ALLEGORY ('AX7trryopla). This word is found in the Authorized Version of Gal. iv. 24, but it does not actually exist as a noun in the Greek Testament, nor even in the Septuagint. In the passage in question Saint Paul cites the history of the free-born Isaac and the slave-born Ishmael, and in proceeding to apply it spiritually says, tiTtpd eXoneopoia4em, which does not mean, as in the A. V., 'which things are an allegory,' but `which things are allegorized.' This is of some importance ; for in the one case the Apostle is made to declare a portion of Old Testament his tory an allegory, whereas in truth he only speaks of it as allegorically applied. Allegories them selves are, however, of frequent occurrence in Scripture although that name is not there applied to them.
An ALLEGORY has been sometimes considered as only a lengthened metaphor; at other times, as a continuation of metaphors. But the nature of allegory itself, and the character of allegorical interpretation, will be best understood by attending to the origin of the term which denotes it. Now the term ' Allegory,' according to its original and proper meaning, denotes a representation of one thing which is intended to excite the representation of another thing. Every allegory must therefore be subjected to a twofold examination : we must first examine the immediate representation, and then consider what other representation it is intended to excite. In most allegories the immediate repre sentation is made in the form of a narrative; and, since it is the object of the allegory itself to convey a moral, not an historic truth, the narrative itself is commonly fictitious. The immediate representation is of no further value than as it leads to the ultimate representation. It is the application or the moral of the allegory which constitutes its worth.
Since, then, an allegory comprehends two distinct representations, the interpretation of an allegory must comprehend two distinct operations. The first of them relates to the immediate representa tion, and the second to the ultimate representation. The immediate representation is understood from the words of the allegory; the ultimate represen tation depends upon the immediate representation applied to the proper end. In the interpreta tion, therefore, of the former, we are concerned with the interpretation of words ; in the inter pretation of the latter, we are concerned with the things sign/lea' by the words. Now, whenever we speak of allegorical interpretation, we have always in view the ultimate representation, and, consequently, are then concerned with the inter pretation of things. The interpretation of the
words, which attaches only to the immediate representation, or the plain narrative itself, is com monly called the grammatical or the literal inter pretation; although we should speak more correctly lin calling it the verbal interpretation, since even in the plainest narratives, even in narratives not I designed for moral application, the use of words is never restricted to their mere literal senses. Custom, however, having sanctioned the use of the term 'literal.' instead of the term 'verbal' in terpretation, to mark the opposition to allegorical interpretation, we must understand it accordingly. But whatever be the term, whether verbal or literal, which we employ to express the interpretation of the words, it must always be borne in mind that the allegorical interpretation is the interpretation of things—of the things signified by the words, not of the words themselves.
Bishop Marsh, from the fifth of whose Lectures on the Criticism and Interpretation of the Bible these principles are derived, proceeds, in that Lecture, to apply them to a few of the Scriptural examples. Every parable is a kind of allegory; and therefore the parable of the sower (Luke viii. 5-15), being especially clear and correct, is taken as the first example. In this we have a plain narrative, a statement of a few simple and intelligible such, probably, as had fallen within the observa tion of the persons to whom our Saviour addressed himself. When he had finished the narrative, or the immediate representation of the allegory, he then gave the explanation or ultimate representa tion of it ; that is, he gave the allegorical interpre tation of it. And that the interpretation was an interpretation, not of the words, but of the things signified by the words, is evident from the expla nation itself: The seed is the word of God ;. those by the wayside are they that hear,' etc. (v. i 1, etc.) The impressive and pathetic allegory addressed by Nathan to David affords a similar instance of an allegorical narrative accompanied with its explana tion (2 Sam. xii. 1-14). Allegories thus accom panied, constitute a kind of simile, in both parts of which the words themselves are construed either literally or figuratively, according to the respective use of them; and then we institute the comparison between the things signified in the former part, and the things signified in the latter part.