which are; not assumed (as we have assumed them) by à priori conceptions, but demonstrated as existing facts, should be much insisted upon in establishing a theory of the progressive development of holy scripture. The deficiency we have noted may be easily supplied in that new edition of Bible Studies which we sincerely hope will soon be demanded. Mr. Titcomb will then have the opportunity of revising his book. We would just hint that its size might with advantage be diminished. Suggestion rather than exhaustion should in such a book be the author's aim. Now and then the attempt to get a great deal out of a chapter or book results in a failure. For example, under the head of "What was taught by divinely appointed Institutions," in a certain part of the book of Genesis, we are told, that "There was only one new appointment; viz., Circumcision. "The church's subjection to God. "2. As a seal of the covenant-it taught: "Confidence in God, "Responsibility of man." It might be fairly objected, that did Circumcision teach "God's love for children," it must, by parity of reason, have taught that such love was only shewn towards one sex. We are reminded of the good old commentator Whately, who set himself the task of drawing lessons from the virtues and vices, the good and bad fortunes, of the actors in the histories recorded in the book of Genesis. When he comes to Potiphar, he rejoices in the text afforded him for a sermon against gluttony, inasmuch as that belly-god would trust Joseph with everything in the household establishment, except the master's dinner; "himself must look to that." Further, it would be well that when, in tracing the progress of development, any doctrine had been shewn to have been fully received at a certain period in that progress, incidental references to it of a subsequent date should not be especially noticed. We desire to know what new teaching the church at any given time was receiving, not of what old truths it had retained the knowledge. The author does not always clearly distinguish between the knowledge of the sacred writer and that of the people about whom he writes. Occasionally there is the confusion of the narrative with its subject-matter, that which pertains to the narration with that which belongs to the thing narrated; that which is in verbo, and that which is in re; and thus the progress of the historical development is obstructed. It would, of course, be too much to expect, that in a book like Bible Studies, all parts should be equally well executed. It has struck us that Mr. Titcomb has been peculiarly happy in his treatment of some of the Psalms. The book of Proverbs is, on the whole, well explained. We transcribe some of Mr. Titcomb's comments on the first twentyfour chapters of that book : "Following the course which I have pursued hitherto, and regarding it as a fresh development of inspired teaching to the church, I think we may safely say, that we have found as yet nothing at all comparable to it. Up to this point we have had to do with histories and poems; but we have never yet met with anything approaching to a treatise on ethics. Like every other new form of divine teaching, however, it appeared exactly in its proper place. The author, the time, and the situation of the church, alike combined to make it do so. We must remember that, unlike any former period of Israel's history, the nation was now in settled peace. Before this it had been in a state of perpetual transformation; wandering in the wilderness; fighting for its very existence in Canaan under Joshua; disorganized by its own weakness under the Judges; revolutionized by the introduction of monarchy under Samuel and Saul; and distracted by civil and foreign wars under David. But now a long respite from the scourge of war had left the people time to cultivate the arts of peace and the study of moral philosophy. An extended commerce with Phoenicia, Arabia, Persia, Syria, Ethiopia, and perhaps India, was also extremely likely to import into Palestine very false notions respecting morals. It became, therefore, of the utmost importance that God should provide his people with correct teaching on these points. The more they were traversing the globe, and mixing with men of other countries and religions, the more they evidently required instruction in the foundation of virtue, and the great principles that regulate moral conduct. For which purpose nothing was better suited than short sententious sayings, or striking aphorisms, which could be easily retained in the memory, and carried away wherever they went; nor would any author have been found more suitable for such work than Solomon, to whom the Lord had especially granted a miraculous outpouring of wisdom. "These remarks will place the Proverbs of Solomon in their right connection with the times and the people, and illustrate God's watchfulness in meeting the wants of his church by means so admirably adapted for the purpose." And again, in commenting upon those chapters which he relegates to the sixth. epoch, as he designates the time B.C. 964-721: "I shall not say much upon the contents of these chapters, because they speak best for themselves. I cannot but remark, however, that they were published by Hezekiah with peculiar fitness, considering the times in which he lived. What, for instance, could have been a better reproof to the old admirers of his father Ahaz, than the caution of chapter xxx. 6, not to add to God's word ?' It had been their peculiar sin to make all kinds of idolatrous additions to the commands of the law. Was not this, then, truly a word spoken in season? Again, what could have been more desirable for Hezekiah's successors than those strong and admirable injunctions delivered in chapter xxxi. 3—9, on the subject of royal temperance, chastity, and justice? Or than those wise observations on the welfare of states, in which the general laws of national prosperity and ruin were laid down with all the precision of divine truth? Had these principles of political economy been really followed by the remaining kings of Judah, how much misery would have been avoided! But alas! as we have already perceived, though God taught them, they refused to be instructed. And here, again, we see how admirably they were addressed in their hardheartedness by such a saying as that in chap. xxxix. 1. Could anything have been more pointed in its rebuke ? Could anything have better seconded the warning voice of the prophets? And so with respect to the nation at large. Each moral maxim touched on some general vice; every incentive to virtue was intended to counteract some prevailing evil. Hence these proverbs were as thoroughly adapted for the times, as if Solomon had written with a foreknowledge of them." Mr. Titcomb has, we think, dealt wisely and judiciously with the difficult question touching the book of Job. We agree with him in considering that the arguments preponderate in favour of its early date. More precisely he states his opinion that the history of Job was "in all probability. . . . exactly contemporaneous with that of Israel in Egypt." He further states : "As for myself, I concur in the opinion of the late Professor Lee, that the contents of this book were found by Moses during his sojourn in the land of Midian, before the exodus of Israel from Egypt; that all the metrical portion of it was probably composed by Job himself after his restoration to the divine favour; and that the Lord directed Moses, by express revelation, to add a short historical preface and conclusion to it, in order that he might take it back to comfort the Israelites under their cruel persecution." But we demur to his treatment of the celebrated passage, "I know that my Redeemer liveth," which he gives up too readily, we think, as an anticipation only of Job's vindication in this life. We demur, too, to the reasoning by which he would disprove the argument of Bishop Warburton in favour of the late date. Mr. Titcomb remarks that, "Bishop Warburton maintains that the term Satan' was never used to describe the evil spirit till after the Babylonian captivity, when it appeared in 1 Chron. xxi. 1, and Zech. iii. 2. Hence he dates the composition of this poem at that time. But this argument cannot be held; for the word is found in the earliest Hebrew writings. Thus the angel that opposed Balaam is said to have acted the part of Satan, or an adversary against him, Numbers xxii. 22. The expression also occurs in one of the Psalms of David, Psalm cix. 6." Now it is not disputed that "the word is found in the earliest Hebrew writings." The question is, rather, how far the word is to be understood in its general sense of enemy; how far in its restricted or specific sense of the great adversary, the accuser of the brethren. There is, of course, the same ambiguity which attends the use of the word diáßoλos in Greek; or, to come nearer home, fiend, in English. No one would assert that in the Greek testament diáẞodos always signifies the great accuser. And so, in like manner, it is impossible to maintain that in the Old Testament Satan must always signify the great adversary. Of course, it may be said that the use of the article designates the proper name. But it should be remembered, that in 1 Chron. xxi. 1, the article is omitted. With the book of Job should be compared or contrasted that of Ecclesiastes. And on turning to Mr. Titcomb's remarks on that great work of the aged monarch of Israel, we confess to some feelings of disappointment. Few books of the Old Testament better repay earnest study than that most unaccountably neglected book of the inspired Preacher. We have been much pleased with the manner in which Mr. Titcomb has treated some of the books of the minor prophets. But we could wish that he had distinguished more clearly between the development to be observed in their moral and religious teaching, and that which is to be noted in the gradually fuller and more distinct shaping of their predictions. And further, we could wish that he had pointed out with more particularity the limits of those two great streams of prediction which, running throughout the sacred canon of the Old Testament, gain more distinctness and brighter colouring, with greater definiteness of margin and form, as they approach nearer towards the time of their fulfilment. It is especially interesting to observe how, in the prophetical volume, the predictions respecting the Messiah become gradually more and more definite and distinct. The vague promise to a nation is given in clearer form to the tribe. The family of David are then pointed out as the family from whom the Hope of Israel should spring; and as the rays of prediction converge, does the pencil become brighter and narrower, until its rays find their convergence in the brightness of the cross of Christ. Sed hæc hactenus; we must now take our leave of Bible Studies, heartily thanking Mr. Titcomb for the pleasure and advantage we have derived from his book. It is less trouble to criticise a good book than to write it; and, with Portia, we "can easier teach twenty what were good to be done, than be one of the twenty to follow" our own teaching. LORD JOHN RUSSELL'S LIFE OF CHARLES JAMES FOX. Life of Charles James Fox. By Lord John Russell. 2 Vols. London: Richard Bentley. 1859. THE greatest events of modern history are the American war of independence and the French revolution of 1789. The former laid the foundations of a new world; the latter tore up the foundations of an old one. Political events in general, following the law of nature in things material, diminish in size as they recede in distance. These are an exception. After almost a century, they are still gaining in importance. We are daily made to feel that we have never yet measured them in their full extent. Their consequences the world is even yet only beginning to feel. They will soon form a barrier, like that thrown up by the fall of Rome, between two kinds of history. Everything beyond them will be obsolete; living, stirring history will date from the period of these two convulsions. In shaping the character of these vast and singular events, whether for good or evil, England played no unimportant part. The American revolution was our own doing. That of France is indebted for some of its strongest features to the course we took in resisting it, and protecting ourselves against the contagion of its principles. The wisdom, and indeed the justice, of our conduct in both instances is still under litigation in the high court of the chancery of nations. And it is not to be concealed, that both at home and abroad there have been many, not ill-qualified to judge, who always gave their voice against us. Of these Charles James Fox was the most eminent in his own times; as his biographer, Lord John Russell, is in ours. We are not surprised to hear that the volumes before us meet with but a cool reception. For if the views of their noble author be correct, they are a sad review of national errors committed on the grandest scale. And though we may admit the justice of the correction, neither nations nor individuals can be expected to shew pleasure when their failings are exposed. The historian has no higher office, the political biographer no more useful, no more honourable pursuit, than, when retracing the policy of a past but not forgotten age, he points out, in a kind and patriotic spirit, those flaws and darker spots which self-love and national pride are industrious to conceal. We confess we think the work before us one of great value upon this account. Lord John Russell writes, of course, with the predilections of the Whig party, of which he has been for so many years a leader. He writes, too, with a warmth of feeling for the great statesman whose political biography he undertakes, with which few perhaps will fully |