selves, whilst they endeavoured to influence the mind of the king by reading the roll to him. The result shewed that their precautions were not need less. The bold self-will and reckless daring of the monarch refused to listen to any advice, even though con-ling with the professed sanction of the Most High. Having read three or four leaves he cut the roll with the penknife and cast it into the fire that was on the hearth, until all the roll was consumed,' and gave immediate orders for the ap prehension of Jeremiah and Baruch, who, however, were both preserved front the vindictive monarch. Of the history of Jeremiah during the eight or nine remaining years of the reign of Jehoiakim we have no certain account. At the command of God he procured another roll, in which be wrote all that was in the roll destroyed by the king, and added besides unto them many like vvords' (ch. xxxvi. 32). In the short reign of his successor Jehoiachin or Jeconiah, we find him still uttering his voice of warning (see ch. xiii. IS ; comp. 2 Kings xxiv. 12, and ch. xxii. 24-3o), though without effect. It was probably either during this reign, or at the commencement of the reign of Zedekiah, that he was put in confinement by Pashur, the chief governor of the house of the Lord.' He seems, however, soon to have been liberated, as we find that they had not put him into prison' when the army of Nebuchadnezzar commenced the siege of Jerusalem. The Chalckeans drew off their army for a thne, on the report of help coming from Egypt to the besieged city ; and now feeling the danger to be imminent, and yet a ray of hope brightening their prospects, the king entreated Jeremiah to pray to the Lord for them. The hopes of the king were not responded. to in the message which Jeremiah received from God. He was as sured that the Egyptian army should return to their own land, that the Chaldxans should come again, and that they should take the city and burn it with fire (ch. xxxvii. 7, 8). The princes, apparently irritated by a niessage so contrary to their wishes, made the departure of Jeremiah from the city, during the short respite, the pretext for accusing him of deserting to the Chaldccans, and he was forthwith cast into prison. The king seems to have been throughout inclined to favour the pro phet, and sought to know from him the word of the Lord ; but he was wholly under the influence of the princes, and dared not communicate with him except in secret (ch. xxxviii. 14, 28) ; much less could he follow advice so obnoxious to their views as that which the prophet gave. Jeremiah, therefore, more from the hostility of the princes than the inclination of the king, was still in con finement when the city was taken. Nebuchad nezzar formed a more just estimate of his character and of the value of his counsels, and gave a special charge to his captain Nebuzar-adan, not only to provide for him but to follow his advice (ch. xxxix. 12). He was accordingly taken from the prison and allowed free choice either to go to Babylon, where doubtless he would have been held in honour in the royal court, or to remain with his own people. We need scarcely be told that lie .who had devoted more than forty years of unrequited service to the welfare of his falling country, should choose to remain with the remnant of his people rather than seek the precarious fame which might await him at the court of the king of Babylon. Accordingly he went to Mizpah with Gedaliah, whom the Babylonian monarch bad appointed governor of JulTa ; and after his murder, sought to persuade Johanan, who was then the recognised leader of the people, to remain in the land, assur ing him and the people, by a message from God in answer to their inquiries, that if they did so the Lord would build them up, but if they went to Egypt the evils which they sought to escape should come upon them there (ch. xlii.) The people re fused to attend to the divine message, and under the command of Johanan went into Egypt, taking Jeremiah and Baruch along with them (ch. xliii. 6). In Egypt the. prophet still sought to turn the people to the Lord, from whom they. had so long and so deeply revolted (ch. xliv.) ; but his writings give us no subsequent information respecting his personal history. Ancient traditions assert the b. spent the remainder of his life in Egypt. ACCOM ing to the pseudo-Epiphanius he was stoned by the people at Taphnx (67 Tdcbva/s), the same as Tali panhes, where the Jews were settled (De Vitis Pro phet. tom. ii. p. 239, quoted by Fabricius, Codex Psendepigraphus V. T tom. i. p. ir to). It is said that his bones were removed by Alexander the Great to Alexandria (Carpzov. /7/trod. part iii. p. IA where other traditions respecting him will be found).
Jeremiah was contemporary with Zephaniah, Habakkuk, Ezekiel, and Daniel. None of these,
however, are in any remarkable way connected with him, except Ezekiel. The writings and cha racter of these two eminent prophets furnish many very interesting points both of comparison and con trast. Both, during a long series of years, were labouring at the same time and for the same object. The representations of both, far separated as they were from each other, are in substance singularly accordant ; yet there is at the same time a marked difference in their modes of statement, and a still more striking diversity in the character and natural. disposition of the two. No one w.ho compares them can fail to perceive that the mind of Jeremiah was of a softer and more delicate texture than that of his illustrious contemporary. His whole history convinces us that he was by nature mild and retir ing (Ewald, Propheten des Alt. p. 2), highly susceptible and sensitive, especially to sorrowful emotions, and rather inclined, as we should imagine, to shrink from danger than to brave it. Yet, with this acute perception of injury, and natural repug nance from being 'a man of strife,' he never in the least degree shrinks from publicity ; nor is he at all intimidated by reproach or insult, or even by actual punishment and threatened death, when Ile has the message of God to deliver. Kings and priests, princes and people, are opposed with the most resolute determination, and threatened, if they disobey, in the most emphatic terms. When he is alone, we hear him lamenting the hard lot which compelled him to sustain a character so alien to his natural temper ; but no sooner does the divine call summon him to bear testimony for God and against the evils wbich surrounded him, than lle forgets his fears and complaints, and stands forth in the might of the Lord. He is, in truth, as remarkable an instance, though in a different way, of the overpowering influence of the divine energy; as Ezekiel. The one presents the spectacle of the. power of divine inspiration acting on a mind na.tu rally of the firmest texture, and at once subduing tc itself every element of the soul ; whilst the other furnishes an example, not less memorable, of moral courage sustained by the same divine inspiration against the constantly opposing influence of a love of retirement and strong susceptibility to impres sions of outward evil. Ezekiel views the conduct of his countrymen as opposed to righteousness and truth, Jeremiah thinks of it rather as productive of evil and misery to themselves— Ezekiel's indig nation is roused at the sins of his people, Jere miah's pity is excited by the consequences of their sins—the former takes an objective, the lat ter a subjective view of the evils by which both were surrounded.
II. WRITINGS.—The style of Jeremiah corre sponds with this view of the character of his mind ; though not deficient in power, it is peculiarly marked by pathos. He delights in the expression of the tender emotions, and employs all the re sources of his imagination to excite corresponding feelings in his readers. He has an irresistible sympathy with the miserable, which finds utterance in the most touching descriptions of their condition. He seizes with wonderful tact those circumstances which point out the objects of his pity as the objects of sympathy, and founds his expostulations on the miseries which are thus exhibited. His book of Lamentations is an astonishing exhibition of his power to accumulate images of sorrow. The whole series of elegies has but one object—the ex pression of sorrow for the forlorn condition of his country ; and yet he presents this to us in so many lights, alludes to it by so many figures, that not only are his mournful strains not felt to be tedious reiterations, but the reader is captivated by the plaintive melancholy which pervades the whole. Nullum, opinor,' says Lowth (De Sacra Roes/ Heb., ed. Michaelis, p. 458), aliud extat poema ubi intra tam breve spatitnn tanta, tam felix, tam lecta, tam illustris adjunctorum atque imaginum varietas elu ceat. Quid tam elegans et poeticum, ac urbs illa florentissima pridem et inter gentes princeps, nunc sola sedens, afflicta, vidua ; descrta ab amicis, prodita a necessariis ; fnistra tendens manus, nec inveniens qui eam consoletur. . . . Verum omnes locos elegantes proferre, id sane esset totum poerna exscribere.' The style of Jeremiah is marked by the peculiarities which belong to the later Hebrew, and by the introduction of Aramaic forms (Eich horn, Eirdetherv, vol. iii. p. 122 ; Gesenius, Ges chickle der Heb. Spracke, p. 35). It was, we imagine, on this account that Jerome complained of a certain nisticity in Jeremiah's style. Lowth, however, says he can discover no traces of it, and regards Jeremiah as nearly equal in sublimity in many parts to Isaiah (De Sacra Foesi p. 426).