374 LECTURES AND ESSAYS [1874- 



referred to. I may, therefore, take this opportunity of 

 directing the reader to what is certainly the most import 

 ant recent contribution to the defence of the historical 

 character of the narrative part of the book. Lenormant 

 thinks that an original Hebrew narrative written under 

 the Persian empire was translated into Aramaic in the age 

 of the Seleucids, that part of the Hebrew text was lost 

 and replaced by this translation, which extends from 

 ii. 4 to the end of chapter vii. We are, then, not to trans 

 late ii. 4 as saying that the Chaldeans spoke in Aramaic 

 or Syriac. The words &quot; in Syriack &quot; are simply a note 

 that we here pass to a different dialect, and should be in 

 parenthesis. This view, which has been received with 

 some favour by Mr. Cheyne in his valuable article 

 &quot; Daniel &quot; in the Encyclopedia Britannica, supplies a 

 natural explanation of several difficulties which Mr. 

 Fuller has by no means been happy in solving. The 

 unquestionably Greek names of musical instruments in 

 chapter iii. may be viewed as due to the translator ; and 

 the fact that the dialect of the Aramaic chapters appears 

 to be Palestinian ceases to possess any critical importance. 

 I must add that Lenormant frankly admits that, as the 

 book now stands, it contains several historical blunders 

 and other corruptions which he ascribes to ignorant 

 correctors. 1 



It is impossible to speak in detail of the commentary 

 by six different hands on the Minor Prophets. It is 

 natural to compare this part of the work with the treatise 

 of Dr. Pusey, which is likely to be very much in the hands 

 of the same readers, and which has plainly exercised a 

 considerable, not to say an over-great, influence on the 

 views of the writers now before us. Professor Gandell s 



1 Another publication of 1876, which touches on the Daniel contro 

 versy, is Dean Stanley s Jewish Church, vol. iii., presently to be noticed 

 in another connection. The statement of the case in a note on Lect. 

 xlii. is, however, inadequate on both sides, and there are one or two 

 positive errors (xrtdpa for x^a/nj, and the reference to the Syriac of 

 Matt. xxiv. 15). 



