go on their journey. Nor can it reasonably be ohjected to this interpretation that we do not read in the Books of Moses that the Israelites worshipped idols in Egypt. For Moses has not related all that happened to them there or in the desert, other circumstances being recorded in other Books of the Old Testament. But that the Israelites had worshipped idols in Egypt, is clear from Ezek. 20, 7. 8, 24. which passage exceedingly confirms the present interpretation.

40. ποίησον ἡμῖν θεοὺς οἱ προπορεύσονται ἡμῶν. By Oeol are meant images of Gods, and Grotius observes that the Egyptians (as we learn from Jambl. and other writers) held the opinion that there were various degrees of gods, and that by the inferior even the superior attrahi in simulachra [by which, I suppose, he means were drawn to worship them. Ed.]: and therefore, he says, the plural is put here and in Exodus. But I assent to Kuinoel, that as we find Aaron made but one such image, and as in the Hebrew we have, a word of plural form, but singular sense, so here we are to understand only one God, an image of a God.

40. Οι προπορεύσονται ἡμῶν. It seems to have been the custom among the Oriental nations of antiquity, for the images of the Gods to be borne before the people in journeys or military expeditions, or in going out to battle; since they imagined that by so doing they should the more effectually enjoy their guidance, protection, and support. See Numb. 10, 33. compared with Deut. 31, 8. 1 Sam. 4, 3. 2 Sam. 3, 21. and Wesseling on Diodor. Sic. 20, 65. (Heinrichs, Krause, & Kuin.) I know not what Markland means by saying, "There is something foolish and absurd in the very expression, make us Gods who shall go before us. Stephen undoubtedly intended it as a sneer!"-Davus sum, non dipus.

40. ὁ γάρ Μωϋσῆς οὗτος — τι γέγονεν αὐτῷ. Here we have an idiom common both to the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, nay, even the modern languages,

namely, an Anacoluthon (as says Beza) or (as Piscator, Grot., Wolf, and Kuinoel contend) an antiptosis or enallage of case, by which the nominative absolute is put for the dative (τῷ Μωϋσεῖ τούτῳ οὐκ oldaper TI VÉDovey*). It is, in translating, filled up by a quod attinet ad "as for," &c. The idiom seems to be of Oriental origin. For, as Valcknaer observes, the Eastern writers are accustomed to place nominatives absolute at the beginning of sentences. For examples see Glass Phil. p. 68., Bos Ellips., Wetstein, and Valcknaer.

41. éμooxoдоinσα. This word is, by the Sept., (like many others) so formed as to express by, one compound word two simple Heb. ones (namely by wy). The nouns (city) and (bullock) are used promiscuously. (Grot. & Deyling Obss. p. 4, 425.) When Moses had departed, and the cloud was no longer discovered, unless, perhaps, on some peak of Mount Sinai, the Israelites thought that Moses was dead, and that God was no longer pleased to give them laws, but left them liberty to form some for themselves. (Le Clerc on Ex. 33, 1.) Now since they had seen that divinities were by the Egyptians worshipped under certain forms and images, they were induced to use a golden, or gilt, calf, or ox, for a symbol of the true God (compare Ex. 33, 5.); wherein they transgressed the express commandment of God, not to worship Him under any image. (See Exod. 20, 4.) Under the figure of Apis (who was a bullock), we may observe, the Egyptians worshipped Osiris, who formerly was an Egyptian king, and was supposed to have invented or introduced agriculture, horticulture, &c. That the ox, which, among the ancients, was a symbol of agricultural labour, was, to the Egyptians, a symbol of Osiris, we learn from Plut. de Is. & Osin, p. 366. On the worship of Osiris by the Egyptians Tibull. 1, 7, 27. says:

* This is better than making it, with Markland, a mere elliptical sentence, to be filled up thus: οὐκ οἴδαμεν τι γέγονεν αὐτῷ (ὃς ἐστιν) ὁ Μωϋσῆς οὗτος, ὃς ἐξήγαγεν, &c.

Primus aratra manu sollerti fecit Osiris, Et teneram ferro sollicitavit humum, &c. See also Herodot. 3, 27. seqq. Plin. H. N. 8, 46. Selden de D. Syr. 1, 4. Bochart Hierog. P. 1. L. 2. C. 34. Jablonski Panth. Ægyt. t. 1. p. 122 & 258. seqq. Braun Select. Sacr. 388. Deyl. ubi supra, and Munthe in loc. (Kuin.) Bp. Pearce, however, maintains that this was not in imitation of Apis, whom they had worshipped in Egypt. "It may (continues he) be made to appear highly probable, that Apis was not known in Egypt so early as when the Israelites were there. See Sir Isaac Newton's Chron. C. 2. on the Empire of Egypt. But however that was, we read in Exod. 12. 12. & 18, 10, 11. and Numb. 33, 4. that the Israelites were brought up out of Egypt in opposiion to the Egyptian gods, and with their destruction and therefore it seems very plain that the Israelites did not make this calf, which they said. (Exod. 33, 4.), was the God which brought them up out of the land of Egypt, in imitation of any of the Egyptian gods, which, as they knew, their God had at that time destroyed."

41. καὶ ἀνήγαγον θύσιαν τῷ εἰδώλῳ. Ανάγειν signifies properly to bring up, lay upon, and is, in the Hellenistic writers, used to denote laying the victim on the altar, which was always raised (hence Bapòs and altare, which denote this). This form of speech seems derived from the Hebrew; since we find

.offering in Judg עדלה to raise followed by העלה

6, 26, 2 Paral. 39, 21. Hence it is found in Philo and (as are many other words and phrases of Oriental origin) in Herodot. 2, 60.; as also in Heliodor. (10, p. 457.), himself an Alexandrian writer. But this will not prove it to be, properly speaking, a Classical phrase.

41. καὶ εὐφραίνοντο ἐν τοῖς ἔργοις τῶν χειρῶν αὐτῶν, i. e. " they celebrated sacrificial feasts to the idol, and rendered to it the homage due to God only. For εὐφραίνεσθαι, which properly denotes to indulge oneself in hilarity, is applied specially to religious

feasting and rejoicing. See the note on Luke 15, 24. and compare Exod. 32, 6. where the words are descriptive of a feast day.

42. ἔστρεψε δὲ ὁ Θεὸς, καὶ παρέδωκεν, &c. Commentators are not quite agreed on the sense of eorgeye, which De Dieu, Glass, Morus, Dindorf, Pearce, Rosenmuller, and others, closely connect with Tapéowkey, and assign to it (by a sort of Hebraism) the force of an adverb, as rursus. But to this it is justly objected that we do not read of the Israelites having before worshipped the stars. There seems more reason (with others) to regard the expression as elliptical. Krebs would supply yuny, and Loesner τρόπους ; though he thinks that ἔστρεψε may be put for eorpán, since verbs active have often a passive sense. He might have added a middle or reflective one; in which case there is an ellipsis of autò: and, indeed, verbs signifying to turn, are, in almost all languages, used either in an active or neuter, passive or reflective sense. So that ἔστρεψε may be rendered, " turned himself." But the context and the circumstances of the case oblige us to understand this of turning away, aversion, &c. and therefore I assent to the interpretation of the Syr., Casaub., Beza, Pisc., Grot., Hammond, Doddr., Wets., Krause, and Kuinoel, aversus est: thus becoming (says Beza) from a kind Father, a righteous Judge. Now turning the face from is a common Hebraism denoting aversion. Therefore the words may be thus paraphrased: " turned himself from them, and suffered them to be polluted with idolatry and vice."

42. Παρέδωκεν αὐτοὺς λατρεύειν τ. σ. T. 0. As a punishment, and in order (as Doddridge observes) to visit one sin by letting them fall into another, the Almighty permitted them to be more and more enslaved to superstition and idolatry; insomuch that they worshipped the stars. Παρέδωκεν is well rendered in our English Version gave them up. Here Kuin. observes (from Glass Phil. S. 234.)

that the Hebrews and all the Eastern nations often used active verbs in respect of those who are not authors of any action, but only give occasion for the commission of it, at least do not hinder it. "Besides (continues Kuinoel) the Hebrews attribute whatever happens in the world, even though it be only by the permission of God, to His operation and agency. See Ez. 20, 25. Rom. 1, 24. where see Kopp. Παρέδωκεν has therefore been well explained by Chrysostom and Theophylact elare, suffered, permitted. Grotius observes that this is not to be referred to the time in which they were in the desert, but after that period.

42. Στρατιᾷ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, in the Sept. answers to the Heb. 8 in 2 Paral. 33, 5. Jer. 19, 13. 33, 22. where the stars only are meant, and in 1 Kings 22, 19., where it signifies angels. In the former sense it is used by Philo: ex. gr. de Op. M. p. 27 & 38. (cited by Wets.) of ye μyv πhávytes, y y' ἀντίῤῥοπος στρατιὰ τῆς τῶν ἀπλανών. & 806 D. (cited by Loesner) ἀναβλέψασα εἰς αἰθέρα εἶδεν ἥλιον καὶ σελήνην καὶ πλανήτας καὶ ἀπλανεῖς ἀστέρας, τὴν ἱεροπρεσα τὰτην οὐρανὸν στρατείαν. It is also found in Luke 2, 13. where see the note. I add Arrian Exp. Alex. 7, 20, 1 & 2. λόγος δὲ κατέχει, ὅτι ἤκουεν Αράβας δύο μόνον τιμᾶν θεοὺς, τὸν Οὐρανόν τε καὶ τὸν Διόνυσον τὸν μὲν Οὐρανόν τὲ αὐτὸν ὁρώμενον, καὶ τὰ ἄστρα ἐν οἱ ἔχοντα τὰ τε ἄλλα καὶ τὸν ἥλιον, ἀφ' ὅτου μεγίστη καὶ φανοτάτη ὀφέλεια ἐς πάντα ἥκει τὰ ἀνθρώπεια. Διόνυσον δὲ, κατὰ δόξαν τῆς ἐς Ἰνδοὺς στρατίας.

42. καθώς γέγραπται ἐν βίβλω τῶν προφητῶν, i. e. the twelve minor prophets, which, it seems, were usually bound in one volume. (See Sir. 49, 10.) And yet that it was sometimes otherwise we may gather from Luke 4, 17, (Zieger, Pisc., Pearce, & Kuin.) The passage is from Amos 5, 25.

42. Μή σφάγια καὶ θυσίας προσηνέγκατέ, &c. The interrogation (like the Heb. .) is itself to be taken negatively. For (as Rosenmuller truly observes), in the passage of Amos, the interrogative,