« FöregåendeFortsätt »
Dr. Good's original intention, with regard to the book of Job, seems to have been to present a literal translation, and one in heroic verse, in opposite pages; as he had previously done with respect to the Song of Songs. But after he had thus versified the first five chapters, he relinquished the task; adding to his specimen a note expressive of his inability to throw “ the many and exquisite beauties of the original” into a translation in modern “measured verse." It is evident that at the time of this attempt, he had not seen Mr. Scott's version, from which I have just quoted. A comparison of the two may, therefore, gratify the inquisitive reader: and I cannot present a better than is supplied by the awful description of the vision in chapter iv., where the midnight darkness, the deathlike silence, the horror, the whirlwind followed by a sudden stillness, the burst of light and glory, the supernatural voice, each, in its degree, contributes to the production of one of the most sublime pictures ever sketched.
But hear the word divine, to me convey'd,
hair started at each stiff’ning pore, And stood erect. At once the wild uproar Was hush'd; a Presence burst upon my sight (I saw no shape) in majesty of light:
Voice follow'd, and celestial accents broke,
This, too, I've seen, this witness'd when alone
Before the moth they fail; with easier strife
An empty boast, a mockery and lie.” The “critical and illustrative notes” subjoined to Dr. Good's translation of Job, occupy 490 closely printed pages. As might be expected, they evince the most extensive reading, and the author's peculiar facility in culling fruits and flowers from every region, and presenting them to those whom he wished to enrich and delight. While, however, they exhibit a greater share of his characteristic excellencies than some of his former publications, they are not free from defects, of which that which a circumspect reader most regrets to see, is the author's proneness to give the reins to his imagination. Still these notęs, many of which are strictly theological, while others, whether critical, poetical, geological, or philosophical, are as strictly elucidatory, cannot but be read with advantage by the biblical student.* My own total ignorance of the Hebrew language, incapacitates me from offering any judgment upon the correctness of the translation. To me, it has always appeared somewhat still and technical; while I have been inclined to regard the notes as
* The author's notes on the Behemoth and the Leviathun, I much regret my want of room to insert. Ile proves, in my judgment, satisfactorily, that the behemoth cannot be either the hippopotamus or the elephant, as many commentators have imagined; and assigns his reasons for believing that it belongs to a genus altogether extinct, like the mastodondonlon or muammoth. The leviathan, he regards as no other than the crocodile. “The general character of the leviathan seems so well to apply to this animal, in modern as well as in ancient times, the terror of all the coasts and countries about the Nile, that it is unnecessary to seek farther.”
too numerous. On my once hinting at these defects to the author, in the frankness of friendship, he acknowledged the justice of my remarks, and said he should hope, in a new edition, to give greater freedom to some parts of the translation, without impairing its general accuracy; and that he should probably strike out nearly all the notes, except those that were written to justify his deviations from the authorized version. I ought, perhaps, to say, in addition to the sentiments of Drs. Smith and Clarke, already quoted, that, on my soliciting the opinion of a very profound Hebrew scholar, as to this translation and the notes, he replied, “The notes are more numerous than was necessary; but still the work is truly valuable, and it is the farthest possible from dry. I need not dwell upon specific differences ; but in point of real utility to the theological student, I class together Lowth, Blayney, and Good.”
Dr. Good's “ Physiological System of Nosology, with a corrected and simplified Nomenclature,” was the result of several years' extensive experience and sedulous research. It was commenced in 1808, and partially announced in the essay on Medical Technology, of which I have already given an account; but it was not published until the year 1820. It is dedicated “ to the President and Fellows of the Royal College of Physicians of London;" “a copy of the work having lain for public inspection upon the Censor's table" for nearly two months, "and three other copies having been circulated among the Fellows in rotation;" after which “the author's request was unanimously acceded to.”
Indeed, the high reputation of Dr. Good for professional zeal and industry, as well as for powerful talents, unusual erudition, and a liberal spirit of investigation, produced a cordial welcome for this comprehensive volume, among all classes of medical men; the most able of whom felt themselves pleasingly “constrained to acknowledge that his intimate acquaintance with almost all branches of science, literature, and the arts, placed him in the very first rank of our learned physicians.”* The same professional critic speaks of this System of Nosology, as having “ been adopted as a text-book in various medical schools, as well as by individual writers. Like all new systems of nosology, (says the same writer) it requires a new technologyand that is unquestionably an evil. The arrangement of Dr. Good we certainly prefer to every other, though no nosological arrangement has yet appeared without defects. To the nomenclature, too, we dare not object, since it is exclusively taken from the Greek, as far as regards his classes, orders, and genera—his authorities, in general, being Celsus and Galen. When he happens to wander farther, he usually supplies himself from Ætius, Cælius Aurelianus, Diascorides, or Aristotle.”
Having adduced this professional opinion of Dr. Good's system from one of the first authorities, and one whose judgment has been amply confirmed by that of several medical friends; I shall now proceed to describe the work in the manner that may
be most interesting to a general reader; that is, principally as a work of literary research and scientific classification. In attempting this, I shall avail myself
* Johnson's Medico-Chirurgical Review, vol. iii. p. 574.