vast metropolis in which he dwells. We do not hold him up as a teacher of morals, or hope to see his works on our shelves by the side of Shakspeare and Scott, and still less in the hands of our reading community. But such fruits of the wild imagination of our age, teeming with new and often monstrous creations, must be estimated in relation to the soil from which they spring. We do not apply our modern standard of morality or taste to the writers of antiquity, nor ought we any more to judge the Freach, the Italian, and the German, by the codes of England or America. On the score of morals, however, we do not think that the advantage is greatly on the insular side of the channel: their own favorites are as far from being faultless, in this respect, as the idols of the Paris public; and they must surely have an accommodating swallow, who can take down Bulwer and Lady Charlotte Bury, and strain at Balzac and Victor Hugo. But it is not our purpose to defend any of the class; we claim equal justice for all; and we fully acknowledge, that among the modern works of fiction, there are many which it is impossible to recall, without shuddering at the moral aspect of the community which receives and countenances them, and deeply regretting that so much talent, and in some cases, so much genius, should be thus unworthily employed.

In conclusion, we must repeat, that M. de Balzac has been before us wholly as an artist, and as such, we have endeavored to give some idea of his magic pencil, although well aware that the subjects of his sketches are neither suited to our tastes, nor likely to be understood by those who are unacquainted with the character of that society from which they are taken. But he who draws from the wide range of human nature, in whatever land he may find the original of his copies, must fill his gallery with many a revolting picture. However, if vice is to be portrayed, it can hardly be a question, which is most perilous to morals, to have it veiled in the attire of virtue, as was done in a former age, or exposed, as in ours, in all its naked deformities.

ART. X.-1. A new translation of the Book of Job, with an introduction and notes, chiefly explanatory. By By GEORGE R. NOYES. Second edition, with corrections and additions. Boston: 1838. James Munroe & Co. 12mo. pp. 212. 2. The Book of the Patriarch Job, translated from the original Hebrew, as nearly as possible in the terms and style of the autho rized English Version: to which is prefixed, an introduction on the history, times, country, friends, and book of the patriarch; with some strictures of the statements of Bishop Warburton, and of the Rationalists of Germany, on the same subject. And to which is appended, a Commentary, critical and exegetical, containing elucidations of many other passages of Holy Writ. By SAMUEL LEE, D. D., Regius Professor of Hebrew in the University of Cambridge, &c. &c. London: 1837. James Duncan, Paternoster Row. 8vo. 8vo. pp. 546.

WE are glad to hear a voice from points so distant and so opposite in theology, respecting this most ancient and interesting portion of revelation. The qualifications of Professor Lee for the task he has assigned himself, will be as little doubted by his friends, as those of Mr. Noyes by the party to which he belongs. As to learning, the labors of the two can bear but slight comparison, since Mr. Noyes has given us little beyond the literature ready at his hand, in the storehouses of the profession; while Professor Lee, though not covetous of originality, has evidently wrought over the materials of others, and filled up much that was wanting in the interstices of the literature of the book. For example, in order to determine the character of the Hebrew of Job, and thereby give no mean clue to its chronology and authorship, he has instituted comparisons without number between its words and the words of other portions of scripture, and sprinkled his references all along his margin, so that any reader, not less intimidated than himself by the formidable task, may put his accuracy to the severest test. This has the air, at least, of the faithfulness and fearlessness of the true scholar. Professor Lee has, also, a due share of the genuine modesty of learning, and of that peculiarly cautious modesty, which should characterize all who assume the responsibility of making vocal the oracles of Almighty God. The Common Version is his model, even to the beautiful chime of its cadences; and he had much rather imitate than dilute its vigorous Saxon.

He gives us a singularly copious extract of the theological instructions of the book, and finds a richness and grandeur in them, which would make the skimming student stare. We wish that he, and others, who have descanted on the poetry of Job, not excepting even Lowth and Herder, had given us not only its colors, but its depths. Colors are superficial; they strike the eye, and it is not difficult to describe them coldly. But he who would enter into the interior spirit of a poem, must feel with the writer, and not less warmly or profoundly. It is far from surprising, therefore, to find a correct, but not an ardent critic, like Lowth, speaking cursorily of the sacred poem, which delineates not merely the outward fortunes of the suffering patriarch, but the surgings and strivings of his soul, laboring like a ship amidst angry floods. But it is a disappointment to see one, of such lively and universal sympathy as Herder, looking at Job, rather than making common cause with him, and living over his catastrophes, till he was able to unfold his whole inward life. The influence of the fashionable theology of their time, upon the feelings of Job's friends, and his now dauntless, and now pathetic, but always eloquent contention with their prejudices and provocations, while Providence was dealing darkly and sharply with him, and his poor flesh writhing in agony, present us a picture of truth, integrity, fortitude, patience, and hope, struggling against odds, humanly speaking, altogether appalling. It were no small gratification, could we see the issue, but the conflict itself is all before us; and more masterly portraitures of emotion and character it is scarcely possible to con

ceive.

. But there is another vein for the curious to open, in this consecrated mine. Job is an argument, as well as a poem. Its exhibition of reasoning would bear longer analysis, as well as its development of events and of the passions.

There is not space to mention Professor Lee's theory of the authorship of Job, further than to say, that he thinks the main portions of the book might have been delivered to Moses during his temporary sojourn with Jethro, in or near the native country of Job; and that he probably added an exordium and conclusion to his materials, and put the whole on record for permanent use. The manner in which he notices objections to "Satan," whose introduction he considers a vision representing a reality, (as in 1 Kings, xxii. 19,) and not a pure fiction, quoad modum Germanorum, may satisfy the reader of his fitness to cope with neologists. "It is absurd to object," he says, (p. 187,) "as the

modern Germans do, that this name could not have been known in the sense of a spiritual enemy, before the time of the captivity. As well might one attempt to prove that no English word, not found in the authorized version of the Bible, was in use in England before the times of King James I. The existence of a tempter, and in this sense an enemy, was known as early as the times of the fall, (see the introduction, as above,) and it can be of little consequence what he was called, oyar, or satan, when both the words will designate the same person: and yet it is on mere quibbles, such as this, that the whole system of modern rationalism rests!"

In respect to Mr. Noyes's notions of the theological peculiarities of Job, we are any thing but amazed to discover him following the example of the Jews respecting its allusions to the Messiah, and copying, what old Schoettgen bluntly calls their fishlike dumbness. The celebrated text (Chap. xix. 25) he would, of course, despoil of its noble testimony to a Redeemer and a resurrection. On the whole, however, when the power of his "idols," as Bacon calls them, is not too strong over him, his criticisms are fair, judicious, and well sustained. One must have something of the poet's fire to understand all a poet's inspiration; and in this Mr. Noyes is lacking. He may possess more grammar-and-lexicon knowledge than such a man as Bishop Horne, but he could never write a commentary upon sacred poetry which could count a tithe of Horne's absorbed and delighted readers.

There is one thing in respect to which all the commentators of Job have disappointed us, not excepting the very latest; and, singularly enough, this is, its chief practical design. "The most prominent part of the author's design is, indeed, (says Mr. Noyes, p. xiv.,) to enforce the duty of unqualified submission to the will of God." "A little consideration" (says Professor Lee, p. iii.) "will enable us to see that the primary object of this book is to show that there is a power attendant on true religion, sufficient to enable its possessor, eventually, to overcome every temptation and every trial."

But we must differ from both, and indeed from most, if not all of Job's commentators, on this leading topic. We do not say that these are not lessons derivable from the book, and fairly too; but when we remember the contents of the much greater portion of the book, namely, the arguments of the patriarch and his misnamed "comforters," we have always thought that the scope of the book lay there; and we are the more convinced of

this, when we listen to Professor Lee's proofs that the beginning and conclusion of Job are afterpieces. Job's friends, it seems, would convert this world into a place of retribution, and denounce him as a criminal for his losses, sores, and pains. It is a natural, perhaps one of the most natural, promptings of the human judgment, to regard sufferings as the due of crime, and to esteem all provi. dential chastisements as, therefore, punitive. It was desirable that such a disposition (especially under an economy whose best disclosures were far down amidst the shadows of the future) should be soon and effectually corrected. In Job we have the intended antidote. The book would turn the attention away from this dim world, where truth so often passes before our faces like a flitting spirit, (Job iv. 15,) to that where it shines with the sun's steadiness and brightness;-where, too, the now sinking good will soar, and the triumphant wicked fall to their merited humiliation.

In other words, we esteem the book of Job as containing the most satisfactory intimation (by way of inference; for it was reserved for the gospel to bring immortality into open day, 2 Tim. i. 10) respecting a future state and its destinies. Job made this inference, as we believe, under the teaching mentioned in 2 Peter, i. 21; and a glimpse, only, of his redeemer and his vindicating judgment, tranquillized his soul into perfect peace, and was the secret of that patience which has stood as a model and a warning for circles of centuries. Indeed, with the added illustrations of the gospel, we consider the book of Job one of the most satisfactory and complete correctives that we know of, for all mistakes and murmurs about providence and retribution.

We are glad to find Mr. Noyes, after the prevailing opinion of the day, arranging his text in parallelisms, and are quite astonished at Professor Lee for pertinaciously avoiding them, especially when we consider his governing reason for so doing, because, forsooth, the parallelism is found to pervade oriental prose. No one doubts that such prose is tinged with it, at least need not, who will look into Jebb's Sacred Literature; but, because such is the fact, it is a strange non sequitur to infer that poetry is, therefore, devoid of it. Is it possible that Professor Lee can maintain that Job, and no small portion beside of the Old Testament, is not genuine poetry? Then poetry must be defined anew. Assuming, however, the position that they are poetry, we are entirely willing to leave the question of arrangement in parallelisms to the mere English reader, satisfied, per