Henry.—The name of this good man is vener able, and will be held in everlasting remembrance. His commentary does not contain much expo sition. It is full of sermonizing. In thorough ness and solidity of exposition he is not to be named with Calvin.
Doddridge.—The taste of this pious commen tator was good, and his style remarkably pure. He had not much acumen or comprehension of mind; but he had an excellent judgment, and a calm candor of inquiry.
Scott.—The prevailing characteristic of Scott's commentary is judiciousness in the opinions ad vanced. The greater portion of it, however, is not proper exposition. The pious author preaches about and paraphrases the original.
A. Clarke.—In most of the higher qualities by which an interpreter should be distinguished, this man of much reading was wanting. His histo rical and geographical notes are the best.
E. F. C. Rosen/nuller.—The Scholia of this laborious writer extend over the greater part of the Old Testament. Looking to the last editions, they are unquestionably of high value. They bring together a mass of annotations such as is sufficient to satisfy the desires of most Biblical students. Yet the learned author undertook too much to perform it in a masterly style. Hence his materials are not properly sifted, the chaff from the wheat.
Olshausen.—The best example of commentary on the New Testament with which we are ac quainted has been given by this writer. It is a model of exposition unrivalled in any language. Verbal criticism is but sparingly introduced, al though even here the hand of a master is appar ent.
Tholuek.—The commentaries of this eminent
writer on various books 'of the New Testament, especially those on the Epistles to the Romans and Hebrews, exhibit the highest exegetical excel lences. While he critically investigates phrases and idioms, he ascends into the pure region of the ideas, unfolding the sense with much skill and discernment. His commentary on John is of a more popular cast. His interpretation of the Bergpredigt, or Sermon on the Mount, is very %-aluable.
In addition to these, Germany has produced other specimens of commentary that occupy a high place in the estimation of competent judges. Lucke, on John's writings, especially in the third edition now in progress; Gesenius, on Isaiah; De \Vette. on the Psalms; Havernick, on Ezekiel and Daniel ; Billroth, on the Corinthians; Harless, on the Ephesians; and Baehr, on the Colossians—pos sess much merit, accompanied, it is true, with some serious faults. As examples of thorough and solid commentary, the English language pre sents none equal to those of Professor Stuart on the Epistles to the Romans and Hebrews.
(0) Later Commentaries. A valuable com mentary on the Epistle to the Romans we also possess in that of Professor Hodge, although the author cannot be said to have gone far beyond Calvin, in whose steps he has closely trodden.
Among the later commentaries of value arc those of Henry Alford; C. J. Ellicott; F. Godet; Keil and Delitzsch; Heinrich A. W. Meyer; J. D. M ichael is; R. C. Trench. (Notes on the Miracles, Notes on the Parables, etc.) ; F. G. A. Tholuck ; D. D. \Vhedon.