The notices of Thucydides are very brief. We should suppose that the following rare book is not known to Mr. Moss, who has commenced his account of Translations with the English Version by Hobbes. " Thucidides's Hystory of the Warre, “ whiche was betwene the Peloponesians, and the Athenyans, “ translated by Thos. Nicolls, Citezeine and Goldesmyth of "London. Imprinted the xxv day of July, in the yeare of oure "Lorde God, a thousande five hundredde and fyftye."

Mr. Moss has introduced into a page of his second volume, a notice of the collection of Latin Classics now in course of publication from Mr. Valpy's press. To many scholars, the insertion of the Delphin Interpretatio in that series of Authors will be an objection, and the instances are not few in which notes occur that have no reference to the text adopted. A very convenient and beautiful octavo edition of the Roman Classics, printed at Paris, by Didot, Bibliotheca Classica Latina, sive Collectio Auctorum Classicorum Latinorum, cum Notis et Indicibus,' might have been recommended by Mr. M. to the attention of his readers.

Art. III. A Key to the Book of Psalms. By the Rev. Thomas Boys, A.M. 8vo. pp. 239. Price 8s. 6d. London, 1825.

MR. BOYS'S ، Tactica Sacra' was reviewed in our twentysecond volume. The terms in which he magnified the importance of his discoveries in that department of Biblical literature in which he has been so diligently labouring, did not appear to us to be justified by any proofs which he had produced of their value. We thought his expressions, indeed, not a little extravagant, and so, we presume, they would appear to every sober critic. ، When I consider, says Mr. Boys, the importance of these results, thought and language fail me.'-' As often as we repeat the word Parallelism, we toll the knell of infidelity.' That any such results should follow from a mere critical investigation of the verbal arrangements of the Scriptures, was scarcely to be imagined, and would require to be established by the plainest proofs. In addition to his former observations, Mr. Boys has now favoured us with the communications which he prepared us to expect, in illustration of the subject of his inquiries, but without furnishing us with examples of the superior utility of Scripture Parallelism, in reference to the objects of his frequent and ardent exclamations. Pursuing his investigation of the Bible for the purpose of ascertaining the character of its composit tion, with a zeal which evinces his own sincere and deep cons VOL. XXVI. N.S.

C

viction of the importance of the examination, he now furnishes us with his remarks on the structure of the Psalms, and exhibits several of them in the various forms of Parallelism, accompanied with the necessary explanations. Mr. Boys admonishes his Reviewers to remember the responsibility of their station, and cautions them against the consequences of betraying injustice, prejudice, or even carelessness, in dealing with a subject of such importance. Our opinion of his work was fairly given, and we represented its contents as curious and interesting, expressing at the same time our desire to give effect to his wishes that the principles for which he is so zealous an advocate may be circulated and examined. But an author may more effectually defeat his own design, than any opposition could do which Reviewers may be the occasion of exciting against it. We are sorry that Mr. Boys should have to complain of any attempt in other quarters to crush his work, and the cause which it supports, in the outset. The extravagant terms, however, which he has allowed himself to use in describing the pretensions of the particular subject of his studies, are not adapted to advance his purpose. Litera scripta manet, nescit vox missa reverti, applies to the one case, not less than to the other.

Many peculiarities of structure may be detected in both ancient and modern writers, which cannot be attributed to design. Such lines in Cicero as, Cum puerorum igitur formas et corpora magno,'-' Morbo tentari possunt, ut corpora possunt,' can be considered only as accidental. No reader of the Public Version of the Bible can imagine that the Translators thought of Hexameter verse, when they inserted the expressions at the beginning of the Second Psalm: Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The infrequency of such examples clearly ranks them as exceptions to the principle of composition in the works in which they are found. If, therefore, in the Bible, a few instances only could be cited of peculiar verbal arrangement, it might be fair to consider them as anomalous constructions, not the result of design on the part of the authors of the books in which they might be found. But if examples in 'abundance should be cited of any particular verbal arrangement, it would lead us to an opposite conclusion. With the evidence, then, accumulated by Mr. Boys, it is impossible to doubt the existence of the principle which he asserts, as pervading many of the compositions included in the Holy Scriptures. Nor can the particular usages be regarded as unintentional. But, allowing all that Mr. Boys may contend for in these respects, it may still be questionable, whether any other reason is to be assigned for the peculiarity, than the

national character of the writers, or whether any purpose was contemplated, which might not have been answered by a different method. The varieties which Mr. Boys has exhibited and analysed, are certainly curious, and must interest every Biblical student; but we are unable to perceive that his labours have rendered any such service to the cause of truth, as might warrant the high encomium which he is anxious to obtain for them.

A very copious introduction is prefixed to the Key,' in which the Author largely and minutely explains the doctrine of Parallelism, and furnishes instances of its various usage from several of the books of Scripture. We have examples of the parallel complex, and its distribution into the alternate and introverted forms, in passages of various lengths, from the most concise expressions of a sentiment to the most complicated paragraphs. From this introduction' we quote a part of the conclusion relative to the work before us.

With regard to the technicalities of the present work, the term parallelism is still sometimes used, even with reference to the more extensive arrangements. This term was originally employed only for the purpose of expressing the correspondencies prevailing in couplets, clauses, parts of verses, and members of sentences. The doctrine, however, has been since extended, and with it the use of the term. Nor will any serious evil arise from this wider application, if we are aware of the sense in which it is made. Even when two corresponding members of an arrangement do not strictly resemble each other in every part, still, if their correspondence be evident, appearing in their leading topics, in their relative situations, and, in addition to these, perhaps, in their leading and final terms, to express that correspondence, I employ the term parallelism. The word may not be thought, in these cases, so strictly applicable, as where the corresponding passages are shorter, and their resemblance more exact. Still the two cases are, in their nature, the same; and a paragraph may be parallel to a paragraph, as well as the end of a verse to its beginning.

I wish to say a few more words on the kind of correspondence which we may expect to find in the parallel members of longer passages. If, in my former work, I was not sufficiently explicit upon this subject, let me now take to myself the whole blame of any apprehensions, or misapprehensions, that may have arisen from my neglect. The resemblance, I say, in the corresponding members of the larger parallelisms, will not always be found exact in every point; yet still it may be an evident, a demonstrable, and a designed resemblance. On examining, for instance, a Psalm, A. B. A. B. I find it falls into two parts, A. B. and A. B. Here A. and A. may be two prayers, and B. and B. two thanksgivings; or A. and A. two exhortations, and B. and B. two reasons or inducements in support of the exhortations; or A. and A. may be addresses to the Almighty, B. and B. no addresses,

but merely descriptions of his attributes, operations, or judgements : then, I say, in each of these cases, A. and A. and B. and B. respectively, though they may not exactly resemble each other in every particular, do certainly correspond. They correspond in their topics; they correspond in their relative situations; and on examination, probably, it will further be found that they correspond in their leading terms; I mean, that A. and A. begin with the same or similar words or phrases, and also B. and B. If, on examining further, we find that they also correspond in their final terms; that A. and A. and B. and B. respectively, not only begin, but end alike; and if, on a still closer comparison, we find other corresponding terms besides those at the beginnings and the ends: then, taking all these particulars together, the correspondence in respect to topics, the correspondence in respect to relative situations, the correspondence in respect to leading terms, in respeet to final terms, and also in respect to other and intervening terms, this is as strong a case of parallelism as in most instances we now have to offer. Nor do I allege that there is a concurrence of all these circumstances in every case. This, indeed, would be too much to expect.

Such is the character of the correspondences and resemblances which I profess to exhibit in the Psalms. The advantages of knowing and observing them are, I conceive, indisputable. They will not always tell us, indeed, whether David wrote the Psalm at Gath or at Mahanaim: but they will tell us what he was writing about; what was the plan of the composition, and what its drift or purport; where its various topics begin, where they terminate, and at what point they are resumed. And on these grounds it is that I call my theory a key to the interpretation of the Psalms.'

Of the alternate arrangement, the following example is given, in which the corresponding members take up two distinct subjects.

a.

| Thou shalt not be afraid for the terror by night;

b | Nor for the arrow that flieth by day;

a. Nor for the pestilence that walketh in darkness;

b. Nor for the destruction that wasteth at noon-day. Ps. xci. 5, 6. 'Here we have the night in a. and a; the day in b. and b.—Thus the two topics, preservation by night and preservation by day, are kept distinct.'

Other instances of alternate arrangement are produced, in which the distinction lies between assertion and negation, one pair of members having a positive, and the other a negative character; as in the following example.

a | But he, being full of compassion, forgave their iniquity,
And destroyed them not.

b.

a. Yea, many a time turned he his anger away,

b And stirred not up all his wrath. Ps. lxxviii. 38. Here a. and a. have a positive, b. and b. a negative character. I

mean a. and a. tell us what the Lord did; "he "Forgave their iniquity," (a.); he "Turned his anger away," (a): and b. and 6. tell us what he did not; he "Destroyed them not," (b.); he " stirred not up all his wrath," (b.)-Thus a. answers to a., and b. to b.'

In the alternate arrangement, the distinction of persons is noticed by Mr. Boys as a character of the composition of a passage, which he explains in the following manner.

• PSALM CXXVIII.

A. 1. Blessed is every one that feareth the Lord; that walk eth in his ways.

B.

:

2. For thou shalt see the labour of thine hands happy shalt thou be, and it shall be well with thee. 3 Thy wife shall be as a fruitful vine by the sides of thine house: thy children like olive plants, round about thy table. A. 4. Behold, thus shall the man be blessed, that feareth the Lord.

B.

5. The Lord shall bless thee out of Zion: and thou shalt see the good of Jerusalem all the days of thy life. 6. Yea, thou shalt see thy children's children, and peace upon Israel.

In this Psalm we have an alternate parallelism of four members, A.B., A.B.. the third member A. answering to the first A.; and the fourth, B., to the second, B.

The principle of the arrangement is this. In A. and A., the first and third members, the man "that feareth the Lord," is spoken of; in B. and B., the second and fourth, he is spoken to. Thus A. and A. go together; and also B. and B.

'On casting the eye over the above arrangement, its propriety becomes obvious. In the first and third members, A. and A., the blessedness of him that feareth the Lord is simply declared. "Blessed is

every one that feareth the Lord," &c. (A.) “Behold, thus shall the man be blessed that feareth the Lord." (A.) But in the second and fourth members, B. and B., the nature of the blessing is particularized. "Thou shalt eat the labour of thy hands: happy shalt thou be," &c. (B.) "The Lord shall bless thee out of Zion: and thou shalt see the good of Jerusalem," &c. (B.) "Children " are promised in B., and Children's children" in B. But I would principally justify the arrangement given, by the circumstance first alleged; namely, that in the first and third members, the person in question is merely spoken of, or described; while, in the second and fourth, he is spoken to, or addressed. In the one instance, the Psalmist uses the third person; in the other, the second person throughout, as may be seen by casting the eye over B. and B. The following arrangement, then, will represent the plan upon which the Psalm is composed; A. | 1. Third person.

B. 2. 3. Second person.

A. 4. Third person.

B. | 5, 6. Second person.

This distinction of persons, I say, is particularly worthy of our at