Physical Description |
|
First edition. Engraved frontispiece portrait, x, [4], 162, [2 divisional titles - misbound], 163-164, 820, [66] pp., 261:210 mm., wide margins, light age and damp staining, stamps. A very good copy bound in contemporary boards, rubbed and split. Title printed in red and black, printer's engraved title device, text in double columns. |
Detailed Description |
|
Title: Apparatus historico criticus antiquitatum sacri codicis et gentis Hebraeae. Uberrimis annotationibus in Thomae Goodwini Mosen et Aaronem...
Carpzov's edition of Thomas Godwin's Moses and Aaron. Civil and Ecclesiastical Rites used by the ancient Hebrews observed (1625), translated for a Continental audience and furnished with a commentary exactly five times as long as the source text. The "Apparatus" is in the form of annotations to Goodwin's "Moses and Aaron," and appended to it are dissertations on "The Synagogue Treated with Honor" (a statement of what the Christian Church has retained of ancient Jewish customs), on "The Charity System of the Ancient Jews" (discussion of the question whether in O. T. ever means "alms"), and others.
Carpzov (1679-1767) German Christian Old Testament scholar; born Sept. 26, 1679, in Dresden; died April 27, 1767, at Lübeck; nephew of Johann Benedict II., and son of Samuel Benedict; most famous and most important Biblical scholar of the Carpzov family. He was titular professor of Oriental languages at Leipsic 1719-30, and preacher and theologian till his death; like his uncle, he was an opponent of the pietists. His critical works are: "Introductio in Libros Vet. Test." 1721, 4th ed. 1757; "Critica Sacra" (I. Original text, II. Versions, III. Reply to Whiston), 1728; "Apparatus Historico-Criticus Antiquitatum et Codicis Sacri et Gentis Hebrææ," 1748.
Carpzov represents both an advance and a retrogression in Biblical science - an advance in fulness of material and clearness of arrangement (his "Introductio" is the first work that deserves the name), and a retrogression in critical analysis, for he held fast to the literal inspiration of the Hebrew text of the Old Testament and bitterly opposed the freer positions of Simon, Spinoza, and Clericus. His antiquarian writings are still interesting and useful.
|