PREFACE. THE publication of the following work, in its present form, originated from the want of a text-book, in our country, on the science of interpretation. But few copies of Ernesti's Institutio Interpretis have yet been imported; and the library of the Theological Seminary, with which the translator is connected, contains by far too few for classic use among the students. The importance of regular scientific instruction in the principles of interpretation, has been long acknowledged by the best biblical and classical scholars of Europe. A multitude of books within a few years have been published, with a view to present a regular digest of the principles and rules of Hermeneutics. Of these, some are much too copious to admit of publication in our country. Others are mere text books of particular lecturers, and formed upon a plan not adapted to our circumstances. The work of Ernesti, now re-published, has been through several editions in Europe, and has been more extensively used as a class-book than any publication of this nature. It may be asked why it is not now re-published in the original form. My reasons for making an English translation are, (1.) That the original Latin, though sufficiently pure in respect to the choice of words, is arranged very much according to the idiom of the German language, the vernacular tongue of Ernesti. It is therefore difficult to be understood by any young man, who has read Latin only in the Roman classics. (2.) Repeated trials, by using the work as printed in Latin for a class-book, have satisfied me that comparatively little profit is gained in reading it, by most who are entering upon their theological studies. For the work is not only difficult, but from its brevity and technical form, it soon becomes dry and uninteresting to a beginner. (3.) I wished to add some explanations for the sake of perspicuity, and if possible, of creating additional interest in the study of interpretation. (4.) An edition in Latin, with the mere text, would hardly meet with sale enough to defray the necessary expenses of publication. The edition from which I have made the translation, is that published at Leipsic in 1809, and edited by Dr. Ammon, who has interspersed many notes of his own. Of these I have made but little use. My reason for this is, that I did not regard them as being of much value. Besides, they not unfrequently partake of the extravagances of the author; who, in his preface, among various improvements recounted by him as introduced since the time of Ernesti, mentions one which may serve as a specimen of many others; viz. that when Jesus is said by the Evangelist to have walked upon the sea, the interpreter can now give the real meaning, which is, that he WADED as far as the shoal water would permit, and after that began to SWIM. I do not deny that Dr. Ammon is learned; but that sobriety and discretion which are the first characteristics of a good interpreter, I am unable to find in him; at least to such a degree as to make his opinions worthy of special consideration. Besides I have found a much better commentator on Ernesti, from whose labours I have reaped great advantage. I refer to Morus, whose Hermeneutica is a system of lectures on interpretation, of which Ernesti's Institutio is the basis or text-book. This work of Morus I prize so highly, that I have, at the close of almost every section of Ernesti, referred to the corresponding part of his commentator. The notes which I have added to the work, contain, for the most part, a summary of what Morus has said. For the fidelity of this summary, and for the matter of . some of the notes, especially of the longer ones, I am responsible. The notes are distinguished from the text, by being printed in smaller type. Any more distinction was thought unnecessary. Morus is an author too copious for re-publication in our country, but may easily be imported. The student cannot fail to read him with great profit. The Latin is uncommonly easy; and, if I may judge from my own feelings, very pure and classical. I would earnestly recommend it to every student, to compare Morus with Ernesti, in all the places where reference in the following work is made to him. The works of Keil, Beck, and Seiler, to which reference is made at the head of most of the chapters, are very useful manuals of the science of interpretation, and can be procured at a very moderate expense. In point of arrangement, and in the exclusion of matter which does not belong to the proper province of Hermeneutics, they have some advantages over Ernesti. I believe, however, that Ernesti has exhibited the essential part of the science in question, more fundamentally, and in a more convincing and instructive way, than either of these authors. Still, as they are more recent, and have been much used by those who study interpretation, I thought it might be acceptable to refer to them. Other books are occasionally referred to, but not often, with the exception of Morus. It would have been easy to add a multitude of references to books, on every subject, and every ramification of subjects, throughout the work. But I am not persuaded of the utility of this method, with beginners. The mind is overwhelmed with the endless task, which the reading of so many writers would occasion. There may be a shew of learning in a writer, who makes his references so copious; but the real profit to the student is comparatively small. A reference to a few of the best books is of more importance than to accumulate an undistinguished mass, which presents a mere catalogue of what has been published. Beck is not free from this fault; and even Keil has not made his "select literature" sufficiently select. My reasons for omitting some parts of the original work of Ernesti, are stated at the end of the introduction. It is sufficient merely to say here, that as Ernesti's work was one of the first respectable efforts to reduce the principles of interpretation to a science, it is not a matter of any surprise that he has included in it much more than appropriately belongs to this subject. Subsequent writers have marked out the limits of the science with more accuracy. I have omitted what is now commonly omitted, in works of this nature. There are some topics belonging to Hermeneutics, on which the work of Ernesti has not touched. I have omitted them in this work, because it is not my object to appear as an original writer here, on these subjects. It is proper however to say, that the topics omitted are much less the subject of precept or rule, than those inserted; and that the principles of several of them are very far from being settled, to the satisfaction of critics. What is most useful will be found in Ernesti. The rest experience will supply; or the instructor, who uses Ernesti, and consults the books referred to, will be able to give the student some adequate views of them. As my duty leads me to read lectures in this department of science, to those whom I am called to instruct, it will be my aim, as far as I am able, to supply deficiencies of this nature; in order that no topic may be neglected, which may be useful to those who are beginning the study of interpretation. To the third division of this work, which treats of translating from one language into another, I have added the greater part of an excellent dissertation of Morus, which comprises this topic. In order to do this, I have omitted a part of the chapter in Ernesti, pertaining to this subject; as I thought it far less useful than what is inserted from Morus. Part fourth contains a summary of the laws of criticism, which are to regulate the judgment of those, who form opinions about the genuine text of the Scriptures. Exceptions might be made to some of these laws; but I have not thought them of sufficient importance to be urged here, where every thing is designed to be a mere summary of general maxims. Beck has given a more brief view of the subject of criticism, than I have been able elsewhere to find; and the Biblical student should not be altogether ignorant of it, as cases of controversy may arise about the text, where ignorance of this nature would subject him to serious disadvantages. Part fifth consists of a chapter from Keil, on the qualifications of an interpreter. It is so much more brief and comprehensive than the corresponding chapter in Ernesti, that I could not hesi tate to prefer it. A list of some of the best books, on the topics to which the chapter adverts, will be found at the close of the respective sections. In regard to the manner of the following translation, it may be proper to state here, that my first attempt was to make a close version of Ernesti, and publish it in this simple form. I proceeded through the work of translating, with this design in view. When I began to review my labour, I found that there was so much of Latinism in it; the sentences were so long and involved; the connecting particles and words of this nature so few and indefinite; and the form in general so technical and uninviting, that I abandoned the design of publishing it in this way; renewed my work of translating; broke up sentences, or sections, as became necessary for the sake of perspicuity; supplied connecting words where they seemed to be wanting; added parts of sentences for the sake of explanation, and in a few cases, whole sentences and even paragraphs have been added for the sake of explanation or connexion. I have not wittingly changed or perverted the sentiment, in any case; but I have taken the liberties of a free translator, who is more concerned to make his book perspicuous and useful, than to represent the exact style and manner of his original. After all, such is the excessive difficulty of putting an English costume upon Ernesti, that I cannot flatter myself that the book does not still contain many Latinisms, which may be unpleasant to a reader, who is not acquainted with the original. Quod potui, feci. Without absolutely abandoning the idea of being a translator, and making a new book, I could not in general well do more than I have done. At the commencement of each section of the text, I have placed a very brief notice of the contents; which, for convenience to the reader, in order to find easily any subject after which he is seeking, has been printed in Italics. These summaries belong not to the original work; I am responsible for them. If the manual shall prove to be intelligible and useful to the student who is entering upon the regular study of the sacred records, my wishes and highest expectations will be gratified. The first edition of this work being exhausted, and a second called for, I have been obliged by my duties to abandon the idea of any augmentation of it at present, and have merely reprinted it with small corrections. M. STUART. Andover, Feb. 1824. PART I. GENERAL RULES OF CRITICISM IN RESPECT TO THE Page Common laws of lower criticism in general. 1,5 Laws of higher criticism for establishing a purer text.... 5-6 Laws proper to guide our judgment in regard to the true reading of the 6-11 PART II. CHAPTER I. SCRIPTURE. ON THE MORAL QUALIFICATIONS OF AN INTERPRETER OF Vital and practical godliness.. Unreserved submission to the authority of divine revelation.. An humble and teachable disposition... A decided attachment to divine truth... Persevering diligence in the use of proper means.. Incessant and earnest prayer... CHAPTER II. 13 ib. 14 15 ib. 16-18 ON THE LITERARY QUALIFICATIONS OF AN INTERPRETER. Knowledge of Biblical Criticism.. the language in which the books are written.. the historical matter of the books... Means by which difficulties and their causes are detected. Means of removing these difficulties... Connexion between words and ideas now rendered necessary by usage.. 34 Signification of words multiplied in process of time.. ib. 35 Ambiguity of words arises from various causes.. ib. Error of those who assign many meanings to a word at the same time and in the same place.... 36 |
