OWEN, JOHN, D.D., was born at Stadham, Yorkshire, in 1616. His studies were prosecuted at Oxford, where, after some years at a private school, he was, at twelve years of age, entered a student of Queen's College. He took his degree of M. A. in his nineteenth year ; but having become a nonconformist, he left the university soon after, and became pastor of an independent church at Coggeshall in Essex. He followed Cromwell as his chaplain in several of his expeditions, and. during the protectorate, he was made dean of Christ Church, Oxford, and vice-chancellor of the university, an office which he discharged with great ability and advantage to the university. This was in r651, and in 1653 he received the honorary diploma of D.D. At the Restoration, being de prived of his ecclesiastical and academical position, he retired to Stadham, but ultimately became pas tor of an independent church meeting in Leaden hall Street, London. He died 24th Aug. 1683, and was buried in Bunhill Fields. Owen was a man of great strength and breadth of intellect, of adamantine perseverance, of vast erudition, and of deep, vital, earnest piety. His works are very nu merous ; in Russells' edition (Loud. 1826), occu pying twenty-eight vols. 8vo, and in that of Dr. Goold (Edin. 1850), twenty-four vols. 8vo. Of these, the greater part is devoted to systematic, polemical, and practical theology • but Owen's greatest work is an exegetical one—his Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews—originally published in four vols. fol., 1668-'684. In this work the author's vast learning and theological fulness and strength are conspicuous ; no point is overlooked ; no difficulty evaded ; and neither the learning nor the improved methods of later writers have added anything material to what Owen has advanced in illustration of this part of the N. T. He wrote also an exposition of Ps. cxxx., but this is almost entirely practical. There is also much Biblical discussion in his Theologumena sive a'e natura, oriu, progressu et studio verve theologise. When Walton's Polyglott was announced, Owen, startled at the proposal to give the various readings of the text, made the serious mistake of writing against that undertaking ; for which he was somewhat sharply rebuked by Walton in his Considerator Considered. —W. L. A.
OWL [YANsiturx ; LILITH ; Qsrrozj.
Be sides these, mention is made of the Cos (rra), an unclean bird (Lev. xi. 17 ; Dent. xiv. 16 ; Ps. cii. 6). This word is mentioned in the A. V., ' little owl,' and ' owl of the desert ;' and most probably designates the white or barn owl, .Stria ji'ammea. Bochart referred this name
to the pelican, on account of the assumed sig nification of cos, cup,' by him fancied to point out the pouch beneath the bill ; whereas it is more probably an indication of the disproportionate hulk and flatness of the head compared with the body, of which it measures to the eye full half of the whole bird, when the feathers are raised in their usual appearance. ' Cos' is only a variation of `cup' and `cap,' which, with some inflexions,. additional or terminal particles, is common to all: the great languages of the old continent. barn owl is still sacred in Northern Asia.—C. H. S.
etas and halivtos, A. V ospray'), an uncleam bird ; but there is a difference of opinion as to the particular species intended. The etymology of the Hebrew word would seem to point to some bird remarkably powerful, fierce, or impudent. Bochart supposes the black eagle to be meant, but reasons. upon the mere conjecture that by the word ,ueXa vaieros is intended eatateros (Hieroz. tom. iii. p. '88, etc.) The traditional meaning strongly favours the English rendering. The following is the line through which it is traced :—The modern systems of ornithology for the most part retain the names of bids given to them by Linnwus in his Systema.
Natures. ' The system of Willughby is without doubt the basis on which the ornithological classi fication of Linnmus is founded' (Neville Wood's Ornithologist's Text-Book, p. 3). Mr. Ray, giving an account of the assistance he rendered Mr. Wil lughby in that undertaking, says, Concerning the names of birds we did not much trouble ourselves, but have for the most part followed Gesner and Aldrovandus, being unwilling to disturb what is settled, or dispossess names that may, for their use, plead prescription' (Preface to the Eng. ed. of Wil lughby's Ornithology); and it is well known that Gesner and Aldrovandus derived their names and descriptions of birds from their predecessors, includ ing Aristotle and Pliny. In the same preface, Mr. Ray observes, Gesner and Aldrovandus wrote mere pandects of birds, comprising whatever had before been written by others.' This continuation of the same names of many at least of the same birds, from Aristotle to the present day, is, in the instance of the haliietos, or ospray, peculiarly clear and un broken ; and the same striking descriptions also of the bird so designated accompany its name from the earliest times.