for a time in his career, and they appear to have given a new direction, or rather a new impulse and enlargement to his studies. The preparation of the Thesaurus was suspended; and the character of the Latin Manual was greatly changed during its progress, so that it became at length a new work, drawn chiefly from the materials collected for the Thesaurus, under the influence of these more extended views.

It was perhaps a singular merit in Gesenius, that he was ever among the first to admit and adopt, with full acknowledgment, every valuable suggestion, from whatever quarter it might come; and also every result which would bear examination, however contrary it might be to his own previous views. The following sentence is doubtless a fair and candid exposition of his creed and practice in this respect: "Unwearied personal investigation, and an impartial examination of the researches of others; the grateful admission and adoption of every real advance and illustration of science; but also a manly foresight and caution, which does not with eager levity adopt every novelty thrown out in haste and from the love of innovation; all these must go hand in hand, wherever scientific truth is to be successfully promoted." The sincerity of this language is evinced in all his subsequent works, by the references and acknowledgments made, not only to the labours of his pupils and personal friends, but also to those of Winer, Ewald, and others, who set themselves up as his opposers.

Some of the results of this new direction and impulse in the studies of Gesenius, were first made known in the tenth and eleventh editions of his elementary Grammar, published in 1831 and 1833; and then also in the Latin Manual, which appeared in 1833. These works, as compared with the previous labours of the author, exhibit evidence of a great advance; both in the wider range of scientific principles, and in the skill and tact of their practical application. By following out the researches of Hupfeld in respect to the elementary sounds, letters, particles, and pronouns of the Hebrew, in their power and use; by introducing a more careful investigation of the primary signification of the Hebrew roots, as well by means of their kindred analogies one with another and with

1 1 Heb. Gr. ed. 11, p. vii.

the like roots of other Semitic dialects, as through the reference of whole families of triliteral roots to single biliteral ones, which are often onomatopoetic, and the illustration of these latter from the analogies of the Indo-European tongues, viz. the Sanscrit, Zend, Persian, Greek, Latin, Gothic, English, and others; and also by a more exact and logical arrangement of the various significations, as derived from the primary one, in which as well as in the treatment of the particles, he acknowledges his indebtedness to Winer ;'—from all these sources he was able, not indeed to obtain a new basis for Hebrew grammar and lexicography, but certainly to enlarge and strengthen the old one by new courses of materials and a new and firmer cement. The great Semitic family was no longer left to occupy its former lone position, as a solitary cluster of dialects; but was brought into connexion and affinity with the other great families of tongues, and shown to be one among many kindred branches in the vast aggregate of human language, which now forms the object of comparative philology.

If therefore it be true, that others have in various respects made advances upon the earlier works of Gesenius, it may be said without hesitation, that these advances bear no proportion to those which he made upon himself, in the works above mentioned; and the same constant progress and enlargement of views continued to mark all his labours down to the close of life.

The fourth edition of the German Manual was published in 1834. The preparation of the Thesaurus had already been resumed, and the second fasciculus, after considerable delay, appeared in 1835. One source of this delay was the long and dangerous illness of his whole household; by which, in an interval of four months, he was called to mourn the death of three children, while himself, his wife, and four other children were all brought to the borders of the grave. To this event he touchingly alludes in the preface of the above volume. His own illness was connected with an alarming complaint of the breast, from which, however he was at length relieved. Another cause of the delay, was the attention he had been led to bestow upon the palæography of the Semitic languages. This had always been with him a favourite study; and traces of it appear

'Pref. to Lex. Man. 1833, p. viii.

more or less in all his writings. So early as in his notes on Burckhardt's Travels, he had ventured some unsatisfactory conjectures towards deciphering the celebrated inscriptions found on the rocks of the Sinaitic peninsula ; and he had published in 1825 a dissertation upon a Phenician-Greek inscription, which was then making some noise, said to have been found in the region of Cyrene, but which afterwards turned out to be an imposition. But he now had taken up the subject more in earnest, especially in respect to the Phenician and Punic palæography; and the fruit of this new impulse was a treatise upon the subject, published also in 1835, which was the germ of his later noble work upon the Phenician language.

It was not the habit of Gesenius to have more than one great object of pursuit at one and the same time; and having become thus interested in palæographic studies, the Thesaurus, although announced to be completed in two years more, was again laid aside, and he devoted himself with fresh ardour to the collection of materials for the illustration of the ancient Phenician. To this end he made a second journey to England early in 1836; where he received great assistance, not only from individual scholars, but also from the Asiatic Society, the Society of Antiquaries, and the Geographical Society. The first of these sent circulars to all the English agents residing in the countries where any remains of this language were likely to be found; and from these and other sources he was able to collect exact copies, mostly facsimiles, of all the known inscriptions and coins. Many of these were still to be deciphered; but from them all, he was able to make out the alphabet, and to complete his great work upon the Monuments of the Phenician language. This was published in 1837, and embraces all the known remains of the Phenician and Punic writing and language; as existing in monumental inscriptions, upon coins, and in Plautus and other ancient writers. These sources are all minute

1 Burckhardt, Germ. p. 1071 sq. These have since been deciphered by Prof. Beer of Leipsic; see his Studia Asiatica, Fasc. III. Inscriptiones Veteres ad Montem Sinai. Lips. 1840. Also Biblical Researches in Palest. I. pp. 188, 552 sq.

2 De Inscriptione Phænicio-Græca in Cyrenaica nuper reperta, Hal.

1825.4. See more in his Monumenta Phanic. p. 247 sq.

3 Paläographische Studien über Phönizische und Punische Schrift. Leipz. 1835. 4.

Scripture Linguæque Phanicia Monumenta quotquot supersunt. Lips. 1837. 4,

ly described; and from the words and forms thence resulting, is deduced the grammatical character and structure of this lost tongue; which is thus found to have been closely kindred to the other Semitic dialects. As an exhibition of critical sagacity and logical development, based upon sound judgment, this work has rarely been surpassed.

Again the Thesaurus was resumed; the third fasciculus appeared in 1839; the fourth in 1840; and the fifth, extending to the article, was completed in May, 1842. There remains yet a sixth part necessary to complete the work; intended to contain the residue of the text, a quadruple index, additions and corrections, especially to the first part, and the general preface. Whether the author, before his decease, was able fully to arrange the materials for this part, is not known to the public; but at any rate, they were all so nearly prepared, that it will not be difficult for any of his associates, to carry out and perfect this main labour of his life. Early in the same year also, 1842, was published the thirteenth edition of his elementary Hebrew Grammar, with important additions. This work, by the clearness and method of its principles and expositions, fully maintains its place over all rivals in the schools of Germany.

It is not known that Gesenius had definite plans for any new works, had his life been spared; but it was his often expressed purpose, so soon as the Thesaurus should be completed, to prepare new editions of his Lehrgebäude and the History of the Hebrew Language; which were now out of print, and also in his own estimation far below the present standard of Hebrew philology.

Such is a general review of the published labours of Gesenius; which serves at least to show, that his was not a life of indolence and ease. But besides all these separate works, he was a copious writer in the periodical literature of the day; chiefly in the Literatur-Zeitung of Halle, of which he was one of the editors. Many articles, also, on topics connected with Hebrew and oriental literature, were furnished by him for the great Encyclopedia of Ersch and Gruber.

The station of Gesenius in the University led him, for more than thirty years, regularly to deliver two lectures a day in public, besides occasional courses and more private classes. His circle of

lectures occupied two years or four semesters; one part, or the exegetical course, comprising the books of Genesis, Job, select Psalms, and Isaiah; and the other part embracing an Introduction to the Old Testament, Hebrew Antiquities, and Ecclesiastical History. This last topic he was led to take up at a time when there was at Halle no other lecturer upon it; and he afterwards continued it, as a matter of convenience. The historian Gieseler, now of Göttingen, was once his pupil; and when the first volume of his Church History appeared in 1827, the writer of these lines, who had just heard the lectures of Gesenius, was struck with the general accordance of the text of that volume with those lectures.

Gesenius was popular as a lecturer, and his lecture-room was always thronged. His manner was easy and natural, too often perhaps familiar, always animated, and without any effort for effect. So clear were his own conceptions, that he never uttered a sentence, nor scarcely ever wrote one, which even the dullest intellect did not at once comprehend. In this respect, he may be said to stand out almost alone among modern German scholars. If we may be permitted to point out another distinguishing trait in the character and scholarship of Gesenius, it was good sense and sobriety of judgment. He was very rarely led away into the visionary pursuit of brilliant paradoxes or striking novelties. In all that fell within the proper sphere of his own researches, he never rested upon the authority of others, but investigated for himself, with all the minute accuracy and closeness of detail and unwearied industry for which German learning is celebrated. His one great object was philological truth. He had no preconceived theories, to the support of which he was at all hazards committed, and in connexion with which only he sought for truth. These traits, combined with his extensive learning, inspired a confidence in his researches and opinions on topics connected with Hebrew philology, such as has been bestowed on few scholars. Indeed the whole cast of his mind, in respect to practical good sense, was more of the English mould. It was English mind with German discipline and habits.

In person Gesenius was hardly of the middle size, with symmetrical features, a high forehead, and light eyes and complexion. In all his movements and deportment there was a degree of quick