This passage concerns the brethren of Jesus in general, without precisely naming James or Jude; but it proves, in our opinion, that there was more than one adɛλpóç of Jesus among the apostles; so much so that even the adversariest of the apostleship of Jude recognize that "this passage speaks of some other apostles besides James, son of Alpheus, whose relationship with the Lord may be unknown to us." Schott, who thus speaks, thinks that Paul also makes allusion to Matthew, or Levi, who like James, is called the son of Alpheus (Mark ii. 14); but this is a mere supposition; for the evangelists have never spoken of the relationship of Matthew with James. Schott explains this by saying that Alpheus may have had this son by a first wife; but he would be no less a brother of James on this account. Turn we to our passage. The words καὶ οἱ ἀδελφοὶ Κυρίου are placed between the preceding ὡς καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι and the following kaì Kŋpãç, from which circumstance we can only refer them to persons who were apostles. Had not Peter been an apostle, but simply a distinguished disciple, this argument would not have availed us anything, since this sentence would show merely that Paul chose to justify himself, first, by the example of the apostles, next, by that of the brethren of Jesus, and lastly, by that of a distinguished disciple; but, since Peter is an apostle, we see not why the adɛλpoí who like him are named separately, may not also be apostles like him, especially in view of the order in which they are placed. Moreover it seems to us that Paul, desiring to vindicate his right to take with him a wife, in the estimation of the Corinthians, whose spirit he knew so well, would not, as a matter of prudence, have given as his authority the example of disciples who were not apostles. Finally, it is easy to explain why Paul has named Peter and the brethren of Jesus separately, viz: from the fact that the former was one of the most distinguished apostles, and the latter were eminent among them (e. g. James) whether Schott, who, it will be remembered, regards the Apostle Jude as the son of some unknown James. on account of their relationship with Jesus, or on account of personal merit. Wherefore he held that he was authorized by the example, not merely of the apostles in general, but even of the more influential among them, of Peter and the ἀδελφοί of Jesus. If our reasoning is satisfactory, this passage shows that some of the adeλpoi of Jesus were found among the apostles; for according to our view maintained elsewhere, we need not suppose that Paul meant to include all of them. We claim only Jude and James, because we find sufficient proof to substantiate the apostleship of these two only. Others* suppose that Simon, one of the brethren of Jesus, may be identical with the apostle Simon Zelotes or the Canaanite; but he is not given as the brother of James in any catalogue of the apostles. We have shown the identity of James, adɛλpós of Jesus (Matt. xiii. 55; Acts, and Gal. i. 19), with the apostle James, son of Alpheus. 1st. By the identity of the words Αλφαίος and Κλώπας. 2d. By the fact that in the Gospel history only one James appears to exercise apostolic authority. 3d. By three passages in Paul's epistles. We must therefore translate Paul's expression adɛλøòç toũ Kvpíov by cousin-german of the Lord (being son of Alpheus and not of Joseph), and the ddeλpoí of Matthew (xiii. 55) by cousins. Now the James of Matthew had a brother by the name of Jude, and the James of Galatians and of Acts, being the son of Alpheus had likewise a brother Jude who was an apostle. These two Judes are therefore one and the same. We have now arrived at the identity of Jude ådɛλpós of Jesus, with Jude the apostle. But the only possible authorship of the epistle of Jude has already been found to lie between these two names, which now prove to belong to the same person. THE AUTHOR OF OUR EPISTLE then is Jude the adɛλpós i.e., the own cousin of Jesus, the apostle, brother of the apostle * Schneckenburger and the old commentators. James, surnamed ó μukpós, son of Alpheus (or Clopas) and of Mary, sister of our Lord's mother. The critics who agree with us in this opinion are the following: Ceillier1, Louis Ellies Dupin', Richard Simon, Calmets, Le Nain de Tillemont, Pritius and Hoffmans, Hänlein, Chr. Wolff, Bertholdt, Hug", Eichhorn, Schneckenburger, Glaire', Leclerc1o, Storr11, Pott12, Gabler13, [Robinson 14, 14, Hackett 15,] etc. Those on the contrary, who think that the epistle was written by Jude the ddeλpós i.e., brother of Jesus, distinguished from the apostle by the fact that he, they say, is the son of an unknown James, and not brother of James, as our author declares himself to be, are as follows: Herder, Jessien, De Wette, Mayerhoff, Jachmann16, Neudecker, Scharling, Neander, Guericke, Scott, Sardinoux, etc. 8 1 Hist. Gèn. des aut. sacrès et ecclésiast. Paris, 1729–63. 2 Nouv. biblioth. des auteurs eccl. Paris, 1686-1711. Prolègom. sur. la Bible. Amsterdam, 1701. 3 La sainte Bible en latin et en français, avec un comment. littér. et critique. Paris, 1714-1720. • Mémoires pour servir á l'hist. ecclés. Paris, 1693–1712. 7 Einleit. in die Schriften des N. T. Stuttg. & Tub. ; 3d ed., 1826. Einleitung in das N. T. Leips., 1804-1827. Introd. hist. et crit. aux livres de l'Anc. et du Nouv. Test. Paris, 1841. 10 Novum Testamentum Francf.; 2d ed., 1714. "Opuscula acad. ad interpret. libr. sacr. pertinent. Tub., 1796–1803. Diss. exeg. in epist. Jac.; 2d vol. 12 Koppe, N. T. gr. perpet. annot. illustr.; vol. 9. Epp. cathol.; fasc. 1 epist. Jacobi cur. D. Jul. Pott.; 3d ed.; 1816. 13 Diss. de Jac. epist. eid. adscript. auctore. Altorf, 1787. 14 15 [Gr. and Eng. Lex. of the N. Test. New York, 1850. p. 355.] 16 Commentar über die kathol. Briefe Leips., 1838. "Comment. sur l'épitre de d'apôtre Paul aux Gal. etc. Valenci, 1837. ART. II.-YORUBA PROVERBS. THE kingdom of Yoruba, formerly called Yarba, and Yarriba, is situated in the peninsular tract of country between the Niger and the Bight of Benin. Elevated a thousand feet above the level of the sea, diversified with broad undulating plains, and abrupt mountains of granite, abundantly watered with clear rocky streams, and adorned with an endless intermixture of forests, farms, and prairies, it is altogether one of the most beautiful countries in the torrid zone. The Yorubas are the Hioes or Eyos of old writers, and the Aku people of Sierra Leone. They number about two millions of souls, including many thousands of exiles in various countries of Africa and America; and are divided into several independent tribes, or kingdoms, as Yorubas, Iketus, Egbas, Ijebus, Ijeshas and Effons or Kakandas, all of whom speak the same language, with more or less dialectic differences. The Yoruba people of all tribes are black, and woolly haired, that is, they are true negroes. Many of them however, like most of the central Africans, or Sudanese, are negroes of a superior type. Their hands and feet are frequently small, and well, even elegantly formed, their noses more prominent than those of some other negroes, their features distinct, and their skulls larger in proportion to the area of the face. Having seen multitudes of Africans of many distinct tribes, I feel confident in saying that "the true typical negro," as he is called, is not very common in Africa. He is generally found in the least desirable portions of the continent, in the swamps on some of the rivers, the rugged defiles of the mountains, and the gloomy, sparsely peopled, and almost uninhabitable forests. All the better portions of the country, and especially the fine airy plains of Sudan, are occupied by a superior race. A few of the Yorubas are as light colored as mulattoes, and the same is true of the Iboes, Bornuese, and some other tribes, who are generally black. The Pulohs, or Fellatahs are gene rally remarkable for the lightness of their color. I have repeatedly seen individuals among them who were almost white. This phenomenon is something wholly distinct from albinism, two varieties of which, the white and the red, and especially the former, are not uncommon in Africa. The albino, whether his skin and hair be white or red, is a real negro; but the mulatto colored people have features cast in the European mould, and the hair, though still woolly, is frequently so long that the women plait it, and tie it under the chin. The Fellatahs account for the lightness of their color by affirming that they are descended from an ancient tribe of white men, who came from some unknown country called Pelli, and settled in Sudan, where they intermixed with the aboriginal blacks. Bello, the Fellatah king of Sokoto, affirms that the ancestors of the Fulahs of Foota, who are the same in color and language with the Fellatahs, came originally from Persia.* We learn from Herodotus and others that a Persian army, under the mad Cambyses, was lost in the Great Desert, but we can not venture to affirm, or even to conjecture that a part of this army reached Central Africa, and became the ancestors of the present Fellatahs. The first acquaintance of Europeans with the Negroes of Africa was formed under circumstances very unfavorable to the reputation of the latter. The men through whose agency they were introduced into America, had very little of that enlightened curiosity which takes pleasure in whatever is new, and especially in all that pertains to the human race. The slavers who knew nothing of Africa except the swampy death-haunted rivers, and the brutal barbarism which they had seen on the coast, told shocking stories of the country and people. The English and Dutch colonists in America, themselves most commonly uncultured men, saw nothing in the newly arrived negroes but naked and jabbering savages, whom they naturally enough set down as almost destitute of human intellect and human feelings. No one of our fathers *See the Extract from Bello's History of Takroor in the Appendix to Denham and Clapperton's Travels in Africa. |