Ethiopians divided the Old Testament into four parts. I. The Octateuch, consisting of the five books of Moses, Joshua, Judges, and Ruth. II. The Kings, in thirteen books; viz. the two books of Samuel, two of Kings, two of Chronicles, two of Ezra (Ezra and Nehemiah), Tobias, Judith, Esther, Job, Psalms. III. Solomon, in five books; Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Wisdom, and Sirach. IV. The Prophets, in eighteen books; Isaiah, Jeremiah's Prophecy and Lamentations, Baruch, Ezekiel, Daniel, and the twelve Minor Prophets. They had besides two books of the Maccabees."

Authorities in the fourth century are less important; but they go to show, that no uniformity had, up to that time, been established. Athanasius, of Alexandria, (A. D. 326–373) in a fragment generally allowed to be genuine, of a work called the "Festal Epistle," introduces a list,* by saying; "The books of the Old Testament are all of them in number two and twenty; for so many are the letters of the Hebrew alphabet said to be." It does not include Nehemiah, by name, though probably Athanasius intended it as the "Second Book of Ezra," of which he speaks. He also embraces Baruch, and a work called "The Epistle." Of the Wisdom of Solomon, the Wisdom of Sirach, Esther, Judith, and Tobit, he says, that they are "not canonical indeed, but ordained by the fathers to be read by neophytes." -The list of Cyril‡ of Jerusalem, (A. D. 315-386) has the same contents with our own Canon, except that, like that of Athanasius, it embraces Baruch and "The Epistle." - Epiphanius § of Cyprus (whose death is dated, A. D. 403) includes all the books of our received

* Athanasii Sancti Opera, Tom. i. p. 962. (Montfaucon's edition.) The same which is now appended, as a sixth chapter, to our book of Baruch.

Cyrilli Hierosolymitani Opera, p. 66. (Milles's edition.) § Epiphanii Sancti Opera, p. 19. (Paris edition. 1622.)

catalogue, adding also to the Lamentations of Jeremiah, his "Epistle," and the Epistle of Baruch. On the other hand, the council of Carthage (A. D. 397) decreed as follows;* "It is our pleasure, that, besides the canonical scriptures, nothing be read in the church under the name of divine scriptures. Now the Canonical Scriptures are; Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua son of Nun, Judges, Ruth, two books of Kings, Job, one book of Psalms, five books of Solomon, twelve books of the Minor Prophets, also Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Tobit, Judith, two books of Ezra, and two of the Maccabees." While we here find the titles of some books not approved in later times, we see no mention of Chronicles, and none apparently of Esther. The "two books of Kings" probably embraced what we call the books of Samuel.+

Coming down to Jerome, (who died A. D. 420)‡ and the Talmudists of the fifth century, we obtain evidence of a definitive settlement of their Canon by the Jews.

In his "Prologus Galeatus," Jerome says, that, as there are twenty-two letters in the Hebrew alphabet, so the Hebrews have that number of books;|| and of

* See Lardner's Works, Vol. ii. p. 574, (4to.)

I do not adduce the authority of the 60th canon of the council of Laodicea, (referred to a time near the middle of the fourth century,) the genuineness of that canon being so extremely suspicious. Its list, and for the most part the arrangement, are the same with those of Cyril.

This is the date of his death commonly adopted by ecclesiastical historians. Some writers would place it a year or two earlier, or later. But their difference is not material. See Lardner's Works, Vol. ii. p. 532.

§ This Prologue may be found in the common editions of the Vulgate, prefixed to the version of the books of Samuel and Kings, the first books which Jerome translated. He calls it "galeatus," or "helmeted," because, as he says, being the beginning of his labors on the Old Testament, it may serve as a head to what is to follow."

"Quomodo igitur viginti duo elementa sunt, per quæ scribimus

these he proceeds to give a list, distributing them into three divisions. The first division contains the Law, the five separate books of which he designates by their Hebrew and Greek titles. The second division consists of the Prophets; viz. Joshua; Judges, with Ruth; two books of Samuel, and two of Kings, each pair being reckoned as one; Isaiah; Jeremiah, with Lamentations; Ezekiel; and the book of the twelve Minor Prophets. The third class, he says, is called, Hagiographa,* (holy writings,) and is composed of Job, the Psalms, three books of Solomon, viz. Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Canticles; Daniel; Chronicles; Ezra, in two books, (including our Nehemiah); and Esther. "Whatever," he adds, "does not belong to this list, is apocryphal;" and he specifies as such the books of Wisdom, of Jesus son of Sirach, of Judith, of Tobit, and of "the Shepherd." He elsewhere speaks† of Baruch, and of our apocryphal portions of Daniel, in the same manner. In another place, viz. in a letter to Paulinus, ‡ (computed to have been written about A. D. 396,) he gives a catalogue in all respects the same, except that there are some transpositions of the names of the books.

The same collection of books, which, at the end of the fourth century, had come to be received by Jews as of distinctive authority, to such an extent as to lead Jerome to speak of it in the terms above quoted, is also specified in the Babylonish Talmud.§ In that

Hebraicè omne quod loquimur, et eorum initiis vox humana comprehenditur; ita viginta duo volumina supputantur, quibus quasi literis et exordiis in Dei doctrinâ, tenera adhuc et lactans viri justi eruditur infantia."

* The origin of this viciously formed Greek word is doubtful. It has been ascribed to Aquila, author of one of the versions into Greek. Opera, Tom. v. pp. 261, 567. (Edit. Erasm.)

‡ Ibid. Tom. iii. pp. 7, 8.

§ It is material to observe this distinction. There are two Talmuds, that of Jerusalem, and that of Babylon; the one consisting of the "Mischna" and the "Jerusalem Ghemara"; the other, of the Mischna, and

compilation we find the following catalogue; The Law; The Prophets, consisting of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Isaiah, the Twelve; and The Writings, (D) or Hagiographa, viz. Ruth, Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Lamentations, Daniel, the roll of Esther, Ezra, and Chronicles.

The list of Jerome,* and of the Talmud is the same,

the "Babylonish Ghemara." The Mischna, (or "second law," so highly do the Jews speak of it,) is reputed to have been compiled by Judah Hakkadosh, (or the Holy) who completed his work at some time between A. D. 190 and 220. (See Ugolini Thesaurus, Vol. ii. p. 55; Vol. xvii. p. 263) The Ghemaras, to use Ugolino's language, consist of "discussions and controversies upon the Mischna." That of Jerusalem was published by Rabbi Johanan, in or about A. D. 370. (Ibid., Vol. i. p. 129.) That of Babylon, the work of Rabbi Ase, dates from A. D. 500. (Ibid., Vol. i. p. 131.) Eichhorn, in citing that testimony of the Talmudists, with which we are now concerned, merely dates it with the words "Sec. II.-IV." (Einleitung ins A. T., Vol. i. p. 136), thus ascribing it to some time previous to the year 400; and then refers to the book “Bava Bathra," for authority. The original book Bava Bathra, is part of the Mischna, making the third chapter of the fourth book of that collection. If (belonging to so early a period) the Mischna exhibited the enumeration of Sacred Writings in question, the fact would be of the first importance. But it contains nothing of the kind. The passage is found in the Babylonish Ghemara, in Volume viii., folio 14, page 2, (near the foot,) of Morinus's edition. I give the reference particularly, because this edition, without an index, or any other of the usual aids for examination of its contents, is the only one, to which in this vicinity we have

access.

* No aid is to be derived to our investigation from the versions ascribed to the period between the Christian era, and Jerome's version, or the Vulgate. Of the Chaldee "Targums," or Paraphrases, none but those of Onkelos and Jonathan, embracing only the Pentateuch and the Prophets, can be dated, with any probability, so far back. — The Old Samaritan versions do not extend beyond the Pentateuch. - The Old Italic version (supposing this name, derived from a passage in Augustine, to be rightly applied) is extant only in fragments. Having been made from the Greek of the Septuagint, it is to be presumed that its contents corresponded with those of that collection.-The Syriac version, as exhibited in Walton's Polyglott, (where it was reprinted from that of Paris, with the further aid of four manuscripts,) embraces most of the Apocryphal books; viz. the Third book of Esdras, Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, "the Epistle" of Jeremiah, the Additions to Daniel,

which, at the time of the Reformation, was adopted by the Protestant churches, and to which they have ever since adhered. The Romish church, at the same time, at the Council of Trent, (A. D. 1545-6,) sanctioned that of the Vulgate, which contains, beside the books translated by Jerome, most of those which exist in the Alexandrine Version, they having been preserved in the Vulgate from the older translation, commonly known by the name of the Italic.*

I have urged, at the greater length, the lateness of the period, at which the Jews came to a definitive agreement respecting the Canon of their scriptures, because of the confidence, with which, in our times, a different opinion is entertained. But, before I leave the subject, I would recur, in a word, to the other question, presented in the beginning of these remarks. If, instead of having to refer to the fourth or fifth century for a specific determination of canonical books, we could trace it to the time of Josephus and Philo, or the time of the Maccabees, or of Simon the Just, still that determination would not be authoritative for us; nor would it have a claim to our adoption upon any grounds, independent of the reasons, which we might find to have justified the original arrangement, or of other reasons which might now weigh with our own minds.

On the most impartial and careful estimate, therefore, which I am able to make of the whole evidence, I find myself unauthorized to acquiesce in the prevailing opinion, described in the beginning of this Lecture, respecting a similar and a distinctive authority of thirty-nine and the two books of Maccabees. But the history of that version is obscure, and there is good reason for believing that part of these books, at least, were not in the original "Peschito." See Eichhorns Einleit. in das A. T., § 252.

* Simon, Histoire Critique du Vieux Testament, liv. 2, chap. 11. Horne's Introduction, Vol. i. p. 293.