« AnteriorContinuar »
see whether in the objections to the account of eis Dr. R. is at all better founded.
The Dr. expresses his surprise at what he calls the management of this preposition, in stating its primary sense to have been at, and referring by different modifications and circumlocutions all the other senses to this as their groundwork. What Dr. R. terms management, I am satisfied will
upon examination be found to be nothing more than the just interpretation of the word, and fully established by the analogy of the language.
Ers according to Dr. R. signifies properly and precisely into. This meaning I readily admit that it very frequently has, but were this to be fixed upon as the primary and radical signification, I suspect it might puzzle the Doctor to account for many of its peculiar applications. In fact, so far as I can judge, stopping place or resting place was really the radical sense ; into may coincide with this in some, perhaps in a good number of instances, especially when following a verb of motion--but there are many, very many others, where this sense would be altogether inapplicable. At seems to come nearer than any other English preposition to the original idea, and was therefore preferred as most truly expressing the radical sense, though to and into are expressly stated in the Grammar also, as often conveying the just signification :to or into however do in no case constitute the primary, but only an adventitious signification of $15, and when this application of it occurs, it may
without difficulty be traced back to the primitive source.
That the idea for which the Doctor has so strongly contended, of the use of es implying always an actual and complete intusposition,-a point tenaciously maintained by all the Antipædobaptist brethren, aided by their dogmatic though inconsistent coadjutor Dr. Campbell, is altogether without foundation,-and that this preposition is often, very often, employed by the best writers where apposition or juxtaposition merely, and nothing more could be intended; the following examples, taken like the former ones, as they came most readily to hand, will, I think, satisfactorily show.
yag TOUTOV OM, Gol Bastw. Eurip. Phæn. lin. 461. “ Looking at,(not surely toor into) him with your eyes.” Εις πυλωμαθ’ Ιππομεδων αναξ εστηκ”.
Eurip. Phæn, lin. 1120. King Hippomedon stood at the gate.” “Οσοι αθροιζονται ες Καστωλου πεδιον.
Xen. Anab. Lib. i. c. 1. “ As many as assemble at the plain of Castolas.”
Τους δε και εν νηεσσιν υπες μεγα λαισμα θαλασσης
Ζευς Κρονιδης κατενασσε πατης ες πειρατα γαης. says Hesiod, speaking of the heroic race of men, (Erg. lin. 163–168.) “ conducting some over the great expanse of ocean, against Troy, where death finally hid them ;-others, Jupiter set down apart from men, at
the extremities of the earth.” In neither of these phrases could es be translated to, or into, and in neither is intusposition implied,—the one set of heroes never got into Troy, for they fell before it,—the others were set down at (not into) the extremities of the earth.
Speaking of a fleet, Thucydides says, ATETAEUOQV ES TNU ntergov, (Lib. iii. cap. 79.) “ they sailed to the continent.” Herodotus tells us, (Lib. ii. cap. 102.) that the Persianς επλεον ες Αττικής, " sailed to Attica. None surely but an Irishman would speak of a fleet sailing into the continent, or into the Athenian terri. tory.-We North Britons would in such cases reckon only that the fleet sailed to, so as to arrive at, its place of destination.
Thucydides in another place, describing the extent of the territory of the Odrysi, says, Eysveto de j agxn ή Oδρυσων μεγεθος, επι μεν θαλασσαν καθηκουσα, απο Αβδηρων πολεως ες τον Ευξεινον ποντον, τον μεχρι Iστρου ποταμου, (Lib. ii. c. 97.) “ The dominion of the Odrysi, extending towards the sea, lay from the city of Abderæ, (situate) at the Euxine Sea, (not surely within it,) as far as the river Ister.”
In the Perleg. of Dionysius we find the following passages :
Hχι τε και χαλκειος ες ουρανον εδραμε κιων, lin. 67. 66 Where the brazen column runs up towards heaven," surely not into it.
Γαγγης δε εις αυγας, ο δε Καυκασος ες πoλον αρκτων. Ganges to the East, Caucasus to (rather towards) the North pole."
Ενθα μεν ηελιοιο βεβηκοτος ες πoλον αρκτων.
lin. 482. “ Where the sun declining towards the North pole :" not into, but only towards, or, pointing at, in all these different passages.
Ναυται δ' ες Ελικην και αστρας Οριωνος
Apollon. Rhod. “ The seamen looked to, or at, the Bear, and the stars of Orion.”
Ουκ αξιευμενος ες τον βασιληιον θρονον ίζεσθαι. (Herodot. Lib. vii. cap. 16,)“ Not deeming himself worthy to sit on the King's throne.”—What would Dr. R. make of to, or into, here?
Eis üdwe yapw, says the old Greek proverb, “I write upon the water," certainly not in the water, far less into it.
“Η εις παραλληλας ευθειας ευθεια εμπιπτουσα, (Euclid. Lib. i. prop. 34.) “A straight line falling upon two parallel lines, literally, falling in at (the places of ) the parallel lines.
Both in the Septuagint and in the New Testament many passages occur, where no intusposition could be intended. Thus eis is made use of, Isa. xxxvi. 2. ATEGτειλε βασιλευς τον Ραβσακην εκ Λαχης εις Ιερουσαλήμ, « The king sent Rabshakeh from Lachish to Jerusalem," not into it, for Rabshakeh got no further than the fuller's field without the walls. 4 Kings vi. 4. Xal ηλθον εις τον Ιορδανης και εσεμνον τα ξυλα, “ and they arrived at Jordan and cut wood." The sons of the prophets undoubtedly did not find it necessary to go into Jordan, in order to cut wood, it was enough if they got to its banks where the trees were growing;
it is surely then no great stretch to suppose, that those whom John baptized at the very same place, es Iogouwv, might also be arranged on its brink. Our Saviour, we are told, Matth. v. 1. aven 815 TO Ogos, “ went up to the mountain.” Dr. R., I believe, will hardly maintain that he went into it. When Peter was directed to angle for the fish from which he was to get the tribute money, the order was (Matth. xvii. 27.) πορευθεις εις την θαλασσαν βαλε αγκιστρον, « having gone to the sea, throw the hook,” &c. It will not, I believe, be supposed that Peter would find it necessary to go into the sea, under the water, in order to cast his hook.
I might multiply quotations without end, but surely it is unnecessary to adduce more to establish the point, that eg is often used where intusposition cannot be implied. I might even perhaps have added to the number, one of the very passages quoted by Dr. R. himself, from Josephus, where the entrance of Pompey into the temple is mentioned ;—for the historian, wishing to convey the idea that he had gone into the inner part, found it necessary to use the expression 615 TO EVTOS, “ to the inner part." Had he contented himself with saying, that he went, or that he stood, erç to jegov, without adding more, it could not have been known that he went farther than the outside.
I hope, then, that Dr. R. may, without scruple, allow that the management of es has been nothing more than was absolutely necessary for due grammatical discipline, and that no further coercion has been