A compleat history of the canon and writers, of the books of the Old and New Testament, by way of dissertation, with useful remarks on that subject ... by L.E. Du Pin ... ; done into English from the French original.

SECT. II. Of the Origin and Invention of Characters; their Diversity. The Ancient He∣brew Characters; their Variation. The Vowel Points: When they were invented and brought into Use.

NExt to Speech, Man has no better way to express his Thoughts by Arbitrary Signs, than by Writing, in which we make use of Figures and Characters perceptible to the Eye, whose difference and distinction represents different things to the Mind. There may be some which express their Thoughts at once, and represent them without any relation to Speech; such as were the Characters of the ancient Egyptians, who by Hieroglyphicks or Symbolical Figures represented a thing at once: Such are still most of the Chinese and Mexican Characters. Their Ciphers are of the same Nature, seeing they represent all at once, the Number they would express, without forming the Idea of any particular word; but the more ordinary and common manner of expressing our Thoughts in Writing, is to make use of Characters, to which Custom hath affix'd an expression of certain Sounds of the Articulate Voice that are call'd Words, which make up Speech, and by that means give us an Idea of things. So that Writing, properly speak∣ing, is not the Pourtracture of our Thoughts, or of Things, but only of Speech, which expresses and makes known our Thoughts. It has this advantage above simple Speech, that this reaches only those who are within hearing, whereas Writing communicates our Thoughts at the greatest distance, and preserves to future Ages the Thoughts and Dis∣courses of those now alive.

The most common Opinion among the Pagans, as to the Origin of Letters, is that the Phenicians are the Authors of 'em, and that Cadmus brought the Invention from Greece. Eupolemus says, Moses was the Inventer of 'em; and his Sentiment is approv'd by Eusebius in his 9th Book of Gospel Preparations, Chap. 4. And also by Isidore of Sevil. It is however certain, that the Art of Writing is older than Moses, and he him∣self makes mention of things that were wrote before him. Suidas thinks Abraham was the first Inventer of Letters, as well as of the Hebrew Tongue; but he is mistaken, for since the Assyrians or Chaldeans, amongst whom he liv'd, had the Language which Abraham spoke, they had also their Characters. It is the same as to the Canaanites or Phenicians, to whose Countries he travelled. So that we may be assured, that Writing is older than Abraham; but the precise time when it began, cannot be discovered with any certainty. Divers are of Opinion, that Adam knew how to write as well as to speak; and that not without great probability. If it be certain that Enoch, the 7th from Adam, wrote that Book quoted by St. Jude, it would be an uncontestable Monu∣ment to prove that Writing was invented before the Flood; for to believe that the Prophecy of that Patriarch was preserv'd for divers Ages by simple Oral Tradition, is a thing not be imagin'd. But there's great likelihood, as we have observ'd, that this Book of Enoch's was an Apocryphal Book; therefore there's no relying on that Proof, no more than on what Josephus reports in the first Book of his Antiquities, Chap. 3. of Characters wrote on two Columes before the Deluge, whereof he assures us there was one remaining in his time. Nor is there any relying upon what the Chinese boast of the Antiquity of their Characters. It is not those Apocryphal Monuments which convince us of the Antiquity of Writing, but the Wit and Industry which we cannot doubt was in Adam and the first Men, which makes us conjecture, as a thing very probable, that the Art of Writing was invented during the Infancy of the World, and in use before the Deluge; that Noah receiv'd it from his Ancestors; that his Posterity, who Peopled the Earth, preserv'd it; and that the Characters of Writing, as well as Languages, had their Variation and Change.

It is to no purpose to enquire what was the Figure of the Characters in use before and immediately after the Deluge, because we have no Monuments left us of those Times, and that no credible Writer makes any mention of 'em; but 'tis a famous Que∣stion amongst the Criticks, what the Characters were which were used by the ancient Hebrews? Some pretend that they were the same as now; but the more common Opi∣nion, both amongst the Ancients and Moderns, and that which is best receiv'd, is that the ancient Hebrew Characters made use of by Moses and others, before the Captivity, are those which the Samaritans preserv'd; and that those now in Use came in after the Babylonish Captivity.

The Hebrew Tongue being in its Origin the same with the Canaanitish or Phenician, we must allow, that the Hebrew Characters of that Language were the same. Now the Phenician Characters, from whence the Greek Characters are deriv'd (a) 1.1, were agreeable to the Samaritan Characters, as appears by the ancient Ionian or Greek Let∣ters, which are altogether like them, as may be seen by ancient Monuments. These are then the Characters that Abraham and his Posterity made use of. That we may un∣derstand how they were preserv'd amongst the Samaritans, and how they were lost by the Jews, we must know, That the Kingdom of Israel being divided in the Reign of Rehoboam the Son of Solomon, the Ten Tribes which separated from that of Judah and made a particular Kingdom, preserv'd the Pentateuch in the same manner as they re∣ceiv'd it from Moses; but that Kingdom being intirely destroy'd by Salmanassar King of Assyria, who took the City of Samaria, and carried away the Israelites, sent other Inhabitants in their Place, who were called Chuteans, and afterwards Samaritans, from the City of Samaria: The latter being molested with wild Beasts, as a Judgment for not adoring the true God, sent for some Israelites, who gave them Copies of the Books of the Law, which they always preserv'd as they had receiv'd them. The Tribes of Judah and Benjamin did also retain the same Characters till the Babylonish Captivity; but the Jews being transported to that City, they insensibly accustomed themselves to write like the Chaldeans; and therefore, after their return, Esdras having collected and re∣ceiv'd the Books of the Bible, made use of the Chaldee Characters (which were bet∣ter known to the Jews than the ancient Characters) whereof they have constantly made use since that time. But a convincing Proof, that they were not in use before, is this, That there are many ancient Shekels found of the Jewish Money before the Captivity, whose Inscriptions are wrote in Samaritan Characters; and on the Reverse there are found these words, Jerusalem Kodeska, the Holy Jerusalem (b) 1.2: Which proves that 'twas the Jews and not the Samaritans amongst whom that Money was currant; be∣cause the latter (nay, nor the Israelites themselves) did not after their Division ac∣knowledge Jerusalem as a Holy City, and would not have called it by that Title in their Money, since they were the declar'd Enemies of that City and Temple. We cannot then doubt but that the Hebrew Characters were those we call Samaritan. This the ancient Authors, who pry'd into those Matters, have deliver'd as a certainty (c) 1.3, Ori∣gen on the 9th of Ezekiel says, He understood by a converted Jew, that the ancient

Hebrew Characters differ'd from those that were us'd in his time: St. Jerom speaks of this Change as a thing not to be doubted of. It is certain, says he, in his General Pro∣logue to the Holy Scripture, That Esdras invented the new Letters we make use of at present, and that till his time, the Samaritan and Hebrew Characters were the same. He assures us, that the Pentateuch wrote by the Samaritans is Letter for Letter the same with that of the Hebrews, and differs only in the Figure and Strokes of the Character. And afterwards tells us, He hath seen the Name of Jebovah writ in the Greek Copies in those ancient Characters. Africanus, Eusebius and Syncellus confirm this Truth, when they distinguish the Samaritan Hebrew from the Jewish Hebrew. The (d) 1.4 Tal∣mudists do likewise agree, That Esdras changed the Hebrew into Assyrian Characters, and left the Hebrew Characters to the Chuteans and Samaritans. (e) 1.5 Divers of the Rabbies are of the same Opinion, and the ablest of the (f) 1.6 R. Catholick Interpreters as well as Protestants agree in this Truth; which is opposed by those only who are too much prepossessed in favour of the Hebrew Tongue; but their Arguments for it are very weak (g) 1.7: Nor have they any solid Answer to give to the Proofs we have brought for the contrary.

The Hebrew Alphabet is composed of 22 Letters, as well as those of the Samaritans, Chaldeans and Syrians. But besides those Letters, none of which is at present a Vowel, and by Consequence they cannot determine the Pronounciation. The Hebrews have invented Points, which being put under the Letters, serve instead of Vowels. Those

Vowel Points serve not only to fix the Pronounciation, but also the Signification of a Word; because many times the Word being differently pointed and pronounced signi∣fies things wholly different. This is the thing that has made the Question about the An∣tiquity of the Points seem to be of Consequence, and hath therefore been treated of ve∣ry prolixly. Some have pretended that those Points are as ancient as the Hebrew Tongue (h) 1.8, and that Abraham made use of them. Others make Moses (i) 1.9 the Au∣thor of them. But the most (k) 1.10 common Opinion, among the Jews, is that Moses ha∣ving learn'd of God the true Pronounciation of Hebrew Words, this Science was pre∣serv'd in the Synagogue by Oral Tradition until the time of Esdras, who invented the Points and Accents to preserve it. (l) 1.11 Elias Levita, a German Jew of the last Age, and very Learned in the Hebrew Grammar, hath rejected this Sentiment, and maintain'd that the Invention of the Points was much later. He ascribes it to the Jews of Tiberias, about the 500th Year of Christ; and alledges, that this Art was not perfected till about the Year 1040, by two famous Massorets, Ben-Ascher and Ben-Naphtali. This Opini∣on hath been embrac'd in the last and present Age by divers Criticks (m) 1.12: But it is be∣come more common since Lewis Capelle, a Learned Protestant Professor of Hebrew at Saumur, establish'd that Opinion against Buxtorf, in his Book, Intituled, Arcanum Pun∣ctuationis Revelatum: The Secret of the Punctuation Reveal'd. Printed in the Year 1624. Since that time, notwithstanding the Efforts of Buxtorf's Son, and of some other Pro∣testants, the Newness of the Points hath been acknowledg'd, not only by R. Catholick Au∣thors, but also by the Learnedst of the Protestants (n) 1.13. Father Morin, one of those who hath writ with the greatest Strength against the Antiquity of the Points, believes the Invention to be later than Elias Levita thinks it, and fixes it about the beginning of the 10th Century.

Before we produce to the Reasons alledg'd for shewing the Novelty of the Hebrew Points, we must observe, That the Hebrew Tongue had real Vowels at first as other Languages; to wit, the Aleph, which is the A; the Jod, which is the I; and the Vau, which answers to the O and the U; and it may be, the Hajin for the E. Those Letters which at present are Consonants, when they are not pronounced, were Originally true Vowels. But as there are abundance of Hebrew words where several Consonants are found successively without any of those Letters, they were supplied by them for pro∣nouncing those Words, whose true Pronounciation were learn'd by Custom. This be∣ing laid down, we come now to Capelle's Reasons for the Novelty of those Points.

His first Argument is from the Testimony of the modern Rabbies: The first he quotes is Aben-Ezra, that liv'd about the Year 1150, who in his Book call'd Tzachut or Ele∣gancies, treating of the Punctuation of a Word. He says, to justifie his Decision, That such is the Custom of the Sages of Tiberias, which ought to serve as a Foundation and Rule, because 'tis they who are the Massorets, from whom we have receiv'd the Punctua∣tion of the Law. He further observes in the same Book, That there are Interpreters who accuse the Author of the Pauses, or of the Distinction of Verses in the Scripture, of Error; and he says, he wonders how he could mistake, especially if 'twas Esdras, seeing it is certain that since his time there's none who hath come near him in Wis∣dom; and that 'tis evident, he hath made no Distinction in the whole Bible but what is very well placed. Buxtorf Answers, That in the first Passage Aben-Ezra does not speak of the first Introduction of Points, but only of their Re-establishment by the Jews of Tiberias, the Authors of the Massora, who pointed the Text more Exactly and Cor∣rectly than Others. As to the 2d Passage, He pretends that it makes for him, and that the Rabbie Aben-Ezra, does there acknowledge Esdras to be the Author of the Pauses; that is to say, of the Points, Accents and Distinctions of the Hebrew Text. He adds,

that this Rabbi in a Book, Intituled, The Ballance of the Holy Tongue, ascribes to Es∣dras and the Assembly of the great Synagogue, the Institution of the Accents, Points and Distinctions. It must be confessed, That those Passages of Aben-Ezra, particularly the last, do not prove altogether what Capellus pretends to; but it shews at least, that in the time of Aben-Ezra there were Interpreters among the Jews, who doubted whe∣ther Esdras was the Author of the Vowel Points; and that Aben-Ezra himself was not very far from being of that Opinion.

The second Testimony produc'd by Capellus, is from the Rabbi Kimchi's Book called Michlol, who speaking of the difference in the Punctuation between the Praeter Tense and the Participle Niphal, says, this difference was made by the Orderers of the Pun∣ctuation. If he had believ'd Esdras to be the Author of those Points, he would never have made use of the term Orderer; which is more applicable to the Massorets than to Esdras. Buxtorf answers, That by this he understands those of the great Synagogue, to whom the Rabbi ascribes the Restitution and Punctuation of the Text, in the Pre∣face to his Commentary on the Prophets, where he says, that the Origin of Keri and Ketib was thus; Those of the Grand Synagogue, who establish'd the Law after the first Captivity, having found differences in the Copies, about which they could receive no Light, wrote one of the Readings without Points, or at least put it so in the Margin. This being supposed. Buxtorf says, the Points were in use at the time of this Re-esta∣blishment, according to the Opinion of Rabbi Kimchi; wherein he seems to be in the right.

His third Testimony is from the Book called Tzach Sephathajim, ascrib'd to Rabbi Juda, who liv'd about the Year 1140, where he observes, that the Points were given upon Mount Sinai, but that the Tables of the Law were not pointed; and that God speaking the Holy Language, those who heard his Voice, learn'd from him how to pro∣nounce the Vowels. But this Passage, as Buxtorf observes, proves only that the Tables of the Law were not pointed; or, at least, that the Points were not mark'd in Moses's time, according to the Opinion of Rabbi Juda: And it cannot be concluded from thence, that he did not believe the Points to be invented in Esdras's time, to fix the Pronounciation which was preserv'd by Oral Tradition from the time of Moses.

The last Testimony of the Rabbies alledg'd by Capellus, is taken from the Book Cosri, where 'tis said, the Vowels were preserved in the Memory of the Priests, Kings, and Judges, and of those of the Sanhedrim, and of righteous and holy Men, and even in the Memories of the Prophane. And that, in fine, they put the Seven Points and the Accents to serve as proper Marks for the guiding of those who copied and read those Books, according to the Cabala and the Tradition receiv'd by Moses, and preserv'd after∣wards. But this Author not setting down the time of the Invention, decides nothing. Therefore we don't think much stress ought to be laid upon the Testimony of the Rabbies for the Decision of this Question; and so much the less, that most of 'em do plainly ascribe the Invention of the Points to Moses or Esdras.

Capel's second Argument is taken from the present Practice of the Jews, who in their Synagogues do, for the publick reading of the Law, make use of Copies without Points; which they revere and lock up with Care, as representing the Copy of Moses that was preserv'd in the Ark. This Argument proves indeed, That the Jews have al∣ways been of Opinion, that Moses did not make use of the Points when he wrote the Law; but it does not prove the same thing as to Esdras; tho' it would seem that they had no reason to be afraid of making use of pointed Copies of the Law; and less still, to look upon them as Prophane, had they been persuaded that Esdras and the Great Synagogue, whose Authority they rever'd, had been the Authors of those Points.

His third Argument is founded on this, That it appears the Points were not known to the ancient Cabalists and Talmudists. There's nothing more usual amongst the new Cabalists, than to seek for Mysteries in the Punctuation. Nor would the old ones have fail'd to have done the same, if those Points had been in use; and had they believ'd they came from Moses or Esdras. The Talmudist Doctors do frequently raise Que∣stions upon the manner of reading and pronouncing certain Words: Had the Points been invented in their time, they would not have fail'd to say with the Modern Jewish Commentators, Don't read by a Camets but by a Cholem, &c. And would either have made use of those Names, or of the Figures of those Vowel Points. Mean while they contented themselves only to write the same Consonants, putting sometimes over them a Vau or a Jod, to denote what Pronounciation they intended. It's true the Massora is mention'd in the Talmud, but the Massora is generally a Critick upon the Text of the Bible, and has no particular regard to the Points. This Argument of Mr. Capel's, to

me seems very convincing. Buxtorf opposes to him Testimonies taken from the Book Zo∣har, where the Points and Accents are mentioned: But this Book being new, and writ since the 1000th Year of Christ, makes nothing to the purpose.

Capel's fourth Argument is taken from the Samaritan Character; which is certainly, as we have already shewed, the ancient Hebrew. The Samaritans have no Points, and use the Letters Aleph, He, Vau and Jod for Vowels. This Argument proves still, that the Points were not in use from the time of Moses till that of Esdras, since the Sama∣ritan Characters, which the Hebrews make use of, admit of none; but it does not prove that Esdras, who chang'd those Characters, did not make use of Points.

His fifth Argument is taken from Keri and Ketib; that is to say, the different Read∣ings put in the Margin of the Bibles. All those different Readings are upon the Con∣sonants, and none upon the Vowels. Had the Points been in use of old, there's no doubt but they would have produced many more different Readings than the Consonants. This then is an evident Proof, That they came neither from Moses nor from Esdras.

Mr. Capel's sixth Argument is founded on the ancient Greek, Latin and Chaldee Ver∣sions, which he maintains were from Copies not pointed. Then what likelihood is there, if the Points had been invented in their time, and that there had then been poin∣ted Copies, that the Interpreters should not have made use of 'em, since 'twould have been much more Commodious, and a great Ease to them in determining the Sense of divers Words. Let Buxtorf say what he will, it will never be believ'd that the In∣terpreters were so negligent and ill advis'd, as not to make use of pointed Copies, had there been any such then: And the Consequence is morally certain, that there were none, if it be well prov'd that they did not make use of any such. Now this is it, that M. Capel demonstrates in particular of the following Versions. 1. Of that of the LXX, even by the Confession of his Adversaries, who don't deny that it was from an unpointed Copy, but give frivolous Reasons for it: And if they denied it, 'twere easie to prove it, because it appears, that in divers Places of the Greek Version, the Interpre∣ter hath read the Words otherwise than they are pointed at present. 2. Capel assures us of the same as to the Chaldee Paraphrases of Onkelos and Jonathan, where that difference of the Version, because of the different ways of reading does still appear. 3. He makes the same Remarks on the Greek Versions of Aquila, Symmachus and Theo∣dotion, and of the other Greek Versions, whereof we have some Fragments remaining; by which it appears that those Interpreters have translated certain Words differently, because the Pronounciation of it was not fixed; which they would not have done, had they had pointed Copies. It's true, there are such Differences which happen sometime from the change of Consonants, Faults of the Hebrew Copy, or Negligence of Transla∣tors; but the greatest part comes manifestly from the different Pronounciation of the Words, which was not then fix'd by the Vowel Points.

The Testimonies of Origen, St. Jerom, and other Greek and Latin Fathers, are M. Capel's 7th Argument to prove the Novelty of the Points. It is morally impossi∣ble, had there been any pointed Copies in St. Jerom's time, but some of them must have fallen into the Hands of that Father, that he would have made use of them, have spoke of them, and that the Jews, who taught him Hebrew, would have taught him the Points and Accents; or, at least, have given him Notice that there were Hebrew poin∣ted Copies; which would have been a great Ease to him. But it appears, That St. Jerom had no knowledge of those Points, and that he not only did not make use of 'em, but that he never heard them spoke of; tho' he could not have avoided it on so many Occasions: For in speaking of the Differences 'twixt his Version and that of the Septuagint, could he have forgot to observe, that the principal Cause of the Differences betwixt them was occasion'd by the different Punctuation that the LXX had read by a Kametz, a Tseré, or a Chiréck, &c. that which he read by a Cholem, or a Segol, &c. How could it be, that in speaking of the Hebrew Letters, he should say nothing of the Points nor Accents? And that in marking the different Pronounciations of the same Word, in different Places, he should not have spoke of the Consonants, and have expressed the different ways of pronouncing those Words, without ever taking notice that this different Pronounciation was occasion'd by the different Pointing (o) 1.14. Supposing al∣ways

that the Hebrew Words which were without Vowels were capable of divers Pro∣nounciations, and that the Hebrews, in reading, supplied by Memory or Conjecture the necessary Vowels, without any thing in the Text that could determine them to one Pronounciation more than another, but only the Sequel of the Discourse. The Hebrew Word, says he, in his Commentary on Jeremy, is writ by 3 Letters, which are Daleth, Beth, and Resch, for the Hebrews have no Vowel in the middle, and they read accord∣ing to the Sense which the following part requires in the Judgment of the Reader. If we read Dabar, that signifies Discourse; if Deber, that signifies Death; if Daber, that signifies to speak. The same Father moreover acknowledges, That the Hebrews have their Vowels which are not Points; but the Jod, which is the I; and the Vau, which is the O (p) 1.15: And observes that they don't place those Vowels in the middle of Words. Tho' these Testimonies of St. Jerom seem to shew plainly, that the Vowel Points were not invented in his time, and tho' those Passages be clear, yet they object some other Passages, in which he seems to make mention of the Accents and Points; as in the Epi∣stile to Evagrius, where he says, that the word Salem is sometimes pronounced Salem, and sometimes Salim, having a different Tone and Accent according to the difference of the Country. And in his Commentary on Amos 8. he observes that the word Bersabeé [in the English Bible Beersheba] is translated according to the variety of the Accents; the Fountains of an Oath, the Fountains of Abundance, or the Fountains of the Seventh. He takes notice of the same variety, because of the Accents in his Commentary on Je∣remy concerning the word Soced, which signifies both a Nut and the Watch if the Ac∣cent be varied. He likewise mentions Accents in his Commentary on Jonas 3. And, in fine, speaking of the Hebrew and Samaritan Text in his General Preface, he says the Sa∣maritans wrote the Pentateuch in the same Letters, and that there's no difference but in the Figures and Points: Figuris & apicibus tantùm discrepantes. It is added, That in divers Places St. Jerom observes that the Hebrew differs from the LXX; where the difference is occasioned by the Punctuation. How, say they, could he observe that dif∣ference, if there had been no Points in his Hebrew Copy? He says himself, divers times, that he followed the Hebrew Text, and that we need but ask the Jews as to the Alte∣rations that he hath made in his Version. And they tell us, that he hath follow'd the Hebrew faithfully. Now his Version is conformable to the pointed Hebrew Text, and he hath almost every where given ambiguous Words the Sense that is fix'd upon them by the present Points. He himself expresses by an E the quiescent Scheva that is found in the middle of Hebrew words. These Objections, tho' specious in appearance, have yet no difficulty in them. Let's but read the quoted Passages, and we shall soon see that St. Jerom does no ways speak there of the Accents or Points mark'd in the Text,

but only of the Sound and Pronounciation. This is clear in his Epistle to Evagrius before-mentioned. It matters not whether it be pronounced Salem or Salim, since the Hebrews seldom make use of Vowels in the middle of a Word, and pronounce the same Words after different manners, according to the Custom of the Place and the Diversity of the Country. Does not St. Jerom clearly observe in this Passage, that the Hebrews had Vowels which were really Letters and not Points, but that they rarely made use of them in the middle of Words, and that in his time the Pronounciation was different and ar∣bitrary? It was not then fix'd by Points which served instead of Vowels, as at present. The Accent or Tone was known by Custom, as it's ordinary almost in all living Languages, and particularly in the French and English, where abundance of Words are pronounced otherwise than they are writ. St. Jerom learn'd this from the Jews, therefore it's not to be wondred at, that he observes that such a Word signifies such a Thing according to the Pronounciation, and that he refers us to the Jews to prove that it ought to be read and translated so. The Massorets, who invented the Points, having followed the common Custom among themselves, and only fix'd them by the Points and Accents, it is not at all to be thought strange that St. Jerom's Version, which was agreeable to Cu∣stom, be found conformable to their Punctuation. As to the Points, or rather the Extre∣mities (Apicibus) of the Hebrew and Samaritan Letters, whereof he speaks in his Ge∣neral Prologue, it can in no ways be understood of our Points, since 'tis certain that the Samaritans never made use of 'em. But it is naturally to be understood of the Corners of the Letters, and St. Jerom explains himself so in divers Places, as in his Commentary on the 12th of Zechariah, where he says, The Letters Daleth and Resh are alike, and differ parvo tantum apice; that is to say, only by the Corner of the upper stroke of those two Letters, as may be seen by their Characters. The Silence of Origen, who certainly understood Hebrew, and who himself copied the Hebrew Text in his Hexapla in He∣brew and Greek Characters; his Silence, I say, as to the Points, is still a Proof that they were not in use in his time. But it is not from his Silence alone that the newness of the Points may be concluded, we have still some Fragments of his Hebrew Copy wrote in Greek Characters, by which it appears, that he knew no other Vowels but the real Letters; for instead of the Aleph he puts α, for Jod ι, for Hajin ε, for Vau ο, or ν, or ♉. We may also alledge the Silence of all the ancient Fathers who have spoke of the Hebrew Text, yet none of them hath spoke one word of the Vowel Points. To this we must add Philo and Josephus, who have said nothing of the Invention or Use of the Points, no more than of the pretended Difference of the Copies of the Law; whereof some, that is to say, the pointed ones, were read in the Synagogue; and the rest, that were for common Use, not so. The Silence of those two Authors, who were very well versed in the Customs of their Country, might justly surprize us, if those Customs had been common in their time.

Mr. Capel's other Arguments, to prove the Novelty of the Points, are taken from the Points themselves, their Number, Use, Name, &c. In general we may observe, That the Points and Accents of a Language are not much in Use whilst the Tongue is living; they were not invented in the Greek and Latin Tongues till after they ceased to be commonly spoken. The Oriental Tongues, as the Chaldee, Samaritan and Syriac, have none; the Arabick had none at first. Nor is there any appearance that the Hebrew Tongue is different in that respect from the other Oriental Tongues. The Number of its Vowels, which is 14 or 15, without reckoning the Raphé, the Daggesh and Mappick, and an infinite Number of Accents now in use amongst the Hebrews, make it plain enough how far those things are from the natural Simplicity of a Language commonly spoke. These are the Niceties and Subtleties of the Grammarians upon a dead Lan∣guage, rather than the Custom of a living Language. The Names given to the Points are Chaldee and Syriac. Most of the Rules given for those things, are either useless or contrary to the Custom of the Ancients: As for Example, the difference betwixt Schin and Sin, which is the same Letter differently pointed, is unknown to St. Jerom, who observes in his Commentary on Titus, that the Hebrews had three S's, the Sameck, the Tsadee, and the Sin, and therefore he counted only 22 Letters in the Alphabet, and made no distinction betwixt Sin and Schin. The Accents are almost of no Use amongst the Hebrews. In fine, there are divers words, whose Pointings occasions a Pronounciation monstrous, irregular, and altogether contrary to the manner wherein the LXX and other ancient Jews, such as Philo and Josephus, read and pronounced, a sthe proper Names do manifestly shew. The same thing appears by the Greek Names put in He∣brew, as Darius and Cyrus, which being read without Points, in taking the Jod and Vau for the Vowels i, e, o, are much more conformable to the true Greek Names than

they are with the Points, which form the Names of Dariares and Cores, which are al∣together different from Darius and Cyrus.

The Reasons alledg'd on the other side, to prove the Antiquity of the Points, are mighty weak. They say first, That there's no Tongue without Vowels. We answer, That this is true, and that the Hebrew Tongue had its Vowels as well as others, as we have already observ'd divers times, viz. Aleph, Jod, Hajin and Vau, as in other Languages a, e, i, o, u. Perhaps they will say, That there being divers Words wherein none of those Letters are found, and which we very seldom meet with in the middle of any Word, the Hebrew Pronounciation must have been very difficult. But it is easie to an∣swer, That Custom supplied that Defect, as in the Chaldee, Samaritan and Arabick, and that it was no way difficult to those that were instructed from their Youth in that Pro∣nounciation, who spoke the Language continually, or read the Bible every day without Points. It is certain, even by the Confession of those who are most wedded to the An∣tiquity of the Points, that the Copies of the Law which were read in the Synagogues had no Points, yet the Jews read 'em commonly and without Error. And don't we see every day, that not only the Jews, who learn the Hebrew in their Infancy, but also those amongst us who are versed in that Tongue read without difficulty or mistake, the Co∣pies that are not pointed, and that they pronounce those Words truly, which by their different Pronounciation may have a different Sense? Therefore it is easie to answer those who say, That if the Hebrew Tongue had not had Points, there would have been divers ambiguous Words in it; by telling them, That Custom and the Sequel of the Discourse, does most frequently determine the true Sense, and that it's rare if any Am∣biguity remain. In a word, all those Objections cannot be made by those who agree, that Esdras is the first who brought the Points in Use, and that until his time the Jews preserv'd by meer Oral Tradition, the Punctuation and Pronounciation of the Hebrew Words: For if they could be without them from Moses to Esdras, why might they not have been as well without them from Esdras till the time they were in∣vented?

In the 2d Place, They object the Authority of the Book Zohar, which they alledge is very ancient, and composed by Rabbi Simeon, the Son of Jochai, who died about the 120 Year of Christ, and mentions the Points and Vowels, of which he believes Moses to have been the Author. But Buxtorf himself confesses, That the Book Zohar was composed after the 10th Century (q) 1.16; or, at least, that divers things are added unto it. They alledge also, the Authority of the Gemara and the Misna, wherein mention is made of the Accents, and Pauses or Verses: But those Accents are to be understood of the Tone of the Pronounciation, and as to the Pauses and Distinctions they have nothing common with the Vowel Points. There's mention likewise made in the Talmud of 15 Words in the Bible that are pointed above; but it is a different sort of Points, which did not serve for directing the Pronounciation, but only to denote some Mysteries.

It is further objected, That the Massorets take notice of anomalous or irregular Pun∣ctuations; whence they conclude that they were not the Authors of the Points, because they would always have followed the same Rule. This Irregularity could come from nothing else, but that they found this Difference of Punctuation in their Copies. This Objection would be of some Weight, if we suppose that the Art of Pointing was for∣med all at once, and by one Man; but, as it's more probable that this was done gra∣dually, and by divers Hands, there's no Reason to wonder if there be some Irregularity in the Punctuations.

They pretend also, to prove the Antiquity of the Points and Accents by the Anti∣quity of the Musick, or the singing of the Canticles. They say, The Notes could not be retain'd in the Memory, that there was a Necessity of marking them, and that the great Number of Hebrew Accents serv'd for that very End. This Argument has so much the less strength, because all are agreed that there's now no Knowledge left of

the ancient Musick of the Hebrews, and that by Consequence we cannot have any cer∣tainty that the Accents which are come to our Hands are the Notes of it; forasmuch as they are not only made use of in the Poetical Works and Canticles, but also in other Books which certainly were never sung. If then there were any Musical Notes in the time of David or Moses, they differ'd from those Accents. But it is very likely, that in those ancient Times, they had the Tunes by Heart, and sung without Notes.

Some in order to prove, That in the time of our Saviour at least, the Jews made use of Points, alledge his Words, Matth. 5.18. That not one jot or tittle of the Law should pass away till all was fulfill'd: That is, all that is wrote in the Law shall be fulfill'd, even to one single Jot or Point. But it is easie to answer, That the Word Jot or Tittle there, in Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, does not signifie Vowel Points, but the Corners of the Letters. This is the natural Sense of the Word in Greek (a), and of Apex in Latin, and agrees perfectly well to this place.

We believe that we have hitherto sufficiently shew'n, That there's not only nothing which proves the Antiquity of the Points, but also that there are Arguments enough to convince reasonable persons, that they are newer than St. Jerom's time. We must now ex∣amine if they were invented about the 500th Year of Christ by the Jews of Tiberias, as most of the Criticks assure us; or, whether they be much later, as Father Morin will have it. The Arguments that we have brought, proves well that the Points were in∣vented since the time of St. Jerom and the Talmud; but they are of no Use to prove the time when; so that 'tis only by Conjecture, they say, that the Jews of Tiberias invented them. In the mean time, there's Reason to believe that this is not the true Epocha, and that the Points were not invented and brought in Use but since the Year 800. For, first the Misna, which is the oldest part of the Talmud, was not com∣pos'd till the 6th Age, and the Talmud of Babylon was not completed till towards the End of the 7th; which we shall make evident in the sequel. The Books Midraschim and Megilloth are still later. Now it's easie to prove, That the Authors of those Books knew nothing of the Punctuation, and that it was not used in their time; for, as we have already said, there's not one word of it said in the Talmud: On the contrary, when they speak of any ambiguous Word, whose Sense must be determin'd by the Pro∣nounciation, they take notice of the Difficulty and Ambiguity of the Word, and say on∣ly, that it must be understood so or so, without speaking of the Points. If they had had pointed Copies, they would have found no Ambiguity in the Term, or would have determin'd it by the Punctuation. Here's a remarkable Instance of it from the 2d Chap∣ter of the Book Bababatra, When Joab came before David, David said to him, What's the Reason that you have done so? Joab answer'd him, Because it is written, you shall make to perish z, c, r, of Amaleck. David replied to him, But we read z, c, r. Joab says to him, They taught me to read z, c, r. He went and ask'd his Master, how he had taught him to read? He told him, z, c, r. For the understanding of this place, we must observe that the Word composed of three Hebrew Consonants, Zain, Caph and Resch, which answer our three Letters z, c, r, signifies different things, according to the dif∣ference of the Pronounciation. If we pronounce it Zacar, as Joab pronounced it, it signifies Male; and so the Commandment was only to cut off all the Males; whereas if we pronounce it Zecer, as David did, it signifies to Remember; and so the Sense was, That they must cut off the Name or Remembrance of Amaleck. If the Points had been invented, they would have taken away the Ambiguity, and the Talmudists would have made mention of them in this place. There's another Instance in the 1st Chap∣ter of the Treatise Kiduschim, where it's said, That two Rabbies being in Controversie upon Exod. 21.8. where it's said, That he who hath bought a Maid that does not please him, he shall not sell her, because he hath abus'd her. [In the English Bible] it is, dealt deceitfully with her. These last Words are ambiguous in the Hebrew; for, if we read Bebigdo Bah, it signifies because of his Garment: But if we read it Bebagdo Bah, it signifies because he has prevaricated with her, and abus'd her. One of the Rabbies un∣derstood it one way, and the other another; the one pleaded the ordinary way of read∣ing; the other pleaded the Authority of the Massora; but neither of 'em alledge the Points in defence of their Opinion. In the 1st Chapter of the Treaty call'd Sanhedrim, there's another Controversie betwixt the Rabbies, upon the Sense of a Word in Levit. (r) 1.17

12.5. which being pronounced Sibheim, signifies 70; and Schuhaim signifies two Weeks: This Difference might have been decided, had there been then any Points: But we see the Rabbies make no mention of them. In the Book. Midraschim, or the ancient Mysti∣cal Commentaries of the Rabbies upon the Scriptures, there's no mention of the Points in any place, no more than there is in the Book Sophrim, which treats expresly of the man∣ner of writing the Law: There he speaks of the choice of Parchment to be used, of the Space there ought to be betwixt the Letters, how many Letters in each Line, how many Lines in a Page, that the Words ought to be separated, that the Letters ought to be great or small, and speaks nothing of the Vowel Points. Could it be possible he should have forgot them? This Book is later than the Talmud, and speaks of it with Applause. The Points then are later than the 7th Age. Since this Book was compos'd, there was about the beginning of the 9th Age, two Reviews of the Text of the Bible, one by the Western, and another by the Eastern Jews. It appears, that in those Reviews they made no use of the Points, nor observed any difference in the Punctuation. Whereas the Rabbies Ben-Ascher and Ben-Naphtali, who made a Review about 100 Years after, that is about 940, spent the greatest part of their Criticks on the Points.

Another Proof of the time when the Points were invented, is the Origin of Grammar among the Jews. The first of their Grammarians was Rabbi Judas Chiug, an Arabian, who lived in the 10th Century. Since then they have had divers. Now there are two things we may lay down as Matter of Fact. 1. That it's almost impossible to know the Rules and the Use of the Points without Grammar. 2. That the Hebrew Grammar is chiefly founded upon the Knowledge of the Points. Which makes it evi∣dent, That those two Things must be invented near upon the same time. In fine, 'tis very probable, that the Hebrews had their Vowel Points from the Arabs, and that they were the first Inventers of them. History informs us, That the Arabs or Saracens be∣coming Masters of a great part of Asia and Africk, and of Sicily and Spain in Europe, in the 7th and 8th Age, their Language, as usual, spread with their Dominions, and be∣came common in all the Countries under their Obedience. Then it was, that to fix the Pronounciation of that Language amongst so many different People, they invented the Points and set up Grammarians to compose Rules for their Tongue. The Jews as well as other Eastern Nations did commonly write in Arabick. Their first Gram∣marians wrote in that Language, and followed the Method and Rules of the Arabian Grammar. The Massorets, whose natural Tongue was the Arabick, imitated the Cu∣stom, and followed the Example of the Arabs in pointing the Letters of the Hebrew Text, to fix the Pronounciation of it. As the Arabians changed their ancient Vowels into Consonants, they did the like, and followed their Distinction into those that are pronounc'd by the Throat, Lips, Roof of the Mouth, Teeth and Tongue. They called the Primitive Words Roots, as they did; and the Vowel Points they called Move∣ments. In the same manner they admitted useless Letters, which they call Quiescent, and don't pronounce: From them they had the Dagesch lene and Dagesch forte; the former directing to pronounce the Aspirates softly; and the latter teaching to dou∣ble them. This Conformity in Grammar and Punctuation shews that the Jews had both from the Arabs.

This is the most probable Opinion concerning the Origin of the Vowel Points, which were not in use among the Jews till the 9th Age. The Invention is commonly ascrib'd to the Massorets of Tiberias, who are renown'd amongst the Grammarians for the Ex∣actness of their Punctuation: And 'tis probable enough that they introduc'd it first, and by degrees reduc'd it to an Art. We shall examine afterwards, whether we are to fol∣low their Punctuation, or whether we may vary from it.

Notes

• (a) 1.1

  From whence the Greek Characters are deriv'd.] Most ancient Authors agree that the Greeks receiv'd their Letters from the Phenicians, and that Cadmus a Phenician brought them to Greece. Herodotus in his History says, The Ionians receiv'd their Letters from the Phenicians, and assures us that he saw in the Tem∣ple of Apollo of Thebes in Beotia, ancient Inscripti∣ons upon the Tripods in Cadmean Letters, altoge∣ther resembling those of the Ionians. Pliny, Plu∣tarch, Sextus Empiricus, the Poet Callimachus, Philo∣stratus, Critias, Pausanias, St. Clement of Alexandria, Eusebius of Caesarea, and all, except Tzetzes, are a∣greed in it. Joseph Scaliger, who hath treated large∣ly of this Matter in his Notes on Eusebius's Chroni∣cle, relates a Greek Inscription on an ancient Co∣lume in the Appian way, writ in Ionian Characters, and comparing them with the Samaritan Characters, makes their Conformity evident.
• (b) 1.2

  On the Reverse are found these Words, &c.] The Rabbi Ramban, who died about 1260, says in his Commentary on the Pentateuch, That being at An∣cona, he found in the Hands of some ancient Men, a Silver Shekel of about half an Ounce weight; on one side of which was represented an Almond Branch, and on the other an Urn, with Inscriptions in Sa∣maritan Characters; which being shew'd to some Samaritans, they read on one side, The Shekel of She∣kels; and on the other, Holy Jerusalem. Postel, Ari∣as Montanus, Vilalpandus, Waserus, Morin, and divers others, had of those Shekels, which on one side had the Representation of an Urn with Manna; and on the other, the Branch of an Almond-Tree flourish∣ing which is Aaron's Rod, with two Inscriptions in Samaritan Characters; that round the Urn being, the Shekel of Israel; and that on the other side, Holy Jerusalem. The oldest of the Jewish Shekels are also in Samaritan Characters, and the new ones in Hebrew. The first Inscription on these Shekels shews them to be ancient, and coin'd at least before the Captivity: For after the return, the Jews of Babylon were no more call'd Israelites, but Jews. And the 2d shews, That it was not the Samaritans who coin'd them, but that it was the current Money of the Kingdom of Judea.
• (c) 1.3

  Origen on the 9th of Ezekiel says, &c.] Origen on those Words, Ezek. 9.4. (Signa Tau super frontes Gementium) Set a Mark upon the Foreheads of the Men that sigh. A certain Hebrew who embrac'd the Chri∣stian Religion said, That in the ancient Alphabets, the Letter Tau was in the form of a Cross, and was foretold concerning the Sign which Christians make on their Fore∣head; which all Believers indeed make, whate∣ver they go about, but chiefly at Prayers and Holy Les∣sons. Syncellus relates the Passage out of Africanus as follows. They differ in their Computation of the Years till the time of the Deluge, as hath been made plain from what is already said. The Hebrew Copies or Counterparts are taken from the oldest Samaritan Code, which is wrote in different Characters, and con∣fessed by the Hebrews themselves to be the genuine & first Book. Eusebius, Chron. Olympiad. 40. says, Esdras is acknowledged to have been an eminent Priest amongst the Jews, in whose time the High-priest was Necliasib the Son of Joachim, the Son of Jesus the Son of Josedec. Esdras was most learned in the Divine Law, and the famous Master of all the Jews, who return'd from the Captivity into Judea; and it is affirmed of him, that he had the Holy Scriptures by Heart, and that they might not be mix'd with the Samaritaus, chang'd the Jewish Characters. Thus that Passage is read in the ancient Editions of Eusebius's Chronicle, but the last Words, after, It is affirmed, are neither found in the Greek nor 'Latin of St. Jerom, according to Scali∣ger's Edition: And there's great probability that 'tis an Interpolation. But we cannot doubt of St. Jerom's Sentiment, which in Prologo Galeato runs thus. The Samaritans also write the Pentateuch of Moses in the same Number of Letters, differing only in Character and Accent. And 'tis certain, that Esdras the Scribe and Doctor of the Law, after the taking of Jerusalem, and the re-building of the Temple of Zerobabel, did invent the Letters which we now make use of; since until that time the Samaritan and Hebrew Characters were the same: And even to this day we find the Name of the Lord Tetragrammaton, expressed in the ancient Cha∣racters in some Greek Volumes. He makes the same Remark in his Commentary upon the 3d Chapter of the Epistle to the Galatians, where he proves that we must read the word All in the Passage of Deutero∣nomy quoted by the Apostle, because 'tis found in the Samaritan Copies, whose Characters are more Ancient. That same Father in his Commentary on Ezek. 9. says, That in the ancient Hebrew Characters which the Samaritans make use of, the Letter Tau hath the Form of the Cross, which is drawn upon the Foreheads of Chri∣stians. This latter Passage hath some difficulty in it, because the Samaritan Tau at present is not in the Form of a Cross: Origen observ'd the same thing before St. Jerom upon the Credit of an ancient Jew; but the ancient Shekels form the Samaritan Tau much like that of the Greeks.
• (d) 1.4

  The Talmudists do likewise agree, &c.] In the Babilonish Talmud, the Treatise of the Sanhedrim, §. 2. In the beginning the Law was given to Israel in the Hebrew Character, and Holy Tongue; and afterwards in Esdras's time in assyrian Letter, and the Aramick Tongue. In that same place R. Jose, comparing Es∣dras with Moses, says, That as the Law was wrote by Moses's Hand, it was chang'd by that of Esdras into the Assyrian Character. In the Jerusalem Talmud, Tract. Magil. Lect. 1. it is observ'd, that Esdras's Character was Assyrian, but his Language Hebrew.
• (e) 1.5

  Divers of the Rabbies of the same Opinion, &c.] Among others Ramban in his Commentary on the Pentateuch, Josephus Albo, &c. The Rabbies who are of the contrary Opinion, are oblig'd to say, that the Hebrews had two sorts of Characters before the Captivity, one Sacred and another Prophane: That the Sacred was that which was preserv'd in the Holy Books; and that the prophane was us'd by the Sama∣ritans. But this is a Suppesition that hath no Foun∣dation. If it were true, why would not the Sama∣ritans have also preserv'd the Books of the Law in the Sacred Character? The Shekels whereof we have spoke, being the Shekels of the Sanctuary and Sa∣cred, their Inscriptions must also have been in Hebrew Characters.
• (f) 1.6

  Amongst the R. Catholick Interpreters.] Sixtus de Sienna, Serarius, Bellarmine, Villalpandus, Bonfre∣rius, Guido, Fabricius, Morin, Despierres, &c. Amongst the Protestants, Postel, Joseph Scaliger, Gerard Vos∣sius, Causabon, Grotius, Sistinus Amama, Capelle, Bo∣chart, Waser, Mayer, Walton, &c. There's none but Buxtorf and Schichard, and it may be Lightfoot, Mat∣thias Valemuth, and a small Number of Protestants who are wedded to the contrary Opinion, which they had maintain'd, and it is at present abandon'd in a manner by most of the Learned.
• (g) 1.7

  Are very weak.] Their Arguments are foun∣ded, 1. On the Testimony of the Rabbies, which is of no great Authority. 2. Upon the ancient She∣kels, as they pretend, whose Inscriptions are in He∣brew Characters. But in this they are deceiv'd. They are new Shekels, made in imitation of the old ones. There are some of them also which must needs be Counterfeit, because they represent the Head of a King which was forbid amongst the Jews. 3. They alledge some Inscriptions of ancient Monu∣ments, as they pretend, but they are either Impo∣stures or Epitaphs of the late Jews. 4. They say, that St. Jerom in his Epistle to Fabian reports, That the Golden Breast-Plate of the High-Priest con∣tain'd the Name of God, Jehovah, in Hebrew Cha∣racters: That may be true after Esdras's time, but before, that Name was wrote in Samaritan Characters, as St. Jerom acknowledes. 5. They object as a Po∣sitive Reason, that which Christ says, Matth. 5.17, 18. That the Heaven and the Earth shall pass away, but not one jot or tittle of the Law, but what shall be fulfilled. Whence they think may be concluded, that the Iota of the Hebrews was only a small stroke, whereas that of the Samaritans consisted of three, made in form of an m. But they don't observe, that Christ spoke at a time when the Jews made use of the Characters which they have at present, and by consequence of the Jod, which is a very small Letter; and that he did not think of the Characters of the Ancients. We have already answer'd to what con∣cerns the Letter Tau: And the other Objections be∣ing founded on the Fictions of the Rabbies, de∣serve no Answer.
• (h) 1.8

  As the Hebrew Tongue.] This is the Opinion of R. Azarias, Meor Enajim, cap. 59. of Rodolph and Peter Chevalier, Matthias Flaccius Illyricus, in his Key of the Scripture.
• (i) 1.9

  Others make Moses the Author of them.] Some say God shew'd the Punctuation to Moses, and that it was preserv'd by Oral Tradition among the Jews. Others say, Moses made use of them, and wrote the Law with Points.
• (k) 1.10

  Common Opinion.] It is the Opinion of the Author of the Book called Zohar, and of most of the Ancient and Modern Rabbies.
• (l) 1.11

  Elias Levita.] In the third Preface of the Book called Massoreth Ham Massoreth.
• (m) 1.12

  Divers Criticks.] Among the R. Catholicks, Martin Raymond, Galatinus, Genebrard, Mercerus, Bel∣larmine, Serarius, Salmeron, Villalpandus, Masius. And among the Protestants, Luther, Zuinglius, Calvin, Beza, Joseph Scaliger, Munster, Olivetan, Chamier, Drusius, Pelicanus, Zuinger, Piscator, Fagius, Sistinus Amama, &c.
• (n) 1.13

  Learnedest of the Protestants.] It is the Senti∣ment of all the R. Catholick Authors, who have wrote since Capelle; and among Protestants it hath been approv'd by Erpenius, Grotius, Causabon, Bochart, Vos∣sius, Ludovicus de Dieu, Selden and Boetius himself, tho' a Defender of Buxtorf; as also by Archbishop Ʋsher, Walton, and Le Clerc. After this, those among them must needs be very heady, who maintain the Antiquity of the Points as an Article of Faith.
• (o) 1.14

  Different Pointings.] Hieron. Comment. on Hosea, Chap. 8. ver. 10. When he shall roar, then the Sons of the Sea or Waters shall be afraid. [In the En∣glish Translation it is, The Children shall tremble from the West.] For the word Mim, which is writ by three Letters, if read Majim, signifies Waters; if Mi∣jam, it is meant of the Sea. Idem. chap. 13. ver. 3. We ask why the LXX, instead of a Chimney, (which Theodotion hath translated 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) rendered it Locusts? The Hebrews write Locust and Chimney in the same Letters; so that if it be read Arbe, it signi∣fies a Locust; if Aruba, a Chimney. Idem in Tradi∣tion. Hebraicis on Genesis says, Tho' Estimation and Barley be writ in the same Letters, yet Estimation is read Searim, and Barley Seorim. In that same Place, he says, That for Shepherd they read Friend, because both of them are writ in the same Letters; but Friend is read Re, and Shepherd Roe. On Habak. 3. The Verb Schan is understood for the quality of the Place, and he hath plac'd [and there,] but it is rather to be read there in this Place. Ibid. on these words, Death shall go before his Face. [The English Tran∣slation has it, before him went the Pestilence.] For that which we translate Death, in the Hebrew there are three Letters without a Vowel, which if read Da∣bar, signifies Word; if Deber, Pestilence or Death. And on Jer. 9.22. the Hebrew word which is writ in three Letters (for it has no Vowels in the middle) if ac∣cording to the Connexion and the Judgment of the Reader it be read Dabar, it siguifies Speech; if De∣ber, Death; if Dabber, speak. On Isaiah 26.14. Thou hast made all their Memory to perish. The LXX translate Male instead of Memory; but all the rest of the Interpreters render it Memory, for the He∣brews write both of 'em with the same three Letters: But when we translate it Memory, we read Zecer; and when a Male, Zacar. In Isaiah 31. Fire and Light are wrote by the same Letters in Hebrew. If it be read Ʋr, it is Fire; if Or, 'tis Light. In Ze∣phaniah 3.8. Also where we have translated, In the day of my rising again, in time coming: All others have interpreted it, rising again for a Testimony. [The En∣glish Translation is, until the day that I rise up to the prey.] The Jew who taught me said, That in this Place it ought rather to be understood in time coming, than for a Testimony. For Ad, which is wrote by the Letter Hajin and Vau, may signifie either in time coming or for a Testimony.
• (p) 1.15

  And the Vau, which is the O.] In Tradit. He∣braic. in Genesis, concerning the Name Ephron, in Ge∣nesis 13. In the Hebrew the first Name is writ E∣phron, as we have put it; the 2d Ephran. For after he was prevailed with to sell the Burying-place for Silver, the Letter Vau, which the Hebrews read for O, was taken out of its Name, and it was called Ephran instead of Ephron. Idem in Epist. 145. Hosi there∣fore is interpreted, God save you. Anna is an Inter∣jection of Deprecation. If you would compose a Word of those two, it will be Hosianna, or as we say Hosanna, the middle Vowel being struck out; for Aleph, the first Letter of the following Word, finding Jod the last of the foregoing, excludes it. Idem in Epist. ad Evagrium de Melchisedec. It's no matter whether it be called Salem or Salim, since the He∣brews very seldom make use of a Vowel in the mid∣dle of a Word; and according to the Custom of Places and the diversity of Countries, they pro∣nounce the same Words with different Sounds and Accents.
• (q) 1.16

  After the 10th Century.] Rabbi Gedalias and Rab∣bi Zacuth acknowledg'd, that there was no mention made of this Book before the Year 1290; and in∣deed no Jewish Authors spoke of it. The Cabali∣stick Art, in the manner there taught, is new among the Jews, and is not to be found in the Talmud. He distinguishes the great and small Letters, makes use of Latin, Greek and Arabian Terms, and even of new French Words. He follows the Talmud, calls the Chaldee the Language of the Targum, proves that it was not in use amongst the Jews when he wrote. He alledges the Paraphrase of Onkelos as of an ancient Author. His Book is full of new Rabbinical Fables. The Book of Bahir is also new, and not writ by Nechenias the Son of Cana, who liv'd before the De∣struction of the Temple, as some of the Jews have believ'd. He quotes some Chaldee Paraphrases: He calls the Roman Empire Edom: He treats at large of the Points and their Characters, and searches for Mysteries in them: All which proves the newness of the thing.
• (r) 1.17

  This is the natural Sense, &c.] Gellinus says, That the Apices of the Letters are the Strokes or Points of 'em: Whence came the Saying, De apici∣bus Juris disputare, to dispute Points of Law. In the ancient Greek Glosses, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, is the Summet or Point of the Letter. The Word is taken in this Sense in Plutarch, Dion, Chrysostom, Philo the Jew, St. Clement of Alexandria, and in the Sy∣belline Verses. St. Jerom uses it in the same Sense, as we have shewn.