Imagens das páginas
PDF
ePub

highly censurable even in editing a profane writer; but, when made in the sacred volume, they involve also a charge of irreverence for the book which was intended to make men 'wise unto salvation.' la most respects the editor coincides with the views of Mutthtei (whose edition of the N. '1'. is pronounced by Bishop Middleton to be far the best yet seen), and, in a great measure, with those of the learned and indefatigable Scholz.

* " In justification of these, [the cancelling*], it has generally been urged, that the words, phrases, or clauses, so thrown out are glossematical, and therefore spurious. On this point, however, the present editor is entirely at issue with the Griesbachian School; and he has much pleasure in referring his readers to a masterly Commentatio by C. C. Tittman de Glossematiss N. T. recte investigandis, (at p. Jul sqq. of his Opusc. Theolog. Lips. 1803;) as also an able and instructive Dissertation of Bornemann de Glossematis N. T. caute dijudicandis, Lips. 1830, who there completely refutes the rash assertion of Wassenberg. in a Dissertation on the Glossis appended to Yaleh-Scholia ad N. 'I'., und ably distributes these pretended Glosses under ./ire classes."

Iii the second edition we have the same sentiments repeated in the following words:—

"To pass on to the text itself,—it will be found, with a few exceptions, the same as in the preceding edition; and with reason ;—since the editor's opinions, as to the origin and character of the Greisbacluan text, are, after much further research, precisely the same as before. He is still firmly persuaded, that the most ancient MSS. of the Western and Alexandrian family, do not present so pure a text, as that of some comparatively modern ones, of the Constantinopolitan family; and represented, with few exceptions, in the invaluable Editio Princeps, for which we are indebted to the munificence of cardinal Ximenes. In short, he has no doubt that the texts of the first mentioned MSS. were systematically altered, for various reasons, by the early Biblical critics: thus exemplifying what Lord Bacon says (de Augm. Scieut. i. 9), that " the most corrected copies are commonly the least correct*."

* " On this important subject the author refers his readers, for proofs and particulars, to the learned Prolegomena of Prof. Scholz, to his critical edition of the New Testament with various readings, now in progress, and on the point of being completed—the result of a quarter of a century's unwearied labours in collating MSS. in every part of Europe,—a monument of diligence and erudition rarely surpassed, and by which he has laid the Christian world under greater obligations than any critical editor since the time of the illustrious Wetstein. See also the able and instructive Prolegomena to Bagster's Polyglott, by Professor Lee."

As the Banaras Translator has placed Home in an honorable niche in his temple, perhaps he will give heed to the following extracts from that laborious man's excellent Introduction to the study of the Scriptures, and he will learn from him that others besides Dr. Bloomneld have differed from Dr. Griesbach, and that even Home himself differs from him.

"The system of recensions, above proposed by Bengel and Semler, and completed by the late celebrated critic Dr. Griesbach, has been subjected to a very severe critical ordeal; and has been formidably attacked on the continent by the late M. Matthaei, anil in this country by the Rev. Dr. Laurence, and the Rev. Frederic Nolan.

"The last system of recensions which remains to he noticed is that of the Rev. T. Nolan. It is developed in his "Inquiry into the integrity of the Greek Vulgate or received text of the Areu> Testament, in which the Greek manuscripts are newly classed, the integrity of the authorised text vindicated, and the various readings traced to their origin (8vo. London, 1815.) That integrity he has confessedly established by a series of proofs and connected arguments, the most decisive that can he reasonably desired or expected.

"We may therefore safely adopt the system of recensions proposed by Mr. >Tolan in preference to any other: not only on account of its comprehensiveness, but also because (independantly of its internal consistency, and the historical grounds on which it is exclusively built), it embraces the different systems to which it is opposed, and reconciles their respective circumstances. But, notwithstanding the strong—we may add, indisputable—claims to precedence which his system of recensions possesses, it is greatly to be feured that the classification of recensions proposed by Griesbach has obtained such a general reception as will prevent the adoption of Mr. Nolan's system much beyond the limits of this country."

Not having any of the writings of any of the German critics mentioned by the Banaras Translators, I cannot say how far they either agree with or differ from Dr. Griesbach; but I happen to have the edition of Stuart's Commentary on the Romans which was published in England with the recommendations of Drs. Smith and Henderson. In this commentary Dr. Stuart says:

"I am grieved to add, that Griesbach, in attempting to account for the variation of manuscripts in regard to xvi. 25, 27 lias advanced suppositions not less visionary and gratuitous than those of Eichhorn. This is the more to be wondered at, since Griesbach is not much prone to phantasies of this nature. The reader of Eichhorn is not surprised to find such a conceit in him; for a critic who could add on the last twenty-six chapters of Isaiah (which he names Pseudo-Isaiah), to the genuine works of that prophet, because the copyist happened to have room to spare in his parchment and wanted to fill it out, may well be imagined not to be incapable of making suppositions like those above related."

I am not sanguine enough to believe that the above extracts will convince the Banaras Translator that Dr. Griesbach's system is disputed by some at least of the most eminent orthodox Biblical critics of the present day; but I think others will be convinced by them. I think, too, that others will come to the conclusion, that as there are so many eminent men in favor of the Textus lleceptus, that nothing which it contains should be omitted in any translation. If the translators really in their consciences believe, that any passage is an interpolation, let them attach a mark to it; but for the sake of others, who have consciences as well as they of Banaras, let the suspected words still appear.

I have no idea what opinion the Bandras Translator has formed of Dr. Judson and Mr. Yates. Others, however, think them both learned and good men. The latter has given a place to all the "omitted passages" in his translations; and the former, who (as I have been informed) in his first translation into the language of Burmah, had been led to follow Griesbach, has seen cause to retrace his steps, and lias retraced them. I fear, however, the Baniras Translator, in his present temper and spirit, will not be his imitator.

I deeply lament to learn from the Translator himself, that though I have detected sixty-six omissions or alterations from the received text in his translation, yet that 1 have not detected the ONE-FIFTH of the passages omitted and altered. I stated that I had observed more than I had noted down; but I had no idea that I had discovered such a small proportion as a fifth only. Such a statement as this will, 1 think, prevent the Christian world (unless we except the Socinians, who love Griesbach dearly) from either buying or using a single copy of any edition the Banaras translators may from this time send forth. I would advise them, therefore, to lay down their pens, or, like Dr. Judson (much to his honor), retrace their steps.

Notk.—As the principal parties in this controversy have unitedly agreed that it should come to a close with the present number, and as all the parties have written, have been replied to, and replied again, we must decline all further communications on the subject, as little more can be said to edification.—Ed.

VII.—Short Description of the Netherlands' Territory on the West Coast of Sumatra, 1837.

BOUNDARIES, DIVISION AND POPULATION.

(Continued from page 334.)

Having given in a preceding number a brief description of the origin of the Soekoes, we shall now proceed to the consideration of the Malay form of government. This was founded by the beforennmed fathers or partially modelled by them after the earlier institutions of their mother's first husband, Serie Alalia Raja, under the direction of their father, Jjattie Bielong Pande. The immediate government of the people is committed to Panghoe/oct in civil matters, to Pagaives in spiritual affairs and to Palawan! or Oeloebulangs for the defence of the land and the maintenance of the right of Government, whilst the nominal supreme power is vested in the house of Mananghubow, (which however, as will appear hereafter, is not very material,) under three princes, named Rajas, viz.

1, Raja Allam, supreme commander. 2, Raja Hadat, chief of religious worship. 3, Raja Hadat, chief of the manners. The first had his seat at Paggerroegong, the second at Soempoe Koedoes, and the third at Boea. This division corresponds pretty nearly with the one produced in the fable, the power of these princes was principally maintained through the influence of the three principal districts of Toma Datar, Toenhoe, Nantoengie, the three pillars of support, named Soengie Trap, Soerocasso and Padang Ganting. The chiefs of these places subject to the princes of Manangkabow, exercised the chief authority in Tona Datar, and were named Datoe Pamontya die Soengie Trap, Datoe Tadamo die Soerocasso and Toean Kallie die Padang Ganting. The power of the Manangkabow princes over the people has however, never been considerable, their power not reaching beyond offering relief or shelter to unhappy people or to those persecuted by the law, or as arbitrators between quarrelling parties. From this it appears that the real power over the people rested with the Soekoes, this will more clearly appear from the following example of the arrangements of one of the provinces. At Matoea, a small province in the highlands with a population of about 3,000 souls. There are found three Soekoes, viz. Ijieniago, Siekoenbang and Tandjang. These three Soekoes or tribes are further divided into ninety lesser tribes or families, named Bataprats. The government of all the above named greater and lesser tribes consists of 3 Panghoeloes Soekoe : ...: l n go... . 90 Ditto, Baeaproets } for all civil affairs. 3 Pagawes, 3 Imams, }~ spiritual matters. 3 Chatips, 3 Palawans, for the defence of the country and the maintenance of civil power. To the Panghoeloes, their revenue secured from Tailamas, Dando and Settie, being a certain fine for deciding differences and fines arising out of the violations of customs. The Imums and Chatips draw the Zakat Pietra, Sedeka oepa kawing, oepa Sara, oepa Talil and Mengadjie koran, being according to the korun their fixed annual collection for their income (24 by 10 id.) for each person, for divorce and prayer, fees for the dead, and for giving instruction in the Qurān. The Palawans share about onethird of the income with the Punghoeloes. All civil differences are first decided by the Panghoeloes Ba'aproets, but parties not satisfied with their decision, appeal to the Panghoeloe Soekoe, and if his judgement is not satisfactory, an appeal is made to the Mappat, which is a council of the chiefs of the provinces. If satisfaction is not found there the applicants proceed to the right of the strongest, named Prang Batoe, which generally puts an end to the strife, after one or two have been killed or wounded; for the prevention of further accidents, the subject is settled by disinterested parties. On this footing the internal government has been for many centuries, when, if I am well informed, these things and especially the spiritual matters were placed under more equitable regulations and obtained greater security by the introduction of the Muhammadan religion, in the year 1177 ; there having appeared at Oelakhan a certain Berhanoedien, disciple of Sheik Abdullah Arief, who had introduced the Muhammadan doctrine at Acheen from which place they spread over the entire population of Agam Amang. True it is, however, that since the first appointment of the Hadats, the original tribes of which the people consisted, have experienced many changes and divisions. This has arisen from an increase of population as well as

VOL. I. 3 F

from religious differences and other circumstances, in consequence of which some separated themselves from their mother tribe and formed in different places, in the high and low Innds, small companies under different forma of government after those of the chief tribes, but directed according to the circumstances, which caused their removal, or were considered necessary for the maintaining of their social rights.

These occurrences may have exercised great influence on the social institutions of the mother tribes, and may have served to divide them from those of their forefathers and to give to them the present irregular appearance, in which we find the internal management of the coast.

Of the present form of government nothing can be said except that it is patriarchal, in which every member of society has equal rights, and is his own master, whilst he to whom the executive power is entrusted, ia only considered as the eldest member with no higher authority, than to give the necessary explanations of their social institutions or usages, (Ffadats) nor can he decide anything without the general consent of the members of the Society or their representatives; and further, there is demanded and expected of him protection for the safety of the members of the Society, (of which he is the Head,) against all foreign power, in consequence of which it often occurs, that when a Malay is spoken to, or persecuted on account of an affray, he always finds a defender in the Head of the society or Soekoe to whicli he belongs.

This also is the cause of such a number of independent provinces, with different social institutions, which are met with on this coast, and the great variety which is introduced in the naming of the chiefs since the original institutions, there being now recognised, besides those already named, Vang die portoeans, Punghoeloes, Pagavoes and Pulawant, a great number of other names, viz., the Sultan at Indrapura and Moco ifoco, who has Maukoe Boemies and Mantrie under him. Rajas at Oeiukhan and Kemullie ; Pangerangs at Bencoolen; Pamontjas over the'entire country Paugalima; at Padang Toeanhoes. This title was formerly only given to principal priests, but at present the Panghoeloes who staud in immediate connection with the Netherlands' government, have also taken this appellation.

Kapella Lares are the usual Panghoeloes Soekoe, who by means of the European government assume a supremacy over their colleagues. The chiefs are always chosen from the tribe of Punghoeloes, and the dignity descends to the nephew, if he possesses the necessary ability.

In former centuries the princes of Manangkabow exercised a great supremacy over these different princes and chief's. The seats, where the three different princes or governors were established, were named lioema die Koedum, Rocma die Tenga, and lioema die Bochit, of which the first belonged to Raja Allan, the second to Raja Hadat, and the third to Raja lladat. At present the first house only exists; the tribe of the second is entirely extinct; and Bagagar Schaah appointed by us and now removed to Batuvia belongs to the tribe of the third house. At that time he had an uncle, named Toeanko Patta, who, according to the inland usage had more title to some power in the government than Bagagar Schaah, and more so because before the revolution of the Pudrirs, he was already placed in the government by the people: he is since dead.

The incomes and profits of the princes of Manangkabow were not very great; they had their own rice fields which were cultivated by their own servants or by criminals, whom they had pardoned but who in consequence became their slaves, (for which they had the power according to the existing custom.) But they could claim no drudgery from the people, with the exception of the furnishing of building materials, which however was demanded in a friendly manner. Besides they had the revenue of three

« AnteriorContinuar »