ADDITIONAL NOTES. NOTE 1. THE CAUSEWAY. (p. 42, n. 3, and p. 396, n. 1.) I HAVE followed our Authorized Version in interpreting 1 Kings x. 5, and 2 Chron. ix. 4, 1 Chron. xxvi. 16, of "a causeway." This interpretation is further supported, not only by Lightfoot, but by various other commentators, Jewish and Christian; and is remarkably confirmed by Josephus, where he speaks of the yépupa which united the palace in the Upper City with the Outer Temple, and particularly by that passage in which he explains that this transit was formed by the interruption of the valley. (See pp. 392-397, and notes.) In the Theological Review of November, 1846, p. 612, n. 2, Dr. Robinson opposes this interpretation, (for which he somewhat unfairly represents Lightfoot as the sole authority,) and in his usual dictatorial style fixes on the words a meaning of his own; telling us that "the Hebrew by and by signify strictly a step, stair, and collectively, a staircase, as in Ezek. xl. 26; and the true rendering of the Hebrew would therefore be the stairs, (or staircase,) which went up to the house of the Lord.' Again, the word rendered 'causeway,' in 2 Chron. xxvi. 16, 18, is strictly a raised way, highway; but it is also put to denote a staircase, stairs;" for which he cites 2 Chron. ix. 11, which Lightfoot will presently teach him to understand in a sense more consistent with what Dr. Robinson himself grants to be the strict meaning of the word. As, under these circumstances, the best end to controversy appears to be, to carry the appeal to a court which is neither partial nor prejudicedviz. to the scholars who wrote before controversy, and had no theory to support, a learned friend has kindly drawn up for me the following critical analysis of the passages in question. "The principal passages which appear to allude to the great causeway, by which Solomon joined the royal palace to the temple are, 1 Kings x. 5. 2 Kings xii. 20. 1 Chron. xxvi. 16. 2 Chron. ix. 4. 1 Kings x. 5 and 2 Chron. ix. 4, are to be considered as identical; for the two passages are in all points but one so exactly parallel, that we must either with Houbigant suppose that in in Chronicles is an error for inby? as in Kings; or that the two words are synonymous. We there read that "when the Queen of Sheba had seen all Solomon's wisdom, and the house that he had built, &c., and his ascent by which he went up unto the house of the LORD; in there was no more spirit in [וַעֲלִיָּתוֹ .Chron] אֲשֶׁר יַעֲלֶה בֵּית יְהָוֹה T: her." The word is simple enough; it sometimes means an ascent, sometimes a burnt-offering. Dr. Robinson, however, insists not only that it means an ascent, but a particular kind of ascent, viz. a staircase. Now if he would condescend to consult proper authorities, he would find that strictly means an ascent, or he that ascends, is qui ascendit, (Rosenmüller); that it is as applicable to an ascent by a causeway, as to a staircase; and equally so to the burnt-offering which ascends in flame and smoke from the altar, as to a causeway or staircase. Indeed, in some of the best authorities (Lee's Lexicon, Parkhurst's Lexicon), burnt-offering is given as the first meaning of the noun, and an ascent as the second. It is not surprising that commentators, more conversant with Hebrew roots than with the topography of the Holy City, should here find a difficulty. "It appears strange," they say, "that the steps to the temple should be a separate matter of astonishment1." And accordingly they translate the words ' in And the holocausts which he offered וְעָלָתוֹ וגו' translate the words J: up in the house of the LORD. This version is adopted by Houb. Dathe, Horsley, Clarke, and Boothroyd, among the moderns, and is countenanced by the Vulgate, LXX., Chaldee, Syriac, and Arabic versions. To it, however, there appears one strong objection; viz. that it would require וְעָלָתוֹ the word to be in the plural number; for I can by no means agree with those commentators who suppose that the sacred writers used singular for plural, and vice versâ, without method or reason. Their translation however of the word in shews us how objectionable they thought Dr. Robinson's staircase. All difficulties vanish, if by ascent, which is the strict meaning of the word, derstand the 'great causeway,' which connected the royal palace and the temple. Of Dr. Robinson's stupendous staircase we find no proof, but we do find that a deep valley was cut off in order to join the palace to the temple. (Josephus Ant. xv. xi. 5). Such a pathway would naturally be called an ascent with reference to the temple, to which the term of going up to was always applied. 1 Dr. A. Clarke, we un In 2 Kings xii. 20, we read, "And his servants arose and made a conspiracy, and slew Joash in the house of Millo, [or Beth-millo], which 770 These last words have .[בֵּית מְלֹא הַיֹּרֶד סלא] "goeth down to Silla been variously rendered, "And slew Joash in the house of Millo as he was going down to Silla," or, "And slew Joash in the house of Millo which goeth down to Silla." This latter version is by far the most natural way of taking the Hebrew words. Munster, Vatablus, Clarius, Gesenius, and some others, suppose that Silla was the name of a town. Abarbinel, and Patrick, &c., maintain that there were two Beth-millos, and that this is called "The house of Millo that goeth down to Silla,” in order to distinguish it from the Beth-millo in Jerusalem. To me it appears unlikely that there were two Beth-millos, especially with the coincidence of the one being coupled with and the other with Dr. A. Clarke says, "The house of Millo was a royal palace built by David, and Silla is supposed to be the name of the road or causeway that led to it." Among the different explanations of these words given by Pool in his Synopsis, are the following :— In descensu Sella, [] Quæ descendit in Sillah, P. Ang. Ma. quæ defert ad Sillam, Ca. Quâ descenditur ex domo in viam publicam, quæ cum adjectitia litera alibi dicitur ? [G.] In loco munitionis qui vergit Sillum versùs, J. T. i. e. aggestum iter. Appellativè accipio ex collat, 1 Chron xxvi. 16. and 2 Chron. ix. 11; ubi Salomon legitur aggestâ terrà ascensum fecisse ad domum Dei. [Jun. Pi. Ma.] Cùm vorago Mello, supra quam erat transitus Regis in Templum, geminum haberet clivum, alterum ad Templum, alterum ad regiam, videtur descensum Sella peculiariter vocatam esse declivitatem illam quæ erat ex parte regiæ, ubi erat quædam domus Regis, quam domum Mello vocat Scriptura, in quâ hic ægrotabat et occisus est. The above extract is strongly corroborative of Lightfoot's view; but no interpretation of the passage in question will afford the slightest countenance to Dr. Robinson's theory, for even he will scarcely venture "strictly means a staircase." סְלָּא to assert that We now come to 1 Chron. xxvi. 16, thus rendered in our Authorized Version: "To Shuppim and Hosah the lot came forth westward, with the gate Shallecheth, by the causeway of the going up yoy nhiyn nhopa nabw], ward against ward.” The word Shallecheth, (of which Dr. Robinson offers no explanation) has by some been interpreted as The gate of projections, i. e. |