on superstition, there is reason to believe, that ne work of antiquity has descended to the present age so free from alteration, as the Hebrew Bible. Nor does Origen appear to have suspected, that the differences between the Hebrew and the Greek arose from any other cause, than alterations in the latter.

He made therefore the Hebrew text the basis of those corrections, which he proposed to introduce in the Septuagint. For this purpose he formed a kind of Polyglot: and, as this was not only a work of immense labour, but has served as a model, even to the signs or marks of criticism, for later editors, it may not be improper to give a detailed account of it.

It contained the whole of the Old Testament, divided into columns, like our modern Polyglot Bibles. The first column was occupied by the Hebrew. But, as very few of those persons, to whose immediate benefit his labours were directed, were acquainted even with the letters of that language, he added, in a second column, the Hebrew words in Greek letters, that his readers might have at least some notion of the form and sound of the Hebrew words. To express their meaning, he added, in a third column, a Greek translation from the Hebrew, which had been lately made by a Jew, of the name of Aquila, and which adheres so closely to the original, as frequently to violate the common rules of Greek construction. The fourth column was occupied by another Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, likewise lately made, but probably after the translation of Aquila. The author of this second Greek translation was Symmachus, whose ob

ject was to give, not so much a literal translation of the Hebrew, as a translation expressive of the sense, and free as possible from Hebraisms.

Having thus prepared the way for his proposed emendation of the Septuagint, Origen placed in the fifth column the amended text of the Septuagint; and in the sixth column another Greek translation, which had been lately made by Theodotion.

In this revision of the Septuagint, the first part of Origen's labour was to collate it throughout with the Hebrew; and wherever he found any word or words in the former, to which there was nothing correspondent in the latter, such word or words he did not expunge from the Septuagint, but he inclosed them within certain marks expressive of their absence from the Hebrew, namely with an obelus, or mark of minus prefixed, and a crotchet at the end to express how far the obelus or mark of minus was meant to extend. On the other hand, where the Hebrew had any word or words, to which there was nothing correspondent in the Septuagint, there he inserted such word or words, as were necessary to supply the deficiency. And, that the reader might always know where such insertions were made, he prefixed to them an asterisk, or mark of plus, again denoting by a crotchet at the end, what words the asterisk was meant to include. And, as the version of Theodotion held a middle rank between the closeness of Aquila and the freedom of Symmachus, the additions in question were chiefly made in the words which were used by Theodotion. For this preference there was also

another reason, namely, that the style of Theodotion more nearly resembled the style of the Septuagint, than either of the other translations, and therefore was better adapted to the purpose, to which Origen applied it. Hence also the translation of Theodotion very properly occupied the column adjacent to the corrected version of the Septuagint. In some instances, either where Theodotion's translation was defective, or for other reasons at present unknown, Origen used the words of Aquila or Symmachus. But in all cases he expressed by the initials A, O, Σ, the translations from which he copied. These were the sources, from which Origen drew in every part of the Old Testament. But in some books he used two other Greek translations, of which the authors are unknown: and in certain passages even a seventh Greek version, of which the author is likewise unknown.

The name, which is commonly given to this work of Origen, is Biblia Hexapla, or Bible in six columns, which it contained throughout, namely, the Hebrew, the Hebrew in Greek characters, the version of Aquila, the version of Symmachus, the Septuagint version, and that of Theodotion. In those books, which contained likewise two anonymous versions, and filled therefore eight columns, it was called Biblia Octapla : and in the passages, where the third anonymous version occupied a ninth column, it received the name of Enneapla. On the other hand, as out of the six columns, which went through the whole work, only four were occupied with Greek translations, the same work,

which most writers call Hexapla, has by others been denominated Tetrapla. They are only different names of the same work, viewed in different lights, though some authors have fallen into the mistake of supposing, from the difference in the names, that they denoted different works.

The labour, which was necessary for a work of such magnitude, can be estimated only by those, who have been engaged in similar undertakings. Eight and twenty years are said to have been employed in making preparations for it, independently of the time, which was employed in the writing of it. It was begun at Cæsarea, and probably finished at Tyre. The text of the Septuagint, as settled by Origen, is called the Hexaplarian text, to distinguish it from the text of the Septuagint, as it existed before the time of Origen, which is therefore called the Ante-hexaplarian.

On the value of the Hexapla modern critics are divided; and it has been considered by some very recent writers, rather as a mechanical, than as a critical undertaking. It is true, that great as the labour was, much was still wanting to make it a perfect work. It does not appear, that Origen at all collated manuscripts of the Hebrew Bible: and, though he compared different manuscripts of the Septuagint, without which he could not have known the variations, of which he speaks, it does not appear, that he applied those collations to the purpose of correcting the text. A comparison between his own copy of the Hebrew Bible and his own copy of the Septuagint seems alone to have determined the places, in which he deemed it

necessary to introduce corrections. It was his design, to render the Bible of the Christians in all respects the same with the Bible of the Jews, that in future controversies there might be a common standard, to which both parties might appeal. And if in the execution of this work, the rules, which modern critics have learnt from longer experience, are not discernible, it must be remembered that this was the first effort, which was ever made to amend a corrupted text, either of the Old or of the New Testament.

The work, in its entire state, has long ceased to exist; and we are indebted, for our knowledge of it, to Eusebius and Jerom, both of whom had seen it in the library of Cæsarea, whither the original itself was removed from Tyre, where Origen died, by Pamphilus, the founder of the Cæsarean library. But as the magnitude of the work was such, that it could not be transcribed without an heavy expense, no copy, as far as we know, was ever taken of the whole: and the original perished in the flames, which consumed the library of Cæsarea on the irruption of the Saracens.

But that column of the Hexapla, which contained the corrected text of the Septuagint, with its critical marks, was transcribed by Eusebius and Pamphilus with occasional extracts from the other versions. If we had this column entire, it might make some reparation for the loss of the rest: but even this column has descended to us only in fragments, which have been collected by the industry of the learned, particularly of Montfaucon, the author of the Palæographia Græca, who published them at Paris, in 1714, in two