A commentary on the prophecy of Hosea by Edward Pococke.

V. 2. Their heart is divided: now shall they be found faulty: he shall break down their altars, he shall spoil their images.

Their heart is divided, &c. or, as in the margin, he hath divided their heart, &c. Whe∣ther we take these words as declaring u 1.1 the cause of what in the foregoing they are said to have been, or to have done, or of w 1.2 the ill con∣sequents of those doings, or as an x 1.3 exaggera∣tion of their wickedness in that, they bestow∣ed not only their wealth, but their hearts also on their idols, will not be much material. Of the words themselves we find different inter∣pretations and expositions; the different read∣ings in our English, given in the Text and the Margin, warn us that all do not agree in one opinion. The ground of which chiefly, is in their different opinion concerning the first word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Calak, concerning which they all so far agreeing, as that it is here in the notion of dividing, yet then differing concerning the use of it in the form in which here it is, whe∣ther it be only Transitive, and signify actively, to divide, as in our marginal rendring, or may be taken y 1.4 Intransitively in a passive significati∣on, and so signify the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 neche∣lak, as Kimchi saith it here doth, to be divided, they necessarily differ in the order of the con∣struction, and in the meaning, at least in the first sounding of it. Several take it in the first way, yet they so far agreeing, differ also a∣mong themselves in the construction, as whe∣ther 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Libbam their heart, shall govern the Verb as a Nominative, or be governed of it as the Accusative; which will appear by instancing in some of them. The ancientest, the LXX. render 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and ac∣cordingly the printed Arabick 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They have divided their hearts, understanding Israel, as the Nominative to the Verb and their heart as the Accusative governed of it. So

also the Tigurin, z 1.5 Divisit cor suum, He hath divided his own heart. a 1.6 Others otherwise, Di∣visit cor eorum, He hath divided their heart, (to wit) understanding, Deus God, for the Nomi∣native, and making 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Libbam, their heart, the Accusative governed, which ours in the margin follow: as if he sent a spirit of divisi∣on among them. Others, Impertitur animus corum, Their mind imparteth (this comes also under the notion of dividing) to wit, Sacrifi∣cia idolis, Sacrifices to idols, as Piscator, or as Junius himself who with Tremellius is the author of the Version, Isti ex animo suo im∣pertiuntur idolis quicquid habent, They from their mind (or heart) impart all that they have to Idols. This note I put in, because without it, I should not understand what they meant; in this way heart is made the Nominative case, and so is it in that rendring which c 1.7 some give, Divisit se cor eorum, Their heart hath divided it self, or d 1.8 separavit se, hath separated it self. But this, as to the meaning, falls in with that other which as we said others make, by tak∣ing the Verb, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chalak in an intransitive or passive signification, to be divided. Among these is the Chaldee paraphrase 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Syriack also in the very same words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and the MS. Arab. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 all sounding the same which the vulgar Latin hath, Divisum est cor eorum, Their heart is divided, whom several e 1.9 others of the more modern Interpreters also follow in it, as ours also, f 1.10 deliberately choosing to put it into the body of the Text in their translation: That of the Greek and the Tigurin, they have, &c. or he hath divided his heart, fall in with it as to the meaning, though differing in the constru∣ction.

But besides the difference caused by the construction, we shall find more in giving the the meaning, even among those who accord, as for what may concern the signification and construction of the words, while they do not concur in their declaring how, or in what regard it is said, Their heart is divided, or they have divided their heart. The Chaldee paraphrast expresly saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 From the Law, viz. their heart is divided from the Law. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 From me, that is, from God, saith R. Solo. Kimchi. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 From the fear of the Lord and from his law, and with those agree g 1.11 several modern expositors, supplying some nempe à Deo, i. e. from God, h 1.12 others à Lege, from the Law, 2. Abarbinel recites it and explains it, as Aben Ezra's opinion, that the division mentioned is their being divided about their Idols, whilst some of them would worship one idol, some another, according to what is said, According to the number of thy ci∣ties are thy Gods, O Judah, Jer. 2.28. and 11.13. In Aben Ezra himself are only these words in the copies that we have 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Because there is not to them, (or they have not, or take not) one part, which (as it seems to a i 1.13 learned man) may be otherwise taken than he takes them. He himself gives as ano∣ther meaning, to take the words as a prophe∣cy of their destruction, and that at that time, they shall lay to heart that the calves which they worshipped are vanity and work of er∣rours; and therefore should divide or sepa∣rate their heart from them, &c. He and o∣thers also understand it in another way, of such divisions of heart and dissentions as were among them themselves; and k 1.14 he with some others go so high as to apply it to those which appeared in the ten Tribes, departing from Rehoboam to set up Jeroboam king, and di∣viding themselves from the other two, so as to be thenceforward two distinct kingdoms, and setting up the calves in stead of God. l 1.15 Others of such as were between the people and their last king, Hosea m 1.16 against whom (they say out of some Jewish traditions) taking away all im∣pediments and permitting, yea exhorting them to go up to worship God at the temple, they stood out and would still adhere to their Idols there. n 1.17 Others, of such dissentions and divisions as were between them themselves, God having taken away from them the spirit of peace and concord, and given them over to divisions, factions, and frequent murthers of kings (or princes) which is the note of the re∣verend Diodati; or divisions between them and the Assyrians their associats, according to the French of Geneva, which the learned Boo∣tins (and I think not without reason) disap∣proves. That which he thinks the best, and we may well think so, is another exposition by o 1.18 others given, viz. that their heart is said to be divided, in regard that they did, as it were, divide themselves between God and Idols, pretending to worship God, in, or to∣gether with idols, not cleaving in sincerity to him, nor giving him their whole heart, as they ought to have done if they would be ac∣cepted by him, but halting between him and idols, 1 Kin. 18.21. And to this purpose he thinks the forecited words of Aben Ezra may b 1.19

be understood. It is the exposition of R. Tan∣chum among the Jews 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Their mind and understanding, and opinion is divided, while they associate others with God (or joyn others in their worship with him) and so by the heart to be understood, Voluntatem, affectum aut a∣morem, The will, affection or love, is by p 1.20 o∣thers look'd on as a thing known and granted. And this indeed seems the most full, appo∣site, and satisfactory exposition; it takes in both the first and the second, and includes much of the following also as necessarily con∣sequent thereon.

Their heart being thus divided, and things standing as they did with them, necessarily fol∣lows, as by q 1.21 way of punishment, what is in the next words said, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Attah yeeshamu, which ours render, Now shall they be found faulty, and so several others to the same purpose. So the Chaldee paraph••ast 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Now shall they be (or be made) faul∣ty, or guilty, so the Syr. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 exinde rei sunt, or rather, Henceforth shall they be made guilty, or condemned as guilty, and the MS. Arab. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and so many mo∣dern Interpreters read, r 1.22 Culpabuntur, s 1.23 culpae obnoxii facti sunt, t 1.24 uunc peccati convincentur, or u 1.25 convicti, or scelerati erunt, Shall be convin∣ced of wickedness, w 1.26 crimen commissuri, being a∣bout to commit a fault, or wickedness, or x 1.27 jam rei sunt, y 1.28 or erunt, now are they, or shall they be guilty. Abarbinel taking the same significa∣tion, in one exposition explains it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They shall condemn themselves, or say, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 We are faulty, acknowledg∣ing their folly, as men repenting of what they had done. These all well agree with that of ours, Now they shall be found faulty, being understood in that latitude as to denote that they shall not only be so, but z 1.29 shewed or con∣vinced or convicted to be so, by the ill conse∣quents of their being so. They all take the same notion of the Verb, and whereas some render it as the Present tense, some as the Fu∣ture, that makes no great matter of difference, the word being in the form of the Future, which is applicable, as we have seen, to ei∣ther, and in prophetical language signifying oft the same thing, yet I think, the Future is well chosen by ours to express it in, that the particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Attah now (as much as a 1.30 brevi shortly) being joyned with it, may shew, that though it be not already so, it will very suddenly and certainly be so.

But others not a few do differently render it, and those too both ancient and modern. The LXX. render it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and the prin∣ted Arabick following them, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they shall be destroyed or taken away, the Vulgar La∣tin to the same purpose, nunc interribunt, now they shall perish, and so several b 1.31 more modern nunc desolabuntur, or vastabuntur, shall be laid Wast, or destroyed, and this is by divers of the Jewish expositors also preferred. So saith Aben Ezra 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, yeeshamu, is in the signification of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shemamah, desolation, and so A∣barbinel explaining that interpretation of his saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The meaning of it is, that they shall be laid wast and destroyed, and so Kimchi explains it by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ere long they shall be destroy∣ed, and saith that its signification is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 laying wast, or desolation. The reason of these different rendrings is manifest, viz. because the Theme 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Asham, doth more ordina∣rily signify, being guilty, or faulty, but is ta∣ken also sometimes to signifie, to be made deso∣late, or laid wast, or be destroyed; as among other places, in that both by Aben Ezra and Kimchi cited, namely, in this prophecy c. 13.16. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Teesham shomron, where Ours also translate it, Samariah, shall become desolate, and they twice together in that no∣tion render it, Psal. 34.21.22. (as likewise Ezek. 66. Isai. 24.6. and Joel the 1.18.) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yeeshamu, shall be desolate, though in the margin putting, shall be guilty; and of this signification of it we have above spoken on c. 5.15. so that the word being looked on as having these two different significations, have these several Interpreters gone their several wayes, according as they thought best suited to the place. Ribera thinks the latter way best to do it, but Calvin taking notice of both, gives his opinion for the first, the word Asham, saith he, is referred tam ad culpam quam ad poenam, both to the fault and to the punish∣ment, but that in his opinion they do best who render it, Nunc convicti erunt, i. e. nunc erunt scelerati, now they shall be convicted, that they are faulty; and this, we see, our translatours though well aware of the other use of the word and elsewhere taking it, pre∣fer to commend to us. These however diffe∣ring in words, do in the thing well agree, the one bringing on necessarily the other, the guilt the punishment.

Having thus spoken of what concerns the literal meaning of the words, give me leave yet before we proceed to mention a Jewish descant on them, by R. Solomon put in his notes. It is, to gather hence an argument for shewing the danger of divisions among peo∣ple, with great stress laid upon the particle c 1.32

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 attah now, to this purpose, d 1.33 Now they being divided, Satan hath occasion with open mouth to accuse them, and they shall be con∣demned, whereas while they were at good a∣greement together, though in worshipping of idols, he could not take that advantage against them, as they gather from what is said, c. 4.17. Ephraim is joyned to idols, let him alone: on which words we have already mentioned this their idle playing on the words, and do not a∣gain here mention them for any thing good or to the purpose in them, but because we find S^t. Jerome here to mention it, as then anciently in his time used among the Jews as an inference from these words, saying, Tra∣dunt Hebraei hujusmodi fabulam, &c. The Jews deliver such a story, which they think is con∣firmed by the Scriptures, viz. that as long as the kings and the people of Israel did toge∣ther worship the golden calves, and were at agreement between themselves, though in ini∣quity, the captivity came not on them, but when in the time of their last king Hoshea, of whom it is said, that He did evil in the sight of the Lord, but not as the kings of Israel that were before him, 2 Kin. 17.2. (whence they gather that he did not forbid the people to go up to Jerusalem to worship as those others had done, but permitted them so to do, but they being wedded to Idolatry contradicted him, and there arose a division of hearts between him and the people) then straightway venit interi∣tus, destruction came upon them, and they were delivered into captivity. I cannot think that Jerome thought this to confer much to the true meaning of the words; yet a e 1.34 learned expo∣sitor saith of him, Tamen quasi ea contentus, nullam aliam literalem adducit, i. e. Yet as if he were therewith, contented he brings no other literal exposition. For his sake therefore, and to give some light to what he faith, though the thing be in it self frivolous, have we put it down as from the Jews themselves also we receive it.

It follows further in description of such punishment as shall befall them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hu yaaroph mizbechotham, &c. He shall break down their altars, he shall spoil their images, &c. How hateful to God altars and images (or statues) erected to idols were, Israel could not but know out of the Law wherein they had received a command not to make any graven image or the likeness of any thing in heaven, or the earth or the waters, nor to bowe down to them nor serve them, Exo. 20.4. to make to themselves no Idols, nor graven image, &c. Levit. 26.1. and that cursed was he that should so do, Deut. 27.15. and if they should find any altars or images erected to Idols among the nations which they should conquer, that they should destroy their altars, break their images, (or statues) Exo. 34.13. Deut. 7.5, & 12.3. But they had now so far forgotten the Law of the Lord, or so far slight∣ed it, as not only not to do what that com∣manded them for destroying such abominable things, but themselves set them up in great abundance, and laid out the wealth that God had given them in adorning them, as in the preceding v. and before c. 8.3. and after again c. 13.2. This will not God longer bear with, but because they have multiplied altars to sin, therefore shall their altars be unto them to sin, (as he saith, c. 8.11.) they shall pull Gods pu∣nishments upon them; and that it may appear for what God was so displeased at them as to send on them those punishments, he will pu∣nish them in f 1.35 those very things wherein they sinned, and wherein they so much delighted, and probably confided for safety and prote∣ction, by destroying those very things, and so shewing how in vain all their cost upon them, all their devotion toward them, was, yea how sinful. g 1.36 And no marvel that God should so destroy those abominable things consecrated to Idols, when even those holy things, his Temple and Altar erected to him∣self and with his own order and approbation, when they were not rightly used to his ho∣nour, but the people through confidence in them, h 1.37 forgat him the Lord of them, and took liberty of sinning against him, and his house which should have been i 1.38 an house of pray∣er was become a den of thieves, he delivered even them up to be destroyed.

As to the meaning of these words in gene∣ral it is plain, yet in rendering some of them is there some difference betwixt Interpreters. The greatest is concerning the first word or Pronoun 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which signifies, he, or it, viz. whom or what it is referred to, which it is said shall beat down their altars, and spoil their images. Aben Ezra, and Abarbinel af∣ter him, saith it is to be referred to their k 1.39 di∣vided heart before mentioned, or else, as Abar∣binel, to that division which was among them, that it should occasion it to be done when the enemy should come upon them: according to either of these wayes it would be rendred, it. This the Syntaxe in the original will admit of; yet do others as Kimchi and l 1.40 many modern expositors, as more anciently Jerome (I think with good reason) rather refer it to God, not as yet mentioned in this chapter, yet of whom it is said in the last verse of the preced∣ing c. My God will cast them away, and it be∣ing

as a title well agreeing to m 1.41 him by way of excellency. He (saith Kimchi) from whom their heart is divided, it is he that shall break down their altars which they multiplied, and spoil their images which they made so gay, and this shall he in the time of their destruction. n 1.42 O∣thers, ipse hostis Assyrius, He, i. e. the Assyri∣an enemy. But this falls in with the former; for what God did in this matter he did by the hand of the Assyrian, who was his executio∣ner and instrument, and what the Assyrian did, he did by Gods permission, and imploy∣ing him to do it; and therefore Cyril and Theophylact make it indifferent to under∣stand either God or the Assyrian king (for so they must be understood (though they say, Rex Babylonius) and the Chald. Parap. takes in both, I will now (or shortly) bring upon them an enemy, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yechazzer kedalhon deagorehon, &c. o 1.43 Which shall wrest off the necks of their altars, and spoil their statues.

As to the next word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Yaaroph, our Translatours mind us of different ways of rendring it, while they put in the Text break down their altars, and in the margin, behead, noting that it is so in the Hebrew. To give the ground of which I shall choose to set down the words of Abuwalid and R. Tanchum, because they are plain and the authors not printed, they are much the same, and in R. Tanch. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 i. e. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 p 1.44 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He shall throw down and lay wast, by a comparison from striking on the poll, (or hinder part of the neck) which throws (or beats down) the body. And for proof of the proper signification of the word cites that in Deut. 21.4 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which ours render, And shall strike off the heifers neck there. The Noun 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Oreph, signifying the poll, or, hinder part of the neck, the Verb may seem properly to note the smiting on that part, or doing violence thereto. And therefore the MS. Arab. seems to choose a word which may more literally answer to the signification of the word by rendring it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Noun 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in Arabick signifying the same that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Oreph, in Hebrew, the hinder part of the neck, and so the Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to smite on that part, kill, or throw down by there smiting. Yet though according to this, our marginal reading be the more literal ren∣dring, that in the Text seems in plainer terms to give the meaning, and therefore I think is there well put. And so other Hebrew exposi∣tors content themselves with saying the mean∣ing here is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shall destroy, (as R. Solom.) or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 throwing down and breaking, as R. Kimchi. Here may seem to be an q 1.45 allusion to their idolatrous sacrificing at those altars; that as they there formerly used the beasts which they destroyed, so now should both their altars and idols be all used, all be destroyed.

As for the following Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yeshoded which ours well render, He shall spoil (as like∣wise the Syr. and MS. Arab. shall spoil, or, rob, perhaps for the gold, &c. on them) their altars, the putting R. Tanchums words also may save us the labour of reciting what o∣thers say, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 i. e. The root of the word Shadad (or its primary signification) is to spoil, but it is translated to signify pulling down and demolishing. So therefore here it is by others taken, and by Kimchi said to signifie 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Breaking and destroying. The Vul∣gar Latin here inverts the order of the words, putting simulacra, images, in the first clause, and aras, altars, in the last. And the LXX. render the latter verb in a passive significati∣on, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and the printed Arabick following them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Their statues shall be afflicted, or in ill condition. But here is still the same mean∣ing, and no suspicion given of any different reading, the Syriack here renders 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 i. e. Images or Statues by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as he s 1.46 like∣wise doth v. 1. and his Latin translatour ren∣ders it, aras, altars; it otherwise signifies Sacrifices, but that will not so well fit here, and perhaps he might by it understand erected statues, things lifted up, agreeable to the root of the word, and in Bar Bahluls Lexicon it is rendred as well 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 t 1.47 statues, as sacri∣fices lifted up on high upon the altars.

Notes

• u 1.1

  Zanchi. Tarnov.
• w 1.2

  River.
• x 1.3

  Trem. Dan.
• y 1.4

  As 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the 1. v.
• z 1.5

  Which Oecolamp. thinketh the best rendring.
• a 1.6

  Drus. and Lud. de Dieu, who saith the LXX. so render it, he seems to read in them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as in the various readings in the Francf. edition. This Tarnov. censures hardly, yet the Dutch notes prefer it.
• c 1.7

  Pagn. see Rivet. and Boot.
• d 1.8

  Zanchi.
• e 1.9

  Munst. Calv.
• f 1.10

  For which they are commended by Boot. animad. l. 4. c. 12. p. 240.
• g 1.11

  Calv. Trem. Vat. Zanchi. Rivet. Gene∣va notes.
• h 1.12

  Grot.
• i 1.13

  Boot.
• k 1.14

  Abarb. Mont. Chr. à Castro
• l 1.15

  See Jerom. Chr. à Castro. Petr, à Fig. Rivet.
• m 1.16

  See above on c. 1, 3.
• n 1.17

  Tirin:
• o 1.18

  Lyra. Capito. Merc. Oecol. Rivet, &c.
• b 1.19

  Jun. Trem.
• p 1.20

  Rivet.
• q 1.21

  Rivet.
• r 1.22

  Capito.
• s 1.23

  Tig.
• t 1.24

  Mercer in his first notes,
• u 1.25

  Calv.
• w 1.26

  Castal.
• x 1.27

  Jun. Trem.
• y 1.28

  Lively.
• z 1.29

  Non refertur ad actum, sed potius ad manifestationem. Calv.
• a 1.30

  Drus. Rivet. for so it is used also to signi∣fy as well as the present time, now, see in the next verse.
• b 1.31

  Pagn. Munst. Drus. &c.
• c 1.32

  Mercer.
• d 1.33

  It is in Bereshith Rabba p. 23. col. 1, in the Ven. edit. but in words more like those which we have set down on c. 4. v. 17. than these of R. Sal.
• e 1.34

  Pet. à Fig.
• f 1.35

  Compare c. 8.6.
• g 1.36

  See Petr. à Fig.
• h 1.37

  See Jer. 7.4, &c. to v. 15.
• i 1.38

  Mat. 31.
• k 1.39

  So Drus. Deus vel ipsum cor divisum, and see Zanchi and Chr. à Castro.
• l 1.40

  Calv. Lively, Pi c. Rivet, &c.
• m 1.41

  Tarnov. Jo. Hen. Ursin.
• n 1.42

  Lyra. Tirin. and see Chr. à Castr.
• o 1.43

  Qui eorum aris cervicem obtorqueat. Mercerstranslation. Others, qui subvertar cacumen altarium eorum, which difference will be reconciled, by seeing what we say of the next word in the Hebrew.
• p 1.44

  Abuwalid is only 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shall throw them down.
• q 1.45

  Capito, Zanchi.
• s 1.46

  And so Micah. 5.13. and Eze. 26.11. where the Latin translatour renders it Excelsa, elsewhere he renders 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Koimotho, statues
• t 1.47

  For so I supose it may be taken for the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉