brought to that perfection, as will doubtless yield much, if not universal, satisfaction unto learned and prudent men, when he shall be pleased to communicate his thoughts upon it to the world; we fell occasionally on the difference of apert sounds or vowels, which when I heard him with good reason affirm to be eight or nine, remembering this argument about the Hebrew points, I desired him to give his thoughts in a few words the next day, which he did accordingly; now because his discourse seems evidently to discover the vanity of this pretence, that the Hebrew vowels are an arbitrary invention from their number, I have here inserted it. Apert sounds are either Simple. Vowels. 1. Apert simple sounds are dis- S Formally. tinguishable. ... { Accidentally. 1. The formal difference is that which doth constitute several letters, and must depend upon the various apertion, required to the making of them, together with the gravity or acuteness of the tone which is made by them. According to which, there are at least eight simple vowels, that are by us easily distinguishable; viz. 1. 2. magis acutum, as in he, me, she, ye, &c. E minus acutum, as the English, the: the Latin, me, te, se, &c. 3. I or Y, which are both to be accounted of one power and sound. Shi, di: thy, my: 4. A 5. 6. 7. magis apertum. All, tall, gall, wall. Rotundum, minus grave, as the English, go, so, magis grave et pingue, as the English, do, to, who. 8. U, as in tu, use, us, &c. So many apert simple sounds there are evidently distinguishable, I would be loath to say that there neither are, nor can be any more; for who knows, how many other minute differences of apertion and gravity, may be now used, or hereafter found out by others, which practice and custom, may make as easy to them as these are to us. 2. But besides this formal difference, they are some of them accidentally distinguishable from one another, with reference to the quantity of time required to their prolation, whereby the same vowel becomes sometimes Long So E min. acute. Long Smete, steme. Short met, stem. I {S. Live, give, driven, SL. Alive, give, drive, title, thine. ie, tittle, thin. Short A, min. Apert. A {S. Bat, hat, cat, sam, dam. SL. Bate, hate, cate, same, dame-ae Ro- L. One, none, note, &c.—oe vel oa. (L. Use, tune, pule, acute. U {S. Us, tun, pull, cut. ue The other remaining vowels, viz. E magis acut. A magis apert. et O magis grave, do not change their quantities but are always long. 2. Diphthongs are made of the complexion of two vowels in one syllable, where the sounds of both are heard. These are, How other diphthongs (which have been used) may be significant for the expression of long vowels, see noted above. There is then very little weight to be ventured upon the strength of this objection. Proleg. 8. 46. 7. It is farther pleaded, that the ancient translations, the Greek, the Chaldee, and the Syriac, do manifest, that at the time of their composing the points were not invented; and that because in sundry places it is evident that they read otherwise, or the words with other points (I mean as to the force and sound, not figure of them) than those now affixed. For this purpose, very many instances are given us out of the LXX, especially by Capellus: Grotius also takes the same course. But neither is the objec tion of any force to turn the scale in the matter under consideration. Somewhat will, in the close of this discourse, be spoken of those translations. The differences that may be observed in them, especially the former, would as well prove that they had other consonants, that is, that the copies they used had other letters and words than ours, as other vowels. Yea, if we must suppose where they differ from our present reading, they had other and better copies, it is most certain that we must grant ours to be very corrupt. 'Hoc Ithacus vellet;' nor can this inference be avoided, as shall, God willing, be farther manifested if occasion be administered. The truth is, the present copies that we have of the LXX do in many places so vary from the original, that it is beyond all conjecture what should occasion it. I wish some would try their skill upon some part of Job, the Psalms, and the Prophets, to see if, by all their inquiries of extracting various lections, they can find out how they read in their books, if they rendered as they read; and we enjoy what they rendered. Simeon de Muys tells us a very pretty story of him. self to this purpose; Assert. Heb. Vind. sect. 1. As also, how ridiculous he was in his attempt. But I shall recall that desire; the Scripture indeed is not so to be dealt withal; we have had too much of that work already. The Rabbinical is not to be compared with some of our critics, Temura and Notaricon. Of the Chaldee paraphrase I shall speak afterward. It seems not to be of the antiquity pretended. It is not mentioned by Josephus, nor Origen, nor Hierome; but this will not impeach its antiquity. But whereas, it is most certain, that it was in high esteem and reverence among all the Jews before the time assigned for the punctuation of the points, it seems strange that they should in disposing of them, differ from it voluntarily in so many places. Besides, though these translators or any of them, might use copies without vowels, as it is confessed that always some such there were, as still there are, yet it doth not follow at all that therefore the points were not found out nor But more of this when we come to speak distinctly of these translations. in use. 8. Of the same importance is that which is in the last place insisted on, from the silence of Hierome and others of the ancients, as to the use of the points among the Hebrews. But Hierome saw not all things, not the Chaldee paraphrase, which our authors suppose to have been extant at least four hundred years before him; so it cannot be made evident, that he mentioned all that he saw. To speak expressly of the vowels he had no occasion, there was then no controversy about them. Nor were they then distinctly known by the names whereby they are now called. The whole current of his translation argues that he had the Bible as now pointed. Yea, learned men have manifested by instances that seem of irrefragable evidence, that he had the use of them. Or, it may be, he could not obtain a pointed copy, but was instructed by his Jew in the right pronunciation of words. Copies were then scarce, and the Jews full of envy: all these things are uncertain. See Munster. Præfat. ad Bib. The truth is, either I cannot understand his words, or he doth positively affirm that the Hebrew had the use of vowels; in his epistle to Evagrius, Epist. 126: Nec refert utrum Salem an Salim nominetur, cum vocalibus in medio litteris perraro utantur Hebræi;' if they did it perraro, they did it; and then they had them; though in those days to keep up their credit in teaching, they did not much use them; nor can this be spoken of the sound of the vowels, but of their figures, for surely they did not seldom use the sounds of vowels, if they spake often. And many other testimonies from him may be produced to the same purpose. Morinus in his late 'Opuscula Hebræa Samaritica,' in his digression against the Hebrew points and accents, the first part, page 209. brings in a new argument to prove that the puncta vocalia were invented by the Jewish grammarians, however the distinction of sections might be before. This he attempts out of a discourse of Aben Ezra concerning the successive means of the preservation of the Scripture: first, by the men of the great synagogue, then by the Massorites, then by the grammarians. As he assigns all these their several works, so to the grammarians the skill of knowing the progresses of the holy tongue, the generation of the kingly points and of Sheva, as he is by him there cited at large. After he labours to prove by sundry instances, that the puncta vocalia are by him called reges, and not the accents, as is now the use. And in the addenda to his book pre fixed to it, he triumphs upon a discovery that the vowels are so called by Rabbi Jehuda Chiug, the most ancient of the Jewish grammarians. The business is now it seems quite finished; and he crys out, Oculis aliorum non egemus amplius, autóπTaι nunc sumus.' A sacrifice is doubtless due to this drag of Morinus. But quid dignum tanto. לשון torf, out of his 1. The place insisted on by him out of Aben Ezra, was some years before produced, weighed, and explained by Buxtorf, out of his win or the standard of the holy IND tongue; De punct. Orig. part. 1. page 13, 14. cap. 3. and it is not unlikely, from Morinus, his preface to his consideration of that place, that he fixed on it some years ago, that he learned it from Buxtorfius, by the provision that he lays in against such thoughts; for what is it to the reader when Morinus made his observations; the manner of the men of that society in other things gives sufficient grounds for this suspicion. And Simeon de Muys intimates, that he had dealt before with the Father as he now deals with the Son; Censur. in Excercitat. 4. cap. 7. pag. 17. himself with great and rare ingenuity acknowledging what he received of him. Ass. Text. Heb. ver. cap. 5. Dicesve me hæc omnia mutuatum a Buxtorfio? quidni vero mutuor, si necesse erit,' But what is the great discovery here made? That the puncta vocalia are some of them called reges; the accents have now got that appellation, some of them are reges, and some ministri: so that the present state of things, in reference to vowels and accents, is but novel. 2. That the grammarians invented these regia puncta, as Aben Ezra says. But I pray what cause of triumph or boasting is in all this goodly discovery? was it ever denied by any, that the casting of the names of the vowels and accents, with the titles, was the work of the grammarians; was it not long since observed by many, that the five long vowels with " and "were called of old, reges? And that the distinction of the vowels into long and short was an invention of the Christians rather than Jewish grammarians; the Jews calling them, some absolutely reges, some great and small, some matres et filias. But then, saith he, the grammarians were the inventors of these points; why so? Aben Ezra refers this unto the work of the grammarians, to know the progresses of the holy tongue, the generation of those kings, &c. but can any |