high terrace overlooking the whole city, and shaded by walnut and other fruit trees, and by weeping willows.' 4 The But it is high time that there should be some important memorial of this great hero nearer home; and we hope that all good Christians will heartily sympathize with the endeavour now being made to erect such a memorial in the new cathedral of his native place.2 If Martyn himself could be consulted, we believe that no memorial would better please him. He wished his life to be remembered as a stimulus to missionary enterprise, and such a memorial would call perpetual attention to an already deathless name, as 'Becket's crown' at Canterbury to that of Becket. place itself was extremely dear to him. Even Cambridge seemed to him 'a dreary scene' and 'a wilderness,' compared with Cornwall.3 He dreamt of the streets of Truro when he was in India. The woods near it contained the spot which he calls his 'Bethel,' 5 where he would pray for seven hours at a time. On preaching there he speaks of the inhabitants of it as 'in the habit of hearing truth.' And if the form of the proposed memorial be considered, it would be in the same line with his own aspirations and efforts. No man felt more keenly the necessity of proper buildings for church worship. He pleaded with one Governor-General of India after another on the disgrace of there being no places of worship at the principal subordinate stations." When the Commander-inChief came to Dinapore, night and morning Martyn engaged him on the subject of churches for that station and for Serampore, begging 'that he would not let the matter drop, but consider it as a duty we owed to God as a Christian nation.' His rejoicing when at last a church was opened at Cawnpore has been already mentioned. And if churches were necessary to the Indian stations, a cathedral is no less so to a diocese: it is no luxurious ornament. The man who longed for the day when the Ganges should 'roll through tracts adorned with Christian churches,' and who sat on the poop as the vessel passed Ceylon, thinking of 'the blissful period when the native Cingalese should rear temples to Jesus in 9 1 Van Lennep's Travels, i. 165–171. 2 The Bishop of Lahore, than whom no Indian missionary has followed more truly in Henry Martyn's steps, proposes, we believe, similarly to make a structural portion of the cathedral, which he is building at Lahore, the memorial of a noble priest whose touching death is fresh in our recollections. 3 Journal, i. 160. 6 lbid. i. 148. 9 Ibid. ii. 209. VOL. XIII.-NO. XXV. 4 Ibid. ii. 215. 5 Ibid. i. 156. 8 Ibid. ii. 70. F their cinnamon groves,' would, we believe, unfeignedly rejoice at the creation of such a working-help to the Church of his native county. But in wishing for churches, he did not wish for the plainest bricks and mortar that could be had. Mrs. Sherwood, at Cawnpore, was half amused at his punctilious attempts to make their temporary place of worship church-like.1 And so far from considering art unworthy of a Christian, he ascribes his own love of beauty expressly to his conversion. Since I have known God in a saving manner, painting, poetry, and music have had charms unknown to me before-I have received what I suppose is a taste for them; for religion has refined my mind, and made it susceptible of impressions from the sublime and beautiful.' 2 Not only did he, at college, find 'the sight of the picture at the altar, of John the Baptist preaching in the wilderness,' stimulate his missionary fervour, and 'receive good to his soul at the sight of a most striking engraving of an angel,' 4 but the less explicit teaching of architecture was clear to him. The interior of the dome of S. Paul's 'filled his soul with inexpressible ideas of the grandeur of God and the glory of heaven.' He mentions King's College Chapel frequently, and speaks of the way in which the service there almost always gave him 'emotions of devotion.' The sanctity of the place,' he says, 'and the music, brought heaven and eternal things and the presence of God very near to me.'7 Even at Funchal, where he attended high mass in the great church, he 'was perfectly dazzled with the golden splendour of the place-but,' he says, 'all the external aids of devotion lost their usual effect upon me,' through watching the unfamiliar and therefore distracting movements of the clergy. In the cathedral of his beloved Truro, where the services would be those which so affected him at King's, and whose very existence is at once a proof and a requirement of the vital religion which was his own, we might well expect to see some arcade, or aisle, or transept, or chapel, 'with appropriate sculptures,' which might record the name of Henry Martyn, if it may not contain his resting-place. 1 Life of Mrs. Sherwood, p. 380. 3 Journal, i. 161. 6 Ibid. i. 201. '6 8 2 Life, p. 65. Ibid. i. 234. 7 Ibid. i. 109. 5 Ibid. i. 157. 8 Life, p. 136. ART. III.-RECENT TRANSLATIONS OF THE 7 SEPTUAGINT. 1. The Septuagint Version of the Old Testament, with an English Translation, and with various Readings and Critical Notes. (Published originally by S. Bagster and Sons re-issued by S.P.C.K., London, 1881.) 2. The Book of Genesis, according to the Version of the LXX, translated into English, with Notices of its Omissions and Insertions, and Notes on the Passages in which it differs from our Authorized Translation. By the Hon, and Very Reverend HENRY E. J. HOWARD, D.D., Dean of Lichfield. (Cambridge, 1855.) 3. Exodus and Leviticus, according to the LXX. By the same. (Cambridge, 1856.) 4. Numbers and Deuteronomy, according to the LXX. By the same. (Cambridge, 1857.) THERE are few Biblical questions which have been the subject of such vehement and prolonged controversy as that of the value and authority of the Alexandrian version of the Hebrew Scriptures. In the earlier times of the Christian Church its authority was upheld in opposition to the attempts to replace it by the more recent versions of Jews or Judaizing heretics. Then followed the labours of Origen, comparing the Hebrew text with the Septuagint and the three versions of Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion, and partly with two other incomplete versions, with the object of purifying the text. Later still, S. Jerome, by the aid of Jewish teachers, consulted the Hebrew text; first, in order to correct the Itala or old Latin version, and then to effect an independent translation of most of the books from the original. Hence the question of the authority of the Septuagint was more directly raised, and its claim to be the Scriptures of the Christian Church from Apostolic times, as well as to possess a separate inspired authority, was considered. In many instances S. Jerome's departures from the Septuagint were necessary corrections of its faults and imperfections; in others, he seems to have been misled by his Jewish preceptors, or by errors in the Hebrew copies which he had before him. Some of these are noticed by Bishop Pearson in his Præfatio Parænetica in Vet. Test. Græc. (Minor Works, vol. ii., p. 258, &c.) Thus, in Isaiah xl. 1, he rejects the rendering πаρакаλεîтε τὸν λαόν μου, in which others are commanded to comfort God's people, and substitutes 'consolamini populus meus,' as if the people were the 'comforters' instead of being the 'comforted.' It is also to be observed that S. Jerome, whilst he accepted the story of the origin of the Septuagint, as related by Josephus, rejected, as interpolations in the narrative, the miraculous additions, and especially the story of the seventy cells. The controversy was revived in the times of Luther and Erasmus, in the first instance, with reference to the Old Testament Canon; the inspired authority of certain passages alleged in the controversy on Purgatory and Indulgences, and notably one from the Maccabees, being denied by the Reforming party, who took their stand upon the Hebrew Canon. The other side reverted rather to the Septuagint than the Vulgate; the object being rather to assail the authority of the Masoretic Hebrew text than to invest the old Latin editions with infallibility. The books common to the Septuagint and Vulgate seemed to have the concurrent testimony of the traditions of the Eastern and Western Churches. The account of the origin of the Greek version, the translators working in separate cells and producing the same verbal result, was asserted, as having the support of Christian antiquity. The extant history of Aristeas was denounced as a later fiction, omitting the miraculous circumstances; and it was urged that an older work by another author, whose name should have been written Aristæus, contained the passage about the cells. Others, following S. Jerome, upheld Josephus and Aristeas, and rejected the miracle as an interpolation. Others, like Hody and Dupin, rejected the entire story, not only as related in the history ascribed to Aristeas, but also in its simpler form by Philo, Josephus, and in the fragment of Aristobulus, and maintained that the Greek version was produced solely for the benefit of the Alexandrian Jews, by the authority of whose synagogue of lxx. elders, first the Pentateuch, and then, at considerable intervals, other sacred books, were translated into Greek. On the opposite side the Tridentine Controversialists argued that the Hebrew copies had been mutilated by the Jews; alleging in support of this the charge of Justin Martyr against them, of removing from the Greek text of the LXX certain passages which were alleged against them by the Christians. A more plausible argument was one which accused the Reformers of Judaizing, in their rejection of the sacred books of the Christian Church in favour of the traditions of her enemies and assailants. Such was the controversy as sustained by Cardinal Bellarmine, Salmeron, Morinus, and many others, and illustrated with a considerable amount of ponderous learning and research. There was also a division on the side of the Reformers, the Calvinists adhering to the more rigorous view of the absolute integrity of the Masoretic Hebrew text; whilst several Arminian writers argued that there were imperfections in the latter, and that a distinct value and authority belongs to the LXX as an aid in determining the text and its interpretation. Thus, Isaac Vossius, in defending the Septuagint, charged his opponents with Judaism. The most important contribution to the controversy was probably that of Cappellus. Thus, Dr. Wall, in his work on the Vowel-Letters (Dublin, 1857), says : 'When, through the publication of the Arcanum Punctationis Revelatum, by Cappellus, in 1624, the comparatively modern origin of the vowel-points was clearly exposed, vast advantages were expected to result from this disclosure. These anticipations, however, have not been realized. In fact, the Masoretic system was the gradual production of a long series of ages, extending from about the seventh or eighth to the twelfth century of our era; and the Masorets pointed their Scriptures, not only with great care and deliberation, but also with the most scrupulous honesty; so that the misreadings to be laid exclusively to their charge, which have been detected by Hebraists since the period of its having been found that the pointing of the sacred text is to be treated as the work of uninspired fallible men, are neither extremely numerous, nor of the very highest importance.' Dr. Wall then proceeds to a learned examination of the use of the vowel-letters Aleph, Yod, and Vau, which, he maintains, were interpolated into the sacred text at an earlier period than that of the introduction of the vowel-points, and with a similar object. He places the introduction of the former in the second century of our era, before the production of Origen's Hexapla. Dr. Wall, however, fails to prove that if there are many errors in the text, due either to punctuation or to the introduction of vowel-letters, the versions would contribute much to their removal. The general integrity of the Hebrew text, as compared to the undoubted corruption of the versions, and especially of the Septuagint, is sufficiently established to preclude any frequent abandonment of the Masoretic readings for conjectures based upon the Greek. Perhaps the best account of the controversy as to the integrity of the Hebrew text is that of Dr. Geiger, Rabbi of |