CHAPTER V. VERSES 12, 14.

Iwill be unto Ephraim as, 1st, a мOTH: and to the house of Judah as, 2d, ROTTENNESS.... .as, 3d, a LION, as, 4th, a Young Lion.

1st, Moth, osh. Vide Job iv. 19; xiii. 28. 2dly, Rottenness, rakab; more properly, perhaps, a gradual decay, a kind of consumption. In Prov. xiv. 30. we read the same word, "envy is rottenness of the bones ;" an eating, corroding, decaying principle, acting slowly but surely; and not only pre venting the effects of nourishment, but counteracting it. This agrees well with the nature of the moth; yet as the moth is a living creature, it may admit some doubt whether a living creature, occasioning rottenness, may not be meant here; as we know that many diseases arise from worms, &c. dwelling in the body: witness that terrible cause of decay, the tape worm. Moreover, insects are thought by many naturalists to be very active and very frequent promoters of decay; they devour timber and stones, no less than garments and flesh.

3dly, A lion, shachal. This species we have considered as the black lion. Vide on Job iv. 10. 4thly, A young lion, cephir. Vide Ezek. xix.

CHAPTER VIII. VERSE 9.

For they are gone up to Assyria, a wILD Ass, alone by himself. The wild ass here is para, for which vide the plate, Job xxxix.

The phrase alone by himself, is, perhaps, hardly correct: we know that the wild ass goes in troops, and a stray wild ass can hardly be intended to describe the powerful kingdom of Assyria. Nor can we well refer this solitary wild ass to Israel? because Israel and Ephraim are spoken of as they before and after. We must therefore take the word

burar, as coincident in some degree with the word bar, barar, a desert, or solitary place, not person; the phrase will then signify, "Assyria is the wild ass of his own domain, of those uncultivated regions where he roams;" which is at once correct, as to the nature of the wild ass; and agrees to the description of that power; no less than that of Ishmael as a wild ass man, does to his character, and that of the tribes descended from him, Gen. xvi.

CHAPTER X. VERSE 4.

Judgment springeth up as HEMLOCK, in the furrows of the field.

Hemlock, rash. This word in general signifies renom: the comparison here is to a bitter herb, which

ble, and substitutes a pernicious weed. If the comparison be to a plant growing in the furrows of the field, strictly speaking, then we are much restricted in our plants likely to answer this character; but if we may take the ditches around, or the moist or sunken places within the field, also, which I partly suspect, then we may include other plants, and I do not see why hemlock may not be intended. Scheuzer inclines to this, rather than wormwood, or agrostes, as the LXX have rendered.

1

I suppose the prophet means a vegetable, which should appear wholesome, should resemble those known to be salutary, as judgment, when just, properly is; but experience should demonstrate its malignity, as unjust judgment is, when enforced. Hemlock is poisonous, and water hemlock, especially: yet either of these may be mistaken, and some of their parts, the root, for instance, may be received, but too fatally.

CHAPTER XIII. VERSES 7, 8.

...

...

I will be unto them as, 1st, a LION; as, 2d, a LEOPARD; . as, 3d, a BEAR; as, 4th, a LION: the, 5th, WILD BEAST shall tear them. 1st, A lion, shachal, the black lion. Vide Job iv. 10.

2dly, A leopard, nimmer, perhaps the hunting leopard. Vide Isai. xi. 6.

3dly, A bear, dub. Vide 2 Kings, xvii. 8. 4thly, A lion, labiah: rather a lioness, which, when having cubs, is fiercer than a lion. Vide Gen. xlix.

5thly, The wild, creatures, of the field, the common field, distinct from the desert, shall tear them.

CHAPTER XIV. VERSE 7.

They that dwell under his shadow shall return, they shall revive, as the corn, and grow as the vine : the scent thereof shall be as the wine of Lebanon... I am like a green fir-tree. From me is thy fruit found.

I presume the comparison here is to corn, which, though it be long buried, yet revives and sprouts ; and to a vine, which, though destroyed, yet if a root of it be left, will shoot fresh stems: q.d. They shall start afresh in their growth, who have been protected, by being cast under his shadow; they shall revive as corn, dagon, shall re-grow as the vine, gophen, their fragrance shall equal the wine, iin, wiin, of Lebanon.

Green fir-tree, beraash ronan, widely spreading its branches, shewing flourishing vegetation, but yielding no edible fruit. The answer to this selfabasing description is, "I will furnish thee with fruit." For this tree, vide 2 Sam. vi. 5.

CHAPTER I. VERSE 4, &c.

THAT which, 1st, the PALMER WORM hath left hath, 2d, the LOCUST eaten; ... 3d, the CANKER WORM .... 4th, the CATERPILLAR. We have here four creatures mentioned, whose original names are gasami, arboh, ialek pr, chasil on; they occur again, but in a different order, in chap. ii. 25. Are they the locust in its different states? Are they different kinds of locusts? Are they different insects, appearing in succession during the same season?

1st, Gazam occurs also, Amos iv. 9. The Jews think it to be a kind of locust.

Bochart, vol. iii. 443. says, Gazam is a kind of locust, furnished with very sharp teeth, with which it gnaws off grass, corn, leaves of trees, and even their bark. The Jews support this idea, by deriving the word from gus, or gasas, to cut, to shear, to mince. This sharp instrument has given occasion to Pisidas to compare a swarm of locusts to a sword with ten thousand edges. Notwithstanding the unanimous sentiments of the Jews take this creature for a locust, yet the LXX read xxu, and the Vulgate eruca, a caterpillar, which rendering is supported by Fuller, Mis. Sac. lib. v. cap. 20. Michaelis agrees with this notion, and thinks the sharp and cutting teeth of the caterpillar, which, like a sickle, clear away all before them, might give name to this insect. Caterpillars also begin their ravages before the locust, which seems to coincide with the nature of the creature here intended.

2dly, Arbeh. Vide plate of locust. 3dly, lalek. If the first of these predatory insects is not a locust, then we are not under the necessity of supposing all that follow to be locusts; but may seek other insects, analogous to what is required by the prophet's description. According to the opinion of Adam Genselius, Eph. Ger. Cent. vii. ialek is an insect which principally ravages the vineyards: called by the Greeks is, is. Pliny, lib. xviii. cap. 18. calls it convolvolus, volvox; Columella calls it volucra; Plautus, Cistell. act iv. sc. 2. calls it involvolus, because it deposites its eggs in the leaves, and occasions them to roll themselves up. It is well

known wherever the vine is cultivated. Vide Psalm Iv. 27; Jer. li. 27.

4thly, Chasil. This word in Deut. xxviii. 38. is employed to denote a consumption, or destruction, occasioned by the locust; and the Chaldee employs it to denote ravage, Nahum iii. 16. It appears, however, in this place to denote a ravaging insect, and one which, coming after the others, devoured what they had left.

These insects are found in Egypt; for the Psalmist says, Psalm lxxxviii. 46. "He gave their increase to the chasil, and their labour to the locust, arbeh :" and, Psalm cv. 34. "He spake, and the locusts, arbeh, came; and the ialek without number." From what this chasil is said to have devoured in Egypt, I would not be sure whether the weevil, or cockroach, is not this insect: if it devoured the stores of the land, what was laid up for future service, it may well come after all the other ravagers; and well be called a consumer, as those who, on long voyages, have had the weevils get at their bread, can amply testify.

The LXX seem to mention four kinds of locusts, καμπη kampé ; ακρις akris ; βροχος brouchos ; ερυσίβη, erusibé: the Vulgate also, eruca, locusta, bruchus, rubigo: caterpillar, locust, chafer, rust, or blight ; which last is not an animal, apparently, but a disease which attacks plants, as vines, wheat, &c. but I find some persons think it to be an insect. If four kinds of locusts are really meant here, the circumstance of their coming all in one year is truly tremendous; but we find the locust has four names, in four states: may this be the reference of the prophet? But how will this agree with other Hebrew names? vide on Levit. xi. 20.

I shall add the remarks following, translated from Scheuzer. Damir, an Arabian author, mentions yel low, white, red, black, large, and small locusts. Mar cellus Vigilius, Diosc. lib. iii. says, " Nature has va ried the locusts by an admirable effect of art. Ther are green, black, yellow, and mottled. Some whil flying appear of a colour very different from what the are when at rest. Some have single wings, other double, others none at all, yet leap; and some possess ing neither of these qualifications, only crawl. Som have long legs, others very short: in these the join are more numerous, and nearer to each other; in tho they are fewer, and more distant. Some sing, othe are silent; some are heard all day long, others on during the obscurity of night. Some do no inju to man, or to the fields; but are easily taken by ch dren: others consume and destroy the whole seed fields of a province, and by the famine which su ceeds their ravages, not infrequently expel the a cient inhabitants from their paternal residences.

CHAPTER IV. VERSE 9.

I HAVE smitten you with BLASTING and MILDEW: when your gardens, and your vineyards, and your fig-trecs, and your olive-trees increased, the PALMER WORM destroyed them.

1st, Blasting, shedephon. I apprehend that this word implies blight on corn, &c. I hardly know whether this is that kind of blight which some persons think is occasioned by insects; but Scheuzer thinks, "it is that which shews itself under the appearance of a black dust, within the grain of corn; or that which in a wet season swells the grain, and blackens it on the outside, while the inside remains white. Corn thus injured has something venomous with it, and is called ergot, hardened, horned." Or, wheth

er it be a kind of rust, which settles on the corn, and blights it. I have examined corn under these states, and to one of them, I presume, this word refers, but to which of them I cannot determine. They are equally dreaded by agriculturists.

Mildew, irekun; a dew which falls upon corn, and corrodes the grain; an injurious moisture furnished by the atmosphere, probably; and therefore not improperly called a dew; perhaps MAL-dew. 3dly, Palmer worm, gazam, vide on Joel.

CHAPTER IX. VERSE 3.

Should they hide themselves at the bottom of the sea, I would command the serpent, nachash, and he shall bite them there. Vide Dragon, plate, Rev. xii.

JONAH is among the oldest prophets whose writings are come down to us: he seems to have had somewhat of a peculiarity in his character, which we should, in the present day, call capricious. That Jonah, conscious of having received a divine commission, should think of evading that commission; and after much thought, should endeavour to execute his plan of evasion, is a striking inconsistency of principle: it seems to indicate a rashness of mind not easily to be controlled, a warmth of temper, which is perfectly correspondent to that irritability manifested in his subsequent behaviour. In what manner, and to what degree, this disposition of Jonah's mind might influence his language, as well as his conduct, is a speculation into which it might be of some use to inquire. If I am not mistaken, it has given a tone to his style, which discovers itself not merely in tokens of a forcible conception, but in a manner of diction not general to the other prophets. To explain this idea, observe, Jonah says, he intended to "flee from the presence of the Lord;" not meaning to deny the ubiquity of the Lord, but using this powerfully significant phrase, to express his proposing a long voyage; so, "the Lord sent out a great tempest," to express the occurrence of a storm; and we find other interpositions of Providence expressed with unusual emphasis: the LORD prepared a great fish, prepared a gourd, prepared a worm, prepared an east wind. There can be no doubt that whatever is prepared, is prepared by God in his providence; but so is the whole

course of nature, and of natural events; and while we admit this, we should cautiously distinguish between what are events according to the usual and customary course of things, and what, being contrary to the usual and customary course of things, is designed to excite peculiar attention. Nor is this all; for if we desire to understand an author correctly, we must examine and understand that style and phraseology employed by him in narrating those events which engage his pen. I am desirous of attributing to the piety of the prophet Jonah those expressions I have pointed out: I believe, with him, that God prepares a gourd to rise over our heads, to deliver us from grief; and that he prepares the worm, which destroys that gourd: but since the growth of this gourd is according to nature, and the action of the worm is according to nature, too, it would sound very strange, in our language, to attribute these to an immediate exertion of creative power; a direct and absolute preparation, by divine interposition, in the sense of calling them into being for this express purpose. But, though it would sound strange to us, it would not sound equally strange where this fact occurred in that country the reference to Deity would be well understood, and the hearers would attribute to the phrase a sense much like what our own good people understand by the word providence, among ourselves. We should startle at hearing a person say, "God broke my leg," "the Lord prepared me a fever;" "the Almighty delivered me from a cannon ball:" either we should

say, Providence visited such an one with a broken limb; Providence has laid aside A.B. by means of a fever; he was providentially missed by that bullet :" or, if we used the former course of language, we should think it a peculiarity, not common speech, not the current language of the time and place; but an emphatical phraseology, somewhat raised by piety above common speech, and to be attributed to a deeper theological view of things than what could fairly be supposed of our compatriots at large; and this is exactly what I conceive to have been the case in respect to Jonah. Deeply sensible of the divine mercy, deeply grateful for the deliverances he had experienced, and deeply feeling their benefit, he has attributed every thing to God, the great Author of all things, and of all events; with the utmost propriety, in a theological view: there is no doubt, there can be no doubt, of its propriety; but then the question recurs, whether these events, thus described, differ essentially from natural occurrences, and how far they differ? whether they be any thing more than interpositions of Providence? and whether, when we have applied our usual conception of such interpositions, of such providences to them, we have not received them in the same sense as if the prophet were alive now, and writing among ourselves, he would offer them. My meaning is, that when Jonah says, the Lord prepared a gourd, we are not to understand the creation of a gourd, on purpose, the causing of this plant to grow where it naturally would not have grown; but, that this plant, growing in its regular and natural place, Providence pointed it out to Jonah as a shelter. In like manner, this gourd grew to its fulness of size; and the worm which struck it, was obeying merely the course of its own nature, when it corroded the heart of this vegetable; it was not a worm made expressly, at the instant, for this very purpose; nor a worm carnivorous by nature, but one whose regular food, &c. was found the year before, and the year after, in other gourds no less than in this. The blowing of the east wind also, and the intense heat consequent on it, it is no unusual occurrence: but what should we think of a traveller, who told us, that "just as he quitted Nineveh, the Lord prepared a violent east wind to beat on his head;" we should think his piety at least vitiated his taste in writing; and though nobody of reflection could possibly doubt the fact, yet the phrase which described that fact would be severely censured by criticism; and would indeed be considered as indefensible by those who wish for plain matter of fact narration, not for emphasis, whether poetical or theological.

These reflections on the evident temper of Jonah, and on the possible effect of that temper on his style, are intended to restore that style to its true import : for this prophet has had extraordinary bad luck among his Jewish interpreters; who conceiving that every

thing belonging to him, as well as himself, was altogether unusual and unaccountable, have extracted from his writings wonders after wonders. They have made him the son of a womb almost, or absolutely, dead; they have brought him to life again, after being dead; they have created for him a great male fish, and finding that not sufficient, they have kindly favoured this fish with a female companion: nor is this all; for to convey him safely to Nineveh, they have moved, if not heaven and earth, yet land and water; rocks and mountains, shallows and sand banks; even continents themselves, have been no obstacle; and what may almost justify some degree of anger in a naturalist, they have composed such a fish for the conveyance of Jonah as has never been seen either before or since, and who has left none of his progeny behind him, to satisfy that curiosity which such a nondescript cannot fail of exciting.

Whether it has been wise in translators to acquiesce so far as they have in the tales of Jewish Rabbins, is a question which we do not enter upon; whether our own translators could have done better than they did, is beyond our ability to determine; we impute no blame to them; but we say, that this subject, together with others which cannot have escaped the reader, demonstrates the necessity of an acquaintance with something besides divinity in those who read the Scriptures, even for the express purpose of drawing from thence every sentiment and idea, connected with that most important of subjects.

:

On the subject of the storm which overtock the fugitive Jonah, we have no occasion to discourse that it was an occurrence of nature, overruled by Providence for a particular purpose, is all we need to suggest on that article.

CHAPTER I. VERSE 4.

The Lord sent a great wind, a hurricane, a typhon, as the Greeks call it, a typhonic wind, Acts xxvii. 14. [what our seamen call tuffoon.] This wind is a combat of two, or three, or more winds, which, rolling in vast eddies, strike a vessel most terrible shocks, raise the waters into tremendous billows, and, on land, root up trees, and destroy all before them. Such are

of the nature of hurricanes.

VERSE 7.

The seamen cast lots. This is not always the word used for this action. In Prov. xvi. 33. we read of the lot cast into the lot vase, which is expressed, by iuthal, not, as here, and in many other places, by ipel. This seems to suggest at least two ways of appealing to the lot; and I would not be certain that when it is said lots came forth to such an one, that the use of the lot vase, was not intended. We can hardly sup pose that the seamen had a lot vase on board this ship;

possibly something like the throwing of dice is meant in this passage, and expressed by this word.

VERSE 17.

The Lord prepared a GREAT FISH, which swallowed Jonah. This subject being miraculous, we may be dispensed with, as naturalists, from investigating it; for we know not any fish which is capable of containing a living man for three hours, much less for three days, in health and safety. The digestive process in fish is so rapid, that when one has swallowed a tolerably long prey, a prey filling his mouth, it is partly digested at the entering end, while the other is perfectly fresh; this is thought to be the reason why fish are always hungry, always ravenous. Moreover,

we know no fish large enough to contain a man, except a whale, whose swallow, or gullet, is so narrow that no man could creep through it; or a shark, whose terrible rows of teeth threaten destruction to all that goes in or comes out. We shall, nevertheless, state that whales of considerable size, even 60 feet long, have been found in the Mediterranean sea; and that sharks prowl every where for prey. It is certain, too, that a human body has been found in the stomach of a shark; so that this fish can certainly swal low so large a subject; which we have no reason to think a whale can. Moreover, a whale does not feed on living flesh, as the shark does; it is by no means a voracious animal; and therefore if a huge fish is what is intended in this history, the shark bids fairest to answer the character required. But, if the same word may signify a floater, generally, vide DAGON, plate, Sam. v.

CHAPTER IV. VERSES 6, 7, 8.

The gourd of Jonah should be no trivial lesson to theological disputants. So long ago as the days of Jerom and Augustin, those learned and pious fathers differed, as to what plant it was and they not only differed in words, but from words they proceeded to blows; and Jerom was accused of heresy at Rome, by Augustin. Jerom thought this plant was an ivy, and pleaded the authority of Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, and others: Augustin thought it was a gourd, and he was supported by the LXX, the Syriac, the Arabic, &c. Had either of them ever seen the plant? No. Which of them then was right? Neither. Let the errors of these pious and good men teach us

to think more mildly, if not more meekly, respecting our own opinions; and not to exclaim heresy! or to enforce the exclamation, when the subject is of so little importance as, gourd versus ivy.

Nevertheless, there is a just importance in this subject, as well as in others; and if "all the works of God are good, and nothing to be refused," so the most minute plant or insect mentioned in the word of God, demands our best endeavours to obtain a competent acquaintance with it; and even a scientific knowledge of it is "not to be refused." We have formerly thought that the elkeroa, or ricinus, was the kikion of Jonah: and we quoted from Niebuhr, those accounts of it which seem to agree with its history. This idea is supported by the major part of the Rabbins, and by a list, too long to repeat, of writers on the same side of the question. The ricinus is well known in the East; it grows very high, and projects many branches and large leaves. It is known, too, in the West Indies, in several of its species, and some of these have been cultivated in Europe. They were first planted in England, A.D. 1562. It is often called palma christi; but we must remember the probable difference between plants of the same class, which are natives of different countries.

The ricinus grows in a short time to a considerable height. Its stem is thick, channelled, distinguished by many knots, hollow within, branchy at top, of a sea green colour. Its leaves are large, cut into bright blackish shining green. Those nearest the seven or more divisions, pointed and edged, of a top are the largest. Its flowers are ranged on their stem like a thyrsus. They are of a deep red, and stand three together.

This plant is the kiki of Herodotus and Dioscorides. Strabo also mentions an oil drawn from the kiki. There is no doubt that it is the el-keroa of the Arabs; and the same plant as our castor oil, which is employed as a purgative, is drawn from.

With this description agrees the account in the prophet, of its rising over his head, to shelter it; for this plant rises eight or nine feet, and it is remarkably rapid in withering, when decayed, or gathered. Vide FRAGMENT, No. 78.

The worm which struck the gourd of Jonah is called tuloth; which we have rather considered as a maggot, than a worm. It was, do doubt, of the species appropriate to the plant; but the name seems not to identify a particular species. Vide Exod. xvi. 20; Deut. xxviii. 39; Isai. xiv. 16.