THAT we place these Dissertations, which are very numerous, in some Order, we shall range them under the Titles belonging to them, which have some relation to the different Passages of Genesis that these Dissertations or Treatises illustrate.
Upon Genesis, and Moses the Author of this Book.
An Author, whose Name we are not acquainted with, has written two Dissertations upon the Beginning of Genesis, and another upon the Original of the Law of Nature, in Latin, at Mastricht, 1713, in 4to. There is a large Fund of Erudition in this Work, but nothing singular in it: The Genius of the Author is seen by his Arguments; and as to the Style, the frequent Repetitions of the same thing are so tedious to the Reader, that he is less affected with what is so often represented to him, and cannot, without Difficulty, keep up his Attention.
Upon Moses, the Author of the Pentateuch, and consequently of Genesis, see what has been written by R. Simon, le Clerc, Hobbes, Spinoza, &c. F. Alexander, F. Frassen, M. Dupin, &c. and in particular Solomon Deyling’s Observationes Sacræ, tom. 1.
Moses vindicatus, seu veritas historiæ creationis mundi, adversus Burnetii Archæologias Philosophicas. This Work, printed at Amsterdam, in two Volumes in 4to. or rather in 12mo. 1694, is by John Graverol of Nismes, a Calvinist, and Minister of the French Church at London, who died in 1694. In this he produces Proofs for the History of the Creation, agreeably to what Moses says of it.
Joan. Henr. Hottingeri Historiæ Creationis Examen. Heidelburgæ, in 4to. 1659. This was printed a second time at Zurich, 1663, in 4to. and at Heidelburg, a third time, in 1672, after the Author’s Death.
He was of Zurich, born in the Year 1620, taught the Oriental Languages at Heidelburg; and going to Leyden, was cast away, in 1667, in the 47th Year of his Age. His Reputation was so great, notwithstanding his being a Calvinist, that the Learned wrote to him from all Parts, to consult him: He wanted nothing but Moderation and Accuracy in his Works; for, as Simon says in his Critical History, he was too hasty in composing them. Jacobi Martinii, seu Eliæ Faddelii Disp. de primo creationis triduo, apud Cren. Fasc. 4. This Piece had been before printed at Wittemberg in 1654, in 4to. together with his Pentas Quæstionum Biblicarum ex Genesi.
He was born at Halberstadt in 1570. was Lutheran Professor at Wittemberg, and died there in 1649, in the 79th Year of his Age.
Melchior Leidecker published an Archæologia Sacra, wherein he sets out the History of the Creation and Deluge, according to Moses, against Burnet: It is at the End of his Commonwealth of the Hebrews, at Amsterdam, 1704, fol. He is particularly known for his History of Jansenism, was a Calvinist of Zealand, and was still living in 1721.
James Hasæus has also treated of Moses and the Pentateuch, in his Philological Library, tom. 6. p. 769, 895. He was a German Lutheran, and lived in the Beginning of the seventeenth Century. This is all that he has written, and the only time that we shall speak of him.
Eusebii Bohemi Quæstiones Biblicæ de luce primigenia, in Crenius’s second Fasciculus. This had been printed at Wittemberg in 1625, in 4to. The Author was a German of Misnia, and a Lutheran.
John Leonard Heubner has a Dissertation on the Chaos mentioned by Moses, at Wittemberg, 1701, in 4to. We shall take notice of another Piece of his in another Place. He was a German, and a Lutheran, and lived in the Beginning of the 18th Century.
John Meisner treated of the Creation, in a Book printed at Wittemberg, 1652, in 4to. De luce primigeniâ, ibid. 1662, in 4to. De Proto Evangelio, ibid. in 4to. Of the Confusion of Languages, and other Treatises, which we shall take notice of hereafter.
He was of Saxony, and Professor at Wittemberg. He died a Lutheran, in 1681. He has also published Controversial Works, whereof M. Dupin has made a List in his Tables, tom. 4. p. 762. He calls him Misnæus.
Andrew Virginius has a Theological Disputation upon the Creation, printed at Derpt, 1647. We shall speak of this Author again upon the Psalms.
He was a German of Pomerania, a Lutheran, and Professor at Derpt in Livonia. He died in 1664.
John-Andrew Van-der-Meulen wrote Philological Dissertations upon the first and second Chapters of Genesis, relating to the Creation of the World, at Utrecht, 1713, in 4to. He was a Hollander, and a Calvinist. He was still living in the Beginning of the 18th Century.
John Nicolai, a German Lutheran, Professor of Antiquities in the University of Tubingen, who died in 1708, wrote a particular Dissertation upon the Name of Alpha, given to Moses. It was printed at Leyden, 1703, in 16to. in Latin. The Author’s whole Design is to vindicate the Hebrew Legislator from Helladius’s Ridicule of this Term which is applied to him. It is in his Chrestomathy, whereof Photius made an Extract, and it may be said that the Sieur Nicolai has succeeded well enough in his Design.
For he makes this Surname Alpha turn to the Honour of Moses; 1. In that he was distinguished by his natural Beauty, and the Lustre which God communicated to him upon his Descent from Mount Sinai. 2. Because he was the Head and Conductor, the Master and Teacher of his People. They who have excelled in their way, and been at the Head of others, have been often called by the Name of the first Letter in the Alphabet, Alpha. 3. Moses’s Meekness may have been the Occasion of giving him this Name, which is an Epithet appropriated to Sheep and Oxen, the gentlest of all Beasts. 4. His having been Mediator between God and Men, and honoured several times with a familiar Conversation with God, may have been Reasons for this Appellation.
These latter Etymologies are taken by Nicolai from the Arabic. It appears from this little Piece that he was not unacquainted with the learned Languages. From Moses he passes to Jesus Christ, who in the Revelations is called Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last. The Sequel of this Work leads to some Reflexions, which might have their Place here; if we were not apprehensive of being too long.
Royal History, or Questions upon Genesis in general, in the way of Letters; dedicated to the King, by Nicholas de Hauteville, a Paris Doctor, at Paris, 1665, in 4to. 1666, ibid, three Vols, in 4to. and 1667, 2 Vols. in 4to. A Work of very little Use: The Title, however, imports that he handles in it the most curious Questions of the Sacred History. He was a Frenchman by Nation, and Canon of St. Peter of Geneva.
Nicolai Abram de opere sex Dierum, in his Pharus, whereof we have already said something, Lib. 1.
Upon the Terrestrial Paradise.
Mosis Bar-cephæ, Commentarius de Paradiso, printed at Antwerp, 1569, in 8vo. John Masius translated it into Latin; It was printed afterwards in the Bibliotheca Patrum, tom. 17. of the Lyons Edition, p. 458, 500, in the Great Criticks of the Amsterdam Edition, 1698. and in the Supplement of 1701, at Frankfort, tom. 2. p. 327. Dupin has given the Analysis of it in his Bibliotheque Ecclesiastique, the Tenth Century, p. 12.
Bar-cephas was by Nation a Syrian, and wrote his Treatise in the Syriac Language. He died in 914. He repeats frequently the same thing; which Defect is corrected by Masius in his Latin Translation.
Thomæ Malvenda, de Paradiso voluptatis, at Rome, in 4to. 1605. This Treatise, small as it is, is more esteemed than all that he has published in five Vols. in fol. on the Scripture. This is M. Dupin’s Opinion, who has made a pretty large Abstract of it, tom. 1. of the Seventeenth Century, p. 262.
He was of Valentia in Spain, born in 1565, turned Dominican, and died in 1628, at 63 Years of Age. He was a great Genius, was Master of abundance of Learning both Sacred and Prophane, had a solid Judgment, a great Memory, and very vigorous Health, in a small, but nervous and well-set Body. He went to the bottom of every thing he handled. He was often a little diffuse.
Georgii Gasparis Kirkmaier, Dissertatio de Paradiso, Arcâ Noe, Diluvio, &c. in Crenius’s Fasciculo quarto. This Dissertation was printed at Wittemberg in the Year 1662, in 4to. The Author was a German Lutheran, and a Philosopher. He died in 1700.
Joannis Hopkinson, Descriptio Paradisi, in Crenius Fasc. 2. This Description was printed at Leyden in 1594, in 4to. and in the Great Criticks, tom. 10. p. 845.
This Treatise, taken out of several Authors, is short, but judicious and well written in Latin, tho upon a Subject on which it is difficult for any one to express himself in this Language. He has shewn, as Dupin thinks, that he understood Hebrew, and had read the Rabbins.
He was an Englishman, lived about the End of the sixteenth Century, taught the Oriental Languages, and spent his last Years in composing this Work.
Joannis Markii Hist. Paradisi. We have spoken of this Author on the Pentateuch. He has illustrated the History of the Terrestrial Paradise in four Books, printed at Amsterdam, 1705, in 4to.
Joannis Frischmuth, Proto-Evangelium Paradisiacum. This was printed at Jena in 1675, in 4to. We meet with it in the first Tome of the Thesaurus Philologicus, together with other Dissertations, to the number of fifty-six, put out by the same Author. We shall speak of them in another Place.
Nicolai Abram, de Fluviis, & loco Paradisi, in the 3d Book of his Pharus. He is of opinion that Paradise was in Palestine.
Solomon Vantil had a learned Dissertation upon Paradise, printed at the End of his Comment upon Malachi, wherein he confutes M. Huet’s System in a very solid manner. No one indeed has treated this difficult Subject with more Accuracy and Care. His Dissertation is divided into three Books, with an Addition. The first contains an exact Description of ancient Mesopotamia, and the neighbouring Countries of Syria, which were watered by the Euphrates; that is to say, of Comagena, Cyrrhesta, and Palmyra, of Assyria, Chaldea, and the Lands of Cush and Havilah. The last Chapter of this Book determines the Position of the Country called Eden: The second Book treats of the Rivers of Paradise, of the Euphrates, Tygris, Pison, Gibon, and the River of Eden. These two Books explain the Oriental Geography more than had been done hitherto, the Knowledge whereof is so necessary to the understanding Scripture. The third Book examines the several Opinions concerning the Situation of Paradise; and the Author having first confuted all besides, proposes his own in the last Chapter. The Addition is nothing but a large Comment upon the Description of Paradise included by Moses in seven Verses of the Second Chapter of Genesis.
The Author in this whole Work shews as much Reading, and more Critical Skill than in his Comment upon Malachi; and we may say, without flattering him, that his Dissertation deserves a distinguished Place among the most curious and useful Compositions. We shall speak of him upon Malachi.
M. Huet’s Dissertation was written first of all in French, and printed at Paris in the Year 1691, afterwards in Latin, with Augmentations, at Lipsick, 1694, in 12mo. and at the End of his Demonstratio Evangelica, ibid. 1694. in 4to. at Amsterdam, 1701, in 12mo. Lastly, in the Supplement to the Great Criticks, tom. 2. p. 737. The Author in this Dissertation endeavours particularly to find the true Situation of Paradise. We shall have occasion to say more of him in another Place. See his Title in the Index.
F. Hardouin, in his new Edition of Pliny the Elder, tom. 1. p. 359. has inserted a curious Dissertation on the same Subject, wherein he shews the Agreement of this Pagan Author with Moses, relating to the Situation of Paradise. As to what concerns him, see his Title in the Index.
M. Mallement, in the Letter abovementioned, Article VI. treats likewise very largely of this Matter. Herein he enquires after the true Situation of Paradise, and endeavours to fix it precisely. We mention this learned Author in several Places.
All that we can say after so many learned Writers, is, that altho’ Moses has described the Situation of Paradise with the utmost Exactness, yet the Change which has since happened to the Places that he speaks of, and our Ignorance of the ancient Geography, have so darken’d his Description, that no Critick has hitherto been able absolutely to clear it. This perhaps is the obscurest Place of the whole Scripture; and by this Obscurity has given occasion for the greatest Diversity of Opinions. The best of it is, that it is a Point which we are at liberty to think of as we please. The Fathers agree in nothing thereupon, the Church has never decided any thing about it, and every one may speak his Thoughts of it.
Upon the Tree of Life, and the Serpent the Seducer.
Ziegra’s Dissertation upon the Tree of Life was printed at Wittemberg, 1679, in 4to. and is to be found in the Thesaurus of Theological Dissertations, tom. 1. as well as in Crenius’s Fasciculus, together with Chemnitius’s Disputation, which had been printed at Jena in 1687, 4to. the third Edition, and four others on the same Subject, ibid. 1679, in 4to. the second Edition. They were both Germans, and Lutherans, and lived almost at the same time.
Thomas Crenius, in the Beginning of his Fasciculus, has inserted a particular Exposition on God’s Command to Adam and Eve, permitting them to eat the Fruits of all the Trees in Paradise, but forbidding them to touch the Tree of Life. This Treatise was printed at Leyden, in 2 Vols in 8vo. He was a German Lutheran, and lived in the Beginning of the 18th Century.
Joan. Frischmuth, de Seductione Serpentis antiqui. This Treatise does not differ from his Proto-evangelium, whereof we have taken notice above.
Cornelii Paschii, de Serpente seductore. This Dissertation was printed at Wittemberg, 1687, in 4to. and in the Thesaurus of Philological Dissertations, tom. 1. He was a German Lutheran.
Andriæ Tillimanni Rivinii, Serpens iste, antiquus seductor & seductus, wherein he follows the Sentiments of the Jews and Christians. It is printed at Lipsick, 1686, in 4to. the second Edition. He too was a Gera German Lutheran, and Professor of the Hebrew Tongue. He died in 1692.
Ryftius’s Work of Man’s Dispute with the Serpent, was printed at Antwerp, 1519, in 8vo. F. le Long takes no notice of this Piece.
To these we may add John Frimel and Christopher Wegleitter, both German Lutherans, who wrote upon the same Subject. The Dissertation of the former is in the first Tome of Philological Dissertations; the latter’s Treatise was printed at Altorf in 1697, in 4to.
Statius Erhenberger wrote a Dissertation on Man’s Delusion by the Serpent, printed at Helmstadt, 1684, in 4to.
On Adam and Eve.
John Nicholas Hardschmidt wrote a Dissertation upon Adam’s Sleep; De somno Adami divinitus immisso; printed at Strasburg, 1700, in 4to. and another which we shall speak of upon Kings. He was a German Lutheran, and Professor at Strasburg in the Beginning of the 18th Century.
George Lanus wrote of Adam’s Rib; De Costâ Adami. This Dissertation was printed at Lipsick, 1687, in 4to. and George Frederick Heupel has a Disputation concerning the Creation of Eve out of Adam’s Rib; De creatione Evæ ex Costâ Adami; printed at Wittemberg, 1690, in 4to. These two Authors were German Lutherans, and lived about the End of the 17th Century.
John Gezel put out Adam’s Nomenclator, containing the different Names given by him to Animals, printed at Abo in 1667, in 4to. He is of Denmark, and a Lutheran Bishop.
Christiani Frederici Sinneri, de nuditate primorum parentum, in the Lipsick Miscellanies, tom. 1. in 8vo. F. le Long had no Knowledge of this Work. The Author was a German Lutheran, of the seventeenth Age.
Julii Bartolocci, de peccato originali, secundum Rabbinos, in his Bibliotheca Rabbin. tom. 2. p. 43.
Salom. Deyling, in hæc verba Genes. 3. 8. Cum audissent vocem Domini perambulantis in Paradiso, in tom. 3. of his Observationes Sacræ, which we have already spoken of.
John Helvicus Willemerus, his Disputation, De Tunicâ Adami pelliceâ, was printed at Wittemberg, 1680, in 4to. It relates to the Coat of Skin made by the first Man for the covering his Nakedness. It is likewise in the Thesaurus Dissert. Theol.
Michterleim’s Dissertation de Tunicis pelliceis, or Nuchterleen’s, as F. le Long calls him, is not in the first Tome of Philological Dissertations. Both were German Lutherans, and lived towards the End of the 17th Century.
Joan. Fromme de Cherubim & gladio flammante, in the Thesaurus of Philological Dissertations, tom. 1. It had been printed at Wittemberg, 1670, in 4to.
John Francis Buddæus has an Hypothesis, De Cherubim Paradisiacis, printed in the Observations of Hall, tom. 10. Observat. 11. We shall speak of both these Authors in another Place. See their Title in the Index.
Deyling, in Gen. 4. 7. Sub te erit appetitus tuus, tom. 3. Obs. Sacr. c. 3.
The Desiderium Gentium confessione Evæ, by Henzel, was printed at Wittemberg, 1676, in 4to. and in tom. 1. of the Philological Dissertations. The Author was a German Lutheran of Silesia, who lived about the End of the 17th Century.
Helvicus has joined his Proto-Evangelium Paradisiacum with his Desiderium Matris Evæ, both printed at Giessen in 1613, in 4to. 1620, in 8vo. and in the Great Criticks, t. 8. p. 54, 82. M. Dupin has given us the Analysis of them, in his Bibliotheque des Heretiques, tom. 2. p. 52. He was of Sprendlingen in Germany, born in 1587, was Lutheran Professor at Giessen, and died in 1617. If we believe Crow, he distinguished himself by his Learning.
Hasæus’s Proto-Evangelium was printed at Bremen, 1691, in 4to. and in the same Thesaurus of Dissertations. He was a German, a Calvinist, and Professor towards the End of the 17th Century.
There are also three others who have put out each their Proto-Evangelium, namely, Christian Langius, a Lutheran of Saxony, who died in 1657. His Disputation was printed at Lipsick, 1641, in 4to. Christian Korthold’s at Kiel, 1678, in 4to. We shall speak of him in the Article upon Numbers: And Martin Troste’s of Wittemberg, 1631, in 4to. He has likewise published, Depulsio nebularum falsæ Interpretationis, ibid. He was a German of Westphalia, a Lutheran, and died in 1631.
Peter Carbo wrote a Treatise on these Words, Ipsa conteret caput tuum, at Prague, 1580, in 8vo. He was a German, of the Carthusian Order, and died in 1590.
John Berthold, a Lutheran, towards the Close of the seventeenth Century, wrote upon the same Subject. His Book was printed at Helmstadt, 1703, in 4to.
Abraham Coster, a Flemish Calvinist, in the Beginning of the seventeenth Century, pretends that this Passage should not be understood of the blessed Virgin, at Leyden, 1614, in 8vo. Nicholas Hughes has likewise put out the Proto-Evangelium Paradisiacum, at Coburg, 1633, in 4to. He was a German Lutheran, and lived in the Beginning of the 17th Century. This is all that he has written.
John Himmel put out a Piece under this Title, The first Gospel proposed to our first Parents in Paradise; upon Gen. iii. 15. It was printed at Jena in 1618.
Martin Gejer has also treated of the First Gospel, in his Works, whereof we shall say something upon the Psalms, in the Article of General Protestant Commentators.
Herman de Hardt wrote a Letter upon this Subject, printed at Helmstadt, 1705, in 8vo. We shall speak of him in another Place. There has been something written against him. See Liebentants.
Samuelis Andreæ, De Salute Adæ, in the Thesaurus of Philological Dissertations; separately at Marpurg, 1678. He wrote another Dissertation, upon the Burial of the first Man, printed ibid. in 1679. He was a German, a Calvinist, and Professor of Eloquence at Marpurg, about the Year 1680.
Harving, or Philippus Bonæ Spei Abbas, has also treated of Adam’s Salvation, in a Discourse which we find in p. 345 of his Works, printed at Doway, 1621, in fol. We shall speak again of him, upon Solomon and the Canticles.
F. Alexander has written a Dissertation on the same Subject, which is the third in the first Tome of his History of the Old Testament, p. 73. It is against Tatian and the Encratites. We speak of him elsewhere. See his Title in the Index.
Upon all the Apocryphal things which are said of Adam, see Fabricius’s Codex- Pseudepigraphus, printed at Hamburg and Lipsick, in the Year 1713, in 8vo. It contains all the fabulous Stories that have been told of him, and the spurious Pieces which have been attributed not only to Adam, but to all the old Patriarchs. It had been better, in my Opinion, to have left this sort of Writings in Obscurity, which deserve so little to be published, and can inform us of nothing besides the Extravagancies which the Mind of Man is capable of, when it is left to itself. Fabricius has done the same for the New Testament, and when we come to it we shall say more of him.
Thomas Sherlock has written a Dissertation upon what the Ancients before Jesus Christ thought concerning the Circumstances and Consequences of Adam’s Fall. It is at the End of a Book entitled, The Use and Intent of Prophecy, printed at London, 1726. Upon Cain and Abel, Enoch, Seth, and Nimrod.
John Fecht has put out Critical, Philological, Historical, and Theological Notes upon the History of Cain and Abel, at Rostoch, 1704, in 4to. He was a German Lutheran, Minister-General at Rostoch in the Beginning of the 18th Century.
John Adam Osiander has treated of Cain and Abel’s Sacrifice, at Tubingen, 1678, in 4to. He too was a German, born at Vayhing, and died in 1697, a Lutheran. See upon the Pentateuch, where we have spoken of his Works.
Deyling is not the only one who has treated of the City built by Cain; with him we must join Frederick Gotter, a German Lutheran, of Altembourg in Misnia, who printed his De Henochia Urbs prima, at Jena, 1705, in 4to.
Paul Stockman wrote likewise a Dissertation upon Cain, printed in the Thesaurus Dissert. Phil. tom. 1. He too was a German and a Lutheran. See upon St. Matthew.
John Andrew Dantz has one likewise upon the Name of Cain, ibid. and printed at Jena, 1682, in 4to. He was a Lutheran, Professor of the Oriental Languages at Jena, about the close of the 17th Century.
Nicholas Langius has treated on Cain’s Discourse with Abel, and with God; this was printed at Wittemberg, 1695, in 4to.
Others have written only on the Mark fix’d on Cain; namely, John Pasch, at Wittemburg, 1685, in 4to. Christian Neubaur, at Erfurt, 1673, in 4to. Paul Stockman, in the Thesaurus Dissert. Philol. tom. 1. And John Christian Ortlob, at Lipsick, 1701, in 4to. to which he has added Cainus non desperans ejusque vindiciæ, ibid. 1706. All these Authors are German Lutherans, of the 17th Century, as well as the following Authors.
Drusius’s Dissertation upon the Translation of Enoch, was printed at Franekar in 1615, 4to. and in the Great Criticks, tom. 8. p. 2029. He examines in this Piece, whether Enoch be dead or alive?
Augustus Pfeiffer has a Philological Dissertation on the same Subject, printed at the End of his Comment upon Obadiah.
Adrian Vanvesebe, a Flemish Calvinist, has treated of the Life and Death of Enoch, at Amsterdam, 1698, in 8vo.
Andrew Keiler has put out the History of Enoch, at Wittemberg, 1702, in 4to. See upon the Psalms.
John-Philip Pfeiffer has a Dissertation on the Murder committed by Lamech, at Koningsburg, 1670, and in Tom. 1. of the Philological Dissertations.
John-William Hilliger has also a Treatise entituled, Homicidium & vindicta Lamechi, at Wittemberg, 1673. and in the first Tome of Philological Dissertations.
F. Alexander, in his fourth Dissertation, speaks of the Polygamy of Lamech.
John Michael Langius wrote a Disputation, de primâ Sethitarum cognominatione, at Altorf, 1705, in 4to. Another upon the Murder committed by Lamech, ibid. 1700. in 4to. and a third upon Nimrod the Hunter, ibid. 1706. in 4to.
George-Henry Gortzius, and John Christopher Uden, German Lutherans, have treated of Cain’s Salvation, printed by the last, at Helmstadt, 1682, in 4to. As to the first, see his Title in the Index.
See also our Dissertation upon Enoch and his Book, before our Comment upon the Epistle of St. Jude.
Ægidii Strauchii, De columnis Sethianis, apud Cren. Fasc. 3.
Upon these Pillars, see Josephus Antiq. Lib. 9. c. 2. Fabric. Apocryph. vet. Test. p. 139, 148, &c. and the Authors there cited.
Upon the Præadamites, and long Lives of the Patriarchs.
Upon the Præadamites, see la Pereira, and Bayle’s Dictionary, under the Article Pereiræ; and M. Simon, Tom. 2. of his Epitres Choisies, Letters 1, 2, 3, 4.
See likewise Vossius of the Seventy Interpreters, George Stramer, Bartholemew Crodelbach, upon the same Præadamites; Christopher Engelka, Præadamitismi incrustati examen, 1707, and Abraham Calovius.
The first Author of the Opinion that there were Præadamites, was Isaac de la Peirere of Bourdeaux, born a Calvinist, but afterwards converted. He died with the Fathers of the Oratory near Paris, 1677 in the 80th Year of his Age. His Work was printed in Latin in Holland, 1655. He employed 30 Years in bringing it to perfection. He was attacked immediately by a great number of Adversaries, who are these following.
John B. Morinus, of Ville Franche, and Doctor of Phyfick, was one of those who undertook to confute him. His Book is in 16to. printed at Paris in 1656, under this Title, Compendiosa refutatio erronei ac detestandi Libri de Præadamitis. The rest may be seen in Lipenius’s Biblioth. Theol. tom. 2. & Phil. tom. 2.
Samuel Desmaretz among the Calvinists took up his Pen likewise, and in 1656 published a Book, in 12mo. at Groninguen, entitled, Refutatio fabulæ Præadamiticæ.
The Work of John Conrad Danhaver, entitled, Præadamita Utis, that is to say, Nullus Nemo, or Fabula primorum Hominum ante Adamum conditorum explosa, at Strasburg, 1656. in 8vo. It is a Dialogue, wherein he introduces two Persons speaking under borrowed Names. It contains near 600 Pages. It deserved very well to have been taken notice of by F. le Long, with the other Works of this Author. See his Title in the Index.
What Philip Priorius has performed under the Name of Eusebius Romanus, is a Letter wherein there are Remarks upon the Book of the Præadamites, addressed to Peyrere himself. It was printed at Paris in 1658, which F. le Long was not acquainted with, since he takes no notice of this Author. He was a Frenchman, and died in 1680. He was a Catholick, and is particularly known for his learned Notes upon Tertullian, Optatus, and St. Cyprian.
The Work of John-Henry Ursinus, Lutheran Minister at Ratisbon, tho’ by Birth of Spire, who died in 1666, or 1662, was printed at Frankfort in 1656.
Anthony Hulsius published the No Præadamite, printed at Leyden, in 1656. He was a Fleming, a Calvinist, and died in 1685.
John Hilpertus’s Book, is an Enquiry, printed in 1656. at Amsterdam. He was a Lutheran of Franconia, and died in 1680.
Caspar Dornavius, Mathusela vivax seu de causis longævitatis Patriarcharum Thes. Theol. Philol. tom. 2. p. 974. This Dissertation was printed separately at Frankfort, 1619, in 4to. wherein the Author examines how the first of Mankind came to live so long. He was a German Lutheran, and a Physician, in the Beginning of the 17th Century. Morhof says of him, Diligens fuit in nugis, sed eruditis.
He was not the only one who wrote upon this Subject; long before him Engelbert, a Benedictine Abbot, in 1297, composed a Book which is among D. Bernard Pez’s Anecdotes, tom. 1. Part I. p. 429. His Work contains one and forty Chapters, wherein he examines this Matter to the bottom.
Among the Lutherans, Godfrey Sprotta has a Dissertation printed at Lipsick, 1668, in 4to.
Lewis Roger wrote an Examination of F. Tournemine’s Conjecture on the Difference of the Hebrew, Samaritan, and Greek Texts, concerning the Years of Patriarchs: This is in French, in the Memoirs of Trevoux, 1703, sect. 140. We shall speak of the Author in the Article upon Isaiah.
Upon the Giants, otherwise called Nephi- Hieronymi Magii de Gigantibus. Paris. Comelin. 1603, in 4to. This Dissertation is also in the eighth Fasciculus of the Historical and Philological Works in 12mo. 1697. at Rotterdam. He was an Italian, taken by the Turks and strangled in 1572. Thuanus speaks much in his commendation, in his Account of Transactions in the Year 1568. They who have spoken of him, call him, Librorum Helluo, a De-vourer of Books; an Expression denoting his passionate Love of Study.
Jacobi Boulduc, de Ecclesiâ ante Legem, l. 1. c. 2, 8, 9, and 11. and l. 3. c. 2.
Anonymi Exercitatio de Nephilinis Gigantibus vulgo dictis contra Jacob. Boulduc. Thomas Bange is the anonymous Author who wrote this Latin Exercitation against F. Boulduc, in answer to what he had published against the Existence of them. It was printed at Copenhagen in 1652. The Author was of Finland, and a Lutheran. He died in 1661. Chassagnon de Gigantibus; or rather, Joannis Cassanii de Gigantibus, contra Joan. Gorop. Becanum, at Basil, 1580, in 8vo. and at Spire, 1587, in 8vo.
Goropius, in his Origin of the City of Antwerp, printed at Antwerp, 1580, in fol. the second Edition, and larger than the first, spoke of Giants; and as he de-nied that there ever were any, John Chassagnon wrote a Book against him. This Person is very little known; but Goropius is in great Reputation. He was born in Brabant, in 1518, and died in 1572, at the Age of 53. Justus Lipsius styles him, Ingenium acre, facile, felix.
Antonius Terillus, de termino magnitudinis & virium in animalibus, in his Mathematical Problems, printed at Parma, 1660, in 12mo. He was an Englishman, of Dorchester; but a Catholick, and a Jesuit.
Athanas. Kircher, Mundi Subterranei, l. 8. sect. 2. c. 4. Father Kircher, in the Place cited by us, p. 56, 64, pretends to prove, that there were Giants, by Bones of a prodigious size found in Caverns.
Voetius, Vol. 1. Disput. de creatione, parte 8. p. 704.
Matthew Hiller wrote likewise, De antiquâ Gigantum gente & sedibus ex Genesi, at Tubingen, 1701, in 4to.
John Christopher Keisewetter made a Disputation concerning Giants, at Jena, 1694, 4to.
John Frederick Rachneé has examined when Giants first appeared, and how long they continued, at Lipsick, 1704, in 4to.
Andrew Senner has an Historical and Philological Dissertation on the same Subject, 1663, in 4to. They were all four Germans, and Lutherans. They lived about the Close of the 17th Century.
See our Dissertation upon Giants, printed in the Collection of our Dissertations, in 4to. at Paris.
A True History of the Giant Theudobochus, at Paris, 1613, 8vo. and the Works published at that time for and against the Existence of Giants, by Guillemot, and Halicot, both Paris Surgeons.
Item, John Riolan’s Gigantomachy, and Gigantology, Paris, 1613, 1618, in 8vo.
Upon the Ark, Deluge, and Rainbow.
Joannis Buteonis, de Arcâ Noe, in Criticis Sacr. Buteo, or Beutel, speaks of the Form and Capacity of the Ark in a geometrical Manner: This Piece is among his Geometrical Works, printed at Lyons, 1554, in 4to. and since separately, in the Great Criticks, tom. 8. p. 83. This is looked upon to be a learned and laborious Composition. The Author was of Vienne in Dauphine, a Monk of St. Antony, and not St. Antonine, as we read in F. le Long. He died of Melancholy for want of Books, in 1564, of his Age 75.
Matthæi Hosti Inquisitio in fabricam Arcæ Noe in Critic. This was printed at Frankfort, 1575, in 8vo. and at Leyden, 1695, in 4to. two Vols. together with his Treatise of Weights and Measures; since that in the Great Criticks, tom. 8. p. 104. He was a German, and a Lutheran. He died in 1567, at not above 25 Years of Age.
M. le Pelletier of Rohan, concerning Noah’s Ark, at Rohan. His Dissertation was printed in French in 1700, 8vo. and M. Dupin has given us a long Extract of it in his Bibliotheque of the 17th Century, tom. 7. p. 53. He was of Rohan, and died in 1711. being only a Layman, and a Merchant.
John Philip Hein has Critical Observations on the Thickness of the Covering of the Ark; in the Literary News of 1716, p. 139. He was a German Lutheran, and may be still living.
Arias Montanus whom we have spoken of upon the Polyglots, has written a lite-ral Description of the Ark. It is the 6th Book of his Jewish Antiquities, printed in the eighth Volume of his Polyglot, and afterwards, in the Great Criticks of England, tom. 8. p. 606.
John Bec, in Latin, Becius, has treated of the Deluge and Noah’s Ark in Flemish, at Arnheim, 1640. He was a Flemish Calvinist, and flourished about 1640. There is a Letter of his among those of some Protestant Divines, written in 1606, with an Answer, p. 168.
George Mæbius put out a Discourse under this Title, Arca Noë conservatrix generis humani. at Lipsick, 1686, in 4to. and among his Theological Disputations, ibid. 1694, in 4to. He was a German Lutheran, born at Lauche in Thuringe, a Lutheran, Professor at Lipsick, and died in 1697, in the 81st Year of his Age. Fabricius speaks of him and his Works in the History of his Library, tom. 5. p. 372, -74. We shall mention him again upon Exodus, and in other Places.
Among the Ancients Venerable Bede put out an Allegorical Explanation with the Figure of the Ark, which he supposes to be thirty Cubits high, and three hundred in length, in the second Tome of his Works, p. 350. of the Basil Edition. We have said something of him in the Article of General Commentators.
Hugh de Saint Victor gives us only a Mystical and Moral Description of it in tom. 2. of his Works, p. 286, of the Roan Edition. We have spoken of him, ibid.
Jerom Savonarola wrote Discourses on Noah’s Ark, printed at Venice, in 1536, 1580, and upon other Books of Scripture. See Exodus, and the following Articles.
Upon the Deluge, see Isaac Vossius, de ætate Mundi, p. 283.
Some have treated in particular this Subject: Christopher Reuchelin wrote a Philological Dissertation upon it, printed at Wittemburg, 1684, in 4to.
Abraham Vander Myle has written upon the Universality of the Deluge, at Geneva, 1667, and at Hall 1705, in 8vo.
John Moller has an Enquiry, de formâ & quantitate anni Diluviani, at Frankfort 1652, in 8vo.
George Kirchmaier put out a Description of the Deluge, together with what he wrote upon the Terrestrial Paradise.
William Bonjour has discoursed of the Time of the Deluge, in his Select Dissertations.
Yves Gukes made a Physical, Geometrical, and Theological Dissertation on the Deluge in thirty Articles, in the Philological Library, tom. 4. p. 798.
Michael Christian Tieroff, put out the Sacred and Profane Deluge, at Jena, 1672. We shall speak of his other Works infra. He was a German Lutheran, and lived about the End of the 17th Century.
In the Memoirs of Trevoux for 1724, we have some Thoughts upon the Deluge, by Dom Hugonet. He endeavours particularly to find out from whence the prodigious Quantity of Water could come which overflowed the whole Earth. We have spoken of him upon Genesis.
There was a Latin Dissertation upon the Deluge printed at Geneva in 1667. in 12mo. It is divided into Eleven Parts, with a Corollary, which may be taken for a Twelfth. In the first the Author produces all the Passages of Scripture, and the several Reasons which establish the Universality of the Deluge. In the second he explains philosophically how this Universality was possible, and how so great a Deluge could cease. In the third, he proposes the Doubts which People might have concerning the Universality of it, and mentions a great number of Passages, as well as Conjectures, which seem to favour them. In the fourth, he examines what Part of the Earth would have been overflown, supposing the Deluge not to have been universal. In the fifth, he proves, by many Authorities, that Man at that time inhabited only some particular Country; and from thence concludes, that there was no Necessity for its being universal. In the sixth, he brings other Proofs to shew that the whole Earth was not inhabited before the Deluge. In the seventh, he maintains that a great Part of the Earth, tho’ not the whole of it, was overflowed. In the eighth, he explains the Term Universality applied to the Deluge, as meaning that the whole Earth which was inhabited was overflowed. In the ninth and tenth, he answers the Objections which are offered against this Opinion. In the eleventh, he enquires where Enoch was at the time of the Deluge, and believes the Place where he was, to be different from Paradise where Adam was created.
He finishes his Corollary with submitting his Dissertation to the Judgment of the Learned. He calls himself a Child of God, Son of the Church, and a declared Enemy to new Opinions.
Another Anonymous Author of the seventeenth Century put out the History of Noah, and the universal Deluge explain’d by the Fathers of the Church, and the Interpreters of Holy Scripture, at Paris, 1687, in 8vo. in French. They who handle one and the same Subject, do not acquit themselves equally well of their Undertaking; every one follows his own particular Genius and Taste. He whom we are speaking of studies only how to put a Spiritual and Moral Sense upon things. His Work is divided into three Books, and every Book into several Parts. He does not begin to treat of the Ark and Deluge, which are his principal Subjects, till he comes to the second, and here he lets loose abundance of ridiculous and low Conjectures. The preceding Book contains only Matters of Morality, which are very foreign to his Purpose. He concludes the third with the Confusion of Languages.
F. Alexander, in his Ecclesiastical History of the Old Testament, has written a Dissertation particularly upon the Ark and the Deluge. It is the tenth, p. 106. of tom. 1. divided into five Articles. In the first he shews that the Ark, such as Moses describes it, might contain Beasts of every kind: In the second he speaks of the mystical Signification of the Ark: In the third, he proves that the following Words of Genesis, And his days shall be a hundred and twenty Years, should be understood of that Space of Time which God allowed Men for Repentance before the Deluge, and not as relating to the Duration of Man’s Life: In the fourth, he treats of the Universality of the Deluge; and in the fifth, of the eternal Damnation of those who perished in the Waters.
D. Petit-Didier spends the second and third Section of his seventeenth Dissertation in speaking of Noah, the Ark, and Deluge. It is no more than an Abridgment of all that others had said thereupon before him. He follows Buteo particularly as the best: He answers the Objections of the Præadamites against the Universality of the Deluge.
The terrible and just Vengeance which God had taken on the Sins of Mankind by such an universal Deluge as spared nothing, engaged him to give some certain Mark, as an Indication that his Wrath was appeased: To this End he chose the Rainbow, which subsisted before the Deluge, but was appointed by God afterwards to be the Sign of his Reconciliation. Some have asserted, that it did not appear till after the Deluge: Others have maintained the contrary.
Solomon Deyling has explained himself hereupon pretty fully, in his Sacred Observations, tom. 1. to whom we may add the generality of the large Commentators.
George Albert Hamberger, in his Academical Dissertations, printed at Jena, 1708, in 4to. has made one upon the Iris, or Rainbow. It is divided into four Chapters. In the first, he sets forth the principal Phænomena of this Meteor, which are thirty-three in number. In the second, he establishes the Principles designed for the explaining these Phænomena. In the third, he endeavours to account for all these Phænomena. In the fourth, he decides the Question, Whether the Rainbow appeared before the Deluge, or since only by a particular Miracle.
He is at no trouble about what Side he is to take in this Dispute. He is persuaded that this Effect is purely natural, and that the same Cause which produces it now, produced it before the Deluge: That God proposed it to Noah, not as a miraculous Effect, capable of encouraging him against the Fears of a second Deluge, but only as a remarkable Sign, and therefore the more proper to renew the Promise which God had made this Patriarch; that the Rainbow is almost always attended with Rain, the Scourge made use of by God in punishing Mankind. In every thing which he here sets forth, there is nothing said by him but what is well supported with Arguments, and discovers great Learning.
Upon Noah, and his Sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
Nicolai Abram, S. J. de Benedictionibus Noe, l. 3. Phari V. T. item, l. 5. With him we may join Bernard Gosman, who has a Dissertation relating to the Blessing of Shem, printed at Rostoch, 1657, in 4to.
On the contrary, John-Philip Olearius has made one upon the cursing of him, at Lipsick, 1707, in 4to.
Abraham Calovius has also treated of Noah’s Prophecy concerning the Tents of Shem, at Wittemberg, 1702. the second Edition, in 4to.
John Busch put out a Dissertation on the sweet Savour of Noah’s Sacrifice, at Wittemberg, 1683, in 4to. and in the Thesaurus Dissert. Philol. tom. 1. These were all German Lutherans.
F. Alexander is almost the only one who has written a Dissertation on Noah’s being drunk: It is the third in his second Age of the World, p. 146. tom. 1. of his Ecclesiastical History. With him we should join Calovius, who in his seventh Disputation speaks de Noe retecto. See the Article upon Lot.
Fabricius, in his Codex Apocryphus V. T. produces every thing that has been ascribed to Noah and his Sons. 1. His preaching to Mankind, and exhorting to Repentance, that they might appease the Wrath of God, before the Deluge happened, in Greek and Latin, p. 234, 239. 2. The Prayer he used every Day in the Ark with his Wife and Children. 3. The Precepts he gave them when they left the Ark, p. 244. 4. His Will, ibid. p. 265. 5. The Seven Precepts of the Sons of Noah.
F. Alexander, ubi supra, has also written a particular Dissertation on these Precepts, p. 143. with his Comment. We have mentioned them likewise in our Comment upon Genesis.
Upon the Tower of Babel, the Confusion of Languages, and transplanting of Nations.
We referr’d ourselves to this Place to speak of F. Kircher’s Work on Noah’s Ark, because of its relation with that concerning the Tower of Babel; both one and the other were printed with his Oedipus Ægyptiacus, at Amsterdam, 1673, 1675. in three Vols. fol. In the first he shews what was the real Structure of the Ark, in the last he treats of the Life of Man after the Deluge, of the building of the Tower, Confusion of Languages, and the transplanting of the several Nations.
Kircher was of Fulda in Germany, born in 1602, turned Jesuit, went to Rome, and died there in 1678, and the 76th of his Age. Morhof, in his Polyhistor, speaking of the last Work, says it is Operosum opus plenum iconibus; and for the Author he calls him Centum Doctor artium.
Joachim Columbus has likewise discoursed concerning the building of this Tower, in Latin, at Koningsberg, 1675, in 4to. He was a German Lutheran.
Conrad Dieterricus, in his Antiquities of the Bible, speaks of this, p. 116, and the Division of the Nations, ibid. p. 128. We shall have occasion to say something of him in another Place.
John Joachim Zentgravius, another German Lutheran, who died in 1707, has also a Latin Disputation on this Tower, at Wittemberg, 1674, in 4to.
Abraham Pungelar has put out several Dissertations on this Subject; at Herborn, 1710. in 8vo. He was a German, and Calvinist, and lived in the Beginning of the 18th Century. He was born in 1679. made Doctor at Franekar, in 1701. His other Works upon the Scripture are mentioned in the Philological Library, Tome 5. p. 166.
See our Dissertation on the Tower of Babel, in the Collection of our Dissertations, in 4to. tom. 1. Nicolai Abram, de divisione Linguarum.
Salom. Deylingii, de Babelis origine, & confusione Linguarum, tom. 3. Observ. Sacra. c. 4.
Joan. Buxtorfii, de Confusione Linguarum, Basil, in 4to. This is Buxtorf the Son, who in his Dissertations on the Hebrew Tongue, speaks of the Confusion of Languages, at Basil, 1645, in 4to. We shall say more of him elsewhere. See his Title in the Index.
Joan. Meisner, de confusione linguarum Babylonica. What Meisner has written on this Subject was printed at Wittemberg, 1664, in 4to.
Georg. Dav. Ziegra, de Confus. linguarum. His Dissertation was printed at the same Place, 1679, in 4to.
Christ. Crinesii, de Confusione linguarum apud Cren. Analecta. This was published at Nuremberg, 1629, in 4to. The Author was a Lutheran of Bohemia. He died in 1629. With this Piece we may join Frederick Vic, who wrote Philological Dissertations upon the Confusion of Languages, at Wittemberg, 1654, in 4to. See below, in the Article upon Joseph.
John-Andrew Quenstedt has written on the Mixture of Languages, at Wittemberg, 1656, in 4to. See upon Exodus.
The Confusion of Languages, which happened while the Tower of Babel was building, has given the Criticks an Opportunity of enquiring, Which was the First, and most ancient of all Languages.
Joan. Buxtorfii, de Linguæ Hebrææ, antiquitate & origine, at Basil, 1645, in 4to.
Henrici Kippingii, de Linguâ primævâ, in Crenius’s Analecta, printed at Amsterdam, 1699, in 8vo. He was a German, and a Calvinist.
Joan. Vorstii, de lingua omnium primâ: This must be in his Miscellanea Academica, or in his Sacred Philology, which we shall mention in another Place.
Stephani Morini Exercitationes de Linguâ primævâ ejusq; Appendiciis. Ultrajecti, in 4to.
Gasper Calovius has treated of the Origin of Languages in his Work entitled, The Glory of Moses. See lower.
Our Dissertation on the First Language, in the Collection of our Dissertations, tom. 1. p. 1.
Abraham Mile wrote of the transplanting People and Animals into all Countries of the World, after the Deluge, in Latin, at Geneva, 1667, in 12mo.
Although it is the Author’s principal Design to shew how this Transmigration happened, he nevertheless goes back as far as the Original both of Men and Beasts. His Treatise turns particularly upon this; and though in itself it be very small, there is a great deal of Study and Learning discernible in it.
As to what relates to the Original of Men and Beasts, he speaks at first like a Philosopher, of their Creation, and that of the World, and confutes those who have believed it to be eternal; whereupon he says some very curious things, and shews the Conformity between the Opinions of the ancient Philosophers, and what Moses has written concerning the History of the Creation.
He proceeds afterwards to the Transmigration, and enquires, with great Accuracy, what the first Country was which Mankind inhabited, without ever departing from what Moses has said of it. He is the faithful Guide whom this Author follows continually. He enlarges much upon the Deluge, the Descendants of Noah, and the Land of Ophir. Lastly, he examines, how it was possible for Men to disperse themselves from their first Habitation, which was Asia, into Africk, America, and Europe. This with regard to Terrestrial Animals seems to him most difficult to explain. However, he endeavours to untie this Knot, and shew how it was practicable.
He concludes this Work with informing us, that he was seventy Years of Age when he finished it, and thanks God for having given him Strength enough, both of Mind and Body to put the last Hand to it. Upon Sacred Geography, Tarshish and Ophir, &c. see the Article of Geography.
Upon Cainan the Son of Arphaxad.
There were three of this Name, who are mentioned in Genesis; one, who was the Son of Enos, about whom there is no Difficulty; and two others, whom some believe to be the Sons of Shem, or Arphaxad, and others have improperly inserted in the Greek Text of the Septuagint.
James Usher’s Dissertation upon Cainan, printed at London, 1655. together with his Syntagma lxx. Interp. and afterwards at Lipsick, 1695, in 4to. It is likewise in the Great Criticks, tom. 9. p. 400. He asserts that there was one only of this Name, the Son of Enos, and that the other was added to the Sacred Text.
Frederic. Spanheim. de eodem, Dub. Evangel. Dub. 23. We shall speak both of him and his Work, in the General Article of the New Testament.
As to Usher, he asserts there was but one of this Name, viz. the Son of Enos; that the two others were added in the Sacred Text, because they are not in the Hebrew, nor in Onkelos’s Paraphrase, and much less in the genuine Greek Version. We have spoken of him in the Article of Various Readings.
F. Alexander is one of those who is most copious on this Point. What he says in his fourth Dissertation of the second Age of the World, tom. 1. p. 148. wherein he asserts, that Cainan is spurious, or added to the Text. This likewise is the common Opinion.
Upon Abraham, Melchisedech, and Lot.
The same F. Alexander, ibid. p. 156. has a Dissertation upon the Year of Abraham’s Birth. It is the sixth of the second Age, p. 54. where he maintains that he came into the World when his Father was already 130 Years old.
Upon the Patriarch Abraham, see St. Ambrose, and Nicholas Abram, in his Pharus, l. 7.
St. Ambrose’s Treatise which is in the first Tome of the new Edition, p. 282. is more Moral than Critical, according to the Custom of this Father, who studied rather to instruct than to dispute.
Joan. Gotleb & Christ. Wagnirus, de Ur Chaldæorum in Thes. Philol. Wagner’s Piece had been printed before, at Lipsick, 1681, in 4to.
Andrew Sennert, wrote likewise a Philological Dissertation upon the same Country, printed at Wittemberg, 1665. in 4to. And John Sebastian Mitternachius, a Dissertation’s on Abraham’s Name and Country, at Gera, 1661, in 4to.
Mich. Leibentantz, de Terrâ Moriah, & monte visionis Dei. This is a Philological Dissertation, printed at Wittemberg, 1663, in 4to. and in the Thesaurus of Philological Dissertations, tom. 2. p. 895.
Upon the Oath required by Abraham of his Servant, saying, Put thine hand under my thigh, Gen. xxiv. 2. see Joan. Henr. Otto Lexic. Rabbinico-Philolog. Selden. l. 2. de Synedriis, c. 11. Samuel Petit, var. Lect. c. 16. Jac. Perizonius, Præfat in Lib. Maimon. de jure jurando latius reddito à Frider. Miegio. Leid. 1706. 4to. Dan. Fesselius, l. 1. adverf. sacr. c. 4. To those who have written upon Abraham’s Oath, we should add Herman de Hardt, who hath shewn, in a Comment on this Subject, that it was made by this Patriarch’s Wrist, and not his Thigh. His Dissertation was printed at Helmstadt, 1711. He was of Osnaburg, a Lutheran, and was living in 1725. He has the honourable Title given him of Lover of the most remote Antiquity.
John Pitron wrote a Dissertation upon the Degree of Consanguinity between Abraham and Sarah, printed in the Memoirs of Trevoux in 1709, for the Month of June, Article 84. with F. Dauche’s Answer. In this Dissertation Enquiry is made, whether Sarah was Abraham’s Sister, or Niece; the Author believes it to be much more probable, that Sarah was his Sister, which he proves by shewing first of all that she was not his Niece; then he proceeds to a more direct Proof, and undertakes to demonstrate that Sarah was this Patriarch’s own Sister: Lastly, he objects the Authority of the Fathers, who seem to contradict this Opinion, and the Reason borrowed from the Law of Nature, which seems to prohibit Marriage between Brothers and Sisters; and he takes pains to answer these two Difficulties.
They who say Sarah was Abraham’s Niece, prove it from Genesis xi. 29. where it is said, that Haran, one of this Patriarch’s Brothers, left two Daughters. To this he replies, 1. That these two Daughters are called, one Milcah, the other Iscah, and not Sarah. To pretend that the Latter had two Names, is, says he, to assert a Fact without Proof, and propose a Conjecture without having the least Foundation for it. 2. Sarah was but ten Years younger than her Husband, Gen. xvii. 17. Haran was Abraham’s younger Brother, ibid. xi. 26, 27. therefore if Sarah was Haran’s Daughter, Haran must have been her Father at eight or nine Years of Age.
To prove the second Part, he supposes, with St. Austin, and several other Fathers, that Abraham did not lye in affirming as he did, that Sarah was his Sister. Now (says he) both he and Sarah herself had said what was not true, if she had not in reality been so, but had been only his Niece: Abraham says to Abimelech, She is indeed my Sister, and I married her: Verè soror mea est.
To the Authority of the Fathers, he answers, that as to this Point, there is no constant and uninterrupted Tradition; that indeed there is a Respect due to their Authority in Matters of Faith and Morality; but that it is by no means decisive in an Historical Point, and a mere Matter of Fact, so remote from the Time wherein they lived.
To the Argument taken from the Law forbidding Marriages between Brothers and Sisters, he answers, that Marriages of this kind were not prohibited in Abraham’s Time, as he proves by the Example of Jacob, who married two Sisters successively. This we may see at full length, in the Memoirs of Trevoux for the Month of June, 1709, the 84th Article.
Giles Stauchius, a German Lutheran of Wittemberg, who died at Dantzick in 1682, and of his Age 50, wrote upon the Year of Abraham’s Birth and Calling, at Wittemberg, 1653, in 4to. 1661, in 4to. the second Edition; and upon Melchisedech, at Dantzick, 1672. in 4to.
George Frederick Nicheneck, another German Lutheran, of Rostoch, in the Beginning of the 18th Century, made an Exegetical and Polemical Dissertation on the three Angels who appeared to Abraham, at Rostoch, 1707, in 4to.
John Winkelman, a rigid Lutheran of Hamburg, who died in 1626, and the 75th of his Age, wrote a Disputation concerning the Covenant of God with Abraham, at Giessen, 1618, in 4to.
Godfry Jungt wrote an Exercitation on Abraham’s Feast, when he weaned Isaac; at Bremen, 1708, in 4to. See upon Exodus.
Gaspar Sibel has a Treatise, De Sacrificio Abraham; at Daventer, 1637, in 4to. He was of Holland, born in 1587, and died in 1658, a Calvinist Minister of Daventer.
Upon Melchisedech, see St. Jerom’s Epistle to Evangelus, tom. 2. p. 570. nov. Edit. wherein he disputes with an anonymous Author, who asserted, that Melchisedech was the Holy Ghost. He proves that he was really a Man, and perhaps Shem, or some other. He explains how he might be Priest of the Most High, King of Salem, and without Father and Mother.
St. Chrysostom wrote a Treatise against the Melchisedechians, who would have it that Melchisedech was greater than the Son of God. It is an Homily, in the sixth Tome of the new Edition, p. 265.
An anonymous Author of Denmark pretends to trace the two Dignities of Melchisedech, the Sacerdotal and Royal, as high as Japheth his Grandfather. This he does in a Problematical and Historical Essay, printed at Copenhagen, 1710, in 4to.
Joan. Owen, Dissert. de Melchisedecho non Enocho. Amstel. 8vo. John Owen was an Englishman, and Head of the Independents. He died in 1684. He wrote upon the Epistle to the Hebrews, printed in Latin at Amsterdam, 1700. two Volumes in fol. and in English at London, 1688. There are two Letters in the Bibliotheca Philologica, tom 3. p. 879. written on this Subject, to John Owen.
Hugh Broughton, an English Calvinist, who died in 1612. believes Melchisedech to be Shem. See a Treatise printed by him at London, 1591, in English, 4to. and in Latin, ibid. 1596, placed afterwards with his other Works, ibid. 1662. in fol. He was profoundly skilled in the Hebrew Antiquities.
Solom. Deylingii, de persona Melchisedechi tom. 2. Observat. Sacr.
Henry Hulse maintains that Enoch began to revive in the Person of Melchisedech, Enoch redivivus, at Amsterdam, 1706, in 8vo. He was Brother to Anthony Hulse, a Fleming, and a Calvinist, whom we have spoken of above.
James la Peyre, who went also by the Name of Auzotes, a Catholick, who died in 1642, wrote on the Time which Melchisedech lived to; this is an Apology against Salinus, printed at Paris, 1626, in 8vo. Salian replied in his Preface to the fifth Tome of his Annals, and proves against what the other advanced, that Melchisedech is not Enoch.
Matthew Van-Rein has also a Dissertation on what is written of Melchisedech in the seventh Chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews: It is in the second Tome of Philological Dissertations.
Christopher Schlegel put out Questions, which are in the tenth Tome of the Great Criticks, p. 829. Herein he reports all the different Opinions of Authors, and maintains that Melchisedech was really a Man, but an extraordinary one, and raised up by God for the Execution of his Designs. These Writers were both German Lutherans: The last died in 1678.
James Gaillard a French Calvinist, who was living in 1704. made a Treatise to shew that Melchisedech is Jesus Christ himself: This was printed at Leyden in 1686. It is particularly against him that D. Petit Didier wrote a Dissertation purposely on this Subject; it is the eighteenth in the Collection of his Critical Dissertations.
Lastly, Fabricius, in his Codex Apocryphus vet. Test. has published a List of those modern Criticks who have written on it; which may be a Supplement to those whom, for brevity’s sake, we have omitted.
The just Punishment of Lot’s Wife has appeared to be something so extraordinary, that particular Dissertations have been thought necessary in order to a full Examination of it.
Henrici Bauman, de Statuâ Salis. Thesaur. Th. Philol. tom. 1. It was printed also at Wittemberg, 1674, in 4to. the second Edition. The Author was of Misnia in Germany, a Lutheran. He died in 1669.
Joan. Clerici, de Statuâ Salis, ad calcem Comment. in Genes. Ejusdem de Sodomæ & finitimarum urbium Subversione, ibid. Le Clerc, in his Dissertation on the Burning of Sodom, examines, whether there were any Miracle in it, and is of the Opinion which is most agreeable to the Scripture; in the Second, he pretends that Moses’s Words are not to be literally understood; that the Fright only made Lot’s Wife immoveable, and choaked her. We shall speak of this Author elsewhere. See his Title in the Index.
David Constantius, de Statuâ Salis, printed at Lausanne in 1691, in 4to. See upon Exodus.
Joan. Saubert, de eâdem. Whether it be the Father or the Son who wrote upon this Statue we cannot well tell.
Christopher Herman, in his Enquiry upon the Fate of Lot’s Wife, maintains, that there was no Miracle in it. It was printed at Jena in 1706, and 1708, in 4to. the second Edition, enlarged. He was a German Lutheran, and was living in the Beginning of the eighteenth Century. See upon the Gospel of St. John, and the Epistle to the Philippians.
John Laurence Fischer entitles his Work upon this Subject, Statua Salaria, printed at Dantzick, 1680, in 4to. He was a German of Prussia, and a Lutheran, who lived towards the close of the 17th Century.
Cæso Grammius has an Exercitation on the Metamorphosis of Lot’s Wife, at Keil, 1664, 4to.
Isaac Philman wrote a Dissertation, printed at Abo, a City of Sweden, in South Finland, 1707, in 4to.
Michael Tieroff speaks also of it, in his Disquisitio de Sacris Judæorum vinculis, printed at Jena, 1657, in 4to.
See our Comment upon Genesis, ch. 19. 2d Edition.
Upon Circumcision enjoined Abraham.
We make elsewhere a particular Article of Circumcision considered as a Sacrament among the Jews, and in all its Circumstances; here we shall speak of it in general only, and very succinctly, to avoid Repetitions.
Julii Bartolocci, de Circumcisione, t. 3. Bibl. Rab. p. 468.
Jacobi Interbuch, an pueri Hebræorum non baptizati aliquo modo salventur. This Author was a Carthusian of St. Saviour’s near Erfurt.
Salom. Deylingii, de origine Circumcisionis, t. 2. Observ. Sacr.
Zachary Grapius compos’d an Examination, wherein he enquires, whether Circumcision was transmitted from the Egyptians to Abraham? at Rostock, 1699, in 4to.
Sebastian Schmid has proved it to be the first Sacrament of the Old Law, in his Exposition of the seventeenth Chapter of Genesis, at Strasburg, 1661, in 4to.
Harman Vander-Hardt has put out a Prodromus upon Circumcision, at Helmstadt, 1700, in 8vo.
Andrew Coler, wrote upon the same Subject, against Lightfoot, at Kiel, 1688, in 4to.
Daniel Lundius published a Dissertation at Upsal, 1709, in 8vo. and John Scherzer a Treatise to the same Purpose; at Lipsick, 1655, in 4to. These were all Lutherans or Calvinists.
Upon Isaac, Esau, Jacob, Rachel, and Leah.
John George Baier, who was a Lutheran of Germany, wrote a Disputation on the sweet Scent of Esau’s Cloaths, at Altorf, 1705, in 4to.
That it may be well understood what this agreeable Smell was, and what these Cloaths were, it is necessary to say something concerning Esau’s Right of Seniority, and see wherein particularly it consisted.
This we have very well explain’d by M. Petit-Pied, in his learned Treatise relating to the Rights and Prerogatives of Ecclesiasticks in the Administration of Secular Justice. In this he shews, from a Passage out of St. Thomas, that the Honour of the Priesthood, joined with a lawful Authority, which was a sort of Magistracy and Regality, was, by the Descendants of Noah, who continued in their Obedience to God, annexed and restrained to the Heads of Families only, and their eldest Sons; hanc dignitatem primogenitis attribuebant; who, in conjunction with their Fathers, performed this Function in their numerous Families: And in this the Right of Primogeniture principally consisted, which was so considerable in the Houses of the Patriarchs.
The Jewish Tradition mentioned by St. Jerom in his Hebrew Questions, upon the twenty-seventh Chapter of Genesis, informs us, that the eldest of the Patriarchs Sons was Priest; that he had particular and very rich Vestments, in which he was dressed, that so he might offer Sacrifices with Dignity. Some Commentators have from hence taken occasion to believe, that the Cloaths which Jacob put on by the Advice of Rebeccah, in order to approach his Father, and obtain his Blessing, were the Sacerdotal Robes, remarkable for the Richness of them, and their agreeable Odour, which belonged to Esau as the Eldest, and were by him sold to his Brother, together with the Rights annexed to the Primogeniture: Primogenitura autem erat vestis Sacerdotalis, quâ induti majores natu cum benedictione patris, victimas, Deo velut Pontifices offerebant, says the common Gloss upon Gen. xxv.
It is the Opinion of the Fathers, of the ancient Rabbins, and of all those who have written upon Genesis, excepting two or three modern Authors, that the Eldest was really Priest, and offered Sacrifices. Jacob having by Surprize obtained his elder Brother’s Blessing, sacrificed several times in his way to his Uncle Laban’s, and at his Return.
We see even from Exodus, that the Eldest had the Priesthood, which afterwards devolved solely to the Tribe of Levi. The Eldest being the Lord of the Family, all sort of Honour was paid him; he had the first Place at Table; a double Portion of his Father’s Fortune was allotted him, by reason of his Dignity: He had besides the Power of a Judge, to terminate Differences among his Brethren, and reconcile them to one another. Such was the Right of Seniority in the Old Law, and before it too, as we see from the Instance of Esau.
Joan. Drusius de Mandragoris, in Criticis Sacr. This Treatise is in the first Tome of the Great Criticks, p. 286. It had been before printed at Amsterdam, 1632, in 4to. the second Edition at the End of his Comment upon Ruth: He herein explains of what Nature the Mandrakes were.
Michael Leibentantz, de Rachelis dudaim, Thes. Theol.
Antony Deusing has likewise a Dissertation on the same Subject, at Groninguen, 1659, in 12mo.
Philip Codurc pretended to prove, that these Mandrakes are not the Dudaims mentioned in the xxxth Chapter of Genesis, but Tuberoses, Tubera, at Paris, 1657, in 8vo. the second Edition. See upon Job.
Ægidius Strauchius, de Statua Sepulchrali Rachelis, at Wittemberg, 1661, in 4to.
Augustin Knericht, de fœturâ Jacob artificiosa. He is not the only one who has written concerning the innocent Artifice made use of by Jacob to help the Fertility of his Ewes. Godfry Vockerod has done the same; in a Dissertation on this Subject, printed at Jena, 1689, in 4to. Both were German Lutherans, and living at the same time.
Sam. Bochart, de Animal. Sacr. parte 1. l. 2. c. 49. p. 544.
Abrah. Calovius, de lucta Jacobi cum Angelo. This was printed at Wittemberg. Gasper Fink, has likewise written on the same Subject, in German, at Giessen, 1612, in 4to.
Here likewise we must insert Campegius Vitringa, whose Dissertation is in the Philological Library, tom. 1. p. 773, to 804. divided into two Chapters: In the first he sets forth and explains the Passage; in the second he proposes some Doubts relating to this historical Fact, and gives the Solution of them. He wrote a second Dissertation on the same Subject, which is in tom. 2. ibid. p. 5 - 48.
Andrew Musculus, Minister-General at Frankfort upon the Oder, who died in 1580. has written upon Jacob’s Ladder, at Frankfort, 1578, in 8vo.
John Simon has enquired into the natural Causes of the supposed Artifice used by Jacob to make his Ewes prolifick, at Wittemberg, 1675, in 4to. He was a German Lutheran, and lived about the End of the 17th Century.
Philip Roesler has treated of the Blessing which Jacob stole from his Brother Esau, at Tubingen, 1706, in 4to. This Author, who was a German Lutheran, wrote in the Beginning of the 18th Century.
Upon Joseph, and the other Patriarchs.
William Bonjour made a Dissertation upon the Name which Pharaoh gave Joseph, at Rome, 1696, in 4to. He was of Toulouse, of the Order of St. Augustin, and was living in the Beginning of the 18th Century.
Ludovicus Alvarez, a Portuguese of the Diocese of Coimbra, who died in 1681, put out Joseph. Illustratus, at Lyons, 1675, in fol.
John Francis Buddæus wrote a Dissertation, and Maurice Wagner a Disputation concerning Joseph’s Cup; the one printed at Wittemberg, 1606, in 4to. the other in the Select Observations of Hall, Observat. 4.
Godfry Scheliger asserts it to be a Mistake to say that he divined by his Cup, at Lipsick, 1704, in 4to.
John Reinard Rus published two Disputations on the head Baker’s Dream, explained by Joseph, at Jena, 1701, in 4to.
James Trigland has a Dissertation on the Patriarch Joseph adored under the Figure of a sacred Ox, at Leyden, 1700. He was a Dutch Calvinist, and died in 1706.
See what relates to Joseph in the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, G. L. among the Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament, by Fabricius. John Frederick Frosch, a German Lutheran, has discoursed of Joseph sold unjustly, upon Gen. xxxvii. at Wittemberg, 1695, in 4to.
James Laurent put out an Exposition of Joseph’s History, entitled, Carcer Regius, at Amsterdam, 1670, in 4to. the third Edition. He was of Amsterdam, a Calvinist, and Minister. He died in 1644, Dupin mentions his other Works, in his Tables, tom. 4. p. 10, 18, 20.
Andrew Selnecer wrote seven Dialogues upon the Patriarch Jacob and his Sons who sold their Brother Joseph, and his Grief upon the Occasion.
Frederick Viccius has treated of Pharaoh’s high Commendation of Joseph, mentioned in the xlist Chapter of Genesis, ver. 44. This was printed at Wittemberg, 1657, in 4to. We shall speak again of this Author upon Exodus.
Sebastian Schmid has treated of the number which Jacob’s Family was composed of, at Strasburg, 1688, in 8vo. . Bernard de Marollos published Critical Letters, in order to reconcile what Moses and St. Stephen have said of them; in French, at Utrecht, 1705, in 8vo.
John Masson put out the same Work, printed ibid. which occasions a Conjecture that this may be the same Author under different Names. He was a French Calvinist.
The Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, by Fabricius.
Upon Jacob's Twelve Blessings.
De Benedictionibus Jacob in filios. See Helvicus, Didacus Celada, Adam Osiander, Gabriel à Costa, Perrerius, and other Commentators; and among the Ancients St. Ambrose and Rusinus.
Didacus Celada’s Comment is Literal and Moral, printed at Lyons, 1657, in fol. the second Edition. He was a Spanish Jesuit, and died in 1661. He was well versed both in Sacred and Profane Learning.
What Adam Osiander put out on the same Subject, is more particular, printed at Tubingen, 1669, in 4to. See above.
As for Gabriel à Costa’s Performance, we have already taken notice of it above.
Benedict Perrerius wrote a whole Book upon the Twelve Blessings, printed at Ingolstadt, 1591, in 8vo.
What Dennis de Arriola has written upon the same Subject is preserved in Manuscript in the University of Alcala.
John Brunus has likewise distinguished himself by his Comment and Questions on the same Subject, printed at Venice 1604, in 4to. See their Title in the Index.
S. Ambrose’s Treatise in the 514th Page of the First Tome. In it he asserts that these Blessings are all Prophetical, and makes a just Application of them. Rufinus’s Treatise was printed with his other Comments, at Paris, 1680. in fol. In it he proves these Blessings to be accomplished either in the Church, or in the Jewish Tribes. He was of Aquileia, contemporary with St. Jerome, and his Antagonist, as is well known. Pope Gelasius calls him Vir Religiosus.
Many have written in particular on the celebrated Prophecy relating to the Sceptre of Judah. Solom. Deylingii, de Sceptro à Juda non recessuro, Genes. xlix. 10. t. 2. Observ. Sacr. and besides him, Philip Caroli, a Lutheran of Newburg, whose Dissertation was printed at Altorf, 1640, in 4to. He died a Catholick in 1638. Christopher de Cheffontaines, or, à Capite Fontium, at Lyons, 1578, in 8vo. He was made General of the Cordeliers in 1571, and Archbishop of Cæsarea by Gregory XIII. He wrote well in Latin, and had a very good Talent at Argumentation, as M. Dupin says.
Critical Letters by M. de J. Amsterd. upon the Sceptre promised to Judah.
We should never have done if we were to take notice of all those who have written on this Prophecy; they may be seen in F. le Long.
We cannot omit F. Tournemine’s Explanation of Jacob’s Prophecy, inserted in the Memoirs of Trevoux. In this Prophecy he finds five infallible Marks whereby the Messiah may be discovered. 1. The Time of his Coming: He shall come before God forsakes the Tribe of Judah, and permits it to be driven out of the Holy Land, and dispersed like the other Tribes. 2. The Family he will be of: He shall be born of the Race of Judah. 3. The Place where he will appear: The Holy Land. 4. A memorable Event which will distinguish him from every Man besides; and this is the Reunion of all Nations in one Church. 5. A very singular Circumstance of his Triumph: He will make use of an Ass, and the Foal of an Ass. The Jews do not deny him to be of the Race of Judah. They agree, that he appeared in the Holy Land some few Years before the entire Dispersion of the Tribe of Judah.
A Dissertation on the same Prophecy of Jacob, which is in the Memoirs of Trevoux for the Month of October 1719, and February, 1721. In this Dissertation there are two Parts: In the first an Attempt is made to overthrow this invincible Argument used by Christians. In the second, the Jews are attacked in a new way: The Proofs which are produced against them are not stale, thread-bare Arguments, but such as no one till now had ever thought of employing; which, however, for this very Reason are much to be suspected. What Judgment we are to make of them may be seen in the Memoirs of Trevoux, where all the bad Reasons of this Author are at full length, in the Part for the Month of February, 1724, p. 107, 138. His Objections too are there answered, ibid. p. 139, — 178. The Examintion of this Dissertation is continued in the Month of February of the same Year, p. 311, — 354.
Upon the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs.
A Dissertation, with Notes, upon the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, by M. Macé, at Paris, 1713, in 12mo. The Author, who had been employed eight Years in explaining the Prophecies of the Old and New Testament, did not venture to insert those which were offered to him by the Book of Enoch, and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, without prepossessing the Publick with something said in behalf of the Authority of these Books. He spends a whole Dissertation, written with great Art, in justifying their Antiquity; and omits nothing to make way for admitting them as the genuine Works of those whose venerable Names they bear. He would have it believed that they are apocryphal only as they were concealed from the People by the Jewish Doctors, and in no other Sense. But for what Reason should a Book so edifying as the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs be concealed from them? There can be no plausible one ever given for it. How comes it that the Apostles, in their Sermons and Epistles, never make use of such clear Predictions of our Saviour’s Divinity and Passion as are contained in the Book of the Twelve Testaments? It is certainly the Work of some Hellenistical Jew converted to Christianity, but who upon embracing the true Religion, did not renounce that Genius for Fables which prevailed among the Alexandrian Jews, and put them upon forging so many Writings. We need only read that which we are speaking of, to be convinced that it is spurious: The Morality of it is excellent, but the Fictions in it are gross, and the Prophecies clearer than those of Scripture. The Impostor who composed it is probably the Author of the apocryphal Book of Enoch, whereof there are only some Fragments remaining. The Error of the Angels Conversation with Women before the Deluge, is taught in these two Pieces, and the Book of Enoch is cited with Affectation in that of the Twelve Testaments. As to any thing farther, these two spurious Books may be older than Origen, who quotes them, without attributing any great Authority to them. They are indeed much older than Origen, if our Conjecture be true, and they are the Work of the same Impostor: For Justin, Irenæus, and Tertullian had read the Book of Enoch. Some have asserted that even St. Jude cited it in his Epistle, which would make it to be much more ancient: But it is more probable that St. Jude mentions the Prophecy of Enoch upon the Credit only of Tradition; and that his Citation was what put it into People’s Heads to ascribe the Book which was in the Hands of the Fathers to the Patriarch Enoch; the Fragments whereof, which were preserved by Syncellus, do evidently prove its being spurious. M. Macé thought he could justify this Book, and that of the Twelve Patriarchs by an ingenious Conjecture. He asserts that the Hebrew Word Elohim, which in Greek has been translated Angels, should be translated, The Great, The Powerful. Elohim has indeed these two Significations. But, besides our having no Proof that the Twelve Testaments, and the Book of Enoch were composed in Hebrew, the Error of the Angels being conversant with Women is expressed too clearly, to justify them with an ambiguous Word. M. Macè however will have the Glory of defending a bad Cause as well as it was capable of being defended.
This Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs is in Greek and Latin among the Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament by Fabricius, together with Grabe’s Preface, p. 497, --- 748. There likewise he draws up the Chronology of their Age, according to Dodwel.
Upon several Places of Genesis.
John Deutschman put out Pentecostalis Pneumatologia Paradisiaca, at Wittemberg, 1692. The Harmony of Harmonies, on Jehovah Elohim, ibid. 1700. in 4to. Upon the Name of Cain, ibid. 1654, in 4to. Upon the Order of Noah’s Sons, ibid. 1671, in 4to. Upon the Patriarch Jacob’s Vow, and a Disputation concerning the Sceptre of Judah, ibid. 1646. in 4to. This Author was a German of Saxony, a Lutheran, and died at Wittemberg in 1705.
John Frederick Mayer wrote a Dissertation on the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, at Wittemberg, 1685, in 4to. Upon the Sins and Penalties of Beasts, in the first Tome of Thesaur. Dissert. Theol. Philol. with the preceding Dissertation. Upon Jacob’s Marriage with two Sisters, at Lipsick, 1674, in 4to. Upon the twelve Patriarchs, at Gripsvaldt, 1707, in 4to. The Author was a Lutheran of Lipsick. He died in 1712. Fabricius calls him the Chrysostom of Pomerania.
Thomas Sherlock, an Englishman, wrote a particular Dissertation upon Judah’s Blessing, joined with that written by him upon Adam. See the Index.
We may mention here again the celebrated Philo, whom we had placed at the Head of such Commentators as were Jews, and who is properly to be taken notice of in this Place; since he wrote, 1. upon the Cherubim of Paradise; 2. upon Abel’s and Cain’s Sacrifices; 3. upon the Vine planted by Noah, and his drinking to Excess; 4. upon the Giants; 5. upon the Confusion of Languages; 6. upon Abraham, Joseph, and Moses; 7. upon Circumcision; Lastly, upon the Six Days Work: The last Edition at Frankfort, 1691, in fol. He was of Alexandria, and lived about the 40th Year of Jesus Christ.
We might mention still many more, but it is time to proceed now to Exodus.