, if not injurious, by the abuse; and the works of Omnipotence, however wise and good in themselves, are unprofitable to those who misuse and pervert them. It were a kind of blasphemy to vilify whatever has proceeded from Omniscient Power; and Solomon can only be supposed to pronounce all things here below vain, when they are applied to a wrong use, by the ignorance and wickedness of man. Nor does he so denominate all things universally and without any exception, but only all earthly things, as wealth, pleasure, pomp, luxury, power, and whatever is merely human and terrestrial. If these are placed in competition with divine and heavenly things, or are foolishly regarded as the means of real happiness, they become useless and unprofitable, because they are uncertain and transitory, never fully satisfying the desires of the soul, nor producing permanent felicity. If worldly things are vain in these respects, it would, nevertheless, be presumption and impiety to represent them as actually bad. They are good in themselves, and, when rightly used, tend only to good, since they contribute to the enjoyment of life, and, in an eminent degree, to the ultimate and real interest of man. But if they are pursued as the only portion in this life,' as constituting the happiness of beings formed for immortality, they are not estimated on right principles, and the result will be vexation and disappointment. Their vanity then, arises from the folly and baseness of men, who, in forgetfulness of eternity, are too apt to regard this world as their sole and final abode, and to expect that satisfaction from them which they cannot give. Nor are they to be condemned on this account. That they are insufficient to render man happy is itself the ordination of Infinite Wisdom, and, consequently, best suited to a probationary state; wisely calculated for the trial of man's virtue, and, by weaning him from too fond attachment to things on earth, to stimulate his desires and exertions after the blessedness of another life.

"In prosecuting his inquiry into the Chief Good, Solomon has divided his work into two parts. The first, which extends to the tenth verse of the sixth chapter, is taken up in demonstrating the vanity of all earthly conditions, occupations, and pleasures; the second part, which includes the remainder of the book, is occupied in eulogizing WISDOM, and in describing its nature, its excellence, its beneficial effects. This division, indeed, is not adhered to throughout with logical accuracy; some deviations from strict method are allowable in a popular discourse; and the author occasionally diverges to topics incidentally suggested; but, amidst these digressions, the distinctions of the two parts cannot escape the attentive reader. It is not the mammer of the sacred writers to form their discourses in a regular series of deductions and concatenated arguments: they adopt a species of composition, less logical indeed, but better adapted to common capacities, in which the subject is still kept in view, though not handled according to the rules of dialectics. Even St. Paul, whose reasoning powers are unquestionable, frequently digresses from his subject, breaks off abruptly in the middle of his argument, and departs from the strictness

The finest commentary on this aphorism, Vanity of vanities, all is vanity, was unintentionally furnished by the late celebrated Earl of Chesterfield in one of his posthumous letters. See the passage at length in Bishop Horne's Works, vol. v. discourse xiii. pp. 185-187., where the frightful picture, exhibited by a dying man of the world, is admirably im. proved to the edification of the reader.

SECT. VIII. Though there is a proper time for the execution
of all human purposes, yet are they useless and vain; the
divine counsels, however, are immutable. (iii. 1—14.)
SECT. IX. The vanity of human pursuits proved from the
wickedness prevailing in courts of justice, contrasted with
the righteous judgment of God. (iii. 15-17.)
SECT. X. Though life, considered in itself, is vanity, for men
die as well as beasts, yet in the end, it will be very different
with the spirit of man and that of beasts. (iii. 18-22.)
SECT. XI. Vanity is increased unto men by oppression. (iv.
1-3.)

SECT. XII. The vanity of prosperity. (iv. 4.)

SECT. XIII. The vanity of folly, or of preferring the world to
True Wisdom. (iv. 5, 6.)

SECT. XIV. The vanity of covetousness. (iv. 7, 8.)
SECT. XV. Though society has its advantages, yet dominion
and empire are but vanity. (iv. 9-16.)

SECT. XVI. Errors in the performance of divine worship,
which render it vain and unprofitable. (v. 1-7.)
SECT. XVII. The vanity of murmuring at injustice; for
though the oppression of the poor and the perversion of
judgment greatly prevail, they do not escape the notice of
the Almighty. (v. 8, 9.)

SECT. XVIII. The vanity of riches; with an admonition as
to the moderate enjoyment of them. (v. 10-20.)
SECT. XIX. The vanity of avarice. (vi. 1-9.)

PART II. THE NATURE, EXCELLENCE, AND BENEFICIAL EFFECTS

OF WISDOM OR RELIGION.

SECT. XX. Since all human designs, labours and enjoyments
are vain, it is natural to inquire, What is good for man?
What is his Supreme Good? (vi. 10-12.) The answer
is contained in the remainder of the book.
SECT. XXI. The praise of character and reputation. (vii. 1.)
SECT. XXII. Affliction improves the heart, and exalts the
character of the wise. (vii. 2-10.)

SECT. XXIII. The excellence of Wisdom. (vii. 11—14.)
SECT. XXIV. An objection, with the answer. (vii. 15. viii. 7.)
SECT. XXV. The evil of wickedness shows the advantage of
True Wisdom. (viii. 8-13.)

SECT. XXVI. An objection, with the answer. (viii. 14. ix. 1.)
SECT. XXVII. An objection, with the answer. (ix. 2. x. 17.)
SECT. XXVIII. The banefulness of sloth. (x. 18.)
SECT. XXIX. The power of wealth. (x. 19.)
SECT. XXX. An exhortation against speaking evil of digni-
ties. (x. 20.)

SECT. XXXI. Exhortation to charity and benevolence. (xi
1-10.)

Prelim. Diss. pp. lxv. lxviii.—lxxii.

SECT. XXXII. An exhortation to the early cultivation of religious habits. (xiii. 1-7.)

SECT. XXXIII. The conclusion. (xii. 8--14.)1

III. Bishop Lowth pronounces the style of this book to be singular: its language is generally low, frequently loose and unconnected, approaching to the incorrectness of conversation; and it possesses very little poetical character, even in the composition and structure of the periods: which peculiarity, he thinks, may be accounted for from the nature of the subject. Leusden says, that in his time (the close of the seventeenth century) the book of Ecclesiastes was read in the Jewish synagogues on the feast of tabernacles; because, as that feast commemorates the gladness and content with which their forefathers dwelt in tents, so this book, while it shows the vanity of all earthly things, inculcates on every one the duty of rejoicing and being content with such things as God in his providence thinks fit to bestow.

SECTION V.

ON THE SONG OF SOLOMON.

I. Author.—II. Canonical authority-III. Structure of the poem.-Its subject and scope.—The Song of Solomon a sublime mystical allegory.

II. If the canon of the Hebrew Scriptures was settled by Ezra (which we have already seen was most probably the case), there can be no doubt but that the Song of Solomon is a sacred book; for, to use the strong language of Bishop Warburton, "Ezra wrote, and we may believe acted, by the inspiration of the Most High,' amid the last blaze indeed, yet in the full lustre of expiring prophecy. And such a man would not have placed any book that was not sacred in the same volume with the law and the prophets."4 In addition to this evidence, the following considerations will authorize us to infer, that the Song of Solomon was, from the most early period, deemed a sacred book, and ranked with the Hagiographa or Holy Writings of the Jews, and thence was received among the canonical books of the Old Testa

ment.

diction is ascribed to the Jewish authors of the Septuagint,

A Greek translation of it is extant, which without contra

who flourished about two centuries before Christ, and which still forms a part of the Alexandrian version. With the same conviction of the sacred character of the work, it was rendered into Greek in the second century of the Christian æra, by Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion. Origen, who wrote early in the third century, on the authority of those learned Jews who were contemporary with him, and whom he was in the habit of consulting respecting the authority and literal import of their sacred books, inserted it in his Hexapla, and wrote some homilies upon it, explaining its FEW poems have excited more attention, or have found mystical sense, which have in part been translated into Latin more translators and commentators, than the Song of Songs, by Jerome. Further, that the ancient Jews, without excepbut the learned are not yet agreed respecting its arrangement from the allegorical signification annexed to it in the Chaldee tion, considered it as a divinely inspired production, appears and design. The majority consider it as an inspired book, and certainly on the best evidence, while others affirm it to paraphrase. Josephus, in his answer to Apion, gives a be merely a human composition: the former regard it as a catalogue of the Jewish books, and in the third class of sacred allegory; the latter, as a mere amatory effusion. such as related to moral instruction includes the Song of I. In addition to other divine compositions of Solomon, Songs. From the Jewish synagogue this book was received we are informed (1 Kings iv. 32.) that his songs were a thou into the Christian church without any doubt of its divine sand and five, of which the present book is supposed to be one. authority it occurs in the catalogue of books of the Old In the first verse it is called, by way of eminence and dis- Testament made by Melito, Bishop of Sardis in Lydia, who tinction, according to the Hebrew idiom (SHIR Palestine on purpose to learn the number of these books, is placed by Cave about the year 170, who travelled into HOSHIRIM), that is, a Song of Songs, or, the most beautiful and who made the first catalogue of the Hebrew Scriptures. Song. Of this ancient poem the author is asserted, by the It is cited by Ignatius, who had been a disciple of the apostle unanimous voice of antiquity, to have been Solomon; and Saint John about the beginning of the second century, as a this tradition is corroborated by many internal marks of authenticity. In the very first verse it is ascribed to the He-book of authority in the church at Antioch. It is enumerated brew monarch by name: he is the subject of the piece, and the principal actor in the conduct of it. Allusions are made to the rich furniture of his palace (i. 5.); to the horses and chariots which he purchased of Pharoah king of Egypt (i. 9. compared with 1 Kings x. 28, 29.); to Aminadab, who was eminent for such chariots, and who married one of Solomon's daughters (vi. 12. with 1 Kings iv. 11.); to his building of the temple under the figure of a palanquin or coach for his bride (iii. 9, 10.); to the materials of which it was formed. In short, all the leading circumstances in Solomon's life, in a religious point of view, appear to be either alluded to or implied in this ancient poem, and, therefore, render it probable that it was the production of some writer in his age, if it were not his own composition. From the occurrence, however, of a few Aramaan words, some later critics have imagined that this book was written in the latter years of the Jewish monarchy, not long before the captivity; but this conjecture is repelled by the internal evidences above cited in favour of Solomon; and the occasional appearance of Aramaan words will be satisfactorily accounted for when we recollect the extensive commercial intercourse that existed between Solomon and the neighbouring nations. Dr. Kennicott was of opinion that this poem is many ages later than Solomon, from the uniform insertion of the yod in all copies, in spelling the name of David; but this remark is not conclusive, for the name of David occurs but once (iv. 4.): and, after it had been written erroneously by a scribe in the time of Ezra, it might have been inadvertently copied by a subsequent transcriber.3

Prelim. Diss. pp. cix. cx. Mr. Des Voeux, in his learned and ingenious work on Ecclesiastes, was of opinion that the royal author's design was to prove the immortality of the soul, or rather the necessity of another te after this life, by such arguments as may be deduced from reason and experience. But Mr. Holden has satisfactorily shown that this is not the primary design of the book in question; though it contains some strong proofs of this article of religious faith. See his Prelim. Diss. pp. xlvii.-lx. Calmet states that some of the rabbins ascribed this poem to Isaiah; but this opinion has long since been rejected. Dissert. tom. ii. p. 258.

Dr. Kennicott, Diss. i. pp. 20-22. Hewlett's Commentary on the Song of Solomon, Supplementary Observations, in fine. A writer of the present day (Mr. Bellamy), who has distinguished himself by his bold and paradoncal assertions, has stated his opinion to be, that it was a book of great VOL. II. 21

in the list of canonical books occurring in the synopsis and in the catalogues of Jerome and Rufinus, towards the attributed to Athanasius, who flourished in the third century, close of the fourth century, in which also we find it cited in the Apostolical Constitutions, and also in the Apostolical Canons; since which time the Song of Songs has maintained its place in the sacred canon.

But, though the Song of Songs has come down to us thus strongly recommended by the voice of antiquity, its divine authority has been questioned in modern days. Theodore, Bishop of Mopsuestia, a bold critic, and a determined foe to allegorical interpretations, in the fourth and fifth centuries, is said to have spoken in disrespectful terms of this poem, as well as of the book of Job: but, as those accounts appear among the charges and accusations of his enemies, Dr. Lardner doubts the accuracy of such representation. In the early part of the last century, Simon and Le Clerc questioned its authenticity, but were refuted by the elder Carpzov; and, subsequently, the eccentric writer Whiston boldly affirmed antiquity in the time of the Hebrew king, and is the same which is referred to in the Psalms by the words "dark sayings of old." He thinks it possi ble that Solomon collected and incorporated the materials of this book, as David did other sacred songs of prophecy and praise, which were in use in the church before his time; but affirms that the idea of Solomon being the author of this Song of Songs is founded on a mis-translation of the He brew word Lishlamoh, which occurs in the first verse. As Mr. B. refers to a work not yet published in support of his hypothesis, it is impossible to form a correct judgment respecting it: but we may be permitted to observe, that the internal evidences above noticed, which makes so strongly received opinion, as well as of the uniform belief of the Jews, who surely against Dr. Kennicott, afford pretty strong corroboration of the universally were acquainted with their native tongue. See the Classical Journal, vol. XV. p. 190. Bishop Gleig's edition of Stackhouse, vol. i. p. xxiii.

Josephus cont. Apion, book i. c. 8. Eusebius, following the Jewish historian, makes the Song of Songs the fifteenth of the number of canonical books. Eccl. Hist. lib. vi. c. 25.

Eusebius has preserved this catalogue of Melito in his Eccl. Hist. lib iv. c. 26.

Constit. Apostol. lib. vi. cc. 13. 18. tom. i. pp. 345. 351. Edit. Amst. 1724. Canon. Apostol. No. Ixxvi. Ibid. p. 453. Both these productions, though pretending to be of apostolical origin, are spurious compilations of the fourth century. See Dr. Lardner's Works, vol. iv. pp. 320–354. 8vo. ; 4to. vol. ii. pp. 421–441.

Jortin's Remarks on Eeel. Hist. vol. i. p. 157. 2d edit. Dr. Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol. iv. pp. 509, 510.; 4to. vol. ii. p. 528.

v. 2.-vi. 9. vi. 10.-vii. 11. Further, the subject of the poem is the same from begin vii. 12.-viii. 3. ning to end; the personages introduced as speakers are the viii. 4-14. same; and, though to a modern reader the transitions in Calmet, Bishop Percy, and Mr. Williams agree with many places may seem abrupt, and the thoughts unconnectBossuet. Bishop Lowth, indeed, who has devoted two of ed, yet the conduct of the piece is not suspended, but is carhis learned and elegant lectures to an examination of this ried on under a fable regularly constructed, and terminating poem, adopts the opinion of Bossuet, not as absolute demon-in a conclusion interesting and unexpected. stration, but as a very ingenious and probable conjecture upon an extremely obscure subject. He therefore determines it to be a sacred pastoral drama, though deficient in some of the essential requisites of a regular dramatic composition.6