something relating to the Hebrew. See HEBREWS. Thus we say, HEBREW Bible. See BIBLE.

HEBREW Character. There are two kinds of Hebrew characters: the ancient, called also the square; and the modern, or rabbinical character.

1. The square Hebrew takes its denomination from the figure of its characters, which stand more square, and have their angles more exact and precise than the other. This character is used in the text of Holy Scripture, and their other principal and most important writings. When both this and the rabbinical character are used in the same work, the former is for the text, or the fundamental part; and the latter for the accessory part, as the glofs, notes, commentaries, &c.

The best and most beautiful characters of this kind, are those copied from the characters in the Spanish manuscripts; next, those from the Italian manuscripts; then those from the French; and lastly, those of the Germans, whose characters are much the same, with respect to the other genuine square Hebrew characters, that the Gothic or Dutch characters are with respect to the Roman.

Several authors contend, that the square character is not the real ancient Hebrew character, written from the beginning of the language to the time of the Babylonish captivity; but that it is the Assyrian or Chaldee character, which the Jews assumed, and accustomed themselves to, during the captivity, and retained afterwards. They say, that the Jews, during their captivity, had quite diluted their ancient character; so that Ezra found it necessary to have the sacred books transcribed into the Chaldean square character. These authors add, that what we call the Samaritan character, is the genuine ancient Hebrew. Of this opinion are Scaliger, Bochart, Caufaubon, Vossius, Grotius, Walton, Capellus, &c. and among the ancients Jerome and Eusebius. On this side it is urged, that the present characters are called Assyrian by the ancient Jewish writers of the Talmud, and therefore must have been brought from Assyria: but to this argument it is replied, that there were two sorts of characters anciently in use, viz. the sacred or present square character, and the profane or civil, which we call Samaritan; and that the sacred is called Assyrian, because it first began in Assyria to come into common use. It is farther al- leged, that the Chaldee letters, which the Jews now use, were unknown to the ancient Jews before the captivity, from Dan. i. 4. Moreover, it is inferred from 2 Kings xvii. 28, whence we learn that a Jewish priest was sent to teach the Samaritans the worship of Jehovah; on which occasion he must have taught them the law; and yet no mention occurs of his teaching them the language or character that the law was then written in, the character which the Samaritans used. But the chief argument is taken from some ancient Jewish shekels, with a legend on one side "The shekel of Israel," and on the other "Jerusalem the holy," both in Samaritan characters. These shekels, it is said, must have been coined before the division of the two kingdoms of Judah and Israel, or at least before the Assyrian captivity, because the Samaritans never afterwards reckoned Jerusalem holy. On the other side, or for the primitive antiquity of the square character, are the two Buxtorfs, Leufden, Calvius, Hottinger, Spanheim, Lightfoot, &c. They urge, from Matthew v. 18, that jod is really the least of the consonants in the present Hebrew, whereas it is one of the largest characters in the Samaritan alphabet: but Walton replies, that if our Saviour here speaks of the least letter of the alphabet, we can only infer, that the Chaldee character was used in our Saviour's time, which is not denied by those who maintain the Samaritan to be the original. They also allege, that the Jews were too obstinate and superstitious to allow their sacred character to be altered; but if this was done under the direction and authority of Ezra, the argument will be much invalidated. Further, they say, that Ezra could not alter the ancient character, because it was impossible to make the alterations in all their copies. This argument, however, is contradicted by fact; since the old English black letter is actually changed for the Roman. They say, likewise, that Ezra was not disposed to profane the sacred writings with a heathen character: but this supposes that Ezra was so superstitious as to imagine, that there was some peculiar sanctity in the shape of the letters. Moreover, the advocates for this opinion appeal to ancient coins found in Judea, with a legend in the Chaldee or Assyrian character. But the genuineness of these coins is much suspected.

The learned Jesuit Societ maintains, with great address, that the ancient Hebrew character is that found on the medals of Simon, and others, commonly called Samaritan medals; but which, he affirms, were really Hebrew medals, struck by the Jews, and not the Samaritans.

Buxtorf endeavours to reconcile these two opinions, by producing a variety of passages from the rabbies to prove, that both these characters were anciently used; the present square character being that in which the tables of the law, and the copy deposited in the ark, were written; and the other character being used in the copies of the law which were written for private and common use, and in civil affairs in general; and that after the captivity, Ezra enjoined the former to be used by the Jews on all occasions, leaving the latter to the Samaritans and apostates. But it can hardly be allowed by any who consider the difference between the Chaldee and Samaritan characters, with respect to convenience and beauty, that they were ever used at the same time. After all, it is of no great moment which of these, or whether either of them, were the Hebrew, original characters; since it appears, that no change of the words has arisen from the manner of writing them, because the Samaritan and Jewish Pentateuch almost always agree after so many ages. It is most probable that the form of these characters has varied in different periods; this appears from the testimony of Montfaucon, in his Hexapla Origenis, vol. i. p. 22, &c. and is implied in Dr Kennicot's making the characters in which manuscripts are written one test of their age.

2. The modern, or rabbinical, is a good neat character, formed of the square Hebrew, by rounding it, and retrenching most of the angles or corners of the letters, to make it the more easy and flowing. The letters used by the Germans are very different from the rabbinical character used everywhere else, though all formed alike from the square character, by the German in a more flowery manner than the rest.—The rabbins frequently make use either of their own, or the square Hebrew character, to write the modern languages in. There are even books in the vulgar tongues printed in Hebrew characters; instances whereof are seen in the French king's library.

HEBREW Language, that spoken by the Hebrews, and wherein the Old Testament is written.

This appears to be the most ancient of all the languages in the world, at least we know of none older; and some learned men are of opinion, that this is the language in which God spoke to Adam in Paradise. Dr Sharpe adopts the opinion that the Hebrew was the original language; not indeed that the Hebrew is the unvaried language of our first parents, but that it was the general language of men at the dispersion; and however it might have been improved and altered from the first speech of our first parents, it was the original of all the languages, or almost all the languages, or rather dialects, that have since arisen in the world.

The books of the Old Testament are the only pieces to be found, in all antiquity, written in pure Hebrew; and the language of many of these is extremely sublime: it appears perfectly regular, and particularly so in its conjugations. Indeed, properly speaking, it has but one conjugation; but this is varied in each seven or eight different ways, which has the effect of so many different conjugations, and affords a great variety of expressions to represent by a single word the different modifications of a verb, and many ideas which in the modern and in many of the ancient and learned languages cannot be expressed without a periphrasis.

The primitive words, which are called roots, have seldom more than three letters or two syllables.

In this language there are 22 letters, only five of which are usually reckoned vowels, which are the same with ours, viz. a, e, i, o, u; but then each vowel is divided into two, a long and a short, the sound of the former being somewhat grave and long, and that of the latter short and acute: it must however be remarked, that the two last vowels have sounds that differ in other respects besides quantity and a greater or less elevation. To these 10 or 12 vowels may be added others, called semi-vowels, which serve to connect the consonants, and to make the easier transitions from one Hebrew, to another. The number of accents in this language is indeed prodigious: of these there are near 40, the use of some of which, notwithstanding all the inquiries of the learned, are not yet perfectly known. We know, in general, that they serve to distinguish the sentences like the points called commas, semicolons, &c. in our language; to determine the quantity of the syllables; and to mark the tone with which they are to be spoken or sung. It is no wonder, then, that there are more accents in the Hebrew than in other languages, since they perform the office of three different things, which in other languages are called by different names.

As we have no Hebrew but what is contained in the Scripture, that language to us wants a great many words; not only because in those primitive times the languages were not so copious as at present; but also on this account, that the inspired writers had no occasion to mention many of the terms that might be in the language.

The Chaldee, Syriac, Ethiopic, &c. languages, are by some held to be only dialects of the Hebrew; as the French, Italian, Spanish, &c. are dialects of the Latin. It has been supposed by many very learned men, that the Hebrew characters or letters were often used hieroglyphically, and that each had its several distinct sense underflood as a hieroglyphic. Neuman, who seems to have taken infinite pains to find out this secret meaning of these letters, gives the following explication: \( \aleph \), he says, is a character denoting motion, readiness, and activity; \( \beth \), signifies 1. Matter, body, substance, thing; 2. Place, space, or capacity; and, 3. In, within, or contained: \( \gimel \), stands for flexion, bending, or obliquity of any kind: \( \daleth \), signifies any protrusion made from without, or any promotion of any kind: \( \heh \), stands for presence, or demonstrative essence of any thing: \( \vau \), stands for copulation or growing together of things: \( \damin \), expresses vehement protrusion and violent compression, such as is occasioned by at once violently discharging and constringing a thing together; it also signifies sometimes the straitening of any figure into a narrow point at the end: \( \cheth \), expresses association, society, or any kind of composition or combination of things together: \( \teth \), stands for the withdrawing, drawing back, or recess of any thing: \( \jod \), signifies extension and length, whether in matter or in time: \( \koph \), expresses a turning, curvedness, or concavity: \( \lamed \), stands for an addition, accretions, impulse, or adversion, and sometimes for pressure: \( \mem \), expresses amplitude, or the amplifying any thing in whatever sense; in regard to contiguous qualities, it signifies the adding length, breadth, and circumference; and in disjunct qualities it signifies multitude: \( \nun \), signifies the propagation of one thing from another, or of the same thing from one person to another: \( \samech \), expresses cincture and coarctation: \( \ain \), stands for observation, objection, or obviation: \( \pe \), stands for a crookedness or an angle of any figure: \( \sad \), expresses contiguity and close succession: \( \koph \), expresses a circuit or ambit: \( \reph \), expresses the edges of any thing, as also the exterior part of a thing, and the extremity or end of any thing: \( \shin \), signifies the number three, or the third degree, or the utmost perfection of any thing: \( \tauau \), expresses a sequel, continuation, or succession of any thing.

According to this explication, as the several particular letters of the Hebrew alphabet separately signify the ideas of motion, matter, space, and several modifications of matter, space, and motion, it follows that a language, the words of which are composed of such expressive characters, must necessarily be of all languages the most perfect and expressive, as the words formed of such letters, according to their determinate separate significations, must convey the idea of all the matters contained in the sense of the several characters, and be at once a name and a definition, or succinct description of the subject, and all things material as well as spiritual, all objects in the natural and moral world, must be known as soon as their names are known, and their separate letters considered.

The words urim and thummim are thus easily explained, and found perhaps the most apposite and expressive words that were ever formed.

Rabbinical or modern HEBREW, is the language used by the rabbins in the writings they have composed. The basis or body hereof is the Hebrew and Chaldee, with divers alterations in the words of these two languages, the meanings whereof they have considerably enlarged and extended. Abundance of things they have borrowed from the Arabic: the rest is chiefly composed of words and expressions, chiefly from the Greek; some from the Latin; and others from the other modern tongues; particularly that spoken in the place where each rabbin lived or wrote.

The rabbinical Hebrew must be allowed to be a very copious language. M. Simon, in his Hist. Crit. du Vieux Testament, liv. iii. chap. 27, observes, that there is scarce any art or science but the rabbins have treated thereof in it. They have translated most of the ancient philosophers, mathematicians, astronomers, and physicians; and have written themselves on most subjects: they do not want even orators and poets. Add, that this language, notwithstanding it is so crowded with foreign words, has its beauties visible enough in the works of those who have written well in it.