another from Wetstein, and for all the rest has trusted to De Wette.

ALFORD.

(6) 10-18.] Proof of this universal sinfulness from the Scripture, said directly (ver. 19) of the Jews, but a portion including, and taken for granted of the Gentiles. Compare throughout the LXX. (reff.)

(7) 11.] In the Psalm,-Jehovah looked down from heaven on the children of men, to see εἰ ἔστι συνιῶν ἢ ἐκζητῶν τ. Θ. He found none. (8) This result is put barely by the Ap. as the testimony of Scripture, giving the sense, but departing from the letter.

(9) 13.] ἐδολιοῦσαν, an Alexandrine form for doλiour: see Lobeck, Phrynichus, p. 349.

(10) The open sepulchre is an emblem of perdition, to which their throat, as the instrument of their speech, is compared. (11) 15.] The LXX. have οἱ δὲ πόδες αὐτῶν . . . . . . . οὐκ οἴδασι. [We have left out the intermediate words for sake of space.]

DE WETTE.

(6) Vs. 10-18. Beweis der allgemeinen Sünd haftigkeit aus dem A. T., aber nach Vs. 19 f. in Beziehung auf die Juden weil sie sich von den Heiden von selbst verstand.

(7) Ps. 14.2. [Jehovah schau tvom Himmel auf die menschenkinder zu

εἰ ἔστι συνιῶν ἢ ἐκζητῶν τὸν Θεόν.

(8) Nach Kpp. Klln. Fr. u. A. ist diess noch nich Anführung sondern vorausgeschichter allgemeiner Inhalt der folgg. Anff, weil die WW. zu sehr von denen der LXX. abweichen.

(9) doλ. Alexandrinische Flexion st. ἐδολίουν, wie ήλθοσαν Ps. 70, 2. Vgl. Win. § 13. 2.

(10) Ein offenes Grab (Bild der verderbens) ist ihre Kehle (Werkzeug der Rede).

(11) LΧΧ. οἱ δὲ οὐκ οἴδασιν [we have left out intermed. words ;there are insertions of Hebrew words, &c.]

Here ends the passage. Is it possible to conceive a more unfortunate position than that in which Mr. Alford stands? Esopi graculus. After making every allowance for the possibility of Mr. Alford and De Wette having both quoted from the same sources, in one or two instances, can any one, however kindly disposed, deny that this-especially in the first part of the passage is really a very sad case? Citations of authors might be passed over; records of various interpretations might, by a friendly critic (though contrary to strict principles), be allowed to pass without more than a general acknowledgment. But when not only citations, not only records of interpretations, but even the very arguments, the ipsissima verba in which those interpretations are discussed, are all taken without a word of avowal, either in the note or in the advertisement, then we do not scruple to say that no desire (which we sincerely entertain) to avoid inflicting pain by our remarks, ought to prevent us recording our opinion, that an unjustifiable use has been made of De Wette's Commentary.

After having observed the painful similarity between the passage we had adduced, and De Wette, we thought it would be only fair to give Mr. Alford another trial; so before we proceeded to compare the two commentaries more closely, we

resolved we would take a chance passage, and look at the two commentaries. We opened the book at random, and our eyes first fell on the notes at the commencement of chap. vii. of this Epistle; and there again it seems utterly impossible to doubt that Mr. Alford has made the most complete and ultimate use of De Wette, and yet De Wette's name never appears on the whole page. Let the reader, who has any doubt, compare the two commentaries on this passage. We here noticed a reference to Hammond which bore every appearance of having been taken from De Wette: this seemed difficult to credit; we remembered, however, an admission which Mr. Alford made (Reply, p. 20), that he had occasionally quoted Hammond (after verifification) from De Wette. Poor Hammond! he had a long and bitter experience in sufferings and indignities, but there was a depth of humiliation lower than any he could have ever expected to sound, yet reserved for him ;-that of being quoted secondhand, out of the commentary of a German Rationalist by an English clergyman. We should have been glad to have cited, for the complete satisfaction of the most doubting reader, either this or some other passage from this Epistle, but Mr. Alford's notes are so insufferably long, that the citation of a few continuous verses would occupy far more space than we could venture to intrude upon. We heartily wish that Mr. Alford could be brought to feel the justice of Calvin's observation: Præcipuam interpretis virtutem in perspicuâ brevitate esse positam; and that he would at any rate adopt, in the forthcoming volume, what Mr. Sidney Smith used to call the post-diluvian' style of commentary.

But is no mention made of De Wette's name throughout the notes? By no means: and this it is which invests the whole case with an unaccountable, not to say painful, peculiarity. Some pages are positively dappled with De Wette's name; sometimes he is simply referred to, at other times he is quoted; sometimes (p. 320) the words Mainly from De Wette' are appended; at other times, again, inverted commas proclaim that it is totally from De Wette, e. g. pp. 297, 375, 423, &c. ; the whole gamut of acknowledgment seems run through, and an unpractised reader would think he was dealing with a compiler who acknowledged almost too fully,' and 'too well.' But the fact is, that something approaching one-half of the great unacknowledged mass is De Wette also, in every varying form of adaptation, from indirect reference, to direct translation. We have already exhibited some convincing proofs, but we could multiply them indefinitely. Nay more, we are prepared to show that there is De Wette latent, in the closest proximity to De Wette avowed. Take any instance, p. 375 for example: there we

6

meet with four lines, embellished with inverted commas; now look backward to the beginning of the paragraph, verse 35; and is it possible to resist the conviction that the whole clause, beginning, The punctuation of these verses is disputed. Many (Aug., Ambr., Reiche, Köllner, Olsh., Meyer, De Wette and 'Griesb., Knapp, Lachmann),' &c. . . . . . is a very close paraphrase of the clause beginning, 'Die Interpunction ist in Vs. 33 streitig, indem Aug. Ambr. Kpp. Rch. Klln. Olsh. Mey. Grsb. Knpp. Lehm. u. A.' &c.?. . . . the identity of the curious order of authorities, and of the consequent statements, seems to leave no possible room for doubt. Now look forward immediately after the avowed four lines, and can any one hesitate in believing that the words, who (i. e. what: but masc. for uniformity with vv. 33, 34) shall,' &c., are a translation of Wer (so statt was, der Gleichformigkeit mit Vs. 31, 33, f. wegen) wird,' &c.?

Again, the divisions of the clauses are nearly always identical, the summaries of the clauses in most cases are literal translations; in one word, the adaptation is so unwearied and so persistent, that no supposition of Mr. Alford and De Wette having both taken from the same sources, can be strained to explain away more than a very few of the coincidences. We have ourselves endeavoured to search into the origin of some of the more marked resemblances, and have failed in coming to any other conclusion than that Mr. Alford has done nothing more than verify the references, and this, we believe, he has always conscientiously done. Why Mr. Alford has avowed a few passages, and not the great mass of adaptation, and why De Wette's Commentary was not named with Meyer's in the Advertisement, is to us an impenetrable mystery. We confess ourselves quite at fault. The only solution we venture to guess at, is this, that (to adopt Mr. Alford's favourite terminology) objectively, it seemed undesirable to offend the nostrils of English orthodoxy, by allowing a name of such ill savour as that of De Wette, to trauspire in the Advertisement; and subjectively, that the loss of all self-dependence, from continued compilation, insensibly led Mr. Alford into a state of real uncertainty as to what he might claim for himself, and what he was bound to disavow.

However, whatever be the reason, this much appears to us most certain, that if there be the least truth in the rules for citation which we broached at the commencement of this art cle, Mr. Alford was bound to have openly avowed, in some most conspicuous place, that his Commentary, on the Romans especially, was founded, mutatis mutandis, on that of De Wette. German scholars would then have seen that the labours of their learned countryman were not merely appropriated, but acknowledged. English students would have been apprised that, to a

considerable extent, they were brought in contact with comments derived from a notorious Rationalist, though at the same time a man of great learning and not inconsiderable candour. And lastly, the publishers of this work would have had an opportunity of weighing the responsibility they were incurring in adding the weight of their names to expositions, cautiously (we hope), yet certainly very copiously derived from one who has so seriously impugned the inspiration of portions of the Holy Scriptures as the late Dr. W. M. Leberecht De Wette.

We trust these remarks, uttered in no unfriendly spirit, may have some weight with Mr. Alford and his publishers.

Our labours are now nearly concluded, and we have only to redeem our promise of quoting a chance-selected general passage. We have opened the volume at the commencement of the First Epistle to the Corinthians; let us take Mr. Alford's notes on verses 4-9, as these appear somewhat beneath the usual standard of prolixity. It is strange, even here in this Epistle, where Mr. Alford has so greatly praised the exposition of Meyer, how much still appears silently taken from De Wette. Corio nunquam absterrebitur uncto. Let us make this our parting quotation without parallel columns; but as we fear that either a broad denial may await us for our last assertion, or our omission of parallel columns may be interpreted rather as a sign of inability to prove our remarks, than of a desire to avoid in a last quotation a painful mode of citation, we subjoin the comments of De Wette in the notes.

4. T. De pov] So Rom. i. 8, Phil. i. 3. TávTOTE expanded in Phil. i. 4. into πάντοτε ἐν πάσῃ δεήσει μου.—The ἡ χάρις ἡ δοθεῖσα τὰ χαρίσματα Tà dobéνra (see below on ver. 7),-a metonymy which has passed so completely into our common parlance, as to be lost sight of as such. "Grace" is properly in God; the gifts of grace in us, given by that grace.

] Not, as Chrys., Theophyl., Ecum., for diá, but as usually in this connexion "in Christ," i.e. to you as members of Christ. So also below. 5.]èv παντί, general: particularized by ἐν παντὶ λόγῳ κ. πάσῃ γνώσει, “ in all doctrine and knowledge," λóyos (obj.), the truth preached; yvôois (subj.), the truth apprehended. They were rich in the preaching of the word, had among them able preachers, and rich in the apprehension of the word, were themselves intelligent hearers. (See 2 Cor. viii. 7, where to these are added

1 μov] Röm. 1, 8. TávTOTE] im täglichen Gebete. Vgl. Röm. 1, 10; Phil. 1, 4; Col. 1,3;... T XápiTi] der Gnade, Gnadenerweisung (die wirkende Ursache statt der Wirkung wie v. 3. u. ö.)'

:

2 év Xp. Ing.] In Chr. J., in der Gemeindschaft mit Ihm so auch nachher év avre, nicht év = diá (Chrys. Thplct. Ec.)... v πavrí] in Allem, allen Stücken; doch wird zunächst Ein Gebiet herausgehoben durch év ... yvwoei) in... jeglicher Lehre und jeglicher Erkenntniss. d. i. in der Christlichen Wahrheit insofern sie verkundet und begriffen wird... erlauternd ist 2 Cor. 8, 7; Glaube, Lehre und Erkenntniss beisammen stehen.'

66

πίστις, σπουδή, and ἀγάπη. 16.] τὸ μαρτ. τ. Χριστοῦ, the witness concerning Christ delivered by me. kabos, "as indeed," "siquidem." Beß., was confirmed,"-took deep root, among you: i. e. "as was to have been expected, from the impression made among you by my preaching of Christ." 2 This confirmation was internal, by faith and permanence in the truth; not external, by miracles. 37.] "So that ye are behind (others) in no gift of grace;" not lack no gift of grace, which would be genitive. xápioua here has its widest sense, of that which is the effect of xápis,—not meaning “spiritual gifts" in the narrower sense, as in ch. xii. 4. This is plain from the whole strain of the passage, which dwells not on outward gifts, but on the inward graces of the Christian life.'

There is nothing particularly to object to in this passage, except the way in which it is fabricated. What is not from De Wette, is, we observe, either from Meyer or the quotations he supplies. It cannot be a very difficult task, we think, to write a commentary upon these principles. With De Wette on the right hand, and Meyer on the left, and the liberty to use both as freely as Mr. Alford is in the habit of doing, a good hard-working scholar might hammer together a very showy commentary upon three or four Epistles, in very little more than twice as many months. It would be, if this rage for German divinity continues, a very good speculation for a compiler who was not fettered with any peculiar prejudices in favour of orthodox theology. We continue:

anexdex.] Which is the greatest proof of maturity and richness of the spiritual life; implying the coexistence and cooperation of faith, whereby they believed the promise of Christ,-hope, whereby they looked on to its fulfilment, and love, whereby that anticipation was lit up with earnest desire. Compare πᾶσιν τοῖς ἠγαπηκόσιν τὴν ἐπιφάνειαν αὐτοῦ, 2 Tim. iv. 8. ἀπεκδ., κ. τ. λ., is taken by Chrys., who understands χαρίσματα of miraculous powers, as implying that besides them they needed patience to wait till the coming of Christ; and by Calv.,-" ideo addit expectantes revelationem, quo significat, non talem se affluentiam illis affingere in qua nihil desideretur; sed tantum quæ sufficiet usquedum ad perfectionem perventum fuerit." But I much prefer taking anekdexouévous as parallel with and giving the result of un voT., K. T.λ.' [Mr. Alford and Meyer agree.]

58. ős] Viz. Oeós, ver. 4; not 'Inσoûs Xptorós, in which case we should

....

14 τὸ μαρτ. τ. Χριστ.] das Zeugniss von Christo (abgelegt von P.) . . . . ἐβεBaion]... befestigt worden tiefe Wurzeln geschlagen (Bllr. Mey.)'

2 Paraphrase of a passage of Calov., quoted in Meyer and approved by De W. 3 év underì xapioμaтi] in (an würde durch den genit ausgedrückt seyn vgl. Röm. 3, 23) Gnadengabe, im weitern Sinne, s. v. a. xápis v. 4; nicht wie 12, 4 (Rck. Olsh. u. d. M.), weil P. h. nur an den sittlichen Kern des Christl. Lebens denkt.' [How closely Mr. A. paraphrases!]

4' ἀπεκδεχομένους κ. τ. λ.] . . . Diese Erwartung verbunden mit ὑπομονή und Amis, ist die Probe des Christl. Glaubens, der Christl. Treue, vgl. Tit. ii, 13; Phil. iii, 20. deкd. bezeichnet nicht-gerade das beharrliche Erwarten (Mey.), eher das hoffende, sehnsüchtige, vgl. άyanâv, 2 Tim. iv, 8.'

os] sc. eós... Der grammatischen Schwierigkeit welche Rck. Mey. geltend machen, steht gegenüber die mit der andern Beziehung auf 'Ino. Xp. verbundene, dass es nachher nicht heisst ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ αὐτοῦ, sondern τοῦ κυρ. ήμ. Ἰησ. Χρ.