B I B 



thi goo'.Incfs of the Supreme Being can b< jutlly impeacUcd, 

 from the f\ippolitii)n tliat many errors have crept into the 

 prefent text ; bccaiife the nioil important matters are llill 

 fecure and certain, and men have always been able to de- 

 rive from the Bible a rule both of faith and praftice. For 

 the ilhidration of this p<jlltion, he appeals to the ancient 

 churches, both Greek and Italian, and the modern churches 

 of both I'roteft'.nti and Roman Catholics; flnce, among;tl 

 all thefe, their facred books tau^jht them " «Uattl'.ey mud 

 do to be faved ;" though they contained many errors, f.'ie 

 torrcttion of which was very dcfirable. Indeed, the inte- 

 grity of the facred books could not have been prcferved 

 without a '• miracle," perp:lual as to time and univerfal as 

 to place, which wciUl confequently be a greater miracle 

 than any in the Biblej neverthelefs, as many corruptions, 

 in tranfcripts made from tranfcripts, ever fince the year 400 

 before Clirill, were unavoidable, it is happy that fevcral 

 verfions, made 1 500 or 2000 years r.^o, will corrcA fome 

 of thefe corruptions ; and that the Hebrew MSS. llill ex- 

 tant, will correcl others. Upon the whole, it is of great 

 importance, that the effeft of thefe oorreflions ihould appear 

 in its whole extent, and asfpeedily as poflible, not only to 

 Chrirtians in particular, but to the world in ^encrr.l. 



The learned Dr. J.(hn Bernard Roffi, profefl'or of divinity 

 and the oriental languages in the Royal Academy of Parma, 

 undertook to make a collection of the various readings of 

 the Old Ttllamcnt, in imitation of that of Oxford -, and for 

 this purpofe he examined, by himfelf, or his friends, 1 470 

 MSS. or printed copies. Of foreign MSS. 210, which had 

 "been omitted by Dr. Kennicott, were collated in the moll 

 important paffjges ; and of ancient editions, either in his 

 own poffefnon, or to which he had accels, the number a- 

 mountcd to 2SS, of which 230 are fuch as had not been 

 collated by Dr. Kennicott. M. de Rofll announced his de- 

 fign in a traft, entitl.d, " Apparatus Hebrxo-Biblicus," 

 and piiblirtied at Parma in 1782, 8vo. ; and he propofed to 

 comprize the relult of his labours in 4 vols. 410. The firil 

 volume was publilhed at Parma in 1784, under the title of 

 " Varix Lediones Veteris Teftamenti, &c." or the various 

 readings -of the Old Tcllament, drawn from an immenfe 

 number of MSS. and printed editions, compared with the 

 Samaritan text and the ancient verfions, and examined and 

 appreciated by the mod accurate rules and principles of 

 ' facred criticifm. This volume contains the '• Prolegomena," 

 and a clavis of the books of Gentfis, Exodus, and Leviticus- 

 In the introduftion we have fcveral curious critical difcuflions, 

 from which we learn that this coUetlion afcertains, as Dr. Ken- 

 nicott's valuable and judicious labours had before done, inftead 

 of invalidating, the integrity of the facred text in matters of 

 the greatell importance ; as all the MSS. notwithllanding the 

 divcrfity of their dates, and of the jilaces where tliey were 

 tranfcribed, agree with refpe"l to that which conilitutes the 

 proper etTence and fubllance of divine revelation, namely, 

 its dodrines, moral precepts, and hillorical relations. M. 

 Rofli charges the variations not merely on the copyids, but 

 on the ignorance and temerity of the critics, who have, in 

 all ages, been too ambitions of diftating to their authors, 

 and who, inftead of correcting tlie pretended en-ors of others, 

 frequently fubftitute in their place real errijrs of their own. 

 This author is of opinion, that the common reading of an 

 ancient text ought never to be changed but bv the authority 

 of MSS. ; and if there be any exceptions to this general 

 rule, they are very rare : and the conjeftural alterations of 

 critics fhould be thrown into the notes. M. Rofll, how- 

 ever, obfcrves, that we muft not confound the alterations 

 introduced into the facred text by the injuries of time, the 

 negligence of tranfcribers, or the boldnefis of critics, with 



3 * 



B I B 



thofe which have been made by public authoiity. TIic 

 facred writers of ancient times left, as he fays, their records 

 to other writers, who wcKe often their difciples, as alfo to 

 pviblic fcribes, and to magiftrates, who revifed them. In 

 this revifion, whicl; was ext-cuted either by facred authors, 

 or by the public authority of the fynagogue, corrections 

 and JCtven.chments were made, wiure th.v were judged ne- 

 cefTary, 'This, M. de Roffi thinks, appears evident from 

 ^the prcfent ftatc of the facred writings ; and in co;)firmatioa 

 of his opinion, he quotes the Syriac Interpreter, who, in a 

 note placed at the end of the peutateuch, fays, that this 

 work was compofed by Mofes, but was afterwar.ls digelled 

 and finid-ied by Jufhua. He alio conjectures, that Mofes 

 him.felf made ufe of ancient records, both in his hiftory of 

 the creation, and in th-it of the deluge. He think? that the 

 frequent repetitions and anachronifuis, which are difceruible 

 in t!ie book of Genefis, ouglit rath.er to be attributed to a 

 writer anterior to Mofes, than to fcribes in aiter-times ; 

 or to the eonfufion of the ancient records then.lelves, as 

 fome have imagined. This opinion was propofed and main- 

 tained with lingular ingenuity and erudition, before the 

 time of Rofli, in a French work piibl.lhed at Bruflels in 

 175'^, and entitled, " Conjectures concerning the original 

 memoirs, which Mofer. appears to ha^c made ufe of m 

 compoling the book of Geiielis, together with remarks de- 

 figned to confirm or iilultrate the feveral conitfturcs." 

 The revifion, fays Rofll, which Ezra made of the facred 

 writings, with the affillance of MSS. and according to the 

 rules of criticifm, both on his own authority as a facred 

 writer, and that of the council of which he was a member, 

 did not annul the MSS. that were anterior to liis time, 

 either in the hands of the Samaritans, or in thofe of the 

 Jews, from which thofe of the Cuthites or Samaritans had 

 been taken, or in the hands of the Egyptians, or in thofe 

 of the Babylonian Jews, who did not return to the holy 

 land. The edition of Ezra remained entire till the dellruc- 

 tion of Jeriilalem ; but it underwent feveral alterations be- 

 fore the time of the Maforites, whofc critical labours or at- 

 tempts, with a view of fecuring the facred code againib 

 future injuries, are well known. Yet, notvi-ithftanding thefe 

 attempts and labours, fome faults, which were anterior to 

 their time, llill remained ; and others, though of little con- 

 fcqiience, afterwards crept into the facred text. The only 

 fourccs from which we can derive warrantable correftions 

 of thefe faults are, according to this author, the MSS., the 

 ancient editions, the Samaritan text, the ancient verfions, 

 Uie parallel places, the analogy of llie text or of the hillory, 

 the tellimonies of ancient writers, critical conjedlnres, ar.d 

 the Malora, which De Rofll treats with more relpeft than 

 Dr. Kennicott, of whom he complanis on that account. 

 He fubioins many learned and judicious obfervations on the 

 various fources, from which materials are to be derived for 

 the neccflary corrections. As to the MSS. he lays down rules 

 for afcertaining their age, of which tlie moH obvious is the 

 date ; and in order to undcritand their dates, he takes notice 

 of the various methods of computing time employed bv the 

 Jews, and the different xras from which they reckon. 

 When the dates are wanting, it becomes difficult to afcer- 

 tain the time of a MS., if it be anterior to the thirteenth 

 century. Thofe which are anterior to the twelfth ce.tury 

 are very rare ; and the author minutely indicates the marks 

 that dillinguiili them. The rarity of the ancient Hebrew 

 MSS. has bten occafioned by the Jewifh cullom of depofit- 

 ing their books and phylacteries in public places, from 

 whence, to make place for others, they have been taken and 

 buried in wells, or under ground, where they foon rot. 

 Tliofe ot a very remote antiquity, which arc no longer ex- 

 tant, 



