&c..* (Ifa. ix. 7+), where 
the alterations in all ink Bo copies. 
Daan to the Samaritans and Bae 
HEBREW LANGUAGE. 
. the Samaritans’ neve a ieinah reckoned. Jerufalem holy. 
This argument feems, indeed, to be demonftrative. Ne- 
i confidering the pany notorious impofitions with 
re{pe& to coins and medals, w vell affured of the 
peternele * ieee anc fe we are apicldicls deter- 
ned by. th 20n the other fide, or for the primitive 
eg of is e character, are the two Bustorfs, 
Leuiden, ase omar % Spanheim, Lightfoot, &c. 
atthew, v. Sg: that jod is really the leait 
maint ain the Samaritan to be the original. 
in favour of the Samaritan character alfo allege the fol- 
lowing paflage of Ifaiah, * of the inna 90D. £- 
the word = DO kemar 
pi a mem claufum in the. middle of it, of which there 
e only two inftances. This, it is imagined, contains a 
myfery, and. fignifies that Chrift fhould come ‘ ex uter 
claufo.’’ But me cannot be ss in the ee, 
chara ate beca 
It js anfwered by y alton, pF that it is 
only gratis dictum, there is any myttery in this letter ; 
and the eafieft way of accounting for it is to attribute it to 
the careleffnefs of fome tranfcriber. They alfo allege, that 
the Jews were too obRiaste. and fuperftitious to allow their 
; but if this was done under 
This arg 
is contradicted by faét; fince the old Ene black biter 
is actually changed for the Roman. fay. phevals> 
that Ezra was not difpofed to profane the facred writings 
with a heathen character ; but this fappofes that Ezra was 
fo fuperftitious as to imagine, that there was fome ati a 
puny in the fhape of the letters. 
‘or 
ee 
he Samaritan 
thelr tes opinions, by 
; oncile 
a variety of paflages from the rabbies to prove, 
that both thefe characters were pegs ea > ee po 
pes af ot E cee the 
in | et that after the captivity, Ezra enjoined 
former to be ufed by the Jews on all occafions, 
be allowed any who confider the difference between the 
Chaldce and Seton tan characters, with refpect to con- 
Poca and a ag that they were ever ufed at the fame 
time. er all, it is of no live epee hich of thefe, 
or whether either of them, characters ; 
rae of the 
it 
Vor. Sci ann Ort change 
- riti 5B 
Povacuc "loan always 
“he 
_brew, befide 
‘that the Hebrew was the ee langua 
the Hebret 
ds fas arifen from foreign idioms. . 
r 
th e Samaritan and Jewith 
s agree after fo man s. Itis 
probable that the form of thefe eaten has varied 
in i dierct periods; this appears from the seinen of 
Montfaucon, in his Hexapla Origenis, vol. i. p. 
and is implied in’ Dr. Kennicott's making the il 3 
in which manufcripts are written, one teft of their age. 
See Jenning’s Ant. vol. ii. p. 336, and. the authors there 
ae Kennicott’s Diff. on the Hebrew Text, vols.1 
il. 
Hesruw Charader, modern, or rabbinical, is a good neat 
Bay formed of the fquare Hebrew, by rounding it, 
and retrenching moft of the an les or corners of the letters, 
to make it the more eafy and flowing. The letters ufed by 
the Germans are very different from the rabbinical character 
ufed every where elle, though all formed alike from the fquare 
charaéter ; but the German in a mere flovenly manner than 
the reit. 
The rabbins frequently make ufe either of their own, or 
the {quare Hebrew character, to write the modern languages 
in. ‘There are even books in the vulgar tongues, printed in 
Hebrew oe ; inftances whereof are feen in the French 
king’s ay 
Hxp 
= 
ij 
w angus called oe: i ote ee is the 
ny {poke by the Hes hid ee’ r 
0 called, as eg Nese fais 
wherein al books of the e 
whence it is alto called the holy or ae ued language. 
to have been preferved in the the confufion at Ba- 
bel, in the family of Heber or "Eber, SB as it is al- 
been Neiataioed. & t Heber’s family, in the fourth gene- 
aa fig? the hipeion lived in Chaldea, where Abraham 
en 28.), and that there is no giv to 
around them. 
not the Hebrew, w was A a angua ge 0 
and it is pr guage was 
Chaldee, and that the Hebrew was the lan e of the 
Cananitets which Abraham and his tidal! t by tra- 
velling am them. For proof of this we refer to 
Le Clere’s I rolegomena, 1. in Pentateuch de Ling. Heb: 
J. Scalig. Epift. 242 & 363. Walt. Proleg. ii. § Panlt 
Selden, c. ke Proleg. de Diis Syris, 
s no piece in all a written in pure He- 
the books of the Old ee oviare and even 
fome parts of thofe are in Chaldce ; . 
The He brew, then,‘ appears to ‘he a te ancient of all 
ct 
he languages in the world ; Ds Rasps abs cin rion 
us, who B enow of no older, Dr. sa gi 
w is the od 
aaa however it might Sass been improved and altered from 
the firft fpeech of, our firft parents, it was the original of all 
he lan: es, or almoft all the nguages, or rather dialefts, 
ar ave 5 fince arifen in the world. Origin, &c. of Lan- 
gua 5 P 22; 
&e. 
wi am been se from the nature and 
of ngs gg 
8 "that 
a original a bp ner fave j nor debafed by 
i i words Ae it is a sompelrd are. 
3 $" fort, 
