« PreviousContinue »
Caius, p. 496, who likewise at p. 497, speaks of another sort. of dog, besides the blood hound, that was called Lorarius, a loro quo ducitur, in English the Lyenimer.
In fine, Sir, were we to part with this word trace, we should lose in a manner all the beauty of this passage, whether we read trash or brach before; and if the fornier, which after what has been said, methinks, we ought to do, we should loose even the very basis and foundation of allthe following metaphors; insomuch that I am entirely for retaining it: and I cannot but wish for a conclusion, that our editors would bring a little more learning and a little more knowledge with them, when they undertake the emending of our ancient authors, and would not attempt writing upon subjects which they apparently do not, and must know they do not understand.
Sumite materiam vestris, qui scribitis, æquam
Quid valeant humeri. Certainly, Mr. Urban, some of the mistakes detected above, are of a very gross kind, and must bring an editor to shame.
T. Row. P. S. Should any think, the words for his quick hunting relate to Roderigo, and not to Cassio, the sense then will be, whom I take into my hand on account of his eagerness, and keenness in the pursuit; eagerness being a different thing from staunchness implied in stand the puliing on,
XXXVIII. On the Conversion of St. Paul.
MR. URBAN, THE festival which the church of England keeps in honour of the great apostle St. Paul, is that of his conversion, Jan. 25. which was, in truth, the most extraordinary and the most important passage of his life, as being the source of all his apostolical labours, and consequently of all the benefits which both by his preaching and his writings the Christian world received afterwards from him. The Latin, as likewise the Greek church, commemorate this apostle along with St. Peter on the 29th of June, and several of our
parish churches, as founded before the Reformation, are dedicated to those two apostles in conjunction, and the wake, or feast, is accordingly celebrated on the Sunday next that day. But this is not tlie case with us protestants, for in our calendars St. Peter stands alone on June 29, and the collect, the epistle, and gospel, relate solely to him; and so this feast is understood by Bishop Sparrow, Mr. Wheatley, and the other rationalists, as likewise by Mr. Nelson, in that excellent work of his, “ The Companion for the Festivals and Fasts;" insomuch that we protestants commemorate only one festival in honour of St. Paul, to wit, his conversion, and even this was not admitted into the table of holydays at its first compiling, the reason of which may be seen in Mr. Wheatley*
Now the history of the miraculous conversion of this apostle is related in the ix. xxii. and xxvi. chapters of the Acts, in the first of which places the account is, “ And Saul yet breathing out threatnings and slaughter against the disciples of the Loril, went unto the High Priest and desired of him letters to Damascus to the synagogues, that if he found any of this way, whether they were men or women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem. And as he journeyed he came near Damascus, and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven, and he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And he said, who art thou, Lord And the Lord said, I am Jesus, whom thou persecutest : it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished, said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do. And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice but seeing no And Saul arose from the earth, and when his eyes were opened he saw no man; but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus, and he was there without sight, and did neither eat nor drink, &c.”
It is well known how prone the history-painters are to run into errors and mistakes ; and one very capital they in general have committed in relation to this affair; for I suppose there are very few pieces representing this subject that do not exhibit the apostle and his company on horseback, and consequently that do not make him, when the light so suddenly and so astonishingly shone round him, and he fell to
* Wheatley, p. 196, edit. 1722. 8vo,
the earth, to túmble from his horse. But in all the three narratives above cited, there is not the least foundation for this; on the contrary, I think it very apparent that the apostle was travelling on foot when -this wonderful incident happened; for after he was risen from the ground, and had lost his sight through the intolerable brightness of the light from heaven, his fellow travellers set him not on his own. beast, whether horse or ass, but led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus, a particular which is again noticed, and much in the same words *, in the xxii
. chapter. It is possible, indeed, that this apostle being a Roman citižen by birth, and well educated as he was, might be in somewhat better condition of life than the other apostles, who were chiefly poor fishermen. He was, nevertheless, but a tent-maker, an honest, but a mean course of life; and, as Chrysostom observes, an argument that his parents were not of a nobler and better rankt; wherefore one has no reason to imagine he kept any beast to ride on.
It is true, he carried letters from the High Priest, but these were obtained at his own request, and probably were nothing more than either a warrant to justify him in what he should attempt against the Christian converts at Damascus, or letters of recommendation to the leading men of the synagogues there, notifying his zeal for the cause, informing them who he was, and requiring them to be aiding and assisting him in the discharge of his bloody errand. Nothing is said of the High Priest's sending St. Paul to Damascus, and, in consequence thereof, equipping him: and as to the rest of the travels of our apostle, which make up so large a part of the Acts, we find him often on ship-board, but never on horseback, that I can remember, except when he was mounted by the Roman governor, Acts xxiii. and sent with expedition and secrecy by night to Cesarea. Insomuch, that one cannot but conclude that the apostle not only made this journey to Damascus on foot, but performed all his other excursions the same way, as the first preachers of the gospel commonly did. Of this we have a remarkable instance, in St. Ceada, or Chad, as related by Ven. Bede; his custom was to walk on foot when he
the ministry, though he was a bishop; but Archbishop Theodore, out of tenderness to him, injoined him to ride wlien the journeys were longer than ordinary; and when he saw him rather un
* The word in both places is xençaywyeiro + Dr, Cave in the Life of St. Paul,
willing to indulge himself in that sort, he compelled him to mount on horse-back, by assisting him to do it with his own hand *
Yours, &c. 1763, Aug.
XXXIX. On the Ellipsis,
MR. URBAN, THE author of that late celebrated production, “The short Introduction to English Grammar," seems not to pay sufficient regard to the Ellipsis: thus p. 134, he reckons that for that which to be either improper or obsolete, whereas in fact, it cannot be said to be either. In respect of impropriety, the idioma of language depend much upon the use and custom, which consequently must settle and ascertain what is proper and what not, and he himself has produced three good authorities for that used for that which; which being, as I take it, omitted in this case by Ellipsis. I shall add a few more examples from yarious authors.
“Do ye enquire among yourselves of that I said." Joh. xvi. 19.
“To do always that is righteous in, thy sight.” 3 Collect, morning service.
“Godliness is great riches if a man be content with that he hath.” Communion Office.
“Bake that which ye will bake to day, and seethe that ye will seethe." Exod. xvi. 23. " I am not bound to that all slaves are free to," Othello iii. 5.
Why, that the Moor first gave to Desdemona.” Ibid iii. 7.
“ The gyse, now a dayes,
Skelton, p. 231, in which author there are six other instances besides.
* Bede, p. 144, Edit. Smith,
« For where echelaboureth to breake that the other maketh." Hall, Edw. v. fol. ii. b. And the same author etsewhere.
To the same sense is that in the dance of Machabree. fol. ccxxi. b. “ One man breaketh that another made."
“ Small vaunt to fie that of constraint thou must.” Mirrour of Magistrates, p. 413.
“ The sonne of man hidder cam
Invective against Card. Wolsey.
“ The king resolved to put nothing like restraint upon his commissioner, from effecting that he wished might be done to-morrow if it could be.” Lord Clarendon's Life, ii. p. 107. The usage, as appears from these instances,
instances, and no doubt an hundred more might be produced, is in a manner universal; and yet, as must be confessed, this way of speaking is just the contrary of these in Latin :
“ Quod tibi non vis fieri, alteri ne feceris.
Quod factum fuisse non debuit, factum valet." where the pronoun demonstrative id inimes, being understood in the relative, for the full or plenary locution, I presume, should be id quod, whereas in the English idiotism, which I ain here endeavouring to establish, the relative is omitted, as being understood in the pronoun. That, in many, or most of these instances, corresponds with what, as will appear by substituting this word in its place*, But something should be said, at least, about obsoleteness, for though the expression may not be improper, yet perhaps it may be obsolete and out of date. Now to try this, I will introduce a common expression or two which every body will allow to be current English at this day; of a bad man it.is usual to say, he has been guilty of all that's bad. As on the contrary, of a man of worth, he has been a follower of all that's great and good. And so we should say, without scruple, of a finished drunkard, he died by that he loved.
Yours, &c. 1763, May.
* See the Short Intrud ction, l. C.